by Patrick C. Ryan
(Rev. 7/ 9 /2008)
The purpose of this short essay is to establish as a hypothesis that IE and Sumerian are both descended from a common ancestor, which, I term the Proto-Language — from the form into which it developed between 55-60K BPE.
This date is based on the estimates of Cavalli-Sforza for the separation of the peoples of Asia and Europe (The Great Human Diasporas, p. 123) from the "main" branch of the people speaking the Proto-Language.
During this phase of development, the Proto-Language was passing out of a class-type morphology into an ergative-type morphology (G. A. Klimov).
The word order of Sumerian is — like Basque (Trask 1997:109) — consistently SOV , what we would expect from any language that preserves early syntax. Although "modifiers overwhelmingly precede their heads" in Basque (genitives and relative clauses; Trask 1997:122) — a further correlative of SOV typology, in Sumerian, genitives and relative clauses follow their referents; however, in Basque, "lexical adjectives follow the nouns they modify (Trask 1997:122)" just as in Sumerian, in which an adjective "stands directly after the noun which it qualifies (Thomsen 1984:64)".
This discrepancy can be resolved when we realize that a number of Basque adjectives like ilun, "dark", also function as nouns: "darkness", which has led "a number of vasconists to suspect that, at some early stage of the language, there was no distinction between adjectives and nouns (Trask 1997:210)", which Trask admits as a possibility if "at a very remote period". This is certainly the case in Sumerian in which "Adjectives do not differ morphologically from nominal or verbal stems and there are no morphological means to derive adjectives from other stems. An adjectival stem is primarily characterized by its syntactic use . . . (Thomsen 1984:64)".
What is enormously exciting about Sumerian is that (unlike Basque and Japanese) it separated from the main branch of the Proto-Language after the stage of development (Pontic) in which the oldest semantic contrasts of CE / CA / CO were replaced by CyV, C(-)V, and CwV, the superscripts indicating semi-consonantal glides or no glide — in keeping with the pattern observed in other Caucasian languages, Sumerian lost the superfluous V before contact with Semitic. The contact with Semitic caused Sumerian C + glide to be replaced with mid-vowels vowels (Cy became Ci; Cw became Cu; while C- became Ca .
Therefore, in open syllables ( in the absence of a ollowing /j/ or /w/), Sumerian preserves a record of and Basque preserves the original vowel quality of the Proto-Language intact.
Sumerian Vowelsa, i, u,
|
In the Table of Correspondence found after the listing of lexical cognates below, the column entitled PROTO-LANGUAGE shows the earliest syllables before vocalic contrasts were replaced by a contrast of glides and no glide (during the Pontic stage: 60-40K BPE).
Similar tables of equivalence can and have been constructed for the Proto-Language, IE and Afrasian (Hieroglyphic Egyptian and Arabic), Altaic, Basque, Beng (Southern Mandé), Blackfoot (Algonquian), Hurrian, Japanese, Mon/Hmong, Nama ([Khoi]san), Pama-Nyungan, (Sino-)Tibetan, and Uralic.
Reassessments of Sumerian and Basque are long overdue. As we have seen in the previously published PL-IE-Basque essay, Basque shows such close relationships with this language, that the basal component of the Basque culture (sheep-herders) must be considered ethnically Sumerian.
However, a reassessment of Sumerian and Basque will not be easy to accomplish. Many Vasconists, of which Professor R. L. Trask is very prominent, vociferously deny that Basque may be related to any language or language family on earth. In a recent serious of postings to the Internet Evolution of Language discussion list, I offered my thoughts in this connection in response to a generally dismissive critique by the late Professor Trask of the ideas presented in this essay, an exchange some readers might be interested in following.
To consider Basque an isolate when genetically, Basques are practically indistinguishable from other Europeans, and to deny the connection with Sumer is to deprive the Basques of their proud heritage.
It will be seen below that the reconstructed roots of Indo-European and the attested roots of Sumerian are related through a very regular system of phonemic correspondences with understandable semantic shifting.
Recently, an interesting essay appeared in the Göttinger Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft (Heft 1 - 1998:111-48) by Gordon Whittaker, entitled Traces of an Early Indo-European Language in Southern Mesopotamia. In this article, Whittaker proposes "to place speakers of an Indo-European language in Mesopotamia at . . . an early date" but I believe the many cognates which he correctly identifies are explained better by supposing a common origin for Indo-European and Sumerian at a much earlier date.
The interpretation of the Sumerian evidence has unique problems. Most of the signs have multiple phonological values; and I have prepared a small series of essays which will explain the significance of these variations.
What will surprise many readers, are the
startling similarities in responses to Proto-Language phonemes
displayed by Basque and Sumerian, which
strongly imply a common development period predating the separation of Afrasian languages
and their subsequent dispersion (presumably through the introduction of agriculture).
Similar tables of equivalence can and have been constructed for the Proto-Language, IE and Afrasian, Altaic, Basque, Beng (Southern Mandé), Blackfoot (Algonquian), Dravidian (incomplete), Etruscan, Hurrian-Urartian, Japanese, Mon/Hmong, Nama, Pama-Nyungan (incomplete), (Sino-)Tibetan, Sumerian (present essay), and Uralic.
An excellent online resource for Nostratic is at the
TOWER OF BABEL, founded by Sergei Anatolyevich Starostin, and now part of the Evolution of Human Languages project at the Santa Fe Institute.
An important new resource for Nostratic studies is the website Nostratica, instituted by Kirill Babaev, the founder of the Cybalist language discussion group at Yahoo! Groups.
number+i=(word) initial; number+m=medial
(non-initial); number+f=(word) final
|
for annotation |
?E
+ HE |
He(1)
+ He:(1) |
i (#)
+ *î, (written) i (#) |
j
+ j |
. |
?A
+ HA |
Ha(1)
+ Ha:(1) HA-FHA-FA Ho:wV (#) |
a (#4,5)
+ *â, (written) a (#) |
j
+ j |
. |
?O
+ HO |
Ho(1)
+ Ho:(1) |
u (#)
+ *û, (written) u (#) |
h
+ h |
. |
¿E
+ HHE |
yV(1)
+ He:(1) |
*yi (*î, written) i (#3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19)
+ *î, (written) i (#3) |
j
+ j |
. |
¿A
+ HHA |
yV(1) / Ha(:)/V(7)
+ Ha:(1) |
*y(a), (written) i(a)/*î, written i (#)
+ *â, (written) a (#8, 10, 19) |
j
+ j |
. |
¿O
+ HHO |
yV(1)
+ Ho:(1) |
*yu (**ü , written) u (#)
+ *û, (written) u (#) |
h
+ h |
. |
P[?]E
+ P[H]E |
b(h)/wV(1), (3)
+ pV(1) |
bi (#)
+ bi (#) |
p
+ p |
. |
P[?]A
+ P[H]A |
b(h)/wV(1), (3)
+ pV(1) |
ba (#17)
+ ba (#) |
p
+ p |
. |
P[?]O
+ P[H]O |
b(h)/wV(1), (3)
+ pV(1) |
bu (#)
+ bu (#) |
f
+ f |
. |
P[?]FE
+ PF[H]E |
bhV(1)
+ p[h]e(:)(1) |
pi (#)
+ pi (#) |
b
+ b |
. |
P[?]FA
+ PF[H]A |
bhV(1)
final bh/b(2) + p[h]a(:)(1) |
pa (#)
+ pa (#) |
b
+ b |
. |
P[?]FO
+ PF[H]O |
bhV(1)
+ p[h]o(:)(1) |
pu (#)
+ pu (#11) |
b
+ b |
. |
FE
+ F[H]E |
wV
+ wV: |
Emesal: (all positions) mi (#) Emegi: initial and medial positions g[~]2i)(6) (#) final *ü, (written) u (#)
+
Emesal: (all positions) mi (#)
Emegi: initial and medial positions g[~]2+i(6) (#) final *ü (written) u (#) |
w
+ w |
. |
FA + F[H]A |
wV + wV: |
u (#6, 20)
+ *û, (written) u (#) |
w
+ w |
. |
FO + F[H]O |
wV + wV: |
*û, (written) u (#)
+ *û, (written) u (#) |
w
+ w |
. |
T[?]SE
+ TS[H]E |
dhV
+ t[h]e(:) initial, rarely: |
zi (#)
+ zi (#) |
D (bar-d)
+ D . |
. |
T[?]SA
+ TS[H]A |
dhV
final dh/d(2) + t[h]a(:) |
za (#)
+ za (#) dialectal ta (#) |
D
+ D |
. |
T[?]SO
+ TS[H]O |
dhV/dhwV(4) initial, rarely: dwo:(5)
+ t[h]/t[h]wo(:)(4) |
Emesal: (all positions) t(u) (#) Emegi: (all positions) t(u) (#17)
Emegi rare, dotted t (*T(u) [retroflex?]) (#)
Emegi rare, tV+'wV became dotted t (*Tu [retroflex?]) (#)
+
Emesal: (all positions) t(u) (#)
Emegi: (all positions) t(u) (#17)
Emegi rare, dotted t (*T(u) [retroflex?]) (#)
Emegi rare, tV+'wV became dotted t (*Tu [retroflex?]) (#)
|
'
+ ' |
. |
K[?]E
+ K[H]E |
g[^]V(4)
+ k[^]V(4) |
gi (#15)
+ gi (#12) kV+'wV became hi (#) |
k
+ k
|
. |
K[?]A
+ K[H]A |
gV
+ kV |
ga (#)
+ ga (#) kV+'wV became ha (#) |
k
k + j becomes H (dotted-h) + k |
. |
K[?]O
+ K[H]O |
gV
+ kV |
gu (#)
+ gu (#) kV+'wV became hu (#) |
T (bar-t)
+ T . |
. |
K[?]XE
+ KX[H]E |
g[^]hV(4)
+ k[^][h]e(:)(4) |
ki (#1)
kV+'wV became hi (#) + ki (#) kV+'wV became hi (#) |
H(dotted-h)
+ H |
. |
K[?]XA
+ KX[H]A |
ghV
final gh/g(2) + k[h]a(:) |
ka (#)
kV+'wV became ha (#) final: h(a) (#)
+ ka (#) kV+'wV became ha (#) final: h(a) (#) |
H
+ H |
. |
K[?]XO
+ KX[H]O |
ghV
+ k[h]o(:) |
Emegi (initial and medial): ku (#6) Emegi (medial) n +: (n)ku, written gu (#) Emegi kV+'wV became hu (#) Emegi (final): h(u) (#) + (initial and medial): ku (#) kV+'wV became hu (#) final: h(u) (#) |
x (hook-h)
+ x |
. |
ME
+ M[H]E |
mV
+ me(:) |
mi (#7)
+ mi (#8) |
m
+ m |
. |
MA
+ M[H]A |
mV
+ ma(:) |
ma (#13)
+ ma (#) |
m
+ m |
. |
MO
+ M[H]O |
mV
+ mo(:) |
mu (#)
+ mu (#) |
m
+ m |
. |
NE
+ N[H]E |
l[^]V
+ l[^]e(:) |
li (#)
+ li (#) |
n
+ n |
. |
NA
+ N[H]A |
nV
+ la(:) |
na (#1,7,8,9)
+ na (#) |
n
+ n |
. |
NO
+ N[H]O |
nV
+ Lo(:) |
nu (#)
+ *Lu, (written) lu (#) |
n
+ n |
. |
QE + Q[H]E |
(n)g[^]V(4)
+ (n)k[^]e(:)(4) |
(n)g[~]3i (#)
+ (n)k2i (#) initial n2i {ñi} (#) |
q (dotted-k)
+ q |
. |
QA + Q[H]A |
(n)gV + (n)ka(:) |
(n)g[~]3a (#) +
Emesal: final n2(a) {ñ(a)} (#)
Emegi (initial): n2a {ña} (#18) Emegi (medial and medial): (n)k2(a) (but transcribed as (n)g[~]3(a)) (#) |
q + q |
. |
QO
+ Q[H]O |
(n)gV
initial, rarely: (n)gwo(:)(4); n(g)o(:) initial, + ‘s: a(:)n'sV + (n)ko(:) |
(n)g[~]3u (#)
+ (n)k2u (#) initial n2u {ñu} (#) |
g
+ g |
. |
to Emegi Vowels EG i ES e EG a remains as ES a EG u ES i EG *ê (written e) ES â (written a) |
|
|||
(IE entries in parentheses are keywords in Pokorny 1959)
|
(1)aK[H]XE-NA ("bgo-fast-thing=business"), (S: kin(a), 'work, send' {700}); (cf. B: e-kin, 'persist, continue, keep on, attempt' {11}); (IE *ke:n-, listed under *4. ken- (for **k[^](h)-en), 'busy one's self, strive ardently, spout'); (cf. also E Hn, 'occupy one's hands with, go speedily'); (cf. also A ghanna, 'be lively'); RATIONALE: "Work" is characterized by the pace of the activity in this word.
(2)S[H]E-RA ("jackal/raw-color=(orangish-)red"), (S: šir(a)2, 'illuminate' {675}; possibly šir4, '*(raw) meat[?]' {338}); (cf. B: sarra, 'rust, oxidation'; B, U: sarna,
"mange, scabies" {1}); (IE *3. ser-, 'red, reddish'); (cf. also E in z3(-)b, 'jackal'); (cf. also A: probably in surHû(-)b-un, 'jackal'); RATIONALE: Animals with characteristic colors are a primary source of color terminology.
(3)HHE-RA(-¿E) ("smoke-color(-like)=red/orange"), (S: ir(a/ê)3, '(foreign) men, male slaves' {89}; erim2 (for **irêm(u)2), 'enemy' {339+111=C1294}); (cf. B: ???, '???' {?}); (IE *ari- (for **eri-), '*foreign, enemy', listed incorrectly under *aryo-?, 'lord, commander', which is derived from ?A-RO(-?E) ("straight-very{-like}=virtuous" {Old Indian
a:ryaka, 'honorable man'}); *er- {for **H1er-}, ‘dark red, brownish hues', listed under *e/e:reb(h)-); (cf. also E in j3b.t, 'East'); (cf. also A: Harra, ‘to be hot, feverish ['reddish{?}']); RATIONALE: Reddish color was the mark of a war-captive (and slave) among both the Indo-Europeans and Sumerians, who were pale Caucasians.
(4)?A-RO(-¿E) ("straight-raise{-like}=put in order"); (S: al(u), 'protect, preserve' {564}; alu, 'city [fortress{?}]' {62}); (cf. B: ar, 'male'; -ari, suffix indicating agent {2}; in ari izan, 'be doing, be occupied with' {19}); (IE *aryo-, 'lord, commander', and (a)re/e:i/i:-, derived from and listed under *3. ar-, 'put together (firmly)'); (cf. also E jrj, 'make, do'; jr(j)j, 'keeper'); (cf. also A: perhaps ?illâ(?-l-y), 'except, save'; probably related to ?illun, 'compact'); RATIONALE: The 'lord' is the personage who put an unruly universe in some kind of order.
(5)?A-RE(-¿E) ("top-apply(-like)=put on"); (S: ari/î, '*man(, *servant[?])' {112}; arad(u)1,2, '(foreign) man, male slave, servant' {89,90}); (cf. B: perhaps ar, 'male'; -ari, suffix indicating agent {*2}); (IE in *are-ti-, 'servant ['those who are attached' {?}]', listed under *3. ar-, 'put together'); (cf. also E j3.t, 'office, function'; j3.t.j.w, 'office-holders ['servants' {?}]'); (cf. also A: ?arrâ (?-r-y), 'to fasten a beast to a pole']); RATIONALE: The characteristic of attachment seems to be the idea of 'service'.
(6)K[?]XO-?A-FA ("hole/shade"+stative="shade-s"="darkening"); (S: kÛ10, '*dark' {770}; reduplicated in kÛkÛ, 'darkness)' {2x 770}); (cf. B: gau / B. gaba, 'night' {4}); (IE *g[^]he:u-,
'yawn, gape, emptiness' {cf. Greek kháos, 'empty space, darkness{?}'}); (cf. also A: possibly ja?â (j-?-w), 'to cover, conceal'); RATIONALE: The idea here seems to be 'darkening' through shade.
(7)ME-¿E-NA(-¿E) ("tongue-like-thing"="speech(-like)"="tongue"); (S: men2 (for *mîn(a)x), 'speech' {889}); (cf. B: mi(h)i / G. min-gain, 'tongue' {5}); (IE *mei-no-,
'intention, view'; *moi-no-, 'deception', listed under *2. mei-, 'change, exchange'); (cf. also E perhaps in m(j)n.t, 'the like ['what was spoken{?}']'); (cf. also A: possibly mâna (m-y-n), 'to tell a lie'); (cf. Nama (Khoisan) min, 'say'); (cf. Southeastern Tasmanian *ména, 'tongue' {FitzGerald /
O'Grady 1994}); RATIONALE: Speech/language is the result of lingual activity; apparently, a secondary nuance of 'lying' developed.
(8)M[H]E-HHA-NA(-¿E) ("eel"+"water-thing(-like)"="thin"); (S: mîn(a)3, '*thin' {919}); (cf. B: me(h)e, 'thin' {7}); (IE *me:ni-, listed under *4. men-, 'small, make small, *thin {in derivatives}'); (cf. also E perhaps in m(j)n, 'be ill, suffer ['become thin, waste away{?}']'; m(j)n.w, 'thread'); (cf. also A: possibly maHana, 'to wear out (of a garment) ['become thin{?}]'); RATIONALE: 'Thinness' is derived from the distinctive form of the eel.
(9)SA-¿E-NA ("sinew-like-thing"="strong-thing"); (S: *sên(a), '*rope' (cf. Sumerian J. 944 + Comb. 1337 = J. 362 +J. 832, glossed as Akkadian Sindu, 'rope, tie'; note sa, 'sinew, cord' {169}); (cf. B: zain, 'sinew, vein, tendon, artery' {8}); (IE *sei-no-, listed under *se:(i)-, 'bind'); (cf. also E zjn.w, 'ropes'); RATIONALE: 'Strength' in terms of non-breakability is derived from the well-known characteristics of 'sinew'.
(10)HHA-F[H]A-RE ("water-s-apply=water (v.)"); (S: Ur(i)3, 'water a field' {496}); (cf. B: ur, 'water' {14}); (IE *awer-, 'water', listed under *9. aw(e)-, 'sprinkle, dampen, flow'); (cf. also E jw3, 'ox (for *'water-buffalo')'); RATIONALE: From the habit of our earliest ancestors to live along river banks, it is understandable that a term for 'water' should be related to seasonal flooding.
(11)PF[H]O-F[H]A-S[H]A ("puff-ing"-state="exhalation"); (S: pUš(a) (for *pUs), '*blow' {324}); (cf. B: putz / futz, 'puff of air' {15}); (IE *p(h)us-, 'blow', listed under *1. pu/u:-, 'blow up, blown up, swollen,
billow'); (cf. also E probably in b(w)zj, 'flow forth'); (cf. also A: nafas-un (from *n+f-w-s), 'puff'); RATIONALE: The ancients were impressed by the sight of cattle who appeared to have "blown their noses".
(12)K[H]E-¿E ("shadow-like"="dark"); (S: *kêx for gî6, 'black' {770}); (cf. B: e-kai-tz, 'storm' (cf. IE *1. sk[^]a:i-, 'shimmer subduedly,
shadow') {50}); (IE *k[^]ei-, 'dark'); (cf. also E in k(j)k(j), 'be dark' (cf. S gîg2, 'night, black, shadow'); in k(j)m, 'black' (cf. IE *k[^]ye:-mo-, 'dark gray')); (cf. also A: in khayâl-un, 'ghost' (cf. IE *k[^]ei-ro-, 'dark, gray, brown')); RATIONALE: The shadow was, because it appeared to move, considered to be endowed with a life of its own.
(13)RA-MA(-¿E) ("back-place(-like)"="carry(-ing)"); (S: ram(a), 'send, charge someone with' {362}); (cf. B: e-ram-an, 'carry, transport, bear, endure' {52}); (IE *rem-, 'rest, prop one's self up, prop up'); (cf. also E in 3mm, 'seize, grasp'); (cf. also A: in ramâ (r-m-y; cf. IE *remey-, listed under *rem-, 'rest, prop one's self up, prop up'), 'convey, charge someone with'); RATIONALE: The back has always been a logical place to carry things.
(14)S[H]O-F[H]A ("clan-member-s / circumlocative"); (S: -zu (for *-sU2), 'your (singular)' {6}); (cf. B: zu, 'you (singular)' but
formerly plural; -zu-, infix for 'you' as indirect object; {53}); (IE *-s, 2nd person
singular; *su-, 'you (plural)' in Old Irish si:, 'you (plural)', listed incorrectly under *1. yu-; *swey-, 'own', and compounds with *swe- like *swe(i)bh-, 'clan(-meeting/house)', listed incorrectly under *se-, 'to one side, separated, for itself'); (cf. also E sw, 'he, him'; sj, 'he, her'; sn, 'they, them'); (cf. also A: probably in sawâ?-un (s-w-y), 'other, equal'); RATIONALE: The 'clan' and its members were the basis for early social relations.
(15)K[?]E-¿E ("penis-like"="male"); (S: -gî3, 'king (the 'man')' {831}); (cf. B: hi, 'you (familiar)'; this development is strongly suggested by
the masculine allocutive form in -k (Trask 1997: 234-6) {54}); (IE in *eg[^]o, 'I' (from ?A-K[?]E, 'this male' ); (cf. also E -k, 2nd person singular); (cf. also A -k(a), 2ndperson singular); RATIONALE: The obvious primary characteristic of a 'male' is a penis; and identifying the gender of speech partners was prestigious.
(16)SA-¿E-RE ("sinew-like-apply"="tie"); (S: šar(i) (for **s/širx), 'chain' {C1238 = 2x J. 281, which reads šir3, depicts a 'knot in rope' [281]}); (cf. B: sare, 'web, net, network' {55}); (IE *s(y)er-, listed under *4. ser-, 'line up against one another, fasten together'); (cf. also E z(j)3, 'cattle-hobble'); (cf. also A ?asara (? + *s-y-r), 'tie, bind'); RATIONALE: A primary use of 'sinew' was for cord or string (thread).
(17)P[?]A-T[?]SO ("piece-hold"="break off"); (S: bat(u)2, 'broken off portion of bread' {820}); (cf. B: bat, 'one ('piece' [?])' {56}); (IE *1. wedh-, 'push, hit, castrate'); (cf. also E in p'.t, 'cake or loaf'); (cf. also A possibly baDDa, 'give scantily, pinch'); RATIONALE: 'Twisting off' is the simplest way of creating a portion.
(18)Q[H]A-RA-¿E ("hump-tall"="height/hill-like"="high"); (S: n2ar(a/ê)3, 'high' {603}); (cf. B: garai, 'high' {57}); (IE *k[^]erei-, 'high', listed under *1. k[^]er-); (cf. also E in q3j, 'high'); (cf. also A possibly in qaryat-un, 'anthill'); RATIONALE: Relating 'tall' to a hill was to differentiate it from 'high=flying' (R[H]A).
(19)HHA-¿E-S[H]E ("water-like"="wet-cold"="ice/winter"); (S: êš(i)13, 'cold, winter' {342}); (cf. B: *is, '*ice' + hotz, 'cold', in izotz, 'ice'{59}); (IE *ei-s-, 'ice, frost'); (cf. also E in ???, '???'); (cf. also A ???, '???'); RATIONALE: The natural combination of elements.
(20)SE-FA ("excrete-imperfective"="radiate"); (S: syu3 (for *šyux), 'light'{677}); (cf. B: su, 'fire, heat'{65}); (IE *4. seu-, 'boil, *bake (cf. Old Persian ha:vayan, 'they bake')'; possibly in **sew-, '*sun', listed under sáwel/n); (cf. also E possibly in nzw.t (n+zw[.t]{?}), 'flame'; possibly in nzw(.t), 'king' (n+zw[.t]{?}= 'the sun {?}'); (cf. also A possibly related to sû?â, 'hell-fire'); RATIONALE: A simple visual metaphor for a phenomenon which cannot be seen only felt.
PL MORPHOLOGICAL ELEMENTS IN SUMERIAN
(not included under lexical headings)
Those interested in Sumerian may also be interested in viewing the Sumerian Lexicon (Version 3.0)
on John A. Halloran's interesting website Additional resources are the Sumerian Glossary at this website, which is arranged alphabetically; and the Sumerian Dictionary at the University of Pennsylvania, with cuneiform, and offering flexible search methods. |
for modifications of the vowels and consonants in combination, see the
Table of Modifications
In order for readers to judge the semantic plausibility of the analysis of
Proto-Language (PL) compounds suggested here, I am including access to a table of
Proto-Language monosyllables and the meanings I have provisionally assigned.
Most assignments can be exhaustively supported by data from actually attested forms but a few animates are very doubtful; and this list does not represent the "final" solution of these
questions, which will only be approached when other scholars assist in refining it.
Patrick C. Ryan
Summer 1998
the latest revision of this document can be found at
HTTP://WWW.GEOCITIES.COM/proto-language/c-SUMERIAN-5.htm
Patrick C. Ryan * 9115 West 34th Street - Little Rock, AR
72204-4441 * (501)227-9947
PROTO-LANGUAGE@msn.com
a. I am aware that some readers, who may entertain the possibility of a
Pontic-Nostratic connection between Indo-European and Afrasian, will not be able to accept the
possibility of a reconstruction of a language as early as the Proto-Language. To
those readers, may I suggest that the Proto-Language reconstruction be merely
regarded as an expression of an arbitrary system of notation that allows for the regular
relationships of correspondence between Indo-European and Sumerian.
b. These semantic proposals are based on the meanings of
Proto-Language monosyllables deduced from many languages but
primarily Egyptian and Sumerian, which, I believe, have conservatively preserved the meanings
of these early monosyllables through their writing systems. Whether the meanings are plausible
to the reader or not has no bearing on whether the forms are phonologically related.
2. Final Early PIE
voiced aspirated stops + a can become unaspirated: -*bha
becomes -*b(a); -*gha becomes -*g(a); -*dha
becomes -*d(a). 3. It is well-known that *b
is rare in IE as an initial and even questioned by some
scholars as a root final. I have found that Early PIE *b
(from PL P[?]) appears in
the stage of IE normally reconstructed as *w or *bh
as a root initial though usually as *b as a root
final. It is uncertain at this time if the presence of a nearby
laryngal-pharyngal (H) was the conditioning factor in P[?]
becoming IE initial *bh as opposed to *w
since the expected lengthening and retention of Nostratic vowel quality does not seem to occur.
4. There are few traces of the Pontic-Nostratic stage through which PIE passed but the regular palatalization from Pontic-Nostratic dorsal stops and affricates and the dorsal nasal + yV is one; the sporadic retention of Pontic-Nostratic wV as PIE *w after coronal affricates and the voiced dorsal nasal is another. In the voiced dorsal nasal, the lengthened vowel compensates for the elided nasalization.
5. Only a few instances recorded: PIE *dwo:(u)- (for **dho(u)-), 'two', for PL T?SO(-FA), 'arm-number' = 'two'; cf. Egyptian ', 'pair'. The lengthened vowel compensates for the elided aspiration; and in *do(:)us- (for **dhos-), ‘(upper) arm', for PL T?SO-SA; ‘arm-sinew' = ‘upper arm'; probably, the development was /dhwo'sa/ -> /dhwos/ -> /dwo(:)s/, and with metathesis: /do(:)us/.
6. The change of bilabial fricative to g[~]2 before i is similar to and probably connected in some way with the Armenian change of PIE *wei- to gi, as in PIE *woinyom- becomes Armenian gini, ‘wine'.
7. The *y of this syllable has been modified initially to *H in, at least, some PIE words such as *okw-, ‘eye’, and *e:n- (for **a:n), ‘look!’.