willemvermeer wrote:
> On the role of Church Slavonic it makes sense to consult such
> collections as Rosetti, Istoria III, pp. 64-68. Some of those words
> are obviously Church Slavonic, e.g. "a blagoslovi" or "sfa^nt", which
> have a technical meaning. Some of them are bound to have originated
> in the popular language, e.g. "pleava'", also on account of its
> meaning. Some of them I'm glad I don't have to determine, such
> as "vreme" and "va'zduh" and many others. As in the case of other
> languages, notable Romance ones, the presence of "�l�ments savants"
> confuses the issues. But then again, the issues were murky already,
> so I'm not complaining.
>
>
>
> Good cheer,
>
>
>
> Willem
I said: "In so far I am informed, the languages used by Slavonic Church did
not
played any building role in the language of Romanians."
I meant herewith that these elements cannot be considered as loans due the
"bilinguismus" and melting of population, but they are very interesting to
compare with the words considered from Slavic, prior to IX century, words
considered as being borrowed just due the bilinguismus of the populations.
The phonetic changes are very attractive to be studied since even Rosetti in
his ILR III makes some affirmations which appears very interesting. I will
pick just some of ideas of him here:
1)-Rom. lang is made up out off autochtoneus main elements ( thracian and
illyrian ), Latin and Slavic (pg. 285)
2)-The Slavs have learned Romanian because this was a prestigious language
since it was belonging to the Roman culture and because of the economic
power of the Romanic population ( p. 291)
3) he quotes Jokl which says "In Albanian the pastoral Albanians assimilated
the agricultural Slavs" ( p. 292)
4) the oldes loans into Romanian have Bulgarian character, but a different
characted as these spoken in _South_ of Bulgaria, namely these phonetic
charcter are to find in the _North-East_ of Bulgaria. (p. 298)
5) there are some Hungarian loans which can be explained phoneticaly just
via Bulgarian ( p. 299)
6) if the Slavic words are present in DR and AR then they are previous to
the X century ( p. 308)
7) the Slavic influence on Albanian, Hungarian and Greek should have happen
after the nasal vocals "o~, e~" dissapered in the South Slavic. On the
contrary, these loans in Romanian, they present the nasals there.
I consider these aspects interesting enough since they bild an image which
can tell us what was wrong there. Apparently the contact between Slavs and
Romanians, did happened somewhere in the North-East of the Slavic controlead
area, the Hungarian loans which are comming via Bulgarian appears to be in
concordance with the extending of the Bulgar Empire in Panonia before
Hungarians ( confirmed by historical facts); more the contact between
Hungarians and Romanians should have happened later since apparently the
Hungarians first have had other direction as South-East from Panonia (
things confirmed by historical facts). From these aspects we are somehow
obliged to place the DacoRomanians North of Bulgars and East of Hungarians.
A suplimentary aspect should be seen from the Cumanic loans into Romanian
since the phonetic aspect of the words do not apply to these of Turkish, but
to these of the Cumans. This aspect force us to put the DR too more North,
namely north of Danuber, and East of Carpathian.
Complicated this puzzle, isn't it?:-))
Alex
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.3 - Release Date: 21.12.2004