On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 19:10:44 +0100, "alex_lycos" <
altamix@...>
wrote:
>But with an "l" which is followed by "a" or "u" is not even so easy,
>even if u > iu for geting a "i".
>Of course I was thinking at Latin construction of type "cla-", "clu-"
>like in "clavis" and " includere" or "inclavare"
>or is there maybe /a/+/i/ after loosing of intervocalic /v/ ; is this
>/ai/ ( from /a/+/i/) the one which should be made responsible for this
>/cl/ > /chi/ (ki) ?
No. The clusters kl-, gl-, pl-, bl-, fl- tended to become palatalized
everywhere in Romance. Italian has carried this the furthest (clave >
chiave, glande > ghianda, placere > piacere, blanko > bianco, flore >
fiore), French/Occitan/Catalan have lost the palatalization (e.g. Cat.
clau, glacie > glaç, plaer, blanc, flor). Romanian only has it for
gl- and kl- (ghindã, cheie), but ple:nu > plin, blasphemare >
blestema, flore > floare). Castilian and Portuguese (at least before
accented vowel) have lost the unvoiced stop, and only the palatal /l^/
remains (Cast. llave, lleno, llama), which in Portuguese further
develops to /c^/ > /s^/ (chave, cheio, chamma).
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...