Talk:やなぎ
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Chuterix in topic Proto-Japonic & Etymology
Proto-Japonic & Etymology
[edit]If it's derived from 木 (ki, “tree”), then why does Okinawan trigger palatalization as yanaji (< PR *yanagi < PJ *yanankOy; *O implies *u or *o), but doesn't in kii tree (PR *ke < PJ *kəy)? Unlikely internal compound etymology? Reanalysis? Borrowing? Chuterix (talk) 17:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Chuterix, looking through https://www.jlect.com/search.php?r=%E6%9C%A8&l=ryukyu&group=words, I see a couple terms where 木 as an element in the Okinawan terms seems to undergo affrication, such as Japanese 黒木 (kuroki) ↔ Okinawan 黒木 (kuruci), or Japanese 木遣り (kiyari) ↔ Okinawan cijai (presumably /t͡ɕijai/?).
- As such, I don't think the reading of Okinawan 柳 as /janaʑi/ requires a reconstruction of any proto form that deviates from the derivation given in JA sources, where the final -gi in JA is treated as 木 (ki, “tree”). ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- (looking back...) @Eirikr I believe these are borrowings from Japanese into Okinawan, or at least a time where Ko/Otsu-rui distinction was lost. Compare also 果物 (kudamono, “fruit”), possibly from pre-Japanese *kO(y [Deleted!])-n(V?)ta-mənə. Chuterix (talk) 12:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- Also @Eirikr I believe 露出形・被覆形 arised from older nidan/unknown verb forms. Hence this irregularity. 真似 (mane, “real thing”), 学ぶ (manabu, “to learn”, literally “to acquire real thing”), from 真似る (maneru, “be real”).
- Perhaps 木 (ki, ko, ku-, “tree”) must derive from 来る (kuru < ku, “to come”), from the way trees must grow fully, therefore must come up to the top. Compare 出来る (dekiru, “to be able to...”), from older ideku; c.f. Okinawan 出来ゆん (dikiyun, “to be able to...”, borrowing? otherwise from *deke). Therefore, must derive from the ren'yokei. We also see this in PJ *əku (“to get up; to rise”) and *ətu (“to fall”). See also Wiktionary_talk:About_Proto-Japonic#The_#Standalone_forms_and_combining_forms_section. Chuterix (talk) 12:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- Deriving 被服・露出 from verb conjugation paradigms means that you have to derive all such nouns manifesting 被服・露出 forms from verbs -- and this simply isn't possible.
- I do think that these are probably related phenomena, but I don't think we can sensibly say that the 被服・露出 vowel shift we see in nouns means that these are all deverbals that reflect underlying conjugation patterns.
- 学ぶ appears first as manebu from the early 800s. The manabu form doesn't appear until the late 900s. Moveover, manebu was apparently more common in woman-oriented literature, while manabu was more prevalent in man-oriented kanbun contexts. It appears that manebu fell out of use as maneru gained prevalence, with manabu remaining.
- More in the NKD notes, as seen here at Sakura Paris and here at Kotobank.
- 真似 has no realizations anywhere I can find as mana, only as mane. This derives from verb manu, which was conjugated using the shimo nidan paradigm, which has no stem forms ending in -a.
- This makes the manabu verb form itself a bit mysterious. One possibility is that the -bu auxiliary may have been considered by learned speakers at that time as analogous to the -mu auxiliary, which some modern linguists reconstruct as -amu. The shift from older and colloquial manebu to newer and (originally) formal manabu thus might have been a kind of hypercorrection. This supposition is purely my own speculation, however.
- ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:44, 12 July 2023 (UTC)