Re: plausible sound change?

Aidan Grey wrote:

>  I'm also wondering if a common welsh derivation
>could work in reverse:
>
>  in plosive clusters, the second element is
>fricativized, then the first element assimilates to
>it, and then vocalizes, forming diphthongs.
>
>  frex: latin nocte > nokT > noxT > noeT /nojT/
>approximately.
>
>  So, could i develop into a palatal fricative, and
>then cause fricativization by assimilation? In welsh,
>i: often > /ij/, with the /j/ becoming /D/. If this is
>plausible, then I've got my solution:
>
>  i:, e:, i all > ij in tonic syll
>  j > pal fric before cons
>  assimilation of fric
>  loss of pal fric
>
>  itir 'between' < OI itir
>   > ijtir
>   > ijTir
>   > iTir <ithir>
>
>  Does this seem plausible now?
Much moreso.  But you seem to have omitted a step (perhaps irrelevant):
    *'itir > i:tir > ijtir
    ijtir > içtir  (that should be c-cedilla; yes?)
    (maybe even an intermediate çt > ht ??)
    içtir/ihtir > iTir <ithir>

The step detailling ijt > içt would be relevant only if, perhaps,  some
dialect took off from that point and retained or further modified the form,
maybe > **iStir etc.

My general feeling is that  the "odder" the sound change, the more steps are
required to show how it gets from there to here.....