{"title":"Zanuridan (megrul-lazuridan) shetvisebuli leksik’uri erteulebis ponet’ikur-ponologiuri da semant’ik’uri adap’t’aciisatvis svanurshi /ზანურიდან (მეგრულ-ლაზურიდან) შეთვისებული ლექსიკური ერთეულების ფონეტიკურ-ფონოლოგიური და სემანტიკური ადაპტაციისათვის სვანურში [Phonetic, Phonological and Semantic Adapta","authors":"Medea Saghliani","doi":"10.54635/tpks.2022.15putk","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the present article, which offers the analysis of phonetic-phonological and semantic transformations of several lexical units assimilated from Zan (resp. Megrelian-Laz) into Svan dialect-sub-dialects in different epochs and in different ways, in the footsteps of our research, all the opinions related to each analytical lexical unit, which are expressed in the academic literature by Georgian or foreign linguists, are taken into account. Naturally, the paper also focuses on material that is lost in Zan itself, although it is preserved in Svan, mainly in the Lower Bal dialect, which indicates the ancient borrowing of this material and, at the same time, its archaism.The lexical units assimilated from Zan, as the observation of the material demonstrated, are attested in Svan both phonetically-semantically unchanged, as well as with different phonetic variants or semantic nuances (modified data). Some of the borrowed roots are “Svanized”, it means they contain morphological inventory typical of Svan: palatal, velar or labial umlaut, long vowel, anaptyctic element, etc. In addition, the following phonetic processes are quite tangible in one part of the lexical units borrowed from Zan: sound alternation, reduction processes in light and hard forms, loss of sounds, etc.In Svan, several such stems (resp. root, morpheme, affix) have been identified, which are either missing or manifested in other forms in Zan. Clearly, such forms, which were presumably preserved by Svan as relics, indicate their ancient borrowing. In our opinion, revealing any archaic form will allow Georgian or foreign comparativists to restore many archetypes. We believe, such research is very important and interesting for presenting a general picture of the development of Svan phonological and lexical systems. \nსაკვანძო სიტყვები: ქართველური (ზანურ-სვანური) ლექსიკა, ფონეტიკური\nპროცესები სვანურში, სემანტიკური ცვლილებები.\nKeywords: Kartvelian (Zan-Svan) vocabulary, Phonetic processes in Svan, Semantic\nchanges.","PeriodicalId":272679,"journal":{"name":"Kartveluri Memk'vidreoba [Kartvelian Heritage]","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kartveluri Memk'vidreoba [Kartvelian Heritage]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54635/tpks.2022.15putk","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the present article, which offers the analysis of phonetic-phonological and semantic transformations of several lexical units assimilated from Zan (resp. Megrelian-Laz) into Svan dialect-sub-dialects in different epochs and in different ways, in the footsteps of our research, all the opinions related to each analytical lexical unit, which are expressed in the academic literature by Georgian or foreign linguists, are taken into account. Naturally, the paper also focuses on material that is lost in Zan itself, although it is preserved in Svan, mainly in the Lower Bal dialect, which indicates the ancient borrowing of this material and, at the same time, its archaism.The lexical units assimilated from Zan, as the observation of the material demonstrated, are attested in Svan both phonetically-semantically unchanged, as well as with different phonetic variants or semantic nuances (modified data). Some of the borrowed roots are “Svanized”, it means they contain morphological inventory typical of Svan: palatal, velar or labial umlaut, long vowel, anaptyctic element, etc. In addition, the following phonetic processes are quite tangible in one part of the lexical units borrowed from Zan: sound alternation, reduction processes in light and hard forms, loss of sounds, etc.In Svan, several such stems (resp. root, morpheme, affix) have been identified, which are either missing or manifested in other forms in Zan. Clearly, such forms, which were presumably preserved by Svan as relics, indicate their ancient borrowing. In our opinion, revealing any archaic form will allow Georgian or foreign comparativists to restore many archetypes. We believe, such research is very important and interesting for presenting a general picture of the development of Svan phonological and lexical systems.
საკვანძო სიტყვები: ქართველური (ზანურ-სვანური) ლექსიკა, ფონეტიკური
პროცესები სვანურში, სემანტიკური ცვლილებები.
Keywords: Kartvelian (Zan-Svan) vocabulary, Phonetic processes in Svan, Semantic
changes.