Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Ladino, Hs, and Fs

From:Raymond A. Brown <raybrown@...>
Date:Thursday, February 4, 1999, 20:54
At 9:03 am -0500 4/2/99, Brian Betty wrote:

>Right, so Carlos' statement applies to this situation - if the words are >being written 'fasis' and 'fue,' might that not suggest that f>h>0 had not >yet occurred, so 'izo' could *not* be the same as modern Spanish 'hizo.' I >think!?!?!
Alas, not so. 'faces' (plural of 'faz') is still the modern Castilian - the initial /f/ has not changed in this word. And the change /f/ -> /h/ -> zero did not take place before [w], so modern Castilian also has 'fue'. So i'm a bit puzzled by the thread over 'fasis', 'fue' & 'izo'. Ladino is surely in complete conformity with Castillian Spanish here! No, the the slightly surprising thing to me about 'izo' is that Castilian [T], should be _voiced_ fricatived [z] in Ladino (since this is surely the sound implied by spelling the consonant with 'zayin'?) But IIRC the modern [T] developed from both earlier [ts] and [dz], the latter being devoiced. I guess in earlier Spanish we had [hi'dzo] <- [fi'dzo] where the intervocalic -c- of the Latin perfect 'feci', 'fecisti' etc was voiced as well as palatalized. Fascinating. Ray.