Re: [tied] das Wort

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] das Wort


On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 06:46:22 +0100, alexmoeller@...
wrote:

>The last tought is I knew that PIE *dh >d in old idiom of
>getae which should mean there cannot be a root *werdh for
rom.
>vorba. But, I see in 2 examples ( I need to verify more) that
>it seems there is an exception. PIE *dh>b in ancient idiom
>when falowed a liquid .And the both words where I see this
>explained are:
>*bhardha>barba
>*werdh>varba>vorba.
>In both cases we have "r" fallowed by "dh" with the result
>"b".
>I need to verify in more examples that this *dh after a
liquid
>gave and "b" instead of normaly "d"

May I suggest you look for them in Latin? That's where the
soundlaw
rdh > rb belongs.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...

[Moeller]
for sure you can do it:-)
1)
what I said before ( dh after r>b) seems to not be valide for
rom. sub strate. How I said, I wanted to verify some more
words , but I got a negative issue. The romanian words from
substrate shows that "dh" after "r" was still "d" and not "b"
and becamme "z" when fallowed by "e" or "i" , but *dh>d>z is
nothing new, we knew about. Substrat examples:
-urda, zgarda, cârd, gard, barzã, etc. It seems are enough
examples for saying for sure there is no dh>b in the words
from substrate. It was just a tought where I said I need to
verify it. I did it, I have seen the tought was not a valid
one.

2) "vorbã" and " a vorbi" cannot be evolution of "verbum" or
"ad verbum". How I said, the romanina linguists assumed the
slavic word "dvorIba" has maybe something to do here, but the
semantism is far.

3) do you have a better ideea regarding the ethymology of
romanian "vorba"?

P.S: I forget to tell you that "palavrã" is known in romanian
too. It has a peyorative air, but the word is known .If this
is inherited too , I have no ideea:-)