SEMANTIC PATTERNS AND SEMANTIC PROCESSES IN THE SWADESH LIST: PRELIMINARY RESULTS

1
SEMANTIC PATTERNS AND SEMANTIC PROCESSES IN THE
SWADESH LIST PRELIMINARY RESULTS

• A. Dybo, Moscow

2

• The long-distance relationship research requires
  the capability to reconstruct Swadesh's wordlists
  for a protolanguage. Wordlist reconstruction is
  the reconstruction of language signs, that is, it
  requires reconstruction of the semantics, and
  for such entities as glottochronological
  wordlists, this reconstruction should rather be
  quite exact.
• On the methods of semantic reconstruction which
  strictly require to include full analysis of
  lexical microsystems see Dybo 1996, Dybo
  2011.
• Swadesh's wordlist provides a large field for
  experimentation here.

3

• Some remarks to the technology of semantic
  reconstruction
• 1. Determination of the exact meanings of the
  words forming the basis for reconstruction.
  Smaller semantic components (features) can be
  isolated in a lexeme's meaning, and they can be
  organized in a hierarchical way. Our semantic
  constructions are most close to the semantic
  model of the MeaningText theory. We are building
  semantic trees as glosses of lexemes by
  analysing phraseologized uses of lexemes in
  lexical mycrosystems for any language.
• 2. Word meaning analysis includes the
  determination of a primary meaning and of the
  products of semantic derivation.
  Historical-semantic analysis is as similar to
  this process as theprocess of phonetic
  reconstruction is similar to the process of
  building deep structures for the phonemic layer
  of a language. During the reconstruction, reflex
  units are viewed as the projections of deep (that
  is, protolanguage) units. In comparative-historica
  l semantic analysis, the variation of the meaning
  of protolanguage word reflexes may be viewed as a
  kind of polysemy - that is, polysemy within a
  language family.

4

• 3. The criterion for discrimination between
  polysemy and omonymy in polysemy, distinct
  meanings have a common non-elementary component
  which represents identical branches of glossing
  trees. In omonymy, the common component of the
  meanings either is elementary or represents
  non-identical branches of interpretation trees
  Apresyan 1995, 184.
• 4. The possibility of some universal semantic
  features which are conditioning the comparability
  of the semantics of words from distinct
  languages' wordlists is, on one side, an implicit
  axiom lying in the basis of Swadesh's method on
  the other side, it is an axiom lying in the basis
  of the both semantic models used by the
  MeaningText theory - Apresyan-Mel'cuk's model as
  well as Anna Wierzbicka's semantic primitives
  theory.

5

• The glossing of Swadesh's words should serve to
  further refinement of the methods of interviewing
  and Swadesh wordlist isolation, which has been
  started in the article Kass. et al..
  Theglossed words will allow for a stronger basis
  for discussing which exact features of these
  words are conditioning the circumstances of
  little transmissivity and great stability, which
  is essential for the understanding of
  experimental results in determining the degree of
  stability of the lexics within a wordlist
  Starostin 2005.
• Theoretically, the intransmissivity feature must
  be guaranteed by the "precultural" character of
  Swadesh semantics. What of the stability, the
  possibilities of semantic drift can be calculated
  for every meaning of a word, based on its
  ECD-interpretation Dybo 1984, Shaykevich,
  Polinskaya 1989 a) metonymic possibilities -
  based on the additions and removals of semantic
  features within an interpretation b) metaphoric
  possibilities - based on the replacements of
  semantic features (anim.ltgtinanim. and alike).

6

• The 100-stable words in the Swadesh list for the
  Turkic languages (marked with magenta) 20 words
  in the more stable half of the list 6 words in
  the less stable half.

7

• Examples of the groups of similar time depth
• Baltic 23 19
• Slavic 32 24

8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10

• 1. All
• Kass. et al. "1. He has cut down all the trees
• 2. He has killed all animals
• 3. All these men are brothers
• The plural all ( Latin omnis). Not to be
  confused with each, every (cf. context 3). If
  possible, should be separated from the singular
  all (Latin totus, in contexts like All of the
  water in the lake/pool became frozen/evaporated
  He has eaten all the meat), which we recommend to
  exclude from the list."
• Usage structure in languages

11

• Semantic derivation in Turkic
• "Being" gt omnis or syncr. 5 cases
• "Collected, taken" gt omnis or syncr. 6 cases
• "Covered" gt omnis or syncr. 1 case
• "Remained" gt omnis or syncr. 1 case
• "Evenly, exactly" gt omnis 2 cases
• "raised" ("up to the brim") gt syncr. 1 case
• "Pressed" ("chock-full") gt syncr. 1 case
• "through" gt syncr. 1 case
• "Healthy" gt totus 1 case
• "Finished" gt totus or syncr. 4 cases
• "Filled" gt totus or syncr. 1 case
• Borrowings omnis 9, syncr. 3, totus 0

12

• Primary words
• 1.1 all (totus) PTbütüm
• ? Derived from PT büt- 'to be finished,
  completed'. PAlt mut?i 'to be finished/ to
  assemble' gt PNMong möci- 'hardly, barely' PTM
  mute-w- 'to finish, to fulfill' (Caus) PKor
  mòt- 'to assemble in flocks' gt mòt? 'all'
  (omnis). PJap muta 'together with'.
• 1.2 all (omnis) PT bar
• ? Semantical derivate from PT bar 'exists, is
  available presence' PA bara 'to have, to
  receive' gt PMong bari- 'to take, grasp', PTM
  bara-n 'many', PKor p?r- 'to receive'.
• 1.3 all ?nly Old ?urkic qamug 'totus omnis'.
• ? PA k?ma 'to unite, together' PMong kam
  'together', kami- 'to join', PTung kamu- 'to
  collect, to join', PJap kama-pa- 'to arrange'.
• 1.4 all (????) Only Old ?urkic qop 'totus
  omnis'.
• ? PA k?opa- PMong kow 'totus omnis', PNTung
  (?)up- 'omnis', PKor kòp- 'to redouble', PJap
  kúpá-pa- 'to add'.

13

• bütüm

14

• bar

15

• For the reflexes of bütüm the meaning remains
  almost unchanged in all branches of Turkic
  languages, except Oghuz, where an expansion to
  quantifier uses occurs the latter may be related
  to the complete exclusion of the use of primary
  quantifier word bar in this range of meanings.
• Proto-Turkic quantifier meaning for bar reflexes
  can be reconstructed completely reliably (it
  shows everywhere, including the most distant
  branches). Its use with collective nouns, it
  seems, can be reconstructed for PCT on the same
  basis. As for the use with abstract nouns, it can
  either be understood as CT or as an innovation,
  independently appearing in three different areals
  Yakut, Central Asiatic in late times and
  Karaim the latter being less probable. Further
  syncretization of the meaning is certainly
  area-dependent in Yakut and Central Asiatic
  (Kazakh, Karakalpak and Uzbek) areas.
• Innovative words that draw a more or less clear
  distinction between the two meanings' types under
  consideration appear mostly in areas where
  syncretization of old words' semantics occurs
  (see Scheme 1, Scheme 2).

16

• Scheme 1.

17

• Scheme 2.

18
(No Transcript)
19

• 2. Ashes
• It's reasonable for this clause in Swadesh list
  to differentiate the following meanings
• 'cinder' shapeless black remains of burned down
  fuel in a fire or a fireplace
• 'coals' - shaped black remains of burned down
  fuel in a fire or a fireplace
• 'ashes' very fine light gray powder or thin
  coating, which can be found amongst these
  remains also very fine light gray powder, formed
  by smoking or burning of small objects.
• 'embers' - glowing hot shaped remains of burned
  down fuel in a fire or a fireplace
• 'soot' black coating, appearing on surfaces in
  containers or rooms as a result of burning, which
  falls down in flocks, reaching sufficient
  thickness.

20

• Kass.et al. "1. The campfire has left only
  ashes.
• 2. The wind scattered the ashes.
• 3. He scooped up a handful of ashes.
• Ashes as the basic result of combustion of wood,
  grass, dry dung (not after cremation, as in
  Russian ????). Not to be confused with special
  words for tobacco ashes, volcanic ashes, or
  embers (hot ashes/coals)"
• In the Russian text , however, ???? was chosen,
  corresponding rather to cinder. The choice is not
  evident - for Slavic lists ????? was taken.
  Evidently, the semantic structure of cinder, ????
  is simpler than that of ?????.
• For the Turkic material the situation here is
  relatively simple.

21

• Semantic derivation in Turkic
• to heat, to burn gtgt cinder 1
• spark gt cinder 1
• embers gt cinder 1
• to heat, to burn gtgt ashes 2
• litter, dirt gtgt ashes 3
• to strike fire gtgt spark 1
• to extinguish gtgt spark 1
• dry dung gtgt spark 1
• to burn gtgt soot, fume 1
• smoke gtgt soot, fume 1
• Borrowings "ashes" 1, "spark" 1.

22

• Primary words
• 2.1 ashes (cinder) PT kül PWA k?uli (
  -e) 'to burn, get hot', PMong köl-ci- 'to get
  warm' P?? xül-de- 'to warm, to incandesce',
  deverbatives are "flame, light".
• 2.2 ashes (ashes) SouthSiberian, WestOghuz Kok
  'ashes' PT Kok 'dust, dirt, ashes' PA
  kok?ò 'trash, dirt', PNMo kokir 'dirt dried
  dung'. PTM kuk-pun 'trash, dirt'. PJap
  k?k- 'to defecate to husk' JLTT 712.
• "Spark" 1) PT Kïp-?ïn PWA gi?up?a 'to
  extinguish', PSTung gup- 'to extinguish'.
• 2) PCT cak-ïn/m 'spark lightning star'
  ? Derived from PT c(i)ak- 'to strike fire' PA
  c?ek?à 'to strike fire', PM caki- id., PTung
  ci(K)u-(n) 'flint', PKor ch?-tòr 'firestone',
  PJap ták- 'to set fire'.
• 3) ? PT Kïm PAK?mV PKor kim 'steam'.
• "Soot" PT kön-e ? Derived from PT kön- to
  burn slightly PA k?ùne ' to burn slightly '
  gt PMo kö?e 'soot' PKor k?n?r- 'soot'
  PJap kuànkàra- ' to burn slightly'.
• "Sooth, fume" PT Kurum PA k?i?uru(mV)
  'soot, ashes' gt PNMo kirbu-su 'burned smell'
  PTung xurum-sa 'tobacco ashes ear wax' PKor
  kur 'soot, fume'.

23

• "Fume, fliying ashes" South Siberian pïr,
  pïrïm ? PT bur-uk 'dust, smoke' PA boru
  'dust, smoke' gt PMo bur-gi- / bür-gi- ' to rise
  (of dust, smoke)' PTM bure-ki-n 'dust, flying
  snow' PKor p?r?-m 'wind'.
• "Coal" PT kömür PA k?ume 'black' gt PKor
  k?m- 'to be black', Old Koguryo kamul 'black'.
  
• "Embers" 1) PT k?r PA k?urkV gt PTM xurkï
  'soot'.
• 2) PCT cog No etymology
• PT "cinder" lt PA "to warm, to burn"
• ? CT "ashes" lt PA "dirt"
• PT "soot, fume" lt PA "soot, ashes"
• PT "embers" lt PA "soot" "embers"

24

• 3. Bark
• Kass. et al. "1. He tore some bark off the tree.
• 2. A piece of bark came loose from the tree.
• The neutral word for bark, applicable to as
  many different tree species as possible".
• This clause belongs as well to the
  encyclopedically loaded lexics. As Swadesh word
  it's not a very good one being geographically
  restricted. In the Turkic languages of South
  Siberia, for example, we saw the following only
  names of certain trees' bark are used, due to
  their practical importance birch bark and larch
  bark bark in general is named with the same word
  that stands for animal and human skin (a?ac
  tere-si), and informants are leaning towards
  scientific, botanical use of this word, not
  everyday use. Moreover, an opposition bark as a
  part of a plant bark as a production
  material stripped bark (parallel to tree
  timber) is observed.

25

• Semantic derivation in Turkic
• bark lt bark, skin 2
• bark lt peel 2
• bark lt leaf 1 (and in the same region
  foliage lt bark 2)
• bark lt to strip 4
• bark lt cambium lt hard 1
• Borrowings 1

26

• Primary words
• 3.1 bark PT Kapuk 'bark, shell' PA k?ap?à
  'bark skin leaf' gt PNMo kawda-sun 'bark' PTM
  xabda(-nsa) 'leaf'. PKor kàph- / k?ph- 'bark,
  skin'. PJap kapa 'skin, bark'.
• 3.5 bark CT Kas 'bark, peel' lt PSam käsa
  'bark'.
• 3.7. bark C? qa/az lt PT Ka/ar '????' PA
  k?érà 'skin, bark, shell', PTung. xere- 'to
  peel, to skin' PJap kárà 'shell'.
• 3.8 bark PT Kadir 'bark, stripped bark' PA
  k?ádí(-rV) 'to scrape any instrument for skin
  tanning' PMong kederge 'scraper', PSTung
  xargan ' stock for fish and game skins
  processing', PJap káintúr- 'scrape'.
• "Birch bark" PCT Toz PWA t?ru 'birch bark,
  birch bark container' PNMo duru-sun 'birch
  bark, bast' PTM duri 'cradle made of birch
  bark'.
• Only PT Kapuk 'bark, shell' and PT Kadir
  'bark, stripped bark gt scales' evidently claim
  for PT meaning bark of tree. Kas, apparently
  borrowed from Samodic, and Kaz, which evidently
  goes back to the PA name for bark (although maybe
  Kapuk as well) are CT words. It still appears
  impossible to reconstruct clear semantic
  differences between all these names only Kadir
  is, most probably, stripped bark.

27

• 4. Belly
• Kass. et al. "1. While fighting, he punched him
  in the belly.
• 2. Wrap this belt around your belly.
• Part of the human body located directly above the
  pelvis. Not to be confused with various terms
  that denote internal organs (stomach, intestines)
  or semantically/stylistically marked words
  (paunch)"
• Certainly in this glossing two sememes are
  merged a) the name of the "exterior" (according
  to Wierzbicka and Arutyunova), that is, visible
  without destroying the organism, body part (the
  front part of the trunk between chest and groin)
  and b) the name of the "interior" body part - the
  container of viscera stomach, intestines, liver,
  spleen, kidneys, urinary bladder. In principle,
  distinct words can be used to signify the two
  sememes in a language (like in Tatar ??????
  'exterior belly' (diagnostic contexts "he has big
  belly", "hit in the belly" or "fasten the buckle
  of one's belt on his belly"), ????? 'interior
  belly' ("my belly hurts", "my belly is empty")).

28

• The "exterior" word must correspond more with the
  criterion of "intransmissivity", because it's
  less linked with the "illnesses and medicine"
  conceptual area which is fatal for the
  transmissivity of the names of body parts. It's
  clear which of these words corresponds with the
  criterion of stability if we accept that
  stability is linked to the number of potential
  single-step metonymic shifts - for the "interior"
  belly it's all the types of entrails contained
  within it and probably also its spiritual
  "content", the inner world of a human being or
  the nutritional content - food (so, at least 8)
  for the exterior belly there are only 3
  possibilities the body part which is higher,
  that is, chest the body part on the same height
  level, only not in front but in side, that is,
  side hip and the hyperonymic meaning "the
  whole trunk".
• Hence, the name of the "exterior" belly is a more
  "Swadeshian" word. But, as quite often the two
  sememes discussed above are syncretically
  expressed with a single word, and a diachronic
  shift between syncretical and distinct expression
  is often imperceptible, we consider the
  expression of both meaning types below. Also, we
  must pay attention to the meaning "animal belly",
  that is, "barrel" (often linked to stylistically
  lowered uses in relation to human).

29

• Semantic derivation
• 'Exterior belly' lt 'Interior belly' 3
• 'Interior belly' lt 'Exterior belly' 2
• 'Interior belly' lt 'Stomach' 1,
• 'Interior belly' lt 'Liver' 1
• 'Interior belly' lt 'interior' 3
• Primary words
• 4.1 belly PT K?rïm 'exterior belly' PWA
  karmu- NTung kerimuk stomach/intestines, PMo
  kormai lap'.
• 4.2 belly PT ic 'inside, interior' PA
  ic?u 'den, interior', PNMo (h)ici- 'to get into
  the den, to hibernate', PJap utu 'den, cavity'.
  
• 4.3 belly PCT Kurg-sak 'stomach' PA k?úrgo
  PNMo kurkag 'animal stomach', PTung xurke-(nse)
  'fish belly' PKor kùr?i 'thoracic cavity'.

30

• Scheme 3. PT Karïm

31

• Scheme 4. PT ic as body part

32

• Scheme 6. PCT Kurg-sak

33

• PT K?rïm 'exterior belly'.
• NB the development of "interior" semantics
  reveal the regular synchronic polysemy
  'reservoir' gt 'contents', so it can be
  independent in all the cases.
• PT ic 'interior belly' gt syncr. in the
  North-Eastern area
• PCT kurgsak 'stomach' (remaining in the
  periphery) gt Karluk-Kypchak 'interior belly' gt
  syncr. The inverted opposition of 'interior' and
  'exterior' belly in the Tatar-Bashkir-Nogai area
  needs more detailed investigation on the material
  of the medieval texts now difficult of access.

34

• 5. Big
• Kass. et al. "1. This person has a big nose,
  that one has a small nose.
• 2. A big stone (leaf, tree, pool, etc...).
• An adjective or verb that may be applied to
  different objects. The contexts are the same as
  in No.78 small."
• As in the theoretical semantics was shown, the
  meanings like"big" shall be glossed with the help
  of the feature "norm" or "standart". "A big
  house" is "a house bigger than standart", and "a
  big apple" is "an apple bigger then standart".
  Other features that can be included in the word
  meaning are different features characteristic for
  the object of atributivisation. So, the size
  attributes may differ by the animated -
  inanimated character of the object (English small
  vs little). Normally the words exist that define
  the "bigness" of an object by individual
  dimensions ("high" vertical, "long" -
  horisontal). If it is an object characterised by
  one marked dimension, the usage with the
  neutralisation of the feature is possible (high
  tree big tree), what leads to a kind of
  polysemy and to a possibility of semantic shifts.
  Theoretically, a shift in both directions is
  possible (big gt high and high gt big).

35

• Here the most neutral word is required, that is
  with the maximal list of objects. Such a word
  must be highly frequent, what principially could
  provide "impenetrability". But its stability
  shall be worse as for any more concrete word,
  while for any word neutralising characteristic
  feature it is just one semantic shift to the
  neutral "big", and for the neutral "big" the
  narrowing of the meaning can go gaining any of 4
  dimensional features (high, long, wide, deep) and
  moreover any other kind of feature.
• A type of meaning near to "big" is the lexical
  function 'Magn', related to the objects
  characterised by any kind of features, and not
  only by physical size. Here also senmantic shifts
  are possible (X gt size and size gt X), that are
  metaphorical (as Russian ??????? ??????). The
  second type is regular for Turkic languages the
  examples for the first type are Shor po?da
  ("sacred" gt "big") ot Tatar ??? ("strong" gt
  "big").

36

• Semantic derivations
• "big" lt Magn 2
• "big" lt "high" 1
• "big" lt "stout" 3
• "big" lt "coarse" 1
• "big" lt "elephant" 1
• Magn lt "big" 9
• Borrowings 8
• Primary words
• 5.1 big PT ulug 'big, great coarse Magn'
  PA ulo 'big, many, good ( Magn)' PMo olan
  'many' PTM ulï- 'good' PKor or-
  'absolutely'.
• 5.2 big C? ülk-ken 'big, great coarse Magn'
  lt PT ülk-ken 'big beautiful' lt PT ülki
  'pattern'.
• 5.3 big C? bedü-k 'big, great coarse high
  Magn', lt PT bedü- 'to grow' PA bedù 'stout'
  PMo bedü?ün 'fat, coarse' PTung b?rgu-
  'stout, fat' PKor p?r?- 'fat, full' PJap
  pùtuà- 'stout, big'.
• 5.6 big Chuv. m?n? lt PT b?n-g 'big, adult,
  old age'. PA mana 'many, big', PNMo mandu- /
  mantu- 'to grow' PTung manduj 'multitude'
  PKor man(h)- 'many'.

37

• Scheme 5.

38

• For CT the Swadesh word must be ulug. But it
  cannot be reconstructed as PT "big" in Old
  Bulgar we have only one usage within a title.
• Ülken receives the Swadesh meaning within a
  coherent isogloss.
• Bedük is the PCT word for "high".
• "Swadesh" usage for idrik 'coarse' increases
  spontaneously in two areas.
• We have two candidates for PT "big" PCT ulug
  'big' (Bulgarian 'Magn') and Bulgarian b?n-
  'big' (in other Turkic languages 'adult'). For
  ulug Altaic parallels speak for common meaning
  "Magn" (quantity and quality) for b?n- -
  rather for "many" ("quality"). So the choice is
  ambivalent.

39

• 6. Bird
• Kass. et al. "1. Something is moving in the
  bushes, I cannot tell if it is a bird or an
  animal.
• 2. Birds lay eggs, animals and people bear
  children.
• 3. There is a bird flying on high, I cannot tell
  what kind.
• Some languages make a contrast between small
  bird / large bird or have a special word for
  large (predatory) bird. The contexts have been
  specially chosen so as to assist in revealing the
  more neutral term."
• So, in a language a common word for "bird" may
  lack. In Tutkic material the Kirgiz system
  contains three words "predatory/ hunting bird",
  "small bird" and "game (edible) bird". From the
  other part, the cases exist when a word for
  "bird" means in reality any flying animal. The
  second case offers no difficulty itn the first
  case evidently we shall analyse both (or all the
  3) words.

40

• Semantic derivations
• "game" gt "bird" 1
• ? "bird" gt "large bird" 1
• ? "small bird" gt "bird" 1
• generalizing of an epithet "flying" 1, "winged"
  1
• Borrowings 2
• Primary words
• 6.1 bird CT Kuš lt PT Ku? 'bird' or 'a k. of
  large bird' PWA k?ula 'predatory bird',
  PNMo kuladu 'duck hawk' PTung xoli 'raven'
  
• 6.2 bird Chuv. kaj?k. P? gejik 'game'.
• 6.5 bird PT sïb-cuk 'small bird' (Dimin.) gt
  West Kipchak 'bird' PA siba 'bird' PMo
  sibawu 'bird' Manch sibir- 'swallow' PKor
  sai 'bird' (lt siba-I)

41

• 7. Bite, ??????.
• Kass. et al. "1. The dog bit him.
• 2. He bit his opponent in a fight.
• Not to be confused with to bite off (while
  eating) or to gnaw. Said of animals or people
  (not a separate word like to sting used for
  insects, snakes, stinging plants etc.)."
• The glosses for Russian ?????? in MAS are
• "to take, to clench one's teeth to wound smb.
  clenching teeth".
• "to separate bits from smth. clenching teeth"
• "to wound smb. sticking a sting" gt "to sting
  (about nettle, wind)"
• Apparently, the Swadesh meaning is "to wound smb.
  clenching teeth".
• This meaning belongs to the group of predicates
  of physical influence, the soubgroup of
  predicates of destruction. Such predicates are
  defined by the types of instrument and object
  the instrument and the (animated) object of this
  verb provide "precultural" character of the word
  (and such instrument as sting is geographically
  restricted). But the semantic shifts for the
  predicates of destruction are multiple - the
  metaphoric ones are innumerable, the metonymic
  ones are provided by the shift of types of
  object, of instrument and of the grade of
  destruction.

42

• Our meaning can be expressed syncretic with all
  of enumerated meanings, and such verb we shall
  take for a Swadesh one, if there is no verb
  meaning strictly "to wound smb. clenching teeth".
  
• Nearest meanings
• "to gnaw" to clench an object with teeth
  repeatedly, with the expected result of
  destruction of this object.
• "to chew" to clench an object with teeth
  repeatedly, with the expected result of grinding
  of this object..
• Semantic derivations
• 'bite' gt 'eat' 3
• 'bite' gt 'assault' 3
• 'bite' gt 'gnaw' 3
• 'bite' gt 'chew' 3
• 'bite' gt 'sting' 2
• 'chew' gt 'gnaw' 1
• 'snap' gt 'bite' 1
• 'snatch by mouth' gt 'bite' 1
• 'to break' gt 'bite' 2
• 'to mow' gt 'to sting' 1
• 'to crack (nuts)' gt 'to sting' 1
• Borrowings 1

43

• Primary words
• 7.1 bite PCT ïsïr- PA ìsú 'to break, to
  crush' PTM (x)ise- 'to break, to beat ' PKor
  ?s?r- 'to break, to crush' PJap ùsú
  'mortar'.
• 7.2 bite CT diš-lA-, a derivate from PCT
  diš 'tooth', lexical function Oper. The most
  common meaning is 'to take by teeth' gt 'to chew',
  'to eat' and 'to bite'. It seems that this is the
  Proto-Common Turkic meaning, and not many
  separate derivatives made by productive model
  another productive Oper - diš-A- - reveals such
  meanings as "to shed teeth", "to dent" and "to
  whet a toothed instrument".
• 7.3 bite CT Kap- lt PT Kap- 'to grasp, to take
  by mouth' PWA k?ap?V 'to grasp, to squeese' gt
  PMo kab-ci-, kab-la- 'to clasp, to squeese'
  PTung xap-ki- 'to strangle'.
• 7.4 bite PT dala- 'to bite, to tear by teeth'
  PWA talV gt PMo dolu?a- 'to lick'',
  PTung dala- 'to lap, swill to eat (about
  animals)'.
• 7.6 bite Chuv. sïrt- lt PT jïrt- 'to tear to
  pieces', an intensive from the PT jir- / jyr-
  'tosplit, to break, to tear'.
• "to gnaw" PCT gEmür- PA kema 'to gnaw,
  bite', PMo kemeli- 'to gnaw gt to bite', PJap
  kàm- 'to bite'.
• "to chew" PCT cAj-na- PWA c?a?V 'cheek,
  cheekbone' gt PMo ?a?i-'to chew part of cheek'
  PTM ?a?i- 'cheekbone'.

44

• Scheme 6

45

• The geography of reflexes of ïsïr- (the
  periphery of CT) let us presume that it is the
  PCT "bite". It cannot be drawn to the PT layer,
  but it is interesting that in consideration of
  the Altaic parallels it is the same semantic
  derivate as the Chuvash word "bite" lt "break".
• The CT derivate tiš-le- is the realization of
  the lexical function Oper from "tooth", so a more
  common semantic than "bite" shall be
  reconstructed - "to take, to clench one's
  teeth".
• The PT Kap- 'to grasp, to take by mouth' shows
  the shift to "bite" as a entral innovation.
• The PT dala- 'to bite, to tear by teeth',
  apparently is the most probable candidate to the
  PT "to bite" The Altaic parallels speak for the
  common meaning "to eat (about animals)".

46

• Conclusion
• The adduced exemples show the possibilities of
  formal semantic analysis of Swadesh words
  meaning. Only such method permits to accomplish a
  reconstruction of Swadesh list for a
  protolanguage. We can see by the way that as in
  any structured sphere of language, in historical
  semantics many processes disturbing the
  tree-shaped scheme of language developments work.