--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Arnaud Fournet" <fournet.arnaud@...>
wrote:
>
> > What about the idea
> > which came up between me and Arnaud, that most agricultural terms in
> > IE derive from Semitic sources?
> > AJ
> ========
>
> Sorry,
> but I have never written that,
> and I have clearly stated Semitic z_r_& and PIE *H2_r_H3 were from a
common
> source,
> not that PIE was a borrowing from Semitic.
> And I added what if it were the case, PIE should be *H2_r_H2.
>
> Arnaud
> =============
You're absolutely right, you did clearly say that you believe that
Semitic *z_r_&- and PIE *H2erH3- are from a common source -- I
misunderstood your drift from the beginning and neglected to correct
my misunderstanding when you pointed this out. And I really don't
know where I got the idea that you said that most agricultural terms
in PIE come from Semitic -- all I remember is saying something like
"what about the evidence of <to plow>, <to sow>, <to mow>, <to reap>,
<scythe>, <sickle>", and some other words, i.e. arguing that these
words were PIE and not of foreign origin -- I don't know how I thought
"Semitic" instead of "foreign".
I think I will have to take a break from posting on Cybalist. Almost
everything I say is in error. Maybe my mind needs a break or a
distraction. Hopefully I can come back at some point with some
correct statements. Right now, it seems my opinions must be excluded,
and I hope this doesn't all boil down to you know what! (kidding,
kidding).
AJ