Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales

On Aug 15, 9:04 pm, Harlan Messinger
<hmessinger.removet...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
Apparently nobody is willing to defend the PIE
etymologies of English bear German Bär Dutch beer
(the bown one, or the wild one, or the overcomer).

This isn't a self-contained game in which the people present are
required to start from the same position. The PIE etymology is defended
already, by the people who came up with it and anyone who later
commented on it. If you want to know what the justification for it is,
do the research. The support it has received has nothing to do with the
people currently sitting in this newsgroup.

[snipping Franz's "just-so" story; Rudyard Kipling's stories were
intended as entertainment, not masqueraded as research]

No, I don't see that anyone defends one of the etymologies.
Trond Engen, one post later than your's, does not agree on
the overcomer and is not happy with the brown one. Peter
T. Daniels kept quiet, you keep quiet, hiding your opinion
behind the rack you make about me. The brown one is not
convincing at all - why the brown one from *bher- 'brown' and
not the growling one from *bher- 'bark, growl'? and how many
animals got a brown fur? what would make the brown color of
a bear so outstanding that the animal would have been named
for it? Likewise the wild one, other animals are as wild as the
bear. And the overcomer: every animal of prey overcomes
it's prey, is an overcomer. Moreover turning ge- into b- seems
like anything-goes-linguistics to me. Why three different PIE
etymologies? and why so many homonyms? *bher- this, *bher-
that, *bher- *bher- *bher- *bher- *bhere/o *bherg- ... PIE just
doesn't reach deep enough, and it's the same problem as
always: a successful theory is claimed to cover all there is,
it is getting generalized and absolutized and no other view
and no other approach is allowed anymore. That's how
science goes kooky. I consider my Magdalenian etymology
of bear a huge success, and am now definetly challening PIE.
As I said many times: I don't consider PIE fairy tales, but it
does not reach deep enough, the sound laws are no real laws
(I made Peter T. Daniels concede this much), the verbal
morphospace, or the strata of the Eurasian languages
can be explored with more methods than sound laws,
it contains much more still intact information than previously
believed.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... (the bown one, or the wild one, or the overcomer). ... the overcomer and is not happy with the brown one. ... a bear so outstanding that the animal would have been named ... I consider my Magdalenian etymology ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... Franz Gnaedinger skreiv: ... I can't remember saying anything about any overcomer. ... I did say something about the proposed root as represented in the original post. ... the remark on the "brown" etymology was no call for your approach. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... etymologies of English bear German Bär Dutch beer ... (the bown one, or the wild one, or the overcomer). ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
    ... (the bown one, or the wild one, or the overcomer). ... I don't see that anyone defends one of the etymologies. ... So they just magically appear in the reference books without anyone ever having done the research and written up the analysis that arrives at the conclusions reported in the reference books? ...
    (sci.lang)