- --- In email@example.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:I think this <himil> had the same origin as the usual 'heaven', and being used for 'painted ceiling panel' created some confusion, which was solved by using the collective suffix. A tantum plurale would not have fixed anything because there are several 'heavens' in most theologies anyway.
> > --- In email@example.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > Here's a *very* tentative idea:
> > >
> > > I have a suspicion the Germanic "heaven" is a loan
> > >
> > > Wortschatz der Germanischen Spracheinheit:
> > > 'hemina, hemila m. Himmel, Zimmerdecke. g. himins m. Himmel;
> > > an. himinn m. dass.;
> > > as. heBan und himil m.,
> > > afries. himel, himul,
> > > ags. heofon m., engl. heaven;
> > > ahd. himil m. Himmel, Zimmerdecke,
> > > mnd. himel, nhd. Himmel.
> > >
> > > Davon abgeleitet
> > > ahd. himilizi, himilze,
> > > mhd. himelze, himelz n. Zimmerdecke, Baldachin,
> > > mnd. hemelte Zimmerdecke, ndl. gehemelte Gaumen (aus
> > > he-militia-).
> > > Vgl. gr. kmélethron. (73:8)'
> > >
> > > 1) the odd suffix -et-,
> > > 2) the inlaut alternation w/m and
> > > 3) the auslaut alternation l/n (some kind of heteroclitic)
> > > sets it apart from other Germanic words (except for *litel- and
> > > *mikel- also having property 3)
> > First things last. In <himilizzi> usw. the Gmc. suffix *-itja
> > apparently functions as a collective, parallel to its use in OE
> > <Elmet> 'Elmwood' (cf. Kluge, Nom. Stammb. 2. Aufl. 36). The sense
> > of <himil> here was neither 'heaven' nor 'ceiling', but 'painted
> > panel', and an assembly of these constituted one ceiling, as
> > indicated by a gloss of Hrabanus Maurus:
> > "Laquearia sunt que cameram subtegunt et ornant que et lacunaria
> > dicuntur pro quibus nos de ligno tabulas pingimus et _himil_
> > nuncupamus."
> Some connection with *kumul-? Anyway, claiming IE-ness on the basis of a tree name is risky.
The tree-name 'elm' is IE, but the rarity of the formation is a problem. As for Udolph's *Bro:m-ith- and other OE collectives in -ithi-, -ithja- (not -itja-), these could be adaptations of an abstract suffix. I fail to grasp Udolph's thesis about the relation between English and continental -ithi-, as these must have been brought by post-Grimm Gmc.-speakers anyway.
> You will enjoy this:Well, maps don't lie, and there's more to Gmc. suffixation than I can find in Kluge. I'm skeptical about dividing -(i)ta:ni: into two suffixes. Time is running out, and I'll try to address the other issues another day.
> (the tinyurl's don't work, they may have referred to something in the files section; but at least check this out:
> Or absorbed Venetic substrate in Hispanic Gothic?
> Apparently Udolph missed them, since he assumed the suffix was Germanic.
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Richard Wordingham"
> > Delamarre objects to this that *wºlkW-o- should have given Old
> > **flech and Gaulish **ulipos, so he links the Irish word to theethnonym
> > Uolcos 'falcon', which he relates to Latin falco: < *g^wol-k-(preferably in its ASCII or Latin-1 form), modified only where you think
> > (traditional *g^h), from a root *g^wel- 'to curve'.
> In the interests of clarity, please use the standard spelling
it misidentifies the correspondences of the sounds or phonemes involved.
If you need to make a point about what you think the actual
pronunciation was, use square brackets (). (I am speaking as a
member, not a moderator.)
>I don't think this is a matter of transcription/encoding as much as of
the actual choice of the reconstructed phonemes. For reasons I stated
before, I think classical "voiced aspirated" stops (series III) were
actually *plain* voiced, so there's no point in perpetuating their
corresponding symbols. IMHO, there're two possible choices for the PIE
stop system, depending on if one includes glottalics or not:
series I - voiceless (phonologically aspirated) / voiceless aspirated
series II - glottalic / (unaspirated) voiceless
series III - voiced
The first system is the one reconstructed for Proto-Kartvelian and the
second one for Proto-Altaic. The latter has the advantage as being more
flexible as regarding the outcome of earlier glottalics, variable among