Re: Nordwestblock, Germani, and Grimm's law

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, johnvertical@... wrote:

>
> > > > > > > Hmmm. It seems you're not counting insufficiently
> > > > > > > estabilish'd sound laws and propagation pathways as
> > > > > > > "assumptions"? And you'll need a ton of both to make
> > > > > > > those complexes work.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Naah, I'll just claim they're wanderwords and then claim
> > > > > > the same privilege for them of exemption from that stuff
> > > > > > that they enjoy.
> > > > >
> > > > > What privilege where? I'm not aware of any that require a
> > > > > handful of idiosyncratic innovations every other step.
> > > >
> > > > These do
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanderwort
> > >
> > > Nope, not seeing anything out of the ordinary there. Would you
> > > care to elaborate?
> >
> > Of course the transmission of those Wanderwörter contains nothing
> > 'out of the ordinary'; we're used to them. Could you be a bit
> > more specific?
>
> Chiefly, no weird consonant alternations. *tSai never becomes
> /dZia/, or *kAhvi never becomes /kubbi/, etc.

None in mine either.

> The burden of proof for defining "privilege of exemption" more
> specifically is on you I believe.

I don't know how you read my sentences. 'the ... privilege ... of exemption from that stuff' is a definition of that privilege.

>
> > > "hand",
> > See the Epimakhov, Koryakova quote in
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/65159
> > With a societal division like that, and with a metaphor of the
> > wings (note the English metaphor) as arms/hands of the main body,
> > you get an easy semantic slide "side" <-> "hand"
>
> Yes, "limb" > "side" is well attested (also "my right hand" etc.)
> However I do not like the opposite direction of development at all.
> Much too specific without motivation. Tons of things are at the
> sides of something.

But in English, it's specifically 'left/right hand side'. No other bodypart is used.

> At least you didn't say it's "group" > "100" > "10" > "5" > "hand".
> ;)

True.

> > > Also, only the first of those is an innovation by any stretch.
> >
> > The second goes with the first as its antonym (if they were once
> > both adjectives): ordered mass vs. unordered mass.
>
> A concept of "group" in general would have existed even before.

Before the necessity of organizing people and land according to the the demand for 100 cavalry? But that's irrelevant.

> I don't see why some existing word couldn't have been appropriated
> for the negativly defined sense.

Note that it is involved in the "long" sense. So it has to do with ordered vs. unordered (single file) march through the landscape.

> After the introduction of *kants, all the older "group" words would
> have by default been "unordered".

But they would not have meant "the totality of the people, regardless of the ordering".

>
> > The third is a mental quest, partly judicial, part magical, a
> > function needed in such a composite society.
> >
>
> Sounds like a fairytale TBH.

Tell that to a judge next time.


Torsten