Re: [tied] Re: semantic shift

tolgs001 wrote:

>> In the same way is to see the Italian chiara & chiaro & chiare
>> & chiari ( for masculine & feminine & plural & sg) comparative
>> with Rom. "chiar" which has no fem., no masc., no pl. no sg,
>> nothing.
>
> You're wrong (I explained on the other list yesterday). Agreed,
> in the contemporary Romanian language, "chiar"'s
> significance is a reduced one: it is an adverb (can usu. be
> translated as "exactly; just; still, as yet").
>
> But I can't believe that your Romanian-Romanian
> dictionary (the "DEX") does not contain this definition too:

I explained in the first text I posted. I quote:

"DEX means, an ancient meaning should have been "clar"= clear. I don't
know where this "ancient meaning" of "clear" was found in the Romanian
texts"

>
>>> CHIAR 2, -Ã, /chiari/, /-e/. adj. (Înv[echit]). Clar, limpede,
> lãmurit. <> (Azi în expr.) /Din chiar senin/ = pe neasteptate.
> -- Lat. *clarus*<<

There is no " din chiar senin" but "din senin din iarbã verde" and that
is all.

> [the slashes are for text parts in italics, and asteriscs for
> bold letters.] Pls look up this entry in your dictionary
>
> This means that, although old-fashioned (and as such
> replaced by the neologism "clar, clarã, clari, clare"), the
> inherited variants "chiar, chiarã, chiari, chiare" still exist!

There is _no inherited_ variant there.Hör auf bitte! It is indeed a
prove for blindness and credulity and no bit analyse.