Page images
PDF
EPUB

K

with respect to transliteration, Mr Roby thinks if the c was assibilated, oo would have represented the sound in Greek more closely than the which was actually used: it may doubtless be replied that the x was used in order to represent the etymology, not the sound; and I think this argument would have force if the Latin had not itself abolished the corresponding symbol k from ordinary use: but does not even pictorially represent the Latin c; and therefore I see no reason for the Greeks having used it for this purpose, unless it gave the sound most nearly. Furthermore, if c had two sounds in Latin, it is surely strange that at some of the attempts to reform the Latin alphabet it was not suggested to employ again the symbol k, which was lying almost idle, to represent one of the two sounds: yet there is no mention of any such idea, though much more subtle distinctions of sound were more than once expressed by new symbols'. To conclude, there can be no doubt that when k (or c) is followed by e or i there is a strong tendency to let the tongue slip upwards and so form a palatal instead of a guttural: and it is a fact that such change has taken place in modern Italian. But this change must have begun at some time; and there is no evidence for that time being nearly so far back as the classical period.

The change of ti to si seems to have been earlier and more general: but Corssen regards it as belonging especially to the vulgar Latin (and the other Italian dialects), and not established in the speech of educated Rome till the fourth or fifth century after Christ. It is traceable however in isolated cases much earlier. Such are e.g. uiciens, which has come regularly through uicesiens and uicensiens from uicentiens: similarly amasius and others with the termination -asio are most probably from old -antio-: Acherunsius is certainly from Acherunt-io-s, Hortensius was in old Latin Hortentius2: and numerous names of towns in -esio

1 Roby, p. xliv.

2 Krit. Beitr. 467, &c.

[blocks in formation]

CH. VIII.

throughout Italy, as Valesium, Falesii (Latin Falerii), compared with others in -ento, as Laurentum, Valentium; and in -usio, as Canusium, Brundusium compared with Acheruntium, coincide with the other evidence for this change in all the Italian dialects, but seem to indicate that it occurred very slightly in Latin. I infer therefore that in classical Latin ti was sounded hard except in cases where another form in si actually occurs beside the latter.

(i) Change of a dental.

(ii) Loss of aspiration in Greek:

IV. DISSIMILATION.

This principle has a more limited application to the consonants than even to the vowels, and for the same reason: there are not many cases in which the occurrence of the same sound twice is unpleasant to the ear. Still, few as they are, they are tolerably certain.

(i) One case where Dissimilation acts is common to Greek and Latin: namely, when a dental comes into contact with another dental at the beginning of a suffix. In this case the final dental of the root passes into s. In Greek the following examples may be given: ἀνυτ-τος becomes ἀνυστός: ἀδ-τεον becomes ἀστέον: πιθ-τος becomes TOTÓS. Similarly in Latin, equit-ter (o) passes into equester: edti becomes est: claud-trum is claustrum.

(ii) In Greek, when two aspirates occur too closely, one is softened: ἐ-θυ-θην becomes ἐτύθην; θι-θημι passes into Tienu. So also the suffix -Ot of the imperative (Indoτίθημι. -0 European dhi), which is found e.g. in êλûlɩ, is changed to when another aspirate precedes, as σwlŋti. Similarly if two aspirates occur in the root, one is dropped in conjugation; for example the two forms Túp-w and Ouπ-σw are referred to a root up. The existence of these doubly aspirated roots has been maintained by Grassmann in his article already often referred to in the twelfth volume of the Zeitschrift1. But where there is no other proof of

1 See also Gr. Et. 51.

the existence of the two than the double forms in Greek, it is much better in my opinion to assume only one for the root and then to account for the second (which never occurs in the same word as the first) by the principle of compensation.

CH. VIII.

duplicated

consonant.

To Dissimilation is also due the loss of the consonant and of initial rein the reduplicated syllable of many verbs which begin with two consonants as ἔκτονα for κε-κτον-α, ἔγνωκα for ye-vw-κa. It may be assumed also that the passage of a consonant into the rough breathing in the presents ἵ-στη-μι, ἵ-η-μι is due partly to the desire for a dissimilar sound in following syllables. In eyeipw and some other words it is more likely that the e is prosthetic (as will be. pointed out in the next chapter) than that the word was originally ye-yeípw. Perhaps too the first consonant may have sometimes fallen away even in simple nouns for the same reason: as in ŏkvos for кok-vos, compared with Latin cunc-tor and Sanskrit √çank. But this must rest un

certain1.

-aris and

-alis.

(iii) The only regular application of this principle in (iii) Latin Latin-which is not equally sensitive with the Greek in this respect-is the curious change in the termination -aris or alis, accordingly as l is found or r in the preceding syllable. Thus we have uolg-aris, popul-aris, &c.: but mort-alis, later-alis. Similarly the form Pari-lia sprang up beside the more difficult Pali-lia.

There are a few isolated cases of dissimilation in each language, which can be reduced to no rule. Such are φι-τύω (φυ) where the change to seems to be due to the following syllable; v is found in the other derivatives: aλλnλw, as Curtius suggests, is another instance of conscious change. So also in Latin ferbui seems to owe its b to the difficulty of sounding the double u: tenebrae has been already mentioned as a possible instance3.

1 See Gr. Et. 660.

2 Corssen, I. 223; Comp. 267.

3 See p. 100.

CH. IX.

Changes produced

by want of

clearness

in pronun

ciation.

CHAPTER IX.

INDISTINCT ARTICULATION.

I HAVE now described at some length the changes arising in Greek and Latin from a weak articulation.

For ex

ample, we have seen how a stronger could be displaced by a weaker sound. This is the simplest instance of absolute weakening. Sometimes, again, we saw that a stronger took the place of a weaker sound, when that sound formed part of a compound which could be pronounced more easily after such change: here, therefore, also there was weakening; a violent contrast of sounds was done away with. In a word, the new sound or new compound was always an easier sound to pronounce under the circumstances.

I wish now briefly to consider a different kind of change, caused by what I call indistinct articulation. It is possible to alter a language in another way than by merely substituting an easier for a more difficult sound; in which case the new sound, weaker though it be, is clearly heard. It is possible to pronounce a word, generally through laziness, without sufficient sharpness to give each letter its full and proper sound. In this case no other recognised letter is at first heard; but an indefinite amount of indistinct sound is produced after the letter thus slurred; which in time, if this relaxed pronunciation become common, often takes the form of the nearest sound in the existing alphabet. Thus two letters grow out of one; and a word is often actually increased; and so it may happen that the new form is not really easier to pronounce than the old one. The old saying is here

justified, that lazy people give themselves most trouble. It is, I think, unquestionably the desire to save labourto avoid the exertion required to pronounce clearly and distinctly a difficult sound-which produced this change, just as much as it produced substitution and assimilation, as we have already seen. Both kinds of change are due to that one and the same principle which causes all phonetic change: but as the sacrifice of clearness is much greater in this second kind, I see no real economy in it, and believe that laziness was generally its immediate cause1.

I have given a few examples of this change from our own language in the first chapter". I now proceed to give some of its more remarkable operations in Greek and Latin. It affects most (as we should naturally expect) the strongest sounds as the gutturals-or combination of sound, as e.g. sum-sit, causing the insertion of a nonoriginal p; or, lastly, such sounds as were especially difficult to a particular people, as the spirants to the Greeks. I take first the passage of the gutturals in both Greek and Latin into the labials or the dentals.

CH. IX.

1. Labialism.

He

K to T

and p.

This name has been given (first, so far as I know, by Change of Professor Curtius) to the change from K to π and p3. believes the change to have been produced through the influence of a parasitic u or w (v): k is the hardest of all consonants, as he says, to pronounce, and requires the most distinct articulation to keep the sound pure from subsidiary breaths. If we pronounce it lazily without fully opening the mouth, the result is that together with it a slight w-sound is quite unconsciously pronounced, because the position of the tongue is almost exactly the 2 At p. 14. See Gr. Et. p. 45, &c.

1 See p. 5.

« PreviousContinue »