m_iacomi wrote:
> BTW, Aromanian m-word is "ñicu" (also spelt "njicu" in some AR
> texts or "n'icu" in most Romanian linguistical works).
>
> Regards,
> Marius Iacomi
that is not an argument. the "ñ" in Rom. is ALLWAYS the palatalised
form of "m". and has nothing to do with any Romance "n".
Since the principal meanings in Latin have been not preserved in Rom.
there is absolutely no reason to give more priority to an argumentum
of the word being derived from Latin but just with an extended sense
comparative with the argumentation the word shouldn't be the reflex of
IE *smi:k-a: directly. For the Latin principal meaning ("Krummel"),
Rom. has "fãrâmã" with Alb. counterpart "thërrime/fërrime".
An another arrgument that the word should be directly from IE are the
words "nothing" (nimic < ne+mic)and the verb "to destroy", "to make
them small", "to make them nothing" which is "nimici". It appears that
the word is indeed the reflex of
PIE *smi:k-a: (small, short) with lost of initial "s" and the
appropiation to Latin "mica" is a real one just on the basis of the
common IE base.
Alex