From: Torsten
Message: 65471
Date: 2009-11-26
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@> wrote:And I think the origin is NWB. No compelling reason, but it wins on Occam: fewest suppositions.
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > As for LL <toacula>, remodelling after <novacula> and similar
> > > words explains the /k/.
> >
> > Hm.
>
> 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.
> > > > > For me to be convinced that such a formation, withForget *dem(x)-. Latin dom-us tells us it's loaned as *dom- "domain, realm", and the *dem- etc form arises from fitting the loan into the IE ablaut system.
> > > > > genitival /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,
>
> ??? How can *dem(h2)- equal *teuh1- ???
> > > its formation must be quite archaic.I thought Tacitus said the natives considered amber worthless?
> >
> > 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"
>
> 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 aDead jellyfish are partly glassy and transparent, partly colored by the remains of their inner organs. Wet amber, apart from the hardness, doesn't look that different. BTW note the cognates glob etc:
> 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.
> > > > I have a suspicion that IE once had an endingless nominative,Note
> > > > 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'.
> > >I don't think it was.
> > > 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?
>
> 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.