Laryngeal enhancement in early Germanic* Gregory K. Iverson University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Joseph C. Salmons University of Wisconsin–Madison This paper builds on growing evidence that aspirated or fortis obstruents in lan- guages like English and German are laryngeally marked, but that phonetic voicing in the (unmarked) unaspirated or lenis series is contextually determined. Employ- ing the laryngeal feature set proposed by Halle & Stevens (1971), as incorporated into the ‘ dimensional theory ’ of laryngeal representation (Avery & Idsardi 2001, forthcoming), we develop an explicit account of this phonetic enhancement of phonological contrasts, which is widely known as ‘ passive voicing ’. We find that both passive voicing and inherent aspiration have been phonetic and phonological characteristics of the Germanic languages since the break-up of Indo-European, with laryngeally unmarked stops repeatedly enhanced by the gesture of [spread glottis]. A key implication of this view is that Verner’s Law was not an innovation specifically of early Germanic, but rather is an automatic (ultimately phonologised) reflex of passive voicing, itself a ‘persistent change’ rising out of the enduring ‘ base of articulation ’ that came to characterise Germanic. 1 Introduction A mounting body of phonological research points to the conclusion that the voiceless aspirated or fortis series of obstruents in languages like English and German are laryngeally marked in the phonology, whereas superficial voicing in the unaspirated lenis series is phonologically inert, i.e. voicing in these languages is contextually determined rather than contrastive (Rice 1989, 1994, Rice & Avery 1989, Iverson & Salmons 1995, 1999, Avery 1996, Avery & Idsardi 2001, Honeybone 2002, among others). Employing the laryngeal feature set proposed by Halle & Stevens * Early partial versions of this paper were presented at the International Conference on Historical Linguistics in Melbourne and the Germanic Linguistics Annual Conference in Banff, and in talks at the Humboldt University in Berlin, the Linguistics Student Organisation at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and Ohio State University during 2001 and 2002. We thank those audiences for many helpful comments and suggestions, and especially owe the following for comments on earlier drafts : Anthony Buccini, Morris Halle, Rob Howell, Michael Jessen, Brian Joseph, Monica Macaulay, Richard Page, Bert Vaux and the anonymous reviewers for this journal. All shortcomings naturally remain our own. Phonology 20 (2003) 43–74. f 2003 Cambridge University Press DOI: 10.1017/S0952675703004469 Printed in the United Kingdom 43