Re: Res: [tied] Swiftness of Indra

Thanks for the link, Torsten.

As I thought, Lubotsky has no language to suggest from which Indra might
have been borrowed.

His strongest argument is that PIE *yAn-dró should have become *y/iN-drá and
**yadrá or **idrá. I find this laughable.


Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: Res: [tied] Swiftness of Indra


--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- "Joao S. Lopes" <josimo70@...> wrote:
>
> > Intara = Indara (-sh) in Mitanni?
> >
> > If there is *yNdro, there should be also a *yNdno- ?
>
>
> ****GK: Note BTW that Lubotsky and Witzel consider
> "Indra" to be an IIr borrowing from the BMAC language,
> with no PIE roots. Cf. e.g. Lubotsky's "THe
> Indo-Iranian substratum" in the 2001 Carpelan-Parpola
> et al. volume 'Early contacts between Uralic and
> Indo-European'****
>

http://www.ieed.nl/lubotsky/pdf/Indo-Iranian%20substratum.pdf

Which means some of the evidence for IIr. presence in Mitanni is
evidence for BMAC presence.


Torsten