> PS: There's no need to mention Potaissa/Patavissa, the ancient
> Dacian-Roman place name. It wasn't as famos as, say, Lutetia,
> Bonna, Vindobonna, Mediolanum etc., so very few people outside
> Romania have heard/read of it. And Turda < Hungarian Torda
> might reflect some Turkic tribal community, Torta, that was in-
> cluded in the primeval Hungarian confederation that changed
> places in 896, moving from Ukraine to Pannonia.
I put Potaissa because more people knows that name not the Turda
one... :)
Torda means nothing in Hungarian. My best friend is hungarian and
he confirmed me this.
Turda is the first city attested on what is today Romania.
This attestation is on 1075: where the city is attested as Turda
(with u as in Romanian and not with o as in Hungarian).
Also this theory that 'might reflect some Turkic tribal community'
is very vague to...
As on my side I arrived to well derived Turda from Potaissa.
In fact the real Dacian name was *Patarwitsa /patarwica/ (you can
find the rwi attested at Ptolemeus: Patruissa (wrong considered as a
corrupted form because the rui was really there). Other attested
forms Patauissa Potauissa Potaissa)
Roman transcription of Dacian sounds:
-------------------------------------
1. Roman ss -> is the notation of Dacian ts /c/
2. Roman ui /wi/ -> is for rui /rwi/ (see also the rui /rwi/ really
attested at Ptolemeu: Patruissa at:
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gazetteer/Periods/Roman/_Texts/P
tolemy/3/8*.html)
The derivation is:
1. *Patarwitsa [pa- -> zero as in Patissus (attested) > (today)
Tisa 'river name'] > *Tarwitsa
2. *Tarwitsa [alternation a-w > u-w similar as in Ma:ris > Mures] >
*Turwitsa or Rom. mamã > Rom. mumã]
3. *Turwitsa [rw > rr as in PAlb arrë] > *Turritsa
4. *Turritsa [contraction: lost of non-accented i] < *Turrtsa
5. *Turrtsa [ rts > rdz; see Albanian mërdhi <-> Romanian amortsi]
>Turrdza
6. *Turrdza > [dz > dh -> see Alb modhull < Rom madzãre] > Turrdha >
Turda (even today the local pronunciation is Turrdha...but the
Romanian alfabet doesn't have rr and dh..)
So this word shows a complete Dacian evolution that indicates you
that the Dacians remained there long after Roman retreat (271 AC)
Even you will have doubts on the above derivation => please take Only
into account the lost of initial Pa as in Patissus (in reality
*Patitsja > [see tj>s in PAlb] > Tisa (that is the Key Point here)
and you already obtained *Tarwitsa.
*Tarwitsa > Turda is not so far, isn't it? so there is no need to
add 'an unidentified Turkic tribe' here.
Best Regards,
marius