[tied] Re: Mercury and lead

--- In cybalist@..., MCLSSAA2@... wrote:

> Someone wrote:
> > in older French (I have no date for this), e.g. <chevaux>, pl. of
> > <cheval> would be pronounced cheváush (sort of portuguese-like
> > inflection, yes?).
>
> --- In cybalist@..., tgpedersen@... wrote:
> > I am sure that this is the standard explanation, but given the

then

> > pronounciation of the letter x as /s^/ in Spanish and Portuguese,
> > doesn't it make sense to assume the French pronounced it that way
> > too? I don't see anything phonetically preventing this assumption
> > either Cf. Portuguese <meus>.
>
> For French, big negatory on that. Portuguese {x} would have been

[sh]

> everywhere, before Portuguese got flooded with Latin and Greek

words

> with `x' in; but French final `x' arose as a habitual handwriting
> distortion of "-us" : {animals} > {animaus} > {animax}; then

scribes

> treated the "x" as a variant of "s" and put the "u" back to get the
> spelling more like the pronunciation: thus {animaux} and sometimes
> even {animaulx}. To that, add classicalizing scribes replacing

final

> "s" by "x" where Latin had final "x", e.g. "voix" and "noix".
>

I love big textbook negatories. And the evidence? Actual instances of
written <animalx>? Did scribes elsewhere in Europe use the letter x
for -us-?

Torsten