Talk:ქაბლა

@Vahagn_Petrosyan: also, any idea about this? And don't mention a certain Russian word, that's not possible. :D კვარია (talk) 18:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I was already working on it when you pinged me. Vahag (talk) 18:56, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

wrt., Čuxua I already saw it and it's interesting but the presence of ჹ in Proto-Kartvelian was also tentatively considered by Fähnrich but there's not enough evidence of it კვარია (talk) 19:11, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I am not competent to judge Caucasian reconstructions. The only other explanation I found is Kvarchia's horrible suggestion (at ақабла (akabla)). Proto-Germanic *kalbaz does not have a good etymology. If we were from the Leiden school, we would say the Germanic and Mingrelian are borrowed from an uknown Mediterranean–Pontic substrate and would close the case. Vahag (talk) 20:19, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@კვარია, Vahagn Petrosyan: I have the terrible suspicion that the Semitic كَبْش (kabš), which I left untouched, not to burn my fingers, but to satisfy its character as a cultic item I always weened to be inside Semitic a wanderwort from the early 1st millennium BCE or earlier, to account for the regular consonant consonant correspondence of the Arabic—while the Akkadian is already because of its s an Aramaic borrowing, notwithstanding the observation of Militarev, Alexander, Kogan, Leonid (2005) Semitic Etymological Dictionary, volume II: Animal Names, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, →ISBN, page 155 Nr. 114 that it is detected once in a late Old Babylonian letter, which is only an exception that proves the pattern; the most current and best Arabic etymological dictionary Corriente, Federico, Pereira, Christophe, Vicente, Angeles, editors (2017), Dictionnaire du faisceau dialectal arabe andalou. Perspectives phraséologiques et étymologiques (in French), Berlin: De Gruyter, →ISBN, page 1089 shrewdly also discerns borrowing—, is actually the same word, the transcription character ś being the IPA sound /ɬ/ historically. Fay Freak (talk) 21:08, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Those are interesting considering that according to Fähnrich Proto-Kartvelian *lʿ /ɬ/ (depending on position) yields in Georgian-Zan ლ (l) and in Svan შ (š). კვარია (talk) 21:28, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Hmmm... aren't you a little bit too trigger-happy, I sure hope Vahagn_Petrosyan doesn't back to crush our Mingrelo-Gothic-Atlantic Semitic theories :) კვარია (talk) 22:39, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Why, if the formal match between Semitic and Kartvelian is 100% and the semantic one too since the Akkadian means a young sheep in particular—though the Mingrelian means the child of a cow instead the one of a sheep, this easily boils down to the cross-linguistic habit of having words for youngs of multiple kinds of animals. This is enough to assume the identity proven, although not of the Germanic word, while the origins remain unsolved, as usual for any words tracked down farther back than 1000 BCE, close to the very invention of writing. Fay Freak (talk) 23:03, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

While cleaning up the Syriac page ܟܒܫܐ, I have noticed the peculiar circumstance that the Aramaic forms for this “wether” word, being but rare and late Classical Syriac and Mandaic and Samaritan, are declared in the references, after Fraenkel and Nöldeke, borrowed from Arabic, while the Old Armenian which is found in the Bible is said from Syriac. While in some rare cases, as وَرِيد (warīd), I have found it reasonable to assume pre-Islamic borrowing from Arabic into Syriac, this is of course none of these cases, and anything other, like borrowing from Hebrew at some biblical stage with pre-Tiberian vocalism or from Phoenician, is better, and this is the final straw to overthrow the Proto-West Semitic reconstruction. Fay Freak (talk) 21:36, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't know about the reliability of these long-range comparisons, but as long as a term does not have a good etymology it is fair game to say "compare this" or "compare that". Vahag (talk) 18:45, 13 April 2022 (UTC)