Re: [tied] a help for Piotr

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:06 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] a help for Piotr


> I've found Duridanov's description, at
> http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/thrac/index.html ,
including the
> 23 Thracian words, and a toponymic description by Georgiev,
at
> http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/vg/vg.html . However,
I am none
> the wiser as to the identity of the words illustrating 'But
these
> rules,
> unchanged gives too the same words from the normal worsd who
are
> considered to be latin AND the dacian and thracian words'.
What are
> these words?

[Moeller] I have a bad sensation that I cannot so well to
explain very clear what I think. In this case the chain of
toughtst was as fallow:

there is a radical PIE . there is a word from substratum in
romania. There is a rule which shows how the word from
substratum evolued from PIE.
then we have an word in romanian a word X supposed to come
from a latin word Y.
For the latin word Y is too a PIE-radical.
So, now I take the PIE radical for latin Y and aply the rule
from the word from substrate. To see if I get the romanian
word which is supposed to come from latin.
And here was my question. If I get the word, then, what
then?What happen with all latin stuff?But worse, what happen
to romanistic at all?