--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tolgs001" <st-george@> wrote:
> >
> [ye]
> diphtongation (which some linguists have assumed to have occurred
> under Slavic influence, warranted or not, I dunno).
Slavic INFLUENCE?
For e/accented > je in Romanian, Albanian and Dacian?
In this case DACIAN Diegis 'the Fervent One' (Decebal's General)
is also a Slavic Name?
Albanian djeg for the same root 'to burn' is from Slavic too?
Romanian viedzure & Albanian vjedhull are also from Slavic?
Please quote a single linguist among that 'some linguists' that
you 'quoted' above...these 'some linguists' are your invention or
they belong to the same category as you.
All these because we have e/accented > ye in Ariesh and you didn't
like this?
I'm perplex until where you can arrive with your bad intentions
For your 'apprentissage' George:
e/accented > ye (ya in closed syll. as in sharpe < sjarpe)
is present in Dacian, Romanian & Albanian
-------------------------------------------------------
It Started : Before Roman Times because is present in Dacian
It Ended : Before the Arrival of Slavs in Balkans
Because Romanian l'ene is from Slavic lĕni
and Romanian i'epure is from Latin leporis
Intelegi macar atata lucru George ca nu poate fi din Slava?
Acuma Intelegi George, ca:
The River Ariesh was NAMED ALREADY Ariesh Before the Slav arrival
in Transylvannia? => can you understand that the name of the River
was Ariesh too in sec VI?
Why?
Because e > je ended and sy > sh ended too when the Slavs arrived
..and the Hungarian arrived 400 years later than the Slavs
Now should be obvious also for you that *Aur-esya is for sure the
Dacian name of that river especially because that place was
named 'the GOLD PLACE/VALLEY' => see also 'loco qui dicitur Aureus'
(1075)
and the rivers in the Dacian times were named :
Ma:resya, > today Muresh
Sa:mesya, > today Somesh
Timbisya, > today Timish
Pa-Tits(s)ya > today Tisa
Crisya > today Crish (Korosh for Hungarians when
they have loaned the name beacuse kr- is not possible in Hungarian,
Ardzjesya > today Argesh
EXACTLY IN THE SAMER WAY AS:
*Auresya > today Ariesh
now can you understand that Hungarian Aranjos is a translation of
Arjesh < *Aur-esja using the Magyar suffix -any that is 'exactly' the
equivalent of the Dacian suffix -esya > Romanian -esh and not vice-
versa
Marius
P.S. : 'Remain to say' that e>ye (with a Timeframe: started Before
Roman Time (in Dacian Times) and ended before the Slavs arrivals in
Balkans) is a Hungarian transformation that have influenced all
together the Dacian, the Romanian and the Albanian