[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Yes, cavallo is really from the nominative.
In this dialect, there are three genders and three cases. The three cases generally derive from latin nominative, accusative and dative. In the neuter of course, the accusative and nominative were the same.
Anyway, now's the time to introduce the way final vowels and vowel + C changed in this dialect:
final short vowel
a > a
o > u
e > i
u > x
i > x
final short vowel + m
am > a
om > o > u
em > e > i
um > u > x
im > i > x
final short/long vowel + t
at > a
ot > o
et > e
ut > u
it > i
final short/long vowel + s
as > e
os > o
es > e
us > o
is > e
final long vowel
u: > u
i: > i
o: > o
e: > e
a: > a
For the Vulgar Latin situation (in the 2nd declension), this dialect would have had:
caballus caballi:
caballu caballo:s
caballo: caballi:s
which became:
cavallo cavalli
caval cavallo
cavallo cavalle
The other forms quoted below are from:
totus > toto > todo > toDo > too > tou
ficatum > fecatu > fecadu > fecaD > fecà
episcopus > epscopo > evscovo > iovscovo > ioscovo
etc
-Elliott
________________________________
From: Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@hidden.email>
To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 8:57:15 PM
Subject: Re: [romconlang] Third Try: New Romlang
On 2009-08-10 Elliott Lash wrote:
> Cavallo horse (caballos)
> tou all (totu)
> fecà liver (fecatu) (neuter)
> ioscovo bishop (epscopos)
> castaio brown (castanjos)
> fomac cheese (formaticu) (neuter)
What's the condition(s) for the loss
or preservation of -U?
Are cavallo etc. really from the nominative?
/BP
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]