--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "m_iacomi" <m_iacomi@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham" wrote:
> > I do not see any need to derive Romanian _plâns_ from Latin
*planxus
> > (which is plausible, given the perfect _planxi:_).>
> Quite right... in Daco-Romanian dialect.
Thanks for the support.
> Aromanian knows a lot of
> forms not transformed by analogy: "ascumtu" for DR "ascuns",
I assume this is the past participle of the equivalent of DR
_ascunde_ 'hide oneself', derived from Latin _abscondere_ 'conceal,
leave behind'. The Latin words past participle is _absconditus_, so
where does Aromanian _ascumtu_ come from?
"Timtu"
> for DR "încins"
I presume these are derivatives of Latin _(in)cingere_ 'gird', whose
past participle was _cinctus_, that simple application of the rules
says should have yielded DR încimpt. By the rules, the Latin
perfect _(in)cinxi:_ should yield analytic DR perfect _încimpsei_
(the rules give _încimpsi_, but analogy has been at work on the
oerfect endings.) What form would DR have if analogy had not been
at work on the stem? I'm wondering if we have nothing more
complicated here than a simplification /mps/ > /ns/ and then DR
continuing the Latin tendency to generalise -s- from the perfect to
the past participle.
Do you know the Aromanian equivalent of _tuns_? Latin _tonsus_
should yield DR *tos. The other Romance languages are of little
help here. French _tondre_ 'to shear, to clip' has past participle
_tondu_, and Italian has the iterative form _tosare_ < *tonsare,
albeit based on the past participle _tonsus_. Unsurprisingly the
Latin perfect _totondi:_ has no representation in Romanian; I don't
think reduplicated perfects survive anywhere in Romance.
Richard.