--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" wrote:
> 1. Iulia Bessa is a personal name (of course related to her
> ethnical or regional name... Bessi, located at the Danube river)
Just like Nicholaus Olahus, for instance. You won't claim that
"Olahus" is a Romanian personal name. Neither is "Olah" (it can
be adopted from another language and make it for a long time as
patronym -- as in "Tiberiu Olah" -- but the name is not genuinely
Romanian even if used to label Romanians at the very beginning).
> so the person "Iulia Bessa" is attested OUTSIDE the Bessi's land
So?!
> Seems that you have a problem with this attestation, that doesn't
> fit with your idea : on the "inexistent substratum"
Well, for a person claiming to have gained knowledge of my ideas,
you have still to show me the message(s) in which I assumed there
is no substratum in Romanian. Feel free to use the search function
on yahoogroups.
> so your argument that cannot be possible to use the ethnical/
> regional mark in the personal name formation
I never claimed that, I simply hinted the character string "Bessa"
is not to be seen as a regular Dacian name (even if referring to
an ethnic Dacian) but merely as a Latin name for someone being of
that ethnicity or coming from that region.
> 3. albanian word : besa is very probable related to the meaning
> of the tribe name "Bessi" : Why ?
> We have a similar example with alb. karpe: => tribe Carpi...
Sorry, this is only "folk etymology". Albanian "besë" is given
as inherited by Pokorny (#227 - *bhendh `to bind`) and Demiraj.
About coincidences, Miguel and Piotr gave you some further hints.
For short words, coincidences happen very often.
> So your argument that the albanian today word cannot be
> related "in general" to the name of a tribe... is not valid.
Make no mistake: there is no "in general" in my argument. If you
want generalities, here you have one: "One should _not_ relate
(etymologically) two somehow similar words, distant in time and
space, unless 1. a complete analysis of more likely possibilities
rules them out, AND 2. there is evidence (semantical, historical)
suggesting their relationship". Up to this moment, you have
neither 1, nor 2 -- so your case is fishy [Note that even if one
admits (let's say, just for fun) that Albanian name "Besa" is not
related to Albanian word "besa" but to the tribe name "Bessi",
one has still to prove that "Bessa" was a _Dacian_ word and not
a _Latin_ name for some ethnic Dacians; that's why I asked you
if you found some new Dacian glosses I'm unaware of].
You should proceed with the same care for all the names you
previously labeled as "Daco-Thraco".
Cheers,
Marius Iacomi