Re: 'dyeus' chronology

Have you tried consulting a sanskrit dictionary and did you not find "sinhrutra" meaning destroyer?

I remember in the past debates you shied away from chronoology of words. Since you seem to claim that Sinhrutra is "New Indo Aryan" would you care to explain what is the chronology of this word?

-Shivraj

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@...> wrote:
>
>
> Shivraj,
>
> You are projecting some dialectal New Indo-Aryan forms (of whose actual existence I am yet doubtful) back into protohistoric times, and this is unacceptable.
>
> I have, just to give an instance, provided the Sanskrit form saMhartR which would, in case, provide the only plausible comparandum for a Minoan word. Corrupted Hindi (etc.) words cannot de any comparanda.
>
> Regards,
> Francesco
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "shivkhokra" <shivkhokra@> wrote:
> >
> > Richard,
> > I am a native Hindi speaker so I know the sound is "n" and not "m". The nasal n is represented in english as an "m" with a "." under the m but it does not mean it is pronounced "m". So the word is pronounced as "sinhrutra" which is the destroyer and "singhar" which means destruction.
> >
> > I have put below the hindi spelling not sure it will pop up correctly in browsers (might want to turn on unicode in your browser):
> > संहार
> >
> > -Shivraj
> >
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I felt impelled to reply in MacDevanagari to get my explanation across.
> > >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "shivkhokra" <shivkhokra@> wrote:
> > > > On Ma-to-ro and Ma-ta-u-ro: Do you understand why some people on one side of the river call it duero and the same river on the other side is called douro?
> > >
> > > The diphthong /au/ and vowel /o/ may be merging in some languages - in others the difference is stable. Do you know of Minoan evidence for a merger in progress?
> > >
> > > > On the sanskrit invention saMhartR: it would be good to get in to a sanskrit class. The word for destroyer is : sun(g)har which can be pronounced sin(g)har (spelling in hindi would be:
> > > > "sa" followed by "nasal dot which sounds like an english n and not m as Dr Brighenti would have us believe" "ha" "r")
> > >
> > > Which those using the Kyoto-Harvard system (at least for
> > > Sanskrit) would transliterate as <saMhara>, for there is no halant and an implicit halant is wrong for Sanskrit.
> > >
> > > 'saMhartR' is an exact transliteration into the Kyoto-Harvard system of ×¢ØÏèÂß.
> > >
> > > > So Gareth Owens is absolutely right that siru (from Sinhrutra) is a word for destroyer in Sanskrit. Keraijo would be the equivalent form in Greek and hence Cretans spoke a satem language.
> > >
> > > Now, what do you mean by 'sinhrutra'?
> > >
> > > Richard.
> > >
> >
>