Re: [tied] OE "afor"

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" wrote:

> alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
>> For the stem 'apr', I tried to put in relation :

^^^^^^^^^ ?

Is there a "stem apr" in "a:pri:cus"? As already hinted, Pokorny
relates it with the root *apo- (#102)

>> <lat. apricus "sunny, having lots of sunshine; warmed

by/exposed

>> to/open to the sun, basking;"

See also Italian "aprico" `sunny, heated by sun; clear`.

>> <dac. aprus -> 'unknown meaning';(same plant at Dioskurides)

Wasn't Aprus a (S-E) Thracian placename? Anyway, Dioskorides gives
the name as "haprus" meaning `gladiolus`.

>> and also thinking to a possible relation (as cognate) to the
>> <rom. aprig (even its meaning is not quite the same, I imagined
>> for 'aprig' -> 'related to the warm/power of the sun')

That could have been a clue. Unfortunately, stress pattern doesn't
match and Romanian "aprig" appears usually for describing persons
(or animals, sometimes) agitating, in warlike mood, while a surface
heated by sun remains still.

My guess for this particular word's etymology is a derivative of VL
"aprus" (CL "aper", see AP 139) `(wild) boar`. A derived adjective
"*a:pricus" meaning `like a wild boar` would perfectly match both
meaning and stress, the only accidental thing (though not surprising
as already seen) being the voicing of the final consonant.

> The semantic aspect of apricus appears to fit -regarding the sun,
> lights- the Rom. "aprins" which is a derivative of "aprinde".

Not quite. It would fit better "pârjolit", "prãjit" or "încins".
Romanian "aprins" is semantically a partial fit. Anyway it is a
clear verbal participle, it's senseless to link it with another
word separately as you do.

> [...] rom. "a aprinde" ( to light (up); to kindle; (lumina) to
> switch on, to put on, to turn on; to set fire to; (fig) to rouse, to
> arouse; (tehn) ignite
> vr to take fire; (la fata) to blush, to turn red; (a se enerva) to

grow

> angry) is seen as vbeing derivate from Latin "appre[he]ndere".

It _is_ deriving from Latin "appre[he]ndere".

> The semantic aspect of "aprinde" fits with "apricus"; the semantic
> aspect of Latin "apprehendere" _is not_ the semantic aspect of rom.
> "aprinde"; but I know many people see more strange semantic
> evolution as being OK if they did happen via Latin > Rom.

It is rather that phonetical fit + explainable semantic shift + bunch
of related words & morphology knowledge are making this etymology far
better than any other. It is not specially related to tongue of
origin.

Marius Iacomi