From: stlatos
Message: 59459
Date: 2008-07-04
> No, the two whole words can't possibly be related etymologically.I also found this old message:
> The only connection possible is between the elements 'trae' and
> 'tar' alone, if indeed 'tar' meant 'three'.
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alexander Stolbov
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 10:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Scythian Cognates -- more speculation
>
>
> If so may I return to a unanswered question I asked before:
>
> According to Herodotus Paralatai is a tribe descending from the
youngest of 3 sons of Targitaus - Kolaxais, the king who possessed
xwarena (if we accept the mentioned etymology).
> According to Avesta Aryan is a tribe descending from the youngest of
3 sons of Thraetaona - Arya, the king who possessed xwarena.
>
> Could Targitaus be linguistically compared to Thraetaona?
> A brilliant idea, Sasha! Supposing that Targitaus is a mangled Greek
version of, say, *þrika-tavah- 'having threefold strength' (or rather
its late variant *þriga-tavah- with the voicing of intervocalic *k),
Av. þraetaona- (*þrai-tauna-) 'thrice potent' would be for all intents
and purposes the same name despite the trivial suffixal differences
(the same roots recur in both parts of the compound). Are we on the
trail of the oldest foundation myth of the Iranians? :)
>
> Piotr
Feel free to consider this as well, if only to argue against what it
has in common with my theory.