Print

Print


On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:38:27 -0700, Garth Wallace <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Alex Fink<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:45:03 -0400, Alex Fink <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Oops.  Make that either changed from something else or just newly arisen
>> from no historical source.  It's the latter which
>
>No historical source? I thought at least some /p:/ came from /P/ under
>gemination (while /P/ elsewhere weakened to /h/, leaving [P] only as
>an allophone before /u/). Am I totally off base on this?

No, good point, I was being sloppy.  Historical /p/ remained when geminate,
but the voicing alternation isn't in play there.  And maybe after nasals?  I
don't recall what happened there.

Alex