The Cornerstone

Let us see what Pokorny says:
[…”Npers. ās (dehnstufig) `Mühlstein’; gr. ακη `Spitze’, dehnstufig ion. ηκη ακωκη, επιδορατις, ηκμη Hes., redupl. ακωκη `Spitze, Schneide’ (wie αγωγη : αγω); nach Kretschmer KZ. 33, 567 und Schwyzer Gr. Gr. I 348 gehört ακοω `höre’ als *ακ-ους- `das Ohr scharf habend’ hierher, s. aber 1. keu-; alb. athëtë `herb, sauer’; lat. acēre `sauer sein’, acidus `sauer’, acētum `Essig’;”…]

corner-stoneIf Pokorny had known my Xur-Bel-Gon speech formula he would not have mixed two quite separate notions: Spitze (tip. point, pinnacle) and hören (hear). His conclusion that ακ-ους- has the meaning `das Ohr scharf habend’ is totaly unacceptable and even ridiculous. Of course, he was partly right when he said that above words were derived from the reduplicated basis (unfortunately, he didn’t specify which one it was and I would add that it was the Gon paleo-basis).

Greek ακουω (hear, hearken, give ear, obey, to be a pupil of) is a cognate of Serbian uho (ear) and oko (eye); cf. Gr. ουατοεις (long-eared), Serb. uveta (ears); εσσα = Serb. uši; Of course, all these words should be compared to those which are signifying first and foremost “noise” (Lat. clamo = Serb. galama /noise/ = Eng. claim), Gr. ηχώ = Serb. jeka; huk = Eng. echo; Gr. εκκαλεω = Eng. call = Serb. glas /voice/; cf. Gr. εκκλησιαζω debate therein, Gr. εκκλησία (church; in Gr. church offical had a name derived from the noun οικοσ /Serb. kuća house/ => οικονομισσα female official in the church; Serb. kućenje economizing, kućanica hostess); i.e. εκκλησία is equal to Serbian glas (voice), oglas (advertisement) and glasanje (voting); hence also Gr. άγγελος (angel); Serb. glasnik (mouthpiece, messenger, forerunner).

All the above words were derived from the agglutinated primeval Gon-Gon-Bel-Gon basis: Serb. oganj (fire), ognjilo/oknilo (a visible area), okno (window), okolina (environment, surrounding), okolo (arround), oko (eye), uho (ear); cf. Serb. osluhnuti (hear; from ho-h- lu-hnu-ti; related to the above mentioned Serb. okolina surrounding), sluh (hearing).

It is said above that Pokorny was “partly” right because (I hope it is absolutely clear now) the words αγωγη and ακουω came out of a different milieu (although it may look otherwise at first sight); i.e. αγωγη is a clear Gon-Gon derivation while ακουω (like Serb. jeka, huk noise) originally appeared from a simple reduplicated Gon basis, just as it happened to the “sharp-angular” words γωνία (Eng. angle; Serb ugao), κινητός (movable; Serb. goniti drive, hunt; Eng. hunt), but with different connotations: one could be expressed through the Serbian syntagm “ugoniti u ugao” (driving/forcing into the corner) and the other through “osluhnuti okolinu” (listen to the environment); therefore there are Latin angulus (angle) and akumen (sharp point), Serb. “ugaoni kamen” (a corner stone) and kama (knife); Gr. γωνία (angle) and ακωκη (a point).

I could continue similar analysis for hours, but I think that the above explanation is enough for any (sound) human being, at least as an incite to begin to understand that (as Italo put his_sharp_question in this thread) we need no Pre-Latin vocabulary, especially not one imagined by alleged lingua-scientists who manufactured the so-called Illyrian nation and Illyrian language on a scanty basis of a dozen of words written (wrongly of course) by the Latin and Greek writers.

Explore posts in the same categories: Comparative Linguistics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: