l vs. s, sh?

[Pekka Sammallahti]

The Portuguese development is pretty straightforward (postconsonantal  
l was more or less voiceless to begin with), and the development in  
Hanti/Ostyak took the opposite course *s > (shift from postdental to  
interdental) *<th> > (lateralization + retraction) *L > (voicing) l.

Pekka Sammallahti


Quoting Marie-Lucie Tarpent <mltarpent at hotmail.com>:

>
> I find these "changes" from /l/ to a variety of sibilants (without a  
>  suggestion of intermediate steps) hard to believe.  I don't know  
> the  language families in question, let alone the reasons for the   
> reconstruction of */l/ in the specific proto-languages, but could   
> the */l/ be from yet another proto-phoneme, such as a **dental, so   
> that the lateral and the sibilant might have a common ancestor, with  
>  the */l/ reconstructed because of its preponderance within the   
> family rather than the phonetic plausibility of *lateral > sibilant?  
>   Even assuming that */l/ is the correct reconstruction, it is one   
> thing to say that /s/ is the reflex of */l/ in language  X, another   
> to say (or imply) that the change has been (directly) */l/ > /s/.
>
> (The Quechua example seems to be of a different type than the other   
> ones, since it involves a palatalized consonant, not the plain /l/).
>
>  marie-lucie tarpent
>
> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:42:02 +0200
> From: parkvall at ling.su.se
> To: histling-l at mailman.rice.edu
> Subject: Re: [Histling-l] l vs. s, sh?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>     Message body
>
>
>
>     I haven?t
>         systematicaly searched for sound changes, but whenever I come
>         across a table or
>         the like citing many of them at once, I usually save them in a
>         file. Who knows what may
>         come in handy some sunny day? For whatever it?s worth, here are
>         the cases I
>         have in that note file which might fit the bill:
>
>     * Proto-Algonquian
>         ? Arapaho: /?/ ? /?/
> (Picard
>       1994:4)
>     * Proto-Algonquian
>       ? Blackfoot: /l/ ? /?/
>       (Berman
>       2006:365)
>     * Proto-Algonquian
>         ? Woods Cree: /l/ ? /ð/
>       (Bakker 1996b:5)
>     * proto-Austronesian
>       ?? Basay: /l/ ? /c/ (Li
>       2004:367)
>     * Proto-Min ? some Min dialects: /toneless l/ ? /?/ (Norman 1988:233)
>     * Proto-Min ? some Western Min dialects:
>       /toneless l/ ? /s/ (Norman
>       1988:233)
>     * Proto-Ongamo-Maa ? Ngasa: /?/ ? /h/ (Vossen & Heine
>       1989:191-3)
>     * proto-Quechua ? Argentinian Quechua of
>       Santiago del Estero:
>       /l?/ ? /?/ (Adelaar
>       2004:204) [Citing from memory, doesn't this characterise
>       Argentinian Spanish as well?]
>
>
>     * proto-Quechua ? some Quechua varieties of
>       Argentina and Ecuador:
>       /l?/ ? /?/ (Adelaar
>       2004:204)
>
>     The IPA is in Unicode. I can provide the refs
>       if anyone needs
>       them.
>
>
>
>
>     /mp
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Histling-l mailing list
> Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu
> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l



_______________________________________________
Histling-l mailing list
Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu
https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l