Re: [tied] evolution

From: altamix
Message: 16972
Date: 2002-12-02

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
>> ger: bin, bist, ist, sind, seid,sind
>> rom: sânt,esti,este,sîntem,sînteti,sînt
>> ger: sage,sagst,sagt,sagen,sagt,sagen
>> rom: zic,zici,zice,zicem,ziceti,zic

> <zic> and <sag-> are completely unrelated and whatever similarity
> you
> see between them _is_ simply accidental. Rom. zic < Latin di:co,
> with
> regular palatalisation of the initial.
> Piotr

1) so, the right answer is that the "z" is an accidentaly
developement.Germanic developed it before 3 century BC and latin
spoked in east of europe, 600 years later.OK, I will keep it in my
mind then.

2)let alone the toughts latin di,de>zi,ze in romanian. There are many
examples which shows that latin "di/de" did not became zi/ze in
romanian.We discussed here on cybalist once but it seems you forgot
about. Here some for refreshing the memory. ( latin/romanian).

diarrhoea/diaree, dentis/dinte, dirigere/dirigui, december/decembrie,
dedere/deda, *diffamiare/defãima, defoliare/defolia,
degelare/degera,digitus/deget, dementis/dement, *depanare/depãna ,
depilare/depãra, depre(he)ndere/deprinde, deponere/depune,
deradicare/deretica, dis/des,densus/des,deasã,
*discaballicare/descaleca, diregere/drege, directus/drept,
discarricare/descarca,discantare/descânta, disclavare/descheia,
*dispartire/despãrtzi,desperare/dispera, *despicare/despica,
dispoliare/despuia, desertus/deshert, diserrare/deshira,
de-excitus/deshtept, detonare/detuna, disglut(i)nare/dezbina,
*disbracare/dezbrãca, disglaciare/dezghetza, *d

You will wonder about latin "des+root" and romanian "des or dez
+root".I wonder too. It seems that "s" became sometimes "z" and
not "d" which is more probable because "s" almost "z":-)

But because romanists argue dico>zice let us see what we have with "z"
in romanian from latin.I will give here _all_ words which begin
with "z" in romanian from my DEX, words which are tought to be from
latin :

Diana/zânã, jacere/zãcea, deus/zãu, exbatttere/zbate,
*exbelare/zbiera, *exvolare/zbura, zema/zeamã, decem/zece,
dextrae/zestre, deus/zeu, *scaberare/zgâria, dies/zi,
dicere/zice, *exventare/zvânta.

That is all what I have in DEX begining with "z" and supposed to come
from latin. We observe that from 14 (!) words we have just decem/zece,
destrae/zestre, deus/zeu, dies/zi, dicere/zice which will sustain a
"palatation" of latin "d".
From these 5, destrae/zestre doesnt match semanticaly cf. DEX .
Myself I could not find "destrae" in my latin dictionary, but this
doesnt matter here.
We have 4 words which wants to make a rule? But we have seen that
deus/zãu can be a thracian word, so we have just 3. If zãu is
thracian I dont see what speaks against "zi" to be thracian too. If
thracian have had "zãu" in the time latin have had "deus" it is
acceptable to guess they have had "zi" for latin "dies". So we remain
with what?
We remain with the false impresion latin de/di went in romanian ze/zi.
I hope at least now, it is clear enough that there is no palatation of
latin "de/di" in romanian .If this is not clear, I should like to see
from romanists the contra-argumentation.

Best regards,