Modern etymological and historical semasiological studies go far beyond linguistic units and have both descriptive and explanatory nature by involving the cognitive, mental level. Traditional approved methods of etymological analysis include external and internal reconstruction. It contributes to identifying the lexical units lost in the process of semantic evolution and word-formation acts. This scientific interdisciplinary approach complies with the modern humanitarian paradigm as it provides deep etymological and historical semasiological analysis in the denotative and word-formation aspects. Such integrated approach to analysis of linguistic means is relevant, primarily, for researching languages with a recent system of writing. This article provides a multifaceted analysis of one particular Adyghe root morpheme
Keywords: MorphemerootsemanticsetymologyAdyghe language
Etymology as a science is known to take into account both the rules of phonetic correspondence and semasiological relations (semantic shifts) between different words, as well as the facts obtained by comparing the linguistic features of cognate languages or variants of one language, dialects. The most effective methods used in etymology are external and internal extrapolations that analyse existing semantic and word-formative correspondences and relations to identify the lost and reconstructed meanings in the historical development of the word. The significance of etymology is determined by the fact that it as the field of linguistics explores highly effective methods to cumulate "modern data, written history, pre-literate reconstruction and semantic typology" (Trubachev, 1976). The current development of etymological research features in its going beyond of sound-semantic correspondences and using methods of comprehending underlying linguistic processes based on cognition. As the famous scientist M. M. Makovsky writes: "We should remember that in many cases a word can disguise the mystery of another word or a word family, and, therefore, in these words the mystery of human thinking or even the mystery of human existence may be hidden. .... (Makovsky, 1996) Only etymological analysis can reveal transphenomenal relations or show that one would think quite obvious relations are falsifiable (Ibid, 1970).
Adyghe language linguistics still lacks scientific works on etymology and it makes it difficult to identify and analyse the process of evolution of original words. The fact is that the issues of word formation and semantic evolution of original words in the Adyghe languages stem from the sticking-points requiring resolution first. And the points are about understanding the etymology and semantics of morphemes. Apart from some articles on etymology, we can distinguish the works of A.K. Shagirov "Etymological dictionary of the Adyghe (Circassian) languages" (1977) and N. R. Ivanokov "Selectas" (2015), where the authors analyse many native words. In contrast to the two-volume etymological dictionary by A.K. Shagirov that deals with both Circassian naming units and borrowed ones, N. R. Ivanokov focuses on the origin of native words only. As for the naming units, the author describes them as taking their origin from root morphemes of the Bzhedukh dialect. We think highly of the works by N. R. Ivanokov and share some of his ideas. Nevertheless, the author's one-sided approach is not appropriate in some aspects of our research. In contrast to his conclusions, our research shows that the sound roots are referred to different periods of the language development (from the Kabardino-Circassian/Adyghe to the General Abkhazian-Adyghe, possibly Pro-Adyghe--Abkhazian period). That is what makes our research relevant and speaks well for its scientific novelty.
Cognitive modelling of the word family in the Adyghe language is relevant for many reasons. There are challenging open problems in the language. They are word formation, semantics, as well as the hierarchy of motivational features between single-rooted words. Before presenting the analysis, it is necessary to differentiate such notions as a word (lexical) family, word-formation family, word root family and etymological family. Despite the proximity of these concepts, there are subtle differences between them. The word-formative structure of a lexical family, understood as a word-formative family, can form several word-formative sub-families inside the lexical one. They are based on various word-formative models that differ in their way of reflecting the reality. Thus, a word-formation family is not a linear system. It is a complex composition with many vectors. The distinguishing feature of the composition is that there is diversity of word-formation types. Further, the word root families are based on related roots. So, the word root family can consist of two or more sub-families, between which there are no word-formation relations. They may have existed initially, but disappeared gradually in the process of historical development. The integrated structural and semantic description of the lexical family begins with the initial stage of its formation, i.e. the analysis of the words forming the etymological family that is referred to one sound-root. S. Yu. Voronin introduces the concept of sound descriptive system that is understood as a part of the general system of the language. In the system there is a necessary, essential, repeating and relatively stable phonetic, primarily motivated relation between the phonemes and the motive (Voronin, 1982).
Thus, the structural and denotative boundaries of the different families remain vague. The word-formation family is a consistent development of the etymological or word root family. "The word-formation family, being a system of semantically and structurally related lexemes formed as a result of different vector word-formation acts, is at the same time a subsystem or a part of the general structure of the root or etymological family. Thus, the lexical family is understood as the unity of its etymological and semantic-word-formation structures. The analysis of motivational relations in the lexical family should begin with the restoration of the initial motivated feature or features of the initial lexeme or the initial root morpheme. The language family at different stages of its development represents formal and semantic unity. All the words included in the structure of the family reveal formal and semantic similarity due to the unity of the cognitive sphere they serve. But there is a restriction imposed by the logic of the internal development of the language, leading to a clash of the principles of deducibility and motivation" (Shomakhova, 2012).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the work is to identify the sound-complex of
The modern cognitive approach to the issues of etymology and historical word formation allows us to analyse the initial sound-root units within the etymological and word-formation families. The approach is effective in the studying of the Adyghe language as the Adyghe root morphemes are characterized by a high degree of productivity. The fact was highlighted in the monograph devoted to cognitive modelling of etymological families in the non-cognate French and Kabardino-Circassian languages (Harayeva, 2007). The cognitive approach offers wide opportunities in the sphere of explication of semantic changes, their typology and systematization. The techniques of comparative-historical, semantic-motivational methods are also used in the analysis.
Based on the theoretical framework, we proceed with analysing the root
In "Grammar of the Kabardino-Circassian literary language"
The well-known Adyghe linguist B. M. Bersirov points (Bersirov, 2010) out six meanings of the verbal root
1. "to be together»:
2. "add; add anything to anything»:
3. "get dry, sun-dry»:
4. "to sympathize, to regret, to forgive»:
5. "forgive, be forgiven":
In the modern Kabardino-Circassian language the component
In our opinion, in the etymological semantic analysis, the examples from all the groups given by the author go back to the initial meanings "dryness" and "close object". In the fourth meaning
In his turn, A. K. Shagirov considers the root
The meaning " forgive" in
In our opinion, this sound-root is one of the most productive as it is a source for several word-formation families united in one large etymological group. It is evidenced by the examples in the following groups with one primary meaning.
1. The sound-root stands out distinctly from all the words that have similar meanings "something that is not wet, moist»:
2. "Something that is no longer growing, is not developing»:
3. "An object where there is nothing what should develop or grow»:
In "Grammar of the Adyghe language" the word
We agree with the authors of "Grammar of the Adyghe language" that the first part of the word should be interpreted as "something dry", but we do not think the second part of the naming unit
4. "Close object/subject»:
As A. K. Shagirov writes, this root is represented in other languages of the Abkhazian-Adyghe group: Abkh..
6. "The burrow, nest, hole" -
7. "Time, time period»:
8. The analysis of the semantic evolution of the sound-root
Among the group with the root
In the word
It is also impossible not to agree with the fact that
In the example ,
Thus, if the element is found in many naming units:
It is impossible to analyse all word-formative models that make up the etymological and lexical families of
It is a noteworthy fact that the word,
In the process of language development, the sound-root morpheme
In the following example
Despite the significant differences in the meaning references, semantic combinations and word-formation models of the studied lexemes, an observable semantic and formal similarity was found. If the element is found in many naming units:
A large number of identical word-formation models and semantic meanings allow to assume that it is not occasional. This fact cannot be explained by the genetic relationship or language contacts only. The typology and hierarchy of motivational features underlying the naming process are explained by the common ways of thinking that leads to the similar semantic changes in the language. The analysis of the word families derived from the sound-root
The applied method of comparative historical analysis can be used in the analysis of other sound-root units of the Abkhazian-Adyghe languages and, therefore, has great prospects for further research.
In our research we focus on the particular one-root monosyllabic group
All the variety of semantic evolution of derivative acts and its multi-vector development are determined by the cognitive activity that result in evaluating and naming segments of the reality.
- Bagov P.M. (1999). Dictionary of the Kabardino-Circassian language. IGI KBSC RAS, I ed. M.: «Digora.»
- Bersirov, B. M. (2001). The structure and history of verbal stems in the Circassian languages. Maikop: "Adygea".
- Bersirov, B.M. (2010). Explanatory dictionary of the Adyghe language, Vol. 8, ОАО "Polygraph-South". Maikop.
- Harayeva, L. H. (2007). Cognitive modeling of etymological families in non-cognate languages (exemplified in the French and Kabardino-Circassian languages). Nalchik, "El-FA".
- Ibid, F.S. (1970). Grammar of the Kabardino-Cherkess literary language. М.: Nauka.
- Ivanokov, N. R. (2015). Selectas. Etymological analysis of some Adyghe (Circassian) words. Nalchik: Ed. M. t V. Kotlyarovs.
- Kubryakova, E. S. (2004). Language & knowledge: On the way to aquire knowledge about language: Parts of speech from a cognitive point of view. The role of language in the world cognition. М.: Languages of Slavic culture.
- Makovsky M. M. (1996). A comparative dictionary of mythological symbolics in Indo-European languages. The image of the world and worlds of images. M: Vlados.
- Shagirov, A.K. (1977). Etymological dictionary of the Adyghe (Circassian) languages. Vol. 1, 2. M.: Nauka.
- Shomakhova, M. H. (2012). Typology of motivational semantic models in lexical families (exemplified in the Russian and Kabardino-Circassian languages). Extended abstract of diss.PhD. North. -Oset. State. Univ.after. K. L. Khetagurov, Vladikavkaz.
- Tcharkakho, J. A. (2004). The Russian-Circassian dictionary, Vol. I-Maikop, "Adygea".
- Trubachev, O.N. (1976). Etymological research and lexical semantics, Principles and methods of semantic research, 147-180.
- Voronin, S. V. (1982). The basics of phonosemantic. L.: Publishing house of the Leningrad University.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
29 March 2019
Print ISBN (optional)
Sociolinguistics, linguistics, semantics, discourse analysis, science, technology, society
Cite this article as:
Kharaeva, L., Kardanov, M., Ezaova, M., Hezheva, L., & Shugusheva, D. (2019). Semantic Changes Of Lexical Derivatives Exemplified In The Adyghe Root Of Гъу. In D. K. Bataev (Ed.), Social and Cultural Transformations in the Context of Modern Globalism, vol 58. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 1622-1630). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.03.02.188