Timeline for What are the exact orthography, etymology and explicit semantics of галимо/голимо?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 2013 at 13:51 | comment | added | Yellow Sky |
ѣ, ъ and ь were never nasalised. Irrespective of whether its position was stressed or not, ѣ changed into modern Russian e everywhere. What you've been writing makes me think you need some rest today.
|
|
| Mar 9, 2013 at 13:41 | comment | added | Manjusri | @Yellow Sky: whatever. My point was that it was a sound which has historically been nasalised. | |
| Mar 9, 2013 at 13:25 | comment | added | Yellow Sky |
@Manjusri - Ѣ is not 'Yer', that is ять.
|
|
| Mar 8, 2013 at 15:48 | comment | added | Quassnoi♦ | @Manjusri: who are fascists? | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 18:01 | comment | added | Manjusri | @shabunc: relax, they are just fascists | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 14:36 | comment | added | Quassnoi♦ | @shabunc: not my downvote, but could you please link to the dictionary itself and not to wiktionary? I can find this word neither in my printed edition nor online. | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 12:58 | comment | added | Manjusri | In stressed positions? | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 12:42 | comment | added | shabunc♦ | @Manjusri, it is actually interesting indeed. Switch from yat to и is not typical for Russian though perfectly imaginable, since it is exactly what happened in Ukrainian, for example. | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 12:23 | comment | added | Manjusri | No, I have not. I have upvoted it, actually. | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 12:06 | comment | added | shabunc♦ | Had you down voted my answer? I yes, please, explain why. | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 11:49 | comment | added | Manjusri | That's an interesting resourse, but how can you explain the switch from Yer to Ee-letter? And how does the Vasmer's version corresponds to the Yer in general? | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 11:43 | comment | added | shabunc♦ | downvoters, please, explain | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 7:11 | history | edited | shabunc♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 121 characters in body
|
| Mar 7, 2013 at 7:07 | comment | added | shabunc♦ | @Manjusri yes, sir, I can indeed ))) feb-web.ru/feb/sl18/slov-abc/04/sl515208.htm | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 7:04 | history | edited | shabunc♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 121 characters in body
|
| Mar 7, 2013 at 7:04 | comment | added | Manjusri | Could you give any proof to your claims pls? | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 7:02 | comment | added | shabunc♦ | довольно типичный для русского словооброзования суффикс и нет, слово появилось гораздо раньше 19-го века. | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 6:52 | comment | added | Manjusri | Если слово появилось не раньше конца девятнадцатого-начала двадцатого, то велика вероятность заимствования из цыганских языков. Суффикс, каким бы он ни был, достаточно интересен и заслуживает отдельного вопроса. | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 6:48 | comment | added | shabunc♦ | по аналогии с любовь/любимый - суффикс не -им-, а не -м-, в современном русском ни в каком контексте это слово положительной коннотации не несёт, что касается второго вашего подвопроса, то это вопрос на который вам вряд ли кто-то даст ответ точнее века) | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 6:39 | comment | added | Manjusri | This results in three questions. First, why the -м- suffix is used? Second, what is the oldest written attestation of this word in Russian? Third, is it/has it ever been used in modern Russian in positive sense? | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 6:31 | history | answered | shabunc♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |