Res: [tied] Re: Afro-Asiatic substrate (re "folk" "polk" "pulkas")

--- On Sun, 7/26/09, george knysh <gknysh@... com> wrote:

From: george knysh <gknysh@... com>
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Afro-Asiatic substrate (re "folk" "polk" "pulkas")
To: cybalist@... s.com
Date: Sunday, July 26, 2009, 6:39 PM

 

--- On Sun, 7/26/09, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@... com> wrote:

Vennemann gave a convincing Semitic etymology for 'folk'
http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ cybalist/ message/48772
http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ cybalist/ message/48897

****GK: There are attested presences of this term in three language groups: Germanic, Slavic, and Baltic (nothing in Iranic?). Now if it came from Semitic to all three, what is the time line of the borrowing?

On the other hand if the Slavic and Baltic terms are borrowings from Germanic, this would imply a time before the Grimm shift. Is that why you are partial to Semitic (:=))?****

And there's Latin populus, provided it's from reduplicated *pul- and that *folkaz is actually *fol-k-az

And, before Douglas can get a word in, there's Etruscan Fuflans