[tied] Re: bg. nvEsta

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 02:26:03 +0100, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...>
> wrote:
>
> >So we would expect Slavic *novIsta instead of neve^sta.
>
> *novIs^ta, in fact (because of the RUKI-rule).
>
>

Rather *novIxta (*s > *x/{*i,*u,*r,*k}_, the progressive
palatalization being blocked by an obstruent that follows and even
not being blocked would yield *s' rather than *s^ here), but I'm not
sure the *xt cluster adheres to Proto-Slavic phonotactics. Any
(counter)examples?

Sergei