Appendix talk:Proto-Dravidian/nīru

RFV discussion: January 2016–May 2017
It is given as ńīr- in George Starostin's Proto-Dravidian database, without the final vocal, but apparently with a palatalised (?) n. — Ivadon (talk) 12:35, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Starostin is definitely not reliable for something like this. might be able to help reference this reconstruction. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 16:06, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you know “A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary” by T. Burrow and M. B. Emeneau whence he derived his work? — Ivadon (talk) 16:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Given as “[http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.1:1:1106.burrow 3690 Ta. nīr]” in T. Burrow (1984). I see no difference in quality to G. Starostin's version, but at least there were no bad Nostraticists at work at that time! --— Ivadon (talk) 17:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * My memory is that Burrow & Emeneau put them under Tamil rather than actually reconstructing the PDrav roots (hence the Ta. above), weirdly enough. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:35, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, it seems to have been a common practice to put Tamil on the same level as Proto-Dravidian, probably because of its long written tradition. — Ivadon (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Bhadriraju Krishnamurti, in The Dravidian Languages, gives PD *nīr. It also says "In any case there is no comparative evidence to set up two n-phonemes for Proto-Dravidian. As in Tamil there could have been a phonetic difference between initial dental [n]" and a non-initial variant, but that seems non-relevant here. - -sche (discuss) 02:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Moved to *nīr per -sche's evidence. This is now at a cited form, so it is resolved. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 08:07, 11 May 2017 (UTC)