Re: [tied] Re: Etymology of "Warsaw"

george knysh wrote:

> --- tolgs001 <george_st@...> wrote:
>
>>> Even for me looks more plausible PIE *wer-s 'rain,
>> flood' (cf. Alb.
>>> <v�rshoj> 'to ovrflood'), I guess we can't deny the
>> long
>>> brotherhood between Slavs and Avars, so the name
>> could easy
>>> be of Avar origin <varosh> 'subburb of the castle',
>> attested
>>> in many place names (cf. also Vrshac in Banat).
>>>
>>> Konushevci
>>
>> cf. Hungarian v�ros ['va:roS] "city" < v�r [va:r]
>> "fortress,
>> castle" (< PIE *wer ?) & Romanian ora$ [o-'raS]
>> "city".
>>
>> George
>
> *****GK: Is there anything in the archaeology of
> Warsaw to indicate that it might have been a fortress
> in Avar times (say up to the end of the 8th c. when
> Avar power collapsed)? If not the above speculation is
> rather idle.****

that is a pertinent question regarding the arheological aspect. I am not
sure how pertinent is my question:
-why no methathesis in "Vars^-" if the "-ova" is just the simply suffix?
I put this question because a similar sounding word presents the
methathesis. I mean for instance here the Sl. "vraz^a" or "vrac^" or
"vrabiI" or "vrahU", "vraz^Ida".
The same situation is in Bulgarian where the name "varna" does not present
the expected methathesis as in word "vrana".

Alex