Re: PIE 'brow'

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "whetex_lewx" <whetex_lewx@...>
wrote:

On second thoughts, it would be unfair not to answer your posting.

>
> But on the other hand - pronouncing of A is more complicated than

O,

*Less* complicated, you mean?

> lips are more relaxed and emerges such mutation of vowel: A>O>U.
> Such situation also is visible in Lithuanian: a:>o:

Before we go on: what does your ":" mean? It usually marks length
(vs. brevity), but seems to have more meanings in your messages.

> and in dialects: Pruss. a:-pe (river), western dialects (including
> Samogitian) o:-pe and finally Lithuanian u-pe (short u) (u:pe in
> East Auxtaitian).
>
> Could you comment?

Well, what exactly I'm expected to comment on? Most Lithuanian
dialects have raised long *a: to o: (most Z^emaitian dialects -- to
uo except in unstressed endings, where we find -a). That's right. Old
Prussian <ape> is a normal reflex of PIE *h2ap- 'water', while East
Baltic *upe: is aberrant and to my knowledge hasn't been
satisfactorily explained (contamination with East Baltic reflexes of
PIE *wo(:)p- ~ *up- 'pond' or East Baltic *up- 'shout, roar' (of a
rapid river)?). That's well known as well. Most Z^emaitian dialects
*lowered* *u to [o(.)] -- every *u, not only that of *upe:. This is
commonly known as well. Now I fail to see how all that is related to
your point on PIE +akW- 'eye'?

> > The situation with the words you mention seems to be rather
> confusing.
>
> Sorry i've brov` - eye brow in my mind, it was small mistake.

No, not that -- I meant the words you mention (most of the words, not
only Russ. brov') are not so easy to etymologize.

> Lithuanian related stem (of brow) would be brau~- or bru:-

Well, I stated essentially the same, if only additionally mentioned
the words with probable stem-extensions (-z^- <*-g(H)^- and -k- < *-k
(^)-) and other versions of secondary-ablauting vowels (see below).

> Also Latvian bru:ns - brown, maybe it's related to the brow? Old
> English brun (related to brown) - dark, so, maybe Proto-Baltic
> meaning was the same, *bru:uv-is - brown thing, -uv - the same
> suffix as in liez^-uv-is (tongue)

liez^ùvis is an old (Baltic) *u:-stem (<PIE *-uH-), converted (as
usually) to an *i-stem -- *u: dissotiates to *uw (>uv) before a vowel
(the same thing in Sl. *brUv- < *bru:- in oblique cases). But are
eyebrows mostly brown?

> > <bru:ks^ny~s> 'line' obviously belongs to the nest of
> > <brau~kti> 'drag, wipe etc', <brùkti> 'thrust',
> <bru:~kis> 'stroke',
> > continuing (with their Latvian, Old Prussian, Slavic and a

handful

> of
> > probable non-Balto-Slavic cognates) PIE *bHr(o)uk(^)- 'push, press
> > (and drag)'.
>
> No, this PIE stem obviously is related to Lithuanian BRUK-ti

(press,

> push, thrust, load), Bru:kis is derivative from Bruk-ti (to push,
> load).

Look, you've just repeated what I wrote (if I get you right). So
why 'no'?

> I was trying to understand this your sentence above, but i was
> floundered, so, which stem is related to *h3kW-bHruh-? *bHreuh-;
> bHreu-h or bHreu-k(^)-????

As I've warned you, the situation is confusing. In short, all the
stems or neither of them *may* be related. I (we?) simply don't know.

> how do you think about this (Lithuanian) akibru:z^is???
> ak-i- (i think here everythink is clear), bru:z^- from bru:z^-e:^
> (line, strich = bruks^nys). Couldn't be this form related to *h3kW-
> bHruh-??? Or maybe there was other similar IE stem?

I'm afraid to surprise you one more time, but I don't know the word
as well. Is it a by-version of akìbroks^tas?

> <bry~z^is> '?'
> (Girdenis's
> > example, but I don't know the word)
>
> I know this word, it's well known, it's strange that you dont know
> it `,:-| ???

Now I've found the word in Fraenkel ('line, stripe'). You seem to be
aware of the meaning 'notch' as well. Well, I've no dialectal
background at all (third generation in Vilnius on the Lithuanian
part).

> Brauz^ti probably from dialect, i hear this first time, but it

could

> be related to bruz^e:^

What do you mean by 'but'? Related, so such and such of what I wrote
is wrong?

> bre:^z^ti is well known too.

Well, I'm ready to agree, but could you explain the exact meaning of
your "^" in that context? Circumflex pitch accent ("tvirtagale:
priegaide:") or what?

> bre:^z^ti, bra:iz^yti (draw, scratch, trace) are from the same

root

> (semantically)
> brau~kti, bru~z^inti, bru:ks^nys, bruz^e:^ (push, wipe, scratch,
> rub) are from second root. It's also related to brukti (thrust,
> push, load, scutch) (semantically too). (!!!!!)

...

> At last, for all these words a common root etymology (*bHer- 'cut')
> > can be suggested.
>
> No, as i wrote above these words have just similar meanings, but
> Proto-Baltic -au; -u: couldn't be conected with -ei; e: (e:^); y; i.

You misunderstood me twice.

First and foremost, the borders of the Schleicher's Lithuanian
apophonic series (that is, a(e), i(ie) and u(au)) are not
unsurmountable barriers on the path of the Balto-Slavic *secondary*
(innovative, not inherited from the PIE one) ablaut. In a nutshell,
it's analogy that it's mostly based on: if, say, e:~uo is inherited
(< PIE *e: ~ o: or *eh1 ~ *oh1), as well as uo~au (under certain
conditions, as in daubà 'ravine' ~ duobe:~ 'pit' < *o: ~ *au < *au in
different prosodical contexts < *ou/h2eu), then let's coin new words
with e: ~ au; if aR ~ iR ~ uR is inherited (*oR ~ *R.), then let's
produce brand new o ~ i ~ u (resp., eg., uo ~ ei ~ au etc.) in any
context and so on. The bré:z^ti nest is a well known example of the
secondary ablaut walking through all the three series (at least
synchronically -- your "semantically"), but crossings of series
borders are not confined to that root: cf. smo~gti 'to strike' ~
smu:~gis 'a strike', s^ókti 'jump' ~ s^úokoti 'jump (iter.)' ~
s^úksnis 'a jump', sre:~bti 'sup' ~ sriubà 'soup', re:~kti 'to shout'
~ rìksmas 'a shout', sver~ti 'weigh' ~ svýroti 'hang down (over)',
dúoti 'give' ~ dosnùs 'generous', brastà 'a ford' ~ braidýti 'to
ford', ka~la 'forges' ~ kú:le: 'thrashed', plýs^ti 'crack, burst' ~
pléis^e:ti 'crack, burst (iter.)' ~ plé:s^ti 'tear' ~
plúos^tas 'tuft; fiber' (< 'torn out') ~ plaus^ai~ 'bast, fiber'
(another well known example of a "thorough" secondary ablaut).

In the second place, by root etymology I meant the *PIE* root
etymology (*bHer- ~ *bHr-, probably underlying *bHr-eu(-C)-, *bHr-ei(-
C)- etc), not the Baltic one.

> So, most likely these
> stems are related to PIE brow second part (if we have in mind
> akibru:ks^nis)

I wouldn't exclude that, but I'd like to hear from other members on
the list.

Sergei