Re: Nordwestblock, Germani, and Grimm's law

From: dgkilday57
Message: 65715
Date: 2010-01-21

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> > > > The gen. of Etr. <lautn> is <lautnes>. The late-archaic Tile
> > > > of Capua has <lautun> not <lautn> because its orthography does
> > > > not allow syllabic resonants. The dyslexic form <lavutn> (for
> > > > *lavtun) occurs in a funerary inscription. Anyhow, try not to
> > > > confuse variants of the zero-case with the genitive.
> > >
> > > I'll pass that admonishment on to Glen Gordon
> > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/5297
> > > or perhaps the Bonfantes.
> >
> > Don't bother. You can't rehabilitate shoehorn freaks like GG.
>
> Too bad he's not around anymore. You and he would have very interesting and entertaining discussions over that.

Yes, and the catfights over methodology would probably get both of us banished from the group. I heard Mr. Gordon has some kind of linguistic blog now, but I don't have time to slog through the bog of a blog.

> > The Bonfantes are usually reliable and I wonder whether they have
> > been cited accurately here.
>
> Only one way to find out.

Yes, and if I had a job, I could afford to take regular trips to the state university to look at recent publications. I had an interview today, but the outfit wasn't hiring. They were just filling lists for possible future hiring. Too bad I can't get a job like your old one, traveling around learning about place-names.

> > > > This is one of a handful of Etr. words which I argued on
> > > > sci.lang in 2002 were borrowed from a pre-Italic IE language.
> > > > Originally <lautn> was something like 'body of freemen'; the IE
> > > > root is *h2leudH-. If Gmc. *le:Tigaz corresponds to anything
> > > > in Etr. it is not <lautn> but the unrelated <Lethe>, the name
> > > > sometimes bestowed upon freedmen.
> >
> > Oops! That should be *h1leudH- of course. The Etr. base *sacn- is
> > more difficult, but I think it is also borrowed from pre-Italic IE,
> > with Lat. <sa:nus> (from *sagH-nos) as a cognate. Anyone familiar
> > with the Etr. corpus will reject Gordon's /n/-genitive nonsense.
> >
> > > Assuming of course that these are not wanderwords from *Lun,-, cf
> > > the thread in
> > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/10861
> >
> > Occam would puke.
>
> Occam would love me. So much explained from so few entibus! Whatever extra in the sociology/ethnology department has to be accepted would have to be assumed to explain the distribution of *kaN-t-, and further *saxn- (vel sim).

The latter also occurs in your favorite IE language as an epithet of Reitia, you know.

DGK