[Histling-l] earliest attestation of a 'cognate set'?

[Nigel Vincent]

Dear Claire,
Just to say I agree that you could hardly call the comparisons Dante makes, both between Latin and the vernaculars and between different vernaculars, correspondence sets in anything like the usual sense of that term.
Best
Nigel


Professor Nigel Vincent, FBA MAE
Professor Emeritus of General & Romance Linguistics
The University of Manchester

Linguistics & English Language
School of Arts, Languages and Cultures
The University of Manchester



https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/researchers/nigel-vincent(f973a991-8ece-453e-abc5-3ca198c869dc).html
________________________________
From: histling-l [histling-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu] on behalf of Claire Bowern [claire.bowern at yale.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 11:05 PM
To: Histling-l at mailman.yale.edu
Subject: [Histling-l] earliest attestation of a 'cognate set'?

Dear list members,
I'm writing an article about historical databases and I'm trying to trace the earliest example of a correspondence set (or some other equivalent organization of data). Rask has comparisons, of course, and earlier the typological/lexical comparisons of Gesner and contemporaries. Dante makes comparisons between Latin and contemporary vernaculars but I'm not sure we could call those correspondence sets. Are there similar correspondences in the Arabic or Turkic grammatical traditions? Or other early authors who talk about systematic correspondences or organize data in a way that we might associate with cognate or comparison sets?
Thanks in advance for your help,
Claire

--

Claire Bowern
Professor, Director of Graduate Studies
Chair: Yale Women Faculty Forum (wff.yale.edu<http://wff.yale.edu>)
Department of Linguistics
New Haven, CT  06511


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/histling-l/attachments/20190423/59102f70/attachment-0001.html>