Re: IE prefix "*s"

From: alexandru_mg3
Message: 28493
Date: 2003-12-15

Hello Miguel,

The rules are (of course you know them better than I):

a) latin stressed 'a' followed by 'n' or 'mC' -> ã (later : ã was
closed to î in Daco-Romanian) :

b) latin non-stressed 'a' folowed by 'n' -> ã (later : ã can passed
to î as above)


As result both : INIMA (< ANIMA) and INEL (ANELLUS) are exceptions,
so they aren't good examples, because each one has its own
exceptions) that are explained by Rosetti as below:

rom. INIMA -> lat. ANIMA
-------------------------
(Rosetti ILR ->vol. IV - VI pg. 218)
" Fonestismul asteptat este înemã (< anima ) .
Timbrul înimã se explicã prin trecerea lui e neaccentuat la i.
Timbrul i al vocalei initiale nu poate fi justificat prin asimilare
(î-i > i-i), decît daca plecam de la formele in care î era
neaccentuat:
înimos > inimos ; inimã este deci un fonetism refacut prin analogie; "

" The expected phonetism is înemã (< anima ).
The sound înimã is explained by the transformation of non-stressed
e to i.
The sound i OF INITIAL VOWEL CANNOT BE JUSTIFY by asimilation
(î-i > i-i), but if we started from the forms where î is not
stressed: so înimos > inimos ;
Thus inimã is a phonetism remake by analogy."

rom. INEL -> lat. ANELLUS
------------------------
(Rosetti ILR ->vol. IV - VI pg. 78)

" dr. înel (fonetism atestat in secolul XVI,v.mai jos pag. 218)
(cu î > i sub influenta lui e urmator) [...] < lat. anellus "

"Daco-Romanian. înel (attested phonetism in XVI century, see below
at page. 218)
(with î > i under the influence of the next e) [...] < lat. anellus


So the derivation would be :
[ex]cambiare -> *[s]kãmbia -> *[s]kîmbia

BUT NOT "schimba".

Best Regards,
marius

P.S. Also what I said in my previous message is still available
(and it wasn't related to 'sk' ):

rom. 'chi' (see 'schimba') is obtained only from latin. : 'clV'
or 'culV'.

I don't know any exception to this (in any case until now)


--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:48:02 +0000, alexandru_mg3
<alexandru_mg3@...>
> wrote:
>
> >Hello Miguel,
> > I try to find other Romanian word derived from Latin in Romanian
> >that have been transform like :
> > sca -> *scâ -> *scâi -> schi (or similar)
>
> The /sk-/ has nothing to do with it. What you should be looking
for is a
> Latin /a/ before a nasal followed by a palatal element, developing
into
> /i/, such as anima > inimã, agnellu > inel, excambiare > schimba.
>
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...