-le: Difference between revisions

From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 7: Line 7:
}}
}}
== Commentary ==
== Commentary ==
Corresponding to the Etruscan pertinentive II ({{bib|Rix 1985}}: 128, {{bib|Wallace 2008}}: 47). Like the ablative, the pertinentive is built with genitive forms as base (on the possibility of genitives originally being adjectives of posession, enabling them to serve as bases for cases, see  {{bib|Rix 1985}}: 127). The pertinentive is historically a locative to the genitive, hence the complex pertinentive endings reflect both those of genitive and locative (''locatiuus genitiui'' in Eichner's terminology). The pertinentive II is based on the genitive II {{m||-l(a)}}, historically -''la'': ''-la-i'' > ''-le''. In this context, the auslauting (umlauted) vowel survived apocope (while being lost in the genitive).
Corresponding to the Etruscan pertinentive II ({{bib|Rix 1985}}: 128, {{bib|Wallace 2008}}: 47). Like the ablative, the pertinentive is built with genitive forms / adjectives of possession as base ({{bib|Rix 1985}}: 127). The pertinentive is historically a locative to the genitive, hence the complex pertinentive endings reflect both those of genitive and locative (''locatiuus genitiui'' in Eichner's terminology). The pertinentive II is based on the genitive II {{m||-l(a)}}, historically -''la'': ''-la-i'' > ''-le''. In this context, the auslauting (umlauted) vowel survived apocope (while being lost in the genitive).


''-le'' appears as ''-ale'' after the patronymic suffix {{m||-nu}}, which is indeed the usual context for the pertinentive II in Raetic. See {{m||-l(a)}} and {{bib|Rix 1985}}: 126 f. on the origin and phonotactic context of ''-al(e)'' in Etruscan. The motivation for ''-le'' instead of expected pertinentive I {{m||-si}} in the other cases, all arguably individual names ending in vowels, is unclear.
''-le'' appears as ''-ale'' after the patronymic suffix {{m||-nu}}, which is indeed the usual context for the pertinentive II in Raetic. See {{m||-l(a)}} and {{bib|Rix 1985}}: 126 f. on the origin and phonotactic context of ''-al(e)'' in Etruscan. The motivation for ''-le'' instead of expected pertinentive I {{m||-si}} in the other cases, all arguably individual names ending in vowels, is unclear.
{{bibliography}}
{{bibliography}}

Latest revision as of 23:09, 13 February 2017

Morpheme
Language: Raetic, Etruscan
Type: inflectional
Function: pertinentive

Attestation: azile, aθivnuale, )auþile, eθunnuale, esθuale, θaθivnuale, kaszrinuale, ketanuvale, laśanuale, )le, metlainile, )nuale, nuþnuale, perkusiale, piθamnuale, sletile, φelvinuale


Commentary

Corresponding to the Etruscan pertinentive II (Rix 1985: 128, Wallace 2008: 47). Like the ablative, the pertinentive is built with genitive forms / adjectives of possession as base (Rix 1985: 127). The pertinentive is historically a locative to the genitive, hence the complex pertinentive endings reflect both those of genitive and locative (locatiuus genitiui in Eichner's terminology). The pertinentive II is based on the genitive II -l(a), historically -la: -la-i > -le. In this context, the auslauting (umlauted) vowel survived apocope (while being lost in the genitive).

-le appears as -ale after the patronymic suffix -nu, which is indeed the usual context for the pertinentive II in Raetic. See -l(a) and Rix 1985: 126 f. on the origin and phonotactic context of -al(e) in Etruscan. The motivation for -le instead of expected pertinentive I -si in the other cases, all arguably individual names ending in vowels, is unclear.

Bibliography