Tocharian languages
Tocharian | |
---|---|
Ethnicity | Tocharians |
Geographic distribution | Tarim Basin |
Extinct | 9th century AD |
Linguistic classification | Indo-European
|
Proto-language | Proto-Tocharian |
Subdivisions | |
Glottolog | tokh1241 |
directly attested (Tocharian A and B)
loanword traces (Tocharian C) |
Part of a series on |
Indo-European topics |
---|
The Tocharian (sometimes Tokharian) languages (/təˈkɛəriən/ or /təˈkɑːriən/), also known as Arśi-Kuči, Agnean-Kuchean or Kuchean-Agnean, are an extinct branch of the Indo-European language family spoken by inhabitants of the Tarim Basin, the Tocharians.[3] The languages are known from manuscripts dating from the 5th to the 8th century AD, which were found in oasis cities on the northern edge of the Tarim Basin (now part of Xinjiang in Northwest China) and the Lop Desert. The discovery of these languages in the early 20th century contradicted the formerly prevalent idea of an east–west division of the Indo-European language family as centum and satem languages, and prompted reinvigorated study of the Indo-European family. Scholars studying these manuscripts in the early 20th century identified their authors with the Tokharoi, a name used in ancient sources for people of Bactria (Tokharistan). Although this identification is now believed to be mistaken, "Tocharian" remains the usual term for these languages.[4][3]
The discovered manuscripts record two closely related languages, called Tocharian A (also East Tocharian or Turfanian) and Tocharian B (West Tocharian or Kuchean).
The oldest extant manuscripts in Tocharian B are now dated to the fifth or even late fourth century AD, making it a language of late antiquity contemporary with Gothic, Classical Armenian, and Primitive Irish.[8]
Discovery and significance
The existence of the Tocharian languages and alphabet was not even suspected until archaeological exploration of the Tarim Basin by Aurel Stein in the early 20th century brought to light fragments of manuscripts in an unknown language, dating from the 6th to 8th centuries AD.[10]
It soon became clear that these fragments were actually written in two distinct but related languages belonging to a hitherto unknown branch of Indo-European, now known as Tocharian:
- Tocharian A (Turfanian, Agnean, or East Tocharian; natively ārśi) of Qarašähär (ancient Agni, Chinese Yanqi and Sanskrit Agni) and Turpan (ancient Turfan and Xočo), and
- Tocharian B (Kuchean or West Tocharian) of Kucha and Tocharian A sites.
Prakrit documents from 3rd-century Krorän and Niya on the southeast edge of the Tarim Basin contain loanwords and names that appear to come from a closely related language, referred to as Tocharian C.[2]
The discovery of Tocharian upset some theories about the relations of Indo-European languages and revitalized their study. In the 19th century, it was thought that the division between
Several scholars identify the ancestors of the Tocharians with the
Most scholars reject
Tocharian probably died out after 840 when the Uyghurs, expelled from Mongolia by the Kyrgyz, moved into the Tarim Basin.[2] The theory is supported by the discovery of translations of Tocharian texts into Uyghur.
Some modern Chinese words may ultimately derive from a Tocharian or related source, e.g. Old Chinese *mjit (蜜; mì) "honey", from Proto-Tocharian *ḿət(ə) (where *ḿ is palatalized; cf. Tocharian B mit), cognate with Old Church Slavonic медъ (transliterated: medŭ) (meaning "honey"), and English mead.[17]
Names
A colophon to a Central Asian Buddhist manuscript from the late 8th century states that it was translated into Old Turkic from Sanskrit, via a twγry language. In 1907, Emil Sieg and Friedrich W. K. Müller proposed that twγry was a name for the newly-discovered language of the Turpan area.[22] Sieg and Müller, reading this name as toxrï, connected it with the ethnonym
In 1938,
Although the term twγry or toxrï appears to be the Old Turkic name for the Tocharians, it is not found in Tocharian texts.[28] The apparent self-designation ārśi appears in Tocharian A texts. Tocharian B texts use the adjective kuśiññe, derived from kuśi or kuči, a name also known from Chinese and Turkic documents.[28] The historian Bernard Sergent compounded these names to coin an alternative term Arśi-Kuči for the family, recently revised to Agni-Kuči,[32] but this name has not achieved widespread usage.
Writing system
Tocharian is documented in manuscript fragments, mostly from the 8th century (with a few earlier ones) that were written on palm leaves, wooden tablets, and Chinese paper, preserved by the extremely dry climate of the Tarim Basin. Samples of the language have been discovered at sites in Kucha and Karasahr, including many mural inscriptions.
Most of attested Tocharian was written in the
In 1998 the Chinese linguist Ji Xianlin published a translation and analysis of fragments of a Tocharian Maitreyasamiti-Nataka discovered in 1974 in Yanqi.[39][40][41]
Tocharian A and B
Tocharian A and B are significantly different, to the point of being mutually unintelligible. A common Proto-Tocharian language must precede the attested languages by several centuries, probably dating to the late 1st millennium BC.[44]
Tocharian A is found only in the eastern part of the Tocharian-speaking area, and all extant texts are of a religious nature. Tocharian B, however, is found throughout the range and in both religious and secular texts. As a result, it has been suggested that Tocharian A was a
The hypothesized relationship of Tocharian A and B as liturgical and spoken forms, respectively, is sometimes compared with the relationship between Latin and the modern
In their declensional and conjugational endings, the two languages innovated in divergent ways, with neither clearly simpler than the other. For example, both languages show significant innovations in the present active indicative endings but in radically different ways, so that only the second-person singular ending is directly cognate between the two languages, and in most cases neither variant is directly cognate with the corresponding
Tocharian B shows an internal chronological development; three linguistic stages have been detected.[45] The oldest stage is attested only in Kucha. There are also the middle ("classical") and the late stage.[46]
Tocharian C
A third Tocharian language was first suggested by Thomas Burrow in the 1930s, while discussing 3rd-century documents from Krörän (Loulan) and Niya. The texts were written in Gandhari Prakrit, but contained loanwords of evidently Tocharian origin, such as kilme ("district"), ṣoṣthaṃga ("tax collector"), and ṣilpoga ("document"). This hypothetical language later became generally known as Tocharian C; it has also sometimes been called Kroränian or Krorainic.[47]
In papers published posthumously in 2018, Klaus T. Schmidt, a scholar of Tocharian, presented a decipherment of 10 texts written in the Kharoṣṭhī script. Schmidt claimed that these texts were written in a third Tocharian language he called Lolanisch.[48][49] He also suggested that the language was closer to Tocharian B than to Tocharian A.[49] In 2019 a group of linguists led by Georges Pinault and Michaël Peyrot convened in Leiden to examine Schmidt's translations against the original texts. They concluded that Schmidt's decipherment was fundamentally flawed, that there was no reason to associate the texts with Krörän, and that the language they recorded was neither Tocharian nor Indic, but Iranian.[7][50]
Phonology
Phonetically, Tocharian languages are "
Vowels
Front | Central | Back | |
---|---|---|---|
Close | i /i/ | ä /ɨ/ | u /u/ |
Mid | e /e/ | a /ə/ | o /o/ |
Open | ā /a/ |
Tocharian A and Tocharian B have the same set of vowels, but they often do not correspond to each other. For example, the sound a did not occur in Proto-Tocharian. Tocharian B a is derived from former stressed ä or unstressed ā (reflected unchanged in Tocharian A), while Tocharian A a stems from Proto-Tocharian /ɛ/ or /ɔ/ (reflected as /e/ and /o/ in Tocharian B), and Tocharian A e and o stem largely from monophthongization of former diphthongs (still present in Tocharian B).
Diphthongs
Diphthongs occur in Tocharian B only.
Closer component is front |
Closer component is back | |
---|---|---|
Opener component is unrounded | ai /əi/ | au /əu/ āu /au/ |
Opener component is rounded | oy /oi/ |
Consonants
The following table lists the reconstructed phonemes in Tocharian along with their standard transcription. Because Tocharian is written in an alphabet used originally for Sanskrit and its descendants, the transcription reflects Sanskrit phonology, and may not represent Tocharian phonology accurately. The Tocharian alphabet also has letters representing all of the remaining Sanskrit sounds, but these appear only in Sanskrit loanwords and are not thought to have had distinct pronunciations in Tocharian. There is some uncertainty as to actual pronunciation of some of the letters, particularly those representing palatalized obstruents (see below).
Bilabial | Alveolar | Alveolo-palatal | Palatal | Velar | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Plosive
|
p /p/ | t /t/ | k /k/ | ||
Affricate
|
ts /ts/ | c /tɕ/?2 | |||
Fricative
|
s /s/ | ś /ɕ/ | ṣ /ʃ/?3 | ||
Nasal | m /m/ | n ṃ /n/1 | ñ /ɲ/ | ṅ /ŋ/4 | |
Trill | r /r/ | ||||
Approximant
|
y /j/ | w /w/ | |||
Lateral approximant | l /l/ | ly /ʎ/ |
- /n/ is transcribed by two different letters in the Tocharian alphabet depending on position. Based on the corresponding letters in Sanskrit, these are transcribed ṃ (word-finally, including before certain clitics) and n (elsewhere), but ṃ represents /n/, not /m/.
- The sound written c is thought to correspond to a alveolo-palatal affricate /tɕ/ in Sanskrit. The Tocharian pronunciation /tɕ/ is suggested by the common occurrence of the cluster śc, but the exact pronunciation cannot be determined with certainty.
- The sound written ṣ seems more likely to have been a palato-alveolar sibilant /ʃ/ (as in English "ship"), because it derives from a palatalized /s/.[60]
- The sound ṅ /ŋ/ occurs only before k, or in some clusters where a k has been deleted between consonants. It is clearly phonemic because sequences nk and ñk also exist (from syncope of a former ä between them).
Morphology
Nouns
Tocharian has completely re-worked the nominal declension system of Proto-Indo-European.[61] The only cases inherited from the proto-language are nominative, genitive, accusative, and (in Tocharian B only) vocative; in Tocharian the old accusative is known as the oblique case. In addition to these primary cases, however, each Tocharian language has six cases formed by the addition of an invariant suffix to the oblique case — although the set of six cases is not the same in each language, and the suffixes are largely non-cognate. For example, the Tocharian word yakwe (Toch B), yuk (Toch A) "horse" < PIE *eḱwos is declined as follows:[28]
Case | Tocharian B | Tocharian A | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Suffix | Singular | Plural | Suffix | Singular | Plural | |
Nominative | — | yakwe | yakwi | — | yuk | yukañ |
Vocative | — | yakwa | — | — | — | — |
Genitive | — | yäkwentse | yäkweṃtsi | — | yukes | yukāśśi |
Oblique | — | yakwe | yakweṃ | — | yuk | yukas |
Instrumental | — | — | — | -yo | yukyo | yukasyo |
Perlative | -sa | yakwesa | yakwentsa | -ā | yukā | yukasā |
Comitative | -mpa | yakwempa | yakweṃmpa | -aśśäl | yukaśśäl | yukasaśśäl |
Allative | -ś(c) | yakweś(c) | yakweṃś(c) | -ac | yukac | yukasac |
Ablative | -meṃ | yakwemeṃ | yakweṃmeṃ | -äṣ | yukäṣ | yukasäṣ |
Locative | -ne | yakwene | yakweṃne | -aṃ | yukaṃ | yukasaṃ |
Causative
|
-ñ | yakweñ | yakweṃñ | — | — | — |
The Tocharian A instrumental case rarely occurs with humans.
When referring to humans, the oblique singular of most adjectives and of some nouns is marked in both varieties by an ending -(a)ṃ, which also appears in the secondary cases. An example is eṅkwe (Toch B), oṅk (Toch A) "man", which belongs to the same declension as above, but has oblique singular eṅkweṃ (Toch B), oṅkaṃ (Toch A), and corresponding oblique stems eṅkweṃ- (Toch B), oṅkn- (Toch A) for the secondary cases. This is thought to stem from the generalization of n-stem adjectives as an indication of determinative semantics, seen most prominently in the weak adjective declension in the Germanic languages (where it cooccurs with definite articles and determiners), but also in Latin and Greek n-stem nouns (especially proper names) formed from adjectives, e.g. Latin Catō (genitive Catōnis) literally "the sly one" < catus "sly",[62][63] Greek Plátōn literally "the broad-shouldered one" < platús "broad".[28]
Verbs
In contrast, the verbal conjugation system is quite conservative.[64] The majority of Proto-Indo-European verbal classes and categories are represented in some manner in Tocharian, although not necessarily with the same function.[65] Some examples: athematic and thematic present tenses, including null-, -y-, -sḱ-, -s-, -n- and -nH- suffixes as well as n-infixes and various laryngeal-ending stems; o-grade and possibly lengthened-grade perfects (although lacking reduplication or augment); sigmatic, reduplicated, thematic, and possibly lengthened-grade aorists; optatives; imperatives; and possibly PIE subjunctives.
In addition, most PIE sets of endings are found in some form in Tocharian (although with significant innovations), including thematic and athematic endings, primary (non-past) and secondary (past) endings, active and mediopassive endings, and perfect endings. Dual endings are still found, although they are rarely attested and generally restricted to the third person. The mediopassive still reflects the distinction between primary -r and secondary -i, effaced in most Indo-European languages. Both root and suffix ablaut is still well-represented, although again with significant innovations.
Categories
Tocharian verbs are conjugated in the following categories:[28]
- Mood: indicative, subjunctive, optative, imperative.
- Tense/aspect (in the indicative only): present, preterite, imperfect.
- Voice: active, mediopassive, deponent.
- Person: 1st, 2nd, 3rd.
- Number: singular, dual, plural.
- Causation: basic, causative.
- Non-finite: active participle, mediopassive participle, present gerundive, subjunctive gerundive.
Classes
A given verb belongs to one of a large number of classes, according to its conjugation. As in
Present indicative
The most complex system is the present indicative, consisting of 12 classes, 8 thematic and 4 athematic, with distinct sets of thematic and athematic endings. The following classes occur in Tocharian B (some are missing in Tocharian A):
- I: Athematic without suffix < PIE root athematic.
- II: Thematic without suffix < PIE root thematic.
- III: Thematic with PToch suffix *-ë-. Mediopassiveonly. Apparently reflecting consistent PIE o theme rather than the normal alternating o/e theme.
- IV: Thematic with PToch suffix *-ɔ-. Mediopassive only. Same PIE origin as previous class, but diverging within Proto-Tocharian.
- V: Athematic with PToch suffix *-ā-, likely from either PIE verbs ending in a syllabic laryngeal or PIE derived verbs in *-eh₂- (but extended to other verbs).
- VI: Athematic with PToch suffix *-nā-, from PIE verbs in *-nH-.
- VII: Athematic with infixed nasal, from PIE infixed nasal verbs.
- VIII: Thematic with suffix -s-, possibly from PIE -sḱ-?
- IX: Thematic with suffix -sk- < PIE -sḱ-.
- X: Thematic with PToch suffix *-näsk/nāsk- (evidently a combination of classes VI and IX).
- XI: Thematic in PToch suffix *-säsk- (evidently a combination of classes VIII and IX).
- XII: Thematic with PToch suffix *-(ä)ññ- < either PIE *-n-y- (denominative to n-stem nouns) or PIE *-nH-y- (deverbative from PIE *-nH- verbs).
Palatalization of the final root consonant occurs in the 2nd singular, 3rd singular, 3rd dual and 2nd plural in thematic classes II and VIII-XII as a result of the original PIE thematic vowel e.
Subjunctive
The
In addition, four subjunctive classes differ from the corresponding indicative classes, two "special subjunctive" classes with differing suffixes and two "varying subjunctive" classes with root ablaut reflecting the PIE perfect.
Special subjunctives:
- iv: Thematic with suffix i < PIE -y-, with consistent palatalization of final root consonant. Tocharian B only, rare.
- vii: Thematic (not athematic, as in indicative class VII) with suffix ñ < PIE -n- (palatalized by thematic e, with palatalized variant generalized).
Varying subjunctives:
- i: Athematic without suffix, with root ablaut reflecting PIE o-grade in active singular, zero-grade elsewhere. Derived from PIE perfect.
- v: Identical to class i but with PToch suffix *-ā-, originally reflecting laryngeal-final roots but generalized.
Preterite
The preterite has 6 classes:
- I: The most common class, with a suffix ā < PIE Ḥ (i.e. roots ending in a laryngeal, although widely extended to other roots). This class shows root ablaut, with original e-grade (and palatalization of the initial root consonant) in the active singular, contrasting with zero-grade (and no palatalization) elsewhere.
- II: This class has reduplication in Tocharian A (possibly reflecting the PIE reduplicated aorist). However, Tocharian B has a vowel reflecting long PIE ē, along with palatalization of the initial root consonant. There is no ablautin this class.
- III: This class has a suffix s in the 3rd singular active and throughout the mediopassive, evidently reflecting the PIE sigmatic aorist. Root ablaut occurs between active and mediopassive. A few verbs have palatalization in the active along with s in the 3rd singular, but no palatalization and no s in the mediopassive, along with no root ablaut (the vowel reflects PToch ë). This suggests that, for these verbs in particular, the active originates in the PIE sigmatic aorist (with s suffix and ē vocalism) while the mediopassive stems from the PIE perfect (with o vocalism).
- IV: This class has suffix ṣṣā, with no ablaut. Most verbs in this class are causatives.
- V: This class has suffix ñ(ñ)ā, with no ablaut. Only a few verbs belong to this class.
- VI: This class, which has only two verbs, is derived from the PIE thematic aorist. As in Greek, this class has different endings from all the others, which partly reflect the PIE secondary endings (as expected for the thematic aorist).
All except preterite class VI have a common set of endings that stem from the PIE perfect endings, although with significant innovations.
Imperative
The imperative likewise shows 6 classes, with a unique set of endings, found only in the second person, and a prefix beginning with p-. This prefix usually reflects Proto-Tocharian *pä- but unexpected connecting vowels occasionally occur, and the prefix combines with vowel-initial and glide-initial roots in unexpected ways. The prefix is often compared with the Slavic perfective prefix po-, although the phonology is difficult to explain.
Classes i through v tend to co-occur with preterite classes I through V, although there are many exceptions. Class vi is not so much a coherent class as an "irregular" class with all verbs not fitting in other categories. The imperative classes tend to share the same suffix as the corresponding preterite (if any), but to have root vocalism that matches the vocalism of a verb's subjunctive. This includes the root ablaut of subjunctive classes i and v, which tend to co-occur with imperative class i.
Optative and imperfect
The
Endings
As suggested by the above discussion, there are a large number of sets of endings. The present-tense endings come in both thematic and athematic variants, although they are related, with the thematic endings generally reflecting a theme vowel (PIE e or o) plus the athematic endings. There are different sets for the preterite classes I through V; preterite class VI; the imperative; and in Tocharian B, in the singular active of the optative and imperfect. Furthermore, each set of endings comes with both active and mediopassive forms. The mediopassive forms are quite conservative, directly reflecting the PIE variation between -r in the present and -i in the past. (Most other languages with the mediopassive have generalized one of the two.)
The present-tense endings are almost completely divergent between Tocharian A and B. The following shows the thematic endings, with their origin:
Original PIE | Tocharian B | Tocharian A | Notes | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PIE source | Actual form | PIE source | Actual form | |||
1st sing | *-o-h₂ | *-o-h₂ + PToch -u | -āu | *-o-mi | -am | *-mi < PIE athematic present |
2nd sing | *-e-si | *-e-th₂e? | -'t | *-e-th₂e | -'t | *-th₂e < PIE perfect; previous consonant palatalized; Tocharian B form should be -'ta |
3rd sing | *-e-ti | *-e-nu | -'(ä)ṃ | *-e-se | -'ṣ | *-nu < PIE *nu "now"; previous consonant palatalized |
1st pl | *-o-mos? | *-o-mō? | -em(o) | *-o-mes + V | -amäs | |
2nd pl | *-e-te | *-e-tē-r + V | -'cer | *-e-te | -'c | *-r < PIE mediopassive?; previous consonant palatalized |
3rd pl | *-o-nti | *-o-nt | -eṃ | *-o-nti | -eñc < *-añc | *-o-nt < PIE secondary ending |
Comparison to other Indo-European languages
This article or section should specify the language of its non-English content, using {{lang}}, {{transliteration}} for transliterated languages, and {{IPA}} for phonetic transcriptions, with an appropriate ISO 639 code. Wikipedia's multilingual support templates may also be used. (January 2024) |
Tocharian vocabulary (sample) | ||||||||||||
English | Tocharian A | Tocharian B | Ancient Greek | Sanskrit | Latin | Proto-Germanic | Gothic | Old Irish | Proto-Slavic | Proto-Indo-European | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
one | sas | ṣe | heîs, hen | sa(kṛ́t) | semel[a] | *simla[a] | simle[a] | samail[a] | *sǫ-[a] | *sḗm > PToch *sems | ||
two | wu | wi | dúo | dvā́ | duo | *twai | twái | dá | *dъva | *dwóh₁ | ||
three | tre | trai | treîs | tráyas | trēs | *þrīz | þreis | trí | *trьje | *tréyes | ||
four | śtwar | śtwer | téttares, téssares | catvā́ras, catúras | quattuor | *fedwōr | fidwōr | cethair | *četỳre | *kʷetwóres | ||
five | päñ | piś | pénte | páñca | quīnque | *fimf | fimf | cóic | *pętь | *pénkʷe | ||
six | ṣäk | ṣkas | héx | ṣáṣ | sex | *sehs | saihs | sé | *šestь | *swéḱs | ||
seven | ṣpät | ṣukt | heptá | saptá | septem | *sebun | sibun | secht | *sedmь | *septḿ̥ | ||
eight | okät | okt | oktṓ | aṣṭáu, aṣṭá | octō | *ahtōu | ahtau | ocht | *osmь | *oḱtṓw | ||
nine | ñu | ñu | ennéa | náva | novem | *newun | niun | noí | *dȅvętь | *h₁néwn̥ | ||
ten | śäk | śak | déka | dáśa | decem | *tehun | taihun | deich | *dȅsętь | *déḱm̥t | ||
hundred | känt | kante | hekatón | śatām | centum | *hundą | hund | cét | *sъto | *ḱm̥tóm | ||
father | pācar | pācer | patḗr | pitṛ | pater | *fadēr | fadar | athair | – | *ph₂tḗr | ||
mother | mācar | mācer | mḗtēr | mātṛ | māter | *mōdēr | mōdar | máthair | *màti | *méh₂tēr | ||
brother | pracar | procer | phrā́tēr[a] | bhrātṛ | frāter | *brōþēr | brōþar | bráthair | *bràtrъ | *bʰréh₂tēr | ||
sister | ṣar | ṣer | éor[a] | svásṛ | soror | *swestēr | swistar | siur | *sestrà | *swésōr | ||
horse | yuk | yakwe | híppos | áśva- | equus | *ehwaz | aiƕs | ech | ( Balto-Slavic *áśwāˀ) |
*h₁éḱwos | ||
cow | ko | keu | boûs | gaúṣ | bōs[b] | *kūz | (OE cū) | bó | *govę̀do | *gʷṓws | ||
voice[b] | vak | vek | épos[a] | vāk | vōx | *wōhmaz[a] | (Du gewag)[a] | foccul[a] | *vikъ[a] | *wṓkʷs | ||
name | ñom | ñem | ónoma | nāman- | nōmen | *namô | namō | ainmm | *jь̏mę | *h₁nómn̥ | ||
to milk | mālkā | mālkant | amélgein | – | mulgēre | *melkaną | (OE me(o)lcan) | bligid (MIr) | *melzti | *h₂melǵ-eye |
In traditional Indo-European studies, no hypothesis of a closer genealogical relationship of the Tocharian languages has been widely accepted by linguists. However,
Contact with other languages
The Tocharian language stood in contact with various surrounding languages, including Iranian, Uralic, Turkic, and Sinitic languages. Tocharian borrowings, and other Indo-European loanwords transmitted through the Tocharians towards Uralic, Turkic and Sinitic speakers, have been confirmed.[69] Influence onto the Tocharian vowel system, which shows certain similarities to Uralic languages is explained through early contact during the Afanasievo culture. Another characteristic of Tocharian is its agglutinative case marking and case functions, as well as the lack of dative case.[70] Tocharian had a high social position within the region, and influenced the Turkic languages, which would later replace Tocharian in the Tarim Basin.[71]
Notable example
Most of the texts known from the Tocharians are religious, but one noted text is a fragment of a love poem in Tocharian B (manuscript B-496, found in Kizil):[72]
Translation (English) |
Transliteration | Inscription (Tocharian script) |
---|---|---|
|
|
See also
- Language families and languages
- Tocharians
- Tocharian and Indo-European Studies (journal)
References
Citations
- ^ "Tocharian A | language | Britannica".
- ^ a b c d Mallory, J. P. (2010). "Bronze Age Languages of the Tarim Basin" (PDF). Expedition. 52 (3): 44–53.
- ^ a b Diringer, David (1953) [1948]. The Alphabet: A Key to the History of Mankind (Second and revised ed.). London: Hutchinson's Scientific and Technical Publications. pp. 347–348.
- ^ Walter, Mariko Namba (1998). "Tokharian Buddhism in Kucha: Buddhism of Indo-European Centum Speakers in Chinese Turkestan before the 10th Century C.E." (PDF). Sino-Platonic Papers. 85: 2–4.
- ^ "Tocharian | the Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism – Credo Reference".
- ^ "Introduction to Tocharian".
- ^ a b Adams, Douglas Q. (25 September 2019). "'Tocharian C' Again: The Plot Thickens and the Mystery Deepens". Language Log. Retrieved 25 September 2019.
- ^ Kim, Ronald I. (2018). "One Hundred Years of Re-Reconstruction: Hittite, Tocharian, and the Continuing Revision of Proto-Indo-European". In Rieken, Elisabeth (ed.). 100 Jahre Entzifferung des Hethitischen. Morphosyntaktische Kategorien in Sprachgeschichte und Forschung. Akten der Arbeitstagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft vom 21. bis 23. September 2015 in Marburg. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag. p. 170 (footnote 44). Retrieved 13 September 2019.
- PMID 31488661.
- ^ Deuel, Leo (1970) [First published Knopf, NY, 1965]. "XXI". Testaments of Time. Baltimore: Pelican Books. pp. 425–455.
- ^ Renfrew (1990), pp. 107–108.
- ISBN 978-1400831104.
- ^ Mallory & Mair 2000.
- ^ Klejn, L. S. Л. С. Клейн (2000). "Migratsiya tokharov v svete arkheologii" Миграция тохаров в свете археологии [Migration of Tokharians in the Light of Archaeological Data]. Stratum Plus (in Russian). 2000 (2): 178–187.
- hdl:1887/139205.
- ^ Mallory & Mair (2000), pp. 281–282.
- ^ Boltz (1999), p. 87; Schuessler (2007), p. 383; Baxter (1992), p. 191; Karlgren (1957), p. 405r; Proto-Tocharian and Tocharian B forms from Peyrot (2008), p. 56.
- ^ References BDce-888、889, MIK III 8875, now in the Hermitage Museum.Sheng dao wenhua zazhi (2020-01-30). "É lì ài ěr mǐ tǎ shén bó wù guǎn cáng kè zī ěr shí kū bì huà" 俄立艾爾米塔什博物館藏克孜爾石窟壁畫. sohu.com (in Chinese).
- ISBN 978-90-04-07877-2.
- ISBN 978-81-85026-85-5. "The panel of Tocharian donors and Buddhist monks, which was at the MIK (MIK 8875) disappeared during World War II and was discovered by Yaldiz in 2002 in the Hermitage Museum" page 65, note 30
- ^ Le Coq, Albert von; Waldschmidt, Ernst (1922). Die buddhistische spätantike in Mittelasien, VI. Berlin, D. Reimer [etc.] pp. 68–70.
- ^ Mallory & Mair (2000), pp. 280–281.
- ^ Mallory & Mair (2000), pp. 281.
- ^ Beckwith (2009), pp. 380–383.
- ISBN 978-0-8242-0970-4.
Also arguing against equating the Tocharians with the Tocharoi is the fact that the actual language of the Tocharoi, when attested to in the second and third centuries of our era, is indubitably Iranian.
- ^ Hansen (2012), p. 72 "In fact, we know that the Yuezhi used Bactrian, an Iranian language written in Greek characters, as an official language. For this reason, Tocharian is a misnomer; no extant evidence suggests that the residents of the Tocharistan region of Afghanistan spoke the Tocharian language recorded in the documents found in the Kucha region."
- ^ Henning (1949), p. 161: "At the same time we can now finally dispose of the name 'Tokharian'. This misnomer has been supported by three reasons, all of them now discredited."
- ^ a b c d e f g Krause, Todd B.; Slocum, Jonathan. "Tocharian Online: Series Introduction". University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved 17 April 2020.
- ISBN 978-1-884964-98-5.
- ^ Henning (1938), pp. 559–561.
- ^ Hansen (2012), pp. 71–72.
- ^ Sergent, Bernard (2005) [1995]. Les Indo-Européens: Histoire, langues, mythes (2nd ed.). Payot. pp. 113–117.
- ISBN 978-0-87099-300-8.
- ^ Le Coq, Albert von. Die Buddhistische Spätantike in Mittelasien : vol.5. p. 10.
- ^ "A dictionary of Tocharian B". www.win.tue.nl.
- ^ In Ashokan Brahmi: 𑀲𑁂𑀧𑀜𑀓𑁆𑀢𑁂 𑀲𑀡𑁆𑀓𑁂𑀢𑀯𑀝𑁆𑀲𑁂 𑀱𑀭𑁆𑀲 𑀧𑀧𑁃𑀬𑁆𑀓𑁅
- ^ Daniels (1996), p. 531.
- ^ Campbell (2000), p. 1666.
- ^ "Fragments of the Tocharian", Andrew Leonard, How the World Works, Salon.com, January 29, 2008. Archived 2008-02-01 at the Wayback Machine
- S2CID 246638642.
- ISBN 978-3-11-014904-3.
- ^ Mallory & Mair (2000), p. 274.
- ^ Mallory & Mair (2000), pp. 67, 68.
- ISBN 978-0-08-044299-0.
- ^ M. Peyrot, Variation and Change in Tocharian B, Amsterdam and New York, 2008
- ^ Michaël Peyrot (2015), TOCHARIAN LANGUAGE iranicaonline.org
- ^ Mallory, J. P. "The Problem of Tocharian Origins: An Archaeological Perspective" (PDF). Sino-Platonic Papers. 259.
- OCLC 1086566510.
- ^ a b "Language Log » Tocharian C: its discovery and implications". Retrieved 2019-04-04.
- hdl:1887/139192.
- JSTOR 24049243.
- ^ Waugh, Daniel C. (Historian, University of Washington). "MIA Berlin: Turfan Collection: Kizil". depts.washington.edu.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Kageyama, Etsuko (2016). "Change of suspension systems of daggers and swords in eastern Eurasia: Its relation to the Hephthalite occupation of Central Asia" (PDF). ZINBUN. 46: 200–202.
- ^ Kurbanov, Aydogdy (2014). "The Hephthalites: Iconographical Materials" (PDF). Tyragetia. 8: 324.
- ^ Hertel, Herbert (1982). Along the Ancient Silk Routes: Central Asian Art from the West Berlin State Museums. pp. 55–56.
- ^ Rowland, Benjamin (1970). The Art of Central Asia. p. 104.
- ISBN 978-0-87099-300-8.
- ^ Renfrew (1990), p. 107.
- ISBN 978-3-11-016294-3.
- ^ Ringe, Donald A. (1996). On the Chronology of Sound Changes in Tocharian: Volume I: From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Tocharian. New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society.
- ^ Beekes (1995), p. 92.
- Perseus Project.
- Perseus Project.
- ^ Beekes (1995), p. 20.
- ^ Douglas Q. Adams, "On the Development of the Tocharian Verbal System", Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 98, No. 3 (Jul. – Sep., 1978), pp. 277–288.
- ^ Holm, Hans J. (2008). "The Distribution of Data in Word Lists and its Impact on the Subgrouping of Languages", In: Christine Preisach, Hans Burkhardt, Lars Schmidt-Thieme, Reinhold Decker (Editors): Data Analysis, Machine Learning, and Applications. Proc. of the 31st Annual Conference of the German Classification Society (GfKl), University of Freiburg, March 7–9, 2007. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg-Berlin.
- ^ Václav Blažek (2007), "From August Schleicher to Sergej Starostin; On the development of the tree-diagram models of the Indo-European languages". Journal of Indo-European Studies 35 (1&2): 82–109.
- PMID 22923579.
- S2CID 248358873.
- S2CID 213924514.
Tocharian agglutinative case inflexion as well as its single series of voiceless stops, the two most striking typological deviations from Proto-Indo-European, can be explained through influence from Uralic. A number of other typological features of Tocharian may likewise be interpreted as due to contact with a Uralic language. The supposed contacts are likely to be associated with the Afanas'evo Culture of South Siberia. This Indo-European culture probably represents an intermediate phase in the movement of speakers of early Tocharian from the Proto-Indo-European homeland in the Eastern European steppe to the Tarim Basin in Northwest China. At the same time, the Proto-Samoyedic homeland must have been in or close to the Afanas'evo area. A close match between the Pre-Proto-Tocharian and Pre-Proto-Samoyedic vowel systems is a strong indication that the Uralic contact language was an early form of Samoyedic.
- S2CID 248358873.
- ^ Carling, Gerd (Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen). "Tocharian (p.16)" (PDF).
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ ISBN 978-87-635-4066-7.
- ^ a b Chrestomathie tokharienne: Textes et grammaire, Georges-Jean Pinault. Peeters, 2008.
- ^ "Language Log » Tocharian love poem".
- ^ "World Atlas of Poetic Traditions: Tocharian".
Sources
- ISBN 978-0-940490-71-0.
- ——— (2013), A Dictionary of Tocharian B, Leiden Studies in Indo-European, vol. 10 (2nd revised and greatly enlarged ed.), Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi, ISBN 978-94-012-0936-6
- ISBN 978-3-11-012324-1.
- Beckwith, Christopher (2009), Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Asia from the Bronze Age to the Present, Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-0-691-15034-5.
- Beekes, Robert S.P. (1995), Comparative Indo-European linguistics: an Introduction, J. Benjamins, ISBN 978-90-272-2151-3.
- Boltz, William (1999), "Language and Writing", in ISBN 978-0-521-47030-8.
- Campbell, George (2000), Compendium of the World's Languages Second Edition: Volume II Ladkhi to Zuni, Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-20298-5.
- Carling, Gerd (2009). Dictionary and Thesaurus of Tocharian A. Volume 1: a-j. (in collaboration with Georges-Jean Pinault and Werner Winter), Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz Verlag, ISBN 978-3-447-05814-8.
- Daniels, Peter (1996), The Worlds Writing Systems, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-507993-0.
- Hansen, Valerie (2012), The Silk Road: A New History, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-515931-8.
- S2CID 161147644.
- —— (1949), "The name of the 'Tokharian' language" (PDF), Asia Major, New Series, vol. 1, pp. 158–162.
- OCLC 1999753.
- Krause, Wolfgang; Thomas, Werner (1960), Tocharisches Elementarbuch, Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.
- Lévi, Sylvain (1913). "Tokharian Pratimoksa Fragment". The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, pp. 109–120.
- ISBN 0-500-05101-1.
- ISBN 978-3-8253-5299-8.
- Peyrot, Michaël (2008), Variation and Change in Tocharian B, Amsterdam: Rodopoi.
- ISBN 978-90-429-2168-9.
- ISBN 978-0-521-38675-3.
- Ringe, Donald A. (1996). On the Chronology of Sound Changes in Tocharian: Volume I: From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Tocharian. New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society.
- Schmalsteig, William R. (1974). "Tokharian and Baltic." Lituanus. v. 20, no. 3.
- Schuessler, Axel (2007), ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, ISBN 978-0-8248-2975-9.
- Winter, Werner (1998). "Tocharian." In Ramat, Giacalone Anna and Paolo Ramat (eds). The Indo-European languages, 154–168. London: Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-06449-1.
Further reading
- Bednarczuk, Leszek; Elżbieta Mańczak-Wohlfeld, and Barbara Podolak. “Non-Indo-European Features of the Tocharian Dialects”. In: Words and Dictionaries: A Festschrift for Professor Stanisław Stachowski on the Occasion of His 85th Birthday. Jagiellonian University Press, 2016. pp. 55–68.
- Blažek, Václav; Schwarz, Michal (2017). The early Indo-Europeans in Central Asia and China: Cultural relations as reflected in language. Innsbruck: Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft. ISBN 978-3-85124-240-9.
- Hackstein, Olav. “Collective and Feminine in Tocharian.” In: Multilingualism and History of Knowledge, Vol. 2: Linguistic Developments Along the Silkroad: Archaism and Innovation in Tocharian, edited by OLAV HACKSTEIN and RONALD I. KIM, 12:143–78. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, 2012. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt3fgk5q.8.
- Lubotsky A. M. (1998). "Tocharian loan words in Old Chinese: Chariots, chariot gear, and town building". In: Mair V.H. (Ed.). The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Peoples of Eastern Central Asia. Washington D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man. pp. 379–390. http://hdl.handle.net/1887/2683
- Lubotsky A. M. (2003). "Turkic and Chinese loan words in Tocharian". In: Bauer B.L.M., Pinault G.-J. (Eds.). Language in time and space: A Festschrift for Werner Winter on the occasion of his 80th birthday. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 257–269. http://hdl.handle.net/1887/16336
- Meier, Kristin and Peyrot, Michaël. "The Word for ‘Honey’ in Chinese, Tocharian and Sino-Vietnamese." In: Zeitschrift Der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 167, no. 1 (2017): 7–22. doi:10.13173/zeitdeutmorggese.167.1.0007.
- Miliūtė-Chomičenkienė, Aleta. “Baltų-slavų-tocharų leksikos gretybės” [ETYMOLOGICAL PARALLELS IN BALTIC, SLAVIC AND TOCHARIAN IN “NAMES OF ANIMALS AND THEIR BODY PARTS"]. In: Baltistica XXVI (2): 135–143. 1990. DOI: 10.15388/baltistica.26.2.2075 (In Lithuanian)
- Peyrot, Michaël. “On the Formation of the Tocharian Preterite Participle.” Historische Sprachforschung / Historical Linguistics 121 (2008): 69–83. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41637843.
- Peyrot, Michaël. "The deviant typological profile of the Tocharian branch of Indo-European may be due to Uralic substrate influence". In: Indo-European Linguistics 7, 1 (2019): 72–121. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/22125892-00701007
- PINAULT, GEORGES-JEAN. “TOKH. B ‘KUCAÑÑE’, A ‘KUCIṂ’ ET SKR. ‘TOKHARIKA’” . In: Indo-Iranian Journal 45, no. 4 (2002): 311–45. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24664155.
- Witczak, Krzysztof Tomasz. “TWO TOCHARIAN BORROWINGS OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN”. In: Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 66, no. 4 (2013): 411–16. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43282527.
External links
- Tocharian alphabet (from Omniglot)
- Thesaurus Indogermanischer Text- und Sprachmaterialien (TITUS):
- Mark Dickens, "Everything you always wanted to know about Tocharian"
- Tocharian Online by Todd B. Krause and Jonathan Slocum, free online lessons at the Linguistics Research Center at the University of Texas at Austin
- Online dictionary of Tocharian B, based upon D. Q. Adams's A Dictionary of Tocharian B (1999)
- Tocharian B Swadesh list (From Wiktionary)
- Comprehensive Edition of Tocharian Manuscripts, University of Vienna, with images, transcriptions and (in many cases) translations and other information.
- Sieg, E.; Siegling, W. (1921). Tocharische Sprachreste, 1.A: Transcription. Walter de Gruyter. Transcriptions of Tocharian A manuscripts.
- Kim, Ronald I. (2012). "Introduction to Tocharian" (PDF). Institute for Comparative Linguistics, Charles University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2018-07-16. Retrieved 2014-05-01.
- glottothèque – Ancient Indo-European Grammars online, an online collection of introductory videos to Ancient Indo-European languages produced by the University of Göttingen