Betreft: Re: k(w)->p
|From:||Rob Nierse <rnierse@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, January 26, 2000, 14:33|
An example of the other way round (p>k_w) is in Iroquoian
Languages (they lack bilabial stops & nasals):
penny -> k_we:ni etc.
>>> Vasiliy Chernov <bc_@...> 01/26 3:21 >>>On Wed, 26 Jan 2000 08:07:14 -0500, Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> wrote:
>Paul Bennett wrote:
>> k_w -> x_w -> W -> p\ -> p
>> As to why the initial velar weakened in the first place, I leave that asan
>> excersize for the reader,
>Is it a property of other voiceless stops? Does /t/ become /s/ or /T/?
>If it's just in /k_w/ that the fricative weakens, it would seem pretty
>odd to me.
Why? You even needn't have /k/ > /x/.
E. g.: /k_w/ > /q_w/ (uvular) > ... oh, you can do funny things with
uvulars then ;)
In general, it seems that labials and velars/uvulars get fricativized
easier than dentals (Japanese, Tungus-Manchu, etc.).