From: Marco Moretti
Message: 29434
Date: 2004-01-12
> On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 13:04:37 +0000, Marco Morettiwrote:
> <marcomoretti69@...> wrote:
>
> >--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...>
> >> On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 06:05:50 +0000, Glen Gordon<glengordon01@...>
> >> wrote:be
> >>
> >> >Marco inputs:
> >> >>Akkadian /eru:/ is not from /*weru:/.
> >> >
> >> >Alright. Where _is_ it from?
> >>
> >> The usual transcription erû(m) (not eru:) suggests a contracted
> >vowel,
> >> probably /i/ + /u/. I think the form can be reconstructed as
> >*weri?-u(m)
> >> (acc. *weri?-a(m), etc.), but that's based on old notes, I'm not
> >100% sure.
> >>
> >> An interesting word in this context is the Hebrew for copper, <?
> >arad>
> >> (aleph-resh-daleth).
> >
> >In Akkadian final -u:(m) (I have no characters with circumflex
> >accents on my keybord, in Italy they are considered useless) can
> >not only from /i/ + /u/ but also from /a/ + /u/ or from /u/ + /u/.(but my
>
> Yes. In this case, however, the form seems to go back to /i/+/u/
> source is indirect: Vennemann, to be exact).satisfied
>
> >Now, I know the Hebrew word /?ara:d/, "bronze", but I'm not
> >with an ancient /w/ becoming /?/ in Hebrew.Yes, my favorite example is of course:
>
> Semitic w- > Hebrew y-.
> >/?ara:d/ is probablydoesn't
> >unrelated both with /eru:(m)/ and with /urudu/, due to impervious
> >phonetic difficulties.
>
> It cannot correspond to (w)erû(m), but a connection with <urudu>
> seem too far-fetched. An original *arudu could explain both forms,with
> vowel harmony giving Sum. urudu and Hebr. ?arad(a), respectively.Tonic /a:/ vowel in Hebrew /?ara:d/ is in any case difficult, but