Re: Latin /j/ etc. (was: Latin <h>)
| From: | Tristan McLeay <zsau@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, January 15, 2004, 0:27 |
|---|
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> At 21:08 12.1.2004, Ray Brown wrote:
>
> >Not Sardinian - but 'twas so in Romanian. Old French had [dZ]. One must
> >remember that intervocalic /j/ was always geminate in Latin, i.e. [jj].
> >It was a change from [jj] --> [dj], and confusions in spelling, {z} ~ {di}
> >~ {i} show the change going on in the 2nd & 3rd cents. CE.
>
> What do you think of the hypothesis that the spelling
> MAGIS represented /majjis/ even in classical times?
My revealing-ignorance question is how do we know that intervocalic /j/
was always geminite in Latin?
--
Tristan
Reply