Re: [tied] Baltic-Slavic disintegration

m_iacomi wrote:

>
> It is the glossed "name" of a Thracian king.

:-)

>
>> You use the word "cognate" here since you think or you get the
>> opinion of other people this name must mean "king". Is there any
>> reason beside a wild guess "why" this name must mean king?
>
> It is the regular confusion for a foreigner when asking: "who's
> the strong guy in front of the army" (or any other instance) and
> getting the answer "the king", but in another language, the one
> of the army (or local language). The word for `king` in the other
> language can be used (and examples are not missing) to depict:
> a) that particular king (confusion with his personal name);
> b) generic name for the other people's king (as nowdays, if one
> says "Kaiser" it obviously refers to some German emperor, or
> "Tsar" refers to major Slavic rulers).
> In this case, the confusion is straightforward (be it a) or b)).
>
> Marius Iacomi

both a) and b) are right conclusions which however do not help here.
There are several thracians kings even in Iliada which are mentioned as
"kings" but mentioned with their name. I don't know why the "glossed
name" should make an exceptions since we know the guy was a king (as
many other) and he have had a name, in this case the o.m. name.
The "informed guess" belongs to the boundle of guesses which lead us to
say something without knowing what.
Such a pity there is no such sentence regarding this name where someone
should have told us "..rex, que Traces riza dicebantum".


Alex