Re: [tied] The "Mother" Problem

----- Original Message -----

From: Piotr Gasiorowski

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 4:46 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] The "Mother" Problem

On 05-01-28 08:44, Patrick Ryan wrote:

>> [PG] I don't know of any such. But the existence of something like
>> *mama, *mamma, *ama or *amma for 'mom' is almost guaranteed by the
>> general tendencies of baby-talk (not to mention the existence of
>> such items in historically known IE languages). For 'dad' we find
>> words of the same structure but with *t or *p instead of *m.
>
> I cannot acknowledge any such guarantee. A quick look at the language
> outside of IE around the world will assure even the most casual
> student that every imaginable consonant has been pressed into service
> somewhere to express the idea of 'mother' and 'father'.

Sorry, I didn't express myself clearly. In the case of 'father', I
wanted to say that we frequently find *t and *p _in_ IE, not worldwide.
Indeed, the choice of the consonant seems to be quite arbitrary, so the
fact that it's somewhat restricted within IE may be significant. For
'mother', forms like /mama/ (involving /m/) are probably more common
cross-linguistically than anything else, and the reason for that is
quite obvious: a bilabial gesture is a baby's natural way of signalling
"Gimme the breast". Yes, I know that in Georgian <mama> means 'father',
but it means 'mother' far more often.

I am not trying to be contentious, Piotr, by insisting on this point. But I think the explanation offered by Rob is likely to be the better hypothesis, namely, that because of the existence of the non-baby talk *má:tr.-, when the baby produces /ma(ma)/, 'mother' responds encouragingly, reinforcing the baby's use of /mama/ to summon mother and her breasts. If 'mother' were a fictitious /dzali/, she would theoretically respond to /da(da)/, eventually perhaps /dza(dza)/; and this would become the baby-talk equivalent in this 'language'.

 

This is an important difference in view. When we find words for 'mother' in other language families (and we do in many) with /m-/, you would explain them by deriving them from baby-talk /mama/ as if that were a universal, while in Rob's view and mine, the existence of non-baby talk words with initial /m-/ is the necessary precursor to a baby-talk /mama/ in those languages. The frequency ("far more often") that you rightly note is a sign that I interpret to mean that,  in MOST cases, these languages have a common origin.

 

Actually, /t-/ for 'father' is not restricted to IE; I relate it, for example, to Egyptian jt, 'father', to IE *at[t]a.

 

I dispute whether a "bilabial gesture is a baby's natural way of signal[l]ing "Gimme the breast"". I think the baby's "natural way" to indicate breast is probably to make sucking sounds.

 

I do agree that 'breast' is the basis for these words. I reconstruct a pre-PIE *ma, 'breast'. And when monosyllables went out of style, a PIE *máma, 'breast', with irregular retention of the earlier /a/.

 

 

Patrick