[tied] Re: -m (-n)?

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

>
> Torsten:
> >I thought that was so. So how does that prove that the "seven" word
> >originated in Semitic and not somewhere else?
>
> I will only answer if you promise to have your cup of java in your

hand and

> have drunk at least three sips. Have you done it? Ready? Feeling

alive now?

> Here we go.
>
> As was already said, *septm is an _indivisable_ root in IE. It is

simply not

> made up of smaller IE morphemes. There is no **sep-, **sept-, or

*se-.

> It's simply a single, atomic word meaning "seven".
>
> There _is_ a Semitic form meaning exactly "seven" that parallels

IE. This

> form is *sab`atum. But it happens to be the masculine, mimated form
> of the numeral. It _can_ be divided into smaller meaningful parts

with

> main root *sab`-.
>
> This shows painfully clear, unless your name is the contrary Mr

Torsten,

> that *septm can be nothing but a Semitic numeral. It can only
> be divided into Semitic, not IE, morphemes. Ergo, it's a Semitic

loan.

>
>

You have just proved that the "seven" is loan from Semitic to IE
which I never doubted. You haven't disproved the it is a loan from
some other language into Semitic, which is what I proposed

Torsten