Re: Portuguese farpa "barb" < *bHardHa?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <sean@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao S. Lopes" <josimo70@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Portuguese <farpa> means "barb", as in <arame farpado>, "barbed wire". Could be <farpa> related to barba "beard"? Usual etymologies consider it as from Arabian or Germanic.
> > >
> > > JS Lopes
> > >
> > The E word barb << barba, but in L the words barba = beard, and forfex = scissors are irregular, as regular changes of:
> >
> > *
> > ...
> > bhordha:
> > phortha:
> > forTa:
> > forfa:
> > forva:
> > forba:
> >
> > would be expected, but isn't found.
> >
> > An assim. f-v > f-f or v-v appears to be the cause (sim. to kW-p > kW-kW , etc.), so *farfa besides barba is just as likely as forfex, with rf > rp being regular in (some?, or opt./dia./irregular?) Romance a good possibility.
> >
> Obviously Latin <forfex> is a Sabinism.

There's nothing obvious about it.

>

The expected *forbex is reflected in Tuscan <fo`rbice>.


I didn't say anything excluding an additonal *forbex, or many others, above.

>

This did not become *borbex, nor did <forbea> 'food' (Fest.) become *borbea, so simple assimilation cannot explain <barba>.


I said it was irregular (just like forfex). The changes p-kW > p-p or kW-kW are both seen in L, also with no explanation. In a similar way to f-v, qui:nque beside prope can not be explained by anything but optionality, since borrowing from, say, P-Celt. or Q-Celt. for both (and every other word with p-kW) are unreasonably unlikely. Similarly, if I posit dis. in formica from m-m it doesn't mean every word with m-m HAD to undergo dis., too.

>

I believe it must be regarded as a hyperurbanism (see message #64690).

>
> DGK
>