From: Gordon Selway
>--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Richard Wordingham"
>> --- In email@example.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 15:37:26 +0000, elmeras2000 <jer@...> wrote:
>> > Why would asyllabic endings like *-s, *-t become voiced *-z, *-d
>> > when not sentence final)? I did not address that issue in message 21817,
>> > but it's not terribly difficult to come up with a possible explanation.
>> > The phenomenon occurs at a morpheme boundary (e.g. *pod-z, *to- d). If
>> > morpheme boundaries were previously word-boundaries (that's the principle
>> > of agglutination), then perhaps there was some overt prosodical marking of
> > > the word/morpheme boundary, such as a rise in pitch, or a glottal stød.
> > Do you need word boundaries? I can't help think there was something
>> similar with the plural -s in English. There are several examples
>> of fossil /s/ - 'bodice' as opposed to 'bodies', 'pence' as opposed
>> to 'pennies', 'dice' as opposed to 'dies'. Similarly, the Scottish
> > pronunciations of 'teas' and 'tease' are reported to be different.
>Some Germanic dialects (German, Dutch, Kent, Somerset) have initial
>z-, v- etc, some (North Germanic, Friesian (and Noordhollands under
>the influence of an old Friesian substrate?) and the rest of English
>have s-, f- etc. If we explain the difference by positing a
>some type of H, English had dialects with and without. Which might
>explain Richard's observations.
>BTW Caesar notes that the Germani had the 'murmur fractum' as an
>ideal. Which we might interpret to mean that some used it and some
>didn't. We might even tentatively identify it with that internal
>reorganisation of the Elbe-Germani Rischl speaks, who later expanded
>to the Rhine-Weser Germani (and without mentioning further names).
>Note that the z-, v- dialects of English are Saxon, thus coming from
>south of the origin of the other dialects.
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/