φuter: Difference between revisions
From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|type_word=noun | |type_word=noun | ||
|number=plural | |number=plural | ||
|case=nominative/accusative | |||
|gender=animate | |||
|language=Raetic | |language=Raetic | ||
|lemma=φut(e)- | |lemma=φut(e)- | ||
|analysis_morphemic=φute{{m|-r(a)|-r}} | |analysis_morphemic=φute{{m|-r(a)|-r}}{{m|-Ø}} | ||
|meaning=unknown | |meaning=unknown | ||
|checklevel=0 | |checklevel=0 | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Commentary == | == Commentary == | ||
Evidently a noun in the plural, being accompanied by the numeral {{w||þal}}. Archaic auslauting {{p||a}} of the plural ending {{m||-r(a)|-ra}} has, as in Etruscan, been lost through apocope. One of only two grammatically marked plurals in the Raetic corpus so far. The word is lexically obscure | Evidently a noun in the plural, being accompanied by the numeral {{w||þal}}. Archaic auslauting {{p||a}} of the plural ending {{m||-r(a)|-ra}} has, as in Etruscan, been lost through apocope. One of only two grammatically marked plurals in the Raetic corpus so far. The word is lexically obscure, no Etruscan cognate is known, but note that the {{p||r}}-plural marks animate nouns. The absence of a case ending makes the form the only clear case of a nominative/accusative in the corpus so far. | ||
{{bibliography}} | {{bibliography}} | ||
Latest revision as of 20:11, 10 February 2017
| Word | |
|---|---|
| Language: | Raetic |
| Word type: | noun |
|
| |
| Case: | nominative/accusative |
| Number: | plural |
| Gender: | animate |
|
| |
| Morphemic analysis: | φute-r-Ø |
| Meaning: | unknown |
|
| |
| Attestation: | SZ-4.1 (kativates/kalitis þal φuter suχ) (1) |
Commentary
Evidently a noun in the plural, being accompanied by the numeral þal. Archaic auslauting a of the plural ending -ra has, as in Etruscan, been lost through apocope. One of only two grammatically marked plurals in the Raetic corpus so far. The word is lexically obscure, no Etruscan cognate is known, but note that the r-plural marks animate nouns. The absence of a case ending makes the form the only clear case of a nominative/accusative in the corpus so far.
