71593Re: [tied] Why there is t- in German tausend "thousand"?
- Nov 13, 2013--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...> wrote:
>Maybe, but I don't understand the relevance here. "shirt" and "skirt" are also two words in the same language.
> 2013/11/13, gprosti <gprosti@...>:
> > --- In email@example.com, <johnvertical@> wrote:
> >> > ---In firstname.lastname@example.org, <gprosti@> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure what you mean by "regular system of diatopic variation",
> >> > but if you have a
> >> > set of words with a sufficient amount of shared phonetic material, plus
> >> > matching
> >> > semantics, this overrides the criterion of regular phonetic
> >> > correspondence when drawing
> >> > a connection between two or more forms.
> >> Which itself can be overriden if the similarities can be shown to have
> >> divergent origins, of course. In this case that'd require a whole bunch of
> >> corroborating evidence for the model of forming numerals as "largest
> >> numeral not yet named", though. The best precedent I can think for
> >> anything along these lines is from the set-theoretical construction of
> >> ordinal numbers, a bit advanced for a supposed pre-HG origin :)
> >> I'm going to wonder if analogy may be again at work, perhaps this time
> >> starting from the rather similar _Dutzend_. Does this have related
> >> /t/-initial forms that could have influenced the appearence of the same in
> >> _tausend_?
> >> _j.
> > True, but "can be shown to have divergent origins" contains a potentially
> > vast spectrum of plausibilty. E.g., it's one thing to show that OHG kuning
> > and Finn. kuningas could each be formed from clearly discernible elements or
> > through clearly productive morphological processes within their respective
> > languages. It's another thing to derive one or both of these words using
> > rare, semantically obscure roots or affixes and use this as a basis for
> > doubting their common descent.
> *Bhr.: isn't it clear that with du^sunt and tu^sunt we are dealing of
> word in the same language?
The case of similar, more or less evidently
> cognate words in different language is completely different! IDo you mean *source* language/dialect from which the variant with "t-" would have come? Upper German has been suggested on this thread.
> understand it's very interesting, but nobody is questioning that, the
> point is that if thu^sunt and du^sunt are (as they are) the regular
> OHG outcome of Germanic *Ã¾Å«sundÄ«, tu^sunt isn't. If You absolutely
> want to have a parallel case of kuning : kuningas, You have to find a
> possible target language in OHG times or before. I'm waiting for that
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>