Greek Y in Dalmatian Romance1

Orsat Ligorio

1. Introduction

1.1 Spoken in the eastern coast of the Adriatic, Dalmatian, a Romance language, became
extinct in the 15th century while still virtually undocumented, with the exception of Vegliot, a minor
dialect of Dalmatian spoken on the island of Krk, which lived on until the 19th century, when it was
documented and when it too went extinct but a significant number of Dalmatian borrowings
survived in Serbo-Croatian which, when they are stripped of that which is properly Slavic and
Serbo-Croatian, constitute the document of the Dalmatian language.
1.2 In this paper I address the question of Greek in Dalmatian Romance, of its history and
of its development, and, further, I address the merit this question holds for the broader issue,
whether Greek borrowings in Dalmatian were inherited from Vulgar Latin or, in fact, borrowed
from Greek, and, consequently, I embrace the underlying problem, whether Greek borrowings in
Serbo-Croatian of Dalmatia were borrowed directly, from Greek, or indirectly, from Greek via
Dalmatian, and try to tackle it or, at least, I do as much as the present subject allows me to.

2. Material

2.0 The material which I propose for analysis (sec. 3) and discussion (sec. 4) consists of 34
etyma containing G which have been borrowed into Serbo-Croatian via Dalmatian Romance, as it
is generally assumed or as it can plausibly be assumed.2 (See sec. 2.12.34 below.) The material
which has been excluded is listed in sec. 2.36.

2.1 : SC (m)bis m. Dubrovnik (ERHSJ I 3); sbis m. Dubrovnik, Poljica (ERHSJ

loc.cit.); bis m. Korula (Kalogjera et al. 2008: 2), Sali (JE I 11); bis m. Murter (Juraga 2010:
41); mbis m. Zlarin (Bjai-Dean 2002: 111); ambs m. Oljak (Vali 2012: 10), Brbinj (Rani
2013: 14), Banjol (Vuleti 2016); ab m. Ist (Smoljan 2015: 21); abs m. Unije (2000: 110); obs
Susak, PN Obs m. (JE loc.cit.); v. sabisati se Dubrovnik (ERHSJ loc.cit.). Ref. Vasmer 1944:
42, ERHSJ I 3, JE I 11, PLSA 68, I 46, Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 50.

1 I am particularly indebted to Nikola Vuleti of Zadar University who helped me collect the data for this paper and, even,
was so kind as to allow me to publish a part of his fieldwork data for Banjol on Rab (= Vuleti 2016).
2 Other etyma of Greek origin in Dalmatian Romance whether borrowed directly from Greek or inherited via Vulgar

Latin and not contianing G include: , PLSA 67; , 71; , 71; , 68; , 81; ,
77; , 69; , 67; , 84; , 84; () , 88; , 89; , 87; , 142; ,
116; , 124; , 125; , 125; , 127; , 127; , 127; , 130; ,
129; , 130; , 102; , 91; , 91; , 93; , 92; , 94; ,
95; , 95; , 105; , 107; , 106; , 115; , 114; , 114; , 114; ,
115; , 118; , 114; , 113; , 121; , 154; , 162; , 166; ,
168; , 171; (), 182; , 183; o, 185; , 187; , 186; , 192;
, 193; , 194; , 192; , 194; , 201; , 203; , 205; , 202 (and
2015b); -, 205; , 204; , 204; , 206; , 207; , 210; , 207; , 211;
, 187; , 220; , 220; , 225; , 227; , 230; , 231; , 237; , 239;
, 240; , 234; , 243; , 244; , 245; , 246; , 247; , 248;
, 249; -, 249; , 251; , 244; , 234; , 234; , 253; , 188; , 198;
, 198; , 108; , 108. (Also , according to 2014.) I omit from this list place
names and proper names, some of which must have been borrowed at a very early date.
\1
 2.2 ()-: SC jup m. s.loc. (ERHSJ 487); jeupka f. Dubrovnik, jupak, -pka m.,
Jeupkinja f., adj. jeupaki (ERHSJ loc.cit.), all s.loc. Ref. ERHSJ 487.

2.3 : SC iga f. Rijeka Dubrovaka (JF II 248), oliga f. Hodilje, Goveari, Korita,
Slano (JF loc.cit.), Rijeka, Vrbnik, Krk (ERHSJ I 31); o(j)ga f. Korula (Kalogjera et al. 2008:
266); oiga f. Lastovo (JF loc.cit.); ojiga f. Povlja, Bakavoda, Podgora, Komia, Raie, Lovite,
uljana, Duba (JF loc.cit.); jga/ga f. Hvar (Beni 2014: 223); ojuga f. Suuraj, Gradac (JF
loc.cit.); jga f. Pitve (Barbi 2011: 112); jiga f. Milna, Postira, Bol, Vrboska, Jelsa, Vis, ga f.
Grohote, Supetar, Starigrad, Zarae (JF loc.cit.); vojiga f. Sumartin (JF loc.cit.); jga [= jga?]3 f.
ibenik (JE II 37); oga f. Jezera, irje (JF loc.cit.); ga/jga f. Murter (Juraga 2010: 120, 156);
ga f. Zlarin (Bjai-Dean 2002: 153), Oljak (Vali 2012: 112), Rivanj (Raduli 2002: 161); ga
[= ga?] f. Sali (JE loc.cit.); gen fsg ge Brbinj (Rani 2013: 90), Ist (Smoljan 2015: 209); ga f.
Kolan (Otari 2005), Pag (JF loc.cit.); ga f. Pag (Kusti 2002: 183); olga f. Omialj (Mahulja
2006: 201), Senj (Mogu 2002: 95, ERHSJ loc.cit.); jica f. Murter, ica f. Sali, gar m.
Prvi-epurina (JE loc.cit.); olinica f. Senj, Vrbnik, olica f. Bakar (ERHSJ loc.cit.). Ref. ERHSJ I
31, JE II 37, JF I 395, Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 48, PLSA 149.

2.4 : SC grma f. ipan (ERHSJ I 617); grmica f. Dubrovnik, grmar m.

Dubrovnik (ERHSJ I 617). Ref. ERHSJ I 617, JF I 399, Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 50, PLSA 147.

2.5 : SC adj. grpan Korita, Mljet (JE I 189). Ref. JE 189, PLSA 148.

2.6 :4 SC gripina Split, Bra (ERHSJ I 616). Ref. Vasmer 1944: 62, ERHSJ I 616,
PLSA 148.

2.7 -1:5 SC v. agirt Pranj, Muo, agrati, agirati Bijela, Boka (ERHSJ I 13);
agirncija Muo (ERHSJ loc.cit.). Ref. ERHSJ I 13, I 60, PLSA 73. See also -2 below.

2.8 -2:6 SC PN irje n. Ref. SR I 151, ERHSJ II 145, PLSA 73, Ligorio-Vuleti 2016.
See also -1 above.

2.9 :7 SC umba f. Montenegro (ERHSJ III 394); PN pan m. Ref. Vasmer 1944: 61, SR
I 233, ERHSJ III 394, PLSA 149.

2.10 : SC PN Drmn m. Murter (Vuleti 2010a: 337); drmn m. Kolan (Otari

2005: 103), Krk, Kastav (ERHSJ I 441), PN Drmn m. Lopar (SR I 57); dr mn, -na m. Lika
(ERHSJ loc.cit.); dermn m. Omialj (Mahulja 2006: 52); PN Drimn m. Barbat (SR loc.cit.);
PN Drmun m. Lopar (SR loc.cit.). Ref. Vasmer 1944: 54, SR I 57, ERHSJ I 441, PLSA 128.

2.11 : SC PN Dr m., gensg Dra. Ref. ERHSJ I 609, Holzer 2011: 102.

3 See PLSA 31, ftn. 38. (Also ga = ga below?)

4 In fact, from -.
5 In fact, from L GYRRE.
6 In fact, from .
7 In fact, from -.

\2
 2.12 : SC tn m. Budva, Raie, Boava (ERHSJ II 523), Korula (Kalogjera et al.
2008: 376); tun m. Ulcinj, Lepetane, Muo, Dobrota, Strp, Kostanjica, Baoi, Drae, Suuraj,
Zarae, Brusje, Stobre, Grohote, Petrane, Novigrad, Vinjerac, Privlaka, Paklenica, Kukljica,
Ugljan, Rivanj, man, Sestrunj, Rava, Ist, Olib, Silba, Premuda, Novalja, Karlobag, Prizna,
Jablanac, Lukovo, Baka, Punat, Malinska (JF II 324); tn m. Senj (Mogu 2002: 155); tn m.
Rivanj (Raduli 2002: 316), Kolan (Otari 2005: 545), Povljane (Tii 2004: 382), Banjol (Vuleti
2016); nompl tnovi Bijela, Muo (ERHSJ loc.cit.); tu m. Goveari, uljana, Komia, Vis,
Podgora, Bakavoda, Jelsa, Vrboska, Starigrad, Hvar, Bol, Sumartin, Povlja, Postira, Sutivan,
Milna, Krilo, Maslenica, Okrug, Sevid, Krapanj, Zablae, ibenik, Zaton, Kaprije, irje, Raanac,
Tribanj, Boava, Veli Rat, Pag, Lun, Barbat, Lopar, Baka (JF loc.cit.); t m. Hvar (Beni 2014:
473), Murter (Juraga 2010: 274), Bibinje (imuni 2013: 738); t m., gensg t Pitve (Barbi
2011: 331); tn f. Blato (Pana 2015: 448); tna/tna f. Rab (ERHSJ loc.cit.); tna f. Omialj
(Mahulja 2006: 343), Malinska (ERHSJ loc.cit.); ta f. Beli (Veli 2003: 496); ta f., gensg ti
(sic!) Cres (ERHSJ loc.cit.); tuna f. Omialj, Bakar (JF loc.cit.). Ref. Vasmer 1944: 145, ERHSJ III
523, JF 1 297, JE III 286, PLSA 255

2.13 : SC PN Krula f. Ref. SR I 198, ERHSJ II 203, Muljai 2007, Kapovi-

Vuleti 2010: 50, Muljai 2007, (Holzer 2011:117), Ligorio 2015.

2.14 : SC garmb m. Boava, Dragove, gormb m. Sali (?), garmb m. Premuda,

kormb m. Martinica (JE I 174); garmb, -ula m., gormbul Sali (?, JE loc.cit.). Ref. JE 174,
Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 47.

2.15 : SC korun Kostanjica, Strp, Perast, Muo (JF II 254). Ref. JF I 233, JE II 101,
Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 49.

2.16 : SC kkula f. ilipi, kuotola f. Hvar, ktula f. Vis, ktul m., ktula f. Komia,
krtul m. Tkon, PN Ktul m. (JE II 103); ktulica f. Korula (JE loc.cit.). Ref. JE II 103,
Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 47.

2.17 : SC da f. Perast, Budva, Stoliv, Korula, Crmnica, ibenik (ERHSJ I 557);

ka f. Korula (Kalogjera et al. 2008: 168), Blato (Pana 2015: 219), Hvar (Beni 2014: 258), Pitve
(Barbi 2011: 136), Zlarin (Bjai-Dean 2002: 148), Brbinj (Rani 2013: 81), Ist (Smoljan 2015:
188), Kolan (Otari 2005: 207), Povljane (Tii 2004: 169), Banjol (Vuleti 2016), Beli (Veli 2003:
191), Unije (2000: 138), Rab, Cres, ibenik (ERHSJ loc.cit.); ta f. ibenik, Senj, kata f. Vrbnik,
kva f. Vrbnik (ERHSJ loc.cit.). Ref. ERHSJ I 557, Holzer 2011: 103, PLSA 123. See also
below.

2.18 : SC cma f. Potomje (ERHSJ I 265), Neretva (Mataga 2003: 36), Hvar (Beni
2014: 124), Pitve (Barbi 2011: 30), Studenci (Babi 2008: 66), Bibinje (imuni 2013: 176),
Zlarin (BjaiDean 2002: 119), Oljak (Vali 2012: 30), Nin (Matrovi 1957: 427), Pag (Kusti
2002: 140), Povljane (Tii 2004: 61), Lovinac (Japuni 2013: 61), Banjol (Vuleti 2016), Beli
(Veli 2003: 59), Grobnik (Lukei-Zubi 2007: 198); cma f. Unije (2000: 115); kma f.
Dubrovnik (ERHSJ loc.cit.); cmica f. Senj (Mogu 2002:14.); kmica f. Ston (JE I 98); kmiica
f. Ston, umak m. Drvenik, Crikvenica (ERHSJ loc.cit.), imula f. Dugi (ERHSJ loc.cit.), omiga f.
Budva (ERHSJ loc.cit.); v. cimti Brbinj (Rani 2013: 43). Ref. ERHSJ I 265, JE I 98, Holzer
2011: 98, 111, PLSA 123.

\3
 2.19 : SC mblica Vrgada (Jurii 1973: 37). Ref. JE I 110, PLSA 123.

2.20 *:8 SC kiniksa Kali (JF II 208). Ref. JF I 67, JE II 82, Kapovi-Vuleti
2010: 50, PLSA 123.

2.21 : SC N ubran, ibran s.loc. (Jireek 1904: 32, 71); PN ubrijn m. Zadar
(Vuleti in Ligorio 2015); N abrijan Baka; ubar, ubre, ubro, ubrilo Montenegro
(ERHSJ I 269), PN ubrilovi Montenegro, N ubrani Krk, ubrani Dubrovnik (Jireek op.
cit.), Baka;9 PN ubranovo Sutomore (ERHSJ loc.cit.). Ref. Jireek 1904: 32, ERHSJ I 269.

2.22 : SC PN urilovo (sc. polje) Konavli. ERHSJ I 269, PLSA 163.

2.23 : SC ljerica f. ilipi, Dubrovnik; lrica f. Peljeac (ERHSJ II 306). Ref.

ERHSJ II 306, PLSA 163.

2.24 : SC mrkatua f. Dubrovnik, Cavtat, mrkatua f. Peljeac (ERHSJ I

447). Ref. ERHSJ 557, Holzer 2011: 103, PLSA 171. See also above.

2.25 : SC morina f. Ulcinj, Dobrota, Baoi, Slano, Vela Luka, Komia, Suuraj,
Jelsa, Vrboska, Supetar, Krilo, Okrug, Sevid, Krapanj, Zablae, ibenik, Kaprije, Jezera, Novigrad,
Vinjerac, Tribanj, Kali, Sali, Silba (JF II 230); morina f. Poljica (ERHSJ II 485); morna f. Milna
(imunovi 2009: 488), Oljak (Vali 2012: 123); mrna f. Trogir (Gei 2015: 218); murina f.
Kostanjica, Meljine, Molunat, Mlini, Mokoice, Zaton, Koloep, Lopud, Suura, Korita, Proura,
Goveari, Doli, Broce, Hodilje, Duba, Brijesta, uljana, Drae, Lovite, Lastovo, Lumbarda, Brna,
Trn, Drvenik, Pogdora, Sumartin, Rogoznica (JF loc.cit.); mrina f. Korula (Kalogjera et al. 2008:
203); murna f. Blato (Milat Pana 2015: 254), Bol, Puia (imunovi 2009: 499), I (Martinovi
2005: 206); mrina f. Dubrovnik, Mljet (ERHSJ loc.cit.); morona f. Murter, Vrgada, Kukljica,
Boava, Veli Rat, Rava, Molat, Ist, Premuda (JF loc.cit.); morna f. Vrgada (Jurii 1973: 123);
morna f. Lepetane, Muo (JF loc.cit.), Stoliv (ERHSJ loc.cit.) morna f. Brbinj (Rani 2013: 98);
morna f. Privlaka, I, mirina f. irje, Bol, marina f. Hvar, Brusje, Starigrad, Zarae, Vis (JF
loc.cit.); marna f. Brusje (DuliDuli 1985: 528), Pitve (Barbi 2011: 152), Hvar (Beni 2014:
283); marna f. Vis (Roki-Fortunato 1997: 281); mrina f. Povlja, Milna, Stobre, Grohote,
Maslinica, mria f. Perast, mria f. Strp (JF loc.cit.); muria f. Sutomore, muruna f. Dubrovnik
(ERHSJ loc.cit.); mra f. Sestrunj (JF loc.cit.). Ref. Vasmer 1944: 101, ERHSJ II 485, JE II 205,
Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 46, PLSA 178.

2.26 -1:10 SC mta f. Split (ERHSJ II 471), Zlarin (BjaiDean 2002: 157), Murter
(Juraga 2010: 169), Vrgada (Jurii 1973: 123), Kukljica (Marii 2000: 166), Nin (Matrovi 1957:
166), Oljak (Vali 2012: 125), Rivanj (Raduli 2002: 177), I (Martinovi 2005: 203), Sali
(Piasevoli 1993: 192), Brbinj (Rani 2013: 99); mrta f. Ist (Smoljan 2015: 216), Unije (Nikoli
2000: 144); mrta f. Boava, Dugi, mrtva f. Sinj, Vranjic, PN Mrta f. Silba (ERHSJ loc.cit.);
PN Mrtovna f. Premuda (ERHSJ loc.cit.). Ref. SR I 86, 92, ERHSJ II 471, Kapovi-Vuleti 2010:
46, PLSA 181. See also -2, -3, -4.

8 Not ! (So Vinja in JF I 67 and JE II 82.) G * yields SC kiniksa by a dissimilation ss > s.

9 Information from Baka by the courtesy of N. Vuleti, via pers. comm. of Feb 7 2016.
10 In fact, from L MURTA.

\4
 2.27 -2:11 SC mra Krtole, Bogdai, Dubrovnik, Mljet (ERHSJ II 471); PN
Mevac m. kaljari (ERHSJ loc.cit.). Ref. ERHSJ II 471, Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 46, Holzer 2011:
130, PLSA 181. See also -1, -3, -4.

2.28 -3:12 SC mrela Patrovii, Dubrovnik, mrla Budva, PN Mrle Spi (ERHSJ II
471); murtla Brusje (DuliDuli 1985: 540), Bol (imunovi 2009: 499), Pitve (Barbi 2011:
166), Hvar (Beni 2014: 299), Zlarin (BjaiDean 2002: 157), Murter (Juraga 2010: 171), Vrgada
(Jurii 1973: 125), Bibinje (imuni 2013: 402), Kukljica (Marii 2000: 168), Rivanj (Raduli
2002: 180), I (Martinovi 2005: 206), Sali (Piasevoli 1993: 196), Brbinj (Rani 2013: 100), Ist
(Smoljan 2015: 232), Kolan (Otari 2005: 259); murtla [= murtla]13 Vis (Roki-Fortunato 1997:
305); murtla Milna (imunovi loc.cit.), Trogir (Gei 2015: 222); mrtla Draevica (imunovi
2009: 493); mrtela Nin (Matrovi 1957: 442); murtla Unije (Nikoli 2000: 147). Ref. ERHSJ II
471, Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 46, PLSA 181, 2015: 48. See also -1, -2, -4.

2.29 -4:14 SC mrka Loinj (ERHSJ II 471); mka I (Martinovi 2005: 202); mrka Ist
(Smoljan 2015: 216). Ref. ERHSJ II 471, Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 46, PLSA 181. See also -1,
-2, -3.

2.30 : SC ppir Komia (Boani 1997: 261). Ref. JE III 63, PLSA 191.

2.31 : SC poreha Rava (Gavazzi 1963: 84), I (JE III 66); pareha I
(Vuleti 2016). Ref. JE III 66, PLSA 192.

2.32 : SC prpor m. Dobrota, Perast, Strp, Kostanjica, Meljine, prmpor m. Krtole

(JF II 382); prpor m. Dobrota, Perast, Strp, Kostanjica, Meljine, prmpor m. Krtole, pumpar m.
Drvenik, Okrug (ERHSJ III 11); pumpar m. Drvenik, Okrug; parpart m. Rivanj, parpartina f.
Brbinj (JE II 242). Ref. ERHSJ III 11, JF II 382, JE III 66, II 242.

2.33 : SC kp m., gensg kpa Montenegro, Boka, Herzegovina, Kuite (ERHSJ III
260); kp m. Vrgada (Jurii 1973: 207); kp m. Zlarin (BjaiDean 2002: 188), Murter (Juraga
2010: 251), Kukljica (Marii 2000: 291), Bibinje (imuni 2013: 682), Nin (Matrovi 1957: 454).
Ref. ERHSJ III 260, Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 50, PLSA 236.

2.34 :15 SC smudut m. Molunat, Cavtat, Mlini, Mokoice, Zaton, Koloep,

Suura, Slano, Korita, Proura, Goveari, Doli, Broce, Duba, Brijesta, Trpanj, uljana, Drae,
Lastovo, Lumbarda, Koula, Raie, Brna, Vela Luka (JF II 260). Ref. JE I 137, III 180, JF I 212,
PLSA 252.

2.35 See also in ftn. 46, in ftn. 58, in sec. 4.48.

2.36 I exclude: 1. SC gruj, ERHSJ I 627, which JF I 161 derives from G but which,
according to ERHSJ loc.cit. and PLSA 116, appears to continue L CONGRU instead; 2. SC koluba,
JE II 92, which op.cit. derives from G () but which, according to Vuleti 2010b and 2013,

11 In fact, from *myrtea. (By derivation, D *myrta *myrtea, or *murtea after MURTA.)
12 In fact, from *myrt(ic)ella. (By derivation, D *myrta myrticella, myrtella, or murticella, murtella after MURTA.)
13 See 2015: 47, ftn. 25.
14 In fact, from *myrtca. (By regressive derivation, D *myrticella *myrtca, or *murtca after MURTA.)
15 In fact, from -.

\5
appears to continue L COLUMBU instead; 3. SC oirac < G , JF I 234, which I think is
questionable; 4. SC mijenduo, ERHSJ II 556, which is supposed to derive from G but
which, according to 2015a, must be reconstructed as either *(a)mednulu or *(a)mendolu
in order to produce the pseudo-yat, which I discuss op.cit.; and 5. a part of the data s.v. ,
which has been remade into L PURPULU, presumably due to a dissimilation *rr > *rl.16

3. Analysis

3.0 Based on the material in sec. 2, G appears to correspond to: 3.1 SC i, 3.2 SC u, 3.3 SC
a, 3.4 SC *ja, 3.5 SC , 3.6 SC *ju, 3.7 SC *ji, 3.8 SC o, 3.9 SC *jo, 3.10 SC e, 3.11 SC *.
3.1 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian i: 1. s.v. in (m)bis Dubrovnik, sbis
Dubrovnik, Poljica, bis Korula, Sali, bis Murter, mbis Zlarin, ambs Oljak, Brbinj, Banjol,
ab Ist, abs Unije, obs Susak, Obs; 2. s.v. in oliga Hodilje, Goveari, Korita, Slano,
Rijeka, Vrbnik, Omialj, Krk, Senj, olinica Senj, Vrbnik, olica Bakar; 3. s.v. in grma
ipan, grmica Dubrovnik, grmar Dubrovnik; 4. s.v. in grpan Korita, Mljet; 5. s.v. in
gripina Split, Bra; 6. s.v. -1 in agirt Pranj, Muo, agirati Bijela, Boka, agirncija Muo; 7. s.v.
in Drimn Barbat; 8. s.v. in cma Potomje, Neretva, Hvar, Pitve, Studenci, Bibinje,
Zlarin, Oljak, Nin, Pag, Povljane, Lovinac, Banjol, Beli, Grobnik, cma Unije, kma, cmica Senj,
kmica, kmiica Ston, imula Dugi, cimti Brbinj; 9. s.v. in mblica Vrgada;17 10. s.v.
in kiniksa Kali; 11. s.v. in mirina irje, Bol; 12. s.v. in ppir Komia;
13. s.v. in kp, -pa Montenegro, Boka, Herzegovina, Kuite, kp Vrgada, kp Zlarin,
Murter, Kukljica, Bibinje, Nin.
3.2 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian u: 1. s.v. in tn Budva, Raie, Boava,
Korula, tun Ulcinj, Lepetane, Muo, Dobrota, Strp, Kostanjica, Baoi, Drae, Suuraj, Zarae,
Brusje, Stobre, Grohote, Petrane, Novigrad, Vinjerac, Privlaka, Paklenica, Kukljica, Ugljan,
Rivanj, man, Sestrunj, Rava, Ist, Olib, Silba, Premuda, Novalja, Karlobag, Prizna, Jablanac,
Lukovo, Baka, Punat, Malinska, tn Senj, tn Rivanj, Kolan, Povljane, Banjol, tnovi Bijela, Muo,
tu Goveari, uljana, Komia, Vis, Podgora, Bakavoda, Jelsa, Vrboska, Starigrad, Hvar, Bol,
Sumartin, Povlja, Postira, Sutivan, Milna, Krilo, Maslenica, Okrug, Sevid, Krapanj, Zablae,
ibenik, Zaton, Kaprije, irje, Raanac, Tribanj, Boava, Veli Rat, Pag, Lun, Barbat, Lopar, Baka,
t Hvar, Murter, Bibinje, t Pitve, tn Blato, tna/tna Rab, tna Omialj, Malinska, ta Beli,
ta Cres, tuna Omialj, Bakar; 2. s.v. in garmb Boava, Dragove, gormb Sali, kormb
Martinica, gormbul garmb, -ula Sali; 3. s.v. in korun Kostanjica, Strp, Perast, Muo; 4.
s.v. in kkula ilipi, ktula Vis, ktul, ktula Komia, krtul Tkon, ktulica Korula, Ktul;
5. s.v. in murina Kostanjica, Meljine, Molunat, Mlini, Mokoice, Zaton, Koloep, Lopud,
Suura, Korita, Proura, Goveari, Doli, Broce, Hodilje, Duba, Brijesta, uljana, Drae, Lovite,
Lastovo, Lumbarda, Brna, Trn, Drvenik, Pogdora, Sumartin, Rogoznica, mrina Korula, murna
Blato, Bol, Puia, I, mrina Dubrovnik, Mljet, mria Strp, muria Sutomore, muruna
Dubrovnik; 6. s.v. -3 in murtla Brusje, Bol, Pitve, Hvar, Vis, Zlarin, Murter, Vrgada, Bibinje,
Kukljica, Rivanj, I, Sali, Brbinj, Ist, Kolan, murtla Milna, Trogir, mrtela Nin, murtla Unije.
3.3 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian a: 1. s.v. in kata Vrbnik; 2. s.v.
in mrkatua Dubrovnik, Cavtat, mrkatua Peljeac; 3. s.v. in marina Hvar, Brusje,

16 Namely, SC vrpalj m. Zablae, Prvi, Tribanj, Kaprije, Pirovac, vrpal m. Fontana, krpal m. Prosika, vrpaj m. Vabriga,
vrpa, -pja m. Neviane, Krapanj, Tkon, vrpolj m. Zaton (JF II 382). See PLSA 53 and compare Ligorio 2013b.
17 In cma, cma, cmica, cimti *k > c by Slavic palatalisation. (L CYMA = *cima > S *cima > SC cima; cf. SC PN

Cavtat < L CIVITATE, ERHSJ I 252.) In imula *k > SC by Dalmatian palatalisation? See ftn. 49, and 66.
\6
Starigrad, Zarae, Vis, marna Brusje, Pitve, Hvar, marna Vis; 4. s.v. in pumpar Drvenik,
Okrug, parpart Rivanj, parpartina Brbinj.
3.4 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian *ja: 1. s.v. in abrijan Baka.18
3.5 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian : 1. s.v. in Drmn Murter, drmn
Kolan, Krk, Kastav, PN Drmn Lopar, dr mn, -na Lika, dermn Omialj, Drmun Lopar;19 2. s.v.
in Dr; 3. s.v. in da Perast, Budva, Stoliv, Crmnica, Korula, ibenik, ka
Korula, Blato, Hvar, Pitve, ibenik, Zlarin, Brbinj, Ist, Kolan, Povljane, Banjol, Beli, Unije, Rab,
Cres, ta ibenik, Senj, kva Vrbnik; 4. s.v. in mrina Povlja, Milna, Stobre, Grohote,
Maslinica; 5. s.v. -1 in mta Split, Zlarin, Murter, Vrgada, Kukljica, Nin, Oljak, Rivanj, I,
Sali, Brbinj, mrta Ist, Unije, mrta Boava, Dugi, mrtva Sinj, Vranjic, Mrta Silba, Mrtovna
Premuda;20 6. s.v. -2 in mra Krtole, Bogdai, Dubrovnik, Mljet, Mevac kaljari; 7. s.v.
-3 in mrela Patrovii, Dubrovnik, mrla Budva, Mrle Spi, mrtla Draevica; 8. s.v.
-4 in mrka Loinj, mka I, mrka Ist; 9. s.v. in smudut Molunat, Cavtat, Mlini,
Mokoice, Zaton, Koloep, Suura, Slano, Korita, Proura, Goveari, Doli, Broce, Duba, Brijesta,
Trpanj, uljana, Drae, Lastovo, Lumbarda, Koula, Raie, Brna, Vela Luka.
3.6 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian *ju:21 1. s.v. - in jeupka Dubrovnik,
jup, jupak, Jeupkinja, jeupaki s.loc.; 2. s.v. in ojuga Suuraj, Gradac;22 3. s.v. in
umba Montenegro; 4. s.v. in Krula; 5. s.v. in umak Drvenik, Crikvenica; 6. s.v.
in ubran s.loc., ubrijn Zadar, ubar, ubre, ubro, ubrilo, ubrilovi
Montenegro, ubranovo Sutomore, ubrani Dubrovnik, ubrani Krk; 7 s.v. in
urilovo Konavli; 8. s.v. in poreha Rava, I.
3.7 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian *ji:23 1. s.v. in iga Rijeka Dubrovaka,24
o(j)ga Korula, oiga Lastovo, ojiga Povlja, Bakavoda, Podgora, Komia, Raie, Lovite,
uljana, Duba, jga/ga Hvar, jga Pitve, jiga Milna, Postira, Bol, Vrboska, Jelsa, Vis, vojiga
Sumartin, ga Grohote, Supetar, Starigrad, Zarae, ga Kolan, Pag, ga Pag;25 2. s.v. -2 in irje;
23 s.v. in pan; 4. s.v. in ibran s.loc.;26 5. s.v. in pareha I.
3.8 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian o: 1. s.v. in garmb Premuda; 2. s.v.
in kuotola Hvar; 3. s.v. in morina Ulcinj, Dobrota, Baoi, Slano, Vela Luka,
Komia, Suuraj, Jelsa, Vrboska, Supetar, Krilo, Okrug, Poljica, Sevid, Krapanj, Zablae, ibenik,
Kaprije, Jezera, Novigrad, Vinjerac, Tribanj, Kali, Sali, Silba, morna Milna, Oljak, mrna Trogir,
morona Murter, Vrgada, Kukljica, Boava, Veli Rat, Rava, Molat, Ist, Premuda, morna Vrgada,
morna Lepetane, Muo, Stoliv, morna Brbinj, morna Privlaka, I, mria Perast, mra Sestrunj;
4. s.v. in prpor Dobrota, Perast, Strp, Kostanjica, Meljine, prmpor Krtole.
3.9 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian *jo:27 1. s.v. in jga ibenik, oga Jezera,
irje, ga/jga Murter, ga Zlarin, Oljak, Rivanj, ga Sali, ge Brbinj, Ist, jica Murter, ica
Sali, gar Prvi-epurina;28 2. s.v. in omiga Budva.
3.10 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian e: 1. s.v. -1 in agrati Bijela, Boka.
3.11 Greek corresponds to Serbo-Croatian ije in Ijekavian, in Ikavian (i.e. to *): 1. s.v.
in ljerica ilipi, Dubrovnik, lrica Peljeac.

18 *kja > a. (*k > supposedly not by Dalmatian palatalisation. See ftn. 68.)
19 In dermn r > er.
20 In mrta, mrta, Mrta, Mrtovna SC r > ar.
21 *gju > u, u; *kju > u, u; *lju > u; *nju > u.
22 From ouga.
23 *gji > i, i; *kji > i, i;*lji > i; *nji > i.
24 Unclear.
25 In vojiga, ojiga, jiga SC i > ji, and in ga, ga ji > i.
26 *k > supposedly not by Dalmatian palatalisation. See ftn. 66.
27 kjo > o; *ljo > o.
28 In joga, joica SC o > jo.

\7
 4. Discussion

4.1 Generally, it could be assumed: 1. in sec. 3.1, where G > SC i, that SC i < D *i (or SC i
< D *u via D * > S *y); 2. in sec. 3.2, where G > SC u, that SC u < D *u; 3. in sec. 3.3, where G
> SC a, that SC a < D *i, *u via S *, * in the strong position; 4. in sec. 3.4 where G > SC ja,
that SC ja < D * via S *j in the strong position; 5. in sec. 3.5, where G > SC , that SC < D
*i, *u via S *, * in the weak position; 6. in sec. 3.6, where G > SC *ju, that SC *ju < D *; 7.
in sec. 3.7, where G > SC *ji, that SC *ji < D *; 8. in sec. 3.8, where G > SC o, that SC o < D
*u through a lowering D *u > *o; 9. in sec. 3.9, where G > SC *jo, that SC *jo < D * through a
lowering D * > *jo ; 10. in sec. 3.10, where G > SC e, that SC e < D *i through a lowering D *i
> *e; 11. in sec. 3.11, where G > SC *, that SC * < D *i through a lowering D *i > *e and a
lengthening D *e > * but I cannot see, as indeed I could not see in 2014, based on the data
presented in PLSA, any evidence that ever in Dalmatian there was any native *, which is a view
that I have substantiated loc.cit.29

4.2 The question of the Graeco-Dalmatian contact is not a new one.

4.3 Its central issue, whether or not Greek borrowings in Dalmatia were borrowed into
Serbo-Croatian via Dalmatian or not, was first addressed by P. Skok in 1955 and, in 1967, it was
further elaborated by V. Vinja. Vinja proposed the following hypothesis: Nous pouvons dire quil y
eut des contacts directes entre les Grecs et les Romans, entre les Romans et les Slaves mais non
entre les Grecs et les Slaves (Vinja 1967: 206).
4.4 It follows, according to Vinja, that Greek borrowings in Serbo-Croatian, or at least those
in Dalmatia, have been transmitted by Dalmatian, a Romance language, which is a proposition, I
think, that finds itself cornered given the absence of D * by the cases in which G happens
to correspond to SC *ju, *ji, *jo. See sec. 3.6, 3.7, 3.9 above.
4.5 For this reason I will claim that such cases do not require the intercession of Dalmatian,
which has been supposed by Vinja, but, instead, constitute a group of borrowings which could have
been borrowed from Greek into Serbo-Croatian directly.

4.6 Let us first consider the common nouns.

4.7 In the first place, it is reasonable to assume that those borrowings of Greek origin which
exist both in Dalmatian and in other Romance languages, e.g. in Italian, Sardinian or Romanian,
were not borrowed into Dalmatian, as it were, but, instead, inherited from Vulgar Latin (whereto,
originally, they were indeed borrowed from Greek).
4.8 According to REW, such borrowings make of the material in sec. 2.
4.9 Compare: > ABYSSU, REW 56; - > AEGYPT-, 23335; > GRYPHU,
3901; -1 (= - + -ARE) > GYRRE, 3937; -2 (= ) > GYRU, 3938; > THUNNU,
8724; > *corymbu, 2272; > *coty lu, 2290; > COTONEU, 2436; >
CYMA, 2438; > CYMBLU, 2441; > MURNA, 5754; -1 (= *myrta) > MURTA,
5801; -3 > *murticella, 5802; > PAPRU, 6218; > PARANYMPHU 6228;
> PURPRA, 6862; > SCYPHU, 7760.

29 See in particular PLSA 134-139.

\8
 4.10 In Vulgar Latin G corresponds either 1. to L Y (= *i);30 31 2. or to L U.32 33
4.11 Accordingly, we would do well to exclude the part of the material which was supposedly
inherited, i.e. , -, , -1, -2, , , , , ,
, -1, -3, , , , and consider only that part which was
supposedly borrowed, i.e. , , -, -, , , *, ,
, -2, -4, , -, since, in the part which was supposedly borrowed, G
was more likely not subject to G > L *i, U.34

4.12 But a part of the data, as it appears, cannot be dismissed in this way.

4.13 In Ligorio 2013a I have proposed a criterion for the distinction of those words which
were supposedly borrowed into Serbo-Croatian directly from Greek and those which were
supposedly borrowed indirectly, or, as it were, those which have taken the Dalmatian route.35
4.14 The criterion is based on the propensity of Latin accentuation to shift the original
accent of Greek proparoxytona to the penultimate syllable when that syllable is long, either natur
or positione, e.g. G > L EMPLSTRU or G > L SCORPANA, whence SC
mplastar, kr pina which since they descend from the older implstar, krpna must reflect L
EMPLSTRU, SCORPANA and not G , .36
4.15 Accordingly, a part of the material which is considered inherited by sec. 4.11 appears,
or at least it does judging from this criterion, to have been borrowed instead.
4.16 G > L ABSSU, sec. 2.1. SC bis (= abs), ab, ambs, mbis (= ambs), obs, Obs,
sbis (= sabs) reflect the accent of L ABSSU, SC bis Murter, mbis Zlarin the accent of G .37
4.17 G > L MURANA, sec. 2.25. SC morna, murna, mrina (= murna), morna,
morna, marna, mria (= mora), mria (= mura) reflects the accent of L MURANA, SC
mrina Korula the accent of G .38
4.18 G > L PAPRU, sec. 2.30. SC ppir Komia reflects the accent of G .
4.19 This criterion, however, has a flaw in that the accent in Greek, as in Latin, can, and
does, shift to the penultimate syllable, which is used as the measure of distinction, so that, within
the singular paradigm of Greek o- and a-stems, the direct stem has -, -, - and the
oblique -, -, - which coincides with L ABSSU, MURANA, PAPRU.
4.20 As a result, nothing, I think, can be said of the paroxytona, such as SC ambs, murna,
whether they have been borrowed directly or indirectly,39 but of the proparoxytona, such as SC
mbis, mrina, ppir, it can be said, I think, that they were borrowed directly from Greek or
otherwise one would have to explain the retraction in *BYSSU, *MRAENA, *PPYRU by the means
of Dalmatian accentuation, which is impossible.

30 See StolzDebrunner 1966: 52.

31 G > L *i in I abisso < L ABYSSU, I cembalo < CYMBLU, cima < CYMA, grifo < GRYPHU, girare < GYRRE, giro <
GYRU, Sard. pabiru < PAPRU, paralimpu < PARANYMPHU, iskivu < SCYPHU, and the like, in REW loc.cit.
32 G > L U in I tonno < L THUNNU, cotogno < *cotoneu, Sard. murena < MURNA, murta < MURTA, I mortella <

*murtella, porpora < PURPRA, and the like, in REW loc.cit. (Cf. L CUBU < G , and the like.)
33 Except for L CYDONIU > L COTONEU and L *corymbu *corym(b)ellu > Sard. koromeu which show *oy / yo

> oo, and I ciotola, Rom. ciutur, which, according to REW, is supposed to continue L *coty lu, but which are,
perhaps, better derived from G , REW 2434, via *cathu *cythula, with *y > *i in hiatus as usual. But *a >
u? (Alessio in DEI s.v. ciotola assumes an incrocio, i.e. , which, I suppose, is a possibility.)
34 Except -2 and -4, which should likewise be excluded since they derive from -,1 and ,

which should be excluded too since it may as well continue L MALU COTONEU.
35 See also PLSA 8892.
36 G , would require SC mplastar, kpina.
37 SC > due to -VNC-.
38 SC mrina is isolated and, possibly, an error for mrina.
39 SC poreha Rava, I, pareha I may similarly reflect either the accent of L PARANMPHU < G or of G

, oblique -. See sec. 2.31.

\9
 4.21 In the other part of the material, which per sec. 4.11 was supposedly borrowed and not
inherited, one does in fact find SC paroxytona corresponding to G proparoxytona.
4.22 G * > L *cyniscssa, sec. 2.20. SC kiniksa Kali may reflect either the
accent of L *cyniscssa or of G , oblique *-.40
4.23 I repeat, as per sec. 4.21, that of SC kiniksa nothing can be said, or at least based on its
accentuation, whether it has been borrowed directly or indirectly.41

4.24 Let us now turn back to the question of G , and of its development.

4.25 In the part of the material which, per. sec. 4.11, was supposedly inherited and which,
thereby, was subject to G > L Y (= *i), U we expect, regularly, SC i, u from L *i, U, or SC a, ,
where L *i, U were borrowed via S *, *, or SC e, o, where L *i, U were subject to a lowering L *i,
U > D *e, *o before they were borrowed.
We find:
4.26 SC i, sec. 3.1, in G > L ABYSSU in sec. 3.1.1;42 > GRYPHU in sec. 3.1.5;
-1 > GYRRE in sec. 3.1.6; > CYMA in sec. 3.1.8; > CYMBLU in sec. 3.1.9;
> MURNA in sec. 3.1.11;43 > PAPRU in sec. 3.1.12;44 > SCYPHU in sec. 3.1.13.
4.27 SC u, sec. 3.2, in G > L THUNNU in sec. 3.2.1; > *corymbu in sec. 3.2.2;
> *coty lu in sec. 3.2.4;45 > MURNA in sec. 3.2.5; -3 > *murtella in sec. 3.2.6.46
4.28 SC e, sec. 3.10, in G -1 > L GYRRE in sec. 3.10.1.
4.29 SC o, sec. 3.8, in G > L *corymbu in sec. 3.8.1;47 > *coty lu in sec.
3.8.2; > MURNA in sec. 3.8.3. Compare sec. 4.46.
4.30 SC a, sec. 3.3, in G > L COTONEU in sec. 3.3.1; > MALU
COTONEU in sec. 3.3.2; > MURNA in sec. 3.3.3.
4.31 SC , sec. 3.5 in G > COTONEU in sec. 3.5.3; > MURNA in sec. 3.5.4;
- > MURTA in sec. 3.5.5; -2 > *murtella in sec. 3.5.7; -3 > *murtea in sec. 3.5.6; -4
1

> *murtca in sec. 3.5.8. Compare sec. 4.53.

4.32 This part of the material conforms with the expectation in that G is found corresponding
to SC i, u, e, o, a, as per sec. 4.25, and was, therefore, supposedly inherited into Dalmatian from
Vulgar Latin but the other part of the material, which, per sec. 4.11, was supposedly inherited does not
conform with the expectation and shows SC *ju, *ji, *jo instead.
4.33 G - > L AEGYPT-, sec. 2.2, has SC *ju in jeupka Dubrovnik. Compare sec. 4.38.

40 Compare also SC epriz (= eparz) < G , oblique - in sec. 4.48.

41 SC kiniksa was not affected by either the Slavic or the Dalmatian palatalisation. It must have, therefore, been borrowed
after the palatalisation in Slavic, which is seen e.g. in G > SC cima, and either before or after the Dalmatian
palatalisation in Dalmatian, which is seen e.g. in G > SC imula or so I claim in ftn. 49 but, most likely, SC
kiniksa was borrowed after the palatalisation in Dalmatian (and iotacism in Greek).
42 Excluding bis Murter, mbis Zlarin per sec. 4.17.
43 Isolated, and, likely, the result of an assimilation murina > mirina.
44 In contradiction with ftn. 39. (That is, supposing that SC poreha, pareha comes from L PARANMPHU. There is no

contradiction if one supposes that poreha, pareha comes from G - per sec. 4.19.)
45 Most likely remade into *cotula. (A late diminutive in Dalmatian, without the syncope. Only SC kkula ilipi appears to

continue D *cotla > *cocla, with the syncope and the subsequent restitution of the syncopated syllable, as in D *cocla > D
*cocula whence SC kokula. Compare PLSA 152.)
46 Hither also SC kuf < G , JE II 111, which is attested only in the written records but see Kapovi-Vuleti 2010: 48.
47 Either due to the lowering L *u > D *o or, more likely, to an assimilation *corymbu > *corombu; cf. Sard. koromeu.

\10
 4.34 G > L CYMA, sec. 2.18, has SC *ju in umak Drvenik, Crikvenica, sec. 3.6.5, and
SC *jo in omiga Budva, sec. 3.9.2.48 49 Compare sec. 4.38, 4.40.
4.35 G > L PARANYMPHU, sec. 2.31, has SC *ju in poreha Rava, I, sec.
3.6.8, and *ji in SC pareha I, sec. 3.7.5. Compare sec. 4.38f.
4.36 Due to this aberration, and given the absence of native * in Dalmatian, it seems to me
that SC jeupka, umak, omiga, poreha, pareha have been borrowed into Serbo-Croatian from
Greek and not through Dalmatian, and that SC *ju, *ji, *jo, is an expression of an attempted
adaptation of G , apparently pre-iotacist, to the Serbo-Croatian system,50 and, moreover, that this
adaptation, which took place in Dalmatia, is comparable to the one which took place in Serbia,
where there was no buffer between Greek and Serbo-Croatian, and where too G was occasionally
adapted as SC *ju, *ji.51

4.37 In the part of the material which, per sec. 4.11, was supposedly not inherited and which,
thereby, was not subject to G > L Y (= *i), U we expect, apparently, SC *ju,52 53 *ji,54 *jo, if the
word was borrowed before iotacism took place in Greek, or SC i,55 56 if it was borrowed after it took
place, or SC a, ,57 if G was borrowed via S *.
We find:
4.38 SC *ju, sec. 3.6, in G in sec. 3.6.2; - in sec. 3.6.3. Compare sec. 4.38, 4.50.
4.39 SC *ji, sec. 3.7, in G in sec. 3.7.1. Compare sec. 4.34, 4.35, 4.51.
4.40 SC *jo, sec. 3.9, in G in sec. 3.9.1. Compare sec. 4.34.
4.41 SC i, sec. 3.1, in G in sec. 3.1.2; in sec. 3.1.3; - in sec. 3.1.4;
in sec. 3.1.7; * in sec. 3.1.10.
4.42 SC , sec. 3.5, in G in sec. 3.5.1; - in sec. 3.5.9.
4.43 This part of the material conforms with the expectation in that G is found corresponding
to SC *ju, *ji, *jo, i, a, , as per. 4.37, and was, therefore, supposedly borrowed into Serbo-Croatian
from Greek, whether before or after iotacism, but the other part of the material, which, per sec. 4.11,
was supposedly not inherited, does not conform with the expectation and shows SC o, u, * instead.
4.44 G > SC korun, sec. 3.2.3, has SC u. In Dalmatian, G appears to have
been remade into *corne with *-one after L C-stems in -ONE, a productive type in Dalmatian,
which yields -un in Serbo-Croatian. Compare pt. 5 in sec. 2.36 and ftn. 45.
4.45 G > SC *lr-, sec. 3.10.1, has SC *. In Dalmatian, G > L LYRA appears to
have been subject to the lowering L Y (= *i) > D *e, as in sec. 4.28, and to the lengthening D *e > D

48 That is, next to SC i in sec. 3.1.8. (Also above, in sec. 4.26.)

49 In G > SC imula the palatal appears to be a product of the Dalmatian palatalisation. Cf. L CIMICE > SC imak/
imak, ERHSJ II 80. (Also, Vegl. inko < CIMICE.) However, after velars it is not possible, I think, to distinguish between
the effect of the Dalmatian palatalisation and jotation arising from SC *ji < G.
50 I have first proposed this view in PLSA 135 and elaborated it in Ligorio 2015.
51 See ftn. 52 and 54.
52 Cf. G > SC panaur, Vasmer 1944:107; > ubar, ERHSJ I 399; > uma, 265, 341.
53 Also in Old Serbian records, if rarely. Cf. G (= *) > OSer. prmikjur, Vasmer 1944: 123.
54 Cf. G () > SC koljivo, Vasmer 1944: 79.
55 Cf. G aor > SC mirisati, 99; > mirosati, 99; > kromid, 84; > mirpoija, 99;

> mistrija, 99; > oriz, 106;. > stipsa, 137; > tiranin, 143.
56 Also in Old Serbian records, very frequently. Compare G > OSer. agripnija, Vasmer 1944: 41;

> ameist, 43; > migdal, 98; > viss, 148; > diaklizmo, 52; > diptih, 53;
> dis, 53; > glikizmo, 61; > grips, 62; > timijam, 142; > kondil, 81;
> kiknos, 77; > kiparis, 78; > lihnitar, 89; * > milokopije, 98;
> panagirik, 108; > panihida, 109; > protosingel, 126; > pirg, 116;
> stiraks, 137; > sinklitiki, 132; > sinaksar, 132; > triandafil, 143;
> timpan, 142; > tipar, 142; > tipik, 142; > edrop, 55; > iparh, 67;
> ipodiakon, 67; > ipostas, 67; > iporg, 67; > hrisobol, 64.
57 Cf. G > OSer. tmian, SC tamjan, Vasmer 1944: 140.

\11
*. (See Ligorio 2013c: 359 and compare 2015.) The resulting D *lr- yields S *lr-
whence SC *lr- develops regularly.58
4.46 G > SC pr(m)por, sec. 3.8.4, has SC o. G > L PURPURA and SC o
points to the lowering L U > D *o,59 as in sec. 4.29. Consequently, SC a in pumpar, parpart,
parpartina, sec. 3.3.4, will predate SC pr(m)por and go back to S * < D *u.
4.47 It seems to me, due to these aberrations, that SC korun, *lr, pr(m)por were not
borrowed into Serbo-Croatian from Greek but through Dalmatian, whose distinct mark they indeed
bear, whether it is in the form of the lowering, the lengthening, or the derivation.

4.48. Instructed by these observations (sec. 4.74.47) I insert a note about the cypress in
Serbo-Croatian. (See ERHSJ I 56.) In Serbo-Croatian, the cypress varies considerably but the range
of its variation can be reduced, in essence, to four principal types: 1. epriz Boka, 2. kpres Bosnia,
3. cpres Dalmatia, 4. pres Dalmatia. I propose that SC epriz (= eparz) is a direct borrowing
from G , oblique -;60 SC kpres an indirect borrowing, through L CYPRESSU (=
*cupressu, with G > L *u as in sec. 4.27);61 SC cpres an indirect borrowing, through L CYPRESSU (=
*cipressu, with G > L *i as in sec. 4.26) with L *ci- > S *ci- due to Slavic palatalisation (as in L
CYMA = *cima > SC cima, loc.cit.); SC pres and indirect borrowing, through I cipresso < L
CYPRESSU.62 It appears that no variant of the cypress has taken the Dalmatian route, except for SC
cpres, which, given its history and its geography, can be considered Dalmatian pace Skok loc.cit.63 64

4.49 Finally, let us consider the proper nouns.

Here we find:
4.50 SC *ju, sec. 3.6, in G > SC Krula in sec. 3.6.4;65 > ubrijn
Zadar etc. in sec. 3.6.6;66 > urilovo Konavli in sec. 3.6.7. Compare sec. 4.38.
4.51 SC *ji, sec. 3.7, in G -2 > SC irje in sec. 3.7.2; - > pan in sec. 3.7.3;67
> ibran in sec. 3.7.4. Compare sec. 4.39.
4.52 SC *ja, sec. 3.4, in G > SC abrijan Baka in 3.4.1.68
4.53 SC , sec. 3.5, in G > SC Dr in sec. 3.5.2.69 Compare sec. 4.31.
4.54. With exception of SC Dr, this part of the material appears to conform with the
expectation in that G is found corresponding to SC *ju, *ji, *ja, as per. 4.37, and has, therefore,
supposedly been borrowed into Serbo-Croatian from Greek, and not through Dalmatian.

58 Hither also SC pijerg < G , ERHSJ I 239, which is attested only in the written records. See 2015a: 64, ftn. 121.
59 Cf. e.g. It. porpora, REW 6862.
60 Compare sec. 4.22 and ftn. 44.
61 Hither also PN Kpres Bosnia.
62 Or, in the north of Dalmatia (where Dalmatian palatalisation takes place), through D *ipresu, or similar, from L

CYPRESSU. However, this type, to which must also belong the most popular variant, SC mpres, is attested both in the
north and the south of Dalmatia, which leads me to conclude that, in the north of Dalmatia, it must be an Italian borrowing.
63 Not in PLSA. (To be added.)
64 Also, I consider SC kpres Bosnia a borrowing from Balkan Latin, not from Dalmatian (like Skok does).
65 In Ligorio 2015 I showed that G > SC Korula, with G > SC *ju, as in sec. 4.38, whereas SC Krkar its

variant in fact continues L CORCYRA < G , not G , with SC a < S * < L Y, as in sec. 4.30.
66 It is preferable to suppose that in G > SC ibran G > SC *ji than that G > L CYPRIANUS and

that L CY- (= *ci-) > SC i- by Dalmatian palatalisation, as in ftn. 49, given that ibran is an isolated variant and that
variants in u- (with G > SC *ju) are far more widespread, as sec. 3.5.6 can testify.
67 In both G -2 > SC irje and G - > SC pan where G > SC *ji it is possible that G was in fact borrowed as S

*j (due to a lengthening in the open stressed syllables, as in sec. 4.45) and that S *j > *jy, whence SC ji develops
regularly. Cf. SC irje and L Zuri irje from 1285, SC ipan and L Juppana ipan from 1222.
68 SC abrijan with G > S *j or *j appears to predate ibran with G > SC *ji and ubrijn etc. with G > SC *ju.

(Again, it is preferable to suppose G > S *j than L CY- (= *ci-) > S - by Dalmatian palatalisation given that abrijan,
like ibran in ftn. 66, is an isolated variant.
69 In fact, G > L DURRACHIU whence SC Dr; cf. A Durrs, I Durazzo.

\12
 5. Conclusion

5.1 I have proposed to investigate the history and development of G in Dalmatian Romance.
5.2 But, as I have pointed out in sec. 1, the fate of this question depends on our ability to
distinguish between Greek borrowings in Dalmatian and Greek borrowings in Serbo-Croatian.
5.3 In sec. 2 I proposed 34 etyma for analysis and discussion, and in particular G ,
()-, , , , , -1, -2, , , , , ,
, , , , , , *, , , ,
, , -1, -2, -3, -4, , , , .
5.4 Out of these, I fished out those etyma which can be considered as direct borrowings from
Greek in Serbo-Croatian based on the criteria discussed in sec. 4, and namely: 1. on the fond of Greek
borrowings in Vulgar Latin (sec. 4.74.11), 2. on the transposition of Greek accent in Latin and Romance
(sec. 4.124.23), and 3. on the development of G in Latin and Serbo-Croatian (sec. 4.244.54); and so,
supposedly, separated Serbo-Croatian Greek from Dalmatian Greek in Serbo-Croatian.
5.5 In terms of G , there are two kinds of Serbo-Croatian Greek borrowings: iotacist,
where G appears to yield [i] before it was borrowed, and non-iotacist.
5.6 A non-iotacist reflex, SC *ju, *ji, *jo, *ja, is supposedly found in G - > SC
jeupka etc. Dubrovnik, > umak Drvenik, Crikvenica, omiga Budva, - >
poreha Rava, I, pareha I, per sec. 4.36; G > SC ojuga Suuraj, Gradac, o(j)ga
Korula, oiga Lastovo, ojiga Povlja, Bakavoda, Podgora, Komia, Raie, Lovite, uljana,
Duba, jga/ga Hvar, jga Pitve, jiga Milna, Postira, Bol, Vrboska, Jelsa, Vis, vojiga Sumartin, ga
Grohote, Supetar, Starigrad, Zarae, ga Kolan, Pag, ga Pag, jga ibenik, oga Jezera, irje, ga/
jga Murter, ga Zlarin, Oljak, Rivanj, ga Sali, ge Brbinj, Ist, jica Murter, ica Sali, gar
Prvi-epurina, per sec. 4.43; G - > SC pan, -2 > irje, > Krula, >
ubrijn Zadar, ibran, abrijan Baka, > urilovo Konavli, per sec. 4.54.
5.7 Map 1. below shows the geography of these borrowings.
5.8 (I observe that G > SC *ju is found primarily in the south of Dalmatia, in Montenegro
and in the vicinity of Dubrovnik, and, secondarily, in the north of Dalmatia, in the vicinity of Zadar.)
5.9 On the other hand, the iotacist reflex, SC i, is supposedly found in those borrowings
which continue G > SC bis Murter, mbis Zlarin, > ppir Komia, per sec. 4.20;
G > SC oliga Hodilje, Goveari, Korita, Slano, Rijeka, Vrbnik, Omialj, Krk, Senj, olinica
Senj, Vrbnik, olica Bakar, > grma ipan, grmica Dubrovnik, grmar Dubrovnik, - >
grpan Korita, Mljet, > Drimn Barbat, * > kiniksa Kali, per sec. 4.43.
5.10 See Map 2 below.
5.11 The rest of the material may be considered Dalmatian Greek in Serbo-Croatian, or, at
least, it may be considered so on the basis of the criteria discussed here, including the development
of G , which it variously renders as SC i, u, e, o, a, , *.
5.12 I note that, from the perspective of SC i, it not possible to distinguish between a iotacist
Serbo-Croatian Greek borrowing and a Dalmatian Greek in Serbo-Croatian borrowing which
was subject to G > L Y (= *i). For this reason, this part of the material is best taken cum grano
salis. (The same issue haunts SC a, which reflect S * < G .)

5.13 The conclusions of this paper are speculative. I have tried to provide a prima facie
formal reasoning for the development of G which, if it is correct, should withstand the test of
other criteria, formal or otherwise, but in particular of those which may be developed for the
purpose of distinguishing Serbo-Croatian Greek and Dalmatian Greek in Serbo-Croatian, and, if
it cannot do so, it should naturally be discarded in the favor of a better proposition.

\13
Abbreviations

* reconstructed form C consonant

< comes from N nasal
> yields R resonant
derivative(s) V vowel

A Albanian OSer. Old Serbian

akavian PN place name
D Dalmatian S Slavic
G Greek Rom. Romanian
I Italian Sard. Sardinian
L Latin SC Serbo-Croatian
N name Vegl. Vegliot

References

[Alessio, Gio. see DEI.]

Babi, I. 2008. Studenaki rjenik. Studenci: upni ured Studenci.
Barbi, A. 2011. Rjenik Pitava i Zavale. Zagreb: Institut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje.
[Battisti, C. see DEI.]
Beni, R. 2014. Rjenik govora grada Hvara : frske rci i trije. Hvar: Muzej hvarske batine.
Bjai, S.; Dean, A. 2002. Zlarin : Kratka povijest i rjenik. Zagreb: Prometej.
Boani, J. 1997. Lingua franca. akavska ri 25, III: 203268.
DL = Hraste, M.; imunovi, P. 1979. akavisch-deutsches Lexikon. T. 1. KlnWien: Bhlau Verlag.
[Debrunner, A. see StolzDebrunner.]
DEI = Battisti, C.; Alessio, Gio. 195057. Dizionario etimologico italiano. Firenze: Barbera.
Duli, J.; Duli, P. 1985. Rjenik brukoga govora. Hrvatski dijalektoloki zbornik 7 II: 373747.
ERHSJ = Skok, P. 19714. Etimologijski rjenik hrvatskog ili srpskog jezika. Sv. IIV. Zagreb:
Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti.
Gavazzi, M. 1963. Rukovet leksikologijskih priloga. Zbornik u ast Stjepana Ivia : Iviev
zbornik, Zagreb: Hrvatsko filoloko drutvo, 7784.
Gei, D. 20152. Rjenik i gramatika trogirskoga cakavskoga govora, SplitTrogir: Knjievni krug
SplitZdrueni artisti Trogira.
Holzer, G. 20112. Glasovni razvoj hrvatskoga jezika. Zagreb: Institut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje.
[Hraste, M. see DL.]
Japuni, M. 2013. Rjenik Lovinca. Vlastita naklada.
JE = Vinja, V. 19982004. Jadranske etimologije : Jadranske dopune Skokovu etimologijskom
rjeniku. Sv. IIII. Zagreb: Hrvatska akademija znanosti i umjetnostikolska knjiga.
JF = Vinja, V. 1986. Jadranska fauna : Etimologija i struktura naziva. Knj. III. Split:
Jugoslovenska akademija znanosti i umjetnostiLogos.
Jireek, C. 1904. Die Romanen in den Stdten whrend des Mittelalters. Wien: Gerold. (Denkschriften
der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, 49.)
Juraga, E. 2010. Rjenik govora otoka Murtera. Murteribenik: Matica hrvatskaupanijski muzej.
Jurii, B. 1973. Rjenik govora otoka Vrgade : Usporeen s nekim akavskim i zapadnotokavskim
govorima. Zagreb: Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti.
\14
Kalogjera, D.; Svoboda, M.; Josipovi, V. 2008. Rjenik govora grada Korule. Zagreb: Novi Liber.
Kapovi, M.; Vuleti, N. 2010. Refleks grkog u hrvatskim dalmatskim grecizmima. Filologija
55: 3759.
Kusti, N. 2002. Cakavski govor grada Paga s rjenikom. Zagreb: Drutvo Paana u Zagrebu.
Ligorio, O. 2013a. Od koga zajmie jadranski Sloveni stare grke rijei? Lucida intervalla 42: 155158.
Ligorio, O. 2013b. Uno sguardo ai relitti dalmato-romanzi in -CULU e -TULU. Mare Loquens :
tudes d'tymologie et de golinguistique romanes la mmoire de Vojmir Vinja, Zadar:
Sveuilite u Zadru, 317321.
Ligorio, O. 2013c. Neto o akcentu dalmato-romanskih relikata. Croatica et Slavica Iadertina 9
II: 353363.
Ligorio, O. 2015. Sh. Korula. Lucida intervalla 44: 147153.
[Ligorio, O. see PLSA.]
Ligorio, O.; Vuleti, N. 2016. Dalmatoromanski relikti u toponimiji ibenskog otoja. Toponimija
ibenskog otoja, Zadar: Centar za jadranska onomastika istraivanja. (In print.)
Lukei, I.; Zubi, S. 2007. Grobniki govor XX. stoljea : Gramatika i rjenik. Rijeka: Katedra
akavskog sabora Grobniine.
Mahulja, I. 2006. Rjenik omialjskoga govora. RijekaOmialj: Rijeki nakladni zavodOpina Omialj.
Marii, T. 2000. Rjenik govora mjesta Kukljica. Zadar: Matica hrvatska.
Martinovi, . 2005. Rjenik govora otoka Ia. Zadar: Gradska knjinica Zadar.
Matrovi, Lj. 1957. Rjeniko blago ninskoga govora. Radovi Instituta Jugoslavenske akademije
znanosti i umjetnosti u Zadru 3: 423465.
Mataga, V. 2003. Romanizmi u neretvanskome govoru. Zagreb: Altagama.
[Meyer-Lbke, W. see REW.]
Milat Pana, P. 2015. Rjenik govora Blata na Koruli. Zagreb: Institut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje.
Mogu, M. 2002. Senjski rjenik. ZagrebSenj: Hrvatska akademija znanosti i umjetnostiMatica hrvatska.
Muljai, . 2007. O podrijetlu nesonima i ojkonima Korula. Folia onomastica Croatica 16. (In print.)
Nikoli, M. 2000. Unije: kuelj vaf sarcu. Mali LoinjCres: Katedra akavskog sabora.
Otari, I. 2005. Rjenik kolanjskoga govora. Zadar: Matica hrvatska.
Piasevoli, A. 1993. Rjenik govora mjesta Sali. Zadar: Matica hrvatska.
PLSA = Ligorio, O. 2014. Problem leksike stratifikacije u adrijatistici. Zadar: Sveuilite u Zadru.
(PhD Thesis.)
Raduli, L. 2002. Rjenik rivanjskog govora. Zadar: Matica hrvatska.
Rani, G. 2013. Zaviajni rjenik i kronika mjesta Brbinj. Zadar: 3000 godina Zadar.
REW = Meyer-Lbke, W. 19353. Romanisches etymologisches Wrterbuch. Heidelberg: C. Winters
Universittsverlag.
Roki-Fortunato, A. 1997. Lbar vkiga jazka. Toronto: University of Toronto.
Skok, P. 1955. Sur llment grec de lancien dalmate. Revue de Linguistique Romane 19: 227230.
[Skok, P. see ERHSJ, SR.]
Smoljan, A. 20152. Rjenik govora otoka Ista. Zadar: Matica hrvatska.
SR = Skok, P. 1950. Slavenstvo i romanstvo na jadranskim otocima. Sv. III. Zagreb: Jadranski
institut JAZU.
Stolz, F.; Debrunner, A. 19664. Geschichte der lateinischen Sprache. Berlin: de Gruyter.
imuni, B. 2013. Rjenik bibinjskoga govora. Zadar: Matica hrvatska.
imunovi, P. 2009. Rjenik brakih akavskih govora. Zagreb: Golden MarketingTehnika knjiga.
[imunovi, P. see DL.]
Tii, A. 2004. Rjenik govora mjesta Povljane na otoku Pagu. Zadar: Matica hrvatska.
Vali, A. T. 2012. Rjenik govora otoka Oljaka. Zadar: Matica hrvatska.
Vasmer, M. 1944. Die griechischen Lehnwrter im Serbo-Kroatischen. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1944.
\15
Veli, N. 2003. Besedar Bejske Tramuntane. RijekaMali LoinjBeli: AdamiKatedra akavskog
sabora CresTramuntana.
Vinja, V. 1967. Le grec et le dalmate. Zeitschrift fr Balkanologie 5 II: 203-223.
[Vinja, V. see JE, JF.]
Vuleti, N. 2010a. Problem stare romanske toponimije u murterskom otonom skupu. Toponimija
otoka Murtera, 335-341.
Vuleti, N. 2010b. O nazivima za uskrnju pletenicu na hrvatskoj obali i otocima : etimoloki
problemi. Rasprave Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje 36 II: 369384.
Vuleti, N. 2013. Les mones de Pasqua de lAdritic croat: un recorregut geolingstic i etimolgic.
Mare Loquens : Etudes dtymologie et de golinguistique romanes la mmoire de Vojmir
Vinja, Zadar: Sveuilite u Zadru, 299317.
Vuleti, N. 2016. Fieldwork: Banjol on Rab, Mar 1922. (Unpublished. Communicated on Mar 20 2016.)
[Vuleti, N. see LigorioVuleti, KapoviVuleti.]

= , . (.) 20032008. . . IIII. :

.
, . 2014. .-. . 57
II: 711.
, . 2015. - .
71 IIIIV: 4372.
, . 2015b. . . 58 I:
6973.

\16
 Map 1.

- -2 - -
G > SC *jo G > SC *ju G > SC *ji G > SC *ja

\17
 Map 2.

-
G > SC i

\18