[tied] Re: Late Proto Albanian *3 /dz/ = Early Proto Romanian *3 /

Hello Miguel,
I don't know any linguist to consider

Lat. eradicare -> rom. ridica
Lat. radicula -> rom. ridiche etc...

as Later Latin loans in Romanian.

I don't know either any OLD romanian form with 3
as 'ra3iche' 'ra3ica' for words like : 'ridiche' , 'ridica':

If you can proove that ALL words in my list are LATER LATIN LOANS
in Romanian or they ALL passed via a /3/ please do it.

But ONLY saying that : "secondary /di/ all postdate" is not at
all an argument.

Best Regards,
marius alexandru

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 13:57:53 +0000, alexandru_mg3
<alexandru_mg3@...>
> wrote:
>
> >Hello Miguel,
> > Your arguments are "false friends" here:
> >
> > 1. a) ep-Romanians "has problems" to pronounce /di/ IN SOME
> >CONTEXTS , BUT NOT IN ALL. Here are other contexts too where
> >
> > lat. /di/ -> ep-rom. /di/:
> >
> > Lat. adiliare -> rom. adia
> > Lat. landica -> rom. lindic
> > Lat. eradicare -> rom. ridica
> > Lat. radicula -> rom. ridiche
> >
> > b) also ep-Romanian /di/ is obtain from other Latin Loans (and
not
> >only) so its existance (LIKE IN in your ALBANIAN examples too)
cannot
> >be put in doubt :
> >
> > Lat. credentia -> rom. credinþã
> > Lat. manitia -> rom. dimineaþã (rom. de + manitia )
>
> These cases of secondary /di/ all postdate the development /di/
> /zi/, so
> they're irrelevant.
>
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...