What do you think?
Rate this book
Development of the Proto-Indo-European Laryngeals in Greek
Unknown Binding
1 person want to read
About the author
Robert S.P. Beekes
8 booksRobert Stephen Paul Beekes was a Dutch linguist and emeritus professor of Comparative Indo-European Linguistics at Leiden University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 9, 2007
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROTO-INDO-EUROPEAN LARYNGEALS IN GREEK was Robert Beekes' doctoral thesis, published in 1969. It is an important document of the final general acceptance of laryngeal theory in the 1960s, and a useful teaching and reference work for the Indo-Europeanist wondering how Greek points to any of several postulated consonants (with vocalic allophones) which disappeared in nearly all Indo-European languages.
Beekes' theories are quite reasonable. He postulates three laryngeals, h1 (e-colouring), h2 (a-colouring), and h3 (o-colouring), as has become the norm in the field. His view of the proto-language does, however, vary from that of Lehmann et al in that he believes PIE to have had a weak vowel phoneme, which has traditionally been called schwa secundum.
The Greek material is separated into three categories. The first is that of laryngeal at the beginning of the word. The words in question are, of course, mainly those containing the so-called "prothetic vowel", as well as cases of s-movable. The second category is that of laryngeal at the end of the word, cases of which are rare but quite evident in the -a stem nouns (the feminine gender) and the neuter plural. Finally, Beekes' tackles the problematic category of laryngeals in the middle of a word, and most of this discussion concerns disyllabic roots. Beekes dedicates some following space to dialectal differences, and one can feel relieved that his studies were carried out at a late enough date to make use of the Mycenaean data.
Beekes' has clearly absorbed the writings of his predecessors. Much of the book serves a response to earlier postulations, such as the theories of Austin (laryngeal reflexes in Homer), Hoenigswald and Nikitina, Kurylowicz, and so forth. His main sparring partner is Oswald Szemerenyi, that great hater of laryngeal theory, many of whose theories (especially those of "Syncope") Beekes shoots down in no uncertain terms. Indeed, the title of the first appendix is "Against Szemerenyi".
While not the sort of book one can easily read from start to finish--is was written as a thesis, after all--Beekes' work does merit attention from anyone interested in comparative Indo-European linguistics. Just flipping through it will result in a new perspective on many issues. And the book is very useful as a reference for anyone curious as to whether the reconstructed PIE form of a Greek word contained laryngeal. Worth getting a hold of for one's personal library.
Beekes' theories are quite reasonable. He postulates three laryngeals, h1 (e-colouring), h2 (a-colouring), and h3 (o-colouring), as has become the norm in the field. His view of the proto-language does, however, vary from that of Lehmann et al in that he believes PIE to have had a weak vowel phoneme, which has traditionally been called schwa secundum.
The Greek material is separated into three categories. The first is that of laryngeal at the beginning of the word. The words in question are, of course, mainly those containing the so-called "prothetic vowel", as well as cases of s-movable. The second category is that of laryngeal at the end of the word, cases of which are rare but quite evident in the -a stem nouns (the feminine gender) and the neuter plural. Finally, Beekes' tackles the problematic category of laryngeals in the middle of a word, and most of this discussion concerns disyllabic roots. Beekes dedicates some following space to dialectal differences, and one can feel relieved that his studies were carried out at a late enough date to make use of the Mycenaean data.
Beekes' has clearly absorbed the writings of his predecessors. Much of the book serves a response to earlier postulations, such as the theories of Austin (laryngeal reflexes in Homer), Hoenigswald and Nikitina, Kurylowicz, and so forth. His main sparring partner is Oswald Szemerenyi, that great hater of laryngeal theory, many of whose theories (especially those of "Syncope") Beekes shoots down in no uncertain terms. Indeed, the title of the first appendix is "Against Szemerenyi".
While not the sort of book one can easily read from start to finish--is was written as a thesis, after all--Beekes' work does merit attention from anyone interested in comparative Indo-European linguistics. Just flipping through it will result in a new perspective on many issues. And the book is very useful as a reference for anyone curious as to whether the reconstructed PIE form of a Greek word contained laryngeal. Worth getting a hold of for one's personal library.
Displaying 1 of 1 review