Show Less
Restricted access

Wort- und Formenvielfalt

Festschrift für Christoph Koch zum 80. Geburtstag. Unter Mitarbeit von Daniel Petit

Series:

Edited By Anna Jouravel and Audrey Mathys

Die Festschrift ehrt Christoph Koch, Professor für Vergleichende und Indogermanische Sprachwissenschaft an der Freien Universität Berlin. Zu seinem 80. Geburtstag vereint der Band wissenschaftliche und persönliche Beiträge von Kollegen, Schülern und Freunden. Sie umfassen verschiedene Bereiche der historischen und modernen Sprachwissenschaften wie der Indogermanistik, der Byzantinistik, der Slavistik oder Baltistik, greifen kunsthistorische und editionsphilologische Fragestellungen auf und spiegeln somit das breite Spektrum der Interessens- und Forschungsgebiete des Jubilars wider.

Show Summary Details
Restricted access

On Avestan text criticism (3): the use and distribution of the letter ń in Avestan manuscripts

Alberto Cantera

Extract

After an exhaustive analysis of the attestation of the Avestan letter ń in the Iranian manuscripts of the Long Liturgy, it is concluded that this letter appears only before i̯, but not before i or e with the exception of the group °niuuV, where ń is also regular. Concerning the use of the epenthesis or not, it is concluded that the epenthesis is regular before ń, except when ń appears after initial a (e.g. ańiia- vs. maińiiu-). The comparison of acc.sg. ainīm to ańiiō and rest of the forms of the paradigm leads us to the conclusion that two successive waves of epenthesis have to be assumed: the first one affected only syllables before i̯ and was prior to the transformation of n > ń. The second one affected the syllables before i or final e and is posterior to the evolution n > ń.

 

The discovery in Iran2 of a large number of Avestan manuscripts, especially of the Long Liturgy (LL), has partially changed our view of the Avestan transmission. Geldner’s edition of the different variants of the LL relies mostly on Indian manuscripts, and there was a widely held belief that the Iranian manuscripts were lost; we now know, however, today the Iranian transmission of the LL before 1700 better than the Indian one. This has enabled us to identify two recensions of the texts, with differences concerning the palaeography, the linguistic shape of the text (reflecting different conventions in the recitation), and some more important...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.