Original Glottalic Proposal
The Glottalic Theory proposes different phonetic values for the stop inventory of Proto-Indo-European:
labials | dentals | velars | labialized velars | |
---|---|---|---|---|
voiceless stops | p ~ pʰ | t ~ tʰ | k ~ kʰ | kʷ ~ kʷʰ |
ejective or glottalized stops | (pʼ) | tʼ | kʼ | kʷʼ |
voiced stops | b ~ bʱ | d ~ dʱ | ɡ ~ ɡʱ | ɡʷ ~ ɡʷʱ |
In his version of the Glottalic Theory, Hopper (1973) also proposed that the aspiration that had been assumed for the voiced stops *bh, *dh, *gh could be accounted for by a low-level phonetic feature known to phoneticians as "breathy voice". This proposal made it possible both to establish a system in which there was only one voiced stop and at the same time to explain developments in later Indo-European dialects (Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit) that pointed to some kind of aspiration in the voiced series.
Gamkrelidze and Ivanov (1973, 1995:5-70) have posited that both non-ejective series (traditional *p *t *k and *bh *dh *gh) were fundamentally aspirated (that is, *ph *th *kh and *bh *dh *gh, respectively) but had non-aspirated allophones (that is, *p *t *k and *b *d *g). According to them, the non-aspirated forms occurred in roots where two non-ejectives were present because of a rule that prohibited more than one aspirate in the same root. To express the variability of aspiration, Gamkrelidze and Ivanov write it with a superscripted h, for example dʰ. Thus, an Indo-European DʰeDʰ (where Dʰ represents any non-ejective stop) might be realized as DeDʰ (attested by Indic and Greek) or as DʰeD (attested by Italic). In contrast, traditional theory would trace a form attested as both DeDh and DheD to an Indo-European DheDh. The advantage of this interpretation over the previous is circumventing the typological oddity of the language having only voiced aspirates by identifying the voiceless non-aspirates of the traditional stop system (*p *t *k) as voiceless aspirates (*pʰ *tʰ *kʰ).
Read more about this topic: Glottalic Theory
Famous quotes containing the word original:
“Wit is often concise and sparkling, compressed into an original pun or metaphor. Brevity is said to be its soul. Humor can be more leisurely, diffused through a whole story or picture which undertakes to show some of the comic aspects of life. What it devalues may be human nature in general, by showing that certain faults or weaknesses are universal. As such it is kinder and more philosophic than wit which focuses on a certain individual, class, or social group.”
—Thomas Munro (18971974)