[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [romconlang] sulunc or sulunque?



eamoniski skrev:
I have a question... for my unnamed language I introduced a couple
days ago, I had the idea of borrowing the Old French sulunc (presumed
to be from a Popular Latin form *sublongum) to serve as a preposition
"according to..."  I had the idea (to be explained in a second) to
"naturalise" sulunc as sulunque.  I then discovered another Old French
spelling, seloncq.  What I imagine is that my conlang's original
writers who borrowed the Old French sulunc engaged in an act of folk
etymology and presumed that the final -c or -cq pointed to a -que. Sulunc just doesn't look right, though it probably would grow on me. What does everyone think of sulunque, or (based on some other old
spellings) selunque, selonque... I like the su- connection to Latin
sub-... on the other hand, one can aalso imagine a crossing between
sulunc (sublongum) and segon (O.Prov. < secundum) leading to selunque...

How do these possibilities sound?

Cheers,
Eamon

I'm of course biassed by the fact that the Rhodrese
equivalent would be _sulonc_ or _saulonc_ (may I
steal it?* :-) but either _sulunque_ or _sulonque_
looks good.  _Sulunque_ may have the added attraction
for your purposes that it falsely suggests UNQUE! :-)

(* I have used _seg�n_, but I don't really like it
for some reason.  I hope I'm not developing an
Odium Hispanici!)

--

/BP 8^)
--
Benct Philip Jonsson
mailto:melrochX@hidden.email (delete X!)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If a language is a dialect with an army and a navy,
of what language, pray, is Basque a dialect?" (R.A.B.)