Re: [tied] Re: Historical implications of Romanian ecclesiastical t

--- m_iacomi <m_iacomi@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh wrote:
> > I am wrestling with two hypotheses concerning the
> PR :(a) they
> > were a population which contacted with
> Christianized elements
> > and borrowed a number of terms from them which
> were retained
> > in the vocabulary, but were not themselves
> Christians;
>
> Hard to believe that since most basical Christian
> words are of
> Latin origin. Some Romance people getting Latin
> Christian terms,
> not being themselves Christians and having no other
> Romance
> neighbor than themselves... that doesn't make much
> sense.

*****GK: We'll get back to these hypotheses (both (a)
and (b)) after a review of some other ecclesiastical
terms. Where do you get the impression that I
suggested they "had no other Romance neighbours but
themselves"? What I had intended to convey under THIS
hypothesis is that the PR might have been those whose
contact with Christianity (unlike that of their
equally Latin-speaking neighbours ==perhaps those of
the cities above all==) was rather superficial.******


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com