Re: Thalla-tun -- was Comparative Notes on Hurro-Urartian, Northern

> Numbers came from somewhere and the relationships need to be pursued but at the earliest possible level, which makes the matter even more difficult. As I recall, there are languages where 2 = "many", 5 = "hand", etc.
> Many others have also noted that triliteral roots come from biliteral and tend to form "families".
>

The difficulty is squared by the possibility of borrowing; foreign words are not always as easily recognizable as 7, 10, 100 and 1000 in some Uralic langs. If we compare Egyptian and Semitic sets, some items look like cognates, others might be borrowings. As for borrowings, in which direction? Egyptian may look more authoritative, but we should count with the presence of a Semitic element in the very creation of Egyptian civilization, which would also mean that its language may have been influenced by Semitic from the earliest times. And so on and so forth. The task is not quite impossible. Just a bit iffy, which is, of course, not a reason for giving it up.

Re triliteral and biliteral:
Searching for 2C in 3C is very possible. I admit that my aim was not so ambitious. I wanted to show some possible root extentions, e.g. that certain Arabic 4C verbs in IV. verbal stem may have evolved from XI. triconsonantal verbal stem. I wanted to explore "suffixal derivation" in Arabic with its emphatic variants, the gradation of laryngeals (such as IV. verbal stem > 4C verbs beginning with ayn), certain metaplasmatic changes, assimilative and dissimilative processes etc.