Proto-Ash-Ish: Difference between revisions
(→Verbs) |
|||
Line 212: | Line 212: | ||
The general changes of individual sounds are fairly straightforward given the small inventory of PAI itself as well as its descendants. However in particular contexts many factors would have come into play at once, yielding more complex changes. Likewise roots were often extended with additional affixes in the daughter branches and so may not always correspond to them perfectly. | The general changes of individual sounds are fairly straightforward given the small inventory of PAI itself as well as its descendants. However in particular contexts many factors would have come into play at once, yielding more complex changes. Likewise roots were often extended with additional affixes in the daughter branches and so may not always correspond to them perfectly. | ||
===Laryngeal colouring=== | ===Laryngeal and rhotic colouring=== | ||
The back consonant {{ash|*q}} sometimes affected vowels in the daughter languages. | The back consonant {{ash|*q}} sometimes affected vowels in the daughter languages. | ||
Line 235: | Line 235: | ||
In this case we see backing of {{ash|*e}} to {{ash|*a}} in Ash while in Ish [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoglottophilia rhinoglottophilia] served as one of the sources of its nasal vowels. Ish also appears to have extended the root with a suffix of which today remains only {{ash|/-ɰ/}}. | In this case we see backing of {{ash|*e}} to {{ash|*a}} in Ash while in Ish [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoglottophilia rhinoglottophilia] served as one of the sources of its nasal vowels. Ish also appears to have extended the root with a suffix of which today remains only {{ash|/-ɰ/}}. | ||
The same seems to have happened around {{ash|*r}}: | |||
{| class="wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | PAI | |||
! colspan="2" | Ash | |||
! colspan="2" | Ish | |||
|- | |||
| {{ash|*nere}} | |||
| "nose" | |||
| → {{ash|*nana}} → {{ash|ıdna͠a}} | |||
| "nose" | |||
| → {{ash|nẽdẽ /tẽDẽ/}} | |||
| "nose" | |||
|} |
Revision as of 17:37, 4 August 2023
Proto-Ash-Ish (henceforth referred to as PAI) is the reconstructed protolanguage linking the Ash and Ish languages through their own respective protolanguages, Proto-Ash and Proto-Ish.
Phonology
Ish appears to be much more conservative than Ash or even Proto-Ash when it comes to the inventory of phonemes as the reconstruction of PAI is quite similar.
Vowels
The following vowels (with conventional romanisation rather than IPA) are posited:
Front | Back | |
---|---|---|
Short | *e | *a |
PAI appears to have had neither the nasal vowels of Ish nor the long vowels of Proto-Ash, but otherwise the same two-way contrast as Ish.
Consonants
These are the basic consonants:
Coronal | Dorsal | Laryngeal | |
---|---|---|---|
Oral | *t | *k | *q |
Nasal | *n | ||
Approximant | *r | *w |
Here a big difference from modern Ish is the presence of a nasal consonant whereas Ish has transferred nasality as a feature onto its vowels, losing the consonant in the process.
- As in Proto-Ash, it is unclear exactly what *q was. It merged with *k in Ish so may have been a uvular plosive but in Ash it develops into a glottal.
- The nasal *n likely assimilated the point of articulation of any other consonant in a cluster.
- The approximant *w was probably */ɰ/ as in Ish.
- The approximant *r might have been */ɹ/. It became /l~ɾ/ in Ish and disappeared in Ash.
Additionally there were important clusters that developed into new consonants in the descendants and may have been single phonemes already in PAI:
Coronal | Dorsal | Laryngeal | |
---|---|---|---|
Prenasalised | *nt~*ⁿt | *nk~*ⁿk | *nq~*ⁿq |
Velarised | *tw~*tʷ~*tᶭ | *kw~*kʷ~*kᶭ | *qw~*qʷ~*qᶭ |
The fact that these may have been single phonemes is supported by the fact that no other clusters seem to have been permitted. The convention is still to write these combinations as clusters.
- The velarised consonants may have been labiovelarised already in PAI.
- Consonants could also be both prenasalised and (labio)velarised at the same time.
The main developments into Ash and Ish were as follows:
PAI | Ash | Ish |
---|---|---|
*k | → /k/ | → /kˣ/ |
*nk | → /ŋᵍ/ | → /k/ |
*kw | → /p/ | → /kˣɰ/ |
*nkw | → /mᵇ/ | → /kɰ/ |
Ash developed poststopped nasals (which merged with the plain nasals, poststopping becoming an allophonic feature) and Ish developed a distinction between plain and aspirated or postfricated plosives.
Grammar and features
Nouns
PAI would have had some nominal morphology in the form of case endings inherited by the daughter branches only to be mostly lost or repurposed in various ways.
Verbs
Verb morphology seems to have been reduced mainly to auxiliaries while the main verb was quite invariant. These auxiliaries were inherited by Ash and Ish but treated somewhat differently. In Ash they became prefixes while in Ish they became nominal prepositions or verbal suffixes depending on analysis.
PAI | Ash | Ish |
---|---|---|
*qek (transitive verb, direct object) | → *qak → ảh- (direct agency) | → *ekˣ → e(g), iq- /e(k(ˣ))/ (direct object) |
*qat (transitive verb, indirect object) | → *qat → ảs- (inverse agency) | → *atˢ → a(d), at- /a(t(ˢ))/ (indirect object, passive) |
While these still serve somewhat similar functions in both languages, they work quite differently on a syntactic level.
Reduplication
Reduplication seems to have formed frequentatives already in PAI as reflexes show up in Proto-Ash as well as modern Ish. In the latter it forms the continuous aspect whereas in Ash the reduplicated forms seem to simply have become separate words or to have replaced the non-reduplicated forms altogether.
PAI | Ash | Ish | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
*kaw~kaw(-ar) | "whirl, whorl, cycle, wrap" | → *ku~kwa: → goa | "be/move around, elapse" | → qacow /kˣa.kaɰ/ | "be passing (of time, weather)" |
Deixis
The proximal and distal determiners are an example of common inheritance from PAI shared between the daughter branches.
PAI | Proto-Ash | Ish |
---|---|---|
*ewe "this" | → *i(j), *(i)ja- → *i, *ja- | → (iy)i /(e)ɰe/ |
*awa "that" | → *u(w), *(u)wa- → *u, *wa- | → (ow)o /(a)ɰa/ |
Syntax
Thanks to the grammatical cases word order was probably somewhat free in PAI, reflected by the resulting differences in word order in the daughter branches as they solidified their own word order in different ways as the case endings collapsed. Ash settled on auxiliary-noun-verb whereas Ish settled on verb-auxiliary-noun.
It is possible that Ash reflects the original trend and that Ish verb-auxiliary constructions were in fact compounds as noun-auxiliary forms would also develop, eroding the distinction between nouns and verbs apart from word order. Another fact in favour of this analysis is that Proto-Ash seems to have had verb ending derived from PAI *-(a)r while Ish does not reflect this and may have attached roots directly to the auxiliaries, although the ending may also have been irregularly eroded in this weak position.
A sentence in PAI may thus have looked as follows:
- *qek te kaw-ar
AUX.DIR water.PAT whirl-INF
stirs water
Vocabulary
Some core vocabulary is shared between Ish and Ash but does not always mean the same thing or have a similar sound anymore. This word stock includes elements of nature, common actions, and cultural aspects.
PAI | Ash | Ish | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
*ntaw- | "fire, burn, glow" | → *n(t)w-aj- → mee | "fire, heart, core, essence" | → dow /taɰ/ | "fire, light" |
*qat- | "uncomfortable, harsh" | → ảdla | "cold" | → qat /kˣatˢ/ | "bad" |
*taw- | "stand" | → *tw-a- → laa | "be, stand" | → tayi /tˢaɰe/ | "appear, see" |
Developments
The general changes of individual sounds are fairly straightforward given the small inventory of PAI itself as well as its descendants. However in particular contexts many factors would have come into play at once, yielding more complex changes. Likewise roots were often extended with additional affixes in the daughter branches and so may not always correspond to them perfectly.
Laryngeal and rhotic colouring
The back consonant *q sometimes affected vowels in the daughter languages.
PAI | Ash | Ish | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
*nteq- | "experience, feel" | → "suffer" → naa; nahga | "die"; "itch, irritate" | → nẽɱ /tẽkɰ/ | "be, live, make" |
→ nao | "(sentient/mortal) individual, soul" | → nẽɱ /tẽkɰ/ | "(sentient) being, individual" |
In this case we see backing of *e to *a in Ash while in Ish rhinoglottophilia served as one of the sources of its nasal vowels. Ish also appears to have extended the root with a suffix of which today remains only /-ɰ/.
The same seems to have happened around *r:
PAI | Ash | Ish | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
*nere | "nose" | → *nana → ıdna͠a | "nose" | → nẽdẽ /tẽDẽ/ | "nose" |