From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
Message: 53518
Date: 2008-02-17
>Your statement was:
>> >> >This is my version:
>> >> >Case breaks down in Romance. Some dimwits use nom. (-i, -ae >
>> >> >-e) in the pl. for all cases, other dimwits use acc. (-os, -as).
>> >> >The choice between those form becomes shibbolethized, so that
>> >> >using 2.sg. -Vs etc is bad for you. It becomes replaced with -i.
>> >>
>> >> Except that this is falsified by the facts.
>> >
>> >> The nominative-accusative distinction (Nom -os, Acc. -o; pl. Nom
>> >> -i, Acc -os) survived in areas where final -s was not regularly
>> >> lost, and is abundantly attested in Old French and Old Occitan.
>> >
>> >OK. And?
>>
>> And that disproves your theory.
>
>There must something here I don't understand. The fact that the case
>distinction continued in French and Occitan shows that the s-endings
>were not shibbolethized in Italian or what are you saying?