Re: Proto-Languages Question
|From:||Elliott Lash <erelion12@...>|
|Date:||Friday, September 24, 2004, 20:30|
I will reply to this on Sunday night or Monday
afternoon, since I have little time right now and I'm
not going to be around over the weekend.
But i liked this post anyways!
--- Rob Haden <magwich78@...> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:55:43 -0700, Elliott Lash
> >Hello All,
> > Well, I have 4 main related languages, as some of
> >may know: Classical Nindic, West Nindic
> >Silindion and Essamea. The entire family is called
> > Classic Nindic and Hinession form what is known as
> >the Northern Nindic branch of Nindic a sub-branch
> >Silinestic. The other language is South Nindic,
> >forms the Southern Nindic branch.
> > Silindion and Essamea, along with two others,
> >Lannelka and South Silic (which are not so defined)
> >form the Silic sub-branch of Silinestic.
> > They all use the same roots and from them derive
> >identical or similar words. The grammar of all the
> >languages is derived from the common source, but
> >to go in different directions, as you might
> >The problem I'm having is...knowing the grammar of
> >the daughter's, I'm not too certain about what the
> >definitive grammar of Silinestic is. I'll give an
> >example, to hopefully show what I mean.
> >"He gave sharp swords and broad shields to the
> I think it should be "heroes," since you gloss the
> word as a plural below.
> >Nâ vasan nherchein nechver ha rhesein cas penos
> It seems like Hinession underwent a second shift in
> >Cl. Nindic:
> >Ethed naw herchín ethaen bo rhedd cath noth i
> It seems that both Cl. Nindic and Hinession actually
> preserve accusative *-
> n. With Cl. Nindic 'rhedd', perhaps the development
> was *rhredn > *rhedd.
> Does 'naw'/'nâ' mean "he"?
> >Anelë kiréin sampi rondeimma kasta i lairohyanu
> I don't see how 'rondeimma' can be from
> >Nelsi kiree sikkie nee rendee kasta sinjänu läirejä
> How can -kk- arise from -pn-?
> >Without giving the interlinears for the daughters,
> >here is what should be reconstructed as the common
> >*anta-ti: (o:) sjarski-j itt-ani: emopod roda-j
> >give-pst (he) sword-pl bite-prp. and shield-pl
> >nods je la:jros-ja
> >unto the hero-pl
> If the original genitive was *-di, perhaps 'emopod'
> preserves it? The
> dative preposition 'nods' seems to be able to be
> analyzed as *nod-s.
> Presumably, this metathesized to *nost giving
> Classical Nindic 'noth'. The
> word for "sword" seems to contain an additional -ski
> >*a-nel-si: kira-j-n sapni naj rodno-j-n
> >AUG-give-pst sword-pl-AC sharp and shield-pl-ACC
> >je la:jros-ja=no:d
> >the hero-pl-to
> >The problem I'm having is how to relate the two
> >proto-languages into one common Silinestic. It
> >like the main differences between Silic and Nindic
> >the stages given above are vocabulary based. So I'm
> >not sure what the original Silinestic vocabulary
> >have been..at least in this case.
> >Anyways, what do you all think?
> > Elliott
> One correspondence between Silic and Nindic seems to
> be S si(:) : N ti(:),
> implying assibilation in Silic. Another one is S ki
> : N sja, implying that
> earlier *ki became palatalized with lowering and
> centralizing of vowel
> quality, giving *kja, and then eventually became
> *sja (cf. Indo-Aryan from
> Indo-European). It's possible that N -ani: in
> 'ittani:' and S -ni (?)
> in 'sapni' are related. Perhaps the roots *itt-
> (source for geminate?) and
> *sap- mean "bite" and "cut," respectively. The
> biggest problem is actually
> the verb: Nindic points to *anta-, while Silic
> points to *nel-. I'm not
> sure how these two can be related, besides both
> containing an /n/.
> - Rob
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!