--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> On 2008-01-22 20:49, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > Based on this, this Weiss asserts, more or less, that Seneca Sr.
> > cannot understand well the Latin vocabulary with all its Slang
> > nuances; so Seneca Sr. would need to invoke an independant
witness or
> > to quote an additional text in order to convince Weiss that he
well
> > understand his own native language
> >
> > I told you that "Herodotus syndrom" (you remember: "that guy that
> > told us some false stories" based on some scholars) is very
spread in
> > our days, everywhere...
> Be my guest, Alex, but you surely realise that by insisting that
> <salapu:tium> has something to do with <praepu:tium> and therefore
with
> the male generative organ you subscribe the opinion that a Latin
word
> like *pu:t-X- 'penis' existed ca. 2000 years ago. OK, you're
playing
> into my hand.
> Piotr
I don't have 'fix ideas' Piotr :
1. But I feel obliged to tell you once again:
that 'putsa' and 'fuck' fits perfectly phonetically (*puk^-) and
semantically ('penis' and 'to fuck'), with or without Albanian puth
(that I still think that belongs here too):
-> everybody that 'can see this' (and I was glad that you really
saw 'fuck' as belonging to *puk^- too) : should be 'at least' shocked
about such a strong similarity
But on the other hand we need to investigate all the paths..
2. When "I found" 'salapu:tium' that "is new" for me I was somehow
shocked too:
Because this 'salapu:tium' used in the context: "di magni,
salaputium disertum!" cannot have other meaning but that one of
Romanian 'putsoi' literally 'a man with a small penis', but having
the meaning "an imature boy/ a man not mature enough /a man not
realized at all/ a 'nobody'"
http://dexonline.ro/search.php?cuv=pu%C5%A3oi&source=12
(Note again that putsa means 'small penis' not any kind of 'penis')
Coming back to salapu:tium
4 admirans ait haec manusque tollens:
(admiring and lifing his hands, said this:)
5 "di magni, salaputium disertum!"
("Good Heavens, what an eloquent little man!")
The above english translation cannot reproduce any kind of humour
But the resulted Romanian translation:
"DOAMNE, CE PUTsOI DEShTEPT!" , really make me laugh
so the humor is generated by the constrast between PUTsOI "an
imature boy/a 'small penis' guy" versus DEShTEPT (adj.) 'eloquent,
clever'
I cannot understand what is 'the contribution' of "sala-" (I
suspect sala- 'joke' as in 'sale nigri delectari (HOR.)'
'to like black jokes' and that of "pu:tium" in this composed word ...
but I'm sure that globally the final joke was based on the meaning
of 'putsoi' there, as I translated it above
So my feeling is that Weiss not being a native speaker of /putsa/
or of /pu:tium/ couldn't find the right nuance, based on all I show
you above, but I will read his article first of all.
Coming back now, to Romanian putsa you still NEED to find FIRST the
PIE etymology of the main-word present in Latin pu:t-ium and
especially to show why that PIE formation generated a form in -ea in
the supposed *pu:tea
Because only pu:tium (that really existed around 0-200 AC) cannot
gives Romanian putsa
Till then you are not at 'a zero-level' with your etymology, for
sure, but you are faraway to be safe
AND
In the opposite direction /putsa/ and /fuck/ fit perfectly as
derived forms of the root *puk^-, you can like this or not, but you
cannot ignore this.
II.
> P.S. You criticise Weiss without having read him, which is not
quite
> fair. If you'd like to see the article, let me know. I've got an
> electronic copy and can share it with you. -- P.
I criticise only the posted quotation (after I read it carefully
several times, and after it really makes me nervous): I strictly
accused Weiss about his position regarding Seneca Sr. capabilities to
understand the slang language of Rome
Seneca the Elder is the persons that wrote things like:
-----------------------------------------------------------
It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare;
it is because we do not dare that they are difficult.
Let us drink, for we must die.
Most powerful is he who has himself in his own power
A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand.
We are born one way, we die in many (ways).
aut in his aut cum his
-> either [only] Among these or With these
------------------------------------------------------------
So I think that nobody can allow such a person to be treated as "the
guy of Cordoba that cannot understand the 'old' slang language of
Rome" : and this is not my wrong interpretation regarding what Weiss
wrote...is really what he did.
Marius
P.S. : If you could send me the article, I would read it for sure.
Thanks in advance.