there is a phonetic constraint against two such consonants in the same root, the Proto-Indo-European glottalic consonants need only have been allophones conditioned by the lexical accent. Since Proto-Indo-European had distinct syllable weights, a stressed short syllable nucleus may have glottalized its onset while a long one (pre)glottalized its coda, at least in polysyllabic words: Conclusion If Occam’s razor suggests that Pre-Proto-Indo-European glottalization was likely an allophonic variation of the consonants in stressed syllables rather than a full phonetic distinction, the question of how *bʱ came to appear in Proto-Indo-European with *p rather than *b remains unanswered. It is typologically odd that the traditional reconstruction appears to distinguish only phonations of the same voice onset time anywhere. If the hypothesis of Indo-European sharing a homeland with Uralic and North Caucasian is supported, it suggests that Proto-Indo-European arose as an interlex of Proto-Uralic and Proto-North Caucasian. The most plausible model of Pre-Proto-Indo-European consonantism would then appear to have a structure similar to the position of Gamkrelidze and Ivanov (1973, 1995:5-70): However, if glottalization was likely an allophonic variation of the consonants in stressed syllables, the cross-linguistically common phonological rule against roots with two glottalized consonants forced the ejectives to pulmonize: Since geminated consonants are typologically rare as word initials, the geminates lenited: This table looks remarkably similar to the Laryngeal theory as it stands, but there are still several phonemes in it that do not exist in this theory. First, the voiceless plosives lost aspiration to the fricatives: Next, the fricatives developed gradation: Third, the stops became grades of the same consonants: As a final step before Proto-Indo-European proper, the non-dorsal fricatives re-stopped: Notes References General References Charles M. Barrack, The Glottalic Theory revisited: a negative appraisal, Indogermanische Forschungen, 2002, pp. 76–95. Charles M. Barrack, The Glottalic Theory revisited: a negative appraisal. Part II: The typological fallacy underlying the Glottalic Theory, Indogermanische Forschungen, 2003, pp. 1–16. Robert S. P. Beekes, Comparative Indo-European Linguistics. 2nd edition revised and corrected by Michiel de Vaan, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2011. Allan R. Bomhard, Reconstructing Proto-Nostratic: Comparative Phonology, Morphology, and Vocabulary. 2 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2008. Allan R. Bomhard, The Nostratic Hypothesis in 2011: Trends and Issues. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man, 2011. James Clackson, Indo-European Linguistics: An Introduction (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp. 40–49. Anthony Fox, Linguistic Reconstruction. Oxford University Press, 1995. Thomas V. Gamkrelidze