Re: [tied] -phóros, -phorós, -fer

On 2006-04-07 15:49, Rob wrote:

> Is the /e/ really analogical in _fru:gifer_? Couldn't it be part of
> the normal reduction of non-initial short vowels in Latin? That is,
> *fru:giforos > *fru:gifors > *fru:gifers > fru:gifer?

I think something like this would indeed be possible before /r/, but
Latin generally shows an analogical remodelling of compositional nomina
agentis after the vocalism of the corresponding presents, cf.
sacri-legus (not *-ligus from the expected reduction of unstressed *-logos).

>> (3) exceptionally in <vir>.
>
> What would cause such an exception?

Great frequency of use, most likely.

Piotr