From: ehlsmith
Message: 27597
Date: 2003-11-25
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
.....
> You're probably right. So, the proper theory is then, that as the
> domesticated dog passed out of SE Asia from one linguistic
community
> to the next, the languages of those communities did not borrow
words
> similar to *kwon along with the dog, but decided independently to
use
> words similar to *kwon for that particular trade article,
presumably
> for onomatopoeic reasons, since dogs go "kwon, kwon" in erh, some
> language?
Torsten,
Nice sleight-of-hand! I admire the way you deftly slipped an unspoken
assumption in there. Even disregarding the cautionary note that
Piotr has raised regarding the whole SE Asia point of origin
hypothesis, what evidence is there that dogs spread by trade? Given
the propensity of domestic dogs to seek out human company, and the
length of time involved, the movement of strays from group to group
could account for the spread of dogs without the need for any inter-
group contact.
How does one say in PIE "He followed me home, Mom. Can we keep him?"
;-)
Ned Smith