Re: Romanian Swadesh list -> 10% substratual

Hello George,

A. COPAC (arbore, pom )
--------------------
You said:

" It is not okay as stated above. <arbore> is indeed very rare in
NW regions of RO, yet it is wrong to assert <<is not at all used>>
... and is able to use it whenever necessary "

Is OK what is stated above. Of course that everybody knows in
Romania what 'arbore' means...because almost everybody goes to school
in Romania...but to know what it is, doesn't mean that you use it.

Regarding "arbore" : Try to identify the frequence
of 'COPAC', 'pom', 'arbore' in the romanian old texts....'COPAC' will
win in all the cases.
Examples :
1. Miron Costin NEVER used 'arbore', he used ONLY 'copac'.
2. Please remember the paragraph where Mihai Viteazu' was
killed...in another writing ("Si cazu'..."): was 'COPAC'
or 'arbore' there?

The widely used form for 'tree' in today romanian is 'copac'

To say that 'copac' is interchangeable with 'pom' is similar to
say that 'om' is interchangeable with 'animal'
- every 'pom' is a 'copac'
- not every 'copac' is a 'pom'

This is obvious from any romanian especiallly starting with
the "illiterates" ones (Why I don't like this term or this split?
Maybe because it point out the "lliterate" ones...)

Regarding your expressions:

a) <pom de iarna> - means a 'domestic' tree (because it 'became'
a 'domestic' tree), so is normal to use 'pom' and not 'copac'.

I don't think that the expressions are a good example to discuss
when one term could be replaced by another one, because you don't
know how this expressions was formed.
Example : Taking your examples : in place of <esti in pom> also
is very used (even more often) <esti in plop> but this not means
that 'plop'='pom'

COPIL
--------------------
The widely form used for 'child' in today romanian is 'copil'

Regards,
marius a.

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, g <george.st@...> wrote:
>
> >Is it more common than pântec?
>
> It is.
>
> > >5. Romanian 'copac' - 'tree' is the general form for 'tree' and
> > >also the widely used.
> > > - 'arbore' is not at all used in NW of the country.
> > > - 'pom' means a 'domestic' tree , and never
> > >replace 'copac'
> > >
> > > 'copac' is considered a substratual word too.
> >
> >OK.
>
> It is not okay as stated above. <arbore> is indeed very rare in
> NW regions of RO, yet it is wrong to assert <<is not at all used>>
> (let alone the fact that any clodhopper and illiterate between
> the river of Mure$ and the province of Maramure$ *knows* what
> <arbore> is, and is able to use it whenever necessary, even if
> he/she has never used this word in his/her life within his/her
> own subdialect). (The same applies for most of the same sub-
> dialectal area in the case of the word "child": whereas most
> Romanians in other provinces use <copil> or <copchil>, in this
> area natives will forever say <prunc> and in Maramure$ <cocon>.
> These mean in other regions only <baby> and <young lord>
> (this one esp. in the variant <cucon> and the reflex <cona$>);
> (plus the semi-slangy meaning, esp. in urban areas and esp.
> in Southern and Eastern regions of Romania, "chum, pal", when
> in the short and vocative form: "coane!"). Now, go figure! :-))
>
> Also wrong the assertion "pom... never replace[s] copac." Of
> course, there are plenty of contexts and locutions where <copac>
> and <pom> are interchangeable, in spite of the fact (that I myself
> underlined today) <pom> tends to be prefered to designate a
> fruit-tree. OTOH, there are locutions, such as <pom de iarna>,
> <esti in pom>, where <copac> or <arbore> cannot replace <pom>,
> the same way as in the idiomatic saying <s'a suit scroafa in copac>
> no one would say <s'a suit scroafa in pom> or <in arbore>.
>
> >Miguel
>
> George