From: andythewiros
Message: 65251
Date: 2009-10-15
>Oh yes, right. I couldn't find the posting that mentioned kämme because it seems to have become one of the many e-mails that my computer lost or destroyed (so had to rely on memory, which was faulty in this case); of course as you pointed out I should have just gone to the cybalist group site.
> >
> > Because of what Doug Kilday said about <kümmen>?
>
> John Vertical, you mean? And more like what he said about *kämme "palm".
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/65236
>Oh. I guess I misunderstood.
>
> > You're right that if *dek^mt really meant 'two hands' originally
> > and was used for the derived concept 'ten', then one should find a
> > *k^mt-/k^omt-/k^emt- meaning 'five' somewhere.
>
> But I don't; I'm proposing *de-kom- is from false division of the teen numbers. And if (part of) the *ka/unt- thing is actually composite *ka/um-t- (*kaN-t-?) then I don't need any -t-'s words for five or ten.
>I know I can recheck the postings to determine this, but did you say at one point that the *kom- part means something like "with" or "together" and the *-tús ending is the IE abstract ending?
> > You and Doug are more qualified than I to determine whether
> > <kümmen> fits that bill.
>
> Me? I'm just another goddam amateur.
>
> > If only we could uncover an ancient book somewhere called "The
> > Story of Ten and Five and the Other Numbers".
>
> If we could find books like that I'd probably be all over other Yahoo groups.
>
>
> > > > Obviously it must mean "group" (of something) in in a field
> > > > where decadic numbers were preferred. And that was in the field
> > > > of military venture / hunting.
> > > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/65159
> > > >
> > > > Fine, I understand and respect your proposal,
>
>
> That's very noble of you. ;-)
>
> > > > but I like the idea of 'ten' coming from simple always
> > > > available objects that virtually always have ten appendages,
> > > > the hands.
> > >
> > > And I prefer to have *kom-t- mean "collection" vel sim., since it
> > > seems to means collections of different sizes.
> >OK.
> > In this meaning, perhaps *kom-t- is related to *k(^)om "with"?
> > ("together with" > "together" > "collection").
>
> Been there, done that.
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/65159
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/62568
> Your arrows should be reversed.
>Is this PIE word definitely held to be a derivative of 'foot'? Can it be merely a coincidental similarity? None of the Austronesian words have the meaning 'foot' or 'track' or 'sole' or similar, whereas
>
> > Not that it adds any support to the idea of it being related to
> > 'hand', though I'm sure one could still connect the idea of "with"
> > to the idea of "hand" (see my previous posting).
>
>
> > > > If the origin of 'ten' is to remain moot, I will remain partial
> > > > to the idea of it being related to Gmc 'hand'.
> > >
> > > I won't object to Gmc "hand" being from some loaned *kom-t-ú-.
> >
> > I have experienced problems with my e-mail and have lost several
> > pages of e-mails, including the one in which *kom-t-ú- was
> > discussed (I believe it was discussed mainly by Doug Kilday?).
>
> You can always access all the postings at
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/
> Also, if you post there, you can use the preview feature to rid your posting of characters Yahoo doesn't understand.
>
> > > > And as far as the origin of 'hand', I suspect there is no
> > > > further etymology than the meaning 'hand' --
> > >
> > > > isn't there no further etymology than the meaning 'foot' for
> > > > *pe(:)d-/po(:)d- or
> > >
> > > Wrong
> > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/39804
> > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/59452
> > > FWIW
> >
> > a) the semantics between 'foot' and the various other concepts like
> > 'grassy meadow' are very far removed;
>
> PIE *pedom "plain" (vel sim.)
>I was going to say 'Austronesian' but I thought Malay (and maybe some others which I forget) was considered Asian. Thanks for the correction.
> > b) I don't place much credence in the idea of Australasian
> > languages either having a common origin with IE or contributing
> > loans for basic words like 'foot'.
>
> Austronesian, in this case.
>I'm not quite sure I follow: for example, they might generalize *ferþuz but not generalize its stress *férþuz? Or they might generalize *furðuz but not generalize its stress *furðúz? I probably don't understand what you're saying, but it seems to me that stress is irrelevant in Gmc since it was all levelled away to initial stress at some point.
>
>
> > > > > > Maybe Gmc 'hand' was originally a consonant stem, and then
> > > > > > became an u-stem because of the accusative endings -um and
> > > > > >-uns, like Gothic <fo:tus>?
> > > > >
> > > > > Note the section names
> > > > > 'Die maskulinen u-Stämme mit grammatischem Wechsel'
> > > > > and
> > > > > 'U-stämmige Adjektiva mit grammatischem Wechsel'
> > > > > in
> > > > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/62159
> > > > > That list contains several I know to be loans (eg. plough)
> > > > > and I suspect they all are, which would mean that
> > > > > Proto-Proto-Germanic had no mobile-accent nouns (but did have
> > > > > mobile-accent verbs). One might therefore suspect the -ú- to
> > > > > be not IE, and further an adjective-forming suffix in the
> > > > > donor language, so that *hanðu- (< **kantú-) was originally
> > > > > an adjective to **kant-.
> > > > >
>
> > > > The other u-stem nouns and adjectives, I've seen IE etymologies
> > > > for most of them, I'm pretty sure (at least for *ferþ/ðu/furðu,
> > > > *grunþu/ðu, *xaþu/xaðu, *xunxru/xunGru, *laGu, *þursu/zu,
> > > > *þranxu/Gu). But always remember my opinions are mostly
> > > > comparatively uninformed.
> > >
> > > Aren't they areally restricted? And why don't they ablaut with
> > > the stress, when Gmc verbs do?
> >
> > Well, if I'm not mistaken,
> > *ferþu- etc. is found in Germanic, Celtic, Italic,
>
> North.
>
> > and its base *per- is found in these and in Indo-Iranian and Greek;
>
> It's bigger than that. It's relatives are found in other language families.
>
>
> > *þursu- etc. is found in Germanic, Italic, and Indo-Iranian;
> > *xaþu- etc. is found in Germanic and Indo-Iranian and I believe
> > Celtic; and
> > *laGu- is found in Germanic, Italic, Greek, Celtic, and
> > Balto-Slavic.
>
> Cf Latin lacus. Latin-Germanic correspondence /a/ - /a/ makes that one suspicious.
>
> > Is that really areally restricted?
>
> Well, some are.
>
> > I don't understand why you're asking why they don't ablaut with the
> > stress like Gmc verbs do. Is it too much to believe that all nouns
> > in Gmc could have generalized one or the other of the various
> > accented forms? To me that seems a pretty obvious possibility
> > which easily takes away any question or puzzlement about the lack
> > of ablaut in these nouns.
>
> No, because that would mean assuming that people at some time would have generalized one ablaut variant without at the same time generalizing stress. Why would they do that in nouns alone?
>Also, I forgot to say, there were many more ablauting verbs in PIE (i.e. ablauting between present and perfect, > present and preterite in Gmc) than there were ablauting nouns in PIE, so it's easy to see why verbs would retain ablaut variation while nouns would lose it.
>
> > Verbs retained ablaut because they used it to indicate tense
> > (whereas nouns only needed inflectional endings to indicate case
> > and number, so ablaut was superfluous).
>
> Well, that's possible.
>Keep on truckin'.
> > As you can see, I'm always conservative in my opinions on IE
> > languages, while it seems you're always seeking new innovative and
> > dogma-overturning explanations for the facts. At least this kind
> > of opposition keeps this list going.
>
> That's me alright. My sergeants in the army cried themselves to sleep.
>