"centum"/"satem" "exceptions" [was Re: Northwest IE attributes]

[Xavier Delamarre]

Rich Alderson wrote (answering Rick Mc Callister)

>Since then, it has been argued that PIE had either (1) palatals and velars,
>and labiovelars are a late development, or (2) plain velars and labiovelars,
>and palatals are a late development.  Today's consensus view seems to be a
>third alternative, that PIE had palatals and labiovelars, and plain velars are
>an odd development of one or both.

This is not true at all. There is no consensus for a two-series system of
tectals (whatever the arrangement). The doubts cast on a three-series
system (k', k, k^w) goes back to  Meillet in his _Introduction à la gramm.
comp. des langues IE_ (last ed.1937), repeated by Lehman in his _Phonology_
(1952), and taken up since by a variety of scholars in France & US.

Two prominent scholars that do not share the alleged "consensus" have shown
recently the methological necessity of positing three series :
- M. Mayrhofer, _Indogermanische Grammatik I-2_ (Phonology), 1986
- O. Szemerényi, _Introduction to IE Linguistics_ , 1996 Oxford.

Holger Pedersen had already shown in 1900, that Albanian has 3 different
reflexes of the three tectals before front vowels (article in KZ), and most
recently Craig Melchert has made the same observation about Luwian (_Fs
Cowgill_, 1987, inter alia).

I recommend on this subject to the American reader, and others who have
doubts, the reading of the excellent article by Martin E. Huld in
_Festschrift for Eric P. Hamp_ Vol. 1 (JIES Monograph 25) :"Satem, Centum
and Hokum", 115-138.

The consensus seems to be, contrary to what stated, in favor of  three
tectals for IE, as posited more than one century ago by our dear
Neo-grammarians.

Xavier Delamarre
Ljubljana
23/1/2000