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

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tolgs001" <george_st@...> wrote:

>
> >The
> >Romanian viat,~a /vjatsa/ should became jatsa ?
> >And the Romanian v~aduv~a should became v~aduj~a ?
> >
> >Bye,
> > Marius
>
> Yeah, bye. It's obvious by now that you are not able to get beyond
> a certain level of comprehension. Innate, or induced by

inappropriate

> didactic habits, the result is the same.
>
> To state that you don't see any relationship between the Romanian
> + Hungarian words and those hypothetic kinship on the Iranic side
> is one thing.
>
> But to add such almost autistic sentences, like the ones I quote
> above, is eloquent enough. So, "lasciate ogni speranza...". (And
> if my memry doesn't cheat me, a few years ago someone gave a
> hint or explanation, here on the list, referring to the behavior
> of /v/'s in vowel environment and how they transformed or vanished
> in Romance languages. To no avail.)
>
> George
>

George, THERE IS NO W THAT "VANISHED" in va-du-wa and ma-du-wa ==>
uveg has a supposed u-wa either, if wasn't directly /u-va/ with /v/
can you understand at least this?

Also is not /v/ 'that vanished' is /w/ but of course that you miss
that lesson too, mixing the contexts.

The reference books for the History of Romanian Language History are:
Rosetti IRL and Ovid Densusianu ILR

Don't be shame to quote 'your transformations' here (they are
usually wrong)....before to make assumptions ...but if you didn't
read Rosetti would be hard for you....

(You are that one that arrived say that toiag and noian in relation
with uj& is the same 'sheet' ==> the correct name for such a
comparison is that "you miss some other basic lessons here" ...and I
used an euphemism)

Marius