--- In phoNet@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@i...> wrote:

> 01-11-03 22:43, Richard Wordingham wrote:
>
> >> The step /ft/ > /pt/ in
> >> Romanian also offers no phonetic problems, although /f/ does

not

> > otherwise
> >> yield /p/ in Romanian (only in the clusters /pt/, /ps/ < */ft/,
> > */fs/).
> >
> > Are there other examples of this limited change? I couldn't

think

> > of any, which is what bothers me about the idea.
>
> It's similar to the extremely limited change of *fs > ps in Old

English

> (*wafsa- > wæps and *rafs- > ræfs-/refs- (Early Mercian) > ræps-),

which

> parallels the much more frequent "hardening" of *xs > ks, as in

<fox,

> oxa, six, weaxan> etc.

*fs > ps and *xs > ks don't persuade me of the plausibility of *ft >
pt.

However, I think I've found *ft > pt in the development of Old
Norse. We have the etymologies English _lift_ (v.) < Old Norse
_lypta_ < Germanic *luftjan, and Old English _wefta_, _weft_, Old
Norse _veptr_, _vipta_ < Proto-Germanic *wefton, *weftaz and
*weftiz 'weft'.

Richard.