Re: kentum/satem: why Lithuanian kg before e/i

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "altamix" <alxmoeller@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tolgs001" <st-george@> wrote:
> > >
> > > >These are the reasons that we are obliged to suspect wa
> > > >not o>oa in Romanian /c^wara/
> > > >
> > > >Marius
> > >
> > > The Romanian diphtong <oa> here (which is by no means
> > > correctly rendered by the narrow transcription /wa/) is
> > > a very late occurrence - a few centuries old, and specific
> > > only to the south-eastern ("muntenian") subdialect of
> > > Romanian.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > George
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > does anyone forget the diphtongation of "o" to "oa" is
> > present in Arumanian as well ??!! :-)
> > The change should be more as a few century old since in

Arumanian

> > _and_ Moldavian dialects there are forms as "oaminji/oaminii"

and

> > that means the diphtongation is older as the change of "e"

to "i"

> > before "n", thus _older_ as the first literar testimonies and of
> > course, not restricted just to some Wallachian (Muntenian)
> > subdialects.
> >
> > P.S. I think that what literary is showed as "oa" is in fact the
> > said "wa". Or is there any posibility for you to distinge
> > between "wa" or "oa"? I have to recognise I cannot make the
> > difference .
> >
> > Alex
> >
>
>
> For George: o/stressed /e,ã,a > oa is considered Common Romanian
> (Rosetti)
>
> and oa is /wa/, George (see Rosseti too)
>
>
>
> Marius
>

As on my side, I think that there wasn't ANY o>oa in
Romanian ....because there was no o in Dacian....

Marius

P>S> this fact will be known in the future as "Marius' Rule" :)