Re: [tied] Enclosed Places (was: The unexplained link between Greek

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
?

>
> In earliest Slavic the pronunciation of what we _spell_ *o was close
> to [a] (this was in fact the original Balto-Slavic value of the
> vowel). I wrote about that at length explaining liquid metathesis and
> the etymology of <daltë> (check the archive if you don't remember the
> details). The change of [a] > [o] is not as recent as you suggest, but
> it probably swept through Slavic about AD 800 (only a very rough
> dating can be suggested) as part of a more general qualitative "vowel
> shift". If *[dalta] was borrowed as <daltë>/<daltã>, there's nothing
> irregular about *[gardU] --> <gardh>/<gard>.
>
> Piotr

This is a posiblity. Against this posiblity is the meaning. For a
borrowing from Slavic, there are not semantical differences or
semantical developments. As far I know there are not such deviation for
borrowign from Slavic, the loaned words having the same meaning as in
Slavic.If there is in Slavic the meaning "fence" then it can be a loan
from Slavic. If not, then it is not. Do you have in Slavic the word
"gardU"= fence? Not simmilars like " umgezeunte platz, stadt, usw usw.
Simply, fence. Is it?

Alex