Re: Order of Some Indo-Iranian Sound Changes

>
> Is it possible that *g in Common Slavic, or at least Proto-Slavic, was
> actually [G] rather than [g]? After all, that could explain why it
> becomes /h/ (actually _voiced_ /h/, no?) in Czech, Slovak, and
> Ukrainian (and Belorussian? On Wiki it says that Belorussian <h> is
> pronounced [G]), and why its palatalized form is /Z/ rather than /dZ/.
> Later developments such as the second palatalization might have
> operated after a *[G] was hardened to [g], and therefore led to
> phonemes such as /dz/ in some dialects.
>

I remember when learning the little Russian I know how the m.n. gen.
adj. ending written -ogo, -ego, pronounced /-ovo, -jevo/ reminded me
of Danish, eg.
hav /haU/ "sea", def. form havet /ha?v&ð/,
tog /toU/ "train", def. form toget /to?G&ð/ or /to?w&ð/

in these, French preciousness (ultimately) has replaced the 'vulgar'
/w/ with /v/ in some of the form. I think I've actually heard (but a
long time ago) some people say /to?v&ð/ vel sim., based on the fact
that 'correct' /v/ and /G/ both have the 'vulgar' allophone /w/.


Torsten