Re: ...uveg <-> uiag&...

(I)

Lemme add (I missed the opportunity in my previous post dealing
with this weird topic) that the most "natural" transformation path for
iveg/üveg -- to become uiagä in Romanian -- is the following:

/'ü-vaeg/ > /u-'vae-g&/ > /u-'vea-g&/ > /u-'vja-g&/ > /u-'ja-g&/ >
/'ja-g&/.

(By /ae/ I mean the "open e", as in has, hat, at
in British Engl. This sound exists in dialectal Romanian,
but unknown in standard Romanian; therefore, there is no
extra font for it in the Romanian latin alphabet.)

Especially in the area where this regional word is in use, namely in the
subdialect of the Romanian native-speakers over there (along with
subdialects in adjacent areas, Banate and (North-)Moldavia), the
/ea/-/ja/ diphtong dichotomy is highly unstable. For many people, it
simply does not exist. They got the chance to realize there is a dif-
ference only by reading, by listening to radio and TV and by listening
to people's talk coming from other regions. Still, not everybody is
able to make this distinction. Hence, those stemming from such areas
have some tough times when having to get... speaking jobs (e.g.
radio, TV, theater and movie actor), where uttering /ya/ where you
have to say /ea/ is a no-go or amounts to be blocked the access to
such professions). All other Romanians do make a strong distinction
between these diphtongs (which is reflected both by Romanian texts
in the Romanian kyrillitsa, by the usage of both yat for /ea/ and ya for
/ja/, whereas the hiatus /i-a/ was rendered by the font yaco, and by the
latin script: <ea> & <ia>).

So, the string above can be shortened by leaving out the /u-'vea-g&/
phase.

***

Note that /u-'ja-g&/ is not the final version.

The final one, in use, is /'ja-g&/.

Roughly, in the southern half of the territory where this regional
word for "bottle" is used, only the variant is used in which the
*disturbing*
initial /u/ is dropped and no one misses it. Despite the fact that the
very same native-speakers very well know (at least over 80%-90% of
them) how exactly the Hungarian counterpart sounds (/'ü-vaeg/). I mean,
those who drop the /u/ know very well that their neighbors in the North
don't drop it and know that their neighbors who are Hung. native-speakers
always have an /ü/ or /i/ combined with /vaeg/. How come? Because this
is an everyday occurrence in the streets of cities and villages over
there,
so that even most non-Hungarian speakers know of üveg, as well as of
the relationship üveg-uiagä-iagä. Only to an outsider is this a thing as
exotic as a kishuaheli or tagalog word. (But such are dialects and
sub-dialects in any language.)

This fact wasn't mentioned by the initial poster; this might be a hint
that
he hadn't been aware of the further development of uiagä. (NB: the
subdialect in which both regional lexemes occur is virtually the same.
The differences aren't worth mentioning. I am a native-speaker of this
subdialect and in perfect command of its phonetics intricacies.)

In my opinion, it's highly disputable (to put it mildly) to make
speculations
on derivations and transformations and words circulation but to have no
inkling of dialectal idiosyncrasies (which means: to have an idea on
what can be easily accepted do to the specific "snout" configuration
and what cannot be accepted. I'll mention these classic examples
here: Italians have big difficulties to utter an /h/ in various words and
names, and Romanians have a big difficulty to pronounce /x/ as it is
in such words as Loch Ness, McLaughlin, Achtung -- namely the kind
of /h/ spelled in English <kh> The Romanian tendency is to replace it
by a /k/. So many Romanians read Johann Sebastian Bach, but say
/Bak/. Turks usually replace /tz/, which they don't have, by saying /s/.
Thus zwei /tzvaj/ becomes /svaj/ and zwanzig /svansik/).

***

As for how on earth the /v/ vanished God knows when, just a hint:
hiberna > /'jar-n&/ "winter."

***

(II)

The Szekler dialectal aspect éveg /'e:-vaeg/ might be a later one, as
well as a *hypercorrect* form. I.e., I assume in their dialect iveg was
or has been spread, and in order to... resume the "correct" (i.e.
general accepted and/or "high-style") one, Szeklers haven't "rolled
back" /i/ to /ü/, but to /é/. The /i/<->/e:/ relationship is -- not inci-
dentally -- typical of the Hungarian dialects spoken between the
plains of the Tissa river and the Moldavian Carpathians. (The phe-
nomenon is also described on the wikipage I mentioned yesterday.)

George