comparison.SUMERIAN.5_table.htm

TABLE OF PL / IE / SUMERIAN CORRESPONDENCES by Patrick C. Ryan 7/5/97

What will surprise many readers, are the startling

similarities in correspondences to Proto-Language

phonemes displayed by Basque and Sumerian.

A Sumerian Comparison essay is currently being developed

and should be ready by summer of 1998.

NOTATIONAL CONVENTIONS

For an explanation of the Proto-Language and Indo-European notational conventions used in these essays, press here.

Sumerian

see 6. below under

SUMMARY OF PHONOLOGICAL CHANGES

FROM PL TO SUMERIAN

Combinatory Modifications for modifications of the vowels and consonants in combination, see the

Assumptions

1. Nostratic, from which IE and Afrasian developed, had gone through a Pontic stage, during which the earlier contrasts of CE, CA, and CO, were replaced by C^yA, CA, and C^wO.

2. E, A, O were leveled to A.

a. A (open central vowel) may have had a stress-accented allophone of 6 (schwa = close central vowel) .

b. This vocalic development enabled Ablaut gradations to take place in IE, and vowel patterning in Semitic (but not Egyptian).

c. In all branches, PL F/FH became /w/^hw/.

d. In all branches, PL $^yE became /j/.

e. Therefore, at the time that Sumerian branched off from the main trunk of the Proto-Language, the Proto-Language had the following consonantal inventory:

P[?], P]?]F, w, M, P[H], PF[H], ^hw, M[H]

T[?], T[?]S, S, N, T[H], TS[H], S[H], N[H]

K[?], K[?]X, X, Q, K[H], KX[H], X[H], Q[H]

?, H, $, /j/, HH, R, R[H]

3. Sumerian





a. PL aspirated obstruents were de-aspirated:





a) PL P[H], PF[H], T[H], TS[H], K[H], KX[H] became *p, *pf, *t, *ts, *k, *kx;





2) PL glottalized obstruents were de-glottalized and possibly voiced:





a) PL P[?], P[?]F, T[?], T[?]S, K[?], K[?]X, became *b, *bw, *d, *dz, *g, and *gç;

1)) these may also contrast with the reflexes from the affricates as voiceless but unaspirated;





3) Sumerian stops and affricates merged as voiced stops and aspirated voiceless stops:





a) Sumerian *b, *p, *d, *t, *g, *k became b, d, g;



b) Sumerian *bw, *pf, *dz, *ts, *gç, *kx became p^h, t^h, k^h;





1)) Sumerian t^hya became z(a);





c) had Sumerian merged voiceless unaspirated and voiceless aspirated stops, it would have had the same consonantal obstruent inventory as proto-Basque: P, T, K.





4) PL N^(Y)E and N^H(Y)E became Sumerian l^(Y) (a) and l^(hy)(a).



5) aspiration was eliminated as a contrasting feature:





a) PL ^hw, S[H], X[H] became *w, s, *x, and merged with *w, s, *x;





1)) Sumerian *w was written u;





a)) Sumerian *ui became g₂i (similar to the Armenian and Celtic reflexes);





1))) Note here M. Civil, quoted in Thomsen (1984), p. 44: "Since /g~/ is regularly found only before 'front' vowels (the few exceptions can be easily explained) . . ." It should be pointed out that, having noted this connection, Civil however comes to a different conclusion regarding its significance.





2)) Sumerian s^(y)e became sh(a);



3)) Sumerian *x^(y)e became sh₂(a), merging with the reflex of s^(y)e;



4)) Sumerian *x was written h;





b) PL aspirated M[H], N[H], L^H(Y), and Q^H were de-aspirated to Sumerian m, n, l^(y)(a), and *nk^(h), merging with m, n, l^(y)(a) from PL M, N, L^(Y) (but see below for *nk^(h));





1)) PL Q was de-nasalized to g₃ initially, merging with g (from PL K[?] and K[H]); but medially or finally, sporadically appearing as (n)g₃.



2)) Sumerian *nk^(h) was de-nasalized to k₂^(h) or n₂ initially, merging with k^(h) (from PL K[?]Xand KX[H]); but medially or finally, sporadically appearing as (n)k₂^(h).





c) PL R[H] was de-aspirated to r, merging with r from PL R;





1)) Sumerian r^(w) from both sources -> l^(w).





d)PL H, HH, ? -> /0/;



e) PL $ becomes /j/, written i;



f) all glides were vocalized;

1)) C^-a remained Ca; C^ya became Ce; C^wa became Co (written Ca).

a)) Ca+i became Cê (written e); Ci+i/u became Cî (written i); Ca+u became Cô (written u); Cu+i/u became Cû (written u).





6. The Sumerian consonant inventory is (Thomsen's [1984] notation, where different, follows each consonant in braces):



b, u(w), [g₂] {g~}, m, p^(h) {p}

d, s, sh, n, l, t^(h) {t}, z,

g, h, (sh₂) {sh}, (n₂) {n}, (n)g₃ {g/ng}, k^(h) {k}, (n)k₂^(h)

i(y), r, [L] {l}

I remain unconvinced of the existence of a dr-phoneme in Sumerian.

PROTO-LANGUAGE MONOSYLLABLES

In order for readers to judge the semantic plausibility of the analysis of Proto-Language (PL) compounds suggested here, I am including access to a table of Proto-Language monosyllables and the meanings I have provisionally assigned.

Most assignments can be exhaustively supported by data from actually attested forms but a few animates are very doubtful; and this list does not represent the "final" solution of these questions, which will only be approached when other scholars assist in refining it.

Patrick C. Ryan

Summer 1997

SUMERIAN BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADDITIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

the latest revision of this document can be found at

HTTP://WWW.GEOCITIES.COM/Athens/Forum/2803/comparison.SUMERIAN.5._table.htm

Patrick C. Ryan * 9115 West 34th Street - Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 * (501)227-9947

PROTO-LANGUAGE@WorldNet.att.net

1. The Pontic stage of the Proto-Language, from which Indo-European and Afrasian developed, had only one V : (a) [possibly with a schwa {6} allophone], which became e, a, or o in Indo-European according to the Ablautstufe required by the grammatical form; and i, a, or u in Afrasian, dependent on vowel patterning but possibly on the earlier glide.

2. Final IE voiced aspirated stops + a can become unaspirated: -bha to b(a); -gha to -g(a); -dha to d(a).

3. v. 2. supra

4. v. 2. supra