Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 15

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Dangla-Migama and Afro-Asiatic II: BidiyaČ- and Ǯ-

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2009
|
vol. 51
|
issue 1
119-124
EN
The paper represents at once a retarded, albeit detailed review article of the 1989 Bidiya vocabulary by Khalil Alio and a contribution to the etymological analysis of the Dangla-Migama language group (spoken in the western part of the Republic of Chad), where also Bidiya belongs, part of the Chadic language family (and, thus, ultimately, of the vast Afro-Asiatic macrofamily).
2
Content available remote

Lexica Afroasiatica IX

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2010
|
vol. 52
|
issue 2
85-98
EN
Comparative-historical Afro-Asiatic linguistics has undergone significant development over the past half century, since the appearance of Essai comparatif sur le vocabulaire et la phonétique du chamitosémitique (1947) by Marcel Cohen. This revolutionary and fundamental synthesis concluded the second great period of the comparative research on Afro-Asiatic lexicon (the so-called "old school", cf. EDE I 2-4). During the third period (second half of the 20th century), whose beginning was hallmarked by the names of J.H. Greenberg and I.M. Diakonoff, a huge quantity of new lexical material (both descriptive and comparative) has been published, including a few most recent attempts (either unfinished or rather problematic) at compiling an Afro-Asiatic comparative dictionary (SISAJ a I-II, HCVA I-V, HSED, Ehret 1995).During my current work on the Etymological Dictionary of Egyptian (EDE), I have collected a great number of new AA parallels, which - to the best of my knowledge - have not yet been proposed in the literature or were observed independently from me.1 Along the EDE project (and the underlying "Egyptian etymological word catalogue"), I have started collecting AA roots (not attested in Egyptian) for a separate Afro-Asiatic root catalogue in late 1999.The series Lexica Afroasiatica started in 20022 for communicating new Afro-Asiatic lexical correspondences observed recently during my work, which may later serve as basis of a new synthesis of the Afro-Asiatic comparative lexicon. The present part of this series is a collection of additional new Afro-Asiatic etymologies with the Proto-Afro-Asiatic initial bilabial nasal (*m-) observed after my research periods at Institut für Afrikanische Sprachwisenschaften of Frankfurt a/M (in 1999-2000 and 2002) guided by Prof. H. Jungraithmayr. The numeration of the etymological entries is continuous beginning from the first part of the series Lexica Afroasiatica.Each entry is headed by the proposed PA root (as tentatively reconstructed by myself). Author names are placed after the quoted linguistic forms in square brackets [] mostly in an abbreviated form (a key can be found at the end of the paper). The lexical data in the individual lexicon entries have been arranged in the order of the current classification of the Afro-Asiatic daughter languages (originating from J. H. Greenberg 1955; 1963 and I. M. Diakonoff 1965) in 5 (or 6) equivalent branches: (1) Semitic, (2) Egyptian, (3) Berber, (4) Cushitic, (5) Omotic (cometimes conceived as West Cushitic), (6) Chadic. For a detailed list of all daughter languages cf. EDE I 9-34. The number of vertical strokes indicates the closeness of the language units from which data are quoted: ||| separate branches (the 6 largest units within the family), || groups (such as East vs. South Cushitic or West vs. East Chadic), while | divides data from diverse sub-groups (e.g., Angas-Sura vs. North Bauchi within West Chadic).Since we know little about the Proto-Afro-Asiatic vowel system, the proposed list of the reconstructed Proto-Afro-Asiatic forms is arranged according to consonantal roots (even the nominal roots). Sometimes, nevertheless, it was possible to establish the root vowel, which is given in the paper additionally in brackets. The lexical parallels suggested herein, are based on the preliminary results in reconstructing the consonant correspondences achieved by the Russian team of I. M. Diakonoff (available in a number of publications3) as well as on my own observations refining the Russian results (most importantly Takács 2001). The most important results can be summarized as follows. The labial triad *b-*p-*f remained unchanged in Egyptian, South Cushitic, and Chadic, while the dental series *d-*t-*t was kept as such by Semitic and South Cushitic (AA *t continued as *d in Berber, Cushitic and Chadic, and it was merged into t vs. d in Egyptian). The fine distinction of the diverse sibilant affricates and spirants (AA *c, *, *c, *s, *č, *, *c, *š, *ĉ, *, *ŝ) was best preserved in Semitic, South Cushitic and West Chadic (while some of these phonemes suffered a merger in other branches and groups). The Russian scholars assumed a triad of postvelar (uvulear) stops with a voiceless spirant counterpart: *g, *g, *q, and *h, the distinction of which was retained in Cushitic and Chadic, but was merged into *h in Semitic and Egyptian. In a number of cases, however, it is still difficult to reconstruct exactly the root consonants on the basis of the available cognates (esp. when these are from the modern branches, e.g., Berber, Cushitic-Omotic, or Chadic). In such cases, the corresponding capitals are used (denoting only the place of articulation).4This part contains new Afro-Asiatic roots with *n- followed by a labial.
3
Content available remote

SOME BERBER ETYMOLOGIES X

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2013
|
vol. 55
|
issue 1
99-110
EN
My series “Some Berber Etymologies” is to gradually reveal the still unknown immense Afro-Asiatic heritage in the Berber lexical stock. The first part with some miscellaneous Berber etymologies was published back in 1996. Recently, I continued the series according to initial root consonants1 in course of my research for the volumes of the Etymological Dictionary of Egyptian (abbreviated as EDE, Leiden, since 1999, Brill)2 with a much more extensive lexicographical apparatus on the cognate Afro- Asiatic daughter languages. As for the present part, it greatly exploits the results of my ongoing work for the the fourth volume of EDE (analyzining the Eg. lexical stock with initial n-). The present part contains etymologies of Berber roots with initial *n- followed by sibilants. The numeration of the entries continues that of the preceding parts of this series. In order to spare room, I quote those well-attested and widespread lexical roots that appear common Berber, only through a few illustrative examples. The underlying regular consonant correspondences between Berber vs. Afro-Asiatic agree with those established by the Russian team of I.M. Diakonoff and summarized by A.Ju. MILITAREV: (1991, 242-243).
4
Content available remote

Ma'A Lexicon and Afro-Asiatic IV: Ma'Aŝ-

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2009
|
vol. 51
|
issue 1
125-131
EN
The paper represents part of a longer series that examines the lexical stock of the Ma'a language, an exotic Mischsprache combining a Bantu grammar with a basically Cushitic (henceforth, Afro-Asiatic) lexicon, from the standpoint of etymology. This part contains (mostly new) etymologies of Ma'a words with the initial lateral sibilant.
5
Content available remote

A. Dolgopolsky's Nostratic Dictionary and Afro-Asiatic (Semito-Hamitic)

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2011
|
vol. 53
|
issue 1
109-119
EN
The monumental comparative dictionary by Aharon Dolgopolsky (Prof. emer. of the University of Haifa), long awaited by many specialists interested in the long-range comparison of language families, is here at last, available online since spring 2008.1 What we have here is a life's work completing more than fifty years' research. The first online publication will soon be followed by a second revised edition. The present reviewer had the privilege in Haifa in December 2008 to be able to assist the author in reviewing the etymological entries with initial *m-.The author is the internationally widely known doyen of this domain, which he established still in Moscow in the early 1960s together with the late Vladislav Illič-Svityč (1934-1966). Both of them were working initially and basically in the field of Indo-European comparative linguistics. Illič-Svityč was an expert on Balto-Slavonic accentology, while Dolgopolsky started his careeer as a researcher of Romance philology. But soon, both of them had become familiar with the results of Semito-Hamitic (recently called Afro-Asiatic after Greenberg), Kartvelian, Dravidian, Uralic, and Altaic historical linguistics. This had led them to a conviction, that has arisen independently in them, on the relationship of the six so-called Nostratic language families enumerated above (including Indo-European). Both scholars had naturally realized that Afro-Asiatic has the least elaborated and reliable phonological and lexical reconstruction2, whereas the proto-languages of the other five families had been uncomparably more clearly and coherently described or, at least (in the case of Altaic), approached. Not accidentally had both Moscovite scholars got to reconstructing two most problematic branches of Afro-Asiatic: Illič-Svityč chose Chadic3 and Dolgopolsky focused on Cushito-Omotic, where his fruitful research had yielded a number of fundamental publications4 until the end of his career in Moscow (1976)5, where he left behind an informal school of comparative linguistics with talanted promising pupils like Sergej Starostin (Old Chinese, Altaic, North Caucasian), Evgenij Helimskij (Uralic), and Olga Stolbova (Chadic). Dolgopolsky's pioneering Comparative-Historical Phonology of Cushitic Languages (Сравнительно-исторический словарь кушитских языков) from 1973 has been very frequently quoted even in Western works in spite of its being published in Russian. After 1976 in Haifa, Dolgopolsky has continued - beside Nostratic studies in general - first of all his comparative Afro-Asiatic research and publication activity devoted primarily to clarifying the regular consonant correspondences among the Afro-Asiatic branches6, which signifies where the priority task still lies in Nostratic. All these results have long raised Dolgopolsky - beside the late Igor' D'jakonov (1915-1999) of Leningrad (St. Petersbug) - to the rank of the highest authority in comparative-historical Afro-Asiatic linguistics of recent times. This is why I devoted in 2008 a Semito-Hamitic (Afro-Asiatic) Festschrift in his honour.7Prof. Dolgopolsky's profound knowlegde of the lexical stocks involved and of the etymological problems in all language families examined by him can only be admired. My present paper cannot be a review stricto sensu of this gigantic accumulation and analysis of many thousands of pieces of linguistic data, let alone the allotted very minimal space. What I regard as most effective under the circumstances is to investigate at least through a few sample entries chosen at random how this magnificent etymological dictionary uses lexical data of the most obscure and scientifically neglected language family, namely Afro-Asiatic. Elsewhere, it might have been probably substantially easier and smoother to extract etymological information from the domains of other language families by far better equipped with reliable etymological lexicons, most of which can be safely regarded as standard tools. If we look at how autonomously Dolgopolsky handles e.g. Indo-European etymologies, we can deduce that he is much farther off than just quoting the relevant etymological sources even in these well-equipped domains.Unfortunately, the objective circumstances are many times less favorable in the case of Proto-Afro-Asiatic, presumably the oldest one of all the known language families8, the parental language of Akkadian, Hebrew, Arabic, Egyptian etc., where we until now simply lack a comprehensive and high-quality comparative lexicon and a reliable lexical reconstruction.9 This is why partial results here are at the moment much more important than the very uncertain comparative dictionaries. Ever since I have known Dolgopolsky's Russian and English articles on Nostratic in general, I have eagerly observed how these - as a "side-effect" - contribute to our scanty knowledge about Afro-Asiatic lexical correspondences. To my mind, the language family of all Nostratic families where the quantitative progress in the inner comparative study of the lexicon has gained most from Illič-Svityč's and Dolgopolsky's Nostratic work is just the still obscure domain of Afro-Asiatic etymology, and vice versa: I have no doubt that modern Afro-Asiatic comparative research has received the strongest impulse from Nostratic linguistics in Moscow, suffice it to refer - beside Illič-Svityč and Dolgopolsky - to Stolbova, Militarev, and Blažek (who also belongs to the Moscow school), the most productive authors of comparative Afro-Asiatic in the recent decades.The Nostratic Dictionary testifies to Dolgopolsky's significant research results contributing to Afro-Asiatic etymology, which is until now hindered by a number of objective circumstances: (1) even we ourselves in the Moscow school only have a general working hypothesis on the basic consonantal correspondences (esp. in the relationship of Proto-Semitic, Egyptian, and Proto-Berber), which have not yet been satisfactorily elaborated and thoroughly tested in all details (esp. in the least explored Omotic and Chadic daughter languages). (2) Secondly, it has always been - almost irrespectively of the individual authors (albeit in different degrees) - difficult in our etymological research, especially in the case of Semitic and Egyptian, to keep a balance between the philological background of our comparanda and their external parallels. Dolgopolsky has worked carefully in order to minimize these unavoidable negative effects. My comments to the following etymological entries that were selected at random mostly carry additional data, new cognates, which signifies the still unexploited immense treasure and possibilities in our domain. May this discussion gain new friends for Nostratic studies and Afro-Asiatic etymology!
6
Content available remote

Lexica afroasiatica vi

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2012
|
vol. 54
|
issue 1
99-132
EN
Gábor Takács. Lexica Afroasiatica VI. Lingua Posnaniensis, vol. L IV (1)/2012. The Poznań Society for the Advancement of the Arts and Sciences. PL ISSN 0079-4740, ISBN 978-83-7654-103-7, pp. 99-132. Comparative-historical Afro-Asiatic linguistics has undergone a significant development over the past half century, since the appearence Essai comparatif sur le vocabulaire et la phonétique du chamitosémitique (1947) by Marcel Cohen. This revolutionary and fundamental synthesis concluded the second great period of the comparative research on Afro-Asiatic lexicon (the so-called “old school”, cf. E DE I 2-4). During the third period (second half of the 20th century), whose beginning was hallmarked by the names of J .H. Greenberg and I.M. Diakonoff, an enormous quantity of new lexical material (both descriptive and comparative) has been published, including a few most recent attempts (either unfinished or rather problematic) at compiling an Afro-Asiatic compartive dictionary (SISAJ a I-III, H CVA I-V, H SED, Ehret 1995). During my current work on the Etymological Dictionary of Egyptian (Leiden, since 1999-, E .J. Brill), Ihave collected a great number of new AA parallels, which - to the best of my knowledge - have not yet been proposed in the literature (I did my best to note it wherever Inoticed an overlapping with the existing Afro-Asiatic dictionaries). Along the E DE project (and the underlying “Egyptian etymological word catalogue”), Ihave started collecting AA roots (not attested in Egyptian) for a separate Afro- Asiatic root catalogue in late 1999.1 The series Lexica Afroasiatica started in 20022 in order to contribute to the existing and published materials of comparative Afro-Asiatic lexicon with new lexical correspondences observed recently during my work, which may later serve as basis of a new synthesis of the Afro-Asiatic comparative lexicon. The present part of this series is a collection of new Afro-Asiatic etymologies with the Proto-Afro- Asiatic initial bilabial nasal (*m-), which results directly from my research at Institut für Afrikanische Sprachwisenschaften of Frankfurt a/M (in 1999-2000 and 2002) guided by Prof. H . Jungraithmayr.3 The numeration of the etymological entries is continuous beginning from the first part of the series Lexica Afroasiatica. Each entry is headed by the proposed PAA root (as tentatively reconstructed by myself). Author names are placed after the quoted linguistic forms in square brackets [] mostly in an abbreviated form (a key can be found at the end of the paper). The lexical data in the individual lexicon entries have been arranged in the order of the current classification of the Afro-Asiatic daughter languages (originating from J.H. Greenberg 1955, 1963 and I.M. Diakonoff 1965) in 5 (or 6) equivalent branches: (1) Semitic, (2) Egyptian, (3) Berber, (4) Cushitic, (5) Omotic (cometimes conceived as West Cushitic), (6) Chadic. For a detailed list of all daughter languages cf. E DE I 9-34. The number of vertical strokes indicate the closeness of the language units from which data are quoted: ||| separate branches (the 6 largest units within the family), || groups (such as East vs. South Cushitic or West vs. East Chadic), while | divides data from diverse sub-groups (e.g., Angas-Sura vs. North Bauchi within West Chadic). Since we know little about the Proto-Afro-Asiatic vowel system, the proposed list of the reconstructed Proto-Afro-Asiatic forms is arranged according to consonantal roots (even the nominal roots). Sometimes, nevertheless, it was possible to establish the root vowel, which is given in the paper additionally in brackets. The lexical parallels suggested herein, are based on the preliminary results in reconstructing the consonant correspondences achieved by the Russian team of I.M. Diakonoff (available in a number of publications4) as well as on my own observations refining the Russian results (most importantly Takács 2001). The most important results can be summarized as follows. The labial triad *b - *p - *f remained unchanged in Egyptian, South Cushitic, and Chadic, while the dental series *d - *t - *s was kept as such by Semitic and South Cushitic (AA *s continued as *T in Berber, Cushitic and Chadic, and it was merged into t vs. d in Egyptian). The fine distinction of the diverse sibilant affricates and spirants (AA *c, *μ, *@, *s, *D, *¸, *E, *b, *ĉ, *H, *ŝ) was best preserved in Semitic, South Cushitic and West Chadic (while some of these phonemes suffered a merger in other branches and groups). The Russian scholars assumed a triad of postvelar (uvulear) stops with a voiceless spirant counterpart: *-, *", *q, and *¯, the distinction of which was retained in Cushitic and Chadic, but was merged into *¯ in Semitic and Egyptian. In a number of cases, however, it is still difficult to exactly reconstruct the root consonants on the basis of the available cognates (esp. when these are from the modern branches, e.g., Berber, Cushitic-Omotic, or Chadic). In such cases, the corresponding capitals are used (denoting only the place of articulation).
7
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Dangla-Migama and Afro-Asiatic IV: Root initial *ḅ- with C2 sonants

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 1
97-134
EN
The paper is a new contribution to revealing the Afro-Asiatic heritage in the lexical root stock of the Dangla-Migama group of Chadic languages by means of inter-branch comparison primarily using, among others, the ancient Egypto-Semitic etymological evidence.
8
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Some Berber etymologies XIII

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 1
175-208
EN
The paper contains new etymological entries to Berber lexical roots and is part of a long-range series eventually resulting, when completed, in materials for an etymological dictionary of Berber, a desired addition to the fascicles of the comparative dictionary of Berber roots (DRB).
9
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Angas-Sura etymologies X

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 1
73-96
EN
The paper as part of a long-running series is devoted to the etymological analysis of a new segment (namely that with initial dental *z-) of the Angas-Sura root stock, a small group of modern languages remotely and ultimately akin to pharaonic Egyptian and the well-known Semitic languages or Twareg in the Sahara etc. Doing so, I wish to continue the noble tradition initiated by J.H. Greenberg (1958), the founding father of modern Afro-Asiatic comparative linguistics (along with I.M. Diakonoff), who was the first scholar ever to have established by Neo-Grammarian the methods regular consonantal correspondences between Angas-Sura and ancient Egyptian in his pioneering (painfully isolated) paper on the ancient trichotomy of the word-initial labials in both branches. Nowadays our chances in following this path are substantially more favourable being equipped with our gigantic comparative root catalogue system of the Egyptian etymologies ever published (ongoing since 1994) and of the Afro-Asiatic parental lexical stock (ongoing since 1999).
10
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Semito-Hamitic or Afro-Asiatic consonantism and lexicon: Episodes of a comparative research I (Part 1: The long century of Semito-Hamitology until the middle of the 20th century)

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 1
135-173
EN
A retrospective account on past comparative research on Afro-Asiatic (AA) or Semito-Hamitic / Hamito-Semitic (SH/HS, resp.) phonology (first of all consonantism, also root structure) and lexicon, segmented into episodes according to diverse trends (often overlapping in time) is now under way and will be presented part by part in a series of papers. The present paper contains the first ever direction of this research, labelled “Semito-Hamitology” covering studies seeking, in their conception, the “African”, i.e. “Hamitic” kinship of Semitic, without a permanent communis opinio over the whole century of this ‘trend’ (better: amalgamate era) regarding the limits of the family.
11
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Angas-Sura etymologies XI

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 2
49-76
EN
The paper as part of a long-running series is devoted to the etymological analysis of a new segment (namely that with initial dental *z-) of the Angas-Sura root stock, a small group of modern languages remotely and ultimately akin to pharaonic Egyptian and the well-known Semitic languages or Twareg in the Sahara etc. Doing so, I wish to continue the noble tradition initiated by J.H. Greenberg (1958), the founding father of modern Afro-Asiatic comparative linguistics (along with I.M. Diakonoff), who was the first scholar ever to have established by Neo-Grammarian the methods regular consonantal correspondences between Angas-Sura and ancient Egyptian in his pioneering (painfully isolated) paper on the ancient trichotomy of the word-initial labials in both branches. Nowadays our chances in following this path are substantially more favourable being equipped with our gigantic comparative root catalogue system of the Egyptian etymologies ever published (ongoing since 1994) and of the Afro-Asiatic parental lexical stock (ongoing since 1999).
12
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

New lexical materials for the Proto-Afro-Asiatic anatomical and physiological terminology I: Body part names with initial labials: General terms, head and neck

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 2
107-144
EN
The paper constitutes the first part of a long-range series of studies gradually elaborating the enormous new materials of the anestral anatomical-physiological vocabulary of Proto-Afro-Asiatic, supposed to be the earliest known parental language spoken by the earliest known neolithic community on earth. This series is parallel to the author’s ongoing projects for a comprehensive analysis of the diverse segments of the immense new cultural lexicon that has emerged in course of the author’s root research over the past some three decades.
13
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Semito-Hamitic or Afro-Asiatic consonantism and lexicon: Episodes of a comparative research I (Part 2: Marcel Cohen’s Essai comparatif)

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 2
177-209
EN
A retrospective account on past comparative research on Afro-Asiatic (AA) or Semito-Hamitic / Hamito-Semitic (SH / HS, resp.) phonology (first of all consonantism, also root structure) and lexicon, segmented into episodes according to diverse (often overlapping in time) trends is now under way and will be presented part by part in a series of papers. The present paper contains the first ever direction of this research, labelled “Semito-Hamitology” covering studies seeking, in their conception, the “African”, i.e. “Hamitic” kinship of Semitic.
14
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Omotic lexicon in its Afro-Asiatic setting VII: Further addenda to Omotic roots with *b-

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 2
145-175
EN
The paper constitutes part of a long-range series aiming, step by step, to identify the inherited Afro-Asiatic stock in the etymologically little explored lexicon of the Omotic (West Ethiopia) branch of the Afro-Asiatic family displaying the least of shared traits among the six branches of this macrofamily, which suggests a most ancient Omotic desintegration reaching far back to the age of post-Natufian neolithic.
15
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Mubi-Toram lexicon and Afro-Asiatic III: Lexemes with initial *ḅ-

100%
Takács G.
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2022
|
vol. 64
|
issue 2
77-105
EN
The paper is another part of a planned longer series designed to step by step reveal the Chadic and wider Afro-Asiatic cognate heritage in the lexical stock of the Mubi-Toram languages which represent the easternmost (27th) group of the vast (6th) Chadic branch of the gigantic Afro-Asiatic family.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.