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

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 07:24:17 +0100, alex <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

>Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:03:39 +0100, alex <alxmoeller@...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The working out of "crãciun" from "creationem" looks very fuss
>>> regarding the vocalism. It is not known in Rom. that /ea/ or /ja/
>>> develop to a; what do your rules do with "e" or "j" here? Why does
>>> it get lost?
>>
>> /j/ is regularly lost after /r/: *grEvu > *grievu > greu.
>
>grevis > PBR grevis
>rivus > PBR rEvus > râu:

Bullshit. ri:vus > rivu > riu > râu.

The change i > î occurs after initial r- only.

>/e/, /E/ does not get lost after /r/ but it became "â"

Bullshit and non sequitur. I said /j/ gets lost after /r/, I never
mentioned /e/ or /E/. Neither /e/ nor /E/ give â after /r/, only /i/ does,
and only after initial r-, never after something like gr-.

>my two cents about "grevis". there is no need for this supposed change of
>you grevis > grEvu > grievu < greu

No need if you don't know or don't care about regular sound
correspondences, in which case you're in the wrong forum.

Romance open /E/ gives pre-Romanian /ie/, always (grEvu > grieu). Then the
palatal glide is lost after /r/.


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...