On 21/02/2018 11:54, Raymond Brown wrote:
> On 21/02/2018 10:59, Alex Fink wrote: [snip]>
>> Oh, and what about Germanic /h/?  Could there be any phenomenon 
>> like French h-aspiré?
> I hope not.  ;)

Perhaps I should add a bit of clarity. French h-aspiré was pronounced
right through the Middle Ages.  But by the 16th cent. it had ceased to
be pronounced, but words where it had occurred continued to be treated
for purposes of liaison and elision as though a consonant was still
pronounced.  In popular speech, however, this was more and more
disregarded, the words being treated as though they began a vowel.

However, the grammarians stepped in to halt such populism, and the
arbitrary mute-h and apirate-h rules were imposed.  According to the
French scholar, Joseph Justus Scaliger (5th August 1540 – 21st January
1609), during the 16th century educated French took to pronouncing /h/
in Latin.

While the 16th century grammarians couldn't actually persuade most
French speakers to pronounce 'apirated h' as [h], the rules they created
came, in the 17th century, to be observed by all who aspired to speak
French 'correctly' - and have been so observed ever since.

It is, of course, not impossible that something similar may have
happened in early modern Britainese; but I rather hope not.  Indeed, if
I am correct that /h/ is still pronounced in Picard & Walloon, then
surely it would be in Britainese.

> As both James & Alex have brought this up, I must rethink /h/.  I 
> believe it is still pronounced in Picard and Walloon.

Yes, it would be perverse of me to preserve initial Germanic [w], as
Picard & Walloon still do, but not preserve [h].

Will this affect the orthography?