Re: /s/ -> /h/ [was: Re: Betreft: Re: k(w)->p]

At 2:37 pm -0700 27/1/00, dirk elzinga wrote:
>On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, yl-ruil wrote (concerning /s/ -> /h/):
>
>> I think this change occurs generally because s is voiced to z, which then
>> weakens to h-. This is also really quite common in the indo-european family:
>> *sawelios --> Greek. helios and Welsh haul (sun, obviously).
>
>There is no evidence for an intermediate voiced stage in the
>alternation between /s/ and /h/. In fact, such a step would make
>the change less likely. What /s/ and /h/ have in common is the
>spreading of the vocal folds during articulation--in fact,
>that's all an /h/ is; spread vocal folds.
Absolutely - both sounds are voicless fricatives.

And the change is very widespread.  Welsh has been mentioned.  The Gaelic
languages have /h/ as the 'soft mutation' form of /s/.  Post vocalic /s/
became /h/ in early French before disappearing to leave, generally, a
circumflex over the vowel to lament its demise.  And in Andalusian Spanish
/s/ has become [h] in just such a position, los amigos /loha'miGoh/.

Prevocalic and intervocalic /s/ became /h/ in early Greek (with
intervocalic /h/ then generally disappearing.  Prevocalic /s/ became /h/ in
Persian at some stage.  And there are many more examples.

>This spreading
>inhibits voicing (actually, makes it impossible). The lenition
>of /s/ to /z/ puts it on a different path whose endpoint is not
>likely to be /h/.
No it not! It's generally /r/, cf English 'was', 'were' <-- wæs, wæron;
Latin 'es', 'est', but 'eram', 'eras' etc.

Ray.

=========================================
A mind which thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language.
                   [J.G. Hamann 1760]
=========================================