A grammar of Oscan and Umbrian : with a collection of inscriptions and a glossary

Robarts - University Of Toronto, Carl Darling Buck

Informations

• Publié par: thawyag
• Nombre de lectures: 11
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 33 Mo

Extrait

GRAMMARA OF UMBRIANANDOSCAN OF INSCRIPTIONSA COLLECTIONWITH AND A GLOSSARY BY PH.D.DARLINGCARL BUCK, COMPARATIVEAND INDO-EUROPEANOF SANSKRITPROFESSOR OF CHICAGOIN THE UNIVERSITYPHILOLOGY U.S.A.BOSTON, & PUBLISHERSGINN COMPANY, Cbe &t&en*tim 19041904COPYRIGHT, BY CABL DARLING BUCK ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDPREFACE is an to furnish in a vol-THE work singlefollowing attempt what is most essential for the ofume of moderate compass study In of the of thethe and Umbrian dialects.Oscan spite meagreness like and andas with Greek Latin,languagesmaterial, compared are stillin of the of detail which unsolved,spite many questions understood. Andmain features of these two dialects are wellthe withrelation to Latin that some themsuch is their acquaintance not to the but to the studentis alone,important, Indo-Europeanist in a less to the student of theof the Latin and, degree,language, of In order that a ofandhistory antiquities Italy. knowledge more it is not that wethe dialects should become general, enough as Italic withhave now such excellent works Conway's Dialects, its full of the and von Planta'sexisting material,presentation exhaustive Grammatik der Oskisch-Umbrischen Dialekte. The fullness of v. Planta's the conscientious oftreatment, weighing and the liberal citation of all add to itsauthorities,possibilities, work of but the bulk of 1372value as a reference, resulting pages one who can devote amount ofis to deter a moderatelikely only there is hastime to the That need of a briefersubject. grammar been the author's which has beenlong conviction, only strengthened 1 and from others in this and abroad.by inquiries suggestions country In order to secure the desired it has been tobrevity, necessary eliminate almost detailed discussion ofwholly any disputed points, as well as references for the views orspecial adopted rejected. one for whom the below is notAny general bibliography given sufficient be referred to v. Planta. in a few herecases,may Only 1 So in a review of the author'sOscan-Umbrian BerlinerSkutsch, Verb-System, 1895: "Der Verf. kame einem BediirfnissPhilologische Wochenschrift, November, wenn er eine Grammatik des O.-U. im Massstab seines Verb-entgegen, vollstandige schriebe . Dennnebendem treffl aber Werke v. PlantasSystems ichen, weitschichtigen ist einkurzes Handbuch zur erwiinscht."Einfiihrung iiiiv Preface and I have added references in to discus-there, footnotes, mostly sions more recent than v. Planta. I have statedGenerally simply the view which seemed to me on the whole the most orprobable, contented with a non It iselse myself liquet. scarcely necessary state that in matters of I have noto had fordispute predilection own withbut have freedommy previously expressed views, equal inthem favor of others or retained themrejected against others, toaccording my present judgment. That the treatment is historical and notcomparative, merely is a matter of course. But the is ondescriptive, emphasis Italic, ratherthan on relations. In the case ofwords whichIndo-European, are to the found in adialects and not wideLatin,peculiar fairly of is in Butas sections 16.range cognates cited, 15, ordinarily andwithin the Italic is deemed forms fromcomparison sufficient, other are introduced forIndo-European languages only special reasons. The is called a Grammar of Oscan andgrammar Umbrian, not of the Oscan-Umbrian for it does not to treatdialects, pretend the minor dialects included under the name Oscan-systematically Umbrian. Most of the of these dialects far ascharacteristics (so in theare are mentioned Introduc-they incidentally, mainlyclear) intion. But to discuss or even mention all the questions arising the to from material of a fewattempt generalize consisting only would an amount of not the results.lines, justifiedrequire space by Unless the material from these minor dialects is increased,notably our of the Oscan-Umbrian will be almost coinci-knowledge group dent with what we know of its two dialects. And inprincipal this sense a of Oscan and Umbrian is alsoapproximate grammar a of Oscan-Umbrian.grammar since theAs the book has been for thepractically ready press in sinceof the and thebeginning year, Phonology type February, been taken account of.almost in the literature of 1903 hasnothing which has con-But in what has there is little entirelyappeared discussionvinced me. mention be made of Brugmann'sSpecial may ' Iof the an- and anter inter' 70 havenegative 15, ff.).prefix (I.E. wished there were some of these withmyself equating directlywayvPreface instead of in 98 with whichthe assumingLatin, by-forms (as c), =out ofthe inthe case of Anafriss if L. Imbribusindeed seems question "But that initial e before nasal98, b). Brugmann's assumption(see had a in theconsonant Oscan-Umbrian+ very open pronunciation become identical in thisand had withperhaps positionperiod Italic a" fails to convince in view of 0. andme, embratur, Entrai, U. iseceles 'insectis.' Nor do I see the ofespecially necessity ' t0. ant from L. ante because of its as far asseparating meaning 299,(see 2). For assistance I am indebted to Professors J. C. Rolfe and Minton who offered to read andWarren, kindly proof, especially to Mr. W. C. Gunnerson and Mr. E. B. whoNelson,my pupils, have over the with no small amountgone proof great care, devoting of time to the verification of and con-references, citations, etc., in The remarkableto the of the text.tributing every way accuracy keenness and in the of theof the officeintelligence proof-reader has also saved the work from blemishes.publishers many D. B.C. 1903.DECEMBEB,