From: Bhrihskwobhloukstroy
Message: 71127
Date: 2013-03-27
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy*Bhr.: only for those - like You - who don't believe in
> <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...> wrote:
>>
>> *Bhr.: Let's take German Butze at its face value: /tts/ (< Germanic
>> */tt/) in order to explain Ibero-Romance /d/ < either /dd/ or lenited
>> /t/; now, everyone realizes that the distance between Ibero-Romance
>> /d/ and German /tts/ isn't greater than the one between Ibero-Romance
>> /d/ and *bHe:mtts^y: if we add that Castilian-Portuguese /o/ (neither
>> from /au/ nor from short /o/) is closer to German /u/ than to */e:/,
>> we necessarily conclude that, however "convoluted" an etymology from
>> PIE *bhud'nis can be, it's less so than one from *bHe:mtts^y
>>
>> > I'm afraid yours isn't a fair comparison, because you apparently
> forgot
>> > the IE and the Altaic words with /o, u/ I quoted before.
>> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/71115
>>
>> *Bhr.: If You mean "Turkic *bugu(ra) 'male deer; camel stallion',
>> Mongolian *bojir 'male elk', Tungusic *pegu(le)-/*pogu(le)- 'young of
>> elk, elk' (...) besides Indo-Iranian and Armenian *bug�-,
>> Germanic and Celtic *bukko-, (...) Italic becco 'male goat' and Basque
> behi 'cow'",
>> then You are making Your etymology still more "phonetically
>> convoluted", provided You can an explanation, if all, for the velars
>> as apposed to Ibero-Romance /d/
>>
>> > I suppose you read my explanation about NEC lateral affricates and
> their
>> > differengt mappings, didn't you?
>>
>> *Bhr.: of course I did - what I can't understand is why do You think
>> it is less "convoluted" than a correspondence *dn : dd
>>
> But this is Kluge's Law, which doesn't apply to Celtic. As you suggested
> a Celtic origin (despite having no evidence in historical Celtic
> languages) this invalidates your argument.
>*Bhr.:
>> > Anyway, you demonstrated your proposed IE etymology and this word
>> > arehomonymous in German.
>>
>> *Bhr.: therefore semantically no more misfit
>>
>> > Not really, because your etymology works for the wrong word, i.e.
>> > Bavarian butz, not German Butz 'little lamb'.
>>
>> *Bhr.: They are the same word
>>
>> > I don't think so.
>>
>> *Bhr.: please explain that
>>
> They're semantically unrelated, thus *homonymous*.
>*Bhr.: The connection between Bavarian butz, butzel 'person or animal
>> > Besides Spanish boto/a 'blunt; clumsy, akward' there's also Occitan
>> > (Langedocian) boda 'paquet rebondi; gros ventre; grosseur; tumeur'.
>>
>> *Bhr.: very good and a plausible etymology indeed, but do You really
>> believe that 'gros ventre' is closer than 'Lämmchen' to 'buck'?
>>
>> > No. They're two different etymologies. One refers to 'thick, clumsy,
>> > etc.' and the other to a domestic animal, 'lamb, male goat, ox'.
>>
>> *Bhr.: I've mentioned three lexemes, You write "they're two different
>> etymologies"; which two?
>>
> One is Bavarian butz, German Butt (< Low German) plus Spanish boto,
> Occitan boda, and the other is German Butz plus Romance bode.