Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

BOOK REVIEWS

Einführung in die Semitischen Sprachen; Sprachproben und Grammatische Skizzen. Pp. xv+ 192. By GOTTHELF BERGSTRÄSSER. München: Max Hueber Verlag, 1928.

This book contains a grammatical outline of parent Semitic followed by grammatical outlines and texts of specimen languages of all the important divisions of the Semitic family of speech. Wherever possible both ancient and modern dialects belonging to the various divisions are treated. All languages are excluded from the discussion which are exclusively or mainly preserved in unvocalized texts.

The grammatical sketches and accompanying texts are preceded by a table of contents, a brief preface, a table of signs used in transliterating the various languages, and a brief preliminary statement concerning the languages treated. The first chapter (pp. 3–19) gives an outline of the reconstructed parent Semitic, and is naturally unaccompanied by any text. Chapter II (pp. 20-36) deals with Assyro-Babylonian (Akkadian) and gives specimens of both Babylonian and Assyrian. Chapter III (pp. 36-59) pictures the Hebrew language, which is exemplified in three forms, Biblical, Mishnic, and Modern Hebrew. Chapter IV (pp. 59-96) is devoted to Aramaic, the ancient Aramaic dialects being represented by Biblical Aramaic, Syriac, and Mandaic, the modern idioms by the dialects of Ma'lula and Urmia, brief texts being given in the case of every dialect. Chapter V (pp. 96-134) deals with South Arabic and Ethiopic, treating the Ancient Ethiopic or Ge'ez and the modern Amharic, Tigre, and Mehri, each one exemplified by brief texts." Chapter VI (pp. 134-180) treats North Arabic or Arabic proper, giving a grammatical outline and specimens both of ancient or classical Arabic, and of some of the modern dialects, the Bedouin of Central Arabia, Egyptian, Moroccan, and Maltese. The work concludes with an appendix (pp. 181-192) containing a list of words common to the five chief branches of the Semitic family, drawn usually from Assyrian, Ethiopic, Syriac, Hebrew, and Arabic.

The book represents an attempt to present the salient characteristics of the Semitic family of speech, and to do for the Semitic languages what Friedrich Müller's Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft (Wien, 1876-84)

tries to do for all the languages of the world. It sets forth the elements of a number of the most important Semitic languages, and furnishes the means for one acquainted with one or more of these languages to extend and intensify his knowledge of this speech family by learning the rudiments of other related idioms. The texts furnish, as the author says, a Semitic counterpart to Schleicher's Indogermanische Chrestomathie (Weimar, 1869), and offer excellent material for illustrating the grammatical sketches. The list of common Semitic words is a great convenience.

The book, moreover, presents the Semitic languages in a form (everything is transliterated, no Semitic characters are employed) which makes it possible for those with no knowledge of the Semitic alphabets to get some idea of the general form and chief peculiarities of this important family of languages. A non-Semitist, however, would be faced with considerable difficulties in any attempt to make extensive use of the work. Many of the examples in Chapter I are not intelligible to one who knows no Semitic, without reference to the other chapters of the book. It would perhaps have been better, from the point of view of the non-Semitist, to have treated Ursemitisch at the end of the book after the discussion of the individual languages had made possible the understanding of the examples here used. In general the grammatical sketches would be clearer to a non-Semitist if the examples were more frequent and the arrangement of forms in paradigms was employed. A better picture of the various idioms would have been presented also if more attention had been devoted to syntactical phenomena, and a discussion of the various ways of expressing the so-called indefinite pronominal ideas and the idea 'to be' in the different languages would have been especially useful. The texts attached to the grammatical sketches, though accompanied by translations, are not furnished with glossaries, and would be difficult for a non-Semitist to use to advantage without reference to the Semitic dictionaries, and all of these except the Assyrian would ordinarily be closed to him by his ignorance of the Semitic scripts.

An occasional error occurs; for example, the inter-dental or postdental or infra-dental spirants (b, d, and emphatic b) are consistently spoken of as dental spirants, which term is ordinarily employed to denote s and z (cf. pp. 20, 37, 61). On p. 40 the statement 'Für die Pluralendung -u findet sich jünger auch -un' in a paragraph dealing almost exclusively with perfect endings, is ambiguous. The author can hardly be referring to the excessively rare perfect forms with this

un ending (cf. Gesenius, Hebräische Grammatik26 44, 1): and the imperfect ending un is certainly older than u.

The author deserves credit for producing an example of a much needed type of linguistic work, a descriptive comparative grammar, a comparative grammar whose chief interest lies in comparing the form and constructions which are employed to express the various ideas and categories of human speech without special regard to their historical connection, that is, a comparative grammar stressing semasiology rather than etymology. The fact that it does not present a more complete picture of the languages treated is largely the fault of the usual conception of what a grammar should be. We are satisfied with descriptive grammars of individual languages which give only a partial picture of the language, emphasizing particularly phonology and morphology, and our comparative grammars must necessarily be of the same character. It is rather curious that in the present advanced state of linguistic studies there is not a single grammar that actually teaches the language it describes by presenting a complete statement of all its essential phenomena. It would seem fairly obvious that the production of such complete grammars both for individual languages and for whole linguistic families is one of the pressing needs of present day linguistic science.

FRANK R. BLAKE

Syntax der litauischen Postpositionen und Präpositionen. Pp. xi and 292. By ERNST FRAENKEL. Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1929.

Last year the distinguished professor in Kiel published his Syntax der litauischen Kasus (Kovno, 1928). His second significant work on Lithuanian syntax, the Syntax der litauischen Postpositionen und Präpositionen, which has just appeared, will be greeted with pleasure by all Indo-Europeanists and particularly by students of Lithuanian, that most ancient in form of living Indo-European dialects. The latter are only too conscious of the lack of similar studies in this division of Lithuanian grammar. It is not too much to say that Fraenkel's book, so methodically excellent and so complete in its presentation of facts, will doubtless inspire others, in this age of awakening interest in syntactical questions, to turn their attention for awhile in the same direction and to add their own contributions toward clearing up the problems of Baltic semasiology. The way will thus be made easier for the composition of a modern scientific Lithuanian grammar, the absence of which has been an immense handicap to linguistic scholars.

The existence of such a definitive grammar of the Lettish languageI refer, of course, to Endzelin's Lettische Grammatik (Heidelberg, 1923) -gives strong support to Fraenkel's method of continually comparing the Lithuanian with its sister language. For the present, until a suitable Lithuanian grammar makes its appearance, it is absolutely necessary to have Endzelin's work always at hand, not only because it contains practically all that one need know about Lettish but because it is a treasure-house of valuable remarks on usage in Lithuanian. The Slavic tongues are likewise brought by Fraenkel into comparison with the Lithuanian. Of these the Polish, on account of the actual influence it exercises over the eastern dialects of Lithuania and of the Polonisms which are apparent in the religious works of older authors, particularly in the Postille of Daukša, is the most important. In citing examples from Daukša and frequently in other quotations, Fraenkel follows the extremely commendable procedure of placing the Polish original beside the Lithuanian, in order to show its effect upon the translation. But, as the author himself takes occasion to mention, it is by no means always possible to tell whether a construction is due to such literary imitation of a foreign language or whether it is a matter of parallel independent development. The effort, however, is distinctly worthwhile.

The facts are presented in an orderly, systematic manner and in a clear-cut, forceful style not possessed by every German writer. The postpositions -na and -pi are treated first; then come the more important prepositions, such as prie 'near', 'at', 'by', añt 'upon', iš 'out', 'out from'; and finally, in an appendix, mention is made of a number of 'unreal' preposition ssuch as gretà 'beside', abipus, abypusiai 'on both sides of', vietoje 'instead of'. Each article, with the exception of those in the appendix, begins with an account of the various forms of the postposition or preposition under discussion and of the case or cases which it governs. Here it is easy to see how intimately acquainted the author is with all the many Lithuanian dialects. Furthermore, in reading these introductory pages to each single article, one is impressed with the advantage which the author had in being able to live in Lithuania while completing his studies. The opportunity thus given to him of hearing as well as of reading puts the stamp of authority upon his work.

The semantic relations, the actual syntactical usages, of each postposition or preposition succeed the explanation of its form. Of the greatest interest are the dialectal peculiarities which are brought to

« ZurückWeiter »