Darwin-L Message Log 5:219 (January 1994)

Academic Discussion on the History and Theory of the Historical Sciences

This is one message from the Archives of Darwin-L (1993–1997), a professional discussion group on the history and theory of the historical sciences.

Note: Additional publications on evolution and the historical sciences by the Darwin-L list owner are available on SSRN.

<5:219>From sally@pogo.isp.pitt.edu  Sun Jan 30 16:06:30 1994

To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re: Who, what, where, when, etc, Re: DARWIN-L digest 132
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 94 17:15:02 -0500
From: Sally Thomason <sally@pogo.isp.pitt.edu>

   Iain Davidson asks, wrt those Indo-European interrogative
pronouns, why all these question words begin with the same phoneme.
In many languages (and language families), of course, they don't
-- in Montana Salish, for instance, `who' is suwe and `what' is
stem' and `where' is chen'.  But in Proto-Indo-European, there was
this single interrogative pronoun root beginning in *kw (which, as
was pointed out earlier, was a single phoneme, not a sequence of
[k] and [w]).  The root occurred with different vowels -- as did
many roots in PIE, though not usually with this particular semantic
differentiation -- and with different following consonants, i.e.
suffixes, depending on case, gender, part of speech, etc.  So, for instance,
the -s of Latin quis `who' and Sanskrit kas `who' and Greek tis `who'
is a nominative singular masculine ending.  The -d of Latin quid/quod
`what', English what, and ...I think...originally Sanskrit cid (in
the attested language this is an emphatic particle, not the pronoun)
is the old PIE nominative-accusative neuter singular suffix.  And
so forth.  The set of interrogative/relative pronouns remains in
most branches of the Indo-European family, and the forms are
transparently related by regular sound changes.

   I probably knew once (but don't any more) why the Sanskrit word
for `what?' is kim rather than cid (pronounced "chid"): the regular
sound change for PIE *kw gives a palatalized "ch" before front
vowels, including [i].  So kim doesn't fit phonetically (and the
suffix -m doesn't fit, either, in a Sanskrit pronoun -- the more
usual pronoun type has -d); that means it's probably analogic, to
the other forms with k, which is the normal reflex (descendent
sound) from *kw except before a front vowel.

   I think the dictionary form given earlier for Sanskrit `where',
kwa, must be wrong, because Sanskrit had no [w], and no [kw].
The glossary in Lanman's Reader gives kva alternating with kua,
and in the latter form the u is accented, so it would have been
two syllables.  (There are other instances of adverbial forms
based on the pronoun root *kwV -- where V = some vowel,
unspecified -- that have a vowel u, i.e. as if from PIE *kwu;
both of these Sanskrit forms, kva and kua, would fit into that
set, as would kutra, the other form given for `where'.)

   Sorry for all the picky detail.  It does get complicated.
Of course, that's why it appeals to (some of) us: it's like a
jigsaw puzzle, trying to get all the pieces to fit in.  But
the main answer to Iain Davidson's question is that the single
PIE pronoun root *kwV- is a fact about PIE, not about languages
in general (though there are no doubt other families with
similar related sets of interrogative pronominals).

  Sally Thomason

Your Amazon purchases help support this website. Thank you!

© RJO 1995–2016