Re[2]: [tied] Slavic palatalistions: why /c^/, /c/?

At 10:00:11 AM on Monday, October 24, 2005, Grzegorz
Jagodzinski 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- ?

I don't know of any direct written evidence.

> 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^, 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^/!

Sorry: I meant to write Latin /k/ before /a, au/ and
borrowed /k/ (e.g., from Germanic and Arabic) before /e, i/:
this was the OFr second palatalization, of Gallo-Roman date.
Examples of the latter type include <eschine> (modern
<échine>), from Frk. <skina>, and <meschin> 'jeune homme,
jeune noble', from Arabic <meskin> 'pauvre'.

What you're describing is the first palatalization, of Late
Latin date.

Brian