From: stlatos
Message: 70358
Date: 2012-10-31
>Then why Nn > mn ?
> At 8:59:53 PM on Tuesday, October 30, 2012, stlatos wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy
> > <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@> wrote:
>
> >> Does the sequence /kt/ > /tÊ/ due to /kt/ > /xt/ > /çt/ >
> >> /jt/ > /tj/ (suggested by areal dialectology) really
> >> imply palatalization of anteconsonantal *velar* /n/?
>
> > The oddity of KC in Romance is easily seen in Rum. kt > pt
> > , ks > ps (octo: > opt , coxa > coapsA);
>
> A sequence /kt/ > /xt/ > /Ït/ > /pt/ (and similarly for /ks/
> is plausible and not especially odd.
>