Leonardo’s theory on skin pigmentation, which is actually quite brilliant:
« Dei paesi caldi e freddi »
Gli uomini nati in paesi caldi amano la notte, perché li rinfresca, e odiano la luce, perché li riscalda. E quindi sono del colore della notte, ciò è neri. Ed in paesi freddi, ogni cosa è al contrario.
“On Hot and Cold Countries”
Men born in hot countries love the night, because it refreshes them, and they fear the light, because it burns them. Therefore, they are the color of night, that is, black. And in cold countries, it is the opposite.
Notes:
The adoption of the palatal lateral approximant, “gl” in the definite article before “s+[consonant]”-initial and vowel-initial masculine nouns is not articulated orthographically, although it probably was in spoken language. Hence, Leonardo uses “li omini”, instead of the modern “gli uomini”.
From the above, we see that diphthongization has not occurred yet on “uomo, uomini”.
I have suspicions that the periphrastic construction used in Italian to denote the simple past was not independently developed alongside Spanish. That, the clitic (e.g. <sorpresame, Sp.>, <sorpresami, It.>, “Surprise me”), and the use of the “gerundive” (really a misnomer, because the gerundive here doesn’t work as a nominative, but rather an adverbial or active participle) to form continuous actions in the present using the form of “to stand” (e.g. <estoy hablando, Sp.> vs. <sto parlando, It.>, “I am speaking”) are far too similar, I think, to be accidental.
I’m curious as to when this contact could have taken place, and under what context.
Changes I made:
<ano in odio> for <hanno l’odio> → <odiano>
<ne’ paesi freddi> → <in paesi freddi>
<per l’opposito> → <al contrario>
<li omini> → <gli uomini>
<rifresca> → <rinfresca>
