Re: old nordic /z/

From: lilyby2003
Message: 3971
Date: 2003-12-30

> Haukur, thank you for your reply. I had also developed the theory
that /z/ could have still been a voiced sibilant at the time of the
second voicing. It seems the most probable thing to me. What I really
hate is that scholars who treat the subject of second voicing do not
mention the possible reasons why /s/ is excluded from voicing, but
simply state that it affected only /f, th/.
Anyway, I feel safer now. Thanks again.

Yours, Lily

Previous in thread: 3970
Next in thread: 3975
Previous message: 3970
Next message: 3972

Contemporaneous posts     Posts in thread     all posts