Patrizia de Bernardo Stempel
Works authored
This is part of the first systematic study of the formation of non-compound nouns and adjectives in Old and Middle Irish. It is divided into three sections: I. primary stem-formations; II. derivation via suffixation; III. other derivation modes. The analysis is both synchronic (inner-Irish) and diachronic (Celtic, Indo-Germanic) throughout and presents new findings of interest not least for the historical study of the phonology and morphology of Irish. It also charts new avenues for the description of word-formation in a corpus language. The analysis is based on a corpus of several thousand words whose etymologies have been verified.
This is part of the first systematic study of the formation of non-compound nouns and adjectives in Old and Middle Irish. It is divided into three sections: I. primary stem-formations; II. derivation via suffixation; III. other derivation modes. The analysis is both synchronic (inner-Irish) and diachronic (Celtic, Indo-Germanic) throughout and presents new findings of interest not least for the historical study of the phonology and morphology of Irish. It also charts new avenues for the description of word-formation in a corpus language. The analysis is based on a corpus of several thousand words whose etymologies have been verified.
Works edited
- I. Indogermanisches. Italisches. Romanisches
- II. Keltische Sprachen und Literaturen
- III. Keltisches Recht. Register zum Gesamtwerk
- I. Indogermanisches. Italisches. Romanisches
- II. Keltische Sprachen und Literaturen
- III. Keltisches Recht. Register zum Gesamtwerk
Works edited
Contributions to journals
[EN] A lead tablet, found in Ratcliffe-on-Soar (Nottinghamshire) in 1963, has been published by R. S. O. Tomlin in The Antiquaries Journal, 84, 2004, p. 346-352. This is a defixio written to recover stolen objects. The author’s proposal concerns in particular two words in the tablet which should be read as vernacular. Actually, what R. S. O. Tomlin understood as the formula si m(ulier) au[ t] si b(aro) RIANTINE, P. de B. St. would interpret as si maup(enne) si briantine, a formula concerned with the social status of the thief : it is similar to Latin si servus, si liber, but should rather be understood as «whether humble freeman, or nobleman ».
[EN] A lead tablet, found in Ratcliffe-on-Soar (Nottinghamshire) in 1963, has been published by R. S. O. Tomlin in The Antiquaries Journal, 84, 2004, p. 346-352. This is a defixio written to recover stolen objects. The author’s proposal concerns in particular two words in the tablet which should be read as vernacular. Actually, what R. S. O. Tomlin understood as the formula si m(ulier) au[ t] si b(aro) RIANTINE, P. de B. St. would interpret as si maup(enne) si briantine, a formula concerned with the social status of the thief : it is similar to Latin si servus, si liber, but should rather be understood as «whether humble freeman, or nobleman ».
[EN] P. de B. St. proposes a new dialectology for Ancient Celtic languages, by stressing contacts and common innovations. She also proposes an earlier date for the introduction of Celtic in Spain and Italy : the presence of Celtic (non Gaulish) elements in the Iberian corpus, and in Ligurian would lead to suppose a multiplicity of Celtic layers in both peninsulas. At least, five successive layers of Celtic languages could then be distinguished. Exactly as there were Celts in Spain before the Celtiberians, in the same way in Northern Italy, Lepontic was preceded by a Celtic element present in Ligurian : Ligurian itself would be a Celtic language, partly preserving of Indo-European -p-, and presenting some other remarkable archaisms. The author is thus led to define a Protoceltic somewhat more archaic than has been supposed till now. J. A. A. E. exposes some common features in the material cultures. The authors also suppose that part of the Hispanic Celticity developed under the influence of the Italian Celts, some of whom might have reached the Iberian Peninsula by sea.
[EN] P. de B. St. proposes a new dialectology for Ancient Celtic languages, by stressing contacts and common innovations. She also proposes an earlier date for the introduction of Celtic in Spain and Italy : the presence of Celtic (non Gaulish) elements in the Iberian corpus, and in Ligurian would lead to suppose a multiplicity of Celtic layers in both peninsulas. At least, five successive layers of Celtic languages could then be distinguished. Exactly as there were Celts in Spain before the Celtiberians, in the same way in Northern Italy, Lepontic was preceded by a Celtic element present in Ligurian : Ligurian itself would be a Celtic language, partly preserving of Indo-European -p-, and presenting some other remarkable archaisms. The author is thus led to define a Protoceltic somewhat more archaic than has been supposed till now. J. A. A. E. exposes some common features in the material cultures. The authors also suppose that part of the Hispanic Celticity developed under the influence of the Italian Celts, some of whom might have reached the Iberian Peninsula by sea.
[EN] The etymology of the Insular Celtic name for «compagnon, client, spouse » . céile, W. cilydd, Bret. (k) ile could be explained by the verbal stem * ḱei-«to lay » starting from * ki-lo-s (with lengthened -i-in Brittonic) / * kei-lo-s. This study considers some Gaulish words which could witness to this same element, such as celicnon «feast / banquest room » , duscelinatia (Larzac), cele (Châteaubleau) and Personal Names like Celecorix (on a coin).
[EN] The etymology of the Insular Celtic name for «compagnon, client, spouse » . céile, W. cilydd, Bret. (k) ile could be explained by the verbal stem * ḱei-«to lay » starting from * ki-lo-s (with lengthened -i-in Brittonic) / * kei-lo-s. This study considers some Gaulish words which could witness to this same element, such as celicnon «feast / banquest room » , duscelinatia (Larzac), cele (Châteaubleau) and Personal Names like Celecorix (on a coin).
L’examen des trois étymologies proposées jusqu’ici pour le terme légal celtibère Pi.n.Ti.s révèle qu’il y a quatre objections possibles pour chacune d’elles. On propose à leur place une nouvelle analyse, par un composé radical / bin-di(k)s /. Tandis que l’élément verbal présente le degré zéro attendu de la racine indo-européenne *deik-, le déterminant *gwid-m pourrait être apparenté étymologiquement au gr. βία (Ion. βίη). La flexion accusative du premier élément du composé suppose l’existence préalable d’une périphrase verbale dont le substantif *gwәm-dik-s a pu être tiré après coup, par une formation parallèle à celle de lat. vindex. Ce dernier est généralement mis en rapport avec gr. īς , mais il pourrait aussi bien contenir le même premier élément que celtib. Pi.n.1ï.s, élément qui a été plus tard réinterprété comme l’acc. de vis. Il paraît d’ailleurs probable que Lat. vis continue à la fois i.e. *weis-et Ie *gwәio-. On doit cependant observer qu’en dépit de leur ressemblances sémantiques et structurales, les deux mots celtibère et latin ne sont pas nécessairement apparentés.
[EN] Celtiberian Pi.n.Ti.s as an ancient I.E. compound.
A review of the three etymologies offered so far for the Celtiberic legal term Pi.n.Ti.s reveals that each of them meets at least with four counter-arguments. Instead, a new interpretation as a root compound /bin-di(k)s/ is offered. Whilst the verbal element shows the expected zero grade of the IE root *deik-, the determinans *gwiә-m is suggested to be etymologically connected with Gk. βία (Ion. βίη). The accusative of the first member of the compound implies the existence of a previous verbal periphrasis from which the substantive *gwiәm-dik-s was later extracted in a way similar to that seen in Lat. vindex. Usually Lat. vindex is connected with Gk. Tç, but it might also contain the same first element as CIb. Pi.n.Ti.s, which was later re-interpreted as the acc. of vis. It seems even plausible that Lat. vis continues both IE *weis- and IE *gweiә-. It should be stressed, however, that in spite of their semantic and structural proximity the CIb. and the Lat. terms need not be etymologically related at all.
L’examen des trois étymologies proposées jusqu’ici pour le terme légal celtibère Pi.n.Ti.s révèle qu’il y a quatre objections possibles pour chacune d’elles. On propose à leur place une nouvelle analyse, par un composé radical / bin-di(k)s /. Tandis que l’élément verbal présente le degré zéro attendu de la racine indo-européenne *deik-, le déterminant *gwid-m pourrait être apparenté étymologiquement au gr. βία (Ion. βίη). La flexion accusative du premier élément du composé suppose l’existence préalable d’une périphrase verbale dont le substantif *gwәm-dik-s a pu être tiré après coup, par une formation parallèle à celle de lat. vindex. Ce dernier est généralement mis en rapport avec gr. īς , mais il pourrait aussi bien contenir le même premier élément que celtib. Pi.n.1ï.s, élément qui a été plus tard réinterprété comme l’acc. de vis. Il paraît d’ailleurs probable que Lat. vis continue à la fois i.e. *weis-et Ie *gwәio-. On doit cependant observer qu’en dépit de leur ressemblances sémantiques et structurales, les deux mots celtibère et latin ne sont pas nécessairement apparentés.
[EN] Celtiberian Pi.n.Ti.s as an ancient I.E. compound.
A review of the three etymologies offered so far for the Celtiberic legal term Pi.n.Ti.s reveals that each of them meets at least with four counter-arguments. Instead, a new interpretation as a root compound /bin-di(k)s/ is offered. Whilst the verbal element shows the expected zero grade of the IE root *deik-, the determinans *gwiә-m is suggested to be etymologically connected with Gk. βία (Ion. βίη). The accusative of the first member of the compound implies the existence of a previous verbal periphrasis from which the substantive *gwiәm-dik-s was later extracted in a way similar to that seen in Lat. vindex. Usually Lat. vindex is connected with Gk. Tç, but it might also contain the same first element as CIb. Pi.n.Ti.s, which was later re-interpreted as the acc. of vis. It seems even plausible that Lat. vis continues both IE *weis- and IE *gweiә-. It should be stressed, however, that in spite of their semantic and structural proximity the CIb. and the Lat. terms need not be etymologically related at all.