From: dgkilday57
Message: 65467
Date: 2009-11-26
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:Another possible mechanism is Frankish intermediacy. Kluge compares French <Chivert> with OHG <Hiltibert>. One might also cite the first examples of 'Hessen' from the year 699; two texts have <ad Chassus> and one has <ad Cassus>. Kluge regarded Franks as the transmissors of the 'Hemd'-word into Late Latin/Romance, Jerome's <cami:sia>, Fr. <chemise>, etc. Kluge insists on morphological grounds that 'Hemd' is Gmc. in origin, *xami:Tja-, pre-shifted *kami:'tjo-, and I am inclined to agree, but I think the middlemen were Celtic. It is not possible to determine whether the Celts borrowed this word before or after Grimm's shift, so far as I can tell. The 'breeches'-word on both structural and etymological grounds also appears to be native Gmc., and most likely borrowed by Celts AFTER the shift.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > As for LL <toacula>, remodelling after <novacula> and similar words
> > explains the /k/.
>
> Hm.
> > > > For me to be convinced that such a formation, with genitival??? How can *dem(h2)- equal *teuh1- ???
> > > > /s/ between two consonants in the middle of a compound, could
> > > > exist in any IE language at the time and place in question, I
> > > > would need other plausible examples.
> >
> > All right, you gave me *dem-s-pot-, and if 'thousand' is parallel,
>
> or the first element identical,
> > its formation must be quite archaic.My planned posting on 'glass' has been held up for weeks with complications. As it looks now, there may have been a count-noun 'piece of amber (used as currency)' and a collective 'heap of amber pieces, hoard' in addition to a mass-noun. Later confusion of stems could be responsible for much of the difficulty with the word 'glass', which unlike glass itself is neither smooth nor transparent.
>
> Also, for forms with reinterpreted genitive -s (all mass nouns), there's *iNg-s- "ice"
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/64980
> *gl-á-s-, and (I'm surmising) *gr-á-s- "grass, fodder"
> > > I have a suspicion that IE once had an endingless nominative,I was referring to Saarikivi's quote, hanka ~ hangas etc. If this /s/ was an oblique marker, it is hardly likely to have come from a source outside Uralic.
> > > like a good accusative language should, and that the present -s
> > > suffix is the old genitive suffix which being used in bound
> > > constructions and that s-stems came about or formal subjects came
> > > to be seen as a nominative marker, hence the confusing, which NB
> > > is not constrained to IE, for some strange reason
> > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/63871
> > > which same confusion is the reason for the appearance of IE
> > > s-stems.
> > >
> > > And notice, BTW, that Finno-Ugric (etc) also has that mysterious
> > > dental 'extension'.
> >
> > Mostly in place-names, so it is parallel to the dative /n/ in Gmc.
> > names, if not to the FU locative. Hardly equivalent to your theory
> > of PIE /s/.
>
> Are we talking about lammas, kuningas etc?
> > Thanks for quoting the interesting archaeological material, which IWell, it keeps us busy and out of trouble, anyway.
> > have no time to discuss today, unfortunately; also I have no
> > knowledge of loanword stratification in the Caucasian languages.
>
> Me neither, a linguist's work is never done; sigh...