--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 01:01:38 +0100, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...>
wrote:
> >caepa > c^iepa > c^(i)eapa > c^apã
>
> I should have known better than to trust Alex' Latin... That's:
>
> ce:pa > c^epa > c^eapa > c^apã
Possibly, but condemn him for his real sins. Lewis and Short
prefers _caepa_ and _caepis_ (but also giving _ce:pa_ and _ce:pis_),
but Onions, who I presume knew his onions, gives the word as
_ce:pa_. The evidence he gives is (Old) French _cive_, Provençal
_ceba_, Picard _chivot_ 'green onion' (what's that?), and (Middle)
English _chive_, which as far as I am aware all argue for _ce:pa_ as
opposed to _caepe_. Romanian <ceapã> provides no evidence either
way.
(Latin /ae/ started to merge with /e:/, but this merger was halted.
It then monophthongised as /E:/, merging with short /e/.)
Richard.