NATLANG: Re: "sz" (was: Beekes.)

>Hi!
>
>Tristan McLeay writes:
>>...
>> Hence the Hungarian <sz> is essentially the same thing as the German ß.
>>
>> I hope that's clear, or that someone can clarify --- it's a bit hard to
>> discuss this sort of thing when you can't remember the actual nature of
>> the sounds.
>
>Probably apical s vs. laminal s.  Apical tends to sound like /S/ for
>speakes of languages with only laminal s.
>**Henrik
Makes sense now. There are examples of this thing elsewhere too, frex the
oldest Germanic loans into Finnic reflect a Germanic apical /s/ as */S/ initially
(modern /h/). These days its *us* who don't have /S/, and it's pretty common
for Finnish tourists be told that our /s/'s sound like /S/...

But what's the deal with Polish <s sz> = /s s`/ then? Does also having /s\/
somehow mess this correlation up?

John Vertical