Re: Rom. vatra - Alb vatër-votër - PAlb *wai-a:tra

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

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3"

<alexandru_mg3@...>

> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry : please read below o>a in place of a>o:
> > So it is:
> > PIE *swe-(>*swoi) 'own;self' + *HaHtr- 'fire'.
> > PIE *swoi-HaHtr- > (o>a) > Old PAlb *swai-*a:tra > (sw>w;

HaH>a:)

> >
> > PAlb *wai-a:tra
> >
>
> If you want to risk your reputation as a sane person and are not
> afraid to injure your academic prospects you might want to consider
> Basque 'su' "fire" (I think it can be reconstructed as *suk- or

*sur-

> based on its combining forms; I'll have to check). Vennemann

proposes

> that root to account for Germanic *swart- "black" (ie.

< "blackened";

> and BTW Swed. 'svart', Dan. 'sort').
>

Having had the weekend to think it over, I came to the conclusion
that 'fire-fire' in two different languages is perhaps not such a
good idea.

On the other hand, as you can see here
http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/HsHp.html
the "burn" root has cognates in other language families (so Miguel is
probably wasting his talent here trying to find a PIE form for it),
and the Orël & Stol'bova in their Hamito-Semitic Etymological
Dictionary also have a problem with a w- that's not supposed to be
there.


Torsten