Topics in Anatolian Historical Grammar Prof. Dr. H. Craig Melchert

More documents

Recommendations

Info

16 Morpurgo Davies, Anna. 1982/1983. Dentals, rhotacism, and verbal endings in the Luwian languages. KZ 96.245-70. Neumann, Günter. 1961. Untersuchungen zum Weiterleben hethitischen und luwischen Sprachgutes in hellenistischer und römischer Zeit. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Oettinger, Norbert. 1979. Die Stammbildung des hethitischen Verbums. Nürnberg: Carl. Pinault, Georges-Jean. 2012. Remarks on PIE amphikinetic and hysterokinetic nouns. In Benedicte Nielsen Whitehead et al. (eds.), The Sound of Indo-European. Phonetics, Phonemics, and Morphophonemics, 399-424. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum. Puhvel, Jaan. 1984. Hittite Etymological Dictionary. Vol. 1. Words beginning with A. Vol. 2. Words beginning with E and I. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton. ——. 1997. Hittite Etymological Dictionary. Vol. 4. Words beginning with K. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton. ——. 2007. Hittite Etymological Dictionary. Vol. 7. Words beginning with N. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. ——. 2011. Hittite Etymological Dictionary. Vol. 8. Words beginning with PA. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Rieken, Elisabeth. 1999. Untersuchungen zur nominalen Stammbildung des Hethitischen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Rosenkranz, Bernhard. 1936. Das griechische Adverbium -ως. KZ 63.241-9. Tischler, Johann. 1983. Hethitisches Etymologisches Glossar. Teil 1 a-k. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck.
H. Craig Melchert University of Siena October 16, 2012 melchert@humnet.ucla.edu Newest Thoughts on The ḫi-Conjugation I. Jasanoff (1979) and (2003: 71&89) posits PIE “h 2 e-conjugation” with orig. acrostatic paradigm (see already Meillet (1916): Present Imperfect/Injunctive 1Sg *mólh 2 -h 2 ei 1Pl *mélh 2 -meH ? *mólh 2 -h 2 e *mélh 2 -meH ? 2Sg *mólh 2 -th 2 ei 2Pl *mélh 2 -(H)e ? *mólh 2 -th 2 e *mélh 2 -(H)e ? 3Sg *mólh 2 -e(sic!) 3Pl *mélh 2 -ti /? *mólh 2 -e(t) ?? *mélh 2 -(s) Paradigm reflected in verb for ‘crushes, grinds’: Hittite malli, mallanzi (1st for mālli*), Lat. molō, OIr. melid, OCS meljo, Goth. malan, Arm. malem. Similarly išpānti, išpantanzi ‘libates’; šākki, šekkanzi ‘knows’ etc. For unpersuasive attempts to derive such forms from PIE perfect or preform thereof see inter al. Eichner (1975), Risch (1975), Cowgill (1979), Kuryłowicz (1979) et al. II. Kloekhorst (2012) makes new attempt to show that e-vocalism in Hittite weak stem is entirely secondary. A. Verbs k(a)rāp-/k(a/i)rēp- ‘devour’ and š(a)rap-/š(a)rep- ‘sip’ show anaptyctic vowel [ɨ] (see already Kloekhorst 2008: 122-3 and 142-3). Supposedly based on similar pattern in mi-verbs teripp- ‘plow’ (/trep-/, /trɨp-/) and wek- ‘ask for’ (/wek-/, /wɨk-/). Non-existent! As shown by parallel case of Hitt. teri- = CLuv. tarri- ‘three’ (< *téri- < *trí-), Hitt. stem is fixed underlying /téripp-/ (strong stem generalized to eliminate allomorphy /téripp-/, */tarp-/). No basis for any alternation in wēk- ‘ask for’ (always ú-e-): thus simply acrostatic *wēkti, wékti (pace Kloekhorst 2008: 996-7). In any case, putative original *ghróbh-, *ghbh- > k(a)rāpi, *karpanzi. No motivation for anaptyxis. Given dominant pattern of descriptive *ó, zero (see below), obvious “repair” could only have been k(a)rāpi, *k(a)rapanzi. No secondary source credible for attested pattern. Must reflect *ghróbhei, *ghrébhti; *sróbhei, *srébhti. NB attested spellings for weak stem are only ka-re-e-pé-er and ka/gi-re-p°. In absence of -ri-i-p° no basis for any reading of re/i sign except /kreb-/. Likewise for ša-re-p°. B. Per Kloekhorst (2012: 153ff.), other e-vocalism in weak stem of ḫi-conjugation verbs began in preterite third plural in analogy to mi-conjugation and then spread subsequently to other parts of the paradigm. On basis of Pres3Pl adanzi : Pret3Pl eter, ašanzi : ešer etc. :: Pres3Pl akkanzi : Pret3Pl eker (replacing aker). Impossible as stated: proportion could only lead to *ekker. Use of other example (e.g. arer → erer) as primary model does not solve basic problem: Pret3Pl of ḫiconjugation originally had strong stem in Hittite: aker ‘died’ (OS), ḫāner ‘drew (liquid) (NS), ḫāšer ‘opened’ (MS) (see Kloekhorst 2012: 154 14 ), ḫāšer ‘gave birth’ (NS); a-re-er ‘arrived’ ambiguous (but cf. Imv2Pl ārten). Part of more general pattern: dai- ‘put’ with older Pret3Pl dāer, dāier, later tiyēr; also naier, nāer to nai- ‘turn’. III. New Account of ḫi-Conjugation Ablaut Pattern A. With Jasanoff (2003: 151) reconstruct also ḫi-conjugation aorist (to telic roots vs. presents to atelic roots, entirely parallel to mi-conjugation). Jasanoff assumes original é-grade throughout plural, just as in the corresponding present above:
Page 1 and 2:
Universität zu Köln Institut für
Page 3 and 4:
2 4. Accented *-u: no certain examp
Page 5 and 6:
4 Melchert 1994: 186-7). NB makes v
Page 7 and 8:
6 ēšta ‘was’ < *h 1 és-t. Ge
Page 9 and 10:
8 References Agbayani, Brian, and C
Page 11 and 12:
10 ——. 2008. The Origin of the
Page 13 and 14: 2 No explanation is offered by Sihl
Page 15 and 16: 4 zarwaniya- ‘of horn’ (C) < *k
Page 17 and 18: 6 requires a preform with fixed mid
Page 19 and 20: 8 no conditioned change of posttoni
Page 21 and 22: 10 contrasting example to prove tha
Page 23 and 24: 12 Appendix: Evidence for Three Set
Page 25 and 26: 14 References Bader, Françoise. 19
Page 27 and 28: 16 Starke, Frank. 1990. Untersuchun
Page 29 and 30: 2 (1) HKM 18:18-20 (MH/MS) nu=mu k
Page 31 and 32: 4 For (“CAPERE”)u-pa- as ‘bri
Page 33 and 34: 6 Appendix 1 Provisional Analysis o
Page 35 and 36: 8 3. /o:/ < *uh 2 wa-šu-u-(ḫa)
Page 37 and 38: 10 Hackstein, Olav. 2007. Ablative
Page 39 and 40: 2 B. Evidence for basic types 1. Op
Page 41 and 42: 4 presents with 3Sg -atär/-etär o
Page 43 and 44: 6 2. Effects of change of state oft
Page 45 and 46: H. Craig Melchert Università di Ro
Page 47 and 48: 3 As to Grk. γέγωνε ‘shout
Page 49 and 50: Hittite ḫi-Verbs of the Type -āC
Page 51 and 52: 3 would like to attribute the alter
Page 53 and 54: 5 wappu- ‘river-bank’ reflects
Page 55 and 56: 7 totally exclude laḫḫiya- < l
Page 57 and 58: 9 *n e h 2 - > naḫḫ-. However,
Page 59 and 60: 11 attempts Tischler (1983: 8-9). P
Page 61 and 62: 13 We may thus assume that the preh
Page 63: 15 Kimball, Sara. 1988. Analogy, Se
Page 67 and 68: 3 E. Ergo not coincidental that onl
Page 69 and 70: On Wh-(Non)-Movement and Internal S
Page 71 and 72: On the Hittite Preposed Relative Cl
Page 73 and 74: 2.1. Movement driven by features On
Page 91 and 92: Focus structure and Q-word question
Page 93 and 94: Hittite Q-word questions 947 di¤er
Page 95 and 96: Hittite Q-word questions 949 This q
Page 97 and 98: Hittite Q-word questions 951 Figure
Page 99 and 100: 4.2. Identifying focus and Q-word q
Page 101 and 102: Hittite Q-word questions 955 (T I )
Page 103 and 104: Hittite Q-word questions 957 with i
Page 105 and 106: quires a lexically expressed subjec
Page 107 and 108: Hittite Q-word questions 961 In (3)
Page 109 and 110: Hittite Q-word questions 963 revers
Page 111 and 112: Hittite Q-word questions 965 uris
Page 113 and 114: Hittite Q-word questions 967 27. In
Page 115:
Hittite Q-word questions 969 É. Ki
Page 127 and 128:
kaiå eœlonto iërÈa SimÌan Kond
Page 129 and 130:
H. Craig Melchert 57th R.A.I. Unive
Page 131 and 132:
3 (7) TÜNP 1 (text after Hawkins 2
Page 133 and 134:
5 MU.ḪI.A-uš ušneškemi kāša
Page 135 and 136:
H. Craig Melchert Naming in Anatoli
Page 137 and 138:
3 (a) /pi:hamma/i-/ ‘resplendent;
Page 139 and 140:
5 4. Ethnica (in contrast with Hitt
Page 141 and 142:
7 5.2. Adverb+Noun (with deity or t
Page 143 and 144:
9 (36) */Tarhu(nta)-tsalma-/, i.e.
Page 145 and 146:
11 8.3 m Tarḫu(n)miya- (Maşat, H
Page 147 and 148:
13 ——. 1994. Über die chronolo
show all

Topics in Anatolian Historical Grammar Prof. Dr. H. Craig Melchert

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?