Etymological Dictionary of Basque R. L. Trask edited for web publication by Max W. Wheeler University of Sussex 2008 © the estate of the late R. L. Trask {Contents} {Editor’s preface} 3 Guide to the dictionary 1. General introduction a. The language and its external history 6 b. Documentation and texts 7 c. Historical work 9 d. The modern language 11 2. The phonemes of Pre-Basque 14 3. The aspiration 16 4. {Phonotactics and} morpheme structure {in} Pre-Basque 18 5. The structure of verbs in Pre-Basque 21 6. Phonological changes 25 7. {Rules applying in} word-formation 39 8. Some morphological {observations and} problems 44 9. The sources of the Basque lexicon 49 10. {Phonological} treatment of loan words 52 11. Expressive forms {caret} 12. Ghost words 55 13. The structure of entries 59 14. List of abbreviations {and symbols} 63 The Dictionary 70 {Morphemes cross-referred to but not listed in The Dictionary} 384 The native lexicon {1. English−Basque} 385 {2. Basque−English} 391 {Supplementary native lexicon} {3. English-Basque} 396 {4. Basque-English} 398 Bibliography 400 Basque index {caret} English index {caret} Index of botanical names {stub only} 415 Index of zoological names {caret} Subject index 417 Etymological Dictionary of Basque 3 {Editor’s preface R. L. (Larry) Trask died in March 2004 at the age of 59, leaving unfinished his Etymological Dictionary of Basque. In 2000 he had been awarded a Major Research Fellowship by the Leverhulme Trust to support this project, to which he devoted much of his time between October 2001 and his death. As a colleague of Trask’s for nearly twenty-five years, now in retirement, I agreed, with the encouragement of other colleagues and of his widow, Jan Lock, to prepare and edit his unfinished typescript for web publication. What is offered here is in no sense a completion of Trask’s project, a task for which I am not qualified. Rather my aim is limited to making available to the world of scholarship, in as useful a form as possible, the results that he had achieved, as a tribute to the memory of a distinguished Vasconist and a long-standing friend. Trask’s own presentation of the objectives of the Etymological Dictionary of Basque can be seen best in section 1 (General introduction) and section 13 (The structure of entries). It is clear that his aim was to provide a single-volume work, in English, of value to scholars such as comparativists, who may not have been Vasconists. It might also be seen as a companion volume to his History of Basque (1997), now with a special focus on the history of the Basque lexicon. It is likely that the list of items with dictionary entries is in large measure complete. There are a certain number of lexemes that are cross-referred to in The Dictionary or mentioned in sections 1-14 (Guide to the dictionary) but are missing from the list of entries as Trask left it. I have included these in the section ‘Morphemes cross- referred to but not listed in The Dictionary’ on page 425. Section 13 explains the indentation structure of the dictionary entries, with head words aligned left, and derivatives and compounds indented below the relevant head words. Derivatives of derivatives have a further indent. In the editing process it was necessary to reconstruct this indentation pattern which had been lost in the transfer of the text between different word-processing and operating systems. For the most part, this structure could be recovered by observing deviations from strict alphabetical order, and, of course, from the sense of the etymological information itself, though in some cases it was necessary to add missing glosses and make guesses about the etymological relationships Trask understood. Trask considerably helped the editor’s task by indicating with ** or **** gaps where he intended to add information. These asterisked gaps are of the following kinds: glosses to dictionary entries, localization of dialect forms, Latin names for flora and fauna, cross-references to other entries, references to sources, references to the phonological changes, morphological and word-formation rules, and phonological treatment of loan words that are discussed in sections 6-8 and 10, and etymological discussions. There are also some evident gaps in sections 6−8 and 10 of the Guide the dictionary where I have done no more here than supply, as Trask had himself done in several cases, a few references to Michelena’s works where the missing points are discussed. I have dealt with the asterisked gaps in the following way. I have attempted to supply a gloss or glosses for most of the words mentioned, in order to make evident the semantic relationships Trask had in mind. The glosses supplied editorially, between { } as with all other editorial material, are derived in the first place from Michelena 4 R. L. Trask (1961a/1977a) which is one of Trask’s major sources, and secondly from Azkue (1905) and Aulestia (1989). In a few cases, the sense of a word is so specialized that the source reference is probably more use than an English gloss; and in a few cases, such as of homonyms, one cannot tell which sense Trask intended to discuss. Only occasionally have I attempted to supply missing dialect localization for the various forms of an entry, especially where the information is mentioned in Michelena (1961a/1977a), or where it helps to make sense of the entry as a whole. After Michelena, the source used is Azkue (1905). The gaps in the scientific Latin terminology for flora and fauna remain as they stood, as do the planned indices of these elements. This kind of information is available in Michelena & Sarasola (1989−). I have supplied all missing cross-references; where the item is not in fact to be found I add ‘{not in The Dictionary}’. As for the references to the work of other scholars, I have managed to trace nearly all of them, I hope accurately. Arbelaiz (1978) was very useful in the case of Michelena’s works, though there remain some ‘Michelena (****)’ that I have not been able to identify. Some 40 entries contain a reference to ‘MT entry’ as a source. Despite help from various Vasconists, for which I am grateful, I have not so far been able to identify ‘MT’. A considerable number of items have been added to the Bibliography, in which I have also attempted to supply the titles of articles when these were not already included, and missing details of editors and publishers. Some gaps remain. The references in The Dictionary to the phonological, morphological, and word-formation rules listed in sections 6-8 and 10 have been added where absent. Not being a Vasconist, I have not attempted to go beyond my expertise in filling in gaps in the etymological discussions. Thus, a considerable number of entries remain without etymology. Occasionally I have supplied a detail or an observation relating to a Romance etymon or comparandum that Trask mentions. The contents list makes clear that Trask would have supplied an alphabetical index of Basque words and English glosses. Since the electronic text here made available will be searchable, such an index does not now seem necessary. As mentioned previously, I have added (425), a list of morphemes cross-referred to but absent from The Dictionary itself. There is no doubt that Trask would have incorporated these, with etymological discussion, in The Dictionary if he had been able to complete it. To the section The native lexicon I have added items listed in The Dictionary where the discussion makes clear that Trask regarded them as native. I have compiled a Supplementary native lexicon consisting of other words mentioned as ‘pre-Basque’ in sections 4-5 or described in The Dictionary as ‘OUO’ (‘of unknown origin’) and which therefore also seem likely to be ‘native and ancient’ (see section 9). No entries have been added to the Subject index, but I have endeavoured to fill out the entries already there with items from The Dictionary where the indexed term occurs. Typographical errors and errors in alphabetical order have been silently corrected. Short editorial deletions are marked with strikethrough. Editorial additions (including elements moved from elsewhere in the text) are enclosed in braces { }. Elements to be suppressed (for example, because of duplication), or combined with other entries, are indicated with {[} at the beginning and {] ... } at the end. This somewhat inelegant device is needed because Trask uses brackets [ ] for other purposes: for numbering different sense of homonyms, for references, particularly ‘[FHV]’ = Michelena (1977a), and for notes to himself concerning matters needing further attention. A certain number of editorial modifications have been made to resolve internal Etymological Dictionary of Basque 5 inconsistencies, when I give preference to that form or relationship where Trask offers the best supporting evidence. I hope Trask’s Etymological Dictionary of Basque, though incomplete, will be found useful and that its web publication will encourage others to follow Trask in the investigation of the history and structure of the Basque lexicon. Max W. Wheeler Falmer, February 2008} 6 R. L. Trask Guide to the dictionary 1. General introduction 1a. The language and its external history Basque is spoken today by about 660,000 people at the western end of the Pyrenees, along the Bay of Biscay. The Basque-speaking region extends for about 160 kilometres from east to west, and for about 50 kilometres from north to south. It now excludes the cities of Bilbao (Basque Bilbo), Bayonne (Baiona) and Pamplona (Iruñea), all formerly Basque-speaking, but it includes the city of San Sebastián (Donostia).