From: Rick McCallister
Message: 68956
Date: 2012-03-13
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> W dniu 2012-03-12 03:38, Rick McCallister pisze:
>
> > For those of you tired of arguing over the same old thing, here's
> > something new to argue about: badgers.
> > My 2 cents: Isn't there a Gaelic term taigh (vek sim.) for
> > "badger" that also comes from *tek'-?
> > French, of course, has blaireau and Spanish has tejón --which I'm
> > sure one of our friends will shortly link both to Vasco-Tasmanian
> > or whatever.
>
> Badgers were discussed on Cybalist as early as the end of the
> previous millennium:
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/4398
>
> I think Joshua Katz's badger article (1998, "Hittite tas^ku- and the
> Indo-European Word for 'Badger'", _Historische Sprachforschung_ 111,
> 61â€"82, based on his UCLA conference paper) is still the last word on
> the subject. At any rate, Katz's analysis militates against the
> traditionally postulated connection between PGmc. *þaxsu- etc. and
> *tetk^- 'build'. Not the builder of setts, but rather the owner of
> smelly glands.
>
Reminds me of the unexplained d- in *(d)akru-. Is *(t)ašku- neuter?
Another seeming -tk- -> -þk- -> -sk- here:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/64572
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/48943
The Dutch and Low German taks "badger" (not **das or **daks) is a problem cf. also
http://runeberg.org/svetym/1046.html