Re: Questions about Japanese historical phonology.

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:12:16 +0300, Isaac A. Penzev <isaacp@...> wrote:

>Well, synchronicly that is simple:
>-tsu, -ru, -u (older -fu) > -tta
>-mu, -bu, -nu > -nda
>-ku > -ita
>-gu > -ida
>-eru, iru > -eta, -ita.
With the velars, it's [-i:ta] and [-i:da] -- long vowels.

Hmm. I learned those forms as the -te forms. The plain past -ta isn't used
much in my experience, especially by gaijin. ;) And the -te forms are used a
whole helluva lot either way.

I learned it in some sort of poem:

utsurutte,
nubumunde,
kuiite,
guiide,
sushite.

And with the -eru, -iru forms, for EVERY conjugation of those verbs you
remove the -ru and add whatever ending (it's the most regular conjugation),
so pointing out -eru, -iru is rather a moot point, especially since you
didn't point out the -su > -shite form.

John Cowan wrote:

>Either that, or the Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian languages satemised
>independantly. I can't see how a satem>centum change could really take
>place.
I've heard that... in Appendix I of the American Heritage Dictionary, I
believe. Apparently the sound changes are more complicated than before
known, and I don't put it past them to have developed that independently.

Ben

Replies