Re: *(H-)p/bh[-r/l-] again again

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Marco Moretti"
<marcomoretti69@...> wrote:

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

wrote:

> >
> >
> > Much as I would love to leave my insane Austronesian( -> Proto-
> > Bantu) -> AfroAsiatic/IE theory behind me, and in particular the
> > unwieldy blob of *(H-)p/bh "water; on, at" together with *(H-)

p/bh-

> > r/l- "one side; across; transport" with its anchoring in

societies

> > living on both banks of a river, unfortunately facts seem to have
> > entered a conspiracy against this laudable intention:
> >
> > Basque ibai "river", ibara "valley, estuary"
> >
> > (is there a -r suffix in Basque and, if yes, what does it mean?)
> >
> > from
> > http://www.germanistik.uni-
> > muenchen.de/theoretische_linguistik/vennemann.html
>
> It's impossible. In Basque there isn't a word ibara at all. Valley
> is "ibar", and with determinative article "ibarra" (the article -a

<

> *-har, the distal pronoun!).

Well, I only know it from Vennemann's page. And <ibai>?

> Etymology of these item is still uncertain to me, but clearly they
> are unrelated with your *(H-)p/bh "water; on, at".

I think that means that the word is not derivable within Basque. But
I am glad to hear that something is clear to you.

> Playing with Basque without a knowledge of Trask's and Michelena's
> works is hopelessly idle.
>

Yes, yes. And the arguments?

Torsten