pusionis: Difference between revisions
From Lexicon Leponticum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| 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| | |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= | |meaning='of Pusio' (?) | ||
|field_semantic=prob. | |field_semantic=prob. personal name | ||
|checklevel=3 | |checklevel=3 | ||
|problem=analysis, meaning, commentary | |problem=analysis, meaning, commentary | ||
}} | }} | ||
==Commentary== | ==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 {{tr|lat|pusionis}} at Bad Kreuznach ({{bib|AE}} 1927, 68) – but a Celtic etymology is difficult. A connection with {{m||buđ-}} is precluded by the use of the Latin alphabet, which would reflect initial /{{p||b}}/ with beta (cf. {{w||sabi}}). | |||
<p style="text-align:right;>[[User:Corinna Salomon|Corinna Salomon]]</p> | |||
{{bibliography}} | {{bibliography}} | ||
Revision as of 12:57, 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)i̯onis/ (?) |
| 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. A connection with buđ- is precluded by the use of the Latin alphabet, which would reflect initial /b/ with beta (cf. sabi).
Bibliography
| AE | Various authors, L'année épigraphique, Paris: 1888–. |
|---|
