Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-European/bʰardʰéh₂

Celtic forms are not listed as inherited in the literature and need checking. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 04:12, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I've removed them until someone can check. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 04:24, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Check Kroonen's Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic s. v. *barzda-. He accounts for this etymon quite differently. I find his solution much more satisfying. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:59, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Not only Germanic, but Lithuanian barzda also points towards an earlier *bʰorsdʰ- < *bʰers- (“sharp tip, brim”) +‎ *-dʰ- (“resultative marker”). I should add that the Lithuanian entry is parallel to Slavic *borzda (“furrow”) (in Lithuanian furrow is bir̃žė) and that the remaining Balto-Slavic data points towards *bardā́ˀ, probably formed in a similar manner from *bʰerH- (“to pierce, to bore”) +‎ *-dʰ- (“resultative marker”). I would not discard the possibility that both sigmatic and asigmatic forms existed and that they were sometimes confused for each other in certain languages. It's hard to tell, because the -a- in Italic does not accord with either of these possibilities.

In either case, the alternative proposition *bʰh₂erdʰeh₂ seems "silly". Its sonority just looks off-hand (especially the sequence aspirated stop + laryngeal + full-grade vowel + trill). Bezimenen (talk) 13:52, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Does the Persian word "balme" really belong here? 5.141.120.250 13:06, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Not likely, but still not impossible.

Wanderword

Here's the talk page you wanted, Victar @“Skiulinamo”. If you looked for more than a second, you'd see that the source I cited states exactly the hypothesis I described. But since you're the self-proclaimed King, that's a lot to ask for. Lovely to see you're back at your old ways. — 24.45.25.54 21:12, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Glad to see you're still at your ways of adding spurious etymologies. =) --Skiulinamo (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, surely irregular correspondences in an areally-distributed word of a semantic class highly prone to borrowing aren't spurious. But a citation from one of the leading linguists in the field who happens to question it, now that's heresy. — 24.45.25.54 21:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)