Re: [tied] Latin pinso etc.

m_iacomi wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" wrote:
>
>> Richard Wordingham wrote:
>>
>>> A Classical form <pinsatum> (whose existence I am not sure of)
>>> would yield Romanian *pisat.
>>
>> why should be reduced the "ns" group to "s"
>
> Why on earth aren't you able to make a note on some agenda when
> a topic is cleared out, for not asking the _same_ questions again
> and again?! The /ns/ > /s/ topic has been already discussed with
> Latin word for `snake`: it is an ancient feature of Latin, as you
> could notice even from Rosetti's ILR (about Latin phonetics) if
> you hate yahoogroups search function.

1)It bother me when the dictionaries and people assumes things which
never happen in a certain language.
Thus if "pisa" is from "pinsare" then they have to say that is from
"pisare" < "pinsare". In our case, there is bloody to say Latin pinsare

> pisa since something like this is simply wrong. Latin "pisare" or

VulgLatin "pisare" > "pisa" is correct. It remains apparently odd the
lost of "n" in that position of the word but keeping it in another
position in Latin and this is why I wonder about because I compare with
Rom. where the "ns" is kept, regardless its position.

2) /ns/ > /s/ in "snake" topic? I ahve to re-see it. I honestly do not
remember about and I don't recal any /ns/ in "snake"

Alex