[tied] Re: to kill

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "altamix" wrote:

>>>> There is nothing in Latin with /g/. I wrote:
>>>> <And no, it is not a new word since it appears in ancient texts
>>>> (even with analogical forms in some of them: "ucigu")>
>>>> ^^^^^^^^^^

Emphasis: the analogical form is "ucigu" (instead of etymological
AND currently used 1st person "ucid(u)"). Now, with this in mind,
read again:

>>>> The word "analogical" is to be taken as opposed to
>>>> "etymological": there is no etymological reason for the
>>>> presence of the /g/, the reason is analogy with other
>>>> verbal forms having it.

So again the emphasis is on non-regular presence of /g/ instead
of /d/ having to be explained through analogy.

>>> analogy with what ? which a verb should be in your eyes the one
>>> who made the analogy here?
>>
>> Verbs having the p.p. in -s, like "strânge", "plânge", "mulge",
>> "curge", "frige" etc. just like "ucide" with p.p. "ucis". The I-st
>> person of many verbs with p.p. in -s ends in -g -> by analogy one
>> reconstructs also "ucig" instead of "ucid" (it's even simpler to
>> articulate, so that made happy lazy people -- engine core for any
>> kind of evolution including language).

So again the emphasis is on etymological "ucid" being replaced by
analogical reconstructed "ucig". Why is that? It is all written
above: the past participle of all these verbs ending in -ge has a
non-trivial -s ending, just like "a ucide" whose participle "ucis"
sounds similar.

> there is no *strinde, *plande, *mulde, *curde, *fride which will
> appear to be analogical with "ucide"

So you just did not understand the sense of the analogy, and tried
to create an inverse one, claiming I wanted to say that. Needless
to say that proves something not very pleasant for you.

> I guess Miguel and Piotr will find your argumentation as a very
> good argumentation for the analogy.

I guess everybody but you already has got the analogy before
explaining it again.

> Me, well, I don't say my opinion since I don't know what an
> argumentation is.

Unfortunately that's not a joke.

> Maybe later if ever.

Better later than never.

Marius Iacomi