Re: [tied] Evolution, Answer

On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:20:47 +0100, alexmoeller@... wrote:

>Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:21:27 +0100, alexmoeller@... wrote:
>>
>>> dignus > demn, signus > semn,
>>
>> Nasal cluster (Latin gn = /Nn/ > ERom. /mn/)
>
>no nasal cluster. there , for a nasal cluster you have tenere>tsine .

No, that's a single nasal. A nasal _cluster_ is nasal + consonant (as
in dEnte > de.nte > dinte, dINnu > dEmnu > de.mnu > demn).

>>> deradicare > deretica, er[a]dicare > ridica,
>>
>> The i is unstressed.
>in my dictionary "i" from "radico" is a long /i/, so we should expoected
>a "rizica" not a "ridica"

Well, we'd expect rãzica. Radicar, erradicar in Spanish are cultisms
(as opposed to inherited arraigar). In Romanian probably too.

>>> ad-depositum > adãpost
>>
>> de:- has long e:
>
>yeap that is right. and e>ã which is untipicaly for de= de like in other
>examples.There is an "ada-" which seems strange there
>>
>>> pedester > pedestru,
>>
>> Not inherited, I suppose.
>
>well, you cann suppose. I suppose nothing is inherited:)

Pedestre in Spanish is a cultism (borrowing from Latin). It's
probably in Romanian too.

>>> dedere > deda,
>>
>> There's -a in Rom., so the forms are not comparable. What does deda
>> mean?
>
>hmm, hard to translate. " to accomodate, to become familiar with
>something, to consacre him/herself to something)

Well, there's no reason for d > z before a.

>>> procedere > purcede,
>>
>> What's the problem?
>
>procedo has a long "o". the /e/ from the procedere is not a long one
>too?

No, it's III conjugation. cédo, cédis, cédit etc. No stress, no
diphthong, no z.

>>
>>> catella > cãtzea
>>> ordire > urzi
>>> tenere > tsine
>>
>> What's the problem?
>
>catella= long /e/, expected catea not catsea

Isn't it from catilla?

>ordire= short /i/ , expected "urdi"

Long i:, as all verbs in -i:re (this one of course secondary, from
deponent ordior)

>tenere= e+nasal expected tine not tsine

The infinitive is analogical after the present tense:
ténet > tiéne > tzíne.

>>> rapide > repede,
>>> nitidus>neted
>>
>> Stress on first syllable.
>
>hier you are quiet right in my opinoin. The palatation is because of the
>accent and not because short or long vowel. But this in another mail see
>please example like:
>verb, adj. sg, adj. plural, conj. prez. ind., pers II sg.
>netezi, neted, netezi, netezeSti
>repezi, repede, repezi, repezi.
>
>It seems the stress is the one who makes everything .

No.

>>
>>> puteus > puts, etc.
>>
>> What's the problem?
>
>right. here was a bad examples. in puteus is indeed a short "e"
>>
>>> petiolus > picior,
>>> -tiosus>-tSios
>>> -atio, itio -onis > tSiune
>>
>> Latin *ky and *ty are a special case (as usually in Romance): they
>> give tz in Romanian, except before stressed ó and ú, where they give
>> /tS/ = <c> (picior, -ciune, etc.)
>
>you mean *titia>tsâtsâ ? I mean germanic zize vers rom tzâtzã , there
>are two existing words and they are fonological quasi-identic and
>semanticaly too.

No, I mean words like puteum "pit", fortia "strength", pre:tium
"price", rationem "reason", bracchium "arm", *facia "face" etc.

>OK, let see some examples for ty, ky>"ts"
> a) you will wonder but from all romanians words which begin with
> "ts" there is _none_ which is supposed to come from
> latin,

We've just discussed tzine < tenet. Off the top of my head, there's
tzarã < terra.

>a bit strange for the two posibilities "ty" and "ky" which
> should have give in romanian a "ts".

The *ty and *ky I mean do not occur at the beginning of the word.


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...