# Build, bauen, bouwen...



## ThomasK

I have been comparing different etymological explanations of "to build" and "bauen"/ "bouwen" (German/ Dutch) at Etymonline.com, at etymologiebank.nl, and at dwds.de. There are obvious resemblances with regard to the reference to *pie. root *bheuH-* (same as the one of "to be"), supposedly something like "to grow", then moving towards "come into existence (_entstehen/ontstaan_), become, be" and then to "to live (_wohnen/wonen_) [dwds.de], and then to "to build".

Etymonline.com refers to _*bold*_, pgm. _buthlam_, suggesting that "build" is the verb form of that, but I cannot find to either of them.

A link with _*bâtir*_ does not seem evident either, according to crntl.fr.

Can someone shed (more) light on this? Thanks in advance.


----------



## CyrusSH

I think it can be related to our discussion about the word Balcony, the English words _beam/balk_ are from the same PIE root (*bheue- "to be, exist, grow"), and also the Persian verb _ bal-_ "to grow".


----------



## eamp

_*bold *_is Old English, meaning house, building or dwelling, besides that existed _*botl *_which probably was originally a variant. Cognates seem to be Old Saxon pl. _*bodlos *_and Old Norse _*ból *_with similar meanings.
From the noun bold is derived _*byldan *_-> _*build*_. 
German _*bauen *_in the modern primary meaning "to build" appears to be likewise a denominative from _*Bau*_. There existed a similar verb _*bûan *_in Old High German, but it meant only "inhabit", "live", never "build". 
Ultimately both English and German words may derive from the same PIE root (the exact reconstruction being hotly debated), but they are independent innovations in their formation and meaning.


----------



## ThomasK

Could there not be a link between bold and _*Bude*_ in German, _boedel_ in Dutch (the interior of the house, the things you can move)?

Bauen would then be derived from Bau, I understand. is there any way of proving that? I just thought - but I am not an expert in any way - that verbs are generally older than (related) nouns. But I have no justification except a vague psychological one...

What stops you from saying that the words simply derive (not 'may') from the same PIE root? I know that I am inclined to jump to conclusions too quickly, but still...

Thanks a lot in advance!


----------



## CyrusSH

I think proto-IE _*bheue-_ "to grow, swell" has two different individual and social meanings, in its individual meaning, in English there are _boast_, _bold_, ... the Persian verb _bal-_ also means "to boast", but in its social meaning, it refers to a place where you live and its growth and development.


----------



## ThomasK

That is an interesting hypothesis, but is there some way to substantiate such a claim?


----------



## CyrusSH

I don't claim to have a new hypothesis, just think about bodybuilding and then an actual building.


----------



## ThomasK

I see... Yes, might be an interesting link. Thanks!


----------



## Testing1234567

Re:

English *build*
English *bold*
German *bauen*
German *Bau*
German *Bude*
Dutch *bouwen*
Dutch *boedel*
French *bâtir*

From Wiktionary:

English *build* is from Old English *byldan*, i-mutated form of Proto-Germanic **buþlijaną* after metathesis of *þ* and *l*, causative of Proto-Germanic **buþlą*. Proto-Germanic **buþlą* through a-mutation gave rise to Old English *botl* (without metathesis) and Old English *bold* (with metathesis), which gave rise to English *bottle* and *bold* respectively (only in the sense of house). Proto-Germanic **buþlą* is from **būaną* (to dwell) with suffix **-þlą* (instrumental suffix). Proto-Germanic **būaną* is from Proto-Indo-European **bʰuH-* (to become), with the semantic shift as hypothesized in #1.

German *bauen* is from Old High German *būan* (to build), which is from Proto-Germanic **būaną*. The etymology of *Bau* is not stated, but it has cognates in other Germanic languages. The etymology of *Bude* is also not stated.

Dutch *bouwen* is from Old Dutch *buwan*, which is from Proto-Germanic **būaną*. The Middle Dutch *bouwen* carried both the sense to build and the sense to dwell. Dutch *boedel* is from Old Dutch **buothal*, which is from Proto-Germanic **bōþlą*.

French *bâtir* is from Old French *bastir* (to build; to sew), which is from Latin *bastiō*, a borrowing from Old Frankish **bastijan*, which is from Proto-Germanic **bastijaną*. One would presume that the Proto-Germanic word is the causative of Proto-Germanic **bastaz* (rope) (whence English *bast* and German *bast*).

Update: After digging more into Wiktionary, German *Bude* is from Old Norse *búð* (whence also English *booth*), from Proto-Germanic **būþiz*, from Proto-Indo-European **bʰúH-tis*.


----------



## Treaty

Testing1234567 said:


> *bold* respectively


Isn't "bold" (not the Old Enlgish "bold") from PIE _*bhel_?


----------



## Testing1234567

Treaty said:


> Isn't "bold" (not the Old Enlgish "bold") from PIE _*bhel_?


I was talking about the obsolete meaning of bold. The "courageous" meaning is indeed from PIE *bhel.


----------



## ThomasK

I always wonder about the reliability of Wikipedia. So far I have not had bad experiences, but...

As for the _bold_ word: Etymonline.org refers to "PIE *_*bhu*_- "to dwell," from root*_*bheue*_- "to be, exist, grow" ", but I suppose you will agree then. However, none of my sources can explain the origin of _bottle_ really (they end at Greek _buttis_)... Your suggestion does sound plausible though.
*buþlijaną/buþlą: *the former is a causative form of the latter, I understand, but are we then referring to building as 'to make grow' or something the like, or 'to make a house', as in _edifice/ aedes-facere_? Wikipedia does not make it quite clear, as for me at least.
I suppose the -_el_ in "boedel" will also be instrumental. But how would explain the link between the verb + suffix and the present verb?


----------



## CyrusSH

The main Proto-Germanic word form proto-IE *bhū- (to grow) is _*bauma_ which means "tree", from this root there is the English word _beam_ (principal horizontal timbers of a building), I think there could be also a Germanic word similar to Persian _bam/baun_ "roof" and then some other words for "building" and etc.

I don't know about the meaning of "tree" in the Germanic words but Persian _bon/bom_ with this meaning is just used as a suffix, like _badambon_ "almond tree" or _alubon_ "plum tree".


----------



## Testing1234567

ThomasK said:


> However, none of my sources can explain the origin of _bottle_ really (they end at Greek _buttis_)... Your suggestion does sound plausible though.


Again, when I was stating the etymology of bottle, it was for the obsolete sense of "house", not for the sense of "container".



ThomasK said:


> *buþlijaną/buþlą: *the former is a causative form of the latter, I understand, but are we then referring to building as 'to make grow' or something the like, or 'to make a house', as in _edifice/ aedes-facere_? Wikipedia does not make it quite clear, as for me at least.


According to Wiktionary, as I stated above, **buþlą* is from **būaną* (to dwell) with instrumental suffix **-þlą*, and it means "house". Then, the causative would be "to cause a house to exist", i.e. "to build".



ThomasK said:


> I suppose the -_el_ in "boedel" will also be instrumental.


As I have stated above, *boedel* is directly from PG **buþlą*.



ThomasK said:


> But how would explain the link between the verb + suffix and the present verb?


I'm not sure what you're talking about.


----------



## ThomasK

Testing1234567 said:


> As I have stated above, *boedel* is directly from PG **buþlą*.


 In my third question, I had not realised that "boedel" was based on it, I am sorry. But your answer to my second question is the key to the rest. Thanks a lot!

Just btw: would you agree if I said that all this shows that /build/ is not a  primitive/ basic/core concept? I had expected it to be in Wierbicka's semantic primes lists, but I suppose one could say "to make" would be more universal than "to build"...


----------



## Testing1234567

ThomasK said:


> would you agree if I said that all this shows that /build/ is not a  primitive/ basic/core concept?


I would, although I am no expert.


----------



## berndf

eamp said:


> German _*bauen *_in the modern primary meaning "to build" appears to be likewise a denominative from _*Bau*_. There existed a similar verb _*bûan *_in Old High German, but it meant only "inhabit", "live", never "build".


I don't agree. If you look at _būa(w)n _together with its transitive derivative _bibū(w)an _with its semantic shift_ inhabit a piece of land > cultivate a piece of land_ the shift that leads to _bauen = build_ and _bebauen = construct a house on a piece of land_ is already visible. There is no reason to assume anything more complicated than the straight forward and completely regular phonetic development OHG _bū(w)an _> MHG _bū(w)en _> ModHG _bauen_.

Also, according to DWDS, while the OHG _būan _still only meant _dwell_ or _cultivate_ (i.e. _doing agriculture_), Old Saxon _bū(w)an _had already acquired the meaning _build a house._


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> I don't agree. If you look at _būa(w)n _together with its transitive derivative _bibū(w)an _with its semantic shift_ inhabit a piece of land > cultivate a piece of land_ the shift that leads to _bauen = build_ and _bebauen = construct a house on a piece of land_ is already visible. There is no reason to assume anything more complicated than the straight forward and completely regular phonetic development OHG _bū(w)an _> MHG _bū(w)en _> ModHG _bauen_.
> 
> Also, according to DWDS, while the OHG _būan _still only meant _dwell_ or _cultivate_ (i.e. _doing agriculture_), Old Saxon _bū(w)an _had already acquired the meaning _build a house._



It seems that German word has another PIE root, Persian bona has also all those meanings, a general meaning of this word can be "estate, property" but it also means "inhabitancy, farm/agricultural land, house, home, ..."

It is from Middle Persian _bundat_ (Modern Persian _bonyad_) which means "To begin building", the Latin origin word _found_ has the same PIE root.


----------



## berndf

Germanic cognates of Latin _fundus_ include English _bottom_ and German _Boden_. I don't think that _Boden_ is in any way related to _bauen._


----------



## eamp

berndf said:


> I don't agree. If you look at _būa(w)n _together with its transitive derivative _bibū(w)an _with its semantic shift_ inhabit a piece of land > cultivate a piece of land_ the shift that leads to _bauen = build_ and _bebauen = construct a house on a piece of land_ is already visible. There is no reason to assume anything more complicated than the straight forward and completely regular phonetic development OHG _bū(w)an _> MHG _bū(w)en _> ModHG _bauen_.
> 
> Also, according to DWDS, while the OHG _būan _still only meant _dwell_ or _cultivate_ (i.e. _doing agriculture_), Old Saxon _bū(w)an _had already acquired the meaning _build a house._


Yeah, I did some more research yesterday and today and think you are correct. Kluge EW (24. Auflage) claims the sense _to build_ is only attested from late MHG onward and is based on the noun. However, as you say, _*būan *_with an accusative object is attested earlier and the semantic shift is not that far fetched. In fact both earlier and later meanings seem to occur side by side in MHG, the meaning depending on the object, so _inhabit_ or _cultivate_ for _land_ or the like but _build_ if the object is _church_, _fortress_, _city _etc. Additionally the meaning of _*bū*_/_*Bau *_is also complex and reflects the shades of meaning of the verb, never just meaning _building_ or similar, so using it to explain the meaning of the verb is not actually very helpful.
Therefore I now also think Kluge is simply wrong here and there was only ever one German verb (or verb-complex) that gradually shifted in meaning.



ThomasK said:


> What stops you from saying that the words simply derive (not 'may') from the same PIE root? I know that I am inclined to jump to conclusions too quickly, but still...


Well, mainly I wanted to express that I don't think it matters much whether the root is the same if the words are merely independent derivations from nouns meaning _dwelling_. That the different words chosen by English and German happened to have been derived from the same root in the distant past would be merely an (interesting) coincidence. 
Though that history might not be accurate in any case as written above...

Besides there is of course always some nagging doubt whether all those Germanic words truly derive from the same PIE root.
Testing already posted most the relevant material, but to summarize we have:

Old English _*bold *_and _*botl*_, < *_*buþla*_, though Dutch _*boedel *_requires *_*bōþla*_. Old Norse _*ból *_could be from either form, for Old Saxon *bodlos *length of the vowel seems uncertain...
OHG _*bū*_, Norse _*bú *_< *_*būwa*_-.
MHG _*buode *_> German _*Bude*_, requires *_*bōþō *_(unless a loan?), besides Old Norse _*búð*_, dial. Germ _*Baude *_> czech _*bouda *_from *_*būþ*_-.
OHG, OE, OS _*būr*_, ON _*búr*_. < *_*būra*_. Also derived *_*būrjō *_in German town names in -beuern.
Old Norse _*bœr *_< *_*bō(w)iz*_.

I note the frequent variation between bō- and bū- with a short bu- seemingly required only for the Old English words.


----------



## Testing1234567

eamp said:


> MHG _*buode *_> German _*Bude*_, requires *_*bōþō *_(unless a loan?), besides Old Norse _*búð*_, dial. Germ _*Baude *_> czech _*bouda *_from *_*būþ*_-..


MHG *buode* is a borrowing from Old Norse *búð* < PG **būþiz*.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> Germanic cognates of Latin _fundus_ include English _bottom_ and German _Boden_. I don't think that _Boden_ is in any way related to _bauen._





ThomasK said:


> Could there not be a link between bold and _*Bude*_ in German, _boedel_ in Dutch (the interior of the house, the things you can move)?



berndf, what do you think about the German word that ThomasK mentioned? The Dutch word has almost the same meaning of Persian _bona_ (estate, baggage) and Latin _fundus_ (fund). We know about that "n" (nasal infix).

I don't think that there could be only one word from a PIE root, for example from the same root there are both Ancient Greek πύνδαξ (púndax) and πυθμήν (puthmḗn).


----------



## berndf

As I said, the Germanic cognates are _Boden_, _bottom_, etc. with the general meaning _ground, bottom, root. _Cognates outside of Germanic include Persian بن, Ancient Greek _πυθμήν_ and Latin _fundus_.

_Bude, booth_ < _*būþ-_ is more likely to be derived from_ *buanaN_ > _bauen_ with an added dental suffix then from _*butmaz_ > _Boden, bottom _with loss of the nasal consonant (_n/m_).


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> As I said, the Germanic cognates are _Boden_, _bottom_, etc. with the general meaning _ground, bottom, root. _Cognates outside of Germanic include Persian بن, Ancient Greek _πυθμήν_ and Latin _fundus_.



I never denied it but I mean another possible Germanic cognate, like the Greek one.

In Persian, Latin and probably other Indo-European languages, the semantic development of "foundation, base" seems to be clear, Middle Persian _bundat_ (or _bundaŝt_) means "dwell, inhabit" and of course "build, construct".

About the word base: base Meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary



> the main place where a person lives and works, or a place that a company does business from:
> I spend a lot of time in Brussels, but London is still my base.
> Nice is an excellent base for (= place to stay when) exploring the French Riviera.


----------



## Testing1234567

Summary:

PIE **bʰuH-*
PIE **bʰewH-*
PG **beuną*

German *bin*, *bist*
Dutch *ben*, *bent*
English *be*, *being*, *been*, *bist*


PIE **bʰúH-tis*
PG **būþiz*

Old Norse *búð*
German *Bude*, *Baude*



PIE **bʰuH-yé-ti*
PG **būaną*

Old German *būan*
German *bauen*

Old English *būan*
Old Dutch *buuuan*
Dutch *bouwen*


PG **bōþlą*/**buþlą*

English *bold*(metathesis), *bottle*
Dutch *boedel*
Old Norse *ból*

PG **buþlijaną*
English *build* (metathesis)




PIE *?*
PG **baumaz*

English *beam*
German *Baum*


PIE *?*
PG *?*

German *Bau*
Dutch *bouw*



PIE *?*
PG **bastaz* "rope"
PG **bastijaną* "to sew"
Old Frankish **bastijan* "to sew"
Latin *bastiō*
French *bâtir*





PIE **dʰub-*
PIE **dʰéwb-us*
PG **deupaz*
English *deep*


PIE **bʰudʰmḗn* (metathesis)
Proto-Italic **fundos*
Latin *fundus*
Latin *fundus*
Anglo-Norman *founder*
English *found*




PG **butmaz*
Old English *botm*
English *bottom*, *bum*


Old High German *bodam*
German *Bodem*


Proto-Iranian **bū̆na-*
Middle Persian *bun*, *bun-dât*
Persian *bon*, *boneh*, *bonyâd*




Proto-Semitic *?*
Arabic *b-n-y*
Arabic *بَنَى* (banā)
Persian *banâ*


Akkadian *banû*
Aramaic *ܒ݁ܳܢܶܐ‏* (bnā)
Ugaritic *bny*
Hebrew *b-n-h*
Hebrew *בָּנָה* (baná)


Source: The Persian etymology is from P.68 of An Etymological Dictionary of Persian, English and other Indo-European Languages (P.98 of document)

Key:

to be
to build ~ house
to live
bottom ~ foundation ~ base ~ establish
deep


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> In Persian, Latin and probably other Indo-European languages, the semantic development of "foundation, base" seems to be clear, Middle Persian _bundat_ (or _bundaŝt_) means "dwell, inhabit" and of course "build, construct".



Germanic _Boden, bottom,_ Latin_ fundus _and Greek _πυθμήν_ have never developed the meaning _dwell, inhabit _or _build, construct_.


----------



## CyrusSH

Testing1234567, that is really an excellent summary, thanks. Please add Persian _bundaŝt_ with Green color and of course _budan_ (_bu-_ "to be") with red color.


----------



## Testing1234567

ThomasK said:


> Just btw: would you agree if I said that all this shows that /build/ is not a  primitive/ basic/core concept?


According to my summary, "build" was developed three times from more primitive concepts:

to be > to live > to dwell > to build
rope > to sew > to build
deep > bottom > to establish > to build
Whether the Proto-Semitic word meant "to build" is beyond me. If it really meant "to build", it would make the concept more primitive.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> Germanic _Boden, bottom,_ Latin_ fundus _and Greek _πυθμήν_ have never developed the meaning _dwell, inhabit _or _build, construct_.



I really don't know about Latin and Greek words, according to Testing's diagram, it seems even the meaning of _found_ (to build) has been developed in English, not Latin. Anyway I think the German verb _gründen_ also shows that the meaning of "ground, bottom" can develop the meaning "to build" in the Germanic languages.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> Please add Persian _bundaŝt_ with Green color


I wouldn't know why. The "green" words contain neither an _n/m_ nor a _d/t_. Just because it starts with _bu-_? I can't find any source for that word. Were did you get that from?


CyrusSH said:


> _found_ (to build)


_Found_ doesn't mean _build_. It has preserved the meaning original meaning of the Latin verb _fundo_ (=_establish_) from _fundus _(=_root, base, ground, foundation_), meaning _lay the base/foundation/ground_.


----------



## Testing1234567

Re: German *Bau*


> aisl. _būa_ (_bjō_, _būinn_) `stay, dwell, bring in good condition, equip', ags. _būan_ and _buw(i)an_ (_būde_, _gebūen_) `stay, dwell, farm' (besides ags. _bōgian_, afries. _bōgia_ `stay, dwell', phonetic type based on got. _stōja_ from _*stōwijō_and _ō_ as initial vowel), ahd. _būan_ (_būta_, _gibūan_) `stay, dwell, farm', nhd. _bauen_; aisl. _byggja_ `live at a place, farm, populate', later `construct, build' (from _*buwwjan_ö_*bewwjan_ö); aisl. _bū_ n. `domicile, household', ags. _bū_ n. `dwelling' (Pl. _by_ n. of _i_-stem _*būwi-_ = aisl. _bȳr_ m. `dwelling, residential site, court'; similarly lit. _būvis_ `permanent stay, residence'), ahd. _bū_, mhd. _bū_, Gen. _būwes_ m., seldom n. `tilling of the field, dwelling, edifice', nhd. _Bau_;


From J. Pokorny's "Indogermanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch".


----------



## apmoy70

berndf said:


> Germanic _Boden, bottom,_ Latin_ fundus _and Greek _πυθμήν_ have never developed the meaning _dwell, inhabit _or _build, construct_.


Well, there does exist the denominative (from πυθμήν) verb πυθμενέω/πυθμενῶ pŭtʰmĕnéō (uncontracted)/pŭtʰmĕnô (contracted) --> _to form/construct a base_


----------



## berndf

Testing1234567 said:


> It developed in Anglo-Norman, according to my diagram.


It is derived directly from Latin _fundo_.


Testing1234567 said:


> Google dictionary lists "build" as a synonym.





apmoy70 said:


> Well, there does exist the denominative (from πυθμήν) verb πυθμενέω/πυθμενῶ pŭtʰmĕnéō (uncontracted)/pŭtʰmĕnô (contracted) --> _to form/construct a base_


The important thing is that the derived verbs never left the semantic circle of _πυθμήν_/_fundus_. It means to _lay/build/construct the base_, and never _build/construct_ in general. The semantic development is very different from that of _bauen_, i.e. _dwell/inhabit > cultivate > build/construct_. There is hardly and similarity.


----------



## Testing1234567

@berndf right, I mixed up the meanings.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> I wouldn't know why. The "green" words contain neither an _n/m_ nor a _d/t_. Just because it starts with _bu-_? I can't find any source for that word. Were did you get that from?



I meant it should be added to the list of Middle Persian words, there are _bun_ and _bun-dât_, there should be also _bun-daŝt_ "to dwell, to live, to reside" and _bunag_ "house, home".


----------



## berndf

Testing1234567 said:


> Re: German *Bau*


Thanks, but there wasn't any disagreement or doubt about _Bau _as a deverbal nound derived from _būan_. The only short disagreement between eamp and myself, which is settled now, was if the modern meaning of bauen developed through a "detour" via this noun, i.e _būan _(_=dwell_)_ > _(deverbalisation)_ bū _(=_dwelling place_)_ > _(semantic shift)_ Bau (=house, building, constructed dwelling place) > _(verbal derivation)_ bauen _(_build a house or building_)_ > _(generalisation)_ bauen _(_build _in general), or if there is a direct route from _būan _to_ bauen._


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> I meant it should be added to the list of Middle Persian words, there are _bun_ and _bun-dât_, there should be also _bun-daŝt_ "to dwell, to live, to reside" and _bunag_ "house, home".


Yes, but _bun_ and _bun-dât_, are from a different root, they belong together with _bottom_ and _Boden _and not with _bauen_. They belong to the brown group and not to the green one. That's what I was trying to tell you all the time.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> Yes, but _bun_ and _bun-dât_, are from a different root, they belong together with _bottom_ and _Boden _and not with _bauen_. They belong to the brown group and not to the green one. That's what I was trying to tell you all the time.



What do you think about other Germanic words for _bottom_, like Norwegian *bunn* or Danish *bund*? Testing has just mentioned English and German words.

By comparing to Latin, Greek and Persian words, if there is a metathesis, it should be in German _boden_ (English _bottom_), not all other words.


----------



## Testing1234567

CyrusSH said:


> What do you think about other Germanic words for _bottom_, like Norwegian *bunn* or Danish *bund*? Testing has just mentioned English and German words.



PG **butmaz* (bottom/foundation/ground)
Old Norse *botn*

Norwegian *bunn* (bottom)
Danish *bund* (bottom)


----------



## CyrusSH

I see no reason to have different PIE roots because the semantic developments in just one of PIE languages, I believe in the Germanic languages, the Latin-origin words "found" and "base" have been replaced with an original Germanic word which could make the link between the words for "bottom", "establish" and "build". The meaning of "being/living" from proto-IE _*bʰuh_ exists in almost all Indo-European languages and it can't be related to this discussion.


----------



## Testing1234567

CyrusSH said:


> I see no reason to have different PIE roots because the semantic developments in just one of PIE languages


What are you referring to?


----------



## rayloom

Testing1234567 said:


> Whether the Proto-Semitic word meant "to build" is beyond me. If it really meant "to build", it would make the concept more primitive.



Yes Proto-Semitic bny means "to build". It can also be traced to Proto-AfroAsiatic, see here.


----------



## CyrusSH

Testing1234567 said:


> What are you referring to?



In your summary you have mentioned one PIE root for Italic/Germanic/Iranian words (which is itself a result of metathesis of a proto-Germanic word!) and six other PIE roots for just Germanic words, when we talk about a PIE root, it means this word can be the root of words in different IE languages, not just one of them.


----------



## Testing1234567

CyrusSH said:


> In your summary you have mentioned one PIE root for Italic/Germanic/Iranian words (which is itself a result of metathesis of a proto-Germanic word!) and six other PIE roots for just Germanic words, when we talk about a PIE root, it means this word can be the root of words in different IE languages, not just one of them.


There are only three PIE root words. The first one just developed into different PIE words.

Summary:

PIE **bʰuH-*
PIE **bʰewH-* (> PG **beuną*)
PIE **bʰúH-tis* (> PG **būþiz*)
PIE **bʰuH-yé-ti* (> PG **būaną*)
PIE *?* (> PG **baumaz*)
PIE *?* (> German *Bau*)

PIE *?* (> French *bâtir*)
PIE **dʰub-* (> English *deep*, *found*)
Proto-Semitic *?* (> Persian *banâ*)


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> I see no reason to have different PIE roots because the semantic developments in just one of PIE languages, I believe in the Germanic languages, the Latin-origin words "found" and "base" have been replaced with an original Germanic word which could make the link between the words for "bottom", "establish" and "build". The meaning of "being/living" from proto-IE _*bʰuh_ exists in almost all Indo-European languages and it can't be related to this discussion.


Sorry to be so blunt but this is completely upside down.

There is no semantic evolution from _bottom_ to _build_ anywhere. You have _banâ = build_ in Persian but that is an Arabic loan and plays no role in any of this. And even if there were a Middle Persian semantic development from _bottom, ground_ to _build in general _and not is the sense of _base upon _or _lay the foundation_, which you failed to demonstrate, it would hardly be relevant to internal developments in Germanic or Romance.

The semantic evolution of _būan > bauen_ from _dwell_ to _cultivate_ to _build_ in some West Germanic languages is sufficiently well attested and happened relatively late. _bauen_ and _Boden_ are ultimately related *within* PIE but their respective etymons had already separated when the PIE continuum split up. For the evolution of _bauen_, the words _fundus, Boden _and _bottom_ play no role.


----------



## Testing1234567

berndf said:


> _bauen_ and _Boden_ are ultimately related *within* PIE but their respective etymons had already separated when the PIE continuum split up.


But they aren't related...


----------



## berndf

Testing1234567 said:


> But they aren't related...


Oops, you are right. My mistake.


----------



## eamp

Testing1234567 said:


> MHG *buode* is a borrowing from Old Norse *búð* < PG **būþiz*.


Well, that's the question, is it actually? 
I can believe it is not originally a High German word, but it may well be native in the Middle German dialects from which it spread to West Slavic.
The same word also appears as MLG _*bōde *_and Middle Dutch _*boede *_(both < earlier *_*bōda*_), so it could be of some age in parts of West Germanic after all. Old East Norse likewise has _*bōþ *_(hence engl. _*booth*_) with a long *ō*, which makes me think *ū* in West Norse might not be original after all but taken from related _*bú*_, _*búr *_and _*búa*_.
Two other points: If the word is a loan in High German it can't be decided whether the medial dental was **þ *or **d*. It's also not certain the Old Norse word actually derives from an i-stem, endings like pl. -*ir *often intrude into original ō-stems and umlauted forms are absent. So reconstructing an ō-stem that can account for both West and North Germanic forms seems more economical to me.


----------



## eamp

Re: Gmc. **baumaz - *The problem here is that this preform only fits West Germanic, but remember Gothic has *bagms *and Old Norse *baðmr*.

As for a PIE root with a meaning _to build_, the first obvious candidate would appear to be **dem(H)*. It shows this sense as a verbal root in Greek (*δεμω*) and surely is the ultimate source of the word for house **dom*-.


----------



## CyrusSH

eamp said:


> As for a PIE root with a meaning _to build_, the first obvious candidate would appear to be **dem(H)*. It shows this sense as a verbal root in Greek (*δεμω*) and surely is the ultimate source of the word for house **dom*-.



What is the possibility of r>l sound change in the Germanic languages? The Persian verb _bal-_ that I mentioned is actually from proto-IE *bʰerǵʰ- "to raise",  of course I know from this root there is Old English _burg_, _burh_ "a dwelling or dwellings within a fortified enclosure,"(Online Etymology Dictionary) but what is the Germanic verb from this root?

I see the relation between _bauen_ and _build_ similar to the relation between _beam_ and _balk_, both of them can be related to building. _balk_ is actually from PIE root _*bhelg-_ "beam". (Online Etymology Dictionary)


----------



## berndf

Your phantasy is running wild here.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> Your phantasy is running wild here.



Are you referring to me?! I just asked a question, you could simply reply r>l sound change is not possible in the Germanic languages, so Old Norse _ból_ and English _bold_ can't be related to _burg_, _burh_ with the same meaning of "dwelling". Of course if we don't consider _burg_ as a loanword.


----------



## Testing1234567

From DWDS:


> *Bude* f. ‘Häuschen, kleiner Laden aus Brettern’, abschätzig und ironisierend ‘(altes) Haus, Wohnung, Zimmer’. Mhd. _buode_ (md. _būde_), mnd. _bōde_, mnl. _boede_, aschwed. _bōþ_, schwed. _bod_, anord. _būð_ (mit Vokalangleichung an anord. _būa_ ‘wohnen’) ‘Hütte, Holzhaus, Zelt’ (germ. _*bōdō-_) sind mit ablautendem mir. _both_ ‘Hütte’, lit. _bùtas_ ‘Haus, Wohnung’ Ableitungen mit Dentalsuffix von der unter ↗ bauen (s. d.) angegebenen Wurzel ie. _*bheu-_, _*bheu̯ə-_ in der Bedeutung ‘wohnen’. Der lange Vokal der Wurzelsilbe im Germ. (ō) ist durch Kürzung aus ursprünglichem Langdiphthong (ie. _ōu_) hervorgegangen. Seit dem Ende des 18. Jhs. steht Bude für ‘(Studenten)zimmer’, vgl. _auf die Bude rücken_, _Leben in die Bude bringen_. [...]


Translation (with all abbreviations lengthened):

*Bude* feminine ‘small house, small shop made of boards’, derogatory and satirical ‘(old) house, appartment, room’. Middle High German _buode_ (Central German _būde_), Middle Low German _bōde_, Middle Dutch _boede_, Old Swedish _bōþ_, Swedish _bod_, Old Norse _būð_ (with vowel adaptation onto Old Norse _būa_ ‘to live’) ‘hut, wooden house, tent’ (Proto-Germanic _*bōdō-_) are derivatives with dental suffix of the Proto-Indo-European root _*bheu-_, _*bheu̯ə-_ in the sense "to live" specified under ↗ bauen (see there), along with the ablauted Middle Irish _both_ ‘Hut’, Lithuanian _bùtas_. The long vowel of the syllable in the Proto-Germanic root (ō) is derived from the reduction of the original long diphthong (Indo-European _ōu_). Since the end of the 18th century, _Bude_ stands for ‘students' room’, compare _auf die Bude rücken_, _Leben in die Bude bringen_. [...]


Also from DWDS:


> Daneben stehen mit abweichender Bildungsweise got. _bagms_ ‘Baum’, aschwed. _bagn_ ‘Stock’, anord. _baðmr_ ‘Baum’. Es gibt zahlreiche Versuche, die unterschiedlichen Formen des Westgerm. , Got. und Nord. miteinander zu verbinden, eine einheitliche germ. Grundform konnte jedoch nicht mit Sicherheit erschlossen werden.


Translation (with all abbreviations lengthened):

There are also these words with a different building-manner: Gothic _bagms_ ‘beam’, Old Swedish _bagn_ ‘stick’, Old Norse _baðmr_ ‘beam’. There have been many attempts to link the different forms between West Germanic, Gothic and Norse all together. Nevertheless, a united Proto-Germanic base form could not be developed with certainty.



eamp said:


> So reconstructing an ō-stem that can account for both West and North Germanic forms seems more economical to me.


DWDS agrees with your reconstruction.



eamp said:


> Re: Gmc. **baumaz - *The problem here is that this preform only fits West Germanic, but remember Gothic has *bagms *and Old Norse *baðmr*.


See above.



eamp said:


> As for a PIE root with a meaning _to build_, the first obvious candidate would appear to be **dem(H)*. It shows this sense as a verbal root in Greek (*δεμω*) and surely is the ultimate source of the word for house **dom*-.


This is most interesting. The same root became *timber* in English and *Zimmer* (room) in German.



CyrusSH said:


> The Persian verb _bal-_ that I mentioned is actually from proto-IE *bʰerǵʰ- "to raise"


Source?



CyrusSH said:


> what is the Germanic verb from this root?


It seems that this root produced no Germanic verbs.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> Are you referring to me?! I just asked a question, you could simply reply r>l sound change is not possible in the Germanic languages, so Old Norse _ból_ and English _bold_ can't be related to _burg_, _burh_ with the same meaning of "dwelling". Of course if we don't consider _burg_ as a loanword.


_Burg_ belongs to a totally different semantic range. It is a fortified settlement on a hill top. The relation to _berg_ (mountain) is lost in some Germanic languages but what remains is _fortified_ as the core meaning.

We are very far away from _build_ or _bauen_.


----------



## CyrusSH

Testing1234567 said:


> This is most interesting. The same root became *timber* in English and *Zimmer* (room) in German.



The more interesting thing word is _balk_ that I mentioned in my first post in this thread, it is from proto-IE **bhelg-* "beam" that you ignored it in your summary, the English word _block_ is also from the same origin: Online Etymology Dictionary, according to Oxford dictionary, _build_ means "construct by putting parts or materials together".


----------



## Testing1234567

What is so interesting about _balk_?


----------



## CyrusSH

Testing1234567 said:


> What is so interesting about _balk_?



The relation between building material and the verb "to build", didn't you mean the same thing?


----------



## berndf

A _beam_ is a _beam_ and does not mean _build_ just because beams are used in building. Otherwise we would need to discuss words like _screw, nail, concrete, paint, welding, wall, tile_ etc here.

Not the word _balk_ but the world _beam_ has actually something to do with _build_ but only very indirectly: The original meaning of beam in _tree, trunk_ (cf. German _Baum_) and that is, like _build_, derived from PIE *_bʰuH_- with the basic notion of _grow_.

So we have in Germanic, a relatively young group, which differentiated less than 2000 years ago, a remarkably diverse set of semantic development to derive the ostensibly simple notion of _build_:

In N Germanic bygga, cognate to English _buy_, developing out of the notion of _purchase_.
In W Germanic _build_ developing out of the notion of _grow_.
In continental W Germanic we have in addition the later development _dwell > cultivate > build _in _bauen/bouwen_.
And also in French from a Frankish, i.e. W Germanic, source _bâtir_, which developed from the notion of _braid, weave, lace, sew_.
Quite astonishing.


----------



## CyrusSH

My summary:

From proto-Indo-European **bʰudʰ-(m)n-o*:

Latin *fondus* (ground, foundation, farm, piece of land, estate)

Persian *bunag* (base, baggage, estate, dwelling, farm, house)

In Germanic languages:

German *boden* (ground, base)
Dutch *boedel* (estate)
North Frisian *budel* (dwelling, inheritable property)
English *bottle* (dwelling, abode, house)
Danish *bol* (farm)
Icelandic *ból* (dwelling, abode, farm, lair)

Source of verbs: *build, bauen, bouwen*


----------



## mundiya

You can add Sanskrit "budhna" (ground, bottom) to the list.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> Source of verbs: *build, bauen, bouwen*


Repetition doesn't make it truer.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> Repetition doesn't make it truer.



It is actually my first post in this thread about a common origin for all those verbs, I also admit that they were developed within the Germanic languages, so they probably didn't relate to other verbs that I mentioned in this thread but they relate to those Germanic words that I mentioned above, so they have different meanings of to dwell in a land, cultivate a farm and build a house.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> It is actually my first post in this thread about a common origin for all those verbs


And it was wrong from the beginning, _fundus, balk and Balken _are from a different root. Please let's return to the question, which is the different semantic sources of words to express the concept of _building_.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> And it was wrong from the beginning, _fundus, balk and Balken _are from a different root. Please let's return to the question, which is the different semantic sources of words to express the concept of _building_.



I was really wrong about _balk_ and it probably doesn't relate any of those verbs, my problem was about the letter "l" in the words _build/bold_ which is in fact from the Germanic suffix, like Latin suffix _-us_ and Persian suffix _-ag_ in the words that I mentioned in the post #59.


----------

