> W dniu 2012-03-09 12:52, Tavi pisze:
> > My own reconstruction is **XrC-o-*, with *C being an affricate
> There's nothing to be gained in this way. The reconstruction doesn't
> explain more evidence than the orthodox analysis, and it *fails* to
> explain some of it (Hitt. hartakka-) without arbitrary special
> You also complicate the reconstruction by proposing an otherwiseunknown
> PIE phoneme. Ockham's Razor applies here.This is no Ockham's Razor but a strict application of the IE ortodox
> > You might redefine "PIE" to designate the most recent lexicon layerin
> > the IE family, but then you should create new names for the olderstrata.
>if X is a language family, Proto-X
> No, I'm not *redefining* anything. I use "PIE" in the standard sense.
> means (and has always meant) the latest common ancestor of all itsmembers. If you want to refer to its
> earlier stages, you can use "pre-" (pre-PIE etc.).If we follow this definition to the letter, "the latest common ancestor
> One does not even have to insist that *h1ek^wos referred originally toIE
> domesticated horses. Wild horses were very common throughout Eurasia
> and they may have kept their name after domestication.
> > Only that there's no actual evidence this domestication was done by
> > speakers.On the contrary, it's extremely important, because domesticated horses
> This is irrelevant.
> > My theory is that **h1ek´w-o-* specifically designated thedomesticated
> > horses from the Pontic-Caspian steppes. As in the case of othersquarely
> > domesticated animals, this is a loanword which originated in the
> > language of the domesticators.
> If you put forward such a theory, the burden of the proof lies
> on your shoulders. I am not aware of any IE language that shows adifferent
> consistent generic distinction between the terms for wild and
> domesticated horses, like that between "wolf" and "dog" (while
> types/breeds of domesticated horses are often distinguished).I think you missed my point entirely. Most names of domesticated animals
> > Of course, as horses were also domesticated in more than just oneplace,
> > there're also other 'horse' words. For example, I've alreadysuggested
> > that Germanic **xurs-a-/*xruss-a-* must have coined by peoplefamiliar
> > with the wild animal.the
> Just about everybody was familiar with wild horses in all putative IE
> homelands. Show me one scrap of evidence that the Germanic word meant
> specifically 'wild horse' before you claim that it *must* have been
> case.I've already linked this word to external cognates meaning 'deer' or