Not all of them, but being a domesticated animal, bee seems to be a Wanderwort of Egyptian origin (BTW, cats were domesticated also there).WeepingElf wrote:And my search for substratum loanwords in western IE languages failed to find anything useful, too. Sure, there are quite a few words in western IE languages that lack cognates in eastern branches such as Greek or Indo-Iranian, but I found that they mostly show no structural features that betray loanwords. They are apparently just dialectal forms within the post-PIE dialect continuum, which may simply have been lost in the east.There are plenty; here a few I found in Pokorny's dictionary:Talskubilos wrote:Any examples?
*bhei- 'bee' (Gmc, Celt, Slav)
*dhreibh- 'to drive' (Gmc, Balt?)
*ghosti- 'stranger' (Gmc, It, Slav)
*lendh- 'loin' (Gmc, It, Slav)
*meldh- 'thunderbolt' (Gmc, Celt, Balt, Slav)
... and many others (the full list I have compiled, which I shall not post here, has 227 entries, but there are some which indeed look suspicious - unexplained *a-vocalism and other unusual shapes of the root; surely, something like *abon- 'monkey' is from some - unknown - non-IE language). We don't know whether they are from a western European substratum language, or just lost from the eastern IE branches, but there is nothing in them which points at a non-IE origin. Given the vast amount of synonyms found in Pokorny's dictionary, there probably was a lot of dialectal variation in Late PIE. Of course, as I know you, you'll find non-IE etymologies for all of them
Paleo-European languages
- Talskubilos
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:02 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
Re: Paleo-European languages
then how would you explain the existence of a common PIE root for honey? and evidence that beekeeping goes back quite some time.
Re: Paleo-European languages
Itinerant Egyptian bee-keepers, wandering from nomadic encampment to encampment with their hives, trading bees for honey as they hadn’t yet worked out the connection between the two (because the Vasco-Caucasians hadn’t explained it to them), obviously.
- WeepingElf
- Posts: 1511
- Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:39 pm
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: Paleo-European languages
I have now uploaded the whole list. It is raw material, though, with glosses in German, unmodernized spellings and other warts.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
My conlang pages
My conlang pages
- Talskubilos
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:02 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
Despite the fact there's a common IE for 'cow', some branches (i.e. Latin lactis, Greek galaktós) have a foreign word for 'milk', which seems to be a Wanderwort also found in Sinitic.
Re: Paleo-European languages
Where is this extraordinary evidence such an assertion requires?Talskubilos wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 1:10 pmDespite the fact there's a common IE for 'cow', some branches (i.e. Latin lactis, Greek galaktós) have a foreign word for 'milk', which seems to be a Wanderwort also found in Sinitic.
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Re: Paleo-European languages
The beast word itself looks as though it also turns up in Sino-Tibetan (as *ŋwa}. And the Indic form turns up as khoː 'cow' on Thai milk cartons, just to prove it's still a wanderer - despite Thai having a perfectly good 'native' form of the word.Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 3:50 pmWhere is this extraordinary evidence such an assertion requires?Talskubilos wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 1:10 pmDespite the fact there's a common IE for 'cow', some branches (i.e. Latin lactis, Greek galaktós) have a foreign word for 'milk', which seems to be a Wanderwort also found in Sinitic.
-
- Posts: 1660
- Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:29 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
Not too extraordinary - there are early IE (mostly Tocharian) loans in Chinese, and at least one suspected IE-ST Wanderwort:Travis B. wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 3:50 pmWhere is this extraordinary evidence such an assertion requires?Talskubilos wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 1:10 pmDespite the fact there's a common IE for 'cow', some branches (i.e. Latin lactis, Greek galaktós) have a foreign word for 'milk', which seems to be a Wanderwort also found in Sinitic.
- PIE *markos
- PST *mVraŋ (~ *sVraŋ? possibly secondary, cf. certain Mon-Khmer branches where monosyllabic words are padded in very different ways in different languages due to the development of a minimum word size restriction - I haven't been able to find this goddamn paper for years, but I'm pretty sure it exists)
But also Manchu morin, Proto-Mongolic *mori, etc. A connection with Proto-Vietic *m-ŋəːʔ seems implausible.
I'm not sure which word this is. Wiktionary claims possible areal diffusion of both 奶 (MC neiX / ɳˠɛX) and 乳 (OC *noʔ), but neither of those look like lactis, and both words may have originally referred to breasts.
Duaj teibohnggoe kyoe' quaqtoeq lucj lhaj k'yoejdej noeyn tucj.
K'yoejdaq fohm q'ujdoe duaj teibohnggoen dlehq lucj.
Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq.
K'yoejdaq fohm q'ujdoe duaj teibohnggoen dlehq lucj.
Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq.
Re: Paleo-European languages
Note that I was not ruling out the possibility of loans from IE into ST via Tocharian or Indo-Aryan or loans from ST into Tocharian or Indo-Aryan, which are perfectly plausible, or even transmission of words in either direction w.r.t. Iranian via Turkic. I was just stating that when making assertions of longer-range transmission a greater degree of evidence is needed - not that it is impossible, as after all Latin got its word for banana from some Papuan language.
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
- Talskubilos
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:02 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
I don't think this could be a PIE word, given it's only attested in Celtic and Germanic.
It looks like the velar stop in *marko- would derive from ST *ŋ with Schwebeablaut.Nortaneous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 9:29 pm- PST *mVraŋ (~ *sVraŋ? possibly secondary, cf. certain Mon-Khmer branches where monosyllabic words are padded in very different ways in different languages due to the development of a minimum word size restriction - I haven't been able to find this goddamn paper for years, but I'm pretty sure it exists) But also Manchu morin, Proto-Mongolic *mori, etc. A connection with Proto-Vietic *m-ŋəːʔ seems implausible.
- WeepingElf
- Posts: 1511
- Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:39 pm
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: Paleo-European languages
In this point, I think you are right. The a-vocalism also speaks against a PIE origin of this word.Talskubilos wrote: ↑Thu Dec 10, 2020 3:06 pmI don't think this could be a PIE word, given it's only attested in Celtic and Germanic.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
My conlang pages
My conlang pages
- Hallow XIII
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2018 11:16 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
I am curious as to whose reconstruction this is from. In all Mongolic varieties I am familiar with, this word is an n-stem: Buryat морин, Kalmyk мөрн, Khalkha мор(и)н- (this latter one does have the nominative form морь, but deletion of final -n in the nominative is regular; see also "water" Kh. ус, Gen. усны, B. уһан, K. усн). That said, there are good reasons to suspect Kalmyk/Oirat forms a subgroup of Mongolic with Buryat and Mongolian Proper, and I don't know what the situation here is in Mangghuer or Moghol.
Mbtrtcgf qxah bdej bkska kidabh n ñstbwdj spa.
Ogñwdf n spa bdej bruoh kiñabh ñbtzmieb n qxah.
Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf.
Ogñwdf n spa bdej bruoh kiñabh ñbtzmieb n qxah.
Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf. Qiegf.
-
- Posts: 1660
- Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:29 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
It's just the form listed on Wiktionary. (Which really shouldn't be the standard reference resource, but everything else is either bad or nonexistent.)Hallow XIII wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 3:08 amI am curious as to whose reconstruction this is from. In all Mongolic varieties I am familiar with, this word is an n-stem: Buryat морин, Kalmyk мөрн, Khalkha мор(и)н- (this latter one does have the nominative form морь, but deletion of final -n in the nominative is regular; see also "water" Kh. ус, Gen. усны, B. уһан, K. усн). That said, there are good reasons to suspect Kalmyk/Oirat forms a subgroup of Mongolic with Buryat and Mongolian Proper, and I don't know what the situation here is in Mangghuer or Moghol.
Duaj teibohnggoe kyoe' quaqtoeq lucj lhaj k'yoejdej noeyn tucj.
K'yoejdaq fohm q'ujdoe duaj teibohnggoen dlehq lucj.
Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq.
K'yoejdaq fohm q'ujdoe duaj teibohnggoen dlehq lucj.
Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq.
Re: Paleo-European languages
Mongolian is a really young/shallow language tree, like on the order of English (not West Germanic, English). Internal reconstruction doesn't often get you anywhere too exciting. The variation in how the roots & stems get presented is, I think, just the variation in how different reconstructors wanted to handle derivational morphology (i.e., *-n). Anyway, I'm not an expert, but if you're looking for the purest, cleanest, truest "roots" I'd recommend working with *mori- and not *morin-with-n-deletion-here-and-there.Nortaneous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:52 amIt's just the form listed on Wiktionary. (Which really shouldn't be the standard reference resource, but everything else is either bad or nonexistent.)Hallow XIII wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 3:08 amI am curious as to whose reconstruction this is from. In all Mongolic varieties I am familiar with, this word is an n-stem: Buryat морин, Kalmyk мөрн, Khalkha мор(и)н- (this latter one does have the nominative form морь, but deletion of final -n in the nominative is regular; see also "water" Kh. ус, Gen. усны, B. уһан, K. усн). That said, there are good reasons to suspect Kalmyk/Oirat forms a subgroup of Mongolic with Buryat and Mongolian Proper, and I don't know what the situation here is in Mangghuer or Moghol.
There's better sources for Mongolian philology than Wiktionary, yes. They're not online though, I don't think; which, at least in my pathetic, outmoded experience, doesn't constitute nonexistence
Re: Paleo-European languages
For what it's worth Wiktionary says something different depending on what page you look at - it has *mori on the page for морь, but *morïn on the page for Proto-Tungusic *murin. Digging a bit deeper, Janhunen writes *mori/n to indicate the deletion in oblique forms and says that the final -n is "generally well preserved in Buryat in the absolute form (nominative)".
- Talskubilos
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:02 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
Quite interesting.WeepingElf wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 12:36 pmI have now uploaded the whole list. It is raw material, though, with glosses in German, unmodernized spellings and other warts.
*ablu- 'apple' looks like a Wandwerwort with correspondences elsewhere: Hittite šam(a)lu-, Uralic *omɜrɜ ~ *omena 'apple', probably also Nakh-Dagestanian *mhălV- ~ *mhănV- 'warm', with some kind of prefix (cfr. Basque udare, udari, madari 'pear'.
*akʷā 'river' is an OEH item derived from the adjective root *Hōk´u- 'quick' and therefore not related to other 'water' words.
*bhar(e)s- 'barley (or other similar cereal)' is a loanword from the language(s) spoken by European Neolithic farmers. It has correspondences elsewhere, including Etruscan *phers- 'husk' > phersu 'masked character' (from which *phersu-na > Latin persona 'theather mask').
*joini 'reed' is surely a substrate loanword related to Daghestanian *Hnǝ̄ttsˀwē/*ttsˀwǝ̄nHē 'reed, cane'.
*skwoi- 'thorn, needle (from conifers)' has Altaic and Uralic cognates and it also would be related to the above root, probably by way of compound.
To be continued...
-
- Posts: 1660
- Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:29 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
also Latin mālum and Turkic almaTalskubilos wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:02 am *ablu- 'apple' looks like a Wandwerwort with correspondences elsewhere: Hittite šam(a)lu-, Uralic *omɜrɜ ~ *omena 'apple', probably also Nakh-Dagestanian *mhălV- ~ *mhănV- 'warm', with some kind of prefix (cfr. Basque udare, udari, madari 'pear'.
what*akʷā 'river' is an OEH item derived from the adjective root *Hōk´u- 'quick' and therefore not related to other 'water' words.
no*joini 'reed' is surely a substrate loanword related to Daghestanian *Hnǝ̄ttsˀwē/*ttsˀwǝ̄nHē 'reed, cane'.
*skwoi- 'thorn, needle (from conifers)' has Altaic and Uralic cognates and it also would be related to the above root, probably by way of compound.
Duaj teibohnggoe kyoe' quaqtoeq lucj lhaj k'yoejdej noeyn tucj.
K'yoejdaq fohm q'ujdoe duaj teibohnggoen dlehq lucj.
Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq.
K'yoejdaq fohm q'ujdoe duaj teibohnggoen dlehq lucj.
Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq. Teijp'vq.
- Talskubilos
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:02 am
Re: Paleo-European languages
Not impossible, but they would require consonant metathesis.Nortaneous wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:59 pmalso Latin mālum and Turkic almaTalskubilos wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:02 am *ablu- 'apple' looks like a Wandwerwort with correspondences elsewhere: Hittite šam(a)lu-, Uralic *omɜrɜ ~ *omena 'apple', probably also Nakh-Dagestanian *mhălV- ~ *mhănV- 'warm', with some kind of prefix (cfr. Basque udare, udari, madari 'pear'.
??Nortaneous wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:59 pmwhat*akʷā 'river' is an OEH item derived from the adjective root *Hōk´u- 'quick' and therefore not related to other 'water' words.
The bisyllabic root *ttsˀwǝ̄nHē could be analyzed as fossilized compound of two monosyllabic roots *ttsˀwǝ̄-nHē, where *ttsˀwǝ̄ would be related to Uralic *ʃuje ~* ʃoje 'prick, tip', Altaic *ʃiỳjò 'thorn, needle (of a conifer)'. The semantic shift 'needle (of a conifer)' > 'reed' is straightgforward.Nortaneous wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:59 pmno*joini 'reed' is surely a substrate loanword related to Daghestanian *Hnǝ̄ttsˀwē/*ttsˀwǝ̄nHē 'reed, cane'.
*skwoi- 'thorn, needle (from conifers)' has Altaic and Uralic cognates and it also would be related to the above root, probably by way of compound.
Re: Paleo-European languages
How does mālum require metathesis?Talskubilos wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:59 amNot impossible, but they would require consonant metathesis.Nortaneous wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 1:59 pmalso Latin mālum and Turkic almaTalskubilos wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 9:02 am *ablu- 'apple' looks like a Wandwerwort with correspondences elsewhere: Hittite šam(a)lu-, Uralic *omɜrɜ ~ *omena 'apple', probably also Nakh-Dagestanian *mhălV- ~ *mhănV- 'warm', with some kind of prefix (cfr. Basque udare, udari, madari 'pear'.
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
- Talskubilos
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:02 am