Re: for Richard

--- In cybalist@..., alexmoeller@... wrote:

This does not appear to be related to illustrating the assertion
that 'these rules, unchanged gives too the same words from the normal
worsd who are considered to be latin AND the dacian and thracian
words'.

I have probably not addressed all the points you were trying to
make. Your posting was too vague for me to hope to correctly guess
what you were thinking. Please check your postings before you send
them. Remember Murphy's law - if something can go wrong, it will go
wrong.

> > http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/vg/vg.html .
>
> Richard, you have a way to explain therwe at Georgiev. This is
> the same way as by Decev and Duridanov.
> There is a very practic and understable page, where you can
> see a lot.
> Now as you seen it, please take a Map of Dacia and Thracia,
> and take please the names from teh dacian tribes and cities
> and other toponims by Ptolemeus.

I presume are referring to the map saved as
http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/vg/vg_map1.jpg

Is there any reason not to use the map at
http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/thrac/thrac_8.html ; this map is
much easier to read.

I do not have Ptolemy's list.

> You will be surprised that you do not find almost nothing from
> what is there by Georgiev.

I think you mean, 'You will be surprised that you cannot find these
toponyms in the account by Georgiev.' When you refer to Georgiev, do
you just mean http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/vg/vg.html ?

For my convenience, I only give the directory and filename in URL's
within http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat .

How were the place names obtained for Georgiev's analysis? They
cannot be the modern place names, for we are told that 'Pulpudeva' is
now 'Plodiv', but the map shows 'Pulpudeva'.

If the map shows the ancient names corresponding to modern place
names, or otherwise having their locations securely attested, I would
not be at all surprised that places on Ptolemy's list cannot be found.

> He gives there some example like:

Again, please read your postings before you send them. Three Greek
words disappeared from the text below (I have restored them) and were
turned into attachments!

> Examples:
>
> IE e > D.-M. ie:
> a Dacian tribe is named [Biessoi], but a Thracian one [Bessoi].
> Dacian PN Diegis from IE dhegwwh-.
The original on the net reads in our scheme dHegWwh-. I presume it's
garbled from dHegWH-.
> Dacian river name [Ierasos] from IE *erðs-.
The IE root has been garbled here. The ð is a typographical error
for a schwa. The Cybalist spelling would be 'h1er&s-'. It looks
like one of many different weak grades the root indexed as 'eres'
number 2 at http://flaez.ch/cgi-bin/pok.pl . This weak grade is
attested in Greek ap-eráo:.
> Dacian word dielina 'Bilsenkraut' from IE *dhel-.
>
> (Attention Piotr with Iepa in the greek word.)
Don't bother - Alex doesn't know, or has forgotten, the letter rho
and has assumed that it is a 'p'. Easily done, even by a Georgian
(European, not American) linguist transliterating the Russian
for 'Armenian' in the references of a document he has written in
English.

> Diegis is put alone there without to remember about Dierna
> which alternate with Tierna most probably because greek and
> latins did not have had the tz.

I don't have the Dacian word list, so I can't comment on his
selection. But as Greek zeta may have been /dz/, this does not
convince me.

> But this example with Biessoi and Bessoi how strong can it be?

On its own, it looks fairly weak. The inference presumably is that
the tribe is split between the Dacians and Thracians. If the
Thracian is original, then it implies that the Dacian sound change e
> ie is recent. If the Dacian is original, it suggest that Thracian
did not have 'ie' .

> Take a look at the name of the dacian (not thracian) tribes:
>
> Predavensii, Potulatensii, Rhatacensii,Burudensii, Caucoensii,
> Arpii (Carpii), Albocensii, Saldensii, Picensii, Cotensii,
> Sensii,Tricornesii, Pricensii

What language is this list taken from? The ending -ensii looks like
a garbled form of the Latin suffix -enses (singular -ensis), which
appears in the names of many minor tribes.

What are you expecting me to do? Speculate on a connection between
Alboca and Albocenses or between Bruda or Buridava and Burudenses?

> Take a look at the dava-s ( some are danas, some are dauas,
> some are davas, it seems is not really sure which is the
> really sufix if a sufix. They are to find with the form deva,
> daba, dama too)
>
> Acidava, Cumidava, Sucidava, Tamasidava, Netindava, Buridava,
> Pelendova, Marcodava

What is the point? I am supposed to notice that it is 'Acidava' in
the text and 'Arcidava' on the maps? Am I supposed to notice that
thrac/thrac_8.html has 'Burridava' and in a different place
to 'Buridava' on vg/vg_map1.jpg? That 'Marcodava' on vg/vg_map1.jpg
is in a very different place to 'Markodava' on thrac/thrac_8.html.

> but without Dava: ( I want to know if there was in the entire
> Roman Empire an another toponym as Blandiana )
>
> Apulum , Bruda, Blandiana, Alboca, Acmonia, Stenae,
> Gernuchera, Petrae, Cibinum,Bersovia, Salinae, Acmonia,
> Phrateria, Ardeiscus, Romula, Pinum, Tierna,Napuca, Pirum,
> Palada, etc

What point are you making about Blandiana? Is Brundisium (modern
Brindisi) in Italy the sort of match you are looking for?

With one exception, the maps only show place names containing common
elements. None of the placenames do, so one should not expect these
places to be shown on either map. Curiously, Apulum does appear on
one of the maps - vg/vg_map1.jpg.

> Take a look please at hidronyms:
>
> Porata, Aparus, Cogaeonus, Marisus, Alutus, Argesus, Naparus
> etc..

I can't find any of these. Mind you, the river names are very hard
to read, both on vg/vg_map1.jpg and the more detailed vg/vg_map3.jpg,
which shows rivers South of the Danube. Have you tried looking for
them North of the Danube on a present day map? Georgiev didn't
identify any Dacian hydronyms South of the Danube.
>
>
> Do you see them by Georgiev? I dont. Can you understand now
> his conclusion anymore?Me, I dont. That is the question with
> me:-(

The only conclusions backed up by vg/vg.html relate to settlement
patterns and distinctiveness of populations. The linguistic
conclusions depend on data presented elsewhere.

>
> Attachment
> vg_27.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 1k Download

This just says 'Biessoi' in Greek characters!

> Attachment
> vg_28.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 1k Download

This just says 'Bessoi' in Greek characters!

> Attachment
> vg_32.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 1k Download

This says 'Ierasos' in Greek characters!