--- In
Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, "H.M. Hubey" <hubeyh@...> wrote:
>
>
> Richard Wordingham wrote:
>
> > --- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, "H.M. Hubey" <hubeyh@...>
wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Richard Wordingham wrote:
> > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > One of the advantages of the Austronesian languages for
studying
> > > > sound changes is that it is such a large group. A change t >
k
> > shows
> > > > up in comparison with other languages, and if you had, say
c~t~k
> > > > collapsing to t~k~k, it should show up by comparison with a
large
> > > > number of unaffected languages. (I know, I ought to write t~k,
> > but I
> > > > let you call your bags - or were they sequences? - sets.)
> > > >
> > > > What are your accepted p>k>t and p>t>k examples?
> > >
> > >
> > > The famous ones which occur accross Semitic, Turkic and IE are
tVr,
> > and
> > > kVr having to
> > > do with "rotation, turning, etc". And there is also evidence of
it
> > in
> > > form pVr. I cannot tell
> > > if it was p>t>k or p>k>t.
> >
> > That's more like a single word. What examples do you have as a
> > _regular_ _unconditioned_ sound change? (Interchange of tl and
kl is
> > well known, but that is a _conditioned_ change.)
>
> I've been posting about these for a long time all over. There is
also
> the pVr and pVl that
> occur across major language families. I think these come from PTh.
>
> The *th and *dh are very useful since we can have *ath>aw > u,o and
*adh
> > ay> e,i.
> That would only require a single vowel as a start.
So useful, I fear, that little confidence can be placed in any
reconstruction that invokes them. You speak as though you were
playing scrabble!
> Here is another little thing that hit me reading Hayes book on
Sumerian.
> (The changes are not necessarily in that exact order.)
>
> *ninth > nin (lady, Sumerian)
> *ninth > inth > insh > ish (lady, woman, Hebrew)
> similarly for Sumerian and Turkic (see previous posts).
> *ninth > inth > ins(an) (human, Arabic)
Strange, all the textbooks I've read say that in Hebrew i:S
is 'man'. The word for 'woman' is an anomalous feminine of this
word. If my memory serves me right, the absolute is iSSa: and
construct is e:SeT - e:sheth if you don't mind the potential
ambiguities. The word for women is massively anomalous - na:Si:m,
which has the _masculine_ plural suffix. There is a rare regular
feminine, i:Sa:, which I think only occurs in Isaiah. What's the
sibilant in Arabic - si:n or sa:?
> PT inital-n disappeared. e.g,. KBal nalmaz=almas (diamond) and nakut
(
> yakut).
> Both yakut and almas are said to be Arabic and almas is said to be
> related to
> diamond, adamant etc. Here they show up with initial-n, and it is
not a
> reconstruction. Such anomolies can either be buried away or
attempts can be
> made to handle them.
I'm not familiar with the abbreviations for Turkic languages. What
forms are you citing for which form?
> I am pretty sure that somethings like -nth-, -rth-, -lth- existed
and it
> existed
> before there were languages like PIE.
> > Looking at Torsten's list of <plosive>Vr roots at
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nostratica/message/90 , I can't help
> > thinking that there's some sort of sound symbolism going on
here. In
> > English we've got 'whir' and 'whirl', and in PIE there's a root
wer-
> > with several extensions, all related to turning.
>
> I do not see onamatopeia.
Do you not see onomatopoeia in 'whir' and 'whirl'?
OTOH, th>w and th>t and you get words like
> whirl, and twirl
> and there is the tVr already. There are too many tVr and kVr root
words
> (including tVl, and kVl)
> to actually list right now. They are all over and must be truly
ancient.
> Some of these are
> *gilgul (Sumerian, Witzel), Greek ghorentus (market, encircled
place?),
> Tk. kurshow, etc
> even Finnish Turku (marketplace), Tk karIn (stomach e.g. round
thing),
> Akkadian (a?)garinnu,
> etc. Pardon the misspellings. I can't remember everything. Then
there
> is kwel, kwer(?),
> English turn, dr- (verbs in GErmanic languages for turning),
torque,
> Latin circle (kirik.el),
> circus, Turkic teker (*ter.ker), Magyar kerek, etc etc.
> > Perhaps it's
> > universal onamatopeia. w- > gw- is fairly common (Welsh, Old
French
> > and American Spanish leap to mind), so if such onomatopoeic words
> > keep being generated, over the millenia all the various
combinations
derived by changes such as gw > g, gw > b, gw > d, gw > kw > ...
> > could be generated without violating SCR
because words like this can be regenerated by onomatopoeia.
> > These words are found well beyond Nostratic.
[Of the spread of Turkic:]
> > > In other areas it also mostly disappeared.
> >
> > It made significant inroads into Fars as well.
>
> Iran and Central Asia is still Iranian-speaking.
Interpenetration! Tabriz speaks Azerbaijani, and Azerbaijani
speakers account for 37% of the population of Iran. Then you have
the Turkmen in the North East of Iran, and lots of smaller groups -
the Qashqais of Fars to name but one.
> Here is something interesting.
>
> Speaker 4 Marc Buhler, Institute for Immunology & Allergy
Research,
> NSW, Australia
> - Title of Presentation Could admixture of the CCR5-delta32
allele
> into Ashkenazi Jews and Vikings be explained by an origin in the
kingdom
> of the Khazars?
>
> The conference below is not exactly the Kook Konvention. Maybe
science
> will take care of what historical linguists refuse to do.
Might be a Scythian connection. Gothic graves in Poland hold a fair
number of Scythian ladies, and that allows more time for the gene to
spread into Scandinavia. I suppose there could be a Finnic
connection instead (or as well). It might be very revealing to see
where the gene doesn't occur, if it has high enough frequency. The
presenter could be in for a rough ride from any Ashkenazis in the
audience.
Richard.