Re: [tied] kuningas <-> knyaz

--- In cybalist@..., "Sergejus Tarasovas" <S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> > Point taken. Still, the Old Prussian form is rather different

from

> the East Baltic one (and presumably represents an independent loan,
> its form clearly indicating mediaeval German as the source).
>
> Consider also Lith. dialectal (Samog.) ku`negas, which also
> complicates matters.
>
> > Since the borrowing of *kuningaz into Finnish and Proto-Slavic

must

> have occurred very early, an early cultural borrowing into East
> Baltic is a priori likely as well and I wouldn't rule it out too
> hastily. Note that the "prince" word, like other titles, is
> particularly prone to phonetic simplification. In Germanic, the
> suffix -ing- is also common and does not normally cause or undergo
> dissimilation EXCEPT in this very word (German König < kunig ~
> chuning, English king < cyning, Norwegian konge < konungr).
> >
>
> Both versions has the right to exist. As a specialist, would you
> comment on the accentuational characteristics of the Proto-Germanic
> and mediaeval German words? Interestingly enough, the Slavic and
> Baltic accents differ for that lexeme: Late Proto-Slavic *kUne,'Zi
> (probably, an old accute sress on e,), but Lith. ku`nigas (an
> oxytone, pl. kunigai~), Latv. ku`ngs (the Prussian form, according

to

> Maz^iulis, also had the first syllable stressed).
> On the other hand, suffix -ing- is always stressed (historically,
> acute-stressed) in Lithuanian (eg., pelni`ngas 'profitable'). I am
> beginning to think that the following scenario is not impossible:
> - Proto-Balts loan this word from Germanic languages (probably at

the

> beginning of our era) and place the stress on the as-if-native -ing-

.

> - Proto-Slavs obtain this word from Proto-Balts, rendering the

Baltic

> stress
> - after the German waves poured into Baltia in the 12th c., the

word

> was re-borrowed, overriding the older form.
>
> Sergei

At what time did Germanic acquire its stress on the first syllable,
and what are the reasons for believing in just that date? There's
another thing that puzzled me, which is Finnish Helsinki nom.,
Helsingin gen. tec. Helsiki is a Germanic loanword (cf
Helsingør/Helsingborg and the village Helsinge in Denmark). It looks
like someone did a Verner on it, but that's not the explanation the
Finno-Ugricists come up with? Did Finnish have variable stress when
it was borrowed? Did Germanic then?

Torsten