The Anatolian stop system and the Indo-Hittite hypothesis

Abstract

This article argues that the phonetic distinction between the Hittite fortis and lenis stops was not one of voice, but rather one of length, and that this distinction must have been present in Proto-Anatolian as well. On the basis of typological and comparative considerations it is argued that the Proto-Anatolian stop system cannot have developed from the stop system that is traditionally reconstructed for the Proto-Indo-European mother language and in which voice is the basic distinction. Instead, the relationship must have been the other way around: the voice distinction of PIE is a younger development of the length distinction as found in the Proto-Anatolian stop system. This relationship can only be accounted for within the context of the Indo-Hittite hypothesis, and therefore forms a new argument in favor of it.

Anatolian evidence suggests that the Indo-European laryngeals *h2 and *h3 were uvular stops

“…PIA *p = *[pː], PIA *t = [tː], etc. (Kloekhorst 2016). This would then imply that *h2 at this level was a long stop as well, *[qː].…”

The phonology, phonetics, and diachrony of Sturtevant’s Law

“…I evaluate the implications of this analysis of StvLfirst, for the reconstruction of the PIE phonological system, and then for diachronic phonological typology. In the former respect, I argue in particular that the Hittite evidence does not support the revisions to the traditional reconstruction of this system proposed by Kloekhorst (2016), and in the latter, that StvL does represent a case in which a historical obstruent voicing contrast was reanalyzed as a length contrast (as argued already by Melchert 1994, 18-21;contra Kloekhorst 2016, Jäntti 2017. Lastly, I discuss some issues related to StvL that remain outstanding and directions for future research.…”

“…c. If a sound change, is it Hittite that has innovated as assumed by Sturtevant? Or was it the ancestor of the non-Anatolian IE languages that innovated as argued by Kloekhorst (2016)? d. If a sound change, in what phonological environments did it apply?…”

“…I contend that StvL is a "law" rather than a "tendency" (cf. Kloekhorst 2016;contra Pozza 2011contra Pozza , 2012; that Hittite orthographic geminate stops contrast phonologically with singleton stops by length rather than by voice (cf. Melchert 1994, 14-21, Kloekhorst 2014contra Kimball 1999, 46, 94-95, i.a.…”

“…I then introduce some data that problematizes this hypothesis, cases in which a PIE voiced stop that was phonetically devoiced by an immediately following voiceless stop unexpectedly yields a non-geminate stop in Hittite. Previous solutions to this problem are discussed, including Kloekhorst's (2016) recent arguments that PIE did not have voicing assimilation and the radical revision of the PIE stop system that he advocates partially on this basis.…”