Re: Plural of 'vatra'

>IMHO, anyone without a li'l bit of systematic introd. into
>linguistics
>basics will forever be prone to such "flexibility" (and hardly able
>to
>grasp patterns/models such as singular reconstructions based on
>plural
>forms).

Hello George,
Please be aware of such appreciations like: "without systematic
introd." especially when you are not in a clear position (viewing
some of your postings here) to really can make such appreciations...

So please atack in this forum the ideas not the persons... this
should be a minimum rule that should be kept by everyone inside this
forum...

> such as singular reconstructions based on plural
> forms

Their is not a reconstruction based only on the Romanian plural
form 'vetre'..The Aromanian form 'veatra' is a singular form (seems
that this thing wasn't clear enough for you...)

As Regarding the Romanian Plural forms indicating traces of an
original 'e' in the singular form please see:

sg. vara - pl.veri 'summer'(pl. form indicates and older 'e': Lat.
vera)

sg. masã - pl.mese 'table' (pl. form indicates and older 'e': Lat.
mensa)

sg. mãr - pl.mere 'apple' (pl. form indicates and older 'e': Lat.
me:lum)

etc...

Best Regards,
marius

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, g <st-george@...> wrote:
> > Your strange reluctance to accept the most economic
reconstruction is
> > incomprehensible to me.
> >
> > Piotr
>
> IMHO, anyone without a li'l bit of systematic introd. into
linguistics
> basics will forever be prone to such "flexibility" (and hardly able
to
> grasp patterns/models such as singular reconstructions based on
plural
> forms).
>
> George
>
> PS: Papahagi says: "also compare with" (not "derived from").