The classification of Roman-Germanic language
Earliest recorded Germanic languages
Handbook 025841
- Bu sahifa navigatsiya:
- Earlyrunic 200–600 Gothic
- Old Saxon (Old Low German) 850–1050 OldNorwegian
- OldDanish 1250–1500* OldSwedish
|
|
approximatedates CE |
|
*Standard cutoff date for beginnings of modern Germanic languages. | |
|
Earlyrunic |
200–600 |
|
Gothic |
350 |
|
OldEnglish (Anglo-Saxon) |
700–1050 |
|
OldHighGerman |
750–1050 |
|
Old Saxon (Old Low German) |
850–1050 |
|
OldNorwegian |
1150–1450 |
|
OldIcelandic |
1150–1500* |
|
MiddleNetherlandic |
1170–1500* |
|
OldDanish |
1250–1500* |
|
OldSwedish |
1250–1500* |
|
OldFrisian |
1300–1500* |
The Germanic languages are related in the sense that they can be shown to be different historical developments of a single earlier parent language. Although for some language families there are written records of the parent language (e.g., for the Romance languages, which are variant developments of Latin), in the case of Germanic no written records of the parent language exist. Much of its structure, however, can be deduced by the comparative method of reconstruction (a reconstructed language is called a protolanguage; reconstructed forms are marked with an asterisk). For example, a comparison of Runic -gastiz, Gothic gasts, Old Norse gestr, Old English giest, Old Frisian iest, and Old Saxon and Old High German gast ‘guest’ leads to the reconstruction of Proto-Germanic *ǥastiz. Similarly, a comparison of Runic horna, Gothic haurn, and Old Norse, Old English, Old Frisian, Old Saxon, and Old High German horn ‘horn’ leads scholars to reconstruct the Proto-Germanic form *hornan.
Such reconstructions are, in part, merely formulas of relationship. Thus, the Proto-Germanic *o of *hornan in this position yielded au in Gothic and o in the other languages. In other positions (e.g., when followed by a nasal sound plus a consonant) *o yielded u in all the languages: Proto-Germanic *dumbaz, Gothic dumbs, Old Norse dumbr, Old English, Old Frisian, and Old Saxon dumb, Old High German tumb ‘dumb.’ What may be deduced is that this vowel sounded more like u in some environments, but like o in others; it may be written as *u∼o, with the tilde indicating that it varied between these two pronunciations.
The above example shows that such reconstructions are more than mere formulas of relationship; they also give some indication of how Proto-Germanic actually sounded. Occasionally scholars are fortunate enough to find external confirmation of these deductions. For example, on the basis of Old English cyning, Old Saxon and Old High German kuning ‘king,’ the Proto-Germanic *kuningaz can be reconstructed; this would seem to be confirmed by Finnish kuningas ‘king,’ which must have been borrowed from Germanic at a very early date.
By pushing the comparative method still farther back, it can be shown that Germanic is related to a number of other languages, notably Celtic, Italic, Greek, Baltic, Slavic, Iranian, and Indo-Aryan (Indic). All these language groups are subsequent developments of a still earlier parent language for which there are, again, no written records but which can be reconstructed as Proto-Indo-European (see Indo-European languages).
The Roman equivalents for the Germanic runes given above are only approximate, for the sounds of Early Germanic did not coincide with those of Modern English. It is unknown where and when runes were invented. The obvious similarities with the Roman alphabet brought early scholars to the belief that the script first appeared among Germanic peoples living close to the Roman Empire, and that the runes were an adaptation of the more prestigious alphabet. Early finds of rune- inscribed objects in Eastern Europe (Pietroassa in Rumania, Dahrmsdorf in central Germany and Kowel in the Ukraine) suggested that runes may have been invented by Goths on the Danube or beside the Vistula. This is further supported by the similarity of occasional runes to letters of one or other of the Greek alphabets. However, continued discovery of early runic texts in various regions of Europe do not allow considering the matter of the origin of runes conclusively proven. Runes spread over the Germanic world and by 500 AD they are found not only in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, England but also in Poland, Russia and Hungary, recording different Germanic languages and being cut, stamped, inlaid or impressed on metal, bone, wood and stone. Runes were used for many centuries and in many lands, gradually changing in their passage through time and space. In England the script died out, superseded by Roman, somewhere in the eleventh century; in Germany rather soon. In Scandinavia and its colonies, however, runes continued well into the Middle Ages.
Nevertheless, the later runic inscriptions are of comparatively little interest, for there is plenty of other evidence for the state of the language they record, whereas the early inscriptions are of great importance to the linguist, for they record material for which there is otherwise little or no evidence.
Download 1.11 Mb.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham:
