Re: Middle English question

JOEL MATTHEW PEARSON wrote:

> Also, one small point:  "nother" was probably [no:Der] rather than
> [no:Ter].  Voicing of intervocalic fricatives like "th" goes right
> back to Old English, and if it was [D] in Old English and [D] in
> Modern English, I don't see why it wouldn't have been [D] in Middle
> English.  (I'm less certain about "the" and "then".  These had [T]
> in Old English, and [D] in Modern English, but I'm not sure when the
> switch-over happened.)
Well, remember also that even, during the Old English period, scribes
made no functional difference between thorn <=FE> and eth <=F0>, which
today normally have their Icelandic values (AFAIK) of the voiceless
and voiced interdental fricatives respectively.   So, it would be difficu=
lt
to tell based solely on the spelling what their Middle-English counterpar=
ts
should have been.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
AIM: Deuterotom ICQ: 4315704
<http://www.angelfire.com/tx/eclectorium/>
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."

"Things just ain't the way they used to was."
     - a man on the subway
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D