Re: [tied] Re: alb. gji

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 10:55 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: alb. gji


On Thu, 27 Feb 2003 21:46:54 +0100, "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
wrote:

>OK, now to Latin "stringo":
>The Romanian form is "strânge" which can derive from Latin 'stringere',
>but the participial form shows there is no Latin form here. For
>participial form we have:
>Latin : strictus
>Romanian : strâns

Well, then Spanish estreñir "to constipate" also cannot come from
Latin stringere, because the participle is estreñido "constipated",
not expected estrecho "narrow". And cocer "to cook" cannot be from
coquere, because the participle is cocido not *cocho

>I see the Albanian and Romanian have both the nasal "n" there which
>cannot come from Latin

striNgere



Well, the trap worked:-)

Dear Miguel, excuse me for showing so insistently on "n" ( which is not
wrong but not the most strongly point); as you know in Albanian is an
/ë/ and in Romanian was too an /ã/ which became /â/ because of the
nasal.
And this /ã/ & /ë/ is by no way from Latin /i/ but from a form with /a/.
I apologise about this little trap, in fact I have to thank you for the
vocalism rules. ( see plango > plâng even if I have my doubts that Latin
plango > plânge because there is Greek plessu from an older *plangiu and
Albanian pl'engu, pl'enk. It seems more these words are balcanic words
which came into Latin too somehow).


Alex