[YG Conlang Archives] > [romanceconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Adam wrote: > While many of these Romance terms are clearly derived from the Latin word, > many others are clearly NOT and some I'm just not quite sure about. > > It would seem that only 6 of the infinitives (Cat. Occ. Ita. Sard. R-R and > Sic.) come from the Latin infinitive. Whence do the otheres derive? All the infinities you listed - except the Rumanian one- are from Lat. infinitive 'essere'. Spanish and Portuguese did undergo apocope: essere > (es)sere > ser(e); French went this way: essere > estre > e^tre; Rumanian on the other hand seems to derive its verb 'to be' from Latin fieri 'to become'. > With the Present 1st sg it looks like 6 come from sum. All of them are from _sum_. -c is quite a common ending in Catalan to mark 1sg: crec means 'I believe'... Rumanian _sint_ really looks like my Lombard _sont_ [suNt]! > With the 2nd sg and 2nd pl it looks like only 2 come from the Latin. Where you meet an initial _s_, as in Italian _sei_, _siete_, Sicilian _si_, _siti_, _, Lombard _seet_ [se:t], _sii_ [si:] that's analogy with the _s_ in the 1st sg. + the regular ending (from Latin -tis). > I'm assuming that the others are suppletive forms and not out right > coinages. Which verms do the other forms come from??? If you are interested in odd forms, here's archaic Italian _enno_, Ligurian _en_, Lombard _hinn_, meaning _they are_; or take a look also at Piedmontese with its cool ending -oma for 1 pl. which applies also for verb 'to be': soma [suma] (cantoma [kaN'tuma] we sing). Italian 'dialects' are morphological treasures. Luca