Re: [tied] Fw: Sorok i devianosto

> -----Original Message-----
> From: george knysh [mailto:gknysh@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 4:46 PM
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [tied] Fw: Sorok i devianosto
>
>
> > It sounds plausible that this litra-equation could
> > make
> > _sorokU_/_soroc^IkU_ acquire a new specific meaning
> > (i. e., trigger a
> > semantic shift 'sack; pack' --> 'a pack of 40 skins
> > as a commodity
> > (later money) unit'), but it's not easy to prove the
> > word itself was
> > borrowed from Greek and later contaminated with
> > (suspiciously
> > homonymic!) native reflexes of *sork-.
>
> *****GK: I think the problem here is that there is no
> attestation of an original meaning "sack" (just plain
> "sack") for -sorokU-/-soroc^IkU- in linguistic
> material prior to the 19th century. Which suggests
> that the borrowing from Germanic was the term as
> meaning "shirt" only. That being the case there is no
> difficulty in seeing the Dahl material as reflecting much
> later developments where the fact that "sorok" martin skins
> were handled in a bag resulted in the shift of meaning. The
> localities about which I asked would indicate where this
> shift of meaning
> occurred.****

Sorry, I forgot to write this: there are no geographical information in
both entries. That would mean that Dahl considered the word pan-Russian
or at least belonging to Standard Russian.

> *****GK: I don't deny the link but I don't think you
> have proved its existence at the time when the term
> "sorok" (40), which is after all what the discussion
> is all about, existed. -sorok%%%- as "bag" didn't yet
> make it into the Muscovite Law Code of 1649.****

Of course I haven't proved that. I already mentioned the main reason: I
don't have (all the) relevant lexicographical sources to hand (eg., a
decent Old Russian dictionary).

> > Actually, one could reject any example on such
> > grounds (i.e., positing
> > the semantic development 'money-commodity unit' ->
> > 'sack').
>
> *****GK: We're not talking about "ANY" example though,
> are we, but about something pretty important, which
> triggered an abandonment of the traditional term for
> "40" among the East Slavs.

I meant "any example from a present-day Slavic language", becase you
wrote:

"That would be important. I don't have enough
resources at hand to check if it has survived in this
sense to our days in any Slavic language."

So I've checked and readily reported: yes, it has survived in that sense
at least in one Slavic language.

> > Of course Nazarenko is more competent as to those
> > -ko-.
>
> *****GK: Actually you've avoided my question, and the
> irony is misplaced.

Sorry, it was a silly pun. Yes Vasmer considers this problematic, but
not impossible.

> But here is something which should
> alleviate your concern. We don't actually have to posit that
> "sorok" emerged as a result of the direct contacts between
> Constantinople and Kyiv. The "Varangian Route" existed long
> before the arrival of the "Varangians" after which it was
> later named. We have Arab documents (and archaeological
> confirmation) of strong trade relations between Crimean
> Chersones and the north (serviced along the Dnipro and its
> links). And certainly thriving at the time of the Khazar
> suzerainty over Far Eastern Europe: ca.660-860. Slavic
> merchants were active here before the Norse. That should deal
> with the Vasmer point even if we assume that it extended to
> any and every Greek lingo of the 9th c.

How would that deal with my point: Middle Greek _sarakonta_ would have
yielded (pre-)East Slavic +soroko,to or +soroko,tU, which must have
reflected as +sorokuto or +sorokutU in Standard Old Russian, while only
_sorokU_ and _soroc^IkU_ are actually attested.

From unattested Middle Greek slang word *_sarakos_ 'a forty units of
something'? Poor hearing? Too a long (and inconvenient) word?
Re-analysis, extracting and throwing away the suffix -o,t- (1.
unproductive suffix found in some fossilized *-j-less participles 2.
diminutive suffix forming the name of a young animal)?

Sergei