2007-The Biconsonantal Semitic Lexicon. 3.The Series: /b-X-/
Gregorio Del Olmo Lete
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
AI
AI
This paper explores the phonological nature of the biconsonantal roots in the Semitic languages, particularly focusing on the series /b-X-/ within these languages. It introduces the concept of the Binary Intensified Base (BIB) to clarify the characteristics of binary bases and their virtual ternary nature through various phonetic phenomena such as elongation, reduplication, and compensation. The paper also examines the distinctions between original Semitic bases and secondary onomatopoeic bases derived from sounds, as well as their respective roles and distributions in the languages.
Key takeaways
- This base should be distinguished from CS /b\y/, 'to search, inquiry, wish' with some other seman.
- On the other hand, Ar.
- BHA, 'to burst forth, be confounded' (> 'être vide'), may be an autonomous ternary root /bahaw:ya/, since the seman.
- It is not clear whether Ar.
- Also the SS seme 'to fly', 'plunder' must be taken as a seman.
Related papers
Phonological Theory and Semitic Linguistics: A Formal Approach to Some Problems in Semitic Phonology (M. A. Thesis)
The Semitic languages have been considered an extremely interesting field in phonology since the works of Jakobson (1957) and Jakobson (1963). In this thesis we discuss some major topics in Semitic phonology, considering in parallel the most recent developments in phonological theory. The goal is to achieve interesting conclusions about these topics relying on results of formal phonology, showing the strong interface between theory and analysis. The introduction (chapter 1) contains the theorical background of this entire work, generative phonology, a synthetic overview on the Semitic languages taken into account (Hebrew, Arabic, Tigre), and a brief exposition of some descriptive problems in Semitic phonetics and phonology. Chapter 2 presents the principles and the necessity for phonological theory in linguistics, following its historical development from the origins (Trubetzkoy) to the `Generative Revolution'. Then, we explain the importance of phonological rules and the way they interact/conflict with constraints. An example application of rules and constraints to Tiberian Hebrew is included too. Chapter 3 focuses on one major problem in contemporary phonology, namely opacity. After presenting the phenomenon 'per se' and in its manifestation in various non-Semitic langugages, we deal with the particular case of Tiberian Hebrew spirantization, comparing various theorical proposals and considering possible solutions. We discuss various formal approaches, namely derivational, stratal, and ``morphological''. We refuse the hypothesis that opacity is not a real phonological problem, because empirical data show phonological opacity is well attested across the languages of the world and, probably not being always solvable in terms of morphological uniformity principles, a neat morphological approach is clearly uneconomical and inadequate. Chapter 4 offers a description of Semitic `gutturals', mainly from an articulatory point of view. Then, the discussion focuses on the proposal of describing the gutturals as a `universal' natural class. This proposal is in contrast with others, like that which considers the gutturals not a natural class as intended by McCarthy, but as a series of patternings specific to Semitic and some non-Semitic languages, ruled out not by universal availability, but according to phonetic feature and parameters. After a discussion on some theorical and descriptive problems of the first proposal, we conclude that formalization of gutturals-related and gutturals-induced processes, although descriptively accurate to a great extent, cannot justify the existence of the guttural as a universal natural class, but rather as a series of language-specific patternings partly due to phonetic properties of the gutturals. Chapter 5 is a research proposal on a recently detected problem in Semitic phonology, namely the occurrence of [tħ-] and [th-] in Tigre. Since this language generally does not allow initial clusters, it is problematic, both at a theorical and at a typological level, to explain those forms (mainly in the imperfect inflection) which present the initial clusters mentioned above. We think the adoption of a uniform model to explain all the phenomena common to Tigre and the other Semitic languages taken in consideration is necessary for an effective further research.
The Semitic Language Family. A Typological Perspective
The Semitic Languages, 2nd ed., 2019
Petr Zemanek: The Origins of Pharyngealization in Semitic (Praha, 1996)
The Origins of Pharyngealization in Semitic, 1996
Emphasis, glottalization and pharyngealization in Semitic and Afroasiatic
2021
This paper investigates the phenomenon of emphasis in Semitic from a phonological perspective. It is well known that Semitic emphatics can be realized either as ejectives (Ethiosemitic) or as pharyngealized consonants (Arabic). Recent interest in the Modern South Arabian languages revealed that the emphatics in this group can be realized through an interaction of glottalization and pharyngealization. Starting from a general assessment of glottalization from a cross-linguistic perspective, a focus on Semitic emphatics will be given by using data from the endangered Modern South Arabian language, Baṭḥari. Our goal is to provide a feature analysis of emphasis in Baṭḥari and to correlate it with the rest of Semitic, with special attention to the peculiar phonological patterning of the emphatic /ṭ/. This consonant appears to pattern in Baṭḥari together with the class of breathed consonants (Heselwood and Maghrabi 2015), probably due to its peculiar features. It will be shown that, by adopting Duanmu's (2016) framework of phonological features, it is possible to provide a coherent model for the patterning of Baṭḥari and Modern South Arabian emphatics within Semitic. Furthermore, this paper will provide some tentative parallels between Semitic emphatics and glottalized segments found in the rest of Afroasiatic.
Onomatopoeia in Hebrew
2011
The domain of onomatopoeia is much vaster than it seems to have been believed (Maurice Grammont 1901: 319) Onomatopoeia and Phono-Iconicity (OP & PI) are the phenomena by which (a) a linguistic element is phonetically inspired by the sound of the reality it conveys, and by which (b) a linguistic sound is iconically related to its meaning. Both refer to the sound as (1) perceived by the speakers and (2) reproduced according to the constraints of the language's phonology. Like intonation-prosody, deixis and iconicity, OP & PI too are found in all languages, including in their grammar, at all their developmental steps, diachronic stages, synchronic uses and stylistic registers. OP & PI are among the key elements which point to the evolutionary origin and biological nature of language (Darwin 1872, Maturana 1978, Lieberman 1991, Kirtchuk 1993 sqq.) out of pre-linguistic communication founded on prosodic and intonative devices based to a large extent on the imitation of natural sounds and on gestural-cum-vocal deixis. OP & PI also show the importance of emotional factors in the way language functions (Fónagy 2000). OP & PI are the most straightforward evidence to the correlation in language between content and form (Bolinger 1949 sqq.). Thus, OP & PI play an important role in LUIT (Kirtchuk 2007). Hebrew displays OP & PI from its oldest layers to our day (Weinstock 1983). They affect its lexicon and grammar deeply, widely and consistently. The bi-phonematicity of the Hebrew (Semitic and Afro-Asiatic) is greatly corroborated by OP & PI.
The Prefix Vowels of the Prefix-Conjugation in the Jewish Arabic Dialect of ˁĀna: A Chain of Innovations
Folia Orientalia, 2023
The Jewish dialect of ˁĀna exhibits three synchronic vowel qualities for the prefix vowel in the prefix-conjugation of the first stem: a, ǝ, and u. While the latter vowel is an allophone of ǝ, the former two are independent phonemes. The existence of two phonemic prefix vowels, especially the vowel a, is intriguing in regional context since the reconstructed prefix vowel in qǝltu dialects is assumed to be *i. Therefore, this paper aims to outline the historical developments that led to this synchronic reality. It will argue that the prefix vowel a was borrowed from surrounding Bedouin dialects. As for the vowel ǝ, two hypotheses will be suggested to explain its existence: it either developed from the prefix vowel a in analogy to other cases of vowel raising, or it is simply a reflection of the older qǝltu prefix vowel. Regardless of which hypothesis we choose to follow, the assumed historical development has clearly not been finalised, resulting in synchronic free variation.
Related papers
Formal Problems In Semitic Phonology and Morphology
John J. McCarthy, 1985
Henshke, Y., “Oral Language Traditions and Classical Hebrew: Phonological and Morphological Phenomena.” Revue des Études Juives 168 (2009): 181–94.
La présence de termes hébraïques dans les langues vernaculaires des communautés juives d'Afrique du Nord constitue un élément d'importance pour l'étude historique de la langue hébraïque. On repère en effet deux démarches a priori antithétiques. D'une part, au niveau oral des langues non juives, l'insertion de mots hébraïques entraîne la création de néologismes. Mais, d'autre part, ces apports étrangers à la langue locale ont permis de préserver les strates archaïques de l'hébreu post-biblique. Dans cet article, nous confrontons les langues vernaculaires d'Afrique du Nord aux traditions de lecture de la Thora, aux meilleurs manuscrits de la Mishna et autres documents d'époque dignes de foi. S'impose alors à nous la fidélité et la précision de la phonologie comme de la morphologie de l'hébreu intégré au judéo-arabe tunisien. Dans le champ de la phonologie, on remarque que l'accent tonique pénultième -caractéristique de l'hébreu ancien -perdure dans le judéo-tunisien. D'autres exemples viennent étayer notre thèse: ainsi le redoublement du resh et la consonne vav, le «v» se prononçant «w». Dans le champ de la morphologie, deux exemples témoignent de deux stades differents dans l'élaboration de l'hébreu ancien: l'emploi du pluriel «-iyot» (yeshiviyot), les formes pausales telles que (se¨uda mafsaqet et non mafseqet). D'autres formes attestent des traditions plus anciennes de l'hébreu: Ìomesh, kummar, afiqomen, gehinnam ainsi que de mots araméens (¨arubba, ma¨al) et d'expressions (¨ese® ¢d-d¢bb®ot et tÌayat ¢m-mitim).
THE BH WEQATAL A HOMOGENOUS FORM WITH NO HAPHAZARD FUNCTIONS (PART 2). Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 2012 38 (1)
This article constitutes the second part of a study which demonstrates that by applying panchronic methodology, all temporal, aspectual, modal, textual and consecutive values offered by the BH weqatal (both by its discursive and narrative variants) may be explained as manifestations of a single, functionally coherent and rational phenomenon -one consistent and typologically plausible functional path, i.e. a modal contamination which a Proto-Northwest Semitic consecutive and contingent input periphrasis (composed by the contingent coordinative-consecutive lexeme *wa and a resultative verbal adjective *qatal(a)) originally experienced in conditional apodoses. Furthermore, the panchronic definition of the BH weqatal will enable us to conclude that the gram is a distinct (even though genetically related) phenomenon to the BH qatal because the two categories are products of different functional trajectories and distinct grammaticalization scenarios.
University of Massachusetts Amherst From the SelectedWorks of Shmuel Bolozky 1997 Israeli Hebrew phonology
were historically geminate are not subject to spirantization, nor is historical /q/. v from BH w and x from BH ħ add to further surface opacity. None of the fricatives concerned is an allophone of the corresponding fricative. Vowels: i e a o u Changes from the BH Tiberian inventory: (a) e, ε and e > e (phonetically ε) (b) a and å > a
A neglected phonetic law: The assimilation of pretonic yod to a following coronal in North-West Semitic
This paper shows the existence of a pretonic assimilation of *y to a following coronal consonant (including *y from proto-Semitic *y and *w) in North-West Semitic languages. This rule, which has been obscured by analogy in each of the North-West Semitic languages, explains three independent sets of facts: the formation of irregular maqtal-s in Hebrew, Phoenician and Aramaic; the irregular conjugations of several verbs in Hebrew; and the plural formation of the irregular noun “house” in Hebrew and Aramaic. This proposal also solves the long-standing problem of the etymology of the verb “to give” in North-West Semitic languages (NTN in Hebrew vs. YTN in Phoenician).
2. Semitic verb structure within a universal perspective
Language Processing and Acquisition in Languages of Semitic, Root-Based, Morphology, 2003
The distinctive character of a Semitic stem is usually identified by the root-andpattern structure, whereby a stem consists of two interdigitated segmental units, a consonantal root and a vocalic pattern. 1 Interdigitation is governed by a prosodic template which determines the syllabic structure of the stem, i.e. the number of syllables, vowel length, and gemination. The vocalic pattern and the prosodic template together form a binyan, which may be accompanied by an affix. This type of word structure appears quite different from the more familiar structure involving morpheme concatenation. Is Semitic morphology indeed so different? Within this volume, which highlights the distinctive aspects of Semitic morphology, I reconsider this question, claiming that the Semitic stem structure is not so peculiar, at least not to the extent that is usually believed. I will show that phonological phenomena constituting evidence for the consonantal root, the vocalic pattern, and the prosodic template in Semitic languages can also be found in non-Semitic languages. I will argue that the difference between Semitic and non-Semitic languages is not a matter of type but rather a matter of degree and combination. The phenomena characterizing Semitic-type morphology, i.e. those which constitute evidence for the consonantal root, the vocalic pattern, and the prosodic template, can be found in other languages but often to a lesser degree. In addition, while each phenomenon can be found in other languages individually, their combination within the same language is not found outside the Semitic family. The discussion is divided into two parts, one concerned with the consonantal root (Section 1) and the other with the binyan (Section 2). Section 1.1 offers a brief review of McCarthy's (1981) structural interpretation of the classical view of the Semitic stem, based primarily on root cooccurrence restrictions. Cooccurrence restrictions in other languages are presented in 1.2 as evidence that in this respect Semitic languages are not unique. Section 1.3 discusses a universal approach to cooccurrence restrictions within the theoretical guidelines of Feature Geometry. Section 2.1 presents the phonological properties identifying a verb in Modern Hebrew, which include the vocalic pattern, the prosodic structure, and prefixes.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.