Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Glé, j'hau troviad lo -- Recent Rhodrese discoveries

Expand Messages
  • Benct Philip Jonsson
    Subject: Glé, j hau troviad-lo From: Benct Philip Jonsson Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:44:21 +0100 To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com I have long
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 13, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Subject: Glé, j'hau troviad-lo
      From: Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@...>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:44:21 +0100
      To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com

      I have long wondered what would be the Rhodrese
      word for 'yes', distinct both from French
      _oïl/oui_ and from Provençal _oc_, and now I
      found it by accident when looking for something
      else. It turns out there is a word Romansch "gea"
      and Sardinian "eja" and Corsican "iè" derived
      from ILLI EST.

      Here follows a dictionary entry retrieved from a
      Corsican site:

      |
      <http://adecec.net/infcor/ricerca.php?f=oui&sf=4&submit=Recherche&inglese=1&definizione=1&etimulugia=1&sinonimi=1&antonimi=1>

      * iè, isié
      * definizione: Serve à marcà un'affirmazione,
      un'apprubazione: ai a fame? Iè! Stai bè ? Ié.
      - ma ancu u disapprovu, à perplessità, u
      fastidiu : Ié ié ! o ancu u sdegnu ironicu :
      Ié chì ... !
      * etimulugia: da l'anzianu toscanu "egli è", da u
      lat. pup. "illi est".
      * inglese: yes
      * sinonimi: sì
      * antonimi: nò

      This would become _glé_ /LE/ in Rhodrese,
      without a final _-t_ because it would normally be
      pre-pausal.

      (The preserved final _-t_ of the third
      person singular of verbs was probably
      reintroduced by analogy from positions before a
      following vowel, as in questions with following
      forms of ILLE (EST ILLE? > Old Rh. /E'del/) or
      the frequent case of a following ET or AUT. Forms
      with a following object form of ILLE: HABET 'LU,
      HABET 'LA > O.Rh. _hallo, halla_ /'ar`U/, /'ar`@/
      would also reinforce the sense of the verb ending
      in a dental stop, since /r`/ could be derived
      from any of _LL, T'L, D'L_ and these forms would
      be a moot case. To the extent that language
      changes are dictated by a percieved need on the
      part of the speakers to preserve or innovate
      distinctions the fact that third person singular forms with
      lost -T, which did occur before consonants and
      prepausally in O.Rh., had become identical to
      first person singular forms in most verbs -- i.e.
      all which didn't have the root vowel _a_.)

      This possible connexion or closer relatedness
      between Rh. and Corsican is interesting since I
      have earlier been suspecting a similarity in the
      treatment of early Vulgar Latin short */I/ and
      */U/ in Corsican and Rhodrese -- in brief these
      eVL vowels in these languages merged with eVL
      */E/ and */O/ from Latin short /e/ and /o/ rather
      than with eVL */e/ and */o/ from Latin long /e:/
      and /o:/. (At least they did in Lucal Corsican
      and possibly Rhodrese, since I'm not 100% sure
      Meyer-Lübke meant they did in Terran Cosican! :-]
      see
      |
      <http://wiki.frath.net/User:Melroch/Vulgar_Latin#endnote_Corsican>)


      In which case FIDES (eVL /'fIdEm/) would become VL
      ?*/'fEdE/ rather than */'fedE/ and so late VL
      */'fiEdE/ Rh. _fier_ rather than lVL */'fe:de/
      and Rh. _fair_, and similarly LUPUS > Rh. _luop_
      rather than _laup_. Latin /e:/ and /o:/ in open
      syllables would still become Rh. _ai_ and _au_
      so TECTUM > _taitx_, and POPULUS (the poplar tree,
      not the people!) > _paubo_. This would decreace
      the incidence of _ai_ and _au/ao_, which may be a
      Good Thing.

      I've also found the right way to form negation in
      Rhodrese. The pattern is _jo ne dig mí_. The
      particle _mí_ /mi/ or /mI/ is derived from an
      unstressed form of the word MICA 'crumb'. As a
      noun it was replaced by MICULINA which became
      _miglin@_ [mI'LinI], plural _miglí_ [mi'Li] /miL/,
      so it's hard to say if _mí_ is derived from MICA
      *[miG@] with loss of [G] in unstressed position or
      from MICULA *[miL@] with [L] > [j] under similar
      condtions. The spelling with _í_ doesn't mean
      that _mí_ is always stressed, but is only intended
      to distinguish it from the first person singular
      dative pronoun _mi_ MIHI. In fact these are
      perfect homonyms, and may be hard to sort out for
      schoolchildren in expressions like _El ne dairt mi
      lo mí_ 'He didn't give it to me' (ILLE NON DEDIT
      MIHI ILLUM MICAM).
    • Adam Walker
      I have been bothered by the lack of contractions in C-a for quite some time. Most of the Romance langs are full of them -- della, qu el, no, l , al, etc.,
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 23, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I have been bothered by the lack of contractions in
        C-a for quite some time. Most of the Romance langs
        are full of them -- della, qu'el, no, l', al, etc.,
        etc. But, until now, I've only known of two sets of
        contractions in C-a: of-the and for-the.

        dji ul = djul
        dji al = djal
        dji il = djil

        peu ul = peu'l
        peu al = peu'l
        peu il = peu'l

        Earlier this week I discovered another set: to-the.

        ad ul = dul
        ad al = dal
        ad il = dil

        This new word set will probably necessitate slight
        edits to much of the C-an corpus of texts, but the
        gain is well worth the work.

        Adam


        Ed ñavisud in junu suñu pera nun regrediri ad ul Erodu, regrediruns ad il sustrus provinchi peu'l via aurra.

        Machu 2:12
      • Adam Walker
        I ve just finished html-ifying my translation of Psalm 1 into Carrajina. I was going to link it to my translation of the first three chapters of Matthew
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 27, 2009
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          I've just finished html-ifying my translation of Psalm
          1 into Carrajina. I was going to link it to my
          translation of the first three chapters of Matthew
          through my "Texts" page by setting up a "Bible" page
          where I'd link any further bits as I translate them
          (I'm almost through with Ps. 117.) But I have a
          problem.

          I don't know what the C-an word for _Bible_ is. If I
          make it a fully nativized word, it would be:

          Bibja /'bib.Z@/

          If I make it a semi-learned borrowing, it would be:

          Bibua /'bib.w@/

          If I make it a learned borrowing, it would be:

          Biblia /bIb'li.@/

          Any input?

          Adam

          Niviachigadu ul omu fi nu nul cunsiju djuls ímfius avevad amvuinadu, fi ni nal via djuls pecadorus avevad pedizadu, fi ni nul sedigu djuls zagagadus avevad xedjidigadu.

          Saumu 1:1
        • Padraic Brown
          Why not something based on euangelion ? In the World, there is really no such thing as a Bible . There are simply collections of scriptures with varying
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 27, 2009
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Why not something based on "euangelion"?

            In the World, there is really no such thing as a "Bible". There are simply collections of scriptures with varying canons and traditional lists. Many churches, particularly in the East, do not even own a full compliment. The collections are roughly divided into "proeuangelion", what would be roughly equated with the O.T. *here*, and the "euangelion", which is the gospels and post-gospel scriptures (letters and apocalypses and the like).

            Curiously, the exact composition of a collection of scriptures is not set forth in church rules. Local and congregational traditions may vary as to what books are included. A survey done some years ago indicates that Thomas and the Diatessary harmonisation are the two most common books found in a typical euangel.

            For what happens in the C. world, I'd ask are other liturgical / religious terms "nativised", part learned or wholly learned terms? I would *suspect* they tend towards the latter, and that biblia or bibua should be chosen. But if they are a highly vernacular church, then bibja would be the obvious choice.

            Padraic

            --- On Tue, 1/27/09, Adam Walker <carrajena@...> wrote:
            From: Adam Walker <carrajena@...>
            Subject: Re: [romconlang] Recent discovery in Carrajina
            To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 10:17 PM











            I've just finished html-ifying my translation of Psalm

            1 into Carrajina. I was going to link it to my

            translation of the first three chapters of Matthew

            through my "Texts" page by setting up a "Bible" page

            where I'd link any further bits as I translate them

            (I'm almost through with Ps. 117.) But I have a

            problem.



            I don't know what the C-an word for _Bible_ is. If I

            make it a fully nativized word, it would be:



            Bibja /'bib.Z@/



            If I make it a semi-learned borrowing, it would be:



            Bibua /'bib.w@/



            If I make it a learned borrowing, it would be:



            Biblia /bIb'li.@/



            Any input?



            Adam



            Niviachigadu ul omu fi nu nul cunsiju djuls ímfius avevad amvuinadu, fi ni nal via djuls pecadorus avevad pedizadu, fi ni nul sedigu djuls zagagadus avevad xedjidigadu.



            Saumu 1:1
























            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Benct Philip Jonsson
            ... To my knowledge the only Romance language where it is not a learned loan is Italian, where it it _Bibbia_. Perhaps it is SCRIPTURA rather than BIBLIA? In
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 28, 2009
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Adam Walker wrote:
              > I've just finished html-ifying my translation of Psalm
              > 1 into Carrajina. I was going to link it to my
              > translation of the first three chapters of Matthew
              > through my "Texts" page by setting up a "Bible" page
              > where I'd link any further bits as I translate them
              > (I'm almost through with Ps. 117.) But I have a
              > problem.
              >
              > I don't know what the C-an word for _Bible_ is. If I
              > make it a fully nativized word, it would be:
              >
              > Bibja /'bib.Z@/
              >
              > If I make it a semi-learned borrowing, it would be:
              >
              > Bibua /'bib.w@/
              >
              > If I make it a learned borrowing, it would be:
              >
              > Biblia /bIb'li.@/
              >
              > Any input?

              To my knowledge the only Romance language where it is not
              a learned loan is Italian, where it it _Bibbia_.
              Perhaps it is SCRIPTURA rather than BIBLIA?
              In Finnish it is _Raamattu_, borrowed from Greek
              _Grammata/Grammaton_ by way of pre-Russian
              (where stressed /'a/ became /Q:/ which later became /a/
              and unstressed /a/ became /Q/ which later became /o/.
              IIRC it's _Gramota_ in Russian as well.

              BTW did the Donatists split off before the NT canon
              was finalized?

              In Rhodrese BIBLIA would be either _Bibre_ /'bibrI/ or
              _Bible_ /'biblI/ depending on dialect and degree of
              learnedness. The latter could have a popular plural
              _Bibo_ or a learned plural identical to the singular,
              as used when referring to copies/physical books.
              If the plural was frequently used there may arise an
              analogical singular in _Beb-_. SCRIPTURA would be
              _Screuture_ /skrY'turI/. Even _Gramade_ is a possibility
              for Old Rhodrese, since the archbishopric of Lugdunum is
              said to have had strong Greek connexions, and since in
              Lucus it would certainly develop into an autocefalous
              Church.

              /BP 8^)>
              --
              Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch atte melroch dotte se
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              "C'est en vain que nos Josués littéraires crient
              à la langue de s'arrêter; les langues ni le soleil
              ne s'arrêtent plus. Le jour où elles se *fixent*,
              c'est qu'elles meurent." (Victor Hugo)
            • Adam Walker
              ... It was about 100 years after. The canon was pretty well decided by the eary to mid 200 s and the Donatist controversy started in the early 300 s but
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 28, 2009
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                --- Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@...> wrote:
                > To my knowledge the only Romance language where it
                > is not
                > a learned loan is Italian, where it it _Bibbia_.
                > Perhaps it is SCRIPTURA rather than BIBLIA?
                > In Finnish it is _Raamattu_, borrowed from Greek
                > _Grammata/Grammaton_ by way of pre-Russian
                > (where stressed /'a/ became /Q:/ which later became
                > /a/
                > and unstressed /a/ became /Q/ which later became
                > /o/.
                > IIRC it's _Gramota_ in Russian as well.
                >
                > BTW did the Donatists split off before the NT canon
                > was finalized?

                It was about 100 years after. The canon was pretty
                well decided by the eary to mid 200's and the Donatist
                controversy started in the early 300's but wasn't
                irreparable until the mid part of the century.

                The info about _gramaton_ is interesting and tempting,
                but I'm affraid C-a is too much a Latin land for a
                completely different term to be embraced.

                I'm leaning toward _Biblia_, but haven't decided for
                sure yet.

                ADam


                Niviachigadu ul omu fi nu nul cunsiju djuls ímfius avevad amvuinadu, fi ni nal via djuls pecadorus avevad pedizadu, fi ni nul sedigu djuls zagagadus avevad xedjidigadu.

                Saumu 1:1
              • Adam Walker
                ... Because Juvandjeju/Evandjeliunu is the term specifically for the four Gospel books. ... ... It
                Message 7 of 7 , Jan 28, 2009
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...> wrote:

                  > Why not something based on "euangelion"?
                  >

                  Because Juvandjeju/Evandjeliunu is the term
                  specifically for the four Gospel books.

                  > In the World, there is really no such thing as a
                  > "Bible".

                  <snip interesting description of what hold in The
                  World>

                  > For what happens in the C. world, I'd ask are other
                  > liturgical / religious terms "nativised", part
                  > learned or wholly learned terms?

                  It varies. The C-an Catholics will follow Roman
                  practice quite closely. The Greeks will follow Greek
                  practice (up until the Iconoclast Anathemas). The
                  Donatists have made some odd choices. Some liturgical
                  terms reflect the fact that Donatism was, for long
                  periods, stonger among the Semitic-speaking coutryside
                  than in the firmly Latin-speaking cities. There are a
                  number of specifically Donatist terms that are drawn
                  from Punic or Berber and a number of others that are
                  intentionally borrowed from Greek as being closer to
                  the original. The Greek terms tend to be only partly
                  nativized.

                  I would *suspect*
                  > they tend towards the latter, and that biblia or
                  > bibua should be chosen. But if they are a highly
                  > vernacular church, then bibja would be the obvious
                  > choice.
                  >
                  > Padraic

                  I *like* Bibja, as do other non-linguists I've asked,
                  but I'm leaning towards one of the other two as well,
                  probably Biblia, but Bibua would be fun.

                  Adam

                  Niviachigadu ul omu fi nu nul cunsiju djuls ímfius avevad amvuinadu, fi ni nal via djuls pecadorus avevad pedizadu, fi ni nul sedigu djuls zagagadus avevad xedjidigadu.

                  Saumu 1:1
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.