thy thigh etc.

[Leo A. Connolly]

ERobert52 at aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 20/05/01 10:35:02 GMT Daylight Time, connolly at memphis.edu
> writes:

> [referring to [c,] and [x] in German]

>> 2. They have now come to contrast in initial position, at least before
>> /a/, albeit only in loan words, and only for certain speakers.  I have
>> noticed this for some time, and am pleased that a Duden author has too.
>> This strongly favors the analysis as separate phonemes.

> On the other hand, maybe the distinction in 'Cha-' words is phonotactically
> conditioned - isn't it always [c,] in words beginning 'Chal-' and 'Char-' and
> always [x] in 'Cha-' followed by anything else? (Excluding of course where it
> is [k], [S] or [tS]). And it can't be borrowing that causes this distinction
> - 'Charkow' has /x/ (usually realised as [x]) in the source language but [c,]
> in German.

I checked in the Duden Aussprachewörterbuch of 1962 and found Chaldi
[xaldi], Chalid [xali:t], Chalil [xali:l],  and Charga [xarga], all with
[x-] rather than [ç], while Chamaphyte [çamEfy:t] (!), Chamäzephalie
[çamEtsefali:], Chasma [çasma] with [ç].  I also found Chatte ([çat@]
beside [kat@]) but Chatti [xati].  So no, if these pronunciations are
factually correct, your rule doesn't work.  It would in any event be
very strange for the pronunciation of a consonant in a Germanic language
to be determined by a noncontiguous consonant.

Leo Connolly