Re: Comparison Þrjótrunn - Icelandic - Latin

Henrik Theiling skrev:
> Hi!
>
> I've added a small overview to my Þrjótrunn pages for an easy
> comparison of the languages.  It clearly shows that Icelanders will
> probably be a bit confused by the declension tables to due false
> friends among the affixes. :-)
>
> There's also an overview of the first four declensions of Latin and
> what is typically the result in Þrjótrunn.
>
> http://www.kunstsprachen.de/s17/s_01.html#03
>
> Comments?
Mjög gaman!  At first I thought "Hey, there *is*
a Latin word for 'birch'!" but on looking it up
I found that BETULA/BETULUS (with numerous variants
in Romance *here* is a loan from Gaulish into
Latin, so it's actually quite reasonable that
your 'North Romance' borrowed its word for
this tree from Germanic.

Does the statement "A four cases system is retained"
apply to the peninsular Scandinavo-Romance languages
*there* as well?  If *here* is anuthing to go by one
would expect them not to be as conservative.  BTW
it would be fun to see what Finnish *there* looks
like, with all loans from Germanic to Modern Swedish
replaced by Scandinavo-Romance loans with different
degrees of assimilation.

And how does _animal_ become _aðal_?  I can see
unstressed posttonic _nim_ become _nn_, but whence
_nn_ > _ð_?  But it would become _agnial_ [a'Jal]
or _anal_ in R3, so who am I to complain!? ;-)
(In actual fact _agniáille_ < ANIMALIA or the
boring _best_ < BESTIA are both more likely.
After all no language is likely to tolerate a
merger or near merger of the words for 'animal'
and 'sheep/lamb' -- cf. Gascon were 'rooster'
is from VICARIUS because GALLUS merged with
CATTUS!

--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se

    "Maybe" is a strange word.  When mum or dad says it
    it means "yes", but when my big brothers say it it
    means "no"!

                            (Philip Jonsson jr, age 7)

Reply