--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "P&G" <petegray@...> wrote:
> > voca:re ... The development from Latin
> > to French is 'obscure'
>
> ca > /Sa/ is regular in French, eg chat.
Yes, but the intervocalic lenition of Latin <c> into French bleeds
this rule. Intervocally, one needs a geminate or a cluster, as in
French sèche 'dry (f.)' < Latin sicca or a cluster, as in blanche
(f.) < Proto-Romance blanca 'white (f.)', as opposed to English bay
< (Old) French baie < Latin ba:ca 'berry'. This suggests that the
Old French is a borrowing from Latin, late enough to prevent
lenition and early enough for the Central French ca > cha change to
occur, yielding Old French vocher, voucher.
Interestingly, if intervocalic <c> is softened by a front vowel, it
yields /iz/, as in the example place:re > please that I gave before.
> Most first conjugation verbs come into Enlgish from the supine,
giving all
> those words in -ate. There are also forms from the present
participle
> (-ant) and the gerund (-and), and the -abilis forms (-able). You
can work
> out if it's an -e/i- vowel or an -a- vowel in all
> these -ent/ant, -end/and, -able/ible words, by remembering which
conjugation
> the Latin form is.
Old French levelling in -ant has had its effect, as in the
nouns 'pendant' and 'dependant', as opposed to the adjectives, which
end in -ent. The conjugation rule for -able/-ible is unreliable.
In English words based on supines often have '-ible', such
as 'flexible'. On the other hand, if there is a corresponding verb
in English, you can almost always use '-able'. There are about half
a dozen exceptions, such as 'discernible'.
>
> Peter