Re: [tied] Slavic palatalistions: why /c^/, /c/?

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:00:11 +0200, Grzegorz Jagodzinski
<grzegorj2000@...> wrote:

>tgpedersen wrote:
>>> Old French: Latin /k/ before /a, au, e, i/ (e.g., carrum >
>>> char, with k > t^ > c^ > s^).
>>
>> This is very interesting. Do you have documentation for this *t^ar- ?
>>
>>
>> Torsten
>
>Only two remarks to this interesting discussion. First, all would be OK if
>we assume [k] > [kJ] > [c] > [tS] > [S] in IPA transcription, with the
>palatal stop [c] instead of the obscure t^,

Well, I don't use IPA transcription for affricates and
postalveolars/palatals, so I would write the above as [k] >
[k^] > [t^] > [c^] > [s^]

>at least for Old French. Second:
>only Latin /k/ before /a/ (including au) developed this way. But before e, i
>we have /s/, not /s^/!

Via Old French /c/ (i.e. /{ts}/).


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...