16-12-03 23:34, alex wrote:
The /i/ in "cambio" was a short "i",
> thus *ex-cambiare > *scambeare > *scambea. Do I see it wrong?
Yes. First, this short /i/ became a non-syllabic glide: /skam.bja-/, not
/skam.bi.(j)a-/ (dots mark syllable divisions). Secondly (if the first
objection didn't apply), *e from Lat. i was only diphthongised in
stressed syllables, and the /i/ in <cambio:, cambia:re> was never stressed.
Piotr