From: t0lgsoo1
Message: 66553
Date: 2010-09-06
>It isn't. I don't know where you get that from.I only underlined that if that thraing had had that initial cluster,
>Early Middle Chinese thraïÅj-li according to Pulleyblank
>http://tech.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/63872
>is a loan from Xiongnu, ie Yeniseian to Chinese, not the other way >around.
>>(Why didn't theI only expressed here my expectation that a Turkic/Mongolian
>>borrowers"solve" _thra-_ *ataran, *atran, *eteren, *etirin, *itrin,
>>*itırın, *ütürün, *ötörön or *taran, teren, tirin, türün or so? Such
>>creations would've sounded more "turkic", "mongolian" and "uralic".
>
>Erh, what?
>That sounds like an interesting suggestion, given that Etruscan alsoThis is not my own suggestion, I read about dingir in the tängri
>It seems you can't rid of the idea that anything complicated must be >loaned from a Hochkultur. Give it up.I won't. Lexical and language creation/mutations aren't haphazard,
>As it stands, the word for the highest god seems to have been loaned >from Siberian squirrel hunters. Live with it.Of course I live with it, as I'd live with a possible official statement
>Erh, and the PIE credentials for those are ...?"Credentials", aha, urplötzlich, all of a sudden! :)