Re: [tied] Tyrrhenian and its relation to IE

From: erobert52@...
Message: 8636
Date: 2001-08-21

In a message dated 19/08/01 03:23:44 GMT Daylight Time,
glengordon01@... writes:

>>In the same way, we can see that /-ale/ is the dative in
>>the Raetic inscriptions. Thus,
>>upiku pheluriesi phelvinuale: "Offering (cf. Etr. /up-/)
>>from Feluria to Felvinua"
>First, I don't remember coming across Etruscan /up-/ for "to give".
>I remember a root /alp-/. If there exists /up-/ I would reason
>that /alp-/ is the fuller, more archaic version. (The vowels /a/ and /u/
>alternate a whole bunch in Etruscan.) However, this may be
>a moot point since we might still theoretically relate Rhaetic
>/upiku/ with an Etruscan perfective /alpa-ce/ "has offered".

/up-/ is glossed by Stoltenberg as "offering". It can also
be found as /uph-/ and /uf-/, and maybe, /vap-/. I don't
relate it immediately to /alpan/, although there may
ultimately be a connection which I explore below. The /-ku/
may be some sort of deverbal related to the Etr. factitive
affix /-xu-/ rather than the past tense /-ce/, which usually
appears in Raetic as /-ke/.

>>paniun laSuanuale upiku perunies sxaispala: "Votive (cf.
>>Etr. /alpan/) to Lasuanua offering from Perunia Scespalis"
>Erh... It's spelled /laSanuale/ with only one "u".
>how might we rule out the
>possibility that /laSanuale/ is part of a larger noun phrase
>/paniun laSanuale/ (meaning: "Lasanua's votive").

Sorry about the surfeit of U's. The reason I relate this to
Etr. /alpan/ is because in Raetic /pan-/ appears more often
as /apan-/. We know that the word /alpnu/ is also attested
in Etruscan, so the /-u-/ could be right too. On the other
hand /alpnu/ might be /alp-nu/. My supposition is that the
word is an adjective */(a)paniun(a)/ qualifying /upiku/. As
in PID 191, I think the name of the god needs to be
mentioned somewhere.

BTW I think your suggestion:

>a strange rule I've detected
>in Tyrrhenian whereupon, if the first vowel is *a, the
>otherwise initial accent is placed on the _second_ syllable.

is really interesting. I've been wondering about this
strange aphaeretic/prothetic /a-/ (and /e-/ too?) that keeps
coming and going. This feature may be of relevance relating
to /pan-/ etc.

>The question here is: Of what you state, which is your own
>strange translations and what is truely known by the few
>Rhaetic experts that exist in the world?

Most of my suggested glosses for the words in these two
inscriptions have been made before in some form by
somebody or other. But there's no truly knowing about it
whoever says it.

>However, I do admit that there may have been an
>"agentive" usage of the genitive case

At last!!! You're on a slippery slope to ergative now.

Ed. Robertson