Re: [tied] Re: Latin barba in disaccord with Grimm's Law?

--- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

> > >> >
> > >> > I gave examples enough to show that an
> individual
> > >> >form may have either o or a (fo-/faveo:); with
> the
> > >> >sporadic nature of the changes this is no
> > >> >counterexample. Also see 100.c for
> > >> counterarguments
> > >> >to your derivation and n.>an, etc.
>
> I don't like sporadics.

Some changes start in a few words and spread, either
to all words or stop at some point. There's no way to
get around this with the information from historical
times. Why shouldn't a few exist in reconstructions?

There are also times when a change is optional, and
forms with the older and a newer sound coexist.
Usually the new ousts the old at some point.

These aren't very common in standard
reconstructions, why should a few cases (and this one
with written evidence) be troubling?

> The existence of both foveo:
> "warm" and
> faveo: "cherish" in Latin, plus Ernout-Meillet's
> remark that words
> with /a/ are 'mots populaires' makes me think there
> must be at least
> one independent source (substrate? adstrate?
> sociolect?) for Latin
> words with /a/.

Well, from Latin to Vulgar Latin doesn't need much
of an explanation.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com