Re: [tied] -e$te [was:expresion]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] -e$te [was:expresion]


> Exactly as in Germanic and Slavic. Thracian might have had
it too, but Thracian influence does not explain the popularity
of adjective-forming <-iscum> outside the Balkans (esp.
It. -esco), while Germanic influence on early Romance is
undeniable and Slavic influence in the Balkans may
additionally account for a number of Romanian words in <-esc>.
By the way, I'd appreciate some concrete examples of this
diminutive <-iscus> from Classical Latin, since I can't think
of any (except for obvious Greek loans like <obeliscus> or
<asteriscus>.

[Moeller] Rosetti quote only this text grom Graur, there is no
example fro such diminutives. If there should have been any I
should have had wrotte them for avoiding to let the people
search for some.>
>
> An Illyrian substrate in Thracian? That's "per ignotum"
squared. Languages we know next to nothing about are very
convenient. We can attribute almost anything to them, and who
can prove we're wrong? ;)
>
> Piotr

[Moeller] It sounded strange to me too. I will give here the
romanian text, maybe I was the one who "forced" somehow the
translation. As I read it, I tought maybe at a common layer of
illirian and thracian but not as illirian beeing "substrate"
for thracian. That should be hylarious..

Romanian text:
"Dupã Bonfante (Lg., 18, p. 290), sufixul ar fi ilir si
prezentza lui in tracã s-ar explica printr-un substrat iliric"
Al.Rosetti, Istoria Limbii Române, Editura pentru Literatura,
1968