йк стоят рядом и часто заменяют друг
друга, что заставляет предполагать, что несмотря на
фонетическое и артикуляционное отличие, они каким-то
образом синонимы:
духовный малкович новоселик (а может и саймак (говорят что правильно симак, но си́мак или сима́к?)) в этих фамилиях суффиксы идентичны, лишь диалектно отличны
знакомыйRU знайомийUA
узел, вязал = въ+за (буквально рецепт вязки)
knit is in and at? in it! k~j (more in vol.32)
greetings from vol.44:
SeeDoBe? K is of S, for both are C. But K is plosive, while Sis is fricative? Well, just as B and V readings of В (also b and v are voiced, while k and s are voiceless. Which makes x a snake, Ѯ)
Isn't Ѯ digraphy кS? But because it looks just like З, I thought it was some form of dz, but it's ks
(what were the chances? is 𓆓 also ks? In russian snake is змея, змей. Which reveals how -k and -й are the same morpheme.
духовный малкович новоселик (а может и саймак (говорят что правильно симак, но си́мак или сима́к?)) в этих фамилиях суффиксы идентичны, лишь диалектно отличны
знакомыйRU знайомийUA
узел, вязал = въ+за (буквально рецепт вязки)
knit is in and at? in it! k~j (more in vol.32)
greetings from vol.44:
SeeDoBe? K is of S, for both are C. But K is plosive, while Sis is fricative? Well, just as B and V readings of В (also b and v are voiced, while k and s are voiceless. Which makes x a snake, Ѯ)
Isn't Ѯ digraphy кS? But because it looks just like З, I thought it was some form of dz, but it's ks
(what were the chances? is 𓆓 also ks? In russian snake is змея, змей. Which reveals how -k and -й are the same morpheme.
...
