altamix wrote:
>I see it an another way. Expensive means much.
The definitions given by Piotr (for the word that turned "scump"
in Romanian) show you quite the opposite: scarcity. That
what's scarce is expensive (this is still valid today, isn't it?)
By the way, Hungarian has the same pattern (influence):
"drága" means both "expensive" and "dear=darling".
Whereas in Romanian, the same word "drag" does not
mean "expensive" at the same time, but its quasi-synonym
"scump" does!
>Regarding what you do. You buy.
Either you buy expensive goods/services or you buy
cheap ones. I still don't see how /expensive/ and/or /cheap/
can influence (if at all) the link of the Romanian verb
"a cumpara - cumparare" (to buy) to the counterparts
extant in the Romance vocabulary.
>Of course I can be mistaking but in this case how would you
>explain the meaning for the words in different languages
>which means "expensive"?
In time, the meaning can change. But look, in this case
as well, at the way *how* the meaning changes: it happens
in a logical way -- and the same semantic phenomenon is
not singular in Romanian, it is there in Hungarian, too.
(Unfortunately, I don't know whether there is a
parallel in a further neighboring language).
>The second one, why should be a comparative getting the
>meaning of expensive?
What comparative? The mere action called "cumparare"
doesn't compare anything. It is only the buyer who compares
prices before buying. It doesn't matter whether something is
cheap or expensive: as long as you pay for it, you buy it.
Otherwise you'll get it as a... donation. (At leas IMHO.)
George