[tied] Re: Slavic palatalistions: why /c^/, /c/?

From: tgpedersen
Message: 41517
Date: 2005-10-22

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
wrote:
>
> At 5:38:50 AM on Friday, October 21, 2005, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> >> Richard Wordingham wrote:
>
>
> >>> Old French has the 'first palatalisation' k > c (no
> >>> comment on intermediate stages), i.e. the Common Romance
> >>> palatalisation, and a 'second palatalisation' k > c^
> >>> before original Latin *a. These thave simplified c > s
> >>> and c^ > s^, as in _cent chevaux_ from _centum caballos_
> >>> 'a hundred horses'.
>
> >>> As to the overtaking, the 'first palatalisation' was k >
> >>> c^ in Picard
>
> > Do you have a reference?
>
> M.K. Pope, From Latin to Modern French, Manchester Univ.
> Press, 1952, §1320, Phonology §i. Some examples given
> there: avanchier, princhier, pieche, blieche. Also briefly
> noted in §292, with the example of <chent>. This is
> originally not just Picard, but northern OFr generally. See
> also English <catch> and <chase>, from Old North French
> <cachier> and Old Central French <chacier> respectively.
> (ONFr retained /k/ before /a/.)
>

Oh now I get it. I was puzzled why I couldn't find mr. Picard's book
of Proto-Slavic in our library service. ;-)


Torsten