Sunday, November 16, 2014

105. Megh : sound and changes in different vernaculars

विभिन्न भाषाओँ में अक्षर और शब्द कैसे बदल दिए जाते है। इस हेतु निम्न विवरण जो क का ख में और ग का घ में और क या ग का घ या ह आदि में कैसे परिवर्तन होता है। उस पर जानकारी विस्तृत रूप से है । कुछ बीच के वाक्यांश उन लोगों के लिए जो शब्दों को लेकर उहा-पोह करते है-

"Not at all unlike is the history which Ascoli traces of the guttural media (g) and of th aspirate (gh) : the various changes of which in the Aryan languages he explains with the help of the hypothesis just referred to. We may, however, pass over them in silence in this brief treatise and proceed at once to critical considerations touching the doctrine of Ascoli which we have set forth." Page- 8-9.

"------He hopes to be able to demonstrate that our linguistic stock, both in its entire pro- ethnic period, and partly also in the several languages, possessed two surd guttural sounds, completely distinct from one another (like the Semitic), of which two sounds then one is represented in Indo-Iranian by k and by c,1 the other by g, and between these almost no contact took place, while partly in Greek and Italic, almost completely in German, they became fused into one sound. For the sake of brevity he denotes these two sounds by the symbols k and kc and he puts before us their changes in the various families of the Aryan dialects. He throws into relief, in the Indo- Iranian, the affinity existing between k and c and the differ ence between k and c, considering c as a successor of k and observing that there is not, on the other hand, an assured instance of c( derived from k and used in place of it, and that herein, with very rare exceptions, Slavo-Lithuanian also agrees with Indo-Iranian. The various ways in which the two sections of the Keltic languages represent the Eroto- Aryan k, which in Old Irish is regularly reflected by c (ch), while in Welsh it is refracted sometimes into c, sometimes into^i, lead Fick to' the opinion that in the primitive Keltic there existed two ^-sounds, which in Irish became fused into a single sound (c), in Welsh maintained themselves distinct and became c and p. Hence the two equations : 1st. O. Ir. c= Welsh ^ = Indo-Iran. k and c; 2nd. O. Ir. c = Welsh e=Indo-Ir an. £=Lith. s?=Sl. s. The first sound, which, becoming c in Irish and p in Welsh, must have had a power intermediate and wavering between c and p, may be expressed, according to Fick, by kv : the power of the second can only have been k. In Greek and in Italic the primitive k appears represented by kv (and by the sounds which this group originates) and also by k (cor- responding to an older kv) : of the Proto-Aryan ke (Indo- Iran. £=Lith. «2=Church-Sl. *=Ir. c=Welsh c) the suc cessor is k. In Teutonic the primordial difference between the two guttural surd sounds of the fundamental Aryan is 12 for the most part obscured by the ' lautverschiebung : ' 1 the one and the other we find represented by h, while this aspi rate does not discover to us its origin from k or from kc . Only in a few instances does initial or final hv show us that, in this family also of Aryan dialects, the k corresponding to the primitive k undergoes the change to kv. In Slavonic the Proto-Aryan k appears well marked only in the group sk. Fick's hypothesis of the double primitive k was received with favour by several philologists, among whom we would first mention G. Curtius, who, to remove all doubt with respect to the genealogical tree of the Aryan languages, considers himself bound " with Fick to suppose for the Indo- Germanic period a double k, or, to be brief, a. guttural k and a palatal k."1 Ha vet, too,3 believes in the existence of the two Proto-Aryan guttural surds, which he represents by the symbols £, and k2 and to which he attri butes in the primitive and fundamental Aryan the same sound which they had in Latin, pronouncing ft, (=ks of Ascoli, k of Fick) as kw, k, (=k' of Ascoli, kc of Fick) as k. But he sees in the development of a parasite after the explosive the effect, not the cause, of the original change of the consonant in question. The change of k into k' is, in his opinion, prior to all formation of a parasitic sound. He then proceeds to show how, by means of successive cor ruptions, the two Proto-Aryan ^-sounds became changed in 13 such a way that it was possible for them to be confounded. The change of the primitive explosive guttural surd into a sibilant, a change which we see in several Indo-Iranic words and in the Slavo-Lithuanian words corresponding to them (as we have just now seen), took place, if we believe Havet, separately in each of the two sections of the languages mentioned, just as, e.g., the c (Lat. k) of centum was sibilised in the c of the French word cent quite independently of the of the Old Indian and Zend qata-1 . Hence he proceeds to demonstrate the existence of the double k in the Proto- Aryan period by the following equations : 1st. £2=Graeco- Italo- Keltic k, Teutonic h (k) = Indo-Iranian s (corresponding to our c), SI. *, Lith. a (k) ; in all these languages in the most ancient form the sound was k : hence it was k before the separation. 2nd. /fc^Gaelic k, Kymric j9=Pan-Keltic kw; /c, = Lat. kw, Osco- Urnbrian p = Pan-Italic kw; k^=ir, Ion. «=Pan-Hellenic kw. hence /fc^Graeco-Italo-Keltic kw — /ck = Teutonic hv (kw),f(p,kw),h (k) = Proto-Teutonic kw; /&, = Lithu-Slav. k, sometimes kw, p (Jcw) : hence Teutono-Lithu-Slavonic kw — hence ^,=European kw — Indo-Iranic k,t' (=k' of the more usual transcription), some times p (kw), kw: thence ki = Indo-Iranian primitive kw. Now, if ki is=kw of Indo-Iranian and of the fundamental European, there results this last equation : ^ = Proto-Aryan kw. The limits prescribed for our treatise do not allow us to follow Havet in the replies which he makes to several objections, and in the exposition of the advantages which he believes maybe derived from his theory. Jolly himself also, in the monograph quoted above, admits in Proto- 14 Aryan two ^-sounds quite distinct from each other, the true physiological value of which we can with difficulty deter* mine, because they have reached us only in one series of representatives. He, therefore, willingly accepts Havet's symbols : kl} ki. The fact, observes J olly, that the written language had only one letter for the guttural tenuis, con tributed unquestionably to confuse two sounds originally distinct. Nevertheless it should be remarked that the written language, whence the written letters used by the Aryan peoples took their origin, offered them two characters for the primitive sound k, by which they might well have indicated with accuracy its two different values. Fick's hypothesis, well received and defended by the philologists mentioned, found a formidable opponent in that learned and acute inquirer Johann Schmidt, who subjected it to a severe examination, in his review of Fick's work on the ancient linguistic unity of the Indo-Germans of Europe.1 Against Fick's theory of the primitive double k J. Schmidt observes, in the first place, that, by the confes sion of Fick himself, these two supposed Proto- Aryan gut tural sounds coalesced in Teutonic almost always into h ; frequently into k on Greek and Latin ground ; in Irish they are not distinguished at all, nor are they always clearly discernible in Kymric. He goes on to quote examples of Indo-Iran. £ = SI. s, Lith. sz reflected by Lat. qv, and of descendants of kv, corresponding to Sanscr. cp against the as sertions of Fick. Further "the South-European languages and the German not only have often the simple k where Fick's rule requires kv, but also kv when the rule forbids it, i.e. the distinction between the two sounds in these lan- 15 guages is not generally complete." From the Lectures of As- coli he learns that thereisnot alwaysawell marked difference between the two ^-sounds even in Indo-Iranian and in Slavo-Lithuanian. Therefore the development of k into kj (Sanscr. f, SI. s, Lith. sz) was still incomplete when a rela tion of continuity existed between Indo-Iranian and Lithu- Slavonic : much less complete must it evidently have been during the far more ancient period of the primitive Aryan unity. Moreover, observes our critic, every Proto- Aryan tenuis has side by side with it a media with an aspirate : thus we have t, d, dh — p, b, bh. Hence if we were bound to ad mit a primitive double k, we should have to expect also a Proto- Aryan double g and double gh, especially as the Indo- Iranic and the Slavo-Lithuanian dialects have sounds which we might look upon as descendants of the six sounds above named, i. e. Sanscr. k, g, gh, h, and p, g', h ; Old Bulgarian k, g, and sz ; Lith. k, g, and sz, z. Now Fick is far from wishing to demonstrate in the primitive and fundamental Aryan the existence of a double media and a double aspirate corresponding to the supposed double tenuis k. Lastly, if the ke of Fick ( = Indo-Iran. f, SI. «,Lith. sz) corresponded to the simple k (not kv) of the other European languages, the logi cal result would be that the Indo-Iranic and Lithu-Slavonic mediae and aspirates of this tenuis ought to be represented in the other European languages by g, gh, not changed into gv,ghv : and this cannot be positively affirmed. Bezzenberger, in his critical remarks on the second part, recently published, of J. Schmidt's work, Zur geschichte des indogermanischen vokalismus,1 has given expression to certain opinions concerning the present argument, which we do not think it right to pass by in silence. " In the fundamental Lithu-Slavonic language," he writes, " there ie was not from the very beginning a sibilant as a substitute for the primitive kc, or a corruption of it, such as the Sanscr. f is, or presupposes, but it was reflected by a simple k. This results — 1st from its being represented by a simple k in the other European languages, 2ndly from the fact that this k has been preserved in some cases." 1 " If in some cases/' he observes, " the development of the sibilant from /cc is a phe nomenon of less ancient origin, it may be such in all the cases/' and accidental. Therefore the agreement of the Sanscr. and Old Bactr. f with the Slav. * and with the Lith. sz is quite unimportant.5 He then proceeds to examine some etymological views held by J. Schmidt in opposition to Fick, which seem to him of doubtful value. He thinks it very doubtful also that every tenuis must have side by side with it a media and an aspirate, as Schmidt supposes, and he quotes, by way of example, the labial media which is so rare, and has an existence so scantily demonstrated in the
fundamental Aryan.3 It is clear from the foregoing exposition that, in spite of the efforts of Ascoli, of Fick, and of some other philolo gists, the history of the Proto-Aryan k has not yet been explained in such a way as to dispel all obscurity. For the final solution of the problem we still need fresh studies on the descendants of the sound in question. And the results of the fresh researches will be far more useful to philology than many people think, in that the problem, which we have dis cussed up to this point, is intimately connected, as will be 17 seen later, with that of the special affinities which are generally thought to exist between the various families of the Aryan linguistic stock.4" pages 10 to -16 and onwards



No comments:

Post a Comment