Classification of sounds
From Indo-European Languages
| This text was copied from a written Grammar and may need to be wikified to meet Wiki Web standards. Please help improve this article, especially its section layout, relevant internal links and references |
2.2.1. The Vowels are short [a], [e], [i], [o], [u], written a, e, i, o, u, and long [aː], [eː], [iː], [oː], [uː], written ā, ē, ī, ō, ū, respectively. The other sounds are Consonants.
The Modern Indo-European Diphthongs proper are [ei̯], [oi̯], [ai̯], written ei, oi, ai, and [eu̯], [ou̯], [au̯], written eu, ou, au. In these diphthongs both vowel sounds are heard, one following the other in the same syllable.
NOTE. For the so-called long diphthongs [eːi̯], [oːi̯], [aːi̯], written ēi, ōi, āi, and [eːu̯], [oːu̯], [aːu̯], written ēu, ōu, āu, which remained only in Indo-Iranian, Greek and partly in Baltic languages, Schulze (1885) interpreted a regular correspondence of the type āi/ā/ī, which came respectively from the full grade of the long diphthong, the full grade before consonant (where the second element was lost), and the zero-grade (a contraction of schwa with the semivowel). Martinet (1953) proposed that laryngeals were behind those long diphthongs.
In any case, in the languages in which they are retained, long diphthongs have not a longer duration than normal diphthongs; phonologically they are equivalent, as Vedic and Greek metric shows. After Adrados (1995), “The difference, therefore, is not on the duration of the group, but on the relative duration of their components; in other words, for example ei and ēi have the same phonological duration (they are long, as opposed to a brief vowel), but in ei both elements have approximately the same duration, whereas in ēi the duration of i is perceptibly shorter than e. Because of that, the name ‘long first element diphthongs’ is more appropriate to refer to these phonemes”. Cf. Allen (1976) for an analysis of these diphthongs.
Strictly speaking, phoneticians do not consider the so-called rising diphthongs, [je], [jo], [ja], [jeː], [joː], [jaː], nor [we], [wo], [wa], [weː], [woː], [waː], as diphthongs proper, but rather sequences of glide and vowel.
NOTE. Whilst most Indo-Europeanists differentiate between sequences of approximant and vowel (rising diphthongs) from true falling diphthongs in their transcriptions, i.e. writing [je] (from [i]+[e]) but [ei] or [ei̯] (from [e]+[i]), some use a different approach, considering all of them combinations of vowel plus glide or glide plus vowel, i.e. writing [je] and [ej], or [i̯e] and [ei̯].
Therefore, there are no real triphthongs. The formations usually called triphthongs are [jei̯], [joi̯], [jai̯], [jeu̯], [jou̯], [jau̯], as well as [wei̯], [woi̯], [wai̯], [weu̯], [wou̯], [wau̯]; and none can be named strictly triphthong, as there is a consonantal sound [j] or [w] followed by a diphthong. The rest of possible formations are made up of a diphthong and a vowel.
2.2.2. Consonants are either voiced (sonant) or voiceless (surd). Voiced consonants are pronounced with vocal cords vibration, as opposed to voiceless consonants, where the vocal cords are relaxed.
- The voiced consonants are [b], [d], [g], [gw], [l], [r] and [ɾ], [m], [n], [z], [j], [w].
- The voiceless consonants are [p], [t], [k], [kw], [s].
- The digraphs bh, dh, gh and ch represent the Indo-European voiced aspirates proper, i.e. [bh], [dh], [gh], [gwh], whereas ph, th, and kh represent voiceless aspirates [ph], [th], [kh], mostly confined to words of Greek origin, as well as foreign [ɸ], [θ] and [x], respectively.
- The consonants [r], [l], [m], [n], and the semivowels [j] and [w], can function both as consonants and vowels, i.e. they can serve as syllabic border or center.
NOTE. There is a clear difference between the vocalic allophones of the semivowels and those of the sonants, though: the first, [i] and [u], are very stable as syllabic center, while [r̥], [l̥], [m̥], [n̥], aren’t, as they cannot be pronounced more opened. Hence the big differences in their evolution, depending on the individual dialects.
2.2.3. The Mutes are classified as follows:
| voiceless | voiced | aspirated | |
| labials | p | b | bh |
| dentals | b | d | g |
| velars | k | g | gh |
| labiovelars | kw | gw | gwh |
Labialized velars or Labiovelars [kw] (written q), [gw] (written c), [gwh] (written ch), are pronounced like [k], [g], [gh] respectively, but with rounded lips.
NOTE 1. German Neogrammarians reconstructed a fourth series of phonemes, the voiceless aspirates *ph, *th, *kh, to explain some irregularities in the outputs of the voiceless row. Most Indo-Europeanists reject this fourth independent row of phonemes, and findings of Indo-Iranian, Armenian and Greek have been explained as 1) expressive in origin, 2) contact of a voiceless with a laryngeal phoneme, and 3) effect of a prior s. For support of the fourth row, cf. Szemerényi (1985).
NOTE 2. The modern mainstream Proto-Indo-European reconstruction, that accepts only these two rows of velars as the most logical PIE phonetic system, has been confronted with the question of the actual existence of the groups [kw], [gw], and [ghw], different from (and similar or identical in their dialectal outputs to) labialized [kw], [gw], and [gwh]. A distinction between both is often found, though, whether an independent row of palatalized velars is accepted or not; as, kwōn, dog, ekwos, horse, ghwer-, wild, kweidos, white, kwet-, cook (cf. O.Ind. kwathati), tekw-, run, etc. which might be found reconstructed as *qōn, *eqos, *cher-, etc. For a defence of such unified forms, see e.g. Jussi Halla-aho at <http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/hum/slavi/vk/halla-aho/problems.pdf>.
2.2.4. The so-called Liquids are l, which represents the alveolar lateral approximant [l], an r, pronounced in PIE and in most modern IE languages (at least occasionally) as alveolar trill [r], today often allophonic with an alveolar tap [ɾ], particularly in unstressed positions. These sounds are voiced.
NOTE. About Indo-European r and l, cf. Ban’czerowski (1968).
For foreign words, the group rh represents an [h] sound coming just after the [ɾ], mainly in words of Greek origin. Other groups include rr, the alveolar trill [r], and its aspirated counterpart rrh. The palatal lateral approximant [ʎ] shall be represented as lj.
2.2.5. The Nasals are labial [m], written m, and dental [n], written n. These are voiced. The velar nasal [ŋ] – as ng in English sing – could have existed in IE as allophone of [n] before velars.
NOTE. Erhart (1970) reconstructs three nasals, N, M1 and M2, this one a fricative seminasal with which he explains the results of alternating m and w in some suffixes and roots; as, -ment-/-went-, men-/wen-, etc. It was left unexplained, though, under which conditions did it change.
The palatal nasal [ɲ] of foreign words (similar to the [n] sound in English onion or canyon) is represented by the pair nj.
2.2.6. The Fricatives are voiceless [s] and voiced [z], z being usually the output of s before voiced consonants. NOTE. [z] was already heard in Late Proto-Indo-European, as a different pronunciation (allophone) of [s] before voiced consonants, as can be clearly seen in PIE nizdos (for nisdos), nest, which comes from PIE roots ni-, down, and zero-grade -sd- of sed, sit. Because of that it is preferred to write s for [z] in MIE.
It is also possible to write voiceless and voiced pairs from foreign words: labiodentals, f and v; dorsal voiceless h and [x], written kh; and postalveolar [ʃ] as sh and [ʒ] as zh. Possible groups include ks, ts, dz, tsh (for [tʃ]), dzh (for [dʒ]), etc.
2.2.7. The Semivowels are usually written j, and w. These are voiced.
NOTE. Some authors make a distinction between consonantal [j], [w], and vocalic [i], [u]. Actually, however, both appear as TIT and EYE (where T = consontant, E = vowel, I = i,u, Y = j,w), and never as TYT or EIE. Against it, see Schmitt-Brandt (1967) and Szemerényi (1985) and Mayrhofer (1986).
2.2.8. Gemination appears in phonemes whose duration is long enough to be perceived – their implosion and explosion, both audible – as distributed in two syllables. They existed in PIE: in stops, as appās, attās (and tātā), dad, pappājō, eat, or kakkājō, shit; in nasals, as anna-, ammā (and mammā), mother, mum; in liquids, as bōullā, buble; and in the sibilant, as kussō, kiss.
NOTE. They appear mostly in words of expressive origin, children vocabulary, onomatopoeia, etc., which makes it more likely that PIE inherited gemination as an expressive resource, different from its central phonological system; a resource that was retained for a long time by most IE languages as a recurrent possibility.
2.2.10. A synoptic table of the Proto-Indo-European phonetic system:
| Labials | Coronals | Palatovelars | Velars | Labiovelars | Gutturals | |
| Voiceless | p | t | kj | k | kw | |
| Aspirated | ph | th | kh | |||
| Voiced b | d | gj | g | gw | ||
| Aspirated | bh | dh | gjh | gh | gwh | |
| Nasals | m | n | ||||
| Fricatives | s , z | h, *H | ||||
| Liquids | r , l | |||||
| Approximant | w | j |
NOTE 1. The existence of a distinctive row of PIE ‘satemizable’ velars, the so-called palatovelars, has been the subject of much debate over the last century of IE studies. Today a majority of modern scholars support only two types of velars in Late PIE – generally Velars and Labiovelars, although other solutions have been proposed, see Appendix II.2.
Palatovelars could be found in PII, though, and are to be represented with Ķ ķ, Ģ ģ, Ģh ģh.
The support of German Neogrammarians to the ‘palatals’ in Proto-Indo-European, as well as its acceptance in Brugmann’s Grundriß and Pokorny’s Wörterbuch, extended the distinction to many (mainly etymological) works, which didn’t deal with the phonological reconstruction problem directly. As Adrados (2005) puts it, about the standard [=Brugmannian] theories nowadays, “Indo-Europeanists keep working on a unitary and flat PIE, that of Brugmann’s reconstruction. A reconstruction prior to the decypherment of Hittite and the study of Anatolian! This is but other proof of the terrible conservadurism that has seized the scientific discipline that is or must be Indo-European linguistics: it moves forward in the study of individual languages, but the general theory is paralised. It is sad when our students go to Germany and come back brainwashed”.
NOTE 2. The cover symbol *H, traditionally *ə, stands for the uncertain Late PIE ouput of the (for Middle PIE) reconstructed laryngeal phonemes h1, h2, h3, which had evolved differently already by the time when Late PIE and Proto-Anatolian were independent languages. There is no consensus as to what these phonemes were like, or how many of them (if any) survived into Late PIE, but it is widely accepted that PIH *h2 was probably uvular or pharyngeal, and that *h3 was labialized. Commonly cited possibilities are ʔ, ʕ, ʕw and x, χ~ħ, xw. See Appendix II.3.
References
- Quiles, Carlos, López-Menchero, Fernando, A Grammar of Modern Indo-European, Second Edition, Indo-European Language Association, 2009, ISBN 9781448682065
