Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>>
>> P.S. what do you have against *(s)kemb-
>
> For starters, I doubt it exists. Pokorny's IEW lists a root *(s)kamb-
> "krümmen, biegen". Only three of the forms given there can be
> derived from a variant *skemb-, namely Norwegian hempa
> "Kleiderstrippe, Schlinge, Henkel", Swedish skimpa "hüpfen, tanzen"
> and OHG scimpfen "schimpfen". All the others come from *(s)kamb-,
> *(s)komb- or *(s)km.b-.
>
> Now what is more likely: that Romanian schimba "change, exchange" is
> related to the fellow Romance words Ita. scambiare, Fr. échanger, with
> exactly the same meaning, or that it's cognate with three obscure
> Germanic words meaning "rag", "to hop, to dance" and "to ridicule"?
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...
>
1) seen trough the meaning of the word the rational person must say , it
is related to meaning of Romance but this is no obligation that is
derived from Latin.
2)I very doubt about the connection which is made by Pokorny here. If
one think right, the change as "operatio" should have preceded the
buy/sell operations in the society, thus somewhere the words should be
related here, one deriving from another, my opinion from change > sell.
I am thinking not at "schimpfen" anmd "krumm" which obviously have
nothing to do with "change" but at kaufen, Slavic "kupati", Rom.
"cumpar", I am thinking at "expensive" which is "scump" in Rom. and
"skupo" in some Slavic language. Please consider that I did not verifiey
anything until now but it seems logical that the change of the goods to
have been before sell/buy, and that there should be a connection.
If you allow me, I should like to study a bit this aspect and the words
I think it could fit together since I am very sceptical as seeing German
"kaufen" as a loan from "caupo". I assume there has been an "kup-" if
not a *kumb-", with Slavic "ku(~)p-" ( from German ?). It seems a
interesting path, but it can be it is an empty one.
Alex
Alex