Reconstruction talk:Proto-Japonic/patu

Cromulence?

I can find no evidence of this in Old Japanese. The first cite I can find is the 大鏡 / Ōkagami completed in 1119, well past the Old Japanese stage. I suspect that Old Japanese patu never existed, and that the modern Japanese noun 初 (hatsu, “first one or first time of something”) is an orthographic shift from Chinese derivation 發, modern shinjitai 発 (hatsu, “initial, starting out”).

Notably, purportedly related terms like Japanese はじめる (hajimeru, “to begin something”) all derive from root /paz-/, which is probably related to root /pas-/, as in modern terms like Japanese 端 (hashi, “edge”). There is no mechanism to explain how this would be related at all to /patu/. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 18:21, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Later on, I found the term 端・傍・側 (hata, “edge”), attested since the late 900s, c.f. KDJ entry at Kotobank, as well as what may be base form (or abbreviated form?) 端 (ha, “edge”), attested since the Man'yōshū completed in 759. This opens up more possibilities. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 05:46, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Also: See Talk:初. The KDJ entry seems to be deficient. Then again, see below: unclear if OJP patu is this same term.

Digging around in ONCOJ now (props to @Chuterix for bringing that site to my attention 😄), searching for \bpatu finds a number of likely instances. However, it is unclear from the syntax if this might be pa ("edge, beginning") + tu (genitive / appositive particle). If so, this could either be a separate term, or it might be that noun 初 (hatsu) attested since the 1100s is in fact a later reinterpretation of this same pa + tu.

I cannot look into this any further at the moment. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 06:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

The ONCOJ Dictionary lists patu here with a search. It is only seen in compounds. It is first attested in the Kojiki of 712.

The patu is surely glossed as "first". 29 attestations. Chuterix (talk) 16:35, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

@Chuterix: Yes, no opposition to the gloss, nor to its existence.

I do believe that modern 初 (hatsu) is a direct descendant of this OJP patu. My concern is about determining exactly what this OJP patu really is.

This string as it appears in Old Japanese is not unambiguously the same thing as modern noun 初 (hatsu), syntactically speaking. For the modern term, we have copious attestations of 初 (hatsu) + [PARTICLE], clearly demonstrating usage as a noun. Meanwhile, in OJP, it looks like we only have instances of 初 (hatsu) followed immediately by a noun, where the つ (tsu) might well be the OJP genitive / appositive particle, rather than an integral part of the term. This could support an analysis of patu as pa ("edge of something in space; edge of something in time: beginning, end") + tu (genitive / appositive particle), aligning with an analysis of pazimu / pazime- as this same pa ("edge: beginning, end") + simu / sime- (c.f. modern 占める (shimeru, “take up; own; possess; account for; hold”).

I also note that the only Ryukyuan examples that we currently have for this, at 初#Okinawan, are all of this same 初 + [NOUN] compounding pattern -- which could again be parsed as deriving from pa + particle tu + [NOUN], if not themselves just borrowings in toto from mainland Japanese.

Are there any published authors who trace modern Japanese 初 (hatsu) to a Proto-Japonic term *patu? If so, I would love to see their reasoning for treating this as an integral term. If not, if no one else is writing about this and this is purely a Wiktionary term, I am quite concerned that we may be inventing phantoms. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 18:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)