Читать книгу An Outline of the Phonology and Morphology of Old Provençal - C. H. Grandgent - Страница 16

28. Cl. L. ĕ, æ ＞ V. L. ę ＞ Pr. ę: infĕrnum ＞ enfęrn, fĕrrum ＞ fęr, pĕdem ＞ pę; cælum ＞ cęl, quærit ＞ quęr.

1. Such forms as glisia, lire, pire, pis, profit are French. Profich may be a cross between profieg and profit, or it may be due to the analogy of dich.

2. Cossint, mint, sint, used by Arnaut Daniel, are perhaps faulty rhymes.

3. Auzil ＜ avicĕllī, in the Boeci, may be due to the analogy of such plural forms as cabil ＜ capĭllī, il ＜ ĭllī, etc. Briu, sometimes used for breu ＜ brĕvem, is evidently connected with abrivar, ‘hasten,’ the origin of which is uncertain. Elig shows the influence either of eligir (beside elegir) or of dig. Ginh = genh ＜ ingĕnium evidently follows ginhos ＜ ingeniōsus and its derivatives. Isme (esme) is a post-verbal noun from ✱ismar (cf. azismamen), a dialect form of esmar ＜ æstimare. Quis ＜ ✱quæsi, tinc ＜ tĕnui are due to the analogy of pris ＜ ✱prēsī, vinc ＜ ✱vēnuī.

4. Beside nęula ＜ nĕbula, we find nebla, neble, presumably from the same source, and also nible, niól, nióla, niúl, niúla, nivól. According to Nigra, Archivio glottologico italiano, XV, 494, nūbes ＞ nūbĭlus ＞ ✱nĭbŭlus (and ✱nĭbūlus?), whence might be derived ✱níŭlus ✱niúlus, which would account for niól-a, niúl-a, and perhaps for a ✱nívol ＞ nivól. Nible might be regarded as a cross between neble and niul. Cf. § 38, 3.

5. In ẹs ＜ ĕst the ẹ probably comes from such combinations as mẹ’s, quẹ’s, understood as m’ẹs, qu’ẹs. Espẹlh ＜ spĕculum shows the influence of cossẹlh, solẹlh. Estẹla presupposes a Latin ✱stēla or ✱stēlla for stĕlla: cf. the Fr. and It.

6. Plais, ‘hedge’ seems to be a cross between plĕxus and paxillus, ‘fence.’ Vianda (＜ vivenda?) is probably French.

7. Volon ＜ volentem shows the influence of the ending -ŭndus.

8. Greuga ＜ con-gregar has been influenced by greu ＜ ✱grĕvem = gravem influenced by lĕvem. Cf. grey ＜ grĕgem.

29. Before a nasal, in most of the dialects of Limousin, Languedoc, and Gascony, ę became ẹ: bĕne ＞ bẹn, dicĕntem ＞ dizẹn, tĕmpus ＞ tẹms, tĕnet ＞ tẹn, vĕniam ＞ vẹnha, vĕntum ＞ vẹnt.

30. Early in the history of Provençal, before u, i, or one of the palatal consonants l´, r´, s´, z´, y, tš, dž, an ę broke into ię, except in a few dialects of the west and north: dĕus ＞ dięus, mĕum ＞ mięu; amāvi ＞ ✱amai ＞ amęi amięi,[16] ✱fĕria ＞ fięira, ✱ec(c)lĕsia? (Cf. Zs., XXV, 344) ＞ glięiza, lĕctum ＞ lięit, pĕjus ＞ pięis; vĕtŭlum vĕclum ＞ vięlh, ministĕrium ＞ mestięr, ✱ec(c)lĕsia? ＞ glięza, mĕdia ＞ mięia, lĕctum ＞ lięg. There seems to be also, at least in some dialects, a tendency to break the ę before a g or a k: lĕgunt ＞ lięgon; ✱sĕquit ＞ sęc sięc, subjunctive sięgas (sęga), but infinitive sęgre ＜ ✱sĕquere.[17]

The breaking was probably due to a premature lifting of the tongue under the influence of a following high vowel or a palatal (or velar) consonant.[18] Before u it occurred everywhere except in the extreme west; before palatals the ę apparently remained intact both in the extreme west and in Quercy, Rouergue, Auvergne, and Dauphiné. At first, no doubt, the diphthong was less marked than it became in the 12th and 13th centuries. It is not indicated in our oldest text, the Boeci (breu, deu, eu, mei, meler, vel)[19], and it frequently remains unexpressed even in the writings of the literary period.

It is to be noted that ę does not break before u ＜ l nor before i ＜ ð: bĕllus ＞ bęls ＞ bęus, pĕtra ＞ ✱pęðra ＞ pęira, Pĕtrum ＞ ✱Pęðre ＞ Pęire, rĕtro ＞ ✱ręðre ＞ ręire[20]. The breaking must, therefore, have occurred before these developments of l and ð, both of which apparently antedate the Boeci: cf. euz = els, v. 139; eu = el, v. 155; Teiric ＜ ✱Teðric ＜ Theodorīcum, v. 44, etc. On the other hand, there is no diphthong before ts, dz, s, z coming from Latin c´, cy, pty, tty, ty: dĕcem ＞ dętz, pĕttia (or pĕcia) ＞ pęssa, nĕptia ＞ nęssa, ✱prĕtiat ＞ pręza, prĕtium ＞ prętz[21]. The breaking, therefore, took place after these consonants had ceased to be palatal. We may ascribe it with some confidence to the period between the seventh and tenth centuries.

1. A number of cases of ię before r are doubtless to be explained by analogy. Hĕri ＞ ęr; autre + er ＞ autręr, which, through the influence of adjectives in -ęr -ięr, became autrięr: hence the form ięr. Fĕrio, mĕreo ＞ fięr, mięr; hence, by analogy, the first person forms profięr, quięr, then the third person forms fięr, mięr, profięr, quięr, sięrf (but sęrvon, sęrva), and the subjunctives ofięira, sofię(i)ra.

2. Ięsc (= ĕxeo), ięscon, ięsca receive their diphthong either from earlier forms with s´ or from ięis ＜ ĕxit.