Lepontic language: Difference between revisions
Kwamikagami (talk | contribs) →Corpus: merge |
Lepontic is widely accepted as a Celtic language - Kwami is POV pushing |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|familycolor=Indo-European |
|familycolor=Indo-European |
||
|fam2=[[Celtic languages|Celtic]] |
|fam2=[[Celtic languages|Celtic]] |
||
|fam3= |
|fam3=[[Continental Celtic languages|Continental Celtic]] |
||
|era=attested 550–100 BC |
|era=attested 550–100 BC |
||
|iso3=xlp |
|iso3=xlp |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
'''Lepontic''' is an ancient [[Alps|Alpine]] language that was spoken in parts of [[Rhaetia]] and [[Cisalpine Gaul]] (what is now [[Northern Italy]]) between 550 and 100 BC. Lepontic is attested in inscriptions found in an area centered around [[Lugano]], [[Switzerland]], and including the [[Lake Como]] and [[Lake Maggiore]] areas of [[Italy]]. |
'''Lepontic''' is an ancient [[Alps|Alpine]] language that was spoken in parts of [[Rhaetia]] and [[Cisalpine Gaul]] (what is now [[Northern Italy]]) between 550 and 100 BC. Lepontic is attested in inscriptions found in an area centered around [[Lugano]], [[Switzerland]], and including the [[Lake Como]] and [[Lake Maggiore]] areas of [[Italy]]. |
||
| ⚫ | Lepontic is a [[Celtic languages|Celtic language]].<ref name=LL>[http://linguistlist.org/forms/langs/LLDescription.cfm?code=xlp LinguistList: Lepontic]</ref><ref name=Koch>John T. Koch (ed.) ''Celtic culture: a historical encyclopedia'' ABC-CLIO (2005) ISBN 978-1-85109-440-0</ref> While some recent scholarship (e.g. Eska 1998) has tended to consider it simply as an early form of [[Cisalpine Gaulish]] (or '''Cisalpine Celtic'''), thus a dialect of the [[Gaulish language]], the majority opinion since Lejeune 1971 continues to view it as a distinct [[Continental Celtic]] language, thus not a Gaulish dialect.<ref name=LL/><ref>Koch 2006; 1142.</ref><ref name=Schumacher/> Within this latter view, the earlier inscriptions found within a 50 km radius of [[Lugano]] are considered Lepontic, while the later ones, to the immediate south of this area are considered [[Cisalpine Gaulish]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Kruta|first=Venceslas|title=The Celts|year=1991|publisher=Thames and Hudson|pages=55}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Stifter|first=David|title=Old Celtic Languages|year=2008|pages=12|url=http://www.univie.ac.at/indogermanistik/download/Stifter/oldcelt2008_1_general.pdf}}</ref> |
||
Lepontic was assimilated first by [[Gaulish language|Gaulish]], with the settlement of Gaulish tribes north of the [[River Po]], and then by [[Latin]], after the [[Roman Republic]] gained control over Gallia Cisalpina during the late 2nd and 1st century BC. |
Lepontic was assimilated first by [[Gaulish language|Gaulish]], with the settlement of Gaulish tribes north of the [[River Po]], and then by [[Latin]], after the [[Roman Republic]] gained control over Gallia Cisalpina during the late 2nd and 1st century BC. |
||
==Classification== |
==Classification== |
||
The majority view<ref name=Schumacher/> (e.g. Lejeune 1971, Koch 2008) is that Lepontic is a distinct [[Continental Celtic]] language.<ref name=LL/><ref name=Koch/> A minority opinion considers it as simply an early form of [[Cisalpine Gaulish]] (or '''Cisalpine Celtic''') and thus a dialect of the [[Gaulish language]] (e.g. Eska 1998). An earlier view, which was prevalent for most of the 20th century and until about 1970, regarded Lepontic as a "para-Celtic" western [[Indo-European languages|Indo-European]] language, akin to but not part of Celtic, possibly related to [[Ligurian language (ancient)|Ligurian]] (Whatmough 1933 and Pisani 1964). However, Ligurian itself has been considered akin to, but not descended from, Common Celtic, see Kruta 1991 and Stifter 2008.<ref name=Kruta/><ref name=Stifter/> |
|||
| ⚫ | Lepontic |
||
The majority view<ref name=Schumacher/> (e.g. Lejeune 1971, Koch 2008) is that that these languages are distinct, with Cisalpine Gaulish being an intrusive dialect of the [[Gaulish language]] north of the Alps. A minority opinion (e.g. Eska 2010) holds that Cisalpine Gaulish is a historical and perhaps dialectical continuation of Lepontic, and not a result of the Gaulish invasions. In the former case, the language north of the Alps may be disambiguated as ''Transalpine Gaulish''; in the latter, it may be called ''Transalpine Celtic'', with the languages south of the Alps, including Lepontic, called ''Cisalpine Celtic''. |
|||
An earlier view, which was prevalent for most of the 20th century and until about 1970, regarded Lepontic as a "para-Celtic" language, akin to but not part of Celtic, and possibly related to [[Ligurian language (ancient)|Ligurian]] (Whatmough 1933, Pisani 1964). |
|||
Referring to linguistic arguments as well as archaeological evidence, Schumacher even considers Lepontic a primary branch of Celtic, perhaps even the first language to diverge from Proto-Celtic.<ref name=Schumacher>{{cite book|last1=Schumacher|first1=Stefan|last2=Schulze-Thulin|first2=Britta|last3=aan de Wiel|first3=Caroline|title=Die keltischen Primärverben. Ein vergleichendes, etymologisches und morphologisches Lexikon|year=2004|publisher=Institut für Sprachen und Kulturen der Universität Innsbruck|location=Innsbruck|isbn=3-85124-692-6|pages=84–85|language=German}}</ref> |
Referring to linguistic arguments as well as archaeological evidence, Schumacher even considers Lepontic a primary branch of Celtic, perhaps even the first language to diverge from Proto-Celtic.<ref name=Schumacher>{{cite book|last1=Schumacher|first1=Stefan|last2=Schulze-Thulin|first2=Britta|last3=aan de Wiel|first3=Caroline|title=Die keltischen Primärverben. Ein vergleichendes, etymologisches und morphologisches Lexikon|year=2004|publisher=Institut für Sprachen und Kulturen der Universität Innsbruck|location=Innsbruck|isbn=3-85124-692-6|pages=84–85|language=German}}</ref> In any case, the Lepontic inscriptions are the earliest attestation of any form of Celtic. |
||
==Corpus== |
==Corpus== |
||
{{Clear}} |
|||
The earliest inscriptions found in [[Cisalpine Gaul]] date from the 6th century BC and are in Lepontic, and were written in a form of the [[Old Italic script|Old Italic ("Etruscan") script]]. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
{{Clear}} |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
Lepontic is known from around 140 inscriptions written in the alphabet of [[Lugano]], one of five main [[Old Italic alphabet|Northern Italic alphabets]] derived from the [[Etruscan alphabet]]. Similar scripts were used for writing the [[Raetic language|Rhaetic]] and [[Venetic]] languages and the [[Germanic languages|Germanic]] [[runic alphabet]]s probably derive from a script belonging to this group. |
Lepontic is known from around 140 inscriptions written in the alphabet of [[Lugano]], one of five main [[Old Italic alphabet|Northern Italic alphabets]] derived from the [[Etruscan alphabet]]. Similar scripts were used for writing the [[Raetic language|Rhaetic]] and [[Venetic]] languages and the [[Germanic languages|Germanic]] [[runic alphabet]]s probably derive from a script belonging to this group. |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
The grouping of all inscriptions written in the alphabet of Lugano into a single language is disputed. Indeed, it was not uncommon in antiquity for a given alphabet to be used to write multiple languages. And, in fact, the alphabet of Lugano was used in the coinage of other Alpine tribes, such as the [[Salassi]], [[Salluvii]], and [[Cavares]] (Whatmough 1933, Lejeune 1971). |
The grouping of all inscriptions written in the alphabet of Lugano into a single language is disputed. Indeed, it was not uncommon in antiquity for a given alphabet to be used to write multiple languages. And, in fact, the alphabet of Lugano was used in the coinage of other Alpine tribes, such as the [[Salassi]], [[Salluvii]], and [[Cavares]] (Whatmough 1933, Lejeune 1971). |
||
While many of the later inscriptions clearly appear to be written in [[Cisalpine Gaulish]], some, including specifically all of the older ones, are said to be in an indigenous language distinct from [[Gaulish]] and known as Lepontic. Until the publication of Lejeune 1971, this Lepontic language was regarded as a pre-Celtic language, possibly related to [[Ligurian language (ancient)|Ligurian]] (Whatmough 1933, Pisani 1964). Following Lejeune 1971, the consensus view became that Lepontic should be classified as a Celtic language, albeit possibly as divergent as [[Celtiberian language|Celtiberian]], and in any case quite distinct from Cisalpine Gaulish (Lejeune 1971, Kruta 1991, Stifter 2008).<ref name=Kruta>{{cite book|last=Kruta|first=Venceslas|title=The Celts|year=1991|publisher=Thames and Hudson|pages=52–56}}</ref><ref name=Stifter>{{cite book|last=Stifter|first=David|title=Old Celtic Languages|year=2008|pages=24–37|url=http://www.univie.ac.at/indogermanistik/download/Stifter/oldcelt2008_2_lepontic.pdf}}</ref> |
While many of the later inscriptions clearly appear to be written in [[Cisalpine Gaulish]], some, including specifically all of the older ones, are said to be in an indigenous language distinct from [[Gaulish]] and known as Lepontic. Until the publication of Lejeune 1971, this Lepontic language was regarded as a pre-Celtic language, possibly related to [[Ligurian language (ancient)|Ligurian]] (Whatmough 1933, Pisani 1964). Following Lejeune 1971, the consensus view became that Lepontic should be classified as a Celtic language, albeit possibly as divergent as [[Celtiberian language|Celtiberian]], and in any case quite distinct from Cisalpine Gaulish (Lejeune 1971, Kruta 1991, Stifter 2008).<ref name=Kruta>{{cite book|last=Kruta|first=Venceslas|title=The Celts|year=1991|publisher=Thames and Hudson|pages=52–56}}</ref><ref name=Stifter>{{cite book|last=Stifter|first=David|title=Old Celtic Languages|year=2008|pages=24–37|url=http://www.univie.ac.at/indogermanistik/download/Stifter/oldcelt2008_2_lepontic.pdf}}</ref> Some have gone further, considering Lepontic and [[Cisalpine Gaulish]] essentially one and the same (Eska 1998). However, an analysis of the geographic distribution of the inscriptions shows that the [[Cisalpine Gaulish]] inscriptions are later and from an area to the south of the earlier (Lepontic) inscriptions, with which they display significant differences as well as similarities.<ref name=Stifter/> |
||
While the language is named after the tribe of the [[Lepontii]], which occupied portions of ancient [[Rhaetia]], specifically an [[Alps|Alpine]] area straddling modern [[Switzerland]] and [[Italy]] and bordering Cisalpine Gaul, the term is currently used by some Celticists (e.g. Eska 1998) to apply to all Celtic dialects of ancient Italy. This usage is disputed by those who continue to view the Lepontii as one of several indigenous pre-Roman tribes of the Alps, quite distinct from the [[Gaul]]s who invaded the plains of Northern Italy in historical times. |
|||
The older Lepontic inscriptions date back to before the 5th century BC, the item from [[Castelletto Ticino]] being dated at the 6th century BC and that from [[Sesto Calende]] possibly being from the 7th century BC (Prosdocimi, 1991). The people who made these inscriptions are nowadays identified with the [[Golasecca culture]], a Celtic culture in northern Italy (De Marinis 1991, Kruta 1991 and Stifter 2008).<ref name=Kruta/><ref name=Stifter/> |
The older Lepontic inscriptions date back to before the 5th century BC, the item from [[Castelletto Ticino]] being dated at the 6th century BC and that from [[Sesto Calende]] possibly being from the 7th century BC (Prosdocimi, 1991). The people who made these inscriptions are nowadays identified with the [[Golasecca culture]], a Celtic culture in northern Italy (De Marinis 1991, Kruta 1991 and Stifter 2008).<ref name=Kruta/><ref name=Stifter/> |
||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
==Sources== |
==Sources== |
||
*De Marinis, R.C. (1991). "I Celti Golasecchiani". In Multiple Authors, ''I Celti'', Bompiani. |
*De Marinis, R.C. (1991). "I Celti Golasecchiani". In Multiple Authors, ''I Celti'', Bompiani. |
||
*Eska, J. F. (1998). "The linguistic position of Lepontic". In ''Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society'' vol. 2, Special session on Indo-European subgrouping and internal relations (February 14, 1998), ed. B. K. Bergin, M. C. Plauché, and A. C. Bailey, 2–11. [[Berkeley, California|Berkeley]]: Berkeley Linguistics Society. |
|||
*Eska, J. F. (2010). "The emergence of the Celtic languages". In Martin J. Ball and Nicole Müller (eds.), ''The Celtic languages''. Routledge. |
|||
*Eska, J. F., and D. E. Evans. (1993). "Continental Celtic". In ''The Celtic Languages'', ed. M. J. Ball, 26–63. [[London]]: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-01035-7. |
|||
*{{cite journal | author=Gambari, F. M., and G. Colonna | title=Il bicchiere con iscrizione arcaica de Castelletto Ticino e l'adozione della scrittura nell'Italia nord-occidentale | journal=Studi Etruschi | year=1988 | volume=54 | pages=119–64}} |
*{{cite journal | author=Gambari, F. M., and G. Colonna | title=Il bicchiere con iscrizione arcaica de Castelletto Ticino e l'adozione della scrittura nell'Italia nord-occidentale | journal=Studi Etruschi | year=1988 | volume=54 | pages=119–64}} |
||
*{{cite book |last= Koch|first= John T.|coauthors= |title= Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia| publisher= ABC-CLIO|year= 2006|month= |isbn=}} |
*{{cite book |last= Koch|first= John T.|coauthors= |title= Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia| publisher= ABC-CLIO|year= 2006|month= |isbn=}} |
||
Revision as of 02:00, 14 May 2014
| Lepontic | |
|---|---|
| Region | Cisalpine Gaul |
| Era | attested 550–100 BC |
| Language codes | |
| ISO 639-3 | xlp |
xlp | |
Lepontic is an ancient Alpine language that was spoken in parts of Rhaetia and Cisalpine Gaul (what is now Northern Italy) between 550 and 100 BC. Lepontic is attested in inscriptions found in an area centered around Lugano, Switzerland, and including the Lake Como and Lake Maggiore areas of Italy.
Lepontic is a Celtic language.[1][2] While some recent scholarship (e.g. Eska 1998) has tended to consider it simply as an early form of Cisalpine Gaulish (or Cisalpine Celtic), thus a dialect of the Gaulish language, the majority opinion since Lejeune 1971 continues to view it as a distinct Continental Celtic language, thus not a Gaulish dialect.[1][3][4] Within this latter view, the earlier inscriptions found within a 50 km radius of Lugano are considered Lepontic, while the later ones, to the immediate south of this area are considered Cisalpine Gaulish.[5][6]
Lepontic was assimilated first by Gaulish, with the settlement of Gaulish tribes north of the River Po, and then by Latin, after the Roman Republic gained control over Gallia Cisalpina during the late 2nd and 1st century BC.
Classification
The majority view[4] (e.g. Lejeune 1971, Koch 2008) is that Lepontic is a distinct Continental Celtic language.[1][2] A minority opinion considers it as simply an early form of Cisalpine Gaulish (or Cisalpine Celtic) and thus a dialect of the Gaulish language (e.g. Eska 1998). An earlier view, which was prevalent for most of the 20th century and until about 1970, regarded Lepontic as a "para-Celtic" western Indo-European language, akin to but not part of Celtic, possibly related to Ligurian (Whatmough 1933 and Pisani 1964). However, Ligurian itself has been considered akin to, but not descended from, Common Celtic, see Kruta 1991 and Stifter 2008.[7][8]
Referring to linguistic arguments as well as archaeological evidence, Schumacher even considers Lepontic a primary branch of Celtic, perhaps even the first language to diverge from Proto-Celtic.[4] In any case, the Lepontic inscriptions are the earliest attestation of any form of Celtic.
Corpus
Lepontic is known from around 140 inscriptions written in the alphabet of Lugano, one of five main Northern Italic alphabets derived from the Etruscan alphabet. Similar scripts were used for writing the Rhaetic and Venetic languages and the Germanic runic alphabets probably derive from a script belonging to this group.
The grouping of all inscriptions written in the alphabet of Lugano into a single language is disputed. Indeed, it was not uncommon in antiquity for a given alphabet to be used to write multiple languages. And, in fact, the alphabet of Lugano was used in the coinage of other Alpine tribes, such as the Salassi, Salluvii, and Cavares (Whatmough 1933, Lejeune 1971).
While many of the later inscriptions clearly appear to be written in Cisalpine Gaulish, some, including specifically all of the older ones, are said to be in an indigenous language distinct from Gaulish and known as Lepontic. Until the publication of Lejeune 1971, this Lepontic language was regarded as a pre-Celtic language, possibly related to Ligurian (Whatmough 1933, Pisani 1964). Following Lejeune 1971, the consensus view became that Lepontic should be classified as a Celtic language, albeit possibly as divergent as Celtiberian, and in any case quite distinct from Cisalpine Gaulish (Lejeune 1971, Kruta 1991, Stifter 2008).[7][8] Some have gone further, considering Lepontic and Cisalpine Gaulish essentially one and the same (Eska 1998). However, an analysis of the geographic distribution of the inscriptions shows that the Cisalpine Gaulish inscriptions are later and from an area to the south of the earlier (Lepontic) inscriptions, with which they display significant differences as well as similarities.[8]
While the language is named after the tribe of the Lepontii, which occupied portions of ancient Rhaetia, specifically an Alpine area straddling modern Switzerland and Italy and bordering Cisalpine Gaul, the term is currently used by some Celticists (e.g. Eska 1998) to apply to all Celtic dialects of ancient Italy. This usage is disputed by those who continue to view the Lepontii as one of several indigenous pre-Roman tribes of the Alps, quite distinct from the Gauls who invaded the plains of Northern Italy in historical times.
The older Lepontic inscriptions date back to before the 5th century BC, the item from Castelletto Ticino being dated at the 6th century BC and that from Sesto Calende possibly being from the 7th century BC (Prosdocimi, 1991). The people who made these inscriptions are nowadays identified with the Golasecca culture, a Celtic culture in northern Italy (De Marinis 1991, Kruta 1991 and Stifter 2008).[7][8] The extinction date for Lepontic is only inferred by the absence of later inscriptions.
Texts
File:Castelletto Ticino S 113 575BC.JPG
Modified to add transliteration from "Old Celtic Languages - Appendix on Lepontic" at http://www.univie.ac.at/indogermanistik/download/Stifter/oldcelt2008_2_lepontic.pdf by Dr. David Stifter, 2008 with permission, attributed as follows: Ill. 5.1.: the oldest Lepontic inscription (ca. 575 BC) from Castelletto Ticino (S 113), containing the name χosioiso (from: F. M. Gambari, G. Colonna, ‘Il bicchiere con iscrizione arcaica da Castelletto Ticino e l’adozione della scrittura nell’Italia nord-occidentale,’ Studi Etruschi 54 (1986), 130).
See also
References
- ^ a b c LinguistList: Lepontic
- ^ a b John T. Koch (ed.) Celtic culture: a historical encyclopedia ABC-CLIO (2005) ISBN 978-1-85109-440-0
- ^ Koch 2006; 1142.
- ^ a b c Schumacher, Stefan; Schulze-Thulin, Britta; aan de Wiel, Caroline (2004). Die keltischen Primärverben. Ein vergleichendes, etymologisches und morphologisches Lexikon (in German). Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachen und Kulturen der Universität Innsbruck. pp. 84–85. ISBN 3-85124-692-6.
- ^ Kruta, Venceslas (1991). The Celts. Thames and Hudson. p. 55.
- ^ Stifter, David (2008). Old Celtic Languages (PDF). p. 12.
- ^ a b c Kruta, Venceslas (1991). The Celts. Thames and Hudson. pp. 52–56.
- ^ a b c d Stifter, David (2008). Old Celtic Languages (PDF). pp. 24–37.
Sources
- De Marinis, R.C. (1991). "I Celti Golasecchiani". In Multiple Authors, I Celti, Bompiani.
- Eska, J. F. (1998). "The linguistic position of Lepontic". In Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society vol. 2, Special session on Indo-European subgrouping and internal relations (February 14, 1998), ed. B. K. Bergin, M. C. Plauché, and A. C. Bailey, 2–11. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
- Eska, J. F., and D. E. Evans. (1993). "Continental Celtic". In The Celtic Languages, ed. M. J. Ball, 26–63. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-01035-7.
- Gambari, F. M., and G. Colonna (1988). "Il bicchiere con iscrizione arcaica de Castelletto Ticino e l'adozione della scrittura nell'Italia nord-occidentale". Studi Etruschi. 54: 119–64.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - Koch, John T. (2006). Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters:|coauthors=and|month=(help) - Lejeune, M. (1970–71). "Documents gaulois et para-gaulois de Cisalpine". Études Celtiques. 12: 357–500.
- Lejeune, M. (1971). Lepontica. Paris: Société d'Éditions 'Les Belles Lettres'.
- Lejeune, M. (1978). "Vues présentes sur le celtique ancien". Académie Royale de Belgique, Bulletin de la Classe des Lettres et des Sciences morales et politiques. 64: 108–21.
- Lejeune, M. (1988). Recueil des inscriptions gauloises: II.1 Textes gallo-étrusques. Textes gallo-latins sur pierre. Paris: CNRS.
- Pisani, V. (1964). Le lingue dell'Italia antica oltre il latino (2nd ed.). Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.
- Prosdocimi, A.L. (1991). "Lingua e scrittura dei primi Celti". In Multiple Authors, I Celti, pp. 50–60, Bompiani.
- Tibiletti Bruno, M. G. (1978). "Ligure, leponzio e gallico". In Popoli e civiltà dell'Italia antica vi, Lingue e dialetti, ed. A. L. Prosdocimi, 129–208. Rome: Biblioteca di Storia Patria.
- Tibiletti Bruno, M. G. (1981). "Le iscrizioni celtiche d'Italia". In I Celti d'Italia, ed. E. Campanile, 157–207. Pisa: Giardini.
- Whatmough, J. (1933). The Prae-Italic Dialects of Italy, vol. 2, "The Raetic, Lepontic, Gallic, East-Italic, Messapic and Sicel Inscriptions", Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press