Re: COMMENT PLEASE (WAS:Conlang Journal and being a fish)

Roger Mills scripsit:

> Theoretically, in historical linguistics, sound change is exceptionless--
> that is, if X (in this case /t/) undergoes change >Y in environment Z (in
> this case /o__a/, or more generally, between vowels), then all instances of
> X will undergo the change.
>
> Thus in the examples given, there is no reason at all why -ota > -oT in one
> case, but ultimately > -ora in the other. All things being equal, the
> sequence -ota has to develop in one way or the other; it can't be both.
Ah, so it's you who doesn't believe in unconditioned phonemic splits
(and all the time I was attributing this to Mark Line).

How then do you explain the French split that led to "franc,ais" on
the one hand, and "danois" on the other?  Randomly, certain words with
the suffix /E/ became /wE/ > /wA/.  Verbal endings consistently
remained /E/, but in other cases there is no trace of explanation
for the split.

--
Knowledge studies others / Wisdom is self-known;      John Cowan
Muscle masters brothers / Self-mastery is bone;       jcowan@reutershealth.com
Content need never borrow / Ambition wanders blind;   www.ccil.org/~cowan
Vitality cleaves to the marrow / Leaving death behind.    --Tao 33 (Bynner)

Reply