Re: [tied] again Slavic "dragU"

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "alex" <alxmoeller@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 10:44 PM
> Subject: [tied] again Slavic "dragU"
>
>
>> I suspect the Slavic "dragU" is not at all a Slavic word but a loan
>> from Balkan form an word which can be direct derived from Latin
>> "di:ligo:" which meant "gern haben, Liebe, Achtung".
>>
>> I guess there is no unanswered question versus how "di:ligo:" >
>> "dragu"
>
> There's no such thing as "Slavic dragU". The common Slavic form was
> *dorg-, giving such reflexes as Polish drog-, Russian dorog-, Czech
> drah-, and South Slavic drag-. The <ra> forms occur only in those
> Slavic languages in which /Ra/ is the normal metathetic outcome of
> preconsonantal *oR (as in mlad- <
> *mold- or gradU < *gordU). In archaic Kashubian names with the

element

> *dorgo- we atill have unmetathesised Dargo-, as in Dargota and
> Dargosl/aw (: Polish Drogosl/aw, Czech Drahoslav, etc.).
>
> Piotr

when I said "Slavic" I meant "OCS" here and not the CommonSlavic. That
is my failure since in dictionary is simply used "Sl." and the
explanation for "Sl." is given as "old slavic languages" which usualy
is to understand as OCS.
Do I make a mistake or the South Slavi languages ( Bulg/Serb-Croatina)
they have too the words as "druga", "drug" ? If yes, then are these
words not deriving from the same CommonSlavic *dorg-? I just want to
point out here about the semantic aspect of "drag" and the semantic
aspect of "drug" which is not the same even if one tries to link them
together. The semantical aspect of Latin "di:ligo:" (to love, to like)
will speak a lot for the semantic field of Rom. "dragu" and there are
no formal troubles in deriving it from the Latin word.

Alex