Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: A sound change question...

From:Muke Tever <muke@...>
Date:Thursday, August 7, 2003, 16:48
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <trwier@...>
> Quoting Garth Wallace <gwalla@...>: > > > Muke Tever wrote: > > > From: "Peter Bleackley" <Peter.Bleackley@...> > > > > > >>[kw] -> [p] > > > > > > If we're throwing in clusters, dont forget [tw] > [s] and [kw] > [t], both > > > from Greek. > > > > Those three seem strange. How are they explained? > > The first, [kw]/[k_w] > [p], is not so strange, and is well-attested. > It occurs simply by fusing some of the features of the two elements/ > segments into one segment: the feature [-continuant] (i.e., stopness) > and [-voice] from the [k] and the feature [labial] from the [w]. > > The other two are more strange, but not unbelievable. I don't know > the particular history of the changes he's mentioning, but [tw] > [s] > might be from two distinct that happened changes in Greek: [w] > null, > and [t] > [s] / _i.
I believe the intermediate in [tw] > [s] was some manner of [tSw], given how it actually comes out as -ss- intervocalically (except in some dialects, including Attic, which have -tt-). Examples are the second person pronoun, e.g. acc. *twe > se; and *twr=ks > sarx "flesh".
> I'm not sure about [kw] > [t] -- does Peter have a citation for that?
Well, if the difference between [kw] and [k_w] is not being held, there are: *penkwe > pente "five" *kwe > te "and" (encl.) *kwis > tis "who" *Muke! -- http://frath.net/

Reply

Roger Mills <romilly@...>