From: C. Darwin Goranson
Message: 48088
Date: 2007-03-26
Oookay, that first time didn't work. Try again, in Roman script. "e" after a consonant palatalizes the consonant, and an apostrophe also denotes palatalization.
Ya - ne prorok, ya ne boyets,
Ya - ne uchitel' mira.
Ya, Bozh'yey milost'yu - pevets,
Moyo oruzh'ye - lira.
Ya volyu Gospoda tvoryu,
Soyuza izbegaya s lozh'yu;
Ya serdtsy pesnu govoryu,
Buzhu v nem iskru Bozhyu.
(for the record, since accents don't work, apostrophes after vowels denote that that vowel is accented)
ne h1eg^o'H wo:ts, ne h1eg^ yeudhmo's,
> ne h1eg^om denster dhg^ho'mom.
> h1eg^om, deiwo's h1ens-dhroh1 kantrom,
> h1moi [weapon] [harp].
>
> ko'nmi dhe:h1sos wek^trom,
> ne k^red-dheh1-mi melsu. [an admitted approximation, but fitting]
> k^e':rdei sh2o'menh1 wekWmi,
> h1ger-[infinitive suffix] [in it] [spark] diwyo's.
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "C. Darwin Goranson" <cdog_squirrel@...> wrote:
>
> Despite the unfinished nature of the Proto-Indo-European grammar and
> vocabulary, both of which will never be fully reconstructed with
> certainty, I believe that there has been an unfortunate lack of
> boldness to assert Proto-Indo-European as more than just an idea.
> It's survived for nearly 2 centuries in some form or another, and is
> still very much alive.
> August Schleicher, I believe, was on the right track when he
> attempted to write a story in PIE (i.e. The Sheep and the Horse).
> There have indeed been a few, highly sporadic attempts since then to
> write short stories in Proto-Indo-European, but they are very rare.
> I think this sparsity of would-be PIE materials should be ended.
> Especially considering the groundbreaking phrase-comparison and myth-
> comparison work of people like Calvert Watkins, by which it is
> possible to find the overall plot-lines of myths that likely are of
> PIEan origin, we have much material that could be used as a basis for
> re-realizing a Proto-Indo-European story.
>
> Myself, I'm trying a slight alternative. Some more modern poetic
> texts lend themselves marvelously to the reconstructed general PIE
> mindset. While admittedly there is a need to create new words by
> adding suffixes to roots, there are still enough reconstructed forms
> to make a rough translation. Being of a musical mind myself, I find
> most of these poems in Lieder. One such Lied is in fact not a Lied
> proper, but Russian in origin, by A. Kruglov, set to music by
> Rachmaninov.
>
> §Á - §ß§Ö §á§â§à§â§à§Ü, §ñ §ß§Ö §Ò§à§Ö§è,
> §Á - §ß§Ö §å§é§Ú§ä§Ö§Ý§î §Þ§Ú§â§Ñ.
> §Á §Ò§à§Ø§î§Ö§Û §Þ§Ú§Ý§à§ã§ä§î§ð - §á§Ö§Ó§Ö§è,
> §®§à§× §à§â§å§Ø§î§Ö - §Ý§Ú§â§Ñ.
>
> §Á §Ó§à§Ý§ð §¤§à§ã§á§à§Õ§Ñ §ä§Ó§à§â§ð,
> §³§à§ð§Ù§Ñ §Ú§Ù§Ò§Ö§Ô§Ñ§ñ §ã §Ý§à§Ø§î§ð,
> §Á §ã§Ö§â§Õ§è§å §á§Ö§ã§ß§å §Ô§à§Ó§à§â§ð,
> §¢§å§Ø§å §Ó §ß§Ö§Þ §Ú§ã§Ü§â§å §Ò§à§Ø§î§ð.
>
> I [am] not a prophet, I [am] not a warrior,
> I [am] not a teacher of the world.
> I by god's grace [am] a singer,
> My weapon - a lyre.
>
> I do God's will,
> shunning alliance with lies.
> I speak to the heart through song,
> [and] in it kindle the spark of God.
>
> Naturally, my attempted PIE version is incomplete:
>
> ne h1eg^¨®H wo:ts, ne h1eg^ yeudhm¨®s,
> ne h1eg^om denster dhg^h¨®mom.
> h1eg^om, deiw¨®s h1ens-dhroh1 kantrom,
> h1moi [weapon] [harp].
>
> k¨®nmi dhe:h1sos wek^trom,
> ne k^red-dheh1-mi melsu. [an admitted approximation, but fitting]
> k^¨¦:rdei sh2¨®menh1 wekWmi,
> h1ger-[infinitive suffix] [in it] [spark] diwy¨®s.
>
> The grammar I used is roughly like this:
> Not I seer, not I fighter,
> not I teacher world-of
> I, God's grace-(that which VERBs)-by singer,
> my [weapon] [harp].
>
> I do/make the Lord's wishing-(de-verbing suffix "that which is VERB")
> Not put-heart-I lie-in.
> Heart-to song-by speak-I,
> wake-[ing] [it-in] [spark] God-related.
>
>
> Does this make sense or work so far, considering the generally
> accepted grammar of PIE? Does anybody know if PIE had an infinitive
> form for verbs, or something equivalent to that? How would one do the
> locative for the demonstrative pronoun?
>