Tlazoltéotl

comparison.AFRASIAN.3_table.htm

TABLE
OF
PL / IE / AFRASIAN
CORRESPONDENCES

by Patrick C. Ryan
2/10/98

number+i=(word) initial; number+m=medial (non-initial); number+f=(word) final
#=unattested (as yet); *=systematically irregular; :=long vowel; &=modified in combination.

PROTO- LANGUAGE

INDO- EUROPEAN

EGYPTIAN

ARABIC

AFRASIAN

HV(1)

HV:

i(#)

i (#)

?(#)

h(#)

HV:

i(#)

i (#)

?(#)

h(#)

HV:

h(#)

h (#)

?(#)

h(#)

HHE

HV:

i(#)

i (#)

$(#)

H(#)

HHA

HV:

i(#)

i (#)

$(#)

H(#)

HHO

HV:

h(#)

h (#)

$(#)

H(#)

P[?]E

P[H]E

b(h)/wV

p(#)

P[?]A

P[H]A

b(h)/wV(2)

p(#)

P[?]O

P[H]O

b(h)/wV

f(#)

f (#)

P[?]FE

PF[H]E

bhV

p[h]V:

b(#)

P[?]FA

PF[H]A

bhV(2)

p[h]V:

b(#)

P[?]FO

PF[H]O

bhV(5)

p[h]V:

b(#)

F[H]E

wV:

w(#)

F[H]A

wV:

w(#)

F[H]O

wV(6)

wV:

w(#)

T[?]E

T[H]E

d(#)

T[?]A

T[H]A

d(#)

T[?]O

T[H]O

t(#)

t (#)

T (dot-t)

S (dot-s)

T[?]SE

TS[H]E

dhV

t[h]/twV:

D(#)

T[?]SA

TS[H]A

dhV(3)

t[h]/twV:

D(#)

T[?]SO

TS[H]O

dhV

t[h]/twV:

' (#)

D(dot-d)

Z (dot-z)

S[H]E

sV:

z(#)

S[H]A

sV:

z(#)

S[H]O

sV:

s(#)

K[?]E

K[H]E

g[^]V

k[^]V

k(#)

K[?]A

K[H]A

k(#)

K[?]O

K[H]O

T(#)

K[?]XE

KX[H]E

g[^]hV

k[^][h]V:

H(#)

K[?]XA

KX[H]A

ghV(4)

k[h]V:

H(#)

K[?]XO

KX[H]O

ghV

k[h]V:

x(#)

x(1)

gh(1)

X[H]E

g[^][w]V

k[^][w]V

S(#)

S (#)

X[H]A

g[w]V

k[w]V

S(#)

S (#)

X[H]O

g[w]V

k[w]V

X(#)

X (#)

M[H]E

mV:

m(#)

m (#)

M[H]A

mV:

m(#)

m (#)

M[H]O

mV:

m(#)

NE
+
N[H]E
l[^]V
+
l[^]V:
n(#)
+
n (#)
l
+
l

NA
+
N[H]A
nV
+
lV:
n(#)
+
n (1)
n
+
l(1)

NO
+
N[H]O
nV
+
LV:
n (#)
+
n (#)
n
+
L (written l)

QE
+
Q[H]E
(n)g[^]V
+
(n)k[^]V:
q(#)
+
q (#)
q
+
q

QA
+
Q[H]A
(n)gV
+
(n)kV:
q(#)
+
q (#)
q
+
q

QO
+
Q[H]O
(n)gV
+
(n)kV:
g(#)
+
g (#)
q
+
q

RE
+
R[H]E
rV
+
rV:
3(#)
+
3 (#)
r
+
r

RA
+
R[H]A
rV
+
rV:
3(#)
+
3 (#)
r
+
r

RO
+
R[H]O
rV
+
LV:
r(#)
+
r (#)
L(written l)
+
L(written l)

What will surprise many readers, are the startling similarities in responses to Nostratic phonemes displayed by Germanic (IE) and Semitic (AA).

NOTATIONAL CONVENTIONS

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

Afrasian

Egyptian

p, f, d, t, k, T(bar-t)
w, z, s, S(hook-s), X(bar-h)
b, D(bar-d), ', H(dot-h), x(hook-h)
m, n, q(dot-k), g
3, r

i, h

Arabic

b, d, dh, f, j, gh, t, th, k, kh
D(dot-d), T(dot-t), Z(dot-z), S(dot-s)
z, s, sh
r, l
m, n, q(dot-k, velar k)

y, ?, h, $ ('ain), H(dot-h, He:)

Combinatory Modifications

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

Table of Modifications

Summary of Phonological Changes

from Proto-Language to Afrasian

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

AFRASIAN BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADDITIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

the latest revision of this document can be found at
HTTP://WWW.GEOCITIES.COM/Athens/Forum/2803/comparison.AFRASI AN.3_table.htm

Patrick C. Ryan * 9115 West 34th Street - Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 * (501)227-9947
PROTO-LANGUAGE@email.msn.com

1. The Pontic stage of the Proto-Language, from which Indo-European and Afrasian developed, had only one V(owel): a (/a/, 'central low') [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 and possibly the influence of former glides.
2. Final IE voiced aspirated stops + a can become unaspirated: -bha becomes b(a); -gha becomes -g(a); -dha becomes -d(a).
3. v. 2. supra!
4. v. 2. supra!
5. The spirantal component of these affricates had become /w/ so that a velar glide ([C]^w) was phonetically redundant. This explains the lack of an "emphatic" in the labial affricates.
6. Since the labial spirant was /w/, a velar glide ([C]^w) was phonetically redundant. v. 5 supra!

comparison.AFRASIAN.3_table.htm

TABLE OF PL / IE / AFRASIAN CORRESPONDENCES

What will surprise many readers, are the startling similarities in responses to Nostratic phonemes displayed by Germanic (IE) and Semitic (AA).

NOTATIONAL CONVENTIONS

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

Afrasian

Table of Modifications

Summary of Phonological Changes

from Proto-Language to Afrasian

PROTO-LANGUAGE MONOSYLLABLES

AFRASIAN BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADDITIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

TABLE
OF
PL / IE / AFRASIAN
CORRESPONDENCES