DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49263#0021
The Vowels
xvii
consequence they, and particularly their short forms, appear almost interchangeable
in the different dialects. The interchange between o and u is particularly facile,
and one has or or ur head, orr or urr dr or uru king, &c. But the Kenus-
Dongola dialect often prefers e where Mahass uses o or u, and so we get elum,
elgon, edmekki in KD. where M. has olum or uhim, olgbn, ormdkki. Conversely
Dongola sometimes uses u, where Kenus and Mahass prefer i, especially in the verbal
suffix -ir, thus uh-ur, und-ur, kuh-ur, jug-ur, &c. u again may replace a as in
ugor, nnatti for agor, anatti. In fact, instances may be multiplied to show that
any one short vowel may interchange dialectically with any other, though some
changes are rare, as a for o.
(b) Long voivels.
Though long vowels are common in Nubian at the present day, this was evidently
not always the case, for many of the present long vowels can be shown to result
from contraction of one kind or another. Thus in M. a short vowel preceding 1 or r
becomes long and loses the 1 or r when a suffix commencing with n is added, as
fa-nam for fal-nam. Tag time and tod boy seem, from comparison with other
cognate forms, to represent tang, tond. Many long vowels result from the coalition
of a short vowel with the semi-vowels w or y. Thus kual Dai. is the fuller form of
kb KD., and mag steal is cognate with Dinka mwok. And a third source of long
vowels seems to be indicated when the Kenus people say soali, boer for soli, ber,
that is, they may result from the juxtaposition of two short vowels. The diphthongs
also ai, ei, oi often originate in the combination of a, e, o with n, itself the compound
of n and y. Thus we have air, oir, and iyir all dialectical forms of a word seen
more completely in the Dongola dialect as unur; while in K. we have oi weep,
ai live for M. on, an.
§ 2. The Semi-vowels w and y.
One of the principal characteristics of Nilotic phonology is the remarkable
prevalence of the semi-vowels w and y, and there is good reason to suppose that
these letters were once as common in primitive Nubian as they are to-day in Dinka
and Shilluk.
The very numerous occurrences of long vowels in Nubian roots, and the frequent
instances1 in which authorities differ as to whether a vowel is in fact long or short
aie sufficient in themselves to give rise to the suspicion that these ‘long vowels’
iepresent in many cases a former combination of a short vowel with a semi-vowel.
1 Almkvist devotes several pages to a list of such instances (Nubische Studien, pp. 21-6).
c
xvii
consequence they, and particularly their short forms, appear almost interchangeable
in the different dialects. The interchange between o and u is particularly facile,
and one has or or ur head, orr or urr dr or uru king, &c. But the Kenus-
Dongola dialect often prefers e where Mahass uses o or u, and so we get elum,
elgon, edmekki in KD. where M. has olum or uhim, olgbn, ormdkki. Conversely
Dongola sometimes uses u, where Kenus and Mahass prefer i, especially in the verbal
suffix -ir, thus uh-ur, und-ur, kuh-ur, jug-ur, &c. u again may replace a as in
ugor, nnatti for agor, anatti. In fact, instances may be multiplied to show that
any one short vowel may interchange dialectically with any other, though some
changes are rare, as a for o.
(b) Long voivels.
Though long vowels are common in Nubian at the present day, this was evidently
not always the case, for many of the present long vowels can be shown to result
from contraction of one kind or another. Thus in M. a short vowel preceding 1 or r
becomes long and loses the 1 or r when a suffix commencing with n is added, as
fa-nam for fal-nam. Tag time and tod boy seem, from comparison with other
cognate forms, to represent tang, tond. Many long vowels result from the coalition
of a short vowel with the semi-vowels w or y. Thus kual Dai. is the fuller form of
kb KD., and mag steal is cognate with Dinka mwok. And a third source of long
vowels seems to be indicated when the Kenus people say soali, boer for soli, ber,
that is, they may result from the juxtaposition of two short vowels. The diphthongs
also ai, ei, oi often originate in the combination of a, e, o with n, itself the compound
of n and y. Thus we have air, oir, and iyir all dialectical forms of a word seen
more completely in the Dongola dialect as unur; while in K. we have oi weep,
ai live for M. on, an.
§ 2. The Semi-vowels w and y.
One of the principal characteristics of Nilotic phonology is the remarkable
prevalence of the semi-vowels w and y, and there is good reason to suppose that
these letters were once as common in primitive Nubian as they are to-day in Dinka
and Shilluk.
The very numerous occurrences of long vowels in Nubian roots, and the frequent
instances1 in which authorities differ as to whether a vowel is in fact long or short
aie sufficient in themselves to give rise to the suspicion that these ‘long vowels’
iepresent in many cases a former combination of a short vowel with a semi-vowel.
1 Almkvist devotes several pages to a list of such instances (Nubische Studien, pp. 21-6).
c