# Proto-Germanic *sparwo "sparrow" and Akkadian ṣibaru "sparrow"



## CyrusSH

According to etymonline, the proto-Germanic word is cognate with Cornish frau "crow", ... so it doesn't relate to the Akkadian word? pure coincidence again?! Akkadian _ṣibaru_ [b>p in Germanic] > _siparu_ > _sparwo_


----------



## Ectab

The Arabic and Hebrew roots seem more related to the Germanic word:
Hebrew tzippor (sparrow) root tz-p-r (to whistle). Arabic ʕu*ṣfūr* (sparrow) root ṣ-f-r (to whistle), Arabic shift (p>f).

I am curious too about the relation between Semitic and Germanic languages, and then Indo-European languages. But I can't think but of a coincidence of these (false?) cognates as these languages are too far to be influenced by each other, right?


----------



## berndf

Ectab said:


> Hebrew tzippor (sparrow) root tz-p-r (to whistle). Arabic ʕu*ṣfūr* (sparrow) root ṣ-f-r (to whistle)


It is nor quite clear if the verb is from the noun (whistling is what a bird does) or the noun from the verb (birds whistle) [related thread which hopefully receives an answer now]. The meaning _ṣ-p-r = bird _seems more wide spread in Semitic languages. To my knowledge there is no satisfactory explanation second radical _-b- _in the cited Akkadian root. The relation with _ṣ-p-r_ remains questionable.



Ectab said:


> I am curious too about the relation between Semitic and Germanic languages, and then Indo-European languages. But I can't think but of a coincidence of these (false?) cognates as these languages are too far to be influenced by each other, right?


_Sparrow_ is most likely related _to spur _and _to spurn_. See also German _Sperrling_ (_sparrow_), _Spur_ (trace, track) and _Sporn_ (_spur_) as well as ON _sperna_ (_to kick [away]_). This points to a root meaning _to kick_ or _to twitch_. The name to bird seems to allude to its way of movement and not to its call.

Another note: In Hebrew, _Tzippor _means any bird, not just a_ sparrow_. If we take this together with Aramaic and Arabic, the root meaning seems to be _small bird_. The kind or kinds of birds the Akkadian word referred to is uncertain.


----------



## fdb

There is a longstanding view that Germanic “sparrow, Sperling” etc. is connected in one way or other with Greek σποργίλος, σπέργουλος, σπαράσιον, all designating some kind of small bird. These Greek words are assumed to be “pre-Greek”, possibly Mediterranian wander-words. In this case I would think it indeed possible that they are connected to the Semitic word for “small bird”, represented by Aramaic ṣeppar, Hebrew ṣippōr, Arabic ʻuṣfūr (with “parasitic” ʻayn) and Akkadian ṣibāru (only in lexical texts).


----------



## fdb

berndf said:


> To my knowledge there is no satisfactory explanation second radical _-b- _in the cited Akkadian root. The relation with _ṣ-p-r_ remains questionable.



The sign <ba> can stand for /ba/ or /pa/.



berndf said:


> The kind or kinds of birds the Akkadian word referred to is uncertain.



Indeed, the authors of the CAD say: "a bird, probably the sparrow", mainly on the basis of the Semitic parallels.


----------



## CyrusSH

Ectab said:


> I am curious too about the relation between Semitic and Germanic languages, and then Indo-European languages. But I can't think but of a coincidence of these (false?) cognates as these languages are too far to be influenced by each other, right?



It is strange for those who know nothing about ancient migrations, for example do you think Finnish and Iranian are too far languages or not? Look at this thread in Finnish forum: orja


sakvaka said:


> It really seems that. The Finnish magazine _Tiede _(Science) published an article about this in 2006: http://www.tiede.fi/arkisto/artikkeli.php?id=687&vl=2006 You can use Google to translate the whole article (which I'm unable to post for copyright reasons) in English or Hungarian.
> 
> The general idea:
> - Finno-Ugrian and Iranian peoples lived close to each other in the past.
> - This is why Finnish has many borrowings from Iranian languages (sata, mesi, jyvä, *deksan, vasara...).
> - The word _aria_ meant 'human' for Indo-Iranian people, but Finno-Ugrians started to use it to mean people abducted, sold or taken as prisoners from other peoples, ie. slaves. The word also changed its first wovel.
> - The huge difference between Aryan peoples and slaves appeared in the early 20th century - for reasons we all know well.


----------



## berndf

fdb said:


> The sign <ba> can stand for /ba/ or /pa/.


So, ṣibaru is just a transcription and not (an attempt at) a phonemic reconstruction?


----------



## fdb

The "phonetic" transcription of Akkadian is based on a tentative interpretation of the often ambiguous signs. 

In principle, ṣi-ba-ru-um could also be transcribed as ṣi-pá-ru-um.


----------



## CyrusSH

fdb said:


> There is a longstanding view that Germanic “sparrow, Sperling” etc. is connected in one way or other with Greek σποργίλος, σπέργουλος, σπαράσιον, all designating some kind of small bird. These Greek words are assumed to be “pre-Greek”, possibly Mediterranian wander-words. In this case I would think it indeed possible that they are connected to the Semitic word for “small bird”, represented by Aramaic ṣeppar, Hebrew ṣippōr, Arabic ʻuṣfūr (with “parasitic” ʻayn) and Akkadian ṣibāru (only in lexical texts).



Other than this fact that both semantically and phonemically the proto-Germanic word is more similar to the Akkadian word than the Greek word, how does it make any difference if Germanic people got this word from Greeks or eastern neighbors of Greeks? Greeks are at least Europeans?!


----------



## berndf

fdb said:


> There is a longstanding view that Germanic “sparrow, Sperling” etc. is connected in one way or other with Greek σποργίλος, σπέργουλος, σπαράσιον, all designating some kind of small bird. These Greek words are assumed to be “pre-Greek”, possibly Mediterranian wander-words. In this case I would think it indeed possible that they are connected to the Semitic word for “small bird”, represented by Aramaic ṣeppar, Hebrew ṣippōr, Arabic ʻuṣfūr (with “parasitic” ʻayn) and Akkadian ṣibāru (only in lexical texts).


These two assumption (Greek-Germanic connection and Pre-Greek, Mediterranian wanderwort) together are difficult to reconcile with the equally long standing assumption that:


berndf said:


> _Sparrow_ is most likely related _to spur _and _to spurn_. See also German _Sperrling_ (_sparrow_), _Spur_ (trace, track) and _Sporn_ (_spur_) as well as ON _sperna_ (_to kick [away]_). This points to a root meaning _to kick_ or _to twitch_. The name to bird seems to allude to its way of movement and not to its call.


Which one would you want to give up?


----------



## fdb

I find the link to IE *spar (*sperH) “to kick” semantically difficult.


----------



## berndf

fdb said:


> I find the link to IE *spar (*sperH) “to kick” semantically difficult.


You doubt the given intra-Germanic relations?
DWDS              –                Sporn

_*sp(h)er(ə)- ‘zucken, mit dem Fuß wegstoßen, zappeln, schnellen’_


----------



## Treaty

What about the proposed cognate in Tocharian (_ṣpārā_), doesn't it point to an IE etymology?


----------



## eamp

The Tocharian comparison seems promising at least, though the meaning is apparently not 100% certain.
After Douglas Adams' dictionary there is:
Tocharian A_ ṣpār -_ sparrow(?)
Tocharian B_ ṣparā-yäkre -_ kind of bird (sparrow hawk?)

There also existed similar words in Old Prussian (but apparently not the other Balto-Slavic languages):
_spurglis_ - sparrow
_spergla-wanag_ - sparrow hawk


----------



## fdb

eamp said:


> There also existed similar words in Old Prussian (but apparently not the other Balto-Slavic languages)
> _spurglis_ - sparrow
> _spergla-wanag_ - sparrow hawk



Indeed, with /g/ and /l/ as in σποργίλος.


----------



## CyrusSH

The Old Prussian word seems to be from Greek, some great linguists such as Henning, Gamkrelidze and Ivanov have talked about contacts between Tocharians and eastern Semitic people, so the Tocharian word could be also a loanword from Akkadian.


----------

