From: shivkhokra
Message: 70296
Date: 2012-10-26
>Are you suggesting Aryan invaders had retroflexes and they passed it onto the "native" IndianS?
> Brian M. Scott:
>
> > At 3:00:03 PM on Thursday, October 25, 2012, shivkhokra wrote:
> >
> >> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister
> >> <gabaroo6958@> wrote:
> >
> >> [..]
> >
> >>> Among items that I offered, Shiv doesn't tell why
> >>> retroflexed consonant sets do not show up in IE languages
> >>> that are not from the subcontinent.
> >
> >> For the same reason:
> >
> >> a) That British after living in India for many years did
> >> not pick up retroflex consonants. See the hindi spelling
> >> of Pune where the n is retroflex and contrast it with how
> >> british wrote it.
> >
> > Not comparable: the British were a superficial layer of
> > Indian society that maintained continuous close ties with
> > England.
>
> Actually it's a good example, but not the way he thinks. You just have
> to take it a little longer, to current Indian English. The language of a
> ruling elite from outside is acquired by speakers of local languages,
> who bring substrate features into the language.
>But does this explain why Thais, Burmese and Cambodians not learn retroflexes?
> >> b) That people in south east asia (thailand/burma/cambodia
> >> etc) who were taught religious texts both in Sanskrit and
> >> Pali did not pick up retroflex consonants.
> >
> > Not comparable: they weren't living amongst large numbers of
> > native speakers of languages with retroflex consonants.
>
> Are there (still) local varieties of Pali that are spoken natively (or
> from childhood in certain classes) in SE Asia? If so, those will of
> course be heavily influenced by local phonology.
>
> >> c) And most importantly the Gypsies who migrated out ofWhat is your theory on why Romanis dropped retroflexes from their alphabet?
> >> India lost their retroflex consonants once they got to
> >> Europe.
> >
> > Because they moved into regions occupied by speakers of
> > languages that did not have retroflex consonants. This is
> > precisely the same reason that the Indo-Aryans acquired
> > retroflex consonants.
>
> Or some of the reason. For Romany proper, I don't think there's been
> widespread conversion of speakers in the regions it moved into. But the
> case is different in many regional Romany-based languages.
>
> >> d) Lastly do retroflex stops in Swedish and NorwegianSo what is your thesis on the development of retroflex in Sanskrit?
> >> count?
> >
> > For what? They're retroflex stops. They have nothing to do
> > with Rick's question, however.
>
> But they do show that retroflexion can develop without substratal influence.
>