[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Well, I just looked around a bit on http://www.pledari.ch/ and am - again - a bit confused about some things I found there: 1) I had formerly thought Sursilvan "uaul" (forest) was a rhaetic loanword since it doesn't really go with any other Romance word for "forest" I know, but when I beheld the other dialects' cognates, I realized that it's acually a loanword borrowed from an older stage of Alemannic. However, it shows /u/ initially, while the other dialects apparently exhibit /g/, which looks like Sursilvan "uiara" (war) being a cognate with Italian "guerra", and so on. Anyway, the point is not the initial sound but the second /u/ in "uaul" (which is part of the diphthong /au/, btw), which confuses me a lot. All Rumansh dialects, including Sursilvan, shifted /lt/ > /wt/, as it is the case with ALTRUM > *autro > *autr > Surs. "auter" (other). But, and that is the strange thing and the reason why I mentioned the origin of "uaul", the /l/ has remained in some words without any reason in Sursilvan and Sutsilvan, later triggering preceding /a/ to diphthongize to /au/ when stressed (In Sutsilvan later monophthongization to <ò>). It's especially strange since you have pairs like "auter" vs. "ault" (high). Can you imagine any explanation for this? 2) Does anyone here have a clue how and from what exactly the negation markers "VERB ... buc(a)" (Sursilvan) and "(na) ... VERB ... betg" (Sutsilvan and Surmiran, respectively) could have evolved?