From: alexandru_mg3
Message: 44315
Date: 2006-04-20
>only
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@>
> wrote:
>
> > As you know we can have 'in the same time in the same context'
> > one phonetic rule => please take a look on the twpo supposedbelow
> > rules (one of them for sure is not true)or
> >
> >
> > 1. Latin kw/a,o > Rom ca,co /ka,ko/
> > ===================================
> > I quote here 'the official' etymologies (DEX -> see dexonline.ro)
> >
> > Rom. ca < Latin quam
> ...
>
> > On the other hand :
> >
> >
> > 1. Latin kw/a,o > Rom pa,po
> > ==========================
> > is based on:
> >
> > 1. Rom. apã < Latin aqua
> ...
> > 4. potârniche > Lat. *perturnicula (< per[dix] + *[co]turnicula)
> > *quo-turniculawhere
> ...
> > 5. pãresimi < Lat. quadragesima
> > Note: In contradiction with Rom. codru if from Lat. quadrum
> >
> > There are no others supposed Lat qua,quo > Rom. po,pa examples
>
> Three points:
>
> 1. The qua/o > ca/o examples are word-initial (plus one phrase
> it is morpheme-initial), while the qua > pa examples are mostlyRichard, patru & pãresimi are intervocalics ? :)
> intervocalic.
> 2. Unfortunately, irregularities abound. It is just that anetymology
> is weaker if it depends on an irregularity. In this case, /kw/can be
> instantly reconceptualised as /k/ or /p/, so the psychologicalbe
> argument for regularity of sound change does not hold. In this
> respect it is similar to the interchange of /k/ and /g/, which can
> distressingly common, or the development of Latin <ae> and <au>,where
> a failed sound change merged some of them with /e:/ and /o:/.Richard, I don't know phonetic rules that depends on a verb or a
>
> 3. qua/o > ca/o is overwhelmingly a change in one morpheme,
> interrogative/relative /kw/.
>
> Richard.