Re: s->h
- From: "Douglas G. Kilday" <fufluns@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Feb 2007 10:57:07 -0800
On Feb 11, 11:26 am, Joachim Pense wrote:
In classical Greek, an original word-initial *s developed into h.
(compare Latin "sex", Greek "hex" for the number 'six').
In Sanskrit, an original word-final *s developed into h. (compare
Latin "sumus", Skr. "smaH").
What would be a plausible development path from s to h? I have
difficulties imagining one.
Producing [s], [þ], and [f] requires glottal constriction without
voicing, so the [h] is already present by coarticulation, and it is
not surprising that all three sounds are commonly weakened to [h].
[S] is different, because the amount of obstruction is so great that
no glottal coarticulation is required, so if it does anything it tends
to shift back to [x], but not directly to [h].
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: s->h
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: s->h
- References:
- s->h
- From: Joachim Pense
- s->h
- Prev by Date: Re: Greek, glagolitic, cyrillic
- Next by Date: Re: s->h
- Previous by thread: Re: s->h
- Next by thread: Re: s->h
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
