Indo-European linguistics and classical philology
E. R. Kryuchkova. E. A. Kuzmenko. Yu. K. Kuzmenko. The verb tar- ‘to cross, overcome’ in Rgvedic formulae. Latin vocabulary of the monastic everyday practice in Liber revelationum of Richalm from Schöntal (XIII century). Non-Indo-European substrates in Germanic (pp. 511–535)
Author
E. R. Kryuchkova. E. A. Kuzmenko. Yu. K. Kuzmenko (Institute for Linguistic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences Lomonosov Moscow State University Institute for Linguistic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences)
Keywords\n Rigveda, formulae, (apáḥ ná nāvā) duritā tarema, ā yus prá tir-á-. monasticism, the Cistercians of the XIII century, everyday practice vocabulary, medieval Latin language contact, substrates in Germanic, Vasconian substrate, Finno-Ugric substrate, unknown substrate(s), archeology of Northern Europe, genetics of population of Northern Europe
Pages\n 511–535
Summary\n
The paper reexamines the skr. root tar- in two RV formulae: (apáḥ ná nāvā) duritā tarema ‘(as waters by a boat) may we cross/overcome obstacles’ and ā yus prá tir-á- ‘to prolong life’. It is argued that while in the first context the verb denotes overcoming all kinds of obstacles, in the second one the same verb combined with the adverbial preposition pra ‘forth’ denotes prolonging and not overcoming. The modification of the meanings of verbs by the adverbial prepositions is well attested in Vedic texts. Thus, the interpretation of the formula ā yus prá tir-á- as ‘to overcome the lifespan’ = ‘to overcome death’ (Watkins 1995) appears to be doubtful from the synchronic (Vedic) point of view. The paper is dedicated to the Latin vocabulary of the Cistercian monastic everyday practice (XIII century). The analysis is based on “Liber revelationum” – the visionary writing of Richalm, who was the fifth abbot of Cistercian cloister Speciosa Vallis. The Latin vocabulary is divided into two categories: space-time vocabulary and words of hierarchical distinction. Consequently the paper demonstrates important shades of meaning and semantic errors of some monastic words and word combinations. The arguments for and against the hypotheses about prehistoric substrates in Germanic are discussed. The hypotheses are verified by new genetic and archeological data. The hypotheses about 30% of substrate words in Germanic (Feist) or 75% of words from a Vasconian (Basque) substrate in the Indo- European languages of western Europe, including Germanic (Vennemann) can not be accepted because of the clear Indo- European etymology of the most words from both lists, and also because of the fact that a great number of phonological and structural features but only a very small number of words can be borrowed by a language shift. However, some words designating local landscape, flora and fauna can be considered as borrowings from an unknown substrate. As an archeological correlate to the substrate language(s) the Funnel-Beaker culture (4000– 2700) can be suggested, and for a genetic correlate one could suppose the chromosome haplogroups I1 and probably I2b.The Basque (Vasconian) hypothesis of Güntert/Vennemann though not fully acceptable in its lexical part, can be accepted in its structural (cf. vigicimal counting and two verbs “to be”) as well as in its hydronymic part. As an archeological correlate to this substrate the initial period of the Bell- Beaker culture (2800-1900) and the cultures preceding the Bell- Beaker culture can be considered, and for the genetic correlate one could suggest the haplogroup R1b characteristic of the population of western Europe and of the Basques.The Finno-Ugric substrate in Germanic can be traced in some phonological features. Some of these features have a prosodic character(initial stress and different accentuation of VCC- sequence), the others are connected with the Finno-Ugric stadium gradation, which is also connectedwith prosodics (the increased number of long consonants, Verner’s law and other consonant alternations). As expected the great number of prosodicborrowing is followed by a small number of lexical borrowings. Thearchaeological correlate to this substrate could be the Pitted Ware Cultureand Pit-Comb-Ware Culture (4000–2000), the genetic correlate could be themitochondrial haplogroups U.Other linguistic hypotheses about a substrate in Germanic (cf. Hamp,Wagner/Kylstra) can not be verified by the genetic and archeological data.
References\n
  1. Ivanov Vyach.Vs. Lingvisticheskaya problematika etnogeneza slavyan v svete otnosheniy slavyanskogo i baltiyskogo k drugim indoevropeyskim yazykam [Linguistic Problems of Slavs’ Ethnogeny in Light of Slavic and Baltic Languages Relations with Other Indo-European Languages]. Kompleksnye problemy istorii i kul'tury narodov central'noy i yugo-vostochnoy Evropy [Systematic problems of History and Culture of the Peoples of Central and South-East Europe]. Moscow, 1979, pp. 27-34. (In Russ.)
  2. Kacnel'son S.D. Sravnitel'naya akcentologiya germanskikh yazykov [Comparative Accentology of Germanic Languages]. L., 1966. (In Russ.)
  3. Kert G.M. Saamskiy yazyk (kil'dinskiy dialekt). Fonetika, morfologiya, sintaksis [Lappish Language (Kildine Dialect). Phonetics, Morphology, Syntax]. L., 1971. (In Russ.)
  4. Napol'skikh V.V. Vvedenie v istoricheskuyu uralistiku [Introduction to Historical Uralistics]. Izhevsk, 1997. (In Russ.)
  5. Kuz'menko Yu.K. Rannie germancy i ikh sosedi. Lingvistika. arkheologiya, genetika [Early Germans and their Neighbours. Linguistics, Archeology, Genetics]. St. Petersburg, 2011. (In Russ.)
  6. Hakulinen L. Suomen kielen rakenne ja kehitys. Helsinki, 1946 (Russ. ed.: Khakulinen L. Razvitie i struktura finskogo yazyka. Ch. 2. Leksikologiya i sintaksis. Moscow, 1955).
  7. Aikio A. On Germanic-Saami Contacts and Saami Prehistory. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 2006, T. 95, pp. 9-55.
  8. Veekes R. Ancient European loanwords. Historische Sprachforschung, 1996, Bd. 109, pp. 215-236.
  9. Bernhard W. Die Ethnogenese der Germanen aus der Sicht der Anthropologie. Ethnogenese europäischer Völker aus der Sicht der Anthropologie und Vor-und frühgeschichte. Stuttgart, New York, 1986, pp. 263-284.
  10. Blok D.P. Chronologisches zum alteuropäischen Flußnamensystem. Namn och bygd, 1971, Åg. 59, no. 1-4, pp. 149-161.
  11. Blöndal Magnússon Ásgeir. Íslensk orðsifjabók. Reykjavík, 1989.
  12. Boutkan D.F. H. On the form of North European substrate words in Germanic. Historische Sprachforschung, 1998, Bd. 111, pp. 102-133.
  13. Feist S. Indogermanen und Germanen. 2. Aufl. Halle (Saale), 1919.
  14. Förstemann E.W. Geschichte des deutschen Sprachstammes 1. Nordhausen, 1874.
  15. Güntert H. Der Ursprung der Germanen. Heidelberg, 1934.
  16. Hamp E.P. The North European word for „apple“. Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 1979, Bd. 37, pp. 158-166.
  17. Hamp E.P. The Pre-Indo-European language of Northern (Central) Europe. When Worlds Collide: Indo-European and the Pre-Indo-Europeans. The Bellagio Papers. Th. L. Markey and J.A. C. Greppin. Ann Arbor, 1990, pp. 291-310.
  18. Hirt H. Etymologie der neuhochdeutschen Sprache. 2. Aufl. Heidelberg, 1921.
  19. Itkonen E. Über die Betonungsverhältnisse in den finnischugrischen Sprachen. Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 1955, vol. 5, pp. 21-34.
  20. Jones, sir W. The third anniversary course, on the Hindu, delivered 2d of February 1786. Works of Sir William Jones in six volumes, vol. 1. London, 1799, pp. 19-34.
  21. Kallio P. Studia Indo-Uralica. The early relation between Indo-European and Uralic. Leiden, 2004.
  22. Kluge F. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. 23. erw. Auflage. Bearbeitet von E. Seebold. Berlin; New York, 1999.
  23. Koivulehto J. Seit wann leben die Urfinnen im Ostseeraum? Zur relativen und absoluten Chronologie der alten idg. Lehnwortschichten. Symposium Saeculare Societatis Fenno-Ugricae. Janhunen J. (ed.). Helsinki, 1983, pp. 35-157. (MSFOu N 185).
  24. Koivulehto J. Die Datierung der germanisch-finnischen Kontakte, revidiert. Finnisch-Ugrische Sprachen in Kontakt. Hahmo et al (ed.). Maastricht, 1997, pp. 11-33.
  25. Krahe H. Unsere ältesten Flußnamen. Wiesbaden, 1964.
  26. Kusmenko J. Der samische Einfluss auf die skandinavischen Sprachen. Berlin, 2008.
  27. Kylstra A.D. Zur Substratforschung. Orbis, 1967, vol. 16, N 1, pp. 101- 121.
  28. Kylstra A.D. Skandinavisch-lappische Parallelen. Symposium saeculare Societatis Fenno-Ugricae. Suomalais-ugrilainen seura, 1983, pp. 159-177. (Suomalais-ugrilaisen seuran toimituksia; 185).
  29. Kylstra A.D. Zur Frage eines Substrats im Skandinavischen. Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik, 1985, Bd. 23. S.1-19.
  30. Kylstra D. et al. Lexikon der älteren germanischen Lehnwörtern in den ostseefinnischen Sprachen. Amsterdam; Atlanta, 1991.
  31. Lagerkranz E. Strukturtypen und Gestaltwechsel im Lappischen. Helsinki, 1927.
  32. Mc Callister R. On-line dictionary of postulated non-IE substrate vocabulary in the Germanic languages, 1999 Available at: http://s155239215.onelinehome.us/turcic/41TurkicInEnglish/Non- IE_GermanEn.htm.
  33. Mikola T. Studien zur Geschichte der samojedischen Sprachen. Aus dem Nachlass hg. von Béata Wagner-Nagy. Szeged. (= Studia uralo-altaica; 45).
  34. Neumann G. Substrate im Germanischen? Nachrichten der Akademie der Wiss. in Göttingen. Philol.-Hist. Klasse, 1971, no. 4.
  35. Orel V. A Handbook of Germanic etymology. Leiden; Boston, 2003.
  36. Polomé E.C. Substrate Lexicon in Germanic. NOWELE, 1989, vol. 14. October, pp. 53-73.
  37. Polomé E.C. Types of linguistic evidence for early contact: Indo- Europeans and Non-Indo-Europeans. When worlds collide: The Indo-Europeans and the Pre-Indo-Europeans. Markey T.L., Greppin J.A.C. (eds.). Ann Arbor, 1990, pp. 266-290.
  38. Polomé E.C. The indo-europeanization of Northern Europe: the linguistic evidence. Journal of Indo-European studies, 1990, vol. 18, pp. 331-338.
  39. Polomé E.C. Linguistics and archaeology: differences in perspective in the study of prehistoric cultures. Language Typology 1988: Typological Models in Reconstruction. ed. by W.P. Lehmann and Helen-Jo Jakusz Hewitt. 111-134.
  40. Posti L. From Pre-Finnic to Late Proto-Finnic: Studies on the Development of the consonant system. Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen, 1953, Bd. 31, pp. 1-91.
  41. Salmons J.C. Accentual change and language contact: Comparative survey and a case study of early Northern Europe. Stanford, 1992.
  42. Schrijver P. Animal, vegetable and mineral: Some Western European substratum words. Sound law andanalogy. A. Lubotsky (ed.). Amsterdam, 1997, pp. 293-316.
  43. Schrijver P. Lost languages in Northern Europe. Early contacts between Uralic and Indo-Europeans. Linguistic and archaeological considerations. C. Carpelan, A. Parpola, P. Koskikallio (eds.). Helsinki, 2001, pp. 417-429.
  44. Schrijver P. Early development of the vowel systems of North-West Germanic and Saami. Languages in prehistoric Europe. A. Bammesberger, Th. Vennemann (eds.). Heidelberg, 2003, pp. 195-226.
  45. Steinbauer D.H. Neues Handbuch des Etruskischen. St. Katharinen, 1999.
  46. Tschirch F. Geschichte der deutschen Sprache, Bd. 1. Berlin, 1966.
  47. Vennemann Th. Etymologische Beziehungen im alten Europa. Europa Vasconica–Europa Semitica. ed. P. Noel, H. Aziz. Berlin; New York, 2003, pp. 203-297 (first published in: Der Ginkgo Baum: Germanistisches Jahrbuch für Nordeuropa, 1995, Bd. 13. 39-115).
  48. Vennemann Th. Zur Entstehung des Germanischen. Sprachwissenschaft, 2000, Bd. 25, pp. 233-269.
  49. Vennemann Th. Languages in prehistoric Europe north of the Alps. Languages in prehistoric Europe. A. Bammesberger, Th. Vennemann (eds.). Heidelberg, 2003, pp. 319-332.
  50. Vennemann Th. Phol, Balder and the birth of Germanic. Etymologie, Entlehnungen und Entwicklungen. Festschrift für Jorma Koivulehto zum 70. Geburtstag. I. Hyvärinen et al (ed.). Helsinki, 2004, pp. 439-457.
  51. Vennemann Th. Contact and prehistory: The Indo-European Northwest. The Handbook of language contact, 2010, pp. 380-405. R. Hickey (ed.).
  52. Wagner H. Nordeuropäische Lautgeographie. Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 1964, vol. 29, pp. 225-298.
  53. Wiik K. The Uralic and Finno-Ugric phonetic substratum in Proto- Germanic. Linguistica Uralica, 1997, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 258-280.
  54. Wiik K. North-European population and languages. Indo-European-Uralic- Siberian linguistic and cultural contacts. A. Künnap (ed.). Tartu, 1999, pp. 292-300.
  55. Wiklund K.B. Entwurf einer urlappischen Lautlehre, Bd. I. Helsingfors, 1896.
  56. Wiik K. Eurooppalaisten juuret. Juväskylä, 2002.
  57. Wiik K. On the emergence of the main Indo-European language groups of Europe through adstratal influence. The Roots of Peoples and Languages of Northern Euroasia IV. K. Julku (ed.). Oulu, 2002, pp. 285-292.