>*****GK: The river in question is the Molda (in the
>Carpathians), supposedly a Germanic hydronym.****
Actually, the rivulet is called Moldova in Romanian.
The legend has it that a founding voyvode's she-dog,
that drowned in the waters of the river, had been
called Molda. (That ruler and his court people came
from neighboring Northern Tranylvania and were
obeying the king of Hungary.)
And if Molda and Moldova are supposed to be
Germanic, then what would be the related Germanic
term? Something like German <Mulde> (that's been
proposed by some)?
>*****GK: Where do you get this? The first clearcut
>mention of the Vlachs is in 976, south of the Danube,
>and has nothing whatever to do with the establishment
>of the Hungarian state.******
The fact that Aromanians don't have Hungarisms
in their dialect can be explained by the fact that
they represent one branch, and Romanians who
coexisted with Hungarians were another branch of
the Romanian-speaking group. Those who bothered
to analyse both dialects came to similar conclusions,
namely that the parting of the two branches must've
happened at least a millennium ago. (Neither Alex,
nor myself are able to perform a real conversation
with any Aromanian without translator or without
resorting to Romanian or another language; but I
suppose that you and Piotr are able to make con-
versation only based on your Ukrainian and his
Polish.)
> >I keep my theory that there was an
> >admigration of Romanians from
> >North to South of Danube from West of actual
> >Transilvania due the Hungarian power.
>
>*****GK: I don't know what you're talking about.*****
He assumes that an important Romanian population
was displaced by the Hungarian invasion around 900
and moved to what's today Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and
Greece. (Only that, unlike in earlier postings on a
Romanian lists, he writes of Transylvania instead
of Pannonia.) His presumption might be based on
accounts by early Hungarian chroniclers who wrote
of dislocation of "Romans" -- but who actually mixed
(up) events during the Avar conquest with events
during the Hungarian conquest, thus resulting a
topsy-turvy also containing fictitious characters
and occurrences. (The most important & the oldest
chronicles are those by the anonymous notary
"magister P." (a possible Pósa ['po:-SO] at a
king Béla's court; and by Simon de Keza (Kézai
Símon) from the Bihor county (aka Partium,
today aka Cri$ana), who concocted his story in
the 1270s during the reign of king László (Vladislav)
"the Cuman".
> >Greek or Byzantine loans.
>******GK: Are there more in some dialects than in
>others? At any rate there are some?*****
Of course significantly more in the Aromanian
and Meglenite dialects.
> >For making the soup better, the Timocean Romanians
> >are speaking dacoromanian and not aromanian.
Historians who see Romanian history in a movement
in the opposite direction (South-West -> North-East)
will retort that Romanians in the Timoc (former Timacus)
valley region are mere remnants of the erstwhile
compact Romanian branch. So, go figure! :-)
George