Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

The non-rule again (was: Sensible passives (was: confession: roots))

From:Raymond Brown <ray.brown@...>
Date:Friday, May 11, 2001, 5:28
At 4:40 pm +0200 10/5/01, Christophe Grandsire wrote:
>En réponse à Oskar Gudlaugsson <hr_oskar@...>: > >> >> I'd really like to know why the "ex before consonant > e" rule works so >> sporadically...
> >Well, this is a strange thing: I've studied Classical Latin for about 6 years, >and I never saw such a rule.
Mainly because such a rule didn't exist :)
>All texts I've studied (all Classical Latin texts, >the preferred author in France being Cicero) have _ex_ in all cases. I don't >know if they have been rewritten,
Probably not - I suspect you're reading what Cicero wrote; he definitely had a preference for _ex_.
>but this rule I really never saw. That's >strange: could the Classical Latin taught in different countries be different?
Strangely - that is not improbable. -------------------------------------------------------------------- At 2:37 pm -0400 10/5/01, Nik Taylor wrote: [snip]
> >Well, the most famous example of that rule is on American money, "E >pluribus unum", "From many, one"
Except, of course, there was no rule. I don't think post-Columbian American coinage can be cited as evidence of a Classical Latin 'rule' ;) Ray. ========================================= A mind which thinks at its own expense will always interfere with language. [J.G. Hamann 1760] =========================================