From: tgpedersen
Message: 60480
Date: 2008-09-29
>Don't be too hard on yourself. The rest of us aren't less fallible
> --- 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).