all corrections done
This commit is contained in:
parent
d03f4da272
commit
992a943fd3
7 changed files with 446 additions and 433 deletions
|
|
@ -191,11 +191,11 @@ These affixes are certainly present in East Sudanic languages along with others.
|
|||
The paper considers each branch of East Sudanic in turn, and briefly lays out the evidence for the affix system, as well as the presence of gemination and stacking. Discussion of the membership of individual branches, and their structure is not given here, but can be consulted in standard references.[^308]
|
||||
|
||||
[^302]: Greenberg, “Nilo-Saharan Moveable-*k* as a Stage III Article."
|
||||
[^303]: Ehret, *A Historical-Comparative Reconstruction of Nilo-Saharan,* 176, 181.
|
||||
[^304]: Bender, *The Nilo-Saharan Languages,* 75.
|
||||
[^303]: Ehret, *A Historical-Comparative Reconstruction of Nilo-Saharan,* pp. 176, 181.
|
||||
[^304]: Bender, *The Nilo-Saharan Languages,* p. 75.
|
||||
[^305]: Ibid.
|
||||
[^306]: Tucker & Bryan, *Linguistic Analyses,* 22-24.
|
||||
[^307]: Storch, *The Noun Morphology of Western Nilotic,* 46.
|
||||
[^306]: Tucker & Bryan, *Linguistic Analyses,* pp. 22–24.
|
||||
[^307]: Storch, *The Noun Morphology of Western Nilotic,* p. 46.
|
||||
[^308]: See Bender, *The Nilo-Saharan Languages* and the 2020 edition of [*Ethnologue*](https://www.ethnologue.com/).
|
||||
|
||||
# Individual Branches
|
||||
|
|
@ -722,7 +722,7 @@ In conclusion, East Sudanic is characterized by a series of affixes, which have
|
|||
|
||||
# Bibliography
|
||||
|
||||
Alamin Mubarak, Suzan.  In *Insights into Nilo-Saharan Language, History and Culture: Proceedings of the 9th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, Institute of African and Asian Studies, University of Khartoum, 16-19 February 2004,* edited by Al-Amin Abu-Manga, Leoma Gilley & Anne Storch. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2006: pp. 9-24.
|
||||
Alamin Mubarak, Suzan.  In *Insights into Nilo-Saharan Language, History and Culture: Proceedings of the 9th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, Institute of African and Asian Studies, University of Khartoum, 16–19 February 2004,* edited by Al-Amin Abu-Manga, Leoma Gilley & Anne Storch. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2006: pp. 9–24.
|
||||
|
||||
Aviles, Arthur J.  MA Thesis, University of North Dakota at Grand Forks, 2008.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -730,39 +730,39 @@ Bell, Herman. : pp. 139-150.
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M. “Genetic Subgrouping of East Sudanic.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere* 45 (1996): pp. 139–150.
|
||||
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  *Africa and Ubersee* 66, no. 2 (1983): pp. 259-297.
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  *Africa and Ubersee* 66, no. 2 (1983): pp. 259–297.
|
||||
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M. “Roland Stevenson’s Nyimang and Dinik Lexicon.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere* 63 (2000): pp. 103-120.
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M. “Roland Stevenson’s Nyimang and Dinik Lexicon.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere* 63 (2000): pp. 103–120.
|
||||
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  In *"Mehr als nur Worte…": Afrikanistische Beiträge zum 65. Geburtstag von Franz Rottland,* edited by R. Voßen, A. Mietzner, and A. Meißner. Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2000: pp. 89-119.
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  In *"Mehr als nur Worte…": Afrikanistische Beiträge zum 65. Geburtstag von Franz Rottland,* edited by R. Voßen, A. Mietzner, and A. Meißner. Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2000: pp. 89–119.
|
||||
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  *Afrika und Übersee* 80 (1997): pp. 189-215.
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  *Afrika und Übersee* 80 (1997): pp. 189–215.
|
||||
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  *Afrika und Übersee* 81 (1998): pp. 39-64.
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  *Afrika und Übersee* 81 (1998): pp. 39–64.
|
||||
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  Carbondale: Southern Illinois University, 2005.
|
||||
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M.  2nd edition. Munich: Lincom Europa, 1997.
|
||||
|
||||
Blench, Roger M.  In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies,* edited by Thilo C. Schadeberg and Roger M. Blench. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2013: pp. 485-500.
|
||||
Blench, Roger M.  In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies,* edited by Thilo C. Schadeberg and Roger M. Blench. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2013: pp. 485–500.
|
||||
|
||||
Blench, Roger M.  In *Insights into Nilo-Saharan Language, History and Culture: Proceedings of the 9th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, Institute of African and Asian Studies, University of Khartoum, 16-19 February 2004,* edited by Al-Amin Abu-Manga, Leoma Gilley, and Anne Storch. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2006: pp. 101-127.
|
||||
Blench, Roger M.  In *Insights into Nilo-Saharan Language, History and Culture: Proceedings of the 9th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, Institute of African and Asian Studies, University of Khartoum, 16–19 February 2004,* edited by Al-Amin Abu-Manga, Leoma Gilley, and Anne Storch. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2006: pp. 101–127.
|
||||
|
||||
Boyeldieu, Pascal.  In *La qualification dans les langues africaines,* edited by Holger Tröbs, Eva Rothmaler, and Kerstin Winkelmann. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag, 2008: pp. 57-70.
|
||||
Boyeldieu, Pascal.  In *La qualification dans les langues africaines,* edited by Holger Tröbs, Eva Rothmaler, and Kerstin Winkelmann. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag, 2008: pp. 57–70.
|
||||
|
||||
Browne, Gerald M.  Leuven: Peeters, 1996.
|
||||
|
||||
Bryan, Margaret.  *Africa* 29, no. 1 (1959): pp. 1-21.
|
||||
Bryan, Margaret.  *Africa* 29, no. 1 (1959): pp. 1–21.
|
||||
|
||||
Carlin, Eithne.  Cologne: Universität zu Köln, 1993.
|
||||
|
||||
Cohen, Kevin B.  Munich: Lincom Europa, 2000.
|
||||
|
||||
Dawd, Abushush & R.J. Hayward.  *Journal of the International Phonetic Association* 32, no. 2 (2002): pp. 249-255.
|
||||
Dawd, Abushush & R.J. Hayward.  *Journal of the International Phonetic Association* 32, no. 2 (2002): pp. 249–255.
|
||||
|
||||
De Voogt, A.J.  *Studies in Language* 35, no. 4 (2011): pp. 898–911. [doi]({sc}): [10.1075/sl.35.4.04dev](https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.35.4.04dev).
|
||||
De Voogt, Alex  *Studies in Language* 35, no. 4 (2011): pp. 898–911. [doi]({sc}): [10.1075/sl.35.4.04dev](https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.35.4.04dev).
|
||||
|
||||
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J.  *Journal of African Languages and Linguistics* 31 (2011): pp. 13–46.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -772,23 +772,23 @@ Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. "Marked Nominative Systems in Eastern Sudanic and Their Hi
|
|||
|
||||
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J.  *Anthropological Linguistics* 42, no. 2 (2000): pp. 214–261.
|
||||
|
||||
Edgar, John T.  In *Proceedings of the Fourth Nilo-Saharan Conference: Bayreuth Aug. 30–Sep. 2, 1989,* edited by M. Lionel Bender. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1991: pp. 111-131.
|
||||
Edgar, John T.  In *Proceedings of the Fourth Nilo-Saharan Conference: Bayreuth Aug. 30–Sep. 2, 1989,* edited by M. Lionel Bender. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1991: pp. 111–131.
|
||||
|
||||
Ehret, Christopher.  Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2001.
|
||||
|
||||
Ehret, Christopher.  Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1971.
|
||||
|
||||
Gilley, Leoma G.  In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies,* edited by Thilo C. Schadeberg & Roger M. Blench. Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2013: pp. 501-522.
|
||||
Gilley, Leoma G.  In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies,* edited by Thilo C. Schadeberg & Roger M. Blench. Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2013: pp. 501–522.
|
||||
|
||||
Greenberg, Joseph H.  *Journal of African Languages and Linguistics* 3, no. 2 (1981): pp. 105-112.
|
||||
Greenberg, Joseph H.  *Journal of African Languages and Linguistics* 3, no. 2 (1981): pp. 105–112.
|
||||
|
||||
Greenberg, Joseph H.  *Southwestern Journal of Anthropology* 6, no. 2 (1950): pp. 143-160.
|
||||
Greenberg, Joseph H.  *Southwestern Journal of Anthropology* 6, no. 2 (1950): pp. 143–160.
|
||||
|
||||
Greenberg, Joseph H.  The Hague: Mouton & Co, 1963.
|
||||
|
||||
Güldemann, Tom. “The Historical-Comparative Status of East Sudanic.” In *Proceedings of the 14th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium,* edited by Roger M. Blench, Petra Weschenfelder, and Georg Ziegelmeyer. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, forthcoming.
|
||||
|
||||
Hayward, Richard J.  In *"Mehr als nur Worte…": Afrikanistische Beiträge zum 65. Geburtstag von Franz Rottland,* edited by R. Voßen, A. Mietzner, and A. Meißner. Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2000: pp. 247-267.
|
||||
Hayward, Richard J.  In *"Mehr als nur Worte…": Afrikanistische Beiträge zum 65. Geburtstag von Franz Rottland,* edited by R. Voßen, A. Mietzner, and A. Meißner. Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2000: pp. 247–267.
|
||||
|
||||
Heine, Bernd.  Nairobi: East African Publishing House, 1976.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -802,7 +802,7 @@ Lamberti, Marcello. ![*Kuliak and Cushitic: A Comparative Study.*](bib:5e8f9f20-
|
|||
|
||||
Norton, Russell. "Ama Verbs in Comparative Perspective." *Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies* 7 (2020): 
|
||||
|
||||
Norton, Russell.  *Occasional Papers in the Study of Sudanese Languages* 10 (2012): pp. 75-94.
|
||||
Norton, Russell.  *Occasional Papers in the Study of Sudanese Languages* 10 (2012): pp. 75–94.
|
||||
|
||||
Rilly, Claude.  Leuven: Peeters, 2009.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -816,17 +816,17 @@ Schrock, Terrill B.  *Journal of Language Relationship* [*Вопросы языкового родства*] 15, no. 2 (2017): pp. 87–113.
|
||||
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland C.  *Afrika und Übersee* 40 (1956): pp. 73-84, 93-115.
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland C.  *Afrika und Übersee* 40 (1956): pp. 73–84, 93–115.
|
||||
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland C.  *Afrika und Übersee* 41 (1957): pp. 27-65, 117-152, 171-196.
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland C.  *Afrika und Übersee* 41 (1957): pp. 27–65, 117–152, 171–196.
|
||||
|
||||
Stirtz, Timothy M.  Utrecht: LOT, 2011.
|
||||
|
||||
Storch, Anne.  Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2005.
|
||||
|
||||
Thelwall, Robin A.  In *Gedenkschrift Gustav Nachtigal 1874–1974,* edited by E. Ganslmayr and H. Jungraithmayr, pp. 197-210. Bremen: Übersee Museum, 1977.
|
||||
Thelwall, Robin A.  In *Gedenkschrift Gustav Nachtigal 1874–1974,* edited by E. Ganslmayr and H. Jungraithmayr, pp. 197–210. Bremen: Übersee Museum, 1977.
|
||||
|
||||
Trigger, Bruce G. “Meroitic and Eastern Sudanic: A Linguistic Relationship.” *Kush* 12 (1964): 188-194.
|
||||
Trigger, Bruce G. “Meroitic and Eastern Sudanic: A Linguistic Relationship.” *Kush* 12 (1964): 188–194.
|
||||
|
||||
Tucker, Archibald N.  Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1940.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -842,6 +842,6 @@ Voßen, Rainer.  Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1993.
|
||||
|
||||
Yigezu, Moges & Gerrit J. Dimmendaal. [“Notes on Baale.”](bib:36f35b75-5629-478b-b969-f806474f54a0) In *Surmic Languages and Cultures,* edited by Gerrit J. Dimmendaal and Marco Last. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 1998: pp. 273-317.
|
||||
Yigezu, Moges & Gerrit J. Dimmendaal. [“Notes on Baale.”](bib:36f35b75-5629-478b-b969-f806474f54a0) In *Surmic Languages and Cultures,* edited by Gerrit J. Dimmendaal and Marco Last. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 1998: pp. 273–317.
|
||||
|
||||
Zwarts, Joost.  In *Advances in Nilo-Saharan Linguistics: Proceedings of the 8th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, University of Hamburg, August 22-25, 2001,* edited by Mechthild Reh and Doris L. Payne. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2007: pp. 281–294.
|
||||
Zwarts, Joost.  In *Advances in Nilo-Saharan Linguistics: Proceedings of the 8th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, University of Hamburg, August 22–25, 2001,* edited by Mechthild Reh and Doris L. Payne. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2007: pp. 281–294.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
File diff suppressed because it is too large
Load diff
|
|
@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ A role for concreteness in grammar was previously proposed in the Pirahã langu
|
|||
|
||||
Research over the past century has also been gradually clarifying the complex morphological system of Ama verbs.[^32] Factative and progressive aspect are distinguished in the affix system as well as in stems, and there is an evolving portfolio of pluractional affixes.
|
||||
|
||||
[^32]: Stevenson, *Grammar of the Nyimang Language,* §XI; Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages,” 41: pp. 171-183; Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik"; Norton, “Number in Ama Verbs”; Norton, “The Ama Dual Suffix"; Norton, "Classifying the Non-Eastern-Sudanic Nuba Mountain Languages.”
|
||||
[^32]: Stevenson, *Grammar of the Nyimang Language,* §XI; Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages,” 41: pp. 171–183; Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik"; Norton, “Number in Ama Verbs”; Norton, “The Ama Dual Suffix"; Norton, "Classifying the Non-Eastern-Sudanic Nuba Mountain Languages.”
|
||||
|
||||
## Affix Selection and Order
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ Distributive pluractionals are characterized by optionality with a plural partic
|
|||
|
||||
[^42]: Corbett, *Number,* p. 116.
|
||||
[^43]: 
|
||||
[^44]: Corbett, *Number,* pp. 115-116.
|
||||
[^44]: Corbett, *Number,* pp. 115–116.
|
||||
[^45]: Norton, “Number in Ama vVrbs,” pp. 78, 79, 91.
|
||||
[^46]: de Voogt, “Dual Marking and Kinship Terms in Afitti,” p. 903.
|
||||
[^47]: I am grateful to Alex de Voogt for sharing this data in personal communication from his field research on Afitti.
|
||||
|
|
@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ Beyond the Nyima branch, the Temein “plural action” suffix *-(ɨ)t̪* shares
|
|||
The confirmation of distributive markers across Nubian, Nyima, and Temein implies that a distributive pluractional was present in Eastern Sudanic from an early stage, with a form like *\*-id.* In Nubian the consonant is palatal,[^50] and although palatals are a difficult area for establishing wider sound correspondences,[^51] the palatal arises in the plausible conditioning environment of a high front vowel.
|
||||
|
||||
[^50]: . Jakobi points that the other very similar suffix *-íd* in Midob cannot be reconstructed to proto-Nubian from just one Nubian language, so appears to be an innovation, and her observation of its similarity to the Ama suffix clearly suggests borrowing into Midob from Ama’s ancestor or another related language. Hence, the reconstructable pluractional **[i]ɟ* is more viable as the historic cognate of the Ama suffix.
|
||||
[^51]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* pp. 303-304.
|
||||
[^51]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* pp. 303–304.
|
||||
|
||||
### Second Historic Pluractional
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -486,7 +486,7 @@ Some time after the contact with Heiban, Rottland and Jakobi note the likelihood
|
|||
|
||||
This period nevertheless also reveals one significant example of simplification in Ama verbs that supports the idea that language contact occurred. Afitti has pronominal subject markers on the verb, seen earlier in **Table 13**, which are absent in Ama. The pronominal prefixes are not the same in form as personal pronoun words in Afitti ([1sg]({sc}) *oi* but [1sg]({sc}) prefix *kə-*),[^68] therefore they are not incorporated versions of the current pronoun words, but rather predate them. Some of the Afitti pronoun words ([1sg]({sc}) *oi,* [2sg]({sc}) *i*)[^69] are similar to Ama ([1sg]({sc}) *àɪ̀,* [2sg]({sc}) *ī*) and must be retentions from proto-Nyima, hence the older pronominal prefixes must also be retentions in Afitti, but lost in Ama. Their loss in Ama is remarkable against the larger trend of growth in complexity of Ama verbs that we have examined in this paper. The predicted cause of this surprising reversal is pidginization under contact. That is, their loss is evidence that the Ama language was used for inter-group communication, presumably with the Kordofan Nubians, during which (and for which) Ama SOV sentences were simplified by dropping verbal subject marking. If Kordofan Nubians spoke Ama, then borrowing from Ama into Kordofan Nubian is also likely. In verbs, the obvious candidate for borrowing into Kordofan Nubian is the reciprocal suffix *-in*, as this is not attested elsewhere in Nubian.[^70] The following two-step scenario would then account for the facts: Ama was learned and used by Kordofan Nubians, during which Ama dropped verbal subject marking and its reciprocal suffix was borrowed into Kordofan Nubian; next, Ama returned to isolation in which the reciprocal suffix developed its dual function that is unique to Ama today.
|
||||
|
||||
[^68]: Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik,” pp. 34-38.
|
||||
[^68]: Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik,” pp. 34–38.
|
||||
[^69]: Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages,” 41: p. 177.
|
||||
[^70]: .
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -543,17 +543,17 @@ Everett, Daniel.  In *Papers in Chadic Linguistics,* edited by Paul Newman & Roxana Ma Newman. Leiden: Afrika-Studiecentrum, 1977: pp. 37–56.
|
||||
|
||||
Gilley, Leoma.  In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies,* edited by Thilo Schadeberg and Roger Blench. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2013: pp. 501-522.
|
||||
Gilley, Leoma.  In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies,* edited by Thilo Schadeberg and Roger Blench. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2013: pp. 501–522.
|
||||
|
||||
Greenberg, Joseph. [*The Languages of Africa.*](bib:df1c2298-341c-4367-a9cf-37452f7e3068) Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1963.
|
||||
|
||||
Heine, Bernd & Rainer Voßen. “Sprachtypologie.” In *Die Sprachen Afrikas,* edited by Bernd Heine, Thilo Schadeberg, and Ekkehard Wolff. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1981: pp. 407–444.
|
||||
|
||||
Hyman, Larry & Imelda Udoh.  In *Globalization and the Study of Languages in Africa,* edited by Ozo-mekuri Ndimele. Port Harcourt: Grand Orbit Communications and Emhai Press, 2005: pp. 297-304.
|
||||
Hyman, Larry & Imelda Udoh.  In *Globalization and the Study of Languages in Africa,* edited by Ozo-mekuri Ndimele. Port Harcourt: Grand Orbit Communications and Emhai Press, 2005: pp. 297–304.
|
||||
|
||||
Jakobi, Angelika. *Kordofan Nubian: A Synchronic and Diachronic Study.* Unpublished manuscript, 2013.
|
||||
|
||||
Kröger, Oliver.  In *Proceedings of the 6th World Congress of African Linguistics, Cologne 17-21 August 2009,* edited by Matthias Brenzinger & Anne-Marie Fehn. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2012: pp. 155–168.
|
||||
Kröger, Oliver.  In *Proceedings of the 6th World Congress of African Linguistics, Cologne 17–21 August 2009,* edited by Matthias Brenzinger & Anne-Marie Fehn. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2012: pp. 155–168.
|
||||
|
||||
Laca, Brenda.  In *Domaines, Journées d’Études linguistiques.* Nantes: Université de Nantes, 2004: pp. 87–92.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -565,7 +565,7 @@ Newman, Paul.  In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies: New Insights,* edited by Gertrud Schneider-Blum, Birgit Hellwig and Gerrit Dimmendaal. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2019: pp. 417–446.
|
||||
|
||||
Norton, Russell.  *Occasional Papers in the Study of Sudanese Languages* 10 (2012): 75-94.
|
||||
Norton, Russell.  *Occasional Papers in the Study of Sudanese Languages* 10 (2012): 75–94.
|
||||
|
||||
Norton, Russell.  In *Nilo-Saharan: Models and Descriptions,* edited by Angelika Mietzner & Anne Storch. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2015: pp. 113–122.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -575,9 +575,9 @@ Rottland, Franz & Angelika Jakobi.  Utrecht: LOT, 2017.
|
||||
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland C.  *Afrika und Übersee* 40 (1956): pp. 73–84, 93–115.
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland C.  *Afrika und Übersee* 40 (1956): pp. 73–84, 93–115.
|
||||
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland C.  *Afrika und Übersee* 41 (1957): pp. 27–65, 117–152, 171–196.
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland C.  *Afrika und Übersee* 41 (1957): pp. 27–65, 117–152, 171–196.
|
||||
|
||||
Stevenson, Roland.  Unpublished typescript, 1938.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
File diff suppressed because it is too large
Load diff
|
|
@ -113,14 +113,14 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
|
|||
* “bird”: N *kawar-ti*, K *kawir-te*, D *kawɪr-tɛ* (= M *àːbéd-dí*, B *kwar-ti*, etc.).
|
||||
* “bite”: N *àc-*, K/D *acc-* (= M *àcc-*, Dl *aɟ*, etc.).
|
||||
* “black”: N *úrúm*, K/D *urumm*- (= M *údí*, B *úːdè*, Dl *uri*, etc.). ◊ The Nile-Nubian form is an original nominal derivate (*\*ur-um* “darkness”) from the adjectival stem *\*ur*- “black.”
|
||||
* “bone”: N *gìsìr*, K *kiːd*, D *kɪhɪːd* (= M *ə̀ːdí*, B *kìzídì*, etc.). ◊ Voiced *g-* in Nile-Nubian is irregular, possibly as a result of assimilation (← *\*kizir*) or contamination.[^13]
|
||||
* “bone”: N *gìsìr*, K *kiːd*, D *kɪhɪːd* (= M *ə̀ːdí*, B *kìzídì*, etc.). ◊ Voiced *g-* in Nile-Nubian is irregular, possibly as a result of assimilation (< *\*kizir*) or contamination.[^13]
|
||||
* “breast”: N *óg*, K/D *og* (= M *ə́ː*, B *ogi*, Dl *ɔki*, etc.).
|
||||
* “claw/nail”: N *sun-ti*, K *sutti*, D *sun-tɪ* (= M *súŋún-dí*, B *sun-di*, etc.).
|
||||
* “cold”: N *ór-kí*, K *oroːke-l*, D *oroːfɛ-l* (= Wali *ór-kō*, Debri *worr-uŋ*, etc.).
|
||||
* “die”: N *dí-*, K/D *diː* (= M *tíː-*, B *ti-n-*, Dl *ti*, etc.).
|
||||
* “drink”: N *ní-*, K/D *niː* (= M *tìː-*, B *ɲiː*, Dl *di*, etc.). ◊ From PN *\*ni-* with regular denasalization in M and Hill Nubian languages.
|
||||
* “ear”: N *úkkí*, K/D *ulug* (= Dl *ulɟe*, M *úlgí*, etc.). ◊ From PN *\*ulg-i*. The Nobiin form goes back to ON *ul(u)g-* and shows a specific phonetic development (*\*-lg-* → *-kk-*); the latter, however, can in no way be construed as an archaism.
|
||||
* (?) “eye”: N *máːɲ* (= ON *maɲ-*), D *mɪssɪ*, K *missi* (= M *pì-dì*). ◊ A complicated case. The K/D forms perfectly correspond to M *pì-dì*, going back to PN *\*miC-ti*, where *-C-* is one of several consonants capable of triggering the lenition *\*-t- → -s-* in K/D. If *\*-C- = \*-ɲ-*, then the forms are further comparable with N *máːɲ*, and we are either dealing with a one-time vocalic dissimilation *\*miɲ → \*maɲ* in N or two independent assimilations (*\*maɲ → miɲ-*) in M and K/D, respectively. Alternately, the N form may be completely unrelated to the K/D–M isogloss, in which case the word should be moved to group III.2, since a separate form like *\*maɲ* “eye” would have no Common Nubian etymology of its own.
|
||||
* “ear”: N *úkkí*, K/D *ulug* (= Dl *ulɟe*, M *úlgí*, etc.). ◊ From PN *\*ulg-i*. The Nobiin form goes back to ON *ul(u)g-* and shows a specific phonetic development (*\*-lg-* > *-kk-*); the latter, however, can in no way be construed as an archaism.
|
||||
* (?) “eye”: N *máːɲ* (= ON *maɲ-*), D *mɪssɪ*, K *missi* (= M *pì-dì*). ◊ A complicated case. The K/D forms perfectly correspond to M *pì-dì*, going back to PN *\*miC-ti*, where *-C-* is one of several consonants capable of triggering the lenition *\*-t- > -s-* in K/D. If *\*-C- = \*-ɲ-*, then the forms are further comparable with N *máːɲ*, and we are either dealing with a one-time vocalic dissimilation *\*miɲ > \*maɲ* in N or two independent assimilations (*\*maɲ > miɲ-*) in M and K/D, respectively. Alternately, the N form may be completely unrelated to the K/D–M isogloss, in which case the word should be moved to group III.2, since a separate form like *\*maɲ* “eye” would have no Common Nubian etymology of its own.
|
||||
* “fire”: N *íːg*, K *iːg*, D *ɪːg* (= Dl *ike*, Debri *ika*; probably also B *uzug*, M *ússí*). ◊ The forms in B and M are comparable if the original stem is to be reconstructed as *\*usi-gi*, with regular elimination of intervocalic *\*-s-* in Hill and Nile Nubian. The vocalism is still problematic, but even without the B and M forms, parallels in Hill Nubian clearly show that the Nile-Nubian items represent an inherited archaism.
|
||||
* “foot”: N *óːy*, K *ossi*, D *oss(ɪ)* (= B *ose*, M *òttì*). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*oy(-ti)*.
|
||||
* “give”: N *tèː-r*, K *ti-r*, D *tɪ-r* (= M *tì-*, B *teː-n*, Dl *ti*, etc.).
|
||||
|
|
@ -140,18 +140,18 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
|
|||
* “not”: N *-mùːn*, K/D *-mun-* (= Dl *-min*, B *-m-*, etc.). ◊ A common Nubian negative verbal stem (interestingly, not attested in M, which instead uses the suffixal morpheme *-áː-* for negation, something that could be construed as an archaism and used as a serious argument against early separation of Nobiin).
|
||||
* “one”: N *wèːr ~ wèːl*, K *weːr*, D *wɛːr* (= M *pàr-*, B *meːl-*, Dl *be*, etc.).
|
||||
* “person”: N *íd* (= M *ír*, Dl *id*, etc.). ◊ The old Nubian root is largely replaced by Arabisms in K/D (K *zoːl*, D *adɛm*), but the word *ɪd* is still used in D as an archaism or in various idiomatic formations.
|
||||
* “rain”: N *áwwí*, K *a-nn-essi* (← *\*aru-n-essi* “rain-waterʼ), D *aru* (= M *áré*, B *aːle*, Dl *are*, etc.). ◊ The development *\*-r- → -w-* in N is regular before *\*-i*.[^14]
|
||||
* “rain”: N *áwwí*, K *a-nn-essi* (< *\*aru-n-essi* “rain-waterʼ), D *aru* (= M *áré*, B *aːle*, Dl *are*, etc.). ◊ The development *\*-r- > -w-* in N is regular before *\*-i*.[^14]
|
||||
* “red”: N *géːl*, K *geːle*, D *gɛːlɛ* (= M *kéːlé*, B *keːle*, Dl *kele*, etc.).
|
||||
* “sand”: N *síw*, K *siːw*, D *sɪu* (= Dl *šu-d*, Debri *šu-du*, etc.).
|
||||
* “see”: N *nèːl*, K/D *nal* (= M *kə̀l-*, B *ell-*, Dl *gel*, Kadaru *ŋeli*, etc.). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*ŋali-*.
|
||||
* “sit”: (a) N *àːg-*, K/D *aːg* (= M *àːg-*, Dl *ak-i*, etc.); (b) N *tìːg-*, K *teːg*, D *tɛːg* (= M *tə́g-*). ◊ Two roots with very close semantics, both easily reconstructible back to PN.
|
||||
* “sleep”: N *nèːr-*, K *neːr*, D *nɛːr* (= M *kèrà-*, B *neːri*, Dl *ɟer*, etc.). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*ɲɛːr-*.
|
||||
* “star”: N *wìnɟì*, K *wissi*, D *wɪssɪ* (= M *òɲè-dì*, B *waːɲ-di*, Kadaru *wonɔ-ntu*, etc.). ◊ There are some problems with the reconstruction, but it is possible that all forms go back to PN *\*wiɲ- ~ \*waɲ-*; at the very least, *\*wiɲ-ti* “star” is definitely reconstructible for Proto-Nile-Nubian.
|
||||
* “sun”: N *màšà* (= ON *mašal-*), K *masil*, D *masɪl* (= M *pàssàr*). ◊ The isogloss with M confirms PN status, although some phonetic peculiarities (such as the irregular *-š-* in N) as well as the attestation of the term *maša ~ masa* in Meroitic, where it denotes a supreme deity[^sun] indirectly suggest a possible areal isogloss; if so, an alternate candidate for PN “sun” would be *\*eːs-* → B *iːzi*, Dl *eɟ* “sun,” further related to M *èːsì* “heat; midday,” K *eːs* id., D *ɛːs* “afternoon.” In either case, N still aligns with K/D rather than anything else.
|
||||
* “sun”: N *màšà* (= ON *mašal-*), K *masil*, D *masɪl* (= M *pàssàr*). ◊ The isogloss with M confirms PN status, although some phonetic peculiarities (such as the irregular *-š-* in N) as well as the attestation of the term *maša ~ masa* in Meroitic, where it denotes a supreme deity[^sun] indirectly suggest a possible areal isogloss; if so, an alternate candidate for PN “sun” would be *\*eːs-* > B *iːzi*, Dl *eɟ* “sun,” further related to M *èːsì* “heat; midday,” K *eːs* id., D *ɛːs* “afternoon.” In either case, N still aligns with K/D rather than anything else.
|
||||
* you (sg.): N *ì-r*, K *e-r*, D *ɛ-r* (= M *íː-n*, B *e-di*, Dl *a*, Karko *yā*, etc.). ◊ Although all the forms are related (going back to PN *\*i-*), N is noticeably closer to K/D in terms of morphological structure (with the direct stem marker *\*-r*).
|
||||
* “tongue”: N *nàr*, K *ned*, D *nɛd* (= M *kàda-ŋì*, B *nat-ti*, Dl *ɟale*, Debri *ɲal-do*, etc.). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*ɲal(T)*-.[^tongue] Interestingly, the ON equivalent tame- (no parallels in other languages) is completely different — the only case on the list where ON differs not only from N, but from all other Nubian languages as well.
|
||||
* “tooth”: N *nìːd*, K *nel*, D *nɛl* (= M *kə̀d-dì*, B *ɲil-di*, Dl *ɟili*, etc.). ◊ All forms reflect PN *\*ɲəl-*.
|
||||
* “two”: N *úwwó*, K *owwi*, D *owwɪ* (= M *ə́d-dí*, B *ul-ug*, Dl *ore*, etc.). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*awri*; the unusual cluster *\*-wr-* is responsible for the unusual development *\*-r- → -w-* already in Proto-Nile-Nubian (rather than just in N), and is actually seen explicitly in the extinct and very poorly attested Haraza Nubian: *auri-yah* “two.”[^15]
|
||||
* “two”: N *úwwó*, K *owwi*, D *owwɪ* (= M *ə́d-dí*, B *ul-ug*, Dl *ore*, etc.). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*awri*; the unusual cluster *\*-wr-* is responsible for the unusual development *\*-r- > -w-* already in Proto-Nile-Nubian (rather than just in N), and is actually seen explicitly in the extinct and very poorly attested Haraza Nubian: *auri-yah* “two.”[^15]
|
||||
* “walk (go)”: N *ɟúù-*, K/D *ɟuː* (= M *sə́-r-*, Dl *šu*, etc.). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*cuː-*.
|
||||
* “warm (hot)”: N *ɟùg*, K/D *ɟug-ri* (= M *sùːw*). ◊ From PN *\*cug-*.
|
||||
* “who”: N *nàːy*, K *niː*, D *nɪː* (= M *kə̀ː-rén*, B *neː-ta*, Dl *de*, etc.). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*ŋə(y)*.
|
||||
|
|
@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
|
|||
* “that”: N *mán*, K/D *man*.
|
||||
* “this”: N *in*, K *in*, D *ɪn*. ◊ The subsystems of deictic pronouns in M, B, and Hill Nubian are much less cohesive than in Nile-Nubian and do not allow for reliable reconstructions of any PN items that would be different from Nile-Nubian.
|
||||
* “what”: N *mìn*, K *min*, D *mɪn*. ◊ It is quite possible that the Nile-Nubian situation here is innovative, since all other branches agree on *\*na(i)-* as a better equivalent for PN “what?”: M *nèː-n*, B *na-ta*, Dl *na*, Karko *nái*, etc.[^16]
|
||||
* “woman”: N *ìd-éːn*, K *eːn*, D *ɛːn*. ◊ Technically, this is not a fully exclusive Nile-Nubian isogloss — cf. B *eːn* “woman.” However, the main root for “woman” in Nubian is *\*il-* (ON *il-*, M *ìd-dì ← il-ti*, Dl *eli*, Karko *îl*, etc.); *\*eːn* is the common Nubian word for “mother,” which has, most likely, independently shifted to “woman” in general in modern Nile-Nubian languages and in B. N is particularly innovative in that respect, since it uses a compound formation: *ìd* “person” + *éːn* “mother.”
|
||||
* “woman”: N *ìd-éːn*, K *eːn*, D *ɛːn*. ◊ Technically, this is not a fully exclusive Nile-Nubian isogloss — cf. B *eːn* “woman.” However, the main root for “woman” in Nubian is *\*il-* (ON *il-*, M *ìd-dì < il-ti*, Dl *eli*, Karko *îl*, etc.); *\*eːn* is the common Nubian word for “mother,” which has, most likely, independently shifted to “woman” in general in modern Nile-Nubian languages and in B. N is particularly innovative in that respect, since it uses a compound formation: *ìd* “person” + *éːn* “mother.”
|
||||
|
||||
[^feather]: Khalil, *Wörterbuch der nubischen Sprache,* p. 124.
|
||||
[^16]: In Starostin, *Языки Африки,* p. 92 I suggest that, since the regular reflex of PN *\*n-* in Hill Nubian is *d-*, both Nile-Nubian *\*min* and all the *na(i)*-like forms may go back to a unique PN stem *\*nwV-*; if so, the word should be moved to [I.1](#i1), but in any case this is still a common Nile-Nubian isogloss.
|
||||
|
|
@ -187,11 +187,11 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
|
|||
|
||||
### II.1. Potential K/D innovations {#ii1}
|
||||
|
||||
* “bark”: *àːcì* (= M *àccì-dì*). ◊ Possibly ← PN *\*aci* “bark, chaff.” As opposed to K/D *gabad* (no parallels in other languages).
|
||||
* “fly”: *wáːy-ìr* (= B *maː-r*). ◊ May reflect PN *\*way-* “to fly” (*\*w- → m-* is regular in B). However, the corresponding form in D is *war* “to jump, leap, spring,” and typologically the development “jump” → “fly” is far more common than the reverse. Opposed to K *firr*, D *fɪrr* “to fly” with no parallels outside of Nile-Nubian.
|
||||
* “bark”: *àːcì* (= M *àccì-dì*). ◊ Possibly < PN *\*aci* “bark, chaff.” As opposed to K/D *gabad* (no parallels in other languages).
|
||||
* “fly”: *wáːy-ìr* (= B *maː-r*). ◊ May reflect PN *\*way-* “to fly” (*\*w- - m-* is regular in B). However, the corresponding form in D is *war* “to jump, leap, spring,” and typologically the development “jump” → “fly” is far more common than the reverse. Opposed to K *firr*, D *fɪrr* “to fly” with no parallels outside of Nile-Nubian.
|
||||
* “liver”: N *dìbèː* (= M *tèmmèɟí*). ◊ In D, the old word has been replaced by the Arabic borrowing *kɪbdaːd*. The isogloss between N and M allows to reconstruct PN *\*dib-* “liver.”
|
||||
* (?) “night”: N *áwá* (= ON *oar-*). ◊ A rare case where K/D are clearly more innovative than N: K/D *ugu*ː “night” occasionally has the additional meaning “24 hours,” and further comparison with ON *uk-r- ~ uk-l-* “day,” K *ug-reːs*, D *ug-rɛːs*, N *ùg-réːs*, M *ùːd* (← *\*ugu-d*) id. suggests that “24 hours; day-night cycle” was the original meaning. On the other hand, N *áwá* is comparable with M *òːd* (← *\*awa-d*?) and could very well be the original PN equivalent.
|
||||
* “skin”: N *náwá* (← *\*nawar*, cf. pl. *nàwàr-íː*; = B *noːr*, Dl *dor*, etc.). ◊ Opposed to K *aɟin*, D *aɟɪn* “skin, leather.”
|
||||
* (?) “night”: N *áwá* (= ON *oar-*). ◊ A rare case where K/D are clearly more innovative than N: K/D *ugu*ː “night” occasionally has the additional meaning “24 hours,” and further comparison with ON *uk-r- ~ uk-l-* “day,” K *ug-reːs*, D *ug-rɛːs*, N *ùg-réːs*, M *ùːd* (< *\*ugu-d*) id. suggests that “24 hours; day-night cycle” was the original meaning. On the other hand, N *áwá* is comparable with M *òːd* (< *\*awa-d*?) and could very well be the original PN equivalent.
|
||||
* “skin”: N *náwá* (< *\*nawar*, cf. pl. *nàwàr-íː*; = B *noːr*, Dl *dor*, etc.). ◊ Opposed to K *aɟin*, D *aɟɪn* “skin, leather.”
|
||||
|
||||
### II.2. Potential Synonymy in the Protolanguage
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -202,13 +202,13 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
|
|||
### III.1. Nobiin-exclusive Items with a Nubian Etymology {#iii1}
|
||||
|
||||
* “blood”: N *díːs* (= ON *dis-*). ◊ Related to K *des*, D *dɛs*, M *tèssì* “oil; liquid fat; butterʼ; the meaning in N is clearly innovative, since the original PN root for “blood” is well distributed across non-Nile-Nubian lineages (M *ə̀ggə́r*, B *igir*, Dl *ogor*, etc.).
|
||||
* (?) “earth”: N *gùr* (= ON *gul- ~ gud-*). ◊ The same word is also found in D as *guː* “earth, ground, floor” and in K as *guː* “field, acre; earth (surface).” According to Werner, in modern Nobiin the meaning “earth = soil” is also expressed by the same root,[^earth] whereas ON *iskit-* “earth; dust” → Nobiin *ìskíːd* corresponds to the narrower meaning “dust” in Wernerʼs dictionary.[^earth2] It is perfectly possible, however, that this is all simply a byproduct of inaccurate semantic glossing and that the situation in Nobiin is actually exactly the same as in K/D. In this case, the word has to be moved to [I.2](#i2) (or [I.1](#i1), if B *izzi-di* “earth” also belongs here).
|
||||
* “hear”: N *úkké-èr* (= ON *ulg-ir- ~ ulg-ar- ~ ulk-ir-*). ◊ Transparent derivation from *ulug* “ear.” The old verbal root “hear” is present in K/D (K *giɟ-ir*, D *gɪɟ-ir*) and Hill Nubian (Dl *ki-er-* etc.) ← PN *\*gi(ɟ)-*. The situation in Old Nubian/Nobiin is seemingly innovative.
|
||||
* “meat”: N *áríɟ*. ◊ Probably a recent innovation, since the ON equivalent for “flesh, meat” is *gad-*, with a likely etymological parallel in M *kàdì* “meat without bones.” As for *áríɟ*, the shape of this word is reminiscent of an adjectival derivate (cf. *fáríɟ* “thick, heavyʼ), making it comparable with K *aːre*, D *aːrɛ* “inside, interior.” The most common Nubian equivalent for “meat,” however, is *\*kosi ~ \*kosu* → K/D *kusu*, M *òsò-ŋí*, B *kozi*, Dl *kwaɟe*, etc.
|
||||
* (?) “earth”: N *gùr* (= ON *gul- ~ gud-*). ◊ The same word is also found in D as *guː* “earth, ground, floor” and in K as *guː* “field, acre; earth (surface).” According to Werner, in modern Nobiin the meaning “earth = soil” is also expressed by the same root,[^earth] whereas ON *iskit-* “earth; dust” - Nobiin *ìskíːd* corresponds to the narrower meaning “dust” in Wernerʼs dictionary.[^earth2] It is perfectly possible, however, that this is all simply a byproduct of inaccurate semantic glossing and that the situation in Nobiin is actually exactly the same as in K/D. In this case, the word has to be moved to [I.2](#i2) (or [I.1](#i1), if B *izzi-di* “earth” also belongs here).
|
||||
* “hear”: N *úkké-èr* (= ON *ulg-ir- ~ ulg-ar- ~ ulk-ir-*). ◊ Transparent derivation from *ulug* “ear.” The old verbal root “hear” is present in K/D (K *giɟ-ir*, D *gɪɟ-ir*) and Hill Nubian (Dl *ki-er-* etc.) < PN *\*gi(ɟ)-*. The situation in Old Nubian/Nobiin is seemingly innovative.
|
||||
* “meat”: N *áríɟ*. ◊ Probably a recent innovation, since the ON equivalent for “flesh, meat” is *gad-*, with a likely etymological parallel in M *kàdì* “meat without bones.” As for *áríɟ*, the shape of this word is reminiscent of an adjectival derivate (cf. *fáríɟ* “thick, heavyʼ), making it comparable with K *aːre*, D *aːrɛ* “inside, interior.” The most common Nubian equivalent for “meat,” however, is *\*kosi ~ \*kosu* - K/D *kusu*, M *òsò-ŋí*, B *kozi*, Dl *kwaɟe*, etc.
|
||||
* (?) “root”: N *ɟúː*. ◊ Perhaps related to D *ɟuː* “nether stone for grinding,” K *ɟuː* “hand mill” (if the original meaning was “bottom, foundation"), but the semantic link is weak. Notably, the word is not attested in ON where the equivalent for “root” is *dulist-* (no etymology). The most common form for “root” in Nubian is *\*ir-* (M *ír-dí*, Dl *ir-tad*, etc.).
|
||||
* “say”: N *íːg-ìr* (= ON *ig-ir* “tell"). ◊ Same as D *iːg* “tell, narrate"; in N, this seems to have become the main equivalent for “say.” Other ON words with similar meanings include the verbs *pes-* (direct speech marker), *il-* (“speak,” “tell") and *we-* (very rare, probably a K/D dialectism); the latter is the common Nubian equivalent for “say” (cf. K *weː*, D *wɛː*, Dl *fe*, Kadaru *wei*, etc.).
|
||||
* “swim”: N *kúcc-ìr*. ◊ Not attested in ON; phonetically corresponds to D *kuɟ-* “to be above,” *kuɟ-ur-* “to place above, set above,” *kuc-cɛg-* “to mount, ride.” If the etymology is correct, the semantic development can only be unidirectional (“to be on top/on the surface” → “to swim") and the meaning in N is clearly secondary. That said, the word “swim” in general is highly unstable in Nubian languages (almost every idiom has its own equivalent).
|
||||
* “tree”: N *kóy* (= ON *koir-*). ◊ Comparable with D *koɪd* “a k. of jujube (*Ziziphus spina-christi*)”; if the etymology is correct, a secondary generalization of the meaning to “tree (gen.)” in N would perfectly agree with the fact that a much better candidate for PN “tree” is *\*pər* → Dl *hor*, Dair *or*, Wali *fʊ́r*, K *ber* “wood,” D *bɛr* “wood” (the meaning “tree” in K/D, as in N, is expressed by an innovation: K *ɟowwi*, D *ɟoːwwɪ*, formerly “*Acacia nilotica*”).
|
||||
* “tree”: N *kóy* (= ON *koir-*). ◊ Comparable with D *koɪd* “a k. of jujube (*Ziziphus spina-christi*)”; if the etymology is correct, a secondary generalization of the meaning to “tree (gen.)” in N would perfectly agree with the fact that a much better candidate for PN “tree” is *\*pər* - Dl *hor*, Dair *or*, Wali *fʊ́r*, K *ber* “wood,” D *bɛr* “wood” (the meaning “tree” in K/D, as in N, is expressed by an innovation: K *ɟowwi*, D *ɟoːwwɪ*, formerly “*Acacia nilotica*”).
|
||||
* “we”: N *ù:* (= ON *u-*). ◊ ON has two 1pl pronouns: *u-* and *e-r-*, the distinction between which is still a matter of debate; Browne, Werner, and others have suggested an old differentiation along the lines of inclusivity, but there is no general consensus on which of the two pronouns may have been inclusive and which one was exclusive. In any case, the two forms are in complementary distribution in modern Nile-Nubian languages: N only has *ùː*, K/D only have *a-r-*. On the external level, K/D forms are better supported (cf. M. *àː-dí*, B *a-di*), but forms cognate with N *ùː* are also occasionally found in Hill Nubian, e.g. Wali *ʊ̌ʔ*.[^we] Without sidetracking into in-depth discussion, it should be acknowledged that *ùː* may well be a PN archaism retained in N.
|
||||
|
||||
[^earth]: Werner. *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 357.
|
||||
|
|
@ -219,20 +219,20 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
|
|||
|
||||
* “dog”: N *múg* (= ON *mug-*). ◊ Not related to PN *\*bəl* (K *wel*, D *wɛl*, M *pə̀ːl*, B *mɛl*, DL *bol*, etc.); no parallels in other Nubian languages.
|
||||
* “dry”: N *sámá*. ◊ Not related to K *soww-od*, D *soww-ɛd* “dry” or their cognates in Hill Nubian (Debri *šua-du*, etc.).
|
||||
* (?) “eat”: N *kàb-* (= ON *kap-*). ◊ ON shows dialectal variety: besides the more common *kap-*, there is also at least one hapax case of ON *kal-* “eat” = K/D *kal*. It is not entirely clear if the two roots are indeed unrelated: a scenario where ON *kap-*, N *kàb-* ← Nile-Nubian *\*kal-b-* (cf. such derived stems as D *kal-bu-* pass. “be eaten,” *kal-bɛːr* “eat to satisfactionʼ) cannot be ruled out. However, it would run into additional phonetic and morphological problems. From an external point of view, only K/D *kal* ← PN *\*kɔl* has sufficient etymological backup; cf. Dl *kol*, M *ə̀l-* id. Regardless of etymologization, N *kàb-* is clearly innovative.
|
||||
* (?) “eat”: N *kàb-* (= ON *kap-*). ◊ ON shows dialectal variety: besides the more common *kap-*, there is also at least one hapax case of ON *kal-* “eat” = K/D *kal*. It is not entirely clear if the two roots are indeed unrelated: a scenario where ON *kap-*, N *kàb-* < Nile-Nubian *\*kal-b-* (cf. such derived stems as D *kal-bu-* pass. “be eaten,” *kal-bɛːr* “eat to satisfactionʼ) cannot be ruled out. However, it would run into additional phonetic and morphological problems. From an external point of view, only K/D *kal* < PN *\*kɔl* has sufficient etymological backup; cf. Dl *kol*, M *ə̀l-* id. Regardless of etymologization, N *kàb-* is clearly innovative.
|
||||
* “fat”: N *sìlèː*. ◊ Not attested in ON; no parallels in any other languages.
|
||||
* “fish”: N *ángíssí*. ◊ Replaces ON *watto-*; neither of the two words has any clear parallels in K/D or any other Nubian languages. A possible, though questionable, internal etymology is “living in water” (from *aɲ-* “to live” + *\*essi* “water,” see notes on “water” below).
|
||||
* “full”: N *mídd-ìr* (= ON *medd- ~ midd-* “to be full/readyʼ). ◊ Possibly from an earlier *\*merid-* (this form is actually attested a few times in ON sources). The item is quite unstable in the Nubian group on the whole; the PN equivalent remains obscure.
|
||||
* (?) “good”: N *màs.* ◊ This word does not have a Nubian etymology; however, the older equivalent *gèn* (= ON *gen-*), mainly used in the modern language in the comparative sense (“better"), is clearly cognate with D *gɛn* “good, healthy” and further with such Hill Nubian items as Dl *ken*, Debri *kɛŋ* “good,” etc., going back to PN *\*gen-*. Were the semantic criteria to be relaxed, this item should have been moved to [I.1](#i1).
|
||||
* “hair”: N *šìgír-tí*. ◊ Not attested in ON. The form is similar to K *siːr* “hair,” but phonetic correspondences would be irregular (*\*-g-* should not be deleted in K). On the contrary, D *dɪl-tɪ* “hair” perfectly corresponds to M *tèː-dì*, B *dill-e*, Dl *tel-ti*, etc. and is reconstructible as PN *\*del-* or *\*dɛl-*. Forms in N and K would seem to be innovations — perhaps the result of separate borrowings from a common non-Nubian source.
|
||||
* “lie /down/”: N *fìyy-ìr* (= ON *pi-*). ◊ No parallels in other languages.
|
||||
* “mountain”: N *mùléː*. ◊ Probably a recent innovation, since the ON equivalent is *naɟ-*. No parallels in other languages. Opposed to M *òːr*, B *kúːr*, Dl *kulí*, Karko *kúrù,* etc. ← PN *\*kur-* (in K/D this word was replaced by borrowings from Arabic).
|
||||
* “name”: N *tàŋìs* (= ON *taŋis-*). ◊ No parallels in other languages. The most common Nubian equivalent for “name” is K *erri*, D *ɛrrɪ*, M *ə́rí*, B *erei*, Dl *or,* etc. ← PN *\*əri*.
|
||||
* “new”: N *míríː* (= ON *miri-*). ◊ No parallels in other languages. The common Nubian root for “new” is K *eːr*, D *ɛr*, B *eːr*, Dl *er* ← PN *\*ɛːr*.
|
||||
* “road”: N *dáwwí* (= ON *dawi- ~ dawu-*). ◊ Although it is likely that *dáwwí* ← *\*dari* (see “rain” above), the word is hardly directly related to K *darub*, D *darɪb*[^17] since the latter is transparently borrowed from Arabic darb-. A separate early borrowing into ON from the same source cannot be excluded, but it is also possible that the word has a completely different origin.
|
||||
* “mountain”: N *mùléː*. ◊ Probably a recent innovation, since the ON equivalent is *naɟ-*. No parallels in other languages. Opposed to M *òːr*, B *kúːr*, Dl *kulí*, Karko *kúrù,* etc. < PN *\*kur-* (in K/D this word was replaced by borrowings from Arabic).
|
||||
* “name”: N *tàŋìs* (= ON *taŋis-*). ◊ No parallels in other languages. The most common Nubian equivalent for “name” is K *erri*, D *ɛrrɪ*, M *ə́rí*, B *erei*, Dl *or,* etc. < PN *\*əri*.
|
||||
* “new”: N *míríː* (= ON *miri-*). ◊ No parallels in other languages. The common Nubian root for “new” is K *eːr*, D *ɛr*, B *eːr*, Dl *er* < PN *\*ɛːr*.
|
||||
* “road”: N *dáwwí* (= ON *dawi- ~ dawu-*). ◊ Although it is likely that *dáwwí* < *\*dari* (see “rain” above), the word is hardly directly related to K *darub*, D *darɪb*[^17] since the latter is transparently borrowed from Arabic darb-. A separate early borrowing into ON from the same source cannot be excluded, but it is also possible that the word has a completely different origin.
|
||||
* “seed”: N *kóɟìr* (= ON *koɟir-*). ◊ No parallels in other languages. The common Nubian root for “seed” is *\*ter-* (K *teːri*, D *tɛːrɪ*, Dl *ter-ti*).
|
||||
* “small”: N *kùdúːd*. ◊ No parallels in other languages, but the word is generally unstable throughout the entire family.
|
||||
* “stand”: N *ménɟ-ìr*. ◊ Attested only once in ON (as *meɟɟ-*), where the usual equivalent for “stand” is *noɟ(ɟ)-*. The corresponding K/D stem is K *teːb*, D *tɛːb*, but a better candidate for PN “stand” is the isogloss between M *tèkk-ér-* and Dl *tek-er* ← PN *\*tek-*.
|
||||
* “stand”: N *ménɟ-ìr*. ◊ Attested only once in ON (as *meɟɟ-*), where the usual equivalent for “stand” is *noɟ(ɟ)-*. The corresponding K/D stem is K *teːb*, D *tɛːb*, but a better candidate for PN “stand” is the isogloss between M *tèkk-ér-* and Dl *tek-er* < PN *\*tek-*.
|
||||
* “stone”: N *kìd* (= ON *kit-*). ◊ No parallels in other languages. The common Nubian root for “stone” is *\*kul-* (K/D *kulu*, M *ùllì*, B *kul-di*).
|
||||
* “tail”: N *ɟèlèw*. ◊ No parallels in other languages. The common Nubian root for “tail” is *\*ɛːb* (K *eːw*, D *ɛːu*, M *èːmí*, Dl *ɛb*, etc.). The old vocabulary of Lepsius still gives aw as an alternate equivalent,[^18] meaning that *ɟèlèw* is clearly an innovation of unclear origin. (Possibly a concatenation of *\*ɛːb* with some different first root?).
|
||||
* “water”: N *ámán* (= ON *aman-*). ◊ No parallels in other languages. The common Nubian root for “water” is *\*əs-ti* (K *essi*, D *ɛssɪ*, M *ə́ːcí*, B *eɟi*, Dl *ɔti*, etc.). The innovative, rather than archaic, character of N *ámán* is clearly seen from the attestation of such idiomatic formations as *ès-kàlèː ~ às-kàlèː* “water wheel” and *màːɲ-éssí* “tear” (lit. “eye-water"); see also notes on the possible internal etymologization of “fish” above. The word *ámán* has frequently been compared to the phonetically identical common Berber equivalent for “water,” *\*ama-n*,[^19] but the inability to find any additional Nobiin–Berber parallels with the same degree of phonetic and semantic similarity make the comparison less reliable than one could hope for.
|
||||
|
|
@ -244,8 +244,8 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
|
|||
|
||||
### III.3. Nobiin-exclusive Recent Borrowings {#iii3}
|
||||
|
||||
* “cloud”: N *géːm* ← Arabic *ʁayma-*. Replaces ON *niɟɟ-*, a common Nubian root (= D *niccɪ*, M *tèccì-dì*, B *naːsi-di*, etc.).
|
||||
* “yellow”: N *asfar* ← Arabic *ʼaṣfar*. The word in general is highly unstable in Nubian and not reconstructible for PN.
|
||||
* “cloud”: N *géːm* < Arabic *ʁayma-*. Replaces ON *niɟɟ-*, a common Nubian root (= D *niccɪ*, M *tèccì-dì*, B *naːsi-di*, etc.).
|
||||
* “yellow”: N *asfar* < Arabic *ʼaṣfar*. The word in general is highly unstable in Nubian and not reconstructible for PN.
|
||||
|
||||
## Analysis of the Data
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ In *Языки Африки,* an alternate hypothesis was put forward, expanding
|
|||
* *kìd* “stone” — cf. Luo *kidi*, Shilluk *kit*, etc. “stone";
|
||||
* *ɟèlèw* “tail” — cf. Nuer *ɟual*, Dinka *yɔl*, Mabaan *yilɛ*, etc. “tail.”
|
||||
|
||||
Additionally, Nobiin *múg* “dog” is similar to East Nilotic *\*-ŋɔk-*[^27] and Kalenjin *\*ŋoːk*,[^28] assuming the possibility of assimilation (*\*ŋ- → m-* before a following labial vowel in Nobiin). These parallels, although still sparse, constitute by far the largest single group of matches between the "pre-Nile Nubian substrate" and a single linguistic family (Nilotic), making this line of future research seem promising for the future — although they neither conclusively prove the Nilotic nature of this substrate, nor eliminate the possibility of several substrate layers with different affiliation.
|
||||
Additionally, Nobiin *múg* “dog” is similar to East Nilotic *\*-ŋɔk-*[^27] and Kalenjin *\*ŋoːk*,[^28] assuming the possibility of assimilation (*\*ŋ- - m-* before a following labial vowel in Nobiin). These parallels, although still sparse, constitute by far the largest single group of matches between the "pre-Nile Nubian substrate" and a single linguistic family (Nilotic), making this line of future research seem promising for the future — although they neither conclusively prove the Nilotic nature of this substrate, nor eliminate the possibility of several substrate layers with different affiliation.
|
||||
|
||||
[^26]: Thelwall, "Lexicostatistical Relations between Nubian, Daju and Dinka," pp. 273–274.
|
||||
[^27]: Vossem, *The Eastern Nilotes,* p. 354.
|
||||
|
|
@ -370,7 +370,7 @@ Starostin, George.  In *Gedenkschrift Gustav Nachtigall 1874–1974,* edited by Herbert Ganslmayr and Hermann Jungraithmayr. Bremen: Übersee-Museum, 1977: pp. 197–210.
|
||||
|
||||
Thelwall, Robin.  In *Etudes Nubiennes, Colloque de Chantilly, 2-6 Juillet 1975,* edited by Jean Leclant and Jean Vercouttier. Cairo: IFAO, 1978: pp. 265-286.
|
||||
Thelwall, Robin.  In *Etudes Nubiennes, Colloque de Chantilly, 2–6 Juillet 1975,* edited by Jean Leclant and Jean Vercouttier. Cairo: IFAO, 1978: pp. 265–286.
|
||||
|
||||
Vasilyev, Mikhail & George Starostin.  ["Lexicostatistical Classification of the Nubian languages and the Issue of the Nile-Nubian Genetic Unity"]. *Journal of Language Relationship* 12 (2014): 51–72.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -4,4 +4,4 @@ title: Claude Rilly
|
|||
|
||||
# Biography
|
||||
|
||||
Something about the author.
|
||||
Claude Rilly is a senior researcher in CNRS (Centre national de la recherche scientifique) in Paris. Since 2019, he also hold the professorship in “Meroitic Language and Civilisation” at the École Pratique des Hautes Etudes, (Paris – Sorbonne). From 2009 to 2014, he was director of the French Archaeological Unit in Khartoum (SFDAS). Since 2008, he leads the French Archaeological Mission of Sedeinga, in Sudanese Nubia. He has written three monographs on Meroitic language: *La langue du Royaume de Meroé* (2007), *Le méroïtique et sa famille lingustique* (2010), and *The Meroitic Language and Writing System* (with A. de Voogt, 2012), as well as a comprehensive “Histoire du Soudan, des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung” (2017).
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ Bechhaus-Gerst, Marianne. "‘Nile-Nubianʼ Reconsidered." In *Topics in Nilo-
|
|||
|
||||
Bender, Lionel M. *The East Sudanic Languages: Lexicon and Phonology.* Carbondale: Southern Illinois University, 2005.
|
||||
|
||||
Bodó, Balázs. "Own Nothing." In *Guerrilla Open Access,* ed. Memory of the World. Coventry: Post Office Press, Rope Press, and Memory of the World, 2018: pp. 16-24.
|
||||
Bodó, Balázs. "Own Nothing." In *Guerrilla Open Access,* ed. Memory of the World. Coventry: Post Office Press, Rope Press, and Memory of the World, 2018: pp. 16–24.
|
||||
|
||||
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. “Nilo-Saharan.” In *The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology,* edited by Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014: pp. 591–607.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Reference in a new issue