Are hares grey? [was: ka and k^a [was: [tied] *kW- "?"]]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: ka and k^a [was: [tied] *kW- "?"]


> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:42:08 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
> <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
>>Miguel Carrasquer wrote:

>>Then perhaps *k^as-, if from **k^a:N-s-, has something to do with
>>*k^ank- ~ *k^a:k- 'rush, spring forth, leap', as in Gk. ke:kio:
>>(ka:kio:) 'gush', Lith. s^ókti 'leap', and Gmc. *xanxistaz/*xangistaz
>>'steed'.
>
> So not named after the colour (hares aren't really grey
> anyway, aren't they?), but after the jumping. Could very
> well be.

> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...

Hares are grey. Cf. Polish (zaja,c) szarak 'Lepus europaeus' (hare), szary
'grey'.

This word comes from *xe^rU(jI) [2nd palatalization!] < *xoir- < *kHoir-,
cf. Gmc. *xaira- in OIcel hárr, OE hár 'grey' and (with some semantic shift)
OHG hêr 'eminent, dignified' (< 'old' < 'grey-haired'). Greek khoiros 'pig'
can be related as well (cf. another word for 'pig', gry:lós, and
khoirogrýllios 'hare', literary 'pig-o-pig' (!)). The final -r is a suffix,
cf. Old Polish szady (also 'grey') < *xoi-d-.

And we have a problem here because some data could suggest that this *kHoi-
was related to *k^as- (*k^H-s- then). We have Skr. <çaçá-> (from *<çasá->),
Gmc. <haso:n->. Lat. ca:nus < *kasnos 'grey' may also belong here. Old
Prussian <sasins> is read by Brückner as zasins. The same formant -in- seems
to occur in Slavic zaje,cI. Initial z- is "mysterious" but cf. also Lith.
zuikis, Lett. zak,is. They may be loanwords or may be not as the word for
'hare' likes to develop irregularly, cf. Russ. zajac, gen. zajca with
unexpected fleeting -a- on the place of Proto-Slacvic -e,-.

My personal view is that the groups of a voiceless stop and laryngeal may
have developed in various ways even if the same language / PIE dialect.
Namely, *k^H can have yielded *kH > x in Slavic (*xe^rUjI) but also *k^H >
*g^ > z (zaje,cI; here *k^Hoi- > *g^aHj-).

Neogrammarians (and even Scherer before) maintain the view that the phonetic
development of language follows set rules that do not admit of exception -
but we are sure here that they were wrong in this point. The most typical
example for breaking the as-if-unexpectional character of sound changes
(called very incorrectly "sound laws") is the 3rd palatalization in Slavic.
Another example: *l > l / r in Sanskrit (often side by side). Yet another:
*bh, *dh > h in Sanskrit. Yet another: Old Polish karw < *korw- without the
expected metathesis (in Kashubian there are more such words). And we can
continue this way but there is no need for this. We must admit that many
phonological changes are multidirectional. Hence I see nothing impossible in
*k^H > x ~ z, and in some relation between Slavic zaje,cI, English hare and
Sanskrit çaça < *k^VH-.

We can point more such examples (the example of Sl. *xapati and *gabati with
connection to Latin habe:- and Grm. habe:- is another one; Slavic sve^tU
'light, luminosity', kve^tU 'flower' and gve^zda 'star' < *k^woit- can be
yet another one).

Grzegorz J.



___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com