Ilk. [w] vanished after medial velars; [-{kgx}w-|VxwV] > [-{kgx}-|VhV]
In Ilkorin, it seems that medial labialized velars were de-labialized, losing the following [w]-sound. There are several examples of this medial development in the Comparative Tables: ᴹ✶-ŋw- > [-ŋgw- >] Ilk. -ŋg-, ᴹ✶-kw- > [-gw- >] Ilk. -g(w)- (PE19/23). There are also a number of examples of this development in The Etymologies (see below). If the [w] in these examples were retained, it would later have become final after short final vowels vanished, and then this final [w] would have become [u], as happened with ᴹ✶khithwa > hedhu (Ety/KHIS). The fact that there are no such examples of final [u] after a velar is strong evidence for this de-labialization of medial velars.
According to the Comparative Tables, the development for intervocalic [-xw-] was slightly different. Here, the labialized spirant developed into [-h-], probably first becoming ƕ [hʷ]. This change did not occur if the [-xw-] was preceded by a consonant, in which case the [w] was simply lost, as described above: ᴹ✶alkwā > [alxwa >] Ilk. alch [alx] (Ety/ÁLAK).
Order (04600)
After | 03300 | [ŋg] vanished before [w] lengthening the preceding vowel | ᴹ✶liñwi > Dor. líw | Ety/LIW |
After | 04400 | voiceless stops voiced after vowels | ᴹ✶-kw- > Ilk. -g(w)- | PE19/23 |
Phonetic Rule Elements
|
> |
|
|
|
> |
|
|
|
> |
|
|
|
> |
|
Phonetic Rule Examples
-gw- > -g- | -gw- > -g- | ᴹ✶-kw- > Ilk. -g(w)- | ✧ PE19/23 |
laigwa > laiga | -gw- > -g- | ᴹ✶laikwa > Ilk. laig | ✧ Ety/LAIK |
liŋgwe > liŋge | -gw- > -g- | ᴹ√LINGWI > Dor. ling | ✧ EtyAC/LIW |
-ŋgw- > -ŋg- | -gw- > -g- | ᴹ✶-ŋw- > Ilk. -ŋg- | ✧ PE19/23 |
uskwe > uske | -kw- > -k- | ᴹ✶us(u)k-wē > Ilk. usc | ✧ Ety/USUK |
alxwa > alxa | -xw- > -x- | ᴹ✶alk-wā > Ilk. alch | ✧ Ety/ÁLAK |
salxwe > salxe | -xw- > -x- | ᴹ✶SALÁK-(WĒ) > Ilk. salch | ✧ Ety/SALÁK |
-xw- > -h- | VxwV > VhV | ᴹ✶-khw- > Ilk. -h- | ✧ PE19/23 |