--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" wrote:
> Seems that you are in the same situation as M. Iacomi.
>
> You cannot say 'a correct' 'tri', and you never used it, but you
> are an expert in the Romanian NW dialect.
You are still making unsupported assumptions. Unlike me, George
_is_ from NW Romania (I was born in South but I travelled all over
my country so I know _exactly_ what's that "trii" sounding like,
even if I would never pronounce [triy] ([trij]) instead of [trey],
but for demonstration purposes). Unlike you, both of us have some
supplementary knowledge on phonetics, esentially unknown for most
compatriotes since these issues are not discussed in elementary
school. You are not to be ashamed for ignorance, it is not your
job to know exactly the nature of the sounds you're producing
when speaking: their basical use is to comunicate with others and
not to be analyzed with machines. Nevertheless, you are at fault
when sloppily denying a speciality claim whose real terms you
ignore plain and simple, and that is a thing you should not do.
Two other persons other than me and George already hinted the very
likeliness of your fallacious interpreting of the diphthong in
popular terms (that is: ignoring its existence), that should have
sounded you an enormous bell. There are two correct possibilities:
either you accept some people really do know better than you these
speciality issues which you did not study (and you're not willing
to in near future) and accept their analysis too, or you spend some
time for really acquiring the basis for making judgements (and not
like Alex who spent time only for learning speciality words to be
further misused in most of his sentences). Speaking when one does
not know exactly what's the matter about is simply bad behavior on
a speciality list.
> A great part of romanian linguistic was written by the people in
> the same situation like you and M. Iacomi (Graur, Iordan, etc...)
Linguistics is to be made by specialists. Before being sustainers
of the commies, Graur & Iordan were decent linguists; afterwards
they accepted to collaborate _politically_ but linguistics had
nothing to do with that. If you're interested, check for their
pre-WWII articles and books.
> P.S. : I already saw you messages here regarding the meaning
> of 'pom', and its equivalence with 'copac', and the use of 'arbore'
> in NW part of the country....now I can add to your skills the
> spelling of 'tri'
Couldn't that be that you simply reject as false anything you are
not aware of?! Consider that in the meantime.
Cheers,
Marius Iacomi