Greek question

[manaster at umich.edu]

For once I agree with the moderator.

On Tue, 23 Feb 1999, Patrick C. Ryan wrote:

[ moderator snip ]

>I have found that Egyptian k corresponds to IE g(g^) and k(k^); ditto T
>(bar-t) for g and k only; but Egyptian H (dot-h) corresponds to IE gh(g^h)
>and k(h)(k^(h)); ditto x (hook-h) for gh and k(h) only.

[ moderator snip ]

>[ Moderator's response:
>  If the Nostratic evidence independently requires 4 series of stops which
>  oppose voicing and aspiration, and it can be shown that in Indo-European the
>  Nostratic voiceless aspirates collapse together with the voiceless plains,
>  well and good:  Cite the etymologies which support this claim.  Otherwise,
>  the Nostratic evidence has nothing to offer for the reconstruction of a
>  series of voiceless aspirates in Indo-European; the few which are claimed are
>  the result of clusters of voiceless plain+laryngeal (specifically, *H_2),
>  although there are those who see the Skt. voiceless aspirates as evidence of
>  Prakrit interference (as the development of *sC to CCh in the Prakrits would
>  provide a source for a hypercorrection of Skt. **sC to the attested sCh,
>  where <C>represents any voiceless plain stop) and do not even accept this
>  laryngeal development while otherwise fully accepting laryngeals.
>  --rma ]