The Germanic substrate - knives?

[X99Lynx at aol.com]

In a message dated 11/11/2000 9:19:50 PM, rmccalli at sunmuw1.MUW.Edu writes:

<< You make a very interesting point regarding <knife> I think of knife in
the sense of "cut, tear, strike, kill" but I can see how "flesher, scraper"
can work>>

That really is the problem with so many of these early words.  They probably
originated in a very specific, narrow, down-to-earth usage.  But the
reconstructed meaning creates the impression that they started with broad
general abstract meanings like "cut, tear, strike, kill."  Which immediately
obscures the real practical meanings and processes.

There is loads of evidence that the "knife" was fundamentally a tool or a
group of tools among hunter-gathers and early farmers and trades folk.  It
undoubtedly had multiple uses.  But any farmer, butcher, woolcutter, wood
carver, fur trapper or a hunter who has actually dressed an animal will tell
you that "killing" is a rare use for a knife.  The OED for example lists
"knifer" not as a killer but as an old term for someone who cut the heels for
shoes. But I see in the old Britannica that is not quite right.  The knifer
actually "trimmed or smoothed" down the heel to match the already made shoe.
He didn't even accurately "cut" them, much less tear or kill them.

<<Watkins (1985: 19) lists knife under *gen- "hypothetical Indo-European base
of a range of Germanic words referring to compact, knobby bodies and
projections, sharp blows". 11 derivative forms are offered.>>

I suspect that this sort of amalgamation of meanings is almost useless.

Just an example.  On the web, you can buy "antler knives" and "bone knives,"
some of them brand new where the handle is made of bone, the others Native
American antiques where the whole knife is made from bone.  You see
exquisitely carved knives made from bone in New Guinea at
http://www.art-pacific.com/artifacts/nuguinea/weapons/bneknife.htm.  At the
non-pointed end of each is the natural "knob" of the bone joint or "knuckle"
of the handle (cf. Pol., <knykiec:> knuckle, <gnat>, bone).  Perhaps knives
are named after the bones they were once made from?  Perhaps not.  But a
pruning knife does not make "a sharp blow," yet if you look back at my
original list you'll see pruning is one of the closest verbs in earlier
German.

Perhaps "knife" come from analogy to wild animal teeth.  See the Greek,
<knops>, <kno:de:>, venemous beast, especially snake, <kno:dalon> wild beast,
<kno:dax> pin, pivot, <kno:do:n>, two projecting teeth on the blade of a
hunting spear, <knoos>, bear, bear teeth.  Cf., Pol, <knur>, boar, <kiel>
tusk, <kielek> blade, <kielnia> trowel.

Perhaps and perhaps more likely it was the other way around, these things
getting their names by analogy with knife.

All these etymologies have to be conjectural.

More importantly, if "knife" and all the similar words I found in Greek are
in fact all connected in some way, how do we think about them?  How is it
that by looking closer at the real meanings of words in context we see strong
similarities where alledgedly there were none before?

You write:
<<The closest roots for "scraping" in Watkins are *gerbh-, *gher-, *ghrei-,
*ghreu-, *grat-. I've seen instances of /kn-/ > /kr-/ but never the other
way.>>

Well, something is wrong there, that's pretty clear.  Watkins is missing
something, big time.   But then again, if this is strictly between
German/Slavic and Greek, then couldn't /kn-/ > /kn-/?

<<Looking through *KVn- in Watkins, the closest other root to knife is
*ghwen- "to strike, kill [1985: 25]>>

And what does Watkins have <<*ghwen- "to strike, kill>> turn into?  I bet
this is rebuilt from some form of knife.

<<Do your sources offer any IE roots for the words you cite?>>

I used Lidell-Scott and they occasionally offer comments on roots but not
often.  I don't recall any.

<<Keep in mind that the list is essentially a compilation of claims (and
possibilities) rather than my own work. I agree that a fair percentage of the
items in the list are probably from IE and I'm convinced that a small
percentage definitely are. >>

Well, the factuality of these supposed non-IE words is often repeated and
without question.  In fact many have dead ringers with clear etymologies in
other IE languages.  It seems the connections between them however have been
discounted either because of bad definitions or because of the sound laws --
which of course should not make us blind to obvious similarities that are
impossible to assign to coincidence.  There are more of these words I'd like
to address.

Regards,
Steve Long