Re: [tied]en versus an ( it was Re: ANUS)

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "alex" <alxmoeller@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 8:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: ANUS
>
>
>> Almost right. The stress in "rumân" is on /a/ since the suffix is the
>> one who took the accent from "rum-". Thus for Rome the word in old
>> Romanian must have been *Rúm(a)
>> rúma +en > rumen > rumân
>
> No! I explained Latin stress to you some time ago, but it seems it
> was to no avail. <rumân> derives from Latin <ro:ma:nus>. It had
> penultimate stress (<ro:má:nus>) because of the long vowel in the
> last-but-one syllable. <ró:ma> had stressed /o:/, which did _not_
> become Romanian /u/ in this position

Piotr, try please to forget the position of a parent who feels ashamed
and irritatet that his child seems to do not understand things which he,
the parent, learned them as "good things". Let us be just simply
"fachlich". Forget Latin for a while please. All ancient points shows an
/-en-/ there as suffix and not an "-an-".
The suffix is an /en/ as showed by Germanic, in Albanian and by all
Dacian tribes names which have been kept by Greeks Caenses, Cotenses,
Potulatenses,Buridavenses, Timacenses etc. It should be enough evidence,
more evidence as this is not possible.That was history. Now to
linguistic:
This suffix /en/ is the perfect one for explaining _both_ suffixes /-ân/
and /-ean/ in Romanian.
Something against this thesis ?

alex