[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
I was trying to construct an alternative to Latin mil-es, -itis based onPIE *ghengh- (also the root of Gaulish *cing-es, -etos ("marcher, warrior", as in the name Ver-cingeto-rix). I'm not quite sure how the phonology works out, but I thought I would post my initial effort here so that wiser heads can point out my errors :)Basically, I thought the primary different between the Latin and Celtic versions of this morpheme might be that PIE gh- > Latin h-. Otherwise, I thought it made sense to cast it as a third declension consonant stem: hinges, -itis. Nom. Sing. hinges Gen. Sing. hingitis Dat. Sing. hingiti Acc. Sing. hingitem Abl. Sing. hingite Nom. Pl. hingites Gen. Pl. hingitum Dat. Pl. hingitibus Acc. Pl. hingites Abl. Pl. hingitibus I have to admit, that word doesn't *seem* very "Latin" to me, but perhaps there's something cunning I've missed!
Well, certainly the fact that the nominative is homographous to an English word probably doesnt help it look more Latin, but the sound changes seem.. sound.
One thing you might do is drop the 'h' (as sometimes happens, cf. "anser")--|inges, -itis| looks much more Latinate.
Second off, must it be a consonant stem and in -it- ?Third off, it's possible Grassmann's Law might apply[1]; thus it could possibly be |ginges| from *g(e)ngh-.
*Muke![1] e.g. |gradior|, etc. < *ghredh-... *if* that isnt the regular outcome of *ghr; competing evidence is |ruo| < *ghre:u-.
-- http://frath.net/ E jer savne zarjￜ mas ne http://kohath.livejournal.com/ Se imnￜ koone'f metha http://kohath.deviantart.com/ Brissve mￜ kolￜ adￜ.