Re: Rum. sce/sci > $te/$ti

From: George
Message: 15420
Date: 2002-09-12

>[Moeller] ah! they are neologisms too:-)))))))))))))))))))))))
>the olds remained "st" stâna,stâncã, stãncutza, staroste ,

The former group: words with $t- followed by vowels
other than "i" and "e". The latter group: st- followed by
vowels other than "i" and "e".

>I said that st >sht when "t" fallowed by "e" or "i"

Fine. But it's not a *must*.

>you said that:
> >No! Only when s + ce & s + ci, *and* ce/ci already =
> >[t$e/t$i], only then you can get > $t.

And I guess I was right.

>The latin example with extergere doesnt work in your rule, but
>in my.

Oh, you've got your own rules, don't you! Ri$piekt.


So, it seems that $t- in words of Latin origin are quite rare.

>[Moeller] I do not care about your "officialy".

You should: exactly people speaking your subdialect are the
... culprits for having admitted the diphtongation at the standard
("official") level. A diphtongation that has been there in most of
extant subdialects. That's what happened in very recent times
(even mentioned in school manuals).

>[Moeller] there is no "oichi".

Oh, boy, that's amazing. The "oichi" variant is typical of your
region (I mean the greater region, not only your county).
(OK, let's stop it. These tripes are rather boring to our list