LL-L 'Phonology' 2012.01.25 (01) [EN]

[Lowlands-L]

=====================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L - 25 January 2012 - Volume 01
lowlands.list at gmail.com - http://lowlands-l.net/
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
=====================================================

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <roerd096 at PLANET.NL> <mwmbombay at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L 'Phonology' 2012.01.18 #01# [EN]

Hi, Ron

I was wondering what you thought of Andy Eagle's and my reaction to your
question about Scots sclusters

Ingmar

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: LL-L 'Phonology' 2012.01.17 (02) [EN]

Hope you are not snowed in too badly, Ron...

About the Scots sclusters, I have my own little theory:

Old Anglosaxon sc- became something like sh- in Scots, as in English, at
least in some cases,
e.g. when a front vowel followed.
As the cluster scr- became shr-, the similar cluster sl- became scl-

About this parallell of sl- with scr-: in Dutch it's not possible too say
sr- , must be schr- [sxr].
In Dutch, many people even say Schri Lanka with intrusive ch [x] -> [sxri].
In German that would be schr- [SR], and in German, one can not say sl-, it
must be schl- [Sl].

Later the Vikings influenced Scots and sh- was replaced back by sk- again,
parallell to the many
Scandinavian words were borrowed into Scots and English with sk/sc  instead
of sh:
scream, scrape, scuttle, sky, skim, skittish  etc.

But in Scots, shr- and shl- were both restored as scr-, scl-, so even old
sl- became scl- via shl-.
In your examples, all the words with scl- have a front vowel, maybe that
was important for sl-
to become shl- as well (influence of Celtic slenderness?)

Just by 2 eurocents.

Ingmar

From: R. F. Hahn <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Phonolgy

Dear Lowlanders,

I am intrigued by some Scots words with scl... in which the /s-/ or the
/-k-/ seem to be intrusive. I wonder if we can make sense of this somehow.

Examples:

Intrusive s?

sclammer 'clamber'
sclammer 'clamor'
sclim 'climb'

Intrusive k?

sclice 'slice' [Medieval French esclicier!]

sclidder ~ slidder 'slither'
sclate ~ slate 'slate' [Medieval French esclat!]
sclender ~ sclinner 'slender' [Medieval French esclendre!]
scly 'slide'
sclype ~ slype 'slap'
sklent ~ slent 'slant'

spl- > skl-?

sklinter 'splinter'

What do you think is going on where Medieval French does not account for
the formations?

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
Seattle, USA (about to be snowed in again ...)

 ----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Phonolgy

Hi, Ingmar!

So far I have merely tossing the info I got from you and Andy around in my
head. (I've been rather busy and also under the weather.)

At this point, Andy's proposal that we are dealing with analogous extension
seems rather appealing to me.

Thanks to both of you!

Reinhard/Ron
Seattle, USA (no more snow but wind ...)

=========================================================
Send posting submissions to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
Send commands (including "signoff lowlands-l") to
listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands.list at gmail.com
http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html .
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/group.php?gid=118916521473498
=========================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20120125/576a140e/attachment.htm>