Glen (Me):
>>How should we explain the Semitic loanwords in Kartvelian?
John:
>Was Kartvellian always confined to Georgia?
The term is Kartvelian with ONE -l-. They were probably there for a good
14,000 years as you've proposed. Most seem to think that this is the case as
well. Linguistically, Kartvelian is off on its own within the Nostratic
grouping. Everything makes sense. As for whether they were confined
_specifically_ to Georgia, I don't know. One would expect Kartvelian or
pre-Kartvelian to attempt a spread but perhaps this spread was erased by the
rich chauldron of languages existent in the area. It probably wasn't so
linguistically populated north of the Black Sea.
The Kartvelian loans I'm talking about involve Kartvelian itself. They are
ancient words having been reconstructed as securely as IE *septm but yet
show the same blunt influence of Semitic. I recall *arwa "eight" (compare
Semitic "four") as well as the ubiquitous numerals for "six" and "seven"
which come out looking something like **weks^w- (<- DANGER, from memory
only) and **s^wid-, I think? Now the numeral for "seven" appears to be based
on the Semitic masculine form, just like IE *septm. The word for "six" looks
alot like IE *sweks.
If you're considering them to be just IE loans, think again. You'd have a
hard time explaining our little friend from above, *arwa "eight". The word
for "four" by the way is *otsxo and appears to be a possible loan via IE
(cf. *oktou "eight" and *okto- "a grouping of four" < ? IndoEtruscan *kwetwe
"four": Etruscan huth). These Semitic-looking words can't be Berberish loans
either, so something's up.
- gLeN
______________________________________________________