In Anglo-Frisian, palatalization did affect the voiceless velar stop /k/ before front vowels in some words, such that it became a voiceless postalveolar affricate /tʃ/, but this did not occur in all words containing velar stops.
@@ModernErilar OK, but I always thought, that after palatalization ᚳ-rune represented /tʃ/-sound after front vowels and /k/-sound in other positions (but there was the same ᚳ-rune). At least, untill northumbrian monks created ᛣ-rune exclusively for /k/. Else, I haven't heard, that there were any graphical differences between long and short vowels in AS runic writing...So, I'd say, that phonetical value of ᚩ-rune was long or short /o/ (< */ɑ̃/), while ᛟ-rune represented œ (< i-umlauted */o/). What do you think about that?
@@DrevniyMonstr vowel differentiation between ᚩ and ᛟ appeared on the Chessell Down scabbard mount. Since that text is only imperfectly understood it's hard to make strong categorical conclusions, but the acrophonic principle would tell us that os and ödal are indeed different sounds, yes.
Wasn't a phonetical value of ᚳ (ċēn) before front vowels = /tʃ/, as a result of palatalization?
In Anglo-Frisian, palatalization did affect the voiceless velar stop /k/ before front vowels in some words, such that it became a voiceless postalveolar affricate /tʃ/, but this did not occur in all words containing velar stops.
@@ModernErilar OK, but I always thought, that after palatalization ᚳ-rune represented /tʃ/-sound after front vowels and /k/-sound in other positions (but there was the same ᚳ-rune). At least, untill northumbrian monks created ᛣ-rune exclusively for /k/.
Else, I haven't heard, that there were any graphical differences between long and short vowels in AS runic writing...So, I'd say, that phonetical value of ᚩ-rune was long or short /o/ (< */ɑ̃/), while ᛟ-rune represented œ (< i-umlauted */o/).
What do you think about that?
@@DrevniyMonstr vowel differentiation between ᚩ and ᛟ appeared on the Chessell Down scabbard mount. Since that text is only imperfectly understood it's hard to make strong categorical conclusions, but the acrophonic principle would tell us that os and ödal are indeed different sounds, yes.