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

Re: Re: [tied] *rebh- or *H3rebh-

Expand Messages
  • Piotr Gasiorowski
    ... What do you take me for, Abdullah? :) *bH does give /pH/ in this root, cf. the derivatives I quoted, such as . However, in the present tense of
    Message 1 of 14 , Jul 3 11:03 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      On 2006-07-04 00:19, Abdullah Konushevci wrote:

      > Really, but *bh > Greek ph: *bhH-n-yo > phainein 'to shine', Alb. <bënj>
      > 'to do, to bring to light'; *bha-k'o > Greek phagos 'lentil', Alb.
      > <bathë> 'broad bean'; *bher- > Greek pherein, Alb. bie, Lat. ferre.

      What do you take me for, Abdullah? :) *bH does give /pH/ in this root,
      cf. the derivatives I quoted, such as <óropHos>. However, in the present
      tense of the verb 'to cover' (*h1rebH-je/o-) the *bH was followed by *j.
      The pre-Greek sequence *-pHj- developed regularly into /-pt-/ (via a
      cluster with a prehistoric affricate), merging with the reflex of *-pj-.
      As an independent illustration, consider <tápHos> 'grave' vs. <tHapto:>
      'bury'. Both these words derive from preforms with *dH..bH- > *tHapH-.
      In the former, Grassmann's Law applies; in the latter (another *-je/o-
      present stem) it doesn't, since the aspiration of the second stop
      disappeared in the process of palatalisation, which was earlier than
      Grassmann's Law in Greek.

      Piotr
    • Abdullah Konushevci
      ... but ... could ... an ... much ... family. If ... rather than ... [AK] First, I found that the verb is to cover, to build , future and
      Message 2 of 14 , Jul 4 12:30 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > On 2006-07-03 17:04, Abdullah Konushevci wrote:
        >
        > > *H3 is described phontecally as a rounded velar fricative [XW],
        but
        > > I doubt as well that /b/ in <brinjë> as well as <v> in <vrap>
        could
        > > as well be a prefix, but rounded character of *H3, followed by
        > > resonant leaves a space to doubt of their laryngeal origin.
        > > Nevertheless, I just started to treat words in *r-. It was just
        an
        > > assumption. But, to not accept that Alb. <brinjë> that has so
        much
        > > cognate in Germanic languages and in Slavic, is very strange.
        >
        > The 'rib' word has likely cognates in Greek -- the verb <erépto:>
        > 'cover, provide with a roof' (*h1rebH-je/o-) and its lexical
        family. If
        > there ever was an initial laryngeal in this root, it was *h1
        rather than
        > *h3.

        [AK]
        First, I found that the verb is <erepho> 'to cover, to build',
        future <erepso> and <erepsomai>, aor. <erepsa>; erepsimos 'belonging
        to roof'. So, for sure, we have *H1rebh-o in verbal root.
        .
        Initial /o/ is only found in "Rasmussen derivatives" with the
        > O-fix, <óropHos, oropHé:> 'cover, roof' and must be due to Gk.
        vowel
        > assimilation, as in <odoús> and <ónoma>. It's far from obvious
        that the
        > Albanian word belongs to the same etymon at all.

        [AK]
        But, that is to be waiting, due to e-o Ablaut in verb and noun stem,
        noun stem to be *H3robh-o > Greek he orophe and ho orophos 'roof',
        especially ho orophos 'rod, cane' that cover the roofs.

        The pattern of
        > assimilation in the alleged "labial + *n" sequence is also
        suspect,
        > given that *-pn- yields Alb. /m/, as in <gjumë> 'sleep'.

        [AK]
        I agree that sequence -bhn-/-pn- has as result Albanian -m-, like in
        gjumë 'sleep', amë 'river', lumë 'river' etc., but if it was
        followed by back vowel /*o/. In case that this sequence is followed
        by palatal glide /y/, like in mër-dhinj 'to freez' < *g'heim-yo, I
        think that *H3r.bh-n-yeH2 > Alb. <brinjë> is far from obvious to
        belong to this root, together with Greek erepho.
        >
        > Piotr

        Konushevci
      • Abdullah Konushevci
        ... Alb. ... Alb. ... ferre. ... root, ... present ... by *j. ... a ... *-pj-. ... ... *tHapH-. ... je/o- ... than ... From what I know, se
        Message 3 of 14 , Jul 4 12:31 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > On 2006-07-04 00:19, Abdullah Konushevci wrote:
          >
          > > Really, but *bh > Greek ph: *bhH-n-yo > phainein 'to shine',
          Alb. <bënj>
          > > 'to do, to bring to light'; *bha-k'o > Greek phagos 'lentil',
          Alb.
          > > <bathë> 'broad bean'; *bher- > Greek pherein, Alb. bie, Lat.
          ferre.
          >
          > What do you take me for, Abdullah? :) *bH does give /pH/ in this
          root,
          > cf. the derivatives I quoted, such as <óropHos>. However, in the
          present
          > tense of the verb 'to cover' (*h1rebH-je/o-) the *bH was followed
          by *j.
          > The pre-Greek sequence *-pHj- developed regularly into /-pt-/ (via
          a
          > cluster with a prehistoric affricate), merging with the reflex of
          *-pj-.
          > As an independent illustration, consider <tápHos> 'grave' vs.
          <tHapto:>
          > 'bury'. Both these words derive from preforms with *dH..bH- >
          *tHapH-.
          > In the former, Grassmann's Law applies; in the latter (another *-
          je/o-
          > present stem) it doesn't, since the aspiration of the second stop
          > disappeared in the process of palatalisation, which was earlier
          than
          > Grassmann's Law in Greek.
          >
          > Piotr

          From what I know, se my previous message, we have'nt here to deal at
          all with ha-ha rule.

          Konushevci
        • Piotr Gasiorowski
          ... Actually, both and are attested in Ancient Greek. The first is a simple thematic present, the second a *-je/o- stem. ... The root is
          Message 4 of 14 , Jul 4 1:34 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            On 2006-07-04 09:30, Abdullah Konushevci wrote:

            > First, I found that the verb is <erepho> 'to cover, to build',

            Actually, both <erépHo:> and <erépto:> are attested in Ancient Greek.
            The first is a simple thematic present, the second a *-je/o- stem.

            > future <erepso> and <erepsomai>, aor. <erepsa>; erepsimos 'belonging
            > to roof'. So, for sure, we have *H1rebh-o in verbal root.

            The root is *h1rebH-, right? So far, so good.

            > Initial /o/ is only found in "Rasmussen derivatives" with the
            >> O-fix, <óropHos, oropHé:> 'cover, roof' and must be due to Gk.
            > vowel
            >> assimilation, as in <odoús> and <ónoma>. It's far from obvious
            > that the
            >> Albanian word belongs to the same etymon at all.
            >
            > [AK]
            > But, that is to be waiting, due to e-o Ablaut in verb and noun stem,
            > noun stem to be *H3robh-o > Greek he orophe and ho orophos 'roof',
            > especially ho orophos 'rod, cane' that cover the roofs.

            There is no such thing as *h1/*h3 ablaut. *h1 remains *h1 whatever
            happens to the root vowel. To be honest, I'm not quite sure what should
            be expected in a root like *h1rebH- with an O-fix as the regular
            development. Jens claims that before a laryngeal or *r the O-fix
            remained a prefix and metathesis was blocked. But what about a complex
            onset with _both_ a laryngeal and a rhotic? Perhaps Jens will find the
            time to comment on this. However, what seems to me to be at least a
            possibility is metathesis with loss of the initial laryngeal, i.e.
            *O-h1r[&]bHo- > *robHo-, not unlike *O-h2w[&]lh1no- > *wolno- (Jens's
            own example). Gk. <óropHos> would then contain a genuine prothetic
            vowel, with the same quality as the root vowel, added to avoid a
            word-initial /r/. The analogy of erépto: ~ erépHo: (where the first
            vowel seems to echo the root vocalism) may have played a role.

            As an alternative explanation, we might simply assume *h1robHos,
            analogical after *tómh1os etc., becoming *eropHos > oropHos by
            assimilation. This, indeed, seems to be the mundane standard
            explanation, though it's less clever than the one above :)

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