Re: Semitic Kartvlian Indo-Europeandeep-level interconnection?-numer

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "piervantrink" <piervantrink@...> wrote:

>
> I am a sympathizer of the out of Anatolia hypthesis (the Vyacheslav Ivanonv -Gamkrelidze version) that seems to be strengthened lately by genetical and archeological evidences (see dienekes pontikos blog) and I think that the hassuna-halaf culture wich is the home of the oldest (5500 BC) Swastika was an Indo-European culture
>

Unfortunately, archaeology can tell us which language did people speak.

> Contrary to what most people thinks, the IE languages expanded by natural farmer colonization
>

Nay, linguistic evidence is against this. The lack of a common IE lexicon relative to agriculture is against this.

> two: Obviously two and twin are connected,
>

Not exactly. The meanings 'two' and 'twin' (please notice the quotation marks) aren't the same thing than the English words two and twin.

> this connection is present also in Semitic tn/sn=two and "twm"=twin(Arabic "tawam", Aramaic "toma" from wich the name "thomas") here too there is no plausible etymology and according to the linguist Blazek "the parallelism between semitic/afro-asiatic and indo-european is more than suggestive" since there is a striking similarity between Semitic dual ending "ay" and Indo-European dual ending "ow/oy"
>

PIE '2' is most likely a NWC loanword *t-q^|:WA '2'.

> five: It's obvious that the etymology is connected with "holding,seize by hand..."; note for example the similarity of "paw" and "five" and thus could be explained by a hypothethical non attested indo-european root "pank"?? meaning to hold analogously with Semitic where the word for five "khamsa" came from the root "kamas"="to seize, hold, grasp, catch"
>

PIE '5' seems to be a loanword from NEC *fimk'wV 'fist'. But Semitic *xam(i)s^- '5' is IMHO connected to a fossilized root *k^ºmt- 'hand' found in the IE numerals '10', '100' and '1000' as well in Germanic *xandu- 'hand'.

> seven: It's accpeted that indo-european for seven "septm" is "borrowed" from Semitic because it could not be explained by indo-european etymology nor it has an indo-european phonology while in Semitic "sabatum" it is explained by "sab"=index finger+"at"=feminine suffixe with incorporated "connective consonant t"+"u"=nominative marker suffix+"m"=definitiness marker suffix, this numerla was also borrowed to Hurric (shete) Finno-Ugric (sata) Turkic (seti) and Eruscan (semph)
>

That's right. Notrice also Germanic *sibun '7' corresponds to the Semitic masculine form.

> eight: The most accepted theory is that it derives from proto indo-european h2ok=sharp but semantically it does not look convincing at all
>

PIE *Hok^te-h3(u) '8' is most likely a dual of '4': PTyrrhenian *hemq'y-dV (NEC *hemq'y) > Etruscan huth '4'

I'd also recommend you use the built-in search engine because many of these topics have already been discussed here.