From: stlatos
Message: 70103
Date: 2012-10-02
>But that, however unattractive you now find it, is exactly what you said to argue against my irregular dissimilation. You seemed to say I was worse than a beginner for saying otherwise, or something similar. If you continue to make mistakes and change your mind about what can't be proven, why do you consider your mere thoughts authoritative over mine and the work of 150 years?
> The printed DRAE (18th ed., 1956) cites Sp. <ivierno> as the regular form, and <invierno> as influenced by the prefix in-. Since this form of the prefix belongs to learned words borrowed from Book Latin rather than inherited (e.g. <invitar> against <envidar>, from Lat. <invi:ta:re>), I find this explanation implausible. It seems more likely that <invierno> actually does continue archaic *hi:mbernum, while the less common <ivierno> continues classical <hi:bernum>, introduced to Spain and Portugal by later colonists.
>
> This eliminates the unattractive hypothesis that heavy and light vowels behaved differently before *-mr-.