rjohara.net |
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 sally@pogo.isp.pitt.edu
Your Amazon purchases help support this website. Thank you!