{"title":"古波斯语中的动词省略和宾格交替","authors":"Ronald I. Kim","doi":"10.13109/HISP.2010.123.1.167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"1. Since most Proto-Indo-European *-y%presents are reconstructed with zero-grade of the root and stress on the suffix, and Old IndoAryan presents in -yaand Avestan presents in -iiamostly exhibit reflexes of zero-grade, one would expect Old Persian presents of this type to follow the same pattern of root ablaut.1 Unfortunately, the notorious ambiguity of the OP cuneiform orthography often makes it difficult to determine whether a given formation contains fullor zero-grade. Thus passive forms such as impf. a-g-r-b-i-[y] (DB II 73) 'he was seized', n-i-y-p-i-[6-]i-[y] (DB IV 91) 'it was written down', and a-Q-h-y (DB I 20.23-4, DNa 20, DSe 19), a-6-h-i-y (XPh 18) 'it was said', pres. lpl. 6-h-y-a-m-h-y (DB I 7, DBa) 'we are called' could represent either zero-grade [a-gsrb-iya], [niy-a-pi6-iya], [oah-sya-] (~ [0ah-iya-]) or full-grade [a-grab-iya], [niy-a-pai6-iya], [Ganh-aya-] (~ [6anh-iya-]).2 As for a-j-n-i-y [a-jan-iya] 'was formed' (DSf 29) and a-v-n-i-y [a-vaniya] 'was poured in' (DSf 25.29), these could continue either zero-grade *jn-ya-, *wn-yaor full-grade *jan-ya-, *wan-ya-. Not surprisingly, the classic handbooks leave the question open, or offer conflicting views. In his discussion of Proto-Iranian *-yapresents in OP, Bartholomae (1896: 83) notes simply that \"[b]ei den Formen aus anund arWurzeln ist es nicht immer moglich zu entscheiden, ob sie hierher oder zu §147 [full-grade + *-ya-] gehoren, da einerseits idg. nn und axn in an, andererseits /r, f und axr zu ar zusammengefallen sind\"; as an example from a Car root, he gives amariyata 'died'. Meillet/ Benveniste (1931: 114) likewise state oi mariy athat \"la vocalisation mar-, adoptee ici, n'exclut pas mr-\"' similarly Duchesne-Guillemin 1950: 638 fn.2 (*amiyata or *amaryata). Brandenstein/Mayrhofer (1964) postulate a full-grade root in fraOiyais and patiyafrasiya, but zero-grades in ag(a)rbiya, amariyata (\"d. i. a-miyata\"), niyapifojifyaj, and Oahyamahiy (s.w.). However, in the case of k(a)riya-, passive of kar'do, make', Brandenstein sets up zero-grade \"akariya < a-kf-ya\" (50), and Mayrhofer full-grade (129).","PeriodicalId":177751,"journal":{"name":"Historische Sprachforschung","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Verbal Ablaut and Obstruent Alternations in Old Persian\",\"authors\":\"Ronald I. Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.13109/HISP.2010.123.1.167\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"1. Since most Proto-Indo-European *-y%presents are reconstructed with zero-grade of the root and stress on the suffix, and Old IndoAryan presents in -yaand Avestan presents in -iiamostly exhibit reflexes of zero-grade, one would expect Old Persian presents of this type to follow the same pattern of root ablaut.1 Unfortunately, the notorious ambiguity of the OP cuneiform orthography often makes it difficult to determine whether a given formation contains fullor zero-grade. Thus passive forms such as impf. a-g-r-b-i-[y] (DB II 73) 'he was seized', n-i-y-p-i-[6-]i-[y] (DB IV 91) 'it was written down', and a-Q-h-y (DB I 20.23-4, DNa 20, DSe 19), a-6-h-i-y (XPh 18) 'it was said', pres. lpl. 6-h-y-a-m-h-y (DB I 7, DBa) 'we are called' could represent either zero-grade [a-gsrb-iya], [niy-a-pi6-iya], [oah-sya-] (~ [0ah-iya-]) or full-grade [a-grab-iya], [niy-a-pai6-iya], [Ganh-aya-] (~ [6anh-iya-]).2 As for a-j-n-i-y [a-jan-iya] 'was formed' (DSf 29) and a-v-n-i-y [a-vaniya] 'was poured in' (DSf 25.29), these could continue either zero-grade *jn-ya-, *wn-yaor full-grade *jan-ya-, *wan-ya-. Not surprisingly, the classic handbooks leave the question open, or offer conflicting views. In his discussion of Proto-Iranian *-yapresents in OP, Bartholomae (1896: 83) notes simply that \\\"[b]ei den Formen aus anund arWurzeln ist es nicht immer moglich zu entscheiden, ob sie hierher oder zu §147 [full-grade + *-ya-] gehoren, da einerseits idg. nn und axn in an, andererseits /r, f und axr zu ar zusammengefallen sind\\\"; as an example from a Car root, he gives amariyata 'died'. Meillet/ Benveniste (1931: 114) likewise state oi mariy athat \\\"la vocalisation mar-, adoptee ici, n'exclut pas mr-\\\"' similarly Duchesne-Guillemin 1950: 638 fn.2 (*amiyata or *amaryata). Brandenstein/Mayrhofer (1964) postulate a full-grade root in fraOiyais and patiyafrasiya, but zero-grades in ag(a)rbiya, amariyata (\\\"d. i. a-miyata\\\"), niyapifojifyaj, and Oahyamahiy (s.w.). However, in the case of k(a)riya-, passive of kar'do, make', Brandenstein sets up zero-grade \\\"akariya < a-kf-ya\\\" (50), and Mayrhofer full-grade (129).\",\"PeriodicalId\":177751,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Historische Sprachforschung\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Historische Sprachforschung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13109/HISP.2010.123.1.167\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historische Sprachforschung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13109/HISP.2010.123.1.167","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
1.由于大多数原印欧语*-y%状语都被重建为词根零级、词缀重音,而古印度雅利安语中的-ya状语和阿维斯陀语中的-i状语大多表现出零级的反射,因此我们可以预期古波斯的这种类型的状语也会遵循同样的词根ablaut模式1 。因此,被动形式如 impf. a-g-r-b-i[y](DB II 73)"他被抓住了",n-i-y-p-i[6-]-i[y](DB IV 91)"它被写下来了",以及 a-Q-h-y(DB I 20.23-4,DNa 20,DSe 19),a-6-h-i-y(XPh 18)"它被说了",pres. lpl.6-h-y-a-m-h-y(DB I 7,DBa)"我们被召唤 "可以代表零级[a-gsrb-iya]、[niy-a-pi6-iya]、[oah-syya-](~[0ah-iya-])或全级[a-grab-iya]、[niy-a-pai6-iya]、[Ganh-aya-](~[6anh-iya-])。2 至于 a-j-n-i-y [a-jan-iya] "形成了"(DSf 29)和 a-v-n-i-y [a-vaniya] "倒进去了"(DSf 25.29),它们既可以是零级*jn-ya-、*wn-ya-,也可以是全级*jan-ya-、*wan-ya-。毫不奇怪,经典手册对这个问题没有定论,或者提出了相互矛盾的观点。在讨论 OP 中的原伊朗语 *-yapresents 时,Bartholomae(1896 年:83)简单地指出:"[b]ei den Formen aus anund arWurzeln ist es nicht immer moglich zu entscheiden, ob sie hierher or or zu §147 [full-grade + *-ya-] gehoren, da einerseits idg. nn und axn in an, andererseits /r, f und axr zu ar zusammengefallen sind";作为 Car 词根的一个例子,他给出了 amariyata '死'。Meillet/ Benveniste(1931:114)同样指出 oi mariy athat "la vocalisation mar-, adoptee ici, n'exclut pas mr-"' 类似地,Duchesne-Guillemin 1950:638 fn.2(*amiyata 或 *amaryata)。Brandenstein/Mayrhofer (1964) 假定在 fraOiyais 和 patiyafrasiya 中使用全级词根,但在 ag(a)rbiya、amariyata("d. i. a-miyata")、niyapifojifyaj 和 Oahyamahiy(s.w.)中使用零级词根。不过,对于 k(a)riya-,即 kar'do, make' 的被动词,Brandenstein 设立了零级 "akariya < a-kf-ya"(50),Mayrhofer 设立了全级(129)。
Verbal Ablaut and Obstruent Alternations in Old Persian
1. Since most Proto-Indo-European *-y%presents are reconstructed with zero-grade of the root and stress on the suffix, and Old IndoAryan presents in -yaand Avestan presents in -iiamostly exhibit reflexes of zero-grade, one would expect Old Persian presents of this type to follow the same pattern of root ablaut.1 Unfortunately, the notorious ambiguity of the OP cuneiform orthography often makes it difficult to determine whether a given formation contains fullor zero-grade. Thus passive forms such as impf. a-g-r-b-i-[y] (DB II 73) 'he was seized', n-i-y-p-i-[6-]i-[y] (DB IV 91) 'it was written down', and a-Q-h-y (DB I 20.23-4, DNa 20, DSe 19), a-6-h-i-y (XPh 18) 'it was said', pres. lpl. 6-h-y-a-m-h-y (DB I 7, DBa) 'we are called' could represent either zero-grade [a-gsrb-iya], [niy-a-pi6-iya], [oah-sya-] (~ [0ah-iya-]) or full-grade [a-grab-iya], [niy-a-pai6-iya], [Ganh-aya-] (~ [6anh-iya-]).2 As for a-j-n-i-y [a-jan-iya] 'was formed' (DSf 29) and a-v-n-i-y [a-vaniya] 'was poured in' (DSf 25.29), these could continue either zero-grade *jn-ya-, *wn-yaor full-grade *jan-ya-, *wan-ya-. Not surprisingly, the classic handbooks leave the question open, or offer conflicting views. In his discussion of Proto-Iranian *-yapresents in OP, Bartholomae (1896: 83) notes simply that "[b]ei den Formen aus anund arWurzeln ist es nicht immer moglich zu entscheiden, ob sie hierher oder zu §147 [full-grade + *-ya-] gehoren, da einerseits idg. nn und axn in an, andererseits /r, f und axr zu ar zusammengefallen sind"; as an example from a Car root, he gives amariyata 'died'. Meillet/ Benveniste (1931: 114) likewise state oi mariy athat "la vocalisation mar-, adoptee ici, n'exclut pas mr-"' similarly Duchesne-Guillemin 1950: 638 fn.2 (*amiyata or *amaryata). Brandenstein/Mayrhofer (1964) postulate a full-grade root in fraOiyais and patiyafrasiya, but zero-grades in ag(a)rbiya, amariyata ("d. i. a-miyata"), niyapifojifyaj, and Oahyamahiy (s.w.). However, in the case of k(a)riya-, passive of kar'do, make', Brandenstein sets up zero-grade "akariya < a-kf-ya" (50), and Mayrhofer full-grade (129).