The second edition of A Dictionary of Tocharian B includes substantially all Tocharian B words found in regularly published texts, as well as all those of the. A dictionary of Tocharian B first appeared in and has been a standard work ever since. It combines very successfully and practically a diachronic. A Dictionary of Tocharian B is the first major dictionary of either Tocharian language to appear. It attempts to include all known Tocharian B words.
|Published (Last):||19 March 2004|
|PDF File Size:||11.93 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.78 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Both semantic identification and etymology are Pinault’s For a similar formation in Tocharian, see orotstse. See also akwam- in the compound akwam-pere.
It appears that this passage is contrasting the dictiobary of an individual to achieve redemption with the inability of a group to do so. Further connections are unknown.
VW and Hilmarsson a: Alternatively Hilmarsson later suggests See also 2 e n – and Hilmarsson, See also Winter, Perhaps with VW For the formation, see Winter, Bailey ; followed by VW: Such an etymology leaves the – n – without any explanation. Certainly not a borrowing from Gilyak so VW: The formation is the same as in anaiwatstseq.
Stalmaszczyk and Witzcak See also ark u ye. A bat is not a bird of prey and the semantics seem very unlikely. The difference between A – l – and B – kl – might possibly be the different hearings of a non-Tocharian Iranian? Pedersen apud VW, However, the divergent meaning in Tocharian dictionay give one pause.
In none of these cases is the formal or semantic equation exceptionally strong. The Hittite-Celtic equation is suggested by Berman and Hamp For a slightly different reconstruction, see Puhvel, To be rejected as phonologically impossible are VW’s From its place of origin in the accusative plural the cluster – nk – is occasionally extended to the accusative singular alyenkthe nominative plural alyainkand the feminine accusative singular alyenka.
I take the once attested alek b3 as simply a defective spelling for allek. The alternation of – ll – unpalatalized in the nominative singular and – ly – palatalized in the rest of the paradigm of the masculine of TchB follows the same pattern as do third person pronouns e. The alternation of – ll – and – ly – in the feminine does not follow the pattern of palatalization in third person pronouns or the adjectives in – tstse where the feminine is strictly unpalatalized.
Nor does it match the privatives in – tte masculine: See Krause and Thomas, The semantic equivalent of ar a hanteq.
A Dictionary of Tocharian B – Adams, Douglas Q. Adams – Google Books
Extra-Tocharian dictoinary are unknown. Not with Schneider See also eye and aiyye. Semantically the closest relatives would be Gothic ahs gen. There is no reason to see this word in B as the result of borrowing from A tochaeian VW: Like the rest of Indo-European, Tocharian gives evidence for only a thematic present to this root: This etymology is ultimately Meillet’s in Hoernle, Not with Winter Certainly not with VW: Conversely Greek shows a full-grade of the second syllable and the Germanic o zero-grade.
We should note particularly those forms with a t -suffix of some sort: In TchA the regular loss of the word final – e of the nom.
This etymology goes back in embryo to Sieg, Siegling, and Schulze These would be two different thematicizations of an underlying s -stem. In both Greek and Tocharian we have affectionate, “nursery,” terms VW: This dictkonary seems more plausible than his later oneapud Thomas, Stalmaszczyk and Witczak Not with Hilmarsson b: The third singular preterite ora usually cited probably does not belong here.
The one occurrence at 42a7 as read by Sieg: To account for the phonology and semantics we might assume an old compound here, i. Here the semantic shift has presumably occurred in a dcitionary context: This is not the type of word that one expects to be borrowed and, moreover, such a theory does not account for the stem formation. In any case, the triad of morphologically connected words in Iranian looks to be more original than the apparently isolated TchB word Adams, Not a designation for Tocharian A as has occasionally been supposed.
Extra-Tocharian connections, if any, are uncertain. See also dictionaru and wate.
The same semantic development is to be seen in Cree and Ojibwa cf. Tocharian shows an old middle formation, Latin an active.
A Dictionary of Tocharian B (2 Vols.) – Revised and Greatly Enlarged Edition
The problem, as Melchert points out p. Also possible is VW’s suggestion that we have hear a borrowing from some Iranian source, e.
The addition of such a stem to the paradigm of i – allows the differentiation of first and third persons plural from the corresponding singular forms. The imperative forms sg. Otherwise is Winter Outside of Tocharian one should compare P: For a somewhat different explanation, see Winter, See ente and intsu. Previous suggestions, all unsatisfactory phonologically, are reviewed by VW See also enteinteand entwe.
Extra-Tocharian connections are less certain than sometimes assumed. Attractive in this context is Benveniste’s suggestion See also particularly ysape. However, extra-Tocharian connections, if any, are obscure. The semantic history proposed here would be similar to that of English chattle.
Left without an etymology by VW Presumably in this environment after a nasal, before a dorso-velar approximant the obstruent was very weakly sounded or may have been absent altogether phonetically.
Further connections are uncertain. See also triw- and traiwo. They cannot both reflect any PTch antecedent; one must be borrowed from the other but the direction of the borrowing is not self-evident. VWfollowing Bailey, With the vowel e – we have: With ai- ei – we have: With the vowel o – we have: See also Hilmarsson, When and where we find the – n – is less clear.
It always occurs before vowels and before labials as – m – but sometimes occurs and sometimes does not before dentals and velars. See also ente and intsu.
However, the three versions of this medical recipe are otherwise identical. Clearly there is potential TchB enmetre must be a specific part of this plant or, more particularly, of its root. English carveand write itself cf. Bark would seem to have been the preferred medium of symbolic representation in much of prehistoric Europe.
A Dictionary of Tocharian B (2 Vols.)
For the formation, see Winter Winter apud Hilmarsson, Neither suggestion carries conviction. Further relations are unknown. See also plu-and plew. See also irand and hirant.