Re: [tied] para

From: alex_lycos
Message: 17759
Date: 2003-01-18

----- Original Message -----
From: <dmilt1896@...>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] para

> W. D. Elcock "The Romance Languages" 1960 writes:
> PER and PRO, though much used (Fr. 'par' and 'pour') tended to
> eliminate one another: thus PER was lost in the Iberian Peninsula
> (Span. 'por'<PRO, and 'para' Old Span 'pora'<PRO AD), but in general
> triumphed over PRO in Italy and the East (Ital. 'per',
> Rum. 'pre', 'pe')
> Dan Milton

I doubt there is a Romanian "pre" & "pe" with the meaning "por", "para",
"per", "pour".

In Romanian "pre" is to find in:
spre ( s+pre)= toward, in the direction of
precum ( pre + cum) = as weel as
pe= on
The equivalent for "per, por, para, pour" = Romanian "pentru"
cf DEX pentru= pre+întru
pre= pe
pe= cf. DEX latin "super" or latin "per". ( don-t forget latin super >
supra in romanian almost as unused but "deasupra" is the word which is
used = de+asupra
întru= cd DEX latin "intro"

The whole composition seems a bit forced since a Romanian sound like
"â/î" ( I use both characters tough is the same sound, the way to write
was changed several times) seems to derive from an "a" and "e" but not
from an "i". Therefore Latin "intro" could hardly give the Rom ."întru".
Beside the fact that the semantism is as usual far away from Latin
"intro". Latin intro should given in Romanian "intra" = to enter

The word "întru" is replaced with "în" which too could not derive from
Latin "in" but from a form like *en or *an. So far I remember even Latin
has had initialy an "en" and this "en" became an "in" in Latin.

Even a nasal could not close the Latin "i" in Romanian , see: linum >
in, plenus> plin, lenus <lin , intro> intra
The Aromanian equivalents for romanian "ân"= "ãn" or pãntru" for
"pentru" show to that there is not an i >ã > â but an a/e > ã > â

Of course I speak just about so-called "inherited forms" from Latin to
Romanian :- )