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

RE: Re: [tied] honestiores and honjesta

Expand Messages
  • dgkilday57
    ... *ǰhandha-ǰyaiṣṭhaka-, cf. Urtsun ɔ̄n house , Rumbūr han (stem hānd-) house, temple of Jeṣṭak
    Message 1 of 61 , Oct 1, 2013


      ---In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, <cybalist@yahoogroups.com> [Bhr.] wrote:

      Kalasha honjesta seems to continue Proto-Indo-Aryan
      *ǰhandha-ǰyaiṣṭhaka-, cf. Urtsun ɔ̄n 'house', Rumbūr han (stem hānd-)
      'house, temple of Jeṣṭak' < *handha- (phonetically also ghon, stem
      ghōnd- = Vedic gandhá- 'smell'), ǰeṣṭä̅ṅgur 'thumb' : Vedic jyéṣṭha-
      'first'. Latin honestior must come from either Proto-Indo-European
      *ghon-es-t-(i)yōs- or *g'hon-es-t-(i)yōs-, while *ǰhandha-ǰyaiṣṭhaka-
      implies PIE *g'hondho-g(w)yeH-ist(h)o-ko-, so we would have at best a
      PIE root *g'hon- in common (provided *handha- reflects a bi-radical
      compound *g'hon-dhh1-o-)


      I believe the palatal is correct.  In message #65990 (18 Mar 2010), I argued that Latin _honor_ (earlier _hono:s_) denotes a raising, either 'elevation of a man to public office' or 'elevation of an offering to the gods'.  The PIE root can then be identified with *g^Hen-, postulated by O. Wiedemann (BB 27:193-205, 1901) to explain Proto-Albanian *zeno: 'I take, seize, begin, hire, conceive (a child)' and the Germanic group including Gothic _du-ginnan_, Old English _on-ginnan_, _be-ginnan_ 'to begin'.  I think the PIE sense of *g^Hen- was 'to pick up, take up, raise, suscipere, tollere'.  I can find no such root in Pokorny or Mallory & Adams, but it now seems to be attested in four branches of IE.

      Note that _honor_ need not reflect inherited /o/-grade.  As I pointed out in my old message, the same /o/-umlaut could have operated on *heno(:)- which we find in _homo:_, _hominem_ from OL *hemo:, _hemonem_ (Paul. Fest.).  Thus your reconstructiunculae of _honestior_ to PIE /o/-grade forms are unwarranted.  De Vaan also neglected /o/-umlaut, referring _honor_ to PIE *gHon- or *g^Hon-, and saying "no further etymology is known".  Likewise Walde-Hofmann, "weitere Anknüpfung unsicher, auch durch die Unkenntnis der Gbd. erschwert".  If the Grundbedeutung was indeed 'a raising', the problem is greatly simplified.

    • oalexandre
      [Tavi] However, there re some reare cases of Basque /r/ arising from gemination of /R/, as in larre meadow; heath; uncultivated land, desert , a loanword from
      Message 61 of 61 , Oct 21, 2013

        However, there're some reare cases of Basque /r/ arising from gemination of /R/, as in larre 'meadow; heath; uncultivated land, desert', a loanword from Celtic (Gaulish) *landa: 'heath, moor' > *lanna > larra > larre.
        That is, the shift /nn/ > /RR/ happened in Paleo-Basque.

        But _landa_ 'campo, pieza de terreno' occurs widely in Basque (Bisc., Guip., Aezc., Lab., High & Low Nav., Ronc.) and appears to continue Gaul. *landa: directly. 
        I think this is from a different Celtic word *landa: '(enclosed) field, plot of land', homonymous to Gaulish *landa: 'heath', Cornish lan, Breton lann 'heath, steppe', which would require a Celtic protoform *Flanda: (cfr. Gascon branda, brana 'heath'). Unfortunately, Celtic specialists conflated both.

        > Moreover a Late Gaul. *lanna would have given Bq. *lana, since Latin _anno:na_ gives Bq. _anoa_. 
        Actually, nn > n isn't a Paleo-Basque but a Vasco-Romance development shared by Gascon, where we find lana.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.