*tér-/tr̥-´
‘to speak’
- Language
- Proto-Anatolian
- Grammar
- verb
- ID
- 2481
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Palaic
dar-
‘to speak (?)’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is found in a festival text and has been recovered due to a new join between the two fragments KBo 37.150 and KUB 35.163.
[D.S.]
1.1.2Forms
| 3pl. pret. ind. act. | da-ra-a-an-da | KBo 37.150 + KUB 35.163 ii 6’/8 | (CTH 753, NS) |
1.1.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photographs in the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv).
[D.S.]
1.1.4Meaning
From an etymological perspective with Hitt. tē-/tar-(mi) ‘to say, speak’, Pal. dar- is probably a verb of speaking. While the context is fragmentary, we notice the indirect object ariyaki occurring before the verb. If darānda means ‘they spoke’, ariyaki may denote an official, to whom they (scil. the king and queen?) would have spoken. In any case, more contextual evidence is needed.
[D.S.]
1.1.5Stem
It is unclear whether the plene spelling in darānda is indicative of any particular verbal stem class, e.g. for a denominative verb in -a(g)a-(di). Pending further evidence, dar- is treated here as a root verb.
[D.S.]
1.1.6Derivatives
2. Reconstruction
2.1Reconstruction ‘to speak’
The comparison of the weak stem of the Hittite suppletive verb tē-/tar-(mi) ‘to speak’ and Palaic dar- ‘id.’ (and the derivative in *-to-, i.e. tarta-) allows for the reconstruction of a Proto-Anatolian root verb of the mi-conjugation, i.e. *tér-/tr̥-´. For the root verb of the ḫi-conjugation as in HLuw. /tadariya-(i)/, the base of CLuw. tātariyamman-, see PLuw. *tedorii̯a-(i). The shape of the root has been reconstructed as either *dher- (Oettinger 1979a:109, Hoffmann apud Eichner 1975a:93, HEG T:146f. with further literature) or *ter- (Petersen 1933a:17, Melchert 1994a:231, Furlan 2007a:294-298, EDHIL:870f. and HEG T:144f. with further literature), undecided Eichner 1975a:93.
The inner-Anatolian arguments used in favor of dher- such as the spelling with initial da- for Hittite (thus Oettinger 1979a:109) and the lenition of the non-reduplicated syllable of Luwian tātariyamman- (thus EDHIL:871) are not valid.For the latter, see Melchert 1994a:252.
From a pure Anatolian point of view, there is no way to phonologically distinguish between the two roots and the decision must rest on the Indo-European perspective.
For a parallel radical formation, see PLuw. *tedorii̯a-(i).
[D.S.]
3. Proto-Indo-European
3.1Semantic Reconstruction
No root verb is attested outside Anatolian which is why no PIE reconstruction of such a stem class is provided here.
3.1.1Root etymology
There may be several cognates of Pal. dar- ‘to speak(?)’ in up to five branches of IE.Arm. t‘rt‘rak ‘good speaker’ is probably borrowed (from MIran.?) because the suffix Arm. ‑ak is characteristic of loan words (or loan-translations), cf. Olsen 1999a:240–255 on the suffix.However, words meaning ‘loud’ vel sim. (cf. Skt. tārá‑, etc.) may be related with the root in question but are rather connected metaphorically with the roots PIE *terh1- ‘to drill, rub’ (LIV²:632f.) or PIE *terh2- ‘to pass, cross’ (LIV²:633f.), cf. the comments above. Proving one or the other connection unambiguously is hardly possible. Furthermore, the meaning of the Tocharian B hapax tärraskemane is not commonly agreed upon and shows a pragmatic/emotional connotation probably also involving metaphorical semantics which renders it a not reliable piece of evidence, either. This leaves the Baltic lexemes as the only certain comparanda. The source of PAnat. *tér‑/*tr̥‑´ ‘to speak’ and Lith. tariù ‘to speak’, etc. can thus safely but on only meager evidence be reconstructed as PIE *ter- ‘to speak’ (LIV²:630f.).It is refrained here from discussing an onomatopoeic origin of the root in question, cf., e.g., the “redupl. Schallwort” PIE *tet(e)r- “gackern, hühnerartige Vögel u. dgl.” (IEW:1079). It must be noted, however, that Pokorny in IEW does not propose an onomatopoeic origin of PIE *ter- ‘to speak’ but rather connects “tor‑, toro‑s ‘laut, vernehmlich’” with PIE “4. *ter- ‘hinübergelangen, hindurchdringen’”. The latter root is reconstructed as PIE *terh2- in LIV²:633f. which makes a connection like that phonologically impossible, at least unlikely (cf. the circumflex intonation of Lith. tariù).
3.2Morphological Reconstruction
No non-Anatolian root formation is attested which is why no PIE reconstruction is provided here.
3.2.1Root etymology
While the Balto-Slavic lexemes can safely be connected based on meaning and phonology (cf., e.g., LIV²:631 n. 3 s.v. *ter‑), the remaining data is hard to evaluate because connections with other roots (PIE *terh1- ‘to drill, rub’, LIV²:632f.; PIE *terh2- ‘to pass, cross’, LIV²:633f.) are equally possible and oftentimes preferred (cf. above). Therefore, the underlying root is reconstructed mainly based on Anatolian and Balto-Slavic material as PIE *ter- ‘to speak’ (LIV²:630f.).
[A.O.]
4. Transmission
OIr. torm ‘sound, tumult’This word could alternatively be derived from PIE *terh1- ‘to drill, rub’, cf. Zair 2012a:246. OIr. torann ‘thunder’ seems to be metathesized from *donaro- (: OHG donar ‘thunder’, etc.), cf. EDPC:384, LEIA T:113, and Zair 2012a:248.
LEIA T:97f., de Bernardo Stempel 1999a:244, Zair 2012a:246
Lith. tariù, tarýti ‘to speak, say’, OPr. attrātwei, etc. ‘to answer’, acc. sg. tārin f. ‘voice’ (III)
EDBIL:—, ALEW 2.0 s.v. tar̃ti (2022-02-11), PKEŽ² s.vv. tārin (2022-02-23), attrātwei (2022-02-23), Smoczyński 2005a:131
(?)Russ. torotórit’ ‘to chatter’, Cz. trátořiti ‘to chatter (a lot)’On further Slavic material, cf. the ref. s.v. PAnat. *tórto- ‘spoken’.
EDSIL:—, Vasmer III:126f.
TochB m‑part. tärraskemane ‘pleading, imploring’ or ‘comforting, soothing’ (hapax, THT 85 a 3)
DTB²:309f., Malzahn 2010a:655, CeTOM s.v. tär- (2022-03-24)