>> 3. Hun 'fogát csikorgatja' 'to gnash one's teeth ' <->
>> Serb.-Cr. 'škrgutati' 'id.,'
>
> Inconclusive without further explanation. It's not immediately
> obvious to a non-Slavicist that there should ever have been a VrV in
> the Hungarian.
Whether the above is relevant or not, in the Hungarian word, -at-ja are
Hungarian endings with specific semantics and grammar significance
(here -ja: 3rd person, singular). I strongly doubt that the Slavic
ending(s?) -utati != Hung. -(o)gatja.
Actually, the same applies to -g -> actually -og, since the verb is
csikorog and the [o] before this -g is dropped because of the
attachment of -at + the flexion endings.
Here the csikor ['c^ikor] word family:
http://csikor.notlong.com
OTOH, is there anything compelling to prompt a conclusion that the
Hung. verb is a loanword? I suppose both to be reflexes of onomatopoeic
utterances (similar e.g. to Rum. <scrâ$ni/re, scârtzâi/re>, Engl.
<grat, screech, grit>, Ger. <knirsch/en, knarz/en, kritze-kratze,
kratz/en>, Lat. <crepitatio>, if I ain't wrong).
>> 4. kereszteny < Christianus
>
> Reduction to CVrC is blocked by the /t/.
IMHO, what's significant in the comparison ['kæræst-] and ['krist-] is
only the fact that in old Hung. one needed a further vowel there in
order to get rid of the "awful" [kr-]. (BTW, kereszt, without the
suffix -ény, means... "cross")
>> 5. karacsony < Rom. 'Craciun' 'Christmas'
>
> This would be interesting if we had any confidence in the origin of
> this word. Last year's discusssion of it did not come to any
> confident conclusion.
Slavic krac^un might also have inspired karácsony.
> Richard.
g