HUNTING INSTRUMENTS IN OLD GREEK - WORDS OR TERMS?

Abstract

FIRST OF ALL, WE MAKE THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WORD AND TERM, THEN WE ANALYSE THE NAMES OF INSTRUMENTS, TRYING TO ESTABLISH THE CATEGORY THEY BELONG TO (WORDS OR TERMS). [...]we can identify two levels of specialisation: one first level is represented by the meaning known by all the speakers that we can find in most texts; on the other hand, the second level refers to a technical, specialised meaning, used by the hunters. First of all, it should be made of twisted yew twigs, with well-rounded hooplike "crowns", with alternate rows of nails of wood and iron woven into the coil. Furthermore, the contexts are related to hunting only. [...]we can say that, unlike akontion and even probolos, was not an ordinary weapon employed in battles and wars, but it was rather an instrument, used by hunters only.

Headnote

ABSTRACT

THIS PAPER AIMS TO ANALYSE THE SEMANTIC FIELD OF HUNTING INSTRUMENTS IN ANCIENT GREEK, WITH THE PURPOSE OF HIGHTLIGHTENING THEIR DEGREE OF SPECIALIZATION. FURTHERMORE, THIS PAPER IS A STUDY OF THE FIELD, AIMING TO PROVE THE LEGITIMACY OF CONSIDERING GREEK HUNTING VOCABULARY A SPECIALIZED FIELD. FIRST OF ALL, WE MAKE THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WORD AND TERM, THEN WE ANALYSE THE NAMES OF INSTRUMENTS, TRYING TO ESTABLISH THE CATEGORY THEY BELONG TO (WORDS OR TERMS). THE CRITERIA THAT WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ARE: THE MEANING OF THE WORDS, THEIR FREQUENCY, THE TYPES OF TEXTS AND THE CONTEXTS. OUR STUDY REVEALS THAT THERE ARE THREE DEGREES OF SEMANTIC SPECIALIZATION: GENERAL WORDS, INTERMEDIATE TERMS AND FULLY SPECI ALISED TERMS. THIS STUDY LEADS US TO MORE GENERAL CONCLUSIONS, CONCERNING THE HUNTING VOCABULARY THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A SPECIALIZED LANGUAGE.

KEYWORDS: TERM, WORD, GREEK VOCABULARY, INSTRUMENTS, HUNTING.

(ProQuest: ... denotes non-USASCII text omitted.)

1. Background

The tenets of the present study are to analyse the semantic field of hunting instruments in Old Greek from the point of view of their semantic specialization. We shall try to identify the (denotative) sense they exhibit in general texts and in the (hunting) corpus that we have built for this study. Analyzing and establishing the lexical and semantic status of the hunting instruments names leads to more general conclusions regarding the Greek hunting vocabulary and the relation between this specialized variety of Greek and the general language. The creation and development of a hunting professionalized terminology demonstrates the importance of hunting in ancient Greece, reflected in the lexicon, as a socially-bound variety.

The resources of our research are both traditional works (editions of Greek texts, as well as translations and dictionaries) and an electronic corpus of texts (Thesaurus Linguae Graecae2).

The corpus of this study includes a selection of hunting texts. Namely, it consists of three texts that describe hunting in ancient Greece, the techniques and the instruments: (i) Kynenetikos, written by Xenophon3, (ii) another hunting treatise with the same title but written by Arrianus (1st century AD) 4 and (iii) a representative fragment of the work Onomastikon of Iulius Pollux (2nd century AD)5. Consequently, the corpus gives us the opportunity to investigate the lexemes from a diachronic point of view. Even though they were written in different historical periods, the description of the hunting process does not differ radically. The vocabulary that the three writers use is similar to one another, which proves that the techniques and the instruments did not change through the centuries6.

2. Definitions: word versus term

First of all, in the following, we would like to briefly define and present the difference between word and term, from a linguistic point of view. We shall employ this distinction in our study, as we find it to be relevant for the analysis of a specialized vocabulary. In the past decades, many linguists have tried to provide a satisfactory definition of the word. Saussure was the first one who defined the word as a twodimensional unit between a signifier and a signified. We can also define a word as a complex linguistic unit, which has a phonetic, semantic and grammatical dimension7.

However, we shall understand better the relation and the difference between word and term, after defining the latter. The term is a linguistic sign, a complex unit that combines a signified and a signifier, but in contrast to a word, it can be defined as a part of a terminology or a specialized language8. So the term is a word with some semantic restrictions, as it refers to a single concept9, and characterized by monoreferentiality, monosemantism, univocity. That is why the semantic content of a term is stable, it does not depend on a particular context and it excludes the synonymy, the homonymy and the metaphorical meanings.

Considered from this point of view, we can distinguish between (1) words, which belong to general lexicon and have a general meaning, known by all the speakers, and (2) terms, words with a technical and specialized meaning. This distinction is relevant to our study and we shall use it in the following part in order to establish the status of the hunting instruments names.

3. Hunting instruments

In the corpus we have identified the paradigm of hunting instruments, which is presented bellow, in Table no. 1.

In the following, we shall analyse these lexical items from the angle of their semantic specialization, in order to establish if we deal with words (items of the general lexicon) or terms (specialised vocabulary). Apart from the etymology and the meaning, we shall take into consideration and refer to the following criteria:

(1) frequency (number of occurrences in texts): the words with a great number of occurrences have a wider and more general meaning, which permits them to be employed in many and various contexts;

(2) contexts and types of text they appear in: general texts, which refer to common themes, or specialized texts, which refer to particular domains;

(3) lexical productivity: generally, productive words, which generate many dérivâtes and compound nouns, have a wider meaning.

3.1. Nets

3.1.1. As we could see, there are three types of hunting nets díktyon, árkys and enódia, which present different degrees of semantic specialization. The first name of net, díktyon, appears in the Mycenaean tablets, in a compound noun10. Díktyon referred to the "net", a fishing net, a hunting net or any other type of net. This general meaning leads to a large number of occurrences (8th BC - 3rd century AD), around 350 (see also Table no. 2), as it could be used in a large number of (con)texts. Furthermore, the same word is inherited in Modern Greek with this general meaning.

Interestingly, in his treatise, Xenophon uses the lexeme díktyon with a specific meaning. It describes a particular type of hunting net, used to catch big game (e.g. deer)11. The general meaning which diktyon had in the common lexicon, in the treatise under discussion, changes its referent into a more specific one.

Consequently, we can identify two levels of specialisation: one first level is represented by the meaning known by all the speakers that we can find in most texts; on the other hand, the second level refers to a technical, specialised meaning, used by the hunters. But the specialised sense is contextualized: diktyon exhibits this meaning when the context refers to hunting techniques, instruments or other elements connected to this area. In turn, the general meaning is not dependent on the context, as the common speaker did not associate diktyon with the instrument described by Xenophon.

Considered from the angle of frame semantics12, we can say that diktyon belongs to the frame of hunting and the whole conceptual system is revealed in the mind of a speaker when a single element of this system is mentioned.

3.1.2. Arkys, "small hunting net", was mentioned for the first time in the 6th century BC, mainly in contexts that refer to hunting. In Kynegetikos, Xenophon gives a detailed description of arkys, presenting the way it was made and employed13. Thus, we find out that it was a small net, for catching hares and boars. Once the game was caught in the net, it formed a sort of "pocket" (gr. kólpos), which closed with a cord.

During the period 6th BC - 3rd AD, the occurrences in the texts are rather few (see Table no. 2), and most of the contexts refer to hunting. Even though, in general texts (tragedies, historiography), árkys does not always refer to the net described by Xenophon, there is a direct connection to hunting14. Subsequently, the narrow sense, the frequency of the lexeme and the hunting contexts in which it appears in make us believe that árkys had a technical, specialised meaning, independently of the context. In our view, it is a term (in the sense we saw in section 2), that belongs to the hunting specialised vocabulary.

3.1.3. Etymologically, enódia, the third hunting net, is a neuter noun, in plural, that comes from the adjective enódios meaning "in or on the way" (gr. en- "in, on" + hodos "way, street"). Although the adjective was mentioned for the first time in the Homeric poems (8th century BC), the noun enódia made its first appearance in the 5th century BC, in the hunting treatise of Xenophon, with a specialised meaning: it referred to a particular sort of hunting net - "nets for stopping the pathways".

The texts in which enódia appears and its contextual occurrences are always related to hunting. Moreover, we can find it mainly in the works of Xenophon, Arrianus, I. Pollux and other writers who dealt with hunting. Thus, we can say that the lexeme under discussion is a monosemantic and monoreferential term.

In the following comparative Table (no. 2) we present the occurrences of the hunting nets we identified in the corpus, from their first occurrence to the 3rd century AD.

As we can see in Table no. 2, during the centuries when hunting literature was written (highlighted in grey), the number of occurrences is higher in comparison to other periods of time.

As a conclusion of this section regarding hunting nets, our analysis reveals that árkys and enódia were specialised terms, while díktyon was a word with general meaning, which could be also used with a specialised meaning in hunting language. We present Table no. 3, in which we compare the three lexemes we analysed, taking into consideration the meaning, the first occurrence, the number of occurrences and the context.

3.2. Traps

3.2.1. Pollux mentions a type of trap, called podagra, from the Greek words pod'foot' and agra 'catching'. The lexeme podagra was used for the first time in the 5th century BC and its frequency in texts is quite poor. Due to the narrow meaning podagra had, it was uttered in hunting (con)texts. We do not have many details about the way this snare looked like or worked, but Pollux tells us that it was employed to catch big game (deer and boars). We can say that it was a specialised term, which referred to a specific instrument used by hunters in catching game.

3.2.2. Another type of trap which both Xenophon and Pollux mention is podostrábe 'foot- gin', a compound noun from pod- "foot" and -strabos, 'trammeling'. Xenophon uses it for the first time in the 5th century and, moreover, his hunting treatise is the only text that mentions it. From the very beginning this lexeme means 'snare', employed to catch large animals. Its frequency, which is also very low, could be explained by the narrow and specialised meaning of the term17.

From the text of Xenophon18 we find out that this snare worked in the following way. First of all, it should be made of twisted yew twigs, with well-rounded hooplike "crowns", with alternate rows of nails of wood and iron woven into the coil. Then the trap is set on a circular hole in the soil and the hunter puts a rope on it, attached to a wooden clog. The game is directed to the trap and it falls into it. Pollux gives us the same description (in Onomastikon, V, 32-33), as the source of his writing is the same treatise of Xenophon. On the other hand, this fact shows that, in the second century AD, hunting and, more precisely, the hunting instruments did not changed (radically) from the time of Xenophon. Hunters hunted in the same way, using the same instruments.

3.2.3. The third name of trap which we shall refer to is page that appears only in the text of Arrianus. The author does not make any reference to the way this trap looked like, worked or was set. Etymologically, the lexeme can be traced back to the IndoEuropean radical *pag- / pak- "fix, freeze, coagulate"19. Consequently we can imagine that the instrument under discussion stopped and caught the game. In the texts, page had just this meaning (trap, snare) so it was a monosemantic and monoreferential term.

3.3. Weapons

Weapons, the third class of instruments, were employed both in war, when fighting against people, and in hunting20. The hunters that practiced the type of hunting described by the three authors under discussion employed nets, traps and hounds to catch the game, which makes us assume that weapons did not play an essential role. Nevertheless, the hunter should have some weapons with him, as they were absolutely necessary in some situations: when fighting against large and dangerous game (deer or boars) and when the hunter wanted to kill the game.

3.3.1. The authors refer to two types of javelins: akontion "long javelin" and probolion "short javelin". Akontion was a weapon used when fighting against people, whose first attestation was in the 8th century. It was a frequent term in Greek texts, especially in historiography and in description of battles. This type of javelin had a long shaft and it could be thrown from a certain distance or used from near against boars.

3.3.2. On the other side, probolion, a short javelin or a "boar-spear", was a diminutive for probolos21, "spear". Etymology and the texts help us to understand the meaning of the word: it is a spear which you throw from the distance.

Probolion makes its first appearance in the 5th century BC, in the hunting treatise of Xenophon. From the 5th century BC until the 3rd century AD, its frequency is limited to about 30 occurrences. Furthermore, the contexts are related to hunting only. Therefore we can say that, unlike akontion and even probolos, was not an ordinary weapon employed in battles and wars, but it was rather an instrument, used by hunters only. This interpretation leads us to the conclusion that probolion had a specialised sense, as the instrument was used in hunting.

3.3.3. Xiphos, "sword", was a very common weapon in the ancient world and in Greece. It was used especially in battles and therefore we cannot consider it a specific hunting instrument. Hunters used this sword to defend themselves.

The lexeme appears in the Homeric poems, it is very frequent and it was inherited in Modern Greek. Although it is mentioned in the hunting text, in our opinion, it is not a specialised term. It is rather an instrument borrowed from the area of war and fighting.

3.3.4. The last word we shall refer to is toxon, "bow", but both toxon and xiphos, was not an instrument used only by hunters. In the ancient world, this weapon was employed in war and in hunting, too. It is an old word (attested for the first time in Mycenaean Tablets) and it was inherited in Modern Greek with a lot of derivates and compounds.

A partial conclusion regarding the names of the weapons is that we cannot consider specialised hunting terms, excepting probolion.

4. Conclusions

After investigating the Greek hunting instruments (nets, traps, weapons), we could conclude that the analysed lexemes have different levels of specialisation. The nets and traps are instruments used especially by hunters and that is why the lexeme have a higher degree of specialisation. Except diktyon, all the other names can be considered terms (in the sense we saw in section 2 of this paper), due to their denotative meaning, the monosemantism and monoreferentiality. As shown, semantically, they are not contextdependent, except diktyon, which refers to any sort of 'net' and, more specific, can be associated to both fishing and hunting.

On the other hand, weapons do not exhibit a high degree of specialisation, due to the fact that they were employed in wars and hunting, too. In spite of this, we saw that probolion was a specialised hunting term, as it occurred only in texts related to hunting.

The above analysis, based on the corpus, revealed that, from the point of semantic specialisation, hunting vocabulary can include three types of terms:

a) technical and specialised terms (only in context referring to hunting): árkys, enódia, podagra, podostrábe, page, probolion - which were known and employed especially by professionals (i.e. hunters);

b) intermediate terms, bordering other fields: they have a higher degree of specialisation, but do not belong necessarily to hunting (vocabulary): akóntion, xiphos, tóxon - known by the most speakers but associated to both war and hunting.

c) general terms that occur more frequently and have a wider meaning: diktyon - the hunting meaning is context-dependent.

The conclusions of the present research, which should be completed by further researches regarding other semantic fields, could be relevant to the linguistic status of the hunting vocabulary in Old Greek. The existence of specialised terms can demonstrate the existence of a hunting terminology, which reflects the role of hunting in ancient Greek society and economy. This area deserves further analysis, as it deepens the understanding of Greek language, society and the relations established between them.

Footnote

2 Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, the Packard Humanities Institute.

3 The first Greek hunting treatise (5* century BC).

4 Kynegetikos, the text of Arrianus, was inspired by the hunting treatise of Xenophon, but it refers mainly to the breeding of hounds and adds some other information in comparison to the first text.

5 The Greek editions that we have used for this research are the ones provided by the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae.

6 Moreover, after analysing Medieval texts, some reserchers claim that the hunting techniques did not change from Antiquity to the Middle Ages.

7 Bidu-Vränceanu, Angela et al., Dicponar de stünde ale limbi! (Bucharest: Nemira, 2005), 152: "unitate lingvisticä complexa, realizatä simultan ca unitate fonetica, semantica §i gramaticalä".

Footnote

8 Idem, 534: "element al unei terminologü sau al unui limbaj specializat, reprezentând cuno§tinCele din acest domeniu".

9 Angela Bidu-Vränceanu, Lexicul specializat ìn miscare. De la dicponare la texte (Bucharest: Editura UniversitaÇii din Bucure§ti, 2007), 38: "un cuvant supus restrictiilor".

Footnote

10 Pierre Chantraine, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque (Paris: Librairie C. Kliencksieck, 1965), s.v. diktyon.

11 Xenophon, Kynegetikos, II, VI, VII.

Footnote

12 C. Fillmore, "Frame Semantics", Chapter 10) in Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings (Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2006), 373-400.

13 Xenophon, Kynegetikos, II, VI, VII, ?.

14 This sense is apparent in a glosse of Hesychios, who says that "arkys is a net used for hunting" (Lexicon, 7288).

Footnote

15 We did Table no. 2 using the electronic corpus Thesaurus Linguae Graecae and we did not count the dérivâtes and the compound words of the words under discussion.

16 We took into consideration the occurences of the noun enodia, 'road net'.

Footnote

17 In the first century AD, the grammarian Harpocration provides the following explanation: "podostrábe were called those instruments that hunters made and in which the game was caught" (Lexicon, 251). That is why we can say that the lexeme displays significant monoreferentiality.

18 Xenophon, Kynegetikos, IX.

19 Pierre Chantraine, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque (Paris : Librairie C. Kliencksieck, 1965), s.v. pégnymi.

Footnote

20 In ancient Greece, hunting was similar to war in many aspects, and it is not unusual for hunters to use weapons, as they practised a dangerous activity. Hunting was also a preparation for war (it was a smallscale war) and the hunting expeditions were simulations of real battles.

21 Formed with the help of the preposition pro- "in front" and the verb ballo "to throw".

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1 . Babiniotis, Gheorghios, ... 2009.

2. Bailly, Charles, Dictionnaire Grec-Français, Paris: Hachette, 1963.

3. Barsalou, Lawrence, "Context-independent and context-dependent information in concepts" în Memory & Cognition, 10, 82-93, 1982

4. Bertrand, Joëlle, Le vocabulaire grec du mot à la pensée, Paris: Ellipses, 2008.

5. Bidu-Vränceanu, Angela, Lexic comun, lexic specializat, Bucharest: EUB, 2000.

6. Bidu-Vränceanu, Angela, Lexicul specializat în mineare: de la diefionare la texte, Bucharest: EUB, 2007.

7. Bidu-Vränceanu, Angela, et al., Dicfionar de stiine aie limbii, Bucharest: Nemira, 2005.

8. Chantraine, Pierre, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque, Paris: Librairie C. Kliencksieck, 1965.

9. Fillmore, Charles, "Frame Semantics" în (Ed.) Geeraerts, D., Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings, Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2006.

10. Lidell, H.G. & Scott, R., A Greek-English lexicon, Oxford: OED, 1940.

11.Xénophon, L'art de la chasse, Delebecque, Edouard, (trad.) Notice; Appendice and Lexique choisi des termes de chasse Paris: Belles Lettres, 1970.

Electronic Texts Corpus: Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLG).