Re: Pre-Germanic speculation

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...>
wrote:

>
> >>In Thracian bolinthos, "aurochs", there is -inthos, but it hardly

can

> >>be some kind of participial suffix.
>

But aurochses are known for bullying their surroundings.

> Piotr's response:
> >Etruscan surely exists, but I fail to see why we have to explain

Greek

> >toponyms in terms of Etruscan if there are other possibilities.
>

Yeah, like Lemnian.

> I'm not seeing a reasonable IE etymology here. Merely a connection
> with a suffix that equally exists in Etruscan. Come to think of it,

I could

> be diabolical and suggest a completely Etruscoid etymology, *pul-in-

tH-,

> derived from *pul- "to be bright" (hence /pulumcHva/ "stars").

There,

> now the ENTIRE word is analyzable in Tyrrhenian, a non-IE language
> group... >:)
>

Since you are in a Tyrrhenian mood, what happened to your proposal
that a lack of voiced stops and of -z- is a sign of Tyrrhenian
substrate, which you dropped like a dead rat when you discovered
Danish fits the bill?

Torsten