--- In cybalist@..., Andrei Markine <andrey@...> wrote:
> >Ethnonym Prussian, whatever be it's origin ( < Baltic hydronym
> >*Pru:sa 'spattering, jetting' or some balticized German
> >toponym/ethnonym, cf. Frisia) is usually believed to be a rather
late
> >one - there's a linguistic evidence (eg, Slavic <prusy> rather than
> ><*prysy>) that it could have hardly existed before ca. VII c.
> >
> >Sergei
>
>
> Could it be a very early one - with later change *au > u ?
>
> Andrei
(First of all, of course '...Slavic *prusi2 rather than *prysi2...'.)
Rather not.
1. Lithuanian (including south-western dialects whose speakers
constantly keeped in touch with Prussians and were even influenced by
the Prussian language) has <pru_'sai> (<*pru:s- rather than **praus-,
the original intonation being disputed). au/u: is a normal _ablaut_
in Baltic, but _phonetic_ development *au > *u: is impossible in
Baltic.
2. Early Slavic **prAusAi would yield Slavic N. pl. **pruxi2, G. pl.
**pruxU > (Standard) Old Russian N. pl. **prus'i, G. pl. **pruxU (and
probably Polish **pruszy, **pruch) - exactly what we don't have in
genetive and other cases with 'non-palatalizing' endings. Of course,
later levelling out of paradigm can not be ruled out.
Sergei