No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Two Tocharian Notes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009
Extract
I have connected this adverb with Skt. atha,having the same meaning, and with OHG. unti, anti, enti =OE., Eng. and,Germ, und(cf. BSL.,41, 184 and also my Lexique (étymologiqbe des dialectes tokhariens),20);the Tocharian form agrees with Skt. athain its root-vocalism:both Sanskrit and Tocharian show the weak grade, IE. *nth-.This etymology, however, leaves the w-suffix of Toch. B. entweunexplained:for -weI have only assumed a secondary origin. At present this view seems no more plausible to me:several extended forms of Skt. atharender imperative a primary origin. Skt. athais attested with following him(“yes, well ”, in dialogue), with following ajri(“nevertheless ”), and with following uand vā.Skt. atha + umeans “afterwards, then, and, even ”, and Skt. atha+vā“or, or also, or even, etc.”Both Skt. atha + uand atha+ vāmay be the formal equivalents of Toch. B. entwe,but an original *-vē-extension is more probable for the Tocharian form, since the final of the Indo-European words is dropped in this language.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , February 1947 , pp. 71 - 72
- Copyright
- Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1947
References
page 71 note 1 An origin *qvu seems not probable to me.
page 72 note 1 For Toch. A. çkam, etc., Poucha, Listy Filologické, 67, 212, proposes IE. *ke + kom: this explanation is not clear to me, and Poucha is surely wrong in reconstructing a disyllabic form for çkam (*-om was to be dropped through the influence of the accentuation).