-s(i): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{morpheme | {{morpheme | ||
|type_morpheme=inflectional | |type_morpheme=inflectional | ||
|meaning='of | |meaning='of/for' | ||
|function=genitive | |function=genitive | ||
|language=Raetic, Etruscan | |language=Raetic, Etruscan | ||
|analysis_phonemic=/{{p|s}}/ | |analysis_phonemic=/{{p|s}}/ | ||
|checklevel= | |checklevel=1 | ||
|problem=Semantik | |||
}} | }} | ||
== Commentary == | |||
Corresponding to the Etruscan genitive I ({{bib|Rix 1985}}: 125 f., {{bib|Wallace 2008}}: 46). As in Etruscan, the older form of the ending *-''si'' can still be inferred from the pertinentive I ending {{m||-si}}. Very well documented in Raetic, unlike the genitive II (see {{m||-l(a)}}); this imbalance might be attributed to Raetic names tending strongly to end in a vowel, in regard to the phonotactic rule for praenomina (individual names) according to {{bib|Rix 1985}}: 127, stating that the genitive II was only used instead of I in names with an auslaut in a dental fricative. Note that genitives in -''es'' and -''is'' are formally identical with ablatives]] in -''es'' and -''is'' (the latter being products of umlaut). On the possibility of genitives originally being adjectives of possession, enabling them to serve as bases for cases (pertinentive, ablative), see {{bib|Rix 1985}}: 127. | |||
{{bibliography}} | {{bibliography}} | ||
Latest revision as of 12:37, 18 September 2018
| Morpheme | |
|---|---|
| Language: | Raetic, Etruscan |
| Type: | inflectional |
| Meaning: | 'of/for' |
| Function: | genitive |
| Phonemic analysis: | /s/ |
|
| |
| Attestation: | enθus, enikes, θiuθis, klu?θurus, kusenkus, lavises, pitis, remies, )s, sφuras, terunies, φelzuries, χaisurus, χaris
|
Commentary
Corresponding to the Etruscan genitive I (Rix 1985: 125 f., Wallace 2008: 46). As in Etruscan, the older form of the ending *-si can still be inferred from the pertinentive I ending -si. Very well documented in Raetic, unlike the genitive II (see -l(a)); this imbalance might be attributed to Raetic names tending strongly to end in a vowel, in regard to the phonotactic rule for praenomina (individual names) according to Rix 1985: 127, stating that the genitive II was only used instead of I in names with an auslaut in a dental fricative. Note that genitives in -es and -is are formally identical with ablatives]] in -es and -is (the latter being products of umlaut). On the possibility of genitives originally being adjectives of possession, enabling them to serve as bases for cases (pertinentive, ablative), see Rix 1985: 127.
