Re: [tied] Re: Derivation Rules from Old Slavic to Romanian

From: alex
Message: 26791
Date: 2003-11-01

Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 14:01:33 +0100, alex <alxmoeller@...>
> wrote:
>
>> Richard Wordingham wrote:
>>> I think the change ct > pt has to be discussed in the context of the
>>> cluster. The discussion ought also to deal with x > ps and gn >
>>> mn. I propose we move the discussion of this group of changes to
>>> the phonet group, as it could be quite a lengthy discussion.
>>
>>> Richard.
>>
>> it seems that for "cs" >ps" should work the via "ki/pi".
>
> Not.

I would wonder why not:-)

>
>> This won't work
>> for "gn" >"mn" ; I don't even think here we have to do with the
>> so-called "labialisation" even if here (in Rom.) "m" is an labial
>> sound. I simply stil don't have any viable examples for "g" > "m"
>> even via "g"
>>> "b" .
>
> Latin <gn> was pronounced /Nn/. The change from /N/ to /m/ is
> comparable to the change from /k/ to /p/ in the clusters /ks/, /kt/.
>
How you can compare fish with cheese? I assume "N" is the palatal "n'"
in your notation or what should it be?

Alex