I don't think there are any cases where <qu> isn't followed by a vowel, so we can't really tell. Theoretically, /kʷ/ could be part of a consonant cluster but I don't think this existed in Latin....that is, only when followed by another vowel, as in quantum, quæro, quid, quoniam, etc.
Ok, let me phrase it differently:There aren't, that was exactly my point.
Thank you very much.C was always pronounced with /k/ sound in Latin, the fricative or affricated pronunciations associated with that letter (/s/, /ʃ/ /tʃ/, /θ/, etc) in its descendants or in church Latin are the product of later sound changes.
That is difficult to say as neither Latin nor Greek nor Germanic distinguished /s/ and /ʃ/ at the time and the Latin /s/ was probably moving between [ s ] and [ʃ] like in modern Greek.It is actually thought that -CE- and -CI- were affricated to /tse/ and /tsi/ in proto-Romance before ending up as /tʃ-/ in Italian, /θ-/ in northern Spain, and /s-/ elsewhere.
Indeed, and an affricate would be different enough to distinguish. This is why in the North of Spain when CI /tsi/ was fricativized it was fronted as well to differentiate it from the apical S, whereas in the South SI and CI merged as predorsal. (I can't see /tʃ/ being fronted to /θ/, which is why I think the intermediate /ts/ makes the most sense.)Latin /s/ was probably moving between [ s ] and [ʃ] like in modern Greek
Yes. That was why I think the ka-palatalization played a role in French.In Picard, which didn't palatalise /ka/, patalised c became /ʃ/, the opposite outcome of Spanish.
It is. Cf. catch-chase, a double loan of the same word, the former from northern French and the latter from standard French.This could be a simplification of the affricate /tʃ/
The problem with French orthography is that it's been artificially replenished with "etymological" and archaic spelling conventions. (Poids is spelled with a D because of the erroneous belief that it derived from pondus and not pensum.)Do you know how French ended up with Q without U in words like coq,
The other evidence that English provides is that /s/ from /s/ sometimes ends up as /ʃ/ (cash, leash, etc.), while I can't think of any word with /s/ from /ts/ where this happened.It is. Cf. catch-chase, a double loan of the same word, the former from northern French and the latter from standard French.
CH was a digraph used to represent the aspirated (and sometimes unaspirated) velar stops (χ, κ) in words borrowed from Greek. It's not a native spelling convention to my knowledge. The only word that is spelled with it that doesn't seem to come from Greek is pulcher, pulchra.Latin already has qu and ch
English has had palatal consonants since Old English, so I imagine that, had the sound /tsj/ been borrowed from Norman or some other language, it's possible that it would have been heard as /tʃ/ by the speakers of medieval English.depending when the loan happened, the input in English might have had /tsj/
Sepulchrum, less common than sepulcrum, perhaps influenced by pulchrum.CH was a digraph used to represent the aspirated (and sometimes unaspirated) velar stops (χ, κ) in words borrowed from Greek. It's not a native spelling convention to my knowledge. The only word that is spelled with it that doesn't seem to come from Greek is pulcher, pulchra.
What you say is very interesting. I know dreadfully little about the Eastern Romance languages. May I ask, what are the real plural forms of those words ending in ț?As a personal opinion, the /ts/ sound was consistently preserved at the end of Romanian words
because if it would have followed the phonetic evolution to /tʃ/
it would have resulted in words like:
*soci, *saci, *laci
with an -i ending, a tipical plural marker in Romanian (as in Italian).
Singular - plural forms:What you say is very interesting. I know dreadfully little about the Eastern Romance languages. May I ask, what are the real plural forms of those words ending in ț?
Another example in modern Italian:In old Italian/Tuscan words that in modern standard Italian have a /tʃ/ sound used to have a /ts/ sound: one of the most egregious examples being the Uffizi (offices) gallery, where "zi" had and still has a /ts/ sound. The modern spelling of the word "offices" is "uffici", where "ci" has a /tʃ/ sound.
It's interesting that the derivatives in Romanian and in Italian maintain the /ts/, but in the West they continued the expected evolution (Sp. calza /kalθa/, Fr. chausse /ʃos/). I wonder if this is a coincident or if it had something to do with the dialect continuum between Italy and Romania.
Thanks for the info. I knew about the Spezia-Rimini line, but I had never put together the sea crossing being the principal way east. Now it all makes much more sense.