From: Bhrihskwobhloukstroy
Message: 70535
Date: 2012-12-09
> And how about rutilus? <*h1rudH-ro-?
>
> JS Lopes
>
>
>
>
> ----- Mensagem original -----
> De: Bhrihskwobhloukstroy <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...>
> Para: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Cc:
> Enviadas: Domingo, 9 de Dezembro de 2012 7:41
> Assunto: Re: [tied] fortis , f- >>
>
> Positing /v/ (voiced labio-dental fricative) is an
> over-simplification: one can at most posit */β/ (voiced BI-labial
> fricative) for Proto-Italic or Proto-Sabellian OR, on the base of
> <Saunitai>, maybe a local voicing of Oscan-Umbrian /φ/ (voiceless
> bilabial fricative), otherwise regularly voiceless ([φ] or [f]). Long
> /o:/ can be ascribed to a Latial (= Non-Roman Latin) dialect; how do
> You explain ru:fus then (with /f/ but /u:/)? Anyway, what's important
> is that Roman Latin DID have /β/, as */dh/ > /b/ near /u/ or /r/
> proves.Other instances of Latin /f/ for the Oscan-Umbrian outcome of
> */bh/ and */dh/ directly reflect Oscan-Umbrian /f/, as the enchoric
> evidence clearly shows
>
> 2012/12/9, stlatos <sean@...>:
>>
>>
>> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy
>> <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...> wrote:
>>>
>>> Where's "Oscan-Umbrian /v/"?
>>
>>
>> Borrowed words like ro:bus with eu > ou > o: instead of u: (as in
>> native
>> L. words) indicate Oscan-Umbrian, like L., voiced internal bh > ph > f > v
>> ,
>> but, unlike L., no v > b . In borrowing a word with -v-, which didn't
>> exist at that stage in L., it was replaced by either b or f, both one
>> feature away, creating doublets like ro:bus : ru:fus (if f > v only
>> occurred
>> in 1 O-U language (with ou > o:), it still would be hard to tell all the
>> details, but that's not important). All that matters is it's analogous
>> to
>> v- > f- \ b- or f- > bortitz \ portitz , not to a two-stage borrowing (in
>> which the rest of, say, bortitz \ portitz, would likely be dif.).
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 2012/12/8, stlatos <sean@...>:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy
>>> > <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> For instance (Oscan-Umbrian loanwords)?
>>> >>
>>> >> 2012/12/8, stlatos <sean@>:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --- 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.).
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Sihler mentioned ro:bus : ru:fus, *londH- > lumbi: = loins (and some
>>> > related words). He compared it to opt. OE borrowings of v (vannus >
>>> > fann,
>>> > v- > berbena, etc.). Either shows the reality of what I proposed.
>>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>