--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Edgard Bikelis" <bikelis@...>
wrote:
> Please, what is the problem with fla:men / bráhman?
See E. Benveniste's discussion in _Indo-European Language and
Society_, transl. by Elizabeth Palmer, London, Faber and Faber,
1973, p. 231:
"Of quite a different kind is the ancient connexion between Vedic
bráhman and Lat. fla:men, which once was in considerable favour. In
this concordance we were supposed to have evidence of ancient terms
preserved both in Latin and Indic; an ancient neuter coined by means
of the same suffix -man, Lat. -men is supposed to have become in
both languages the word for a cult officiant. Added to this were
supposedly the remarkable resemblances in the functions of
bra:hman.a and fla:men respectively. But this equation encounters
numerous objections. The comparison of the essential element of the
form, the root brah- in Indic and fla:- in Latin causes grave
difficulties; we should have to posit for Latin *flags-men-, a form
difficult to justify, with the additional disadvantage that it does
not yield any precise sense either in Italic or in Indo-European.
This is why this equation has been abandoned."
Regards,
Francesco