Re: [tied] a help for Piotr

On Tue, 3 Sep 2002 20:43:32 +0200, alexmoeller@... wrote:

>[Moeller] you are partialy correct in what you say .But
>italian has "qu" and the "v" between wovels did not dies. It
>is still today there. Adn Miguel gives examples od "v" and "b"
>sincoping in romanian laike in caballus>cal but he "forget" to
>give the mst important verb "habere" which is in romanian " a
>avea".

Well, thank you for admitting that this "most important" verb indeed has a Latin
etymology. The retention of -v- in the infinitive form <avea> is perfectly
understandable, if we consider what the consequences would have been (*aea).
Glide deletion does not take place when blocked by pragmatic reasons.

> There is no sincope anymore. The rules for rumanian >
>latin have so much exceptions that you can say, is a rule in
>romanian to have for every rule a lot of exceptions. And this
>means?This means the rules are artificialy, after a
>selbstgedachte model, and not the normal evolution of the
>language.

Au contraire. Artificial rules have no exceptions. The normal evolution of
language continually generates exceptions.


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...