>if one doesn't know what it means , one has to ask.
>ana-nojan= to renew, rom. "innoi"= to renew;
Awright, but I was asking you who that "one" was.
I mean: who's the author of this thesis (ana-nojan >
innoi/re)?
>DEX gives it as a compund of in+nou leting the "i" remain
>somewhere in the sapce. Theactual germanic form is too
>with "i", "new"= neu (noi)
I don't understand. What "i" and what do you mean?
>It is hard to accept a derivation from a special form of
>the adjective.
It isn't difficult at all: if a Romanian is told "Create a
verb by using the *Romanian* preposition <<în>> and
the *Romanian* adjective <<nou, nouã, noi (+ nouã)>>",
the Romanian will... automatically build "a înnoi".
(NB for those who might be interested in peculiarities
of the Romanian language: the second "nouã" in
brackets stands for the feminine plural. The modern
*official* usage = that the plural form for masc.
and fem. are the same, e.g. "case noi". But until
the beginning of the 1950s, the accepted/received
feminine plural was "nouã" -> "case nouã". And so
is the usage in most of the Rumanian sub-dialects.)
>Indoi is too a verb (to bend, to doubt)which seems to
>appera as compound of in+doi, but this doesn't make
>sense
Have a look at the neighbors' vocabulary, too. For
instance, the notion "doubt" in Hungarian is also
rendered by making use of the notion "two", to which
one attaches suffixes etc. Have a look at:
http://tinyurl.com/bfl3
There you'll see many derivates of "két-", which is
the variant of "ketö" (two) used in creating new words
(and composita).
So, here's one example for the notion "doubt" expressed
by terms that contain the term "two". I for one would ask
myself "are there similar lexical occurrences in other
languages too?" and I'd start looking at neighboring
languages.
OTOH, if Rum. "a îndoí" isn't supposed to be built this
way "în-" + "doi" (regarless of which modell for that),
then what kind of an etymological alternative is there?
>as Rom. word.(indoiala) see the Dacian sufix "-ala".
Even if "-alã" were a suffix of Dacian extraction, what
matters is what are we gonna do with "[indoi]"? How
are we going to explain it other than în+doi?
>But the phonetic changes doesn't allow it deriving
>it from Latin thous, this is seen as in+two.
>The Latin "dubio"=is a derivative of IE *dui.
Perhaps because the word is made of *Romanian*
"în-" + *Romanian* "doi". That is: which had already
become Romanian in the moment as the first hypothetical
Romanian native speaker coined "a îndoì".
>There are several words where I see the habbit of Latin of
>introducing an "w" for making derivatives (see for instance
>Mars > Mavors) and this is too a very interesting question to
>me, if Latin have had indeed the habbit of introducing an
>"v" for conjugation and make some derivativeas.
I don't see any relevance of this to the thread: old Germanic
words as possible loanwords in Romanian.
>I mentioned Filstich and the "late" valachians in Transylvania
>since Filstich spoked about the valachians of that time. If you
>recall , I guess Mi$u told us about the interdiction from the
>germanic & hungarian people to let
Germans are indeed Germanic. But in this *late* context and
chronology it is wrong to use the word "Germanic": we
should write "German", since it is a... Deutsche population --
that showed up in the region as early as the 80s and 90s
of the 12th century, being "imported" from the Holy Roman
Empire of German Nation (actually exactly from West
Germany).
Whereas Germanic in the former Roman provinces Dacia,
Moesia, Pannonia, Illyricum, Thracia means Bastarnae,
Marcomanni, Goths, Vandals, Gepids, Langobards & the
like. You know, Ardarich, Geiserich, Odowakar, Dietrich
& the like, and no Hans Meier or Hans Mueller from
Hermannstadt or Kronstadt. :-)
>One shouldn't wonder if there are not linguisticaly
>loans, but one should wonder why/how they (germans &
>hungarians) learned romanian if there was not a pretty
>good conntact.
That's wrong: the contacts among these 3 main ethnic
groups (and other minor ones) were as close as you
can imagine. So, there's plenty of loanwords
vocabulary. But small wonder: even if Romanians were
supposed to have spread North of the Danube only after
the Mongol invasion, they had 8 centuries time to coexist
and to perform lexical exchanges with the Hungarians
and with the Transylvanian Germans (the so-called
"Saxons", which haven't had any direct connection with
Sachsen, Sachsen-Anhalt and Niedersachsen, but
with the Rhein-Mosel area and with Luxembourg).
Centuries, not decades (as was the case with them old
Germanic tribes that crossed S-E Europe toward the
middle of the 1st millennium).
George