Picard - Issues in the Glottalic Theory of Indo-European (1995)

8/16/2019 Picard - Issues in the Glottalic Theory of Indo-European (1995)

1/12

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rwrd20

Download by: [173.93.163.225] Date: 03 June 2016, At: 06:16

WORD

ISSN: 0043-7956 (Print) 2373-5112 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rwrd20

Issues in the glottalic theory of Indo-European: Thecomparative method, typology and naturalness

Marc Picard

To cite this article: Marc Picard (1995) Issues in the glottalic theory of Indo-European:

The comparative method, typology and naturalness, WORD, 46:2, 225-235, DOI:10.1080/00437956.1995.11435943

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1995.11435943

Published online: 16 Jun 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 20

View related articles

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/00437956.1995.11435943http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/00437956.1995.11435943http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=rwrd20&page=instructionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=rwrd20&page=instructionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1995.11435943http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/00437956.1995.11435943http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rwrd20http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rwrd20


2/12

M RC PIC R D

Issues in the glottalic theory

of

Indo-European: The comparative

method, typology and naturalness

Abstract . The Glottalic Theory of Proto-Indo-European, whereby the

traditional voiced series

of

stops *b, *d, g has been replaced by the

ejectives *p',

*t',

*k', has been argued for mainly on typological

grounds. What I will try to show here

is

that since any proposed sound

change must satisfy the condition

of

naturalness every reconstructed

segment or class

of

segments, no matter how typologically plausible,

must be derivable in each daughter language in conformity with this

fundamental principle. To illustrate this, I will present a case from

Proto-Algonkian showing how both the comparative method and typo

logical considerations are insufficient to help us choose whether 6 or *i

should be reconstructed since these two factors are not necessarily de

terminative

of

naturalness.

1.

Introduction. Although there have been different reconstructions

of the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) stop system since the Neogrammar

ians posited two series

of

plain stops and two series

of

aspirated stops,

the accepted standard reconstruction is generally recognized to be the

following:

*p

(*b)

*bh

*t

*d

*dh

*k

g

gh

*T

*D

*Dh

As noted by Salmons,

the

reconstruction of basic PIE phonology is

treated with great and justifiable reverence by historical linguists as

one

of

the most monumental achievements

in

the history

of

the study

of human language. As a result, the reconstruction is sometimes re

garded as more solid than it actually is because even though

the

triumphs

of

the reconstruction

of

PIE obstruents were many, the sys

tem was never accepted as set in stone by Specialists (1993:6).

After having looked at some of the things that have made a num

ber of indo-europeanists realize that the comparative method alone is

225

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


3/12

226 WORD

VOLUME 46, NUMBER 2 (AUGUST, 1995)

insufficient to insure phonetically real reconstructions, and that as a

consequence it must be supplemented by typology, I will try to show

that there is another crucial and indispensable factor that must be taken

into account, one that has been, notwithstanding a few scattered allu

sions to its desirability, almost totally neglected by historical linguists.

This factor is naturalness.

2 Problems with the reconstructed stop system

o

PIE

Among

the numerous criticisms that were leveled at this reconstruction, the

two that are most often

quoted-and

that are remarkably similar in

nature-come

from Martinet

a nd

Jakobson. In the mid-fifties, the

former expressed the opinion that ' 'a series

of

the type bh, dh, gh only

appears to be attested in languages in which there also exist a series

of

voiceless aspirates, ph, th, kh (1955: 114-5). A little later, Jakobson

observed that ' 'no language adds to the pair / t /-/d/ a voiced aspirate

/dh/ without having its voiceless counterpart /th/ ; therefore the

ories operating with the three phonemes / t /- /d/- /dh/ in Proto-Indo

European must reconsider the question of their phonemic

essence''

(1962:532). A few years later, Emonds remarked that any quick

inventory

of

stop systems in existing natural languages throws doubt

on whether the T[raditional] I[ndo] E[uropean] stop system is even

possible in natural language

(1972: 110). In a nutshell, then, it

seemed that ' 'the comparative method was at odds with known facts

of

language structure because the reconstructed PIE stop system

con

tained a typologically unbalanced structure which is not characteristic

of natural languages (Baldi & Johnston-Staver 1989:88).

Another problem was the apparently arbitrary absence of *bin the

voiced stop series, something which is apparently without parallel in

any known language which has otherwise regular stop series. In Mad

dieson' s Patterns o Sounds (1984) where he surveys 317 phonemic

inventories, only two show a bilabial gap but, unlike PIE, they are also

missing another stop somewhere else. As summed up by Salmons, a

voiced bilabial gap represents a notable oddity in the world's

languages, even if we could identify one clear case (1993:53). A

further anomaly was that the standard PIE reconstruction created some

very unusual restrictions on root structures, the most notable being the

so-called *deg constraint, i.e. the fact there were no roots containing

two voiced stops (*DVD). Nobody seemed to be able to find any

parallels to this kind of restriction in any known languages, so some

thing was definitely amiss. Finally, there was the peculiar

''exclusion

of the plain voiced stops from inflectional affixes and pronouns''

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


4/12

PICARD: IE GLOTTALIC ISSUES

7

(Barnhard 1986:67-8), which is unusual for unmarked consonants like

*b, *d, *g.

Following is a sample of what phonologists have had to say about

these types

of

reconstructional incongruities:

''Although it is necessary to make inferences about the phonetic

systems which we reconstruct, these inferences must be solidly

grounded in a theory

of

universal processes and phonetics'' (Her

bert 1986:269).

''Reconstructed languages should be thought of as real languages

in every sense

of

the term. This means that we should be very

careful not to reconstruct anything that

is

not characteristic

of

language

in

general: our goal should be to strive for reality in our

reconstructions (Barnhard 1986:281).

Nothing (no event, sequence

of

events, constellation of prop

erties, general law) that cannot for some good reason be the case

in the present was ever true in the past (Lass 1986:22). Lass

calls this the principle

o

pan-temporal uniformity which in turn

yields a simple rule for reconstructive procedure, namely that

the

impossible never happened (1986:26)

What all this shows, as a growing number

of

Indo-Europeanists

came to realize, is that the venerable, reliable, tried-and-true method of

comparative reconstruction was not sufficient to insure plausible pro

tosystems. One also had to take typology into consideration if some

kind

of

phonetic reality was to be achieved. This

is

essentially what led

to the development

of

what has come to be known as the Glottalic

Theory of Indo-European (also sometimes called the Ejective Model).

In 1973, it certainly seemed like an idea whose time had c'ome since it

was proposed completely independently by Hopper in the United

States and Gamkrelidze Ivanov in the Soviet Union. There were

minor differences, of course, but the essence of the proposal was the

same.

3 Typology and the Glottalic Theory

This proposal centered on

the hypothesis that PIE did not have plain voiced stops but rather

voiceless ejectives

which, phonetically, are produced with a

glottalic

airstream mechanism which involves the movement

of

pharynx air by

the action of the glottis (as opposed to most sounds which are produced

with a pulmonic airstream mechanism). This is why it has become

known as the Glottalic Theory.

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


5/12

228 WORD VOLUME 46, NUMBER 2 (AUGUST, 1995)

The replacement of

*0

by *T' provides a very plausible explana

tion for the distributional anomalies that were noted above. First

of

all,

the case of the missing *b becomes much less aberrant

if

we substitute

*p' since it turns out that a gap in the labial series of a language with

glottalized stops is a common situation (Hopper 1973: 155). There is

a very simple phonetic reason for this, as explained by Salmons:

Ejectives involve the closure and raising

of

the glottis while the

primary occlusion of the airstream is occurring . . . This has the effect

of

compressing the air in the chamber, which when released, provides

the popping sound characteristic of

ejectives. This requires enough

compression so that the pop is

a1 1dible

and is thus easier to produce at

more posterior points of articulation. The chamber created by a bilabial

ejective is large enough-hence weak enough-that it is entirely lack

ing in some systems (1993:51-2).

Secondly, the singular constraint against *DVD roots gains a very

straightforward explanation

if

we posit *T'VT' instead since

' ' in

lan

guages having ejectives, there is a widespread constraint against the

cooccurrence of two ejectives in a

root

(Bombard 1986:68). Finally,

concerning the fact that the traditional voiced stops are inexplicably

missing from certain morphological categories, this

is

accounted for by

the observation that cross-linguistically glottalics as a class occur

only very rarely in inflectional affixes and pronouns'' (Bombard 1986:

68).

The Glottalic Theory did not gain immediate universal acceptance

despite its apparent advantages, however. There were a number

of

criticisms from various quarters, and three basic types of counterar

guments were put forth, namely that (1) *b was not absent but simply

rare, or that /b/ gaps exist in attested languages; (2) a voiced aspirate

series is possible without a voiceless aspirate series; and (3) typology

has no business in linguistic reconstruction. A review of the first two

issues would lead us too far afield, and I will not deal with them here,

especially since they have been discussed at some length by Salmons

(1993). I will turn directly to the third issue.

4 Naturalness in phonological change As we have seen, the Glot

talic Theory of PIE has been argued for mainly on typological grounds.

In his overview

of

the debate that has raged around this model since its

inception some twenty years ago, Salmons (1993) surveys some of the

critical responses to its usefulness and viability. One

of

these stems

from the view expressed by some Indo-Europeanists that typological

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


6/12

PICARD: IE GLOTT ALIC ISSUES

229

considerations are useless in general and especially in the case at hand,

and that the comparative method alone is suitable for reconstruction.

However, it seems obvious to anyone who wishes protosegments

to be more than simple abstractions with no phonetic reality that ty

pology can play a supporting role to the comparative method in lin

guistic reconstruction. As stated by Hopper, few comparative lin

guists these days would be content with a purely algebraic account of

sound changes. In recent years, linguists have insisted with increasing

emphasis that language change and hypothetical proto-languages

should not only have internal consistency, but should also conform to

some standard

of

'naturalness', i.e. should have generalizable analogs

in

documented systems and diasystems (1973: 143).

Having recognized that typology can serve as a complement to the

comparative method, can we then go on to claim that it is the only such

adjunct? This would certainly seem the view of Baldi and Johnston

Slaver if we are to judge by their statement that 'the introduction of

synchronic typological analysis into diachronic linguistics results from

. . . the fact that there exists no mechanism within comparative re

construction methodology to establish the correctness of a recon

structed system, or the relative superiority of one proposed system over

another' ( 1989:85). Similarly, Gamkrelidze has claimed that all recon

structional decisions

' 'must

rest wholly with typological consider

ations (1988:6, 1989: 118). What I will try to show here is that other

crucial factors, which seem to have been almost completely neglected

in

the disputation over reconstructional accuracy, must be taken into

account.

As I have argued elsewhere (cf. Picard 1984, 1990, 1994), any

proposed sound change must satisfy the condition of

naturalness

Very

briefly, a natural sound change is one that obeys the canons of mini-

mality

and

directionality

Thus, a diachronic correspondence between,

say, u and Iii would automatically be deemed to have taken place in

at least two stages, i.e. with fronting to Iii (perhaps via /tt/) and

unrounding to Iii occurring separately, since the requirement that any

change be minimal would normally dictate that a vowel cannot alter

more than one feature at a time (though further conditions may be

necessary for consonants, as explained in Picard 1994: 16-20).

On the other hand, restrictions on the direction of sound changes

would preclude

us

from positing that a correspondence between i and

lui could have had

Iii

as an intermediate stage given that such a shift,

although minimal, does not appear to be attested (for reasons that have

yet to be determined as far as I know). Every reconstructed segment or

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


7/12

230

WORD

VOLUME 46, NUMBER 2 (AUGUST, 1995)

class o segments, then, no matter how typologically plausible, must

be derivable in each daughter language in conformity with this funda

mental principle. To illustrate this, I will present a case from Proto

Algonkian which evidences the fact that typological considerations

alone are insufficient to insure phonetically realistic reconstructions

since they are not necessarily determinative o naturalness.

5. Typology and naturalness

n

Proto-Algonkian. Bloomfield s

reconstruction

o

Proto-Algonkian (P A) assumes the following set

o

consonants:

*p *t

*v

c

*k

*6 *s *s *h

1

*m *n

*y *w

To my knowledge, no one has ever questioned the typological plausi

bility

o

this system. All

o

these segments are found in Modern

English, for example. Yet there exists a strong possibility that one

o

the obstruents, namely *6, could be wrong because it yields changes

that violate the minimality constraint.

Bloomfield s (1946) reconstruction was mainly achieved on the

basis o four languages o the Central group, viz. Fox, Cree, Meno

mini and Ojibwa (FCMO). One

o

the problems he faced in this en

deavor was to determine the proper proto-segments for the various

correspondences shown below:

FOX CREE MENOMINI

OJIBWA

(1)

askoteewi iskoteew eskootEEW iskotee fire

2)

ineniwa iyiniw enEEniw

10101

m n

3)

ayaapeewa ayaapeew ayaapEEW

ayapee

buck

4) ineniwa

iyiniw

enEEniw inini

m n

5) anemwa a im aDEEm

anim

dog

Sets

1,

2 and 3 obviously reflect PA *t, *n and *y respectively.

For set 4, he selected 1 on the basis o the reflex ll found in languages

other than FCMO, e.g. Abenaki /aln-/, Miami-Illinois /alenia/, Mic

mac /lnu/ etc. The most problematic set was 5 since most languages

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


8/12

PICARD: IE GLOTTALIC ISSUES

23

were found to have either /n/,

It/

or

Ill

(as in Delaware /all urn/ or Miami

/alemwa/). The sole exception was Arapaho with /6/, i.e. /he6/

dog ,

and it

is

on this basis that 6 was reconstructed for correspondence sets

like 5.

In spite

of

the fact that, within PA, 6 fits in perfectly, there are

good reasons for rejecting it

as

the direct antecedent of all the modern-

day variants. First of all, since /n/ in this series of correspondences (5)

is in

all probability the reflex

of

an earlier

Ill,

the shift

1

In being

widespread throughout Algonkian as evidenced by series 4, we can

infer the following scenario:

6

I\

I

I \

6 t I

>n)

Of

the two diachronic changes this entails, 6

It/

poses no

problem since it involves a single phonetic property, namely manner of

articulation or,

in

other terms, the feature [continuant]. The shift *6

Ill,

on the other hand, must be viewed with the utmost suspicion since

it

is

far from being minimal. As far as I know, no such development

has ever been observed

in

any language, which should come as no

surprise given that it would imply the simultaneous modification

of

no

less than four features, viz. [sonorant], [voiced], [lateral] and [distrib-

uted]. In other words, point

of

articulation, manner

of

articulation and

voicing would all have to change at the same time, which is hardly

conceivable. Moreover, it

is

difficult to come up with any reasonable

intermediate stage(s) between

6 and

Ill.

At this point, it

is

instructive to go back to Bloomfield's original

statement concerning the origin of the /6/:/t/:/l/:/n/ synchronic corre-

spondence. With characteristic terseness, he wrote: 'PA 6 (unvoiced

interdental or

lateral?)

(1946:87) (my emphasis). Because he actually

used the symbol [6] throughout, however, most Algonkianists seem to

have either taken it at face value, i.e. as a voiceless interdental frica-

tive, or to have been content to regard it as phonetically indetermi-

nate (Goddard 1990: 102). One notable exception was Siebert who,

while continuing to represent the protosegment with a theta, opined

that 'Bloomfield's second surmise

is

the preferred solution'

in

that

1*61

was not an interdental but a voiceless lateral and the unmarked

member of the contrast 1*11:1*61 (1975:451). Adding phonetic speci-

ficity to these constructs, he stated that

/*II

[was] a voiced lateral,

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


9/12

232

WORD VOLUME 46, NUMBER 2 (AUGUST, 1995)

probably apico-alveolar, and /*9/ a voiceless lateral or lateral fricative,

probably apico-alveolar also' (1975:300).

Without being aware

of

Siebert's conclusions, I set out to show

in

Picard ( 1984) that, on the basis

of

evidence both internal and external

to

PA proper, the most likely protosegment was *i because its dual

lateral/fricative nature, combined with its [+anterior], [+coronal],

[+continuant] features, could easily have led to a shift

to Ill

on the

one hand, and /9/, on the other, with the latter further evolving to It/

in certain languages,

as

summarized below:

Arapaho e

Cree, Atsina, Cheyenne, etc. t

i

Miami, Delaware, Abenaki, etc.

In sum, naturalness can be seen to be an indispensable factor in

reconstruction.

s

Salmons has observed,

it

is

a kind of diachronic

typology'' in the sense that when one tries to establish naturalness, one

tries to show that a given proposed change occurs across various lan

guages of the world in similar fashion (1993:68). That is not its only

role, however, for it also constitutes the most accurate way of consis

tently establishing the all-important distinction between sound corre-

spondences and sound changes. Historical phonologists are starting to

pay much more attention to the phonetic content

of

proto-segments and

intermediate stages ofdevelopment, and such a perspective requires that

maximal use be made

of

all available tools and mechanisms.

6 Naturalness and the Glottalic Theory

f we

now take a look

at

the Glottalic Theory in terms of naturalness,

we

find that there are two

important issues which closely parallel the PA situation we have just

examined, and which have led to skepticism

of

this model in various

quarters. First

of

all,

as

noted by Salmons, critics

of

the Glottalic

Theory have often charged that positing glottalization means positing

a feature for the proto-language that has disappeared from all of the

daughter languages except Armenian (1993:43). The reason voiced

stops were posited in the first place, of course,

is

that this

is

what most

of

the daughter languages have (cf. Meillet 1964:88, Baldi 1983:6-7,

131, Watkins 1985:111).

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


10/12

PICARD: IE GLOTIALIC ISSUES

233

However, there

is

no a priori motive for excluding the possibility

of

reconstructing protosegments which have changed across the board

if the criterion of naturalness warrants it. This was certainly the case

for PA

*i,

a segment for which one has to go outside the Algonkian

family proper and into Ritwan, the other branch of the Algie family, in

order to obtain direct evidence of synchronic manifestation from Yurok

(cf. Picard 1984:435 -6). Another example of this type is from Proto

Muskogean where, given Choctaw, Koasati, Hitchiti lbl and Creek

lkl

Haas (1947) reconstructs

kw

which yields the well-attested shifts of

labial fronting and voicing in one case, and delabialization in the other.

Better yet, there are cases

of

this type in well-recorded language

families like Romance where the original Latin segment is obviously

not reconstructed. As noted by Hall, for example, the developments

of lui w] show either the labio-dental fricative Ivi or the bilabial

plosive lbl in the various Romance languages (1976:59), e.g. Latin

vocem

>French

voix but Spanish voz Such a development necessarily

implies an inter-mediate bilabial fricative IBI as Hall himself suggests,

which is the product

of

fricativization, and which either becomes stri

dent or non-continuant, and it shows conclusively that

it

is

thoroughly possible that a particular feature

of

a proto-language can

fail to survive in any (attested) daughter language (Salmons 1993:

44).

The second major issue regarding naturalness and the Glottalic

Theory involves the development of the voiceless ejectives into voiced

stops. This seems like a pretty radical change and one that can hardly

be conceived to have occurred in one fell swoop. As pointed out by

Baldi and Johnston-Staver, there is such articulatory distance be

tween explosive glottalized stops and voiced stops that a direct change

seems phonologically impossible (1986:84).

If

we assume, in accor

dance with the criterion of minimality, that any change which affects

obstruents can never simultaneously involve more than one

of

its major

phonetic properties, namely voicing, point of articulation and manner

of articulation, then a shift of *T' to D is in clear violation

of

this

constraint.

In order to entertain the possibility of such a development, one

must postulate one or more intermediate stages. The most plausible

scenario would appear to be by way of implosives These are stop

consonants which differ minimally from both

T'

and D in that they are

produced with an ingressive glottalic airstream like the former, and

voiced like the latter. Not surprisingly, according to Salmons,

the

change from implosive to plain

voiced

stops is very common and

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


11/12

234 WORD VOLUME 46, NUMBER 2 (AUGUST, 1995)

can be straightforwardly motivated and described, phonologically and

also articulatorily (1993:53). Finally, those few languages such

as

Hittite and Germanic that have T would simply have undergone de

glottalization.

7 Conclusion In order to achieve the greatest possible degree of

phonetic realism and accuracy in our reconstructions, which is some

thing a growing number of historical linguists feel can and should be

done, the time-honored comparative method must be supplemented by

typological considerations and phonological naturalness. As stated

most appropriately by Salmons, ':the

comparative method

and internal

reconstruction often admit multiple reconstructions, i.e., they are often

inconclusive.

Typology

like

naturalness

and so on, may help

us

elim

inate some proposed reconstructions (1993:63) (my emphasis). Not

only that but they will also undoubtedly help us to postulate in their

stead reconstructions that have real phonetic substance and factuality.

Department

o

Modern Languages and Linguistics

Concordia University

Montreal Quebec

REFERENCES

Baldi, Philip. 1983. An introduction to the Indo-European languages. Carbondale: Southern

Illinois University Press.

Baldi, Philip, and Ruth Johnston-Staver. 1989. His toric Italic phonology in typological per

spective.

The new sound

o

Indo-European: Essays

n

phonological reconstruction.

Ed.

Theo Vennemann. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Pp.

85-101.

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1946. Algonquian. Linguistic structures o Native America. Eds. Harry

Hoijer et al. New York: Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 6. Pp.

85-129.

Bombard, Allan. 1986.

The

aspirated stops of Proto-Indo-European. Diachronica. 3:67-79.

Emonds, Joseph. 1972. A reformulation of Grimm's law. Contributions to generative pho

nology. Ed. Michael Brame. Austin: University

of

Texas Press. Pp. 108-22.

Gamkrelidze, Thomas

V

1988.

The

Indo-European glottalic theory in the light

of

recent

critique. Folia Linguistica Historica 9:3-12.

Gamkrelidze, Thomas

V

1989. Language typology and Indo-European reconstruction. The

new sound o

Indo-European: Essays in phonological reconstruction.

Ed. Theo Vennemann.

Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Pp. 117-21.

Garnkrelidze, Thomas V., and Vyacheslav V Ivanov. 1973. Sprachtypologie und die Rekon

strucktion der gemeinindo-germanischen Verschli isse. Phonetica

27:150-56.

Goddard, Ives. 1990. ' 'Algonquian linguistic change and reconstruction.'' Linguistic change and

reconstruction methodology. Ed. Philip Baldi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Pp. 99-114.

Haas, Mary. 1947. Development of Proto-Muskogean *kw. International journal o American

linguistics 13:135-37.

Hall, Robert A., Jr. 1976.

Proto-Romance phonology.

New York: Elsevier.

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6


12/12

PICARD: IE GLOTT ALIC ISSUES

235

Herbert, Robert. 1986. Language universals, markedness theory, and natural phonetic pro

cesses. Amsterdam: Mouton.

Hopper, Paul. 1973. "Giottalized and murmured occlusives in Indo-European."

Glossa

7:141-

66.

Jakobson, Roman. 1962. "Typological studies and their contribution to historical comparative

linguistics." Selected writings, val.

I

The Hague: Mouton.

Lass, Roger. 1986. "Conventionalism, invention and 'historical reality': some reflections on

method.

Diachronica

3:15-41.

Maddieson, Ian. 1984. Patterns o sounds. Cambridge University Press.

Martinet, Andre. 1955. Economie des changements phonetiques. Berne: Francke.

Meillet, Antoine. 1964 [1937]. Introduction a / etude comparative des langues indo-europe

ennes. University

of

Alabama Press.

Picard, Marc. 1984. On the naturalness of Algonkian

*i.

International journal

o

American

linguistics

50:424-37.

Picard, Marc. 1986. On the structure of the lower numbers in pre-P

A.

International journal

o American linguistics 52:72-76.

Picard, Marc. 1990.

On

the evaluation of competing analyses in historical phonology: natu

ralness, minimality and the case

of

Armenian /erk ." Language Sciences 12:85-99.

Picard, Marc. 1994. Principles and methods in historical phonology: From Proto-Algonkian to

Arapaho. Montreal: MeGill-Queen's University Press.

Salmons, Joseph. 1993. The glottalic theory: Survey and synthesis. (=Journal

o

Indo-European

studies, Monograph series, Number 10). McLean, VA Institute for the Study of Man.

Siebert, Frank

T.,

Jr. 1975. "Resurrecting Virginia Algonquian from the dead: the reconstituted

and historical phonology of Powhatan." Studies in Southeastern Indian languages. Ed.

James M. Crawford. Athens: University

of

Georgia Press. Pp. 285-453.

Watkins, Calvert, ed. 1985. The American heritage dictionary o Indo-European roots. Boston:

Houghton Mifflin.

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ 1 7 3 . 9

3 . 1

6 3 .

2 2 5 ] a t 0 6 : 1 6 0 3 J u n e 2 0 1 6

Picard - Issues in the Glottalic Theory of Indo-European (1995)

Documents

Transcript of Picard - Issues in the Glottalic Theory of Indo-European (1995)