Re: Finnish KASKA

It's interesting and we definitely have to step back
from IE to appreciate it. My intuition is that
Etruscan is more likely to be related to IE than to a
N Caucasian language but it's just that and you've got
a lot more work to do.

--- etherman23 <etherman23@...> wrote:

> > *deH2 to divide, itu to divide

root of ides?

. . .

> > *H1neun nine, nurpH nine

-r is from where? Some type of suffix meaning what?
. . .

> > *dHeu to pass away, lup to have lived, to die

So Etruscan did the /d/ > /l/ thing? --which I've seen
on a website as attributed to Sabellic

. . .

> > *yeu youth, hus child

Etruscan kept its laryngeals or what?

. . .

>
> My reconstructions for each of the above are:
> *?nu(G, m, n) nine The reconstruction in PIE is
> complicated. It's
> usually reconstructed with a final *n but some have
> argued for a *m. t
> might have been variable. The Greek from looks
> compatible with a final
> *H2. IMO final *H3 merged with final *H2, which
> leaves open the
> possibility of a final *H3. As we see in the root
> for "to give"
> non-initial PIE *H3 corresponds with Etr r. The pH
> in Etr is
> analogical from sempH.

OK, how do we get from /H3/ > /r/ --what other
languages do that?

>

. . .

>
> *yus' child The loss of the ejective spirant is
> regular in PIE as is
> its merger with s in Etr (4 other cognates exist).
> I'll grant that
> this is the only example of *y~h. I've postulated
> this as coming from
> PIT *y, but there is another possibility. It may
> come from PIT *xW (>
> h in Etr) with an irregular PIE development of *xW >
> *xJ by
> dissimilation > *y.

OK this answers my question above, sort of
. . .

>
> Have you been enslaved by Greenberg and Ruhlen's
> look-alike methodology?
>
> > ***
> >
> > But, let us say that PIE *du (zero-grade) =
> Etruscan <t(h)u>
> formally, which
> > I do not belive.
> >
> > What evidence do you have that *du ever meant
> 'one' or anything like it?
>
> Because PIE *dwo: is a dual formation. A dual of
> what? If we undualify
> two we get one. Two ones are two. 1+1=2, does it
> not?

You're gonna hafta do better than that. Think along
the lines of *sem- "one" but also "whole" whence
English same, sum, etc. The dual of "whole' would be
"2". But make it more sophisticated than my
suggestion. And yes, you will hafta find a word like
*dwo- meaning "one, whole, same, sum, total, etc."

>
>
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping