pe (enclitic): Difference between revisions
From Lexicon Leponticum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
m (Corinna Salomon moved page -pe to pe (enclitic) without leaving a redirect) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
}} | }} | ||
==Commentary== | ==Commentary== | ||
First segmented and identified as an enclitic coordinating conjunction by {{bib|Torp 1897}}: 4 and {{bib|Kretschmer 1905}}: 100, -''pe'' < PIE *-''k<sup>u̯</sup>e'' remains the only securely attested conjunction in Cisalpine Celtic. As noted by {{bib|Lejeune 1971}}: 79 f., -''pe'' with /k<sup>u̯</sup>/ > /{{p||p}}/ corresponds to Celtiberian -'''kue''' and Italic forms (Latin -''que'', Faliscan -''cue'', Venetic -''kve'') in free use, while Transalpine Gaulish only attests incorporated apocopated -''k'' (with /k<sup>u̯</sup>/ > /{{p||k}}/ in word-final position) in {{bib|RIIG}} [https://riig.huma-num.fr/documents/CDO-01-19 CDO-01-19] ({{bib|RIG}} | First segmented and identified as an enclitic coordinating conjunction by {{bib|Torp 1897}}: 4 and {{bib|Kretschmer 1905}}: 100, -''pe'' < PIE *-''k<sup>u̯</sup>e'' remains the only securely attested conjunction in Cisalpine Celtic. As noted by {{bib|Lejeune 1971}}: 79 f., -''pe'' with /k<sup>u̯</sup>/ > /{{p||p}}/ corresponds to Celtiberian -'''kue''' and Italic forms (Latin -''que'', Faliscan -''cue'', Venetic -''kve'') in free use, while Transalpine Gaulish only attests incorporated apocopated -''k'' (with /k<sup>u̯</sup>/ > /{{p||k}}/ in word-final position) in {{bib|RIIG}} [https://riig.huma-num.fr/documents/CDO-01-19 CDO-01-19] ({{bib|RIG}} L-13) ''etic'' < ''h₁eti-k<sup>u̯</sup>e'' (also at Chamalières), booking the form (p. 114) as a specifically Lepontic one (cf. {{bib|De Hoz 1992}}: 228, {{bib|Eska 1998}}: 7). See also {{bib|Matasović 2009}}: 175 f. | ||
<p style="text-align:right;>[[User:Corinna Salomon|Corinna Salomon]]</p> | <p style="text-align:right;>[[User:Corinna Salomon|Corinna Salomon]]</p> | ||
{{bibliography}} | {{bibliography}} | ||
Latest revision as of 20:25, 5 November 2024
| Attestation: | VB·3.1 (latumarui:sapsutai:pe:uinom:natom) (1) |
|---|---|
| Language: | Celtic |
| Word Type: | particle |
|
| |
| Grammatical Categories: | |
|
| |
| Morphemic Analysis: | -pe |
| Phonemic Analysis: | -/pe/ |
| Meaning: | 'and' |
Commentary
First segmented and identified as an enclitic coordinating conjunction by Torp 1897: 4 and Kretschmer 1905: 100, -pe < PIE *-ku̯e remains the only securely attested conjunction in Cisalpine Celtic. As noted by Lejeune 1971: 79 f., -pe with /ku̯/ > /p/ corresponds to Celtiberian -kue and Italic forms (Latin -que, Faliscan -cue, Venetic -kve) in free use, while Transalpine Gaulish only attests incorporated apocopated -k (with /ku̯/ > /k/ in word-final position) in RIIG CDO-01-19 (RIG L-13) etic < h₁eti-ku̯e (also at Chamalières), booking the form (p. 114) as a specifically Lepontic one (cf. De Hoz 1992: 228, Eska 1998: 7). See also Matasović 2009: 175 f.
Bibliography
| De Hoz 1992 | Javier de Hoz, "Lepontic, Celt-Iberian, Gaulish and the archaeological evidence", Études celtiques 29 (1992), 223–240. |
|---|---|
| Eska 1998 | Joseph F. Eska, "The linguistic position of Lepontic", in: Benjamin K. Bergin, Madelaine C. Plauché, Ashlee Bailey (eds), Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Special Session on Indo-European Subgrouping and Internal Relations, Berkeley, CA: 1998, 2–11. |
