Re: [tied] OE "afor"

m_iacomi wrote:

>>
>> "aprins" yes, this is a verbal adjective which shows us more
>> better the semantism of the verb

I mean the semantism of the verb "aprinde" is

>
> Rephrase it. I fail to see your point.
>
>> if one has some doubts or phantesise too much about semantic
>> mutations from Latin apprehendere.
>
> If you have doubts, read Dante: it's always a source of wisdom:
> "Amor, ch'al cor gentil ratto s'apprende". Italian word derives
> from the very same "appre[he]ndere" (< ad + prehendere) and one
> of its (old) meanings appears similar to Romanian word (that is:
> `to start to burn`, 'to be communicated` - used about fire, passion
> and in other similar contexts).


>> You know what? [...] If you are convinced, be convinced by
>> such ilusorial linguistic explanations.
>
> Your point being?
>
> Marius Iacomi

So what? Would you mean that "learn" , aprentice, apprendre, changed its
meaning in Italian and Rom. in "start to burn"?
I see the Rom. word as derivative of "prinde" and not as inherited from
"apprehendere"; The initial "a" is like in "acata", "alinta", etc...
I have nothing against of seing it as a intern derivation of "prinde"
which will make sense. It seems absurd to me to try to ignore the
semantism just for seing "an another inherited word". What does not
feets in your concept for seeing "aprinde" as being derived from
"prinde"?

Alex