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

Re: [tied] Latin merx

Expand Messages
  • dgkilday57
    ... Learn to read more carefully. I neither stated nor implied that is etymologically related to . Also, note that intervocalic *-bH-
    Message 1 of 14 , Jun 18, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Tavi" <oalexandre@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
      > >
      > > This connection is denied by Osthoff (IF 6:9-14, 1896), who refers the
      > Skt. word
      > > to IE *mr.k^-, citing also the noun <mars'anam>. Vulcan is not known
      > for
      > > touching things lightly, but for melting metals, and his epithet
      > <Mulciber>
      > >(with the suffix *-dHro-) is most likely 'Melter', indicating that Lat.
      > > <mulceo:> literally meant 'I cause to melt' or 'I soften', later used
      > in a figurative sense.
      > >
      > Not so. If <Vulcan> is indeed related to <Mulci-ber>, then the latter
      > must be a loanword from some Italic language, where <-ber> is the
      > equivalent of native Latin <-fer> < IE *bher-. It has nothing to do with
      > <mulceo:>.

      Learn to read more carefully. I neither stated nor implied that <Vulca:nus> is etymologically related to <Mulciber>. Also, note that intervocalic *-bH- regularly becomes Latin -b-; it is P-Italic which shows -f-. In Latin objective compounds with <-fer>, like <signifer>, the -f- has been introduced from the simplex <fero:> by analogy of <armiger> to <gero:>, etc.

      The proposal that <Mulciber> is to <mulceo:> as <latebra> is to <lateo:>, of native Latin origin with the implemental suffix *-dHlo-/-dHla:-, is far more plausible than groping in the dark for borrowing from an unidentified language.

      > This of course raises the question of the actual etymology of the root
      > *Vulc- ~ *Mulc-, (as you suggest) possibly 'to melt, to soften'.

      I proposed no such vacillating root. My argument involved only <mulceo:> and words to which it might be related through known soundlaws.

      > > Scholars supporting an Etruscan origin for Latin <merx> and its
      > relatives include Hofmann (not Walde!) and Watkins, who are not
      > specialists in the field of Etruscan loanwords in Latin. Among scholars
      > who have published monographs in this field, such as Ernout, Breyer, and
      > Watmough, I am not aware of any support for deriving <merx> this way.
      > While it is possible for Latin to borrow Etruscan nouns as
      > consonant-stems (such as <satelles> 'bodyguard, attendant' from Etr.
      > <zatlath>, probably 'axe-striker' vel sim., referring to the lictors of
      > Tarquinius Superbus), there is no parallel for borrowing the totality of
      > *merk-, *merku-, *merka:-, and *merke:d- from Etruscan. Since no
      > evidence for a root *merk- can be extracted from Etruscan texts anyway,
      > such a borrowing hypothesis explains nothing and should be discarded.
      > >
      > But Etruscan has *marx-, with a different vocalism, so a borrowing is
      > still possible.

      Onomastic evidence is overwhelmingly against such a change in vocalism when Latin borrows from Etruscan; cf. Lat. Larcius, Largius = Etr. Larcna, etc.

      DGK
    • Tavi
      ... PLEASE use please before an imperative verb form. Just to be polite. ... related to . Of course, you didn t, because this was my own
      Message 2 of 14 , Jun 19, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@...> wrote:
        >
        > Learn to read more carefully.

        PLEASE use "please" before an imperative verb form. Just to be polite.

        > I neither stated nor implied that <Vulca:nus> is etymologically
        related to <Mulciber>.

        Of course, you didn't, because this was my own hypothesis.

        > Also, note that intervocalic *-bH- regularly becomes Latin -b-; it is
        P-Italic which shows -f-. In Latin objective compounds with <-fer>, like
        <signifer>, the -f- has been introduced from the simplex <fero:> by
        analogy of <armiger> to <gero:>, etc.
        >
        Possibly.

        > The proposal that <Mulciber> is to <mulceo:> as <latebra> is to
        <lateo:>, of native Latin origin with the implemental suffix
        *-dHlo-/-dHla:-, is far more plausible than groping in the dark for
        borrowing from an unidentified language.
        >
        I suppose you mean *-dhro-.

        > > This of course raises the question of the actual etymology of the
        root
        > > *Vulc- ~ *Mulc-, (as you suggest) possibly 'to melt, to soften'.
        >
        > I proposed no such vacillating root. My argument involved only
        <mulceo:> and words to which it might be related through known
        soundlaws.
        >
        My own interest lies on the etymology of Vulca:nus and its possible
        relation with <mulceo:>

        > > But Etruscan has *marx-, with a different vocalism, so a borrowing
        is
        > > still possible.
        >
        > Onomastic evidence is overwhelmingly against such a change in vocalism
        when Latin borrows from Etruscan; cf. Lat. Larcius, Largius = Etr.
        Larcna, etc.
        >
        I still see this root is a good candidate to be a loanword.
      • Richard Wordingham
        ... But your post strongly suggested it was. I had to reread carefully to be sure that Douglas wasn t proposing it. ... Have you some other explanation? ...
        Message 3 of 14 , Jun 19, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Tavi" <oalexandre@...> wrote:
          > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:

          > > I neither stated nor implied that <Vulca:nus> is etymologically
          > related to <Mulciber>.
          >
          > Of course, you didn't, because this was my own hypothesis.

          But your post strongly suggested it was. I had to reread carefully to be sure that Douglas wasn't proposing it.

          > > Also, note that intervocalic *-bH- regularly becomes Latin -b-; it is
          > P-Italic which shows -f-. In Latin objective compounds with <-fer>, like
          > <signifer>, the -f- has been introduced from the simplex <fero:> by
          > analogy of <armiger> to <gero:>, etc.

          > Possibly.

          Have you some other explanation?

          > > The proposal that <Mulciber> is to <mulceo:> as <latebra> is to
          > <lateo:>, of native Latin origin with the implemental suffix
          > *-dHlo-/-dHla:-, is far more plausible than groping in the dark for
          > borrowing from an unidentified language.

          > I suppose you mean *-dhro-.

          No reason to - see http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/29858 et seq. for a discussion of the suffix -tlo/-thlo or -tlo/-dHlo and its conditionally rhotacised version. For Latin, so far as I am aware, the rhotacisation could be PIE or Latin - recall the conditioned alternant -a:ris of -a:lis.

          Richard.
        • Tavi
          ... http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/29858 et seq. for a discussion of the suffix -tlo/-thlo or -tlo/-dHlo and its conditionally rhotacised
          Message 4 of 14 , Jun 20, 2010
          • 0 Attachment

            --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

            >
            > No reason to - see http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/29858 et seq. for a discussion of the suffix -tlo/-thlo or -tlo/-dHlo and its conditionally rhotacised version. For Latin, so far as I am aware, the rhotacisation could be PIE or Latin - recall the conditioned alternant -a:ris of -a:lis.
            >
            It seems this *tl ~ *tHl ~ *dhl cluster was actually some kind of lateral consonant in PIE, whose result could be either /l/ or /r/, depending on conditions.

          • Tavi
            ...
            Message 5 of 14 , Jun 23, 2010
            • 0 Attachment

              --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@...> wrote:

              >
              > An IE root *merk^- is found in the zero-grade in Sanskrit <mr.s'áti> 'he
              touches, grasps, handles' and in Greek <brakeîn> 'to come together, meet,
              assemble', <bráketon> 'crowd', <bráttein> (*brákyein) 'to fill, load heavily'
              and <dusbrákanos> 'hard to handle'.
              >
              > > The Greek word has a doublet parptó: 'to catch, seize, lay, hold off,
              overtake'. Beekes then devises a Pre-Greek root *mr(a)kW- > brap-, brak- with
              different outputs of the labiovelar cluster.
              >
              > Beekes's error of making only superficial changes to Furne'e's completely
              wrong-headed Pre-Greek reconstructive methodology is most unfortunate, but such
               matters probably belong on the other list.
              >
              There's an IE root *bhrak- 'to stuff, squeeze together' (Latin farcio:, Greek phrásso:, phrátto:), which looks like a non-native one due to its *a. In this way, both *bhrak- (with denasalization) and *merk^- would be (borrowed) reflexes of a former root *mreH-k- ~ *meHr-k- (with metathesis CRVC ~ CVRC), possibly connected to Sino-Tibetan *mre:(H) 'to buy, debt'. A relationship with IE *meH2ºr/ºn- 'hand' (Greek máre:, Latin manus) and Uralic *mOrV 'handful' is also possible.

              I should remark Sergei Nikolayev merges Latin merc- with some outputs of IE *per- 'to exchange, barter', although IMHO linguistic data don't support this. The latter seems to be a Wanderwort related to Afro-Asiatic *pVxVr-  'gathering, assembly'.

            • Tavi
              ... merchandise, ...
              Message 6 of 14 , Nov 1, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" dgkilday57@ wrote:
                >
                > An IE root *merk^- is found in the zero-grade in Sanskrit <mr.s'áti> 'he touches, grasps, handles' and in
                > Greek <brakeîn> 'to come together, meet, assemble', <bráketon> 'crowd', <bráttein> (*brákyein) 'to fill,
                > load heavily' and <dusbrákanos> 'hard to handle'.
                >
                > It is plausible that the normal grade of the same root occurs in Italic with Latin <merx> 'merchandise,
                > wares', <merce:s> 'price, reward', <merca:ri:> 'to conduct trade', <Mercurius> 'god of trade', Faliscan
                > <Mercus> 'god of trade', and Oscan <amiricatud> 'without remuneration'. The basic sense of *merk^- is
                > likely 'to handle'. The development in Italic is then parallel to German <handeln> 'to trade', <Handel>
                > 'traffic, trade'. A similar development in Greek would explain <bráketon> originally as 'market-place', like > Latin <merca:tus>, then 'crowd at the market-place, crowded assembly, mass of people, full load', etc. But > <dusbrákanos> preserves the original force of the root.

                > > The Greek word has a doublet parptó: 'to catch, seize, lay, hold
                off, overtake'. Beekes then devises a
                > > Pre-Greek root *mr(a)kW- >
                brap-, brak- with different outputs of the labiovelar cluster.
                >
                There's also the root *bhrak-/*bhark- reflected in Greek phrásso:, phratto: 'to crowd together', Latin farcio: 'to fill'.

                Although I don't exclude the possibility of semantic contamination in some cases, IMHO Latin merx and related words aren't etymologically connected to 'handle' or 'crowd'. As I mentioned before, we've got the related Etruscan form marXar, pressumably 'trader', which I derive from a protoform *m-HarXwV related to NEC *=HirfVr 'to change' (I implictly assume f=Xw).

                With a different output of the cluster *Xw, we've got a root *merH- reflected in Celtic *mar-na- 'to bretray', *mrato- 'to deceit'. The latter is the origin of the Romance verb *barata:re '
                to trade; to cheat; to barter', borrowed (through French) into English barter. Also Sino-Tibetan *mre:(H) 'to buy, debt' belongs here.

                With a different prefix, we've got *p-HarXwV > *prak-, reflected in Greek prásso:, prátto: 'to deal with, to trade', pratós 'sold'. And with a different output of *Xw also *perH-, reflected in Baltic *pi~rk- (*pe~rk-a-) 'to buy'.
              • Tavi
                ... sold . ... Of course, the Baltic forms are derived from *perk-. But *perH- is the source of Greek pérne:mi to sell , pipré:sko: to betray , more or
                Message 7 of 14 , Nov 1, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Tavi" <oalexandre@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > With a different prefix, we've got *p-HarXwV > *prak-, reflected in
                  > Greek prásso:, prátto: 'to deal with, to trade', pratós 'sold'.
                  > And with a different output of *Xw also *perH-, reflected in Baltic
                  > *pi~rk- (*pe~rk-a-) 'to buy'.
                  >
                  Of course, the Baltic forms are derived from *perk-. But *perH- is the source of Greek pérne:mi 'to sell', pipré:sko: 'to betray', more or less semantical counterparts of the Celtic forms.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.