Re: etyma for Crãciun...

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, g <george.st@...> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 29, 2003, at 07:11 PM, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > Thanks, but you didn't answer the question: Why "must've"?
> > Could the word not be older, since there is already one
> > supposedly Albanian-substrate word in the area?
> >
> > Torsten
>
> IMHO, the best explanation is the one given by
> Piotr on two different occasions. And indeed: the
> most probable carriers of the word in the mountaineous
> regions (and Piotr underlined in Polish the word
> is limited to those Carpathian areas) were the
> Romanian pastoral migrants, known outside the
> Romanian language as Vlachs. What's more: those
> Polish & Slovak areas are so-to-speak nextdoor
> neighbors to provinces inhabited by Romanians (look
> at maps reflecting the administrative situations
> up to September 1939; besides, in some periods,
> Hungary's frontier was near Przemysl; and Pocutia,
> a region between Maramuresh and Bucovina belonged
> for a while to the princes of Moldavia, after some
> kinda transaction with the Polish king). Romanian
> migrations to Poland, Slovakia and Moravia in ME
> times seem to be pretty well documented. (For the
> time being I'm not able to give bibl. references
> though.)
>

You answered my question "why exclude the other option" by telling me
why to include the first option. I'll take that as an answer. Thank
you.

Torsten