[tied] Re: PIE's closest relatives

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...>
wrote:

>
> Marco inputs:
> >Akkadian /eru:/ is not from /*weru:/.
>
> Alright. Where _is_ it from?

I don't know. Only Dionysos knows. And I dare to ask: "there is a
person on the whole universe that knows it?". I need time and energy
in order to formulate some proposals (and positive results are not
ensured).

> >It's not a "bright ship" nor a "bright sun ten". It is simply /ur
> >(u)/ "bright object" + /du/ "to mould", as seen in Halloran's

lexicon.

>
> Yeah, but Halloran's proposals are not rational. If you're going by

them,

> then we have to part ways because I will never agree with what

you're

> saying. Halloran has put a lot of work into his Sumerian lists, but

the

> etymologies he provides are nonsense.

At list some proposal IS rational:

/lugal/ "king" is without doubt "great man"
/egal/ "palace" is without doubt "big house"
/kusig/ "gold" is without doubt "yellow metal"

and there are hundreds of these items.
In Italy there are many crackpots that compare Sumerian /lugal/ with
the Celtic theonym Lugus. I have to fight everyday with similar
pseudoscientific ideas.

> >Surely it has nothing to do with Austronesian.
>
> Please. Bringing Halloran's pseudo-etymologies into this is insane
> enough. Let's not rock the boat more than we have to.

I dont bring Halloran's "Sumerian language invention by means of
phonograms" into this, but only some analysis of transparent compound
words. It's curious your obsession for Occam Razor when it permits
you to shave off something not suitable and your opposition to the
same instrument when results don't satisfy you.

> >I never said that Sumerian and IE were in direct contact. Proposed
> >matchups, if valid, must be secondary.
>
> Good. So there needs to be a path from A to B by which this
> loan wanders. It's not good enough to say what the ultimate
> source is. HOW did it get from A to B? At least some of them,
> I believe, were transferred via a para-Semitic language
> situated once in Northern Anatolia c.5500 BCE. This seems to
> be the only proposal that explains *septm, at least. So I naturally
> wonder whether it can explain *?reudH- and I've given my
> thoughts on that already, take it or leave it. If you leave it,
> you're left with far more fantastical ideas than mine.

I'm quite satisfied to propose an ultimate origin. There is nobody
that can specify how loans wonder, because we know nothing about
prehistorical or protohistorical deeds. We don't know the genealogies
of Minoan kings, we don't know the exact dynamics of invasions, we
cannot intrinsecally determine something until we'll able to make
dead people speak.
The suggestion of a Semici-like language in Anatolia seems made of
thin air. It is only a baseless speculation and it will be so until
we'll find some document able to prove it.

> >Once again libraries! I have already told you that we have no

similar

> >resources in libraries: I searched for many years and I found very
> >little.
>
> Start a romance with your librarian. Sometimes these relationships
> can yield books that were otherwise hidden from view :)

My librarian is only a kind of parasite. When I was 18 I often
studied on a little but interesting book about ancient languages.
It contained much Hattic stuff. When I asked for that book again,
some years later, the librarian told me that it was too old and
consumed, so it was cast in rubbish! When I proposed to buy some old
books destined to waste, the sow told me that for bureaucratic
reasons it was impossible! I sweared to my librarian eternal hatred.

Best wishes to you, dear Glen

Marco