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

Fwd: PIE for wash (was: Re: [@ustronesian network] Re: water buffalo 2)

Expand Messages
  • Richard Wordingham
    This was meant for Cybalist! Richard. ... Richard Wordingham wrote: Some Nostratic-Austronesian-Sino-Tibetan correspondences have been
    Message 1 of 9 , Jul 26, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      This was meant for Cybalist!
      Richard.
      --- In austronesian@yahoogroups.com,
      "Richard Wordingham" <richard@w...>
      wrote:
      Some
      Nostratic-Austronesian-Sino-Tibetan
      correspondences have been mentioned
      on Austroneisan and Cybalist. The
      Nostratic-Sino-Tibetan connections
      were
      proposed by Shevoroshkin. One of
      them cites PIE forms which I am not
      confident I can identify, viz:
      PAN *basuq "wash" cf PIE *m-sk-,
      *w-sk "wash" Old Chinese s(r)u?,
      Lushai
      shuk, Luoba cuk [the 'c' is the
      alveolo-palatal fricative].
      What are the proposed PIE cognates?
      For *m-sk all I can think of Latin
      muscus and a smattering (Dutch and
      dialect words in Scandinavian
      languages)
      of Germanic forms. These are
      analysed by Pokorny as a k-extension
      of an
      s-extension of root 1309 *meu 'wet;
      dirt; to wash'. For *w-sk all I can
      think of is Proto-Germanic *waskan
      'wash', which Onions derives within
      Germanic as a simplification of
      *watskan formed on *wat- 'water',
      presumably
      with the inchoative -sk- suffix.
      Richard.
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@h...>
      To: <austronesian@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 10:21
      AM
      Subject: [@ustronesian network] Re:
      water buffalo 2
      > > 3) The
      (Sino-Tibetan)-Austronesian (STAN)
      genetic link is real.
      > Do any of
      > > them occur in Laurent Sagart's
      paper for the Canberra conference?
      > (The
      > > paper's attached to Message 431,
      dated 12 December 2002 )
      > Surprisingly few, considering the
      number of correspondences I found
      > with Nostratic/SinoCaucasian.
      >
      > Quoted from the Sagart's paper:
      >
      > Some PAN and PECL correspondences
      > (q)uRung (we've been there!)
      > kuka "chicken" cf. English
      chicken, cock (but might be
      onomatopeia)
      > kawaS "speak, say" cf kavi
      "sorcerer" in some Anatolian
      language (by
      > memory!)
      >
      > Sino-Tibetan-Austronesian Lexiacal
      Comparisons
      > 12 (q)uRung etc etc
      > 17 -taq "earth" cf PIE dhgh^om
      "earth"
      > 10 SiRaH1 "salt"
      > 34 kep "grasp"
      > 37 dilaq "lick"
      > 46 kawaS "speak" see above
      > 49 basuq "wash" cf PIE *m-sk-,
      *w-sk "wash"
      >
      > cultural vocabulary
      > 1 beRas "husked rice" see
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tg
      pedersen/Opr.html
      > for names of grains
      > 3 kuka "chicken" see above
      > 4 kurung again!
      >
      > BTW, it seems the
      transitive-causative s- is
      widespread outside of
      > AN; it would be no surprise to
      find it in AfroAsiatic and
      > IndoEuropean.
      >
      > The Nostratic/SinoCaucasian
      matches with Manansala's list are
      found
      > in the files (roots):
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/tn1.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/HkW.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/An.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/Hs.html
      > (the root should be divided into
      Hs and Hp, but some of the
      > Austronesian words in Manansala's
      list have -h-, and I don't yet know
      > whether that's p > h or s > h
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/gn.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/Opr.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/wd.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/tp.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/sr.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/ken.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/tm.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/sw.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/tk.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/kr.html
      > http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpe
      dersen/krn.html
      >
      > in all 36 N-SC correspondences in
      15 roots.
      >
      > Torsten
      --- End forwarded message ---
    • Richard Wordingham
      ... Whoops! I means Austronesian and Nostratic-L. ... (my presumption) ... From the resounding silence, I take it then that these are indeed the only forms
      Message 2 of 9 , Jul 31, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham" <richard@w...>
        wrote:
        > This was meant for Cybalist!
        > Richard.
        > --- In austronesian@yahoogroups.com,
        > "Richard Wordingham" <richard@w...>
        > wrote:
        > Some
        > Nostratic-Austronesian-Sino-Tibetan
        > correspondences have been mentioned
        > on Austroneisan and Cybalist.

        Whoops! I means Austronesian and Nostratic-L.

        > The Nostratic-Sino-Tibetan connections
        > were
        > proposed by Shevoroshkin. One of
        > them cites PIE forms which I am not
        > confident I can identify, viz:
        > PAN *basuq "wash" cf PIE *m-sk-,
        > *w-sk "wash".

        > For *m-sk all I can think of Latin
        > muscus and a smattering (Dutch and
        > dialect words in Scandinavian
        > languages)
        > of Germanic forms.

        > For *w-sk all I can
        > think of is Proto-Germanic *waskan
        > 'wash', which Onions derives within
        > Germanic as a simplification of
        > *watskan formed on *wat- 'water',
        > presumably
        (my presumption)
        > with the inchoative -sk- suffix.

        From the resounding silence, I take it then that these are indeed the
        only forms for *m-sk and *w-sk.

        Richard.
      • P&G
        ... Roots of the form C-sC are not common in PIE (about 25-30 examples, depending how you count), and normally we would see them as root C-s plus an extension.
        Message 3 of 9 , Jul 31, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          > > Latin
          > > muscus
          >>Proto-Germanic *waskan
          > > 'wash',
          > I take it then that these are indeed the
          > only forms for *m-sk and *w-sk.

          Roots of the form C-sC are not common in PIE (about 25-30 examples,
          depending how you count), and normally we would see them as root C-s plus an
          extension. For example, Latin muscus is taken as *meus- with a guttural
          extension The same thing applies to Latin musca "fly, midge" (<
          *mu:s -k-).

          Peter
        • Piotr Gasiorowski
          ... Just one comment. Apart from typical inchoative or iterative varbs, PIE *-sk^e/o- formed durative verb stems derived from nous, cf. Gk. metHusko:
          Message 4 of 9 , Jul 31, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            31-07-03 19:29, Richard Wordingham wrote:

            >> For *w-sk all I can
            >> think of is Proto-Germanic *waskan
            >> 'wash', which Onions derives within
            >> Germanic as a simplification of
            >> *watskan formed on *wat- 'water',
            >> presumably
            > (my presumption)
            >> with the inchoative -sk- suffix.
            >
            >>From the resounding silence, I take it then that these are indeed the
            > only forms for *m-sk and *w-sk.

            Just one comment. Apart from typical inchoative or iterative varbs, PIE
            *-sk^e/o- formed durative verb stems derived from nous, cf. Gk.
            metHusko: < *medHu-sk^e- 'drink freely, get drunk'. *wod-sk^e- seems to
            belong to this type.

            Piotr
          • tgpedersen
            ... I recall it as being *mozg-. I ll go check. Torsten
            Message 5 of 9 , Aug 1, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "P&G" <petegray@b...> wrote:
              > > > Latin
              > > > muscus
              > >>Proto-Germanic *waskan
              > > > 'wash',
              > > I take it then that these are indeed the
              > > only forms for *m-sk and *w-sk.
              >
              I recall it as being *mozg-. I'll go check.

              Torsten
            • Piotr Gasiorowski
              ... From: tgpedersen To: Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 11:54 AM Subject: Re: [tied] Fwd: PIE for wash ...
              Message 6 of 9 , Aug 1, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
                To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 11:54 AM
                Subject: Re: [tied] Fwd: PIE for wash


                > > > > Latin
                > > > > muscus
                > > >>Proto-Germanic *waskan
                > > > > 'wash',
                > > > I take it then that these are indeed the
                > > > only forms for *m-sk and *w-sk.

                > I recall it as being *mozg-. I'll go check.

                PIE *mus-o- 'moss, bog' is decently attested (Slavic *mUxU, Germanic
                *musa-), and *mus-ko- is just a suffixed variant of that.

                Piotr
              • Richard Wordingham
                ... Pokorny cites some Slavonic forms in -zg-. The complete papagraph, under Root 1309 _meu_ wet; dirt; to wash reads: 5. Mit formantischem Guttural: lat.
                Message 7 of 9 , Aug 1, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
                  <piotr.gasiorowski@i...> wrote:
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@h...>
                  > To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
                  > Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 11:54 AM
                  > Subject: Re: [tied] Fwd: PIE for wash
                  >
                  >
                  > > > > > Latin
                  > > > > > muscus
                  > > > >>Proto-Germanic *waskan
                  > > > > > 'wash',
                  > > > > I take it then that these are indeed the
                  > > > > only forms for *m-sk and *w-sk.
                  >
                  > > I recall it as being *mozg-. I'll go check.
                  >
                  > PIE *mus-o- 'moss, bog' is decently attested (Slavic *mUxU, Germanic
                  > *musa-), and *mus-ko- is just a suffixed variant of that.

                  Pokorny cites some Slavonic forms in -zg-. The complete papagraph,
                  under Root 1309 _meu_ 'wet; dirt; to wash' reads:

                  5. Mit formantischem Guttural: lat. muscus m. `Moos'; norw. dial.
                  musk `Staub, feiner Regen, Dunkelheit', da"n. dial. musk `Schimmel',
                  mndl. mosch, mosse ds.; aksl.; muzga (*mouz-ga:) `Lake, Weiher',
                  russ. mzgnutü `verderben', mozgnutü `abmagern', abg. múz^diti
                  `schwa"chen', russ. mozgú `regnerisches Wetter', moz^s^itü
                  `einweichen'.

                  If we accept Pokorny's analysis, the alleged Nostratic root deduced
                  from PIE 'm-sk, w-sk' is composed of nothing but PIE suffixes!

                  Richard.
                • tgpedersen
                  ... Germanic ... `Schimmel , ... Here it is: Koivulehto: Uralische Evidenz für die Laryngaltheorie, p 113 ural. *mos´ki_- waschen ... aus idg *mozg-
                  Message 8 of 9 , Aug 4, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > > > > > > Latin
                    > > > > > > muscus
                    > > > > >>Proto-Germanic *waskan
                    > > > > > > 'wash',
                    > > > > > I take it then that these are indeed the
                    > > > > > only forms for *m-sk and *w-sk.
                    > >
                    > > > I recall it as being *mozg-. I'll go check.
                    > >
                    > > PIE *mus-o- 'moss, bog' is decently attested (Slavic *mUxU,
                    Germanic
                    > > *musa-), and *mus-ko- is just a suffixed variant of that.
                    >
                    > Pokorny cites some Slavonic forms in -zg-. The complete papagraph,
                    > under Root 1309 _meu_ 'wet; dirt; to wash' reads:
                    >
                    > 5. Mit formantischem Guttural: lat. muscus m. `Moos'; norw. dial.
                    > musk `Staub, feiner Regen, Dunkelheit', da"n. dial. musk
                    `Schimmel',
                    > mndl. mosch, mosse ds.; aksl.; muzga (*mouz-ga:) `Lake, Weiher',
                    > russ. mzgnutü `verderben', mozgnutü `abmagern', abg. múz^diti
                    > `schwa"chen', russ. mozgú `regnerisches Wetter', moz^s^itü
                    > `einweichen'.
                    >
                    > If we accept Pokorny's analysis, the alleged Nostratic root deduced
                    > from PIE 'm-sk, w-sk' is composed of nothing but PIE suffixes!
                    >

                    Here it is:
                    Koivulehto: Uralische Evidenz für die Laryngaltheorie, p 113

                    ural. *mos´ki_- "waschen" ... aus idg *mozg- (ablautend zu idg. *mezg-
                    "untertauchen")..
                    Sanskrit majjáyati "versenkt, taucht unter"
                    Lith. mazgóti, mazgóju "tauche mehrfach ein, wasche" < PIE *mozg-
                    eye/o-


                    Sorry for not being social with the archiving, but I'm working from a
                    public computer.

                    Torsten
                  • Piotr Gasiorowski
                    ... This is Pokorny s *mezg-[1] plunge, subMERGe , different from the *meu- that seems to underlie . The Latin cognates are and
                    Message 9 of 9 , Aug 4, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      04-08-03 12:59, tgpedersen wrote:

                      > Here it is:
                      > Koivulehto: Uralische Evidenz für die Laryngaltheorie, p 113
                      >
                      > ural. *mos´ki_- "waschen" ... aus idg *mozg- (ablautend zu idg. *mezg-
                      > "untertauchen")..
                      > Sanskrit majjáyati "versenkt, taucht unter"
                      > Lith. mazgóti, mazgóju "tauche mehrfach ein, wasche" < PIE *mozg-
                      > eye/o-

                      This is Pokorny's *mezg-[1] 'plunge, subMERGe', different from the *meu-
                      that seems to underlie <muscus>. The Latin cognates are <mergo:,
                      mergere> and <mergus> 'merganser'. Pokorny also mentions the Uralic
                      connection.

                      Piotr
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.