--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:
>
> At 5:37:22 PM on Friday, April 4, 2008, Anders R. Joergensen
> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud"
> > <fournet.arnaud@> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> *bhel-H2-k "beam"
> >> Gaulish *bala:kon
> >> SKrt bhur-i-jau < -H-g-
> >> Greek phalan-g-s
> >> Latin ful-c-io
> >> Isn't this clear ?
>
> > You also gave a W balog first time around. What is your
> > source for this and for Gaul. *bala:kon?
>
> Pokorny, p. 122, *bhel-5; <balog> 'Zinne' and *<bala:kon>
> '(Mauer-)Vorsprung', with a reference to M.-L. 890.
>
> Brian
>
Thanks Brian.
When I looked at it a few days ago, I wasn't able to locate a W balog
of appropriate meaning in the Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru, which could
indicate that we are dealing with a ghost (though I'm not quite sure,
and I don't have the GPC with me here).
As I recall, Gaul. *bala:ko- was inferred from modern Occitan and
other dialectal forms, where a _balet_ (vel sim.) appeared, thus we
would have suffix substitution (though again, I'm quoting from
memory, not having Meyer-Lübke with me here).
Anyway, *-a:ko- is a very common suffix in Celtic and an analysis as
*bal-a:ko- (should the material hold up) seems likely. This is also
the way Pokorny sees it.
And finally, a (weakly attested) word pointing to PCelt. *-k- does
not really seem relevant to the present discussion?
Anders