[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Carl Edlund Anderson wrote: > Deiniol Jones wrote: > > Ralph Penny in his "History of the Spanish Language" suggests that > > deixar/dejar are from Lat *DAXARE, a dialectal (Sabellian) form or more > > archaic form of LAXARE (initial d/l variations in Latin are not unknown: > > lacrima < PIE *dakru), only preserved in Hispanic Latin. FWIW, Hispanic > > Latin has a wealth of more archaic forms, to pick two at random: quaerare > > and cova. > > Yes, that's more what I remember reading. I decided I wanted to collect > up some of the archaisms in Ibero-Romance and generalize them back to my > alt-Latin Qurese ancestor. I think I settled on "dakruma", for example, > in my little file of vocabulary I've been collecting .... Personally, I think Archaic Latin is so much cooler than Classical Latin. Off the top of my head, some features of AL vs. CL which might interest you for Qurese: most diphthongs are retained, so "oinouersei" rather than "uniuersi", c.f. also the Carmina of the Salii many atonic vowels are dropped (and then restored in CL, VL didn't bother), e.g. "oclus" instead of "oculus" (see the dialogues in Plautus) PIE *dw- hadn't yet become b-, so "Duellona" for "Bellona" and "duene" for "bene". AC still had -Vd as the ablative singular inflection, rather than -V: no rhotacism of medial -s- final *-t became -d, so "feced" instead of "fecit" (the t was later restored by analogy) short vowels in medial open syllables were not raised to i/u BTW, whence "Qurese"? Dan