Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!sun4nl!mcv
From: mcv@inter.NL.net (Miguel Carrasquer)
Subject: Re: Language and genes
Message-ID: <D0Ez85.M96@inter.NL.net>
Organization: NLnet
References: <634@percep.demon.co.uk> <3boeun$eot@amy13.Stanford.EDU> <D08Mr4.DsI@inter.NL.net> <aldersonD0Eox1.DBr@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 1994 00:12:05 GMT
Lines: 33

In article <aldersonD0Eox1.DBr@netcom.com>,
Richard M. Alderson III <alderson@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <D08Mr4.DsI@inter.NL.net> mcv@inter.NL.net (Miguel Carrasquer)
>writes:
>
>>At the `microscopic' level of phonetics, a gradual and unspectacular change
>>takes place.  At the `macroscopic' level of phonology, there's a sudden 
>>system change.
>
>This is not necessarily true.  For example, I doubt that there were gradual
>stages in the evolution of labial+j clusters in the Slavic languages to
>labial+<palatalized l>.  The phonotactics of a language often do not allow
>gradual change.

Of course.  That's why (in that same article, I believe) I said that
if a case is to be made at all for gradual change in language (more
specifically: phonetics), you should look at the vowels only.  
For consonants, gradual change just doesn't make sense, in general.  
And even for the vowels, change is not usually gradual at the _phonological_ 
level.  

Slavic pju => pl'u is a funny phenomenon, b.t.w.  It's the
exact reverse of what happened in Italian (pl'u => pju), so
it always made sense to me.  But while the Italian development
is not unusual (palatalized l loses its lateral quality and 
becomes a central palatal sound), I don't see any particular
reason why a labial stop should lateralize the following "j" 
sound.

-- 
Miguel Carrasquer         ____________________  ~~~
Amsterdam                [                  ||]~  
mcv@inter.NL.net         ce .sig n'est pas une .cig 
