> alex_lycos wrote:
> Also note that "galben" is today's standard form
> But there still exist these variants: "galbin", "galbãn"
> and "galbîn" /galbIn/. The most frequent both in older
> Romanian and in various contemporary dialects thereof
> is "galbãn" (whose plural, however, is "galbeni")
there is no substantiv "galben" for speaking about its plural form. The
meanign "money" in the medieval time should be the only one you can
think about. In so far the plural form pretty depends on substantiv:
pagini galbene, pepeni galbeni
>> I speak about "galbeazã" one of the words which is not
>> derivable from Latin "galbinus"
> Rather an assimilation <yellow>+<the Albanian word>
> Used in the context of certain animal diseases, esp. of
> sheep, exclusively (Fascicola hepatica & Dicrocelium
> dentriticum; entero-parasytes). The vast majority of the
> Rum. native speakers have to look "galbeaza" in the
> dictionary in order to get its meaning
YOu see? That is that when someone lives just in the city:)) Ask every
peasant and he will tell you what galbeaza ist. And what galbejit
>> And indeed there is the Albanian word. It is "gëlbazë"
>> and "gelbazet"
> Are you sure it isn't rather spelled _këlbazë_?
There are both forms in Albanian and Romanian. Since both consonants are
velar "k" & "g" they are in some cases confounded when not followed by
"i" or "i". It seems the form with "k" is the confounded one. The "kalb"
has no family neither in albanian nor in romanian.
The only one should be "chel" given by DEX as being Turkish "kel" =
bald-head whit its derivative "chelie"= baldness.
We do not have to confound the both diseases. One is to become
green/yellow because of hepatitis and one is to loos your hair because
of "chelbe ".
I don't know why should be the Turkish "kel" when there is the substrate
word "chelbe"= disease which is characterised trough loosing the hair.
The Rom. verb is "a chelboSi" or the new one "a cheli". I thought abut G
ermanic "kahl" with the same meaning. Germanic "Kahl" ( Kahlkopf),
english "callow", dutch " kaal" is not from Latin "calvus" but in the
same family with balto-slavic "golyj", and I will say, with Romanian
"chel". If the Romanian "gol"= empty, naked is not a loan from Slavic,
then it should belong in this family too