From: Alexander Stolbov
Message: 11741
Date: 2001-12-09
----- Original Message -----From: Piotr GasiorowskiSent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 3:29 PMSubject: Re: [tied] Iranic in SlavicWho says that the borrowings were exclusively (or indeed mainly) Scythian? Certainly I do not :). I have already mentioned arguments in favour of dating several Iranian loans or calques (e.g. *bogU with the meaning 'god', *boz^Inica <-- *bagina-) to the early Middle Iranian ("Sarmatian") times. Also, *xUte^ti, *sUto and the rivernames with *dUn- must belong to that period (in earlier loans we'd expect *o rather than the reduction vowel *U). Interestingly, some of the Middle Iranian loans may have come from dialects diferent from those ancestral to Ossetic, and more similar to Middle Persian (of the late Seleucid to early Sassanid periods) in terms of phonetic developments. They are perhaps culturally important wanderworts migrating from the south. One characteristic example is *mirU, which possibly derives from mi:r- < mihra- < miþra- 'contract, pact (and, of course, Mithra)' with lenition and loss rather than the Alano-Ossetic metathesis *-þr- > -rt- as in Iron fyrt, Digor furt 'son' < *puþra-. Another, more speculative case is Szemerényi's derivation of *gospodI from *gos-pad ~ *gus-pad < *vis-pati- 'community headman, leader of a clan' (Middle Persian vi- > gu- ~ go-). This particular loan could be dated approximately to the 3rd century AD on linguistic grounds.Piotr----- Original Message -----From: Alexander StolbovSent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 11:37 AMSubject: [tied] Iranic in SlavicSlavonic scholars seem to have a consensus concerning traces of a mighty
influence of an East Iranian source on the Common Slavic language. The
Common Slavic lexicon and a series of god names don't allow denying it.
Theoretically there could be 3 main sources of such an influence
(chronological borders can overlap, of course) -
1) Scythian (7th - 4th cent. BC)
2) Sarmatian (4th c.BC - 1st c.AD)
3) Alano-Yazygian (1st - 6th cent. AD - later it would be an influence on
single Slavic groups, not on Common Slavic)
However always when I met mentioning of the Iranian influence only the
Scythian variant was considered (usually 6th - 5th cent. BC were suggested
as the contact period).
Is there a _linguistic_ basis for such an approach?
Are we able to distinguish the Scythian loans from the Sarmatian and Alanian
ones?
Alexander
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.