Re: [G] and [g] and PIE voiced plosives

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Jarrette" <anjarrette@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I was wondering if the different outcomes of Engl. -ough was caused by
> > them being different from the beginning, thus
> > -ough /-oUx/ > /-of/ and
> > -ough /-oUG/ > /-oU/
> >
> >
> > Torsten
> >
>
> That's what I would think too, but the evidence doesn't present a
> clear-cut pattern:
>
> <enough> [inVf] from OE <genog> [jeno:x] or [j@...:x] with final /-x/,
> inflected <genoge> [jeno:Ge] or [j@...:G@] etc. > <enow> [inaU] archaic
> plural of <enough>, also = <enough>
> <tough> [tVf] from OE <toh> [to:x] with final /-x/
> <rough> [rVf] from OE <ruh> [ru:x] with final /-x/
> <cough> [kAf],[kOf] from OE *<cohhian> with /xx/
> <trough> [trAf], [trOf] from OE *trog [trOx] with final /-x/
> <laugh> [læf] from OE <hlæhhan> with /xx/
>
> BUT
> <though> [DoU] from Scand. *To:x, *Tox, with final /-x/
> <dough> [doU] from OE <dag> [dA:x] with final /-x/
> <bough> [baU] from OE <boh> [bo:x] with final /-x/
> <slough> [slaU] from OE <sloh> [slo:x] with final /-x/
> <plough> [plaU] from late OE <ploh> [plo:x] with final /-x/

Oh the shame! I wrote <boh> instead of <bog> and <ploh> instead of
<plog>, basing them on alternative but etymologically wrong spellings.
With this in mind perhaps there's a tendency for words ending in *-g
to develop diphthongs while those ending in *-h develop [-f]; *trog
and *þoh/þo:h (Toh/To:h) are exceptions. Cybalist members will have
noticed these mistakes and corrected them before this message gets posted.

Andrew