Reconstruction talk:Proto-Semitic/kinnār-


 * I'm not sure if creating a PS is the way to do for this or not. Thoughts? -- 17:36, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well I am really innocent of music but my first thought was that this is a loanword spread one or two millenia later than Proto-Semitic (which I date to 4000 BCE ± 300) over Semitic, and the first article I stumble upon when searching the Arabic term tells me that it spread amongst the Sumerians around 2700 BCE (archeological descriptions following). Maybe Proto-Hurro-Urartian? Fay Freak (talk) 21:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It is definitely an unknown direction of etymology, but I will try to at least give notice to a few things. There are essentially three separate but interrelated traditions, a 🇨🇬 "*kinnār-" from which the 🇨🇬 is borrowed, a 🇨🇬 from which the 🇨🇬 is derived, and 🇨🇬/, which also renders the 🇨🇬. The eldest renderings attested archaeologically seem to be 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬, likely in that order. There has been a suggestion by the scholar Vyacheslav V. Ivanov who dedicated a paper to this topic, of the following: WS ki- > proto-Luw. kui- > zi- (whence Hatt./Hitt. zinar) > za- (Akk./Sum. zannāru). This has generally been seen as viable although some doubts exist usually regarding a proto-Luwian term becoming established in Mesopotamian usage by the OAkk. period; Ivanov's suggestion that not all forms in z- need go back to a single development (palatalization of k- before front vowel is a common phenomenon). It has been pointed out by other scholars that the sound changes like the Canaanite shift in the 🇨🇬 indicate that this word at least had an established 🇨🇬 precursor form, the question is if this root extends to include the 🇨🇬 as well. The real debate is classification of languages like that of Mari and Ebla, which have generally been seen as falling into the Eastern branch grammatically, but not definitively as they show many overlapping Western similarities lexically as we see here. Its definitely a tough one, we could always create it and list what we do know, perhaps indicating the uncertainty of development, direction, and even classification.
 * There are also some other related terms 🇨🇬 from the New Kingdom period likely borrowed from Semitic; 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬 Kinnara; 🇨🇬 Cinyras which has high connection to an Ugaritic deity of the harp; also there is an 🇨🇬 which is likely developed from a metathesized form. Lastly, I think the page number is incorrect for the Sino-Iranica source, its found at the bottom of page 565 rather than 548. Hopefully the above will help in some capacity. -Profes.I. (talk) 04:48, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. I created this now as a mainspace entry. Yeah, I read about that Luwian palatalization theory, which peaked my interest because the Iranian forms are also point to a palatalized form, assuming they are actually related. I'm however not quite sure how to work that all in as it's rather precarious. -- 21:32, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Man, I have zero recollection of this entry and the ensuing conversation, but I feel pretty good about it. -- 07:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC)