Re: Re[2]: [tied] Re: a discussion on OIT

--- "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:

> At 1:40:07 AM on Sunday, May 25, 2008, Rick
> McCallister
> wrote:
>
> > --- david_russell_watson <liberty@...>
> wrote:
>
> >> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister
> >> <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >>> It happened in Franco and Ibero Romance. In
> Italian and
> >>> English there was "chentumization" e.g. Italian
> cento,
> >>> English church, etc.
>
> >> The change seen in Italian 'cento' isn't
> comparable to
> >> the Satem change, for it's conditioned by the
> frontality
> >> of 'e',
>
> > and /i/
>
> And for that matter [a] < Latin [A], though not in
> some
> Northern varieties.
>
> >> while the Satem change was unconditioned.
>
> > Wrong, it happened to palatovelars, but not to
> velars.
>
> And for palatovelars it was unconditional.
>
> > The phenomenon in Franco and Ibero-Romance also
> occured in
> > palatovelars. It is true that palatovelars in
> those
> > languages only occured before palatal vowels, but
> the
> > process is the same.
>
> No, it isn't: the front vowels are the trigger,
> first of
> palatalization, then of affrication, e.g., kentum >
> t^entU >
> tse~nt (> sãnt > sÃ), kArrum > kArrU > karrU > tSar
> (> Sar >
> SaR).
>
> Brian
>
>

I was thinking of <ce->, <ci->, but of course French
/ka/ went to /Sa/. Thanx