>What's the general opinion of the age of the -eÅti suffix?
I don't know. If it is the plural changing of the singular -esc,
then it must be PIE-old (either via Latin -isk, or via a substrate
-isk). Perhaps it's contained in the hydronym Tibiscum and in
the place name Transmarisca, and perhaps in Resculum too.
For -sk- in the area cf. G. Mikhailov (or Mihailov), Le suffixe
-sk- en Thrace, in: Linguistique Balkanique, XXX, 1987, Sofia.
If -e$ti were a continuation of -(e)st- for place names, then in
Romanian its perception as such is unknown (lost). Romanian
perceives -e$ti, as I said, as the plural of -esc. And this one
has a semantic value of an adjective ("what kind of?") similar
to -esco, similar to Germanic -isk & -isch. (So Ionescu would
have a perfect equivalent in the German variants such as
Hänsch, Henschel, Jensch - I mean as far as -isch or -'sch is
implemented in such names.)
So, if -e$ti is supposed to also represent some substrate
place name suffix, then it would have two different meanings
(and perhaps origins). And its origin might be rather -sk-
than -st-.
The other one, -i$te, is deemed as a Slavic "import" and it's
primarily used for areas covered with certain plants/cultures
(or if they're harvested, cut). Even if this one might share
the etymon with the one contained in Trieste, they are
different (and, thus, not interchangeable).
(It "competes" in some cases with the suffix -i$ [iS] and, to
a lesser extent, with -et, which has Lat. origin. These two
are rather used for forest trees. The oak is one rare example
that fits all of these: stejar > stejäri$, stejäret, stejäri$te;
and this is the order of the awareness: all Romanians know of
stejäri$, yet stejäret and esp. stejäri$te are known only by
some - I myself had to look 'em up to be sure that there exist
stejäri$te, and it does, as regional variant; yet I can't tell
in which Romanian-speaking it is popular.)
And not to mix 'em up with the suffix -e$te, which is the
adverbial one linked to the same (masc.) -esc, (fem.) -eascä
(e.g. "weiblich" adj. muieresc, femeiesc > adv. muiere$te,
femeie$te).
>Does Trieste have it own name in Romanian? 'TîrgeÅti'?
I assume there ain't no such place name. There are several Târgu,
TârguÅor & the like (with the still transparent meaning "market
place"); as well as the most notorious one, with the slavic -i$te
suffix, Târgovi$te (which is like Trhovište), Dracula's capital. :)
Seemingly, there is no Târgule$ti/Tîrgule$ti either. But there
is at least one Târguleni/Tîrguleni, i.e. târg + def. art. -ul
+ the plural of the place name suffix -(e)an: -eni. {-eni is
as productive as -e$ti, if not even more prolific, in the
concoction of place names}.
George
PS: Dierna, Tierna, Tsierna vs. Cerna:
<<[Cicerone] Poghirc (in _Istoria limbii române_, 5.41)
betrachtet Cerna als "eine slawische Angleichung des
alten rumänischen Namen". Er weist darauf hin (_Istoria
limbii române_, 5.1), daà der ON [Ortsname] Dierna,
Tierna, Zerna, heutiges Cerna, von [Bogdan Petriceicu]
Hasdeu mit dem dakischen Pflanzennamen _pro-diárna_
"Nieswurz", lat Veratrum nigrum. "A se zîrni [zârni]"
heiÃt, von Pflanzen sprechend, "schwarz werden"; "zîrna"
[or zârna] ist auch ein Epitheton für "schwarzes Schaf".>>
(so the substrate word is akin to the Slavic one)
<<[G.] Schramm (_Eroberer_, 25.1 [_Eroberer und
Eingesessene_, Stuttgart, 1981]) meint, daà der aktuelle
FlN [Flussname]Cerna eine slawische Benennung ist, die
weder eine lautgetreue Wiedergabe des ursprünglichen
Namen, noch eine Ãbersetzung desselben darstellt, sondern
eine Angleichung eines irgendwie "im Klange benachbarten"
Wortes.
Man muà hier daran erinnern, daà es im Dakischen schon
ein Wort gibt, daà sicher mit Cerna ins Slawische übersetzt
wurde, nämlich Axi- in Axiopa, das slawisch Cernavoda heiÃt.>>
in: Bratu, Ioana, Lokale Ortsnamen in den auf dem Gebiet
Rumäniens gefundenen Inschriften, N. Brockmeyer, Bochum,
1992