Date: 14-May-2008
From: Nicholas Zair <naszthefirsthotmail.com>
Subject: Zum Germanischen aus laryngaltheoretischer Sicht
E-mail this message to a friend
Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/18/18-3314.html
AUTHOR: Müller, StefanTITLE: Zum Germanischen aus laryngaltheoretischer SichtSUBTITLE: Mit einer Einführung in die Grundlagen der LaryngaltheorieSERIES: Studia Linguistica Germanica 88PUBLISHER: Walter de GruyterYEAR: 2007
Nicholas Zair, Linguistics, Philology and Phonetics, University of Oxford
SUMMARYThe laryngeal theory has its roots in the late 19th century, and is now agenerally accepted part of Indo-European linguistics, with a consensus on thebasic details: originally three laryngeals in Proto-Indo-European (PIE); directreflexes of (one or more) laryngeals are found in the Anatolian languages insome environments, otherwise they can only be identified in Indo-Europeanlanguages by their influence on surrounding sounds, or by their development intovowels (a detailed overview can be found in Mayrhofer 1986: 121-150). Despitetheir name, there is no agreement as to their phonetic nature (which is hardlysurprising for a reconstructed proto-language).
As recently as 1965 a quite varied, not to say idiosyncratic, approach tolaryngeals and the range of phenomena attributable to them was evident (Winter1965). The basic picture of the PIE laryngeals has been solidified in the lastfew decades. Perhaps as a reaction to the earlier situation, their developmenthas been seen as quite uniform in the non-Anatolian Indo-European languages(with certain exceptions, such as the Greek ''triple reflex''). However, in-depthstudies of their reflexes in individual languages (e.g. Schrijver 1991) haveshown that their development could differ quite significantly both between thedaughter languages and within individual languages according to phonologicalcontext. Consequently, there is still room for disagreement about laryngealsboth in PIE and in the prehistory of the individual daughter languages. Thedetailed examination of laryngeals on the basis of evidence from individuallanguages or language groups is therefore extremely valuable in providing a morenuanced picture of the PIE laryngeals.
The present volume systematically treats the development of the laryngeals indifferent phonological environments, and how they affected the development ofthe Germanic phonological and morphological systems. Its primary interest willbe to Indo-Europeanists and those interested in comparative diachronic Germaniclinguistics. However, it includes up-to-date information about Indo-Europeanphonology and morphology, expressed in modern linguistic terminology, and assuch can also be seen as a useful short introduction to the Indo-European system.
Chapter 1 consists of a short introduction with an overview of the contents ofthe following chapters, and a lengthy (seventeen page) recounting of the historyof the laryngeal theory, quite heavily slanted towards its earliest conceptionand reception. Although there will be little here that is new to anyone with amore than brief acquaintance with laryngeals, it is well written and far clearerthan many other descriptions of the early stages of the theory.
Chapter 2 begins with definitions of technical terms and symbols used, includingbrief explanations of the various symbols for writing Old English, Greek,Sanskrit, Early Runic, Armenian, Old Norse, Proto-Germanic, Gothic, Hittite,PIE, Old Church Slavonic, Latin, and Tocharian. Such a thorough approach isunusual, and extremely helpful. The remainder of the chapter is given over to adescription of the phonemic system of PIE, described in terms of distinctivefeatures. This is split into sections on vowels, ablaut and accent; resonants(nasals, liquids and semivowels); obstruents; and laryngeals. Each sectionincludes a description of the place of the phonemes in the PIE system, and alist of sound changes involving them from PIE itself to Proto-Germanic (exceptfor the laryngeals, for obvious reasons). It also includes sound changes inother daughter languages which will be useful to know in the forthcomingdiscussion.
Chapter 3 represents the greater part of the book. It collects and discusseslaryngeal developments in Proto-Germanic. The first part of this chapter isdevoted to phonological changes. It is split into further sections, consistingof laryngeal developments next to vowels; change into vowels; development nextto resonants; development next to obstruents; change into consonants;metathesis; and loss. Sound laws are written in bold type, followed by (some)discussion of the evidence, what other scholars have said about them, and thewider implications for Germanic. Further details about sound laws, and morein-depth descriptions of particular points of interest are written in smaller type.
It should be noted that only in exceptional instances (usually where there ismuch disagreement over a limited amount of evidence, or where the author isputting forward a novel interpretation) is evidence, in the form of individualwords, discussed at length. Generally, examples of the development at hand aregiven only as a Proto-Germanic form. These forms are collected with detailedreconstruction at the end of chapter 3.
The second part of chapter 3 is devoted to the impact of laryngeals onProto-Germanic morphology, consisting of sections on laryngeals and ablaut; thesuffixes of weak verbs of the first Proto-Germanic conjugation; the loss oflaryngeals in suffixes; and long vowels in endings.
The third part consists of a brief discussion of changes in syllable structureand a chronological overview of changes involving laryngeals fromProto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic, placing them in relation to otherGermanic sound changes such as Verner's law.
The fourth part of the chapter consists of the examples of Proto-Germanic formsused throughout the previous sections, in alphabetical order, but with differentforms derived from the same root collected together. Each collection of forms isfollowed by attested forms from the Germanic languages, along with related formsfrom other Indo-European languages, and usually very detailed discussion ofetymology and their derivation in Germanic. This takes up nearly half (111pages) of chapter 3.
Chapter 4 is a brief but useful and up-to-date appendix on PIE morphology,chapter 5 a list of references, and chapter 6 an index, both of technical termsused and of quoted forms, in attested languages, PIE and Proto-Germanic.
EVALUATIONOverall, this book is a very worthwhile contribution to the continuing projectof detailed analysis of the effect of the PIE laryngeals on the daughterlanguages. It is impressively thorough in its approach, as exemplified by theeffort to give so much explanatory material before embarking on its discussionof the laryngeals in Proto-Germanic. It shows scholarly rigor in dealing withquestions which in some cases have been discussed for decades. For, example,Müller's discussion of the question of the so-called Germanic ''verschärfung''includes a detailed and lengthy summary and criticism of previous attempts toexplain this phenomenon (pp. 88-95). He argues for a rule whereby a resonantfollowed by a laryngeal and another vowel was geminated when the preceding vowelwas short and unstressed; otherwise the laryngeal was lost without gemination.However, he admits the possibility that this may not be the correct formulation.
The importance of this sort of open-minded approach is highlighted when onecompares his conclusion regarding the question of ''laryngeal-hardening'', i.e. achange to Proto-Germanic *k (pp. 116-124), with that of e.g. Ringe (2006:68-70). Müller concludes that instances of *k are due to another sound law,unconnected with the laryngeals. Ringe suggests that ''hardening'' did indeedoccur, and that Proto-Germanic *k can be the direct reflex of a PIE laryngeal inProto-Germanic. Such disagreement is of course due to the lack of firm evidenceeither way, and the correct response is to give the reader access to all theevidence, and admit that it is difficult to come to a firm conclusion, as Müllerdoes. When proposing a more-or-less new sound law regarding the results inProto-Germanic of a word-initial resonant followed by a laryngeal and aconsonant (where word-initial resonant includes resonant preceded by alaryngeal), he breaks his habit of quoting forms collected at the back ofchapter 4, and instead produces them with etymology and discussion within thebody of the section. This is part of a commitment to transparency of argumentthat is very commendable. Also to be praised is a general scepticism towardsproposed sound laws regarding laryngeals for which there does not seem to befirm evidence (most obvious in the sections on laryngeals changing intoconsonants, and on laryngeal loss), and a preparedness to discuss these critically.
There is little to criticize in terms of content. A couple of minor quibbles:Müller argues for true vocalization of a laryngeal between consonants ratherthan the insertion of an epenthetic vowel followed by loss of laryngeal. Onepiece of his evidence is that a cluster *-VRHy- (where V stands for vowel, R forresonant, and H for laryngeal) ought to have led to a geminated resonant afterthe addition of such an epenthetic vowel (p. 81). This would not be the case ifPinault's rule, whereby laryngeals were lost in this context in PIE, holds good.The rule is not mentioned here, but is dismissed without discussion later (p.134). The discussion of the PIE word for 'wind' (pp. 85-86, 314-315) ignores theTocharian evidence for a long vowel as the reflex of this particular environmentcontaining a laryngeal.
It should be noted that the book does not attempt to give every example of aGermanic word involving a laryngeal in a particular environment, but only arepresentative sample; sometimes it gives no examples at all for a particularlyclear change (e.g. loss of initial laryngeals before consonants, pp. 74-75). Thelack of a particular form can be frustrating; e.g. there is no discussion of theGermanic 'brow' word in the section on metathesis (pp. 128-131), which featuresquite prominently in the formulation of laryngeal metathesis by Winter (1965: 192).
The only real difficulties with this book, however, are in its organization andlay-out. As is not uncommon with books written in German, to the English eyethere is a lack of help in navigating the book. The majority of the bookconsists of a single chapter; only the main heading of each part of the chapterappears at the top of the page, without any further chapter division. Withineach part, there are further sections, but these cover a wide range of subjectswithout providing much help in finding the right one. The text within a sectionis in continuous paragraphs, without further headings or breaks, and the logicalconnection or otherwise between paragraphs is sometimes obscured. In the main,one has to find what one is looking for by going to the appropriate part of thechapter and flipping through until one finds it, unless one knows a form thatcan be looked up in the index (it helps that sound laws accepted by Müller areprinted in bold; where they are not accepted, however, it may be difficult tofind discussion of them). It would have been better to split the four mainsections of chapter 3 into separate chapters, which would have allowed them tobe more clearly broken down further in terms of headings and in the contents page.
Since the laryngeal environment is defined in terms of adjoining segments(''Wirkung neben Obstruenten'' etc.) it is not always clear where to look to findinformation about laryngeals in particular positions in the word; word-initiallaryngeals before a consonant, which were lost without trace in Proto-Germanic,are discussed under the heading ''Entwicklung zum Vokal'' (pp. 74-75). The symbolsused throughout the book are a mixture of International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA),those commonly used in Indo-Europeanist literature, and some which this reviewerhad never seen before (e.g. the symbol used both for ''zero-grade'' and ''not'' inexpressing ideas such as ''a resonant which is not a semi-vowel''). This can leadto difficulties in comprehension at first (though there is a list of symbols atthe front).
Some specific comments on
REFERENCESMayrhofer, Manfred (1986). _Indogermanische Grammatik I/2: Lautlehre_.Heidelberg: C. Winter
Ringe, Don (2006). _From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic: A LinguisticHistory of English_, Volume I. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Schrijver, Peter (1991). _The Reflexes of the Proto-Indo-European Laryngeals inLatin_. Amsterdam: Rodopi
Winter, Werner (ed.) (1965). _Evidence for Laryngeals_. The Hague and London: Mouton
ABOUT THE REVIEWERNicholas Zair is a D. Phil student at the University of Oxford. His thesis is onthe reflexes of the PIE laryngeals in the Celtic languages. His interestsinclude PIE phonology and morphology, the Celtic and Italic languages, and soundchange.
|