GREEK AND INDO-IRANIAN

Frederik Kortlandt
 CONTENTS

GREEK
Greek numerals and Proto-Indo-European glottalic consonants (1982) ............. 4
The Aeolic optative (1987)........................................................................................... 9
The Greek 3rd pl. endings (1987) ..............................................................................14

INDO-IRANIAN
Glottalic consonants in Sindhi and Proto-Indo-European (1979) ....................... 18
Archaic ablaut patterns in the Vedic verb (1983) ................................................... 22
Accent and ablaut in the Vedic verb (1999) ............................................................ 27
The origin of the Indo-Iranian desiderative (2008) .............................................. 34

REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 38
 GREEK NUMERALS AND PIE GLOTTALIC CONSONANTS

Gamkrelidze and Ivanov have suggested on typological grounds that the

reconstructed voiced occlusives of the Indo-European proto-language were
actually glottalic (1973). A similar argumentation was put forward earlier by
Holger Pedersen (1951: 14). Elsewhere I have argued that this hypothesis is
supported by immediate comparative evidence from Latvian (K025), Armenian
(K031), and Sindhi (K038), and by indirect evidence from Balto-Slavic (Winters
law, cf. Winter 1978), Latin (Lachmanns law, cf. K086), and Indo-Iranian
(Bartholomaes law, cf. K032). Additional evidence from Indo-Iranian has been
adduced by A. Lubotsky (1981). Elsewhere I have argued that the new theory
provides a possible explanation for the rise of preaspiration in Icelandic and the
so-called vestjysk std in Danish (cf. K072). Here I intend to show that it offers
an explanation for several problems in connection with the formation of the
numerals in Greek.
The PIE word for 100 is usually reconstructed as *ktm. This
reconstruction does not account for the initial vowel of . The initial
vowel is usually derived from *sem- (e.g. Risch 1962: 132) or *s- (e.g.
Chantraine 1967: 150) if its origin is not simply called unknown (e.g. Beekes
1969: 53) or left out of consideration altogether (e.g. Szemernyi 1960). These
explanations meet with several difficulties. There is no support for the ad hoc
hypothesis that the final nasal of *sem was dissimilated before *ktm. The
alleged substitution of for * < *s- cannot be compared with the
replacement of with because the latter is limited to a part of the
dialects. Above all, the assumption of a composite form one hundred is at
variance with the indeclinability and the syntactic behaviour of . The
original character of the indeclinability is evident both from the preservation of
the final nasal in composition and from the impossibility of using * after
etc. If such a construction had been possible at an earlier stage, it would
hardly have been replaced with a derivative formation in -io-. Thus, I think that
the Greek form and its syntax are more archaic than is generally assumed.
The hypothesis that the unaspirated voiced stops of the Indo-European
proto-language were glottalic offers a straightforward explanation for the initial
vowel of . If we start from *dktm, we can assume that the buccal
features of the initial consonant were lost while its glottalic feature merged with
the reflex of the PIE laryngeal *H1 and yielded *e-: *. The aspiration was
apparently taken from . Thus, I agree with Frisks prudent variety of the above
hypotheses that initial - mu irgendwie mit eins oder idg. *s- (gr. -)
zusammenhngen (1973: 475). The ending of *dktm can be identified with
the gen.pl. ending *-om, not because the numeral represents an original gen.pl.
form (this is Szemernyis view, o.c. 140, which Risch has effectively rebutted,
o.c. 135) but because the gen.pl. must be derived from an uninflected PIE form
(cf. K030: 294 f.). The original meaning of *dktm was pertaining to the
category of portions of reality which carry the feature consisting of 10
members. As Laroche remarked on the Hittite genitive in -an (1965: 40), the
ending is characteristic of tres ou catgories allant par groupes.
The explanation put forward here has the additional advantage of
simultaneously accounting for the long vowel in the decades, a traditional
analysis of which leads to the following reconstruction (cf. Szemernyi, o.c. 24):
20 *wkt vgint
30 *trkont- trgint
40 *kwetwkont- quadrgint
50 *penkwkont- qunqugint
60 *swekskont- sexgint
70 *septkont- septugint
80 *oktkont- octgint
90 *newkont- nngint
I now reconstruct *d instead of the vowel length in the proto-forms, e.g.
*penkwedkomt. This view has been put forward a number of times in the earlier
literature, as Szemernyi points out (o.c. 136). It has never been explained,
however, that *d merged with the laryngeals in this environment. Szemerenyis
reference to a chronological difference begs the question because he does not
discuss the origin of the Indo-European lengthened grade. I agree with
Szemernyi that originally there was no final vowel in 30 through 90,
especially because Indic -at would otherwise be very difficult to explain. The
assumption that *d was also present in *sweksdkomt, where it lost its glottalic
feature and was assimilated to *t before *k, provides an explanation for the rise
of the Indo-Iranian suffix -ti- in the higher decades if it is correct that the final
*k of the cluster was lost in this branch of Indo-European. Greek eliminated the
cluster by introducing -- from into .
It can be objected against the theory advanced here that the long vowel is
absent from etc. The objection does not hold because the latter
formation is limited to Greek and must apparently be dated to the period after
the reanalysis of * as --. The Indo-European proto-language had
no names for the hundreds.
In the case of *septdkomt, the hypothesis that *d yields the same reflex as
*H1 accounts for the difference between -- in and -- in the
corresponding Latin form. It may also account for the irregular voicing in
Greek. The alleged development of PIE *septms to * rather than
* lacks parallels and can hardly be correct. More probably, the voicing
arose in * after the development of the syllabic nasal at a stage which
was posterior to Sievers law, cf. < *dh(w)H2ts, < *stH3ts.
(This is in agreement with Szemernyis view, o.c. 8). It then spread to ,
from there to , which replaced * < *H3ktH3ws, and finally to
*, which replaced * < *H3ektoHdkomt-. (On the
neutralization of the timbre opposition between the laryngeals in the
neighbourhood of PIE *o see K034. Vedic at- developed by dissimilation from
*Hatti-, which reflects *H3ektHdkomt with medial zero grade from the
ordinal *HatHa- < *H3ektHo-.) The introduction of the medial vowel from the
ordinals into and is probably late.
The form *H1newdkomt yielded *, in which *w was apparently
lost at an early stage because of the aberrant syllable structure. At a later stage,
*w was assimilated or became u before a following resonant (cf. Lejeune 1972:
181f.). The usual derivation from *enwen- cannot be correct because that would
yield ** in Ionic, cf. < .
The theory advanced here also provides an explanation for the coexistence
of < * and , both of which represent PIE *dwidkti. Partial
dissimilation of the initial consonant yielded *H1widkti, from which the
southern form must be derived, whereas total dissimilation yielded the northern
form. Unlike Szemernyi (o.c. 24), I assume that Indo-Iranian and Greek
faithfully reflect PIE short -i, which was lengthened in Latin and British by the
addition of the dual ending *-H1.
The long vowel of cannot represent an original plural ending -,
as is often assumed, because it is absent from < *triH2. I think that the form
continues *triaHkonta, which developed from PIE *triH2dkomt under the
influence of . Indeed, this is the form where in my view the final vowel
of - originated on the analogy of *dwidkti and from where it spread to
the higher decades. The difference between *dwi- and *triH2- has been
preserved in Old Irish fiche < *wikent- versus trcho < *trkont- and in
Tocharian B ik < *wikt versus tryka < *triaka, with Proto-Tocharian *a as
the phonetic reflex of PIE *H2. The ending -a < *-H2 is the regular Proto-
Tocharian plural ending, which replaces *-ont in the decades. The short vowel
which is reflected in Breton tregont is doubtless of analogical origin. British
- in Old Welsh uceint and Breton ugent also points to a short vowel: it
represents *wi- before a syllable with a front vowel, cf. Welsh ucher evening,
Latin vesper. The development of - from *wi- is not due to umlaut but to the
preservation of the palatal feature in this environment. The initial part *dwi- is
apparently the PIE neuter form *dwoi of the root *du- 2 with zero grade in
composition, and *triH2- is similarly the neuter form with zero grade of the root
*tri 3.
While *d merged with *H1 in , and , it
apparently merged with *H3 in , which was preserved in West Greek
and regularized to * elsewhere. I think that developed
regularly from *kwetwdkomt and that the rounding of the medial vowel
represents the lost *w, as is the case with the rounding of the epenthetic vowel
in < *kwtw-. The combined evidence of , and
allows us to date the merger of *d with the laryngeals to a stage
which was posterior to the rise of colored epenthetic vowels, but anterior to the
eventual loss of the laryngeals (which had merged as a result of the previous
development): *triHaHkont, *kwetwroHkont, *penkweHkont. Since the
development of colored epenthetic vowels is specifically Greek, it follows that
the PIE glottalic consonants were preserved up to a stage which was posterior to
the separation from the other languages. This result is in accordance with what
has been demonstrated earlier for Indo-Iranian (cf. Lubotsky, o.c.), Armenian,
Balto-Slavic, and Germanic (cf. K032: 110-114). I think that the same holds for
Albanian, Italic and Celtic.
The Albanian material is difficult to interpret, as it usually is. The initial
consonant of -zet 20 must be derived from *gw- because it requires the
simultaneous presence of labial, palatal, and velar articulation (cf. K022: 249;
the rule was first established by Pedersen 1900: 338). It probably originated from
assimilation in *dwigti < *dwidkti, with *g combining the glottalic feature of
*d with the palatovelar articulation of *k.
A similar explanation could be put forward for the voiced stop in Latin
vgint if the voicing were not absent from the ordinal vcsimus and from Old
Irish fiche. Moreover, Lachmanns law suggests that a glottalic consonant
dissolved into a sequence of a laryngal and a voiceless buccal part, the former of
which merged with the reflex of the PIE laryngeals, when it was preceded by a
vowel and followed by a voiceless stop (cf. K032: 117). One therefore expects *dk
to develop into *Hk, not into *g. However, it is probable that the cluster became
voiced after a nasal (cf. Thurneysen 1883: 313). The neutralization of the
opposition between glottalic and aspirated stops in the position after a nasal
accounts for the absence of Lachmanns law in strictus and pictus, which
adopted the short vowel of fictus and mictus, cf. string, ping < *-g- and fing,
ming < *-gh-. The glottalic feature was apparently absorbed by the preceding
laryngeal in lassus < *lH1dtos, just as the laryngeal was absorbed by the following
glottalic obstruent in Vedic pajr- firm < *peH2gro- (Lubotsky, o.c.). The initial
syllable of sede was prefixed to *sdtos in -sessus, where the glottalic feature had
been lost at an early stage, cf. the zero grade in ndus < *nisdos. In my view,
*septdkomt and *H1newdkomt developed into *septHgont and *newHgont,
which subsequently yielded *septmgont and *newngont in Italo-Celtic.
Szemernyis view that the introduction of zero grade in Latin -gint was
anterior to the elimination of the long resonants (o.c. 169) cannot be correct
because the latter development was Italo-Celtic and the former was not (cf.
K046: 14). Note that Old Irish sechtmogo can represent either *septmgont or
*septmkont, with medial o for a under the influence of the preceding labial (cf.
Thurneysen 1946/75: 50). The former reconstruction is more probable
because -ach- seems to have resisted the voicing of voiceless fricatives between
unstressed vowels (ibidem, 82). The form ncha 90 was apparently modelled
after trcho 30, while cethorcho developed regularly from *kwetwrkont. For
coca 50, Modern Irish caogad, I assume metathesis of *kgexo to *kxego and
voicing of *x after the syncope (ibidem, 80). The rounded vowel of the initial
syllable is due to the original labiovelar environment, as it is in guidid <
*gwhedh- and gonaid < *gwhen- (cf. Cowgill 1980). Together with *kwetwrkont,
these forms are the source of the final vowel in Latin -gint, which was
introduced on the analogy of vgint. Thus, the ultimate origin of the difference
between Greek -a and Latin - is the different vocalization of the laryngeals in
the two languages.
After the disintegration of Italo-Celtic, the influence of 70 and 90 first
affected *swekskont, which was preserved in Irish sesca, and *oktkont, where
Latin preserved -- and Celtic adopted *-m-. The preservation of the difference
between the short vowel of Old Irish fiche < *dwidkt- and the long vowel of
trcho < *triH2dkomt- suggests that the *d was simply lost after a vowel in Celtic.
If the length in Latin vgint is correctly attributed to the glottalic feature of the
lost *d, it shows that the elimination of the glottalic obstruents was posterior to
the disintegration of Italo-Celtic. Note that the difference between fiche and
vgint corresponds with the difference between Old Irish recht law and Latin
rctus, where the long vowel originated from Lachmanns law.
 THE AEOLIC OPTATIVE

1. Despite considerable effort which has been spent on a variety of possible

solutions to the problem (cf. especially Thomas 1957 and Forbes 1958, with a
survey of the earlier literature), the origin of the so-called Aeolic optative has
not been clarified: Le problme reste pos (Chantraine 1967: 266).1 I think that
the absence of a convincing solution is the consequence of an imperfect
understanding of the original, Proto-Indo-European state of affairs. In the
following I intend to discuss a few points which, though relevant to the
problem, have not received sufficient attention and to present an alternative
solution.
2. Proto-Indo-European verbal paradigms could have either fixed or mobile
stress. When the stress was fixed, as in the sigmatic aorist and the thematic
flexion, the optative suffix was *-iH1, followed by the personal endings with no
vowel intervening:
1st sg. -siH1m -oiH1m
2nd sg. -siH1s -oiH1s
3rd sg. -siH1t -oiH1t
1st pl. -siH1me -oiH1me
2nd pl. -siH1te -oiH1te
3rd pl. -siH1nt -oiH1nt
Outside these two categories, I find no trace of an original paradigm with fixed
stress in Greek. When the stress was mobile, the optative suffix was *-ieH1- in
the singular and *-iH1- in the plural of the active voice, and *-iH1- in the middle
voice. The stress was on the ending in the 1st and 2nd pl. forms of the mobile
paradigms, and evidently also in the sg. forms of the middle voice, but not in
the 3rd pl. forms, where a number of indications point to original root stress.
First of all, the 3rd pl. active ending of the Vedic optative is -ur, not -an. The
ending -ur is found in root presents with fixed stress, e.g. inj. takur of tkati
they fashion, in reduplicated imperfects, e.g. dadhur of ddhati they put, in
the sigmatic aorist, which has -sur, and in root aorists of roots in a laryngeal,
e.g. dhur they put, i.e. in all those athematic forms where the stress is either
on the root or on a preceding syllable. It follows that -ur replaces earlier *-at
from syllabic *-nt.
Secondly, the agreement between Latin velint, Gothic wileina and Old
Church Slavic velt, which are all related to English will, suggests that the
optative paradigm from which these forms are derived had an e-grade in the
root. The oldest paradigm of the Slavic compound stem do-vlje- suffice,
which has a reduced grade in the root and is evidently based on the 3rd sg. form
in *-ieH1t, has an irregular 3rd pl. form dovlt, which must be derived from
*-i(H1)nt. The same alternation is found in xote- < *-tye- want, 3rd pl. xott.
It points to an original paradigm *ulieH1t, *ueliH1nt.
Thirdly, the Vedic optative of the type dheym I may put requires an
explanation. This form cannot have replaced *dheya(m) < *dheH1iH1m or
*dhym < *dheH1ieH1m because neither of these forms is attested in the
material while both are supported by other paradigms and would not therefore
easily be lost, cf. gamyam, gams beside gamys of gam- go. This suggests that
the full grade of the root *dheH1- and the full grade of the suffix *-ieH1- were
taken from different forms of the same paradigm, which means that the stress
alternated between the root and the suffix. Since the suffix had full grade in the
singular, the obvious source of the full grade root vowel is the 3rd pl. form
dheyur, which is the expected reflex of *dheH1iH1nt.
On the basis of these considerations I arrive at the following reconstruction
of PIE paradigms for the present optative of the root *H1ei- go and the aorist
optative of the root *dheH1- put:
1st sg. H1iieH1m dhH1ieH1m
2nd sg. H1iieH1s dhH1ieH1s
3rd sg. H1iieH1t dhH1ieH1t
1st pl. H1iiH1me dhH1iH1me
2nd pl. H1iiH1te dhH1iH1te
3rd pl. H1eiiH1nt dheH1iH1nt
In the middle voice, which will not be discussed here, I also assume full grade of
the root in the 3rd pl. form and zero grade elsewhere (cf. K065).
3. What is the expected development of the reconstructed paradigms in
Greek? This question hinges on the development of the laryngeals. In the
position after a vowel and before a consonant, the laryngeals were apparently
lost at an early stage with compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel, cf.
especially < *mns < *meH1ns month, where the accent points to an
original monosyllable, and similarly acc.pl. -, - < *-ns < *-eH2ns,
acc.sg. - < *-m < *-eH2m, also acc.sg. - < *-uHm, acc.pl. - < *-uHns, but
acc.sg. -yan on the analogy of nom.sg. -ya < *-iH2, where the vocalization of the
word-final laryngeal is regular.2 Thus, I assume that the phonetic reflex of 1st sg.
*-siH1m and 3rd pl. *-siH1nt should be *-sn.
In the thematic flexion, *-oiH1- yielded *-oiy- (or *-oyy-) with vocalization
of the following nasal in Arc. I may drive out and Hom.
they may follow. Before the nonsyllabic consonant of the endings *-s, *-t, *-me,
*-te, the sequence *-oiy- was evidently reduced to *-oi- (or *-oy-).3 It is clear
from the 3rd sg. form in - that the assimilation of the laryngeal to the
preceding semivowel was anterior to the loss of final *-t because the laryngeal
would otherwise have been vocalized to yield -, as it was in < *H3ekwiH1
(pair of) eyes. However, the circumflex ending of he may order,
where the accent was not retracted to the initial syllable, points to a disyllabic
ending *-oyi or *-o, suggesting that the assimilation of the laryngeal was
anterior to the rise of a distinction between *i and *y. Thus, we arrive at the
following relative chronology: (1) assimilation of a laryngeal before a final
consonant (cluster) to a preceding (semi)vowel, (2) vocalization of the syllabic
nasals and loss of final *-t, (3) reduction of *-oii to *-oi before a consonant, (4)
rise of an opposition between *i and *y, (5) loss of the laryngeals in antevocalic
and intervocalic position.
The laryngeals of *H1i- and *dhH1- were lost after the vocalization of the
following *i cf. especially < *H1e-pH3iom I drank.4 In intervocalic
position, the laryngeals were retained longer than elsewhere, as is clear from the
circumflex tone which reflects the original disyllabic character of the resulting
long vowels and diphthongs. This leads us to the following reconstruction of
Proto-Greek paradigms:
1st sg. -sn -oiya iyn thin
2nd sg. -ss -ois iys this
3rd sg. -s -o iy thi
1st pl. -sme -oime ime thme
2nd pl. -ste -oite ite thte
3rd pl. -sn -oiya(n) eyn then
The disyllabic character of *then is still preserved in < *tithe-en they
may put, where the accent was not retracted to the initial syllable, cf. ,
you may be able, which replace earlier *dunso, *dunsthe.
4. The 3rd pl. ending *-sn, which was homophonous with 1st sg. *-sn, was
now replaced by *-sen on the analogy of *-then, the ending of which was also
found in the passive aorist and in the paradigm of let go. This is the origin
of the Aeolic optative.
The ending *-sen was subsequently replaced by *-seiyan on the analogy of
the thematic ending *-oiyan. This replacement accounts for the retraction of the
accent in they may loosen in accordance with the limitation law, as
compared with . The ending *-seiyan then gave rise to the 3rd sg. ending
*-seiye on the analogy of the indicative, cf. , he, they loosened,
also 2nd sg. *-seiyas. In the 1st and 2nd pl. forms, however, the model of
, yielded , on the analogy of the thematic
endings. The latter analogy did not work in the 3rd sg. form, where the
indicative ending was -. Thus, the distribution of -- and -- is ultimately
based on the spread of *-ei- from the 3rd pl. form on the one hand and the
absence of -- from the 3rd sg. indicative form on the other.
In the thematic flexion, the isolated 1st sg. ending *-ya was replaced by the
usual athematic ending *-mi, e.g. I may loosen, which then gave rise to
the analogical form . The substitution of - for *-an in the 3rd pl.
ending must have taken place at a time when *-en < * -ent had not yet been
replaced by -, - or - in the indicative, as in Hom. ,
they yoked, they went, Skt. yan < *-H1ient.
In the original paradigm with mobile stress, the full grade of the 3rd pl.
form spread to the other forms of the paradigm, e.g. , < *titheiys,
*tithete you may put. This development is analogous to the rise of Skt.
dheym. The 3rd pl. ending *-n was replaced by *-iyen on the basis of the
indicative paradigm, e.g. < *titheiyen, also Delphi < *-i-eiyen
they may go round, Hom. < *i-eiy he may go. Similarly, , <
*weideiy, *weideiyen he, they may know represent *uidieH1t (Skt. vidyt),
*ueidiH1nt (with original full grade in the root) plus *-e- from *then and 3rd
pl. - < *-ent.
The Cretan forms he may judge, he may arrange
(Dreros), they may perform, they may dissolve (Gortyn)
are apparently built on the zero grade of the suffix *-s-iH1-. It is highly
improbable that the singular forms represent *-y- because there is no trace of
the full grade suffix in the sigmatic aorist, which had fixed stress from the
outset. These forms rather represent a variety of the Aeolic optative with
generalization of the zero grade *-- instead of the 3rd pl. vocalism *-e-. The
endings -, - suggest that we have to reconstruct a real Aeolic optative
(-, -) with *-- not yet replaced by -- in the 1st and 2nd person forms
and subsequently generalized throughout the paradigm. The form
adopted - from the other optative paradigms, and the eventual substitution
of -- for *-- is clear from the forms he may perform, they
may break (Gortyn). It appears that Cretan lagged behind in a development of
the optative which was the same as in the other dialects.

NOTES
1
Cf. Chantraines footnote On mesurera dans ces articles lextrme
complication de toutes les solutions proposes. Rixs conception of
-/ii- umgebildet [...] zu -eiia/e- mit den Ind.-Ausgangen und
Dissimilation -ii- > -ei(i)-, nur als Variante in der 2. 3. Sg. 3. Pl. (1976: 233)
stretches the imagination and does not explain the distribution of the e-grade.
Cf. also Risch (1982: 328, fn. 29): Nicht eindeutig geklrt ist noch immer die
Herkunft des sog. olischen Optativs, z. B. , -, -.
2
Professor Ruijgh draws my attention to point, which is based on the
original acc.sg. form *glkhn of < *-iH2 tongue.
3
The e-grade of he seemed suggests that this form represents an original
stative *deiH2-o, cf. he lies, he hangs, 3rd pl. *deiH2ento
(replacing earlier *-ro), cf. Hittite kitta(ri) he lies, kiyanta(ri) they lie. The 3rd
pl. ending *-ento was regular in the middle root aorist, e.g. Skt. kranta they
made, ranta they went (cf. K065: 220), also < *dhH1ento they put.
4
Cf. also * < *sH2ieH2 strap (Ruijgh 1967: 205) and < *-gwH3is healthy,
< *gwwiH3os < *gwH3iuos life, < *-gwwiH3eH1m < *-gwH3iueH1m I
lived (cf. SCr. vjeti, OPr. giwt), < *gwweiH3omH2- I will live where the
*-w- apparently inhibited the palatalization of the preceding labiovelar. The
word < *gwywos alive and its derivatives contain a secondary full grade
which replaces the original zero grade of *gwwos < *gwH3iuos, Skt. jvs, where
the Balto-Slavic and Celtic evidence shows that the laryngeal preceded the *i,
e.g. Latvian dzvs (with broken tone reflecting preservation of final stress),
Welsh byw (with a short root vowel), cf. K014: 76-82. The verb < *lowes
adopted the root vowel of < *low I wash, which replaces athematic *loumi
< *leH3umi, where the phonetic loss of *H3 before *u in such forms as 3rd pl.
*lH3uenti led to confusion with the paradigm of I loosen. The root vowel
of cannot represent a vocalized laryngeal because in that case there would
be no motivation for the rise of the secondary full grade which is attested in
Myc. rewotorokowo, metathesized in Hom. bath-pourer. The rise
of *lewo- may be due to the influence of the quasi-synonymous root - pour,
as Professor Ruijgh suggests to me. Note that < *tH2euos and
< *ptH2euiH2 are no counterexamples to the loss of a laryngeal before a
vocalized semivowel, cf. also Breton tanao < *tanawos thin.
 THE GREEK 3RD PL. ENDINGS

The Vedic 3rd pl. active ending is -ur instead of -an in the following instances:
(1) root presents with fixed stress, e.g. inj. takur of tkati they fashion;
(2) reduplicated imperfects, e.g. dadhur of ddhati they put;
(3) sigmatic aorist -sur;
(4) root aorists of roots in a laryngeal, e.g. dhur they put;
(5) optative -yur.
Besides, the ending -ur is found in the perfect. Elsewhere (K065, cf. also K097) I
have argued that -ur replaced earlier *-at from syllabic *-nt in those athematic
forms where the stress was either on the root or on a preceding syllable. It
follows that inj. dhr adopted the vocalism of ind. dhur, whereas the converse
substitution took place in ind. vran they covered, inj. vrn. This view is
supported by the apophonic difference between 3rd pl. indicative and injunctive
forms in the middle root aorist: krata they made, rata they went versus
kranta, ranta (cf. Meillet 1920: 203, 205). It also provides an explanation for the
remarkable 3rd pl. middle subjunctive ending -anta, which must originally have
been the inj. ending corresponding to ind. -ata from syllabic *-nto. This ending
was evidently reinterpreted as a subjunctive because it differed from the other
inj. endings by the presence of an initial vowel.
What is the expected distribution of full and zero grade 3rd pl. endings in
Greek? In the thematic flexion we expect -, - (-), -, -
(-). Outside the thematic flexion, the sigmatic aorist, and the original
stative, I find no evidence for an original paradigm with fixed stress in Greek. I
therefore expect zero grade 3rd pl. endings in the sigmatic aorist, reduplicated
and augmented forms, the optative, and the original stative, and e-grade
endings in unreduplicated athematic presents and augmentless root aorist
forms. I claim that the actual distribution is closer to this expectation than is
usually assumed. In the following, page numbers will refer to the discussion of
the 3rd pl. forms by Risch (1982).
The ending - (-) is attested in Myc. e-e-si /ehensi/ they are,
contracted in Ionic and West Greek (324), also in Myc. ki-ti-je-si
/ktiyensi/ they cultivate, Vedic snti, kiynti. Risch puts the middle verbs
- lie, - sit and - wear in the same category, which is inappropriate
because these represent original statives with a root-stressed 3rd pl. form, e.g.
, , which are in perfect agreement with the corresponding Vedic
forms. The original zero grade ending - (-) from syllabic *-nti is well
preserved in the perfect, e.g. Hom. they have grown. Elsewhere we
find - and - (-) for the zero grade active endings.
Turning now to the reduplicated presents and the root aorists, we find the
zero grade 3rd pl. endings in Attic , , Arcadian , Cyprian
ka-te-ti-ya-ne /katethiyan/, Boeotian and Locrian , also Arc. imp.
beside , Elean opt. , (325). These forms have
not received an adequate explanation. Rischs comment deserves full quotation
(327):
Die Tatsache, da der Typus , sowohl im Arkadischen als auch im Kyprischen gilt,
spricht m.E. eindeutig dafr, da er wenigstens bei dieser Dialektgruppe alt ist. Auch das
Botische ist ein Dialekt, der neben verschiedenen Neuerungen doch manches Alte bewahrt
hat, so z.B. die Endung - in , pronominale Formen mit - in frher,
Patronymika auf -. Also darf auch im olischen Bereich eventuell als alt betrachtet
werden. Dafr spricht auch das Zeugnis des homerischen Gebrauchs. Bekanntlich haben wir
hier bei den langvokalischen Aoristen sowohl als auch , sowohl als auch
usw., wobei die lngere Form typisch ionisch-attisch ist und die krzere vermutlich
dem olischen zugewiesen werden kann. Ebenso und und bei - und
. Um so berraschender ist, da nur , , nie ,
vorkommen. Der Schlu liegt nahe, da auch das vorhomerische olisch sie nicht kannte,
sondern vermutlich , (oder *?) hatte, die dann ohne weiteres durch metrisch
gleichwertiges , ersetzt werden konnten.

In view of this, the West Greek forms , , , , ,

can hardly be ancient. They are easily explained as the result of a secondary
development, while their replacement by forms in - (-) and - in the
other dialects can hardly be motivated.
Risch thinks that the Attic forms , , , are recent
(similarly Chantraine 1973: 471 and Rix 1976: 252) because we find Myc. di-do-si
/didonsi/, -i-je-si /-hiyensi/, and Hom. , , , , where he
attributes the accent to the influence of , from - (329). The
problem is that the perfect provides a small and none too obvious basis for such
an analogical development. Moreover, the ending - (-) from syllabic *-nti
must have been introduced into the perfect from the reduplicated present. It
seems much more plausible that the zero grade ending was never eliminated
from the reduplicated present in Attic and was replaced by the regular
athematic ending - (-) in Ionic. Thus, we may surmise that ,
represent earlier *, * (West Greek may actually
represent *). Since neither the replacement of - by -, nor the
converse replacement can easily be motivated, we may conjecture that the two
endings were alternative solutions for the elimination of an irregular ending. In
this way I arrive at the tentative reconstruction of the 3rd pl. forms *,
* for Attic-Ionic.
The situation in Aeolic and Arcado-Cyprian is different. Though the
evidence of these dialects points to the aorist forms , , it appears that
the present forms were replaced by , , as they were in West Greek
(where the substitution may have taken place independently at a more recent
stage). First, Myc. di-do-si and -i-je-si seem to reflect /didonsi/ and /hiyensi/.
Second, Risch has called attention to Arc. present beside imperfect
(329). This can hardly be a recent distribution. Third, there is
evidence for * beside in the Hom. imperfect (329):
Es ist vielleicht auch nicht zufllig, da bei Homer zwar keine Aoriste vom Typus , wohl
aber einige Imperfekta dieser Art, nmlich 33, 273, 377 (stets vor der
Hephthemimeres-Zsur), dazu als Lesung Aristarchs 112 (cod. ) neben
sonstigen , , bezeugt sind.

These may be Aeolic forms. Fourth, the remarkable spread of the secondary
ending - in Thessalian requires an explanation. The raising of a to e before
and after i in Thess. -, for -, does not suffice to explain the rise of the
ending - for -, e.g. beside . The spread of - suggests
the earlier replacement of * by , which presupposes the
replacement of * by , as in West Greek. Putting the evidence
together, I tentatively reconstruct the following distribution:
3rd pl. present imperfect aorist
West Greek
Aeolic
Arcado-Cyprian
Attic-Ionic
This scheme does not necessarily reflect a single chronological layer. In
particular, the Aeolic state of affairs may be a younger development of the one
posited for Arcado-Cyprian. The West Greek simplification may have taken
place at any stage; the Elean optative forms in -, e.g. , suggest that it
was a recent development. In any case, the Attic-Ionic distribution is evidently
archaic and the cleavage between this dialect and Arcado-Cyprian must be
ancient.
We now come to the discrepancy between and on the one hand,
and and on the other. There can be little doubt that the disyllabic
forms are secondary. If they replace earlier and , it is hard to see a
motivation for the introduction of the new ending. Such a motivation is even
more difficult to find in the case of * and * if these replace earlier
and . therefore think that we have to start from *, *,
*, *, where the introduction of the root vowel is a natural
development. It follows that after a consonant the laryngeals were lost without a
trace before a syllabic nasal, which was regularly vocalized to a, in spite of the
fact that word-initial laryngeals were vocalized before a tautosyllabic nasal.
 This brings us to a reconsideration of the nt-participle. Since Beekes
discussion of Latin iens (1985: 67-71) we have to start from nom. *dheH1nts, acc.
*dhH1entm, gen. *dhH1ntos, which now yields Greek , , *. The
oblique stem may be reflected in Arc. , Elean from
*- (325). The original participle of is preserved in
wretched, which represents *telH2nts, *tlH2(e)nt-, while the 3rd pl. form
evidently replaces *. Similarly, I think that replaces * from
*-gnH3nt and cannot be used as evidence for a root aorist with fixed stress. After
a consonant, the nom.sg. ending *-as from zero grade *-nts was replaced by
*-n(t), e.g. willing, evidently because polysyllabic consonant stems
usually had an asigmatic nominative in Greek. Thus, the ending of , ,
(not -) corroborates the reconstruction *H1esnts, *H1eints, *gwelH1nts,
as opposed to , from *deH3nts, *gneH3nts, cf. also beside
reflecting *derknts, *drkentm.
As I pointed out above, the Vedic evidence leads us to expect e-grade 3rd pl.
endings in augmentless and unreduplicated forms, as opposed to zero grade
endings in the forms which have just been discussed. This is actually what we
find in the imperative , ; the -a- of Arc. beside
must have been taken from the indicative. The e-grade ending is also found in
the optative , as opposed to - in the sigmatic aorist (cf. K097). There
seem to be traces of the original distribution in the middle voice as well, cf.
Hom. for *-, for * and *, but
and for * from *-gwlH1nto. The 3rd sg. form
bought for * must be based on augmentless from
*kwriH2ento, similarly they hasten from *diH1ento, also they
drank for * on the basis of *pH3ient, and they lie. The e-grade
endings were largely replaced by the thematic o-grade endings outside the
optative, where the model for this substitution was lacking. Thus, we find -o- for
e-grade 3rd pl. endings in , , , , ,
beside the usual zero grade in , , ,
. The accent of , may reflect earlier *-, *-,
as in the case of .
It appears that Greek preserved the original PIE alternations more faithfully
than is generally assumed.
 GLOTTALIC CONSONANTS IN SINDHI AND PROTO-INDO-EUROPEAN

1. In 1973 Gamkrelidze and Ivanov suggested on typological grounds that the

reconstructed voiced occlusives of the Indo-European proto-language were
actually glottalic. Elsewhere I have argued that this hypothesis is supported by
comparative evidence from Baltic (K025) and Armenian (K031) and offers an
explanation for the lengthening in Latin ctus, lctus (Lachmanns law) and the
devoicing in Sanskrit yukt < *-gt-, vsutti < *-dHt-, as opposed to dugdh <
*-ght-, vsudhiti < *-dhHt- (K032). I have not discussed the Sindhi material,
which will be the subject of the present article.
2. Apart from the usual obstruents which are found in the other Indo-Aryan
languages (voiced and voiceless, aspirated and unaspirated), Sindhi possesses a
series of voiced implosive stops, which will be denoted by b, , j, g in this
article (on the phonetics see Nihalani 1974). There is no dental implosive stop.
The phonemic status of the implosives is beyond doubt, cf. bakhu sacrifice of a
goat, bakhu embrace, ih bold, ih seen ja barley, ja lac, gacu
mortar, gacu much. These examples are taken from Turner 1924, who gives a
few dozens of minimal pairs; his article serves as a basis for the following
analysis. The topic of this article is their historical origin.
3. As Turner points out, a detailed examination of the words in which they
occur shows that initially g j b correspond to initial g-, j- (dy-), d-, b- (dv-) in
Sanskrit, and intervocalically to consonant groups in Sanskrit that in Prakrit
became -gg- -jj- -- (-dd-) -bb- (-vv-), while the simple voiced stops in Sindh,
g j d b, are the result of special conditions and in most cases (where not
occurring in loan-words from other languages) are descendants of Primitive
Indian sounds other than g j d b. The simple voiced dental d, except in the
group nd, is found only in loan-words. That is to say, except for certain specific
conditions, Sindh has shifted Primitive Indian g-, j-, d-, b- to g j b (1924:
305 = 1975: 196).
4. The rise of the glottalic articulation which is characteristic of the Sindhi
implosives can hardly be attributed to external influence because the
neighbouring Dravidian (Brahui), Iranian (Baloi), and Indo-Aryan languages
do not present anything comparable, with the exception of the westernmost
dialect of the closely related Lahnda language. The southern (Kacchi) and
eastern (Thareli) dialects of Sindhi do not have implosives. On the other hand,
it is difficult to perceive an internal motivation for the rise of the glottalic
consonants, which are not found elsewhere in the Indo-Aryan linguistic area.
Since the Sanskrit reflexes of the sounds for which Proto-Indo-European
glottalic articulation has been assumed are reflected as implosives in Sindhi, e.g.
iau to give (Indo-European *d-), we must consider the possibility that the
latter language has preserved an archaism which was lost elsewhere.
5. As Turner points out, the simple voiced stops g j b can result from
the disaspiration of the corresponding aspirated voiced stops gh jh h bh. A
voiced aspirate when followed by an aspirate or by h in the same word lost its
aspiration and became the corresponding simple voiced stop without glottal
closure. It makes no difference whether h represents a Sanskrit intervocalic
sibilant or has been inserted simply to avoid hiatus (1924: 311f. = 1975: 202).
Examples: bath quiver (Skt. bhstr), ih bold < *hih (Skt. dh-), ghu
fodder (Skt. ghs-), cf. ghu bait < grsa-. It follows that the rise of the
implosives was anterior to the dissimilation of voiced aspirates before another
aspirate or h.
6. A surd stop preceded by a nasal becomes the corresponding voiced stop,
which remains without glottal closure. The original voiced stops preceded by a
nasal are completely assimilated to the preceding nasal. In the group stop + r,
the r is lost, except when the stop is a dental. In the latter case, the dental
becomes a cerebral and the r (except in South Sindhi) remains. Even when the
resultant cerebral is voiced, there is no glottal closure, e.g. rkha a small grape
(drk), r entrails (ntr-), caru moon (candr-). Thus, where the
voiced stop is preceded by a nasal or followed by r there is no glottal closure.
These clusters do not offer a basis for a relative chronology because it cannot, at
this point, be decided whether the glottal closure arose in ghu bait after the
loss of r in grsa-, or was lost secondarily in rkha.
7. Initial vy- became w- in Sindhi, e.g. wghu tiger (Skt. vyghr-), but
intervocalic -vy- became -b- without glottal closure, e.g. sibau to sew (svyati),
katabu business (krtavya-). It follows that the rise of the intervocalic
implosive -b- from -br-, -rb-, and -dv- was anterior to the development
of -vy- into a bilabial stop. The rise of b from initial and intervocalic dv and the
rise of j from intervocalic dy do not offer a basis for a relative chronology
because the glottal closure may have been a feature of the dental obstruent
before the sound change already, e.g. ba two, bj second (Skt. dv, dvitya-),
ubaau perfumed flour to rub the body with (udvartana-), aju today (ady).
8. Sindhi, like Kashmiri and Sinhalese, keeps Skt. j and y apart. The former
became j, the latter j, e.g. j , j who (y, y), j because (yta), jay
sacred cord (yajopavt-), jhu coitus (ybha-). It follows that the rise of the
implosive j was anterior to the development of initial y into a stop. In the same
way, Skt. -ya- (Pali -ya- or -iyya-) is reflected in Sindhi as -ija-, while
Skt. -idya- is reflected as Sindhi -ija-, e.g. ijau to be given (dyte, Pali
diyyati, Prakrit dijja), chijau to be broken (chidyate). Cf. also bhj sisters
son (bhgineyaka-, Pali bhgineyya-), mrj belonging to a stepmother
(*mtreya-, Pali matteyya-), sja couch (ayy, Prakrit sejj), as opposed to
bhajau to be broken (bhajyte), upajau to be produced (utpadyate), wju
doctor (vaidya-). Thus, I assume that -j- is the regular reflex of
intervocalic -yy- in Sindhi.
9. The treatment of -ry- and -rv- differs from that of -yy- and -vy- in the
presence versus absence of glottal closure, e.g. kju ceremony, work (kry-),
cabau to chew (carvati), sja couch (ayy), katabu business (krtavya-). We
have to conclude that r was not assimilated to a following y or v, but developed
into glottal closure. I think that -ry- and -rv- became -dy- and -dv- at an early
stage and subsequently shared the regular development of these clusters in
Sindhi. They do not offer a basis for a relative chronology because the glottal
feature may or may not have been present in the original
clusters -dy- and -dv- at the time when the obstruent replaced the alveolar or
retroflex flap in -ry- and -rv-.
10. The facts which have been discussed so far do not inhibit the identification
of Sindhi and Proto-Indo-European glottalization. In particular, Sindhi may
have preserved the glottal closure which has been surmised as a feature of the
PIE voiced occlusives except for certain specific environments. There are a
number of instances where the identification is impossible, however. First of all,
the unaspirated voiced stops which came into being as a result of Grassmanns
law are reflected as implosives in Sindhi, e.g. badh bound (baddh-), ah
curds (ddhi), jagha leg (jgh), ginhau to buy (grhnti). If the
identification of Sindhi and PIE glottalization is to be upheld, we must assume
that the initial consonant of these words became glottalic as a result of the
aspiration dissimilation. This is no serious objection because there was no series
of unaspirated voiced stops without glottal closure at the time of the
dissimilation if PIE glottalization had not yet been lost at that stage.
11. Besides, there is an implosive in the words pju drinking, pja, pj rice-
water, pju, pj watering land after sowing (Pali peyya-). The implosive
cannot continue -yy-, which yielded -j- (see above). I think that the glottal
closure is the reflex of the laryngeal in the Indo-European root *poH(i)- drink.
The preservation of the laryngeal before the semivowel in this word family is a
consequence of its particular root structure. The development of the laryngeal
into glottal closure gave rise to a marginal phoneme -y- in pre-Sindhi, which
was to merge with -j- from -dy- and -jy-. A similar merger of laryngeals with
the glottal closure of the PIE voiced occlusives took place in Baltic and Slavic
(cf. K025).
12. The hypothesis that the laryngeal was preserved in the position before a
semivowel up to a stage which was posterior to the rise of the Sindhi implosives
is supported by the absence of glottal closure in the words ju living being
(jv-), jiar alive (jval-), jiau to live (jvati). Turner attributes the absence
of glottal closure in these words to the following -- (1924: 309 = 1975: 199). This
is unsatisfactory because there is an initial implosive in jibha tongue (jihv)
and it is not clear why the length of the following vowel should have caused the
loss of the initial glottal closure. I assume that the latter was lost by dissimilation
before the glottal closure which had developed from the laryngeal of Indo-
European *gwiH(u)- live, which had been preserved before the semivowel and
was subsequently lost. Several conjectures can be made in connection with jr
cummin-seed (jraka-), none of which seems to be demonstrable.
13. Moreover, there is an implosive in sujau to be heard (ryte, Pali
suyyati), sujau to be swollen (yate), ujau to be woven (yate). Here again
I assume earlier -y-, where the glottal closure continues a laryngeal which was
original in se verbs and spread to ani verbs in the passive. In nijau to be
carried away (nyte) etc. the glottal closure was apparently lost
between -i- and -y- at an early stage.
14. One may wonder if it is probable a priori that an archaic feature which was
lost elsewhere in the Indo-Aryan linguistic area should be preserved in Sindhi.
It must be remembered that Sindhi belongs to the more conservative dialects,
e.g. in the preservation of the distinction between Skt. j and y, which it shares
with Kashmiri and Sinhalese, and in the preservation of r after a dental
obstruent. Since there are indubitable traces of early dialectal diversity in the
Rgveda (cf. Emeneau 1966), the possibility that Sindhi has preserved an
archaism which was lost elsewhere cannot be rejected a priori. The original
Indian script does not provide the means of distinguishing between glottalic
and plain voiced obstruents, which became phonemically relevant only as a
result of the Sindhi dissimilation of voiced aspirates before another aspirate or
h.
15. In any case, the Sindhi material cannot be adduced in support of the
general diachronic hypothesis that at least one source of injectives might be a
sound shift from voiced plain to voiced implosive stops (Greenberg 1970: 134).
The comparative evidence points the other way.
 ARCHAIC ABLAUT PATTERNS IN THE VEDIC VERB

1. The 1st sg. active form of the Vedic sigmatic aorist injunctive does not take
vddhi. This is a remarkable archaism which has not been sufficiently
appreciated.
2. In his article on the proterodynamic root present, Insler calls attention to
the fact that the system of proterodynamic present inflection reflected in Vedic
forms is nearly identical to the oldest system of Vedic sigmatic aorist inflection
(1972: 56). It is only when we compare the act. indic.-inj. of proterodynamic
root presents that the complete parallelism breaks down (Insler 1972: 57). The
active forms of the sigmatic aorist have lengthened grade vocalism throughout
the whole paradigm and do not show the expected alternation between
lengthened grade in the singular and full grade in the plural which is found in
ti, tkati. We must therefore ask the question: which paradigm seems to
continue the original ablaut relationship? (Insler 1972: 58).
3. The obvious explanation is that the active paradigm of the sigmatic aorist
has participated in the same sort of leveling of vocalism observed in act. root
aorists of the type kar, karma, karta (Insler 1972: 58). Insler rejects this view
because the lengthened grade vocalism was extended to the 3rd pl. form of the
sigmatic aorist, whereas the corresponding form of the root aorist maintains the
original zero grade, e.g. kran. The argument does not hold because the ending
of the root aorist was -an < *-ent, whereas the sigmatic form ended in *-sat <
*-snt. The ending *-at was replaced with -ur, as it was in the injunctive takur
and in the reduplicated imperfect. The retention of the ablaut contrast in the
paradigm of ti and the extension of the lengthened grade to the 3rd pl. form
of the sigmatic aorist fit the general tendencies of the Vedic verb system to
characterize act. athematic present inflection by ablaut differences, but to mark
act. athematic aorist inflection by the predominant absence of any alternating
vocalism (Insler 1972: 61).
4. Lengthened grade vocalism was generalized in the active paradigm of the
sigmatic aorist indicative, but not in the injunctive, which betrays the original
distribution of the ablaut grades. It is noteworthy that the original distribution
was already indicated by Wackernagel in his Old Indic grammar (1896: 68): the
lengthened grade spread from the monosyllabic 2nd and 3rd sg. forms to the
rest of the paradigm. The archaic character of this distribution is supported by
the Balto-Slavic evidence (cf. K014: 84-86 and K064: 114-117). It is also clear
from the Vedic material.
5. The 1st sg. indicative has lengthened grade in RV ajaiam, aprkam,
abhram, aysam, aspram, ahram, akniam, akriam, acriam,
asniam, and ambiguous vocalism in aysam. It has full grade in akramiam
and in the analogic forms akramm and aasiam. The 1st sg. injunctive has
full grade in VS TS TB jeam, TS KS TB JB yoam, and RV stoam, vadhm, and
lengthened grade in the analogic form rviam (ru- break).
6. Following Hoffmann, Narten interprets jeam and 1st pl. RV jema as
precative forms (1964: 120). The reason for this interpretation is evidently the
absence of lengthened grade (cf. Hoffmann 1967a: 254). The functional evidence
for the interpretation as precative (Hoffmann 1967b: 32f.) or subjunctive (Insler
1975: 1526) is very weak, while the formal objections against it are prohibitive. It
is therefore preferable to retain the traditional view that these forms are what
they look like: full grade injunctive forms, which were interchangeable with the
corresponding subjunctive in certain contexts and which could be interpreted
as precative when the latter category became common.
7. Narten assumes that the injunctive forms yoam and stoam took their
vocalism from the subjunctive (1964: 213, 277). The model for this analogic
development is lacking, however, because the subjunctive ending was -ni,
not -am. Hoffmann attributes the alleged substitution of the injunctive
ending -am for the earlier subjunctive ending - to the influence of the 2nd sg.
imperative: Das Bestreben, den Konjunktivausgang - von dem durch
Auslautsdehnung gleichlautend gewordenen Imperativausgang zu sondern, hat
das Ausweichen zu -am, wodurch die 1. Person deutlich gekennzeichnet wurde,
gefrdert (1967a: 248). I find such influence highly improbable. The use of the
1st sg. injunctive for the subjunctive must be explained from the meaning of the
forms. Note that Standard British English offers an exact parallel in the use of I
shall where other persons will. During my stay in Dublin, Dr Patrick Sims-
Williams told me that when an Irish friend asked him in front of an open door:
Will I go first?, the only reasonable answer to him would be: I dont know.
Compare in this connection RV 7.86.2 kad nv ntr vrue bhuvni ... kad
mk sumn abh khyam When will I be inside Varuna? When shall I,
cheerful, perceive his mercy? Also 10.27.1 sat s me jarita sbhiveg, yt
sunvat yjamnya kam That will be my excitement, singer, that I shall be
helpful to the pressing sacrificer. In 10.28.5 kath ta etd ahm ciketam How
shall I understand this (word) of yours? the substitution of the subjunctive for
the injunctive would yield a quite different shade of meaning: it would shift the
responsibility from the singer to Indra.
8. The indicative has lengthened grade in RV 3rd du. asvrm, 1st pl.
ajaima, abhaima, atrima, 2nd pl. achnta, 3rd pl. achntsur, abhaiur,
atriur, apviur, amdiur, ariur, arviur, avdiur, asviur, and
ambiguous vocalism in aysur, arjiur, and viur. It has full grade in 3rd du.
amanthim, 1st pl. agrabhma, 3rd pl. atakiur, adhanviur, anartiur,
amandiur, all of which have a root in a double consonant (cf. gbht- <
*gbhH-ita-). It has zero grade in amatsur, anindiur, and kiur (na- attain).
9. The injunctive has full grade in Rgveda 2nd du. aviam, kramiam,
gamiam, caniam, cayiam, mardhiam, yodhiam, vadhiam, nathiam,
3rd du. avim, 1st pl. jema, ramima, 2nd pl. avia(na), grabha, raiana,
vadhia(na), nathiana, zero grade in hisia, and ambiguous vocalism in
3rd pl. dhsur, hsur. It has lengthened grade in 2nd du. yauam (pMB
yoam), triam, 2nd pl. naia (pS yoa), 3rd pl. yauur, jriur, and in the
analogic form 2nd du. yviam (yu- unite). Note that the difference between
1st pl. ramima and atrima parallels the one between jema and ajaima.
10. One may wonder if the ablaut difference between the indicative and the
injunctive is also found in the asigmatic aorist. It has long been noticed that the
3rd pl. middle indicative forms krata and rata correspond to the injunctive
forms kranta and ranta (Meillet 1920: 203, 205). The archaic character of this
distribution is supported by the isolated 3rd pl. injunctive forms naan and
naanta, which correspond to indicative kiur (for ur replacing *at) and
ata. Hoffmanns conjecture that the initial n- of the injunctive is of secondary
origin (1957: 124f.) does not explain why it is limited to the 3rd pl. forms, cf. 3rd
sg. middle aa. As in the case of the sigmatic aorist, it is probable that the
vocalic alternation was eliminated in the indicative paradigm. This must have
occurred at a much earlier stage, however, because it affected the form which
was to yield sthur. The full grade injunctive ending -anta survived in the
paradigm of the subjunctive, which shared the thematic vowel. There is a trace
of the original distribution in Homer , .
11. As I indicated above (section 3), the 3rd pl. ending -ur replaced earlier *-at
< *-nt, not -an < *-ent. Since the optative ends in -yur, the original form must
have had zero grade both in the suffix and in the ending. This suggests that it
had full grade in the root.
12. Hoffmann has argued that the root aorist optative had fixed stress on the
root (1968). His proposal offers a straightforward explanation for 3rd pl. Latin
velint, Gothic wileina, and OCS velt, but not for the remarkable alternation
which the latter language shows between 2nd pl. xotete, dovljete and 3rd pl.
xott, dovlt. It appears that the 3rd pl. form differed from the other persons
in the original paradigm. This enables us to remove the unlikely assumption
that the root aorist differed from the root present in the accentuation of the
optative.
13. Insler connects the type dheym with the type gamyam, the two being in
complementary distribution (1975: 15). His explanation falters on two points.
First, it requires the previous existence of both *dheyam and *dhym, of which
the attested form represents a blending. It is highly improbable that neither of
the earlier forms would have survived because both were supported by other
paradigms, while the alleged blending created a new type. Second, the
motivation for the spread of the new vocalism to the 3rd person forms is very
weak. The long chain of analogic changes which Inslers theory requires is too
complicated to be credible.
14. Thus, I arrive at the following reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European
active root optative:
singular plural
1st dhH1ieH1m dhH1iH1me
2nd dhH1ieH1s dhH1iH1te
h
3rd d H1ieH1t dheH1iH1nt
After Sievers law and the loss of tautosyllabic laryngeals this paradigm turned
into the following:
singular plural
1st dhiym dhma
2nd dhiys dhta
3rd dhiyt dhaiat
The generalization of *dha- and the substitution of -ur for *-at yielded 1st sg.
dheym, 3rd pl. dheyur.
15. The isolated 1st pl. middle optative form namahi (3) next to amahi (5)
suggests that this paradigm also contained a form with full grade in the root.
Since the initial n- is lacking elsewhere in the middle optative and indicative
paradigms, it was probably taken from the unattested 3rd pl. optative form.
16. The accentual mobility in the paradigm of the optative is reminiscent of the
one in the reduplicated present, where 3rd pl. bbhrati and ddhati have both
initial stress and zero grade in the root and in the ending. Thus, I reconstruct
PIE *dhedhH1nti they put. It follows that the 3rd pl. form does not have the
same origin as the other forms of the paradigm.
17. The reduplicating syllable da- of ddhmi replaces earlier di-, which is
preserved in and in the desiderative present ddhimi. It is difficult to
agree with Leumanns view that da- was taken from the perfect (1952: 27)
because the motivation for such an analogic development was very weak. More
probably, the paradigm of the present contained a form with da- from the very
outset. This must have been the 3rd pl. form. In my view, PIE *dhi- was simply
the pretonic (zero grade) variant of *dhe- before a double consonant, cf. ,
, beside and , Czech tvrt < *tvrtyj fourth,
OCS l < *dl went.
18. The 3rd pl. forms ynti, kranta, dheyur and ddhati have in common that
the initial syllable contains a full grade vowel. They have the same vocalism as
the participles ynt-, krnt-, ddhat-. It is therefore probable that the form
in -nti represents the original nominative plural form of the participle. The
plural ending -i is also found in the Proto-Indo-European pronominal
inflection: nom. *to-i, gen. *to-i-s-om, dat. *to-i-mus, abl. *to-i-os, inst. *to-i-bhi,
loc. *to-i-su. It follows from this point of view that the secondary ending *-nt
was created on the analogy of the singular forms, where the primary -i had a
different origin. In my view, the plural ending -i is of Indo-Uralic origin. It can
be identified with the Fennic and Northern Samoyed oblique plural suffix -i-,
e.g. Finnish talo house, pl. talot, taloi-. It is also found as a plural object marker
in the Northern Samoyed objective conjugation, e.g. Yurak mada-i-n I (did) cut
(more than two things), cf. Finnish pala-n I burn (intr.), Lappish puolm <
*palak-mi.
 ACCENT AND ABLAUT IN THE VEDIC VERB

Most scholars nowadays reconstruct a static root present with an alternation

between lengthened grade in the active singular and full grade in the active
plural and in the middle. I am unhappy about this traditional methodology of
loosely postulating long vowels for the proto-language. What we need is a
powerful theory which explains why clear instances of original lengthened
grade are so very few and restrains our reconstructions accordingly. Such a
theory has been available for over a hundred years now: it was put forward by
Wackernagel in his Old Indic grammar (1896: 66-68). The crucial element of his
theory which is relevant in the present context is that he assumed lengthening
in monosyllabic word forms, such as the 2nd and 3rd sg. active forms of the
sigmatic aorist injunctive. Since the sigmatic aorist is the prototypical static
paradigm in the verbal inflection, it offers the possibility of testing the relative
merits of the two theories, Wackernagels lengthening in monosyllabic word
forms versus a static paradigm with lengthened grade in the singular and full
grade in the plural. As I have pointed out elsewhere (K065), the evidence
substantiates Wackernagels view and forces us to reject the alternative because
we find full, not lengthened grade in the 1st sg. form, e.g. Vedic jeam conquer,
stoam praise. The only 1st sg. active form with lengthened grade in the
sigmatic aorist injunctive is rviam of the root ru- hurt, which is clearly
analogical. It is therefore reasonable to assume that originally the static present
also had lengthened grade in the 2nd and 3rd sg. active forms of the injunctive
and full grade elsewhere.
Narten assumes that the injunctive forms yoam and stoam took their
vocalism from the subjunctive (1964: 213, 277). The model for this analogic
development is lacking, however, because the subjunctive ending was -ni,
not -am. The use of the 1st sg. injunctive for the subjunctive must be explained
from the meaning of the forms. Note that standard British English offers an
exact parallel in the use of I shall where other persons will. Similarly, 8.74.15
dediam I shall point out must be identified as an injunctive (cf. Hoffmann
1967a: 253281), not a subjunctive (thus Schaefer 1994: 42f. will ich [...]
hinweisen), and the same holds for yoam and stoam. The injunctive presents
the event as a fact without specifying its time frame. As a result, the listener has
to supply a time frame in which the event is part of reality, and is driven by the
context to choose the most obvious possibility. The subjunctive, however,
presents the will to achieve a situation as part of reality, and thereby suggests
that its accomplishment may be beyond the subjects control. The Spezialfall
of the Nebeneinander von Injunktiv und Konjunktiv in der 1. Person
Singularis (Hoffmann 1967a: 247) is a result of the fact that the first person can
take full responsibility for his own actions, cf. also 2.18.3 hr n ka rtha
ndrasya yojam yi sktna vcas nvena die Falben schirre ich nun an
Indras Wagen [now indeed shall I harness the steeds to Indras chariot] mit
wohlgesprochener neuer Rede, auf da er komme beside 1.82.1-5 yj nv ndra
te hr ich will dir nun deine Falben anschirren, Indra followed by 82.6
yunjmi I harness (Hoffmann 1967a: 253).
If Wackernagels theory is correct, as I think it is, we also expect lengthened
grade in the 2nd and 3rd sg. active forms of the root aorist injunctive. Perhaps
the clearest piece of evidence for this original distribution is the long vowel in
3rd sg. *gwmt came, Latin vnit, Gothic qm-, Toch. B em, which can hardly
be explained otherwise. Another instance is Greek - < *sgwst (the fire) went
out (cf. Ruijgh 1998: 226). A third example may be Old Irish ro-mdair he
judged < *md- of midithir judges < *med-, Gothic mt- measured, Greek
- be disposed, inclined beside - be observant, attentive. This raises the
question of why in Indo-Iranian the long vowel was generalized in the sigmatic
aorist indicative, which had fixed stress, and eliminated in the root aorist, which
had mobile stress. The reason must be sought in the difference between static
and dynamic paradigms. The problem will be taken up below.
We first have to establish the nature of the static present, which is not a
frequent type of inflection. I subscribe to Alexander Lubotskys unpublished
theory that it must be derived from a reduplicated formation (cf. already Rix
apud Hararson 1993: 2912). A clear instance is Vedic 3rd sg. ti, 3rd pl. tkati
fashion, which cannot be separated from Greek carpenter < *tetk-.
Another example is Vedic 3rd sg. di makes offering beside dkate is able <
*dedk- (cf. Lubotsky 1994: 204). These verbs may have provided a model for
k- appear beside ce sees < *kwet- < *kwekwk-, then *s- order<
*ke(k)Hs- beside aorist *s-, i- < *keHs-, *kHs-, and 3rd sg. mri wipes <
*me(m)rg-, stuti praises < *ste(st)u-, with lengthening of the vowel replacing
the lost consonants. The original formation can be identified with Greek
engender.
It may be useful to have a look at the place of this formation in the original
verbal system. Following a line of thought developed by Pedersen (1921: 25f.)
and Kuiper (1934: 212), I reconstruct a hysterodynamic s-present, 3rd sg. *tresti,
3rd pl. *trsenti, beside a static s-subjunctive (Indo-Iranian aorist injunctive), 3rd
sg. *trst, 3rd pl. *tersnt, the coexistence of which is perhaps best preserved in
Tocharian (cf. already K064: 1173), where we find B ts- < *dhH1es- beside A
ts- < *dhH1s- in the present and B tes-, A cas- < *dhH1s in the preterit of the
verb t- < *dheH1- put. If the reduplicated formations followed a similar
pattern, we may reconstruct a hysterodynamic reduplicated present, Vedic 3rd
sg. vvakti speaks < *wiwekwti, weak stem *wiwkw-, but with retracted stress in
3rd pl. *wewkwnti, cf. 3rd sg. sakti, 3rd pl. scati accompany < *sisekwti,
*seskwnti, beside a static reduplicated subjunctive (Indo-Iranian aorist
injunctive), 3rd sg. *wwkwt, 3rd pl. *wewkwnt, Vedic vocat he spoke,
subjunctive vcati beside vcti. This reconstruction actually explains the long
*-- in the reduplication syllable of original reduplicated aorists, as opposed to
original presents and perfects, in Tocharian (cf. K149: 173). The original
accentuation of the hysterodynamic reduplicated present is preserved in Vedic
3rd sg. juhti, 1st pl. juhums, 3rd pl. jhvati sacrifice. For the reduplication
syllable cf. also 3rd sg. yuyti separates, aorist injunctive yyot for *yyut <
*yywt (?), also 3rd sg. ppatat for *-pp(t) < *ppt beside paptat, 3rd pl.
paptan flew for *-paptat < *peptnt, and jhti leaves beside jhte goes forth,
further 2nd sg. vavki beside 3rd sg. vivai desires, imperative rirhi beside
subjunctive rrate give, also jgti goes, jgat going, world, like Greek
engender, carpenter. There is no reason to assume two types of
reduplicated present which as a result of partial adaptation under mutual
influence gave rise to four different combinations of accent and ablaut in Vedic
(thus e.g. Hararson 1993: 3014) because this assumption does not explain the
coexistence of the two types of reduplication within a single paradigm. The rise
of the static reduplicated present may have been provoked by the raising of
pretonic -e- to -i- in the reduplication syllable (cf. K065: 222).
If the historical background of the reduplicated formation proposed here is
correct, we should expect full grade reduplication and zero grade root vocalism
throughout the paradigm of the Vedic intensive. It follows that full grade root
vocalism in the paradigm of the intensive is always the result of analogy after
the hysterodynamic flexion types. Thus, I think that 1st sg. dediam point out is
the regular injunctive form and that e.g. 2nd sg. dardar split, 3rd sg. adardhar
held are analogical for *dardur, *adardht, which were anomalous forms. On
the other hand, 3rd pl. forms in -at < *-nt could easily give rise to a thematic
injunctive paradigm with 3rd sg. -at and 3rd pl. -an, e.g. davidyutat or -an
flashed (cf. Thieme 1929: 12f., Hoffmann 1967a: 200f., Schaefer 1994: 41).
Jamison asks the question why the intensive was not thematized throughout: it
is the restriction, the relative rarity of these thematic forms that is curious, not
their existence (1983: 48). The answer is precisely that the subjunctive had zero
grade root vocalism in the intensive so that the thematic paradigm existed
already with a different function. Since the intensive was the only athematic
present without full grade vocalism in the predesinential syllable of the active
singular forms, the analogical introduction of a full grade root vowel is only to
be expected, e.g. dvidyot for *-dyut beside davidyutat or -an. Interestingly, the
two instances which Jamison adduces as clear examples of thematized
injunctives, as opposed to subjunctives, are precisely the 3rd pl. forms carkiran
commemorate and ppatan fly (1983: 47), where -an may have replaced -at <
*-nt (cf. also Schaefer 1994: 41f. and Lubotsky 1997: 561), like -anta
replacing -ata in the middle. This replacement must have been earlier than the
general substitution of -ur for *-at < *-nt in Vedic (cf. K044: 1292).
As I have argued elsewhere (K065), the 3rd pl. form occupies a special
position in the paradigm. This is clear not only from the alternating vowel in
the reduplication syllable of 3rd sg. sakti, 3rd pl. scati accompany and jgti
goes, jgat going, world, but also from the alternating vocalism in the active
and middle root aorist and in the paradigm of the optative. As Meillet noticed a
long time ago (1920: 202-205), the 3rd pl. middle indicative forms krata made,
rata went correspond to the injunctive forms kranta, ranta. The archaic
character of this distribution is supported by the isolated 3rd pl. injunctive
forms naan and naanta attain, which correspond to indicative kiur (for
ur replacing *at) and ata. Hoffmanns conjecture that the initial n- of the
injunctive is of secondary origin (1957: 124f.) does not explain why it is limited
to the 3rd pl. forms, cf. 3rd sg. middle aa. In the active root aorist we find 3rd
pl. sthur stood, vran covered beside the corresponding injunctive forms
sthr, vrn, which suggest an original alternation between double zero grade in
the indicative and a full grade ending in the injunctive. This distribution must
be old because the double zero grade is supported by comparative evidence
from Greek, where 3rd pl. put replaces earlier *, with loss of the
laryngeal and vocalization of the nasal (cf. K098: 67), and from Germanic,
where original *dun is reflected in the Old English preterit sg. dyde, pl. dydon
did (cf. K109: 102). In the optative, the alternation between a full grade suffix in
the singular and double zero grade in the suffix and the ending in the 3rd pl.
form is best preserved in the Old Church Slavic je-presents xote- want and
dovlje- satisfy, which have *-iHnt in 3rd pl. xott and dovlt,
corresponding to Latin velint, Gothic wileina (cf. K065: 221). As in the case of
the reduplicated presents, there is no reason to assume different flexion types in
the optative, an assumption which does not explain the coexistence of the two
types within a single paradigm. Instead we must reconstruct an original
alternation between suffixal stress in the active singular, desinential stress in the
active 1st and 2nd pl. forms and in the middle, and root stress in the active and
middle 3rd pl. forms. This reconstruction actually offers an explanation for the
Vedic isolated 1st pl. form namahi (3) beside amahi (5) attain, which
suggests that this paradigm also contained a form with full grade in the root.
Since the initial n- is lacking elsewhere in the middle optative and indicative
paradigms, it was probably taken from the unattested 3rd pl. middle optative
form.
The reconstruction of a triple accent and ablaut alternation advocated here
also accounts for the root aorist optative type exemplified by 1st sg. Vedic
dheym, Greek put (cf. Hararson 1993: 126-142 for a survey of the
scholarly literature). In his elaborate treatment, Insler connects the type dheym
with the type gamyam, the two being in complementary distribution (1975: 15).
His explanation falters on two points. First, it requires the previous existence of
both *dheyam and *dhym, of which the attested form represents a blending. It
is highly improbable that neither of the earlier forms would have survived
because both were supported by other paradigms, while the alleged blending
created a new type. Second, the motivation for the spread of the new vocalism
to the third person forms is very weak. The long chain of analogic changes
which Inslers theory requires is too complicated to be credible. Thus, I think
that the paradigm of dheym was based on the 3rd pl. form *dhaiat, which had
full grade in the root and double zero grade in the suffix and the ending,
because the zero grade of the root was reduced to dh- before the optative
suffix -y-, -- in the other persons. Similarly, Greek introduced the stem vowel
from 3rd pl. *then into the other persons, where the zero grade of the root had
been reduced to th- before -i-, -- (cf. K097: 238). The disyllabic character of
*then is still preserved in < *tithe-en they may put, where the accent
was not retracted to the initial syllable, unlike , you may be
able, which replace earlier *dunso, *dunsthe. The 3rd pl. ending of the sigmatic
aorist optative *-sn < *-snt, which had become homophonous with 1st sg. *-sn
< *-sm, was replaced by *-sen on the analogy of *then, the ending of which
was also found in the passive aorist and in the paradigm of let go. This is
the origin of the so-called Aeolic optative. The correctness of these
reconstructions is corroborated by the Old High German preterit subjunctive
(Indo-European optative) of weak verbs. The difference between Alemannic
nmi took and suoht sought (Notker nme versus suoht), which cannot be
explained as a secondary development, shows that the two paradigms represent
different formations. While nmi can be compared with wili wants (Notker
wile) and derived from *-t, the weak ending -t must be compared with Vedic
1st sg. dheym, 3rd pl. dheyur, Greek , , and derived from *dhet (cf.
K109: 105). It provides conclusive evidence for the compound origin of the
Germanic weak preterit.
The peculiar accentuation of the 3rd pl. forms such as Vedic tkati
fashion, scati accompany, jhvati sacrifice, *jgati go, krata made,
rata went, naan, naanta, ata, kiur attain(ed), sthur stood, vran
covered, dheyur put points to a different origin from the other forms of the
verbal paradigm. In fact, the accentual alternation in 1st sg. juhmi, 3rd sg.
juhti, 1st pl. juhums, 3rd pl. jhvati sacrifice suggests that these forms have
three distinct origins: the singular looks like a regular verbal paradigm, with
suffixed endings which may go back to clitics, while the 1st pl. form resembles a
derivative, perhaps a compound, and the 3rd pl. form has the appearance of a
participle. As I pointed out earlier (K065: 222), I think that the form in *-nti
represents the original nom.pl. form of the participle, with the Indo-Uralic
plural ending *-i which is also found in the Proto-Indo-European pronominal
inflection, e.g. *toi they, these, gen. *toisom, etc. Since Beekess discussion of
Latin iens, eunt- going (1985: 67-71), we have to start from a reconstructed
paradigm with nom.sg. *H1eints, acc.sg. *H1ientm, gen.sg. *H1intos, in which
Vedic 3rd pl. ynti < *H1ienti may have been the original nom.pl. form of the
participle. If the present indicative *trsenti and the aorist injunctive *tersnt
originally belonged to the same paradigm, the latter form looks like the original
neuter of the participle. This is indeed the expected form if the agent of a
transitive verb in the aorist was in the ergative case (cf. K049). Thus, I
tentatively reconstruct present indicative *toi trsenti beside aorist injunctive
*tois tersnt, where *tois is the original ergative from which the genitive *tois-om
and the instrumental *to-ois were derived. A typological parallel is offered by
the dialectal Russian (plu)perfect, e.g. v jix koal balje nabto (bli) snom
they have/had filled the big bags with hay (cf. Honselaar 1998: 303), literally: at
them [gen.pl.] bags [nom.pl.] big [nom.pl.] filled [neuter past participle] (were
[pl.]) hay [inst.sg.]. It appears that the participial form was cliticized after the
augment in Vedic sthur stood for *sthat < *H1e-stH2nt, also krata made <
*H1e-krnt-, and after the reduplication, e.g. neuter ddhat putting < *dhedhH1nt,
3rd pl. ddhati < *dhedhH1nti. In this view, forms like naan, naanta attain,
vran covered adopted the full grade ending on the analogy of the primary (i.e.
nom.pl.) form in *-enti, whereas the static paradigm is ultimately based on the
secondary (i.e. neuter) form with zero grade *-nt exemplified in *tersnt and
*dhedhH1nt. The model for the creation of the full grade secondary endings *-ent,
*-ento beside primary *-enti was of course provided by 3rd sg. *-t, *-to beside
*-ti, while the zero grade primary ending of ddhati they put may have been
the original nom.pl. ending of the reduplicated participle.
The remaining question is why the lengthened grade was eliminated from
the Indo-Iranian root aorist, e.g. Vedic 3rd sg. gan went < *-gwemt, cf. Latin
vnit, Gothic qm-, Toch. B em came < *gwm-. As in the case of the s-present
and the s-aorist, I think that we have to start from a reduplicated present
indicative, 3rd sg. *wiwekwti, 3rd pl. *wewkwnti, beside a reduplicated aorist
injunctive, 3rd sg. *wwkwt, 3rd pl. *wewkwnt, cf. Vedic vvakti speaks, vocat
spoke. The meaning of this formation must have been iterative or intensive (cf.
Bybee et al. 1994: 166-174 on the semantic development of reduplicated
formations). When lengthened grade superseded reduplication in the active
singular of the static present, first in TeK-roots such as ti fashions, di
makes offering, then analogically in mri wipes, stuti praises, the long
vowel became characteristic of this type of derived present and thereby
anomalous in the paradigm of the root aorist, where it was limited to the 2nd
and 3rd sg. injunctive forms and could easily be eliminated, cf. 3rd sg. imperfect
akrmat beside aorist akramt strode. The original lengthened grade may have
been preserved in 2nd and 3rd sg. akrn cried, asyn moved, raik left, acait
perceived, avait brightened, adyaut shone, which are isolated in the
paradigm of the root aorist and could be reanalyzed as sigmatic aorist forms.
The hypothesis that these forms are independent analogical creations (Narten
1964: 18) does not explain their isolated character in the oldest texts. I therefore
think that they may be relics from the stage when lengthened grade had not yet
adopted the function of reduplication in the static present, which provoked its
elimination from the root aorist.
 THE ORIGIN OF THE INDO-IRANIAN DESIDERATIVE

In his detailed account of the Indo-Iranian desiderative (2006), Franois

Heenen offers a new functional analysis in order to establish the invariant
meaning of the category and to determine the semantic roles of the
morphological components in this meaning. A typical example is jghsati he
wishes to slay in JB 1.193 indro vai vtram ajighsat Indra wished to slay
Vtra. The desiderative is characteristically a
(i) thematically inflected
(ii) sigmatic derivation from a
(iii) verbal root with
(iv) zero grade vocalism and
(v) initial reduplication with
(vi) i-vocalism and
(vii) initial accentuation.
Heenen concludes that the semantic value of the reduplication is the image of a
dveloppement progressif graduel. Le sujet excute des efforts rpts qui
convergent vers un rsultat (p. 68) and that the suffix -sa- has une origine
commune celui du subj. aor. (p. 72), combining perfective aspect -s- with a
non-factive mode of expression -a- (p. 70). The desiderative itself denotes
neither the successful accomplishment of the basic action, nor the modal value
of a subjunctive. Heenen suggests that the reduplication was the original carrier
of the categorial meaning and that the suffx -sa- was added later on the analogy
of the aorist subjunctive. This does not explain how the distinction between
actions rptes convergentes des thmes ds. redoubls avant laddition du
suffixe -sa-, et actions rptes des prs. redoubls du type de bbhar- developed
(p. 73). In a presentation at Leiden University (28 October 2005) Heenen took a
different view, viz. that the desiderative must be derived from the aorist
subjunctive and that the reduplication appeared at a later stage. In the following
I intend to show that the comparative evidence points to a third possibility, viz.
that the perfective -s- was the oldest component and the thematic -a- the most
recent addition and that the meaning of the desiderative reflects this
chronology.
Elsewhere I have argued that all subjunctive and strong future formations
of Old Irish can be derived from a single athematic paradigm with a stem in
*-s- and secondary endings (K239: 71). This unitary inflection combined with six
types of stem:
 (a) unreduplicated, e-grade, ani, e.g. fo-l supports < *leugs-,
(b) unreduplicated, e-grade, se, e.g. -genathar is born < *genas-,
(c) reduplicated, e-grade, ani, e.g. fo-cicherr will throw < *kikerds-,
(d) reduplicated, e-grade, se, e.g. -gignethar will be born < *gigenas-,
(e) reduplicated, zero grade, ani, e.g. fo-lil will support < *lilugs-,
(f) reduplicated, zero grade, se, e.g. -gna will wound < *gigns-.
As a rule, the unreduplicated forms are subjunctives and the reduplicated forms
are futures, but there is a class of basic verbs (lie, sit, run, flee, arise,
protect) where the unreduplicated forms are used both for the subjunctive and
for the future (cf. Thurneysen 1946: 410f.). It is therefore probable that all of
these formations represent an earlier athematic subjunctive paradigm with
secondary endings. Moreover, there is a seventh type without reduplication but
with a zero grade root and a full grade suffix *-es-, viz. subjunctive -b < *bes- <
*bhwest be, future -bia < *biyas- < *bhwiHes- (cf. K239: 73), cf. Latin fu- be,
fi- become. It appears that the reduplication was introduced in order to
differentiate the future from the subjunctive.
From an Indo-European point of view, the full grade forms can be
compared with the sigmatic aorist injunctive and the zero grade forms with the
injunctive of the s-presents (cf. Pedersen 1921, Kuiper 1934). I have proposed to
reconstruct a hysterodynamic present 3rd sg. *tresti, 3rd pl. *trsenti beside a
static aorist 3rd sg. *trst, 3rd pl. *tersnt (e.g. K188: 9). The system is perhaps
best preserved in Tocharian, where we find B ts- < *dhH1es- beside A ts- <
*dhH1s- in the present and B tes-, A cas- < *dhH1s- in the preterit of the verb
t- < *dheH1- put. For the reduplicated formations I reconstruct a
hysterodynamic present, e.g. Vedic 3rd sg. vvakti speaks < *wiwekwti, weak
stem *wiwkw-, but with retracted accent in 3rd pl. *wewkwti, cf. 3rd sg. sakti <
*sisekwti, 3rd pl. scati < *seskwti accompany, beside a static aorist 3rd sg.
*wwkwt, 3rd pl. *wewkwt, reflected in Vedic vocat he spoke, subjunctive
vcati beside vcti. This reconstruction explains the long *-- in the
reduplication syllable of original reduplicated aorists, as opposed to original
presents and perfects, in Tocharian (cf. K149: 173). The original accentuation of
the hysterodynamic reduplicated present is preserved in Vedic 3rd sg. juhti, 1st
pl. juhums, 3rd pl. jhvati sacrifice. In the same vein I now reconstruct a
reduplicated s-present sg. *titrsmi, -si, -ti, pl. *titsms, -tH1, *ttrsti, which
explains the combination of accented i-vocalism in the reduplication syllable
and zero grade in the root of the Indo-Iranian desiderative. It follows that the
thematic vowel is the most recent component of the formation.
The unreduplicated athematic s-present *bhHues-, *bhHus- is also attested in
Balto-Slavic and Italic, e.g. Lithuanian bs will be, Old Church Slavic byteje
the future (which is an athematic nt-participle), Oscan fust, Umbrian fust, 3rd
pl. furent will be, Oscan fusd, Latin foret, 3rd pl. forent were, with full grade
suffix *-es- in Umbrian ferest will bring, Oscan pertemest will prevent, also
Umbrian menes you will come reflecting *gwmes- with zero grade in the root.
This formation is clearly identical with the Old Irish subjunctive -b < *bhwest.
The Balto-Slavic s-subjunctive became a future in East Baltic, e.g. Lith. bs will
be, but assumed the function of an imperative in Old Prussian, e.g. teks put!,
where the addition of thematic present endings yielded a future paradigm, e.g.
postsei you will become. The reduplicated s-present is attested in Italic, where
it adopted the function of a future perfect, e.g. Latin mer I will have bought,
Oscan fifikus you will have decided, fefacust he will have done, Umbrian
fefure < *fifusent they will have been, dirsust < *didust he will have given (cf.
K239: 72, 152).
The data presented here invite a consideration of the following scenario.
We have to start from a hysterodynamic s-present with zero grade root
vocalism and a static s-aorist with e-vocalism in the root. Both the present and
the aorist injunctive could turn into a non-factive subjunctive. The s-present
became a future in Lith. bs and in Oscan and Umbrian fust will be, 3rd pl.
furent, but not in Old Irish -b be and in Latin foret, 3rd pl. forent were, which
adopted the productive suffix *--. These forms show that the future meaning
was comparatively recent here, as it was in Latin er. The non-factive meaning
of the s-present could easily be combined with the aspectual meaning of the
reduplicated present, which denoted repetitive activity (cf. Kulikov 2005:
442-444, with references to Uljanov 1903 and Elizarenkova 1982), e.g. Vedic
pbati drinks (series of sips), jghrati smells (series of sniffs), jgti goes
(series of steps) in RV 10.73.3 v te pd pr yj jgsi your feet are high when
you (Indra) are treading. A clear example of the difference between telic
bhrati brings (Russ. nest) and atelic bbharti carries (Russ. nsit) is RV
10.30.13 yd po dram ... ghtm pysi bbhratr mdhni ... ndrya
sma sutam bhrant when the waters, which carry (bbhratr) ghee, milk
and honey, which bring (bhrant) the well-pressed soma-sap to Indra,
became visible .... The reduplicated s-present with secondary endings denoted
repetitive activity aimed at an accomplishment which does not happen. This is
Heenens dveloppement progressif graduel. Le sujet excute des efforts
rpts qui convergent vers un rsultat (2006: 68) which is implied by the
perfective -s- but not accomplished because the action is not telic. The meaning
may be compared with that of the secondary imperfective verb pridumyvat in
Russian Levin slual i pridumyval i ne mog pridumat to skazat (Lev Tolstoj,
Anna Karenina) Levin listened and tried to think of something to say but
could not, covering effort and attempt but not necessarily desire (except by
implication). The expected meaning of the reduplicated s-present is conative,
not desiderative.
The last step in the development of the Indo-Iranian desiderative is the
thematicization of the reduplicated sigmatic formation. Elsewhere I have argued
that the Vedic subjunctive presents the will to achieve a situation as part of
reality, thereby suggesting that its accomplishment may be beyond the subjects
control (K188: 8). This modal value differs from that of the injunctive, which
simply presents the event as a fact without specifying its time frame. It follows
that the thematic subjunctive of a reduplicated s-present depicts the will to
achieve a situation of repetitive activity aimed at the accomplishment of a goal
which may be beyond the subjects control. When this mode of expression lost
its non-factive (subjunctive) character, it became a desiderative present, stating
the will to achieve the desired situation as a fact. The conflation of the situation
desired (-a-) and the situation aimed at (-s-) into a single goal of action (-sa-)
enabled the creation of a full paradigm of the desiderative, e.g. vvsati desires
to win, imperfect vvsat, subjunctive vvst, optative vivset, imperative
2nd sg. vivsa, participle vvsant- (cf. Heenen 2006: 223-226). There never
was an Indo-European desiderative formation with a reduplicated thematic
present of the type *titrse/o-.
 REFERENCES

Beekes, Robert S.P.

1969 The development of the Proto-Indo-European laryngeals in Greek (The Hague:
Mouton).
1985 The origins of the Indo-European nominal inflection (Innsbruck: Institut fr
Sprachwissenschaft).
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca
1994 The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the
world (Chicago: University Press).
Chantraine, Pierre
1967 Morphologie historique du grec (2-me dition, Paris: Klincksieck).
1973 Grammaire homrique I: Phontique et morphologie (Paris: Klincksieck).
Cowgill, Warren
1980 The etymology of Irish guidid and the outcome of *gwh in Celtic. Lautgeschichte
und Etymologie (Wiesbaden: Reichert), 49-78.
Elizarenkova, Tatjana Ja.
1982 Grammatika vedijskogo jazyka (Moskva: Nauka).
Emeneau, Murray B.
1966 The dialects of Old Indo-Aryan. Ancient Indo-European dialects (Berkeley and
Los Angeles: University of California Press), 123-138.
Forbes, K.
1958 The formation of the so-called Aeolic optative. Glotta 37, 165-179.
Frisk, Hjalmar
1973 Griechisches etymologisches Wrterbuch I (Heidelberg: Carl Winter).
Gamkrelidze, Thomas V., & Vjaeslav V. Ivanov
1973 Sprachtypologie und die Rekonstruktion der gemeinindogermanischen
Verschlsse. Phonetica 27, 150-156.
Greenberg, Joseph H.
1970 Some generalizations concerning glottalic consonants, especially implosives.
International Journal of American Linguistics 36, 123-145.
Hararson, Jn Axel
1993 Studien zum urindogermanischen Wurzelaorist (Innsbruck: Institut fr
Sprachwissenschaft).
Heenen, Franois
2006 Le dsidratif en vdique (Amsterdam: Rodopi).
Hoffmann, Karl
1957 Zur vedischen Verbalflexion. Mnchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 22,
121-137.
1967a Der Injunktiv im Veda: Eine synchronische Funktionsuntersuchung (Heidelberg:
Carl Winter).
1967b Der vedische Prekativtyp yeam, jema. Mnchener Studien zur
Sprachwissenschaft 20, 25-37.
1968 Zum Optativ des indogermanischen Wurzelaorists. Pratidnam (The Hague:
Mouton), 3-8.
Honselaar, Zep
1998 The dialect of Ostrovcy in the Pskov oblast. Dutch Contributions to the Twelfth
International Congress of Slavists (Amsterdam: Rodopi) = Studies in Slavic
and General Linguistics 24, 283-307.
Insler, Stanley
1972 On proterodynamic root present inflection. Mnchener Studien zur
Sprachwissenschaft 30: 55-64.
1975 The Vedic type dheym. Die Sprache 21, 1-22.
Jamison, Stephanie W.
1983 Two problems in the inflection of the Vedic intensive. Mnchener Studien zur
Sprachwissenschaft 42, 41-73.
Kortlandt, Frederik [numbering of www.kortlandt.nl]
K014 1975 Slavic accentuation: A study in relative chronology (Lisse: Peter de Ridder).
K022 1980 Albanian and Armenian. Zeitschrift fr vergleichende Sprachforschung 94,
243-251.
K025 1977 Historical laws of Baltic accentuation. Baltistica 13/2, 319-330.
K030 1978 On the history of the genitive plural in Slavic, Baltic, Germanic, and Indo-
European. Lingua 45, 281-300.
K031 1978 Notes on Armenian historical phonology II. Studia Caucasica 4, 9-16.
K032 1978 Proto-Indo-European obstruents. Indogermanische Forschungen 83, 107-118.
K034 1980 H2o and oH2. Lingua Posnaniensis 23 [Fs. Kudzinowski], 127-128. [= K272,
51-53]
K038 1981 Glottalic consonants in Sindhi and Proto-Indo-European. Indo-Iranian
Journal 23: 15-19. [= K272, 121-124]
K044 1981 1st sg. middle *-H2. Indogermanische Forschungen 86, 123-136. [= K272,
81-90]
K046 1981 More evidence for Italo-Celtic. riu 32 (1981), 1-22.
K049 1983 Proto-Indo-European verbal syntax. Journal of Indo-European Studies 11,
307-324. [= K272, 91-103]
K060 1983 Greek numerals and PIE glottalic consonants. Mnchener Studien zur
Sprachwissenschaft 42: 97-104. [= K272, 105-109]
K064 1985 Long vowels in Balto-Slavic. Baltistica 21/2: 112-124.
K065 1987 Archaic ablaut patterns in the Vedic verb. Festschrift for Henry Hoenigswald
(Tbingen: Gunter Narr), 219-223. [= K272, 125-129]
K072 1988 Vestjysk std, Icelandic preaspiration, and Proto-Indo-European glottalic
stops. Languages and cultures: Studies in honor of Edgar C. Polom (Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter), 353-357. [= K272, 165-168]
K086 1989 Lachmanns law. The new sound of Indo-European: Essays in phonological
reconstruction (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter), 103-105.
K097 1992 The Aeolic optative. Rekonstruktion und relative Chronologie: Akten der
VIII. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, Leiden, 1987 (Innsbruck:
Institut fr Sprachwissenschaft), 235-239. [= K272, 111-115]
K098 1988 The Greek 3rd pl. endings. Mnchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 49,
63-69. [= K272, 117-120]
K109 1989 The Germanic weak preterit. Amsterdamer Beitrge zur lteren Germanistik
28, 101-109. [= K272, 227-233]
K149 1996 The Tocharian imperfect. Historische Sprachforschung 109, 169-174. [= K272,
159-163]
 K188 2004 Accent and ablaut in the Vedic verb. Indo-Iranian Journal 47/1, 7-15. [=
K272, 131-137]
K239 2007 Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
(Amsterdam: Rodopi).
K254 2008 The origin of the Indo-Iranian desiderative. Indologica [=Gs. Elizarenkova]
(Moskva: RGGU), 227-230. [= K272, 139-142]
K272 2010 Studies in Germanic, Indo-European and Indo-Uralic (Amsterdam: Rodopi).
Kuiper, Franciscus B.J.
1934 Zur Geschichte der indoiranischen s-Prsentia. Acta Orientalia 12, 190-306.
Kulikov, Leonid
2005 Reduplication in the Vedic verb: Indo-European inheritance, analogy and
iconicity. Studies on Reduplication (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter), 431-454.
Laroche, Emmanuel
1965 tudes de linguistique anatolienne. Revue Hittite et Asianique 23, 33-54.
Lejeune, Michel
1972 Phontique historique du mycnien et du grec ancien (Paris: Klincksieck).
Leumann, Manu
1952 Morphologische Neuerungen im altindischen Verbalsystem (Amsterdam: KNAW).
Lubotsky, Alexander
1981 Gr. : Skt. pajr- and loss of laryngeals before mediae in Indo-Iranian.
Mnchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 40, 133-138.
1994 RV. vidhat. Frh-, Mittel-, Sptindogermanisch (Wiesbaden: Reichert), 201-206.
1997 Remarks on the Vedic intensive [Review of Schaefer 1994]. Journal of the
American Oriental Society 117, 558-564.
Meillet, Antoine
1920 Sur le rythme quantitatif de la langue vdique. Mmoires de la Socit de
Linguistique de Paris 21: 193-207.
Narten, Johanna
1964 Die sigmatischen Aoriste im Veda (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz).
Nihalani, Paroo
1974 An aerodynamic study of stops in Sindhi. Phonetica 29, 193-224.
Pedersen, Holger
1900 Die gutturale im Albanesischen. Zeitschrift fr vergleichende Sprachforschung 36,
277-340.
1921 Les formes sigmatiques du verbe latin et le problme du futur indo-europen
(Kbenhavn: Hst & Sn).
1951 Die gemeinindoeuropischen und die vorindoeuropischen Verschlusslaute
[Historisk-filologiske Meddelelser 32/5] (Kbenhavn: Munksgaard).
Risch, Ernst
1962 Das indogermanische Wort fr hundert. Indogermanische Forschungen 67,
129-141.
1982 Ein Problem des griechischen Verbalparadigmas: Die verschiedenen Formen der
3. Person Plural. Serta Indogermanica [Fs. Neumann] (Innsbruck: Institut fr
Sprachwissenschaft), 321-334.
Rix, Helmut
1976 Historische Grammatik des Griechischen: Laut- und Formenlehre (Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft).
Ruijgh, Cornelis J.
1967 tudes sur la grammaire et le vocabulaire du grec mycnien (Amsterdam:
Hakkert).
1998 Review of Hararson 1993. Mnemosyne 51, 216-227.
Schaefer, Christiane
1994 Das Intensivum im Vedischen (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Szemernyi, Oswald
1960 Studies in the IE System of Numerals (Heidelberg: Carl Winter).
Thieme, Paul
1929 Das Plusquamperfektum im Veda (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Thomas F.
1957 Autour de loptatif grec dit olien. Revue des tudes Anciennes 59, 250-274.
Thurneysen, Rudolf
1883 Urspr. dn tn cn im lateinischen. Zeitschrift fr vergleichende Sprachforschung 26:
301-314.
1946 A Grammar of Old Irish (Dublin: Institute for Advanced Studies).
Turner, Ralph L.
1924 The Sindhi recursives or voiced stops preceded by glottal closure. Bulletin of the
School of Oriental Studies 3/2, 301-315.
1975 The Sindhi recursives or voiced stops preceded by glottal closure. Collected
Papers 1912-1973 (London: Oxford UP), 192-205.
Uljanov, Grigorij
1903 Kratnoe znaenie udvoennyx osnov. Russkij filologieskij vstnik 49, 235-249.
Wackernagel, Jakob
1896 Altindische Grammatik I: Lautlehre (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
Winter, Werner
1978 The distribution of short and long vowels in stems of the type Lith. sti : vsti :
msti and OCS jasti : vesti : mesti in Baltic and Slavic languages. Recent
developments in historical phonology (The Hague: Mouton), 431-446.