Re: [tied] Re: some terms for George (it was Re: Historical...)

tolgs001 wrote:

> Cristos is the Christ, and creStin is the Christian.
> I.e. Yeshu (Yehoshua) is the Christ, and His worship-
> pers are also known as Christians/cre$tini/chrétiens/
> Christen etc.

Cristos has nothing to do with creShtin & derivatives from the
linguistic point of view seen trough the period of entering the
language.

>
>> as for "Isus" I expected the word in an another
>> form for being inherited).
>
> Jesus, Maria & Josef, :-) what do you mean by
> "inherited" here?! It is a Graecized/Latinized
> name. It is Yehoshua. The Arab form is Isa (Issa).

I mean the form of the world which should be expected if the word should
have been known or entered the language in the II-III century AC.

>
>> devil was discussed, this is "dracul" and supposed
>> to come from Latin "dracones"
>
> nominative "draco"

pe dracul! :-)

> (groapa!) It is by no means "controversial."
> (groapa actually means the mere excavated/dug
> place, while mormânt means this together with the
> entire funerary construction; and a funerary
> construction is usually a monument)

I agree since this is the explanation for monumentum. My problem with
agreeing with this etymology is the weakness of relation between an term
which represent a monument, a rich grave and the life of the valahians.
But this is an another story.

>
>> Resurrection is a Romanian creation "înviere/îng'iere"
>
> Don't insist on "înghiere": this (utterly isolated)
> pronunciation is no substratic relic, it is a Romanian
> continuation of the [v] consonant in certain subdialectal
> areas (including my own area, where nobody says înghiere).

I don't insist on it. I show just this is an own creation of the rom.
language and not a Latin term.

>
>> holly is "sfânt" and it is given by DEX as from slavic "sventU"
>
> Not only this, but also "sânt, fem. sânta", which has
> been popular in all Romanian subdialects, and which
> can be deemed as the continuation of sanctus, sancta,
> sanctum. "sfânt" (< sventU) has a higher place only
> *stylistically*, i.e. in official texts. But grammar
> "wardens" could've very well proclaimed that the
> official word should be "sânt:" everybody'd have
> accepted right away, since highly numerous people
> still say "sânt, -a."

The form with "sânt" is seen as a contamination between Slavic sventU
and latin sanctus; it ought to remember sanctus should have given
*samptu thus this is why the word is seen as suspicious.

>
>> sin is "pãcat" from Latin peccatum
>> priest is "popã" (sl. popU) or "pãrinte" ( lat parentis)
>
> And preot/preut! ['pre-ot] ['pre-ut]. His
> wife is preoteasa/preuteasa.

Shit! Sorry, I forgot about it. Yes, preot is the another one. So there
are 3 words. Preot is given as coming from Latin "presbiterium" but
there is unusualy much lost of the word , thus it is simply no regular
change of it and beside "pre-" there is nothing which can link the both
words together.

>
>> wafer "anafurã" is from slavic (a)nafora
>> holly water "agheasmã/a[gh]iasmã" is from Slavic agiazma
>
> and < their Greek counterparts (actually Greek words).

of course this is from Greek initialy.

>

>> Ianu[a]rie (Sl. ijanuarij), februarie ( lat. februarius)
>
> Why Ianuarie Slavic and not from Ianuarius, but
> Februarie from Februarius?

Because the vocalism doesn't work from Latin but works from slavic "-ij"

>
>> gerar (from "ger" > lat. "gelus"), fãurar (unknown,
>> probl. Lat "febr(u)aris"),
>
> [auzi la el, "unknown"] Of course must've been
> this popular/peasant name for the month of February
> (and do capitalize them, Gerar, Faurar, Martzisor,
> Prier...) sort of a Volksetymologie/popular etymology:
> a "faurar" or a "faur" is in Romanian a (black)smith,
> and in general a wright (also compare wrought = faurit).
> Lat. faber, fabri. In Romanian, the synonim f(i)erar
> is more frequent than faur today (both of them are
> in use also as family names, F(i)erar(u), Faur -
> the latter more frequently in Transylvania).

Aauzi la el? the form "faur" shows an /u/ there which is not to find in
Latin.I thought you pay a bit attention to the phonetic too.

>
> So, Faurar is a melting of Februar + faur.

sniff. Month "februaris" has nothing to do with Latin "feber" but with
Latin "februum"; it was the month where people made clean and stuff( if
curious I post all the entries for this word); Vulgar Latin "febrar-".
The Rom. word makes in leting be derived direct from Latin form.

>> rãpciune (unknown etym.)
>
> But your dictionary states "compare with Lat. raptio,
> raptionis."

No. In my dictionary does not stand something like this. Neither for
this nor for "rãpciugã, rapãn" which have nothing to do with raptio,
raptionis Entführung, Kidnapping, Rom. rãpi, rãpire < Lat. rapire ( >
rapere) ; see there Alb. "rjep" = entführen too, which is not a
derivative _as romanian word too_ from Latin; see Old Lith. ap-repi, Old
Sanskrit "rapas-", "rapitah")

>
>> undrea (or andrea, unknown etym)
>
> Undrea/Îndrea must be put - I suppose - in connection
> with Andrew, i.e. St. Andrew (Greek Andreas). St.
> Andrew's day: 30th of November.

the word "undera" or "andrea" means usually "knitting needle"; more is
not known

> As for the alleged deriv. of Sl. sonbota: there
> existed a Graeco-form sambaton too. Now, one could
> argue Romanian m before b is anyway a convention
> for the written form, the spoken one is anyway a
> nasal consonant without a necessary closing of
> the lips. But in Hungarian it is also szombat and
> no szonbat. (Well, perhaps this doesn't mean
> anything though...)
>
>> Alex
>
> George

sâm-bã-tã; I doubt about any nasal there. there are 2 labials there.