Misplaced Pages

#313686

129-530: Proto-Afro-Asiatic may refer to Proto-Afro-Asiatic language , the reconstructed common ancestor of the Afro-Asiatic languages Proto-Afro-Asiatic Urheimat , theories concerning the original homeland of Afro-Asiatic Topics referred to by the same term [REDACTED] This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the title Proto-Afro-Asiatic . If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change

258-544: A case system with at least two cases. Proto-Afroasiatic may have had marked nominative or ergative-absolutive alignment. A deverbal derivational prefix *mV- is also widely reconstructed. While there is disagreement about the forms of the PAA personal pronouns, there is agreement that there were independent and "bound" (unstressed, clitic ) forms. There is also agreement that a widespread demonstrative pattern of n = masculine and plural, t= feminine goes back to PAA, as well as about

387-581: A dental consonant but does co-occur with other pharyngeal consonants , it must itself have originally been a dental *d in Proto-Afroasiatic, which later became *ʕ in Egyptian. Rössler's ideas have come to dominate the field of Egyptology without, however, achieving general acceptance. Orin Gensler argues that Rössler's sound change is typologically extremely unlikely, though still possible, while many of

516-410: A terminative case in -iš . Scholars debate whether these are vestigial cases or adverbial postpositions . The ending -iš has often been connected to the Egyptian postposition js and is sometimes used to reconstruct a Proto-Afroasiatic locative case. Diakonoff also believed he could reconstruct a comitative - dative case in *-dV or *-Vd , an ablative - comparative case in *-kV ,

645-550: A "directive" case in *-l , and an ablative case in *-p . A prefix mV- is the most widely attested affix in AA that is used to derive nouns. For PAA, its shape has variously been reconstructed as *ma- , *ma(i)- , *mV- , and *-m- . In the daughter languages, it is attested with a wide variety of meanings and functions, such as forming deverbal agent nouns , place nouns, instrument nouns, as well as participles. Erin Shay argues that *mV-

774-545: A consonant; consonants included in the pattern often involve gemination . If root-and-pattern morphology originated in Proto-Afroasiatic, then an explanation must be found for why it has mostly disappeared in the Omotic and Chadic branches; if it was not present in PAA, then an explanation must be found for why it developed independently in the Semitic, Egyptian, and Cushitic branches. Hans-Jürgen Sasse proposed that Proto-Afroasiatic

903-464: A demonstrative *h- ('this/that') or *ha- ('this/that one'). The most common Afroasiatic interrogative pronoun is *mV , which Ehret reconstructs as *ma , *mi 'what?'. Diakonoff argued that *mV ultimately derived from a demonstrative stem *m- . Only the Semitic reflexes of this root have separate forms for animate ('"who?") and inanimate ("what?") referents. The Old Egyptian and Berber descendants both appear to be used regardless of whether

1032-405: A fact which has not yet been explained. Additionally, it is not always clear which words are cognates, as some proposed cognates may be chance resemblances. Moreover, at least some cognates are likely to have been altered irregularly due to analogical change , making them harder to recognize. As words change meaning over time, the question of which words might have originally meant the same thing

1161-728: A facultative trial, like in Ngan'gi . Most languages with a trial are in the Austronesian family, and most non-Austronesian languages with a trial are nearby in Oceania. The latter category includes the Austronesian-influenced English creole languages of Tok Pisin , Bislama , and Pijin . In Australia, the trial can also be found in Aboriginal languages of many different language families. In Indonesia, trial pronouns are common in

1290-432: A few branches, making them difficult to reconstruct. In addition to a singular and plural, Egyptian and Semitic attest a dual , the endings of which can be reconstructed respectively as Ancient Egyptian : * -a(y) and Semitic * -ā (nominative) and * -ay (oblique). These endings are very similar to each other, and due to the dual's attestation in the two earliest attested branches of Afroasiatic it

1419-528: A form of the copula 'to be' or a particle meaning 'self'. Afroasiatic languages attest a variety of determiners , only some of which are likely to derive from Proto-Afroasiatic. As first noticed by Joseph Greenberg , Afroasiatic languages in all branches but Omotic attest a series of third person agreement markers in the form n- (masculine), t- (feminine), and n- (plural), which probably derive from Proto-Afroasiatic determiners; Omotic attests t- (feminine) alone of this set. Additionally, Omotic attests

SECTION 10

#1732845039314

1548-663: A grammatical rather than a lexical function, and argue that there is thus no basis to reconstruct it as a lexical feature in PAA, as Diakonoff does; they find Ehret's reasoning more sound. Igor Diakonoff argues that Proto-Afroasiatic required a consonant at both the beginning of a syllable and the end of a word, and that only one consonant was possible at the beginning or end of a syllable. Zygmont Frajzyngier and Erin Shay note that these rules appear to be based on Semitic structures, whereas Chadic includes syllables beginning with vowels as well as initial and final consonant clusters. Christopher Ehret argues that all word stems in PAA took

1677-487: A group of 100,000 referred to in the plural. Much like the dual, it is crosslinguistically variable which words and parts of speech may be marked with the paucal. Baiso has the paucal only for nouns and not pronouns, whereas Yimas has the paucal only for pronouns and not nouns. In Meryam Mir , the paucal is mostly marked on the verbs. Avar has the paucal for only about 90 specific nouns, including brush, spade, snake, and daughter-in-law (the only kin term that can take

1806-452: A large number of something, and has been called the plural of abundance. In other languages like Kaytetye , it can refer to all of something in existence, and has been called the global plural. Like some other grammatical numbers, languages also vary as to which cases the greater plural may be used in. The greater plural is more common in nouns than in pronouns. Accordingly, in Kaytetye,

1935-404: A marked nominative language. However, Abdelaziz Allati notes that, if PAA was originally ergative-aligned, it is unclear why both the attested ancient languages and modern AA languages predominantly have nominative-accusative alignment . Proto-Afroasiatic word order has not yet been established. Igor Diakonoff proposed that PAA had verb-subject-object word order (VSO word order), meaning that

2064-438: A masculine agreement form k- , while Chadic and Cushitic show a gender- and number-neutral form k- : both likely go back to a Proto-Afroasiatic determiner *k- , reconstructed by Ehret as *kaa 'this'. Diakonoff argues that in Proto-Afroasiatic these forms were originally demonstrative pronouns that later developed into third person personal pronouns in some branches and into genitive markers in others. Ehret also reconstructs

2193-615: A number distinction is pronouns. An example of a personal pronoun system distinguishing singular and plural is that of Wayoró : Like the singular denotes exactly one item, the dual number denotes exactly two items. For example, in Camsá : In languages with a singular/dual/plural paradigm, the exact meaning of plural depends on whether the dual is obligatory or facultative (optional). In contrast to English and other singular/plural languages where plural means two or more, in languages with an obligatory dual, plural strictly means three or more. This

2322-558: A number larger than and beyond greater plural. It has also been called the "even greater plural". For example, in Warekena : A similar system is found in Banyun , where the greater plural represents unlimitedness, and the greatest plural represents "a higher degree of unlimitedness". Linguist Daniel Harbour has represented the paucal, greater paucal, plural, greater plural, and greatest plural as collectively definable by "cuts" that divide

2451-529: A paucal. Similar things have been said about trial pronouns in Larike and Anejom̃ . Russian has what has variably been called paucal numerals, the count form, the adnumerative, or the genitive of quantification. When a noun in the nominative case has a numeral added to quantify it, the noun becomes genitive singular with 2, 3, or 4, but genitive plural with 5 or above. Many linguists have described these as paucal constructions. However, some have disagreed on

2580-472: A plural, leaving the former plural with a greater plural meaning. A different four-way distinction of singular, paucal, plural, and greater plural can be found in some verbs of Hualapai . A more complex system is found in Mele-Fila : pronouns distinguish singular, dual, plural, and greater plural, but articles attached to nouns distinguish singular, paucal, and plural. The result is that for full sentences, there

2709-604: A pluralizing morpheme in which a vowel *a was inserted between the two final consonants of the root, possibly replacing another vowel via apophony . However, Paul Newman has argued that while plurals via vowel alteration are frequent in Chadic, they cannot be reconstructed back to Proto-Chadic or Proto-Afroasiatic. Andréas Stauder likewise argues that Coptic and Egyptian plurals via vowel change may have developed independently. Lameen Souag argues that while some form of vowel-changing plural likely goes back to Proto-Afroasiatic, many of

SECTION 20

#1732845039314

2838-481: A quadral or a quintal. Linguist Susan McBurney has contended that American Sign Language has a true dual, but that the trial, quadral, and quintal should instead be classified as numeral incorporation rather than grammatical number. This is motivated by the dual marker handshape being distinct from the handshape for the numeral two, in contrast to higher number markers; the ability to also incorporate these numerals into other words, including those for times and amounts; and

2967-479: A quadral; the final 2016 reference grammar of Marshallese by Byron W. Bender , a linguist with expertise in the language, still refers to it as having a quadral. Besides singular, dual, trial, and quadral or paucal, Marshallese additionally has two different plural forms, one for five or more and one for two or more (referred to as multiple and plural absolute respectively), creating a partially overlapping six-way number distinction. Kove has been recorded as having

3096-408: A rare pronoun form for exactly six people. Some American Sign Language speakers have incorporated numerals up to nine into inclusive pronouns upon solicitation. Israeli Sign Language theoretically has the grammatical ability to incorporate numerals up to ten into pronouns. Greater plural is a number larger than and beyond plural. In various forms across different languages, it has also been called

3225-464: A similar pronoun system as Marshallese, with one addition: the plural (2+) is split between two categories, one for members of the same family and one for members of different families, creating a seven-way distinction. A few other languages have also been claimed to have quadral pronouns. Robert Blust and others have said they exist in some of the Austronesian Kenyah languages , specifically

3354-501: A spoken language with the trial (in both pronouns and verbs) outside of Oceania is Muklom Tangsa , spoken in northeast India. The paucal number represents 'a few', a small inexactly numbered group of items. For example, in Motuna : Almost all languages with a paucal also have a dual. However, this is not universal. Nouns in Mocoví only have singular, paucal, and plural. On the other hand,

3483-409: A suffix *-Vb- used to mark harmful animals. Vladimir Orel also attests less well-defined uses for this suffix, while Ehret takes this as a suffix to mark animals and parts of the body. Afroasiatic languages today clearly distinguish singular and plural. One of the first features of Proto-Afroasiatic proposed by Joseph Greenberg was the existence of "internal-a plurals" (a type of broken plural ):

3612-456: A system of paucal, greater paucal, plural. Other examples can be found in the related languages of Northern Gumuz and Daatsʼiin . Northern Gumuz is said to mark the plural and greater plural on verbs, and Daatsʼiin is said to mark "three degrees of plurality" (plural, greater plural, and greatest plural) on verbs. In both languages though, the "plural" is often actually a paucal, understood to mean about two to four. However, in neither language

3741-646: A third consonant. As early as the Middle Ages, however, grammarians had noticed that some triradical roots in Arabic differed in only one consonant and had related meanings. According to supporters of original triradicalism such as Gideon Goldenberg, these variations are common in language and inconclusive for the matter. He compares phonetic similarity between words with similar meanings in English such as glow , gleam , glitter , glaze , and glade . Other scholars argue that

3870-483: A tonal system of at least two tonal phonemes, falling tone, rising tone, and possibly a third tone, level tone. Other scholars argue that Proto-AA had a pitch accent and some branches subsequently developed tone. Such scholars postulate that tones developed to compensate for lost or reduced syllables, and note that certain tones are often associated with certain syllable-final consonants. Zygmunt Frajzyngier and Erin Shay note that in AA tonal languages, tone usually has

3999-852: A true quadral did exist, but it has since morphed into a plural form. It has thus been hypothesized that the quadral existed in Proto-Oceanic and Proto-Southern Vanuatu. The quintal number denotes exactly five items. Apparent examples of its use can mostly only be found in pronouns of sign languages. Like the quadral, its existence has been contested, and only some classifications accept it. Like trial and quadral forms, rare quintal forms of pronouns have been said to be attested in Tok Pisin and Bislama. These languages insert numerals to represent exact numbers of referents. For example, in Bislama, the numerals tu (two) and tri (three) are contained within

Proto-Afro-Asiatic - Misplaced Pages Continue

4128-468: A two vowel system ( *a and *ə ), as supported by Berber and Chadic data, and then developing further vowels. Some scholars postulate that Proto-Afroasiatic was a tonal language, with tonality subsequently lost in some branches. Igor Diakonoff argued for the existence of tone based on his reconstruction of many otherwise homophonous words. Christopher Ehret instead takes the fact that three branches of AA have tone as his starting point; he has postulated

4257-400: Is c.  4000 BCE , after which Egyptian and the Semitic languages are firmly attested. However, in all likelihood these languages began to diverge well before this hard boundary. The estimations offered by scholars as to when Proto-Afroasiatic was spoken vary widely, ranging from 18,000   BCE to 8,000   BCE. An estimate at the youngest end of this range still makes Afroasiatic

4386-509: Is Nukna , which has only a single trial pronoun, nanggula , which can be either 2nd or 3rd person. The trial may also be marked on verbs, such as in Lenakel . While the dual can be obligatory or facultative, according to Greville Corbett there are no known cases of an obligatory trial, so the trial might always be facultative. However, languages may have both a facultative dual and a facultative trial, like in Larike, or an obligatory dual and

4515-428: Is redundant , since quantity is already indicated by the numeral two . A language has grammatical number when its noun forms are subdivided into morphological classes according to the quantity they express, such that: This is partly true for English: every noun and pronoun form is singular or plural (a few, such as " fish ", " cannon " and " you ", can be either, according to context). Some modifiers of nouns—namely

4644-452: Is a combined five-way distinction of singular, dual, paucal, plural, and greater plural. Singular and plural have straightforward number agreements, whereas dual has dual pronouns but paucal articles, paucal has plural pronouns but paucal articles, and greater plural has greater plural pronouns but plural articles. The exact meaning of and terminology for the greater plural differs between languages. In some languages like Miya , it represents

4773-435: Is a larger paucal category, for an inexactly numbered group that is larger in size than a smaller paucal. It can be found in the pronouns of the Austronesian language of Sursurunga , which exhibit a five-way distinction described as singular, dual, paucal, greater paucal, and plural. The Sursurunga paucal is used for smaller groups, usually of about three or four, or for nuclear families of any size. The Sursurunga greater paucal

4902-474: Is a later development, which he associates primarily with Semitic. Helmut Satzinger has argued that the earliest form of conjugation in Afroasiatic was the so-called "prefix conjugation," a form found in Semitic, Berber, and Cushitic that uses prefixes to conjugate verbs for person, gender, and number. Other scholars ague that, as there is no evidence for the "prefix conjugation" in Omotic, Chadic, or Egyptian,

5031-401: Is a morphological category characterized by the expression of quantity through inflection or agreement. As an example, consider the English sentences below: The quantity of apples is marked on the noun—"apple" singular number (one item) vs. "apples" plural number (more than one item)—on the demonstrative, that/those , and on the verb, is/are . In the second sentence, all this information

5160-416: Is also a divergent proposal that has become popular among Egyptologists ; there is no agreement about PAA's vowels, the existence of tone , or its syllable structure. At the same time, scholars disagree to whether and to what extent the classical Semitic languages are a conservative, faithful representation of PAA morphology. This is particularly important for the question of whether the lexical roots in

5289-461: Is also accepted by Takács, but he reconstructs it as *ʔaw / *wa 'who?'. Diakonoff also reconstructs an interrogative adjective, *ayyV- , which he claims left traces in Semitic, Cushitic, and Omotic. Lipiński, on the other hand, holds this term to be Semitic and deriving from a particle ʔay 'where?'. Takács derives this particle from PAA *ʔay / *ya , a variant of *ʔaw / *wa 'who?'. Most morphological reconstruction for PAA has focused on

Proto-Afro-Asiatic - Misplaced Pages Continue

5418-470: Is also debate about whether some of the forms may have been nominal (using verbal nouns), or possibly participial or gerundival , rather than purely verbal. TAMs may have been indicated by both changes in the verb stem and the use of suffixes and prefixes. Some scholars argue that prefixes were used for "eventive" (describing things happening) aspects, as opposed to the "suffix conjugation," which described states. Abdelaziz Allati, however, argues that this

5547-409: Is also possible for forms closer to PAA to be preserved in languages recorded later, while languages recorded earlier may have forms that diverge more from PAA. In order to provide a more accurate reconstruction of Afroasiatic, it will be necessary to first reconstruct the proto-forms of the individual branches, a task which has proven difficult. As of 2023, there is only the beginning of a consensus on

5676-484: Is also usually reconstructed for the proto-language. The loss of the dual in the other branches over time is a well attested feature in languages, including within the Egyptian and Semitic branches themselves. There is widespread agreement that Proto-Afroasiatic had case inflexion . First proposed by Hans-Jürgen Sasse on the basis of his reconstruction of the Proto-Cushitic case system in 1984, Proto-Afroasiatic

5805-425: Is attested among the Semitic languages and may have been dialectal in origin. The forms of the personal pronouns are very stable throughout Afroasiatic (excluding Omotic), but there is no consensus on what the reconstructed set of Afroasiatic pronouns might have looked like. Most modern branches have an independent / absolute pronoun, an object pronoun, and a suffix /possessive pronoun. According to Igor Diakonoff,

5934-437: Is evidence for natural gender in all branches, including Omotic, perhaps marked originally by an opposition of PAA *-u (masculine) and *-i (feminine), as also found in the second person singular pronouns . In addition to grammatical gender, Igor Diakonoff argues that Afroasiatic languages show traces of a nominal classification system , which was already unproductive in the Proto-Afroasiatic stage. In particular, he noted

6063-436: Is found in the two oldest attested branches of the family. In the Semitic languages, the "nisba" is used to form adjectives, derive nouns for people associated with a place or profession, and to form hypercoristic names . In Egyptian, it forms adjectives and nouns from nouns and prepositions. The "nisba" is often assumed to be connected to the genitive case ending in Semitic and possibly Cushitic. Igor Diakonoff argued that

6192-515: Is found particularly in the isolating languages of West Africa. One of the simplest number distinctions a language can make is singular and plural. Singular denotes exactly one referent, while plural denotes more than one referent. For example, in English: To mark number, English has different singular and plural forms for nouns and verbs (in the third person): "my dog watch es television" (singular) and "my dog s watch television" (plural). This

6321-429: Is likely that this is inherited from proto-Afroasiatic. Vladimir Orel and Olga Stolbova (1995) reconstruct 32 consonant phonemes, while Christopher Ehret reconstructs 42. Of these, twelve in both reconstructions rely on the same sound correspondences, while an additional eighteen rely on more or less the same sound correspondences. Both reconstructions also include a number of other consonants. While some of these are

6450-486: Is no evidence for this in Ancient Egyptian, Cushitic, or Chadic, perhaps indicating that there was no gender distinction in the plural in Proto-Afroasiatic. Chadic has both an inclusive and exclusive form of "we", which Igor Diakonoff and Václav Blažek reconstruct also for Proto-Afroasiatic. Helmut Satzinger has argued that Proto-Afroasiatic only distinguished between the "object" and "possessive" pronouns, deriving

6579-422: Is not universal: Wambaya marks number on nouns but not verbs, and Onondaga marks number on verbs but not nouns. Latin has different singular and plural forms for nouns, verbs, and adjectives, in contrast to English where adjectives do not change for number. Tundra Nenets can mark singular and plural on nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and postpositions . However, the most common part of speech to show

SECTION 50

#1732845039314

6708-447: Is obligatory for pronouns but facultative for nouns. In Comanche , it is obligatory when referring to humans, facultative for other animate nouns, and rarely used for inanimate nouns. There are also languages where use of the dual number is more restricted than singular and plural. In the possessive noun forms of Northern Sámi , the possessor can be in the dual number, but the noun possessed can only be singular or plural. Pronouns are

6837-495: Is often difficult to answer. As a result, Robert Ratcliffe suggests that Proto-Afroasiatic may never be reconstructed in the same way that Proto-Indo-European has been. The current state of reconstruction is also hindered by the fact that the Egyptian and Semitic branches of Afroasiatic are attested as early as 3000 BCE, while the languages of the Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, and Omotic branches are only attested much later, sometimes in

6966-419: Is rare for a language to mark the trial on nouns, and some sources even claim that trial marking on nouns does not exist. However, it has been recorded for a few languages; besides Awa, Arabana , Urama , and Angaataha have trial number. It is much more common for a language to have trial pronouns, the case for the Austronesian languages of Larike , Tolai , Raga , and Wamesa . A minimal example

7095-411: Is the case for Sanskrit , North Mansi , and Alutiiq . In languages with a facultative dual, two of something can be referred to using either the dual or the plural, and so plural means two or more. This is the case for modern Arabic dialects, at least some Inuktitut dialects, and Yandruwandha . In some languages, the dual is obligatory in certain cases but facultative in others. In Slovene , it

7224-412: Is the only prefix in the AA phylum that clearly goes back to the proto-language rather than possibly being an areal feature . The precise meaning and origin of this prefix in PAA are debated. There is a long tradition of comparing the prefix to the interrogative pronoun *mā 'who'. Carsten Peust has suggested a common PAA origin for the prefix in forming nouns of place and instrument, but proposes that

7353-476: Is the reconstructed proto-language from which all modern Afroasiatic languages are descended. Though estimations vary widely, it is believed by scholars to have been spoken as a single language around 12,000 to 18,000 years ago (12 to 18 kya ), that is, between 16,000 and 10,000 BC . Although no consensus exists as to the location of the Afroasiatic homeland , the putative homeland of Proto-Afroasiatic speakers,

7482-494: Is the use of the prefix *ʔan-/*ʔin- , which appears in the Semitic and Old Egyptian first person independent pronouns, the Old Egyptian, Cushitic, and Semitic second person singular and plural pronouns, and the Old Egyptian and Berber third person singular and plural independent pronouns. While Ehret reconstructs this as the original form of the first person singular pronoun, other scholars argue that this element either represents

7611-417: Is this always the case. The Northern Gumuz paucal/plural may sometimes refer to "much greater than four". In some languages, the default form of a noun is not singular, but rather general, which does not specify number and could mean one or more than one. Singular and plural forms are marked from the general form. The general is used when the specific number is deemed irrelevant or unimportant. In this system,

7740-456: Is to categorize the apparent trial/quadral/quintal forms as "cardinal plurals", or forms of the grammatical plural number where the number of people is specified. Other authors have treated these concepts as perfectly equivalent, referring to pronoun numeral incorporation while still applying the terms quadral and quintal. There are also cases of sign language pronouns indicating specific numbers of referents above five. Ugandan Sign Language has

7869-605: Is used for groups of four or more (and must be used instead of the plural for a group of two or more dyads). There is thus some overlap between the two groups; a family of four can be referred to in Sursurunga by either of the paucals. This distinction is found both in Sursurunga's personal pronouns and in two different sets of possessive pronouns, one for edible things and one for non-edible things. The quadral number denotes exactly four items. Apparent examples of its use are almost entirely confined to pronouns, and specifically those in

SECTION 60

#1732845039314

7998-513: Is usually reconstructed with a case system similar to Proto-Semitic. This gives a nominative ending *-u , accusative or absolutive *-a , and genitive *-i . Besides Proto-Semitic, evidence for these endings is derived from the Cushitic languages and has been argued to exist in Berber as well. The Egyptian nominal ending -w , found on some masculine nouns, may also be evidence of this system. Some evidence for nominative -u may also exist from

8127-456: Is widely agreed to have been present in Proto-Afroasiatic. However, Russell Schuh argues that there was no gender distinction in the plural, as this feature is found only in Semitic and Berber (see also personal pronouns ). Christopher Ehret argues against the consensus that grammatical gender existed in Proto-Afroasiatic, arguing that its development is an isogloss separating all other Afroasiatic languages from Omotic, which alone preserves

8256-409: The *mV- prefix used in agent nouns and participles is actually a post-PAA development, derived from the interrogative pronoun *mā 'who'. Christopher Ehret, meanwhile, proposes that the prefix did not exist in PAA at all, but is a later development from the interrogative pronoun. Gábor Takács and Andrzej Zaborski both reject a connection to *mā entirely; Takács instead suggests that a connection to

8385-467: The Moscow School of Comparative Linguistics including Igor Diakonoff and Alexander Militarev includes also *pʼ, *tɬ, *ʃ, *kx⁽ʷ⁾, *gɣ⁽ʷ⁾, *kxʼ⁽ʷ⁾, *x⁽ʷ⁾. Taking Ehret's labialized velars as equivalent to Orel and Stolbova's non-labialized set, and taking Ehret's extra nasals as equivalent to Orel and Stolbova's <n>, the two reconstructions mostly agree on the following correspondences between

8514-597: The Sorbian languages . Indo-European languages that have long ago lost the dual still sometimes have residual traces of it, such as the English distinctions both vs. all , either vs. any , and neither vs. none . The Norwegian både , cognate with English both , has further evolved to be able to refer to more than two items, as in både epler, pærer, og druer , literally "both apples, pears, and grapes." The trial number denotes exactly three items. For example, in Awa : It

8643-519: The demonstrative determiners—and finite verbs inflect to agree with the number of the noun forms they modify or have as subject: this car and these cars are correct, while * this cars and * these car are incorrect. However, adjectives do not inflect for and many verb forms do not distinguish between singular and plural ("She/They went", "She/They can go", "She/They had gone", "She/They will go"). Many languages distinguish between count nouns and mass nouns . Only count nouns can be freely used in

8772-410: The "nisba" was an "expanded" form of the genitive suffix: he reconstructs the "nisba" suffix as *-iya or -*ī ; he also suggests the existence of a variant *-uwa . Lipiński suggests that the "nisba" originated as a postposition, which was also used to create the genitive case. Christopher Ehret argues that the original form of the suffix was -*iy and also reconstructs a form -*ay . This latter form

8901-526: The 20th century. The long history of scholarship of the Semitic languages compared to other branches is another obstacle in reconstructing Proto-Afroasiatic; typical features of Semitic have often been projected back to the proto-language, despite their cross-linguistic rarity and lack of correspondences in other branches. Like cognates, shared morphological features tend to disappear over time, as can be demonstrated within Afroasiatic by comparing Old Egyptian (2600–2000 BCE) with Coptic (after 200 CE). Yet it

9030-482: The Egyptian preposition m needs further consideration, while Zaborski argues for a connection to a verb *VmV- 'to be'. The term "nisba" refers to a suffix found in the Semitic ( -iy ) and Egyptian ( -j ) branches, with possible relict traces in Berber. A related suffix -āwi occurs in Arabic and possibly Egyptian, as suggested by e.g. ḥmww 'craftsman', from ḥmt 'craft'. Carsten Peust argues that this suffix descends from Proto-Afroasiatic, as it

9159-467: The Kiwaian languages, but it is now recognized that many actually have a paucal instead. Linguist Michael Cysouw has suggested that most languages reported to have trials in fact have mislabelled paucals, and that true trials are very rare. On the other hand, Luise Hercus stated in her published grammar of Arabana that the language's trial (which can be marked on nouns) is a true trial which cannot act as

9288-452: The Melanesian pidgins of Tok Pisin, Bislama, and Pijin. However, while these are grammatically possible, they are rare, and plural forms are almost always used in their place. Many different sign languages have been explicitly described as having quadral pronoun forms. Estonian Sign Language has even been described as having the quadral for nouns. Marshallese has been said to have

9417-413: The Omotic branch. By the evidence of Semitic, in the dual and plural , only the nominative and an oblique were distinguished. David Wilson, on the other hand, argues that the case endings are often not cognate in the individual branches of Afroasiatic and that this precludes their reconstruction for the proto-language. Old Akkadian and Palaeosyrian have two additional cases, a locative in -um and

9546-555: The PAA root may have originally been mostly biradical, to which a third radical was then added. Christopher Ehret argues that the third consonants were derivational affixes, proposing as many as thirty-seven separate verbal extensions that subsequently became fossilized as third consonants. This theory has been criticized by some, such as Andrzej Zaborski and Alan Kaye, as being too many extensions to be realistic, though Zygmont Frajzyngier and Erin Shay note that some Chadic languages have as many as twelve extensions. An alternative model

9675-420: The PAA root was originally biradical but saw the biradical roots outside of Semitic as largely the result of losing a third consonant. Afroasiatic languages feature a "root-and-pattern" ( nonconcatenative ) system of morphology, in which the root consists of consonants alone and vowels are inserted via apophony according to "templates" to create words. A "template" consists of one or more vowels and sometimes

9804-458: The addition of a consonant. Not all triradical roots can be convincingly explained as coming from biradicals, and there are cases in which triradical roots with similar meanings appear to differ in one consonant due to root-internal changes or derivation via rhyme. Andréas Stauder argues that the evidence from Ancient Egyptian shows that both tri- and biradical verbs were probably present in Proto-Afroasiatic. Igor Diakonoff, in contrast, argued that

9933-475: The central vowels *e and *o could not occur together in the same root. Taking a different approach, Ronny Meyer and H. Ekkehard Wolff propose that Proto-Afroasiatic may have had no vowels as such, instead employing various syllabic consonants (*l, *m, *n, *r) and semivowels or semivowel-like consonants (*w, *y, *ʔ, *ḥ, *ʕ, *h, *ʔʷ, *ḥʷ, *ʕʷ, *hʷ) to form syllables; vowels would have later been inserted into these syllables ("vocalogenesis"), developing first into

10062-473: The different branches of Afroasiatic: Additionally, there is another proposal for the sound correspondences between – and phonetic values of – Egyptian and Semitic consonants. This second theory is known as neuere Komparatistik and was first proposed by Semiticist Otto Rössler on the basis of consonant incompatibilities . In particular, Rössler argued that, since the hieroglyph conventionally transcribed as <ʿ> and described as *ʕ never co-occurs with

10191-427: The difficulty in reconstruction is likely related to the use of vowel changes known as apophony (or "ablaut") in the "root-and-pattern" system found in various Afroasiatic languages. In addition to apophony, some modern AA languages display vowel changes referred to as umlaut . Igor Diakonoff, Viktor Porkhomovksy and Olga Stolbova proposed in 1987 that Proto-Afroasiatic had a two vowel system of *a and *ə , with

10320-554: The dual can only be used by an adult male speaking to another adult male. Dual number existed in all nouns and adjectives of Proto-Indo-European around 4000 BCE, and was inherited in some form in many of its prehistoric , protohistoric , ancient , and medieval descendents. Only rarely has it persisted in Indo-European languages to the modern day. It survived in Proto-Germanic in the first and second person pronouns, where it

10449-442: The etymologies proposed in support of the theory have been attacked by Gábor Takács. The most important sound correspondences in the neuere Komparatistik that differ from the traditional understanding are: Attempts to reconstruct the vocalic system of Proto-Afroasiatic vary considerably. While there is no consensus, many scholars prefer to reconstruct a simple three vowel system with long and short *a , *i , and *u . Some of

10578-444: The existence of an interrogative pronoun *mV , which may not have distinguished animacy . There is some agreement that the PAA verb had two or possibly three basic forms, though there is disagreement about what those forms were and what tenses, aspects, or moods they expressed. There is also widespread agreement that there were possibly two sets of conjugational affixes (prefixes and suffixes) used for different purposes. Additionally,

10707-486: The existence of multiple plural categories may blur the line between paucal and plural. For example, Mele-Fila is said to have a paucal, plural, and greater plural. However, the transition between plural and greater plural occurs around 15 to 20. This puts the Mele-Fila "plural" in range of some larger "paucals" described in other languages. Thus the distinction is muddied between a system of paucal, plural, greater plural, and

10836-450: The forms of the pronouns in the other branches show evidence of marked nominative alignment. Igor Diakonoff instead argued that Proto-Afroasiatic was an ergative-absolutive language, in which the ergative case marks the subject of transitive verbs and the absolutive case marks both the object of transitive verbs and the subject of intransitive verbs. Satzinger suggests that Proto-Afroasiatic may have developed from ergative-absolutive to

10965-558: The global plural, the remote plural, the plural of abundance, the unlimited plural, and the superplural. For example, in Tswana : The greater plural may also be a component of larger number systems. Nouns in Barngarla have a four-way distinction of singular, dual, plural, and greater plural. The same four-way distinction is found in Mokilese pronouns, where a former trial has evolved to become

11094-458: The great amount of time since Afroasiatic split into branches, there are limits to what scholars can reconstruct. Cognates tend to disappear from related languages over time. There are currently not many widely accepted Afroasiatic cognates, and it is difficult to derive sound correspondence rules from a small number of examples. The most convincing cognates in Afroasiatic often have the same or very similar consonants but very different vowels,

11223-401: The greater plural exists only in nouns and not pronouns. Oppositely, Mokilese has the greater plural in pronouns but not nouns. Chamacoco has the greater plural only in first person inclusive pronouns, second person pronouns, and first person inclusive verb inflections. Tigre has the greater plural only in a single word, nälät , which means a large number of deer. Greatest plural is

11352-425: The grounds that a Russian noun cannot be declined to stand by itself and mean anywhere between 2 and 4. Similar constructions can be found in other Slavic languages , including Polish , Serbo-Croatian , and Slovene. Because Slovene also has a regular dual, there is a four-way distinction of nouns being singular with 1, dual with 2, plural with 3 or 4, and genitive plural with 5 or more. The greater paucal number

11481-565: The highland Lepoʼ Sawa dialect spoken in Long Anap . There seems to be no other published sources of info on this dialect's pronouns, and an investigation into the lowland Lebo’ Vo’ dialect has revealed a paucal instead of a quadral. A quadral claim has also been made for the animate demonstrative pronouns in Nauruan . Outside the Austronesian family, Abun storytelling reportedly frequently contains quadral pronouns in addition to trial ones. Perhaps

11610-427: The importance of verbal gemination and reduplication and the existence of three derivational affixes, especially of a causative -*s-, are commonly reconstructed. A numeral system cannot be reconstructed, although numerous PAA numerals and cognate sets from 1 to 9 have been proposed. There is no consensus as to when Proto-Afroasiatic was spoken. The absolute latest date for when Proto-Afroasiatic could have been extant

11739-450: The independent pronouns via various processes in the branches. He argues that the independent pronouns derive from various strategies combining pronominal elements with different nominal or pronominal bases. Václav Blažek reconstructs an original set of independent pronouns but argues that the ones found in most current Afroasiatic languages arose by a process of suppletion similar to that argued by Satzinger. An example of one such process

11868-561: The individual daughter languages. Most reconstructions agree that PAA had three series of obstruents ( plosives , fricatives , and affricates ) and that the continuants were all voiceless. There is also general agreement that obstruents were organized in triads of voiceless, voiced, and "emphatic" (possibly glottalized ) consonants, and that PAA included pharyngeal and laryngeal consonants . Disagreement exists about whether there were labialized velar consonants. Several Afroasiatic languages have large consonant inventories, and it

11997-467: The lack of grammatical number with an extensive system of measure words . Joseph Greenberg has proposed a number category hierarchy as a linguistic universal : "No language has a trial number unless it has a dual. No language has a dual unless it has a plural." This hierarchy does not account for the paucal. Obligatory plural marking of all nouns is found throughout the languages of western and northern Eurasia and most parts of Africa . The rest of

12126-617: The language were originally mostly biradical or triradical , that is, whether they originally had two or three consonants. It also plays into the question of the degree to which Proto-Afroasiatic had root-and-pattern morphology , as most fully displayed in the Semitic , Egyptian , and Cushitic branches. There are nonetheless some items of agreement and reconstructed vocabulary. Most scholars agree that Proto-Afroasiatic nouns had grammatical gender , at least two and possibly three grammatical numbers (singular, plural, and possibly dual ), as well as

12255-437: The languages of Oceania or in sign languages . It has been contested whether the quadral truly exists in natural language; some linguists have rejected it as an extant category, while others have accepted it. Some languages that have previously been described as having a quadral, like Sursurunga, have since been reanalyzed as having a paucal instead. Like trial forms, quadral forms of pronouns have been said to be attested in

12384-433: The later realized as [i] or [u] depending on its contact with labial or labialized consonants . Christopher Ehret has proposed a five vowel system with long and short *a , *e , *o , *i , and *u , arguing that his reconstruction is supported by the Chadic and Cushitic vowels. Vladimir Orel and Olga Stolbova instead proposed a six vowel system with *a , *e , *o , *i , *ü ([ y ]), and *u ; they further argued that

12513-499: The link to point directly to the intended article. Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Proto-Afro-Asiatic&oldid=867637391 " Category : Disambiguation pages Hidden categories: Short description is different from Wikidata All article disambiguation pages All disambiguation pages Proto-Afro-Asiatic language Proto-Afroasiatic ( PAA ), also known as Proto-Hamito-Semitic , Proto-Semito-Hamitic , and Proto-Afrasian ,

12642-644: The majority of scholars agree that it was located within a region of Northeast Africa . The reconstruction of Proto-Afroasiatic is problematic and has not progressed to the degree found in Indo-European linguistics . The immense amount of time over which the branches have been separated, coupled with the wide gap between the attestations of the original branches (3rd millennium BC for Egyptian and Semitic, 19th and 20th centuries for many Chadic , Cushitic , and Omotic languages ) mean that determining sound correspondences has not yet been possible. In addition to more traditional proposed consonant correspondences, there

12771-506: The number of times an event occurs, such as the semelfactive aspect, the iterative aspect, etc. For that use of the term, see " Grammatical aspect ". Most languages of the world have formal means to express differences of number. One widespread distinction, found in English and many other languages, involves a simple two-way contrast between singular and plural number ( car / cars , child / children , etc.). Discussion of other more elaborate systems of number appears below. Grammatical number

12900-485: The oldest proven language family. Contrasting proposals of an early emergence, Tom Güldemann has argued that less time may have been required for the divergence than is usually assumed, as it is possible for a language to rapidly restructure due to areal contact , with the evolution of Chadic (and likely also Omotic) serving as pertinent examples. At present, there is no commonly accepted reconstruction of Afroasiatic morphology, grammar, syntax, or phonology. Because of

13029-433: The only known spoken language outside Oceania to have a claimed quadral is Apinayé of Brazil, recorded as having a third person pronominal prefix meaning "they four", although this has been little researched or described. In some Austronesian languages with a singular/dual/trial/plural pronoun system, the plural forms are etymologically related to the number four. This has led to suggestions or assertions that historically

13158-452: The only part of speech with a dual form in some Polynesian languages , including Samoan , Tuvaluan , and Māori . In Maltese , the dual only exists for about 30 specific nouns, of which it is obligatory for only 8 (hour, day, week, month, year, once, hundred, and thousand). Words that can take a facultative dual in Maltese include egg, branch, tear, and wicker basket. In Mezquital Otomi ,

13287-531: The original gender system of Afroasiatic had masculine endings *-y/*-w (later *-Vy / *-Vw ) and feminine endings *-H/*-y (later *-āʔ / *-āy ), the later of which was later ousted by feminine *-(a)t on nouns. Marijn van Putten has reconstructed a feminine ending *-ay/*-āy from Semitic and Berber evidence: he argues that this ending comes down from the last common ancestor of Berber and Semitic, which may be Proto-Afroasiatic. Despite arguing that Proto-Afroasiatic had no grammatical gender, Ehret argues that there

13416-465: The original, genderless grammar of the proto-language. Other scholars such as Lionel Bender argue that Omotic has lost grammatical gender despite originally having had it. A feminine morpheme -Vt is found widely in Afroasiatic languages. Lameen Souag argues that this feminine ending -t is probably a case of a grammaticalized demonstrative , as this feature has also independently developed in some Chadic and Cushitic languages. Diakonoff argued that

13545-645: The paucal in Avar). Takivatan Bunun has a paucal only in its distal demonstratives used in reference to people. It is common for former trials to evolve in meaning to become paucals, and many Austronesian languages have paucal markers that are etymologically derived from the numeral three, indicating the old usage. It is less common for duals to evolve into paucals, but this has been observed in some dialects of Arabic. Paucals that are etymologically trials are sometimes incorrectly described as being trials. For example, trial pronouns were once described as being found in all

13674-406: The prefix conjugation may be a shared innovation in Semitic, Berber, and Cushitic. In those languages where it appears, the "prefix conjugation" is used with two stems, with Igor Diakonoff identifying one as perfective/punctual as well as jussive, and the other with the imperfective. These stems may also be known as "short form" (=perfective) and "long form" (=imperfective). Assuming a PAA origin,

13803-399: The prefixes can be reconstructed as agreeing with the forms of the "bound" personal pronouns in having *n- for first person plural, *t- for second person plural and singular and feminine third person singular, and *y/*i- for third person masculine and third person plural; the form of the first person singular is unclear, but may be *ʔ- . The prefixes may have originally developed from

13932-418: The primary factor for using the paucal is not a specific number range, but the referents forming a single group; although the paucal is most common between 3 and 5, it has been used with more than 20. In Paamese , a major factor is relative group size compared to the plural, such that even though the paucal generally means 12 or fewer, a group of 2,000 people may be referred to in the paucal when contrasted with

14061-796: The pronouns in Mussau and Lihir have dual, trial, and paucal. The lower bound of the paucal is usually defined by what other number categories exist in the language. In singular/paucal/plural paradigms, use of the paucal begins at two, but with the addition of the dual, the paucal begins at three. There is usually no exact upper bound on how many paucal refers to, and its approximate range depends on both language and context. It has been recorded as going up to about 5 in Warndarrang , about 6 in Baiso , 10 in Arabic, and about 10 or 15 in Murrinh-patha . In Manam ,

14190-427: The pronouns or from auxiliary verbs with pronominal elements, though N. J. C. Kouwenberg argues that the close agreement between the forms in Semitic, Berber, and Cushitic indicates that such grammaticalization must have happened in Proto-Afroasiatic itself or earlier. Grammatical number The word "number" is also used in linguistics to describe the distinction between certain grammatical aspects that indicate

14319-415: The quadral as a regular feature in its pronoun system. While the apparent Marshallese quadral can mean exactly four, it also has an alternate rhetorical use in speeches to larger groups in order to impart a sense of individual intimacy. According to Greville Corbett , this means it is better classified as a paucal. However, there is not consensus that this alternate use means Marshallese does not truly have

14448-525: The range of possible numbers into different sections. One low cut defines paucal and plural, and one high cut defines plural and greater plural. Two low cuts define paucal, greater paucal, and plural; one low cut and one high cut define paucal, plural, and greater plural; and two high cuts define plural, greater plural, and greatest plural. There does not appear to be any language with three such cuts, and so no language with three paucal categories and an "even greater paucal". Because they are inexactly defined,

14577-420: The reconstruction of Proto-Semitic , and no widely accepted reconstruction of any of the other branches' proto-forms. Current attempts at reconstructing Afroasiatic often rely on comparing individual words or features in the daughter languages, which leads to results that are not convincing to many scholars. There is currently no consensus on the consonant phonemes of Afroasiatic or on their correspondences in

14706-443: The referent is a person or thing. It is therefore not clear if this pronoun differentiated animacy in Proto-Afroasiatic. Lack of differentiation between "who?" and "what?" is also sporadically attested in Semitic and Cushitic, but appears to be absent in Chadic; most modern AA languages use different lexical roots to make the distinction. Ehret also reconstructs a second interrogative *wa-/*wi- 'what?'. The PAA origin of this form

14835-760: The same, they rely on correspondences in the daughter languages which cannot be reconciled. For instance, although both Ehret and Orel and Stolbova reconstruct *tʼ , Ehret gives its Egyptian correspondence as s , while Orel and Stolbova give it as d and t ; and though both reconstruct PAA *tlʼ , Ehret gives its Arabic correspondence as ṣ , while Orel and Stolbova give it as ḍ . Additionally, Ehret has reconstructed 11 consonants not found in Orel and Stolbova, while Orel and Stolbova have reconstructed 2 not found in Ehret. The additional consonants are: An earlier, larger reconstruction from 1992 by Orel, Stolbova and other collaborators from

14964-504: The second person pronouns yutufala (dual) and yutrifala (trial). These forms theoretically have no specific limit, but in practicality usually stop at three. Sign languages described as having a quintal in addition to the quadral include American Sign Language , Argentine Sign Language , British Sign Language , German Sign Language , Levantine Arabic Sign Language , and Ugandan Sign Language . The validity has been debated of categorizing sign language pronouns as having

15093-472: The shape CV (with a possible alternate form VC) and CVC, with suffixes often giving the syllabic shape CVCC. David Wilson agrees with Diakonoff that the root syllable could only begin with a single consonant, but adds a requirement that syllables have two mora weight and argues for the possibility of an extra-syllabic consonant at the end of a root (CVC-C or CV:C). The degree to which the Proto-AA verbal root

15222-566: The singular and in the plural. Mass nouns, like "milk", "gold", and "furniture", are normally invariant. (In some cases, a normally mass noun X may be used as a count noun to collect several distinct kinds of X into an enumerable group; for example, a cheesemaker might speak of goat, sheep, and cow milk as milks .) Not all languages have number as a grammatical category. In those that do not, quantity must be expressed either directly, with numerals , or indirectly, through optional quantifiers . However, many of these languages compensate for

15351-554: The storytelling of Abun , a possible language isolate. In the Solomon Islands, trial pronouns are used very frequently in Touo , either a Central Solomon language or a language isolate. As a result, bilingual speakers of Touo and Pijin will use trial pronouns a lot more commonly in Pijin than other speakers, for whom the trial is usually a lot less common than the dual. A very rare example of

15480-620: The suffix/possessive pronoun was originally used as the object of verbs and to show a possessive relationship, the "independent" pronoun served to show emphasis, and the "object" pronoun was used to mark the subject of intransitive verbs and the direct object of transitive verbs. All Afroasiatic branches differentiate between masculine and feminine third person singular pronouns, and all except for Cushitic and Omotic also differentiate between second person singular masculine and feminine pronouns. Semitic and Berber also differentiate between masculine and feminine second and third person plural, but there

15609-663: The templates found in the branches likely do not. Several Afroasiatic languages of the Semitic, Chadic, and Cushitic branches attest pluralization via reduplication , a feature which has often been assumed to go back to Proto-Afroasiatic. Robert Ratcliffe has instead argued that this reduplicating pattern originated after PAA, as a way to allow biradical nouns to insert "internal-a," a process which then became generalized to other roots in some languages; as an alternative hypothesis, they may have developed from forms with plural suffixes. Afroasiatic languages also use several pluralizing affixes – few of these, however, are present in more than

15738-537: The use of markers higher than the dual not being obligatory, with replacement by the plural being acceptable. There was not enough data available to McBurney to argue whether or not these reasons equally applied to other sign languages. Linguist Raquel Veiga Busto has argued they do not equally apply to Catalan Sign Language , and has applied the terms quadral and quintal to the language's pronouns for convenience without taking an official stance as to whether they are grammatical number or numeral incorporation. A third model

15867-745: The verb would come first in most sentences. Carsten Peust likewise supports VSO word order, as this is found in the two oldest attested branches, Egyptian and Semitic. However, Ronny Meyer and H. Ekkehard Wolff argue that this proposal does not concord with Diakonoff's suggestion that PAA was an ergative-absolutive language, in which subject and object are not valid categories. Zygmont Frajzyngier and Erin Shay further note that, if Proto-Afroasiatic had VSO word order, then an explanation must be found for why two of its branches, Omotic and Cushitic, show subject–object–verb word order (SOV word order). Both sets of scholars argue that this area needs more research. A system of sex-based male and female grammatical gender

15996-404: The verb, with categories found in Semitic languages such as aspect , voice , and person . There is little agreement about which tenses, aspects, or moods ( TAMs ) Proto-Afroasiatic might have had: it may have had two basic forms (indicative vs. subjunctive, state vs. action, transitive vs. intransitive, or perfective vs. imperfective) or three (unmarked vs. perfective vs. imperfective). There

16125-680: The world's languages present a heterogeneous picture. Optional plural marking is common in Southeast and East Asia and Australian languages , and complete lack of plural marking is particularly found in New Guinea and Australian languages. In addition to the areal correlations , there also seems to be at least one correlation with morphological typology : isolating languages appear to favor no or non-obligatory plural marking. This can be seen particularly in Africa, where optionality or absence of plural marking

16254-400: Was a marked nominative language, in which the nominative case is only used to mark the subject of a verb, whereas an absolutive case is the citation form of the noun and also marks the object. Evidence for marked nominative alignment comes primarily from the use of cases in Cushitic and the so-called "states" of the noun in Berber languages; additionally, Helmut Satzinger has argued that

16383-404: Was originally triradical (having three consonants) or biradical (having two consonants) is debated. Among the modern branches, most Semitic roots are triradical, whereas most Chadic, Omotic, and Cushitic roots are biradical. The "traditional theory" argues for original triradicalism in the family, as is the case in Semitic. In this theory, almost all biradical roots are the result of the loss of

16512-536: Was proposed by Georges Bohas , who argued that the third consonants were added to differentiate roots of similar meaning but without the third consonant having a particular meaning itself. Biradical verbs may also have been made triradical on the model of so-called "weak verbs," which have a final radical y or w . Many scholars do not argue for the original nature of either biradical or triradical roots, instead arguing that there are original triradical roots, original biradical roots, and triradical roots resulting from

16641-563: Was then inherited by Old English , Old High German , Old Low German , Early Old Swedish , Old Norwegian , Old Icelandic , and Gothic . It continued in Icelandic until the 1700s, some dialects of Faroese until at least the late 1800s, and some dialects of North Frisian through the 1900s. From Proto-Greek it entered Ancient Greek , and from Proto-Indo-Iranian it entered Sanskrit. From Proto-Slavic , it still exists today in Slovene and

#313686