From: Rick McCallister
Message: 51369
Date: 2008-01-18
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski____________________________________________________________________________________
> <gpiotr@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2008-01-17 22:11, ualarauans wrote:
> >
> > > Could you please recommend some reliable and
> easy-to-get source
> for
> > > the origin and etymology of these words?
> >
> > I wonder if there is one. Etymological
> dictionaries may be
> helpful, but
> > I don't think it has occured to anyone to write a
> monograph about
> > obscene words in Slavic (which is a pity). And as
> for
> dictionaries... I
> > have just discovered, to my severe disappointed,
> that Vasmer's
> Russian
> > etymological dictionary, otherwise so complete,
> has none of the
> three
> > worst ones (by which I mean two nouns and one
> verb). How
> Victorian! Just
> > like the New English Dictionary omitting the two
> most tabooed
> English
> > tetragrammata. Derksen has an entry for the verb
> *(j)ebati,
> presumably
> > because its Sanskrit and Greek cognates make it
> too time-honoured
> to be
> > ignored, but I can't see the nouns there. Aren't
> the Baltic and
> Albanian
> > connections of *pizda 'cunt' respectable enough?
> Even good old
> Pokorny
> > has an entry for it!
> >
> > Those words present interesting comparative
> problems and certainly
> > deserve to be discussed; in particular the exact
> relation of Gk.
> oípHo:
> > (and zépHuros) to *jebati and Skt. yábHati _has_
> been much
> discussed
> > (however, without reaching firm conclusions).
> There is a brief
> > discussion of these issues in Beekes's Greek
> dictionary in the
> relevant
> > entries.
>
> Thanks for the clues. BTW I heard a weird idea that
> these words
> originally were a part of a sacral vocabulary
> utilized in fertility
> cults and that their semantic degradation started
> with Christianity.
> Etymological parallels in other IE languages if
> found could shed
> some light upon this.
>
> Makovsky in his Sravnitel'nyj slovar'
> mifologic^eskoj simvoliki v
> indoevropejskix jazykax (1996) reconstructs for the
> "basic formula"
> _j**b tvoju mat'_ the original meaning "be thou
> cursed with [my]
> word/hand" (pp. 188-201, s.v. kliatva). I'm not sure
> if that makes
> sense. Opinions?
>
>