For PIE, the root *pAl-, where *A is the Ablaut vowel (*e/*o/*ø), does
mean 'fill/full'.
=============
A.F
This time, I can -nearly- agree on something you write
!
The meaning and syntax of this root is an adjective
: full.
fill (verb) is a derivative of full.
Arnaud
==============
This word, 'fill/full', apparently drives from the idea of the inflation
that occurs when a skin bag has either air or liquid/solid put in it.
===========
A.F
it does mean "full" and nothing else
as documented by many languages.
I disagree with speculations like that.
They lead nowhere
Arnaud
=============
If we allow that Sumerian is related, then Sumerian bul,
bul-4, and bul-5, 'inflate', indicate that the vowel which became PIE *A
in this word was earlier *o/*u. That is why, among other reasons, I
reconstruct *PHO-NHA as a preceding form: *po/ul.
============
A.F
I definitely disagree.
PIE polu has *o because it is basically built like a
past participle.
Other PIE forms are vowelless : *pl-
PAA has -i- in Arabic and Egyptian *a in
Touareg.
I would suggest that Sumerian inflate bul has more to do
with root *puH-
to blow, to breathe. And it is a verb not an
adjective.
===================
If we are willing to expand our sights to PIE *(s)p(h)el-, 'split, split
off, tear off', we can compare Sumerian pe-el (for pi+il(i)-5 = *pil),
'dig, excavate'. If this is valid, it tells us that the form
preceding *(s)p(h)el- was *PHFE-NHA: *pe/il-.
With this latter, we can compare Arabic falaHa, 'cultivate, till'.
With the former, Arabic ?aflaHa, 'prosperous' .
========
A.F
I have previously refuted this assertion.
One basic rule of etymology is that the best
explanations are synchronic,
The meaning "prosperous, successful" is a metaphoric use
of the verb "to cut"
As in "break-thru" from "break". Here Arabic uses "cut"
instead of "break" to express "success". To cultivate is cut the
earth.
None of these words has anything to do with *p_l
"full".
I repeat :
A.F : (new on Dec 02)
According to Kazimirsky :
?a:fi:l : to make abundant or numerous (rendre abondant
ou nombreux)
Hafl : abundant, numerous ; plenty of (abondant,
nombreux ; grand nombre)
Ha:fil : full (plein)
Hafi:l : numerous, abundant (nombreux,
abondant).
I maintain that the root in these words is *p_l as in
PIE pl-eH1 or pol-u.
The word you were suggesting :
fala:H "salvation, delivery ; happiness"
is a particular use of the root : to cut
f_l_H
for example to cut the ground : hence Fellah :
peasant = earth-cutter.
the meaning f_l_H : to become happy, to
succeed
is to be compared with Break-through as a semantic
evolution of break.
In this case, it is "to cut-through" = to
succeed
Fa:laH is both : cutting, splitting, ploughing and
successfull, happy.
F_l_H has nothing to do with the meaning "full,
abundant, numerous".
It never has this meaning and originates in a different
root.
Arnaud.
============
There are a number of prefixes like ?a- that can be added to Arabic verbs
to produce various nuances of the basic verbal idea but note: these are
added to triliterals. ?a to f-l-H.
==================
A.F
This is the Form IV of Arab grammarians.
Very often it does not change the meaning, but
transitivity.
It can be further expanded as form XII
Your last statement : **added to tri-literals** is false
:
zaqq : to jump = ?azaq (z_q : 2)
aqlawla : to fly in the air very high : Form XII (q_l :
2)
Apart from a good dictionary of Arabic, I warmly
recommend you also get a good grammar.
==============
Your idea that prefixes can be added to biliterals, which hardly exist in
Arabic, such as H-, r-, ?a to f-l. which preserves its meaning of 'fill/full'
is totally contrary to established theory.
=======
A.F
This is not "my idea"
although I adhere to this approach
I give you again the relevant source.
The three books on the left describe the
theory.
=======================
And, in the case of these 'derivatives' , you have so far been unable
to substantiate the meanings that Kazimirski assigned them.
===========
A.F
I repeat :
I gave you my sources for Arabic data :
A. de Biberstein Kazimirski, Dictionaire
Arabe-Français,
2004, Al-bouraq, tomes 1 et 2,
Now :
If you are not afraid :
you can get Kazimirski
direct from the original source at :
Choose the word you want in the right
column.
I am not accountable if you do not work with the right
tools.
Kazimirski did not assign "meanings" : he translated
them from Arabic.
==================
I keep asking where you obtained Egyptian "Hipulil". It is a figment of
someone's imagination.
==========
A.F
First time you asked.
So answer is : From M. Georges Roquet : a specialist of
Coptic and Egyptian
who works on the reconstruction of Old
Egyptian.
Serious work.
I think he will probably publish his reconstructions in
two or three years.
=
