Re: [tied] luare [Re: Pronoun]

On Sun, 18 May 2003 13:06:17 +0200, alex_tiscali_dsl
<alxmoeller@...> wrote:

>In this direction I was thinking too but the problems are here:
>levare > leare > lea.
>léa > liea > l'iea > iiea > iea > ia
>
>In this way the derivation from "levare" is clear. The sg. conj. to stem
>/ia-/ are as usual 1=/-u/, 2=/-i/, 3=/-a/
>ia+u > iau, ia+i > iai , ia+a > ia.
>
>Thus the sg conjugation is absoltuely OK. The plural one doesnt't fit
>anymore.
>How you said from "leware" to "lua" should be a Katzensprung, but it is
>not.
>You cannot go back to "lu" from "ie". Here I fail to see how about.

Dumnezeu, there was no /ie/ in the 1/2pl! The stress was on the /a/,
not on the /e/:

lévo: > lyévu iau
léva:s > lyéva (lyévi) iei
lévat > lyéva ia
levá:mus > levámu luãm
levá:tis > leváte luatzi
lévant > lyéva iau
leva:re > leváre lua(re)
leva:tum > levátu luat

In Spanish, llevo, llevas, lleva, llevan, and by analogy also
llevamos, llevais, llevar, llevado. It's a remarkable archaism in
this Romanian verb that the forms with non-initial accent have not
been ausgeglichen.


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