The earliest semitic society linguistic data

Journal of Semitic Studies

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 209-220

  Diakonoff, Igor ^a  

^a RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 22144469577     PISSN: 00224480     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jss/43.2.209     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. P. Fronzaroli, Studi sul lessico comune semitico (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rendiconti della Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche 8, Rome 1964-9), vol. 19, fasc. 5-6, pp. 1-54
2. I. M. D'yakonov [Diakonoff] (ed.), A. G. Belova, A. S. Chetverukhin, A. Yu. Militarev, V. Ya. Porkhomovsky, O. V. Stolbova, Sravnitel'no-istoricheskiy slovar' afraziyskikh yazykov, I-III (Moscow 1981-6)
3. the first five issues have been republished in English: (same authors), 'Historical Comparative Vocabulary of Afrasian', St Petersburg Journal of African Studies 2-5 (1994-5)
4. Vladimir E. Orel and Olga V. Stolbova, Hamito-Semitic Etymological Dictionary: Materials for Reconstruction (Leiden 1994); hereafter OS
5. The term 'Hamito-Semitic' is unacceptible, because the linguistic macrofamily in question cannot be divided into a Semitic and a 'Hamitic' branch: it is currently divided into at least five families of approximately equal age: Semitic, Berbero-Libyan, Kushitic, Omotic, and Chadic. Note that the Bedauye branch of Kushitic may be a family in its own right, that also other branches of Kushitic may rank as separate families, and that Omotic may not belong to the macrofamily in question at all. Seen from the point of view of grammatical isoglosses, the Afrasian macrofamily may be divided into two comprehensive groups; on this see more below. Cf. also I. M. Diakonoff, Afrasian Languages (Moscow 1988), 14-15
6. I. M. Diakonoff, 'Proto-Afrasian and Old Akkadian,' Journal of Afro-Asiatic Linguistics 3 (1991), 1 ff
7. Igor M. Diakonoff, 'Earliest Semites in Asia: Agriculture and Animal Husbandry, According to Linguistic Data (8th-4th Millennia B.C.)', Altorientalische Forschungen 8 (Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des Alten Orients, Berlin 1981), 23-74. Apart from the following references to this paper, it also contains other important information relevant to the present topic, which could not be quoted here for reasons of space
8. On Semitic terms for metals, see Diakonoff, 'Earliest Semites', 50. Sem. 'an(n)ak- is derived from Sumerian an-na(-k). The term consists of the noun an (meaning unknown) + attribute na(k) in the genitive
9. H. Lhote, À la découverte des fresques du Tassili (Paris 1958)
10. Vers d'autres Tassilis (Paris 1982)
11. J. D. Lajoux, Merveilles de Tassili n'Ajjer (Paris 1960)
12. E. Anati, Rock Art in Central Arabia I-IV (Louvain 1968-74)
13. Cf. Diakonoff, 'Earliest Semites', 60. This would mean that the first domestic animals were kept as a living store of meat, not for milking (or, in the case of sheep, not for shearing, cf. n. 14)
14. Cf. 'Earliest Semites', 38 ff
15. Thus, 'emmer' was called kussām-t-, probably 'truncated'
16. Cf. [A. Aichenwald, A. Yu. Militarev], Liviysko-guanchskie yazyki (Afraziyskie yazyki IV, 2, Moscow 1991), 148 ff
17. K. M. Kenyon, Digging in Jericho (New York 1957)
18. idem, Archaeology in the Holy Land (Leningrad 1960)
19. I. M. Diakonoff, 'External Connections of the Sumerian Language', Mother Tongue 3 (1997)