From: Rick McCallister
Message: 61411
Date: 2008-11-05
> From: Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud@...>I can very well imagine that forms were borrowed back and forth, and this may explain some irregularities. But I'd like to hear from those who the time to track them down.
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Scandinavia and the Germanic tribes such as Goths, Vandals, Angli and Saxones.
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, November 5, 2008, 10:52 AM
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick McCallister"
> <gabaroo6958@...>
> >
> > --- On Tue, 11/4/08, Brian M. Scott
> <BMScott@...> wrote:
> > . . .
> > Note too that we sometimes
> >> underestimate the percentage of loans in some
> other
> >> languages. French, for instance, borrowed quite
> >> extensively
> >> from Latin at various times, but because it's
> a Romance
> >> language, we tend not to notice this.
> >>
> > . . .
> >>
> >> Brian
> >
> > Is there a term for this intra-family borrowing that
> has made modern
> > Spanish and Portuguese look closer than their medieval
> ancestors?
> > Both Spanish and Portuguese have flor
> "flower" but Medieval Portuguese was
> > fror and chor /Sor/, common in Medieval Spanish and
> modern rural Spanish
> > is jlor /hlor/. Spanish and Portuguese borrowed from
> one another but also
> > from Catalan, Italian, French and Latin to such a
> large degree that
> > lexico-chronology has them splitting c. 1500. In
> American Spanish and
> > Portuguese, things got even more muddied between
> Spanish and Portuguese to
> > the extent that regional, slang and rural terms in one
> language are often
> > the standard terms in the other.
> > Slavic languages, I am told, do the same.
> > And I imagine Scandinavian problably does the same as
> well.
> >
> ==============
>
> The issue you are raising is interesting because it may
> have played a role
> in the reason why PIE "seems" to have split so
> late.
>
> Arnaud