Henrik Theiling skrev:
> Hi!
> 
> Benct Philip Jonsson writes:
>> No liave/laviaç mi(g) la botegle nel lave-vescil
> 
> Is _botegle_ natively shifted (from BUTICULA) according to the Rhodese
> GMP or is it a loan from another Romance language in your universe?
> 
> It seems to me that most Romance language *here* which have the word
> borrowed it from French, e.g. I think BUT(T)ICULA would be
> *_botticchia_ in Italian if sound changes had applied regularly, and
> not _bottiglia_.  Similarly for Spanish.

I didn't think of that, but actually the result of
BUTTICULA per the GMP or a loan from French (or
_Franciá_, as the Berghenzié say) would be the
same.  Since French _ou_ usually is _o_ in Rh.
a loan would be likely to be thus adapted, but
in this case, the pronunciation would be the same,
since unstressed _o_ and _u_ both are [U].

OTOH the position of French isn't the same in
Lucus (the ATL) as in Cosmos (OTL), so it's
unlikely that Italian would have a French loan,
or a Rhodrese loan, for this item Lucally!
A Provençal loan would be likelier, or a
native form. I guess Provençal would have
_botelha*_ or _botilha*_ though!  Rh. may
have borrowed its word from either French
or Provencal, so it may end up with
_botigle_.  However a plural _botigl_
would be likely to develop an analogical
singular _botegle_ anyway.

> For Tirkunan, I decided to borrow the word, too, so it is _butel_
> instead of *_butikra_, but I am not entirely sure I did the right
> thing, because not much is known about the world *there*.

So French */L/ becomes /l/ and not /j/?

> (And I am still unsure whether it should rather be 'lava-prat' instead
> of 'lavaprat'.)

The difference would be one of stress, right?

/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)