Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

It seems that we forgot to consider an important guide, namely the Nagy-Szent-Miklos vase inscription, which happens to be found just where Eskel would be spoken). The inscription indicates that the language shared the phenomenon of vowel breaking/diphthong-isation with its Volgan sisters. The phonology of Eskel would then be closer to Romanian, with its glided diphthongs, than we thought (perhaps Romanian's vowel breaking was due to an Oghur substrate?)

The text (taken from Erdal) reads:

Buyla zoapan tes(s)i dü'etö'i, Butaul zoapan tağro'i içi'i tes(s)i
( ' indicates unpronounced gammas; we know that the gammas before front vowels are silent due to its presence between the diphthong of the third word)

Quite literal meaning: Master Buyla's carried (possessed?) bowl; Master Butoğlu's making drinking-bowl

Interpretation, along with the word's origins (summarised from the article with some additions)

buyla (proper name, attested later as Boyla in Bulgarian)
zoapan < *čōpan w/ contamination from Slavic župan, both meaning 'Master' and ultimately of Iranian origin
tessi < *täpsi 'tray, container, bowl'
dü'etö'i < yüüd-dök-i 'carry > possess (?)'
butaul < but-oğul (proper name 'son of But')
tağro'i < toğ-doq-i 'do' (same meaning in Chuvash)
içi'i < içi-ki or içi-yi

-dOk is the Turkic non-finite participle suffix, -yi the 3rd possesive, and -ki the familiar adjectival. Note that the two verbal forms are non-finite, refer to the article.

Sound changes leading to 'Transylvanian Bulgar', as suggested by the inscription:

o > a
oo > oa
üü > üe
k,g,q,ğ > y or Ø intervocalic
y > d word-initial
d > r intervocalic
dd > tt (devoicing of geminated voiced plosives? That, or the tau might indicate a voiced plosive in contrast to the delta affricate)

to which may be added :

uu > ua (or uo?)
öö > öe (also attested in Volga Bulghar)
Typical Oghur changes : z > r, ş > l, etc.
Last edited by dva_arla on 11 Jan 2020 18:46, edited 1 time in total.

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

Историческая морфология чувашского языка (p. 59) states that the 3p. conjugative suffix -ś evolved from -sem. Ashmarin, quoted in the same book, says that the suffix is "borrowed, firstly, from Udmurt, later from Manchurian (??)".

By the way, while reading of Bulgar möçeller (zodiacs), I came across an interesting title: Tuna Bulgarları ve Dilleri ([Turkic] Bulgars and their Language), by Talat Tekin. You might want to find a downloadable copy; currently I am wanting energy to do so.

Zythros Jubi
sinic
sinic
Posts: 404
Joined: 24 Nov 2014 17:31

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by Zythros Jubi »

The Nagy-Szent-Miklos vase inscription is considered by some as Avar (see the paper I cited above, Аварская надпись на сосуде из клада Надь-Сент-Миклош), and had a totally different interpretation (albeit Oghuric).
The interpretation by Mudrak:
buila. ʒ́o apan. tesi. žɨGetöGi; buta ul. ʒo apan. taGroGi. ic́ĭGi. tɛsi.
His translation:
"Если князь, то в таком случае, как говорится, прославься!
А вот - чаша, то в таком случае, опрокинь и выпей!, как говорится" или
"Князь, следовательно, так сказать, веди себя достойно! (⁓ прославься!)
А вот - чаша, следовательно, опрокинь и выпей, так сказать."

По чувашски это бы звучало так:
*Pule eppin (⁓ sav abъn) teze *sijət-xa!
*puta vъl eppin (⁓ sav abъn) tavъr-ɣa, əs-xe teze.
In a word, his interpretation contains no instance of *d>*r or diphthongs, but shows *e>*a. Through Hungarian and OCS evidence, Danube Bulgar did have diphthongization, i.e. *oo>á/vá-, *öö>é/vé- in Hungarian, and *oo>va, *öö>ve in OCS. OCS also has *aa/ee>a and *a/e>o respectively; likewise, short high vowels became yers, but *ạ>i in Hungarian and ï in Chuvash regardless of length. Whether long high vowels diphthongized is a mystery; the word for "day" in Volga Bulgar was sometimes considered irregular (<*köön).

Dybo (Вокализм раннетюркских заимствований в венгерском) listed Turkic loanwords in Hungarian of Oghuric origin and analyzed their etymology, reconstructing the Old Hungarian vowel system as *å, *ā, *ä, *ǟ, *e, *ē, *i, *ī, *u, *ū, *ü, *ǖ. Notably, the Proto-Turkic *o and *ö became OH *u and *ü resp. (both long and short), but got diphthongized at a later stage namely Danube Bulgar. Besides, I didn't notice any instances of *d following a vowel (except in the word idő < *öd-leg).
Lostlang plans: Oghur Turkic, Gallaecian Celtic, Palaeo-Balkanic

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

Although Erdal (and other scholars') interpretation of the vase inscription are speculative, that of Mudrak seems quite "forced", especially with the way he breaks up words.

From what I can gather from the very limited ability of my Russian and Google Translate (liable to misunderstandings), Mudrak's grievances seem to be centred on the interpretations of "tessi" and "zoapan". He seems to be confounded that a word meaning 'trough', 'tray', and later 'dish' in other Turkic languages may refer to a "drinking bowl with a diameter of 12 cm", however lexical change should not be discounted, especially considering the vast distance of Mongolia, the Volga, and Pannonia (Mudrak also cites the Hungarian-based Codex Cumanicus, however the Cumans are Qypchaqs!)

Mudrak's doubting of "zoapan" basically goes thorugh the following reasoning : 1) in later Turkic, čupan means 'shepherd' and 2) č and ž alternates in a strange manner in the languages involved. We may, though, regard "zoapan" as a borrowing from Slavic or Iranian, with/without contamination from the original Turkic lect, then subject to vowel-breaking. Titles are, after all, often borrowed, and cognates, in Croatian and Romanian, of the word can be observed.

From what I can gather, he translates: If the Buyla had said, "Glorify!" (cheers?), then raise this bowl, and drink!

Mudrak's interpretation, however problematic it may seem, suggests some interesting grammatical features, namely the imperative in -ği (or -i?), a perfective in -si (<-zi, troublesome devoicing?) corresponding to Com. Turkic -p, and a cliticised deictic -ul -- very prospective candidate for a definitive marker -l in Eskel.

The text mentions a Preslav inscription:
Отражение пратюрк. *o через u как в Преславской надписи, где tul-‰i 'исполнил, наполнил' при пратюрк. *dl-.
perhaps you know something of it?
The Nagy-Szent-Miklos vase inscription is considered by some as Avar
Whether or not Pannonian Avar is really a language is disputed. That they are a polity or a nation is not disputed, but "American" is not a language... The Pannonian Avars spoke a lot of languages (Caucasian, Iranic, Turkic), but Proto-Slavic or Hungarian (depends on which scholar you follow) would later get the upper hand as the lingua-franca.
Dybo (Вокализм раннетюркских заимствований в венгерском) listed Turkic loanwords in Hungarian of Oghuric origin and analyzed their etymology, reconstructing the Old Hungarian vowel system as *å, *ā, *ä, *ǟ, *e, *ē, *i, *ī, *u, *ū, *ü, *ǖ.
Also:
The historical phonetics of the Hungarian language believes that in ancient Hungarian (there was no vowels o, ō, ö, ȫ), vocalism did not exist in ancient Hungarian (the period from the separation from the Ugrian community to the appearance of the first written fixations, that is, until the 10th century AD). Modern vowels o, ö evolved from ancient Hungarian u, ü short, and modern vowels u, ü, ú, ű - from ancient Hungarian ū, ǖ long. (translated from the Russian)
The vocalisms in the article you cited are muddled with environmental conditions (especially the Hungarian front-vowel rounding); the correspondences aren't as simple as those listed in the tables.

Zythros Jubi
sinic
sinic
Posts: 404
Joined: 24 Nov 2014 17:31

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by Zythros Jubi »

a perfective in -si (<-zi, troublesome devoicing?) corresponding to Com. Turkic -p
In Chuvash it's -sA in affirmative and -sAr in negative, which is the original form. The origin of this is also unclear per se Levitskaya; some speculated a Uralic origin, while other suggest being cognate to Common Turkic conditional; however it is said that *-sAr also appears in Old Turkic.

As for the conditional suffix in Chuvash -Ătt-, where does it come from? Besides, do you have any idea about the modal and evidentiality system? (I recommend Modals in Turkic and Evidentiality in Turkicby Lars Johanson, downloadable from his homepage).
The text mentions a Preslav inscription:
He may refer to Заметки о языке и культуре дунайских булгар; in this inscription, no instance of kappa was found, but there are many chi's.
Lostlang plans: Oghur Turkic, Gallaecian Celtic, Palaeo-Balkanic

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

Zythros Jubi wrote:
13 Jan 2020 14:35
As for the conditional suffix in Chuvash -Ătt-, where does it come from?
Levitskaya claims it is related to Com. Turkic -r-di. Which would imply the sound-change -rd- > -dd-; any examples from other words/forms?
Besides, do you have any idea about the modal and evidentiality system?
I'd suggest scavenging grammatical forms from attested corpuses (which is what I've been doing lately); those from Danube Bulgar, Volga Bulgar, and then Chuvash (in exactly that order). Don't incorporate all of the forms at once though; some of them may be contradictory (partly due to the variety of interpretations), some may come and go, and some may undergo innovation. Also consider the grammatical structures of Hungarian, Romanian, and surrounding Slavic Languages.

I'd not worry of these sort of things though; the only verbal forms you'd need to work out right now are the non-past, past, negative, and other basic forms; forms from which the conditional, gerunds, etc. can be derived. I'd work from bottom to top if I were you; have you got the nouns, out of all things, figured out?
He may refer to Заметки о языке и культуре дунайских булгар; in this inscription, no instance of kappa was found, but there are many chi's.
Thanks! I am trying to understand the article (with the less-than-reliable aid of Google Translate). I'll post what I get from the text after getting the gist of it.

By the way, where did you get these Russian articles? And any more Bulgar inscriptions in your pocket?

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

dva_arla wrote:
13 Jan 2020 19:44
Zythros Jubi wrote:
13 Jan 2020 14:35
As for the conditional suffix in Chuvash -Ătt-, where does it come from?
Levitskaya claims it is related to Com. Turkic -r-di. Which would imply the sound-change -rd- > -dd-; any examples from other words/forms?
Besides, do you have any idea about the modal and evidentiality system?
I'd suggest scavenging grammatical forms from attested corpuses (which is what I've been doing lately); those from Danube Bulgar, Volga Bulgar, and then Chuvash (in exactly that order). Don't incorporate all of the forms at once though; some of them may be contradictory (partly due to the variety of interpretations), some may come and go, and some may undergo innovation. Also consider the grammatical structures of Hungarian, Romanian, and surrounding Slavic Languages.

I'd not worry of these sort of things though; the only verbal forms you'd need to work out right now are the non-past, past, negative, and other basic forms; forms from which the conditional, gerunds, etc. can be derived. I'd work from bottom to top if I were you; have you got the nouns, out of all things, figured out?
He may refer to Заметки о языке и культуре дунайских булгар; in this inscription, no instance of kappa was found, but there are many chi's.
Thanks! I am trying to understand the article (with the less-than-reliable aid of Google Translate). I'll post what I get from the text after getting the gist of it.

By the way, where did you get these Russian articles? And any more Bulgar inscriptions in your pocket?
(I recommend Modals in Turkic and Evidentiality in Turkicby Lars Johanson, downloadable from his homepage).
Got the link?

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

Zythros Jubi wrote:
13 Jan 2020 14:35
As for the conditional suffix in Chuvash -Ătt-, where does it come from?
Levitskaya claims it is related to Com. Turkic -r-di. Which would imply the sound-change -rd- > -dd-; any examples from other words/forms?
Besides, do you have any idea about the modal and evidentiality system?
I'd suggest scavenging grammatical forms from attested corpuses (which is what I've been doing lately); those from Danube Bulgar, Volga Bulgar, and then Chuvash (in exactly that order). Don't incorporate all of the forms at once though; some of them may be contradictory (partly due to the variety of interpretations), some may come and go, and some may undergo innovation. Also consider the grammatical structures of Hungarian, Romanian, and surrounding Slavic Languages.

I'd not worry of these sort of things though; the only verbal forms you'd need to work out right now are the non-past, past, negative, and other basic forms; forms from which the conditional, gerunds, etc. can be derived. I'd work from bottom to top if I were you; have you got the nouns, out of all things, figured out?
He may refer to Заметки о языке и культуре дунайских булгар; in this inscription, no instance of kappa was found, but there are many chi's.
Thanks! I am trying to understand the article (with the less-than-reliable aid of Google Translate). I'll post what I get from the text after getting the gist of it.

By the way, where did you get these Russian articles? And any more Bulgar inscriptions in your pocket?
[/quote]
(I recommend Modals in Turkic and Evidentiality in Turkicby Lars Johanson, downloadable from his homepage).
Got the link?
[/quote]

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

dva_arla wrote:
13 Jan 2020 20:01
Zythros Jubi wrote:
13 Jan 2020 14:35
As for the conditional suffix in Chuvash -Ătt-, where does it come from?
Levitskaya claims it is related to Com. Turkic -r-di. Which would imply the sound-change -rd- > -dd-; any examples from other words/forms?
Besides, do you have any idea about the modal and evidentiality system?
I'd suggest scavenging grammatical forms from attested corpuses (which is what I've been doing lately); those from Danube Bulgar, Volga Bulgar, and then Chuvash (in exactly that order). Don't incorporate all of the forms at once though; some of them may be contradictory (partly due to the variety of interpretations), some may come and go, and some may undergo innovation. Also consider the grammatical structures of Hungarian, Romanian, and surrounding Slavic Languages.

I'd not worry of these sort of things though; the only verbal forms you'd need to work out right now are the non-past, past, negative, and other basic forms; forms from which the conditional, gerunds, etc. can be derived. I'd work from bottom to top if I were you; have you got the nouns, out of all things, figured out?
He may refer to Заметки о языке и культуре дунайских булгар; in this inscription, no instance of kappa was found, but there are many chi's.
Thanks! I am trying to understand the article (with the less-than-reliable aid of Google Translate). I'll post what I get from the text after getting the gist of it.

By the way, where did you get these Russian articles? And any more Bulgar inscriptions in your pocket?

(I recommend Modals in Turkic and Evidentiality in Turkicby Lars Johanson, downloadable from his homepage).
Got the link?

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

Zythros Jubi wrote:
13 Jan 2020 14:35
As for the conditional suffix in Chuvash -Ătt-, where does it come from?
Levitskaya claims it is related to Com. Turkic -r-di. Which would imply the sound-change -rd- > -dd-; any examples from other words/forms?
Besides, do you have any idea about the modal and evidentiality system?
I'd suggest scavenging grammatical forms from attested corpuses (which is what I've been doing lately); those from Danube Bulgar, Volga Bulgar, and then Chuvash (in exactly that order). Don't incorporate all of the forms at once though; some of them may contradict each other (partly due to the variety of interpretations), some may come and go, and some may undergo innovation. Also consider the grammatical structures of Hungarian, Romanian, and surrounding Slavic Languages.

I'd not worry of these sort of things though; the only verbal forms you'd need to work out right now are the non-past, past, negative, and other basic forms; forms from which the conditional, gerunds, etc. can be derived. I'd work from bottom to top if I were you; have you got the nouns, for instance, figured out?
He may refer to Заметки о языке и культуре дунайских булгар; in this inscription, no instance of kappa was found, but there are many chi's.
Thanks! I am trying to understand the article (with the less-than-reliable aid of Google Translate). I'll post what I get from the text after getting the gist of it.

By the way, where did you get these Russian articles? And any more Bulgar inscriptions in your pocket?
(I recommend Modals in Turkic and Evidentiality in Turkicby Lars Johanson, downloadable from his homepage).
Got the link?
Last edited by dva_arla on 13 Jan 2020 20:09, edited 2 times in total.

Zythros Jubi
sinic
sinic
Posts: 404
Joined: 24 Nov 2014 17:31

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by Zythros Jubi »

I found these articles through Wikipedia links and partly from Googling. Then a Swedish conlanger shared some pdf's on ConWorkshop.
Lostlang plans: Oghur Turkic, Gallaecian Celtic, Palaeo-Balkanic

User avatar
Vlürch
sinic
sinic
Posts: 300
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 21:19
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by Vlürch »

I thought I'd already replied to this saying I like the idea of an Oghur conlang, but looks like I didn't. Well, I like the idea! I don't really know anything about Oghur languages so I can't say anything constructive, but this thread is interesting and I'm sure the conlang will be cool no matter where exactly it goes.
Zythros Jubi wrote:
12 Jan 2020 18:16
́
Am I the only one who just sees a box with letters and numbers in it? I looked up what it's supposed to be, and it's a Private Use Character (which I've never understood the concept of tbh), and... it's that one famous rare kanji?
Image
Sorry for being stupid, not trying to derail the thread or anything.

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

Vlürch wrote:
14 Jan 2020 06:22
it's that one famous rare kanji?
Ah yes, the Three Dragons on a cloudy day. A Japanese work-of-art indeed.

By the way, do you know Russian? On the Kazakh thread you were citing an article in Russian, if I am not mistaken.

User avatar
Vlürch
sinic
sinic
Posts: 300
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 21:19
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by Vlürch »

dva_arla wrote:
14 Jan 2020 14:47
A Japanese work-of-art indeed.
The entire Japanese language is a work of art, but yeah, it really is one of the most impressive kanji ever.
dva_arla wrote:
14 Jan 2020 14:47
By the way, do you know Russian? On the Kazakh thread you were citing an article in Russian, if I am not mistaken.
Very little. I tried to learn it for a while but it got too depressing to seriously put any effort into it. So, I can understand some really basic Russian but have to constantly look up words, and have to use Google Translate to make sense of basically anything (but obviously Google Translate's output can't be taken at face). It takes hours to get through long texts, and also hours to write even short paragraphs since I have to constantly fix mistakes after looking up the correct word/inflection/preposition/whatever to use... [>_<] Just to be clear, I can't speak anything except Finnish and English, or even understand anything else; I understand only like 1-5% of Japanese, 0.5-3% of Turkish (and other Turkic languages to similar degrees, except Siberian ones only like 0.1-1% and Chuvash only 0.00001%), maybe 25-50% of Spanish in writing and when spoken slowly but only 10-25% at average speed, 1-2% of Russian and Swedish. I pulled those percentages out of my ass so take them with a grain of salt, though. The problem is always vocabulary... nothing sticks, except useless words that are literally never used.

Sorry for the self-centered rambling...

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

Vlürch wrote:
14 Jan 2020 19:50
The problem is always vocabulary... nothing sticks, except useless words that are literally never used.
My problem is with the Cyrillic alphabet... I can read a paragraph of Finnish, Hawai'ian, Polish, or Basque; I can look and skim at a paragraph and the letters would easily form words and come into my head, whether or not I understand what is being read. But a text in Russian or Persian would look like an endless block or string; although I know every letter from a to я, I can only read one word at a time. Even when speaking (whatever little I know of) Russian inside my head, my brain would "write" them out only in Latin... experiencing similar problems?

Zythros Jubi
sinic
sinic
Posts: 404
Joined: 24 Nov 2014 17:31

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by Zythros Jubi »

dva_arla wrote:
14 Jan 2020 20:44
Vlürch wrote:
14 Jan 2020 19:50
The problem is always vocabulary... nothing sticks, except useless words that are literally never used.
My problem is with the Cyrillic alphabet... I can read a paragraph of Finnish, Hawai'ian, Polish, or Basque; I can look and skim at a paragraph and the letters would easily form words and come into my head, whether or not I understand what is being read. But a text in Russian or Persian would look like an endless block or string; although I know every letter from a to я, I can only read one word at a time. Even when speaking (whatever little I know of) Russian inside my head, my brain would "write" them out only in Latin... experiencing similar problems?
How much can you understand a text in Acehnese, Javanese, Balinese and so on?
Lostlang plans: Oghur Turkic, Gallaecian Celtic, Palaeo-Balkanic

User avatar
Vlürch
sinic
sinic
Posts: 300
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 21:19
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by Vlürch »

dva_arla wrote:
14 Jan 2020 20:44
My problem is with the Cyrillic alphabet... I can read a paragraph of Finnish, Hawai'ian, Polish, or Basque; I can look and skim at a paragraph and the letters would easily form words and come into my head, whether or not I understand what is being read. But a text in Russian or Persian would look like an endless block or string; although I know every letter from a to я, I can only read one word at a time. Even when speaking (whatever little I know of) Russian inside my head, my brain would "write" them out only in Latin... experiencing similar problems?
Thankfully that's never been a problem for me, although I do still read in the Cyrillic alphabet somewhat slower than the Latin alphabet. I just suck at memorising words and keep mixing words up, including ones that don't even resemble each other. [>_<]

Zythros Jubi
sinic
sinic
Posts: 404
Joined: 24 Nov 2014 17:31

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by Zythros Jubi »

On definite article: Volga Bulgar inscriptions show a postpositional deictic *kü after the noun, also a postpositional *ol IIRC (and there seems to be no instance of the emphatic particle *ok)?

Well, let's return to the problem of noun plural and 3rd plural personal verb suffix formation.
Lostlang plans: Oghur Turkic, Gallaecian Celtic, Palaeo-Balkanic

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

Zythros Jubi wrote:
15 Jan 2020 05:30
How much can you understand a text in Acehnese, Javanese, Balinese and so on?
In precisely the order you mentioned, and awful poorly for the three of them. Malay (any variety), Betawi-nese, and to some extant the Minangkabau language would be more intelligible to a monolingual Indonesian speaker. But I can pronounce texts written (using the Latin script) in the three languages once I know their orthographical rules, which is the point I was making there.
On definite article: Volga Bulgar inscriptions show a postpositional deictic *kü after the noun, also a postpositional *ol IIRC (and there seems to be no instance of the emphatic particle *ok)?
*ol can become a definite marker -(o)l (coincidentally similar to Romanian!). I suggest retaining the deictic 'this' function of *kü.
Well, let's return to the problem of noun plural and 3rd plural personal verb suffix formation.
I'd either a) append the same suffix the nominal-plural uses just to be safe (as in Turkish), or b) not append any at all (in Uyghur, -du serves both the 3sg and 3pl). Of course, any solid data indicating how the 3pl (and the noun plural) was formed in Danube (or Pannonian) Bulgar would be very welcomed!
Vlürch wrote:
15 Jan 2020 06:43
Thankfully that's never been a problem for me, although I do still read in the Cyrillic alphabet somewhat slower than the Latin alphabet. I just suck at memorising words and keep mixing words up, including ones that don't even resemble each other. [>_<]
How, then, did you progress your Cyrillic-reading from being as good as five-year-old Russian toddlers or Likbez participants, for you must surely have once passed through that stage? (no offence intended)

dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 82
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: Eskêl (Carpathian Bulgar) Scratchpad

Post by dva_arla »

The Preslav stele seems to belong to an 'older' Bulgar dialect (dated 7-9 c. by Mudrak due to the phonetic devolpment sr>str); this is shown by the lack of middle-vowel-breaking in the title "zopan" which we have seen earlier.
zit kon ićirğon bule
kumči kɨpe 455 tulči 540
estroğin kɨpe 427 tulči 854
turtuna pile
zopan estrɨğin kɨpe 20 tulči 40
alkasi kɨpe 1 klubrin (or hlubrin) 1
Interpetation (from the Russian with personal additions, somewhat speculative) :
(in) seven days through hard-work,
barrel (?) type (or units?): 455, increased (to) 540
clasp type: 427, increased (to) 854
Through extension/lag (?),
Kaftan* clasp type: 20, increased (to) 40
earring/pendant: 1, 1 left.
*according to the text, župan is apparently used as a metonymy for the kaftan in several Balkan languages.

I'm not sure how ićirğon and turtun makes sense; perhaps they refer to "workdays" and "holidays". That, or the latter refers to overtimes?

Note that the text does not distinguish /k/ or /q/, both written in х. ö and ü are not distinguished from their back counterparts.

Grammatical features:

1) the word büle, which may be interpreted as a comitative (c.f. bilen, ile, etc.) or as a "connecting participle" derived from the stem *bol- (be) or *böl- (divide).
Mudrak derives another "connecting participle" pile from the stem *bil- "to know", but I think the word may just be an alternative form of büle.
(Levitskaya, though, derives bilen, ile, etc. from *bir-le, with *-le serving as an adjectival suffix, putting doubt on Mudrak's etymologies...)
2) a genitive in -in, here acting as adjectival : estriyin** kıpe (ring's (?) shape = ring-shaped)
3) third-person past-perfect in -çi (= Chuvash -çĕ) before stem ending in l (tul-). ldi > lçi (or -lj?) thorugh palatalisation.
4) third-person possessive suffix -si
5) -a of turtuna : converb?
6) -e of kɨpe : cognate to Turkic third-person possessive -i (often giving "definitive" force to nouns)?

**in Uzbek and Kypchak languages (i)sirge = "earring".

Phonological features :

1) PT *o > u, ö > ü
2) PT *ė > ı
3 *je > ji > źi
4) sr > str (carried on from Slavic)
5) o > u

Post Reply