P: Difference between revisions

From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 10: Line 10:
Pi is one of the letters (together with [[index::L|Lambda]] and [[index::U|Upsilon]]) which serve as a basis for distinguishing the Magrè and Sanzeno alphabets (see [[index::Script]]): The variants {{c||P}}, {{c||P3}}, {{c||P4}}, {{c||P5}} with an angle (sometimes rounded), often termed "Venetoid" in the TIR, are attributed to the Magrè alphabet, while {{c||P2}} with a bar on top extending against writing direction is used in the Sanzeno alphabet.
Pi is one of the letters (together with [[index::L|Lambda]] and [[index::U|Upsilon]]) which serve as a basis for distinguishing the Magrè and Sanzeno alphabets (see [[index::Script]]): The variants {{c||P}}, {{c||P3}}, {{c||P4}}, {{c||P5}} with an angle (sometimes rounded), often termed "Venetoid" in the TIR, are attributed to the Magrè alphabet, while {{c||P2}} with a bar on top extending against writing direction is used in the Sanzeno alphabet.


While the schibboleth letters mentioned above do usually appear in the expected forms and are grouped together appropriately in numerous inscriptions from both alphabetical contexts, the letter form ←{{c||L|d}} / {{c||L}}→ (commonly Magrè Lambda) does crop up in Sanzeno context, where it is not only incongruous, but in some cases must clearly be read {{p||p}} instead of {{p||l}}. We even have cases where all three forms ←{{c||P2|d}}, ←{{c||P2}}, ←{{c||L2}} (or turned the other way) appear together, being one clear (Sanzeno) Lambda, one clear (Sanzeno) Pi, and one letter of doubtful ascription.
While the schibboleth letters mentioned above do usually appear in the expected forms and are grouped together appropriately in numerous inscriptions from both alphabetical contexts, the letter form ←{{c||L}} / {{c||L|d}}→ (commonly Magrè Lambda) does crop up in Sanzeno context, where it is not only incongruous, but in some cases must clearly be read /{{p||p}}/ instead of /{{p||l}}/. The identification of ←{{c||L}} / {{c||L|d}}→ is problematical in the following circumstances:


←{{c||P2|d}}, isolated (not accompanied by any other variant of Pi or Lambda), is read Pi based on content-related arguments in the inscriptions [[index::BZ-9]] and possibly [[index::NO-13]]. The name {{w||piθam(n)e|piθame}} in [[index::BZ-9]] is securely attested with anlauting {{p||p}} in [[index::Serso]] and [[index::Magrè]], but note another instance of the name written with ←{{c||P2|d}} in [[index::WE-3]] (see below). For the question of whether ←{{c||P2|d}} is intended in [[index::NO-13]], see the inscription page; if it is the case, {{w||perisna}} is well attested also. ←{{c||P2|d}} also appears on its own in [[index::NO-11]], but without parallel attestation no decision can be made between the readings {{w||liri}} and {{w||piri}}.
*Inscriptions in which ←{{c||L}} appears together not with Magrè-Pi {{c||P5}}, but with Sanzeno-Lambda {{c||L2}} and/or Sanzeno-Pi ←{{c||P2}}.
*Inscriptions with isolated ←{{c||L}} (not accompanied by any other variant of Pi or Lambda), whose linguistic content (e.g. phonetical plausibility, but most prominently comparison with independently attested material) suggests a reading /p/.


←{{c||P2|d}} appears combined with Sanzeno Lambda {{c||L2}} on [[index::CE-1.3]] (twice) and [[index::SZ-22.1]], and is consequently considered to represent Pi turned against writing direction in both cases. Both inscriptions duly have Sanzeno alphabet {{c||U2}}, though the one from geographically intermediate [[index::Cembra]] also features word-internal punctuation. With the bar of Pi extending in writing direction, the distinction between the three schibboleth letters Pi, Lambda and Upsilon is still sustained, and this system is actually the one in use in the Lugano alphabet. However, both inscriptions display Raetic features (←{{c||A}}, ←{{c||S}}).
Both types of cases are so far only known from Sanzeno context, wherefore we may add a third, not purely epigraphically motivated condition:


It is not clear, how and why the non-Venetic features of the Sanzeno alphabet arose, but a letter variant ←{{c||P2|d}} might reasonably be expected to have been an intermediate form between {{c||P5}} and {{c||P2}}. However, on [[index::SZ-87]] ←{{c||P2|d}} appears combined with Sanzeno Pi {{c||P2}}. The two letters occur, separated by only one letter, within the same word {{c||S}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||L}}, probably an individual name in the genitive. A reading Pi is nevertheless possible: The form might be compared with {{w||pipe}} on [[index::BZ-11]] (not autopsied!); [[index::SZ-15.1]], which also has {{c||L2}}, contains an individual name {{c||E}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2|d}} with identical letter forms.
*Inscriptions from (epigraphical or geographical) Sanzeno context with isolated ←{{c||L}} which cannot be definitely demonstrated to write /{{p||l}}/.


Three inscriptions have the triple combination of ←{{c||P2|d}}, ←{{c||P2}}, ←{{c||L2}}: the abovementioned [[index::WE-3]] and [[index::SZ-15.1]], as well as [[index::SZ-30]]. [[index::WE-3]] has three incontestably correct Sanzeno Lambdas, and one Sanzeno Pi in the name {{w||laspa}}, which is also attested on [[index::SZ-1.1]] and, incidentally, [[index::SZ-15.1]]. The dubious ←{{c||P2|d}} occurs in the name {{w||piθamnuale}}, as in [[index::BZ-9]] (above). [[index::SZ-15.1]] has one Sanzeno Lambda in {{w||laspa}}, two Sanzeno Pis in {{w||laspa}} and {{c||E}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2|d}}, and two instances of ←{{c||P2|d}} in {{c||E}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2|d}} and {{c||U4}}{{c||N}}{{c||U4}}{{c||Ś}}{{c||A5}}{{c||P2|d}}{{c||A5}}{{c||K}} (the latter sequence with a highly questionable parallel in [[index::SZ-14]] (with ←{{c||P2}})). [[index::SZ-30]], the only dextroverse one of the inscriptions discussed here, has Sanzeno Lambda twice in well attested forms, Sanzeno Pi in the anlaut of an isolated name (?) {{w||pumis}}, and twice anlauting {{c||P2}}→ in obscure words.
←{{c||P2|d}} appears combined only with Sanzeno Lambda {{c||L2}} on [[index::CE-1.3]] (twice) and [[index::SZ-22.1]], and is consequently considered to represent Pi turned against writing direction in both cases. Both inscriptions duly have Sanzeno alphabet {{c||U2}}, though the one from geographically intermediate [[index::Cembra]] also features word-internal punctuation. With the bar of Pi extending in writing direction, the distinction between the three schibboleth letters Pi, Lambda and Upsilon is still sustained, and this system is actually the one in use in the Lugano alphabet. However, both inscriptions display Raetic features (←{{c||A}}, ←{{c||S}}).


Regarding solely its form, the letter ←{{c||P2|d}} might in Sanzeno context be considered either an influence from the Magrè alphabet (Lambda, alongside Sanzeno Pi; in [[index::SZ-87]]), or a remnant form of Pi (alongside Sanzeno Lambda; in [[index::BZ-9]], [[index::CE-1.3]] and [[index::SZ-22.1]]). While it might not be absurd to postulate such a double origin of the form, neither of these explanations accounts for the cases where it appears alongside both regular Sanzeno letter forms. The postulation of writing mistakes is not advisable, seeing as there are three independent cases. In [[index::WE-3]], ←{{c||P2|d}} occurs only in the second line as opposed to ←{{c||P2}} in the first, which might be used as an argument for a scribal error, but in [[index::SZ-15.1]] they occur almost successively; in [[index::SZ-30]], the writer has switched back and forth, and that only in that part of the inscription which is left to us. Writing ←{{c||P2|d}} instead of ←{{c||P2}}, which is the only letter with a bar extending "backwards" from a straight hasta, may seem an easy mistake to make, but there appears to have been no problem with the equally counterintuitive ←{{c||A}}. Sigma is the only letter which is sometimes turned both ways in the same document (so in [[index::WE-3]]). All of the three inscriptions with the triple combination are noticably well and neatly executed specimens of some length.
It is not clear, how and why the non-Venetic features of the Sanzeno alphabet arose, but a letter variant ←{{c||P2|d}} might reasonably be expected to have been an intermediate form between {{c||P5}} and {{c||P2}}, cropping up sporadically as a marginal archaism. However, on [[index::SZ-87]] ←{{c||P2|d}} appears combined with Sanzeno Pi {{c||P2}}. The two letters occur, separated by only one letter, within the same word {{c||S}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||L}}, probably an individual name in the genitive. Here, ←{{c||P2|d}} would a priori be considered a case of alphabetical inference, Magrè Lambda in a Sanzeno inscription – maybe written by a person proficient in both alphabets. But a reading {{w||lipis}} precludes the comparison of the form with {{w||pipe}} on [[index::BZ-11]] (not autopsied!). A reading {{w||pipis}} can be argued by grouping [[index::SZ-87]] with the three inscriptions have the triple combination of ←{{c||P2|d}}, ←{{c||P2}}, ←{{c||L2}}, being one clear (Sanzeno) Lambda, one clear (Sanzeno) Pi, and one letter of doubtful ascription. These are [[index::WE-3]], [[index::SZ-15.1]] and [[index::SZ-30]]. In [[index::WE-3]], the dubious ←{{c||P2|d}} occurs in the name {{w||piθamnuale}}, which is attested several times – in Magrè context with {{c||P5}}, but in the other instance in Sanzeno context also with ←{{c||P2|d}} (see [[index::BZ-9]] below). [[index::WE-3]] has three incontestably correct Sanzeno Lambdas, and one Sanzeno Pi in the name {{w||laspa}}, which is also attested on [[index::SZ-1.1]] and, incidentally, [[index::SZ-15.1]]. [[index::SZ-15.1]] has one Sanzeno Lambda in {{w||laspa}}, two Sanzeno Pis in {{w||laspa}} and {{c||E}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2|d}}, and two instances of ←{{c||P2|d}} in {{c||E}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2|d}} and {{c||U4}}{{c||N}}{{c||U4}}{{c||Ś}}{{c||A5}}{{c||P2|d}}{{c||A5}}{{c||K}}. {{c||E}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2|d}} may be compared with {{c||S}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2}}{{c||I}}{{c||P2|d}} in [[index::SZ-87]] (the corresponding nominative?); on the segmentation of and possible comparanda for {{c||U4}}{{c||N}}{{c||U4}}{{c||Ś}}{{c||A5}}{{c||P2|d}}{{c||A5}}{{c||K}} see the inscription page. [[index::SZ-30]], the only dextroverse one of the inscriptions discussed here, has Sanzeno Lambda twice in well attested forms, Sanzeno Pi in the anlaut of an isolated name (?) {{w||pumis}}, and twice anlauting {{c||P2}}→ in obscure words.


Note that among twelve instances of ←{{c||P2|d}}, two words appear twice: the names {{w||piθam(n)e}} and {{w||pipie}}. The former might etymologically belong with other individual names in ''piθ-'', one of which is {{w||piθiave}}; one of the forms in question on [[index::SZ-30]] might also belong with this group. Yet it is unlikely that ←{{c||P2|d}} vs. {{c||P2}} reflects a phonetic reality – while a surprising number of characters for labial stops seem to have been used by the Raeti, and the problematic case of [[index::NO-13]] might connect ←{{c||P2|d}} with [[index::Φ|Φ5]], the name {{w||piθam(n)e}} is attested with regular Magrè Pi in [[index::Serso]].
Isolated ←{{c||P2|d}} is read Pi based on content-related arguments in the inscriptions [[index::BZ-9]] and possibly [[index::NO-13]]. On the name {{w||piθam(n)e|piθame}} in [[index::BZ-9]] see above ([[index::WE-3]]). For the question of whether ←{{c||P2|d}} is intended in [[index::NO-13]], see the inscription page; if it is the case, {{w||perisna}} is well attested also. ←{{c||P2|d}} also appears on its own in [[index::NO-11]], but without parallel attestation no decision can be made between the readings {{w||liri}} and {{w||piri}}.
 
Regarding solely its form, the letter ←{{c||P2|d}} might in Sanzeno context be considered either an influence from the Magrè alphabet (when alongside Sanzeno Pi; in [[index::SZ-87]]), or a remnant form of Pi (when alongside Sanzeno Lambda; in [[index::BZ-9]], [[index::CE-1.3]] and [[index::SZ-22.1]]). While it might not be absurd to postulate such a double origin of the form, neither of these explanations accounts for the cases where it appears alongside both regular Sanzeno letter forms. The postulation of writing mistakes is not advisable. For [[index::WE-3]], this explanation might pass, seeing as ←{{c||P2|d}} occurs only in the completely inverted second line as opposed to ←{{c||P2}} in the first, in combination with the fact that Sigma also appears turned in different directions. But Sigma is the only Raetic letter whose orientation varies within one inscription – letter with bars are generally written with surprising uniformity. Writing ←{{c||P2|d}} instead of ←{{c||P2}}, which is the only letter with a bar extending "backwards" from a straight hasta, may seem an easy mistake to make, but there appears to have been no problem with the equally counterintuitive ←{{c||A}}. In [[index::SZ-15.1]], ←{{c||P|d}} and {{c||P}}→ occur almost successively; in [[index::SZ-30]], the writer would have switched from "wrong" to "correct" and back again, and that only in that part of the inscription which is left to us. Such crude mistakes would stand in contrast to the noticably neat execution of the inscriptions discussed.
 
Note that among twelve instances of ←{{c||P2|d}}, two words appear twice: the names {{w||piθam(n)e}} and {{w||pipie}}. The former might etymologically belong with other individual names in ''piθ-'', one of which is {{w||piθiave}}; the second one of the forms in question on [[index::SZ-30]] might also belong with this group. Yet it is unlikely that ←{{c||P2|d}} vs. {{c||P2}} reflects a phonetic reality – while a surprising number of characters for labial stops seem to have been used by the Raeti, and the problematic case of [[index::NO-13]] might connect ←{{c||P2|d}} with [[index::Φ|Φ5]], the name {{w||piθam(n)e}} is attested with regular Magrè Pi in [[index::Serso]].


In TIR, ←{{c||P2|d}} in Sanzeno context is consistently defined as Pi and transliterated accordingly, unless there is a reason to do otherwise. This includes fragmentary inscriptions which have not been discussed above ([[index::VN-2]], [[index::VN-3]], [[index::SZ-32]]), and a great number of inscriptoids from [[index::Sanzeno]] (most prominently the {{w||upi}}-inscriptions). The only exception so far is the {{w||la}}-group, which appears to have {{c||L}} alternating with {{c||L2}}.
In TIR, ←{{c||P2|d}} in Sanzeno context is consistently defined as Pi and transliterated accordingly, unless there is a reason to do otherwise. This includes fragmentary inscriptions which have not been discussed above ([[index::VN-2]], [[index::VN-3]], [[index::SZ-32]]), and a great number of inscriptoids from [[index::Sanzeno]] (most prominently the {{w||upi}}-inscriptions). The only exception so far is the {{w||la}}-group, which appears to have {{c||L}} alternating with {{c||L2}}.


{{bibliography}}
{{bibliography}}

Revision as of 16:23, 4 August 2015

edit with form
Character
Customary name: pi

Variants and attestation

Transliteration Sinistroverse Dextroverse
  Glyph Number Glyph Number
P P.png 8 Pd.png 9
P2 P2.png 29 P2d.png 3
P3 P3.png 1 P3d.png 0
P4 P4.png 2 P4d.png 0
P5 P5.png 1 P5d.png 0
P6 P6.png 1 P6d.png 0

Commentary

Pi is one of the letters (together with Lambda and Upsilon) which serve as a basis for distinguishing the Magrè and Sanzeno alphabets (see Script): The variants P s, P3 s, P4 s, P5 s with an angle (sometimes rounded), often termed "Venetoid" in the TIR, are attributed to the Magrè alphabet, while P2 s with a bar on top extending against writing direction is used in the Sanzeno alphabet.

While the schibboleth letters mentioned above do usually appear in the expected forms and are grouped together appropriately in numerous inscriptions from both alphabetical contexts, the letter form ←L s / L d→ (commonly Magrè Lambda) does crop up in Sanzeno context, where it is not only incongruous, but in some cases must clearly be read /p/ instead of /l/. The identification of ←L s / L d→ is problematical in the following circumstances:

  • Inscriptions in which ←L s appears together not with Magrè-Pi P5 s, but with Sanzeno-Lambda L2 s and/or Sanzeno-Pi ←P2 s.
  • Inscriptions with isolated ←L s (not accompanied by any other variant of Pi or Lambda), whose linguistic content (e.g. phonetical plausibility, but most prominently comparison with independently attested material) suggests a reading /p/.

Both types of cases are so far only known from Sanzeno context, wherefore we may add a third, not purely epigraphically motivated condition:

  • Inscriptions from (epigraphical or geographical) Sanzeno context with isolated ←L s which cannot be definitely demonstrated to write /l/.

←P2 d appears combined only with Sanzeno Lambda L2 s on CE-1.3 (twice) and SZ-22.1, and is consequently considered to represent Pi turned against writing direction in both cases. Both inscriptions duly have Sanzeno alphabet U2 s, though the one from geographically intermediate Cembra also features word-internal punctuation. With the bar of Pi extending in writing direction, the distinction between the three schibboleth letters Pi, Lambda and Upsilon is still sustained, and this system is actually the one in use in the Lugano alphabet. However, both inscriptions display Raetic features (←A s, ←S s).

It is not clear, how and why the non-Venetic features of the Sanzeno alphabet arose, but a letter variant ←P2 d might reasonably be expected to have been an intermediate form between P5 s and P2 s, cropping up sporadically as a marginal archaism. However, on SZ-87 ←P2 d appears combined with Sanzeno Pi P2 s. The two letters occur, separated by only one letter, within the same word S sI sP2 sI sL s, probably an individual name in the genitive. Here, ←P2 d would a priori be considered a case of alphabetical inference, Magrè Lambda in a Sanzeno inscription – maybe written by a person proficient in both alphabets. But a reading lipis precludes the comparison of the form with pipe on BZ-11 (not autopsied!). A reading pipis can be argued by grouping SZ-87 with the three inscriptions have the triple combination of ←P2 d, ←P2 s, ←L2 s, being one clear (Sanzeno) Lambda, one clear (Sanzeno) Pi, and one letter of doubtful ascription. These are WE-3, SZ-15.1 and SZ-30. In WE-3, the dubious ←P2 d occurs in the name piθamnuale, which is attested several times – in Magrè context with P5 s, but in the other instance in Sanzeno context also with ←P2 d (see BZ-9 below). WE-3 has three incontestably correct Sanzeno Lambdas, and one Sanzeno Pi in the name laspa, which is also attested on SZ-1.1 and, incidentally, SZ-15.1. SZ-15.1 has one Sanzeno Lambda in laspa, two Sanzeno Pis in laspa and E sI sP2 sI sP2 d, and two instances of ←P2 d in E sI sP2 sI sP2 d and U4 sN sU4 sŚ sA5 sP2 dA5 sK s. E sI sP2 sI sP2 d may be compared with S sI sP2 sI sP2 d in SZ-87 (the corresponding nominative?); on the segmentation of and possible comparanda for U4 sN sU4 sŚ sA5 sP2 dA5 sK s see the inscription page. SZ-30, the only dextroverse one of the inscriptions discussed here, has Sanzeno Lambda twice in well attested forms, Sanzeno Pi in the anlaut of an isolated name (?) pumis, and twice anlauting P2 s→ in obscure words.

Isolated ←P2 d is read Pi based on content-related arguments in the inscriptions BZ-9 and possibly NO-13. On the name piθame in BZ-9 see above (WE-3). For the question of whether ←P2 d is intended in NO-13, see the inscription page; if it is the case, perisna is well attested also. ←P2 d also appears on its own in NO-11, but without parallel attestation no decision can be made between the readings liri and piri.

Regarding solely its form, the letter ←P2 d might in Sanzeno context be considered either an influence from the Magrè alphabet (when alongside Sanzeno Pi; in SZ-87), or a remnant form of Pi (when alongside Sanzeno Lambda; in BZ-9, CE-1.3 and SZ-22.1). While it might not be absurd to postulate such a double origin of the form, neither of these explanations accounts for the cases where it appears alongside both regular Sanzeno letter forms. The postulation of writing mistakes is not advisable. For WE-3, this explanation might pass, seeing as ←P2 d occurs only in the completely inverted second line as opposed to ←P2 s in the first, in combination with the fact that Sigma also appears turned in different directions. But Sigma is the only Raetic letter whose orientation varies within one inscription – letter with bars are generally written with surprising uniformity. Writing ←P2 d instead of ←P2 s, which is the only letter with a bar extending "backwards" from a straight hasta, may seem an easy mistake to make, but there appears to have been no problem with the equally counterintuitive ←A s. In SZ-15.1, ←P d and P s→ occur almost successively; in SZ-30, the writer would have switched from "wrong" to "correct" and back again, and that only in that part of the inscription which is left to us. Such crude mistakes would stand in contrast to the noticably neat execution of the inscriptions discussed.

Note that among twelve instances of ←P2 d, two words appear twice: the names piθam(n)e and pipie. The former might etymologically belong with other individual names in piθ-, one of which is piθiave; the second one of the forms in question on SZ-30 might also belong with this group. Yet it is unlikely that ←P2 d vs. P2 s reflects a phonetic reality – while a surprising number of characters for labial stops seem to have been used by the Raeti, and the problematic case of NO-13 might connect ←P2 d with Φ5, the name piθam(n)e is attested with regular Magrè Pi in Serso.

In TIR, ←P2 d in Sanzeno context is consistently defined as Pi and transliterated accordingly, unless there is a reason to do otherwise. This includes fragmentary inscriptions which have not been discussed above (VN-2, VN-3, SZ-32), and a great number of inscriptoids from Sanzeno (most prominently the upi-inscriptions). The only exception so far is the la-group, which appears to have L s alternating with L2 s.

Bibliography

Kluge & Salomon 2015 Sindy Kluge, Corinna Salomon, "Ausgewählte Funde aus Dercolo im Kontext der rätischen Inschriften", Wissenschaftliches Jahrbuch der Tiroler Landesmuseen 8 (2015), 80–95.
Markey 2006 Thomas L. Markey, "Early Celticity in Slovenia and at Rhaetic Magrè (Schio)", Linguistica 46 (2006), 145–171.
Retrieved from "https://tir.univie.ac.at/index.php?title=P&oldid=13203"