LITHUANIA-L Archives

Archiver > LITHUANIA > 2003-06 > 1054835899


From: David Zincavage <>
Subject: [LITHUANIA-L] Fw: RE: Kolwzan
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 10:58:26 -0700


----- Original Message -----
From: "Leon Stevens" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 2:03 PM
Subject: RE: RE: Kolwzan


> Based on Tadeusz Kolwzan's description of the indigenous antiquity of
> the Kolwzans, I have changed my mind completely about the etymology of
> this surname. I originally suspected it to be of non-Slavic origin
> owing to its consonant cluster, which Slavic languages disdain. I had
> ruled out Lithuanian because the surname's vowel pattern did not match
> modern Lithuanian sequences. I had assumed that Kolwzan had been
> Polonized relatively recently (i.e. during the Commonwealth period) when
> Polish made an effort, even if only half-hearted, to preserve the
> vocalic integrity of foreign names. However as this surname may be
> extremely old in the Grand Duchy, the present identity of vowels has
> little significance, but the sequence of consonants and their close
> phonetic relatives becomes far more operative. In short, I believe this
> name has as its root proto-Lithuanian or Baltic "*kalv" ("smith" or
> "forge") as in Latvian "kalvis" ("blacksmith") or "kalve" ("smithy" or
> "forge"). This root survives in Lithuanian "kalavijas" ("sword"). In
> Slavic languages, voiced and unvoiced consonants cannot occur next to
> each other, so that "vs" must be converted either to "fs" or "vz." Of
> course the latter seems to apply here. The final "n" is most likely the
> remnant of the Baltic passive and attributive suffix "-n" corresponding
> with the Latvian desubstantival suffix "-ain" as in "kalnains" ("hilly")
> from "kalns" ("hill"), or the simple passive suffix "-en" as in
> "slavens" ("glorified") from "slava" ("glory"). This suffix appears in
> modern Lithuanian as "-om" as in "statomas" ("is being built") but the
> suffix used to be "-on." This passive suffix is very old and dates to
> Indo-European, surviving in English "taken," "given," "broken," etc.
> Because this name has been buffeted by centuries (a millennium?) of
> linguistic influences, I am not yet prepared to say whether it stems
> from an old form of "kalavijas" plus the passive/attributive, as if
> "equipped or girded with a sword" or from "*kalvis" plus the
> passive/attributive, as if "equipped with a blacksmith" (topographic).
> In any case, it's this general etymology upon which I am now placing my
> bets. Here I do not necessarily disagree with Mr. (Tadeusz) Kolwzan's
> speculation that "Kowzan" is a shortened or alternative form of
> "Kolwzan," but my current "smith"-based theory accounts for the
> otherwise seemingly intrusive "l."
>
>
>

This thread: