Re: "Will the 'real' linguist please stand up?"

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 10:20:10 -0000, "tgpedersen
> <tgpedersen@...>" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> >--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
> ><piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
> >>
> >> A minor thing. The Proto-Satem (and proto-Indo-Iranian) reflex

of

> >*k^ must have been something like *[c] or *[ts'] (palatal stop >
> >affricate, the latter preserved in Nuristani). Note FU *porc'as ~
> >*pors'as, and Finnish -deksan/-deksän < *teksa, which Koivulehto
> >interprets as early Proto-Iranian (something like *dätsa, with *ts
>
> >*ks).
> >>
> >> Piotr
> >
> >*ts > *ks ? Do I see a finger on the weight here?
>
> It's not uncommon. The Dutch for "nothing" is <niets> [nits]
> (accidentally very close to the Polish for "nothing", <nic>

[n^its]),

> but is commonly pronounced as [nIks].

Weet ik wel. But in German "nothing" is "nichts", also commonly (Low
German and Low_German) [nIks], and Dutch has borrowed before from
that language (überhaupt, zich (cf. mij)).

>
> I've been toying with the idea of something similar in PIE, in

another

> borrowed numeral, "6", if from Semitic *s^eds^ (*s^ets^), giving PIE
> *sWeksW.
>

"6" and what else? Now I see two thumbs on the weight.

On the other hand it seems Hawaiian and other eastern Polynesian has
*t > *k, which at first I found hard to believe (there are examples
in Manansala's list).

Torsten

> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...

Torsten