Re: The scientist's etymology debate

At 1:00:19 AM on Friday, June 6, 2008, Carl Hult wrote:

[...]

> To me the latin caseus "tastes" like it been introduced
> from elsewhere.

The source of Lat. <ca:seus> is an altogether different
matter from the point that you raised previously and address
again below, namely, whether it is in turn the source of the
Gmc. 'cheese' words.

[...]

> Anyway, the romans loved soft cheese and since the word
> caseus didn't live on that long (I do however think
> italian keeps a version of the word in dialects, correct
> me if I'm wrong here) and formaggio, fromage and so on
> took its place it couldn't have had a very strong position
> within the roman society and vocabulary.

This is nonsense: consider the Latin and Romance words for
'horse'.

> I know that isn't a strong case I'm building but unless
> someone gives me a text where it says "we took the word
> cheese from the romans" I will go on doubting the
> etymology for the word cheese, at least as far as germanic
> speakers getting it from the romans.

Then you're wasting your time and ours on what is
essentially a matter of faith for you rather than something
subject to scientific inquiry.

> Rush hasn't been discussed. Does that mean that you agree
> with me (and Elof Hellquist) in not thinking the english
> word rush comes from a latin source or has it been
> forgotten?

He does not appear to say anything about the English word.

I have no strong opinion about the English word: I've not
investigated it.

> Well, even I as an amateur can see that the kinship
> between church and circle is rather dumb. But it's the
> same there. It's a lot better than the greek alternative.

No, it isn't.

> We know that scandinavians were present at the court in
> Byzantion and we know that they learned a lot from being
> there in terms of military, trade and customs. But since
> the phrase kyriakon doma is attested only once in
> literature, [...]

This is dealt with in my original response to you.

Brian