Re: swallow vs. nightingale

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

From: tgpedersen

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 7:03 PM

Subject: [tied] Re: swallow vs. nightingale

Torsten :
Those forms that came as loans would bypass that process.
=========

Arnaud

What about examples to substantiate this assertion ?

 

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

Arnaud (old)
> Cf. the word "water, rain" *NG-u-t?-
> Chinese *NG-u-t?-a "rain" (BeiJing yu3)
> PIE H2w_t?-
> But Semitic has *m_t?- "rain"
> suggesting that this #m- could be from *NGw
> (with loss of velar feature > m and NG-u- reinterpreted as NGw-)

Torsten (old) :
Pokorny:
mad-, naß, triefen; auch von Fett triefen, vollsaftig, fett, gemästet;
mad-do-, Mästung'.
=======================

Arnaud (New)

I suppose it is Pokorny 699 m_H2-

LAtin mân-âre, mâdêo : "flow ; be wet" (a is long)

It doesn't have the same structure : m_H2 versus m_t? (or ngw_t?).

 

I first didn't know what nass was doing here. (But I understood later on)

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

Torsten :

Møller:
"2 *m- 'Wasser'
(< voridg.-semit. -hamit. A-m-, vgl. berberisch Plur. aman 'Wasser'),
========

ARnaud (new) :

The exact underlying form is *m_? (glottal stop).

Berber is ama:n with long â.

The root for proto-berber is also *m_?

#a- is not part of the root but the article. -n is plural.

============
+ Laryngal idg. reduz. ma:-,
nordwesteurop. mit r-Suffix in lat. mare  ETc

 

Arnaud : obvious cognates between PIE and PAA.

==================
= semit. m- in
hebr. màyim
aram. màyin Pl. Wasser'
syr. mayå,
assyr. *mu:, Plur. me: 'Wasser',
arab. + y-, w- oder A- dehnstufig ma:`un 'Wasser'
(vgl. Nöldeke Neue Beitr. 166 ff.);
======

Arnaud (new) :

Arabic has mâ? with glottal stop.

(Arabic -â# is possible without glottal stop

therefore this glottal stop is relevant).

Egyptian m_?_r = Coptic mêre "abyss" < *mu?-ra-

Semitic does not distinguish ?y y? y and ?w w? w.

(Tchadic does)

So the only form that is relevant is Arabic mâ?

 

==========
Torsten :
which is why the /n,W/ in a reconstructed *(a)n,W- "water" is nice: it
may produce m- and n- and w-.
======

Arnaud (new) :

It looks smart.

The major trouble is it fails to provide *m_?-

which obviously is the ground form for Berber, Egyptian, PIE, Arabic.

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

Pulleyblank reconstructs /n,W/ for Old Chinese, which is where I got
the idea.

Arnaud : I didn't read Pullyblank

but Cantonese ngo = "e-go" was enough for me

to reach the same conclusion.

========================
I usually don't prove things from 'probably'.
Torsten

 

Arnaud

I don't want to sound ironic

but some of the fetish ideas (like Vasconic or Euro-Semitic substrate)

are not only unproved but do not look "probable" at all.

But I will always welcome your advice, analysis and data.

 

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