From: whitedawn
Message: 43445
Date: 2006-02-16
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> Arabic has a root for "lick" something like l-s^-,>
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> OC something like>
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> *lVk- (by memory). But maybe it's not surprising>
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> there's an /l/ in>
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> words for "tonge" and "lick".>
Yes. They seem to be onomatopoeic. Physiology-induced
:)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems that above Torsten's notice deserves a more profound consideration. I also spotted that sound > L< might have been directly or indirectly linked to all those words referring to water-movement (fluid). I presume that erstwhile meaning of “l” (li-) was pour, shed, flow, splash, spray… In combination with “g” or “gn” (perhaps meaning, drive, go /gone) later appeared other verbs likewise “lick”, “lie” (liegen; horizontal position of water – river, lake, sea), “lake”, “lingua”. For instance, Sanskrit “lakayati” has the meaning “to taste” (le-lihyase – you are licking; Eng. lick, Russ. лизать, Serb. lizati /lignuti>liznuti); “lag” – to meet, come in contact, and adhere; laghaya – to make light, lessen, diminish ( Eng. light, Russ. легко, Serb. lak, lako.
I do not want to be boring and I will try to explain such a “philosophy of language” using two examples:
1. Probably, one could hardly say that English word “sleep” has anything to do with fluid but if we compare this word with Sanskrit “svapati” (Serb. spavati - to sleep) we shall see something unusual. Namely, it seems that English “sleep” (Got. slepan sleep) could be equal to Serbian adj. “slep” (blind). When in sleep, human being is literally sightless, is it not? Serbian verb “slepiti” (za-lepiti, lepak to glue, glue) and “slepeti” (getting blind) are obviously in a close logical relation and both words were a derivation of the verb “slivati” (primary “s-li-ba-ti”) – suffuse, flood. In addition, there are another two verbs in Serbian: “sljubiti” (adjoin like rivers’ mouth; ljubiti – kiss) and “slupati” (slew, shatter, ruin). Even if it looks as we have cleared one problem; a serious-minded reader would have asked why Serbian used verb “spavati” instead of “slepeti”? Let us thumb through the Serbian dictionary. We have found the verb “zalepljivati” or “slepljivati” (gluing a certain parts together) and “uspavljivati” (lull a baby). Uslepljivati
> uspavljivati? Of course, it sounds morbid if we have to come down a baby byblinding (uslepljenje > uspavljenje) but according to this analysis it was the truth. Finnaly, there is the word “izbavljenje” (salvation; “slivati” again!?) similar to another “weird” relation among “smrt” (death), “smiriti” (to calm down) and “mir” (peace); absolutely in concordance with the main postulates in Buddhist religion (nirvana).
2. The second example I wanted to explain was the English „slip“(Serb. kliznuti/ kli-gnu-t, gladiti) but now I see it would be unnecessary, because it is quite clear that water “glides” (Serb. gladi) over the solid surface; i.e. it “slips” (sliva-ti). Serbian adj. “glatko” (sleek, glossy, polished) is the basis for the word “led” (ice, gladak led - sleek ice). Hence Serbian adj. "hladan" (cold, Ger. kalt), "hlad" (shade, "it is much cooler in the shade")...
Latin “lingua” also may be connected to the above “li-gna” (lignuti > liznuti - lick). On the other side, Serbian “jezik” (tongue, language) appeared from the compound word “jezero” (lake, Sanskrit kaasaaraH, geyser); "jeza" (cold), "jezhiti" (creeps; as if a tongue is "gliding" over the neck) – water again!
Best regards,
Dusan Vukotic
Or it could have been Sino-Tibetan -> PIE.>
Anyway, I wonder what those prefixes meant or what> >
their functions were (e.g. in *galakt- and *melg).> >
> >>> I'll get back on that.
Indoeuropean direction is> > The Old Chinese ->
of course, but I doubt it was OC -> PIE due to the> possible,> >
chronology (but I may well be mistaken). We might,> >
however, think of the predecessor of Old Chinese> >
(which I know little about, unfortunately).> >
>> S(ino-)T(ibetan)
Also, I wonder what the most common semantic> >
milk is. Since, as Miguel pointed out, the> source of> >
root is only attested in Greek and Latin, my> *galakt-> >
pre-Tocharian suggestion gets weakened a bit.> >
Greek *galakt-, Latin *lact-, Germanic and Slavic> >>
Germanic has -k-, which it shouldn't).> *melk- (note that>
I'm not sure what semantic shifts could lead to> >
"milk", but let's consider the following> >
more or less connected to the concept of "milk",> expressions,> >
languages that did have linguistic contacts with> from> >
Indoeuropean languages, as well as, perhaps, PIE> >
PKartvelian *loq.- "insipid, sweet"> > itself:> >> > Kartvelian comparanda:> >> > PKartvelian *.qwel- "cheese"> > PKartvelian *lok.- "to lick"> >
Saam (Lapp): lak'ca^ -âvc- (N) "cream; thick sour>> > Uralic comparanda:> >> >
cream" (a loan? from where?)> >
Arabic has a root for "lick" something like l-s^-,>>
*lVk- (by memory). But maybe it's not surprising> OC something like>
> there's an /l/ in> words for "tonge" and "lick".
I'm not claiming anything at this point. The> >
expressions above may well be ordinary> >
> look-alikes.>> It does look a bit suspicious.