Open Research Europe presents an interview with David Stifter, the author of ‘The rise of gemination in Celtic’, in this month’s research spotlight to understand the evolution of the Celtic language into what we know today through the emergence of a certain phonological class (a specific set of sounds in a language that share certain distinctive features).
Can you share a summary of your Research Article?
Geminate, i.e., double consonants such as –ll-, –rr-, –kk-, are a common feature of the ancient Celtic languages (e.g., Gaulish, Celtiberian, circa 1st millennium b.c.) and have left unmistakable traces in the medieval and modern Celtic languages (e.g., Irish, Welsh, Breton; since circa 7th/8th century a.d.).
However, their status as a class of sounds is somewhat surprising. The ancestor language of Celtic, known as Proto-Indo-European and spoken in the 4th millennium b.c., is actually known for not having any geminates, as the language style actively prohibited them.
In my Research Article, I analyze a large set of data to trace the origins of Celtic geminates. In most instances, they arose through regular sound change, but psychological factors and contact with other languages also added to their number and reinforced them as a phonological class.
This is the first systematic study of geminates in a sub-branch of Indo-European languages, and it provides a model methodology for studying similar occurrences in other language families.
What inspired you to investigate this?
This study is unusual, because it is the result of two different European Research Council-funded projects: my own project Chronologicon Hibernicum (ChronHib) at Maynooth University in Ireland about the language history of Irish, and the EUROLITHIC project of Dr Guus Kroonen at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, which studied the prehistoric languages of Europe before the arrival of Indo-European languages.
I had written a short account of Celtic geminates for my own project in 2020, but I attended a conference in 2021, where I engaged in a discussion about the EUROLITHIC project that included borrowings from prehistoric languages.
This inspired me to expand my perspective and to conduct a comprehensive, in-depth study of the question that not only adds to the knowledge of the Celtic languages, but is of use to researchers in the much wider world of comparative linguistics.
What were the outcomes of your research?
Most geminate consonants in the Celtic languages are the product of mergers between groups of inherited simple consonants, which are strategies to drastically reduce the possible combinations of sounds in the language – it seems that speakers of Early Celtic actively avoided complicated groups of consonants when they were speaking.
To give just two representative examples of a huge variety of changes: inherited Indo-European –sm– regularly became –mm– in Celtic, or –dk– became –kk– in Celtic.
However, in addition to these regular products of mechanical sound change, I argue that psychological factors also played a role in the rise of gemination as a phonological class.
In a group of neologisms, i.e., newly created words, geminates had sound symbolic function (the association between particular sound sequences and particular meanings in speech). This is especially true of adjectives (e.g., *biggo- ‘small’), but it is also common in the formation of personal names, specifically in the basic act of addressing people and grabbing their attention.
Finally, there is a small group of nouns that can neither be explained by regular nor by psychological factors. These words are probably the consequence of prehistoric language contact.
They are likely to have been borrowed from unknown Bronze Age languages in Europe, and they allow us a small glimpse into a world thousands of years ago that would otherwise be completely lost to us.
Why is open research important to you?
The main attraction of open research for me as a researcher is that it guarantees the largest possible readership for my publications, because there are no restrictions – of a physical or financial nature – for people to access it.
Articles in my field are typically only available in a few specialized libraries, but through online open access, anybody who is interested can read them. As an academic author, I want my work to be read and to advance the disciplinary discourse, and open research is the best way to do it.
What motivated you to publish with Open Research Europe?
First of all, I found the idea and the format intriguing and exciting. I wanted to ‘try it out’ with an article that I consider fundamental and important to my field, and for which I wanted to reach a larger readership.
But there are also a number of other aspects that contribute to the attractiveness of Open Research Europe.
For example, my academic field is very small and one gets to know everybody else very quickly. As a result, it becomes very difficult to undertake truly anonymous, double-blind peer review. The openness of Open Research Europe throughout the peer review process, including the names of authors and reviewers, therefore introduces much needed transparency into the process while also giving reviewers due recognition for their input.
Similarly, the speed of the production process is fantastic. In my field, it is typical for many years to pass before a submitted or commissioned manuscript appears in print, and there is always a risk that the contents may be obsolete by the time the research is finally published. Having a first version of the article publicly available just a few weeks after submission is a truly exciting experience and it is more pleasant to the usual nature of academic writing.
What are your next steps?
The article is one of a series of studies into details of the phonological history of Celtic. The ultimate goal is to combine them in a new handbook of the early phonological history of the Celtic languages.
Read the full Research Article today on Open Research Europe to dive deeper into David Stifter’s study and findings.
