DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1167#0267
• rri.t (VVrVjtV) "sow" > sp&&p£ /'ra:re/
• srj.t "daughter" > sjjjeepe /'Je:ra/, bujepi
• d'n.t "Tanis (town)", perhaps to be reconstructed as ('du'VntV) (cf. Vvcichl 1983:
328) > s2id»ANe /'ca:ng/
However, there are a few examples for which I would expect that vowel lengthening took
place according to the rules given in § 5.5.10.2. Nevertheless the vowel was absorbed by
the sonorant. There is the possibility that these words had long syllabic sonorants which
however are not clearly rendered as such in writing:
• qk.t ('qVSVrtV) "door-bolt" > ».»KMe /k'la/ (/k'l:o/ ??)
• qr' "shield" > s&\~6&\
5.10.7 The phonological status of syllabic sonorants in Coptic
In Sahidic and Akhmimic, syllabic sonorants occur in any environment in which vowels
are allowed. However they seem to be phonemic only when unstressed and immediately
preceding a vowel at the same time. In this case, minimal pairs can be found such as the
following from Sahidic:
• po /'to/ "mouth" - ppO /rV "king" -epo /arc/ "to you (fern.)"
• TrlOM /'tnam/ (besides TAOA) "furrow" - TNNO /tnV "to pound" - TGNCir /ta'nu/
"now" - TdvMO /taW "to produce"
If certain marginal exceptions, especially loan words, are disregarded, stressed syllabic
sonorants are in complementary distribution with the vowel s'1>&. = a>%. Although a writing
such as KMN£ is rendered as /'kna/ in this book, which is probably closer to its actual
pronunciation, the same word can also be represented as /'kana/ on a more abstract level
of phonological representation.
5.10.8 Emergence and loss of syllabic sonorants
Most syllabic sonorants can be avoided in a phonological analysis (Eg* above), and
stressed syllabic sonorants are in complementary distribution with the vowel s>''6i = a>fe
(< Egyptian iiow, u\oyl). This fact is traditionally regarded as an indication that they are
an innovation within the Egyptian language. It is, however, difficult to say at which time
syllabic consonants emerged.
The much discussed (e.g. Schenkel 1986, Schneider 1993) term nzw "king" with
somewhat uncertain reading is attested both as un-zu I un-su and as in-si in cuneiform
attestations from the time of the New Kingdom. The varying transcription un ~ in is
perhaps to be interpreted as the rendering of a syllabic nasal. In Coptic, nzw is still
preserved in the compound s-aUJNC /'Jns/, bUjeNC "fine linen" < ss-nzw "royal linen"
which indeed has a syllabic nasal. On this question cf. further Zeidler (1995: 225-228).
It is also possible that the phenomenon known as defective writing (Eg" § 2.6.4) 's related
to a syllabic pronunciation of consonants to a certain extent.
267
• srj.t "daughter" > sjjjeepe /'Je:ra/, bujepi
• d'n.t "Tanis (town)", perhaps to be reconstructed as ('du'VntV) (cf. Vvcichl 1983:
328) > s2id»ANe /'ca:ng/
However, there are a few examples for which I would expect that vowel lengthening took
place according to the rules given in § 5.5.10.2. Nevertheless the vowel was absorbed by
the sonorant. There is the possibility that these words had long syllabic sonorants which
however are not clearly rendered as such in writing:
• qk.t ('qVSVrtV) "door-bolt" > ».»KMe /k'la/ (/k'l:o/ ??)
• qr' "shield" > s&\~6&\
5.10.7 The phonological status of syllabic sonorants in Coptic
In Sahidic and Akhmimic, syllabic sonorants occur in any environment in which vowels
are allowed. However they seem to be phonemic only when unstressed and immediately
preceding a vowel at the same time. In this case, minimal pairs can be found such as the
following from Sahidic:
• po /'to/ "mouth" - ppO /rV "king" -epo /arc/ "to you (fern.)"
• TrlOM /'tnam/ (besides TAOA) "furrow" - TNNO /tnV "to pound" - TGNCir /ta'nu/
"now" - TdvMO /taW "to produce"
If certain marginal exceptions, especially loan words, are disregarded, stressed syllabic
sonorants are in complementary distribution with the vowel s'1>&. = a>%. Although a writing
such as KMN£ is rendered as /'kna/ in this book, which is probably closer to its actual
pronunciation, the same word can also be represented as /'kana/ on a more abstract level
of phonological representation.
5.10.8 Emergence and loss of syllabic sonorants
Most syllabic sonorants can be avoided in a phonological analysis (Eg* above), and
stressed syllabic sonorants are in complementary distribution with the vowel s>''6i = a>fe
(< Egyptian iiow, u\oyl). This fact is traditionally regarded as an indication that they are
an innovation within the Egyptian language. It is, however, difficult to say at which time
syllabic consonants emerged.
The much discussed (e.g. Schenkel 1986, Schneider 1993) term nzw "king" with
somewhat uncertain reading is attested both as un-zu I un-su and as in-si in cuneiform
attestations from the time of the New Kingdom. The varying transcription un ~ in is
perhaps to be interpreted as the rendering of a syllabic nasal. In Coptic, nzw is still
preserved in the compound s-aUJNC /'Jns/, bUjeNC "fine linen" < ss-nzw "royal linen"
which indeed has a syllabic nasal. On this question cf. further Zeidler (1995: 225-228).
It is also possible that the phenomenon known as defective writing (Eg" § 2.6.4) 's related
to a syllabic pronunciation of consonants to a certain extent.
267