From: Torsten
Message: 66542
Date: 2010-09-06
>It shows signs of the IE 'extended' roots *di-ew- and *di-en- (Dienstag, dinsdag etc), which means that it too is best served with a PIE root de-iÅ- (vel sim.). The -r of ON Týr, Dan. tirsdag etc could be explained as a rhotacization of a final *-n#, as some have explained the nom./acc. of the heteroclitics, but that would require the existence of an endingless nominative(?). This all seems far-fetched, but I don't know of any other attempt to explain the -w/-n/-r alternation of that Germanic theonym.
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor#Name
>
> Tyr/Ziu/Tue is even more interesting (related to the *deiuos &
> daeuua family, but phonetically somwhat close to tengri, tangra
> & Sumer. dingir too. :^))
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyr
> >*tieÅ- vs. *dieÅ- is a comparison between Yeniseian(?) and someAs far as I know (I only know Georg's line of argument from some other article, which I can't find now) he proposes that the Turkic Tengri etc is a cultural loan from Yeniseian, which makes discussion of the relative affiliation or super/substrate status of Turkic and Yeniseian irrelevent to this question.
> >substrate to PIE.
>
> According to Stefan Georg, Yeniseyan was a "Eurasian" idiom.
> What does "Eurasian" mean when compared with neighboring
> Turkic, Mongolian, Tungus et al.? Is it to be seen sort of a
> "substrate" language if compared with the Turkic, Mongolian
> and Ugric idioms of the relevant regions?
> As for your hypothesis: do you imply that some deities areInto PIE, and later, independently, into Proto-Germanic.
> "imported" from some "paleo-Siberian" "pantheon" into the
> ancient religions (say, of Iran and India)?
> (BTW, are chorea (khoreia, khoros) & chorus, choir as well as thePrellwitz
> circle dances horo, hora also based on a "Wanderwort"?
> The circle dance of shamans is called in Mongolian yohor.)
>