Mixing
Germanic Philology: “translate†a word from indoeuropean language to the germanic language
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm having a philology test next week. One of the questions will be to "translate" an indoeuropean word into a germanic word, like: i.e. Agros -> germanic Akraz (i.e. "g" --> germ. "k" for Grimm's Law, excetera). I understood that there are some exceptions to this law, like the Verner's law. Are there other exceptions or can i say that every i.e. "p" turns ALWAYS into "f", or that every i.e. "b" turns ALWAYS into "p"?
phonology historical-linguistics ipa proto-indo-european germanic-languages
asked Sep 8 at 11:50
Marko Nervo
162
New contributor
Marko Nervo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm having a philology test next week. One of the questions will be to "translate" an indoeuropean word into a germanic word, like: i.e. Agros -> germanic Akraz (i.e. "g" --> germ. "k" for Grimm's Law, excetera). I understood that there are some exceptions to this law, like the Verner's law. Are there other exceptions or can i say that every i.e. "p" turns ALWAYS into "f", or that every i.e. "b" turns ALWAYS into "p"?
phonology historical-linguistics ipa proto-indo-european germanic-languages
asked Sep 8 at 11:50
Marko Nervo
162
New contributor
Marko Nervo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Possible duplicate of Not affected by Grimm's Law?
– Alex B.
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm having a philology test next week. One of the questions will be to "translate" an indoeuropean word into a germanic word, like: i.e. Agros -> germanic Akraz (i.e. "g" --> germ. "k" for Grimm's Law, excetera). I understood that there are some exceptions to this law, like the Verner's law. Are there other exceptions or can i say that every i.e. "p" turns ALWAYS into "f", or that every i.e. "b" turns ALWAYS into "p"?
phonology historical-linguistics ipa proto-indo-european germanic-languages
asked Sep 8 at 11:50
Marko Nervo
162
New contributor
Marko Nervo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I'm having a philology test next week. One of the questions will be to "translate" an indoeuropean word into a germanic word, like: i.e. Agros -> germanic Akraz (i.e. "g" --> germ. "k" for Grimm's Law, excetera). I understood that there are some exceptions to this law, like the Verner's law. Are there other exceptions or can i say that every i.e. "p" turns ALWAYS into "f", or that every i.e. "b" turns ALWAYS into "p"?
phonology historical-linguistics ipa proto-indo-european germanic-languages
asked Sep 8 at 11:50
Marko Nervo
162
New contributor
Marko Nervo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Sep 8 at 11:50
Marko Nervo
162
New contributor
Marko Nervo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Sep 8 at 11:50
Marko Nervo
162
asked Sep 8 at 11:50
Marko Nervo
162
162
New contributor
Marko Nervo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Marko Nervo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Marko Nervo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Possible duplicate of Not affected by Grimm's Law?
– Alex B.
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
Possible duplicate of Not affected by Grimm's Law?
– Alex B.
2 days ago
Possible duplicate of Not affected by Grimm's Law?
– Alex B.
2 days ago
Possible duplicate of Not affected by Grimm's Law?
– Alex B.
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
Verner's Law is not an exception, since Germanic did not emerge in one sudden leap from PIE, it is a complication, i.e. there is another law that has to be factored in. Grimm's Law happened, and then Verner's Law also happened. You can't say "except for further developments under Verner's Law, p t k always become f θ x", because there are other complications. PIE *steigh "climb" shows up in OE forms such as gestīgan, Icelandic stiÃŒÂga and do on – there is another complication (GL does not apply after a fricative). Sanskrit teÃŒÂjate "to be sharp" and OE sticca are related, which illustrates another kind of complication (not an exception) – this IE root illustrates the phenomenon of "variable s", that s just sort of shows up sometimes. You could say that the Germanic (Greek etc) form reflects the root steig and the Indo-Iranian forms reflect the root teig, i.e. the reconstructed root itself is not totally fixed.
The word "path" seems to correspond to Sanskrit path-, constituting what looks like a serious exception to the claim that PIE p turns into Gmc. f. It is, however, thought that this word was borrowed from some Iranian language into Germanic, thus escaping the effects of GL. The word kitchen likewise corresponds to PIE pekʷ, exemplifying an extreme "irregularity", except the Germanic word is borrowed from Latin, cf. coquīna. That is, sometimes words are borrowed. There are also "exceptions" (though I cannot remember a specific one) where a word is iconic / onomatopoeic, and the correspondences seem to be off (the expected sound change does not happen).
It has been a virtual axiom in historical linguistics that sound change is regular, but recognizing that regularity requires knowing all of the complicating factors.
answered Sep 8 at 15:48
user6726
28.6k11654
1
re: the overused path example, something important to remember: “this explanation does however pose historical problems, given the limited distribution of the Germanic word†(OED).
– Alex B.
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
I would like to briefly add more info on how consonant clusters were affected by Grimm's law (based on a number of sources, e.g. Arsenieva et al. 2003; Ringe 2017, vol. 1 etc.). All the Proto-Germanic reconstructions are from Ringe. All of the exceptions below are well-known and usually studied in undergrad (at least, that was in my case).
s followed by an obstruent (crucially, this is not only restricted to s-mobile):
Gothic stairno, OE steorra < PGmc *sternan- < PIE *h2stēr-s (cf. Latin stella)
Gothic fisks < PGmc *fiskaz < PIE *pisk- (cf. Latin piscis)
two obstruents: only the first obstruent - if it's a stop - is affected:
Gothic ahtau, OE ahta, eahta < PGmc *ahtōu < PIE *h3(e)kÃŒÂteÃŒÂh3 (cf. Latin octo)
OE nift, Old High German nift < PGmc *niftī < PIE *h2nep-t-iH (cf. Latin neptis)
the coronal cluster *tst becomes ss:
OE sess < PGmc *sessaz < PIE *sedstoÃŒÂs
geminates pp, tt, kk (often explained with Kluge's law, if you accept it)
miscellanea:
Gothic fidwor, OE fēower (PGmc *fedwōr) seems to defy Grimm's law, cf. PIE *kÊ·eÃŒÂtuōr
Several proposals have been put forward, analogy (Ringe) or /kÊ·/>/p/>/f/ (Krahe).
word-initial PIE *gÊ·Ê° > PGmc *b (Ringe 2017: 127-128), Gothic banja, OE benn, cf. PIE *gÊ·Ê°en-;
PIE *gÊ·Ê° followed by a nasal was not affected: Gothic siggwan, ON syngva, cf. PIE *sengÊ·Ê° -
etc.
answered 2 days ago
Alex B.
6,67311030
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
Verner's Law is not an exception, since Germanic did not emerge in one sudden leap from PIE, it is a complication, i.e. there is another law that has to be factored in. Grimm's Law happened, and then Verner's Law also happened. You can't say "except for further developments under Verner's Law, p t k always become f θ x", because there are other complications. PIE *steigh "climb" shows up in OE forms such as gestīgan, Icelandic stiÃŒÂga and do on – there is another complication (GL does not apply after a fricative). Sanskrit teÃŒÂjate "to be sharp" and OE sticca are related, which illustrates another kind of complication (not an exception) – this IE root illustrates the phenomenon of "variable s", that s just sort of shows up sometimes. You could say that the Germanic (Greek etc) form reflects the root steig and the Indo-Iranian forms reflect the root teig, i.e. the reconstructed root itself is not totally fixed.
The word "path" seems to correspond to Sanskrit path-, constituting what looks like a serious exception to the claim that PIE p turns into Gmc. f. It is, however, thought that this word was borrowed from some Iranian language into Germanic, thus escaping the effects of GL. The word kitchen likewise corresponds to PIE pekʷ, exemplifying an extreme "irregularity", except the Germanic word is borrowed from Latin, cf. coquīna. That is, sometimes words are borrowed. There are also "exceptions" (though I cannot remember a specific one) where a word is iconic / onomatopoeic, and the correspondences seem to be off (the expected sound change does not happen).
It has been a virtual axiom in historical linguistics that sound change is regular, but recognizing that regularity requires knowing all of the complicating factors.
answered Sep 8 at 15:48
user6726
28.6k11654
1
re: the overused path example, something important to remember: “this explanation does however pose historical problems, given the limited distribution of the Germanic word†(OED).
– Alex B.
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
Verner's Law is not an exception, since Germanic did not emerge in one sudden leap from PIE, it is a complication, i.e. there is another law that has to be factored in. Grimm's Law happened, and then Verner's Law also happened. You can't say "except for further developments under Verner's Law, p t k always become f θ x", because there are other complications. PIE *steigh "climb" shows up in OE forms such as gestīgan, Icelandic stiÃŒÂga and do on – there is another complication (GL does not apply after a fricative). Sanskrit teÃŒÂjate "to be sharp" and OE sticca are related, which illustrates another kind of complication (not an exception) – this IE root illustrates the phenomenon of "variable s", that s just sort of shows up sometimes. You could say that the Germanic (Greek etc) form reflects the root steig and the Indo-Iranian forms reflect the root teig, i.e. the reconstructed root itself is not totally fixed.
The word "path" seems to correspond to Sanskrit path-, constituting what looks like a serious exception to the claim that PIE p turns into Gmc. f. It is, however, thought that this word was borrowed from some Iranian language into Germanic, thus escaping the effects of GL. The word kitchen likewise corresponds to PIE pekʷ, exemplifying an extreme "irregularity", except the Germanic word is borrowed from Latin, cf. coquīna. That is, sometimes words are borrowed. There are also "exceptions" (though I cannot remember a specific one) where a word is iconic / onomatopoeic, and the correspondences seem to be off (the expected sound change does not happen).
It has been a virtual axiom in historical linguistics that sound change is regular, but recognizing that regularity requires knowing all of the complicating factors.
answered Sep 8 at 15:48
user6726
28.6k11654
1
re: the overused path example, something important to remember: “this explanation does however pose historical problems, given the limited distribution of the Germanic word†(OED).
– Alex B.
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
Verner's Law is not an exception, since Germanic did not emerge in one sudden leap from PIE, it is a complication, i.e. there is another law that has to be factored in. Grimm's Law happened, and then Verner's Law also happened. You can't say "except for further developments under Verner's Law, p t k always become f θ x", because there are other complications. PIE *steigh "climb" shows up in OE forms such as gestīgan, Icelandic stiÃŒÂga and do on – there is another complication (GL does not apply after a fricative). Sanskrit teÃŒÂjate "to be sharp" and OE sticca are related, which illustrates another kind of complication (not an exception) – this IE root illustrates the phenomenon of "variable s", that s just sort of shows up sometimes. You could say that the Germanic (Greek etc) form reflects the root steig and the Indo-Iranian forms reflect the root teig, i.e. the reconstructed root itself is not totally fixed.
The word "path" seems to correspond to Sanskrit path-, constituting what looks like a serious exception to the claim that PIE p turns into Gmc. f. It is, however, thought that this word was borrowed from some Iranian language into Germanic, thus escaping the effects of GL. The word kitchen likewise corresponds to PIE pekʷ, exemplifying an extreme "irregularity", except the Germanic word is borrowed from Latin, cf. coquīna. That is, sometimes words are borrowed. There are also "exceptions" (though I cannot remember a specific one) where a word is iconic / onomatopoeic, and the correspondences seem to be off (the expected sound change does not happen).
It has been a virtual axiom in historical linguistics that sound change is regular, but recognizing that regularity requires knowing all of the complicating factors.
answered Sep 8 at 15:48
user6726
28.6k11654
Verner's Law is not an exception, since Germanic did not emerge in one sudden leap from PIE, it is a complication, i.e. there is another law that has to be factored in. Grimm's Law happened, and then Verner's Law also happened. You can't say "except for further developments under Verner's Law, p t k always become f θ x", because there are other complications. PIE *steigh "climb" shows up in OE forms such as gestīgan, Icelandic stiÃŒÂga and do on – there is another complication (GL does not apply after a fricative). Sanskrit teÃŒÂjate "to be sharp" and OE sticca are related, which illustrates another kind of complication (not an exception) – this IE root illustrates the phenomenon of "variable s", that s just sort of shows up sometimes. You could say that the Germanic (Greek etc) form reflects the root steig and the Indo-Iranian forms reflect the root teig, i.e. the reconstructed root itself is not totally fixed.
The word "path" seems to correspond to Sanskrit path-, constituting what looks like a serious exception to the claim that PIE p turns into Gmc. f. It is, however, thought that this word was borrowed from some Iranian language into Germanic, thus escaping the effects of GL. The word kitchen likewise corresponds to PIE pekʷ, exemplifying an extreme "irregularity", except the Germanic word is borrowed from Latin, cf. coquīna. That is, sometimes words are borrowed. There are also "exceptions" (though I cannot remember a specific one) where a word is iconic / onomatopoeic, and the correspondences seem to be off (the expected sound change does not happen).
It has been a virtual axiom in historical linguistics that sound change is regular, but recognizing that regularity requires knowing all of the complicating factors.
answered Sep 8 at 15:48
user6726
28.6k11654
answered Sep 8 at 15:48
user6726
28.6k11654
answered Sep 8 at 15:48
user6726
28.6k11654
answered Sep 8 at 15:48
user6726
28.6k11654
28.6k11654
1
re: the overused path example, something important to remember: “this explanation does however pose historical problems, given the limited distribution of the Germanic word†(OED).
– Alex B.
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
1
re: the overused path example, something important to remember: “this explanation does however pose historical problems, given the limited distribution of the Germanic word†(OED).
– Alex B.
2 days ago
1
1
re: the overused path example, something important to remember: “this explanation does however pose historical problems, given the limited distribution of the Germanic word†(OED).
– Alex B.
2 days ago
re: the overused path example, something important to remember: “this explanation does however pose historical problems, given the limited distribution of the Germanic word†(OED).
– Alex B.
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
I would like to briefly add more info on how consonant clusters were affected by Grimm's law (based on a number of sources, e.g. Arsenieva et al. 2003; Ringe 2017, vol. 1 etc.). All the Proto-Germanic reconstructions are from Ringe. All of the exceptions below are well-known and usually studied in undergrad (at least, that was in my case).
s followed by an obstruent (crucially, this is not only restricted to s-mobile):
Gothic stairno, OE steorra < PGmc *sternan- < PIE *h2stēr-s (cf. Latin stella)
Gothic fisks < PGmc *fiskaz < PIE *pisk- (cf. Latin piscis)
two obstruents: only the first obstruent - if it's a stop - is affected:
Gothic ahtau, OE ahta, eahta < PGmc *ahtōu < PIE *h3(e)kÃŒÂteÃŒÂh3 (cf. Latin octo)
OE nift, Old High German nift < PGmc *niftī < PIE *h2nep-t-iH (cf. Latin neptis)
the coronal cluster *tst becomes ss:
OE sess < PGmc *sessaz < PIE *sedstoÃŒÂs
geminates pp, tt, kk (often explained with Kluge's law, if you accept it)
miscellanea:
Gothic fidwor, OE fēower (PGmc *fedwōr) seems to defy Grimm's law, cf. PIE *kÊ·eÃŒÂtuōr
Several proposals have been put forward, analogy (Ringe) or /kÊ·/>/p/>/f/ (Krahe).
word-initial PIE *gÊ·Ê° > PGmc *b (Ringe 2017: 127-128), Gothic banja, OE benn, cf. PIE *gÊ·Ê°en-;
PIE *gÊ·Ê° followed by a nasal was not affected: Gothic siggwan, ON syngva, cf. PIE *sengÊ·Ê° -
etc.
answered 2 days ago
Alex B.
6,67311030
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
I would like to briefly add more info on how consonant clusters were affected by Grimm's law (based on a number of sources, e.g. Arsenieva et al. 2003; Ringe 2017, vol. 1 etc.). All the Proto-Germanic reconstructions are from Ringe. All of the exceptions below are well-known and usually studied in undergrad (at least, that was in my case).
s followed by an obstruent (crucially, this is not only restricted to s-mobile):
Gothic stairno, OE steorra < PGmc *sternan- < PIE *h2stēr-s (cf. Latin stella)
Gothic fisks < PGmc *fiskaz < PIE *pisk- (cf. Latin piscis)
two obstruents: only the first obstruent - if it's a stop - is affected:
Gothic ahtau, OE ahta, eahta < PGmc *ahtōu < PIE *h3(e)kÃŒÂteÃŒÂh3 (cf. Latin octo)
OE nift, Old High German nift < PGmc *niftī < PIE *h2nep-t-iH (cf. Latin neptis)
the coronal cluster *tst becomes ss:
OE sess < PGmc *sessaz < PIE *sedstoÃŒÂs
geminates pp, tt, kk (often explained with Kluge's law, if you accept it)
miscellanea:
Gothic fidwor, OE fēower (PGmc *fedwōr) seems to defy Grimm's law, cf. PIE *kÊ·eÃŒÂtuōr
Several proposals have been put forward, analogy (Ringe) or /kÊ·/>/p/>/f/ (Krahe).
word-initial PIE *gÊ·Ê° > PGmc *b (Ringe 2017: 127-128), Gothic banja, OE benn, cf. PIE *gÊ·Ê°en-;
PIE *gÊ·Ê° followed by a nasal was not affected: Gothic siggwan, ON syngva, cf. PIE *sengÊ·Ê° -
etc.
answered 2 days ago
Alex B.
6,67311030
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
I would like to briefly add more info on how consonant clusters were affected by Grimm's law (based on a number of sources, e.g. Arsenieva et al. 2003; Ringe 2017, vol. 1 etc.). All the Proto-Germanic reconstructions are from Ringe. All of the exceptions below are well-known and usually studied in undergrad (at least, that was in my case).
s followed by an obstruent (crucially, this is not only restricted to s-mobile):
Gothic stairno, OE steorra < PGmc *sternan- < PIE *h2stēr-s (cf. Latin stella)
Gothic fisks < PGmc *fiskaz < PIE *pisk- (cf. Latin piscis)
two obstruents: only the first obstruent - if it's a stop - is affected:
Gothic ahtau, OE ahta, eahta < PGmc *ahtōu < PIE *h3(e)kÃŒÂteÃŒÂh3 (cf. Latin octo)
OE nift, Old High German nift < PGmc *niftī < PIE *h2nep-t-iH (cf. Latin neptis)
the coronal cluster *tst becomes ss:
OE sess < PGmc *sessaz < PIE *sedstoÃŒÂs
geminates pp, tt, kk (often explained with Kluge's law, if you accept it)
miscellanea:
Gothic fidwor, OE fēower (PGmc *fedwōr) seems to defy Grimm's law, cf. PIE *kÊ·eÃŒÂtuōr
Several proposals have been put forward, analogy (Ringe) or /kÊ·/>/p/>/f/ (Krahe).
word-initial PIE *gÊ·Ê° > PGmc *b (Ringe 2017: 127-128), Gothic banja, OE benn, cf. PIE *gÊ·Ê°en-;
PIE *gÊ·Ê° followed by a nasal was not affected: Gothic siggwan, ON syngva, cf. PIE *sengÊ·Ê° -
etc.
answered 2 days ago
Alex B.
6,67311030
I would like to briefly add more info on how consonant clusters were affected by Grimm's law (based on a number of sources, e.g. Arsenieva et al. 2003; Ringe 2017, vol. 1 etc.). All the Proto-Germanic reconstructions are from Ringe. All of the exceptions below are well-known and usually studied in undergrad (at least, that was in my case).
s followed by an obstruent (crucially, this is not only restricted to s-mobile):
Gothic stairno, OE steorra < PGmc *sternan- < PIE *h2stēr-s (cf. Latin stella)
Gothic fisks < PGmc *fiskaz < PIE *pisk- (cf. Latin piscis)
two obstruents: only the first obstruent - if it's a stop - is affected:
Gothic ahtau, OE ahta, eahta < PGmc *ahtōu < PIE *h3(e)kÃŒÂteÃŒÂh3 (cf. Latin octo)
OE nift, Old High German nift < PGmc *niftī < PIE *h2nep-t-iH (cf. Latin neptis)
the coronal cluster *tst becomes ss:
OE sess < PGmc *sessaz < PIE *sedstoÃŒÂs
geminates pp, tt, kk (often explained with Kluge's law, if you accept it)
miscellanea:
Gothic fidwor, OE fēower (PGmc *fedwōr) seems to defy Grimm's law, cf. PIE *kÊ·eÃŒÂtuōr
Several proposals have been put forward, analogy (Ringe) or /kÊ·/>/p/>/f/ (Krahe).
word-initial PIE *gÊ·Ê° > PGmc *b (Ringe 2017: 127-128), Gothic banja, OE benn, cf. PIE *gÊ·Ê°en-;
PIE *gÊ·Ê° followed by a nasal was not affected: Gothic siggwan, ON syngva, cf. PIE *sengÊ·Ê° -
etc.
answered 2 days ago
Alex B.
6,67311030
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
Alex B.
6,67311030
answered 2 days ago
Alex B.
6,67311030
answered 2 days ago
Alex B.
6,67311030
6,67311030
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Marko Nervo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Marko Nervo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Marko Nervo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Marko Nervo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f28953%2fgermanic-philology-translate-a-word-from-indoeuropean-language-to-the-germani%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Possible duplicate of Not affected by Grimm's Law?
– Alex B.
2 days ago