In this paper, I analyze etymologies of Arm. pʿetowr ‘feather’ and
tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly... more In this paper, I analyze etymologies of Arm. pʿetowr ‘feather’ and tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly’. Since 19th century, these words are compared to PIE *pet- ‘to fly; to fall’ and its derivatives in other languages. I adduce additional semantic and derivational arguments in favor of the direct derivation pʿetowr ‘feather’ < Armenian pʿetem ‘to pluck (esp. hair, feathers), fleece’. This derivation has parallels in such Baltic formations as Lituanian plùnksna ‘feather’ and Old Prussian plauxdine ‘vederbette (Federbett); feather bed’. The suffix -owr can be also found in the word mrowr ‘dregs, sediment, faeces; slime, mud’. Researchers usually compare the word tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly’ and such related word as tʿitʿeṙn ‘butterfly’ with Greek πέτομαι ‘to fly’, πτερόν ‘feather; wing’, Old Indic pátati ‘to fly; to fall’ and other words derived from *pet- ‘to fly; to fall’. However, it is necessary to reconstruct a strange protoform *pt-ēr-s or *pt-ēr-n for Armenian which is even weaker if πτερόν is not related and corresponds to Proto-Slavic *pero- ‘feather’. I propose another etymology. Arm. tʿrčʿim can be derived from *tērs, an altered form of the root *tres- ‘to shake’; Latin terreō ‘to frighten; to terrify’ can represent a similar formation (from *tors- with secondary vocalism). The primary meaning should be ‘tremble’, ‘shiver’ with semantic change to ‘flutter’ and then to ‘fly’. Such cognate Armenian lexemes as tʿitʿeṙn ‘butterfly’, tʿṙtʿṙem, aor. tʿṙtʿṙeсʿi ‘to flutter; to flap; to fly about’, tʿrtʿṙem, aor. tʿrtʿṙeсʿi ‘to vibrate; to tremble’, prove these semantic peculiarities. It is also remarkable that in many Indo-European languages the basic words with the meaning ‘to fly’ are derived from other motion verbs; one of them is Proto-Slavic *letěti related to Lith. lekiù, lė̃kti ‘to fly’, lakstýti ‘to flutter’, Latvian lèkt, ‘jump’, OHG lecken ‘jump’
Индоевропейское языкознание и классическая филология - XXII, 2018
В статье рассматривается древнеармянское слово слово pʿetowr
‘перо’, которое традиционно связываю... more В статье рассматривается древнеармянское слово слово pʿetowr ‘перо’, которое традиционно связываются с *pe/ot-r̥, род. п. *pet-n- ‘крыло; перо’. Показывается, что данная этимологии формально слаба и стоит предпочесть альтернативное решение, а именно связь с глаголом pʿetem ‘вырывать; выдергивать (волосы, перья)’.
In this paper, I examine three Vedic stems: vār-, udán-, and udaká-, meaning ‘water’, in the li... more In this paper, I examine three Vedic stems: vār-, udán-, and udaká-, meaning ‘water’, in the light of the hypothesis that vār- and udán- formed a suppletive paradigm in Vedic and reflect two related PIE forms, *u̯e/oh1r and *ud-en-. According to this view, formulated by M. de Vaan and A. Lubotsky, vār- reflects the old PIE heteroclitical nom.-acc. form *u̯od-r and udán reflects the oblique stem *ud-en- ‘water’, because of the conditioned sound change *d > *h1 in PIE. My research shows that, while vār- and udán- could indeed form a suppletive paradigm in Vedic, they are probably unrelated on the PIE level. The meaning of the independent noun *u̯e/oh1r was ‘wet, moist’, and all attested meanings of its derivatives could develop from this semantics, among them Avestan vāra- ‘rain’; Latin ūrīnor, ūrīnāri ‘to plunge under water, dive’, ūrīna ‘urine’; Old Irish fír ‘milky; milk (gloss)’, Old Welsh gwir-awt ‘strong drink’; Old Norse úr ‘drizzle’, Ols English úrig- ‘dewy’ (in compounds); Old Prussian wurs ‘pond’ etc. A remarkable parallel for such semantic development can be found in Slavic: reflexes of the Proto-Slavic noun *moča / *močь ‘wet, moist’ have the meanings ‘wet, moist’, ‘rain’, ‘rainy weather’, ‘marsh, swamp’, ‘urine’ etc. It is further established that the unusual phonetic appearance of *u̯e/oh1r- is insufficient reason to analyze it as containing the root *u̯eh1- and the suffix *-r; the same can be said of PIE *i̯eh1r- ‘year’. Finally, I analyze the assumed sound change *d > *h1, listing the most significant cases, and conclude that these examples are not fully convincing, while the phonetic conditioning of this sound change is obscure. According to these data, the correlation between the stems vār-, udán- and udaká- can be described as follows: the regular heteroclitic nominative-accusative #vā̆dar was lost and supplemented by the similar nominative-accusative vār- /váar/ ‘wet, moist; rain’. The latter received the meaning ‘water’ but retained its earlier meanings ‘wet, moist’ and ‘rain’ in several cases. Later both vār- and udán- were replaced by the noun udaká- ‘water’, which was the cognate of udán- and became the basic word for ‘water’ as early as the Atharvaveda.
В статье рассматривается праиндоевропейский корень *ku̯sep- ‘ночь’, реконструируемый на основании... more В статье рассматривается праиндоевропейский корень *ku̯sep- ‘ночь’, реконструируемый на основании таких форм, как хетт. išpant- ‘ночь’, др.-инд. kṣap-, авест. xšap-, xšapan-, xšapar- ‘ночь’; греч. ψέφας ‘тьма’. Рассмотрение хеттских слов с рефлексами триконсонантных начальных кластеров показывает, что развитие *CsC- > *sC- в хеттском не является стандартным. Этот факт делает спорной традиционную этимологию išpant-.
Также в статье показывается, что соответстие и.-ир. p ~ греч. φ является проблемным, что также может свидетельствовать в пользу того, что что и.-ир. *kšap- является изолированной основой неизвестного происхождения.
Abstract. This paper examines three etymologies of Proto-Slavic *xudъ. They are the traditional e... more Abstract. This paper examines three etymologies of Proto-Slavic *xudъ. They are the traditional etymology proposed by A.A. Potebnya and H. Pedersen according to which this word is connected with OI kṣudrá- ‘small’, the hypothesis of V.V. Ivanov who connects *xudъ with Ossetic
fyd / fud ‘bad, evil’ and also the assumption of A.S. Melnichuk who believed that *xudъ is at first to be compared with Proto-Slavic *xylъ. The paper shows that the traditional etymology cannot be accepted because of semantics, and the version of V.V. Ivanov is phonetically impossible. It means that comparison of *xudъ and *xylъ is the most probable solution.
Key words: etymology, Proto-Slavic, loanword, semantic reconstruction, semantic change, phonetic substitution.
На какой стадии развития права находились древние греки в архаическую эпоху? В какой степени можн... more На какой стадии развития права находились древние греки в архаическую эпоху? В какой степени можно реконструировать данную систему и ее истоки? В данной монографии предпринята попытка описания древнегреческой системы возмездия гомеровского времени на фоне имеющихся микенских данных и предполагаемой праиндоевропейской ситуации. В ней рассмотрена семантика корней индоевропейского праязыка, связанных с возмездием. В книге также представлены результаты исследования текстов, написанных Линейным письмом Б и посвящённых судам и наказанию. В монографии выявлены взаимосвязи между гомеровскими терминами возмездия и реконструирована система наказания в гомеровское время.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0060 In this paper, we present a new reconstruction of Indo-Eur... more https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0060 In this paper, we present a new reconstruction of Indo-European phylogeny based on thirteen 110-item basic wordlists for protolanguages of IE subgroups (Proto-Germanic, Proto-Slavic, etc.) or ancient languages of the corresponding subgroups (Hittite, Ancient Greek, etc.). We apply reasonably formal techniques of linguistic data collection and post-processing (onomasiological reconstruction, derivational drift elimination, homoplastic optimization) that have been recently proposed or specially developed for the present study. We use sequential phylogenetic workflow and obtain a consensus tree based on several algorithms (Bayesian inference, maximum parsimony, neighbor joining; without topological constraints applied). The resulting tree topology and datings are entirely compatible with established expert views. Our main finding is the multifurcation of the Inner IE clade into four branches ca. 3357-2162 BC: (1) Greek-Armenian, (2) Albanian, (3) Italic-Germanic-Celtic, (4) Balto-Slavic-Indo-Iranian. The proposed radiation scenario may be reconciled with diverse opinions on Inner IE branchings previously expressed by Indo-Europeanists.
In this paper, I analyze etymologies of Arm. pʿetowr ‘feather’ and
tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly... more In this paper, I analyze etymologies of Arm. pʿetowr ‘feather’ and tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly’. Since 19th century, these words are compared to PIE *pet- ‘to fly; to fall’ and its derivatives in other languages. I adduce additional semantic and derivational arguments in favor of the direct derivation pʿetowr ‘feather’ < Armenian pʿetem ‘to pluck (esp. hair, feathers), fleece’. This derivation has parallels in such Baltic formations as Lituanian plùnksna ‘feather’ and Old Prussian plauxdine ‘vederbette (Federbett); feather bed’. The suffix -owr can be also found in the word mrowr ‘dregs, sediment, faeces; slime, mud’. Researchers usually compare the word tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly’ and such related word as tʿitʿeṙn ‘butterfly’ with Greek πέτομαι ‘to fly’, πτερόν ‘feather; wing’, Old Indic pátati ‘to fly; to fall’ and other words derived from *pet- ‘to fly; to fall’. However, it is necessary to reconstruct a strange protoform *pt-ēr-s or *pt-ēr-n for Armenian which is even weaker if πτερόν is not related and corresponds to Proto-Slavic *pero- ‘feather’. I propose another etymology. Arm. tʿrčʿim can be derived from *tērs, an altered form of the root *tres- ‘to shake’; Latin terreō ‘to frighten; to terrify’ can represent a similar formation (from *tors- with secondary vocalism). The primary meaning should be ‘tremble’, ‘shiver’ with semantic change to ‘flutter’ and then to ‘fly’. Such cognate Armenian lexemes as tʿitʿeṙn ‘butterfly’, tʿṙtʿṙem, aor. tʿṙtʿṙeсʿi ‘to flutter; to flap; to fly about’, tʿrtʿṙem, aor. tʿrtʿṙeсʿi ‘to vibrate; to tremble’, prove these semantic peculiarities. It is also remarkable that in many Indo-European languages the basic words with the meaning ‘to fly’ are derived from other motion verbs; one of them is Proto-Slavic *letěti related to Lith. lekiù, lė̃kti ‘to fly’, lakstýti ‘to flutter’, Latvian lèkt, ‘jump’, OHG lecken ‘jump’
Индоевропейское языкознание и классическая филология - XXII, 2018
В статье рассматривается древнеармянское слово слово pʿetowr
‘перо’, которое традиционно связываю... more В статье рассматривается древнеармянское слово слово pʿetowr ‘перо’, которое традиционно связываются с *pe/ot-r̥, род. п. *pet-n- ‘крыло; перо’. Показывается, что данная этимологии формально слаба и стоит предпочесть альтернативное решение, а именно связь с глаголом pʿetem ‘вырывать; выдергивать (волосы, перья)’.
In this paper, I examine three Vedic stems: vār-, udán-, and udaká-, meaning ‘water’, in the li... more In this paper, I examine three Vedic stems: vār-, udán-, and udaká-, meaning ‘water’, in the light of the hypothesis that vār- and udán- formed a suppletive paradigm in Vedic and reflect two related PIE forms, *u̯e/oh1r and *ud-en-. According to this view, formulated by M. de Vaan and A. Lubotsky, vār- reflects the old PIE heteroclitical nom.-acc. form *u̯od-r and udán reflects the oblique stem *ud-en- ‘water’, because of the conditioned sound change *d > *h1 in PIE. My research shows that, while vār- and udán- could indeed form a suppletive paradigm in Vedic, they are probably unrelated on the PIE level. The meaning of the independent noun *u̯e/oh1r was ‘wet, moist’, and all attested meanings of its derivatives could develop from this semantics, among them Avestan vāra- ‘rain’; Latin ūrīnor, ūrīnāri ‘to plunge under water, dive’, ūrīna ‘urine’; Old Irish fír ‘milky; milk (gloss)’, Old Welsh gwir-awt ‘strong drink’; Old Norse úr ‘drizzle’, Ols English úrig- ‘dewy’ (in compounds); Old Prussian wurs ‘pond’ etc. A remarkable parallel for such semantic development can be found in Slavic: reflexes of the Proto-Slavic noun *moča / *močь ‘wet, moist’ have the meanings ‘wet, moist’, ‘rain’, ‘rainy weather’, ‘marsh, swamp’, ‘urine’ etc. It is further established that the unusual phonetic appearance of *u̯e/oh1r- is insufficient reason to analyze it as containing the root *u̯eh1- and the suffix *-r; the same can be said of PIE *i̯eh1r- ‘year’. Finally, I analyze the assumed sound change *d > *h1, listing the most significant cases, and conclude that these examples are not fully convincing, while the phonetic conditioning of this sound change is obscure. According to these data, the correlation between the stems vār-, udán- and udaká- can be described as follows: the regular heteroclitic nominative-accusative #vā̆dar was lost and supplemented by the similar nominative-accusative vār- /váar/ ‘wet, moist; rain’. The latter received the meaning ‘water’ but retained its earlier meanings ‘wet, moist’ and ‘rain’ in several cases. Later both vār- and udán- were replaced by the noun udaká- ‘water’, which was the cognate of udán- and became the basic word for ‘water’ as early as the Atharvaveda.
В статье рассматривается праиндоевропейский корень *ku̯sep- ‘ночь’, реконструируемый на основании... more В статье рассматривается праиндоевропейский корень *ku̯sep- ‘ночь’, реконструируемый на основании таких форм, как хетт. išpant- ‘ночь’, др.-инд. kṣap-, авест. xšap-, xšapan-, xšapar- ‘ночь’; греч. ψέφας ‘тьма’. Рассмотрение хеттских слов с рефлексами триконсонантных начальных кластеров показывает, что развитие *CsC- > *sC- в хеттском не является стандартным. Этот факт делает спорной традиционную этимологию išpant-.
Также в статье показывается, что соответстие и.-ир. p ~ греч. φ является проблемным, что также может свидетельствовать в пользу того, что что и.-ир. *kšap- является изолированной основой неизвестного происхождения.
Abstract. This paper examines three etymologies of Proto-Slavic *xudъ. They are the traditional e... more Abstract. This paper examines three etymologies of Proto-Slavic *xudъ. They are the traditional etymology proposed by A.A. Potebnya and H. Pedersen according to which this word is connected with OI kṣudrá- ‘small’, the hypothesis of V.V. Ivanov who connects *xudъ with Ossetic
fyd / fud ‘bad, evil’ and also the assumption of A.S. Melnichuk who believed that *xudъ is at first to be compared with Proto-Slavic *xylъ. The paper shows that the traditional etymology cannot be accepted because of semantics, and the version of V.V. Ivanov is phonetically impossible. It means that comparison of *xudъ and *xylъ is the most probable solution.
Key words: etymology, Proto-Slavic, loanword, semantic reconstruction, semantic change, phonetic substitution.
На какой стадии развития права находились древние греки в архаическую эпоху? В какой степени можн... more На какой стадии развития права находились древние греки в архаическую эпоху? В какой степени можно реконструировать данную систему и ее истоки? В данной монографии предпринята попытка описания древнегреческой системы возмездия гомеровского времени на фоне имеющихся микенских данных и предполагаемой праиндоевропейской ситуации. В ней рассмотрена семантика корней индоевропейского праязыка, связанных с возмездием. В книге также представлены результаты исследования текстов, написанных Линейным письмом Б и посвящённых судам и наказанию. В монографии выявлены взаимосвязи между гомеровскими терминами возмездия и реконструирована система наказания в гомеровское время.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0060 In this paper, we present a new reconstruction of Indo-Eur... more https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0060 In this paper, we present a new reconstruction of Indo-European phylogeny based on thirteen 110-item basic wordlists for protolanguages of IE subgroups (Proto-Germanic, Proto-Slavic, etc.) or ancient languages of the corresponding subgroups (Hittite, Ancient Greek, etc.). We apply reasonably formal techniques of linguistic data collection and post-processing (onomasiological reconstruction, derivational drift elimination, homoplastic optimization) that have been recently proposed or specially developed for the present study. We use sequential phylogenetic workflow and obtain a consensus tree based on several algorithms (Bayesian inference, maximum parsimony, neighbor joining; without topological constraints applied). The resulting tree topology and datings are entirely compatible with established expert views. Our main finding is the multifurcation of the Inner IE clade into four branches ca. 3357-2162 BC: (1) Greek-Armenian, (2) Albanian, (3) Italic-Germanic-Celtic, (4) Balto-Slavic-Indo-Iranian. The proposed radiation scenario may be reconciled with diverse opinions on Inner IE branchings previously expressed by Indo-Europeanists.
Uploads
tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly’. Since 19th century, these words are compared
to PIE *pet- ‘to fly; to fall’ and its derivatives in other languages.
I adduce additional semantic and derivational arguments in favor of the
direct derivation pʿetowr ‘feather’ < Armenian pʿetem ‘to pluck (esp. hair,
feathers), fleece’. This derivation has parallels in such Baltic formations as
Lituanian plùnksna ‘feather’ and Old Prussian plauxdine ‘vederbette
(Federbett); feather bed’. The suffix -owr can be also found in the word
mrowr ‘dregs, sediment, faeces; slime, mud’.
Researchers usually compare the word tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly’ and
such related word as tʿitʿeṙn ‘butterfly’ with Greek πέτομαι ‘to fly’, πτερόν
‘feather; wing’, Old Indic pátati ‘to fly; to fall’ and other words derived
from *pet- ‘to fly; to fall’. However, it is necessary to reconstruct a strange
protoform *pt-ēr-s or *pt-ēr-n for Armenian which is even weaker if
πτερόν is not related and corresponds to Proto-Slavic *pero- ‘feather’.
I propose another etymology. Arm. tʿrčʿim can be derived from *tērs,
an altered form of the root *tres- ‘to shake’; Latin terreō ‘to frighten; to
terrify’ can represent a similar formation (from *tors- with secondary
vocalism). The primary meaning should be ‘tremble’, ‘shiver’ with semantic
change to ‘flutter’ and then to ‘fly’. Such cognate Armenian lexemes as
tʿitʿeṙn ‘butterfly’, tʿṙtʿṙem, aor. tʿṙtʿṙeсʿi ‘to flutter; to flap; to fly about’,
tʿrtʿṙem, aor. tʿrtʿṙeсʿi ‘to vibrate; to tremble’, prove these semantic
peculiarities. It is also remarkable that in many Indo-European languages
the basic words with the meaning ‘to fly’ are derived from other motion
verbs; one of them is Proto-Slavic *letěti related to Lith. lekiù, lė̃kti ‘to fly’,
lakstýti ‘to flutter’, Latvian lèkt, ‘jump’, OHG lecken ‘jump’
‘перо’, которое традиционно связываются с *pe/ot-r̥, род. п. *pet-n-
‘крыло; перо’. Показывается, что данная этимологии формально слаба и стоит предпочесть альтернативное решение, а именно связь с глаголом pʿetem ‘вырывать; выдергивать (волосы, перья)’.
Также в статье показывается, что соответстие и.-ир. p ~ греч. φ является проблемным, что также может свидетельствовать в пользу того, что что и.-ир. *kšap- является изолированной основой неизвестного происхождения.
fyd / fud ‘bad, evil’ and also the assumption of A.S. Melnichuk who believed that *xudъ is at first to be compared with Proto-Slavic *xylъ. The paper shows that the traditional etymology cannot be accepted because of semantics, and the version of V.V. Ivanov is phonetically impossible. It means that comparison of *xudъ and *xylъ is the most probable solution.
Key words: etymology, Proto-Slavic, loanword, semantic reconstruction, semantic change, phonetic substitution.
tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly’. Since 19th century, these words are compared
to PIE *pet- ‘to fly; to fall’ and its derivatives in other languages.
I adduce additional semantic and derivational arguments in favor of the
direct derivation pʿetowr ‘feather’ < Armenian pʿetem ‘to pluck (esp. hair,
feathers), fleece’. This derivation has parallels in such Baltic formations as
Lituanian plùnksna ‘feather’ and Old Prussian plauxdine ‘vederbette
(Federbett); feather bed’. The suffix -owr can be also found in the word
mrowr ‘dregs, sediment, faeces; slime, mud’.
Researchers usually compare the word tʿrčʿim, aorist tʿṙeay ‘to fly’ and
such related word as tʿitʿeṙn ‘butterfly’ with Greek πέτομαι ‘to fly’, πτερόν
‘feather; wing’, Old Indic pátati ‘to fly; to fall’ and other words derived
from *pet- ‘to fly; to fall’. However, it is necessary to reconstruct a strange
protoform *pt-ēr-s or *pt-ēr-n for Armenian which is even weaker if
πτερόν is not related and corresponds to Proto-Slavic *pero- ‘feather’.
I propose another etymology. Arm. tʿrčʿim can be derived from *tērs,
an altered form of the root *tres- ‘to shake’; Latin terreō ‘to frighten; to
terrify’ can represent a similar formation (from *tors- with secondary
vocalism). The primary meaning should be ‘tremble’, ‘shiver’ with semantic
change to ‘flutter’ and then to ‘fly’. Such cognate Armenian lexemes as
tʿitʿeṙn ‘butterfly’, tʿṙtʿṙem, aor. tʿṙtʿṙeсʿi ‘to flutter; to flap; to fly about’,
tʿrtʿṙem, aor. tʿrtʿṙeсʿi ‘to vibrate; to tremble’, prove these semantic
peculiarities. It is also remarkable that in many Indo-European languages
the basic words with the meaning ‘to fly’ are derived from other motion
verbs; one of them is Proto-Slavic *letěti related to Lith. lekiù, lė̃kti ‘to fly’,
lakstýti ‘to flutter’, Latvian lèkt, ‘jump’, OHG lecken ‘jump’
‘перо’, которое традиционно связываются с *pe/ot-r̥, род. п. *pet-n-
‘крыло; перо’. Показывается, что данная этимологии формально слаба и стоит предпочесть альтернативное решение, а именно связь с глаголом pʿetem ‘вырывать; выдергивать (волосы, перья)’.
Также в статье показывается, что соответстие и.-ир. p ~ греч. φ является проблемным, что также может свидетельствовать в пользу того, что что и.-ир. *kšap- является изолированной основой неизвестного происхождения.
fyd / fud ‘bad, evil’ and also the assumption of A.S. Melnichuk who believed that *xudъ is at first to be compared with Proto-Slavic *xylъ. The paper shows that the traditional etymology cannot be accepted because of semantics, and the version of V.V. Ivanov is phonetically impossible. It means that comparison of *xudъ and *xylъ is the most probable solution.
Key words: etymology, Proto-Slavic, loanword, semantic reconstruction, semantic change, phonetic substitution.