Disclaimer * - I'll breakdown the comparative method used when discussing these also in a upcoming thread. Patience.
The establishment of phonetic correlations is the most difficult but also the most important part of the comparative method because it conditions and therefore must precede the establishment of the morphological correspondences that are the final proof of the genetic relatedness of the compared languages. Indeed the grammatical morphemes, like the other morphemes, must absolutely obey the rules of phonetic correspondences to be taken into account, otherwise their relationship is not probative because we can not exclude borrowing, especially if compared languages are reputed to have had close contacts in the past.
Also, a particular care will be granted to this work so that the correspondences are indisputable. As the comparative method requires, any deviation from the correspondence rules must be explained by simple and well-established phonetic laws. To do this, all available phonetic elements (phonemes, tones, accent) will be used. But it goes without saying that it is on the consonants - especially those which are in the initial position - that the effort will have to be carried first. Then come the vowels and the tones but in the latter case only two truly tonal languages (Sango and Hausa) will be put to contribution and provided that they bring something.
We will begin first with the most obvious series of matches and will finish with those that are the most difficult at first sight. Special care will be given to semantic equations. It is also remarkable that all the words concern only the basic vocabulary in the six languages considered. This is a clear proof of their inherited character. The etymology of each word will be proposed if it turns out that it is originally a compound word, which will provide us with valuable information on morphology.
This luxury of detail may seem tedious and even useless, especially to those who are trained at the school of "comparatist" Africanists. But YOU - the reader must know that in historical linguistics the least detail counts enormously - think only of the role the accent (in Sanskrit) in the understanding of the evolution of the Germanic languages. Another reason - and not the least - is to avoid unnecessary criticism from those who paradoxically have used lax methods in historical African linguistics.
more coming.....
The establishment of phonetic correlations is the most difficult but also the most important part of the comparative method because it conditions and therefore must precede the establishment of the morphological correspondences that are the final proof of the genetic relatedness of the compared languages. Indeed the grammatical morphemes, like the other morphemes, must absolutely obey the rules of phonetic correspondences to be taken into account, otherwise their relationship is not probative because we can not exclude borrowing, especially if compared languages are reputed to have had close contacts in the past.
Also, a particular care will be granted to this work so that the correspondences are indisputable. As the comparative method requires, any deviation from the correspondence rules must be explained by simple and well-established phonetic laws. To do this, all available phonetic elements (phonemes, tones, accent) will be used. But it goes without saying that it is on the consonants - especially those which are in the initial position - that the effort will have to be carried first. Then come the vowels and the tones but in the latter case only two truly tonal languages (Sango and Hausa) will be put to contribution and provided that they bring something.
We will begin first with the most obvious series of matches and will finish with those that are the most difficult at first sight. Special care will be given to semantic equations. It is also remarkable that all the words concern only the basic vocabulary in the six languages considered. This is a clear proof of their inherited character. The etymology of each word will be proposed if it turns out that it is originally a compound word, which will provide us with valuable information on morphology.
This luxury of detail may seem tedious and even useless, especially to those who are trained at the school of "comparatist" Africanists. But YOU - the reader must know that in historical linguistics the least detail counts enormously - think only of the role the accent (in Sanskrit) in the understanding of the evolution of the Germanic languages. Another reason - and not the least - is to avoid unnecessary criticism from those who paradoxically have used lax methods in historical African linguistics.
more coming.....
