Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
> On Sun, 11 May 2003 17:18:36 +0200, alex_lycos <altamix@...>
> wrote:
>
>> Even with the loosing of the intervocalic "b" I don'T see how to get
>> an /o/ in Rom. from /ui/
>> cubitus > cuitus > cuitu > ?
>
> /kúbitu/ > /kúBetu/ > /kúãtu/ > /kút/, I guess
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...
and later? from /kut/ to /kot/ ?
Here even the plural does not help since /u/ does not become /ua/ when
followed by /e/ or /ã/ as /o/ does.
If it should have been so, then we could have an easy escape since the
plural of *kut could have been *kuate and because of the very bad
perceptibility of /ua/ to /oa/ there was percepted as "koate" not
"kuate" and the singular was remade as "cot" from "coate"
The trick should work , but the /u/ remains /u/ and does not dyphtongues
to /ua/ even when fallowed by /e/ or /ã/
More, for making the things worse, the plural of "cot" as measurament is
not "coate" but "coTi".
Of course I try one excape now and I look at the glosses of the
Thracians:
"Kotys"= thracian King, "Cotenes"= thracian tribe which have had the
dwelts just in the "ell" of the Carpathian.
This does not help since we cannot speculate with the names even if
seems very attractive to connect it with these glosses:-(