Re: Negau

From: Andrew Jarrette
Message: 60581
Date: 2008-10-05

--- In, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> Finally, STC reconstructs yet another supposedly unrelated root in
> this semantic area, *blin,~*plin, 'full' (#142), underlying such forms
> as WB prañ´ 'be full', phrañ´ 'fill'; Mikir plen, 'be full', peplen,
> 'fill', etc. From what has already been said, it should be clear that
> this set represents the very same etymon as #138 and #352

I can't help but wonder whether these Sino-Tibetan words might be
borrowings from Sanskrit (cf. WB <prañ>/<phrañ>, Mikir <plen>/peplen>
with Skt <pra:nah.> "filled, full"). If not Sanskrit, maybe some
other IE source (perhaps the ancestors of Tocharian?) unless you know
this to be out of the question. From here I also wonder whether the
"flat" words might not also be due to borrowing rather than shared
heritage. I know that Matisoff is arguing against this idea, but I
suggest this idea ought to be carefully considered. I don't have the
means or the knowledge to do it myself, which I should, nevertheless I
am putting this idea out there.