IE *k^won and its origin

[Robert Orr]

At 07:13 PM 4/5/99 +0200, you wrote:

>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

Maybe I should have posted this one to the whole list.  Individuals who have
already seen it, please bear with me.

	"Ironically, although there does seem to be a considerable amount of
evidence that the notions 'dog' and 'wolf' can be combined, the
reconstruction of Nostratic *küynä, based on a comparison of PIE *kuon with
various other forms in Uralic, Afro- Asiatic, etc., may not be a good
example of the phenomenon.  It has been proposed on and off for nearly a
century, starting with Osthoff (1901:199, et passim), that PIE *kuon is in
fact originally derived from the root which gives Latin pecus, Gothic faihu,
etc., < IE *peku-, and that OCS pisu is also related.  According to such a
reconstruction *kuon would originally have meant "sheep-dog", and be derived
from something similar to *pekuon < *peku- + - on, with PIE *kuon derived
from *pkuon, a zero-grade form of *pekuon.  Such an etymology allows us to
derive, ultimately, both the set of forms normally traced back to IE *kuon,
and OCS pisu, from the same root.  Osthoff's theory has found a small but
steady stream of followers, e.g., Knobloch (1971), Hamp (1980), who have
added further refinements."

And by way of clarifictaion, recall that Slavic tended to insert jer vowels
into old IE zero-grades, thus giving us *piku-.  Hamp has a convincng line
of argumentation showing how other Slavic derivational forms  (e.g.,
pisynja) could be seen as from pikuon, and how pisu (< *piku-) would be a
back formation.

This etymology allows to explain OCS pisu, which is troublesome in most
reconstructions.  It is very likely an old *-u-stem.


For IE *kuon < *pekuon, see

Hamp, Eric P. 1980. "IE *()kuon - dog". Indogermanische Forschungen 85.35-42.

Knobloch, Johann. 1971. "Die indogermanische Benennung des Hundes", 	Donum
Indogermanicum. ed. by Robert Schmitt-Brandt, 39-40. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

Osthoff, Hermann. 1901. Etymologische Parerga, Erster Teil, Leipzig: S. Hirzel.

And perhaps one could segment Modern Turkish kopek - dog (I don't have
dacritics in this programme) as ko + pek, thus providing us with a beautiful
parallel from outsde IE?)