Re: sanskrit "bhuman"

--- In cybalist@..., "m_iacomi" <m_iacomi@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@..., "Richard Wordingham" wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@..., "m_iacomi" <m_iacomi@...> wrote:

> >> Phonetically, the Logudorese "pamentu" proves there is no

problem

> >> of derivation: a vernacular late Latin form "*paumentu(m)" should
> >> be the "missing link" [...] Unstressed /e/ > /&/ (<ã>) and
> >> stressed /e/ before /n/ (or /m/) > /1/ (<â>) are regular in
> >> Romanian.
> >
> > Do you need a preceding labial (e.g. the /m/ we have) to get /1/
> > and not /i/? I am thinking of dinte < dentem and 'CinV > C1nV
> > if C labial', as Miguel cited in
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/15151 .
>
> Huh? I checked up the message and it doesn't mention any of these
> cases.

Whoops! I meant number 15051.

> I would like to recall you the message:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/15462
> where I stated some rules.

Which get us as far as -mintu.

> When -ent(u) becames the last syllable, (stressed) /e/ > /1/
> and not /i/; a frequent case is the Latin -mentu(m) > -mânt
> as in monumentum > mormânt. <-mânt> is productive in Romanian,
> see asezãmânt, zãcãmânt, invãTãmânt, etc., for plurals we have
> the expected alternance with /i/ in asezãminte, zãcãminte,
> invãTãminte. See also ventum > vânt, conventum > cuvânt (pl.
> cuvinte; but vânturi, under the influence of closed /u/ from
> the last syllable).

So the environment which is a subset of C_nV does NOT generalise to
C_n(C)V. Is vânturi exceptional?

Richard.

P.S. Thank you if you did the Romanian Swadesh word-list for the
Rosetta Project.