NovilaraTalanta.pdf

MÍMNIS ÉRUT GÁARES TÁDES RÓTNEM ÚVLIN PÁRTEN ÚS PÓLEM ISÁIRON TÉTS 2 UT TRÁTNESI KRUVÍTÈNÁG TRUT ÍPIÉM RÓTNEM LÚTÙIS T H ÁLU ISPÉRÌON VÚLTES RÓTNEM TÉÙ AITÉN TÁS 2 UR SÓTER MÉRPON KÁLÀTNENIS VÍLATOS PÁTEN ÁRNUÍS BÁLÈSTENÁG ANDS ÉTS 2 UT LÁKUT TRÉTEN TÉLETÁU NÉM PÓLEM TÍS 2 U SÓTRIS ÉUS

With regard to the lack of historical information concerning the inhabitants of this territory in the ancient period, the language of the inscriptions ## 342-345 is called North Picenian according to the location of the inscriptions. Numerous attempts to interpret these probable tomb inscriptions dated to the mid of the 1st millennium BC were not successful. Till the present time no personal names were identified. For this reason the genetic affiliation of the North Picenian language remains ambiguous. There are supporters of both the hypotheses of its Indo-European appurtenance (Herbig 1927;Durante 1962Durante , 1978Poultney 1979) and non-Indo-European characterization (Imperato 1994;Sverdrup 2009).

The following comments refer to specific features of the North Picenian language in comparison with other languages of ancient Italy.

Phonetic features

The occurrence of voiced stops: b-BALESTENAG; -d-TADES, ANDS; g-GAARES, -g BALESTENAG, KRUVITENAG / KRUŠTENAG. The presence of the voiced stops would exclude the Etruscan and probably Raetian languages, although the scarcity of 175 10 11 12

the voiced consonants can be more probably explained through borrowing from a language in which the voiced stops are typical.

A final -m: IPIEM, POLEM (2 times), ROTEM, ROTNEM (after Eichner 2 times), NEM or TELETAUNEM. This feature is characteristic of both Etrucan and many of the Indo-European languages, e.g. Indo-Iranian, Italic, Lusitanian, Celtic in Celtiberian, Lepontic and Gaulish of Gallia Narbonensis. The change *-m > -n appears in the central and northern dialects of Gaulish, including Cisalpian Gaulish, further e.g. in Messapic, Greek, Phrygian, Anatolian.

The basic set of five vowels i -e -a -o -u is well documented in North Picenian. The vowel o is foreign to Etruscan, but usual in the Italic and Celtic languages. The doubled aa in the word (or a foreign proper name, on account of the initial voiced g-?) gaares can indicate that the language differentiated /a/ and /ā/. It is natural to ask, if there are the long correlates to other vowels. In the inscription PID 344 the doubled ee appears (...MDEGEEΡ·T). The long *ō can be hidden behind ů, at least in the final syllables. Similar development is known from the Osco-Umbrian and Celtic languages. An unambiguous counter-argument is not provided by the word SOTER from the 8th line, although it represents an adaptation of Greek swt»r "saver, rescuer, saviour, liberator", gen. -Ároj, voc. sîter.

The adaptation is apparently late, and o is not in the final syllable.

In the text PID 343 there are 14 different consonants which occur 132 times in sum, in the following order: t t 33 (25,0%), n n 19 (14,4%), j s 18 (13,6%), d r 17 (12,9%), l l 10 (7,6%), M m 8-7 (6,1-5,3%), p p 6 (4,5%), š 6-5 (4,5-3,8%), v v 4-3 (3,0-2,3%), k k 3 (2,3%), C g 3 (2,3%), d 2 (1,5%), B b 1 (0,8%), 6 θ 1 (0,8%). Remarkable is the high frequency of the stop t, it represents a quarter of all given occurrences. This fact cannot be explained only by the role of the final -t as a grammatical marker. In the final position -t appears 6 times (if the words TET|SŮT and ET|ŠŮT would be wrongly reconstructed, then 8 times), which is comparable with -s (8 or 9 occurences, depending on connection or separation of GAARES TADES) and -n (7 times). It is necessary to propose that the sign t designated more consonants than only t. The voiced correlate d is the first candidate which should be taken in account. It is identified in the sign , but only in medial position (TADES, ANDS), similarly in PID 345: AMDET. Maybe a similar prefix resembling the continuants of Italic *amb h i-in the Osco-Umbrian languages (Osc. AMNÚD "around") is expectable in PID 344: ...MDEGEEΡ.T. In the initial and final position only one dental appears -in the inscription PID 343 it was recorded by the sign t, up to this time transcribed as t. If this sign was read not only as t, but also as d, or, if need be, some other consonants with simular articulation. Thanks to this assumption other forms and idioms may receive a sense: TEŮ · ... · ... · SOTER resemble the Greek vocative ï Zeà sîter "ó Zeus liberator!" Original d-was preserved e.g. in Laconian and Boeotic DeÚj.

Among vowels and diphthongs the sign e e is most frequent, it occurs 27 times, not taking in account the diphthongs, including eů with 2 and ie with one occurence(s). The sign $ a follows with 15 occurences, plus aa 1 time and the diphthongs ai 2 times and aů 1 time. Further occurences: ů (13), plus ůi (2), i i (13-12), O o (10), plus io (1). The significant difference in representation of the sign e e in comparison with all other vowels indicates that this sign could express more vowels or diphthongs, e.g. ē, reflecting either the original quantity or the diphthong *ei; this one is not attested directly (with exception of PID 342, where the form avei appears).

Morphological features

In inscriptions of this type predominantly occur nominal forms, frequently proper names. For this reason the interpretation of the noun inflexion is most promising. Nom. sg. of o-stems: VILATOS -it can be an adaptation of Greek eÙ»latoj "very merciful (epithet of Apollo and other deities)" (Durante 1962, 68) or of a proper name of the type Etruscan Filatas, which itself is apparently of Greek origin (Morandi 1985, §6 Acc. sg. of consonant or i-or ē-stems: POLEM (2x), ROTNEM, ROTEM, maybe also IPIEM, TELATAŮ|NEM, cf. Lat. mentem, hominem, rēgem, diem; Umb. UVEM. Poultney (1979, 59) added still the -io-stems. Poultney 1979, 60;Untermann 2000, 599).

In some words the pronouns may be identified: Concerning verbs, Poultney (1979, 60-61) thinks that at least some words terminating in -t represent verbs in the 3sg. and the final -n indicates the 3pl. ending *-nt. In the singular the following forms should be taken in account: ERŮT, TRŮT, AKŮT; maybe also TRAT, if it does not form one unit with the following word NEŠI. From the point of view of the internal structure of the Indo-European verb there is only one grammatical category which can be identified in the forms in -ů-t, namely the IE thematic optative in *-o i-, originally from the thematic vowel *-o-, plus the own optative marker *-ieH 1 -/*-iH 1 - (Brugmann 1916, 557-561;Szemerényi 1996, 260). The development *-o i-> ū is also known in the Italic languages: Lat. ūnus "one" m., Umb. UNU "one" ntr. < *o ino-. The final -n appears in the following forms : ŮVLIN, PARTEN, ISAIRON, ISPERION, AITEN, MERPON, PATEN, TRETEN, plus ANOIAN in PID 342. The development *-nt > -n is known e.g. from the Venetic language. Durante (1962, 69) mentioned that the forms in -on can indicate their Greek origin, while in the final -en/-in the 'postposition' en can be identified. It is a feature characteristic for the Osco-Umbrian languages, cf. SPic. AKREN < *agrei en, Osc. HÚRTÍN < *hurtei en. Presence of verbal forms in other persons than the 3rd one is hypothetically possible, but less probable (naturally in this case their nominal functions discussed above are excluded):

Lexicon

Relatively easiest is the identification of loans. According to Durante (1962, 68) the following words are of Greek origin: POLEM~ pόλιν, ISPERION~ ˜σpέριον, SOTER & SOTRIS, maybe also (-)ŠOTERI~ σωτήρ, VILATOS~eÙ…latoj, MERPONd everbative of the verb mšlpomai, BALESTENAG 'ballistarius' ~ *ballist», TELE-TAÚ~teleuta‹oj, TIŠŮ~ qus…a. It is possible to add the form TEŮ, if it reflects the voc. sg. *Deà (see above). Ribezzo (1950-51, 193-194) proposed several Etruscan etymologies of the words from the inscription of Novilara: TRŮT~ TRUT-NVT 'fulguriator' (bilingual from Pesaro); LŮTŮIS~ LUT, LUΘ "temple" (LL; -uihas to be a feminine marker); VŮL|TES~ VOLTA 'infernal deity' = VELΘA (LL); ARNŮIS~ *Arnui, female counterpart of the man's personal name Arna; KALATNE|NIS~ CALATNAM (LL). As it seems, the Etruscan influence is visible especially in adaptation of the proper names, titles, and cultural terms, which do not allow us any unambiguous conclusions concerning the genetic affiliation of the North Picenian language on the basis of lexicon.