In a very important article Paul Thieme demonstrated that Ved. Sindhu- was a nominal -u- formation, based on a non-attested present stem *sinadh-/*sindh- derived by a root sidh (usual present stem sadha-). Then, *sindhú- would mean ‘warding off, keeping away’, while the corresponding substantivization as síndhu-, m./f., (with the stress on the root) meant ‘he/she who wards off, keeps away’, i.e. ‘natural frontier’. Notwithstanding the evident absence of a present stem like *sinadh-/*sindh-, the reconstruction suggested by Thieme is still the most reasonable in the light of the Ṛgvedic passages where the older interpretation of síndhu- just as ‘river’ or ‘ocean’ results patently far-fetched or simply impossible. In any case, for the Avestan corresponding form, hiṇdu-/həṇdu- (O.P.hindu-), no good Iranian or Indo-Iranian (independent) etymology seems to be recognizable, and it is presumable, as normally stated, that this one was a very early loanword in Iranian, just meaning not ‘India’, but ‘(natural) frontier’, and thus referring to barriers or obstacles as big and large as a river or a large basin of water (lake, sea or ocean). Here some problems connected with this interpretation of the linguistic data are analyzed, with special regard for the Indo-Iranian and Avestan mythology.

Additional Considerations about Ved. Síndhu-, Av. Hiṇdu-/Həṇdu- / Panaino, Antonio. - STAMPA. - 5:(2016), pp. 41-52. [10.14277/6969-100-3/EUR-5-2]

Additional Considerations about Ved. Síndhu-, Av. Hiṇdu-/Həṇdu-

PANAINO, ANTONIO CLEMENTE DOMENICO
2016

Abstract

In a very important article Paul Thieme demonstrated that Ved. Sindhu- was a nominal -u- formation, based on a non-attested present stem *sinadh-/*sindh- derived by a root sidh (usual present stem sadha-). Then, *sindhú- would mean ‘warding off, keeping away’, while the corresponding substantivization as síndhu-, m./f., (with the stress on the root) meant ‘he/she who wards off, keeps away’, i.e. ‘natural frontier’. Notwithstanding the evident absence of a present stem like *sinadh-/*sindh-, the reconstruction suggested by Thieme is still the most reasonable in the light of the Ṛgvedic passages where the older interpretation of síndhu- just as ‘river’ or ‘ocean’ results patently far-fetched or simply impossible. In any case, for the Avestan corresponding form, hiṇdu-/həṇdu- (O.P.hindu-), no good Iranian or Indo-Iranian (independent) etymology seems to be recognizable, and it is presumable, as normally stated, that this one was a very early loanword in Iranian, just meaning not ‘India’, but ‘(natural) frontier’, and thus referring to barriers or obstacles as big and large as a river or a large basin of water (lake, sea or ocean). Here some problems connected with this interpretation of the linguistic data are analyzed, with special regard for the Indo-Iranian and Avestan mythology.
2016
Borders. Itineraries on the Edges of Iran
41
52
Additional Considerations about Ved. Síndhu-, Av. Hiṇdu-/Həṇdu- / Panaino, Antonio. - STAMPA. - 5:(2016), pp. 41-52. [10.14277/6969-100-3/EUR-5-2]
Panaino, Antonio
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/560859
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact