Re: [tied] Re: On the ordering of some PIE rules

--- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

> On 2007-01-29 02:37, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> >> And if they were so intent on out-Iranianising
> the Iranians, why are
> >> actual Germanic loans from Iranian, such as
> *paTa-, so boringly
> >> straightforward instead of ending
> >> up as *faTa- or the like?
> >
> > Since it is also Slavic, it is tempting to ascribe
> it to a late
> > influence, when spirantization (I mustn't say
> Grimm) had run its
> > demographic course.
>
> Any reason to regard Slavic *poNtI as a loan? It can
> very well be a
> regular reflex of *ponth2-i-, while Gmc. *paTaz
> makes no sense in
> Germanic terms and can hardly contain anything else
> than the weak grade
> of Iranian *panta:-/*paT-. The borrowing must have
> been directly from
> Iranian into Germanic.
>
> Piotr

****GK: Is there any term in the Germanic languages
which can be proved to be a loan from Iranian PRIOR to
the "Grimm" sound shift?****





____________________________________________________________________________________
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html