From: Tavi
Message: 66192
Date: 2010-06-07
I'll recommend you broke your writings into more readable chunks/paragraphs, João.
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao S. Lopes" <josimo70@...> wrote:
>
> If *marko- is related to Asian *mor-, we might postulate a Sarmatian, Scythian or any similar "missing link".I don't think they're related.
> WIE *markos sounds like *pork^os, should we presume similar distribuition? *Pork^os was more widespread (porcus, farhaz, orkos, etc.).
Similar sounding, perhaps, but no similar distribution at all. IMHO, IE *pork^o- is a Neolithic LW from some Vasco-Caucasian language. Sergei Starostin studied these LW in an old article (in Russian): http://newstar.rinet.ru/Texts/iecauc.pdf-
> Is there any example of Italic *markos? Could *markos designate the mounted horse (for riding) versus the wagon-horse PIE *ek^wos? Both Celts and Germans inherit and mantain this *ek^wo- word for the horse (*equos, *ehwaz), so *marko- would not enter as a word for "horse", but for some particular kind of horse.
Possible, yes.
> Let's consider the parallel development of Latin equus in Romance, when the usual and "regular" word was replaced by an alien caballus, who would mean some particular kind of horse, later generalized (cf. Slavic kobyla, Persian kaval, Turkish jaby, Finnish hebo).
Latin caballus is a loanword from Gaulish *ca-ballos. This word comes from some reflex of PNC *bHaK\K\i 'young one, young (of animals)' (a root to which I referred in an earlier post) plus a prefix *ka-.