TI·38: Difference between revisions

From Lexicon Leponticum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{inscription
{{inscription
|reading=)uisou!]uisou : so?(!sọ?[
|reading=unknown!]??i : uosiu(!uosiu[
|reading_lepontic=]{{c|U|U7|d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|S|S2}}{{c|O|O2|d}}{{c|U|U7|d}}{{c|separator|separator3|d}}{{c|S|S2|d}}{{c|O|O2|d}}?[
|reading_lepontic=]{{c|U|U7|d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|S|S2}}{{c|O|O2|d}}{{c|U|U7|d}}{{c|separator|separator3|d}}{{c|S|S2|d}}{{c|O|O2|d}}?[
|direction=ambiguous
|direction=ambiguous
Line 28: Line 28:
|source_detail=Morandi 2004: 706-707
|source_detail=Morandi 2004: 706-707
|checklevel=3
|checklevel=3
|problem=Orientierung, Schriftrichtung
|problem=Orientierung, Schriftrichtung, alte Wortseiten )uisou, so?( löschen
}}
}}
==Commentary==
==Commentary==
First published in {{bib|Morandi 2004}}: 706 f., no. 279.
First published in {{bib|Morandi 2004}}: 706 f., no. 279.


Images in {{bib|Morandi 2004}}: 707, fig. 33 (photo and drawing).
Images in {{bib|Morandi 2004}}: 707, fig. 33 (photo and drawing), {{bib|Dell'Era 2020}}: 217, fig. 1 (photo and drawing).


The fragment preserves part of an inscription between frame lines. The letters are damaged, but reasonably well legible; the letter to the right of the separator in the photo above is a slightly wiggly line which could be iota, but is more likely to be intended as four-bar sigma, considering that the other sigma, also with four bars, is also quite flat. According to {{bib|Piana Agostinetti 2004}}: 162, the frame lines widen at the end of upsilon; interpreting this section as the stylised feet, she considers this the lower end and beginning of the inscription. It seems to us, however, that the widening could as well represent the beginning of the head, in which case this would be the inscription's end. In terms of letter forms, both options are feasible, as the writing direction is ambiguous. Morandi's reading assumes dextroverse writing: ]''uisou:ṣo''?[ (or indeed ''uisou:ṣo''?[, if this is the inscription's beginning), which yields a linguistically unattractive ending °''ou'' (cf. {{w||uerkou}}, {{w||prikou}}, {{w||anatikou}}). In a sinistroverse reading ]?''os:uosiu'' (the end of the inscription), °''os'' makes for a more plausible ending, but °''iu'' is, if anything, even worse.
The fragment preserves part of an inscription between frame lines; the letters are damaged and badly legible. The letter to the right of the separator in the photo above is a slightly wiggly line which could be iota (Crivelli, {{bib|Dell'Era 2020}}: 218) or four-bar sigma (Morandi), the other sigma, also with four bars, being also quite flat. The letter next to it is read as rho by Crivelli, omicron by Morandi, and considered illegible by Dell'Era.
 
According to {{bib|Piana Agostinetti 2004}}: 162 and {{bib|Dell'Era 2020}}: 218, one of the frame lines curves outward on the left side. Agostinetti, interpreting it as a stylised foot, considers this the lower end and beginning of the inscription. Morandi's reading accordingly assumes dextroverse writing: ]''uisou:ṣo''?[ (or indeed ''uisou:ṣo''?[), which yields a linguistically unattractive (''on''-stem nominative?) ending °''ou'' (cf. {{w||uerkou}}, {{w||prikou}}, {{w||anatikou}}). As pointed out by Dell'Era, the curve could as well represent the beginning of the head, in which case this would be the inscription's end. The writing direction being ambiguous in terms of letter forms, he suggests a sinistroverse reading ]??''i:uosiu''[ (the end of the inscription), with {{w||)i}} a likely dative ending and another dative in emended {{w||uosiu(|uosiui}}. This would agree better with our expectations regarding the text formula of a Ticino gravestone (binominal formula in the dative); irregularities are constituted by the absence of the formula word {{w||pala}} and the formation of the assumed second name {{w||uosiu(}} without {{m||-al-}}.  


If the fragment shows the frame's head, the frame can be classified as type B, if it shows the feet, as type C according to the system of {{bib|De Marinis & Motta 1991}}: 206; hence the non-committal dating above.
If the fragment shows the frame's head, the frame can be classified as type B, if it shows the feet, as type C according to the system of {{bib|De Marinis & Motta 1991}}: 206; hence the non-committal dating above.

Revision as of 20:56, 14 October 2023

edit with form
Inscription
Reading in transliteration: ]??i : uosiu[
Reading in original script: ]U7 dI dS2 sO2 dU7 dseparator3 dS2 dO2 d?[
Object: TI·38 Pregassona (stela)
Position: front
Frame: ?top and bottomtop and bottom?  (left: unknown, middle: top and bottom, right: unknown)
Direction of writing: ambiguous
Script: North Italic script (Lepontic alphabet)
Number of letters: 8
Number of words: 2
Number of lines: 1
Workmanship: carved
Condition: fragmentary
Archaeological culture: Golasecca III A, La Tène B, La Tène C
Date of inscription: 5th–mid-2nd c. BC
Type: prob. funerary
Language: prob. Celtic
Meaning: unknown
Alternative sigla: Morandi 2004: 279
Sources: Morandi 2004: 706-707

Images

TI·38
Inscription TI·38 from Morandi
TI·38 Pregassona
Stela TI·38 Pregassona with inscription TI·38 from Morandi
TI·38 Pregassona
Stela TI·38 Pregassona with inscription TI·38

Commentary

First published in Morandi 2004: 706 f., no. 279.

Images in Morandi 2004: 707, fig. 33 (photo and drawing), Dell'Era 2020: 217, fig. 1 (photo and drawing).

The fragment preserves part of an inscription between frame lines; the letters are damaged and badly legible. The letter to the right of the separator in the photo above is a slightly wiggly line which could be iota (Crivelli, Dell'Era 2020: 218) or four-bar sigma (Morandi), the other sigma, also with four bars, being also quite flat. The letter next to it is read as rho by Crivelli, omicron by Morandi, and considered illegible by Dell'Era.

According to Piana Agostinetti 2004: 162 and Dell'Era 2020: 218, one of the frame lines curves outward on the left side. Agostinetti, interpreting it as a stylised foot, considers this the lower end and beginning of the inscription. Morandi's reading accordingly assumes dextroverse writing: ]uisou:ṣo?[ (or indeed uisou:ṣo?[), which yields a linguistically unattractive (on-stem nominative?) ending °ou (cf. uerkou, prikou, anatikou). As pointed out by Dell'Era, the curve could as well represent the beginning of the head, in which case this would be the inscription's end. The writing direction being ambiguous in terms of letter forms, he suggests a sinistroverse reading ]??i:uosiu[ (the end of the inscription), with )i a likely dative ending and another dative in emended uosiui. This would agree better with our expectations regarding the text formula of a Ticino gravestone (binominal formula in the dative); irregularities are constituted by the absence of the formula word pala and the formation of the assumed second name uosiu( without -al-.

If the fragment shows the frame's head, the frame can be classified as type B, if it shows the feet, as type C according to the system of De Marinis & Motta 1991: 206; hence the non-committal dating above.

Already mentioned (without readings) in Tatarinoff 1924: 125, PID Add.: 629, Lejeune 1971: 5, no. 10.

Corinna Salomon

Bibliography

Dell’Era 2020 Romeo Dell'Era, "uisou o uosiu[i]? Cambiando senso, il senso cambia. Nuova lettura di un'iscrizione celtica da Pregassona (Lugano)", in: Michel Aberson, Francesca Dell'Oro, Michiel de Vaan, Antoine Viredaz (eds), [vøːrtər]. Mélanges de linguistique, de philologie et d'histoire ancienne offerts à Rudolf Wachter [= Cahiers de l'ILSL 60], Lausanne: 2020, 215–220.
De Marinis & Motta 1991 Raffaele C. De Marinis, Filippo Motta, "Una nuova iscrizione lepontica su pietra da Mezzovico (Lugano)", Sibrium 21 (1990–1991), 201–225.
Retrieved from "https://lexlep.univie.ac.at/index.php?title=TI·38&oldid=28035"