Re: [tied] Romanian Development of /st/ (was: Against ... 'Albanian

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

> Richard Wordingham wrote:
>
> >> 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>.
>
> Expeted should have been "crãStin" here, remember "creationis"

which is

> supposed to give "crãciun". But that is a minor thing.

Actually, your forgetting 'the rules' is a major irritant. I don't
see the analogy. The postulated development, phonetically, is
<creationem> = /krea:ti"o:nem/ > /krja"tjo:ne/ > /krja"c^one/

> /kra"c^une/ > /kr&"cûne/ = *crãciune.

The development of *cristi:nus is <christinus> = /kris"ti:nus/

> /krestinu/ > /kreStin/ = <cre$tin>. No contradiction!

> Is there a demonstrative "iest"? I don't know it even as regional

form.

> There is "ãst-", "aist-", eventually even "ist-" but not "iest".

DEx on-line ( http://dexonline.ro/search.php?cuv=iest ) gives it as
a regional from.

>
> >
> > The regular plural forming pattern is exhibited by (just, justã,
> > ju$ti, juste) 'just, correct'.
>
> the word is a neologism but it shows the regular forming. Note stV
> StV
> gust when v= /i/ or /y/. It seems /e/ is not enough for building

palatal

> medium, thing expected in fact since /e/ is the unrounded form

of /o/,

Fronted as well as unrounded.

However, I am inclined to agree with you. I am beginning to think
that the /S/ in <$terge> < <extergeo> 'wipe off' is due to the
breaking: stErge > stiearge > $tearge > $terge. I'd like to
assemble more examples, though.

Richard.