Res: [tied] Re: Afro-Asiatic substrate x NW substratum

From: tgpedersen
Message: 64469
Date: 2009-07-29

 
> > --- In cybalist@... s.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@ ...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > > I believe the non-IE Hellenic element is believed to be
> > > > > either Pelasgian (possibly an Eteo-Cretan language?) or
> > > > > Anatolian, and I've only seen Afro-Asiatic, Uralic or
> > > > > Basque proposed as substrates for Germanic.
> > > >
> > > > Add to that
> > > >
> > > > 1) Krahe's IE Old European (plenty literature)
> > > >
> > > > 2) Kuhn's ar-/ur- language, or non-IE NWB (see file section)
> > > >
> > > > 3) Kuhn's IE Nordwestblock language (see archive, plenty)
> > > >
> > > > 4) Peter Schrijver's language of geminates
> > > > (= 2, in my opinion)
> > > >
> > > > 5) Peter Schrijver's language of bird names (also = 2?)
> > > >
> > > > 6) Venetic (= 3?; archives)
> > >
> > > > So where do Apple Language and Folkish fit in?
> > >
> > > 'Apple' has an a/u ablaut, so 2)
> >
> > For some other reason I wrote up the root variants for apple as
> > belonging to the combined language 2) and 4). Some of them were
> >
> >
> > *abl-/*an,Wl- /*apl-/*ubl- /*un,Wl- etc
> >
> > But that didn't satisfy Latin malum. It does Gamkrelidze/ >
> > Ivanov's *amlu-, though.
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/2095
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/37983
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/2600
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/2599
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/40134
> >
> > However, if the combined language 2 (ar-/ur-) and language 4 (of
> > the geminates) was also identical to language 5 (of bird names),
> > Latin malum etc would fit in (see Schrijver's article in
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/62677
> > for definitions) . The same goes for the water word; the
> > *akW-/*an,W- /*ap-/*up- "water"
> > root would be identical to the one in
> > *wo-dor (*n,Wo-dor)
> > if it belonged to a combined language 2, 4 and 5. Which means
> > henceforth I will consider those substrate languages to be
> > identical.
> >
> > Torsten
> >
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao S. Lopes" <josimo70@...> wrote:
>
> Even if Northern IE *abl-/ubl-/o:bl- and Latin ma:lum had the same
> source, their forms are so divergent that would need a different
> route of diffusion. Italica Abella would match the NIE word, but
> malum wouldn't, requiring a Southern way (cf. Greek me:lon,
> ma:lon).

No. Read Schrijver's article again
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/62677
*amlu- and malum/me:lon
Those forms are no more divergent than his
Amsel / merula,
aruz / raudus
and to a new one
Ameise / mier "ant"

Celtic Lugus and Germanic *Lokan would fit in this Northwestern substratal scenario?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lugh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki

Mmm - no. Not particularly. Not morphophonemically, anyway, which is how I defined that substrate language.


> I think this substratum would require a mythical scheme with a
> Sun-Goddess and a Moon-God (cf. Slavic, Baltic and Germanic),
> preceeding the PIE Sun-God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvognen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebra_skydisk


Torsten