From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 42951
Date: 2006-01-15
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Wordingham" <richard@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2006 6:11 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: The personal pronouns of PIE (and other families) are
loans
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> >***
> >Patrick:
> >
> >Is there any indisputable example that could be cited?
> >
> >***
>
> I just cited it: they (from ON þeir, replacing OE híe, héo).
Though possibly eased by cognate _þa:_ 'those' in Old English.
***
Patrick:
Maybe we should be discussing what "indisputable" means to you and to me?
I would certainly want to dispute your characterization of this example.
It seems to me that the explanation is much easier if we consider _Þa:_ to
have been influenced/contaminated by _Þeir_.
Is loss of ON final -r regular for _actual_ loans into OE?
***
In languages with large sets of personal pronouns, foreign loans are
quite easy. For example, Thai has a second person familiar masculine
/lM:_H/ (M = high back unrounded vowel, _H = high tone) from Chinese.
***
Patrick:
A scan of Mathews' revealed no obvious source to me in Chinese for such a
'loan'.
What is the actual form of the Chinese word believed to be the source of
/lM:_H/?
Was there some reason you neglected to mention it?
***
English 'I' and 'you' are also reported to be used, but they haven't
made their way into the (Thai) Royal Institute Dictionary. The usual
polite Thai second person pronoun, /khun_M/ (_M = mid tone), derives
from Sankrit or Pali _guNa_ 'thread; quality' (as in the Sanskrit
vowel grade). Likewise there's the formal /ta nu_H/ 'I; self' from
Sanskrit/Pali _tanus-_/_tanu-_/_tanu:- 'body, self'.
Richard.
***
Patrick:
/khun_M/ from_guNa_? What an odd semantic development!
/ta nu_H/ may be arguable.
Also, I am under the impression that Thai has no formal category
corresponding to PIE personal pronouns. Is that incorrect?
***
Yahoo! Groups Links