4 ms·
>This sounds to have a Russian angle to me (e.g., the word 'vse') Proto-Slavic *vьśi ("all") would yield "vsi", not that far off. Many modern Slavic languages
by kgeist 5y ago
>This sounds to have a Russian angle to me (e.g., the word 'vse')
Proto-Slavic *vьśi ("all") would yield "vsi", not that far off. Many modern Slavic languages add additional suffixes: wszystcy, všichni, vsichki etc., which are secondary. Serbian comes close but they swapped the first two consonants: svi.
- throwaway290 5y agoThey did not just swap it, did they? Svi (everything) is also related to svit (the world), which is also in Russian as svet. This is why I say Serbian made more sense to me as a native Russian speaker. Likewise Serbian sutra, which in Russian is zavtra, same idea (in the morning, i.e. tomorrow) but with seemingly more unnecessary manipulations (considering morning is still utro in Russian).
- kgeist 5y agoPretty sure Serbian swapped vs- > sv-, the word is not related to "svit" (it's a folk etymology). Russian vs'ak "everyone" = Serbian svak "everyone"
- throwaway290 5y agoI cannot respond without looking into what grounds are there to believe svet in proto-slavic is not related to sve. No one speaks proto slavic, so it is all conjectures based on languages that were spoken more recently. I believe linguist academics are citizens of their countries, and their interpretations of things in the past are influenced by languages they speak.
- kgeist 5y agoThere's an academic field called "historical linguistics" [0]. What laypeople believe about language is called "folk etymology" [1]. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_linguistics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_linguistics [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folk_etymology https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folk_etymology
- kgeist 5y agoProto-Slavic vьśi => Serbian svi, Russian vse. Proto-Slavic světъ => Serbian svet/svit, Russian svet. It's two unrelated words which just happen to start with the same two consonants in Serbo-Croatian out of all Slavic languages, after the phonetical change vs- => sv-
- kgeist 5y ago>No one speaks proto slavic, so it is all conjectures based on languages that were spoken more recently Not really. Written Slavic exists since 9 century and it was spelt vs- already back then. Serbo-Croatian is an outlier here because all other Slavic languages have vs-. Baltic languages are related to Slavic and Old Prussian had "wissa" for "all" (not "siva")
- wheelerof4te 5y agoNot pretty sure, absolutely. Also: svak => svako svit => svet
- kgeist 5y ago>Likewise Serbian sutra, which in Russian is zavtra, same idea (in the morning, i.e. tomorrow) but with seemingly more unnecessary manipulations (considering morning is still utro in Russian). I'm not sure what the argument is here. Can you elaborate?
- throwaway290 5y agoutro = morning, sutra = in the morning, zavtra = also in the morning but weirdly distorted for no obvious reason. There seems less etymological distortion in Serbian.
- kgeist 5y agoZavtra <= za utra. What distortion are you talking about? That -u- became -v-?
- throwaway290 5y agos became za, u became v.
- kgeist 5y agoS- didn't become za-. It's just a different choice of preposition in Russian. S utra = "starting from the morning" Za utra (utrom) = "after the morning" Both have a right to exist, just slightly different original meanings.
- throwaway290 5y agoThat's your opinion, let it be different from mine
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- 5y ago