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;
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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
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
morphologia prefix phonology phonetics
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
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
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.
add a comment |
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
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.
add a comment |
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.
add a comment |
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.
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.
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
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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