Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-dvtzq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T02:21:02.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Latin uncia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2026

Karl M. D. Rosen
Karl M. D. Rosen*
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On the basis of Varro's etymology ‘uncia ab uno’ (LL 5.171), it has been said that Lat. uncia ‘ of anything, esp. as a weight ( of a pound) and monetary unit ( of an as)‘ represents an earlier *oiniciā. There are two possibilities of development: *oiniciā > *ōnciā > *ŏnciā > uncia, or *oiniciā > *ūnciā > uncia. The first requires a change known only in nōn < noenum (provided this etymology of nōn is accepted) and three regular changes—syncope, shortening of a long vowel before nasal plus consonant, and ŏ > ŭ before /η/. The second is not debatable, for oi > ū and shortening of the long vowel are both regular; given the etymon, therefore, it is the preferable development.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 40 , Issue 1: January-March , March 1964 , pp. 21 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © 1964 by Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 E.g. J. B. Hofmann, LEW3 2.816.

2 Ibid, in support of this development; see also nōn (2.174–5; noenum, < *n'oinom). Ribezzo, RIGI 2.145 (1918), also supports the first development.

3 Cf. M. Niedermann, Phon. hist, lat.313; F. Sommer, Hdb. der lat. Laut- u. Forment.2124, 64. Sesconciam (CIL 11.1430) can no longer be cited as preserving the o-stage (be it ō or ŏ) since it is now to be read sescvnciam (CIL 5.4108 = 12.2137); cf. Sommer, Krit. Erl. 29. For the phonemic status of /n/ cf. agnus /annus/ vs. annus.

4 Sommer, Hdb.2 74–5, 124. That *oi may have first yielded *[o:] ( ‘long close o’), in the Praenestine dialect at least, is suggested by coraveron ‘curaverunt’ of CIL 12.59 (Sommer, Hdb.2 75; Niedermann, Phon. hist, lat.3 62).

5 Epicharmus, Frag. 203 Kaibel = Sophron, Frag. 151: onkían· tòn stathmón. S. kaì E. (Photius). With this goes pentónkion / of Epicharmus 9.10 (from Pollux 9.81–2; the manuscript variants allow either reading), which shows o either directly or indirectly in the contraction of a + o; it need not be a calque or loanshift of Lat. quīncunx (so L. R. Palmer, Latin language 45) in view of pure Gk. tetrádrakhmon, pentádrakhmon, and the like.

6 Frag. 510 Rose (= Pollux 9.80). Just what Aristotle did write is not known, since ounkíā and oungíā are spellings of a later date.

7 A: Debrunner, IF 52.228 (1934); this is the later Greek replacement; for the earlier see below.

8 Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. 1.210.

9 Debrunner, loc.cit.; accepted by LEW3 2.815–6.

10 Debrunner, loc.cit.; cf. Gk. augora, Sporios (E. H. Sturtevant, Pron. of Gk. and Lat.2 43).

11 Niedermann, Phon. hist, lat.3 61–2; cf. Sommer, Hdb.2 74–5. Archaizing forms (e.g. oino [CIL 12.9], oinvorsei [ibid. 581], coeravervnt [ibid. 672]) appearing after this date show that the change was recent enough for the earlier spelling oi/oe to be remembered.

* ō does not fit here.

12 Cf. RIGI 14.132 (1930), 16.31 (1932).

13 Die vorgriechischen Sprachen Siziliens 95 (Wiesbaden, 1958).

14 Cf. Palmer, Lat. Ig. 43–6.

15 Cf. J. Whatmough's basic study of Sicel in PID 2.431–500.

16 The model can have had either *o or *u initially.

17 Le lingue dell'Italia antica oltre il latino 287 (Torino, 1953).