Re: Odin as a Trojan Prince

--- In cybalist@..., "Christopher Gwinn" <sonno3@...> wrote:

>
> > > > The origins of a domestic animal (which could have easily

been

> > spread
> > > > far and wide via trade) has no real bearing on the ethnicity

of

> > the
> > > > people.
> > > >
> > > > - Chris Gwinn
> > > >
> > >
> > > Surely I know this, I was just sugesting that maybe there's

some

> > link
> > > between Egyptian and Irish dogs. I don't know its origin,

perhaps

> > trade via
> > > phoenicians, or some kind of Afro-Asiatic substratum in Ireland.
> >
> > That dog name
> > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/kur.html
> > is all over the place too. Where dogs can go, so can words. If
> there
> > was no migration, at least there was travel. Which means the
> origins
> > of a domestic animal *is* relevant to linguists.
>
> But you should re-read the thread - we are talking about the

movement

> of peoples here, not linguistics. It is quite obvious that if a new
> type of animal (or a new product) is introduced into an area, there
> is a very high probablity of the receivers borrowing the name for

the

> animal (or product) from the providers.
>
> - Chris Gwinn

I *have* read the thread. My point was that, since there must have
been contact, and since the recipients so to speak have declared
their willingness to borrow words from that source, then besides 1
piece product and 1 piece corresponding word you might expect also
other words to have have travelled the same route.

Torsten