Re: Germanic Scythians?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
> <piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> > To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 5:38 PM
> > Subject: [tied] Re: Germanic Scythians?
> >
> >
> > > > If the *-ing- offends you, let's note it's Germanic and
> concentrate on *þur-
> > >
> > > OK, but then your Tungri connection evaporates completely.
> > >
> > > Depending on where we place Verner relative to Grimm.
> >
> > Really? What's your scenario, then?
> >
> I'll have to go read up on the various proposals there have been.
> Meanwhile I realized that Pre-Gmc *tur-engh- would fit the bill too.

So! A good night's sleep and ...

I realise from Collynge "The laws of IndoEuropean" that the whole
matter of the sequence of Grimm and Verner isn't settled yet.
Therefore asking me to settle that question before *tur-enko- >
*tungra- can be settled is a fine move: no matter what I come up
with, unless I'm better than all mu illustrious predecessors, will
contain holes. So I'll do something else:

*tur-enko- > *tur-nka- > *tunkra- > *tungra-

And then I can claim that the last rule was specific to the language
of Ariovist's Tungri. Not very special pleading, the rule seems
ordinary enough. There are a lot of Düring, Dierick etc families in
Belgium, accidentally showing that the language of the land is not
that of the Tungri (which was doomed with their defeat).

Torsten