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

Re: sea, seal

Expand Messages
  • Abdullah Konushevci
    ... ************ Why not with *welk- to drag : Av. varǝk- drag : Lith. velkù (vil̃kti ), O.C.S. vlěkǫ “pull, drag”: Gk. ἄ[F]ολξ furrow ,
    Message 1 of 44 , Aug 10, 2007
      --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
      > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@> wrote:
      > >
      > Connection with *saiwa-la- "soul" (water creature)?
      > Torsten
      Why not with *welk- 'to drag': Av. varǝk- 'drag': Lith. velkù (vil̃kti
      ), O.C.S. vlěkǫ “pull, drag”: Gk. ἄ[F]ολξ 'furrow', the original root
      form of *swelk-/selk- 'to draw, pull'. Probably form *swelk- with w -
      k > k - k assimilation will explain Alb helq/heq 'to pull, pull down',
      so much disputed by some linguists.

    • Anders R. Joergensen
      ... from ... Bret. paret from Lat. para:tus. ... Really? I don t think it s that bad (especially when we bear in mind its age - it s from 1892). Anyway, this
      Message 44 of 44 , Aug 23, 2007
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "indravayu" <sonno3@...> wrote:
        > > Is there any particular reason not to consider paraf a borrowing
        > > Latin para:re 'to prepare, provide, procure' (as did Loth)? >
        Bret. paret from Lat. para:tus.
        > If you are referring to Loth's "Les Mots Latins Dans Les Langues
        > Brittoniques", I have to say that I don't find this book to be
        > completely reliable.

        Really? I don't think it's that bad (especially when we bear in mind
        its age - it's from 1892). Anyway, this has no direct bearing on
        whether or not par- is borrowed from Latin.

        Regardless, Pokorny (IEW) has it as a native
        > Celtic root and I think that most scholars these days follow him
        > this matter

        Pokorny derives W par- from a reduplicated present (with
        dereduplication), LIV derives it from the root aorist. We should
        however remember that hardly any form of the paradigms involved
        would actually produce PCelt. *kWar- (as syllabic -r- would vocalize
        as -ri- in the 1st and 2nd plural).
        The 3pl. *kWr-ént could, with "Lindeman" or analogical vocalization
        as *kWr.-ént, produce PCelt. *kWar-e/o-, but that's about it.

        And W par- is absent from Schumacher's Primärverben, as far as I can
        see. I take this as an indication that he does not derive it from an
        athematic PIE *kWer-/*kWr-.

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