Re: [tied] Re: vulgar Latin ?

tolgs001 wrote:

> altamix@ wrote:
>
>> I found some writings which means in the lingua prisca was
>> a kind of post posed article like in Rom. "-ul".
>
> In those Latin examples, /-ul+us,a,um/ is some kind of...
> diminutival suffix. e.g. homunculus. Whereas the
> Romanian /-ul/ (along with the -le, in such words like
> burete+le, berbece+le, soarece+le) is the definite
> article - which has the same hist. background as
> /il, lo, le, el/ in other Romance languages
>
> George

I expected you read better the texts from begining of the IX century. It
is not about "-ul" only ( see "casa lupuli") and it does not sho the
daco-romanian character, but the aromanian one.

Alex