Re: when did oinos become oinos/oikos/oiwos ("one")
- From: "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:26:30 -0400
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 00:23:09 -0700 (PDT), lorad
<lorad474@xxxxxx> wrote in
<news:6e180491-9860-4e76-8498-62675cb1f853@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
in sci.lang:
On Aug 25, 9:03 pm, "John Atkinson" <johna...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
lorad wrote:
On Aug 25, 3:43 am, analys...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 24, 10:45 pm, Harlan Messinger
You seem to be under the impression that these
suffixes were made up ad hoc. Are you sure? Keep in
mind that you're extremely good at commenting on
things about which you haven't bothered to get all
the facts (including all the times that you admit
quite frankly that you're too lazy to look for them).
Hint: where are English "any", "unique", "inch", and
"ounce" traced back to?
but the posited PIE suffix is semantically inert - Oi
simply decided to change to Oika so that "eka" can be
derived from it through sound change. "ka" is a
well-known suffix that inflects words and changes
their meaning in Sanskrit (ashta = eight, ashtaka =
set of eight and is also a diminutive suffix Putra =
son, putraka = little son).
I'm not certain what the Saucureans are trying to
convince you of..their made up 'rules' are fearsome and
ever recursive.. But two different roots are involved
here. The 'oi' root is different than 'eka'.
This "oikos" appears to be a new contrivance (never
mind that it means "house" in Greek) intended to bring
"eka" into line.
'Eka' does mean 'house' in Latvian too. Give the
antiquity of Cla. Greek and Latvian it probably only
had that meaning.
Latvian didn't even emerge as a distinct language until the
16th century or so.
If Latvian is a satem language, it's impossible for
Latvian eka to be cognate with Greek (w)oikos.
That's the kicker.. Baltic is *not* Satem.
Nor is it Centum.
It has properties of both.
Baltic as a whole is satem; it just happens to have a bit of
kentum vocabulary. This is probably because it was near the
fringe of the satem shift: either the shift didn't affect
all dialects, or it was unstable in some, and some words
reverted.
The "k" comes from PIE k^ (palatal velar). Cognates of
(w)oikos are Avestan vis-, Sanskrit vis'-, OCSlav vIsI,
Latin vi:cus, Gothic weihs, Tocharian B ike.
Not to mention the first elements of Old Prussian
<waispattin> (acc.) 'mistress' and Lithuanian <vie~s^pati>
'queen, mistress, lady' and <vie~s^pats> 'lord'.
Those don't convince me at all.
Of course not: you're ignorant of historical linguistics and
committed to your own chauvinistic kookery.
All are distant cognates.. if cognates at all.
Meaningless noise.
Can you give related words with related meaning to that of 'oikos'
within Cl.Greek itself?
I don't think so.
Obviously you've never consulted a Greek dictionary.
Compounds include <oikonómos> 'managing a household;
householder, keeper', <metoikéo:> 'to change one's abode',
and <epoikos> 'settling or sojourning among foreigners; a
colonist, settler in a colony; a neighbor', among many
others. Derivatives include <oikiakós> 'belonging to the
house, housemate', <oikéte:s> 'housemate, servant, domestic
slave', <oikéo:> 'to house, to reside', <oíke:sis> 'to
found, to settle', <oikeios> 'belonging to the house,
domestic, homely, near', <oikídios> 'id.', <oikízo:> 'to
found, to settle', <oíkothen> 'from home', and <oíkade>
'homeward', among many others.
And of course there are dialect <woikos> and Mycenaean
<woikode> 'home' that retain the PIE *w.
And..Gothic 'weihs' is contended to be genetically related to
'oikos'?..
To Greek <(w)oikos> 'house'? Yes, of course.
to '*(H)oy?'..
Of course not. PIE *(h)oy- is obviously not the same as PIE
*weyk^- ~ *woyk^-.
I don't think so.
Who cares? But for a wonder this time you're at least
partly right.
'Weihs' meaning 'sacred' is contended to mean 'house' or
'one'? That's clearly erroneous.
Indeed. But the error is entirely yours. Gothic <weihs>
'holy, sacred' and <weihs> 'town, village' are distinct
words with distinct origins; the former is from PIE *weyk-,
the latter from *weyk^-.
By following your listed *pie model.. they have
successfully also conflated two Gothic root words; 'ains'
with 'weihs'. (!)
I have no idea to whom your 'they' refers, but it certainly
isn't linguists, who have done no such thing.
[...]
Assertions must be questioned when they do not conform to
reality.
It's a pity that you don't follow your own advice.
There are *multiple* representations of 'one' in Cl Greek
--- not just 'hoy', 'oy', or 'oikos':
one ei|ß heis [1]
one ejkei'noß ekeinos [2}
Not '1', but 'that person or thing'.
(another) one
&teroß heteros
Not '1', but 'the other, one of two'; the <he-> part goes
back to the same PIE root (*sem- '1') as Gk. <heis>.
one kajkei'noß kakeinos
A compound of <kai> 'and' and <ekeinos>.
one* katav kata [3]
No idea what nonsense you have in mind here.
one oJ ho [4]
Not '1', but 'that, the'.
one o&ß hos [1]
Not '1', but a relative pronoun, 'who'.
one oujdeivß oudeis [3]
Not '1', but 'no one, none, no', a compound of <ou> 'not'
and '1'.
one pa'ß pas [3]
Not '1', but 'all'.
one tiß tis [3]
Not '1', but an indefinite pronoun with a variety of uses.
This little list is enough to [...]
.... demonstrate yet again that you don't know what you're
talking about.
.
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Laz in Poland?
- Next by Date: Re: Does language ambiguity affect thought?
- Previous by thread: Re: when did oinos become oinos/oikos/oiwos ("one")
- Next by thread: Re: when did oinos become oinos/oikos/oiwos ("one")
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
