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

Are hares grey? [was: ka and k^a [was: [tied] *kW- "?"]]

Expand Messages
  • Grzegorz Jagodzinski
    Message 1 of 10 , Sep 29, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
      To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 7:10 PM
      Subject: Re: ka and k^a [was: [tied] *kW- "?"]


      > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:42:08 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
      > <gpiotr@...> wrote:
      >
      >>Miguel Carrasquer wrote:

      >>Then perhaps *k^as-, if from **k^a:N-s-, has something to do with
      >>*k^ank- ~ *k^a:k- 'rush, spring forth, leap', as in Gk. ke:kio:
      >>(ka:kio:) 'gush', Lith. s^ókti 'leap', and Gmc. *xanxistaz/*xangistaz
      >>'steed'.
      >
      > So not named after the colour (hares aren't really grey
      > anyway, aren't they?), but after the jumping. Could very
      > well be.

      > Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
      > mcv@...

      Hares are grey. Cf. Polish (zaja,c) szarak 'Lepus europaeus' (hare), szary
      'grey'.

      This word comes from *xe^rU(jI) [2nd palatalization!] < *xoir- < *kHoir-,
      cf. Gmc. *xaira- in OIcel hárr, OE hár 'grey' and (with some semantic shift)
      OHG hêr 'eminent, dignified' (< 'old' < 'grey-haired'). Greek khoiros 'pig'
      can be related as well (cf. another word for 'pig', gry:lós, and
      khoirogrýllios 'hare', literary 'pig-o-pig' (!)). The final -r is a suffix,
      cf. Old Polish szady (also 'grey') < *xoi-d-.

      And we have a problem here because some data could suggest that this *kHoi-
      was related to *k^as- (*k^H-s- then). We have Skr. <çaçá-> (from *<çasá->),
      Gmc. <haso:n->. Lat. ca:nus < *kasnos 'grey' may also belong here. Old
      Prussian <sasins> is read by Brückner as zasins. The same formant -in- seems
      to occur in Slavic zaje,cI. Initial z- is "mysterious" but cf. also Lith.
      zuikis, Lett. zak,is. They may be loanwords or may be not as the word for
      'hare' likes to develop irregularly, cf. Russ. zajac, gen. zajca with
      unexpected fleeting -a- on the place of Proto-Slacvic -e,-.

      My personal view is that the groups of a voiceless stop and laryngeal may
      have developed in various ways even if the same language / PIE dialect.
      Namely, *k^H can have yielded *kH > x in Slavic (*xe^rUjI) but also *k^H >
      *g^ > z (zaje,cI; here *k^Hoi- > *g^aHj-).

      Neogrammarians (and even Scherer before) maintain the view that the phonetic
      development of language follows set rules that do not admit of exception -
      but we are sure here that they were wrong in this point. The most typical
      example for breaking the as-if-unexpectional character of sound changes
      (called very incorrectly "sound laws") is the 3rd palatalization in Slavic.
      Another example: *l > l / r in Sanskrit (often side by side). Yet another:
      *bh, *dh > h in Sanskrit. Yet another: Old Polish karw < *korw- without the
      expected metathesis (in Kashubian there are more such words). And we can
      continue this way but there is no need for this. We must admit that many
      phonological changes are multidirectional. Hence I see nothing impossible in
      *k^H > x ~ z, and in some relation between Slavic zaje,cI, English hare and
      Sanskrit çaça < *k^VH-.

      We can point more such examples (the example of Sl. *xapati and *gabati with
      connection to Latin habe:- and Grm. habe:- is another one; Slavic sve^tU
      'light, luminosity', kve^tU 'flower' and gve^zda 'star' < *k^woit- can be
      yet another one).

      Grzegorz J.



      ___________________________________________________________
      To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
    • Piotr Gasiorowski
      ... What _data_? ... Note that *s^e^rU (as in Pol. szary) is geographically restricted in Slavic and may well be nothing else that Gmc. *xaira-. The rest of
      Message 2 of 10 , Sep 29, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote:

        > And we have a problem here because some data

        What _data_?

        > could suggest that this *kHoi-

        Note that *s^e^rU (as in Pol. szary) is geographically restricted in
        Slavic and may well be nothing else that Gmc. *xaira-. The rest of
        Slavic has *se^rU, which is a regular reflex of *k^oiro-, cognate to the
        Germanic word.

        > was related to *k^as- (*k^H-s- then). We have Skr. <çaçá-> (from *<çasá->),
        > Gmc. <haso:n->. Lat. ca:nus < *kasnos 'grey' may also belong here. Old
        > Prussian <sasins> is read by Brückner as zasins.

        Oh, don't take Brückner's readings and etymologies too seriously.
        There's a lot of outdated stuff there.

        > The same formant -in- seems
        > to occur in Slavic zaje,cI. Initial z- is "mysterious" but cf. also Lith.
        > zuikis, Lett. zak,is. They may be loanwords or may be not as the word for
        > 'hare' likes to develop irregularly, cf. Russ. zajac, gen. zajca with
        > unexpected fleeting -a- on the place of Proto-Slacvic -e,-.

        If the Baltic words are borrowings from Slavic (and they can hardly be
        anything else), *zajeNcI is perhaps derivable from the root *g^Hei-
        'hurl, move quickly', cf. Skt. háya- and Arm. ji 'horse'. Details later.

        Piotr
      • Piotr Gasiorowski
        ... Sorry, a blunder on my part. Of course it s all consistent with *s from the second palatalisation (and also with the word being a loan in the first
        Message 3 of 10 , Sep 29, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

          > Note that *s^e^rU (as in Pol. szary) is geographically restricted in
          > Slavic and may well be nothing else that Gmc. *xaira-. The rest of
          > Slavic has *se^rU, which is a regular reflex of *k^oiro- ...

          Sorry, a blunder on my part. Of course it's all consistent with *s' from
          the second palatalisation (and also with the word being a loan in the
          first place!).

          Piotr
        • Grzegorz Jagodzinski
          Piotr Gasiorowski wrote: Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote: And we have a problem here because some data What _data_?Semantic dataGrzegorz J.
          Message 4 of 10 , Sep 29, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
            > Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote:
            >
            >> And we have a problem here because some data
            >
            > What _data_?

            Semantic data

            Grzegorz J.


            ___________________________________________________________
            To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
          • Piotr Gasiorowski
            ... Meaning, Hares are grey and so they should be called grey ones ? That s speculation, not evidence. Hares also have conspicuously long ears and hind
            Message 5 of 10 , Sep 29, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote:

              >>What _data_?
              >
              >
              > Semantic data

              Meaning, "Hares are grey and so they should be called 'grey ones'?"
              That's speculation, not evidence. Hares also have conspicuously long
              ears and hind legs, they move by leaping, etc., so names like 'eared
              one', 'longlegs', 'jumper' etc. would all be equally natural (assuming
              that PIE animal names should be semantically transparent, which is not
              necessarily the case).

              Piotr
            • pielewe
              ... wrote: [...] ... changes ... Slavic. [...] The 3d palatalization in Slavic has received a fairly wide range of formulations in the
              Message 6 of 10 , Sep 30, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Grzegorz Jagodzinski"
                <grzegorj2000@y...> wrote:

                [...]

                > The most typical
                > example for breaking the as-if-unexpectional character of sound
                changes
                > (called very incorrectly "sound laws") is the 3rd palatalization in
                Slavic.

                [...]


                The 3d palatalization in Slavic has received a fairly wide range of
                formulations in the course of time, the overwhelming majority of
                which conform to the "neogrammarian" requirement of regularity. In
                any case it is not at all an obvious case of irregularity, hence it
                is unsuitable for falsifying the neogrammarian position, whether or
                not the latter is correct.


                Willem
              • Grzegorz Jagodzinski
                Piotr Gasiorowski wrote: Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote: What _data_? Semantic data Meaning, Hares are grey and so they should be called
                Message 7 of 10 , Sep 30, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
                  > Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote:
                  >
                  >>> What _data_?
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> Semantic data
                  >
                  > Meaning, "Hares are grey and so they should be called 'grey ones'?"
                  > That's speculation, not evidence.

                  No, Polish <szarak> is not a speculation. It is a linguistic fact.

                  Grzegorz J.


                  ___________________________________________________________
                  To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
                • Piotr Gasiorowski
                  ... It only shows that the hare _may_ be named after its colour. It doesn t follow that it has to be so. Piotr
                  Message 8 of 10 , Oct 3, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote:

                    > No, Polish <szarak> is not a speculation. It is a linguistic fact.

                    It only shows that the hare _may_ be named after its colour. It doesn't
                    follow that it has to be so.

                    Piotr
                  • Grzegorz Jagodzinski
                    Piotr Gasiorowski wrote: Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote: No, Polish is not a speculation. It is a linguistic fact. It only shows that the hare
                    Message 9 of 10 , Oct 3, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
                      > Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote:
                      >
                      >> No, Polish <szarak> is not a speculation. It is a linguistic fact.
                      >
                      > It only shows that the hare _may_ be named after its colour. It
                      > doesn't follow that it has to be so.
                      >
                      > Piotr

                      And did I say it has to? I only said that Greek <khoiros> 'pig' is striking
                      because <gry:los> also means 'pig' but <khoirogryllios> ('pig-o-pig') means
                      'hare'. I also noticed that the hypothesis that Slavic *xe^rU 'grey' is
                      inherited and comes from *kHoiro- is probable when you consider Greek facts.
                      You are right that arguments are not too strong (because the development of
                      *kH in Slavic is not attested with many examples - even the most famous
                      example of <soxa> 'primitive plough' may be an Iranian borrowing and not an
                      inherited word related to Skr. çakha 'branch'). But you have not strong
                      evidence that this word is a Germanic borrowing either. And of course Slavic
                      <zaje,cI> may be completely unrelated but it does not has to be. However, we
                      know that the name of the hare may come from 'grey'. It causes that the
                      hypothesis of genetic relation between <zaje,cI> and *xe^rU cannot be
                      rejected at the start, nothing more. And if we were able to show more
                      examples of twofold development of *k^H in Slavic, into *x and into *z (no
                      matter how much irregular and improbable it seems now), all the "grey hare"
                      hypothesis would be yet more probable.

                      Grzegorz J.



                      ___________________________________________________________
                      To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
                    • Piotr Gasiorowski
                      ... No, refers to the Syrian hyrax, _Procavia syriaca_. It s a chubby little critter with a quivering snout, easy to associate with a
                      Message 10 of 10 , Oct 4, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote:

                        > And did I say it has to? I only said that Greek <khoiros> 'pig' is striking
                        > because <gry:los> also means 'pig' but <khoirogryllios> ('pig-o-pig') means
                        > 'hare'.

                        No, <kHoirogrull(i)os> refers to the Syrian hyrax, _Procavia syriaca_.
                        It's a chubby little critter with a quivering snout, easy to associate
                        with a piglet. I'm not sure at all that the <-grull(i)os> part was
                        supposed to mean 'pig'. <grullos> can also mean a performer of
                        <grullismos> (an Egyptian dance) or, figuratively, a comic character or
                        caricature. Given the agility of hyraxes, contrasting with their plump
                        form, something like 'pig-dancer' sums them up fairly well.

                        > I also noticed that the hypothesis that Slavic *xe^rU 'grey' is
                        > inherited and comes from *kHoiro- is probable when you consider Greek facts.
                        > You are right that arguments are not too strong (because the development of
                        > *kH in Slavic is not attested with many examples - even the most famous
                        > example of <soxa> 'primitive plough' may be an Iranian borrowing and not an
                        > inherited word related to Skr. çakha 'branch').

                        It's quite possible that *kh2 > Slavic *x, but I don't know of any
                        examples of stop + *h1 yielding an aspirated stop even in Indo-Iranian,
                        not to mention Greek.

                        > But you have not strong
                        > evidence that this word is a Germanic borrowing either.

                        No, but at least the formal match is impeccable.

                        > And of course Slavic
                        > <zaje,cI> may be completely unrelated but it does not has to be. However, we
                        > know that the name of the hare may come from 'grey'. It causes that the
                        > hypothesis of genetic relation between <zaje,cI> and *xe^rU cannot be
                        > rejected at the start, nothing more. And if we were able to show more
                        > examples of twofold development of *k^H in Slavic, into *x and into *z (no
                        > matter how much irregular and improbable it seems now),

                        If.

                        > ... all the "grey hare"
                        > hypothesis would be yet more probable.

                        OK, I promised to tell you what I think of *zajeNcI. To begin with, the
                        Russian case forms that seem to contain a yer have been influenced by
                        variants of the word without a nasal vowel, *zajIcI or *zajIkU (with a
                        restored velar); Old Russian had gen.sg. <zajaca>, but the Russian
                        falling together of unstressed /ja/ and /je/ (< *jI, with a strong yer)
                        has obscured the difference and has led to a mismatch between the
                        official spellling of the nom.sg. and the vowelless forms of the other
                        cases.

                        I'd derive the word from the root *g^hei- 'dart, move abruptly', which
                        also underlies OInd. háya- and Arm. ji (< *g^Héj-o-s). There seems to be
                        a good deal of contamination between this root and a few similar ones,
                        and I'm not quite happy, for example, with the way etymological
                        dictionaries lump these words together with others meaning 'hurt, spear'
                        etc. (cf. Gms. gaiza-), which may constitute a different etymon (or even
                        different etyma). However, RV <héman> 'impulse' and <hitá> 'running' may
                        well belong here (< *g^Hei-mn., *g^Hi-tó-). An animal name could be
                        formed as an o-grade root noun (cf. Gk. pto:ks 'hare', sko:ps 'scops
                        owl'), so we'd get something like *g^Ho:i (gen.sg. *g^Hej-ós for
                        acrostatic *g^Hei-s), converted into a Proto-Slavic i-stem *zajI
                        reflecting the vocalism of the old nom.sg. (like *g^Hwe:r > *zve^rI or
                        *nokWts > *noktI). *zajI-cI ~ *zajI-kU are simple diminutives of that.

                        The origin of the nasal in *zajeNcI is unclear. We have to start with
                        pre-Slavic *za:jin-ko-, which looks like an untypical (archaic?)
                        diminutive of a nasal stem (the *in may of course reflect a syllabic
                        *n.). Perhaps the 'hare' word could also be extended with the highly
                        productive Slavic suffix -nt-, cf. *zve^rI ~ *zve^reNt- or *agnIcI ~
                        *agneNt-. The hypothetical *za:jin(t-) + -ko- > *za:jinko- does not look
                        impossible (cf. *kamykU 'pebble', with -k- attached to the nom.sg. *kamy
                        rather than the stem *kamen-). To be sure, the *-nt- noun *zajeN is not
                        directly attested (but neither is *agnU, which must have existed, and
                        *de^tU 'child' is vanishingly rare in the singular), and if -nt- stems
                        could ever form their k-derivatives in this way, the process lost its
                        productivity with the spread of the *-eNt-U-ko type, with a buffer vowel
                        between the suffixes (and the resulting diminutive remaining neuter). A
                        difficult word, however one explains it.

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