Abdullah Konushevci wrote:
> Dear Alex
> I think that Rum. word kepec must be segmented as kep- + -ec, when -
> ec is deminutiv Slavic suffix.
hmmm. wait a bit . there is no "kepec" in Rom. There is just "petec",
dialectal "petic":
The root is petec and from this woard is derived the rest:
a peteci (vb), peticit ( adj. and imperf. form).peticeala ( subst. =
action to put a petec)
>I agree that Alb. pet- + -k
> (ë) "garment" are from the same root with Rum. pet- + -ec, very
> unproductive (cf. Sll. mjesec "moon", zec " rabbit") with doubtfull
> origin. It's also present in Albanian mistrec "undergrown,
> undersized", like Slavic kepec with same meaning, etc
I have to think a bit more about, maybe Mr Iacomi or Mr George will find
more examples. But if "ec" should be a suffix then we wil have:
scutec, mânecã, cioarec, shoarec, berbec,varatec, iernatec. But I am not
feeling OK with these examples.
In words as iernatec, vãratec, tomnatec, primãvãratec, sãlbatec,molatec,
muieratec, these are all regional forms where the literary forma are not
with "ec" at the end but with "ic". Though, here "ec/ic" is indeed a
suffix on the participial form of the verb which end in "-at"
In words as berbec, cioarec, Soarec,petec, scutec, which should be the
roots?
cioar- ( no sense alone), Soar-( no sense alone), scut- is OK since to
protect is a "scutec" ( scutec= diaper, napkin; (pl) swaddling clothes),
pet- ( no sense alone), berb- ( should be related just with bardh).
Interesting, here we have for some words which are to find in Latin the
nominative "x" sorrix, berbex. Since the oblique case was sorricis and
berbecis it was accepted that berbec & Soarec derived from Latin
sorricis and berbecis.
P.S. I appologise for not writting right the Latin words but just teh
end of them should be important here and I gues I gave them right ( -x
& -icis)