Pseudo-epenthetic /l/ in Slavic

[E Wayles Browne]

If I recall correctly, Nahtigal uses the abbreviation sle. [slovenski] for
'Slovenian' and sla. [slovanski] for 'Slavic'. *pl'ujo with a hook under
the o [not an open o, but a nasal vowel o] is good reconstructed Common
Slavic for 'I spit' [1st person singular present tense].

1) The difference between non-syllabic i and the consonant j is indeed
unclear in various phonetic theories. Phoneticians know various kinds of
j, with more friction and with less friction (in Spanish [j], spelled y
and sometimes ll, has a lot of friction, and can become a fricative
obstruent in various regional pronunciations). It would be nice if Slavic
linguistics could contribute to a better understanding of it.

2) and 4) are very good questions, and I don't have good answers for them.
On 3), there is a similar phenomenon in Czech, namely an epenthetic n'.
Older [mj] has become [mn'] (m followed by a palatal n). Thus the past
tense of 'to have' (mi/t} is spelled me\/l; the letter e\/, representing
the old vowel "jat", is now pronounced je after most labial consonants, as
in pe\/t [pjet] 'five', but after m we get the pronunciation [mn'el].


Wayles Browne, Assoc. Prof. of Linguistics
Department of Linguistics
Morrill Hall 220, Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853, U.S.A.

tel. 607-255-0712 (o), 607-273-3009 (h)
fax 607-255-2044 (write FOR W. BROWNE)
e-mail ewb2 at cornell.edu

> Hello!
> I'm not sure if that's of any importance, but I wanted to point out that
> there is no such word as 'plujo' in the Slovene language.
> I could have misunderstood something since I didn't understand 90% of your
> message, being linguistically uneducated, but I thought that you could
> have
> misquoted something or... whatever :)
>
> Regards, Ajda.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alexandre Vaxman" <alexandre_vaxman at YAHOO.COM>
> To: <SEELANGS at LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 7:16 PM
> Subject: [SEELANGS] Pseudo-epenthetic /l/ in Slavic
>
>
> Dear SEELANGers,
>
> Reading Rajko Nahtigal's "Slavic languages" (Ljubljana, 1952; Moscow, 196=
> 3),
> I found the following statement:
> "The soft l' (also) developed from non-syllabic i after labial conso-
> nants: i.-e. * (s)pieu [non-syllabic i and u] , lat. spuo, lith. spiauju,=
>
> slovene pl'ujo [open o]. The traditionnal label "l-epentheticum" (inserte=
> d
> l) is not correct for the soft l'".
> I have four questions pertaining to this quotation:
>
> 1)Where does the difference between a non-syllabic i and the consonantal =
> j
> lie? Slavists have always used this notion of non-syllabic i, e.g.
> Reformatskij (1975) "O foneme j i "i" v russkom jazyke" (in: Fonolo-
> gicheskie etjudy) speaks of three different phonetic realizations of /j/:=
>
> as a [j], as a zero, and, third, precisely as "non-syllabic i".
> Is there any phonological and/or phonetic criteria justifying the existen=
> ce
> of such phoneme? As far as I know, it is not much used in the generative =
>
> framework with wich I am more acquainted .
>
> 2)What could cause the deletion of a non-syllabic i in latin "spuo" and i=
> ts
> deglidification in lithuanian "spiauju";
>
> 3)Could you cite examples from other Slavic languages, especially with =
>
> pseudo-epenthetic consonants other then /l/?
>
> 4)What is in your thought the reason of this sound change?
> Would it be appropriate to explain in by a positional factor like
> fortition i --> l'/ C.___ where . is a syllabic boundary?
>
> Finall, what literature could you recommend on these topics?
>
> Best,
>
> Alex Vaxman,
> PhD student,
> Laboratoire Parole et Langage,
> Aix en Provence, France
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------