[tied] Re: Latin pinso etc.

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

> Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> > 15-01-04 23:10, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> >
> >> I think it is undule harsh to describe the derivation of

_$arpe_ /

> >> _$erpe_ from <serpens> as irregular. In particular, there is no
> >> appeal to analogy, dissimilation or assimilation.
> >
> > If fact, it's just as straightforward and phonologically regular

as,

> > say, <pãrinte> from <parens>/<parentem> or <pieptene> from
> > <pecten>/<pectinem>. The generalisation of the Latin nom.sg.

rather

> > than the oblique stem is rare but neither impossible nor
> > unprecedented.
> >
> > Piotr
>
> one can see the things how one likes. So far I have from

Latin "plâns"

> with final "-ns" I am not allowed to say the "Sarpe" is derived

from

> serpens with lost of "n". It is simply not allowed. I don't want to
> point more to the bloody nominative/accusative game. What is

expected

> one should have had from a PIE root as serp-? thowoobadu? that is

simply

> a streight evolution of se > Sa and nothing more.

Well, as a loan word it's conceivable that one might have *þap in
the Central Tai dialect spoken in or near the place spelt Hsi-lin in
the Wade-Giles system. (Sanskrit _sarpa_ 'snake' > Pali *sappa,
which would be borrowed in Siamese as *sap. For a native Siamese
word *sap I would expect Hsi-lin *þap, and I don't know the date of
the Hsi-lin change s > þ. The counter-arguments are that I cannot
find any evidence for Siamese *sap - it would be homophonous with
the representative /sap/ 'different, all (kinds of)' of Sanskrit
_sarva_ 'all, whole' - and I know nothing of the linguistic impact
of Buddhism on the Hsi-lin dialect.)

I know little enough about Sinhalese that I can't rule out
*thowoobadu as the representative of a formation analogous to Greek
_herpeton_ 'reptile'.

> How on the earth want one to say it derived from Latin serpens and

not

> from IE *serp- ? Is there any scientifical, any sure posiblity to

say

> "it is excluded to derive straight from IE bypassing latin?"

You can't exclude Latin either, which is the key point. If you want
to ask a sensible question, ask which known or reconstructable
language of around 1 AD best explains the words on the Swadesh 100
list. Latin did very well.

> The PIE root has no nasal here, the Rom. word has none, the Alb.

word

> has none, but I have to accept it derived from a certain dialectal

form

> of Latin where already in Latin the infix "n" was lost.

The dialect being Vulgar Latin! The change Vns > V:s is shown by
all Romance languages of the last 2000 years _except_ Classical
Latin and its literary descendants (Late Latin, etc.).

> That appears funny and not at all scientifical. At least I don't

see any

> argument for sustaining it is more probable the posiblity of

*serpens >

> Sarpe ( what about ns > s > i here Piotr??????????) als the

probability

> of *serp- >Sarpe _even_ in a satem language?

I think you'll find that the change s > i is restricted to stressed
syllables, thus very largely to monosyllables.

> The root *serp- is one of these roots they do not change too much

and

> there is nothing on the earth which oblige us to go with that word
> trough a Latin filter since there is _no need_.

There are many words which in themselves say little about a
language's affiliations. Even if the Albanian form is rejected, an
analogue of the Greek _herpe:s_ 'shingles; snake(?)' could also be
the source. (Incidentally, the Greek _herpe:n_ 'shingles' might
also have been relevant to a discussion of Albanian snake words - I
don't remember it being mentioned, but I could well have forgotten
it.)

> that have been my truly 2 cents here because of Oçam's obsession.

It needs to be wielded with care - several of its fans have cut
themselves on it!

Richard.