Re: [tied] Dacian - /H/ -> seems not possible

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 17:09:24 +0000, Richard Wordingham
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>> Latin had no /h/ (it lost it very early on). Therefore, no native
>> Romanian
>> words have /h/, and no substrate /h/'s would have survived among a
>> Romanized population.
>
>Does that follow? Where do Scots <-lz-> and <-nz-> (originally
>palatalised) come from?

Never heard of them. Can you give some examples?

>I'm assuming Gaelic, but should that be seen as a superstrate?

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...