Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

71575Re: Re: [tied] Why there is t- in German tausend "thousand"?

Expand Messages
  • Bhrihskwobhloukstroy
    Nov 13, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      2013/11/13, dgkilday57@... <dgkilday57@...>:
      > ---In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...> wrote:
      > So <t> is old (while e.g. diot and its derivatives have thoroughly
      > either <d-> or <th->). In my robotical opinion, it's a completely
      > different etymon - a substantived participle *dhú-h1s-nt-ih2/4 'the
      > highest numeral not compounded by other numerals', with *dhu > Goth.
      > du and *h1es- 'be' (Goth. du mostly translates Gk. en; Gk. tò enón,
      > pl. tà enónta means 'everything possible')
      > > OHG also *tu^sent*, *tu^sunt *beside *thu^sunt*, *thu^sont du^sont*,
      > > *du^sent*, *du^sint*, inflected NA *thusunta*, D *thusuntin*,
      > *thusonton*,
      > > *dusonton*, *dusuntun*; Late OHG *tu^sunt*; MHG *tu^sunt tu^sint*
      > *tu^sent
      > > *beside *du^sent*, plur. *tu^sent*, apocop. *tu^sen*, Late MHG
      > > *tu^sung*, *tu^sinc
      > > *(Alemannic), *tu^seng*, *tu^si^g*
      > >
      > [DGK:]
      > Nice try, but your rather atomistic explanation fails to account for Gothic
      > _þu:sundi_, Old Saxon _thûsundig_, Old Frisian _thûsend_, and Old English
      > _þúsend_, all of which point unequivocally to Germanic *þ-, Indo-European
      > *t-.
      *Bhr.: I've written: "it's a completely different etymon". This
      unequivocally means, I think, "different from that of the other
      Germanic (incl. Old German) forms", whose etymology therefore isn't
      affected by my atomistic explanation (otherwise, how could it be
      atomistic? We would have again to face a phonological problem, which
      is precisely what I intended to avoid)
    • Show all 50 messages in this topic