FAQ

Volume 17, Issue 2

2012 Next

Publication date: 22.05.2013

Licence: None

Editorial team

Editor-in-Chief Marek Stachowski

Secretary Barbara Podolak

Issue content

Michael Knüppel

Studia Etymologica Cracoviensia, Volume 17, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 89 - 100

https://doi.org/10.4467/20843836SE.12.004.0394

Yakut elements in the Tungus languages X-XII: Yakut in Urulga-Ėwenki (X), BarguzinĖwenki (XI) and Nānaj (XII) (according to S. M. Širokogorov’s “Tungus Dictionary”)
The following article deals with Yakut elements in Nānaj and two Ėwenki dialects (Urulga-Ėwenki and Barguzin-Ėwenki) as well as some Yakut-Tungus “parallels”, and it is based on the material included in S. M. Širokogorov’s “Tungus Dictionary”.

Read more Next

Viktor Levickij

Studia Etymologica Cracoviensia, Volume 17, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 101 - 104

https://doi.org/10.4467/20843836SE.12.005.0395

The Germanic and Slavonic words for ‘milk’ and ‘to milk’
A hypothesis has been proposed stating that the Germanic words with the meaning ‘milk’ and ‘to milk’ go back to IE root *mel- ‘to crush, to squash’, ‘to spread, to smear’. This root could have generated two semantic derivatives, namely, ‘to spill; wet, moist’ and ‘to rub, to stroke’ to which the meanings ‘milk’ and ‘to milk’ go back. The Germanic *mel-uk- ‘milk’ might be a compound word, the second component o which *au eg-/ug- has the meaning ‘to increase, to add’.
 

Read more Next

Tomasz Majtczak

Studia Etymologica Cracoviensia, Volume 17, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 105 - 122

https://doi.org/10.4467/20843836SE.12.005.0396

The article investigates some aspects of the Old Turkic word sü. A sense not recorded in the standard dictionaries is established on the basis of a philological analysis of the available texts. The phonetic shape of sü is defended against some claims proposing a different vocalic or consonantal part of it. And finally, a derivation of this word from a Chinese source is questioned as not satisfactorily proved
 

Read more Next

Dariusz R. Piwowarczyk

Studia Etymologica Cracoviensia, Volume 17, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 123 - 125

https://doi.org/10.4467/20843836SE.12.007.0397

This article investigates the problem of the etymological connection between the Greek word ὀμείχω ‘to urinate’ and the agent noun μοιχός ‘adulterer’, the semantics of which has often been termed improbable. It is pointed out that the connection might be made more probable when analyzing the Latin data: the verb meiō, -ere ‘to urinate’ and its meaning in the Latin texts, which is not always restricted to ‘urinating’ but is also used as an obscene word meaning ‘to ejaculate’. We can then postulate that μοιχός was an agent noun of ὀμείχω in the meaning of ‘to ejaculate’ and this way as ‘adulterer’.

Read more Next