Re: root *pVs- for cat
- --- In email@example.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>
>'puss' has p- and therefore can't be Germanic either (since that would
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@>
> > Gaelic piseag can not be from Celtic because it has a
> > /p-/. It also has a dimunitive ending -ag.
> -ic~a of Romanian pisic~a is a diminutive too
> see : mam~a -> m~am-ic~a
> > book is based on a specific dialect, not Gaelic as a
> > whole or even standard Gaelic. I've seen other forms
> > of the word such as pus, puis. It IS from English,
> > given that the normal Gaelic word is cat, which is
> > from Latin. If you don't believe me, ask Kim Mc Cone
> > or another specialist in Gaelic and Celtic languagues.
> 1. If Gaelic piseag IS from English (with bold :), not with
> arguments) ... from where is English puss?
> 2. Why English puss has an Unknown Etymology (Webster)?
> 3. Where are Germanic counterparts of English puss?
be from almost non-existent PIE b-). As a matter of fact, initial p-
is one of the criteria Kuhn uses to identify NWBlock loans. It so
happens that I have made a list of Kuhn's NWBlock words in p- and
supplemented it with Celtic (Irish, Welsh, Breton) cognates, also in
p- which shouldn't be there, but all three dictionaries I consulted
were brim-full with words in p- (and the NWBlock cognates all had
invariably p-, regardless of whether the language was q-Celtic or
p-Celtic), and it worries me that no Celtic expert has been puzzled
and/or dismisses them as loans from Enlgish (but they can't be
English, they have p-!).
One possible solution is to consider whether it is possible the Celts
in England had replaced a NWBlock-speaking people. Is there some
heavy-duty Celtic expert out there who will issue something
authoritative on this subject?
As for the -eag suffix; it appears in several of the Celtic cognates
I've found to Kuhn's list; it seems to correspond to the typical
- At 10:26:26 AM on Monday, September 19, 2011, Torsten wrote:
>> Perfectly normal in Germanic. Six others:Yes.
>> *libnō- 'be left over',
>> *libjanaN 'to live';
>> *fra-luznō- 'become lost',
>> *fra-leusanaN 'to lose';
>> *þurznō- 'to dry out (intr.), wither',
>> *þersanaN 'to dry out' (trans.);
>> *ga-sturknō- 'to dry up (intr.), thicken',
>> *ga-sterkanaN 'to cause to harden';
>> *waknō- 'to wake up (intr.)',
>> *wakjanaN 'to wake (someone) up; to be awake';
>> *liznō- 'to learn',
>> *laizijanaN 'to teach'.
>> The pair
>> *warnō- 'to take heed; to warn',
>> *warjanaN 'to protect'
>> fits the pattern well.
> So you're saying there are two suffixes in play here
> *-nó:- and *´-(j)a-n- ?
> Thanks for pointing that out.To be honest, I've not paid any attention to them, so I have
> Would you say the correspondences to *war- and *war-Vn-
> outside Germanic which Tavi pointed out are spurious then?