--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "m_iacomi" <m_iacomi@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george-st@... wrote:
>
> >> On the other hand, _brãTarã_ 'bracelet' is feminine in Romanian,
> >> so perhaps it is a new formation.
>
> Gender change is by no means surprising, especially for things
> without clear reason to be more likely masculine than feminine:
> Lat. F arbor > Rom. M. arbore, Lat. F. fagus > Rom. M. fag but
> Lat. M. dolor > Rom. F. durere, etc.
I thought these changes were explicable:
1. Name of trees are feminine in Latin, but form was allowed to
prevail, so the numerous 2nd declension tree names switched from
feminine to masculine.
2. Most nouns in -or are masculine, so when the rule that trees are
feminine was abandoned, _arbor_ could switch too. (I've a feeling
this change is *not* Common Romance.)
3. In Latin, abstract nouns (or at least, those derived from or
parallel to adjectives) are feminine, *except* for abstract nouns in -
or, which are masculine. This exception was abandoned, so the
abstract nouns in -or became feminine. I'm not sure that this rule
applies to Romanian. The only example I can think of is Latin
_dolor_ (m.) > *doru > _dor_ (n.) 'longing'. The new gender may be
connected with the plural in Romanian being _doruri_.
Surely Romanian _durere_ (f.) is merely the verbal noun of
_durea_ 'to hurt, be in pain', i.e. derived from the Latin infinitve
_dole:re_. There is another gender switch here - neuter to feminine -
probably a generalisation of the rule for abstract nouns - and
unlike Latin infinitives, these verbal nouns have plurals.
Richard.