Reconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šawmān-

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Reconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šawmān-. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Reconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šawmān-, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Reconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šawmān- in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Reconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šawmān- you have here. The definition of the word Reconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šawmān- will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofReconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šawmān-, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
 This Proto-Semitic entry contains original research. The reconstruction in this entry is based on published research, but the specific form presented here is not found in prior works.

Proto-Semitic

A user has added this reconstruction entry to requests for deletion(+).
Please see that page for discussion and justifications. You may continue to edit this reconstruction entry while the discussion proceeds, but please mention significant edits at the RFD discussion and ensure that the intention of votes already cast is not left unclear. Do not remove the {{rfd}} until the debate has finished.

Alternative reconstructions

Noun

*šawmān- m

  1. dove

Reconstruction notes

It was suggested in Rescher (1911)[1] to identify Arabic حَمَام (ḥamām, “dove”) with Akkadian 𒋢𒌝𒈬𒌝 (summum, “dove”).

He knew some examples where Arabic varies ح (ḥ) with ه (h), such as حَرَّشَ (ḥarraša) and هَرَّشَ (harraša). About the relevant sound-changes for the first phoneme there was little consciousness then:

Akkadian s corresponding to West-Semitic š is secured, leaving no need to read Akkadian šummum here, such as for *šaʔal- (“to cough”) and even *šabʕ- (“seven”), and has been taken since Goetze (1958) as grounds to posit another Proto-Semitic phoneme *sₓ.[2][3]

Whereas a sound-law effective in West-Semitic, visible in *šim (“if”), was formulated in Al-Jallad (2015):[4]

  1. Proto-West Semitic: *š > *h / #_, _#
  2. Incompletely in Aramaic depending on regio- and chronolect, and in Arabic and Ethio-Semitic: *h > *ʔ / {#_VC}.

Arabic seems to have evaded the second sound shift by shifting /h/ to /ħ/, bringing it closer to a lovely phonestheme (as in ح ب ب (ḥ-b-b), compare dialectal حَبْحَب (ḥabḥab, “watermelon”), a fruit as plump as the pigeon), while Northwest Semitic opted for popular /j/ in the first position. The Arabic and Akkadian forms have been left out in Militarev and Kogan (2005, 2011)[5],[6] reconstructing but with the Amharic and Northwest Semitic, without the Amorite form[7] later added by Golinets (2016), an unlikely variation Proto-Semitic *yawn-at ~ *wānay- (“dove”), but the usual terms for “dove, pigeon” in Arabic and Akkadian were left isolated thus, listing instead the Akkadian[8] together with but an obscure Arabic سَمَامَة (samāma) and سُمَّان (summān), which has a native derivation, under *sVm(V)m(-at)- ~ *cVm(V)m(-at)-.

Assuming this form *šawmān-, the ultimate derivation may be transparent, +‎ *-ān- from the verb *šawam- whence Arabic سَامَ (sāma, “to rove, to pasture”), in reference to how pigeons walk around, compare the etymology of Arabic حَجَل (ḥajal, “partridge”); hardly *šamāy- (“sky”) whence سَمَا (samā, “to be high”) since flying high is not distinctive for doves, while the formal match is also less, unless one reconstructs *šamwān-.

The morphological transparency as a well-known but rather meaningless suffix then accounts for the loss of +‎ *-ān- in Akkadian, while the full form can be seen in the terminative 𒋢𒌝𒈠𒌋𒌋 (su-um-ma-niš /⁠summāniš⁠/, “like a dove”),[9] though -āniš be assumed an alternative form of -iš (“terminative or adverbial”). From the full Akkadian form Arabic سُمَّان (summān, “quail”) could only be borrowed, alternatively -ān- is a West Semitic addition and we have to reconstruct *šawm- respectively *sₓawm-, however compare *ʔirbay-, *ʔirbayān- (“locust”) where Arabic and Eblaite point to an archaism in *-ān-, and in either case, the trailing consonant following the stress was hard to hear and could not resist the pressure of the middle /m/, hence Amorite and Arabic have regressively assimilated it for economy as *ām- – that is, the change in place of articulation, though its assumption in addition to other transformations seem unparsimonious in connecting the common Semitic term, took place because its retention required to change the place of articulation at every instance of the word’s pronunciation and was thus unparsimonious and ultimately unlikely. Recognizing alteration being more likely than not, -ān is the lectio difficilior, additionally supported by the other languages exposing it.

Inflection

Declension of *šawmān-
Case Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *šawmānum *šawmānāna plural stem + *-ūna
Genitive *šawmānim *šawmānayna plural stem + *-īna
Accusative *šawmānam
possessive forms
1st person *šawmānī / *šawmānVya — *šawmānVni
2nd person m *šawmānVka *šawmānVkumā / *šawmānVkumay *šawmānVkum(ū)
2nd person f *šawmānVki *šawmānVkin(ā)
3rd person m *šawmānVšu *šawmānVšumā / *šawmānVšumay *šawmānVšum(ū)
3rd person f *šawmānVša *šawmānVšin(ā)
Note: the endings -m and -na are dropped in the bound form, which may also undergo syncopation of an unstressed final vowel where possible.

Note: the ending -V before the possessive endings responds to case: *šawmānuya for nom. case, *šawmāniya for gen. case, *šawmānaya for acc. case, etc.

Declension of 2sg m. possessive form (your/thy m.) *šawmān-
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *šawmānuka *šawmānāka plural stem + *-ūka
Genitive *šawmānika *šawmānayka plural stem + *-īka
Accusative *šawmānaka
Declension of 2sg f. possessive form (your/thy f.) *šawmān-
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *šawmānuki *šawmānāki plural stem + *-ūki
Genitive *šawmāniki *šawmānayki plural stem + *-īki
Accusative *šawmānaki

Descendants

References

  1. ^ Rescher, Oskar (1911) “Einige Etymologien”, in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft‎ (in German), volume 65, pages 521–522
  2. ^ Goetze, Albrecht (1958) “The sibilants of Old Babylonian”, in Revue d’Assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale‎, volume 52, number 3, pages 137–149
  3. ^ Militarev, Alexander, Kogan, Leonid (2000) Semitic Etymological Dictionary, volumes I: Anatomy of Man and Animals, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, →ISBN, pages LXXII–LXXIII
  4. ^ Al-Jallad, Ahmad (2015) “Yusapʿil or Yuhapʿil, that is the Question. Two Solutions to Sound Change *s¹ > h in West Semitic”, in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, volume 165, pages 27–39
  5. ^ Militarev, Alexander, Kogan, Leonid (2005) “*yawn(-at)-, *wānay-”, in Semitic Etymological Dictionary, volume II: Animal Names, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, →ISBN, pages 321–322 No. 252
  6. ^ Kogan, Leonid (2011) “Proto-Semitic Lexicon”, in Weninger, Stefan, editor, The Semitic Languages. An International Handbook (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft – Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science; 36), Berlin: De Gruyter, →ISBN, page 210
  7. ^ Golinets, Viktor (2016) “Amorite Animal Names: Cognates for the Semitic Etymological Dictionary”, in Proceedings of the 6th Biennial Meeting of the International Association for Comparative Semitics and Other Studies (Babel und Bibel; 9)‎, Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, →DOI, →ISBN, page 64
  8. ^ Militarev, Alexander, Kogan, Leonid (2005) “*sVm(V)m(-at)- ~ *cVm(V)m(-at)-”, in Semitic Etymological Dictionary, volume II: Animal Names, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, →ISBN, pages 257–258 Nr. 196
  9. ^ SpTU III 99:28
Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia