Re: [tied] Re: Albanian valle 'circular dance' - Proto-Albanian for

On 04-11-17 15:00, alexandru_mg3 wrote:

> As pre-requisite I want only to add that Albanian "valle"
> Romanian "hora" and Bulgarian "horo" is the same dance. Same
> movements , same rythm, same formation: really the same dance.
> Do you know this? I suppose yes.

(Sigh.) But is it the same word? You haven't even provided any other
examples of Romanian <h-> reflecting *w, so what are we talking about?
The equation is totally ad hoc.

> Next your scenario is the following:
> Albanians plays this dance for pre-historic times naming it "valle"
> maybe PAlb *walwo:- from PIE *wel-7....

Your faith in the depth of this tradition is touching, but can you in
any way substantiate your claim that the very same dance has been danced
since prehistoric times AND that its name can't have changed, so it MUST
be as ancient as the hills?

> But Bulgarians learn the same dance from Greeks (by the way the
> Greek word that you proposed is not at all the name of this dance...)
> or
> Bulgarians having their own dance (by a strange coincidence the
> same dance as Albanian 'valle') named this dance by loaning a Greek
> word to named it...
> or
> Bulgarians learning the dance from Albanians not used the Albanian
> name for it, but used a loaned Greek word for dance,music,etc.. to
> name this dance.

Gk. kHoros meant 'dance' especially as a public or religious ceremony,
and typically as a form of ring dance; it could also mean 'a band of
dancers and singers, a choir', or a circular ground where dances could
be held (even the agora, as in Sparta). The verb <kHoreuo:> could refer
to ring-dancing or to any circling movement, such as the motions of
celestial bodies. No semantic problem here.

> On their turn the Romanians that shared in common hundred of words
> with Albanians, and live together from (at least) before Decebal's
> time (before 100AC) didn't know anything about the Albanians dances,
> and especially regarding 'valle' dance, because they cannot or didn't
> want to learn nothing about this one.
>
> In contrary, Romanian are waiting for about 600-700 or 800
> hundred years...in order to can learn this dance and/or especially
> the name of this dance.
>
> a) first The Romanians are waiting for Bulgarians to arrive in
> Balkans (for about 500-600 years) in order to learn the dance
> played 'each day' by Albanians that are near them in all this
> period...
>
> b) next the Romanians are waiting for Bulgarians to learn this
> dance from Greeks or to learn the dance from Albanians and next to
> loaned a Greek word in order to name it.
>
> c) Finally at the end the Romanians decided or arrived to learn
> this dance from Bulgarians after about for 700-800 years, when during
> all this period they saw 'each day' this dance played by Albanians
> that lived near them.

Why not? We have the same name for the round dance in Turkish and Modern
Hebrew (!) as a result of a recent chain of borrowing.

> If this is the logic that you, Piotr and Abdullah, are trying to
> sustain here, I'm sorry for it.
>
> Now the logic that I proposed is the following :
>
> I will resume my logic below:
> -------------------------------
> As pre-requisite I want only to add that Albanian "valle"
> Romanian "hora" and Bulgarian "horo" is the same dance. Same
> movements , same rythm, same formation.
>
> Next my scenario is the following:
> Albanians plays this dance for pre-historic times naming
> it "valle" maybe PAlb *walwo:- from PIE *wel-7....
>
> Romanian that share the same substratum with Albanians or have a
> very close one, learned this dance at least in the times when the
> name of the dance was *walwo:- (or someting similar) so in Proto-
> Albanian (Dacian?) times...
>
> When Bulgarians arrived in Balkans they learned this dance from
> Romanians and of course also the word (at that time the word sound
> very close to something like *horua / *horoa), maybe because the
> Romanians where much closer to Bulgarians than the Albanians were at
> that time.
>
> (I want to add that there is no issue to derive Romanian hora
> from PAlb *walwo:- PIE *wel-7 )

If you mean that the derivation is unproblematic, then of course I
disagree. See above on the initial .

> So Piotr, is possible to qualify my logic above like:
> "It fully qualifies as flogging a dead horse."
>
> and to consider your and Abdullah logic as the solution for this
> topic ?
>
> What should be the straightforward logic to follow here: mine or
> your?
>
> I'm sorry to say but your logic is not very logic here...

My logic is this: when the choice is between an etymology that presents
no formal or semantic problems and a contorted one that gives rise to
more problems than it purports to solve (even if it appeals to
somebody's sentiments), I choose the former. The word <horã> has been
discussed before in the context of one of Alex's old postings. That's
why this pseudo-problem qualifies as a dead horse.

Piotr