Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

45201[tied] Re: Labiovelar Phonological Identity???

Expand Messages
  • squilluncus
    Jul 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "altamix" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
      >

      > is the "labiovelar" who stoped the Palatalisation or was there
      just
      > the "u"? In Rumanian the labiovelar element could not prevent
      anymore
      > the palatalisation of the labiovelars, so if Rum. "c^e" is from
      > Latin "quid", then begining with II century AD , the word was
      > pronounced "ke" (as today in Italian which contrary to the said
      > about labiovelars, in "who"-words, Italian did not kept the
      > labiovelars).
      >
      OK. The labio-part must have been kept long after the general
      palatalisation in the west contrary to Roumanian.

      As for aqua and che I am confident that an Arabian at a dictation
      would use qaf for the former and kaf for the latter.
      There is a natural change of position of the tongue depending on the
      vowel being fronted or not.
      I am also confident that the same Arab would have used different
      letters at a dictation from German when hearing Karl Kampf vs Kerl
      Chemnitz.

      /k/ in che is pronounced further to the front than /k/ in aqua and
      this is produced naturally if a langue does not make a phonematic
      distinction between fronted and unfronted /k/.

      Lars
    • Show all 15 messages in this topic