The origins of Pharyngealization in Semitic

THE ORIGINS OF PHARYNGEALIZATION IN SEMITIC PETR ZEMÁNEK enigma corporation, Ltd. Praha 1996 The Origins of Pharyngealization in Semitic/ Petr ZEMÁNEK - Prague : enigma corporation, Ltd. 1996 (Prague : T.R.S. Polygrafické služby) ISBN 80-9010704-3-9 Published by enigma corporation, Ltd. P.O. Box 308 CZ 111 21 Praha 1 © 1996 by enigma corporation, Ltd., Prague © 1996 by Petr ZEMÁNEK All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the Czech Republic. ISBN 80-9010704-3-9 CONTENTS Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Characteristics of emphasis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Characteristics of pharyngealized articulation in Arabic . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Characteristics of glottalized articulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Characteristics of individual emphatic consonants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.1 Emphatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.2 Uvular q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.3 Emphatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.4 Emphatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.5 Emphatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.6 Other emphatic phonemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 The relation between pharyngealization and glottalization . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Analysis of the alternations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1 Emphatic and its alternation with voiced d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2 Uvular q and its alternation with voiced ğ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3 Emphatic and its alternation with voiced z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Analysis of the control set: Phonetically conditioned doublets . . . 2.2.1 Emphatic and its alternation with non-voiced t . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 Uvular q and its alternation with non-voiced k . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3 Emphatic and its alternation with non-voiced s . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Analysis of the control set: Phonologically and phonetically non-related doublets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Doublets with the alternation of b / r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 Doublets with the alternation of / ġ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Summary and conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Evaluation of the sets of alternations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Phonetic environment of the alternations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Semantic distribution of the alternations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 Model of the development of pharyngealization in Arabic/Semitic 4 Supplement: Lists of doublets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 4 6 7 7 9 11 12 13 13 16 20 20 24 29 32 33 36 39 41 42 44 46 46 49 50 50 54 55 81 t̄ ṫ ḋ ṡ ż ṫ ṡ ṫ ṡ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The present study is an attempt at the explanation of the origins of the pharyngealized articulation in Arabic and Semitic and is a culmination of several years of work, although many times interrupted. The interest in this type of articulation was inspired already during my studies in the beginning of eighties by Professor PhDr. Karel PETRÁČEK, CSc., who also guided me through the first steps in the study of this phenomenon. I am glad to get the opportunity to express my gratitude for his teachings and his inspiring ideas. Through my work at this study, it has been at various stages consulted and discussed with several scholars, who have contributed in important ways to the growth of my knowledge and understanding at different stages of my journey. These include notably Arne A. AMBROS, Michael G. CARTER, Ladislav DROZDÍK, Jaroslav OLIVERIUS, Zdena PALKOVÁ, Stanislav SEGERT and Petr VAVROUŠEK. Needless to say, none of these scholars are to blame for any errors that remain in the work. Finally, I owe my thanks to James LANCASTER, who willingly corrected my English. I know that I have surely missed mentioning others who truly deserve inclusion here, and to them I apologize most deeply. ABBREVIATIONS AION ArOr BSOAS C GLECS JAOS JCS JNES JQR LAR LIQ MSA OA R1(2,3) SON SV V WZKM ZA ZDMG Annali di Istituto Orientale Universitario di Napoli, Napoli. Archív orientální, Praha. Bulletin of School of Oriental and African Studies, London. consonant, consonants. Groupe linguistique des études chamito-sémitiques, Paris. Journal of the American Oriental Society, New Haven. Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Baltimore. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Chicago. Jewish Quarterly Review, London, Leiden. laryngeal, laryngeals. liquid, liquids. Modern Standard Arabic. Oriens Antiquus, Roma. the first (second, third) radical of the root. sonant, sonants. semivowel, semivowels. vowel, vowels. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, Wien. Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie, Berlin, New York. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, Wiesbaden. Characteristics of emphasis 1 Introduction One of the characteristic phonological features in Arabic, but also in majority of other Semitic languages, is the so-called "emphatic" series. From the articulatory point of view, it is, especialy in Arabic with its dialects, a bunch of various types of co-articulation. Under the heading "emphatic" we usually understand pharyngealized1 or glottalized consonants.2 Roughly it can be said that the former are found in Arabic and Modern Aramaic (Neo-Assyrian, cf., e.g., HOBERMAN 1988 or TSERETELI 1982), the latter in the Semitic languages spoken in Ethiopia. In all of these languages, since they are still living ones, with the exception of G c z, we have direct evidence on the phonetic realization of these consonants, while in case of other Semitic languages the character of the articulation can differ. Traditionally, it is the pharyngealization that is ascribed to most of the dead Semitic languages. Modern Hebrew constitutes a special example in this respect because of cultural influence that results in de-emphatization in the pronunciation of originally emphatic sounds. From the phonetic point of view, a lot of studies state that this correlation exhibits considerable growth, especially in the modern dialects of Arabic. It should be pointed out that this growth does not in many cases mean the growth of number of pharyngealized consonants, but various types of co-articulation, like labialization, (strong) nasalization, etc. This is, e.g., the case of emphatic b (labia˙ in lization) or the case of emphatic (nasalization). These issues will be treated detail further on in the following part of this study. However, there are still some aspects of this co-articulation feature in Arabic and Semitic languages that are not completely clear. The discussion on the origin and type of development of this correlation is still going on. The aim of present study is to investigate exactly these two aspects and attempt at a proposal of the development of the phonological feature of "emphasis" in Arabic and Semitic languages. The study tries to contribute to the discussion on which coarticulation of emphatics, i.e. glottalization and pharyngealization, predates the other. It is based on data collected from the dictionary of Arabic (KAZIMIRSKI 1860), and the data are evaluated from statistic, phonetic and semantic points of view. The concept of emphatics in this study is mainly based on TRUBETZKOY’S analysis of co-articulation (Nebenarbeitskorrelation, 1939:122 ff.). The approach ee ṅ 1 Instead of the term pharyngealization, one can meet terms like velarization (e.g., OBRECHT 1968) or, rather rarely, uvularization (DOLGOPOLSKY 1977). 2 In Semitic, especially post-glottalized ejectives. 2 Petr ZEMÁNEK to the phonological system used in this study proceeds from the non-statical, dynamic conception of the system, as given especially in the study of the phonological system of Czech by J. VACHEK,3 together with the reflexion of these concepts in the work of K. PETRÁČEK (1971, 1975, 1990:142-159 and 247-290). The terminology used in this study corresponds mainly to the one used by ESSEN (1979). 3 Dynamika fonologického systému současné spisovné češtiny [The Dynamics of the Phonemic System of Contemporary Literary Czech]. Praha 1968. Characteristics of emphasis 3 1.0 Characteristics of emphasis Let us first try to resume the situation of the "emphatics" in Semitic:4 ḋ 7 t̄ 9 ḋ ṗ ṡ ˇ l̇ ( ṙ ż ḋ ḋ k̇ ż ḋ ṫ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṫ ṗ q q q q q q q q ˇ q ż ṡ ċ ṫ ṡ ṫ Akkadian5 Eblaite6 Ugaritic Hebrew Syriac Sayhadic8 G c z Arabic (Classical) Neo-Assyrian Modern South Arabian11 ) 10 ee In all the Semitic languages, there are at least three of them: , and q,12 which holds especially for the Ancient Semitic languages. This could point to the ṡ ṫ 4 If not quoted differently, our data are taken from MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:43-45. 5 For Akkadian, cf. JUCQUOIS 1966:264-266; for the problem of the original articulation cf. KNUDSEN 1961. 6 The situation in Eblaite is not completely clear. KREBERNIK 1982:179 and 1983 passim postulates 4 emphatic phonemes, which are nevertheless not attested in the texts. His analysis offers reconstruction of the system, graphical manifestation of the phonemes in the texts is nevertheless heavily dependent on the possibilities of the cuneiform writing. DIAKONOFF 1984:4 characterizes these phonemes as non-voiced - cf. also the use of the symbol z for non-voiced "emphatic" phoneme in Ugaritic - e.g. GARR 1986, SEGERT 1984, etc. ˙ 7 In the ugaritological literature, this phoneme is represented as z - cf. e.g. SEGERT 1984, KTU 1976 passim etc.; for discussion see e.g. VOIGT 1990 etc. ˙ 8 Old Epigraphic Southern Arabic. The name Sayhadic is used according BEESTON 1981. 9 For the characteristics of this phoneme, cf. RODINSON 1981, VOIGT 1990, etc. ˙ 10 The last two mentioned sounds function rather as variants, cf. reading of Quran, articulation of wa-llāhi, bi-llāhi etc. For more details, cf. e.g. PETRÁČEK 1952, FERGUSON 1956, AMBROS 1981. For possible emphatic r already in Classical Arabic cf. SCHAADE 1911. ˙˙ ˙˙ ˙ 12 i.e. mehri, š e ri, soqotri etc., languages spoken in Yemen. ḣ 11 Including q, which is nevertheless a little bit problematic from the point of view of modern Semitic, e.g. Arabic. 4 Petr ZEMÁNEK fact that the emphatic sounds in older phases were non-voiced, which is also the way the proto-Hamito-Semitic phonological system is reconstructed.13 In the West Semitic (i.e. Arabic, Hebrew, Syriac, Ugaritic and Neo-Assyrian) the emphatic consonants are pharyngealized, in Ethiopian Semitic (here represented by G c z), they are glottalized. For Akkadian, there is at least a possibility that the emphatic sounds were glottalized (cf. KNUDSEN 1961), and Modern South Arabian probably stands in the borderline between glottalization and pharyngealization.14 In the following, we will characterize the pharyngealized and the glottalized ways of articulation: ee 1.1 Characteristics of pharyngealized articulation in Arabic The characteristics of emphasis in Literary Arabic, from the synchronic point of view, is not connected with special difficulties. Articulatorily, it is characterized by the raising of the dorsum to the back part of the velum (GAIRDNER 1925), by slight backing of the typical dental and alveolar articulatory position to the rear.15 They are produced with a primary constriction involving the tongue tip and blade in the anterior region of the oral cavity, and a secondary posterior-inferior movement of the back of the tongue into the pharynx region. This secondary movement may be accompanied by a lateral spreading of the tongue dorsum thus creating a more hollow configuration. Accoustically, as shown in OBRECHT 1968, the main characteristics is the lowering of the second formant (F2), which can be in some cases considerable.16 OBRECHT also points to the fact that the velarization17 is the most effective in 13 Cf. e.g. DIAKONOFF ET AL. 1987:12, where the following emphatic phonemes are reconˇ c, ˆ k, kw, x, xw. structed: ṗ, t, c, c, ˙ ˙ 14 Cf. NAUMKIN & PORKHOMOVSKY 1981:9 for Soqotri, where they describe a free variation of pharyngealization and glottalization. ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ 15 ALI & DANILOFF 1972 give the following values: s is shifted to the back for 2.89mm when compared to s, for t/t the difference is 2.76mm. ˙ ˙ 16 OBRECHT 1968:24-26 gives the following types of differencies in F2: t/t - 1800/1200 Hz; d/d - 1750/1050 Hz; s/s - 1500/1050 Hz; z/z - 1500/750 Hz. From the point of view of the lowering of F2, the values for opposition of k/q are very similar to the ones given above 2100/1200 Hz. ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ 17 The term "velarization" was later on replaced by "pharyngealization", which, at least in Arabic, is more exact. Characteristics of emphasis 5 influencing neighbouring sounds - both consonants and vowels. It induces a tongue backing gesture on adjacent sounds, much more clearly than pharyngeals. A little bit more problematical is the characteristics of emphasis in the dialects of Arabic. In most of the dialects, the emphasis covers much more consonants than in Literary Arabic. Especially the Maġrib dialects exhibit a high degree of emphasis in their phonological systems. E.g. ZAVADOVSKY 1981 in his analysis of Mauretanian dialect stated that each consonant can have its emphatic and non-emphatic variant.18 Such a situation lead some authors to distinguish between emphatisant and emphatisables.19 Nevertheless the degree of emphasis is dependent on further criteria. It is not always the pharyngealization that is gathered to the new emphatics in the Arabic dialects, they are sometimes characterized differently. E.g. emphatic b is rather characterized as labialized than pharyngeali˙ zed, emphatic and as strongly nasalized (MALAIKA 1959), etc. It is surely also the phonetic nature of the feature in question - i.e. the pharyngealization - that leads to the rise of further emphatic phonemes in Arabic. This can be observed even in Literary Arabic, where we can mention e.g. the assimilation t > , t > etc. at the VIII verbal stem. The pharyngealization can further effect on the consonants in the non-contact position - cf. GAIRDNER 1925:51, and sometimes it is the whole word that is considered "emphatised" - cf. D. COHEN 1969:63-6, BANI YASIN & OWENS 1987:303 etc. Also phonetic studies show that the pharyngealization can considerably affect its neighbourhood. Some remarks can be found by OBRECHT 1968; the studies of GHAZELI 1981 and HAMDI 1990 must also be mentioned. The first states that the effect of pharyngealization does not pass beyond the boundaries of a syllable, the second claims that according to his measurements the pharyngealization can spread over the syllable boundaries, but only towards the end of the word (i.e. progressive, not regressive spread). It seems that this situation is caused mainly by phonetic-articulatory ṅ ṁ ṫ ḋ ḋ ṫ ṫ ṫ 18 A similar situation is also described by BANI YASIN & OWENS 1987:303-5 for Jordanian dialect, where the authors allow for the possibility that each phoneme has its emphatic counterpart. Nevertheless, as independent emphatic phonemes they name only the following: d, t, s, m, l, g, b, w. ˙ ˙ 19 The terminology was adduced by D. COHEN 1969, based on HARRELL 1957:69ff where in his analysis of the phonological system of Egyptian colloquial Arabic, where he speaks about primary emphatics (i.e. t, d, s, z), secondary emphatics (i.e. r, l, k, b), that occur quite rarely and mostly in words where primary emphatics occur, and marginal˙ emphatics (g, f, t, h, ġ, ˘ h, n, w, y, ’) - i.e sounds, where there is phonetic possibility of emphatizing these phonemes, but there are no minimal distinctive pairs. HOBERMAN 1988 and 1989 gives also phonemes that stop the spread of emphasis, i.e. phonemes that cannot be emphatised. ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ¯ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ 6 Petr ZEMÁNEK reasons, i.e. the articulatory organs that are in a specific position remain in such a position even after the articulation of the pharyngealized sound. Such a situation clearly leads to attempts to create another concept of emphasis, i.e. a concept connected not only with one phoneme but with a higher unit syllable or even word. From 1942 we have an attempt to characterize emphasis as a suprasegmental feature - the study by Z. HARRIS on Morrocan Arabic. From this study, there were several similar attempts suggesting a similar solution, e.g. ZAVADOVSKY 1981, etc. Apart from purely linguistic criteria and arguments it is possible to adduce also other criteria that can shed further light on the role of emphasis in the Arabic dialects. This feature has been used also as a criterion for socio-linguistic study (ABD-EL-JAWAD 1986), but also in other studies we can find remarks on stylistic "deemphatisation" (KHALAFALLAH 1969:30) and the use of emphasis can also be determined socially - the younger and more educated the speaker is, the lower degree of emphasis used.20 1.2 Characteristics of glottalized articulation Under glottalized sounds various types of sounds have been understood: ejectives, implosives, creaky or glottalized vowels, pre-glottalized continuants etc. For the Hamito-Semitic languages, the ejectives and implosives are the most important. We can find implosives in Chadic (b’, d’ and y’) and post-glottalized ejectives especially in Cushitic languages, but they occur in other groups of Hamito-Semitic as well. In the frame of Semitic, the area with the greatest spread of glottalized sounds is Ethiopia, where in the Ethio-Semitic the glottalized sounds may have emerged or preserved due to the areal influence of the Cushitic languages. Other area, where glottalized articulation alternates with the pharyngealized one, is the Southern Arabia, in Modern South Arabian, i.e. Mehri, Š ri and Soqotri. All of the glottalized sounds attested in Semitic are ejectives. These facts mean that for the purpose of this work we can basically limit our scope to ejectives, i.e. eggressive post-glottalized consonants, since these represent the main articulatory manner in Semitic. Ejectives are produced with egressive pharynx air. The larynx moves upward with the vocal cords closed during the articulation of the consonant, which creates air pressure in the pharynx. After the release of the consonant articulation, the air e ḣ 20 E.g. BANI YASIN & OWENS 1987:304 in note 8 mention that the lowest degree of emphasis is in the category 30-45 years of age, with university education - 81% of non-emphatic variants. The use of emphasis is also determined sexually - women use less emphasis than men. Characteristics of emphasis 7 from the pharynx creates an egressive air stream originating from the pharynx. We can find glottalized plosives (p’, t’, k’) and glottalized affricates and fricatives (č’, c’ ~ s’). It should be noted that it is physiologically impossible to produce other than voiceless ejectives, since the glottal closure does not allow participation of the voice. On the other hand, implosives, which are attested in Chadic languages, tend to be voiced (cf. WEDEKIND 1990:128). Another point which is important for Semitic languages is that, according to WEDEKIND (1990:128) languages tend not to use the difference between a glottalized affricate (such as c’) and a glottalized fricative (such as s’) for phonemic contrast. This might help in explanation of the articulatory character of the Semitic a de. ṡ 1.3 Characteristics of the individual emphatic consonants in Arabic As the basis of our analysis we include among the emphatic consonants the following five phonemes: , , , and q.21 In addition, we will comment on the phonemes that can be emphatic or emphatized, but do not appear in the MSA. These phonemes can be traced especially in the dialects of Arabic or other Semitic languages. The phonemes that appear as emphatic in the phonological systems of other Semitic languages are discussed briefly in the review of other Semitic phonological systems. ż ṡ ḋ ṫ 1.3.1 The emphatic The explosive unvoiced alveolar is in Arabic situated in the center of the Arabic emphatic sounds (mu b aqa - cf. SIBAWAIH 1889, D. COHEN 1969 etc.) and is attested in Literary Arabic as well as in almost all the dialects of Arabic. The exception here is the situation in the peripheral Arabic dialects (Malta, Arabic dialects in Central Asia, Arabic dialects in Africa - Sudan, Chad, Kenya etc.). In case of African dialects, this phoneme is substituted by its glottalized counterpart cf. e.g. ZELTNER & TOURNEAUX 1986 as an injective for the Arabic dialects in Chad. A similar situation can be found also in the Upper Egyptian dialects - cf. KHALAFALLAH 1969:30. Exceptionally, it is also possible to find it realized as the implosive d’ (in the dialects in Algerian Sahara - J. OWENS, personal communication). A close connection between the glottalized t’ and pharyngealized is shown also by the perception similarity of the two sounds - cf. FRE WOLDU 1984-86 and ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ 21 This phoneme is not always included among the emphatic phonemes. 8 Petr ZEMÁNEK 1988.22 The possible alternation of these two types of articulation is also attested by the data from Soqotri, where these two forms are perceived as allophones (cf. NAUMKIN & PORKHOMOVSKY 1981:9-10). The data in FRE WOLDU 1984-86 and 1988 also show that this phoneme is most probably the connecting bridge between the glottalized and pharyngealized way of articulation. This phoneme in Sudan is the only one that allows the twofold articulation and both articulations are considered acceptable. Although is attested in all the Semitic languages, its articulation in various languages can be different. In all the Ethiopian Semitic languages it is realized as glottalized, the same is the situation in South Arabian and Neo-Assyrian. It is reconstructed for Akkadian, too, where it has been mostly represented by the grapheme for d. The reason for this might be caused by the shortcomings of the cuneiform writing as indicated by MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:31. Nevertheless, the choice of d might be caused also by other reasons. Our opinion is that analogically with the situation of the glottalized k’ (q) in Akkadian (cf. KNUDSEN 1961) the emphatic was in Akkadian realized as glottalized, or its graphical representation can reflect the processes of the transformation of the glottalized articulation into the pharyngealized one. In case of Hebrew and other Canaanite languages, the situation is not completely clear as far as the manner of articulation is concerned, and we are still unable to decide which manner of articulation was the one used. Outside the Semitic languages, in the Hamito-Semitic languages, we find this phoneme only in the Cushitic and Omotic languages, represented as the glottalized t’ (EHRET 1980 and BOMHARD 1984 for the Cushitic languages, BENDER 1975 for the Omotic). For Chadic we find it only in the reconstruction of STOLBOVA 1986 for Western Chadic, in the actual systems it is not attested (NEWMAN 1977 and JUNGRAITHMAYR & SHIMIZU 1981 do not reconstruct this phoneme even for Proto-Chadic). In their reconstruction we find only voiced implosives. In Berber we find it only in the reconstruction of Proto-Berber (PRASSE 1972), APPLEGATE 1970:592-3 classifies emphasis in Berber as a suprasegmental phoneme,23 which would reflect a situation similar to the one in modern Arabic dialects or Modern ṫ ṫ 22 In these two studies, FRE WOLDU examines the perception similarity of pharyngealized and glottalized consonants in Tigrinya and Sudanese Arabic. In the perception test with the Sudanese speakers, the glottalized t’ is perceived as an acceptable articulation of pharyngealized t. ˙ 23 Emphatic consonants are treated there as a sequence of a consonant and an additional feature of pharyngealization. This additional feature is phonemic, but its ___domain is bigger than the consonant (syllable, CV, etc.) and it has been found to affect nearly all of the consonants of the phonemic system. Characteristics of emphasis 9 Aramaic. The realization of the emphatic sounds in Berber is pharyngealized. For Egyptian it is reconstructed in the protosystem only by RÖSSLER 1971, whose reconstruction is nevertheless motivated by an obvious effort to postulate a clearly symmetrical system. The reconstruction of the emphatic series is based only on analogy with other series (voiced and non-voiced), i.e. analogically to the phonological systems in Semitic languages. No other analysis of Egyptian phonology includes emphatic . As we have seen, although this phoneme is not present in a number of actual systems of the Hamito-Semitic languages, it is reconstructed for almost all the protosystems (Semitic: MOSCATI ET AL. 1964, BOMHARD 1988, etc., Cushitic: EHRET 1980, Omotic: BENDER 1975, Chadic: STOLBOVA 1978, 1986, Berber: PRASSE 1972, etc.) and similarly, it is reconstructed for the Hamito-Semitic (Afroasiatic) system (cf. DIAKONOFF 1988:34 ff., 1987; BENDER 1975, BOMHARD 1984, HODGE 1987pr. etc.). The reconstructed manner of articulation is the glottalized one. ṫ 1.3.2 Uvular q. Explosive non-voiced q is usually included by the old Arabic grammarians among the emphatic consonants, though not in their center (i.e. mu b aqa), but in the mustacliya set. This phoneme is not always taken into consideration when studying the emphatic consonants. The reasons why we include it in our analysis are historical and systematic. We are aware of the fact that in case of articulative definiton of the emphasis (i.e. pharyngealization in case of Arabic) this phoneme would have to be excluded from the analysis. The features of this phoneme rank it rather with the back consonants (even pharyngeal - cf. DELATTRE 1971) rather than with the pharyngealized ones. This phoneme is without doubt one of the most interesting phonemes of the Arabic phonological system. This is i.a. proved by the rich bibliography connected with this phoneme and its problems. The realization of this phoneme in Arabic can be very different (especially in Arabic dialects, but the differencies are tracable even in MSA). In Arabic, it can be realized in the following way:24 ṫ - q - non-voiced uvular (CANTINEAU 1960:68; HARRELL 1962:5; DIEM 1972:9, etc.) 24 On the other hand, there is also some evidence for other phonemes that are realized as q cf. the situation in Mauretania, where h (non-voiced velar fricative) is realized as q (WILLMS ˘ 1972:1). 10 Petr ZEMÁNEK - g - voiced palatal (CANTINEAU 1960:68; ZAVADOVSKY 1962:7; DIEM 1972:9, etc.). - ’ - glottal stop (GAIRDNER 1925; FEGHALI 1919:25; CANTINEAU 1960:68, etc.). - ġ - voiced velar (postvelar) (CANTINEAU 1960:68, etc.). - k - non-voiced palato-velar, e.g. in Maltese (COHEN 1970) and other peripheral dialects of Arabic (e.g., HEINE 1982, OWENS 1985, etc. - ğ - voiced affricate, e.g. in Iraqi Arabic - šarğı̄ for šarqı̄ - eastern. CANTINEAU 1960:68 differentiates the realization of this phoneme between the sedentary population25 (q, , k, ’ - i.e. as a non-voiced consonant) and bedouins (ġ, g, ğ, ǵ - i.e. as a voiced consonant). On the other hand, the different articulation can be based on other factors, too. This phoneme is used as a criterion for sociolinguistic studies (cf. e.g. ABD-EL-JAWAD 1986, ROSENHOUSE 1984, etc.). According to GHALI 1983:436 q in most Arabic dialects has a very low functional load, nevertheless, such a situation may be caused by the above mentioned variety of articulation of this phoneme. In Classical Arabic, it is sometimes characterized as voiced (cf. medieval Arabic grammarians, e.g. SIBAWAIH, ZAMAHŠARĪ, cf. also SEMAAN 1968). Today, ˘ in MSA it is realized as non-voiced postvelar or even more often, as uvular (cf. AL-ANI 1970, GIANNINI & PETTORINO 1982:9 etc.). Non-voiced explosive q is attested in all the Semitic languages (MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:44 and 45 table). The differences are in the realization of this phoneme in a number of languages (Ethiopian, South Arabian, Modern Neo-Assyrian) it is realized as glottalized. Its articulation in the dead languages is not completely clear, there are indications, however, that point to the glottalized articulation (cf. KNUDSEN 1961, BOMHARD 1988:115-116 - both authors study the influence of glottalization and pharyngalization on the neighbouring vowels, non-voicedness of the emphatics in Akkadian and the application of the Geer’s law (GEERS 1945). The pharyngealized articulation would be then limited to Arabic and most probably also to Canaanite languages. This region, together with Arabic, seems to be in case of emphasis the innovative area. k̇ 25 i.e. especially in the villages, the situation in the towns can be different. Characteristics of emphasis 11 1.3.3 Emphatic The voiced explosive i s in Arabic traditionally included among the emphatic sounds. Its articulation is given in KÄSTNER 1981 and AL-ANI 1970. In some regions of the Arab world it merges with emphatic (Iraq, Tunisia, etc.). In many studies, it is possible to find this phoneme listed as a member of the Semitic protosystem (cf. e.g. BROCKELMANN 1908:43, also MOSCATI ET AL. 1964 as ) , but as early as by VILENČIK (1930:89ff) we find another position. MARRASSINI (1976:337) speaks on the delicacy of the problem of the classification of in Proto-Semitic, cf. also RODINSON (1981). In other Semitic languages it is not possible to find the phoneme in all the systems, and furthermore the correspondences with other Semitic languages show the possibility that this phoneme might have another type of co-articulation than pharyngealization (cf. M. COHEN 1931:10; MARTINET 1953:72 etc.). Also the correspondences with other HamitoSemitic languages (cf. DOLGOPOLSKY 1983:130-31 for Cushitic, BALDI 1987pr. for Hausa, CONTI 1976 for Egyptian) offer a different picture. The phoneme in loanwords and correspondences is often realized as l or d (in Hausa and other Chadic languages also as implosive d’). The situation in G c z shows that in graphical representation the phoneme was differentiated from . RODINSON 1981, based on further data, speaks about a lateral character of this phoneme, i.e. not about emphasis understood as pharyngealization or glottalization. A similar situation is found in Arabic dialects (GAIRDNER 1925:20, RABIN 1952:33, CANTINEAU 1960:54ff., 284ff.; D. COHEN 1963:11, COLIN 1930:92, 101-4 etc.), in the articulation of some Coranic reciters and in Modern South Arabian languages (Mehri, Š ri, Soqotri - BROCKELMANN 1908:132), where the phoneme is realized as l. Besides these data, there is also a correspondence with ld - loanwords from Arabic in Spanish - a - a yca > aldea, alqā ı̄ > alcalde (RODINSON 1981:103), in Maltese with l - ri ā > rela, rama ān > ramelan etc. (COLIN 1930:101). Today the lateral character of is rarely doubted, though sometimes the phoneme is characterized slightly differently - as cacuminal (MARRASSINI 1976:337), and generally the as an emphatic (i.e. pharyngealized or glottalized) is not included into the Semitic protosystem. Cf. also HODGE 1983:149 in the Hamito-Semitic (Afroasiatic) context. Nevertheless it is not possible to exclude definitely the connection of and the sibilant series. This idea has appeared already in VILENČIK 1930 and BLAKE 1946, and the combinatorics (incompatibility) also show that this phoneme preserves almost completely the incompatibility with sibilants and not with l, as might be supposed on the basis of its possible lateral character. There are also a number of doublets of this phoneme with lateral ś that are mentioned in KURYŁOWICZ 1973:28, STEINER 1977 (passim) and FISCHER 1968:59-60. One of the best anaḋ ḋ ż d̄ ḋ ḋ ee ṡ e ḣ ḋ ḋ ḋ ḋ ḋ ḋ ḋ 12 Petr ZEMÁNEK lyses known to us is VOIGT 1991, where the phoneme is included to the protosystem as lateralized sibilant ś. From such a position even the most peculiar correspondences can be explained.26 That is why our position is that should be classified in the Semitic protosystem as a lateralized member of the sibilant series. ḋ 1.3.4 Emphatic In Arabic, from the first attestations by the Arabic grammarians (SIBAWAIH, HALĪL - cf. ROMAN 1977, etc.) this sibilant is put among the emphatic sounds, i.e. ˘ pharyngealized (the so-called mu b aqa) series. It is one of the phonemes that appear as pharyngealized in all the Arabic dialects in the role of "emphatisant".27 It is attested in all the Semitic languages with the exception of Neo-Assyrian and some Arabic dialects that have lost the emphatic series (Malta - D. COHEN 1970, Chadic Arabic - ZELTNER & TOURNEUX 1986, ROTH 1979, Arabic pidgins in Sudan, Kenya and Nigeria - e.g. OWENS 1985:233-4, HEINE 1982 etc.). In older works the supposed articulation is pharyngealized, in recent studies other solutions are offered (cf. VOIGT 1986, STEINER 1982, CLAASSEN 1971, CARDONA 1968 etc.). In other languages, where we have the possibility to see the phonetic realization, is realized in a different way. In Modern Hebrew it is realized as affricate (c) and this usage prevails today even in liturgical praxis with Biblical Hebrew. In Modern Ethiopian languages it is realized as c, in G c z it is usually characterized as emphatic. Also in Modern South Arabian we can see a tendency towards an affricated realization of this sound (both articulations, i.e. pharyngealized and affricated, are considered equal - MILITAREV, personal communication). Outside the Semitic languages we find one indirect indication for an affricated realization of this sound - in Old Egyptian it corresponds with the phoneme (i.e. ğ in Semitistic transcription) - cf. CONTI 1976, which might reflect a correspondence of a nonvoiced (c) and voiced (ğ) affricate. Cf. also GARBINI 1972 and 1984. Beside this manner of articulation, in some works it is possible to find attempts to characterize the original articulation of this phoneme as glottalized (s’ cf. ROMAN 1990 etc.). ROMAN 1981-2 characterizes the sound as "pseudoglottalized", and the position of VOIGT 1986 is similar. ṡ ṫ ṡ ee d̄ 26 Cf. the correspondences with q in Aramaic (Arabic ’ard-un - Aramaic ’arqā - the earth) and correspondences with s in a number of languages, e.g. Hebrew ’eres - Arabic ’ard-un the earth. ˙ ˙ ˙ For terminology, cf. COHEN 1969. ˙ 27 Characteristics of emphasis 13 Interesting data is found in Yemen, where this phoneme in some dialects can be realized as st (BEHNSTEDT 1986:5-9). A similar situation can be found also in loanwords in Arabic - cf. lat. castra > qa r - D. COHEN 1962:120. As far as its position in the protosystem is concerned, it seems that it should be classified as a glottalized affricate or fricative.28 ṡ 1.3.5 Emphatic The articulation of this phoneme in Classical Arabic places the phoneme clearly among the pharyngealized emphatic consonants (cf. SIBAWAIH). It is articulated as voiced pharyngealized alveolar spirant or interdental ( - AL-ANI 1970:48 etc.). The Arabic pharyngealized explosive often merges with this phoneme in the dialects of Arabic, e.g. in Iraq, Tunisia etc. In Classical Arabic, its functional load is minimal (cf. HERDAN 1962:54 - only 0,6%) to such a degree that for the majority of the roots with it is hard to find minimal correlation pairs. In other Semitic languages, this phoneme is attested only scarcely, MOSCATI 29 ET AL. 1964:43-5 mentions it only for Arabic and Epigraphic South Arabian. The grapheme transcribed as in Ugaritic represents an unvoiced phoneme (cf. MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:43, VOIGT 1991 etc.). Outside the Semitic languages this phoneme can be traced only in Berber (cf. WILLMS 1972 and WOLFF 1981:177), where it is possible to expect the influence of Arabic. In every other family of the Hamito-Semitic languages this phoneme is not attested. Sometimes this phoneme has been postulated for the Proto-Semitic phonological system - cf., e.g., MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:24. On the other hand some authors speak about this phoneme as an innovation in the Arabic system. Cf. e.g. GARBINI 1972:42 (footnote 1), PETRÁČEK 1981:165 etc., who speak of an innovation in the Amoreic and especially the Arabic area (cf. also LOPRIENO 1977:135). ż d̄ ḋ ż ż 1.3.6 Other emphatic phonemes The five above mentioned phonemes occur in Classical Arabic (and also MSA). Nevertheless the number of emphatic phonemes in the dialects of Arabic is much higher. Especially in the "central" Arabic dialects30 the correlation of 28 Note that according to WEDEKIND 1990:128 it is not necessary to distinguish between fricative or affricate character of this type of ejectives, since languages tend not to use this opposition for phonemic contrast and the two types can easily be variants of one phoneme. 29 Sayhadic in BEESTON’s terminology - BEESTON 1981. 30 In the so-called peripheral Arabic dialects, the emphasis is mostly lost. 14 Petr ZEMÁNEK emphasis developed considerably. There are dialects where we can find an emphatic variant of every phoneme (e.g. in Mauritania - cf. ZAVADOVSKY 1981, Morrocco - cf. HARRELL 1965, Jordan - cf. BANI YASIN & OWENS 1987, etc.). In studies on such dialects we meet the idea of conceiving the emphasis as a suprasegmental phoneme. The occurrence of additional emphatic phonemes in other Semitic languages is rather rare. MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:43-5 does not mention any other emphatic phonemes, SWIGGERS 1981 adduces emphatic ˇ for Mehri and Š ri. Within the framework of glottalized phonemes, it is possible to find glottalized ṗ and č (NeoAssyrian - TSERETELI 1978:34-8, G c z - e.g. VOIGT 1989:634 etc.). As far as the Hamito-Semitic languages are concerned, several other emphatic phonemes are postulated. The largest number can be found in the reconstructions of DIAKONOFF (1988, 1984, 1987 etc.) - ṗ, , , ˇ , , q˘h, w. In actual systems of the Hamito-Semitic languages we find pharyngealized phonemes in Berber, non-voiced ejectives in Cushitic and Omotic and implosive sounds in Chadic (b, d, y). Generally the character of the original emphatic phonemes is postulated as non-voiced, only in Chadic do we find voiced implosives and in Berber voiced pharyngealized consonants. The situation in Arabic is rather different. Already in Literary Arabic (MSA) we find certain tendencies towards the expansion of the pharyngealized type of articulation (emphatic - cf. PETRÁČEK 1952, FERGUSON 1956, etc.), also the possibility of velarization/pharyngealization of r (> ) in Classical Arabic - cf. SCHAADE 1911:14-16. In the Arabic dialects, the growth of this correlation becomes considerably dynamic. From the point of view of emphasis we can divide the Arabic dialects into two groups - to the peripheral dialects, where the emphasis does not grow or decreases - dialects in Malta (D. COHEN 1970), in Central Asia (G. TSERETELI 1956), in Africa (ROTH-LALY 1972, HEINE 1982, OWENS 1985 etc.), the second group is formed by the central dialects, where the pharyngealization increases very dynamically. Here, in fact, are all the Arabic-speaking countries. It seems that in the Arabic Maġrib (especially in Morocco and Mauretania) the dynamics of emphasis is so high that it covers the whole phonological system - cf. especially ZAVADOVSKY 1981. Even more "emphatic" sounds can be found in Neo-Assyrian, where the expansion of "emphasis" is the highest of all the Semitic languages (cf. TSERETELI 1982, HOBERMAN 1988 and 1989 etc.). Emphasis is nevertheless treated differently in those studies: it is not connected with the individual emphatic phonemes, but is considered as a so-called suprasegmental feature, or, as in HOBERMAN 1988 and 1989 in the framework of so-called autosegmental phonology. e ḣ k̇ ṡ ee k̇ ṙ ċ ċ ṫ l̇ Characteristics of emphasis 15 Nevertheless, from the articulatory point of view, under so-called "emphasis" we can find very different types of articulation. Apart from emphatics from Classical Arabic, which are pharyngealized, we encounter labialized (b, etc.), and stro˙ ngly nasalized ( , - MALAIKA 1959) consonants. It is clear that the number of "emphatic" consonants in the modern dialects of Arabic is growing, on the other hand, it is also clear that not all of them can be covered by pharyngealization. It seems that in this case use of a more general term like co-articulation or secondary articulation would be more suitable. ṅ ṁ 16 Petr ZEMÁNEK 2. The relation between pharyngealization and glottalization 2.0 In all reconstructions of the Hamito-Semitic phonological system the connection between glottalization and pharyngealization is widely accepted. Both types of articulation are taken as two realizations of the co-articulation (Nebenarbeitskorrelation, cf. TRUBETZKOY 1939, PETRÁČEK 1988:32-4, 1990:284-290). As has been observed several times, the emphatic phonemes in Semitic are generally realized by two basic ways of articulation, i.e. as pharyngealized and glottalized.31 The problem of which of the two articulations was the original one appeared relatively early, and during the discussion the question has been solved in different ways,32 however, recently the opinion that the glottalization is the original way of articulation in proto-Semitic is gaining ground. This can be seen e.g. in recent reconstructions of the proto-Semitic and proto-Hamito-Semitic (Afroasiatic) phonological system,33 where the emphatics are reconstructed as glottalized and voiceless. The relation between glottalization and pharyngealization is confirmed also in studies by FRE WOLDU (1984-6, 1988), which show a certain auditory similarity between glottalization and pharyngealization. In this study the author i.a. shows that Tigrinya emmigrants in Sudan, when speaking the Sudanese dialect of Arabic, often realize the Sudanese pharyngealized sounds as glottalized (ejective). The native speakers of the dialect then usually accepted the ejective articulation of the emphatic as a normal variant, while at other emphatics they pointed out the auditory differences and described it as foreigners’ speech. The Tigrinya speakers usually realized the difference in the articulation of , and , but usually did not notice the difference between ejective t’ and pharyngealized . The similarity between glottalization and pharyngealization is reflected also in the situation in contemporary South Arabian languages (Mehri, Š ri, Soqotri), where the glottalized articulation of pharyngealized sounds is perceived as a valid variant (cf. SWIGGERS 1981, NAUMKIN & PORKHOMOVSKY 1981:9). ṫ ż ṡ ḋ ṫ e ḣ 31 Of course, other types of articulation can be effective, too, especially in the broader concept of emphasis, as it is generally applied in the case of Arabic dialects, where one can observe types of coarticulation like labialization (emphatic b% , ) , (strong) nasalization (emphatic ) , etc. ṁ ṅ 32 Cf., e.g., LESLAU 1957:325 in favour of the pharyngealization as proto-Semitic, KNUDSEN 1969 for glottalization as original. For an attempt at an alternative solution (emphasis = uvularization) cf. DOLGOPOLSKY 1977. Naturally, a number of other studies have appeared. 33 Cf., e.g., ROMAN 1981 and BOMHARD 1988 for Proto-Semitic, DIAKONOFF 1984, 1987, BOMHARD 1984 for Proto-Hamito-Semitic, etc. Pharyngealization and Glottalization 17 These data clearly show the relation between pharyngealization and glottalization, but do not solve the problem which predated the other. We, however, accept the arguments that glottalization was the original one, that have been articulated already in MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:23-4,34 and that pharyngealization appears as secondary from some of originally glottalized consonants, especially glottalized t’ and k’. Then, the pharyngealized forms the core of the newly formed series, while q, due to articulatory reasons,35 is not pharyngealized, but shifted to the back and is not accompanied by coarticulation. Even in SIBAWAIH (1889:302ff) q is not ranked together with other emphatics (mu b aqa - , , , ) , but with a broader set of mustacliya. 36 The secondary character of pharyngealization is, according to our view, supported also by the further development of pharyngealization in Arabic, especially in its dialects. Arabic is then probably the originator and without any doubt the propagator of pharyngealization.37 A similar approach, i.e. the concept of secondary character of pharyngealization, can be observed also in studies on other Semitic languages. In recent studies we find clear statements that the correlation of emphatic phonemes that we know from Arabic is of heterogeneous origin and moreover, that the pharyngealization is secondary (cf. GARBINI 1972:141, note 1, similarly also 1984; DOLGOPOLSKY 1977, ARO 1977, ROMAN 1981, etc.). The concept of this correlation (as well as the concept of the whole proto-Semitic phonological system) is dynamic and pharyngealization is regarded as an innovation. In most of the branches of the Hamito-Semitic languages, this correlation is also represented, and only Egyptian forms an exception.38 In Chadic we find ṫ ż ṡ ḋ ṫ ṫ 34 "a) the Ethiopic "emphatics" are voiceless and, apart from Arabic, so the Semitic "emphatics"−almost without exception; b) the Ethiopic "emphatics" do not appear to influence the timbre of neighbouring vowels and, again apart from Arabic, this seems to be the norm in the Semitic languages (cf. however for certain facts in Akkadian SODEN, 1952, p. 12); c) the phenomenon q > ’ in some Arabic dialects can only be explained by way of glottalization." (Ethiopic "emphatics" stand for ejective consonants). 35 The backing articulation, when applied to back consonants, has a different manifestation than when applied to dentals and alveolars. Cf. DELATTRE 1971. 36 Mustacliya = mutbaqa + q, h. ˘ 37 Cf. the spread of pharyngealization in modern dialects of Arabic. The pharyngealized consonants in Berber are usually ascribed to Arabic influence, too (APPLEGATE 1970). ˙ 38 Emphatic phonemes are nevertheless reconstructed on the proto-Egyptian level, cf., e.g., RÖSSLER 1971 in his systematic reconstruction; CONTI 1976 reconstructs only emphatic t. Sometimes, Egyptian grapheme for voiced affricate ğ (= d in egyptological transliteration) is interpreted as corresponding to Semitic s. ˙ ¯ ˙ 18 Petr ZEMÁNEK implosives (b’, d’, y’ - NEWMAN 1977).39 Cushitic offers a number of post-glottalized ejectives and implosives, with maximum of 11 emphatics in DOLGOPOLSKY’S (1973) reconstruction. Berber has pharyngealized consonants, cf., e.g., the reconstruction of K. PRASSE (1972), where we find , , and . Generally, the pharyngealized articulation of Berber emphatics is ascribed to the influence of Arabic. Glottalization is thus the quantitatively prevailing type of articulation, and according to its behaviour in loanwords, it seems that the emphatic consonants were non-voiced (cf. DIAKONOFF 1991-92:59). The Hamito-Semitic evidence offers also an indication of the possible development from glottalization to pharyngealization. MERLINGEN (1978) speaks of Chadic implosives b’ and d’ as sounds characterized by "laryngealized voicing" or "creaky voice". This might point to a certain degree of articulatorily similarity and the direction of succession of the two ways of articulation. The transition from glottalization to pharyngealization must have been a process which had to leave some traces in the system. It is probable that after the release of the glottal occlusion applied in the articulation of the glottalized consonants, the way for the participation of voice opens (postglottalized ejectives are attested only as non-voiced), and such a possibility could result in the existence of doublets alternating in non-voiced emphatic and its voiced counterpart. These types of alternation were noticed already in BROCKELMANN 1908 (e.g. 160, 162 for / z), MAIZEL’ 1983, cf. also PETRÁČEK 1987, 1990:288; for "emphatic" q cf. CANTINEAU 1960:182, CONTI 1976, ROMAN 1981 etc. According to us, in the moment of substitution of glottalized articulation by the pharyngealized one, part of the roots with the glottalized t’ and k’,40 and, with some reservation, possibly also the roots with emphatic 41 change after the release of the glottal occlusion to roots with the voiced counterpart of the originally glottalized consonants. ż ḋ ṫ ṡ ṡ 39 JUNGRAITHMAYR & SHIMIZU 1981 reconstruct the following "emphatics" (i.e. implosives and ejectives): b’, d’, y’, k’, s’; STOLBOVA (1986), obviously in a maximalist reconstruction, reconstructs the emphatic series in the following way: p, t, c, č (c), k, kw, q. It should be said that "emphatic" in the Russian concept corresponds rather to the "gepreßt" from TRUBETZKOY’S (1939) gepreßt x nicht gepreßt opposition. ˙ 40 The situation at the shift from glottalized k’ to uvular q is in Arabic obscured by the fact, that the voiced counterpart which is reconstructed in the protosystem is changed to its palatalized variant (g > ğ). 41 The question of the original articulation is not clear, the discussion has not been concluded and the possibility remains of original affricated articulation, which would set this consonant somewhat apart from our speculations. Pharyngealization and Glottalization 19 Such a type of alternation is attested also from other Semitic languages, where e.g. in Old Babylonian graphemic representation, the signs with d are used for words with etymological (cf. MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:31; SODEN 1952:§29, §26b.42 For the test of our hypothesis we used the method, which is in Semitistics relatively common, i.e. the collecting of the so-called doublets. This method is based on the character of the root in Semitic languages (or in Arabic, to be more precise), which is formed in the vast majority by 3 consonants that serve as basis for the morphological derivations and that bear some "basic meaning". Doublets then are such types of pairs of roots that differ in only one of the three radicals in the specified position, i.e. for alternation / d an example for a doublet would be e.g. bl / bld. This method has been used e.g. in the discussion about the original character of the root in Semitic, namely as the supporting argument for the biradical character of the Semitic root, as shown e.g. by the so-called PR3 series.43 For a radical explanation of this phenomenon cf. EHRET 1989.44 Furthermore, the method is relatively often used for showing the original character of a phoneme, cf., e.g., STEINER 1977 passim for doublets like ś/l, ś/ , / l, etc. On the other hand, it has to be said that this method cannot be considered a reliable one. It is, beside the formal differences of one element in the root, based on semantic similarity that can be influenced very often by subjective criteria of the researcher, and often these criteria can be hardly defined by some rules, since the existence of doublets can be caused not only by historic relations between the two roots, but also by the subsequent phonetic and phonological processes, phonetic similarity, etc. ṫ ṫ ṫ ḋ ḋ 42 VON SODEN 1952: §29b says: "In der Schrift werden d, t und t aA (= Altassyrisch) nirgends, aAK (= Altakkadisch) fast nie unterschieden ...". Cf. also GELB 1961:29 and the following discussion. These problems were obviously caused by the character of the cuneiform script which did not represent the emphatic phonemes. These were in Akkadian substituted by signs for auditory similar sounds. Nevertheless, in Greek loanwords we find non-voiced t for emphatic t (DIAKONOFF 1991-92:59). ˙ ˙ 43 Cf., e.g., MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:72-73, where there are given examples like Hebrew prd "to separate", prm "to tear", prs "to split", prs "to break down" etc., which are interpreted as a biconsonantal root base pr with the basic notion "to divide". For critique, cf. VOIGT 1988, for an alternative explanation of this phenomenon, cf. PETRÁČEK 1987. ˙ 44 This study is an attempt to assign certain types of meanings to the root extensions. Such an explanation goes probably too far, when one realizes that a number of such alternations can be caused by phonetic reasons. Another problem is that EHRET concentrates on R3 only, while Semitic offers data on the alternation of both R1 and R2 as well. 20 Petr ZEMÁNEK It is exactly these types of processes, i.e. phonetic and phonological, that are very frequent in Semitic languages and especially in Arabic. A good overview of the richness of these processes in Semitic languages is given in MAIZEL’ 1983 which deals with the processes of the expansion of the roots in Semitic, with the main processes allothesis, metathesis and chaining (of the type PR3 series, cf. above). Relatively frequent are also alternations based on clearly phonetic reasons, e.g. the alternation of semivowels (w, y), laryngeals (c/ , h/ , c/’ etc.), alternations like d/ / s, etc. These facts lead us to the conclusion that the use of this method without some accompanying correction procedures is not sufficiently valid. With the assumption that it is difficult to avoid the subjectivity when collecting the data, we have decided to use the method together with a control set of data that were collected in the same way as the sets that are at the centre of our attention. The control sets that we use are of a twofold character: the first consists of doublets, where there is a clear phonetic relation in the alternation, i.e. doublets with alternations / t, q/k and / s, and the second that contains doublets of phonetically clearly non-related sounds. For the choice of the second set clearly quantitative criteria were used. We have chosen the consonants according to their relative frequency as given in HERDAN 1962:54, and the resulting pairs were r/b (occurrence frequencies 7,7% / 5,7%) and / ġ (occurrence frequencies 1,8% / 1,9%). Such a choice offers, despite the subjectivity of the input procedure the possibility to compare the results of the data collection, since it offers information on relative frequencies of the doublets. It should also allow for setting up a more contoured picture of the situation and processes that took place in Arabic. ḣ ḣ d̄ ṫ ṡ t̄ 2.1 Analysis of the alternations of non-voiced emphatics with their voiced counterparts 2.1.1 Emphatic and its alternation with voiced d The emphatic has the central position in our hypothesis, according to which this phoneme represents the connecting bridge between the older type of articulation of emphasis - glottalization - and the newer type - pharyngealization.45 The doublets of / d we consider as the residue of the period when the glottalized t’ was changing into pharyngealized . After the loss of the glottal stop a way ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ 45 The other phoneme could be q, but this consonant does not fit exactly to the model of development from glottalization to pharyngealization. Its articulation in Arabic cannot be characterized as pharyngealized, but uvularized. Pharyngealization and Glottalization 21 opened for the participation of voice in the articulation and part of the roots with t’ changed into roots with voiced d, and other part changed to roots with pharyngealized , with overlapping of the two sets. It is exactly this overlapping that documents this change. Because of reasons given above the type of articulation that emerged at , the correlation of emphatic pharyngealized consonants is created. Then, in the part of the doublets where the t’ changed to d, originally as an allophone, the d received gradually phonematic character. The voiced explosive d thus has two origins - one is the old phoneme (*d as opposed to *t etc.), and the other is the original variant of glottalized/pharyngealized . In the dictionary of A.B. KAZIMIRSKI (1860) we find a relatively large number of these doublets (cf. Table I): ṫ ṫ ṫ Table I: Alternation of / d in Arabic 274 14,59 Total 40 37 32 109 ṫ % d R3 d 212 249 18,86 14,85 ṫ total number of roots in the dictionary R2 d 200 259 ṫ ṫ Number of doublets R1 d 214 782 ṫ ṫ Alternation / d on the position 626 18,5 12,35 14,95 13,93 17,41 Such a frequency, especially the frequency of doublets with the emphatic , is clearly very high. It is hard to imagine that such a frequency could be a result of purely random similarity, although the phonetic similarity in this case plays a considerable role. The amount of the onomatopoetic (or, somewhat more widely, descriptive) phonemes in the corpus is relatively low and is almost exclusively restricted to the group of / d = R1 (R1: T’T’; Tqq; Tnn; TnTn; R2: hThT; R3: 0). Normally, these types of roots might influence the results of the analysis, since the semantic similarity can be caused by the character of these words, i.e. the phonetic imitation of some sound or process. Here, in this case, considering to the very limited number of these phonemes (less than 2% in the highest possibility), we can suppose that their occurrence will not influence the analysis. Table II shows the phonetic distribution where the alternation / d is preserved (only the consonants in the contact position are given; this means in the case of R2 ṫ ṫ ṫ 22 Petr ZEMÁNEK both contact positions before and after the alternation is given - the third number is the total of the preceding two): Table II: Phonetic environment of the alternation / d in Arabic: a) voiced consonants: ṫ R1 Alternations of / d on the position: ṫ consonants: b r z R2 (R3) 2 2 0 3 2 1 5 2 1 7 (∑) 7 6 0 5 3 4 9 3 3 8 Total (R2) 2 5 1 2 1 5 2 2 2 5 12 12 1 9 6 11 13 9 10 17 ġ l m n h w/y (R2) 3 2 0 2 2 2 3 4 5 4 Total: 27 48 27 100 % 67,5 67,6 75,75 69,45 R3 Total (R2) 1 2 2 1 0 1 0 1 4 2 12 7 8 3 5 5 c (R1) 5 4 0 2 1 3 4 1 2 1 R3 b) non-voiced consonants: Alternation of / d on the position: ṫ consonants: ’ R1 R2 h s˘ š f q (R2) 1 0 5 2 3 0 1 1 (R1) 0 0 2 3 4 2 1 3 (R3) 2 0 3 1 1 0 1 0 (∑) 2 0 5 4 5 2 2 3 Total 13 23 8 44 % 32,5 32,39 25,8 30,55 t̄ ḣ Pharyngealization and Glottalization 23 The table clearly shows a great dominance of the voiced consonants in the contact positions of the alternation. It is remarkable that the occurrence of the voiced consonants is proportional, in most of the cases the number of occurrences is about 10 (9-11). Only m and especially w/y occur more frequently. The voiced consonants are mostly from the group of the so-called "glides" or the transitory zone [(C) - LIQ - SON - LAR - SV - (V) - cf. K. PETRÁČEK 1971]. Only b, ġ and z do not enter this zone.46 The group of non-voiced consonants is clearly much smaller than the group of voiced ones. Also the distribution of these phonemes is much less proportional than is the case at the first group. Half of them does not occur at all the subgroups (according to the position of alternation, i.e. R1, R2 and R3). The phoneme with the highest occurrence ( ) comes also from the group of the "glides". It is evident that the character of the neighbouring phonemes played a substantial role in preservation of (and, possibly, to a certain degree in the causing) the alternation of / d, and served also as the catalyst of the transition. It is probably the voicedness that helped in the preservation of this alternation, and moreover, in the contact position, there are consonants from the zone of the transition between consonants and vowels (cf. PETRÁČEK 1971), that exhibit a high degree of voicedness (liquids, sonants, semivowels).47 A certain number of doublets in this set are interrelated phonetically. Namely, they are the following: at R1: 17. Tcs - 18. Tcz, 29. Tnn - 30. TnTn; at R 2: 31. mTT 33. mTw/y; at R3: 2. blT - 24. lbT, 10. zrT - 11. zlT. The alternations in these roots (beside the alternation of / d) can be explained by phonetical changes. Morphologically most of the doublets preserve the alternation in its verbal manifestation; nominal patterns are rather rare. Semantic analysis could also show some interesting facts. That is why we tried to divide the doublets into groups that are evident in the data. The present analysis is based only on our own division, and is to be considered tentative. Although the semantic division here is rather speculative, we consider it useful to mention it here, since it can bring interesting facts to the environment where the alternation is preserved. This holds also for the semantic division of the doublets with the alternation of q/ğ and / z. The Table III shows the semantic division of the doublets with the alternation of / d: ḣ ṫ ṫ ṡ ṫ 46 According to RŮŽIČKA in a number of studies (e.g., 1954) and PETRÁČEK 1955, 1975, it is possible to count ġ among the glides due to a supposed transition of c > ġ. 47 For the question of the degree of sonority, cf. GVOZDANOVIĆ 1985:89. 24 Petr ZEMÁNEK Table III: Semantic division of the doublets with / d in Arabic. R1 violence, aggressivity ṫ Alternation of / d on the position: R2 R3 Total 4 13 9 26 actions connected with movement 10 6 7 23 actions and activities connected with space 2 3 4 9 spiritual and corporal qualities 10 4 3 17 taboo actions and activities 2 4 3 9 production of sounds 5 1 0 6 rest 7 6 6 19 40 37 32 109 ṫ Total It is evident that most of the features that we have managed to distinguish in the data are somehow connected with some emotional charge (aggressivity, violence, etc.), spiritual and corporal qualities (mostly pejorative) or with dynamics (movement, etc.). These three groups form almost 60% of the whole. Emotional charge can without doubt be seen also in the taboo actions and activities (8 doublets). Thus, with 53 doublets we can speak of emotional charge, with 23 doublets of dynamics (especially movement; a certain dynamics could be also ascribed to some of the doublets that are here gathered under the "rest" label). This dynamics can be to a high degree strengthened by the fact that most of the doublets are verbs. We assume that it is also this dynamic and emotional charge in the semantics of the doublets that plays its role in preserving the remnants of the transition of t’ > / d > , d. Nevertheless, in our tentative semantic analysis we did not find any regular semantic change due to the variant used. That is why we consider this alternation as caused mainly by phonetic features, mostly by the voiced environment of the alternation. ṫ ṫ 2.1.2 Uvular q and its alternation with voiced ğ: As has been said above when describing the uvular q, this phoneme can hardly be associated with the other "emphatic" phonemes of Arabic, both from the Pharyngealization and Glottalization 25 phonetic and phonematic point of view. This phoneme enters our analysis only on historical grounds. There are many reasons why we should consider this phoneme as originally glottalized, one of them is the alternation with the glottal stop ’ in a number of Arabic dialects (e.g. in Egypt and elsewhere). Here, we would like to add another argument. Based on the hypothesis formulated above, we suppose also with this phoneme the transition k’ > q, i.e. a change in the manner of articulation. After the release of the glottal closure, there is a way opened for the participation of voice, and thus for the transition k’ > g. In Arabic, this transition is somewhat obscured by the fact that the original g was palatalized to ğ (we assume this transition according to the correspondences among the Semitic languages without examining the reasons for this process). In spite of this, as our data show, the traces of the transition k’ > q in Arabic are preserved in a number of doublets. In the dictionary of A.B. KAZIMIRSKI (1860) we find the following number of doublets of q/ğ: Table IV: Alternation of q/ğ in Arabic: Alternation q/ğ on the position R1 R2 R3 Total Number of doublets 50 21 36 107 total number of roots ğ in the dictionary 357 % q ğ 413 205 14,00 12,1 9,46 q ğ q ğ 248 322 363 884 q 1024 8,43 11,18 9,91 12,10 10,45 As opposed to the alternation of / d, the relative (i.e. percentual) number of the doublets with the alternation of q/ğ is smaller. We suppose that this relatively smaller number of doublets is caused by the related palatalization g > ğ, which without doubt influenced the possibility of the preservation of the traces of the change. As onomatopoeic (or descriptive), the following roots can be determined: Qšš, Q Q, šQQ, and hQhQ. Their number is so small that even here we can exclude any considerable influence of these words on our analysis. The following table gives the phonetic environment of the alternation of q/ğ, summarizing the consonants in all the contact positions of the alternation: ṫ ṡ 26 Petr ZEMÁNEK Table V: Phonetic environment of the alternation of q/ğ in Arabic: a) voiced consonants: Alternations of R1 R2 R3 q/ğ in the position: consonants: b d l m n h w/y (R2) 2 4 3 9 0 2 5 4 3 2 2 Total: 36 36 28 90 % 72,00 69,23 84,85 72,00 R2 R3 Total (R2) 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 - 1 3 5 5 5 1 12 3 d̄ r z c (R1) 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 4 3 (R3) 1 0 0 2 0 3 2 2 1 1 1 (∑) 1 1 0 3 0 4 2 3 2 5 4 Total (R2) 5 2 0 2 1 2 6 2 1 3 4 8 7 4 14 1 8 13 9 6 10 10 b) non-voiced consonants: Alternation of q/ğ in the position: consonants: ’ R1 f 0 (R2) 1 2 1 4 1 0 5 - Total 14 16 5 35 % 28,00 30,77 15,15 28,00 t̄ ḣ s š (R1) 0 1 2 1 3 1 2 - (R3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 (∑) 0 1 2 1 3 1 5 3 ṡ Pharyngealization and Glottalization 27 Just as with the preceding group of doublets ( / d) the phonetic environment of the alternation is formed mostly by the voiced consonants. Most frequent are liquids and semivowels, the role of laryngeals, esp. h, is also substantial. Into the group with higher occurrence come the sounds r, l, h, w/y (with occurrence over 10), while at the other extreme stands z with one occurrence only. ṫ Non-voiced consonants in the environment of the alternation are much less frequent than voiced ones. It is interesting that here the phoneme f is very prominent. It occurs more than twice as often as the other most frequent phonemes ( , s, š). On the other hand, in the case of this alternation, the occurrence of one "emphatic" phoneme ( ) is also attested here.48 ḣ ṡ In this group also occur roots of the type R1R2R2 which are here under the non-voiced consonants where the third consonant is labelled with 0 in the table. It is interesting that with the preceding group this type of root was of very low occurrence. Again it is possible to say that it is the voiced environment, especially sounds with high degree of voicedness that are close to vowels (liquids, semivowels, laryngeals) which served as the catalyst for the transition and also where most traces of the transition are attested. As it has been the case at the / d alternation, here also we can find some doublets whose interrelations can be explained by phonetic reasons. Namely they are the following: at the alternation on the position of R1: 7. Qdd - 11. Q ; 19. Qrf 37. Qlf; 30. Qff - 32. QfQf; at the position of R3: 6. b Q - 7. hbQ; 10. drQ - 12. ˘ rdQ; 28. frQ - 29. flQ. ṫ d̄ d̄ ḣ Morphologically also the verbs are dominant and nominal (mostly adjectival) meanings are not so frequent. The tentative semantic analysis is given in the following table. 48 Root sQQ; it is especially the combination of these two consonants that is very common in Arabic. ˙ 28 Petr ZEMÁNEK Table VI: Semantic division of the doublets of q/ğ in Arabic: Alternation of q/ğ in the position: R1 R2 R3 Total violence, aggressivity 16 9 8 33 actions connected with movement 2 3 6 11 actions and activities connected with space 0 2 2 4 spiritual and corporal qualities 7 2 5 14 taboo actions and activities 0 1 4 5 production of sounds 0 1 2 3 dryness 4 0 0 4 "draw in, remove" 9 0 0 9 rest 12 3 9 24 50 21 36 107 total The table shows, as was the case of the semantic analysis of the alternation of d/ , the dominance of meanings of emotional charge and dynamics (violence, taboo actions and spiritual and corporal qualities - 52 doublets, movement - 20 doublets). Unlike the alternation / d, however, the meanings in the individual groups of doublets (i.e. R1, R2 and R3) are not distributed so proportionally. Here we have two semantic features that occur only with one group (dryness, "draw in, remove" only at R1). The dominant meaning is violence, in the second position stand spiritual and corporal qualities. Again, it seems evident that the emotional charge and dynamics helped in the preservation of the traces of the transition of k’ > q and it is possible to assume that to a certain degree it served as the catalyst for the process. Nevertheless the most important role is without doubt played by the phonetic environment of the alternation. ṫ ṫ Pharyngealization and Glottalization 29 2.1.3 Emphatic and its alternation with voiced z. As we have already pointed out, the original manner of articulation of this phoneme is still a question to be solved. It is not clear whether it was originally an affricate which might be indicated by the situation in Modern Hebrew and also Modern Ethiopic Semitic (cf. also an indirect evidence - correspondence with the Egyptian phoneme ğ,49 or, as others assume it was an originally glottalized phoneme, as in the case of . Alternatively, it could be a glottalized affricate, which is the solution offered (implicitly) by DIAKONOFF 1991-92:56ff. Nevertheless, whatever side we choose, the fact remains that in the lexicon of Arabic we can find a number of doublets with the alternation of / z, as the data given here show. The following table gives the numbers of the doublets with the alternation of / z that were found in A.B. KAZIMIRSKI 1860: ṡ ṫ ṡ ṡ Table VII: Alternation of / z in Arabic. ṡ Alternation / z in the position R1 R2 R3 Total Number of doublets 26 26 27 79 % 9,28 11,35 13,33 ṡ 229 195 z z 151 238 ṡ 280 z z 184 713 17,21 11,34 14,67 11,08 ṡ ṡ total number of roots in the dictionary 564 14,01 ṡ Here, the relative frequency of the doublets, especially when compared to the doublets of / d, is considerably lower. Possibly the sibilant character or the different original manner of articulation might have played a role. The number of doublets of onomatopoeic or descriptive character is very low here, in fact it is only one - SrSr. The influence of this type of roots on our analysis is then negligible. The following tables show the phonetic environment in the contact positions of the alternation of / z: ṫ ṡ In Egyptological transliteration d. ¯ 49 30 Petr ZEMÁNEK Table VIII: Phonetic environment of the alternation / z in Arabic a) voiced consonants: ṡ Alternations of / z in the position: R1 R2 R3 Total (R2) 1 0 6 0 1 4 1 2 2 2 11 5 14 6 1 10 7 5 6 10 ṡ consonants: b d r ġ l m n h w/y (R2) 3 3 4 3 0 1 1 0 1 6 Total: 22 34 19 77 % 84,61 72,34 70,37 75,49 R2 R3 Total (R2) 2 1 2 0 1 1 1 7 2 3 3 4 5 1 c (R1) (R3) 3 4 0 2 2 2 3 0 0 0 3 2 2 3 2 1 3 0 1 1 (∑) 7 2 4 3 0 5 5 3 3 2 b) non-voiced consonants: Alternation of / z in the position: R1 ṡ consonants: ’ ḣ h š˘ f q k (R2) 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 (R1) (R3) 1 2 1 0 1 0 3 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 (∑) 3 1 1 3 3 2 0 Total 4 13 8 25 % 15,39 27,66 29,63 24,51 Pharyngealization and Glottalization 31 Also in the case of alternation of "emphatic" with its voiced counterpart z we observe a clear majority of the voiced consonants in the neighbourhood of the alternation, especially in case of R1. Also in the overall figures this alternation exhibits one of the highest rates of voiced consonants in its neighbourhood. The occurrence of voiced consonants here is not so "proportional" as is the case of the alternation of / d. We can divide the consonants into two groups according to their frequency - a group with higher frequency (14-10 - b, r, l, w/y) and lower frequency (5-7 - d, c, m, n, h). Beside these two groups we find ġ with only one occurrence. Again, as it was the case with the previous alternations, the consonants belonging to the transitory zone (PETRÁČEK 1971) can be found here with the highest frequencies (i.e. liquids and semivowels). All of the consonants found here belong to the group with high sonority. ṡ ṫ With the non-voiced consonants it is remarkable that the occurrence of completely non-voiced contact is infrequent in the case of groups R150 and R3; but also the occurrence of non-voiced environment at the group of R2 is relatively small. It is also remarkable that the higher frequency can be found at ’ and q, sounds that are not very stable and tend to alternate with other sounds.51 Beside these two sounds with the highest frequency and with exception of k with only one occurrence, the frequency here is proportional. It seems that in case of this alternation the influence of the voiced environment is even stronger than is the case of the alternation / d and q/ğ. Such a type of environment would point especially to the phonetic character of this alternation. ṫ As far as the phonetically related pairs of doublets are concerned, in this set we find the following ones: at R1 it is 1. S’b - 2. S’m and 12. Srm - 18. Slm; at R3 we find 11. rqS - 18. qlS.52 The following table offers the tentative semantic distribution of the doublets, divided according to the most frequent semantic groups: 50 In case of R1 it is only ’ and q that occur in the contact position! 51 Cf. the situation in the dialects of Arabic - ’ often changes to simply a vocalic reflex, and q can be realized in a number of ways - voiced or unvoiced. 52 I.e. both metathesis and alternation of liquids - r/l. 32 Petr ZEMÁNEK Table IX: Semantic division of the doublets of / z in Arabic: ṡ Alternation of / z in the position: R1 R2 R3 Total violence, aggressivity 11 6 10 27 actions connected with movement 0 3 7 10 actions and activities connected with space 2 4 0 6 spiritual and corporal qualities 1 3 2 6 taboo actions and activities 1 2 0 3 production of sounds 3 2 0 5 rest 8 6 8 22 26 26 27 79 ṡ Total Similarly to the preceding two cases, we also observe here the dominance of semantic notions connected with emotionality and dynamics. The most prominent notions are quite clearly activities connected with violence and aggressivity (27 doublets), second is movement (10 doublets). These two notions together represent almost half of the doublets. Then come taboo activities and corporal and spiritual qualities that without doubt also bear an emotional charge. Here too it is possible to say that it is the dynamics and the emotional charge that represent the environment where the alternation of / z is preserved. ṡ 2.2. Analysis of the control set: Phonetically conditioned doublets This set is included here in order to achieve more plastical information about the behaviour of the doublets with emphatic phonemes in Arabic. Here, five sets are analysed, three for the alternation of emphatic vs. non-voiced non-emphatic, i.e. the alternations of / t, q/k and / s, and two sets of doublets with variation of non-emphatic and phonologically non-related consonants chosen according to their frequency. The alternation of b/r stands here for the group of consonants ṡ ṫ Pharyngealization and Glottalization 33 with the highest frequencies, and the alternation of ġ/ for the consonants with the lowest frequencies. The frequency data are taken from HERDAN 1962:54, although these data may differ from the results obtained from KAZIMIRSKI 1860. The reason for the difference is mainly in the fact that HERDAN (based on GREENBERG 1950) takes into account only verbal roots, while our data cover both verbal and nominal roots, while another reason for difference could be caused by GREENBERG’S use of other dictionaries for his analysis. t̄ 2.2.1 Emphatic and its alternation with non-voiced t: ṫ The number of doublets with this type of alternation, which is based clearly on phonetic features, is relatively low, especially when compared to the number of doublets with the alternation of / d. The data are summarized in the following table: ṫ Table X: Alternation of / t in Arabic. ṫ Alternation / t on the position R1 R2 R3 Total Number of doublets 10 22 14 46 ṫ t t ṫ ṫ % t t ṫ ṫ Total number of roots in the dictionary 151 212 238 200 189 214 578 626 6,62 4,71 9,24 11,00 7,4 6,54 7,96 7,34 In case of this alternation, only the alternation on the position of R2 gives numbers little bit higher, but still in no way comparable to the numbers at the / d alternation. The following tables show the phonetic environment at the contact positions of the alternation of / d: ṫ ṫ 34 Petr ZEMÁNEK Table XI: Phonetic environment of the alternation / t in Arabic: a) voiced consonants: ṫ Alternation / t on the position ṫ consonants: b d r R1 R2 Total (∑) 2 1 6 1 2 5 6 0 1 0 (R2) 2 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 0 3 5 1 9 2 2 10 8 1 1 4 24 11 43 ġ l m n h w/y (R2) 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 Total 8 % 80 54,76 78,57 64,18 R1 R2 R3 Total (R2) 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 4 4 4 3 1 2 4 2 c (R1) (R3) 2 0 0 1 1 5 0 1 2 0 4 1 3 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 R3 b) non-voiced consonants Alternation / t on the position ṫ consonants: ’ t/ ṫ ḣ h s˘ š f q (R2) 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 (R1) (R3) 1 2 0 4 1 2 0 2 1 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 (∑) 3 4 3 2 1 2 2 2 Total 2 19 3 24 % 20 45,23 21,42 35,82 Pharyngealization and Glottalization 35 Here, the dominance of the voiced consonants at the contact positions is clearly observable only at R1 and R3 doublets, while at R2 doublets the frequencies are almost equal. In the overall picture, the voiced consonants are still prevailing at the contact position, with the highest frequencies of liquids (l, r) and nasal m. Here, for the case of de-emphatisation to a non-voiced counterpart, the prevalence of non-voiced neighborhood would be expected, which is obviously not the case. Nevertheless, similar relations were observed at all the alternations of emphatic vs. non-voiced non-emphatic. Phonetic similarity (beside / t) can be observed only at mt / mth. ˘ with the Table XII shows the tentative semantic division of the doublets alternation of / t: ḣ ṫ ṫ Table XII: Semantic division of the doublets of / t in Arabic: ṫ Alternation / t on the position R1 R2 R3 Total violence, aggressivity 1 9 3 13 actions connected with movement 3 1 2 6 taboo actions and activities 0 2 0 2 spiritual and corporal qualities 1 1 2 4 production of sounds 0 0 2 2 rest 5 9 5 19 10 22 14 46 ṫ Total The semantics of the doublets exhibits again quite a high percentage of roots with dynamic and emotional meanings. Altogether, this type of alternation exhibits similar characteristics as the alternation of / d, except that the frequency of occurrence is considerably lower than it is the case with the / d doublets. ṫ ṫ 2.2.2 Uvular q and its alternation with non-voiced k. 36 Petr ZEMÁNEK The data for this type of alternation, collected in KAZIMIRSKI’S dictionary, are summarized in the following table: Table XIII: Alternation of q/k in Arabic. Alternation q/k on the position R1 R2 R3 Total Number of doublets 20 20 11 51 Total number of roots k in the dictionary 323 % 5,88 q k q k q k q 413 211 248 201 363 735 1024 4,6 9,47 8,06 5,47 3,03 6,93 4,98 As has been pointed out several times above, the position of q in our analysis is, from the point of view of pharyngealized emphatics in Arabic, rather complicated. It is highly probable that it is linked with the Arabic emphatics historically (glottalization), but synchronically the situation is different. Also the reflects of the process of transition from glottalization to pharyngealization or to back articulation, which is the case of q, are in Arabic obscured by the fact that the protoSemitic g was palatalized in Arabic. These facts, i.e. the alternation caused by purely phonetic similarity (q/k) and the alternation with some historical background but the traces of which are obscured by the subsequent phonological process, could make the results of the sets of q/ğ and q/k quite close. Nevertheless, similar results were obtained only at R2 doublets, where the numbers of doublets are almost identical. In case of R1 and R3 doublets, the numbers (both absolute and relative) are much higher (more than twice in most cases) at the doublets with the alternation of q/ğ. In this set, we found also one onomatopoeic root - krkr. Its presence, however, will hardly exert any influence on the results of our analysis. The following table shows the phonetic environment at the contact positions of the alternation of q/k in Arabic: Table XIV: Phonetic environment of the alternation q/k in Arabic: a) voiced consonants: Pharyngealization and Glottalization Alternation q/k on the position consonants: b d r z R1 l m n h w/y (R2) 0 0 1 1 1 3 3 2 1 1 Total 13 % 65 c R2 37 R3 Total (∑) 2 5 2 2 7 2 1 2 1 2 (R2) 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 5 4 4 8 5 6 4 2 4 27 4 44 69,23 40 61,97 R2 R3 Total (∑) 0 2 2 1 1 1 5 (R2) 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 4 3 5 3 1 4 5 12 6 25 60 38,03 (R1) (R3) 2 0 2 3 2 1 1 1 5 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 b) non-voiced consonants Alternation q/k on the position consonants: t f k/q53 (R2) 2 1 2 1 0 1 0 Total 7 % 35 t̄ š ḣ ṡ 53 R1 (R1) (R3) 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 30,77 This set consists of the roots R1kk/R1qq, i.e. the mediae geminatae roots. 38 Petr ZEMÁNEK At this type of alternation, the dominance of voiced consonants is broken, this time on the position of R3, where we get the dominance of non-voiced consonants, the only case from all of our sets. But even at the two other positions, the dominance of voiced consonants is not as high as was the case with the alternations of emphatics and voiced non-emphatics. As has been said above, this points to a purely phonetic character of the alternation, together with the possibility of de-emphatization. The distribution of both voiced and non-voiced consonants in the contact position is surprisingly equal, most of them ranging in the interval between 4-6 (voiced) and 3-5 (non-voiced). Surprisingly, it is laryngeal c that appears 8 times, i.e. with the highest score. Relatively frequent is also the group of roots of the type R1R2R2 (5 occurrences). The following table shows the semantic division of the alternation of q/k in Arabic: Table XV: Semantic division of the doublets of q/k in Arabic: Alternation q/k on the position R1 R2 R3 Total violence, aggressivity 2 6 3 11 actions connected with movement 1 1 1 3 taboo actions and activities 0 2 1 3 spiritual and corporal qualities 5 2 1 8 production of sounds 1 0 0 1 "pick up" 3 1 0 4 "origine, race" 0 3 0 3 rest 8) 5 4 17 20 20 10 50 Total Similarly to all the other sets of alternations so far we find the majority of meanings connected with some emotional charge and dynamics. Such a type of semantic environment seems to be the catalysing one for the alternations, which even stresses the phonetic nature of the phenomenon. Pharyngealization and Glottalization 39 2.2.3 Emphatic and its alternation with non-voiced s. ṡ We have several times expressed our reservations in regard to including the emphatic i nto our analysis. These limitations are based on the problems with the original way of articulation of this sound, which could be, as observed above, affricate or glottalized, or both. Especially in case of affricate articulations, there would be problems with finding a direct voiced or non-voiced counterpart. Then, of course, the number of doublets should be lower than in the other two cases. The following table shows the number of doublets with the alternation of / s in Arabic. ṡ ṡ Table XVI: Alternation of / s in Arabic: 8,8 Total 30 21 21 72 ṡ % R3 s ṡ Total number of roots s in the dictionary 341 R2 s ṡ ṡ Number of doublets R1 s ṡ ṡ Alternation / s on the position 229 243 151 280 184 864 564 13,1 8,6 13,9 7,5 11,41 8,3 12,76 In this case, the number of doublets is very close to those with alternation of z/ . In case of R1 doublets the number is even higher, in the two other cases slightly lower. Generally, there is no substantial difference in the number of doublets in both cases. This might point to purely phonetic reasons of both alternations of / z and / s. The following table shows the phonetic environment at the contact positions of the alternation of / s in Arabic: ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ 40 Petr ZEMÁNEK Table XVII: Phonetic environment of the alternation / s in Arabic: a) voiced consonants: ṡ R1 Alternation / s on the position ṡ consonants: b d r ġ l m n h w/y (R2) 1 2 2 2 2 5 1 1 0 3 Total 19 % 63,3 c R2 R3 Total (∑) 2 0 5 1 1 2 6 0 2 1 (R2) 2 0 4 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 5 2 11 4 4 7 8 2 3 6 20 13 52 47,6 65 56,52 R2 R3 Total (∑) 1 2 4 2 2 3 7 1 (R2) 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 1 2 3 6 2 4 6 15 2 22 7 40 35,00 43,48 (R1) (R3) 1 1 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 1 1 1 3 3 0 0 2 0 0 1 b) non-voiced consonants Alternation / s on the position ṡ consonants: ’ f q k (R2) 1 0 2 0 2 1 5 0 Total 11 % 36,6 ḣ h s/˘ 54 ṡ ṫ 54 R1 Roots of the type mediae geminatae. (R1) (R3) 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 2 0 2 3 0 4 3 0 1 52,4 Pharyngealization and Glottalization 41 The proportions of voiced and non-voiced consonants correspond roughly to what we have observed at the alternations of / t and q/k. At this set, there is, however, one considerable difference - half of the non-voiced contact positions of nonvoiced consonants are taken by emphatics - emphatic (4 occurrences) and uvular q (15 occurrences). This might quite clearly mean that in these cases we witness also the process of emphatisation, while in the other cases it was by far more probably the vice versa process, i.e. the de-emphatization. Within the voiced consonants, the most frequent are the liquids (r, l) and nasal m. In this set, we found only one case of phonetically interrelated pairs of doublets, namely 24. s/ l q - 25. s/ l qm at R1. The following table shows the results of the tentative semantic analysis of the doublets with the alternation of / s: ṫ ṫ ṡ ṡ ṡ Table XVIII: Semantic division of the doublets of / s in Arabic: R1 violence, aggressivity ṡ Alternation / s on the position R2 R3 Total 5 3 6 14 actions connected with movement 2 6 1 9 spiritual and corporal qualities 6 1 5 12 production of sounds 2 1 1 4 rest 15 10 8 33 30 21 21 72 ṡ Total 2.3 Analysis of the control set: Phonologically and phonetically non-related doublets: In this section, we are going to deal with the doublets of non-emphatic, phonologically and phonetically non-related consonants, which are included here in order to show the relevance of the method used and to produce comparable data which will enable us to judge the reliability of the data presented here. The doublets for these two sets have been chosen based on purely quantitative criteria - the first set represents the two most frequent consonants (b = 7,7%, r = 5,7%). Such a choice should show us average frequency of a random alternation of roots in Arabic. The existence of this type of doublets in Arabic can basically be explained in two ways: one of them is pure random similarity, the other way is based on the 42 Petr ZEMÁNEK assumption of the originally bi-radical character of the root in Arabic. The second explanation seems to us at present to be unjustifiable only based on the presence of this type of doublets, but would need a further examination based on additional data and knowledge of phonetic, phonological and semantic processes involved in this type of root development. On the other hand, solving the problem of the original character of the root in Arabic (and both Semitic and Hamito-Semitic) is of crucial importance for the whole discipline with serious consequences for many of its parts. However, the set of data that we have at our disposal here, does not allow us to enter into such speculations.55 2.3.1 Doublets with the alternation of b/r As has been said above, the inclusion of this set of doublets in our analysis is meant as an attempt to provide comparative data that could serve to evaluate the validity of the sets of doublets with the alternation of non-voiced emphatics with their voiced counterparts. The results of the examination of roots with the b/r alternation as reflected in KAZIMIRSKI’S dictionary, are summarized in the following table: Table XIX: Alternation of b/r in Arabic R1 Alternation b/r on the position Number of doublets total number of roots in the dictionary % 4 b r b R2 R3 Total 12 11 27 r b r b r 415 349 417 798 384 456 1216 1603 0,96 1,15 2,87 1,5 2,86 2,41 2,22 1,68 The table shows that the number of doublets is in this case much lower than in all the preceding cases, but still the percentage is quite high regarding the difference between both types of consonants. However, such a frequency can still be ascribed to a random similarity. The following table shows the phonetic environment at the contact positions of the alternation of b/r in Arabic. 55 For this hypothesis, cf. MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:72-73, for critique VOIGT 1988 and PETRÁ1987. The listing of this possibility does not necessarily mean that the data presented here can be interpreted this way. ČEK Pharyngealization and Glottalization 43 Table XX: Phonetic environment of the alternation b/r in Arabic: a) voiced consonants: Alternations of b/r on the position: consonants: b/r ğ d z R1 R2 (R3) 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 (∑) 2 4 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 Total (R2) 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 2 5 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 2 ġ n h w (R2) 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Total: 3 14 6 23 % 75 58,3 54,55 58,97 R3 Total (R2) 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 4 1 3 2 2 2 ḋ c (R1) 0 3 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 R3 b) non-voiced consonants: Alternation of b/r on the position: consonants: ’ R1 R2 q ṫ (R2) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Total 1 10 5 16 % 25 41,7 45,45 41,03 t̄ ḣ h s˘ (R1) (R3) 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 (∑) 1 0 2 0 3 2 1 1 ṡ 44 Petr ZEMÁNEK The analysis of the phonetic environment shows some interesting facts. The occurrence of individual consonants is widely distributed, most of them occurring only once (7 of 18) or twice (5 of 18). The highest frequencies have ğ (5x, 3x at the alternation at the position of R2) and (4x, equally at R2 and R3 alternations). This might point to the random character of the process, but the inequality here might be caused by the small number of doublets at the position of R1. The tentative analysis of the semantics of the doublets results in the following table: ḣ Table XXI: Semantic division of the doublets of b/r in Arabic. Alternation of b/r on the position: R1 R2 R3 Total violence, aggressivity 1 3 4 8 actions connected with movement 2 1 1 4 spiritual and corporal qualities 1 2 1 4 rest 0 6 5 11 4 12 11 27 Total Again, as was the case with all the preceding sets of doublets, the prevailing ones are the dynamic and emotional semantic charges, and the usual most frequent categories are present here, too. It is very probably the semantic notion that is common to the alternations of consonants in Arabic. 2.3.2 Doublets with the alternation of / ġ t̄ Similarly to the preceding set, i.e. the doublets with the alternation of b/r, this set should offer comparative data on the validity of the method used at the alternations with non-voiced emphatics. The two consonants ( and ġ) are, according to the figures given in HERDAN 1962:54, among to the least frequent at verbal roots, reaching the relative frequencies of 1,8% ( ) and 1,9% (ġ). The number of the doublets with the alternation of the two above mentioned consonants is summarized in the following table: t̄ t̄ Pharyngealization and Glottalization 45 Table XXII: Alternation of / ġ in Arabic t̄ Alternation / ġ on the position R1 R2 R3 Total Number of doublets 3 0 0 3 t̄ t̄ 144 222 175 1,08 1,35 0 ġ t̄ % ġ 169 156 0 0 ġ ġ t̄ t̄ total number of roots in the dictionary 112 475 503 0 0,63 0,59 The relative frequency of doublets at the position of R1 is very similar to the average percentage at the alternation of b/r, which might show the average percentage of random (or non-phonetically conditioned) similarity. The zero occurrence of doublets at positions of R2 and R3 decreases this similarity, but this is not very important for our aims. The situation seems to point to the fact that the random (or non-phonetically conditioned) similarity will probably not reach 3%. Analysis of the phonetic environment of doublets is this time very simple, with d featuring only once and m occuring twice. The small number of doublets does not represent sufficient data for drawing more general results. A very similar situation holds for the semantic analysis: Here, we can observe the notion of quantity expressed by all the three doublets, with a small quantity in one case and a big one in the remaining two. In two cases, the meaning is connected with water or liquid. In general it is clear that the occurrence of doublets of such phonetically nonrelated consonants that we have here in cases of the alternation of b/r and / ġ is relatively low and their frequency only slightly surpasses 2 per cent. t̄ 46 Petr ZEMÁNEK 3. Summary and conclusion 3.1 Evaluation of the sets of alternations In the preceding parts of the present study, we have examined a number of sets with doublets of emphatic and its voiced counterparts, namely / d, q/ğ and / z. The collecting of such types of doublets was based on an assumption that this type of alternation is phonologically conditioned, influenced by the shift of originally glottalized consonants to the pharyngealized ones. ṫ ṡ When collecting these types of sets based on phonetic and semantic similarity, Arabic (and other Semitic languages as well) can be deceitful since the semantic similarity of phonetically similar roots is very common there, and also the process of collecting the doublets is based mainly on subjective criteria since it is sometimes hard to establish hard criteria of what is semantically similar or not. In order to show comparative data resulting from the same way of data collecting we have included also two types of control sets. One of them is based on phonetically similar doublets with the emphatic consonants that we investigate here, i.e. / t, q/k and / s. The other type tries to show the percentage of random similarity of both phonetically and historically non-related consonants. For this, we have chosen two doublets, based on frequency criteria56 - i.e. two phonemes from the highest frequency rank and two from the lowest one, namely we were looking for alternation of b/r (highest frequency rank) and ġ/ (lowest frequency rank). ṡ ṫ t̄ It would seem that the method used when collecting the doublets, i.e. the use of control sets, offers a far more contoured image of the transition from glottalized to pharyngealized consonants. It also shows considerable differences between the three types of doublets, although in some cases the borderlines are not necessarily too sharp. For a better overview of the results we have set up the following table that shows the relative frequencies of doublets at the individual types of alternations: 56 The frequency data are taken from HERDAN 1962; they are based on dictionary entries, not on the frequency of graphemes in the text. Summary and Conclusions 47 Table XXIII: Overview of alternations R1 d 14,85 14,95 d 12,35 17,89 d 14,32 t 9,24 6,54 t 7,4 7,34 t 7,96 ğ q 14,00 8,43 ğ q 9,43 9,91 ğ q 11,18 10,54 ğ 12,22 t 6,62 11,00 ṫ ṫ ṫ 4,71 Total ṫ ṫ /t d 14,59 18,5 ṫ 18,86 R3 ṫ /d R2 ṫ Type of alternation ṫ ṫ q/ğ q 12,10 q/k q 4,6 k q 5,88 8,06 k q 9,47 3,03 k q 5,47 4,98 k 6,93 ṡ z 9,28 17,21 z 13,33 14,67 z 11,34 14,18 z 11,22 13,10 s 8,8 13,9 s 8,6 11,41 s 7,5 12,76 z 8,3 b 0,96 r b 1,15 2,87 r b 1,5 2,86 r b 2,41 2,22 r 1,68 ġ 1,35 0,00 ġ 0,00 0,00 ġ 0,00 0,63 ġ 0,59 t̄ t̄ ṡ t̄ ṡ t̄ 2,08 ṡ ġ/ ṡ ṡ ṡ b/r ṡ /s ṡ 11,35 ṡ /z t̄ When comparing the relative frequencies of the doublets we get clearly higher values at the alternation of / d than at the alternation of / t, and at the alternation of q/ğ in relation to the numbers at the alternation of q/k, although in the latter case we could expect a lower rate.57 The differences between the ṫ ṫ 57 According to our hypothesis, the counterpart of q should be voiced stop g, which has undergone a subsequent change to ğ in Arabic. Such a shift could, however, obscure the results at the alternation of q/ğ, since the palatalization of g could diminish the number of doublets at the alternation. This could result in smaller difference between the two types of doublets, i.e. between q/ğ and q/k. This is, however, not the case here since as our data show, the difference is relatively high, especially at the positions of R1 and R3, only at R2 the rate of both alternations is very similar. 48 Petr ZEMÁNEK alternations with voiced consonants and non-voiced consonants are relatively large, the frequencies of the doublets of non-voiced emphatics with the voiced counterpart are more than twice as high as the frequencies with the non-voiced sounds. We have observed considerably less difference in the occurrence of the doublets with emphatic , where the frequencies of alternation both of voiced z and non-voiced s are very similar to each other. The fact that the emphatic behaves so differently from a nd q indicates that its development from its protoSemitic correspondent has not been completely parallel to the development of the two other consonants. On the other hand, the number of alternations with sibilants might point to its sibilant (not affricate) character, at least in Arabic. It should be noted, however, that our data only indicate necessity to further investigate this issue. The frequency of the alternation of b/r is not comparable to the situation at other alternations, but still is relatively high bearing in mind that these two consonants are not related both phonetically and historically. This points to the delicate problem of drawing conclusions based on randomly collected data, without a systematic approach or at least a sufficiently closed corpus, and the problematic character of the root in Arabic. Alternation of ġ/ in the overall picture is not very frequent, but at the position of R1 the results are comparable to the frequencies of the alternation of b/r. No occurrence at the positions of R2 and R3 might be caused by the relatively low number of roots with these two consonants. / show that the percentage of random Both these sets of doublets (b/r and ġ) (or phonetically non-conditioned) alternation is not very high, only just surpassing 2 per cent. The considerable differencies between the three types of alternations (nonvoiced emphatic / voiced counterpart; non-voiced emphatic / non-voiced counterpart; alternation of phonetically non-related consonants) lead us to the conclusion that the data we present here can be used for further speculations on the character of emphatic consonants in Arabic. It is evident that it is the emphatic t hat has according to statistical data preserved most traces of the transition from the original glottalized t’ to pharyngealized . This is, however, a situation that could also be expected according to the data in FRE WOLDU (1984-86), where it is the emphatic t hat exhibits highest auditory similarity to the glottalized t’. According to the proportion of relative frequencies it could be also the ejective glottalized k’ that underwent a development that might be at the beginning similar to the transition of t’ to , but the loss ṡ ṡ ṫ ṫ t̄ t̄ ṫ ṫ ṫ Summary and Conclusions 49 of glottalization in this case has not been accompanied by the pharyngealized coarticulation, but by the shift of articulatory place to the back. The security of such speculations is nevertheless somewhat at doubt owing to the lower frequency of doublets with the alternation of q/ğ (10,44%) as against / d (17,89%). ṫ 3.2 Phonetic environment of alternations As far as the phonetic environment of the alternations is concerned, we can observe higher occurrence of voiced consonants at the alternation of emphatic with voiced occlusives. Table XXIV: Rate of voiced and non-voiced consonants at the alternations t/t q/k s/s b/r voiced 69,45 72,00 75,49 64,18 61,97 56,52 58,97 100 nonvoiced 30,55 28,00 24,51 35,82 38,03 43,48 41,03 0 ˙ s/z ˙ q/ğ t/ġ ¯ t/d ˙ ˙ Such a situation is probably to be expected, and it emphasizes the phonetic character of the transition from glottalized co-articulation to the pharyngealized one. For a comparison, we have counted the relation between voiced and nonvoiced consonants based on data from HERDAN 1962:54, and the resulting data at verbal roots in Arabic are 61,4% of voiced and 38,2% of non-voiced consonants.58 The table shows that while the alternations of emphatics with their nonvoiced counterparts are relatively close to figures from HERDAN,59 but at the alternations of emphatics with their voiced counterparts, which is the most important set for our analysis, the rate of voiced consonants is clearly higher than the average. 58 One has to keep in mind that the data from HERDAN are not directly comparable with our data, since the inclusion of the nominal roots in our data could alter the relations. The missing 0,4% in the sum of HERDAN’S data is probably caused by rounding off the results at individual consonants. 59 The situation at the alternation of t/ġ is not representative, having in mind the number of doublets found at this alternation. It should be, however, noted, that our data are not directly comparable to HERDAN’S, since the way of acquiring them was in both cases different. ¯ 50 Petr ZEMÁNEK 3.3 Semantic analysis of the alternations It is relatively difficult to summarize the semantics of the doublets, especially because of the tentative character of the analysis. There are also different semantic notions at some alternations, and the results at each set are not directly comparable. Nevertheless, the property that is common to all the groups of doublets,60 and also to the alternation b/r,61 is the prevalence of meanings connected with violence and aggressivity, notions connected with movement, and spiritual and corporal qualities. These semantic notions can be described as containing dynamics and emotionality, and those two clearly prevail in all the groups. It should be also noted that most of the lists of doublets in Arabic and Semitic62 do exhibit exactly this type of semantic charge. It seems highly probable that the dynamics and the emotional charge is the semantic environment accompanying most of the various types of root alternations in Arabic and Semitic. The dynamic nature is even strengthened by comparing the proportion of verbs and nouns occuring in the doublets. The fact that most of the doublets are verbs is a confirmation of the fact that dynamics is one of the features that are very frequent with alternations in Arabic. These facts confirm the phonetic character of this process, which means that the transition from glottalized co-articulation to the pharyngealized one in Arabic (Semitic) is best preserved thanks to the phonetic characteristics. The other features involved in this transition seem to be general features for most of the alternations in Arabic. 3.4 Conclusions As it has been said several times, there are considerable differencies between the three types of sets, which clearly divide them into 3 categories. The relative frequencies of the first set, i.e. emphatics alternating with their voiced counterparts, are the highest of the three, and especially the frequency of the set of doublets with the alternation of / d clearly overpass the other types. The second set, i.e. doublets with the alternation of emphatics and their non-voiced counterṫ 60 In our sets, only t/ġ set is excluded from this type of speculation due to the limited number of doublets and the consequent difficulties with the evaluation of this set from this point of view. ¯ 61 We do not gather here the data from the set of t/ġ alternation because the set is so limited that it is difficult to draw conclusions from it. ¯ 62 Cf., e.g., STEINER 1977, EHRET 1989, the PR3 series mentioned in MOSCATI ET AL. 1964:72-3, or examples in VOIGT 1988: passim. Summary and Conclusions 51 parts, occupies the middle position, and the lowest frequency can be found at the alternations of phonetically non-related consonants. This leads us to the assertion that the first set does reflect the transition of glottalized consonants to the pharyngealized ones. Such an assertion naturally means that the glottalized articulation of emphatics preceded the pharyngealized one. This sequence seems to us confirmed also by other arguments, the principal being the development of emphasis (pharyngealization) in the dialects of Arabic and in Modern Aramaic (Neo-Assyrian), where pharyngealization exhibits a clear tendency to expansion in such an extent that it lead several authors to single out the feature of emphasis (pharyngealization) as a suprasegmental feature (e.g., HARRIS 1942, ZAVADOVSKY 1981, etc. for Arabic, TSERETELI 1982, HOBERMAN 1988, 1989, etc. for Neo-Assyrian). The current level of our knowledge of the problem does not allow us to offer more exact conclusions about the chronological dating of the transition, but we can speculate at least about some basic points. Based on the fact that the pharyngealized consonants in Arabic are also voiced, we can judge that pharyngealization is fully set only in Arabic. In other Semitic languages, we can probably come up with some points that could be used for further discussion. It seems that Akkadian did not posses pharyngealized co-articulation. This is based on two facts, that emphatics in Akkadian did not influence the neighbouring vowels, which is a property characteristic for glottalization,63 and that emphatic sounds in Akkadian could not co-occur in one word, as shown by GEERS (1945).64 The latter fact by itself cannot be used for the exclusion of pharyngealization in Akkadian, although we might think so from the fact that the cooccurrence of emphasis in Semitic changed later on and that the GEERS’ law is no longer valid in younger Semitic languages. In these, e.g. in Hebrew, we can observe co-occurrence of q together with and (cf. AEŠCOLY 1939), and the same holds for Arabic. Even a passing glance through Arabic dictionary shows the co-occurrence of q and the ṫ ṡ 63 Cf. KNUDSEN 1961; pharyngealized consonants do influence both vowels and consonants in their neighbourhood, as has been many times shown in acoustic analyses of emphasis in Arabic. 64 Beside Akkadian it seems that Eblaic conforms to this rule - cf. CONTI 1990:39-41 and CONTI 1993. It should be noted, however, that, according to WEDEKIND (1990:132) Amharic allows combinations of two glottalized consonants in one root - e.g. s’itt’ita = silence, etc. It is difficult to decide whether this is an inherent feature of Semitic languages, or a result of areal contact with the neighbouring Cushitic languages. Despite this difficulty, it has to be said that the argument using incompatibility data for emphasis remains for the time being at a level of mere speculations. 52 Petr ZEMÁNEK other emphatic consonants, with the exception of 65 . This means that we witness a change in the incompatibility rules, which can be the result of the change of the articulatory characteristics of the coarticulation in Semitic, i.e. from the glottalized coarticulation to the pharyngealized one. That would also mean that pharyngealization in Semitic can be constituted as the main type of coarticulation probably later than in Akkadian. In Ethio-Semitic, the glottalization is preserved due to the areal influence of the Cushitic languages. The picture that we have here is one of a relatively complicated model of development. At the beginning of this process there existed glottalized (ejective) consonants (t’, k’, s’, etc.) that gradually start to change from one type of secondary articulation (glottalization) to another one (pharyngealization). At a certain stage of this transitory process, after the release of the glottal closure, this release is in certain circumstances (voiced neighbourhood, dynamic or emotional meaning) substituted not only by pharyngealization, but also by voicedness. In this stage, the doublets with the alternation of emphatic (originally glottalized) and non-emphatic voiced consonants appear. The new type of coarticulation starts to change the characteristics of ejective k’ from a consonant with coarticulatory characteristics to a consonant without coarticulation, and the main articulatory position is drawn to the back.66 The emphatic stands a little aside from these speculations, due to the fact that its position in the protosystem seems to be slightly different from that of the above two consonants.67 Data that we collected also show a behaviour that is different from the other two non-voiced emphatic consonants in Arabic. After the constitution of pharyngealization as the coarticulatory realization of the emphatic consonants, the behaviour of the emphatics changes. This is caused mainly by the fact that pharyngealization, unlike glottalization, has a strong tendency to spread, both progressively and regressively, as has been shown in many studies on their phonetic characteristics in Arabic. This results in the establishment of pharyngealization as the main type of coarticulation and it covers also other types of coarticulation that existed in proto-Semitic, e.g. lateralization at . Uniform series of coarticulated consonants is thereby established in the Classical Arabic series of , , and . The tendency to spread can be observed ż ṡ ḋ ż ṡ ḋ ṫ 65 E.g., cf. in WEHR’S dictionary verbal roots like sqb, sqc, sql; tqq, tqs, tqm, and a number of roots of the type of qs3 (10 roots), qd3 (5 roots) and qt3 (9 roots). ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ 67 ˙ 66 For the impossibility of backing coarticulation of back consonants, cf. DELATTRE 1971. The possible affricate realization of this consonant in proto-Semitic would mean that the counterparts of this consonant are not directly s and z, but other consonants. Summary and Conclusions 53 even in Classical Arabic itself, where Arabic grammarians68 admit the possibility of emphatisation (’i b āq) of r and l. The spread of this type of coarticulation is especially evident in Modern Semitic languages - i.e. modern Arabic dialects and Neoassyrian.69 It should be noted, however, that coarticulation in all the cases does not have to be pharyngealization.70 The case is rather different with Modern Hebrew due to the Western style of pronunciation of emphatics. It is exactly this type of development that shows that pharyngealization is secondary. The development in modern Semitic languages, where emphasis is preserved, shows that the other direction of development, i.e. from pharyngealization to glottalization, is not very probable, since in all of them the development of pharyngealized coarticulation goes in a different direction. ṫ 68 According to SCHAADE 1911:14-16. 69 In this language, the spread seems to be very strong. According to TSERETELI 1982 and HOBERMAN 1988, it covers most of the phonological system, and that is why they understand it to be a suprasegmental phoneme. 70 As has been pointed out, in case of Arabic one meets coarticulation types like labialization (emphatic m, b), "strong nasalization" (emphatic n - cf. MALAIKA 1959), etc. For modern Aramaic, HOBERMAN 1988 and 1989 comes with the feature "constricted pharynx", which would mean pharyngealization or a coarticulation type close to pharyngealization. This should be, however, in order to arrive at a definite solution, confirmed by acoustic analysis of emphatics in modern Aramaic. 54 Petr ZEMÁNEK 3.5 Model of the development of pharyngealization in Arabic/Semitic Supplement: List of Doublets 4. Supplement: List of doublets with the alternation of voiceless emphatic and its counterpart (voiced, non-voiced) 55 56 Petr ZEMÁNEK 4.1 Doublets with the alternation of / d: (T = / d) 4.1.1 Alternation of / d on the position of R1: T’T’ : pencher, baisser; / d: pencher, aller de côté Tbs : noir; / d: tout ce qui est noir ou se présente comme une masse noire : glu pour prendre les oiseaux; / d: glu. Tbq Tbl : battre le tambour; / d: frapper quelqu’un à coups redoublés, une fois après l’autre, avec une bâton. : étendre à plat, comme un tapis; / d: s’étendre, se détendre, T s’élargir, se dilater. T r : pousser en avant, donner la chase; / d: éloigner, écarter, chasser. : violent, qui pousse avec violence; / d: pousser violemment T m en frappant par derrière. : petit, courtaud, de petite taille; / d: petit de taille et ventre. T n T w /y : étendre à plat comme un tapis par terre; / d: étendre comme un tapis ou une natte (se dit de Dieu, qui a étendu la terre et en fait une surface plane). Thr : homme maigre, chétif et sans vigeur; / d: être petit, chétif et ˘ méprisé comme tel. Thm (dhms) : tirant sur le noir; / d: épais et noir. ˘ ˘ Trb 1. : faire de la musique ou chanter pour emouvrir quelqu’un; / d: habile, qui joue avec art et habileté d’un instrument de musique. Trs : effacer en frottant; / d: être effacé, s’effacer. Tss : s’enforcer dans intérieur du terres, du pays; / d: cacher un objet sous un autre ou sous terre. Tsc : parcourir, traverser un pays, s’enforcer dans l’intérieur des terres; / d: s’enforcer, être enfoncé. : être effacé; / d: s’effacer, disparaître. Tsm Tcs : cohabiter avec une femme; / d: cohabiter avec une femme. Tcz : cohabiter avec une femme; / d: cohabiter avec une femme. Tġr : voy dġr; / d: pousser en donant un coup par derrière. Tġy : orgueilleuse, injuste, méchante, rebelle (femme); / d: méchanceté, mauvaise nature. : s’éteindre (se dit de la flamme, du feu); / d: être chaud, conTf’ tenir la chaleur. ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ḣ ḣ 21. ḣ 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. ṫ 15. ḣ 13. 14. ṫ 11. 12. ḣ ḣ 10. ṫ 8. 9. ṫ 7. ṫ 6. ṫ 5. ṫ 3. 4. ṫ 1. 2. Supplement: List of Doublets 23. Tll 24. Tlq 25. 26. 27. Tmm Tmh Tms˘ 28. Tnn 29. 30. Tn’ TnTn 31. 32. Tnfs Thš 33. Thq 34. 35. Thl Thm 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. Thw/y Twr Tws Tw/yh Twl ˘ : bruit produit par le choc d’un corps dur contre une pierre; / d: casser, concasser, battre, frapper à la porte. : grace, beauté, élégance; / d: bonnes manières, manières aissées (qui n’excluent pas ni la gravité ni la décence). : être renvoyé, laché, mis en liberté (se dit d’une chamelle qu’on laisse paitre librement en lui otant les entraves); / d: envoyer, lancer, lacher. : malheur, calamité; d: se conduire mal, agir mal. : être fier; / d: être vil, bas, ignoble. : ( m sl) être impuissant à la cohabitation; / d: cohabiter avec une femme. : bourdonner (se dit des insectes); / d: bourdonner (se dit de certains insectes, etc.). : rougir, avoir honte; / d: être vil, bas, ignoble. : bourdonner (se dit des insectes); / d: bourdonner (se dit des certains insectes). : devenir mauvais, méchant; / d: méchant. : être derangé, troublé dans son travail au point de gâter l’ouvrage que l’on fait; / d être jeté dans la stupefaction, dans le trouble, perdre la présence d’esprit. : marcher avec rapidité; / d: presser, faire marcher plus vite, pousser. : petite quantité de fourrage; / d: peu, petite quantité. : s’épouvanter, et se presser en foule les uns sur les autres sous l’impression de la peur; / d: foule, multitude, nuée. : être habile (dans un art ou un métier); / d: être habile, adroit. : disque, rond; / d: rond, disque. : fouler avec les pieds; / d: fouler le sol avec les pieds. : anéantir quelqu’un; / d: soumettre, assujetir, conquérir. : richesse, grande fortune, abondance des biens; / d: richesse, opulence. ṫ Tqq ṫ 22. 57 ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ 4.1.2 Alternation of / d on the position of R2: ṫ bT 3. bTğ ṫ 2. : faire le commerce de canards; / d: faire un commerce d’échange. : s’étendre, être vaste; / d: vaste, spacieux, ouvert de tous cotés. : même signif. que bdğ; / d: être sali d’excréments humains. ṫ bTT ṫ 1. ḣ 58 ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ qTw/y ṫ 27. ṫ qTc ṫ 26. ṫ qTT ṫ 25. ṫ ğTl fTr ṫ ḣ 23. 24. ṫ Tm Tn ṫ ḣ c c ḣ ḣ 21. 22. ṫ štw/y ṫ 20. ṫ šTT ṫ 19. ṫ 16. 17. 18. rTw/y sT / h ˘ sTc sTm sTw/y ṫ 14. 15. ṫ rTc rTm ṫ 12. 13. : même signif. que bdġ; / d: être sali d’excréments humains. : qui a un gros ventre; / d: obésité, corpulence. : être jeté par terre; / d: jeter, lancer quelque chose. : brûler; / d: être brûlant, brûler. : chemin; / d: chemin. : marcher d’un pas rapide; / d: marcher à pas menus et rapides. : faire un pas, posant le pied sur le sol, marcher; / d: aller d’un pas rapide. : tendre, délicat; / d: traiter quelqu’un avec doucer, avec bienviellance. : cohabiter avec une femme; / d: cohabiter avec une femme. : embarasser, embrouiller quelqu’un de manière qui il lui soit difficile de se dégager; / d: obstruer, embarasser. : sottise, stupidité; / d: ignorance, bêtise. : ( ) étendre à plat, faire une surface plane de q.c.; / d: (h) être ˘ étendu, s’étendre. : frapper, battre des mains; / d: être frappé. : fermer (la porte); / d: fermer, barricader (la porte). : qui marche d’un pas large (cheval); / d: qui marche à larges enjambées (chameau). : être injuste et oppresseur envers quelqu’un; / d: traiter quelqu’un avec dureté, avec sévérité, maltraiter, persécuter ... : diminuer, amoindrir, réduire; / d: un peu, petite quantité qui reste d’un grand nombre. : périr; / d: ne pas exister. : endroit autour d’un abreuvoir où les troupeaux (chameaux ou moutons) réponsent après avoir bu et avant de revenir au pâturage; / d: être à demeure fixe dans un lieu; continuer de paitre ses troupeaux dans les mêmes pâturages. : vie aisée, exempte de soucis; / d: aisance, bienêtre. : fendre, pourfendre, couper en deux; / d: se briser, être brisé, cassé en morceaux grandes et petites. : couper, sourtout dans le sens de la largeur; / d: couper ou déchirer en lanières, en lambeaux, dans le sens de la longuer. : être arreté et empeché de continuer son chemin; / d: arreter (son cheval) en tirant la bride à soi. : marcher d’un pas menu (soit lent soit rapide); / d: marcher rapidement. ṫ 11. bTġ bTn rT T m hTT ˘hTf ˘hTw/y ˘ rTb ṫ 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Petr ZEMÁNEK Supplement: List of Doublets lTT 29. lTs 30. lTm 31. mTT 32. 33. 34. mTh ˘ mTw/y nTb 35. 36. 37. hTT hThT wT’ ṫ 28. 59 : exciter quelqu’un ou l’aider à refuser à un autre ce qui lui revient de droit; / d: se querreller avec quelqu’un, avoir une rixe. : frapper un corps large et plat avec un autre corps large et plat; / d: frapper, tapper quelqu’un avec la main. : donner à quelqu’un (sur la joue ou sur le corps) un coup du plat de la main; / d: se frapper le visage. : tendre et allonger une chose en la tirant avec force; / d: allonger en tirant, tirer pour allonger. : salie le nom, la réputation de quelqu’un, médire de lui; / d: être injuste. : tirer, trainer; / d: tirer, extraire. : irriter, exciter l’un contre l’autre, mettre aux prises l’un avec l’autre; / d: exciter, pousser quelqu’un à faire quelque chose. : hommes qui périsent; / d: (hd’) mourir, être mort. : hennir (se dit d’un cheval); / d: mugir (se dit d’un chameau). : cohabiter avec une femme; / d: dresser son pénis (se dit d’un cheval). ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ 4.1.3 Alternation of / d on the position of R3: : éloigner; / d: être éloigné. : se coller à la terre, au sol; / d: être à terre, coucher et se coller fortemment à la terre. : rendre des excréments liquides; / d: rendre des excréments liquides. : se remplir d’eau, en avoir bu beacoup; / d: boire d’un seul trait, à pleine gorge et sans humer. : tirer le sabre du fourreau; / d: se battre au sabre l’un avec l’autre. : garder quelque chose, veiller sur quelque chose; / d: (var. ) garder quelque chose, veiller sur quelque chose. : lier, serrer des liens; / d: lier, attacher avec des liens. : se tenir à la même place sans bouger; / d: faire halte. : s’écarter de la ligne droite, en allant à gauche ou à droite; / d: aller cà et là,tantôt s’avancer, tantôt revenir sur ses pas. : avaler (une bouchée); / d: avaler (une bouchée). : bouchée qui tombe pendant qu’on la porte à la bouche; / d: avaler une bouchée. : aigu, tranchant (sabre); / d: percer, trouer. ṫ 3. lT ṫ srT ṫ 12. ṫ zrT zlT ṫ 10. 11. ṫ rbT r T rwT ṫ ḣ 7. 8. 9. ṫ w T ṫ ğlT d̄ 5. ṫ ğ’T ṫ t̄ 4. 6. ṫ bT blT ṫ 1. 2. c t̄ 60 Petr ZEMÁNEK 15. 16. 17. šnT šyT n /mT ṫ ṫ ṫ ḋ ḣ ḋ w /yT zT c lT ġmT frT 30. nhT 31. hrT 32. 33. hyT whT ˘ ṫ mġT n T ṫ 28. 29. ṫ mcT ṫ 27. ṫ l T lhT ṫ ṫ 25. 26. ṫ kšT lbT ṫ c 23. 24. ḣ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ t̄ ṫ ṫ ṫ Q’b Qbb ṫ 1. 2. ṫ 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. T ḋ š ṫ 14. : languir, faiblir (dans la course - se dit d’un cheval); / d: amaigrir, rendre maigre (un cheval). : être absent et très éloigné, emmener par force; / d: (var. ) chasser, éloigner quelqu’un. : rôtir; / d: préparer le repas. : perdre, faire périr, anéantir; / d: périr. : ( n ) avoir deux amants à la fois (se dit d’une femme); / d: ( m d) avoir deux amants à la fois (se dit d’une femme). : grand, long, haute; / d: grand, énorme. : voy czd; / d: cohabiter avec une femme. : petits, courts (en parlant des ânes); / d: grand. : humer et boire avec avidité; / d: avoir beacoup d’eau. : être premier, être supérieur à tous; / d: être seul, unique et isolé. : oter l’écume du pot; / d: écumer. : se coucher, être couché par terre; / d: être par terre et presque collé au sol. : pousser, ou repousser avec violence; / d: injuste, méchant. : frapper quelqu’un du plat de la main; / d: repousser quelqu’un en lui portant un coup de poing sous les mamelles. : étendre, allonger; / d: tirer avec force, comme quand on veut arracher ou enlever promptement quelque chose. : long, très grand de taille; / d: gros, long et charnu. : pousser, sortir de dessous terre (se dit d’une truffe, etc.); / d: pousser, sortir de dessous terre (se dit d’une truffe, etc.). : percer quelqu’un avec une lance; / d: pénétrer, traverser de part en part. : déchirer quelqu’un en son absence, attaquer à son réputation; / d: déchirer quelqu’un en son absence. : s’éloigner; / d: éloigner, écarter quelqu’un. : marcher d’un pas accéléré; / d: marcher vite ou à larges enjambées et d’un pas semble à celui de l’autruche. d̄ sqT ṫ 13. 4.2 Doublets with the alternation of q/ğ: (Q = q/ğ) 4.2.1 Alternation of q/ğ on the position of R1: q: grand, d’un grand capacité; / ğ: gros, épais. q: couper, abattre; / ğ: couper, retrancher en coupant. Supplement: List of Doublets 4. Q 5. 6. 7. Q w Q f Qdd 8. Qds 9. Qdc 10. 11. Qd/ f Q 12. 13. Q Q 14. 15. Qr Qrd 16. Qrz 17. Qrs 18. Qršb 19. Qrf 20. Qrm 21. Qrn 22. 23. Qrw/y Qss 24. 25. Qsm Qsn t̄ t̄ t̄ ḣ d̄ d̄ d̄ c d̄ m q: enlever, cueillir quelque chose avec les doigts; / ğ: lever, percevoir l’impôt, le tribut... q: attirer à soi en traînant quelque chose; / ğ: arracher, deraciner; arracher (un arbre) du sol. q: amasser (des richesses); / ğ: ramasser, réunir. q: enlever, emporter tout; / ğ: enlever en balayant. q: couper ou déchirer...; / ğ: couper, séparer, retrancher en coupant. q: être pur, sans tache; être saint; / ğ: terrain inculte, qui n’a jamais été labouré. q: frapper sur le nez avec mépris; / ğ: mutiler quelqu’un en lui coupant soit le nez, soit les lèvres, soit les oreilles. q:( ) jeter (l’eau du vase); / ğ: (d) jeter, lancer quelque chose. q: couper également les extrèmités; / ğ: être coupé, enlevé, arraché. q: saletés, ordures; / ğ: homme bas et sans caractère. q: se dépêcher, aller vit; / ğ: rapide dans sa course, dans sa marche. q: blesser quelqu’un (voy ğr ) ; / ğ: blesser quelqu’un. q: branche de palmier dépouillée de ses feuilles (comp. ğarı̄d); / ğ: branche de palmier dépouillée de feuilles. q: sol dur, raboteux et inégal; / ğ: sol qui souffre de la sécheresse. q: petits cousins (insectes); / ğ: insecte qui se dévore, qui se nourrit de quelque plante. q: agé, très-vieux; / ğ: arriver à l’âge critique, à l’âge de cinquante ans, et cesser d’avoir ses règles (se dit de la femme). q: enlever l’écaille, la croûte; / ğ: enlever, emporter tout en balayant. q: retenir, emprisonner; / ğ: charger quelqu’un d’un crime, le lui imputer à faux. q: manger à la fois des dattes fraîches et des dattes séches; / ğ: mettre les dattes en tas sur l’aire. q: percer quelqu’un avec la lance; / ğ: pénétrer quelque part. q: chercher, rechercher, poursuivre quelque chose avec persistance; / ğ: fouiller quelqu’un, chercher dans sa poche. q: beauté, élégance des formes; / ğ: beau. q: avoir les mains duurcies, calleuses à force de travailler; / ğ: être dur et fort. ḣ Qbw d̄ 3. 61 d̄ ḣ 62 Petr ZEMÁNEK 26. Qsw 27. 28. 29. 30. Qšš Qc Qcf Qff 31. Qfš 32. QfQf 33. Qfn 34. Qfw 35. 36. Qll Qlc 37. Qlf 38. QlQl 39. 40. 41. Qlm Qmm Qm 42. 43. Qmh ˘ Qml 44. 45. Qn Qns 46. 47. Qny Qhr q: être sec et durci; / ğ: être dur au toucher (se dit de la main, ou de quelque outre membre). q: broyer, écraser en frottant dans le main; / ğ: brisser, casser. q: chasser, éloigner; / ğ: éloigner, chasser. q: arracher (un arbre) avec la racine; / ğ: arracher. q: sécher, se dessécher et devenir aride (se dit d’une plante); / ğ: sécher, être sec (se dit des vêtements, ...). q: traire (une femelle) avec rapidité; / ğ: exprimer en serrant légèrement avec le bout des doigts (p.ex. traire une femelle en serrant légèrement le pis). q: se dessécher (se dit des végétaux); / ğ: sécher à peu près entièrement (se dit du linge etc.). q: égorger (une brebis) en portant le couteau sur la nuque; / ğ: égorger un chameau et en servir les morceaux dans des écuelles... q: frapper quelqu’un à la nuque; / ğ: traiter avec dureté et injustice, opprimer, tyranniser. q: grandir (se dit des plantes); / ğ: être grand, haut, imposant. q: arracher; oter quelque chose de sa place; / ğ: oter (l’habit, le vêtement). q: dépouiller d’écorce (un arbre); / ğ: enlever, oter (p.ex. la peau ou la bone qui s’atrtache à quelque chose). q: remuer, agiter, secouer; / ğ: agiter avec les doigts (une crecelle, un grelot etc.). q: couper, rogner; / ğ: couper, retrancher une partie en coupant. q: troupe des hommes; / ğ: troupe des hommes. q: éloigner, chasser quelqu’un...; / ğ: partir de toute sa vitesse, s’éloigner avec rapidité. q: être fier et 1être assis avec aire de suffisance et d’orgueil; / ğ: être fier, orgueilleux. q: être très-nombreux, pulluler (se dit d’une population nombreuse); / ğ: grande quantité, grande somme. q: plier, courber, cambrer; / ğ: se pencher, s’incliner. q: racine, origine; / ğ: origine commune, ou même origine, même genre. q: grappes des dattes; / ğ: dattes fraîches, récemment cueillies. q: vainquer, victorieux; / ğ: vaincre, avoir le dessus. ṫ ḣ ḣ Supplement: List of Doublets 48. Qhm 49. 50. Qwb Qwh 63 q: avoir de l’aversion pour quelque chose; / ğ: regarder quelqu’un de travers, la recevoir mal, lui faire une mauvaise mine, une grimace... q: creuser (la terre); / ğ: creuser. q: puissance, pouvoir, rang élevé et influence (voy ğāh); / ğ: rang, dignité, honneurs. 4.2.2 Alternation of q/ğ on the position of R2: 1. 2. 3. 4. Q l Q Q Q n dQl 5. 6. rQf šQQ 7. šQ 8. šQc d̄ ḣ ḣ t̄ 9. Q Q ṡ 10. c 11. fQs 12. fQc 13. mQc 14. 15. 16. 17. nQf hQr hQf hQm Qr q: être grosse (se dit d’une femme); / ğ: femme de grande taille. q: venir chez quelqu’un; / ğ: aller et venir; marcher. q: retenir; / ğ: attirer quelque chose à soi avec un baton crochu. q: cohabiter avec une femme; / ğ: cohabiter, être en coït, copulation. q: trembler, frissonner (du froid); / ğ: trembler; qui tremble. q: fendre, pourfendre (le bois), casser le bâton; / ğ: sillonner, fendre. q: nuire ou porter malheur par son mauvais oeil; / ğ: faire de mal, se faire sentir, causer de la peine à quelqu’un (se dit d’une chose). q: nuire à quelqu’un par son mauvais oeil; / ğ: rendre hostile, malveillant. q: produire un bruit (se dit du bruit que produit de caméléon); / ğ: sonner, produire un cliquetis (se dit du fer qui heurte contre le fer). q: blesser, faire une plaie; / ğ: fondre sur quelqu’un le sabre, etc., à la main. q: saisir quelqu’un par les cheveux de derrière et le traîner avec violence; / ğ: traiter quelqu’un avec dureté et violence. q: accabler ou briser quelqu’un (se dit des malheurs); / ğ: frapper, affecter, accabler quelqu’un (se dit d’un malheur qui fait perdre à quelqu’un, quelque chose qui lui est cher). q: avaler avec avidité (un liquide); / ğ: manger des dattes et boire en même temps, ou ausitôt après, du lait doux ou caillé. q: tirer, extraire une chose d’une autre; / ğ: tirer, extraire. q: grand, long et stupide; / ğ: plus long et plus gros. q: manger d’appétit; / ğ: avoir faim. q: dompter, soumettre, assujétir; / ğ: fondre avec impétuosité sur quelqu’un, aborder quelqu’un à l’improviste. 64 Petr ZEMÁNEK 18. hQhQ 19. 20. wQb wQm 21. wQy q: marcher d’un pas accéléré et violent; / ğ: stimuler un chameau à la marche en criant. q: se coucher (se dit du soleil); / ğ: se coucher (se dit du soleil). q: traiter quelqu’un avec violence et dureté; / ğ: frapper quelqu’un d’un coup de poing. q: qui craint de marcher sur un sol dur, n’ayant pas le sabot muni d’une semelle (cheval); / ğ: avoir le sabot usé par de longues marches. 4.2.3 Alternation of q/ğ on the position of R3: ’wQ 2. 3. bcQ blQ 4. bwQ 5. 6. 7. ğlQ b Q d Q 8. 9. hbQ ˘d Q 10. 11. drQ dmQ 12. 13. rdQ rhQ 14. zcQ 15. zlQ 16. 17. 18. s Q sfQ snQ q: se trouver sur une hauter et dominer ce qui est en bas; / ğ: le plus haut point du ciel. q: égorger (un chameau); /ğ: fendre le ventre avec le couteau. q: ouvrir brusquement la port, ou l’ouvrir tout entière; / ğ: ouvrir. q: entourer, ceindre, clore d’une cloison; / ğ: envelopper, accabler, opprimer. q: raser la tête; / ğ: tête. q: péter; / ğ: péter. q: blesser quelqu’un, causer une lésion à la prunelle; / ğ: frapper. q: péter; / ğ: lâcher un pet. q: ne pas retenir, rejeter le sperme; / ğ: forcer une fille et cohabiter avec elle. q: aller vite, se hâter; / ğ: aller, marcher, s’avancer. q: entrer brusquement et sans permission chez quelqu’un; / ğ: entrer, s’engrener et y tenir. q: voy rdğ; / ğ: s’avancer, marcher pas à pas. q: exciter quelqu’un au mal, à la rebellion; / ğ: soulever, exciter la poussière. q: crier à quelqu’un, pousser un cri contre quelqu’un; / ğ: crier, pousse un cri. q: glisser sur un terrain glissant; / ğ: courir légérement et glisser à la surface du sol. q: courir doucement (comp. s ğ); / ğ: courir, aller vite. q: souffleter (les joues); / ğ: violent souffle du vent. q: étoile qui brille d’un vif éclat; / ğ: lampe. ḣ 1. ḣ ḣ ḣ ḣ Supplement: List of Doublets 21. 22. ṡ 20. lQ c bQ c blQ fQ c 23. c 24. c 25. ġbQ 26. ġ l Q 27. ġmQ 28. frQ 29. flQ 30. lzQ 31. mlQ 32. nbQ 33. 34. 35. 36. hmlQ hw/yQ wšQ whQ whQ wQ q: frapper quelqu’un avec un bâton, fustiger; / ğ: frapper avec un bâton, donner à quelqu’un une rincée. q: homme d’un mauvais caractère; / ğ: homme qui n’a rien de bon en lui. q: fort, robuste, grand; / ğ: gros, épais. q: fouetter et disperser (en parlant du vent qui fouette le sol et disperse ce qui se trouve à sa surface; / ğ: frapper, battre. q: 1. long 2. Awhak, nom d’un chameau dont provient une belle race du chameaux; / ğ: 1. qui a un long cou, épithète de l’autruche, de la gazelle, du chameau; 2. Jeune chamelle. q: arrêter quelqu’un; retenir quelqu’un ou le détourner de quelque chose; / ğ: faire faire halte à quelqu’un, le faire rester dans un lieu. q: donner à boire à quelqu’un, lui faire boire un coup du soir; / ğ: humer, boire d’un trait, en humant. q: ne pas bien cuire les viandes et ne pas y mettre le sel; / ğ: ne pas bien cuire les viandes et ne pas y mettre le sel. q: être humide (se dit de la terre ou des herbes; / ğ: humer et boire avec avidité. q: fendre, pourfendre et séparer en deux; / ğ: fendre, pourfendre. q: fendre, couper en deux; / ğ: fendre en deux, pourfendre; partager en deux, rompre. q: s’attacher, se coller à quelque chose; / ğ: se coller, s’attacher. q: teter sa mère (se dit d’un petit); / ğ: saisir avec le bout des lèvres le sein de sa mère (se dit d’un enfant qui se met à teter); teter (sa mère). q: lâcher un pet léger; / ğ: cul, derrière (ka i bat nibāğatuhu - il a lâché un pet). q: fort, robuste, grand; / ğ: fort, robuste, grand. q: long et mince, grand et mince; / ğ: long, qui a le corps long. q: percer quelqu’un avec une lance; / ğ: lance. q: être brûlant, renvoyer une chaleur brûlante (se dit des cailloux embrasés par l’ardeur du soleil; / ğ: brûler. d̄ 19. 65 ṡ 66 Petr ZEMÁNEK 4.3 Doublets with the alternation of / z: (S = / z) 4.3.1 Alternation of / z on the position of R1: : être rempli de boisson, en avoir bu jusqu’à satiété, être gorgé de ...; / z: boire à grands traits en se hâtant. : se gorger d’eau; / z: dévorer, avaler avec rapidité. : éclat, morceau de rocher ou de fer; / z: morceau de fer. : montrer quelqu’un au doigt avec mépris ou en faisant des reproches; / z: se mettre dans une colére violente contre quelqu’un, tempêter. : éloigner, détourner de sa destination; / z: qui repousse en donnant un coup violent; situé loin et à l’écart des autres (maison, etc.). : ramener quelqu’un, faire revenir d’un lieu; / z: voy d r. : coussin, oreiler; / z: voy d ġ. : tomber sur quelqu’un, atteindre, frapper quelqu’un; / z: attaquer, assaillir quelqu’un (se dit des brigands). : serrer et nouer une bourse; / z: fermer, serrer. : crier (se dit de la voix du pivert); / z: chanter (se dit de l’étourneau). : jeter avec force, violemment par terre; / z: ensemencer un champ de quelque graine. : couper, retrancher en coupant; / z: interrompre, arrêter tout court, faire cesser, couper court à quelque chose. : espèce d’origan ou de thym (voy zctr); / z: marjolaine. : homme vil, méprisable; / z: homme méchant. : cri, vocifération; / z: crier à quelqu’un, pousser un cri contre quelqu’un. : faucon; / z: voy sqr et q r. : lâcher un pet; / z: lâcher un gros pet (se dit de l’âne). : couper et arracher avec la racine (le nez, une oreille); / z: couper, mutiler (p.ex. le nez). : être en colére; / z: irriter, mettre quelqu’un dans une colére violente contre un autre. : être riche, posséder beacoup de troupeaux, de biens; / z: prospérer, être dans un état florissant ou riche de verdure. : verser, répandre quelque chose; / z: couler (se dit de l’eau). : fendre; / z: disperser (ce qui était réuni). ṡ ṡ ṡ 1. S’b 2. 3. 4. S’m Sbr Sbc 5. Sbn 6. 7. 8. Sdr Sdġ Sdm 9. 10. Srr SrSr 11. Src 12. Srm 13. 14. 15. Sctr Scfq Scq 16. 17. 18. Sqr Sqc Slm 19. Smk 20. Shw 21. 22. Swb Sw ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ḣ Supplement: List of Doublets Swc 25. Swġ 26. Sy ṡ 24. : faire incliner, faire pencher, ou faire pendre; / z: être penché, incliné, aller en biais, aller obliquement. : séparer deux choses en les écartant; / z: couper pour quelqu’un une tranche de melon ou de viande. : mentir, dire une mensonge, faire des mensonges, inventer; / z: être injuste et s’écarter de la vérité dans ce qu’on dit. : vacarme, tintamarre, bruit, cris confus; / z: crier, pousser des cris, des vociférations. ṡ Swr ṡ 23. 67 ṡ ṫ 4.3.2 Alternation of / z on the position of R2: ṡ 11. šSw 12. 13. 14. c SS Sd c Sf c ṡ šSr ṡ 10. ṡ šSb ṡ 9. ṡ 7. 8. hSl ˘ rSS rSf ṡ ḣ 6. ṡ S S ṡ 5. ṡ bSq bSl ṡ 3. 4. ṡ bSbS ṡ 2. : cordes avec lesquelles on attache aux pieux fichés en terre les pans de la tente; / z: s’attacher à quelqu’un et en être inséparable. : rapide, fait accompli rapidement (se dit du voyage que font les chameaux dans la nuit); / z: vitesse et impétuosité de la course, du mouvement. : Même signif. que bzq; cracher; / z: cracher, jeter la salive. : peler, mettre à nu en ôtant l’envelope extérieure ou l’écorce; / z: oter, enlever. : se partager, se distribuer des portions, aller au partage; / z: tailler, faire une entaille, des entailles, des coches, à quelque chose. : couper un morceau (de viande, etc.); / z: couper, retrancher, séparer. : plomb; / z: plomb. : rapprocher, joindre (p.ex., les pieds en faisant la prière); / z: approcher, être près, imminent; s’approcher de quelqu’un. : être sec, desséché, aride; / z: être sec et fané (se dit d’un rameau). : percer d’un coup de lance; / z: percer; porter au coup de lance à quelqu’un. : être suspendu très-haut dans les airs (se dit d’un nuage); / z: être elevé. : devenir dur, se durcir; / z: sol dur. : cohabiter avec une femme; / z: cohabiter avec une femme. : souffler avec violence (se dit du vent); / z: siffler (se dit des démons, que l’on croit entendre siffler dans le désert). ṡ ’Sn/m ṡ 1. 68 Petr ZEMÁNEK 23. 24. hSS hSr 25. 26. hSm wSm ṡ nSb ṡ 22. ṡ mSS mSd nS’ ṡ 19. 20. 21. ṡ lSq ṡ 18. ṡ lSb ṡ 17. ṡ lSS ṡ 16. : être en suppuration (se dit d’une plaie); / z: saigner ou suppurer (se dit d’une plaie). : s’attacher et se coller fortement (syn. lzz); / z: se coller et être joint (se dit des choses). : être collé sur les os; / z: s’attacher fortement, se coller à quelque chose. : être collé, se coller, s’agglutiner à quelque chose; / z: s’attacher, se coller à quelque chose. : sucer; / z: sucer. : intensité du froid; / z: froid. : stimuler à la marche de sa voix (une bête de somme); / z: pousser, exciter quelqu’un à quelque chose. : fredonner, chantonner (se dit des palefreniers qui fredonnent certains airs); / z: crier (en parlant de la voix propre aux gazelles). : casser, briser; / z: (hz’) briser, casser. : repousser quelqu’un et éloigner; / z: éloigné, repoussé à coups de batons. : 1. homme fort, robuste; 2. lion; / z: 1. fort, robuste; 2. lion. : casser, feler (p.ex. une vase en bois ou par en terre); / z: briser, casser, rompre. ṡ fSS ṡ 15. 4.3.3 Alternation of / z on the position of R3: ṡ ṡ ğnS hrS ˘rfS ṡ 8. 9. 10. ṡ trS ğ’S ṡ 6. 7. ṡ bhS ṡ 5. ṡ 3. 4. bhS ˘ bl’S blS ṡ 2. : être agile et rapide à la course; / z: faire un bond, un saut, s’élancer pour courir (se dit d’une gazelle). : crever l’oeil et l’arracher avec les chairs et la graisse qui l’entoure; / z: crever l’oeil. : se sauver, s’enfuir; / z: fuir. : prendre, reprendre tout sans rien laisser; / z: accepter, prendre, recevoir etc. quelque chose de quelqu’un. : éloigner, écarter quelqu’un de quelque chose; / z: repousser, éloigner. : être ferme, solide; / z: être dur, rude au toucher. : boire, avaler à grands traits; / z: être suffoqué en buvant d’un seul trait. : mourir; / z: mourir. : réparer, arranger; / z: mettre en ordre, arranger (ses affaires). : pousser, frapper avec le pied; / z: frapper, battre. ṡ ’bS ṡ 1. Supplement: List of Doublets qlS qnS krS 21. l S 22. lkS 23. mrS 24. mlS 25. nġS 26. whS ˘ whS ṡ 18. 19. 20. ṡ qrS ṫ 17. ṡ fw/yS ṡ 16. ṡ frS ṡ 15. wS ṡ c ṡ 14. lS ṡ c ṡ 13. : sauter, sautiller; / z: sauter, bondir. : contracté, ratatiné, ridé; / z: se contracter, se renfronge (se dit du visage). : déranger l’estomac (se dit de l’indigestion qui affecte estomac); / z: douleurs en ventre. : être grave, ardu, difficile (se dit d’un affaire, d’un événement); / z: être difficile, dur à faire (se dit d’un événement fâcheux, d’une chose). : couper, fendre en deux; / z: séparer une chose d’avec un autre. : s’en aller et s’engager dans l’intérieur des terres; / z: s’en aller, fuir. : pincer quelqu’un (en serrant la chair avec le bout des doigts); / z: voy qr . : sauter, faire un saut; / z: sauter, faire un saut. : proie tuée ou prise à la chasse; / z: voy qn . : broyer, écraser le fromage aigrelet et tendre (’aqi ) ; / z: manger habituellement beacoup de fromage ’aqi , en être grand amateur. : acculer quelqu’un, le réduire à l’extremité, le mettre dans l’embarras; / z: presser quelqu’un, demander jusqu’à se rendre importun. : frapper quelqu’un d’un coup de poing; / z: frapper quelqu’un d’un coup de poing à la poitrine, sur les mâchoires ou sur le corps pour le repousser; repousser. : serrer, presser avec les doigts (le sein, la mamelle); / z: presser légerement et sans causer de doleur avec le bout des doigts. : échapper, s’échapper, être délivré; / z: se soustraire à quelque chose et s’en délivrer, échapper à ... : troubler, gâter, p.ex. le plaisir, la jouissance ...; / z: semer, exciter, fomenter les discordes parmi les hommes. : ne donner qu’une petite quantité, que fort peu; / z: petit nombre. : fouler avec violence; / z: fouler fortement avec les pieds le sol. ṡ rqS šmS ṡ 11. 12. 69 ṫ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ḣ 27. 70 Petr ZEMÁNEK 4.4 Doublets with the alternation of / t: 4.4.1 Alternation of / t on the position of R1: : Intelligent, habile; / t: être intelligent, fin et rusé. : Voy tahūm. Limites; / t: mettre une borne, une limite à quelqu’un. ˘ : couper, retrancher en coupant; / t: couper, retrancher. : estragon; / t: voy a rhūn. : petite quantité, un peu; / t: peu, petite quantité. : être humide, légerement humecté par la pluie ou par la rosée (se dit du sol); / t: se couvrir de moiteur. : agiter, secouer; / t: agiter, secouer. : gravir une montagne, monter, s’élever sur une hauter, monter en haut; / t: hauteur, élévation, monticule. : se charger l’estomac de mets gras, et en avoir une indigestion; / t: souffrir de l’indigestion. : tourner autour de...; / t: faire le tour, circuler au tour d’un point. ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ 10. ṫ n h ˘ twr ṫ 9. ṫ tltl tlc ṫ 7. 8. ṫ 3. 4. 5. 6. tbn thm ˘ trr trhn tff˘ tll ṫ 1. 2. 4.4.2 Alternation of / t on the position of R2: ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ġtrf ft’ ftr ṫ 10. 11. 12. ṫ ġtt ṫ 9. ṫ stm štr štc ṫ 6. 7. 8. ṫ t’ rtm ṫ 4. 5. ṫ btt btr ṫ 2. 3. : II. raffermir, consolider; / t: corde avec laquelle on lie les pieds d’une vache pour qu’elle se laisse traire. : bouteille en cuir; / t: bouteille (voy ba a tun) : fendre, percer, p.ex. un ulcère; / t: couper, retrancher en coupant, enlever. : cohabiter avec une femme; / t: cohabiter avec une femme. : IV. Se taire, ne pas desserrer les dents (voy. rtm); / t: mā ratima bi-kalimat Il n’a pas dit un seul mot. : mer; / t: mer. : partager en deux parties égales; / t: couper, disséquer. : voy štc; / t: être triste ou agité, troublé par la faim ou quelque maladie. : plonger quelqu’un dans l’eau la tête la première; / t: plonger quelqu’un dans l’eau la tête la première. : marcher avec fierté, se donner des airs; / t: voy ġ r f. : casser, briser; / t: casser. : fendre, pourfendre, couper en deux; / t: voy f r . ṫ ṫ ’td ṫ 1. ḣ Supplement: List of Doublets 13. qtt 14. qtr 15. ltt 16. lt 17. 18. lth ˘ ltm 19. mtt 20. 21. 22. mt mth htl˘ 71 : couper, surtout dans le sens de la largeur; / t: couper quelque chose, rogner (dans le sens de la longueur). : plage, région (du ciel ou de la terre); / t: région du ciel (voy qu r ). : serrer sa queue et la tenir, pour ainsi dire, collée contre les fesses; / t: lier fortement, serrer. : taper quelqu’un, lui donner un léger coup sur le dos; / t: frapper, taper quelqu’un avec la main. : salir quelqu’un, éclabousser de quelque chose; / t: salir quelqu’un d’ordures (voy l h). ˘ la joue ou sur le corps) un coup du : donner à quelqu’un (sur plat de la main, souffleter quelqu’un; / t: frapper quelqu’un (comp. l m ). : tendre et allonger une chose en la tirant avec force; / t: étendre quelque chose en long (p.ex. une corde). : frapper quelqu’un avec la main; / t: frapper quelqu’un. : frapper quelqu’un avec quelque chose; / t: frapper. : qui tombe coup sur coup à grosses gouttes (pluie); / t: pluie continuelle, mais faible. ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ḣ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ḣ ṫ ṫ 4.4.3 Alternation of / t on the position of R3: ṫ flt 8. 9. kct(l) lwt ṫ 7. ṫ ġlt ṫ 6. ṫ sw/yt ṫ d̄ t̄ 5. ṫ zmt šmt ṫ 3. 4. : IV. voy b t; / t: IV. établir solidement, fixer. : voy t;’ / t: étrangler en serrant la gorge au point de faire sentir la langue. : voy zmt; / t: être grave et plein de dignité dans son maintien. : qui grisonne, qui a des cheveux blancs mêlés aux noirs, ou à moitié blancs; / t: qui commence à grisonner plus que celui malhūz (v. šm ) . : (y) vacarme, tintamarre, bruit, cris confus; / t: (w) pousser un cri; rendre, produire un son, un bruit, se faire entendre. : se tromper, commettre une erreur, une faute (en parlant, en écrivant, ou dans le calcul; comp. ġlt); / t: se tromper, commettre une erreur (dans le calcul) (comp. ġl , qui se dit d’une faute comise en parlant). : ce qui arrive tout à coup, à l’improviste; / t: survenir à l’improviste et fondre sur quelqu’un. : (kc )l se mettre à courir; / t: se dépêcher, aller vite. : cacher, céler; / d: cacher, taire (une nouvelle, un message). d̄ b t t’ t̄ 1. 2. ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ 72 Petr ZEMÁNEK 10. n t 11. nft 12. hbt 13. 14. hrt hwt : respiration pénible et étouffée; / t: gémissement ou respiration pénible accompagnée d’un gémissement. : bouilloner au point de lancer des gouttes d’eau, de cracher (se dit d’une marmite); / t: bouilloner au point de faire jaillir au dehors les gouttes du contenu (se dit d’un pot). : jeter quelqu’un, précipiter en bas; / t: jeter en bas, précipiter en poussant. : déchirer (une pièce d’étoffe); / t: déchirer son vêtement. : crier, faire du tapage, du vacarme; / t: appeler quelqu’un en criant. ṫ ḣ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ 4.5 Doublets with the alternation of q/k: 4.5.1 Alternation of q/k on the position of R1: 1. 2. 3. ktc ktl k m 4. k 5. k 6. 7. 8. krkr kzm kš 9. 10. kcnb kfh ˘ 11. 12. kll kld 13. 14. kls km q: être vil; / k: vil, méprisable, de nulle valeur. q: ame; / k: ame (comp. qatāl). q: ramasser, surtout des objects vils, des ordures, etc.; / k: réunir, ramasser (ce qui était dispersé). q: être pur, franc, sans mélange (se dit d’une boisson); / k: pur, sans mélange, franc, pur-sang (voy q ) . q: manquer, ne pas tomber (se dit de la pluie); / k: manquer (se dit de la pluie). Voy. q . q: rire aux éclats; / k: rire tout haut et répéter le rire (voy. qrqr). q: petit de taille (homme); / k: court, petit, bref. q: oter une chose de sa place; / k: oter de dessus une chose ce qui lui sert de couverture, p.ex. la housse du dos du cheval. q: lion; / k: lion. q: frapper un corps creux, la tête, un crâne, etc.; / k: porter un coup de bâton sur la tête de quelqu’un ou lui donner un soufflet sur la joue. q: totalité, le tout; / k: la totalité, tous. q: ramasser, recueillir (le lait, l’eau, le vin, etc.) dans un réservoir ou dans un vase destiné à cela; / k: entasser, accumuler, amonceler. q: église (voy. kalı̄sa); / k: église. q: redresser la tête et ne vouloir pas boire (se dit d’un chameau); / k: tirer à soi avec la bride la tête du cheval au point qu’il redresse la tête. t̄ ḣ ḣ ḣ ḣ ṫ ḣ ṫ ḣ ṫ ḣ Supplement: List of Doublets 15. 16. kmh ˘ kmz 17. 18. 19. knr kns khb 20. kw/yc 73 q: (’aqmaha bi-anfihi) être fier, et être assis avec un air de suffisance et ˘d’orgueil; / k: (kamaha bi-anfihi) être fier. q: ramasser et prendre quelque˘chose du bout des doigts; / k: ramasser quelque chose avec les mains et en faire un tas arrondi. q: gros, épais, mal tourné; / k: gros, épais et mal bâti. q: racine, origine; / k: racine, origine, tête (d’une chose). q: gris, grisâtre; / k: couler gris poudreux tirant sur le noir (pariculière au poil des chameaux). q: se reculer, se retirer; / k: reculer, s’éloigner d’une chose et s’abstenir par peur. 4.5.2 Alternation of q/k on the position of R2: 3. 4. k k k d t̄ t̄ ḣ 5. 6. dkk dkm 7. rkk 8. rkd 9. zkk 10. 11. c 12. c kš 13. c k 14. c kl kd kr ṡ c q: fendre (un sac); / k: déchirer, rompre, fendre. q: s’en aller, s’éloigner dans une contrée buqca; / k: s’éloigner, s’en aller (le même que bqc). q: parler sottement; / k: être sot, imbécile. q: origine, racine, source; / k: origine, racine, source (comp. ma q id et ma f id). q: casser, concasser; / k: concasser, piler, broyer (voy. dqq). q: casser à quelqu’un les dents de devant en le frappant sur le bouche; / k: porter à quelqu’un un coup sur la poitrine pour le repousser. q: être mince, fin, délicat, point gros; / k: être très-mince (comp. rqq). q: être couché (sans dormir); / k: être en repos, se tenir tranquille (comp. rqd). q: rendre les excréments (se dit d’un oiseau); / k: rendre les excréments (voy. zqq). q: racine, naissance de la langue; / k: racine de la langue. q: racine, base, fondement, origine (voy. cikr); / k: racine, origine, point de départ. q: réunir, rassembler (son troupeau dispersé); / k: ramasser, rassembler. q: être de mauvaise humeur ou de mauvaise caractère; / k: être méchant, d’un mauvaise caractère. q: entrave, particulièrem. corde avec laquelle on attache le bas du pied du chameau, en lui pliant la jambe au haut de l’épaule; ḣ bkk bkc ḣ 1. 2. 74 Petr ZEMÁNEK 15. fkk 16. lkz 17. 18. nk / h hkk ˘ 19. wkc 20. wkn / k: corde avec laquelle on attache le bas du pied ployé du chameau à la partie supérieure de la jambe. q: disjoindre, séparer, détacher (voy. fkk); / k: séparer, disjoindre deux objets. q: donner à quelqu’un un coup de poing sur la poitrine, ou sur le corps; / k: frapper quelqu’un d’un coup de poing à la poitrine, sur les mâchoires ou sur le corps, pour le repousser; repousser. q: (h) percer à jour, trouer, forer; / k: percer, forer. ˘ q: cohabiter avec une femme avec violence; / k: abîmer une femme à force de cohabiter fréquemment avec elle. q: frapper, affliger quelqu’un par des maux et l’éprouver; / k: frapper, donner les coups dans le pis de la brebis qu’on trait, pour en faire sortir plus de lait. q: nid (d’un oiseau); / k: nid (d’oiseau). ḣ 4.5.3 Alternation of q/k on the position of R3: ’fk zk 3. zmk 4. smk 5. w k ṡ ḣ 6. c 7. c 8. l k 9. ntk 10. wšk tk fk q: mentir; / k: mentir, forger un mensonge. q: serrer, garrotter (avec une corde); /k: serrer, presser, comprimer. q: s’emporter, se mettre en colère contre quelqu’un; / k: irriter, mettre quelqu’un dans une colère violente contre un autre. q: être haut, grand, d’une belle taille (se dit des plantes, des arbres); / k: être très-haut, grand. q: V. se salir de ses propres excréments. Voy w k V.; / k: se salir de ses propres excréments ou de son sperme. q: être ancien, antique, vieux; / k: être vieux et rougeâtre de vicillesse (se dit du bois d’un arc). q: cafaqa-hu can ’l-amr Il l’empêcha de se livrer à telle et telle occupation, il l’en retint; / k: empêcher quelqu’un de faire quelque chose, de se livrer à son gré à quelque chose. q: s’attacher à ... et en être inséparable; / k: se coller fortement et tenir à un corps. q: tirer, retirer (p.ex. le seau du puits); / k: tirer violemment quelque chose à soi, au point de casser. q: se dépêcher, se hâter; / k: aller vite, s’empresser de ... ṡ 1. 2. ḣ Supplement: List of Doublets 75 4.6 Doublets with the alternation of / s: 4.6.1 Alternation of / s on the position of R1: : être rempli de boisson, en avoir bu jusqu’à satiété, être gorgé de ... / s: se gorger de quelque chose, de la boisson. : être long (se dit du tibia); / s: être long et descendre en bas jusqu’à traîner par terre (se dit d’une robe, des cheveux, etc.). : crier, vociférer; / s: cri. voy hb. ˘ l’intensité de la chaleur; / s: : brûler quelqu’un, l’affecter par chaud. : montagne; / s: montagne. : coussin, oreiler; / s: voy d ġ. : chemin, route, sentier. On l’écrit aussi i rā ; / s: chemin. : couper, retrancher en coupant; / s: II. couper en morceaux. : Hospice. On l’écrit aussi mas a ba; / s: voy ma a ba. : voy s r ; / s: écrire. : espèce d’origan ou de thym (voy zactar); / s: thym (thymus serpyllum). : voy sc ; / s: injecter un médicament dans le nez. : Voy sġb; / s: être épuisé de fatigue, de faim et de douleur. : voy sġl; / s: être petit de taille et avoir des jambes minces, un corps chétif comme un homme qui est mal nourri et faible. : donner un soufflet, souffleter; / s: souffleter quelqu’un, lui donner un soufflet, des soufflets. : chauve; / s: chauve. : faucon; / s: faucon (voy q r). : éloquent (orateur); / s: éloquent (orateur, predicateur). : polir, fourbir; / s: polir, fourbir (une lame, un corps métalique) (voy q l). : Slaves; / s: Slaves, peuples slaves. Voy q lb. : frapper avec le sabre, donner un coup de sabre; / s: couper, abattre (le nez) avec un coup de sabre, couper, retrancher. : voy sl ; / s: être absolu et dur dans le commandement. : voy slġ; / s: avoir une dent incisive. : produire un grand bruit, un fracas, pousser un grand cri; / s: crier, pousser un cri. : claquer, grincer des dents; / s: faire claquer des dents. : boucher (un flacon, etc.); / s: boucher (un flacon, etc.). : voy sn ; / s: n’avoir pas de barbe, ou n’avoir de la barbe qu’on menton. ṡ ṡ 1. s’b 2. sbġ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. shb s˘hd ˘ sdd sdġ sr srm s b s r sctr 12. 13. 14. sc sġb sġl 15. sfc 16. 17. 18. 19. sq sqr sqc sql 20. 21. sqlb slt 22. 23. 24. sl slġ slq 25. 26. 27. slqm smm sn ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ t̄ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṡ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṫ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ḣ ṫ ṫ 76 Petr ZEMÁNEK ṡ sw/yq ṡ 30. : s’embourber, ne pas pouvoir se tirer d’un bourbier; / s: tomber dans un bourbier et y rester embourbé. : voy sw ; / s: fouet de nerf de boeuf ou de courroises tressées, cravache. : voy swq; / s: pousser devant soi, mener, stimuler à la marche (une bête de somme, le troupeau). ṫ 29. sw/yh ˘ sw ṡ 28. ṫ 4.6.2 Alternation of / s on the position of R2: ṡ ṡ qsm lsq ṡ 16. 17. ṡ qsqs ṡ 15. ṡ q(w)sr ṡ ṡ 14. ṡ qss ṡ 13. ṡ 10. 12. fsh ˘ fs fsl ṡ 9. ḣ sb ṡ c ṡ 8. ṡ rsy ṡ 7. ṡ bsq sk hsm ˘rsh rs˘ġ ṡ 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. : lier, attacher avec la corde; / s: lier, serrer avec des liens, avec une corde, etc. : même signif. que bzq. Cracher; / s: cracher. : chandelier, flambeau; / s: chandelier, flambeau. : voy ’uhsūm sous hsm; / s: anse d’une sacoche. ˘ / s: être ferme, ˘ : voy rsh; solide, être planté, établi solidement. : voy rs˘ġ; / s: procurer à quelqu’un une vie aisée, comode, du bien-être. : IV. rester à sa place, n’en pas bouger, être ancré; / s: IV. être ferme, immobile, être ancré quelque part. : chefs ou principaux personnages d’une tribu, d’une communauté; / s: chef d’une tribu, d’une communauté; le premier parmi les siens. : démettre un membre du corps (voy fsh); / s: disloquer, démettre un membre du corps, p.ex. le bras,˘ causer une luxation. : ordure des ongles; / s: rognure d’ongle. : jeune arbre transplanté ou rameau enlevé de la tige dùn arbre pour être planté ailleurs (voy fsl); / s: rejeton de palmier ou jeune rameau de palmier détaché de la tige et planté. : suivre quelqu’un pas à pas; être aux trousses de quelqu’un; / s: chercher, rechercher, poursuivre quelque chose avec persistance (comp. q ) . : panier en feuilles de palmier ou en osier dans lequel on conserve les dattes; / s: voy qaw a ra. : appeler à soi un chien. Voy qsqs; / s: appeler un chien en disant qūs qūs. : morceau, fragment; / s: partie, portion (d’une chose divisée). : être collé, se coller, s’agglutiner à quelque chose; / s: se coller, s’attacher à ... ṡ ’sr ṡ 1. ṫ Supplement: List of Doublets 19. 20. msh ˘ ms 21. 22. hss hsm : (ma a a ’llāhu mara a ka) que Dieu t’ôte ta maladie!; / s: (masa a ’llāhu mā bika min cilla) que Dieu ôte la maladie dont tu es atteint. : voy msh; / s: transformer, changer, métamorphoser quel˘ qu’un en quelque chose. : voy ms ; / s: serrer avec les doigts l’orifice d’une outre ou presser avec la main les boyaux, pour en faire sortir peu à peu quelque chose. : casser, briser; / s: casser, briser en petits morceaux. : casser, briser; / s: casser, fracasser. ḣ ms ḋ 18. 77 ṡ ṡ ḣ ḣ ṡ ṫ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṫ 4.6.3 Alternation of / s on the position of R3: ṡ rfs 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. šrs šks c rs c ms fqs 10. 11. 12. qbs qrs qfs 13. 14. qns lqs 15. lw/ys 16. mġs ṡ 4. : maigreur; / s: chamelle amaigrie et qui n’a plus de lait. : nourriture d’accouchée. Voy sous hrs; / s: accouchée à qui on donne la nourriture qui convient à˘son état. : agiter les pieds dans des convulsions, et en remuer la terre, gigotter (se dit d’un animal qu’on vient d’égorger (comp. d )s ; / s: chercher, fouiller en remouant la terre avec le pied. : pousser, frapper avec le pied (voy rfs); / s: frapper, pousser du pied, ruer. : tirer, traîner; / s: tirer à soi par la bride (sa monture). : voy šakis; / s: difficile à vivre. : entremetteur. Voy mucarris; / s: entremetteur, maquereau. : voy camās; / s: malheur, calamité. : casser (un œuf); / s: casser, détruire (se dit d’un oiseau qui détruit ses œufs). : race, origin (voy qbs); / s: origine, race. : ortie, graine de l’ortie; / s: ortie, et graine d’ortie. Voy qarı̄ . : lier aux pieds (une gazelle); attacher avec un fil dans la ruche la reine des abeilles pour l’empêcher de s’envoler; / s: lier les pieds (d’une gazelle), mettre des entraves aux pieds de ... : pontre qui soutient le toit; / s: voy qāni .a : être affecté péniblement, éprouver une vive douleur, une angoisse; / s: être affecté, éprouver du chagrin par suite de quelque chose. : sorte de friandise, appelée autrement fālū ; / s: qui aime les friandises, les douceurs. : éprouver des douleurs dans les entrailles; / s: voy mġ . ṡ 3. bcs hrs ˘ d s ṡ 1. 2. ḣ ḣ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ d̄ ṡ 78 Petr ZEMÁNEK 17. nbs 18. hw/ys 19. wqs 20. whs : parler. Voy nbs; / s: parler, surtout avec volubilité et avec des gesticulations. : casser, rompre, briser, p.ex. le cou à quelqu’un; / s: concasser; briser. : voy. ’awqās; / s: la queue d’une troupe ou d’une tribu, comme les valets et les esclaves. : fouler avec violence. Voy. whs; / s: fouler aux pieds, avec les pieds. ṡ ṡ ṡ ṡ 1. 2. b/rwh b/rc ˘ 3. b/rdd 4. b/rhw/y ˘ 4.7 Doublets with the alternation of b/r: 4.7.1 Alternation of b/r on the position of R1: b: 1. être las, fatigué - r: 3. être las, fatigué. b: se remuer, s’agiter en mouvements convulsifs - r: 1. Agiter, remuer, secouer. b: 3. Éloigner, renvoyer quelqu’un et le tenir dans l’éloignement -r: 1. Repousser, éloigner, écarter. b: se calmer, s’apaiser (se dit de la colère) - r: 1. Relaxation, relâchement (de ce qui n’est plus tendu). ṡ 4.7.2 Alternation of b/r on the position of R2: 1. ğbb/rr 2. ğb/rz 3. ğb/rw/y 3. 4. db/rdb/r sbb/rr 5. sb/r 6. 7. šb/r b /r ḣ ḣ ḣ ḋ ḋ ṡ 8. 9. b /r’ b /rğ b: 1. Couper, retrancher en coupant; / r: 6. Fendre la langue à un petit chameau (pour l’empêcher de téter sa mère, en voulant le sevrer). b: Couper, séparer une partie du reste; / r: 1. Couper, retrancher. b: 2. Ramasser l’eau, la faire couler dans les citernes; / b: Couler (se dit de l’eau, du sang, des larmes). b: Tambour; / r: 1. Bruit du tambour. b: 1. Couper; / r: Couper à l’enfant le cordon ombilical par lequel il tient à sa mère. b: 4. Être libre, exempt de quelque chose; / r: 1. Laisser (le troupeau) aller librement et lui permettre de paître où il veut. b: Fendre; / r: couper, disséquer, fendre. b: Clair, évident, manifeste (vérité, etc.); / r: Rendre clair, exposer clairement, rendre évident. b: IV. 1. Cacher; / r: Être caché, se cacher. b: Se jeter par terre et se rouler dans la poussière; / r: 3. Jeter, lancer. Supplement: List of Doublets 10. b: Noir (se dit de toute chose); / r: II. Peindre en noir, noircir (la porte au signe de deuil, etc.). b: 1. Prendre quelque chose avec le bout des doigts; prendre une pincée; / r: 1. pincer quelqu’un (en serrant la chair avec le bout des doigts). b: Mourir d’une mort subite; / r: Mourir, périr. b /rs qb/r 12. hb/rz ṡ ṫ 11. 79 4.7.3 Alternation of b/r on the position of R3: 1. c b: Qui coule, liquide; / r: Suc vénéneux que distille l’arbre samr. b: Portion, lot; / r: Couper (les grappes des dattes mûres pour la récolte) (syn. ğazza). b: Construire une voûte ’zğ; / r: construire une voûte, une construction voûtée. b: Être vert, verdoyant (se dit des arbres), avoir des plantes vertes, des rameaux verts (se dit de la terre, des arbres qui se couvrent de verdures); / r: Être vert, verdoyant et d’un aspect riant (se dit des plantes, des céréales). b: Repousser, éloigner, donner la chasse; / r: Éloigner, écarter, chasser. b: Couper en deux, pourfendre; / r: Partager en deux parties égales. b: Taper, frapper quelqu’un de la paume de la main; / r: Frapper quelqu’un d’un bâton, ... b: Agé; / r: Très-agé (homme ou chameau), mais qui conserve encore quelques forces. b: Nombreux, abondant; / r: Être nombreux, être en grand nombre. b: Enlever l’écorce d’un arbre; / r: Raboter le bois avec un rabot (se dit du mennisier). b: 1. Avaler, p.ex. la salive; 2. Boire en humant (se dit des oiseaux); / r: Boire beacoup, avaler beacoup d’eau, etc. b/r t̄ 2. ğzb/r 3. n b/r ḣ 4. h b /r ˘ 5. d b /r 6. š b /r 7. q b/r ḋ ḣ ṫ ṡ 8. q b /r 9. k b /r 10. nğb/r 11. nġb/r ḣ t̄ 4.8 Doublets with the alternation of / ġ: 4.8.1 Alternation of / ġ on the position of R1: t̄ t̄ / ġdq : Tomber en abondance, verser ses eaux (se dit de la pluie, d’un nuage, d’un torrent); / ġ: Se répandre abondamment. t̄ t̄ 1. 80 : Petite quantité d’eau, et qui, pour n’être pas alimentée, tarit; / ġ: Avoir fort peau d’eau. : Riche, opulent; / ġ: Richesse, biens immenses. 4.8.2 Alternation of / ġ on the position of R2: No doublets found. t̄ 4.8.3 Alternation of / ġ on the position of R3: No doublets found. t̄ / ġmr t̄ t̄ t̄ 3. / ġmd t̄ 2. Petr ZEMÁNEK References 81 REFERENCES ABD-EL-JAWAD R., 1986: The emergence of an urban dialect in the Jordanian urban centres. International Journal of the Sociology of Languages 61, 53-63. AEŠCOLY A.Z., 1939: Incompatibilités de phonèmes en hébreu et en araméen. GLECS 3, 54-56. AL-ANI S.H., 1970: Arabic Phonology. The Hague, Paris. ALI L. & DANILOFF R.G., 1972: A Contrastive Cinefluorographic Investigation of the Articulation of Emphatic - Nonemphatic Cognate Consonants. Studia Linguistica 26, 81-105. AMBROS A.A., 1981: Zur Entstehung der Emphase in ALLĂH. WZKM 73, 23-32. APPLEGATE J.R., 1970: The Berber Languages. In: SEBEOK T.A.(ed.), Current Trends in Linguistics. Vol. 6, Linguistics in South West Asia and North Africa. The Hague, Paris, 586-661. ARO J., 1977: Pronunciation of the "Emphatic" Consonants in Semitic Languages. Studia Orientalia 47, 5-18. BALDI S., 1987(preprint): Some Remarks on Arabic Loan Words in Hausa. Paper read at 5th International Hamito-Semitic Congress, Wien, 27.9.-2.10.1987. BANI-YASIN R. & OWENS J., 1987:The Phonology of a Northern Jordanian Arabic Dialect. ZDMG 137, 297-331. BEESTON F.L., 1981: Languages of the Pre-Islamic Arabia. Arabica 28, 178-186. BEHNSTEDT P., 1986: Die Dialekte der Gegend von ca dah. Wiesbaden. BENDER M.L., 1975: Omotic: A New Afroasiatic Language Family. Carbondale. BLAKE F.R., 1946: Studies in Semitic Grammar IV. JAOS 66, 212-215. BOMHARD A.R., 1984: Toward Proto-Nostratic: A New Approach to the Comparison of Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Afroasiatic. Amsterdam. BOMHARD A.R., 1988: The Reconstruction of the Proto-Semitic Consonant System. In: ARBEITMAN Y.L. (ed.), Fucus. A Semitic/Afrasian gathering in Remembrance of Albert Ehrman. Amsterdam - Philadelphia, 113-140. BROCKELMANN C., 1908: Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen. I. Band: Lautlehre und Formenlehre. Berlin. CANTINEAU J., 1960: Études de linguistique arabe. Mémorial Jean Cantineau. Paris. CARDONA G.R., 1968: Per la storia fonologica del " a dē" semitico. AION 18, 1-14. CLAASSEN W.T., 1971: The Role of / / in the North-West Semitic Languages. AION 31, 285-302. COHEN D., 1963: Le dialecte arabe a ssānı̄ya de Mauritanie. Paris. COHEN D., 1969: Sur le statut phonologique de l’emphase en arabe. Word 25, 59-69. COHEN D., 1970: Le système phonologique du maltais. Aspects synchroniques et diachroniques. In: Études de linguistique sémitique et arabe. The Hague 126-149. COHEN M., 1931: Études d’éthiopien méridionel. Paris. COLIN 1930: Notes de dialectologie arabe. Hesperis 10, 91-120. Ṡ ṡ ṡ ḣ 82 Petr ZEMÁNEK COLIN 1939: Incompatibilités consonantiques dans les racines de l’arabe classique. GLECS 24, 61-2. CONTI G., 1976: Il sistema consonantico egiziano. OA 15, 44-55. CONTI G., 1990: Il sillabario della quarta fonte della lista lessicale bilingua eblaita. Miscellanea eblaita 3, Firenze. CONTI G., 1993: Il sistema grafico eblaita e la legge di Geers. Quaderni del Dipartimento di Linguistica - Università di Firenze 4, 97-114. DELATTRE P., 1971: Pharyngeal Features in the Consonants of Arabic, German, Spanish, French, and American English. Phonetica 23, 129-155. DIEM W., 1972: Skizzen jemenitischer Dialekte. Beirut. DIAKONOFF I.M., 1984: An evaluation of Eblaite. In: FRONZAROLI P. (ed.), Studies on the Language of Ebla. Firenze, 1-10. DIAKONOFF 1987: = D’YAKONOV I.M. - MILITAREV A.Y.- PORCHOMOVSKY V.Y. - STOLBOVA O.V.: Obščeafraziyskaya fonologičeskaya sistema. In: Afrikanskoye istoričeskoye yazykoznaniye. Problemy rekonstrukcii. Moskva 1987, 9-29. DIAKONOFF I.M., 1988: Afrasian languages. Moscow. DIAKONOFF I.M., 1991-92: Proto-Afrasian and Old Akkadian. A study in historical phonetics. Princeton [Journal of Afroasiatic Languages 4, nr. 1-2]. DOLGOPOLSKY A.B., 1973: Sravnitel’no-istoričeskaya fonetika kušitskich yazykov. Moskva 1973. DOLGOPOLSKY A.B., 1977: Emphatic consonants in Semitic. Israel Oriental Studies 7, 113. DOLGOPOLSKY A.B., 1983: Semitic and Cushitic sound correspondences. In: SEGERT S. BODROGLIGETI A.J. (ed.), Ethiopian Studies dedicated to W. Leslau. Wiesbaden, 123-142. EHRET C., 1980: The Historical Reconstruction of Southern Cushitic Phonology and Vocabulary. Berlin. EHRET C., 1989: The origin of third consonants in Semitic roots: an internal reconstruction (applied to Arabic). Journal of Afroasiatic Languages 2, 109-202. ESSEN O. von, 1979: Allgemeine und angewandte Phonetik. Berlin. (5. Auflage). FEGHALI M.T., 1919: Le parler de KfarcAbîda (Liban-Syrie). Paris. FERGUSON C., 1956: The Emphatic L in Arabic. Language, 32, 446-452. FISCHER W., 1968: Die Position von im Phonemsystem des Gemeinsemitischen. In: FLEISCHHAMMER M., (ed.), Studia Orientalia in memoriam Caroli Brockelmann, Halle, 55-63. FRE WOLDU K., 1984-86: Evidence of Auditory Similarity between Tigrinya Ejective / / and Arabic Emphatic / / . Orientalia Suecana 33-35, 123-138. FRE WOLDU K., 1988: Phonetics and Historical Relationships in Semitic. A study of Ejective and Emphatic Consonants. In: BEYENE T., (ed.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of Ethiopian Studies. Vol. I. Addis Ababa, Frankfurt, 705714. ḋ ṫ t̄ References 83 GAIRDNER W.H.T., 1925: The Phonetics of Arabic. A Phonetic inquiry and practical manual for the pronunciation of Classical Arabic and of one Colloquial (the Egyptian). London. GARBINI G., 1972: Le lingue semitiche. Napoli. GARBINI G., 1984: Le lingue semitiche. (2nd edition) Napoli. GARR W. R., 1986: On Voicing and Devoicing in Ugaritic. JNES 45, 45- 52. GEERS F.W., 1945: The treatment of emphatics in Akkadian. JNES 42, 65- 67. GELB I.J., 1961: Old Akkadian Writing and Grammar. Chicago. GHALI M.M., 1983: Pharyngeal articulation. BSOAS 46, 432-444. GHAZELI S., 1981: La coarticulation de l’emphase en arabe. Arabica 28, 251-277. GIANNINI A. & PETTORINO M., 1982: The Emphatic Consonants in Arabic. Speech laboratory Report IV, Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli. Napoli. GREENBERG J. H., 1950: The Patterning of Root Morphemes in Semitic. Word 6, 162-181. GVOZDANOVIĆ J., 1985: Language System and Its Change. On Theory and Testability. Berlin - New York - Amsterdam. HARRELL R., 1957: The Phonology of Egyptian Colloquial Arabic. New York. HARRELL R., 1962: A Linguistic analysis of Egyptian Radio Arabic. In: FERGUSON C., (ed.), Contributions to Arabic Linguistics. Cambridge, 1-77. HARRELL R., 1965: A Short Reference Grammar of Morrocan Arabic. Washington. HARRIS Z.S., 1942: The Phonemes of Morrocan Arabic. JAOS 62, 309-318. HEINE B., 1982: The Nubi Language of Kibera - an Arabic Creole. (Language and Dialect Atlas of Kenya, Vol. 3). Berlin. HERDAN G., 1962: The Calculus of Linguistic Observation. London. HOBERMAN R.D., 1988: Emphasis Harmony in a Modern Aramaic Dialect. Language 64, 1-26. HOBERMAN R.D., 1989: Parameters of emphasis: autosegmental analyses of pharyngealization in four languages. Journal of Afroasiatic Languages Vol. 2, 73-97. HODGE C.T., 1983: Afroasiatic: The Horizon and Beyond. JQR 74/2, 137- 158. HODGE C.T., 1987(preprint): Etymological Reassessment. Paper read at the 5th International Hamito-Semitic Congress, Wien 27.9.-2.10.1987. JAKOBSON R., 1957: "Mufaxxama": The Emphatic Phonemes in Arabic. In: PULGRAM E. (ed.), Studies Presented to Joshua Whatmough... The Hague, 105-116. JUCQUOIS G., 1966: Phonétique comparée des dialectes moyen-babyloniens du nord et de l’ouest. Louvain. JUNGRAITHMAYR H. & SHIMIZU K., 1981: Chadic Lexical Roots (A First Evaluation of the Marburg Chadic Word Catalogue). Vol. 2: Tentative Reconstruction, Grading and Distribution. Berlin. KÄSTNER 1981: Phonetik und Phonologie des modernen Hocharabisch. Leipzig. KAZIMIRSKI A.B., 1860: Dictionnaire Arabe-Français. Le Caire. KHALAFALLAH A.G., 1969: A Descriptive Grammar of Sacidi Egyptian Colloquial Arabic. The Hague, Mouton. 84 Petr ZEMÁNEK KNUDSEN E.E., 1961: Cases of Free Variants in the Akkadian q Phoneme. JCS 15, 84-90. KNUDSEN E.E., 1969: Spirantization of Velars in Akkadian. In: ROLLIG W. (ed. with the collaboration of DIETRICH M.), Lišān mithurti. Festschrift Wolfram Freiherr von ˘ Soden... gewidmet... Neukirchen-Vluyn, 147-155. KREBERNIK M., 1982: Zu Syllabar und orthographie der lexikalischen Texte aus Ebla. Teil 1. ZA 72, 178-236. KREBERNIK M., 1983: Zu Syllabar und Orthographie der lexikalischen Texte aus Ebla. Teil 2 (Glossar). ZA 73, 1-47. KTU = DIETRICH M. & LORETZ O. & SANMARTÍN J., 1976: Die keilalphabetischen Texte aus Ugarit. Teil 1 Transkription. Neukirchen-Vluyn. KURYŁOWICZ J., 1973: Studies in Semitic Grammar and Metrics. Wroclaw, London. LESLAU W., 1957: The Semitic Phonetic System. In: KAISER L., (ed.), Manual of Phonetics. Amsterdam, 325-329. LADEFOGED 1964: A phonetic study of West African Languages. Cambridge. LOPRIENO A., 1977: A proposito delle consonanti dentali e velari in egiziano ed in semitico. AION 37 (N.S. 28), 125-142. MAIZEL’ S.S., 1983: Puti razvitiya kornevogo fonda semitskich yazykov. Moskva. MALAIKA N., 1959: Grundzüge der Grammatik des arabischen Dialektes von Bagdad. Wiesbaden. MARRASSINI P., 1976: Semitico e camitosemitico nella linguistica etiopica. OA 15, 333344. MARTINET A., 1953: Remarques sur le consonantisme sémitique. Paris. MERLINGEN 1978: Zur Problematik der sogenannten Implosive. Phonetica 36, 241-238. MITCHELL T.F., 1956: An Introduction to Egyptian Colloquial Arabic. Oxford. MOSCATI ET AL. 1964: = MOSCATI S. - SPITALER S. - ULLENDORFF E. - SODEN W. von, An Introduction to the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages. Wiesbaden. NAUMKIN V.V. & PORCHOMOVSKIJ V.Ja., 1981: Očerki po etnolingvistike Sokotry. Moskva. NEWMAN P., 1977: Chadic Classification and Reconstructions. Afro-Asiatic Linguistics, 142. OBRECHT D., 1968: Effects of the 2nd Formant on the Perception of Velarized Consonants in Arabic. The Hague, Mouton, Paris. OWENS J., 1985: The Origins of East African Nubi. Anthropological Linguistics, Fall 1985, 229-271. PETRÁČEK K., 1952: Zur Artikulation des sogenannten emphatischen L in Arabischen. ArOr 20, 509-523. PETRÁČEK K., 1955: Die Struktur des semitischen Wurzelmorpheme und der Übergang cain > ġain und cain > r im Arabischen. ArOr 23, 475- 478. PETRÁČEK K., 1971: Die innere Strukturation des phonologischen Systems der Schriftarabischen. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 4, 37-40. References 85 PETRÁČEK K., 1975: Le dynamisme du système phonologique protosémitique et les problèmes de la phonologie chamito-sémitique. In: BYNON J. & TH. (eds.), Hamito-Semitica. Proceedings of a Colloquium Held by the Historical Section of the Linguistic Association (Great Britain) at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 18-20th March 1970. The Hague, 161-165. PETRÁČEK K., 1981: Le système de l’arabe dans une perspective diachronique. Arabica 28, 162-177. PETRÁČEK K., 1987: Sur le rôle des modalités sonantiques dans l’élaboration de la racine en sémitique. Arabica 34, 106-110. PETRÁČEK K., 1988: Altägyptisch, Hamitosemitisch und ihre Beziehungen zu einigen Sprachfamilien in Afrika und Asien. Praha. PETRÁČEK K., 1990: Úvod do hamitosemitské (afroasijské) jazykovědy. I., II. [Introduction to Hamito-Semitic (Afro-Asiatic) Linguistics]. Praha. PRASSE K.-G., 1972: Manuel de grammaire touaregue (Tahaggart). I-III. Copenhagen. RABIN C., 1952: Ancient West Arabian. London. RODINSON M., 1981: Les nouvelles inscriptions d’Axoum et le lieu de déportation des Bedjas. Raydān. Journal of Ancient Yemeni Antiquities and Epigraphy. 4, 97-116. ROMAN A., 1977: Les zones d’articulation d’aprés Al-Chalîl. Arabica 24, 139-144. ROMAN A., 1981: De la langue arabe comme un modèle général de la formation des langues sémitiques et de leur évolution. Arabica 28, 127-161. ROMAN A., 1981-2: Le rôle des seuills de perception temporelle dans la constitution des contoïdes glottalisées. Travaux de l’Institut de phonètique d’Aix 8, 205-226. ROMAN A., 1990: Grammaire arabe. Paris. RÖSSLER O., 1971: Das Ägyptisch als semitische Sprache. In: ALTHEIM F. - STIEHL R., (eds.), Christentum am Roten Meer. I., Berlin - New York, 263-326. ROTH A., 1979: Esquisse grammaticale du parler arabe d’Abbèché (Tchad). GLECS Suppl. 8, Atlas linguistique du monde arabe (publiée sous la direction de David Cohen). Paris. ROTH-LALY A., 1972: Esquisse de la phonologie du parler arabe d’Abbéché. GLECS 16, 33-79. RŮŽIČKA R., 1954: La question de l’existence du ġ dans les langues sémitiques en général et dans la langue ougaritienne en particulier. ArOr 22, 176-237. SCHAADE A., 1911: Sı̄bawaihi’s Lautlehre. Leiden. SEGERT S., 1984: A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Berkeley and Los Angeles. SEMAAN K.I., 1968: Linguistics in the Middle Ages. Phonetic Studies in Early Islam. Leiden. SIBAWAIH 1889: Le livre de Sibawaihi. Traité de grammaire arabe par... Tome second. Paris. SODEN W. von, 1952: Grundriss der akkadischen Grammatik. Roma 1952. STEINER R., 1977: The Case for Fricative Laterals in Proto-Semitic. New Haven [American Oriental Society, 59]. 86 Petr ZEMÁNEK STEINER R., 1982: Affricated Sade in the Semitic Languages. New York. STOLBOVA O., 1978: Sravnitel’no-istoričeskoye issledovaniye fonetiki zapadočadskich yazykov. Avtoreferat kandidatskoj dissertacii. Moskva. STOLBOVA O., 1986: Rekonstrukciya konsonantnoy sistemy zapadočadskich yazykov. In: Pismennyye pamyatniki i problemy istorii i kul’tury narodov Vostoka. Moskva 1980 [1986], 80-115. SWIGGERS P., 1981: A phonological analysis of a rsūsi consonants. Arabica 28, 358-361. TRUBETZKOY N.S., 1939: Grundzüge der Phonologie. Prag. TSERETELI G.V., 1956: Arabskie dialekty sredney Azii. Tom 1. Tbilisi. TSERETELI K., 1978: Grammatik der modernen assyrischen Sprache (Neu-ostaramäisch). Leipzig. TSERETELI K., 1982: On one suprasegmental Phoneme in Modern Semitic. JAOS 102, 343346. VACHEK J., 1968: Dynamika fonologického systému současné spisovné češtiny. [The Dynamics of the Phonemic System of Contemporary Czech]. Praha. VILENČIK J., 1930: Welchen Lautwert hatte im Ursemitischen? Orientalische Literaturzeitung 33, 89-98. VOIGT R.M., 1979: Die Laterale im Semitischen. Die Welt des Orients 10, 93-114. VOIGT R.M., 1986: A note on the Alleged Middle/Neo-Assyrian Sound Change s’(*š’) > ss< > . JNES 45, 53-57. VOIGT R.M., 1988: Die infirmen Verbaltypen des Arabischen und das BiradikalismusProblem. Stuttgart. VOIGT R.M., 1989: The Development of the Old Ethiopic Consonantal System. In: BEYENE T., (ed.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of Ethiopian Studies. Vol. 2, Addis Ababa, Frankfurt, 633-647. VOIGT R.M., 1991: On voicing and devoicing in Ugaritic. In: KAYE A.S., (ed.), Semitic Studies. In honor of Wolf Leslau... Wiesbaden, 1619-1619. WEDEKIND K., 1990: Glottalization Constraints and Ethiopian Counter-Evidence. Folia Linguistica 24, 127-137. WEHR H., 1980: A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic. (Third Printing). Beirut, London. WILLMS A., 1972: Einführung in das Vulgärarabische von Nordwestafrika. Leiden. WOLFF E., 1981: Die Berbersprachen. In: Die Sprachen Afrikas. Band 2. Afroasiatisch. Hamburg, 171-186. ZAVADOVSKY Ju.N., 1962: Arabskie dialekty Magriba. Moskva. ZAVADOVSKY Ju. N., 1981: Mavritanskiy dialekt arabskogo yazyka (xassaniya). Moskva. ZELTNER J.-C. & TOURNEUX H., 1986: L’arabe dans le bassin du Tchad. Le parler des Ulâd Eli. Paris. ZEMÁNEK P., 1990: A propos de la pharyngealisation et de la glottalisation en arabe. ArOr 58, 125-134. ḣ ḋ ṡ