From: Anne Lambert
Message: 18995
Date: 2003-02-21
>From: Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...>To cybalist:
>Reply-To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
>To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [tied] Re: "Will the 'real' linguist please stand up?"
>Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 21:13:25 +0100
>
>On Fri, 21 Feb 2003 10:29:39 -0000, "Piotr Gasiorowski
><piotr.gasiorowski@...>" <piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
>
> >> If three non-IE languages [assuming Nahali also to be one such --
> >> even though Piotr considers this to be an Indo-Aryan language? --,
> >> apart from Burushaski and Language 'x']
> >
> >I've discussed that before. Nahali is an IA language with a very thick
> >layer of non-IA loans, many of which come from a language apparently
> >unrelated to anything we know.
>
>Another layer is Dravidian. Judging by the numerals, the Dravidian
>layer is older than the Indo-Aryan one:
>
>1 biDum
>2 irar
>3 moTho
>4 na:lo
>5 p�co
>6 cha:h
>7 sato
>8 aTho
>9 nav
>10 das
>
>The numbers 5-10 are clearly of IA origin. The numbers 1-5 are
>Dravidian:
>
>biDum cf. Toda w�D, Kota vodde, Irula vondu
>irar cf. Toda e:D, Brahui ira:, Kolami i:ral, Kannada eraDu
>moTho cf. Toda mu:D, Telugu mu:Du
>na:lo cf. Toda no:N, Koya na:lu, Tulu na:l, Malayalam na:lu
>
>
>=======================
>Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
>mcv@...