--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham" wrote:
>>> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...>
>
>>>> /j/ is regularly lost after /r/: *grEvu > *grievu > greu.
>>>
>>> And we can add _mãcelar_ 'butcher' < macella:riu(s) 'meat-seller,
>>> victualler' for the loss of more ancient yods.
Actually, the yodh from Romanian archaic suffix /-árju/ was lost
slightly later; the result /-áru/ was treated as mark of article
(with usual loss of final -l from /-árul/) and words ended up
without etymological final /u/, getting regularized in /-ár/. But
the form with final diphthong still survives in regional speech and
several personal names as "Cojocariu", "Blidariu", "Berariu", etc.
(forms coexisting with modern "Cojocaru", "Blidaru", "Beraru").
> Is -rie- (one syllable) attested in words like _greu_? As far as
> I can tell, in modern Romanian the vowels of -rie- are in separate
> syllables.
No, the loss of the glide in -rie- was not recorded AFAIK (for
instance, in 16th century texts one finds "grei"). But nowdays,
the group /-rje-/ is no longer "banned", even if most "-rie-"
appear as i-e (hiatus). new words as "bacterie", "glorie", "carie",
"istorie", "orient", "materie", "artilerie", "barierã", etc. are
most usually pronounced with diphthong (those with internal "-rie-"
might be also pronounced with hiatus "o-ri-ent", "ba-ri-e-rã", the
other ones, never). So the loss has to be much earlier.
Regards,
Marius Iacomi