Re: The Brahman and the Brain

--- In cybalist@..., "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@..., Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: tgpedersen
> > To: cybalist@...
> > Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 12:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: [tied] The Brahman and the Brain
> >
> >
> > > Hermann Møller claims (I believe I recall) a connection between
> Latin 'multus' and 'plus'. Does that make sense?
> >
> >
> > Lat. multus seems to derive from *ml.tó-, possibly related to

comp.

> melior, melius < *mél-jos- (the positive grade unattested), which
> presupposes the root *mel-, tentatively interpreted as 'be strong'.
> <plu:s>, pl. <plu:res> (archaic forms also <plous, pleores>)

derives

> from *pléh1-jos-, the comparative of *plh1-ú- 'much'. There is no

way

> to connect the two by ordinary means. _Extraordinary_ means (if
> that's what Møller has recourse to) are beyond my competence.
> >
> > Piotr
>
> As far as I can tell Møller argues *ml- > *mbl- > *pl-, which,
> judging from your earlier postings, is not beyond your competence,
> extraordinary or otherwise? ;-)

I think you're thinking of the possibility of PIE *ml- > Germanic pl-
which was discussed around
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/16475 . The implied
route was ml > bl > pl, which would not be applicable to Latin. We
did not establish any examples. There was also the issue of words
related to Old Norse blaða, in the same part of the thread.

Richard.

>
> http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/pl.html
>
> Torsten