Re: [tied] Re: IE right & 10

From: petusek
Message: 34148
Date: 2004-09-14

From: "Harald Hammarström"
> It should be noted that it is typologically very rare to borrow exactly
> one single numeral and not at the same time borrow all the ones above it.
> It is also typologically rare that the number '7' is borrowed alone.

Do you know of any language (anywhere in the world) that adopted the numeral
"7" from another language (besides the Semitic issue) a) only, b) with
another numeral c) together with more than one numeral?

As for IE, it is thought that not only "7" is an old loan, but (according to
some poeple) also "6" :

(As for "6", Glen has written a lot about it, already. The remarkable
similarity between some Indo-European forms (Old Indic nom-acc-voc s.a't.,
instr. s.ad.bhís "6", Lith s^es^i "6") and their Semitic counterparts
(Arabic sitt "6", sa:dis "6th", Hebrew s^e:s^) is evident, bud if we compare
the IE reconstruction *Ksweks and Semitic *s^idT-, their incompatibility is
clear. Among the latest attempts, there is reconstruction of Kswek^s <
ghswek^s < g^hs-wek^s "hand-overgrowing". As attested in some historical
records, the constrained-looking phonetic developement (via palatal
dissimilation) could be in accord with the rule not allowing the presence of
two occlusives of the same series in the same root/stem (Gamgrelidze &
Ivanov). This change (*ghs >Avestan xs^ (and Old Indic ks.) is a documented
fact.)

Petusek