Re: [tied] Laryngeal theory as an unnatural

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 15:45:43 +0200, alex <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

>Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 00:03:42 +0200, alex <alxmoeller@...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Remember the discution about Latin "verus"? Well all romance as that
>>> "cousin" & alike from Latin.
>>
>> Apparently you don't remember the discussion. Spanish does not have
>> a form
>> like "cousin": it has <primo>.
>
>So what? Because Spanish has "primo" I have to see that Latin "truth"
>became cousin in Rom?

First cousin (consobrino primo -> primo), true cousin (cusurin vãr -> vãr).
We've been over this ad nauseam

>>> brother = frate, but the Rom. word is "fãrtat"
>>> sister = sorã, but the ancient word is "suratã"
>>
>> Those are just derivatives with -at, -atã < Latin -a:tus, -a:ta.
>
>It seems you forget what a role plays the suffix "-at" in DacoRom. This
>suffix makes:
>a) adjectives from substantives
>b) adjectives from adjectives
>c) name for animals; toponyms from adjectives

And names of persons (bãiat, bãrbat, etc.)

>> No, it's correct. What's pure phantasy is to think that însura is
>> related to "sister".
>> I don't think incestuous marriages were ever the norm
>> among Romanians.
>
>Not this way. From the original root derives surata and insura. Both
>means semanticaly "to comme together"

Phantasy. What Lat. uxor (*(y)ug-sor) and soror (*swe-sor) have in common
is the element *sor "woman".

>Is the "y" used in Pokorny kind of "i" or "u" or "iu" or what kind of
>sound is this?

Pokorny doesn't use <y>

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