Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ross Clark <benlizro@ihug.co.nz>
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_This_must_be_Bulgarian_=28audiobook=3f=29_--_Russian_?=
 =?UTF-8?B?dGl0bGUgaXM6INCT0ZHQtNC10LvRjCwg0JXRiNC10YAsINCR0LDRhQ==?=
Date: Sun, 19 May 2024 23:06:13 +1200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <v2cmfc$3bm7m$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v272k2$237kg$2@dont-email.me> <v27div$25kbg$1@dont-email.me>
 <slrnv4fh6a.2p6a.naddy@lorvorc.mips.inka.de> <v29a4o$2kg7e$1@dont-email.me>
 <slrnv4hs53.hp8.naddy@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>
Reply-To: r.clark@auckland.ac.nz
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 19 May 2024 13:06:21 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1742960b2072d5da89e293b80ff5c5f6";
	logging-data="3528950"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX196xRdTAgLXp4Gd/J9zeoULvmn5Zkg/TzI="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:L0ZH22yfhK3UBmw7sMimD05Ikw0=
In-Reply-To: <slrnv4hs53.hp8.naddy@lorvorc.mips.inka.de>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3644

On 19/05/2024 6:17 a.m., Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2024-05-18, Ross Clark <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> 
>> I'm remembering, without consulting any books, but I think there is no
>> actual palatalization before (historic) a,o,u, as one might expect.
>> The Russian я following palatalized consonant comes from the front nasal
>> vowel *ę;
> 
> There are other sources of я.  Just looking at two feminines on -я:
> неделя ‘week’ < PSl. *neděľa
> заря ‘dawn, dusk’ < PSl. *zořa

I don't doubt there are other sources. These two look to me as though 
they both have a *-ja suffix.
My point was that the palatalization process which produced the largest 
number of palatalized C's in modern Russian applied only before front 
vowels. The palatalized C's before a-o-u have other origins.

>> and unless I'm mistaken ю only represents /ju/ in native
>> Slavic words
> 
> любить ‘to love’ < PSl. *ľubiti
> 
> Proto-Slavic already had a number of palatalized consonants, most
> easily traceable ň, ľ, ř.  Those later merged with the newly
> palatalized consonants before front vowels.
> 
> So there are clearly native examples of Cʲa and Cʲu.  The lack of
> Cʲo is curious.  Leaving aside the later development of ё, Russian
> morphology shows an alternation between Cʲe and Co.  I don't know
> what to make of that.
> 
> Huh, it seems to have been as simple as fronting o > e after
> palatal consonants:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Slavic_language#Alternations
> 
>>> This could be related to the fact that the Russian
>>> vowels have fronted allophones after (ё) or between (ю) palatalized
>>> consonants.
>>
>> Yes, this is a better reason for using ё and ю. It also accounts for the
>> Bulgarians using ьо /jo/. (Found another example: шофьор 'driver'.)
> 
> You keep writing /jo/, but there is no /j/. Шофьор is /ʃoˈfʲɔr/.
> When an actual /j/ is needed, Bulgarian resorts to й:
> Jörg Haider > Йорг Хайдер
> yo-yo > йо-йо

My impression from Wikipedia was that the Bulgarians could not agree on 
whether /Cj/ or /C'/ was the correct analysis (for the standard language).

> Russian also tends to use йо over ё in such contexts.
>