On Tue, 12 Dec 2000 11:37:12 , "Glen Gordon"
<
glengordon01@...> wrote:
>>I also reserve the right to have pre-PIE **q^ (> *k^) and **qw (>
>>*kw), for reasons of symmetry and because of two cute self-discovered
>>Nostratic etymologies which I'm reluctant to let go of (PIE *g^hesr-
>>"hand", PSem *3as'r- "10", PKartv. *qe(l)- (Svan pl. qäl-är-) "hand,
>>arm"; and PIE *g^en(d)h1u- "chin, jaw, cheek", PKartv. *Ga(:)c'.w-
>>"cheek", *Ga(n)c^.- "jaw"), both with (palato-)velars in PIE for the
>>expected uvular.
>
>Make a copyright if you want - I'm sure no one will steal your idea. Your
>Nostratic etymology is very outdated and sloppy, as well as incompatible
>with anything vaguely credible that has been done within the last quarter of
>the 20th century. It certainly doesn't follow the usual Nostratic
>correspondances. You have parentheses strewn everywhere and I'm not
>impressed. Who's giving you these correspondances? This looks like the work
>of Illich-Svytich. He's been dead for some time now. It's time to move on.
>
>I don't see how you can seriously believe that PIE *gh = Semitic *3 nor can
>I see how you can support the added equation with Kartvelian *q without
>weaving more fantastical stories together.
It's quite simple. The PIE *K series (*k^/*k/*kw, *g^/*g/*gw,
*g^h/*gh/ghw) is an amalgamation of a "Nostratic" velar *K and uvular
*Q series. In Proto-Kartvelian, the two are distinct (*k, *k., *g and
*q, *q., *G), except that the voiced *G (smallcap G) has merged with
*G (gamma), the voiced fricative that goes with *x. That's why PK *G
can match both PIE *g (*uG- ~ *yug- "yoke", *Ga(n)c.'w- ~ *gen(d)h1-
"cheek, chin, jaw") and *h2/3 (*Gweb- ~ *Hwebh- "weave").
Proto-Semitic has a fricative series *x *x. *3 (`ayn) which is
atypical because it has an "emphatic" member. The PAA evidence (Orël
& Stolbova), doubtful as it is, seems to confirm that this series
derives from original uvular stops (**q > *x, **q. > *x., **G > *3),
besides the true "laryngeals" *x, *G (gamma), *h and *?
The correspondences would thus be (simplified, of course):
PN PSem PKa PIE
*k *k \ *k *gh
*k. *q } *k. *k
*g *g / *g *g
*q *x \ *q *gh
*q. *x. } *q. *k
*G" *3 / *G *g
*x *x *x *h2
*G *G *G *h2
*h *h *(h) *h1
*? *? 0 *h1
As to the equation PKa. voiceless aspirate = PIE voiced aspirate, PKa.
voiceless ejective = PIE voiceless, PKa. voiced = PIE voiced (except
in the labial series, which I don't understand), it's just something
that follows from the data. I didn't like it at first, but I have to
deal with it (it means that both Illich-Svitych and Bomhardt are wrong
about the PKa - PIE correspondences). Here are the supporting
etymologies from Klimov's Kartvelian etymological dictionary:
PK *gen- make suck ; hear, learn PIE *genH- erzeugen; kennen
PK *dwire- beam ; PIE *dru- tree
PK *zisxl- blood ; PIE *h1esh2ngw- (**?isxngu- ?)
PK *tel- sucking pig ; PIE *dhe(:)il- suck
PK *tiqa- soil ; PIE *dhgh-om- earth
PK *tkwen you (pl) ; PIE *-dhwe (?)
PK *k.wam(l)- smoke ; PIE *kuapn-
PK *k.reb/*k.rep- gather ; PIE *karp-
PK *k.rk.o- acorn ; Lat. quercus oak
PK *k.ud- tail ; Lat. cauda
PK *m-k.erd- chest ; PIE *kerd- heart
PK *Ldz'e milk ; PIE *m-lg- ?
PK *s'w- drink, wet ; PIE *seu(H)-
PK *s^w- give birth ; PIE *seu(H)-
PK *t.ep- warm ; PIE *tep-
PK *uG- yoke ; PIE *yug-
PK *Ga(n)c.'w-, *Ga(n)c^.- chin, cheek, jaw ; PIE *gen(d)Hu-
PK *Gweb- weave; PIE Hwebh-
PK *band(G)- plait; PIE *bhendh-
PK *k.b- bite ; PIE *kap-
PK *omp.e- navel ; PIE *ombh-
PK *p.er- fly ; PIE *p(^)er-
How PAA corresponds to PIE-PKa is a different matter, which I haven't
looked into yet.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...