A Formula for a New Millennium


Bjorvand & Lindeman take No. and (i.e. Eng and wing) as derivations from the root Gmc *we:- > Non-Anatol. *Hwe:- < PIE *H2w-eH1-. (Accepting this, the suffixes are self-evident.) Since the "wind"-word has reflexes in several branches, it's probably older than Germanic. In Non-Anatolian this derivated stem wouldn't look very different from Pokorny's *uendH1-. The "wing"-word, OTOH, must be younger, since the verbal noun suffix -ing is a Germanic innovation.

Trond Engen

You seem not to understand the logic of "belgianism" or "xurbelgonism".:alien:

Dentals are the "younger" sounds and they always come out from velars, glottals and other "laryngeals". The other thing is a matter the pure philosophy and the primal symbolism – all the words in any IE vocabulary must be firmly connected to the natural phenomena (for instance, Eng. love, lips and libation, even lime /from libe/; globe, Slavic zemlja /earth/ and Latin cumulus, including nebula, noble and Arab dunja). I hope there would soon be people on sci.lang who would be able to understand the basic principles of the Xur-Bel-Gon Theory. As I see it, you are a born explorer, intelligent and far above average. Try to compare swing and wing/wind, fling and flying or (this is much more difficult), Serbian pero (feather), vetar (wind) and German Feder (feather), Greek πτερόν (feathers), modern Greek φτερό (wing, feather).

I hope you have already spotted that English feather is close to weather. Is it a chance resemblence? No my dear it is not. Who ever tell you different he must be either a liar or an ignoramus. All the above words are most closely related. Compare Serbian words vetar (wind) and vedro/vedar (clear sky; Serb. vedar dan = Eng. good weather) with English weather and feather. Feather – weather – vetar – vedar; wind and wing!

The time has come for a new linguistic breakthrough. Xur-Bel-Gon speech formula is a start for a new millennium. :drunk:

B&L mention OCS among the reflexes of PIE *H2w-eH1-. Some of your "cognates" aren't even remotely close, and you still mix prefixes and roots, but at least some looks OK. I'd better leave that to someone who actually knows something about Slavic, though.

You must have beee listening too much to Kriha's scientifically- prefixed idée fixe! 😉 Today it just looks like that but the Slavic prefixes (as any other) couldn't be older than the basic words one vocabulary could contain. For instance, Serbian word so/l, soliti (salt) is related to the verb saliti/zaliti (suffuse) but it doesn't mean that the word so/l is prefixed. Even Latin sorbeo (suck in, drink, swallow) is coming from the same Ur-basis as Serbian verb saliti/salivati (suffuse) and it is even related to the mere name of Slavs. As I told many times before, it is quite normal that all IE languages used the same "source" or "roots" of their different languages and the "key" lies in the fact if you are in a position to have that "key" or not..

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Comparative Linguistics

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: