From: tgpedersen
Message: 50636
Date: 2007-11-30
>How do you know that?
> > > A.F :
> > > > pling : full => Cf. PIE pel(H1/w)
> > > > It is quite clear that these words are cognates not
> > > > loanwords. They had more than one syllable in ST before the
> > > > "crunch".
> ==
> > I think they are borrowed either into both Old Chinese and
> > PIE from some unrelated language geographically in between them,
> > or into PIE from some early predecessor of Chinese.
> >
> What about :
> Yukaghir pojo- : a lot (l > yod is regular in Siberian languages)
> Niger Touareg : balal : full, abundant (this language has no b/p
> contrast)
> Arabic : Hafil : full (note that H1 is initial in Arabic not final
> : pel-H1-)
> Hieroglyphic Egyptian (with vowels) : Hipu:lil : abondant (H1
> initial)
>
> There is no alternative to super-cognate status for root *p_l :
> full, abundant.
>
> NB : Uralic forms pal/pol are tainted by PIE and I disagree they
> may be cognates.
> They are at best cognates, secondarily tainted by IE words, or IE
> loanwords.