+Smitan and +Smijxlz (E Smite, Smith, G Schmeifjen, Schmied, Etc.) *
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
17. Note on the etymology ofPGmc. +smitan and +smijXlz (E smite, smith, G schmeifJen, Schmied, etc.) * The understanding of the regularities of Indo-European has long since progressed to a point where it might well be deemed likely that the easy problems have already been solved, so that future progress will, logically, tend to con tain mther big surprises. In this situation, we should not shrink back from saying out loud what we see, even if we know of no other case of that particular nature. In histori cal linguistics, we are after the truth about the linguistic past. If we permit ourselves only to say trivialities about that past, there is little point in searching for it in the first place (Jens Elmegard Rasmussen [\988] 1999: I. 340). Abstract The Proto-Germanic words +smitan (root +smit-, class I) 'to strike, throw' and +smijJaz 'smith' (with derived +smiJx5n 'to forge, smithy' and +smiJx5 'metal to be worked on, smi th' s work, jewelry, skilled work', root +smi P-) have no good Indo European etymology and are not connected to each other in the etymological dic tionaries. It is proposed that +smitan reflects a borrowed Semitic word derived from the root :f.md which means a certain kind of weapon for striking or throwing in Ugaritic and 'to strike' in Arabic, and which has what seems to be a related root :f.mt meaning 'to vanquish' in Ugaritic. It is further proposed, though with reserva· tions, that +smijJaz likewise reflects a Semitic loan-word based on the root form :f.mt, and that +smiJx1Z is thus etymologically related to +smitan. 17.1. PGmc. +smitan: The problem A strong verb +smitan (class I) is well attested in Gothic and West Ger manic. l Several meanings seem to be attached to the verb: Goth. bi smeitan (only 3rd sg. indo pret. bismait) 'to anoint' and ga-smeitan (only 3rd sg. ind. pret. gasmait) translate Gk. €7nXPLEW 'to anoint, to besmear' (Lehmann 1986: s.v. *bi-smeitan). Since these are derived verbs, the meaning is likely to be a derived one too, and therefore Gothic does not tell us the meaning of the basic verb. r602 300 PGme. +smitan and +smij:>az Fortunately, the simplex is also attested. Seebold (1970: s.v. l-ISMEIT-A-) gives 'schmeiBen, werfen' ('to fling, to throw') as the meaning of OFris. smUa; this is also the meaning of G schmeij3en. OE smitan is glossed 'to daub, smear, soil, pollute, defile' by Clark Hall and Meritt (1960: s. v.). This is indeed the meaning in the oldest occurrences (ca. 725, 1000) listed in the OED. But as early as ca. 1150 the simplex verb also occurs with that meaning which is the only one in the contemporary language: pu ofsloge vel smite (Canterbury Ps. iii. 8, cf. OED: s.v. smite st.Y.), i.e. 'you struck down or smote'. Given these divergent meanings in the oldest attestations it does not come as a surprise that opinions differ concerning the original meaning of the verb, namely, whether it is 'to throw' or 'to smear'. The OED writes: "The development of the various senses is not quite clear, but that of throwing is perh[aps] the original one." Seebold (1970: s.v. [-]SMEIT -A-) writes, "Die Bedeutung ist 'beschmieren, beschmutzen, beflecken' neben 'werfen'; Ausgangspunkt ist vermutlich das Bewerfen einer Hauswand mit feuchtem Lehm." [The meaning is 'to spread upon, sully, stain' alongside 'to throw'; the starting-point may have been the daubing of a building wall with moist clay (lit. "the be-throw ing of a house wall with moist clay", i.e. 'the throwing of moist clay upon a house wall'). f This is also the semantic reconstruction of Pfeifer et al. (1997: s. v. schmeijJen), who nevertheless assume a dental deriva tion from an Indo-European root *sme-, *smei- 'to smear, wipe, rub'. In my view we arrive at the original meaning by putting these two semantic proposals together: The meaning of throwing is at the semantic heart of the verb; daubing, i.e. originally the throwing of clay upon a wickerworked wall, is an applied meaning; more general meanings such as that of spreading any kind of substances on a surface or, on the con trary, more specialized meanings such as that of anointing or sullying have developed from this intermediate notion. Since the meaning in English has for centuries been that of hitting by striking, perhaps an even more basic meaning of the verb was that of hitting with an object by either throwing or striking.3 Note that not only to smite itself has the meaning of striking but also the derived verb to forsmite 'to smite in pieces, to strike down', first attested ca. 1205 (cf. OED: s.v.).41603 I conclude from all this that the original meaning is that of 'striking' or 'throwing', i.e. things one - typically though not exclusively - does with a weapon. This is the meaning which is best preserved in English smite andforsmite. The meaning of 'smearing' evident in Middle High German is secondary. A parallel can be seen in PGmc. +strfka- which preserves its original meaning in English to strike whereas in German streichen it has taken on the meaning of 'smearing'. G streicheln 'to PGmc. +smitan and+smipaz 301 stroke, fondle' too has moved away from the original basic meaning, as has E to stroke; however the noun Streich 'blow, stroke' preserves the original meaning within German.5 PGmc. +smitan has no clear etymology. This is in part due to the fact that the original meaning of the word is under dispute. Only if the original meaning is assumed to be that of 'throwing' is there any possi ble Indo-European connection at all, namely with Lat. mittere 'to let go, send, throw, hurl,.6 I will return to this etymology in section 17.3 below. 17.2. Semit. s,mt 'to vanquish', s,md 'to strike; weapon for striking or throwing' In earlier publications I have suggested that Germanic strong verbs without etymology may be prehistoric borrowings from Semitic (V en nemann 1998c: 42, 2000b: 252), and for several verbs concrete Semitic etymologies have been proposed: +metan V 'to measure' (Vennemann 1995: 105f.)7, +wak(n)an VI 'to wake up' (Vennemann 1997a: 894f.), +plegan V 'to cultivate' (Vennemann 1998d), +dragan VI 'to drag' (Vennemann 2002b), +drepan V/IV 'to hit' (Mail hammer, Laker, and Vennemann 2003). As for PGmc. +smitan, the following passage from the Ugaritic Baal Cycle (Smith 1994) opens up the possibility that the same may be done for this verb, too: r604 8 ht.°ibk 9 bClm.ht.°ibk.tmb~.ht.t~mt~rtk8 (Smith 1994: 319) This passage is translated, vocalized, and metrically arranged by Smith (1994: 322) as follows: 9 Now your foe, Baal, hitta °iba-ka baclu-mi Now your foe may you smite, hitta °iba-ka timba~ Now may you vanquish your enemy. hitta ta~mit ~arrata-ka Evidently Smith here translates the root mlt~ as 'smite', and the root ~mt as 'vanquish'. However, since E smite and vanquish are similar in meaning9 and are here used as stylistic variants for poetic purposes, one may speculate that the meaning of U garitic ~mt is not very distant from that of PGmc. +smitan. The thematic vowel in a root of the structure (no guttural as second or third consonant) and meaning (fientic, transitive) w of U garit. ~mt is regularly _i_. Cf. the following partial (singular) para- 302 PGmc. +smitan and +smij:mz digm of the short form of the prefix conjugation (Tropper 2000: 453- 455), which expresses the meaning perfective, viz. (a) "preterite" and (b) "jussive" (Tropper 2000: 431): 1st Q-a~mit 2nd m. t-a~mit f. t-a~mit-i 3rd m. y-a~mit f. t-a~mit The long form of the prefix conjugation, which expresses the meaning imperfective or "present tense" (Tropper 2000: 431), differs from the short form only by adding a -u to suffixless forms and -n after suffixed vowels (Tropper 2000: 457). Since early Germanic did not have para digmatic prefixes of this sort, the Qa-, ta-, ya- etc. at the beginning of such verb forms were likely to be misinterpreted by the Germanic speakers as some sort of pronouns, leaving ~mit- as what appeared to be the verbal root. One way of integrating this abstracted root form into the early Germanic verb system was treating it as a class 1602 I root. The same would hold true for the root or root variant ~md- to be treated directly. 11 Krahmalkov (2000) has an entry $MD 'mace, club' used as an epi thet of Bacal in the expression bacal ~md 'Baal of the Mace'. He writes, "Reference is to the mace made for Baal by the god Kusar (K6thar) with which he smashes his enemies." Krahmalkov compares the root to Ugaritic ~md. Smith (1994) discusses this root ~md, which occurs several times in the Ugaritic Baal Cycle, on pp. 330 and 338-340. He writes in particu lar: The word s.md(m) refers to a weapon of some sort .... The nature of the weapon is not clearly understood although attempts to resolve the difficulty have been made on the basis of a variety of etymologies. Albright (1941: 16 n. 24a; TOl2 136 b. 0) compared Arabic s.amada, 'to strike' (Lane 1726-27).13 Neuberg (1950: 164) suggests the root *s.mt, 'to destroy,' and assuming Neuberg's view, GaIT (1986: 52) explains the variation in the final consonant as a phonological shift involving voicing. Ginsberg (1935: 328) and Rosenthal (1953: 72-83; cf.