From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 12502
Date: 2002-02-26
----- Original Message -----From: Dean_AndersonSent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:53 AMSubject: Re: [tied] Centum in Vedic?> So then what we're seeing is probably s. > x > kh? In other words,
it's an uncommon but not unheard of "un-satemization"?It has nothing to do with Satem/Centum developments. I don't think the last step (x > kH) is real as a sound change (though it is very possible that in classical Sanskrit the dialecticisms in question had a spelling-pronunciation with [kH]). More likely, <kH> is merely an orthographic rendering of [x] (Skt. had no characters to spell <xV-> directly, so <kHV-> was used as an approximation). Even English often uses <kh> as a rough indication of foreign [x] in loanwords.Piotr