DOCSLIB.ORG

The ARMAZI Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The ARMAZI Project Jost Gippert München, 3-8-2000 The ARMAZI Project 1. Scope of the ARMAZI project: Fundamentals of an Electronic Documentation of Caucasian Languages and Cultures (Alternative Resources, Materials, Applica- tions and Zipped Information to be dissemi- nated via the World Wide Web) 1.1. Common project, supported by Volkswagen Foundation within the program Common Roads to Europe 1.2. Project homepages: http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/armazi/index.html http://www.osgf.ge/armazi/index.html 1.3. Project partners: University of Frankfurt / Main: Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft / TITUS Gelati Academy of Sciences Georgian Academy of Sciences: Arnold Cikobavaˇ Institute of Linguistics ˙ ˙ Korneli˙ Kekelize Institute of Manuscripts Šota Rustaveli Commission Giorgi Cereteli˙ Institute of Oriental Studies National University of Kutaisi: Institute of Dialectology National University of Tbilisi: Chair of Old Georgian / Scientific Laboratory “Orioni” Chair of Structural and Applied Linguistics 1.4. Individual projects: Digitization of Old Georgian texts of the Gelati school Encoding standards for the languages of the Caucasus Computer models for Caucasian languages Annotated bibliographical database of Cau- casian languages Digitization of the Albanian palimpsest manu- scripts from Mt. Sinai Electronic historical dictionary of Georgian Digitization of classical Georgian literary texts translated from Persian Digitization of published textual materials of Svan and Mingrelian Critical edition of parts of the Old Georgian Bible (Four Gospels) Digitally based Middle Georgian dictionary Textbook of Common Linguistics for Geor- gian speaking students Jost Gippert The ARMAZI Project München, 3-8-2000 2. Preliminary work: 2.1. Caucasian linguistic material prepared for the TITUS text data base (formats: HTML [Unicode] and WordCruncher; J. Gippert, V. Imnaišvili, Z. Sarˇzvelaze a.o.; cf. http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de /texte/texte2.htm#georgica): 2.1.1. Old Georgian texts: Sinai Lectionary (Graz, Austria) Vienna palimpsest manuscript: Parts of the Four Gospels, Parts of the Old Testament, Protoevangelium Iacobi, Martyrium Christinae, Martyrium Cy- priani) ˙ Other Xanmeti˙ and Haemeti Texts Adishi Gospels Acts of Apostels (Sinai version) St. Paul’s Epistles Texts of the Old Testament (Oški˙ and Jerusalem manuscripts) Mcxeta Bible (under preparation) Corpus of hagiographical and homiletic texts: Šatberd˙ codex (Gregorius Nyssenus, De hominis opificio; Epiphanius Cyp- rensis, De Gemmis; Physiologus; Conversio Iberiae etc.) Zveli kartuli agiograpiuli zeglebi I (Martyrium Šušanicae; Martyrium Evstathii Mcchethensis; Martyrium Habo Tphilisensis; Conversio Ibe- riae etc.) Zveli kartuli agiograpiuli zeglebi II (Vita Hilarionis Iberiensis; Vita Iohannis et Euthymii Hagioritarum; Vita Georgii Hagioritae etc.) Zveli kartuli agiograpiuli zeglebi III (Vitae Sanctae Ninonis etc.) Synaxarium ibericum (Inventio Reliqui- arum Sancti Stephani etc.) Hagiographical texts from manuscript A95(Martyrium Christinae; Marty- rium Cypriani et Iustinae) Kartlis Cxovreba I (Leonti˙ Mroveli, Zˇuanšer etc.) Other texts (Nicodemus, Acta Pilati; Martyrium Apostoli Thomae; Marty- rium Sanctarum Rhipsimae et Gaia- nae; Expugnatio Hierosolymae etc.) Synoptical arrangement of St. Nino’s legend as contained in the manuscripts ˙ of Šatberd˙ and Celiši,ˇ with two "meta- phrastic" versions, Leonti˙ Mrovelis adaptation from Kartlis Cxovreba and its Armenian version from Patmowtciwn Vracc, and text passages from the Latin Ecclesiastical History by Tyrannius Rufinus -2- Jost Gippert The ARMAZI Project München, 3-8-2000 2.1.2. Middle Georgian texts: Šota Rustaveli, Vepxist˙˙ qaosani Visramiani Šavteli, Abdulmesiani Caxruxaˇ ze, Tamariani Amirandareˇyaniani Arˇciliani (under preparation) Teimuraziani (under preparation) 2.1.3. Modern Georgian texts: Besiki, Txzulebani 2.1.4. Svan texts: Svanuri Poezia˙ Svanuri enis krestomatia˙ (under prep- aration) ˙ Svanuriprozauli ˙ teks˙ tebi I (under prep- aration) Gigo Gelvan (with audio adaptation; under preparation) 2.1.5. Laz texts: Xoˇya Nasrettini (with audio adaptation) The man from Dutxe (with audio adap- tation) Bediš osteu (with audio adaptation) 2.2. Encoding of Caucasian Languages: 2.2.1. Adaptation of Unicode block 10A0-10FF (Asomtavruli / Mxedruli) 2.2.2. Draft of a Unicode block for Nusxa-Xucuri -3- Jost Gippert The ARMAZI Project München, 3-8-2000 2.2.3. Draft of a Unicode block for the transcription of Caucasian Languages (on the basis of Mxedruli und Latin script; M. Tandašvili, J. Gippert, N. Vajkonny): 2.3. Computer modelling of Caucasian Languages: Georgian noun, Georgian verb (L. Cxaiˇ ze a.o.); Udi noun, Udi verb (M. Tan- dašvili) 2.4. Bibliography: Ca. 3000 entries of Caucasological literature (J. Gippert, M. Tandašvili) 2.5. Digitization of photographic material: 2.5.1. Digitiziation of colour slides (Armazi bilingual; Bolnisi inscriptions) -4- Jost Gippert The ARMAZI Project München, 3-8-2000 2.5.2. Digitization of microfilms (manuscript A 95) 2.5.3. Digitization and reediting of negative UV-photographs (of palimpsest manuscripts: Vienna Cod.georg. 2): 3. Working program of the ARMAZI project: 3.1. Project start: November 1999 3.2. November 1999-July 2000: Visits of members of the Geor- gian partner institutes in Frankfurt 3.3. March 2000-October 2002: Continuation of the individual projects to be undertaken in Georgia; continuous publication of results via Internet (home pages in Frankfurt and Georgia: http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/ armazi and http://www.osgf.de/armazi) -5- Jost Gippert The ARMAZI Project München, 3-8-2000 3.4. Work accomplished so far (31.7.2000; examples only): 3.4.1. Old Georgian Four Gospels: Matthew and Mark according to two recensions: Pre-Athonian redaction: 8 manuscripts: A: Ksnis otxtavi, X c.; B: Bertis otxtavi, X c.; R: Sin.-15, A.D. 975; S: Sin.-16, X c.; T: C˙˙ qarostavis otxtavi, X c.; P: Sin.-30, X c.; F: Urbnisis otxtavi, XI c.; ˙ G: Pales˙ tinuri otxtavi, A.D. 1048; Athonian redaction (Giorgi Mtacmindeli):˙ 10 mss.: H: Vanis otxtavi, A-1335; I: Eˇcmiacinis otxtavi K: Gelatis otxtavi, Q-908; N: Sin-19, A.D. 1074 Z: Jer.-103, XIII c.; Y: Jer.-153, XII c.; U: Jer.-102, XII-XIV c.; X: Jer-93, XII c.; J: Jer.-122, XIII-XIV cc.; Q: Jer.-49. (Sopiko˙ Sarˇzvelaze, Dareˇzan Tvaltvaze) 3.4.2. Middle Georgian texts: Rusudaniani (text and critical apparatus) Švidi Mtiebi (text and critical apparatus) Kartlis Cxovreba II (text only) (Giuli Šabašvili, Ketevan Goˇcitašvili,˙ Dali Citunašvili)ˇ 3.4.3. Old Georgian texts of the Gelati school (translations of Greek authors): Proclus Diadochus, The Elements of Theology Nemesius Emesenus, De natura hominis Ammonius Hermeiou, In Porphyrii isagogen sive quin- que voces (Beka Topuria) -6- Jost Gippert The ARMAZI Project München, 3-8-2000 3.4.4. Megrelian texts: I. Qipši˙ ze (Kipshidze), Grammatika mingrel’skago (iver- skago) yazyka s xrestomatieyu i slovarem, S.-Peter- burg 1914 (Megrelian texts with Georgian transla- tion); ˙ ˙ K.˙ Danelia / A. Canava (eds.), Megruli tekstebi (kartuli targmaniturt), II, Tbilisi 1991 (Megrelian texts only) ˙ ˙ ˙ (E. Dadiani, L. Kortxonˇ˙ zia, T. Putkaraze) 3.4.5. Svan texts: ˙ A. Šanize / V. Topuria (eds.), Svanuriprozauli ˙ teks˙ tebi, I: Balszemouri kilo,˙ Tbilisi 1939 (Svan texts only); A. Šanize / M. Kaldani / Z. Cumburiˇ˙ ze (eds.), Svanuri enis krestomatia,˙ Tbilisi 1978 (Upper Bal texts only); A. Davitiani, V. Topuria, M. Kaldani (eds.), Svanuri ˙ ˙ prozauli˙ teks˙ tebi, II: Balskvemouri kilo, Tbilisi 1957, pp. 1-70 (Svan texts with Georgian translation) ˙ ˙ ˙ (I. Canˇ tla˙ ze; N. Nakani, D. Pircxelani, T. Putkaraze) 3.4.6. Annotated bibliography: Database with interactive server access (cf. M. Tanda- shvili’s contribution) 3.5. Next steps: 3.5.1. Further preparation of texts (e.g.: Gospels of Luke and John; Sibryne Sicruisa; Qaramaniani˙ ; Persian text of V¯ısuR¯am¯ın; Georgian Š¯ahn¯ame derivatives with their Persian model; Megrelian texts ed. by M. Xubua (Tbilisi ˙ 1937); Svan texts contained in Svanuriprozauli ˙ teks˙ tebi III (L¯ašx) and IV (Lentex˙ ); a.o. 3.5.2. Extension of bibliographical database 3.5.3. Photographing of Sinai Albanian palimpsest manuscript etc. etc. -7- Jost Gippert The ARMAZI Project München, 3-8-2000 -8-.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PRO GEORGIA JOURNAL of KARTVELOLOGICAL STUDIES N O 27 — 2017 2
    1 PRO GEORGIA JOURNAL OF KARTVELOLOGICAL STUDIES N o 27 — 2017 2 E DITOR- IN-CHIEF David KOLBAIA S ECRETARY Sophia J V A N I A EDITORIAL C OMMITTEE Jan M A L I C K I, Wojciech M A T E R S K I, Henryk P A P R O C K I I NTERNATIONAL A DVISORY B OARD Zaza A L E K S I D Z E, Professor, National Center of Manuscripts, Tbilisi Alejandro B A R R A L – I G L E S I A S, Professor Emeritus, Cathedral Museum Santiago de Compostela Jan B R A U N (†), Professor Emeritus, University of Warsaw Andrzej F U R I E R, Professor, Universitet of Szczecin Metropolitan A N D R E W (G V A Z A V A) of Gori and Ateni Eparchy Gocha J A P A R I D Z E, Professor, Tbilisi State University Stanis³aw L I S Z E W S K I, Professor, University of Lodz Mariam L O R T K I P A N I D Z E, Professor Emerita, Tbilisi State University Guram L O R T K I P A N I D Z E, Professor Emeritus, Tbilisi State University Marek M ¥ D Z I K (†), Professor, Maria Curie-Sk³odowska University, Lublin Tamila M G A L O B L I S H V I L I, Professor, National Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi Lech M R Ó Z, Professor, University of Warsaw Bernard OUTTIER, Professor, University of Geneve Andrzej P I S O W I C Z, Professor, Jagiellonian University, Cracow Annegret P L O N T K E - L U E N I N G, Professor, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena Tadeusz Ś W I Ę T O C H O W S K I (†), Professor, Columbia University, New York Sophia V A S H A L O M I D Z E, Professor, Martin-Luther-Univerity, Halle-Wittenberg Andrzej W O Ź N I A K, Professor, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw 3 PRO GEORGIA JOURNAL OF KARTVELOLOGICAL STUDIES No 27 — 2017 (Published since 1991) CENTRE FOR EAST EUROPEAN STUDIES FACULTY OF ORIENTAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW WARSAW 2017 4 Cover: St.
    [Show full text]
  • For the Annotation of Titlo Diacritic
    Irina LOBJANIDZE Associate Professor Ilia State University Tbilisi, Georgia For the annotation of Titlo Diacritic Abstract: The paper describes different levels of annotation used in the Corpus of Modern, Middle and Old Georgian Texts. Aiming at building a new, extensive and representative tool for Georgian language the Corpus was compiled under the financial support of the Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation and the Ilia State University (AR/266/1-31/13). In particular, the Corpus of Georgian language is envisaged as collecting a substantial amount of data needed for research. The scope and representativeness of texts included as well as free accessibility to it makes the corpus one of the most necessary tools for the study of different texts in Modern, Middle and Old Georgian (see, http://corpora.iliauni.edu.ge/). The corpus consists of different kind of texts, mainly: a) Manuscript- based publications; b) Reprints; c) Previously unpublished manuscripts and; d) Previously published manuscripts and covers Modern, Middle and Old Georgian. The paper presents the research area, the design and structure and applications related to the compilation of the corpus, in particular, different levels of annotation as meta-data, structural mark-up and linguistic annotation at word-level, especially, from the viewpoint of Titlo Diacritic. This paper is structured as follows: Section 1 includes background and research questions; Section 2 presents a methodological approach and briefly summarizes its theoretical prerequisites; Section 3 includes the findings and hypothesis, which refers generally to the differences between the annotation of Modern and Old Georgian texts; and Section 4 presents the answers to the research questions.
    [Show full text]
  • (Tamaz) Kochlamazashvili
    OLD GEORGIAN TRANSLATIONS OF GREGORY OF NYSSa’S WORKS Tina Dolidze/Ekvtime (Tamaz) Kochlamazashvili “Great Father,” “Stronghold of Orthodoxy,” “River of the Paradise,” “Tree of Life for the believers,” “Inculcator of the Truth,” “Splendid Preacher of repentance”—this is an incomplete list of the epithets that Old Georgian intellectuals, on the trail of Byzantines, used to attribute to Gregory of Nyssa. Along with these elevated appraisals, numerous translations of Gregory of Nyssa’s works are preserved in a multitude of manuscripts, as well as quotations from his works. Chants and nar- ratives included in the Georgian liturgical books attest to the great reputation Gregory of Nyssa had among educated men in Georgia. The Georgian manuscript tradition identifies more than 30 works under the name of Gregory of Nyssa, both authentic and pseudo- epigraphic. The Georgian reader has been acquainted with the works of Gregory of Nyssa since the earliest period of medieval Georgian literature. Fol- lowing the periods into which the Georgian literature of the Middle Ages is divided as well as the typological classification of translation, the Georgian versions of his works can be organised into three periods: (1.) before the 80s of the 10th century, (2.) from the 80s of the 10th century until the second half of the 11th century, and (3.) from the second half of the 11th century up until the 20s of the 12th century. During the first period there were produced three anonymous trans- lations of Gregory’s works: a) On the creation of man which he wrote to his brother Petrus bishop of Sebasteia, which actually is a translation of De hominis opificio.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Aramaic Script in Georgia
    Grapholinguistics in the 21th Century Paris, June 17-19, 2020 Helen Giunashvili G. Tsereteli Institute of Oriental Studies/Ilia State University, Georgia OLD ARAMAIC SCRIPT IN GEORGIA Introduction Aramaic is mostly important for Georgia. All the three historical phases of this language: Old, Middle and Modern are well represented in the Georgian cultural tradition. On the territory of contemporary Georgia, mainly in its Eastern part‒Kartli being historically Iberian kingdom (IV c BC-IV c AD) a number of original Aramaic inscriptions were found. They were made on different objects: steles (an epitaph and a victory stele), bone plates, wine- pitchers, silver bowls, and household items, stones of sanctuary buildings and sarcophagi, jewels. For the present, the whole corpus of inscriptions comprises nearly 100 units dated by III-II cc BC –III c AD and is kept at different funds of the National Museum of Georgia. These ancient Aramaic inscriptions were discovered in Mtskheta, the capital of Iberia as well as its outskirts – Armazi, Bagineti and other different locations in Central Georgia – Uplistsikhe, Urbnisi, Zguderi, Bori, Dedoplis Gora (Mindori), Dzalisa. The Aramaic inscriptions of Georgia are distinguished by their form and content. Some of them are quite extensive, such as Armazi steles and a number of dedicational inscriptions dated by III c AD, found on golden bracelets from Armazi burials. The rest of inscriptions are rather short, consisting only of one or two words, denoting a proper name, or a title, they also frequently have an attributive meaning of weight, size and function of an object. The Old Aramaic was one of chief written languages of Iberia before adoption the Christianity (IV century AD).
    [Show full text]
  • Church – Consolidating the Georgian Regions
    Church – Consolidating the Georgian Regions Metropolitan Ananya Japaridze Saint Ilia the Righteous said from the very establishment of the holy Church of Georgia, that it presented a strong power consolidating the whole population of the state. It was not locked within the narrow ethnic borders but was the belonging of different ethnos residing in the state. According to Holy Writ, it never differentiated Hellenist from Jew, Georgian from non-Georgian, as its flocks were children of Georgia with mutual responsibility to the country and citizenship. Even Saint Nino, founder of the Georgian Church, came from Kapadokia. Saint of Georgian Church, martyr Razhden, and Saint Evstati Mtskheteli were Persian. Famous 12 fathers struggling against fire-worship and Monophysitism were Assyrian (Syrian). Neopyth Urbani Episcope was Arabian. The famous Saint Abo Tbileli came from Arabia too. The Saint Queen Shushanik was Armenian etc. The above list shows that Georgian church unified all citizens of the country in spite of their ethnic origin. At the same time, the Georgian church always used to create a united cultural space. The Georgian Church was consolidating regions and different ethnic groups of Georgia. The Georgian language was the key factor of Georgian Christian culture. Initially, Georgian language and based on it Georgian Christian culture embraced whole Georgia, all its regions. Divine services, all church acts, in mountains and lowlands from the Black Sea to Armenia and Albania were implemented only in Georgian language. Georgian language and Georgian culture dominated all over the Georgian territory. And just this differentiates old Georgia from the present one. It’s evident that the main flocks of Georgian Church were Georgians of West, South and East Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • A Language Guide to Georgian Language
    Georgian Language Beginner Program Peace Corps/Georgia The script accompanies the following 13 audio tracks. GE_Georgian_Lesson_1 (Time 3:57) (File Size: 2.72 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_2 (Time 1:38) (File Size: 1.12 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_3 (Time 5:01) (File Size: 3.45 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_4 (Time 5:10) (File Size: 3.55 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_5 (Time 2:59) (File Size: 2.05 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_6 (Time 5:46) (File Size: 3.96 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_7 (Time 2:22) (File Size: 1.62 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_8 (Time 7:47) (File Size: 5.35 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_9 (Time 5:02) (File Size: 3.45 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_10 (Time 4:20) (File Size: 2.98 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_11 (Time 3:15) (File Size: 2.23 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_12 (Time 3:52) (File Size: 2.66 MB) GE_Georgian_Lesson_13 (Time 5:58) (File Size: 4.09 MB) 2 Table of Contents Lesson 1 Letters and Sounds of Georgian Language 4 Lesson 2 Pronouns/The Verb "To Be" 6 Lesson 3 Greetings and Getting Acquainted 8 Lesson 4 Phrases for Meeting Somebody 13 Lesson 5 Meeting Somebody 14 Lesson 6 Forms of Address 16 Lesson 7 Members of the Family 18 Lesson 8 Some Basic Questions and Answers 19 Lesson 9 In a Restaurant 21 Lesson 10 House Orientation 22 Lesson 11 Buying Personal Items 23 Lesson 12 Georgian dancing 25 Lesson 13 Georgian Supra 26 Foreword Note (without an audio track) The following pre-departure language CD and an accompanying script will briefly introduce you to the basics of the Georgian Language, as well as give you some insights on two of the core cultural values of Georgia – folk dances and supra (feast).
    [Show full text]
  • Ninidze, Mariam " a New Point of Vew on the Origin of the Georgian Alphabet"
    Maia Ninidze A New Point of View on the Origin of the Georgian Alphabet The history of the development of different scripts shows that writing may assume the organized systemic appearance that Georgian asomtavruli (capital alphabet) had in the 5th century only as a result of reform. No graphic system has received such refined appearance through its independent evolution. Take, for example, the development of the Greek alphabet down to 403 B.C. In reconstructing the original script of the Georgian alphabet I was guided by the point of view that "the first features and the later developed or introduced foreign elements should be demarked and in this way comparative chronology be defined" (10, p. 50) and that "knowledge of the historical development of the outline of letters will enable us to form an idea of how the change of the outline of letters occurred and ... perceive the type of the preceding change, no imprints on monuments of which have come down to us" (12. p. 202). When one alphabet evinces similarity with another in the outline of corresponding graphemes of similar sounds, this suggests their common provenance or one's derivation from the other. But closeness existing at the level of general systemic peculiarities is a sign of later, artificial assimilation. The systemic similarity of Georgian asomtavruli with Greek would seem to suggest that it was reformed on the basis of the Greek counterpart. The earliest Georgian inscriptions in the asomtavruli are characterized by similarity to Greek in: 1) equal height of letters, 2) geometric roundness of graphemes and linearity-angularity, 3) the direction of writing from left to right, 4) the order of the alphabet and the numerical value of graphemes, but not similarity in the form of individual graphemes.
    [Show full text]
  • History in Support of Synchrony*
    History in Support of Synchrony* ALICE C. HARRIS SUNY Stony Brook 0. Introduction In a recent paper I argued that diachronic linguistics can explain certain typological phenomena that are otherwise problematic; in the present paper I want to discuss two other ways the study of historical data can contribute to synchronic linguistics. In §1 I argue that consideration of a prior stage of a language offers the kind of insight also provided by the examination of closely related languages. In §2 I show that diachronic data offer a way of testing hypotheses and claims. 1. Person Agreement in Old Georgian Generative grammar has gained insight into the way language operates by examining in depth minimal differences between dialects or closely related European languages. Of course, other approaches have also made good use of related dialects. For example, it is well known that it was in part the comparison of the Swiss dialect of Kerenz with other forms of German that led to the recognition of the regularity of sound change (Osthoff and Brugman 1878:viii-ix). In this section I argue that it is possible to gain similar insights by studying older stages of a language from a synchronic point of view. Person and number agreement in the Georgian verb has been one of two testing grounds for new morphological theories for more than twenty years. At least eight analyses of these paradigms have appeared in the literature in that time; here I discuss only two of these—those of Anderson (1982, 1984, 1986, 1992) and Halle and Marantz (1993).
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Georgian 2Nd Edition
    TAMAR MAKHAROBLIDZE BASIC GEORGIAN 2 nd Edition Proofread and other contributions made by Krystyl Kane Contents Introduction............................................................................. 11 The Location of Georgia..........................................................................................................11 The National Flag of Georgia..................................................................................................12 The History of the Flag...........................................................................................................12 Earlier Flags of Georgia...........................................................................................................13 The State Emblem of Georgia.................................................................................................14 Former State Emblems............................................................................................................15 Basic Data.................................................................................................................................15 Short Information about the Georgian Script and Language................................................16 The Georgian Alphabet...........................................................................................................18 Morphology.............................................................................................................................19 Morphophonology...................................................................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • Epistemic Modality in Georgian
    166 Nino Sharashenidze Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Georgia 1 Ilia Chavchavadze Ave, Tbilisi 0179 Tel.: +995 599 393980 +370 686 91 423 e-mail: [email protected] Research interests: syntax, dialectology, semantics (modality), language history, methodology of teaching Georgian as a foreign language and as a second language EPISTEMIC MODALITY IN GEORGIAN The epistemic modality consists of epistemic possibility and necessity. Particle “Unda” (must) is the main formative of the epistemic necessity. Originating from a notional verb, it still retains its verbal functions. In the conjugation of an object, “Unda” is the III person form. It means “wish”, “want”. However, in modern Georgian, it is a multifunctional particle, with the epistemic necessity being one of the meanings thereof. “Unda” is associated with a verb in the subjunctive mood and expresses the speaker’s opinion, evaluation and attitude to the reality, the speaker’s assumption, conviction or the lack thereof. The said modality expresses intellectual perception of the speaker. Sentence1.“ის ახლა სახლში უნდა იყოს” [is axla saxlshi unda ix’os] – He must be at home now. “Unda” (must) expresses the speaker’s certainty ensuing from the analytical assessment of reality. The sentence implies his belief that someone must be at home since it is the most logical possibility based on the fact that lights are on. 2. “მას კარგად უნდა გაეკეთებინა ეს საქმე” [mas k’argad unda gaek’etebina es sakme] – He must have done a good job of it. Here “Unda” implies that as far as I know him, his capabilities and sense of responsibility, I believe that he must have got on with the job well enough.
    [Show full text]
  • The Consonant Phonotactics of Georgian
    The Consonant Phonotactics of Georgian Published by LOT phone: +31 30 253 6006 3512 JK Utrecht fax: +31 30 253 6000 The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] http://www.let.uu.nl/lot/ Cover illustration: The oldest specimen of Georgian writing, found in the Bolnisi Sioni Temple (5th century). ISBN 90-76864-24-1 NUGI 941 Copyright © 2002 by Marika Butskhrikidze. All rights reserved. The Consonant Phonotactics of Georgian PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van Doctor aan de Universiteit Leiden, op gezag van de Rector Magnificus Dr. D.D. Breimer, hoogleraar in de faculteit der Wiskunde en Natuurwetenschappen en die der Geneeskunde, volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties te verdedigen op woensdag 6 november 2002 te klokke 16.15 uur door Marika Butskhrikidze geboren te Tbilisi (Georgië) in 1971 Promotiecommissie promotores: Prof. dr. C.J. Ewen Prof. dr. H.G. van der Hulst (University of Connecticut) co-promotor: Dr. J.M. van de Weijer referent: Prof. dr. E.V. Hume (Ohio State University) overige leden: Prof. dr. V.J. van Heuven Dr. H.J. Smeets YX=5YQL&HPVP6REOHEV [To my parents] Contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................... xi Abbreviations and Symbols .......................................................... xiii 1 Preliminaries ....................................................................... 1 1.0. Introduction: the ‘problem’ ............................................................................... 1 1.1. Ontological premises .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Svan Language. Kevin Tuite Département D'anthropologie
    The Svan language. Kevin Tuite Département d’anthropologie, Université de Montréal PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. This description of the grammar of the Svan language is more than a revised edition of the grammatical sketch I published in 1997. That earlier attempt appeared just as Svan linguistics was entering a new and exciting stage. At the Arnold Chikobava Institute of Linguistics in Tbilisi, a new generation of researchers, many of them native speakers of Svan, were bringing the long-overdue Svan dictionary project to completion, and beginning to explore aspects of the language that had hitherto drawn little or no attention. I cannot adequately express my gratitude to these extraordinary colleagues, without whom this grammatical sketch could never have been written. Their works are cited throughout this grammar, and many of their publications are listed in the bibliography, but there are some whom I wish to thank personally in this preface: Roena Ch’k’adua, Lela Giglemiani, Chato Gujejiani, Rusudan and Xatuna Ioseliani, Ketevan Margiani- Subari, Meri Saghliani, Nato Shavreshiani, and of course, Madame Iza Chant’ladze. Deep thanks as well to my friends in the commune of Lat’ali, for their hospitality, patience, and willingness to let a clueless outsider learn something about daily life in a Svan village: the C’erediani family (Nino, Leri, Levan, Maik’o; their beloved parents Davit and Valia, who alas are no longer with us); also Bagrat Nansq’ani, Madona Chamgeliani, and many other kind residents who have shared their knowledge, food and drink over the years. Among the non-Georgian colleagues who have generously offered their comments and expertise, I wish to acknowledge Winfried Boeder, Jost Gippert, Christine Jourdan; and my students Hélène Gérardin and Jean-François Juneau.
    [Show full text]