The Etruscan Language: An Introduction

by Giuliano Bonfante, Larissa Bonfante

A revised, updated and expanded edition of the first concise introduction to the study of the Etruscan language in English. The standard historical reference and a popular textbook for students of languages, linguistics, ancient civilization and Etruscan studies. Provides the best collection of Etruscan inscriptions and texts currently in print. A substantial archeological introduction sets language and inscriptions in their historical, geographical and cultural context. The overview of Etruscan grammar, the glossary and chapters on mythological figures all incorporate the latest scholarship and innovative discoveries.

Genres: History, Language, Nonfiction, Linguistics

288 pages, Paperback

First published November 1, 1983

Reviews

[Koen Crolla · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's a shame this book is still usually considered the go-to introduction to the Etruscan language, considering that so much of it is—to put it kindly—complete amateur hour garbage.

A lot of this is certainly due to Bonfante senior, the linguist of the pair, who by 1983, when he was 79, had apparently been retired long enough to have forgotten many of the basics of the field as well as to have accumulated a lot of "idiosyncratic" views, especially when it comes to etymology. Some of the appearance of the former can perhaps be attributed to the fact that the book starts out wanting to be accessible to non-linguists (this presumably explains the claim that "[a]lphabets when they are first used are strictly phonetic"), though it does change its mind about that a few times, rendering particularly the phonology section fucking unreadable, as it avoids succinct jargon in favour of laborious circumlocution in heavy jargon. (It also changes it mind about whether or not it expects you to have any experience with Latin. Expect to enjoy "participle of obligation" rather than "gerundive", but also not to have cases explained to you.)
Most of what makes the book bad, however, has to be attributed to the fact that what we know about Etruscan grammar can fit on four pages, and the complete vocabulary on seven more (more if you want to separate early Etruscan from late, which you should but the book does not), but the Bonfantes seem to be loath to admit that and so obscure it with poor structure and copious filler. Some of that filler is more than fair enough (archaeological context, the Sources chapter that shows what actual text on actual artifacts looks like), some of it is embarrassing and/or irrelevant (e.g. the chapter on how Etruscans gave the Germans their runes—fundamentally true, but none of the details provided have any basis in material evidence; the claim that contact between Germany and Etruria is confirmed by the word Erz 'ore', which Bonfante repeatedly claims derives from the name of the city of Arrētium (Etruscan Aritim, though he lists it as Aret-(?)) is bunk), some of it is outright academic malpractice (the Glosses chapter, which lists "Etruscan" glosses by various Roman and Greek authors, a solid majority of which are transparently nonsense and most of the remainder of which need heavy footnotes, with translations but zero commentary). Very much not used to pad anything out is an explanation of how we know almost any of the things the book claims we know about the language, even when many of the claims are outrageous on the face of it: it's briefly mentioned why ś was probably [ʃ] "as sh in shin" (though not in the phonology section itself, obviously, which only suggests that s and ś might have been allophones of a single phoneme—uniquely in the alphabet, in fact, as though literally three paragraphs earlier it wasn't talking about c, k, and q), but if you're hoping for an explanation as to why liciniesi hirsunaieśi in mi liciniesi mulu hirsunaieśi 'I have been given by [allegedly] Licinie Hisunaie' is a dative of agent rather than a normal-ass dative you'll presumably have to go digging in the bibliography.
And the bibliography is extensive, though much of it is in Italian, which is also ostensibly the reason the Bonfantes wanted to write an introduction in English in the first place.

I do think every Latinist has a moral duty to have at least a survey-level awareness of Etruscan, but this book is an unpleasant and inadequate way to acquire it. Thankfully, there seem to be English-language alternatives now, and I'll be checking those out.

[Pante · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best scientific work about Etruscan language, which is available in English language. It's pretty hard do get this book, but if you're interested in the mentioned subject it's the best option for you.

[Sineala · Rating 4 out of 5]

There isn't much available on Etruscan, and I was honestly surprised that this book had as much as it did, even if there are a lot of question marks where glosses should be. The beginning historical/archaeological section seems solid to me, though I am not in a position to judge. As a reference grammar, the sections on syntax, morphology, etc., seem decent to me, though they are of course speculative in many places. I wish there had been more, but... we just don't have the data, as far as I know. The best thing, I thought, was the extensive section of inscriptions with pictures, and I quite enjoyed the list of Greek and Roman references to Etruscan vocabulary.

There isn't really anything here attempting to argue for linking Etruscan to major language families -- it's just an introductory grammar. There's very little on genetic relationships. The authors just accept that it's an isolate and move on. I am fine with this, as I just wanted to read this because it's a reference grammar, but anyone looking to put Etruscan in with another family can safely skip this.

[Jessica · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want to learn about the Etruscan language this is the book to go to. It covers the language from a lot of different angles to give you the fullest possible picture. There's the grammatical description and vocabulary that you'd expect, but it also includes engaging and readable chapters on the history of the Etruscan people (insofar as we're able to say much about it); the history of archaeology of Etruria; an extensive section with large plates showing language in its real context in photos of various artifacts; and special sections on the alphabet, Etruscan vocabulary reported by Greek and Latin authors but not attested in Etruscan sources, etc.

I must confess some disappointment after reading this book but through no fault of the authors'. I wanted to learn the Etruscan language but through this book I discovered that there is simply not enough known to make real fluency or literacy possible for the language. And there probably never will be since Etruscan books and other significant texts have almost certainly all been lost to time. The one known exception is a linen book for priests which was reused for mummy wrappings in Egypt and preserved in the dry climate there. The odds of finding any other surviving texts of significant length is low.

So spare a thought for the lost Disciplina Etrusca, the dramas and comedies of Etruscan theater (from where our words "person" and "histrionic" derive), and other treasures. And don't count on achieving Duolingo levels of mastery for this language. But if you want the best guide available in English to what is known, this is the place to look.

[Vera · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting if long-winded insights into Etruscan language and culture, but hanging by a pretty thin thread, academically speaking. Authors claim Etruscan was introduced in Germania in 300BCE even though the oldest evidence is from 1st/2nd century CE (a difference OF FIVE HUNDRED YEARS!!!!) and support their claim by "well I guess the earlier evidence just got destroyed [shrug emoji]"

Also contradictory at points: p.89-90 speaks of the usage of both patronymics AND matronymics on epitaphs "showing the importance of the descent from the mother's family." and then later on in the book the authors suggest that Etruscan society was strictly patriarchal. Huh? Wishful thinking?

[Michael Brescia · Rating 4 out of 5]

The title is very accurate. The author touches on Etruscan culture and history, but not in any depth. She makes no mention of Vinca culture symbols as possible predecessors to the Etruscan alphabet, and her short section on the runes is sterile and uninspired. But again, the book does deliver on the title’s promise. It’s well cited and includes some good images.

[Noah Hall · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very informative introduction, sadly due to the lack of longer texts the work is more of a survey of remains (very interesting and beautiful though).

[Christopher · Rating 3 out of 5]

THE ETRUSCAN LANGUAGE: An Introduction by Giuliano and Larissa Bonfante, the second edition of which appeared in 2002, is one of the few resources in English on this enigmatic language of early Italy. As a student of comparative linguistics, I thought that the work would be interesting and would include some discussion of the possible links between Etruscan and other language families. However, the authors show some dislike of the comparative method and are unwilling to consider Etruscan in a comparative context.

The book is divided into three parts. First comes the historical background, i.e. who the Etruscan people were. The discussion of the language itself comes in the second part, a meagre grammar with most of the phonology and morphology that can be discerned from available evidence. The third part, "Study aids", has sample inscriptions and texts and glossaries.

I imagine that this book will be most useful to archaeologists and historians who need some basic understanding of the language. Comparative linguists will want to look elsewhere.