# Asturiano: ye



## Yul

"El sarampión ye una enfermedá infeiciosa exantemática como la rubeola o la varicela, abondo frecuente, especialmente en niños, causada por un virus..."

Comment expliquer ce "ye"?

Merci. Yul


----------



## chlapec

Buenas tardes,
se trata de dialecto asturiano.


----------



## Yul

¿Entonces, "ye" significaría "es" del verbo ser?
Gracias, 
Yul


----------



## Artifacs

Yul said:


> ¿Entonces, "ye" significaría "es" del verbo ser?
> Gracias,
> Yul


 Sí. «(... ye una enfermedad» = «es una enfermedad»

Un saludo.


----------



## Penyafort

Effectivement,* ye *veut dire "est", autant en asturien qu'en aragonais, qui sont deux langues romanes, pas de dialectes.


----------



## Yul

Suis content d'avoir posé ma question et content des réponses reçues.
Merci.
Yul


----------



## Sardokan1.0

It's similar in use and meaning to the Corsican "ghjè" (also identical pronunciation of "ye"), cognate also of Italian "c'è" (ci + è = there is), while in Sardinian we use "ch'est" (che + est, abbreviation of Latin "hicce est" = there is), or "b'est" (bi + est, abbreviation of Latin "ibi est" = there is).


----------



## Cenzontle

If I may compare Asturian "ye" with Castilian "es":
Both forms are derived from Latin "est", and both regularly lost the final "t".
The diphthong of Asturian, versus the lack of a diphthong in Castilian
is explained* as a result of derivations from stressed versus unstressed versions of "est", respectively.
The loss of "s"—which also occurred in Galician and Portuguese, in both of which the form is simply "é"—is more difficult to explain.  Neither Asturian, nor Galician, nor Portuguese deletes final "s" in other words.
--------
*For example by Alonso Zamora Vicente, _Dialectología española_, p. 96.


----------



## Yul

¡Bravo!
Gracias
Yul


----------



## Penyafort

Cenzontle said:


> The loss of "s"—which also occurred in Galician and Portuguese, in both of which the form is simply "é"—is more difficult to explain.  Neither Asturian, nor Galician, nor Portuguese deletes final "s" in other words.



I can't really speak for Asturian, but regarding the Aragonese _*ye*_, the medieval form in written texts was in fact _*yes**_. This -and what you state about the non-deletion of final -s, which does not happen in Aragonese either, makes me suspect that it could be a case of avoiding confusion with the second singular form, which is also _*yes *_(_tu yes_). If I recall it right, that second form is also _yes _in Asturian.

*But _get _in the Glosas Emilianenses.


----------

