Re: [tied] Re: alb. gji

On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:44:52 +0100, "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
wrote:

>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"

I meant frânã (fre:na).

>for the /i/ or /e/ which under the influence of nasal become /ân/ I have
>my trouble but first let see:

We've been over this a hundred times before and you've still made no
prpogress at all. One last time...

>linum > lin

long i:

>,plenum > plin

long e:, but not immediately after labial, s- or Cr-

>,vinum > vin,

long i:

>lingo > linge ,lingula > lingura, stingo > stinge,

short i, but not immediately after labial, s- or Cr-

>preambulare > plimba ( I can just laugh here)

long e:, but not immediately after labial, s- or Cr-

>transpungere > strãpunge = to pierce trough ( here I am lost with the
>changes:)

Irrelevant.

>mensa > masã ( why lost "n" ?) ,

Because -ns- was lost everywhere (Spa. mesa)

>mentis > minte ( not minTi= to lie, but
>minte= mind)

Short e, not before -u

>,sternutare > strãnuta (?? how)

Irrelevant.

>venere > veni

(veni:re) Unstressed. Stressed vine < viene, short e not before -u.

>, 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.

penna > pena > peanã > panã

>You see for every "in" Latin is an "in" and for /en/ is an /en/ in Rom.
>not an /ân/.

Nonsense. The rules are that after labial, s-, Cr- an /e/ before /n/
(/nC/) becomes î. After labial and before -u, an /E/ before /nC/ also
becomes /î/ (but /i/ in non-Daco-Romanian).

>Now, there is this "jocker" the /E/
>I do not agree with it

Who cares?

>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)

it's from accu-illum, as everywhere else in Romance.

>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/.

E > ie, before -a/-e ie > iea > ia


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...