Re: [tied] Rim-?

--- In cybalist@..., Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:18:04 +0200, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
> <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> >There was also an Old Church Slavic variant with <u>: <rumU,

rumIsk-> (cf. OHG Ro:ma/Ru:ma,

> >Gothic Ru:ma, Arabic Ru:m 'Byzantium' for a similar treatment of

the vowel). This <rum->

> >can't be a very old loan, for otherwise foreign *u: would have

yielded OCS <y>, so it was

> >probably picked up somewhere in the Balkans. The form *rimU (OCS

rimU, Russian Rim,

> >Polish Rzym, Czech R^ím, etc.) must come from the same or similar

direction as Polish

> ><krzyz*> 'cross' (virtual *kriz^I), ultimately from <crucem> via

some north Romance dialect

> >and I suppose Bavarian (Old Bavarian <kruzi>) and/or East Central

German (cf. also Polish z*yd,

> >Hungarian zsidó 'Jew' (ultimately from <iu:daeum>). There must be

a detailed solution waiting

> >to be found somewhere (I know of an article by Stieber that

discusses these words, but my

> >access to library resources is limited at the moment). I can only

speculate that something

> >like dialectal *ru:m-isk- 'Roman' became *rümisch ~ *rimisch (cf.

jiddisch), was borrowed

> >into Slavic as *rim-Isk- and yielded *rim- as a back-formation. I

wish I knew more about

> >German historical dialectology.
>
> Me too. How old is the Umlaut in words like <römisch>, and is it

old

> enough to explain Common Slavic *<rimU>? Maybe we should rather

look

> at some Balkan/Pannonian Romance source (cf. Albanian

<kryq> "cross").

I believe there was no Bavarian until 500-800 CE? The Slavs would
have heard of Rome before that?

Torsten