pusionis: Difference between revisions

From Lexicon Leponticum
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
No edit summary
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
|number=sg.
|number=sg.
|case=gen.
|case=gen.
|gender=masc.
|language=Celtic
|language=Celtic
|linguistic_ascription=perhaps
|linguistic_ascription=perhaps
|language_adaptation=Latin
|language_adaptation=Latin
|analysis_morphemic={{m|pusi̯on-}}{{m|-is|is}} <span style="color:red;">Attention, needs to be checked!</span>
|analysis_morphemic=pus{{m|-(i)i̯-|-(i)i̯}}{{m|-onis}}
|analysis_phonemic={{p|p}}{{p|u}}{{p|s}}{{p|i̯}}{{p|o}}{{p|n}}{{p|i}}{{p|s}}
|analysis_phonemic=/{{p|p}}{{p|u}}{{p|s}}({{p|ss|s}})({{p|i}}){{p|i̯}}{{p|o}}{{p|n}}{{p|i}}{{p|s}}/ (?)
|meaning="(son) of Pusiu"?
|meaning='of Pusio' (?)
|field_semantic=prob. patronymic
|field_semantic=prob. personal name
|checklevel=3
|checklevel=0
|problem=analysis, meaning, commentary
}}
}}
==Commentary==
==Commentary==
<span style="color:red;">Attention, needs to be checked!</span><br />
Grammatically, the form is a Latin genitive. While it could hypothetically be a patronymic genitive, the absence of ''f.'' indicates that it is a cognomen (see the inscription page). A base ''pus''(''s'')- is attested sporadically and predominantly in the Transalpine east – cf. especially {{tr|lat|pusionis}} at Bad Kreuznach ({{bib|AE}} 1927, 68) – but a Celtic etymology is difficult.
cf. ''Busio'', ''Pusio'' < ''bussu-'' ? ({{bib|Delamarre 2007}}: 50, 150, 214, {{bib|DLG}}: 95, {{bib|Matasović 2009}}: 84)
<p style="text-align:right;>[[User:Corinna Salomon|Corinna Salomon]]</p>
{{bibliography}}
{{bibliography}}

Latest revision as of 21:04, 23 August 2024

Attestation: VB·13 (p:pusionis) (1)
Language: perhaps Celtic
adapted to: Latin
Word Type: proper noun
Semantic Field: prob. personal name

Grammatical Categories: gen. sg. masc.
Stem Class: on

Morphemic Analysis: pus-(i)i̯-onis
Phonemic Analysis: /pus(s)(i)onis/ (?)
Meaning: 'of Pusio' (?)

Commentary

Grammatically, the form is a Latin genitive. While it could hypothetically be a patronymic genitive, the absence of f. indicates that it is a cognomen (see the inscription page). A base pus(s)- is attested sporadically and predominantly in the Transalpine east – cf. especially pusionis at Bad Kreuznach (AE 1927, 68) – but a Celtic etymology is difficult.

Corinna Salomon

Bibliography

AE Various authors, L'année épigraphique, Paris: 1888–.