From: alex
Message: 28569
Date: 2003-12-17
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 13:50:11 +0000, george.st@... wrote:the transition of /in/ to /în/ or the transition of /în/ to /in/?
>
> Your plea for considering the value of the dialects has been duly
> noted.
>
>> Last but not least, I'd pay some more attention to the
>> [i]<->[I] relationship in Romanian phonology. Ad-hoc examples:
>> <scânteie> <-> <schinteie> "spark" < Lat. scintilla. Both variants
>> coexist, whereas <schinteie> [skin-'te-je] is old-fashioned now;
>> it's chiefly extant as as a... surname: Schinteie. / Then,
>> <sprânceana> <-> <sprinceana> "brow": in some regions of Romania,
>> local people prefer the pronunciation [sprin-]; the same regional
>> preference in <cuvânteaza> <-> <cuvinteaza>: some people will
>> forever prefer [ku-vin-], instead of the standard [ku-vIn].
>
> This is also easily explained if we look at the dialects. The
> transition of /ín/ to /în/ is recent and Daco-Romanian only
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...