Re: [tied] tt/st/ss

--- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

> On 2007-06-12 20:39, stlatos wrote:
>
> > The dim. ra:stellus not -illus makes it seem late.
>
> All is regular here. The treatment of secondary
> syllabic *r. and *l. in
> Latin was different! The former yielded *er _before_
> the rhotic was
> assimilated --
>
> *-tr-elo- > *-tr.lo- > *-terlo- > -tellu-
>
> Similarly, ager, sacer < *agr.s, *sakr.s < agros,
> sakros, and agellus <
> *agerlos < *agr.los < agrelos
>
> -- whereas secondary *l. and *n. developed *i before
> the sonorant, hence
> tignus : tigillus, po:culum : po:cillum.

At one stage i was inserted to correct difficult clusters created
from new formations and sound changes: *kswizdh+ >> *swizdhlo+ >
si:bila:re, *kalklo+ > *kalglo+ > *kaliglo+ > caliga.

No syllabic C is possible for these, therefore those in which you
say it could be are probably the result of met. (creating more common
forms like nl, rl as *dwenlos > bellus, *sterla: > stella).

pultlos
pulslos
pulsilos
pusillos

analogy:

putlo+lo+ > putillus

etc., so:

wekslo+lo+ .. tegno+lo+ .. po:klo+lo+
weksl+lo+ ... tegn+lo+ ... po:kl+lo+
weksl+ilo+ .. tegn+ilo+ .. po:kl+ilo+
wekslilo+ ... tegnilo+ ... po:klilo+
weksillo+ ... teginlo+ ... po:killo+

etc.