--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas"
> Does he [Trubac^ëv - JER] mention Lith. <stum~bras>, Latv. dial.
<stumbrs> 'aurochs'?
No, but I believe the word is precisely another instance of the
observed Baltic rendition of a prestage of the Slavic sibilants from
palatals. Your point about the vocalism could even be used in favour
of the connection. The radical alternative of separating the words
appears ridiculous.
> >OPr. parstian 'pig'
>
> But see _Pru:su, kalbos etimilogijos z^odynas_, III, 344-345 for
> other interpretation (Lith. dial. <par~s^is^c^ias> looks
convincing).
Trautmann (Bsl. Wb. 1923) posited *parsistia- as a prestage of the
OPruss. form (i.e. the same analysis as Maz^iulis, though without an
actual attestation), but Trubac^ëv attacks that head-on, suggesting
instead that parstian is directly from (a prestage of) Slavic
*porseN, nasal and all.
The small article of Trub. has one final example: OPruss.
werstian 'calf' (Lith. ver~s^is), which in his mind is not from
*versistian (thus Trautmann), but "developed under the influence of
the form parstian" which sounds strange to me (why not posit a lost
Slavic *verseN ?).
Ref.: O.N.Trubac^ev: Leksikografija i ètimologija. In: Slavjanskoe
jazykoznanie. VII mez^dunarodnyj s"ezd slavistov, Vars^ava, avgust
1973 g. Doklady sovetskoj delegacii. Moskva 1973: Nauka, pp. 294-
313. [The story about the loanwords is quite short: pp. 310-313.]
Jens