From: Miguel Carrasquer
>In this direction I was thinking too but the problems are here:Dumnezeu, there was no /ie/ in the 1/2pl! The stress was on the /a/,
>levare > leare > lea.
>léa > liea > l'iea > iiea > iea > ia
>In this way the derivation from "levare" is clear. The sg. conj. to stem
>/ia-/ are as usual 1=/-u/, 2=/-i/, 3=/-a/
>ia+u > iau, ia+i > iai , ia+a > ia.
>Thus the sg conjugation is absoltuely OK. The plural one doesnt't fit
>How you said from "leware" to "lua" should be a Katzensprung, but it is
>You cannot go back to "lu" from "ie". Here I fail to see how about.