Allan Bomhard the author of Reconstructing Proto- Indo-European outlines a historical background of the entire reconstruction process of the Indo-European language. Bomhard starts by saying that even though August Schleicher was the first person to attempt the rebuilding of the phonological system and the nature of the Indo-European parent language in the year 1861. But, earlier scholars such as Jacob Grimm and Rasmus Rask had already given out the fundamental volume of the correspondence sound between the existing daughter languages. Hence, the need to conduct the reconstruction of the phonological systems of their mother tongue had already been identified by Theodor Benfey in 1837, but Schleicher succeeded the work.
Inclusion, Bomhard backs up his argument by acknowledging the Schleicher’s reconstruction to have maintained high acceptance up to the late years of 1870’s, when various influential discoveries come to be in a rapid succession. Further, he emphasizes on the discussion of the Neogrammarian period, which he states to have done a proper work on the reconstruction of the phonological system by the end of the 19th century as well as gained acceptance due to its fair, accurate outline of the Proto-Indo-European. Thus, he recommends strong respect for the period due to its affirmative adherence to the principles of the sound law (Bomhard, 2016).
Additionally, Bomhard helps us develop a deeper understanding of the stop system that consists of the four-way contrast, such as; A-stops of the plain voiceless, B-stops aspirated voiceless, the C-plain voice stops and lastly the aspirated voice stop. Also, his primary focus became more concentrated on the scholars who adventured the field of reconstruction of the Indo-European Language. On the other hand, he conveys a well productive message to the students with a greater interest in learning how the reconstruction process took place. For example, Bomhard explains the work that Brugmann contributed to the process, which was the rebuilding of the five short vowels, five long vowels, the schwa Indo-Germanic um also known as the reduced vowels as well as the long or original vowels. However, he moved to the 20th century to 1970 where he majorly focused on the little Ferdinand de Saussure, who attempted to perfect the long or original vowels, which he derived from the earlier sequences of coefficient sonantique plus the short vowels. Also, he describes a series of scholars who come up with solutions in trying to solve the entire problems resulting from the removal of the outdated traditional voiceless aspirates. For instance, he uses the example of Kurylowicz of 1964 who tried to bring out that the aspirates of voice were no longer phonemically voiced (Mallory & Adams, 2016).
Bomhard proceeds with his explanation of the Glottalic theory that he says involve several scholars who put to light much benefits of their work above that of the traditional way of reconstructing the Indo-European stop system. Therefore, he concludes by saying the Glottalic theory has spread attraction of a good deal of the full attention over the past two decades as well as widely spread with no universal acceptance. However, Bomhard the author of the article puts more focus of his work to reach both scholars and students who have high interest in learning the various reconstructions of languages. For example, he gives a precise sequence of the full steps involved in the reconstruction period that makes it easy to understand for both students and scholars. Also, the deeper explanations he gives on all the scholar who engaged in the rebuilding process gives a student a very ample time for doing more research regarding the whole topic of Indo-European language, its originality until its final reconstructed version. Hence, Bomhard tried to reach both the scholars and students in his full illustration on the reconstruction of the Indo-European Language.
However, I find Bomhard’s work being of high quality, the arrangements of words and points make his writing even more appealing to the eye; thus, uplift the reading motive of any reader or scholar. For, instance, he starts with the first attempt of the reconstruction process, which he gives all the detailed information about its development as well as all names of the inventors of full development. Inclusion, he clearly explains a point after point for example; when he was talking about the advantages that were found in the Glottalic period he provides much classified information about it (Byrd, 2010).
The main reconstruction steps, scholars involved and the type of work they produced help me understand the cultural competitive nature of the early European scholars. For example, we find Schleicher work being overtaken by more advanced inventories by the European scholars who also had passion in developing their language. Additionally, there are several language development achieved in the reconstruction of this language that makes me understand better the different types of the vowel that existed in the past years but can still help many individuals in developing their style. Therefore, the study of the reconstruction of the Indo-European language has added more value to my knowledge know-how on the language development and cultural approaches.
References
Bomhard, A. (2016). Reconstructing Proto-Indo-European: Phonology. Utexas.edu. Retrieved 4 March 2016, from http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/iedocctr/ie-ling/ie-phon-Bomhard.html
Byrd, A. (2010). Reconstructing Indo-European syllabification.
Mallory, J., & Adams, D. (2006). The Oxford introduction to Proto Indo European and the Proto Indo European World. New York: Oxford University Press.
