Fredrik Otto Lindeman

The triple representation of Schwa in Greek and some related problems of Indo-European phonology

U niversitetsforlaget Oslo - Bergen - TromS0

© Instituttet for sammenlignende kulturforskning 1982 (The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture) Oslo, Norway ISBN 82-00-09533-9 ISSN 0332-6217 UNIVERSITETSFORLAGET

Distribution offices: . NORWAY U niversitetsforlaget Box 2977 T0yen Oslo 6

UNITED KINGDOM Global Book Resour~es Ltd. 109 Great Russel Street London WOIB 3NA

UNITED STATES and Canada Columbia University Press 136 South Broadway Irvington-on-H udson NY 10533

Printed in Norway by A.s John Grieg

To My Wife

CONTENTS P~e

Preface.... . . . . . .... . . . . . . ... . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 9 Ab brevia tions ........................................ 11 Note on the use of symbols. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 12 Introduction ......................................... 13 § 1 Palaic g < *H2 ? ................................... 18 § 2 The ablaut *li: *0 ................................. 23 § 3 Assimilation of a laryngeal and R (= r, l, m, n). . . . . . . . . 31 § 4 The triple representation of schwa in Greek ........... 36 § 5 On the prothetic vowels of Greek and Armenian. . . . . . .. 57 § 6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 68 Index ............................................... 71

PREFACE

The primary aim of this short work is to support the theory tlUtt the triple representation of schwa is an innovation in Greek. In this connexion I have found it necessary to discuss in some detail a number of related problems in Armenian and Anatolian. This entailed a critical survey of much of the'laryngalist' literature of the last decade. Naturally, anyone who is foolhardy enough to undertake such a task runs the risk of being branded as a 'know-all'. It is my conviction, however, that this particular area of Indo­European studies is in danger of becoming a kind of fantasy world in which common sense and the normal standards of scholarship have been left behind. The laryngeal theory is a powerful tool; unconstrained and uncritical use of it is of no service to our dis­cipline.

My manuscript was completed in August 1981, and I am grateful to my friend and colleague Patrick Stiles (University of Man­chester) for kindly checking through my English text.

Oslo, May 1982

Fredrik Otto Lindeman

9

ABBREVIATIONS

Anttila~ Schwebeablaut = Raimo Anttila, Proto-Indo-European Schwebeablaut. 1969. University of California Publications Linguistics 58.

BB. = Beitrage zur Kunde der indogermanischen Sprachen (ed. Bezzenberger), 1877-94.

Beekes, Development = R. S. P. Beekes, The Development of the Proto-Indo­European Laryngeals in Greek. Janua Linguarum Studia Memoriae Nicolai Van Wijk Dedicata. Series Practica 42. 1969.

BSL. = Bulletin de la Societe de Iinguistique de Paris. BSOAS. = Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. London.' Chantraine, Dictionnaire = Pierre Chantraine, Dictionnaire etymologique de la

langue grecque. Histoire des mots. Paris 1968ff. EC. = Etudes Celtiques. Paris. EL. = F. O. Lindeman, E.infiihrung in die Laryngaltheoric. Berlin 1970. Eif'L.2 = Evidence for Laryngeals, .second edition edited by Werner Winter.

Janua Linguarum Studia Memoriae Nicolai Van Wijk Dedicata. Series Maior XI. 1965.

Flor. Anal. = Florilegium Anatolicum, Melanges offerts a Emmanuel Laroche. Paris 1979.

FuW. = Flexion und Wortbildung. Akten der V. Fachtagung der Indoger-manischen Gesellschaft. Herausgg. von H. Rix. Wiesbaden 1975.

Godel, Introduction = R. Gode1, An Introduction to the Study of Classical . Armenian. Wiesbaden 1975 .. Bul. = Hethitisch und Indogermanisch. Vergleichende Studien zur historischen

Grammatik und zur dialektgeographischen SteHung der indogermanischen Sprachgruppe Altkleinasiens. Herausgg. von E. Neu und W. Meid. Inns­brucker Beitrage zur Sprachwissenschaft Bd. 25. 1979.

IF. = Indogermanische Forschungen. II]. = Indo-Iranian Journal. JAOS. = Journal of the American Oriental Society. Kratylos = Kratylos. Kritisches Berichts- und Rezensionsorgan filr indogerma­

nische und allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft. Wiesbaden. Kurylowicz, Apophonie = Jerzy Kurylowicz, L'apophonie en indo-eUI.'opeen.

'.- Wroclaw 1956. . Kurylowicz, Idg. Gramm. II = Jerzy Kurylowicz, Indogermanische Grammatik

II. Akzent. Ablaut. Heidelberg 1968. Kurylowicz~ Problemes = J erzy Kurylowicz, Problemes de linguistique indo­

europeenne. Polska Akademia Nauk Komitet J~zykoznawstwa Prace J~zy­koznawcze 90. Wroclaw 1977.

KZ. = Zeitschrift fUr vergleichende Sprachforschung (begriindet von A. Kuhn). Lejeune, Phonetique historique = Michel Lejeune, Phonetique historique du

mycenien et du grec ancien. Paris 1972. LuE. = Lautgeschichte und Etymologie. Akten del' VI. Fachtagung der Indo­

germanischcn Gesellschaft. Wiesbaden 1980. Meillet, Esquisse2 = Antoine Meillet, Esquisse d'une grammaire comparative

de Parmenien c1assique. 2e edition, Vienne 1936.

11

Meillet, IntroductionS = Antoine Meillet, Introduction a l'etude comparative des langues indo-europeennes. 8~ edition, Paris 1937.

MSS. = Mtinchener Studien xur Sprachwissenschaft. NTS. = Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap. Pokorny, lEW. = Julius Pokorny, Indogermanisches etymologisches Worterbuch

Bd. I. Bern, MUnchen 1959. REArm. N. S. = Revue des Etudes Armeniennes. Nouvelle Serie. Paris. RHA. = Revue Hittite et Asianique. Paris. RL. = Ricerche linguistiche. Bolletino semestrale dell'Istituto di Glottologia

dell'Universita di Roma. Schwyzer, Griech. Gramm. = Eduard Schwyzer, Griechische Grammatik, Erster

Band, Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, 2. Abt., 1. Reihe, 1. Band, Munchen.

Seebold, VEWGSV. = Elmar Seebold, Vergleichendes und etymologisches Worterbuch der germanischen starken Verben. Janua Linguarum Studia Memoriae Nicolai Van Wijk Dedicata. Series Practica 85. 1970.

Sprache = Die Sprache. Zeitschrift fUr Sprachwissenschaft. Wien. StBoT. = Studien zu den Bogazkoy-Texten, herausgg. von der Kommission flir

den alten Orient der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur. Wiesbaden.

Studi Micenei = Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Ami.tolici. Roma. Studies Arch. A. Hill = Linguistic and Literary Studies in Honor of Archibald A.

Hill. The Hague. 1978. Studies Palmer = Studies in Greek, Italic, and Indo-European Linguistics Of­

fered to L. R. Palmer. Innsbruck. 1976. Szemerenyi, Numerals = Oswald Szemerenyi, Studies in the Indo-European

System of Numerals. Heidelberg. 1960. Szemerenyi, Syncope = Oswald Szemerenyi, Syncope in Greek and Indo­

European and the Nature of Indo-European Accent. Naples. 1964. Watkins, Idg. Gramm. III/l = Calvert Watkins, Indogermanische Grammatik

Bd. III/I. Geschichte der indogermanischen Verbalflexion. Heidelberg 1969. ZGP. = Zeitschrift ftir celtische Philologie.

NOTE ON THE USE OF SYMBOLS

The notations for the 'laryngeals' in this work are the ones used in EL., i.e.:

HI, phonetic notation x', = a neutral, non-colouring 'laryngeal' H 2 , phonetic notation x, = an a-colouring 'laryngeal' H a, phonetic notation xW, = an o-colouring 'laryngeal' H = an unspecified 'laryngeal'.

For other symbols see EL. p. lOS£.

12

INTRODUCTION

Accordin'g to Cuny's cogent analysis verbal adjectives of the type. Skt. pur~ui~ (: Pr1}liti), stif7Jd- (: st(1Jdti) presuppose earlier *[Plano-], *[strano-J, in which *a represents a consonantal element inherently less sonorous than the resonants *r, *l, *m, *n (d. EL. 25ff).1 Cunis

1 See now also N. E. Collinge, Gollectanea linguistica 71, for a refutation of the objections that W. F. Wyatt jr. has raised against Cuny's analysis, i.e. that one cannot know which of the two elements, jRI (= resonant) and IH/, was in fact vocalized in sequences of the type ICRH.C/; Collinge draws "encourage­ment from the theoretical factor that, in a form like * # pIH-C, to assume 'H = G', pennits a valid Sievers-Edgerton formula (* #= tit) to produce *PI.f!-C, while 'H = V', if seen in *Plf;l-C, invokes the invalid * # tyut." Otherwise T. Burrow, The Problem of Shwa in Sanskrit 1979, 25£. According to W. R. Schmalstieg, A Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian Parallel: The Non-Existence of Shwa Indogermanicum (or Laryngal) in the So-called Long Sonants, Baltistica 9, 1973, 7f£., Skt. gi11Jd- and pur~d- etc. show a shift of *-ir-, *-ttr- (with acute intonation, d. Lith. girtas 'drUnk', pilnas) to -ir-, -ur-, and a form like Skt. Jii-ta- 'born' is supposed to repr<:;sent an original ani/-form (i.e. "stem alternant jii- deriving simply from *jan- with no shwa or laryngal", ibid. 12). These suggestions are based on SchmaIstieg's personal views on IE. ablaut and would seem to create far more problems than they solve. Of. Schmalstieg, New Thoughts on Indo-European Phonology, KZ. 87, 1973, 99ff.; More on Indo­European Monophthongizations, Arch. ling. IX, 1978, 135ff. (ibid. 157, Schmal-

-._stieg follows Kronasser's (unconvincing) attempt to explain away the Ana­tolian 0, as secondary.). Hans Jonsson's criticism (in The Laryngeal Theory, 1978) of Cuny's analysis is based on a series of misunderstandings, see my review in IF (forthcoming).

According to Chr. Peeters (The Word for 'dog' and the Sequence *wH + Consonant in Indo-European, IF. 78, 1973, 75ft), *k'wHn-e/os (gen. sg.) has given regularly *k'un-e/os (e£. Skt. 5lina[i., Gk. ~vIl6£,) in all the IE. languages wjth the only exception of 'pre-Latin', where *w was lost before the following *H: *k'wHn-es > pre-Latin *kHn-es > Lat. canis (see ibid. 76). In all nou­ambiguous cases, however, in which a laryngeal stands between *Cw- and a foHowing resonant, the laryngeal is lost with compensatory lengthening of the preceding vocalic resonant in all IE. dialects (outside of Anatolian), in­cluding Latin, d. e.g. Skt. dhitmd-, OCS. dymu, Lat. litmus < *dhwHmo-: Hittite tu1JlJ.ima-, tu!Jltui- (d. EL. 55 with references).

13

interpretation finds some support in the following (Sprache 19, 198f.): apparently, initial groups consisting of *y- + a consonantal resonant + a vowel (i.e. schematically * #yRV-) did not occur in Proto-lndo-European, see Meillet, IntroductiorL8 136. 2 Consequently, if one follows Wyatt and defines * ~ as a vowel, one must interpret a form like * /yn'Jt( e) r-/, the reduced grade of * /yen'Jter-/ (attested in Gk. el'Va'dee~, Lith. jente), phonetically as * [inat(e)r-] ; a reflex of such a form is nowhere attested (e.g. Skt. *initar-). However, Post-Vedic ytitar- may be explained as reflecting * [Ytzater-] , the nasal appearing in its vocalic form since it stands between *y- and a following consonant.3

In certain formations Hittite elY)!}' which may represent a velar fricative4, is indubitably to be identified with Cuny's reconstructed consonant *~. Whether the graphic opposition between -lJ- and -(MlJ- in cases like 1 sg. preterite welJun (u-e-lJu-un, from wel;- 'turn'5) vis-a-vis na(lJ)ljun (na-a-lju-un, na-alJ-lJu-un, d. BSL. LXXV, 167) from na(lj)lJ- 'fear', points to the existence of two different lJ-pho-

2 Cf. now also Roenigswald, Initial Semivowel Clusters, Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik Heft 5/6, 1980, 83ff.

S According to Hoenigswald, op. cit. 86, note 19, Lat. ianitrix "testifies uncer­tainly to *Ytln- in a disyllabic case." For another possible explanation of Lat. *iana-ter see my remarks in Sprache 19, 199 (: -ana- for original 'l'-na- = -ala­in palma < *palama for *-la-), d. also Kurylowicz, Idg .. Gramm. II 250.

• See EL. 93f., d. now J. Tischler, Hethitisch lJ und die Rekonstruktion des indoger­manischen Phoneminventars, LuE. 1980, 509. For the Luwian lJ and the Lycian reflexes x, q, g see EL. 30, d. now Sevoroskin, MSS. 36, 132. L. S. Bayun, Pozdneanatolijskie jazyki kak istocnik po xetto-luvijskoj dopis'mennoj istorii, Vestnik Drevnej Istorii 1980, 2, p. 18, assumes that Lycian B q goes back to a Proto­Anatolian laryngeal in position before front vowels which he symbolizet> as * HI, e.g. Lye. B qtti- 'to kill' = Ritt. a,attai- '(ab)schneiden, (nieder)-schlagen' from Proto-Anatolian * H1et-i-. Lycian B x is supposed to be from a Proto­Anatolian laryngeal * H2) e.g. Lye. B xlu-sa 'controversy' = Hittite balluwai­'id.' I cannot see any justification for this: Hitt. [}altai- and l}alluwai- may both have their initial 1;- from * H2- (d. Tischler, Hethitisches etymologisches Glossar I, 137; II, 215).

Ii The oldest paradigm of the present of wel}- in Hittite is (3 sg.) u-e-elJ,-zi (KBo XXV 31 (= StBoT. 25 Nr. 31) Vs. II 13'; StBoT. 8 (= StBoT 25 Nr. 3) IV 3 (d. StBoT.23 p.·147, B. 237), wa-lJa-an-zi (3 pl.), e.g. StBoT. 25 Nr. 33 Vs. (I) 10', 11'; Nr. 34 Vs. 19', 20', 23', 24'; Nr. 54 Vs. I 16 (= StBoT. 23 p. 197, B 342.) lowe this information to my friend Erich Neu.

14

nemes in Hittite remains a moot point.6 Hittite words with simple ~!J- (and e-vocalism) of the type meljur 'time', wel~zi 'turns' etc. lack convincing etymological connections in the other IE. languages. H. Eichner, however, .derives (MSS. 31, 1973, 53ft.) Hittite mel~ur from a root *meH2- 'die rechte Zeit sein, zur rechten Zeit sein' (d. Lat. maturus); me!Jur is suppos~d to represent *meH2-Wr (for the lengthened grade d. Gk. i]nae) with *§ preserved before * H2 :

"Die Annahme cler Erhaltung von uridg. § in dieser Position ist prinzipiell unbedenklich, da Langvokale erfahrungsgemass durch benachbarte Konsonanten nicht in demselben Mass verandert werden wie die entsprechenden Kurzvokale." (ibid. 72).

Since Eichner's explanation of meljur presupposes the existence of a lengthened grade at a stage when * leI had not yet been coloured to *[a] in the vicinity of *H2 , we should expect to find non-ambi­guous traces of an alternation of the type *me- (from the lengthened grade *meH2-) ,,-,*ma- (from the normal grade *meH2-) in the IE. dialects outside of Anatolian, (see my remarks in Hul. 153, note 6, and d. now J. Catsanicos, BSL. LXXV, fasc. 2, 117). However, this is not the case, and Eichner's explanation remains ad hoc.

S The gen. sg. esnas, which shows no trace of the laryngeal found in the nom. acc. sg. form eSfJar, was considered as 'old' in EL. 47 since it seems to cor­respond to Vedic asnds (not *asinds), g. sg. of dsrk 'blood'. Cf. Eichner, LuE. 129, note 41. However, G. Hart, BSOAS. XLIII, 1980, WI. and note 27, suggests that Old Hittite is~J;a-na-a-as, the i- of which "must represent a reduced or even zero-grade version of the radical vowel when unaccented", may have lost its -If- in interconsonantal position and that the e-vocalism (in e-es-na-as) may have been taken over from the nom. acc. sg. (ibid. 11). The oldest form in Indo-European of the g. sg. of * JH1esHr-J (Hitt. eSfJar etc.) may be posited as * /H1sHnes/ which one would expect to have been realized phonetically as *[H1SH~is] (with a vocalic nasal after the initial consonant cluster in accordance with Sievers' Law). The prevocalic * H is lost, and *[Hls(H)~es] gives *[H.s~es] which may now have been 'reduced' to *[Hsnes] after a short preceding syllable (Sievers' La~), whence Vedic *snds > asnds with a- from the nom. acc. sg. dsrk. (Vedic smds 'we are' from *[Hsnufs] ( '" * [HS1pes] after a long preceding syllable) is a phonetic parallel to Vedic *snds from *[Hsnes] "" * [Hstzes] after a long preceding syllable}. Since *H1

disappears in Hittite (EL. 38), a g. sg. *[H1sHtzes] may regularly hav~ given Anatolian *slumds which may in fact be reflected in the Old Hittite is-b-a-na­a-as; a form *esb-anas (with e- taken over from the nom. acc. sg.), may have led to *esb-nas by syncope of the internal -a-, whence *esb-nas > esnas with loss of Tj in interconsonantal position. (For the possibility of a syncope of this kind in Hittite see H. Eichner, MSS. 31, 1973, 59 and note 22).

15

Remark 1. Ibid. 82, Eichner proposes to take Hitt. sakuwa 'eyes' from * s + okwaz < * Hatkwaz = Gk. wna 'eyes, face' (orig. nom.ace. pI. neut.) , but his own explanation of melJur leads us to expect Hitt. *sekuwa and Gk. *i]na as reflexes of * (s-)Hatkw-. (Gk. rona doubtless represents the phonetically regular reflex of a lengthened grade * [H30kW-] vis-a-vis the normal grade * [H30kW-] «* /Haekw-J) seen in Gk. (Jaas). However, it has never been proved that Hitt. sakuwa is in fact to be connected etymologically with Gk. wna. According to J. Puhvel, California Stud. in Class. Ant. 6, 229, JAOS. 94, 294£., Incontri ling. 2, 129ff., Hitt. sakui- (sg.) and Luwian da-a-u-i-is 'eye' reflect an IE. *dhyagWh-i-, Gk. aarpfjc; 'evident, clear'. According to Szemerenyi, Latin Verbs in -u6, -uere, Italic and Romance. Linguistic Studies in Honor ~f Ernst Pulgram, 1980, 27, "there can be no doubt that Luwian tawi- is based on the verb *teu- (or *tou- ?) seen in Latin tuor,. tawi- represents IE *towi-, tuor either IE *tewo­or *towo-. The early altern ant tueor represents the intensive *toweyo-."

I know of no convincing etymological connection for melJur, selJur7, welJzi and similar forms.S In Hul. 27£., note 8, Cowgill writes: "The realization that single h between e and u in Hittite has no etymological value applies also to mehur 'time', which ...

7 ]. Puhvel, in a highly interesting article in Flor. Anat. 297ff., observes that the mean~ng of selwr is not simply 'urine' in all cases; thus, KUB XXII 33 Vs. 9 A MUSEN_ma ..• sea,ur tarnas "means simply 'the eagle let fall droppings' (since birds have no urine). Finally, KBo X 45 IV 37-38 yields a meaning which is incompatible with bodily wastes or emissions of any kind and points rather to 'muck, crud': karizz-a-kan GIM-an URU-az Se{}UT 1M-an iirri 'as the deluge washes crud (and) mud off the city' (1M = wilan- or purut- 'clay, mud')." (ibid. p. 298). Puhvel points to the "gloss-wedged Luwoid neuter noun du-u-ur 'urine' in KUB XIII 4 III 67-68 apedani-ma DINGIR.MES zakkar """dilr adanna akuwanna pianzi 'to him the gods will give excrement (and) urine to eat (and) drink'." (p. 298). Together with Luwian du-u-ur Hitt. selJur (which is taken to be the verbal noun of sal}- 'clog (with dirt), plug, stop' (ibid. 300) goes back to Proto-Anatolian *dyelJ,uT from IE. *dhyiE-wr. Puhvel proposes to see the root of the latter form continued in Lat.fimus 'ordure' ,Jaex 'dregs, sediment, impurities' (ibid. 302). This raises interesting perspectives, but the suggested etymology remains essentially a 'root etymology'; also the absen~e of any laryngeal in Jimus and the a-vocalism of Jaex do not seem to be easily com­patible with Puhvel's restitution of a non-colouring (voiced) laryngeal in *dhyeE-wr·

8 For M. Peters' discussion of Hitt. lJenkzi, which he takes from older * H2ink'-ti: *H2nek'- in Skt. dna!, see my remarks in HU!. 153, note 6.

16

I believe can very well be a *-1}!:IM1}en-noun to the root *mex .... 'measure', and so ultimately be related to German Mal and Latin semel. The derivation would be *mex¥-!: > *mexur > *meur (disylM labic), of which mehur is either a writing or a further, development." This, however, remains empty speculation as long as it has not been shown that the -lJ,~ in e.g. U~e~elJ,-zi has been analogically restored on the model of forms with intervocalic -lJ~ (wi!J,un etc.), see EL. 97 (with references).

Remark 2. According to. Eichner, MSS. 31, 100, note 88, -lJ,- in melJur represents a "Lenis ... nach betonter Lange"; a fortis lJlJ, is supposed to occur before or after a stressed short vowel, and he adds that "Massgeblich ist weitgehendnicht det historische, sondern der vorhistorische Akzent ... " Cf. also Eichner, Phonetik und Lautgesetze des Hethitischen - Weg zur En tsch liisselung , LuE. 144, for cases like Hitt. pedan: Gk. ne~o'V, te-(e-)kdn < *dheg'h6m 'earth' in which the originally short *e is supposed to have been lengthened under the accent "in offener urhethitischer Silbe". Whether the e of melJur, pedan, tekan etc. was ever phonemic ally long in Hittite is, however, doubtful: G. Hart, Some Observations on Plene'" Writing in Hittite, BSOAS. XLIII, 1980, 1££., has made it seem extremely plausible that plene-writing does not indicate vowelleng~h, but is historically connected with the Indo-European accent.

Whether Armenian h- is in some cases a reflex of an initial IE. laryngeal remains doubtful (see EL. 30). According to J. A. C. Greppin, Initial Vowel and Aspiration in Classical Armenian (Studien zur

. armenischen Geschichte 13, 1973, 37ff.), Armenian h VCN represents an tEo sequence *HVC- (e.g. haw 'bird': Lat. auis < *H2ewi-), whereas Armenian VC- goes back to an IE. sequence without any initial laryngeal (e.g. acem 'I lead' which is supposed to reflect IE. *ag'-, not * H 2eg' - (ibid~ 64£,)).

I cannot accept that the meagre (and frequently ambiguous) Armenian etymological material available permits such far-reachi~g conclusions with regard to Indo-European phonology. Further, it is not clear to me why Armenian VRC- (without aspiration) is thought (ibid. 47£.) to b.e the normal development of an IE. sequence *H~C- (e.g. arcatC 'silver' < *Hrg'-, d. Hitt.ljarki-).

17

Frederik Kortlandt, H2o and oH2 ) Lingua Posnaniensis 23, 128, teaches that "the opposition between * Hae- and * H30~ was appar­ently not neutralized in Proto-Indo~European: initial * H2 and * Ha were preserved as h before *e but lost before *0 in Armenian, while * HI was always lost before a vowel, e.g. hot < * Haed- (original s-stem, d. Lat. odor), hoviw < * Hacui-peH2- (d. Lat. ovis, pastor), but orb, orjikC

, ofke, ost (d. oecpa'V6~, OeXt~, oeeo~, lfCo~, OHG ars, ast). There is zero grade in oskr < * Hastuer- (d. oa-c8o'V)."

Kortlandt's way of reasoning seems wholly circular to me: an (unexplained) Armenian contrast between ho;;, and 0- is made the justification of the assumption of an opposition between * Hae- and *Hao .. in Proto-lndo-European, the onlY vestige of· which is the Armenian contrast in question.

Meillet, Esquisse2 38, mentions that "parfois Ie meme mot se pre­sente avec et sans h, ... " and quotes hogi: ogi 'esprit' as an example. Discussing Arm. h- < IE, *H~, A. R. Bomhard (Orbis XXV, 231) points to Arm. harawunkc 'arable land': arawr 'plough' (Gk. ae6co). Walde-Pokorny, Vergleichendes Worterbuch der indogerm. Spraclzen I 78, list this etymology of harawunkc (d. Scheftelowitz, BB. 29, 58), but add: "Meillet brieflich zweifelnd". I am far from convinced that harawunkc has anything to do with the IE. verb seen in Gk. ae6w: it is attested in the Bible (Amos 9, 13) with the meaning 'sowing, seed time' cw xaycescCi xalol i harawuns 'and the grapes shall ripen at seed time', d. Leviticus 26, 5 ew kutCkC i sermans "at 0 -cevyrrnk XU-CaA?]V'e-Cat TO'll a:n:6eo'V.

§ 1. Palaic g < *Hz ?

1.0, According to C. Watkins, Die Vertretung der Laryngale in gewissen morphologiscluJ1l Kategorien in den indogermanischen Sprachen Anatoliens, Fu W. 358ff., the IE", aN colouring laryngeal has been preserved as an autonomous phoneme - written g - in Palaic. The evidence which he adduces in support of his hypothesis is taken from the following four categories: I. secondary, derived verbs in -aNgaN, -a-a-; 2. the neuter plural in -a-ga, -a~a, -a)' 3. verbs in -na-a-ga-, -na-a-, -naN, and 4. the name of the PaIaic god Za-par-waaC -a-).

1.1. Palaic verb forms in -a-ga-I-a~a- are scarce: Carruba, Das Palaische, StEoT. 10, 22f1., lists a 3 sg. form [tdk-k]u-wa-ga-ti,

18

~ak-ku-wa-ga- [ti] , tak-ku-wa-a-ti (of unknown meaning9) with the present participle forms (nom. pI. c.) ta[k-ku]wa-a-an-te-es, tdk-ku­wa-an-te-es. (The other verbs that Watkins cites can be ignored here because they do not contain the -g- which is supposed to be the reflex of a laryngeal). The sequence -aga- is regarded as a continua­tion of a Proto-Anatolian suffix *-a~ye/a-, i.e. *-alJ (= IE. stem in *-eH2) + the verbal suffix *-ye/o-. However, no explanation is of­fered of what happened to the *:1'- of the suffix in Palaic, d. ibid. 373: "Weitere Auskunfte uber die Entwicklung von Jod im Inlaut im Palaischen waren willkommen. Aber wie so oft in der Indo­germanistik: erst kommt die morphologische Einreihung; von da aus muss die Lautlehre deduktiv hergeleitet werden, und nicht umgekehrt.' '10

However, if Palaic a-ni-e-elj,-lj,a[ is the 1 sg. preterite of ani(ya-) 'wirken' (Kratylos 16, 59), the -lill- of its ending -bba corresponds exactly to that of the Luwian 1 sg. preterite ending (e.g. lJ,u-i-nu­wa-a[rlJa: lJuiya- 'to run'), d. Hitt. -lJ,lJun (IE. *-H2c). Cf. also Carruba, SlBo T. 10, 45. Similarly, lr in Palaic lja-a-ap-na-as 'river' (Carruba, ibid. 54) corresponds to the lJ- of Hitt. lJ,ap(a-) cid.' and reflects IE. *H2- (d. E. P. Ramp, MSS. 30, 35£.). As long as no particular phonetic environment has been pointed out for an aber­rant development of * H2 into Palaic g, it would seem preferable to continue regarding (lJ,)lJ as the normal reflex of the IE. a~colouring laryngeal in Palaic.

Szemerenyi, Palaic and the Indo-European Laryngeals, Flor. Anat. 318, is unquestionably right in rejecting Watkins's interpretation of Palaic takkuwa(g)a-: he thinks that if GA is not simply a misspelling for TA here (Carruba, StBoT. 10, 72), "then it would be more

II Watkins connects Palaic takkuwa(g)a- with a Hittite verb tdk-ku-wa-a-ri (3 sg. pres. middle), da-ak-ku-da-ku-wa-at-ta-at (3 sg. pret.), cf. E. Neu, StBo T. 5, 162. H. C. Melchert, KZ. 93, 266, suggests a meaning 'cover' > 'enclose, shelter' for the Hittite verb.

10 Watkins thinks (op. cit. 371£.) that *-0,.. may have been lost 'regularly' before *-:y- in Hittite and Luwian -aye- (Hitt. 3 sg. pres. -aizzi, Luwian -aiti) < Proto­AnatoL *-aflye (IE. *-eHgye-); d. also Eichner, LuE. 129; Jasanoff, MSS. 37, 92 (taking Hitt. tayezzi to be from * (s)tohJ-eje-). See, however, EL. 50. Szeme­renyi, Flor. Anat. 318, is justified in observing: "The assertion that h in the cluster -/zy- was lost in Hittite and Luwian ... , is based on the preconceived idea that -aizzi/-aiti must reflect -aye-ti ... ".

19

satisfactory to regard the verb takkuwaga- as based on an adjective derived with -(a)ga- from takkuwa-." Szemerenyi also points to the Palaic neuter plural as-ku-ma-a-u-wa-ga ( attested once) which is generally supposed to correspond to Hitt. uzusuppa 'kultisch reines Fleisch~. According to Watkins (p. 360) the -g- is here a reflex of Proto-Anatolian *-(a)lJ, < IE. *-(e)H2• Szemerenyi, however, ana­lyzes the form as *askumauwag-a seeing in the -a the neuter plural ending (= Hittite -a) of an adjective with a guttural suffix of the type *-ko-.

With no previous knowledge of Szemerenyi's article, I suggested a similar interpretation of askumauwaga in a lecture given at Bochum (Summer 1980): it seems possible to me that the relation­ship of the Palaic thematic stem askumauwa- to the enlarged stem askumauwaga- is the same as that of Skt. sana- 'old' to sanaka- 'id.'

Szemerenyi, op. cit. 317, insists on the fact that n ••• , the neuter plural ending -ah, which on Watkins' assumptions should appear as -ag, in fact appears as -aga, and again no word is loston this aber­ration." This is a cogent objection since we have no indication that a -g was originally lost in absolute finality in Palaic so that what is here written -aga could represent a 'restoration~ of the type we find in Luwian where dentals in absolute finality are lost, see Laroche, Dictionnaire de la langue louvite 132: "Get amuissement a eu pour effet des refections de finales vocaliques: l'enclitique prono­minal neutre est -ata en face de hitt. -at (= Leur. wod) ;"

However, an entirely different interpretation of the Palaic verb forms in question seems possible: takkuwati may be, not a 3 sg. pres: indo act., but a 3 sg. preterite middle of the type seen in Hittite dati (: es- 'to sit') , kisati (: kis- 'to be, happen'), kistati (: kist- 'erloschen'), for this type d. E. Neu, StBo T. 6, 28. If takkuwati should be a 3 sg. preterite middle, we may further point to the attested alternation in Hittite between 3 sg. pret. middle forms in -ati and those in -tati (e.g. lJarptati: lj,arp- 'absondern', nalJ,sariyatati: nalJ,sariyaw 'to be afraid', d. StBo T. 6, 28), and assume that Palaic takkuwati had beside it a variant form *takkuwatati: I suggest that it is the latter form that has been misspelt takkuli!agati (through confusion of the signs GA and T A). The following may lend some credibility to this admittedly hypothetical interpretation: the -g- in takkuwa(g)a- is clearly attested only in the finite 3 sg. forms; it never appears in the forms of the present participle.

20

1.2. Watkins (op. cit. 3641.) thinks that the IE. collective suffix *~eH2 survives in the Luwian abstract·collective ·suffix .alJi(t), e.g. adduwalalJi(t) 'badness': adduwali- c., adduwal n. He takes the t to be a secondary enlargement and analyzes *.alJi- as Proto·Anatolian *-alj (IE. *.eH2) + *·i-.ll The suffix combination *-alJ,i· is supposed to have survived in the Palaic word purtalJljis (of unknown mean­ing): Watkins regards this as a substantive in the nom. sg. or plural (see A Palaic Carmen, Studies Arch. A. Hill III 305ff.); according to Carruba, however, purtablJis is a verbal form in the 2 sg. preterite (StBoT. 10, 45). A vestige of Anatolian *~alJi- is seen also in Hitt. pa-ra-ra-alJ~hi-is (KEo III 60 II 10) which Watkins (365) takes to be "irgendein stadtischer Beamter oder Offizier", and in lJ,a-a-ta­!pi-is: "Das Nomen lJ,ataljis bedeutetetwas, was auf der Leber zu beobachten ist. Ware es vom Verbum ljat- 'vertrocknen' abgeleitet, konnte lwtalJ,is hier 'trockenes, trockener Fleck (auf der sonst nass aussehenden Leber)'bedeuten." (Cf. ibid. 365). But there is abso­lutely nothing to prove that the -(lJ,)lj- in these Hittite words represents * H2 (rather than * H 3) and that their -iw is a secondary enlargement. (The Palaic wa-ar-Ia-lji-is which Watkins cites is equally obscure and may be in the nom. pI. c., see Carruba, op. cit. 78).

Remark. Watkins (ibid. 366) takes KBo XIX 152 I 14' as-ku-ma-a~ u-wa-as ljaHa-an-ta ti-i-li-la lw-a-ri to mean "(Die Stucke) Fleisch [PI. cemm.] sind warm, die tilila (PI. neut.] sind (ist) warm." He finds

. in l~a~a-ri 'ist warm' a proof that Palaic preserves the old rule according to which a neuter plural was constructed with the verb in the 3 sg. Kammenhuber, however, Kratylos 16, 56, interprets the

--- Palaic passage in question as follows: "rrem (kult. reinen) Fleisch (D.-L. Pl.)gegenuber (: heth. menalJl.J.anda; . .. ) plaziert (0. a.) er/sie die tilila." lw-a-ri may well be a 3 sg. pres. active 'places' as K.ain·

11 Watkins, ibid. 364f., writes: "Rein typologisch ist die luwische Suffixhaufung -altit- mit dem archaischen griechischen Feminin -r{t:~- in formelhaft und metrisch stark eingeschrankten Wendungen wie neea/1'YJtoa 'tt.u~v(Hymn.Hom. 29, 3), np.ij~ /1uatJ.'Y)toor; (Z 193), XJ.wQrJt~ d'YJ&bv (T518), durchaus vergleichbar. Beide sind parallele Neuerungen." Szemerenyi, Flor. Anat. 316, note 9, is justified in objecting: "But if this type is, as is usually assumed (d. Schwyzer, GG I 465), from -?J.f-tO-, then the comparison with the Luwian type is im­possible. And if it is from -aH-id-, then it ought to be represented in Greek as -ato-, not -?JLO-."

21

menhuber thinks; in my opinion its initial lJ- precludes any ety­mological connection of it with Hitt. a- 'to be warm, hot'.

1.3. Of the nasal verbs in -na .. a-ga-, -na-a-, -na- there is only one form, i.e. pa-na-a-ga-an-zi, which appears with a g in it. According to Carruba, StBo T. 10, 66, this may be a present participle in -ants (written -an-zi for expected -an-za). The form in question is found in the following passage: MUSEN?JlJa-ra-as-ku-wa-ar-zi pa-na-a-ga-an-zi which Carruba, Satzeinleit. Partikeln in den idg. Sprachen Anatoliens 70, translates tentatively: "(der Adler) wird sich begeben". Watkins, ibid. 361, segments pa-na-a-ga-an-zi in panag- + ant + s, a participle of a nasal verb in -nag- < Proto-Anatolian *-nalJ- < IE. *-neH2-

and writes (p. 378): "Und sollte pal. pa-na-a-ga-an-zi, mit erhal­tenem Laryngal, in der Tat etwas wie 'wird sich begeben' oder 'erscheinen' bedeuten, dann ist es mindestens erwagenswert, An­schluss bei der Wurzel von skr. bhdti 'scheint, erscheint', und bei der seltsamen N asalbildung in griech. cpa.{yro lrp6.l'1'J zu suchen. "12

A completely different interpretation of pa-na-a-ga-an-zi has been suggested by Szemerenyi, Flor Anat. 318, who thinks that the meaning of the verb may be 'fly' rather than 'go, come': "We have referred above ... to the divinities named Gulzannikes. It has long been held that they have their name from gulzatar 'tablet', that is from *gulzatn-ika-. Assuming, then, that, unlike Luwian but like Hittite, Palaic assimilated -tn- to -nnw, *pan(n)aga- could represent *pat-n-aga-, that is IE *pet-n-oko- 'flying' from *pet- 'to fly', Of,

a Frisk, Criechisches etymologisches Worterbuch II 983, writes: "Aus arm. ba-nam mit dem nasallosen Aor. ha-fi 'ofinen, enthtiIIen' ergibt sich aber ein altes Nasalprasens; mithin lasst sich auch in lIm.v- ein urspr. Nasalprasens erkennen, das flir fast aIle ubrigen Formen massgebend wurde." However, the Armenian aorist ba-cci does not necessarily represent a stem without a nasal: just as the Armenian subjunctive aorist e-kecces etc. may reflect earlier *gWem-see- (with loss of -m- before the -s- of the suffix *-sk'e-, see Cadel, REArm. N.S. II, 36), a Pre-Armenian *bham-sk'e- may have given Arm. ha-cce- (3 sg. aorist cbacC). Pre-Armenian *bham- could represent the zero-grade *hh1JZ- of a root *bhem­which could be to *bheH2- in Skt. bhd-ti as is *gWem- (Skt. gam-) to *gWeH2- in Skt. gaR, Gk. {Ja-. lPalvro admits of the same phonetic explanation as {Ja{vro,­elPav'r] may be for *bh1Jt-e- (with n taken over from the present stem); the vocalic resonant in *bh1p-e- may be explained as the result of analogical influence from the old scJ-type seen e.g. in -6af1.-1J- (: ~dp,lIro) and similar forms. See Kurylowicz, Apophonie 171£., 177f.

22

alternatively, an IE *pet-n-ogo- from the original rJn-stem seen in Hitt. pattar 'wing', and comparable to Ind. pataltga- 'flying'."

1.4. The name of the Palaic god Zaparwa-JZaparwat- cannot be accepted as evidence for the preservation of IE. * Hz in Palaic, see Szemerenyi, Flor. Anat. 318£.

1.5. Watkins's hypothesis that IE. * Hz is continued as g in Palaic does not seem to find convincing support in the attested material: despite their very fragmentary state, the meagre Palaic remnants nevertheless indicate that the regular Palaic reflex of the IE. a-colouring laryngeal was (lj)lJ. Further, if the proposed morphemic analysis of askumauwaga as *askumauwag-a is correct, the Palaic neuter plural may have ended in -a (as in Hittite and Luwian).

§ 2. The ablaut *li: *0.

2.0. The vowel triad *t: *0,.' *0 points to the earlier existence of at least three different laryngeals: the occurrence of a- and 0-

grade in morphological environments that otherwise show e-grade may be accounted for by' assuming that the laryngeals caused not only lengthening, but also colouring of neighbouring vowels (EL § 23).

N. E. Collinge, Collectanea linguistica 98, referring to W. Cowgill adduces another piece of evidence which points in the same direction: since the present is normally characterized by an e-grade, the Greek nasal infixing verbs in (sg.) -v&.- seem to presuppose *-mtHz- with an a-colouring laryngeal, which means that the parent language must have possessed at least two different laryngeals, i.e.

---* Hz and * Hl) the neutral or non-colouring laryngeal found e.g. in the stem *pleH1-, d. Skt. purlJd-.13

Remark 1. ' According to A. R. Barnhard, Typological Studies and the Identification of the Indo-European Laryngeals, Festschrift for Oswald Szemerenyi, 1979, Part. I, 128, stressed *d "was not changed to *e

IS Collinge, op. cit. 98, looks for an alternative explanation of the verbs in -va-, suggesting that they may be due to analogy: " ... possibly -IJ'ijt.uj-bE/-le1l brings -VVpt/-'VvJlev into line, and -ViipL/-VC1.peJ) fits the patterning." However, he does not find his own suggestion very convincing since it is "the full grade which seems to have affected (in coloration) the zero grade" in Greek (ibid. 98).

23

'l,

in the neighborhood of the laryngeals *~2 and *~4 (Sturtevant's x and h respectively)." Bomhard reconstructs the vowel system of Pre-Indo-European as a iii.

Remark 2. The IE. dialects present no direct reflex of the non­colouring laryngeal (* HI)' The situation in Anatolian is unclear (EL. 38fI.): there can be no doubt that * HI has been lost in certain cases (e.g. Bitt. da-a-i: Skt. dha-); on the other hand, the origin of the simple -lJ- (combined with e-vocalism) in welJzi and similar forms is unknown. According to G. A. K.limov, Vopro-rJ metodiki sravnitel 'no-geneticeskix issledovanij (Akademija Nauk SSSR, L~ningrad 1971), p. 46, we may have a tangible reflex of an initial * HI - in the Udi word for 'horse', i.e. ~k, pI. ~k-ur or ~k-ur-ux (the u belongs to the suffix) in which ~ is a pharyngealized vowel e, and Ie is aspirated voiceless k. (U di is the southernmost of the East-Caucasian'lan­guages). Klimov suggests that ~k may be an IE. loan-word, i.e. a reflex of IE. *H1ek'wo- (Skt. asva-, Lat. equus etc.). Hans Vogt has -informed me that the 'pressed' vowels of U di may as a rule be ascribed to the loss of an initial pharyngeal. Thus one might assume that IE. * HIek'wo- underwent the following development once it had found its way into Udi: *H1ck'wo- > [*xek-] > *[x~k-], whence ~k. Klimov's etymological explanation might indicate that IE. * HI should be defined as a pharyngeal, i.e. a fricative consonant produced by retracting the root of the tongue towards the hind­wall of the pharynx. (For the possibility that some of the IE. 'laryngeals' may in fact have been pharyngr:als, see Martinet, Pro­ceedings Vlllth Congress 42f£'). Although Klimov's hypothesis raises interesting perspectives, a critical appraisal of it remains impossible as long as it is based on only the word l}k as accidental similarity of form cannot be ruled out in such a case.

2.1. The existence of an IE. ablaut *ti: *0 is extremely doubtful (see EL. §§ 26, 39, 80).14 However, Borgstr0m's suggestion (EL. 49) that the contrast *e: *a was phonemicized through a syncretism of * HI and * H2 in * H prior to the rise of the qualitative ablaut can no longer be maintained. On the other hand, the ablaut

14 C. J. Ruijgh, Lingua 26, 19Off., tries to motivate a phonetic change of *H2,o to * H2,a " his conclusions are accepted by E. P. Ramp, MSS. 37, 62. From a phonetic point of view such a change is hardly plausible, see EL. 49 (with references) .

24

*e > *0 may have arisen while the contrast *e: *a was still pho­netic, and since, according to this view, the ablaut in question oc­curred later than the colouring of * lei to * [a] by a neighbouring * H 2 , it could not affect the * lei of * leH2! which had already been changed to * [a], an allophone of * I e/.15

There seems to be no way of deciding whether the ablaut *e > *0, the origin of which remains unexplained,16 is to be placed chronologically before or after the zero grade (d. also below § 6). There. can be no doubt, however, that Anatolian preserves cle"ar traces of the ablaut *e > *0 (d. § 6.1).

2.2. According to R. S. P. Beekes, Sprache 18, 117££., *(H2)0 < * H 2o is in regular ablaut alternation with * (H2) a < * H 2e. How­ever, as indicated in HuI. 156f., note 30, several of the examples that he quotes in support of his theory may be explained diffe­rently: thus a form like Lat. auris may represent *x(W)ews- (through dissimilation of labiality17), whereas a non-dissimilated *xWews­underlies Gk. oJ~. The suggested dissimilation may have occurred either at a stage when *[a] and *[0] were still allophones of *JeJ,

Iii See NTS. 25, 120, where Hovdhaugen, who considers the contrast e:a to have been in the first instance phonetic, assumes the following 'ordering of rules' : "Basic phonological represen tation : [eH l ]

Rule 1: e --> [:J /- [~:] [eHI]

[eH2] [eHa] [aH2] [oHa]

Rule 2: e --> 0 (Ablaut) [eH1, oH1] [aH2] [oHa] Since rule I operates before rule 2, rule 2 cannot affect the [e] in the basic representation, which is changed to [a] or [0] by rule 1. There is in this case no reason to assume any merging of laryngeals." Of. § 6.2.

16 Of. e.g. Szemerenyi, Einfuhrung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft 112ff. 1'1 A. R. Bomhard, Typological Studies and the Identification of the Indo-European

Laryngeals, Festschrift Oswald Szemeren)'i, 1979, Part), 129f., maintains that Indo-European appears not to have had labialized laryngeals: "Since refleXes of the Indo-European labialized postvelars are written in Hittite with the sign ku, we would expect labialized Iaryngeals to be written with the sign !Ju. In not a single instance where Martinet and those who follow him would reconstruct *AW does Hittite have a corresponding lJ,u." However, a labialized velar fricative * [XW] may, of course, have developed differently from a labi­alized stop *kw in Anatolian. Bomhard points further to the root *po. 'to drink' which he interprets as *poH1- (*H1 being defined as a glottal stop); Skt. p£bati from *pibeti is taken to represent *pi-pH1eti. However, the recon­struction of an o-grade in *poH1- would seem to require some further motiva­tion.

25

or even before the colouring of */e/ to *[a] or *[0] in the vicinity of *H2 or * Ha. The following examples may be explained cor­respondingly:

Skt. dyus- < *XWryw-: Gk. aiEl, alwv < *x(W)ryw-; OIr. uan < *xWeg(W)no-: Gk. afhv6~ < *xCW)egWno-; Gk. olwv6~ < *xwewy-: Lat. auis < *x(W}ewy-.

Remark 1. E. P. Hamp, MSS. 37, 64, note 7, reconstructs 'sheep' as *f!aewi- and writes: "A further interesting poi.nt of the non­apophonic vowel of *f!aewi- is that it does not undergo Brugmann's Law in Skt. dvif1,." However, Skt. dvif1, may reflect a dissimilated *x(l~)ewy-; alternatively it may have a- through analogical in­fluence from oblique cases like the gen. sg. avyaf1, (*xwewy-e/os).

Op. cit. 125 Beekes discusses Gk. nof,"'~v and Lat. pasco, pastor and writes: "1 think a convincing argument can be found in Hitt. pahs- 'schiitzen'. If we were to distinguish *pii- = *peh2- from *po- = *peha-, the meaning of the Hittite word would make us expect *po- = *peha-. This, however, is impossible, as Hitt. pas­'einen Schluck nehmen' must certainly represent *po- = *peha- 'to drink', which shows that ha in this position disappeared. The -h­therefore must represent h2 • Further, the -s- of Hittite has its parallel in Latin. This means that the form (*peh2-s-) of the one and the meaning ('schiitzen') of the other of the two supposed roots are found together in Hittite. This strongly suggests that it is in fact one root. We have, then, *peh2- > *pa--j*poh2- > *po-." (Cf. also F. Bader, Noms de bergers de la racine *pa-, Studies Palmer 17f£') .

However, if Ritt. pas~ 'einen Schluck nehmen' should he related to IE. *po-'to drink' - which is by no means certain18 - it might still be assumed (EL. 51) that IE. *peHa- 'to drink' contained a voiced laryngeal (d. Skt. pibati19) which was lost in Hittite. A voice-

18 Schmitt-Brandt, Die Entwicklung des indogerm. Vokalsystems 117, compares Hittite pas- with Skt. bhas- 'to devour'.

10 H. Eichner, LuE. 146f., note 69, writes: "Doppeldeutig bleibt palaisch Adj. PI. Dat. malitannat 'honighaltig'. Statt einer dem heth. militd- analogen ErkHirung kann hier die Wirkung von lzs (ths > d wie phs > b) angcnommen werden, denn eine Grundform +mlit-hson-( -+ *mlidon) 'honighaltig' mit dem Possessivsuffix -Hon- (Karl Hoffmann, Aujsiitze zur Indoiranistik p. 378-383),

26

less * H3 would seem to have been preserved as (lj)lj in Hittite and in Luwian, d. e.g. Luwian ljawis 'sheep', Hitt. ljastai and similar forms (EL. 35f.). Hence, Gk. 'lWtfl~V might represent a root *PeH3~ 'to protect' (d. NTS. 22, 110).

However, if one root only should underlie Gk. nOtfl~'V and Lat. pasco, pastor etc., I would suggest that this be reconstructed as *pexw-.(with a voiceless *xw = * H3)~ In a stem *PexwJw~, seen in Skt. payu- and Gk. nwv, an early dissimilation of labiality (*pexWyw- > *pexyw-) may have given rise to a variant root~form *pex- > *pa­(seen in Lat. pastor etc.). Theoretically, Skt. payu- might reflect a dissiInilated *payw- < *pex{w)yw-, and there is no way of knowing whether Ritt. paljs-, paljljas- is from (dissimilated) *pex-s- or from *pexw-s-.

In REArm. N.S. 15 I have suggested that the Armenian verb keam 'I live', aorist kecci goes back to a stem * gWia_ < * gWiex(W)-, the dissimilated counterpart of * gWiexW-, seen in Gk. {JtW-.

The form *ak'-'sharp' (Gk. dun etc.) may have originated in the u-stem *x{W}ek'w- (Lat. acus, -ils 'needle'), d. Pokorny, lEW. 18f. for the various forms. (One might even consider explaining Lat. acu(-pedius) as representing' a (dissimilated) normal grade *x(W)ek'w­vis-a.-vis a lengthened grade *xw6k'w- seen in the Gk. wuv~ etc.).

Some a-grade forms may be explained along the lines suggested by Kurylowicz, Apophonie 185: "On sait en effet que Ie degre zero phonetique des cliphtongues ai, au, ar, etc., etant i, u, r, il existe la possibilite d'en tirer un degre 0: ai, au, or ... Autrement dit, un degre zero i, u, (, detache du degre plein ai, au, or, peut devenir la base du vocalisme oi, ou, or, etc." Examples: Gk. alaa 'part qui echoi t' 20, Oscan aeteis 'partis' : laaaa{}at· u;'?]e 0 va{} at. Aea (J tot (Hsch.) :

- --ol7:o~ 'sort, destin, infortune'; Arm. ayt 'joue': Lett. idra 'Ia moelle pourrie d'un arbre': Gk. olr5a.v 's'enfler'; Gk. ayxd>v 'coude', If.yuo~ 'vallee', Lat. ancus 'qui aduncum brachium habet': Skt. acati

des sen Laryngal Eric P. Hamp als ha identifizieren konnte (MSS 30, 1972, p. 36), erkHirt schlagend Bildung und Bedeutung des pal. Adjektivs." How­ever, Carruba, StBoT. 10,40, maintains - as does Kammenhuber, BSL. LIV 28f. - that Sturtevant's rule cannot be 'verified' in Palaic.

20 According to Szemerenyi, Studi Micenei 20, 220, alaa "is an Aeolic develop­ment from the Anatolian hannessa ... 'judgment', ... the syncopated Ana­tolian form *hansa was taken over as *havO'a, and then developed into psilotic alaa. The semantic development was 'judgment, statement, fatum' - 'destiny, someone's lot' - 'share' ... ".

27

'courber': Lat. uncus 'crochet, etc.', Ok. oyxo~ 'barbes'; Lat. angulus 'angle': Skt. agra- 'pointe': Lat. ungulus 'bague'; d. ibid. 186: "De meme, lorsqu'il s'agit du vocalisme normal ii, on peut aboutir au degre 0 en partant du degre zero fJ, commun a e et ii." Examples: q)'Ylflt: rp(JPBY, rpa:r:or;, rpriatr;: rpw'V1J (but see EL 48f.)21; lf3r)'v: jJd7:'r}'V,

{Jif:ro t;, {Jriau;: jJwpo r; (but see Hirt, Indogerm. Gramm. II, 183 : * g W em-) ; nt'fjaaw (1] < ii) : ennlxo'V: nt'w~ ; Dfjyw ('YJ < ii) 'aiguiser' : t'sDwYflevOt • t'E{}V/lWP.B1IOt, flsflE{}vapB'Vot, and t'B{}wxt'at • t'8f}vfl()n:a£ ("Le manque du degre zero n'est qu'accidentel ... ", p. 186); (for Dw~at • {-tcfJvaat, nA'YJeWaat (Hsth.) etc. see. Chantraine, Symbolae Kurylowicz 39f£'). Ibid. p. 186, Kurylowicz adds: "Sous l'influence de l{)w{)fj 'nourriture', onwnfj 'vue, action de voir', o{)W01] 'odeur', formes du type t'op,fj a redoublement et allongement morphologique ... , on tire aussi de *ag', ifyiiyo'V, avec un if con«;u comme degre zero, aywY1} 'conduite', -aywyor; 'qui guide'; d. aussi axwx'lj 'pointe' < *ak' et, sans redoublement, 'Xwn'r} 'poignee, manche' < xan7:w 'happer' ." If Att. a7:O (t) a 'roofed colonnade' represents * stowiti and is derived from *steH2- 'stand', its o-grade may have been built on the zero grade seen in a7:VAOr; 'pillar', i.e. *stiiw(ros) , d. m:aveor; 'stake,,: *stu(los): *stow(iri). Gk. o'Vae may represent *Haonr, *Haner­(d. Beekes, Development 46); Arm. ar.urj 'dream' may have a pro­thetic a- which is to Gk. ~- in O'V8teO~ as is the a- of Arm. onun to the 0- of Gk. o'Vop.a. For Lat. aio which is for *egyo: perf. * eg- in the same way as apio is for *epyo: perf. ep-, and for Gk. (a'V-)wya < perf. * H1e-Hlog- see BSL. LXIX, 155ff. The 1 sg. pres .. ending *-0 allows of different interpretations, d. HuI. 157, note 30.

In MSS. 34, 1 7£., Beekes quotes some further examples in support of his theory. Thus n&.eo~ (= Skt. purds) from *Prh20S "definitely proves that h2 did not change 0 into a. The a of naep~ proves that the laryngeal was h2 (hl would have given Sf], ha oe), and the Greek 0

requires PIE 0." However, the alleged passage of *CrHl V-, *CrHa V­to Gk. C 8e V-, C oe V- is itself a questionable hypothesis (see IF. 77, 307£., and d. also M. Peters, Untersuchungen zur Vertretung der idg. Laryngale im Griechischen, Wien 1977, p. 1 05f.) which cannot 'prove' anything. Beekes refers further to the root *al-/*ol- 'darliber hinaus' (OIr. al 'beyond', ind-oll 'ultra' etc.) and writes: "If *ol- was *h2el-, *ol- must be *h2ol- with the 0 unaffected." (ibid. p. 18). However,

21 E. P. Ramp, MSS. 37, 64, note 7, thinks that pwv~ and oY"o~ "must be new productive Proto-Greek o-grades."

28

aIr. al may represent * H/- (for the development of preconsonantal */ to aIr. al d. e.g. (at-)baill 'dies' < *-baln-, and see Thurneysen, 'A Grammar of Old Irish 131).

To sum up: the preceding examination would seem to show that there is no conclusive evidence for the view that * (H2) 0 < * H 2o is the regular o-ablauting counterpart of the normal grade *(H2)a < *Hze.

Remark 2. Eichner, Sprache 24, 151, believes that the verbal roo't underlying Arm. aganim 'I dress' (and Hitt. unu- 'Schmuck an­legen') is *au- ; he adds in his foot-note 28: "Wegen der Proportion .~au: *ues = * H 2eu: * H 2ues 'die Nacht verbringen' ... ist *ues als ;Erweiterung von au zu beurteilen . .. Damit ist zum ersten Mal eine einradikalige uridg. Verbalwurzel nachgewiesen." Since there is no vestige of an initial laryngeal in *wes- (Skt. vdste etc., see Cowgill, EvfL.2 161), the idea that *wes- is derived from *Hew­should be regarded with scepticism. Arm. aganim < *aw- may reflect -a dissimilated *x{W}ew-,' *ow- < *xwew- (without dissimila­tion) is found in Umbriart anouihimu 'induitor' and in Lat. ind-uo. (Szemerenyi, Latin Verbs in -uo, -uere, Italic and Romance. Linguistic Studies in Honor of Ernst Pulgram, 1980, 9££., thinks that Lat. ind-uo, oas. ob-uJg, and Lith. aviu can represent IE. *auyo. He takes Umbrian anouihimu as "an intensive *oweyo (d. Umbrian tursitu 'terreto' from * torseyetod) ." ( ibid. p. 21).). _ 2.3. F. Kortlandt, Lingua Posnaniensis 23 127£', discusses the ablaut

*li: *IJ and agrees with Ruijgh, Lingua 26, 181f£., that * H2 coloured a contiguous *0 to a in Greek, but he thinks (p. 128) "that the relevant instances do not date back to the Indo-European proto­language. The simplest assumption is that the opposition between the laryngeals was neutralized in the neighbourhood of PIE *0, where they merged into * H a, and that * li2 was restored in certain productive categories in Proto-Greek. Thus, we have &yo~ < * H 2og6s) q;ljftrJ < *blwH2meH2, (:JtfJrJua. < (:Je(:Jaua < *-glJ-oH2- (d. ~e~olxa) on the analogy of ayw < * H 2eg-, ([JrJftl < *bheH2-, (:Jl(:J'YJftl < *-gY-eH2- next to oyftO~ < * Haog- < * H2og-, aywylj, cpwPfj, f3wftOC; < *-oHa- < *-oH2-. The analogical development must be dated be­fore the loss of the laryngeals because the latter eliminated the motivation for it." He assumes further that the "timbre neutrali­zation of the laryngeals in the neighbourhood of *0 has its analogue

29

in Shuswap, which offers the closest typological parallel to the PIE laryngeals. In this language, all consonants which are members of pairs exhibiting the rounding-correlation are rounded before and after the rounded vowel ... "

Kortlandt's hypothesis seems to me to be une vue de l'esprit since the supposition of a restoration of * H2 in certain productive cate­gories in Proto-Greek and the assumption that a distinct * H2 could colour a neighbouring *0 to *a at this relatively late stage are entirely gratuitous. (Moreover, the change of * H2o to * H2a would seem difficult to motivate phonetically, d. EL. 49.).

In accordance with what has been said above, a formation like ay6~, in which one might expect an *o-grade (d. 7:op,6~: 7:8p,Vro and see Lejeune, Phonetique historique 203, note 3) goes back to * [Hzag' ...!..] « * IH2eg'...!../) , the *[aJ of which has not been affected by the ablaut *e > *0 since the latter occurs later than the colouring of * leI to * [a] in the neighbourhood of * H 2 •

Remark. The etymology of oypor; 'furrow' has not been established beyond doubt. Theoretically, it may represent older *lJu-por; with the sonorization seen in 'J'CAtypa: 'J'CABXro etc. as suggested by Ben­veniste, Hittite et Indo-Europeen 107£., who compared lJypo~ to Hittite akkala- 'Saatfurche' (d. Friedrich-Kammenhuber, Hethi­tisches Worterbuch 1, 52). For the sonorization in nAsYt-ta, fJsTyt-ta and similar cases see Lejeune, Phonetique historique 77. It should be stressed here that the Hittite word is written ak-ka-a-Ia-an (ace. sg.), ag-ga-li (dat., loc.) etc., the -kk-, -gg- indicating an original voiceless *-k- in accordance with Sturtevant's rule.

2.4. It is often assumed, doubtless correctly, that the flexion seen in the Vedic type vrkflJ 'she-wolf' (: vika- m.), gen. sg. vrktyalz" d. Olcel. ylgr22, is built on a generalized zero-grade of the suffix *-yeH2- found in the equally old type Vedic devt 'goddess' (: deva­m.), gen. sg. dev(i)yd!t. (For Iranian vestiges of the type vrktlJ see

22 According to Streitberg, Urgermanische Grammatik 146, *wulgw- (in Proto­Germanic *wulgwiz = Vedic vrkt!z,) was reduced to *wulg- (d. ylgr) pho­netically in the oblique cases where the *-w- stood before a consonantal *-J-. This explanation may be maintained if one assumes that the Proto-Germanic flexion (*wulgwiz), *wulgwijaz (= Vedic vrkf/t, vrkiyafr,) had been assimilated, at an early stage, to the one in (*-i), g. sg. *-Joz etc. (= Vedic devf, dev(i)yd[i,), see EC. (forthcoming) for further details.

30

Mayrhofer, Recherches de linguistique. Hommages it M. Leroy, 1980, 130f.). If this is accepted, the gen. sg. of the word for 'she-wolf' may be reconstructed as */wlkWyH2es/. In accordance with what has been said in § 2.1 this form, which would be realized phoneti­cally as *[w/kwiH2as], would not have its -a- affected by the subse­quent ablaut *e > *0 (d. Lat. g. sg. (ped)-is: Gk. (noo)-6~). The sequence * [-iH2as] would develop into *-i(y)as after the loss of the intervocalic laryngeal in the IE. dialects outside of Anatolian . .I have suggested in EG. (forthcoming) that a genitive of this type in *-i(y)as survives in the OIr. gen. sg. in -e seen in *-i-, *:)Ia- and *-a-stems (of the type seitche, soilse, tuaithe: setig, soilse, tuath). The Gaulish SVLLIAS discussed by D. Ellis Evans, Gaulish Personal Names 471, may also represent Celtic *-tJas; the same applies to the genitives in -ia(s), -eas etc. found in the Ogam inscriptions.

§ 3. Assimilation of a laryngeal and R (= f, l, m, n).

3.0. For the possibility of an old assimilation of laryngeal and *y or *w see EL. 62f. and d. examples like *dheyyeHl -, optative of *dheH1- (Skt. dha-) seen in Skt. dheydm, Gk. f)elrw)' *g'noyyeHl -,

optative of *g'neH1- 'to know' (Skt. jfia-, Hitt. ga-ne-es-, ·NTS. 24, 7ff. ), seen in Sk t. j neyds, G k. y'V 0 ll] ~.

This assimilation may have left a vestige in the so-called Ger­manic 'Verscharfung' (EL. 64£., with references) and d. R. Ltihr, MSS. 35, 73.23 R. S. P. Beekes, Orbis XXI, 327f£., maintains that

____ 23 R. Ltihr, ibid. 84, note 3, refers to K. Hoffmann, Aufiiitze zur Indoiranistik II 561, Anm. 2, who thinks that Goth. twaddje, GIcel. tveggja, ORG. zweiio may ultimately reflect a preform *dwoy-How, an old dual form with a laryngeal in the gen. loco ending. Independently, I offered the same explanation of the Germanic forms in question in NTS. 26, 1972,231, where I posited *dwoyHows as the original form. My reconstruction of a gen. loco dual ending *-Hows was motivated in the following way (ibid. 224f.): "bei den i-, u- und r-Stammen verlangt das Metrum in I}gveda auch nach kurzer Silbe so ganz iiberwiegend dissyllabische Aussprache der Ausgange -yos, -vos, -ros, dass Wackernagel, Ai. Gramm. III, S. 56, darin das Ursprlingliche sieht. Eine Aussprache (Gen. Lok.) hdrios (: hari- 'goldgelb') erklart sich am einfachsten dadurch, dass diese Bildung einst *g'heli-Hows lautete: nach dem Schwund des anlautenden 'Laryngals' der Endung erhalten wir ein (dreisilbiges) *g'heli-ows (mit einem pra-vokalischen Allomorph *jg'heli-j.)"

31

laryngeals have no bearing on the question of the Germanic 'Verscharfung', but he does not enter into a discussion of its origin(s). Recently J. J as an off, Observations on the Germanic Ver­scharfung, MSS. 37, }7£f., has proposed a new interpretation of forms like OIcel. byggva, byggja: he suggests that a Pre-Germanic form *bheuh2-eje- gave Grnc. *beu-i-, whence *beuw-i- with -w- filling out the hiatus caused by the loss of the intervocalic laryngeal: "Subsequently, intervocalic *-uw- could have been reinterpreted as a phonological geminate, and * beuwi- would have assumed the shape *bewwi- (> *biwwi- > OT. byggvi-)Y, d. ibid. 80. It is generally agreed, however, that a resonant or semi-vowel standing after a vowel and before a consonant was consonantal in form in Proto-Indo-European (see Edgerton, Language 19, 108, § 63a, A. 4; E. Seebold, Das System der indogerm. Halbvokale 344ff.). Consequently, Jasanoff's reconstructed form *bheuh2-eje- shopld be interpreted phonemically as * /bhewH-eye-/: the subsequent loss of the pre­vocalic laryngeal would produce * bhew-eye- (unless one accepts the assumption of a much earlier gemination of *w and the following laryngeal), and there would thus be no basis for introducing a 'euphonic glide' [-w-] here.

3.1. I do not know of any convincing example of a corresponding assimilation of a laryngeal and one of the resonants *r, *l, *m, *n (EL. 62£.). Seebold's explanation (KZ. 80, 273££.) of the nn in OIcel. kann (and ann) is not the only possible on·e24 ; d. also PEE. 94, 433, concerning simple n of Gnlc. *Nana N (to breathe, d. Goth. uz-on, which Seebold himself takes to represent IE. *anaH

•

R. Ltihr, in an article entitled Germanische Resonantengemination durch Laryngal, MSS. 35, 37f£., has attempted to produce more evidence in support of Seebold's hypothesis of a gemination of *-RH- V- > Gmc. *NRR- V-. (Since *-1j.H- V~ seems to give Gme. *-uR-V-, it follows, according to R. Liihr, ibid. 86, note 15, that the development of *-!}- to *-uR- is chronologically posterior to the gemination in question). Liihr's discussion of a passage of *-RH-V­> *-RR- V- is restricted to Germanic. Several of the examples that she adduces involve both phonetic and morphological difficulties that make them seem at best inconclusive. The following are the best candidates for such a development:

2& See IF. 71, 281.

32

IE. *gWerHs-eJow 'swallow' > Gmc. *kwerra- 'id.', d. OEng. a-cworren 'betrunken, iibersattigt', see also Seebold, KZ. 80, 280. (Thematic forms of this stem are attested e.g. in Vedic 3 pI. sub­junctive aorist garan RV. I, 158, 5, and probably in the Armenian 3 sg. aorist eker (("OW keraw : present utem 'I eat', d. § 4.1) ) .Th ere is no such gemination, however, in OHG. queran 'seufzen' < IE. *gWerli- 'to praise, sing, etc.' (d. Skt. pres. g['lltiti; gurta-, from gur­'to greet', see Pokorny, lEW. 478), d. what was said above con­cerning Gmc. *-ana- 'to breathe'. (Cf. however Seebold, VEWGSV: 317).

The coexistence of forms like Goth. stairno, OIcel. stjarna, OHG. sterno: OEng. steorra, ORG. sterro, or Goth.fairneis, OS.fern, ORG. firni: Goth. fairra, OIcel. .!Jarre, OEng. jeor, ORG. ferro, OS. fer (for which see Streitberg, Urgermanische Grammatik 140) may give some reason to speculate whether the rr of OEng. -cworren might not ultimately be due to an assimilation of earlier *-rn- which would allow us to explain *kwurrana- (> OEng. -cworren) by as­suming a contamination in Germanic of an old verbal adjective *kwurra- < Gmc. *kwurna- 'betrunken' = Skt. girtJa- < IE. * gWrHano- (for the sense cf: Lith. girtas 'betrunken') with the parti­ciple of the regular strong verb, i.e. *kwurana- (of the type seen in *hurana-, Goth. baurans). The rr of OEng. mete-cweorra 'Vbersat­tigung' (Seebold, VEWGSV. 318) might have been taken over from * kwurrana- > -cworren.

According to R. Liihr, ibid. 75, the stem of Gmc. *arja- 'to plough' must originally have been *arr- < IE. *arHa- (d. Gk. ae6ro etc.) since its preterite, seen in ORG. ier, follows the Vllth Class which comprises roots of the structure *~aCC~. She offers no ex-

--planation, however, for the subsequent 'reduction' of the postulated *rr of *arr- to the r that we find attested in Goth. arjan, etc.

An IE. (or Pre~Gmc.) *-yejo- present to a stem *HzarH- 'to . plough' (the stem final laryngeal of which remains undecided, see § 4-.15) may be posited as */H2arH-ye-/. The latter, realized pho­netically as * [H2arH-iye-J in accordance with Sievers' Law, would have yielded *ar-iye- after the loss of the prevocalic laryngeals. If a present stem of this shape existed in Germanic while Sievers' Law was still active, its preterite would be likely to be formed according to the pattern of the Vllth Class: the root of *ar-ije- behaves morphophonemically as if its structure were of the type *-aCC-, d.

33

e.g. *haldM) * saltM (in Goth. haldan, saltan, preterite haihald, saisalt). -This observation would seem to give some support to my earlier attempt to account for the OHG. preterite ier which I have identi­fied with Lat. araui (NTS. 22, 74f£., d. also below §§ 4.1, 4.15). At a later stage the suffix *MijeM in *arije- must have been reduced (by some sort of 'converse of Sievers' Law') to Grnc. *-je- (*arje-). A corresponding reduction of an original *arije- to *arje- would seem to have taken place in Welsh arddaf'I plough' the -rddM of which presupposes earlier *-rj- (see K. Jackson, Language and History in Early Britain 472£,). OIr. airim is ambiguous in this respect.

Grnc. *wella- (wallen, waltzen') seen in OIcel. vella, is supposed to reflect IE. *welH-e- (R. Luhr, ibid. 76), d. Skt. urmi- 'a wave'. One might, however, prefer to connect the Grnc. verb in question with OIr. fillid 'beugt, wendet' (d. Seebold, VEWGSV. 553), and in that case the II of *wellaM would represent earlier * .. In-. Gme. *bella- 'bellen' has no established etymology and may be ignored here.

Gmc. *rinna- 'rinnen, laufen' (d. Goth. rinnan etc.) is taken to reflect IE. *ri-nH-, d. 3 pI. Skt. ri'(ulnti (: sg. rilpiti), ibid. 78: the nn is supposed to have spread to all other forms of the verb in question frorn the 3 plural. According to R. Luhr, ibid. 78, *rinw­is not a likely source of Grnc. *rinn-: she thinks that "ari~zvan

MS I 2,17 : 27,3 sicherlich eine singuHire Entgleisung ist. AIle ubrigen Texte haben namlich irn selben Opferspruch das korrekte ari1Jan". However, Seebold's thorough discussion (VEWGSV. 376£.) shows clearly enough that an original form of the shape *rnw~ (Skt. 1'lp5ti, 1'1J.vanti) cannot be excluded as a possible preform of *rinna- (with an analogical vocalism).

3.2. In Fu W. 376f£., C. Watkins postulates a 'gemination' of R + laryngeal to -RRM in Hittite: "der Laryngal geht verloren vor Vokal, mit graphischer Verdoppelung des Sonorlauts." (p. 376). His results are accepted by Jasanoff, MSS. 37, 1978, 88, note 3.

Watkins describes (ibid. 376) the possible difference between graphic -nn- and -n- etc. in Hittite as follows: ''~b der Unter­schied einer von geminierten versus einfachen Konsonanten war [-nn-: -n-] , oder einer vonjortis versus lenis_[-N- : -n-], ist ungewiss und vielleichtnie sicher zu entscheiden; aber der graphische

34

Unterschied ist da, und der Fall von geminierendem -a 'und' und nicht-geminierendem -a caber' bringt eine willkommene Bestati­gung dazu."

However, the evidence which Watkins produces in support of the suggested change of *-R + H- to -RR- is far from convincing. Thus, he takes (p. 376f.) tarra- 'imstande sein, konnen, vermogen' to represent *trH-o- (or *torH-o-), and to be etymologically related to tarfy- 'iiberwinden, konnen'; the middle form tarratta is thought to correspond to Skt. tirati or tarale. A corresponding morphologiCal type is sought in sarra- 'brechen', marra-(nt-) 'zerstiickelt werden, zergehen', malla- 'mahlen', iskalla- 'zerschlitzen'. Watkins has not been able, however, to point out the exact phonetic conditions that produced Hittite -RR- from *-R- + laryngeal: many Hittite words and forms present an unaltered sequence -RlJ,- between vowels: arlJa 'weg', arlJai- 'die Runde machen' (StBoT. 12, 82), tarlJ- 'be­siegen' (d. 1 sg. pret. tarlJun etc.), pallJi- 'breit' etc., parlJ- 'hetzen, treiben', iterat. parlj,esk-, san(lJ,)lj,- 'suchen' (1 sg. pret. salllj,un etc.), sarlJ- 'iiberfallen', sarlJuntalli- 'diuberisch', wallJ- 'schlagen' .25

25 Similarly, I find it hard to believe that Hittite kuissa is from *kuis-~a, ibid. 375: "Nun entspricht heth. ku-is-sa 'jeder', mit Doppelung, dem luwischen ku-is-lJa, hieroglyphisch QU-i-s-Iza. In diesen Sprachen erscheint die enklitische kopulativische Konjunktion 'und' im allgemeinen als -lJa, neben heth. -a. Ich schlage daher vor, class die hethitische Konjunktion -a, die immer und nur nach Konsonanten erscheint, einen anlautenden Laryngal verloren hat; und class dieser Laryngal mit kompensatorischer Verdoppelung des vorange­henden Konsonanten schwand." The postvocalic form of 'und' in Hittite is :)la, and I think Kammenhuber is perfectly right in writing (Hethitisches Wiirter­buch 1, 44): "Heth. -ja neben -a ausserdem (mit Neumann IF 67, 1962, 200, der dies mi t got.Ja-h, toch. yo, beicle 'und', verbinden mach te) keinesfalls als Var. mit Gleitlaut (so z.B. Kronasser VLFH, 1956, § 167) wegzudisputieren. "One may also point to the fact that a sequence -S£t- is found unaltered in cases like Hitt. e$lLar, is£tai- etc. I cannotfollowV.1. Georgiev, Orbis 27, 44ff., who thinks that *-rxy- (x = * Ha) gives Hitt. -rr- (lJarra- 'zerstossen, zerdrUcken, zerreiben' from *herxyex- (h = * H 2) = Gk. de6w etc.; tarra- is supposed to come from *terx-y- (where *terx- is the stem tarlJ-)); according to Georgiev, *-rxs- gives Hitt. -rS-: ~ars 'beackern', with -s- as in pars- 'zerbrechen' and similar forms. Such speculations show just how little we still know of Hittite phonology both synchronically and diachronically. Ibid. 49, Georgiev explains (quite un­convincingly) the double -ltlJ- of Hitt. I sg. pres. -altlJi as being the result of the following combination: * -ex (= Hi tt. -alJ = Gk. 1 sg. -(I)) + * -he (= G k. 1 sg. perf. -a) + -y (introduced analogically from the 3 sg. pres. in *-ty).

35

Theoretically, the initial consonant of e.g. larra- 'imstande sein' may represent IE. *l-, *th-, *d-, *dh-, so that it seems in fact difficult to prove definitely that tarra- is genetically related to tarlY- 'besiegen' (a u-enlargement of which is attested in tarlJu(i)- = Skt. tarute, tiirvati 'besiegt', d. EL. 44, note 22). One might equally well con­nect Bitt. tarra- with e.g. Lith. deru, inf. dereti 'taugen, etc.' Matters beconle even more ambiguous as Watkins (ibid. 376) thinks that the position of the accent may in some cases be responsible for 'geminated' RR in Hittite.

3.3. In my opinion neither R. Lilhr nor e. Watkins has succeeded in presenting conclusive evidence for gemination of a resonant by a following laryngeal either in Germanic or in Hittite.

§ 4. The triple representation of sehwa in Greek.

4.0. Lith. dukte, DeS. dusti, Goth. dauhtar, Avestan dugdar, Arm. dustr, and, with a medial vowel, Skt. duhitrlr-, Toch. B tkacer, A ckacar, Hieroglyphic Luwian tU-wa/i-tarafi- (KZ. 92, 112ff.), Lye. A kbatra, Gk. {}vya:7:rJf2 all reflect an IE. preform which we may reconstruct as */dhwgHter-f 'daughter'.26 The medial vowel (Skt.

21> For an entirely different reconstruction of the word for 'daughter' in Indo­European see Szemerenyi, Hermes 105, 1977, 387. For Oscan fuutrei see Lejeune, BSL. LXX 251 (: *dhug(~)ter- > *Juhter- > jUter-) , but d. Buck, A Grammar if Oscan and Umbrian 129, note 1.

A. O'Brien, Celtica III, 178£., thinks that the old word for 'daughter' survives in the element Ter-, Der-, Dar, Derb- in women's names in Early Irish: the loss of the first syllable in proclisis is supposed to have led to a form *chter- which was further reduced to *ter- (later der- etc.). This seems con­vincing to me. In an article entitled dhugHter in Irish, MSS. 33, 1975, 39£., E. P. Hamp concludes on the strength of the form Ter- that there cannot have been a vocalized medial * H in the Celtic preform of the word for 'daugh­ter', d. p. 40: "Now if Celtic had in fact vocalized the * H as a medial syllable we should have had *dugatir > *dogthair. But as O'Brien has correctly recon­structed, Ter- must come from *duchtir < *duktir. In this indirect fashion we gain valuable additional evidence for the' form of this important and archaic IE word. It is clear that Celtic treated its syllabic structure in the same way that Armenian did. There is no necessity here to assume a North European syncope of internal schwa such as we see for Germanic and Balto-Slavic." This is, however, most unconvincing: an inherited Celtic *dugater- would have given Old Irish (post syncope) *[doyper-], the [-y-] of which may early

36

-i-, Gk. -a- etc.) is probably the result of an earlier anaptyxis (d. EL. SS£.); the same vowel reflex is found in a sequence. of the type */CHC-/ (e.g. Skt. hiM: dha; pitar-, Gk. :1la-r:~e, Arm~ hayr etc.). The conditions under which the supposed anaptyxis developed are not fully known (d. forms like Avestan pta 'father' fgbroi). However, where it has developed, its reflex is i in Indo-Iranian, a in the other languages27 (with the exception of Greek). (For the situation in Hittite See §§ 4.22f., 5.9). This discrepancy seems to suggest that the loss of the laryngeal in zero-grade sequences of the types * /CHC-/ and * INCHC-! occurred in a dialectal period of Indo-European -at a stage when all the laryngeals of different colour had. fallen together. 28 Should this be accepted, it would follow that the triple

have become unvoiced before the following [-p-] (d. Thurneysen, Grammar of Old Irish § 126, for similar examples); it is further clear (Thurneysen, ibid. § 141) that a form *dochther- may have undergone a phonetic reduction, already in the Old Irish period, to *dochter- (whence, with loss of *do-, *chter­> *ter-, Ter-). It is an established fact that a medial *-3- gave Celtic MaW, and the interpretation suggested here of Early Irish Ter- etc. does not force one to make an exception for the word for 'daughter'.

27 Old Phrygian keneman which is perhaps the preform of Late Phrygian kinouma knouma 'tomb' is not a convincing piece of evidence for the view that inter­consonantal * Hl has given Phryg. e (= Gk. MeW, d. O. Haas, Die phrygischen Sprachdenkmiiler pp. 76, 190; W. Dressler, Sprache 14, 47) ; the proposed etymolo­gical connection with Skt. khan-, kha- 'dig' remains conjectural. Cf. also below §4.1O.

IE. *3 seems to have given u in Germanic in originally final syllables (type OHG. anut, OIcei. Qnd: Lat. anas), see EL. 105. In originally medial syllables we do not find any vestige in Germanic of a vocalized laryngeal, see Meillet, Les dialectes indo-europeens 64, W. H. Bennett, Studies Arch. A. Hill III, 13£. I am unable to follow W. Winter's suggestion (apud Bammesberger, Das Priiteritalparadigma einiger 'reduplizierender' Verhen im Urgermanischen, LuE. 17) that (pre-Germanic) * se-sa-I;t (: * seH1- 'to sow') has given Gmc. * seza-un, whence '(with a glide -w-), *sezawun (> *sezwun, OEng. seowon etc.): if the loss of prevocalic laryngeals occurred in a dialectal period of Indo-European (EL. 1 02f.), a reconstruction like * sesa-f!.t > Gmc. * seza-un is fictitious. For the West-Gmc. forms in question I refer to my discussion in NTS. 22, 54f.

28 The assumption of a syncretism of all the laryngeals in non-Anatolian Indo­European is compatible with the current view that certain cases of tenuis aspirata in Indo-Iranian go back to sequences of a voiceless occlusive + a laryngeal, see now the convincing analysis by E. Polome, Reflexes if Laryngeals in Indo-Iranian with Special Riference to the Problem qf the Voiceless Aspirates, Saga og sprak. Studies in Languages and Literature, 1972, 233ff. The same applies to the aspiration seen in Skt. mtih-, ahdm, duhitdr- etc. (EL. 81).

37

representation seen in Greek in cases like {}c7:6c; : {}rJ-,. G7:a7:6c; : G7:a.-,

o01'6c;: OW~ cannot be original, but must be due to an analogical development in Greek. This line of reasoning (which seems con­vincing to me, d. EL. 91£.) is the one that Kurylowicz has elabo­rated in a series of penetrating discussions: Apophonie 202ff., Idg. Gramm. II 252ff., BSL. LXXII, 69ff., Probtemes 179ff.

However, it is common today to take the view that the triple representation found in Greek is original and reflects directly the original quality of the different laryngeals in interconsonantal zero-grade forms. Before undertaking a critical discussion of the alleged Greek evidence, I propose to examine in some detail the situation in Armenian, as this language shares a great number of features with Greek.29

4.1. According to Meillet, Esquisse2 42, interconsonantal *a is lost in an internal syllable in Armenian: dustr 'daughter' : Gk. 1fvyal'r;e. (E. P. Ramp, REArm. N.S. III, lIf., JAOS. 90, 228ff., explains Arm. ner, g. sg. niri, as a reflex of earlier *yenater with *-a- < *-a- (d. Gk. elva'deee;) preserved in an internal syllable, but his interpretation presupposes a series of ad hoc constructions and remains inconclusive).

G. Klingenschmitt, MSS. 28, 80, 86 and note 9, teaches that all the laryngeals of different colour have fallen together in a in Armenian initially, medially and finally. The evidence that he adduces for the preservation in Armenian of medial and final a < *;) does not, however, prove its point. Thus, Arm. dalar 'green, fresh' is supposed to reflect *dhala1ros = Gk. {JaAc(}6~ (allegedly with 8 from vocalized * HI)' The Armenian form in question may, however, represent *dhlil-16~; the IE. verbal stem seems to have been *dheH21-, see Pokorny, lEW. 234. Gk. 1faAse6c; may contain the suffix -ero- seen in eAev{}eeO~, fPofJee6~, etc., d. Lat. libero-, Veneto louderobos (Schwyzer, Griech. Gramm. I 482). Chantraine, Dictionnaire II 420, thinks that {}aJ..ee6c; may be to an original *1Jall:vc; (d. 1faAew f. 'florissante, riche' of banquets) as is YAvuce6c; to yAvUV~.

Arm. acckc 'eyes' is taken to represent earlier *acCa( _kC) < IE. *a3kWj~1 = Gk. dualoaGs (d. Forssmann, MSS. 25,46 and note 27).

29 E. P. Ramp, Studies Palmer 91, maintains "that the time is approaching when we should speak of Helleno-Armenian."

38

It should be pointed out, however, that the aRflexion of the ArM ~enian plural (ins~r. accawkc , g.d.abl. acCar;C) does not in any way prove that the form acckc is from *acCa( Mk C

) since we have "clear evidence for a gradual spreading about of the Ma-declension during the PA p~riod: it was propagated to the plural of PIE stems ending in a resonant:

jerkC (GDAbl.jeracC) ~hands' < PIE *g'hesr- (*g'her-)

acckc (GDAbl. acCacC) 'eyes' *okWijokYM artasukC (GDAbl. artasuacC

) 'tears' *drak'u-mawrukc (GDAbl. mawruacC

) 'beard' . *smokru-~"

(R. Godel, Introduction 94).'

The precise preform of acckc is unkilown, ct below § 4.9. The a-flexion of cungkC (gen. etc. engacC) cannot prove that cungkC itself is from *cunga(-kC

) < IE. *g'ony.a2 = Gk. yoij-pa, as Klingenschmitt thinks it does. Meillet, Esquisse2 84, takes cungkC to reflect *g'onw-i. One may also point out that a preform corresponding to a Gk. dual *yovv-e, d. Gove-e, (apparently with the same ending as (faas from *oky-e, d. § 4.9), would have given Arm. cungkc• For the Gk. dual *YOVYB see my remarks in NTS. 26, 224. (I do not understand Salta's assumption of a 'Gutturalerweiterung' in Arm. cungkC

, Stel­lung des Armenischen im Kreise deT idg. Sprachen 166, note 29). c I am unable to accept the idea that the Arr~. pI. akanJkc .(: sg. unkn) represents *h2a1)S1}jal (Eichner, Sprache 24, 146, note 17, 151, refer­ring to K.lingenschmitt, MSS. 28, 86, note 9) for reasons that I have expressed in my Indo-European and Classical Armenian: a pho­nological Note (First International Conference on Armenian linguistics: Proceedings 1980, 59ft). There I have suggested that the Armenian

--- form in question goes back ultimately to *aws1}~d = Gk. ovu-cu from *OWS1}-[t]-a, with a-vocalism and a t-enlargement. The develop­ment of *'aws1}-a in Armenian would be: *aw(h)an~a > *awan which took over the _cc_ of *acc 'eyes' (Meillet, Esquisse2 84), whence *awan + CC > *aganJ (with voicing of _cC after n, and *w > g be­tween vowels), i.e. phonemically * /aghan3h/ according to Hans Voges phonemic description of the Old Armenian voiced stops and affricates (NTS. 18, 1958, 143ff.). A dissimilation of *[ ... gll. .. jh ... ] > *[ ... g ... jh ... ] changed the latter to * [aganjh] , which will have been interpreted phonemically as /akan3h/ = akanjkC (with secondary plural marker _kC

).

39

In Armenian, IE. stems of the type *g'enH- 'to give birth', *gWerH- 'swallow etc.' generally make aorist stems in -a- « IE. *-a-, d. Lith. 3 sg. dirbo etc. and see GodeI, Introduction 121), e.g. cnaw 'he is born', keraw 'he ate'; cnaw represents *cina- (+ ending -w < ?), which in its turn is an enl~rgement in *-a- of an IE. imperfect *e-g'enH-e-t (d. Skt. pres. Jdnati). The stem *g'enH-(e-) (without the morpheme -a-) underlies the Armenian aorist sub­junctive C1ZCCCS (also cncCis), which is structurally comparable to the aorist subj. bercCesfrom a stem *bher-(e-), d. the aorist indo cber < IE. imperfect *e-bher-e-t (Skt. dbharat etc.). See my remarks in REArm. N.S. XI, 15, and d. the aorist luaw which would seem to go back ultimately to a thematic aorist *e-k'lu-e-t (Greek EUAva, Skt. sruvam).

The noun cnawl 'parens' is b1,lilt on the Armenian stem *cina­(0£ cna-w) and does not go back to *g'en~-tlo- (despite Kurylowicz, Apophonie 202); similarly, the stem of the aorist *cina- has been made the basis of the present stem (*cina + ni- > cnanim).

Arm. keraw (: pres. utem) would seem to ultimately reflect a thematic stem *gWerH-e- (d. e.g. Vedic subj. garan, above §. 3.1), still seen in the variant 3 sg. aorist eker (without the enlargement -a-). There is thus nothing to prove Rix's reconstruction (Kratylos 14, 182) of eker as *egWer~t.

Arm. atawri 'mill' is frequently considered to reflect *al~trios = Gk. &Ae"!ew~ (d. e.g. J. A. C. Greppin, Istoriko-filologiceskiJ zurnall, 1975, 63, Akad. Nauk Arm. SSR; R. S. P. Beekes, Orbis XX, 142). However, ala- (in alawri) ought not to be separated from the verbal stem ala(-y) .' the latter may represent a pre-Armenian (secondary) nasal present *alna- (0£ the type seen in *barJnam > barnam) which has ousted an earlier athematic present formation. Thus, I see no basis for Klingenschmitt's suggestion (apud Eichner, Sprachc 24, 153, note 37) that ala(-y) is a direct reflex of IE. *h2Jna1-.

Meillet, Esquisse2 74, compares Arm. arawr (plough' with Lat. aratrum which seems to be built on the stem of araMre. The latter is generally explained as a refashioned athematic *arii- (d. NTS. 22, 79 with references). Armenian arawr, if it is from earlier *arcitro~, may likewise be built on the stem of a prehArmenian verb *ara-, which, however, was later lost in Armenian. The latter verb may have been an iterative in *-a- with zero-grade in the root syllable, i.e. *araye- « * H2fH-eH2-ye-). See Meillet, IntroductionS 210, for this iterative type in -aM. Theoretically, Lat. ara-re might go back

40

to the same iterative preform. In that case my explanation (NTS. 22, 79) of the perfect araui as reflecting *aro( + wai) would have to be given up.

Thus, as far as I am able to judge, there is no evidence available that forces us to believe that a vocalized laryngeal was preserved as a in an origin'ally medial (or final) syllable in Armenian. The Armenian reflex of *~ in an initial syllable is a (e.g. hayr).

4.2. According to Kurylowicz the Greek triple representation of *a is of a secondary, analogical origin, d. e.g. his statement in· ProbLemes 181: "La triple representation de ~ (a, e, 0) est tine in­novation du grec dont la date peut etre fixee, bien que de maniere uniquement relative: elle est posterieure a la loi d'allongement de Wackernagel, laquelle elle-meme semble preceder les change­ments phonetiques du grec tellement anciens que la chute inter­vocalique de -s-, -j-. La triple representation de a en grec n'a rien a fa ire avec Ie probleme de laryngales i.e. proprement dit, c.-a.-d. avec l'ongine de voyelles longues fondamentales etc/'

Wackernage1's Law (Das Dehnungsgesetz der griech. Komposita) reflects a preliterary contraction of _aX + a"-, interpreted as elision of. aX plus lengthening of a" (a = any timbre of the triad a, e, 0). At a prehistoric stage, however, the long (medial) vowels of com­pounds such as (]7:ea'(iiy6~, wp/YJ(]7:f;~, peyaJ.w'JJvpo~ may also have been felt to represent -0 + a-, -0 + e-, -0 + 0- etc. (e.g. wfl6~, ec5w), i.e. to be the products of a contraction of a-, ~-, 0- respectively with a'lry short preceding vowel: it = aXa, e = aXe, 6 = aXo (a.x = any member of the triad a, e, 0).30 Such long, motivated, vowels (it = 30 BSL. LXXII, 70f., Kurylowicz writes: "Mais au moins la loi de Wackernagel

... fournit une base permettant d'interpreter de fa~on objective l'attitude du ---sujet parlant ·par rapport a certains faits de la langue. Quant a la categorie

des composes, Ie sujet parlant s'est trouve en presence d'un procede que voici: :'0 + a- > -a- -a + a- > -a- -c + a- > -ii-

-0 + e- > -e- -a + e- > -e- -e + e- > -e--0 + 0- > -0- -a + 0- > -0- -e + 0- > -0-.

Le manque de dependance entre Ie timbre de la longue et celui de la voyelle du ler membre peut etre symboliquement exprime par~

A+a>ii A+e>e A+o>o

ou A represen te n' importe quel membre de la triade vocalique (a, e, 0). Les voyelles longues (ii, e, 0) apparaissent comme des produits de la contraction de ii, e,O; respectivement, avec n'importe queUe breve precedente. II faut done se garder de

41

aXa etc.) have been the model on which certain inherited, non­motivated, long vowels (in *sta-, *dhe-, *da-, etc.) were decomposed into aXa, aXe, aXo thus acquiring a quasi biphonemic st?-tus parallel to that of the diphthongs aXi, aXu. This changes the old relationship between full-grade and zero-grade, i.e.

1 ai, ei; oi 1 au, e~ ou 1 ii, :' (~ a)

to; I aX~ 1 aXu I aXa aXe aXo

i- 't Y u ~ a e 0

by the suppression of the aX. See Kurylowicz, BSL. LXXII, 7If., Problemes 179f. (In Problemes 180, he adds the following remark: "On pourrait ici contester Ia validite des rapports ai: i, au: u, oi: i, ou: u (avec 0 fondamental), cette sOfte de degre ,zero n'etant en effet attestee que dans des traces insignifiantes, ,d. ldg. Gr. II 250ssq. Mais on peut aussi avoir recours au sch6ma e = e + e, a = e + ii, a = e + 0, cf.l'augment dit temporel. Si Ia suppression de e dans ei eu fournit les degres zero i u, c'est par suite de la meme suppression que e a 6 deviennent e ii 0.")

The transformation of the relationship between the inherited long vowels and a applies also to set-roots of the type CeRa vis-a.-vis the full-grade forms CRe, CRa, CRa < *CReH1- etc. ('theme 11')31:

considerer automatiquement a comme a + ii, e comme e + e,6 comme "d + 0: A r epoque prehistorique en question, un li long (Aa) comprend non seulement a + a, mais aussi e + a et 0 + a."

31 In some cases CRe- < *CReH1- reilects a secondary full-grade as in Skt. prli-ta-, Lat. -pletus < *pleH1-tO-: Skt. purtJd- < *pIH1no-, see below § 4.8. A further example is (xaO"t-)yvrrror; < ~<g'neHl-to-, from the sel-root *g'enHc /*g'neH1 ....

The full-grade of the 'theme 1', *g'em-, seen in Skt.janitdr-, appears in Greek as * gene-, cf. yevST~e. (In my view, the Oscan form Genetai represents syncopated *gen(a)tai with subsequent development of an anaptyctic vowel -e-. For Arm. cnawl see above § 4.1. ). The G k. aorist iyev€'to is for * lyva'to (d. Cowgill, EvfL.2

150). Szemerenyi, Syncope 180, analyzes eYSVe"tO as an inherited full-grade formation, i.e. *e-g'ena-to > Gk. *e-yeva-ro, whence, cI. Kurylowicz, Apophonie 206f., i-yive--w; the e before the ending -ro was interpreted as the thematic vowel. A different analysis is proposed by J. Safarewicz, Note sur l'aon'ste grec du type ey{:vSTo, V cest na Akademik Vladimir Georgiev. Studia linguistica in Honorem Vladimiri 1. Georgieu, 1980, 135f£. He takes lyivero to be an archaic thematic form with inherited full-grade vocalism in the root syllable: " ... , tandis que eA-mOl' etait un derive du present du type J..e{nw, l'aoriste Byevero etait la forme fondamentale de la conjugaison et c'est a partir de cet aoriste que l'on a derive la forme du present y{yvopat."

42

CeRa ('theme 1') is attested in Greek as CeRe, CeRa, CeRo. The zero-grade forms appear either as CeRe, CaRa, CoRa or as 'can.;. tracted' forms, i.e. CRe, CRa, CR6. See Apophonie 206, ldg. Gramm. II 254, BSL. LXXII 7If., Problemes 182f.

4.3. An example of a full-grade form of the type CeRa which appears in Greek as CeRe vis-a.-vis a full-grade form CRe < *CRel-I1-

may be seen in the athematic present stem *ale( -ti) 'grinds, bruises' which is for earlier * ala ( -ti) < 'theme l' * Hzel3-.' 'theme II' * H2leH1- > *ale- found in aA'lj'l?w. The originally athematic stem· *ale(-ti) is continued in dAew (see Schwyzer, Griech. Gramm. I 682, Chantraine, Dictionnaire I 59, Beekes, Development 129).

Once the passage of *ala( -ti) to *ale( -ti) 'grinds' had taken place, a thematic present *an-e(-ti) 'breathes' (= Skt. AV. dnati32), which I suppose had been inherited in Greek beside the athematic *ana( -ti) = Skt. R V. dniti, would be morphemically ambiguous and nlay now have been reinterpreted as an athematic present by a new 'coupe morphologique' according to the following analogical proportion:

*ala( -ti) .' *ale( -ti) - *ana( -ti) : x; x ( < *1:f.pa-pOt;).

*ane(-ti) , d. ape-par;

The reinterpretation of the originally thematic present *an-e( -ti) as athematic *ane(-ti) , which then replaced the old athematic *ana(-ti), may have been the model for a corresponding transfor~ mation of an inherited thematic present *wem-e(-ti) , d. Skt. Brahm. ipf. dvamat, coexisting with a likewise inherited athematic *wema( -ti), d. Skt. RV. ipf. dvamit, into *weme(-ti) in Greek: the analogically created athematic stem *weme- replaces the earlier athematic *wema­in all categories of this verb, d. e.g. future lpiaw, (Att.) lpw, aorist (Hom.) efheaaa,. efh87:0C;; lfhl:f)w etc.33

In some cases, the 'theme II' may have been lost in Greek at a relatively late stage, i.e. after the transformation of the full-grade of the 'theme 1', d. e.g. Myc. me-re-ti-ri-ja nom. pI. f. = meletriai 'femmes qui tournent la meule' (Chantraine, Dictionnaire I 59) in which mete- could be for *mela- < *mela-. A (secondary) full-grade *mleH1- maybe attested in Skt. mla-ta- 'made soft by tanning; withered', d. Pokorny, lEW. 716.

32 Possibly this form (A V. tinati etc.) was originally a subj unctive (;~ tinH-e-ti) . 33 For details concerning the etymology and form of Gk. ep'sw see Chantraine,

Dictionnaire II 343.

43

4.4. Meillet, IntroductionS 214f., teaches that the Greek future goes back ultimately to an IE. desiderative present with the suffix *-([1)s(y)ejo-. Greek forms like f-le'PECO, future of pi'Pco 'stand fast', are frequently thought to prove that the suffix of the IE. desiderative formation contained the non-colouring laryngeal * HI (i.e. *-(a1)s(y)e/o-). Kurylowicz, Apophonie 254, assumes, no doubt cor­rectly, that the *a of the suffix in question has been detached from set-roots: "L'element [1, tout comme la voyelle de grec -e(a)aa ou -t(a)co, a ete degage de 1a racine verbale precedente. Sa generali­sation est une simple consequence de la disparition de R antevocali­que (surtout au present en -ejo-) et de la 10i d'implication (evince­ment d'un suffix par voyelle 'de liaison' + suffixe)." See also Idg. Gramm. II 229. Kurylowicz, however, has little to say about the origin of the timbre e in Greek -i(a)co (d. Apophonie 208). Kury­lowicz's explanation leads us to posit *menaso( < *menaso) as the oldest future of *men-ejo- (Pt'Pco) in Greek. The future *wemaso « *wemaso = Skt. *vami$ydmi) , being replaced by *wemeso (ipiaOJ, Bf-lW) in the way described above, may have furnished the model on which *menaso was transformed into *meneso (IlE'VBW). The analogical proportion would have been:

(disappearing them. pres.) *wem-o: future *wemaso > *wemeso = (them. pres.) *men-6: future *menas6 > x J'

x = *meneso. I.e.: vis-a.-vis (the disappearing present) *wem-o the future (*wem-aso » *wem-eso seemed to present a characteristic suffix (*-aso » *-eso which was now taken over by the future of *men-o, i.e. *men-eso, and eventually became generalized in future formations of this type in Greek. (For the various Greek reflexes of the IE. desiderative formation in question see my article Sur quelques formes verbales en grec ancien, BSL. 60, 1965, 46ff.).

4.5. The following example may illustrate K.urylowicz's expla­nation of the IE. desiderative suffix: the verbal stem *petH- 'to £Ii (Skt. patita-) - to judge by Vedic ptitati _. made a thematic present in Indo-European, i.e. *petH-e-ti. A desiderative present from this stem is seen in Vedic (A V.) pi-pati$ati < *pi-petH-se-ti. The loss of prevocalic * H leads to the following contrast: pres. indo *pet-e-ti: desider. pres. *pi-petHse-ti > *pi-pet[1se-ti. The latter may now have been reinterpreted as having a suffix *-ase- which could spread to an#-verbs (such as *gWem-, d. Skt. jl-gam-i$a-). Kurylowicz's ex-

44

planation may thus give further support to the suggestion that the IE.laryngeals were lost earlier before vowels (and syllabic resonants and semi-vowels) than in other positions (d. EL. 51£.). However, one cannot rule out the possibility that the loss-of prevocalic * H occurred simultaneously with that of * H in interconsonantal posi­tion (and the development of an anaptyctic vowel [-a-] , i.e. *CHC> *CaC). In that case the pres. indo *pet-e-ti would have beside it a desid. pres. *pl-petase-ti which may now have been analyzed as *pi-pet-ase-ti.

4.6. Rix, Kratylos 14, 179£., writes of Gk. -&e6~.' "gr. Dea­(:rdalO~ etc.) {}S6; < *#ea6r; mit Schwundstufe *dh~lS- (wie in lat.

fanum < *dhils-nom, ai. dhl~tz)a- < *dhils-nijo-) neben vollstufigem *dheils- in arm. di-kc (*dhes-es) (Gotter', lat. fer-iae, osk. fllsnu (*fesna) 'Heiligtum'. Die bisher anscheinend noch nicht formn­lierte, aber semantisch wie morphematisch einwandfreie Ety­mologie von gr. {feu- {h:o~ lasst die Vertretung von interkonsonan­tischem il durch gr. /e/ als gesichert gelten."

However, there is nothing to prove definitely that Arm. dikc, gen. pI. dice, goes back to JE. *dhes- (*dheH1s-). Consequently, it cannot serve as basis for a reconstruction of a preform * dhH1s-os for Gk. iJeoe;, and I think that Chantraine, Dictionnaire II 430, is justified in stating that the etymology of Ok. {Je6; is 'inconnue'. The Armenian word in question is formally quite ambiguous and may reflect a series of preforms such as *dhe- (without any *-s-); * dlu:}- (with or without a suffix * s), d. Arm. ji (horse': Skt. hdya~ 'id.'; * dhwe- (with or without a suffix * s) or * dhwt- (with or without a suffix *s), d. Arm. di, gsg. dio) 'corpse' (and see Pokorny, lEW. 261). I suggest that Arm. dikc be explained as reflecting *dhwes-, the lengthened grade of *d/zwes- seen in Lith. dvesiu 'I breathe', cf. dvasia 'Geist', MHG. ge-twas 'Gespenst'. (Gk. DeD; is not likely to. belong here, see Chantraine, Dictionnaire II 430: H •• objections: a) les Grecs voient leurs dieux sous forme corporelle et non comme des esprits; h) il n'y a trace d'un groupe (),r- ni dans la metrique homerique ni dans les temoignages myceniens;").

4.7. [ee6~ cannot be explained as a development of *isH1ros, as has been shown by Szemerenyi (Studi Micenei XX 210£.). Szeme­renyi starts from a pre-Mycenaean *hi(y)iros ( < IE. *isiros 'strong, powerful, supernaturally potent (= holy, saint)', d. Skt. i$ira-) which "was contracted to *Izfros (later with psilosis ieo~) in a small

45

area only, in the rest of the Greek territory it was dissimilated to *hi(y)eros ... " He thinks that "NW [ae6~, shows the regular development of 8 before e in this dialect area."

4.S. E. D. Francis has shown (Greek e{3A:rrv, Glotta LII, 1974, 1 Iff. ) that s{3A'Yj'V cannot be cited as evidence for a Proto-Greek aorist *igwlen « IE. *gWleH1-); Francis suggests that the paradigm of ef3Arrv may have been an innovation of Epicharmus's 'comic idiolect.' (ibid. 30).

Francis holds that the middle (Hom.) {3J..r;TO and the participle {3A'Yj7:6~ both represent an ~E. zero-grade *gWIH1-, and he assumes that *C1!H1-C and *Clj.H3-C have given regularly CRe-C and CR6-C in Greek. His argumentation is as follows: since the paradigm of SPA'Yj'V cannot be cited as evidence for the survival of a 'theme II' *gw/eHl- in Greek, and since normal zero~grade forms like the middle 3 sg. {3J..r;7:0 and the participle (3).'YJ7:6~ appear with a vocalism e (not *ci, *pJ..a7:o), we must conclude that original preconsonantal *gw/H1- has given Gk. PJ..rJ- phonetically. (For a similar view on the development of *C1j.H1-C and *C1j.H3~C in Greek, see W. Cowgill, in Indo-European and Indo-Europeans 148, note 30 with references).

As I mentioned above (§ 4.2, foot-note 31), there is evidence of an IE. secondary full-grade in cases like Skt. prii~td-, Lat. -pletus < *pleH1-to-, d. Kurylowicz, Apophonie 134: "Admettons qu'en face de *PeICR i1 existait des fornles flexionnelles ou derivees qui de­pla~aient l'accent sur Ia syllabe suivante, p. ex. *Pe1eK-to-. Le result at de 1a reduction s'identifiait alors necessairement au degre zero de *pel~. 8i de l'autre cote Ie complexe *Pete~ etait introduit en position atone en gardan t Ie rapport e: e de la position tonique ... , done *PiCK(-t6-) , il aboutissait a *pleR{-ta-), dont Ie vocalisme ne se distinguait pas du degre plein de Ia forme 11." See also Idg. Gramm. II § 287, p. 223.

If we accept this, the 'YJ of fJArJ7:6c; may have the same origin (IE. *gwle-to-) as that of Skt. pra-td-, Lat. ~pletus. The e-vocalism of *gwlewtos may have spread to the middle 3 sg. /3Afj7:0 in accordance with the following analogical proportion:

GRa-las « *CfiH-16s): middle Ssg. eRa-to « *CfiH-IO) = eRe-tos (as in *gwle-t6s) : middle 3sg. eRe-to (as in *gwle-to) for ear­lier *CRii-to (=~gWlii-to), d. forms like oJ-trJ7:6c; 'tamed' ( < *d1flH2-tos) : middle plpf. (Od.) oe-ofl'YJ-7:0 (-'J')- < -a-).

On the model of (zero-grade) eRa-tos: CeRa-, a zero~grade of

46

the type CRe-tos (*gWle-tOs) may have acquired a new full-grade CeRe (*gWele) beside it replacing the older CeRa (*gwela) < *CeRa (*gWel~) : this may have happened to the old athematic root aorist *e-gWel3~t which may have given *e-gWele( -t), whence *i-dele = eCsAs . e{3aAs (Hsch.); eCeAe may easily have been reinterpreted as a thematic form under the influence of the inherited thematic e{3aAs < *e-gwJH1-e-t. 34

4.9. Forssmann, MSS. 25, 39ff., takes the Gk. dual OO'O'S to ~e from IE. *okw-ia1

35 and defines the ending *-i91 as a phonetic variant of *-i~1 seen in Skt. dual n. -i (ibid. 46); he is likewise tempted to see the variant *-ia1 in Arm. aeCkC and in Tach. (B es(a)ne etc.), d. above § 4.1.

Forssmann, however, does nothing to clarify under which con­ditions the two variants in question have developed. Phonemically, the position *J-yHJ# (i.e. absolute finality) is equivalent to */..,yHCI as we know from numerous examples (d. EL. 55), and we have one excellent example in, Greek that shows that * HI was not vocalized to 8 in a sequence * ICyH1C/, i.e. the optative plural pIps'V < *es-i-men with the same -i- (from *-iHr ) as in Lat. s-i~mus, Goth. ber-ei-na etc.

The preform of Arm. aeckc remains obscure. According to Pisani, RL. 1, 166f., acckc is from *okw-i (Oas. oei). However, th<:: examples that- are cited in support of the idea that *kw has been palatalized to cC before *e, *i in Armenian are somewhat ambiguous: thus, lCorkc '4' remains a crux (despite Winter, Language 31, 6; Szeme­renyi, Numerals 19££.), and I do not see how Pisani's explanation of incc which he takes to reflect * kWim-kwid (d. Skt. kim) is phonetically possible, since one would have expected the suggested preform to have yielded *inj (d. Meillet, ibid. 84, 40: akanJkc, see above § 4.1). According to lVleilIet, MSL. 13, 244, the _ec in incc is to be connected with Lat.quia, Gk. -(JO'U (Ion. a-aO'u etc.), i.e. IE. *kWyeH2• Finally,

34. I withdraw my earlier explanation of Gk. l1;eJ..ev in IF. 76, 127ff. The origin of dp.vw, beflOV remains obscure; a stem final *-H2 would not seem to be excluded, see Chantraine, Dictionnaire IV, 1104: "il faut seulcment recon­naitre que l'on peut hesiter entre un radical *tem-a1- ou plutot *tem-32- (en ce cas Ie second e resulterait d'une assimilation *TeJ.la-VO~ > 7:8f.levo~ avec Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. I, 255 et 362) ;".

35 A reconstruction *3akW-j31 is suggested, ibid. 46, for Gk. oaae, and also ten­tatively for Lith. aki, oes. oci (but prothetic vowels from vocalized initial laryngeals are othenvise unknown in Baltic and Slavic).

47

the negationocc remains unexplained (for an attempt see Cowgill, Language 36, 347ff.).

However, a sequence *k(W)y has unquestionably given Arm. CC in e.g. CCu 'Aufbruch' = Skt. cyuti-, see Hiibschmann, Armenische Gram­matik 485, and d. the Arm. aorist cCogay and Skt. cyavate etc. Arm. acCkC may consequently reflect a preform *okWye, which in its turn may underlie the Greek dual (Jaas (Meillet, Esquisse2 52). I see no fault with the traditional explanation (Schwyzer, Griech. Gramm. I 565, Cowgill, EvfL.2 150, note 12) that sees in (Jaas an old dual *okwi (with *-z as in siuoat), to which the dual ending -e has been later added, i.e. *oky-e > (jaas. 36

Tach. B es, d. ynes 'offenbar', A a sii1l} , gen. asnis presuppose a Tocharian *ak + a palatalizing element (which, in this case, remains undecided: *-i, *-e, *:)Ie etc.). Cf. also Klingenschmitt, FuW. 162, note 21.

Remark. Klingenschmitt, FuW. 162, note 22, sees in Gk. optative -Ot~ < *-O-i~l-S the result of a loss of * HI in interconsonantal position in Indo-European. However, it is generally assumed, no doubt correctly, that the thematic optative suffix *-oy- represents *-0- + *-i- (the zero-grade of the suffix *:)IeH1-), or, as Cowgill, EvfL.2 160, says: "evidently oy-optatives were not put together in the dialect ancestral to Greek until *~iH-C had already become *f-C." (For an entirely different explanation of the oy-optative, see C. Watkins, Idg. Gramm. III/I, 226f£., and d. the objections raised by Kurylowicz in Prohlemes 98).

4.10. Klingenschmitt, FuW. 159ff., suggests that the IE. middle participle suffix be reconstructed as *-mH1no-, whence, by vocaliza­tion of the interconsonantal laryngeal, Gk. -""8'PO~ (and possibly Phryg. -menos) , Tach. *-rnana- (A -rna1/}, B -mane) and OPruss. -manas (in poklausimanas, attested once) . However, * H in an internal syllable is lost in Baltic, and Lsee no fault with Stang's explanation (Das slavische und baltische Verbum 207) according to which -manas may reflect IE. *-monos. Greek -jJevo~ (and perhaps the ~hryg.

36 Hittite provides a morphological parallel: 1 sg. preterite (da)sganun (: dask­'wiederholt nehmen') reflects IE. *-sk'om, 1 sg. ipf., d. the type Skt. dprccham, to which has been added the 1 sg. preterite ending -un « ?), d. further the type lJatranun : lJatrai- 'write' etc. (J. Friedrich, Hethitisches Elementarbuch J2 91, 95 etc.).

48

form, for which d. K.lingenschmitt, ibid. 163, note 24, and here § 4.0, note 27) may represent the e-grade of the suffix. Skt. -manas may have its -a- from -ana- (parte. pres. and perf. middle), see Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altindische Grammatik II 775; it may also presuppose *-monos (Brugmann's Law). The Tocharian forms in question would seem to reflect a generalized a-umlaut of an original o-grade: *-mona (Jem. sg. and neut. pI.) should give a Proto­Tocharian *-mana (with -a- under the influence of the following *-a). B .. a- (-mane, d. e.g. akemane) and A -a- (-marl), e.g. akmarl)) may represent Proto-Tocharian *-a-. We may reconstruct (despite Klingenschmitt, ibid. 160f.) the following ablaut forms of the middle participle suffix in question: *-mno- (e.g. Avest. -mna-, Arm. -un, type gnayun (mobile', Lat. alumnus); *-meno- (Gk. -fl,81JO-); *-mona- (OPruss. -mana-, d. Tach. *-marui, possibly Skt. -mana-). A morphological parallel may be found in the suffix of the pres .

. ptc. active: zero-grade *-Vt- (*Y-1J.t-ef6s in Skt.yatds, gen.abI. sg. of yant-); e-grade *-ent- (*y-ent- in OLith. ent-, Dauksa enti etc.: eiti, Stang, op. cit. 205); a-grade *-ont- (*y-ont-, partly transformed in: Lat. euntis, Sommer, Handbuch der Lat. Laut- und Formenlehre2 498; d. Gk. £'wv).

4.11. As the above examination of the Greek material has shown, the claim that a vocalized interconsonantal * HI has regularly given Gk. -e- rests on ambiguous, i.e. non-conclusive, evidence. '

4.12. Discussing Gk. enela7:0 (bought' (d. Skt. kri-td-, kri1)ati), in which the combination of *y and laryngeal seems to have a disyl­labic reflex, W. Cowgill, EvfL.2 150, writes: "Even where the disyl­labic reflex does seem to continue a genuine zero grade~ I strongly suspect that it is the result of a series of morphologic innovations. Thus eneta7:0 for *e:rt:eho does not seem basically different from eyiVE7:0 for *e'Yvo:ro. But I cannot now make out much of the pre­history of these and similar forms." Lejeune, Phonetique historique 206, posits *kwrDya2-for Gk. neta-; Beekes, Development 247£., suggests that the preform may have been *kTJrih2-e-to.

An entirely different solution may be sought along the following lines: Hittite testifies to the existence of an ending *-0 (> Hitt. -a) in the 3 sg. middle (type OHitt. ljapparu, lJuittiyati, siyari, siyati) which is older than *-to (> Hitt. -ta), see E. Neu, StBoT. 6, 20; C. Watkins, Idg. Gramm. III/I, 86ft, d. my remarks in HuI. 156. In NTS. 26, 68£., d. 78, note 18, I have suggested that the oldest

49

form of the ending in question was *we and that "die Stufe *-0 in der 3 Sing. Medium nach der Entstehung des qualitativen Ablauts *e > *0 als charakteristisches Merkmal der Kategorie des Mediums verallgemeinert worden ist. Das idg. Perfektum hat die urspriing­liehe e-Stufe der Endung bewahrt." Consequently, one might spec­ulate whether the earliest form of the 3 sg. middle of *kW reyH2•

should not be posited as * /kWryH2e), i.e. phonetically *[kWriH2dJ the a-ending 01 which was not affected by the subsequent abla:ut *e > *0 (d. § 2.1). After the loss of the prevocalic laryngeal, *kwriHza gives *kwria. After the creation of a special middle ending *-6/*-t6, *kwrid would be analyzed as a 3 sg. middle form with zero-ending, i.e. *kwria-0. The ending *-0 of the latter may now have been replaced by the normal middle ending, and in this case *:"t6 was preferred in order to avoid a hiatus (-aiJ), whence *kwria-t6, the stem of which has replaced the inherited preconsonantal athematic *kwri- « *kwriHz- = Skt. kri-) in Greek.

4.13 Much of the material which has been adduced as evidence for a vocalization of interconsonantal * Ha to -0- in Greek is ety .. mologically doubtful and may be ignored here (e.g. Oft'VVf.U, aor. info dp,oa(a) at 'swear', d. Chantraine, Dictionnaire II 798; Dvop,at, aor. wvoaap:r)'v 'blame', Chantraine, ibid. 804).

However, ooXp,6~ and 06Xp,lO~ 'en travers, oblique' are connected with Skt. jihma- (although the initial consonantism is troublesome, d. Chantraine, ibid. I 295). Cowgill, EvfL.2 154, suggests that oOX!-l6~ may be an assimilation of *(jaXf.l6~. However, forms of the type Vedic Sya-ma- 'black, etc.' (: Lat. ci-mex 'a bug') show that a full~gradea7 may precede the suffix *-mo-, and Skt. ghar-ma- < *gWhor-mo- shows that the full-grade in question may be an o-grade. Hence Gk. fJoXp,o~ may go back to *dHog'h-m6-. The quality of the laryngeal involved here remains undecided (* HI or * Ha) .

4.14. It is generally assumed that the Greek stem lewo- seen in Myc. re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo etc. ( .. AS ForeoxoFOl, d. Hom. AOSt'eOXoo~) is etymologically related to Hi tt. la (Mljuwa- 'to pour' (d. EL. 61, with references). 38 Hitt. la-l~u-wa-a-ri (an old form, StBo T 5, 103) may be analyzed as representing *loHw6( -ri) with the accent

37 Theoretically, also a lengthened grade in this example. 38 According to Eichner, LuE. 129, note 41, the Hittite impv. laY, 'pour!' is to

be connected with Lat. lama 'Pfiitze' (??). Otherwise, Lindeman, Tilegnet Carl Hi Borgstrom 83£f., who sees in lalJ, the root of the enlarged stem la(y,)l~uwa-.

50

(according to G. Hart's hypothesis, d. Introduction, Remark 2) falling on the ending, as one would expect it to in au· athematic 3 sg. middle. Cf. BSOAS. XLIII, 9, where Hart quotes the following forms of the verb in question: la-a,u-wa-a-ri, pte. nom. acc. sg. neut. la-l}u-a-a-an: 3 sg. pres. active la-a-a,u-i. The apparent full-grade in *loHw-o would seem to have been modelled on the (accented) sg. *16Hw-e(i) « IE. perfect ?, ·cf. Hul. I53£.) seen in the 3 sg. pres. active la:.a-bu-i.39

Hitt. la-lJu-wa-a-ri < *loHw-o(-ri) may (according to § 4.12) go back to an original * /leHaw-e/. A variant form of the latter with a later metathesis of the laryngeal and the *w may be posited as *jlewI-1.a-e/; i.e. phonetically *[lewHs-o]. In the same way as Ritt. la-lJu-wa-a-ri, i.e. *loHw-6( -ri) , has beside it a (later) variant la-lJu-wa-ta-ri, i.e. *loHwo-to(-ri), in which the ending *-to has been added to the' old form in order to better characterize it morpho­logically (d. Watkins, Idg. Gramm. III/I, 84, for this replacement of *-0 by *-to), the variant 3 sg. middle *lewHs-6 may have under­gone exactly the same morphological refashioning to *lewHao-to, whence, after the loss of .the prevocalic laryngeal, *lewo-to. The stem of the latter, interpreted as the regular athematic preconso­nantal reflex for·this verb, mus,t have (gradually) replaced *lewa­« *lewa-) in Greek. For the metathesis seen in Hom. Ao(f)e-'q~o'V etc. see below. '

4.15. Gk. aeO(/), info aor. deoa(a) at, and related forms are generally taken to reflect a stem * H2erH3- 'to plough' (although the stem final laryngeal may have been * HI, d. below) .40 There are some forms in dea,- in Greek, however, see Chantraine, Dictionnaire I 113: " ... les formes doriennes en dea-, aeaao'Vt't (Tabl. Heracl.), bae&:cw'JI (Rhodes), aea7:eo'V (cretois), 'Aea7:vo~ (locrien) presentent un a qui n'est pas explique, mais peut etre bref ... ".

The starting point of a preconsonantal stemdeo~, which has replaced the older stem aea- < *ar3-, possibly preserved in the Doric forms in question, may be found in the IE. perfect of this verb: according to NTS. 22, 77, both Lat. araui (but d. above § 4.1) and ORG. ier go back ultimately to an active sg. stem, built

39 *loHw-o whh a full-grade would perhaps have been morphologically more transparent than */Hw-o (> Bitt. *allJuwa(ri) 1).

40 See Cowgill, EvfL.2 154, Martinet, Economie des changements phonetiques 224, for the quality of the stem final laryngeal.

51

on the 'theme II', i.e. *H2e-H2roH-. A 3 sg. perfect active * H2e~H2roH~e, after the loss of the laryngeals, would have given *aroe.41 To the extent that the latter was analyzed as a perfect with a lengthened 'root' vocali~m of the type seen in *6kW- « sg. *Hae-Haokw., pI. *H3e~HakW-) vis-a.-vis normal grade *okw•

« * Haekw-, d. o1po/-wt), it appears to have been built on a normal grade stem * aro-, d. the following analogical proportion: *okw- : normal grade *okw

- = *aro-: normal grade x)' x = *aro-. In the dialect ancestral to Greek the latter stem would seem to have re­placed the earlier stem *ara- « *ar~ .. ) penetrating into the present (*anJ-ti, d. ae6co) , the aorist (*aro-s-, d. de611{1l)at), and into for­mations like *aro~tro-, aeO-7:eo'P. The perf. middle pte. de-rJeo-pbo~ (d. II. 18, 548) is apparently a vestige of the supposed perfect stem *aro- which was assimilated to the reduplicating type seen in 07C-C07C-a (: Au. ropp,at), i.e. *ar-aro-.42 (Hittite lJar.as-zi 'beackert' may be a loan-word from Semitic, see]. Puhvel, JAOS. 74, 86ff., Technology and Culture 5, 183.).

4.16. The stem *lewo- (of Myc. re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo, § 4.14) under­went metathesis to *lowe-. (Hom. AOe~Te6'P etc.), see Ruiperez, Emerita 18, 386ff., Cowgill, EvfL.2 I58£. (with references). Similarly, the stem of the aorist ECn:6e8au (: a7:6evvf-Lt.) seems to be the result of a metathesis of earlier *stero- which is generally assumed to represent directly a preconsonantal IE. stem. *sterHa-. I have discussed such forms in my article Zu den griech .. Aoristen vom Typus ear:6esaa, NTS. 25, 35£., and I would like here to expand briefly on my previous discussion.

4.17. Skt. astaris (AV., 2 sg.) seems to presuppose a root aorist *a~starl-, and the Greek s-aorist EaT6eeaa may represent a secondary transformation of a radical aorist the oldest form of which may be posited as *iJ-llTeea < *e-stera-t (d. NTS. 25, 37, with references). The full-grade *stera- became early *stero- in accordance with the following analogical proportion: eRa-: CeRa- = eRa - (d.

U Since the accented verb is the 'forme fondee' (Kurylowicz, L'accentuation des langues indo-europeennes2 99), the following analogical proportion may have caused the accent to have been retracted to the 'root' syllable of *aroe already in Indo-European: *{jkw-e: *hkw-e = *iiro~e: x; x = *tiro-e (for earlier *iiro-e < *H2c-H2roH-e).

42 For Att. wp,p,at see Schmeja, Studies Palmer 355. For the type seen in ihrwna see Kurylowicz, ApopllOnie 270, and cf. NTS. 25,41 and note 25.

52

a-ceco--co~) : X,. X· = *stero-)· a-ceco--co~ « secondary full~grade

* streH3-tO-) would seem to be to e-a-cew--co (for originally * stra- < *strH3-tO) as is {3}.'Yj-TO~ to 3 sg. {3Mj--co, d. above § 4.8. To judge by Skt. (RV.) ti-stir-e (3 sg. middle), pte. ti-stir-aT!a-, the stem *sterHa- .

formed a perfect in Indo~European, see NTS. 25, 38, where the 1 and 3 sg. perf. active are reconstructed as *ste-storHa-H2c and *stc-storHa-e > Greek *e-a-c6e-a, *i-a-coe-e (with the type of redu- . plication seen in 'krr:'Yjat: Skt. ti~thati). In Greek verbs with an initial consonant cluster there is a tendency to replace the originaf reduplication by e- as if it were an augment, d. NTS. 25, 38: «So wurde * s-, das als Reduplikation von a + Konsonant nicht mehr versUindlich war, durch e- ersetzt, vgI. Hom. (ad. 10, 532) eacpay flivov (Part. Perf.: a<paCw), 6aavp,m, (n. 13, 79), eaG'lJp,svo c; (II. 11, 554), vgI. dazu auch Chantraine, Gramm. Hom. I, S. 433 und s. Brandenstein, Griech. Gramm. I, S. 649. Wir konnen demnach unter Hinweis auf die homerische Form 6G-CeWTO (Plusqu.Perf.), und indem wir die Tatsache in Betracht ziehen, class der Akzent in finiten Verbalformen im Griech. so weit nach vorne wie moglich vorgezogen wird, fiir eine g~wisse Periode des Griech. die folgenden 1. und 3. Sing. Perf. ansetzen: * e-a7:0e-U, * e-a7:0e-e."

From a formal point of view, a structure *6a7:0ee (3 sg.) allowed of two different interpretations, i.e. 1) 3 sg. perf. active *e-a7:0e-e, or 2) 3 sg. of an augmented aorist (with zero-ending) *e-a-coee. To the extent that *eG7:ol}e was analyzed as aorist 3 sg., it would seem to be the result of a metathesis in the inherited aorist 3 sg. *l-at:eeo = Skt. *a-stad-t. On the model of the 3 sg. (*ea-ceeo > *la-co{]e) the other forms of the aorist paradigm underwent the same metathesis, and we get 1 sg. *e-a7:0ee-y, 2 sg. *e-a-coee-c; ("'" unaugmented

--* a-c6ee-v, * a-c6ee- ~ etc.). In order to distinguish clearly between the (analogically created)

aorist paradigm (3 sg. *e-a7:0ee) on the one hand, and the old perfect *e-a7:0e-e on the other, the aorist paradigm was transformed to the productive type in -s-: *e-rnoee -+ .*e-rnoee-ae etc.

Other aorist paradigms have followed the model of ea-COeeo"u :

* (e-)a1:BeO -+ * (e- )O'1:oeo£ -+ * (e-) <)"t"oeo£-ao£

* (e-) xseo -+ * (e-) xoes -+ * (e-) "oeE-as *(e-)AElo -+ *(l-)AoFe -+ *(e-)AoFs-aB

Hom. Isg. bcoesGa From. info AOeaaUt

53

As the stem *ker-Ha- does not seem to have had any 'theme II' ,,*kr-eHa- beside it (see Anttila, Schwebeablaut 140), its root aorist

must have been *e-ker~-t > Gk. *e-xcea. The postulated form *lJ-xeeo may be due to the following analogical proportion: old perf. *e-a'we-s: aor. *e-aTBeO = perf. *xe-xo(?-e (d. pte. pf. act. xexoe1JWc;, Od. 18, 372): aor. x)· x = *e-xceo.43

The perfect *se-smor-e > AeoL ep.,p.,OeB which has been reinter­preted as an aorist by later poets (d. 2 sg. ep.,p,oeec;, 3 pI. IIp,!weo'V) offers an interesting parallel to the proposed reinterpretation of an inherited perfect *ea'wee (d. NTS. 25, 41).

4.18. For the aorist (Hom.) wABaa, oAeaaa I refer to my discussion in NTS. 25, 40: as long as (JAAVfl" remains without any convincing etymology, there is no way of determining the quality of the ste.m final laryngeal of the preform of this verb.

4.19. According to K.urylowicz, Apophonie 207£., the aorists 1i()eEJ'V (: -&ew (t) axw) , !WAs"iv (: (3Awax'w) , To(!si'V (: 'tt1:(2wauw) and noee"iv (: JT,bceo.nat) represent old thematic formations *fJaeejo-, * fl-aAeJo­etc. « IE. *dhrHs-eJo- etc.) the o-vocalism of which is due to the analogical influence of {}ew-, * flAw;', etc. In ProblCmes 188, Kury­lowicz suggests that there may have been an assimilation of the radical vocalism to that of the following syllable: Bp,OAOV < *mJo­(for * ttaAo-). This does not seem convincing to me (d. efJuAov <' *gW!o_) .

Referring to the explanation given above in § 4.8 of the aorist *e-gwele (lCsAe'V), I would suggest that the forms in question are in origin athematic aorists: IE. *i-ter3-t (: 'theme II' *treH3-, d. 'tew-1:'6~ with secondary full-grade) gives Greek * e-1:'Eea which is transformed into *e-1:'eeO in the same way as *e-aTeea < IE. *e-stera-t (: 'theme II' *streH3-, d. a7:ew-7:6~) is changed to *e-aTSeO. The latter under­goes metathesis and gives * e-aTOee)' * S-7:eeO follows suit and be­comes * e-1:'Oee. However, since * e-'r:o(1e coexisted with an inherited thematic aorist *e-1:'ae-e ,-...., (dialectally) *ll-7:o(1-e « IE. *e-trH-e-t), it was itself reinterpreted as being a thematic formation, i.e. *e-7:o(1e -+ l-7:0(1-8. The same applies to e-poA-e, e-7We-e etc. For the development of l}. > oR in Aeolic, Arcado-Cyprian, and Mycena­ean, see Lejeune, Phonetique historique 197£., d. W. F. Wyatt jr., Studi Micenei XIII, 1971, 107f£. (with references).

43 A different explanation of y.O(}EfJat is suggested by K. Strunk, MSS. 28, 122f.

54

4.20. The preceding examination of the Greek material thus lends support to Kurylowicz's view that the regular reflex in Greek of interconsonantal * g is d. In Apophonie 205, note 50, Kurylowicz points to the fact that "les 3 isoles, ~immotives', apparaissent en grec comme u, ainsi dans na't'nf?, 1Jvya:r:'1'Je, flEya, xes ( F) a~, (rpeeov'"t-) a, (t:pEe6p,ef)~)a = indo Pitj-, duhitj-, mdhi-, krav($-, (bhdrant-)i, (bhdramah-) i." .

4.21 In a series of articles44 K. Strunk has attempted to justify the assumption of a phonetical development of *-J~x- ~o Gk. -OAt-' in interconsonantal position, e.g. in OOAtX6~: Skt. dirghd-, and in (Hesiod) (&p,-)POAt(-sey6~) 'Arbeit aufschiebend': PArj-. The symbol * ~x signifies here a laryngeal "welcher gewisse Ahnlichk~iten mit dem e-Hirbenden Laryngal hat, aber nicht unbedingt damit iden­tisch· ist." (Proceedings Xlth Congress 377). However, Strunk has not been able to determine the exact conditions that allowed *-kx· to develop differently in Greek from (interconsonantal) *-JH- > -Au­(e.g. AfjVO~: Lat. lana, -CA'1'J-c6~: Lat. (t)latus), or UAa (e.g. 'JT,(J.Aa-p,rj: Lat. palma < *pala-ma). See Kurylowicz, Apophonie 195ff. Strunk's *~X) which has left no trace in combination with the other resonants in Greek, seems to be weakly motivated. Skt. drdghiyas- etc. may reflect *dleHlgh~) and Anttila, Schwebeablaut 121, is justified in maintaining that: " ... endelekhes does in fact represent the normal replacement of the expected * dte~ ... , which makes it quite probable that dolikh6s is a replacement of *dolokh6s under the in­fluence of oligos ... " Schwyzer, Griech. Gramm. I 278, thinks that OOAlX6~ is for *c5oAX6~ with an anaptyctic i. For Hitt. daluki- (long', the formation of which is obscure to me, see Anttila, Schwebeablaut 121 with references.

-4.22. I know of no convincing evidence for a vocalization of interconsonantal *H to a in Hittite (d. EL. § 81, where cases like sanC!J}!Jzi, walC!J)l"!'zi, have been cited; pdr-lw-zi may be read parlYzi, or perhaps rather praljzi, since the verb seems never to be written pa-ar-( alJ,) -).

According to Eichner, MSS. 31) 55 (d. LuE. 1 28£.) who postulates IE. vocalic allophones *gl) *32, *aa (MSS. 31, 86, note 13), *31

develops in Hittite "vermutlich zunachst zu einem indifferenten

44 Glolta 47, ·1970, Iff.; lVfSS. 28, 1970, 109ff.; Proceedings Xlth Congress I (1972), 376ff.; Studies Palmer. 398.

55

Murmelvokal a und bei ungestorter Weiterentwicklung zu a (wie {I2 = a2)· Der resultierende Vokal kann im Hethitischen synkopiert sein: genzu- 'Schoss' (mit Ableitungen) < *genasu- < *g'ena1-su-." However, Hitt. genzu~ means 'entrails' and is a u-enlargement of *gem(s-) 'to contain', d. Gk. YBlrr:a 'entrails', yaa7:rJ(! (*g1[lSdr), see Laroche, RHA. 23, 51.46 Eichner thinks (d. LuE. 128£.; note 41) that a preform * sa2gej (: * sef!~- in Lat. sagire) survives in Hitt. sagai + s 'Vorzeichen', g. sg. sakijas < *sfJ2gjes, whereas a perfect * s6~2ge + i 'hat aufgespurt' is supposed to be continued in Hitt. sakki 'knows' (with assimilation of the laryngeal and the *g), ef. MSS. 31, 71. However, there is nothing that forces us to accept the proposed connection of sagais with sakki. I know of no convincing etymology for Ritt. sakki, sekkir, the ablaut of which remains equally unexplained.

4.23. In BSL. 62, 1967, 48 (d. BSL. 53, 1958, 189) Laroche has explained Lye. A kbatra 'daughter' as having a Luwian origin: ~'A I'une des extremites de la chaine on posera: i.-eur. *dhughater > anatolien *tugat(a)r-a a l'autre bout, lye. A kbatra issu de lye. B *tbatra (non atteste). La forme louvite intermediaire etait *twatra de *tu (g) atra-." J. D. Hawkins, KZ. 92, 1978, 112ff., discovered the word for 'daughter' in Hieroglyphic Luwian tu-waJi-taraJi-, the exact phonetic shape of which remains somewhat unclear.

The same explanation of Lye. A kbatra was given in 1901 by Sophus Bugge in his Lykische Studien II 25 (Videnskabsselskabets Skrifter II. "liistorisk-filosoJisk Klasse. 1901. No.4): "Wenn an­lautendes Iyk. t dem indogerm. dh entspricht, fallt dadurch Licht auf Iyk. kbatra 'Tochter'. Dies ist lautgesetzlich aus *tbatra ent­standen (Stud. I 43f., 48, 63). kbatra aus *tbatra gehort gewiss zum idgerm. *dhughater {Jvya-ene, wie dies Holger Pedersen (Tskr. f. Filo!., 3 Rrekke, VII Bd. S. 100), Arkwright (Jahreshefte 1899 S. 67) und ich vermutet haben. kbatra, lyk. 2 *tbatra ist wol aus *twatra, *tuatm, *dhughatra (oder -tera) entstanden. Fur den Ausfall des inlautenden vortonigen idgerm. gh vgl. preiias in cler Bedeutung neeya{a~ (Stud. I 37)."

However, a Luwian form twalra 'daughter', the internal a of which seems to reflect a vocalized laryngeal, does not prove that

,6 Eichner might have posited *g'en-su- for Bitt. genzu- on the strength of the ani/-form *g'en- seen in Lat. gens, g. sg. gentis.

56

this word, which is unattested in Hittite, would there have dis­played a corresponding vocalization of the medial laryngeal. It is sufficient to refer to the difference between Skt. duhitar- and Avestan dugdar in order to demonstrate that the reconstruction of an Anatolian *tugat(a)ra- on the strength of Luwian twalra remains doubtful (despite N. Oettinger, MSS. 34, 101). It seems, therefore, that we have so far no conclusive evidence for a vocalization of a laryngeal in Hittite (either initially or medially/finally). Risch's hypothesis in Corolla linguistica 189f. of a vocalization of * H1 to' Hitt. i remains questionable, see EL. 52, HuI. 153f£. For 'prothetic' a- in Hittite see below.

§ 5: On the Prothetic Vowels of Greek and Armenian.

5.0. In his Phonitique historique 150, Lejeune is justified in em­phasizing that "Aucune des theories proposees jusqu'ici ne rend compte de ia<;on satisfaisante de l'ensemble des faits, notamment des desaccords entre grec, armenien et albanais, et des flottements que presente Ie grec entre. formes avec et sans prothese ou entre voyelles prothetiques de timbres divers. Ni la theorie qui pose, pour l'indo-europeen, deux series de liquides et de nasales, de­meurees distinctes en grec, en armenien, en albanais, confondues ailleurs: une serie 'emphatique' developpant une prothese et une serie non emphatique. Ni la theorie qui voit, dans taus les e, a, 0 prothetiques devant liquide ou nasale, des vocalisations de ces 'quasi-sonantes', symbolisees par *a, dont d'autres considerations amenent a envisager l'existence en indo~europeen ... Rien n'empeche, au surplus, de supposer que les voyelles prothetiques

. 'ali grec pourraient etre d'origines (et de dates) diverses. La phone­tique syntactique ... et l'analogie, dans des conditions que nous pouvons malaisement determiner, ant dil jouer un role dans l'aIternance de formes avec et sans prothese devant A-, p,-, v- (et r-) et dans des cas comme celui des doublets ea/aea." (Cf. also ibid. 150, note 1).

It follows from my discussion (§ 4) of the development of inter­consonantal * H in Greek, that I would expect a vocalized initial laryngeal to have given phonetically *a- in Greek, d. also Kury­lowicz, Voprosy JazykoznaniJa 1971, 3, 123. This is exactly what we find in the rare cases where a Greek prothetic vowel can be com-

57

pared to etymologically related forms with a preserved lj,- in Ana­tolian, see EL. 69£. for examples like Gk. aea'XEl, aorist aEaa: Hitt.lj,uis.d 'lives', lj,uesu- 'living'; anal 'blows': Hitt.lj,uwa.nza 'wind'.

Remark. K.urylowicz, Studia Indoevropejskie 1974, 1llff. (Polska Akad. Nauk Prace KomisJi ltt.zykosnawstwa 37), Problemes 184££., thinks that a satisfactory explanation of the prothetic vowels may be found by assuming a phonological syncretism of initial Rand lJ. in Greek and Armenian, but his discussion is not wholly intelligible to me.

\"'hether the initial vowel of aa7:n{! and Arm. astl admits of the same explanation seems somewhat doubtful: Watkins, SPrache 20, 13, thinks that 'star' was of the type seen in Skt. pantlzal,z" Avestan pantii, g. sg. Skt. pathdl,z" Avest. patho, and reconstructs the nom. sg. as * H2ost-er, d. Hitt. lJa-as-te-er-za (in which vVatkins sees a secon­dary sigmatic nominative, d. lJaras 'eagle', nom. sg. of the stem lj,aran-). However, since &o"7:~e seems to be to Goth. stairno as is Gk. a'Y}O"£ to Goth. winds, I find it tempting to posit * Hster- as the primi­tive form: Hitt. lJasterza would then be for *lJster(-s) with the expected non-vocalization of the laryngeal. Cf. also Eichner, Sprache 24, 161, note 76. (The objections raised by G. T. Rikov, On the Distinction between Indo-European * H2 and * Ha in Hittite, Balkanskoe ezikoznanie 23, 1980, 79£., note 2, are not valid as they are based on the ghost-word astira-.). The quality of the initial· laryngeal of this word cannot be decided (* H2- or * Ha-) .

An entirely different analysis of 'star' has been proposed by E. P. Hamp, Proceedings XItlz Congress II 1050£., who posits an IE. form * Haa-ster-: "Unfortunately we do not know the Hittite form for the numeral 'one, single'; but from the syntax of all the forms in question this is what we might expect here. It seems possible, then, that such a prefixed form might underlie as a source some instances of the notorious Greek &-." It is equally difficult to prove as to disprove such a hypothesis, the formal basis of which remains obscure.

The formal relationship between Hitt. lj,uiana-, lJuliya- 'wool' and Lat. lana, Gk. Afj'VO~ etc. is unexplained (EL. 56); I have suggested (IF. 77, 307) that the initial laryngeal suffered a (dissimilatory) loss in the IE. languages outside of Anatolian, i.e. * HwJH-n- > *wJH-n- J'

one might further speculate whether the medial laryngeal of this

58

word might not be posited as * HI since this disappears in Hittite. (Otherwise Eichner, Sprache 24, 160, note 69, who reconstructs *hzlJjh2-io- for ljuliya- assuming (ad hoc) that *hz was lost before *j. The initial laryngeal may have been * H z- or * H 3-.).

If Eichner is right in connecting Hitt. lJ,ar(u)wanai- 'es hellt vollsUindig auf' with Arm. arew 'sun', areg-akn 'id.' (Sprache 24, 144ff.), the initial a- of the latter forms might reflect a vocalized laryngeal (* H2- or * Ha-). However, as long as the morphological analysis of the Hittite verb in question remains unclear, we are faced with a typical root-etymology, and one should therefore suspend judgment on the proposed etymology. "

5.1. The 'Attic reduplication' does not allow of a !aryngea1 ex­planation, see Kurylo wicz , Metrik und Sprachgeschichte" 1975, 15f£', H. Schmeja, Die Entstehung der attischen Reduplikation, Studies Palmer 353ff. (d. EL. 73f.). (C.]. Ruijgh, Le redoublement dit attique, Me­langes de linguistique et de philologie grecques offerts a Pierre Chantraine 1972, 211ft, believes in a laryngeal origin of the 'Attic reduplica­tion', hut he has introduced no fresh arguments or additional, conclusive evidence in its favour).

5.2. Concerning the negative adjectives in P1]-, PiiN, W.t)N I refer to my remarks in IF. 77, 308: " ... auf Grund eines lautgerechten Ausgangspunkts dC-: piiC- « *aC-: *1}-~C-) konnten zu se- (vgl. den Typus syelew, dessen s-, trotz aller Bemiihung, unklarer Her­kunft ist) ein PrJC- (d. p~ye8t'O~ 'ohne Erwachen') und zu oC- (vgL o'JIopa, dessen 0-. nicht-Iaryngaler Herkunft sein muss) ein pwC­(d. PWPvlwt;,) gebildet werden." (I do not understand K.urylowicz's explanation of these negative adjectives in Problbnes 188f. He does not introduce laryngeals into his discussion). ---Hom. Pfjl.t;, 'ignorant' remains a crux, d. Chantraine, Dictionnaire

III 750, Beekes, Development 107. According to E. P. Ramp, Studi Clasice XIX, 1980, 91, vfj('t;, is '~a delocutive compound, perhaps of Indo-European date, resting upon a favourite phrasal structure which lent itself to Univerbierung. The IE structure was * NEG­KNO W, and could well have been *ne-1)oidH(le -+ *ne-lJid-." Ramp (p. 92) thinks that IE. *nesti, attested by OIr. nl 'non est', Lith. *nesti etc. "could have given rise in these fixed locutions to an ap­parent negative *ne-." (?)

5.3. In Orbis XX, 138ft, Beekes takes pwpv~ 'with a single, i.e. unc1oven, hoof', to represent * S1p-H3nogh- (d. ovv~): tJ-W- is sup-

59

posed to be the phonetic outcome in Greek of preconsonantal * s1pHa-' Despite Beekes I fail to see' anything wrong with an ex­planation that starts from *C1f.t-W'VV~ with compositional lengthening, see Kurylowicz, Apophonie 267, d. BSL. LXXII, 70; *afl-w'Vv~

would be parallel to ova-w'VVp,or;: o'Vop,a, a'V-?]'Vwe: d'V1]e etc. 5.4. In MSS. 27, 1970, 79ff., H. Rix, in an article entitled An­

lautender Laryngal vor Liquida oder Nasalis sonans im Griechischen, has proposed to establish the following sound law (p. 80): "Fur idg. ~1- ~2- ?3- im Anlaut vor r / 1[l1J erscheint im Griechischen e- d- d· vor e ;. p, 'V (Ie a 01 + Ir 1 m nl." He adds the following comment: "Die Entwicklung der Laryngale hat hier auch Konsequenzen fur die Sonanten: Hinter r und 1 tritt nicht wie sonst im Griechischen ein 'StiitzvokaP (je nach Dialekt lal oder 10) auf; rp und I} werden nicht wie sonst durch lal a (bzw. /o{ 0) ersetzt, sondern bleiben Nasale (wie vor i). Man darf folgern, dass der Ersatz der idg. Laryngale durch griechische Vokale mindestens in dieser Position alter ist als die griechische Vokalisierung der idg. Sonanten."

Rix's assumptions here are in conflict with what has hitherto been the communis opinio regarding the behaviour of the IE. laryngeaIs: in prevocalic position, i.e. * HV- and * H!J.- (If = i, u, ,!, /, 1p, ~), the Iaryngeals are lost in the IE. dialects outside of Anatolian (with the possible exception of Arm. h-), d. e.g. Gk. l1}ae6~ < *H2idh-: al1}()) < *Hzeidh-, d. Cowgill, EvfL.2 146; EL. 39£.46

One of Rix's examples is aeyo~ < *dey(e)o~ (with dissimilatory loss of the *r of *-ros) < IE. * # H<Jlg'r6s (Hitt. lJ.arki~) through vocalization of the initial laryngeal > Gk. d-. However, since IE. *r (and *1) appear as Gk. at!, (aJ.)in cases where no initial laryngeal is involved, e.g. ~ae7:eeO~ ......., ~e(heeo~ .' uf]8a(1())'V (see Lejeune, Pho­netique 197; Kurylowicz, Apophonie 179f£.; Schwyzer, Griech. Gramm. I 342), there is nothing to prove that a preform *# rg'(r)6s (after the loss of the initial * H- in * Hrg' (r) 6s) could not have yielded Gk. aeyo~. The same objection applies to all of Rix's examples of the types aeC~, ditC-. (Ibid. 89, Rix takes a'V- in the g.sg. a'V(jeor; (: a'V~t!) from * # H21J(r6s) with vocalization of * H2- > a-, but concedes

46 Brian Joseph, Laryngeal before iju in Greek: Morphology in Diachronic Change, Papers/rom the Xlth Regional Meeting Chicago Linguistic Society 1975, 319fl., holds views close to those of Rix.

60

that this is not really a necessary assumption since the n may have been taken over from the nom. acc. stem * Hner- > aYB{1-, d. Szemerenyi, Syncope 109.).

Gk. OI,L(paA6~ is supposed to be from *Ha1}bh-Jo- (p. 94£,). However, there is ~othing that forces us to prefer this to the hypothesis that sees the Greek word in question as the continuation of a preform *Haembh-/o- (d. *Hanebh- in ORG: naba etc.), see Chantraine, Dictionnaire II 801, with references, d. Beekes, IIJ 14, 73. Szeme­renyi, Syncope 238ff., 246ft, starts from an original *nobh- > Gk. *a-volPaJ.6~, whence, by syncope, op.cpaJ.6l;; d. Anttila, Schwebeablaut 124. Forms of this type (0p.cpa;'6~), which involve many formal uncertainties, are hardly a suitable, basis for the construction of a new laryngeal theory a la Rix. Chantraine, Dictionnaire II 801, quoting various forms of the IE. root in question observes justly: "Le caractere populaire de ces mots peut rendre compte de ces nombreuses variations."

5.5. Rix also proposes to establish a new sound law for Latin (op. cit. 96): "Fur idg. ~1- ~2- f/3- im Anlaut vor I} rp erscheint im Lateinischen ungeachtet. spaterer kombinatorischer Verander­ungen e- a- 0- vor n m (Ie a 0/ + /n mJ)." This law is based on umbilicus ( < * H3Vbh-), unguis ( < * H31}gh~) and amb- « * H2Wbhi).

For each of these examples other (and more convincing) expla­nations are available: umbilicus may be from * H3embh- (d. above for Gk. ap,lPa;'6~), or be due to an assimilation of *embolos « *1Jbholos, see Szemerenyi, Syncope 247). Szemerenyi, ibid. 248, takes unguis to represent older *engus/*engwos (from *1}ghus/*1}ghwos) which underwent assimilation to *ongus/*ongwos (or directly to ~ungus/*ungwos); Beekes, I1J. 14, 74, posits *h3engh~ > Lat. unguis. FInally, there is nothing to prove that Lat. amb- and Gk. G.fLcpl cannot be from *H2embhi ("-' *H211Zbhi, OHG. umbi etc.).

5.6. In his Historische Grammatik des Griechischen 1976, 69, Rix cites some additional evidence in support of his theory, e.g. eex8"ac. = Skt. rchdti < *Hl1-sk'e- with *H1- > Gk. e-. However, Gk. eexerat, which is frequently connected with an IE. root *ser-, has no established etymology, d. Chantraine, Dictionnaire I 141.

Rix also suggests that * H 1-, * H 2-, * H3- before *u have given Gk. e- G.~ 0- or zero; the different developments are tentatively ex­plained as 'satzphonetische Dubletten': e- a- 0- appearing after a consonantal final, zero after a preceding vowel. Examples:

61

* H1urus: eVeV~ = Skt. urUs * H2ugsont1?,Z: aV~01J7:a = Skt. uk!}antam * Hzud-eHz-: av6rj 'voice' beside * Hzud-eye- > v6c;iv (: Skt. vdd-a-ti

< * H 2wed-). In a note Rix adds: "Doch ist v6c;i'V, das einzige Beispiel fiir I~u-) > Ju-/ (bzw. /hu-/ . .. ), erst spat belegt (hellenist. Epik) und vielleicht Kunstbildung."

However, Gk. av~ovl:a may reflect a full-grade * Hzewgs- (seen in Lat. auxilium, Lith. dukstas, d. Chantraine, Dictionnaire I 141, d. Ramp, MSS. 37, 63). av6f] may be of the type seen in 7:0ftlj and consequen tly represent * [H2awd-dH2] (see § 2.1). eV(2v q is formally too obscure to permit sure conclusions to be drawn from it (d. Chantraine, op. cit. I 388, Beekes, Development 287£., Hamp, MSS. 37, 63). Rix's suggestion that civ61j < * ... C Hzud-eHz and {;6EtV < * ... V H2ud-eye- may be sandhi variants seems to be contradicted by :rtAa7:vq < *pJtHu- = Skt. prthu-.

Remark. Rix (p. 70) teaches that Gk. 1;- goes back to a combination of an initial laryngeal with a Iyl, e.g. Cvy6v = Skt. yugdm)' Skt. ayunak with a lengthened augment is supposed to be evidence for the presence of an initial laryngeal in the verbal stem in question. The example is ill-chosen since a lengthened augment is no con­clusive proof of the former presence of a laryngeal, d. Vedic li-ri1)ak, ti-raik : ric: 'leave'.

J. A. C. Greppin, The Sequence HRC- in Latin, Glotta LI, 1973, 112ff., accepts Rix's explanation of the origin of the Greek prothetic vowels, but suggests another interpretation of the Latin forms in question: thus, he takes Lat. amb- to reflect a pre-Latin * Hzembhi ( < IE. * H2 1'/Zbhi) with the normal development of interconsonantal *1'/Z to Lat. em and subsequent coloration of the e in em to a by the initial * H2• Similarly, ursus is supposed to go back to earlier *orsos < * Hzork't-. (pre-Latin form) - Greppin holds that * Hz did not colour a neighbouring *0 to a - < IE: * Hzrk't-. Greppin's explanation presupposes the preservation of an a-colouring laryngeal in pre­Latin, which would seem difficult to substantiate as Lat. amb- (and Gk. a/-up{) may· simply reflect a full-grade * H2embhi. The positing of an intermediate stage * H 20rk't- between IE. * Hrgk't- (??) and Lat. ursus would seem superfluous since *r (according to the tra­ditional doctrine) gives Lat. or (ur) J' i.e. * H21C-, after the loss of * H'l.-' would have given *(C- > Lat. orC- (urC-) ..

62

5.7. In his article On Greek 'Prothetic' Vowels, MSS. 37, 1978, 59£., E. P. Ramp maintains that "When initial *He- occurred be­fore certain consonantisms, esp. those which vanished prehistori­cally in Greek, it seems that the s- which resulted from vocalisation did not alter or assimilate ,to the quality of the following syllabic; thus we find eV- < * Hesu-, pple. Myc. e-o-te > eO'P7:- < * Hes-ont-, opt. e'lr}'P < * HesjeHem, as well as Myc. e-e-si lsl'(Jt = Bitt. a-sa-an-zi < * Hesenti; .... It is as if the phonetic weakness of the foHowing . consonant permitted the [e] -timbre of the vocalised laryngeal to be perceived undistorted by the environment. However, when a consonantism subsists in position after initial * He we find significant instances of the assimilation of the vocalisation product to the quality of the following syllabic; that is, it seems that the conso­nant(s) took on the colour of the following vowel and passed it back to the emerging vocalisation of the syllabified He. Thus we find cM01rz:- < * Hed-ont- (* He- guaranteed by vijan~ < *nHed-ti-) , opvita < *oPof,la (attested opofta is freshly assimilated) < *Henom1} (*He- guaranteed by the Tocharian initial; .,. ".

Hamp (p. 64, note 4) has but little to say about the e- of 'Epvfta (ueaTloa.~), which may be old (d. Beekes, Orbis XX, 140), and he does not offer any comment on Aeo!. lr50'JIr:e~ (for which see Chant­raine, Dictionnaire III 776, d. Beekes, Development 55, 11 0). The analysis of vfja7:t~ is doubtful, see Chantraine, Dictionnaire III 753, who refers to Wackernagel's explanation which starts from a *nesti 'he does not eat.' Cf. Beekes, Development 110.

However, there is little to prove that the e- of e.g. eail', eVeyxs£v, Aeol. loov7:s~, etc. is in fact the phonetic outcome in Greek of a ygcalized initial * H1-: It seems possible that the prothetic vowel

/ - whatever its origin - tended to adopt the timbre of the corresponding radical vowel, see Kurylowicz, BSL. LXXII, 72: "Meme dans Ie . cas de racines 'biformes' comme ge. eneklenk (v. indo nas/ans) la voyelle initiale de enek n'est pas la continuation d'un Rl vocalise, mais une voyelle prothetique developpee devant la sonante initiale, son timbre etant adapte a l'initiale de enk « *RIenk'), forme I correspondant a la forme II nek." Cf. also Problbnes 187f.

Kurylowicz's hypothesis is nicely corroborated by e.g. Myc. e-e-si lh-evat (d. Vedic santi) vis-a.-vis full-grade *es- < * HIes- (in eaTl, Vedic asti). (According to C. J. Ruijgh, Studi lvlicenei XX, 89, the Ion. Att. form slat "peut desormais s'expliquer a. partir de

63

lhovat ;"). The same explication applies to the e- of AeoI. l~ov'te~ (: l6w < * Hled-) ; o66'VTe~ would show an assimilation of the initial e to the 0 of the following syllable.47 .

Remark. The origin of the aorist e'Veyueip is disputed. Cowgill, EviL.2 151£. (d. Anttila, Schwebeablaut 125), takes spay x- to be for *apeyu- (by assimilation) from an original root aorist *Hnenk'- (d. Skt. I sg. middle aor. na1[lsi, RV.), the initial laryngeal of which is shown not to have been * Hl by the Old Irish preterite -anaic. However, Beekes, MSS. 38, 18f., holds that BPeyxeiy must be sepa­rated from Skt. ndmsi etc. for semantic and formal reasons. He posits an initial * H I - in the preform of the Greek verb. G. Schmidt, Orbis XXVI, 113, thinks that Gk. eyeyu- and Skt. na~si represent IE. * H1n-Hl enk' -. For Old Irish -dnaic which despite Cowgill, EvfL. 2 151, does not reflect an IE. full-grade * He-Hnonk' e (d. Skt .. an dT[l sa) , see my remarks in Eriu XXXIII. Anttila, Schwebeablaut 125, explains the Old Irish causative present -uccai « *onk'-) as "cut out of *iin-onk- ... " « * He-Hnonk'e).

5.B. Despite Ramp's reconstruction of the word for 'name' as * Hellom1J and Eichner's restitution of Hittite laman as *h1nohamon (Sprache 24, 162, note 77), I am far from convinced that 'name' ever contained any laryngeals: the original inflection may have been nom. acc. *nom~, g. sg. *~mens parallel to the type seen in Skt. dnru, dr6l;, see Cowgill, EvfL.2 156 (and d. Anttila, Schwebeablaut 126£.). The prothetic vowels of Gk. 'Eyvp,a-, ovopa, and Arm. anun, g. sg. anuan would thus be of non-laryngeal origin. The a- of the latter may originally have had the timbre e- as e seems in some cases to have been changed to a before u in the following syllable, see Meillet, Esquisse'J. 55, who points to vatCsun '60' for expected *vetCsun, d. vecC 'six'. The change of *enun to anun would have preceded the change of an *e to i before a following nasal in Armenian.

47 Cf. Kurylowicz, Problemes 187: "11 faut aussi signaler un facteur purement phonetique responsable du timbre variable de Ia prothese. Dans certains exemples Ie degre 0 d'un e radical entraine Ie changement simultane de Pe ou r a prothetique en 0.. eesqJw 'couvrir': OeOrpOI;, oeoqJ~ 'toit', vljJ6eorpor;,. eei&w 'exciter': *oeof}or; dans oeofJ-dvw (meme sens); a, .. d)'yw: op,o'Ayij) J' ap,s(!yw: op,6eyvvp,t,. lboVfEt;: ob6vrer;. Cf. 'Xe).w&or;: a'Jt6'Aovf)-or;. "Cf. also Ramp, MSS. 37, 61.

64

The absence of a diphthongization in the first syllable of Albanian erne'r, Geg. emen (: J:q- < inherited * e- in Jam 'I am') points to a zero­grade vocalism (see Ramp, EvfL.2 138), which means that we may start from *1Jmen- or the like for the Albanian forms in question. Despite Ramp, MSS. 37, 59, I do not think that the Tocharian forms (B fiem, A nom) 'guarantee' the original presence of * H1- in the IE. word for 'name'. Instead I suggest that Tocharian inherited the old inflection *nom1J, *1Jmins etc" and that the oblique stem at an early stage developed into *iinm'iin- (with regular palatalization of m before *ii < IE. *e). The latter form may have become *iin'm'iin- or the like (with palatalization spreading to comprise the whole group n + m'), whence, with anaptyxis and the subsequent loss of *ii-, *fliim(~ ), the palatal initial *fi- of which may have spread by analogy to the old nom. acc. sg. form *nam(iin) > *fiam(iin), B fiem, A flom. A similar spread of palatalization seems to have occurred in the participles of the type B asefica, A asant (: AB ak-, d. Lat. ago) where the vocalism of the suffix (B e : A a) points to an original *0, whereas s would seem to presuppose a following palatal vowel. (The palatalization may in this case have originated in participles in *-:),ont- and spread from there to thematic forms; alternatively, Tocharian may have had a full~grade *-ent- beside a full-grade *~ont- in the suffix of the partic. pres" d. § 4. 11, for OLith. ent-)48.

5.9. I do not know of any really convincing explanation of the initial a- of Hittite forms like ammuk, gen. ammel (: nom. uk), asanzi 'they are', adanzi 'they eat' etc. (d, EL. 71, with references).

Theoretically, ammuk, ammel etc. might reflect Sievers' Law variants of the type (schematically) * H{Jpe jug , r-...I * Hlmeg' (Goth .

. -. mik), * Hl1flel etc., d. e.g. Vedic tuviim r-...I tviim etc.

48 Two other cases in Tocharian showing a palatalfzed consonant before what seems to be the reflex of IE. *0 (A a : B e) may be discussed here. W. Winter, Zum Beitrag der tocharischen Sprachen zu Prohlemen der lautlichen Rekonstruktion des Indogermanischen, LuE. 542f£., reconstructs the Obliquus sg. of the demonstrative pronoun B ce (: nom. se < *so) as Proto-Tocharian *t'e and assumes that "zu einem sehr fruhen Zeitpunkt in der Sprachgeschichte des Tocharischen die Form des Akkusativs Singular des Demonstrativpronomens ohne Stammer­weiterung dem Akkusativ der singularischen Personalpronomina angepasst wurde und dass clann spater innerhalb des Bereichs der Demonstrativpro­nomina ein paradigmatischer Ausgleich erfolgte." (ibid. p. 552). This is a gratuitous hypothesis, since there is absolutely no trace in Tocharian of forms

65

of the type *Iwe, *me, etc. (d. Skt. enclitic tva, ma etc.). A much simpler explanation may oe provided along the fonowing lines: we know that the * s­of the sequences *se- and *$i- has given Tocharian $- through palatalization (d. e.g. B $kas, A $ifk ~six'; imperfect B $ey, A ~e~ < *sioi-, d. Goth. sijai), whereas *v- seems to have given Tocharian AB S-, see Winter, IF. 67, 20, and d. B yamusa Ayamus < *-Va, parte. pret. fern. nom. sg.). It seems possible, therefore, to assume that the *t- of the sequences *te- and *ti- has led to the same result in Tocharian, i.e. C-, d. B cake ~fIood': Lith. tekU, d. Krause­Thomas, Tocharisches Elementarbuch I 67; possibly A 3 pI. ending --fie < *-nti, but d. A wiki, B ikii'f[l '20'); *{y- seems to have regularly given Tocharian AB ts-, e.g. infinitive AB -tsi < *-ryey, see Winter, IF. 67, 21£. On this basis I suggest that Toch. B ce < *tiom is to ~gveda ace. sg. masc. tiam (written {yam, but frequently to be pronounced titim) as is Tach. B nom. sg. se < *so to R V. sa. The stem tyti- is derived from ta with the suffix -ya- and means 'that' in ~gveda. Theoretically, it cannot be ruled out that B nom. sg. se in part represents Toch. *va < *.ryo = RV . .ryti.

According to Winter, ibid. 552f£., the palatalization found in Preterite I of the type A dirk, B carka: AB tiirk-, A sifl, B sala: AB kiil-, A /yiim, B bama: AJ3liim-, suppletive root to ~iim- 'to sil' (Krause-Thomas, op. cit. I 239£.), cannot be attributed to "auslOsende Elemente im Indogermanischen" (p. 552) : to the extent that we are not dealing with suppletive verbs we find palatali­zation of the initial consonant of transitive verbs the present stem of which has an infix n. Winter (ibid. 554) thinks that "das Merkmal der Palatali­sierung (neben dem einer unterschicdlichen Prasensbildung) dazu benutzt wird, die Selektionsklasse der transitiven Verben von def. anderen der in­transitiven abzusetzen, wobei dies Abgrenzungsverfahren in dieser konkreten Form nur fUr eine relativ produktive Stammbildungsklasse des tocharischen Verbs Anwendung £jndet." This palatalization (used for certain morphological purposes) may have originated, however, in athematic and thematic aorists with *e-grade in the radical syllable that have gone into the Tocharian Preterite I (which has a stem in -a-, IE. *-a-), d. also Pedersen, Tocharisch 184f. (A corresponding morphological development has taken place in Classical Armenian (see above § 4.1), d. e.g. cnaw 'he is born' which represents an a-enlargement of an older imperfect *g'enH-e-t (Skt. pres.janati), i.e. *g'en(H)-a­> *CiTUl- etc.). A possible Tocharian example may be the preterite A siim, B sama 'stood', if the underlying root is to be reconstructed (with Winter, IF. 67, 27) as *stem-. (The stem B stiim-, A $tiim- is suppletive stem to AB kti{Y-). A thematic aorist * (e-)stem-e-t (of the type seen in Skt. inj. sarat: pres. sisarti 'flows') or an athematic aorist *(e-)stem-t (of the type seen in Skt. tigan < *e-gWem-t) , on adopting the preterite marker *-£1-, would both give *stemii- > (with palatalization) *st'ema-, whence A Slim, B sarna. tThe plural seen in A ~tamar has a different ablaut grade, *stom-ii- ??). The Tocharian (causative) preterite II A sa-slim (d. B scam, pte. sce-scamor) allows of a corresponding explanation: an inherited thematic aorist (with a lengthened i-grade in the reduplicating syllable, see NTS. 23, l5f£.) *sti-stem-e-t was transformed into *ste-stern-ii- > (with palatalization) *st'e-st'ema-, whence A sa-siim, B sce­scamor (root initial st- is treated in Tocharian as a simple consonant for the

66

The a- of asanzi, adanzi and similar forms might be due to ana­logy: an athematic verb like Bitt. na(lJ)lJ- 'to fear' (1 sg. na-alJ-mi, 2 pI. na-alJ-te-e-ni d. BSL. LXXV, 167) would once have had the fo1l9wing 3 sg. and 3 pI. forms: * ndH-ti, * 1}H-enti, i. e. schematically *CVC-ti, 3 pI. *CC-enti. An Anatolian athematic *es-ti: 3 pI. *s-enti (after the loss of the initial * HI - of * HI es- 'to be'), if analysed as *@es-ti: *0s-enti (0 = zero consonant), would fit the pattern *CVC-ti: *CC-enti. The regular phonetic development of *1}H-ent~ in Anatolian would have been to *anH-anti (since *v gives Hittite

purpose of reduplication, Krause-Thomas, op. cit. I 238£.). For the finite forms of Preterite II in West-Tocharian see Pedersen, Tocharisch 177ff.

The morphological relationship between Pret. I A sam, B sarna (to the extent that it goes back to a thematic aorist * stem-e-t), and Preterite II A sa-sam etc. (from a reduplicated thematic aorist * ste-stem-e-t), would seem to find a parallel both formally and semantically in the corresponding relation­ship in Vedic between thematic aorists and reduplicated thematic aorists with a causative meaning, d. the following cases: d-gamat (: gam-) : red. aor. djigarnat ' (cf. caus. pres. gamayati 'causes to go'); dsadat (: sad-) : red. aor. dsi~adan (d. caus. pres. siiddyati 'causes to sit'); asamat (Brahm.,: sam- 'be quiet'): red. aor. aSlSamat (cf. caus. pres. samdyati 'appeases'). Of. also the following cases where a root aorist has beside it a reduplicated thematic aorist with causative meaning: dmrta (: mr- 'die'): red. aor. amimarat (d. caus. pres. marayati),. var (2, 3 sg. of vr- 'cover'): red. aor. dvivaran (cf. caus. pres. viirdyaii 'hides'); aor. participle vasana- (: vas- 'dwell'): red. aor. dtiivasat (cf. caus. pres. vlisayati) ,. inj. hhes (: hhi- 'fear'): red. aor. bibhayat. The following are reduplicated aorists with *e-grade in the root syllable: dcicarat' (: car­'move'); tijijasata (: Jas- 'be exhausted'); djighasat (: ghas- 'eat'); dtiftaras (: tarati 'crosses'); djiiparam '(: Pr- 'pass'); apipadiima (: pad- 'go'); ddidharat (: dhr- 'hold); driramat (: ram- 'rejoice'); dvivatan (: vai-: 'apprehend').

In Tocharian, Pret. I *' st' limli-: Pret. II *' st' a-st' amli- (a < * i) may have been the starting point of the following morphological rule: the singular stem of Pret. I + reduplication of the root initial consonant and vocalism a = stem of Pret. II, schematically: Pret. I *C'iiCa- ~ Pret. II *C'a-C'aCli-. Conse­quently, in the cases where Pret. I did not have a palatalized root initial consonant (in its singular stem), the palatalization of the consonant of the reduplicating syllable was abolished. Example: Pret. I A stak, from satk· 'ausbreiten',: Pret. II A sa-siitkiir-ci. The analogical proportion would be: *C'a(C)Ca-: *C'a-(C)Cii- = *Cli(C)Ca-: X J• x = *Ca-Cii(C)Ca- (i.e. with the non-palatalized root initial consonant of Pret. I simply repeated in the reduplicating syllable of Pret. II). This pattern was later extended to cases where a Pret. II did not have a Pret. I beside it, e.g. A ka-kiil (.' kiil- 'ertragen'), for earlier *sa-kiil vis-a.-vis Pret. III B keftsa; A pret. II sasi1Jl: Pret. III si'!lsiite (: siN, si-n- 'sattigen; satt werden'); A ka-kiilniir: B Pret. III kafnsate (: AB kiiln- 'tonen'); A ka-ksiint: B Pret. III kesasta (: AB kiis- 'erloschen').

67

an regularly), so that a 3 sg. *naH-ti at one stage contrasted with a ~

3 pI. *anH-anti, i.e. structurally *CVC-ti: 3 pI. *aCC-dnti: it seems that * 0es-ti: 3 pI. *a0s-anti > Hittite asanzi, has been assimilated to this pattern. (Later, 3 pI. *anH-dnti will have abolished its samprasaral)a and given *naH-dnti, d. 2 pI.. na-alJ-te-e-ni). : 5.10. According to Kodderitzsch, ZGP. 36, 287£., IE.' initial pre consonantal * Ha- has given Celt. a- : aCorn. abrans 'supercilium' (d. Breton abrant) < * Habhr1}-to-, d. Gk. oCP(tiJ~ < * H3bhruHs ; aCorn. asen 'costa" (d. Welsh asgwrn) < * Hast-, d. Hitt. l~astai; l\Ilid. Ir. anim 'blemish' < *Hsn-: *Haen- in Mid. Ir. on 'shame', d. Gk. O'P0flUt; Mid. Ir. dirne 'sloe; kerneP < * Hagriniii, d. Lith. uoga 'fruit'. (Initial * H 1- and * H 2- before a consonant have been lost in Celtic, d. ibid. 287). .

However, Kodderitzsch's examples are all inconclusive: since the 0- of Gk. ocpev~ cannot be proved to go back to a vocalized laryngeal (d. Szemerenyi, Studia Pagliaro III, 233, for the Greek word), and since OIr. brae, brat 'eyebrows' shows no trace of a ~prothetic' vowel, there is in fact nothing t.o support th~restitution ofa preform *HabhnJto- for OCorn. abrans. Mid. Ir. dirne and Goth. akran may represent *agr-(and be derived from IE. *ag'ms). Both Vendryes, Lexique etymologique de r Irlandais ancien 0 22£., and 9hantraine, Dictionnaire III 804, reject the connection of Mid. Ir. anim (and on) with Gk. O'POp,Ut as pure conjecture. The a-vocalism of aCorn. asen, W. as(gwrn) is difficult to account for. However, ~Iie might speculate whether these Celt. words might not represc:nt ~n IE. *ast- < *x(w)est- (through a dissimilation of labiality) ,"-' *xWest- (in Gk. oO"7:eov); the suggested dissimilation might have taken place in certain sandhi situations, e.g. in sentences where the word *xwest- was immediately preceded by the (sentence connective' *nu (Ritt. nu, OIr. no), i.e. *nu x(w)est- > *nu ast-, d. Hittite nu ba-as-ta-i-si-[tiJ-it QA- TAM-MA ma-al-la-an-du (und seine Knochen ebenso zermahlen' (StBaT. 22, 10).

§ 6. Conclusions.

6.0. Since the evidence for Sturtevant's 'Indo-Hittite' still remains inconclusive (despite Cowgill's discussion in Proceedings Xlth Congress 557-570, and Hul. 25-39), there is nothing that forces us to abandon Pedersen's hypothesis that sees Hittite (Anatolian) as an IndoM

68

European dialect on an equal footing with the sister-languages (d. Eichner, Fu W. 71ft; Kammenhuber, KZ. 94, 33ff.). However, certain facts suggest that Anatolian must have separated from the Indo-European linguistic community at a relatively early stage.

6.1. The vowel colouring brought about by the laryngeals (e.g. * feH 2! > * [aH2J) is attested bot4 in Anatolian and in nonNAna­tolian Indo-European, e.g. Hitt. na(!J,)l!,§ariya- 'fear': OIr. naire 'shame' (d. EL. 48, and see now J. Catsanicos, BSL. LXXV, 167ff.). The ablaut *e > *0, which is later than the colouring of * lei by neighbouring * H2 and * Ha, is found both in Anatolian (e.g. Hitt. kasza 'hunger': kisduwant- 'hungry', Kurylowicz, Proceedings Vllith Congress 230) and in non-Anatolian Indo~European. The regular alternation between a full-grade and a zero-grade seen in Vedic hanti: 3pI. ghndnti is continued in Anatolian as well, e.g .. Hitt. kuenzi: kunanzi.

The development of an anaptyctic vowel in a sequence of the type * jCHC-/ would seem to have occurred at a stage when all the Iaryngeals of different colour had fallen together phonetically in non-Anatolian Indo-European: the fact that all languages (with the exception of Greek) present only one anaptyctic vowel type (Indo-Iranian -i-,' otherwise -a-) speaks in favour of this interpre­tation. The Greek triple representation of * ~ seems to be, a Greek innovation.

A corresponding syncretism of the different IE. laryngeals seems not to have occurred 'in Anatolian: here the (voiceless) *H2 and * Ha have fallen together in (lJ, )lJ" whereas * HI can be shown to have disappeared in many cases. The source of the (simple) a, in _words like welJzi, melJur, etc. has not been decided. There is no ;:on-ambiguous trace of a vocalization of interconsonantal laryn­geals in Hittite, which here differs from Luwian (twatra 'daughter').

6.2. On the basis of the preceding observations I venture to suggest the following tentative chronology:

1. Colouring: */eH1/, */eH2/' *JeHal > *reH1], *[aH2], *[oHa] 2. Zero-grade: *CeHIC...!..., *CaH2C...!..., *CoHaC...!... >

*CH1C-L, *CH2C..!..., *CHaC..!.. 3. Qualitative ablaut: *eH1 > *oHl

(The order of 2 and 3 may have been the reverse, d. above § 2.1). 4. Anatolian separates from the IE. linguistic community.

69

5. Syncretism of the laryngeals under one colour in non-Anatolian Indo-European49 :

*CeH1C, *CdH2C, *C6HaC > * /CeHC/, * ICaRC/, * IC6HCj *CH1C..!..., *CH2C..!..., *CHaC...!.. > * ICHC...!-j

6. Loss of * H in a dialectal period of non-Anatolian Indo-European (possibly first in position before a vowel). The disappearance of * H entailed a compensatory lengthening of a preceding short vowel in the sequences * .. exH-C and *-exH#, d. Kurylowicz, Probtemes 197: "L'opinion suivant laquelle certaines voyelles longues proviennent d'une contraction de breves avec ~ ante­consonantique est confirmee par les exemples ou ces longues s'observent in statu nascendi, d. ved. dl1ipa-, siinara-, ayan (augment + yan) , etc." For * /~/ see EL. § 93.

6.3. What happened to the laryngeals in Anatolian (after the . separation of Anatolian from the IE. linguistic community) is

mostly unknown. Thus, we ignore whether a development of the type *-ex H-C > *-ex-C took place in those cases in which a laryngeal seems to have disappeared (e.g. pas-, d. § 2.2). We know next to nothing about a possible distinctive vowel quantity in Hittite: the so-called plene-writing seems to be historically connected with the place of the accent (Introduction, Remark 2) .

.. , A. R. Bomhard, Orbis XXV, 232, ass~mes that "Indo-European had only one laryngeal in one stage of its development, namely in Disintegrating Indo­European." The laryngeal in question is defined as the glottal fricative h (with a vocalic allophone h, a). 'Disintegrating Indo-European' = "the Indo-European antecedent 0 of the Non-Anatolian daughter languages" (Festschrift O. Szemerenyi, I, 128).

70

INDEX

Cuneiform lalJ,uwari 50,51 !J,awis 27 Hittite lalJ,uwatari 51 -lJ1.J,a 1 sg. prete 19

-a 3 sg. middle 49 Laman 64 kuislJa 3§ -a neut. pl. 20, 23 na(lJ)lJ,-andJforms14,67,68 dauis 16 -a/-ya 35 melJur 15,16, 17,69 dur 36 akkala- 30 palJ!- (palJlJas-) 26, 27 ammel 65 pararaJifyis 21 Hi eroglyphic

ammuk 65 pas- 26, 70 Luwian

asanzi 63,65,67,68 pattar 23 tu-wa/i-taraJi- 36,56

adanzi 65,67 saga is 56 Lycian -ati 3 sg. pret. 20 sakki 56 A kbatra 36,56 islJ,anas 15 sakuwa 16 B x/usa 14 e§!J,ar 15,35 sakui- 16 B qtti- 14 eSnas 15 selJur 16 lJap(a-) 19 -sganun 1 sg. prete 48 Palak lJarki- 17, 60 -ta 3 sg. middle 49 -a neut. pl. ·18, 23 lJar-as-zi 52 tayczzi 19 anielJlJa 19 lJ,ar( u) wanai- 59 tarra- 35, 36 askumauwas 21 lJastai 27, 68 tarlJ,- and forms 35, 36 askumauwaga 20, 23 lJasterza 58 tarlJu(i)- 36 lJanta 21 lJ,atalJis 21 -tati 3 sg. prete lJapnas 19 lJ,ulana- 58 middle 20 !Jari 21

'--lJ,uliya- 58,59 tulJ,lJ,ima- 13 DGulzannikes 22 kasza 69 tulJJjui- 13 malitannas 26 genzu- 56 unu- 29 panaganzi 22 kisduwant- 69 welJ-andforms 14,16,17,69 purtalJlJis . 21 ga-ne~es- 31 takkuwagati 18, 19,20 kuissa 35 Cuneiform takkuwantes 19 tal} 50 Luwian takkuwati 19,20 lalJ,uan 51 Ma neut. pl. 20, 23 tilila 21 lalJui 51 -alJi(t) 21 °Zaparwa( t-) 18, 23

71

Old lndic p{pati~ati 44 ( Language A) dnati 43 plbati 25,26 kakiil 67 dniti 43 purds 28 wile 66 dvamat 43 pur!ld- 13, 23, 42 sasam 66,67 auamit 43 Prthu- 62 i

~ .

dvi- 26 prata- 42,46 Armenian asua- 24 bhdti 22 aganim 29 dsrk 15 -mtinas 49 aeem 17 asnds 15 mlatd- 43 akanJkc 39,47 astaris 52 ydtar- 14 alay 40 andTfisa 64 riT]dnti 34 alawri 40 ayan 70 vddati 62 anun 28, 64 dyus- 26 vdste 29 anurJ 28 i~irli- 45 vrktlJ 30 acckc 38, 39, 47, 48 uk$antam 62 su.nara- 70 astl 58 urUs 62 stirt}a- 13 arawr 18,40 -1 dual neut. 47 smds 15 aregakn 59 rchdti 61 va 66 arew 59 !1!0ti 34 hdrios dual 31 arcatC 17 kri- 49,50 banam, bacci 22 garan 33,40 dalar 38 girTjd- 13,33 Avestan dike 45 jdnati 40,66 dugdar 36,57 dustr 36, 38 janitdr- 42 eker 33,40 jihma- 50 ekecCes 22 jatd- 13 Tocharian incc 47 jneyiis 31 ( Language B) cnaw 40, 66 tarate 35 asefica 65 en awl 40 tarute 36 es 48 cneCes (cncCis) 40 tirati 35 ce 65,66 cungkC 39 tiirvati 36 tkticer 36 keam, kecci 27 tya- 66 Hem 65 keraw 33,40 duhiMr- 36,57 -mane 48,49 harawunkc 18 dVipa- 70 sarna 66,67 haw 17 dh{$'!lya- 45 scescamor 66 hogi 18 dhuma- 13 ~ey 66 hot 18 dheylim 31 -sa pte. 66 hoviw 18 patanga- 23 se 66 ner, mrz. 38 payu- 27 -tsi 66 ogt 18

72

orb 18 orjikC 18 oikc 18 oskr 18 ost 18

Greek

ayo~ 29, 30 ayroY1/ 28, 29 -ayroyo~ 28 alel 26 alaa 27 alwv 26 dU1/ 27 dxrou1] 28 aAs't'(!tO{;' 40 dAtw 43 aA1/1?w 43 ap.f3oALeey6~ 55 ap.1'o{; 26 ap,q;£ 61, 62 avc5eo~ 60 (hep,o<; 43 a1'1/e 60 a:vroya 28 aeaao1'n 51 aea't'eo1' 51

"j Aea-rvo (; 51 deyo~ 60 de'YJeop,Svo~ 52 aeo't'eov 52 aeoro 18, 33, 35,

aa't'ne avc5~ av~ov't'a

PLCO­(3),ij't'o

51,52 58 62 62 27 46,53

{3A1'rrOC; prop,Ot; yaCJ't'1]f! YS1'8't'1/e yl,v't'a yvot'l'jt; yovva 00), txo t; fJOXP,Ot; s{JaAS s{JA1'}v eyslew

lYSV8't'0 loov't'st; lCe),s

e'lrrv flp,ev

46,53 28,29 56 42 56 31 39 55 50 47 46 59 42,49 63,64 47 63 47

eiva't'ees<; 14, 38 luoeea~ 53 ep,sro etc. 43, 44 ep,t-t0ee etc. 54 lvaeanov 51 lVOSASX1/t; 55 beyuetv 63, 64 , Evvp,a- 63, 64 lnela-ro 49 sflxe't'at 61 -I, (a) ro 44 Ea-CO(!Saa 52 eaTflw't'o 53 svevr; 62 -1'}i'0- 21 DaAEeO~ 38 IJel'Y)v 31 {}eo<;, {}sa- 45 Doeeiv 54 iJvya't'1'Je 36, 38 18(!6~ 45 If)aeoc; 60

-xaatyv1'}'t'Ot; 42 x8'Xofl'Y)Wt; 54 'Xwn'l'j 28 Afjvo~ 55, 58 AosO'aat 53 A08't'eOV 51, 52 ;'oe't'eoxoo~ 50 p.evew 44 -P.SVOC; 48, 49 p. 0), srv 54 p,(jjvv~ 59 -v&- 23 v1/Yes't'Ot; 59 vfjt~ 59 vfjanc; 63 vwvvp,oc; 59 oyxo~ 28 oyp.oc; 29, 30 0001''t'8<; 64 otOt; 18 oloeiv 27 -Ott; (2 sg. opt.) 48 olwvot; 26 OAAVP.t etc. 54 op,rpaAOr; 61 ovae 28 lhsteot; 28 ovop.a 28,59,60,63,64 Beeoe; 18 oerpavor; 18 oeXtt; 18 Gaae 16, 38, 39, 47, 48 oa'dov 18, 68 ova-ca 39 ovc; 25 orp(!iJr; 68 naeor; 28 nAa-rVr; 62

26,27

73

no(!elv 54 equus 24 deru 36 nQta- 49 fa ex 16 dukU 36 n"Cw~ 28 fanum 45 dvasiit 45 nwv 27 - feriae 45 dvesiu 45 C1aqnJ~ 16 fimus 16 enti 49 -C1C1a 47 jumus 13 girtas 13, 33 C1"Co(t)d 28 ianitrix 14 jente 14 C1"c(!(JYCO ~ 53,54 induo 29 pUnas 13 TU}W'XTat etc. 28 lama 50 TEf-lVW etc. 47 lana 55,58 Old Church "'Co e eiv 54 maturus 15 Slavonic "!Qro"C6~ 54 odor 18 dusti 36 V ()eLV 62 ouis 18 dymu 13 cpalvw etc. 22 pasco 26,27 obuj() 29 qxovrl 28,29 pastor 18, 26, 27 oei 47 , , ro~v~ 27 -pletus 42,46 CDna 16 quia 47 Old Prussian

stmus 47 poklausimanas 48 Mycenaean tueor, tuor 16 e-e-si 63 umbilicus 61 Old Irish e-o-te 63 uncus 28 Mid.' If. dirne 68 me-re-ti-ri-ja 43 unguzs 61 al 28, 29 re-wo-to-ro-ko-wo 50, 52 ungulus 28 -anaic 64

ursus 62 Mid. Ir. anim 68 -e gen. sg. 31

Latin Oscan ind-oll 28 jfisml 45 ndirc 69

acu .. 27 fuutrei 36 rtf 59 acus 27 Genetai 42 Ter- (Dar-, Deroo aio 28 etc.) 36 anas 37 Umbrian uan 26 amb- 61,62 anouihimu 29 arare 40 Old· Cornish aratrum 40 Albanian abrans 68 araul. 34, 41, 51 emen (Geg.) 65 asen 68 auis 17, 26 auns 25 Lithuanian Welsh auxilium 62 auk§tas 62 arddaf 34 cams 13 aviu 29 asgwm 68

74

Gothic Old English Phrygian akran 68 acworren 33 (OPhryg.) keneman 37 arjan 33 metecweorra 33 -men os 48 bereina 47 seOW01l 37 dauhtar 36 Udi slJa1, 66 ~k, pl. ~kur(ux) 24 stairno 33,58 Old High German twaddJe 31 anut 37

ars 18 Old Icelandic ast 18 byggja 32 ier 33, 34, 51 tveggja 31 naba 61 vella 34 queran 33 ylgr 30 umbi 61 end 37 zweiio 31

75