Re: [tied] das Wort

--- In cybalist@..., Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> C.D. Buck says:
> "Rum. <vorbi>, with sb. <vorbã> 'saying, talk', prob. a loanword of
> uncertain source. Densusianu 1.74 (not fr. Lat. <verbum>). Tiktin
> 1771 (fr. Slavic). Diculescu, Z. rom. Ph. 41.427 (fr. Gmc.)."
>
> I don't have any other sources, and I haven't given the matter any
> thought. I always kind of assumed it was from verbum, but the
> expected Romanian form would have been, if I'm not mistaken,
> *varbã, *a vãrbi (from the collective <verba> -> *vierba
> (diphthongisation) -> *viearba (breaking) -> *viarba
> (simplification) -> *varbã (after labial)).

Correct.

> Whether a > o in this context is really such an unsurmountable
> obstacle, I don't know.

The phenomenon a > o in Balkan Romance is usually viewed as a sign
of Slavic intermediate (as in Aluta > Olt, calendae > colinda --
the latter is surely not inherited directly from Latin as -l- > -r-
between vowels in Romanian; the inherited word lives in some parts
of the Romanian speaking area, "cãrindã"). Nevertheless, some people
think that could also be a late Balkan Latin conditioned evolution,
as for instance one has attested forms in CIL III with "o" instead
of "a" (like Troianus for Traianus). Not being attested in a solid
bunch of safe inherited Latin words, the issue is very doubtful.
OTOH, the *varbã > vorba should have taken place at a different
timing than late Latin, that is after splitting of the 4 Romanian
dialects. So it would be safer to assume "vorbã" as Slavic loanword.

> What's the Aromanian form, if any?

There is no Aromanian equivalent of "vorbesc/vorba" from the same
root, they say <zburãsc> for "(I) speak", another key sign that the
term is neither inherited nor substrate.

Regards,
Marius Iacomi