tools   help STEDT Etymon #1181

---

• PKC *til TESTICLE / SCROTUM

Chinese comparanda

There are several likely Chinese comparanda (HPTB:422, 504), including:

臀 OC *d’wən, GSR #429b-c ‘buttocks’
殿 OC *tiən, GSR #429d ‘rear of an army’
沌 OC *d’wən, GSR #427h ‘confused / stupid’
鈍 OC *d’wən, GSR #427i ‘dull’
頓 OC *twən, GSR #427j ‘worn / dull / spoiled’.
[JAM]

As noted above, if this PTB root is related to *r‑tul ⪤ *r‑til DULL / BUTTOCK / HEEL / ROUNDED PART, then it can be compared to the following Chinese word family (see Coblin 1986:67-68; Gong 1995 #154; HPTB:422, 504):

臀 OC *d’wən, GSR #429b-c ‘buttocks’; Li 1971: *dən; Baxter 1992: *dun; Mand. tún.
殿 OC *tiən, GSR #429d ‘rear of army’; Li 1971: *tiənh; Baxter 1992: *tɨns; Mand. diàn.
沌 OC *d’wən, GSR #427h ‘confused, stupid’; Li 1971: *dənx; Baxter 1992: *dunʔ; Mand. dùn.
鈍 OC *d’wən, GSR #427i ‘dull’; Li 1971: *dənh; Baxter 1992: *duns; Mand. dùn.
頓 OC *twən, GSR #427j ‘worn, dull, spoiled’; Li 1971: *tənh; Baxter 1992: *tuns; Mand. dùn.

The correspondence between PTB *‑l and OC *‑n is regular (see Gong 1995 for numerous examples). The initials and vowels also match well. The voicing alternation and suffixation seen in the Chinese word family are typical, although in this case the morphological function is not clear.
[ZJH]

The following comparanda are offered for PTB *zril EARTHWORM in STC p. 171:

蟺 OC *d̑i̯ɑn, GSR# 148p; Mand. shàn
蚓 OC *di̯ĕn, GSR# 371c; Mand. yǐn
螾 OC *di̯ən, GSR #450j; Mand. yǐn

[JAM]

蟺 OC *d̑i̯ɑn, GSR #148p ‘earthworm’; Li 1971: *djanx; Baxter 1992: *djanʔ; Mand. shàn.
蚓 OC *di̯ĕn, GSR #371c ‘earthworm’; Li 1971: *rinx; Baxter 1992: *ljinʔ; Mand. yǐn.
螾 OC *di̯ən, GSR #450j ‘earthworm’; Li 1971: *rənx ?; Baxter 1992: *ljɨ/inʔ; Mand. yǐn.

Benedict (STC p.37 note 121 and p. 171 note 457) argues that all three Chinese words are related and ‘point... to an original initial such as *zr‑’. These in turn are compared to TB *zril ‘worm’.⁵ Based on this and a handful of other comparisons, Benedict argues for the following developments from PST to Chinese: *zr‑ > *źr‑ > *d̑i̯ ⁶ varying with *zr‑ > *zy‑ > *y‑ > *di̯.

Based on our current understanding of Old Chinese, Benedict’s hypothesis is no longer sustainable, at least not in full. GSR #148 is a dental series while GSR #371 and #450 are lateral series. This and the vowel difference indicate that 蟺 shàn is not an allofam of 蚓 yǐn and 螾 yǐn.⁷ As for the latter two, the reconstruction in both Li’s and Baxter’s systems is difficult. The Middle Chinese forms might be descended from either OC *i or OC *ə (Li)/*ɨ (Baxter). Li and Baxter agree that GSR #371 has main vowel *i, but the reconstruction of GSR #450 is ambiguous.

Schuessler 2007:574 explicitly relates 蚓 yǐn and 螾 yǐn, indicating that they are variant graphs used to write the same morpheme. He reconstructs OC *lə/inʔ or *jə/inʔ. While various attested binomial forms for ‘earthworm’ suggest that *i is the OC vowel, Min dialect forms point to *ə.

As for the initial, it is now generally agreed that it should be *l or *j, not *r.

Looking again at Benedict’s comparison with PTB *zril, we note that the vowel and coda correspondences are regular. A comparison of PTB *zr‑ with OC *l‑ or *j‑ looks doubtful on phonetic grounds, but cannot be dismissed out of hand. Since *zr‑ is so rare in TB, it is difficult to establish regularity of correspondence.

Whatever the fate of that comparison, Benedict’s claim that these Chinese words are ultimately connected to #1181 PTB *d(i/u)l EGG / TESTICLE now seems quite unlikely to be true.
[ZJH]