Nebraska

[RLR]

> > Ok.. I am trying to get a better handle of the s/th/hk transformation/shift

> ... it is clear that in early times it did have s/s^/x
> (etc.) more or less in synchrony with the other languages.

Ted Grimm did a talk on this about 3 years ago at the Siouan Conference.
He did find early transcriptions with "s" in place of "theta" (th). I
don't remember his dates/sources off the top of my head. Maybe he is
reading the list...?

> The usual explanations for sound changes of this sort revolve around
> unconscious individual human efforts to express group solidarity by
> adopting (progressively exagerating) certain perceived markers of > group identity, in this case pronunciation norms.

Labov (his 1994 book) has finally admitted that "imitation" in any real
sense is only a characteristic of a relatively few sound changes and
that most (as we've known since the 1880's) are blind, fortuitous and no
respecters of meaning. No sound change begins for any sort of
sociolinguistic reason. All have to do with the shape and movements of
the human articulatory and perceptual apparatus (the mouth, tongue,
teeth, larynx, etc.) AFTER the change has already taken place, however,
it can be diffused from person to person, group to group via immitation.
This is what linguists have traditionally called "dialect borrowing".
And as John points out, at that point it can involve the notion of
"prestige" (tho that doesn't necessarily refer to class distinctions).

My lecture for the day. ;-)

Bob