On Certain Disputable and/or Unexplained Forms of the Imperative in Modern Armenian Dialects
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU:B/2024.15.3.088Keywords:
forms of the imperative, modern Armenian dialects, the intense interplay of various analogical and phonetic changes, the synchronic morphological relationships, imperative,, aoristAbstract
An attempt is made to demonstrate that the historical development of forms of the imperative in modern Armenian dialects has been quite a complex process, significantly influenced by the intense interplay of various analogical and phonetic changes. These changes have frequently obscured the original situation and the synchronic morphological relationships between different formation types of the imperative, as well as the relationship between the imperative and the aorist. On the other hand, because dialectologists have often overlooked relevant evidence from other dialects when describing a particular dialect, this has largely hindered scholars from gaining a deeper understanding of the issues being examined and from thoroughly and accurately investigating the linguistic material. In addition, it should be noted that the investigation of modern Armenian dialects has, for the most part, been of a synchronic-descriptive nature. As a result, the joint effect of the above circumstances has frequently led to various misunderstandings and misinterpretations. Of course, examining all such controversial issues would be going too far. Therefore, this article will address only some of the most questionable interpretations and/or unexplained phenomena.
References
Cf. K. S. Davt‘yan, Leṙnayin Ɫarabaɫi barbaṙayin k‘artezə [The dialectal map of the Mountainous Ɫarabaɫ], Yerevan, 1966, p. 178.
Ibid., p. 178, Footnote 1. See also p. 85.
Here the dictionary Nor baṙgirk‘haykazeanlezui [New Dictionary of the Armenian language], Vol., 1-2, (Venetik,1836-1837)is referred to by the notation NHB [ՆՀԲ].
Cf. A. Margaryan, Gorisi barbaṙə [The dialect of Goris], Yer., 1975, pp. 196-197.
For the cited forms see H. D. Muradyan, Karčewani barbaṙə [The dialect of Karčewan], Yerevan, 1960, pp. 137-147.
Cf. H. D. Muradyan, Kak‘avaberdi barbaṙə [The dialect of Kakʻavaberd], Yerevan, 1967, pp. 141-147, Ē. B. Aɫayan, Meɫru barbaṙ [The dialect of Meɫri], Yerevan, 1954, pp. 200-203, 215-218.
Cf. Ē. B. Aɫayan, op. cit., p. 199.
In Armenian dialectology, the terms dialect of Erevan and dialect of Ararat are often used interchangeably (cf., for example, A․ Ɫaribyan, Hay barbaṙagitut‘yun: hnč‘yunabanut‘yun ew jewabanut’yun [Armenian dialectology: phonology and morphology], Yer․, 1953, p. 218).
See H. Ačaṙyan, Hay barbaṙagitut‘iwn: uruagic ew dasaworut‘iwn hay barbaṙneri, [Armenian dialectology: A sketch and classification of Armenian dialects], Moskua: Nor-Naxiǰewan, (Ēminean azgagrakan žoɫovacu, vol. 8), 1911, p. 43.
Ibid., p. 44.
Cf., for example, A․ Ɫaribyan, op. cit., pp. 225-227, M. Asatryan, Hay barbaṙagitut‘yan gorcnakan ašxatank‘neri jeṙnark [A Manual of practical works of Armenian dialectology], Yer., 1985, p 128․
See, for example, A. Grigoryan, Hay barbaṙagitut‘yan dasənt‘ac‘ [A handbook of Armenian dialectology], Yer., 1957, p. 217, 220-221. Cf. also V. Katvalyan, Bayazeti barbaṙə yev nra lezvakan aṙnč‘ut‘yunnerə šrǰaka barbaṙneri het [The dialect of Bayazet and its linguistic relationships with surrounding dialects], Yer., 2016, p. 140.
More on which see S. Avetyan, On One Important Peculiarity of the Imperative Singular in the Dialect of Ararat // Banber Yerevani hamalsarani. Banasirut‘yun [Bulletin of Yerevan University: Philology], 2023, № 3, pp. 30-38.
See ibid. for a more detailed discussion of the issue.
Cf. A. Y. Aikhenvald, Imperatives and Commands, Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 339-351, 362-364.
Cf. H. Ačaṙean, K‘nnut‘iwn Maraɫayi barbaṙi [Study of the dialect of Maraɫa]. Yer., 1926, p. 234.
Cf. ibid., pp. 45-46, 57, 78.
Cf. For a historical account of ի-final forms of the Imperative singular in Armenian dialects, see S. Avetyan, Main factors conditioning the absence of the final ր and the origin of the final ի of the Imperative singular in Armenian dialects. // Banber Yerevani hamalsarani. Banasirut‘yun [Bulletin of Yerevan University: Philology], 2023. № 1, pp. 68-78.
Cf. A. Margaryan, op. cit., p. 196.
Cf. ibid., p. 50.
For the cited forms, see Ibid., p. 196.
Ibid., p. 195. Cf. also p. 69.
For a more detailed discussion of the issue see S. Avetyan, Main factors conditioning the absence of the final ր and the origin of the final ի…, pp. 68-78.
See A. Margaryan, op. cit., p. 196.
See ibid., p. 196.
Cf. ibid., pp. 58-63, 196.
For the cited forms, see ibid., pp. 217, 219.
For the cited doublets, see A. Margaryan, op. cit., p. 218.
For the cited forms see ibid., p. 218.
Cf. A. Y. Aikhenvald, Imperatives and Commands, Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 339-351, 362-364. See also S. Avetyan, Hramayakan yeɫanakə dasakan hayerenum tipabanakan yev patmakan tesankyunic‘ [The Imperative in Classical Armenian from a typological and histoeical perspective]. // Banber Yerevani hamalsarani. Banasirut‘yunn, [Bulletin of Yerevan University: Philology], 2021, № 3, p. 41ff.
For the cited forms see H. Ačaṙyan, K‘nnut‘yun Hamšeni barbaṙi [Study of the dialect of Hamšen], Yerevan, 1947, pp. 132-133. See also Hamšeni Čeniki (Dženiki) xosvack‘ə . Hayereni barbaṙagitakan atlasi antip nyut‘er [The subdialect of Čenik (Dženik) of of Hamšen. Unpublished materials of Armenian dialectological atlas], tetr № 39, point 642.
For the cited forms, see H. Ačaṙyan, K‘nnut‘yun Hamšeni…, p. 28.
Cf. Ē. Aɫayan, op. cit., pp. 203-210, also p. 199.
By the way, in the dialect of Meɫri, the regular phonetic change ի >է is attested in accented as wall as in posttonic syllable (see ibid., pp. 39-42).
Cf. ibid., pp. 203-210.
See Y. Č‘olak‘ean, K‘esapi barbaṙə [The dialect of Kʻesap], Yer., 2009, pp. 124-125.
Ibid., pp. 133-134.
For the form of the 2 sg. Imperative դէ՛ ‘put!’, see ibid., pp. 134, 162-164.
Ibid., p. 164.
Ibid., p. 36.
M. Muradyan, Šataxi barbaṙə [The dialect of Šatax], Yerevan, 1962, p. 150.
J.Karst, Historische Grammatik des Kilikisch-Armenischen, Strassburg, 1901,S. 315-317.
For the cited forms, see M. Muradyan, op. cit., pp. 147-149.
For proportional analogy, see R. S. P.Beekes, Comparative Indo-European Linguistics: An Introduction, 2nd ed., revised and corrected by M. de Vaan, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 2011, pp. 75-76.
Cf. J. Karst, op. cit., p. 317.
Ṙ. Baɫramyan, Šamaxii barbaṙə [The dialect of Šamaxi], Yerevan, 1964, p. 162.
For the cited forms, see H. Ačaṙyan, K‘nnut‘yun Kilikiayi barbaṙi [Study of the dialect of Cilicia], Yerevan, 2003, p. 494։
For the cited forms, see H. Ačaṙyan, K‘nnut‘yun Vani barbaṙi [Study of the dialect of Van], Yerevan, 1952, p. 173.
For the cited forms, see M. Muradyan, Urvagic Moksi barbaṙi [An outline of the dialect of Moks]. In Hayereni barbaṙagitakan atlas: usumnasirut‘yunner ew nyut‘er 1, Yerevan, 1982, p. 173.
For the cited forms, see ibid., pp. 172-174.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Bulletin of Yerevan University
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
