Pre-Basque phonology (fwd)

[Eduard Selleslagh]

[ moderator re-formatted ]

-----Original Message-----
From: Roslyn M. Frank <roz-frank at uiowa.edu>
Date: Thursday, September 16, 1999 5:26 PM

[snip]

>In an unrelated discussion Larry brings up the fact that he will accept the
>root-stem <ke> "smoke" for his database of reconstructed items:

>LT]

>>Second, I repeat yet again that I am *not* excluding any data because
>>they don't fit my expectations.  I am excluding data for entirely
>>different reasons, reasons that are independent of my expectations and,
>>in my view, entirely justified for the task I have in mind.  For
>>example, the universal word <ke> `smoke' definitely does not fit my
>>expectations, but I have to include it anyway, because it satisfies all
>>of my criteria.

>[RF]
>However, my question is the following: since this root stem has several
>different attested representations, which one should you choose? You seem to
>have chosen a southern variant, namely, /ke/.  I refer to the fact that this
>item is often pronounced /ke/ and /kee/ in southern dialects but frequently
>/khe/ in northern ones. I emphasize the fact that /khe/ is considered a common
>variant of this item in the northern dialects, but not */khehe/ to my
>knowledge. Is this evidence for anything?

>And to make things more complicated there is ample evidence for a variant in
>/ekhe/ "smoke" in northern dialects whereas this appears as /eke/ in southern
>dialects. I assume that Hualde would list /kehe/ also. So faced with these
>representations of the same word, how does one go about reconstructing the
>form?  Keeping in mind that the attested cases are /ekhe/, /khe/, /kehe/,
>/eke/ /ke/ and /kee/, which one should be assigned the role of best
>representing the earlier form?  Or should none of them play that role? And was
>it originally monosyllabic or bisyllabic. Finally, will the reconstruction of
>this form, i.e., the choices that are made, have any bearing on the way that
>we reconstruct /behe/ vs. /be/? Or stated differently, doesn't the set of
>choices we make about the reconstruction of the proto-form of /behe/ vs. /be/
>bear on the way that we reconstruct the proto-form of the root-stem meaning
>"smoke"?

[Ed Selleslagh]

Two remarks:

1.  KE could be related (but how?) to Greek KAPNO'S, ''smoke', i.e. to the
first syllable, the second being derived from the IE root that gave rise to
Grk. pneuma, 'breath, wind, etc.', Lat. ventus, 'wind' and Eng. wind.

I am not sure whether KAPNO'S is considered entirely IE, but if it is, the
Basque word isn't original Basque.

2. If it is of IE origin, maube via ancient Greek, the aspiration would be
secondary, I think.

Ed.