DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1167#0051
is always preserved as 1)1 in phonetic environments which regularly preserve /j/ at
all. Option c) (defective writing) is very common for this morpheme throughout all
periods of Pre-Coptic Egyptian. The same phenomenon occurs in many other
Egyptian morphemes and words.
Although some of these defective writings may be explainable by morphological or
phonetic rules which have still to be discovered,^2 the assumption can probably not
be avoided that suppression of spoken consonants in writing actually existed.
2) A consonant is not (or rarely) written in Egyptian but appears in Coptic. For exam-
ple, the noun hnq.t "beer" is usually written hq.t, whereas -re- appears only in late
texts and in Coptic (^NKG). Since we do not know a linguistic change which could
have led to the development of -re- in Egyptian, it is generally assumed that -re- had
always been present in this word but was hidden by defective writing (cf. Edel
1955/64: § 34). Defective writings of this type are less frequent than those of type 1).
3) A consonant is never written in Egyptian nor is it directly visible in Coptic.
However scholars assume it was there because according to the syllable structure
rules (KIT §4.2) the word must have had one more consonant than is written to be
identifiable with the presumed Coptic successor. This type of defective writing is
assumed frequently, however these are the most dubious cases of defective writing.
For discussion 0®° § 4.8.6.
Defective writing does not apply at random but affects different consonants to a different
degree. By far the most affected are <j> and <w>, to a lesser degree <n>, <m>, <r> and <>>.
Other consonants are hardly ever written defectively. It has not been possible, however,
to find exact conditions for defective writing.^'
An explanation of defective writing may be the high degree of sonority of the consonants
being affected. Bearing in mind the general principle of Egyptian orthography not to
write vowels, which rank at the top of sonority hierarchy, it might be plausible that
consonants of high sonority can also be unwritten.
From the New Kingdom on, it becomes very common for the monosyllabic prepositions
<m>, <n> and <r> to be omitted in writing.34 This might point to a syllabic, i.e. vocalic,
realization of these consonants.
32 Certain graphical variations that were formerly interpreted as defective writings
have recently been reinterpreted as morphologically or phonetically conditioned
variations (Kammerzell 1990 and 1991a, Schenkel 1994a). It is possible that more
writing variations will be linked with functional differences in the future.
33 Kahl (1992: 104) gives as a restriction, valid for the Pyramid Texts only, that defec-
tive writing does not affect a consonant which forms the onset of a closed syllable,
with the exception of syllables containing a morpheme boundary. Note that this rule
is formulated within the framework of the traditional syllable structure rules.
34 Cf. Kroeber (1970: 45-50) and Winand (1992: 413-423, 504-510). The preposition <hr>
can be omitted likewise from Dynasty 18 on. Here another explanation must
probably be found.
5i
all. Option c) (defective writing) is very common for this morpheme throughout all
periods of Pre-Coptic Egyptian. The same phenomenon occurs in many other
Egyptian morphemes and words.
Although some of these defective writings may be explainable by morphological or
phonetic rules which have still to be discovered,^2 the assumption can probably not
be avoided that suppression of spoken consonants in writing actually existed.
2) A consonant is not (or rarely) written in Egyptian but appears in Coptic. For exam-
ple, the noun hnq.t "beer" is usually written hq.t, whereas -re- appears only in late
texts and in Coptic (^NKG). Since we do not know a linguistic change which could
have led to the development of -re- in Egyptian, it is generally assumed that -re- had
always been present in this word but was hidden by defective writing (cf. Edel
1955/64: § 34). Defective writings of this type are less frequent than those of type 1).
3) A consonant is never written in Egyptian nor is it directly visible in Coptic.
However scholars assume it was there because according to the syllable structure
rules (KIT §4.2) the word must have had one more consonant than is written to be
identifiable with the presumed Coptic successor. This type of defective writing is
assumed frequently, however these are the most dubious cases of defective writing.
For discussion 0®° § 4.8.6.
Defective writing does not apply at random but affects different consonants to a different
degree. By far the most affected are <j> and <w>, to a lesser degree <n>, <m>, <r> and <>>.
Other consonants are hardly ever written defectively. It has not been possible, however,
to find exact conditions for defective writing.^'
An explanation of defective writing may be the high degree of sonority of the consonants
being affected. Bearing in mind the general principle of Egyptian orthography not to
write vowels, which rank at the top of sonority hierarchy, it might be plausible that
consonants of high sonority can also be unwritten.
From the New Kingdom on, it becomes very common for the monosyllabic prepositions
<m>, <n> and <r> to be omitted in writing.34 This might point to a syllabic, i.e. vocalic,
realization of these consonants.
32 Certain graphical variations that were formerly interpreted as defective writings
have recently been reinterpreted as morphologically or phonetically conditioned
variations (Kammerzell 1990 and 1991a, Schenkel 1994a). It is possible that more
writing variations will be linked with functional differences in the future.
33 Kahl (1992: 104) gives as a restriction, valid for the Pyramid Texts only, that defec-
tive writing does not affect a consonant which forms the onset of a closed syllable,
with the exception of syllables containing a morpheme boundary. Note that this rule
is formulated within the framework of the traditional syllable structure rules.
34 Cf. Kroeber (1970: 45-50) and Winand (1992: 413-423, 504-510). The preposition <hr>
can be omitted likewise from Dynasty 18 on. Here another explanation must
probably be found.
5i