Re: Pater Noster (purely linguistically)

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 14:58:38 +0100, Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
> Quoting Ray Brown <ray.brown@...>:
>
>> It seems that |quo| and |co| were both pronounced the same [k_wo] by most
>> (all?) speakers, and there are other examples of confusion in spelling.
>
> Reminds me - I saw a piece on Latin inflection somewhere that claimed that forms
> like _equus_, _equi_ were late regularizations for classical _ecus_, _equi_. Any
> comment on this?
That is the normal explanation, yeah. Original |quu| and |quo| became
|cu| and |co|.  In many places where analogy allowed restoration of |qu|,
it was restored, |equus| being an example.  For many function words in |qu-|
there was a lot of wavering, such as for |quot-| and |cot(t)-| in this word.
In some cases the |c| form won out, as |cum| over attested |quum|.

	*Muke!
--
website:     http://frath.net/
LiveJournal: http://kohath.livejournal.com/
deviantArt:  http://kohath.deviantart.com/

FrathWiki, a conlang and conculture wiki:
http://wiki.frath.net/