アナトリア祖語の子音組織についての一考察

DOI Web Site

書誌事項

タイトル別名
  • A Remark on the Consonant System in Proto-Anatolian
  • アナトリア ソゴ ノ シイン ソシキ ニ ツイテ ノ イチコウサツ

この論文をさがす

抄録

One of the most dramatic developments in recent Indo-European studies is the increase of data written in minor Anatolian languages: Palaic, Cuneiform Luvian, Hieroglyphic Luvian, Lycian, Lydian, etc. These languages had little more than names a few decades ago compared with rich documents in Hittite. The increase in the database has, however, led us to a position where all the Indo-European languages of ancient Anatolia will contribute to the reconstruction of Proto-Anatolian.<br>In this paper an attempt has been made to show that the Proto-Indo-European contrast between *d and *dh was still preserved at the stage of Proto-Anatolian. This assumption is based on different reflexes of *d and *dh before *i in daughter languages. The Hittite ablative ending -za corresponds to Coneiform Luvian -ati, Hieroglyphic Luvian -ati, -ari and Lycian -adi, -edi. Similarly, the Hittite reflexive particle -za corresponds to Palaic -ti, Cuneiform Luvian -ti and Hieroglyphic Luvian -ti, -ri. The spelling of intervocalic -t- in Cuneiform Luvian and rhotacized r in Hieroglyphic Luvian, among others, suggest that these minor Anatolian forms include Proto-Anatolian *d. On the other hand, Hittite 2 sg. imperative ending -t, represented by it “You go!” which perfectly corresponds to Sanskrit ihi and Greek 'ιθι (<*h1i-dhi), and a particle -ti attached to Old Hittite preterite middle endings (<*-dhi; cf. Sanskrit -mahi and Gathic Avestan -maidi <*-ma-dhi) do not show assibilation. These two kinds of correspondences can be best explained by assuming that Proto-Anatolian had notmerged Proto-Indo-European *dh with *d.<br>It should be noticed that the view presented here is not conclusive yet and needs further investigation in many respects.

収録刊行物

  • オリエント

    オリエント 37 (2), 1-15, 1994

    一般社団法人 日本オリエント学会

キーワード

詳細情報 詳細情報について

問題の指摘

ページトップへ