From: Torsten
Message: 67267
Date: 2011-03-20
>I'm not, but they do.
> >Sounds like what the Russians do.
> >Influence of the former Cyrillic spelling?
>
> Not at all. Only because they aren't accustomed to ö and ü.
> (Whether Russians write /ju/ instead of ü and /jo/ instead
> of ö, this is known only by those who are in command of
> Russian.)
>Interesting. I think there was another case of s- in Grimm.
> >Interesting. Is <çoban> analyzable in Turkic as root + suffix?
>
> I don't know. And I don't know whether this is a Turkic word
> or of another origin (Iranian??). I only know it is pan-Turkic.
> (Do post this question on sci.lang; Turkologues there might
> know the answer.)
>
> >The short version of what Grimm says, yes. Is that <saphan>
> >for real or a typo (I was looking for Å¡/s alternation)?
>
> No, not a typo.
>Related. Borrowed into English from Urdu, which borrowed it from Turkic, it seems.
> >BTW, here's Turkic for "slave":
> >http://tinyurl.com/62b39dx
> >Proto-Turkic *Kul, *kȫle and *K(i)aĺ-
>
> In modern Turkish _köle_. Are these Turkic _kul/köl(e)_ akin
> to _coolie_ < Hind. _kuli_?
> >Hm! CfGrimm thinks so.
> >http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/66821
>
> What if all these _khlape/khlop_ have something in common
> with German _Knappe_ + _Knabe_ (and, therefore, with
> Engl. _knave_)?