Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> PIE *w- has other reflexes as well, e.g. Irish f-, Welsh gw-, and
> Armenian g-, whereas /v-/, which is a very common reflex, has
> developed further into /b-/ e.g. in some Indic and Iranian languages,
> and in Spanish (perhaps also in Thracian). *w has been a fairly
> unstable consonant, and English is quite exceptional in preserving
> something close to its original quality to this very day.
>
> Piotr
Piotr, as usual, you have plenty of information. Of course you know
already when I ask something I have always something in my mind,
something regarding the Romanians.
I was thinking at the verb " a uita "= to forget and its reflexive form
" a se uita"= to look.
DEX gives the "a uita" from Latin *oblitare ( oblitus). The semantic
aspect of Latin oblitus is indeed " to forget" but never "to look". No I
ask myself in how far we can put "to look"= "to see"
Of course I wonder about the another semantic aspect "to forget" of the
Romanian word where for I have no idea what to say.
The Latin etymology seems too funny for being seriously and the PIE form
*ueid, *uid is very similar to Rom. "uit-a" as in coincidental joke.
I would like to ask about the augment in the past tense. I must say, I
do not know too much about.
I just found out the Prygian form of making a past tens with "e" or "ai"
like sanskrit with "a" too.
Prygian "e-daes", Sanskrit " a-dhat"
It seems maybe too a simple coincidence since we all know that in
romance the past tense is made with derivatives of latin "habeo" but the
forms again, phonetically similar, must be just a coincidence, isn't it?
(s)a uitat= he was looking is a muster of parallelism with Prygian
"e-witeto" if there is a "e-witeto" and not a simple "witeto".
a dat = s/he has given versus "a-dhat" or "e-daes "
I find in fact very intersting the way Latin has almost all the vowel
"e", "o" and "a" in the verb " to give" :
do, dare, dedi, datus.
From such a multitude of forms you can say very well Romanian " a da" =
to give is from Latin form "dare".
But the fact in Romanian is no "do-" like French "donner", Italian
"donare" should be just seen as an accident.
But I am extending again the subject where I just wanted to show the
correspondence of PIE *uid with Rom. "uita" and not that etymology from
Latin *oblitare
Regards
Alex