>If there is no link between Dacian and Romanians I cannot
>explain the stories of Greuceanu (Dacian Greucenes), the
>stories with Ileana Cosânzeana (Dacian Cosinges and the
>pristess Cosinzes) and the Stories with PipãruS Impãrat
>(Dacian Piperus), the story of "Baba Dochia" and the sister
>of Decebal which coincidentaly was called too Dochia.
These tales (this is the word, and not stories) have hardly
to do, if at all, with circumstances represented by some
coincidental ancient terms. Ileana (= Helen) Cosânzeana
might be a reminiscent of some "San(c)ta Diana". Dochia
might be reminiscent of Dacia, but at the same time rein-
forced by Evdochia (Evdokia).
>There _is_ the dirket link between Romanians and Dacians
>and I am not fantasing about.
Unfortunately, many have gone too far in Romania
for many decades, so that generations have been induced
into thinking that there are links to this and that Dacian
thing, but where there is no proof whatsoever because
it can't be, any and there's nothing we can do about it.
(So no wonder that such daring [read: weird] speculations
such as Greuceanu & many other items occur.) Of course,
Romanian folklore also consists of numerous pre-Christian
and pre-historic elements, but it's no intellectual
honest feat to automatically ascribe them to Dacian
culture (or Thracian, for that matter). To do so simply
means, as the German saying goes, an "Armutszeugnis."
As well as keeping up a certain... business (out of
wordly desires: money & influence & ...circenses).
For such dreamers, the old Romans had the adage: "Ne
sutor supra crepidam."
>italian "commo te chiammo"
comme
>and Rom. "cum te chiamã", but the substrate sintactic
>"cum iTi spune" or "cum iTi zice".
>the second one is not looking anymore as Romance
>("cum iTi zic^e" or "cum iTi spune").
Who says that this construction is based on a
substrate pattern (although the 'material' used
is Latin)? (I'm just asking, for I dunno.)
Anyway, be it a Dacian, be it a Slavic/Turkic or
I-don't-know-what loan translation, you oughta say
that "what's your name?" is rendered in most of
the cases in Romanian as "cum te cheama?"[*], and that
"cum iti zice?/cum iti spune?" are marginal constructions
("cum iti spune?" even sounds unusual, awkward and
outlandish; "cum iti zice?" has a slangy-sloppy
connotation, whereby the stress falls on the
idea of sloppiness and being a... rube; this is
valid in the entire realm of the so-called Daco-
Romanian dialect of the Romanian language).
George
__________________________
[*] until Apr 1, 1954, the official/standard
spelling was "chiama" (which, actually, better fits
the pronunciation)