Re: [tied] Words with nucleus *-eu- & *-ou-

Abdullah Konushevci wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
>> there is too Rum. "rumen" and "roshcat" ( of course, roshu as well)
>> which are explained as such:
>> "rumen" should be from Slavic, "roshu" from Latin "roseus" and
>> "roshcat" is not explained via any suffix. I was not aware of
> Albanian
>> "nryshk" which appears is the same as Rum. "roshcat" until now.
>>
>> Alex
> ************
> Yes, by all means, <rumen> 'light red' is a Slavic loan. Exists also
> denominal <za-rumen-iti> (cf. above za-rud-iti) etc.
> Albanian base is n-rysh-k(n <*H1en, rysh <*ru:s and -k diminutive
> suffix), so Rom. <roshcat>, except vocalism, is akin to Alb.
> <*ryshk>. Problem, for me, is Rom. suffix -at.
>
> Konushevci
>

there is nothing to bother about. The word is an adjective made up like
the participial adjectives with the suffix "-at"; presumabely there has
been once a verb "a in/*roshca" which now is completely replaced by
"inroshi" and it has survived just the adjective "roshcat".
There is the need for an explanation about "u" > "o" apparently with no
reason. Maybe the word has been simply influenced by "roshu"(red) and it
became "roshkat" from an "rushkat" but this is simply speculation.


Alex