--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Alexandru Moeller <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
> Phoneticaly I don's see problems, the problems I see are more of
> chronological nature of some changes. To be honest, even today I am not
> able to say if there has been a time where CommonRommanin have had an
> c^(tsh) first or an c (ts) first.> Alex
>
My point is the following:
1) c^, g^ existed in Common Rumanian because /c^wara/ 'crow' (and not only) has a c^ both in Arumanian as in Rumanian
2) The Arumanian ts, dz alternance versus Daco-Rumanian c^, g^ is originated from some of the dy, ty, ky clusters -> for all these clusters I suspect a Common-Rumanian ts /c/, dz /3/ first, and a later c^,g^ in Rumanian for some of them (some others remaining ts, dz depending on different contexts)
I said this, because:
a) once we assert that c^, g^ existed in Common-Rumanian based on /c^wara/ 'crow' that exists with c^ both in Rumanian as in Arumanian
b) a later reduction of c^, g^ to ts, dz in Arumanian would have been reduced also the c^ of /c^wara/ 'crow' to <ts> /c/ too...
BUT this didn't happen.
Marius