Re: [tied] Re: Miguel & dentis

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Miguel & dentis
> The suffix is -IcI. As far as I know, zo~bIcI (> Bulg.
z&b&c), from zo~bU (>
> Bulg. z&b), would have had o-grade, so the /i/ in Rom. zimtz
is not expected.
> The loss of yer is regular in the Slavic oblique cases
(zOb&c, zObca), but I
> imagine also in Romanian if the word was borrowed as an
u-stem (*'z&mb&tzu >
> zimtz).
>
[moeller] pacalici, (remember please of latin pacalis:-),
zgribulici, aici, ici ( the short form of aici=here),
somnorici and so on.. there are too much to put them here.
In the rumanian "ici " has as aufix more an diminutival role.
But not every whee: bici, shorici are normal substantives
where it seems that "ici " is not a suffix at all.