{"id":826,"date":"2016-06-22T17:46:55","date_gmt":"2016-06-22T17:46:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/?p=826"},"modified":"2016-06-22T17:46:55","modified_gmt":"2016-06-22T17:46:55","slug":"the-language-of-the-inscriptions-of-the-sinaia-tabletsii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/the-language-of-the-inscriptions-of-the-sinaia-tabletsii\/","title":{"rendered":"The Language of the Inscriptions of the Sinaia Tablets(II)"},"content":{"rendered":"
    \n
  1. acino<\/em>, aceno<\/em> \u2018region, territory\u2019 (005, 009, 016, 069-2, 098, 111, 122-3, 126, 129, 134). This term is not found in today\u2019s Romanian, but we can not say whether any of the Romanian Balkan dialect may have preserved it. For now, I do not know the origin of this Thraco-Dacian noun. However, it is possible that Romanian \u021binut<\/strong> \u2018region, territory\u2019 was rebuilt after acino<\/em> by folk etymology after the past participle of\u00a0 Romanian \u021bine<\/strong> \u2018to hold\u2019.<\/li>\n
  2. aevu<\/em>, aevio<\/em> \u2018dream, wish\u2019\u00a0 was preserved in today\u2019s Romanian adverb aevea<\/strong> (aievea) \u2018as in a real dream, as real, really\u2019 which is considered to be of Slavic origin, but the assumption is wrong (see DELR, aievea<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
  3. anio<\/em>, anu<\/em>, anoe<\/em> \u2018years (since…) in the year\u2019 (003, 031, 062, 130) are forerunner forms of Romanian an<\/strong> \u2018year\u2019, a cognate of Latin annus<\/em> ‘year’ (see DELR, an<\/strong>)<\/li>\n
  4. arami<\/em> \u2018altars, shrines\u2019 (117) aridu<\/em> \u2018poor\u2019 (045) asondue<\/em> \u2018incinerated \/ taken to heaven\u2019 (069) are cognates of Latin \u0101ra<\/em> \u2018altar, shrine\u2019. All these forms derive from PIE *as<\/strong>-, *azd<\/strong>-, *azg(h) – \u2018to burn\u2019 (IEW, 68) with a rhotacized intervocalic s<\/em> in both Latin and Thraco-Dacian, as well as in Umbrian are<\/em> \u2018shrines\u2019. The adjective aridu<\/em> \u2018poor\u2019 is a cognate of Latin aridus<\/em> \u2018dry\u2019, which\u00a0 \u00a0 was not preserved in Romanian, but it was reintroduced in the 19th century. Offshoots of this root are found in many other Indo-European languages, such as Hittite, Sanskrit and Germanic languages (cf. EDL, 49) . In this case, the suffix i<\/strong> is a plural suffix also in Romanian and other Indo-European languages (see DELR, arde<\/strong> \u2019to burn\u2019). It is unclear why in many other cases, nouns with a plural meaning have no plural endings and they seem to have singular forms.<\/li>\n
  5. arie<\/em> \u2018area, zone\u2019 (013) is a cognate of Latin \u0101rea<\/em> < \u0101r\u0113re \u2018<\/em>being dry, arid\u2019. It seems to derive from the same root PIE *as<\/strong>– *azd<\/strong>– *azg<\/strong>(h) \u2018to burn\u2019 as arami<\/em> (IEW, 68) above (see arami<\/em>, supra).<\/li>\n
  6. argeu<\/em> \u2018competence, governance, elevating\u2019 (080). It seems to derive from PIE * reg<\/strong>‘- * rog’<\/strong>– \u2018right, to lead, to straighten\u2019 (IEW, 854) with the metathesis of the lateral r<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
      \n
    1. armeo<\/em>, armoso<\/em>, armosa<\/em>, etc. \u2018army\u2019 (005, 013, 016-3, 025-2, 028-2, 042, 052, 080-2, 084, 092, 096, 120-2, 121, 126 128, 134), armeturie<\/em> \u2018(of) the weapons (of …) in (\u2026)’ (115), armu<\/em> \u2018by\u00a0 \u00a0 weapons\u2019. These forms are predecessors of Romanian arm\u0103<\/strong> \u2018weapon\u2019 and arma\u015f<\/strong> \u2018a third rank aristocrat in of Medieval Romanian hierarchy, commander of the artillery\u2019, cognates of Latin arma<\/em> \u2018weapon\u2019.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      102 a sile<\/em> (zile) p\u0103<\/em> \u2018when he was alive\u2019 (107) is an expression of three lexical elements: the preposition a<\/em> \u2018at, to\u2019, the noun sile<\/em> \u2018days\u2019 and preposition p\u0103 \u2018on, onwards\u2019 . All are all discussed separately and all have correspondent forms in modern Romanian.<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. asi<\/em> \u2018nation, race, family, local people\u2019 ((013), also esio<\/em>, esi, esie, esii<\/em> \u2018nation, tribe, people\u2019 (007, 040, 062, 079, 092, 108-2, 109, 115, 116) are cognates Latin\u00a0 assyr<\/em> \u2018blood\u2019. The root is found in many other Indo-European languages, all deriving from PIE * es-r<\/strong> * s-en-s<\/strong>– \u2018blood\u2019 is slightly different the one in Walde-Pokorny (IEW, 343). From the second form of this radical derives Thraco-Dacian songe<\/em>– (li<\/em>) \u2018(the) blood\u2019 (where –li<\/em> is a postposed definite article) also found on the Sinaia tablets which is the forerunner of Romanian s\u00e2nge<\/strong> \u2018blood\u2019 cognate of Latin sanguis<\/em> \u2018id\u2019\u00a0 (see songeli<\/em> (infra).<\/li>\n
      2. atlaito<\/em>,, atlatoe<\/em> \u2018fighters (mythical, ?), Atlanteans<\/em> (025, 079,), also atleu<\/em> \u2018fighter, fight\u2019 (013), atlio<\/em> (atlu) \u2018fight\u2019 (091-2) are cognate of Greek \u03ac\u03b8\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2<\/em> \u2018fighting, contest, competition\u2019 missing from Beekes\u2019s Greek Etymological Dictionary (EDL). Therefore, we can not say whether Thracian if borrowed from Greek or phenomenon was vice-versa. Presumably, the verb lutue<\/em> \u2018to fight\u2019 belong to this\u00a0 family (see lutue<\/em>, supra, verbs)<\/li>\n
      3. badu<\/em>, badiu<\/em> \u2018nation, relative\u2019 (006, 007), bato<\/em> (bado) \u2018fraternal, related\u2019 (045). Nothing similar was preserved in Romanian. In addition, the origin of these root remains obscure.<\/li>\n
      4. balo<\/em> \u2018warrior, fighter, soldier\u2019, bela<\/em> \u2018of (the) warriors \/ fighters\u2019 (094) are cognates of Latin bello<\/em>, bellare<\/em> \u2018to wage war\u2019, belabor<\/em> \u2018warrior, fighter\u2019 and of Etruscan bele<\/em> \u2018to wage war\u2019. In addition, the Dacian god of war was called Zabelo, <\/em>while zabelo<\/em> means \u2018war\u2019, clearly related to Latin Bellona<\/em> \u2018goddess of war\u2019. Therefore, I am convinced that Romanian r\u0103zboi<\/strong> \u2018war\u2019 derives from an older *razbalio<\/em> < *zabalio<\/em> < zabelo<\/em>, where the root –balio<\/em> has the same origin, while r\u0103z<\/em>– is a prefix, which replaces za<\/em>– when this prefix became meaningless in Romanian, while r\u0103z<\/em>-(r\u0103s-) is an usual one.<\/li>\n
      5. bastarnu<\/em>, bastarnio<\/em> \u2018Bastarn\u2019 (020, 025-2, 091, 106-2, 115, 126-2) is the name of eastern Germanic tribe of Bastarnae<\/em> as in Latin bastarnus<\/em>. We know from ancient historians that the Romans were using the Bastarnae (and other barbarian tribes) to attack the Dacia kingdom, as it is shown in the Sinaia tablets inscriptions as well.<\/li>\n
      6. beni<\/em> \u2018to be blessed\u2019 (092), if the meaning given by author is correct, and I believe it is correct, then this term is a cognate with Latin bonus<\/em>, bene<\/em>, from a similar -Thraco-Dacian root ben<\/em>– \u2018good\u2019 (see, DELR, bun<\/strong> \u2018good\u2019).<\/li>\n
      7. bio<\/em>, rubio<\/em>, bioso<\/em>, vioso<\/em>, bioso<\/em> \u2018neighbor(s), convives\u2019 (115, 129), biotu ra<\/em> \u2018neighboring countries\u2019 (012). We know that Romanian sat<\/strong> \u2018village\u2019 has an older form fsat<\/em> < Thraco-Dacian *visato<\/em> \u2018village, setting\u2019, found in Aromanian, a Romanian dialect spoken in Greece, Albania and Bulgaria and in Albanian language as well.\u00a0 (see DELR, sat<\/strong>). The root is found in Dacian city name Potaissa<\/em>, as it appears in the Latin texts, but it must have been *Patavisa<\/em> in Dacian, a compound place name from pata<\/em>– \u2018wide, high\u2019 and vissa<\/em> \u2018village settlement\u2019 (created on the same principle as today\u2019s city name Satu-Mare<\/em>). In Latin there was no v<\/em> sound, and in foreign words it was pronounced (written) u<\/em>, deleted in this case, since it was difficult to pronounce. Walde-Hoffmann (2, 783) shows that Latin vicus<\/em> \u2018village\u2019 < PIE * \u016doikos<\/strong> \u2018dwelling house\u2019. It looks like Romanian vecin<\/strong> \u2018neighbor\u2019 derives from Latin vicinus<\/em> \u2018neighbor\u2019 < vicus <\/em>\u2018village\u2019. On the other hand, given all these data, one may say Romanian vecin<\/strong>, replaced an older Thraco-Dacian similar form, unknown to us, but similar to the forms discussed here. The root is found in many Indo-European languages. All these Thrace-Dacian forms derive form the same Proto-Indo-European root, where PIE *k<\/strong> turned into the sibilant s<\/em>, when followed by a high vowel, as in Potaissa<\/em> as well, an usual phonological transformation in Thrace-Dacia and Romanian (see, DELR, Potaissa<\/strong>, sat<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
      8. bisica<\/em> \u2018altar, temple\u2019 seems to derive from the same root as the basilica<\/em> <\u00a0 Greek \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2<\/em> \u2018king (particularly the Persian kings), prince\u2019, as well as Romanian biseric\u0103<\/strong> \u2018church\u2019 (see DELR, biseric\u0103<\/strong>). Greek has two words for \u2018king\u2019. Beekes shows that \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2<\/em> is a Pre-Greek loanword. A similar form is found in Mycenaean of the Linear B as\u00a0 qa-si-reu\/g\u02b7asileus<\/em>, feminine qa-sire-i-ja<\/em>. In most mainland Greek dialects PIE *q\u02b7 <\/strong>and g\u02b7 <\/strong>turned into p<\/em> or b<\/em> respectively. There was a similar situation in Thraco-Dacian and Illyrian (and preserved in Romanian) where these labio-velars turned into p<\/em> or b<\/em>, only when they were followed by a back vowel (a, o). The Linear B texts are about 3400-3450 years old and they are rather Proto-Thracian than Proto-Greek as it is generally assumed. The hypothesis remains to be verified by correct etymological evaluation of the vocabulary of the Linear B. One may notice that at that time the Indo-European labio-velars were still preserved and therefore, this phonological transformation took place some time later, perhaps around, 1,300 B.C (see DELR, Introduction).<\/li>\n
      9. boiciro<\/em> \u2018member(s) of a higher Dacian caste\u2019 (006, 025, 065, 092, 119), boeni<\/em> \u2018descendants of goddess Bo\u2019 (084) considered to be the ancestor of the people who belonged to this caste.<\/li>\n
      10. bun<\/em>, bune<\/em> \u2018ancestor, ancient\u2019 (124, 134) are forerunners of Romanian bun<\/strong>, bunic<\/strong> \u2018grandfather\u2019, str\u0103bun<\/strong> \u2018ancestor\u2019, from PIE *aweu<\/strong>-, *awyo-,<\/strong> *awo<\/strong>– (Lehmann A242) (see DELR, bun<\/strong>\u00b2)<\/li>\n
      11. calisteu<\/em> \u2018welfare \/ healers\u2019 (069) should be associated with Greek \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cc\u03c2<\/em> \u2018beautiful, noble, good\u2019. Beekes (EDG, I, 626) argues that it is of unknown Pre-Greek origin, but it seems to be a loanword from Proto-Thraco-Illyrian.<\/li>\n
      12. cap<\/em> (capu) \u2018end\u2019 (042), capo<\/em>, capi<\/em>, capu<\/em> \u2018head, priest, chieftain \/ holy person\u2019 (003, 011, 016, 018, 022, 028, 065, 108, 117, 119- 2, 134), capoe<\/em> \u2018priestess\u2019 (109), capono<\/em> \u2018chieftain, shrine (122) copono<\/em> \u2018shrine, holy place\u2019 (001, 021, 023, 028, -35, 096, 116, 118, 124 127) capisenta \u2018temple’ (003), copo<\/em> \u2018princes (priests) \/ holy person\u2019 (119) are forerunners of Romanian cap<\/strong> (and other derivatives) are cognates of Latin caput<\/em> and many other Indo-European languages forms, all deriving from PIE *kap-ut<\/strong> \u2018head\u2019 (IEW 529). The verb decapeu<\/em> \u2018decapitation\u2019 (111) has the prefix de<\/em>– found in Romanian and Latin and other Romance languages (see DELR, cap<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
      13. casa<\/em> \u2018home, house\u2019, caseto<\/em>, casoto<\/em>, casitu<\/em> \u2018local, from their places, from their homes\u2019 (003, 080, 106), cosoa<\/em>, cosu<\/em> \u2018sanctuary\u2019, as well as a casu<\/em> \u2018in the sanctuary\u2019 where a<\/em> is the preposition \u2018at\u2019 plus the noun caso<\/em>. These forms are forerunners of Romanian cas\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018house\u2019 (and its derivaitves), a cognate of Latin casa<\/em> \u2018cottage\u2019. Some linguists such Ernout-Meillet (103) and de Vaan, (96) believe that Latin casa<\/em> is a loanword in Latin.\u00a0 All these forms derive from PIE *ket<\/strong>– *kot<\/strong>– \u2018dwelling\u2019 (IEW, 586) with other cognates in Indo-Aryan, Germanic, Celtic languages as well as in Albanian, besides the Romance languages (see DELR, cas\u0103<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
      14. caser<\/em>, casero<\/em>, caesar<\/em> \u2018Caesar\u2019 (028, 040) a loanword from Latin caesarus<\/em>.<\/li>\n
      15. catenoe<\/em> \u2018chains\u2019 (130) is a cognate of Latin catena<\/em> \u2018chain, link\u2019 from an older *catesna<\/em> (Walde (1, 181) or a *cates<\/em>– (de Vaan, 98), while Walde-Pokorny reconstructs a PIE *kat<\/strong>– \u2018weaving, braiding , link\u2019 (IEW, 534). From this root stems Romanian c\u0103tu\u0219\u0103<\/strong> \u2018fetter\u2019, as well.<\/li>\n
      16. catulat<\/em> \u2018cornered\u2019 (040) originates from a root * kat<\/em>– with the ending (u)-l<\/em> and the suffix –at w<\/em>hich is, as in other cases, the past participle suffix as in modern Romanian, Latin and a number of Romance languages. It should be associated with Romanian col\u021b<\/strong> \u2018corner, fang\u2019. Both derive from PIE *kel<\/strong>– \u2018to sting, to bore, to pierce\u2019 *kol-to<\/strong> \u2018sharp tip, apex\u2019 (IEW, 545). The Thrace-Dacian form derives from the Proto-Indo-European nominal root *koi-to<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
      17. cerencea<\/em>, cerentea<\/em> \u2018application, request, requirement\u2019 (022, 040), cerentia<\/em> \u2018asked for, required\u2019, cerinceo<\/em> \u2018putting conditions \/ claims \/ obligations\u2019 (121) are predecessor forms of the Romanian verb a cere<\/strong> \u2018to ask for\u2019, a cognate of Latin quaere<\/em> \u2018seek, investigate\u2019, all deriving from PIE *k\u02b7eit<\/strong>-, *ke <\/strong>(i<\/strong>)ro<\/strong> \u2018to notice, to defend\u2019 (IEW, 636) with cognates in most Romance languages. Note that both the meaning of the Latin and the Romance languages are quite different from Thraco-Dacian, respectively Romanian meaning.<\/li>\n
      18. ceri<\/em> (ceriu) \u2018sky\u2019 (126) is the forerunner of Romanian cer<\/strong> \u2018id\u2019, cognate of Latin caelum<\/em> \u2018sky\u2019 and Albanian qiell<\/em> \u2018id\u2019.<\/li>\n
      19. cetie<\/em>, cetu<\/em> \u2018bands (groups), fortress\u2019 (009-2, 062) is the predecessor of Romanian ceat\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018group, band\u2019, cognates of Latin caterva<\/em> \u2018company, group, band\u2019 and Umbrian kateramu<\/em>, caterahamo<\/em> \u2018band, group\u2019.<\/li>\n
      20. cotopolo<\/em> \u2018His Eminence, His Holiness\u2019 (006, 013, 025, 028, 035-2, 039, 052-2, 065, 080, 092-2, 117, 119, 120, 122, 134), cotopolu boiceru<\/em> \u2018the Pontiff of the boiceros\u2019 (-94, 096, 124). It seems to be a derivative of copono<\/em> \u2018shrine, holy\u2019 (001, 021, 023, 028, -35, 096, 116, 118, 124, 127), but the derivation is uncertain.<\/li>\n
      21. compeu<\/em> \u2018change \/ compensation \/ completed\u2019 (025) is the predecessor of Romanian schimb<\/strong> , schimba<\/strong> \u2019(to) change\u2019, a cognate of Latin cambo<\/em>, -ire \u2018to change\u2019 which is considered Gaulish origin (cf. DELR, schimba<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
      22. compo<\/em> \u2018all\u2019 (018) is a compound word from po<\/em> (as in po<\/em>, pu<\/em> \u2018to put\u2019, prefixed by com<\/em>– (con-). Similar forms are found in Latin and Romance languages (see supra, verbs). Therefore, the original meaning of this word is \u2018putting together\u2019. The noun was not preserved in Romanian.<\/li>\n
      23. daceu<\/em>, dace<\/em> \u2018Dacians\u2019 (005-2, 006, 022-2, 065-2, 084, 121), daco<\/em>, dacu<\/em> \u2018Dacian\u2019 (adj.) (016-2, 028-2, 098, 126) is ethnonym by which Dacians called themselves, borrowed into Latin. The older form was dau<\/em> (pl. dai<\/em>), being associated with dava<\/em> \u2018city, fortress\u2019. Both forms derive from PIE *dh\u0113<\/strong>– \u2018to place, to settle, to set\u2019, with the nominal form *dew<\/em>-. Therefore, this ethnonym meant \u2018local, sedentary, settled people\u2019 which, semantically speaking, has the same meaning with get<\/strong> \u2018Getus (Getae)\u2019 (see dava,\u00a0 geto, ultra) (cf. DELR, dac<\/strong>, get<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
      24. dalmatu<\/em> \u2018Dalmatians\u2019 (091) is the ethnonym by which were called the ancient Illyrians of Dalmatia.<\/li>\n
      25. dardani<\/em> \u2018Dardanians\u2019 (091, 123) is the ethnonym of the Thracians of\u00a0 Dardania.<\/li>\n
      26. dava<\/em>, davo<\/em> \u2018Dacian city or fortress\u2019 (001, 003, 008-2, 009, 010, 011-2, 014-2, , 025, 028, 042-2, 045, 0052-2, 058, 0-69-2, 092, 108, 112, 116, 117-2, 118-2, 119, 120, 122, 123-2, 124, 126, 127-2, 134-2),\u00a0 daviu<\/em> \u2018of the city\u2019 ((108), davogheto<\/em>, davogeto<\/em> (008, 009, 010, 011, 12-2, 015, 035, 031-2, 035-2, 039-2, 045, 069, 072-2, 079, 080-2, 092-2, 116, 118-2, 119-2, 120, 126-2, 127, 128-2, 129, 130). A well known noun found in many ancient authors as well as in many Dacian place names. Tomaschek (2, 1:9) argues that dava<\/em> derives form PIE*dh\u0113<\/strong>– \u2018to place, to settle, to set\u2019, related to the ethnonym daco<\/em> \u2018Dacian\u2019 (older dau<\/em> (pl. dai) (see daceu, <\/em>supra).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

         <\/p>\n

          \n
        1. dardani<\/em> \u2018Dardanians\u2019 (091, 123) is the ethnonym by which were called the Thracians of Dardania.<\/li>\n
        2. dava<\/em>, davo<\/em> \u2018a Dacian fortress or city\u2019 (001, 003, 008-2, 009, 010, 011-2, 014-2,, 025, 028, 042-2, 045, 0052-2, 058, 0- 69-2, 092, 108, 112, 116, 117-2, 118-2, 119, 120, 122, 123-2, 124, 126, 127-2, 134-2), daviu<\/em> \u2018of the city or fortress\u2019 ((108 ) davogheto<\/em>, davogeto<\/em> \u2018a citizen of a Getian dava\u2019 (008, 009, 010, 011, 12-2, 015, 035, 031-2, 035-2, 039-2, 045, 069, 072- 2, 079, 080-2, 092-2, 116, 118-2, 119-2, 120, 126-2, 127, 128-2, 129, 130). The noun is well-known from ancient writings, but also as in Dacian compound place-names. Tomaschek (2, 1: 9) believes that dava derives<\/em> from PIE * dh\u0113<\/strong>– \u2018to place, to set\u2019, zesco<\/em> \u2018of the gods, godlike\u2019 (122), ziead\u0103<\/em> \u2018pantheon\u2019.<\/li>\n
        3. deu<\/em> \u2018god\u2019 (003, 011, 039, 094, 122), diu<\/em> \u2018god, priest\u2019 (001, 005, 010, 015, 020, 042, 052, 072, 080, 091, 115, 116-2 122), deus<\/em> \u2018the High Priest \/ god\u2019 (058), dieu<\/em> \u2018the god, divine,\u00a0 of the god\u2019 (002, 010, 035, 039, 092, 096, 098, 107, 116, 122-2, 124),\u00a0 ze<\/em>, zeu<\/em>, zi<\/em>, ziu<\/em>, zieu<\/em> \u2018god, gods,\u00a0 of the gods\u2019 (003-3, 008, 010, 011, 015, 016, 018, 025, 036, 039, 052, 062, 065, 069, 079-7, 080-2, 091, 094, 096-2, 109, 117, 121-2, 123, 124-3, 128-2), zesco<\/em> \u2018of the gods, godlike\u2019 (122) zieada<\/em> \u2018the gods\u2019 realm, pantheon\u2019, zieado dava<\/em> \u2018Zeudava \/ City of Gods\u2019, zieo<\/em> \u2018pantheon, realm of the gods\u2019. All these forms are forerunners of Romanian zeu<\/em> \u2018god\u2019, z\u00e2n\u0103<\/em> \u2018goddess, fairy\u2019. All cognates of Latin deus<\/em> \u2018god\u2019. Outside Sinaia tablets, the root is found Thracian\/Dacian god-names, such as Saba-zios<\/em>\/Saba-dios, Gebelei-zis<\/em>, and even Zeus<\/em>, the well-known \u201cGreek\u201d god-name which exhibits a Thraco-Dacian phonological development, rather then a Greek one. In modern Romanian we have forms in z only (see DELR, zeu<\/strong>). The forms in voiceless dental such as tei<\/em>, teu<\/em>, teo<\/em>, teos<\/em>, tio<\/em>, tiu<\/em> \u2018parents \/ priests \/ divine \/ prelates \/ gods \/ priests \/ deity\u2019 (008-2, 010, 035-2, 052, 058, 069, 072-2 , 080, 107, 113, 116, 124-2) seem to have the same origin as those in d<\/strong> (respectively z) by turning the voiced dental into voiceless one for semantic reasons. One may notice that forms in voiceless dental define mostly the priests and prelates rather than the gods, while the forms in voiced dentals define, in general, the gods or related directly to these realities or to the high priests. We also know that one of the High Priests (1st century B.C.) was known to the ancient world as Deceneus<\/em>. According to the inscriptions of the tablets, he was actually called Dio Ceneo<\/em> \u2018the Divine Ceneo\u2019, not Deceneo<\/em> as one may expect. Obviously Deceneus<\/em> is a misnomer due to the misunderstanding of his real name by the ancient Greek and Roman writers. Also, the form zesco<\/em> \u2018of the gods, godlike\u2019 exhibits the suffix –esco<\/em> identical to the Romanian –esc<\/strong> (as in Romanian zeesc<\/em> \/dumne-zeesc \u2018godlike, of the gods\/of God\u2019) with the same meaning and very frequent in Romanian language. Similar suffixes are found in Germanic and Slavic languages, but not in Latin.<\/li>\n
        4. diniza<\/em> (duniza) \u2018uproar \/ hasty stampede\u2019 (076) seems to be a cognate of Latin\u00a0 densus<\/em> < PIE *d <\/strong>(e<\/strong>) –ns<\/strong>–o<\/strong>– \u2018thick\u2019 (de Vaan, EDL, 167). If the association is correct, Romanian des<\/strong> \u2018thick, frequent\u2019 is related to the Thraco-Dacian. diniza<\/em>.<\/li>\n
        5. dinogeto<\/em> \u2018Dinogetian, of Dinogetia (a place-name)\u2019 (120) is a compound form from dino<\/em>– and get,<\/em> where get <\/em>is well known (get<\/em>, ultra), however, the origin of dino. remains unknown.<\/li>\n
        6. disile<\/em> \u2018collapse, disappearance\u2019 (106) is a cognate of Latin dissilio<\/em> \u2018to crack, to shatters\u2019 (cf. Nicolaescu). It has the same origin as Romanian a \u00eens\u0103ila<\/strong> \u2018to tack together\u2019\u00a0 from the same root sil<\/em>– (see \u00eens\u0103ila<\/strong>, DELR).<\/li>\n
        7. dota<\/em> \u2018dowry \/ given\u2019 (118) is a derivative of the past participle form of the verb dau<\/em> \u2018to give\u2019 (see da<\/em>, supra, Verbs).<\/li>\n
        8. doxa<\/em> \u2018teaching\u2019 ((003), doxu<\/em> \u2018sage\u2019 (116) are\u00a0 Greek loanwords.<\/li>\n
        9. droizo<\/em> \/ druzo<\/em> (110) \u2018Druids\u2019. Most linguists consider that Celtic druid<\/em> derives from PIE *der<\/strong>– \u2018tree\u2019 which would have meant in Celtic languages \u2018oak\u2019.<\/li>\n
        10. eresie<\/em> \u2018heresy\u2019 (110) may be considered of Greek origin, borrowed in Latin as well: cf. Latin haeresis<\/em> < Greek hairesis<\/em> \u2018capture, choice, party, philosophical school\u2019, a derivative of haireoo<\/em> \u2018to take, to grasp, to seize\u2019 has not known etymology in Greek (cf. Beekes, EDG, I, 42). In other words, Romanian erezie<\/strong> \u2018heresy\u2019 as well as eres<\/strong> \u2018superstition, belief in miraculous forces\u2019 seem to be in the language for thousands of years. If erezie<\/strong> has many correspondents in other European languages, eres<\/strong> has no cognates, not even in Greek. One may conclude that Romanian eres<\/strong> may have a different origin or the Greek hairesis<\/em> is not a derivative of the verb haireoo.<\/em><\/li>\n
        11. erigerio<\/em>, erigeros<\/em>, erigiro<\/em> \u2018ruler, governor\u2019 (107, 124-2), erigeriu<\/em> ‘leader (deputy), follower, regent\u2019 (007-2, 031-3, 062, 069-2, 092- 2, 094, 120, 124). It was not preserved in Romanian as such, but it is closely related to rig\u0103<\/strong> \u2018king\u2019 (obs.). It derives from PIE * reg<\/strong>‘- \u2018right, to direct, to guide, to lead, to stretch\u2019 (IEW, 854) with cognates in many Indo-European languages (cf. DELR, rig\u0103<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
        12. erie<\/em> \u2018provinces \/ area\u2019 (123-2). It seems to have the same origin as arie<\/em> \u2018area, zone\u2019 (see arie<\/em>, supra).<\/li>\n
        13. erio<\/em> \u2018creature, being\u2019 (002) derives from the root er<\/strong>– of the verb\u00a0 fi <\/em>\u2018to be\u2019, found also\u00a0 in some\u00a0 forms of the verb \u2018to be\u2019, in Romanian, Latin and some of the Romance languages.<\/li>\n
        14. falangeo<\/em>, -u \u2018phalanx, arms, wings\u2019 (080, 111, 117) is related to Greek \u03c6\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03be<\/em> \u2018a long, round piece of wood, beam, girder\u2019. Beekes (EDG, II, 1548) argues that this noun is loanword in Greek. In Thraco-Dacian the original meaning seems to be \u2018arms, wings\u2019. The fact makes us to believe that\u00a0 it is a Thraco-Macedonian word, from where it got its famous meaning of a military formation of attack, military strategy devised by Macedonians who were related to Dacians and Thracians.<\/li>\n
        15. famiho \u2018<\/em>famous\u2019 (0170) is the predecessor of Romanian faim\u0103<\/strong>, faimos<\/strong>, a cognate of Latin fama<\/em> \u2018fame\u2019 (see\u00a0 DELR, faim\u0103<\/strong>,).<\/li>\n
        16. feazu<\/em>, fizu<\/em> \u2018shrine, place of adoration \/ worship\u2019 (108-2) fofeaz<\/em>, fofeazu<\/em>, fofezeleu<\/em> \u2018praying, may the gods do so, prayer establishment to the gods\u2019 (024, 084, 124), cognates of\u00a0 Latin fido<\/em> \u2018trust\u2019 and foedus<\/em> \u2018contract, peace treaty\u2019 from PIE * bheidh<\/strong>–e<\/strong> \/ o<\/strong>– (EDL 218), hence Albanian be<\/em> \u2018oath\u2019, bes\u00eb<\/em> \u2018trust, faith\u2019.<\/li>\n
        17. fedix<\/em> \u2018decree\u2019 (116) seems to derive from the same PIE * bheidh<\/strong>–e <\/strong>\/ o- (EDL 218), as feazu<\/em>, fizu<\/em> (and the other forms) (see above).<\/li>\n
        18. foro<\/em> \u2018forum\u2019 (096) seems to be a loanword from Latin forum\u00a0<\/em> (cf. Umbrian furu<\/em>, furo<\/em> \u2018id\u2019).<\/li>\n
        19. geta<\/em>, getu<\/em> \u2018Getae\u2019 (008, 15-2, 25, 035, 042-2, 052-2, 112), ghetu<\/em>, ghetero<\/em> \u2018Getian kingdom, Getae, Getian\u2019 (003-3, 007- 3, 023, 042, 052, 058, 076-4, 091-2, 106-3, 108-2, 109-3, 115-3, 127), ghetodav<\/em> (058) (see davoget) is the ethnonym of the population living to the southern and eastern sides of the Carpathian mountains. It was associated to Greek Gea<\/em>, Gaia<\/em> \u2018the goddess of the earth\u2019. The root is found in many other Indo-European languages meaning \u2018earth, land\u2019 from PIE * dh<\/strong>–g’h<\/strong>–man<\/strong>– \u2018earth\u2019 (EDL 292); cf. Latin humus<\/em>, Oscan huntrus<\/em>, Umbrian hutra<\/em>, Greek \u03c7\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd<\/em>, Albanian dhe<\/em>,\u00a0 OCS zemlija<\/em> etc. One may notice that the Greek form is different from the name of the goddess which much closer to the ethnonym of Getae<\/em>. In other words, the ethnonym get<\/em> \u2018Getus\/ Getae\u2019 means \u2018local people, original people\u2019 (see dac<\/em>,\u00a0 supra).<\/li>\n
        20. gramat<\/em> \u2018learned\/educated person\u2019 (013) is a loan from Greek.<\/li>\n
        21. hatu<\/em> \u2018territories, realms\u2019 (002). It may be related to Romanian hat<\/strong> \u2018fallow, border\u2019 (cf. DELR, hat<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
        22. hero<\/em> (heru) \u2018legacy, inheritance\u2019 (109) is a cognate Latin h\u0113r\u0113s<\/em> \u2018heir\u2019 < PIE * g’hero<\/strong> – \u2018left abandoned\u2019 (EDL 282). It is difficult to say if it is a loanword from Latin or it is a Thraco-Dacian word, since PIE * gh<\/strong> > g<\/em>, Thrace-Dacian (and Romanian) but there are a few exceptions to this rule (cf. DELR, horn<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
        23. hiho<\/em>, chico<\/em> \u2018children\u2019 (003) should be associated with Romanian cocon <\/strong>(coc\u0103) \u2018child\u2019 whose origin has been controversial for a long time. In DERL(cocon<\/strong>) I have shown that it derives from PIE * kouko<\/strong>–s<\/strong> \u2018curved, round\u2019 (IEW, 588).<\/li>\n
        24. hronosu<\/em> \u2018chronicle\u2019 (134) is a loanword from Greek.<\/li>\n
        25. hurasiu<\/em>, jurasiu<\/em>, zurasio<\/em> \u2018oath\u2019 (019, 134-3) is either a cognate of Latin i\u016bro<\/em> \u2018to swear\u2019 or a loanword from Latin.<\/li>\n
        26. hiro<\/em> \u2018heroes\u2019 (127) is another loanword from Greek.<\/li>\n
        27. iazyges<\/em>, eazigi<\/em> (040-3, 128) is the ethnonym of some Scythian tribes.<\/li>\n
        28. icu<\/em> ‘kick \/ hit\u2019 (003) is a cognate of Latin ico<\/em> -ere \u2018to strike, to strike hard\u2019 < PIE * ik<\/strong>–e<\/strong> \/ a <\/strong>\u201cto hit, to bore, to pierce\u2019 (EDL 295). The verb was not preserved in Romanian language, unless\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 the verb a izbi<\/strong> \u2018to hit, to strike\u2019 is not a variant of it.<\/li>\n
        29. ilerio<\/em> \u2018Illyrian\u2019 (108) is the ethnonym of the on the western side of Dacian kingdom who spoke the same language.<\/li>\n
        30. ime<\/em>, imu<\/em> ‘name, naming, named\u2019 (003-2, 040, 062, 079, 084, 096, 119), imeio<\/em> \u2018to be appointed \/ nominated\u2019 (072), imitu<\/em> \u2018will be called, called\u2019 (119), imu<\/em> ih<\/em> \u2018calling, \/ named, his name\u2019 (003), imanu<\/em> \u2018nomination \/ appointment\u2019 (062), z<\/em> (imu<\/em>) \u2018(they) call themselves, are called\u2019 (003) emia<\/em>, mia<\/em> \u2018called (fem.)\u2019 (109). There are also forms such as numu<\/em> \/numi \u2018name’ (119), the same as in modern Romanian nume<\/strong> \u2018name\u2019. These forms have cognates in many Indo-European languages, including Latin. all from PIE * ne<\/strong>–mn<\/strong>-, n<\/strong>–men<\/strong> \u2018name\u2019 (EDL, 412). Most of the Thrace-Dacian forms for \u2018name\u2019 are similar to the Celtic, Albanian and Slavic forms; cf. Old Irish ainm<\/em>, Old Welsh anu<\/em>, Albanian em\u00ebr\u00a0<\/em> and\u00a0 Russian imya<\/em>.<\/li>\n
        31. istriano<\/em> \u2018Istrian (from Istros region)\u2019 (052) defines an inhabitant of the Danube region. One may notice that the suffix –ian<\/em>(o) is a specific not only to Latin and Romance languages, but also to Thraco-Dacian. Romanian language inherited it from\u00a0 Thraco-Dacian.<\/li>\n
        32. itu<\/em> \u2018thread\u2019 (069) is a cognate of Latin licium<\/em> \u2018string, lace\u2019 and a predecessor of Romanian i\u021b\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018warp, spider\u2019s thread\u2019..<\/li>\n
        33. iso<\/em> (izu) \u2018measurement unit\u2019 (025). Obscure origin.<\/li>\n
        34. lari<\/em> \u2018lares\u2019 (009, 025) is a cognate Latin L\u0101r<\/em>, L\u0101ris \u2018<\/em>tutelary god\u2019.<\/li>\n
        35. lieo<\/em>, lieu<\/em> \u2018binding \/ bonding \/ alliance \/ link\u2019 (007-2) is a cognate of Latin lego<\/em> \u2018to bind\u2019 < PIE * leg<\/strong>‘-e<\/strong> \/ o<\/strong>– \u2018to reap\u2019 (EDL 332), as well as of Greek, Albanian, Celtic verbs.<\/li>\n
        36. limio<\/em>, limu <\/em>\u2018border\u2019 (128) linatu<\/em>, lunea<\/em> \u2018border, shore, border\u2019 (003-2, 042, 134) is a cognate of Latin limes<\/em> \u2018border\u2019.<\/li>\n
        37. luce<\/em> \u2018light\u2019 (130) is the predecessor of Romanian lucoare<\/em> \u2018light\u2019 and a luci<\/strong> \u2018to shine\u2019 (and its derivatives) and a cognate of Latin lux<\/em>,\u00a0 lucere<\/em> < PIE * leuk<\/strong>– \u2018light\u2019 (EDL, 356) derivatives in several Indo-European languages (cf. DELR, luci<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
        38. luez<\/em> \u2018praise, to praise\u2019 (084) is a cognate of Latin laus<\/em>, -dis \u2018praise\u2019 < PIE * leu-t (EDL 330), There are derivatives in Germanic languages.<\/li>\n
        39. luku<\/em> \u2018wolves\u2019 (127) is the predecessor of Romanian lup<\/strong> \u2018wolf\u2019 with cognates in most Indo-European languages; cf.\u00a0 Latin lupus<\/em>, Albanian ulk<\/em> etc. (see DELR, lup<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
        40. luneo<\/em>, luniea<\/em> \u2018boundary, border\u2019 (003-2) is a cognate of Latin linea<\/em> ‘line, border, limit\u2019.<\/li>\n
        41. lure<\/em> \u2018penitence, payment\u2019 is a cognate of Latin luri<\/em> \u2018to atone\u2019 (cf. Nicolaescu).<\/li>\n
        42. mahidonu<\/em>, makidonu<\/em> \u2018Macedonian\u2019 (007, 013, -79, 091-2, 106, 108, 109, 115). The inscriptions texts show that the Dacians considered Macedonians as their own brothers.<\/li>\n
        43. maico<\/em> \u2018mother’ (108) is the predecessor of Romanian maic\u0103<\/strong> \u2018mother\u2019 and derive from PIE * ma<\/strong>– \u2018Lalwort\u2019 (IEW, 694). The form was\u00a0 borrowed into Bulgarian language.<\/li>\n
        44. mato<\/em>, matu<\/em> \u2018great \/ master \/ ruler\u2019 (0101, 012, 014, 015, 025, 028-2031, 045, 052-3, 058-2, 062, 072, 076, 079-2, 080 , 091-3, 094, 096-3, 106-3, 107, 113, 126, 128, 129), matiho <\/em>\u2018the most great\u2019 (091-5), matoso ghetto<\/em> \u2018the great Geatae\u2019 (123), mateu<\/em> \u2018majority, bulk\u2019 (108). These forms appear to come from a Proto-Indo-European root meaning \u2018great or powerful\u2019, similar to the one\u00a0 the one from which Thrace-Dacian mare<\/em>, mairo<\/em> \u2018big, great\u2019 derives; cf. Latin\u00a0 magnus<\/em>, Albanian madh<\/em> \u2018big, great\u2019 etc. All these forms derive from PIE *me<\/strong>-, mo<\/strong>– \u2018big, great\u2019 (IEW, 704). From this basic root there are, in various Indo-European languages, forms in lateral –r<\/strong>-, in velar (g<\/strong> or k<\/strong>) (cf. DELR, mare<\/strong>).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

           <\/p>\n

            \n
          1. medio<\/em> \u2018middle\u2019 (128), miazul<\/em> \u2018the core, the heart\u2019 (003) are forerunner forms of Romanian miez \u2018core, middle\u2019 with cognates in several Indo-European languages, including Latin. The second form has the postposed definite article, as in modern Romanian. It derives from PIE * medhio<\/strong>– \u2018middle, core\u2019 (IEW 706). Outside the Sinaia tablets, the form is attested in the Thracian personal name Mieza<\/em> (cf. DELR, miez<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
          2. mega<\/em>, mega su<\/em> \u2018great, magnificient\u2019 (091, 092, 130), megal<\/em> \u2018the magnificent\u2019 (039), megau<\/em> \u2018several, large\u2019 (084) are cognates of Greek \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1\u03c2<\/em>, Latin magnus<\/em> etc. It might be a loanword from Greek, although the root is found in some modern Romanian words such as m\u0103g\u0103dan<\/strong>, m\u0103g\u0103oaie<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

             <\/p>\n

              \n
            1. meri<\/em> \u2018blessed\u2019 (025, 084, 124) could be a cognate Latin merus<\/em> \u2018pure, clean\u2019 from PIE<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              *merH<\/strong>–o<\/strong> \u2018what remains pure\u2019 (EDL, 376).<\/p>\n

                \n
              1. mist<\/em> \u2018the mysterious\u2019 (110) is a cognate of Greek \u03bc\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf<\/em> \u2018hidden, secret\u2019.<\/li>\n
              2. mita<\/strong> \u2018half\u2019 (106) is predecessor of Romanian jum\u0103tate<\/strong> \u2018half\u2019. The Dacian form seems to be a short form for *jemita<\/em>, *jumita<\/em> from PIE * iemo<\/strong>– \u2018twin\u2019 (IEW, 505). There are derivatives in several Indo-European languages (cf. DELR, jum\u0103tate<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              3. mondau<\/em> \u2018(he) entrusted \/gave\u2019 (076) has the same origin as Romanian com\u00e2nd<\/strong>, com\u00e2ndare<\/em> \u2018recommendation for proper funeral rituals\u2019, cognates of Latin mando<\/strong> \u2018to order, to entrust\u2019 and commendo \u2018to entrust, to recommend\u2019 (cf. DELR, com\u00e2nd<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              4. montu<\/em> \u2018high, subjected, government\u2019 (010, 062), montu<\/em> \u2018mountain\u2019 (025) are forerunner forms of Romanian munte<\/strong> \u2018mountain\u2019 and cognates of Latin mons<\/strong>, -tis \u2018id\u2019 from PIE * monti<\/strong>– \u2018elevation, height\u2019 (EDL 388). Other cognates are found in Avestan and Celtic languages (cf. DELR, munte<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              5. munu<\/strong> \u2018hand, arm\u2019 (045) is a forerunner of Romanian m\u00e2n\u0103<\/strong> \u2018hand\u2019 (and its derivatives) and a cognate Latin manus<\/em> \u2018hand\u2019 from PIE * mon<\/strong>–u<\/strong> \u2018hand\u2019 (EDL 363). Other cognates are found in \u00a0 Italic, Celtic and Germanic languages (cf. DELR, m\u00e2n\u0103<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              6. negotiu<\/em>, negusiu<\/em> \u2018trade, commerce\u2019 (013) is a loanword from Latin negotium<\/em> (< otium<\/em> \u2018time, leisure, relaxation\u2019.<\/li>\n
              7. nidu<\/em> \u2018nest \/ location \/ birthplace, abode\u2019 (108) is a cognate Latin nidus<\/em> \u2018nest\u2019 from PIE * nisdo<\/strong>– \u2018nest\u2019 (EDL 409). Other cognates are found in Celtic, Balto-Slavic, Germanic languages\u00a0 and in Armenian. There is no related form in modern Romanian.<\/li>\n
              8. nobalio<\/em>, nobalie<\/em>, nobalisu<\/em> \u2018noble, gentry\u2019 (012, 028-2, 079, 084, 094, 096, 113, 116, 118-2, 121, 122, 124-2, 126), nobalitico<\/em> \u2018nobility\u2019 (025) is a cognate of Latin nobles<\/em> \u2018famous, noble\u2019 < *(g)nobilis < PIE *gno<\/strong>– \u2018to know\u2019 (IEW, ). The term may be a loanword form Latin.<\/li>\n
              9. noctio<\/em> \u2018night’ (109-2, 127) is the predecessor of Romanian noapte<\/strong> \u2018night\u2019, with cognates in most Indo-European languages from PIE *nog\u02b7ts<\/strong>, * nok\u02b7ts<\/strong> \u2018night\u2019 (EDL 416) (cf. DELR, noapte<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              10. obolu<\/em>, obolio<\/em> (121) is a Greek silver coin weighing 0.1 grams. The term was borrowed into Latin and Thrace-Dacian as well.<\/li>\n
              11. onperiu<\/em>, onperosia<\/em> \u2018empire’ (040, 121), onperosi<\/em> \u2018emperor\u2019 (121) is a loanword from Latin imperium<\/em>.<\/li>\n
              12. ontulneos<\/em>, ontulnus<\/em> \u2018meeting\u2019 (076) are predecessor forms of Romanian a \u00eent\u00e2lni<\/strong> \u2018to meet\u2019 (cf. DELR, \u00eent\u00e2lni<\/strong>). As in many other cases initial o<\/em> was a middle central (unrounded) vowel (spelled \u0103), and it corresponds in modern Romanian to a high central (unrounded) vowel (spelled \u00ee).<\/li>\n
              13. os<\/em> \u2018bone\u2019 (042) the predecessor form of Romanian os <\/strong>\u2018id\u2019, a cognate of Latin ossum<\/em> \u2018id\u2019(cf. DELR, os<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              14. pace<\/em>, paciu<\/em> (pacieo) \u2018of peace, peace\u2019 (006, 007, 022, 107, 121-2) are predecessor forms of Romanian pace<\/strong> \u2018peace\u2019, cognates of Latin pax<\/em>, cis from PIE * pe<\/strong>–k<\/strong> \u2018agreement\u2019 (EDL 452) with cognates in the Italic, Indo-Aryan, Celtic languages.<\/li>\n
              15. paghiu<\/em> \u2018payment \/ taxes\u2019 (123, 134) is a cognate Late Latin p\u0101c\u0101re<\/em> \u2018to give satisfaction, to pay, pacify (by arms)\u2019. LL p\u0101c\u0101re <\/em>is a derivative of Latin pax<\/em>.<\/li>\n
              16. pant<\/em>, pante<\/em> \u2018flag, banner\u2019 (065, 092, 094, 096-2, 098, 112), pante data<\/em> \u2018battle formation\u2019 (014), patella<\/em> \u2018flag\u2019 (014). The two Thraco-Dacian forms for \u2018flag\u2019 have the same origin. They derive from PIE * pan<\/strong>– \u2018fabric\u2019 (IEW, 788) with cognates in Latin, Greek, and Germanic languages. The root is preserved in modern Romanian p\u00e2nz\u0103<\/strong> \u2018fabric\u2019. Nicolaescu associates these forms\u00a0 with Latin pannus<\/em> \u2018fabric, cloth\u2019 which is indeed a cognate of Romanian p\u00e2nz\u0103 <\/strong>(see DELR, p\u00e2nz\u0103<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              17. parta <\/em>\u2018part, side\u2019 (096) is the predecessor of Romanian parte<\/strong> and a cognate of Latin pars<\/em>, -tis . Other cognates are found in Hittite, Sanskrit and Persian language (cf. DELR, parte<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              18. pasco<\/em>, pacso<\/em> \u2018meadow, inheritance\u2019 (108) is a predecessor form of Romanian a pa\u0219te<\/strong> \u2018to graze, to watch\u2019 from PIE * pe-s-, p<\/strong> (e<\/strong>) –ke<\/strong> \/ o- \u2018to guard, to watch\u2019, (EDL, 449) with cognates in Latin Hittite, Indo-Aryan, Greek and Tocharian (cf. DELR , pa\u0219te<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              19. pater<\/em> \u2018parent\u2019 (042), patrido<\/em>, patridu<\/em>, patridi<\/em>, patridiu<\/em> \u2018homeland, of the homeland,\u00a0 birth place\u2019 (015, 039, -72-3, 079, 080, 113, 124, 134),\u00a0 pater ilane<\/em> \u2018father of the gods\u2019 (042) derive from PIE *pater<\/strong> \u2018father\u2019 with cognate in most Indo-European languages. Romanian p\u0103rinte <\/strong>\u2018parent\u2019 may derive from these older forms or may be a Latin loanword, while patrie<\/strong> \u2018homeland\u2019 seem to be a modern loanword.<\/li>\n
              20. patie<\/em> \u2018patience\u2019 (128) is a cognate of Latin patior<\/em>, patientia<\/em> \u2018patience\u2019, Greek \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 <\/em>\u2018incident, experience, misfortune\u2019, as well as Albanian pocaqi<\/em> \u2018incident, misfortune\u2019. There\u00a0 are several different hypotheses regarding the origin of this root in Greek and Latin. I discussed them in DELR. On the other hand, Beekes (EDG, 1156) and de Vaan (EDL, 450) advanced some new hypotheses for Greek and Latin. It is possible that the Greek forms are loanwords from the Greek substratum. In modern Romanian, we have patim\u0103<\/strong> \u2018passion\u2019 and a p\u0103\u021bi<\/strong> \u2018to undergo, to have trouble\u2019, and p\u0103\u021banie<\/em> \u2018incident, adventure, trouble\u2019, respectively which should be associated with the Thraco-Dacian form and all other forms indicated here. De Vaan shows that Latin patior<\/em> derives from PIE *pet<\/strong>– \u2018to fly, fall\u2019 > \u2018to befall\u2019 > \u2018it\u00a0 befalls me\u2019 > \u2018I experience\u2019. On the other hand, it is obvious that the meanings in all these languages are similar and all these forms derive forma single source. Unfortunately, neither Beekes, nor de Vaan have any knowledge about the Romanian and Albanian forms. To make the long story short, one may reconstruct a Proto-Indo-European root *pet<\/strong>– \u2018to suffer, to have trouble\u2019, different from the one indicated by de Vaan.<\/li>\n
              21. peio<\/em>, peu<\/em>, pii<\/em>, poieh<\/em> \u2018children, descendants’ (002, 003, 062, 124-2) have cognates in many Indo-European languages from PIE *p\u014du<\/strong>– *p\u01ddu<\/strong>-, *pu<\/strong>– \u2018small, little\u2019 (IEW, 842), with the\u00a0 nominal form *po<\/strong> (u<\/strong>) los<\/strong> \u2018baby animal\u2019, putlo-s<\/strong> \u2018child, baby\u2019. Outside Sinaia tablets,\u00a0 on various Thracian inscriptions appears the form –por<\/em> in many Thraco-Dacian personal names. It was associated with Latin puer<\/em>. In modern Romanian, we have forms such as prunc<\/strong> \u2018(newborn) baby\u2019, pici<\/strong> \u2018urchin\u2019, pu\u0219ti\u00a0 <\/strong>\u2018boy\u2019 which\u00a0 derive form the same Proto-Indo-European root (cf. DELR).<\/li>\n
              22. peliu<\/em>, pelu<\/em>, pelu so<\/em> \u2018to bury, to be buried \/ buried\u2019 (107, 122, 124) derive from PIE *pel<\/strong>-, *pel\u01dd<\/strong>– \u2018to cover\u2019 (IEW, 802) with cognates in many Indo-European languages meaning usually \u2018skin\u2019 or \u2018cover\u2019. For all we know, there is not any verb in modern Romanian deriving from this root., but there are several nouns of this sort such as : piele<\/strong> \u2018skin\u2019, poiat\u0103<\/strong> (dial. polat\u0103<\/em>) \u2018barn\u2019, pleoap\u0103<\/em> \u2018eyelid\u2019, pojghi\u021b\u0103<\/strong> \u2018film, lick\u2019, polei<\/strong> \u2018glazed frost\u2019 (cf. DELR). Outside Sinaia tablets,\u00a0 in Suidas, there is the Thracian form pelton<\/em> \u2018Thracian shield\u2019, while in\u00a0 Hesychius is mentioned the Thracian peltor<\/em> \u2018goatskin shield\u2019. The two forms are almost identical and closely related to Romanian piele<\/strong> \u2018skin\u2019.<\/li>\n
              23. pen<\/em> \u2018in the hand of\u2019 (118, 134) is cognate of\u00a0 Latin penes<\/em> \u2018belong to, in the power of\u2019.<\/li>\n
              24. peneo<\/em> \u2018from (someone)\u2019. Nicolaescu associates it with Latin penes<\/em> \u2018belong to, in the power of\u2019 (see pen<\/em>).<\/li>\n
              25. peptu<\/em> \u2018chest\u2019 (069) is the predecessor of Romanian piept<\/strong> \u2018chest\u2019 cognates in Latin\u00a0 \u2018id\u2019, Old Irish uchte<\/em> < *puktu and in Tocharian and Baltic languages (cf. DELR, piept<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              26. percila<\/em>, perciliu<\/em> ‘victory over the opponent, to triumph\u2019 (005, 040, 126). It is a compound word from *per<\/em>– \u2018on, over, in front of\u2019 and –cil<\/em> < PIE *k<\/strong>\u2019el<\/strong>– \u2018to cover, to hide\u2019 (IEW, 553).<\/li>\n
              27. peresete<\/em> \u2018one who straddle\u2019 (114) a cognate of Latin perequito<\/em> \u2018to ride around, to ride through\u2019. Both forms are compound from per<\/em>– < PIE *per<\/strong>– \u2018over, too\u2019 (IEW, 810) and a verbal root *kueto<\/strong>-. I have shown on different occasions that in Tharco-Dacian, a velar (or dental) stop followed by a high vowel (e or i) underwent palatalization turning into a sibilant as it happened in this Thraco-Dacian word.<\/li>\n
              28. plenu<\/em> \u2018rich people\u2019 (045) seems to be the predecessor Romanian adjective plin<\/strong> \u2018full\u2019 a cognate of Latin plenus<\/em> \u2018id\u2019. Other cognates are found in Celtic, Germanic, Baltic, Slavic and Sanskrit languages from PIE * pel<\/em>-, ple<\/em>– \u2018to pour, to flow, to fill\u2019, *pleno<\/em>– \u2018full\u2019 (IEW, 1337) (cf. DELR,\u00a0 plin<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              29. poesta<\/em>, poesto<\/em>, poestu<\/em> \u2018sovereign, to lead, governor, chieftain\u2019 (010, 013, 028-2, 035, 045-2, 052, 065, 069, 072-2, 091, 098, 118, 119, 122, 130) derive from the verbal form poio<\/em> (puo, pou), puto<\/em> \u2018he\/she can, it may\u2019 (see poio<\/em>, in Verb section).<\/li>\n
              30. popoe<\/em> (popu, popa) \u2018priest\u2019 (109) is the predecessor of Romanian pop\u0103<\/strong> \u2018id\u2019, a\u00a0 cognate of Latin popa<\/em> \u2018(a low level) priest\u2019, borrowed into Slavic languages from Proto-Romanian.<\/li>\n
              31. ra<\/em>, re<\/em>, rei<\/em>, \u2018kingdom, governing, administration, king, leader\u2019 (002-2, 007-2, 010-2, 011, 012-4, 023, 040, 045-2, 052, 062, 072-2, 076-3, 070, 080, 091, 092, 098, 106-2, 107, 108-2, 111, 115, 122-2128-2, 130) , reca<\/em> \u2018kingdom, provinces\u2019 (010, 040, 045, 052, 106), reghio<\/em> \u2018governing dominion\u2019 (107), reo<\/em> \u2018reign\u2019 (072, 080), ro, ra<\/em>, ri<\/em> \u2018king, lord, governor, kingdom\u2019 (002, 006, 007, 013, 022, 040, 052, 065-2, 079, 091, 092-2, 096, 098, 107, 109 -2, 111, 115, 121, 122-2, 130-2), reini<\/em> (regni) \u2018to govern\u2019 (007) reghelento<\/em> \u2018governor\u2019 (123), re<\/em> BO \u2018queen BO (?)\u2019 (the ancestor of Dacian caste of boiceros<\/em>),\u00a0 rio<\/em> \u2018governance\u2019, cognates of Latin rex<\/em> and other forms of various Indo-European languages . All from PIE *reg<\/strong>‘- \u2018right, to direct, to guide, to lead\u2019 (IEW, 710). Dacian forms preserved the voiced velar (g) in three cases only. The fact is that in Old Irish and in Italian, there is a similar situation. Romanian rig\u0103<\/strong> \u2018king\u2019 (obs.) has the same origin.<\/li>\n
              32. recheu<\/em> \u2018requirement, decision\u2019 ((010). If this lexical item is correctly identified, then it\u00a0 is a cognate of Latin requirere<\/em> < re<\/em>-, plus quaerere<\/em> \u2018to seek, investigate\u2019\u00a0 < PIE *kuei<\/strong>–t<\/strong>, *kue<\/strong>(i<\/strong>)-ro<\/strong> (IEW, 636) (cf. DELR, cere<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              33. rio<\/em> \u2018river\u2019 (010, 040, 69, 118), ruvio<\/em>, rivio<\/em> \u2018river\u2019 (115) are the forerunners of Romanian r\u00e2u<\/strong> \u2018river\u2019 and cognates to Latin rivus<\/em> \u2018id\u2019 (cf. DELR, r\u00e2u<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              34. rivieto<\/em> \u2018neighboring states, neighbors, close poeple\u2019 (127) similar to Latin riparius<\/em> \u2018a person who own land on the bank of a river\u2019 < ripa<\/em> \u2018bank (of a river)\u2019. It seems that in Latin, at a certain\u00a0 time took place a confusion between rivus<\/em> and ripa<\/em>. Therefore, it seems that Thraco-Dacian riveto<\/em> derives from rio<\/em>, rivio<\/em> \u2018river\u2019, with the original meaning of \u2018neighboring country bordered\/separated by a river\u2019.<\/li>\n
              35. ritu<\/em> \u2018rite, ritual\u2019 (107) is a cognate of Latin ritus<\/em> din PIE *r<\/strong>(e<\/strong>)i<\/strong>– \u2018to count, to observe carefully\u2019 (EDL 524).<\/li>\n
              36. rudo<\/em>, rudo<\/em>, rudu<\/em> ‘relatives, brothers\u2019 (111, 123, 128), rodim<\/em> \u2018born\u2019 (003), a rudio<\/em> \u2018to become brothers, to fraternize\u2019 are the forerunners of Romanian rud\u0103<\/strong> \u2018relative\u2019 (and its derivatives) considered by Romanian old school of linguistics to be of Slavic origin. In fact, the Slavic forms are cognates of the Thrace-Dacian and Romanian ones.<\/li>\n
              37. rimu<\/em>, rumuanu<\/em>, rumunu<\/em>, rumuno<\/em>, rumunuso<\/em> \u2018Roman, (of) the Romans, from Romans\u2019 (005, 006, 016, 020, 022, 025-5, 028-2, 040 -3, 065, 069,, 076, 084, 094, 096, 113, 118, 121-3, 126-2, 128, 129-2, 130, 134-2) derive from Latin romanus<\/em> < Rome, a place-name apparently, of Etruscan origin.<\/li>\n
              38. sacea<\/em>, sageo<\/em> \u2018(the) sage\u2019 (079), sagano<\/em> \u2018instructors, care \/ wisdom\u2019 (065) are cognates of \u00a0 Latin s\u0101gus<\/em> \u2018prophet, seer\u2019 from PIE * s\u0101g<\/strong>– \u2018to seek, to pursue\u2019 (IEW, 876). It was not preserve in Romanian.<\/li>\n
              39. saceu<\/em> \u2018arrow(s)\u2019 (069) is a cognate of Latin sagitta<\/em> \u2018arrow\u2019. The Latin form is found in Naevius. The etymology remains unknown in Latin, although there are similar forms not only in Romanian, but also in Albanian, and Celtic languages but also in Hittite: cf. Hittite \u0161iyattal <\/em>\u2018arrow\u2019, Irish saighid<\/em> \u2018arrow, spear\u2019, Breton saeth<\/em> \u2018arrow\u2019, Albanian shigjet\u00eb<\/em> \u2018id\u2019, and Albanian (Tosk dialect) seget\u00eb\u00a0<\/em> \u2018ray, jet, stream\u2019. All these forms derive form PIE * selg<\/strong>‘- \u2018to free, to send, to throw\u2019 (see salcero<\/em>, ultra).<\/li>\n
              40. salcero<\/em> \u2018lancer\u2019 (094). It should be associated with saceu<\/em> and with Latin sagitta<\/em> \u2018arrow\u2019 with no etymology in Latin. It is a derivative of saceu<\/em> with the suffix -ero, found in Romanian, Latin and other Indo-European languages. Thus, this lexical item derives frpm an older *sa<\/em>(l<\/em>) g<\/em>, * sa<\/em> (l<\/em>) k<\/em> < PIE * selg<\/strong>‘- \u2018to free, to send, to throw\u2019 (IEW, 900).<\/li>\n
              41. samitue<\/em> \u2018heights\u2019 (094) is a cognate of\u00a0 Latin summus<\/em> \u2018highest\u2019.<\/li>\n
              42. sar<\/em> \u2018priest, clergyman\u2019 ((079). It may be a cognate cognate of Latin sursum<\/em> \u2019high, up\u2019, but the assumption is not quite sure (see sargerio<\/em>, sarmatu<\/em>, ultra).<\/li>\n
              43. sarcedav<\/em> \u2018release, order\u2019 (005) is a compound word from sarce<\/em>– and –dav<\/em>, where sarce<\/em> may be associated with sar<\/em> (see infra) and dav<\/em> with dava<\/em> (see dava<\/em>, above).<\/li>\n
              44. sargerio<\/em> (sarceru) \u2018senior (high) leaders, order, mission\u2019 (120) is a derivative of sar<\/em> with the suffix –erio<\/em>, found in other Thraco-Dacian lexical items.<\/li>\n
              45. sargeto<\/em>, sargheto<\/em> \u2018Upper Getae(?)\u2019, Sargetia<\/em> \u2018river in Dacia running by the capital city of Dacian kingdom, Sarmigesetusa<\/em> (008, 21, 076, 117). They seem to be compound words from sar <\/em>and get<\/em>– (see above get<\/em>, sar<\/em>).<\/li>\n
              46. sarmato<\/em>, sarmatu<\/em> \u2018Sarmatians\u2019 (009-2, 040-3091-2, 120), sarmi<\/em>, sarmizu<\/em> \u2018Sarmatians, of the Sarmatians\u2019 (015, 058-3, 108-2) is the ethnonym of the inhabitants living east of the Dacian kingdom.<\/li>\n
              47. sarmatu<\/em>, sarmetu<\/em> \u2018high priests, summit\u2019 (079, 118) is a derivative of sar<\/em> (possibly a compound word) (see sar<\/em>).<\/li>\n
              48. sarvaceru<\/em> \u2018argument, fight, fight, disputed, confrontation\u2019 (028-2, 080, 119), a word\u00a0 of obscure etymology. It seems to be a compound form.<\/li>\n
              49. skitu<\/em>, skiteu<\/em> \u2018temple\u2019 (001, 002-2, 003-2, 079-3, 130, 134-3) should be associated with \u00a0 Romanian schit<\/strong> \u2018little monastery (in the mountains)\u2019 which is considered to be a loanword form Medieval Greek \u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2<\/em> \u2018exercise training\u2019 < \u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03ad\u03c9<\/em> \u2018to process, to shape\u2019 or \u2018to exercise, to train\u2019 (Herodotus) whose etymology is unknown in Greek (cf. Beekes, 1 , 150). It seems that the term existed in Thraco-Dacian language before the arrival of the Romans and obviously before Christianity if the word was correctly identified.<\/li>\n
              50. seleat<\/em> \u2018mischief\u2019 is a cognate of Latin scelus<\/em> \u2018unrighteousness, wickedness\u2019. It was not preserved in Romanian.<\/li>\n
              51. semio<\/em> \u2018race, tibe, stock\u2019 (031) is the predecessor of Romanian semin\u021bie <\/strong>\u2018id\u2019, cognates of Latin semen<\/em> and Russian semea<\/em> \u2018family\u2019 (cf. DELR, sem\u0103na<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              52. socros<\/em> \u2018(of, to, with, against) father-in-law\u2019 is the predecessor Romanian socru<\/strong> \u2018father-in-law\u2019 with cognates in several Indo-European languages, including Latin, all from PIE * s\u016dekuro<\/strong> \u2018father-in-law\u2019 (cf. DELR, socru<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              53. sora<\/em>, sore<\/em> \u2018sister\u2019 (040, 107) is the forerunner of Romanian sor\u0103<\/strong> \u2018id\u2019 with cognates in many Indo-European languages, all from PIE * suesor<\/strong>– \u2018sister\u2019 (IEW, 1051) (cf. DELR, sor\u0103<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              54. sotia<\/em> \u2018wife, association\u2019 (020, 128), soot \u2018together\u2019 (117) sotivo<\/em> \u2018next to\u2019 (079) onsoticie<\/em>, onsotise<\/em>, onsotice<\/em>, onsoticeu<\/em>, onsohito<\/em> \u2018together, accompanied by\u2019 (009, 025, 028, 062 079, 084, 094, 108), sokeo<\/em>, soceo<\/em> \u2018accompanied by, together\u2019 (120) are forerunners of Romanian so\u021b <\/strong>\u2018husband\u2019, so\u021bie<\/strong> \u2018wife\u2019, a \u00eenso\u021bi<\/strong> \u2019to accompany\u2019 (and other derivatives) are cognates of Latin socius \u2018<\/em>companion\u2019, all\u00a0 from PIE * sok\u02b7ui<\/strong>–s<\/strong> \u2018companion\u2019 (IEW, 896) (cf. DELR, so\u021b<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              55. sovaio<\/em> \u2018decree, agreement\u2019 (0130), sovun<\/em> \u2018pact, treaty\u2019 (134) seems to be cognate of cu OCS suvet\u016d<\/em> > Russian sovet<\/em> \u2018advice, council\u2019 which, according to Vasmer (REW,) it is a calque after Greek \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd<\/em> \u2018conference, council’ (cf. Vasmer (REW), but his hypothesis is not correct. These forms are the forerunners of Romanian sfat<\/strong> \u2018council, advice\u2019 (and its derivatives).<\/li>\n
              56. spatu<\/em> \u2018back\u2019 (076) is a forerunner of Romanian spate<\/strong> \u2018back\u2019 (and spat\u0103<\/strong> \u2018scapula\u2019) with cognates in several Indo-European languages (cf. DELR, spate<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              57. stratu<\/em> \u2018army\u2019 (021-7, 084) is a loan from Greek \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2<\/em> \u2018id\u2019. Thraco-Dacian language has also the form\u00a0 armosa<\/em> \u2018army\u2019 which is used more often.<\/li>\n
              58. surloi<\/em>, surlari<\/em> \u2018trumpets\u2019 (012, 084) are the forerunners of Romanian surl\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018trumpet\u2019. They are of imitative origin and derive from PIE *suer<\/strong>– \u2018to hum, the buzz\u2019 (IEW, 1049) (cf. DELR, surl\u0103<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
              59. tali<\/em>, talu<\/em>, talue<\/em> \u2018heights, high, tall, above\u2019 (002, 092, 107), talipico<\/em>, talipica<\/em> \u2018towering, lofty, the chiefs, uplifting\u2019 (021, 052, 058, 062, 079, 084, 094, 115, 120, 121, 124, 130), talpico<\/em> (talipico) \u2018from above\u2019. It is difficult to establish etymological connections in other Indo-European languages, unless one considers that the root tal<\/em>– is the result of a metathesis of alt<\/em>– \u2018high, tall\u2019 as in Latin altus<\/em> \u2018high, tall\u2019, found in several Indo-European language groups (Celtic Germanic, Albanian), as well as in Romanian \u00eenalt<\/strong> \u2018tall, high\u2019.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                235 tela<\/em>, tera<\/em>, telus<\/em> may be associated with Latin tellus<\/em> \u2018earth, ground\u2019 and with Romanian \u0163ar\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018country, countryside\u2019. I have to mention that in classical Latin terra<\/em> means \u2018dry earth, soil\u2019 (cf. DELR, \u021bar\u0103<\/strong>).<\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. telaos<\/em> \u2018absolute, perfect\u2019 (110) is a cognate of Greek \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2<\/em> \u2018perfect\u2019. There seems to be a loanword from Greek. It was not preserved in Romanian.<\/li>\n
                2. tera<\/em>, teira<\/em>, tere<\/em>, tero<\/em>, teru<\/em> \u2018country, land, fields\u2019 ((003, 011, 012, 018, 025, 031, 079-2, 121-2, 134) are predecessors of Romanian \u021bar\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018country, land\u2019, \u021b\u0103r\u00e2n\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018dust\u2019, \u021barin\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018field\u2019. In general, Latin tellus<\/em> and terra<\/em> are not regarded as having a common origin as may be the case with Thrace-Dacian tela<\/em>, telus<\/em>, etc. and tera<\/em>, teira, etc.<\/em><\/li>\n
                3. teta<\/em> \u2018priest\u2019, also used as an appellative to address a priest (107). This noun is of particular interest. It can be paired with Romanian tat\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018father\u2019, but especially with tete <\/strong>(tite) \u2018a form of respect to address an older brother or an older man\u2019 found in southern Transylvanian and northern Oltenian dialects. I think teta<\/em> is closer\u00a0 to tete<\/strong> than the tat\u0103<\/strong>. Chantraine indicates that Homeric Greek \u03c4\u03ad\u03c4\u03c4\u03b1<\/em> has the same meaning as in today\u2019s Romanian language. All these forms derive from PIE *tata<\/strong> \u2018father (in children’s talk)\u201d (IEW, 1056) (cf. DELR, tete<\/strong>, tat\u0103<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
                4. tir<\/em>, tiro<\/em> \u2018recruits soldiers\u2019 (111, 114), a cognate of Latin tiro<\/em> \u2018recruit, novice soldier\u2019 (not listed in EDL, de Vaan).<\/li>\n
                5. tole<\/em> \u2018lifting\u2019 (011) is a cognate of Latin tollo<\/em> \u2018to raise up, the lift up\u2019. It was not preserved in Romanian.<\/li>\n
                6. tometo<\/em> \u2018Tomitans\u2019 (119), the inhabitants of the city of Tomis on the Black Sea.<\/li>\n
                7. topo<\/em> \u2018tall, mighty, haughty\u2019 (042, 116) does not seem to have kept anything similar in Romanian. It can be associated with certain forms of Germanic languages: cf. English top<\/em>,\u00a0 Old Norse toppr<\/em> \u2018id\u2019.<\/li>\n
                8. tracu<\/em>, trachio<\/em> \u2018Thracian, Thrace\u2019 (005, 006, 011, 012, 022, 034, 035, 040, 045, 052, 058, 065, 069, 072, 079, 092, 096, 121, 122 124, 126, 129, 134) is the ethnonym of Thracians tribes living south of Danube river.<\/li>\n
                9. tribu<\/em> \u2018tribe\u2019 (079) was lost over time being reintroduced in the 19th century is cognate of Latin tribus<\/em>.<\/li>\n
                10. trupeu<\/em>, trupeo<\/em> \u2018council, gathering, army, defense system\u2019 ((010, 052, 058, 091-2, 092-2, 096, 116, 129). I associate this Thraco-Dacian word with French troupe<\/em> or troupeau<\/em> \u2018flock\u2019 which is considered of Germanic origin, related to NHG Dorf<\/em> \u2018village\u2019 or Old English thorp \u2018id\u2019. I doubt those French words are of Germanic origin, and I think they are rather of Celtic origin and cognates to these Thrace-Dacian forms.<\/li>\n
                11. uger<\/em> \u2018udder\u2019 ((023) is the predecessor of Romanian uger<\/strong> \u2018id\u2019 with cognates in Sanskrit, Greek, Germanic and Lithuanian language, besides Latin uber,<\/em> all from PIE * \u0113udhr<\/strong>– * \u016bdhr<\/strong>– \u2018udder\u2019 (cf. DELR , uger<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
                12. unghio<\/strong>, unghiu<\/strong> \u2018angles, sides\u2019 (127) is the predecessor of Romanian unghi<\/strong> \u2018angle\u2019, ungher<\/strong> \u2018corner\u2019. They derive from PIE *ank<\/strong>– *ang<\/strong>– \u2018to bend\u2019, with the nominal forms *anko<\/strong>-, *onko<\/strong>– *ankulo<\/strong>– (IEW, 46) with cognates in various Indo-European languages, including Latin (cf . DELR, unghi<\/strong>, \u00eencovoia<\/strong> \u2018to bend\u2019).<\/li>\n
                13. vida<\/em> \u2018life’ (092), bio<\/em> \u2018life, behavior, to live\u2019\u00a0 (016, 129), poltavio<\/em> (po alto vio \/ bio) ‘to have existed \/ lived \u201c(042), vio<\/em> \u2018force\u2019. Poltavio<\/em> is a compound verb form (or phrasal verb). These forms are the predecessors of Romanian\u00a0 viu \u2018<\/strong>alive\u2019, via\u021b\u0103 <\/strong>\u2018life\u2019, a vie\u021bui<\/strong> \u2018to live\u2019 are cognates of Latin vita<\/em>, vivus<\/em>, all from PIE * g\u02b7\u012bwe<\/strong> \/ o- \u2018to live’ * g\u02b7\u012bwo<\/strong>– \u2018alive\u2019, * g\u02b7\u012bt\u0101<\/strong>-\u2018life\u2019 (EDL, 685),. There are cognates in Celtic, Baltic and Slavic languages.<\/li>\n
                14. (mairo) viro<\/em> \u2018(the) great man, a consul to the Romans, mayor\u2019 (010, 011, 025, 045, 062, 092, 094, 119, 120, 121, 124, 126), veiro<\/em> \u2018manfully\u2019 (094, 114) brebiro<\/em> \u2018emerging victorious \/ like a man\u2019 (023). Thraco-Dacian. viro<\/em> was not preserved in Romanian only somehow indirectly in b\u0103rbat <\/strong>\u2018man\u2019 which originally meant \u2018bearded (man)\u2019 as in Latin and in several other Indo-European .languages, all from PIE * \u016dir<\/strong>– \u2018man\u2019 (IEW, 1177). Forms in b<\/em> (as in brebiro<\/em>) were associated by folk etymology with *barbato<\/em> which replaced all forms in vir-o<\/em>, around 2000 years ago or even more. We have reasons to believe that the language of the Sinaia tablets is an archaic language. New Greek varvatos<\/em> \u2018man\u2019 in a loanword from Thraco-Dacian, not from Romanian since in Greek b > v around 2000 years ago, before Romans set foot in Dacia and before any type of possible Romanization.<\/li>\n
                15. virgerio<\/em> \u2018victors, valiant men\u2019 (009) seems to be a derivative of vir<\/em>-(o) suffixed by -gerio (see biro, above).<\/li>\n
                16. voxo<\/em> \u2018voice\u2019 (017) is a cognate of Latin vox<\/em> \u2018id\u2019 (see DELR,\u00a0 boace<\/strong>, boci<\/strong>). Today\u2019s Romanian voce<\/strong> \u2018voice\u2019 is a loanword from 19th century.<\/li>\n
                17. zaveso<\/em> \u2018back\u2019 (076). The etymology remains obscure.<\/li>\n
                18. zeibun<\/em> (Zeubun \u2018Thraco-Dacian name of a deity\u2019) \u2018ancestral god\u2019 (002) is probably a compound form from zeu<\/strong> \u2018god\u2019 and bun<\/strong> \u2018ancestor, grandfather\u2019.<\/li>\n
                19. zerfio<\/em> \u2018sacrifice\u2019 (035, 052), sarfite<\/em> \u2018let (them) sacrifice\u2019 (121). Outside Sinai tablets, it is attested a similar form, the Thracian zetraia<\/em> \u2018sacrifice\u2019 (cf. IEW, 447).\u00a0 These forms derive from PIE *g’heu<\/strong>– *g’heumn<\/strong>– \u2018to pour, to make libations\u2019 (IEW, 447) with cognates in several Indo-European languages, such as Sanskrit hotra<\/em> \u2018sacrifice\u2019, hotar<\/em> \u2018priest\u2019, Avestan zaotar<\/em>, zaothr<\/em> \u2018the priest, the one who sacrifices\u2019 and Greek \u03c7\u03cd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2<\/em>, \u03c7\u03cd\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1<\/em> \u2018jar (for libations)\u2019 (cf. IEW). Regarding Thracian zetraia<\/em>, Walde-Pokorny shows that it derives from a PIE * g\u2019heutr<\/strong>-. Allegedly, Romanian jertf\u0103<\/strong> \u2018sacrifice\u2019 < OCS *\u017ertva<\/em> which is non-existent in Old Church Slavonic, but it was \u2018rebuilt\u2019 by Miklosich from the southern Slavic forms. It was borrowed into Russian as well. It seems to me that the southern Slavic forms are loanwords from Proto-Romanisn (cf. DELR, jertf\u0103<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
                20. zu<\/em>, zoi<\/em>, \u2018(the) day\u2019 (130) is the forerunner of Romanian zi<\/strong> (ziu\u0103) \u2018day\u2019 (day), with cognates in many Indo-European languages, all from PIE *diues<\/strong>– \u2018day\u2019 (IEW, 185), related to zeu<\/strong> (see deu<\/em>, zeu<\/em>) (cf. DELR, zi<\/strong>, zeu<\/strong>).<\/li>\n
                21. zuna<\/em> \u2018zone, region\u2019 (111) to be associated with Latin z\u014dna \u2018<\/em>belt, girdle, zone\u2019 which is a loanword from Greek \u03b6\u03ce\u03bd\u03b7<\/em> \u2018belt, girdle, girdle\u2019. If the word is\u00a0 properly identified, it looks that it is a loanword from Latin, since the meaning of \u2018zone\u2019 appears only in Latin, but not in Greek.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                  The following is the second part of The Language of the Inscriptions of the Sinaia Tablets (a relatively small etymological dictionary of Dacian language), namely the nouns (see Verbs in…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":196,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kad_blocks_custom_css":"","_kad_blocks_head_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_body_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_footer_custom_js":"","_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[98,30],"tags":[126,127,128,129,130,32,119],"class_list":["post-826","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-98","category-linguistics","tag-dacian-language","tag-etymologies","tag-indo-european-language-and-indo-europeans-languages","tag-inscriptions","tag-nouns","tag-romanian-language","tag-sinaia-tablets"],"taxonomy_info":{"category":[{"value":98,"label":"5\/2015"},{"value":30,"label":"Linguistics"}],"post_tag":[{"value":126,"label":"Dacian language"},{"value":127,"label":"etymologies"},{"value":128,"label":"Indo-European language and Indo-Europeans languages"},{"value":129,"label":"inscriptions"},{"value":130,"label":"nouns"},{"value":32,"label":"Romanian language"},{"value":119,"label":"Sinaia tablets"}]},"featured_image_src_large":false,"author_info":{"display_name":"Mihai Vinereanu","author_link":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/author\/mihai-vinereanu\/"},"comment_info":0,"category_info":[{"term_id":98,"name":"5\/2015","slug":"52015","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":98,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":4,"filter":"raw","cat_ID":98,"category_count":4,"category_description":"","cat_name":"5\/2015","category_nicename":"52015","category_parent":0},{"term_id":30,"name":"Linguistics","slug":"linguistics","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":30,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":13,"filter":"raw","cat_ID":30,"category_count":13,"category_description":"","cat_name":"Linguistics","category_nicename":"linguistics","category_parent":0}],"tag_info":[{"term_id":126,"name":"Dacian language","slug":"dacian-language","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":126,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":1,"filter":"raw"},{"term_id":127,"name":"etymologies","slug":"etymologies","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":127,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":1,"filter":"raw"},{"term_id":128,"name":"Indo-European language and Indo-Europeans languages","slug":"indo-european-language-and-indo-europeans-languages","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":128,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":1,"filter":"raw"},{"term_id":129,"name":"inscriptions","slug":"inscriptions","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":129,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":1,"filter":"raw"},{"term_id":130,"name":"nouns","slug":"nouns","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":130,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":1,"filter":"raw"},{"term_id":32,"name":"Romanian language","slug":"romanian-language","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":32,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":4,"filter":"raw"},{"term_id":119,"name":"Sinaia tablets","slug":"sinaia-tablets","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":119,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":3,"filter":"raw"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/826","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/196"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=826"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/826\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=826"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=826"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/limbaromana.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=826"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}