[tied] Re: Weeping (was: Latin pinso etc.)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

> Richard Wordingham wrote:
> > Does anyone use my sound change applier at
> >

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/richard.wordingham/sounds/prep5d_rom.htm

> > (or the rule list therein)? I need to move the merger of

unstressed

> > reflexes of /o/, /o:/, /u/ and /u:/ to before the rules

conditioned

> > on a following /u/. I will do that this afternoon. It's

currently

> > mispredicting the reflex of _video:_ as *vez rather than /v&z/,

i.e.

> > <vãz>. However, there's no point in commenting on such matters

if

> > they don't affect anyone but me.
>
>
> ... and it is predicting right. The "&" is there just in the

moment when

> there is no vowel in the next syllable:
> eu _vãz/vãd_ but tu vezi, el vede, noi vedem, ei _vãd_. If in the

next

> syllable there is a vowel, then the /e/ remains /e/ does not get

closed

> to /&/.

Once I had moved the merger as I stated above, the corrections came
out correct. I've put a few other simple corrections in, and I
uploaded the new version at 19:00 GMT tonight. There are a few
problems with rule ordering, but I want to simplify my checking
procedure before I make such drastic changes.

> Question:
> how does it happen that Latin infinitive in /o:/ has counterparts

in

> /-ea/ in Rom? Is there any another explanation beside some analogy?

You're also not reading carefully today. I quoted the Latin 1st
singular present, not the infinitive, because it does not need a
colon or macron to distinguish the second and third conjugations.

Richard.