Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Origin of Spanich /ch/ and /j/

From:BP Jonsson <bpj@...>
Date:Thursday, November 28, 2002, 10:34
At 13:35 26.11.2002 +0200, you wrote:
>I'm comparing Sp. _ojo_ to Po. _olho_ and >VL _oclu_ and get lost in doubts...
Well, *kl developed rather differently in the different Romance lgs, and different from *lj and *ll within most of the languages. At 10:30 27.11.2002 +0200, Isaac A. Penzev wrote:
>I know. The question still is: how can I know if in OS it was /S/ or /Z/?
From the etymology, obviously. Also IIRC Judeo-Spanish doesn't have these mergers, i.e. never lost the voiced fricatives/affricates. You could also compare with Portuguese/French/Italian. At 13:54 26.11.2002 -0300, Pablo David Flores wrote:
>Maybe the distinction was lost later and there were >/x/ and /G/ for a while;
Hardly, since then /Z/ would have merged with [G] /g/, and you'd get _fuejo_ rather than _fuego_. IIRC I read explicitly somewhere that the sequence was Z > S > x. BTW you might want to check out Author: Entwistle, William J. Title: The Spanish language together with Portuguese, Catalan and Basque Edition: 2. ed. Published: London Year: 1962, pr. 1965 Description: 367 s. Series: The great languages / B.Philip Jonsson B^)> -- (delete X!) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ No man forgets his original trade: the rights of nations and of kings sink into questions of grammar, if grammarians discuss them. -Dr. Samuel Johnson (1707 - 1784)