1) Γλωσσολογία: Ινδοευρωπαϊκά Θέματα , Ελληνική Γλώσσα , Βαλκανικές γλώσσες
(Σύνοψη βασικών γλωσσολογικών αναρτήσεων)
2) Ιστορία: Αρχαία , Μεσαιωνική
5) Γιουτιουμποπαίδεια (ντοκυμαντέρ από το youtube)
6) Υγεία & Άθληση
just dropped by to say hi. a friend of mine told me about your page where you address in a quite authoritatively manner a wide range of questions. I’ve been immersed in a ongoing debate about ancient toponyms of northern Greece. The name of Haliacmon caught my attention but there is virtually nothing given satisfactorily about its Greek etymology. Can you, please, enlighten me about this river-name?
I need to investigate it more before I give you a definitive answer. All I can say now are the following:
1) Haliakmon (Ἀλιάκμων) is certainly IE because it contains the o-grade IE suffix -men- (cf. ἄκμων, ειδήμων, πλαταμών) and there’s a great chance that the /i/ is the so called Caland’s conjunctional -i- that binds the IE morphemes (cf. Greek terp-i-keraunos, Latin luc-i–fer, Slavic Vlad-i-mir etc).
So by looking at the river name I am inclined to see it as Hal-i-ak-mon.
In this morphemic division the -ak- seems to be the IE suffix *-h2k- of words such as Grk. *sru-h2k-s > ῥύαξ and latin *h1roudh-i-h2k-h3onh2 > rubigo (the laryngeal here instead of vocalizing has lengthened the preceding /i/).
This suggests to me that Hal-i-ak-mon is a -men- derivation of a word like **haliak-s. So the etymology is reduced into explaining the initial root hal-.
Since the slavic name of the river is Bistrica (= fast flowing) it would seem plausible to derive hal- from the zero-grade *sl.- of the root *sel- “move energetically” that gave greek hallomai = “jump” and latin salio = “jump, flow down, spring forth”.
Of course the root hal- can also be derived from roots such as *swel-, *wel-,*yel- or the /a/ rather than the anaptyctic vowel of the zero grade ablaut of a syllabic *l. it could be a vocalized laryngeal *h2 (like the one in *-h2k- > -ak- explained earlier).
In this case the possible root can be something like *(s)(w)eh2l-, *yeh2l-.
I need to see the lists of IE roots before I examine these possibilities.
2) The other thing that is interesting is that the name Haliakmon appears as an alternative name of the river Inakhos in the Argolid, another river (actually more like a torrent) that the ancient poets describe as “fast-flowing”.
Here I give you a link to Plutarch’s “about rivers”, where he says that Haliakmon and Karmanor were older names of the river Inachos in the Argolid:
Thanks friend. You have mapped out a truly impressive analysis on the etymology of Haliakmon. All you need is to hone further your analysis because it is profoundly persuasive. I just cleared up my confusions about this river-name because prior I’ve asked you, I clung to another interpretation (apparently wrong huh). actually it was a mere conjecture which sought to relate it to a possible Phrygian word. Historical hints which had Phrygians as inhabitants in nearby of Haliakmon gave rise to another etymology (don’t get me wrong I do not subscribe to this idea) given that ,Akmon’ was an epithet given by Phrygians to Zeus. The linguists went further and contended that its very root stretch back its origin to k. I don’t put my hand on fire, as the old saying goes, because I am left far from being persuaded if such semantics does make any sense at all. Then again, the language of Phrygians had some impact on other Balkanic languages. you know there are theories varying from Greaco-Phrygian group (which is gaining more ground) to the old yet widespread idea for a Thraco-Phrygian sub-group (devised, if I’m not mistaken by Kretchmer). the rest went further by envisaging a chain of languages from Albanian-Northern Greek-Thracina-Phrygian-Armenian (Pedersen, Baric as the most eminent linguists who endorsed such a view).
Thanks friend. You have mapped out a truly impressive analysis on the etymology of Haliakmon. All you need is to hone further your analysis because it is profoundly persuasive. I just cleared up my confusions about this river-name because prior I’ve asked you, I clung to another interpretation (apparently wrong huh). actually it was a mere conjecture which sought to relate it to a possible Phrygian word. Historical hints which had Phrygians as inhabitants in nearby of Haliakmon gave rise to another etymology (don’t get me wrong I do not subscribe to this idea) given that ,Akmon’ was an epithet given by Phrygians to Zeus. The linguists went further and contended that its very root stretch back its origin goes back to k. I don’t put my hand on fire, as the old saying goes, because I am left far from being persuaded if such semantics does make any sense at all. Then again, the language of Phrygians had some impact on other Balkanic languages. you know there are theories varying from Greaco-Phrygian group (which is gaining more ground) to the old yet widespread idea for a Thraco-Phrygian sub-group (devised, if I’m not mistaken by Kretchmer). the rest went further by envisaging a chain of languages from Albanian-Northern Greek-Thracina-Phrygian-Armenian (Pedersen, Baric as the most eminent linguists who endorsed such a view).
Well, if you prefer to see the -akmon part as one morpheme then your start should be the IE root *akmon- “stone” (Greek ἄκμων, Lithuanian akmuo, slavic kamen etc.).
For example, you can find the term in the greek compound notakmon (νωτάκμων, “with mailed back”, literally “with Rocky back”) describing the turtle and it’s shell.
If you want to find an etymology on this line of research, then you could keep the *sel- > *sl.-i- > hali- “spring forth, jump” and see “Hali-akmon” as the river that “spings forth from the Rock”.
According to the ancient Greek legend, the first water spring was produced when the first horse stroke a rock with its hoof and water came out from the fissure.
Here, you can read about it in this page:
I simply preferred the “fast-flowing” etymology, because we have at least the later slavic name Bistrica for the river to support this:
Of course it doesn’t mean that it is the definitive etymology.
ups I forget to finish out the following sentence: The linguists went further and contended that its very root stretch back its origin goes back to a supposed <*as (which may well compared to Old indian ,Asman'') which meant ''stone''.
abundantly clear, thnx again! another river-names that caught my attention is Akheron “the river of underworld”. Accordingly, Hesychius held that akherousia meant ”swamp water”. Rozwadowski adhered to his hypothesis conceiving a possible PIE root *agher (lake) which in turn may be related to (water). He further proffers that Pannonian Asseriates (lake-dwellers) evolved basically from the very same root. Baltic area reeks of examples containing this root, for instance Assaran, ezers, ezeras, azeras. Does it have any grain of truth Rozwadowski’s conjecture? Last but not least, I am perplexed to know is there any possibility to subscribe this root to a specific language (Baltic, Illyrian or whatever). My point is that it’s of utmost importance to put certain words within a specific ethno-linguistic framework. Is that possible? Thnx in advance
The root *ag’her- is common IE so it belonged to the PIE mother language.
Its reflexes on the other hand are of the specific daughter languages.
For example slavic ezero/ozero and lithuanian ezeras “lake” show the characteristically *g’h>z reflex of the satem languages.
On the other hand, the hydronyms Ἀχερών (< *Akher-ont) and Ἀχερουσία ( Akher-ontija) show the reflex *g’h> kh («χ»), which is specifically greek, so in this case we can be certain that they are greek hydronyms.
Compare for example the reflexes of IE *g’hel- “yellow, shine”
Greek has *g’hl.h3-ros > χλωρός (khlo:ros)
Phrygian has *g’hl.h3-ros > γλουρός (glouros) = “gold”
English (Germanic) has *g’hl.-tom > gold
And the satem slavic languages have *g’holtom > *zolto > south slavic zlato like the /z/ of ezero:
Recently I mused time and time again for a vexed problem which never got any satisfactorily answer. We had debates to no end whether ”Illyrian” should me lightly lumped on satem or centum type of language. I am pretty aware that its material is slim and meager to draw any sort of far-reaching conclusion. Yet linguists still argue whether the material at our disposal (place-names and personal names) features satem or centum peculiarities. In this misty twilight, it seems mighty reasonable to assume that a satem layer is to be found in certain southern regions while centum layer preponderates further north comprising even Venetic and Liburnian, while its debatable if Dacian features as Centum likewise. In this misty twilight, I found a gloss recorded by Hesychius and many linguists thought to be Illyrian (?). In his lexicon the word for snake is αβεις·εχεις, which in turn we may track down its origin back to PIE **h₂engʷʰis. It follows as certain that there is a plethora of IE cognates into several languages: Greek ekhis, Armenian iž, Toch. auk, Avest. aži- and so forth. If αβεις is really an Illyrian word, is there any reasonable foundation to assume a satem peculiarity where gʷ>s?
Indeed as you said it is not clear if Illyrian was centum or satem just as it is not clear if we must speak about one or more Illyrian languages. Most scholars are prone to consider it centum, but the evidence they provide is not completely unambiguous. For example, if we link Gentius to *g’enh1es- = “people” (as in latin gens/gentem) then we have a centum reflex. But Illyrian Gentius could equally be related to the german name Günther = “warrior” and the english word gun, terms that go back to the root *gwhen- “strike, slay”.
Now the gloss that you mentioned is actually a “ghost gloss”. What Hesychius actually writes is:
ἄβεις = ἔχεις
He nowhere labels the gloss as “Illyrian” and it is not even clear that by «ἔχεις» he means “vipers” (the plural of ἔχις).
The problem is that ἔχεις is also the 2nd person singular of the verb ἔχω = hold, have and ἄβεις is very similar to latin habēs, the 2nd sg. of latin habeo = I have:
So to me it seems that Hesychius actually glossed the latin verb for “have” habeo = ἔχω , habēs (ἄβεις) = ἔχεις.
Unfortunately, the error “abeis = snakes Illyrians” is reproduced uncritically even in the great IE handbooks and no one explains (or shows the original) what Hesychius actually wrote.
However, if we suppose that there was an illyrian word abeis = snakes from *h1ogwhis- then this would be a proof of Illyrian being centum. Why?
Because only the centum languages show labial reflexes (p,b,f,v) in the labiovelars (*kw,gw,gwh). In the satem languages, the labiovelars have merged with the plain velars (i.e. *gw(h)>g) so they cannot give labial reflexes.
Note the following examples:
*gwous = “cow,ox” : greek βους, latin bos
*penkwe = “five” : proto-germanic fimfe , eng five
*wl.kwos = “wolf” : latin lupus, germanic wulfaz , eng wolf
*gwhen- = “strike, slay” : english bane, greek φόνος, λατιν de-fend-ere
On the other hand, it is impossible for a satem language to show labial reflexes of the labiovelars for the reason explained above.
So if there was an illyrian word abis = snake from *h1ogwhis then this would unambiguously make Illyrian a centum language. However, as I said, the gloss “abeis = snakes, Illyrians” is a ghost gloss, a modern very ambiguous reading of what Hesychius actually wrote. And what Hesychius seems to have written is latin habes = greek ἔχεις (“you have”).
A very thoughtful and informative response because it has all the makings of a commendable analysis. Finally, it’s fair to say that Illyrian language(s) had mixed accretions when it comes to satem/centum peculiarities. I’ve just one more question (I hope I’m not bothering you). I’ve been puzzled for a while to dissect some phonetic shifts in the regions between Macedonia and Illyria. The tribe of Dassaretae is a case in point. Hecateus had the oldest reference of the tribe of Δεξάροι (according to Hammond this tribe was Chaonian). There is no compelling reason to not assume that Δασσαρέται stem from Δεξάροι (as the oldest attested form) on phonetic grounds given the common gr.-illyr. -ks- > -ss- phonetic shift. Yet there is another striking example Σεσαρήθιοι which account to a distinct ”dialect”, all the more so when we may corroborate it with another example. A gloss in Heychius (cited from Amerias) state that Macedonians called the Sileni σαυᾶδαι (Σουαδοι. σαυδοι. Αμεριας στους σειλήνους αυτώ καλείσθαί φησιν υπο Μακεδονων). Moreover, according to another gloss it was Illyrians who applied the term Δευάδαι to the Satyri (Δευάδαι οἱ Σάτ[υρ]οιὑπ’ `Iλλυριῶν), who are undoubtedly identical according to Pausania (I.23.5). It was Ridgeway who conjectured that Illyr. /-d/ and Maced. /-s/ stems from a possible *dh or even *th. He opined that such phonetic shifts were dialectal features of both Illyrian and Macedonian (whom he lumped together on other grounds).
Don’t worry you’re not bothering ! As long as it is linguistics it’s always interesting.
Establishing the limit between Illyrian and Macedonian at this point is something practically impossible. Both Upper Macedonians and the southern most Illyrians were nomadic tribes who moved seasonally their flocks here and there. So it is certain that there would be no “clear cut” linguistic border line.
Now the Deksares > Dassaretae evolution is interesting and it seems to be an areal feature of southern Illyris, because in the same region we find the river Apsamus > Assamus > Osam. So in both cases we have an assimilation of the s-containing consontant clusters like the one that later occured in Italian:
Aleksander > Alessandro
Clepsydra > Clessidra
In the ancient greek dialects this feature was characteristic of the Thessalian and Cretan dialects (Ptolemaios > Ttolemaios, nukta > nutta etc), however I have not (yet) found a case of ks>ss like the ones we discuss.
So Dassaretae and Assamus seem to show an areal feature of assimilation to -ss- of s-containing consonant clusters.
Regarding the Macedonian Sauadai and the Illyrian Deuadai, I always considered the word Sauadai to be a Thracian loanword in Macedonian, ultimately from the thracian god Sabadius (< Swobh-odh-jos). Since Sabadius was considered the Thracian Dionysus and the Sileni were the followers of the latter, I think that Sauad-ai can originate from Sabad-ios after spirantization of the thracian /b/ in the mouth of the Macedonians (b>v rendered as “u” as it still happens in modern greek, for example the modern greek word for “egg” (αβγό = αυγό), both forms are used and both render the sound /avγo/.
Again the Illyrian Deuadai = Satyrs is close both semantically and structurally to both Sauadai and Sabadios, but I can’t see any regular reflex Illyr. d > Maced. s like the one that Ridgeway proposed almost a century ago when linguistics was still in its infancy.
However, Σεσαρήθιοι might be from Zesar- and itself could be from de(k)sar-/gesar- just as Thracian Seuthes actually represents Zeuter- < *g'heu- "to pour", hence the Indo-Iranian terms zaotar/hotr for "priest" (he who makes the libation).
So it is possible that the term Sesarethioi could be related to Dexares/Dassaretai and it could mean something like "lakemen", because in the Epirotan dialects “daksa” meant “sea”.
I don’t know if the latter is related to greek deksamene (δεξαμενή) = cistern
I’m actually kind of enjoying this debate because it brings to attention perplexing problems, yet interesting. You’re right about Ridgeway, he was not adept on linguistics, I’ve just took his examples as point of departure to unravel any possible phonetic commonality between Illyrian and Macedonian. Your proposal for a possible borrowing from Thracian seems very likely all the more so when we take into account the very fact that Thracians occupied for some time large sections of coastal Macedonia, namely the regions stretching in Pieria plain. Although their presence dwindled away, Thracians left a good deal of influence behind them (one is tempted to mention religious traditions). Whereas the phonetic shift -ks- > -ss- (-s), appears to be a pertinent feature of southern Illyrian (if such term accurately fits to the region in nearby of Macedonia and Epirus). I found out another example which seems to further betoken this phonetic shift. A river that sprung in nearby of Lissus (modern Lezhë/Republic of Albania) was called Ἀρδάξανος. Taking into consideration several attested forms of this river-name during Middle age, we may plainly conceive a possible trait as *Arsan and with the drift of time /-s/ through sonorization yielded into /-z/ (Ἀρδάξανος > Erzen; -ks>ss-z). I searched in vain to find examples on Greek (or northern variants), Pokorny offered no example to prove his statement. I am not that sure if Gr. ζύλον (tree) proves the rule-of-thumb on the grounds it may be tentatively linked to IE *oksu- (wood, tree, timber) through -ks> -s shift!?
In the example that you’ve mentioned Αρδάξανος > Erzen there is no ks>ss>z involved. The ks was simply lost. The /z/ of the albanian name probably originates from the d as in radius > radju > radzu > alb. rreze ~ romanian rază
Compare also latin decem = “ten” > romanian zece:
The intermediate state dzece is preserved in Vlach/Aromanian dzatse:
So, as with many other ancient toponyms of Albania, balkan romance (Vlach) intermediation seems to be the missing link between Ardaxanos and Erzen .However, this evolution works only if we start from *Ardexanos, because the d>dz>z evolution only occures before the vowels i,e (i.e. the decem > dzece > zece & radius > rreze/raza examples mentioned above).
Since you’ve mentioned Pokorny, I have to warn you that it is a highly outdated source of IE roots and cognates and has many errors. I recommend you the root-cognate database of Mallory & Adams. If you don’t have the book, you can download it here:
The greek word for “wood” ksulon (ξύλον) that you’ve mentioned comes from the root *k’sulom:
The ζύλον (zulon) that you wrote, I’ve never heard it. Where did you find it? Are you sure that you have not confused the greek ks (ξ,Ξ) letter with the greek /z/ (ζ,Ζ) letter;
On the other hand if you want a greek example of ks-cluster simplification, that happened in *ksun-. Only the Athenians had preserved the original ks cluster (ξύν), meanwhile all other Greeks lost the /k/ and used the form sun (σύν), which eventually became panhellenic and was adopted even by the Athenians in the hellenistic period.
For example, in 5th century Athens you would hear people saying ksymposion (“ksymposium”), when all other Greeks were saying symposion (“symposium”).
Ok Tydeus, I had sometime to examine the evolution Ardàxanos > Erzen. Indeed, as I said there seems to be Dalmatian (West Balkan) Romance intermediation.
A difference between West Balkan Romance (WBR, Dalmatian) and East Balkan Romance (EBR = Vlach and Romanian) exists in the evolution of the clusters /ks/ and /kt/.
EBR kt > pt & ks> ps as opposed to WBR kt>jt & ks > js.
Albanian had contacts with both these Balkan Romance varieties who met along the vertical line that linked the river Drina to Lissus (Lezhë).
lucta > lupta > luftë and coxa (/koksa/) > copsa > kofshë came from EBR (i.e. Romanian luptă, coapsă).
But on the other hand albanian directus > drectus > drejtë came from Dalmatian not EBR (romanian dreptu).
Now the WBR variants jt, js cause i-mutation changing a preceding a>e as in spanish:
lactem > lajte > leche and
taxus (taksus) > tajso > tejo (spanish /j/ is pronounced /χ/=/h/).
Note also the evolution of WBR ks>js> /χ/ (“thick” /h/) in the spanish words:
taxus (taksus) > tejo
fixus (fiksus) > fijo/hijo
texere (teksere) > tejer
So the hydronym Ardàksanos in the mouth of Dalmatian/WBR speakers is expected to follow the following evolution:
Ardàksanos > Ardàjsan > Ardèhan (with i-mutation as in spanish taksus > tajso > tejo)
At this stage, the accented diphthongization è>jè (pètra > ital. pietra) gives ardjèhan > ardzèhan > arzèhan as in the romanian cases:
decem > > djèce > dzèce >zece
deus > > djèu > dzeu >zeu
And the albano-romanian cases spodium > shpuzë = Rom. spuză & radius > radia > radja > radza > rreze/rază.
And then Albanian needs only to apply it’s “rhythmic rule” and lose the non accented -ha-:
Arzèhan > Arzèn and later by another i-mutation Erzèn as in
mèdicus > mjèδik > mjèhik > mjek
The intermediate d>δ>h is preserved in *blaiduros > bledura > bleδurë > blehurë
Here’s the Albanian “rhythmic rule” in polysyllabic words as explained by Vladimir Orel:
Sorry for the delayed response because it took me some time to get access to the library of my university and rummage back and forth a plethora of articles. Indeed the comparison (apparently doubtful) Αρδάξανος > Erzen was broached for the first time by Anton Mayer. But from now on, I take this connection with a pinch of salt, as the old saying goes, because you plainly pointed to stressed out the phonetic difficulties. By the way, I found pretty interesting some hints given by E, Cabej in one of his articles dwelling on this question. He conjectured that Erzen might be related to Thracian river-name ‘Αρσος (a Thracian ingredient in modern Albania?). In following I shall post some more valuable hints to ponder further on this matter:
1. According to Ivan Duridanov, ‘Αρσος may be well related to IE *arg’o- ‘white, shining’
2. He further furnished us with ample examples like Arzos (Ptol.) – a tributary of Hebros (Marica); Arzon (Prok.), Arzum (Tab. Peut.) – a fortress on the same river.
2. An Indo-European /-*g/ is usually reflected in Albanian as a voiced fricative /-z/, for instance: ndez ‘I kindle’ < *en-dhogw h-eie (root *dhegwh- burn).
3. Vladimir Orel argues that in the early Proto-Albanian the IE *dh becomes /-z/: gjazë 'riverside forest' < Proto-Albanian *sedja<IE *sed- 'to be settled, to sit';
3. Its worth of mentioning some other attested forms of that river-name like Argenta, Arzenta, Charzanes, etc. If that is the case, then we may justly surmise that the ending /-nd/ yielded into alb. as /-n/.
P.S: I too consider Pokorny's dictionary as a bit outdated although he did an impeccable work for his time (his dictionary was used down to 1960s). I find dead erroneous some cognates he substantiated to exemplify certain roots. Of course Mallory-Adams is way better than Pokorny (I have a copy of it). I apologize for ζύλον, I got it wrong because I had only a vague memory of an article of Polish linguist, Krzysztof Witczak. I checked out once again his article and here what he stated:
Mac. Αξος (*Gk. ξύλον) < IE. *oksu- 'wood, firewood, tree, timber', cf. Skt. aksu- 'bamboo-pole'. Gk. οξύη f. 'beech', etc.;.
My mistake then!
Albanian Erzen cannot originate from h2arg’- “white, shine” because PIE *g'(h) in albanian became first dz and then d/dh as in
*weg’h– > wedza > vjedh
It is in romanian that the g’h>dz>z evolution is possible and this is why to albanian vjed(h)ull there is romanian viezure:
The same thing happened in *bherHg’– > albanian bardza >bardhë and romanian barză
And the same thing happened in *meg’h2 > madh
mog’h2 > madza > madh
So the Albanian descendant of the root *arg’- would have been **ardh- not arz-. It only takes a simple look at wikipedia to understand that:
*g’ombhos > dzamba > dhëmb
*g’eus- > dua ~ due:
In what book did you find that PIE *g’ can become albanian z?
Anyway, Ardaxanos/Erzen I believe that they clearly correspond to the same river.
My advise to you is to dedicate some time first and understand the phonological transitions from PIE to Albanian. Otherwise you’ll be simply losing your time by constantly making erroneous transitions.
I have given Vladimir Orel’s books for those who are interested in this post:
Macedonian àksos “timber, cut wood” comes from the same root as cretan àksos = “fracture”, they derive from greek agnumi = “break,cut”, from IE *wag’- “break”. The wag’s-> (w)aks- devoising is normal is all IE languages (b,d,g+s > ps,s,ks), for example Srb, Srpski and the *ghes- > ghs-enwos which ended up greek ksenwos, phrygian kseunos and proto-albanian kso:nwja > huaj:
Anyway, remember that there are 6 different kinds of voiced velars in PIE:
plain velar: *g
palatal velar *g’ (the one discussed above)
their aspirated analogs *gh and *g’h
and the labiovelars *gw,*gwh
In early proto-albanian (EPA) the aspirated series (gh,g’h,gwh) merged with the non aspirated one (gh > g, g’h > g’, gwh>gw)
So at the end you have 3 different EPA voiced velars: g,g’,gw
*g remained as such
*g’ (the palatal) became dz > d/dh
*gw merged with *g
So you have *dhegwh– “burn” > deg– > djeg
And *gwous > gauka > gak
*g’ on the other hand, as I showed in the earlier comment first became dz as in all satem languages and then, instead of becoming dz>z as in the other satem languages it became dz>d/dh as in Avestan Persian.
This is why *g’ombhos became for example zub in serbo-croatian, but dhëmb in albanian
It is exactly the same thing with the albo-romanian couples dh-z mentioned earlier (*weg’h- > wedz- > vjedhull = viezure and *bherHg’– > bardza > bardhë = barză).
And here’s the explanation of the z in ndez:
The labiovelar evolution is a bit difficult in albanian, but I’ll try to explain it simply:
As I said above before back vowels (a,o,u) the albanian labiovelars behave like plain velars (gw>g as in dhegwha > dega > djeg).
However, before front vowels (i,e) and theglide j the labiovelars dissociate and follow the evolution: gw > g-w > dz-w> dž > z
The same thing happens in the unvoiced case as in *penkwe > penk-w-e > pentswe > pentše > pense > pesë:
The “trigger” element that promotes the hyper palatalizations (dz>dž, ts>tš) is the dissociated -w-.
sorry if my silly question causes any inconvenience or smth like that, but I was told to address my question right here. it was my friend Petros Houhoulis in theapricity forum who gave me your page. as i am taking my first steps on basic linguistics, I find too difficult to apprehend certain phonetic concepts which are in wide usage among scholars. Diacritic symbols are far too difficult to familiarize with, especially for me 🙂 but to me is mighty complicated the puzzling question of laryngeals. ok i am well aware of the ongoing debates on this matter, but i am thrilled to know what does mean the following symbols: h1, h2 and h3 with their “coloring” effects? i realise that they are very applicable when it comes to devise a PIE root *. i would be grateful if you can sketch in a deliberately simplified fashion some explanations for a “general audience” like me 🙂 thanks in advance
Hi Leo. Don’t worry there’s no such thing as a “silly question”.
The sounds you are asking about are the so called proto-indo-european (PIE) laryngeals h1,h2,h3.
They once existed in the earliest PIE language along with the glides j (=y) and w. Just like the latter they could form ablauting e-diphthongs (ew = eu , ej = ei , eh1, eh2 , eh3) that eventually evolved into the PIE long vowels.
The laryngeals have 2 basic characteristics: they can vocalize into specific vowels and they can “colour” nearby vowels (usually /e/) into some other vowel.
Their original colouring tendency has been fully preserved in Greek, a feature that is called “Greek triple reflex”. In the other IE daughter languages this “triple reflex” has been lost and the laryngeals were mostly lost without vocalization. However, when they do vocalize they usually give /a/ or -in the Indo-Iranian languages- /i/.
The most ancient IE daughter language, the Anatolian branch, is interesting because it seems to have preserved the laryngeals in the sound /ḫ/.
Now let’s be more specific:
1) The “triple reflex” vocalization preserved in Greek is *h1>e , *h2>a and *h3>o
*h1leudh- > ἐλεύθερος (*h1leudh-)
*h1reudh- > *h1rudh-ros > ἐρυθρός (*h1reudh-)
*h2r.tk’os > ἄρκτος (*h2r.tk’os)
*ph2tēr > πατήρ, father etc , yet indo-iranian pitā (*ph2tēr)
*h3bhel- > ὄφελος (*h3bhel-)
*h3leig- > *h3ligos > ὀλίγος (*h3leig-)
Colouring effects. Before being lost they have coloured a nearby /e/ again with a “triple reflex” tendency: h1e > e , h2e> h2a > a , h3e > h3o > o
*h1ei- > ei- εἶμι (*h1ei-)
*h2eig’s > *h2aig’s > aig’s > αἴξ (*h2eig’s)
*h3ewis > *h3owis > owis > ὄις , ovis , ovьca etc. (*h3ewis)
Creation of long vowels. The PIE long vowels (ē,ā,ō) are actually ablauting laryngeals e-diphthnongs and they behave as such.
The long *ē originated from the sequence *eh1, the long *ā from the sequence *eh2 and the long *ō from the sequence *eh3.
Just as the e-diphthongs *ei and *eu have the ablauting zero grades *i and *u respectivelly, so the laryngeal diphthongs *eh1,*eh2,*eh3 have the ablauting zero grades *h1,h2,h3.
*dheugh- with zero grade *dhugh- is seen in greek τεύχω , but *τυχ-τός > τυκτός
(τεύχω , τυκτός)
*meig- > μ(ε)ίγνυμι, but μικτός and ἀμιγής. (μείγνυμι , μικτός, ἀμιγής)
The laryngeal diphthongs behave in the same manner:
*dheh1– > *dhē– , but *dhh1– > dhe– . This alternation exlains the difference in τίθημι and θέσις, θετός etc.
*steh2– > *stā– , but *sth2->sta– . This alternation explains the difference in ἵστημι/ἵστᾱμι and στατός, ἄστατος etc.
ἵστημι , στατός, ἄστατος.
*deh3– > *dō– , but *dh3– > *do-. This alternation explains the difference, in Greek between δίδωμι and δοτός and in Latin the difference between dōnum and datus (here *h3 was vocalized into /a/).
δίδωμι , δοτός , dōnum , datus
smerdalee καπου διαβασα οτι η καστορια εγινε κοστουρ απο τους σλαβους.στα σλαβικα-βουλγαρικα κοστουρ ειναι η περκα(ειδος ψαριου).λεω μηπως ειχε η λιμνη της καστοριας πολλες περκες και εμεινε το ονομα?γκουγκλαρισε riba kostur(ψαρι περκα) και θα δεις.φιλικα παντα.
Γεια σου Billy. Ξέρω ότι kostur = πέρκα από τα κόκαλα (kost) που έχει το ψάρι.
Βέβαια η πέρκα kostur δεν έχει καμία σχέση με την Καστοριά που έγινε Kostur στο στόμα των σλάβων εξαιτίας της σλαβικής τροπής a>o που ολοκληρώθηκε κατά τον 8ο αιώνα.
Η Καστοριά έγινε Kostur, όπως η Salona έγινε Solin (στην Κροατία) και όπως ο Τίμαχος/Timacus έγινε Timok (στην ανατολική Σερβία).
Ο Προκόπιος, γράφοντας γύρω στο 550 μ.Χ. περιγράφει την λίμνη ως Καστορία και την πόλη ως Ιουστινιανούπολη (πρώην Διοκλητιανούπολη). Δες το χωρίο του Προκόπιου στα δεξιά εδώ.
Αν σε ενδιαφέρει περισσότερο η τροπή o>a σε προσλαβικά τοπωνυμία στο στόμα των Σλάβων έχω παραθέσει πολλά παραδείγματα εδώ.
επισης πως ψαχνω θεματα σου?πχ θελω απευθειας να διαβασω για τον σκυλιτση.πως μπορω να παω κατευθειαν εκει?
Ψάχνε στο google “Σκυλίτσης smerdaleos“. Έτσι βρίσκω εγώ τις παλιές μου αναρτήσεις. Αφού βρεις μια ανάρτηση, μετά αρκεί να πας πίσω μέχρι να βρεις την πρώτη της σειράς.
Τώρα στο Σκυλίτση ξέχασα να δώσω το πρωτότυπο κείμενο, το οποίο μπορείς να το διαβάσεις εδώ.
πως μπορώ να σου πω κάτι εκτός δημοσιότητας?
μπορώ να το γράψω εδώ χωρίς να το δημοσιοποιήσεις?
κάτι θέλω να σου ζητήσω.
Γεια σου Χρηστάρα!
Μπορείς να γράψεις στα σχόλια ό,τι θέλεις να διαβάσω μόνο εγώ. Τα σχόλια δεν δημοσιεύονται αυτόματα, αλλά αφού εγώ επιλέξω δημοσίευση.
Επομένως, αν θέλεις κάνε εάν σχόλιο με το Εmail που θέλεις να σου απαντήσω (δεν θα δημοσιευτεί) και θα σου απαντήσω από το Email μου.
View post on imgur.com
Το πρόγραμμα του συνεδρίου μπορεί να το κατεβάσει κανείς από εδώ.
Καλώς τον Simlizissimus!
Καλή Χρονιά, μιας και έχουμε να τα πούμε από το 2016!
Με έχει ήδη ενημερώσει ο Πέρτιναξ για το συνέδριο, λέγοντας ότι «θα στήσει αντίσκηνο» εκεί εκείνες τις ημέρες!
Καλή χρονιά, Σμερδαλέε. Στο πιο πάνω σημείωμα είχα ανεβάσει και μια φωτογραφία, που δεν φαίνεται. Μήπως, για την πληρότητα του πράγματος, μπορείς να επέμβεις;
Θα επέμβω Simp. Όπως συνέβη και άλλες φορές εγώ βλέπω τον σύνδεσμο της εικόνας, αλλά δεν φαίνεται η εικόνα. Θα τυο βολέψω τώρα.
Οκ, τώρα φαίνεται η εικόνα σου.
Σμέρδ, τι έπαθαν …
Ριβαλδίνιο θα σου απαντήσω στο Email σου που βλέπω.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.