Re: An invention called 'the Jewish people'

On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 19:56:24 +0100, Trond Engen
<trondnet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<news:AMednYNyqsLFZVfa4p2dnAA@xxxxxxxxxxx> in sci.lang:

Brian M. Scott skreiv:

On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 15:13:20 +0100, Trond Engen
<trondnet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<news:GJCdnbvY_-WdK1fa4p2dnAA@xxxxxxxxxxx> in
soc.history.ancient,sci.archaeology,sci.lang:

John Atkinson skreiv:

"Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:19hy2gkf828rm$.h7imav0n9t1i.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 07:41:42 GMT, John Atkinson
<johnacko@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<news:WSsyj.21327$421.10650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> in
soc.history.ancient,sci.archaeology,sci.lang:

[...]

As Sigge says, there is a good PIE etymology,
*h2ste:r, "ember", from *h2eh-s-, "burn" , with
suffix -ter.

[...]

Hittite hasterza is attested from about 2000 BC, the
same date as Akkadian istar.

On Cybalist some time back Miguel gave it as <hasterz>,

At a guess, in the Hittite cuneiform syllabic script it
would be something like HA-AS-TE-IR-ZA, which could
be read as either /hasterz/ or /hasterza/ -- their
system had problems with final consonant clusters.

[...]

Birgit Anette Olsen in _The Noun in Biblical Armenian:
Origin and Word Formation_ writes it <hasterza> but
interprets this as /hsters/. She goes into a little more
detail about the PIE r-stem, saying that *h2sté:r appears to
'belong to the system of animate, hysterodynamic stems in
*-r, the type of *h2né:r/*h2n.rós 'man', i.e., nom.sg.
*h2sté:r (> Gk. <'asté:r>), acc.sg. *h2stér-m. (> Gk.
<'astéra>), gen.sg. *h2str-ós, inst.pl. *h2str.-bHís (-->
Skt. <str.'bhih> with secondary columnal accentuation)'.

She's a new acquaintance. I see that some of her
publications are available online. I'll have a look.

I believe that she's the wife of Jens Elmegård Rasmussen; a
very IE family!

'Hysterodynamic' is a nice word.

Also called 'hysterokinetic', just as 'proterodynamic' is
also called 'proterokinetic'. Fortson's version (courtesy
of an extract at Google Books, since I've not yet got round
to buying it):

Acrostatic: the root is accented throughout the paradigm,
with ablaut distinction between the strong and weak cases
(nom. *nókW-t-s 'night', gen. *nékW-t-s).

Proterokinetic: the root has full grade and the accent in
the strong cases, and both shift to the suffix in the weak
cases (nom. *mén-ti-s 'thought', gen. *mn-téi-s).

Hysterokinetic: the suffix is accented in the strong cases,
the accent shifting to the ending in the weak cases (nom.
*ph2-tér-s > *ph2-té:r, gen. ph2-tr-és).

Amphikinetic: the accent is on the root in the strong cases
and on the ending in the weak cases; the suffix in the nom.
sing. is typically in the lengthened o-grade, and in the
acc. sing. the o-grade (nom. *h2éus-o:s 'dawn', gen.
*h2us-s-és).

Applying the same interpretation to *H2ntér- (Why doesn't
she have a -t- there?)

It's Gk. <'ane:r>; the /d/ in gen. <'andrós> is epenthetic,
like the /b/ in English <thimble> (OE <þy:mel>).

as i did to H2stér-, it could be a cognate of 'other' and
have meant something like "fellow" or "neighbour".

[...]

We may conclude that no consensus is achieved [on the
phonemic interpretation of <hasterz(a)>].

Well, there does seems to be pretty general agreement that
the <-a> is purely orthographic

[...]

Is B&L still available? I did a very brief search a
while back without success.

A new edition last year, apparently:
<http://www.bokkilden.no/SamboWeb/produkt.do?produktId=2926230&rom=MP>.
It's almost 300 pages -- 25% -- longer than mine, so there
seems to have been a substantial extension.

Ah, thank you. I've also now found it at norli.no, which
(a) claims to have it as 'lagervare' and (b) makes my life a
little easier by giving complete ordering instructions in
English.

and mentioned that /haste:r/ is also found.

This would be one of those famous r/n stems I suppose?

Is there an -n- anywhere?

Most branches have *-r with some suffix. PToch *s´cär-,
attested with an -n-suffix in Toch A and a -ya-suffix in
Toch B. Armenian <astL> and Latin <stella> seem to point
to an r/l alteration -- or different suffixes.

Olsen:

If <astL> were an archaism, which remains rather
unlikely, this would imply that a stem-final *-r-
replaced *-l- independently in at least six branches
of the IE family, including Anatolian where l-stems
are not particularly uncommon, and since we have
no further examples of a spontaneous development
of final *-r > *-L in Armenian, <astL> clearly calls
for an analogical explanation.

In a footnote she says that there seems to be no evidence
for IE primary l-stems or root nouns in *-l, though there is
at least one *-l/n- heteroclitic, *sáh2wl/suh2éns? 'sun',
and *-tel-/-tol- existed as a variant of the agent noun
suffix *-ter-/-tor.

Hm. I'll withdraw my hint to a "doubtsome agent suffix
-tér", then. I was under the impression that it was
probably a newer invention.

And I wish they'd come up with a good explanation for the
l/n-alteration in the 'sun'-word, so it's somewhat
disappointing if there are more of the kind.

In Václav Blaz^ek's review of B&L at
<http://www.phil.muni.cz/linguistica/art/blazek/bla-005.pdf>
he suggests in connection with *ag^(H)no-/*og^(H)no- 'lamb'
that 'it is possible to think about the primary
l/n-heterclitic paradigm of the type nom. *h2óg^Hl. : gen.
*h2ég^Hn.s', which would then cover such forms as Breton
<eal> 'foal', MWelsh <ael> 'cubbing, breed, race', OIr <ál>
'offspring, cubbing', all representing a PCelt. *aglo-
'brood, litter'.

She also says that Latin <stella> 'should be interpreted as
*h2ster-lah2 rather than *stel-nah2 on account of the
supplementary evidence of <septentrio:nes>', while Beekes
writes 'Lat. stella < *ste:r-la: or rather *ste:l-na:'.
Michael Weiss, in his _Outline of the Historical and
Comparative Grammar of Latin_, says that PIE *-rl- > Lat.
-ll- regularly, offering *h2ste:r-leh2 > ste:lla and
*agro-lo- 'a small plot of land' > *agr2lo > agerlo >
agellus. The suffix *-lah2 is collective.

It's nice to see a professional going for the -l-suffix
and -rl- > -ll-. A collective for stars is reasonable,
and collectives individualized as feminines are common
as dirt. (That's Bjorvand's field, actually. Wonder
where I've stuck his book?). Why couldn't that have
happened in Armenian as well?

Perhaps *-lah2 would have left traces? I wasn't thinking
about it when I had the page in front of me, I'm afraid.

[...]

Brian
.

Quantcast