Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 23:43:59 -0000, "Richard Wordingham
> <richard.wordingham@...>" <richard.wordingham@...>
> wrote:
>
>> This is inspired by Message 17515
>> What does Romanian 'senin' mean? (I
>> don't have access to an
>> English-Romanian dictionary.). Why
>> does Latin 'sere:nus' yield Romanian
>> 'senin' rather than 's&nin'? ('&'
>> represents 'short 'a''.)
>
> Looks like an irregularity. Cf. a servi "to serve", if that's
> inherited
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...
>
"A servi" is a neologism from French
The word for " a servi" is " a sluji", a Slavic word, got trough the
church I guess.
The one which is supposed to come from Latin "servire" is the noun
"Serb". The verb ( if ever existed) should have been " a Serbi" . Even
in the medieval times the people who have been bounded to the land have
been called "Serbi" and the phenomenon called "Serbie".
And the transformations respect the rules as I guess them at least in
the accentuated part of the word:
serb > sierb > Serb ( see diphthong of /e/ in /ie/ when not in the next
syllable is a n /ã/)
as for "rv" > "rb" it should be compared with Latin "corvus" > Rom.
"corbus" , Latin "cervus" > Rom. "cerbus".
One will say, look , there is this. You have the rule. All come from
Latin with _regular changes_. Latin "rv" got in Rom. "rb".Did it indeed?
For Latin "cervus" we have _attested_ dacian "cerb-" and illirian
"cerb-"
And that in the time of Latin. There in the time Latin was alive and
kicking, with "rv" in words, there is the "rb" in attested dacian
glosses. What should one belive now?