Indo-European languages outside of Europe: - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Indo-European languages outside of Europe:

Euphratic

28 Oct. 2014Slide2
Slide3

The Issues

When did the Indo-European (i.e. Indo-Anatolian)

continuum

end?

Alternatively, when did Indo-European

migrations

begin?

Where was the (final) Indo-European

homeland

?

How early are Indo-European languages

attested

?

How likely is it that some migrations have gone undetected?

Can

loanwords

be used as evidence?

Does Mesopotamia offer a pertinent case study? Slide4

The Sumerian Question

What do we know, or can surmise, about the early

linguistic landscape

of Mesopotamia?

From what period on are

Sumerians

present in Mesopotamia?

Are they the

original inhabitants

of Southern Mesopotamia?

Was the linguistic landscape of Mesopotamia in

the 4

th

millennium B.C.

less complex than in later periods?

If the Sumerians were not the only or earliest population, what

other speech communities

may have been present or have preceded them? Slide5

Relevant Evidence

Names

, especially place names

Lexical

data

Elements in the

writing

system

References

in written documents

The

language

of written documents Slide6

Place Names

Landsberger

(1974 [1944]):

“

None

of the ancient cities had a Sumerian name”

Edzard

(2003):

“It cannot be excluded that, within Mesopotamia proper,

Sumerian had neighbours who spoke a language – or

languages – […] which left their

traces

in Sumerian

proper names (gods, places) and vocabulary”

Michalowski (2005):

“

One must admit, however, that

most of the toponyms

in

Southern Mesopotamia are neither Sumerian nor Semitic”

Slide7

Lexical Data

Landsberger

(1974 [1944]):

lists 30 alleged polysyllabic technical loans, including

one brewing term, from a suspected

substrate

Salonen

(1968):

assigns polysyllabic terms to

loanword strata

on basis

of meaning and ending

Civil (1996):

“practically all”

brewing terms are “foreign”

Rubio (1999):

“

all”

brewing terms are “foreign” Slide8

Syllable Structure in Sumerian

Monosyllabic or polysyllabic?

Edzard

(

2003)

and others have

sharply criticized what he calls

the

“

monosyllabic myth”

Phonotactic

structure

of Sumerian (Whittaker

2005)

:

Category A: mono- and

sesquisyllabic

terms

Category B: polysyllabic

In

the

Ninmešara

of

Enheduanak

(ca. 2285-2250 B.C.):

Category

A: 810 words

Category

B:

54

words

(incl. names, loans

) Slide9

Phonotactic Circularity

Rubio

(1999):

claims

Landsberger’s

šidim

‘mason’ has a

“

well-attested

Sumerian

pattern”

but fails to

note

that

silim

‘peace’

(

from Akkadian) does,

too

Edzard

(2003

) dismisses

the “monosyllabic myth” but states:

“

divine names such as

Nanše

or

ĝ

atumdu

…

may

belong

to

a substratum … because these

names

defy

all

efforts to

explain

them by way

of

Sumerian etymology

”, failing to

notice

that

it

is their polysyllabic shape that disturbs

him

Slide10

Potential Loanwords in Sumerian

Polysyllabic, yet morphologically

unsegmentable

:

hanzalub

‘reed pulp’

Medial

cluster

:

uktin

‘appearance; facial features’

Disharmonic vowels

(subject to vowel harmony):

tabira

‘joiner; artisan’ >

tibira

Multiple

variants

:

lu

-um-

gi

~

lu

-un-

ga

~

ni

-in-

gi

-in

‘brewer’

uk-ra

~

u

2

-še-ra

‘reed bundle’ Slide11

Elements in the Writing System

Early signs with

phonetic values

lacking motivation in Sumerian

Sign order

not consistent with Sumerian word order

Early

sign compounds or groups

unexplainable within Sumerian

Lack of correspondence between

sign usage

in proto-cuneiform and historical Sumerian documents Slide12

Where the Debate Stands

Englund

(2007: 5-6):

“

The discussion about the ‘Sumerian Question’

continues

,

at

least in my mind, and has taken a

rough

edge of late,

the

more so with publication

of

contributions to a Leiden

Rencontre

that,

particularly

with contributions by Rubio

and

Wilcke

, added

wild speculation

to the fairly

stale

list

of

‘proofs’ that Sumerian

phoneticisms

were

a clear element

in

Late

Uruk

documents.

”Slide13

Dass

nicht

sein

kann

,

was

nicht

sein

darf

Rubio (1999) mocked:

“Indo-European

before

the Indo-Europeans”

Melchert

(

n.d.

, “The Position of Anatolian,” 1

st

draft)

:

“

Suffice it to say that I find most of the claimed instances

of lexical borrowing [in

Gamkrelidze

and

Ivanov

1995]

wholly unconvincing

, […

]. There is even less merit to the

claims of

Whittaker (1998 and elsewhere) of

an Indo

- European “

substrate”

[sic] in Sumerian. For a detailed

refutation

of his

proposal

see Rubio 2005

.”

Cf.

Melchert

(1998) on an unrelated matter:

“I would like to see a genuine debate on this issue, not a

summary

dismissal based on …

prejudice

”

Slide14

Euphratic and the

Euphrateans

Scenario 1a:

A pre-Sumerian language

and population

(present by the

mid-4

th

millennium B.C

. at the latest,

and a Sumerian-period substrate or

superstrate

)

Scenario 1b: Or

a Sumerian-period

superstrate

from the beginning of

Uruk

IV (ca. 3400-3100 B.C.) onwards

Scenario 2: Involved in the so-called

Uruk

expansion

(ca. 3700-3200 B.C.) and thus responsible for early

Indo-European loanwords in Egyptian and Semitic

Scenario 3: Influenced or initiated the development of

proto-cuneiform

(ca.

3400-2900

B.C.)

Slide15
Slide16

Gender

Is there any

evidence for gender

in

Euphratic

?

If so, was it an

animate-inanimate

opposition,

as in Anatolian?

Or was there a further differentiation of animate

into

masculine and feminine

?

Sumerian preserves a series of polysyllabic (mostly disyllabic)

terms ending in

–ah

Slide17

Terms in -ah

Almost all of these are

nouns

:

nerah

‘snake;

Nerah

(god);

Nerah

(city)’

But there is also an

adjective

:

dara

4

(h)

‘dark-

coloured

, dark red’

(cf. Old Sumerian

derih

in sign name

derihum

at Ebla)

Thus, concord indicating the

presence of (feminine) gender Slide18

Case Marking

Singular

Nominative

(

-s

,

-

os

):

semed

‘(value of sign ONE)’ <

*

sem

-s

‘one’

lugud

‘pus (written BLOOD+WHITE)’ <

*

louk

-

ó

-s

‘bright’

lugud

2

‘miscarriage’ <

*

lóg

h

-o-s

‘childbirth’

lugud

4

‘place to put things’ <

*

lóg

h

-o-s

‘storage place’

Accusative

(-

i

-m

, -

o-m

, -

eh

2

-m

):

gilim

2

‘rat (Old Sum., Ebla); mongoose’ <

*glh

1

-i-m

‘rodent’

aktum

‘garment’ <

*h

2

nt-ko-m

‘garment, cloak’

anzam

‘large drinking vessel’ <

*h

2

ens-eh

2

-m

‘strap handle’

Vocative

(-

e

):

lu

-bi/be

2

‘o dear, o darling’ <

*

léub

h

-e

‘o dear, o darling’ Slide19

Case Marking

Plural

Locative

(

-

su

):

apsu

‘subterranean waters (used in divine epithets such as

‘child of the waters’; ‘king of the waters’)’

<

*h

2

ep-su

‘in the waters’ (cf. Vedic divine epithets ‘child in

the waters’; ‘king in the waters’)

Instrumental

(-

b

h

i

):

-BI

‘(Old Sum. scribal convention for

-da

with instrumental/

comitative

plural)’ <

*-

b

h

i

‘(instr. pl.)’ Slide20

EYE(der.) (

IGIgunû

)

sig

7

‘(phonetic value)’ <

*

sek

w

- ‘follow’ (cf. Germ.

see

)

agar

4

/

ugur

2

/

ukur

5

‘(phonetic values)’ <

*h

3

ok

w

- ‘eye’

imma

3

‘physiognomy, (facial) features’ <

*h

2

im

- ‘copy’

(cf. Hittite

himma

- ‘imitation, substitute, replica’ <

*h

2

im

-

no

-

?;

Lat.

imāgō

‘image’) Slide21

EYE(der.)+FORM

(

IGIgunû.ALAN

)

uktin

‘appearance, facial features’ <

*h

3

k

w

-

ti

-

m

(acc.) ‘appearance;

expression; sight’

ulutim

2

/

ulutin

2

‘appearance, form, facial features’ <

*

wl

-

ti

-m

(acc.)

‘appearance, facial features’

(cf.

ulutim

/

ulutin

‘written notice, notice of intentions’

<

*wlh

1

-ti

-

m

(acc.) ‘wishes’) Slide22

NAIL/CLAW

umbin

‘nail, claw’ <

*h

3

ng

wh

- ‘nail, claw’

umbin

‘(container for animal fat)’ <

*h

3

ng

w

-en-

‘fat, salve’

umbin

‘wheel’ <

*h

3

nb

h

-

en-

‘navel’ Slide23

DUNG

šed

6

‘shit’ <

*

skeid

- ‘shit (vb.)’

šurum

‘dung, droppings’ <

*

skor

-(o-m)

‘shit, dung’