Does an ig- prefix mean there's an underlying g in the root?Choosing between the prefixes e- and ex-Did the Romans ever combine Greek and Latin morphemes?What does the prefix 'ab-' mean in the Latin verb 'abundare'?Does 'fiebam' contain the same root twice?What is the meaning and origin of the “se-” prefix?Does anyone know of a resource that lists 'root morphemes' of latin words?Ad- instead of co- as a prefix for morphismHow was “gnosco” pronounced?

Dogfights in outer space

Bringing Power Supplies on Plane?

Does an Irish VISA WARNING count as "refused entry at the border of any country other than the UK?"

Would the USA be eligible to join the European Union?

Are there really no countries that protect Freedom of Speech as the United States does?

Boss wants me to ignore a software API license

Why does the cable resistance jump from a low value to high value at a particular frequency?

Good textbook for queueing theory and performance modeling

What unique challenges/limitations will I face if I start a career as a pilot at 45 years old?

How would you translate this? バタコチーズライス

How can God warn people of the upcoming rapture without disrupting society?

Chunk + Enumerate a list of digits

How to not forget things?

Do you "gain" 1st level?

How to prevent criminal gangs from making/buying guns?

What is a "soap"?

Does fossil fuels use since 1990 account for half of all the fossil fuels used in history?

Telephone number in spoken words

How to gracefully leave a company you helped start?

What is the farthest a camera can see?

What kind of liquid can be seen 'leaking' from the upper surface of the wing of a Boeing 737-800?

Pokemon Go: Gym Badge Over-completed?

How do I call a 6-digit Australian phone number with a US-based mobile phone?

Are there examples in Tanach of 3 or more parties having an ongoing conversation?



Does an ig- prefix mean there's an underlying g in the root?


Choosing between the prefixes e- and ex-Did the Romans ever combine Greek and Latin morphemes?What does the prefix 'ab-' mean in the Latin verb 'abundare'?Does 'fiebam' contain the same root twice?What is the meaning and origin of the “se-” prefix?Does anyone know of a resource that lists 'root morphemes' of latin words?Ad- instead of co- as a prefix for morphismHow was “gnosco” pronounced?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








4















There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/, such as noscō /gnosko:/ [nɔsko:]—this "hidden" /g/ appears when prefixes are added, as in cognoscō /congnosko:/ [cɔŋnɔsko:] (with the prefix con-).



If we see a word that starts with ign-, is that a sure sign of such an "invisible" /g/? For example, can we say with confidence that ignāvus, ignōbilis, and ignōrō have an underlying /g/ in their stems?



EDIT: I'm particularly interested in words that show clear prefixing—ignis, for example, doesn't count.










share|improve this question
































    4















    There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/, such as noscō /gnosko:/ [nɔsko:]—this "hidden" /g/ appears when prefixes are added, as in cognoscō /congnosko:/ [cɔŋnɔsko:] (with the prefix con-).



    If we see a word that starts with ign-, is that a sure sign of such an "invisible" /g/? For example, can we say with confidence that ignāvus, ignōbilis, and ignōrō have an underlying /g/ in their stems?



    EDIT: I'm particularly interested in words that show clear prefixing—ignis, for example, doesn't count.










    share|improve this question




























      4












      4








      4








      There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/, such as noscō /gnosko:/ [nɔsko:]—this "hidden" /g/ appears when prefixes are added, as in cognoscō /congnosko:/ [cɔŋnɔsko:] (with the prefix con-).



      If we see a word that starts with ign-, is that a sure sign of such an "invisible" /g/? For example, can we say with confidence that ignāvus, ignōbilis, and ignōrō have an underlying /g/ in their stems?



      EDIT: I'm particularly interested in words that show clear prefixing—ignis, for example, doesn't count.










      share|improve this question
















      There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/, such as noscō /gnosko:/ [nɔsko:]—this "hidden" /g/ appears when prefixes are added, as in cognoscō /congnosko:/ [cɔŋnɔsko:] (with the prefix con-).



      If we see a word that starts with ign-, is that a sure sign of such an "invisible" /g/? For example, can we say with confidence that ignāvus, ignōbilis, and ignōrō have an underlying /g/ in their stems?



      EDIT: I'm particularly interested in words that show clear prefixing—ignis, for example, doesn't count.







      morphologia prefix phonology phonetics






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 8 hours ago







      Draconis

















      asked 9 hours ago









      DraconisDraconis

      24.4k2 gold badges33 silver badges104 bronze badges




      24.4k2 gold badges33 silver badges104 bronze badges























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          The short answer would be no. Nomen is a well-known example of a word that did not historically start with a velar consonant but that has a velar in some related prefixed words: agnomen, cognomen, ignominia (but not in praenomen or pronomen). This is thought to be the result of analogy.




          There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/




          I wouldn't put it this way. Words like nosco* historically started with a velar consonant. It's much less obvious that an "underlying" /g/ continued to be present at the start of words like nosco after they came to be pronounced with initial [n], and spelled with initial <N>.



          This topic is covered extensively in Aspects of the Phonology and
          Morphology of Classical Latin,
          by András Cser (2016). See Chapter 11, "The issue of〈gn〉-initial stems" (pp. 194-205).



          Cser suggests a phonological development from a form with gn, to a form with a dorsal "floating C-Place node" before n, to a form with initial n:




          it is clear that the literary period saw the gradual disappearance of the floating C-Place node and the lexical split of words in which it occurred. The unprefixed forms were relexicalised with a single initial [n], whereas the prefixed forms were relexicalised with a fully specified [ŋn] sequence which was no different from the [ŋn] sequence found internally in the regnum and
          ignis-type words, and from this point on the relation between these unprefixed
          and prefixed forms was no longer motivated phonologically. This made it possible
          for other prefixes to attach to 〈gn〉-initial (now phonologically [n]-initial) stems, hence the novel formations like renatus ’born again’, praenoscere ‘know in advance’, pernobilis ‘most noble’.




          (p. 202)




          *I think the o in the first syllable is long /o:/—thought to come in this word from a vowel + *h₃ sequence, according to de Vaan—although I don't know what direct evidence there is of the length.






          share|improve this answer





























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "644"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11323%2fdoes-an-ig-prefix-mean-theres-an-underlying-g-in-the-root%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            4














            The short answer would be no. Nomen is a well-known example of a word that did not historically start with a velar consonant but that has a velar in some related prefixed words: agnomen, cognomen, ignominia (but not in praenomen or pronomen). This is thought to be the result of analogy.




            There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/




            I wouldn't put it this way. Words like nosco* historically started with a velar consonant. It's much less obvious that an "underlying" /g/ continued to be present at the start of words like nosco after they came to be pronounced with initial [n], and spelled with initial <N>.



            This topic is covered extensively in Aspects of the Phonology and
            Morphology of Classical Latin,
            by András Cser (2016). See Chapter 11, "The issue of〈gn〉-initial stems" (pp. 194-205).



            Cser suggests a phonological development from a form with gn, to a form with a dorsal "floating C-Place node" before n, to a form with initial n:




            it is clear that the literary period saw the gradual disappearance of the floating C-Place node and the lexical split of words in which it occurred. The unprefixed forms were relexicalised with a single initial [n], whereas the prefixed forms were relexicalised with a fully specified [ŋn] sequence which was no different from the [ŋn] sequence found internally in the regnum and
            ignis-type words, and from this point on the relation between these unprefixed
            and prefixed forms was no longer motivated phonologically. This made it possible
            for other prefixes to attach to 〈gn〉-initial (now phonologically [n]-initial) stems, hence the novel formations like renatus ’born again’, praenoscere ‘know in advance’, pernobilis ‘most noble’.




            (p. 202)




            *I think the o in the first syllable is long /o:/—thought to come in this word from a vowel + *h₃ sequence, according to de Vaan—although I don't know what direct evidence there is of the length.






            share|improve this answer































              4














              The short answer would be no. Nomen is a well-known example of a word that did not historically start with a velar consonant but that has a velar in some related prefixed words: agnomen, cognomen, ignominia (but not in praenomen or pronomen). This is thought to be the result of analogy.




              There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/




              I wouldn't put it this way. Words like nosco* historically started with a velar consonant. It's much less obvious that an "underlying" /g/ continued to be present at the start of words like nosco after they came to be pronounced with initial [n], and spelled with initial <N>.



              This topic is covered extensively in Aspects of the Phonology and
              Morphology of Classical Latin,
              by András Cser (2016). See Chapter 11, "The issue of〈gn〉-initial stems" (pp. 194-205).



              Cser suggests a phonological development from a form with gn, to a form with a dorsal "floating C-Place node" before n, to a form with initial n:




              it is clear that the literary period saw the gradual disappearance of the floating C-Place node and the lexical split of words in which it occurred. The unprefixed forms were relexicalised with a single initial [n], whereas the prefixed forms were relexicalised with a fully specified [ŋn] sequence which was no different from the [ŋn] sequence found internally in the regnum and
              ignis-type words, and from this point on the relation between these unprefixed
              and prefixed forms was no longer motivated phonologically. This made it possible
              for other prefixes to attach to 〈gn〉-initial (now phonologically [n]-initial) stems, hence the novel formations like renatus ’born again’, praenoscere ‘know in advance’, pernobilis ‘most noble’.




              (p. 202)




              *I think the o in the first syllable is long /o:/—thought to come in this word from a vowel + *h₃ sequence, according to de Vaan—although I don't know what direct evidence there is of the length.






              share|improve this answer





























                4












                4








                4







                The short answer would be no. Nomen is a well-known example of a word that did not historically start with a velar consonant but that has a velar in some related prefixed words: agnomen, cognomen, ignominia (but not in praenomen or pronomen). This is thought to be the result of analogy.




                There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/




                I wouldn't put it this way. Words like nosco* historically started with a velar consonant. It's much less obvious that an "underlying" /g/ continued to be present at the start of words like nosco after they came to be pronounced with initial [n], and spelled with initial <N>.



                This topic is covered extensively in Aspects of the Phonology and
                Morphology of Classical Latin,
                by András Cser (2016). See Chapter 11, "The issue of〈gn〉-initial stems" (pp. 194-205).



                Cser suggests a phonological development from a form with gn, to a form with a dorsal "floating C-Place node" before n, to a form with initial n:




                it is clear that the literary period saw the gradual disappearance of the floating C-Place node and the lexical split of words in which it occurred. The unprefixed forms were relexicalised with a single initial [n], whereas the prefixed forms were relexicalised with a fully specified [ŋn] sequence which was no different from the [ŋn] sequence found internally in the regnum and
                ignis-type words, and from this point on the relation between these unprefixed
                and prefixed forms was no longer motivated phonologically. This made it possible
                for other prefixes to attach to 〈gn〉-initial (now phonologically [n]-initial) stems, hence the novel formations like renatus ’born again’, praenoscere ‘know in advance’, pernobilis ‘most noble’.




                (p. 202)




                *I think the o in the first syllable is long /o:/—thought to come in this word from a vowel + *h₃ sequence, according to de Vaan—although I don't know what direct evidence there is of the length.






                share|improve this answer















                The short answer would be no. Nomen is a well-known example of a word that did not historically start with a velar consonant but that has a velar in some related prefixed words: agnomen, cognomen, ignominia (but not in praenomen or pronomen). This is thought to be the result of analogy.




                There seem to be certain words in Latin which start with an underlying /gn/




                I wouldn't put it this way. Words like nosco* historically started with a velar consonant. It's much less obvious that an "underlying" /g/ continued to be present at the start of words like nosco after they came to be pronounced with initial [n], and spelled with initial <N>.



                This topic is covered extensively in Aspects of the Phonology and
                Morphology of Classical Latin,
                by András Cser (2016). See Chapter 11, "The issue of〈gn〉-initial stems" (pp. 194-205).



                Cser suggests a phonological development from a form with gn, to a form with a dorsal "floating C-Place node" before n, to a form with initial n:




                it is clear that the literary period saw the gradual disappearance of the floating C-Place node and the lexical split of words in which it occurred. The unprefixed forms were relexicalised with a single initial [n], whereas the prefixed forms were relexicalised with a fully specified [ŋn] sequence which was no different from the [ŋn] sequence found internally in the regnum and
                ignis-type words, and from this point on the relation between these unprefixed
                and prefixed forms was no longer motivated phonologically. This made it possible
                for other prefixes to attach to 〈gn〉-initial (now phonologically [n]-initial) stems, hence the novel formations like renatus ’born again’, praenoscere ‘know in advance’, pernobilis ‘most noble’.




                (p. 202)




                *I think the o in the first syllable is long /o:/—thought to come in this word from a vowel + *h₃ sequence, according to de Vaan—although I don't know what direct evidence there is of the length.







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 1 hour ago

























                answered 8 hours ago









                sumelicsumelic

                10.2k1 gold badge25 silver badges65 bronze badges




                10.2k1 gold badge25 silver badges65 bronze badges






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Latin Language Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11323%2fdoes-an-ig-prefix-mean-theres-an-underlying-g-in-the-root%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    ParseJSON using SSJSUsing AMPscript with SSJS ActivitiesHow to resubscribe a user in Marketing cloud using SSJS?Pulling Subscriber Status from Lists using SSJSRetrieving Emails using SSJSProblem in updating DE using SSJSUsing SSJS to send single email in Marketing CloudError adding EmailSendDefinition using SSJS

                    Кампала Садржај Географија Географија Историја Становништво Привреда Партнерски градови Референце Спољашње везе Мени за навигацију0°11′ СГШ; 32°20′ ИГД / 0.18° СГШ; 32.34° ИГД / 0.18; 32.340°11′ СГШ; 32°20′ ИГД / 0.18° СГШ; 32.34° ИГД / 0.18; 32.34МедијиПодациЗванични веб-сајту

                    19. јануар Садржај Догађаји Рођења Смрти Празници и дани сећања Види још Референце Мени за навигацијуу