[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [romconlang] Re: De-palatisation in Northern Romance (WAS: Northern Romance chronology and



--- Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@hidden.email> wrote:


[...]
we
> hardly take
> any liberty if we assume it for the VL underlying
> Germano-
> Romance! Pre-Slavic even had is > iS > ix, and
> Swedish went
> through sj > S > X in recent centuries. Some
> Indo-Aryan
> dialects apparently went through S > x > k_h --
> presumably
> because speakers of dialects which lacked /x/ used
> /k_h/
> to emulate the [x] sound.
> 

You've convinced me (not hard, because we need /x/!).
So we have Lat /sj/ >  Rom /S/ > GmRom/NRom /x/.  

:)

What was your answer ref #/dj/?  Couldn't tell if you
were agreeing with #/dj/ or #/j/. My preference is
#/j/.