Spoken Yamna Style: Atman's guide to Proto-Indo-European

[atman]

Iirc, it wasn't necessarily su1nús - there are also reflexes of su1yús, and maybe other variants. Iirc there's some debate about both the stress and the grade of dhug'2tér, which may have been dhéug'2ter or dhúg'2ter.
3rég's was some sort of authority figure, but not necessarily a king - iirc there are also reflexes indicating a priest or the like, and there are some other terms that might mean 'king'.
'Tribe' is a difficult one - there are a lot of different words there, and it's hard to tell what they meant exactly, particularly regarding people vs army vs settlement. [uik'-, gen1-, de2m-, 1leudh-, kori-, la2u-, ple1dwe1-, tewt-, etc, and varients]

Thank you for your comments. As you probably suspect, I was already aware of most of the etymological complications you pointed out. But I'm writing this guide least of all for people who are already into Indo-Europeanistics. This is an informal, amateur-made, necessarily simplified guide for beginners, total beginners who can't tell laryngeals from laryngitis. When there are alternate forms, dubious meanings of reconstructed words/roots and suchlike... I decide which one seems most convincing to me and only feature that, for the sake of simplicity and not to intimidate prospective readers (and why not, maybe prospective Indo-Europeanists ). And after all, the featured PIE forms are only there to give a feel for what the language was probably like; it's not like the readers will need to use these words in their everyday life...

[atman]

EXERCISES

Several kind readers have asked for PIE exercises in recent months. I never posted any, as I didn't have much time available. Now, I still don't have much time, but here are some exercises on personal pronouns, thematic and -eh₂ nouns and the most basic forms of h₁ésmi. You can find the paradigms on the first page of this thread. Of course, those who make too many mistakes will have to sacrifice the usual goat or sheep to dyḗus ph₂tḗr and His friends .

Translate the following into Late PIE:

- I
- you two (NOM)
- from you (PL)

- with a yoke
- in the nests (PL)
- of the tribe

- It is.
- I was.
- They are.

[Lambuzhao]

If these questions have already been answered somewhere else on the CBB, please pm/direct me. Gracias.

It's about PIE. How closely related are the present participle morpheme and the morpheme for the PRS.3PL? Is it just happenstance that they both have /nt/? Where are some sources that specifically focus on this possible relationship, b/c what I have found so far puts PIE PTCPs in with the Legos, and PIE verb morphemes with the Tinkertoys.

Any suggestions or ideas where to find out more?

Gracias de antemano.

[atman]

How closely related are the present participle morpheme and the morpheme for the PRS.3PL? Is it just happenstance that they both have /nt/?

ne wóydh₂e, dedwóyh₂e
I don't know, I'm afraid.

But I think there could be a possible semantic link between the two forms "the ones who X" / PTCP.PRS.PL and "they X" / PRS.3PL:

What do bʰérontes (those who carry) do?
bʰéronti (they carry).

What do gʷíh₃wontes (those who live) do?
gʷíh₃wonti (they live).

What do linkʷóntes (those who abandon) do?
linkʷénti (they abandon).

Clearly this is total speculation, my answer remains "no tengo ni idea" .

Any suggestions or ideas where to find out more?

Yes: just ask an Indo-Europeanist! I mean... an actual one, one who unlike me saw a university from the inside!

There are several top IEists who work near you: Ben Fortson, Don Ringe, Jay Jasanoff...

[Lambuzhao]

Tienes ideas buenas!

I did some more cybernautical spelunking, and came up with the following.

In Historical and Comparative Linguistics, Raimo Anttila briefly describes the similarity between Finnish pojat menevät 'the boys go' and menevät pojat 'the going boys', and Latin (sic. pueri) ferunt and feruntes to prove how internal reconstruction canm work in syntax of Proto-Uralic.

Also, Frederik Kortlandt gives this assertion. In An Outline of Proto-Indo-European in his discussion of the particle ending *-i, he asserts that the PRS.3PL *-nti represents the original NOM.PL form of the nt- participle. He also states that both PIE and PU (Proto-Uralic) are possessed of a non-past participle morpheme /nt/. So this thing might actually antedates PIE (!).

[atman]

Tienes ideas buenas!

But "tenés ideas buenas" around here

I did some more cybernautical spelunking, and came up with the following.

In Historical and Comparative Linguistics, Raimo Anttila briefly describes the similarity between Finnish pojat menevät 'the boys go' and menevät pojat 'the going boys', and Latin (sic. pueri) ferunt and feruntes to prove how internal reconstruction canm work in syntax of Proto-Uralic.

That's surprising... I had never thought that such a connection could exist before you asked me, and when you did ask I came up with my examples in five seconds flat, using something close to "native" intuition as I don't have an academic background. And well, here is an historical linguist showing us this thing could not only exist, but even have Proto-Indo-EUralic roots. Wow!

Also, Frederik Kortlandt gives this assertion. In An Outline of Proto-Indo-European in his discussion of the particle ending *-i, he asserts that the PRS.3PL *-nti represents the original NOM.PL form of the nt- participle. He also states that both PIE and PU (Proto-Uralic) are possessed of a non-past participle morpheme /nt/. So this thing might actually antedates PIE (!).

That's OK, but Fredy Kortlandt and his friends in Leiden have some ideas that are considered "rather weird" "premature" "unsupported" and worse in the wider IE community... Proto-Indo-EUralic isn't supported (at least for now) by the great majority of specialists. I think they have their reasons to be careful before accepting such a far-reaching hypothesis...

[Lambuzhao]

Tienes ideas buenas!

But "tenés ideas buenas" around here

I did some more cybernautical spelunking, and came up with the following.

In Historical and Comparative Linguistics, Raimo Anttila briefly describes the similarity between Finnish pojat menevät 'the boys go' and menevät pojat 'the going boys', and Latin (sic. pueri) ferunt and feruntes to prove how internal reconstruction canm work in syntax of Proto-Uralic.

That's surprising... I had never thought that such a connection could exist before you asked me, and when you did ask I came up with my examples in five seconds flat, using something close to "native" intuition as I don't have an academic background. And well, here is an historical linguist showing us this thing could not only exist, but even have Proto-Indo-EUralic roots. Wow!

Also, Frederik Kortlandt gives this assertion. In An Outline of Proto-Indo-European in his discussion of the particle ending *-i, he asserts that the PRS.3PL *-nti represents the original NOM.PL form of the nt- participle. He also states that both PIE and PU (Proto-Uralic) are possessed of a non-past participle morpheme /nt/. So this thing might actually antedates PIE (!).

That's OK, but Fredy Kortlandt and his friends in Leiden have some ideas that are considered "rather weird" "premature" "unsupported" and worse in the wider IE community... Proto-Indo-EUralic isn't supported (at least for now) by the great majority of specialists. I think they have their reasons to be careful before accepting such a far-reaching hypothesis...

How do you say "Cave Kortlandtem" Yamna style?


http://www.border-wars.com/wp-content/u ... ompeii.jpg

[Lambuzhao]

skeuedhí Skwardlendhom!

[atman]

Precisely!

And what a nice mosaic!

[HinGambleGoth]

What is "There can be only one" in PIE?

[DrGeoffStandish]

What is "There can be only one" in PIE?

Thinkin' 'bout this dude? Childhood memories, ah, 'em memories of an analogous past.

[Lambuzhao]

What is "There can be only one" in PIE?

Thinkin' 'bout this dude? Childhood memories, ah, 'em memories of an analogous past.

Indeed. That makes a lot more sense than the Engineers using PIE in Promethe-wha?

[HinGambleGoth]

What is "There can be only one" in PIE?

Thinkin' 'bout this dude? Childhood memories, ah, 'em memories of an analogous past.

Indeed. That makes a lot more sense than the Engineers using PIE in Promethe-wha?

Please, do not mention that travesty again, I have Always seen that character as an embodiment, almost a parody of gimbuta's kurgan riders .

Spoiler:

Denmark 500bc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsQSaEHOLN0

In dense fog a fleet of warships slowly emerge paddling through the marshlands, the ships have grotesque beastly heads in their sterns.

The warriors rush ashore, slaying their foes with daggers and clubs, eventually strangling them in the murky bog.

The victors sacrifice their enemies and their weapons, to their vicious war gods.

But, something is moving in the weeds, and suddenly a bloodied man rises from the darkness, takes a bent bronze sword that he straightens out with his own hands, and begins killing everyone effortlessly and unscathed, he stops at their injured chieftan, and yells [insert *PG here] and chops his head of, the rest flee while a rush of lightning sets the surrounding buch on fire.

Queen soundtrack kicks in.

[atman]

What is "There can be only one" in PIE?

What about óynos káywelos h₁éseti? Literally it means "one alone will/may/can be", using the subjunctive of h₁ésmi.

káywelos is the best I could find for alone/only: it was reconstructed on the basis of Sanskrit kévala- "alone" and Latin caelebs "not married". But if anyone can find something better, I'd like to know.

Instead, if you want to say "only one will live", we can use the subjunctive of gʷíh₃woh₂ "I live", that is gʷíh₃wēti.

Indeed. That makes a lot more sense than the Engineers using PIE in Promethe-wha?

My friend, I don't know what you're talking about. Care to explain?

[HinGambleGoth]

Indeed. That makes a lot more sense than the Engineers using PIE in Promethe-wha?

My friend, I don't know what you're talking about. Care to explain?

Aliens spread PIE, basically, apparently the makers of the movie thought that PIE is "the source language" and that it had to be brought here by them, I guess the conjugations were to complex to be crafted by primitive humans I suppose. Can you reconstruct the PIE terms for "Phased plasma rifle" and "Warp drive" through the comparative method? I guess those would be important words in a space-faring civilization. The bad guy in Highlander was actually based on the bronze age steppe cultures so translating his lines makes atleast some sense.

[Lambuzhao]

Can you reconstruct the PIE terms for "Phased plasma rifle" and "Warp drive" through the comparative method? I guess those would be important words in a space-faring civilization.

Ha! At gloaming, I read a thread from Lang Log

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4623

Which was debating the completeness of in general and :tli: specifically. There was quite a sprightly little repartee between Rohan F and John D in the latter part, which reminds me of HinGambleGoth's comment.

Personally, if PIE did have terms for such things, and I kind of side with Rohan F in that a language like PIE is complex enough to calque/neologism a way into vocab like that, the engineers would've used crazy, centuries-beyond-original-context combos quite like warp drive.

IMHO, phrasal terms for the above that come to mind include "beam shoulder shooter", and "wave motion push".

For ready one-word correspondences, which is what John D was pushing for, idk, depending how common or famous they were, they could just be "the shooter" or "the push".

Check the above link out, will you.

[HinGambleGoth]

Can you reconstruct the PIE terms for "Phased plasma rifle" and "Warp drive" through the comparative method? I guess those would be important words in a space-faring civilization.

Ha! At gloaming, I read a thread from Lang Log

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4623

Which was debating the completeness of in general and :tli: specifically. There was quite a sprightly little repartee between Rohan F and John D in the latter part, which reminds me of HinGambleGoth's comment.

Personally, if PIE did have terms for such things, and I kind of side with Rohan F in that a language like PIE is complex enough to calque/neologism a way into vocab like that, the engineers would've used crazy, centuries-beyond-original-context combos quite like warp drive.

IMHO, phrasal terms for the above that come to mind include "beam shoulder shooter", and "wave motion push".

For ready one-word correspondences, which is what John D was pushing for, idk, depending how common or famous they were, they could just be "the shooter" or "the push".

Check the above link out, will you.

Maybe mjolnir originally was a energy weapon or something, Zeus shoots lazers? Maybe it was all engineered by some lost Aryan race that lived the Himalayans?

[atman]

Can you reconstruct the PIE terms for "Phased plasma rifle" and "Warp drive" through the comparative method?

Ni en sueños

Maybe it was all engineered by some lost Aryan race that lived the Himalayans?

Aliens, lost Aryan tribes (and lost Aryan aliens) stay out of this thread.

Ha! At gloaming, I read a thread from Lang Log

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4623

Which was debating the completeness of in general and :tli: specifically. There was quite a sprightly little repartee between Rohan F and John D in the latter part, which reminds me of HinGambleGoth's comment.

Personally, if PIE did have terms for such things, and I kind of side with Rohan F in that a language like PIE is complex enough to calque/neologism a way into vocab like that, the engineers would've used crazy, centuries-beyond-original-context combos quite like warp drive.

IMHO, phrasal terms for the above that come to mind include "beam shoulder shooter", and "wave motion push".

For ready one-word correspondences, which is what John D was pushing for, idk, depending how common or famous they were, they could just be "the shooter" or "the push".

Check the above link out, will you.

We don't have to speculate on what PIE would have done to find names for new objects and inventions. We can see what PIE did in those cases. The whole semantic field of wheel-chariot-travel-transportation and related words was studied in depth. One etymology I remember is the famous kʷékʷlos "wheel" , which is a regular and therefore recently derived reduplicated thematic noun, derived from the verbal root kʷél- "to turn". In fact kʷékʷlos originally meant "the turn-turn-er" > "the thing that turns and turns" > "the wheel".

[Lambuzhao]

Very very good point, Atman.

Maybe mjolnir originally was a energy weapon or something, Zeus shoots lazers? Maybe it was all engineered by some lost Aryan race that lived the Himalayans?

Or some lost Aryan race that lived in that guy's coif.
Wuttupwitdat?

[HinGambleGoth]

Or some lost Aryan race that lived in that guy's coif.
Wuttupwitdat?

Lets just stick to the Kurgan hypothesis for now.