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

Re: [tied] Evening/Night (was Re: The "Mother" Problem) *wekwer-o-

Expand Messages
  • Joao
    *kWel - Greek tel- *gWHen-yo: Greek theino: *kWetwr- Greek tettares, tessares ... From: whetex_lewx To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, February
    Message 1 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
      *kWel -  >Greek tel-
      *gWHen-yo: > Greek theino:
      *kWetwr- > Greek tettares, tessares
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 1:53 PM
      Subject: [tied] Evening/Night (was Re: The "Mother" Problem) *wekwer-o-


      --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@y...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "whetex_lewx" <whetex_lewx@y...>
      > wrote:
      >
      > > Lith. va~karas (evening), Lv. vakars, Slav. vec^er, wiec^or
      > > (evening), Lat. vesper (evening), gk. vesperoj IE.: *wesper-o-,
      > > *weker-o-, *we(s)kwer-o-?
      > >
      > > It's not nescesarry say that nokWt-i-s was evening
      >
      > The Attic Greek form is actually hésperos.  Some other Ancient
      Greek
      > dialects had wésperos.
      >
      > Could the Lithuanian word reflect earlier *vaskaras?
      >
      > The Greek forms with -p- don't seem to match the Balto-Slavic
      > forms.  One would think that a protoform like *weskWeros would
      lead
      > to Greek *westeros, not *wesperos.  But then I could be wrong. 
      > Could the Latin form actually be a borrowing from a Greek
      dialect? 
      > We could be lead to a protoform *weskWeros instead of *wesperos.
      >
      > - Rob

      I dont know all Greek trifles, but here are some "evenings":
      &#946;&#961;&#945;&#948;&#953;&#957;&#972;&#962;, &#949;&#963;&#960;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#957;&#972;&#962;, &#957;&#965;&#954;&#964;&#949;&#961;&#953;&#957;&#972;&#962;, &#945;&#960;&#959;&#963;&#960;&#949;&#961;&#957;&#972;&#962;
      bradinos, eoperinos, nukterinos, apospernos.
      "*weskWeros would lead
      to Greek *westeros" i don't think so. Hippos <*ekWos (Lith. as^v
      ['a], as^v[i']enis) Let's look at the "eoperinos", i guess it would
      be closelly related to the *wekWer-o-. I've big doubts, that Baltic
      or Slavic could reflect *weskwer-o-...



    • whetex_lewx
      ... HIPPOS? Maybe -kw- in your examples changed to -t- because it s in closed syllable? Hi-ppos
      Message 2 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
        > *kWel - >Greek tel-
        > *gWHen-yo: > Greek theino:
        > *kWetwr- > Greek tettares, tessares

        HIPPOS?

        Maybe -kw- in your examples changed to -t- because it's in closed
        syllable?

        Hi-ppos <ekW-os opened syllable???
      • Rob
        ... The Attic-Ionic Greek reflexes to the IE labiovelars are the following: *kW/gW/ghW k/g/kh before a central vowel, t/d/th before a front vowel, and p/b/ph
        Message 3 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
          --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "whetex_lewx" <whetex_lewx@y...>
          wrote:
          >
          > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
          > > *kWel - >Greek tel-
          > > *gWHen-yo: > Greek theino:
          > > *kWetwr- > Greek tettares, tessares
          >
          > HIPPOS?
          >
          > Maybe -kw- in your examples changed to -t- because it's in closed
          > syllable?
          >
          > Hi-ppos <ekW-os opened syllable???

          The Attic-Ionic Greek reflexes to the IE labiovelars are the
          following:

          *kW/gW/ghW > k/g/kh before a central vowel, t/d/th before a front
          vowel, and p/b/ph before a back vowel.

          That explains *(h)ékWos > híppos, because the */kW/ phoneme precedes
          a back vowel (*/o/). It also explains e.g. *kWis > tis 'who'.

          - Rob
        • Rob
          ... Correction: the IE form does *not* have a true labiovelar in horse , but rather a cluster /kw/. So the correct form is *(h)ékwos. However, /Kw/ and /KW/
          Message 4 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
            --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@y...> wrote:

            > That explains *(h)ékWos > híppos, because the */kW/ phoneme
            > precedes a back vowel (*/o/). It also explains e.g. *kWis >
            > tis 'who'.

            Correction: the IE form does *not* have a true labiovelar in 'horse',
            but rather a cluster /kw/. So the correct form is *(h)ékwos.
            However, /Kw/ and /KW/ (where 'K' stands for any member of the velar
            series) had come to be treated as the same before the classical Greek
            dialects.

            - Rob
          • alex
            ... so if IE have had not a true labiovelar in horse, Latin builded the labiovelar from the cluster kw ? How that? Alex -- No virus found in this outgoing
            Message 5 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
              Rob wrote:
              > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@y...> wrote:
              >
              >> That explains *(h)�kWos > h�ppos, because the */kW/ phoneme
              >> precedes a back vowel (*/o/). It also explains e.g. *kWis >
              >> tis 'who'.
              >
              > Correction: the IE form does *not* have a true labiovelar in 'horse',
              > but rather a cluster /kw/. So the correct form is *(h)�kwos.
              > However, /Kw/ and /KW/ (where 'K' stands for any member of the velar
              > series) had come to be treated as the same before the classical Greek
              > dialects.
              >
              > - Rob

              so if IE have had not a true labiovelar in horse, Latin builded the
              labiovelar from the
              cluster "kw"? How that?

              Alex




              --
              No virus found in this outgoing message.
              Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
              Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03.02.2005
            • Rob
              ... To my knowledge, Italic also treated both /kw/ and /kW/ the same. The true Latin form for horse , however, is ecus -- equus is a later formation (I forget
              Message 6 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
                --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@t...> wrote:

                > so if IE have had not a true labiovelar in horse, Latin builded the
                > labiovelar from the cluster "kw"? How that?

                To my knowledge, Italic also treated both /kw/ and /kW/ the same.
                The true Latin form for 'horse', however, is ecus -- equus is a later
                formation (I forget the exact term for this, something like "neo-
                archaism"). Cf. cum for quom, secundus for sequondos, etc.
                Basically, Latin had delabialized labiovelars before back vowels.

                - Rob
              • alex
                ... that is why I lanced the question. Basically Latin had delabialised the labiovelars before back vowels, later the Romance delabialised the labiovelars
                Message 7 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
                  Rob wrote:
                  > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@t...> wrote:
                  >
                  >> so if IE have had not a true labiovelar in horse, Latin builded the
                  >> labiovelar from the cluster "kw"? How that?
                  >
                  > To my knowledge, Italic also treated both /kw/ and /kW/ the same.
                  > The true Latin form for 'horse', however, is ecus -- equus is a later
                  > formation (I forget the exact term for this, something like "neo-
                  > archaism"). Cf. cum for quom, secundus for sequondos, etc.
                  > Basically, Latin had delabialized labiovelars before back vowels.
                  >
                  > - Rob

                  that is why I lanced the question. Basically Latin had delabialised the
                  labiovelars before back vowels, later the Romance delabialised the
                  labiovelars before palatal vowels as well. A such "neoarchaisms" could
                  not take place in the speach of the vulgar people but it could be just
                  because of the traditionalists grammarians. How ever, there is remains
                  Sardinian "ebba(?)" and Rom. "iapa" which requests a labiovelar there
                  after the known rules.
                  By myself I am very sceptical versus the labiovelars but the reason here
                  is more profane maybe. There is an alternance (not explained enough) of
                  "k" with "p" and of "g" with "b". It is true, this alternance is just
                  when the "k,g" are followed by "i,y" but the alternance is not supposed
                  oder deduced, it is a living and real fact. And since the plural form
                  could have been used for remake a new sg form, I get the change of "k"
                  to "p" without the presence of any labiovelar, just trough the
                  alternance I spoke about. I gues an example is a bit more evident.
                  There is actually the IE *lukos" which could make a plural *luki; the
                  alternance of "ki" with "pi" allows the another form of the word which
                  is "lupi". These are facts, not deductions. The deduction is here:
                  -from the plural "lupi" was remade an sg "lupu". This fact is not
                  recent. We know about this alternance even in pre-roman and roman times
                  where we find the name of one city with thes both forms. For instance,
                  "Ulpiana" versus "Ulciana".
                  In how far this alternance "ki/pi", "gi/bi" affected the whole IE
                  spectrum once, it remains open. But a such alternative makes very
                  questionable even the existence of the labiovelars. I know, a such
                  assumptions can be considered a blasphemy by some people but it is an
                  explanation which, I repeat myself, appears to be very plausible since
                  the facts are there, even if there can be an another explanation for
                  these facts.

                  Alex




                  --
                  No virus found in this outgoing message.
                  Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                  Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03.02.2005
                • Miguel Carrasquer
                  On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:22:58 +0100, alex ... Actually *wl. kWos, in a number of languages simplified to *lúkWos. ... *lúkWoi. ======================= Miguel
                  Message 8 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
                    On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:22:58 +0100, alex
                    <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

                    >There is actually the IE *lukos"

                    Actually *wl.'kWos, in a number of languages simplified to
                    *lúkWos.

                    >which could make a plural *luki

                    *lúkWoi.


                    =======================
                    Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
                    mcv@...
                  • Joao
                    No, kWe-,kWi- te-, ti- (pe-,pi- in dialects). ... From: whetex_lewx To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 5:20 PM Subject: [tied]
                    Message 9 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
                      No, kWe-,kWi- > te-, ti- (pe-,pi- in dialects).
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 5:20 PM
                      Subject: [tied] Evening/Night (was Re: The "Mother" Problem) *wekwer-o-


                      --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
                      > *kWel -  >Greek tel-
                      > *gWHen-yo: > Greek theino:
                      > *kWetwr- > Greek tettares, tessares

                      HIPPOS?

                      Maybe -kw- in your examples changed to -t- because it's in closed
                      syllable?

                      Hi-ppos <ekW-os opened syllable???



                    • alex
                      ... true for IE. *lukWos paralel with *wl.kWos and from *wl.kWos ... true for IE, not true for some daugether languages. Are there some thoughts of you that
                      Message 10 of 17 , Feb 4, 2005
                        Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
                        > On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:22:58 +0100, alex
                        > <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >> There is actually the IE *lukos"
                        >
                        > Actually *wl.'kWos, in a number of languages simplified to
                        > *l�kWos.

                        true for IE. *lukWos paralel with *wl.kWos and from *wl.kWos

                        >
                        >> which could make a plural *luki
                        >
                        > *l�kWoi.
                        >
                        >
                        > =======================
                        > Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
                        > mcv@...

                        true for IE, not true for some daugether languages. Are there some
                        thoughts of you that the ancient "ki" versus "pi" from the example given
                        (Ulpiana/Ulciana) is absolutely independent and has nothing to do with
                        the alternance of "ki" with "pi" which is today stil alive? If yes, I
                        assume there are very strong reasons and the explanation will follow.

                        Alex




                        --
                        No virus found in this outgoing message.
                        Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                        Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03.02.2005
                      • whetex_lewx
                        ... given ... with ... yes, I ... follow. ... You ve started discussion about wolves. Ok. Could anybody explain lith. la~pe:, Latin vulpes and Lith. vilkas,
                        Message 11 of 17 , Feb 5, 2005
                          --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@t...> wrote:
                          > Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
                          > > On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:22:58 +0100, alex
                          > > <alxmoeller@t...> wrote:
                          > >
                          > >> There is actually the IE *lukos"
                          > >
                          > > Actually *wl.'kWos, in a number of languages simplified to
                          > > *lúkWos.
                          >
                          > true for IE. *lukWos paralel with *wl.kWos and from *wl.kWos
                          >
                          > >
                          > >> which could make a plural *luki
                          > >
                          > > *lúkWoi.
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > =======================
                          > > Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
                          > > mcv@w...
                          >
                          > true for IE, not true for some daugether languages. Are there some
                          > thoughts of you that the ancient "ki" versus "pi" from the example
                          given
                          > (Ulpiana/Ulciana) is absolutely independent and has nothing to do
                          with
                          > the alternance of "ki" with "pi" which is today stil alive? If
                          yes, I
                          > assume there are very strong reasons and the explanation will
                          follow.
                          >
                          > Alex

                          You've started discussion about wolves. Ok.

                          Could anybody explain lith. la~pe:, Latin vulpes and Lith. vilkas,
                          Lat. lupus...
                          It makes view that Latin counterchanged these twoo words...
                        • whetex_lewx
                          (h)[e ]kWos hippos kW p before back o w[e ]kWer-o- *eoper-os *eoper-in-os; -kW- versus -o- became -p-. ... *wekwer-o- ... closed
                          Message 12 of 17 , Feb 5, 2005
                            (h)[e']kWos > hippos kW > p before back "o"

                            w[e']kWer-o- > *eoper-os > *eoper-in-os; -kW- versus -o- became -p-.




                            --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
                            > No, kWe-,kWi- > te-, ti- (pe-,pi- in dialects).
                            > ----- Original Message -----
                            > From: whetex_lewx
                            > To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 5:20 PM
                            > Subject: [tied] Evening/Night (was Re: The "Mother" Problem)
                            *wekwer-o-
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
                            > > *kWel - >Greek tel-
                            > > *gWHen-yo: > Greek theino:
                            > > *kWetwr- > Greek tettares, tessares
                            >
                            > HIPPOS?
                            >
                            > Maybe -kw- in your examples changed to -t- because it's in
                            closed
                            > syllable?
                            >
                            > Hi-ppos <ekW-os opened syllable???
                            >
                            >
                            >
                          • Joao
                            w[e ]kWer-o- *eoper-os could be dialectal (instead of *eoteros) or analogical to a *eopros or *eoporos. This doublets labiovelar+e, labiovelar+o
                            Message 13 of 17 , Feb 5, 2005
                              w[e']kWer-o- > *eoper-os  could be dialectal (instead of *eoteros) or analogical to a *eopros or *eoporos.
                               
                              This doublets labiovelar+e, labiovelar+o > dental,velar, were frequently "standardized" through analogy.
                               
                              For example, Erebos, erebeos (<*HregWos, *HregWesos), instead of expected Erebos, eredeos.
                               
                              Joao SL
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 10:08 AM
                              Subject: [tied] Evening/Night (was Re: The "Mother" Problem) *wekwer-o-


                              (h)[e']kWos > hippos kW > p before back "o"

                              w[e']kWer-o- > *eoper-os > *eoper-in-os; -kW- versus -o- became -p-.




                              --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
                              > No, kWe-,kWi- > te-, ti- (pe-,pi- in dialects).
                              >   ----- Original Message -----
                              >   From: whetex_lewx
                              >   To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
                              >   Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 5:20 PM
                              >   Subject: [tied] Evening/Night (was Re: The "Mother" Problem)
                              *wekwer-o-
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >   --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
                              >   > *kWel -  >Greek tel-
                              >   > *gWHen-yo: > Greek theino:
                              >   > *kWetwr- > Greek tettares, tessares
                              >
                              >   HIPPOS?
                              >
                              >   Maybe -kw- in your examples changed to -t- because it's in
                              closed
                              >   syllable?
                              >
                              >   Hi-ppos <ekW-os opened syllable???
                              >
                              >
                              >




                            • whetex_lewx
                              ... or analogical to a *eopros or *eoporos. How to check it (that it s dialectal)? Also there is possibility, that Baltic *wa~karas from PIE wekW-or-, then
                              Message 14 of 17 , Feb 5, 2005
                                --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
                                > w[e']kWer-o- > *eoper-os could be dialectal (instead of *eoteros)
                                or analogical to a *eopros or *eoporos.

                                How to check it (that it's dialectal)?

                                Also there is possibility, that Baltic *wa~karas from PIE wekW-or-,
                                then eoperinos in Greek and wieczo´r in Polish would be explained

                                > This doublets labiovelar+e, labiovelar+o > dental,velar, were
                                frequently "standardized" through analogy.
                                >
                                > For example, Erebos, erebeos (<*HregWos, *HregWesos), instead of
                                expected Erebos, eredeos.
                                >
                                > Joao SL
                                > ----- Original Message -----
                                > From: whetex_lewx
                                > To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
                                > Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 10:08 AM
                                > Subject: [tied] Evening/Night (was Re: The "Mother" Problem)
                                *wekwer-o-
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > (h)[e']kWos > hippos kW > p before back "o"
                                >
                                > w[e']kWer-o- > *eoper-os > *eoper-in-os; -kW- versus -o- became -
                                p-.
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...> wrote:
                                > > No, kWe-,kWi- > te-, ti- (pe-,pi- in dialects).
                                > > ----- Original Message -----
                                > > From: whetex_lewx
                                > > To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
                                > > Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 5:20 PM
                                > > Subject: [tied] Evening/Night (was Re: The "Mother" Problem)
                                > *wekwer-o-
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao" <josimo70@y...>
                                wrote:
                                > > > *kWel - >Greek tel-
                                > > > *gWHen-yo: > Greek theino:
                                > > > *kWetwr- > Greek tettares, tessares
                                > >
                                > > HIPPOS?
                                > >
                                > > Maybe -kw- in your examples changed to -t- because it's in
                                > closed
                                > > syllable?
                                > >
                                > > Hi-ppos <ekW-os opened syllable???
                                > >
                                >
                              • Richard Wordingham
                                ... phoneme ... in horse , ... velar ... Greek ... Piotr s chided me in the past for making this claim, but I can t find the relevant post in the archives -
                                Message 15 of 17 , Feb 6, 2005
                                  --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@y...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@y...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > > That explains *(h)ékWos > híppos, because the */kW/
                                  phoneme
                                  > > precedes a back vowel (*/o/). It also explains e.g. *kWis
                                  >
                                  > > tis 'who'.
                                  >
                                  > Correction: the IE form does *not* have a true labiovelar
                                  in 'horse',
                                  > but rather a cluster /kw/. So the correct form is *(h)ékwos.
                                  > However, /Kw/ and /KW/ (where 'K' stands for any member of the
                                  velar
                                  > series) had come to be treated as the same before the classical
                                  Greek
                                  > dialects.

                                  Piotr's chided me in the past for making this claim, but I can't
                                  find the relevant post in the archives - it's not in my index. I
                                  recall that he pointed out that:

                                  a) k^w and kW have distinct reflexes in Greek.
                                  b) -k^w- > -pp- is regular in Greek.

                                  I think he gave some other examples, but alas I don't remember them.

                                  Richard.
                                • Richard Wordingham
                                  ... It s a hard habit to break! I unthinkingly typed **ekWos for ek^wos!
                                  Message 16 of 17 , Feb 6, 2005
                                    --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham"
                                    <richard.wordingham@n...> wrote:

                                    > Piotr's chided me in the past for making this claim,

                                    It's a hard habit to break! I unthinkingly typed **ekWos for ek^wos!
                                  • Piotr Gasiorowski
                                    ... The intervocalic outcome varies between -pp- or -kk-, the latter as in axe-handle axe , or in (a
                                    Message 17 of 17 , Feb 14, 2005
                                      On 05-02-06 16:22, Richard Wordingham wrote:

                                      > Piotr's chided me in the past for making this claim, but I can't
                                      > find the relevant post in the archives - it's not in my index. I
                                      > recall that he pointed out that:
                                      >
                                      > a) k^w and kW have distinct reflexes in Greek.
                                      > b) -k^w- > -pp- is regular in Greek.
                                      >
                                      > I think he gave some other examples, but alas I don't remember them.

                                      The intervocalic outcome varies between -pp- or -kk-, the latter as in
                                      <pelekkon> 'axe-handle' < *pelek^w-o-, cf. <pelekus> 'axe', or in
                                      <ikkos> (a dialectal variant of <hippos>). -kk- is also the reflex of
                                      *-kw- (*k + *w) as in lakkos 'pond, cistern' < *lakw-o-.

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