Re: [tied] das Wort

From: alexmoeller@...
Message: 16942
Date: 2002-11-30

----- Original Message -----
From: "m_iacomi" <m_iacomi@...>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 12:52 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] das Wort
OTOH, the *varbã > vorba should have taken place at a
timing than late Latin, that is after splitting of the 4
dialects. So it would be safer to assume "vorbã" as Slavic


the problem is that we find at Miron Costin the term " tzineau
dvorba" meaning "they serviced" and there is a clear that
dvorba used at the court of princess have had the slavic
semantism as expected and it is not confunded with "vorba".
So, it is hard to keep "vorba" it for slavic, even if this
seems to be more safe.

> What's the Aromanian form, if any?

There is no Aromanian equivalent of "vorbesc/vorba" from the
root, they say <zburãsc> for "(I) speak", another key sign
that the
term is neither inherited nor substrate.


I wont be so sure. zburasc / vorbesc= zbur / vorb. I dont care
here about the "z" and I see bor= vor. The question of you
here should be "so what?".
I will tell you about the coresspondences between thracian and
dacian glosses (meaning south versus north of danube). There
are fonetical differences like in this case. The fallowing
paars shows dialectal differences in ancient glosses (
Such dialectal differences shows it could be more safe to
think (z)bor can be vor(b).It is maybe worth to be studiated
something deeper.