Kuryłowicz - Review of Schmitt-Brandt, Die Entwicklung des indogermanischen Vokalsystems

8/13/2019 Kuryowicz - Review of Schmitt-Brandt, Die Entwicklung des indogermanischen Vokalsystems

1/11

Schmitt-Brandt, Robert. Die E n ~ i c k Z u n g des indOgermanischen VokaZsystems.Heidelberg, Julius Groos Verlag, c. 1967.Reviewed by Jerzy Kurylowicz in SL 63: 2.41-9 1969). Review translatedby Allan R Bombard.

Preceded by an introduction and followed by a bibliography and anindex of the words cited in the text, the chapters of the work t reatsuccessively the following: 1. the diphthongal apophony: i u; 2.the diphthongal apophony: t u (the long diphthongs; the sonantsi u in the interior of a word; the verbal and nominal stems in i u ;3. ini t ia l j and w; 4. the Indo-European vowel a; and S. apophonic andnonapophoni c o.

The following is a summary of the ideas of Schmitt-Brandt:1. The phonemes i u existed in Indo-European as independent

vowels even before the vocalization of j w. For certain types ofroots i t is necessary to assume a fundamental form in i u and tointerpret the ej, ew grades as secondary. For the weakening offorms such as Zejkw-, bhewdh-, dhwen- would lead, in the opinionof the author, to Z e j ~ - Ztkw-, bhewdh- bhudh-, dhwen-

d h w ~ - The full-grade of these forms is due to analogy. Thedevelopment of the diphthongs ej, ew we would be here posterior tothe weakening pePk,- *ptk,- or ghPem- g h ~ and is to beexplained by the proportions p ~ k , - : pePk,- = ZikW-: Zejkw- orghtm-: ghPem- = d h w ~ - : dhwen-.This explains why the majority of the root-nouns appear in the

zero-grade *dik,-, ~ i k , - , duk-, etc.) , which is only their normalgrade.


2/11

2. The long diphthongs existed only either as long-grades of theshort diphthongs, or as products of contractions (e.g. *-oj < *-o-ejin the dat. sg.). That which is currently called long diphthongmerely represents a long final vowel extended by a or u.

The wavering between the zero-grades t and i u and u, attestedin numerous cases (Skt. v i ~ : Lat. vtr; Skt. sUnu-: Goth. sunus; Lat.vivus: Gk BCos; Skt. bhut -: Gk , 8 a ~ s , is explained by the followingrule:

j i GW u but j t; W UThus bhut - < *bhawti-, but ~ ~ ~ s < *bhwti-; vivus < *gWjwo-,

but 8Cos < *gWjawo-. In many cases where the zero-grades t usuggest.fither the existence of a s e ~ root or a long diphthong ,i t is simply a question of a light root in t , u

The situation remains the same even when ej, ew are precededby TR- or by TH- *TRj- *TRi-; *THj- *THi-). The length isnot due to the full-grade forms TeRi- or TeHi- ( long diphthong ),but simply to the fact that i u are preceded (and not followed) bythe reduced vowel .

This explanation is based upon the theory of the phonologicalexistence of schwa secundum) in the individual languages. Theauthor sees the proof of this in the zero-grades of er, eZ, em enand of re, Ze, me ne, which as a general rule (Skt. ~ b e i n g the onlyexception) are distinguished everywhere. Therefore, Indo-Europeandid not have the syllabic sonants r Z m n.


3/11

3. At a remote period of Indo-European, the phonemes j and ~were consonants which differed from the independent vowels i u.I t is only the development of ja to i and of to u which led tothe phonological identification of j with i and o f ~ with u.

The author tries to establish the difference between theancient consonants j - and the more recent forms Hj- EW(supposing Hi/Hej, H u / H ~ initially. Starting with the dualrepresentation of j - in Greek, he adopts the view of Sapir,who saw in the rough breathing a continuation of Hj- and inthat of j . In the same manner could often be continued by' (rough breathing) through the intermediate stage of hf-. InHitt i te ini t ia l disappeared before a ~ as i t did before anyother consonant, e.g. ~ e r i j a to summon call , name : UW tacurse , while in ~ e k z i swears , etc., i t has been reintroduced

by analogy hukanzi, etc.) 4. The Indo-European a-grade is not only due to an ini t ia l

H2 , but also to a neighboring guttural, either preceding or following(p. 97f.). According to the author, i t is a question here rather ofthe retention of the original vowel quality of the fundamental vowel> e) than of a modification caused by the phonetic surroundings on

a primitive e.I t is known that in Hitt i te the presence or absence of is

independent of the a ore quality of the following vowel. In realitythe combinations ha- and he- a- and e- are all attested.

These two premises are used by the author as the basis for thefollowing construction. In a rather remote period in the prehistory


4/11

of Indo-European, there were two series of occlusives which wereconfused in a later period: the gutturals k1 , g1 , gh 1 on the onehand and the uvulars k2 , g 2 , gh 2 on the other (leaving out ofconsideration the labiovelars k ~ , gW g h ~ and the palatals k,, ~g,h--the lat ter representing a specific development of the satemlanguages).

The merger of k2a with k 1a is the cause of the phonemicizationof the e-grade along side of the a-grade, thus:

k2a: k1a > k 1a: k1e (i .e. a: e ; ak 2 : ak1 > ak 1: ek 1Now, two series of homorganic fricatives xy (gutturals) and

x2y2 (uvulars) correspond to the two series k and k2 Thedifference between the voiceless and voiced varieties Cx 1x2 : y1y2was preserved in Hittite in intervocalic position -hh-: -h-).

In this way Hittite e would correspond to y 1 (-aae- to XI),and aa to y2 (-baa- to x2).

The correspondence between the gutturals and the fricatives issuggested by alternations such as *Host: *kost (Lat. aosta, OCS.kost' .: Gk. OO Tov) or *seg: *seH to sow, scatter (Lat. seges:semen), etc. (other examples p. 106).

5. The Indo-European o-grade had two sources. Along side ofapophonic o there was a nonapophonic o which, just like a, appearedinitially or after gutturals, e.g. *ok,t CM eight , o k ~ - to see ,*k, onk- to hesitate , *ghosti- host . . . t comes from an ancientu, the articulation of which has been lowered under the influenceof a uvular or pharyngal sound.


5/11

As for apophonic o, i t appears in those positions where specialmorphological or phonological conditions have prevented the formationof the zero-grade as would normally be expected by the accentuation.

The ideas set forth by the author require a rather detailedexamination.

There is no obstacle to admitting the existence of the vowelsi for a period preceding the vocalic weakenings. What isimportant though is trying to avoid grouping i u w i t h ~

~ o r j w with R r, Z n, m). ~ i s an allophonic variant syllabic)of the nonsyllabic sonant R, while i are vowels. This results fromhistorical facts such as the following: between nonsyllabic elementsR is admissible everywhere except in the combinations -Rj-, -RuJ-,where i t is treated as i i t were found before a vowel. Cf. Skt.- ipY- , -urv-, Gk - a p ~ - ~ -apF-. That is to say that opposed toi u the sonant R functions as a consonant Ri, Ru), while opposed

t o ~ . j w function as vowels in spite o f being nonsylZabia.The formation of a secondary full-grade is a well known fact.

Cf. examples of the type *diw-: *dejwo- Skt. div-: deva-), wherethe process of vtddhi is foreshadowed. The coexistence of TeRT andTReT * p e r k ~ - and *prek,-, *dhews- and *dhwes-, etc.) has sometimesbeen explained by the creation of a secondary grade. However, therepeated assertion of the author p. 23, 43 that in generaZ thetypes TejT, TewT must be secondary because their expected zero-gradewould be TiT, TUT *Zikw- < *Zejkw- or *bhudh- < * b h e w ~ 1 - ) isincomprehensible. If, according to the opinion of the author,


6/11

b h e ~ d h - has been built on bhudh- after the model of p ~ k , - : *perk,(p. 24), that is to say i f b h e ~ d h - was due to the insertion of ein bhudh-, i t is also possible to accept the proportion *perk,-:

p ~ k , - = b h e ~ d h - : bhudh- with the subtraction of e even i f onerefuses to consider bhudh- as a purely phonetia reduction of b h e ~ d h - .

Here are several particular examples of secondary full-grade:wP. 24: k e bJJres four would be posterior to the form * c(e)tur-

in Skt. aatur-, turiya-; p. 29: the roots * k ~ e r - to do, make ,k ~ e t to turn , g ~ e r to swallow are explained by *kur-, *kut-,gur-, with u preserved in Lith. kurti to build , Gk. xux>..os; Toch.

A kuka.Z chariot , Lat. gurguUs, Arm. kur food (for birds, cats,etc.) . The roots bher- to gush, spout, burst out , mel- togrind, mill, crush could, according to the author, continue*bh1JJer-, *11 F.J)el-, with secondary full-grade drawn from bhur-

(in Gk. ~ o p ~ u p w , Skt. jarbhuriti) and mul- (Gk. ~ u A n , Lat. mulier).In the opinion of Schmitt-Brandt (p. 23) the full grade of the

type TiT would have been formed by the insertion of e before thesemivowel, whence TejT, as opposed to the type TiR, whence TjeRwith diphthongal je before sonant. What must one think then ofroots such as Skt. tyaj- or svap-?

The author considers the secondary character of the full-gradeof Goth. diups deep , Lith. dauba, or Welsh dvfn gulf, pit abyssas evident ( offensichtlich p. 28). Why?

TI1e zero-grade of the root-nouns, which are to a large degreeverbal derivatives (with zero-grade suffix), cannot serve as proof


7/11

of the chronological priority of i u in * d i k ~ - , ~ i k ~ - , duk-, etc.First of al l i t can be seen that the vocalism of these derivativesis far from a repetition of that of the verbaZ stems, cf. Gk. xp6xa< xpxw), o ~ a E ~ ~ E ~ V ) , ~ A 6 ; ~ A E y w ) , X A W ~ x A ~ T w ) , p w ~ p n y v u ~ ~ ) .

Then, in heavy roots (with sonant or i u followed by a consonant),the ancient o/zero alternation is distributed between the typeZowkos (o-grade) and the type Zuks (zero-grade).

Schmitt-Brandt insists upon the phonetic passage of aj tw u, but ja t wa u. Now, i f there is a relationship between

ej and t ew and u , i t is indirect. In the cases where a formwith consonantal morpheme is buil t upon a form with vocalic morpheme,i t could happen that antevocalic i j might be replaced byanteconsonantal t e.g. TRije-: TRtte- (in place of TRtte- . I tis a question of forms in which the antevocalic i j (in place of tis conditioned by a preceding consonantal group. The author isthus right in insisting on the fact that an inflection such as Skt.

b h ~ , gen. b h r u v a ~ , does not suppose by i tself either a s e ~ rootor a long diphthong (the anteconsonantal u corresponding to uvbefore vowel). But for want of the interference of antevocalicforms in - i j - -uw-, i t is t uwhich represent the phoneticweakening of ej, ew in innumerable examples such as Skt. drita-,druta-, sruta-, etc., while Gk. x A O ~ ~ is explained by theantevocalic kZuw- of EXAU F)ov.

To posit TaR and TRa as forms inherited by the individuallanguages, as does the author, amounts to challenging the


8/11

Sonantentheorie . In the course of the history of comparativegrammar, the opinion of competent linguists has long fluctuatedbetween the two solutions: R or R R). In the introduction ofhis Memoire , F. de Saussure confessed to having f i rs t rejectedBrugmann's solution only to embrace i t after mature consideration(1879) and to crit icize later the Kritik der Sonantentheorie ofJ. Schmidt (1895). H Guntert took up again the notion of thereduced vowel schwa secundum) in order to account for equationsof the type Lat. ra =Gmc ru =Balto-Sl. r i etc. (1916). In1935, the author of these speculations made use of them in orderto explain the a primwn) as a continuation of ( laryngealplus reduced vowel). Finally, H Hirt admitted, just as didGiintert, a Reductionsstufe ( R) beside a Schwundstufe R)

Thanks to the phonological criterea of Trubetzkoy (1935),the problem seems resolved in favor of First of all thepresence of the hypothetical serving to explain the apparentphonological differences ( R: R before consonants) cannot bedemonstrated to have existed in other anteconsonantal positions(cf. e.g. ~ E 1 T 6 s Lat. sessus, Lith. keptas, etc.) . In thesecond place, anteconsonantal TR is only an allophonic variantof the zero antevocalic TR and a zero represents also the normaltreatment of the zero-grade of e between consonants (Gk. 1 T a ~ a ~axetv, etc.) . Consequently the anteconsonantal contrast TRTR: eis only a medial opposition of an aZZophonic variant. This meansthat i t is a question of an optionaZ variant of anteconsonantal TR.


9/11

Its phonetic realization aR, aRa, Ra) is unknown and is of noimportance, neither for phonology or morphology. The merger ofTaR and TRa is p ~ e d i a t e a t a Z . The parallelism with OSl. u, isnot relevant, since the jers are found in v ~ e n v i ~ o n m e n t , andnot only in contact with the l iquids.

The author does not hesitate, moreover, to posit the ini t ia lgroups RH- with nonsyZZabia sonant R, establishing an ad hoarule (p. 67 n. 69).

The spli t t ing up of interconsonantal R in the individuallanguages is explained by morpho(no)logical factors, such as inLat. pateo Gk ~ C T v n ~ ~ . etc.

But there was, perhaps already toward the end of the Indo-Europeanl inguistic community, a t ~ a n s i t i o n a Z period in which phonoZogiaaZ ~existed. The loss of laryngeals created hiateses iHe > teuHe > ue ~ H e > in opposition to je we, Re. They have,

consequently, been spl i t into i je uwe, ~ R e (following the transcriptionof Brugmann) and je 1Je, Re. The result depended solely upon thequantity of the preceding syllable (Siever's Law).

The alternation TeR, Tej Tew: TRe, Tje Tu e is considered bySchmitt-Brandt (p. 14f., 7Sf., 96 etc. , who follows Th. MaurerLanguage 23.1-22), as a simple metathesis permitting a consonantal

group at the end of a root to be avoided hence TRete- in place ofTeRTe-). Is i t a question here of a phonetic law? Nobody wouldbelieve i t to be. Or rather is i t a choice between two forms ofthe root which at a certain moment beaame equivaZent? But thereplacement of TeR by TRe created an initiaZ aonsonantaZ g ~ o u p


10/11

otherwise important from the point of view of the unity or of theidentity of the word.

The application of this principle by the author is arbitraryand is open to severe objections. Cf. p. 16 and 2lf.: * k ~ ~ ~ ndog * k ~ ~ ~ n * k ~ etJn with preservation of the syllable weight-en equal to -etJn), etc. to be compared with OSl. mZeko meZko;

p. 49 Oir. i th *pttu- tallow and Skt. pitu- nourishment, food< IE *pjtUs, gen. p j ~ e s ; p. 61 the same thing for Skt. aarvati:ciao- * k ~ e n u e t i : * J U r ~ n 6 - , etc.; p. 77 IE *nH&,s, * n H ~ e s ship ;IE *rHejs, *rHjes wealth ; p. 102f. IE *saHZ, *sHZes salt ;*naHs, *nHses nose , etc.

Skt. t t ~ outstretched, wide would be due to a metathesis,TRH-te- > TRY-te-, while Lat. has stratus and Gk O T p w T o ~ .

That the long diphthongs --in the sense given this term by WSchulze--did not exist in Indo-European is a familiar idea (cf. e.g Etudes indo-europeenes p. 40). The long vowel (and the semivowel)of the full-grade only appear when the diphthong is heterosyllabic,e.g. Skt. ga-y-ati to sing . Before consonants the double form ofthe full-grade *gaj- > *g H-, e.g. Lith. gf-edu to sing and gaidgscock , and gCi-, e.g. Skt. gCi-t-t>-, proves that the semivowel is

an extension which has been incorporated in the root in Lithuanian.The existence of this double form of the full-grade gCi- (ancient)and *gai- (recent) is sufficient to demonstrate the structure of thelong diphthongs without which t would be necessary to have

recourse to determinatives and to etymological comparisons whichare often dubious.


11/11

The overlooking of functional semantic) considerationscauses the author to form the hypothesis of a relationship betweenthe - t )u of the 3rd person imperative and the u found in the Skt.jajnau (Lat. novt or the tU of the OCS aor. mretu, etc. (p. 123).

The problem of the division rough bPeathing in Greek hasscarcely been advanced. The disappearance of before w in Hitt i tecannot be demonstrated by the material at our disposal. Aperemptory proof would be furnished by alternations of the type

~ e k z i : ~ u k a n z i which are lacking, or at least by derivativesin which the formation of the ini t ia l group carries over thetl which has been lost in the root-word. Let us add that inadmitting the simplification of hw tow- t is necessary, inorder to explain hwekzi as an analogical form buil t on hukanzi,... ...to establish another phonetic law which would just i fy thereintroduction of the ini t ial group hw into the system of thelanguage. For purely morphological proportions would not knowhow to modify the phonological repertory.

14 September 1972

Documents

Kuryłowicz - Review of Schmitt-Brandt, Die Entwicklung des indogermanischen Vokalsystems