Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tied] Re: Dacian

Expand Messages
  • Piotr Gasiorowski
    ... From: Abdullah Konushevci To: Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:32 PM Subject: [tied] Re: Dacian ...
    Message 1 of 19 , Mar 21, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Abdullah Konushevci" <akonushevci@...>
      To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:32 PM
      Subject: [tied] Re: Dacian


      > Accepting the views and results of well-known Croat linguist Radoslav Katicic, Polish linguist Waclav Cimohovski [Waclaw Cimochowski -- PG], Albanian linguist Eqrem Çabej, I consider that any attempt to treat Albanian language as non-descendent of Illyrian language, is simply an adventure.

      Dear Abdullah,

      One could just as easily list a number of authorities who doubt or deny this connection. Can you provide any arguments in favour of your claim? (We seem at least to agree that Albanian is closely related to Dacian.)

      Piotr
    • alex_lycos
      ... Should it be you are sympathetic to the Dacian-Baltic connection as supposed by Georgiev and Duridanov?
      Message 2 of 19 , Mar 21, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
        > One could just as easily list a number of authorities who doubt or
        > deny this connection. Can you provide any arguments in favour of your
        > claim? (We seem at least to agree that Albanian is closely related to
        > Dacian.)
        >
        > Piotr

        Should it be you are sympathetic to the Dacian-Baltic connection as
        supposed by Georgiev and Duridanov?
      • Piotr Gasiorowski
        ... From: alex_lycos To: Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 12:22 AM Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dacian ... Albanian
        Message 3 of 19 , Mar 21, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
          To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 12:22 AM
          Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dacian



          > Should it be you are sympathetic to the Dacian-Baltic connection as supposed by Georgiev and Duridanov?

          Albanian certainly has northerly affinities (as noted also by Eric Hamp, another eminent student of the language), but there is no particularly close relationship to Baltic. I take Albanian/Dacian to be one of the Satem groups more or less coordinate with Balto-Slavic, Indo-Iranian, Armenian and Thracian.

          Piotr
        • alex_lycos
          ... Which should be the book of Hamp you will recomand to someone to read regarding this relationship? Is there something awailable online? Alex
          Message 4 of 19 , Mar 21, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
            > To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 12:22 AM
            > Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dacian
            >
            >
            >
            >> Should it be you are sympathetic to the Dacian-Baltic connection as
            >> supposed by Georgiev and Duridanov?
            >
            > Albanian certainly has northerly affinities (as noted also by Eric
            > Hamp, another eminent student of the language), but there is no
            > particularly close relationship to Baltic. I take Albanian/Dacian to
            > be one of the Satem groups more or less coordinate with Balto-Slavic,
            > Indo-Iranian, Armenian and Thracian
            >
            > Piotr

            Which should be the book of Hamp you will recomand to someone to read
            regarding this relationship?
            Is there something awailable online?

            Alex
          • alex_lycos
            ... I could find on the net just an article called The Position of Albanian Eric P. Hamp, University og Chigaco. Interesting enough, from all words we know the
            Message 5 of 19 , Mar 22, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
              > Albanian certainly has northerly affinities (as noted also by Eric
              > Hamp, another eminent student of the language), but there is no
              > particularly close relationship to Baltic. I take Albanian/Dacian to
              > be one of the Satem groups more or less coordinate with Balto-Slavic,
              > Indo-Iranian, Armenian and Thracian
              >
              > Piotr


              I could find on the net just an article called The Position of Albanian
              Eric P. Hamp, University og Chigaco.
              Interesting enough, from all words we know the meaning from Thracian
              language there is almost nothing discussed. Apparently the authors
              connect the words with unknown meaning just on the basis of their
              phonetically appearance with some other languages as Baltic.(I include
              Dacian in the terminology "Thracian language" since the speculation of
              Georgiev about Dacian being a different language as Thracian is wrong
              even for a blind fish)
              It appears very suspect for instance that Duridanov modify an wrong
              written Dacian gloss "skaugdae" (= skaugetae), he put an "d" there for
              making an "skau(d)gedas thus connecting it with Baltic Skawd-gedas.
              In the same manner one will put an "r" there and we will have the form
              *skaurgedae analysing it as scourge= to flow and dae= the iranian
              "daoi".
              I am sorry but this is a very curious thing to make such connections
              with words we do not know what they mean. It looks as making first a
              theory and then trying to put these words ( even if modifying them)
              inside of this theory. Is this an accurate way to work? I guess, it is
              not.
              This is why I cannot put the Duridanov and Georgien to the level of
              Dimitri Detschev. It has something to do with the quality of the work.
              You got me curious about Hamp . I should like to read more of him for
              building myself an idea..
            • tolgs001
              ... In: Eric Hamp, The Position of Albanian http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/balkan/ehamp.html there is this sentence:
              Message 6 of 19 , Mar 22, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Piotr wrote:

                >Albanian certainly has northerly affinities
                >(as noted also by Eric Hamp, another eminent
                >student of the language), but there is no
                >particularly close relationship to Baltic. I
                >take Albanian/Dacian to be one of the Satem
                >groups more or less coordinate with Balto-
                >Slavic, Indo-Iranian, Armenian and Thracian.

                In:

                Eric Hamp, The Position of Albanian
                http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/balkan/ehamp.html

                there is this sentence:

                <<For Salentine Greek, G. Rohlfs (Die Sprache 1959: 5.173-175)
                has proposed a Messapic etymon /*squeros/ for the word /skero/,
                and puts this in relation with Albanian /hirrë/ "Käsewasser.">>

                Can Romanian "zer" and "[zar&]" be seen in this relationship
                as well? ("zer"/"zară" mean "Käsewasser" - more or less)

                George
              • Abdullah Konushevci
                Eric Hamp, The Position of Albanian According to Hamp: Çabej points out (VII Congresso intemazionale 245) that Latin + CC is regular, a statement I can
                Message 7 of 19 , Mar 22, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  Eric Hamp, The Position of Albanian
                  According to Hamp: Çabej points out (VII Congresso intemazionale
                  245) that Latin + CC is regular, a statement I can neither affirm
                  nor control at the moment.
                  I will add here: shëgjetë < lat. sagitta, letër < lat. littera,
                  shenjë < lat. signum, i denjë < lat. dignum, i shtrenjtë (cf. lat.
                  strictus), enj-te (cf. lat. ignis `fire'), etc. So equation Lissus >
                  Leshë > Lezhë is quit regular, as meshë < missa. See also Akrolissus
                  and kryelezha.
                  Jokl's Illyrian-Albanian correspondences (Albaner §3a) are probably
                  the best known. Certain of these require comment: Strabo (7.314) &#=
                  61548;
                   : lëgatë '=
                  swamp'. This could be *lug-, but there is also
                  *lag- 'wet', which might of course also represent *loug-.
                  I think that Albanian *lug- "to bend" and *lag- "to wet" are
                  completley different roots.
                  Ludrum : Tosk lum 'muck', Geg lym, Tosk ler, but there are also
                  Latin and Greek cognates.
                  Aquae Balizae : baltë 'mud'. But Krahe (IF 1962:67.151-158) thinks
                  Balissae is from Bal-is(i)a : *Bal-sa in Balsenz < *Bal-s-antia (:
                  *Ap-s-antia > Absentia) : Lith. balà 'swamp' : OCS blato, Alb.
                  baltë. Therefore, for Krahe Balissae/Balizae is "Alteuropaisch" (see
                  below).
                  Metu-barbis ~ -barris is ambiguous.
                  Malo/untum, etc., involve root etymologies and are dubious.
                  Place names in -V-ste/a/o : kopshtë 'orchard', vresht 'vineyard' :
                  (Illyrier §4) Lith. -ysta 'membership'.
                  That Alb. -ínj is a plural-collective is clear, but what about the
                  meaning of Delminium?
                  Also an plural-collective and nothing else.
                  Cimochowski thus believes that Illyrian (-Messapic) shows velars
                  where uncontested sat m languages do, and that therefore these
                  reflexes fail to make Illyrian a centum dialect. I agree
                  provisionally with Cimochowski's conclusion here, but on other
                  grounds. True, the facts speak against a centum status for Illyrian;
                  but Cimochowski has too simple a formula for the centum-sat m
                  dichotomy. In all of his examples, the following environment always
                  involves a resonant, while the other cognates adduced are sometimes
                  weak or dubious or susceptible of other explanations: Vescleves, Can-
                  davia (for which * - is gratuitously reconstructed, but which
                  points only to * - at most), Acra-banis, Bargulis/Bargilius,
                  Skerdis, ''. This environme=
                  nt matches exactly that posited by
                  me for the merger of palatals and velars in Albanian (KZ 1960:76.275-
                  280), and on no account depends on erratic matches in the sat m
                  languages as conventionally understood.
                  A special feature of Illyrian claimed by Cimochowski is its separate
                  reflex of the labiovelars (pp. 44-46). Before front vowels, as
                  Pedersen and Jokl showed, Albanian distinguishes the labiovelars.
                  Jokl correctly saw that Illyrian distinguished them, too, but tried
                  wrongly to prove that. (…)Thus, according to Cimochowski, the
                  evidence for Thracian labiovelars crumbles away. The distinct
                  reflexes of labiovelars in Albanian and Illyrian form, then, a
                  capital proof of the Illyrian ancestry of Albanian.
                  Regards:
                  Abdullah Konushevci
                  --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
                  <piotr.gasiorowski@i...> wrote:
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: "Abdullah Konushevci" <akonushevci@n...>
                  > To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
                  > Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 10:32 PM
                  > Subject: [tied] Re: Dacian
                  >
                  >
                  > > Accepting the views and results of well-known Croat linguist
                  Radoslav Katicic, Polish linguist Waclav Cimohovski [Waclaw
                  Cimochowski -- PG], Albanian linguist Eqrem Çabej, I consider that
                  any attempt to treat Albanian language as non-descendent of Illyrian
                  language, is simply an adventure.
                  >
                  > Dear Abdullah,
                  >
                  > One could just as easily list a number of authorities who doubt or
                  deny this connection. Can you provide any arguments in favour of
                  your claim? (We seem at least to agree that Albanian is closely
                  related to Dacian.)
                  >
                  > Piotr
                • Piotr Gasiorowski
                  ... From: Abdullah Konushevci To: Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 3:46 PM Subject: [tied] Re: Dacian ...
                  Message 8 of 19 , Mar 22, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Abdullah Konushevci" <akonushevci@...>
                    To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 3:46 PM
                    Subject: [tied] Re: Dacian


                    > Eric Hamp, The Position of Albanian
                    > "... Thus, according to Cimochowski, the evidence for Thracian labiovelars crumbles away. The distinct reflexes of labiovelars in Albanian and Illyrian form, then, a capital proof of the Illyrian ancestry of Albanian."

                    ----

                    That is Hamp's summary of Cimochowski's arguments. But in the very next paragraph Hamp goes on to say:

                    "But, in the face of all this, I feel we must bear in mind that the positive Illyrian labiovelar evidence is sparse and conjectural in the extreme. Moreover, as a retention it would be, strictly speaking, only weakly diagnostic."

                    And I would add that the evidence for the different treatment of *k and *kW in Albanian is also weak and inconclusive.

                    Hamp's bottom line is:

                    "Clearly, the whole question remains completely open. But perhaps we have been able to clear a little ground."

                    Piotr
                  • alex_lycos
                    ... From: Piotr Gasiorowski ... have been able to clear a little ground. ... I stil fail to see which are at last the
                    Message 9 of 19 , Mar 22, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <piotr.gasiorowski@...>

                      > Hamp's bottom line is:
                      >
                      > "Clearly, the whole question remains completely open. But perhaps we
                      have been able to clear a little ground."
                      >
                      > Piotr


                      I stil fail to see which are at last the linguistic reasons for making
                      Albanian the directly descendant of Dacian. That should be the first
                      point. The second point is a comedy piece in my eyes.
                      There are Romanians in the place of ancient Dacians ( or a tribe of it).
                      There are the Albanians in the places of ancient Illyrians ( or a tribe
                      of it). Now, some scholars move the Dacians in the place of Illyrians
                      so, the Albanians should be the Dacians, and they move the Illyrians in
                      the place of Dacians for having the Romanians. I agree, is very easy to
                      move them with the pencil on the map, hardly to put them in the reality.
                      For these which are sympathetic with such idea, I will like to take a
                      look at this:

                      -there is Rom. Name Drâstor for ancient Durostorum , called by Slavs
                      "Silistra"
                      -there is the Rom. toponyms and names with Preda, ancient tribe of
                      Dacian Predavenses
                      -there is the Dacian Tribe of Timacenses and the Timocean Romanians who
                      _do not speak_ Aromanian but Dacoromanian, they being there where they
                      have been observed 2000 ago, in the Valley of Timoc.
                      - there is the Dacian Tribe of Racatenses and the Rãcãtãu region in
                      Transilvania even today.
                      - there is the Dacian plant "dracila" and the romanian plant "dracila"
                      and some other plants.
                      - there are a lot of such testimonies, a part of them I showed in the
                      long time here, I don't repeat them now.

                      And beside of this , some scholars, move the Dacians in Illyria, they
                      cannot show any connection between what we know from the Dacian language
                      and the actually Albanian language and they expect someone will believe
                      all of this? And when someone else shows Thracian "longa" versus Latin
                      "longus", Thracian "rumpa" versus latin "rumpere", thracian "apa" versus
                      Latin "aqua", Thracian "Cerbula" versul Latin "cervus", Thracian "lax"
                      versus latin "lax", Thracian "arboria" versus Latin "arborea", Thracian
                      "Seutes" versus Latin "Suetonius", Thracian "Sel-umbria" or and Italic
                      "Umbria", Latin "Sabini" and Thracian "Sabinibria", Italic Calabria
                      versus Thracian Skelabria, Thracian Genucla versus Latin genuculum, etc,
                      etc, etc, ,etc, what to do with this someone else then?

                      Show him where he is wrong:-)
                    • george knysh
                      ... *****GK: Also (earlier) Drister, Derester, Durostol in various mediaeval manuscripts.***** ... *****GK: What you need to demonstrate is the preponderance
                      Message 10 of 19 , Mar 22, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- alex_lycos <altamix@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: "Piotr Gasiorowski"
                        > <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
                        >
                        > > Hamp's bottom line is:
                        > >
                        > > "Clearly, the whole question remains completely
                        > open. But perhaps we
                        > have been able to clear a little ground."
                        > >
                        > > Piotr
                        >
                        >
                        > I stil fail to see which are at last the linguistic
                        > reasons for making
                        > Albanian the directly descendant of Dacian. That
                        > should be the first
                        > point. The second point is a comedy piece in my
                        > eyes.
                        > There are Romanians in the place of ancient Dacians
                        > ( or a tribe of it).
                        > There are the Albanians in the places of ancient
                        > Illyrians ( or a tribe
                        > of it). Now, some scholars move the Dacians in the
                        > place of Illyrians
                        > so, the Albanians should be the Dacians, and they
                        > move the Illyrians in
                        > the place of Dacians for having the Romanians. I
                        > agree, is very easy to
                        > move them with the pencil on the map, hardly to put
                        > them in the reality.
                        > For these which are sympathetic with such idea, I
                        > will like to take a
                        > look at this:
                        >
                        > -there is Rom. Name Dr�stor for ancient Durostorum ,
                        > called by Slavs
                        > "Silistra"

                        *****GK: Also (earlier) Drister, Derester, Durostol'
                        in various mediaeval manuscripts.*****

                        > -there is the Rom. toponyms and names with Preda,
                        > ancient tribe of
                        > Dacian Predavenses

                        *****GK: What you need to demonstrate is the
                        preponderance of Geto-Thracian hydronyms and toponyms
                        in Romania+Moldavia if you wish to argue continuity,
                        You've never been able to do this.****

                        >etc. etc. etc.
                        > Show him where he is wrong:-)

                        *****GK: You've been arguing your point for well over
                        a year. I'm not sure how many (if any)of your examples
                        have been accepted as correct. It seems to me that the
                        overwhelming majority of your arguments have been
                        thoroughly refuted.******


                        __________________________________________________
                        Do you Yahoo!?
                        Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
                        http://platinum.yahoo.com
                      • alex_lycos
                        ... From: george knysh To: Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dacian ... You said
                        Message 11 of 19 , Mar 22, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: "george knysh" <gknysh@...>
                          To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
                          Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 12:24 AM
                          Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dacian

                          > *****GK: What you need to demonstrate is the
                          > preponderance of Geto-Thracian hydronyms and toponyms
                          > in Romania+Moldavia if you wish to argue continuity,
                          > You've never been able to do this.****

                          You said the magic word: Moldova It should be enough just only one, no
                          more:-)
                          BTW which Moldova you mean now? The part of Rom. which is called Moldova
                          or the part incorporated for a time by Russia in its URSS and now being
                          the Moldavian Republic?

                          > *****GK: You've been arguing your point for well over
                          > a year. I'm not sure how many (if any)of your examples
                          > have been accepted as correct. It seems to me that the
                          > overwhelming majority of your arguments have been
                          > thoroughly refuted.******
                          >
                          Yes you are right. I was arguing for an year and every time I found more
                          argument. The arguments have been refuted? Which one? So far I remember
                          there have been discussion just regarding the opinions of Rom. words
                          versus Latin words, but nothing regarding the arguments like
                          Preda/Predavenses, Timoc/Timacenses & co. As I spoke about these there
                          was always silence and nothing more, no discussion about.
                        • Piotr Gasiorowski
                          ... From: alex_lycos To: Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 8:32 AM Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dacian ... Alex, I ve
                          Message 12 of 19 , Mar 23, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
                            To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 8:32 AM
                            Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dacian


                            > ... but nothing regarding the arguments like Preda/Predavenses, Timoc/Timacenses & co. As I spoke about these there was always silence and nothing more, no discussion about.

                            Alex,

                            I've always tried to respond to your arguments as fully as humanly possible, but sometimes I've been too busy to deal with every single query, especially those that seemed to be of marginal interest. It's rather dishonest of you to say that the discussion has been restricted to Latin/Romance question, since I've tackled countless Thracian and Dacian-related questions as well, even those raised for the umpteenth time.

                            Piotr
                          • alex_lycos
                            ... From: Piotr Gasiorowski ... possible, but sometimes I ve been too busy to deal with every single query, especially those
                            Message 13 of 19 , Mar 23, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
                              >
                              > I've always tried to respond to your arguments as fully as humanly
                              possible, but sometimes I've been too busy to deal with every single
                              query, especially those that seemed to be of marginal interest. It's
                              rather dishonest of you to say that the discussion has been restricted
                              to Latin/Romance question, since I've tackled countless Thracian and
                              Dacian-related questions as well, even those raised for the umpteenth
                              time
                              >
                              > Piotr


                              You are right Piotr, I appreciated anyhow your position even then when I
                              did not liked what you say. And it is true, it is not so honest from me
                              to say our discussion have been just on Latin/Romanian; rather I should
                              have to say that the ideas advanced by me which made a lot of disscusion
                              have been on the edge of this Latin-Romanian issue.

                              Alex
                            • george knysh
                              ... *****GK: What exactly is magic about this Germanic-rooted word?****** ... *****GK: The latter.****** __________________________________________________ Do
                              Message 14 of 19 , Mar 23, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- alex_lycos <altamix@...> wrote:
                                > ----- Original Message -----
                                > From: "george knysh" <gknysh@...>
                                > To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
                                > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 12:24 AM
                                > Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dacian
                                >
                                > > GK: What you need to demonstrate is the
                                > > preponderance of Geto-Thracian hydronyms and
                                > toponyms
                                > > in Romania+Moldavia if you wish to argue
                                > continuity,
                                > > You've never been able to do this.
                                >
                                > You said the magic word: Moldova It should be enough
                                > just only one, no
                                > more:-)

                                *****GK: What exactly is magic about this
                                Germanic-rooted word?******

                                > BTW which Moldova you mean now? The part of Rom.
                                > which is called Moldova
                                > or the part incorporated for a time by Russia in its
                                > URSS and now being
                                > the Moldavian Republic?

                                *****GK: The latter.******


                                __________________________________________________
                                Do you Yahoo!?
                                Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
                                http://platinum.yahoo.com
                              • alex_lycos
                                ... OK, I will see about this region in the future.. What should be Germanic rooted there in the root? The actually accepted etymology of Moldova point to
                                Message 15 of 19 , Mar 23, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  >
                                  > *****GK: What exactly is magic about this
                                  > Germanic-rooted word?******

                                  OK, I will see about this region in the future.. What should be Germanic
                                  rooted there in the root?
                                  The actually accepted etymology of Moldova point to Slavic not to
                                  Germanic.

                                  alex
                                • Vassil Karloukovski
                                  ... I think the Slavic name was/is Dorostol . Nowadays the metropolian of this region still has the title of mitropolit Dorostolsko- Chervenski . The other
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Mar 24, 2003
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex_lycos" <altamix@l...> wrote:

                                    > -there is Rom. Name Drâstor for ancient Durostorum , called by Slavs
                                    > "Silistra"


                                    I think the Slavic name was/is 'Dorostol'. Nowadays the metropolian
                                    of this region still has the title of "mitropolit Dorostolsko-
                                    Chervenski". The other medieval name of the Latin
                                    Durostorum, 'Dr&st&r' ('Dristra'), is certainly proto-Bulgarian. It
                                    occurs as a personal name as well - a local governor under tsar
                                    Simeon, called Drist&r, is mentioned in the 904 AD inscription from
                                    New Philadephia near Thessaloniki and in one church text of that
                                    period.


                                    Regards,
                                    Vassil
                                  • alex_lycos
                                    ... Proto-Bulgarian? It seems something is wrong here. Accepting the proto-bulgarians took it from the inhabitants of the region , it still remains a loan but
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Mar 24, 2003
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Vassil Karloukovski wrote:
                                      > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex_lycos" <altamix@l...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      >> -there is Rom. Name Drâstor for ancient Durostorum , called by Slavs
                                      >> "Silistra"
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > I think the Slavic name was/is 'Dorostol'. Nowadays the metropolian
                                      > of this region still has the title of "mitropolit Dorostolsko-
                                      > Chervenski". The other medieval name of the Latin
                                      > Durostorum, 'Dr&st&r' ('Dristra'), is certainly proto-Bulgarian. It
                                      > occurs as a personal name as well - a local governor under tsar
                                      > Simeon, called Drist&r, is mentioned in the 904 AD inscription from
                                      > New Philadephia near Thessaloniki and in one church text of that
                                      > period
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Regards,
                                      > Vassil

                                      Proto-Bulgarian? It seems something is wrong here. Accepting the
                                      proto-bulgarians took it from the inhabitants of the region , it still
                                      remains a loan but not an word of "proto-bulgarian" origin. In fact this
                                      word is not thracian at all or Dacian but it is assumed to be a celtic
                                      one since the name should be celtic.
                                      If I understand your point of view, the old form Durostorum should be
                                      phoneticaly modified by proto-bulgars/slavs and just after this time the
                                      word could arrive to valahians?
                                      Now I ask myself which form should be the slavic one since in Rom. are
                                      both forms used? The Dârstor or Drâstor?
                                    • V. Karloukovski
                                      ... OK, if you say it is Celtic and not Latin. It doesn t matter in this case. I should have used the neutral Roman Durostorum . The form Dr&st&r is
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Apr 2, 2003
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex_lycos" <altamix@l...> wrote:
                                        > Vassil Karloukovski wrote:

                                        > > I think the Slavic name was/is 'Dorostol'. Nowadays the
                                        > > metropolian of this region still has the title of "mitropolit
                                        > > Dorostolsko-Chervenski". The other medieval name of the Latin
                                        > > Durostorum, 'Dr&st&r' ('Dristra'), is certainly proto-Bulgarian.
                                        > > It occurs as a personal name as well - a local governor under
                                        > > tsar Simeon, called Drist&r, is mentioned in the 904 AD
                                        > > inscription from New Philadephia near Thessaloniki and in one
                                        > > church text of that period

                                        > Proto-Bulgarian? It seems something is wrong here. Accepting the
                                        > proto-bulgarians took it from the inhabitants of the region ,
                                        > it still remains a loan but not an word of "proto-bulgarian"
                                        > origin. In fact this word is not thracian at all or Dacian but
                                        > it is assumed to be a celtic one since the name should be celtic.


                                        OK, if you say it is Celtic and not Latin. It doesn't matter in this
                                        case. I should have used the neutral 'Roman Durostorum'. The
                                        form 'Dr&st&r' is attested for the X-XI c. and at this time the town
                                        was one main centres of Bulgaria - it was the seat of the
                                        patriarchate in the X c. At the beginning of the XI c. it is
                                        mentioned in the second chrysobul of Basil II concerning the
                                        reorganisation of the Bulg. church. Anna Comnena has 'Dristra' in the
                                        Alexiad.

                                        > If I understand your point of view, the old form Durostorum should
                                        > be phoneticaly modified by proto-bulgars/slavs and just after
                                        > this time the word could arrive to valahians?


                                        'Durostorum' was modified as 'Dr&st&r' by the proto-Bulgarians.
                                        Apparently, it meant something, was re-etymologised - the attested
                                        personal name 'Drist&r' points to that. I don't know how the name
                                        developed in Vlachian/Romanian.

                                        > Now I ask myself which form should be the slavic one since in
                                        > Rom. are both forms used? The Dârstor or Drâstor?


                                        'Dorostol', I told you. Still preserved in church use.


                                        Regards,
                                        Vassil
                                      • alex_lycos
                                        ... In this case the Dârstor and Drâstor are Romanians both? I guess just Dârstor is the Romanian form The drâstor looks like the metathesised one.
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Apr 2, 2003
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          V. Karloukovski wrote:
                                          >> Now I ask myself which form should be the slavic one since in
                                          >> Rom. are both forms used? The Dârstor or Drâstor?
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > 'Dorostol', I told you. Still preserved in church use
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Regards,
                                          > Vassil

                                          In this case the Dârstor and Drâstor are Romanians both? I guess just
                                          "Dârstor" is the Romanian form The "drâstor" looks like the metathesised
                                          one.
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.