Re: [tied] Nominative: A hybrid view

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Fri, 23 May 2003 22:35:26 +0000, Jens Elmegård Rasmussen
> <jer@...> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the support. I hardly dared adduce it, and I would

still

> >like to hear if you know of evidence that proves that
> >intervocalic /s/ was ever voiced in Spanish? It is elsewhere, and

<j-

> >> [x-] was obviously once voiced, but is there real evidence for

[z]

> >> [s]?
>
> Yes: intervocalic /s/ was written <ss> and /z/ was written <s>.

E.g.

>
> USU > uso /uzo/
> AUSARE > osar(e) /ozar(e)/
> FORMOSU > hermoso /hermozo/
>
> vs.
>
> GRASSU > grasso /graso/
> PASSU > passo /paso/
> GROSSU > gruesso /grweso/
> TRAVERSU > traviesso /travyeso/

Thanks, Miguel, most illuminating. Now another important question:
Can the lost opposition /s/ : /z/ in Spanish be recovered on purely
synchronic evidence? Could it be shown, for example, that some /s/'s
are former geminates which caused the syllable to become closed and
thereby influenced the placing of the accent, while other /s/'s have
been single units all along? In theory I would expect this to be
possible though I would not find it easy to carry out the
demonstration.

Jens