From: Piotr Gasiorowski
> Elisabeth : Hungarian Erzsebetas -(i)us
> Balthasar : Hg. Boldizsar
> Blasius (Blaise) : Hg. Balazs
> Eusebius : Hg. O"zseb
> Rose : Hg. Rozsa Cz. Rozâ, Roza Pol. Ro:z.a
> Moses : Hg. Mo:zes Cz. Mojz^is^ Pol. Mojz.esz
> Sigmund: Hg. Zsigmond
> Esauh: Hg. E:zsau
> This s > z > z^ occurs in Hungarian and influenced other languages?
> Occurs in some Germanic dialect? Some Italian dialect?
> In Polish, Czech and Hungrian the ending -(i)us appears sometimes
> or -(i)us^. Maybe orthographical variations.Theresa /Tereza/, Rosa
> -s->-z- is typical of Western Latin languages, cf.
> /Roza/in early
> Joao SL
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 7:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [tied] s > Hungarian zs, Polish z., Czech z^
> > On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 19:16:19 +0100, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
> > <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> > >The replacement of /s, z/ by Hungarian s, zs /S, Z/ is the rule
> loanwords (iskola <-- schola,), now the pattern is different(szemeszter,
> zoológia). The reason must be sought in early Hungarian phonetics --a
> subject I know little about.his
> > That's what I always imagined, but apparently this is not so. In
> > excellent treatment of the "Historical Phonology of the UralicLanguages",
> > Languages", Pekka Sammallahti (in: Sinor, ed. "The Uralic
> > 1988) makes it quite clear that PUgr. *s > Hung /s/ (<sz>), whileexception is
> > Hung. /S/ (<s>) derives from PUgr. *c^. The one, minor,
> > *sk > *s^.
> > There must be some other reason, but I can't imagine what it'd be
> > (some Southern German orthographical oddity?).
> > =======================
> > Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> > mcv@...