Timeline for r in Romance names of London
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 25, 2015 at 7:22 | comment | added | brass tacks | No; I actually don't know if the n was intervocalic when it was subject to rhotacism. We do agree on the rhotacism of n, though! | |
| Aug 25, 2015 at 7:05 | comment | added | Lucian | @sumelic: Do we at least agree on the rhotacism of intervocalic n then ? | |
| Aug 25, 2015 at 6:44 | comment | added | brass tacks | I don't think either of those is metathesis... from what I remember, Spanish and Italian forms are generally descended from the Vulgar Latin accusative, so it would actually be padre < patrem and madre < matrem. Metathesis, as you say, requires two sounds to switch places. Our answers contradict because I say that no metathesis took place, and you say that metathesis did take place. | |
| Aug 25, 2015 at 6:34 | comment | added | Lucian | @sumelic: The metathesis of r is quite frequent in Romance languages, so that's why I immediately thought of that (e.g., pater/padre and mater/madre in both Spanish and Italian). I also don't see how my answer contradicts yours. | |
| Aug 25, 2015 at 5:18 | comment | added | brass tacks | What would be the metathesis? Londinium > Londirium > Londriium? I think metathesis is unnecessary: all that is needed is syncope of the i. Is there some reason you think the explanation I gave in my answer is not correct? | |
| Aug 24, 2015 at 22:47 | history | answered | Lucian | CC BY-SA 3.0 |