--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
> Richard Wordingham wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
> >
> >> For your information it appears probable that Latin "st/+"
yelded
> >> simply "S" in Rom:
> >>
> >> ustia > uSã (door)
> >> pastionis > pãSune ( place for pasture)
> >
> > No, the rule here is intervocalic -sti- > S - it was quoted in
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/18412 .
> by myself I find odd pastionis > pãSune .
It seems to be the general pattern, even if you might have expected
VstiV > V$tV rather than V$V.
The word "creStin" < christianus
> has too an intervocalic "st".
However, _cre$tin_ is exactly what you would expect from
*cristi:nus, as in the English girl's name _Christina_, once you
realise that /sti/ > <$ti>, not <$Ti>.
> I would like to see more such intervocalic "st"
since "ãStia", "astea",
> appears that they do not want to believe in a such VstV > S
Perfectly reasonable - I don't either! I trust you actually meant
VstiV > VSV.
As to the demonstratives, the suffix (-a) probably wasn't there in
Vulgar Latin, so (ãsta, asta, ã$tia, astea) is just (ãst, astã,
ã$ti, aste) + a. Interestingly, the development of the
demonstrative _iest_ from Latin _iste_ (VL *istus) backs up the idea
that initial stressed PBR e- (as opposed to E-) yields ie-. Slavic
influence?
The regular plural forming pattern is exhibited by (just, justã,
ju$ti, juste) 'just, correct'. Nouns in -stã follow this pattern.
Apart from nouns in -ist, plural -i$ti, nouns in -st are neuter
and form a plural in -uri. The exceptions I could find in on-line
DEX are _hipocaust_ 'hypocaust' and _test_ 'test', which have
plurals in -ste, and nominalised adjectives. The rule ste > $te has
a lot of exceptions - I wonder if the rules for the exceptions have
been identified.
Richard.