8

I'm aware of шёл's derivation from Proto-Slavic *xьdlъ, related to ходить, but that form still seems irregular — given that вёл, which has the exact same relation to водить, had e rather than ь in the root, as demonstrated by the lack of elision in the feminine, neuter, and plural.

My guess is that шёл, шла, etc. were in fact a contamination of *хedl- and the lost regular past participle form of идти, which I expect to be *jьdl-. Am I correct? And, out of curiosity, what would the hypothetical regular (in Proto-Slavic terms) past tense of идти have been in modern Russian? Probably *ёл, but what of the other forms? *Ила, *ило or maybe even *ла, *ло?

5
  • 1
    произведение из "ход[ить]" в "шёл" совершенно стандартно для русского языка. со всеми сопутсвтующими изменениями - преобразование "х" в "ш" (пример: плохо/оплошать), смена "о" на "ё" (явление тоже достаточно типичное), прибавление суффикса "л" и упрощение трудно произносимых звуковых комбинаций. на выходе имеем слово "шёл". – user3694243 Jun 17 '16 at 10:01
  • @user3694243 «смена "о" на "ё"», по-вашему, «достаточно типичное явление»? а примеры можете привести? (причем не связанные с орфографией, а именно чтобы согласный перед "о" взял да и вдруг палатализировался) – Nikolay Ershov Jun 17 '16 at 23:01
  • о каком именно согласном идет речь? согласных поддвергшихся либо поддвергающихся так называемой пал-зации и сопутствующих корней можно по пальцам на руках сосчитать. в дополнение ко всему букву "ш" я всего лишь вариантом букв "х" и "т" считаю, таким же как и букву "ж" получающуюся из "д" или "г". не вижу предмета разяснений. а рассказы о том что нормы использования русского языка из книг происходят, а не из частной практики общения я не способен воспринимать чисто физически. это говоря об орфографических словарях. так что мы видимо на разные темы говорим. – user3694243 Jun 19 '16 at 2:47
  • зачем вам вообще русский, переходите на эсперанто. и извращайтесь там на темы правил орфографии сколько вашему типу людей будет угодно. – user3694243 Jun 19 '16 at 2:48
  • @user3694243 да, похоже, мы говорим на разные темы. – Nikolay Ershov Jun 19 '16 at 5:33
3

Не претендуя на ответ... Нашла вот это.

"ход" - "шед" Произошло замещение буквы "Х" на "Ш" в одной из форм изначального глагола "хъдьти" ("ъ" и "ь" - это звук "э" разной краткости, сегодня стал где "о", где "е", где "и", а где и вовсе выпал)

первоначальная форма глагола *хъдьти, откуда через *хьдьти > идти, причем, в основных формах "хь" перешло в "ь" (краткое гласное "е") *хьду > иду - *хьдемы > идем *хьдеши > идешь - *хьдете > идете *хьде > идет - *хьдут > идут в перфекте "хь" > "ш": *хь (дъ) л > шь (дъ) л > шел

1
  • Do you claim идти is unrelated to Latin iter and PIE e̯eiti "goes"? – Anixx Sep 2 '16 at 9:30
2

"X" mutating into "ш" - is not that rare, if it is not obvious with say "ход"/"шедший" this connection can be found for instance in such pairs like "тихий"/"тишь", "Михаил"/"Миша".

This started in Praslavic and it's part of well known and well studied process, it is actually called "первая палатализация согласных" and it is about к, г, х mutating into soft ч', ж', ш' accordingly. The was also a second one (вторая палатализация), which is about the law of mutating the same set of consonants into ц', з', c'.

Up to the XIV century ж' and ш' (unlike ч) in Russian have lost their softness, but what you see in "шёл" is the remnant of palatalisation.

Regarding the fact that this happend in Proto-Slavic - and first palatalisation is present in all Slavic languages - the "what-if" part of you question is very hard to answer. It's sort of "what if we won't consider one of the main phonetic changes in Slavic languages"?

Well, I don't know. What if Pedersen's law never had happened? To be honest, any answer will be pretty speculative.

3
  • I know about the palatalisations (if I do keep getting which one did which wrong). My question here is more about the reason for what I (perhaps wrongly) find to be an unexpected root vowel, and the hypothetical addition about the present-day regular past tense of идти doesn't require imagining that any of the systematic shifts from Proto-Slavic had never happened — just that this particular form had never been lost. – Nikolay Ershov Jun 15 '16 at 2:14
  • 1
    NikolayErshov - in that case I'm confused and it's not clear to me what you are asking? It was that way just because well, it was - and you are asking what if it had not been. I'm not arguing but I won't be surprised if I'm not the only one for whom this is not clear. – shabunc Jun 15 '16 at 4:59
  • I'm asking for evidence to support or reject a hypothesis that the root yer in *хьdlъ shows an influence from the original, lost (but predictable) regular forms of the verb *jьdti. And, additionally, to reconstruct what those forms would have sounded like today. – Nikolay Ershov Jun 15 '16 at 11:33
1

Если мы посмотрим на этот же глагол в сербском языке, то увидим.

Инфинитив "ићи" (ћ - сербская мягкая "ч", как в словах "ночь" - "ноћ", "печь" - "пећ" и т.д.); в настоящем времени "ћ" чередуется с "д" - "ми идемо"; в прошедшем времени "ћ" чередуется с "ш" - "ми смо ишли".

То есть спряжение практически регулярно за исключением чередования "ћ-д-ш". Так что можно предположить, что и русское "шёл" / "шли" получилось чередованием "д"-"ш" и усечением начального "и" - "ишёл" / "ишла" / "ишло" / "ишли".

1
  • Похожее есть в словацком и украинском. Точечность этого явления и то, что "ш" как результат чередования "д" противоречит вообще всем славянским закономерностям, заставляет думать, что это более поздняя реэтимологизация, достаточно предсказуемая, чтобы произойти в нескольких языках независимо. – Nikolay Ershov Aug 8 '16 at 18:48
1

Fasmer's dictionary gives шьлъ as an old form of шёл; this makes sense given х > ш (the first palatalization of velars) and the loss of д before л. The strong ь in шьлъ then becomes е, which (according to Vlasto) around the 12 century becomes o to result in шёл (for comparison he gives льнъ > лён, осьлъ > осёл).

0

шёл is to идти as вёл to вести, not водить. Водить / водил and ходить / ходил seem quite regular to me.

I'm not aware of any reflexes other than шёл and шествие (< шьствие) which would have been used to reconstruct *xьd-.

The contamination hypothesis would not let you get rid of *хod-, and if you accept a root with another vowel gradation, *хed- is not any better than *xьd-. It does not explain any other reflexes, and you need to invoke an extra assumption about that contamination to justify the change in the root vowel.

8
  • My point was that шёл is to ходить, not идти, what вёл is to водить. And the root in the latter already has that change of vowel. I might be completely wrong about my basic assumptions if вёл is in fact from *vьdlъ and not *vedlъ (not being a professional, it's hard to always know what I don't know), but if that isn't the case, with шёл we have what seems to be an atypical vowel gradation when the one present in other motion verbs, whatever its explanation, is at least consistent. – Nikolay Ershov Jun 16 '16 at 16:56
  • change in the root vowel is due to ш was soft initially – shabunc Jun 16 '16 at 17:57
  • 1
    @NikolayErshov: вёл is of course from *vedlъ. But vowel gradation is a grammatic phenomenon, not phonetic, which had stopped being productive long before the advent of Proto-Slavic. You can find both ь/о pairs (*mьrti/moriti) and е/о pairs (already mentioned *vedti/voditi) and pretty much all other combinations you can think about. – Quassnoi Jun 16 '16 at 18:25
  • @shabunc: change from what to what? – Quassnoi Jun 16 '16 at 18:25
  • @Quassnoi None of them with motion verbs, though, am I right? *Neslъ, *vezlъ, etc. No ь root that I can think of, except this one. – Nikolay Ershov Jun 16 '16 at 20:16
-1

There are also another similar words "шастать" (old Russian word) or "шляться" (more like slang) , which I would translate as "walking" or "walking around". But "шастать" has its own past form "шастал". Maybe they had some impact on the origin of "шёл"

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.