[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Mark, The masculine plural in –is is actually a carry over from Old Pilovese. It works like this. In Vulgar Latin, the masculine and neuter dropped the final letter from the –us & -um so that they both ended in –u. The u in Pilovese has been pronounced as [y] since those early days. By the end of Old Pilovese era, the [y] had moved to [i] and spelling had shifted from –u to –i so that the VL word for dog, canu, became cini in Old Pilovese. To make it plural, an –s was added so that it was cinis. Modern Pilovese has dropped that final –i except in the plural which still required the –i for the plural hence cin/cinis. In the case of feminine the final -a remained for the most part so that the plural is –as. Example is ischa [Iska] with the plural ischas. Scotto ( I know that I answered this in another offline email, but thought I’d post it here too.) -----Original Message----- From: romconlang@yahoogroups.com [mailto:romconlang@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark G Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 9:52 AM To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com Subject: [romconlang] Re: Etymology of Ibero-Romance "Pequeño" and Cognates Wow, I googled this one to death and never saw that thread-- crazy! Big thanks, Scotto! BTW, I'm really intrigued by the noun endings in your Pilovese-- are the masculine plural endings the result of an unusual derivation (say, from the dative), or is that the result of a vowel shift? --- In romconlang@yahoogro <mailto:romconlang%40yahoogroups.com> ups.com, "Scotto Hlad" <scott.hlad@...> wrote: > > In the development of Pilovese, I wrested with this as well. The word becomes pichinh [pi’kinj]. The etymology is “obsc poss from pikk + innu, a childish pronunciation of pic-ul-inu†> > I did quite a bit of Googling on this. If you have access to the conlang archive, there was a lot of discussion about this in April. You can see the archive starting here: > > http://archives. <http://archives.conlang.info/ka/bhuadho/> conlang.info/ka/bhuadho/ > > > Scotto > -----Original Message----- > From: romconlang@yahoogro <mailto:romconlang%40yahoogroups.com> ups.com [mailto:romconlang@yahoogro <mailto:romconlang%40yahoogroups.com> ups.com] On Behalf Of Mark G > Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 10:23 PM > To: romconlang@yahoogro <mailto:romconlang%40yahoogroups.com> ups.com > Subject: [romconlang] Etymology of Ibero-Romance "Pequeño" and Cognates > > This isn't exactly urgent, but does anybody happen to have any idea as > to the origin of the Spanish word "pequeño" and all of its Iberian > correspondents? I've read in many places that their source is unclear, > but no sources seem to even suggest any potential connections, and > they do seem vaguely connected to many CL words that would evoke a > small stature or amount, such as "paucus" (though this would already > seem to be the precursor to that group of cognates represented in > Castilian by "poco"), or, even less practically speaking, "parvus." > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]