Re: Centum in Vedic?

--- In cybalist@..., "Dean_Anderson" <dean_anderson@...> wrote:

>
> > The source of <s.> is IE *s in the "ruki" context, not a velar
> stop, so it's quite clear that <kH> is secondary. Quite likely, the
> spelling was employed to represent a velar fricative pronunciation
> [x] in the dialects. The development of "ruki" *s^ to *x is

attested

> in Slavic. A similar development has taken place in Spanish (the

old

> pronunciation of <j/x> was [s^]).
>
> So then what we're seeing is probably s. > x > kh? In other words,
> it's an uncommon but not unheard of "un-satemization"?

On Swedish sh > x : I might be wrong, but it seems to me native
Swedes don't get past a pronunciation I can best compare to the
American version of wh-. You hear the -x- pronunciation from
immigrants, however, probably because they identify Swedish sh- with
the -x- of their native language (any Swedes here want to comment on
this?). This may then also have happened in the other cases, or?

Torsten