A little while ago there was speculation on this
List as to whether the present state of the notional "reconstruction" of PIE was
sufficient to enable to allow scholars to converse (notionally) with the
original IE-speakers. The topic didn't attract much comment, which is a
pity. Ah well, pressing ahead in the face of apathy... I wonder if there
is any speculation on what personal names one might be likely to encounter, were
one to converse. I have found no relevant reference to the topic on the
Web, and if some Lister could direct me to one I would be very
grateful.
The origins of personal names is a field not well
served by etymologists, professional or amateur. The vast majority of
surnames-researchers confine themselves to dredging up homonyms, and (or
therefore) their research produces little more than basic folk-etymology.
John means..., and Henry means..., and surname Baker means an ancestor was a
baker, and so on and on, all announced with a certainty that is just plain
irritating.
It is more likely that personal names (families'
surnames and individuals' given names) began at the very dawn of speech.
As the lineal descendants of other proto-languages' words survive today
(arguably), so may personal names - in variations decided by the diffuse
speeches of the IE family. If any Lister has an opinion on this, I hope he
or she will post it here. We have established that
the deduced vocabulary of IE ("PIE", though there should be no
distinction) exists only as a series of snapshots, and so must any deduced
personal names. So what names do the snapshots give for the originals of
James and Heinrich and Piotr and Ivan?
(I won't ask about the names by which we know the
ancient aristocrats and kings and priests. I think most of them were
probably titles or made-up names. Alexander looks like a
hybrid Semitic+IE royal name ["holy king"] from Anatolia, for instance,
though we may never know one way or the other. And Tutankhamen wasn't a
playground name, now, was it?)
Gordon Barlow