alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>One more argument here regarding:
>
>"[Hun.] -alom (or: -V+lVm) has been kept [in Rom.] (as -almã"
>
>I don't know in Romanian any '-alom' in Romanian or something
>similar that became 'alma'
Obviously, you didn't completely understand what I was trying
to explain in my previous post.
I myself underlined the fact that the Hungarian suffix
(which is a typical one for this language, namely
-VlVm, which is to read: "vowel+L+vowel+M", e.g.
szerelm ['særælæm] "love", uralom ['urOlom]
"domination; reign; sway; rule &c.", veszedelem
"peril, danger,jeopardy", unalom "boredom, dullness"
&c.; usually the vowels are either <a>+<o> or <e>+<e>,
according to the vowel contained in the root of the
word)
had also been taken and preserved in the slightly altered
form "-almã", which in Romanian has no meaning whatsoever
-> hence: no use -> ergo: no wonder that you don't find
it in other Romanian lexical occurrences. But this would
- at least IMHO - be a hint that the word is a loanword
from Hungarian.
The Romanian language could've supplied lots of suffixes
in the stead of the Hungarian one (e.g. -ire, -intzã, -i$,
-ialã &c.); moreover, there was no impossibility for the
verb <a suduí> to be put into another flexion cathegory,
of the rest fo them: -áre, -ére, -'-ere. But no, the
ancestors who adapted the Hungarian word preferred the
fourth conjugation (-íre) for the verb and a weird
non-Romanian suffix attached to the root: sud+alma. Which
suffix obviously evokes the typical Hungarian -elem/-alom
kind of suffix (the counterpart to -ness, -dom, -vowel+ty,
-(t)ion). Last but not least: the noun Romanian <sudalma>
is translated into Hungarian as <szidalom>.
>but for sure the insertion of a vowel beween a consonant
>cluster ('lm' in this case)
The -elem/alom phenomenon has nothing to do with it.
>is something specific to Hungarian loanwords (see Hungarian
>form 'kereszteny' (sorry if my spelling is wrong) for
>Christianus).
This has nothing in common with the aforementioned examples
(phenomena). <Kereszt> "cross" is a mere Hungarian
adaptation of <Christ>, with the typical "auxiliary" vowel
introduced in order to avoid the initial cluster [kr-].
-ény [e:ñ] is a highly frequent Hungarian suffix, which
seems to correspond to the Lat. suffixes -in-us, -a, -um
& -ian-us, -a, -um. So <keresztény> fits <Christi(a)nus>
(and for that matter Romanian <cre$tin>, French <chrétien>
and Engl. <Christian>. But in onomastics, AFAIK, there is
only the older adapted variant Krizsán ['kriZa:n], of
which rare a Hungarian is aware that it means "Christian"
in some Slavic idiom [I don't know which one: Slovak?]).
>lm loaned as lom in Hungarian
Nope, there ain't no such thing as *lm becoming -lom,
but -alom or -elem. Moreover, similar endings are
common endings in flexing verbs, e.g. rühelem "I loathe,
detest, abhor".
And last but not least, consider the word <halom> ['hOlom]
"mound, heap, hillock" that turns <halma> ['hOlmO], i.e.
a *flected* variant, in genitival environments in a sentence.
As you can see, Hungarian itself creates lexems with -alma
(let alone the word <alma> ['OlmO] "appel", which can be
compared with Turkic <elma> and <alma> -> Alma Ata).
>Best Regards,
> Marius
George
[snip fullquote]
>>>Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
>>>http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
>>>
>>>the art of quoting
>>>http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/quotingguide.html
[snip the rest of it]