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

Re: Re: Re: [tied] Anser (was: swallow vs. nighingale)

Expand Messages
  • fournet.arnaud
    ... From: Patrick Ryan To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 8:53 PM Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: Re: [tied] Anser (was: swallow
    Message 1 of 66 , Nov 30, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 8:53 PM
      Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: Re: [tied] Anser (was: swallow vs. nighingale)

      Fournet:
      ====
      A.F
      Dear Pinocchio,
      What kind of overweening feeling makes you think you are entitled to call me Fournet and sign with your full name Patrick Ryan ?
      ===========
       
      I am not sure what you mean by a "super-cognate" but *p_l is, most certainly, not one.
      ====
      A.F
      Dear Pinocchio,
      If you are not sure of anything, avoid making abrupt conclusions about what may be a super-cognate.
      I am afraid you fail to understand what this word is about.
      =====================
       
      If we look to languages like KhoiSan, for example, we should _not_ expect to find roots of the form *CVC which correspond with PAA (and through it, PIE) and Sino-Caucasian roots. KhoiSan broke away too early for *CVCV stems to have been formulated. The best we might be able to do is find simple monosyllables with a fairly straightforward meaning like **ma: (from *MHA), 'ripe and full', that are only an element in *CVC roots.
      =========
      A.F
      Dear Pinocchio,
      I disagree with that kind of unprovable unfalsifiable flapdoodle.
      Please avoid using "we" when you speak about your own little person.
      There are super-cognate roots present in Khoisan with the structure CvC,
      and CvC-vC.
      Please look at Khoisan a little bit closer,
      before I humiliate you once again with rock-solid data.
      ==============
       
      With PAA (especially Semitic) and PIE, which were in contact, we might be able to find a few *CVCC correspondences but supposing that "Hafil" corresponds to PIE *pleH- is amateurish. The PAA biliteral roots that developed into triliteral roots did not do so by prefixing H but rather by suffixation and gemination. If you do not (apparently) know this, you should read up on the subject before recklessly tossing out obvious nonsensicalities.
      =========
      A.F
      Dear Pinocchio,
      If you had any idea what PAA and Semitic were about,
      I think you would avoid making a fool of yourself,
      uttering that kind of over-assertive and absurd comments.
      Arabic has a large array of prefixes, infixes and suffixes.
      Get yourself Kazimirski or Lisan and you will know.
      Keep on reading and try to understand something
      before you proclaim yourself an expert.
      ===============
       
      As it happens, there is an Arabic word which in one of its stem forms _may_ possibly be compared with PIE *pleH-, namely ?aflaHa, 'prosperous' /fala:H-un, 'prosperity' , by way of 'provided with abundance/fullness' . The root here, for your instruction, is f-l-H.
       
      There is no "H1" in Egyptian, hieroglyphic or otherwise. In any case, if there were really an Egyptian cognate of *pel(H)-, it would appear in Egyptian as *fn(j). There is, in fact, a cognate with the root of PIE *pne-u-: fn, 'pant, be weak'; and fnD, 'nose'.
      =======
      A.F
      Dear Pinocchio,
      PIE *pneu is an infixed variant of *p_H1 root,
      as evidenced by Hebrew and Arabic n_p_H / n_f_H
      which have infix n- treated as a prefix, instead of an infix.
      this makes shreds with your comparison between *pnew and Egyptian fn.
      The root in *pnew is *p_H1.
      Note that Basque is buh-atu from the same root p_H1 with no affix at all.
      This root *p_H also exists in Uralic and Amerind Salish, etc.
      I am afraid you overlooked something...
      I dare say this is becoming habitual.
      Please do something about this predicament of yours.
       
      Dear Pinocchio,
      Before you claim you swallowed the big whale,
      and understand everything,
      I suggest you first take care your big nose
      does not fall off.
       
      Arnaud.
      ====================
       
       
       
      Patrick Ryan
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 2:36 PM
      Subject: Re: Re: [tied] Anser (was: swallow vs. nighingale)

       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 10:48 AM
      Subject: [Courrier indésirable] [Courrier indésirable] Re: [tied] Anser (was: swallow vs. nighingale)


      > > A.F :
      > > > pling : full => Cf. PIE pel(H1/w)
      > > > It is quite clear that these words are cognates not loanwords.
      > > > They had more than one syllable in ST before the "crunch".
      ==
       I think they are borrowed either into both Old Chinese and
      PIE from some unrelated language geographically in between them, or
      into PIE from some early predecessor of Chinese.

      Torsten

      ========

      A.F

      What about :
      Yukaghir pojo- : a lot (l > yod is regular in Siberian languages)
      Niger Touareg : balal : full, abundant (this language has no b/p contrast)
      Arabic : Hafil : full (note that H1 is initial in Arabic not final : pel-H1-)
      Hieroglyphic Egyptian (with vowels) : Hipu:lil : abondant (H1 initial)
       
      There is no alternative to super-cognate status for root *p_l : full, abundant.
       
      NB : Uralic forms pal/pol are tainted by PIE and I disagree they may be cognates.
      They are at best cognates, secondarily tainted by IE words, or IE loanwords.

      Arnaud

      ============ ===

    • fournet.arnaud
      The current state of my own classification does not follow usual limits such as Nostratic or ST. So far, my groups are : A. Paleo-European Mainly Basque and
      Message 66 of 66 , Dec 7, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        The current state of my own classification does not follow
        usual limits such as Nostratic or ST.
        So far, my groups are :
         
        A. Paleo-European
        Mainly Basque and Etruscan
        Features : *l and *r > [s] written -z- in basque
        *d and *t? > l and r
        MAin contrast is : glottalized versus unvoiced.
        Voiced rare.
         
        B. Mediterranean
        PIE + PAA
        PIE includes : hurri and Yenissei and North-Caucasian
        Features : highly complex morphology
        including vowel apophony to express tenses and
        a large array of infixes, prefixes, suffixes.
        The "real" root is often hard to retrieve.
        Grammatical genders : most often two.
        Verbal derivatives (nomen actionis) absurdly belong to
        the feminine gender, even when neuter exists,
        something that makes no semantic sense at all.
        PAA : does not include some parts of Greenberg's Tchadic
        probably includes Kushitic, probably does not include Omotic.
        Velar nasal > & as in ngay-in
        ng-g- > *gh (most often non satem)
         
        C. Kartvelian
        no clear connection with any other group
        phonetically conservative.
        Probably its own group.
         
        D. Center-Asiatic
        D1 : Uralic, Tibetan
        (extensive use of suffixes mo ma mi po pa pi)
        D2 : Chinese, Yi-lolo,
        Tonogenesis because of media and codas :
        glottalized or voiced or unvoiced yield different tones.
        D3 : Turcic, Eskimo
        D4 : Japanese, Aleut.
        Others : position unclear :
        mongolian, gilyak, ainu, tungusic
        Korean : not studied.
        Main features :
        -l- > yod
        English shoulter < *s-kl-tr
        North Caucasian : gäl (from Starostin)
        Proto-Yenissei : *qol (from Starostin)
        Uralic kay- : Hungarian haynal, hanyal "arm-pit"
        Chinese : FuZhou kaing < *koy-in
        Languages that have -l- when Center-Asiatic has -y-
        are group B
        Starostin is worth reading for the data.
         
        velar nasal is kept and reinforced by ng-g- > ng.
        ngay : to see
        ngay-in : eye
        FuZhou : ngaing
        Arabic : &ayin
        PIE : prefix : T+&ay > dhay "to see"
        Uralic : ngay > nay : Moksha : näy- "to see"
         
        My fetish cognate for this group : *naw "soft"
        Or maybe *nab
        Naked form :
        Yi lolo : no or nyo
        Chinese : BeiJing rou < *nyew < *naw
        Extension 1 :
        Chinese : BeiJing ruan3 < *nawan?
        Extension 2 :
        Uralic : Hungarian la:gy < *nawandzh
        Extension 3 :
        Turcic : Uighur nyawlek < *nawanak
        Japanese : yawaraka
         
        Burmese : po : not the same as usual
        Germanic : a loanword as usual : *sanft < s-nab-tos
        Germanic is in favor of *nab as the proto-form.
         
        E : South Asia
        Burmese
        all the rest unclassified
         
        Arnaud
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 7:44 PM
        Subject: Re: Re: [tied] Anser (was: swallow vs. nighingale)

        Since I don't have the wherewithal to judge, please
        tell me how Yenesseian is related to IE. Is it
        Nostratic? How close is it related to Uralic, then?

        --- "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@ wanadoo.fr>
        wrote:

        > I am afraid not,
        > whatever you label "sino-tibetan"
        > Yenissei is just a (forgotten and overlooked) branch
        > of Indo-European,
        > They are the only languages 2 000 miles around
        > that have masculine, feminine and neutral gender,
        > Ket and Kot are not close relative of Tibetan and
        > Chinese.
        > They belong to PIE,
        > And they originate in Anatolia, just like the rest
        > of PIE.
        >
        > Starostin's analyses are worth nothing.
        > Requiescat in pace.
        >
        > Arnaud
        >
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: Rick McCallister
        > To: cybalist@yahoogroup s.com
        > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 11:15 PM
        > Subject: Re: Re: [tied] Anser (was: swallow vs.
        > nighingale)
        >
        >
        > And the southern end of the Yenessei is the
        > original
        > home of Ket et al. So are you linking Sino-Tibetan
        > &
        > Uralic to Yenesseian?
        >
        > --- "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@ wanadoo.fr>
        > wrote:
        >
        > > Arnaud to Torsten,
        > >
        > > One reference is interesting as far as I am
        > > concerned :
        > >
        >
        >
        http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ cybalist/ message/42758
        > >
        > > I disagree with the idea that SiChuan is the
        > > homeland of Tibeto-Birman,
        > > for at least two reasons :
        > > 1. I do not believe Tibeto-Birman is a
        > legitimate
        > > family,
        > > 2. Next, I think Uralic is the closest parent to
        > > Tibetan and Chinese,
        > > even though this statement requires
        > documentation.
        > > I believe Tibetan and Uralic originate in the
        > > southern basin of Ob and Ienissei Rivers.
        > >
        > > I have previously discussed the word "egg" :
        > > Chinese dan4 < *tox-an
        > > Micro-burmese *tuj < *tox
        > > Compare Hungarian toj-ash "egg" < *tox
        > >
        > > Arnaud
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: tgpedersen
        > > To: cybalist@yahoogroup s.com
        > > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 12:54 PM
        > > Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: [tied] Anser
        > > (was: swallow vs. nighingale)
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroup s.com,
        > "fournet.arnaud"
        > > <fournet.arnaud@ ...>
        > > wrote:
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > From: tgpedersen
        > > > To: cybalist@yahoogroup s.com
        > > > Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 1:29 AM
        > > > Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: [tied]
        > Anser
        > > (was: swallow vs.
        > > nighingale)
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > How do you know that?
        > > >
        > > > Myself, I think there was some kind of
        > sea-born
        > > trade with SEAsia
        > > > going on them, possibly around Africa, which
        > > accounts for these words
        > > > as loanwords from SEAsia.
        > > >
        > > > You will enjoy these:
        > > >
        > http://www.angelfir e.com/rant/ tgpedersen/ Op.html
        > > >
        > >
        > http://www.angelfir e.com/rant/ tgpedersen/ Opr.html
        > > >
        > > > Torsten
        > > > =========
        > > >
        > > > A.F :
        > > >
        > > > I agree some words in PAA are loanwords from
        > SE
        > > Asia,
        > > > especially : kl_b "dog"
        > > > But I do not think *p_l is a loanword from SE
        > > Asia.
        > > > I was disappointed by your references :
        > nothing
        > > about "full"
        > > > I suppose something went wrong when giving the
        > > references.
        > >
        > > There are a few references in the bottom. But
        > > you're right, here is
        > > the real reference:
        > > http://www.angelfir e.com/rant/ tgpedersen/ pl.html
        > >
        > > The whole area of 'manifestations' of *p-l- etc
        > > suffers from what I
        > > unsavourily referred to as the spittoon problem
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ cybalist/ message/8719
        > >
        > > which is why the way I've divided up the whole
        > > field into roots is
        > > somewhat arbitrary, here's another part of it:
        > >
        > http://www.angelfir e.com/rant/ tgpedersen/ bHrl.html
        > >
        > > On the origin of these terms, this is relevants:
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ cybalist/ message/45555
        > > What I think happened is that some type of early
        > > geometry, a theory of
        > > weights and measures, was developed in China or
        > > environs (as much as
        > > early agriculture needed, with fixed boundaries
        > > between pieces of
        > > land), and that it was exported, and with it the
        > > various words.
        > > You might want to read the article I refer to.
        > It
        > > is
        > > Matisoff, James A.:
        > > 1988. "Universal semantics and allofamic
        > > identification -- two
        > > Sino-Tibetan case-studies: STRAIGHT / FLAT /
        > FULL
        > > and PROPERTY /
        > > LIVESTOCK / TALENT."
        > > In Akihiro Sato, ed.,
        > > Languages and History in East Asia, pp. 3-14.
        > > Kyoto: Shokado.
        > >
        > > Also
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ cybalist/ message/42758
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ cybalist/ message/43973
        > >
        > > Torsten
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
        > Looking for last minute shopping deals?
        > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
        >
        http://tools. search.yahoo. com/newsearch/ category. php?category= shopping
        >
        >
        >

        ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
        Looking for last minute shopping deals?
        Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools. search.yahoo. com/newsearch/ category. php?category= shopping

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