Sanskrit Voiceless Aspirates - Etymology of 'likh'
From: Neeraj Mathur (neemathur_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 10/27/04
- Next message: SJ: "Re: Origin of Chinese spoken languages - 5th evidence"
- Previous message: Ekkehard Dengler: "Re: Spanish, a Romance language"
- Next in thread: Miguel Carrasquer: "Re: Sanskrit Voiceless Aspirates - Etymology of 'likh'"
- Reply: Miguel Carrasquer: "Re: Sanskrit Voiceless Aspirates - Etymology of 'likh'"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 01:10:25 +0100
Hi,
I have a question about the voiceless aspirates in Sanskrit. I understand
that most scholars prefer to exclude such a series from Indo-European, on
the basis that, for the most part, they appear only in Indo-Iranian (and a
handful of words in Greek, like 'sphrageomai') and that the evidence of the
one family is not considered sufficient for deciding IE phonology (never
mind that the evidence of Greek is considered sufficient by many scholars
for settling on three laryngeals, despite the fact that this does not really
account for the Hittite reflexes, where so-called H2 and H3 are apparently
not always preserved).
I understand further that there do appear to be several cases where the
combination of stop + laryngeal has given a voiceless aspirate in
Indo-Iranian, and that many people are happy to consider this to be the
principal ulimate source for the series, making it an entirely Indo-Iranian
innovation.
My question now is about the Sanskrit verb 'likh-'. It forms its present
tense in the zero grade (or in Paninian terms, it is not strengthened):
'likhami, likhasi, likhati' etc, suggesting that it was stressed on the
thematic vowel, not the root. In its past participle form, however, it
behaves like a 'set' verb and adds an 'i' vowel: 'likhita'.
All of the above could be explained by an IE verbal root *likwH. Here, an
accent on the thematic vowel in the present could keep the laryngeal
pronounced consonantally; on the other hand, the verbal adjective *likwHtos
would require the laryngeal to be vocalised. From the present, then, the
Sanskrit voiceless aspirate would be expected to appear; the expected
adjective *likita would be levelled on the analogy of the present to
'likhita'.
The problem with this is that this kind of verbal root seems not to have the
right shape: to my knowledge, laryngeals cannot appear (or at least do not
appear) after a stop at the end of a verbal root (it should be closer to the
syllabic nucleus than a stop). If the laryngeal is not an integral part of
the root, however, and is treated as some kind of suffix, we have a
homophone problem (IE *l(e)ikw- is the stem found in Greek
'leipo'/'limpano', Latin (re)linquo).
Given all of the above, what is the etymology for the Sanskrit root 'likh'?
If it is not from IE, why does it seem to conform to peculiarities of IE
inflection (are borrowed roots ever 'set' or are they only 'anit'?)? If it
is IE, how is its shape explained (or are the shape rules simply wrong, with
there being other exceptions)? Is it possibly related to the root of Latin
'lego'? How has the voiceless aspirate arisen in this word?
Thanks very much. As always, both discussion and references are sought and
welcome.
Neeraj Mathur
- Next message: SJ: "Re: Origin of Chinese spoken languages - 5th evidence"
- Previous message: Ekkehard Dengler: "Re: Spanish, a Romance language"
- Next in thread: Miguel Carrasquer: "Re: Sanskrit Voiceless Aspirates - Etymology of 'likh'"
- Reply: Miguel Carrasquer: "Re: Sanskrit Voiceless Aspirates - Etymology of 'likh'"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|