Bomhard - The Placing of the Anatolian Languages

7/28/2019 Bomhard - The Placing of the Anatolian Languages

1/43

CENTRE INTERNATIONAL DE DIALECTOLOGIE GENERALEDE L'UNIVERSITE CATHOLIQUE NEERLANDAISE

DE LOUVAIN

ORB ISBulletin international de Documentation linguistiqueFonde en 1952 et dirige de 1952 il 1960 par

SEVER POP

Tome XXV, N 2, 1976

EXTRAIT

The Placing of the Anatolian Languages.

PAR

Allan R. BoMHARD.

LOUVAINCENTRE INTERNATIONAL DE DIALECTOLOGIE GENERALE

Redaction et AdministrationBlijde lnkomststraat 21.


2/43

i

The Placing of the Anatolian Languages.Abstract. - T h e exact relationship of the Anatolian languages to theother Indo-European daughter languages is clarified. Phonological evidence is presented to show that Proto-Anatolian can only be derived from

an earlier form of the parent language, " Pitch Indo-European ". Theentire phonemic jinventory of the various Anatolian languages is considered. Morphological issues are generally not discussed.I. Introduction.

I.I. The Anatolian languages differ so much in their general structurefrom the other Indo-European languages such as Sanskrit, Greek, andLatin, for example, that they cannot possibly be derived from the sameform of Indo-European as the other daughter languages. This fact haslong been recognized and has generated a great deal of controversy asan ever-expanding number of scholars have tried to determine the exactrelationship of the Anatolian languages to the Non-Anatolian IndoEuropean languages. The following is a summary of the thoughts ofseveral leading scholars on this subject:

A. STURTEVANT (1942: 23f.), developing an idea of Emil FoRRER,held that Proto-Anatolian and Proto-Indo-European weresister languages, whose common ancestor he called " IndoHittite ". In the second edition of his Comparative GrammarJj the Hittite Language, STURTEVANT details the evidenceupon which the " Indo-Hittite Theory " is based. This theoryhas now been mostly abandoned (cf. PUHVEL 1966: 235f.),though recently Warren CoWGILL (1972 and 1974) has advanced new evidence in its favor.

B. BuRROW (1973: 17f.) has proposed that two separate stagesof Indo-European be recognized: I) Early Indo-European


3/43

200 A. R. BOMHARDand 2) Late Indo-European. He would derive the Anatolianlanguages from Early Indo-European and the other daughterlanguages from Late Indo-European.

C. GEORGIEV (1966: 347. and 382f.) maintains that the Anatolian languages belonged to one of many Indo-Europeandialect groups situated in Eastern Europe and WesternTurkey in the 6th-4th millennia B.C. As a result of theirisolated geographical location in Western Turkey, the Anatolian languages had undergone a long period of relativelyindependent development by the time they entered intorecorded history in the 2oth century B.C. According to GEOR-GIEV, it is this period of isolation that accounts both for thepreservation of archaisms and for the many innovationsfound in the Anatolian languages.

1.2. In my article entitled " An Outline of the Historical Phonologyof Indo-European ", I established that the Indo-European parentlanguage passed through four distinct periods of development: 1) thephonemic stress stage, 2) the phonemic pitch stage, 3) Late IndoEuropean, and 4) Disintegrating Indo-European. I mentioned in 45of that article that the Anatolian languages probably became separatedfrom the main speech community at the end of the phonemic pitchstage of Indo-European. I based this statement on phonological considerations, which I simply stated without elaboration.

In the present article, I will substantiate my derivation of ProtoAnatolian from Pitch Indo-European. In so doing, I will also providesupport for many of the assertions about the development of the IndoEuropean phonemic system that I made in my previous article.

In order to gain a better understanding of the Anatolian developments,it is necessary to begin by reviewing the Indo-European developments.

2. Pitch Indo-European.2.1. The Pitch Indo-European phonemic system may be reconstructed

as follows (cf. BoMHARD 1975: 4.1):A. Consonants :

b p d ts

B. Vowels:

g kIJy X

a i ua z u

G qqh


4/43

THE PLACING OF THE ANATOLIAN LANGUAGES 201c. Resonants:

ywmnlr

2.2. Notes:A. p, t, k, and q can have non-phonemic aspirated allophones

(cf. BOMHARD 1975: 3.9).B. G, q, and q are pronounced with lip-rounding (cf. BOMHARD

1975: 39).C. f, k, and q are glottalized stops ft', k', q'f (cf. BoMHARD

19J5: 3.9).D. During the phonemic pitch stage of Indo-European, stress

was phonemically non-distinctive. High pitch had replacedstress as the suprasegmental marker of morphologicallyimportant syllables. There was a contrast between morphologically distinctive syllables with full-grade vowel and highpitch and morphologically non-distinctive syllables withfull-grade vowel and low pitch. Cf. BoMHARD 1975 : 34 35 3.6, 37 44 55 and 5.6 for details about thedevelopment of vowel gradation. See also BURROW 1973:108f. ; HIRT 1921 : 172f. ; LEHMANN 1952: 109f. ; ScHMITT-BRANDT 1967: 124f.

E. The vowels a and a had front allophones under high pitchand back allophones under low pitch (cf. BoMHARD 1975: 44).

3 Late Indo-European.3.1. Pitch Indo-European was followed by Late Indo-European. Late

Indo-European had the following phonemes (cf. BOMHARD 1975: 5.1):A. Consonants:

b p d t g k G q! ~ qs ')' X h

B. Vowels:e 0 a i ue. o a ., . u

c. Resonants:l

[ ~u 1ft ?;t l

~ ]w m n r lm n


5/43

202 A. R. BOMBARD

3.2. Notes:A. Vowel quality replaced accentuation as the primary internalgrammatical morpheme as the front and back allophones

of a and a became phonemic (cf. BoMBARD 1975: 5.4).B. g, k, and ~ developed palatalized allophones when they werecontiguous with front vowels and with apophonic o (cf. BoM-

BARD 1975: 57; GEORGIEV 1966: 21f.; MEILLET 1964:gif.).4 Proto-Anatolian.

4.1. Proto-Anatolian phonemic system:A. Vowels: e a i u

e. a. ~ . uB. Semivowels: y wc. Nasals and Liquids: m n l 1'D. Stops: p kE. Sibilant: sF. Laryngeal: X

4.2. Notes:A. Pitch IE d ) PAn. e, and Pitch IE d ) PAn. e exceptwhen contiguous with the laryngeals h and x (cf. 6.1 and 6.3 for examples. See also 7.2).B. The back allophone of a remained sub-phonemic in Anatolian.There is no evidence that Pitch IE a ) PAn. o (cf. 6.2 and

6.4 for examples. See also 7.3).C. The voiced stops are devoiced, and the glottalized stops are

deglottalized (cf. 11.1):b p d t I g k ~ G q qv/ "'V "'V "'Vp k kwfu

D. The syllabic resonants 1p, v. ~ rbecome am, an, al, ar respectively (cf. 8.3, 8.6, 8.8, and 8.10 for examples. Seealso g).

E. Final m ) n (cf. 8.5).F. Pitch IE a i) PAn. i, and Pitch IE au) PAn. u (cf. 6.g, 6.10, 6.II).G. The laryngeals ;J and h are lost in Anatolian (cf. 12.10).H. x and 'Y merge into x (cf. 12.1).


6/43

THE PLACING OF THE ANATOLIAN LANGUAGES 203

5. Development of the Proto-Anatolian phonemes.PAn. Hittite Written Form Palaic Luwian Lyciane e; i e; i a a ea a a a a a; e; e; a8 . e; i e; i i i ?a a a a a ?i i i, e i i iu u U, U u u ui . i i ? ? ?u u U, U ? ? ?y y i, y, iy, yy y y yw w U,U, W,UW,UW w w w; b- - m m(m) m m mn n n(n) n n n; -a; -e; -iil l l( l) l l lr 1' r(r) r r rp p p(p), b(b) p p p; bt t; ts t(t), d(d); z(z) t t t; dk k k(k), g(g), q(q) k ;x k; x; 0- k; g; 0-kwfu kwfu k(k)u kwfu kwfu t; ks s; ts sm; z(z) s s; ts s; hX X !J(!J) X X x;g;q

s.I. Notes on Hittite (cf. KRONASSER 1956: 3Sf.; STURTEVANT 1951:2gf.):A. Originally, PAn. e ) Hitt. e. However, in the form of Hittitespoken about 1300 B.C., e seems to have become i.B. The cuneiform syllabary does not indicate vowel length.C. x is lost when final (cf. 12.6) and initially before w whenanother x follows in the word (cf. 12.5).D. The clusters mn and nm ) m(m).E. The cluster tn ) n(n).F. t ) ts (written z[z]) before i or e except after s (cf. 6.3A

and 6.3C).G. s ) ts (written z) after n (cf. 8.6).H. IE !y- ) s- (written s-) initially (cf. BENVENISTE 1962: 8f.and 1o.sC).

5.2. Notes on Palaic (cf. CARRUBA 1970: 39f.):A. Pal. a corresponds to Hitt. efi as well as to Hitt. a.B. Medial k ) x (written !J) in a number of words.C. The cluster tn ) n(n).


7/43

204 A. R. BOMHARD53 Notes on Luwian (cf. LAROCHE 1959: 132f.):

A. Luw. a corresponds to Hitt. efi as well as to Hitt. a. Palaic(cf. 5.2A) and Hier. Luwian also have a where Hittite hasefi. However, see 7.2.B. A Luwian word can only end in one of the following: -a, -i,-u, -s, -n, -l, -r.

C. n is often dropped before t and ts (written z).D. s ) ts (written z) after l and n.E. Hitt. initial kefki- corresponds to Luw. i- in several words(cf. 10.7B).F. Medial k ) x (written !J) in a number of words. This changeis also found in Palaic (cf. 5.2B).G. There are several examples of the loss of x (written !J) before

-u- and -w-.5+ Notes on Lycian (cf. BENVENISTE 1952: 206; GEORGIEV 1966:

229f.; NEUMANN 1969: 373f.):A. Lycian had the following sounds: a, e, i, u; a, e (nasalizedvowels); y, w; m, n, l, r; p, b; t, d, 8; k, g, q; s, z; h; x ({1, 'T, K).B. b, d, g were probably the fricatives [ ~ ] , [a], [y] respectively.C. m, n, and r could be used both as syllabics and non-syllabics.When m and n were syllabic, they were written m and it

respectively.D. Luw. a ) Lye. e (cf. 7.2).E. p, t, k, and x sometimes have voiced fricative allophones (cf. 11.1).F. Labiovelars are delabialized.

6. Examples of the vowels.6.1. Pitch IE a) PAn. e ) Hitt. efi, Pal. Luw. Hier. a:

A. Hitt. 3 sg. pres. eszi " is " festsif; Pal. 3 sg. pret. e-es-ta" was" (probably a Hittitism, cf. CARRUBA 1970: 52}, 3 sg.impv. a-as-du (= Hitt. eSdu festuf); Luw. 3 sg. pret. a-as-ta" was " (= Hitt. esta festaf) ; Hier. 3 sg. pres. asti " is "(= Hitt. eszi festsif, OHitt. esti festif); Lye. 3 sg. pres.essti "is", 3 sg. pret. esste "was"


8/43

THE PLACING OF THE ANATOLIAN LANGUAGES 2051959 : 32f. ; MERIGGI 1962 : 34. ; POKORNY 1959 : 340. *es" to be"; STURTEVANT 1951: 56 IH *'esty.B. Hitt. 3 sg. pres. weriyazi " calls, names " fweryatsi/; Pal.3 sg. pres. u-e-er-ti "says, calls" < PAn. *wer- Gk. e'lpw " I say, speak ". Cf. BoMHARD 1973: 3; CAR-RUBA 1970 : 76; FRIEDRICH 1952 : 252 ; PoKORNY 1959 :n62f. *1Jer- "to say, speak".

C. Hitt. I sg. pres. edmi " I eat" fetmif


9/43

206 A. R. BOMHARD*sponte ) Lat. spondeo " to promise solemnly ". C. also Gk.cndvSw " to pour out a drink-offering ". Cf. FRIEDRICH 1952:193f. ; POKORNY 1959: 989 *spend- " to pour out a drinkoffering"; STURTEVANT 1951: 58.

D. Hitt. gen. sg. !Jannas " grandmother " fxanas/; Lye. xnna" grandmother " < PAn. *xanas " grandmother " < Pitch IE*xanas) Late IE *xanos) Common Disintegrating IE *hanos)Arm. han " grandmother " ; Lat. anus " old woman ". C.FRIEDRICH 1952: so; GEORGIEV 1966: 230; PoKORNY 1959:36. *an- "old woman, ancestor"; STURTEVANT 1951: 66IH *xenos; WINTER 1965a: 102.

E. Hitt. ta " then, next " ftaf; Hier. tas " this, that " < PAn.*ta-


10/43

I .

I THE PLACING OF THE ANATOLIAN LANGUAGES 207383; CARRUBA I970: 73; KRONASSER I956: I I ] ; MEILLETI964: 323 dat. sg. ending *-oi; MERIGGI I962: 60; STURTEVANT I95I: I33a.

6.5. Pitch IE i) PAn. i) Hitt. Pal. Luw. Hier. i :Hitt. kui "who? " fkwisf, kuit "what? " fkwitf; Pal.kuis; Luw. ku-is; Lye. ti-; Lyd. qis, qid


11/43


12/43

THE PLACING OF THE ANATOLIAN LANGUAGES 209slowly becoming more and more different from the rest of the IndoEuropean speech community (cf. GEORGIEV 1966: 347f.; STURTEVANT1942: 23f.). In like manner, the Non-Anatolian dialects developed theirown peculiarities. Moreover, since they remained in close geographicalproximity, a certain amount of parallel development must have takenplace in them even after they had begun to be mutually unintelligible(cf. MEILLET 1964: 423f.). Therefore, though individual differences exist,the Non-Anatolian daughter languages share many similarities as agroup.None of the known daughter languages preserves the original systemof vowel gradation without modification. Fortunately, however, enoughof the old patterns remain so that that system can be reconstructed witha reasonable amount of certainty.

7.2. Even though Palaic, Luwian, and Hieroglyphic Luwian a corresponds to Hittite efi in the vast majority of cases, there are severalexamples where these languages have efi as in Hittite: r) Luw. dat.sg. 1i-i-ti " to the water " : Hitt. dat.-loc. sg. weteni " in the water " PAn. -e C- and Pitch IE -ahC- >PAn. -a C-.

8.2. Pitch IE w > PAn. w > Hitt. Pal. Luw. Hier. w:Hitt. 2 pl. impv. westin "clothe yourself! " jwestinj; Luw.3 pl. pres. wa-as-sa-an-ti " they clothe " < PAn. *wes-

Date post:	03-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	allan-bomhard
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

Bomhard - The Placing of the Anatolian Languages

Documents