Re: [tied] /s/ to /x/ sound change

----- Original Message -----

From: Piotr Gasiorowski

To: cybalist@egroups.com

Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 8:19 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] /s/ to /x/ sound change

Hi, Jerzy,

 

There are a number of natural trajectories of sound change. It's common for [s] to change into [s.] (a postalveolar or "retroflex" sound) -- it's enough for the tip of the tongue to be slightly retracted towards the palate. Both sounds are defined as "coronal", which means that they are articulated with the front part of the tongue. Some languages typically realise their /s/ phoneme as a remarkably retracted fricative in all positions, while in others retraction is conditiones by certain well-defined phonetic contexts. In the latter case we may eventually get a split of an original /s/ into two phonemes with quite different phonetic realisations.

 

The acoustic effect of retraction is enhanced if the sound is "dark" (velarised), i.e. if the tongue-tip articulation is accompanied by the raising of the back of the tongue towards the soft palate (the back part of the roof of the mouth, a.k.a. the velum). If now the tongue-tip "gesture" is weakened while the tongue-back raising is emphasised, the fricative may shift towards a predominantly "dorsal" (tongue-back) rather than coronal articulation, becoming velar [x].

 

This is what happened in the prehistory of Slavic: first, in some environments (most notably after *r, *u, *k and *i) PIE *s was retracted to [s.] (the same or only minimally different development, known mnemonically as the "r-u-k-i" change, is visible in Indo-Iranian and Baltic). Then -- and this is a uniquely Slavic development -- this [s.] changed into  velar [x]. When we say that PIE *s became Slavic *x in this or that context, we in fact take a mental shortcut, taking the intermediate stages for granted.

 

Incidentally, when followed by a front vowel or *j, *x was realised as a palatovelar fricative [ç], which evolved smoothly into Slavic palatoalveolar *s^ (= [S], pronounced like English "sh"). The latter sound was then dispalatalised in some languages, becoming again [s.] (= Polish "sz", Russian "sh"). This is why we have ucho [uxo] 'ear' but uszy [us.I] 'ears [originally dual]' < *aus(-os), *ausi:.

 

The articulation of [s] may also be "lenited" or weakened by reducing the tongue-tip movement; as a result, the fricative may change directly into the glottal glide ("aspirate") [h] (which is regarded by many phonologists as a "basic fricative" deprived of any place-of-articulation components). This development is familiar from the prehistory of Greek, Iranian and Brythonic Celtic; it also takes place (in syllable-final positions) in some Spanish dialects. Of course more complex evolution is also possible, e.g. [s] > [s.] > [x] > [h].

 

Our Spanish and Portuguese members could tell fascinating stories about the development of coronal fricatives in their languages.

 

Piotr

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: J. Klek

To: cybalist@egroups.com

Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 12:33 AM

Subject: [tied] /s/ to /x/ sound change

Hello!

My question may seem a bit amateurish, but I am an amateur
in this field (being an software engineer by profession):
When reading the discussion on slavic endings I started to
wonder how easy/likely is the /s/ to /x/ sound change?
I know it happens, but these sounds are no so similar (well,
both voiceless fricatives), so this sound change is not that
trivial as palatalization, for example. I would rather imagine
/s/ > /S/ > /x/. What (phonetically) help such a change?

Jerzy

p.s. I follow this list for a quite a long time and I like it
very much, but never dared a post before.