Re: [tied] Vladimir

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

>
> They can't be dated with , but they surely postdate the Slavic entry
> into the Balkans and predate the time by which the local Slavic
> dialects had undergone liquid metathesis. There are just a few such
> items indicative of early contacts, e.g. *dolto (< *dolb-to)
> 'chisel', cf. Alb. daltë, Rom. daltã. One might add Greek placenames
> of Slavic origin like Gardiki < *gordIkU, Gardenitsa < *gordInica,
> etc

how are you sure *gord- is a slavic root?
So far I remember there is Gordianus the wellknow knot where we have
already the root gord- .

>
> All later loans show metathesised combinations. Metathesis was the
> norm already in Cyril's OCS (though occasional older variants can be
> found in Church Slavic texts, e.g. <aldii> ~ <alUdii> for <ladii>
> 'boat'). It must have affected the southern periphery of the
> Slavic-speaking lands by the 830's, when young Cyril was learning the
> language.

Wait a moment. There is no text of Cyril in slavic. Everthing which is
preserved is re-writen almost over 100 years after his dead.

influence?*****

>
> How would that influence have affected purely Slavic items like
> <darg> 'dear', <smard> 'stench', <sarka> 'magpie' or <varna> 'crow'?
> And what about unmetathesised sequences in Old and Middle Bulgarian
> dialects, far from Norse influence?

Varna is stil today as toponym without methathesised form.