--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "João Simões Lopes Filho" <jodan99@...>
>
> 1) Perhaps -x in alopex was a later innovation, alo:pe:ks <
*alo:pe:s <
> *alo:pe:s- ?
>
> 2) Gk. aló:pe:ks, Skt. lopa:s'á- 'jackal', Iranian *raupasa-, Arm.
aLue:s
> *(h2)loupe:s- or *(h2)laWope:s- or *(h2)laWope:k^-
>
> 3) Pre-Latin *olupe:s- > *ulpe:s > *vulpe:s ?
>
>
> But all non-Latin evidence points to *k^. Loss in one branch
(explicable via the Latin diminutive) is more likely than a
conspiracy of innovations. If anything is certain in this word, it's
the *-pek^- part.
>
> Piotr
This might be interesting:
Falk & Torp:
'ræv' (vulpes), Sw. 'räf', ON 'refr'. The word does not occur in
other Germanic languages. On the other hand it is strongly similar to
Finnish 'repo'. Since this is of genuine Finnish descent (cf.
Mordvin 'rives', Magyar 'ravasz'), if it is a loan, it must have been
borrowed before the [Grimm] sound shift. This, however, seems not
likely. [Why not? And then comes the standard derivation from 'tail',
cf. Spanish 'raposa' "fox", 'rabo' "tail". Or is that a folk
etymology of a Germanic or Alanic loan?].
Perhaps an Iranian loan in Finno-Ugric?
Torsten