Re: a help for Piotr

From: George S t a n a
Message: 15010
Date: 2002-09-03

>[Moeller] hmmm.. looooooool.. I could not help but I laugh
>now. Mr. Vinereanu say that The Form of certainly romanian
>words are MORE closely to sanscrit forms as to latin forms.

Sorry, Alex, he doesn't say that:

<<Nu este o exagerare sa spunem ca cel putin in anumite privinte
Romana se apropie de Sanscrita la fel de mult ca si de Latina.>>

<<There is no exaggeration for us to say that, at least from certain
points of view, the Romanian language is as close to Sanskrit
as to Latin.>>

>Pavimentum. It is a wonderfull example. The romanized
>population, as the salvs camme, they ran away in the
>mountains, they forgot averything , even the word for "earth"
>but they said. "OK once in our lifes we have seen a pavage=
>pavimentum" so we do not forget it never ever. This will be
>from now our word for "earth".That is grotesque, sorry :-((

But pay heed to the initial meanings of it ("festgestampfte
Erde + Estrich", remember? :)

>And about terra I should like to
>tell you about the composed word Tara-bostes

Oh, c'mon, Alex, you're better than that! What on earth
should Jordanes's "tarabostes" (or thorabostes or strabostes)
have in common with "terra" (or Rum. "tzara" for that matter)?

>You say thracian "Zalmos"= helmet.

Pardon? Who said that? Is that for sure? Have "Zamol-" and "zemelen-"
meanwhile been discarded, along with "Zelmo- & -zelmis"? :-)

>Have you thought that Zal is not a helmet but, it means "God"?

How come?

>Do you ever tought about Zal + mos=zalmos could be in
>romanian = Zãul Mosh=

Yeah, sure. :)

>The rumanians linguists argue here with the "big culture and prestige"
>for learning latin. This is why the thracian romanized.

This is not true. And this is even tantamount to offending
all those who've practised no-nonsense studying of all that
Thracian-Dacian stuff.

>a. moelller