To the primary formation of numerals in the Nostratic languages
|
|  Yüklə 174 Kb.
|
| Valentin Stetsyuk
To the primary formation of numerals in the Nostratic languages In ongoing studies we include to the Nostratic macrofamily the Indo-European, Finno-Ugric, Turkic, Semitic-Hamitic (Afroasian), Kartvelian and Dravidian languages. Maybe, it is possible that they include other languages, primarily North Caucasian (Northwest Caucasian and Nakh-Dagestani). However, we refer to the so-called "Altaic" languages only Turkic. In all things, total dissimilarity between the Turkic and Mongol numerals says against the genetic relation of Turkic and other Altaic, not to mention about similarity between Turkic and Tungus-Manchu, Korean and Japanese (see Table 1). Table 1. The cardinal numbers of the ancient Turkic and the Mongolian languages.
The importance of similarity of words having numerical values for the evidence of genetic relationship between languages is confirmed by the semblance of numerals within particular Nostratic languages, and among the Turkic languages especially. Moreover, some similarities of numerals can be found also among the languages of different families, being the Nostratic. For ease comparing of numerals up to ten of the particular Nostratic languages, they are summarized in Table 2. The Ingush and Kabardian numerals are assessed too for the estimation of their possible membership to the Nostratic languages. Table 2. The cardinal numbers of the Nostratic languages.
Careful examination of the table makes it possible to detect some patterns that can be a starting point for finding the logic of formation of numerals in the Nostratic languages:
The remaining cases of similarities will be considered in the process of further discussion. We begin our analysis by considering the origin of the name of a single object. Herewith we will bear in mind that the thinking of primitive man proceeded by their own laws, different from our formal-logical thinking. Before man came to the abstract understanding of numbers, the quantitative relationships between objects were joined with the objects themselves and could be used a variety of accounts for different categories of subjects. For example, in the process of exchange, equating of the two rams to one cow confused the difference between the numbers one and two. As can one can see from the table the words using for the number 1 in the languages considered family derive from different roots, except that the Old Indian éka can be likened to the Finno-Ugric words having the root *ek / ik. After further searches similar numbers were found in several Iranian languages, in particular Farsi - jak, Kurdish - ēk, and Gilaki - jek “one”. Obviously, words of Finno-Ugric languages (Komi, Udm kyk) having the meaning “two” derived from the same root by reduplication (ik-ik).Number two was seen initially as a couple, a sort of a unit of the pair of objects - two eyes, ears, hands. The emergence of the dual grammatical number would simply be meaningless if the two pairs of items are not opposed to the set of items for which there was a separate category of number. Taking into account the possible similarities in the names of neighboring numbers and initially unconscious quantitative difference between the numbers 1 and 2, we assume that the Turk ikki “two” has the same origin and look for the original word with the meaning, which is likely to be the beginning of the account. After a short search we can stop at the Indo-European pronoun *eĝ “I”. It is quite logical for man to begin counting from oneself therefore the same word might well be used to characterize myself and the number 1. Analysis of the symbolic meanings of numbers in the folklore led ethnographers to the conclusion that the symbolism of the one claimed the symbolism of the center too, and the number 1 become the value of the "divine" or "royal" number and a person which it defines1. The primitive man looked at the world from self-serving positions which led him to the identification of himself with the unit, symbolizing the center. The assumption that the primary identity of the numeral "one" and the pronoun "I" is also supported by the fact that other Indo-European word *sem with value "one" in the Slavic languages corresponds to the pronoun “myself”. Derived words from this root languages retained in some Indo-European value "one" or have meaning "same", "equal", "similar" (Latin similis, Утп same, etc.) Obviously, this numeral is the most ancient in the human language as similar words having meaning "one" can be find in many languages, in particular, in Daghestan (Andi, Godoberi, Tabasaran. - seb, sab)? Korean hana, Ainu šine etc. Further confirmation of the identity of the numeral "one" and the pronoun "I" is the fact that some Indo-European words having meaning “one” (Latin ūnus, Gr , Goth ains, Eng one, Old-Irish oen) are similar to the words of Semitic languages with the meaning "I" (Hebrew, ani, Ar ana). The similarity of the first-person pronoun singular and the numeral "one" can be observed in Kabardian: se “I” - zy “one", Ingush: so «I», sa «my» - caI «one" (besides saI “man"). If the pronouns were used for counting, it should be examples of use for accounting also the second person pronouns. At least one such example exists - PIE *dvou ”two" to sounding is like the PIE *tu “you” (singular). It would be logical to assume that the third person pronoun was used with the meaning "three", but this match is not found. Obviously, this is due to the fact that at first the count was only up to two, followed uncertainty "a lot". Thus, we can assume that to use third person pronouns to refer to three items was not necessary at the time of birth of the count. Nevertheless, its tracks are found in the names of numbers. Indo-European and Dravidian words meaning "one" (Latin ūnus etc. - Tulu onji, etc., see above) correspond to the Indo-European words meaning "he, that, this" (Russian on, Lit. añs, Old Ind anyas, N Germ enn, Hittite anni). It is interesting that similar words in Semitic languages belong to the first person pronoun, just as Hung. én “I”. Obviously, this is because the same word for the speaker means "I", and for the listener - "he". Overcoming uncertainty "a lot" happening by splitting the large number of subjects in pairs and further count occurred already by pairs, and this explain similarity in the names of even numbers which can be observed even within the same language: Hebrew šnaim «two» - šmone “eight", Hung. négy (in other Finno-Ugric neljä, nyl, nila and under.) - Hung nyolc “eight”, Mansi nila “four”- n'ololov “eight” Pair count also explains the similarity in the names of numbers "one" and "two", another example of which can be a match: Lat. par “equal”, paria “couple" - Chuv pěr “one" (in other Turkic - bir). It is possible that word cam to the ancient Italics from the Bulgars2. Of course, that when paired counts very clearly were aware the first two pairs therefore the number 4 was of particular importance. It was the last "small" number, after which followed large numbers and all numbers from 1 to 4 acquired in human consciousness a special meaning, as evidenced, for example, all genres of Ukrainian folklore: riddles, proverbs, beliefs, etc3. Special significance of the number 4 is confirmed by the Indo-European *octou “eight" takes the form of dual number i. e. basically means two fours. In addition, we note the striking similarity of the Finno-Ugric and the Dravidian word meaning "four", while the names of the remaining numbers are totally dissimilar (see Table 2). The number 4 corresponds to the directions of natural human spatial orientation (left-right, front-back) and, most importantly, the number of fingers on one hand, without large, so the binary counting system easily passed in the quaternary one, but arose confusion in the numbers of couples, as uncertainty "a lot" made itself felt for a long time. Also intertribal trade contributed to confusion in which the names of numbers are no longer aligned with the pronouns of an unknown language for one of the contractors, but took a specific value of a number. Besides, due to the locality of trade relations, local countable nomenclature existed and the standardization of number names did not take place for a long time. In such circumstances it is possible that similar words were used for different numbers (Tulu enma «eight, Gondi anma “nine "), and different words for a number were used as it is confirmed by the examples of even more recent times ("two" and "pair", "twelve" and "a dozen"). Obviously, when paired counts numerals 1 and 2 could easily become synonymous with what we observe in the likeness of the Turkic and Finno-Ugric numerals of such value. In connection with this hypothesis, Indo-European *quetwor can mean "two pairs", arisind composing two synonyms *(i)ki and *dvou. It was also logical to assume that by pair counting odd numbers were not originally perceived and appeared later. No wonder they are considered as "bad" or strange numbers (cf. the means of English odd). This is explained by the fact that archaic world tend to identify every odd thing and surpluses with disordered, unstable, dynamic and therefore dangerous, bad element4. Therefore, the similarity of odd numbers in the Nostratic languages is expressed very unclearly and can be simply accidental, or be the result of later borrowings. However, despite some confusion in the names of even numbers less than ten, ten items have already determined more or less clearly, helped by the number of fingers on both hands. Apparently, this happened at a time when the Nostratic northern tribes migrated to Eastern Europe, as there is in the languages of their descendants nothing mutaul with Semitic-Hamitic, Kartvelian and Dravidian names for the ten subjects. But Hebrew and Arabic words teša / tis`ah “nine” can be somewhat likened this numeral in some modern Indo-European languages. Is it coincidence randjm or whether this phenomenon has some explanation, yet to be determined. Some Dravidian languages (Kurukh, Malto, Peng, Kui, Kuvi) have the form das for the number ten, close to the word for many Indo-European languages, but they can be later borrowings from Hindi, Bengali and other Indian languages, as the most widened Dravidian languages Telugu, Tamil, Tulu have nothing like. The rate of development of counting systems was very slow. People have learned to count after ten quite late and the formation of the numerals went different ways at people even speaking closely related languages. For example, the duodecimal system of accounts among the Germans said that the account after ten began after the split of the Indo-European community (3rd thousand BC). The advantage of duodecimal system was the fact that 12 is divisible by two, three and four, while 10 coupled be divided only by two and five5. However, this advantage is not used by all peoples of the word. The common Indo-European original form of the numeral ten is restored as *deќm (Latin děcěm, Germ tehun, Slav desętĭ, Let desmit, etc.) and interpreted as "two five" compound in one word of Germanic *handu “hand” wich has no counterparts in other Indo-European languages, and late word-formation di-/de- “two" from Gr dis. It is very doubtful interpretation, despite the fact that you can find a more transparent etymology of the European word. It derives from the ancient Turkic *dekim “a lot6,”, because there in the ancient Turkic manuscripts the word tekim “many", which has a match in modern Turkish takım “group, team." Obviously, in Turkic word with a total value was transformed by Indo-Europeans to more specific meaning in the process of inter-tribal trade. This could well happen, which is confirmed by the example of the Tatar language, in which tugyz means both "nine" and "a lot". We can assume that the words like to tekim in the Turkic languages also meant "ten" but only later were replaced by on, un which can be compared with the Indo-European words having meaning “one” (Lat unus, Eng one etc), as ten subjects can be one unity in counting by tens. It is more difficult with the number 10 in the Finno-Ugric languages, which refer to his use different words. However, the common primordial dorm can be restored as *deksan, which is present as such partial word in the Finnish numerals "eight" (kahdeksan) and “nine” (yhdeksän). These numbers, as well as in other Finno-Ugric languages are formed by a form of "ten minus two” (kah has the same origin as kaksi “two") and ten without one (yh as yksi “one”). The form *deksan was something simplified in other Finno-Ugric languages (Upper-Mari - dakšy, Low-Mari - daše, Vepsian - esa, Erzya and Moksha - ksa / kse). The simplified form das means ten in the Komi and Udmurt languages, but it is not borrowed from Iranian, many of have the word meaning ten of the same form. The numerals eight and nine in Komi and Udmurt languages contain formant mys, which also must mean ten but its origin remains unclear. Another variant of the numeral "ten" is spread in the Baltic-Finnish and Mordvin languages: Finnish. kymmenen, Est. kümme, Erzya kemen 'etc. Obviously, it is based on the name of the palm (Finnish kämmen, Est. kämmal, Veps. kämen'), borrowed from the East Slavic languages, which have the word zhmenya "a handful" (Slav. *gĭmĭnĭ from Indo-European *gem “to grab, press"). The languages Mari, Mansi and Sami have for "ten" the words lu, lov, love, logi, Hungarian has tíz. The origin of these words is beyond our study. Indo-European * deќm can be corresponded with Finnish *deksan, but it must be found an explanation for the appearance of the sound s in the last word. Speculation may be different, but we can consider the origin of the Finnish from the Turkic languages, because it is surprisingly very similar to the Turkic numerals "ninety": Tur doksan, Tat. tuksan, Kaz. toqsan etc. We have already suggested that the Turkic toquz previously meant "ten", but was later replaced by the words on, un, and farther took a new meaning "nine". It can be assumed that toquz and on / un were synonyms for some time and words doksan, tuksan, meant "ten tens" that when trading by dozens of items (eg small skins) could be seen simply as a "ten" and in such an understanding had been loaned to the western Finnish languages7. Since an odd number of objects were not perceived by people for a long time, "extra" item was joined to a greater or lesser number. However, it is rightly to assumed that the number 3 appeared before other odd numbers and the relevant words could come from the nearest even number 4 (as opposed to two, four subjects likely to be perceived as three). Therefore, we consider what forms are the numerals "three" and "four" in the Nostratic languages. Remote similarity are Indo-European *treis “three”, Turkic tort “four "and Semitic-Hamitic *talat “three” (klass. al. rhalatah, Syrian-ar. tlāte, Hebrew šaloš, etc.) This let to assume their common origin from the word meaning "wrong, bad." Traces of it have been preserved in many Turkic languages as ters "wrong, perverse, complex, reverse, opposite”. Such traces are less distinct in Indo-European languages, but still visible: lat. trīstus «bad," Old Eng. dryslic “awful”. Following the same path, we can take to examination the Fin. kummalinen, Est. kummaline “trange” and others similar ones for the number 3 in the Finno-Ugric languages (Finnish kolme, Erzya kolmo).When metathesis of consonants, such words might mean "three", but similar words are not found yet in other Finno-Ugric languages. If this assumption about the origin of the name for the number 3 is true, then the Turkic numeral tört should be a secondary name, produced by the names of three, for the four originally was by no means "bad" number. However, this change seems unlikely because of the special values of the number 4. This seems fair for the early stage of development accounts, but because of its “incorrectness”, the number 3 seemed incomprehensible to people and bacame mystical connotation in accordance with the three coordinates of the universe on a vertical (upper, middle and lower worlds). Since the number 4 is consistent with the coordinates in the horizontal plane, both the number have equally great importance in the human psychology, as it is reflected, for example, in the form of religious buildings - churches in Ukraine have long been "build with four angles and three tops." Another example could be a characteristic alternation of "three or four" in the Ukrainian archaic poetics: "Poles came by three marches, and the Tatars by four ones did” and many others8. At the Indo-Europeans in general and, in particular, among the Celts, all that was supernatural and the sacred took the shape of the triad, trinity9. Taking into account the possibility tabooed substitutions in the religious sphere, changing the names of the numbers becomes quite understandable, moreover, that, the three could mean "the opposite" in accordance with the value of the Turkic ters. The fact that the Turkic tört / dört “four" are secondary names, says his absence in the Chuvash language, where the four designated by the word tăvattă. The ancestors of the Chuvash, the Bulgars, had separated from the other Turkic community, and therefore retained the old name, not knowing about the new word-formation. We can assume that this rather complicated word was reduplication of the Nostratic numeral "two", derivative of which was preserved in Indo-European - *dvou, ie four could exist in Turkic in the form *dvadva, from which evolved Chuv tăvattă, and from it later and Latin quattuor. It is difficult to assume the origin of numerals meaning “five”. On the one hand? It could be like to the nearest even number, on the other hand to take the name of the hand as adequacy to five fingers. In this case, five objects could be the unit of account and hence the name "one" and "five" may be similar, as we see when comparing Komi öti “one" and the Hungarian öt “five", which has parallels in other Finno-Ugric languages. 1 NOVIKOVA М.О. 1993. Ukraiinski zamovliannia (In Ukrainian) - Ukrainian exorcisms. Comments.278. 2 Old Italis settled the area next to Bulgarian settlements in the 2nd vill DC. http://alterling2.narod.ru/Rus/CilaRusE.doc 3 NOVIKOVA М.О. 1993. Ukraiinski zamovliannia (In Ukrainian) - Ukrainian exorcisms. Comments.276. 4 Ibid..278. 5 Hirt Herman. 1940. Die Heimat der indogermanischen Völker und ihre Wanderungen: Anton Scherer. 1968. Die Urheimat der Indogemanen. Darmstadt. 6 Ancient Turkic Dictionary. (Ed.. Nadelayev V.M. etc.): 1969. Liningrad. „Nauka“. 7 The areas of forming the Baltic-Finnic and Mordwin languages were located in the west part of the territory of the settlements of Finno-Ugric tribes between the rivers Don and Volga.(see http://alterling2.narod.ru/English/AO22a.doc). 8 Popovich M.V. 1985/ Mirovozzrenie drevnikh slvian (In Russian) - The World Outlook of the Ancient Slavs. Kiev. 82. 9 Botheroyd Sylvia, Botheroyd Paul F. 1990. Lexicon der keltischen Mythologie. Knaur. 115. |