From: dgkilday57
Message: 68997
Date: 2012-03-16
>I see no reason to dismiss the usual derivation of <caerul(e)us> from <caelum> 'sky' (also <caelus>, <cael> Enn.) by liquid dissimilation. Both <caesius> and <caelum> might be Etruscan loanwords, but from different roots. None of the IE derivations cited by de Vaan is compelling. Adolfo Zavaroni noted that Lat. <Caesius> corresponds to Etr. <Ceisna> in a bilingual epitaph. Of course, gentilicia were borrowed both ways. If the Etruscan was original, presumably there was a noun *cais (later *ceis) after which the color was named. There was an old Etr. praenomen <Caile> borne by one of the Vipina/Vibenna brothers, which looks like a native formation parallel to <Avile> (later <Avle>, <Aule>, borne by the other V. brother). But there is no semantic support for <Caile> as 'Elevated' or whatever, so Etr. derivation of <caelum> is purely speculative; it cannot be properly "etymologized".
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > See message #68217, which corrects my earlier posts. I regard the
> /z/r/-less forms 'meed', 'woad', 'kien' as borrowed from NWB *me:do:-,
> *waida-, *kaina- in which the */z/ between a vowel and a voiced
> consonant was vocalized. OE <weard>, <werd> reflect inherited Gmc.
> *wazDa- 'woad', and Go. <ouisdil> (etc.) reflects Gmc. *wizDila- with
> /e/-grade, from PIE *wezdH-. In my opinion the Greek and Latin words
> are unrelated to this.
> >
> I strongly disagree. Firstly, 'woad' is semantically linked to 'glass',
> because in ancient times glass had a blueish colour. This is why
> Germanic *glása-/*glazá- 'glass' is cognate to Celtic *glasto-
> 'green, blue', reflected in the Gaulish word glossed in Latin as glastum
> 'woad' (Pliny). They're derivates from PIE *g´helh3-/*ghelh3-
> 'yellow, green'.
>
> Secondly, the voiced fricative in Germanic must be a consequence of
> Verner's Law, leading to a protoform (I won't call this a "PIE" root)
> *wai-t-, while the other forms would lead to
> *wai-s-t-/*wi-s-t-/*wi-t-r-. I regard these formations as being parallel
> to the Baltic outputs of "PIE" *k´wei-t-
> <http://newstar.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ie\
> /piet&text_number=++1568&root=config> 'white', e.g. Lithuanian svitra-s
> 'sand; glass; sandpaper'.
>
> IMHO this as a Vasco-Caucasian loanword from NEC *?VqqWo-ji- 'white,
> light, blueish', a derivate of *=eqqwA
> <http://newstar.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ca\
> uc/caucet&text_number=+117&root=config> 'yellow'. So I guess the 'woad'
> words ultimately derive from some Neolithic language where the initial
> labiovelar cluster was reduced to /w/. As many other plants, woad
> (Isatis tinctoria <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isatis_tinctoria> ) was
> imported to Europe in the Neolithic.
>
> This Vasco-Caucasian etymology is also the source of "PIE" *gWhai-
> <http://newstar.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ie\
> /piet&text_number=+400&root=config> 'light, bright', with Baltic
> outputs such as Lithuanian gai~sa-s 'glow, redness in the sky', Latvian
> gàiss 'air, wheather', gàis^s 'bright, clear', gaisma 'light'.
> IMHO Latin caesius 'light blue' and caerul(e)us 'blueish' are Etruscan
> loanwords from this root.