is quite general. _K_ became palatalized to _c_ in primitive Eng.
initially before front vowels, also before Gmc. _e_ and _eu_ (Kluge,
P.G.(2)I, 991). Kluge accepts gutturalizing of a palatal _c_ before
a consonant where this position is the result of syncopation of a
palatal vowel. In the South palatal _c_ became a fricative _ch_.
According to Kluge it never developed to _ch_ in Northern England
and Scotland, but either remained _c_ or recurred to a guttural _k_.
The same is true with regard to _g_. The exact extent of such
palatalization is very difficult to determine. It is possible that
the sound always remained a guttural in the North. We have seen that
_c_ or _g_ did not cause diphthongation of the following vowel in
the North as often as in the South. In view of the fact that
palatalization was not always indicated, this may not prove
anything, but may, however, indicate less palatalization than in the
South. The fact that _e_ or _i_ was sometimes inserted before a
following dark vowel, cp. _ahefgia_, "gravare," _gefragia_,
"interrogare," proves that palatalization in these words, at least,
existed.


12. _SK_ AS A SCANDINAVIAN SIGN. CERTAIN WORDS IN _SK_.
PALATALIZATION IN NORSE.

Wall argues that non-palatalization cannot be regarded as a sign of
Scand. influence and cites a number of words in support of this
conclusion (see Wall, §30). With regard to _dick_, "ditch," and
_sag_, "sedge," Wall is probably right. Those in _sk_ are, however,
not so easily disposed of. The presence of certain words with _sk_
in the South or those cited in _sh_ in the North does not prove the
case. While the presence of a word in South Eng. diall. is in favor