--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "altamix" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "aquila_grande" <aquila_grande@>
> wrote:
> >
> > In Italian there is an opposition between "qu" and "cu",
examples:
>
> > qui-here, quieto-still, cui-which, acuito-sharp
> >
> > The difference is that in "qu", the labial komponent is more or
> > less overlapping with the velar stop, where in "cu" the labial
> > component is a separate syllable.
>
>
> allow me please the question. Where is the labiovelar in "qui,
> queito"? I have the feeling they are written with "qu" just
because
Aren't you confusing Spanish and Italian (which easily happens)?
However in Spanish qu still has a distinct function as a "hardener"
before fronted vowel.
In Latin poetry qu is normally considered a single entity not giving
length, a witness that it was considered a single phoneme.
There are exceptions, however, but these should be considered
licentia poetica to help out poets to form the meter:
Talia te fallant utinam mendacia, copo:
tu vendes a-cü-am 'et bibes ipse merum
(or perhaps "set bibes ipse merum" to give rehabilitation to the
unknown poet).
In some polyglot areas (as Pompei) we shouldn't, however, exclude qu
as c + u among speakers having Latin as a second language. But this
never prevailed as witnessed by modern Italian retaining labiovelar
and French, Spanish and Portuguese retaining a hard non-palatalised
k before fronted vowels after delabialisation.
Lars