to google

[William Ryan]

An entirely convincing explanation. Thank you. Clearly gugl is a lexeme 
for linguists to watch, and perhaps use as an example in class - it 
promises a multitude of forms, even if some of those currently on the 
net (razguglivat', pereguglit', obguglennyi for example) are probably 
facetious.
Will


gladney at UIUC.EDU wrote:
> William Ryan writes:
>
>   
>>> Gugl'nut' one would expect to be a semelfactive verb and thus less 
>>> used. Personally I find the alternative guglianut', also to be found, 
>>> much more euphonious. [...] These are not phonetic but >>>>>>>>>>morphological mechanisms [,,,].
>>>       
>
> These two forms may in fact be related by phonetic (euphonious) mechanisms. _Gugl'nut'_ is unavoidably trisyllabic.  My off-line correspondent informs me it is pronounced as if spelled _gugyl'nut'_.  That spelling shows the [g] being released before the coronal occlusion for the [l'] is formed.  But if the [l'] occlusion is formed before the [g] is released, this results in a (potentially) syllabie [l'], which is realized as [l'i], corresponding to the spelling _guglianut'_.
>
> Frank
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  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/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>   

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------