Re: [tied] Re: Latin pinso etc.

alex wrote:

> Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "alex" <alxmoeller@...>
>> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 2:48 AM
>> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Latin pinso etc.
>>
>>
>>> Piotr, you want to have an sonore "z" which has given "z^"? I assume
>>> the "z" is not a very disponible sound to become more affricated as
>>> it is.
>>
>> Check the meaning of "affricated" in a dictionary. [z] and [z^] are
>> both fricatives, and neither of them is more (or less) fricative than
>> the other. They can also rather easily change into one another.
>> Cross-linguistically, [z] seems to be quite prone to change.
>
> that was not the point of which of them is more fricative as other.
> The point is of "z > z^which appears to be imposible .Try to speak
> them out and try to make the change from "z" to "z^" even in a
> palatal medium.

I guess I have to revide some thing here Piotr.I thought there is no more
alteration of "z" in a palatal medium but it seems I was wrong. It seems it
iz, at least when "z" is followed by unstressed "half-vowel" "i", the one
very short "i" which makes the plural in rom.
The example which came in my mind was the word "treaz", the adjectiv.
Thinking about this word, I seen there are several words which shows the
same regular transformation of "z" > "j" consonantal "j" here, like in
French "jardine"
Thus sg= "z", pl = "ji"
treaz - treji
breaz - breji

It ought to observe that the next "i" play no acction of "z" if the "i" is
stressed. Here we see it in derivative of "treaz" as the substantiv "trezie"

Appologise for sustaining there is not possible any alteration more of "z"
to anything else.

Alex