Suffixal -sk-

[Douglas G Kilday]

David L. White (9 Feb 2001) wrote:

>On a vaguely related point, do "Faleri-" and "Falisc-" come from
>/fales/, as has been alledged, or from /falis/?  Since lowering before /r/
>is a sound-change known from Latin (see especially endings in /-beris/ for
>expected /-biris/), it would seem that original /i/ is more likely.

Original /i/ would be supported by analogy with <cineris> < *cinisis and the
fact that /e/ is not raised to /i/ in closed syllables of native Latin
words: <obsideo> but <obsessus>. However, a preclassical inscription from
Falerii (CIL I{2}.364) reads in part:

Iouei Iunonei Mineruai / Falesce quei in Sardinia sunt
donum dederunt. magistreis / L. Latrius K. f. ... coiraueront ...

This shows the priority of /fales/. The modern toponyms Falleri and Fa`lisca
indicate that Falerii and Faliscus were accented initially. Being from
outside the Roman dialect zone, they were never subjected to the classical
penultimate law, and retained their initial accent. Similar examples are
*Ramesta (modern Varra`mista < Valle Ra`mista), Pisaurum (mod. Pe`saro),
Truentus (mod. Tronto).

The explanation is thus that /e/ was raised to /i/ in Falisci, despite the
closed syllable, under the influence of the previous accent. The /e/ in
Falerii was blocked from this raising by the /r/; it did not result from an
earlier /i/ lowered by /r/.

DGK