fortis , f- >>

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

>

> A doublet like <bortitz>/<portitz> from Lat. <fortis> in this view requires no intermediate language, merely an earlier and later stage of borrowing the same word.
>

I don't think 2 stages of borrowing are needed. If Bq. had no f, then either f > p or f > v ( > b later) would be equally good substitutions. This is sim. to how L. borrowed Osc-U. words with -v- as either -b- or -f- (before w > v in L.).