Proto-Germanic language

Spoken in

• Urindogermanisch Präger manic Proto-Germanic language

Acc

Proto-Germanic ( Protogermanisch ) is called the hypothetical precursor language of all the Germanic languages ​​, in a way the original language of the Germanic language family, which among other things, the present-day languages ​​German, English, Dutch or Swedish count. It developed possibly in the 2nd millennium BC, the latest in the 1st millennium roughly around the western Baltic Sea.

• 5.1 Categories 5.1.1 Nominal System
• 5.1.2 Verbal System

• 6.1 Basics
• 6.2 Word order
• 6.3 Form Usage 6.3.1 Using the case
• 6.3.2 The use of tenses and modes

Speaker and main characteristics

The speakers of this language level are called regardless of ethnological and geographical documents as Germans. About the dating of the Primitive Germanic can be due to lack of evidential texts say anything definite. The previous state of language ( first sound shift, Verner law and shift in emphasis not yet been completed on the root syllable ) is as Vorgermanisch (English: Pré- germanique: Pre -Germanic or Germanic Parent Language and French ) referred.

One of the most characteristic features of the Primitive Germanic counts in the field of phonology that emerged from the first sound shift new plosive ( obstruents ) system. In the area of ​​morphology is based on the ablaut system of strong verbs, the introduction of a tooth Loud for marking the past ( Dentalpräteritums ) and the introduction of a weak adjective inflection were noticeable features of the Primitive Germanic.

Dating and ordering

The Proto-Germanic was spoken to incipient dissolution of the Germanic language unit towards the end of the 1st millennium BC, was certainly already broken at this point, given the extent of its range dialect. An indication of this is found in the Germania of Tacitus (Section 43.1 ). In addition, the Germanic language had already undergone a long development at this time, will be conducted in detail, little is known. Therefore, only early- Late - Pay ( relative chronologies ) are generally possible, that is, statements about the sequence of various phonetic and morphological changes, but do not have their period.

On various the Germanic with other Indo-European language branches were combined to form a larger group. Before the discovery of Tocharian and Hittite distinction was made between Kentum languages ​​and satem languages ​​, the Germanic belonged to the Celtic and Italic to the group of Kentum languages. This based on only a single phonological feature of classification has long been obsolete, if it is also ( esp. in English literature ) amortized time and again. So lost in the second half of the 20th century, the adoption of an " old-European language" strongly plausibility and influence.

Development

Since the Primitive Germanic no textual evidence are obtained, one speaks of a Rekonstruktsprache, ie a language that is accessible by the method of comparative historical linguistics. The reconstruction of the Primitive Germanic takes place one hand on the basis of individual languages ​​frühestbezeugten old Germanic Gothic, Old High German, Old English, Old Saxon, Old Norse, Old Dutch, Old Frisian and Altfränkisch, on the other hand, by comparison with the other branches of Indo-European language family. The Proto-Germanic is one of the continuer of the Indo-European proto-language. For the reconstruction of the Primitive Germanic one does not primarily of the modern Germanic languages ​​, but as these the original language must have been much closer from the earliest attested language levels of the Germanic language family.

Therefore form the basis of the development of the Primitive Germanic Old Germanic body languages. Since these vary greatly in shape, quantity and time of delivery, do not play all the old Germanic languages ​​play an equally important role in the reconstruction. In the first place it is based on the Gothic, as we have good knowledge of the archaic language of the Visigoths in the 4th century, thanks to the Wulfilabibel. The rest of North and West Germanic languages ​​are handwritten occupied until the early Middle Ages: Old High German and Old English from the 7th century, Old Saxon from the 9th century, Altniederfränkisch about the 10th century, Old Norse in the 12th century ( in short, urnordischen runic inscriptions, however, as early as the 2nd century ) and Old Frisian from the 13th century. Short runic inscriptions of the Western and Südgermanischen ( Voralthochdeutsch, Altfränkisch ) date back to the 5th and 6th centuries.

However, the age of the tradition does not say everything about the value of a language for the reconstruction. Thus, for example the Gothic as opposed to the later languages ​​( almost) no traces of Verner's Law in the verbal area more, and thus provides on this point no help in the reconstruction of Proto-Germanic relations, although the Gothic is attested much earlier than, say, Old High German or Old English which nevertheless still clearly show the results of Verner's law.

Important information for Proto-Germanic also provides a majority found on Scandinavian soil corpus of runic inscriptions. From about the 2nd century are such inscriptions - are linguistically classified as urnordisch or as nordwestgermanisch - depending on doctrine and terminology. The language of these inscriptions is of Germanic proto-language, as they are being reconstructed today, still relatively close. Since many inscriptions, however, are not clearly interpreted or only consist of single words or proper names, the arising therefrom insight regarding holds on the Proto-Germanic limited.

More knowledge about the Proto-Germanic from the early Greek and Latin tradition ( personal names, ethnonyms, single words), as Gaius Julius Caesar and Tacitus. Even early loanwords can provide important information. Firstly, there are early Germanic loanwords in non Indo-European languages ​​, such as in the Finnish and Estonian kuningas, King ', probably by PGmc. * kuningaz. On the other hand, can also borrowed words that have come for example from the Celtic to the Germanic to certain conclusions.

An equally important method for the development of the Primitive Germanic language is the historical comparison with the other Indo-European language branches and the branches of the Indo-European proto-language developed from these. In this way as statements can be made about which properties must have lost Proto-Germanic after its spin-off from the Primitive Indo-European. To DELETED features, a reconstruction that is based solely on the old Germanic individual languages ​​, of course, provide nothing.

Phonology

Phoneme inventory

In Primitive Germanic so there was not a short / o / still a long / ā /. Whether there has been only one or several long / ē / - lute, is controversial. Often two different phonemes are recognized, which are listed as to distinguish / E1 / and / E2 /. According to recent research opinion it is probably only at / E1 / a Proto-Germanic long vowel ( / ǣ / ) in / E2 / contrast to a diphthong. The diphthongs were usually postulated / ai /, / au /, / eu /, / iu /.

The voiced fricatives were probably in allophonischem relationship with the plosive counterparts b, d, g, g ʷ why the notation with these letters is also permitted.

Phonetic developments for Primitive Germanic

Between the Primitive Indo-European and the Primitive Germanic are some partly phonetic radical changes. A part of these changes is at least relatively datable; The following summary gives an approximate time sequence again:

Early changes in

• The vocalic laryngeal Indo-European * ə developed early to PGmc. * A
• All other Indo-European gutturals ( laryngeals ) disappeared. This is obviously also be done early, because ( Celtic, Italic, Baltic ) no trace of laryngeals find more in other western Indo-European languages ​​.
• The syllabic Resonant m, n, l, r -u- a scion of vowel was presented also early.
• The palatal variants of the Indo-European velars * k, * g and * g ʰ fell with the corresponding proto-Germanic and Indo-European nichtpalatalen velars. * k, * g, * g ʰ together.
• Auslautend Indo-European * - m was early to * -n, which in the Primitive Germanic mostly disappeared later; analogous Indo-European * - t * -d until it was always (for more dating unclear) disappeared.

Changes ( so far) of unknown date

• Indo-European / o / was in all positions to urg. / a / and fell while ( dating unclear ) with the old Indo-European / a / together. Probably at the same time were Indo-European * oi and * ou au to Germanic * ai or *.
• By Verner's Law voiceless fricatives were voiced in certain phonetic environments. At this time still had to have passed the old Indo-European accent conditions. Traditionally, this change was dated after the first sound shift; today an early dating is increasingly preferred last of Euler
• Definition of the word stress on the root syllable ( usually the first syllable, in compound words, however, regularly the second ). This happened with certainty about the effectiveness of Verner's Law. Some authors assume that the shift in emphasis occur simultaneously with the First Sound Shift or whose cause was.

Late changes ( around 500 BC)

• First sound shift, also known as Grimm's law. Were doing the old " plosive series " Probably in several steps (p, t, k, k ʷ, b, d, g, g ʷ ʰ and g, d ʰ b ʰ and g ʷ ʰ ) completely rebuilt. It was the new set of fricatives like-f -,- þ ( dental fricative, see Engl. Th in thief ) and ch. The dating of the first sound shift is controversial; deemed to be sure that they may have begun at the earliest from the 5th century BC, as a number not previously acquired Celtic and Scythian loanwords in Germanic have mitvollzogen these changes. Also apparently speak for a rather late dating of the First Sound Shift a small number still undisplaced Germanic names in ancient writers ( Cimbri teutonique , vacalus ⇐ the river Waal >, Tencteri and Catualda ) and the fact that in the ancient Indo-European plosive series despite the sound shift in the Germanic no mixing has occurred.
• Only after the first sound shift (* braka, trousers' about kelt. ) Was an Indo-European / ā / to / ō /, as several Celtic loanwords the La Tène period have mitvollzogen this change. Along with the change of Indo-European / o / to proto-Germanic / a / (see above) this explains the lack of / ā / and / o / in Primitive Germanic.
• Also apparently late different consonants were assimilated to neighboring Liquide and nasals in the course of the combinatorial sound change. Thus, Indo-European * -sm -to urg. * mm, Indo-European * -ln -to urg. * -ll- and Indo-European * -nw -to urg. * -nn - simplified.
• Chance already in ancient Germanic period, the weakening and loss of sounds and syllables began at the end of the word. In a larger scale this happened but only much later, in German only with the transition from Old - to Middle High German in the 10th century AD.

Since the phonological changes from Indo-European, at least approximately, can be determined in their chronological sequence for Primitive Germanic, is trying for a long time, phonologically and morphologically closer to analyze transition states between these two linguistic states and describing, then, for example, in the middle and later Bronze Age or the ( early ) pre-Roman iron Age were spoken. In the English literature for this language states next to " pre -Germanic ", more recently, the term " Germanic Parent Language" used in German, however, usually the terms " peen manic " or " Protogermanisch before the first sound shift ".

Morphology

Categories

Nominal system

Of the eight Indo-European case ( cases ) are in the Germanic proto-language six left: nominative, accusative, genitive, dative, instrumental, and vocative. The instrumental is only in the West Germanic, more precisely, is in Old High German and Old English, but thereby secured for Proto-Germanic. The vocative in turn is obtained only in a few forms in Gothic, but has already matched in the Indo-European proto-language in several declinations with the nominative. The functions of the instrumentals, the locative and the ablative are mostly risen in the dative, in Urnordischen predominate in the dative even in several declensions the old Lokativformen. The loss of case by mixing or other simplifications of the paradigms is called syncretism. There is evidence that the coincidence of and ( old ) dating has been done in the forms of Proto-Germanic dative case not too long before the beginning of the tradition of the Germanic individual languages ​​locative, which is why a separate locative has in Primitive Germanic still exists. In the Gothic are also remnants of the Indo-European ablative detectable (especially in Adverbialbildungen ). This suggests that the Indo- eight- case system has existed at least in Präger manic time for a long time and may well have been reduced to BC Proto-Germanic six- case system only at the end of the first millennium.

At other categories Proto-Germanic knows the three numbers singular, dual and plural as well as the three genders masculine, feminine and neuter.

Verbal system

Here knew the Proto-Germanic of categories, the three modes indicative, subjunctive, imperative, and the two diatheses active, ( Medio ) passive. The complex tense / aspect system of the Primitive Indo-European verb has been greatly simplified, and there remained only the two tenses, present and preterite left, while Greek and Latin had six or seven of them. However:

• Have ( for example, English ) her time system using periphrastic constructions again greatly expanded later Germanic languages.
• Indo-European proto-language had possibly but less verbal categories than about the Greek, as some categories, such as the future tense may have originated only in the individual language. See, for example, the past tense forms in Latin on - bā, extending from a Primitive Indo-European verbal root / b ʱ hurt ₂ ː / " be be " derived ( AMA bā - s, which is literally " you were the love" ).
• Contains the Germanic past tense forms of the aorist and the perfect tense, as the Latin Perfect.

Innovations

Are the key innovations of the Primitive Germanic

• Expansion of the system of strong verbs, where the inflection operates with a combination of distinctive endings as well as of ablaut ( Binnenflexion ).
• Introducing a new category of "weak" verbs without ablaut. They form the past tense with a dental suffix, whose origin is controversial. Maybe it is a periphrasis do with the word, or a suffix IE * -to-.
• Introduction of a weak adjective inflection. The weak adjective forms have the endings of the substantive n strains and see syntactically certain contexts (especially right after the demonstrative pronoun ) use. See, a happy chicken (strong) and the happy chicken ( weak).

Example paradigms

As an example paradigm is used here with the meaning of the noun, gift ', the verb ' carry ' and the demonstrative pronoun, this '.

Syntax

Basics

The development of the Proto-Germanic syntax is associated with many difficulties, because the texts preserved only conditionally allow conclusions on the word order:

• The oldest runic inscriptions rarely consist of complete and almost never from structured sentences. Often single words or names are, which provide information about the syntax inconclusive.

• The earliest texts are to a large extent translation literature that most closely adheres to the set position to the respective Greek or Latin original. Especially in the field of Bible translation reflect Interlinear translations or translations based on the predominant in the early Middle Ages " word - for-word principle " primarily the syntax of the translated Greek or Latin template back or offer only a " distorted " ( Hellenized or Latinized ) Germanic syntax. Therefore, references to the syntax of the old Germanic target language are found especially where the translation differs from the syntax of the original.

• In ancient Germanic texts that are not translation literature is often linked to metric poetry. As far as the syntax is here also not influenced by style models from other languages ​​, in particular from Latin, they can indeed be considered as Germanic, but the syntax of lyrical texts differs in many cases from that of the standard or everyday language. Especially the meter (eg the Germanic alliterative effective long line in Beowulf ) or rhyme (in the case of the Old High German Diatessaron Otfrids ) lead to deviations from the usual syntax of Old Germanic languages ​​and, ultimately, the Primitive Germanic. However, these texts allow many conclusions on the syntax, especially where allow metric or rhyme alternative word orders.

In general, the Proto-Germanic syntax is far less intensively explored as phonology, morphology and lexicon of that language. As far the only monograph on this subject applies the multi-volume work of Otto Behaghel German syntax. A historical account of the years 1924, 1928 and 1932. Since this problem has been explored mainly in individual articles regarding specific aspects, a recent summary of the state of research is the monograph by Wolfram Euler.

Word order

While the most widely endung loose language the word order is relatively fixed, for example, in modern English and deviations often highlight the conceptual differences, Ancient Greek and Latin was in the early Old Indic traditional Indo-European languages ​​, the word order is far less defined. The same has been true in apparently also very rich in forms Primitive Germanic. For example, predominates in those urnordischen runic inscriptions that contain complete sentences with subject, object and verb, only slightly the word order subject-object - verb. The position of subject-verb - object is as familiar and seems to outweigh anything in the Pre-OHG ( " südgermanischen " ) inscriptions.

As regards the position of attributes ( adjectives, pronouns and Numerals ) next to the nouns, the picture is equally mixed. In the earliest Old English and Old High German texts, the noun is the attribute requires slightly more often than vice versa. Unless the attribute is adjusted, it was emphasized regularly. Since the findings of the Urnordischen is very meaningful and use in West Germanic at least not contradict, one can assume that the nouns were usually preceded in Primitive Germanic attributes and emphasized by the adjuster.

Form Usage

Using the case

In the Primitive Germanic dative has united the functions of the Indo-European dative, locative, ablative and partially also the instrumental to be morphologically pass the Dative of the old Germanic languages ​​mainly from old inherited locative and dative forms. This origin of the Proto-Germanic dative corresponds to its use as Sammelkasus in its dative, lokativischer, ablativischer and also instrumental function in the old Germanic languages ​​, which apparently continue here the Proto-Germanic language ( and persists in the Germans in principle).

In the other case the obtained form use differs little from that of other Indo-European languages ​​from (Latin, Greek, Old Church Slavonic, Lithuanian). A special feature in all three branches of the Germanic (East, North and West Germanic ) is the dativus absolutus that describes a subplot or circumstances with respect to a main plot. It corresponds in several places the Latin ablative absolute and the Greek genitive absolute. In today's German, he is most likely using formulaic phrases in the genitive as "standing foot" or " empty-handed " comparable.

Similarly as in Latin (and occasionally in German ) was provided in the Primitive Germanic the AcI ( accusative with infinitive ), since he appears not only in translations from Latin to the expected places, but also several times in the Gothic translation of the Bible different from the Greek original.

Use of tenses and modes

Something stronger than the case system, the Germanic languages ​​have single at the start of its delivery reduces and simplifies the Indo-European verbal form system. Although Proto-Germanic of Christ's birth perhaps even a much greater diversity than did about the traditional from the 8th century Old High German, so a large part of the reduction of the verbal system was at that time probably already taken place.

For example, the Indo-European subjunctive ( as a mode of fixed desire and intention ) was apparently already disappeared. Its function was also copied mostly from the surviving optative ( present tense), who had initially referred to in the Indo-European time only Possible, unreal and generally relevant box. This development has a parallel in Latin, the ( new ) subjunctive is based on Indo-European Optativformen, while several old subjunctive forms in Latin to the future tense forms were ( above all in the consonantal conjugation). Accordingly, in the Primitive Germanic prohibitive (negative desire and prohibition ) with the combination of * was formed ne verb in the optative present tense.

During the Indo-European aorist has set as its own past tense in Germanic from a few relic forms, there was a Futur as little as in the Indo-European proto-language. This was in the Primitive Germanic rather unchanged ( as in German and in many cases to date) expressed with the present tense ( adverb ) (tomorrow I go home ).

A Proto-Germanic innovation in form and function was the optative of the preterite, who described the Irrealis the past but also the present, as matching documents in Gothic, Old High German, Old English and Old Norse prove. This use of the (new ) preterite optative as Irrealis all time levels apparently did not occur until after the ( Proto-Germanic ) preterite had repressed than one term perfect the Indo-European aorist.

In addition, the Proto-Germanic knew a consecutio temporum ( time series ) to distinguish between pre-and simultaneity in the main and subordinate clause. A pluperfect did not exist, so that the Vorvergangenheit was expressed in the next sentence with the past tense.

Vocabulary

The proto- Germanic vocabulary contains many words for which an Indo-European origin is difficult to prove or is flatly denied (see Germanic substrate hypothesis). These uncertainties relate primarily to areas of social structure as well as ship and seafaring creatures and have to assert an influence by a previously existing language (substrate ) and an emergence of Germanischer out as an immigrant language; for most of the field conducted for this hypothesis, however, Indo-European etymologies lemmas are also already been proposed.

Loanwords show above all close to (subsequent ) Relationships ( cf. Sprachbund ) to the Celtic languages. In addition, the Finnish was influenced early by several Germanic words, which has kept it in almost unchanged until today, the words kuningas, King ' from proto-Germanic * kuningaz and rengas ' Ring' from proto-Germanic: * hrengaz ( in two words, for z for voiced s ).

Text samples

Awiz eχ ʷ az- uχ Awiz, χ ʷ Esja wulno ne is speχet eχ ʷ anz, Ainan Krun waǥan weǥantun, Ainan- uχ Mekon ƀoran, Ainan- uχ ǥumonun aχu ƀerontun. Awiz nu eχ ʷ amaz weuχet: χert aǥnutai meke witantei, eχ ʷ to the akantun weran. Eχ ʷ az weuχant: χluđi, awi! χert aknutai us wituntmaz: mannaz, foþiz, wulnon awjan χ ʷ urneuti seƀi warman wistran. Awjan - uχ wulno ne isti. That χeχluwaz awiz akran ƀukeþ.

The Munich-based Indo-Europeanist tungsten Euler also proposed in 2007 for the same text the following proto- Germanic reconstruction (language prior to the birth of Christ ):

Awiz eχwôz - uχ Awis, þazmai wullô ne wase, eχwanz gasáχ, Ainan Kurun waganan wegandun, anþeran mekelôn burþînun, þriđjanôn gumanun berandun. Awiz eχwamiz kwaþe: " Χertôn gaángwjedai mez seχwandi eχwanz gumanun akandun. " Eχwôz kwêđund: " Gaχáusî, awi, χertôn gaángwjedai unsez seχwandumiz: gumôn, faþiz awjôn wullôn sez warman Westran garwidi; avimiz wullô ne esti. " That gaχáusijandz awiz akran þlauχe.

The German translation is:

The sheep and the horses A sheep that had no wool saw horses, the one that drew a heavy car, the other, which was carrying a large load, and the third, wearing a man. The sheep said to the horses: "The heart narrows me when I see how the person drives the horses. " The horses said: "Listen, sheep! The heart narrows a us at the sight: Man, the Lord, prepared from the wool of sheep for a warm garment, and the sheep have no wool. " As the sheep heard it, they fled from the field.