Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:33:55.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies in the Vocabulary of Tocharian

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

A. J. Van Windekens
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I have explained the first member in my article in KZ., 68, 218 f. (relationship to Arm. eres). The meaning of the second member is certainly near that of the first, since we evidently have to do with an old dvandva. I would suggest connection with the root of Olr. Mlr. bind “ melodious ’, Skt. bhand- “ worship, exhilarate, shine ”, IE. *bhend- “ ± sing ” (Walde-Pokorny, 2, 151). For the semantic development “ ± countenance ” from “ ± sing ”, cf. Skt. vadana- “ mouth, face ” and vad- “ speak, sound ”, and also Toch. A. sunk-, B. sähkw- “ muzzle ”, related to Grk. όμΦ “ voice ”, Goth, siggwan, OHG., OS. singan “ sing ” (cf. my Lexique etymologique des dialectes tokhariens, 127, and my Morphologie comparee du tokharien, 45).

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , February 1947 , pp. 67 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1947

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 67 note 1 I never have connected the Tocharian word with Goth, sigqan “ sink ”, as Wolfgang Krause assumes in Gōtt. Gel. Anz., Z943, 29. The Tocharian origin (A. sunk-) of Saka surmca- “ beak, bill ” (cf. my Lexique, 127) is now clearly confirmed by the older form B. sänkw-, which shows no anticipation of the w-sound.

page 68 note 1 My older connection with IE. *qrek- (Lexique, 45) is certainly to be discarded.

page 70 note 1 Sieg explains A. çiçri (149, ftn. 3) as a nominative plural, but it seems more probable to me that we are dealing with a nominative-accusative singular: in the text çaçmu çiçri hoc (of. Tocharische. Sprachreste, 12b5), çiçri must be the direct object of the causative verbal form çaçmu. The Tocharische Grammatik, 47, also seems to take çiçri as a (nominative-accusative) singular.

page 70 note 2 The etymology proposed in my Lexique, 131, is certainly to be discarded.

page 70 note 3 The explanation of the final -i given in my Morphologie, 96, remains possible, but seems not preferable

page 70 note 4 Written according to the Tocharian pronunciation