# The strange "r" in the Spanish word "estrella"



## Testing1234567

"Star" in Latin is STELLA, which gave rise to:
- Spanish "estrella"
- Galician "estrela"
- Portuguese "estrela"

yet:
- French "étoile" < *ɛstéla (ɛs>é, é>oi, a>e)
- Occitan "estela"
- Italian "stella"
- Romanian "stea"

The question is: where did the "r" come from?


----------



## Dymn

My first impression was that it could be a contamination from Latin _aster_, which initially meant 'star', and which has evolved into modern Spanish as _astro_, meaning 'celestial body' (correct me if I'm wrong).

However, according to this site, the added _r_ is due to the existence of another liquid (_ll_). The same phenomenon seems to happen in _hojaldre _'puff pastry', originally _hojalde._

By the way, in Catalan we have both _estrella_ and _estel_


----------



## merquiades

The reason given by Coromines is that it's a resonance that is produced in anticipation of the liquid l.
I'm not totally satisfied with this explanation because there are many words with similar phonetics where this didn't occur.


----------



## Cenzontle

I have always accepted the theory mentioned by Diamant7, that "estrella" was contaminated by _aster/ast*r*um_ —
until today, when I looked it up in Menéndez Pidal's _Manual_.  (When you follow this link, click on the subsequent link to "Page 95".)
There you can see other examples of inserted _r_'s:  
foliatilem > hojaldre, jalde/jaldre, corytum > goldre, *stupaculum > estropajo, regestum > registro, mixtencum > mostrenco, rastellum > rastrillo.


----------



## Penyafort

In terms of etymology, I agree with the options mentioned by Diamant.



Diamant7 said:


> By the way, in Catalan we have both _estrella_ and _estel_



But the r in the Catalan _estrella _seems a recent thing, Old Catalan having _estel_, _estela _and _estella_. 

So this -r- is probably a West Iberian thing. Aragonese also has _estrel _and _estrela_, but we can see it with no r in the Navarrese town Lizarra/Estella, _izar _being 'star' in Basque.

What I don't know is if that -r- in modern Catalan is due to Spanish influence or to avoid the convergence with _estella _'splinter' (< *ASTELLA).


----------



## sotos

Testing1234567 said:


> "Star" in Latin is STELLA,



and _astrum_ , from the Gr. άστρον. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0059:entry=astrum


----------



## Cossue

In Galician, less so in Portuguese, it is not uncommon that the cluster -st- became -str-, but I'm not that sure about the concrete circumstances that lead to the epentheses of this vibrant, maybe the presence of a nasal or a liquid(?):

Gal _congo*str*o_/_congostra _'sunken lane' (PN Congusto 950CE) < Latin (?) *coangusta (vs. Catalan name _Congost_, if it have the same origin, and Portuguese _congosta_)
Gal _e*str*alar_/_estalar _'to explode' vs. Spanish _estallar_, Pg _estalar _< *astellare
Gal and Pg _ma*str*o _'mast' vs Spanish _mástil _< PG *mastaz
Gal _guinda*str*e _'crane (machine)' vs. Pg _guindaste _< OFrench _guindas _< Nord. _vindáss _< Germanic *wind-

In place names I can cite also a hamlet named _Vilanu*str*e_, probably deriving from the expression _villa Nausti_, _Nausti _being a local Early Medieval personal name.


----------



## wtrmute

There is also Brazilian Portuguese _registro_, European _registo_, from Latin _regestum_; but compare French _registre_...


----------



## fdb

Latin aster and astrum are (as mentioned) borrowings from Greek. Stēlla is not borrowed, but cognate with these Greek words, and also English “star”. It is believed that stēlla represents a proto-Italic *stēr-lā-. Thus, you might want to say that Latin first lost its “r” through assimilation to the “l” of the suffix, and then regained it in a different location in some of the Romance languages.


----------



## Cenzontle

I don't want to go there, fdb.  "Regained *it*" implies that the new "r" was the same entity as the old one.  Once a sound is lost, it's pretty much lost, generally speaking.


----------



## Cossue

Yep. Also Spanish _registro_.

In Galician, in fact, this epenthetic r also occur rather frequently after other consonantal clusters composed of nasal/liquid + stop:
v. g. Gal _faldra_/_falda _vs. Pg _falda_

And we have also, for example, Galician/Portuguese _meixengra_/_mejengra _'titmouse' < _meygengos _1272 (in Galicia) < Germanic *maisingaz.


----------



## mataripis

Might be from influnce of Sanskrit Battara.


----------



## Cenzontle

So, as noted above, an extraneous "r" has appeared in several words, not just "estrella".
For this reason, I'm ready to set aside the theory of contamination by "astrum".
My question now is, Why complicate the pronunciation of these words in this way?
It *is* a complication, isn't it?
The standard wisdom says that lenition and deletion are for the speaker's benefit, making pronunciation easier;
and fortition and (shall we say?) elaboration are for the hearer's benefit, making comprehension easier.
(Not to overlook some cases of transitional epenthesis that arguably make pronunciation easier, such as Sp. *homre > hom*b*re.)
But these words in their "pre-R" form weren't threatening to merge with some other word, or otherwise in danger of causing comprehension problems, I presume.
So, what is a possible motivation for complicating a consonant cluster, as /st/ > /str/, /ld/ > /ldr/?
Could it be a sociolinguistic hypercorrection by some in-group trying to distinguish itself from an out-group of cluster-simplifiers?  I speculate.


----------



## Testing1234567

I know many non-natives who say "trandition" when they say "tradition". Also, we have a documented case that says STRICTVS became STRINCTVS, still inserting an "n" into it.

If an "n" can be inserted, why can't an "r"?

I have an anecdotal evidence myself, it is that sometimes I mispronounce "thou heaven's bright son" as "thou heav*r*en's bright son", because of the "r" in the "bright" that immediately follows.


----------



## Cossue

Cenzontle said:


> So, what is a possible motivation for complicating a consonant cluster, as /st/ > /str/, /ld/ > /ldr/?



Yep. Haven't read any half decent explanation. Although the /st/ cluster in Galician appears to be a little "unstable", at least before a front vowel or yod, when it tends to palatalize in /tʃ/:
Western Galician (ti) _comiste _vs. standard (ti) _comiches _< *comisches < latin _comēdistī_
Medieval Galician (Cantigas de Santa Maria c. 1264) _crischãos 'Christians' < cristianos_
MoGalician _becha 'bug' < c. 1264 bescha 'beast' < bestia
_​Cf. http://sli.uvigo.es/xelmirez/xelmirez.php?pescuda=sch&corpus=xelmirez

Maybe -st- was reinforced just like that as a reaction against (???) palatalization. This maybe can explain guindast*r*e (vs. **guindache < **guindasche), but _congostra_, _faldra_? 
​


----------



## mopc

wtrmute said:


> There is also Brazilian Portuguese _registro_, European _registo_, from Latin _regestum_; but compare French _registre_...



All modern languages with that root have the added "r", except for European Portuguese, even Finnish rekisteri, Latvian registrs, Romanian înregistrare, Polish rejestr, Czech rejstřík / registrace, Russian registracija, etc. It seems that the "r" was added in Medieval Latin and from then it survived in all modern languages except for the Portuguese (who probably overcorrected etymologically the word, since Brazilian Portuguese always had and still has only 'registro'/'registrar').


----------



## Cossue

Just for the record, I have just found that Latin _genista _'common broom' (Galician _xesta, _Portuguese gesta/giesta < Galician-Portuguese_ geesta_) have produced the Italian _ginest*r*a_. So, it appears that this weird -st- > -str- was also in effect somewhere in Italy.


----------



## Penyafort

In Catalan and Aragonese forms such as_ ginestra / chinestra_, or _conchestra _can also be found.


----------



## sotos

Cossue said:


> Just for the record, I have just found that Latin _genista _'common broom' (Galician _xesta, _Portuguese gesta/giesta < Galician-Portuguese_ geesta_) have produced the Italian _ginest*r*a_. So, it appears that this weird -st- > -str- was also in effect somewhere in Italy.


It is another story  when this -r- appear in the suffix, I think. It is also used in modern and ancient Greek as a "productive suffix". e.g. potIzo (I water plants or animals) > potIstra (an implement to water plants or animals). Xeo (I scratch) > xestro(n) (a tool for scratching). In some cases one more suffix may be added (e.g. diminutive), which can be -ella/-ello in Italian, in some parts of Greece etc, and therefore strings like -strella/-strello sound very familiar (and cute)  in some languages and can be overused.


----------



## Cossue

Ah, OK. I'm reading now in the _Diccionario Etimológico Castellano e Hispánico_ of Coromines (s.v. _retama_) that GINESTRA was already a Vulgar Latin form. It would explain the Catalan and Aragonese forms mentioned by Penyafort, and also German _Ginster_.


----------



## El Mexicano 2010

Hi everybody and first of all sorry for my bad English.

I wonder that nobody has considered the simpliest possible solution, a morphological analogy. In Medieval Spansih, there was almost no usual word with the stem /esté-/, but there were more and very frequent forms beginning with /estr-/, as _*estrecho*_ 'strict', _*estremo*_ 'extreme', _*estranno*_ 'strange or foreigner', etc. Maybe it is the influence of these words and nothing else.

Menéndez Pidal's cited examples are very confusing, because they are evidently analogical and nothing to do with phonetics. The 'r' in _rast*r*illo_ (< _rastillo_) and _rast*r*ojo_ (< _restojo)_ is due to _*rastro*_ (< RASTRUM), and that of_ most*r*enco_ (< _mestenco)_ is influenced by the verb _*mostrar*_. _Registro_ is from Medieval Latin _*registrum*_, and there created from REGESTUM under influence of other words ending in _-strum_ (MONSTRUM, CLAUSTRUM, CASTRUM, etc.)

Maybe _hojaldre_ is a cross of _hojalde_ and *_hojadre_, parallel development from Proto-Castilian *_fojadle_...

So I think that phonotactical "explanations" have no sense, as there has never been a romance "sound law" like d > dr, t > tr, etc.


----------



## francisgranada

See also:

Latin _castrum > castellum _(_castillo _in Spanish, _castello _in Italian, )
Latin_ canistrum > canistellum _(which results in _canasta/canastillo_ in Spanish, but _canestro/canestrello_ in Italian).


----------



## El Mexicano 2010

francisgranada said:


> See also:
> 
> Latin _castrum > castellum _(_castillo _in Spanish, _castello _in Italian, )
> Latin_ canistrum > canistellum _(which results in _canasta/canastillo_ in Spanish, but _canestro/canestrello_ in Italian).



Exactly. _Castellum_ first gave _castiello_ in Old Spanish (due to the open latin E sound), then simplified to _castillo_ ("_de Castiella vos ides pora las yentes estrannas_" — modern Spanish: "de Castilla vos vais [ = usted va] para (las) tierras extranjeras").

I think I had read somewhere that Latin _-r_- in words like CASTRUM "assimilated" into diminutive suffix _-ellus, -a, -um_ for morphological hypercorrection. Speakers thought that CASTELLUM is from *CASTE*R*LUM and deleted the original -R-. As phonotactically, an -RL- group resulted very strange in Latin and it tended to become -LL- by assimilation (as Modern Galician-Portuguese does the same: e. g. *_cantarlo _'to sing it' > *_canta_[ll]_o_ > _cantalo, cantá-lo)_.


----------

