Rhotacism

Operation

One will take here as example the rhotacism of /s/, very frequent in Latin.

The phenomenon must be broken up into two times:

is voiced, between two Phonème S sound (like vowels) for example:

/s/ > /z//V_V;

the new phoneme changes Joint and becomes vibrating rolled:

/z/ > /r/.

The fact that the /z/ phoneme evolves/moves in /r/, to which the joints are relatively close but which differ both by the Mode from articulation, is often explained by the absence of other /z/ in the phonological system of the language concerned. Thus, it is about a phonological form of levelling by Analogie: the language, rather than to accept a new phoneme, confuses it with another which it has already, in fact a /r/. In Latin, indeed, there does not exist /z/ phoneme (if it is not in loanwords, most of the time with the Greek , and still the phoneme is it carried out).

Examples

In Latin

The rhotacism is a type of phonetic evolution very frequent in Latin; it makes it possible to explain many apparently abnormal forms.

Nominal system

Thus, the names sigmatic of the third variation (names formed starting from a Suffix - be or - bone before the ending) offer an inflection during which the topic seems modified:

Personal = radical + - e/os- + Ø

corpus Ø;

Genitive = radical + - e/os- + - is > radical + - e/or- + - is
corp-bone-is > corp-o' r' - is .

The name quoted in example thus has a topic corpus only with personal (naked topic). As soon as an ending with initial vocalic is added, the suffix - e/os- passes to - e/or- by rhotacism ( - e/os- + V > - e/or- V). Other names with rhotacism can be quoted:

flos , flowered , “flower”;

honos , honor-is (become in traditional language honor , honoris by analogical levelling ), “honor”;

Come , Vener-is , “Venus”;

scelus , to seal-is , “crime”, etc

In addition, the rhotacism can affect endings: it is the case of those of plural genitive of the names of the first variation, - rum (thus rosa-rum ). The compared Linguistique makes it possible to pose a étymon - sōm (coming from the pronominal variations) preceded by the vowel of the radical. The old ending is found in Osque in the form - sum then - zum , which is thus an intermediate stage enters and. The Greek has - ῶν - ỗn coming from **sōm , which passes to - āōn (by Amuïssement of intervocalic), attested at Homère: τᾱ́ ων tấôn , plural Genitive of the article to the female one; τᾱ́ ων evolves/moves finally in τῶν tỗn by Contraction. It is seen: three languages, three treatments different from the same phoneme in the same context.

Verbal system

The rhotacism is almost systematic in Latin, in the verbal inflection just as easily that in the nominal one: thus, starting from the radical of the verb “being”, is are , one obtains with imperfect and with the future er-amndts , er-have , er-At , etc and er-O , er-is , er-it , etc starting from forms which go back to *es-am , *es-as , etc and *es-o , *es-is , etc

This mechanism can be dissimulated by the absence of forms rhotacized without forms of origin in glance: it is the case of infinitives in - Re ( ama-Re , vacuum-Re , caper , etc, respectively “to like”, “to see”, “to take”), which come étymologiquement from forms in *se . As there does not exist enough any more of alive forms in *se , the suffix of formation of infinitives indeed seems to be - Re . One finds it in fact in only one infinitive, be-, that of the verb “being” (see higher) like in perfect infinitive, as fled “to have been”, amavis- “to have liked”, etc

In the others Indo-European Languages, the rhotacism is replaced by other modifications (or the language does not modify /s/ between vowels), so that to light , “lira”, Latin corresponds λέγειν légein , “to say”, Greek (by disappearance of intervocalic /s/), both resulting from same a étymon *lege-se (N) ; this suffix - SEN (without *n in Latin) is found well in Sanskrit in the form - san , in hittite in the form - sar .

Influence on the Latin alphabet

It would be vain to count all the cases of rhotacisms in Latin: they are indeed very numerous. In conclusion, it should be recalled that if Latin made pass his intervocalic /s/ to /r/, it is especially because /z/, which would be the phoneme awaited by Voisement, does not exist in the phonological system of the language, contrary to /r/: that explains why the Latin alphabet primitive does not have a letter Z: although inherited the Greek via the Etruscan , this alphabet could do without the letter located at the seventh position (which is also a zayn in the Hebrew alphabet); the grec ΑΒΓΔΕϜΖ, etc, should give, indirectly, ABCDEFZ. As the Etruscan model used Greek gamma (Γ) to note and not (the Etruscan does not have indeed a /g/ phoneme), the Latin alphabet needed a new letter for this phoneme: it made use of a modification of C, that is to say G (C with an additional bar). Its invention is allotted to Spurius Carvilius Ruga (or Rufa, according to the sources), at third century BC. The new letter was located at the site free of Z, then useless, in order to avoid a replanning of the alphabetical order: that explains why one has ABCDEF' G' and not ABCDEF' Z' . According to J. Gow, which does not mention Rufa/Ruga, it is at the time of the critic Appius Claudius Cæcus, towards -312, which the new letter would have been introduced into the alphabet. It is later, with the Ier front century J. - C., that the Latin language, needing to note words borrowed from the Greek, reintroduced letter Z; the alphabetical order being able only with difficulty to be faded, the letter was placed at the end.

In the Germanic languages

The rhotacism of /s/ also touched all the Germanic languages, except for the Gotique. The phenomenon applied according to the place of the tonic Accent: the process is described in detail in the article devoted to with the Loi of Verner; one can quote the verbal forms of the verb “being”, which, according to the place of the accent, give was or we' r' E in English.

Elsewhere

The Germanic Latin and languages are the Indo-European Langues in which the rhotacism is most systematic. One finds however, sporadically, some traces of rhotacism in other Indo-European idioms. It is the old case in Greek, in certain dialects, like Ionian of Eubée the southernmost one (dialect érétrien), where an intervocalic /s/ becomes /r/ (knowing that in Greek either /z/ does not form part of the phonological system); the intervocalic treatment of /s/, in the majority of the Greek dialects, rests rather on a Amuïssement if /s/ is old, a maintenance if it is resulting from other sources (Assibilation, Simplification, etc): for example, plural dative of the name παῖς paĩs , “child”, made παιριν pairin in érétrien, against παισίν paisín in Ionian-attic, all forms going up with παιδ-σίν paid-sín . Once again, it is about the rhotacism of.

The modern Greek has as for him several terms having undergone the rhotacism, like αδέρφος adhérfos , alternative d'αδέλφος adhélfos (Greek old ἀδελφός adelphós ) “brother”, or ήρθε írthe “it came” (Greek old ἦλθε ḗlthe ), Aoriste d'έρχομαι érkhome . In these two terms, one notes confusion between /l/ and /r/ (rolled), supported by the auditive resemblance between the two sounds.

Rhotacism like interference of pronunciation

The term of rhotacism qualifies also an interference or an error of pronunciation in which a /r/ is used in the place of other sounds (like, or) or when another sound replaces a /r/ attendu. !!! Caution! Certain cases of systematic rhotacism of NR in R in the terms of Celtic origin can make think of a linguistic phenomenon which the phonologists could perhaps explain. An example among others: a river AVRE obviously going up with a Celtic name SWALLOW-HOLE. -->

Thus, in Onomastic, a patronym with a /l/, as Leblond is modified so that it passes to Lebrond . The case also arises in Toponymie: the Latin Londinium gave the French London , compared to the London English and in France the town of Langres holds its name of the Gallic tribe of Lingones. In a sporadic way, the rhotacism can clarify certain modern terms compared to their étymon: thus it is explained that the name for “brother”, αδερφός aðerfós in Greek modern comes, after rhotacism, of ἀδελφός adelphós in Greek old. In the same way, by extension of the starting direction, all “problem” of pronunciation of a /r/ will be named rhotacism: it is the creole case in of the Guadeloupe where /r/ of the words come from the Lexique French are pronounced as of /w/: to take becomes pwann .

The fact that all these words are Lexicalisé S prevents from speaking about an error.

One speaks about rhotacism by interference of pronunciation when a foreign speaker confuses one or more sounds with a /r/, whatever his realization: a Japanese, for example, whose language does not have the Phonème /l/, will tend to pronounce /l/ of a foreign language as of /r/ of his own language. They are errors well there because the words obtained are never considered correct, except if the word is borrowed and lexiconized in the language of the speaker: miruku Japanese represents milk English, meaning it of this being explained loan, inter alia, by a rhotacism. The error will lie in a statement uttered by a Japanese requiring has fatty mirk off, for example.

Lastly, during language acquisition, of many children /r/ by /w/ replace. One will speak there still about rhotacism. It is in this case a problem of pronunciation that the adult speakers will correct, directly or not.

Sources and references

Random links: