Re: [tied] Thracian place-names

--- George Hinge <litgh@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh
> <gknysh@...> wrote:
> >
> > --- George Hinge <litgh@...> wrote:
> >
> > > The short vowel of Don / Tanais is problematic
> > > whether you point to
> > > Thracian or to Scythian as the source of the
> > > proprium. You would have
> > > to accept either a peculiar variant of the stem
> or a
> > > special Thracian
> > > or Scythian vowel shortening (ad hoc).
> >
> > GK: It is only problematic if you insist on
> > looking for an Iranic source. Then you have to
> posit
> > unknown and unattested "Scythian" dialects which
> > already reflect a transition not occurring in
> Ossetic
> > (developing from late steppe Alanic) until after
> the
> > Mongolian invasion. There is no need to speculate
> > about the short "a" in the Thracian riverword. For
> the
> > evidence. cf. S. Stryzhak et al., "Hidronimija
> > Ukrajiny v jiji mizhmovnykh i mizhdialektnykh
> > zvyazkakh", Kyiv: Naukova Dumka 1981, pp. 13-14,
> > 27-30, with references to Lehr-Splawinski,
> Trubachov,
> > Mashtakov, and others.
> > >
>
> If you derive the riverword from the same IE root, I
> cannot see, why
> a Thracian intermediary would make the short vowel
> more
> understandable.

*****GK: Because the relevant "a" is short in the
attested areal Thracian and long in the attested
areal Iranic. Why this should have occurred is a
different question.*****

> The problem with the hypothesis that the Cimmerians
> were Thracians

/rest snipped for economy GK/
*****GK: I do not claim that the Cimmerians proper
were Thracians. In fact I prefer the hypothesis of
their Iranism. This is a different issue from that of
the short "o" in Don and its historical
implications.*****





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/