tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post2142920417079878936..comments2024-02-19T12:11:32.695+01:00Comments on Language Evolution: Tense Wars, and the Survival of the PerfectPiotr Gąsiorowskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comBlogger41125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-14984589156251366862019-07-28T20:48:58.998+02:002019-07-28T20:48:58.998+02:00I think that Anatolian is not very different regar...I think that Anatolian is not very different regarding verbal tenses and aspects than the very Protoindoeuropean. But PIE probably had seeds for the perfect and aspects in the form of derivational elements that could be used rather freely, but was not any part of the verbal paradigm yet, and probably some of the deverbal derivations found in Anatolian are those that later got used to form perfective, imperfective and perfectum stems in the later stages of IE.Knut Holthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06569037251709619563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-70542129686324775692013-03-14T13:05:27.210+01:002013-03-14T13:05:27.210+01:00Thanks, I will!Thanks, I will!Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-39445738728460030702013-03-14T12:59:54.473+01:002013-03-14T12:59:54.473+01:00One day or another, I'll post about these thin...One day or another, I'll post about these things on my own blog, so feel free to make any comments there.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-803767720564094542013-03-13T18:58:54.307+01:002013-03-13T18:58:54.307+01:00Frankly, I'd rather not do it here. We have st...Frankly, I'd rather not do it here. We have strayed far enough from anything related to the topic of my post.Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-3256261431913980852013-03-13T12:28:17.595+01:002013-03-13T12:28:17.595+01:00Let's forget Etruscan huθ for the moment and g...Let's forget Etruscan <b>huθ</b> for the moment and get back to IE '8'. Kartvelian <b>*o(ś)tx(w)</b> '4' (Georgian nad Mengrel <b>otx-</b>, Svan <b>woštx(w)</b>, Laz <b>o(n)txo-</b>) is apparently a loanword from Paleo-IE (a better term than "PIE") which <i>includes</i> the dual suffix. This would imply the numeral was originally a dual of '2', and would make it cognate to Uralic <b>*kakta</b> and Omotic <b>*gutto</b> '2'. <br /><br />This root has been studied by Nostraticists such as Dolgopolsky (who didn't include the IE numeral, though) and its original meaning can be reconstructed as 'to join, to couple', reflected in Baltic <b>*kek(e)t-ā</b> 'troop' and Slavic <b>*četá:</b> 'couple', in turn related to Latin <b>catēna</b> 'chain', <b>caterva</b> 'crown, troop', presumably borrowed from Etruscan.<br /><br />What we don't know is the reason of the shift from '4' to '8' at an early date, which left a vacant niche occupied by different words in Anatolian and the rest of the historically attested IE languages.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-57247875513116660282013-03-13T10:38:03.939+01:002013-03-13T10:38:03.939+01:00Some of the oddities of the Proto-Germanic consona...Some of the oddities of the Proto-Germanic consonantal system could be explained if it was based upon a <i>tenseness</i> rather than a voice contrast. So it's time these old "laws" were reformulated in a entirely new framework.<br /><br />However, I'd retain the term "Grimm's Law" for the spiration of pre-Proto-Germanic tense/voiceless stops, which were phologically aspirated (as well as for similar changes in other languages), and call his original proposal "Great Consonant Shift", after the "Great Vowel Shift" in Modern English.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-86852951838812105962013-03-12T14:56:37.835+01:002013-03-12T14:56:37.835+01:00The omission of a diacritic is irrelevant, and no ...<i>The omission of a diacritic is irrelevant, and no great linguistic expertise is needed in such a simple matter.</i><br />I won't call the correct identification of the Etruscan numerals a "simple matter". I also disagree with your <i>belief</i> about Pre-Greek, as there's other evidence which contradicts it (see above).<br /><br />I also don't quite understand your argument about the genitive of a numeral can't be used as an ordinal.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-3222144558537432012013-03-12T14:39:41.730+01:002013-03-12T14:39:41.730+01:00The omission of a diacritic is irrelevant, and no ...The omission of a diacritic is irrelevant, and no great linguistic expertise is needed in such a simple matter. The identification of <b>θu, zal, ci</b> as '1, 2, 3' does require linguistic arguments and has been securely established mostly on the basis of their use in the Liber Linteus. The <b>only</b> arguments in favour of <b>huθ</b> = 4 are those you have already presented, both of them hopelessly weak. The interpretation of <i>Hyttenia</i> is based on untestable assumption about Pelasgians and Pelasgian toponyms, and <i>Χarun huθs</i> (sic! not **<i>Χarun huθ</i>) does not meant 'the fourth Charun': <i>huθs</i> is a genitive, not an ordinal numeral.Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-80812428738628870672013-03-12T14:21:21.099+01:002013-03-12T14:21:21.099+01:00What's that got to do with Etruscan? Can you d...<i>What's that got to do with Etruscan? Can you demonstrate that Pelasgian was related to Etruscan?</i><br />Although it would be <i>naïve</i> to assume there was only one Pre-Greek language, as Beekes do, some Pre-Greek material has Etruscan counterpats. For example, Greek <b>ksanthós</b> 'yellow' ~ Etruscan <b>zam(a)θi</b> 'gold'.<br /><br />I suppose Pelasgian <b>*hutt</b> reflects an intermediate form with <b>*-kt-</b> > <b>-tt-</b>.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-50542114472356629472013-03-12T14:11:28.809+01:002013-03-12T14:11:28.809+01:00Besides that, there's another evidence: In the...Besides that, there's another evidence: In the Tlomb of Th Charons, the 4th figure of the demon Charon is labelled <b>Χarun huθ</b> 'the fourth Charon'. See Giulano & Larissa Bonfante: <a href="http://books.google.es/books?id=VWGN6e5Rzf8C&pg=PA127&lpg=PA127&dq=charun+huths&source=bl&ots=OdZ-JOsbLn&sig=ybcT8OekaTjoiFEekakJygIx6eY&hl=ca&sa=X&ei=9AI_UbrAB6OS7AbWmIDgAw&ved=0CFkQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=charun%20huths&f=false" rel="nofollow">The Etruscan Language: An Introduction, revised edition</a>. Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-996579891192392752013-03-12T14:05:09.214+01:002013-03-12T14:05:09.214+01:00Thank you very much.
Thne problem is the authors...Thank you very much. <br /><br />Thne problem is the authors aren't linguist themselves (notice how they mispelled <b>śa</b> as <b>**sa</b>), so they rely on the view of specialists and they limit themselves to decide about the distribution of 4 and 6. But this is a <i>logical fallacy</i>, as the dice argument applies to the <i>relative</i> complementary (on dice sides) distribution of numerals 1-6, 2-5, 3-4 and NOT to their actual value.<br /><br />So if we know from independent evidence (see above) that <b>huθ</b> = 4, then it follows <b>θu</b> = 3. So it turns out that the wrong assigned numerals where 1/3 instead of 4/6. So the Etruscan numerals 1-6 would be:<br /><br /><b>ci</b> = 1<br /><b>zal</b> = 2<br /><b>θu</b> = 3<br /><b>huθ</b> = 4<br /><b>maχ</b> = 5<br /><b>śa</b> = 6Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-80765481172300565882013-03-12T13:04:43.004+01:002013-03-12T13:04:43.004+01:00It's behind a paywall, but I have emailed you ...It's behind a paywall, but I have emailed you a copy.Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-44333476213377346552013-03-12T11:16:56.248+01:002013-03-12T11:16:56.248+01:00Unfortunately, this is a pay-per-view article.Unfortunately, this is a pay-per-view article.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-28920171759094083032013-03-12T10:39:56.984+01:002013-03-12T10:39:56.984+01:00Here are the authors' conclusions:
The result...Here are the authors' conclusions:<br /><br /><i>The results of the mathematical analysis indicate the following:<br /><br />• Only two of the 15 theoretically possible non-enantiomorphic combinations of six numbers on the cube face are observed in the ancient Etruscan dice.<br /><br />• The two observed combinations—that is, (1–2, 3–4, 5–6) [i.e., numerical difference between opposite faces = 1] and (1–6, 2–5, 3–4) [i.e., numerical sum of opposite faces = 7]—have a marked temporal distribution, with the first one being invariably in use before the fifth century bc, and the second one being invariably in use after the third century bc. In the fourth century bc,<br />both combinations were in use in central–southern Etruria.<br /><br />• The assessed use of only two numerical permutations in ancient Etruscan dice, and the consistent use of 3 and 4 as opposite numbers, allows unambiguous assignment of the Etruscan numerals 4 and 6 to their graphic representation </i>sa<i> and </i>huth<i>, respectively. Combinatorial analysis of the Etruscan dice finally allows straightforward solution of a longstanding linguistic problem.</i><br /><br />Incidentally, the two dice with words turned out to be of the "modern" type (with numbers on the opposite faces adding up to 7)Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-88713188882284750142013-03-11T22:28:59.561+01:002013-03-11T22:28:59.561+01:00I'll read the article and gave you a more educ...I'll read the article and gave you a more educated opinion.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-425200925646877372013-03-11T22:14:49.079+01:002013-03-11T22:14:49.079+01:00Let me explain it for you. The authors of the stud...Let me explain it for you. The authors of the study examined 93 Etruscan dice, 91 with pips and 2 with words. Of the 15 possible combinations only two are attested, and even those two do not occur at random. One of them (1-2, 3-4, 5-6) is used on all dice before the 5th c. BC, and the other (1-6, 2-5, 3-4) on all dice after the 3rd c. BC. In <b>both</b> 3 and 4 are paired. That proves that <i>śa</i> = 4 whatever the arrangement of the dice with words. Therefore, <i>huθ</i> = 6. Of course you may deny reality, stop your ears and repeat "this is not evidence". But don't ask me to take such contrarianism seriously.Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-20600977594834902422013-03-11T21:54:39.541+01:002013-03-11T21:54:39.541+01:00On the contrary, in Antiquity, the sum property of...On the contrary, in Antiquity, the sum property of dice wasn't exactly invariable, due to imprefect manufacturing or other reasons. So this "evidence" cam hardly be reliable.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-79291969228192069522013-03-11T21:46:01.093+01:002013-03-11T21:46:01.093+01:00What's that got to do with Etruscan? Can you d...What's that got to do with Etruscan? Can you demonstrate that Pelasgian was related to Etruscan? Can you prove that the Pelasgian name also meant 'the Four Cities'?<br /><br />The dice argument is waterproof in comparison, since in <b>either</b> of the two (and only two) attested numerical combinations 3 and 4 are on the opposite faces of the die.Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-11048509145770612072013-03-11T21:19:47.178+01:002013-03-11T21:19:47.178+01:00There's direct evidence that Etruscan huθ is &...There's direct evidence that Etruscan <b>huθ</b> is '4'. The Pre-Greek toponym <b>Hyttenia</b> is translated as Greek <b>Tetrapolis</b> '4 cities'.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-86115348684617168502013-03-11T19:52:37.282+01:002013-03-11T19:52:37.282+01:00Your point being...?
Your point being...?<br />Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-76563936747491145122013-03-11T19:28:08.742+01:002013-03-11T19:28:08.742+01:00Except that it's now quite clear that huθ mean...<i>Except that it's now quite clear that huθ means '6'. See Artioli, Nociti and Angelini (2011).</i><br />Paraphrasimg Einstein, comparative linguists don't play dice.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-47876593069803358872013-03-11T19:00:15.076+01:002013-03-11T19:00:15.076+01:00In this model, Grimm's Law in Proto-Germanic b...<i>In this model, Grimm's Law in Proto-Germanic becames greatly simplified, reduced only to the spirantion of the voiceless aspirated series.</i><br /><br />This ignores the fact that PGmc. *<b>b, *d, *g, *gʷ</b> were actually voiced fricatives rather than stops. It also fails to account for the different development of Celtic loans in Germanic before and after Grimm's Law, and does not allow one to connect Kluge's Law with the Grimm/Verner complex of changes in a phonetically plausible way.Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-11993995494525415722013-03-11T18:51:40.448+01:002013-03-11T18:51:40.448+01:00For example, the IE numeral *Hok´te-H3(u) '8&#...<i>For example, the IE numeral *Hok´te-H3(u) '8' can be considered as a fossilized dual of a numeral '4' reflected in Etruscan huθ. Although purely anecdotical, this illustrates my point.</i><br /><br />Except that it's now quite clear that <i>huθ</i> means '6'. See <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-4754.2011.00596.x/abstract" rel="nofollow">Artioli, Nociti and Angelini (2011)</a>.<br /><br />Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-18249369207430450332013-03-11T18:47:56.681+01:002013-03-11T18:47:56.681+01:00From external comparison and internal data, I gath...From external comparison and internal data, I gather that traditional "voiced aspirated" (series III) were actually <i>plain voiced</i>. By contrast, traditional voiced (series II) weren't actually voiced but rather ejective or pre-glottalized in an earlier phase. Also traditional voiceless (series I) were phonologically aspirated, although this feature was only relevant in Germanic and Armenian (and partially also in Celtic). This is more or less what the so-called "glottalic" theory states, although they're other proposed variants.<br /><br />In this model, Grimm's Law in Proto-Germanic becames greatly simplified, reduced only to the spirantion of the voiceless aspirated series. The hardest thing to explain is the shift of series III in Italic and Greek, but I think this an areal feature due to language contact which also involved Etruscan (or rather its ancestor).Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4569985457770997949.post-81638957725112695552013-03-11T18:21:32.872+01:002013-03-11T18:21:32.872+01:00Like Newton's gravitational theory, the tradit...Like Newton's gravitational theory, the traditional PIE model can still be useful for some practical purposes, but it's far from being an ultimate theory like Einstein's.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.com