Re: [tied] Re: Proto-Romance *ve:ci:nus 'neighbour'

> I can explain *ve:ci:nus (derivative from attested by-form
>_ve:cus_ of _vi:cus_). *vici:nus would be a dissimilatory
>shortening.

(a) Is ve:cus actually an attested "by-form"? I know it is attested as the
older form of vi:cus, but we can't just assume it survived alongside its own
later product. Pokorny says it is "latin dialect" but where is the
evidence?

(b) If we accept vici:nus with shortening of the first syllable, ve:cinus is
unnecessary - both would give the same outcome.

Peter