Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales

analyst41@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 3, 6:32 pm, Harlan Messinger
<hmessinger.removet...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dušan Vukotić wrote:
On Aug 3, 6:42 pm, Harlan Messinger
<hmessinger.removet...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dušan Vukotić wrote:
Is there anyone who is able to explain the homonymy of English bear
(carry, cause to be born) and bear (omnivorous animal/mammal)? Why and
how has it happened?
Because there isn't any reason why it *wouldn't* happen, and both words
evolved in unsurprising ways to become, as it happens, homonyms.
And how that "unsurprising way" looked like? Could you be more
specific? What bear (carry, cause to be born, bring forth) and bear
(animal) have in common?
Why don't you LOOK THEM UP and find out for yourself if you want to know
what they are? If you haven't bothered to look up the details, then you
have no basis for disputing them.

Maybe you believe it happened by chance?
Yes.

But
what if there is no accidental word-developing within the IE
vocabulary?
Who said anything about "accidental word-developing"? What does that
even mean?

In French, the words "ou" ("or"), "où" ("where"), "houx" ("holly"),
"houe" ("hoe"), and "août" ("August") are all homonyms, derived,
respectively, from the non-homonymic words Latin "aut", Latin "ubi", Old
High German "hulis", Old High German "houwâ", and Latin "Augustus".

thats very instructive. Thanks.

But of course I would use something like this to poke holes in the
standard PIE model.

Of course you will. You'll do anything that you think will poke holes in the standard PIE model without regard to whether your argument makes any sense.

I am sure there are no homonyms in any PIE reconstruction - since the
neogrammarian principles would prevent two words that sound alike in
the parent language from evolving along dfferent paths in the daughter
languages.

Your understanding is incorrect, since two homonyms that by their nature appear in environments that are mutually different can evolve separately under the influence of those respective environments.

What's really amazing is how you can continue to gloat about how "sure" you are about the things you are saying when you have been informed of your incorrectness on objective factual matters as many times as you have.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... What bear (carry, cause to be born, bring forth) and bear ... I am sure there are no homonyms in any PIE reconstruction - since the ... origins don't evolve, coincidentally, into homonyms. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... What bear (carry, cause to be born, bring forth) and bear ... So kindly dispense with your presumption that words from separate origins don't evolve, coincidentally, into homonyms. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: [OT]: King Kong!
    ... Some people were born in the 80's and they love this ... >>> Well I was born in the 40's and I love this King Kong thingy that was ... > Bear say that LotR was better than the Prequels. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc)
  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... bear (carry, cause to be born) and bear (omnivorous ... respectively, from the non-homonymic words Latin "aut", Latin ... Sankrit bhrti- (with suffix, via *bhrtis) ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... bear (carry, cause to be born) and bear (omnivorous ... Albanian bie, Greek phero:, Armenian berem, Sanskrit bharati, ... ferma, Sanskrit bharman (with suffix, via *bhermn-); ...
    (sci.lang)