Richard Wordingham wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Grzegorz Jagodzinski"
> <grzegorj2000@...> wrote:
>
>>> My hypothesis regarding the nomenclature is that a people settled
> at Rome,
>>> who called each other *ro:m ('adult human'[PCR]), and, collectively
>>> *ro:m-a:. When they needed to designate an individual as a member
> of the
>>> *ro:ma:, they called him/her *ro:ma:-n(o). When they wanted to
> specify
>>> several *ro:ma:-n(o), they formed a plural *ro:ma:n-i. If there is
>>> anything linguistically objectionable to this theorized process, I
>>> would be glad to learn of it.
>>
>>
>> Dear linguists here, what do you think on this etymology? Does it
>> sound probable? Is it science or true fiction?
>
> It doesn't seem impossible - English place names like Worthing, which
> are basically clan names, do exist. Pure speculation seems a better
> description.
>
> Richard.
I did not mean the proposed meaning of the place name, I meant the specific
meaning *ro:m 'adult human'. But it is true, clear speculation, nothing
more. Do you know one fact which would give the basis for suspections that:
1) the word Ro:ma: was related to any word with the meaning "people" (I mean
evidence, not improbable and ridiculous comparisons with the Indic word
'black')
2) the suffix -a:no- can be analysed this way: {[(Ro:m)a:]no}-
And especially, do you know any evidence for *ro:m 'adult human' and *ro:ma:
'people'? Could you present more IE facts for *ro:m- 'man, people'? If it
had meant 'man', should not we have expected that more IE examples would
have been preserved? And could you present any evidence that Latin Ro:ma:
had ever had the meaning 'people'? Should we treat seriously such an
etymology, without correct comparison, without proved semantics, without
facts? Just a man, called himself "etymologist", opened a dictionary, found
a word in its very special meaning, found another word in another
dictionary, even not having similar meaning, and shouted that those words
are related. Is this etymology? Or rather a joke?
I am no longer surprised that many people do not want believe in any
nostratic and long-range etymologies, if such methods are used and fantasies
are termed etymologies.
Until I see the evidence, I will be stating that all this is nothing more
but mere fantasy. And I will be stating that it has nothing to do with
science.
And this is about Latin Ro:ma:. Now about the Sanskrit word. Let's take the
two following citation now:
"All Roma originated in India. Which part of India, is another question.
From their language, many experts feel the Roma originated in Greater Punjab
(NE Pakistan, NW India and most of Rajasthan). There is solid evidence for
this assumption since many Punjabis today can understand some of the Roma
language, depending upon the dialect. But the grammar is another matter.
Roma grammar indicates an origin in NE India, in the area of Bihar, the
ancestral homeland of the pre¥Dravidian people called the Dom. Since the "d"
and the "r" in Panjabi are interchangeable, many experts feel that the Rom
and Dom are one in the same. From my experience with both people, I believe
they are related because they share so many customs., traditions, oral
histories, characteristics and music. For the past few thousand years, the
Doms have also been found in Greater Punjab under a series of subcastes,
namely the Banjari and Khebeli (Gabeli) who have maintained their caste
names in Eastern Europe."
(
http://www.chgs.umn.edu/Educational_Resources/Curriculum/Gypsies_of_Kosova/History/history.html)
"The significations of the names mentioned in the previous pages will help
us trace the etymology of the word Rom". Paspati thinks that the word "Rom"
is derived from Rama. From the Sanskrit root ram (ramate, rama) (Vedic also
ramati or ramnati) rama, ramna are formed.
Rama in Sanskrit has the following meanings:
- One who pervades and operates all:
- One who roams about. 'Ramta Ram' in Panjabi is one who roams about. In
Sanskrit the word virama means to stop: viramati (he takes rest) and if you
remove the prefix vi, rama should have the opposite meanings 'non-stop,
moving'
- Dark-coloured: In the Vedas the word 'rama' has been used in the sense of
black and not as a proper noun.
- Husband ' which is the same as in the Romani language.
- Pleasing, delighting, charming (in Sankrit ramana is masculine and ramapi
feminine and in Romani language the feminine is also romni (meaning 'wife').
Because of their oriental features and the wheatish colour of their skin,
the Roma are considered beautiful and charming.
- One who pleases or delights others. Roma of Europe do please others and
delight others by their exellent music and dances."
(
http://www.romani.org/rishi/retyrom.html)
As they are popular texts (not less popular than the text of P. Ryan
anyway), we may believe them or not. But I am curious if really "ra:ma" was
_not_ used as a proper name in the Vedas. If yes, it would be a very strong
argument that ra:ma pl. 'a name of a people' is nothing more than just 'the
Black'. The fact is that many dictionaries do not even mention this meaning.
Grzegorz J.
___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos
http://uk.photos.yahoo.com