Re: Tyrrhenian context

From: jdcroft@...
Message: 9011
Date: 2001-09-04

For another 2 cents worth

Yes it does seem that the TRWS mentioned in Egytpian records may be
the Tyrsenoi, that later, through a consonental shift, become
Tyrrhenoi. The connection with Pelasgian is a close one, and I would
see them as essentially the same people. Greek and Roman sources
also put Pelasgian in Southern Italy, and in Anatolia. It has been
suggested that the people were a substrate language group throughout
Anatolia, from the Caucasas to Italy where *-inthos, *-ossos, and *-
indos place names show a common source.

As regards to influence on Greek, I have seen it reported that up to
30% of classical vocabulary was non-Greek in origin. The proportion
rates much higher where nautical terms, or terms related to
Mediterranean agriculture are referred to. I understand terms of
abuse are also non-Indo-European in origin. Given the fact that the
Greeks themselves seem to use "Pelasgian" as we use the
term "Aboriginal", I would suspect that these words are Pelasgian in
origin. I know of no linguistic work that is (yet) comparing this
substrait language with Proto-Etruscan, Lemnian or anything else for
that matter. I do know that it has been reported that the number of
substrait words present in Attic and Ionian generally seems higher
than in Dorian or NW Greek. Clearly more work is needed here.

There is a good archive on "Macro-Pelasgian" on cybalist which I
would recommend to all who are interested in this interesting topic.