Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T08:02:37.272Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

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+“or, or also, or even, etc.”Both Skt. atha + uand atha+ may 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
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1947

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

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).