--- Ray Brown <ray.brown@...> wrote:
> The borrowing argument needs to be used with care
> IMO.
I agree completely. That's why I pointed out that one
of the original criterion should exclude two colors
that *modern* English couldn't conviniently dispense
with.
Consider that
> "albus", Latin word for 'white', does not survive as
> an adjective in any
> of the Romancelangs (only as a fem. noun meaning
> 'dawn', cf. It. l'alba,
> Fr. l'aube).
Not so. Romanian has abl - white, and Vegliot had
yaulb - white, so it survived in Eastern Romance.
The western Romancelangs all borrowed
> the Germanic blank- (cf.
> English 'blank'). Does this mean that white is not
> a basic color among
> Romance speakers? The French also borrowed 'bleu'
> from Germanic . So blue
> is not a basic color among the French?
>
Exactly. Which along with the English data would seem
to go a long way toward debunking that particular
criterion for determining "core-ness".
Adam
=====
Indjindrud edjuebu ul Azor ad ul Sadoc. Indjindrud edjuebu ul Sadoc ad ul Acim.
Indjindrud edjuebu ul Acim ad ul Eliud. Indjindrud edjuebu ul Eliud ad ul
Eleazar. Indjindrud edjuebu ul Eleazar ad ul Matan. Indjindrud ul Matan ad ul
Jagovu. Indjindrud edjuebu ul Jagovu ad ul Jozevu ul maridu djal Maja dji fin
ninadud ul Jezu fin nicuamad Cristu.
Machu 1:14-16