Gripla - 01.01.1975, Blaðsíða 205

THE EAST TOCHARIAN PERSONAL PRONOUN 201
(4) The last aspect of the problem to be considered here is of the
sound form, viz. nas > nds. It is clear that the forms do not fit com-
pletely, especially as West Tocharian n should apparently have been
taken up in East Tocharian as n. If the borrowing has, however, gone
through the intermediate stage *nas it seems possible that some kind
of palatal dissimilation has been at work here.10 In fact, pronouns are
well known for presenting irregular forms, sometimes attributed to
development in unaccentuated position. But relatively little is known
about Tocharian sound systems and dialects and it seems at least
possible from this point of view as well that this is a question of
borrowing.
clear as it is easy to envisage a distinction ordinary,feminine/honorific,masculine.
Cf. the distinction in Khasi, mentioned above: ‘However, . . . in the 2nd pers. the
distinction is not, or no longer, one between m. and f., but me is given as “thou”
(to man, rude) and pha as “thou” (famil.),’ H. J. Pinnow, ‘Personal Pronouns in
the Austroasiatic Languages: A Historical Study,’ Lingua 14 (1965), 6. Yet
another, and apparently fluctuating, distinction is described by A. D. Haudricourt,
‘La premiére personne inclusive du singulier en Polynésie,’ Bulletin de la Société
de linguistique de Paris 54 (1959), 130-135; see also G. B. Milner, ‘Notes on the
Comparison of two Languages (with and without a Genetic Hypothesis),’ Linguis-
tic Comparison in South East Asia and the Pacific, London 1963, 39-40.
10 Cf. East Tocharian sah ‘art’, but West Tocharian sah and sah, Werner
Thomas, Tocharisclies Elementarbuch II, Heidelberg 1964, 148, 249, 253. On n,
h, cf. West Tocharian hikahce ‘silvery’, humka ‘ninety’, East Tocharian nkahci,
nmuk, Tocharisches Elementarbuch II, 195, but these are hardly loan-words; cf.
also Sanskrit niraya > West Tocharian nrai, East Tocharian hare, Tocharisches
Elementarbuch II, 206. As for á and s, cf. Sanskrit sloka > West Tocharian slok,
East Tocharian élok and slyok, Tocharisches Elementarbucli II, 148, 248. Holger
Pedersen, Tocharisch vom Gesichtspunkt der indoeuropáischen Sprachver-
gleichung, 238, mentions ‘Zahlreiche Verschiebungen zwischen intakten und pala-
talisierten Lauten.’