From: Rick McCallister
Message: 54912
Date: 2008-03-09
>____________________________________________________________________________________
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Francesco Brighenti
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud"
> <fournet.arnaud@...> wrote:
>
> > I will add that Chinese qian1 [tçhjän]
> > possibly from *gho-y-in
> > tends to prove that
> > something like *gh_l or *gh_zl- makes sense
> > but starting with -sl- the result should be qian4.
> > So a proto-form is not clear *ghezlo/*gheslo ?
> > although the meaning is clear.
>
> Excuse me? What are you postulating: a
> "Proto-Sinitic-IE" numeral
> 1000? What would this proto-form *gho-y-in
> represent? An early
> borrowing from IE?
> =================
> Having no particular dogma to sell,
> I try to look at data in order to understand
> what we can get from it.
>
> Chinese Mandarin san1 "three"
> and Tibetan gsum have a clear relationship
> with Uralic Hungarian ha:rom.
> and Basque hiru with loss of -m
> These can be cognates.
> My reconstruction is ka?-t_?om.
> (one + two= three)
> Next
> Number seven :
> Chinese qi1 < *tsat
> PIE sept
> PAA *tsap-(plus suffixes)
>
> Chinese looks like a loanword from an
> early PIE source that still had the affricate *ts
> as initial.
>
> =================
>
> In any event, the Chinese proto-form is likely to
> have been *chi:n-
> '1000, to be a thousand'. It may also have some
> cognates within the
> Tibeto-Burman family:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/32rbeu
> http://tinyurl.com/3xd3hj
> ===============
>
> I let you explain
> how ChaoZhou koin31 can be derived from *tshi:n !!
> Good luck. My beloved comrade...
>
> I prefer *ghoyin.
> No doubt, as Torsten likes to say.
>
> As for ST connections, I don't think
> 1000 is the same thing as a growth of the jungle.
>
> Lushai 10 000 may be a loanword from late chinese
> or have no connection at all.
>
> Arnaud
> =============
>
>
> In Shang shell and bone inscriptions the
> corresponding character is
> 千, a pictograph of a person with a line drawn
> at the shin to
> indicate extension forward, suggesting that 1000 =
> number reached by
> counting on and on.
>
> ============
>
> Traditional explanation is :
> Shi Bai Ye. Cong Shi, Ren Sheng.
>
> That is to say (when unzipped) :
> Qian1 is ten hundreds.
> The character "ten" (Shi) is the lower part of the
> character.
> The upper part "man" (Ren) is a phonetic
> approximation.
> (Older phonetics was Qian = tçhi:n and ren <
> (n)zin).
>
> MAy I know what your source is for explaining
> Chinese Characters ?
> I'm afraid it's bad.
>
> Arnaud
>
> ==============
> Apparently this has no conceptual and semantic
> relation whatsoever with PIE *g^Heslo-, especially
> is the latter is
> related, as Piotr has suggested, with
> *g^Héso:r/*g^Hesr- 'hand'.
>
> Regards,
> Francesco
> ============
>
> The connection between *gheslo- and word "hand"
> is fun.
> I don't rate this as information or data.
>
> Arnaud
> ===============
>
>
>
>
>