just a quick question

[Frances Karttunen]

One possible explanation is the invisibility of syllable-final nasal
consonants in written Nahuatl.  Orthographically they are often represented
by a tilde or bar over the preceding vowel.  Or they are simply left out.
Phonetically there seems to be a reason for this.  Syllable-final resonants
[n,m,l] are "devoiced" in Nahuatl.  That is, they are whispered.  So they
are hard to hear.  Hence, they get left out of writing.  Speakers in some
sence "know they are there."  It's only for nonspeakers that the writing
system is confusing.

Fran Karttunen

----------
>>Hi,
>>
>>I just happen to come across the following:
>>
>>(...) oncan quicenquixtiaya in tlatlaloque:
>>auh in ihcuac oquicenquixtique, niman oncan quinmictiaya:
>>auh in ihcuac in oquimonmictique, niman (...)
>>( there they gathered them together [the sacrificial victims
>>called] tlalocs: and when they had gathered them together,
>>then they slew them there: and when they had slain them,
>>then etc.)
>>
>>Would someone be kind enough to explain to me why is it
>>found twice qui- instead of the expected quin-/quim- ,
>>namely 'quicenquixtiaya' (they gathered them together) and
>>'oquicenquixtique' (they had gathered them together)? After all
>>"tlatlaloque" is plural isn't it? Are those mere 'typos'
>>or is there an explanation for them that I can't see? And if so,
>>why then the "correct" quinmictiaya and oquimonmictique?
>>
>>Tlazocamati.
>>
>>Leonel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>