Re: [tied] again gW>b and getae

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 16795
Date: 2002-11-18

----- Original Message -----
From: alexmoeller@...
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 9:31 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] again gW>b and getae

> in a previous message of you , you used to say that apparently the dacian word for water was a reflex of *ud_ and you gave me the example of "Salmorude". But shis is an another cup of tea I dont care here in this thread about.

Would Dacian *ud- 'water' and apas < *apos 'river' make you happy? (Never mind the misquoted example.)

> I care about something else.In romanian you have "apa" for every kind of water. Let it be flow water, a lake, rain, or what ever, there is just a word and this is "apa", nothing more.For describing which kind of water is this , you must use a complementary word for showing what kind of water this is ( de râu, de baltã, de ploaie, de izvor)

Yeah. So far, it's just like Lat. aqua, glossed in my pocket Latin dictionary as 'water ... esp. the water of the sea, a lake, a river, or rain; in plur. (medicinal) springs'. More comprehensive dictionaries give more meanings, but it's obvious that the word means 'water' in the most general sense.

> As for your "apos" you will do not wonder if you will learn that there is a worn in romanian "apos" and this means " wich much water". But this just a simple coincidence from apa+ suf "os" , sincoping of "a" ( why not of "o"?) and giving apos (why not apaos, or apas?) .

I'm not surprised in the least, since Lat. aquo:sus 'full of water, watery', accounts for Rom. apos jolly well (besides, a Dacian word would have dropped its inflectional ending in Romanian, just as Lat. -us/-um was dropped). We have <aquo:sus> rather than *<aqua-o:sus>, because the stem vowel -a- is regularly elided before the suffix -o:s- 'abounding in ...', cf. <pecu:nia>, <pecu:nio:sus>. Such things are easy to look up in dictionaries and other books and warmly I recommend that you should do some checking before posting any more aquose stuff.