--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
<akonushevci@...> wrote:
> Beside Greek ibe:ros, Latin ibe:rus and Basque ibar, river name in
> Kosova Ibër, Ibri in Albanian and *Ib-er in PAlb (Ibar in Serbian)
> speaks for initial accentuation, characteristic for Illyrian. It
> could easy be of PIE origin derived from *ei- 'reddish', zero-grade
> *i- + *bhw- 'being', so 'being reddish', suffixed in -er with
> quantitative Ablaut form -e:r.
>
> Konushevci
>
Well, I think every linguist by now knows that Greeks knew of at least
three territories they called Iberia: one in the Caucasus, one on the
East coast of the Adriatic sea and a third in the northwestern coast
of what we now call the Iberian peninsula (all three BTW associated to
the presence of rivers). They probably thought, as we may still think
today, that they were dealing with the same name mysteriously arising
in three wide-apart and apparently unrelated places. They plausibly
solved the puzzle by unifying phonetic forms (so that a possibly
Basque ibar was forced into a Greek Ibe:r to meet the caucasian hiber
and the (Illyrian?) iber). Later Greeks, and Romans, continued this
belief, only adding a suspected (but unlikely original) H- (whence
their hesitation between "Iberia" and "Hiberia" in all three cases, as
they also vacillated between Esp- and Hesp[eria] and Isp- and
Hisp[ania] (=> Spain) from a Phoenician H-less source ispah-). As we
nowadays don't believe in magic-like unexplained facts, all we are
left with is to marvel at the triple coincidence and wait until some
testable theory arises that may give a scientific explanation to each
case. Only then will we be able to tell whether it is really a
coincidence (and/or a Greek-forced identification) or there's
something common in it (a far-fetched and almost incredible
all-encompassing substratum? a Wanderwort? a(super)areal term --but
then why only three instances with none in the middle--?, etc.). Until
something specific arises, with heavy facts --not mere clues or
suspicions-- backing it, all we can say now is, I think, sheer
speculation (plus a sense of wonder).
BTW, May I correct myself? In my last message I said:
>
> > Frankly, I don't believe the name of the river has nothing to do
> > with
>
Damn those double negatives!! (I meant only one, of course.)
I also said:
> >
> > we can admit that, if the explorers/colonisers from the West
> >
I meant East, naturally. I was referring to Greeks and, later, Romans,
who first met --after the Phoenicians-- the impressive valley gorge
(=the ibar (?) of natives) of the Ebre as seen from the sea.
Ton Sales