Talk:Proto-Northern-Romance (MGR)
Major revisions to morphology April 2010 following improvements to sound change program.
Ewert on atonic vowels
Ewert's treatment is terse, to the point and clarifying:
Fine distinctions of quality are obliterated, with the result that ɛ and e, ɔ and o falI together. Further, the V.L. quantitative distinction (if it ever existed in atonic vowels, cf. § 21) was not maintained. GalIo-Roman therefore inherited from V.L. the atonic vowels a, e, i, o, u, which were presumably short and were already tending to weaken and disappear.
(ii) FINAL AND COUNTERFINAL VOWELS
29. These persist in V.L. in a weakened form with a tendency to confuse e and i, o and u. In Old French, a remains in a weakened form as so-calIed feminine e ( = ə) (cf. § 61) : BONA> bonne, AMAS> aimes. This change dates from about the end of the eighth century. e, i, o, u generally disappear (about the seventh century), but they persist in the form of the weakened supporting vowel ə in the following cases: (a) before a group of consonants (AMENT>aiment); (b) after a group of consonants requiring a supporting vowel, notably cons. + I, r, m, n, excepting kl, gr, gn, rm, rn (DUPLUM > double, PATREM > peðre >pere, *HELMU (Germ. helm) > helme > heaume, ALNUM> alne> aune). The group may be primary, i.e. inherited as such from Latin, or secondary, i.e. developed subsequently through the loss of a vowel (MASCULUM > MASC'LU > masle> male). In the absence of any supporting vowel an ə is developed (INSIMUL> ENSEM'L > ensemble, MINOR> MEN'R > mendre later moindre ≠ moins). It will be seen that ə persists even after the reduction of the group which originalIy required the supporting vowel (pere, heaume, aune, male). For the apparent exceptions presented by borrowed words, cf. § 500.
- I take this to mean:
| C.L. | V.L.? | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | Stage 3 | OF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ī | i | i | i | i | i |
| ĭ | ɪ | e | e | ə | — |
| ē | e | ||||
| ĕ | ɛ | ɛ | |||
| ū | u | u | u | y | y |
| ŭ | ʊ | o | o | ə | — |
| ō | o | ||||
| ŏ | ɔ | ɔ | |||
| ā, ă | a | a | a | a | ə |
BPJ 21:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Germanic family?
Are there any survivors of the Germanic family in this timeline? What about the Celtic family? Is the English-analogue derived from original Roman settlement, or from 5th century invaders as in our timeline? Nik 03:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- I can't answer for Pete, but I guess the North Germanic lgs are still around, and perhaps even some of the East ones! Perhaps Poland and/or eastern Germany are Germanic-speaking in MGR too. ☺. The English analog derives from 5th century refugees from northern Germania, themselves driven away by invaders from further east, Germans from east of the Elbe or even the North-West Iranian Alans. BPJ 19:44, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Wow, a question and I completely missed it - I've been 'on a break'. Well, not sure if there's any point answering now, but just in case you drift this way again...
- In this timeline only the West Germanic dialects are specifically extinct (if indeed they can be said to have ever existed at all) , having been surplanted by Northern Romance dialects early in the first millennium. As with Benct, I think its reasonable to surmise the Celtic and North Germanic languages co-exist there alongside Northern Romance, although I'm not as sure about any East Germanic descendents. My mental map of the linguistic situation in Europe is that is essentially no different from ours, except for the West Germanic/Northern Romance analogy.
- My original intention had been to surplant only the High German dialects, leaving the Low German ones as they are, but I fancy a go at a Dutch analogue once I have this one nailed down (and Benct is playing with an English one)- so that ultimately meant it was curtains for poor old West Germanic. Pete 22:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
