What is the origine of the Slavic word, liubliu ?

I still don't suppose that the words "ljubit' ", "lubić" or "ljubiti" have any connections with latin iubilare. The latter, seems to get into other slavic languages from Latin as jubilej (as Guest 123 said) or jubileusz (polish equivalent). The meaning is of these words (jubileusz, jubilej) is still the same as in Latin. It would be far strange that the meaning could have changed so much that now in some slavic languages we have similar word for "love" or the verb "to love".

What is more in Polish used to exist two words "luba" and "luby" (they are not used now, they are supposed to be very old-fashioned or even poetic), which for sure come from "lubować". They literally can be translated as "lover (girl)" and "lover (boy)". Lubować meant "to love" and it hadn't nothing to do with "iubilare" :/

augustin717,

I was asking only if there could be a connection between Iubilare (which means also satisfaction (sometimes in love) and Liubliti (a iubi-deduc)...becaus ein some contexts satisfaction is an result of Love...making love is pleasent, brings satisfaction...

By having said that, at one point, I was thinking that maybe, even the Slavic word Liubliti, might have had its roots in Latin. Or maybe the Slavic word just resuscitated the word Iubilare giving it a new connotation in modern Romanian...Or maybe the Latin Iubilare, came from Slavic Iubliti...

I was just curios because both appear to be build on a few common letters, and despite to the fact that Iubilare is not totaly = Love, satisfaction can be a resultant of love. And the other way around, as well.

On the otehr hand, the ancient words do not necessary keep the original sense in the later modern languages. Therefore, the transcendence of the words from the old Latin into the new Romance language are generally suffering different mutations. That's why your example with Iubilare and Laudare is not convincing enough for me.

I can bring you a lot of very old words which have lost their original sense, even meaning but are written simmilarly in the new languages. I'm sure you know that as well...

Take care!

<<I was just curios because both appear to be build on a few common letters, and despite to the fact that Iubilare is not totaly = Love, satisfaction can be a resultant of love. And the other way around, as well.
>>

satisfaction -> love? eh... then the word "bird" should have direct connotations with "egg"... A bird comes out of an egg, doesn't it?

<<I can bring you a lot of very old words which have lost their original sense, even meaning but are written simmilarly in the new languages. I'm sure you know that as well... >>

I absolutely agree with you but in my opinion in this case your point of view is misjudged. I still claim that all words mentioned in previous posts are of slavic, not latin origin.

Jakubik,

I don't want to make a big deal of this but to simple claim that all words mentioned in previous post are Slavic, is not relevant for me.

Tell me please, why is that, and not just claim it? And your example with the bird and the egg is childish, I'm sorry to say that. I don’t see any similarity between what I said and your example. I'm speaking about sensations, fillings which are defined by those words; you bring up birds and eggs to prove your point. I'm afraid; you didn't understand my question in the first place.

I'm not contesting that the Romanian verb " a iubi " is of a Slavic origin. But let's say that I'm not 100% sure either because nobody is able to prove it to me scientifically. And that is what I expected.

In fact, what I'm trying here is to find out how sure are we that:

- Liublit is pure Slavic;
- Liublit was originating "a iubi";
- Liublit and Iubilare don’t have a common root.

I'm afraid that you don't understand the word Iubilare and its exact meaning. It exists in Romanian as well, Jubileu, a jubila...

Finally, I have to tell you that I know very well if there is a connection between Iubilare and Liubliti; I know very well what the real origin of the verb " a iubi" is... I addressed this question on this forum, to see how well a novice could find reliable information here. And I did find out!

Thank you!

@Sergio:
Hello!
I'd say Croatian is closer. First of, we are neighbours and in times of former Yugoslavia the formal language was Serbo-Croatian. I never learned Croatian, but I can speak and understand it quite well (sadly I can't say that for Croatian people and Slovenian language).
Slovakian language...Hm...I've been to Slovakia. I had no troubles understanding basic meaning of the words because of similarities. The biggest difference is where the word is stressed (beginning or end). But after you grasp that, it is easy to understand and talk. I also never learned Slovakian language, but coud comunicate with Slovaks in...hm...mixture of Slovak-Russian-Croatian language. It was quite funny, because english was out of the question.

And one more thing (unique to Slovenian language). Even though there are similarities to both Croatian and Slovak language in adition Slovenian language has aditional form not singular, not plural but a form to exactly match only two persons / things, without saying "two" in the sentence. That, I think, is why Croatians and other Slavic nations have hard time understanding us.

Best regards

I don't think that the question was if "ljubiti" is or not coming from Latin "Iubilare". That is out of discussion. There is not chance to be Latin. Probably, common indo-european roots, but still doubtful. The question was if there would be a plausible chance for the Romanian word (Iubire, Love) to have its origins in Latin "Iubilare" and not in Slavic "Liubiti".

BR

Hi Guest123,

Thanks for your answer. I find Slavic languages really fascinating!!!
My mother tongue is Spanish. Would you say that a linguistic axis Slovakian-Slovenian-Croatian would be equivalent to a Portuguese-Spanish-Catalan one?

Greetings,

I think we can reasonably speculate that there may be some common proto-Indo European root form, which "lubit" and "jubilare" came from. Unfortunately we don't have any written samples of "Proto Indo European," so it has to remain as speculation and nothing more.

As for the possibility that the Romanian "a iubit" comes from Latin and not Slavic, I think the most interesting part of this red herring is to note how keen most Romanians are to stress the Latin origin of Romanian words, and downplay the Slavic influence. It was all a long time ago, prieteni (slavic word, that) - GET OVER IT!

Stefeniel SPaniel,

I'm Romanian and by you remark:"to note how keen most Romanians are to stress the Latin origin of Romanian words, and downplay the Slavic influence", I feel that I need to tell you the followings:

I really don't care if the origin of my language is Latin or Slav. What I do care though, is to establish the truth and I believe that under special circumstances it is normal to try protect this Truth.

When I addressed this question (because I started this postings, on this subject), I was trying to show you how uncertain some statements made by different language annalists, are. I wanted to prove that although they are not able to establish the truth, they do have the courage to advance theories (without support). That was my starting idea, my key intention. I just tried to show you all, how shaky the theory about language evolution is.

It has never a tendency to downplay Slavic (why would that be if the truth was the other?), but it has always been the tendency to preserve the language because Stefaniel amice, (Latin word for the Slavic prieten, both Romanian), there was a period of time when the Russians started to teach us a new nation’s history; a new theory of Romanians origin, a new country’s history (after Austro-Hungarian taught us another lesson, some time earlier)...it has gone so far that in one point, a communist propagandist stated even that the Thracians where Slavs, speaking a Slav language. (look what hapens today with Moldova Republic. They invented a "molodveneasca" language! That might explain why the Romanians are sensitive to this subject.

Some fellows here are not able to manage the truth. They are here not to exchange opinions but to make propaganda anti Romanians, anti Greeks, anti Albanians...and we all know WHY, of course!

How would you react if you had been hearing that your language origine is, let'say, Celtic, ( assuming that it is not)?

Be loved!

Ion,
Romanian "amic" (you were using the Vocative case) is a RECENT LOAN WORD in Romanian, from Latin, but NOT a word INHERITED as such. And it is still felt as not the normal word for "friend" and not 100% synonimous to "prieten". You know that. The normal Romanian word is PRIETEN. And that's Slavic.

Augustin, we are both Romanians but we speak diffrent languages...I said amic = prieten = both Romanian words...I dind'say anything about how they cam into the Romanian language..I said what they are today = Romanian words ...capisci?

Please , pay attention to what I'm saying!

P.S.

Prieten si not inheritated as well! So, I only tried to prove something to Stafniel Spaniel, nothing more. I hope, he got the point!

"Prieten" hasn't entered the Romanian language in exactly the same manner as "amic" has. The later is a bookish loan word and slightly ridiculous, while the former is not an erudite borrowing and is also felt as "normal", without any connotations.

augustin717

Prieten is clear a borrowed word. Amic was only resuscitated later by the linguists. Amore More Ore Re Probantur Amicitiae!

I don't understand your inputs! Do you want to prove me that Romanian is a Slavic langauge? Feel free and prove it! Let's speak: you, your Slavic Romanian; I will speak my usual Latin Romanian. Let's see which one is more inteligible!

Regards!

One more thing, Augustin717!

Are you trying to say that before the Slaves came in the zone, the daco-romans didn't have a word to express a friendly relationship? Or for Love? They were just waiting for the Slaves to come up and show them these feelings and to give them the names?

You don't realize that here is a matter of philologist limitations. What they cannot prove, they assume. That's the problem!

Then, the "slightly ridiculous" sense of AMIC was the work of the snobs, later on, when the word re-entered the language via French.

On the other hand, the "ridiculous sense" can be found in Italian Amico, or in Spanish Amigo as well. It is never happened to you to be approached by a Spanish or Italian individual, in a store or on the street, with a slightly ridiculous AMICO, or AMIGO?

Then, how many times didn’t you hear Romanians speaking seriously about amicii mei, sau amicul meu. Or how many times didn’t you hear this slightly ridicules sense affecting “Prieten" as well; that’s perceived when a guy is calling you this way on the street without to have you ever met before. These are nuances which are present for both and are present in another romance languages as well.

Remember that, for mentioning a strong friendly relation, a Romanians has to emphasize: un prieten bun, or un amic bun, both with a the same serious meaning.

I cannot agree with you I’m sorry! I don't understand what are trying to prove here.. Sometimes I have the impression that your are a Serbian born in Romania because you miss aspects which are unusual for a Romanian get beget.

Regards!

Let's see the word family of "prieten":
prietenie-friendship
a se imprieteni-to become friends
prietenusag (slavic+hungarian suffix), regionalism used in Ardeal.
prietenesc-friendly
prieteneste-friendly (adv.)
prietenos -friendly
Related words:
a prii-to suit somebody; to be useful for somebody
prielnic-favourable
"Amic" only entered Romanian in the 19th century, its use being unknown in the most conservative registers of the language.