From: stlatos
Message: 68495
Date: 2012-02-07
>I don't know what you're attempting to separate as dif. expl. The palatalized forms are more widespread than the non-palatalized, but each comes from a combination of sounds like gYHG or gHGY, as in many words. The opt. change is whether K KY clusters assim. > KY KY or K K , etc., or do nothing (sometimes not detectable since any x() > 0 in most). The presence of the "laryngeal" is also seen by g / gH or k / kH before x(), as in çátru- = enemy V S; *kxatr.u > kHot. t.s.ok- (v) = fight Kh; or *xYy > *GYGY / *gHGY / etc. > g\z^\jente: OLith; ianitri:x L; etc., the same as *gYGY/xYyem+ 'bind'.
> W dniu 2012-02-07 22:17, stlatos pisze:
>
> > I'll say it again: opt. changes.
>
> So you propose a houyhnhnm protoform for 'goose' to account for the
> _absence_ of palatalisation in Slavic and then invoke "opt." to accunt
> for the _presence_ of palatalisation in Baltic? It's way easier to
> assume that the Baltic form is regular and the Slavic one is aberrant
> ("opt.", if you prefer). However, it seems to me that satemisation isYou can attempt to pick out whatever happens to be similar in a few and use that, but there are many that differ. The most common in Slavic appears on the surface as KYa > Ka , but of course the a is caused by x in most of those cases.
> often cancelled in Slavic if there is already an inherited *s in the
> same stem, cf. *svekUrU 'father-in-law' (Lith. s^es^uras), *kosa
> 'scythe' (Ved. s'as-, s'astra-, s'a:sa-, etc.). It may not be fully
> regular, but then dissimilation at a distance rarely is.
>