Re[2]: [tied] Eastern cz sz

At 4:36:17 PM on Thursday, February 7, 2008, Rick
McCallister wrote:

> Hungarian <s> for /s^/
> and <sz> for /s/
> is interesting.
> What happened?
> Was <s> originally an apical /s/ that switched to /s^/

> and bumped an original /s^/ to /s/
> Or was the original situation similar to Basque <s>
> and <z> which stand for apical and non-apical /s/?
> --and one got bumped over to /s^/?

Don't know; I've not seen much of anything on Hungarian
historical phonology.

Brian