Re: Implications of Bangani

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, johnvertical@ wrote:
>
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <wrote:
> > >
> > > The existence of Khowar òhts 'bear' makes it likely that
> > > Finnish otso/ohto was borrowed from an Indo-Iranian l[anguage]
> > > like Kh[owar], possibly even proto-Kh[owar].
> >
> > No, _otso_ is a recent hypercorrection based on _ohto_ (cf. Tampere
> > dialectal _ketsu_ pro _kettu_ "fox"), which derives from older
> > *okti .
>
> The two of you have been discussing for weeks a Khowar word, transcribed as "òhts" by "stlatos", which isn't possibly even the correct form.

When discussing little-known languages I expect to encounter people ignorant of the words and formations I cite, but I don't expect them to attempt to correct me with no good evidence.

I am as capable of mistakes, lack of memory, or typographical errors as anyone, but I have been "corrected" wrongly and for no reason often enough that I can't take it lightly. Unless you are an expert in whatever field under discussion, and maybe not even then, I would prefer to receive a question rather than a complete denial.

There are opt. and dialect-variations for Khowar, including tones (the dia. Strand described with the most conservative, both because the others commonly discussed can be derived from it and because of comparison with other Indo-Iranian l. retaining tonal distinctions, see especially:

http://users.sedona.net/~strand/Phonology/IIFproc.html

).

>

Morgenstierne, later cited by Turner, has "orc" (with an underdot over the /c/, most likely representing a -ts sound).


As I've said, the -h- < -X<R<r-; R > X / q / etc. was opt., and was very old, so the existence of "orc." = Kh òrt.s. changes nothing about my theory (I think I know what you mean by "underdot over the /c/", but I've used few symbols to represent Kh affricates as possible, because there are so many and any single symbol might be confusing).

>

Morgenstierne postulates a "Kafir" (i.e. Nuristani) origin for this Khowar (Dardic Indo-Aryan) word:

>
> http://tinyurl.com/39w7wj8
> http://tinyurl.com/39xvqnz
> http://tinyurl.com/392fyzu
>

Strand was a student of Morgenstierne's and often referred to his work, so I am aware of that theory. Nuristani has variants with both -ts- and -t.s.-, but this doesn't suggest borrowing by Khowar, as ks. > t.s. was opt., ks. > ts. > ts later, in both, and r, > ir in Nuristani, which would not > or in any env. The only reason anyone would have for thinking that would be a classification of Khowar as Indic, as both did with no good ev.