From: mkelkar2003
Message: 53633
Date: 2008-02-18
>According to M. Witzel Rig Vedic people who broke off from the earlier
> Wouldn't the Indo-Iranians have been familiar with the
> Caspian and Aral Seas? And possibly remembered the
> Black Sea? And isn't Lake Balkhash (sp?) not too far
> from where they passed?
>____________________________________________________________________________________
> --- george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > --- george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > --- Francesco Brighenti <frabrig@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh
> > > > <gknysh@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is there anything radically impossible about
> > the
> > > > "Indic" analysis
> > > > > of Temarunda?
> > > >
> > > > One substantial objection to his analysis could
> > be
> > > > that arn.a- in
> > > > the RV means 'wave, flood, stream; (fig.) tumult
> > > of
> > > > battle' --
> > > > lit. 'being in motion, flowing, surging' (< ar-
> > > 'to
> > > > put in motion,
> > > > send, move, rise'). I am not sure as to the
> > > > existence of an equally
> > > > old meaning 'sea', at least in the R.gvedic
> > > period.
> > > > For instance,
> > > > ar.na- is not glossed as 'sea' in either
> > > > Monier-Williams' and Apte's
> > > > Skt. dictionaries.
> > > >
> > > > Did the R.gvedic Aryans know any "real" sea or
> > > not?
> > > > Did they have
> > > > any term designating the sea, or was their
> > > original
> > > > habitat so land-
> > > > locked that they hadn't any?
> > > >
> > > > (Remember the past discussions on the R.gvedic
> > > > Sanskrit term samudra-
> > > > = 'water confluence', not 'sea'?)
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Francesco
> > >
> > > GK: (1)What about the Indo-Iranian stage? Is
> > > there
> > > a "sea" word? (2) Is there one in Iranian? (just
> > out
> > > of curiosity)
> >
> > ****GK: Or leaving (1) and (2) aside. I think that
> > it
> > is more than incredible that Indians would not have
> > had experience of the "sea", whether at the R.vedic
> > stage or afterwards. That's a complete non-starter.
> > If
> > "temarunda" (or something similar) means "mater
> > matris" (and why doubt Pliny?) then it's clear there
> > must be something in it that's seaworthy (:=)))
> > Sanskrit (judging by dictionaries) seems to have
> > quite
> > a large vocabulary referring to things that, one way
> > or another, are associated with the sea. It seems to
> > like circumlocutions. So what, then, if this ar.na
> > isn't in Apte or Monier-Williams? It's "wet" enough
> > I
> > believe. At least "tem-" and "da" work. Close
> > enough.
> > It might look like circular reasoning to feel that
> > perhaps the Sindic "arun" was closer to "sea" than
> > classical Sanskrit was, but on balance, Hesychius
> > and
> > "Sindica" are all it really takes to label these
> > populations. And there is plenty more. Feel free to
> > be
> > skeptical.I'm not.****
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> > > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.____________________________________________________________________________________
> > > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> > Looking for last minute shopping deals?____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
> >
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
> >
>
>
>
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
>