Re: Goats

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham"
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "altamix" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
> > <piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
> > > 19-01-04 04:48, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> > >
> > > > If Romanian had borrowed the precursor of Albanian <edh> from
> the
> > > > source of its Albanian-like substrate, what would the

borrowed

> > word
> > > > look like now?
> > >
> > > Assuming that the precursor was *e:dz in Roman times (from

still

> > earlier
> > > *aidz'(a)- < *h2aig^(o)-), I'd expect Modern Romanian *ez.
> > >
> > > Piotr
> >
> > you mean of course Modern Rom. "iez".
>
> No he doesn't. Try running Latin _haedus_ and *e:dus through 'the
> rules' and see what you get.

is there any difference Richard?
PBR has had no vowel quantity and Latin "h" was mute.
thus :
haedus > edu
*e:dus > edu

>
> > There is no "e" at the begin of
> > the words in Rom. in the ancient words if I don't mistake,

but "ie-"

> > *ez > iez
>
> Quality matters here.

Meaning ?

>
> > (no diphtongation here, but iotacisation of /e/)
>
> I don't believe there is any itacisation here. Are you saying a
> prothetic semivowel was added?
>
> Richard.

What do you believe it is then?

Alex