[tied] Re: Monovocalism: sequel

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, mcv@... wrote:

> tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps Germanic vowel-initial (including those in w- and y-)
> > words in the Romance languages were loaned with the Knacklaut,

thus eg.

> > *?werra > gwerra, similar to the way Verschärfung in North
> > Germanic is supposed to have taken place. *?y- > *dy- would have

followed,

> > including native Romance words.
>
>

There is no Knacklaut before in initial w- in Germanic.

And there never was?


And even if it had been there, it would have been totally ignored by
Latin/Romance speakers.

If we stick to what we know, we might modify that statement to: At
least one Romance speaker would have totally ignored it.

> The evolution was w- > gw-, as still in Castilian (borrowed:

güisqui; native: agüelo, güevo), followed by gw- > g-, which is
equally trivial.

Yes, I have dictionaries too. I was making an alternative proposal.


Torsten