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

As far as I am concerned :

1. English bird < OE Brid

=> probably a Tibetan loanword from *brad

VI century's Tibetan bya < *brad

2. English pig

=> probably a Tibetan loanword from *phag

VI century's Tibetan phag < *pag

3. English dog

=> probably a proto-world super-cognate

from *d_?-k (Germanic) or (ARabic) *d_?-b "dog, wolf, jackal"

=============

Clearwater.

No issue,

matter settled once and for good.

No substrate :

2 loanwords (adstrate)

1 cognate

=============

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

From: tgpedersen

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 12:20 PM

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

> > to make sure Tokharian could borrow the word *laks "salmon",
> > and misinterpret this loanword as meaning "fish".
>
> What's so strange about is? Slavic has the otherwise unknown
> innovation *ryba (possibly a colour term, originally) as the
> generic word for 'fish' and almost no trace of *d(H)g^Huh1- . Even
> very basic vocabulary can be replaced with loans and newly coined
> words, like English <animal> or <beast> (both borrowed) for PIE
> *g^Hwer- and Germanic *Deuza- or <bird> (of God knows what origin)
> for PIE *hawi- and Germanic *fuGla-.

Let's assume that bird, pig, dog etc are substrate words in English
(but he would say that, wouldn't he). Do they have any particular
regional origin?

Torsten