Re: [tied] Proto-Romance *ve:ci:nus 'neighbour' (was:PIE *kwokt)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "P&G" <petegray@...> wrote:

> >Spanish _vecino_ and French _voisin_ point to *ve:ci:nus (or
> >*vici:nus). Interestingly, Pokorny records Latin _ve:cus_ as a
> >doublet of the Latin root word _vi:cus_ 'a group of houses'.
> >Although Italian _vicino_ appears to derive from _vi:ci:nus_, if I
> >remember recent discussions aright, it too could derive from
> >*ve:ci:nus.
>
> The form vecos is found in Old Latin (CIL388, plural at CIL1806).
> The process is:
> *woikos > *weikos > we:cos > vi:cus

Are you implying that Old Latin <e> represented 3 sounds: /e/ >
Latin short /e/, /e:/ (presumably open) > Latin /e:/ and /e:/
(presumably close) > Latin /i:/? Old Latin ought to have had /e:/
that did not change to /i:/, e.g. *ve:ros 'true' (Pokorny root
#2172).

> The suggestion that the older form survived unchanged in some

dialect of

> Latin, and resurfaces in the Romance languages, replacing the

classical

> form, is interesting, but without actual evidence it seems scarcely
> believable.

If the evolution is as you suggest, I have to agree.

Is it better to suggest that vi:cinus > ve:cinus for some

> reason, such as dissimilation?

If <vecos> is genuinely a by-form, as opposed to an ancestral form,
then there may have been corresponding competing derivatives
_vi:ci:nus_ and *ve:ci:nus - whether the victory of *ve:ci:nus
should then be called dissimilation is debatable.

Richard.