-le: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{morpheme | {{morpheme | ||
|type_morpheme=inflectional | |type_morpheme=inflectional | ||
|function= | |function=pertinentive | ||
|language=Raetic | |language=Raetic, Etruscan | ||
|checklevel= | |checklevel=1 | ||
|problem= | |problem=Semantik | ||
}} | }} | ||
== 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 / 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. | |||
{{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.
