Re: [tied] Re: Indo-Iranian

Miguel Carrasquer wrote:

>> You see it wrong, or better sayd, you can see it just to see it that
>> way. "ecce" has in Rom. "iacã" perfect regulary phoneticaly and
>> semantic.
>
> Accu- is not ecce-.

what is this accu- ? wherefrom you got it? I never found this form
nowhere? Is this eventualy a form _requested_ by romance for explain the
derivation from Latin?

>
> So you're denying the simple fact that e.g. Catalan aquest "this",
> aquell "that" are related to Romanian acest "this", acel "that"?
>
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...

No. I simply do not derive them from Latin, but to an older layer as
Latin. Thus, I see tehm as erlated to Latin but not derived from it.