Re: [tied] RE: etyma for � Romanian forChristmas

Hello,
A more simple explanation is that both Slavic forms can be
explained by a loan at different stages from Romanian.

In this case the explanation of : why Bulgarian (+ OCS) has *tj and
East Slavic *s^t , is more easy to be done, in place of "a hybrid
form with the East Slavic development" .

Best Regards,
marius






--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

> 28-12-03 02:30, Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
>
> > 28-12-03 02:08, Mate Kapovic wrote:
> >
> >
> >> But there is no such word in Croatian or Serbian. Only as

somekind of a name

> >> not necessarily related, not in the meaning Christmas. And

Bulgarian also

> >> has a name like krac^un. The meaning Christmas is attested in

Ukrainian and

> >> Rusinian (Slovak dialect) if I am not mistaking.
> >
> > The problem is, Bulgarian (+ OCS) has *tj > *s^t, and East Slavic

has

> > *kortj- > *koroc^-. If the Slavic form is indeed *krac^- with

_old_ *ra

> > (not from mliquid metathesis), it can't be related to *kort(-Uk)-
> > 'short'. The only solution I see is a wandering loan from a

dialect

> > related to Serbo-Croatian or Slovene that had the word.
>
> Oops, East Slavic <koroc^un> (the expected form) is in fact

attested,

> and <krac^un> could be a hybrid form with the East Slavic

development of

> *-tj- and Slovak vocalism.
>
> Piotr