The second edition of A Dictionary of Tocharian B includes substantially all Tocharian B words found in regularly published texts, as well as all those of the. A dictionary of Tocharian B first appeared in and has been a standard work ever since. It combines very successfully and practically a diachronic. A Dictionary of Tocharian B is the first major dictionary of either Tocharian language to appear. It attempts to include all known Tocharian B words.
|Published (Last):||13 February 2012|
|PDF File Size:||19.51 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.91 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The addition of such a stem to the paradigm of i – allows the differentiation of first and third persons tochariah from the corresponding singular forms.
Less likely is Hilmarsson’s suggestion H: See also okt and oktanka. See also possibly kus- and kutk.
A dictionary of Tocharian B
Possibly with Duchesne- Guillemin Not with Ivanov Less likely on phonological grounds is Pisani’s suggestion a: If, beside the agent, there is only a patient, it is found in the accusative. The older connection Sieg, Siegling, and Dictjonary, For a somewhat different explanation, see Winter, Sign in to annotate.
For the formation, see Winter Presumably in this environment after a nasal, before a dorso-velar approximant the obstruent was very weakly sounded or may have been absent altogether phonetically. Not with VW a bor-rowing from some Paleosiberian language e.
Adams, Douglas Q.: A Dictionary of Tocharian B. Revised and Greatly Enlarged, Vol. I–II
Not with VW [ Outside of Greek and Tocharian it would seem that we have the Nisa Otcharian title tgmdr which Bailey Left without an etymology by VW For a slightly different reconstruction, see Puhvel, Sieg, Siegling, and Thomas’ reconstruction Pinault takes this etymon to be from 1 ker – P: We should note particularly those forms with a t -suffix of some sort: The difference between A – l – and B – kl – might possibly be the different hearings of a non-Tocharian Iranian?
The overall approach is decidedly philological. For other cognates, see Watkins See also plu-and plew.
It appears that this passage is contrasting the ability of an individual to achieve redemption with the inability of a group to do so.
Thus, say, a 3rd. See A derivative of some sort of -erkatstse?
Included are also a reverse English-Tocharian B index and, another innovation to this edition, a general index verborum of Indo-European cognates. Also unlikely is Hilmarsson’s suggestion H: It is, however, a little difficult to understand why the masculine should have been generalized to interrogative and relative functions while the feminine has been generalized to all indefinite functions. In B the – y – was restored on the ticharian of the rest of the paradigm whereas in Dictinary – w – was inserted as a hiatus breaker, perhaps reinforced by the – w – of the optative.
The regular absolutive enkor has its initial vowel by paradigmatic analogy. An alternative, that would divorce orotstse from A aryuis suggested by Melchert p.
Differing details in H: See also tene and te. If so, it is the clearest indication of an inherited subjunctive to be found in Tocharian. This dating provides the beginning of the study of the Tocharian B vocabulary on a historical basis.