Re: Basque onddo

I fail to see a palatalized result of /n/ in onddo (sorry) and don't
understand the formulation "in Western Romance, the phoneme N changed
into NY > nY > ñ": it would require at least a phonotactic restriction
(to intervocalic position?) and a heavy diatopic reduction (the most
widespread result is rather a velarization)

2012/10/29, stlatos <sean@...>:

>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@...> wrote:
>>
>
>
>> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Tavi" <oalexandre@> wrote:
>> >
>
>> > >
>> > This is very unlikely. Spanish pollo gives Basque oilo just as Romance
>> > fongo gives onddo (with expressive palatalization).
>>
>> I rejected that etymology before, and believers in "expressive
>> palatalization" need to explain why a mushroom would produce such a demand
>> for expressivity in speakers that only palatalization could satisfy it.
>> Are we talking about a MAGIC mushroom?
>>
>
>
> In Western Romance, the phoneme N changed into NY > nY > ñ . Since N was
> not a phoneme before k/g (but only classified as C+nasal, automatically
> acquiring the place of the following stop), it didn't change. However, in
> Bq, nasals weren't automatically given the place of the following stop.
> Therefore, Ng > nYg > nYgY > etc.
>
>
> The existence of clusters like mX is seen in:
>
> * XasYEmXálXi >
> Acenari = (name), azebari / azegari / azeri / azari Biz = fox Bq;
>
>
>
>