Re: [tied] Slavic "lada"

Usually Le:da and Le:to: are linked to Lycian lada "woman, wife".

Joao SL

----- Original Message -----
From: "petusek" <petusek@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Slavic "lada"


>
> Vadim:
> > No haplology can exist here, because such a process develops only when
> there
> > exists two similar syllables side by side, and this is not the case. And
> if
> > no haplology, then what is the reason for the shortening? If it were a
> word
> > used extremely frequently, this could cause the shortening by itself,
but
> > this is not the case either, I think.
>
> I am sorry for this terminological inaccuracy of mine, but in Czech,
> haplology ("haplologie") means both simple shortening (e.g. Akademicky'
> slovni'k cizich slov) due to a quick pronunciation and what you defined it
> above. Perhaps, there is a different term for simple shortening in
English.
>
> > >Another reconstructions starts with *ladU < *la:-dho- from the
pronominal
> > >element *la and the reduced form of the IE root *dhe: "to lay (down),
> put,
> > >etc." (cf. Czech <bez ladu a skladu> "in a total disarray, disorder".
>
> > And what about a possibility to be connected with <sklad> itself?
> > sklad < *sU-kladU, cf. R. klast' "to put, to lay (down)" < *klasti <
> > *kladti. In present R. klast' is conjugated as kladu, kladëš, kladët
etc.,
> > but the
> > future tense is: po-lož-u etc. Here po- is a prefix, and the root is
lož-
> <
> > *log-. Cf. po-laga-t' "to consider, to think", with the long grade of
the
> > root vowel, and the different thematic vowel; osnovo-polagat' "to lay
the
> > foundation". More examples: s-klad-yva-ju "I am putting together" (with
> the
> > same prefix as in <sklad>, and a frequentative suffix), fut. s-lož-u. It
> is
> > not clear if the contemporary suppletive roots klad- and log-/lag- can
> > historically represent the same root, but if so, <lad> could be
connected
> > with them as well. And, of course, we must remember that historically
> > log-/lag- is nothing but a causative/transitive from ležat' "to lie, to
be
> > situated"...
>
> Well, yes, I have also considered that possibility (with similar words in
> Czech). PS *klasti (<*klad-ti) can be connected to Lith. klo~das "layer",
> klóti "to lay over, to spread" and Goth. hla?an, German laden "load" (OE
> hladan) < the first part being IE *kla:-
> The future tense, however, is from a different root, it is just a
different
> ablaut of the IE root *legh-.
> So, now, we can compare the two roots *kla:- and *legh-/*logh- and not see
> any apparent similarity, but:
>
> (perhaps, some external - Nostratic? - parallels could help us)
> We may hypothesize and speculate about the -lV- element and ask if PS
*ladU
> (IE *la:-?), IE *kla:- (**-la:-???) and IE *legh- (**lV-gh-?) have
something
> in common and what, if so.
>
> > > Machek
> > >thinks Rus./Ukr. <lado> is secondary, being derived from f. <lada>, as
> he,
> > >moreover, claims it is an old Black-sea, Asia Minor loan. But he does
not
> > >explain where it is from, which non-IE languages it is present in, that
> is
> > a
> > >pity...what is your opinion, Vadim?
> >
> >
> > Without knowing what Machek says more deeply, it is difficult to give
any
> > conclusion... I can only tell some very common thoughts on the subject.
If
> > the similarity of Slav. <lada> and some words of other languages were
> > strict, this could be a proof of borrowing (either into Slavic or from
it)
> > by itself. But really, it is not the case, and the words of other
> languages
> > that are presumably connected have great differences bouth in phonetics
> and
> > meaning (as it is with Gr. Leto and Lat. Latona, for example).
Therefore,
> to
> > consider Slav.<lada> a loan, we have not only to find out a hypothetical
> > source, but also to understand why it had been borrowed, and why such
>
> That something does not exist cannot be claimed just because it has has
not
> been found yet :-) But, yes - why should any language adopt that word?
>
> > semantical and phonetical shifts had place. For example, borrowing from
> Leto
> > and Latona is so disprooved, because if Slaves borrowed the name of a
> > goddess, it hardly could develop the meaning present in Slavic
languages.
>
> The great changes in both phonetics and semantics would be due to
different
> donor-languages (that mediated the exchange) and different times of the
> borrowing.
>
> By the way, what are the etymologies of the following Goddeses?
>
> Gr. Léda
> Gr. Letó
> Lat. Latóna
>
> &
>
> Etr. Voltumnus
>
> (Machek speculated about their common root *veldh- "to rule", but I think,
> if he wanted to connect it to Cz vla'dnout, Goth. waldan etc., the
> projection would be IE *waldh-, which is sometimes considered relative to
IE
> *wal- "to be strong, healthy")
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>