Re: Daci

--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: tgpedersen
> To: cybalist@...
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 4:13 PM
> Subject: [tied] Re: Daci
>
>
>
> > Yes, of course, it is a banal and obvious metaphor. That's why I

limited myself to toponyms. (BTW does Polish have any toponyms based
on gl/e,bina?)

>
> All the deeps of the Baltic Sea are called <gl/e,bia> (e.g.

<Gl/e,bia Bornholmska, G. Gdan'ska, G. Gotlandzka>), which is a
variant of <gl/e,bina>.

>
>
> > I assume -eto- is cognate with Latin -ita-, Germanic -T-

(<depth>)?

>
> No, it isn't; they only look similar. The respective PIE prototypes

are *-et-o- and *-i-tah2-. Germanic de-adjectival abstracts have the
latter (> *-iþo: '-th' [f.]); Latin uses an extended form of the
same: *-i-tah2-t- > -ita:-t-.

>
> Piotr

Of course, I should have told myself. Germanic -i- doesn't match PIE -
e- here. But is *-et-o- cognate with Bulgarian -ët then, so that
<debët> is "*the* deep" (Danish <dybet>)?
Parallel example: Swedish <världen>, Danish <verden> "the world", but
Swedish <en värld>, Danish <en verden>, uncorrect back-formation
from "the world", more frequent since there's only one of them, as
with "the deep".

Torsten