Re: pulcher

>
> I know it's a minor detail, but it's been bugging me: what is
> that /h/ doing in Lat. <pulcher>? Considering other inflected forms
> ("nigra sum, sed pulchra...") it would make sense to assume that
> the /h/ is there to indicate that the /c/ should not be
> pronounced /c^/, but then it looks like very early Italian? Didn't
> the Romans otherwise use /h/ in Greek loans to indicate aspiration?
> But this is not aspirated? I'm confused.
>
> Torsten
>



--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> <pulcher> is a spelling variant of <pulcer>, also attested. Like
> <lachryma> for <lacruma> or <triumphus> for older <triumpus>, it
> may be a recherché pseudo-Greek spelling, perhaps reflecting a real
> affected pronunciation with an aspirated stop. Compare those
> English mock-classical <ph> and <th> spellings that have no
> historical justification but have already managed to affect the
> pronunciation of <nephew> (now often ['nefju:] rather than
> ['nevju:]), <author> (ME autour -- even Milton still wrote
> <autority>) and sometimes even of <Thames>, at least locally in
> Connecticut.
>
> Piotr
>

cf.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/8806
(should be <mlac(h)>)


I came across this very outdated etymological dictionary
http://tinyurl.com/2vaa6hp
'Pulcher "beautiful"

for <pulchrus> from
<πολύχρους> "having much color or complexion"

Or else from
<πολύχαρις> "having much grace and elegance"
Hence <polchris>, <pulchris>.

Or else from
<πολύχειρ> considered as meaning
"having much avail in the hand, strong"...'


Pure speculation or ...? Latin <pulcher> does look like something that has been through Etruscan.


Torsten