{"id":342,"date":"2019-04-29T15:18:08","date_gmt":"2019-04-29T15:18:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/?p=342"},"modified":"2019-05-04T18:14:53","modified_gmt":"2019-05-04T18:14:53","slug":"etymological-content-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/2019\/04\/29\/etymological-content-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Etymological Content"},"content":{"rendered":"

Phonetic Analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n

AUD\u012aRE [awdire] > O\u00cfR [wir] (conjugated O\u0178SMES [wism\u0259s] in text) > OU\u00cfR [wi\u0281]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [i] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. AUDIRE<\/b> [awdire] > AUDIR [awdir] after deletion of unstressed word-final vowel \u201ce\u201d [e]<\/span>
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. AUDIR [awdir] > AUIR [awir] after complete lenition of consonant \u201cd\u201d [d] in penultimate syllable due to intervocalic position
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. AUIR [awir] > AUIR [\u0254ir] after Classical Latin diphthong [aw] resolves to low mid vowel [\u0254]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. AUIR [\u0254ir] > <\/span>O\u00cfR<\/b> [wir] after deletion of unstressed vowel \u201ca\u201d [] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. O\u00cfR [wir] > <\/span>OU\u00cfR<\/b> [wi\u0281] after voiced postalveolar approximant [r] yields voiced uvular fricative [\u0281]<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

ESS\u011aRE [esere] > ESTRE [\u025bstr\u0259] (conjugated ESTOIT [est\u0254jt] in text) > \u00caTRE [\u025bt\u0281]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [e] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. ESS\u011aRE<\/b> [esere] > ESSERE [\u025bsere] after unstressed mid-high mid-front vowel [e] yields mid-high mid-front [\u025b] in antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. ESSERE [\u025bsere] > ESRE [\u025bsre] after syncope of stressed vowel \u201ce\u201d [e] in penultimate syllable, shifting stress to \u201ce\u201d [\u025b] in Classical Latin antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. ESRE [\u025bsre] > ESRE [\u025bsr\u0259] after unstressed word-final mid-high mid-front vowel [e] yields mid central vowel [\u0259] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. ESRE [\u025bsr\u0259] > <\/span>ESTRE<\/b> [\u025bstr\u0259] after consonant epenthesis of \u201ct\u201d [t] into consonant cluster \u201c-sr-\u201d
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. ESTRE [\u025bstr\u0259] > <\/span>\u00caTRE<\/b> [\u025bt\u0281] after voiced alveolar approximant [r] yields voiced uvular fricative [\u0281] and unstressed word-final vowel [\u0259]<\/span><\/p>\n

POPULUS [populus] > PUEPLE [pwepl\u0259] > PEUPLE [p\u0153pl]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [o] in antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. POPULUS<\/b> [populus] > POPULU [populu] after deletion of word-final \u201cs\u201d [s] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. POPULU [populu] > POPLU [poplu] after syncope of unstressed high back vowel \u201cu\u201d [u], shifting stress to \u201co\u201d [o] in Classical Latin antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. POPLU [poplu] > POPLU [p\u0254plu] after stressed vowel [o] yields stressed vowel [\u0254] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. POPLU [p\u0254plu] > PUOPLU [pw\u0254plu] after stressed vowel \u201co\u201d [\u0254] yields stressed diphthong \u201cuo\u201d [w\u0254] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. PUOPLU [pw\u0254plu] > PUEPLU [pweplu] after stressed diphthong \u201cuo\u201d [w\u0254] yields stressed diphthong \u201cue\u201d [w\u025b] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a06. PUEPLU [pweplu] > <\/span>PUEPLE<\/b> [pwepl\u0259] after word-final unstressed \u201cu\u201d [u] yields \u201ce\u201d [\u0259] in ultimate syllable, since the word-final vowel supports the consonant cluster \u201cpl\u201d [pl]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a07. PUEPLE [pwepl\u0259] > PEUPLE [p\u0153pl\u0259] after stressed diphthong \u201cue\u201d [we] simplifies to \u201ceu\u201d [\u0153] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a08. PEUPLE [p\u0153pl\u0259] > <\/span>PEUPLE<\/b> [p\u0153pl] after word-final unstressed mid-high mid-front vowel [\u0259] is lost in ultimate syllable<\/span><\/p>\n

EFFECTUS [efektus] > EFFECT [efekt] > EFFET [ef\u025b]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [e] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. EFFECTUS<\/b> [efektus] > EFFECTU [efektu] after deletion of word-final \u201cs\u201d [s] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. EFFECTU [efektu] > <\/span>EFFECT<\/b> [efekt] after deletion of unstressed high back vowel \u201cu\u201d [u]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. EFFECT [efekt] > EFFECT [ef\u025bkt] after stressed mid-high mid-front vowel [e] yields mid-high mid-front [\u025b] in blocked ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. EFFECT [ef\u025bkt] > <\/span>EFFET<\/b> [ef\u025b] after complete lenition of voiceless velar stop \u201cc\u201d [k] and voiceless laminal denti-alveolar stop [t] in ultimate syllable<\/span><\/p>\n

SP\u012aRITUS [spiritus] > ESPERIT [esperit] > ESPRIT [\u025bsp\u0281i]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [i] in antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>This word shows a possible irregularity. We would expect the long [\u012b] in the Classical Latin free antepenultimate syllable to yield [i]. Here, it mirrors a short [\u012d] in a Classical Latin blocked syllable and yields [e] instead.
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. SP\u012aRITUS<\/b> [spiritus] > SPIRITU [spiritu] after deletion of word-final \u201cs\u201d [s] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. SPIRITU [spirit] > SPIRIT [spirit] after deletion of unstressed word-final high back vowel \u201cu\u201d [u]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. SPIRIT [spirit] > SPERIT [sperit] after stressed high front vowel [\u012b] in penultimate syllable yields mid-high mid-front vowel [e]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. SPERIT [sperit] > <\/span>ESPERIT<\/b> [esperit] after addition of prosthetic \u201ce\u201d [e] to beginning of word before penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. ESPERIT [esperit] > ESPREIT > [esprejt] after metathesis of stressed \u201ce\u201d [e] in penultimate syllable and \u201cr\u201d [r] in ultimate syllable, condensing three syllables to two syllables with stressed diphthong \u201cei\u201d [ej]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a06. ESPREIT [esprejt] > ESPRIT [esprit] after syncope of \u201ce\u201d [e], simplifying stressed diphthong \u201cei\u201d [ej] to stressed vowel \u201ci\u201d [i] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a07. ESPRIT [esprit] > ESPRIT [\u025bsprit] after unstressed vowel [e] yields [\u025b] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a08. ESPRIT [\u025bsprit] > <\/span>ESPRIT<\/b> [\u025bsp\u0281i] after lenition of voiced postalveolar approximant [r] to voiced uvular fricative [\u0281] ultimate syllable, and complete lenition of word-final [t] in ultimate syllable<\/span><\/p>\n

PORT\u0100RE [portare] > POURTER [p\u0254wrter] (conjugated POURTEROIT [p\u0254wrter\u0254jt] in text) > PORTER [p\u0254\u0281te]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [a] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. PORT\u0100RE<\/b> [portare] > PORTAR [portar] after deletion of word-final mid-high mid-front vowel [e] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. PORTAR [portar] > PORTER [porter] after stressed low central vowel [a] yields mid-high mid-front vowel [e] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. PORTER [porter] > <\/span>POURTER<\/b> [p\u0254wrter] after unstressed mid-high back vowel \u201co\u201d [o] in penultimate syllable yields to \u201cou\u201d [\u0254w]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. POURTER [p\u0254wrter] > PORTER [p\u0254rter] after \u201cou\u201d [\u0254w] simplifies to low-mid back \u201co\u201d [\u0254]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. PORTER [p\u0254rter] > <\/span>PORTER<\/b> [p\u0254\u0281te] after lenition of voiced postalveolar approximant [r] to voiced uvular fricative [\u0281] in penultimate syllable, and complete lenition of word-final voiced postalveolar approximant [r] in ultimate syllable<\/span><\/p>\n

AUR\u0112LIANUM [aurelianum] > ORLIENS [orljens] > ORL\u00c9ANS [\u0254\u0281le\u00e3]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [a] in penultimate syllable, later shifts to [i] in antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>This word shows a possible irregularity. With the eventual stressed syllable being [i] in the Classical Latin antepenultimate syllable, we would expect this [i] to either stay [i] in modern French if it is a long [\u012b], or to become [ie] in modern French if it is a short [\u01d0], because it is in a Latin blocked syllable. Instead, this [i] evolves to become [e] in modern French.
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. AURELIANUM<\/b> [aurelianum] > ORELIANUM [orelianum] after diphthong \u201cau\u201d [au] simplifies to mid-high back vowel \u201co\u201d [o] in propreantepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. ORELIANUM [orelianum] > ORELIAN [orelian] after deletion of word-final voiced bilabial nasal consonant [m] in ultimate syllable, and deletion of unstressed high back vowel [u] in ultimate syllable, causing stress to shift from low central vowel [a] in new ultimate syllable to high front vowel [i] in new penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. ORELIAN [orelian] > ORELIANS [orelians] after addition of word-final voiceless alveolar fricative \u201cs\u201d [s] to end of ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. ORELIANS [orelians] > ORLIANS [orlians] after syncope of unstressed mid-high mid-front vowel [e] in antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. ORLIANS [orlians] > <\/span>ORLIENS<\/b> [orliens] after unstressed low central vowel [a] yields mid-high mid-front vowel [e] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a06. ORLIENS [orliens] > ORLIANS [orlians] after unstressed mid-high mid-front vowel [e] yields unstressed low central vowel [a] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a07. ORLIANS [orlians] > ORL\u00c9ANS [o\u0281leans] after stressed high front vowel [i] yields mid-high mid-front vowel [e] in penultimate syllable, and lenition of voiced postalveolar approximant [r] to voiced uvular fricative [\u0281] in antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a08. ORL\u00c9ANS [o\u0281leans] > <\/span>ORL\u00c9ANS<\/b> [\u0254\u0281le\u00e3] after unstressed mid-high back vowel [o] yields low-mid back \u201co\u201d [\u0254] in antepenultimate syllable, loss of word-final consonant cluster \u201cns\u201d [ns] in ultimate syllable, and nasalization of [a] to [\u00e3] in ultimate syllable<\/span><\/p>\n

CL\u0100RUS [klarus] > CLER [kler] > CLAIR [kl\u025b\u0281]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [a] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>This word shows a possible irregularity. We would expect [a] in a Classical Latin blocked syllable to remain [a]. Instead, we see it yield [e] here, as we would only expect from a Classical Latin free syllable to Modern French free syllable.
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. CL\u0100RUS<\/b> [klarus] > CLARU [klaru] after deletion of word-final \u201cs\u201d [s] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. CLARU [klaru] > CLAR [klar] after deletion of unstressed high back vowel \u201cu\u201d [u]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. CLAR [klar] > <\/span>CLER<\/b> [kler] after stressed low central vowel [a] yields mid-high mid-front [e]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. CLER [kler] > <\/span>CLAIR<\/b> [kl\u025b\u0281] after stressed mid-high mid-front \u201ce\u201d [e] yields Modern French mid-high mid-front \u201cai\u201d [\u025b], and lenition of word-final voiced postalveolar approximant [r] to voiced uvular fricative [\u0281]<\/span><\/p>\n

F\u0112MIN\u012aNUS \u00a0[femininus]> FEMENIN [feminin] > F\u00c9MININ [femin\u025b\u0303]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [i] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. F\u0112MIN\u012aNUS<\/b> [femininus] > FEMININU [femininu] after deletion of word-final \u201cs\u201d [s] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. FEMININU [femininu] > FEMININ [feminin] after deletion of word-final unstressed high back vowel \u201cu\u201d [u]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. FEMININ [feminin] > <\/span>FEMENIN<\/b> [femenin] after unstressed high front vowel [i] yields mid-high mid-front \u201ce\u201d [e] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. FEMENIN [femenin] > FEMININ [femin\u025bn] after unstressed mid-high mid-front \u201ce\u201d [e] yields high front vowel [i] in penultimate syllable (possibly due to \u201cfemenin\u201d [femenin] not becoming fully standardized and\/or accepted), and stressed high front vowel [\u012b] yields mid-high mid-front vowel [\u025b] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. FEMININ [femin\u025bn] > <\/span>F\u00c9MININ<\/b> [femin\u025b\u0303] after complete lenition of voiced alveolar nasal [n] in ultimate syllable, and nasalization of stressed mid-high mid-front vowel [\u025b] to [\u025b\u0303] in ultimate syllable<\/span><\/p>\n

AM\u0100RE [amare] > AYMER [ajmer] (conjugated AYME [ajm\u0259 in text) > AIMER [eme\/\u025bme]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [a] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. AM\u0100RE<\/b> [amare] > AMERE [amere] after stressed low central vowel [a] yields mid-high mid-front [e] in open penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. AMERE [amere] > AMER [amer] after deletion of word-final unstressed mid-high mid-front vowel [e] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. AMER [amer] > <\/span>AYMER<\/b> [emer] after unstressed low central vowel \u201ca\u201d [a] yields mid-high mid-front vowel \u201cay\u201d [e] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. AYMER [emer] > <\/span>AIMER<\/b> [eme] after complete lenition of word-final voiced postalveolar approximant [r] in ultimate syllable, and either spelling shift from \u201cay\u201d [e] to \u201cai\u201d [e] with the same pronunciation in penultimate syllable (which would be regular for Modern French free syllable)<\/span><\/p>\n

CR\u0112DERE [kredere] > CREIRE [krejr\u0259] (conjugated CREUSSENT [krewsent] in text) > CROIRE [k\u0281wa\u0281]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [e] in antepenultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. CR\u0112DERE<\/b> [kredere] > CRERE [krere] after complete lenition of unstressed penultimate syllable \u201cde\u201d [de]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. CRERE [krere] > CREIRE [krejre] after palatalization of stressed vowel \u201ce\u201d [e] to diphthong \u201cei\u201d [ej] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. CREIRE [krejre] > <\/span>CREIRE<\/b> [krejr\u0259] unstressed word-final mid-high mid-front vowel [e] yields mid central vowel [\u0259] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. CREIRE [krejr\u0259] > CROIRE [kr\u0254jr\u0259] after stressed diphthong \u201cei\u201d [ej] yields diphthong \u201coi\u201d [\u0254j] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. CROIRE [kr\u0254jr\u0259] > CROIRE [kro\u025br\u0259] after stressed diphthong [\u0254j] yields diphthong [o\u025b] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a06. CROIRE [kro\u025br\u0259] > CROIRE [k\u0281w\u025br\u0259] after stressed diphthong [o\u025b] yields diphthong [w\u025b] in penultimate syllable, and lenition of voiced postalveolar approximant [r] to voiced uvular fricative [\u0281] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a07. CROIRE [k\u0281w\u025br\u0259] > CROIRE [k\u0281war\u0259] after stressed diphthong [w\u025b] yields diphthong [wa] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a08. CROIRE [k\u0281war\u0259] > <\/span>CROIRE<\/b> [k\u0281wa\u0281] after word-final unstressed mid-high mid-front vowel [\u0259] is lost in ultimate syllable, and lenition of voiced postalveolar approximant [r] to voiced uvular fricative [\u0281] in ultimate syllable<\/span><\/p>\n

ILLOS [illos] > EULX [ewlks] > EUX [\u0153]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [i] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>This word shows a possible irregularity. With the eventual stressed syllable being [i] in the Classical Latin antepenultimate syllable, we would expect this [i] to either stay [i] in modern French if it is a long [\u012b], or to become [ie] in modern French if it is a short [\u01d0], because it is in a Latin blocked syllable. Instead, this \u201ci\u201d [i] evolves to become \u201ceu\u201d [\u0153] in modern French. We would also expect the deletion of word-final [s], which likely remained to serve as a liaison.
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. ILLOS<\/b> [ilos] > ILS [ils] after syncope of unstressed high back vowel \u201co\u201d [o] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. ILS [ils] > ELS [els] after stressed vowel \u201ci\u201d [i] yields stressed vowel \u201ce\u201d [e]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. ELS [els] > EULS [ewls] after stressed vowel \u201ce\u201d [e] diphthongizes to \u201ceu\u201d [ew]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. EULS [ewls] > <\/span>EULX<\/b> [ewlks] after consonant epenthesis of [k] causes \u201cs\u201d to yield \u201cx\u201d
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. EULX [ewlks] > EUX [ewks] after complete lenition of \u201cl\u201d [l]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a06. EUX [ewks] > EUX [\u0153ks] after stressed diphthong [ew] simplifies to stressed vowel [\u0153]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a07. EUX [\u0153ks] > <\/span>EUX<\/b> [\u0153] after complete lenition of word-final \u201cx\u201d [ks]<\/span><\/p>\n

FRANCE [fr\u00e3nts\u0259] + -ENSIS [ensis] > FRAN\u00c7OIS [fr\u00e3nts\u0254js] > FRAN\u00c7AIS [f\u0281\u00e3s\u025b]
\n<\/b>Stressed vowel is [a] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span><\/em>This word shows a possible irregularity. We would expect the diphthong [w\u025b] to continue in its typical evolution and yield [wa]. Here, it simplifies to [\u025b] instead.
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. FRANCE [fr\u00e3nts\u0259] + -ENSIS [ensis]<\/b> > FRANCENSIS [fr\u00e3ntsensis] after combination of two words, with deletion of word-final unstressed mid-high mid-front vowel [e] is lost in ultimate syllable of \u201cFrance\u201d [fr\u00e3nts\u0259]
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. FRANCENSIS [fr\u00e3n,tsens,is] > FRAN\u00c7EIS [fr\u00e3ntsejs] after complete lenition of [n] in penultimate syllable and [s] at end of penultimate syllable, and grapheme change of \u201cc\u201d to \u201c\u00e7\u201d without phoneme change
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03. FRAN\u00c7EIS [fr\u00e3ntsejs] > <\/span>FRAN\u00c7OIS<\/b> [fr\u00e3nts\u0254js] after stressed diphthong \u201cei\u201d [ej] yields diphthong \u201coi\u201d [\u0254j] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04. FRAN\u00c7OIS [fr\u00e3nts\u0254js] > FRAN\u00c7OIS [fr\u00e3ntso\u025bs] after stressed diphthong [\u0254j] yields diphthong [o\u025b] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. FRAN\u00c7OIS [fr\u00e3ntso\u025bs] > FRAN\u00c7OIS [fr\u00e3ntsw\u025bs] after stressed diphthong [o\u025b] yields diphthong [w\u025b] in penultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a06. FRAN\u00c7OIS [fr\u00e3ntsw\u025bs] > FRAN\u00c7OIS [fr\u00e3ntsw\u025b] after complete lenition of word-final [s] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a07. FRAN\u00c7OIS [fr\u00e3ntsw\u025b] > FRAN\u00c7AIS [fr\u00e3nts\u025b] after stressed diphthong \u201coi\u201d [w\u025b] simplifies to stressed mid-high mid-front vowel [\u025b] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a08. FRAN\u00c7AIS [fr\u00e3n,ts\u025b] > FRAN\u00c7AIS [fr\u00e3s\u025b] after complete lenition of [n] in penultimate syllable and [t] in ultimate syllable
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a09. FRAN\u00c7AIS [fr\u00e3s\u025b] > FRAN\u00c7AIS<\/b> [f\u0281\u00e3s\u025b] after lenition of voiced postalveolar approximant [r] to voiced uvular fricative [\u0281]<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Verbal Morphology Analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n

ADMONEBAT [admonebat] > <\/b>AMMONESTOIT<\/b> [amonest\u0254jt] > ADMONESTAIT [adm\u0254n\u025bst\u025b] (third person singular simple indicative imperfect)
\n<\/b>The verb <\/span>admonester<\/span><\/i> (to admonish) demonstrates the typical evolution of the imperfect indicative form from Classical Latin through Old French to Modern French. The central variation of Old French became the dominant one, and evolved to the final Old French standardized endings of \u201c-oie,\u201d \u201c-oies,\u201d \u201c-oit,\u201d \u201c-iiens,\u201d \u201c-iiez,\u201d and \u201c-oient.\u201d These evolved to the Modern French endings of \u201c-ais,\u201d \u201c-ais,\u201d \u201c-ait,\u201d \u201c-ions,\u201d \u201c-iez,\u201d and \u201c-aient.\u201d Thus, in Modern French, the imperfect indicative conjugations of <\/span>admonester<\/span><\/i> are \u201cadmonestais\u201d [adm\u0254n\u025bst\u025b], \u201cadmonestais\u201d [adm\u0254n\u025bst\u025b], \u201cadmonestait\u201d [adm\u0254n\u025bst\u025b], \u201cadmonestions\u201d [adm\u0254n\u025bstj\u0254\u0303], \u201cadmonestiez\u201d [adm\u0254n\u025bstje], and \u201cadmonestaient\u201d [adm\u0254n\u025bst\u025b].<\/span><\/p>\n

DIXERUNT [dikserunt] > <\/b>DISTRENT<\/b> [distrent] > DIRENT [di\u0281] (third person plural pass\u00e9 simple)
\n<\/b>The verb <\/span>dire<\/span><\/i> (to say) demonstrates paradigm leveling in the simple past indicative form. In Old French, this form uses the paradigms \u201ce\u201d and \u201ci,\u201d which both level to \u201ci\u201d in the Modern French. We also see here the typical evolution of third person plural verbs, in which all Latin endings collapse to [\u0259nt], for which the spelling was later standardized to \u201cent.\u201d The subsequent sound changes (loss of final [t], nasalization, and loss of final [n]) caused the whole \u201cent\u201d ending to become silent. Thus, in Modern French, the simple past indicative conjugations of <\/span>dire<\/span><\/i> are \u201cdis\u201d [di], \u201cdis\u201d [di], \u201cdit\u201d [di], \u201cd\u00eemes\u201d [dim], \u201cd\u00eetes\u201d [dit], and \u201cdirent\u201d [di\u0281].<\/span><\/p>\n

ERAT [erat] > ESTROIT [estr\u0254jt] > <\/b>ESTOIT<\/b> [est\u0254jt] > \u00c9TAIT [et\u025b] (third person singular imperfect simple indicative)
\n<\/b>The verb <\/span>\u00eatre<\/span><\/i> (to be) is highly irregular, but still demonstrates paradigm leveling. In Old French, this form uses the paradigms \u201cie,\u201d \u201ce,\u201d \u201cer,\u201d and \u201ces.\u201d These level to the paradigm \u201c\u00e9\u201d in Modern French. Thus, in Modern French, the imperfect indicative conjugations of <\/span>\u00eatre<\/span><\/i> are \u201c\u00e9tais\u201d [et\u025b], \u201c\u00e9tais\u201d [et\u025b], \u201c\u00e9tait\u201d [et\u025b], \u201c\u00e9tions\u201d [etj\u0254\u0303], \u201c\u00e9tiez\u201d [etje], and \u201c\u00e9taient\u201d [et\u025b].<\/span><\/p>\n

AMAT [amat] > AIME [ajm\u0259] > <\/b>AYME<\/b> [ajm\u0259] \u00a0> AIME [\u025bm] (third person singular present indicative)
\n<\/b>The verb <\/span>aimer<\/span><\/i> (to love) demonstrates paradigm leveling, the typical evolution of a Classical Latin Class I verb through Old French to Modern French. In Old French, this form uses the paradigms \u201cai\u201d and \u201cay\u201d fairly interchangeably, which level to just the paradigm \u201cai\u201d in the Modern French. Classical Latin Class I singular verbs often ended in [\u0259] in Old French, which is what we see with \u201caime\u201d [ajm\u0259] and \u201cayme\u201d [ajm\u0259] in the Old French here. In Modern French, the word-final [\u0259] is dropped from the end of these singular conjugations. The plural conjugations are more varied. The first person plural ends with \u201c-ons,\u201d taken from the transformation of the verb \u201cto be\u201d (SUMUS > SONS) that was extended to all first person plural present indicative conjugations. The second plural ending is \u201c-ez,\u201d which was pronounced [ets] in Old French, and is now pronounced [e] in Modern French. For the third person plural, all Latin endings collapse to [\u0259nt], for which the spelling was later standardized to \u201cent.\u201d The subsequent sound changes (loss of final [t], nasalization, and loss of final [n]) caused the whole \u201cent\u201d ending to become silent. Thus, in Modern French, the present indicative conjugations of <\/span>aimer<\/span><\/i> are \u201caime\u201d [\u025bm], \u201caimes\u201d [\u025bm], \u201caime\u201d [\u025bm], \u201caimons\u201d [\u025bmj\u0254\u0303], \u201caimez\u201d [\u025bmje], and \u201caiment\u201d [\u025bm\u025b].<\/span><\/p>\n

CREDERENT [krederent] > <\/b>CREUSSENT<\/b> [krewsent] > CRUSSENT [k\u0281ys] (third person plural imperfect subjunctive)
\n<\/b>The verb <\/span>croire<\/span><\/i> (to believe) demonstrates paradigm leveling and the use of the stem extender \u201c-isc-\u201d in the imperfect subjunctive form. Old French uses the paradigms \u201ccre\u00ef\u201d and \u201ccre\u00fc\u201d in this form, which simplify to all become \u201ccru\/cr\u00fb\u201d [k\u0281y] in Modern French. The use of \u201c-sc-\u201d as an extender is apparent in the \u201c-ss-\u201d in both Old French \u201ccreussent\u201d and Modern French \u201ccrussent.\u201d As is typical with \u201c-ir\u201d ending verbs in French, the stem extender \u201c-sc-\u201d was inserted into the word during its evolution from Classical Latin to Modern French. We also see here the typical evolution of third person plural verbs, in which all Latin endings collapse to [\u0259nt], for which the spelling was later standardized to \u201cent.\u201d The subsequent sound changes (loss of final [t], nasalization, and loss of final [n]) caused the whole \u201cent\u201d ending to become silent. Thus, in Modern French, the imperfect subjunctive conjugations of <\/span>croire<\/span><\/i> are \u201ccrusse\u201d [k\u0281ys], \u201ccrusses\u201d [k\u0281ys], \u201ccr\u00fbt\u201d [k\u0281ys], \u201ccrussions\u201d [k\u0281ysj\u0254\u0303], \u201ccrussiez\u201d [k\u0281y.sje], and \u201ccrussent\u201d [k\u0281ys].<\/span><\/p>\n

HABUIT [habuit] \u00a0> <\/b>OT<\/b> [ot] > EUT [y] (third person singular pass\u00e9 simple [preterite \/ perfect] indicative)
\n<\/b>The verb <\/span>avoir<\/span><\/i> (to have) demonstrates paradigm leveling in the simple past indicative form. In Old French, this forms uses the paradigms \u201coi,\u201d \u201ce\u00fc,\u201d \u201co\u00fc,\u201d \u201cou,\u201d and \u201co.\u201d These are leveled to \u201ceu\/e\u00fc\u201d [y] in Modern French. For the third person singular in particular, we also see the \u201c-t\u201d ending that is expected for Classical Latin Class II, III, or IV vowels. Thus, in Modern French, the simple past indicative conjugations of <\/span>avoir<\/span><\/i> are \u201ceus\u201d [y], \u201ceus\u201d [y], \u201ceut\u201d [y], \u201ce\u00fbmes\u201d [ym], \u201ce\u00fbtes\u201d [yt], and \u201ceurent\u201d [y\u0281].<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Noun\/adjective Morphology Analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n

Old French: Et devant <\/b>elle<\/b><\/span> vont fuyant les <\/b>ennemis<\/b><\/span>, ne nul n’y dure. (XXXV)
\n<\/b>Modern French: Et devant elle, les ennemis s\u2019enfuient ; personne ne peut lui r\u00e9sister.
\n<\/b>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0– The Old French \u201celle\u201d [el\u0259] comes from the Classical Latin nominative feminine singular subject pronoun \u201cilla\u201d [illa]. The stressed Classical Latin vowel \u201ci\u201d [\u012d] in the penultimate syllable yields \u201ce\u201d [e] in the Old French. Classical Latin word-final \u201ca\u201d [a] yields Old French word-final \u201ce\u201d [\u0259]. The Old French phoneme [\u0259] is dropped with Modern French, while the grapheme \u201ce\u201d stays.
\n<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0– The Old French masculine plural \u201cennemis\u201d [enemis] comes from the Classical Latin second declension nominative singular noun \u201cinimicus\u201d [inimikus]. To reach the masculine singular \u201cennemi\u201d [enemi] in Old French, the ultimate syllable \u201ccus\u201d [kus] is deleted. Also, the unstressed \u201ci\u201d [i] in the Classical Latin preantepenultimate syllable and the unstressed \u201ci\u201d [i] in the Classical Latin antepenultimate syllable both yield \u201ce\u201d [e] in Old French. The phoneme [n] stays the same, but the grapheme \u201cn\u201d becomes \u201cnn\u201d in Old French. For the plural form, \u201cs\u201d [s] is added to the end of the ultimate syllable, as is typical in French for words that don\u2019t end with \u201cu,\u201d forming Old French masculine plural \u201cennemis\u201d [enemis]. None of the graphemes change from the Old French plural to the Modern French, plural but there are multiple phoneme changes. The unstressed phoneme [e] in the Old French antepenultimate syllable yields [\u025b] in Modern French. The unstressed phoneme [e] in the Old French penultimate syllable is deleted. The word-final [s] in the Old French ultimate syllable undergoes complete lenition. These phoneme changes all yield \u201cennemis\u201d [\u025bnmi] in Modern French.<\/span><\/p>\n

Old French: Ne nul n’arrestoit contre <\/b>lui<\/b><\/span>, et tout conquestoit (XXVII)
\n<\/b>Modern French: Personne ne put lui r\u00e9sister, et il conquit tout
\n<\/b>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0– The Old French \u201clui\u201d [l<\/span>\u0265i<\/span>] comes from the Classical Latin third person feminine singular dative indirect object pronoun \u201cillui\u201d [illui]. Personal pronouns are some of the few remnants from the Classical Latin case system. The unstressed antepenultimate syllable \u201cil\u201d [il] is deleted in Old French, which leaves \u201clui\u201d [lui]. The phoneme [ui] then yields the phoneme [<\/span>\u0265i] for the final Old French word \u201clui\u201d [l\u0265i].<\/span> There are no grapheme or phoneme changes from Old French \u201clui\u201d [l<\/span>\u0265i<\/span>] to Modern French.<\/span><\/p>\n

Old French: Mais quant \u00e0 nous, oncques parler n’o\u00ffsmes de si grant <\/b>merveille<\/b><\/span> (XXVI)
\n<\/b>Modern French: Mais quant \u00e0 nous, nous n\u2019entend\u00eemes jamais parler d\u2019un si grand prodige
\n<\/b>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0– The Old French feminine singular noun \u201cmerveille\u201d [merv\u1ebdjl\u0259] comes from the Classical Latin third declension neuter singular adjective \u201cmirabile\u201d [mirabile]. The unstressed \u201ci\u201d [\u012d] in the Classical Latin preantepenultimate syllable yields \u201ce\u201d [e] in Old French. The unstressed \u201ca\u201d [a] in the Classical Latin antepenultimate syllable undergoes syncope when evolving into Old French. The \u201cb\u201d [b] in the Classical Latin penultimate syllable undergoes lenition and yields \u201cv\u201d [v] in Old French. An \u201ce\u201d [e] is added before the stressed \u201ci\u201d [i] in the Classical Latin penultimate syllable, creating the stressed diphthong \u201cei\u201d [\u1ebdj]. Finally, the word-final unstressed vowel [e] yields word-final unstressed [\u0259], while the grapheme remains the same, completing the evolution into Old French \u201cmerveille\u201d [merv\u1ebdjl\u0259]. Then, the unstressed \u201ce\u201d [e] and \u201cr\u201d [r] in the Old French antepenultimate syllable yield \u201ce\u201d [\u025b] and \u201cr\u201d [\u0281] in Modern French. The stressed diphthong \u201cei\u201d [\u1ebdj] in the Old French penultimate syllable simplifies to \u201cei\u201d [\u025b]. The grapheme \u201cl\u201d [l] in the Old French ultimate syllable evolves to become \u201cll\u201d [l], before the \u201cll\u201d [l] palatalizes and becomes \u201cll\u201d [j] in Modern French. The pronunciation of unstressed word-final [\u0259] is dropped, while the grapheme \u201ce\u201d stays for Modern French.<\/span><\/p>\n

Old French: <\/b>Une<\/b><\/span> fillete de XVI ans (XXXV)
\n<\/b>Modern French: Une fillette de seize ans
\n<\/b>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0– The Old French \u201cune\u201d [yn\u0259] comes from the Classical Latin nominative feminine singular numeral \u201cuna\u201d [una]. The stressed \u201cu\u201d [u] in the Classical Latin penultimate syllable yields \u201cu\u201d [y] in Old French. The unstressed \u201ca\u201d [a] in the Classical Latin penultimate syllable yields \u201ce\u201d [\u0259] in Old French. The grapheme \u201cune\u201d stays the same through Modern French, while the pronunciation of unstressed word-final [\u0259] is dropped.<\/span><\/p>\n

Old French: Et <\/b>les<\/b><\/span> traictres mis \u00e0 desert! (XXXIV)
\n<\/b>Modern French: Ainsi que les tra\u00eetres ont \u00e9t\u00e9 extermin\u00e9s !
\n<\/b>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0– The Old French \u201cles\u201d [les] comes from the Classical Latin masculine and feminine accusative plural definite articles \u201cillos\u201d [ilos] and \u201cillas\u201d [ilas]. Classical Latin \u201cillos\u201d [ilos] and \u201cillas\u201d [ilas] merged and yielded \u201cilles\u201d [iles]. Then, the stressed vowel \u201ci\u201d [i] in the Classical Latin penultimate syllable was deleted, the stress shifted to \u201ce\u201d [e], and the grapheme \u201cll\u201d [l] simplified to \u201cl\u201d [l] in Old French, ending with \u201cles\u201d [les], which was used for both masculine and feminine nouns. The Old French grapheme \u201cles\u201d stayed the same, while there was complete lenition of word-final [s] when evolving into Modern French \u201cles\u201d [le].<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Phonetic Analysis AUD\u012aRE [awdire] > O\u00cfR [wir] (conjugated O\u0178SMES [wism\u0259s] in text) > OU\u00cfR [wi\u0281] Stressed vowel is [i] in penultimate syllable \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01. AUDIRE [awdire] > AUDIR [awdir] after deletion of unstressed word-final vowel \u201ce\u201d [e] \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02. AUDIR [awdir] > AUIR [awir] after complete lenition of consonant \u201cd\u201d [d] in penultimate … Continue reading Etymological Content<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1220,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-342","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-libby"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/342","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1220"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=342"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/342\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":603,"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/342\/revisions\/603"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=342"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=342"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/commons.mtholyoke.edu\/historyoftheromancelanguages2019\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=342"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}