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

starling

Expand Messages
  • Abdullah Konushevci
    *storo- `stalring . Alb shturë `red-coloured starling; starling (Sturnus vulgaris L.) from *str.H1r-eH2: NE starling: OHG star(a) from Germanic *staraz: Lat
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 26, 2007
      *storo- `stalring'. Alb shturë `red-coloured starling; starling
      (Sturnus vulgaris L.)' from *str.H1r-eH2: NE starling: OHG star(a)
      from Germanic *staraz: Lat sturnus `id.': Old Prusian stranite `gull,
      seagull': Russian strentka `yellowhammer'. Seems that perform was
      *storH1o-, because *r.H1 > Alb –ur (cf. *gWhr.H1-u > Alb gur `stone'
      (Watkins). (Pokorny storos 1036.)

      Konushevci
    • alexandru_mg3
      ... 1. The quality of the laryngeal in *gWhr.H-i is considered Unknown at least by Lubotsky :) = see Leiden, Indo-Aryan Etymological Dictionary Based on what
      Message 2 of 4 , Feb 27, 2007
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
        <akonushevci@...> wrote:
        >
        > *storo- `stalring'. Alb shturë `red-coloured starling; starling
        > (Sturnus vulgaris L.)' from *str.H1r-eH2: NE starling: OHG star(a)
        > from Germanic *staraz: Lat sturnus `id.': Old Prusian stranite `gull,
        > seagull': Russian strentka `yellowhammer'. Seems that perform was
        > *storH1o-, because *r.H1 > Alb –ur (cf. *gWhr.H1-u > Alb gur `stone'
        > (Watkins). (Pokorny storos 1036.)
        >
        > Konushevci
        >

        1. The quality of the laryngeal in *gWhr.H-i is considered Unknown at
        least by Lubotsky :) => see Leiden, Indo-Aryan Etymological Dictionary
        Based on what you wrote h1? What are the arguments?

        NOTE also: that we have an i-stem here, not an u-stem


        2. NExt we have : PIE *r.h1 > PAlb/Dacian? ar
        as in Romanian barza & Alb. bardh& (see Piotr's message on this forum
        related to the quality of the laryngeal in Albanian bardh&, with a very
        good argumentation)

        So once again : if rh1 > ar WE CANNOT have rh1 > ur (SAME CONTEXT -
        SAME RULE)


        Marius
      • Abdullah Konushevci
        ... (a) ... `gull, ... was ... `stone ... Unknown at ... Dictionary ... forum ... very ... ************ About the nature of laryngeal in *bherHg - shine :
        Message 3 of 4 , Feb 27, 2007
          --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
          > <akonushevci@> wrote:
          > >
          > > *storo- `stalring'. Alb shturë `red-coloured starling; starling
          > > (Sturnus vulgaris L.)' from *str.H1r-eH2: NE starling: OHG star
          (a)
          > > from Germanic *staraz: Lat sturnus `id.': Old Prusian stranite
          `gull,
          > > seagull': Russian strentka `yellowhammer'. Seems that perform
          was
          > > *storH1o-, because *r.H1 > Alb –ur (cf. *gWhr.H1-u > Alb gur
          `stone'
          > > (Watkins). (Pokorny storos 1036.)
          > >
          > > Konushevci
          > >
          >
          > 1. The quality of the laryngeal in *gWhr.H-i is considered
          Unknown at
          > least by Lubotsky :) => see Leiden, Indo-Aryan Etymological
          Dictionary
          > Based on what you wrote h1? What are the arguments?
          >
          > NOTE also: that we have an i-stem here, not an u-stem
          >
          >
          > 2. NExt we have : PIE *r.h1 > PAlb/Dacian? ar
          > as in Romanian barza & Alb. bardh& (see Piotr's message on this
          forum
          > related to the quality of the laryngeal in Albanian bardh&, with a
          very
          > good argumentation)
          >
          > So once again : if rh1 > ar WE CANNOT have rh1 > ur (SAME CONTEXT -

          > SAME RULE)
          >
          >
          > Marius
          ************
          About the nature of laryngeal in *bherHg'- 'shine': NWels
          berth: 'shiny', NE bright, Liath brekšta 'dawns', Pol brzask 'dawn',
          Alb bardhë 'white' and underleis the Proto-Indo-European word
          for 'birch' (Alb bredh 'fir-tree') because of its shiny white or
          silver bark (Mallory-Adams *bherHxg'- 329), the authors think that
          it is of unknown origin Hx, but based in Albanian 'bredh' I guess
          that the preform was *bhreH3g'-, IE *bhro:g'-, as far as concerned
          the Albanian form. But, no one is forced to accept such
          reconstruction. Based on NE birch, Lat fraxinus, Skt bu:rja- is hard
          to get any further conclusion.

          *-r.H1- > Alb -ur-, attested in *gWhr.H1-u > Alb gur 'stone' we have
          other example *terH1- 'to rub, drill': Greek teretron 'drill' <
          *tere-tro-m (see Jens, Cybalist, message17888): Alb turielë 'drill'
          < *tr.H1-el-.

          Konushevci
        • alexandru_mg3
          ... a ... CONTEXT - ... brzask dawn , ... hard ... Your guess is wrong: 1. Romanian form is BRAD fir tree so your proposal *bhreH3g -, IE *bhro:g - is
          Message 4 of 4 , Mar 1, 2007
            --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
            <akonushevci@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
            > > <akonushevci@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > *storo- `stalring'. Alb shturë `red-coloured starling; starling
            > > > (Sturnus vulgaris L.)' from *str.H1r-eH2: NE starling: OHG star
            > (a)
            > > > from Germanic *staraz: Lat sturnus `id.': Old Prusian stranite
            > `gull,
            > > > seagull': Russian strentka `yellowhammer'. Seems that perform
            > was
            > > > *storH1o-, because *r.H1 > Alb –ur (cf. *gWhr.H1-u > Alb gur
            > `stone'
            > > > (Watkins). (Pokorny storos 1036.)
            > > >
            > > > Konushevci
            > > >
            > >
            > > 1. The quality of the laryngeal in *gWhr.H-i is considered
            > Unknown at
            > > least by Lubotsky :) => see Leiden, Indo-Aryan Etymological
            > Dictionary
            > > Based on what you wrote h1? What are the arguments?
            > >
            > > NOTE also: that we have an i-stem here, not an u-stem
            > >
            > >
            > > 2. NExt we have : PIE *r.h1 > PAlb/Dacian? ar
            > > as in Romanian barza & Alb. bardh& (see Piotr's message on this
            > forum
            > > related to the quality of the laryngeal in Albanian bardh&, with
            a
            > very
            > > good argumentation)
            > >
            > > So once again : if rh1 > ar WE CANNOT have rh1 > ur (SAME
            CONTEXT -
            >
            > > SAME RULE)
            > >
            > >
            > > Marius
            > ************
            > About the nature of laryngeal in *bherHg'- 'shine': NWels
            > berth: 'shiny', NE bright, Liath brekšta 'dawns', Pol
            brzask 'dawn',
            > Alb bardhë 'white' and underleis the Proto-Indo-European word
            > for 'birch' (Alb bredh 'fir-tree') because of its shiny white or
            > silver bark (Mallory-Adams *bherHxg'- 329), the authors think that
            > it is of unknown origin Hx, but based in Albanian 'bredh' I guess
            > that the preform was *bhreH3g'-, IE *bhro:g'-, as far as concerned
            > the Albanian form. But, no one is forced to accept such
            > reconstruction. Based on NE birch, Lat fraxinus, Skt bu:rja- is
            hard
            > to get any further conclusion.

            >I guess that the preform was *bhreH3g'-, IE *bhro:g'-

            'Your guess' is wrong:

            1. Romanian form is BRAD 'fir tree' so your proposal *bhreH3g'-, IE
            *bhro:g'- is completly wrong because there is no A in *bhro:g'..what
            is strange here is that you can see this as I see too...but 'next'
            you simply decide to ignore this...proposing *bhro:g' ...by
            supposing 'suddenly' that Romanian brad has nothing to do with
            Albanian bredh 'id.' ...

            This is (for me at least), an unbelievable mental mechanism
            trigerred more by emotions ('I don't like to link bredh to Romanian-
            (->Romanians)') than by a rational thinking.

            Your conclusion makes me perplex too: "But, no one is forced to
            accept such reconstruction [*bhro:g']" => I translated this (for
            me): 'I'm tired regarding your objections so finally I think what I
            want'

            2. ALB. BREDH 'id.' is only the umlaut of BRADH (due to the plural
            in -i, see ORom bradzi > Rom brazi) so we have here a common
            PAlb/Dacian? ACCENTED short A (preserved in Romanian).

            3. ALB. BREDH < BRADH (Rom. BRAD) has no link with ALB. BARDHE/(Rom.
            BARZA)
            Why? Because in both words the accent is on 'A => so is a non-
            sense to consider BR'A and B'AR from the same root and in the same
            time accented on 'A
            It should be either BR'A or B'AR but cannot be Both in the same time

            Seems that you continue to have problems to apply the rules coherently

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