Re: Origin of *marko- Margus murg ma'rgas amurg

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> On 2008-04-16 00:22, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > 3. Matasovic:
> > "Notes: This word is probably a "Wanderwort" of eastern origin,
> > that established itself in Celtic and Germanic alongside the
> > inherited PIE word for 'horse', *h1ek'wos (OIr. ech). "
> >
> > 4. I fully agree with what Matasovic writes above.
>
> I don't think Ranko would subscribe to your Balkano-Baltic

scenario.

> He's simply referring to the familiar "Altaic origins" theory.

1. I prefer Matasovic than Marko...
2. What are that related names in Altaic....?

> > In addition I will say that the Balkano-Baltic zone is the source

of

> > this horse-word *marg-/*murg- :
> >
> > I. The word entered in Celtic with -k- (< *g -> this indicates a
> > k-language as the Celtic Source (probable a Germanic Eastern-
> > Dialect : this is 'my' Germanic *marko-)
>
> What is a "k-language"?
>
> >
> > II. and from Celtic the word entered next in West-Nothern-
> > Germanic with -k-
>
> How many times doest it have to be repeated to you that the word

has no

> /k/ in Germanic? You have the cheek to quote Pokorny (who shows all

the

> relevant forms) and then repeat the same misrepresentation of facts.
> It
> had *k _before_ Grimm's Law. The PGmc. form was already *marxo-

(fem.

> *marxjo:n > Eng. mare), whose *x can't derive from *g (Grimm's Law

can't

> affect the same consonant more than once).

1. First I didn't say that *x can be derived from g.
First also, I can show you an intervocalic g versus an
intervocalic h ( having the same origin) : so the situation is more
complex in Germanic that that one sthat you present here

2. Secondly, I didn't put in question k > x : (this should be obvious
because I quoted Pokorny and Matasovic *marko) => is you that repeat
again something obvious for nothing

3. Third : I have talked about loans.

4. Fourth, Based on what you assert that k>x and g>k etc...
happened 'in the same time'? I can tell you: based on nothing...

5. Fifth,
a loaned k- after k>x finished was loaned as what ?
or a loaned g- after g>k finished was loaned as what ?
These are simple questions Piotr....

> For the same reason the Marcomanni were certainly the 'Border Folk'
> (Gmc. *marka- 'mark, boundary stone', *marko: 'boundary, border),

just

> like the Anglian Mercians.

First, I DON'T SEE that 'reason' ---> see 4. and 5. first

So I disagree here....'Border Folks'? Border Folks of Who?
The Germanic Tribes were very dispersed...(see Tacitus) also I
don't think that they have a Global Germanic 'Conscience' at that
time to refer to the Germanic Borders of All the Germans...

And 'Certainly'? They translated their names for you?
'Horse-men' don't sound irrelevant...

> > 5. My opinion:
> > The similarity marg-/murg-/mark- 'horse' is too important to be
> > a simple coincidence
>
> Obviously. The equation _has_ to be true because it's _so_

important ;)

> Piotr

Not because is "so important" (this false emphatism serve to nothing
Piotr)

but because WE HAVE <<marg/k->> (the forms in -ur being later
evolutions)
that means 'HORSE' in three languages :
-> Celtic,
-> Germanic,
-> Romanian-Substratum (/Proto-Albanians)
-> and in Baltic <marg-> refers to animal-names for 'cow,
dog, ox'

Despite some 'not clear' phonetical evolutions :
the fact above is for me more than a pure coicidence:
You can ignore this if you like but I prefer not to ignore it.

Marius