Re: [tied] Re: Gland

From: alex
Message: 32605
Date: 2004-05-13

Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>> Since a word like "chiar" is not involved in any alternance,
>> the diphthong [ja] is preserved even if the syllable is final;
>> the same holds for "cheag" whose form does not change at the
>> plural ("cheaguri").
> Thanks. That (apart from the analogical stuff) can go
> straight into the "sound changer".
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...

It seems there is a need one has to continue with additional lexical
data in different position as the one at the begin of the word.

So we have:

Latin Italian Romanian

genuculus > ginocchio > genu(n)chi ( < genuclus)
peduculus > ... > pãduche ( < peduclus)
oculus > occhio > ochi ( < oclus)
paricula > ... > pereche ( < paricla)
radicula > radicchio > ridiche ( < radicla)
auricula > orecchio > ureche ( < oricla)
vigilare > .... > veghe ( < vigla)

From "veghe" is the derivative "priveghi" and not from "(per)vigilare"
since Latin "per" > "pre" > "pe" in Rom. but never "pri".

One observes that except "peduclus" the "clu" > "chi" but the "cla"
and "gla" > "che" and "ghe" as in the words which begin withthe
clusters "cla-" and "gla-" where it ought to say "pãduche" appears
to be a remade singular since the expected form should have been
"pãduchi" which is in fact the plural form ( the same for "genu(n)chi"
which knows the form "genu(n)che" as well; boths appears to be remade
singulars from plural "genu(n)chi" respectively "pãduchi")

One ought to consider some compositum with such clusters as "cla, clu"
and "gla,glu" in Romanian:

inclavare > încheia
*inclaguare > închega
includere > închide
inclinare > închina
inglaciare > ingheTa
ingluttire > înghiTi

From these compositum and words which contains the clusters "cla",
"clu", "gla", "glu" one observe that the rule repeat itself.
That is: "gla" & "cla" > "ghe" & "che" and "glu" & "clu" > "ghi" &

There is for instance an exception which does not fit as derivation
100% but not for the cluster in discussion; for instance "inclavare"
cannot give any "incheia" but "*încheua".The word "cheutoare"
should be a testimony for the rightness of the phonetical change I

It appears there is as follow:

cla, gla > che, ghe
clu, glu > chi, ghi

1) observations about "che, chi" and "ghe, ghi" in different phonetic
for Rom. che & ghe there is just 2 way to change the "e" there:
a) e > ea when in the next syllable is an "ã"
b) e > i before "nC"
the "chi" remains apparently unchanged, it does not suffer any

2) observations on the comparative basis with Italian:
a) the sequences "clu", "glu" have the same output as Italian
namely "chiu" versus italian "chio". That is, the "l'" yelded
as expected an "i". The reduction of "iu" in the midle of the
word remain to be explaned in a credible way.
b) on the contrary, the "cla", "gla" does not show this "i" and
that should be seen as curious since the output is "che",

The whole bundle of ideas and pseudorules about curious changes in
umlaut of an inexistent "ja" is not worth to mention since it does
not exist as such but the simply "ea" which is the ordinary result
of the diphtongation of "e". The examples given by Mr Iacomi are
mostly with a questionable Latin etimon or they are to explain
other way. Every word in discussion should be discussed separate.