Re: Basque onddo

From: stlatos
Message: 70360
Date: 2012-10-31

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...> wrote:
>
> Prochain, proche and approcher aren't in contrast with the whole
> picture, because they rather proceed from *propea:nus, *propeus and
> *adpropea:re. Apart from Gaulish names, all the rest is made of 1)
> /kt/ and /ks/ with /k/ > /x/ > /ç/ before dental obstruent (a partial
> assimilation), 2) /Vs/ + sonorant > long vowel + sonorant (fricative >
> approximant > vowel lengthening), also an assimilation, and 3) <gn>
> [ŋn] > [ɳ:], the only proper palatalisation; note that étain, as
> opposed to Provençal estanh, Catalan estany, Castilian estaño,
> Portuguese estanho, simply shows (after diphthongization of the vowel
> preceding palatal nasal, as in montaigne < *montanea) regular
> depalatalisation of final palatal [ɳ] as in loin < longe, whose
> contrast with long < longus definitely excludes palatalization of
> velar nasals.


I never said all N > NY, I said the opp. The sequence isn't clear, and it could be Ng > NYg > Ng by assim. (if borrowed at mid-stage into Bq; otherwise Bq was just influenced by Romance, not exactly as any (or from one now extinct)).