[tied] Re: 'Dog' revisited

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

> 26-11-03 13:08, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > The question is, when did it start to spread out of its SE Asian
> > home? Perhaps on rafts caught in postdiluvian floods? I'm sure

Noah

> > would have taken some on board.
>
> If you'd read the original article (I've just posted a link), you'd

have

> learnt that dog domestication started to spread _very_ long ago.

I'm not a subscriber, so I can't get access to the site. Do you have
an alternative link?

>
> >>Talking of similarities, however, the alleged popularity of
> >> "kwon" as a term for 'dog' in various language families is a

myth.

> >>It's
> >> only when you start cheating, relaxing your criteria

until "kwon"

> >>and,
> >> say, Semitic *kalb count as similar, that you create the

impression

> > of a
> >> long trail of "kwons" starting in SE Asia.
> >
> > Orël & Stolbova thinks 'kalb' _may_ belong to one of their

entries,

> > cf.
> > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/kur.html
> > Who's cheating now?
>
> What does Orël and Stolbova's thinking that *kalb may be derivable

from

> their putative Proto-Afroasiatic roots (if that's what you mean)

have to

> do with your "kwon"? "Kal-" is not "kwon" either.
>

You might of course argue that since I quote that particular root of
Orël and Stolbova's that I subscribe also to their derivation *kal >
kalb.

Torsten