Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 09:16:19 +0100, "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
> wrote:
>
>> if stingo > stinge then
>> why *stancus ( = staticus) > stînga
>> end if
>
> Because án > ân, always
But this is not _just_ for Latin. I have nothing against an /an/ > /ân/
but I have a lot against /in/ > /ân/
Let see. You said sân, frân(sic), vâna
sinus > sân
vena > vâna
French 'frein' > frânã ( there is no frân in rom.)
I guess you meant frâu=rein from Latin "frenum" where is not to explain
the los of "n"
for the /i/ or /e/ which under the influence of nasal become /ân/ I have
my trouble but first let see:
linum > lin ,plenum > plin ,vinum > vin,lingo > linge ,lingula > lingura
,stingo > stinge, preambulare > plimba ( I can just laugh here)
transpungere > strãpunge = to pierce trough ( here I am lost with the
changes:)
mensa > masã ( why lost "n" ?) ,mentis > minte ( not minTi= to lie, but
minte= mind) ,sternutare > strãnuta (?? how)
venere > veni, vinder > vinde,etc
very nice is latin "pinna" which gave "pana"= feather. If one said that
i> E > iea and that /i/ fom /iea/ became assimilated in the previous
consonant if this one was d,k,t,g,s, one has no ideea what happened to
/i/ from /iea/ like in pinna > pana . Most probably the same thing as in
virdia , aka /i/ > /E/ > /e/ > /ea/ > /a/ .And this all in the short
time until the slavs came:)It looks more as paper thoughts as
reality-like.
You see for every "in" Latin is an "in" and for /en/ is an /en/ in Rom.
not an /ân/.
Now, there is this "jocker" the /E/
I do not agree with it because there are more important examples which
shows an another way to handle:
erba = iarbã, pl. ierburi
epa = iapã, pl. iepe
eccum = iacã ( and with this is every speculation eccum-illum >ac^el=
not true)
esca = iascã , pl. iesci
In so far this /i/ in stressed position diphtongued to /ia/ when in the
nest syllable was an /ã/ but in /ie/ when in the next syllable was
anything else as /ã/.
Thus this found "joker" is very strong, took very analytical is weak,
even it cannot hold stand.
I asked once for a list with pan-romanic words. There are 4 hundred and
something and Rumanian is missing almost the half and over 100 of these
words have a curious semantic change. I guess if we look carefully at
these words there will be maybe 100 indeed Latin words. Do you know a
such a list on the net?
Abot stânga =leftside but stângaci= clumsy I am interested in the
semantic aspect.
DEX gives "stânga"= "leftside " as *stancus < staticus (???? how?).
Do not forget the Albanian "shtëngër", rom. "stângaci" here , both with
the same semantism ( clumsy).
And not, I dont have a PIE cognate for "stângaci" and Albanian
"shtëngër". Maybe they are neoliticval words:)