Pequeno (was Re: Pilovese in the Romance Language Family)

	Hi. :)

Scotto Hlad wrote:
> So then pequeno and poco come from the same root?
	Er... actually no, I don't believe it does. :/ See below.


> Pequeno is derived from pitzinus.
	I don't know in Spanish. In Portuguese, "pouco" comes from Latin
"paucus"; and "pequeno" is usually (there is still a little dissension
about it) ascribed to some sort of crossover between Vulgar Latin
"pitinnus" with the root "*pikk-" (present in Italian 'piccolo',
'piccino'). If you read Corominas, he'll say that "pequen-" belongs to
the "la vasta colección de expresiones romances de la idea de pequeñez
(it. pìccolo, piccìno, fr. petit, sardo pithinnu, gascón pouninn, etc.)
constituídas todas ellas por una p inicial, seguida, por lo común, de
vocal aguda, otra oclusiva sorda y en la terminación -innu. En latín
vulgar se encuentra ya pitinnus, y en las formas hispánicas esta
variante se presenta combinada con la consoante interna del tipo
piccolo." (translating: pequen- belongs to the wide collection of
romance expressions of littleness (it. pìccolo, piccìno, fr. petit,
sardo pithinnu, gascón pouninn, etc.), constituted, all of them, of an
initial P, usually followed by an acute vowel, of another unvoiced
occlusive and of the ending -innu. In Vulgar Latin, there already exists
[the word] pitinnus, and, in the Hispanic model, this variant presents
itself combined with the inner consonant of the type "piccolo".)

	Corominas is Spanish, but what he said is true for Portuguese as well -
the process he mentioned has existed in Portuguese since the very
origins of the language, in words like apequenado, empequenecer,
pequename, pequenete, pequenote etc.




Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
 > Meyer-Lübke's "Romanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch"
 > rejects a connexion with PAUCUS

	I personally agree.



 > Meyer-Lübkes conclusion is that the root of
 > the Spanish _pequeño_ is unknown.

	As far as I know, there isn't a consensus yet, although most Romance
etymologists tend to agree that it comes from the source I mention in
the beginning of this e-mail. I actually agree with that view myself.

Peace,
Ken :)

Replies