Re: [tied] Re: for Alvin

From: alexmoeller@...
Message: 14387
Date: 2002-08-19

-----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
Von: "richardwordingham" <richard.wordingham@...>
An: <>
Gesendet: Montag, 19. August 2002 19:20
Betreff: [tied] Re: for Alvin
> English has many doublets where one form is a word borrowed from
> French and inherited by French from Latin, and another form taken
> directly from Latin, or at least with no evidence of borrowing via
> French, e.g. 'frail' v. 'fragile', 'royal' v. 'regal'. One cannot
> argue that only one form was ultimately derived from Latin. However,
> only one form was _inherited_ by French from Latin. It is generally
> the one which is most different from Latin, for there has been longer
> for it to be modified.
> Richard.
[Moeller] I think the same way. And in the example with Miguell , we was
talking about some words where at least one of them is not directly
inherited from latin. They are not borrowed, or reintroduced either:
so we have in rom. "fa:t"=fetus (foetus) , ve have "fa:ta"= meaning to
give bitrth ( just for animals used), we have fata=girl and we have too
a mithically personaj from popular culture caled "Fa:t " and regionaly
and archaic, they used for boy the word fa:t.
I can hardly imaganie myself that if a population goes asimilated by
another will keep therms from the same branche from diferent language,
but it can happen.
The romanians have for girl too, copila, where copil=child and copil+a
is a feminine. But the problem is, they dont have something similar for
boy. Boy in romanian is [bai:at] , funny even in english is
boy/ba:iat.or Ba:iat has an unknown ethymology, at least none
satsifying.When copil is to find in albanian too, ba:iat, has no where
an equivalent.In this point I ask myself if therer are some things witch
fits together like ba:iat(boy)/ba:rbat(man)/ba:tra:n (old man) It is in
my opinion, a very interesting job to do here:))