[tied] Re: Six, -ts- > -ks-

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "m_iacomi" <m_iacomi@...> wrote:
>> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" wrote:
>>
>>>> [...] /s/ > /h/ > 0 occurs before voiceless consonants. So it
>>>> cannot be for final -s, like the one in "chevals/chevaus" since
>>>> there is no further consonant. There is no OF text hinting for
>>>> /s/ preceded by voiceless consonant being pronounced /s^/, and
>>>> there is no OF text denoting /s/ in that position by <x>. So
>>>> there is no reason for your claim. So you are the one who should
>>>> bring on some proof (e.g. strange related spellings) pointing
>>>> to that intermediate stage /s^/, and to generalization of your
>>>> claimed "path of disappearance" also to final -s preceded by -u-.
>>>> If not, your allegations are only wishful thinking speculations
>>>> having nothing to do with scientifical approach.
>>>
>>> RUKI
>>
>> What has that ancient rule to do with OF, a different language
>> separated by origin and some millenia?!
>
> us > us^

So, according to your logical skills, a phenomenon produced in
slightly different conditions, some millenia before OF and in other
linguistic groups (that is the shift of PIE alveolar /s/ to palatal
/s^/ in Slavic) is to account as proof that in OF there should have
been an intermediate stage /s^/ between /s/ and /h/ denoted by <x>?
Is that your point?!

Regards,
Marius Iacomi