Mongolo-Tibetica Pragensia '10
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Mongolo-Tibetica Pragensia ’10 3/1 MMongolo-Tibeticaongolo-Tibetica PPragensiaragensia 110-1.indd0-1.indd 1 112.1.20112.1.2011 119:17:599:17:59 MMongolo-Tibeticaongolo-Tibetica PPragensiaragensia 110-1.indd0-1.indd 2 112.1.20112.1.2011 119:17:599:17:59 Mongolo-Tibetica Pragensia ’10 Ethnolinguistics, Sociolinguistics, Religion and Culture Volume 3, No. 1 Publication of Charles University in Prague Faculty of Arts, Institute of South and Central Asia Seminar of Mongolian Studies Prague 2010 ISSN 1803–5647 MMongolo-Tibeticaongolo-Tibetica PPragensiaragensia 110-1.indd0-1.indd 3 112.1.20112.1.2011 119:17:599:17:59 Th e publication of this volume was fi nancially supported by the Ministry of Education of the Czech Republic as a part of the Research Project No. MSM0021620825 “Language as human activity, as its product and factor”, a project of the Faculty of Arts, Charles University in Prague. Mongolo-Tibetica Pragensia ’10 Linguistics, Ethnolinguistics, Religion and Culture Volume 3, No. 1 (2010) © Editors Editors-in-chief: Jaroslav Vacek and Alena Oberfalzerová Editorial Board: Daniel Berounský (Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic) Agata Bareja-Starzyńska (University of Warsaw, Poland) Katia Buff etrille (École pratique des Hautes-Études, Paris, France) J. Lubsangdorji (Charles University Prague, Czech Republic) Marie-Dominique Even (Centre National des Recherches Scientifi ques, Paris, France) Tsevel Shagdarsurung (National University of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia) Domiin Tömörtogoo (National University of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia) Reviewed by Prof. Václav Blažek (Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic) and Prof. Tsevel Shagdarsurung (National University of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia) English correction: Dr. Mark Corner, formerly lecturer at Charles University in Prague, presently HUB University, Brussels, Belgium Institute of South and Central Asia, Seminar of Mongolian Studies Faculty of Philosophy, Charles University in Prague Celetná 20, 116 42 Praha 1, Czech Republic http://mongolistika.ff .cuni.cz/?page=home Publisher: Stanislav Juhaňák – TRITON http://www.triton-books.cz Vykáňská 5, 100 00 Praha 10 IČ 18433499 Praha (Prague) 2010 Cover Renata Brtnická Typeset Studio Marvil Printed by Sprint Publication periodicity: twice a year Registration number of MK ČR E 18436 ISSN 1803-5647 MMongolo-Tibeticaongolo-Tibetica PPragensiaragensia 110-1.indd0-1.indd 4 112.1.20112.1.2011 119:17:599:17:59 CONTENTS Alena Oberfalzerová Th e use of iconopoeic words in spoken Mongolian – Eva Obrátilová Personal names among Mongolian nomads – J. Lubsangdorji Th e Secret History of the Mongols in the mirror of metaphors (3), Venus of the Khorchin Mongols and Etügen – Pavel Rykin Towards the etymology of Middle Mongolian Bodončar ~ Bodančar – Jaroslav Vacek Verba dicendi and related etyma in Dravidian and Altaic 5.1. Etyma with initial vowels (i-, e-, u-, o-, a-) and root-fi nal stops, aff ricates, nasals and glides – MMongolo-Tibeticaongolo-Tibetica PPragensiaragensia 110-1.indd0-1.indd 5 112.1.20112.1.2011 119:17:599:17:59 Review Section Svetlana Menkenovna Trofi mova, Grammatičeskie kategorii imennyh osnov v mongol’skih jazykah (Semantiko-funkcional’nyj aspekt). Izdatel’stvo kalmyckogo universiteta, Elista 2009, 282 pp. Paperback, ISBN 978-5- 91458-038-1 – Reviewed by Rachel Mikos – Ц. Шагдарсүрэн, Эх хэлээ эвдэхгүй юм сан… Монгол хэлний мөн чанар, онцлог, одоогийн байдал, олон нийтийн эх хэлний боловсрол, сөрөг үзэгдэл [We should not spoil our mother tongue… (Essence of the Mongolian language, its special character, present-day condition, communal speech culture, negative phenomena)]. Монгол Улсын Их Сургууль, Улаанбаатар 2010, 324 pp.; ISBN 999295315-2 – Revied by J. Lubsangdorji – MMongolo-Tibeticaongolo-Tibetica PPragensiaragensia 110-1.indd0-1.indd 6 112.1.20112.1.2011 119:17:599:17:59 Th e use of iconopoeic words in spoken Mongolian Alena Oberfalzerová, Charles University in Prague Summary: Th is paper discusses the subject dealt with in my previous paper. It describes sys- tematically the group of words known as iconopoeia (words depicting images) and concen- trates on the problem of their formation and meaning. Concrete examples show the active use of iconopoeia in spoken language as a modal means of expression. Th is topic is to be followed later by a discussion of two more groups – purely onomatopoetic words and words which de- pict both sound and image. Th e role of these words should also be shown in the historical con- text, of which one aspect is the oral tradition of the nomadic Mongols. Th is will best illustrate the use of onomatopoeia and iconopoeia in a natural context. Th erefore the third part of this paper includes an example of a fairy tale, in which this means is used as an essential part of the construction of the narrative. 0. Introduction Th is paper deals with iconopoeic words and documents their role in spoken Mongolian as the basic means of expressivity. In my previous paper (Ober- falzerová 2009) I dealt with the manner of their formation with respect to the determining vowels and consonants. Now I will carry on with the subject and will particularly concentrate on the use of iconopoetic words in every- day spoken language, and will document my analysis using a relatively large number of collected examples. For Mongolian speakers iconopoeic words are comprehensible, but un- derstanding their meaning and modality is rather diffi cult for a foreigner. Th e reason for this is that with iconopoeic words there is a process of meta- phorisation of sounds which is perceived by feeling for language which has been developing since early childhood. Foreign Mongolists therefore resort to searching for their meaning in dictionaries, where, however, they only fi nd the basic information about their forms, not about their expressivity.1 1) For example Prof. V.I. Rassadin in his lecture in Prague in autumn 2010 voiced the opinion that iconopoeic words do not have expressivity. Cf. also (Rassadin 2008, p. 15.): “I nakonec, v mongol’skih jazykah predstavleno dovol’no mnogo slov, kotoryje ničego ne nazyvajut, ni MMongolo-Tibeticaongolo-Tibetica PPragensiaragensia 110-1.indd0-1.indd 7 112.1.20112.1.2011 119:17:599:17:59 8 Mongolo-Tibetica Pragensia ’10 In bilingual dictionaries the meaning is rendered in a very general man- ner and broadly, the fact that these are du’rsleh u’g – depicting words is not mentioned, and thus their specifi c reference picture is not properly revealed. For example, with the iconopoeic words taadgar, tagdgar, pagdgar they al- ways mention the same meaning ‘low, of small growth, small’ (namhan).2 In addition to that the diffi culty in understanding these words properly is also enhanced by the fact that in monolingual dictionaries iconopoeic words are oft en rendered by other iconopoeic words (cf. Norjin 1999, p. 2244). Per- haps it would be useful to fi nd a way of explaining iconopoeic words by us- ing non-iconopoeic words so that they may be more easily understood by everybody. However, I do realise the considerable diffi culty in the eff ort to grasp the exact image and at the same time expressivity. Th is is perhaps the reason why there is no summarising work which discusses iconopoeic and onomatopoe- ic words more deeply. Both indigenous and foreign authors only off er brief grammatical descriptions3 or their defi nition and specifi cation of this group as a special word class.4 Th erefore it is very important to clearly specify that a particular word is an iconopoeic or ‘form-depicting’ word (du’rsleh u’g), and to describe the image or sound by way of a concrete example. Finally it is important to describe briefl y in ordinary words the modality or emo- tion with which the image or sound is accompanied. I try to mention with each and every listed iconopoeic word systematically all its forms and of- fer as many examples as possible in order to clarify the use of such words in spoken language. In this paper I will deal with the fi rst group of depicting words, the iconopoeia. na čto ne ukazyvajut, ne vypolnjajut služebnyh funkcij, ne vyražajut otnošenija k vyskazy- vanniju i ne vyražajut nikakih čuvstv i emocij. Eti slova liš’ peredajut sredstvami mongol’skih jazykov različnyje obrazy, kotoryje postupajut k čeloveku iz vnešnego mira.” 2) Cf. taadaih = taadgar boloh, taadgar haragdah; taadgar = yumnii zohistoi hemz’eenees namhan, bogino baidal (Mongol helnii delgerengui tailbar toli (5 boti) 2008, tom IV, p.1860); taadaih = tagdaih u’z (see tagdaih): tagdaih = 1) to be of a short build, not tall; 2) to be short (Bol’šoj akademičeskij mongol’sko-russkij slovar’, 2001, tom III, p.176.). 3) For a brief discussion of authors who dealt with iconopoeic words, see Oberfalzerová 2009, pp. 31–32. 4) V.I. Rassadin (2008, p. 15) distinguishes depicting words as a separate word class which is further subdivided according to what the words depict: “Po sposobu vosprijatija čelovekom izobrazitel’nyje slova podrazdeljajutsja na 1) izobrazitel’nyje slova sluhovogo vosprijatija (zvukopodražatel’nyje); 2) izobrazitel’nyje slova zritel’nogo vosprijatija (obraznyje); iz. slova sensornogo (čuvstvennogo) vosprijatija; slova obraznogo vosprijatija dejstvija. Takije slova tože objedinjajutsja v samostojatel’nyj klass izobrazitel’nyh slov.” MMongolo-Tibeticaongolo-Tibetica PPragensiaragensia 110-1.indd0-1.indd 8 112.1.20112.1.2011 119:17:599:17:59 Th e use of iconopoeic words in spoken Mongolian 9 1. Model of formation of du’rsleh u’g, morphological structure I discussed the manner of forming