Horse, Linguistic History and more

[MOESAN]

Yes indeed; weather conditions is another forgotten aspect of the IE spread models, that's very true. Thanks for the file, it is very informative !


horses :

And I would had an argument : contrary to Taranis, I state that the word for "horse" is generally different in the IE languages. The *ekwos etymon doesn't work in many languages : English "horse" is "of unknown origins", Spanish "caballo" (= French "cheval, = Irish "capall", = Welsh "cefyll"), Danish "heste", Breton "marc'h" (= Welsh "march") as well. I am not sure but the Albanian kalë would not fit in *ekwos without dramatic manipulations. It tends to indicate that the PIE urvolk did not have a specific horse culture.

urvolk :

To be a bit provocative (as I like to be and as Sparkey rightly stated :) ), I would also add : are we sure that a PIE urvolk ever existed ? We have clear linguistic convergences (although many of them are based upon heavily distorted interpretations), is it sufficient to declare that you had an urvolk and an urheimat and horses and bronze swords and conquest and the like ? Well, I don't think so. I don't discard the hypothesis of a PIE urvolk, I am just wondering, this is after all only a hypothesis.

some thoughts of mine:
We have to be cautious about presence or absence of cognates words in languages

1- old words can have disappeared (and recently enough sometimes)
2- the litteral meaning of old words can evolve, even if giving birth to new meanings close enough or still related to old meanings (see the exchanges between meanings like «horse», «stallion», «mare», «foal» or «colt», «filly» ...)
3- on another side, without shift of meaning, by instance, in a population where horses are common and well used for different purposes, a lot of names can exist for them, more precise (we see that even in french): according to gener, to task/use (food, ploughing, war...) you can find diverse names: it does not prove that these different words haad been loaned to foreign languages and cultures... not always.
'horse' (I red it) would be for *'hros' << **'kros' ? (dutch 'ros', french 'rosse' = «bad horse») – so not isolated in lonely english -
as said by Taranis (I believe) *'ek^w-' has some sons as 'hyppos', 'epos' >> 'each' (gaelic, irish) + 'ebol'/'ebeul' (welsh/breton) and as 'yegua'/'egua'/'iapä'(«mare» in spanish, portugales, romanian)
*'capall'-'caball' common to latn and celtic languages gave names in occidental languages but too in slavic ones like 'kobyla', 'kobila' (mare) -
*'mark-' is common to celtic languages as 'marc' (gaelic) and 'march'/'marc'h («stallion» in welsh and breton) but germanic had the same root in ancient 'marh' or 'marah' (marhskall >> 'marshall', 'maréchal' in english and french, and I suppose 'mare'/'merrie'/'merr' (english, dutch, norvegian) have some ancient connexions too as maybe 'hoppe' (norvégian, swedish) with *'caball-'...
the scandinavian 'hest'/'häst' could have a link too with welsh and breton 'caseg'/'kaseg'...
diversity of namings is not always a sign of loans -
I have sone difficulties to imagine that all these words were picked up here and there by the first
I-Eans: surely some words are not I-E but the basic ones, MORE THAN A NAME, were in western I-E, I suppose... it is not to disprove some heterogeneity concerning the naming of the horse in I-E: the example of slavic 'konj' (connected to turkic by someones) shows what seams a loan word;
just to say: be carefull concerning multiplicity of forms!


I 'm very doubtfull concerning ancient I-E = convergence of different languages (super-creole?): NO P-I-E thesis:
the majority of basic words for family, physical environment, body, basic verbs are not a distorded intellectual construction to create a forged common origin, as say someones: not all of them; even the conjugaisons endings show some similitude between say breton and persian (verbe 'to be')! It is not possible if I-E is only a convergence of not related languages – or I have not well understood what people were meaning about that.
Have a good supper!

[Kardu]

Since we are talking about horses any idea from which IE language Georgian would borrow Achua (Horse in baby language, while the general term for a horse is local - Tskh-en-i) :)

[Kentel]

some thoughts of mine:
'horse' (I red it) would be for *'hros' << **'kros' ? (dutch 'ros', french 'rosse' = «bad horse») – so not isolated in lonely english -

Interesting. But the French "rosse" is probably a loanword, since it cannot be a reflex of *kros. This is also the opinion of the TLF (Trésor de la Langue Française) : Empr. au m. h. all. ross « cheval » (= "borrowed from Old High German ross"). Moreover we don't have a PIE etymon such as *kros.

The OED (Oxford English Dictionary) suggests the following : of unknown origin, connected by some with PIE root *kurs-, source of Latin currere "to run"

For "ross" the DEW (Duden's Deutsches Etymologisches Worterbuch) says : Herkunft unklar (origins unclear) but confirms your connection with "horse" : auch in anord. hross, ae. hors, afr. hors, hars, hers. (ae = Old English).

*'mark-' is common to celtic languages as 'marc' (gaelic) and 'march'/'marc'h («stallion» in welsh and breton) but germanic had the same root in ancient 'marh' or 'marah' (marhskall >> 'marshall', 'maréchal' in english and french, and I suppose 'mare'/'merrie'/'merr' (english, dutch, norvegian) have some ancient connexions too as maybe 'hoppe' (norvégian, swedish) with *'caball-'...

Here the German words are borrowed from Celtic according to Henry's (Lexique Etymologique du Breton), or are common only to Celtic and Germanic, hence it is not IE in any case.

the scandinavian 'hest'/'häst' could have a link too with welsh and breton 'caseg'/'kaseg'...
diversity of namings is not always a sign of loans -

I have not my Danish etymological Dictionary at hand, but I'll check it and tell you more about this one.

I have sone difficulties to imagine that all these words were picked up here and there by the first
I-Eans: surely some words are not I-E but the basic ones, MORE THAN A NAME, were in western I-E, I suppose... it is not to disprove some heterogeneity concerning the naming of the horse in I-E: the example of slavic 'konj' (connected to turkic by someones) shows what seams a loan word

I agree with you here, but which conclusion do you draw from this ? IMO if they are not IE then the hypothesis of a specific IE horse culture vanishes.

I 'm very doubtfull concerning ancient I-E = convergence of different languages (super-creole?): NO P-I-E thesis:
the majority of basic words for family, physical environment, body, basic verbs are not a distorded intellectual construction to create a forged common origin, as say someones: not all of them; even the conjugaisons endings show some similitude between say breton and persian (verbe 'to be')! It is not possible if I-E is only a convergence of not related languages – or I have not well understood what people were meaning about that.

Yes, I agree, creolisation cannot explain all the convergences. Meillet said that we could assume the existence of a proto-language, as a mathematical model, not as a reality. And in no case was the existence of a urvolk demonstrated. As for myself I don't know. On one hand you have indeed many convergences which cannot be coincidental, on the other too many striking differences (and the verbal paradigm shows both of them : striking convergences and unexplainable differences - considered as "innovations" but it is again speculatory).

[Yetos]

I see we are speaking again about the horse but nobody notices the donkey, which East of Summerian has another theme-root and west another.

[Taranis]

I see we are speaking again about the horse but nobody notices the donkey, which East of Summerian has another theme-root and west another.

The word for "donkey" is almost certainly a wanderwort in most languages in Eurasia, as donkeys were originally not native to Eurasia, but north Africa.

[LeBrok]

I would like to mentioned that horses always existed in Europe. They were hunted and consumed by hunter gatherers. Obviously there was a word for horse before IE showed up. The only question is which one and if the word survived.

We also have to keep in mind that there were different types of horses. The horse that we know today, is pretty much human creation, like dogs, and was expensive and mostly used for battles. It was like a Ferrari of horses.
The most common horse in ancient times was a small one used for transportation of people over distances. It had a specific trot, thus a smooth ride, and could do it all day.
Obviously these two main types of horses had different names. The big one in Latin times might have been called caballo, the smaller one (because of the trot) aquos.
Now we have only big horse existing, therefore only caballo in use today.

I think caballo is IE. There is so vast uniformity of word kobila and kon (soft n), sometimes kun for horse in all slavic languages, and kuznia (stable/black smith), that easily backtrackts it into proto-slavic, and more likely IE. Also in many slavic languages trot is called kwus, kus, and possibly name of the small horse. Small horses were native to steppes from Europe to Mongoilia, and even used as a battle horse for Hunic invaders and Mongols in middle ages.

[Taranis]

I would like to mentioned that horses always existed in Europe. They were hunted and consumed by hunter gatherers. Obviously there was a word for horse before IE showed up. The only question is which one and if the word survived.

We also have to keep in mind that there were different types of horses. The horse that we know today, is pretty much human creation, like dogs, and was expensive and mostly used for battles. It was like a Ferrari of horses.
The most common horse in ancient times was a small one used for transportation of people over distances. It had a specific trot, thus a smooth ride, and could do it all day.
Obviously these two main types of horses had different names. The big one in Latin times might have been called caballo, the smaller one (because of the trot) aquos.
Now we have only big horse existing, therefore only caballo in use today.

I agree with regard for Mesolithic/Neolithic peoples and their relationship with horses. Incidentially, I remembered this paper, which argues for modern continuity between Neolithic/Bronze Age horse breeds in western Europe.

I think caballo is IE. There is so vast uniformity of word kobila and kon (soft n), sometimes kun for horse in all slavic languages, and kuznia (stable/black smith), that easily backtrackts it into proto-slavic, and more likely IE. Also in many slavic languages trot is called kwus, kus.

I would agree with you with respect for *kaballo-, but I'm inclined to think the word is still regional:
- we only have it in Celtic, Latin/Romance (which in turn might be borrowed from Celtic) and Slavic. We might as well add Paleo-Balkan (Albanian "kalë", Romanian "cal"), but I'm not aware of any reflexes for Indo-Iranic, Tocharian or Anatolian.

[spongetaro]

It is possible that Horses have also been domesicated in the Iberian Peninsula. As wikipedia states:

Variation in the mitochondrial DNA is used to determine so-called haplogroups. A haplogroup is a group of closely related haplotypes that share the same common ancestor. In horses, seven main haplogroups are recognized (A-G), each with several subgroups. Several haplogroups are unequally distributed around the world, indicating the addition of local wild mares to the domesticated stock.^{[12][19][23][24][25]} One of these haplotypes (Lusitano group C) is exclusively found on in Iberian Peninsula, leading to a hypothesis that the Iberian peninsula or North Africa was an independent origin for domestication of the horse.^[23]

It would explain the specific Basque word for Horses.

[LeBrok]

It is possible that domestication of horse happened interdependently in few places. As I mentioned before the most important thing is who used horses on industrial scale, and it points to people of the steppe around Ukraine to Kazakhstan, possibly IEs.
Most archeological and genetic finds point to Ukraine.

Here is the latest research, or rather its conclusions:

A study published in 2012 that performed genomic sampling on 300 work horses from local areas as well as a review of previous studies of archaeology, mitochondrial DNA, and Y-DNA suggested that horses were originally domesticated in the western part of the Eurasian steppe.^[20] Both domesticated stallions and mares spread out from this area, and then additional wild mares were added from local herds; wild mares were easier to handle than wild stallions. Most other parts of the world were ruled out as sites for horse domestication, either due to climate unsuitable for an indigenous wild horse population or no evidence of domestication.^[21]
Genes located on the Y-chromosome are inherited only from sire to its male offspring and these lines show a very reduced degree of genetic variation (aka genetic homogeneity) in modern domestic horses, far less than expected based on the overall genetic variation in the remaining genetic material.^[17][18] This indicates that a relatively few stallions were domesticated, and that it is unlikely that many male offspring originating from unions between wild stallions and domestic mares were included in early domesticated breeding stock

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestication_of_the_horse


PS. Perhaps we should open Horse thread. :)

[Kentel]

I think caballo is IE. There is so vast uniformity of word kobila and kon (soft n), sometimes kun for horse in all slavic languages, and kuznia (stable/black smith), that easily backtrackts it into proto-slavic, and more likely IE. Also in many slavic languages trot is called kwus, kus, and possibly name of the small horse. Small horses were native to steppes from Europe to Mongoilia, and even used as a battle horse for Hunic invaders and Mongols in middle ages.

Here is the notice from Delamarre's Etymological Dictionary of Gaulish (2003) (my translation):

"caballos : workhorse. The Latin caballus and its Romance cognates [...] are sometimes considered as originally Gaulish. [...] The Insular Celtic word is not a borrowing from Latin. [...] The word, which has not an IE aspect is attested in Greek at an early date (kaballes) and is probably not borrowed from the Galates. It is either a "wanderwort" (cf. Turkish keväl and Persian kaval) or a word borrowed by the European IE languages from an indigeneous substratum."

original version :caballos : cheval de trait. Le latin caballus et ses dérivés romans [...] sont parfois considérés d'origine gauloise. [...] Le mot en celtique insulaire n'est pas un emprunt au latin. [...] Le mot, qui n'a pas un aspect indo-européen, est attesté en grec à date ancienne (kaballes) où il n'est probablement pas emprunté aux Galates. Il s'agit d'un mot voyageur (Wanderwort) (v. turc keväl et persan kaval) ou d'un mot passé dans les langues IE d'Europe à partir d'un substrat local."

Hence : wandering or substratic word, but in any case not IE.

[Kentel]

PS. Perhaps we should open Horse thread. :)

Yes, definitely ! I just can't paste all the posts devoted to the topic in a new thread. We need a moderator to do that :)

[LeBrok]

Here is the notice from Delamarre's Etymological Dictionary of Gaulish (2003) (my translation):


Hence : wandering or substratic word, but in any case not IE.

Interesting, It's hard to believe how wildly it had spread just on bases of borrowing. I'm not saying you and Taranis are wrong, I'm just amazed how it turned out.

[Kentel]

Interesting, It's hard to believe how wildly it had spread just on bases of borrowing. I'm not saying you and Taranis are wrong, I'm just amazed how it turned out.

If I understand well, Delamarre's conclusion is that the word was substractic somewhere in Central Asia (because of the Turkish and Persian cognates) and became a wandering word afterwards. It sounds realistic from an archaeologic point of view.

He says that cabalos "has not an IE aspect", probably because PIE *b is very rare. Some linguists go as far as considering it as non-existant.

[Yetos]

The word for "donkey" is almost certainly a wanderwort in most languages in Eurasia, as donkeys were originally not native to Eurasia, but north Africa.

Correct, and that is wher I want to focus,

the theme root asinus osl onos in finnish aasi and Summerian anse, and in Tocharian Persian and rest East as Kerkapo kar etc
shows clear a line, a line among Indo-Iranian and European, and strangely divides Anatolian languages to Hettit and Ludian and Tocharian,

I think that is something that we must observe it,
as also some other differences, for example the word for mountain,

on how these words spread and towards where, we can understand the move, or the waves.

for instance in the above example we have clear contact of IE with Summerian either as loan or common word the theme-root asinus, but Tocharian Kerkapo (reminds me kapros Capri) is after what? and which other language connected?
I think such comparisons gives us lines and limits, so we can understand the waves.

a good example
Greek εγειρω and English raise
could that be connected with south Slavic goran the word for mountains?
or Greek ορος, Slavic goran, Spanish Sierra cognates with Summerian Kur?
another linguistic line? notice that in both (Greek south Slavic) misses the theme-root for mountain.

[LeBrok]

He says that cabalos "has not an IE aspect", probably because PIE *b is very rare. Some linguists go as far as considering it as non-existant.

Doesn't this apply to PIE *v too? Possibly PIE kaval?

[MOESAN]

Interesting. But the French "rosse" is probably a loanword, since it cannot be a reflex of *kros. This is also the opinion of the TLF (Trésor de la Langue Française) : Empr. au m. h. all. ross « cheval » (= "borrowed from Old High German ross"). Moreover we don't have a PIE etymon such as *kros.

I agree, I was aware 'rosse' was presumed being of germanic origin - it seams evident enough -

The OED (Oxford English Dictionary) suggests the following : of unknown origin, connected by some with PIE root *kurs-, source of Latin currere "to run"

For "ross" the DEW (Duden's Deutsches Etymologisches Worterbuch) says : Herkunft unklar (origins unclear) but confirms your connection with "horse" : auch in anord. hross, ae. hors, afr. hors, hars, hers. (ae = Old English).



Here the German words are borrowed from Celtic according to Henry's (Lexique Etymologique du Breton), or are common only to Celtic and Germanic, hence it is not IE in any case.

It was just to make a list of words before trying to give an possible PIE origin or not


I have not my Danish etymological Dictionary at hand, but I'll check it and tell you more about this one.



I agree with you here, but which conclusion do you draw from this ? IMO if they are not IE then the hypothesis of a specific IE horse culture vanishes.

I don't draw anuy conclusion now, lacking knewledge about eastern satem languages


Yes, I agree, creolisation cannot explain all the convergences. Meillet said that we could assume the existence of a proto-language, as a mathematical model, not as a reality. And in no case was the existence of a urvolk demonstrated. As for myself I don't know. On one hand you have indeed many convergences which cannot be coincidental, on the other too many striking differences (and the verbal paradigm shows both of them : striking convergences and unexplainable differences - considered as "innovations" but it is again speculatory).

convergences prove more than divergences, when we know how quickly innovations can occur in living languages - french lonaed a lot of english words, but for now never adopted the english verbs conjugaisons, very easier nevertheless than the latine french conjugaisons! and look at personal pronouns in IE languages (different today but cognates, but today their new forms are not exchanged) -
and the 'ne' negative marker also - it is not every kind of words which is commonly loaned -
i could say in modern french: "Je vais dans mon jogging voir mon père qui est manager d'un petit fast-food low-cost": mais pas: "I vais in mon survêtement voir my father who dirige un petit fast-food à prix cassés."

[MOESAN]

Sorry, I made a mess of my answers to Kentel

[MOESAN]

If I understand well, Delamarre's conclusion is that the word was substractic somewhere in Central Asia (because of the Turkish and Persian cognates) and became a wandering word afterwards. It sounds realistic from an archaeologic point of view.

He says that cabalos "has not an IE aspect", probably because PIE *b is very rare. Some linguists go as far as considering it as non-existant.

I agree 'caball-' is very curious: it is surely a loan word, and I suppose it was loaned at different times through different ways because phonetic laws are not too much respected in its case, if loaned at an unique source:
celtic *'cabalos', BUT gaelic 'capal' and welsh breton 'ceffyl', 'kefel-' ('kefeleg' is the name of a bird !!! see my other posts): in celtic languages, we would have expected *"kaval" or "kevel" ('kaval' exists in Brittany, but it's a place name) but
even if we can imagine *'capal-' before 'cabalos' in Galia, the other forms in Eire-G-B suppose rather a *'cappal-' form...

[Kentel]

Doesn't this apply to PIE *v too? Possibly PIE kaval?

Yes, there is (apparently) no fricative in PIE but for *s. Hence PIE *kaval is impossible.

[Kentel]

convergences prove more than divergences, when we know how quickly innovations can occur in living languages - french lonaed a lot of english words, but for now never adopted the english verbs conjugaisons, very easier nevertheless than the latine french conjugaisons! and look at personal pronouns in IE languages (different today but cognates, but today their new forms are not exchanged) -
and the 'ne' negative marker also - it is not every kind of words which is commonly loaned
i could say in modern french: "Je vais dans mon jogging voir mon père qui est manager d'un petit fast-food low-cost": mais pas: "I vais in mon survêtement voir my father who dirige un petit fast-food à prix cassés."

Yes but innovations and borrowings are two different things. Innovations stricto sensu may exist only in echoism (a new root built upon an onomatopeia). And I don't believe in echoism.

By the way, "jogging", from Middle English "to jog" has no known origins :)

[Kentel]

A propos horses, here is the etymology for Danish "hest" (horse, same word in all the Scandinavian languages) according to the Gyldendals Etymologisk Ordbog. I have to stress the fact that this dictionary is fanatically pro-PIE and sees PIE roots everywhere. The guys know what meaning distorsion is the name for. But you can judge by yourselves :

hest : glda. hæst, no. hest, sv. häst, oldnord. hestr; af urnord. *hahistaR, germ. *hanhista- der er Verners vekselsform til germ. *hanqista-, se hingst. [...] Begge ord er superl. "best springende", dannet til ie *kak "springe, danse" ligesom fx lit. šókti "springe, danse", nasaleret šankìnti få (en hest) til at springe.

my translation:

hest : old Danish hæst, norwegian hest, swedish häst, old Norse hestr, from common Nordic *hahistaR, proto-Germanic *hanhista, which is the alternate proto-form of *hanqista (Verner's Law), see hingst. [...] Both words are actually a superlative "best jumping", built upon PIE *kak- "to jump", like f.ex the Lituanian šókti "to jump, to dance" and its nasalized form šankìnti "make (a horse) jump".


other jumping animals (my suggestions for forecoming etymologies):

rabbit
grasshopper
squirrel
salmon
frog
etc.

My contribution (I hope you'll like it): kangaroo, from PIE *kak- "to jump" (nasalized).

By the way, contrary to the kangaroo, the horse does not move by jumping, so let's face it : "hest" is not IE.

[MOESAN]

A propos horses, here is the etymology for Danish "hest" (horse, same word in all the Scandinavian languages) according to the Gyldendals Etymologisk Ordbog. I have to stress the fact that this dictionary is fanatically pro-PIE and sees PIE roots everywhere. The guys know what meaning distorsion is the name for. But you can judge by yourselves :

hest : glda. hæst, no. hest, sv. häst, oldnord. hestr; af urnord. *hahistaR, germ. *hanhista- der er Verners vekselsform til germ. *hanqista-, se hingst. [...] Begge ord er superl. "best springende", dannet til ie *kak "springe, danse" ligesom fx lit. šókti "springe, danse", nasaleret šankìnti få (en hest) til at springe.

my translation:

hest : old Danish hæst, norwegian hest, swedish häst, old Norse hestr, from common Nordic *hahistaR, proto-Germanic *hanhista, which is the alternate proto-form of *hanqista (Verner's Law), see hingst. [...] Both words are actually a superlative "best jumping", built upon PIE *kak- "to jump", like f.ex the Lituanian šókti "to jump, to dance" and its nasalized form šankìnti "make (a horse) jump".


other jumping animals (my suggestions for forecoming etymologies):

rabbit
grasshopper
squirrel
salmon
frog
etc.

My contribution (I hope you'll like it): kangaroo, from PIE *kak- "to jump" (nasalized).

By the way, contrary to the kangaroo, the horse does not move by jumping, so let's face it : "hest" is not IE.

thanks for the joke, but I think you are very hard concerning the dan etymologists and by the way, a horse is not everytime moving by jumps BUT CAN JUMP - I don't pronounce myself about the last part of this etymology, but I think it 's a vauable HYPOTEHSIS -
concerning innovations in languages, I was speaking about evolutions of meanings or creation of new words by derivation or association of two words, we see everywhere in every language, almost...

[MOESAN]

'valuable' - 'hypothesis' - sorry, my fingers are swifter than my brain...

[LeBrok]

Yes, there is (apparently) no fricative in PIE but for *s. Hence PIE *kaval is impossible.

Interesting. It makes the most common name in Poland "Kowalski" none IE, in otherwise very IE language. :)

[Taranis]

Interesting. It makes the most common name in Poland "Kowalski" none IE, in otherwise very IE language. :)

In a number of IE daughter languages (including Slavic, but also Latin and German, for instance), the sound *v arose from an earlier *w. Another typical way for *v to arise is from an earlier *b, which happened in Brythonic and (medieval to modern) Greek for instance. The latter also explains why the Cyrilic letter В has the value /v/ while a new letter for /b/ (Б) was invented.

My contribution (I hope you'll like it): kangaroo, from PIE *kak- "to jump" (nasalized).

By the way, contrary to the kangaroo, the horse does not move by jumping, so let's face it : "hest" is not IE.

Yes, there is (apparently) no fricative in PIE but for *s. Hence PIE *kaval is impossible.

Not quite: you're forgetting the so-called laryngeals (*H₁, *H₂, *H₃), which were also fricatives.