ThePIERoot.htm
THE
ROOT
(and its developmental antecedents)
in Proto-Indo-European languages
۩ dedicated to the memory of Winfred P. Lehmann ۩
(Nostratic Hypothesis)
by Patrick C. Ryan
(rev. 6 / 19 / 2008)
The purpose of this short essay is to propose a theory to account for the form of the root
as it is presented in PIE studies.
In order to put it in context, the historical antecedents of the PIE root
will be briefly discussed.
Language, like all things in the real world, developed principally through accretion.
Since the simplest PIE root-form is *CV, we shall begin to investigate at that stage of development although it is speculatively possible to semantically analyze
the open monosyllable into smaller segments
|
The PIE Open Monosyllabic Root
Very few open monosyllabic roots have survived into PIE from earlier stages in the development of the language (pre-PIE).
With the phonolgical inventory hypothesized for the Proto-Language (30 consonants and 3 vowels), 90 open monosyllables were possible; and each possible monosyllable was utilized with a broad semantic range.
Eventually, these 90 open monosyllables became insufficient to meet the expression needs of these speakers; and the obvious solution, to compound two monosyllables, was adopted. Excluding the second reduplications in the series, this produced a potential semantic inventory of 8100 *CVCV and *CV words (roots), which was ample.
These compounds were marked by the presence of the stress-accent, which could appear on either of the two open monosyllables in a compound (*'CVCV or *CV'CV).
If the compound was understood nominally, initial syllable stress-accent signified singularity while final syllable stress-accent signified plurality.
If the compound was understood verbally, initial syllable stress-accent signified momentary (punctual) aspect while final syllable stress-accent signified durative aspect.
In PIE, the *V of each or both of the two syllables could be long or short; naturally long vowels were caused by earlier phonological processes. Accordingly, roots could theoretically appear in the following forms:
There are some indications among pronouns that an early way of indicating the plural with open monosyllabic roots (at least, with the inanmimates) was by adding -*'nV (
NO, 'basket'). This possibly contrasted with a new singular in -*'nV ( NA, 'one').
At this time, I have no idea what the animate equivalent plural formant, if any, may or may not have been.
*CV
*CV:
*'CVCV — *CV'CV
*'CV:CV — *CV:'CV
*'CV:CV: — *CV:'CV:
The PIE Root
According to the Vocalic Theory, the qualities of the PIE long vowels ( *e: / *a: / *o: ) and the quality of the short vowel *a can be better explained by assuming, that, in the Pontic stage of Nostratic, i.e. pre-PIE:
1) there was a single 'laryngeal' that had the phonological value of [h]; and
2) the retention in PIE of short vowel qualities ( [ *e / *a / *o ] ), originating in pre-PIE, was due to their being lengthened by [h]: ( *e: / *a: / *o: );
3) which lengthened the short vowels by being placed either immediately before or after them;
4) in addition, that there were three naturally long vowels ( *e: / *a: / *o: ) which arose through compensation when the aspiration of aspirated voiceless stops ( *p(h), *t(h), *k(h)(1) ), aspirated spirants ( *fh, *sh, *xh ), aspirated nasals ( mh, *nh, *nkh ) and the aspirated rhotic ( *rh ) —— was relinquished; and these consonants merged with their unaspirated counterpart voiceless stops, spirants, nasals, and rhotic;
5) a fifth source of long vowels has been proposed for pre-PIE in the form of an inflectional but possibly also lexically differential lengthening of the root vowel. This is a known phenomenon from the PIE-derived Indo-Iranian branch, where it is called vŗddhi but is scantily attested (if at all) in the other branches. Until more evidence is forthcoming from other branches, I reject this as a pre-PIE source of lengthened vowels, and will regard it as a strictly Indo-Iranian viz. (P)IE innovation but not pre-PIE.
6) PIE short *a has the following sources:
1)) shortening of PIE *a: according to the Principle of Phonological Entropy, v. infra;
1))) since all pre-PIE short *a had become *A, v. infra;
2)) shortening due to the closing of a formerly open syllable ending in a:.
In a further development, during the Pontic stage of Nostratic, shared by both pre-PIE and pre-PS ( Proto-Semitic and Hieroglyphic Egyptian branches of pre-PAA), all short vowels became *V(owel) [or *A{blautvokal}], which may have been realized as schwa ([ə]), preceded by y, no glide, or w.
1. In PIE, *A became *é, *ò, *° ( currently written *e, *o ) or *Ø, according to the Ablautsstufe or stress-accent-grade required by the workings of the stress-accent,
which stress-accented the root vowel in a *CÁC(V) form
for a singular nominal or punctual (momentary) verbal root (citation form);
or the final vowel (*CACÁ)
for a plural nominal or durative (non-momentary) verbal root;
and moved the stress-accent to the right one syllable for every additional formant added:
CÁCA + NA 
*CACÁ(-)NA.
Similarly, lengthened vowels had a reduced grade showing the same vowels as short, and a zero-grade of [*ə] ( [ *ɦ ] ).
a. The glides subsequently disappeared in PIE, leaving only dorsals (*g^, *g^h, *k^, *k^(h)) and dorsal nasals ([n]g^, [n]k^) palatalized by *y, and notated here by ^; and a few apicals (*dw, *tw, *dhw, *t(h)w, *sw) and dorsal nasals (*[n]gw, *[n]kw) velarized by *w.
2. In PS, a branch of PAA, the glides and no glide + *A became *i, *a, and *u; and the glides were eliminated.
a. In PS, Proto-Semitic, all vowels (no phonemic long vowels in PAA) were merged into *a but *i and *u (as well as *Ø) lived on as allophones of *a employed to mark various grammatical forms (vowel patterning) but no longer lexical (semantic) distinctions; it is possible that some root nouns retained original *i(:), *a(:), and *u(:) but not conclusively proven.
3. In other Nostratic-derived languages like Sumerian, the Nostratic vowel qualities of *i, *a, *u were retained as i, a, u.
These developments produced a vowel inventory for Pontic and pre-PIE of *e:, *a:, *o:, and *A (not including the impure vowels *i and *u derived from avocalic *y and *w).
PIE Root Definition
The PIE root open monosyllable comprises one or two morae(6): *me, e.g. has one mora; length provides the second mora: e.g. *la:- ( *lha). PIE ma:-, 'full, ripe', is also a root but because it is a result of *ma + *H(a). it is of the closed monosyllable class (v. infra).
The lexical index root form for bisyllables is *CeC-, which is the momentary/singular form of *CACA: *CÁCA *CéCØ. The durative/plural form still remains in the so-called thematic inflections of the verb and nominative plural of the noun(*CeCé/ò-C vs. *CeC-e/o-C; *CeCé-s vs. *CeC-es).
A PIE root like *CARe:/a:/o: appears in these different durative/plural forms: *ple:-, *pla:-, *plo:-, i.e. *CØRe:/a:/o:; as well as momentary/singular *CÁRə(1/2/3) for all three (*pélə(1/2/3)).
One of the reasons the 'Laryngeal' Theory was constrained to distinguish the effect of a preceding 'laryngeal' (*HV) from one following (*VH) was that it needed to provide for instances of (initial) *a in, e.g. PIE *ak^-, 'sharp', in which the *a is short and not attested otherwise as **a: in this word.
The 'Laryngeal' Theory therefore presumes that all short *a arises from contact with a preceding a-coloring 'laryngeal', namely *H2; and, just as importantly, that *VC is not a permitted root form.
According to the 'Laryngeal' Theory, *H2Ák^- (currently written: *H2ék^) would produce PIE *ák^-, i.e. *H2 would a-color the *Á but not lengthen it. The circumstance that *i and *u do not participate in Ablaut suggests strongly that they must be in a separate though related category from *e and *o.
This has the further implication that short *a was not a constituent of the pre-PIE inventory of 'pure' vowels beside *e and *o (*i and *u being 'impure' vowels deriving from *y and *w).
Another opinion among some subscribers to the 'Laryngeal' Theory is that some long vowels are 'natural', i.e. are retentions of original vowels and original vowel qualities from pre-PIE. The is, of course, in conflict with the asssumption of the 'Laryngeal' Theory above unless we assume *pla: is the result of pre-PIE **plH2éH(1, 2, 3)- which seems quite unlikely (**CCCVC), and would certainly not conform to the normal definition of a root.
The Vocalic Theory expects **Hak^ only if the pre-PIE **Ha:k^- was shortened to *Hak^- through the operation of the Principle of Phonological Entropy (v. infra) since it holds that any pre-PIE unlengthened *a would have been subsumed under *A.
To explain the short vowel we actually find, the Vocalic Theory proposes the Principle of Phonological Entropy, which states:
any phonological feature which does not
lexically distinguish one root from another
is subject to loss as non-functional.
Thus, in the case of predicted *a:k^-, since no root of the form *ak^- exists, *a:k^- can be reduced to *ak^- with no loss to lexical integrity; and usually is so reduced.
The innumerable entries of the form *CV:/VC like Pokorny's *1. bha:/au-, 'beat, push', show this law in operation. 'Laryngealists' will want to explain the short vowel as a reduction due to the shiftng of the stress-accent.
The second form we encounter lexically with PIE roots is *CéC(Ø), which is a result of *CÁCA.
The PIE Closed Monosyllabic Root
The PIE root 'closed' monosyllable comprises two morae(6): *3. men-, 'think' ( pre-PIE *myÁnA) ( / *m(e)né- — durative/plural form pre-PIE *myAnÁ), is derived from *myA, 'converse' + *na, 'one'; and means 'to hold/initiate an internal conversation' (cf. Old Indian mánati, 'mentions').
SUMMARY
From the discussion above, it can hopefully be seen that every genuine PIE root derives from *CA/V:(-CA/V:).
As long as the quality of the inherited vowels had been maintained, the root inventory could provide semantically quite adequately; but after the Pontic stage collapsed all short vowels into *A, stem extensions, *C(A) was added to *CA/V:(-CA/V:) to assist in maintaining lexical differentiation and integrity among many now homophonous roots.
An excellent online resource is at the
TOWER OF BABEL, founded by Sergei Anatolyevich Starostin, and now part of the Evolution of Human Languages project at the Santa Fe Institute.
An important new resource for Nostratic studies is the website Nostratica, instituted by Kirill Babaev, the founder of the Cybalist language discussion group at Yahoo! Groups.
Although there has been an understandable negative reaction to linking 'race' and language notably because of the racial doctrines of the former National Socialists, responsible scholars have now begun to re-investigate the connections among genetic profiles of populations and culture and
language, with the result that the basic Monogenetic Hypothesis (and with it, monogenesis) is gaining substantial credibility through the results of research by
physical scientists.
The kind of solid data being generated and careful analysis cannot be "quibbled away" by the liberal ideologues who still chase the butterflies of independent language invention
and "borrowing frenzy".
The author has originated a Table of Correspondence for the Proto-Language, IE and
Afrasian, Altaic, Basque, Beng (Southern Mandé), Blackfoot (Algonquian), Dravidian (incomplete), Etruscan, Hurrian-Urartian, Japanese, Mon/Hmong, Nama, Pama-Nyungan (incomplete), (Sino-)Tibetan, Sumerian, and Uralic.
PROTO-LANGUAGE MONOSYLLABLES
In order for readers to judge the semantic plausibility of
the analysis of Proto-Language (PL)
elements suggested here, I am including access to a listing of Proto-Language
monosyllables and the meanings I have provisionally
assigned.
Most assignments can be exhaustively supported by data from
actually attested forms but a few animates are very doubtful; and
this list does not represent the "final" solution of
these questions, which will only be approached when other
scholars assist in refining it.
Patrick C. Ryan
Summer 1998
|
the latest revision of this document can be found at
HTTP://WWW.GEOCITIES.COM/proto-language/ThePIERoot.htm
Patrick C. Ryan * 9115 West 34th Street - Little Rock,
AR 72204-4441 * (501)227-9947
PROTO-LANGUAGE@msn.com
NOTES
1. pre-Pontic Nostratic [*pf, *ts, *kx]
2. The differentiating procedure called vŗddhi is commonly regarded as a lengthening of the root vowel but the apparent employment of infixed *e in roots with resonants in zero-grade (e.g. diu-, 'sky', zero-grade of *deyew- deiwó-s, 'divine') shows us its actual mechanism. In a root sylable with *é, the two combine to produce *e:, hence are 'lengthened'.
I prefer to think of this as adding a mora to the root syllable rather than 'infixing' anything.
3. A root of the form *CV:C would contain three morae, and appears to have been generally discouraged if not being outright impermissible, reverting to *CVC.
When we see a root of the form *CaC, we should understand that it earlier was **Ca:C. Why, then, was the long *a: preserved? Apparently, the root even earlier had the form *Cá:CA, which opened the root syllable for a permissible long vowel. Subsequently, the stress-accent on the long vowel made the *A become *Ø, thereby closing the syllable; and eventually occasioning the shortening of *a: to *a.
The same will be true of a root of the form *CoC.
With a root of the form *CeC, it will be impossible to determine if it passed through an earlier form of **Ce:C or not.
