read10.docx
- 文档编号:24312557
- 上传时间:2023-05-26
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:26
- 大小:43.06KB
read10.docx
《read10.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《read10.docx(26页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
read10
CHAPTERTEN
HERMANGRASSMANN
CONCERNINGTHEASPIRATESANDTHEIR
SIMULTANEOUSPRESENCEINTHEINITIAL
ANDFINALOFROOTS
"UeberdieAspiratenundihrgleichzeitigesVorhandensein
imAn-undAuslautederWurzeln,"Zeitschriftfür
vergleichendeSprachforschungaufdemGebietedesDeutschen,
GriechischenundLateinischen,12.2(1863),81-138
Editor'sIntroduction
Grassmann'sisoneofthecelebratedarticlesoflinguistics.Rightly,becauseitlargelyledtotheconvictionthatreconstructedlanguagesmustbesetupforanylanguagefamily.BeforeGrassmann,Sanskrithadservedasthemeasureagainstwhichformsintheotherlanguageswerecompared.OnthesurfaceitmayseemthatallearlierscholarsviewedSanskritasthesourceofthevariousotherIndo-Europeanlanguages;buttheirwritingsindicatethattheywerenotquitesosimple.BecauseofthetransparencyofitsformsSanskritseemedclosertotheagglutinativeperiod,throughwhichtheIndo-Europeanlanguageswerethoughttohavepassed,thandidanyoftheotherlanguages.Theunparalleledantiquityofitsmaterialssupportedthisview.Accordingly,soundsandformsoftheotherIndo-EuropeanlanguagesmightwellbecontrastedwiththoseofSanskrit.BydemonstratingthatGermanicactuallywas"older"inonephonologicalpatternthanwasSanskrit,GrassmannunderminedthepositionofSanskritasthelanguagewhichwastheearliestattainableinIndo-Europeanlinguistics.
BythisdemonstrationGrassmannalsounderminedthenotionthatlanguagedevelopedfromananalytictoasyntheticstructurethroughanagglutinative.Withithedidawaywiththecloserelationshipthathadbeenobservedpreviouslybetweengenealogicalandtypologicalclassification.Afterthepublicationofhisarticlewefindfewerandfewerreferencestothetypologicalstructureofalanguageincomparativetreatments;andwhentypologyistakenupbyFinckinthedefinitivetreatmentofthenineteenth-centuryapproachthereisnoreferencetogenealogicalclassification.Theappealingnotionofastraightforwarddevelopmentoflanguagehadbeenabandoned.
ThesecontributionstogenerallinguistictheorywereachievedbyexplanationofonephonologicalprobleminIndo-Europeanstudies.WehavenotedhowvonRaumerhadhitontheexplanationearlier,buthadstateditsobrieflythatitremainedwithoutimpact.WehavealsonotedLottner'simportantpreparatorywork.NeitherreducesGrassmann'sachievement.Hisarticleisadmirablycomposed.Firstheexaminespreviousattemptsatexplanation,thenthedata.Hisexaminationofbothiscomplete.Whenhepresentshisconclusionsthereisnoquestionoftheirvalidity.
Hisconvincingexplanationledlinguiststodealwithentireforms,notmerelywithsinglesegments.Inthiswayitpreparedfortheconcernwithentireutterances,demandedbySievers.Unfortunatelythisconcernwithentireformsandwithentireutteranceswasoftenneglectedsubsequentlyintheattempttosolvethenumerousminorproblemswithinthevariouslanguages.
ItisalsonoteworthythatGrassmann,withhisbackgroundinmathematics,objectstofancifultheory--theequilibriumtheory.Heinsistsonan"organic"approach;speechsoundsmustbeclassifiedinaccordancewiththeirorgansofarticulation.Foranunderstandingoflinguisticchangeaknowledgeofarticulatoryphoneticsisindispensable.Tobesure,hestumblesoverLottner'snotionofaWahlverwandtschaftbetweenmediaeandliquids;butsuchanotionisnotcompletelyincontrastwitharticulatoryphonetics,forbothsetsofsoundsarevoicedandusuallylenisinarticulation.Grassmann'sachievementisgreat,eventhoughheleftafieldforVernertoconquer.Hisoverallprocedureisunobjectionable.All"exceptions"havebeendealtwith.Onecouldnotaskformorerigorousmethods.
HermannGrassmann(1809-1877)wasabankerwhowascompelledtoretirebecauseoftuberculosis[seeN.E.Collinge,TheLawsofIndo-European,Amsterdam:
JohnBenjamins,1985,p.47].Inhisleisureheoccupiedhimselfwithmathematicsandlinguistics.Hemadeimportantcontributionstobothfields.Hisworkonnon-commutativealgebraisanimportantcontributiontomathematics.Forlinguistics,besideshisclarificationofthereflexesoftheIndo-Europeanaspirates,hepreparedacompletedictionaryoftheRig-VedawhichisstillindispensableforIndo-EuropeanistsandforSanskritists.Otherworkswhichwouldbemajorformostscholarsroundouthislistofachievements,suchashiscompletetranslationoftheRig-Veda.Heremainsoneofthegreatfiguresinlinguistics.
ThequestionofwhethertherewereoriginallyrootsinIndo-Europeanwithaspiratesinitiallyandfinallyhasinmyopinionnotyetbeendecided.Itisnotsurprisingthat,beforeSanskritandalsothecomparativeinvestigationoflanguagesgainedinfluenceonClassicalphilology,manygrammarians-impelledbythemovingaboutofaspiration,e.g.intrékhō,thréksomai-assumedrootsingreatestabundanceforGreekwithinitialandfinalaspirateandinthiswaydefacedGreekgrammarinpartwithrootsthatneverexisted,aslinguisticcomparisonshowed;forGoth.þragjaaswellastheCelticroottrag,PBB1.167besideGktrékhōforbidsettingupaformthrekh**astheoriginalformoftheroot.Itwasnaturalthattheinvestigatorsstartingoutfromcomparisonoflanguages,intheirfirstunhappinessaboutsuchmonstrositiesrejectedallrootswithoriginalinitialandfinalaspirates;andsubsequentlytheprinciplethattherewerenorootsofthistypewasheldasakindofaxiominlinguistics,thoughinmorerecenttimesaninclinationtothatolderpointofviewmayagainberecognizedinvariousplaces(cf.Ahrens,GriechischeFormenlehre§152,SchleicherCompendium§143).ButasfarasIknowanactualinvestigationhasnotyetbeenundertakenaboutthematter.Encouragementofsuchaninvestigationistobethemainpurposeofthepresentessay.Yetitisimpossibletotakeupthematterwithouttouchingthedisputedquestionwhetherthehardorthesoftaspiratesweretheoriginal.Forevenifthemostessentialresultsoftheinvestigationarenotdependentontheanswertothisdisputedquestion,theentirepointofviewandtheformofthepresentationinitsdetailswillbequitedifferent,dependingontheanswertothisquestion,sothatitisnotpossibletoavoidithere.Iwillthereforefirsttreatthisquestionandonlyafterwardsproceedtotheactualtask.
Firstessay:
Onthepresenceofhardandsoftaspiratesbeforethelinguisticseparation.(82-110).
[InthisessayGrassmannassumestwokindsofaspirates,thevoicelessaswellasthevoiced,specifyingthatheisdealingwiththeoriginalIndo-Europeanlanguage.AttheendoftheessayhestatesthattheGermanicshiftbeganwiththelossoftheaspiration,sharingthisphoneticmodificationwithSanskritandGreek.ThechangeoftenuesinGermanicheviewsasrelated.Andonlythechangeofmediaetotenuesdoesheconsiderwithoutparallelintheotherlanguages,thoughhestatesthatittookplacetorestorethebalancewhichwaslostinthefirsttwomodifications.]
Secondessay:
Ontheoriginalpresenceofrootswhoseinitialandfinalcontainedanaspirate.(110-138).
Withregardtothequestionabouttheoriginalpresenceofrootswithaspiratesininitialandfinalpositionitisaboveallnecessarytonotethetwofollowingwell-knowneuphoniclawsofGreekandSanskrit,whichIgivehereforthesakeofclarity.
Ifarootendswithanaspirateandbeginswithaconsonantcapableofaspiration,andifitsfinallosesitsaspirationthroughtheoperationofsomeothersoundlaw,theaspirationmovestotheinitial.ButthisistrueofSanskritonlywhenthefinaloftherootisasoftaspirateandwhentheinitialisanon-palatalmedia;andforGreekonlywhentheinitialisτ.
ForGreekonlyτεύχω,τυγάνωwiththeircommonfutureτεύξομαιetc.andτρῡχω,futureτρύξωprovideexceptions.Fortheformer,asshownabove,χresultsasalatermodificationoftheoriginalκ,whichisalsomaintainedinthederivationsandintheaoristτετυκεῖν,butthiscannotbedemonstratedforτρύ-χ-ω(fromτρύ-ω).ThislawisalsovalidinGreekwhenthefinalrepresentsanoriginallyhardaspirate,asinταχύ,Comp.θάσσων(seethefirstessay),andalsowhentherootnevercontainedanaspirateinitiallyaswellasfinallyatthesametime,asinτρέχω(=Goth.þragja),fut.θρέξομαι.Thesecondlawwecanexpressingeneralasfollows:
Ifaspiratesthatbelongtothesamerootoccurintwoconsonantgroupsofawordwhichareseparatedbyavowel,thenoneofthem,usuallythefirst,losesitsaspiration.Onlyrarelydoesthishappenwhentheaspiratesbelongtodifferentroots,ortodifferentsuffixes,oroneofthemtoarootandtheothertoasuffix,orwhenmorethanonevowelstandsbetweentheconsonantgroups(asinέκε-χειρία,τηλεθοων).
Thereisnodoubtthatreduplicationoriginallyarosefromarepetitionoftheentirerootsyllable,asespeciallytheformationofintensivesillustrates(e.g.dar-dhar-shi'youholdfirm'fromdhar,dhṛ,(παμφαίνωfromthethemeφαν);originallythentheaspiratemusthavebeenrepeatedassuchtoo,andonlylaterwhentherepeatedrootcombinedintoonewordandtheabove-statedlawofeuphonyenteredintoeffectdidoneoftheaspiratesgiveupitsaspiration.Indeedwefindthisaspirationoftenmaintainedstillinonomatapoeicwords,butinthesetheabovelaw,whichwoulddisturbtheintendedimitationofthesoundsofnature,isnotapplied(gharghara,ghurghurā,gharghurghā,ghurghura,jharjhára,jhinjhi,etc.)
Thedecisionwithregardtotheformoftherootitselfisnotsosimple.ItwouldfollowfromtheabovelawthattherewouldbenorootsinGreekandSanskritwhichsimultaneouslyshow
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- read10