Ilk. [w] vanished after medial velars; [-{kgx}w-|VxwV] > [-{kgx}-|VhV]

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

[-kw-] > [-k-]
[-gw-] > [-g-]
[-xw-] > [-x-]
[VxwV] > [VhV]

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-(WĒ)
-xw- > -h- VxwV > VhV ᴹ✶-khw- > Ilk. -h- ✧ PE19/23