From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 18639
Date: 2003-02-09
>Miguel Carrasquer wrote:By the speakers of Latin.
>> Additional on serpe:ns, serpentem: I had forgotten about Ita. serpe,
>> which can perhaps be explained by loss of -n in Eastern Romance, but
>> not so Cat./Occ. serp, Old Cast. sierpe. As Meyer-Lübke already
>> showed, Lat. serpe:ns, pronounced /serpe:s/, when the semantic
>> connection with the participle loosened up, was reinterpreted as an
>> e:-stem serpe:s, serpe:m (or later even as a C-stem serps, serpem),
>> which then gives the Romance forms. The form serpent (Cat/Occ/Fre),
>> serpiente (Cast) is learned, not inherited
>
>Reinterpeted by whom?