希腊亚美尼亚语

IF 0.1 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Indogermanische Forschungen Pub Date : 2018-08-01 DOI:10.1515/if-2018-0009
Ronald I. Kim
{"title":"希腊亚美尼亚语","authors":"Ronald I. Kim","doi":"10.1515/if-2018-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It has been generally held since the beginning of the 20th century that Armenian is more closely related to Greek than to any other Indo-European branch. A more recent minority opinion posits an especially close relationship between Greek and Armenian, even going so far as to assume a period of Greco-Armenian unity. Following upon recent publications, above all Clackson 1994, this paper argues that the available evidence does not at all support this stronger hypothesis. In contrast to the lexical innovations common to Greek and Armenian, the phonological isoglosses shared by the two languages are extremely few and of an easily repeatable nature. The morphological features claimed as shared innovations may likewise represent independent developments and/or have parallels in other Indo-European branches, whereas other features of verbal morphology rather appear to connect Armenian with Indo-Iranian or Balto-Slavic. These considerations suggest that pre-Armenian belonged to a dialect continuum encompassing the ancestors of Greek, Phrygian, and Indo-Iranian for some time after the breakup of Proto-Indo-European, but made up a distinct speech community already by the late 3rd millennium BC.","PeriodicalId":13385,"journal":{"name":"Indogermanische Forschungen","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/if-2018-0009","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Greco-Armenian\",\"authors\":\"Ronald I. Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/if-2018-0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract It has been generally held since the beginning of the 20th century that Armenian is more closely related to Greek than to any other Indo-European branch. A more recent minority opinion posits an especially close relationship between Greek and Armenian, even going so far as to assume a period of Greco-Armenian unity. Following upon recent publications, above all Clackson 1994, this paper argues that the available evidence does not at all support this stronger hypothesis. In contrast to the lexical innovations common to Greek and Armenian, the phonological isoglosses shared by the two languages are extremely few and of an easily repeatable nature. The morphological features claimed as shared innovations may likewise represent independent developments and/or have parallels in other Indo-European branches, whereas other features of verbal morphology rather appear to connect Armenian with Indo-Iranian or Balto-Slavic. These considerations suggest that pre-Armenian belonged to a dialect continuum encompassing the ancestors of Greek, Phrygian, and Indo-Iranian for some time after the breakup of Proto-Indo-European, but made up a distinct speech community already by the late 3rd millennium BC.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13385,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indogermanische Forschungen\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/if-2018-0009\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indogermanische Forschungen\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/if-2018-0009\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indogermanische Forschungen","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/if-2018-0009","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要自20世纪初以来,人们普遍认为亚美尼亚语与希腊语的关系比与任何其他印欧分支的关系都更密切。最近的一种少数民族观点认为,希腊和亚美尼亚之间的关系特别密切,甚至认为希腊和亚美尼亚有一段统一的时期。根据最近的出版物,尤其是Clackson 1994,本文认为现有证据根本不支持这一更有力的假设。与希腊语和亚美尼亚语常见的词汇创新相比,这两种语言共享的语音同音异义词极其罕见,而且很容易重复。被称为共同创新的形态特征可能同样代表独立的发展和/或在其他印欧分支中具有相似性,而言语形态的其他特征似乎将亚美尼亚语与印伊语或巴尔托斯拉夫语联系在一起。这些考虑表明,在原印欧语系解体后的一段时间内,前亚美尼亚语属于一个方言连续体,包括希腊语、弗里吉亚语和印度-伊朗语的祖先,但到公元前3000年末,已经形成了一个独特的语言共同体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Greco-Armenian
Abstract It has been generally held since the beginning of the 20th century that Armenian is more closely related to Greek than to any other Indo-European branch. A more recent minority opinion posits an especially close relationship between Greek and Armenian, even going so far as to assume a period of Greco-Armenian unity. Following upon recent publications, above all Clackson 1994, this paper argues that the available evidence does not at all support this stronger hypothesis. In contrast to the lexical innovations common to Greek and Armenian, the phonological isoglosses shared by the two languages are extremely few and of an easily repeatable nature. The morphological features claimed as shared innovations may likewise represent independent developments and/or have parallels in other Indo-European branches, whereas other features of verbal morphology rather appear to connect Armenian with Indo-Iranian or Balto-Slavic. These considerations suggest that pre-Armenian belonged to a dialect continuum encompassing the ancestors of Greek, Phrygian, and Indo-Iranian for some time after the breakup of Proto-Indo-European, but made up a distinct speech community already by the late 3rd millennium BC.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
33.30%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Indogermanische Forschungen publishes contributions (essays and reviews) mainly in the areas of historical-comparative linguistics, historical linguistics, typology and characteristics of the languages of the Indogermanic language family. Essays on general linguistics and non-Indogermanic languages are also featured, provided that they coincide with the main focus of the journal with respect to methods and language history.
期刊最新文献
Tocharian B ore (plural wrenta) and nominal reduplication in Tocharian and PIE Avestan-Middle Persian tense mismatches in the Zand and the Middle Persian “performative preterite” Translation and transmission in the Armenian New Testament A note on the syntax of interrogation in Gothic Non-nominative subjects in Latin and Ancient Greek
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1