Re: Mitanni and Matsya

----- Original Message -----
From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [tied] Re: Mitanni and Matsya


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Patrick Ryan
>
>
> > ===========
> >
> > I have stated I believe Hurri [&ari] is PIE.
> >
> > If we look at real forms attested in Hurri
> > ?uruwana and aruna
> > I would try to make sense out of this
> > with a mobile-stress root
> >
> > Stressed form :
> > ?OruwAna (stress on O and secondary on A)
> > Unstressed :
> > ?°ru-na- (stress on suffix)
> >
> > Maybe Hoffman's suffix might help
> > the one in charge H3_n of *?oru-
> > hence ?oru-H3an-
> > ?oru might be "height" ?
> > Maybe "sky-carer" makes sense.
> >
> > I consider Varuna can't be derived
> > from either Ouranos nor ?uruwana.
> > Phonetics are impossible.
> > But semantics is possible.
> >
> > Arnaud
> >
> > ===============
> What in Heaven's name is "&ari"?
> And are you actually saying that Hurrian is PIE?
>
> ========
> The cuneiform for hurri can be read
> &uri or &ari
> as in &aryan.
> Arnaud
> ============

***

Do you know what a subscript is?

The subscript would tell us how it _can_ be read.

Why would you use <&> to indicate [?]?

As it happens, *ario- did not originally have a glottal stop: it had [H].

Who told you <hurri> can be read [?uri] or [?ari}?

***

> You consider that "Varuna can't be derived from either Ouranos nor
> ?uruwana".
> But it is perfectly possible for all three to reflect PIE *weru-na.
>
> ===========
> Absurd
> Greek should be *eruna
> Hurri should be *waruna
> None exists.
> Arnaud
> =======

***

Quite possible.

*werú-n- -> *urún -> Ouranó-s, and

-> ?uruwan [uruwan]

*wéru-n- -> Varuna

The pre-PIE form being *waruwana.


Patrick

***