Re: [tied] RE: etyma for =?UNKNOWN?Q?Cr=C3=A3ciun=2CRomanianforChris

29-12-03 11:43, Mate Kapović wrote:

> OK, but honestly this looks like science fiction to me. *Why* oh *why* would
> Old Russian get an originally Slavic word from Hungarian?

But the alternative scenario assumes that the word is not originally
Slavic (in the sense of 'Christmas') but a product of Balkan Romance
(ultimately from Lat. crea:tio:nem). Folk-etymological contamination
between a Romance word and Slavic *korc^- > neo-Slavic krac^- ~ koroc^-
(as suggested by George) is also thinkable.

> Is there another
> such example? I would say no. And another thing, Hungarian word is Karácsony
> with the final -o-. How would you get East Slavic regular -u- from that? *o:
>> *u in Slavic, but this is not an [o:] in Hung., and this *o: > *u was in
> any case probably earlier than 9th century when the Hungarians came. Also,
> Slavic word has final stress. Cf. Croatian kra` cˇu:n (short rising on the
> first and length on the second one), Bulg. kracˇún and East Slavic also has
> desinential stress. I remind you, Hungarian has the stress always on the
> *first* syllable.

The substitution of a similar-sounding Slavic suffix would not be an
unprecedented phenomenon.

> So I would say no way for your theory.

Well, it isn't exactly a theory. I was just exploring all alternative
paths, _as is the duty of any conscientious etymologist_. I agree (at
the moment at least) that a purely Slavic etymology looks preferable,
but I wouldn't say that there is no room for doubt.

Piotr