Re: [tied] Re: Nature, virtus etc. (was: Why borrow 'seven'?)

----- Original Message -----

From: alex

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 5:45 PM

Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Nature, virtus etc. (was: Why borrow 'seven'?)

Richard Wordingham wrote:
>
> Whoops!  You're right, I meant *g^enh1 :)
>
> But Latin _na:tu:ra:lis_ and _na:ti:vus_ are readily analysed, even
> when Anglicised, as na:t(o)-u:r(a:)-a:li-s and na:t-i:vu-s.  The
> suffixes -u:ra (> English -ure) and -i:vus (> English -ive) are very
> common additions to the past participle (or should I say supine?).
> _na:tus_ 'born' is the past participle of _na:scor_ 'be born'.


strange participle , isn't it? it appears as a reduction of "*nascotus" or
how is to explain the "nat-" from "nasco-"?
and if a reduction, then why should be a such big cluster reducced ?
na-sko-tus > na-tus ?
I think at other verbs as "pasceo" which does not have a participle as
"*patus" so the reduction appears unlike here..
Alex