Re: [tied] Must sound change be linguistically motivated?

----- Original Message -----
From: "mkelkar2003" <smykelkar@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 9:25 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Must sound change be linguistically motivated?



<snip>

> > ***
> > Patrick:
> >
> > In the past, I innocently suggested that a part of the explanation
> might lie
> > in actual physical changes in the architecture of the mouth, and was
> accused
> > of 'racism', which is an easy out for a difficult question.
> >
> > ***
> >
> Would climate have something to do with it? Colder climates may
> require more effort to pronunce certain sounds thus compelling their
> speakers to swith to other "easier" sounds.
>
> I have observed that many maestors of North Indian classical music
> consistently mispronunce rishab as rikhab, perhaps due to a lack of
> formal education, or perhaps because they habitually talk while
> chewing a mouthful of betel nut leaves.
>
> Could it be possible to explain the difference between snusha and
> snokha without reconstrucing another word?
>
> M. Kelkar

***
Patrick:

I rule nothing out.

As for your question, I believe no new word need be reconstructed:

snokha -> snoxa -> snoça - snosha -> snusha

Of course, it would be nice to be able to suggest a reason why all that
happened.

***