Re: [tied] Rum. prefix în- [Re: Androphobia]

On Fri, 30 May 2003 00:15:21 +0200, alex <alxmoeller@...>
wrote:

>Right. And that means , under the assumtion they once negated with "in-"
>as in Latin, they replaced "everywherwe" the "in" with the slavic "ne-".
>In all dialects. What one can understand here? Have they been aware of
>the particle "in" as negative particle at that time

Of course they were aware of the difference between the negative
particle and the preposition/preverb.

>and replaced (why?) it with Slavic ?

First Slavic compounds with ne- were borrowed (nevoie, etc.), then ne-
was added to native words (ne-drept). It's what happens in a
situation of bilingualism.

>> You have apparently been looking in Pokorny's indogermanisches
>> etymologisches Wörterbuch, without understanding what it says (under
>> *n.-):
>
>Miguel, is a standard to write with point thie circle there under *n ?

Yes.

>> "im Bsl. durchaus durch ne- verdrängt; über ksl. ne-jeN-vêrI
>> ,ungläublig', ne-jeN-sytU ,unersattlich = Pelikan' s. Berneker 429"
>
>ksl. in Baltic when the Balts became very late chrsits =

What are you babbling? ksl. is Kirchenslavisch. Not Baltic.

>> What Pokorny says is that *n.- does not occur in Balto-Slavic anymore,
>> a n d h a s b e e n r e p l a c e d b y n e - .
>> The regular outcome of *n.- in Slavic (*jeN-) does perhaps (more
>> details in Berneker) occur in the words ne-jeN-vêrI, ne-jeN-sytU.
>
>1)Yes, that is what he means. the *n was replaced by ne via OCS.

Can't you read? What he says is that *n. was replaced
e v e r y w h e r e i n B a l t i c a n d S l a v i c b y
n e - .

>And
>OCS is to find in Balcan not in North Russian.

OCS = aksl. Church Slavonic (ksl.) sure is found in Russia.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...