----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] again the slavic methathesis


The words you quote belong to a distict set. They contained
so-called syllabic liquids (*r, *l), actually realised as a
very brief reduced vowel plus a liquid in Proto-Slavic (*Ir,
*Ur, *Il, *Ul), but changing into real syllabic consonants
e.g. in Czech and Serbo-Croatian. They did not undergo the
metathesis rules as applied to *er, *el, *or and *ol (as in
*bolto, *dolto, *gordU), but developed in their own special
way (e.g. *tUrgU 'market' > OCS trUgU which may look like
metathesis but elsewhere we get Cz. trh, S-Cr. trg, Pol. targ,
Russ. torg. Romanian borrowed the word from a dialect in which
the rhotic was syllabic, [tr.g], and since Romanian has no
such sound, the perceptually closest approximation with an
accmpanying central vowel was employed instead, [1r] = <âr>.

[Moeller]I will coment just a word because the rest I have to
study a bit about.
The word is trUgU ,and how you say, romania doesnt has such a
sund so it used <âr> for having târg.
The problem is that romanian has no restriction tih
pronounceiation of the group "tr" when fallowev by a vowel or
a halfwovel like:
trage, trânti, trãsni, trei, trifoi.,trosni, trup, for having
every wovel here.

So, if they heard in the slavic dialect tr:g, normaly it
should be like romania almost always do for breaking cononatic
groups, to put after "tr" an "â" so to have trâg.
The same penomenom is with rom. "târn" which come from slavic
trUnU where we have almost the same construction beside "g" is
replaced by "n".
Just for my curiosity I studied the words which begin with
"târ-" because they are interesting here, the others with
"tra-, tre-, tri-, tro, tru-" beeing uninteresting since just
"â" could com from a slavic word which begin with "trU-"
I found as fallow:
târî= slavic trEti, târfã= un. etym. , târg= slavic
trUgU, târlã= slavic trlo, târlici = turc. terlik,
târn=slavic trUnu, târnã= bg. trAvna, târnaT=hung. tornac,
târnacop=bg. tArnokop or serb. trnokop,târnosi=serb.
tronosati, târpan= turc. tirpan, târsa= ukr. tirsa, târsâna=
bg. tArsina, , târ$oagã= un. etym., târS= un. etym., târtiTã=
bg tArtica and serb trtica, târtan= un. etym, târziu= lat.
tardivus

We observe that we have 4 old slavic words, they are: trEti,
trUgU, trUnu, trlo

That mean that not only "U" but "E" went too "â" and for
"trl" the consonatic group was as expected brocken with an
"â", but not as expected after tr but between "t" and "r"..
hmm. strange.. I have a lot think about..:-)

Interesting become it if I study the clusters "trâ-", "tre-",
"tri-", "tro-", "tru-" in romanian :
trândav= serb truntav, trânji= slavic trondU, trânti= bg.
tArtja, trântor= sl. trontU,

That is all . I observe there are 4 from old slavic , 4 un.
etym, 2 turc, 2 bulgarian, 1 ukrainian, 1 hungarian, 2
bulgar/serb they are not sure, and 1 latin.

The slavic "U" and "E" seems pretty strange to me because they
suffered several transformations like:
(first rom word , after"=" slavic word)
târî= trEti, treabã=trEba, treasc=trEskU, treaz=trEzvU,
trebui=trEbovati, trezi=trEzviti, mândru=mondrU

I .. I guess I still have to learn a lot:-))))))