DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1167#0080
3.2 The opposition between two series of stops in Egyptian:
various hypotheses
After the stops of class 3 had undergone spirantization, there were only two manners of
stop articulation left in Egyptian (classes 1 and 2). These two classes of stops persisted
as stops throughout all of the history of the language. Let us now consider the nature of
the phonemic opposition between both classes.
The first Egyptologists tended to understand the distinction of both classes as a mere
allographic variation (cf. Schenkel 1990: %<){.). However the consistent differentiation in
Egyptian writing soon made scholars believe that there must actually have been a
phonetic distinction between these stops. Consequently, they invented various diacritics
to distinguish them in their transcriptions. The nature of the opposition, however,
remained obscure.
3.2.1 Opposition voiceless — voiced
When Brugsch & Erman (1889) established a convention of transcribing Egyptian, they
decided to render class 1 stops with the letters for tenues, class 2 stops with the letters
for rnedias of the Latin alphabet. It was clearly expressed then that this practice served
nothing but typographical convenience and did not anticipate a decision on the phonetic
interpretation of these signs, e.g.:
"Gegen eine Wiedergabe des © durch g und des '^^ durch d kann man
einwenden, dafi diese Laute dabei eigentlich genauer bezeichnet sind, als
gut ist; es ware richtiger, sie durch k und t mit angefiigten diakritischen
Zeichen auszudriicken. Aber da wir ohnehin schon zwei k und zwei * in
unserem System haben, so wird es gut sein, doch bei g und d zu bleiben (...)"
(Erman 1896: 53).
This transcription system, being propagated by the influential Berlin school, soon
became firmly established. Subsequently, a number of scholars began to believe in the
voiced character of the stops of class 2,65 and the suspicion can hardly be avoided that
the mere transcription convention encouraged them to do so. Based on this assumption,
dozens of Egyptian-Afroasiatic etymologies were proposed66 which seemed to corrobo-
rate the voice hypothesis. Today this hypothesis is prevalent primarily in non-specialized
literature on Egyptian from other fields than Egyptology.
Hoch (1994: 425-427) examines the representation of Semitic borrowings in Late
Egyptian. He concludes that the opposition between the two classes of Egyptian stops
65 E.g. Sethe (1912: 96f.), Gardiner (1957: § 19). Albright (1934b: 222) even assumes
that <d> was voiced and <t> was half-voiced.
66 E.g. Ember (1930), Calice (1936), Vergote (1945: 127-148), Cohen (1947), Vycichl
(1958), Orel & Stolbova (1994), Ehret (1995).
80
various hypotheses
After the stops of class 3 had undergone spirantization, there were only two manners of
stop articulation left in Egyptian (classes 1 and 2). These two classes of stops persisted
as stops throughout all of the history of the language. Let us now consider the nature of
the phonemic opposition between both classes.
The first Egyptologists tended to understand the distinction of both classes as a mere
allographic variation (cf. Schenkel 1990: %<){.). However the consistent differentiation in
Egyptian writing soon made scholars believe that there must actually have been a
phonetic distinction between these stops. Consequently, they invented various diacritics
to distinguish them in their transcriptions. The nature of the opposition, however,
remained obscure.
3.2.1 Opposition voiceless — voiced
When Brugsch & Erman (1889) established a convention of transcribing Egyptian, they
decided to render class 1 stops with the letters for tenues, class 2 stops with the letters
for rnedias of the Latin alphabet. It was clearly expressed then that this practice served
nothing but typographical convenience and did not anticipate a decision on the phonetic
interpretation of these signs, e.g.:
"Gegen eine Wiedergabe des © durch g und des '^^ durch d kann man
einwenden, dafi diese Laute dabei eigentlich genauer bezeichnet sind, als
gut ist; es ware richtiger, sie durch k und t mit angefiigten diakritischen
Zeichen auszudriicken. Aber da wir ohnehin schon zwei k und zwei * in
unserem System haben, so wird es gut sein, doch bei g und d zu bleiben (...)"
(Erman 1896: 53).
This transcription system, being propagated by the influential Berlin school, soon
became firmly established. Subsequently, a number of scholars began to believe in the
voiced character of the stops of class 2,65 and the suspicion can hardly be avoided that
the mere transcription convention encouraged them to do so. Based on this assumption,
dozens of Egyptian-Afroasiatic etymologies were proposed66 which seemed to corrobo-
rate the voice hypothesis. Today this hypothesis is prevalent primarily in non-specialized
literature on Egyptian from other fields than Egyptology.
Hoch (1994: 425-427) examines the representation of Semitic borrowings in Late
Egyptian. He concludes that the opposition between the two classes of Egyptian stops
65 E.g. Sethe (1912: 96f.), Gardiner (1957: § 19). Albright (1934b: 222) even assumes
that <d> was voiced and <t> was half-voiced.
66 E.g. Ember (1930), Calice (1936), Vergote (1945: 127-148), Cohen (1947), Vycichl
(1958), Orel & Stolbova (1994), Ehret (1995).
80