Miguel Wote :
" None of these words derive directly from Latin ra:di:ce(m) and
its variants, which would have produced *rãzice.We have to depart
from a basis *radece, as also found in Catalan arrel "root" (< (la)
raEl < raDEu < raDez < radece). "
Why we have to depart from a root *radece? ....You exclude from
the beginning what you have to proove by excluding the case BASED on
the assumption that we have ALWAYS /3i/ and never /di/.
BUT This is what you have to proof here....
Lat. radicula -> Rom. ridiche
-------------------------------
English : little root.
Romanian Linguists that derived it from Lat. radicula:
PuScariu : radicula
Cioranescu : radicula
Romanian DEX : radicula
None but you derived rom. ridiche from Lat. *radece (a reconstructed
form, based on some Catalan words...Where this form is attested?)
We have in italian : radicchio (i - not e).
Cioranescu give us also alb. radhikje (i - not e)
for "cicoare" "chicory"
(Abdullah, could you help us here please because I have no
details about this Albanian word radhikje)
Now you circular reasoning regarding "radicula" is the following :
1. Miguel : we have ONLY one rule di -> 3i in ep_Romanian
2. Question : what about 'radicula' -> ridiche ? /di/ -> /di/
3. Miguel : cannot be from radicula. We have to start here
from *radece ?
4. Question : Why ?
5. Miguel : Because we have ONLY one rule here di->3i (see 1.)
You (and not only you, see Piotr too) applied the same circular
scenario as regarding pro-slavic h-theory in romanian.
Best Regards,
marius alexandru
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 14:46:51 +0000, alexandru_mg3
<alexandru_mg3@...>
> wrote:
>
> >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 didn't say that. The word for "root" in Romanian is
rãdãcinã, "radish"
> is ridiche, the verb ridica means "to lift, to raise". None of
these words
> derive directly from Latin ra:di:ce(m) and its variants, which
would have
> produced *rãzice. We have to depart from a basis *radece, as also
found in
> Catalan arrel "root" (< (la) raEl < raDEu < raDez < radece). Now
the
> variants are easily derivable:
>
> radecína > rãdãcina
> radécula > *rãdechie > ridiche
>
> As to your other examples, *adilia:re (with short i) would have
given
> *adel^a(re) > adi(j)a. The (late) raising of /e/ before nasal is
> well-known and has been discussed previously ad nauseam (credent,a >
> credint,a), as well as the raising of unstressed /e/ to /i/ before a
> following /i/ (*adeja(re) > adia, *demineat,ã > dimineat,ã, etc.).
>
> The development /di/ > /zi/ is early was already over by the time
of the
> Slavic loans (c^uditi > ciudi).
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...