> --- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, "H.M. Hubey" <hubeyh@...> wrote:
> > Richard Wordingham wrote:
> > > --- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, "H.M. Hubey" <hubeyh@...>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Richard Wordingham wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the advantages of the Austronesian languages for
> > > > > sound changes is that it is such a large group. A change t
> > > shows
> > > > > up in comparison with other languages, and if you had, say
> > > > > collapsing to t~k~k, it should show up by comparison with a
> > > > > number of unaffected languages. (I know, I ought to write
> > > but I
> > > > > let you call your bags - or were they sequences? - sets.)
> > > > >
> > > > > What are your accepted p>k>t and p>t>k examples?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The famous ones which occur accross Semitic, Turkic and IE
> > > and
> > > > kVr having to
> > > > do with "rotation, turning, etc". And there is also evidence
> > > in
> > > > form pVr. I cannot tell
> > > > if it was p>t>k or p>k>t.
> > >
> > > That's more like a single word. What examples do you have as a
> > > _regular_ _unconditioned_ sound change? (Interchange of tl and
> kl is
> > > well known, but that is a _conditioned_ change.)
> > I've been posting about these for a long time all over. There is
> > the pVr and pVl that
> > occur across major language families. I think these come from PTh.
> > The *th and *dh are very useful since we can have *ath>aw > u,o
> > > ay> e,i.
> > That would only require a single vowel as a start.
> So useful, I fear, that little confidence can be placed in any
> reconstruction that invokes them. You speak as though you were
> playing scrabble!
> > Here is another little thing that hit me reading Hayes book on
> > (The changes are not necessarily in that exact order.)
> > *ninth > nin (lady, Sumerian)
> > *ninth > inth > insh > ish (lady, woman, Hebrew)
> > similarly for Sumerian and Turkic (see previous posts).
> > *ninth > inth > ins(an) (human, Arabic)
> Strange, all the textbooks I've read say that in Hebrew i:S
> is 'man'. The word for 'woman' is an anomalous feminine of this
> word. If my memory serves me right, the absolute is iSSa: and
> construct is e:SeT - e:sheth if you don't mind the potential
> ambiguities. The word for women is massively anomalous - na:Si:m,
> which has the _masculine_ plural suffix. There is a rare regular
> feminine, i:Sa:, which I think only occurs in Isaiah. What's the
> sibilant in Arabic - si:n or sa:?
> > PT inital-n disappeared. e.g,. KBal nalmaz=almas (diamond) and
> > yakut).
> > Both yakut and almas are said to be Arabic and almas is said to
> > related to
> > diamond, adamant etc. Here they show up with initial-n, and it is
> not a
> > reconstruction. Such anomolies can either be buried away or
> attempts can be
> > made to handle them.
> I'm not familiar with the abbreviations for Turkic languages. What
> forms are you citing for which form?
> > I am pretty sure that somethings like -nth-, -rth-, -lth- existed
> and it
> > existed
> > before there were languages like PIE.
> > > Looking at Torsten's list of <plosive>Vr roots at
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nostratica/message/90 , I can't
> > > thinking that there's some sort of sound symbolism going on
> here. In
> > > English we've got 'whir' and 'whirl', and in PIE there's a root
> > > with several extensions, all related to turning.
> > I do not see onamatopeia.
> Do you not see onomatopoeia in 'whir' and 'whirl'?
> OTOH, th>w and th>t and you get words like
> > whirl, and twirl
> > and there is the tVr already. There are too many tVr and kVr
> > (including tVl, and kVl)
> > to actually list right now. They are all over and must be truly
> > Some of these are
> > *gilgul (Sumerian, Witzel), Greek ghorentus (market, encircled
> > Tk. kurshow, etc
> > even Finnish Turku (marketplace), Tk karIn (stomach e.g. round
> > Akkadian (a?)garinnu,
> > etc. Pardon the misspellings. I can't remember everything. Then
> > is kwel, kwer(?),
> > English turn, dr- (verbs in GErmanic languages for turning),
> > Latin circle (kirik.el),
> > circus, Turkic teker (*ter.ker), Magyar kerek, etc etc.
> > > Perhaps it's
> > > universal onamatopeia. w- > gw- is fairly common (Welsh, Old
> > > and American Spanish leap to mind), so if such onomatopoeic
> > > keep being generated, over the millenia all the various
> derived by changes such as gw > g, gw > b, gw > d, gw > kw > ...
> > > could be generated without violating SCR
> because words like this can be regenerated by onomatopoeia.
> > > These words are found well beyond Nostratic.
> [Of the spread of Turkic:]
> > > > In other areas it also mostly disappeared.
> > >
> > > It made significant inroads into Fars as well.
> > Iran and Central Asia is still Iranian-speaking.
> Interpenetration! Tabriz speaks Azerbaijani, and Azerbaijani
> speakers account for 37% of the population of Iran. Then you have
> the Turkmen in the North East of Iran, and lots of smaller groups -
> the Qashqais of Fars to name but one.
> > Here is something interesting.
> > Speaker 4 Marc Buhler, Institute for Immunology & Allergy
> > NSW, Australia
> > - Title of Presentation Could admixture of the CCR5-delta32
> > into Ashkenazi Jews and Vikings be explained by an origin in the
> > of the Khazars?
> > The conference below is not exactly the Kook Konvention. Maybe
> > will take care of what historical linguists refuse to do.
> Might be a Scythian connection. Gothic graves in Poland hold a
> number of Scythian ladies, and that allows more time for the gene
> spread into Scandinavia. I suppose there could be a Finnic
> connection instead (or as well). It might be very revealing to see
> where the gene doesn't occur, if it has high enough frequency. The
> presenter could be in for a rough ride from any Ashkenazis in the
This two-trick pony will now perform its other stunt: The connection
is with the historical Odin's people at the sea of Azov (cf. a long
and drawn-out battle on that in cybalist which earned me two
citations (and not for valor), and also Heyerdahl's last theory).