Re: [tied] Re: Active / Stative

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:55:35 +0000, Richard Wordingham
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:06:50 +0100, petegray
>> <petegray@...> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>e:ius, cu:ius and hu:ius.
>> >> >That should be eyyus, cuyyus, huyyus. >
>> >> I was citing the Classical Latin forms, where Vjj > > V:j.
>> >
>> >Nonsense.
>> >I was also talking of the Classical forms, where Vjj survives,
>and does not
>> >undergo the process you mention.
>>
>> My Latin grammar says e:ius, etc. It certainly doesn't say
>> "eyyus".
>
>Mine (Kennedy's Latin Primer) says the consonantal <i> was
>pronounced double in these words.

Does it mark length?

> What are we to do? Weigh the grammars?

There's a simple rule to map one transcription onto the
other, so it really doesn't matter that much.

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