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

Re: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"

Expand Messages
  • Piotr Gasiorowski
    On second thoughts, Skt. ahi- is *h2ngWHi- rather than *h1eg^Hi- -- cf. Av. az^i (and the the phonetically repetitive poetic formula he killed
    Message 1 of 15 , Jul 10 12:32 PM
      On second thoughts, Skt. ahi- is *h2ngWHi- rather than *h1eg^Hi- -- cf. Av. az^i (and the the phonetically repetitive poetic formula <ahann ahim> 'he killed the serpent', which may well go back to pre-Indic times). This reduces the evidence for *h1eg^Hi- 'viper'. The main witness is Greek, where <ekhis> may be idiosyncratic ("stinger"? -- cf. the "sea-urchin" and "hedgehog" words). I wonder if there is a real basis for reconstructing *h1eg^Hi- as a PIE "snake" word. Baltic, Slavic and Latin require only *h2(o)ngWH-i- for "snake" and its derivatives for "eel". Gk. ophis and Arm. iz^ are a little irregular but at any rate require a root in *-gWH-, not *-g^H-; <ophis> may be a compromise between the ablaut variants *aphi- and *omphi- (as you seem to suggest) or between *omphi- and ekhi-.
       
      Sorry for these changes of opinion, but I'm just analysing the material as the discussion goes on; please treat the above as tentative thoughts to be verified later :)
       
      Piotr
       
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 5:10 PM
      Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"

      I think these two words (perhaps related in a older origin) developped into *h2ongWHi- "snake" and h1eg^Hi- "venomous snake, viper". Or perhaps *h1eg^Hi- "hedgehog" contaminated first root.
       
      The Greek ophis is curious. We must have something like aphis, amphis or omphis <*(o)ngWHi-, beside ekhis, ekhidna "viper", ekhinos "hedgehod" < *eg^Hi- . I think the element Amphi- in some anthroponyms could have the meaning "snake" instead of "both".
       
      And Germanic has the enigmatic egi/dehsa (OHG) "lizard". egi < eg^Hi- ?
       
       

    • tgpedersen@hotmail.com
      ... cf. Av. az^i (and the the phonetically repetitive poetic formula he killed the serpent , which may well go back to pre- Indic times). This
      Message 2 of 15 , Jul 11 2:50 AM
        --- In cybalist@y..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@i...> wrote:
        > On second thoughts, Skt. ahi- is *h2ngWHi- rather than *h1eg^Hi- --
        cf. Av. az^i (and the the phonetically repetitive poetic formula
        <ahann ahim> 'he killed the serpent', which may well go back to pre-
        Indic times). This reduces the evidence for *h1eg^Hi- 'viper'. The
        main witness is Greek, where <ekhis> may be idiosyncratic
        ("stinger"? -- cf. the "sea-urchin" and "hedgehog" words). I wonder
        if there is a real basis for reconstructing *h1eg^Hi- as a
        PIE "snake" word. Baltic, Slavic and Latin require only *h2(o)ngWH-i-
        for "snake" and its derivatives for "eel". Gk. ophis and Arm. iz^ are
        a little irregular but at any rate require a root in *-gWH-, not *-
        g^H-; <ophis> may be a compromise between the ablaut variants *aphi-
        and *omphi- (as you seem to suggest) or between *omphi- and ekhi-.
        >
        > Sorry for these changes of opinion, but I'm just analysing the
        material as the discussion goes on; please treat the above as
        tentative thoughts to be verified later :)
        >
        > Piotr
        >
        >
        >
        Being the superstitious Platonist that I am (or rather, being one who
        suspects these ancient peoples of being just that) I wondered whether
        there was an underlying verb "to wind, to be bent, to be crooked"
        which verb then might have an n-infix (or be perceived to have, which
        by back-formation, removing the -n-, would add up to the same thing).
        Were snakes then snakes (in an Linnéan sense) or were they emanations
        of the principle of snakeness or crookednes? This discussion might
        look fatuous, but I think it determines in the end what we will
        accept as semantically "contiguous".
        One of the reasons I wonder is because in the course of collecting
        material for my clever Austronesian theory, in that material there
        seemed to condense three collections having to do with "creation",
        maintenance" and destruction, respectively, and *H-n-g- (or similar)
        was exactly that (principle of) "destruction".

        http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/forces.html

        Torsten
      • Piotr Gasiorowski
        Of course IE snakes could be emanations of the principle of crookedness or creepy-crawly snakehood, but in that case derivatives of *serp- to wind, be
        Message 3 of 15 , Jul 11 3:14 AM
          Of course IE snakes could be "emanations of the principle of crookedness" or creepy-crawly snakehood, but in that case derivatives of *serp- 'to wind, be crooked, creep' were used, hence Lat. serpent-, Gk. herpet- and Skt. sarpa-. CVC roots are almost never nasal-infixed, so {h2engWH-} or the like would have to be treated as an unalysable whole. Well, I'm not aware of such a verb root, whatever its supposed meaning. On the other hand, the i-stem *h2ongWHis could be adjectival, so maybe the root from which it was formed had been lost. {h2eng^-} 'squeeze, tighten' does exist, but as I said its association with serpents is at best folk-etymological.
           
          Piotr
           
           
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 11:50 AM
          Subject: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"

          Being the superstitious Platonist that I am (or rather, being one who
          suspects these ancient peoples of being just that) I wondered whether
          there was an underlying verb "to wind, to be bent, to be crooked"
          which verb then might have an n-infix (or be perceived to have, which
          by back-formation, removing the -n-, would add up to the same thing).
          Were snakes then snakes (in an Linnéan sense) or were they emanations
          of the principle of snakeness or crookednes? This discussion might
          look fatuous, but I think it determines in the end what we will
          accept as semantically "contiguous".
          One of the reasons I wonder is because in the course of collecting
          material for my clever Austronesian theory, in that material there
          seemed to condense three collections having to do with "creation",
          maintenance" and destruction, respectively, and *H-n-g- (or similar)
          was exactly that (principle of) "destruction".

          http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/forces.html

          Torsten
           
           

        • Piotr Gasiorowski
          Sorry, a typo. I mean {h2eng^H-} as in German eng, Latin angere, etc. Piotr ... From: Piotr Gasiorowski To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, July 11,
          Message 4 of 15 , Jul 11 5:22 AM
            Sorry, a typo. I mean {h2eng^H-} as in German eng, Latin angere, etc.
             
            Piotr
             
             
             
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 12:14 PM
            Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"

            {h2eng^-} 'squeeze, tighten' does exist ...
          • tgpedersen@hotmail.com
            ... crookedness or creepy-crawly snakehood, but in that case derivatives of *serp- to wind, be crooked, creep were used, hence Lat. serpent- , Gk. herpet-
            Message 5 of 15 , Jul 12 2:59 AM
              --- In cybalist@y..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@i...> wrote:
              > Of course IE snakes could be "emanations of the principle of
              crookedness" or creepy-crawly snakehood, but in that case derivatives
              of *serp- 'to wind, be crooked, creep' were used, hence Lat. serpent-
              , Gk. herpet- and Skt. sarpa-. CVC roots are almost never nasal-
              infixed, so {h2engWH-} or the like would have to be treated as an
              unalysable whole. Well, I'm not aware of such a verb root, whatever
              its supposed meaning. On the other hand, the i-stem *h2ongWHis could
              be adjectival, so maybe the root from which it was formed had been
              lost. {h2eng^-} 'squeeze, tighten' does exist, but as I said its
              association with serpents is at best folk-etymological.
              >
              > Piotr
              >
              >
              >

              Even I know that a serpent is something that serps. But...

              "Man må sno sig, sagde ålen(, den lå på stegependen)"
              "You have to [twist, wind, make shady deals] said the eel (, it was
              lying in the frying pan)".
              (Danish saying)

              There´s your verb root (ON snúa).

              And I wasn't thinking of just creepy-crawliness, but something more
              destructive.

              Torsten
            • proto-language
              ... From: tgpedersen@hotmail.com To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 4:59 AM Subject: [tied] Re: PIE for eel You have to
              Message 6 of 15 , Jul 12 3:55 AM
                Dear Torsten and Cybalists:

                ----- Original Message -----

                Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 4:59 AM
                Subject: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"
                <snip>

                 
                 "You have to [twist, wind, make shady deals] said the eel (, it was
                lying in the frying pan)".
                (Danish saying)

                There´s your verb root (ON snúa).

                And I wasn't thinking of just creepy-crawliness, but something more
                destructive.
                [PCR]
                I favor the opinion that the "eel"-word derives from an IE *a:/al-, which is analyzable into *a:-, 'water'+ *le/o-, 'worm'.
                 
                Pat
                 

                PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@...
                (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA
                WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE: http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/
                and PROTO-RELIGION:
                http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html

                "Veit ec at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío,
                geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit,
                hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)

              • tgpedersen@hotmail.com
                ... was ... more ... , which is analyzable into *a:-, water + *le/o-, worm . ... language/ ... religion/indexR.html ... My NuDansk Ordbog says of ål, Aal,
                Message 7 of 15 , Jul 13 1:48 AM
                  --- In cybalist@y..., "proto-language" <proto-language@e...> wrote:
                  > Dear Torsten and Cybalists:
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  >
                  > From: tgpedersen@h...
                  > To: cybalist@y...
                  > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 4:59 AM
                  > Subject: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"
                  > <snip>
                  >
                  >
                  > "You have to [twist, wind, make shady deals] said the eel (, it
                  was
                  > lying in the frying pan)".
                  > (Danish saying)
                  >
                  > There´s your verb root (ON snúa).
                  >
                  > And I wasn't thinking of just creepy-crawliness, but something
                  more
                  > destructive.
                  >
                  > [PCR]
                  > I favor the opinion that the "eel"-word derives from an IE *a:/al-
                  , which is analyzable into *a:-, 'water'+ *le/o-, 'worm'.
                  >
                  > Pat
                  >
                  > PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@e...
                  > (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA
                  > WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE: http://www.geocities.com/proto-
                  language/
                  > and PROTO-RELIGION:
                  > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-
                  religion/indexR.html
                  >
                  >
                  > "Veit ec at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío,
                  > geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit,
                  > hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)

                  My NuDansk Ordbog says of ål, Aal, eel etc "of unknown origin". But
                  all we need is -ng- to relate it to the anguilla. So how about using
                  the old Germ. "Hengst" vs N.Gmc "hest" trick again (ng > ng, nX >
                  nothing).

                  Torsten
                • Piotr Gasiorowski
                  The trick won t work. The sequence *-ngWH- can only give -ng(w)- across the board in Germanic. Vernerian alternations are only possible in words containing an
                  Message 8 of 15 , Jul 13 8:46 AM
                    The trick won't work. The sequence *-ngWH- can only give -ng(w)- across the board in Germanic. Vernerian alternations are only possible in words containing an original medial voiceless stop, e.g. -onk^- > PGmc. -anx-/-ang- (depending on the location of stress) > -a~x/-ang- (the deletion of the nasal is conditioned by the following velar fricative), etc. Not that I support the "water-worm" analysis. All we have is PGmc. *e:l-a-z, external cognates unknown.
                     
                    Piotr
                     
                     
                     
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 10:48 AM
                    Subject: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"

                    My NuDansk Ordbog says of ål, Aal, eel etc "of unknown origin". But
                    all we need is -ng- to relate it to the anguilla. So how about using
                    the old Germ. "Hengst" vs N.Gmc "hest" trick again (ng > ng, nX >
                    nothing).
                  • João S. Lopes Filho
                    There were attempts to connect *e:laz with Greek *egkhe:lys (-e:lus). Other possibility is to analyze *e:laz as *es-los, perhaps a root *es- related to Latin
                    Message 9 of 15 , Jul 14 6:35 AM
                      There were attempts to connect *e:laz with Greek *egkhe:lys (-e:lus).
                      Other possibility is to analyze *e:laz as *es-los, perhaps a root *es- related to Latin esox "pike", Slav jeseteru "sturgeon", and a Celtic word for salmon that I forgot now.
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 12:46 PM
                      Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"

                      The trick won't work. The sequence *-ngWH- can only give -ng(w)- across the board in Germanic. Vernerian alternations are only possible in words containing an original medial voiceless stop, e.g. -onk^- > PGmc. -anx-/-ang- (depending on the location of stress) > -a~x/-ang- (the deletion of the nasal is conditioned by the following velar fricative), etc. Not that I support the "water-worm" analysis. All we have is PGmc. *e:l-a-z, external cognates unknown.
                       
                      Piotr
                       
                       
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 10:48 AM
                      Subject: [tied] Re: PIE for "eel"

                      My NuDansk Ordbog says of ål, Aal, eel etc "of unknown origin". But
                      all we need is -ng- to relate it to the anguilla. So how about using
                      the old Germ. "Hengst" vs N.Gmc "hest" trick again (ng > ng, nX >
                      nothing).

                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.