IE *k^won and its origin

[Adam Hyllested]

ROBERT ORR:
> Actually, there is evidence to suggest that IE *kuon is probably
> from a zero-grade of *pekuon (*pkuon) > *kuon, and related to *peku-
> "herd(?)".(...)a comparison between *pekuon and Nostratic, etc. forms
> would be a desideratum.

GLEN GORDON:
> Until we find a *p- before that word in some attested language, it's all
> but one of many possibilities (Probably the unlikeliest possibility
> too). (...) Allan Bomhard reconstructs a Nostratic item, #652
> *k(h)uwan-/*khuw at n- "dog", to account for both IE *k^won and AfroAsiatic
> with similar forms. Illych-Svitychs earlier Nostratic reconstruction
> (...) is also based on Uralic forms (...), all of which Bomhard had
> trouble finding (...).
> Not knowing alot of detail behind the forms sited for AA, it looks
> intriguing but IE and AA are very far apart. I'd be interested to know
> if others have found these forms in Uralic (...) and if so, could they
> simply be borrowed from IE?

Even if they were, this wouldn't explain the existence of similar forms in
other language families closer to IE than AA. J.Greenberg lists the
following Eurasiatic forms, none of which show any trace of *p- or the
like: Old Turkish <qanc^iq> 'bitch', Mongol <qani> 'a wild masterless
dog', Proto-Tungus <*xina> 'dog', Korean <ka> 'dog' (< kani), Gilyak <qan>
~ <kan> 'dog' and Sirenik <qanaya> 'wolf' (read the y as a gamma).
In "On the Origin of Languages", Stanford Univ. Press 1994, J.D.Bengtson
and M.Ruhlen boldly add probable cognates from a wide range of other
language families, even khoisan.

Thus, *k^won seems not to be derived from *peku-, but is probably an
indivisible word belonging to the very oldest core of human vocabulary.

Adam Hyllested