Helmut Satzinger

Egyptian Verbal Roots: Some Observations.

VIII. International Afro-Asiatic Congress

11—13 September 2008 University of Naples “L’Orientale”

« — les langues chamitiques possèdent des verbes bilittères (= à 2 consonnes seulement), les langues sémitiques non... Les langues sémitiques en revanche ne possèdent que des verbes à 3 ou à plusiers radicales... » (W. Vycichl Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue copte. Leuven: Peeters, 1983, p. X).

“Two things, however, may still deserve being re-examined, viz. the extent of triradical predominance and the alleged consonantal nature of Semitic roots.” (G. Goldenberg “Conservative and innovative features in Semitic languages. A. Bausi — M. Tosco (eds.) Afroasiatica Neapolitana. Contributi presentati all’8˚ Incontro di Linguistica Afroasiatica (Camito-Semitica). Studi Africanistici. Serie Etiopica 6. Napoli 1997, 3).

Types of Stems of Egyptian Verbs

Types of Stems of Egyptian Verbs

Types of Stems of Egyptian Verbs

Types of Stems of Egyptian Verbs

Types of Stems of Egyptian Verbs

Types of Stems of Egyptian Verbs

3-literal verbs are the most frequent:

Figures refer to the verbs contained in the “Lexicon”, in: J. P. Allen The Inflection of the Verb in the Pyramid Text, 541–598.

3-literal verbs are the most frequent:

Figures refer to the verbs contained in the “Lexicon”, in: J. P. Allen The Inflection of the Verb in the Pyramid Text, 541–598.

3-literal verbs are the most frequent:

Figures refer to the verbs contained in the “Lexicon”, in: J. P. Allen The Inflection of the Verb in the Pyramid Text, 541–598.

3-literal verbs are the most frequent:

Figures refer to the verbs contained in the “Lexicon”, in: J. P. Allen The Inflection of the Verb in the Pyramid Text, 541–598.

3-literal verbs are the most frequent —

But only strong 3-lit. verbs should be considered:

Geminating verbs ABB may be seen as augmented 2-lit.

Is triliterality an innovation?

Pro:

Is triliterality an innovation?

Contra:

Is triliterality an innovation?

Strong 3-lit. verbs may be derived from 2-lit. roots

—1. By partial reduplication

Strong 3-lit. verbs may be derived from 2-lit. roots

—2. By root affixes,

—2.1 Root prefixes.

Is triliterality an innovation?

Figures refer to examples in Wiener Zeitschr. f. d. Kunde d. Morgenlandes 97, 2007, 475–489.

Strong 3-lit. verbs may be derived from 2-lit. roots

—2. By root affixes,

—2.2 Root suffixes:

Is triliterality an innovation?

Figures refer to examples in Wiener Zeitschr. f. d. Kunde d. Morgenlandes 97, 2007, 475–489.

Figures refer to examples in Wiener Zeitschr. f. d. Kunde d. Morgenlandes 97, 2007, 475–489.

s- and n- prefixes: much more frequent — attached to all kinds of roots, also 3/4-lit. — transparent semantic character — wereobviously productive in comparably recent stage of the language.In Semitic: stem prefixes (Arabic stems IV & X, and VII, respectively).

Other affixes: attached to 2-lit., rarely to 3ae inf., never to strong 3-lit. roots — obscure semantic effect — much earlier stage of the language

3-lit. roots are not infrequent in AA etymological comparison — e.g.,

Is triliterality an innovation?

It seems so. But a very old one...Not an Egyptian innovation — rather, a

proto-AA innovation.