Talk:baie

DEX disagrees

@Nicodene, basically all the major contemporary Romanian dictionaries mention the Latin etymology as the most plausible, only referencing the Slavic counterpart as a related term. Shouldn't we be in keeping with the consensus? Do you have some insight in this matter @Bogdan? Robbie SWE (talk) 18:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

It isn’t Wikipedia so we don’t have to follow a majority view, as it were.

As I understand the stressed /a/ speaks against a direct inheritance, per the cited examples. Is there a counterargument to that point? Nicodene (talk) 18:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Direct normal inheritance from Latin is not possible phonetically. Rarely there are "freak accidents" of words that are expected to be inherited, but don't fit the expected inheritance phonetical changes. Perhaps these are internal changes (or borrowings from other Late Latin dialects early on) and we generally can find the source in current dialects or ancient dialectal texts, especially of Northern Italy. In that case, the Late Latin source word should look like *balia, but I am not able to find any such word anywhere in the Romance languages.

The problem is not just that we don't have the evidence of *balia, but that the "nj" is found in Aromanian banji whereas ã is found in inherited words like arãnji. Bogdan (talk) 19:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

What about baier/baieră < Vulgar Latin *baiula, from Latin baiulus? The stress is on /a/ in both Latin and Romanian. I truly believe that being decisive in this respect is difficult since both the Latin and Slavic terms are so similar and might have ended up influencing baie at different point in history. Robbie SWE (talk) 18:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

The point is that [a] before nasals (including original *[ɲ]) underwent raising in the proto-language that unites Romanian and Aromanian. It has nothing to do with [j]. Nicodene (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2024 (UTC)