Re: The palatal sham :) (Re: [tied] Re: Albanian (1))

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 5:49 AM
Subject: Re: The palatal sham :) (Re: [tied] Re: Albanian (1))


> It's interesting to note what happens in areas where uvular and velar
stops
> are common, such as the North West Coast area of North America. In
> Wakashan, which has /k/ and /q/, /k/ has a tendency to go to /c^/, and
this
> is an areal feature of other NW Coast languages (Salishan, Chimakuan).
> Proto-Athabaskan is reconstructed with labialized consonants: *c^, *c^W,
> *k, *q, *qW. The absence of *kW is explained by an unconditional merger
> with *c^W (Proto-Athabaskan */k/ is described as "front velar").
>
> In a system with both velar and uvular stops, there is therefore a
> potential for the velar series to become palatalized.

This also happens in some Arabic dialects (in Iran?) where /k/ > /k'/ which
is reflected in Turkish loanwords from Arabic too.

> In a system with palatal and velar stops, there is to my knowledge no
> tendency, nor would one expect there to be, to back the palatals so that
> they merge with the velars.
>
> Of course a system with palatal*ized* consonants always has a potential to
> lose the palatalization, so it matters whether we consider *k^ to be a
> palatal stop (IPA /c/), or a palatalized /k'/.
>
> Considering the satem and the centum evidence, the first solution (*k^ =
> /c/, *k = /k/) seems out of the question, because of the centum facts.
The
> second possibility (*k^ = /k'/, *k = /k/) is possible: centum and satem
> both could follow from it. The third possibility (*k^ = /k/, *k = /q/)
> also explains satem and centum (as in Wakashan), and has the additional
> advantage of explaining /a/-colouring near *k.

I think this is the most reasonable statement. I too agree that uvular
theory is possible but I also think that the traditional one is possible
also. I see no reason to reject it fully.

Mate