Re: Laryngeals Indo-Uralic

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "caotope" <johnvertical@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" wrote:
> >
> > > > ***R Would English ice < gicel < *Hieg/k- (vel sim) and Uralic
> > > > *jäNe work as examples?
> > > > >
> > > > Loans is nicer.
> > > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/60884
> > > > It accounts for two traditionally unconnected IE roots.
> > > > Form in donor language something like *in,g-
> > >
> > > Which would probably have to be from a sister group to both IE
> > > and Uralic then?
> >
> > Actually, I don't even have a theory of how those two are
> > related. I stick to loans. In this case from a substrate to both,
> > presumably one that knew ice.
>
> > Torsten
>
> Hm, but if the word is a substrate loan into PIE and PU both, how
> do you rule out the possibility of this being of common inheritance
> after all?

Several small things:

1) My proposal covers both the 'ice' and the 'icle', but they are not relatable within PIE with known rules, which they would have been if they were inherited.

2) The limited and northern geographical distribution of the PIE words cognates (except for the Iranian word, but who knows what nomads pick up).

3) The derivation with a genitive partitive -s as in *gl-a-s (and, I suspect, *gr-a-s) points to Aestian or whatever preceded it.

> Etherman brought up other examples of a correspondence
> of PU *ä to IE *ei not long ago on the Nostratica list.

That is not a counter-argument, loans of one and the same path also show regular substitutions.


Torsten