From: Rick McCallister
Message: 51529
Date: 2008-01-20
> If we find a word in Arabic, we have two choices: 1)cybalist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> to regard it is deriving from Semitic, or 2) to
> regard it as a loanword. I think most would agree
> that native words greatly outnumber loanwords, so it
> is a fair presumption that the odds favor any Arabic
> word being native, I.e. derived from Semitic.
>
> We have excellent Arabic dictionaries which
> facilitate etymological comparisons.
>
> Unless we have good reason to label an Arabic word a
> loanword, it is likely (but not certain) that the
> word derives from Semitic.
>
> Our Egyptian sources are also well developed so that
> it is often possible to match Egyptian and Arabic
> words.
>
> Almost everyone agrees that the AA work that has
> been done is highly unreliable so that comparisons
> between PIE and PAA are not very feasible. I agree,
> they would be most desirable; and if I could use
> them, I would.
>
> As for Berber, is there a Berber etymological
> dictionary which links Berber to either Arabic or
> PAA? If there is, I do not know of it. Hence, Berber
> is only a grace-note.
>
> With Cushitic, Omotic, and Chadic, I am afraid my
> impression is that the proto-languages that have
> been reconstructed are as questionable as the PAA
> material. I could always be convinced otherwise, I
> suppose.
>
> So, a comparison among PIE, Arabic, and Egyptian
> seems most practical in view of the materials
> available.
>
> Of course, I add Sumerian, which gives us some
> insight into the original vowels.
>
> Patrick
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rick
> McCallister<mailto:gabaroo6958@...>
> To:
>
><fournet.arnaud@...<mailto:fournet.arnaud@...>>
> Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 6:03 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: [tied] Re: PIE-Arabic
> Correspondences (was Brugmann's Law)
>
>
> PIE Arabic is a waste of time --go back to AA and
> you
> can't find the AA root, at least give roots from
> Semitic, Berber, Egyptian, Cushitic, Omotic and
> Chadic. No one will take PIE Arabic seriously
> unless
> you're positing loanwords
>
> --- "fournet.arnaud"
>
> wrote:cybalist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:cybalist%40yahoogroups.com>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Patrick Ryan
> > To:
>
>__________________________________________________________
> > Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 7:44 PM
> > Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: [tied] Re:
> > PIE-Arabic Correspondences (was Brugmann's Law)
> >
> >
> >
> > I will add :
> > sekw "to follow" = Arabic *saq
> >
> > ***
> >
> > There is _no_ *saq meaning 'follow' in standard
> > Arabic.
> > Patrick
> > ***
> >
> > Very often, I wonder why such a level of
> > incompetence is put up with on this forum.
> > You claim proto-world-esque reconstructions
> > but you don't even have a good Arabic dictionary
> :
> >
> > Kazimirski tome 1 page 1167 :
> > sâq : "suivre, aller à la suite ; se suivre les
> > uns les autres"
> >
> > Arnaud
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, andhttp://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ<http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ>
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>