The book is divided into three big sections with an introduction to each: Part 1 (pp.1-122), Blevins' reconstruction of Proto-Basque; Part 2 (pp.123-211), a formal comparison between Blevins' Proto-Basque and PIE; and the appendix (pp.213-386), which is devoted to the PB reconstructed words themselves and thus the etymologies of the many attested words supposed as derived from the PB roots, and their supposed cognates in PIE. The first two sections are divided into 7 and 5 chapters, respectively.
The chapters and their contents I do no justice by summarising, but nevertheless: Part 1 has an introduction (pp.1-12) outlining the well-established nature of Basque as a language, its crosslingual influences in the form of loanwords, and a general overview of Part 1, then chapter 1 (pp.13-25) addresses the current scholarly consensuses (notably by Mitxelena and Lakarra) regarding the nature of Proto-Basque. The following chapters contain Blevins' own developments of an earlier stage of Proto-Basque (her proposed phonology is shown in the material below the disclaimer) as based on the scholarly foundation: chapter 2 addresses the PB vowels (pp.26-36), in reference to a curious root variant: CVhVC, compound forms and potential root relationships (eg. *kʰei {animal sleeping place} to *kʰoi {bed}), chapter 3: the PB consonants (pp.37-82), as can also be reconstructed by reference to compound and affixed words, and in reference to Aquitanian and older Basques, and conservative dialectal allophony (eg. Eastern dialects have aspirated stops, distinctive /h/, and long vowels), chapter 4: the PB phonotactics and syllable structure (pp.83-99), taking a further look at the affect of compounding and affixing on the nature of PB, with their diachronic consequences, chapter 5: the PB stress and accent system (pp.100-115), with its various diachronic consequences (eg. the sometimes survival of medial *sTʰ and initial *h), and finally chapter 6: the evaluated research consequences of this proposal of PB (pp.117-122), including a segmental sound change summary list (this is shown in the material below the disclaimer with examples).
Part 2's introduction (pp.125-132) discusses the distinct nature of Blevin's PB to earlier PB reconstructions and its at-first superficial resemblances with PIE, recognising the detailed and thorough history and scholarship behind the reconstruction of PIE, and PIE's unique phonological distinctions (eg. the velar series, the three laryngeals, and the three stop series lacking *b, vocalic ablaut), the problem of time depth and its relation to archaising languages (some well-known as PIE vs. Lithuanian, and Old Norse vs. Icelandic; others such as Proto-Austronesian vs. Paiwan, a Formosan language), and the strong scholarly foundation and historical confirmation of the validity of the comparative method, and Blevins' concessions made for the as-of-yet limited nature of her PB (ie. none-to-little morphological comparison, so instead assessing for Nichols 1996's "individual-identifying evidence", and hence using some statistical analysis), followed by a general overview of Part 2. The following chapters contain Blevins' proposed comparisons. Chapter 7 (pp.133-150) addresses Blevins' proposed regular consonant and vowel sound correspondences (initial and medial) between PB and PIE, including her proposed cognates, and some regular discrepancies (eg. PB *(D)VRhV vs. PIE *(D)hVRV, PB *skʰ vs. PIE *Ks). (These correspondences are shown in part, in full, or expanded upon in the material below the disclaimer.) Chapter 8 (pp.151-183) follows Blevins' attempts at establishing statistical significance for the sound-meaning correspondences given in chapter 7, particularly regarding vocalic ablaut (as in the set PB *stʰVh {stand > be} vs. PIE *stVh₂ {to stand}), the lower numerals ({1} PB *{e/o}hi-kʰ{a/o} vs. PIE *oy-ko-, {2} PB *bi vs. PIE *dwóh₁,*dwi-, {3} PB *tʰiri vs. PIE *tréyes,*tri-; along with other basic numerical correspondences), homophones (particularly regarding four corresponding PB *bVn vs. PIE *mVn pairs), and Nichols' individual-identifying words (eg. Blevins identifies B hezur {bone} < PB *hasTʰur with Arm. oskr {bone}, Alb. asht {bone}, and Wel. asgwrn {bone} < *h₂ést-r-), followed by Swadesh word-list comparison (by Kessler 2001's "Monte Carlo" method; removing potential loanwords and root doubles). Chapter 9 (pp.184-200) compares the synchronic and diachronic phonologies between PB and PIE, linking parallel sound processes (in contrast to those motivated by area), and chapter 10 (pp.201-211) concludes by evaluating the research consequences for studying IE and PIE in light of such a comparison (eg. **b > PB *b, PIE *m,*p,*w, the origins of the *Dʰ series, PIE root extensions).
The book in its first read is really straightforward as far as a scholarly treatise goes, with little need for backtracking or skipping between chapters, as Blevins visibly maintains and reiterates her established train of thought as the book goes on. Each chapter with its sections is easily revisited by the reader to refer to, specific data is visibly sectioned and tabled, and any interesting points the reader may wish to follow up on have their section pointed out in the text. Through the book, Blevins' attention to the controversy of linking Basque to any outside language is very clear (p.7;128,129-131;147-149), and the work she does to make plain her proposal and evidence is obvious and well thought-out. It is really best read as a whole so to fully reason through her argument, but each chapter is succinct and thought-provoking. The more controversial parts of her PB reconstruction are all-the-more highlighted and worked through the same as the other material with evidence, particularly in chapter 3 (pp.37-82) which is a shining example (she here addresses her *pʰ, *sTʰ series, and *m). Chapter 8 (pp.151-183) and 9 (pp.184-200) are also very appreciated by me, though I must admit my own inadequacy at evaluating the validity of the statistical methods used in chapter 8 (although the simple probability calculations are not unlike Zompist's own for instance, and actively avoiding the excesses of some comparisons he speaks against there; but I have listed a number of correspondences down below the disclaimer so that the reader may decide for themself).
I really appreciate the extent of the evidence that Blevins draws from, and this without referring to PIE at first for her reconstructions. Blevins pulls together the compounding and typological evidence in addition to narrow down older roots, recognising semantic and phonological similarities between pairs and highlighting skewed sound distributions and typology comparisons as motivation for further analysis (as in p.48,54-55). She is well aware of the distinct dialects and their own sound systems and tendencies and clearly marks dialectal variants used where relevant, and also recognises their limits. Overall Blevins approaches the Basque data and scholarship respectively and conscientiously, not speeding to any final conclusion without nailing down the relevant evidence and establishing regular correspondences.
Blevins' work treats primarily the Proto-Basque phonology and its comparison with PIE, and treats Proto-Basque as a potential relative, not a descendant of PIE. A morphological reconstruction and comparison however is sorely missed (although Blevins treats this in part: eg. accented PB particles, apparent ablaut, affixes and compounding); an included morphological comparison seems likely to have firmly established any correspondence with PIE and shed further light on the exact nature of the correspondence, and antecedent morphological developments into PB and PIE. On the one hand, morphological comparisons have not always shed further light on macro-genetic relationships; the nature of any morphological comparison for the Indo-Uralic proposal for instance is limited by the size of the morphemes involved, the relative sizes of the compared phonologies, and hence by random chance. However, a famous recent macrolinguistic relationship proposal was made exactly on the basis of regular and extensive morphological correspondences: Vajda's Dené-Yeniseian.
Blevins' book is not easily the work of an inept enthusiast or a delusional comparativist when you read through it. She starts from the well-established foundation of Proto-Basque scholarship and works forward using the same tools and principles and referring to well-analysed primary source material. Where she moves into macrolinguistic comparison, she works the same way; not settling with a simple list of correspondences, but going further to pinpoint every available piece of evidence that may suggest more than superficial or areal relationship, and using the evidence to inform her conclusions. This is not grabbing at straws, but at each point reaching for the maximum amount of evidence as has been concluded by diachronic linguists as indicating a significant genetic relationship between two languages. In the end, I found Blevins' book both really pleasant and intriguing to read. I hope to read a sequel to this detailing her morphological reconstruction of PB and such a comparison with PIE, especially in light of the current view that Proto-Basque was likely isolating and how that affects the comparison. I also hope to see some more scholarly views on this, which I hope this review facilitates discussion regarding. Even supposing as a cynic that many of these correspondences are in the end pure coincidence or conflated with loanwords, some of the correspondences may spark some further talk into the nature of macrolinguistic comparison and the older natures of the languages concerned.
- Znex 2019
Disclaimer: None of the provided material below is mine, but has been edited to include examples and correspondences for clarity's sake, mostly from the book; IE examples have been sourced from Wiktionary and other webpages. The material is otherwise expounded upon in Blevins' book itself. If I should otherwise remove how much detail is below for reasons I have neglected, please inform a moderator or admin by pressing report on my post.
Modern Basque:
More: show
More: show
More: show
More: show
More: show
More: show
