Proto-Indo-European Lexicon
Proto-Indo-European Lexicon
After transcribing the data in the Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European World (Mallory & Adams), I have merged with with a list I already made based on a dump of Lubotsky's Inherited Indo-Aryan Lexicon with a few additions from Beekes and from Masatovic. This is all duly noted in the spreadsheet itself.
So anyway, here is what I put together. It's an .xls spreadsheet compressed in a .zip and available from my Google Docs account. It has a lot of notes, and lists the cognates for most roots.
Indo-European Lexicon
So anyway, here is what I put together. It's an .xls spreadsheet compressed in a .zip and available from my Google Docs account. It has a lot of notes, and lists the cognates for most roots.
Indo-European Lexicon
Last edited by Morrígan on Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Like freakin' forever. I've been working on the Mallory and Adams thing over the last two months, on and off. That was something like ~2300 entries. The Lubotsky thing was easier, because I was copying HTML tables off of the Leiden database, in table-mode. Still took a good hour though. And then it was several more hours trying to condense duplicate entries between the lists. There are probably a bunch more I can condense, but I got a lot of them.Elyndian wrote:This is very impressive, how long did it take you to compile all of this together?
- Sleinad Flar
- Lebom

- Posts: 124
- Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:18 pm
- Location: Coriovallum, Germania Inferior
Re: Proto-Indo-European Lexicon
This is DAMN impressive, TheGoatMan!!!TheGoatMan wrote:After transcribing the data in the Oxford Introduction to Proto-Indo-European and the Proto-Indo-European World (Mallory & Adams), I have merged with with a list I already made based on a dump of Lubotsky's Inherited Indo-Aryan Lexicon with a few additions from Beekes and from Masatovic. This is all duly noted in the spreadsheet itself.
So anyway, here is what I put together. It's an .xls spreadsheet compressed in a .zip and available from my Google Docs account. It has a lot of notes, and lists the cognates for most roots.
Indo-European Lexicon
I can say this because I attempted something similar twice, and didn't even remotely get so far in either case. First, with a friend we started to index (using Reflex Plus on the Macintosh) Buck's Dictionary of Selected Synonyms of IE languages. Secondly, I myself created a database on MS Access with the aim of creating a comprehensive and usable IE database, starting with the data in Delamarre's Vocabulaire Indo-Européen. Both projects petered out, I just didn't have your dedication.
Do you have plans to put this information up on an Internet site?
Wow. I'm speechless. Thanks a lot for this enormous effort!
Blog: audmanh.wordpress.com
Conlangs: Ronc Tyu | Buruya Nzaysa | Doayâu | Tmaśareʔ
Conlangs: Ronc Tyu | Buruya Nzaysa | Doayâu | Tmaśareʔ
- Niedokonany
- Lebom

- Posts: 244
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:31 pm
- Location: Kliwia Czarna
So I've performed a little bug hunt regarding OCS:
ostrŭs > ostrŭ (no final -s in OCS, particularly in native vocab)
začf ieti "begin" > should be: začęti
œ̌etyre "4" > should be: četyre
cĭto "what" > čĭto
měse fi cĭ "moon, month" > měsęcĭ
mǫdrǫ "wise" - why acc. fem.?
potĭ "way" > pǫtĭ
sěme "seed" > sěmę
kosu "blackbird" > kosŭ (as other ъ's are represented like that)
so- "with" > I believe sǫ- is meant, as in OCS сѫсѣдъ (oddly, modern Russian has сосед, though)
ras-tfiegǫ > ras-tęgǫ
tyšęsti > tysęšti
dese fi tĭ > desętĭ
jfi etro > jętro
lyuby 'love' > ljuby (you've written <ljudĭije> "people" after all)
imefi > imę
jfietry > jętry
ogli > ǫglĭ
I think all those f's are some encoding issue, but some ę's are displayed correctly on my computer (devętĭ).
ostrŭs > ostrŭ (no final -s in OCS, particularly in native vocab)
začf ieti "begin" > should be: začęti
œ̌etyre "4" > should be: četyre
cĭto "what" > čĭto
měse fi cĭ "moon, month" > měsęcĭ
mǫdrǫ "wise" - why acc. fem.?
potĭ "way" > pǫtĭ
sěme "seed" > sěmę
kosu "blackbird" > kosŭ (as other ъ's are represented like that)
so- "with" > I believe sǫ- is meant, as in OCS сѫсѣдъ (oddly, modern Russian has сосед, though)
ras-tfiegǫ > ras-tęgǫ
tyšęsti > tysęšti
dese fi tĭ > desętĭ
jfi etro > jętro
lyuby 'love' > ljuby (you've written <ljudĭije> "people" after all)
imefi > imę
jfietry > jętry
ogli > ǫglĭ
I think all those f's are some encoding issue, but some ę's are displayed correctly on my computer (devętĭ).
uciekajcie od światów konających
IMHO not all the roots commonly reconstructed as being "PIE" are actually so. In particular, "regional" roots found only outside the Central Area (for example, those listed as "NW" or "Greek-Aryan" in Mallory-Adams) are probably substrate/adstrate loanwords.
But there're also lots of such loanwords in the "common PIE" lexicon. Of the most interest to me are those from Vasco-Caucasian, a hypothetical macro-family which embraces (among others) Basque and North Caucasian.
Intra-IE explanations for words like *H2ºrk'to- 'bear' or *pork'o- 'piglet' are actually folk-etymologies.
But there're also lots of such loanwords in the "common PIE" lexicon. Of the most interest to me are those from Vasco-Caucasian, a hypothetical macro-family which embraces (among others) Basque and North Caucasian.
Intra-IE explanations for words like *H2ºrk'to- 'bear' or *pork'o- 'piglet' are actually folk-etymologies.
TheGoatMan,
That is bloody great! Cheers.
That is bloody great! Cheers.
IPA Sound Reference
IPA in your posts!!!
Etymology Dictionary
"Man i kisim pusi"
http://www.doggerelizer.com
http://www.pureenglish.com
YouTube: user/BryanAJParry
IPA in your posts!!!
Etymology Dictionary
"Man i kisim pusi"
http://www.doggerelizer.com
http://www.pureenglish.com
YouTube: user/BryanAJParry
... Basque? I'm sorry, but anything that tries to incorporate Basque into anything seems to fall flat on its face. Source? Link?But there're also lots of such loanwords in the "common PIE" lexicon. Of the most interest to me are those from Vasco-Caucasian, a hypothetical macro-family which embraces (among others) Basque and North Caucasian.
See my blog: http://vasco-caucasian.blogspot.com
This is probably true of NW roots, although in some cases it may be just by chance that a root simply did not survive in Greek and Indo-Iranian (II).Octaviano wrote:IMHO not all the roots commonly reconstructed as being "PIE" are actually so. In particular, "regional" roots found only outside the Central Area (for example, those listed as "NW" or "Greek-Aryan" in Mallory-Adams) are probably substrate/adstrate loanwords.
I rather doubt that there are adstrate, let alone substrate, loanwords common to Greek and II. In my view, dialects ancestral to these two branches remained adjacent (in the North/NE Pontic area) to each other after speakers of the pre-NW dialects had wandered off in a W/NW direction.
These pre-Greek-pre-II dialects, already well distinguished phonetically (pre-II being satemized, for example), acquired common vocabulary and grammatical changes (the augment, for example). They may have been influenced by neighbouring, possibly non-IE, languages, but where would a substratum have come from? They hadn't actually moved yet, and their ancestors would have been in the north-Pontic area for millennia. Any substratum influence, from well before, would have entered the NW dialects as well.
Thanks for the OCS corrections, Piotr; my copy of Mallory and Adams is actually a PDF, and the encoding is inconsistent throughout the document. Most of the time, ogonek letters were the letter plus a non-combining ogonek. Actually, that was the case for almost all diacritics. I just ran a script to replace them with either their combining coutnerparts, or actualy letter+diacritic glyphs. The 'fi' thing eluded me though.
And there might be a few places were Greek ȋ shows up as <iu>, or places where <ff> is <V> and things like that. I tried to fix them, but I may have missed a few.
I've uploaded a new version. Link here and in the OP.
And there might be a few places were Greek ȋ shows up as <iu>, or places where <ff> is <V> and things like that. I tried to fix them, but I may have missed a few.
I've uploaded a new version. Link here and in the OP.
Unless of course they've got cognates outside, as in the examples I gave earlier.gsandi wrote:This is probably true of NW roots, although in some cases it may be just by chance that a root simply did not survive in Greek and Indo-Iranian (II).Octaviano wrote:IMHO not all the roots commonly reconstructed as being "PIE" are actually so. In particular, "regional" roots found only outside the Central Area (for example, those listed as "NW" or "Greek-Aryan" in Mallory-Adams) are probably substrate/adstrate loanwords.
Well, this isn't very far from my own scenario. I place PIE homeland at the Balkans-Ukraine area in the Mesolithic. And although this is only a hypothesis, I think these "pre-NW" dialects spread along LBK culture in the Neolithic, an event probably triggered by the Black Sea flood around 5,600 BC.gsandi wrote:I rather doubt that there are adstrate, let alone substrate, loanwords common to Greek and II. In my view, dialects ancestral to these two branches remained adjacent (in the North/NE Pontic area) to each other after speakers of the pre-NW dialects had wandered off in a W/NW direction.
- WeepingElf
- Smeric

- Posts: 1630
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
PIE cannot be earlier than about 4000 BC, because it has words for metals, (probably) domesticated horses and wheeled vehicles. All of that was yet unknown at the time of the Black Sea Flood, or at the time of Catal Hüyük. A Mesolithic PIE is impossible.
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
I've heard of this before, but this argument can turn to be fallacious, as words relating to cultural innovations tend to diffuse from one language to another. This is why they're called Wanderwörter (singular Wanderwort).WeepingElf wrote:PIE cannot be earlier than about 4000 BC, because it has words for metals, (probably) domesticated horses and wheeled vehicles. All of that was yet unknown at the time of the Black Sea Flood, or at the time of Catal Hüyük. A Mesolithic PIE is impossible.
The arguments in support of an older PIE come from the study of its relationships (either of contact or genetic) with other language families. It has also something to do with the concept of ecological niche applied to historical linguistics.
Do you know how the word football is rendered in various languages other than English?krinnen wrote:Words may diffuse, yes, but following the sound changes that language went through? Dude.
Perhaps the strongest argument against a post-Neolithic dating is PIE lacks a common lexicon relating to farming. most of it being independently borrowed by IE branches.
Good way of not addressing the issue.Octaviano wrote:Do you know how the word football is rendered in various languages other than English?krinnen wrote:Words may diffuse, yes, but following the sound changes that language went through? Dude.
Laurie Anderson wrote:Writing about music is like dancing about architecture
I'm all agog to know what handwaving you're going to invoke to bypass all those securely reconstructed vocabulary items related to agriculture and pastoralism.Octaviano wrote:Perhaps the strongest argument against a post-Neolithic dating is PIE lacks a common lexicon relating to farming. most of it being independently borrowed by IE branches.
Salmoneus wrote:(NB Dewrad is behaving like an adult - a petty, sarcastic and uncharitable adult, admittedly, but none the less note the infinitely higher quality of flame)
I'm sure you could give me some examples.Dewrad wrote:I'm all agog to know what handwaving you're going to invoke to bypass all those securely reconstructed vocabulary items related to agriculture and pastoralism.Octaviano wrote:Perhaps the strongest argument against a post-Neolithic dating is PIE lacks a common lexicon relating to farming. most of it being independently borrowed by IE branches.
Illustrate, pleaseOctaviano wrote:I see you didn't get my point.krinnen wrote:Good way of not addressing the issue.Octaviano wrote:Do you know how the word football is rendered in various languages other than English?krinnen wrote:Words may diffuse, yes, but following the sound changes that language went through? Dude.
(EDIT: It would be so cool if you could somehow demonstrate PIE pedh- bhel- > brazilian portuguese /fut_Sib~ao/ through regular sound changes...or something)
Laurie Anderson wrote:Writing about music is like dancing about architecture
Oh no, you first. Burden of proof resting on the lunatic fringe and all that.Octaviano wrote:I'm sure you could give me some examples.Dewrad wrote:I'm all agog to know what handwaving you're going to invoke to bypass all those securely reconstructed vocabulary items related to agriculture and pastoralism.Octaviano wrote:Perhaps the strongest argument against a post-Neolithic dating is PIE lacks a common lexicon relating to farming. most of it being independently borrowed by IE branches.
Salmoneus wrote:(NB Dewrad is behaving like an adult - a petty, sarcastic and uncharitable adult, admittedly, but none the less note the infinitely higher quality of flame)


