[tied] Re: yellow

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex_lycos" <altamix@...> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 1:43 AM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: yellow
>
>
> > On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:42:56 +0100, "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Do not forget please, almost all Romanian words which

are "inherited"

> > >from Latin, show a derivation from the accusative form of the

Latin

> > >words. What should it mean?
> >
> > That Romanian is a Romance language. Almost all Portuguese,

Spanish,

> > Catalan, Occitan, French, Italian, Rhaeto-Romance and Sardinian

words

> > are derived in the singular from the accusative sg. of the Latin
> > words
> >
> > =======================
> > Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> > mcv@...
>
> OK, but why from acusativ form ? It is not logicaly to derive from
> nominative?

___________________________________________________________

Historiccally this is not quite correct. In an inerrime periode all
cases exept the nominative had merged into one - casus obliquus.
Formally this often resembled the latin ablative in singular, and
accusative in plural.

The sigular form most often derived from this merged case.

In the plural, de develpment differs from language to language: In
Italian an Rumenian the nominative plural gave rise to the plural
form. In the other languages the oblique case was used.

This development has caused the Italian sigular to look like the
latin ablative in most nouns, and latin nom in plural.

ex: Tetto - roof (lat.abk. tecto:), aqua - water(lat.abl aqua:) -
Parte - part (lat.abl parte), Uuovo - egg(lat.abl ovo:)

Plural: Orsi -bear (lat.nom ursi:), aque - (lat.nom aquae), uova -
(lat.nom ova)