Re: [tied] Re: derivation rules from later latin to romanian

Richard Wordingham wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
>> Richard Wordingham wrote:
>>
>>
>>> hospitem > oaspete, not ospete. Why? Cybalist 18582.
>>
>> /o/>/oa/ if in the next syllable an /ã/ or an /e/ folllows: see
> soare,
>> doare, intoarce.
>
> The issue here is that it was given in
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/18147 as
>
> '5) 6) 7) /é/, /ié/ and /o/ > /eá/, /ieá/, /oá/ before final -e and -
> a
> (but not -u); d(i)récta > dreaptã but d(i)réctu > drept.'
>
> Is there any reason for the word 'final' in the formulation?

Miguel constructed a bit unlucky the sentence. There should be " when in
the next syllable an /e/ occur" and not " before final /e/".In "oaspete"
/o/ is stressed, thus it became diphtongated;/e/ is not stressed and did
not changed to /ea/ under the influence of of the next /e/.
in oaspete the stress os on /o/ and now is on /a/, the word being:
oáspete

>
>>> Dropping of final -r Cybalist 18557 and account of sora.
>>
>> about "sora" see up. About droping of final "r" there is no
> explanation
>> ( see Alb/Rom "mãgar"(donkey) and other examples)
>
> Didn't these words once have final '-u'? That would protect them
> from the application of the rule.

We musst assume they have had the final /u/ for explaining the actual
form. About this final /u/ I guess there is some work to do in Albanian
language since in Rom. there is for sure it became mute. I am not quiet
sure regarding the Albanian, but I guess that won't be so hard to find
out.
We can observe "it became mute" but the answer "why became mute" should
be a more interesting question.

>
>>> Need to investigate l^ > y. femeie (18642). Also rule ordering
>>> issues, to get ea > e, not a.
>>
>> me too:-)
>
> For these it is just a matter of detail. Some of the developments
> leading to _femeie_ seem to be vary from subdialect to subdialect,
> whence the variant forms.

Well, if it is accepted that familia > femeie because the woman means in
fact having a family, the Albanian senses fo the word (fëmíjë) are
1)"child", 2)family, 3)wife; the derivatives are just regarding the
"child" ( fëmijërí= childhood).
It seems to me that the Latin word "familia" is a loan word from a
language where initialy it meant "wife" and is deep cognate with Latin
"femina". A honest observation about the semantic development is here
highly required. Is more probabil to have woman > family or more
probably to have family > woman ?

> The variants _$apte_ and _$epte_ are
> another example where the ordering of the rules is crucial, and
> seems to vary between dialects.
>
> Richard.

"Septe" is IMO a hyper-urbanismus. In my dictionary for archaisms and
regionalism there is no such form as "$epte" but DEX gives this form and
meant it is a regionalism and not a hyper-urbanism. Unfortunately there
is no indication in which region should be "$epte".