Pelasgian/was Etruscans

[Hans-Werner Hatting]

On Sat, 05 May 2001 06:52:55 Douglas G Kilday wrote:

>> These proposals are too numerous and too complicated to repeat here -- and
>> they not infrequently involve even more far-flung words, such as German
>> <Blei> 'lead', Georgian <brp'eni> 'lead', Hebrew <bdi:l> 'lead', and a
>> reported Berber <buldun> 'tin'.

> Hebrew <b'dhiyl> means 'tin'; <!o:phereth> is 'lead'. These are contrasted
> in the enumeration of metals (Num. 31:22). The former is probably derived
> from <b-d-l> 'to separate'. For this connection to work in a relatively
> sane way, one would have to assume that Punic used <b'dhiyl> vel sim. for
> 'lead' instead of 'tin', and that the word diffused through Iberia to the
> Basque Country undergoing peculiar phonetic changes. I certainly wouldn't
> endorse this one.

This would not be the only case of "tin" and "lead" being mixed up in
cognate languages, e.g., Russian <olovo> means "tin", while the Polish
equivalent <olowo> (with barred <l>) means "lead". But as long  as we do not
know the Punic word for lead, this is speculation, and DGK seems right to be
cautious.

Best regards,
Hans-Werner Hatting