Re: long, flat, full

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Arnaud Fournet" <fournet.arnaud@...>
wrote:

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> > > ============
> > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/Op.html
> > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/Opr.html
> > which is why it is present in so many language families (the Peter
> > Bellwood hypothesis).
> > ===========
> What is this hypothesis ?
> Arnaud
> ========

That the major language families are all individually the product of
one hunter-gatherer group which leaned the prerequisites of farming
and prodeeded to clear and colonize the space around them, forcing out
possible remaining neighbor hunter-gatherers.

>
> > I don't understand the relationship between your references
> > and the words full and flat.
>
> The *akW/p- root is the primeval river.
> The *bh/p/-l/r- root is crossing the river, dividing stuff, going
> across the river of life and death, etc. The various *plen,- etc
> stuff has to do with dividing space, surface, line into two, to
> create a bounded space, surface, line, and so is semantic subfield
> of the *bh/p-l/r- root.
> ======
> I still do not understand what 'river' and 'divide' have to do with
> 'full' and 'flat'.

I thought it might be a problem explaining it to you.
It's like this: With a (sub)space of dimensionality n, for n=0,1,2 you
can 'cut' (divide) a space of dimensionality n+1. If those subspaces
are oriented, you can create bodies of dimensionailty n with them.
If you don't understand that, please get Brian to explain it to you.
You seem to have developed a liking for him.


Torsten