{"title":"Сausal古高棉标记","authors":"Sergey Yu. Dmitrenko","doi":"10.21638/spbu13.2022.207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper considers causal markers in Old Khmer, the language of epigraphic 7th–15th century monuments found in Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand. Consistently looking at the contexts of two lexemes, hetu and man, it ascertains that hetu (traceable to the Sanskrit noun “cause”) was used in the 10th–11th centuries as a specialized conjunction to introduce causal clauses. Modern Khmer has transformed hetu into the conjunction haet tae. Modern Khmer also widely uses haet in various consequence phrases (as against its merely sporadic occurrences in this meaning in Old Khmer). The conjunction man is another ancient causal marker, probably ascending to Old Javanese. In consistence with modern views on the emergence of causal markers, its causal function may have developed from its earlier temporal uses (“when”). Man is not found in Modern Khmer, having fallen out of use as early as in the Middle Khmer, the language of the 15th–18th century monuments. Our probe into causal constructions with hetu and man could not come up with any examples of Old Khmer constructions with dependent nominal causal phrases, while these are common in Modern Khmer, though evidently — as derivatives of dependent causal clauses. The paper also looks into the potential emergence paths for the modern causal markers prʊəh and daoj(-saː). Our conclusion is that the registered occurrences of the Old Khmer ancestors of these words (roḥ and toy, respectively) provide no definite clue as to their evolution or the exact period when they or their derivatives assumed the causal function. Nevertheless, the existence of their modern Thai (pʰrɔ́ʔ, dûay) and Lao (pʰɔ̄ʔ, dûay ) counterparts suggests that the Old Khmer also used the respective causal markers that were later borrowed by Tai languages.","PeriodicalId":342908,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Asian and African Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Сausal markers in Old Khmer\",\"authors\":\"Sergey Yu. Dmitrenko\",\"doi\":\"10.21638/spbu13.2022.207\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper considers causal markers in Old Khmer, the language of epigraphic 7th–15th century monuments found in Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand. Consistently looking at the contexts of two lexemes, hetu and man, it ascertains that hetu (traceable to the Sanskrit noun “cause”) was used in the 10th–11th centuries as a specialized conjunction to introduce causal clauses. Modern Khmer has transformed hetu into the conjunction haet tae. Modern Khmer also widely uses haet in various consequence phrases (as against its merely sporadic occurrences in this meaning in Old Khmer). The conjunction man is another ancient causal marker, probably ascending to Old Javanese. In consistence with modern views on the emergence of causal markers, its causal function may have developed from its earlier temporal uses (“when”). Man is not found in Modern Khmer, having fallen out of use as early as in the Middle Khmer, the language of the 15th–18th century monuments. Our probe into causal constructions with hetu and man could not come up with any examples of Old Khmer constructions with dependent nominal causal phrases, while these are common in Modern Khmer, though evidently — as derivatives of dependent causal clauses. The paper also looks into the potential emergence paths for the modern causal markers prʊəh and daoj(-saː). Our conclusion is that the registered occurrences of the Old Khmer ancestors of these words (roḥ and toy, respectively) provide no definite clue as to their evolution or the exact period when they or their derivatives assumed the causal function. Nevertheless, the existence of their modern Thai (pʰrɔ́ʔ, dûay) and Lao (pʰɔ̄ʔ, dûay ) counterparts suggests that the Old Khmer also used the respective causal markers that were later borrowed by Tai languages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":342908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Asian and African Studies\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Asian and African Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu13.2022.207\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Asian and African Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu13.2022.207","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文考虑了古高棉语的因果标记,这是在柬埔寨、越南、老挝和泰国发现的7 - 15世纪铭文纪念碑的语言。通过对“hetu”和“man”这两个词的语境的持续研究,该研究确定了“hetu”(可追溯到梵语名词“cause”)在10 - 11世纪被用作引入因果从句的专门连词。现代高棉语将hetu转化为连词haet tae。现代高棉语也广泛使用haet在各种结果短语中(相对于它在古高棉语中只是偶尔出现)。连词man是另一个古老的因果标记,可能上升到古爪哇语。与现代关于因果标记出现的观点一致,其因果功能可能是从其早期的时间用法(“when”)发展而来的。现代高棉语中没有人类,早在15 - 18世纪纪念碑的语言——中高棉语中就不再使用了。我们对hetu和man的因果结构的研究没有发现任何古高棉语结构中有从属名义因果短语的例子,而这些结构在现代高棉语中很常见,尽管很明显是作为从属因果从句的衍生物。本文还探讨了现代因果标记pr / h和daj (-sa /)的可能出现路径。我们的结论是,这些词的古高棉祖先(分别是rotah和toy)所记录的出现并没有提供关于它们的演变或它们或它们的衍生物承担因果函数的确切时期的明确线索。然而,它们的现代泰语(p * r * * *, d ay)和老挝语(p * * * * *, d ay)的存在表明,古高棉语也使用了各自的因果标记,这些标记后来被泰语借用。
This paper considers causal markers in Old Khmer, the language of epigraphic 7th–15th century monuments found in Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand. Consistently looking at the contexts of two lexemes, hetu and man, it ascertains that hetu (traceable to the Sanskrit noun “cause”) was used in the 10th–11th centuries as a specialized conjunction to introduce causal clauses. Modern Khmer has transformed hetu into the conjunction haet tae. Modern Khmer also widely uses haet in various consequence phrases (as against its merely sporadic occurrences in this meaning in Old Khmer). The conjunction man is another ancient causal marker, probably ascending to Old Javanese. In consistence with modern views on the emergence of causal markers, its causal function may have developed from its earlier temporal uses (“when”). Man is not found in Modern Khmer, having fallen out of use as early as in the Middle Khmer, the language of the 15th–18th century monuments. Our probe into causal constructions with hetu and man could not come up with any examples of Old Khmer constructions with dependent nominal causal phrases, while these are common in Modern Khmer, though evidently — as derivatives of dependent causal clauses. The paper also looks into the potential emergence paths for the modern causal markers prʊəh and daoj(-saː). Our conclusion is that the registered occurrences of the Old Khmer ancestors of these words (roḥ and toy, respectively) provide no definite clue as to their evolution or the exact period when they or their derivatives assumed the causal function. Nevertheless, the existence of their modern Thai (pʰrɔ́ʔ, dûay) and Lao (pʰɔ̄ʔ, dûay ) counterparts suggests that the Old Khmer also used the respective causal markers that were later borrowed by Tai languages.