port l>r and ital l>i change
Marc Adler
1) When did the l->r change happen in Portuguese? (blanco->branco,
etc.)
2) When did the l->i change happen in Italian? (blanco->bianco, etc.)
3) Why didn't it happen in Spanish or French? (I understand that there
might be no answer to this.)
4) Aside from r and i, are there any other sounds l became in other
Romance languages?
5) Are there any examples of the reverse? (r/i->l and so on)
Thanks,
Marc
Alan
"Marc Adler" <marc....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125017817.7...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
As for your question #5 (r>l) --- it's quite common in Cuban Spanish for the
[r] to be pronounced pretty darn close to an [l];
e.g. Roberto becomes Lobelto .... don't know if that shift is true is all
vocalic environments, though
Ruud Harmsen
sci.lang:
>A few Romance phonetics questions.
>
>1) When did the l->r change happen in Portuguese? (blanco->branco,
>etc.)
Don't know. But it was certainly earlier than Camões.
>5) Are there any examples of the reverse? (r/i->l and so on)
Portuguese dictionaries list a word 'frol', which I think was once
'flor'.
And perhaps pt. and es. 'azul' vs. fr. 'azur' is such a case?
And 'south' is 'sul' in pt, 'sur' in es., and 'sud' in fr.
--
Ruud Harmsen - http://rudhar.com
Miguel Carrasquer
<marc....@gmail.com> wrote:
>A few Romance phonetics questions.
>
>1) When did the l->r change happen in Portuguese? (blanco->branco,
>etc.)
After the split from the other Iberian Romance languages.
>2) When did the l->i change happen in Italian? (blanco->bianco, etc.)
That one is very early. In all initial sequences Cl- the l
was palatalized. In Italian, pl^-, bl^-, fl^-, kl^- and
gl^- developed to pj-, bj-, fj-, kj- and gj- (writen pi-,
bi-, fi-, chi-, ghi-). Elsewhere, the palatalization was
partially or wholly lost. Romanian has retained it only for
velar consonants (Arom. kl^-, gl^-, Rom. kj- (chi-), gj-
(ghi-)). Spanish and Portuguese have retained it only for
voiceless consonants [before the accent] (kl-, pl-, fl- >
llave/chave, lleno/cheio, llama/chama).
>3) Why didn't it happen in Spanish or French? (I understand that there
>might be no answer to this.)
In French, Occitan/Catalan and Rhaetic the palatalization
was wholly lost, although the northwesternmost Catalan
dialects have kl^-, pl^- (cllau, plle(n) for Cat. clau,
ple).
>4) Aside from r and i, are there any other sounds l became in other
>Romance languages?
Palatalized l (from li, gl, ll, depending on the language)
remains word-internally as Ita. <gl>, Fr. <ill>, Spa. <ll>,
etc. In Spanish, old /l^/ becomes /z^/ and then /s^/ > /x/,
as in folia > hoja /oxa/. As we saw above, in Port. /Cl^-/
becomes /c^-/ > /s^-/.
A velarized l after a vowel and before a consonant becomes
/w/ in French (and Modern Brazilian). altus > (h)aut, etc.
Geminate /ll/ becomes /l^/ in Spanish and Catalan. In
Sicily (and I think Sardinia), it becomes a retroflex /d.d./
(bellu > bed.d.u).
>5) Are there any examples of the reverse? (r/i->l and so on)
Spa. periculum > peligro.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
m...@wxs.nl
Ekkehard Dengler
Marc Adler schrieb:
> A few Romance phonetics questions.
>
> 1) When did the l->r change happen in Portuguese? (blanco->branco,
> etc.)
According to Paul Teyssier's "História da Língua Portuguesa", "l" in
word-initial consonant clusters changed to "r" very early on, at a stage
where Portuguese and Galician were still one language. In fact, this is one
of the first sound changes he deals with under "Do século VIII ao XII: a
*emergência* do galego-português".
He also states, however, that "l" > "r" was largely restricted to words used
in a relatively formal register, the normal vernacular development being
"voiceless consonant + l > ch", e.g. "clave" > "chave", "clamar" > "chamar".
(I believe Galician has "cramar", though.) In scholarly words such as
"século", "l" apparently didn't undergo any change at all.
> 3) Why didn't it happen in Spanish or French? (I understand that there
> might be no answer to this.)
This isn't really an explanation, but still relevant, I think: While "l"
became "r" in word-initial clusters, intervocalic "l" was vocalised, i.e.
disappeared ("mala" > "maa" > "má"), which could be an indication that "l"
was pronounced without any real closure. A phonetician could probably tell
you more.
> 5) Are there any examples of the reverse? (r/i->l and so on)
It isn't unusual for "l" to change places with another consonant (cf. Port.
"borboleta", Gal. "bolboreta"), but metathesis probably isn't what you had
in mind. I believe Cat. "cal" ("it is necessary") is due to hypercorrection
of l-vocalisation (cab > cau > cal), but I'm not sure and the intermediate
stage may be unattested.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Ekkehard Dengler
Ekkehard Dengler schrieb:
> According to Paul Teyssier's "História da Língua Portuguesa", "l" in
> word-initial consonant clusters changed to "r" very early on, at a stage
> where Portuguese and Galician were still one language. In fact, this is
one
> of the first sound changes he deals with under "Do século VIII ao XII: a
> *emergência* do galego-português".
> He also states, however, that "l" > "r" was largely restricted to words
used
> in a relatively formal register, the normal vernacular development being
> "voiceless consonant + l > ch", e.g. "clave" > "chave", "clamar" >
"chamar".
> (I believe Galician has "cramar", though.) In scholarly words such as
> "século", "l" apparently didn't undergo any change at all.
"Pleno" would have been a more relevant example.
Ruud Harmsen
<ED...@t-online.de>: in sci.lang:
>> 1) When did the l->r change happen in Portuguese? (blanco->branco,
>> etc.)
>
>According to Paul Teyssier's "História da Língua Portuguesa", "l" in
>word-initial consonant clusters changed to "r" very early on, at a stage
>where Portuguese and Galician were still one language. In fact, this is one
>of the first sound changes he deals with under "Do século VIII ao XII: a
>*emergência* do galego-português".
>He also states, however, that "l" > "r" was largely restricted to words used
>in a relatively formal register, the normal vernacular development being
>"voiceless consonant + l > ch", e.g. "clave" > "chave", "clamar" > "chamar".
>(I believe Galician has "cramar", though.)
In some words, both effects seem to have taken place, resulting in
different words in Portuguese. See my
http://www.rudhar.com/etymolog/prantoen.htm , which doesn't date the
changes (because I don't know them), but illustrates results.
Ruud Harmsen
<ED...@t-online.de>: in sci.lang:
>> 5) Are there any examples of the reverse? (r/i->l and so on)
>
>It isn't unusual for "l" to change places with another consonant (cf. Port.
>"borboleta", Gal. "bolboreta"),
Is Spanish arbol, Portuguese arvore, French arbre another example of
this?
Ruud Harmsen
<realemail...@rudhar.com.invalid>: in sci.lang:
>Is Spanish arbol, Portuguese arvore, French arbre another example of
>this?
Correct spellings are árbol, árvore and arbre, of course.
Ekkehard Dengler
Ruud Harmsen schrieb:
Span. "įrbol" (< Lat. "arbor") seems to be the result of dissimilation.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Miguel Carrasquer
<ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>This isn't really an explanation, but still relevant, I think: While "l"
>became "r" in word-initial clusters, intervocalic "l" was vocalised, i.e.
>disappeared ("mala" > "maa" > "má"), which could be an indication that "l"
>was pronounced without any real closure. A phonetician could probably tell
>you more.
Good one, that's another interesting development of /l/ in
Romance.
Intervocalic -n- also disappeared in Portuguese.
>> 5) Are there any examples of the reverse? (r/i->l and so on)
>
>It isn't unusual for "l" to change places with another consonant (cf. Port.
>"borboleta", Gal. "bolboreta"), but metathesis probably isn't what you had
>in mind. I believe Cat. "cal" ("it is necessary") is due to hypercorrection
>of l-vocalisation (cab > cau > cal), but I'm not sure and the intermediate
>stage may be unattested.
No, Cat. cal (inf. caldre, caler) is from Lat. cale:re "to
be hot, excited". Mihi calet "I'm hot for it, it matters to
me" -> Cat. em cal "I need to", cal "it is necessary".
Ekkehard Dengler
Miguel Carrasquer schrieb:
Hi Miguel.
Thanks for the correction. Here's another candidate: Apparently, Span.
"nalga" derives from Lat. *"natica":
"natica" > "nádega" [cf. present-day Portuguese] > *"nadga" > "nalga".
Regards,
Ekkehard
Miguel Carrasquer
<ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>Miguel Carrasquer schrieb:
>> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 12:08:40 +0200, "Ekkehard Dengler"
>> <ED...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>> I believe Cat. "cal" ("it is necessary") is due to hypercorrection
>> >of l-vocalisation (cab > cau > cal), but I'm not sure and the
>intermediate
>> >stage may be unattested.
>>
>> No, Cat. cal (inf. caldre, caler) is from Lat. cale:re "to
>> be hot, excited". Mihi calet "I'm hot for it, it matters to
>> me" -> Cat. em cal "I need to", cal "it is necessary".
>
>Hi Miguel.
>
>Thanks for the correction. Here's another candidate: Apparently, Span.
>"nalga" derives from Lat. *"natica":
>"natica" > "nįdega" [cf. present-day Portuguese] > *"nadga" > "nalga".
Yes. The expected Castilian form would have been nazga
(nadga), which is actually attested in Old Castilian. The
form nalga is a borrowing from Leonese, where in (secondary)
consonant clusters the first regualrly develops into /l/:
Leon. julgar, Cast. juzgar < Lat. judicare;
Leon. caldal, Cast. caudal < Lat. capitale
Leon. delda, Cast. deuda < Lat. debita
Leon. coldo, Cast. codo < Lat. cubitu
etc.
Herman Rubin
>1) When did the l->r change happen in Portuguese? (blanco->branco,
>etc.)
>2) When did the l->i change happen in Italian? (blanco->bianco, etc.)
>3) Why didn't it happen in Spanish or French? (I understand that there
>might be no answer to this.)
>4) Aside from r and i, are there any other sounds l became in other
>Romance languages?
There are many places in French where l -> u, often as
a semi-vowel. The plural of "cheval" is "chevaux", and
there are many similar.
>5) Are there any examples of the reverse? (r/i->l and so on)
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
António Marques
>> 1) When did the l->r change happen in Portuguese? (blanco->branco,
>> etc.)
>
> Don't know. But it was certainly earlier than Camões.
Probably somewhere near the 10th century. After original bl >
[tS], and before portuguese became written (as early written
examples already have br).
>> 5) Are there any examples of the reverse? (r/i->l and so on)
>
> Portuguese dictionaries list a word 'frol', which I think was once
> 'flor'.
flore > frole > X, reintroduction of [flor].
Plural froles and not frois, so probably introduced for the 1st time
after les > is.
> And perhaps pt. and es. 'azul' vs. fr. 'azur' is such a case?
From persian, so probably not relevant.
> And 'south' is 'sul' in pt, 'sur' in es., and 'sud' in fr.
Galician [sur].
Popular portuguese 'belboreta' [bE-].
Regarding n, consonantal syllable-final [n] disappeared everywhere in
portuguese, which is an extension of a general romance tendency.
--
am
laurus : rhodophyta : brezoneg : smalltalk : stargate