stringtranslate.com

Proto-Indo-European numerals

This article contains characters used to write reconstructed Proto-Indo-European words (for an explanation of the notation, see Proto-Indo-European phonology). Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode combining characters and Latin characters.

The numerals and derived numbers of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) have been reconstructed by modern linguists based on similarities found across all Indo-European languages. The following article lists and discusses their hypothesized forms.

Cardinal numbers

The cardinal numbers are reconstructed as follows:

Other reconstructions typically differ only slightly from Beekes and Sihler. A nineteenth-century reconstruction (by Brugmann) for thousand is *tūsḱmtiə.[3][4] See also Fortson 2004.[5]

The elements *-dḱomt- (in the numerals "twenty" to "ninety") and *dḱm̥t- (in "hundred") are reconstructed on the assumption that these numerals are derivatives of *deḱm̥(t) "ten".

Lehmann[6] believes that the numbers greater than ten were constructed separately in the dialect groups and that *ḱm̥tóm originally meant "a large number" rather than specifically "one hundred."

Gender of numerals

The numbers three and four had feminine forms with the suffix *-s(o)r-, reconstructed as *t(r)i-sr- and *kʷetwr̥-sr-, respectively.[5]

Numerals as prefixes

Special forms of the numerals were used as prefixes, usually to form bahuvrihis (like five-fingered in English):

Ordinal numbers

The ordinal numbers are difficult to reconstruct due to their significant variation in the daughter languages. The following reconstructions are tentative:[20]

The cardinals ending in a syllabic nasal (seven, nine, ten) inserted a second nasal before the thematic vowel, resulting in the suffixes *-mó- and *-nó-. These and the suffix *-t(ó)- spread to neighbouring ordinals, seen for example in Vedic aṣṭamá- "eighth" and Lithuanian deviñtas "ninth".

Reflexes

Reflexes, or descendants of the PIE reconstructed forms in its daughter languages, include the following.

Reflexes of the cardinal numbers

In the following languages, reflexes separated by slashes mean:

Reflexes of the feminine numbers

Reflexes of the numeral prefixes

Reflexes of the ordinal numbers

Notes

  1. ^ All suggested etymologies of një "one" are highly speculative, at best. This etymology is one of two given by E. Hamp in Indo-European Numerals (Jadranka Gvozdanović, ed., 1992), pp. 903-904; the other is simply from PIE *eni- (or H₂en-), a PIE deictic particle visible in Sanskrit anyá- "the other", OCS onŭ "that one", Lithuanian anàs "that one". Michiel de Vaan, in a review of Demiraj's Sistemi i numerimit, suggests PIE *H₂en-io-no- > pre-Proto-Albanian *ëńán > Proto-Albanian *ńâ > një. M. Huld (Basic Albanian Etymologies, p. 101) attempts to derive një from PIE *sm-iH₂, feminine of *sem "one" and reflected in Ancient Greek mía; this etymology is also tentatively suggested in Don Ringe et al. "IE and Computational Cladistics", p. 75 (Transactions of the Philological Society 100, 2002).
  2. ^ For example, qñnã-tba "twelve" (litt. "ten" plus "two").[8]
  3. ^ See also: Umb peturpursus "quadruped".
  4. ^ Cf. Thr ketri- "four".[11]
  5. ^ See also: Osc pomp- "five".[13]
  6. ^ See also Phry pinke "five".[14]
  7. ^ Built upon osmŭ "eighth" < *H₁ok̂t-mo-.
  8. ^ With nasalization after *septḿ̥ "seven".
  9. ^ There is the possibility that Lycian sñta could mean either "ten" or "(one) hundred".[15][18]

References

  1. ^ Sihler (1995:402–24)
  2. ^ Beekes (1995:212–16)
  3. ^ Brugmann (1892:48)
  4. ^ Meillet:372)
  5. ^ a b c d Fortson (2004:131)
  6. ^ Lehmann (1993:252–255)
  7. ^ a b c Fournet, Arnaud (2010). "About the Mitanni Aryan gods". Journal of Indo-European Studies. 38 (1–2): 26-27.
  8. ^ Shevoroshkin, Vitaly. "Anatolian laryngeals in Milyan". In: The Sound of Indo-European: Phonetics, Phonemics, and Morphophonemics. Edited by Benedicte Nielsen Whitehead. Museum Tusculanum Press. 2012. p. 481. ISBN 978-87-635-3838-1
  9. ^ Kassian, Alexei. "Anatolian *meyu- ‘4, four’ and its cognates". In: Journal of Language Relationship 2 (2009). pp. 68 (footnote nr. 9), 69.
  10. ^ Accent location unknown.
  11. ^ Duridanov, Ivan (1985). Die Sprache der Thraker. Bulgarische Sammlung (in German). Vol. 5. Hieronymus Verlag. p. 60. ISBN 3-88893-031-6.
  12. ^ a b c d e Blažek, Václav (2008). "Gaulish language". Sborník prací Filozofické fakulty brněnské univerzity. N, Řada klasická. 57 (13): 37–65. hdl:11222.digilib/114125.
  13. ^ HOLMER, N. M. (1990), “The semantics of numerals”. In: Fontes linguae vasconum, 22: 16.
  14. ^ Woudhuizen, Fred C. "Phrygian & Greek" (PDF). Talanta. XL–XLI (2008–2009): 187–217.
  15. ^ a b Melchert, H. Craig (1989). "New Luvo-Lycian Isoglosses". Historische Sprachforschung. 102 (1): 23–45. JSTOR 40848962.
  16. ^ "This numeral ... is obviously derived from the word for "nine". (...) The etymological connection with PIE *newn ... is evident ...". Eichner, Heiner. "Anatolian". In: Gvozdanovic, Jadranka (ed.). Indo-European numerals. Trends in linguistics: Studies and monographs n. 57. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1991. p. 87. ISBN 3-11-011322-8
  17. ^ Wodtko, d. S. "Remarks on Celtiberian Etymology". In: Villar, Francisco y Beltrán, Francisco (eds.). Pueblos, lengua y escrituras en la Hispania Prerromana. Actas del VII Coloquio sobre lenguas y culturas paleohispánicas (Zaragoza, 12 a 15 de Marzo de 1997). Ediciones Universidad Salamanca. 1999. p. 734. ISBN 84-7800-094-1
  18. ^ Anthony, David W. (2007). The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Princeton University Press. p. 28. ISBN 978-1-4008-3110-4
  19. ^ a b Fortson (2004:131–132)
  20. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Fortson (2004:132)
  21. ^ Gvozdanovic (1991)
  22. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "one" and "first"". In: Sborník prací Filosofické fakulty Brněnské university, A 47. Brno: MU, 1999. p. 7-27. A 47. ISBN 80-210-2098-9.
  23. ^ de Vaan, Michiel. "Proto-Indo-European *sm and *si 'one'". In: The Precursors of Proto-Indo-European. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill|Rodopi, 2019. pp. 203–218. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004409354_015
  24. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "two"". In: Sborník prací Filosofické fakulty brněnské university. Brno: Masarykova universita, 1998. p. 5-25. A 46. ISBN 80-210-1796-1.
  25. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "three"". In: Lingua Posnaniensis, Polsko: neznámý, 1998, vol. 40, No 1, p. 33-45. ISSN 0079-4740.
  26. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "four"." In: Indogermanische Forschungen, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1998, vol. 103, No 1, p. 112-134. ISSN 0019-7262.
  27. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "five"". In: Indogermanische Forschungen, Berlin-NY: Walter de Gruyter, 2000, vol. 105, No 1, p. 102-120. ISSN 0019-7262.
  28. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "six"". In: Sborník prací Filosofické fakulty brněnské university. Brno: Masarykova universita, 2000. p. 5-18. A 48. ISBN 80-210-2350-3.
  29. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European 'Seven'". In: Journal of Indo-European Studies, Monograph Series 22 (1997): 9-29.
  30. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-european "eight"". In: Historische Sprachforschung. SRN: neznám, 1998, vol. 111, No 1, p. 209-224. ISSN 0935-3518.
  31. ^ Craig Melchert stated: "Meriggi, 'Fs Hirt' 266, suggests 'eighty' and 'ninety' respectively for aitãta and nuñtata ... 'Eight' and 'nine' are not only more reasonable contextually ... The remaining *aita- and *nuñta- may be derived from *ok̂tō and *néwn̥ ... " Melchert, H. Craig. "New Luvo-Lycian Isoglosses". In: Historische Sprachforschung. 102 Band. 1 Heft. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. 1989. pp. 24-25. ISSN 0935-3518
  32. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "nine"". In: Historische Sprachforschung. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999. vol. 112, No 2, p. 188-390. ISSN 0935-3518.
  33. ^ "This numeral ... is obviously derived from the word for "nine". (...) The etymological connection with PIE *newn ... is evident ...". Eichner, Heiner. "Anatolian". In: Gvozdanovic, Jadranka (ed.). Indo-European numerals. Trends in linguistics: Studies and monographs n. 57. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1991. p. 87. ISBN 3-11-011322-8
  34. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "ten"". In: Bygone voices reconstructed. On language origins and their relationships: In honor of Aharon Dolgopolski. Ed. by Vitalij V. Shevoroshkin & Harald U. Sverdrup. Copenhagen: Underskoven Publishers ApS, 2009. pp. 113-123. ISBN 978-87-91947-33-9.
  35. ^ Blažek, Václav. "Indo-European "hundred"". In: History of Language. Melbourne: Association for the History of Language, 1999, 5.2, No 2, p. 71-82. ISSN 1441-5542.
  36. ^ Douglas Q. Adams, A Dictionary of Tocharian B, 2nd ed., 2013, ISBN 9401209367 s.v. yaltse
  37. ^ Fortson (2004:120)

Bibliography

Further reading

Look up Category:Proto-Indo-European numerals in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.