Most prominent in Aramaic. Cf. also Gz. tamāhlala, tamāḥlala ‘to beseech, supplicate’.
PC
*msk - to mix (wine with spices)
(Kogan 2015: 297)
Related to *mzg.
According to E. Lipiński (1970:84), probably an Indo-European borrowings (Latin misceo, Greeek μίσγω < PIE *meik’-, *meig’-, Buck 1949: 335)
Tropper 2000:238, Friedrich–Röllig 1999:72, Rainey 1996 I 106‒108 Noorlander 2012:218
Gez. mi is structurally very close, but its meaning is “what”. Probably, together with its Tigre cognate mi, is derivable instead from PS *mīn- ‘what’ with loss of final -n
+ Eg.-syll. na⸗ˁa⸗ru₂⸗na ‘soldiers’ (Hoch 1994:182‒183)
can go back either to PS *nˁr ‘to cry, to shout’ or to the homonous root with meaning “to stir, to raise”, but neither seems to provide a fully suitable source of derivation. Arb. nuˁarat- ‘foetus in the womb of female wild ass’ is semantically more attractive, but too isolated. J. Hoch (1994:182‒183) tentatively connects *naˁr- with Akk. nīru ‘a word for troops’
If EthS forms (Amh. tänagga, Muh.Msq.Gog.Sod. (tä)nagga, Wol. tänagä) are related (so tentatively Leslau 1958:33), the meaning “to butt, to gore” in PC could represent a semantic development from “to collide, to clash,” although the reverse is also possible. Arb. nǯḥ ‘to succeed, to attain one’s wish’ could be related with an original meaning “to gore,” “to fight.”
Hbr. näšäḳ is usually compared with Arb. nsq ‘to put in order’ Gez. nasaḳa ‘to arrange in order, join closely’, which implies a semantic derivation from “order of battle” to “war,” “warfare,” “weapons” (Kopf 1976:206‒208). But CDG 403 relates them to Akk šutassuḳu ‘to put in order, to make ready, to prepare’. And phonologically problematic - reliable examples of PS *š > Ugr. ṯ are few (possible cases: Tropper 2000:109‒111).