[tied] Re: h3elh1- => destroy, anihilate

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, alex <alxmoeller@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > alexandru_mg3 schrieb:
> >
> > > > > As far as I see, hal in Romanin has exactly the
> > > meaning 'situation,
> > > > > position', so I am afraid that it is really the loan from
> Turkish.
> > >
> > > No. Romanian hal has almost the same meaning as the Albanian

word.

> > >
> > > "In ce hal esti!" -> 'In what disaster/physical-trouble/bad-

status

> > > you are!'
> >
> >
> > and what should be wrong here if the original semantism was
> > "postion", "situation"? It appears to me that this "hal" fits
> > perfectly the other turkish loans, having as most of them a
> > peiorative connotion and a big spot of colour in speach when
> someone
> > use these kind of words. Honestly, I guess this is a loan from
> > Turkish. This "hal" has synonims just bad position, bad situation
> > bad habit, bad aspect thus the meaning which fits the
> Arabic/Turkish
> > meaning. Actually it is a "Bereicherung" of the language having a
> > word which means bad position, habit, situation, aspect, looking
> and
> > you can say them all just using "hal".The semnatism developed as
> > almost all other words from Turkish, they have been used on the

low

> > level stilistic scala. They are there to be used mostly

peiorative

> > less they mean something to eat or drink :-))
> >
> > Alex
> >
>
> Sorry, Alex, but your explanation above is a pure 'ad-hoc' one.
>
> You know as me, that the Romanian word 'hal' clearly point to ' a
> very very bad situation, a big trouble, a bad injury etc..' (so
> nothing peiorative in this word) we don't have a word in Romanian

to

> indicate better 'the worst situation' than 'hal' (excluding of

course

> the 'dead' situation)
>
> On this aspect, Albanian and Romanian clearly point to one and the
> same word : now, if this word is a Turkish loan, than it should be

a

> Turkish loan in both Languages.
>
> So if in Turkish, the word has/had a 'minimum' meaning of 'bad,
> trouble, sorrow' OK for me, but if not, the semantic will not fit

=>

> why 2 languages, separated by more than 600 KM when the Turks

arrived

> in Balkans, to develop such a similar meaning that didn't exist in
> the supposed source language?
>
> Marius
>

Same for Romanian/Albanian hai , haide, haidi 'come! come on! come
here!' weong considred from Turkish

'I can saw' inside hai/haidi/haide
a) the PIE imperative suffix -dHi and
b) the PIE Root *h1ei - to go etc...


so if Rom/Alb HAI, HAIDE is from Turkish , than Turkish is an IE
language

Marius