Re: [TIED] IE apple

>From: "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...>

>Hi, folks.
>
>Sorry I was silent - I'm sure you all missed my infamous "ascorbic tongue",
>as it were. At any rate, I figure I should respond more to Piotr's
>discussion of the word "apple" because I have some new thoughts on it and
>the topic seemed to die once I got busy with things in my physical world.
>:(

Hey I remember you from Nostratic-L! I just joined up here. I was
impressed by the IE website, so I had to join the list.

I remember finding the root *apel in the appendix , but it was listed as
only being attested in Germanic. The Russian word, _j�bloko_, is probably a
borrowing. Latin has _malus_ (not the same as _malus_ 'bad'; one's got a
long vowel but I forgot which). I forgot what Greek has for the fruit.
Outside IE, there are similar words in Uralic languages: Finnish _omena_,
Hungarian _alma_...

>Simply put, is it possible that the word is in fact based on the root *xem-
>"to taste sour"? I guess apples were more like crab apples back then :)
>Plus, is it possible that the root here was in reality *xemx-/*xmex- with a
>final laryngeal? I explain...
>
>If we reconstruct *xemxlos for "apple", we get a literal meaning of "sour
>(thing)" since it would be formed from the adjectival stem *xmxlos
>(Sanskrit
>a:mra, was it?). We might further explain the "southern dialectal" forms
>that Piotr mentioned as being related to a related form with *xmex- (Latin
>ama:rus).

I assume that /x/ is one of the laryngeals? Is that the same as /H/ (H1,
H2, H3)?

>Finally, the solution seems sufficient to explain why *-ml- becomes *-bl-
>instead of **-mpl- since the laryngeal would serve as a devoicing element
>for the *m, producing *p: (later *b). So *xemxlos becomes *xep:los (later
>*ablos).

I've find a tendency to shift ml > mbl, mr > mbr (Spanish _hombre_ 'man')
from Pre-Romance/Latin *homerus?) in natlangs, so that makes a lot of sense.

>There. I think this is a happy solution solved the gLeN way.

Thanks. I got some ideas of my own. I'm going to post something on
Gamqrelidze and Ivanov's glottal theory, and how they reconstruct
palatal-neutral-labiovelar distribution not only of k/g/gh (or, according to
the Glottalists, /k/k'/g), but also /s/, and some have added a back-velar
/q/. The laryngeals are possibly split the same way; since the three H's
result in the vowels e/a/o, I wouldn't doubt these being H^/H/Hw (or
x^/x/xw).

Daniel A. Wier ����
Lufkin, Texas USA
http://communities.msn.com/DannysDoubleWideontheWeb
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com