Re: [tied] Czech r^

I am not aware of any sound like that. That Czech sound is a palatal vibrant
of two realisational variants: voiced and unvoiced. The closest "relative"
(phonetical) seems to be the Polish the "rz" sound...


Petusek

----- Original Message -----
From: <mkapovic@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 12:17 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Czech r^


> It occures in some (south?)African languages. I think I once saw something
> about something like r^ in one Italic language, but maybe that was some
> dream of mine? :-/
>
> Mate
>
> > I remember rhotics were discussed a year or so ago. I seem to recall
> > that someone said the notorious Czech r^ sound was not unique to Czech
> > but occured in some other language as well. Did I dream taht up?
> > Thanks,
> > Harald
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 3 Sep 2004, Harald Hammarström wrote:
> >
> >> Speaking of IE ten, what's Piotr's and you others' take on the
etymology
> >> of Russian devyanosto and its Old Polish counterpart?
> >> Thanks
> >> Harald
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004, Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 9/1/04 2:14 PM, Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> >> > > On 8/29/04 11:50 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >>Well, if one starts counting on the fingers of the left hand,
*dek^m
> >> > >>or *dek^mt '10' might have meant something like 'right hand full'
> >> > >>or 'rightmost'. With the former meaning, /mt/ _might_ be
> >> > >>*met 'measure'. With the latter meaning, /m/ might be the
> >> > >>superlative suffix. However, why then do we have *dek^m or *dek^mt
> >> > >>and not *dek^sm or *dek^smt for '10'?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Assuming that the *-s- of *dek^s- is some kind of detachable
suffix,
> >> and
> >> > > that *dek^- is an acceptable combinative form, one would expect, in
> >> a
> >> > > hypothetical compound with *met-, *dék^-mot- in the strong cases,
> >> with
> >> > > *dek^m.t- as its weak allomoprph. Why then do we have *-(d)k^omt-
in
> >> the
> >> > > decadic numerals? It seems to rule out *-m(e)t-.
> >> > >
> >> > > Piotr
> >> >
> >> > An afterthought: if one wants *dék^m.t to be an analysable compound,
> >> the
> >> > only possibility I can see is *dék^-h1m.t- (gen.pl. *dk^-h1m.t-óm,
> >> > compositional collective or animate stem *'-(d)k^-h1omt-). The second
> >> > element could be *-h1m.-t-, an extended root noun derived from *h1em-
> >> > 'take, get' (the *-t- extension is normal after root-final sonorants
> >> and
> >> > laryngeals, cf. *-gWm.t- in compounds), with the approximate meaning
> >> > 'taking'. What we gain is a natural explanation of the heterorganic
> >> > sequence *-mt- and of the early disappearance of the initial *d- in
> >> > *dk^-. Before a vowel we would expect a "thorny" treatment of *tk^- <
> >> > *dk^-, but if a consonant (here, *h1) follows, the expected outcome
> >> > involves the loss of the initial stop! I'm beginning to like this
> >> idea.
> >> >
> >> > Piotr
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>