From: Richard Wordingham
> Richard Wordingham wrote:Romanian
> > What does Latin *_tit(t)ia_ explain? If the "i" is short, that
> > would give Italian *_teza_ (whereas the standard language has
> > colloquial _tetta_, consistent with Latin *_tit(t)a_) and
> > *_teazã_, while long "i" would yield Italian *_tizza_ andRomanian
> > *_tzitã_. Still no "â"!Rom.
> It explains nothing. The word is reconstructed for explaining the
> "TâTã". Unfortunately in DEX there is no marque for shorth orlength of
> the Latin vowel, thus I canot tell you about what the peoplethought
> about as they tried to reconstruct the Latin word.( lat. > *titia)following
> > Can we rule out a German origin for Estonian "tis"?
> In my Germ. Etym. Dict. the German word "Zize" is given with
> cognates:That looks too good to be true. Of course, it violates the root
> Armenian "tit" (Mutterbrust)
> Greek " titthe" (Brustwarze, Muterbrust)There's a nice little family here: _títtHe:_ 'teat, nurse';
> It seems the Alb. and Rom. words are unknown and the Italian wordis too
> unknown. I mean, there is no reference about them; maybe they areThat's what my etymological dictionary (Onions) says for Italian and
> considered as being loans from Germanic.
> In the Germanic languages the cognates are ( I guess ) well known:Middle Swedish "tiss" would explain Estonian "tis". What explains
> Dutch "tit", Old. Eng. "titt", Schwed. Mdl. " tiss, titt".
> In Rom. Lang the word is used for everything wich presentsan "appendix"
> á la "tit of the cow". This appendix, this prolongation isdescribed as
> "TâTã" too. Can it be the word has something with the fact theorgan (
> by humans something later) has the prolongued form?If you mean the application to both humans and cows, it's quite
> I don't know which is the protoslavic form for "heart" but inSerbian I
> remember the word is "cârce" where "c"= "T"Pokorny quotes the Serbian as _srce_. I'm not sure about the Proto-