m_iacomi wrote:
>> And where is your problem here ? Eventualy the missing of
>> standalone Greek "throphos"?
>
> The "problem" is that being a composed word (with Romanian prefix
> "în-") it cannot be linked in this new form with the Ancient Greek
> word already exhibiting "an" at the beginning.
there is no problem. At least not so as you imagine yourself there
should be one.
>
>>>> which suppose an older *antrupa
>>>
>>> Nonsense.
>>
>> e, ca sã vezi..
>
> First take a look in your DEX. "în-" is a productive prefix in
> Romanian (continuing Latin prefix "in-")
there is not only your Latin story with /in/ > /ân/
> There is no need to
> suppose "older" forms since the derivation is 100% Romanian.
I agree it is Romanian and I sustain it is a old form.
> OK, since you obviously aren't able to make necessary links, I'll
> rephrase: Greek word means `human (being)`, not `to get a body`, nor
> `corpse`. Slavic word "trup" means `body, corpse` in Russian,
> Serbian, Bulgarian, Czech, Slovak, Slovene, Polish and OCS. The
> derivation "în+trup" should mean in Romanian `to get a body/corpse`
> and not `human (being)`. It does. End of story.
>
> Marius Iacomi
It should mean in Slavic languages what you say; the Slavic languages
use today other words for "body", just your language as a very
conservative one do not make place even to latin "corpus" ( vezi trup si
suflet and not corp si suflet), but keep this "trup".
The Greek word means:
a human being, whether male or female
generically, to include all human individuals
to distinguish man from beings of a different order
of animals and plants
of from God and Christ
of the angels
with the added notion of weakness, by which man is led into a mistake or
prompted to sin
with the adjunct notion of contempt or disdainful pity
with reference to two fold nature of man, body and soul
with reference to the two fold nature of man, the corrupt and the truly
Christian man, conformed to the nature of God
with reference to sex, a male
indefinitely, someone, a man, one
in the plural, people
joined with other words, merchantman
It was translated as:
NAS (531) - Man, 89; any, 1; anyone, 1; child, 1; enemy, 1; everyone, 1;
fellow, 1; friend, 1; human, 5; human judgment, 1; human relations, 1;
king, 1; man, 232; man's, 8; mankind, 5; men, 164; men's, 2; nobleman,
1; one, 3; others, 4; people, 1; person, 2; persons, 1; self, 4;
In your own language the word "trup" is never related to anything else
as "human being". There is nothing as "trup de câine or trup de oaie, or
anything else but just related to human kind).
The whole gama of derivatives , all related to "human body" but not any
slavic meaning should make you to think a bit more about.
I don't see any strong argument in what you said. You keep up the in=
latin prefix, trup= slavic word and end of story, nothing new to me in
your argumentation. Your links should be updated a bit, they are too
static and fixed on Latin and Slavic.