Re: Re[4]: [tied] Romanian Verb Endings and Substratum influence (r

Brian M. Scott wrote:

> [...]
>
>> the initial "e", does not become "a" in Rom. There is
>> erba, esca > iarba, iasca and not *arba, *asca, thus a
>> derivation with the help of "ecce" is simply wrong.
>
> The derivation under discussion is from *accu, not from
> <ecce>. And tonic initial /E/ doesn't became /a/ in Spanish
> or Portuguese, either; the development to *accu is
> exceptional.
>
>> Since you mention the forms in "aqueste" and "aquel",
>> which is the explanation of this "u" here? Is the "u" from
>> "*eccu" or which one?
>
> From *accu, obviously.
>
> Brian

nice. Rom. has "acela" for "he one who is far" and "acesta" for "he one
who is near" as another set of demonstrative.
I guess none doubts "acela, acesta" are not cognate with "aquel" and
"aqueste". I see no "u" there.


Alex




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.2.0 - Release Date: 27.05.2005