Re: [tied] Renfrew's theory renamed as Vasco-Caucasian

The connection of *laks "salmon" with Tokharian "fish"

is unclear, and it does not work so well

from a phonetic point of view, as you underline.

I believe this is phonetic Fancy.

I suppose Peter Pan flew over this little pond.

----- Original Message -----

From: Piotr Gasiorowski

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 12:15 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] Renfrew's theory renamed as Vasco-Caucasian

On 2007-09-17 23:38, stlatos wrote:

> The intermediate form must have been -kWkW- which could be changed
> by analogy to -kYkY- if obviously related to a word with -kYu-.

I agree. The 'horse' word may be related to Gk. o:kús, but the
relationship is far from obvious.

> This only works with kYw not kw; *LakYu+s has e>a by L.
>
> *LakYko+s 'little pond dweller, fish'
>
> *LakYkos
> *LakYxos
> *LakYs.os

But Gmc. laxsa-, Lith. la~s^is, Slavic *lososI all mean 'salmon', and
Ossetic läsäg and Arm. losdi, 'salmon trout'. TB läks 'fish' is a loan
borrowed from a language which had something like *loksos at a time when
PToch. had no *o (so the word was adopted as *luksu- > *l&ks&). Salmon
and trout are hardly describable as little pond-dwellers. Then, what
about Slavic *loky/*lokUv- 'pond, pool'?

Piotr