--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> > So the reflexive form Alb. PUTHEM means (only III. pers) 'to make
sex'
> > and Romanian PUT,A means '(small) penis'
>
> This is somewhat Ruhlenian. The core meanings of Alb. puth-
are 'kiss,
> caress, touch with the mouth', etc. (I assume meanings
like 'collate,
> dovetail' are figurative), and the reciprocal sense 'to make sex'
may be
> a euphemism of no particular antiquity. How do you know it fits
into
> your "time frame", especially in the absence of anything directly
> corresponding to the Romanian word? (fem. *puthë 'penis' would fit
the
> bill, but where is it?). Demiraj's derivation of <puth> from *bHus-
dH-,
> is completely unlikely: it's a safe bet that the word is simply
> sound-imitative and was coined within Albanian.
>
> Piotr
>
Piotr, let's agree first on Albanian puth
------------------------------------------
1. Why is a safe bet?
Do you know Albanian verbs constructed with -th- ? I didn't.
If yes, please shows us these verbs
If no, you will need to agree that -th- in this Albanian root
belongs to the root (or its a back derived verb from a noun,etc..),
BUT it cannot be explained in anyway from as an extension of an
onomatopeic bu~pu
=> Demiraj knows this , otherwise why to try *bHus-dH?
=> Pedersen knows this, otherwise why he didn't follow 'the
safe bet' if this path is so obvious, as you said?
2. If -th-, belongs to the root we cannot have other root here but
*puk^- => end this is quit the same root as in English 'fuck'
This sexual connotations '1. to kiss, 2. to fuck' similar 'to
fuck' really enforce the proposed etymology
3. Next accepting this, we know that the original meaning of the root
*peuk^ was NOT AT ALL related to TO KISS
Yourself, indicated 'to punch' I could add 'to sting' etc...
4. So the semantic evolution of Albanian puth was:
PIE 'to punch' > 'to have sex' (thks, again to correct me)
(Germanic 'fuck' is here too) > Albanian 'to kiss'
and not: to punch > to kiss > to make sex
5. The PAlbanian/Dacian? form of puth was *PUTSA, both of us have
agreed on this...
Based on 4, you cannot say in any circumstances THAT the PAlbanian
meaning of *PUTSA has nothing to do with the meaning 'to have sex'
(even today the meaning is there...in Alb. puthem) and if Germanic
fuck is cognate : the sexual connotation here is above any doubt
Based on 1-5 : I see, as very probable, that Albanian puth to be
originated from puk^- and cognate with English fuck
II. Now regarding Romanian putsa 'penis'
-------------------------------------------
Albanian 'bardza:' is not there either as 'the known bird' => but
based on this: would you assert that Romanian bardza has nothing to
do with with Albanian 'bardh&' 'white'? I hope not.
Plesae find below : some other Romanian Substratual words that
don't have direct Albanian counter parts:
One of them is :
Romanian burta that is originated from *barukta: so it cannot be
loaned directly from Albanian bark that is originated from *baruka:
The second one is:
Romanian vizuina that don't have a counter part in Albanian (at
least, as I know) BUT you cannot ignore that is well originated from
*wedzul-ina < viezurina
The third one:
Romanian br^andza 'cheese' is there and there is no such word in
Albanian but it's PIE root 'screams' inside it
Same thing for Romanian m&lai (no Albanian direct counterpart but
its PIE root is there too and Albanian miell is there too)
Same thing regarding Romanian pandza etc...
And I can still give you a lot of other examples too...
To conclude:
Albanian /puth&/ 'penis' is not there either, you are right: but
Albanian verb puth (pronounced in PAlb *PUTSA 'to kiss, to make sex')
is here ...and Romanian noun PUTSA 'penis' is here too...
and I show you, above, that the fact that Romanian preserved
words that are not directly present in today Albanian is not
something new
(Rosetti demonstration against 'Albanian loans' theory, were based in
fact on this : the loans reflects exactly what 'was loaned': that is
not the case here)
So we don't have to deal here with 'Albanian loans in Romanian'
(this is a wrong model) => but with 2 Balkans Dialects belonging to
the same Old Language : one dialect is that one of Romanian
Substratum, the other one is the PAlbanian One: otherwise you cannot
explain in anyway, based on 'Albanian Loans' theory Romanian words
like: brandza, malai, vizuina, burta, pandza, mis,ka etc...
The 2 Dialects split Before the Balkan Romanization started, from
here a lot of similar forms&words but not quite identical ones that
were preserved in Romanian and Albanian
So Finally PAlbanians said *PUTSA for 'to kiss, to have sex' and
The Balkan Latin said *PUTSA(:) for 'penis' IN THE SAME TIME, IN THE
SAME ZONE: and you try to tell me here that these 2 forms has nothing
to do one with the other?
In addition, the Germanic 'fuck' and the PIE root *peuk^-/*puk^-
leads us to an original meaning of PUTSA that wasn't at all "to kiss"'
Sorry, Piotr, but I think I'm right here.
Marius