>Calthinus at 23:09, 26 March 2021

2021-03-26T23:09:41Z

New page

{{For|Grassmann's law in color theory|Grassmann's laws (color science)}}
{{IPA notice}}

'''Grassmann's law''', named after its discoverer [[Hermann Grassmann]], is a [[dissimilatory]] [[phonological process]] in [[Ancient Greek]] and [[Sanskrit]] which states that if an [[Aspiration (phonetics)|aspirated]] consonant is followed by another aspirated consonant in the next syllable, the first one loses the aspiration. The [[descriptive linguistics|descriptive]] version was given for Sanskrit by [[Pāṇini]].

Here are some examples in Greek of the effects of Grassmann's law:

* {{IPA|/'''tʰ'''ú-ɔː/}} {{lang|grc|θύω}} 'I sacrifice (an animal)'
* {{IPA|/e-'''t'''ú-'''tʰ'''ɛː/}} {{lang|grc|ἐτύθη}} 'it was sacrificed'
* {{IPA|/'''tʰ'''rí'''k'''-s/}} {{lang|grc|θρίξ}} 'hair'
* {{IPA|/'''t'''rí'''kʰ'''-es/}} {{lang|grc|τρίχες}} 'hairs'
* {{IPA|/'''tʰ'''á'''p'''t-ein/}} {{lang|grc|θάπτειν}} 'to bury (present)'
* {{IPA|/'''t'''á'''pʰ'''-os/}} {{lang|grc|τάφος}} 'a grave'

In [[reduplication]], which forms the [[perfect tense]] in both Greek and Sanskrit, if the initial consonant is aspirated, the prepended consonant is unaspirated by Grassmann's law. For instance {{IPA|/'''pʰ'''u-ɔː/}} {{lang|grc|φύω}} 'I grow' : {{IPA|/'''p'''e-'''pʰ'''uː-ka/}} {{lang|grc|πέφυκα}} 'I have grown'.

The fact that deaspiration in Greek took place after the change of [[Proto-Indo-European language|Proto-Indo-European]] {{IPA|*bʰ, *dʰ, *gʰ}} to {{IPA|/pʰ, tʰ, kʰ/}} and the fact that all other Indo-European languages do not apply Grassmann's law both suggest that it was developed separately in Greek and Sanskrit (although quite possibly by [[areal feature|areal influence]] spread across a then-contiguous [[Graeco-Aryan]]–speaking area) and so it was not inherited from Proto-Indo-European.<ref>See discussion in {{Harvcoltxt|Collinge|1985|pp=47–61}}</ref>

Also, Grassmann's law in Greek also affects the aspirate {{IPA|/h-/}} < {{PIE|*s-}} developed specifically in Greek but not in Sanskrit or most other Indo-European. (For example, {{PIE|*ségʰō}} > {{PIE|*hekʰō}} > {{lang|grc|ἔχω}} {{IPA|/é'''kʰ'''ɔː/}} "I have", with dissimilation of {{PIE|*h...kʰ}}, but the future tense {{PIE|*ségʰ-sō}} > {{lang|grc|ἕξω}} {{IPA|/'''h'''é'''k'''-sɔː/}} "I will have" was unaffected, as aspiration was lost before {{IPA|/s/}}.) The evidence from other languages is not strictly negative: many branches, including Sanskrit's closest relative, [[Iranian languages|Iranian]], merge the Proto-Indo-European voiced aspirated and unaspirated stops and so it is not possible to tell if Grassmann's law ever operated in them.

According to Filip De Decker,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=De Decker |first1=Filip |title=Another attempt at a chronology for Grassmann's law in Greek |journal=Journal of Indo-European Studies |date=March 2015 |volume=43 |issue=1 |pages=140–177 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282382518_Another_attempt_at_a_chronology_for_Grassmann%27s_Law_in_Greek}}</ref> Grassmann's law had not operated in [[Mycenaean Greek]] yet, and it is almost certain that it occurred later than 1200 BC; it might even postdate the [[Homeric Greek]] period.

==In Greek==

In [[Koine Greek]], in cases other than reduplication, alternations involving labials and velars have been completely [[morphological leveling|levelled]], and Grassmann's law remains in effect only for the alternation between {{IPA|/t/}} and {{IPA|/tʰ/}}, as in the last two examples above. (It makes no difference whether the {{IPA|/tʰ/}} in question continues Proto-Indo-European {{PIE|*dʰ}} or {{PIE|*ɡʷʰ}}.)

Thus, alongside the pair {{lang|grc|ταχύς}} {{IPA|/'''t'''a'''kʰ'''ús/}} 'fast' : {{lang|grc|θάσσων}} {{IPA|/'''tʰ'''ássɔːn/}} 'faster', displaying Grassmann's law, Greek has the pair {{lang|grc|παχύς}} {{IPA|/'''p'''a'''kʰ'''ús/}} 'thick' : {{lang|grc|πάσσων}} {{IPA|/'''p'''ássɔːn/}} 'thicker' from the Proto-Indo-European [[etymon]] {{PIE|*bʰn̻ɡʰ-}} (established by cognate forms like Sanskrit {{lang|sa|बहु}} {{IPA|/bahú-/}} 'abundant' since {{PIE|*bʰ}} is the only point of intersection between Greek {{IPA|/p/}} and Sanskrit {{IPA|/b/}}) in which the {{IPA|/p/}} in the comparative is a result of levelling. Similarly, {{lang|grc|πεύθομαι}} {{IPA|/'''p'''eú'''tʰ'''omai/}} ~ {{lang|grc|πυνθάνομαι}} {{IPA|/'''p'''un'''tʰ'''ánomai/}} 'come to know' from PIE {{PIE|*bʰeudʰ-}} has the future {{lang|grc|πεύσομαι}} {{IPA|/'''p'''eúsomai/}}. However, only {{IPA|/tʰ/}} dissimilates before aspirated affixes like the aorist passive in {{IPA|/-tʰɛː/}} and the imperative in {{IPA|/-tʰi/}}; {{IPA|/pʰ/}} and {{IPA|/kʰ/}} do not, as in {{lang|grc|φάθι}} {{IPA|/'''pʰ'''á'''tʰ'''i/}} 'speak!'.

==Diaspirate roots==
Cases like {{IPA|/tʰrík-s/}} ~ {{IPA|/tríkʰ-es/}} and {{IPA|/tʰáp-sai/}} ~ {{IPA|/tapʰ-eîn/}} illustrate the phenomenon of ''diaspirate roots'' for which two different analyses have been given.

In one account, the [[underlying representation|underlying]] diaspirate theory, the underlying roots are taken to be {{IPA|/tʰrikʰ/}} and {{IPA|/tʰapʰ/}}. When an {{IPA|/s/}}, a word edge, or various other sounds immediately follows, the second aspiration is lost, and the first aspirate therefore survives ({{IPA|/tʰrík-s/}}, {{IPA|/tʰáp-sai/}}). If a vowel follows the second aspirate, the second aspirate survives unaltered, and the first aspiration is thus lost by Grassmann's law ({{IPA|/tríkʰ-es/}}, {{IPA|/tápʰ-os/}}).

A different analytical approach was taken by the Indian grammarians. They took the roots to be underlying {{IPA|/trikʰ/}} and {{IPA|/tapʰ/}}. The roots persist unaltered in {{IPA|/tríkʰ-es/}} and {{IPA|/tapʰ-eîn/}}. If an {{IPA|/s/}} follows, it triggers an aspiration throwback and the aspiration migrates leftward, docking onto the initial consonant ({{IPA|/tʰrík-s/}}, {{IPA|/tʰáp-sai/}}).

In his initial formulation of the law, Grassmann briefly referred to aspiration throwback to explain the seemingly aberrant forms. However, the consensus among contemporary historical linguists is that the former explanation (underlying representation) is the correct one, as aspiration throwback would require multiple root shapes for the same basic root in different languages whenever an aspirate follows in the next syllable ({{PIE|*d}} for Sanskrit, {{PIE|*t}} for Greek, {{PIE|*dʰ}} for [[Proto-Germanic]] and [[Proto-Italic]] which have no dissimilation), but the underlying diaspirate allows for a single root shape, with {{PIE|*dʰ}} for all languages.

In the later course of Sanskrit, under the influence of the grammarians, aspiration throwback was applied to original mono-aspirate roots by [[analogy]]. Thus, from the verb root {{lang|sa|गाह}} {{IPA|/ɡaːh-/}} ('to plunge'), the [[desiderative]] stem {{lang|sa|जिघाख}} {{IPA|/dʑi-ɡʱaːkʰa-/}} is formed by analogy with the forms {{lang|sa|बुभुत्सा}} {{IPA|/bu-bʱutsaː-/}} (a desiderative form) and {{lang|sa|भुत}} {{IPA|/bʱut-/}} (a nominal form, both from the root {{lang|sa|बुध}} {{IPA|/budʱ-/}} 'to be awake', originally Proto-Indo-European {{PIE|*bʰudʰ-}}).

The linguist [[Ivan Sag]] has pointed out an advantage of the ancient Indian theory: it explains why there are no patterns like hypothetical {{IPA|*/trík-s/}} ~ {{IPA|*/tríkʰ-es/}}, which are not ruled out by the underlying diaspirate theory. However, aspiration fails to account for reduplication patterns in roots with initial aspirates, such as Greek {{IPA|/tí-tʰɛːmi/}} 'I put', with an unaspirated reduplicated consonant. Aspiration throwback thus needs to be enhanced with a stipulation that aspirates reduplicate as their unaspirated counterparts. From a diachronic standpoint, the absence of these patterns in Greek is explained by the [[Glottalic theory#Problems|Proto-Indo-European constraint]] against roots of the form {{PIE|*T...Dʰ-}}.

==Other languages==

A process similar to Grassmann's law is also known to occur in [[Ofo language|Ofo]], an [[extinct language|extinct]] and underdocumented [[Siouan]] language. The law is found in compounds such as the following:

* ''ós'''kh'''a'' ('the crane') + ''afháⁿ'' ('white') → ''os'''k'''ạfha'' ('the white egret')

A similar phenomenon occurs in [[Meitei language|Meitei]] (a [[Tibeto-Burman]] language) in which an aspirated consonant is deaspirated if preceded by an aspirated consonant (including {{IPA|/h/, /s/}}) in the previous syllable. The deaspirated consonants are then voiced between sonorants.

* {{IPA|/tʰin-/}} ('pierce') + {{IPA|/-'''kʰ'''ət/}} ('upward') → {{IPA|/tʰin'''ɡ'''ət/}} ('pierce upwards')
* {{IPA|/səŋ/}} ('cow') + {{IPA|/'''kʰ'''om/}} ('udder') → {{IPA|/səŋ'''ɡ'''om/}} ('milk')
* {{IPA|/hi-/}} ('trim') + {{IPA|/-'''tʰ'''ok/}} ('outward') → {{IPA|/hi'''d'''ok/}} ('trim outwards')

[[Hadza language|Hadza]], spoken in Northern Tanzania, exhibits Grassmann's law in its lexicon, but most obviously in reduplication:
:{{IPA|/tʃe-tʃʰeʔe-mae/}} 'look at each other', from {{IPA|/tʃʰeʔe/}} 'look'
In Hadza, {{IPA|/h/}} has no effect on aspiration.

A similar effect takes place in [[Koti language|Koti]] and other [[Makhuwa languages]], where it was dubbed ''Katupha's law'' in Schadeberg (1999). If two aspirated consonants are brought together in one stem, the first loses its aspiration. The effect is particularly clear in reduplicated words: ''kopikophi'' 'eyelash'; ''piriphiri'' 'pepper' (cf. Swahili 'piripiri'); ''okukuttha'' 'to wipe'. This is slightly different than in Greek and Sanskrit, in that the two syllables need not be adjacent.

The four [[Salishan languages]] [[Salish-Spokane-Kalispel language|Salish-Spokane-Kalispel]], [[Okanagan language|Okanagan]], [[Shuswap language|Shuswap]] and [[Tillamook language|Tillamook]] exhibit a similar process affecting ejective rather aspirated consonants, which has been called "Grassmann's law for Salish", for example Shuswap underlying {{IPA|/x-'''tʼ'''ək-tʼəkʔ-éχn/}} 'crutches' → surface {{IPA|/x'''t'''əktʼəkʔéχn/}}.<ref>Laurence C. Thompson, M. Terry Thompson, "A Grassmann's Law for Salish" ''Oceanic Linguistics Special Publications'' '''20''':134-147 (1985) {{jstor|20006717}}</ref>

==See also==
*[[Dahl's law]], a similar sound law in [[Bantu languages|Bantu]]
*[[Graeco-Aryan]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Sources==
* {{Citation
|last=Collinge
|first=N. E.
|year=1985
|title=The Laws of Indo-European
|place=Amsterdam
|publisher=John Benjamins
|ISBN=0-915027-75-5
}}
* Chelliah, Shobhana L. (1997). ''A Grammar of Meithei''. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. {{ISBN|0-19-564331-3}}.
* Reuse, Willem J. de (1981). "Grassmann's law in Ofo". ''[[International Journal of American Linguistics]]'', '''47''' (3), 243–244.
*Sag, Ivan A. (1974) "The Grassmann's Law Ordering Pseudoparadox," ''[[Linguistic Inquiry]]''; 5, 591–607.
* Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa & Kinkade, M. Dale (1998) ''Salish Languages and Linguistics'', Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs, 107, 1-68.

{{Proto-Indo-European language}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Grassmann's Law}}
[[Category:Indo-European linguistics]]
[[Category:Sound laws]]

Grassmann's law - Revision history

>Calthinus at 23:09, 26 March 2021