Re: Ancient writing systems

From: António Marques <m.ap@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 11:09:35 +0100

Douglas G. Kilday wrote:

Aeneid 1:101
SCVTA VIRVM GALEASQVE ET FORTIA CORPORA VOLVIT

De Rerum Natura 5:1347
SED FACERE ID NON TAM VINCENDI SPE VOLVERVNT

The first requires [wolwit] 3sg. 'rolled'; the second requires
[wolue:runt] 3pl. 'wished', from which we can see that the 3sg.
'wished' is [woluit],

We can?

contrasting with [wolwit].

Not necessarily.

Aeneid 1:24
PRIMA QVOD AD TROIAM PRO CARIS GESSERAT ARGIS

Ib. 1:249
TROIA NUNC PLACIDA COMPOSTVS PACE QVIESCIT

Here the first requires [tro:jam] acc. sg. 'Troy'; the second requires
[tro:ia] neut. acc. pl. 'Trojan (arms)', contrasting with the nom. sg. [tro:ja] 'Troy'.

But does an acc [iam] enforce a nom [ia]?

All this is extremely flimsy, at best.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

.

References:
- Re: Ancient writing systems
  - From: Douglas G. Kilday

Prev by Date: Re: Armenian, Sumerian, Burushaski, and Turkic languages
Next by Date: Re: Armenian, Sumerian, Burushaski, and Turkic languages
Previous by thread: Re: Ancient writing systems
Next by thread: Re: Ancient writing systems
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread