[YG Conlang Archives] > [westasianconlangs group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Message: 2 Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 11:32:04 +0200 From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <isaacp@hidden.email> Subject: Re: Re: Emegali /y/ in the Verb Paradigm Replying to habarakhe and draqonfayir: > > Also is [s<lat>] closer to an emphatic s or to [S]? > > I'd say [S]. I've heard of /s<lat>/ going to /S/ in Arabic, and /s/ in > Hebrew, but never to emphatic S. I'm sure you could have lateral-S go to > emphatic-S, if your emphaticness is something like pharyngealization. But > if it's something conarticulated but distinct from tongue > shape/placement, like glottalization for instance, i don't see how it > could develop. I may suppose that if Emegali is a Semito-Sumerian mix, it may have developped /l/ or /K/ on place of /s<lat>/. Some scholars even think /s<lat>/ indeed *was* /K/! Compare He. |bo:s<lat>em| and its loan into Greek as |balsamon|. Yitzik Which transcription are you using? I thought a Kirschenbaum lateral- S was the same as /K/. Could you describe /K/ in phonetic terms?