Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> That's why there are so few of them. And who ignores those temporal
> constraints? We had a long discussion of them here some time ago. I'm
> not going to bring back subjects already argued and explained in great
> detail, but if you still want to claim that <daltã> is of Slavic
> origin, I can only shrug. Check the archives to see why.
>
> Piotr
Piotr, as we discussed about "balta" I intended to speak about another
word too but I don't know howI forgot it.
I mean here the word "mud".
There are a a bit too much words in Rom. for showing this and I wanted
to take a better look at it. I will give some synonims now for "mud":
noroi, nãmol, mâl (reg. nomol), mocirlã (marsh), glod, tinã, im and
maybe there are som more but I guess it should be a paar of examples for
showing that there are a lot of such words and maybe it is very
innteresting their origin.OK, let us say, what the accepted etymology
for these words are:
noroi= cf DEX from Bulgarian "naroj"
nãmol/nomol= from Ukrainean "namil", "namolu"
mâl= compare with Ukjarinean "mul"
mocirlã=compare with Bulgarian "moc^lo"
glod= 1) compare with Hungarian "galad"; 2) Russian "gluda"
tinã= from Slavic "tina"
im= from Latin "limus"
So, how we see, there are a lot, a lot of words for expriming one and
the same notion, thus, some of them _must_ be loan-words- Now, I should
like you to give your opinion about what looks as being Slavic here.
Alex