It would be just as easy to construct them as having two separate roots from two separate language
----- Original Message -----
From: "H.M. Hubey" <hubeyh@...>
To: <Nostratica@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 5:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Nostratica] Cardinal and Ordinal Integers
> Yes, I can see that pattern. I am wondering if they did not come from "one" from another language.
No, PIE had several roots that could mean something like "one" (*h1oi- and *sem-, most obviously), which is hardly surprising, since the concept of "one" inhabits the borderland between numerals and pronouns (not to mention adjectives) and any word meaning 'single', 'alone', 'some', 'a time', etc. can sneak into the numeral system. The ordinal derives from the root *per- 'forth, forward'; the metaphor is obvious: 'first' = 'coming before the rest'. The story of "two" and "second" is similar. The semantics of the lowest numerals is extremely complex, and so the corresponding grammatical patterns are often suppletive.
> IE has two roots for fire, and two for water and I tend to think that one root is good enough for a language.
We use labels like "water" without being able to reconstruct the semantics very accurately. For example, "water (as a substance, e.g. for drinking)", "flowing ('living') water, river", etc. were not necessarily parts of the same idea to the IEs. There is no rule against having more than one word for a single vaguely defined concept.
families which met someplace and mixed.
Piotr
Piotr
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nostratica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
-- M. Hubey -o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o The only difference between humans and machines is that humans can be created by unskilled labor. Arthur C. Clarke /\/\/\/\//\/\/\/\/\/\/ http://www.csam.montclair.edu/~hubey