Re: [tied] Re: Galicia.

----- Original Message -----

From: João Simões Lopes Filho

To: cybalist@egroups.com

Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 1:01 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Galicia.

 

There's nothing anomalous about it; it simply affects a different lexical layer than the regular Proto-Romance > Portuguese development. Castilian also has newer plata, plaza, clamar etc. beside archaic clamare > llamar, planu- > llano, plorare > llorar, masculu- > masclu- > macho, etc.

 

The words which don't undergo the regular development are more recent loans, usually from Mediaeval Latin, French or an Ibero-Romance dialect, such as Aragonese, which has preserved the etymological clusters. What I had in mind was that, as opposed to Castilian pl in words like plaza, Galician and Portuguese have pr (praza, praça) -- a relatively late common innovation.

 

Piotr

 

 

 

Joao wrote:

 

The change cluster Consonat+L > Consonant+R in Portuguese is not normal. It occurs in anomalous conditions:

 

BL- > L-  eg: Latin blastimare > Port. lastimar "to lament"; but Latin blancus > Port. branco

GL- > L-  eg: Latin glattire > Port. latir "to bark"

PL- > CH- (spelled sh) eg: Latin plorare > Port. chorar "to cry"; but Latin platta > Port prata "silver"

FL- CH- eg: Latin flamma > Porto chama "flame"; but Latin flaccu > Port fraco "weak"

CL- > CH eg: Latin clavis > Port. chave "key"; but Latin clavu > Port cravo "horseshoe nail"

-cl- > -lh- (palatal L)  Latin ovicula > Port ovelha "ewe"

 

So compare the variants:

Latin plicare > Portuguese pregar "to nail" and chegar "to arrive"

Latin regula /*regla > Portuguese regua "ruler", regra "rule" and relha.

Latin macula > Portuguese magoa "grief", malha "spot" and mancha "spot" (<*ma(n)cula)