Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>> why exactly *gUpan with "gU"?
>
> Because Czech /h/ comes from /g/, and the yer that follows
> after /g/ must be /U/.
or from "k" (are there several other posiblites?) I remember about
"hrijovatka" (intersection)
>
>> I keep in mind the time frame where the change "an" > "1n" since the
>> Rom. reflex of the word is "jup1n". The "ju" could be yelded out
>> off "g^u" or "iu" but the Slavic "an" remains "an" in Rom. and does
>> not become "�n".
>
> Except in old borrowings, like st�p�n, jup�n.
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...
There are in fact just two words considered to be of Slavic origin which
shows "�n" and you told them. "st�p�n" and "jup�n". For "jup�n" one can
say:
1) there is the word "jupan" which is considered to be the Slavic
"z^upanU". Paralel with this word is the word "jup�n" which cannot be
from the same word "z^upanU", thus even DEX avoid to consider it from
Slavic, but it gives "unknown etymology".
2) for "st�p�n" there was long time considered Slavic "stopanU" as being
the etymon. The second problem beside "an" > "�n" is the change of
Slavic "o" to Rom. "�" which is not sustaining by anything. Thus, we
have two phonetical problems which speaks against loaning it from
Slavic. The same phonetical problems allow very well the loan from Rom.
into Slavic since Rom. *stapanu could yeld very well Slavic *stopanU.Of
course one should know the quality of the vowels here for being sure of
that. I wonder how Dacian "Diurpaneus" appears in Latin texts. With long
or short "a"?
Alex
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03.02.2005