LEIDEN STUDIES IN INDO-EUROPEAN 8

FaB.J. KUIPER

Series edited by
SELECTED WRITINGS ON
R.S.P. Beekes
INDIAN LINGUISTICS
A. Lubotsky . . AND PHILOLOGY
J.J.S. Weitenberg

Edited by·

A. Lubotsky, M.S. Oort and M. Witzel

Amsterdam - Atlanta, GA 1997

 VI Vll

9. Eine alte Bedeutung von ved. cyávaii. AO 16 (1938), pp. 310-
313 ............................................................. 156
10. Vedisch piirdhí, Pt'!7tti 'geben'. AO 16 (1938), pp. 313-326.159
11. Ai. Mandiikinf 'EN. verschiedener Flüsse'. AO 17 (1939), pp.
17-20 ........................................................... 173
12. Ai. yttpa-~ 'der Pfosten, an den das Opfertier gebunden wird'.
AO 17 (1939), pp. 20-22 ........................................ 176
13. Ai. sir~aktí-~, sfrokti-~ 'Kopfleiden, Kopfschmerz'. AO 17
(1939), pp. 22-24 ............................................... 178
14. Ai. iisfdati 'nahert sich' und Verwandte. AO 17 (1939), pp.
25-30 ........................................................... 181
15. Ai. surungii 'ein unterirdischer Gang, Mine, Bresche'. AO 17
(1939), pp. 30-34 ..... oo 186
........................................
Postscript on ajá. Indo-Iranian Journal9 (1965), pp. 30-31 ........ 381
The Sanskrit Nom. Sing. víf. Indo-Iranian Journall0 (1967), pp.
103-125 ........................................................ 383
ví dayate and vidátha-. Indologica Taurinensia 2 (1974 [1975]), pp.
121-132 ........................................................ 406
ahura mazdii 'Lord Wisdom'? Indo-Iranian Journal18 (1976), pp.
25-42 ........................................................... 418
C. NOTES ON VEDIC NOUN-INFLEXION. Mededelingen der Ko-
ninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Ajd. Letter-
kunde, 5/4, pp. 161-256 ........................................ .439

Word index (by A. Lubotsky and M.S. Oort) ...................... 531

16. Jaw. aiahva-, aiana-, ayrii, ayostis 'Namen von Krankheiten'.
AO 17 (1939), pp. 34-35 ........................................ 190
17. Jaw. iieaiti 'verdirbt' (intrans. und trans.). AO 17 (1939), pp. Errata ............................................................ 566
35-50 ........................................................... 191
18. Jaw. jraspiit-'Kissen, Pfühl'. AO 17 (1939), pp. 50-51 ..... 206
19. Jaw. vyusr¿, Hao.N. 2,7 und apa.asavr¿,n Yt. 19,84. AO 17
(1939), pp. 51-63 ............................................... 207
20. Aw. sii 'wehren'. AO 17 (1939), pp. 63-64 .................. 219
The Three Sanskrit Roots añc-/añj-. Viik 2 (1953), pp. 36-98 ...... 221
Shortening of Final Vowels in the Rigveda. Mededelingen der Ko-
ninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Ajd. Letter-
kunde, 18/11 (1955), pp. 253-289 ............................... 284
Avestan mazdii-. Indo-Iranian Journall (1957), pp. 86-95 ......... 321
Rigvedic sahasiivan. Annals oj Oriental Research oj the University
oj Madras 13 (Centenary Number), Sanskrit section (1957), pp.
14-18 ........................................................... 331
Avestan ainita- "unharmed". Indo-Iranian Journal3 (1959), pp.
137-140 ........................................................ 336
Yiipaya~ti- (Divy. 244,11). Indo-Iranian Journal3 (1959), pp.
204-205 ..................................................... " . 340
Sváv!~ti-, ~S. I.52.5a, 14c. Indo-Iranian Journal4 (1960), pp.
59-63 ........................................................... 342
Three Notes on Old Persian. Annali Istituto Orientali di Napoli
(A ION), sezione linguistica, II/2 (1960), pp. 159-170 ............ 347
Zur kompositionellen Kürzung im Sanskrit. Die Sprache 7 (1961),
pp. 14-31 ....................................................... 359
The Interpretation of Chandogya Upani~ad nI.1.2. Munshi Indolo-
gical Felicitation Volume [1963] = Bhiiratfya Vidyii 20/1-4 (1960)
and 21/1-4 (1961), pp. 36-39 .................................... 377
 v

Kern Institute miscellanea. 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introducticm (by M. Witzel) ........................................ ix

A. PAN-INDIAN, DRAVIDIAN AND MUNDA STUDIES

Altindisch abhyiisa-~ 'Studium, Gewohnheit usw.'. Sfbinda (~S
VIII,32,2) und Binda. Acta Orienialia 17 (1939), pp. 304-317 ...... 3
Two Problems of Old Tamil Phonology. Indo-lranian Journal 2
(1958), pp. 191-224 .............................................. 17
Rigvedic k1:rín- and krifí-. Sir Ralph Turner Jubilee Volume, I =
Indian Linguisiics XIX (1958), pp. 349-362 ....................... 51
Note on Old Tamil and Jaffna Tamil. Indo-Iranian Journa16 (1962),
pp. 52-64 ........................................................ 65
The Genesis of a Linguistic Area. Indo-Iranian Journal10 (1967), pp.
81-102 ........................................................... 78

B. VEDIC AND IRANIAN STUDIES

Ap. eiiiiy und ai. s7Lsti. Acia Orienialia 12 (1934), pp. 191-210 (From
Indo-Iranica 1-20. Acia Orienialia.
@ The paper on which this book is printed meets the requirements of "ISO
9706: 1994, Information and documentation - Paper for documents -
Requirements for permanence".
ISBN: 90-420-0235-2
©Editions Rodopi B.V., Amsterdam - Atlanta, GA 1997
Printed in The Netherlands
the article "Zur Geschichte der indoiranischen s-Prasentia", pp.
190-306) ........................................................ 103
1. Ai. anganii 'Frau, Weibchen (eines Tieres)'. AO 16 (1938),
pp. 203-206 ..................................................... 123
2. Ep. kl. asiamana-m 'Untergang der Sonne'. AO 16 (1938),
pp. 206-211 ..................... : ............................... 126
3. Ved. iidhrá-h 'schwach, arm, dürftig, gering', G.aw. iidro
'gering (an Stell~ng), abhangig, untergeben'. AO 16 (1938),
p. 212 .......................................................... 132
4. Ved. enii. AO 16 (1938), pp. 213-220: ....................... 133
5. Ai. bhrkufí-, bhrakufí-, bhrukufí- 'das Verziehen der Brauen'.
AO 16 (1938), pp. 295-297 ....................................... 141
6. Ai. ka'f!apa-~ 'eine bestimmte Waffe'. AO 16 (1938), pp. 297-
300 ................ :' ...................................... '...... 143
7. Ai. gehá-m 'Haus', gehya-m 'Hausrat',' gehinz(Kl.) 'Hausfrau'.
AO 16 (1938), pp. 301-303 ...................................... 147
8. Ai. campü-~ 'eine bestimmte Literaturgattung'. AO 16 (1938),
pp. 303-310 ...................................................... 149
 VI VIl

9. Eine alte Bedeutung von ved. cyávati. AO 16 (1938), pp. 310- Postscript on ajá. Indo-Iranian Journal9 (1965), pp. 30-31 ........ 381
313 ............................................................. 156 The Sanskrit Nom. Sing. víf. Indo-Iranian Journal10 (1967), pp.
10. Vedisch piirdhí, P!''f!ÍLti 'geben'. AO 16 (1938), pp. 313-326.159 103-125 ........................................................ 383
11. Ai. Mandakinz 'EN. verschiedener Flüsse'. AO 17 (1939), pp. ví dayate and vidátha-. Indologica Taurinensia 2 (1974 [1975]), pp.
17-20 ........................................................... 173 121-132 ........................................................ 406
12. Ai. yflpa-~ 'der Pfosten, an den das Opfertier gebunden wird'. ahura mazda 'Lord Wisdom'? Indo-Iranian Journal18 (1976), pp.
AO 17 (1939), pp. 20-22 ........................................ 176 25-42 ........................................................... 418
13. Ai. sir?aktí-~, szrokti-~ 'Kopfleiden, Kopfschmerz'. A O 17
(1939), pp. 22-24 ............................................... 178 C. NOTES'ON VEDIC NOUN-INFLEXION. Mededelingen der Ko-
14. Ai. aszdati 'nahert sich' und Verwandte. AO 17 (1939), pp. ninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letter-
25-30 ............... '" ......................................... 181 kunde, 5/4, pp. 161-256 ......................................... 439
15. Ai. surunga 'ein unterirdischer Gang, Mine, Bresche'. AO 17
(1939), pp. 30-34 ............................................... 186
Word index (by A. Lubotsky and M.S. Oort) ...................... 531
16. Jaw. aiahva-, aiana-, ayra, ayostis 'Namen von Krankheiten'.
AO 17 (1939), pp. 34-35 ........................................ 190
17. Jaw. aBaiti 'verdirbt' (intrans. und trans.). AO 17 (1939), pp. Errata ............... , ............................................ 566
35-50 ........................................................... 191
18. Jaw. fraspat-'Kissen, Pfühl'. AO 17 (1939), pp. 50-51 ..... 206
19. Jaw. vyus'l Hao.N. 2,7 und apa.asav'ln Yt. 19,84. AO 17
(1939), pp. 51-63 ............................................... 207
20. Aw. sa 'wehren'. AO 17 (1939), pp. 63-64 .................. 219
The Three Sanskrit Roots añc-/añj-. Vak 2 (1953), pp. 36-98 ...... 221
Shortening of Final Vowels in the Rigveda. Mededelingen der Ko-
ninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letter-
kunde, 18/11 (1955), pp. 253-289 ....... , ....................... 284
Avestan mazda-. Indo-Iranian Journal1 (1957), pp. 86-95 ......... 321
Rigvedic sahasavan. Annals of Oriental Research of the University
of Madrás 13 (Centenary Number), Sanskrit section (1957), pp.
14-18 ........................................................... 331
Avestan ainita- "unharmed". Indo-Iranian Journal3 (1959), pp.
137-140 ........................................................ 336
Yiipaya?t i- (Divy. 244,11). Indo-Iranian Journal3 (1959), pp.
204-205 ........................................................ 340
Sváv!'?ti-, ~S. L52.5a, 14c. Indo-Iranian Journa14 (1960), pp.
59-63 ........................................................... 342
Three Notes on Old Persian. Annali Istituto Orientali di Napoli
(AION), sezione linguistica, II/2 (1960), pp. 159-170 ............ 347
Zur kompositionellen Kürzung im Sanskrit. Die Sprache 7 (1961),
pp. 14-31 ....................................................... 359
The Interpretation of Chandogya Upanir;;ad IIL1.2. Munshi Indolo-
gical Felicitation Volume [1963J = Bharatzya Vidya 20/1-4 (1960)
and 21/1-4 (1961), pp. 36-39 .................................... 377
 IX

INTRODUCTION

M. Witzel

In 1987, on the occasion of F .B.J. Kuiper's eightieth birthday, it had

been planned to honor him with the reprint of a major part of his articles
which cover virtually all the fields of lndian and lndo-Iranian philology
and linguistics. 1 His selected writings on mythology had been published
earlier by his friend John lrwin under the title Ancient Indian Cos-
mogony. lrwin added a detailed discussion 2 of Kuiper's work on lndo-
lranian and Vedic mythology. Here 1 will discuss Kuiper's linguistic and
philological work because its full range has not been easily available 3 and
consequently appreciable in South Asia where this collection originally
was to be published. For various reasons this plan could only be carried
out now, with considerable delay, in the Netherlands.
The selection made here is limited to F.B.J. Kuiper's writings on
linguistic and philological problems in the older forms of the languages
and literatures of India and Iran. It comprises those on Sanskrit and
Prak~t, on Dravidian and MUl).q.a, on Old Persian and Avestan. It also
includes problems of the reconstructed parent language (lndo-Iranian)
spoken by the still undivided, proto-historic Aryan tribes before they
entered Iran and the lndian subcontinent. Finally, this selection deals
with the Pan-Indian linguistic area, with the lndian Sprachbund, as it
has developed over the past four millenia, with special attention to its
earliest stages.
However, we have excluded most, though not all of the articles pub-
lished in the Indo-Iranian Journal as they are easily traceable and ac-
cessible. For example, in India alone the Journal is available at more
than fifty public or University libraries. Even though the collection of
Kuiper's articles on Old lndian mythology, together with this volume of
1 In this way, we hope to circumvent the fact that in many countries a collection
and reprint of even such out standing work as that of F.B.J. Kuiper is not made
possible by scientific orgaruzations and has to be left to the initiative of individuals.
2F.B.J. Kuiper, Ancient Indian Gosmogony, Essays selected and introduced by
John Irwin, Dellii 1983. A cletailed description can also be found in T. Elizarenkova's
Russian translation of his articles (Trudy po vedijskoj mifologií [Studies on Vedic
mythology], Moskva 1986).
3S ee the English translation of T. Elizarenkova's introductory essay to Trudy po
vedijskoj mifologii, (T. Elizarenkova, F.B.J. Kuiper, Fundamental directions of his
scholarly work, Numen XXXIV, 2,1987,145-178).
 f
x Xl
selected studies, cannot fully present the whole range of his work, 1 trust
that the most important or otherwise representative studies have been
included both in Irwin's and in the present volume.
***
Franciscus Bernardus Jacobus Kuiper was born on July 7, 1907 at
's Gravenhage (Den Haag, The Hague) in the Netherlands. He spent
his school years at the gymnasium in The Hague. He then studied La-
tin and Greek as well as Sanskrit and Indo-European linguistics at the
University of Leiden. Towards the end of Willem Caland's life he also
took private lessons from this great Vedic scholar at Caland's home in
the Koningslaan in Utrecht. True to Caland's special interest, they read
Brahmar;ta and Sutra texts. At Leiden his teachers were, among others,
F. Muller and N. van Wijk. In 1934 he completed his dissertation on the
nasal pre~ents ~n Sanskrit and other Indo-European languages; the work
was pubhshed m Amsterdam in 1937.
As all the positions in Sanskrit and allied subjects were occupied at
that time, just as they are today, and as it was a period of severe eco-
nomic difficulties, Kuiper took a position as a high school teacher of
Latin and Greek at the lyceum of Batavia (J akarta) in Indonesia then
the Dutch East Indies. The experience of a tropical, at one time Hindu-
Buddhist country, made a deep impression on him although he would
find a chance to visit India only much latero For, when he was appointed
as Professor of Sanskrit at Leiden University in 1939, he was not allowed
by the Education Ministry to stop over in India on his way back from
Jakarta. Then the second world war began.
In May 1940 German troops occupied the Netherlands and there was
no way to visit other countries until after the end of the occupation in
May 1945. During this period, Kuiper had to work in relative isolation.
This isolation was intensified when the University was closed in 1943
after ~he Leiden. professor Cleveringa gave a strong speech against th~
excluslOn of JewlSh professors from the University, which had been or-
dered by the ~ azi occupation. For two years, until the liberation in May
1945, academlc work had to be done in seclusion. The last winter was
the most difficult periodo After a strike, the German occupation had shut
off all communications, notably trains with food supplies to the western
pa.r t o~the ~eth~rlands (the provinces ofNorth and South Holland), and
thlS wmter lS stIlI known as bollen winter because people had to resort
to eating tulip bulbs.
After the liberation, Academia gradually retraced its previous course
though in a somewhat different political and social atmosphere tha~
before the war. Greater reforms were tocome in the late Sixties and
early Seventies. The student unrest tha:t had blown over from across
the Atlantic and shook most West European countries at the end of the
Sixties, had its effect in the Netherlands as well. The result, a seeming-
ly democratic set-up of the University, brought with it an enormous
amount of time spent on a point by point discussion of the organization
of research, teaching and administration on all levels. Many professors
became discouraged by this unproductive loss of time and energy, and
this certainly was one of the reasons why Kuiper took the possible early
retirement 'at the age of 65, instead of the customary one at the age of
68.
It must be said that Kuiper has, in my impression, enjoyed and profited
from his retirement. If one takes a closer look at the number and range
of his publications after this date one easily notices that they are greater
in number and perhaps also in range than those he had published after
his dissertation.
Little involved anymore with University business, he has enjoyed con-
tact with his friends, with visiting colleagues, and with his violin quartet.
1 remember many spirited conversations in his house in the Handellaan
at Voorschoten or at my home, and he particularly enjoyed visitors from
aH parts oí the globe who carne to see him. Also, 1 remember weH the one
occasion that 1 could persuade him to "rejoin" us at the Institute Kern,
in 1981/82, when 1 had invited Dipak Bhattacharya of the Vishvabharati
University at Santiniketan for a one year stay at Leiden, intending to
further his edition of the Paippalada Sarphita of the Atharvaveda. We
read sorne unpublished parts of this text, the manuscripts of which Di-
pak's íather Durga Mohan had borrowed and acquired in Orissa at the
end of the Fifties and in the early Sixties. At that time Kuiper made
many valuable suggestions which will be included in a proposed edition
of the texto
During his years at Leiden University, Kuiper taught Sanskrit, Pra-
krit and Indo-European linguistics. Among his foremost pupils are the
linguist R.S.P. Beekes, G. Schokker who specializes on early New Indo-
Aryan, Prakrt and Sanskrit drama, and the Buddhist scholar J.W. de
Jong.
In 1957, Kuiper founded, together with his Leiden colleague J.W.
de Jong, the Indo-Iranian Journal. He was its chief editor for the next
quarter of a century, until 1979 when he successively asked the present
writer to take over moreofhis responsibilities. Nevertheless, he still takes
an active interest in it and remains activelyinvolved in it as one of the
editors and also by contributing many of his own articles. The journal
was and to sorne extent still is the only truly international journal oí
Indological studies. Its foundation was a great step íorwards and right
 r
XlI
from its first issue it carried articles by the foremost scholars of the day.
To quote T. Elizarenkova,4 it is a journal "which united the best forces
of scholars of different countries. lt determined in many respects the
course of studies in lndian and Iranian studies. The activity of Kuiper
in this journal is uncommonly many-sided. He is not only the author
of many articles which have opened new perspectives for Indology, but
also an active reviewer who quickly published his reactions to important
lndological and Iranistic publications, a participant in different scholarly
discussions. "
***
The articles in the present volume are not arranged historically in the
way Kuiper's thinking developed but have been divided into the major
areas of his interests described aboye. Because all of his articles could not
be included here, his philological and linguistic writings will be discussed
in sorne more detail.
1. Indo-Iranian and the Laryngeal theory
F.B.J. Kuiper's e~rliest publications 5 deal with the Indo-European
grammar, notably wIth the verbs that show an n-infix in the present
stem,6 - a rathe.r characteristic feature in Indo-European. 7 In passing it
should be m~ntlOned that he continued his interests in Indo-European
throughout hIS c.areer, though this only occasionally resulted in separate
works such as hIS study of Homer, Nwpom X('J..AxéiJ.8 The next group of
problems tackled by him were the effects that the laryngeals had exerted
on t~e Vedic phonolo~ical, nominal, and verbal system, including their
Iraman analogues; thIS was followed by a study of their influence on
J;tgvedic sandhi.
T~e laryngeals, usually perceived as three sounds of different phonetic
quahty represented by the symbols h1, h2 , h3 or simply by H, are sounds
that are reconstructed for the Proto-Indo-European parent language.
T~e~ have disappeared iI). nearly all Indo-European languages except for
HIttIte.where h2 ~nd h3 are retained. Nevertheless, they have left many
traces m the vanous languages. In Vedic Sanskrit, they are most fre-
4 Numen XXXIV, 2, 1987, 145-178.
:Z~r ?eschichte ~er indo-irallischell s-Prasentia, AO 12, 1934, 190-306.
DIe Indogermanlschen Nasalprasentía. Ein Versuch zu eíner morphologíschen
Analyse. Amsterdam 1937.
7 A~ Kuiper ~emarks in .his preíace, "Die Ursache des alleinigell Vorkommens von
Infixbildungell [m I.E.] blelbt nach wie vor eill ungelostes Riitsel" .
8 MKNA W 14, 5, pp. 201-227.
XlII
quently represented by unexpected vowellengthening (e.g. visviivasu),9
or by the 'extra' i of the set roots (as in bhav-i-tum, bhav-i-~yati).
Among Kuiper's early investigations on the laryngeals in Sanskrit was
a study of Vedic nouns. 10 This was followed, after the war, by a study
of those cases where laryngeals played a role in phonology and were
of consequence in many of the verb forms and in word formation in
general. l l
The traces of laryngeals can also be noticed in sorne peculiarities of
Rgvedic sa~dhi,12 that is where final vowel is shortened in unexpected
~ays. However, this shortening takes place only in certain positions,
which had already become difficult to understand or even i~comprehen­
sible to the BrahmaI).a time redactors of the text (such as Sakalya).
These investigations became, again in the words of T. Elizarenkova,13
"an integral part of comparative-historical study of the Indo-European
languages and the successful application of the laryngeal theory to the
materials of the Vedic language served as a stimulus for the study of tra-
ces oflaryngeals also in other ancient languages: Greek (Cowgill), Hittite
(Puhvel), ltalic (Watkins), Germanic (Lehmann)." This evaluation can
easily be applied to much, if not to most of Kuiper's work in other areas
as well. As will be seen, Kuiper was typically the forerunner of innova-
ting research in several areas of Indo-Iranian linguistics and mythology,
and of Indian studies in general. The present writer, therefore, thinks
himself lucky to have spent sorne nine years in Kuiper's close vicinity
enjoying frequent contacts.
The study of RV sandhi was not the last one in Kuiper's occupation
with laryngeals. Apart from his writing, this approach also influenced
his pupil R.S.P. Beekes, and indirectly much of Dutch Indo-European
studies now concentrated at Leiden. He continued to write occasionally
on the topic. A rather short example among them, the brief note on aja
has been included here on purpose, as to indicate how linguistic and
close philological study can aid in the interpretation of the Veda. The
occurrences of the word aja in the RV have frequently been taken 14 to
9 For one oí the rather íew Indian reactions to publications illlndo-European lingui-
stics and the laryngeal theory in particular, see Satya Swarup Mishra, New lights on
Indo-European comparative grammar, Varanasi (Mallisha Prakashan) 1975. Mishra,
p. 67 sqq., still maintains: "1 have established that this [laryngeal] theory is no-
thing but a burden to lE Comparative Grammar." Cí. also Mishra, The laryngeal
controversy, Indían Línguístícs 29, 1968.
10 Notes on Vedíc Noun l7ífiexíon. Amsterdam 1942.
llTraces oí laryngeals in Vedic Sanskrit, India Antígua, FS. J.Ph. Vogel, Leiden
1947.
12 Shorteníng of final vowels ín the Rigveda, Amsterdam 1955.
130p. cit. p. 147 sq.
14For example, R.a. Narahari, The "ullborn part", AP 24 (3), March 1953, 106-
 XIV
mean unborn (next to goat), even after Kuiper's note. Kuiper succinctly
.shows that the passages where aja has been supposed to mean unborn
are wrongly understood, and that the only correct interpretation is goat
-something quite unfortunate for those who h~ve used t.he mean~ng ~ja
"unborn" to construct some wide-ranging theones on rebuth. As lmgms-
tic study shows, the root jan "to give birth" .contains a finallaryngeal, a
set root in Panini's terms, and the inflection of a supposed aja- "unborn"
m~st have indicated this. But it does not, and with this seemingly simple
observation, all the theories built on the use ofthe word in the RV should
finally and safely be put to resto
Il. Vedic
This selection includes a few articles which have a bearing on themes
of lndian mythology and cosmogony as well, though they were mainly in-
tended as linguistic papers. lncidentally, this combination is quite typical
for Kuiper's writing. It indicates what can be achieved if one combines
critical observation of the minutiae of linguistic theory and traditional
philology, especially with a study of all the Vedic texts available and
with a well-founded and systematic investigation of Vedic religion. In
Kuiper's case, this is enhanced by his systematic approach based on a
comprehensive theory - a theory that takes into account both the struc-
ture of Vedic religion as well as its gradual historical development. He
follows this development in e~ch case from the level of the J3,gveda to
that of the Mantra texts of the Atharvaveda and the early Yajurveda,
then to that of early Yajurveda Sal1lhita prose, and finally to that of the
BrahmaI).as proper and of the UpanÍ1!ads and Slitras.
This periodization of the Vedic period, which is increasingly used now,
is combined in Kuiper's work with a magisterial view of the unique traits
of Vedic and later Hindu religion, so much so that some reviewers, for
example those of his hook Varu~a and Vidii?aka, felt compelled to state
that he had shown that nothing ever had really changed in the period
from the J3,gveda to the Epic and later Hindu texts. This, of course,
does injustice to Kuiper's intention and to the actual execution of his
research plans, with its great attention to historical detail as displayed
in his books and in the articles presently reprinted.
There is no room here to go into detail with regard to similar ar-
ticles as the ones detailed ahove. However, as examples may he listed:
~08, see Dandekar, Ved. Bíbl. JII, 422: ajo bhaga~ RV 10.16.4 = precursor oí Up.,
Atman oo. destiny oí unbOTIl part is heaven; seat is manas "brain".
XV
his treatment of parye divi 15 which means, in a cosmogonic sense, "on
the following day of a new period" (and not "decisive moment" as in
Geldner's RV translation); or svav[?1iI6 which is determined as "sponta-
neous action"; or the important investigation of vidatha 17 "distribution
of gifts" , which aims at improving thesocial standing of the donor and
of strengthening of his vital powers. This investigation is the key to the
understanding of a large part of the J3,gvedic social and religious struc-
tures.
Kuiper's 'studies in other lndian languages are taken up in more detail
below. Some of them have become separate monographs.
IIl. Iranian
The Iranian languages and religions are closely related to those of
early India, notably Vedic. They, and their common parent language
and culture, lndo-Iranian (Aryan), are represented here by a numher of
studies. In this field as well, Kuiper has been fascinated by mythology,
and again, many of his ohservations take their origin in minute philo-
logical and linguistic observations, as in his articles on Mazda or Ahura
Mazda.
He analyzed the word mazda18 which is part of the name of the highest
god, ahura mazda, mazda ahura, making use of the laryngeal theory,
and concluded that it means "wise". A long discussion about this word
and concept has been carried out with another grand old man of Indian
studies, Paul Thieme, over the exact and correct interpretation of the
collocation. 19
The declension of Ahura Mazda makes it East Iranian, and this is
proof of a spread of the ZoroastriaI]. faith from Eastern towards Wes-
tern Iran. 20 These two, originally separate, epithets were joined only
under the Achaemenids as ahuramazda-,21 which posits Zoroaster's date
long before that of the reign of Cyrus, i.e. more towards the beginning
of the first millenium B.C. than to the middle of the sixth century as
15 IIJ 5, 1962, 169-183.
16 IIJ 4, 1960, 59-63.
17 Ind. Taur. 2, 1974, 121-132 .
18 Avestan mazdii, JIJ 1,1957,86-95.
190n this, see most receritly by J. Narten, Der Yasna Haptayhiiítí, Wiesbaden
1986, p. 29, and passím.
20 Cí. K. Hoffmann, A ufsatze zur Indo-Iranístík, p. 275 sq.; and: Das Avesta in der
Persis, Prolegomena to the sources on the hístory of pre-Islamíc Central Asía, Akad.
Kiadó, Budapest 1979, 89-93.
21 Ahura Mazda "Lord Wisdom"?, JIJ 18,1976,25-42.
 XVI
Henning thought. At Zoroaster's time East Iranian already was sharply
differenciated from Western Iranian. 22
Zoroaster's language,23 even if it originally was a Western Iranian
(Mede) dialect from Ragha (modern Rai~ south ofTehran), has absorbed
many traits from other sources; it is to sorne extent an artificiallanguage,
a Kunstsprache, elements of which often are older than the language of
the RV. 24 This fact may be explained by a certain amount of conser-
vatism of the sacred and even of the popular language in Iran, which
shows little impact of the substrate languages - an unstudied problem so
far. This kind of influence certainly was less than that exerted on the lan-
guage and culture ofthe ~gvedic Indo-Aryans in the Panjab. North-west
India was a large "colonial" area, where the Indo-Iranian or early Vedic
immigrant clans and tribes (including their poets) were struggling with
each other and with the more numerous local population of non-Aryan
descent which belonged to the post-Indus civilizations (c. 1900 B.C. and
later). In Greater Iran, however, the local population, for example that
ofthe Bactro-Margiana archaeological complex at the close of the second
millenium B.C., does not seem to have influenced the Iranian offshoot of
Indo-Iranian to the extent the indigenous languages affected Vedic and
other Old Indo-Aryan dialects in the Panjab and beyond. 25
IV. Dravidian
Another group of Kuiper's studies in the present selection deals with
specific questions of Dravidian and other pre-Indo-European languages
of the subcontinent. Kuiper is one of the few Indologists who excels by
his knowledge of all the major Indian language families, something that
makes his younger colleagues fe el rather uncomfortable. However, when 1
22 Cí. Kuiper, Old East Iranian dialects, IIJ18, 1976, 241-253 and: Old East Iraman
*niimaní "names", etc., JIJ 20 (1978) 83-94; ; cí. also present writer, Early Eastern
Iran ánd the Atharvaveda, Persíca IX (1980), 86-128; Jungavestisch apiix;;¡Ora- im
System der avestischen Himmelsrichtungsbezeichnungen, MSS 30, (1972), 163-191,
esp. n. 18; Humbach, Die awestische Landerliste, WZKSOA 4, 1960, 34-36.
230n Zarathustra 's language, Amsterdam 1978.
24Such as the well-known archaic agreement oí the neuter plural oí the subject with
a singular in the verb or many individual íorms such as the possessive pronoun mana
instead oí innovative Vedic mama (affected by assimilation); the older, Iraman íorm
agrees with Germanic (Gothic maíns, Engl. mine etc.), and can be compared even
beyond the Indo-European area with Uralic (Finn.) mí-na, Altaic (O. Jpn.) wa-no,
etc.
25This question, especially its Iraman aspect, is in need oí much closer study; cí.
the Proceedíngs of the Conference of Archaeologísts and Línguists, held at Toronto
ín October 1991, ed. by George Erdosy as: The Indo-Aryans of Ancíent South Asía.
Language, Materíal Culture and Ethnícíty, Berlin/New York 1995.
XVll
once complained about the growing specialization in Indian Studies and
the narrowing of one's field ofvision, at least as far as active knowledge of
the texts and participation in research is involved, he simply remarked:
"Well, this is what we used to say about our predecessors ... "
His work in Dravidian comprises such topics as the periodization of
sorne sound changes in Dravidian, the correlation of voiced and unvoiced
consonants at the beginning of words and their loans into Sanskrit,26
or the phon,ology and morphology of Old Tamil (aytam problem), the
formatÍon of an epenthetic -i when two nominal bases join 27 including his
reply to Chandrashekhar 28 as well as sorne problems of morphology.29
V. MUl,l<;la
The other great non-Indo-European linguistic family of the subcon-
tinent, MUl).q.a, is dealt with in many of F.B.J. Kuiper's studies. We
could only select a few shorter articles on this topic in this volume.
Kuiper's interest in MUl).q.a certainly was kindled by his long stay in
Indonesia. Early on, he published a study on the relationship between
the Munda and Indonesian languages. 3o He correctly pointed out that
Munda is' related to Malayo-Polynesian (Austronesian) - now an accep-
ted 'f~ature of Asian linguistics, in which Austro-Asiatic (Mul).q.a and
Mon-Khmer) is seen as related to A ustronesian (Malayo-Polynesian),
while the whole family is now called Austric and thought to include
sorne other South-East Asian languages as well.
Among his earlier studies in MUl).q.a are his investigation into con-
sonant variation, which makes linguistic comparison difficult. 31 However,
it must be remembered that we know of the MUl).q.a languages only for
the past 100 or 150 years and from often imperfect phonetic transcrip-
tions. It was necessary for Kuiper, even after the appearance of Pinnow's
comparative grammar 32 to study closely the phonetic, phonematic and
26Zur Chronologie des Stimmtonverlusts im dravidischen Anlaut (skt. kur¡,ga-m,
kutfcaka-~, gola-~),BSOA 9 (1939), 987-1001.
27Two problems oí Tamil phonology, IIJ 2,1958,191-224.
28 A. Chandrashekhar, The iiytam problem reexamined, Ind. Líng. 34, 1973, 211-
216, and Kuiper, The iiytam problem, Ind. Ling. 35, 1974, 205-217.
29 Note on Dravidianmorphology, AO 20, 1948, 238-252.
30Munda and Indonesian, .Gr. Neerl., Leiden 1948,372-401.
31Consonant variations in"Munda, Língua 14, 1965, 54-87.
32Cí. H.J. Pinnow, Versuch eíner hístoríschen Lautlehre der Kharía Sprache, Wies-
baden 1959; or: Theposition oí the Munda languages within the Austro-Asiatic lan-
guage íamily, Linguístíc Comparíson ín South East Asía and the Pacífic, ed. H.L.
Shorto, London (SOAS) 1963, 140-152; N.H. Zide, Munda and Non-Munda Aus-
trasiatic Languages, Current Trends in Linguístics, 5, 1969, 411-430.
 xviii
structural facts of the various MUJ)~a languages and dialects, befare he
could begin to use this rather late material for a comparison with Vedic
and classical Sanskrit in arder to study MUl).~a loan words in these early
texts. This, he has carried out especially in his study of RV loan words
in the Fs. Kirfel and recently in a separate book. 33
VI. Pan-Indian linguistics
Finally, we come to F.B.J. Kuiper's Pan-lndian studies. Our present
selection stresses his treatment of the languages of the lndian subcon-
tinent seen as a whole, as a linguistic area, a Sprachbund. 34 This was
the programmatic title of one of his articles: "The genesis of a linguis-
tic area" (IIJ 10, 1967). The concept had been developed in the studies
of the Balkan area where languages belonging to four or five different
linguistic families have been in clase contact over the past few millenia
a~d ha~e .greatly influenced each other across linguistic boundaries by
bljmultl-Imgual, calque type borrowing which extends to grammatical
feature~. For exa~ple Rumanian (a 'daughter' language of Latin) and
Bulganan (a Slavlc .langua?e, with an old-Turkic, i.e. Bulgar adstrate)
both have a postposlted artlcle, attached to the noun. 35 Similar develop-
ments can be detected in the lndian subcontinent,36 such as the spread of
retroflex (still often called cerebral, miirdhanya) sounds, or the develop-
ment ~f two types of gerunds in Vedic Sanskrit which is based, according
to Kmper, on a Dravidian calque (see below). Therefore, Kuiper's semi-
nal paper "The genesis of a linguistic area,,37 has been chosen here as a
representative article.
It is necessary to refer at greater length to his studies on N ahali 38
:v hich could not be included here. N ahali is a small triballanguage, found
m ~he border are.a between Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra (north of
Elhchpur). In thIs language the influences of MUl).ga, Dravidian, and of
33 Aryans in the Rigveda, Amsterdam - Atlanta (Rodopi) 1991.
34
.r: .. .
. C~. 0man Jakobson, Uber die phonologischen Sprachbünde, Traveaux du Cercle
Lzngutsttque de Prague, 4, 234-40¡ reprinted in Selecied Writings, The Hague, 1962,
Vol. I, 137-143.
. 35For examp~e, irr;rerator-ul Romani-lor "The emperor oí the Romans" in Ruma-
ruan, and pf}rvt-yat the first", drugi-yat "the other" in Bulgarian.
36Se: also M.B. Emeneau, India as a linguistic area, Language 32 (1956), p. 3-16¡
A.F. SJoberg, The Impact oí Dravidian on Indo-Aryan, in: Reconstructing Languages
a~~ Cultures, ed. E. Polomé and W. Winter, Berlin/New York 1992, p. 507-529.
IIJ10 (1967), p. 81 sqq.
38 Nahali. A comparative study, Amsterdam 1962¡ The sources oí Nahali vocabulary
in: H. Zide, Studies in contemparative Austroasiatic. Linguistics, ed. N.H. Zide, Th~
Hague 1966, p. 96-192.
XIX
modern lndo-Aryan can be detected. Kuiper pointed out that under the
present lndo-Aryan appearance of Nahali, there is a Dravidian substrate,
and under that a MUl).~a substrate; still below this, there exists a level
represented by the c. 25% of Nahali vocabulary that are not related to
any other lndian language. Proto-Nahali therefore represents the true
lndian substrate, which is otherwise unattested and unstudied in the
various modern and ancient languages ofIndia. 39 (This does not exclude,
of course, the possibility that even the Proto-Nahali substrate language
again is to'be leveled into several earlier and so far unknown substrate
languages) .
Therefore the earliest attainable substrate of N ahali leads us back to a
time when none of the three majar language groups was in evidence in the
area of the Proto-Nahali speakers. Proto-Nahali is one of the "original"
languages spoken on the subcontinent, next to Proto-Burushaski in the
Western Himalayas, Proto-Kusunda in the Nepal Himalayas, the possible
substrate ofTharu in the lndian and Nepalese Tarai, and the substrate of
the Vedda language in Sri Lanka. Theoretically, Proto-Nahali, along with
the other proto-Ianguages such as Proto-Burushaski, ana the perhaps
more likely Proto-Dravidian, could be a candidate for the language of
the lndus inscriptions.
Kuiper's stress of the concept of an lndian linguistic area (Sprach-
buná), has been seminal for the research carried out during the past
few decades. It acquires special importance in view of the more recent
concept of a Nostratic linguistic family,40 as two of its sub-families are
lndo-European and Dravidian (next to Uralic, Altaic, Caucasian and
Afro-Asiatic), and also in the context of the rather hastily conceived, still
more encompassing, linguistic super-families. 41 As Kuiper mentioned in
passing in his book on Nahali, clase observation ofthe various substrates
in alllanguages of the lndian subcontinent could lead to wide-ranging
comparisons such as that of some words in Proto-Nahali and in Ainu. 42
39Note that 80% oí agricultural terms in Hindi have no Indo-Aryan etymology,
and 31% oí these words go back to (an) unknown language(s) no longer extent in
the sub continent , see C. Masica, Aryan and non-Aryan elements in north Indian
agriculture, in: M. Deshpande and H. Hock, Aryan and non-Aryan in India, CSSEAS
Publ., Univ. oí Michigan, Ann Arbor 1979, p. 55-152.
40 As developed by the late Russian linguist lllich-Svitych, Opyt sravnenija no-
straticeskix jazykov, Moskva 1971-1984¡ see Vitaly Shevoroshkin, Reconstructing Lan-
guages and Cultures, Bochum 1989¡ íor popular surnmaries see US News and World
Report, Nov. 5, 1990, Scientific American, Apr. 1991, 139-147, The Atlantic, Apr.
1991, 39-68.
41 For a summary see Scientific American, Apr. 1991.
42 I may point out, in passing, the history oí early loan words such as that oí
rice (see KEWA, S.V. Ved. vrfhi) and sugar cane, or the proto-Asian words íor líon
(sirp,ha) , mustard (sar~apa) and tiger (pu7}(larrka) , pointed out long ago, by Henning
and Mayrhoíer.
 F
xx
Kuiper began his Pan-Indian studies with investigations of borrowing
from the non-Indo-European languages of the lndian subcontinent into
Vedic and classical Sanskrit. From the start he was very much interested
in the substrate of the various non-Indo-European languages of India as
fotmd in Old lndo-Aryan. His interest goes back at least to 1939 when he
published an article in which he compared the two Vedic words srbinda
and binda. They show the typical MUI?-<:la prefixes, found in such words
as Kalinga, T(r)ilinga, etc. Kuiper further studied loans fram these lan-
guages in a number of articleg43 and in his recent book. 44 Consequently,
the earliest traces of the mutual influence which the majar language fa-
milies of the subcontinent exercised on each other can be noticed already
in the oldest lndian text itself, the ~gveda.
As a case in point, the early influence of Dravidian and MUI?-<:la on
Vedic Sanskrit is elaborately shown in Kuiper's early summary of his
studies on loan words in the ~gveda (FS Kirfel, 1955). Though not all
the words provisionally collected in this article may be of Dravidian 01'
MUI?-<:la origin, it is evident that a large number of them is either Proto-
Munda ar Proto-Dravidian. 45 About 100 Sanskrit and Prakrit words
alo~e' are borrowed fram early (proto-MuI?-<:la) Austro-Asiatic. 46 Kuiper
even traces a Mu:¡;t<:la ~yth in the Vedic texts. 47 As he has stressed on
other graunds, the appearance of the Emu~a motif already in the RV
points to a very early local influence even on the mythology of the RV.
Kuiper has now returned to the topic of loan words in the Vedic texts
in his latest book, Aryans in the Rigveda,48 where the evidence has
been re-evaluated after sorne 35 years in which a dramatic development
in Dravidian and also in MUI?-<:la studies has taken place. The selection
of words could therefore be limited to sorne extent, but the list still
encompasses sorne 300 words.
Attention should be drawn to the fact that, apart from the expected
reservoir of typically local words of flara and fauna, there is, in the RV,
a large number of loan words in the areas of agriculture. This indicates
43Two Rigvedicloanwords, FS Debrunner, Bern 1954,241-250; Rigvedicloanwords,
FS Kirfel, Bonn 1955, 137-185; sailiI~a- and Kuiflava-, FS Brandenstein, Irmsbruck
1968, 77-84.
44 Aryans in the Rigveda, Amsterdam- Atlanta (Rodopi) 1991.
45To this may now be added also an early Proto-Tibeto-Burmese level: see author,
Notes on ancient fudian geography. 1. Kosala, fU (íorthc.) and cf. Nepalese Hydro-
nomy. Towards a history oí settlement in the Himalayas. Proceedings of the Franco-
German Conference on Nepal, Arc-et-Senans, June 1990, ed. G. Toffin, Paris 1992.
Shafer's identifications usually go too faro (R. Shafer, Ethnography in Mahabharata.)
46 Proto-Munda words in Sanskrit, Amsterdam 1948; see now, however, Kuiper,
Aryans in the Rigveda, p. 17 sq.
47 An Austro-Asiatic myth in the Rigveda, Amsterdam 1950.
48 Amsterdam - Atlanta (Rodopi) 1991.
XXI
that the Vedic lndo-Aryans relied, just as the early Vedic texts indeed
show mainly on pastoralism with a little agriculture on the side. 49 This
tedio~s work, notably that of rice cultivation which first becomes visi?le
in the Atharvaveda,50 was apparently carried out by the local populatlOn
and not by the Aryan cattle herders themselves. 51
It is remarkable that many lndo-European scholars still overlook these
facts and try to etymologize every RV word as lndo-European, at least
as far as they possibly can. Of course, designations of flora and fauna
can be exp~cted to be based on local wards or to be new formations. For
example, even in describing the flora and fauna of N orth America which
resembles that of England to a large extent, many English words have
taken on a new meaning, have been coined anew, 01' new words have
been taken ayer from Amerindian languages. For example,
(a) old wards, new animals: deer, squirrel (fram Engl. red squirrel)
.. mrga "wild animal" > "gazelle, antilope, deer"; kapota "pigeon"; rk/fa
"(brown) bear" > lndian "(black) bear";
(b) new formations for new animals: mountain lion ("puma'); ground-
hog :: hastin "the one with a hand" > "elephant"; dvzpin "the one with
islands (on his skin)" > "leopard";
(c) folk etymologies for new anim~~s: woodchuck.. :;: ~jibwa o~chi~:
chipmunkjchipmonk < chitmunk < OJIbwa atchztamo stnped sqmrrel
:: niiga "elephant" < niiga "snake"; siiliivrka "hyena"; sisumiira "Ganges
dolphin";
(d) local words : caribou N .Am. reindeer < Micmac khalibu, moose <
Algonquian, N atick moos-u, for "e!¡¿'; puma < Quechua "mountain lion,
panther" :: si¡y¡ha "lion", siirdiila "tiger", pU'f}4arzka "tiger".
In ~gvedic and later India sorne words are simply transferred to a
species close or simílar to the one in the older homeland. For example,
mrga (Avestan maraya-) which originally meant "wíld animal" ,52 carne
49Represented by old hldo-European words such as sa, kr~, yava, etc. .
50Unless the RV word (brahma- )odana indicates, as it does later on, use of rIce, as
Kuiper pointed out to me orally, c. 1988. - There is evidence now for the illtroduction
of rice in the latest phases of the Illdus civilization. However, the word and the
plant are of (S)E. Asian origino Some forms are given by Mayrhofer K.EWA (!ran.
*brinj, Nilristanf wric, etc., Tamil ari( ci), Greek oruza, etc.), to which must be,
added Tibetan 'bras, Malay beras, Japan. uruchi. This indicates at least two paths
of dissemination of the plant/word and allows a reconstruction oí the original word
as something like **vra(n)j/ci.
51The situation resemblés one of much later times, that of the kingdom of the-
Visigoths in Spain who were more interested in laws dealing with their cattle than
in those dealing with land and property of the Celto-Iberic farmers, - even though
Spain had been one oí the "bread baskets" oí the Roman empire.
52fucluding "wild bird", a meaning still íound in RV, e.g. 1.,182.7; Avest. maraya
y 10.10, Yt. 13.70, V. 5.1, etc.
-~-------------------------------._.~r
XXIl
to denote the antilope, especially the black gazelle. Others had to be
coined anew, such as hastin "the one with the hand" for the newly en-
countered Indian animal, the elephant. In most cases a local name is
taken over, such as in words for the tiger (pu'f}qarzka, Prdaku) while the
Indo-Iranian and Paleo-Asian word (**parB)was forgotten. 53 The surpri-
sing fact is the high number, as shown by Kuiper in his book, of clearly
non-Indo-European words even in a hieratic text such as the RV.
Clearly, the evidenceof such a large number of loans in the RV estab-
lishes that the early Indo-Aryans moved into an area with a strong local
population of Dravidian and MUl]~a speakers. The process of actual
immigration, or perhaps we should rather say, infiltration, of small clans
and tribes is not yet visible in the archaeological record, - and perhaps
not to be expected,54 as the case of the movement of the Huns 55 into
Europe shows. However, the repercussions are visible in the Gandhara
(Swat) grave culture and later on in the Kuruk~etra/Doab area.
Archaeology, which has made major advances in the past few decades
indicates that such a theory is indeed the correct one: Many early cul-
53KEWA II, 301 s.v. pU7}4arfka.
54It should be pointed out here that most Indian scholars and an increasing number
of archaeologists, such as Jim G. Shaffer (The IndocAryan Invasions: Cultural Myth
and Archeological Reality, The People of South Asia, ed. John R. Lukacs, New York
1984,77-90), do no longer accept an Aryan "invasion" or even a trickling in, that is a
gradual irnmigration of Indo-Aryans into the subcontinent but rather think purely in
terms of cultural shifts. However, the relationship of Vedic with Old Iraruan, and also
with Slavic etc., indicates that some Indo-Aryan group, speaking a form of an Old
Indo-Aryan (mainly: Vedic) language and possessing all the traits of Indo-Iranian
culture, from poetry and mythology to chariot building and funeral customs and
ancestor worship with áraddha offerings, must have introduced the Vedic language
and culture. This cannot have been effected by occasional traders. The immigrating
group(s) may have been relatively small one(s), such as the Normans who came to
England in 1066 and who nearly turned England into a French speaking country
- while they originally had been Scandinavians, speaking N. Germanic. This may
supply a model for the Indo-Aryan immigration as well. If they had resided and
intermarried with the local populatioll of the llorthern borderlands of Iran (the so-
called Bactro-Margialla Archaeological Complex) for some centuries, the immigrating
Indo-Aryan clans alld tribes may originally have looked like Bactrians, Afgharus or
Kashmiris, and must have been racially submerged quickly in the population of the
Panjab, just like the later immigrants whose staging area was in Bactria as well: the
Saka, Kusalfa, Huns, etc. - However, the introduction of the horse and especially of
the horse-drawn chariot was a powerful weapon in the hands of the Indo-Aryans. It
must have helped to secure military and political dominance even if some of the local
elite were indeed quick to introduce the new cattle-based economy and the weapon,
the horse-drawn chariot, - just as the Near Eastern peoples did on a much larger and
planned scale.
55In spite of the well recorded movemellt - here we can speak of an invasioll, not
of irnmigration - of the Huns into the Ukraine and into the rest oí Europe after 375
A.D., material renmants have only recelltly been found when Huruuc graves were
discovered in Hungary.
..
--------------------------------~
XXIll
tures have been uncovered in the various parts of the sub continent , and
for example, the Eastern Gangetic plains show a local, sparsely distribu-
ted culture of primitive (neolithic, chalcolithic) nature which was slowly
superseded by the dominant Vedic cultures of the western Doab and E.
Panjab of the Kuru-Pañcala tribes.
In this area, i.e. the W. Doab and apparently even further west, in
the area of ],tgvedic India, early contact with MUl]~a peoples is ver y
likely to have taken place. 56 This is not the place to discuss in detail the
probable and possible earlier homeland(s) of the Dravidian languages,
though the remnants of N. Dravidian (Korku/Kurukh in N. Maharashtra
etc.), and especially the remnants of Brahui in Baluchistan, point to a
settlement of Dravidian speakers much more to the north than the area
these languages occupy nowadays. A contact zone in Sindh and beyond
is likely and has been supposed for Mahara~trL
Kuiper's articles and his work on Nahali, on the Indian Sprachbund
and now, his latest book on loan words in the RV, therefore indicate that
the Indian linguistic area seems to date further back than we usually care
to admit. 57
Much oí Kuiper's work on Pan-Indian traits is brought together in
his long article on the genesis of the South Asian linguistic area, reprin-
ted in this volume. Kuiper traces the influence of the substratum in the
use oí iti,58 in the two forms of the gerund, which presupposes a long
period of "subliterary" usage 59 until they "made it" into the high and
hieratic language, and, as has been mentioned aboye, the spread of the
so-called crirebrals, that is the 'retroflex sounds such as t, q, 'f}. In this
respect, it should be mentioned that virtually every population that has
entered the subcontinent from the west was influenced by this feature,
even Pasht0 60 and the even íairly late arrival, Baluchi, whose speakers
56Cf. author, Kosala (IIJ, forthc.).
57Similarly, there are areal features which include larger or smaller parts oí the
subcontinent, and which may be oí considerable antiquity: the retroflex sounds, but
cf. Australianj - I should like to add some interesting words that indicate cultural
contact with the East: vrfhi "rice" (see aboye), and the word íor"sugar cane": tu
in NewarI, and tu in the Philippinesj Western influence is seen in godhüma "wheat",
a popular etymology oí Iraruan *ganduma (Avest. gantuma) < Near Eastern words
such as Hittite kant, Egypt. xnd, Arab. lJ.int- (see Mayrhoíer, KEWA 1 p.348 sq. III,
698, Berger, JIJ 3,40 sqq.).
58 A feature íound here and there in Asia, incidentally, from Hittite up to Japanese.
This quotation marker in Japanese is ... to, in Nepali ... bhanne "saying ... " etc.
59 As the tu-stem is rather archaic even in the RV.
6oWho now can be traced already in the Baudhayana Srautasütra (18.44), ullder
the name ParSu (incidentally identical with the llame oí the Persians (OP Parsa),
see author, Tracing the Vedic Dialects, Dialectes dans les littératures indo-aryennes,
ed. C. Caillat, Paris 1989, p. 235.
 f
XXIV
have been in their present habitat only for about one thousand years. 6I
To put it somewhat facetiously, only English escaped the trend - and
in lndian ears, it has that feature anyhow, as the Indian pronunciation
and transcription of English words show (tea = ti). Kuiper concludes
that "between the arrival of the Aryans ... and the formation of the 01-
dest hymns of the RV a much longer period must have elapsed than is .
normally thought."
Indeed, recent archaeological research 62 indicates that the Indus ci~il­
~zat~on had disintegrated, somewhat in the fashion of the Maya civil-
IzatlOn, already by 1900 B.C., and that it was reverting to village level,
where many of its traditions - though not the script - were kept alive.
The Indo-Aryans of the J;tgvedic tradition cannot have entered the area
earlier than this, as their texts do not mention any of the five larger
and the many smaller cities of the Indus civilization,63 except as ruins. 64
Furthermore, the RV is - and this has not been understood so far _
mainly the text of the Puru and later on, of the Bharata tribes, with just
a few reco~lections of the earlier Indo-Aryan inhabitants of the Panjab,
the four tnbes ofthe Yadu, Turvasa, Anu, and Druhyu. That means, the
core of the RV covers merely a span of some five generations of constant
,:arfare betwee~ the Puru and Bharata tribes. However, even by the,
tIme of the. earhest of the thre.e consecutive J;tgvedic periods (i.e., that of
the four tnbes plus the fifth, the Puru, and that of the late-comers the
Bharata), the Indus towns had already disappeared and only ruins ~ere
encountered by the early Indo-Aryan immigrant clans and tribes. This
means that even the early J;tgvedic hymns of the four tribes are later than
65
190? B.C. On. the other hand, the rather late "Bharata" hymns are
earher than the mtroduction ofiron (first mentioned in the Atharvaveda)
61 A feature stressed already in K. Hoffmann's (unpublished) Ph D th . d l'
' . " eSls ea mg
WI:~ the words wlth medial-7J~- in the RV'(Munich 1940).
. See George Erdosy as: The Indo-Aryans Di Ancíent South Asía. Language, Ma-
te~~al Culture and Et.hnícíty, Berlin/New York 1995.
Harappa, MohenJo Daro, Dolavira in Cutch, etc.; the word pur in the RV has to
be understo.od as "fortress", and it is indeed found, in the lJ.gvedic texts, mostly in
the mountaInous
. V . . areas, such as Afghamstan', on pur, see W . Rau , The mealllng
. of
p~ m edic literature, Abhandlungen der Marburger Gelehrten Gesellschajt 1973.
Cf. word~ such as armaka, or (maha-)vaílasthana. On armaka, see now W.
Rau, Zur vedtschen Altertumskunde, AkadeJme der Wissenschaften und der Literatur
M:~n~, Jg. 1983, Nr.1,.Wiesbaden1983, p. 37 sq.
Smce RV, púetry IS based on an old and complicated poetical tradition that
r~a.~es back mto the Indo-Iranian and even into the Indo-European period, the pos-
~Iblli.ty C~llllOt b: excluded, of course, that sorne lJ.gvedic hynms stem from the pre-
~mnugratlOn ~erJod and refiec~ ~he situation in Sistan, Bactria, or even beyond this,
m Central ASIa. There are reffilllls~ences ofthese areasin the RV ofthe Parnoi (Pa7Jí),
Dahae (Dasa, cf. dasyu), the Rasa (E.Iran. Rayha, N.Iraman * Raha = Greek Rhli =
Volga); sorne even want to compare ríp- RV with the Rhipaen (Ural) Mts.
XXV
at c. 1100 B.C. This leaves a maximum time span for the composition
of :J;,tgvedic hymns of some 800 years. A similarly long period had been
deduced by Kuiper by his observation of certain linguistic features which
indicate a prolonged and early linguistic and cultural relationship with
Dravidian and also with MUI!~a.
This rather long period of acculturation can be noticed, as Kuiper
now points out, also in the appearance of "Aryan" kings with non-Aryan
names, such as Balbutha and Brbu.66 In fact, this isjust one ofthe many
features wliich point to a rather close relationship, in spiteofthe constant
warfare mentioned in the RV, between immigrating Indo-Aryans and
the local population which subsequently was slowly "Aryanized". 67 That
means, it did not only take over the language of the newly arrived 68 elite
but also its culture, including the new technology of the Vedic "tank",
the horse-drawn chariot.
This period of a fairly "liberal" and wide-spread acculturation lasted
until the period of the late RV. Only at that time do we find an attitude
that lead to the formulation of the "first constitution of India" (Paul
Mus) and the early system offour castes (var~a) in the Puruf?a hymn of
the RY. This was followed by a "First Sanskritization" under the Kurus
and their king Parikf?it,69 about the time of the introduction of iron,
during the Mantra period (AV), at about 1100 B.C. 70
Again, Kuiper's early intuition and his detailed subsequent research,
first carried out in the articles mentioned aboye and summarized in the
Festschrifi Kirfel of 1955, has been the correct one. Clearly, we now have
to recleon with a long :J;,tgvedic period, with multiple processes of cultural,
social and linguistic acculturation and interaction between the newly ar-
rived Indo-Aryans and the local populations. Much of this is, as Kuiper
has consistently shown, already visible in such hieratic texts as the va-
rious :J;,tgvedic hymns, whose composition and transmission was restricted
to traditional and rather conservative clans of poets and priests .
***
In sum, Kuiper's work may justifiedly be characterized as very inno-
66See author, The Realm Di the Kurus: Origins and Development oi the First
State in India, Nihon Minami Ajia Gakkai, Kyoto 1989, pp. 1-4 (sUllUllary), see now:
Electronic Journal oi Vedic Studies (EJVS), Vol. 2, 1996, at the Internet-address:
www.shore.net/-india/EJVS.
67 Cf. sentences like RV 9.63.5 índra'Tl}o várdhanto aptúra~ kr'l}vánto víslIam firyam I
apaghnánto árav7Ja~.
68 See aboye, n. 54.
69See RV Khila 5.10, and author, The Realm oi the I(urus, Kyoto 1989, Early
Sanskritization, EJVS 1996.
70See author, The Realm oi the Kurus, Kyoto 1989, Early Sanskritization, EJVS
1996.
. -.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -___4_p
•.._ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~

~:
"'
XXVI

vative in the many areas of researeh he has been working in: whether he
publishes a short note in IIJ or a monograph, these eontributions always
eontain a new approaeh to an old problem, or they deal with a novel
tapie first diseovered and treated by him. I personally regard it as rather
unfortunate that sorne ofhis diseoveries and eoneepts, espeeially those in
mythology and the Indian drama, have not yet found a wider aeeeptanee
in indologieal eircles, espeeially in Germany and Ameriea. In my perso-
nal estimation, it is Kuiper who represents the most innovative and at
the same time, lasting work done in the Netherlands in our field during
this eentury. It is hoped that the present eolleetion will make sorne of his
most representative writings on philology and línguisties easily aeeessible A. PAN-INDIAN, DRAVIDIAN AND MUNDA STUDIES
to seholars in India and elsewhere.

Leiden, 4/26/1986 - Cambridge, Mass. 1/26/1992 (4/7/97)

ft
*

Altindisch abhyii8a-~ ,Studium, Gewohnheit usw.'.

S/binda (~S VIII, 32,2) und Binda.
Von

F. B. J. Kuiper, Batavia.

Aind. abhyasa-1;l.
Für altind. abhyasa-~ wird in den Petersb. vVorterbüchel'll als
Bedeutung ,Obliegen, Übung, anhaltende Beschaftigung mit et"'as,
wiederholte Anwendung, Gebrauch, Gewohnheit, insbesondere wieder-
holtes Rezitieren, Studium' angegeben. Es ist als Lehnwort auch
in mehrere anderen Sprachen übergegangeÍl, wo es eine ahnliche 'Be-
deutung' aufweist, z. B. tamil appiyasam ,Gewohnheit, Übung, Er-
fahrung:', malai. bijasa ,gewohnt, erfahren, Gewohnheit'. Das alt-
indische Wort ist in dieser Bedeutung verhaltnismaJ3ig' jung und
scheint auch in den spatesten Auslaufern del' vedischen Literatur
noch nicht gebrauchlich gewesen zu sein. Bezüglich seiner Herkunft
steht so viel fest, daJ3 es jedenfalls das nomen actionis ist zu abhy-
asyati, abhy-asati ,obliegen, betreiben, besorgen, verrichten, studieren,
lesen', vgl. abhyasta-b ,gelesen, studiert', und abhyasana-rn (Ram.,
Bhag., Ragh.) ,Obliegen, Studium'. Auch das Verbum kommt erst
seit l\1anu und dem Mahabharata VOl'. Über seine Vorgeschichte
mogen hiel' einige Bemerkungen folgen.
Altind. abhyasyati ,studieren usw.' wird in den Petersb. ,Yor-
terbüchern als eine Zusammensetzung von asyati ,werfen' angegeben,
und Cappeller hat in sei~em Sanskrit-English Dictionary das Yer-
haltnis naher erlautert, indem el' eine Bedeutung ,to throw one's
self upon' zugrunde legte. Ahnliches findet man Z. B. auch in Lan-
mans Sanskrit Reader S. 123, der auch gr. 1tf!OCTÉX8L)) (ohne -rO)) pOúv)
zur Vergleichung heranzieht. Soweit mil' bekannt ist, ist diese Auf-
fassung niemals angefochten worden, obwohl sie ernsten Bedenken

3
 ~ ~-------"""""""------.._-------------~
-- --
Altindiseh abhyasa-~ ,Studiulll, Gewohnheit usw.'.
unterliegt. 1 Von asyati ,werfen' kommt ja eine normale Ableitung
abhy-asyati VOl', die ,hinwerfen, zuwerfen, absehieI3en, sehleudern'
bedeutet. 'Vie sieh aber hieraus die übertragene Bedeutung ,obliegen,
betreiben' hatte entwiekeln _ konnen, bleibt vollig unyerstandlieh.
Die von Lanman herangezogene Parallele kann ja kaum etwas für
den vorliegenden Fall beweisen. Aueh die Bedeutung del' anderen·
Zusammensetzungen von asyati gibt keine nahere Aufklarung: zwar
erklart Lanman in bekannter vYeise vyasana-m ,FleiI3, Betriebsamkeit'
aus einer ursprüngliehen Bedeutung ,a throwing one's self away
(upon a thing)', woraus sieh dann die Bedeutung ,a passionate de-
votion to a thing' entwiekelt haben so11, aber die wirkliehe Bedeutung
VOll vy-asyati: ,auseinanderwerfen, zertrennen, zerstüekeln, zerstreuen,
trennen' kann für diese Erklarung sehwerlieh eine Grundlage hiIden.
Die Etymologie von vyasana-m ist daher wohl in ganz anderer
Riehtung zu suehen, siehe Verf., Acta Oriento XII, 222.
Es gibt im Sanskrit noch ein anderes Verbum, das na hez u die
glei~e Bedeutungssphare wie abhyasyati aufweist und demnach für
die Bedeutungsentwieklung, die abhyasyati durehgemacht hat, eine
wichtige Andeutung geben kann: aste bedeutet namlieh U. a.: ,einer
Handlung fortwahrend obliegen, in einem Zustande oder Verhaltnisse
verharren, sich langere Zeit hindureh darin befinden usw.', upaste U. a.:
,einer Sache obliegen, dabei bleiben, sieh mit etwas zu tun machen,
ausführen, ausüben, anwenden, gebrauehen'. Ahnlich samupaste, vgl.
auch lato incumbere, nhd. obliegen.
Damit stimmen die Daten, die uns das Awestisehe an die Hand
gibt, vollig überein. Man findet namIich an mehreren Stellen des
Nrrangastan Formen von aiwi-ah- ,sich geistig womit beschaftigen,
dem Studium (del' heiligen Texte) obliegen, lesen, lesend zu Gehor
bringen, vorlesen'. Es handelt sieh hierbei aber nieht um ah- ,werfen',
sondern, wie aus den Partizipialformen aiwi-santlJ (Nir. 52 xratüméa
1 Nur Geldner, Studien zurn Avesta (1882) 60, vergleicht aw. aiwi8ti§ ,Li-
taneien (?)', das er auf ah- ,sein' bezieht, rnit altind. abhy-a8-, ohne aber die
abweichende Flexion von abhy-a8yati zu beachten. Bartholornae HU3t daher in
seinern Worterbuch das ai. Verburn beiseite.
4
rf
305 306 F. B. J. Kulper.
asaValliim aiwisantlJ ,dem Studium del' frommen vVeisheit obliegend')
und aiwiéa haite Nir. 84 unzweideutig hervorgeht, um die Wurzel
ah- ,sein' (vgl. Altir. Wb. 277 sq.). Das Verbalabstraktum lautet
denn aueh aiwístis ,Lesen, Studium del' heiligen Texte'.1 Mit ah-
,werfen' und aiwy-ah- (arsti§ hvaiwyi'lsta Yt. 13, 72 ,ein gut gesehleu-
derter Speer') ist im Awestisehen also keine Verwirrung moglieh.
Yon diesen a westisehen Wortern laI3t sieh die altindisehe W ort-
gruppe nieht trennen. Nun bedeutet freilieh abhy-asti, das, wie fast
alle Zusammensetzungen von asti, nur in del' altesten Spraehe vor-
kommt, bloI3 ,übertreffen, überragen, erfolgreieh sein usw.' und
aueh abhí~ti-~ weist keine verwandte Bedeutung auf. Offenbar ge-
harte die Bedeutung ,betreiben, studieren', die wegen del' auffalligen
Übereinstimmung mit dem Awestischen doch wohl sehr alt sein
muI3, mehr del' gewohnliehen- Umgangssprache an, so daI3 ihr Ge-
braueh in den heiligen Texten vermieden wurde. Del' weitere
geschichtliche Verlauf laI3t sich dann aber leicht rekonstruieren.
Thematische Nebenformen zu athematischen Verben, die formell eher
als Konjunktive aufzufassen sind (Konjunktiv-Prasentia), sind aus
del' alteren Sprache wohlbekannt, vgl. Renou, BSL XXXIII, 1 sqq.,
und besonders S. 10, wo über asatí ohne modalen vVert gesproehen
wird. In del' spateren Spraehe ist die Tendenz zu Thematisierung
besonders bei zusammengesetzten Yerba sehr stark gewesen, vgl. Z. B.
Renou, Gramm. sanscr. 421. Wenn das Simplex athematiseh blieb,
konnte auf diese Weise das Gefühl für die etymologische Zusammen-
gehorigkeit verlorengehen, wie Z. B. bei palayate ,el' flieht', das
eine alte Zusammensetzung von i- (éti ,el' geht') ist, oder astamayate,
das man als ein Prasens del' 10. Klasse empfunden haben mu13
(siehe Acta Oriento XVI, 211).
In ahnlieher vVeise ist offenbar aus abhy-asti ein neues Prasens
abhy-asati, abhy-asate (Manu, Mhbh.) entstanden, das sowohl dureh
seine Form wie dureh seine Bedeutungsspezialisierung nieht mehr
als eine Zusammensetzung von astí empfunden wurde. So konnte
1 Eine der Belegstellen Y. 9,24 (nach Geldner, Studien 59 sq., 165) ist freilich
zu dunkel, als dal3 sie etwas beweisen konnte. Vgl. auch Lornrnel, Die Ylilít's 190.
5
 Altindisch abhyasa-lJ, ,Studium, Gewohnheit usw.'.
nach Analogie von den Zusammensetzungen von asyati ,werfen', von
welchen mehrere eine doppelte Pdisensbildung sowohl nach der 1. wie
nach der 4. Klasse aufweisen (z. B. ny-asati und ny-asyati), eine Neben-
form abhy-asyati ,er studiert usw.' gebildet werden. Auch das altindische
Verbalabstraktum abhyasa-Z¡ statt abhi~ti-lJ" das dem aw. aiwisti§ ent- .
sprechen würde, ist ein indirekter Beweis dafür, daLl man das Verbum
nicht mehr als zu asti gehorig empfand, denn zu as- ,sein' gibt es kein
Verbalabstraktum -asa-. 1 Abhyasa-lJ, muLl daher eine indische Neu-
bildu¡1g sein. Nun niinmt zwar Bartholomae auch für aw.· aiwyilr;ha
eine Bedeutung ,Lesen, Studium' an (Altir. Wb. 99), freilich ohne
es mit altind. abhyéisa-Z¡ zu verbinden. Nach ihm muH die Über-
setzung del' Vendldad-Stelle yo .:f1'izaramaem 1'atüm aiwyl1vhqm noil
ailcyiísti noil gií.:fil sravayeiti Vd. 18, 9 lauten: ,dal3 el' wahrend del'
drei (dafür bestimmten) Frühlinge dem Studium (del' heiligen Texte)
nicht obliegt, (dan el') die Gatha's n¡'cht aufsagt', wofür el' sich
besonders auf Nir.l1 beruft (vgl. Z. ahír. Wb. 169 gegenüber Geldner,
Sb. Berl. Akad. 1903, 423). 1st aiwyl11)ha eine awestische ~eubildung?
Gewagt ware es, eine Ableitung von ah- ,sitzen' (vgl. ai. upasa
,religiose Betrachtung", l\Iul}.Q.. Up. 2, 2, 3) anzunehmen. 2
Ai. abhyasa-Z! ,Reduplikation' und abhyasta-lJ, ,redupliziert'
gehoren zu abhy-asyati in del' Bedeutung ,hinzufügen, verdoppeln,
multiplizieren' und enthalten somit die "\Vurzel as- ,weden', Vgl. lato
adicere ,hinzufügen'.
Sfbinda (~S VIII, 32, 2) und Binda.
1. Sfbinda und Kusurubinda.
Zu welcher Zeit die arischen Stamme in die 1ndusebene ein-
gewandert sind, ist bekanntlich noch immer eine strittige Frage.
"\Yahrend man VOl' nicht zu langer Zeit noch vermutungsweise 1500
1 Ai. itihaaa-?¿ ist natürlich hesonderer Art.
2 Vgl. freilich upa'l)ha- ,dus Sichbeschaftigen mit' Y. 27, 7 und Vr., das zu
upa-ah- ,beachten' (,Ehre untun' Lommel) gehort, mit defektiver Schreilmng wie
a?Jha- ,Lagerstiitte einer Hündin' (m. E. unrichtig über beide Worter Bartolomae
Wb. 391, 1 0 6 ) . '
6 7
307 308 F. B. J. Kuiper.
oder 1700 v. Ohr. angab, vertritt in den letzten Jahren von Reine-
Geldern die Ansicht, dal3 die arische Einwanderung erst z,,-ischen
den Jahren 1200 und 1000 v. Ohr. VOl' sich gegangen seín kann. 1
Jedenfalls kann die Tatsache nicht angezweifelt werden, dal3 die
Arier, als sie in Nordindien eindrangen, dort schon drayidische und
austroasiatische Stamme vorfanden. De Revesys Theorie über die
heutigen Munda-Sprachen kann hierbei aul3er Betracht bleiben, da
die Frage, . ob diese nachtraglich auch andere Sprachelemente auf-
genommen haben, in dieser Beziehung vollig irrelevant ist. Aus
morphologischen Gründen konnen die alten einheimischen Sprachen,
denen die vielen Lehnworter im Sanskrit entstammen, nur als
rein-austroasiatisch aufgefal3t werden. Andererseits finden arclüio-
logis che Untersuchungen ihrerseits sol che wichtigen Beweise für die
Anwesenheit von Austroasiaten in Nordindien in vorgeschichtlicher
oder wenigstens sehr früher Zeit, dal3 wir, wenn wir uns mit den
austroasiatischen Pra- Munda-Volkern beschaftigen, die Theorie de
Revesys nicht naher zu berücksichtigen brauchen. Nach von Reine-
Geldern müssen die Dravidas sich in Nordindien schon im 3. Jahr-
tausend, wahrscheinlich sogar im 4. Jahrtausend oder noch früher
angesiedelt haben. 2 Nun sind freilieh die dravidischen Lehnworter
in del' Sprache del' ~ksalphita ziemlich selten,8 aber dies erkliirt
sich ohne weiteres, wenn von Heine-Gelderns Vermutung richtig ist,
daLl die Dravidas mit del' autochthonen Bevolkerung schan in weit-
gehendem Mal3e verschmolzen waren, als die Austroasiaten ,on
Osten her vorrückten, die Bevolkerungsgruppen, welche sie \"01'-
fanden, nur überlagerten und ihnen ihre austroasiatische Sprache
1 ,Zur Chronologie der arischen Einwanderung in lndien' (Zeitschr. f.
Rassenf. l, 1935, 209-210) und ,Archaeological traces of the Vedic Aryans' (Journ.
lnd. Soco of Oriento Arts IV, 2, 87-115); letztere Abhandlung ist mir! nur aus
dem Referat in der Annual Bibliogr. of Ind. Arch. XI, Nr. 24 a, bekannt.
2 Siehe Festschrift W. Schmidt 827, 839.
~ Siehe Bloch, BSOS V, 744. Die zahlreichen angeblichen dravidischen
Lehnworter, die C. Narayana Rao, An Introduction to Dravidian Philology
(Anantapur 1929) 126 sqq., aus den Vedas anführt, sind fast alle anders zu
, beurteilen. Unsicher ist auch iÍratla-m ,Untiefe' (s. Neisser, Wb. n, 38).
 Altíndísch abhyasa-(I ,Studium, Gewohnheit usw.'. 309
aufdrangten. Die ~ksarp.hita steht ja unter den Vedas del' Lebens-
sphare del' niedrigen Volksschichten am fernsten und wird in hohem
:;\Iaf3e durch das Standesbewuf3tsein del' herrschenden arischen Klassen
bestimmt. Ihre Religion ignoriert viele uralte religiOse Anschau-
ungen, die im Volke weiterleben. Mit diesem einseitigen Bilde, das
uns die Bksarp.hita bietet, ist die Tatsache in volligem Einklang, da!3
die Xamen del' feindlichen Dasa-Fürsten im allgemeinen, insofern
sich ihre Herkunft überhaupt bestimmen laf3t, austroasiatische Ge-
stalt haben. Mit den del' Oberschicht angehorenden Austroasiaten
hatte man Zll kampfen, ihre Namen wurden von del' Traditiori be-
wahrt; um die Untel'schicht von Dravidas und -Autochthonen mag
man sich dagegen wenig gekümmert haben.
Über die Grenzen des austroasiatischen Gebietes bemerkt von
Heine-GeIdern, Festschr. Schmidt 829, U. a.: ,In westlicher Richtllng
erstreckte sich ihr Bereich iro HimaIaya bis ins südliche Kashmir,
in del' Ebene vielleicht bis an die indische vVüste heran. Damit
so11 jedoch nicht gesagt sein, daf3 dieses ganze Gebiet nun aus-
schlief3lich von austroasiatischen Volkern bewohnt war. Es konnen
ganz gut in del' Gangesebene munda- und dravidasprechende Volker
nebeneinander gelebt haben, wie noeh heute in Zentralindien.' Ieh
glaube, da/3 wir einen derartig'en Zustand schon flir die rigvedische
Periode yoraussetzen düden. Den N amen Sámbara, del' zweifellos
austroasiatisch ist (Acta Oriento XVI, 306 A. 1), n.nden wir in ver-
sehiedenen Teilen del' ~ksarp.hita erwahnt, und zwar in del' folgenden
VerteiIung über die MaQ.Q.alas: 17 II4 IV2 VI6 VIP IXl. Sowohl
naeh Arnolds wie naeh vVüsts Chronologie würden wenigstens einige
Belegste11en del' altesten Periode del' ~S angehoren, del' Name wird
daher wohl sehon im nordwestlichen Indien bekanntgeworden sein.
Andere Xamen, die eine Lokalisierung gestatten, wie Árbuda, be-
statigen dies: die Arier müssen schon bald nach ihrer Einwandel'ung
auf austroasiatische Stamme gestof3en sein. Mehrere dieser Stamme
werden übrigens sehon früh in die arisehe Gesellschaft aufge-
nommen worden seín, denn sowohl unter den Stammen del' Arier
(Zimmer, AItind. Leben 119 sqq.) als unter den ~~is und den in
8 9
310 F. B. J. Kuiper.
den BrahmaQ.as erwahnten Brahmanen gibt es viele mit unarisehen
Namen. Die anderen Dasa-Stamme aber, die auf3erhalb del' arischen
Gesellsehaft stehenblieben und nieht dureh Opfer dazu mithalfen,
die Weltordnung naeh arisehem Glauben zu bewahren (vgl. ~S I,
51, 8; 130, 8), muf3ten notwendigerweise, weil man die soziale und
politisehe Realitat nur im Lichte des mythischen 'Veltbildes zu er-
fas sen vermochte, als dem Reieh del' feindlichen Damonen angehorig
betraehtet werden: 'Ver den dharma übt, so11 sieh nicht mit den
Nicht-Ariern abgeben (Manu X, 53). Viele del' in del' ~S erwahn-
ten Damonen tragen daher den Namen eines einheimischen Stam-
mes. Del' Damon A1'buda ist dem Namen naeh identiseh mit den
A1'budas (Arvudas), die die PuraQ.as als ein Volle im Westen nennen,
und weiter mit dem Berg Arbuda (l\1ount Abu), südlich del' indischen
'Vüste. Pal'l.¡áya, ein yon Indra getOteter Damon (~S I, 53, 8, vgl.
X, 48, 8), steht ohne Zweifel zu den Pár1.wkas, einem Ni~ada-Stamm,
in naherer Beziehung. l
Nun lesen ~ir ~S VIII, 32, 2:
yá"Q sfbindam ána1'sanim
pípru7[! dasám ahi~úvam
vádhid ugró 2'\!ánn ap.áZ¡
Es werden hiel' eine Anzahl von Indras damonischen Gegnern
aufgezahlt, in 3 wird weiter noeh Árbuda genannt. Wer aueh nur
einigermaf3en mit dem morphologisehen Oharakter des Austroasiati-
sehen bekannt ist, wie es uns VOl' allem im Lehngut des Sanskrit
klar VOl' Augen tritt, wird durch Sfbinda auf die Vermutung geführt,
daf3 hiel' ein Wurzelelement -binda- yorliegt, das mit einem Prafix
sr- verbunden ist. Man kennt das Verhaltnis del' Pran.xe ka- (ku-) :
kar- (kr-): kan- oder bha- (bhu-) : bha1'- (bhr-): bhan- uSW. So fin-
det man nebeneinander sl1-, su-, sa1'-, sr- und sano, ygl. z. B. sara1iga-Q
,Antílope', das wegen des gleiehbedeutenden kuranga-Q, pali kU1'ai¡ga-
miga ein Pran.x sa- enthalt; surui¡ga ,Mine', mit einem Praf1x su-
1 Die Endung -aya- findet man besonders haufig in Fremdwortern (siehe
Acta Oriento XVI, 304), vgl. S('ñjaya, vielleicht auch púraya.
 ~Utindisch abhyasa-lJ, ,Studium, Gewohnheit usw. '. 311
gebildet (Acta Oriento XVII, 30 sqq.), sarvarI, sambara-lJ, (neben
sabara-lJ,) mit sar-, san-o
Sobald man aber annimmt, daB del' Name Sf:binda austroasia-
tisch ist und daB in diesem Damonennamen ein altes Ethnikon
vorliegt, liegt weiter die Annahme ganz nahe, dal3 im Personennamen
Kusurubinda Auddalaki derselbe Stammname steckt, nur mit einem
neuen Pran.x leu- versehen (das dann natürlich, wie in kU1'añga-lJ"
das bekannte austroasiatische Pran.x ist, nicht etwa das pejorative
Element des Sanskrit). Neben del' Namensform KUSu1'ubinda ist im
Jaim. Brahm. (NI'. 164 und 169 bei Caland; siehe auch dessen Namen-
verzeiehnis) Kusurbinda überliefel't: beide Formen stellen offenbar
verschiedene Versuche dar, die einheimische Aussprache von -sur-
binda, -srbinda wiederzugeben. 1 So hat das Jaim. Brahm. auch statt
rbisa-m ,Spalte' (J,lS) die Form arvi§a-m (Ausg. Caland S. 50). Wie
Z. B. del' J,l~i Sibi Ausrnara seinen Namen dem des Volkes Usinara
verdankt, so hangt del' Name Kusurbinda offenbar mit dem del'
Srbindas zusammen. Natürlich lassen sich Hypothesen wie die vor-
liegende schwerlich streng beweisen, aber wenn man erwagt, welche
Rolle das Prafix ku- im Austroasiatischen spielt, so seheint mil' die
Übereinstimmung -S1tr( u )binda : srbinda zu auffallend, als daB ieh
sie als zufallig betrachten mochte. Charpentiers Skepsis, Monde 01'.
XXVIII (1934) 70, beruht auf einer zu einseitig indogermanistischen
Einstellung.
In del' spateren Literatur scheinen beide Namen nicht sicher
nachweisbar zu sein. Doch muB hiel' mit Rücksicht auf die drei-
fache Verwendung des N amens Arbuda für ein Volk, einen Damon
und einen Berg darauf hingewiesen werden, daB in den PuraI,las
del' Name Sabindu (Savindu, Suvindu) vorkommt für einen del'
kleineren Berge ostlich vom Meru (Kirfel, Kosmologie 96) und daI3
im PadmapuraJ;l.a und im Mahabharata (VI, 9,56) unter den Volkern
von Bharatavarl}a auch die Kusabindu's (Kusavindu's in del' Calc.
1 -8Ul'binda, dessen erste Silbe durch Position lang ist, weist auf eine ein-
heimiscbe Aussprache 8e,'- (etwa wie im heutigen Indonesischen) hin; die vedische
Schreibung ar- wird also prosodisch weniger genau gewesen sein.
10
312 F. B. J. Kuiper.
Ausg. ) ~O'enannt werden', siehe Kirfel 78,1 Del' letztere Name ist
offenbar nach kusa-lJ, und bindu-(¿ yolksetymologisch umgestaltet
worden, wie auch neben Kusurubinda als jüngere Formen Kusw'u-
bindu, Kusul'uvindu erseheinen, so dal3 Kusabindu sich yom morpho-
logischen Standpunkt leicht als eine Nebentorm von KUSU1'~¿bil1da
auffassen lie3e. In Ermangelung eines beweiskraftigen Matenals ist
es aber nicht moglieh, diese Vermutung naher zu begründen.
2. Binda.
Über die Bedeutung von Sfbinda la3t sich nichts ermitte1n;
man erwartet einen Tiernamen, wie el' bei den alten austroasiatischen
Stammen üblich war und sich aus dem bei ihnen yerbreiteten To-
temismus erklaren la3t, aber unbeweisbare Vermutungen darübel'
aufzustellen, hat keinen Sinn. Beweisführungen wie die yorliegende
und wie sie Z. B. Sylyain Lévis bekannter Autsatz im Journ. As.
1923, II, 1 sqq., bietet, gründen sich ja nur auí morphologisehe
Merkmale, nicht auf \iVorterklarungen, deren Beweiskraft kaum sehr
groI3 sein konnte. .
Beschrankt man sich aber auf morphologlsche Betrachtungen,
so 1a3t sich neben Kusurubinda noch ein zweites und, wie mir
scheint, wichtiges Argument zugunsten del' hiel' gegebenen Analyse
yon Sfbinda geltend machen. Nehen Sfbinda treffen wir namlich
im alten Indien auch Binda als Namen eines Ni~ada-Stammes ano
In VS 30, 16, einer Stene, die sich auí den purul}amedha bezieht,
lesen wir U. a.: sárobhyo dhaivarám, upasthávarabhyo dása~,vai­
santábhyo b aínd á~, nai/-valábhya(¿ saúi¡kalam . .. Es folgen weiter
noch margarám, kevártam, andám, mainalám, pá'f'rJ-akam, kí1'atam,
jámbhakam und kimpüru~ám. Man findet hiel' somit eine Gruppe
von bekannten Ni~ada-Namen, obg1eich mehrere in Vrddhi-Ableitungen
statt in del' sonst üblichen Namensform yorliegen, so Z. B. dhaiva1'á-l)
statt des gewohnlichen dhivara-(!.
Auch baindá-, das uns besonders interessiert, ist eine Vrddhi-
Ableitung von binda-, welche Form von MahIdhara überlieíert wird
1 Vgl. auch den EN Sasabindu (dazu Holtzmann, Grammat.2).
11
 Altindisch abhyasa-~ ,Studium, Gewohnheit usw. '. 313
und womit nach ihm ein Ni~ada-Stamm bezeichnet wird, wahrend
SayaJ;la zur Parallelstelle TBr lII, 4, 12, 1 als Bedeutung ,Fischer'
1
angibt. Beide Angaben widersprechen einander natürlich nicht,
denn viele Ni~ada-Stamme lebten bekanntlich von del' Jagd und vom
Fischfang. lUan denke an die Beschreibungen del' Pulindas oder
Sabal'as im l\fahabharata oder an Manu X, 48:
rnatsyaghato ni§adanarp, tva§(is tv ayogavasya ca
medandh1'acilCurnadgilnarn a1'a'IJ-yapasuhi7f!sanam
Ebenso wie heutzutage viele Stamme del' Aboriginer Kasten mit
einer bestimmten Berufstatigkeit bilden, ist dies offenbar auch in
verhaltnismailig fl'üher Zeit schon del' Fall gewesen. Beispiele dieser
Art sind allbekannt. 2
Au!3er del' erwahnten Stelle im Kommentar von Mahldhara
wel'den die Bindas, wie es scheint, nirgends in del' altindischen und
del' Pali-Literatur erw1ihnt. Ihl'e Heimat wird man, weil Bainda
nur zweimal in Yajurveda-Texten vorkommt und del' Yajurveda in
Madhyadesa entstanden sein muil,a wohl irgendwo in del' Ganges-
ebene zu suchen haben.
Nun erwahnt ,The Imperial Gazetteer of India' XII (1908),
225, im Distrikt Ghazipur na eh einel' Anzahl von Hindu-Kasten,
1 ~rahIdhara: vaindam, vindo ni~adapatyam; S¡¡yana: bindUl'jülam tenaj'tva-
tIti baindcu (in R¡¡jendral¡¡la Mitras Ausg.: VindUl', vaind(8).
2 Man denke etwa an dhivara-l¡, ,Fischer', das im Vayupural).a einen Ni~ada­
Stamm bezeichnet (Gonda, Bijdragen Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde XC, 168).
Der Name ist identisch mit tiVa¡'a-l¡, ,Fischer, Jiiger' und noch immer sind die
Tiyar ,a Dravidian boating and fishing tribe in the Eastern Districts' (Crooke,
The Tribes and Castes of the North-Western Provinces and Oudh IV, 411). Der
dravidische Wandel von anlautender Media in Tenuis ist ja nicht auf die Tamil-
Malaya!am·Gruppe beschrii.nkt gewesen. So wird diÍJa·l¡" eine Nebenform von
dMa-l¡" schon früh nur in der engeren Bedeutung ,Fischer, Flihrmann' gebraucht
(aiehe auch Thieme, ZDMG XCI, 113). In der Jatakamala erscheint ni~adal¡,
(134, 24), na4adal¡, (135, 15 U. 22; 136, 1 u.15) als gleichbedeutend mit Jalcunikal¡,
(133, 3). Aber auch wenn diese Worter als Berufsbezeichnung gebraucht werden,
wird dies doch meistens zugleich Zugehorigkeit zu einem Aboriginer-Stamrn im-
pliziert haben.
3 Vgl. H. Zimmer, Altind. Leben 38, von Schroeder, Maitr. Samh.
Einl. XIX sqq.
Acta orientaUa XVII. 21
12
314 F. B. J. Kuiper.
die roan zum Teil auch anderswo antrifft, als kleinste Kaste dieses
Distrikts die del' Binds (,fishermen and cultivators'), die nur etwa
28.000 Angehorige umfa3t. Man findet sie nur im Osten del' United
Prom ces und in Bihar. Eine ausführlichere Behandlung n.ndet sich
bei Crooke, The Tribes and Castes of the North-Western Provinces
and Oudh (1896) lI, 106 sqq., del' sie beschreibt als ,a non-Aryan
tribe in the Eastern Districts of the Division and with scattered
colonies el~ewhere'. Del' Proze!3 del' Hinduisierung ist bei ihnen
zum Teil schon ziemlich weit fortgeschritten (II, 107). Die Binds
sind sehr eng verbunden mit und nicht genau zu unterscheiden
von den Kewats (skr. kevarta~) ,a caste of fishermen, boatmen and
cultivators' (lII, 217) und gelten anderswo auch als eine Unter-
abteilung del' Mallah ,a general term including various boating and
n.shing tribes'. Auch eína Schopfungslegende aus Mirzapur zeugt
von ihrer Verbundenheit mit den Teichen (lI, 107). Man findet sie
offenbar in Mirzapur, Benares, Ghazipur, BaHia, Azamgarh und
GorakhpUl·.
Obwóhl die Gegenden, in denen man heute die Binds antrifft,
ostlicÍi Íiegen vom Gebiet, wo del' Yajurveda wahrscheinlich ent-
starlden ist, scheint es kaum zweifelhaft, dail wir in ihnen die Nach-
kommeri del' vedischen Baindas oder Bindas zu erkennen haben.
Man beachte besonders, dal3 auch die Vajasaneyi-Sarp.hita sie schon
zu den Teichen (vaisantá.) in Beziehung setzt und díe Kommentare
sie als einheimische Volker von Fischern kennen. Das Schweígen
del' spateren Sanskrit-Texte beweist nur, wíe sehr die Ni~adas del'
Aufmerksamkeit del' al'ischen Gesellschaft entzogen waren. Nur
einem Zufall verdanken wir fuI' diesen Stamm eíne sehr frühe Er-
wahnung, die für andere Stamme oft vollig fehlt. 1
Die Existenz eínes alten Stammesj del' Binda heil3t, liefert
eme wichtíge Stütze für die Annahme, da!3 del' Name Sl;binda ein
Prafix enthalt. Für die Lokalisierung del' Srbindas ergibt diese
Vergleichung natürlich nichts. Sogar bei volliger N amensgleichheit
1 Vgl. Crooke, n,4, über das Schweigen der Sanskrit-Literatur in bezug
auf die Bhars.
13
 Altindisch abhyasa-~ ,Studium, Gewohnheit usw. '. 315
mul3 man bisweilen Íür die rigvedische Periode westlichere W ohn-
sitze annehmen, als für die Nachzeit bezeugt sind. l Doch verdient
es in dieser Beziehung Beachtung, daB del' Name Kausambeyá
Kaúsul'ubindi (8B XII, 2, 2, 13) für den Namen Kustwttbinda eíne
Lokalisierung an del' ostlichen Grenze von l\1adhyadesa, also nahe
dem heutigen Gebiete del' Binds, zu ergeben scheint. Man denke
auch an die ostliche Lage des Berges Sabindu.
3. *Kubinda1
~ur eine Frage bedarf noch naherer Erorterung: Hat es neben
Binda. S('bi:nda, Kustwubinda (und eventuell Kusabindu) auch noch
andere yerwandte Namensformen gegeben? Ohne diese Frage ent-
schieden bejahend heantworten zu wollen, mochte ich hiel' auÍ eine
bemerkenswerte Stelle im von Caland herausgegebenen Schauspiel
Gopalakelicandrika 2 hinweisen, wo man S. 46, Z.15-16 folgendes liest:
sadyo bhamini bhamtaji1'ajanaZ¡ kaJikal¡, puUnclal¡, khasa
abh¡'I'a yavanaZ¡ kuvindasava¡'a lokam ptmana yataZ¡
usw.
Offenbar wird hiel' mit Iúwincla ein einheimischer Stamm gemeint,
del' meines \Vissens sonst nirgends erwahnt wird. Die Savaras,
mít denen sie zusammen genannt werden, findet man jetzt be-
kanntlich in Orissa, in West-Bengalen und den Central Provinces
und weiter nach Süden bis zu Madras, aber früher müssen sie auch
nordlicher gewohnt haben. Del' Tradítion gemal3 sind sie einst auch
in Shahabad wohnhaft gewesen (Ling. Survey IV, 217), also nut'
wenig südlich von Ghazipur, wo man jetzt die Binds antrifft. vVeil
del' Xame Kttsu1'ubinda wegen J(ausambeyá Kaúslt?'ubindi westlich
von AUahabad heimisch gewesen sein mul3, ware es vel'lockend
anzunehmen, daB in del' Gangesebene zwischen Allahabad und
1 '-gl. Zirnlller, Altind. Leben 130. 31, über die Uslnaras und die K¡katas.
~ Vgl. Een onbckcnd Indisch tooneelstuk (gopulakelicandrika), Tekst ~et
inleiding door W. Caland, Verhandelingeu dcr Koninklijke Akadelllie van Weten-
sehappen te Arnsterdalll, Afd. Letterk., Nieuwe Rceks, Deel XVII No. 3 (Amster-
darn 191 j'¡, ,
Acta orientali. XVII.
21*
14
316 F. B. J. Kuíper.
Ghazipur einst auch noch a1s dritte Namensform *Kubinda gebrauch-
lich gewesen sei. Aber auch wenn man annimmt, dal3 der Dichter
nicht b10Ll einige Ni~ada-Namen aneinandergereiht hat und dal3 die
Stamme der Kuvindas und Savaras eng zusammengehoren (wie ja
auch die Pulindas und Sabaras oft verbunden vorkommen), ist
eíne einigermaLlen sichere Lokalisierung del' Kuvindas schon deshalb
unmoglich, weil die Savaras auch viel westlicher gewohnt haben.
Subandhu 'und Ba:Q.a erwahnen sie neben den Pulindas im Vindhya,
an den Ufern del' Narmada (Vasav. 83, 3; Kadamb. 22, 20 Peto usw.).
Siehe auch Gonda, Bijdr. Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde XC (1934),
167 sqq.l
So mochte ich als ziemlich sicheres Ergebnis dieser Unter-
suchung betrachten, dal3 Sfbinda g1eich A1'buda, Pa1'J.láya ein altes
Ethnikon ist, das einerseits rnit KusUJ'ubinda, andererseits mit Binda
verwandt ist. Sprachliche Zugehorigkeit'von Sabindu und Kusabindll
halte ich' für wahrscheinlich, die von Kuvinda für moglich, ohne
daLl aber eine überzeugende Beweisführung infolge del' sparlichen
Daten moglich ware. Inwiefern dieser Namensverwandtschaft auch
engere Zusammengehorigkeit entsprochen hat, b1eibt eine offene Frage.
Die Loka1isierung ostlich von Allahabad schlieLlt für die Zeit der 1;{S
die Existenz von Srbindas in vi el westlicheren Gegenden nicht aus.
Zwei andere Erklarungen sind bisher für den Namen Sfbinda
gegeben worden. Auf die Brunnhofersche brauchen wir nicht mebr
einzugehen; dagegen muLl Wüsts Untersuchung in WZKM XXXI Y
(1927), 191-209, schon desha1b hiel' erwahnt werden, weil sie mi!
1 Nur vollstlindigkeitshalber ist hier der Name Kuvinda als moglicher
Verwnndter von Binda und Srbincla erwiihnt worden. Hült man si eh nber an der
überlieferten Namensform, so liegt Zusammenhang mit lcuvinda ,Weber' nahe:
ursprünglich ware dann die Berufsbezeichnung zugleich wieder ein Stammname
gewesen. Andcrerseits kann rnan dann an die Vermutung, daB diese mit santali
bindi (und bersisi bon, stieng bei! usw.?) ,Spinne' verIYandt sei, festhalten. Vgl. dazu
Acta Oriento XVI, 305 und die ühnlichen Bedeutungsverhaltnisse Z. B. bei santali
kunkq.l 1. ,a potter, a Hindu caste who are potters' 2. ,a species of wasp that
builds a clay house in which it lays its eggs', und vielleieht auch bei marathi
ko1¡ ,Spinne': sindhi kori ,Weber', Spinne' (s. A. Master, BSOS IX, 1009sq,) u. dgl.
15
 Altindisch abhyasa-Z¡ ,Studium, Gewohnheit usw.'. 317
seinel' Theol'ie von den il'ano-skythischen Eigennamen in del'
~ksaIJlhita eng zusammenhangt. "\Vüst nimmt an, da13 in S('binda eine
El'innerung an die Wanderungen del' lnder durch Iran bewahrt ge-
blieben sei: S('binda soH nach ihm ,Hel'l', Fürst, El'stel' del' Sl'b's'
bedeuten (S. 197), wofül' el' Volksnamen aus dem Kaukasus . wie.
~B(!j8ol IS. 206) hel'anzieht. Es ist Wüst abel' nicht gelungen, seine
These in übel'zeugendel' Weise zu fundieren. Seine Al'gumentierung
(S. 196., da{3 Stbinda, weil es in del' nachl'igvedischen Litel'atur
nicht mehr vorkommt, nicht in lndien entlehnt worden sein künne
und daD somit Entlehnung aus einel' Aboriginer-Sprache (Wüst
dachte damals nur an das Dravidische) ausgeschlossen sei, ist nichts
wenigel' als zwingend. Sein Versuch, prakritisches -inda- in unarischen
Ethnika nachzuweisen, wonach z. B. Kulinda ,Hel'l' del' Kuls' be-
deuten würde (S. 202), ist mif3lungen; siehe auch Pol'zig, ldg. J ahrb.
XIII, 96; Charpentier, Monde 01'. XXVIII (1934), 70. Überhaupt
ist del' Volksname doch fast immer primar, die Verwendung für
den Fül'sten oder den Führer als den Volksgenossen xa'Z') ~goX~'}J
sekundar (vgl. ó IU(!O"r¡r;;, Poenus). vVüst ist sich dieser SchwieriO'-
/:)
keit offenbal' bewu{3t gewesen (vgl. S. 197 A. ::3, wo das andel's-
geartete Verhaltnis Kanva~ : Kanva~ verglichen wird), hat sich aber
allzu leicht darüber hinw.eggesetzt.
F argument to those not familiar with Tamil it is necessary first to explain
'í
II
!
21**
16
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY
by
F. B. J. KUIPER
Leiden
l. THE OLD TAMIL AYTAM
(with an Appendix by K. Zvelebil)
1. In 1941 Prof. C. R. Sankaran for the first time considered the possi-
bility that the Old Tamil phoneme called iiytam llÚght represent a lin-
guistic form ofthe Dedekind "cut" 01' "gap" and constitute the imaginary
point in the flux of speech where the vowe1 ends and the consonant begins
(see Bulletin of the Deccan College Research Institute 2, p. 343 ff.).
Essential1y the same view, which he has sínce discussed in a long series
of artic1es, he still defends in his book on Phonemics of Old Tamil (Poona,
1951), where the iiytam and the other two "non-autonomous phonemes"
(ciirp-efuttu)l of the Old Tamil grammar Tolbippiyam are characterized
as "non-linear". A1though this theory is mainly concerned with problems
of a decidedly non-linguistíc character, and although there are no indi-
cations to show that the author of the Tolkappiyam knew of any such
distinction as "non-linear" versus "linear" which Sankaran reads into
the old sütras,2 the 1atter's studies have been indirectly use fuI in that they
rellÚnd us of how litt1e is known about the real nature of the iiytam.
Therefore, an attempt to determine more exact1y its nature would seem
justified in the present state of these studies. In order to make cIear the
some essential details.
The so-called iiytam was a phoneme of the older language, the exact
Old Tamil pronunciation of which is unknown. The Tolkappiyam c1asses
it apart, along with the two extra-short vowels, as the three "non-
autonomous phonemes", which can only occur when "supported" by
another phoneme. (For the notíon of such phonemes, which has no
1 Although it would no doubt be better to write eruttu (see Svarny-Zvelebil, Archiv
Orientální 23, p. 389), I' have preferred in this artic1e to keep to the transliteration
system of the Tamil Lexicon.
• See the present writer's review in Lingua, vol. 7 (1957). pp. 99-102.
17
 192 F. B. J. KUIPER
doubt been borrowed from Sanskrit grammarians, ef. Skt. pardsraya-
"dépendant d'un autre phoneme (non autonome)", Renou, Terminologie
grammatieale du Sanskrit, pp. 34, 368). Whenever ít occurs in literary
texts, it is now pronounced as a guttural fricative, voiced according to
Ramaswami Aiyar and Vinson,3 voiceless according to others. 4 This was
certainly not the Old Tamil pronunciation. The statement of the Tol-
kappiyam that the Old Tamil dytam had the same place of articulation
as the following plosives,5 of which there were six (k, e, 1,1, t,p), would
seem to exclude any oral articulation. The dytam occurs a) in sandhi
(both external and internal); b) in a few non-compound words. The first
category is the most instructive one. The occurrence of tiytam is limited
by the following rules: 1. Íts unique place is at the end of the first syl1able
of a ,,:ord (a seeming exception is only muppaht' "thirty",6 properly
belongmg to category b), which is a compound of mu-"three" and patu
"ten"). This implies that in the case of sandhi it can only stand at the
end of monosyllables. 2. the preceding vowel is always short. 3. it is
always followed by a plosive (which induced the native grammarians to
call it etirp-eluttu, lit. "letter with a support, shelter"). According1y the
sound cannot possibly occur in sound groups other than, e.g., -ahk-,
-ahe-, -ahl-, -ahp-, -ehk-, etc.
2. The sandhi phenomena faH into two groups. According to the theory
of the oldest grammar and the practice of the oldest literature the group
• .Cf. L. Y. Ramaswami Aiyar, A Primer 01 Malayafam Phonology, Bulletin 01 the
r:
Sn. Ra';1a arma Re~eareh ~nstitute 6 (1938), p. 94, n. 3: "voiced velar fricative value
whlch IS umformly glven to lt today", JAOS 58, p. 666: "which later assumed a voiced
glottal fricativ~ value"; Yinson, Manuel de la langue tamoule, p. 19: "se prononce
~omme un espnt doux, comme un g tres légerement aspiré" (e.g. ihtu being pronounced
Igdu).
• E.g" .Graul, Tamil Grammar, p. 13 (as German eh in mieh), Clayton in Arden's
Progr~sSlVe Gramma~ 01 Common Tamil, 5th ed., p. 52 (as eh in Engl. 10ch), Beythan,
Prakllsche Grammatlk der Tamil-Sprache, p. 37 (unvoiced aspirate, viz. h or x, as in
German N~cht; likewise "A Senthamilan", Tamil Culture 4, p. 70). In Old Tamil it
~as ~ccordmg to P. S. ~ubrahmanya Sastri, History 01 gramm. Theories in Tamil. p. 67,
a kmd of arrested vOlceless spirant".
6 ~ee.' e.g., P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri, Comparative Grammar 01 the Tamil Language
(Tnchrnopoly 1947), p. 52, and Tolkappiyam, Ejutt-atikaram 101.
6 • To!. Ej. 1. The.aytam is usually transliterated by fs., 1;, or b. Since there is no phoneme
h I~ O.Tam. nothrng prevents the use of hin transliteration, without diacritical marks,
whlch would suggest a more exact knowledge of its phonetical character than we
actu~lIy have .. Yoiced [h] in the more recent Grantha script never occurs before
ploslves. Aga~st the. older rule is the, apparently isolated, instance ceyvaht'i Kur.
541, where a~/ e ~nstltutes a separate metrical foot; "for the sake of metre", Subrah-
manya Sastn, Hlst. gramm. Theories, p. 14(?).
18
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 193
áytam -;- plosive may be optionally used instead of a geminate. We find
it both in external sandhi, that is, in such syntactical groups as kal titu
"the stone is bad", which becomes in sandhi ka11itu or kahlitu, or mu!
titu "the thorn is bad", which becomes mullitu or muh{itu; and in in-
ternal sandhi in such compounds as *al-tilJai (the grammatical terro for
the inferior noun c1ass), which is always written ah-lilJaU These cases
are c1early different from the second group of sandhi phenomena, which
will be discussed below. The instances given aboye point to the following
con~lusion: since the plosive following after the dytam in, e.g., the stan-
dard example kahlitu is not the original dental t of titu "(that which)
is bad", but the alveolar 1 which is the resuIt of the assimilation of
I + 1, the group hl can hardly represent an independent phonetic deve-
lopment It > hl, but must be a mere secondary variant of the assimilated
geminate 11. 8 Both 11 and hl make position. In the case of 11, however,
the syllabic trench must regular1y have been between the occ1usion and
the explosion of the long consonant, whereas in the second case the
stoppage of breath must have been simultaneous with the beginning of
the second syllable. Nevel'theless, if we may trust the testimony of
Tolkappiyam (El. 101), at the moment when the áytam was pronounced
at the end of the preceding syllable, the tongue had already adopted the
position required fol' the following plosive. We are here confronted with
the problem of the Old Tamil evaluation of the plosive after h.
The modern practice has no authority whatever and is fully incon-
sistent. On the one hand ahtilJai is nowadays pronounced [axrill.ei], on
the other hand the modern pronunciation of the Old Tamil standard
example ka/¡fftu is said to be [kayri:ow] or [kaydi:5w],9 although other
authorities give [muxti:ow] (with t, not q!) as the correct pronunciation
of mul/{itu (Beythan). As a rule the plosive seems to be pronounced as
if it stood intervocalically, in which position it is mostly voiced. Thus
ahtu, now a highly literary side-form of atu [aow] "that", is pronounced
[axour], and there seems to be a presumption among some scholars that
the OId Tamil pronunciation has also been, e.g. [kahQi:dw], [muhqi:dur],
- 7 Similarly ahkatiya for a-kkatiya, Tol. Ej. 380 (where kk is the normal geminate
after the demonstrative stem a-).
8 Ramaswami Aiyar, A Primer 01 Malayiifam Phonology (see n. 3), p. 95, n. takes the
opposite view, stating that aytam plus plosive "may optionally be replaced in sorne
compounds by another stop similar to the one following", which theory he wrongly
attributes to the Tolkappiyam. Similarly P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri, Hisf. gramm.
Theories, pp. 67, 69.
• For [axriIl.ei] see Beythan, op.c. p. 37; for [kaydi:ów] see Yinson, op.C. p. 33, who
gives "kagr'ídu ou kagdídu". The curious pronunciation [axOw] for ah/u which may
be inferred from Tamil Culture 4, p. 69, is found nowhere else.
19
194 F. B. J. KUIPER
[aMi1l.ai]. Sínce the geminate was voiceless, this would ímply an opposi-
tion voiced-voice1ess in such variants as, e.g., [kahgi :dru] and [ka1ti :dru],
or [muhcj,i:dru] and [mutti:dru].lO The fact should be stressed, however,
that there does not exist an oral tradition on this point. In the colloquial
.of the Middle Tamil period the aytam seems no longer to have existed,ll
and grammarians of the 12th century A.D. misinterpreted it already as
a guttural fricative. In Old Tamil itself it seems to have been more or
les s a literary convention since the oldest texts. No conclusion, it is true,
can be drawn from the words in which the Tolkappiyam allows the use
of ht, etc. for 11, etc., viz. p'ukar-i1Jr-e1Jma1Jar pulamaiyore "learned men
do not call it a fault" (Tol. El. 370), although these words would be in-
telligible, if this work is rightly assigned to the second half of the fifth
cent. A.D. (S. Vaiyapuri Pillai, Histol'Y ofTamil Language and Literature,
pp. 65, 14), at which time its author may be supposed to have simply
formulated the practice of the older Sangam works. However, our
inference seems justified by the following facts:
a) The frequency of the use of the aytam in the various texts is widely
divergent. In four Sangam texts I counted respectively 16 occurrences in
about 8000 lines for the Kuruntokai, 4 occurrences in (roughly estimated)
2400 lines for AiIi.kurunüru, 23 occurrences in 1800 lines for Patigup-
pattu, while the Pattuppattu ("Ten Idylls") appeared to have 15 instances
in a total number of 3552lines. In the much later Kural there are 47 occur-
rences in 2660 lines, and in the Nalatiyar, probably dating from about the
end of the Old Tamil period, 8 occurrences in 1600 lines. Accordingly,
the average number of li/les il1 which aniiyfam occurs is respectively:
Ku[untokai 500, Ail'lkurunüru circa 600, Patirruppattu 75, Paltuppüttu
254, Kural 57, and Nalatiyar 200.
b) The texts show a striking divergence in their use of the aytam. In
sorne Sangam texts, such as the Pattuppattu and the Patiguppattu, this
is restricted to the few roots ehku-, ahku-, vehku- and the sandhi pheno-
mena of the type kohrer, pahrilJai, pahl'akaippu, pahro1, or kolum-
pah ralJ, mostly accordingly in the sandhi -1 t- (see note 22). The sandhi
variants aht' and ¡ht' for atu, itu (to be discussed below) are here totally
absent. On the other hand AiIi.kurunüru has only 4 occurrences of aht',
and in other texts, where the aytam is not exclusively restricted to aht'
and ¡ht', we find it frequent1y, e.g., 14 times in the Kuruntokai, 29 times
in the Kural (total numbers of occurrences of aytam respectively 16 and
10 cr. Ramaswami Aiyar, Primer, pp. 95, 98.
11 cr. Ramaswami Aiyar, Educationaf Review, Dec. 1938, p. 4 (of the reprint).
20
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 195
47). It wiIl be clear that a problem faces us in this connection whose
implications are of direct importance for literary criticismo How can we
aceount for the faet that there appears to be a striking difference between
the anthologies with regard to the use of the aytam, notwithstanding
the circumstance that poems assigned to one and the same poet are
contained in different anthologies? That the aytam is used in the Patir-
ruppattu, in 17 of its 23 occurrences, in the words ehku, ehkam "weapon"
might be attributed to the special character of this anthology, which
consists ,of panegyrics upon the Cera kings, but this does not account
for 'the total absence of aht' in this collection. On the other hand, it is
a remarkable feature of the aytam that not on1y the frequency of its use
and the words in which it occurs are different for each anthology, but that
c) each anthology shows (more or 1ess) a preference for certain pet
words and phrases that are characteristic of that particular work. In the
Kural too 21 out of the 29 occurrences of aht' concern phrases or combina-
tions that are found more than once, viz. 6 times aht'ilar (80, 170, 236,
572, 591, 600), four times aht'oruva1J (38, 220, 226, 414), thrice aht'i1Jrel
(556, 575, 1014), and twice aht'um (49, 459), aht'oppatil (363, 621),
ahte tUlJai (76, 242), aht'irantu (476, 971). In the Kuruntokai we find,
among 12 occurrences of aht', four times aht'eva1Jo (93.4, 175.7,237.3,
259.7), which may accordingly be considered a shibboleth of this parti-
cular anthology. The homogeneous character of these collections has
often been commented upon. P. Meile, L'Inde Classique rr, p. 305, after
having stressed the fact that the attributions to several poets are almost
exclusively based on the colophons of the manuscripts, observes: "11 ne
faut pas songer a s'appuyer sur des particularités de style: les expressions
sont interchangeables, les clichés sont communs a plusieurs auteurs dif-
férents, et il a été impossible, jusqu'a présent, de discerner ce qui est le
bien propre de chaque auteur, son individualité: tout semble sorti du
meme atelier, tellement est grande la stylisation", and again (p. 298):
"Les themes, les conventions poétiques, le vocabulaire, l'état de langue
se retrouvent semblables d'une anthologie a l'autre, non moins que les
noms des auteurs ou des héros célébrés, si l'on accorde créance aux
colophons". Now the last words appear to be not quite true, as far as
the use of the aytam is concerned. While this confirms the previous con-
clusions as to the homogeneous cha'racter of each anthology in itself, it
points to the existence of differences in linguistic usage between some of
them, even though these differences may part1y be due to stylistic con-
siderations. (See in general also Zvelebil, Arch. Oro 25 (1957), p. 168). In
Kuruntokai 259, which the colophon states to be a poem of ParaI}.ar,
21
 196 F. B. J. KUIPER
Hne 7 contains the words aht'evalJo which occur also in 175.7 and in
93.4, 237.5 (ascribed to the poets Uloccau and A!!lir Naumullaiyar res-
pectively). On the other hand, in the decade 41-50 of the Patirruppattu,
which is said to be equal1y from Para1)ar's pen, we find ehku in 45.4,
.49.6 and 50.9, fulIy in concordance with the general stylistic tendency of
this anthology (which has not a single instance of aht'). Similarly Kapilar
uses aht' in Ku[untokai 18.3 yár aht'arint'icilJoríJ (which may be paral-
leled with aht'ariyátoríJ 170.1, aht'ariyalar 290.1), and aht'evalJ kolin
Aiñku¡:unliru 204.1, but in his decade ofpanegyrics in Patirruppáttu we find
only pahrol62.2 (which recurs in this anthology in 52.5 and 83.3), ehkupa(ai
(62.3, 64.9), ehkilJ (66.12), ehkii(inam (67.17). Since itis hardlyconceivable
that the poets could intentionally have changed their linguistic habits
on such minor points as the avoidance of aht' in certain poems, there
is every reason to question the correctness of the tradition of the
colophons. (H may be noted that L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar arrived at a
similar conclusion on the strength of morphological observations in
J. 01'. Res. Madras 11, p. 268). Even if there should have existed more
than one poet bearing the name Kapilar (as S. Kalya1)acuntaraiyar states
in his introduction to the AÍliku¡:unli¡:u, 4th ed. 1949, p. XVIII), this
cannot account for the same difference in the poems assigned to Para1)ar.
d) That the use of the áytam has be en 1argely dominated by stylistic
considerations is also apparent from its preponderant occurrence in the
fourth dI' of the ku¡:al-stanza. In the Tirukku¡:al the frequency of occur-
rence in each of the seven clrs of which a kural consists is: P, 2 5, 34,
424 ,5 4,6 5, 71• Obviollsly its lIse, which at one time must have been rooted
in the linguistic reality, was becoming ti traditional, merely literary device
as early as the oldest Sangam works.
If this is true, the possibility that a reliable oral tradition could have
survived until the age of the later grammarians can safely be rejected.
Hence only theoretical considerations can guide us in determining the
probable phonetic value of the plosive. Now, the rule that, e.g., a!!-
could optionally be pronounced as ah/- reminds us of an analogous
phenomenon in modern Icelandic, where tt, kk, pp as a rule are pro-
nounced with a breathed glide after the vowel, e.g. [douht:lrl for d6ttir
(see Stefán Einarsson, Icelandic, pp. 322,21). Sievers 12 compared this to
u Grundzüge der Phonetik § 20. Cf. Pope, Introduction to Niilatiyiir, p. xiv, who caIled
iiytam an aspirate, equivalent to Skt. Iz in the middle of a word, and especiaIly L. V.
Ramaswami Aiyar, The glottal Iricative Hin Dravidian (Ind. Ant. 59 (1930), pp. 198-
203, especiaIly p. 198), A Primer 01 Malayá/am Phonology (Bull. Sri Rama Varma Res.
Inst. 6), p. 94, n. 3. For the reference to Einarsson's lcelandic Grammar my thanks
are due to Prof. A. C. Bouman.
22
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 197
the Sanskrit use of the Visarga I;t befo re stops, e.g. in Skt. dubkham
"sorrow". This is exactly what the Old Tamil state of things leads us to
expect for ahf-, while it is in agreement with the current native theories
that equate the áytam to the Skt. Visarga. If this inference is correct,
the stop in ahf- is likely to have been pronounced in the same way as it
was in aH-, accordingly as a voiceless alveolar plosive.
3. In the sandhi phenomena discussed in the preceding section the áytam
functions more or less as a boundary-mark, as it marks off the end of the
first (monosylIabic) word. Indeed, the substitution of áytam plus plosive
for the geminate seems to owe its origin to the need of restoring the
eharacter of the preceding monosyllable as a separate word by postponing
the occ1usion till after the syllabic trench (e.g., [kah-ti :dw]). Apparently
this was only possible when, owing to the shortness of the preceding
vowel, the geminate charaeter of the plosive was functionally characte-
rized by its making the preeeding syllablc long by position. After long
vowels, which made the syllable long by nature the geminate was not
functionally charaeterized as such (and mostIy, indeed, replaced by the
corresponding single phoneme, e.g. narrá-toláar for *nar!ii{-toláar
[nal tá! loláar] "those who do not adore the good feet", Kural 2). This
may aeeount for the faet that the áytam never oceurs after a long vowel.
A similar conflict between a general phonetic rule (as in [katti:dwD
and the neeessity of preserving the individual form of monosyllables for
the. sake of c1earness (as in [kah-ti:dw]) is manifest in the Rigvedic
tendency to avoid contraction of a final vowel with the initial vowel of
a following word, if this final vowel belongs to a monosyllabic word.
The second category, whieh has now to be discussed, may at first sight
seem to have a somewhat different charaeter. In most Old Tamil words
terroinating in -u this final -u, whether extra-short or normal-short (as
in celavu, varavu), is elidible. An exception to this rule are the words
consisting of (consonant) + short vowel + plosive + u, where -u cannot
be elided. Thus when the two demonstrative pronouns itu "this" and
atu "that" are followed by an initial vowel of the following word, a
glide -v- is inserted, e.g. atu-v-um "and that". Now most grammars state
that for itu and atu the optional use of ihtit and ahtu is allowed, and these
forros are aetually used in learned prose texts, such as the eommentaries.
However, these forms owe their existence to a mere misapprehension of
the viri docti. As faras 1 am aware, it is nowhere c1early stated that the
sole forms which actually occur in Old Tamil are iht' and aht' with
elided -u. This is also implied, though wrongly interpreted in Tolkappi-
23
 198 F. B. J. KUlPER
yam, El. 424, which prescribes that before a vowel the aytam must
"remain" (ma!JtJa1 véfJfum) in these demonstratives (as though their pro-
per forms were *ihtu and *ahtu; cf. El. 201). Thc frequcnt use of ah/'
in some Sangam tcxts, such as Aitikurunüru and Kuruntokai (both to
be dated betwecn 100 and 250 A.D.) was noted aboye (see also the
Appendix). In the Kura¡ (cirea 600 A.D. according to S. Vaiyapuri
Pillai) it is also often found. Out of a total number of 47 occurrences of
dytam 1 counted 29 instances of aht' 13 and one of iht' (in 1161). The same
use is found in Kalittokai, which like the Kural belongs to a rater period
of the Old Tamilliteraturc. 14 Even in such a late Old Tamil text as the
NiiIatiyar (cirea 700 A.D.?) five out ofa total number of eight occurrences
of iiytam concern the form aht',15 notwithstanding the fact that this text
already shows traces of the Middle Tamil use of at- (with eIision against
the oIder usage) before voweIs, e.g. at-um "that also" instead of atu-v-um
01' aht-um (Kural 49, 459). The very existence of at-U/n however leaves
no doubt that aht' had become an artificial archaism by tbis time. Traces
of this development can already be observed in the earlier literature.
The sandhi of the type kah-litu, already comparatively rare in the Sangam
literature (see the Appendix), had become obsolete in the late Old Tamil
period, as it does not occur in the KuraJ. While the technicaI term ahJifJai
(ahril:/ai) of the Tolkappiyam maintained itself in the learned jargon of
the grammarians, there is a c1ear tendency already in Old Tamil to restrict
the use of the aytam in literary use more and more to the two forms ala'
and iht'. In the Middle Tamil period this evolution was complcted. In
the Til'lIviicakam. probnbly dllting from about the 9th ccntury, no in-
stances other than aht' seem to OCCllf, and even this is but rarely met with
(cf. 3.28; 5.186), no doubt because its learned, literary character was alien
to Mal}.ikkavacakar's style. Naccinarkkiniyar (13th cent.) and Pari-
u Kural 38, 49, 76, 80, 170, 220, 226, 236, 242, 363, 368, 414,459, 476, 556, 572,
575,591,600,621,943,971,1001,1014,1032,1093,1166,1279, 1308. In theremaining
passages we find mainly forms of ahku- and vehku- (in 171-180), fUl'ther ceyvallt'e
541, ehku "edge, weapon" 759, 773, and kallcti 1037. Note the etllkai of ehk'ata/Ji/J with
ceyka porulai in 759 (Iike Pllkka: (uykkum Nálati 83, evvam: ceyvar 147).
14 See Ramaswami Aiyar, Joum. 01'. Res. Madras, vol. 11, pp. 253, 266. See also
S. Vaiyapuri Pillai, History 01 Tamil Language and Literature, pp. 29 f., 57 (two or
three centuries later (han the Sangam works, respectively dating from the eighth
century, whieh would seem too late). If the Kalittokai eontains quotations from the
Kural (cf. 139.17, 18 etc.) and if the latter work is rightly placed about 600 A.D.,
Kalittokai must be later than Appar (shortly after 600) but the learned eontinuations
of tlíe older Sangam works cannot be compared with the hyms of the Saiva Saints.
16 Nálati 39, 61, 250, 251, 398. The remaining instan ces are ehku{aiytir 137, ahki/Jtir
12, vehkaomi!J 17.
24
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 199
melalakar (cirea 14th cent.) in their great commentaries on the Old Tamil
literature continue to write aht' and iht' before vowels, but the artificial
character of this spelling is apparent from the fact that they for the first
time write ahtu and ihtu without elision. Thus Naccinarkkiniyar some-
times still fol1ows his c1assical models in writing, e.g. iht-e!JlJa viyappó e!Ja
(comm. on Kalittokai, ed. Anantarama Aiyar 2 p. 906), but the spelling
ihtu e!J!Ja viyappó e!Ja (p. 953) represents his normal practice. The same
is true of Parimelalakar in bis commentary on the Kural. 16 Apparently he
no longer ,realized that, while his practice of quoting parts of a text with
removed or simplified sandhi before commenting upon it is unobjection-
able in such cases as, e.g., na!Jru arral for na!Jrárral (Parimel. ad Kural
469), it is impossible in the case of, e.g., aht'oruvalJ (Kural 220), since
ah/u oruvan introduces a word-form, the very existence ofwhich is exc1uded
by the circumstance that the occurrence of the aytam is determined by the
elision of -u. Here only atu (-v-) oruvav would have been correct, just
as Parimelalakar ad st. 49 rightly writes ahtum in the text-quotation,
which he then renders by atuvum in his commentary.
This situation has since remained unchanged. In later times, too,
virtual1y the sole words in which h is used are ahtu and ihtu. In the Tamil
Grammar for Junior Classes Ilaiñar IlakkafJam by S. G. Daniel (Madras,
1928), for instance, its use is illustrated by the examples ahtu, ihtu, and
ehku. In modern Tamilliterature, it is true, the aytam is rightly ignored.
The normal spelling is, e.g., atu eppati-t teriyum? "How do you know
that?". Elision of the final -u is however often indicated in the spelling,
e.g. at-e!J!Ja? "What is that?". This is also the practice of such authors
as Bhiirati, who writes, e.g. at-avatu "namely" for aht-ávatu ofthe ancient
commentators. In his Katturaika{(I) 1 found only two exceptions, viz. in
pausa(!) "ta! (ahtu)", p. 167, where in a discourse on the Upanishadic
doctrine the Sanskrit philosophic term is translated, and iht-oru, p. 130.
Tamil savants, however, who aim at a grammatical1y correct use of their
language, continue to write like Parimelalakar ahtu and ihtu before
vowels, with or (more often) without elision of the final _U. 17
10 Apart from passages where the words of the text are quoted without sandhi (e.g.
ahm oruvaLl220, ahtu yiippiuu¡1093, for whieh see below) eL aht' iIlai 110, iht'iiyiU 220,
ahl'o/inta 221, aht'arintu 1098, and on the other hand ahtu ¡!JIu 127, ahlll urai 208, cf.
1103, aJ¡m uJatám 1092, ahtu avv-tir-uyirkku 1141, ihtu ofiyiir 218, ihtu ovvát' 1108.,
etc. - For at-um as an indication of a late origin of Nálatiyár see L.V. Ramaswami
Aiyar, Anthropos 33 (1938), p. 781, Quarter/y Joum. Myth. Soco 19, 304, Primer 01
Ma/ayá!am Phon%gy (Bull. Sri Rama Varma Res. Inst. 6, p. 22). For the date of
Nálatiyár (probably circa 700 A.D.) see S. Vaiyapuri Pillai, History ofTamil Language
and Uterature, p. 89.
11 E.g. V. G. Suryanarayana Sastri, TamiJmoJiyiy Vara/tiru, p. 71 iht-eY!JG, aht-
25
200 F. B. J. KUIPER
4. Thís elísion of -u in atU, ¡tu, with simultaneous compensatory length-
ening of the preceding syIlabIe by means of h, may be compared with an
anaIogous phenomenon in oru "one", whose final -u is reguIarly not
elídible eíther. Stíll Tol. El. 479 prescribes the elision of -u with compen-
satory lengthening of o befo re vowels (e.g., ór-iitai for oru ii!ai "one
cloth"), which is still quite normal in present-day Tamíl. For iru- "two",
a form only used in compounds such as iru-patu "twenty", an analogous
ínstance is found in ír-aintu "twice five". To understand the basic prin-
cipIe of this Iengtheníng we must consider the phonetic changes that take
place in determinative compounds, the prior member of which is an ad-
jective stem in normal-short -u (see, e.g., Vinson, Manuel de la langue
tamoule, p. 90, Beythan, Praktisclle Grammatik del' Tamil-Sprache, p.
132). From the evidence we may infer the following rules:
1. If the consonant which precedes -u does not admit of gemination
the root vowel is lengthened. This is the case with l' and 1, e.g. peru-:
pér-ulakam "great world" (Pattuppattu), pér-ür "great town"; aru-:
iir-uyir "precious life" (Ku¡:at 73, NaIati 238, 330); kolu-: kól-ilai
"luxurious leaf" (Akam), kól-araf, etc.
2. When the preceding consonant is c or r (which phoneme is histori-
cally identical with the alveolar plosive 1 of the older language), we find
either gemination of this consonant or Iengthening of the preceding
vowel; e.g. ciru-: cirr-il, cir-il "hut" (Puram), cir-ür (Puram),), cirr-ür
(modern Tam.) "village", cirr-eli, cir-eli "mouse" (modern Tam.), cf.
cirr-a{icil (Parip.), cirr-iopam (Kural); kuru-: kurr-eluttu "short vowel"
(Tal. El.); 1,(/l'I(-: I"ie-al'a! "gI'CCIl licld" (Pu¡:nm). pacc-iJ'wnjJu "moltcn
iron", pacc-i1ai "gl'een leaf" (Cintfimat)i).
3. If the adjective stem ends in -{uor -tu only gemination 01' the con-
sonant is allowed, e.g. ne{u-: nef{-eluttu "long vowel" (Tol. El.); putu-:
putt-él "God" (Kalittokai, Kural), if this etymology is correct; putt-ó{U
"new pot" (Nalati).
UnIike the geminates which are the result 01' assimilation, as in ahrilJai
(for non-attested *arrilJai) these geminates ce, rr, !l, tt cannot be replaced
by he, 111', etc.
Since the vowel-lengthening in ór', ir', is plainly parallel to that in
pér-ür and iir-uyir we might expect to find, in analogy to put!' "new",
unarntu yamum; pp. 58,79 ah/-avatu; but p. 55 ihtu a!ikka!i; p. 26 ah/u iruveru; p. 27
aíau iopa-c-cuvai. Quite the same practice is foHowed by the learned authors in Annals
01 Oriental Research, vol. XIII (Centenary Number), e.g. p. 59, where one finds four
instances of ah/u, and one of ihtu (aH without elision) before a vowel, p. 62 ahl-avatu,
etc.
26
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 201
the ante-vocalic forms *att' and *itt' for atu "that" and itu "this". In
trus case, however, the true geminate tt is completely unknown. What can
have been the reason why in the case of the adjectives only the geminate
voas used (e.g. putt- but never *puht-), and in the case of atu and itu ex-
c1usively the form with iiytam but never atto, itt-? Since the possibility
that this difference is due to purely phonetic causes can apparent1y be
ruled out the explanation must rather be sought in the different syntactic
reIation that exists between, e.g., putu-ótu "new-pot" on the one hand,
and e:g. atu iorél "that not-being, when that does not exist" (Ku¡:at 556,
etc.) on the other. While in the first case the combination of determinans
and determinatum forms a compound, the second instan ce is no com-
pound but a sort of clause, in which atu and iorél virtually function as
subject and predicate respectively. Illdeed, atu cannot possibly serve as
a determinans, this function being reserved for the form anta (and in
compounds for a-). In aht-iorél, just as in kah-ritu (kah-litu) "the stone
is bad", the iiytam may be stated to mark off, in the flux of speech, the
end of a monosyllabic word which functions as a separate syntactic
unit. Without trying to turn this statement into something like a theory
we may describe the role of iiytam in Old Tamil as follows:
1. Under certain conditions the combination of h plus a following
plosive may serve as a substitute for a geminate, whether this geminate
be the result of assimilation or of compensatory lengthening.
2. If the geminate is the result of assimilation, the substitution of
h + pIosive for the geminate can take place both when the first word is
a subject (e.g. kah litu) and when it is a determinans (e.g. ah-jilJai, ah-
ril:zai). This substitution is mostly optional.
3. If the geminate would have be en the result of compensatory length-
ening, substitution of h plus plosive is obligatory if the first word is not
a determinans. (After the determinans a- this substitution is optional 7,
but the compensatory character of this geminate is questionable).
Our conclusion that in the last case, too, ht is equivalent to tt (aht'
standing for *att') is confirmed by a few variant forms ofnon-compound
words, which are not accordingly affected by sandhi, e.g. pahtu for pattu
"ten" (in ou-pahtu, etc., Tol. El. 439), ahtai for attai(?). Ina smal1 group
of words h is always written without its origiu being quite c1ear. 18
18 Note such cases as ahku- "to be shortened, to be reduced, shrink": a/ku- "to shrink,
diminish"; ohkll- "to retreat, faH back": o/ku- "to shrink, flinch". Perhaps the aytam
indica tes an assimilation in.these words, but this problem could only be solved on the
basis of an extensive etymological study. Note the existence of Tam. o{lI1iku-, Kann.
ULjugu- "to shrink, shrivel"; Tam. o!ukkll- "to reduce", Kota org- "to be destroyed":
ork- "to reduce in length" and see further Emeneau, Kolami, p. 226, nr. 609. As for
27
202 F. B. J. KUIPER
5. A brief observation may he re be inserted by way of excursus. Elision
of -u in oru "one" occurs, according to Tol. El. 479, not only before
vowels but also before yá-, e.g. or-yál "one lute" for oru yál. This seems
to allow but one interpretation, viz. that the consonant in yá- contains
a non-syllabic vocalic element, something like [ija:]. Sometimes, indeed,
this initial i is even written in the Sangam texts. Burrow, BSOAS. XI, .
p. 598, quotes, e.g., ivav iyár "who is this" (Pu¡:anagü¡:u 13.1). On the
other hand, it is a well-known feature of Old Tamil that inwords ending
in an elidible extra-short -u, this -u, when standing before yo, is replaced
by the "extra-short -i" (kurriyal-ikaram), e.g. in the standard example
náki'yátu, which stands fol' náku yátu. This phenomenon is explicit1y des-
cribed as a substitution of i fol' ti in Tol. El. 35,411, and e.g. by Vinson,
Manuel de la langue tamoule, p. 29. In the Tolkappiyam this extra-shol't
i is l'eckoned among the thl'ee "non-autonomous phonemes" (cárp-
eluttu). Rowever, is -u here really replaced by -i? If the normal-short -u
of oru is elided befo re yá-, this elision must have been possible a Jortior;
in the case of the extra-short -u in náku. In other words, the extra-short
i' in náki'yátu must rather be interpreted as representing the short vocalic
element of [ija:dUI] and we must accordingly analyse nák' i'yátu. (In this
respect our conc1usion differs from Burrow's, BSOAS. XI, p. 599 n. 1).
It should also be noticed that in, e.g., Kural 4 .... cérntárk-kiyálJtu-
mitumpai-yila (that is, cel'l1tárkk' iyálJfum i{umpai-y ita) ."for those who
have attained (the feet, etc.) there is no trouble", the i of iyálJtum (which
must be syllabic on account of the metre) belongs to the same Gil' as
yá{l{um. which argucs in favotll' of i)'ci(I{lIIn rnthcl' thnn Cl'l'IItlirkki-)'(i(I{urn.
A particular fact provcs this cxplanation to bc corrcct. Thc name of the
greatest river on the West Coast of South India is Per-áru, for *peru-áru
"great river" (Patigupp. 43.15, Cilappatikaram; see P. Meile, Mélanges
asiatiques p. 91). Rere the long e refiects the compensatory lengthening
due to the loss of the final normal-short -u of peru-. Now Old Tamil has
beside áru also a form yáru, and the name of the river is a1so attested as
Periyáru (Akam 149.8, Patirrupp. 28.10, 88.25, CHapp.). In passing it may
be noted that this name is identical with Parji pered, Kui pihereju "river".
On account of e we must conc1ude that here, too, the final -u has been
elided, the correct analysis being Per' i'yáru. A similar analysis is required
for periyál "a certain type of great lute" (Pattuppattu 4.462, Patirrupp.
46.5, 57.8, 66.2, etc.). The different sandhi in 01" yál points to the exis-
~htai "name of the daughter of a Cola king", it is equated to attai "father's sister,
mother-in-Iaw" on account of the meaning "lady, woman of rank or eminence",
which lexicographers assign to the last word. See also Vinson, Manuel, p. 50.
28
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 203
tence of an allegro pronunciation (comparable to the k$aipra-sarizdhi of
Vedic phonology), which may also account for the circumstance that in
ancient texts i is sometimes written, though the metre shows it to be non-
syllabic, e.g. in kulal ¡Vit' iyál ivit' "the fiute is sweet, the lute is sweet"
(Kural66).
Now the parallelism which is manifest in the treatment of OI'U "one"
and atu "that" before vowels leads us to ask if, parallel to the use of
the ante-vocalic form 01" before yá-, also aht' may have be en used in this
pos.ition·. A passage in Parimelalakar's commentary on the Kura¡ is of
sorne importance in this connection. Though strictly observing the rule
that aht(u) is only allowed before vowels, this cornmentator once para-
phrases the words aht' aval yáppiv-u{ aUiya nir "that is the water she pOUl'S
into our affection" (Kural1093) by ahtu yáppivu{ ava! aUiya nir. This has
a close parallel in ahtu yát'e!Ji!J in Naccigarkkigiyar's commentaryon
Cintama1J.i 609, 901 ff. Since the elision of -u is, as a rule, no longer noted
in these works, the spelling ahtu is an indirect indication that in Old
Tamil, e.g., atu yál "that is a lute" could become *aht'i'yál, paralle! to
pel"iyáI "great lute". (This conclusion was afterwards confirmed by a
few quotations from Sangam texts which 1 owe to Dr. Kamil Zvelebil,
viz. aht'iyá !JoveV Kalittokai 75.11-12, for atu yáV nove!J, ahtu yám
Narri1J.ai 150.5 and iht'iyám Puranagü¡::u 145.8. For the simplified sandhi
in Naraya1J.acami Aiyar's edition of Narri1J.ai, viz. ah tu yám for aht'
iyám, see below, p. 207.
6. So far things seem reasonably c1ear. But how was aht' actually pro-
nounced? If our previous conc1usion regarding kahlitu, ahlilJai, as re-
presenting Old Tamil [kahti:dUI], [ahtirtai] is correct, the inference that
the stop in [aht] was different from that in [adu] seems inevitable. (Our
reasons for assuming a voiced lax, though perhaps not fricative, arti-
culation for Old Tamil t in atu will be put forward in the second chapter
of tbis artic1e). In quite the same manner, we may add, the stop in
putt-otu "new pot" (see p. 200) was different from that in, e.g., putu-
kkalam, id. For aht', however, a complication arises from the fact that
the metre sometimes indicates a syl1abic value for the áytam. Pope, in
his edition of the Nalatiyar, draws attention to aht'utaimai 251 (follo-
wing aftel' a pu{imá, which exc1udes a long first syllable), and aht'úl'um
398 (dito after a temá). Vinson, Manuel p. 19, notes aht'utampu in Ku¡::al
943, where aht' is also taken to have the value of two short syIlables.
Cf. also aht'oruvav 226. It is a well-known fact that this disyllabic pro-
nunciation is sometimes rendered in the manuscripts by the readings
29
 204 Po Bo Jo KUIPER
akutu, ¡klitu, which seem to occur even in ancient Sangam texts 19 (al-
though there might remain some doubt as to the authentic Old Tamil
character of such readings, since the rendering of áytam by k would seem
rather to reflect the later pronunciation of the 13th century NalJlJül). In
any case, if the prosodical value of aht'utampu is v v v - v (the so-called
karuvifai1káy), the question arises why the poet did not simply write
alu-v-utampu (Iike, e.g., itu-v-qIG Kura! 37, alu-v-al/at' 231), which would
equalIy well have suited the 111ctre. Perhaps it may be suggested that the
pocts purposely avoidcd the use of atu-v- before a following a-,
the
disyllabic aht' being used as an elegant substitute for it, but it would
require a minute investigation to settle this point. Here, however, we are
only concerned with the disyllabic pronunciation of aht' in connection
with the phonetic value of t. Now this pronunciation suggests a com-
parison with the (perhaps rather ancient)20 prollunciation of the Sanskrit
Visarga with a vocalic glide, e.g. [aha ], [ihi ] for -af:¡, -ib. According to
Sir G. A. Grierson, Centenary Supplement of JRAS (1924), p. 117 ff.,
the Bihar PaI~Qits prono unce Skt. sivatl even as [Jivahah]. Although there
is a fundamental difference between both pronunciations since this regio-
nal pronunciation of the Visarga has no cOllsequences for prosody, as
the variant pronunciation of the Old Tamil áytam has, still it is illustrative
of how this occasional disyllabic character of the áytam may have arisen.
Cf. also Winfield, A Grammar ofthe Kui Language, p. 3, and the somewhat
related phenomenon communicated by KitteI, Grammar of the Kannaifa
Language, p. 7. The occasional occurrence of a disyllabic pronunciation
of ah- would not sccm scriously to contradict Viramámuuivar's statement
that thc iiytall1 was ncitllCr a vowcl, nor a consonant (see the reference
in BDCRI 2, p. 345, n. 14) 20 a • Nor is it, 1 think, incompatible with the
assumption that, although the phonemic system allowed in principIe a
wide range of (phonemically irrelevant) varÍations for the plosives, Old
TamiI t had, in aht'i!Jl'él as well as in aht'u/ampu, the same tense articu-
latíon that we must as sume for, e.g., -pahtu beside pattu (see aboye §4),
accordingly [ahtilJ<je:l] and [ah"tuqambUI]. Although these assumptions
19 See Sankaran, BDCRIvoI. 2 (1941), p. 345. Cf. Vinson, l.c., and T. P. Meenakshi
Sundaran, Ind. Ling., 17 (1957), p. 52 (kü for hin the 17th cent.).
20 See Kirste, Wiener Sitzungsberichte 121, p. 15, Debrunner, Nach/riíge ad Wacker-
nagel, Altind. Gramm. 1, p. 260, 1. 3.
'Oa See also P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri, Hislory o[ gramm. Theories in Tamil, p. 66.
01 For analogous developrnents in Kui and Gondi see Ramaswarni Aiyar, Ind. Ant.
59 (1930), p. 201 ff. (ef. also Friend-Pereira, A Grammar o[ Ihe Küi Language, p. 3).
30
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 205
rest on general deductions, rather than on facts, it seemed worth wmle
to point to tms probIem and to attempt a solution. 21
Appendix: THE USE OF AHT' AND IHT' IN THE SANGAM TEXTS
by KAMIL ZVELEBIL (Prague)
The author of the preceding articIe owes a great debt of gratitude to Dr. Zvelebil, who
read the manuscript and pointed to the occurrence of ahtu without elision in his texts
of the Narrinai and the Kuruntokai. Since the KurT. text in the edition by Dr. U. V.
Svii.minath~ Aiyar (2nd ed~ by his son S. KalyaI)acuntaraiyar, Madras 1947) reads
aht' it was' cIear from the outset that ahfu might be due to the habít of sorne modero
editors of introducing a simplified sandhi into their editions. Thus Dikshitar, who de-
liberately simplifies the sandhi in his edition of the Kura! reads ahtu iranfu 971. On
Ihe other hand, it canoot be denied that the scholarlike edítions of the Sangam texts
are different from Dikshitar's text, which is rather designed for the general reader. A
second possible explanation could be that sorne scribes following the practice 'of the
great cornmentators Parimela!akar and Naccil}arkkil}iyar have sometimes employed
Ihe spelling ah tu, ihfu in their manuscripts. In the absence of any real critical apparatus
in our editions, however, it is impossible to decide how far the editors have followed
or corrected the sandhi of the manuscripts. Since it was essential to know, whether
or not the evidence of the Sangam texts confirmed the theory of the preceding articIe,
Dr. Zvelebil was kind enough to examine the following texts: NarriI)ai (ed. Naraya-
oacami Aiyar, 1952), Kuruntokai (ed. P. V. C5macuntaral}, 1955), AiIikurunüru (ed.
Dr. U. V. Svaminatha Aiyar, 1949), Kalittokai (ed. 1. V. Anantaramaiyar, 1931),
Akanal}ÜrU (ed. K. Cettiyar, 1947-51), and PuranauüIu (ed. Dr. U. V. Svaminatha
Aiyar, 1950). A text of the 1>aripatal was not available. In Patirruppattu and Pattup-
pattu, as stated aboye, ahl' and iht' do not occur. 22 The following is a brief account of
Ihe results of Dr. Zvelebil's enquiry.
1~ As for the reIative frequency of the three categories of cases in which
the liytam occurs it will be interesting to note that an examination of the
above-mentioned Sangam texts, to which Cilappatikaram and Mullaip-
pattu were added for the sake of comparison, yielded the following
numerical results:
Even if those phenomena should eventually turn out to be historically connected with
those of Old Tamil, it is advisable first to study the Old Tamil áytam separately.
11 To ilIustrate the linguistic usage of these texts 1 give here the passages where words
wilh h occur. Patirruppattu: ehku (ehk', ehkiIJ) 12.16, 24.21, 45.4, 49.6, 50.9, 51.30,
52.6,62.3,64.9,66.12,67.17 (ehk'á('), 74.13, 76.1, ehkam 11.7, 19.4,24.2,33.9, 90.37,
}'ehká/u 22.7, sandhi in pahr61 52.5, 62.2, 83.3, ko!umpah ralJ palJai 90.46. Although
Ihe poems of the Pattuppattu no doubt date from different periods and are unlikely
to have formed an anthology befo re a rather late date (perhaps the 11th century, as
S. Vaiyapuri Pillai, His/ory o[ Tamil Language and Litera/ure, p. 58, suggests), no
attempt at a chronological cIassification has been made. Instances with áyfam were
only found in the poems 1 (Murukarruppatai), 2 (Porunararruppatai), 5 (Mu11aippattu),
6 (Maturaikkañci), 9 (Pattil}appalai), and 10 (Malaipatukatam); cf. 1.111 ehku, 295
pah-rukiliIJ; 2.130 pahrer, 221 pahrilJai; 5.68 ehkam; 6.633 kohrer, 739 ká!ma11t'ehkam;
9.30 pahri, 78 ehk'. 143 pahrakaippiIJ; 10.129 kalmalJt'ehkam, 300 ehk', 401 /ohril;Ulí,
490 ehkam, 551 ahkiya.
31
 206 F. B. J. KUIPER
a. in root morphemes (eh/m, ehkam, vehku-, ahku-, ahtai) the aytam
was found 43 times.
b. in sandhi other than ah!', ih/', the áytam was found 17 times. The
instances are pahl'okai, pahra/ai, pahl'uva/ai, pahro1ku{i, pahrol, pahru{i,
pahru{UppU, pahl'árattana!u, pahrer, pahl'lIl,1(1a, pahrinoy, pahráram, and
marankohl'accalJ. Some more instances might be quoted from the Pattup-
piittu .
c. aht' and iht' (sometimes spellcd without elision of the final-u) were
found 89 times.
2. With elision aht' and iht' occur in the above-mentioned editions in
the following passages:
NarriJ).ai: 62.10, 128.10 & 11,295.2, 311.2 (5 occurrences).
Ku[untokai: 18.3, 80.3, 93.4, 97.2,4, 158.6, 170.1, 175.7, 237.3, 259.7,
265.8, 290.1, 295.3 (13 occurrences).
Ailikurunüru: 46.1, 104.4, 161.4,204.1,280.5 (5 occurrences).
Kalittokai: 22.3, 60.9, 61.1, 62.1-4 (thrice), 63.14, 64.8,13, 75.11, 84.18,
28-30 (twice), 33, 88.10, 103.32, 36, 46, 105.57, 107.1, 18, 108.8,
134.14, 18, 138.10, 141.15, 144.2, 145.8, 146.22 (29 occurrences).
Akana!}ü[u: 6.15, 21, 38.17, 52.6, 56.14, 68.8, 195.11, 258.4, 301.8,
310.13,316.17,335.3,372.6 (13 occurrences).
Purana1].üru: 48.5, 85.1-2 (twice), 97.25, 145.8, 156.4, 167.11-12, 349.4,
360.10 (9 occurrences).
3. Without elision of -u we find ahtu and ihtu in the above-mentioned
editions of N arrÍl).ai (6 times), Kuruntokai (once), and Akana1].üru (twice).
In Ku[untokai 80.3-4
yam a/¡t-a)'arkañ cerun tátJ ahtu
añcuvat-utaiya{ ayitJ vempor
Svaminatha Aiyar's edition reads tatJah / tañcuvat-. Since this is the sole
passage in KurT., where the aytam stands at the end of a line, it may be
supposed that the editor C6macuntara!}, to avoid the separation of the
carpe!uttu from the following stop, here follows the praetice of the
medieval eommentators in writing ahtu befo re a vowel notwithstanding
the faet that this removes the parallelism aht' ... aht'. This may also
account for one passage in Akam, viz. 266.15 kavvai aki!]ral perité
yi!]i yahtu / avalam (cf. aht'avalam Kalitt. 108.8!), and for Cilapp.
26.11-12 nampal o!ikuvat-ayitJ alik-ahtu / emp61 (against 5 oceurrenees
of aht', iht'). Not cIear is the motive in Akam 172.15-16 ariyé!] yatJ ahtu
arintatJe!] ayi!]. Perhaps this is merely an ineorrect reading of sorne MSS.
The regular use of aht' with ari-, frequent in several Sangam texts, is also
found, e.g., Akam 68.8 piUlJUli kélliyo etJavum aht-ariya{.
32
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 207
Apart from these three instances, ahtu and ihtu are only found in
Narayal).acami Aiyar's edition of the Narril).ai. In two of the seven
passages the word is again the last one of a line, viz. in 53.1-2 yatJahtu
añcitJe!J karappavun ta!]ahtu/arinta!Ja{ and 134.9-10 melliya i!Jiya kürali!J
i!JiyatJahtu/ olfé!] ... While here only iUi yau aht' (a so-called pulimalikay)
would seem metrically possible (cf. also 295.2 yayum aht' arínta!]a{!), the
sandhi proves ahtu to be incorrect in 150.5 matJtJeyil utaiyor pola ahtuyam.
The spelling ahtu before a consonant (instead of aht'i'yám) is again that
of.Parimela!akar and Nacci!}arkki!}iyar. As for 174.8 a[[um akumahtu
ariyatorkké we may compare KurT. 170.1,Puram 360.10, aht'ariyatoré.
Finally we find it in 206.11 arintalJa{ kollahtu arikalé!] ya!]e and in 332.1
iku{aitto!iyihtu e!]lJe!]appatumo.
It may be stated, accordingly, that the ratio of the occurrences with,
and without, elision is 79: 10, and that ahtu and ihtu are nearly ex-
clusively restricted to one text (Narril).ai) where this reading can some-
times be shown to be ineorreet on aceount of the metre or the sandhi,
whereas in three of the four remaining instances (viz. in KurT., Akam
and Cilapp.) the motive has clearly been to avoid an aytam without
following plosive at the end of a lineo It may be considered sufficiently
certain, accordingly, that only aht' and iht' with elision of the -u have
been used in the Sangam literature. Forms without elision appear not
to oeeur in texts edited by Dr. U. V. Svaminatha Aiyar, which may be
presumed to represent the highest standard of philological exactness in
this domain.
*
n. "CONVERTIBILlTY OF SURDS AND SONANTS"
1. It is a well-known fact that the Tamil phonemic system differs from
that of the other Dravidian languages in that plosives are initially always
voiceless, whereas in intervocalic position and after an homorganic nasal
they are mostly (more or less) voiced. Since there is nó phonemic op-
position between "voiced" and "voiceless" the Tamil script has one
symbol for, respeetively, the guttural phoneme (pronounced [k], [x], [9],
[y], [g], [lil, according to the various positions in the word, the more or
less distinct pronunciation, etc.), the dental phoneme, etc. In the usual
transliteration into the Roman seript these symbols are rendered by k,
1, etc. (which eorresponds to their origin, as they are derived from the
North Indian symbols for the voíceless plosives). Caldwell, in his "Com-
33
 208 F. B. J. KUIPER TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 209

paratíve Grammar of the Dravidian Languages or South-Indian Family (1947), p. 89). It may be usefuI, therefore, briefly to summarize the various
of Languages" 2nd ed. (1875), p. 21 f.1 caBed this distribution of voiced arguments that have been advanced concerning the Old TamiI system of
and voiceless allophones "the peculiar Dravidian Iaw of the converti- plosives.
bility of surds and sonants", whích "ís not a mere dialectic peculiarity ...
2. Such doubts as expressed by Sankaran and Sekhar are but seIdom
but is essentially inherent in the language, and has been a characteristic
met with. On the whole the correctness of CaIdwell's Iaw, as a synchronic
principIe of it from the beginning" (p. 22). He poin.te~, to the ~amil
description of the pIosive system of modern Tarnil, seems not to be
script which, though being borrowed from North IndIa systematIcaIly
seriousIy questioned. StilI, the phonetic details that can be gathered
passed by the sonants of the Sanskrit" and concluded: "This circumstance
from the existing manual s and sorne modest personal experience give a
clearly proves that ah ¡/litio the Dravidian phonetic system ... differed
far- more complicated picture than CaIdwell's law and the analogous
essentially from that of Sanskrit". Apart from the rather obscure words
descriptions in sorne of the modern handbooks would suggest. Since the
"from the beginning" and "ah ¡/litio" Caldwell appears to have fuIly
informations of educated Tamil speakers are sometimes radically contra-
realized that there is in each case only one phoneme, which is variously
dictory, while even the ample and exact descriptions by Firth, CIayton
pronounced. Unfortunately, by calling this a "Dravidian law" he mixed
and Beythan Ieave many details undecided, the foIlowing survey can only
up a description of the Tamil system of plosives with a historical theory
be given with much reserve. It is hoped that its imperfections will stimu-
according to which Tamil represents the original state of things from
late Indian scholars, not only to undertake exact experimental investi-
which the other Dravidian languages have diverged in the course of
gations but also to collect exact data on the geographical and social
time. Indeed, when viewed from a historical angle Caldwell's "law"
differences which no doubt exist in this respecto
confronts us with two different problems, viz., Was there originalIy in
Apart from the very frequent combination of a nasal with the homor-
Dravidian an opposition voiced: voiceless in initial position? and,
ganic stop, consonant clusters are comparatively rare and never tauto-
second, Did such an opposition exist in intervocalic position? Apart from
syllabic. They comprise the following combinations (cf. Tolkappiyam,
these fundamental problems of Dravidian comparative linguistics, how-
Elutt-atikaram 23, 26, 29): {k, rk, yk, rk, Ik, fk, {k, 1)k, lJk; te, re, ye, re
ever, there is a more modest one, which concerns only the historical
le: le, {e, 1)e, lJe; {p, rp, yp, rp, !p, fp, {p, IJP, lJP; yt, rt, fr, and in loanwords,
development of Tamil. Indeed, if Caldwell's "law" may be taken to hold
kt, et, etc. Apart from these clusters the Tamil plosives occur in the
good for modern Tamil, it stilI remains to be demonstrated that it is
folIowing positions:
also correcl as rar as Oltl Tamil is conccl'I1ed. Now, (his is dcnicd by
A. initially
Prof. C. R. Sankaran, P/¡ol1únies of Old Tamil (1951), p. 11, who writes
B. in intervocalic position
"The very fact that in the first sütra of Tolkappiyam, Efuttatikáram, itself
C. (phonemically) as a geminate ("doubled")
we meet with the statement that there are only thirty linear phonemes in
D. after the homorganic nasal
Old Tamil, nullifies Caldwell's unwarranted assumption of the conver-
The phonetical value of the plosive phonemes in these various positions
tibility of surds and sonants in ancient Tamil". Although these words,
may approximately be noted as folloWs:
taken in themselves, are no doubt open to serious criticism, we should
not lose sight of the fact that they do not simply reproduce the view A B e D
previously taken by P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri (which will be discussed k [k] [x, 9, y, li] [kk] [g]
below). Some six years earlier Sankaran had already stated, in an article e [s, J, tn [s] [ttSJ [d3]
written by him and A. C. Sekhar, that the "observation ofthe colloquials t [<t] [tt] [clJ
of Tamil-Malayalam and our laboratory investigations incline us to t [t] [5] [tt] [d]
question the validity of the convertibility theory and its practical appli- P [p, pcp] lb, ~] [pp] lb]
cations" (Bull. Deeean Coll. Res. Inst. vol. 6 (1945), p. 159; cf. also vol. 8 11! [r] [tt, ttr, ttJ] [d, dr, QJ]
Generally it should be noted that the length of the geminates shows a
1 3rd ed. (1913), p. 138 f. great variability; phonetlcally it is often equivalent to that of a single

34 35
210 F. B. J. KUIPER
voiceless tense stop, especially in the third or fourth syIlable of a word.
As the synopsis shows, aH phonemes which belong to the Tamil system
of plosives are pronounced voiceless initially and when "doubled", but
as voiced stops after the homorganic nasal. It is true, incomplete occlusion
is occasionaIly noted even in initial position, e.g. in pü!)ai "cat", when
pronounced [pepu:nei]. See Firth, A sltort Outline ofTami/ Pronunciation,
p. iv. In the last category neither the occ1usion nor the voicing is always
clear and unambiguous. Thus S. K. Chatterji, BSOS. 2, p. 193, renders
the words anta, vantá!), nél'11tatu phoneticaIly by [An5;}], [vAn5ccn],
[ne:rn5;}5rn] (but -(n)/- in the third syIlable of ciranta by [JirAnd;) D,
which is confirmed by the statement in Tamil Culture 4, p. 69, that
cérntu is pronounced with [15] of Engl. this, while it agrees more or Iess
with Gordon Matthews' description of t in nt: "as d in did, less voiced
and slightIy aspirated" (BSOS. 5, p. 992). Similarly Beythan's statement
that p in mp is "meist stimmhaft" seems to imply the possibility of an
unvoiced lenis, while the authorities give diametrically opposed rules for
p after !J, e.g. in a!)pu "love". See below pp. 223 and 213.
The chief difficulty, however, is the phonetic value of these phonemes
in intervocalic position (category B). As may be expected a priori, there
is in this posÍtion, in the absence of any phonemic opposition other than
that of geminate: single stop, a wide range of possible realizations.
k: the normal pronunciation is that of a lax voiceless fricative [x] or
[9] (German ach- or ich-sound); e.g., [mAxAn] for maka!) "son, child".2
Very little is known, however, about the whole range of variations that
actually occur, nnd about their geographical amI social contexto There
is a definite difTcrence bctwcen the pronunciation in ordinary conver-
sation and in slow, careful speech. Cf. the different palatograms of véki
in the very important study of Svarny and Zve1ebil, Arcltiv Orientální
23 (1955), p. 416 (nrs. 73 and 74). These authors controvert the prevailing
view of the fricative character of intervocalic k, t, p, which phonemes
according to them are "articulated simply with a weakened occlusion
(even if the occlusion is eventually so weakened that it is, sometimes,
not completely produced at aH)" (p. 381, n. 15). This weakened occlusion
is met with "especially in ordinary conversation, not so often, however,
in distinct pronunciation" (p. 394). These words, which draw attention
to an important difference that may be observed in many languages, are
11 cr. e.g. Rhenius, A Grammar 01 the Tamil Langllage 1st ed. (Madras 1836), p. 15
(x or y), Graul, Olltlíne 01 Tamil Grammar p. 8 ("somewhat Iike the German ch in
Bach, but rather softer"), Gordon Matthews, BSOAS 8, p. 992 ("as ch in loch"),
Firth, A short Outlíl1e 01 Tamil PronunciatioTl, p. x.
36
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHO~OLOGY 211
not meant to suggest that a pronunciation [mA~n] witltout weakened
occlusion is possible. As DL Zvelebil wrote to me, he has heard variations
ranging from [mAgh;}n] with a weakened, even strongly weakened,
occlusion but without friction, to [mAX(m]. The following words written
by "A Senthamilan" in Tamil Culture 4, p. 70, would seem to suggest
the conc1usion that even the realization as a voiced plosive is not quite
inconceivable: "In many dialects now, they [tite stops] assume after a
vowel the value of the fricative allophone and, in the case of people
-&flW.king in a highly Sanskritised way, the voiced allophone. Thus, for
example: pakal is articulated as (PAXAL)-fricative, or (PAGAL)-voiced.
Sorne persons use this pronunciation even where the consonant occurs
initially. This is principally due to the influence of Sanskrit and English
on Tamil Speech. In any case it is only a preference for one allophone
as against another of the same phoneme" (cf. also Arden, quoted in
note 4). I once heard a c1ear voiced plosive [g] in a very artificial situation,
when an informant was reading a Kural-text for a recording. Afterwards
he strongly denied the possibility of this pl'onunciation until he heard his
own voice played back from the tape. Apart from this exceptional case,
1 have never heard, even in the slowest and most careful pronunciation,
but a fricative sound. However, a voiced [y] and even [ft], which according
to sorne authorities occurs only in the (weakly stressed) third or fourth
syllable of a word (e.g., in vaJiyáka "in a way")3 rpay also be heard
pronounced by sorne speakers in, e.g. [mAyAn] and is'¡ indeed recognized
by several authorities. 4 The sole statement for inte'rvocalic k/that is
• Beythan, Praktische Grammatik del' Tamilsprache, p. 27 (who however writes
[varuxire:nl), and Firth, op. c. p. II (e.g. in orllkiilallil, but he admits voiced h aIso/in
disylIables before a or u, e.g. in takum, ciikllm, see p. X). Vinson, J. As. XI. 13 (1919),
p. 116, categorically denies the existence of a pronunciation [h], whereas P. S. Subrah-
rnanya Sastri, Compar. Gramm. olthe Tamil Language, p. 69, declares it to be a pecu-
liarity of the Tanjore aritl Trichinopoly district, and Subbaya (see n. 4), of the Brahman
pronunciation.
• Cf.e.g. Rhenius (see aboye), CaldwelI, Comparo Gramm. 2nd ed. p. 23 (3rd ed.
p. 140), who compares the sound of lrish gh and transcribes e.g. magan (Iike the
Grammaire Iranr;aise tamo/de par un provicaire apostolique, p. 9, and Vinson, Manuel
de la langlle tamoule, p. 17), Pope, A Tamil Handbook 2nd ed. p. 11 (y as in German
Tag), Arden, A Progressive Grammar 01 Common Tamil, 1st ed. p. 28 ("often pro-
nounced, specially in Madras, with a simple g sound: but in other parts, specially in
Tinnevelly, it takes an aspirate sound of gh"), Sub baya, A Primer 01 Dravidian Pllono-
logy, pp. 19, 43 (a voiced velar spirant fricative y in the non-Brahman dialect, but an
aspirate h in the Iiterary pronunciation), S. K. Chatterji, BSOS. 2, p. 192 f. (y, sorne-
times unvoiced to x). See also below § 9 on the Jaffna-dialect, and cf. J. Bloch, MSL,
16 (1910), p. 8 ([g, y], sometimes [h] in the regional dialects of the Brahmans, lb, v],
but also [g] in those of the higher Sudra castes, without any apparent rule), Gordon
Fairbanks, Ind. Ling., 17 (1957), p. 110, n. 16 (free variation between [y] and [xl).
37
212 F. B. J.
generally valid would seem to be that it is a lenis stop with a more or
less loose contact owing to the lax pronunciation. Voícing is no general
characteristic of it.
e: "a medium frequency s with a little J in it" (Fü·t"h, op. C., p. xi)
I have never heard a voiced [z] in this position, but Firth not only notes
a lax pronunciation (which is unquestiollable) but also states that it is
intervocalically frequently voiced (which Beythall, Praktische Grammatik
del' Tamil-Sprache, p. 29, holds possible only in the third syllable, as in
paricu ['PAriZur], pe{icam ['pd:qizAm)). Dr. Zvelebil, too, has heard this
variant. Still, Beythan is probably right in stating thut intervocalic e
is "überwiegend stimmlos".
{: in contrast to the other plosivcs the cerebral (retroflex) ! is inter-
vocalically a voieed stop.
t: always a voieed frieutive [o]. Only Beythan (p. 31) makes an ex-
ception for the position after y, where according to him a voiced stop
[d] is pronounced, e.g. [sejdi] fol' ceyti "news". The eorrectness of this
statement is confirmed by Dr. Zvelebil. On the other hand, the "Sen-
thamilan" in Tamil Culture 4 (1955), p. 69 quotes ay tal as an instanee
where [9] of Engl. thin is pronounced. Neither pronunciation is known to
me from personal experience, nor did I find a reference to them elsewhere.
p: as a rule single p does not oceur intervocalically in genuine Tamil
words, since it has here become v in the first centuries A.D. So most
examples are Sallskrit loanwords, where the influence of the learned
Sanskrit pronunciation cannot be eliminated. According to Graul, Out-
line 01 Tamil Grammar, p. 8, p is here [b] "but rather softer", which no
doubt refcrs to the very lax pronunciation. As a result of this, the oc-
clusion is very weak and incomplete, which gives the acoustic impression
either of a "voiced bi-labial frieative [~]" (Firth, p. iV)5 or even, if 1 am
not mistaken, of a very weak applosive merging into a fricative (accor-
dingly an affricate [b~]). This is at least the sound that seemed to be
produced by sorne educated Tamil speakers in, e.g., capai [sab~ei], which
refleets Skt. saMa. However, to others, no less educated, the pronun-
ciation [~] appeared to be unknown, and one ofthem (a Sanskrit scholar!)
denounced it as "absurd". They pronounced [sabei], which Firth, p. xi,
notes as the "Sanskritic pronuneiation" (with bol' bh). At any rate, most
authors do not leave any doubt as to the sound being voiced. Still, in
the case of the frieative pronunciation, one may sometimes get the im-
pression that the fricative is essentially voiceless, perhaps with a voiced
glide forming the transition to the following vowel, something like
5 Graul, op.C. p. 9 "tibam (nearIy tivam)" obviously means [ti:~Aro].
38
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 213
[sa<p~ei]. It is interesting to note in this conneetion that in Tamil Culture
4, p. 69 the p in vaypa{u is described as a [ep]. A similar experience has
probably indueed Clayton, in the 5th edition of Arden's "Progressive
Grammar 01 Common Tami!, p. 46, to define the intervocalic p, in a
marked eontrast to Firth's description, as "a much laxer p sound"
(viz. than initially). This description, though unique, may be partly
correet but instrumental investigations are needed definitively to solve the
problem. It may be added that a similar disagreement about p prevails
in sorne other positions, e.g. in carpu, na{pu, where it is aecording to
Clayton "a sound between p and b", whereas others reeognize b for the
first word (ef. Vinson, Manuel p. 210: marbu), but p for the latter (e.g.
Graul, p. 9, Arden, 1st ed. p. 27, Vinson p. 203). In i[2pam the pis voioed
according to Arden p. 27, Vinson pp. 18, 189, Firth p. iV,6 and Clayton
p. 46, but Beythan p. 31 states expressis verbis that it is voiceless in allPu
"love", and Svarny-Zve1ebil, Arch. 01'.23, p. 385, are equalIy emphatical
on this point. There may be a considerable fluctuation but very often
the voicing, if there is any, is hardly perceptible. One hears a very lax
p, perhaps followed by a voieed glide.
!Ir: the alveolar plosive of Old Tamil (ef. Kota ti d, Parji d, (l, Kolami d)
has intervocalicalIy become an alveolar vibrant consonant sinee the
Middle Tamil period.? In 1891 Arden stated that "practieally little dif-
ferenee is made in the pronunciation" of! and r, and in 1909 Subbaya,
Primer 01 Dravidian Phonology p. 34 (:Ind. Ant. 1909, p. 210), noted that
"in New Tamil the distinction between ! and l' is fast disappearing".
In the normal speech this process seems to be completed. Modern
phoneticians do not reeognize any difference between both sounds, which
accordingly have become one phoneme in this position. 8 When a dis-
• On the other hand, Firth, p. xv prescribes [ijalppru] for iyalpu.
7 L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, Educational Review, Dec.1938, pp. 3-4. For MOÓ~LpL; =
Muciri see below, p. 221. For the problem generally see Ramaswami Aiyar, lJistory 01
the Tam. Mal. Alveolar Plosive, Journ. Madr. Univ. 8 (1937), which is not accessible
to me.
s See, e.g., S. K. Chatterji, BSOS 2, p. 192, Firth, A Short Out/ine 01 Tamil Pro-
nunciation, p. xvi, Clayton in Arden's Progressive Grammar 01 Common Tamil, 5th
ed., p. 48 ("essentially the same sound. But r is sometimes rolled or trilled a Httle
more than r"), Svamy-Zvelebil, Arclziv Orientální 23 (1955), p. 388, Subrahmanya
Sastri, Comparative Grammar 01 the TamU Language, p. 63 ("It is now gradually
replaced by r in colloquial Tamil").
9 The r is said to be half-dental and half-lingual (Graul, Outline p. 4, Schomerus in
Glasenapp, Die Literaturen Indiens, p. 273), a velar r ("Gaumen-R", Schomerus, Die
Hymnen des Mtil,1ikka-Va§aga, p. IV), a pala tal sound (Pope, Tiruva9agam, p. xcvii,
cf. Handbook p. 11: "to the ridge of the palate"; to Dr. J. Pinnow, Berlin, I owe the
information that sometimes an articulation resembling that of the palatalized r in
39
 -~---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
214 F. B. J. KUIPER
tinction is marle in educated speech 9 (and according to my very modest
experience every educated Tamilian maintains that he makes sorne
distinction), this is perhaps equally artificial in origin as the pronunciation
in educated speech of [1" Ilr as mr], [UQr] with an additional r-sound,
which seems to owe íts ofigin to a misinterpretation of the spelling and
an attempt to reproduce this misapprehension in the actual pronun-
ciation.1o "The tendency of modern colloquial Tamil to distinguish
the r (from r) by a mere velarization of the resonance-chamber through
Russian m6re ean be heard), a strong r (Vinson, p. 18: "un r fort", similarly, e.g.,
Meile, Mélanges asiatiques 1940--41, p. 90, Beythan, Praktische Grammatik p. 33), an
alveolar trill (Emeneau, Language 21, p. 185 note). Cf. Ramaswamí Aiyar, Bull. of
the Sr¡ Rama Varma Res. Inst. 6, 1938, p. 7, who assumes "a palato-alveolar trill
(slight1y eerebralised sometimes) in some of the south Indian speeehes in an aneient
past". See also note 11.
10 For this diffieult problem er. Ramaswami Aiyar, Tbe Educational Review, Dec.
1938, p. *4: "The long voieeJess alveolar plosive ti had, according to the old co~men.
tary (12th or 11th century) on ViracO!iyam, already the v~lue of dental tt In the
colloquial of the period, though it is also pointed out that thls val~e was current on~y
among th<; arivil!iidiir "the ignorant". Today, the Tam. colloqu~als of .South India
always use the valueof dental tt in colloquial utterance, though In readmg te~ts ~he
oId group !t is evaluated aSJ!Cr). [Note: The l' here is an alveolar l' homorgamc w1th
the sounds preeeding it in the groups]. Similarly, the alveola: group od had alrea~y
in late Middle Tam. coIloquial speech, the value of UU, as IS shown by C?lloqUlal
instances (in the inscriptions) like el/UII for eugu, OllUII f?r OL/gII,. etc. To~ay, In collo-
quial speech, the value of O (or of ¡nI in some'areas, partlcularIy In th~ nelghb?urhood
of back vowels) is given though when texts are rcad the group lld (wntten or) IS evalu-
ated as lJff(r)" [with th~ same note as aboye]. In explanation of this "so-caIled 'ex-
cresent' r which IIppenrs in the south lndinn Tnmil liternry evn!untion of 1/(/,) lInd
ud(r)" the same author rcmarks in (he BI/Il. Sri Rama Vorma. Rc:s. Institllle 6 (193~),
p. 7 f.: "Therc are reasons to think that the alveolar stop was m(¡mat~ly b~und up In
sorne contexts with a palato-alveolar trill (sliglltly cerebralised sometlmes) In some of
the south lndian speeches in an ancient past .... At the same time one has to recognise
that (except in soutll lndian Tamil) the incorporation of the trill in the evaluation of
the groups 11 and lId or in their cognates is not met with in the south lndian speeches;
cr. Te!. !r < 11; Te\. ¡ti! < od; and also cf. the Jaffna Tamil evaluation of 1.and od ....
In Malaya¡am the trill is not embodied in the evaluation either of tt (both h!erary ~nd
colloquial), or of litarary llff (when texts are read)." It may here be noted m passmg
that the exact pronunciation in the Jaffna dialect would deserve a monograph. P. S.
Subrahmanya Sastri, Comparalive Grammar 01 the Tama Language, p. 65, h?lds that
this very dialect proves the original pronunciation of U to have been ~ttr], -:vhlch how-
ever is likely to be due to some misapprehension (see p. 223 of thls artlcIe). Now,
since in other respects, too, the idea of educated Tamilians about what a .correet
pronunciation should be is sometimes largely infiuenced by the script - as an IIlustra-
tion that is particularly instructive in this connection 1 may mentiDn the case of an
excellent Tamil schoolmaster with a very good insight into the phonetics of his mother-
tongue who at one time insisted upon my pronouncing, e.g., eOfll as [jennu~, no d?ubt
beeause the absence of a symbol for [d] in the spelling ellfll suggested to hlm the Idea
that the [d] is here an "excrescent" sound - 1ventureto suggestthat themodern educated
pronunciation of Tamil r in llf, fr "like the English fricative r-sounds in laundry,
40
..
.---------------------------------~
the hollowing of the back of the tongue (without any raising of the point
of articulation of the tonguetip to the palato-cerebral portion of the
mouth roof"l1 is perhaps, in spite of the colloquial character assigned
to it, rather peculiar to the educated speech, and the aItered quality of
preceding front vowels, e.g., in piraku [plr;;lnm],12 may be supposed to
be a result of that specific pronunciation of r. However, the available
information about the real facts of the pronunciation and their geo-
graphical and social spread is still astonishingly pOOl'. It may be noted
that, since the geminate 11 has become dental tt in the colloquial as
early as the 11th or 12th century (see note 10), the original alveolar
phoneme 1/4 has now completely disintegrated in colloquial Tamil.
From the preceding survey it follows that the opposition surd (initial-
ly): sonant (intervocalically) is not a general characteristic of the Tamil
plosive system. It is found in the phoneme t, but not (or not con-
sistently) in the phonemes k and c. In the case of p the details are not
sufficiently cIear, whereas t does not occur initialIy, and r must be ex-
cluded from the system of plosives in modern Tamil. The fundamental
opposition is rather between tense articulation and lax articulation
(accordingly between fortis and lenis), the latter of which may additio-
nally be characterized by voicing but need not necessarily be so.
3. Caldwell's opinion that his "law" holds good also for Old Tamil has
particularly been disputed by P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri. 13 His main
patrol" (Firth, A short Outline 01 Tamil Pronunciation, p. xvi) is artificial in its origino
For those speakers who still distinguish Of, ff, from nt, If, and intervocalic f from r,
the statement "that alveolar !' and dental l' are two distinct phonemes in Tamil"
(Narasirnhia and Sankaran, BDCRI 4 (1942), p. 154, Gai, ibid. 6 (1944), p. 58 n. 1),
holds good. While Irkl is still [tk] in the Jaffna pronunciation, colloquial Middle
Tamil inscriptions already confound it with rk (Ramaswami Aiyar, Educ. Rev., I.c.,
and Bulletin, p. 14). Intervocalically the one-tap /r/ is in the Jaffna dialect quite
different from the alveolar trill Ir/. For the geminate Inl see also Gordon Fairbanks,
Ind. Ling. 17, p. 110, n. 12. A 9th cent. instance of [tt] for [!t] is apparentIy ettu-
"to praise" Tiruvac. 1.49 against erru- Tol.
11 L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, A Primer 01 Malayiílam Phonology, Bulletin 01 the Sri
Rama Varma Research Institute 6 (1938), p. 20. The sound described by Beythan p. 33
(and perhaps that presupposed by Meile, Introduction au tamoul, p. 17) may be es-
sentially the same. Perhaps A. C. Sekhar's staitling definition "The cerebral (or
retrofiex) f of Tamil-Malayalam group" (BDCRl. 12, p. 8, also in Sankaran, Phonemics
01 Old Tama, p. 8) is also an attempt to describe the phenomenon referred to by
Ramaswami Aiyar.
aSee Beythan p. 34 (following Lazarus), Meile, Introduction, p. 17.
l. See History 01 Grammatical Theories in Tamil and their relation to the grammatical
Literature in Sanskrit (1934), pp. 49-57 [= Journ. 01'. Res. Madras 6 (1932), pp.
35-43], and the same author in Tolkiippiyam, E!uttatikiíram (Madras 1930), Introd.
41
216 F. B. J. KUIPER
arguments are the following: 1) the author ofthe Tolhippiyam, who had
a very exact phonetic knowledge, does not state any difference between
voíced and voiceless plosives but calls them indiscríminately vall-eluttu
"hard consonants". 2) the Old Tamil script uses the symbol k to denote k,
kh, g, gh in Sanskrit loanwords, which is taken to prove that "at the
time when the Tamil scrípt was newly invented, it did not have the voíced
consonant sounds". Both arguments are based on a neglect of the concept
of phoneme. Although theoretical definitíons of "phoneme" have not
be en formulated before modern times, nothing prevents our assuming
that the grammaríans of Old Tamil, while using (like the comparativists
ofthe first decades ofthe 19th century) the term "letter" (eluttu) to denote
both a symbol and the sound represented by it, practically operated with
that concept. The Tolkappiyam (Elutt-atikaram 19-21) c1asses the con-
sonants as follows:
19: vall-eluttu (hard letters): ka, ca, ta, ta, pa, la
na, ña, 1)a, na, ma, !Ja
20: mell-eluttu (soft letters):
21: itai-y-eluttu. (middle letters): ya, ra, la, va, la, la
14
This classification, which the author perhaps owes to earlíer scholars.
shows sorne traces of the system of the Sanskrít grammar, for the place
ofthe alveolar stop at the end (while it should have been between t and t)
shows that the sequence guttural, palatal, cerebral, dental, labial has
been borrowed, the alveolar phoneme (unknown in Sanskrit) merely being
ndded to it, jusI as lil,fil (01', 1110re eorreclly, fa, fa) have beell added to t1~e
group ya, ra, la, va of the Sanskrit alphabet. On the otiler hand, the mam
tripartitíon is based on the different amount of energy (muyarci) involved
in the articulation of the various sounds. It is incorrect, accordingly, to
interpret "hard letter" as denoting "voiceless consonant" .l~ No argume~t
as to the real pronunciation of these "letters" can be denved from thlS
grammatical system, which is rather of a phonemic nature. The idea that
p. VI, Tolkappiyam, E!utlatikiiram with an elab?rate .col~mentary (1937), p. 5 (vide
Introd. p. 89), Comparative Grammar 01 TamIl (Tnchmo~oly 1947), pp. ?~, 7~,
Historical Tamil Reader (Annamalai 1945), pp. XX, 79. HIs theory that VOlcmg 18
posterior to the 12th cent. A.D. was criticized by Sankaran and Sekhar, BDCRI,
6 (1946), p. 159. . .
u For references in the Tolklippiyam to earher scholars see P.S. Vedachala Alyar,
Journ. Oro Res. Madras 7 (1933), p. 56. . scriptions et Belles Lettres, janvier 1947, pp. 107-118, esp. p. 109. For a reproduction
15 P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri, History 01 Grammatical T/¡eories, p. 52, and his editlOn
Tolkappiyam vol. 1 (1936), p. 3, Tuttle, JAOS. 57, p. 4.15 (co?,tro.verted by L. ~;
Ramaswami Aiyar, JAOS. 58, p. 665). Sankaran's rendermg by vOlcedconsonants
(Phonemics olOld Tamil, p. 23) hás been corrected in BDCRI. 12 (1951), p. 240.
42
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 217
rall-eluttu refers to "voiceless" (as distinct from "voiced") is exc1uded
both by the absence of any such a phonemic opposition and by the
testimony of the old commentaries. 16
4. The Seript. The evidence of the Tamil script has often been adduced
as an argument in favour of an Old Tamil system consisting exclusively
of surdsY The facts now known to us are the following. The oldest
inscríptional use of a Tamil script we know of is (apart from sorne short
Bra,hmi .inscriptions in natural caverns that have be en assigned to the
3rd cent. B.C.) that of the graffiti of Virapatnam (wrongly known as
Arikamedu). These must date from a period between 20 and 60 A.D.
and are written in a script also known from two Old Sinhalese inscriptions
dating according to Filliozat from 29 B.C. This script is essentially the
so-called Asolean Brahmi. Now one of the inscriptíons ofVirapatnam
led Filliozat to suppose that here an era was in use which counted the
years elapsed since the introduction of Buddhism into South India, whích
again may be put at about 251 B. C. on account of the 13th Rock Edíct
of Asoka. Be that as it may, the use of the Asokan Brahmi for Tamil can
hardly be prior to the missionary actívity of the North Indian king. Now
the interesting point is that these BrahmI graffiti show just the same
praetice as the later Tamil script does. Filliozat remarks about them:
"Elles sont intéressantes en ce qui concerne l'orthographe du tamoul qui
est déja conforme a celle des documents des époques elassiques et moder-
nes. C'est ainsi que les occ1usives intervocaliques qui sont aujourd'hui
prononcées sonores mais marquées par le meme signe que les sourdes
correspondantes, sont figurées de meme a Virapatnam. A la différence
de ce qui a líeu en moyen-indien, les redoublements sont marqués, quoi-
que non constamment et sans l'usage du point qui peut surmonter le
premier élément en tamoul plus réeent".lB The existence of this script at
that date raises a number of questions. First of all, the grammar Tol-
kappiyam presupposes a written language, as the frequent references to
the script and the use of the term eluttu "letter" for what would now be
14 See Ramaswami Aiyar, JAOS. 58, p. 665, and cf. the reference to IjampfuaQar
in Subrahmanya Sastri, History 01 Gramm. Theories, p. 48 f.
11 cr. a1so Edwin H. Tuttle, Dravidian Developments (Language Monographs 5,
1930), p. 12.
18 Filliozat, Les inscriptions de Virapatnam, Comptes-rendus, Académie des In-
of the dravicji characters see R. E. M. Wheeler, Arikamedu in Ancient India, Bull. Arch.
Surv. 01 India, Nr. 2 (July 1946), p. 110, fig. 45. My thanks are due to Mr. A. P. Ke1der
of the Kern Institute, Leiden, for having drawn my attention to the study of Mr.
Filliozat.
43
218 F. B. J. KUIPER
called a "phoneme" indicate. From the general character ofTolkáppiyam
we may infer that this written language was a literary language. On the
other hand, we may suppose, on the analogy of what is known of North
India, that the Asokan Bráhmi script has be en introduced into South India
primarily for practical purposes, such as the fixation of contracts, grants,
etc. In this connection it is interesting to note that sorne donative reeords
written in a primitive form of Bráhmi script have been assigned to the
3rd cent. RC., which, if correet, would confirm our supposition. (Cf.
K. A. Nilakanta Sastri, History of India, pt. 1, 1950, p. 74). The use
ofthis script for literary works must rather be due to a secondary develop-
mento However, if the Tolkáppiyam would really date from the 3rd
cent. B.C. (ás it is frequent1y assumed to dO),19 we should have to reckon
with the possibility that the script it refers to is an older native one, which
has only Iater been ousted by the Northern dráviifi script found in
Virapatnam. Since nothing is known about such an oIder script, and
since the Tolkappiyam is likely to date from a much later period (perhaps
450-500 AD., see aboye p. 194), it is safer to identify the script referred
to in the Tolkáppiyam with sorne form of the dráviifi that may have been
introduced into the Tamil country circa 250 RC., the earliest specimens
of which are perhaps the cave inscriptions mentioned aboye. In any case
the very existence of such a work as Tolkáppiyam testifies to a long
tradition of philologicallearning and theoretical study of literature. Now
such schoIars, versed in the analysis of their language ean very well be
expccted to have adaptcd the northcrn script to the phonemic system
of Tamil in a way which has justly evoked the admiration of Plodern
scholars. 20 If, however, the script is likely to aim at a phonemic rendering
19 cr., e.g., Sankaran, Phonemics, p. 17, M. Sh. PiUai, Ind. Linguistics 15 (1955-:56~,
p. 31 n. 3. No agreement has been reached (see the general remarks of K. K. PIllal,
Joum. Madras Univ. XXVIII, 2 (1957), p. 166): it is al so ascribed to the 5th cent.
B.C. (e.g. M. Arokiaswami, ibid. p. 13), the 4th cent. (V. R. R. Dikshitar, Studies in
Tamil Literature and History, p. 178), not later than the 2nd cent. RC. (Subrahmanya
Sastri, Historical Tamil Reader, p. X), last cent. B.C. (Zvelcbil, Are/l. Oriento 23!
p. 393), after 400 A.D. (K. G. Sankar, JRAS. 1924, t:. 6~7), w~erea~ L. V. Ramaswaml
Aiyar is inclined to question the claim that Tolkap~IY~:n IS pnor to" the Sa~ga~
literature, see Antltropos 33 (1938), p. 749. K. K. PIllal s article on The Brahml
Inscriptions of South India and the Sañgam Age" in Tamil Culture, vol. V, No. 2
was inaccessible to me.
20 Cf., e.g., Pope, The Nalarjiyar, Introduction p. xxx: "it is admirabl!"adapt7d to
the nature of the Tamil language, and seems naturally evolved from lt ; slmilarly
Vinson, Manuel de la langue tamoule, Introd. p. xxxii (also cited by Tuttle, D!,~vidian
Developments, p. 9): "cet alphabet est évidernment l'oeuvre d'un grarnmamen ~u
d'un groupe de grarnmairiens'; (cf. also J. As. X. 18 [1911], p. 653 f.), and Damel
44
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 219
of the language, the conclusions whieh Subrahmanya Sastri and Tuttle
have drawn from it are ill-founded.
5. Old Tamil Voicing in intervocalic Position.
An independent argument in favour of intervocalic voicing at the time
of the Tolkáppiyam is the occurrence of new forms with intervocalic v
(which have since remained in use) beside the oIder forms with p. Cf.
alapu (twice in Tol. El., avv-a{apu 1, mú-v-a{apu 1) against a{avu 10, and
the Sanskrit Ioanwords urupu 1 (urupu-nilai 1, urup-iyaI12), against uruvu 6
(etc.).21 The learned terms uvama-k-ki{avi "particIe denoting comparison"
(2) and uvama-t-tokai Tol. Col. (2) are also more likely to represent Skt.
upamá- than Prakrit uvamá-. In another Sangam text· occurs alipu
"destruction", for which Tol. Por. 115 has the more recent form alivu,
which remains in use in the Kural, etc. Other words, however, retain p
till such late O. Tam. texts as Nálati, e.g. marapu, for which a younger
forro *maravu does not seem to be attested. The frequent change of
initial p to V 22 is irrelevant in this connection.
It will no doubt be possible to find more instances of this kind. Those
quoted, though not numerous, have a fundamental importance because
p is the sole ph.oneme where the transition via [~] to a different phoneme
v makes it possibIe to detect clear traces of voicing. Since the occurrences
of the word variants Ieave no doubt as to p being oIder than v, we are driven
to the conclusion that at the time of ToIkappiyam the intervocalic p
was characterized by a Iax, voiced articulation.
6. Old Tamil in Greek Transcription.
The special importance of the testimony of such Greek sources as the
PeripIus and Ptolemy, whose date can be exact1y fixed, has long been
recognized. 23 They are probably contemporaneous with the oIdest
Jones, Tite Pholleme, Its Nature and Use, p. 23: "Those who originally invented this
orthography must have had a clear conception of the phoneme idea, though the
theory have never been formulated".
21 Cf. A. Master, ESOS. 9 (1939), p. 1006.
'3 See A. Chidambaranatha Chettiar, A Volume 01 Indian and Iranian Studies pre-
sellted fo Sir E. Denison Ross (Bombay 1939), pp. 75-78. Many details do not allow a
conclusion.
23 See, e.g., Caldwell, Compar. Grammar 01 the Drav. Lallguages, 2nd ed. Introd.
p. 92 fr. (3rd ed. p. 89 fr.);' Vinson, Manuel p. xxiif., S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Some
Contributions 01 Sourh India to lndian Culture (Calcutta 1923), pp. 332-342, Meerwarth
(A. M. Mervart), The History 01 the intervocalic Stops in the Dravidian Languages,
Comptes rendus de ['Académie des Sciences de l'Union des Républiques soviétiques
45
220 F. B. J. KUIPER
(Sangam) litera tu re of Tami12 4 and can on the whole be supposed to
reproduce the pronunciation of the geographical names that was usual
in the respective regions. The evidence points to the following conc1usions:
1. PI osi ves aftel' homorganic nasals are as a rule voiced, cf. IIo:vll(ovo<;,
IIo:vllmeXTvo: Ptol., TuvIlL<;(Tam. TOl)ti, in the North of the Céra-country,
Meilc p. 96), Nú,xuvllo: Per. Me:AXU(v)llo: Ptol. There are however some
exceptions, viz. IIe:p(yxO:PL (:Tam. perwi-karaí Caldwell), 'EAeXYXWp(0<;)
MO:VT(TOUp, MOCVTeXvoup.25
2. the dental phoneme is intervocalically rendered by d, ef. IIollouxr¡
Pero Ptol. (Tam. ~'Putukai, perhaps the older form of modern Putuvai=
Putucceri? See Schoff, Periplus p. 242 with references), IIollo1t¿poupo: Ptol.
(Tam. putu-p-per-ür "new great town"), Molloupo: ~o:cr(Ae:LOV IIo:vll(ovo<;
Ptol., Modura Pliny VI. 105 (contrasting with MMtópo: Arrianus, Methora
Pliny for the North Indian town Mathurd).26 Much later attested is
IIoullo:mho:vo: in Cosmas Indicopleustes 448 A (Tam. putu-p-pattar;am
"new town").27 There are no instances fo1' -k- and -p-, unless NLYO:¡.to: Ptol.
VII. 1. 12 (Renou: NLcreX¡.t¡.to:) stand s fol' Tam. nikamam.
3. the cerebral phoneme is intervocalically rendered by r, e.g. Kúipu
(Tam. k6ti),28 'Apouo:púiv (as most MSS. read in Ptol. VII. 1. 14 for
,Apouo:pvwv): Tam. Arul'á!ar, 20 KOTTO:-VO:pLX~ Pero (Tam. kuttaná¡u) and
other words in -vo:<; (Tam. llá{u "countl'y").30 ef. also cro:yyo:po: Pero
(Malay. cmiliarjam, Tam. cmiká{mn).31 A striking proof of the comparati-
vely exact rendering of these Dravidian names by the Greek and Roman
authors is the sceming cxception Modogalinga in Pliny VI. 19. 67 for
Socialistes·(D~klady Akademii Nauk), B. No. 7 (1928), pp. 142-149, chiefly based upon
Caldwell; see also A. Master, BSOS, 9 (1939), p. 1007.
04 B.g., P. Meíle, Mélanges asia tiques 1940-41, p. 89 with references, K. Zvelebil,
Charisteria Orientafia (Prague 1956), p. 408 f., K. K. Pillai, Journ. Madras Univ.,
Section A. Humanities, XXVIII, No. 2 (1957), p. 165.
25 For the pronunciation of nt in modern Tamil see pp. 210 and 223; for grantha
nd in 10th cent. Malayalam cf. Sekhar, BDCRI, 12 (1951), p. 16.
28 Ptolemy VII. 1.50 has for the latter Mo?oupo: ~ Túiv 8eúiv, which however may reflect
a Prakrit formo
27 Thus Winstedt's ed. instead of IIoullo1teXTO:VO:.
26 Meerwarth, p. 147. Cf., e.g., the French pronunciation of Tamil [4] aS [r], see
Vinson, J. As. XI, 13 (1919), p. 115.
29 S. K. Aiyangar, op. C., p. 341. [But Arllválar should be deleted!]
30 The oblique stem seems to be reflected by sorne names with VIXT-, cf. "O"&OUpIX
~o:cr(Ae:LOV l':WpVeXTO<; Pto!. VII. 1.91 (for Cola-ná{{u), and IIouvvcho: &'1 1i ~~pUAAO<;
VII. 1.86 (for Plluauáftu?). See also Caldwell, p. 96 (3d ed. p. 92) on ' ApXO:TOÜ:
árukát!1I (?). [Punná/a-: V. A. Smith, Early Hist., 461, M. Arokiaswami, JMadr Un.
23, 73 tr.]
al Cf. Hobson-Jobson S.V. jangar, Bloch, Langue marathe, p. 417, S. K. Aiyangar,
op. C., p. 340, Zvelebíl, Are/¡. Orientální 22 (1954), p. 586f.
46
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 221
Telugu Múrju-galiliga (:Skt. Tri-kaliliga- "the three Kalingas").32 Since t;l
is in modern Telugu an alveolar sound,33 its rendering by d in Pliny is
perhaps an indication that Telugu t;l was already different from Tamíl
[(t] at that time. On the other hand, the alveolar [<1] of Tamíl is rendered
by r in MOU~LpL<; Per., MOU~r¡pL<; (etc.) Ptol. (Old Tam. Muciri, Modern,
Muyiri-kottam).34 Does this perhaps refleet [muJi<1i] or [mujigi]? Meile
p. 90, suggests muéiri or musiri, aecordingly with the Middle Tamíl
evaluation of cj (se e notes 7, 10 and 30).
I~ may finally be noted that K6AXOL Pero Ptol. allows no conc1usions
as to pronunciation of k in Tam. Korkai (Kolkai), as it may perhaps
refleet the West Coast pronunciation [kolkkai].35
Meerwarth's conc1usion (p. 148) "that the sonantisation of the inter-
vocalic stops must have be en completed at least at the beginning of our
era" is doubtless correct in so far as these words are meant to be a
synchronic statement for the Old Tamíl periodo See further § 9.
7. Gemination.
While in other South Dravidian languages an initial stop is voiced in
composition (e.g. Telugu müt;lu-galiliga for müt;lu kaliliga "the three
Kalingas"), it preserves its surd character in Tamíl in such compounds
(and in certain phrase units) by being "doubled", e.g. putu-p-pattar;am
"new-town". This has given rise to the suppositions 1) that tbis gemi-
nation is mere1y grapbical, and 2) that it has be en introduced in order to
preserve the voiceless character of the stop. The first thesis need not be
refuted. Owing to the absence of a phonetic opposition [k] :[kk], etc.
in intervoealic position, there is a wide range of possible realizations of
the gemínate, which is often phonetically a mere [k].36 It cannot yet be
decided, whether the occurrence of the single stop is regulated by prin-
cipIes strict enough to consider it an allophone of the geminate, or if it
must rather be considered a more incidental realizatÍon of it. 37 As for
32 Caldwell, p. 97 (3d ed. p. 94), Meerwarth, p. 148.
.. See Svarny-Zvelebil, Archiv Orientálni 23 (1955), p. 396.
u See Schotr, Peripflls p. 205, S. K. Aiyangar, op. C., pp. 336, 360, P. Melle, Mélanges
asiatiqlles 1940-1941, pp. 95, 98 n. 3, J. As. 234, p. 75.
35 For this pronunciation see L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, Bull. Sri Rama Varma
Research Inst. 6 (1938), p. 92, P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri, Comparo Gramm. 01 Tami/
Lang.p.87. .
10 Cf. Firth, Olltfine p. iü (the geminates are "tense as opposed to the lax articulation
of single p, k, t ...."), Beythan, Praktische Grammatik der Tamilsprache, p. 27. See
also Firth, BSOS. 8, p. 541 on modern Malayalam, Burrow-Bhattacharya, The Parji
Language p. 7, etc.
n Master's attempt to demonstrate the single character of the geminates kk, tf, ti,
47
222 F, B. J. KUIPER
Old Ta~il, the circumstance that in the dravüji-script of the graffiti of
Virapatnam the geminates as a rule are written double (in contrast to
the Prakrit usage) testifies to the fundamental importance of the oppo-
sition between geminates and single stops in this phonemic system. With
regard to the second thesis Master, BSOS 9, p. 1005, right1y remarks that
the gemination "is not a conclusive proof of intervocalic voicing, but is
explained better by the supposition of its existence than by any other·
theory".3S Some connection is likely to exist between both phenomena.
8. Tamil Words in a Sanskrit Text.
In a Sanskrit commentary written by Kumarila Bhatta c. 750 A.D.
the Tamil words atar, probo [AOAf] "road" and páp (:pámpu, probo
[pa :mbw]) "snake" are etymologically connected with the Sanskrit words
*atara- "difficult to be crossed" and pápa- "bad". Konow, Linguistic
Survey 01 India IV, p. 287, wisely refrained from drawing any concIusion
from tbis passage, but Bloch, MSL 19 (1914), p. 87, argued that the modern
pronunciation with voiced [o) and [b] must accordingly have arisen after
that date, and even after the grammar NaQ1}ül, dating from the 13th
cent. A.D.39 The cIear evidence of the Greek sources shows this con-
clusion to be wrong. It looks as if Kumarila Bhatta has derived bis
knowledge from a written source, but aIl details remain obscure. See the
ample discussion of this problem by Meerwarth, op.c. and cf. Kane,
JBombRAS 1921-22, p. 96, Renou, Hist. ¡angue skte p. 203 (nar/er for
atar?).
9. Conclusions.
The modern opposition between a tense voiceless articulation of the
plosives in initial position, and a lax (more or less voiced) articulation
with weakened occIusion intervocalically seems essential1y to have existed
already about the beginning of our era. This system is likely to be the
result of a specialization, which caused such single voiceless stops as
occur in the other Dravidian languages to disappear in intervocalic
position. Indeed, since the occurrence of both surds and sonants in tbis
position in the other languages can hardly be explained as the result of
etc. from the Old Tamil prosody (BSOS. 9 [1939], p. 1005) was based on an incorrect
idea of the prosodical value oS pI/lima and pu/ima,¡kay in the velJpii metre.
88 cr. Jules Bloch, MSL. 19 (1914), p. 89: "les redoublements de l'initiale .. " ne
sont pas probants". See also Meerwarth, op. c.
89 cr. also Subrahmanya Sastri, Historical Tamil Reader, p. 79 (rejected by Sankaran
and Sekhar, BDCRl. 6, pp. 160, 232).
48
TWO PROBLEMS OF OLD TAMIL PHONOLOGY 223
a secondary development, we cannot but conc1ude that at a prebistoric
stage of Tamil too, voiced as well as voiceless stop s must hefe have
occurred. The theory that Tamil at one time had only voiceless stops
lacks any foundation (see the sections 3 and 4). In support of it, it is
true, the Ceylonese pronunciation of Tamil is sometimes adduced.
P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri states that "Even now in Jaffna such voiceless
consonants are pronounced as voiceless and not voiced", but from his
words "in the dialeet spoken at Jaffna it is said that most of the sounds
g, j,. r/, d, b, § and h are not found"40 it is c1ear that he had no first-hand
knowledge of that dialecto His statement is presumably based upon a
misunderstanding. In 1953 1 had the opportunity to work for some time
with Mr. C. Balasingham from Tellippallai (Jaffna Distriet). With regard
to the intervocalic stops bis pronunciation did not show any material
difference from the continental norm. 1 noted, e.g. maka!) [mAyAn],
tolkáppiyam [toHia:ppijAm), vanta pótu [uAndg ~o:ow), eupé!) [enbe:n],
átu pol [a:cl.m ~o:l), and even iyalp'áka-v~é [ijal~a:ygve:] against Firth
p. xv, who states the standard pronunciation to be [ijalppw). It is true,
Pinnow informs me that he has heard [pa:mpm] for pámpu (see also
aboye, pp. 210 and 220), but in my recordings tampi is c1early [tAmbi),
and iruntu is [mundw). Oñly in 'ceyyum poruf{u the sound of p seemed
to be between [b) and [p). If however Tamil has simply given up the
older differentiation between surds and sonants in intervocalie position
and after nasals (e.g. Tam. kW;l{i [kwl1.cl.i) "buttocks" against Kannada
kw;z{e "pit": kW;lr/e "buttocks"), it is of eourse impossible to attribute the
intervocalic voicing to the influenee of Sanskrit loanwords. 41
Less clear is the problem, whether the voiceless character of the initial
plosives in Tamil, which constitutes the other aspect of CaldweU's law,
is also due to a secondary development of Tamil alone. In the other
Dravidian languages voiced stop s are comparatively rare in this position.
A discussion of this intricate problem lies outside the seo pe of tbis article.
Still; a very rough estimate of the relative frequency of initial surds and
sonants in sorne Dravidian languages is possible by eounting the pages
(respectively the columns, for Parji) in the dictionaries of Kittel, Sankara-
narayana, Burrow-Bhattacharya and Winfield. To facilitate a eomparison
with sorne non-Dravidian languages the corresponding figures for
Santali (Munda) and Sanskrit (Indo-European) have been added:
<o History 01 Grammatical Theories in Tamil, pp. 54 and 47 (= JORMadr. 6, pp. 40
and 33). Accepted by Beythan, Praktisclze Gramm., p. 19. The origin of this idea is not
clear, but it is already implied in the rather vague words which M. Srínivasa Aiyangar,
Tamil Studies (1914), p. 134, devotes to this problem.
ti Subrahmanya Sastri, Comparative Grammar 01 the Tamil Language. p. 68.
49
 224 F. B. J. KUIPER

Kannada Telugu Parji Kui

k/g 3: 1 2.4:1 2:1 1.4:1
c/j 2:1 7:1 (2.1 :1)
t/d 1.6:1 1.7:1 3.5:1 0.7:1 RIGVEDIC KfRtN- AND KRlr,.t-
p/b 1.4:1 3:1 2.5:1 0.7:1
Santali Sanskrit
k/g 1.4:1 2.5:1
c/j 1.1 :1 1 :1 F. B. J. KUIPER, Leiden
t/d 0.8:1 0.7:1
1. When; exactIy a century ago, the second volume of the Petersburg
p/b 0.7:1 5:1 Dictionary appeared, it contained s.v. kriLq,- a reference to some verbal forms
Th~ c01:np arison with Sanskrit has only a very l'estricted value on account in a passage of the Kathaka Sarhhita for which a meaning "to thicken" was
of I~S d¡fferen~ morphologicaI principIes. The preponderance of initial p, conjectured.2 Since it was natural to trace kriiq,- back to an older form
for mstance, IS Iargely due to the numerous compounds wI'th pano, . pra- "kruzd-, and since there exists in Avestan a word xruzdra- (compar.
. xraozdyah-; superl. xraozdista-) "hard" the etymological dictionaries soon
and pra~l- ..~n. the w~~le, however, the surd may be said to outweigh the began to quote krii</-- as a cognate of the Iranian word. 3 In spite of MAYRHO-
sona?t m 11lltJaI posItlOn in Kannada, Telugu, and Parji. Kui deviates FER'S prudent reserve in his Con'Cise Etymological Sanskrit Dictionary 1
conslderably from the Dravidian pattern and comes rather near to (1955), p. 280, we find again in DEBRUNNER'S recent Additions to WACKER-
Santali. If Tamil is held to have preserved the original state of th' NAGEL'S Altindische Grammatik, vol. 1, p. 2754 the brief note: "Kath. KapS.
th ... 1 .. mgs,
e 11l1tJa. so~ants m the other languages must be due to a generalization krüiJ,-, AV. VS. krocJ-: jAw. xriL'Zd-, g.jAw xraozd-". However, that krocJá-,
of sandhl-va:Iants (e.g. Ramaswami Aiyar), and to sorne extent perhaps m. "breast" (AthS. IX. 4.15 etc., VS.25.8) should realIy be a derivative of
also to the mfJuence of a foreign substratum (Burrow). On the oth this root (as Mahidhara had suggested in his commentary on VS.) is very
h d h" . er doubtful on semantic as well as phonetic grounds. 5 It will be briefiy dis-
an ,suc lllltIal sonants must have existed already at a fairly early date
cussed below. As for krii</--, the meaning assigned to it in 1858 can now be
perhaps even at a. time. prior to 1000 Re., if the Dravidian origin pro~
shown to be wrong. It occurs in the following passages of the Kathaka,
posed for such RIgvedlC words as gárta-, m. "throne, etc." is correct.
(with which those in the parallel recension of the Kapi9thala-Katha-Sarh-
hita are virtually identical) :
KS. VI.3 (: p. 51, 9 ff.), cf. KapKS. IV. 2 (: p. 38, 9 ff.):
Samiine ovai yona ástiim süryas ciignis ca, tatas sürya úrdhva udadra-
vat, tasya retal], pariipatat, tad agnir yoninopiigrh'lJ-ii4, ayasa tad a k r ú Q, a-
ya t, tat Te r ú Q, y a m ii 71 a m gavi nyadadhiit, tad idam payas, tasmiid atrapv

1. 'I'he following article elaborates a few ideas which have been briefly indicated
in "Studia 1ndologica, Festschrift für Willibald Kiríel" (Bonn 1955), but for which
a more extensive treatment appeared desirable.
2. PW. rr, col. 507: "viell. dick machen".
3. See, e.g., the etymological dictionaries of FrcK 14 (1890), p. 191, UHLENDECK
(1898-99) p. 68, LEUMANN (1907), p. 71 f., WALDE-POKORNY 1 (1930), p. 479, POKORNY
(1953), p.' 621 (but not in BARTHOLOMAE, Altir. Wb. See CALAND, WZKM 26, 1912, p. 123!).
4. Jakob WACKERNAGEL, Altindische Grammatik, Nachtriige zu Band 1, von Albert
DEBRUNNER (Gottingen, 1957), p. 154 (ad 1, p. 275, line 32).
5. Cí. also MACDONELL, Vedic Grammar, p. 57 n. 7 (with much reserve), LEUMANN
l.e. For further references see WALDE-POKORNY 1. 479.

51
50
 350 F. B. J. KUIPER
ayaspiitram pratidhuk k r ü q, a y a t i, yat payasiignihotram juhoty, amum
6
eva tad iidityam juhoti . .. and KS. VI. 7 (: p. 56, 20), KapKS. IV. 6 (: p.
44, 18 f.): reto vii eiad yad agnihotrarh, na sus]'tarh kuryü,d, retalJ, k r ü iJ, a-
yen, no a§rtarn, antarevaiva7 syü,d. The corresponding passage in the MaUra-
Ya:J;Ü Sarilhita reads as follows:
MS.I.8.2 (: p. 117, 12 ff.) sahá va eta astiirn agnís ca suryas ca, sarnliM
yónii, áyasi lóhite. Sá adityá ürdhvá údadravat, tásya rétalJ, pá1'lipatat, tád
agnír yóninópü,g?,h~t, tád enant v y d d a h a t, tásmiid úyo'trapú prati-
dhúk l~rám v í d a ha t i, túsmiid etáj juhvati .. (Hnes 16-17) natiSrtarh
kü,31'ydrh, réta~t s o ti a Y e t. With both recensions we may further compare
ApSS. VI 6.1 reto vii agnihotrarh na su§rtaú¡, ¡curVad, retalJ, kl1layen (comm.:
dahet) , no'§rtam, antarevaiva syü,t. VON SCHROEDER in a footnote to MS.
(p. 117), it is true, gives the readings of KS and KapKS as kü4ayati, and
in his footnotes on KS. (pp. 51 and 56) those of KapKS. as kümdayati and
trüq,ayen, but his statements are contradictory. Apparently krfrq,- is the
correet reading for KS. as well as KapKS.
'I'he parallel texts leave no doubt whatever that krüg,ayati is a variant
of the rather rare verb küq,ayati 01' külayati, for which the Maitr. version
has substituted the current synonym vidahati. 8 It is significant for the
antique charaeter of kiig,- that Apastamba writes intervocalically l, but
before a consonant q, (7.19.8 iihavan'iyasyü,'ntame'rigii1'e vapiilh nikiig,ya) ,
quite in accordance with the rules of the Rigvedic Samhita-palba, and in
the later literature küc;l- seems also exclusively attested in npakfr,g,ya (Caraka
3.7.). Tbe otber form is further met with in ~S. VIII. 26. 10c nédiyasalJ,
kü~ayiitalJ, par:ttmr utá "and they (viz. tbe Asvins) will scorcb tbe Pal)is
in our very neigbbourbood", in Ait. Br. IV. 9.1 asvatar'irathenii'gnir iijim
adhü,vat, tiisiim p1'iijarnano yonim aldi!ayat9 (comm. dagdhavü,n) , tasmiit tli
6. See CALAND, WZKM 26, p. 123, and Raghu VIRA'S note on KapKS.IV.2: ayaspatram
to be read for aya1¡, piitram KS. (VON SCHROEDER, and SANTlvALEKAn's edition of 1943, which
is a mere reprint of VON SCHROEDER'S text). The manuscript of KS. reads praticukrüqa-
yati (corrected by VON SCHROEDER), to which cukrü~ayati in WHrrNEY'S "Roots, Verb-
Forms and Primary Derivatives" (1885), p. 26 owes its existence. For yad payasa
( : tad payasa v. Schr.) d. KapKS. and CALAND, WZKM 26, p. 123.
7. Thus KapKS. ApsS. VI.6.1 (comm.: antarii, madhya, ¿va) for anta¡'enaiva KS.
Cf. CALAND, ZDMG. 72 (1918), p. 13. But CALAND still translates (WZKM 26, P'. 123 and
ApflS) "thereby he would make the semen coagulated (non-liquid)" (dick, d.h. unflüssig
machen). Owing to this misinterpretation he suggested to read /C1'l1¡ayiita~t for Rigv.
kü¡ayata1¡, (ZDMG. 72, p. 27, cf. NEISSER U, p. 63).
8. It may be noted in passing that ayaga tnd a/m1qu¡mt is a remodelling of an Old
Aryan expression, cf. Avestan K8r8siispo aynM,u pitlim pacnta (Yasna !J,l1).
9. Ed. Anandasrama Series (No. 32, pt. I, Poona, 1896), p. 459 reads akülayat.
52
RIGVEDIC KiRíN- AND KRlr"t- 351
\1.4vijéiyante, and latel', apparently as a technical term, passim in Susruta
(lculayati, avakiilayati, see PW).
Beside küc;l- the Dhatupatha 1.289 records a verb kwryJate "dlihe"
which is not entil'ely untrustworthy becuuse of Pkt. kU7J.ifaya-,n. "fire-place,
a small pot" (Desmamamala 2.63) and perhaps Pali kWl.tifalca- "kitchen".lO
A variant with l is again Pkt. kullac;la-, n. "fire-place" (Desln. 2.63). 'rhe
origin (01', at least, that it would be very hazardous to suggest a foreign
foreign character. It is true, tbere is still a comrnunis opínio that tbe
occurrence of a word in th~ Rigveda is a guarantee for its Indo-European
origin (01',. at Test, tbat it would be very hazardous to suggest a foreign
origin for such a word) , but this opinion can hardly be said to be founded
on facts,12 The problem, however, with whicb we are more particularly
concerned hel'e, is the existence of a variant krüg,- by tbe side of küq,-, kiil-.
2. Sanskl'itization of foreign wOl'ds by substitution of tr, dr (01' rt,
rd) for t, iJ, is well attested in tbe classical language. As instances may be
quoted kadr'Üka-, gadrüka-, m. beside gaij,tt-, m. "a hump on tbe back (of
the lndian bulfalo)", lex. candrila-, m. beside cal.1g,ila-, m. "barber",13 How-
ever, the circumstance that in sorne cases where borrowing from Dravidian
is probable, variants witb r are also found in Kannada, still awaits explana-
tion. If a form Dand1'aka- has existed in India beside Da1J4aka- (BAILEY,
TPS. 1952, p. 57 ff.) it must also be secondary in origino Sometimes we
find even r with the cerebral, e.g. Coc;lra- Mbbb. II.28,48 crit. ed. with many
10. The reading ku~qaya- is to be preferred to ku~(lhaya-, see the critical apparatus
of PrSCHEL'S ed. of Desinamamálii (2nd ed. by P. V. RAMANUJASWAMI, Bombay, 1938).
For Buddh. Hybr. Skt. kU7}qana-, one of the tortures in the hell, see EoGERTON, Dictional'Y
S.V. Pali kUf!.qaka- is quoted by J. BLOCH, Langue marafue, p. 316, but not recorded
by fue PTSDict.
11. TI there is sorne connection wifu Sora kucW.-/kul· "oven" (Parengi ku<Jon "fue"?)
and with Kharia kul(lii "fever", Pkt. kullaqa- might be a direct borrowing from these
languages, and Skt. kulha¡'-i, kulhar-iká "oven, pot" (Bhiivaprakiisa 3.150) might represent
an independent borrowing with r for if (see below, § 3 cf. however MAYRHOFER, op. C. I,
p.243). Note also kumuli- "fireplace" Desin.2.39, which might contain the infix -em-
discussed in Festschrift-Kirfel, p. 141 n. 11 (k-em-ul- > kumul-, through umlaut of the
vowel e). UHLENBECK also compared Skt. lcukt11a-, for which however only the mean-
ing "chaff" seems to be attested. (For Pali ku/cku¡a- "hot ashes, embers", BHSkt. /wküla-,
kukkula-, name of a hell, see MAYRHOFER 1, pp. 218, 565). Note Burushaski 9 uLas-,
Wercikwar 9 ól "to burn"!
12. See "Rigvedic Loanwords", Festschrift für W.Kirfel, pp. 137-185. Fo!' the lE.
etymologies proposed for Icüqayati see references ibid. p. 171, and MAYRHOFER I, p. 566.
13. See "Sprachgeschichte und Wortbedeutung" (Festschl'ift Albert DERRUNNER,
Bern 1954), p. 244 f., where this phenomenon has been discussed at greater length.
53
 352 F. B. J. KUIPER
vv. n. for Tam. Cola'lj (like karq,ana- "biting" in Gujarati Sanskrit),1 4
In an older text we find kudrici- for gui/-üci- (KauS.S.), and in the Yajurveda
víkiridra VS. 16.52 (VSIQi;r).va 17.52~ d. KapKS. 27.6) against víkiricf,a.
KS. 17.16 (: p. 259, 3). Although the occurrence of analogous instances
in the Rigveda cannot be questioned on account of rándryá, v.l. for the true
reading rom,if,ya VI.23.6d, still a similar explanation proposed for Rigv. kartá-,
m. "hole, cavity" (l. 121.13, n. 20.6, IX. 73.8f.) as against /vapá-, m. "depth,
hole" (1. 106.6, AthS.) has been rejected even though the foreign ol'igin
of the Pkt. words khatta-, gaif,a- etc. is accepted.1 5 See C. REGAMEY, Chatterji
Jubilee Volume (Ind. Ling. 16), p. 9 and MAYRHm'ER, Etym. Dict. l, p. 196.
However the doctrine of a Prakritic development of rt > t in the Rigvedic
language, though sanctioned by a long tradition, is scarcely founded 1G and
the explanation of kartá- as a Sanskritization of katá- would seem to be
rather the only one that is phonetically admissible accol'ding to our pl'esent
knowledge.
Sometimes, howevel', a somewhat diffel'ent procedure has been follow-
ed, which left the cerebral intact but substituted a cluster with r for the
initial consonant. This tendency has been at work in all periods of Indo-
Aryan. Sorne of the cases of "intrusive r" in Gujarati, for instance, which
P. B. PANDIT discusses in the Chatterji Jubilee Volume, p. 120 ff. belong
l'ather to this category than to the first, e.g. k8roy from Skt. koti-. See
also MORGNSTIERNE, Festskr. Olaf Broch, p. 154, and Prof. TuRNER, Nepali
Dict. s. v. dhasnuP A late class. Skt. instance may illustrate this point.
In aIl the three linguistic families of India we find wOl'ds with the radical
element tutjtot or tuif,/tof!, denoting "beak, spout". In late Skt. this word
14. On account of cipúdru- AthS.VI.1272d' (not in Paipp.), probo name of a plant,
which Wm:rNEY aIready supposed to stand for cípu4u-, attention may be drawn to lex.
kalidru- : kalinda- ""Terminalia Bellerica" (like balivarda-: balivanda-, Festschr. De-
brunner p. 247 n. 23); kalidTuma- is obviously due to popular etymology. Lex. retl'a-, n.
"aromatic powder" might reflect ret- (to be presupposed for Te~-ú- which replaces
p<'i1ns-1Í-) but the reading is very' doubtfuI.
15. Since Pkt. aga<!-a-,m. "pít" (which SHETH wrongly connects with Skt. avata-)
contains the Munda prefix a-, the Munda origin of ga<f,a-, khatta- etc. (Festschr. Debrun-
ner 245) seems reasonably certain; Kannada ka<f,<!-a "a pitfalI to catch elephants" (BUR-
ROW, BSOAS.XII, p.371, d. TPS.1946, p.21) is likely to be a borrowing from Munda.
Note Santali ga<!-a, Mundari ga<!-a, gara (Ho gaTa) "pit, hole" and cf. TURNER, Nep. Dict.
S.V. gli¡-nu·
16. See Festschr. Debrunner p. 245 (and esp. p.247 n. 21 for vikata-).
17. For Skt. udhTasnati, udhTásayati sorne connection might be suggested with San-
tali dt;r;sur, dhrpur "to break down, cause to fall down, collapse, sink" (influenced by dhasao,
id. from Hindi dhaslinii), tasrao, thasrao "to fling down, or away, throw down, (let) fall
down", See a!so MAYRHOFER S.V. dhrasniiti.
54
RIGVEDIC KIRfN- AND KRfI"l- 353
occurs as troti- (lexx., also in the Madras and Srirangam edd. of the Vásava-
daWi., see GRAY, Vasavadatta, p. 207, and in the YaSastilaka, see SCHMID'J.',
Nachtrage) 01' troti- (passim in the commentary on the Kádambari, glossing
cañcu-, e.g. p.52 ed. Nir.r,taya Sagara Press). Prof. TURNER, in his admirable
Nepali Dictionary, p. 245b l'ightly l'efrains from taking this as the authentic
prototype of tot- or tot-. Cognates with initial tare indeed attested as early
as the Atharva Veda (tÚJ7Jf!,ika- VIlI.6.5b). The cluster tr must be secon-
dary, as it is also in, e.g. trota ka- m., the name of a venomous insect (SuSruta
2.288.10) contrasting with totaka-, m. (ibid. 2.257.13!), see MAYRHOFER l,
537,18 More complicated is the case OI Skt. trutyati "breaks, is split", as
Lahnda and Sindhi have truttan and truP7Ju l'espectively; see TuRNER 245b
S.V. tutnu and 291a S.V. tornu. The earliest occurrence of trut- is in truti-,
f. "a' ;ery minute space of time" (Mhbh. 1.27.14 crit. ed., Varo BS.), "atom"
(lexx.) . For semantic as well as phonetical reasons TEDESco's ext>lanation
of trut- from *trtta- encounters insurmountable difficulties.19 No theory
that ignores the' existence of such word-groups as Santali thutt;r; "short,
maimed, shortened" (etc.) and the indications oI. foreign origin contained
in Hindi tW7Jtá. tm.l(J,ii, thuthií, thothii., tota "maimed, amputntcd" (Proto-
Munda Words 150) can be considered satisfactory.
Analogous instances are: drekkéinJ,a-, from Greek de'kJinós (apparently
from dek/vana- with n reproducing Greek n), lex. krüra- beside kil'l'a-,n.
"boiled ricé (cf. Tel~gu küq,u, Tam. kilO, where popular etymology (as
in trasara-, kramelaka-) is excluded. To. Pkt. bu~a~ "sinks, drowns"
corresponds Skt. vruf!,ita- in the RaiataranginI, but also vuiJ,ita- "magna7):'
in the commentary on KátsS. 20.8.16, and *bocJ,ayati, presupposed by lex.
bolayati "sinks". TuRNER 453a S.V. burnu rightly ignores the Skt. form
with vr-. Earlier attested is this initial cluster in vrüJ,ate "is ashamed"
18. For a similar use of variant forms in SuSruta, cí. kürcaka-,m. 1.101.17 etc. :
küci- f. 1.344.5 (see Festschr. Kirfe!, p. 160).
i9. See TEDESCO, JAOS. 73, 1953, p. 80 and the eritieal remarks by ~AYRHOFER
J, p. 536. The folIowing objections could be raised: (1) the assumptIon of a~
Early Middle Indian intermediate stage TU in the historieal development. of r lS
questionable since the vocalization has rather been directly from voealIc r, cf.
Rigv. múhu from *mrhu and J. BLOCH, BEFEO 44, 1951, p. 44 (2) the meaning
of tTd- "to split" cannot sufficientIy aceount for tTuti- "minute space of time".
(Not~ also the meaning "Iacuna in a manuscript" in mod.Skt.: "Ioss, destruction" Wil-
son, Apte). (3) trtta- is quite hypothetical, only trnna- being attested (4) since Pfu:¡..
3.1.70 alIows both trutyati and tTutati, only very decisive arguments cou!d induce us to
reject the natural analysis as trut-ya and tTUt·a-, and to explain the first form as a
Sanskritization of $tTUttati, the second by degemination of the first (5) the thesis that
traces of the alleged Prakritie degemination coul~ be found in Pfu:¡.ini is unacceptable~
55
 ---~ '---~-----
354 F. B. J. KUIPER
(since Mhbh. Ram.) for which the sole acceptable etymology is that proposed
by BURROW, viz. from Dravidian *vi<l-, (cf. Tam. viJivu, Kann. bi{liya, Tulu
birle "shame", Tam. vi~i- "to be overcome with shame"). All these words
are borrowings from foreign sources, and in all these the intrusive r must
be due to the adaptation of words, the second (01' third) syllable of which
began with a 'cerebral phoneme. (For the third syllable, cf. besides
drekka~a- also Drami{la- : tamiD . Also of this development, of which the
ultimate reason still remains obscure, traces can be found in the Vedic
language. The Atharva Sarhhitá has some such instances as húdu I.25.2 & 3
with the variant readings hrúrJ,u, hrúdru, rúrJ,u, or círJ,ük~a~: ádrülC?1Ja-
(mss.) VIII.2.16, for which Whitney conjectured árük~-. More interesting
is k1'orJ,á·, m. "breast" (AthS., VS., see above). Since the variant kola-, m.
seems only to be known so far from lexicographical works, it might be
explained as a Prakritism (MAYRHOFER, 1, p. 281), but k1'ü{layati: külayati,
vrttrJ,ati: bolayati show that this explanation is not necessarily correcto
MASTER'S suggestion to derive k1'o{lá. from Drav. kuJ-, lcurf,- "hollow, curved"
(BSOAS, 12, p. 363) fails to convince, but since k1'- (which he too consi-
dered secondary) need not be explained from a Dravidian proenthesis, we
may suggest some connection with Santali koram "chest, breast, bosom",
NIundari kuram "human chest, chest of birds", Ho 1etw,m "chest" (with
regular 10s5 of r). Munda words in -am or-om/-um are mostly early
borrowings from Sanskrit and Prakrit. In this case, however, the possi-
bility that the words are of genuine Munda origin may be 'considered on
account of Santo kondoram "the sternum, breastbone, chest of animals",
which may contain the same infix -nd- that is found in Korku bindil "to
sprcad" : Mund. Ho llil. etc. (Variation r : l' ir; often found in Sant., but
,. in 7wllc!ornm might nlso be dlle to nssimilation). Sce further TURNER
108b S.V. kolto. For class. Skt. krorf,a-, m. "boar" connection with Santo
lw{lu "a male, tlllcastrated pig, a boar" may be suggested, rather than with
Tam. kótu "tusk, horn" (MASTER). If our first supposition is correct, krOrf,á-
"breast" is a Vedic instance of "intrusive 1'" after an initial consonant.
We can now return to Ved. krürJ,- : k114-. The lE. etymologies that
have been proposed for 1ct1q,... are not only very improbable, but even un-
acceptable because none of them can account for the existence of a variant
root krür;L-, while all must necessarily try to explain the cerebral as the
result of a Prakritic development which is excluded for the Vedic periodo
Since the "intrusive r" is only found, according to our present knowledge,
in non-Aryan words, 7c(r)ü{layati must be a loanword, which accounts both
for the cerebral in a Rigvedic word and for the nasalized variant ku~te.
(MAYRHOFER'S doubt as to its connection with k{u1alla.ti (op. C. 1, p. 226)'
was indeed based on the supposition of an lE. origin of the latter verb).
56
RIGVEDlC KiRíN- AND KRir"i- 355
3. While some Vedic loanwords with cerebrals have been Sanskri-
tized according to the methods discussed in the preceding section (the types
randryá and b-ü4ayati) , in others a iJ, has been replaced by r. It is a well-
known fact that the Dravidian voiced cerebral stop is often rendered as [1']
by speakers of foreign languages. On the one hand we find in the Gr8l:h.
geographical works Kórü and Kotta-nar-ike for Tam. Kóti and Kutta-niitu
on the other hand J. VINSON sta tes that the coromon Fr~nch pron~~ciatio~
of Tamil [~] is [1'] (Journ. As. XI, 13 (1919), p. 115). An analogous
instance belonging to a rather early stage of Sanskrit is nibirisa- beside
nibi{la- in the sense "nate niisikiiyii1)," (Pa:t;iini 5.2.32), which words are
related to ·Nep: nepto, cepto "flat-nosed" and further to Skt. cipita-, id. Hence
nibirisa- is composed of nibig- and suffixal -isa-o The details of its etymology
need not be discussed here. From the Yajurvedic word kubhrá-, m. "hump-
backed bull" (Maitr.S. 2.5.3: p. 50, 16 & 18) against kubcJ,hq, "humpbacked"
in modern Santali it has been inferred in earlier publications that Munda r
for iJ, dates back to the Vedic period (Froto-Munda Words in Sanskrit, p~.
8,43). Perhaps, however, the r represents merely a misheard Proto-Munda d.
In the Rigveda a similar r is met with in Dravidian word: ku1'ira-, n. "hai~­
net (worn by women and by eunuchs)" X. 85.18 has been explained as a
derivative of Drav. ko# "tip, point", etc. (cf. Skt. lex. kofira- "diadem
crown") on the strength of the parallel case, viz., lex. lwrí1'a-, ~.: kufi1'a-, n:
k~ttára-, . n. "sexual union" (cf. Tam. küj;al, küffam, küffu, Kann. küta, Te!.
kutami, Id., Tam. kütu-, Tel. kü{lu- "to have sexual intercourse": Tam.
kütu- "t~ come together") .20 On the other hand, takart- 01' tagari-, ~ word
for the female pudenda in the AthS. and YV., has been explained as an
early borrowing from the same (presumably Munda) source fro~ which
Marathi tangaif,i, Hindi tangri (etc.) "leg, thigh" must have been taken.
LÜDER~' statement that an ancient q.. never becomes r in Sanskrit (Philologi-
ca IndIca p. 555), though generally.correct, accordingly requires some res-
trictions.
In this connection it is interesting to note OLDENBERG'S suggestion to
interpret RS. 1. 116. 13a ájohavin nfisatyii ka1'a viim as "she (Purarhdhi)
called you, Nasatyas, although she was hoarse" (d. karJ,á- "hoarse", Sato Br)
Though not accepted by GELDNER in his translation, and by NEISSER Zun
Worterb. des Rigveda II, p. 54, this idea deserves serious reconside~ation,
• 20. Skt. kuttani- "bawd, procuress" (also lex. kuti-) is doubtless derived from
tlus word-f.0up , though not in the way as KITrEL, Kann. Engl. Dict. Preface XXVIII
suggested ( s~e who brings together"). For Pkt. khuMia-, kuq.uccia- see Festschr. Kirfel
152 n.27 (agamst PrscHEL, Gramm. der Pkt. Sprachen p. 148: kürdati).
57
 P. 13. J. KUIPER
since the meaning proposed suits the context, whereas the foreign origin sug-
gested for kaq,á- (see references in MAYRHOFER l, p. 145) allows us to account
for the Rigvedic r. See also DEBRUNNER, Nachtrage ad Altind. Gramm. I,
p. 212, line 30 ff.
4. It is clear that the preceding conclusions regarding V1'Uf,- (Ep. +)
and krüq,- (.KS. KapKS.) may be of immediate importanee for .k1'if/,- "to
play". 'l'aken in itself, it is true, krig,- might be taken to represent lE. *kris-d-
01' *klis-d-, but no satisfactory connection has been proposed (see lViAYRHo-
FER, l, p. ~39). Owing to its occurrence in the 1;{.ksamhita it is generally
belíeved to be of lE. origin, but this is strongly contradicted by the great
variety of Prakrit and NIA forms, e.g., Pkt. JweHa¡, khe~a~, khecJf/,ai (which
is traced back to khif/,q,a'i, khig,at, see PISCHEL, Gramm. d.er Pkt. Sprachen
§ 90), with kh for k (cf. ArdhaMag. kheq,q.,a-, n. : ki(J,cJIi-, f. "play") and HI?
The aspiration of initial k is mostly described as a specltic Prakritic develop-
ment (PISCHEL, § 206), but the circumstance that many of the words con-
cerned are suspect of being loanwords suggests the idea that the aspiration
may often be due to the foreign source, 01' to the process of adoption; cf. e.g.
Palí Pkt. khujja-, Mar. k/mjli: Skt. kubja- (with further cognates, Proto-
Munda Words, p~ 42). Contamination with k(lvel- (SCHWARZSCHILD, J.As. 244,
1956, 26S) affords no sufficient explanation since klivel- is probably merely
a Sanskritisation of khel-. As for krig,-, the problem is stated in its most
concise form by Prof. TURNER, Nep. Dict. 127b s.v. khelnu as follows: "The
word for "play" appears in a number of similar, but not identical forms, the
result perhaps of various contaminations: - (1) Sk. kríq,ati: Pa. ki?ati- Pk.
lcicJai:;- (2) Sk. kl,lvelati . .. ;- (3) SIc /celati (contamination of MI. /ckla~ with
*lchelai?):, Pk. lceli- f.;-(4) ~k. /chela f . . . . ;--(5) *lchellati . . : . j - -
(6) *lchig,g,u ... ;--(7) */chec!4a-." Note also kilati (Dhatup.) and lex. kila-,
m. "play".
Whenever a multitude of obviously cognate words cannot be traced
b~~k to a clear ~ommon original, there is some reason to consider the possi-
bIllt~ of ~orrowmg. If, however, /crüJ,- should be a loanword, it might stand
for bg,- (Just as hüq,- stands for kür!, and vricJ- for *vicJ-) and Skt. /celati and
many Pkt. forms might directly continue the root form without r (se~ aboye
~U<;lati, ~olayati: vrug,ati). Since however kríq,- is apparentIy the sole for~
In use smce the earliest period of Sanskrit, and since a root /cid- has not been
traced :0 far in any of the non-Aryan languages of India, 'the hypothesis
that kncJ- represents a non-Aryan *kUf,- must remain a vague possibility as
long as t~e existence of *kUf,- cannot be demonstrated. For this purpose a
more detalled semantic study of l~ríq,. in tha Rigveda is required.
58
RIGVEDlC KiRtN- AND KRfI,J- 357
In translations of the Rigveda /crrg,- is nearly exclusively rendered by
such expressions as "to sport" or "to play", in accordance with its meaning
in the later language. In the Rigveda, however, the context shows it most1y
not to refer to the playful' character of an action (as the translations sug-
gest), but rather to denote a quick up-and-down, or leaping, movement. To
demonstrate this we shall have to quote in full the Rigvedic evidence. With
reference to Soma kriq,- and its derivatives are used: IX.66. 29ab e-1á sómo
ádhi tvací gávlim krilaty ádribhilp (GELDNER here remarks: "plays" =
"dances"); 96,21bc kánikradat pári várli7}y ar(la, krílañ camvor ti viSa püyú-
miínalp; SO.3cd. pratyáñ sá víSva bhúvanabhí paprathe, /críian hárir átyalp
syandate 'vfl,lii; 86.26d átyo ná krí~an púri varam arl,lati; 86.44cd áhir
ná jür/Jam áti sarpati tvácam, átyo ná krílann asarad vfl}ii h4rilp; 108.5bc
ávyo varebhilp pavate madíntamalp, krtlann ürmír apam iva; 6.5 yám átyam
iva vajínam mrjánti yÓI,la:/Jo dáSa / váne /crilantam átyavim; 45.5ab
sám i sákhiiyo asvaran váne krilantam átyavim; 106.llab dh'ibhír hinvanti
vájínam, váne kr'i:/antam átyavim; 21.3 vfthii /críianta índavah sadhástham
abhy ékarri ít I síndhor ürmiÍ vy d~aran; not quite clear is 97.9ab sá ramhata
urugayásya jütím, vfthii krilantam mimate ná gavalp. In aIl these passages
the Soma that trickles down is likened to a leaping or stamping race-horse
and to the leaping waves of the water. The participle mostIy determines a
verb of movement (pari-arl,l:, syand-, sr-, vi-~ar-), and the same is true of
the adjective krilú- in IX.20.7ab kri1:úr makhó ná mamhayúlp, pavítram soma
gachasi "frisking ... thou goest to the sieve". In 66.29ab kri¡aty ádribhilp is ren-
dered by "skips, frisks" (hüpft, GRASSMANN), "dances by the stones" (LuD-
WIG) or "plays (: dances) with the stones" (GELDNER), for which svásrbhir
a'I1ar.til,lulp (see below) would be a close paraIlel. In some other passages LUD-
WIG translates "playing" but adds the explanation "sporting, frisking" (sich
tummelnd, 96,21c,86.44d). In a single passage the sómalp krílan is likenedto a
young child, cf. IX.1l0.10ab sóma1J, puniinó avyáye vare, síSur ná krí¡an páva-
mano a~alp, where the tertium comparationis, accordingly, must also be
some movement. GRASSMANN and LUDWIG rightly render it by "frisking"
(hüpfend), while GELDNER translates "playing like a child", which do es not
suit the context.
It will be clear that these passages confront us with a methodological
problem. AIl translations are based upon the tacit assumption that Rigvedic
krüJ,- has the meaning "to play" of classical Sanskrit, and they try, accord-
ingly, to express somehow the idea of "playful, sportive". Taken in itself,
howeyer, the Rigvedic text does not indicaté that such a connotation is
meant. When we try to read it with an unbiassed mind the sole meaning
it suggests is "leaping, frisking, dancing". Now there is nothing unnatural
in the supposition that class. Skt. kr'iif,- "to play" has semantically developed
59
 358 F. B. J. KUIPER
from "to frisk", as we find in Germanic, beside Gothic laikan "to skip, rrisk"
(: Skt. r~ja;; "sha~e~, trembles"), Old Icelandic leika "to play", (also "to
mov~, swmg ). A .sImIlar development is found in Kurdic. (We might even
conslder the questlOn, whether O. Icel. leika "to playa trick upon delude"
!Goth. bi-laikan "to mock, ridicule", Middle High German leic7~en: id. ma;
throw sorne light on Palí khi~ana- "scorn"). Note also Tam. atu-, Telugu,
Kannada iiif,u- 'to move, wave, shake, dance": "to sport, play" •.
This supposition is confirmed, it seems, by the use of krid- to denote the
unsteady, flickering flames of Agni in V. 19.5a kl'!1an no r~sma a bhuvah
"wavering, o beam of light, assist us". Again we may compare O. Icel. leik~
which is used "of Hame, fue, water, waves, to play lightly about or ove/
liele" (ZOEGA), although the. meanings difiero Any reference to a playfuÍ
character of flames, presupposed by such renderings of V.19.5 as "playfuIly"
(GELDNER) or "sporting" (OLDENBERG, SBE. 46, p. 407) is fuIly absent from
X.3.5cd jyé~thebhir yás téj~thaiQ, kri~umádbh*, vári}~thebhir bhanúbhir
nálei}ati dya:m, where GELDNER'S translation "the most excellent sharpest
playing, highest lights" yields no satisfactory sense. Instead of i~ "blazing':
may be suggested on the strength of X.79.6c ákri~an krí~n hárir áttavé'dan,
which means "the golden one (Agni), not springing upward. (from the earth)
and yet springing upward (wavering) must eat, though he has no teeth",
rather thari "not playing and yet playing" (GELDNER).
With reference to the pressing-stones kñ4í is used in X.95.9cd ta átáyo
ná tanvaQ, sumbhata sva, áSváso ná kri~áyo dándaSánáQ" which contains a
threefold comparison, the pressing-stones getting the yellow colour of the
~oma, while they move up and down like frisking and biting horses. Partí-
cularly interesting is X.94.14ab suté adhvaré ádhi vacam akrata kri~áyo ná
me'itáram tudántaQ" which GELDNER renders "At the pressed sacrifice they
have raised their voices, pushing the mother like playing (children)." Simi-
larly, e.g., GRASSMANN and HILLEBRANDT, Lieder des RV. p. 31. The poet of
?C. 94, however, likes stressing both the noise and the movement of the press-
mg-stones. Thus we read in 4cd sarhrábhyá dhirah svásrbhir a n a r t i s u r
a 9 h o ~ á y a n t a Q, prthivim upabdíbhi~~, and i~ 5ab' supar~ v ~ a ~ a
a k r a t ópa dyávy, akharé kf~ ~ira a n a r t i ~ u Q" the pressing-stones as
producers of Soma here apparently being likened to their mythical proto-
type, the eagle, who has brought the Soma to this world. Perhaps the words
samrabhyá and anart~uQ, in 4cd also contain an allusion to a cosmogonical
myth (X.72.6 súsamrabdha ... nftyatám, see below). Be that as it may,
tl:e correspondence between vacam akrata in 14a and ágho~áyantaQ, 4d,
vacam akrata 5a, leads us to take kr'i~áyo in 14b as paraIlel to anartisuh 4c
5b, the translation being: "At the pressed sa'crifice they have raised theu.:
60
RIeVEDIC KfRtN- AND KR1r"t- 359
voices, trampling upon the Mother (Earth) like dancers". (After this had
been written, I found the same rendering in LUDWIG: "gleichsam wie tanzend
die muttererde stampfend").
The dices are said to "spring up and down" (kriif,-) in X.34.8a tripañ-
ciisá~~ kri~ati vrata e~ám, for which 9a nico' vartanta, upá'J'Í sphuranti "they
roIl down, they spring upward' serves as a commentary. Finally it is used
with reference to the missiles in IV-.41.11c yád diclyával], pftanásu prakri~án
"when the missiles leap rorward in the battle" (not: begin to play, GELDNER)
and to Indra's life-inspiring gifts in VIILl3.8ab kri~anty asya súnftá, apo ná
pravátá yatí~~ "His clivine gifts spring upward Hke water that flows clown"
(in which words, again, an allusion to the mythical prototype of these gifts,
the release of the waters, seems possible).
In none 01 the passages quoted is tbere any suggestion oí a meaning
"to play". When Soma is likened to a child, as in IX.ll0.10b Síst~r ná 1erílnn
páva.máno ak.~áQ" the tertium comparationis is the movement ("dancing, or
springing upward, likc a Httle child"). Not quite conclusive is X.85,18ab
(in a marriagc hymn) 1)tlrviipa?'á'1i~ carnto máyallaita1í, síMi lcrilanta1t r)(Í?'i
yáto adhvarám, hut the two verbs car- ancl pa.ri-yá- suggest a meaning "Hke
dancing children", rather than ("playing") as it is usualIy translated. In
another stanza of the same hymn, it is true, tbe later meaning appears (for
the first time, it seems), Cr. 42bcd (víSvam áyur vy asnutam, krt~antau pu-
traír náptrbhir, módamánat~ své grhé (said 01 the newly-married couple).
Sínce this semantic development seems to he characteristic or the latest Rig-
vedic period, it is questionable whether IV.49cd kr1.~antas tvá sumánasa7J;
sapemá, 'bhí dyumna tasthivamso 5ánánám really means "Let us worship
thee (viz. Agni) sporting and joyous" (OLDENBERG, SBE. 46, p. 332), hut this
question cannot be decided.
5. When kñ4- is applied to persons 01' personified things, the mean-
ing suggested by the context is mostly "to dance". This is also true of the
remaining passages which refer to the Maruts.
An i1Jstructive parallel may first be discussed, Indra is characterized
by the epithet nytú-, no doubt a derivative of the root nyt- (e,g. W ACKERNA-
GEL-DEBRUNNER, Altind. Gramm. II.2.p.471). Although nyt- denotes manifes-
tations of strength in general (V.33.6b nrm:l;l4ni ca nytámdno ámartal]" also
said of Indra), n¡-tú- is likely to refer to a particular manifestation oI it in
the dance. This we may probably infer from the feminine nrtu- in 1.92.4a
ádhi pésá1nsi vapate nytúr iva "she [U~as] throws gay garments round her
Hke a dancing girl" (MACD()NELL). If Indra, the Creator, is a dancer, his
61
 360 F. B. J. KUIPER
dance may be supposed to be a creative dance (d. especialIy n.22.4)21 A
'Clear reference to Indra's dance, which occurs in the hymn to the battle-drum
(AthS. V.21) , seems so far to have escaped notice. The stanzas 7-9 of this
hymn run as follows :
páriimítrán dundubhína ha?'i7'}ásyii 'jínena ca
sárve deva atitrasan yé samgrámásyésate / / 7
yaír índralJ, prakrt4ate padgho~aís chiiyáyií sahá
taír amítras trasantu no 'm~ yé yánty anikaSá~~ 1/8 '
jyagho~a dundubháyo 'bhí krosantu y,á díSa~t
séniilJ, páriijita yat1:r amítrii7'}iim aníkaSálJ, / /9
"(7) With the drum and the skin of the antélope .an the gods that sway
the battle have scared away the enemies. (8) By the footnoises with which
Indra dances (prakrU;late) , and by (: together with) his shadow let our ene-
mies be alarmed who go yonder in troops. (9) Let the drums, the bow-string
noises, yen toward an the quarters, toward the armies of our enemies
going conquered in troops". Owing to their rendering pralcrtf,ate by
"p]ays", respectively "disports himself", WHITNEY and BLOOMFIELD could
not detect a reasonable sense in the first hemistich of sto 8, which to them
was "not very c1ear", resp. "altogether obscure". Appa:r::ently the battle-
drums are here thought of as embodying all sorts of terrific powers, inc1uding
those of Indra's cosmic dance. The poet seems to suggest that, just as
the noise of the drums reproduces and recrea tes that of Indra's feet, so
also their shadows will have the magical effect of Indra's shadow. 22 The
passage is also instructive for RS. IV.14.11c prnlcri!-án, in that it shows
GELDNER'S interpretation to be incorrecto
21. If there is a reference to a creative dance of the gods in X.72.6 yád devá adáT¡,
salilé súsam,rabdhd áti$thata átrá va nftyatám iva tivr6 renúr ápáyata, this is only an
mdirect one ("as of dancers"). If howev~r the description of the ritual in X,94.4cd (sam-
rábhyii ... anaTti~1!(t) is an intentional allusion to this cosmogonical myth as suggested
above, the dance must have been an essential element of it. Nor is there anything in-
congruous in the supposition that the very archaic myth of the Churning of the Ocean
has its roots in the Vedic mythology. This cosmogonical myth must have had a central
religious importance and in Bhal'ata's statement that the first drama was the samavaltüra
Amrtamanthana, which was performed before Siva on the Himiilaya, a faint memory of
ritualistic dramatic performances may have been preserved. In any case it is interesting
to note that after that performance Siva is reported to have himself performed the
Tfu:H;lava dance in the 4ima Tripuradaha (Sten KONOW, Indisches Drama, pp. 37, 29).
22. Like WHITNEY also LUDWIG, Del' Rigveda UI, p. 375. The welI.known passage
in Jaim.Br. III.246, where !ndra dances disguised as an old man has a totalIy different
character.
62
RIGVEDIC KIRtN- AND KRn;.,t- 361
The same parallelism of the terms nrt- and h14- which we- met with
aboye in the hymn to the pressing-stones, and again with reference to Indra
recurs in the hymns to the Maruts. They are also addressed as nrtavalJ,
VIII.20.22a, and their arrival at the well is described by útsam á ... nrtulJ,
V.52.12 (see below). That the verb kri!ati and its derivatives, when applied
to them as the typical young warriors (náralJ,), must denote their warrior's
dance, was already recognized by HILLEBRANDT, Vedische Mythologie 112,
p. 154 n. Cf. 1. 31.la Icrí!ám va~t sárdho marutam (5b: k. yác chárdho m.);
I.166.2b kr'i!anti Icrt-¡,á vidáthe~u ghfl?vayalJ,; I.87.3c té kriJáyo dhúnayo
bhrajadr#ayalJ,¡ and V.60.3cd yiÍt 1cr'iJatha maruta n:timánta, ápa iva sadhr-
yañco dhavadhve. Cf. kriJáyalJ, "dancers" in X.94.14b (discussed above).
Again, as in the case of Soma (IX.ll0.10b), we find the comparison with
children in X.78.6cd siSula ná 1crtláya1), sumiitáro, mahágriimó ná yaman ....
"the sons of a noble mother, dancing Hke Httle children, like a mighty clan
on its raid .... ". This passage and kri!áyo .... bhrajadrl?tayalJ" kri!atha ....
rstimántah which are particularly suggestive of a warriors' dance may be
~;mpared' ~ith a passage occurring in several recensions of the Yajurveda,
which explains the ritual use of the term mar{¡'dbhya~t 1~ñ4íbh1Ja1J. (VS.
24.16, etc.). In the version of the Maitr.S. this passage reads as follows:
sá vaí svó bhüté vytrám hántum upapltiyata, Mm ma'I'Úta1), parikri4anta
asams, te'syá!ptva vyanayams, te'bhy.ddhar$ayams, tásmát kri4áyas .... de va
vaí vytrám hatám ná vyajünams, tám marúta1), kri4áúó'dhyakrii!a:ms, tásmat
IcrüJáyo (MS.I.10.16: p. 155,15 & 20, KS. 36.10 : p. 77,5 & 10, etc.).
~. The preceding discussion of the Maruts as dancers (kr-if,áya1),)'
leads us to consider more 'Closely another epithet of the Maruts, viz. k1:rín-.
It occurs in V.52.12ab chandastúbha1), kubhanyáva útsam á kírí7'}O nytu1),.
The word is a hapax legomenon (PISCHEL, Vedische Studien 1, p. 222 f.).
Its meaning is unknown, the main reason for the traditional rendering by
"gleemen (strolling minstrels)" or "singing", "bards"23 apparentIy being,
besides frequent references to the song of the Maruts (PISCHEL, l.c.) , the
circumstance that at an earlier stage of Rigvedic studies it had be en identi-
fied with kírí, which was erroneously connected with 1oiirú-, m. (interpreted
as "singer, poet") . Instead of it, NEIS SER, Zum Worterbuch des Rigveda n,
p. 59. suggested a meaning "(stumblin~. tottering:) raging", but this was
based on a very vague lE. etymology. However, when we 'Consider that 1)
a foreign origin of kriiJ.- is probable (2) kruJ.. may accordingly stand for
kiiif,-, just as kTÜiJ.- stands for kili!- (3) in Rigvedic loanwords a foreign iJ.
23. Cf. M. MULLER, SBE. 32,pp,313,317, respectively LUDWIG, Der Rigveda II, p. 299
(but see V, p. 246!), GELl>m:R, Der Rigveda übersetzt (a.l.).
63
~---
362 F. B. J. KUIPER
18 sometimes rendered by r (4) kñlí- is one of the characteristic epithets
of the Maruts (5) krilá- and kñlú- are sorne times used predicatively in
combination with verbs, e.g. IX.20.7 kríl:úr rnakhó ná' mamhayúlJ, pavítram
soma gachasí "springing upward (or frisking), O Soma, thou goest to the
sieve liberal like a lord" (6) there is a parallelism between the use of nrt-
and krúJ,-; then our supposition that the words útsam á l<:irí7}o nrtulJ, mean'
"frisking they danced to the well" and are comparable to I.166.2b krl~nti
kri~a vidáthe~u, is not, 1 think, unfounded. 1 would even venture to say
that it is so far the sole interpretation of kírín- that is phonetically accep-
tableo Since absolute certainty is excluded for a hapax 'legomenon of per-
sumably foreign origin, a reasonable degree of acceptability is alI that we
can expect. This would certainly be no sufficient justification for a lengthy
discussion that does not lead up to a fully certain result, were it not that this
discussion, as 1 venture to hope, may find sorne justification in itself, inasmuch
as it may throw sorne light on certain aspects of the Rigvedic language
which are still unjustly ignored. If this interpretation of kirín- is correcto
it furnishes the lacking evidence of a root variant *kid- beside kñq..-, which
would prove the foreign origin of kr'f4,- beyond doubt.
In conc1usion it may be observed that kírín- "frisky, dancing" pre-
supposes a Vedic verb *l<:irati (cf. in general WACKERNAGEL-DEBRUNNER,
Altind. Gramm. II, 2, p. 341 ff), hut must soon have become isolated.
To the author of the hymns to the Maruts that are handed down to us
in RS. V. 52-61 it was no longer known, since he uses kñd- as the corres-
ponding verb in 60.3c yát krtfatha maruta r~timántalJ,. In the B'ráhmalJ,as
the ritual formula manídbhya'Q, l<;rüJ,íbh¡¡alJ, (from Ved. kñ4í-) w:¡s also
rcferrcd to n stcm /crir;lflJ-. Its curlicst occurrcneo in VS. 17.85c Tc7-i.r;li Crt
MM: cojjc~'i muy be due to the analogy of the following words.
64
NOTE ON OLD TAMIL AND JAFFNA TAMIL
by
F. B. J. KUIPER
Leiden
1. Most palaeographers accept Bühler's theory that the Brahmi script
has been introduced in South India at least one or two centuries before
Asoka.1 This opinion is based on the specifically southern form of the
letters for i and ma, which are no longer known in the northern Brahmi
script. At first this script may have been used for records written in
Pali, as is the case in the earliest cave inscriptions of Ceylon, which per-
haps date from the 3rd cent. 2 B.C. and in any case are not later than the
2nd cent. Soon however the same script (with some necessary additions)
has come to b~ used also for Tamil. The earliest of the cave inscriptions
which have successively be en discovered from 1906 onwards in the Tinne-
velly and Madura districts are on palaeographical grounds ascribed to
the third cent. B.C., although it has been objected that this dating is
based "on grounds which are largely theoretical, in contradistinction
to the dating ofthe Arikamedu sherds which is objective and secure".3
Anyway, it has been the great merit of K. V. Subrahmanya Ayyar to
have recognized that these inscriptions are written in Tami1. 4 Whatever
uncertainties there may remain as to the interpretation of sorne details,
this result may be considered firmly established. 5
One of the striking peculiarities of these inscriptions, which induced
Subrahmanya Ayyar to explain them as written in Tamil, is the fact that
"The soft consonants, i.e., the varga-trtfyas are conspicuous by their
absence" (p. 283). In his transcriptions, it is true, one meets with such
1 Büh!er, Indian Palaeography, p. 33; K. V. Subrahrnanya Ayyar, Proceedings and
Transactions 01 the Third Oriental Conlerence (Madras, 1924), p. 282; .P. E. E. Fernando
Univ. Ceylon Review, VII (1949), p. 284 f.; ef. also Anden! India, n, p. 109.
• Cf. C. W. Nichols, Univ. Ceylon Review, VII (1949), p. 60.
• Andent India, I1, p. 109.
, Proceedings and Trans. llIrd Oro Conlerence, p. 284.
5 Cf. S. K. Chatterji, Ind. Ling., XIV, p. 2. Sorne doubts were expressed, however,
by K. Zvelebil, Tamil Cu'lture, VI/3 (1957), p. 226 n. 2, who conternplated the pos-
sibility that "the language of these inscriptions is rather a forrn of Southern hybrid
Prakrit with very rich Kannada-Tarnilloan-words". Similarly VI/I, p. 50 n. 1.
65
 NOTE ON OLD TAMIL AND JAFFNA TAMIL
53
words as ~ec;lu (pp. 288, 299), Ve{ ac;lai (p. 292), Kavuc;li (p. 296), but
these seemmg exceptions are merely due to the fact that the author had
adopted the. transcription which K. Krishna Sastri had proposed on
palaeographIcal grounds in his first attempt at a decipherment,6 al-
though from Subrahmanya Ayyar's own comment 7 it is clear that he
rightly e.quated this ~ to the Irl of Modern Tamil. Since it can hardly
be questlOned that thIS phoneme was an alveolar plosive in Old Tamil
(see the Excursus below, p. 60), these words should rather be transcribed
as Nelu, Ve{{alai (or Ve!!a1!ai?) and Kavuli. The same script has since
been found also in the graffiti of Virapatnam (alias Arikamedu).
2. ~rom the orthography of the oldest cave inscriptions we mayinfer
that, Ifthere has ever been a phonemic contrast between surds and sonants
in a prehistoric period of Tamil, this had at any rate ceased to exist as
f~r ba~k as the earliest records of the language. S. K. Chatterji may be
nght 1il concluding, in his interesting account of this much disputed
pr? b~e~, that. "~t would indeed be a little too hazardous to look upon
8
PnffilÍlve DravIdIan as being a language of the Tamil type in its phonetics
and phonology".9 Anyhow, whatever views one may have on the
Dravidian prehistory, this problem is immaterial to Tamil where such
a phonemic opposition did no longer exist. Since only the letters for
the surds were adopted from the existing Brahmi script, ~here was ap-
parently no need for letters for the corresponding sonants, which were
us~d, .about the same time and in the same script, in the Pali cave in-
scnptlOns of Ceylon. It might seem tempting, then, to conclude that
these phonemes were al so pronouneed as surds in every position. For
: Proceed~ngs and Trans. olthe First Oro Conf. (Poona, 1919), p. 334, n. 3.
8 Pr~:eedmgs a~d Tra~s. 01 the Illrd Oro Conf., p. 285.
In ?Id TamIl, Anclent Tamil and Primitive Dravidian", Ind. Ling., XIV (1954),
p. 9 (whlch has only recently become accessible to the present writer)
a This wa~ th7 opinion of K. V. Subbaya, Ind. Ant., 38 (1909), p. 1'95, and of L. V.
R~maswaml ~Iyar, JORMadr. 4(1930-31), p. 17lf. In the last letter which J re-
celved ~rom ~1?1. (dated ~1 December 1938) he wrote: "Regarding the anteriority or
otherwlse.of ImtIaI surds In Gemein-Süd-Dravidisch, 1 have always been of the opinion
that Tamll stands for the more conservative stage and that the voicing of surds in
1
!e ugu, Kann~?a and TuJu (not at all general) may have been due primarily to the
Intervocal pOSItlOns assumed by the original surds in word-compounds and intimate
p~ras~1 sequences. Subbaya's explanation of course is unsatisfactory, but Bloch's
v~e,:", l,~ ~:ter all based on a mere theoretical reconstructíon (in his "Sanskrit et Dra-
('d/en). If h?we~er the sandhi voicíng has arisen at a comparatively late date
as Ramaswam~ AI.yar as:;u~es because in ínscriptional instances of pre-líterary
~annad~ there 15 ~tlll gemmatlOn of surds), it would be ínadequate to explain ínitial
nants In e.g. V~dlc loa~-','I'0rds. [See now also A. Master, Adyar Libr. Bull., 25 (1961),
pp. 188-202, Uchlda Noríhlko, Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyü IXll (1961),pp. 357-353.]
66
54 F. B. J, KUIPER
the first centuries A.D., however, this conclusion is unequivocally con-
tradicted by the Greek transcription of Old Tamil geographical names,
which pro ves that the Greeks interpreted the intervocalic plosives of
Old Tamil as sonants. Since the principies of the Tamil orthography
had not materially changed by that time the question arises if there is
any reason to suppose that in the 2nd cent. B.C. the pronunciation was
different in this respecto
One point is of special interest in this connexion. Alfred Master has
drawn attention to the fact that in the Tolkappiyam we sometimes find,
beside thé current forms a!avu and uruvu, also the older forms a!apu
and urupu. 10 This transition of the phoneme Ipl to the phoneme Ivl
cannot be explained unless we as sume that by that time intervocalic
¡p! was pronounced as a voiced bilabial fricative [~]. Again the question
must be raised if there is any justification for the assumption that in the
2nd cent. B.C. its pronunciation was different. As a matter of fact, we
do not know anything definite about the actual pronunciation at that
time. An interesting case in point are the forms kutupitií, kotupitó!),
kOfupitava!) in the cave inscriptions for what in the later language
was kot!uvitta!), kOt!uvittÓ!), kottuvittava!),u The correctness of
this interpretation appears from .one of the Jaina Rock Inscriptions
from the Pallava period published in Ep. Ind., IV, p. 137, where we
read pac;limam kof{uvittií?] "caused an image to be engraved" (see
Subrahmanya Ayyar, op. e., p. 288). Suchvi-causatives do not appear
in literary texts before the end of the Sangam period, e.g. pU1;lar-vi-ttal
Paripatal 20, 110, eer-vi-ttal ibid. 12, i!)ai-vi-ttal Kalittokai 147, pa!ar~
vi-ttaval ibid. 14l,12 We may surmise that this causative formation
originaiIy be10nged to a more colloquial form of speech, which ac-
counts both for its absence from the earlier literary texts and for its
occurrence (with p for v) in the still earlier inscriptions. As at the end
of the Sangam period this was written with v, the p must for some
time .have been pronounced as [~] during the Sangam periodo The
phonemic spelling of the oldest inscriptions does not rule out the
possibility of a similar pronunciation at that time, but this cannot
be either proved or disproved. This much is only c1ear that from the
beginning of the historical period there was no phonemic opposition
of intervocalic surds and sonants, but about the range of inter-
10 A. Master, BSOS, IX (1939), p. 1006.
11 H. Krishna Sastri, Proc. and Trans. 1st Oro Conf., p. 333, K. V. Subrahmanya
Ayyar, Proc. and Trans. Ilird Oro Conf., p. 287f.
u See L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, Anthropos, 33 (1928), p. 754, JORM, XI (1937),
pp. 8, 263f.
67
 NOTE ON OLD TAMrL AND JAFFNA TAMrL
vocalic allophones used in actual speech we are completely ignorant.
3. 1t is a well-known fact that nevertheless both the Tamil script and
the circumstance that Tolkappiyam and later grammarians are silent
about the existen ce of voiced allophones have given rise to the theory
that Old Tamil had, initial1y as well as medially, only surd plosives.
In support of this theory reference is sometimes made to the Jaffna
dialect, which as a remarkable instance of a "marginal" dialect preserves
several antique features of the language. As far as 1 know, M. Srinivasa
Aiyangar was the first to use this argument in his TamiZ Studies (Madras,
1914). After stating that the script is inadequate to denote all sounds
actually occurring in speech, but that sorne of these may be supposed
to have crept in during later times owing to the infiuence of Indo-Aryan,
he wrote: "This may be accepted as partly correct, as we find to this
day, if one is careful enough to observe slight variations in the pro-
nunciation of the Jaffna Tamils and Tamil Brahmans". In 1932 Prof.
P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri stated, in support of the same theory, that
"even now in Jaffna such voiceless consonants are pronounced as voice-
less and not as voiced."13 When 1 expressed my doubts as to the cor-
rectness of trus statement in IIJ, II (1958), p. 223, 1 had overlooked a
remark ofmy informant for the Jaffna dialect, Mr. C. Balasingham from
Tellipallai, to the effect that "further to the East" poka is pronounced
as [po :k;)]. From his communications it would appear that there are
at least two different forms of speech in what is generally called the "J affna
dialect". The main object of this brief note is to stress once more the
urgent need for exact data on the phonetics of the Tamil dialects of
Ceylon.
That 1 was indeed wrong in questioning the learned author's state-
ment about a voiceless pronunciation of the plosives is now apparent
from the brief account of "The Jaffna Dialect of Tamil" by K. Kana-
pathi Pillai. 14 However, welcome though this article is in our present
state of almost complete ignorance about the facts, it is too brief to be
of much help. According to his description "In many respects, the words
are pronounced as they are written. No doubt, there are slight vari-
ations in the written and spoken speech. But they are not what Cald-
well speaks of" (p. 222). 1ntervocalic /k/ is according tú him eh], e.g.
in akam, nakam, ttikam, ika!, ukir, while after nasals it is voiceless [k]
in ktiilke, ailke, mailke. Similarly /ñc/ is [ntn, not [nd3], but there is
~: JORMadr., VI (1932), p. 4{) (=History ofGrammatical Theories in Tamil, p. 54).
Ind. Ling., Turner Jubilee Volume, l. p. 219ff.
68
55 56 F. B. J. KUIPER
unfortunately no explicit statement about intervocalic /p/ and It/. It should
be noted that the pronunciation [po :b] seems to be unknown to rum.
On the other hand 1 had observed a clearly voiced pronunciation of
intervocalic Ik/, Itl and Ipl in the idiolect of Mr. Balasingham, and these
observations were later confirmed to sorne extent by the results of K.
Zvelebil's investigations, which he sums up as follows :15 "Traditionally,
the "unvoicing" (?) of medial stops is regarded as a characteristic feature
of Jaffna Tamil. My informant for the Trincomalee speech pronounced
medial stops as voiced, following the continental norm. In the idiolect
of Mrs. Kokilam Subbiah who gave me an example of Jaffna Tamil, a
fiuctuation was clearly discernible; the medial stops were most1y voiced,
sometimes, however, they were clearly voiceless and more fortis, though
the informant herself maintained that they were voiced". Unfortunately
his materials for the Ceylon dialects are scarce, as he himself complains, 16
and for the Jaffna dialect no specimen is given. 1t may be useful, there-
fore, to give he re a specimen of Mr. Balasingham's pronunciation. The
text has been taken from G. N. Lansdown, E!) ciilkam karjikkiratu, p. 1.
'ula'ham ve'ym 'va:h~ama:'y;) r'rmnda ~o:'om 'tJiI)gam 'a:qm '~o:l
sat'tamiqmva'om va'lakkam. 'a :yei'ja:l tJiI)gam mat'ta mrrrnY;)I)ga'lei
'sula~am'a:y;) pr'qrttm 'trnna mu'qmd;)om. 'orm na:l mrrmy;)I)g;)Wla:m
orm 'yu:ttam ku:'qi IsrI)gattr'na:l taI)galmkkm 'e:tpaqmm 'a:~attei
kureik'k;) orm 'valrjei t0 :qr'ne.
ulakam veku valipamtika iruntapotu cifzkam titu po! cattami{uvatu valakkam.
tikaiyal ciilkam marra mirukafzka{ai culapamtikap pi{ittut ti!)!)a mu{intatu.
oru nti{ mirukafzka{ elltim oru küttam kü{i cifzkatti!)til tafzka{ukku erpatum
tipattaik kuraikka oru valiyait teti!)a.
It may be added that last year 1 met with another speaker of Jaffna
Tamil at London. Owing to the circumstances the information given was
confined to a few shibboleths but the pronunciation of my informant, Mrs.
Jayatillake, did not seem to differ appreciably from the one illustrated
abo ve, e.g. [~] in capai, [o] in itu [r'ou], and a velar fricative in maka!).
With regard to this form of speech there would seem to be no suf-
ficient reason for drawing a sharp line between the Jaffna dialect and
Ceylon Tamil generally. There is indeed no fundamental contrast with
Zvelebil's phonetic rendering of the Trincomalee dialect (as spoken by
Miss Thilagam Selvamani Vadivelu)Y Here we find:
15 Archiv Oriellfální, 28 (1960), p. 414 n. 1.
16 See "Zametki po tamil'skoj lingvistike", Problemy Vostokovedenija, Akademija
Nauk SSSR, No. 4, 1959, p. 91.
17 Arch. Or., 27 (1959), p. 282, n. 20. Zvelebil's method of transcription is here rc-
produced.
69
 NOTE ON OLD TAMIL AND JAFFNA TAMIL 57
for medial Ik/: [x] in en<;li xattikol).<;li, ondil xe :tkire :n, [y] in aluyIra:'
(= alukiráy), [y] in nittirayolraom (= nittirai-ko{{ukiratu), po :yuoi-
leija:' (= pókavillaiyá), amma yo<;luttm.
for medial It/: [cU in app;;¡<;li, ku :<;la :om, yo<;luttm.
for/t/: [o] in aom, ni:r oa :n, aomkkm, etc.
for medial Ip/: [~] in a :noe ~o :le:.
After nasals we find inge:, va :nga, iñJ;;¡va: (= iñk€ vá), aliñJirükkm:,.
vanomom, - iründm, marandm, so :m~ari, na<;lakkmm~o :ow:, ondu,
endm (= elJru), indeikkm (= ilJraikku).18 The contrast with the Jaffna
pronunciation as given by Kanapathi Pillai (p. 223) is manifest; cf. e.g.
[al)ke], [mtre], [kantrI], [erttu] (= elJru).
From these data it may be inferred that there is, in Trincomalee as
well as in the Jaffna district, a form of speech in which the medial plosive
phonemes are more or less voiced between vowels and after nasals.
This type of Ceylon Tamil is also reflected by such loan-words in Singh-
alese as agil, abin, aifaya from Tamil akil, apilJ, a{ai. 19 On the other hand,
the other dialect with voiceless plosives is not confined to Ceylon. Ac-
cording to a personal communication of Dr. H. J. Pinnow (Berlin)
the same phenomenon is met with in the south of the continent, from
Cape Comorin and Tiruchendur up to about Tinnevelly-Palamcottah,
where [tapa:l] and [pa:mpu] is the norm. Apparently the Ceylon dialects
cannot well be studied as isolated forms of Tamil but will finally have to
be considered in the wider context ofTamil dialect.geography as a whole.
4. In the absence of such a comprehensive study of the Tamil dialects
any attempt at a historical explanation would be premature. Only sorne
brief remarks may therefore be added in conclusion.
The theory that the Jaffna dialect with voiceless plosives preserves an
antique feature of the language may be defended on several grounds,
apart from the general conviction that "the Jaffnese Tamils, long isolated
in the north of Ceylon, are noted as having retained many archaic Tamil
customs long since lost by their'continental kindred and as employing in
ordinary speech a form of Tamil closely approachlng the classical".20
On the one hand several scholars, such as Prof. P. S. Subrahmanya
Sastri and Prof. C. R. Sankaran, have argued on the strength of the
18 For the pronunciation [nd], a very antique peculiarity oC the Jaffna dialect, see
L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, Bull. Sri Rama Varma Res. Inst., 6 (1938), p. 7, and Curther
IIJ, JI, pp. 214, 238, Zvelebil, Arch. Or., 27, p. 272; 28, p. 572 n. 1. See below, n. 34.
1. Helmer Smith, JAs., 1950, p. 180.
10 J. Hornell, Mem. As. Soco Beng., 7 (1918-1923), p. 168, who thus explains the
survival oC an eye carved upon either bow oC the Jaffna dhonis.
70
58 F. B. J. KUIPER
Tamil script and the rules of the Tolkappiyam that Old Tamil of the
Sangam period was characterized by a voiceless pronunciation of the
plosives. It has been stated aboye why the present writer feels unable
to accept these arguments as decisive. On the other hand the Jaffna
pronunciation has to be considered in the light of Prof. S. K. Chattelji's
theory of the historical deveIopment of the Tamil system of plosives,
which theory he has elaborated in his learned and thought-provoking
study referred to aboye (se e n. 8). He there assumes the following sub-
sequent stages:
c. ·300 "RC. - 400 A.D.: Ancient Tamil (pre-Sangam period), with
voiced and unvoiced plosives, initially and medialIy, as distinct phonemes.
400 - 600 A.D.: Period of Transition.
600 - 1350 A.D.: Old Tamil (Centamil): a11 voiced plosives, initial
and medial, became voiceless. The Sangam texts were written down in
the new spelling.
1350 - 1800: Middle Tamil period, with voicing of medial plosives. 21
After 1800: Modern Tamil period (Kotuntamil), with fricative pro-
nunciation.
This is not the place to enter into a detailed discussion of this interest-
ing theory. It may only be observed that the transition of Ipl to Iv/ in
Tolkappiyam and the late Sangam works presupposes the existence of a
bilabial fricative [~] prior to 500 A.D., rather than after 1800 A.D.
Intervocalic /t/ and /t/ must have been voiced in the 1st cent. A.D.
(cf. IIo6oóx:t¡, Konovcxp~x~ in the Periplus), about 550 A.D., when Cosmas
Indicopleustes rendered putuppattalJam in Greek script by II ouacxmh"lXvlX, 22
and in the 10th cent., when Malayalam Itl was sometimes rendered by
the Grantha d. 23 On the other hand, the spelling pacauta in Marco Polo,
which has been explained as standing for Tam. pakavata,2A may possibly
reflect a Sanskritizing pronunciation. The Tamil Lexicon, however, gives
only pakaválJ and pakavati. One fails to see decisive argüments for the
theory of a material change in the pronunciation of the plosives after
the first centuries A.D. If this is so, the only possibility would be to con-
nect the voiceless plosives of the "Jaffna Pronunciation" with a (hypo-
thetical!) pre-Sangam stage of the Tamil system of plosives.
Si On different grounds P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri dates the intervocalic voicing
after 1200 A.D. (see lIJ, 11, p. 215 n. 13).
•• Christian Topography, 448A (in Book XI which, it is true, did not originally belong
to this work, see Winstedt;Introduction, p. 5 n. 1).
23 A. C. Sekhar, BDCRI, XII (1951), p. 16.
.. Chatterji, lnd. Ling., 14, p. 14.
71
 NOTE ON OLD TAMIL AND JAFFNA TAMIL 59
5. Therefore a different explanation ofthe modern Jaffna pronunciatíon
would seem to deserve serious consideration. The voiced pronunciation
of intervocalic plosives (which is far from universal in continental Tamil
see IIJ, Ir, p. 215) is apparent1y a mere corollary of the lax articulation:
An?ther corollary of this articulation is the fricative pronunciation,
WhICh must be dated back to the Sangam period (i.e., the first centuries
A.D.). If in any period the intervocalicplosives had been exc1usively .
surds, they would have been [k], [t], [p], etc. The dialect described by
Kanapathi Pillai, however, do es not conform to this norm since inter-
vocalic Ikl is here pronounced as [h], which is even entirely elided in
sorne cases, e.g. in [mo:n, me:n] for maka!J,25 [mo:l, me:l] for maka{, [to:
ppan, te: ppan] for takappa!J. They are of particular interest since similar
contracted forms have also been recorded from the colIoquial Tamil
of Madras State, viz. marumoen "son-in-Iaw", marumoa "dauohter-in-
1aw, " 26 an d f rom t he Korova dialect,
" VIZ. topan "father".27 o In con-
tinental Tamil it cannot reasonably be questioned that the pre-stage of
the~e ~ontractions was a word-form with a velar fricative, e.g. [ta'(AppAn].
It 1S hk~ly, therefore, that a previous stage of [h] in the "devoicing"
Jaffna dlalect has also been [y] 01' [x], which occurs in the other Jaffna
dialect as well as in Trincomalee.
The conclusion that in an earlier period of this dialect Ikl \Vas a fric-
ative in intervocalic position is obviously bound to have sorne conse-
quences fo1' s'ome of the other plosives. It would be a reasonable infer-
ence, indeed, that at that time Itl, Ip/, etc. were also fricatives. In that
case, the modern pronunciation as [t], [p] would rather have to be ex-
plained as the result of a secondary development to voiceless plosives.
That Ikl was not affected by this more recent development may be due
to the fact that at the time the velar fricative had already become the
glottal [h]. Only detailed investigations in the field of Tamil dialects
general1y, and those of Ceylon in particular, can enable us to decide
whether or not this hypothetical reconstruction of the historical develop-
ment of the "devoicing" Jaffna dialect is correcto Anyway, in the present
state of our knowledge the current view that the voiceless plosives of
(one of) the Jaffna dialects represent an antique feature of the pre-
~6 1 aro unable to ver,ify the statement that makalJ has bocome mahn (with
a;:tam 1) before developi~g to mon; see C. R. Sankaran, BDCRI, II (1941), p. 346 n. 1
wlth references. OtherwlSe Andronov, Razgovomyj tamil'skij jazyk í ego dialekty
(Moskva, 1962), p. 17,11. 14: aka > ava > o.
28 M. Shanmugam Pillai, "Tamil - Literary and ColloquiaJ" Intem Joum Amer
Ling., 26/3 (1960), p. 35. ' . . .
17 Ling. Survey o[ India, IV (1906), p. 319.
72
60 F. B. J. KL1PER
Sangam period (for this is implied in the theory if our conclusions are
correct) would seem to lack a solid foundation.
EXCURSUS ON OLD T AMIL /1/
Our assumption of an alveolar plosive in Old Tarnil calls for sorne
comment since Emeneau posits an alveolar trill Irl as a Proto-Dravidian
phoneme,28 and this is also included in the Table of Proto-Dravidian
phonemes in A Dravidian Etymological Dietionary by T. Burrow and
M. J:3. Emeneau,29 p. xii. According to this view the Proto-Dravidian
system of dental, alveolar and retrofiex plosives, trilIs, lateral s and other
continuants has been as follows :
dentals n r
alveolars U r 1
retrofiex 1). r
From the point of view of Old Tarnil, with which alone we are he re
concerned, it must be objected that:
a) the five nasal phonemesn, ñ, ~; n, and m correspond to the plosives
k, e, {, t, and p respectively, most of which do not admit any other but
the homorganic nasal before them. Hence izk, ñc, ~t, nt, and mp are
comrnon clusters, although !JP, ~p, etc. do occur (aupu, e!Jpé!J, u~pé!J).
The sole fact that there exists a sixth nasal I!JI, and that the cluster cor-
responding to izk, ~(, etc. is !Jr points to the conc1usion that Irl functions
as a plosive in this system.
b) In the past tense of roots ending in -{I we find {I+t > {Ir [ll.cU, in
other words, the dental is articulated at the sarne place as the preceding
nasal, but preserves its plosive character, e.g. U{I-té!J "1 ate." In roots
ending in -!J we find !J+t > !Jr, e.g. ti!Jré!J "1 ate". Since there is a fairly
general agreement as to the alveolar character of lul, we may expect
that· t becornes an alveolar plosive in this cluster. In any case it is ap-
parent that in this system the phoneme Irl has its place among the plo-
sives. Similarly, if in the past tense of roots ending in a retrofiex { we
find I +t > tt, we must conclude that t adopts the retroflex articulation
of I while I is assimilated to the dental, the result being a long retroflex
plosive [t :]. In roots ending in a non-retroflex lateral we find a parallel
developrnent l+t > !l. ApparentIy the dental again adopts the alveolar
lB See Kolami (Berke1ey-Los Angeles 1955), p. 152, TPS., 1957, p. 50.
u Oxford, 1961.
73

NOTE ON OLD TAMIL AND JAFFNA TAMIL 61
articulation of 1, which in its turn is assimilated to t. Hence the result
must have been a long alveolar plosive [! :], as it still is in modern colloquial
Malayalam (JORM, XI, p. 6).
e) Adjectives in -[U, such as ci[u- "small", ku[u- "short", when stand-
ing before a noun with initial vowel, are treated like those in -cu, i.e.
either the vowel or the consonant is lengthened, while in adjectives end-
ing in -[U or -ru only the vowel can be lengthened, e.g. cirr-il or cf[-il
"hut" like pacc-ilai "green leaf", ptic-aval "green fields", as opposed to
pér-úr "great town", kar-ilai "luxurious leaf". It is accordingly treated
as a plosive.
d) [ differs from the trills, laterals and continuants r, 1, {, r in that it
cannot occur in word-final position, but must always be followed by a
ku[[iyalukaram, like aH plosives,30 e.g. ti[u.
e) In the systematical arrangement of the Tamil phonemes of Tol-
káppiyam and the other ancient grammatical works Ir/ is cIassed among
the plosives. The description ofits articulation in Tol. El. 94 and Na:!mül
86, it is true, has been differently interpreted. A. Chandra Sekhar re-
marks: "It is very significant that in both Tolktippiyam and NalJlJúl [ is
described as being produced by the contact of the front part of the tongue
with the palate as in the case of 1), NalJlJúl cIearly says that the contact is
very cIose and firm, while the term 0[[- employed by Tolkáppiyam seems
to suggest that the duration of the contact was shorter without any other
difference in the nature of the contact. From these descriptions it is
cIear that the speech-sound was not the heavily trilled [ of today but
was an alveolar plosive. The plosive nature of [ is also cIear from the
cIassification of the sound as valleluttu and from the statement that [
cannot end a word. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that a word
like ti[UI "river" was pronounced in Ancient and Middle Tamil as tiJUi". 3l
It is obviously neither necessary nor safe to base one's concIusions as to
the articulation excIusively on these old texts whose terminology ap-
pears to be ambiguous. P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri inferred from the
Tolkáppiyam alone that /r./ was an alveolar fricative in Old Tamil,32 al-
though he pointed out that this conclusion contradicted the evidence of
80 See also C. P. Venkatarama Aiyar, "The Pronunciation of the hard r in Dravidian
Languages", Proceedings and Trans. o[ the 1st Or. Conf., Poona (1920), pp. Ixxxi-
Ixxxiv.
81 A. Chandra Sekhar, "Tamil Speech-sounds", BDCRI, XIV (1952), p. 225 (the
addition "Middle Tamil" is probably incorrect, see L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, Edu-
cational Review, Dec. 1938, pp .• 3-4). See also P. Meile, JAs., 1943-1945, p. 75.
81 See Comparative Grammar o[ the Tamil Language (1947), p. 64.
74
"'I
62 F. B. J. KUIPER
Old Kanarese, where the plosive character ofthe corresponding phoneme
is definite according to A. N. Narasimhia. 33
f) While the Greek rendering of the name Muciri by MOÚ~tptC;, etc.
(which is, it seems, the only serious argument in favour of the theory of an
alveolar trill in Old Tamil) may be interpreted in different ways, the
spelling - x.uv~C( (in ~UA-X.UV~C(, NlA-X.UV~C() points to a plosive [<]] in Tam.
kUlJ[u "mountain". The assumption of an Old Tamil pronunciation
[1].<]] also accounts far better for the development of 1)g to lJV in the late
Middle Tamil colloquial speech, and to ~~ in modern colloquial Tamil
(espécially in [WOIV1UI] for OV[U "one").34 In this connexion attention
may be drawn to the abnormal pronunciation [i :ntUI:] for ev[u in the
present-day Madura dialect (beside normal [innUI]),35 to [elltu] in the
same meaning in the Jaffna dialect, 36 and to [nd] in the remaining areas
of Ceylon Tamil, e.g. [ondií, endUI].37 It may also be noted that while
according to Ramaswami Aiyar /1].r./ "has changed to ññ everywhere in
Malayálam",38 A. Chandra Sekhar found the pronunciation as alveolar
[1].<]] surviving in the Kayavar dialect of Malayalam (spoken in Central
Travancore) among the older generation, e.g. tingUl "is", nikkUlngUl
"she stands". 39
g) Tamil /rI differs from the dental trill in that it frequently occurs as
a long consonant. In the Tamil coHoquials of South India and Ceylon
this long /r./ is today always pronounced as dental [t:], which pronunci-
ation is stated to be current among the "ignorant" as early as the 11th
or the 12th cent. If éttu- "to praise" in Tiruvácakam 1.49 may be taken
as a colloquial variant of érru- id. (Tolkáppiyam, etc.) this pronunciation
can be traced as far back as about the 9th cent. Possible earlier indications
in Sanskrit loan-words admit of different interpretations (e.g. puttikti-
"white ant", Manu; if Dravidian, cf. Tam. purru: Kann. puttu "ant-hill").
The Jaffna pronunciation [nitka] > [nikb] for ni[ka "to stand" is likely
to preserve the ancient plosive nature of /r./, which in colloquial Middle
33 A Grammar ol/he oldest Kanarese Inscriptions (Mysore, 1941), p. 35. The earliest
instance of r>r in Old Kannada occurs in an inscription dated 750 A.D., see G.S. Gai,
Historical Grammar o[ Old Kannada (Poona, 1946), p. 15.
O< E.g. L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, The Educational Review, Dec. 1938, p*4; Arden-
Clayton, A progressive Grammar o[ Common Tamil, 5th ed. (1942), p. 300. For [nd]
in "vulgar" speech see Beythan, Prakt. Gramm. der Tamilspr., pp. 31, 33. Zvelebil
rightly characterizes modern [ndr] as "Bühnenaussprache," Arch. Or., 27, p. 272.
35 Zvelebil, Arch. Or., 28, p. 435 n. 40, p. 437.
36 K. Kanapathi Pillai, Turner Jubilee Volume, I. p. 225.
37 See aboye n. 18.
38 Bulle/in al/he Sri Rama Varma Res. Inst., 6 (1938), p. 8.
SQ A. Ch. Sekhar, BDCR1, X (1950), p. 48.
75
 NOTE ON OLD TAMIL AND JAFFNA TAMIL 63 64 F. B. J. KUIPER

Tamil inscriptions is aIread y confounded with the dental trill in this Aecordingly, the alveolar phoneme in Mucili, which in any case was
position. 40 voiced like ¡tI, may also have been a fricative sound like [~] and [y]. In
For these reasons the O/d Tami/ system seems to have been as follows that case the definition of Tol. El. 94 w;z"ri nuviná-v-wp:zam orra "when
dental t n r the tip of the tongue being raised slightly touches the palate" may be
alveolar t U taken to refer to this very intervocalic position of Itl, while Nal}!}ül 86
retroflex t 1). r W:ll)a nUlJiná nalJiyuri "when the tip of the tongue has firmly touched the
pala te" possibly refers to the alveolar plosive in the c1usters lut, !!, t~,
The question whether the Proto-Dravidian original of /t/ may also have te, tpl or to a later trilled articulation. P. S. Subrahmanya Sastn,
been a plosive is a different problem which does not concern us here. A Comparative Grammar of the Tamil Language, pp. 59, 65, assumes an
early 'confusion of Irl and intervocalic 11/. In any case, the possibility of
[Remark on MOÓ~LpL<;. While intervocalic voicing in Old Tamil may an Old Tamil pronunciation [a: tw] as suggested by Sekhar (see aboye,
be inferred from the Greek rendering of It, t, cl in IToí)o-, -VIXP, and p. 61) must be ruled OUt.]41
MOÓ~LpL<; (see pp. 58, 61), a voiced fricative pronunciation must be
assumed on account of Sangam v for p and probably also in Sangam
-uka- > -uva- (etc.), which would seem to point to a pronunciation [uya].
A lax articulation of intervoealic Ikl in Old Tamil is in any ease suggested
by the following instanees: tuvalai "crowd" (Ainkurunüru) : tuku- "to
be gathered in a mass, as the hair", toku- "to assemble, colleet, to be
crowded", etc. [DED. 2861]; uvi- (tt, pp) "to boil, v.t." (Puram), uvarru-
"to cause to swell up, to flow" (Akam) : Kann. ukku- "to rise, swell,
come up or over in boiling, to be greatly increased", ukkisu- "to make
boíl up or over", cf. Tam. uvi- (nt, v) "to boil away, as water in a pot of
rice"; uvar- "to dislike, abhor, loatlie" : Kann. ugar- "to emit (saliva),
spit out, etc." [DED. 547]; uva- "to be glad, to rejoiee" (Pattuppattu,
Tirumurukarruppatai), uvar "pleasantness" (Narri!}ai), urakai "love"
(Tolkappiyam), uvappu "joy, delight" (ibid.) : uka- "to be glad, pleased,
satisfied" [DED. 476]; tuyar- "to grieve, sorrow, lament", tuyaram
"afHiction" (Akam) : Lex. tuku "pain, distress", Tel. tokka{a "distress,
grief" (otherwise DED. 2895]; tevvu- "to fill" (Paripatal), tevi!{u- "to
chew the cud" (Puram), teviftal "that which is spit or vomited" (Akam) :
tekil- (lex. tekul-) "to be full", tekuftu- "to cloy, glut" [DED. 2801];
tevvu- "to get, obtain" (Pattuppattu), teviftu- "to reach, atta in" (Tol-
kappiyam) :tekku- "to receive, take", taku- "to be obtained", Kann.
tege- "to take away" [DED. 2804]. ef. also A. Master, Adyar Libr. Bull.
25, p. 200.

40 L. V. Ramaswami Aiyar, The Educational Review, Dec. 1938, p. *4, For nikki1 in
Ceylon Tamil see Zyelebil, Arch. Or.,27, p.293 (Trincomalee dialect) and Kanapathi
Pillai, Turner Jubilee Volume, 1 (1958), p. 227 (Jaffna dialect). In continental Tamil
[tk, tp] etc. still occurs beside [rk, rp] etc. (U y zayisimosti ot indiyidual'nyx osobennostej u Acknowledgment should be made to Mr. B. J. Hoff for his expert adyice with re-
goyorjascego", Andronoy, Tamil'skij Jazyk, p. 19). gard to the phonetical analysis of the tape recording (p. 56).

76 77

THE GENESIS OF A LINGUISTIC AREA*
by
F. B. J. KUIPER
Leiden
1. A German scholar of a former generatíon once remarked that there
ca~ be no more important task for the Sanskrit philologist than to de-
scnbe ~he chang~s that have taken place, in the course of the ages, in the
mentahty of the mhabitants of India. 1 What he referred to was the slow
but steady cultural process ofIndianization ofthose Aryan tribes who had
o~ce, in a p.rehistorie period, invaded India from lran. The same thing
mlght be sald of the lndic languages. Here, too, there has been a slow
?rocess of lndianization, which brought Indo-Aryan, the language of the
mvaders, .n:ore. and more into harmony with the languages of the indige-
nous famlhes, m particular Dravidian and Munda. ./
As f~r as modern Indo-Aryan languages are concerned, this fact was
recogmzed about a century ago by Caldwell, the founder of Dravidian
~ompar~tive linguistics. When he remarked, in 1875, "that the direction
mto WhlCh those vernaculars have been differentiated from Sanskrit has
to a c.onsi~~rable extent been non-Aryan'',2 he was among the first to
state, lmphCItly, the existence of an Indie linguistic area.
A1though similar phenomena were incidentally pointed out in Sanskrit
the. remarkably c1assicistic attitude of most Sanskrit philologists ha~
senously hampered a correct interpretation of the earliest developments of
Indo-Ary~n, in. the period when it began to develop independently, in
c~mp~ete lsolatlOn from its Iranian cognate. It is for this reason that a
~lstoncal account of this earliest stage of Indo-Aryan, which at the same
tIme marked the beginnings of a process of convergence in the Indic are a ,
; !ext of the ~ollitz lecture delivered at the sununer meeting of the Linguistic
;c1eti<.of Amenca at Ann Arbor, July 30, 1965. 1 am greatIy indebted to Professor
ans . ura~h, who was so kind as to reading the typescript and to suggest many
correctlOns ID the English text.
: See Hermann Oldenberg, Vedalorschung (1905), p. 53.
Caldwell, A Comparative Grammar 01 the Dravidian or South ¡ndian Family 01
Languages, 2nd ed. (1875),1, p. 57, .3rd ed. (London, 1913; Madras, 1961), p. 53. The
1st ed. (London, 1856), p. 38 has a slight1y different wording.
78
82 F. B. J. KUIPER
may be useful. And such an account will necessarily have to start with
the problem of the Indo-Aryan retroflexes.
2. It goes without saying that a problem on which so much has be en
written can onIy briefly be summarized here. As far back as 1833 August
Friedrich Pott pointed to the high frequency of the retroflexes in the
autochthonous languages of India, whieh led him to as sume that in
Sanskrit "a great multitude ofwords with such sounds have certainly be en
adopted from the autochthonous languages".3 In the middle ofthe nine-
teenth century CaldwelI,4 Morris, Benfey, and Ascoli affirmed the Dravi-
dian origin of the Indo-Aryan retroflexes, but ás ear1y as 1864 Bühler
controverted it. 5 In 1906 Konow 6 briefly referred to "a long discussion as
to whether the Aryans have adopted the cerebral letters from the
Draviqas 01' developed them independently". His own conc1usion is that
"it is ... quite possible that the Indo-Aryan cerebral s have been developed
quite independently". On the other hand it seemed probable (in his
opinion), that the Dravidian influence has "at least given strength to a
tendency which can, it is true, have taken its origin among the Aryans
themselves." These words bear witness to the impossibility, in the be-
ginning of this century, of dealing with this problem methodically. It is
a
characteristic that a few years earlier Konow, in rather speculative
artic1e in which all conceivable traces of Dravidian influence on Indo-
Aryan were enumerated, was still more cautious and pointed to a possible
parallel in modern Norwegian, where a retroflex t has developed from rt. 7
Much later, in 1925, Jules Bloch stated that "there is nothing to justify
the assertion that Indo-Aryan cerebral s are of indigenous origin", 8 but he
changed his position five years later, admitting (like Konow) that the
action of the substratum, though of minor importance, "has helped to
hasten and fu the results of an evolution anterior to the contact of both
languages".9
These words, whieh apparently pretend to indicate the exact dosage of a
foreign influence in a prehistoric development, may strike us as curious,
• Etym%gische Forschungen, J1 (1833), p. 88f., IP (1836), p. 19; cf. p. 453.
• Caldwell, A Comparative Grammar ... , 2nd ed. (1875),1, p. 55; n, p.32 withreferences.
6 Wackernagel, Altind. Gramm., 1 (1896), p. 165, refers to Bühler, Madras literary
Jouma/, 1864.
• Lingl/istic Survey ofIndia, IV (1906), p. 279.
7 "Notes on Dravidian Philology", Indian Antiquary, 32 (1903), p. 455.
• BSL, 25, p. 6; in English translation by P. Ch. Bagchi in Pre-Aryan and Pre-
Dravidian in India (1929), p. 40.
• BSOS, 5 (1930), p. 733. Cf. L'Indo-Aryen du Veda al/x lemps modemes (1934), p. 327
("incontestable").
79
 THE GENESIS OF A LINGUISTIC AREA 83
but they were no doubt prompted by the chronological difficulty which
Bloch must have felt at that time of admitting a Dravidian influence in
pre-Vedic times. Unfortunately, this difficulty has never been c1early
stated in any artic1e 1 know of. If it had been, the discussion could have
become more substantial. The neglect ofthis aspect is one ofthe reasons
why the progress made since 1864, when the controversy aros e, is not
material. It explains, to sorne extent at least, how it was possible that in
1956, when Emeneau, in his well-known artic1e of "India as a linguistic
area",lO accepted the substratum-influence and right1y stressed the im-
portant role of the bilinguals in this pro ces s, two other eminent scholars,
without knowing his study, rejected any such approach. Renou, in his
Histoire de la langue sanskrite,ll expressed his strong scepticism with
regard to any traces of foreign influence in the Rigveda except for a few
loan-words. He apparently con si de red the thesis of a Dravidian influence
in the genesis ofthe Indo-Aryan retroflexes sufficiently refuted by the mere
fact that the retroflexes already belonged to the Vedic phonemic system.
Here the implications ofthechronologicalargument are evident. Leumann
in his review of Renou's book12 expressed his approval and pointed out
that all innovationsin Sanskrit have been carried through with linguistic
means inherited from proto-Indo-European.
Since the notion of linguistic calque itself was not questioned, the point
at issue apparently is, whether 01' not this should be restricted to the
vocabulary. There is evidence enough to prove that it should noto Several
students of Middle Indo-Aryan have been struck by the curious con-
struction tassa iigatakiile (approximately "at the time ofhis having come"),
which occurs in a Paji text written about 500 A.D. in Ceylon. 13 The
construction, inconceivable in older Indo-Aryan, must be a mere calque,
directly or indirectly, of the corresponding Tamil expression avay vanta
polutu "when he had come". In Sinhalese, the New-Indo-Aryan language
spoken in Ceylon, the older ablative case ending was replaced in the tenth
century by a morpheme which properIy meant "standing in". Again,
Sinhalese gamahi sita "from the village" is obviously a mere calque of
Tamil üriyiy[U.14 Cases of this kind are not uncommon in the Indic
linguistic area.
10 Language, 32 (1956), p. 7.
11 Histoire de langue sanskrite (1956), pp. 16, 29.
11 Kratylos, 1 (1956), p. 156.
13 Cf., e.g., Erneneau, Language, 30, p. 484,32, p. 10. Hans Hendriksen, Syntax ofthe
lnfinite Verb-Forms ofPa/i (1944), p. 151 ff., tried to explain theconstruction by analogy.
Erneneau found also instances in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit.
u See rny note, Lingua, 8 (1959), p. 335, in a review of D. J. Wijayaratne, History of
the Sinhalese Noun.
80
84 F. B. J. KUIPER
To sum up. No agreement has yet been reached after a discussion
extending ayer more than a century. There are several points which
require sorne c1arification. The assumption of Dravidian influence
requires strong arguments since borrowing of phonemes is, according
to very experienced dialectologists, rare. Most discussions in the past
were too abstract and tended to deal with generalities rather than with
concrete facts. A telling example is the cavalier way in which such an
eminent Iinguist as atto Jespersen did away with the theory of Dravidian
influence by a mere reference to modern Norwegian. 15 Phonetic develop-
menfs have been reconstructed but phonemes occur in words, and in this
case it may be particuIarIy interesting to determine just in which words
retroflexes occur in the oIdest extant text, viz. the Rigveda. Finally,
there is a problem of chronology which, for the very reason that it has
never been explicitly stated, calls for c1arification.
3. It is necessary, therefore, to subject the entire Rigvedic evidence to a
more detailed examination.
First, there is the sibilant $, which in Sanskrit ranks with the retro-
flexes. 16 It is an inheritance from proto-Indo-Iranian, being an allophone
of s after i, u, r, and k, and, before t, of the palatal sibilants s and i, e.g. in
i$tá- and a$tá-. Besides, it occurs in a few words of apparentIy foreign
origin, which raise the allophone to the rank of a separate phoneme;
ef. c(/$dla-, jálii$a-, a$atara-. 17
The voiceless stop t occurs after retroflex $, as in i$(á-, a$tá-, and in word-
final position, to which 1 shall return latero Besides, it is found in 17
words of evidentIy foreign origin, such as kfkata-, kévata-, birfta-, beka-
mita-, vatijrfn-. 1B Distinctive word pairs like kútas "whence" versus kútas
(perhaps a proper name) are rare. Sorne ofthese words used to be traced,
or are still traced, to Indo-European. From the Rigvedic doublets kartá-
and kiitá- "hole" it was inferred that the cluster rt could, as the result of
15 Language, lts Nature, Development and Origin (1922), p. 197.
18 The lateral 1, allophone of {I, is a dialectal feature of the Rigveda only and will be
left out of consideration.
17 Cf. kavá$a- VII" ca~dla-vant- IlIl (cf. ca~dla- l'), jála$a- IP VIIl (vá$af IP VII");
á$atara- 1', cá$a- X" ba$káya- P. New words from the Atharva-Veda are: tÍ$a-, kal-
mtÍ~a-, ká$ka$a-, ja$á-, jala$á-, ja$kamadá-, ma$ma$tÍ, md$a-, yéva$a-.
18 Cf. (re{lú-)kakafa- VP, kikata- III" kéva{a- VI" btrita- VIP; aratvá- VIIIt, bá{
VIIIl (cf. bál itthd, ba/ti), bekandta- VIIP; aghatí- X', itátaf:¡ X" káfuka- Xl, kafá- P,
kúta-l', kilta- X" krpi(a- Xl, vafürín- P, víkata- Xl, sakatt- Xl; for sraú~af P, cf. vá$ar.
New words frorn the Atharva-Veda are: (árafu-par{Ul-), aratakf-, avata- (X. 134. 6),
ita-, vikarikaff-(mukha-, cf. vaikarikafá-), kifá-, kurüfín-, küfá-, krkafa-, tirifín-,parará-,
pa{aurá- (pafürá-), pardo, phár, matmatá-, laltÍra-, sarkóta-, sdrkofa-.
81
 THE GENESIS OF A LINGUISTIC AREA
a phonetic deveIopment, incidentalIy beco me a retroflex {. This is, it
is true, a normal sound change in much later times but, ap~rt from aH
etymological considerations, in Vedic dentals were not affected by a pre-
ceding ,19 andretroflexes were even cIearIy avoided in its neighbourhood. 20
The aspirated voiceless stop th is very rare and occurs only in words of
unknown origin. 21
The voiced retroflex (1 occurs intervocalicalIy, not only in the welI-
known Indo-European word for "nest" (Sanskrit nif;lá- from *ni~f;lá-) and
four Indo-European root morphemes, but also in three more roots, which
are obviously non-Aryan. 22 The twelve words in which it stands after a
nasal, such as dal,l(lá-, must aIl have been borrowed from a foreign source.23
The voiced aspirate (lh occurs in sorne seven inherited words, where it
has arisen from *~(lh.24 In foreign words the aspirate is rare: there is
probably only one instance. 25
FinalIy, the retroflex nasal, originalIy an aIlophone ofthe dental n after
~: H. Reichelt, Stand und Aufgaben der Sprachwissenschaft (1924), p. 251.
See Wackernagel, 1l!indi~che Grammatik, 1 (1896), p. 173. The theory implies (1)
the occurrence of~rakntIsms In the Veda, (2) weakened articulation of r and r, although
on1.y a ~ery few Instances can be t:¡uoted for this weakening, (3) an early retrofiex
artICulatI.on o~ t after r, which, however, is strongly contradicted by the evidence. Out
o~ the RIgvedIc words supposed to have -af- from -rt- on1y two deserve notice viz.
~a(uka,: "pung:nt, bitter, biting", which is traditionalIy connected with Lith. k~rtus
bItter , and vikata-, a hapax of unknown meaning in book X which is supposed to
stand fo~ *vikrta- (see however, Fs. Debrunner, p. 247 n. 21 a~d Fs. Kirfel, p. 171).
C:0~nte~nstances ru;e, however, kitavá-, if standing for *krtavá- (Wackemagel), and
!'thlYá-, If representlng >1<srthirá-. [vika ta- in the sense "monstrous" is later, of course
In current use.]
21 Cf. jafhára- 31, píthinas- VP; jáfhara- JI, játhala- JI pátharvan- JI sirímbitha- Xl
(cf. irimbi!hi- Anukr.). ' . , . from colloquial speech into the higher idiom of the poets can hardly be
2> The different distribution of the inherited and the non-Aryan words over the older
and more recent books is instructive. Cf. on the one hand niláyati VII mrláti mrlá-
yati (Passim), viláyati, vilitá- I18 I1P VIs; VIIJI and vilú- ,1II8 IVl VII'. vino: 10 'X'
hélate (etc.), hilitá- IP VII VII8, etc., on the other hand krflati IVI V2. VIIil IXU:
JI X', kri!á-, krilí-, krilú-, krilumánt- IXl; 13 X', pipi/é JV1. külayati VIIIr,' nalf- Xl. cl.
also me/l- ~l IV~. ~~": words in the Atharva-Veda are: kaphau(Úi- (v. 1. -or/á-, etc.)
kror/á-, khar/ura-,jangl(Úi-, tár;la- (? cf. Altind. Gramm., Il/2, p. 62 but Burrow-Emeneau
I?rav. etym. Dict., Nr. 2466), (niír/iká-), Sálur;la- (in vrn.6.17 udumbálam tundélam uttÍ
sálur;lam), hrür/u- (vv. lI. hür/u-, hrüdru-, rür/u-). ..
28 1 C.f. dalJ(Úi- VIJI, pÍlJr;la- in hiral,lyafi1J.f/á- VII, mal,lr/ftka- VIP IXl (-f Xl), miírtií1J.f/á-
II ~,~ál,lr/ra- (v. 1. _rá~rya-) VJI, sál,lr/ika- IJI, siil,lr/á- VII; iíkhal,lr;lala- VIII!, iíl,lr/á-
vrn 1 _X 1 (cf. m~rtal,lr/á-), kul,lr;/a-(Páyya-) VIlJ1; píl,lr/a- JI (cf. hiral,lyapil,lr/á-),
kUI,lr/~l,lácl- 1, pUI,lr/á"ka- Xl, mal,lr/iira-(dhiíl,liki-) Xl. New words in the Atharva-Veda
~:e: ur~I,lr/t;-; ká?r/a-, c~l,lr/a-, tal,lr/ulá-, tÚI,lr/ika-, tUI,lr/éla-, dál,lr;/ana-, pál,lr;laga-, bal,lr/á-,
sal,lr;ladurva-(.), sikhal,lr/m- (cf. nfla-sikhal,lr;la-). Here also occur the first words with
I,l!(h): kál,ltaka- (v.!.), sahákanthikií-
:: SCf,'h' gülhá-, trlhá-, drlhá-, ¡;iilhá-: milhií-, (á-)rilha-, (á-)~iilha- (cf. sálhr-).
Ju u-o
82
85 86 F. B. J. KUIPER
r and $, became phonemic. in a few words, after a preceding voiced
sibilant had disappeared, e.g. in dÜl,Idsa-, (from prehistoric *du~l,Idsa-).
Apart from these two or three words, it occurs in the cluster 1,1(1 in the
twelve foreign words just mentioned, and besides, intervocalicaI1y, in
sorne thirty-five words 26 of presumably foreign origin, such as gal,lá-.
Most puzzling are three inherited words, where it stands for dental nasal
without any apparent reason. 27
4. From this account it follows that the role of the foreign words in the
expansion 'ar establishment of the new phonemes may have been partic-
ular1y important. This raises the problem of the criteria for dec1aring a
Rigvedic word as borrowed. Only in passipg can this be mentioned here,
as it is impossible to enter into technical details. Instead, a more general
remark must sufflce. It is still a common practice of etymological dic-
tionaries to reject a non-Indo-European etymology for a Sanskrit word
for no other reason than that the word is already attested in the Rigveda.
Therefore, 1 should like to point out - a1though it is unnecessary to stress
this point in a meeting of linguists - that adoptions can occur in any
language and at any time, and thl\.t it would be surprising if there were
none in the Rigveda. Despite the general disinc1ination of Vedologists to
accept the existence even of incidental non-Aryan loan-words in the
Rigveda it does not seem quite realistic to look upon ear1y Indo-Aryan as
a language spoken in a vacuum. There must have been, from the earliest
times, contacts between the Indo-Aryan invaders and the autochthonous
,
population, and the possibility that sorne foreign words found their way
denied.
There remains, it is true, the question as to which are the criteria for
16 iíl,lí- VI; P, (DdsjOl,li- VII; Xl (Dásol,lya- Khila, OlJí- IX8; 11), kalydl,la- (-t-), 1111 IVl ;
11 Xl, kúl,liíru- III\ gal,lá- 39 and compounds (gál,lya- IIP), nilJík IVl (nil,lyá- 1111 IVl
VII'; IXl; I' Xl), pal,lí- SO, pÚl,lya- 111 (púl,lya-gandha- VIII), phal,l-, iipániphal,lat IVl
(áphiíl,layat VIIP), biil,lá- VP, val,líj- VI; P, viil,lá- IVl; 11 (the interpretatio~ of the words
viil,lá- and vdl,li- is problematic), S6l,la- IIll VI; IXl; P Xl, The foIlowmg words are
characteristic of the eighth book: anulbal,lá- VIIP (apparently different from anulbalJá-
Xl), kál,lva-, kiíl,lvá- VID' (prdskal,lva- VIII' JI), kiil,luká- VIIP, jañjal,lii-bhávant- VII11,
nicumpul,lá- VII11; a word of the ninth book is ál,lva~ (-i-) IX"; P. Words not attested
before the two last books (1 and X) are: ogalJá- XI, kal,liikayántib XI, kiil,lá- X',
-dhiiniki- Xl venú- Xl sfhiimí- Xl. For the reconstructed words *ambhal,lá-, *kul,lr/al,ldci-,
and *aliítal,lcl- s~e bel~w, p. 88. Atharvavedic words are: el,lf-, kál,la-, kÚl,lapa-, klzal,lvakií-,
gUl,lá-, pratipal,lá-, pratipál,lá-, maI,lÚ-(?}, laval,lá-, S/olJá- (? cf. Altind. Gramm., 1, p. 193,
11/2, p. 736). Cf. ámalJako mál,latsakab XX.l30.9.
21 sthál,lá- "pillar" (Av. sfünii-), malJí- "gem", andpiíl,lí- "hand". Cf. also sal,lá- "hemp"
in the Atharva-Veda.
83

THE GENESIS OF A LINGUISTIC AREA 87
declaring a word non-Aryan. This is a technical problem, which cannot
be dealt with here. Although an attempt has been made to sift out more or
les s methodically the majority of the foreign elements in the Rigvedic
vocabulary, this has not yet been the subject of a general discussion. Nor
could it possibly be otherwise because hardly any Vedologist is equipped
for this kind of research. With the reserve, therefore, that all conclusions
in this field must be considered provisional, it may be stated that in the
oldest books ofthe Rigveda (H-VII) there occur about 35 words offoreign
or doubtful origin which contain a retroflex. Next in the chronological
order comes the eighth book, which stands somewhat apart beca use it
shows traces of a more profound non-Aryan influence. It has 12 new
foreign words with retrofiexes, three times as many as any of the older
books had introduced. 28 In the two last books (1 and X) the newly intro-
duced foreign words number 38. The total number for the whole Rigveda
is approximately 90.
The steady, though not spectacular, increase of words with retroflexes
continues in the later and more popular Atharva-Veda, which has sorne
50 new borrowings. Very many ofthem are hapax legomena, but this very
fact points to a general conclusion. If, indeed, in the priestly idiom of
these hymns so many foreign hapax lego mena occur, it may safely be in-
ferred that in the contemporary colloquial speech such occasional bor-
rowings, probably restricted to very definite periods and areas, must have
been much more frequent. It may be added that several non-Aryan names
of Vedic theologians such as Kava$a Ailú$a prove that members of autoch-
thonous tri bes had been adopted into the Aryan community. At that time
the distinction between Aryan and non-Aryan apparentIy had a socio-
religious, rather than an ethnic, character.
Some linguistic refiexes of a social differentiation can perhaps be
detected in traces of a puristic counter-movement found in the Rigveda.
I will not stress this point because, again, this conclusion is based on an
interpretation of certain facts which so far has not be en the subject of a
thorough discussion and cannot be said to have been generally accepted.
In all the words con cerned an r seems to have be en secondarily inserted
owing to the occurrence of a retroflex consonant in these words.
By the side of the Rigvedic verb kütJáyati (kúfáyati), which has no
satisfactory Indo-European etymology, a later Vedic text has krú(layati
with inserted r. For Rigvedic rdlJ(lya-, a hapax of unknown meaning and
28 For retrofle~es in this book see Karl Hoft'mann, Worter und Sachen, 21 (1940), p.
149; for traces ID book VIII of a non-Aryan civilization see An Austro-Asiatic Myth
in the Rigveda (= Meded. Kon. Ned. Akad. van Wetensch., N.R. 13/7) (1950).
84
- ~
88 F. B: J. KUIPER
origin, sorne manuscripts have the variant reading rdndrya-, with dental
nd and insertion of r. Beside the word ká¡á- "hole", which fol' etymo-
logical reasons seems to be the original form, there occurs a doublet
kartá-, in which r is likely to be secondary. For etymological reasons
Rigvedic ambhf1,1á- seems to be a hypercorrect form for ambhal,la-, which
is attested in later texts. Also in kUI,I(lrl,ldcf- and alátrlJá- the cluster rl,l has
been explained as standing for al,l. In other hypercorrect forms the
Rigveda has a dental for what in the later language is a retroflex.
If this theory of a secondary insertion of r in foreign words with retro-
flexes 'Ís córrect29 - and the corroborative evidence of similar cases in
later Sanskrit is very strong -, these facts reflect different sociallevels, and
a reluctance of higher classes to accept foreign words containing retrofiex
phonemes without sorne previous Sanskritization. However, the proce-
dure oflegalizing them by the insertion of an r is curious and poses prob-
lems of its own, which lie outside the line of this argumento
5. So much for the facts. As far as their explanation is concerned, I must
apologize for repeating a few things which others have stated before with
petfect clearness.
For the arguments which led to explain the new set ofphonemes as the
result of a so-called natural internal development of Indo-Aryan we have
to go back to 1934. In that year Jules Bloch gave his last exposition ofthe
problem30 and, although he was ready, then, to concede sorne subsidiary
influence of the Dravidian phonemic system, he maintained that the
retroflex stops (to which 1 shall have to confine myselfhere) have arisen in
Indo-Aryan from three different sources. Since the present-day rejection
of any Dravidian influence must be based on the same arguments, it is
necessary to consider them more closely. 1 shall first discuss two ofthem.
The least important and most problematic argument is based on the
occurrence in the Rigveda of the two synonyms kartá- and kiifá-, the last
ofwhich (with a retroflex f) is supposed to represent a phonetical develop-
ment üf the first. Since the theory of such a development has been con-
tested and kartá- is one ofthe words in which the r can have been second-
arily inserted, the argument is at best a doubtful one. Besides it accounts
only for a few isolated words.
•• See, e.g., Bloornfield-Edgerton, Vedic Variants, JI (1932), p. 296, H. Oertel,
Festgabe-Jacobi (1926), p. 25, Zur Kapi$!hala-Ka!ha-Sarilhitii (= SBAW, 1934), p. 36,
Kuiper, Festschrift Debrunner (1954), p. 242ft'., Turner Felicitation Volume,I (= Indian
Linguistics, 1958), p. 351ft'., Museum, 59 (1954), p. 120, Festschrilt Kirlel (1955), pp.
149, 177ft'. For garla- besidekarta- see also Lokesh Chandra, Jaim. Br. Il, 1-80 (1950),
p.23.
so L'Indo-Aryen du Veda aux temps modernes, pp. 53-57, 325.
85

THE GENESIS OF A LINGUISTIC AREA 89
The second, and most important, factor is the assimilation which is
supposed to have changed the dental t to a retroflex t after ~ in words like
i~tá- and a~tá-. It need hardly be pointed out nowadays that this phonetic
explanation disregards the real problem. "The different articulatory
positions of the final t in English bat and bashed"31 do not imply a pho-
nemic contrast in English. Nor was there any such contrast between the
t in Avestan asta- "messenger" and asta- "hurled, thrown", while there
certainly was one in Vedic between the retroflex I in ~!á- and the dental t
in asta-o So the difference that exists in this respect between Old lranian
ista- "desired" and lndo-Aryan i~!á-, far from explaining the emergence
of the retroflex 1, rather presupposes its existence as a separate phoneme.
In lndo-Aryan, and only here, an allophone must have been raised to a
phonemic status.
Now, from a Pan-Indian point ofview it is apparent that this prehistorie
development ofIndo-Aryan may be looked upon as a first step taken in the
direetion of a Pan-Indie convergence. lf so, it is no longer possible to
ignore the development that has taken place in a different linguistic family
of India. It has often been pointed out that nowadays every language in
India has a set of retroflex stop s, and this is also true of the M unda family32
- with the sole exeeption of one or two of the southem languages of this
group. Their distribution in Munda is eertainly not the same as in Dravi-
dian, nor does Munda have the retroflex nasal of Dravidian, but their
phonemic status is as firmly established he re as it is in lndo-Aryan,
Dravidian or Burushaski. Still, the eomparison with other Austroasian
languages points to the eonclusion that they must be the result of dif-
fusion throughout the lndian subcontinent-perhaps at an early date, as
sorne Munda loan-words in the Veda might indieate.
In later times the gradually growing importance of the retroflexes in
Indo-Aryan fits in very well with the general tendency towards eonver-
gence in the Indian area. This convergenee is quite clear at a mueh later
time, when the retroflex rJ in Hindi developed, in postvocalie position, to
the same retroflex flapped sound that also exists, partly with the same
origin, in North Munda.
It may seem natural, then, to as sume that in the same way, in pre-
historie Indo-Aryan, bilingual speakers who reeognized a phonemic eon-
trast between dental s and retroflexes in the foreign language, carne to
11 Turner, JRAS, 1924, p. 556.
•• See H. Pinnow, Versuch einer historischen Lautlehre der Kharia-Sprache (1959), p.
289ff.
86
----~- -~~----------------
90 F. B. J. KUIPER
interpret the allophones of proto-Indo-Aryan in terms of the foreign
phonemic system. The loítn-words with retroflexes which - at least in my
interpretation of the Rigvedie evidence - they must have introduced into
Indo-Aryan may have contributed eonsiderably to the spread of this
novel phonemic distinetion among the speakers of early Indo-Aryan.
Emeneau clearly formulated this conclusion in 1956 when he stated that
pre-Indo-Aryan and pre-Dravidian bilingualism provided the eonditions
whieh allowed pre-Indo-Aryan allophones to be redistributed as retroftex
phonemes. 33
Mast linguists will probably agree with Emeneau that the correctness
of this explanation is, as he put it, "beyond doubt". Nevertheless, sorne
diffieulties remain.
First, the assumption of such a foreign inftuence eonflicts fundamentally
with the traditional picture of a pure1y Aryan society. Although this
pieture has been defended with modern arguments it is basically an in-
heritance of a romantic and idealizing attitude of 19th-century scholars,
which can hardly be considered relevant. Still a more ample demon-
stration of Emeneau's thesis would seem desirable.
More important is the faet that we are here faced with a methodologieal
dilemma. Indeed, historie al linguistics shares sorne characteristics with
the scienee of hi'story in general. The historian interprets the past in the
light, and with the knowledge, ofwhat happened afterwards. This is what
we are doing when, in the light of ¡ater deve1opments, we interpret pre-
Vedie developments as the first steps taken in the direetion of a conver-
gent evolution. However, how far are we entitled to trace back the line of
this evolution into prehistory? If it may be taken for granted that con-
vergence was a real factor in the development of Indo-Aryan of, say, five
eenturies ago, have we a right to interpret in the same light phenomena of
ten, or twenty, or thirty centuries ago? Can we entirely exclude the theo-
retieal possibility that a development started as a fully autonomous pro-
cess, only to become, at a much later time, a factor in the context of a
general Pan-Indie evolution? In other words, can we be sure that our
ínterpretation of the pre-Vedic evolution is more than an unwarranted
extension of the observer's own perspective to periods that should be kept
apart?
To this basic dilemma of historical interpretation there ¡s, as far as 1
can see, only one answer. Any such interpretation of an isolated phe-
nomenon will to some extent remain problematical as long as we are
3' Language, 32 (1956), p. 7. Cf. my conc1usion in India Antiqua (1947), p. 212: "as
far back as the prehistoric period".
87
 THE GENESIS OF A LINGUlSTlC AREA 91
unable to correlate it with similar ínterpretations of other, apparently
contemporary, phenomena.
There is a third difficulty. Apart from the position after ~, as in i~tá­
"desired", the retroflex t occurs in sorne noun and verb forms 34 in word-
final position, e.g. in rdt, gen. rájáb "king", which corresponds to Latin
rex, regís. Now, many Indo-Europeanists think that this retroflex rep-
resents an older palatalized stop of proto-Indo-Iranian and must, there-
fore, date back to a remote prehistory.35 If so, its early origin enables the
adherents of this theory to argue that, once a retroflex had arisen from
this Indo-Iranian palatal stop or affricate, this could Iead to a redistri-
bution of aIlophones in such cases as i~tá-.
1 need not explain why this theory seems to me unacceptable, and why
I think that the tlnal retroflex is rather the result of the redistribution.
What matters is that the theory exists and that the controversy which
arose a century ago is bound to go on indetlnitely, unless decisive proof
for the Dravidian "origin" ofthe Indo-Aryan retroflexes can be furnished.
This decisive proof must consist in providing cumulative evidence for
the view that the tendency of Indo-Aryan for conforming to Dravidian
patterns actuaIly dates back to prehistoric times. In the light of this
evidence it will, I think, no longer be permissible to ignore the wider
Pan-Indian perspective with regard to those innovations of Indo-Aryan
that have striking paraIleIs in non-Aryan Ianguages of India.
6. One of these parallel innovations, which curiously enough has never
been mentioned in this connection,36 is the use of Vedic íti "thus". In
order to make the character of this innovation c1ear, it may be convenient
to start from Old Iranian.
In Avestan there is a word uiti "thus", which can be used in the meaning
"likewise" but mostIy occurs before direct speech, in expressions like
"thus he said", "saying thus". Sometimes these words are inserted into
the quotation but they never follow ~fter it.
In the Rigveda there is a paralIel formation íti, which occurs 70 times. 1
leave aside ten passages where it simply means "thus, then, likewise", líke
3 Sanskrit Syntax (1896), p. 93.
Latin ita. ? In the remaining 60 pas-sages a verb of saying or thinking ís
3j See below, p. 103ff.
85 E.g., J. Bloch, BSOS, 5 (1930), p. 733, who however, while explaining ~át "six"
from ·(fat!, disregards the faet that ~ot;lhá "six times" points to *$G1+dhá.
36 A brief reference to this word can be found in IIJ, V (1961), p. 81.
n According to Geldner's translation. Cf., e.g., X.120Aa íti cid dlrí t1'ii ... anumádanti
"Ebenso jubeln ja dir ... zu". Delbruek, Altind. Syntax (1888), p. 529, supposed a verb
of saying to be implied in these passages. Por the Rigvedie evidence see the Appendix.
88
92 F. B. J. KUIPER
expressed or may be understood. However, in striking contrast with the
Avestan usage, the words "thus he said", etc. stand only six times before
the direct speech,38 but 30 times after it. Obviously there has been a
shift. 39 The resulting construction, although unknown in Old Iranian,
would not seem impossible as Indo-Aryan sentence structure. A simple
English equivalent may illustrate what has happened. A literal translation
of the first type would be
(1) Thus he said: "1 shall come" (6 + 1)
The second type,
(2) "1 shaIl come", thus he said (30),
while stíll being conceivable as an Indo-Aryan sentence, has at the same
time become entirely identicaI with the only construction by which this
can be expressed in Dravidian. Here, indeed, indirect speech is unknown,
the only equivaIent being direct speech, followed by a word which means
"having said", e.g., Tamil ey[u, Kannada endu, Telugu ani. The general
structure of the Dravidian sentence makes it pretty certain that this has
aIways been the genuine Dravidian equivalent for indirect speech.
Nevertheless it is a drawback that we cannot compare the syntax of the
Rigveda with contemporaneous Dravidian texts. The oldest Dravidian
texts that we know are those in Old Tamil. They probably date from
about the second century A.D. and are, accordingly, at least a thousand
years later than the Rigveda. An exact comparison with one of these Old
Tamil classics, the Pu[anáyü[u, is now made possible by the recent publi-
cation of a word index of this text,40 which enables us to make the fol-
lowing statements.
First, although Tamil e!)[u properly mean s "having said", it could be
used in Old Tamil (as it is in modern Tamil) merely to mark off the pre-
ceding words as direct speech. As such it could be followed by a verb of
saying. In such Old Tamil instances like ey[u collupu or eG[U palar kü[a4 1
38 A1so in later Sanskrit literature it rarely stands here, see Speyer, Vedische und
3. Delbruek, Altindische Syntax (1888), pp. 23, 531, Speyer, Ved. und SkI. Syntax
(1896), p. 92ff.
40 See V. 1. Subramoniam, lndex 01 Puranaanuuru (University of Kerala, 1962).
41 Puram 152.18, 278.3. My sincere thanks are due to Dr. Kamil Zvelebil, who kindly
ehecked the majority of the passages in the PuranálJiiru. He found that elJa occurs in
Puram at least 200 times as a simple marker of direet speeeh, followed by sueh verbs
of :saying as nuval-, kiiru-, ~.g. 27.9-10 tañ ceyvilJai mu{itt-elJa k€{pal '''Is their (good)
work finished' thus 1 shall ask", 212.1 nU/ik6 yár-elJa vitwvilJ "'Whó is your king?' if
you ask thus", 239.6-7 valiyar-e!J(l vajimojiyalalJ, me/iyar-elJO mi-kkiiralalJ "he will not
89
 THE GENESIS OF A LINGUISTIC AREA 93
the function of elJ!U is not noticeably different from that of Sanskrit íti.
The closest English translation would be "thus having said", resp. "thus
many having said". In Old Tamil, however, e!J!U was not the most fre-
quent marker of direct speech. Far more common was the form ena a
different formation from the same verbal root, which occurs after dir~ct
speech in more than 200 passages. 42 Now, this function of the Old
Dravidian elJa, elJ!U enables us to explain not only why in pre-Vedic times
tlle words "thus he said" were put after the direct speech but also, and
particularly, how the word íti came to be syntacticalIy separated from the
following verb and to be connected more closely with the preceding words.
That this actually has happened is apparent from the third construction,
(3) Re said "1 shall come" thus (11),
which occurs in eleven passages. Rere the normal Indo-Aryan construc-
tion seems to be restored. The verbal form "he said" precedes the words
"1 shalI come", but íti "thus" has now beco me a fu1ly independent word
that marks off the end of the direct speech. As such it has ever since re-
mained in current use in Sanskrit and, as the fourth construction,
(4) "1 shall come", thus (12),
demonstrates, an additional verb was no longer necessary. Rere we find
the beginnings of the later practice in Sanskrit of expressing utterances or
thoughts by direct speech followed by íti. In the Rigveda this had not
become a fixed rule, and direct speech without íti still occurred by the
side of the new construction. 43
All these four constructions occur equally in the earlier and the later
parts of the Rigveda. So the shift in the syntactical structure which re-
sulted from the re-interpretation of "1 shall come" - thus he said as "1 shall
come" thus - he said cannot be shown to have taken place in historical
times, and the explanation here proposed necessarily implies the assump-
tion that the inherited Indo-Aryan construction had been adapted to the
praise (them) saying 'they are strong', he will not say with intensity 'they are weak"'.
On t~e o~?er ?and ~here are only 26 occurrences of e1)ru, mostly used in its fulllexical
meanmg havmg sald", and followed by verbs like ikaJ- "to reproach" ettu- "to praise"
but not by verbs of saying except for the two passages mentioned, ~. 152.18 miik k61
val~m tammi1) evru collupu, kuruki" 'give the black stick to the right', thus having said,
havmg ~pproached".", 278.3 ciruva1)". miiri!)Q1) e1)ru palar kúra "'The boy ". has
changed thus many having proclaimed".
.. Cf. also, e.g., Tol. Col. 62 e!)Q mojipa "thus they say".
(3 Renou, Grammaire védique (1952), p. 392: "La situation normale reste le discours
direct sans particule". Geldner in his notes to his translation ofien adds the remark
"jti zu erganzen", e.g. VI. 16.26. This betrays an imperfect understanding of the Rig-
vedic construction and its historical development.
90
94 F. B. J. KUIPER
Dravidian pattern in the prehistoric periodo That this process can be
considered the first manifestation of what was to beco me a general area)
tendency is proved by Munda.
lules Bloch, curiously enough, denied the existence of a similar con-
struction in Munda:" Nevertheless, in several northern languages like
Santali and Mundari, whose structure do es not admit of indirect speech
at all,45 the word mgnte (lit. "by saying") is used in quite the same way as
elJa in Old Tamil and íti in Sanskrit. In a southern Munda language like
Sora the equivalent is gamle "having said".46 The circumstance that in
North and' South Munda different words, derived from the common verbs
of saying, are used suggests the conc1usion that this construction has been
introduced in comparatively recent times. Indeed, in an isolated northern
language (Korku) and in Kharia it is, as far as 1 am aware, unknownY
Some modern Indo-Aryan languages, líke Marathi and Bengalí,
have developed similar constructions by using, instead of Sanskrit íti,
derivatives of verbs of saying (cf. Mar. mhm;lün, Beng. boliyá), parallel to
those of Dravidian and Munda. They can be used in a way more or less
comparable to that of Dravidian. 48 Ever since the prehistoric period,
accordingly, the tendency {or adaptation to the Dravidian pattern has
produced new formations and constructions in the Indian area.
The question naturally arises whether the tendency towards convergence
in a linguistic area is actually such a real and, persistent factor that the
evidence of modern Munda can be used in support of an interpretation of
a prehistoric development in Indo-Aryan. A particular detail shows that
it can.
A specific use of e!J!U in Tamil is that after onomatopoeas, as in pata-
pata-v-eu!U "with the sound pata pata" (lit. "saying pata pata"). In Old
Tamil eua is used in a similar way, e.g. tutum e!Ja, ka!! elJa, ilum elJa. 49
u See L'lndo-Aryen, p. 327.
•• Cf. Hoffmann, Encyclopaedia Mundarica, p. 2817, A. Nottrott, Grammatik der
Kohl-Sprache (1882), p. 89, Bodding, Materials for a Santali Grammar II (1929), pp.
252,269, Santal Dictionary, 4 (1953), p. 280. [Hoffmann, Mund. Gr., pp. LVII, 61, 175,
211.]
.. See G. V. Ramamurti, A Manual of the Sora Language (1931), pp. 52, 149, Sora-
English Dictionary (1938), p. 97: irte gamle anin opuniflten ("1 shall go saying he told
me" =) "he said to me that he would go".
" See John Drake, A Grammar of the Kúrkú Language (1903), p. 136.
48 See Jules Bloch, L'lndo-Aryen (1934), p. 327f., and cf. Bloch, La formation de la
langue marathe (1920), p. 272, Navalkar, The Student's Mara{hi Grammar (1880), pp.
357, 667, Wilberforce-Bell, A Grammatical Treatise of the Maratlzi Language (1914),
p. 39: mi tujhe gharf yein""mhal;lún mhaJ;1ála "he said he would come to my house".
•• Puram: tufl/m e1)a 243.9, kall eva 320.9, i/um e1)a 3.3, 93.1, 159.18, 176.5,237.18,
399.33.
91
 THE GENESIS OF A LINGUISTlC AREA 95
Sorne Munda languages which have developed the construction of direct
speech with mgnte or gamle imitate Dravidian also in using these words
after onomatopoeas. 50 Now, although in the Rigveda a similar use of fti
is still unknown, in later Vedic texts the first instances are found of what
was to become the normal practice in later Sanskrit. 51 The Rigveda uses
a cognate of íti in a slightly different way in bá{ itthd "indeed, forsooth". 52
So there is a strict parallelism between the Indo-Aryan innovations of the
pre-Vedic and Vedic periods and those in Munda. The case of fti may be
considered a classical example of how a language can adopt foreign
syntactical constructions while retaining its inherited morphological
elernents.
1 think no apology is needed for this rather minute analysis because
only in this way are we able to reconstruct to sorne extent what happened
more than three thousand years ago. And this exact reconstruction is
indispensable since, once it has been demonstrated that the use of a single
word has been conformed to a foreign pattern in pre-Vedic times, this
conclusion may also be valid for problems of wider importance. Such a
problem is the origin of the gerunds in Sanskrit.
7. In such constantly recurring phrases of the Rigveda as "Indra after
killing the dragon let loose the waters" the poets use, to express "after
killing", beside the inherited perfect participle sorne indeclinable forms
derived directly from the roots (the so-called gerunds). It is generally
agreed that they are comparatively recent innovations of Indo-Aryan.
Their distribution over the older and more recent books of the Rigveda
points to the conclusion that their use was not yet firmly established. In
two of the oldest books (IV and VI) they are practically absent, whereas
more than half of the occurrences are found in the two last books (1 and
X).53 Still, they cannot have been created at such a late date as their occur-
rences in the Rigveda might seem to suggest.
MorphologicaIly they are generaIly assumed to be old instrumental
forms - an assumption that is supported by paralleI formations in North
Munda. However, this explanation implies the assumption that they
must have been created long before the oIdest hymns ofthe Rigveda were
50 E.g., Santali sal mente "suddenly" (ef. Skt. jha{ iti), Sora ramelJén maulJ-maulJ
gamle gute "the cat eries maung maung".
61 !~bahíNeastubálfti,AS.I.3.l_9, KS. 13.9 (p. 191, 7), TS.III.3.10.2, VaNéIJok$alltu
bálul AS. XVIlI.2.22, and bhúg íty abhígatab, idl íty apdkrtintab, phdl íty abhí¡fhitab
AS. XX. 135.1 (Kuntiipa-hyrnns). Cf. ghrtiti ítl SB. XIV. 1.1.10.
52 RS.1. 141.1, V.67.1, 84.1, VI.59.2. .
oa 1'7 II15 IIP6 IV! V' VJ3 VII' VIlF IX' X5S. The total number is 143 according to the
list occurring in Delbrüek, Das altilldische Verbum (1874), p. 228f.
92
96 F. B. J •. KUIPER
composed. As a matter of fact, the Vedic form krtvd "having done"
points to an oId type of paradigmatic ablaut that has left no traces in t~e
Rigveda. The contrast between the early origin of these forms and theu
late adoption into the archaic priestly poetry is apparentIy the result of a
social differentiation. These gerunds must have emerged among lower
social classes and must have been used in colloquial speech, long before
they found acceptance in the highly traditional religious poetry.
The introduction of these gerunds has led, especial1y in narrative prose
of later Sanskrit, to the development of a type of sentence consisting of a
long ;eries of gerunds and ending with a single finite verb formo Now,
this is exactly the Dravidian sentence pattern. As a matter oC fact,
Dravidian admits of only one conjugated verbal form, at the end of the
sentence. Other verbal forms, when referring to the same subject, are
indeclinables, used in quite the same way as the Sanskrit gerunds. It is not
surprising, therefore, that, at least from the beginning of this century, the
possibility that the Sanskrit gerunds might be a calque of the Dravidian
indeclinables has often been considered. 54 However, as was expressly
stressed sorne twenty years ago, this necessarily implies that the adap-
tatíon of the Vedic sentence pattérn to that of Dravidian must date from
a pre-Vedic, that is prehistoric, periodo As stated aboye, several scholars
ha ve since expressed their dis belief. 55
The paraIlelism WÍth the case of íti is, it would seem, obvious. In
Dravidian, which has no subordinate clauses in the current sense of the
word a sentence structure without gerunds is inconceivable. In Munda
the c~rresponding forms in the northern languages differ froro those in
South Munda: cf. Santali sen-ka te "having gone", Mundari hiju-akan-te
"having come", Ho agu-ked-te "having brought", Korku hadir-en-ten
"having arrived", as opposed to Kharia col-kon "having gone", Sora
jum-le "having eaten", Gorum sunu-qu "having fal~en". Thi~, togeth~r
with the fact that cognate languages outside the Indtan area (hke Khasl)
do not have them, proves the Munda forms to be innovations.
Again, as in the case of íti, modern Indo-Aryan languages have in-
dependentIy created new formations which have taken the place of the
older gerunds of Sanskrit: Hindi jti-kar, Gujarati avine "having come"
" Cf. Sten Konow, IlIdiall Alltiquary, 32 (1903), p. 456, Lillgllistic Survey 01 India, 4
(1906), p. 280, J. B1och, La structllre grammaticale des lallgues dravidiennes (1946), pp.
67 100 (but ef. BSOS, 5(1925), p. 733f.), Kuiper, India Alltiqua (1947), p. 211 f., P.
M~i1e, L'Inde Classique 1 (1947), p. 119. A different view was taken by Pavel J;'0ucha,
Archiv Orielltdlní, 17/2 (1947), p. 292, who eonsidered this a struetural affimty of a
larger group of Asiatic languages. cr. Emeneau, Lg., 32 (1956), p. 9.
55 See Renoll, Histoíre de la ¡angue sanslcrite (1956), p. 29 n. 1.
93
 THE GENESIS OF A LINGUlSTIC AREA 97 98 F. B. J. KUlPER

are used in quite the same way as their Tamil equivalent va-ntu. So the it would seem unsafe to date any part of the Rigveda earlier than c.
reality of a convergent development cannot be questioned : the prehistoric 1400B.C.
creation of the Indo-Aryan gerunds was its first manifestation. Incidental- When compared to Old Iranian, Indo-Aryan seems, even in prehistoric
ly, their antiquity is also apparent from the fact that, when they were times, to have been open to foreign influences, while the development of
created, laryngeals must still have been pronounced in word-final Old Iranian was more largely determined by tendendes inherent in its
position. own system. However, in the case of Iranian no comparison with foreign
We can only accou~t for the total mas s of facts by assuming that long languages of the same area is possibIe, and the internal evidence alone,
before the oIdest hymns were composed the use of gerunds in proto-Indo- acquired by the study of an isolated linguistic system, is no sufficient basis
Aryan arose among bilinguaIs, presumably in colloquial speech. The for definitive conclusions. In lndo-Aryan it was not the unpredictability
poets continued to use the traditional perfect participle until, in the last as súch o'f the innovations but the wider Pan-Indian perspective that
period of Rigvedic poetry, when the influence of other social classes furnished the criteria for tracing foreign influences. To the methodo-
became stronger, the new formation was fully accepted even in poetry. logical probIem that different linguistic observers may view the same data
in a different perspective the only solution is that the conclusions derived
8. Summing up, I may state that in the oldest text of Indo-Aryan, dating from a more comprehensive view must prevaifover those based upon a
from sorne three thousands years ago, three unpredictable innovations narrower perspective.
were found to occur, viz. a new set of phonemes and two new traits of In this respect the changes that took place in proto-Indo-Aryan, more
sentence structure, one connected with a new grammatical category (the than three thousand years ago, may have sorne importance for the method-
gerund), and the second with a completely new use made of the inherited ology of convergence studies in general. In so far as these changes may
word íti. 56 In two of these cases the tendency for convergence could be be considered the result of a subtle interpIay between internal factors in-
shownto be a persistent factor in the Indian linguistic area, as the Sanskrit herent in the system and external factors of foreign influence they may
innovations were at a much later time again repIaced by new formations contribute to our insight into the ever-fascinating problem of change in
of modern lndo-Aryan languages. language.
The cumuIative evidence of the three pre-Vedic innovations would
seem to Ieave little doubt as to the role of Dravidian in the lndian sub-
continent. Ifthis evidence should prove strong enough to put an end to a APPENDlX: IT1 IN THE RJGVIDA
dispute which started more than a hundred years ago, the effort made to
demonstrate this thesis has not been in vain. A. íti "thus, then, likewise":
The implications of this evidence are particularly interesting because 1.138.3 krátvii cit sántó 'vasii bubhujrirá
the picture of proto-Indo-Aryan that emerges from this analysis differs íti krátvii bubhujriré
considerably from the concept of a former generation. A language in (? ef. Delbrück, Altind. Syntax, p. 530).
which simultaneously Dravidian calques arose and Indo-European laryn- IV.1.l devdso devám aratírh nyerirá
geals were still pronounced was more progressive and, at the same time, íti krátvii nyeriré
more archaic than could be imagined a few decades ago. There is, besides, V.7.1O íti cin manyúm adhrljas
this historical implication that the period between the arrival of the Indo- tvddiitam d pasúrh dade
Aryans in the Indian subcontinent and the composition of the oldest V.41.17 Íti cin nú prajdyai pasumátyai
Vedic hymns must have been much longer than was previousIy thought. ("Also gewinnt euch .. ").
Although every attempt at a chronological fixation is mere guess-work, V.53,3 té ma iihur ... imán pásyann íti ${uhi
(GeIdner: "preise sie so, wie du sie siehst", cf. VIII.30.2).
56 In this connection Holmer's conclusion that phonology and syntax are as a rule VI.62.7 íti cyaviinii sumatím bhural)yú
first affected by foreign infiuence might be of interest. See Lund Arsbok 1961/1962
utgiven av seminariernafor slaviska sprllk oo. (1965), p. 49. VIlI.30.2 íti stutdso asathii riSiidaso

95
94
 THE GENESIS OF A LINGUiSTIC AREA 99 100 F. B. J. KUIPER

yé sthá tráyas ca trifnsác ca 1.161.8 idám udakám pibatéty abravitana

(Geldner: "Darum seid ihr gepriesen"; Delbrüek, p. 531, I.161.9 tipo bhiÍyi.ythá íty éko abravid
suggests that a yerb of saying is implied). agnír bhiÍyi.ytha {ty anyó abravit
X.61.26 sá gr~liinó adbhír deváviin IV.35.3 vy aknlOta camasám caturdhd
íti subándhur námasii sükta{b sákhe v{ sik~éty abravita
X.97.4 ó~adhir {ti mataras aSatrv aryáb sám ajáti védab
V.2.l2
tád vo devír úpa bruve ítimám agním am(tá avocan
X.120.4 íti cid dh! tvii dhána jáyantam ... anumádanti V.61.8 utá ghá némo ástutab
For X.l19.1 see B and E. púmám {ti bruve pavíb
VÍ.54.l yá evédam íti bravat (= Khila IX.l)
B. The inherited construetion ífy abravft, etc. before direet speeeh. VI.54.2 (yo') imá evéti ca brávat (ef. Khila IX.2)
VIII.92.2 índra íti bravitana
V.27.4 yó ma {ti pravócaty "indem du denkst (ieh bin) Indra"
ásvamedhiiya süráye IX.39.l yátra devd íti brávan _
V.6I.18 utá me vocatiid íti "dorthin, wo man sagt, dass die G6tter sind"
sutásome ráthavitau IX.63.9 índur índraiti bruván
ná kdmo ápa veti me "also spreehend 'Der Gott ist Indra'''.
VIII,77.1 jajñiinó nú satákl'atur IX.IOI.5 índur índráya pavata {ti deváso abruvan
ví Pf'chad {ti miitáram X.27.3 ndhám tám veda yá {ti bráviti
. ká ugrdb ké ha srnvire (referring to the preeeding stanza).
X.61.12 pasvd yát pascd víyuta budhánté X.I09.3 brahmajáyéyám {ti céd ávocan
, ti bravíti vaktári l'ártilJab X.1l5.9 íti tvágne vmihávyasya putrd
vásor vasutvd .... upastutdsa (.yayo 'vocan
Geldner: "da redete der yersehenkende Spreeher also: ,.," tdms ca páh{ grvatás ca sürfn
X,95.18 {ti tva devd imá iihur ai!a vá,yarj vá.yarj íty ürdhváso anak.yan
yáthem etád bhávasi mrtyúbandhub námo náma íty ürdhváso anak.yan (se e E)
X.l19.1 íti vd fti me máno
gdm ásvmn sanuyám {ti
Rere the first fti might be classed under A, but the paral- 2) {ty áha:
IV.25,4} yá índráya sunáváméty áha
lelism with (ti manyate (see C) leads me to assign it to this
category, V.37.l
IV.33.5 jye.y{há áha camasá dvá karéti
Without a following quotation stands X.27.3 yá {ti brávfti.
kániyán trfn krvaváméty áha
kani~thá áha catúras karéti (see D)
C. The more current eonstruction fty abravit (etc.) after direct speech. VII,41.2 rtijá cid yám bhágam bhak.ytty áha
VII.1 04.15 ádhá sá viralr dasábhir ví yüyii
1) with brü-jvac- (ef. GAy. uiti mraval, LAy. uiti mraol): yó má mógham yátudhánéty áha
I.122.l2 etám sárdham dháma yásya sürér VII.104.16 yó máyátum yátudhánéty áha
íty avocan dásatayasya námse yó vii l'aksáb súcir asmfty áha
I.161.5 hámimainMz fti tvá~tá yád ábravid VIII.I00.3 néndro astfti néma u tva áha

96 97
 - ...

THE GENESIS OF A LINGUISTIC AREA 101 F. B. J. KUIPER

102
3) íti vad-, vand-: Geldner interprets differently: "Das wir nur die Zügel
X.73.l0 ásvád iyáyéti yád vádanty nicht zerreissen", also heischend ...
ójaso játám utá manya enam 1.164.15 sakamjdnam saptátham ahur ekajám
X.115.8 árjo napat sahasavann íti tvo ~á! íd yamd f$ayo devajd íti
)pastutásya vandate vf~a wik (after voc.) 1.191.1 dvdv íti pl~iíti
4) íti ghó~a asit: ny adt$(a alipsata
X.33.1 dub,Sásur ágad íti ghó~a asit Geldner: "diese beiden meine ich, die Plu~i heissen - die
unsichtbaren (Gifttiere) sind angeschmiert".
5) íti manyate (cf. Av. uiti ma1Jhiino):
V.52.1I ádhii náro ny ohaté
VIII.93.5 yád vá pravrddha satpate )dhii niyúta ohate
ná mara íti mányase
ádhii pdravata íti
X.l46.4 vásann aravyanyám sáyám
citrd rüpdvi dárSya
ákruk~ad íti manyate Ge1dner: "... und ihre wunderbaren Gestalten werden
sichtbar (bei denen man sagt): Leute aus der Fremde!" Cf.
D. The construction aha " ... " íti.
De1brück, Altind. Synt., p. 531.
I.162.l2 yé vajínam paripásyanti pakvám VI.56.1 yá enam iidíde.sati
. yá fm ahúl;t surabhír nír haréti karambhdd íti pü~ávam
Il.l2.5 yám smaprchánti kúha séti ghorám Or rather sub D? Geldner: "Wer ihn, den Pü~an, mit dem
utém ahur naí~ó astfty enam Wort 'Breiesser' gemahnt. ... "
IV.33.5 jye~thá aha camasá dvá karéti IX.6.2 abhí tyám mádyam mádam
kánfyan trin krvavaméty aha índav índra íti k$ara
kani~thá aha catúras karéti X.17.1 tvá$ta duhitré vahatúm krvo tf
IX.114.1 tám ahul;t suprajá íti )tfdám vísvam bhúvanam sám eti
yás te somávidhan mánah Ge1dner: "Tva~tf richtet seiner Tochter die Hochzeit aus,
X.24.5 násatyav abruvan devál;t . auf solche Kunde kommt diese ganze Welt zusammen."
púnar á vahatiid íti X.115.9 vá$at;! vá$al íty ürdhvdso anak$an
Il.30.7 ná vocama má sunotéti sómam námo náma íty ürdhvdso anak~an (see C 1).
VIlI.32.15 nákir vaktá ná diid íti X.119.1 gdm á§Vam sanuyam íti
1.117.18 sunám andháya bháram ahvayat sá kuvít sómasydpam íti (see B).
vrkir aSvina vuava náréti\ The last parla is the refrain of vv. 1-13.
~eldner: '''Heil, Sieg dem Blind¿n, ihr Manner!' also rief X.130.1 imé vayanti pitáro yá ayayúb
die Wolfin, ihr bullengleichen Asvin." But cf. Oidenberg prá vaydpa vayéty asate taté
Noten, 1, p. 113. '
II.12.5 yám sma prchánti kúha séti ghorám (see above)
X.34.6 sabhám eti kitavál;t prchámano
je~yámiti tan va sásujiínal;t

E. íti alone after a quotation.

1.109.3 má chedma rasmirfzr íti nádhamiínal;t

98 99
B. VEDIC AND IRANIAN STUDIES
 l. Ap. {}litiy nnd al. sásti.
§.1. .Ap. ~átiy ,er verkünd~t' enthalt bekanntlieh eine lautliehe
Schwierigkeit, wofür es bisher nieht gelungen ist, eíne befriedigende
Erklarung zu fin den , namlich das a. W' enn ~átiy, wie man anzu-
nehmen pflegt, aus *~ahatiy elltstandell ist - unannehmbar ist jeden-
falls die Herleitung aus *[}ahtiy (Pizzi, Grammatica elem. deU' antieo
Iranico 70) -, macht die Erklarung von a~aham und ahatiy grone
Schwierigkeiten, welehe noch zunehmen, wenn Bartholomaes An-
nahme, dan in a~aham usw. del' Nasal noch gesprochen worden sei
und ~átiy ein *~iJ;tiy mit Sehleifton vertrete, riehtig seín sollte
(Altir. Wb. 1579 N. 5; von Wackernagel, IF XLV, 326 sq., aber
mit Recht abgelehnt). Jedenfalls hat Benveniste, Gramm. du vieux
perse 2 81, recht, wenn er verneint, dan es sich hierbeí nur um eíne
graphische Wiedergabe von aha han dIe : 1 denn so ware del' Gegen-
satz z. B. zwischen a~aham und ~atiy unerklarlich. Mit Bartholomae
aber eine lautgesetzliche Entwickelung ammnehmell, scheitert m. E.
an unüberwindlichen Schwierigkeiten. Dissimilation (etwa ah aus
ahilh) ",are nur in ~iJ,hy und ahy moglich. DaS del' idg·. Akzent in
dieser Frage keine Rolle spielt,2 ergibt sich sehon aus dem Gegen-
satz zwischen ahy, das aus *ahahy (ved. ásasi) elltstallden seín so11,
und ahatiy (ved. ásati). Es ist daher fraglieh, ob sieh für diese Falle
überhaupt éin Erklarungsprinzip geltelld machen lant.

1 So Bartholomae, Gr. Ir. Phil. 1 a, 160 und Juati, lA XVII, 105 (h ,durch

das Aleph, d. h. den Spiritus lenis, ersetzt').

, So W. Foy, KZ XXXV, 14 A 1: ,Intervok. h Bchwindet, wo nicht bezeichnet,
auch in der sprache wirklich, doch nicht beliebig, sondern nur nach dem ton und
a . •... ahatiy ist durch systemzwang bewahrt.' EinigermaBen abweichend S. 67:
das h so11 ,wahrscheinlich überhaupt nach gestoBenem hochton' geschwunden sein.

103
 192 F. B. J. Kuiper.
§ 2. Keinen Beweisgrund für die lautgesetzliche Entwickelung
enthalt jedenfalls apariyaya Bh. I, 23/ das Bartholomae, Stud. z.
idg. Sprachg. U, 67, mit sapa¡'yáti verbunden hat.' Entweder kann
man es mit Wei13bach und Bang 3 in upa1'iyaya andern oder Ínit
Spiegel, Keilinschriften 285, apariy- als eíne altpersische Neubildung
nach upariy betrachten. 4
>
Wichtiger ist das zweite für das Lautgesetz aha . a anO'efUhrte
b
Beispíel: ahy (Bh. IV, 37. 68. 87). Über diese Frage s. Benveniste,
op. c. 135, Tolman 72. An zweí der drei Stellen steht es neben dem
Konj. ahatiy, z. B. Bh. IV, 36 sq.: J.atiy Da1'ayavaus xsayaJ.iya:
tuvam ka x[sayaJ.iya hJya aparam ah (i) y, haca dra~¿ga da1'sam
patipayauva,. martiya hya drauJana ahatiy .... usw. Aus diesem
Nebeneinander von ah(i)y und ahatiy hat man geschlossen, dal3 ah(i)y
wie ahatiy ein Konjunktiv sei, was augenscheinlich durch eine Stelle
wie Bh. IV, 70: tuvam ka, hya aparam imam dipim vainah(i)y
(Konj.) .... usw. bestatigt wird. Es handelt sich hierbei um einen
Konjunktiv, welcher in den neueren Sprachen mit einem Futurum
übersetzt werden mul3. Daraus folgt aber keineswegs, dal3 el' eine
futurische Bedeutung in unserem Sinne hat, delln die alten indo-
iranische~ Sprachen bezeichnen viel weniger zeitliche als modale
Verhaltnisse. Ein Futurum hat die Ursprache, wie im letzten Kapitel
naher dargelegt werden wird, überhaupt nicht besessen. Statt des sen
wurde ein Ind. Pras. oder ein Konj. verwendet. Del' Ind. bezeiehnet
das Gesehehen als feststehende Tatsaehe, wahrend der Konj. viel-
mehr die Erwartung des Redenden ausdrüekt. Infolge des subjektiven
Charakters dieser modalen Ausdrueksweise ist eíne grof3e Freiheit
im Modusgebraueh von vornherein wahrseheinlieh. In del' Tat werden
1 Diese Lesung wird von King und Thompaon bestatigt, s. Tolman, Ancient
Persian Lexicon and Texts 132. Folgende Angaben naeh Bartholomae und Tolman.
2 So aueh noeh Z. Altir. Wb. 104.
3 So auch Meillet-Benveniste, op. c. 35, wegen upa"iy (ayam) Bh. IV, 64
(s. dazu Tolman 68, 73).
, Eine ahnliche Erklarnng hat Waekernagel, SB. Berl. 1918, S. 392 sq., sehon
für jaw. aoail'i ,unten' (nach upai1'i) und einige andere Adverbia vorgesehlagen.
104
Zur Geschichte del' indoiranischen s-Prasentia. 193
im altesten Altindisehen und Iranisehen del' Ind. und del' Konj. in
,futurischer' Bedeutung manehmal nebeneinander gebraueht. Für
das Altpersisehe 1 vgL Bh. n., 83: ka ram hamit;iyam hya mana naiy
gaubatiy, avam jata (Konj., wie auch IU, 86) ,das abtrlinnige
Reer, das mil' den Gehorsam verweigert, besiegt das' gegenüber
Bh. n, 20: avam karam tyam madam jata, hya mana naiy gaubataiy
(mit Ind.; so noch an vier anderen Stellen) ,besiegt das medische
Reer, .das .mir den Gehorsam verweigert'.2 Ebenso findet si eh im
Awestisehen del' Konj. z. B. Y. 46, 10: y'J va moi, na gema va,
Mazda Ahura, dayat .. " ,wer mil', Mann oder Weib, das tut (tun
wird)' 8 gegenüber Y. 13, 150: Paoiryqn tkaes'J yazamaide imanqmca
visqméa zantunfJmca dah'yunqmca yoi hemti.... ,welehe sein werden'. 4
Ein vedisches Beispiel für diesen Spraehgebraueh findet sieh
~S VI, 52, 2:
át'Í va yó, Maruto, mányate no
bráhma va yá~ kriyáma'IJ.a7]~ nínítsat
tápü~§i tásmai vrjiniÍni santu usw.,
1 Folgende Beispiale beachriinken aich absichtlieh allÍ die hier in Frage
stehenden Ralativsiitze.
2 Siehe Benvenista-Meillet, Gramm. du v. perse 141.
3 Mit modaler Nebenbedeutung: siquia faciat.
4 Nach vorangehendem: yoi a'!)har'J ,welche geweaen sind' und yoi babva)'i)
,welche geworden sind (und jetzt sind)' (für diese Bedeutung vgl. Delbrüek, Vgl.
S. n, 1940). Die 'Oberaetzung Bartholomaes Wb. 933 (nach Geldner) ist falsch. In
der Regel dient bekanntlich a'!)haiU - z. B. a~C'il ahmiii, Mazda, asa a'!)haiti ,wird
zuteil werden' Y. 50, 3 - oder bavaiti als Futurum von cuti (s. Delbrück, Vgl. S. n,
90. Reichelt, Aw. Elem. § 628) z. B. Y. 33, 10 ya.zi a'!)har;¡ yasca Mnti ya.aca, Mazda,
bavainti. Das durative h:mU betont aber, daB es sieh um einen künftigen Zu-
stand handelt. Ein iihnlicher Gebrauch des durativen Prasens findet sich im
Grieehischen (s. Brugmann-Thumb, Gr. Gr. 4 558), im Slavischen (s. Vondrák-
Grünenthal, Vgl. SI. Gr. IP, 385) und im Gotischen, wie sich aua dem Gegensatz
von jabai nu 8unua izwiB frijana b,'Íggi'jJ, bi BUnjai ¡rijai .iju'jJ J. 8, 36 zu dem
griechischen Originaltext (iJ.EVf}Ef!Ot EI1EI1f}E) ergibt. Mit a'!Jhaiti vergleiehbar ist
der Optativ in: jah 'ijaina 'jJo twa du leika 8amin Mc 10, 8 (lI1OVT(U) (vgl. Streitberg,
Got. Elementarb.5-6 203), wiihrend für das dem aw. bavaiti entsprechende per-
fektive Prasens, das noch. in ags. b¿om, béo ,ieh werde sain' (hauptsachlich im
Béowulf, s. K. Jost, Beon und Wesan S.4, 10 sq.) vorJiegt, im Gotischen wair'jJan
eingetreten ist •
.A.ela oden tali •• XII. 13
105
194 F. B. J. Kuiper.
vgl. Delbrück, SF l, 133 (und V, 319), Speyer, Ved. Skr. Synt. § 272, 3.
So auch einmal in einem Hauptsatze (~S VI, 60, 1 n), vgl. Delbrück,
op. c. 134. Aus diesen Beispielen geht hervor, dan im Vedischen,
Awestischen und Altpersischen der Ind. Pras. in Relativsatzen ge-
legentlich die Bedeutung eines Futurums haben konnte 1 und - wie
sich aus der l;lksarp.hita-Stelle ergibt - mit einem Konj. wechseln
konnte. Hinsichtlich dieses Moduswechsels sei nochbeiHi.ufig darauf
aufmerksam l:>o-emacht , dan sich im Gotischen genau derselbe Gebrauch•
wiederfindet, nur "ird hier statt des Konj. natürlich der Opto
gebraucht. Vgl. )latth. X, 38 saei ni nimi'P galganseinana jah
laistjai ajar mis) nist meina wair'Ps ,8r; ov/'a~lfJ&)lB~ .•.. "a~
a"oA.ov.9-Bí' s. P. H. van Moerkerken, Over de verbinding der volzinnen
in 't Gotisch (Gent 1888) 8 sq., Streitberg, Got. Elementarb. 234. 2 DaG
hier ein uralter Gebrauch vorliegt, scheint mir keinem Zweifel zu
unterliegen. Auf Grund dieser Tatsachen ist man also berechtigt,
ap. ah(i)y als eine Form des lnd. Pras. (ved. ási) aufzufassen.
§ 3. Haben sich nun die wenigen Gründe, welche zugunsten
des - an sich schon sehr fragwürdigen - Lautgesetzes aha a >
angeführt werden, als hinfallig erwiesen, s so bleibt für .9-i'itiy nur
éine Auffassung übrig, und zwar als Form einerWurzel {fa-
1 Beispiele ror die Verwendung des Ind. Pras. mit futurischer Bedeutung in
den idg. Sprachen hat )Iagnien, Le futur grec II, 285 sqq., gesammelt. Siehe auch
Grundr. IP, 3, 741 sqq.
, Die angelsachsische Evangelienübersetzung hat an diesen Stellen immer
den Indikativ.
3 Die von Wackernagel, NGGW 1931, 316 sq., zusammengestelltan Beispiele
beweisan nichts für die al tpersische Sprachperiode: der EN. Villana (Air. Wb. 1452;
Massina, Actes du XVIII' congr. interno d. oriento 103) kann zu aL aw. Ilan- ,siegen'
gehOren (für vi s. Delbrück, AL Synt. 466), der Ortsname Á¡'sada- (= Jp1ada, s.
Meillet-Benveniste, Gramm. du V. p. 54) ,receptaeulum virorum' bedeuten (-a-da-,
vgl. ai. dayadá-h ,Erbempfánger'); die Deutung alter Eigennamen bleibt aber
*
immer problematisch, so daB der Erkliirung von Tig¡·ana- aus "T-ig¡·a-ahana-
gegenüber ap. allahanam kein groBer 'Vert beizumessen ist. Die übliche Auf-
fassung von miihya als Lok. Sg. ist wohl aufreehtzuerhalten (so aueh Benveniste,
Gramm. 148, 181), wiihrend armo avan (s. dazu Andreas, NGGW 1916, 5 Al) und
np.8an für die altpersisehe Lautlehre keinen 'Vert haben.
106
Zur Geschichte der indoiranischen s-Prasentia. 195
(urindoiran. "'sa-). Dann liegt aber die Vermutung nahe, daJ3 *sa-
eine Nebenform der Wurzel *sas- sei, welche in ai. siÍsti vorliegt:
siÍsti ware somit als s-Prasens zu betrachten. 1
Eine unerlaBliche Bedingung für diese Annahme ist allerdings,
daG zwischen den Wurzeln .9-anh- und .:fa- ,paradigmatische Kon-
vergenz' stattgefunden hat. 2 Dafür lieGe sich anführen, daf3 ap . .9-a n h-
die Bedeutung ,befehlen' hat (Bartholomae 1579), welche sich im
Ai. und im Aw. nur bei der Wzl. sas- (bzw. sah-) findet, ygl. a.(fhy
(a.:fah (i) Y oder a.9-ahya) ,es wurde befohlen' mit der Bedeutung von
siÍsti neben .:fahyamah(i)y ,wir werden genannt', das die alte Be-
deutung yon .9-an h- hat (vgl. aw. sa1iJhaite ,er wird genannt'). 0atiy
,er verkündet' hat die Bedeutung von ai. sá1l1sati ,er spricht feier-
lich aus'.
Eine ahnliche Beeinflussung von sásti durch Sá1fl.Sati laf3t sich
im Altindischen nachweisen. Eine gegenseitige Vermischung aber,
wie dies fürs Ap. vorauszusetzen ist, hat hier offenbar nicht statt-
gefunden. s
Diese Annahme dürfte sich auch darum empfehlen, weil eS
zum mindesten auffallig ware, wenn dem Ap. diese Wurzel, welche
im Ai. und Aw. sehr gebrauchlich ist und zahlreiche Ableitungen
hat, ganz fremd gewesen ware. Die ap. Formen lassen sich jetzt
leicht erklaren: .:fatiy ist 3. Sg. eines athematischen Prasens, wie
ai. vd ti) páti; .9-ah (i) Y ist 2. Sg. Konj.
1 Hopkins, Amer. Journ. oí Phi!. XIII, 28 A 2, verzeichnet eine Anzah
a-Prlisentia und erwiihnt '§Ü8, sa1!l8 zu s,a. Welche Wurzel áa er meint, ist mir
nicht klar.
2 Der ,Suppletivismus' Osthofi's. Obige Benennung, welehe mir den Vorzug
zu verdienen seheint, rührt von Uhlenbeck her. Eine lihnliehe Vermischung
zweier Verbalwurzeln findet sieh Z. B. in lat.1)olo, vis (trotz Sommer, Handb. 2 534),
ags. eom, eart, lit. e8u, yra.
3 stisti wird in der spliteren Spraehe gelegentlieh für iá1[!aati verwendet
(PW VII, 165 sub 7). Aber sa8ta-~, das PW VII, 120 in der Bedeutung ,gestraft'
aus ~em Ramayal).a anführt und das das Partizip von sá1[!8ati se in müBte (nicht
zu ai.i8ti, wie das PW will), ,1St wohl Fehler für /¡ilBta-l), (ebenso 8aatra-m Ram. 1, 5,
20 8tatt, sastra-m), beweist also nichts für etwaige Beeinflussung von íá1!lsati
durch aa8ti.
13*
107
196 F. B. J. Kuiper.
§ 4. Das Awestisehe hat wahrseheiulieh noeh eíne Spur von
sa- neben sah- in satar-, eine Nebenform von sastar- ,Maehthaber,
FUrst'. Eine befriedigende Erklarung dieses Wortes ist meines
Wissens bisher nieht gegeben worden. Die Pahl. Übers. erklitrt
beide Worter mit sastar; Neryosang übersetzt satar- dureh anyayakaZt
(zu Y. 9, 61 in Spiege1s Ausg.), wahrend aw. sastar- von ihm ge-
wohnlich mit anyayi wiedergegeben wird. 1
Man konnte zwar versueht sein, sa.'trqm und sa:h'as(cit) - die
einzigen belegten Formen von satar- - aus *sattr-, idg. *kadtr-
(zu Sad1"dm ,Leid, Qual', sasto) herzuleiten, naeh demselben Prinzip,
wonaeh F. de Saussure, MSL VI, 246 sqq. (= Reeueil 420 sqq.)
ano figar, ahd. sedal, gr. fih(!oy und rpl'C(!og zu erklaren versueht
hat. S Dies seheitert jedoch sehon an der BedeutunO' b' denn sa:trasCit
_
hamo.xsa.:Jrahe Y. 10, 109 kann nur ,Maehthaber' s bedeuten, wie die
Vergleiehung mit siista (daiilh?Jus) hamo. xsa:f1'o Y. 13, 18. 69 und
Y. 14, 13; 15, 50 1ehrt. Es darf folglich von sastar- nieht getrennt
werden. 4
1 So z. B. Y. 17, 49 (bei Spiegel), Y. 45, lb und Aogemad. 82 (unrichtig
Geiger in seiner Ausg. S. 123 B. v.). Die Bedeutung von anyiiyi bei Neryosang
(nach Spiegel zu Y. 32, 12 a ,schlecht') wird erlautert durch anyiiyal;-, das bei ihm
,Bedrlickung' (so SpiegeI zu Y. 29, 6) bedeutet. (In dieser Bedeutung auch im.
Malayischen: anijaja ,Unterdrlickung' und im Cam: aniayyak ,vexation, tourment'.
In der ai. Literatur Bcheint das Wort in dieser Bedeutung nicht belegt zu sein.)
Vgl. auch Aogemad. 2, wo pazend antli ,Elend, Ungllick' mit anyiiyalJ, übersetzt
wird. Anyiiyi und anyiiyakalJ, werden somit etwa ,Bedriinger' bedeutet haben, was
auf volksetymologische Anknüpfung an alíato ,qualend, grausam' hinweist (welche
man librigens auch für ma8yo.aiista.aiistotamo in dem spaten Ardabahist Yast an-
zunehmen hat). DaB in alíatar- aber zwei etymologisch verschiedene Wilrter zu-
sammengefallen seien (Bal'tholomae, Wb. 1574 N 2 zw.), ist nicht wahrscheinlich.
Siehe auch Güntert, über die ahur. u. daev. Ausdr. 30.
I Xhnliches hat wohl ·Weber vorgeschwebt, als er I/iilw'- mit ai. áátru-~l
gleichsetzte und aus *aatta¡' (= *aad + tar) erklarte (SB. PreuB. Akad. 1891,
816 FuBn.).
3 So Bartholomaej vgl. auch Geldner, Drei Yasht 77: ,Die sastaro sind die
kleineren Gaugraíen, liber welchen der dai~hupaitish als Oberhaupt stand.'
4 DaB zu einer und derselben Wurzel gehorige \Vilrter mit und ohna das B-For-
mans ohne irgendwelchen Bedeutungsunterschied nebeneinander verwendet werden
108
Zur Gesehichte der indoiranischen s-Prasentia. 197
§ 5. 1m Altindischen sind mir keine Spuren von sa- neben
silS- bekannt. Die 3. Sg. Imperf. asat (Pal). 8, 2, 73) 1 ist eine Neu-
bildung und der Name der drei zu Samaveda 1, 269 gehorigen saman
lautet, wie Prof. Oaland mir freundlichst mitteilte, nieht satm-m, wie
das pw. VI, 221 angibt, sondern sakta-m. 2 Ich glaube jedoeh, daG
mehrere auffallige Erseheinungen in der Flexion von slÍsti sieh nur
durch die Annahme, dan es ein altes s-Prasens zu einer Wzl. sa- sei,
erklaren lassen.
Das richtige VersUtndnis der idg. s-Prasentia ist neuerdings
dUl'ch eÍne meisterhafte Abhandlung Pedersens über das idg. Futu-
rum sehr gefordert worden. B Pedersen sueht die Erklarung des
¡dg. Futurums in einem perfektiven s-Prasens (von ihm freilieh
,Futurum' genannt), woneben ein s-Prateritum stehe, das im s-Aorist
der historisehen Spraehen weiterlebe.'" Ieh mu13 mich darauf be-
sehranken, hier das Ergebnis zusammenzufassen, zu welchem er S. 26
konnen, laBt sich auch im Ai. beobacht.en. So findet man in der ~S neben bhiyÚ.
,aus Furcht': bhiyása und bhifit ,dass.'. Neben ved. bhirná-~t ,schrecklich, furchtbar'
tritt seit den BrahmaJ.1as auch óh~má-~t mit derselben Bedeutung auí. Ved. bhit~t
(= bhit-ao-) N. ,Licht, Schein' hat eine Nebenform ved. bhliaalJ, (= bhiiB-aII-) N. dass.,
vgl. auch ved. dlt!ty-alJ, N. neben dhaa-í-lJ, M. ,Trank, Labung'. Für ,stark' hat díe
~S távya-lJ" tavitlJ, und tavi~á-Q. Deutlich el'kennbaren Bedeutungsunterschied
zeigen dagegen áJ"Úti-l;- ,das Roren UBW.': ~tí-lJ, ,Erhilrung, Gehorchen'. Xhnliche
Beispiele aUB dem Aweatischen sind: jaw. axmusW neben jaw. axonüto ,nicht Zll-
friedengestellt'; jaw. kiirayeiti ,Samen aU8schütten', wozu ala Parto P. Pass. km'sto
belegt ist (vgl. np. kiirad: Háta). Neben pairi.karam pail-i.ka¡·ayoiJ V. 17, 6 ,du Bollet
einen ringsum gehenden Furchstreifen ziehen' findet man V. 19, 21: pail-i.ka¡·[¡Jl1t
pail·i.kar8oi~ ,er soll ..•. ' Vgl. gr. n)..~,ul1 und nAf¡rr,ul1 ,Flut', ab. ulro und uatro
,Morgen' (Berneker 1, 462 sq.).
1 Erst im Epos belegt. Siehe Oertel, Festgabe Jacobi 18.
9 So nach den Jaiminiyas. Die sii7ctiini sind nach Sakti benannt worden,
welcher ala Sohn Va8i~tha8 galt. Nach letzterem heiBen aie daher auch wohl
viiai~ehiini (briefliche Mitteilung Calands)'.
3 Les formes sigmatiques du verbe latin et le probleme du futur indo-européen,
Det KgI. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, Ristorisk-filologiske Meddelelser 111, 5,
Kilbenhavn 1921. (Vgl. dazu Schrijnen, Museum XXIX, 233 sqq., Meillet, BSL XXII,
220 sq.) [Siehe jetzt auch· Ders., Etudes lituaniennes (Medde!. XIX, 3), 19 sq.,
Verí., Glotta XXI, 284sqq. Korr. Nachtr.]
4 Siehe auch Grundr. 11', 3, 336 sq., Persson, Beitr. 581 A 2.
109
 F. B. J. Kuiper.
198
gelangt: von einer \\Tzl. *em- wurde in urindogermanischer Zeit ein
s-Prasens folgender Gestalt gebildet:
1. Sg. *r¡¡,m-és-mi
1. Pl. * r¡¡,-s-més
Daneben stand ein Prateritum *im-s-r¡¡,. Ieh halte díes im allgemeinen
für durchaus richtig. Es fragt sich aber, wie es sich mit den zu
a-Wnrzeln gehorigen s-Prasentien verhalt, denn ai. páti, váti nsw.
zeio-en in ihrer Flexion keinen Ablaut. Es HWt sich somit von
<>
vornherein vermuten, daB auch die zu solehen vVurzeln gehOrigen
s-Pl'asentien abstufungslos gewesen sind.
§ 6. N un lal3t sich die s freilich für §ásti nicht mit Sicherheit
el'weisen. Die von Pal}.. 6, 4, 34 vorgeschriebene Wurzelform si~­
steht nur für den haufig vorkommellden Opto Pras. §i?yam und für
den Aor. ási?am fest. Aber für den Dual und Plural des Ind.
Pras. und Imperf. lassen sich meines Wissens nur (tau) si§ta~ und
(avarp,) §i~va~ aus dem Schol. zur gellannten Pal}.ini-Stelle und die
3. Du. Impv. sl:.~tam (Malavikagnim. 88) anführen. 1 Dagegen haben
drei andere mil' aus del' Literatur bekannte Formen alle a: ved.
2. PI. Impv. sastána, ep. 2. Pl. asasta,2 kl. 1. Pl. asasma~¿.s Hieraus
ergibt sich, dal3 in den drei Hauptperioden del' altindischen Literatur
die Regel PaJ;linis jedenfalls nicht ausnahmslos gegolten hatj bezüglich
des Ind. Pras. und des Imperf. dürfte sie überhaupt unrichtig sein.
Auf das argumentum ex silentio, das sich - abgesehen von
sastlÍna 4 _ del' vedischen Überlieferung entnehmen laBt, grol3en
1 Prof. Wackernagel teilte mir auí meine Anfrage ireundlichst mit, daB
weder in den handschriítlichen Sammlungen Whitneys noch in seinen eigeuen
Materialsammlungen §j,¡-Formeu aus dem Ind. Pras. U. Imperf. vorkamen. Auffallend
Bopp, Vgl. Gr. 1 702 (113, 339), nach dem die 1. Du. PI. 8iis1)á~, áasmá(t, die 2. PI. aber
áj,¡thá gelautet habe. Worauf diese Angabe beruht, ist mir nicht bekannt. Spatere
(BenCey, Vollst. Skr. Gr. 357) erwahnen diese l!'ormen nicht.
2 Mhbh. In, 168, 80, 8. Holtzmann, Grammatisches 16.
3 Sltyat;la zu ES VIII, 24, 1.
'Eben bei den Imperativformen auf -tána ist hochstufiger Vokalismus
nicht selten.
110
Zur Geschichte del' indoiranischen s-Prasentia. 199
"\Vert zu legen, ware zwar an sich nicht unbedenklich. Von grol3ter
Bedeutung ist aber in dieser Beziehung, dal3 die Flexion von sásti
in vielen Formen eine ,unregelmailige' Vollstufe hat, und zwar:
a) in del' 3. PI. Akt.: ved. slisati, sasatu (TS V" 2 12, 1)',
b) im Medium (immer mit a- aul3er asasata IX , 102, 4 b, wo
aber SayaJ;la und der SV-Text [=1, 101 aJ áSélsata les en)
, áSliste, ásasmahe, lÍsasate (Z,S), asasva (Kath. XIX, 13); 1
e) 1m Passiv: ep. sasyate (Si§yate nur in der klass. Sprache);
d) im Partizip: ved. sásat,
e) im Parto Perf. Pass.: sütr. sasta-~, ep. sasita-~, neben ved.
si?tá-~ ;
f) im Gerundiv: ved. sásya-~, asasyá-l¡ (für si§ya-~ S. unten);
g) im Absolutivum: kl. siisitva und (neben br. -Si§ya) ep. -sasya;
h) im Plural des Perfekts: ved. 2. PI. sasasá, 3. PI. {;asasu~.
Da.!3 diese Formen unter Einflu.!3 von áste entstanden seien, wie
Pisani, Grammatica deU' antico indiano 137, meint,2 ist wenig wahr-
seheinlich. Dagegen sind sie mit meiner Annahme, dal3 die Flexion
ursprünglich abstufungslos war, vollig im Einklang. Darauf deutet
auch das Part. Pedo Pass. {;asta-~ hin. Obwohl im Vedischen nur
si~tá-~¡ belegt ist, muB sasta-~ alt sein, denn das Awestische hat neben
asiSt~m Y. 34, 4 c 8 auch mazdo .f1·asasto, zavano .f1·asasto, dUB. hqm .sasto,
hUB. hqm.sasto.4. Das hohe Alter del' Formen mit él wird auch durch
aw. yiisto, gr. 'wO''fóg, lit. júostas bestatigt, welche ebenfalls zu einem
s-Prasens gehoren, das noch in lit. júosmi, júosiu (*jo(u)-s-mi zur
Wzl. *jau-) vorliegt, vgI. auch abo pojas2, pojasati, das nach Fraulein
1 Vgl. asva Kané. 87, 12 Mhbh. IX, 40, 20 p¡'atyiislJa Ap$S 12, 5, 2 gegen-
über iislle (gegen Whitney, Gr. § 166), iis81Ja SB XIV, 1, 3, 2.
2 Auch Wackernagel, Aind. Gr. 1, XXIII A 5, und de Saussnre,' Recueil161,
halten die Formen für unursprünglich. '
3 So liest Bartholomae statt Geldners all18tim. Die Erkliirnng ist nnsicher
8. Ar. 1!'orsch. lI, 132. '
, 1m P¡¡li 8attha- ,told, taught' JiU. lI, 298 (v. 1. 8i~tha-!). Vgl. für diesen
Wechsel auch Gr. Ir. Ph. I a, 110.
111
200 F. B. J. Kuiper.
Buning, De Indogermaansche athematische Oonjugatie in het Slavisch
S. 50, auf einem alten athematischen Prasens beruht. 1
§ 7. Da13 siÍsti ein s-Forman s enthalt, ist auch aus anderen
GrUnden wahrscheinlich. Die set-vVurzeln mit konsonantischem Aus-
laut, die z. B. in aL dirghá-l), kárdati, mürdhá, bhrajate, bhrilsate,
gr. fUXAmtóf;, UAaOOf;, xÉ(!aOOf;, qcpa(!arÉop.at, nÉAarOf;, 'ra(!ax~ vorliegen,
sind bekanntlich durchgli.ngig durch Wurzelerweiterung entstanden:
del' auslautende Konsonant ist ein an eine vokalisch auslautende
set-Wurzel angefügtes Determinativ. Es fragt sich, inwieweit die s
auch bei den einsilbigen schweren W urzeln auf Konsonanten der Fall
ist. Beispiele dieser Art sind im Altindischen selten. Wackernagel,
AL Gr. 1,17, erwahnt au13er siÍsti: ási~am nur noch sádhati: sídhyati
,vonstatten gehen' (,* sjj"'dh- : *S'ddh-), das wegen gr. i{)Vr; ,gerade' als
dh-Priisens ('*se(t)-dh-) aufgefa13t werden kann (s. Brugmann, MU 1,
35), und khádati ,zerbei13t' : khidáti ,driickt', das aber zu streichen
ist. 2 FUr ved. sithirá-~ ,schlaff', das Noreen, Abr. Urgerm. Lautl. 119,
mit ahd. hadara ,Lumpen' zusammengestellt hat, vgI. Wackernagel,
AL Gr. 1, XIX und 19. 8 Aw. iri:Jyeiti : rilst/' ,haftet' (1·a:>-: ri:>-)
konnte man als th-Prasens zu del' in aL liyate ,sich schmiegen an,
steckenbleiben' vorliegenden W'urzel betrachten, wenn diese Wurzel
(Bartholomae 1521 sq.) überhaupt feststande. Aber ras ti kann ein
8-Prasens zu rll- ,gewahren' sein und auch die anderen Formen
werden von Lommel, KZ L, 269 sqq., ganz anders beurteilt.
Es scheint also, als ob die schweren Wurzeln immer vokalischen
Auslaut hatten. Diese Ansicht hat neuerdings V. Pisani, Grammatica
dell' antico Indiano (Roma 1930) S. 48, verteidigt. Nach ihm sei del'
1 DaS '!las- einmal auch auí indischem Sprachgebiete lebendig war, darf
man vielleicht aus rlÍana ,Gurt' BchlieSen, 8. Wackernagel, KZ XLVI, 272.
, Ved. khidáti, wozu ved. khédii ,Harnmer(?)', wird jetzt allgemein zu lato
caedo U8W. gestellt (wodurch auch Bartholornaes, Z. Altir. Wb. 37 A 3, Erklarung von
kh· hinfiillig wird) und khlidati ist vielleicht rnit lit. kándu ,beiae' verwandt, B.
Perason, Wzerw. 88 Beitr. 808 A 6 (anders Wzerw. 39).
o Siehe aber auch Manoion, Esquisse d'une hist. de la 1. scr. 131. Für ahd.
hada¡'a vgl. Zupitza, Gerrn. Gutt. 103.
112
Zur Geschichte del' indoiranischen s-Prasentia. 201
A~laut nur im \Vurzelauslaut alt; wenn el' im Inlaut auftritt,
1l"':fJ
se¡ el' entweder aus Wurzelerweiterung (z. B. lato facio : fecr) oder
d~rch ~n~logie zu erklaren. SolIte dies richtig sein, so wUrde es
eme WIchtIge SWtze fUr die Vermutung bieten, da/3 sásti ein mit s
gebildetes Prasens sei.
§ 8. Die 3. PI. des Ind. Pras. Alet. hat -ati : siÍsati , vO'l Pan. .6,
<:>.
1, 6.. Die. gelegentlich vorkommende Form auf -anti: silsanti 1 kann
zu dem thematischen sasatí gehoren. Die Endungen mit Schwund-
stufe: -ati, -ate, -ata (aus *-1Jti usw.) sind mehrmals Von Bartholomae
besprochen worden (s. Gr. Ir. Phil. 1, 91).2 Sie sollen sich nach ihm
nur dort :linden, wo aus irgendeinem Grunde Yollstufe del' v¡r ul'zel-
silbe gefordert war: eine Art ,GIeichgewicht', das in del' indo-
~ermanische~ Morphologie nicht ungewohnlich ist. a Aus del' ursprting-
hchen Identltat del' prateritalen s-Formen und des s-Aorists (s. § 5)
erklart sich dann die Úbereinstimmung zwischen asasu~ (3. PI.
Imperf. A.), asas ata (3. PI. Imp. Med.) und ved. aya8U~, ahasatá
(s-Aorist).
In den Fallen, wo in del' 3. PI. -ati uSW. auftritt (also nach
langer Wurzelsilbe) hat das Partizip gewohnlich -at (aus *-'l}t-),
S. Gr. Ir. Phil. 1, a, 98, Neisser, Bn XXX, 321. Vgl. auch Meillet,
MSL XXI, 201, welcher darin eine rhythmische Erscheinung sieht.
Auch in dieser Form zeigt sich die Úbereinstimmung zwischen Sásti
und dem s-Aorist, vgI. ved. siÍsat neben ved. d(h)ák~at (zu dah-).
Nach Debrunner, Ai. Gr. IU, 263, liege freilich in slÍsat eine indische
Neubildung vor.' Ich vermag aber keinen zwingenden Grund zu-
gunsten dieser Annahme zu erkennen, die ja nur auf del' irriO'en
Ansicht beruht, da/3 -at ursprünglich auf die reduplizierten For~en
1 Z. B. Mhbh. XIII, 16, 47 (anu8a1]l8ant'iti '(Iiitha"Q nacchal¡. = Nilak.) vgl. auch
Sayal)a zu 1,'{S IX, 102, 4.
i Unbefriedigend de Saussure, Recueil S. 178 Al.
. a VgI. auch Meillets, MSL XXI, 201 sq., Bernerkungen über ,le balancernent
rythrnlque' in dem Verhaltnis ,ffinól¡.: divál¡..
4 Siehe aber jetzt op. C. 597 (in den Nachtriigen).
113
 F. B. J. Kuiper. Zur Geschichte der indoiranischen s-Prlisentia. 203
202

beschrankt gewesen sei. 1 Aw. stavas von den ai. Formen zu trennen
(s. Debrunner, 1. c.), geht nicht ano Au13erhalb des Indoiranischen
findet sich das Formans -1}t noch im Griechischen (beim s-Aorist):
aBlga;, GS. aBlgarro; (für '" aBlga-ro; S. Streitberg, IF 1, 86). Die
litauischen Partizipia des FuturuIDs wie bús~s sind aber trotz
J. Schmidt, Pluralb. 426 sq., anders zu beurteilen (vgl. Grundr.1P,
3, 384).
§ 9. Wenn sich auch mehrere Gründe dafür geltend machen
lassen, da13 das Prasensund Imperfektum von sásti auch im Dual
und Plural vollstufigen W urzelvokalismus hatten, so ist es doch
angesichts der zweifellos alten Formen ved. ási~am ~ a-Aorist), si~tá-'(¡,
aw. stSá usw. unwahrscheinlich, da13 die ursprüngliche Flexion vollig
zweifellos noch Reste des alten Sachyerhaltes vor, s. Brugmann,
Grundr. 112, 3,393, Thumb, Hb. Skr. 378. 1
Hiermit sind die zu a-\Vurzeln gehorigen s-Aoriste adi§i, adi§ata
AthS. Br. (neben den aktiven Formen dasat , dásathal!) . , asthisi.,
asthi§ata Br. (neben aw. st&rahat), adhyagí§ta Br.1.1hbh. 2 vollig im
Einklang. Obwolll im Vedischen a auch im medialen Aorist die
Regel bildet und das Awestische überhaupt keine schwundstufigen
Aoristfqrmen von a-Wurzeln mehr aufweist,s müssen die vereinzelten
Formen mit i alt sein, eben weil sie der allgemeinen Regel wider-
sprechen und nicht alsAnalogiebildungen erkHirt werden konnen.'
Der oben vorausgesetzte Parallelismus zwischen den \Vurzel- und
s-Prasentien (páti: páma'(¡ = slÍsti : sasmaZI) wird dadurch bestatigt,
da13 in vollkommener ÜbereinstimmunO' b mit dem Verhaltnis von adisi •

abstufungslos war. zu adasam der Wurzelaorist im Medium adita, adhita usw. hat
Von alters her hat es bekanntlich neben den. athematischen gegenüber ádat, ádhlit im Aktiv, vgl. gr. 'icpa-ro neben 'icpr¡, 'icp3-a-ro
s-Prasentien auch thematische so-Formen gegeben, wie ai. uk~ati, neben 'icp3-r¡.
ta1]1.sati (neben atasat), welche Neubildung'en sein müssen, seies Dementsprechend darf nun für sásti folgendes Schema angesetzt
denn, da13 sie wenigsten zum Teil bis in die Zeit der Spracheinheit werden:
Aktiv n1edium
zurückreichen konnen. Oft la13t sich aber noch nachweisen, da13 sie Wurzelprasens
aus der athematischen Flexion hervorgegangen sind, z. B. ved. sásati Pras. káx-ti Cap. 3-atiy) káX-tai
(zu sásti), ved. cák§ate (zu cá§te). Auf solch ein so-Prlisens scheinen Prat. é-kiJ/"-t é-ka-to
auch ved. ási§am, aw. sisa uSW. hinzuweisen. Weil aber das voraus- s-Prasens
zusetzende urindoir. *si§ati von der Flexion von sásti ausgegangen sein Pras. káx-s-ti káx-s-tai
mu13, hat es folglich in dieser Flexion Formen mit i gegeben. Prat. é-kax-s-t Ú,~-s-to
1m Urindogermanischen s.cheinen die medialen Formen des Ieh bin mir freilieh bewu13t, da13 damit nicht alle Sehwierig-
2
Ind. s-Aorists durch Schwundstufe charakterisiert worden zu sein. keiten hinlanglich erklart sind. So ist das Verhaltnis von gr. cpr¡f.ll,
In historischer Zeit sind die schwundstufigen Formen zwar zum paplv, cp&:r:at (neben liWn, lir¡-ral) zu dem indischen Flexionstyp.us
grol3ten Teil durch hochstufige ersetzt worden, aber in ved. ágasmahi, noch immer dunkel.
gaw. m'Jhmaidí, ved. adhü§ata, anü~i, ahü§ata, gaw. asrüzdüm Hegen
1 Meillets Aufsatz ,Sur l'aoriste sigmatique' (Mélangas de Saussure S. 81 sqq.)

1 Daher faSten wohl die indischen Grammatiker sa8- als reduplizierte Form
kann mich weder im Ganzen noch auch hinsichtlich sainer Beurteilung dieser
von 8a1!l8- auf, vgl. Pill}.. 6, 1, 6. Ebenso Benfey, Joh. Schmidt, Vocalismus I, 35, vedischen Formen überzeugen.
I PW n, 721, Holtzmann, Grammatisches 30.
vgl. Whitney, Gr. § 675, Roots 172. Abweichend Bopp, Vgl. Gr. I¡a, 302 A., und
3 Filr aw. düa Y.43, 7 h (Bartholomae, Stnd.169) vgl. Altir. Wb. 673.
Pott, EF I1, 280 (Redupl. von ¡so).
4 Siehe auch Pisani, Gramm. dell' antico indiano 154.
I Siehe J ohansson, KZ XXXII, 508.

114 115
204 F B. J. Kuiper.
Aua :1< aSi§i muG also das urindoiranische Prasens :1< ái§ati hervor-
gegangen sein. 1m AL ist :1< asi§i spater durch ein unter EinfluG der
übriO'en
lO>
Formen entstandenes asilsi verdrangt worden (vgl. asiMata
~S IX, 102, 4 b). Dimnoch laGt sich im Vokalismus von si§yam (seit
den Upan. belegt) noch der EinfluG des zum asi§i gehorigen Optativs
:1< si§¡ya nachweisen. Das Aw. verwendet dafUr s¡§iJi~ und silhí~
,er lehre'.
§ 10. Aw. sahi~
Y. 50, 6 h gehort zu den aw. Formen mit í,
woruber am ausführlichsten Bartholomae, Stud. II, 156 sqq. gehandelt
hat.1 Die Mehrzahl dieser Formen ist nicht befriedigend erklart
worden: da6 sie mit den altindischen - zum groJ3ten Teil erst in
nachvedischer Zeit entstandenen 2 - Formen del' 2. und 3. Sg. auf
•• , -u naher zusammenhanO'en
-,h 10>' hat Bartholomae
• nicht wahrscheinlich
machen konnen. Eine zweisilbige Wurzel kommt nur fuI' vyamrvUa
in Betracht (vgl. ai. abravlt). FUr die meisten anderen Beispiele
(s. Bartholomae, op. C. 157) scheint die Auffassung als Optativ 3 noch
immer erwagenswert. FUr aojita Vyt. 11 hiilt übrigens Bartholomae,
Altir. Wb. 38 Al, selbst diese Erklarung noch fUr moglich. Dagegen
sol1 gaw. daidi~, jaw. daicñ~, nidaio'is den zweisilbigen Basen nach-
gebildet sein. Aber eine Grundform :l<ededfJ-t, welche Reichelt, Aw.
Elem. 102, offenbar für diese Formen voraussetzt, ist unannehmbar.
Die einzig mogliche Grundform ist doch wohl :1< édedot, vgl. ai. ádadilt,
gaw. dada~, jaw. daoat (s. dazu Bartholomae, KZ XXVIII, 37 Al).
Der Satzzusammenhang laJ3t aber an a11en Stellen die Auffassung
von daidi~ als Optativ zu:' Y. 43, 14 b (,so11 gewahren),ó 43,16 j
1 Siehe auch KZ XXVIII, 36, Ar. Forsch. II, 66 sqq., Gr. Ir. Phil. I a, 80.
2 Siehe auch Pisani, Grammatica 178.
3 So noch Bartholomae, Altir. Verbum 136, Handbuch § 306, Schmidt,
KZ XXIV, 317 (analogisch nach dem Plural).
4 Die eingeklammerte Übersetzung iet die Bartholomaeische (Die Gathas
des Awesta, StraBburg 1905).
5 ,Would give' Smith. Studies in the Syntax oí the Gathas 105, ,gewiihrt'
Markwart, Das erste Kapitel der Giithit UstavatI S. 59; jedenfalls nach Reichelt,
Elemen t. § 746, 2 f3 zu beurteilen.
116
Zur Geschichte der indoiranischen s-Prasentia. 205
(,so11 zuweisen'),l 46, 2 h (,gewahrt') 2 und zuletzt Y. 28, 2 t, wo ya¡s
1'apanto daidit xVMh'e statt ,welche die Getreuen in ,V
ohlbehagen
versetzen' (Bartholomae) ebensogut bedeuten kann: ,womit es (naml.
das Asa) die Getreuen in Wohlbehagen versetzen soU',s An der
jaw. Stelle Y. 13, 12: yeioi zi me noi~ daioí~ upastqrn tritt die
optativische Bedeutung besonders klar zutage, denn yeirJi kommt im
Aw. fast ausschlief31ich mit dem Optativ verbunden vor, S. Altiran,
Wb. 123.9 sq, Ebenso ist nidaiois V. 19, 23 ,du sollst (ihn dem Licht)
aussetzen' kaum etwas anderes als ein Optativ, der im Vendidad bei
Vorschriften sehr haufig vorkommt, vgl. nidaiSyqn Y. 5, 12 i 6, 29.
31. 43 i 7,29 i nioayaeta V.16, 2; nidaiJ-íta V. 6,51 i 8, 76. Siehe auch
Reichelt, Elem. 319 sq. In mil mfJrfJncainis Y. 3, 17 V. 8, 21 U. a.
hat Bartholomae, Ar. Forsch. II, 94, einen Injunktiv gesucht, weil
dieser nach miL der gewohnliche Modus seL Für die Verbindung
yon mil mit dem Optativ im Jungawestischen führt aber Reichelt,
Aw.. Elem. 320, zahlreiche Beispiele an.'" FUr jaw. vainí~ Y. 60, 5
scheint wegen del' parallelen Verhalformen jamyal (in 1), jamyarfJ§
(in 2), buya~ (in 3), jamyqn (in 4) die Auffassung als Optativ ge-
boten. Ó Die \V zl. van- bildete ursprünglich ein athematisches Prasens,
wie sich aus ved. vá'lflsva (2. Sg. Impv.) und vanáti, das wegen des
Akzents wohl in Anlehnung an die 3. PI. vanánti (*'lfttn-énti) ent.
standen sein wird, ergibt.
Übrig bleibt noch das vielumstrittene ma jrazahit Y. 60, 7, das
ebenso wie mfJ1'fJncainiS ein Optativ sein kann. Die von Reichelt als
* gesei angesetzte Wurzel (wofür ved. 2. PI. jasyata naturlich keine
1 ,May assign' Smith, ,moge oie geben' Markwart. Die Form daidii steht
paralltil mit dem Opto hya! in f und h.
2 ,Gives' Smith, obwohl hier ebensogut wie an der iihnlichen Stelle Y. 43,
14 b ,would give' moglich ware.
a ,(Blessillgs) by which it ahall place (its) upholders in bliss' Smith; s. auch
E. Schwyzer, IF XLVII, 236. Anders Andreas und Wackernagel, NGGW 1931,315.
~ Siehe auch Gr. Ir. Phil. 1 a, 195. Ganz andera erklii.rt Scheftelowitz,
ZDMG LIX, 702, 781 sq., die Jc'orm mal'JncainM.
Ó Die Übersetzung ,er besiegte' (Reichelt, Element. 101) paBt nicht in den
Zusammenhang.
117

206 F. B. J. Kuiper.
Stütze bildet) beruht auf sehr unsicherer Grundlage, s. "\Valde,
V gl. Wb. I, 694. Das sehr unsichere .&1·av'i~ P 23 lasse ich auner
Betracht.
An aUen Stellen kannen die Formen mit 'i also als Optativ
erklart werden. Diese Auffassung ist auch sprachhistorisch weitaus
die einfachste, denn für Prateritalformen wie ai. iisi~, as'it, arautsi~,
arautsit fehlt im Aw. jeder Anhalt. 1 Wahrscheinlich handelt es sich
in der Mehrzahl dieser Falle um defektive Schreibung: daioi~, vaini1,
frazah'i~ sind wohl als *dadyat, 2 *vanyat und *frazahyat (= ai. prahasyat)
zu lesen. Dagegen steckt in nidaiois V. 19, 23 wahrscheinlich eine
mediale Form (vgl. nidai'&ita und die anderen oben angeführten
medialen Formen); die Form steht dann für nidaiOiSa. Dasselbe
gilt für mfJrancain'is, weil ja marfJk- fast nur medial flektiert wird.
Auch die 3. Sg. auf -i~ ist bisweilen als mediale Form aurzufassen,
z. B. daiol~ Y. 13, 12 (für daio'ita, s. F. Altheim, ZII III, 35).3 Auí
diese Weise gewinnen wir eine Optativform sahyat, welche, im Gegen-
satz zu ai. sii}yat, den aIten Wurzelvokalismus noch erhalten hato
Es fragt sich, ob in sah'ya~ Y. 44, 9 f nicht dieselbe Form vor-
liegt. Das vVort hat an dieser Stelle as'istis zum Objekt, was Bartholo-
mae mit ,Unterweisung geben' (Ar. F. II, 167) oder ,VerheiJ3ungen
machen' (Air. Wb. 211), Smith, Studies in the Syntax oí the Gathas 110,
mit ,make-known the promises' übersetzt. Diese Verbíndung erinnert
an Falle wie paoirYCf:1n gM'fJzqm gfJrfJza6ta asis Y. 17, 57 ,die erste
Klage klagte Asís' (vgl. Reichelt, Element. 227, Brugmann, Grundr. II 2,
2, 620 sqq.) und kannte somit auch darauf hinweisen, dan saliya~
nicht zu sqh-, sondern zu sah- gehart. Weil die angebliche athema-
tische Flexion von sqh- sich nur auf sah'ya~ und die Konjunktivform
s~nghaiti Y. 43, 6 h .c das aber durch defektíve Schreibung für -aití
1 DaS ai. -il), -it in diesen Formen aus der Periode der indoiraniscben Spracb-
einbcit stammen, was Bartbolomae u. a. offenbar annahmen, iat sebr unwabrschein-
licb. Die Formen sind allem Anachein nach erat in bistorischer Zeit analogisch ent-
standen. Siehe Pisani, Grammatica 177 sq. (Ullbefriedigend Thumb, lib. Skr. 382 sq.)
• Vgl. auch E. Schwyzer, IF XLVII, 236 AL
3 Vgl. casiiit für * caaaeta (Bartholomae, Stud. 1I, 63).
118
Zur Geschichte der indoiranisehen s-Prasentia. 207
stehen kann) stützt, ist es daher nicht ausgeschlossen, dan salival
aIs *sahyat aufzufassen und mit sahit gleichzusetzen sei. Diese Ver-
mutung wird, wie es scheint, bestatigt durch die zweite Stelle, wo
sah'yat belegt ist, namlich Y. 44, 1 f:
- - - - - - ya.&a mmJi xsmavato
mazda f¡·yai .&wavUts saliyat mavaite.
B. Geiger, Die Amesa Spentas 95, übersetzt: ,wie die Verehrung
eínes Euresgleichen [beschaffen seín so11J, 01\1., Deinesgleichen mage es
einem Freunde meínesgleichen sagen'. Ebenso Bartholomae in seiner
Gatha-Übersetzung: ,mage mitteilen'. Man beachte aber, dan sqh-
in den Gathas (abgesehen von Y. 44, 1 f und 9 f) niemals von Ahura
Mazda, einmal von Armaiti (43, 6 h ,wird verkünden', namlich die
Richtersprüche), S011st nur von Zarathustra (46, 17'> ,ich will melden ')
oder von den Menschen i}1l all~emeinen (31, 1 b ,wir vel'künden') 1
gebraucht wil'd, wahrend sah- der stehende Ausdruck für die Be-
lehrung durch Ahura Mazda ist, vgl. Y. 28, 11 d, 34, 12 e, 45, 6 j ,
48, 3 d, 50, 6 h. Dan diese Bedeutung auch in unsel'er Stelle zu
suchen ist, hat M. W. Smith (,mayest thou teach [it] to me') sehon
erkannt. Defektive Schreibung kommt im Gaw. zwar viel seltener
vor als im Jungawestischen, laf3t sich dennoch auch hier ofters nach-
weisen (s. NGGW 1911, 7).
§ 11. Für die Annahme, dan ai. ási§am, aw. slSaiti aus dem
medialen s-Prateritum hervorgegangen ist, bietet die vol1kommen
parallele Erscheinung, welche sich bei del' Wzl. dha- beobachten
lant, eine wichtige Stütze. Neben dem Aor. adhi~, dhi§iya kommt
in der ~S ein Prasens dhi§e VOl', das von dem medialen Aorist aus-
gegangen ist. 2 Dan auch dhi§e aus der Periode del' indoiranischen
Spracheinheit herrührt - wie oben für *ii§ati .orausgesetzt wurde - ,
geht aus gaw. V¡dISiJmnai(s) Y. 51,1 e hervor, das ebenfalls zu einem
so-Prasens gehal't. Es mit Bartholomae als Partizip eínes s-Aol'ists
1 Passivisch steht oiinghaite 32, 7° (,wird kund') .
s Irrige Vermutungen bei Charpentier, Deaiderati,bildung 28.
119
208 F. B. J. Kuiper.
zu erklaren,l empfiehlt sich nicht wegen des Formans -mna- gegen-
liber z. B. m:¡¡nhana (Prtz. s-Aor. von man-).2 So konnte man auch
gr. ocxlop.lCU wegen des Aor. 80CX(JU&fl1)J! auf *OCXOJO!lat ("'dfJ-s-) zurück-
flihren. s
Die liberlieferten aw. Formen SIMit (3. Sg. Opt.), sisa (2. Sg.
lmpv.) und aEfi§tfJm machen es sehr wahrscheinlich, daG im Aw.das
Prasens sIsaiti noch üblich gewesen ist. Dagegen haben im Vedischen
nur die prateritalen Formen als ,Aorist' Verwendung gefunden, wie
es oh bei den so-Prasentien del' Fall ist, s. Grundr. II 2, 3, 342. Zu
* si~ati gehort aber auch ved. si§tá-l}, wonach in jüngerer Zeit Si!Jya-l}
(statt ved. sásya-~) und si§(va (Gramm.) geschaffen sind. 4
§ 12. Das Altindische hat Wurzelnomina sowohl von sas- als
von si§-: sáb, lisá~ 5 neben list~, praSi~. 1m Awestischen findet sich
dagegen nur sah-: frasah-, af1'asah-, af1'asahvant-, saxvan-.
Für Joh.Schmidts Annahme,6 der u. a. Bartholomae beigetreten
7
ist, daG ai. ilSí§- aus den schwachen Kasus von asás- stamme und
nachtraglich verallgemeinert worden sei, ist kein Grund vorhanden.
Ved. silsá-b ,Gebieter', sása-~ ,Befehl', aw. s¡]raho (Bedeutung?) gehen,
1 So auch Hertel, Indoir. Quellen und Forsch. VII, 124, desBen abweichende
Ansicht mir abar nicht einleuchtet (vgl. VJI"fJzyeidyiU Y. 43, 11", diiyii~ Y. 46, 10 b !).
3 Hier ware auch gaw. pi8yeiti ,sehen', womit Bartholomae api8man-,
api8ma.x va¡.- vereinigt, zu erwahnen, wenn es in der Tat auí eine Wzl. piih-,
8-Erweiterung von pii- ,hüten' (Bartholomae 891) zu beziehen ",,¡ire. Dies scheint
mir aber trotz Toch. A pliB- ,hUten, Uben' berechtigtem Zweiíel zu unterliegen.
Die auí dar Hand liegende VerknUpfung mit gaw. apaoyii, ai. paayati, welche
auch Bartholomae túr moglich haH, verdient jedenfalls den Vorzug (Grdf. *pek-a-,
vgl. paáne ,in conspectu', wohl mit 8 aus ka; mit apaBitaiicf(a)ca Y. 19, 6 ist
nichts anzufangen). FUr den Vokalismus ist vielleicht pi8/¡·a- (Z. altír. Wb. 194)
vergleichbar.
3 So Bchon J. Schmidt, KZ XXVII, 294, Schulze, Qu. Ep. 366 A 2. Sieha
aber Brugmann-Thumb, Gr. Gr." 348.
4 'fhumba, Hb. Skr. 437, Betrachtungen über diese Formen halte ¡ch somit
für grundaatzlich verfehlt.
6 FUr a8ii B. Aind. Gr. III, 283.
B Pluralbildung 382, KZ XXV, 81.
7 IF I, 182 sq.
120
Zur Geschichte der indoiranischen s-Prasentia. 209
Wle díe Mehrzahl der so-Nomina, auf ein s-Prasens zurück. 1 Neu-
bildungen zu den s-Nomina sind gewiG "iel seltener, als man oft
angenommen hat: es ware an sich auch wenig wahrscheinlich, daG
die meistens ziem1ich junge Anfügung von -a- noch Ablaut im Formans
-es- herbeigefüh~t hatte, vgl. ai. avasá-m, dívasa-b, alasá-b. 2 An
s-Prasentia schlieGen sich wohl u. a. folgende so-Nomina an: drapsá-lj.
(s. Ai. Gr. 1, 242), gl'apsa-~ (s. Ai. Gr. 1. c., Grundr. lIs, 3, 341 j ab-
weiche~d Lidén, Studien 9 sq.), lakgá-m (lak!Jate), gft8a-~, aw. vaXSfJm
(vgl. gaw. vaxsal Konj.), sra oso (vg1. ved. s1'ó§am(1)a-~ trotz Perssons,
Beitr. 582, abweichender Ansicht). Ebenso ai. vasa-~ ,'Vohlgeruch'
zu *vasti,5 vgl. lit. véstu, vésti ,kühl werden'.
AuGerhalb des lndoiranischen sind sichere Verwandte bisher
nur im Armenischen nachgewiesen worden. Lat. castus, castigo, '"
p1'oceres 5 und ir. cáin ,Gesetz' 6 sind fernzuhalten. Auch sa1!~sati 7
und sasatí 8 sind unverwandt.
Als bloGe Vermutung sei hier noch die Moglichkeit erwahnt,
daG indoÍt·. *Aa- mit der Wz1. *leo- ,scharf sein, gewetzt sein' identisch
seín konnte. Vgl. lato catus ,scharfsinnig', ir. cath ,weise' (*k~-tó-)
neben ai. si~tá-l¡ ,Gelehrter'.9 Die Grundbedeutung von Sásti ,tadelt,
1 Meillets, MSL XVI, 67, Annahme, daB die indischen Nomina auí -Ia-
jung seien, ist unbegrUndet. übrigens hiilt er Belb8t, MSL XX, 31, gr. {3ov;'~ (aus
.. g'l.ol-aii) für eine vorgriechische Bildung.
I Siehe Pisani, Grammatica 268.
3 Vgl. viiti ,riechen, GerUche verbreiten'. Dazu das Kausativum vliBayati
,wohlriechend machen'. So auch Perason, Wzerw. 201, Beitr. 12 (gegen dessen
Heranziehung von Bchwed.08 ,Geruch' usw. S. Charpentier, KZ XLVI, 42 Al).
, Frohde, KZ XXIII, 311 BB 1, 191, Leo Meyer, BB VI, 137; Grundr.P, 728sq.
6 De Saussure, Mémoire 173 (= Recueil 162 Al).
6 Stokes, BB XXIII, 45, Fick II', 74. Siehe aber Pedersen, KeIt. Gr. 1, 193.
1st ir. cáinid ,hOhnt' (s. Kelt. Gr. II, 496) vielleicht aus *kii"'-(a)-ne-ti zu erklaren?
Vgl. .Mati ,weiat zurecht, tadelt', tocho A kiiQ- ,schelten, schmahen', armo aaat ,Schelte,
Vorwurf'. Andero über cáinid Fick II', 66_Boisacq 447.
7 Joh. Schmidt, Vocal. 1, 35, E. W. Fay, AmJPh. XXV (1904), 178 sq.
• So fragend Hirt, BB XXIV, 234.
9 FUr das von Reiche~t, KZ XXXIX, 10, herangezogene fXO¡UEV' YI13-6,UE{}CX
und x6/1' lU6. Hes. (so auch Brugmann-Thumb, Gr. Gr. 318) 8. vielmehr Baunack,
Studien 257 FuBn.
Aeta orientalla: XII. 14
121
210 F. B. J. Kuiper.

1ehrt, gebietet' ware dann etwa ,einscharfen' gewesen. Mehr als eine
Vermutung ist dies allerdings nicbt. V gl. aber sár¡¡, Sisati, das in
del' vedischen Spracbe auch ,anfeuern, aufreizen, bereit machen zu'
bedeutet. Indoiranica.
Von

F. B. J. Kuiper, Batavia (Java).

[1. AL aftgana. 2. AL aatamana-m. 3. AL adll1·á-ZI. 4. Ved. ená. 5. AL bhl'(u)lcu¡'í-.

6. AL ka'Qapa-l¡.. 7. AL gehá-m. 8. Ai. campü-l¡.. 9. Ved. cyávati. 10. Ved,pül'dhí,
pr~ti. 11. Ai. Mandakinf. 12. Ai. yápa-l¡.. 13. AL 8"il\<aktí-l¡., si1·okti-l¡.. 14. Ai. aai-
dati usw. 15. AL 8U1·uitga. 16. Jaw. azah1!a-, arra usw. 17. Jaw. a{}aiti und a\\'. a
~tatt a. 18. Jaw.f¡·a8pat-. 19. Jaw. VYU8Cf: und apa. asa1!qn. 20. Aw. 8ii- ,wehren'.]

1. Ai. angana ,Frau, Weibchen (eines Tieres)'.

Das ,Vort ailgana ist del' alteren Sprache fremd und kommt
erst im Epos und in del' klassischen Literatur VOl'. Überzeugende
etymologische Erklarungen fehlen. Man konnte an Zusammenhang
mit a1igana-m (aJigalJ,a-m) ,Rof' denken und eine ahnliche Be-
deutungsentwicklung annehmen wie bei nhd. Frauenzimme1'. So
würde Peiles Bemerkung, Notes on tbe Nalopakhyanam 54: ,first,
a woman's chamber (so PW) then (in polite conversation) its
occupant' zu Recht bestehen, DaÍür aber, dal3 aligana-m ,Frauen-
gemach' bedeutet hahe, fehlt jeder Beweis. 1 Auch jetzt noch be-
deutet hind, MIgan, a1igna, ai¡gna'f, ,inclosed space adjoining a house;
court-yard, court area, quadrangle', hat also dieselbe Bedeutung
wie das altindisehe W orto 2 In alteren ,Verken leitet man ailgana
gewohnlich von áliga-m ,Glied' ab, unter Annahme einer Grund-
bedeutung ,ein seban geformtes Frauenzimmer', die sieh aber nur
auf vage Angaben del' indiscben Lexikographen stützt, a So PW I, 52

1 Ofi'enbar hat P. die Bezeichnung ,Frauenzimmer' im PW miBverstanden.

2 Nilaka~tha zu lIIhbh. XI, 11, 11 glossiert mit nrtyasilcQiibhümil¡.,
3 Bemerbnswert ist, daB sich diese Angabe auch in Hindi-Lexika wieder-

findet, vgl. John T. Platts, A Dict. of Urdu, cIass. Hindi, and English (London 1884):
,a well-formed woman, a beaut.y; a woman' und J. D. Bate, A Dictionary of the
Hindee Language (Allahabad 1918): ,of beautiíul body, a lady, a woman'.

122 123
204 F. B. J. Kuiper.
1ndoil'aniea.
205
(aber nicht mehr pw), Peile 1. c. und Lanman, Skr. Reader 112.
Annahme einer ,sonorisation du +
intervocaIique' weO'en des -do) E'
Diese Erklarung laLlt sich aber weder semasiologisch noch morpho- "b d B' e .' 111
U el'zeugen es elspieI fül' diesen Lautwechsel lieO"t in al' l-' l
logisch recht.fertigen und ist heute denn auch alIgemein aufgegeben Ptl I:l • anga a-m
, ug' 1'01', das Pl'zyluski, BSL XXIV 118 "q t ff d .
worden. Ai. migana laLlt sieh somit als indogermanisches Erbwort A (~.,
, re en mlt
annam. cuy, .khmer aJikal, khasi kaZyi¡kol' verglichen hat (aus-
lautendes l ~lrd im Khasi zu 1', S. Schmidt, Khasi 723). Leider
nieht befriedigend erklal'en: etwaige Ableitung von einer vVurzel
m'¡g-, was morphologiseh jedenfalls nahelage, wird sehon durch das g
hat P~zylusln den ,Vert seines Aufsatzes durch die Hel'anziehuDo'
widerraten (s. Wackernagel, Festgabe Jacobi 5),1 aueh das spate
yon ~rel~m U~zugehol'igem se11r beeintrachtigt. Cmgekehrt ist da:
Auftl'eten in del' Literatur scheint darauf hinzuweisen, daLl es sieh
V:rhaltms' bm makal'a-(!. Da!3 die Bedeutung nicht ,Delphin' ist,
um ein junges vVort handelt.
:re das Peto 'Vb. vel'mutete, sondel'll ,eine Al't Krokodil', lehrt die
1st aber m'¡gana ein Lehnwort, so kommt für die Frage nach
Skulptur; lUan hat das IVort also mit santali mwigar AlliO'ator'
seiner Herkunft an erster Stelle das Austroasiatisehe in Betraeht. b' d '. , zu
ver m en. VlellelC~t da~'f aueh l(bigula-rn (das untel' 8. campa-l.!
b

naher b~sproc.hen wlrcl) hIerfür geItend gemacht werden. Offenbar

Die erste Silbe ai¡- von miganá erinnert ja an das Prafix a (n)-,
wofür es in dieser Spraehgruppe zahIreiche Beispiele gibt, z. B.
wirkt hIel' eme ahnliehe Tendenz wie in einigen indonesischen
khmer ru~ ,feilen': alÍ1'U~ ,Feile'.2 ,Veiter ist, was -gana betrifft, Sprachen, wo pl'anasalierte 'l'enuis haufig zu Media wird.
zu beachten, daLl in den bisher el'mittelten austroasiatischen Lehn-
".Ei~e la~tliche Parallele zu láilgala-m el'blicke ich in w'¡gana,
wortern mehrmals einer ai. Media in den einheimischen Sprachen
WOfUl slch nahere Entsprechungen in einer Anzahl hintel'indischer
Vorder- und Hinterindiens eine Tenuis entspl'icht, so z. B. in ai.
Spracl~en finden, wo ein ,Vort für ,IVeib' in folgender Gestalt
kadalr) kandali, faUs dies mit semang teluwi) telui, sakei telay usw. erschemt:
zusammenhangen sollte (Przyluski, 1\ISL XXII, 206 sq.).3 V gl.
A. Ohne Prafix:
gorJumba ,cucumis maderaspatanus', das mit tumba-l) ,Lagenaria
vulgaris' zu verbinden ist (Przyluski, Journ. As. 1926, 32, unter Semang, Sakei, Senoi: leen ah ,épouse'.
D1u Petani: lene ,wife'.
1 AL a¡'zgana-m ,Gang, Bewegung' (s. PW und Schmidt, s. v.) als Ableitung
DI u Kelan tan: kníe ,wife'.
von a?'!gayati widerspricht Wackernagels These nicht, denn das 9 ist hier in jüngerer
Zeit fest geworden (dagegen ved. áñJasa und Br. Ar. Up. iñjayati).
Mon: k'1Ía ,virgin'.
2 VgI. z. B. P. W. Schmidt, Die Sprachen der Sakeí und Semang auf Mil.- Khmer: kan ,jeune femme'.
lacea 506 sq., G. Maspéro, Grammaire de la langue khmere 194, 198. Aus dem- Hin: lean ,femme'.l
selben Grunde ist auch dola ,Schaukel', dolayate ,schaukelt, schwankt' usw. wegen
Alak, Sué: lean ,femme'.2
des daneben vorkommenden '&ndoláyati ,schwingt, schaukelt' der Entlehnung aus
dem Austroasiatischen verdachtig und daher sowohl von tul- (PW III, 697, Whitney, Nikobarisch: lean(g,) ,Eheweib'.
Roots 75) wie von lit. delaiu ,saume, zogere' (Uhlenbcck, Wb. 130) oder w. oss. iiw- B. 1Ifit Prafix a-:
dolun (\Y. ~Iiller, Sprache der Osseten 30; ablehnend Charpentier, Monde Oro
XXVIII, 68 A. 3) zu trennen. Eine nlihere Bestatigung für diese Vermutung bieten Kon-tu: alean ,femme, épouse, femelle'.
ai. hirulola-l), hindolalca-'" ,Schaukel', hindolayati ,scho.ukelt' (vgl. Hobson-Jobson, Bahnar: alean (daneben: drakan) dass. s
s. v. andor).
3 Ganz abweichend aber in der englischen tlbersetzung von P. C. Bagchí
1 Schmidt, Die Sprachén der Sakei und Semana
b
449 , t);)
--1
(in: Pre-Aryan and Pre-Dravidian in India S. 5): die Wurzel seí kali, in welche ! Cabaton, Journ. As. 1905, 1, 307.
A

eín ,simple ínfix -da-e, bzw. ,a double infix -n-da-' eingefügt worden sei. 3 Cabaton, 1. C.

124
125
206 F. B. J. Kuiper.
C. 1Iit Pranx ano, en-:
Zentl'al- und Chowra-Nikobarisch: enkang,.l
Teressa: enkei:ina. 2
nlit einem Pranx Id- nndet man weiter im Car-Nikobarischen
kikang" mit i- angkú, mong lwe íleon. Erwahnt sei noch, daJ3 nach
S. K. Chattel'ji in ol'iya rna'ikinia ,female' dasselbe IVurzelwort zu
suchen ist. 3
In Hinsicht auf diese Formen ist austl'oasiatische Herkunft für
aiigana (auch wegen seines ziemlich spaten Auftretens) wahrscheinlich.
2. Ep. kl. astamana-m ,Untergang der Sonne'.
Die Richtigkeit del' Lesal't astarnana-m, welche Form seit dem
Epos das altere astamáyana-m del' Brahmalfas z. T. ersetzt, steht
fest. Man nndet die Form an mehreren Stellen des Mhbh. 4 und
Ram. und in einem Sloka del' Kosegartenschen Pañcatantra-Aus-
gabe (II, 7):
satpattau ca vipattag ca mahati'im ekarüpata
ekada savita ?'akto ?'akta§ ci'istarnane tatha. 5
Daneben oIters in den Prosateilen del' alteren und neueren
Pañcatantra-Ausgaben, z. B. in del' Bombay-Ausgabe von Kielhorn
1 Vgl. Schmidt, ~Ion-Khmer V6lker 74: ,eigentlich Weiberheit, ein Abstractum
von kan = Eheweib'. Daneben menlcang, ,Weiber von verschiedenen D6rfern' (wie
neben enkona ,lIIann': menkona ,M¡inner aus verschiedenen D6rfern'.
2 Skeat and Blagden, The pagan faces oí the Malayan Peninsula n, 601.
Dasselbe Prafix liegt auch z. B. in nikob. enwin ,rund' vor, vgl. mon wen ,gebogen'.
3 Siehe ,Pre-Aryan and Pre-Dravidian in India' by Sylvain Levi, Jean
Przyluski and Jules Bloch, translated from French by P. Oh. Bagchi (Oalcutta
1929), S. XXII.
~ lnwieweit sje im Mhbh. alt ist, liiLlt sich vorliiufig noch nicht bestimmen: die
Belegstelle aus dem Adi·Parvan (1, 2, 295 Bomb.) hat Sukthankar nicht in seinen
kritischen Text aufgenommen. Sie steht in einer - übrigens in mehreren Hss. und
Ausgaben vorliegenden - interpolierten Stelle (vgl. Sukthankar zu 1, 2, 180).
5 Die Benares-Ausgabe (Haridas Sanskrit Series 13 j 1930) hat an dieser
Stelle aatamaye. Dagegen in derselben Ausgabe astamanavelayam S. 115 so, 117 18• 25,
1223~ und aatamanaaamaye S. 137 20 (astamayavelayam nur S. 54 27 ).
126
Indoiranica. 207
und Bühler: I, 66 18 lII, 53 14 56 8• 13 62 23 71 1 und auI3erdem im An-
fang del' 14. Erzahlung des IV. Buches in del' Kosegartenschen
Ausgabe. 1 Das "\Yort erscheint hiel' nur in del' Zusammensetzung
astarnanavelayam oder (einmal) astamanasamaye. Sonst ist, wie es
scheint, astamana-m au(3er in den beiden Epen nur noch in del'
Varaha Brh. S. nachweisbar, wo es neben einfachem asta-m in del'
Bedeutung ,heliakischer Untergang' (PW V, 1081) yorkommt.
Die gebrauchlichste Form in del' alteren Literatul' ist asta-
mayá-Z¡ - woneben astarnáyana-m im SB -, das in den Brahmalfas,
Upani~aden und Sütl'as haufig vorkommt, aber auch del' spateren
Sprache nicht fremd ist. So findet man es z. B. im Raghuíaijlsa
und Kathasaritsagara (P"\V 1, 560, V, 1081 und s. v. SÜ¡'yi'istamaya-
VII, 1178). Es ist in del' hüheren Literatul' wohl uiemals durch
astamana-m, des sen Gebrauchsgebiet offenbar ziemlich beschrankt
gewesen ist, verdrangt wol'den. Die lebende Sprache hat aber zu
anderen Bildungen gegriffen.
1m Pali ist von astam eti nur noch das Partizip übriggeblieben
in zweimaligem 'anattlzamite (vgl. Mahara~tri atthamiyo), sonst ,er-
wendet man immer Formen von gacchati: 2 atthar(l,gacchati, atthar¡lgato
und die Verbalabstrakta atthar¡zgamo und atthagarnanam, del'en
Sanskrit-Form in astagarnana-m (Mhbh. J, 155, 17), süryiistar(l,-
garnanam Verz. Oxf. Hss. (PW VII, 1178) vol'liegt.
Die Form astamana-m gehürt somit, wenn wil' vom Gebrauch
im Pañcatantl'a absehen, jener letzten lebenden Phase des Altindischen
an, in welcher das Sanskrit nichts andel'es war als ,une tl'ansposi-
tion du moyen-indien ... auquel il prete la noblesse du costume'
(Bloch, L'Indo-Aryen 5). Man künnte somit leicht auf den Gedanken
verfallen, daJ3 del' U l'sprung von astamana-m im Mittelindischen zu
suchen . ware, in welchem Falle seine Erklarung nicht zweifelhaft
1 IV, 9 (S. 161 23 ) in der Ausgabe der ,Haridas Sanskrit Series' (Benares
1930). In der Bombay-Ausgabe fehlt die Erziihlung.
! So ist auch für anatthamite an beiden Stellen als Variante anattha7[lgamite
überliefert. übrigens findet man a8tam gam- seit der iiltesten Zeit (l;tS, Prasn.
Up. 4, 2).
127
 Indoiraniea. 209
208 F. B. J. Kuiper.
vollzogen und werden udéti und astaméti als ZusammensetzunO'en
seín kannte. Sehon früh wurde bekanntlieh del' Akkusativ ástam in
desse1ben Typus empfunden. Am klarsten tritt dies woh1 in ~en
ástam éti als mit einem Praverbium gleiehwertig empfunden. In
Zusammensetzungen abhyudeti und abhyastameti hen-or. AuGer den
del' Atharvasaqlhita finden sieh zuerst die Formen astarrtyán IX. G. 46,
PW I, 360. 763 pw 1, 92 e verzeichneten Stellen führe ieh noeh
astarrtyaté, astame?yaté, ástamitaya XVII. 1. 23, wo die Betonung
~n abhyastamagat KaI;lv. SB 1. 3. 1. 3, abhyastamiyat Ait. Br. 7. 12, 1
beweist, daf3 astam sehon nieht mehr als ein selbstandiges W ort
Asv. GS 3: ~. 1 ~1an. GS 1. 3. 1 (abhyastamita~ 1. 3. 2; 3) und (yam)
empfunden wurde. Daneben freilieh sonst noeh getrennt ástaT(l. yátm
paryastarmyat Alt. Br. 7. 11. 4,1 das in den Petersb. Warterbüehern
ca gácchati X. 8. 16 b (= Brh. Al'. Up. 1. 5. 23, wo es mit astameti
fehIt .. Auf. valliges Zusammengewaehsensein del' beiden ,Varter weist
glossiert wird), ástaln ágad XIV. 2. 13", pátYU1' ástam parétya
~ueh U1'dhastamite ,wenn die Sonnenseheibe halb untergegangen ist'
XIV. 1. 43 d, u. a. Dafür aber, daf3 sehon zur Zeit del' jüngsten
Asv. GS 3. 7. 4 hin. 2 ,Venn im Epos uns wieder Ausdrüeke wie
rigvedisehen Ma.Qc.1alas ástam im Begriffe war, zu einem Adverb zu
jagamastam Mhbh., gate tv astar¡¡, dinakal'e Ram. begegnen, so
erstarren, liegen unzweídeutige Anweisungen VOl'. Nur zweimal
handelt es sieh hierbei nieht mehr um ein ,Veiterleben del' alten
wird noeh ein anderer Kasus als del' Akkusativ gebraueht: III. 53. 4',
vedisehen Ausdrueksweise, sondern teils um eine dichterische Auf-
wo ástam Pradikatsnomen ist, und VII. 1. 2" áste, beide Male also
lO~ung der ,Vortelemente (so aueh Renou, Gramm. ser. 149), teils
in einem alteren ~Ia.QQ.ala. Sonst ist nur akkusativisehes ástam ge-
wIrd aueh die naehvedisehe Vorstellung yom Berge Asta an diesen
brauehlieh. Ein wiehtiger Beweis für adverbiale Bedeutung von
Stellen im Spiele sein. s
ástam ist uns aueh erhalten in astam'iké l;{,S 1. 129. 93, das anders-
Mit Rüeksieht auf diese Tatsaehen Hige nun die Annahme
woher nieht bekannt ist und offenbar nur eine gegenüber paraké
nahe, daf3 auf del' mittelindisehen Spraehstufe, wo das untrennbare
(in d) ins Leben gerufene Augenblieksbildung ist. Das Wort laf3t
*atthameti, *atthamei ganz mit den del' ai. zehnten Klasse entspreehen-
si eh, wie sehon Grassmann und Roth erkannt haben, nur als eine
den Prasentien (z. B. pa. katheti, mahar. kahei = ai. kathayati ,erzahlt')
Analogiebildung naeh samíká-, ánlka-, abhika-, p1'átika- erklaren,
zusammenfallen muflte, naeh dem normalen Verhaltnis von kahei zum
was aber adverbiale Erstarrung von ástam in del' spatesten Periode,
abgeleiteten Nomen kaha7J-am ,Erzahlung' (aí. kathayati: kathana-m)
del' das erste MaI;lQ.ala angehart, mit Notwendigkeit voraussetzt.
zu *atthamei ein Verbalnomen *atthamanam gebildet worden ware ,
Tatsaehlieh stehen die jüngsten MaI;lQ.alas dem fortgesehrittenen
dessen sanskritisierte Form dann in astamana-m vorlage.
Stadium del' Atharvasaqlhita nahe: sind ástam und das Verbum
Diesel' Auffassung stehen aber mehrere Bedenken entgegen.
(i, ga, ya, nak~) aueh noeh getrennt (z. B. ástaT(l. yár¡¡, yánti V. 6. lb)
Zuerst ist darauf hinzuweisen, daf3, abgesehen yon atthamito, das
und steht ástam bisweilen noeh naeh (áy1W ástam 1. 116. 25 d, á yahy
dstam IV. 16. lOa), so findet si eh die spater normale Wortfolge
1Neben abhyudiyiit. Vgl. den Komm.: amiiviisyii1lL pau/·,.zamiisl1lL vii yiim
sehon VII. 37. 4 b (ástam e§i), X. 86. 21 e (ústam e§i), X. 14. 8 e, :r:a'.'Ípl'ii~ya
SÜ¡'yo'stam iyiit. Zu dieser Zusammensetzung steht pa¡'yastamaya.~
86. 20° (ástam éhi). V gl. ástar¡¡, jagayat X. 28. 1 d, ástam párehi· Sankh. SS 1. 3. 5 in keinem nliheren VerJüiltnis. Wohl schlieBt sich dagegen an
X. 95. 2 e , ástar¡¡, vi pá1'etana X. 85. 33 d , welehe Stellen fast alle dem abhyastameti unmittelbar anuddhrtiil,hyastamaya-lJ, Katy. SS 25. 3. 18 ano
JI Mit Unrecht schreibt Aufrecht in seiner Auscrabe " des A·¡·t.Br
. e'lllerSe¡'t 8
jüngsten ~Ia.QQ.ala angeharen. Dagegen ist das Partizip ástamita-~,
astamite (z. B. 5. 24.11; 29.3 und 6.31. 4), anderseits getrennt aatam eti 1. 7.6, aatam
das splUer in den Brahmava-. und Sütratexten am haufigsten vor- yan 8.28.9 (vgl. Iür das Parto auch AL Gr. II, 193). überall ist, wie heute denn auch
kommt und in del' AS zuerst erseheint (XVII. 1. 23), del' l;{,S noeh üblich ist, ein Wort zu schrciben (ebensowohl Aáv. GS 2. 6. 14 astar¡lyiity iiditye).
3 Vgl. Z. B. aavitiiatam iyiid (1. ayiid) 9i,'Ím Mhbh. 1. 4i. 15 Bomb.
hemd. In del' BrahmaI;la-Periode hat sieh diese Entwiek1ung ganz
Act. orientalia XVI. 14

128 129
210 F. B. J. Kuiper.
Pali nur noch gacchati verwendet (siehe oben), wodurch jener
Hypothese jede tatsachliche Grundlage entfallt. Aber es gibt noch
andere Bedenken. Bohtlingk und Roth, die astamana-m als eine
Verstümmelung ,on astamayana-m betrachteten, haben schon auf die
auffallende Parallelbildung aufmerksam gemacht, die im einmaligen
haviranta¡'a1.le Kat). SS 25. 1. 15 (Komm.: yadi nama havir anta1'itar¡1,
na grhitam eva, tada) vorliegt. Freilich handelt es sich hierbei nur um
ein l1n:ag A8r6p.eJJOJJ, aber dies berechtigt uns nicht, an der Richtig-
keit dieser, wie es scheint einstimmig von alien Hss. überlieferten
Form zu zweifeln. Nun sind zwar Prakritismen in den Sütras nicht
selten, aber diese Form, die uns zwingt, die Moglichkeit, da13 auch
astamana-m schon '\orepisch gebraucht worden ist, naher in Betracht
zu ziehen, macht es doeh wahrscheinlieh, da13 die Erklarung in
anderer Riehtung zu suchen ist. l
Seit del' altesten Zeit macht si eh beim Prasens éti die all-
gemeine Tendenz zur Einführung thematiseher Flexion bemerkbar.
Schon in der ~S lassen si eh solehe Formen naehweisen, die hier
aber oft gegenüber denen des Konjunktivs noeh nieht seharf abzu-
grenzen sind, siehe Renou, BSL XXXIII, 22. Als Beispiel sei nur
genannt 1. 119. 2 b scímayanta tÍ dísab ,naeh allen Seiten gehen
(meine Gedanken)' Geldner. Spater hat sieh diese Tendenz bei
diesem Verbum zwar im allgemeinen nieht durehsetzen konnen, aber
thematisehe Nebenformen zu dem immer als normal geltenden éti
finden sich auch in den spateren Sprachperioden, und zwar, der all-
gemeinen Regel gema13 (Renou, Gramm. ser. 421), besonders naeh
Praverbien. Wil' erinnern nur an Falle wie palyayate SB, Jaim.
+
Br. (Nr. 90 8, 101 8. 12) ,herumgehen' (pari i), palayate SB, Mhbh.~
+
Kl. ,fliehen' (pa1'jJ. i). Ebenso finden sich neben l¿deti sehon früh
thematische Nebenformen: udayate führt PW aus SB 6. 2. 1. 15 an, in
der KaI).VIya-Rezension scheinen die Formen aber haufiger gewesen
1 Gegen den Gedanken, der etwa aufkommen mochte, daB das Verhii.ltnis
von aámana-l;I.S AS zu 8amayá-(¡ Neubildungen ins Leben gerufen hii.tte, lüBt sieh.
abgesehen von der Bedeutungsversehied.enheit dieser Worter, die Besehrünkung von
aámana- auf die iilteste Literatur anführen.
130
Indoiranica. 211
zu sein, denn Oaland, Introduction 44, erwahnt drei Stellen, wo der
Kal}.va-Text udayate hat gegenübel' udeti der Madhyandina-Rezension. 1
In den spateren Literatul'gattungen finden wir diese Neben-
formen wieder: udayan Prasn. Up. 1, 6; 4, 2 (udayate 1, 7, ttdayati 8),
udayate Mhbh. 5, 108, 3 (Holtzmann § 625), udayati Ram. 3. 12. 4,
Mrceh. 25, 4. Daneben la13t sieh a priori auch astamayate erwarten
weil die beiden Yerba assoziativ eng verbunden wal'en und of;
nebep.ei~ander gebraueht werden. Tatsachlich lii.l3t sich astamayate
sowohl 1m Epos (Mhbh. 12, 223,' 6) wie in del' klassischen Literatur
(Prabodh. 112, 6) nachweisen. Da13 es auch altere Belege gibt, ist
wegen des ziemlich frühen Auftretens von udayate sehr crut mocrlich
• b b,
aber es 1St mil' nieht gelungen, solche aufzufinden.
Hierdurch wird das Verbalabstraktum asta mana-m vollkommen
klar. Nicht ein mittelindisches *atthamei, sondern astarnayate, dessen
Vorderteil seit den Brahmal}.as fest mit dem Yerbum verwaehsen
war, ist del' analogischen Beeiuflussung durch Prasentia del' zehnten
Klasse erlegen und naeh dem Verhaltnis kathayati: kat7wna-m ist
ein Nomen astamana-m ius Leben gerufeu worden. Ahnlich hat
man sich auch die El1tstehung von anta1'a1.w-m zu denken, wofür
antm'ayab (2. Sg. Imperf.) im Baudh. Kalpasütra XX, 13 eine wich-
tige Stütze liefert. Oaland, Über das rito S. des Baudh. 42, vermutet
für di~se Form al1alogisehe Umbildung nach der 1. P. Sg. anta?'ayarn,
aber dle allgemeine Tendenz zur Thematisierung bei den Komposita von
eti maeht es wahrscheinlicher, da13 auch hiel' antal'ayati zucrrunde liecrt
welches Prasens vom PW tatsachlich aus del' klass. Sprache (l\lrcch.
" ",
35, 11, freilich in ganz anderer Bedeutung) angeführt wird. 2
Das unklare ayama (: aima M&dhy.) kan n hier auBer Betracht bleiben
1
• • Obigea war sehon gesehrieben, als ieh in Pisanis Gramm. dell' ant:
2
llldlano ~37 .(§ 600) eine verwandte, wenn aueh anders gerichtete Bemerkung
fand. DIe hler versuchte philologische Begründung scheint mir trotzdem nicht
überflüssig. Pisani erkHirt aueh ved. sámana- in dieser Weise, mit Unrecht, wie mir
seheint (t:otz ved. samaniÍ = aamayiÍ). Es ist gemii.13 Bl'ugmann, GrundriB II 2,1,270,
zu analysleren als aama-na-, vgl. 'Ví~u-na-
. (Whitnev • , Gramm . § 1945
- " d) J'aw . apana-
(von apa), vielleieht ap. paj'anam (aber siehe MeilIet-Bemeniste, Gramm. 156, 234).
Renous Bedenken (BSL XXXVII, 25 A. 1) basieren, wie mir scheint, auf einer
faIschen Pramisse. Zugrunde liegt ein Adv. *sama (= gr.li,u(?).
14*
131
 F. B. J. Kuiper.
212
3. Ved. adhrá-l;1 ,schwach, arm, dürftig, gering', G. aw. adro
,gering (an SteUung), abhangig, untergeben'.
Die alte Zusammenstellung von aL adhrá-~, aw. adro (siehe
Bartholomae, Z. altir. "b. 139 sqq.) mit gr. ')Iw.:feÓ¡; ,matt' (Johansson,
IF 11, 40 sq., Wackernagel, AL Gramm. I, 14) ist als verfehlt zu be-
trachten, weil dieses \\ort von lJ.:fo[.lcn ,kümmere mich' nicht getrennt
werden darf, siehe Bechtel, Lexilogus zu Homer 237. Auch ags. anda,
as. ando ,Zorn, Aufgeregtheit' usw. (Falk-Torp-Davidsen 5. 1428)
sind fernzuhalten, siehe Uhlenbeck, Etym. Wb. 21, Walde, V gl. Wb.
I,57 A.1.
Für die indoiranische Gruppe haben sich somit noch immer
keine Entsprechungen in den anderen Sprachgruppen gefunden.
Innerhalb des Indischen ist aber Anknüpfung an nadhitá-l¡ ,be-
drangt', niÍdhamana-~ ,Hilfe suchend, flehend' maglich. Wahrscheinlich
sind mit 'Wackernagel, Ai. Gramm. I, 123, die daneben vorkommenden
Formen mit th: nlithitá-~ ,bedrangt', Sal11h. nlithate als sekundare,
im Anschluil an ved. -nlithá-Z¡ ,HUfe' entstandene Neubildungen zu
erklaren.1 Grundbedeutung von nadh war nicht ,Zuflucht suchen'
(PW IV, 101, Grassmann 722), sondern ,bedrangen'. :rin.sic~tl~ch
del' Bedeutung lassen sich ved. adh1'á-ZI, aw. adro also mlt al. dma-l¡"
k$i'fJ-a-~, gr. dAarraO')lÓ¡;, OUAÓ¡; vergleichen (vgl. Zs. f. Indol. u. Iran.
VIII 252). Del' Komparativ von ad1'o wird regelrecht von del'
volls~ufigen 2
Wurzelgestalt nlidh-ohne das Formans -1'a- gebildet :
g. jaw. naidya ,del' schwachere, unterliegend', wodurch die -: erwandt-
schaft von adh- mit nadh- keinem Zweifel mehr unterhegt. Zu
nlidh- pflegte man früher die nasalierten slawischen Formen aksl.
nozda ,Zwang, Gewalt', poln. n@zda ,Not' , aksl. ne diti ,natigen' zu
s;ellen, was von Walde, V gl. vVb. n, 316, wohl mit Recht ab-
gelehnt wird.
Moglich ist natürlích auch, daB náthate ein altes th-Prasens von na. (siehe
1
Walde, Vgl. Wb. n, 315) ist, das in der Bedeutung sekundar durch nádh- beemfluBt
worden ist.
2 V gl. aL d~I¡'á-l,!. : dávlyán¡ TcUip¡·á-l,!. : Tcsépiyán¡ gr. ~x9-1!6r; : iX9-twv u. a.
132
Indoiranica. 213
4. Ved. ena.
Die alteste Phase des Altindischen kennt den ISg. ena und
mehrere zugeharige Kasusformen bekanntlich in zweierlei Yer-
wendung. Erstens finden sich orthotone Formen eniÍ ISg., enám
AkkSgF. u. a. mit Ich-Deixis, also mit ganz derselben Funktion, die
auch yon alters her den entspl'echenden Formen yon ayám ,dieser'
eigen war. Es handelt sich hierbei offenbar um einen alten Sprach-
rest oder wenigstens um einen alten Ansatz zu einer Xeubildung,
die sich nicht endgliltig hat dUl'chsetzen kannen. Diese betonten
Formen kommen ja fast nur in del' ~k-Salphita, nur -rereinzelt in
del' A tharva-Sarp.him und den anderen Mantras yor und treten bald
VOl' den spater normal gewordenen Formen anéna UST\". zurück.
Siehe 'iYackernagel-Debrunner, Ai. Gramm. lII, 524 sq.
'iVal' dieser Sprachbildung kein langes Leben beschieden, so haben
dagegen die gleichlautenden e~k1itischen Formen mit anaphorischer Be-
deutung sich im Altindischen zu behaupten gewuilt und sind zu einem
festen Be~tandteil des indischen Pronominalsystems geworden. Auch
in dieser Funktion zeigt del' Stamm ena- unyerkennbare Beziehungen
zu den obliquen Kasus von ayám, die ja auch enklitisch und mit ana-
phorischer Bedeutung yerwendet wurden und deren Paradigma dann
durch enam, ena usw. erganzt wurde (siehe Ai. Gramm. 111, 522).
An del' historischen Identitat del' beiden Formenreihen Hif3t
si eh nicht zweifeln, und zwal' wird man die enklitisch·anaphorisehe
Verwendung als das Resultat sekundarer EntwickIuno' o zu betraehten
baben (op. c. 525). Es müssen also die alten, nul' in del' ~S noch
in weiterem Umfang gebrauch1ichen Demonstratiyformen eniÍ usw.
flir das Indische den Ausgangspunkt für die spateren Formensysteme
gebildet haben. Úber die Herkunft dieses Demonstrativstammes ,
welche bekanntlich noch immer nicht befriediO'end
b
aufO'ehelltworden
o
ist (op. c. 525 sq.),l magen hiet· einige Bemerkungen folgen.
Bekanntlich muil die ai. Endung des ISg. MN -ena, die von
del' Pronominalflexion ihl,'en Ausgang genommen hat, eme Reubildung
1 Meillets Ansicht vertritt jetzt J. Bloch, L'Indo·Aryen 128.
133
 Indoiranica. 215
214 F. B. J. Kuiper.
a ¡gel' A us1au t sw'ec h se1 a: a bemerkbar,
altesten Indl'sehen el'n a uff"ll'
des ~~ltindischen sein. Weder das rli:ichstverwandte Altil'anische,
so Z. B. in áth'tt ,darum, also, sodann usw.', dem a1s Korre1atiya
noch die anderen indogermanischen Spraehen haben etwas Ent-
yátha und tátha mit ausseh1ieLllichem azur Seite stehen,l und ádh7í
spl'eehendes. Statt dessen hat das Altiranisehe gewohnlieh -a, das
,dann, darum, und', das mit pUJ'udh'li, vi§¡;ádha 2 naher zusammen-
die ursprachliche Endung des ISg. vertritt, vgl. aw. ka (: ai. lcén'tt),
gehoren dürfte. Del' Aus1autsweehse1, del' in solchen Fallen an den
tli (: ai. tén'tt) , ya (: al. yén'tt). Daneben findet sich abel' eine auf-
Tag tritt, kann urspl'aeh1icher Herkunft sein, siehe Meillet, Introdue-
fallende, nicht weiter analysierbare Endung -ana in aw. kana
tion 7 139. V gl. auch S. 294 sq, desselben 'íerkes, wo als ursprach-
(neben ka), cinn (: ai. *cina oder caná), altpers .. aniyana, avana,
liche I:rstr~menta1endung mit Vorbehalt -8 angegeben wird. Aber
tyana.1 Auf einen ISg. geht vielleieht aueh ap. yanaiy ,wo, wol'in'
aul3erdem konnte die Instrumenta1endung -na, die wegen ilnes
zul'üek, obwohl die Bedeutung dieser nur einmal belegten Form
anomalen Charakters jedenfalls alt ist, zu jeder Zeit del' ana1oO'i- e
nieht feststeht. Eine indisehe Entspreehung dieser Instrumental-
s~hen Beeinflussung dureh die normale Endung -a er1iegen. Es fo1gt
formen seheint in del' zu einer Partikel erstarrten Form caná vor-
hleraus aber, daLl del' Aus1aut del' in Frage stehenden Instrumentale
zuliegen, das mit aw. cin'tt identiseh sein kann.
für ihre historische Erklarung kein Kriterium bilden kann.
Úber den U rsprung dieser auWtlligen Instrumentale auí -ana
Betrachten wir jetzt die bereits erwahnte Annahme, ana sei
liWt si eh niehts Sichel'es el'mitteln, aber sehl' wahl'scheinlieh ist die
im Altiranischen del' Ausgangspunkt für die anderen Instrumentale
Vermutung, dal3 del' altil'anisehe Instrumental ana für die andel'en
gewesen (die somit als sekundare Analogiebildungen aufzufassen
Formen das Muster abgegeben habe, siehe Bl'ugmann, Gl'undriLl 112,
waren), etwas naher. Wenn wir von ai. caná = aw. cin'á absehen, so
2.339, 'Vackel'nagel-Debrunnel', Ai. Gl'amm. 111, 527. Freilieh wird
ist anlí die einzige Form, die sich sowoh1 im A1tindisehen, a1s áueh
an letzterwahnter SteUe demgegenüber das Bedenken geauLlert:
im Awestischen und Altpersisehen nachweisen lli.l3t und die zudem
,Abel' del' uriranisehe Auslaut diesel' Ins~l'umentale kann ebensogut
keine kürzere Form (wie aw. ka neben kana) nehen sich hato In
-a als -a gewesen sein, ... wahl'end sieh für iran. ana auslautende
del' ~S, wo es nur 5 mal, und zwar in adverhialer VerwendunO' el
Lange aus ai. aná el'gibt. Odel' ist dieses für *aná eingetreten,
vorkommt, hat es schon ganz den Charakter eines versteinerten
mit a aus den anderen Instrumentalen?' Tatsachlieh bildet die Kürze,
Spraehrestes. Nur für diese Form fehlt, im Gegensatz zu kana und
die einst, wie sich aus ai. caná ergibt, wenigstens in gewissem Umfang
den sonstigen Instrumentalen auí -ana, jede Anzeige dafür, daf3 es
die Regel gewesen sein mul3, eine Sehwiel'igkeit. Die Unsieherheit,
eine sekundare Bildung ware: nur ana kan n als del' urindoiranische
in del' wir uns hinsiehtlieh des vol'historisehen Auslauts befinden,
Instrumental zum Pronomen del' Ieh-Deixis (ai. ayám) gelten, wobei
wird dul'eh die Tatsaehe, daLl wedel' die awestisehe noeh die alt-
man glbttogonisehe Spekulationen über die Entstehung dieser auf-
pel'sisehe Überlieferung 'uns in dieser Hinsieht einen Anhalt gibt,
falligen Form (siehe Ai. Gramm. 111, 527) auf sieh beruhen lassen dad.
noeh erheblieh vergroLlert. Doeh dad man diesel' Seite des Pl'oblems
Wie sehon bemerkt, ist aniÍ in del' ~S yollig zu einem Adverb
keine allzu grol3e Bedeutung beilegen: maeht sieh doeh ofters im
erstarrt, wahrend in pronominaler Funktion hiel' enlÍ gebrauehlich
ist, worür aber sehon in del' AS wieder eine jüngere Form anéna
1 Letztere Form (Bb. 1, 23) steht bekanntlich nach der neuen Kollation

der Bisutun-Inscbrift durch King und Tbompson und durch den neuen Beleg in (in del' ~S nur 3mal) eintritt, welehe seitdem die übliche geblieben
der Bauinschrift von Susa endgültig fest. Wegen Lommel, Oro Lit. 1934, 186, der 1 Anders Meillet, Introduction 7 172 (vgl. .iL Gramm. I, 123).
für die Bh.-Stelle an der alten Annabme von Dittographie festl1alten will, vgl. 2 Wegen der auslautenden Kürze in diesen í\ortern siehe Ai. Gl'amm. IlI, 429.
Kent, J AOS LI, 208 A.

135
134
216 F, B. J. Kuiper.
¡sto 1m Gegensatz zu anIÍ hat ená keine Entspreehungen in den
altira,nisehen Spraehen, ist also offenbar eine neue Spraehsehopfung
des Indisehen gewesen,l die sieh aber nieht dauernd hat behaupten
konnen. Von dieser einwandfreien Tatsaehe, da13 ená eine an die
Stelle von aná getretene Neubildung ist,2 oder, seharrer fol'muliert,
da13 im vorgesehiehtliehen Indiseh del' zu *ai-árn gehorige ISg. *ana
dureh *aina ersetzt worden ist, hat man somit 1J,uszugehen.
Dann liegt aber die Annahme ganz nahe, daG hier del' Anlaut
versehiedener, dureh paradigmatisehen Zusammenhang verbundener
Formen in ahnlieher 'Yeise ausgegliehen worden ist, wie man dies
auf indoiranisehem Gebiete aueh bei den obliquen Kasus des Personal-
pronomens del' II. Person Plural beobachten kann: aL ytl§rnán usw.,
aw. yilsmaibya uSW. sind bekanntlich unter Einflu13 des N ominatiys
yüyárn aus *u§rnán usw. entstanden. Ebenso ist aus dem alten
Gegensatz zwischen dem NSg. *só und den obliquen Kasus mit *to-
beim Demonstrati,um im Altpreu13ischen ein neuer Stamm *sto-
(stas usw.) hervorgewachsen, siehe van Wijk, Altpreu13. Studien 111 sq.
Da13 in ganz paralleler 'Yeise lato iste entstanden ist, hoffe ieh an
anderer Stelle naher darzulegen. 3
Naeh dieser Auffassung so11 del' ISg. ená del' Ausgangspunkt für
die Bildung del' übrigen Kasusformen (ená, eniÍm) gewesen sein, wofür
mehrere Tatsaehen spreehen dürrten. Zunaehst ist an die Parallele
1 Veraltet z. B. Brugmann, Demonstrativpronomina 92 sq., GrundriB 112,
2,338sq.
S DaB das ofl'enbar nur im Südwest-Iranisehen und erst in jüngerer Zeit
naehweisbare in (Phlv. Neupers.) ,dieser' die urindoiranische Existenz von * aina-
erweise (Bartholomae, GrlrPh. la 139, \Vackernagel-Debrunner, Ai. Gramm. IU,
525 sq., Rorn, Grundr. der neup. Etym. 33), ist mir voUig unglaublieh. Da sind
doch einerseits das Schweigen der beiden alteren Spraehen sowie der Dialekte,
anderseits die groBe Wahrscheinliehkeit, daB in mit dem auch in anderen Dialekten
nachweisbaren e, ¡ ,dieser' (Rorn, Etym. 32) irgendwie' zusammenhlingt, wahr-
scheinlich dafaus erst un ter EinfluB seines Gegenstüeks an entstanden ¡st, wohl
geeignet, Zweifel zu erregen.
a Eine verwandte ErkHirung hat für eniÍ schon J. Sehmidt, KZ XXVII, 292 sq.,
gegeben, der aber f1ilsehlich von einem ursprachlichen Instr. des Stammes *ei-
ausgeht.
136
Indoiraniea.
217
an~ zu e~innern, yon der aus die Formen anéna, anáya und anáyoh
weItergebIldet worden sind (Ai Gramm III 527) Ah h d' 'lT •
. ',. el' aue le \ er-
wendungshauflgkeit del' versehiedenen Formen von ena- maeht es
reeht wahrseheinlieh, da13 sie auf Grund des Inst t 1
rumena s ent-
standene Neubildungen sind. Oben sind wir mit 'Yaekernagel-
Debrunner von der Annahme ausgegangen, da13 die orthotonen
Formen die alteren sind: eine oberflaehliehe Orientierun O' in G ~
UT b ra:ss-
maI?-ns VI orterbueh, S. 208, 300 (unten) , 1755, 1758, e
l I1r,t da 13 von
'
del' orthotonen Flexion del' Instrumental eniÍ 38mal bele"'" "1 d
·
dle 5·, wa 1ren
anderen Kasus ,selten und meist zweifelhaft' 1 sI'nd A () d
• . ULler em
ZeIgt del' Gebraueh von eniÍ in den versehiedenen l\fal).~alas mit
A.usnahme .des X. keine gro13ell Abweiehungen: 2 es ist eine alte
BIldung mIt festem Gebrauchsgebiet und konstanter Gebrauehs-
frequ~nz. Nur konnte die gro13e Zahl del' Belegstellen im letzten
u~d Jüngsten lIIal).~ala auffallen, da ja ená in del' Atharva-Samhita
selll Gebiet sehon gro13tent"eils dem jüngeren anéna hat abt~eten
müssen: aber in del' Mehrzahl dieser Falle (naeh Grassmann an neun
von den elf Stellen) handelt es sieh hiel' um ein adverbial er-
starrtes eniÍ.
Dagegen ist das wohl jüngere enklitisehe ena- wie es ja die
an~p~lOrisehe Bedeutung mit si eh braehte, vorwiegen'd in den akku-
satIvIsehen Formen gebrauehlieh, und zwar kommt es soweit si 1
d b' , el
as eIm heutigen Stand unserer Kenntnis Von del' relativen Ohrono-
logie der ~k-sal1lhita-Lieder bestimmen la13t, in den jüngeren Teilen
haufiger 1'01' als in den alteren. 8 l\lan vergleiehe einmal den Ge-
b~aueh von enam AkkSg. und ella ISg. in den zehn l\1aQ.~alas. Um
lllehts zu prajudizieren, sind die orthotonen und enklitischen
Formen hiel' zusammengezahlt worden, wodureh die Gesamtzahl
del' Instrumentalformen sieh zu 42 steigert.
I Ai. Gramm. IIl, 525.
.217: Ira, lIP, IVI, va, VP, VIra, VlIP, IX 4, X 11. Dabei ist zu bedenken,
daB ~le ~lederzahl des r.'und des IX. Mal,lQ.ala si eh verhalten wie 5 : 3, so daB
relabv dIe Verwendungshaufigkeit in beiden Büchern gleich groB ist.
a So auch, wie ieh Ai. Gramm. lII, 521 entnehme, Arnold, KZ XXXVII, 214.
137
218 F. B. J. Kuiper. Indoiranica. 219

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Gesamtzahl Sprachmilieu del' ~S hatte anéna noeh fast keine Yerwendung ge-
en'tí 8 3 1 1 4 2 3 3 5 12 42 funden (3maJI gegenüber 38maligem ená). Also eine Neubildung,
enam 11 2 5 6 1 o 4 6 2 26 68 die noeh erst im Entstehen begriffen war und der alteren Nebenform
enlÍ noch keine Konkurrenz machen konnte? Aber diese Neubildung
Wenn wir hiel' (und oben) für Fragen del' relati~en Ohrono-
kann doch nur dureh Anfügung von -ena (das ja im Yedischen die
100'ie von del' 1'IlaI).Q.ala-Einteilung ausgehen, so geschieht dies in del'
normale Pronomina1endung des ISg. geworden war) aus dem alten
Ü~erzeugung, daD diese für eine rohe Orientierung eine brauehbare
ISg. aná gebildet worden sein, ehe letzterer adverbial erstarrt
Grundlage bildet, womit aber keineswegs die Homogenitat d~r
war!2. Andere Formen mit an- kamen ja ursprünglieh im Paradigma
einzelnen MaI).Q.alas prinzipiell zugegeben werden sollo Das E~gebms
von ayám nicht VOl'. Freilieh ist es gefahrlieh, aus dem Schweigen
von Wüsts Untersuchungen (Stilgeschichte und Ohronologle des
unserer Texte positive SehluDfolgerungen zu ziehen, und so folgt
.... gve da ,S. 152 'l::>"
P v 0'1 S 164/5) 1ehrt - freilich in erheblicher Ab-
aus del' Tatsaehe, daD aná in del' ~S nur adverbial gebraueht wird,
weichunO' von Amolds Resultaten - , daD das IX. MaI).Q.ala das
noeh keineswegs, daD es darum aueh in del' damaligen Sprache
"lteste ~as X. das J'ünO'ste und das 1. das zweitjüngste ist. Gehen
a, l:> • • 1 seiner pronominalen Bedeutung bereits ganz verlustig gegangen war:
wir hiervon aus, so zeigt sich, daD ena 1m IX. Ma:Q.Q.ala relatlv
hat ja auch das pronominale enlÍ oft adyerbiale Bedeutung. Doch
ebenso haufig wie im 1. vorkommt und das X. relativ nur 1,4m~1 spricht die "rahrseheinliehkeit dafür, daD, als anlÍ in del' Dichter-
soyiel Belegehat, wahrend dagegen für enam das 1. MaI).Q.a1a relatlv
spraehe des rgvedisehen Sprachkreises als Pronomillalform ganz
3,3ma1, das X. sogar Smal soviel Belege aufweist a]s das alteste
durch enlÍ verdrangt worden war, s es in einem anderen Sprachkreis,
Buch. Offenbar beruht enam auf jüngerer Spraehentwicklung.
sei es, daD wir uns diesen geographisch oder sozial abgegrenzt zu
Auch die anderen Kasus des anaphorischen Pronomens eno~,
denken haben, weiter existiert hat und daD von hiel' aus die Neu-
enan, enam, ene, ena~ gehoren meist den jüngeren Teilen an: sie
bildung anéna die rgvedische Form ená verdrangt hato Es Hige
kommen in del' ~S insgesamt 22 mal VOl', und zwar in del' folgenden
dann ein interessantes Beispiel für Dialektspaltung im altestell
l' el' t'l
"'{T el ung.. 1 6, Vi , VIl , VI12 , VII12 , IXl , X10. Auch diese Formen Indischen VOl'.
sind offensichtlich jüngere vVeiterbildungen. 2
V on allgemeinerer Bedeutung ist die Form eníÍ trotz ihrer
Nur ein Punkt laDt sich mit del' hiel' gegebenen Darstellung
ephemeren Existenz durch die Rolle, die sie beim Entstehen del'
des geschichtlichen Verlaufs nicht olma weiteres in Eink1ang bringen:
indisehen Instrumentalformen del' pronominalen (und indirekt del'
wenn urindoiran. *ana fiur no eh in del' ~S omal vorkommt, und
nominalen) Flexion gespielt haben muD, wenn aueh daneben die
zwar nur in adverbialer Verwendung, dagegen in pronomina1er
Funktion durch ená ersetzt wird, das in der jüngeren Sprachstufe 1 ~S r, 93, 10' lII, 17, 2 0 VIII, 44 2 b.
del' AS sehon wieder VOl' anéna s zurückweiehen mu!3, so bleibt es 2 Ahnliches gilt selbstverstlindlich für anáya (IX, 65, 12'. 2i o) statt áya.
dunkel, wie anéna entstanden ist. In del' Sprachperiode und dem 3 Darauf weist, wie es scheint, die Tatsache hin, daE aná gleichmaBig in
den lilteren und jüngeren Mal}(lalas gebrliucblich ist (IVl, VIIP, X 2), \Vas sich
Das l. und das X. Ma1}Q.ala enthalten 191 L.iede~: das ~X. nur 114 (5S0~;~
1
nur dadurch erklliren lliEt, daB aná ein erstarrter, ganz traditioneller Ausdruck
Seit der AthS. auch enena statt ena, wonut spater dIe Kommentare
2 der Dichtersprache geworden war und nur dureh den Umstand, daB es aus dem
altere Porm erlliutern, Z. B. Komm. zu Jaim. GS 22 20 (ed. Caland, 1905) für das paradigmatischen Zusammenhang mit ayám hinausgetreten war und als selbstlin-
Zitat ~S X, S5, 27°. . diges Wort ein gewisses Eigenleben bekommen hatte, vor der Konkurrenz von ená
a Ebenso beim enklitischen Pronomen seit der AS anena. einigermaBen geschützt war, so daE es sich noch eine kurze Zeit behaupten konnte.

138 139
220 F. B. J. Kuiper.

'h -e bh ya.,
pronominalen P1ura1endungen -e bh t., h -esárn
'. und -e$U Einflu/3
.
ausgeübt haben konnen. Es 1ehrt uns, ~~ fe~tv m ~~rvedlseher
Zeit (sehon die J;tS kennt ja uur noe~ ~ena, k~na, yena statt .des
alteren *tá usw.) del' Gebraueh von ená m geWlssen ~praehkrels~n Indoiranica.
. il Auilerdem sind die anderen Pronommalformen fuI'
gewesen sem mu . . . Von
die Auslautsfrage wiehtig, indem aueh sie anfangheh em .Sehwa~ken F. B. J. Kuiper, Batavia (Java).
zwisehen -ena und -ena zeigen, bis endlieh -ena den Sleg errmgt.
Man darf darin einen indirekten BeweÍs für die einstige Existenz
. aueh von *ana 2 erblieken. 'Siehe dazu AL 5. Ai. bhrku(f-, bhrakutf-, bhri1kutf- ,das Verziehen dar Brauen'.
von ená 1 und somIt
Gramm.l1I, 92. Alle Formen dieses 'Wartes sind erst seit dem Epas belegt. 1
Dail man, von del' letzter"'ahnten Form ausgehend, ",elche die etyillo-
logis eh durchsichtigste zu seín scheint, in diesen Formen das 01't ,V
bln·;J-l} ,Augenbraue' zu finden geglaubt hat, ist zu yerstehen (ygl.
Pott, Etym. Forsch. JI, 51). Bohtlingk und Roth setzten demzuliebe
für lwti-l} eine Grundbedeutung ,Biegung' an, "wofür aber jeder
Beweis fehlt. 2 In diesem Falle müLlte bll1'il7cut~- also die ursprüng-
liche Form seín, wahrend für die anderen Formen dann irgendwelche
analogische Beeinflussung anzunehmen ware. Fül' bh1'ukut~- konnte
man zur Not noch alten Kompositionsablaut annehmen,s bhrkutf-
lieLle sich als Hypersanskl'itismus erklal'en,4 an bh1'akutf- muLl aber
jeder del'al'tige Erklal'ungsversuch seheitern. Überdies steht dieser
Vokalwechsel in del' Anlautssilbe nicht ganz vel'einzelt da: dieselbe
Erscheinung zeigt bhrku'f{!sa-l} ,Schauspie1er in weiblichem Anzuge',
woneben die Lexikographen als Nebenformen auch bhraku'f{!§a-l} und

I Sieheaueh Holtzmann, Gramm. aus dem Mhbh. 5.

2 SiehePW n, 312.
3 SiebeAínd. Gramrn. n, 55.
4 SieheAind. Grarnm. I, S. LIV A. 4 und vgl. ibid. 33 sq. Einen Laut-
wandel l'U >r nahmen Delbrüek, Aínd. Verbum 154 sq., und Osthoff, MU IV, '215,
an, vgl. neuerdings wieder Seheftelowitz, KZ LUl, 265 sq. Von Pedersen, IF n,
1 1m Sarp.hitapatha so nur 1, 173, 9' (enklitisch), wlihrend es v~n ~ehreren
307, wurde dies aber rnit Reeht abgelehnt, weil bhrl1.- auf volksetymologischer
. kt auch VI <>0 10 b (statt des überlieferten ena) emgesetzt Umgestaltung des alteren bhr- beruhen kann. Siehe aueh Verf., Die indogermani-
Forsehern dureh K onJe ur ,~ , . 1
Arnold, Vedie Metre 113 und vgl. Al. Gramm. Il , sehen Nasalpriisentia 90 A.2:" Ma:har. bhiu<Ji, wofür Jacobi, Ausgew. Erzahl. XXV,
wird. Siehe Grassmann 208,
Vokaldissimilatíon annahm, geht auf bhrkuti-l), zurück. Vgl. noeh Charpentier,
92, 525. t d K" ná JF XXIX, 375 sq., Gundert, ZDMG XXIII, 5'21.
1 Dazu stimmt, wie oben bemerkt, auch die auslau en e urze von ca .

141
l40
 F. B. J. Kuiper. Indoiranica. 297
296
Fal3t man nun bh l'/W 7 t"¡:- mlt. selllen
. Varianten auch als solch
bh1'{lku-q¿§a-Z~ anführen. Diesel' vVechsel darf als em sicherer Beweis
ein" Lehnwort auf ' so 1"osen SIC . 11 a11 e S chwiel'igkeiten: es enthalt ein
für austroasiatisehe Herkunft des Wortes gelten. l\Ian hat sehon
Prafix bhr-,
• bh?'a- , bh1'U- , das z . B • a U eh'III sa k' al b?'e-cat ,koehen'
mehrfaeh daraur hingewiesen, daG im Cam die V okale a, i, n oft
miteinander wechseln, z. B. ikan, akan ,Fisch', ikak, akak ,festbinden',
vorliegt,l und ist weiter mit santa11' k"t; "".0, met'k uti ,the eye-brows'
zu verbinden,
knmei, kamei ,Tochter'. Siehe Aymonier, Grammaire de la langue
chame 39, Przyluski, BSL XXIV, 120. Überhaupt lal3t sich aber in 6. Ai. ka!lapa-l;1. ,eine bestimmte Waffe'.
den Spraehen Vorder- und Hinterindiens ein haufiger vVechsel a : u
. pas ,vVort kommt im Epos und vereinzelt in del' spateren
beobachten, 'gl. dazu Przyluski, BSL XXVI, 100, Journ. As. 1926,
LIteratur vor, und zwar in schwankender Gestalt: bald erscheint es
I, 29, un~ J. Gonda, Austrisch en Arisch 32 (mit Literatur).l
~Js ka7}apa-ZI, bald als kU7}apa-b, einmal sogar ist kanapa-(¡2 tiber-
.d.uch dem Santali, del' am besten bekannten l\luJ.lQ.a-Sprache,
hefert (Mhbh. IlI, 20, 34). Die Bedeutung steht nicht fest und ¡st
ist diese Erseheinung nicht fremd, wie aus den oft nebeneinander
offe~bar dem ~(ommentator NIlakaJ.ltha nicht mehr bekannt gewesen:
VOl' kommenden Varianten eines W ortes oder Ausdrucks hervorgeht.
we~l~stens wml3 el' für dieses vVort nicht mehr als sinnlose Etymo-
~·I
lY an vergl elc uc gnsuc, = gq,n d ucJ gq,suc, = gan d ac' gq.suc,
. h e z. B . gnn d'
logls~~runge~ zu geben, s wahrend el' doch Z. B. für bhu§w,uP/í- eíne
,listless, lazy'; guni gU1'ib = gq,ni gq,1'ib ,the pOOl' people'; kq.rllé
Erkla~ung glbt, der.- mag sie nun richtig sein oder nicht - jeden-
bq,rué = kq,l'ué bw·tté ,to grumbIe'; tha7}(tgat = tliW,lq,gut ,having
falls e~ne scharfumnssene Vorstellung zugrunde 1iegt (vgl. Nrl. zu I,
hair cropped very short 01' shaved', katap katap, katap kq.tnp, katap
227, 20). Um so mehr fallt es auí, dal3 das Petersb. Wb. fÜl' das
kntup, kut1l1J kutup ,sound produced by feet striking the ground,
letzte Wort nur die vage Bezeichnung ,eine bestimmte "\\Taffe' O'ibt
as when a horse gallops' usw, In diesem Zusammenhange sei auch
ohne NilakaI.ltha zu erwahnen, dagegen für ka~1apa-Z¿, kw.wpa-~ "'die
an den ai. Vogelnamen bha1'a7}q,a-Zl, bhal'u7}¿¡'a-~, bhttl'lI7}(ta-~, bhe1'u7}(ja-~
ga~z phantastische Erklarung des indischen' Kommentars in modi-
erinnert, dessen vokalische Verhaltnisse nur dann erklart werden
fizlerter Form tibernimmt (P\V III, 1238) und als Bedeutung ,eine
konnen, wenn man annimmt, daG das W ort, wie so viele andere
Art Lanze' angibt. 4 Inwieweit diese genaue Bedeutungsangabe
Namen del' vorderindischen Flora und Fauna, aus einer alten austro-
genugsam begründet ist, sei dahingestellt; wenigstens bildet die
asiatischen Sprache entlehnt worden ist. 2
1 Auch in den indonesischen Sprachen lii/3t sich diese Erscheinung beobachten, k~matha-l¡, in der Bedeutung ,Schildkrote' noch unerklart. Uhlenbecks VerbindunO'
siehe Brandstetter, An Introduction to Indonesian Linguistics 28 sq. ~It gr. xcl.fl-fl-ctflo" xáfl-fl-Oflo. ,Krebs' (Tijdschrift Ned. Taal en Letterk. XXV 246°)
uberzeugt. eb ensowe~~g, " Wle eh ar~enhers . '
Erkliirungsversuch (Monde Oro XVIII,
2 Mit Unrecht hat man früher den Vokalwechsel aus mittelindischem Ein-

fiu/3 zu erklaren versucht, vgl. Wackernagel, Altind. Gramm. 1, 21. Rier sei noch
auí zwei Pfianzennamen aufmerksam gemacht. Ai. 7camatha-l} kann nach dem
Sabdakalpadr. auch ,Bambu' bedeuten, vgl. mar, 7cavag, ,bambou pour le transport
de fardeaux sur l'épaule' u. a. (Charpentier, Monde Oro XVIII, 15 A. 2), hindi
lcaTfltha ,a bow, esp, one made of bamboo'. Man vergleiche santali mat', mundari mat',
mad' ,Bambu'. In diesem Zusammenhang schcint auch fUr lata ,Liane' indogerm.
Rerkunft (Uhlenbeck, Paul und Braunes Beitr. XXVI, 302, Johansson, IF XIV,
330 sq.) nicht wahrscheinlich. Vielleicht darf man taren Mt, boloven la, erau 7cela
,Bambu' (Cabaton, Journ.As.1905, 1, 291) vergleichen, Anders Chatterji beÍ Bagchi,
Pre-Aryan and Pre-Dravidian in India, Introduction, S. XXIV. Dagegen ist ai.
1~ 8~) oder ChatterJIs Vorschlag (bei Bagchi, S. XXII), es mit 7ca¡'7cata-h, beng.
7ca 1ha. ,Krebs, Krabbe' aus einem austroas. Wort fUr ,Krabbe' herzuleiten: Hüngt
es mlt hal'1nuta-l} zusammen?
~ V~l. P. V:. Schmidt, Die Sprachen der Sakei und Semang auf Malacca 513.
, DIe Va~lante kar;taya-, welche an zwei Stellen 'belegt ist, kann bloBer
Schrelbfehler sem, obwohl sie auch die mittelindische Lautgestalt des Wortes ent-
halten kann, vgl. pa. 7car;.aya- ,a sort of spear, lance'.
3 Vgl. NIlakar¡.tha zu'· 1, 227, 25 III, 20, 34.
• 4 PW 1, 30, 318 III, 1238, pw lI, 72 (7cur;.apa-). Nur für kar;.apa- wurde
dles pw lI, 7 zurückgenommen (,eine bestimmte Waffe').

142 14~
298 F. B. J. Kuiper.
Etymologie km.la + pa ,tropfenweise (das Blut) trinkend, d. i. nur
einen geringen Blutverlust verursachend' keinen hinreichenden Grund
zu diesem Bedeutungsansatz. Richtig mag es zwar sein, dal3 das Wort
volksetymologisch in dieser vVeise zel'legt uud als eine Zusammen-
se t zu n '"O' ml't pa- ,trinkend' aufO'efal3t
" wurde, denn nur so erklart
sich die Form kaTJapayin- Mhbh. VIII, 744 Oalc., offenbar das
,VaO'nis eines spateren Dichters nach dem Verhaltnis k§zrapa-:
k§'i1':payin-, tailapa- : tailapay-in-, somapa-: somapayin- u. dgl. .Für
die etymologische El'klal'ung hat aber dieses éln:a; ASyÓ!LSJJOY kemen
,Vert, zumal die Bombay-Ausgabe an del' entsprechenden Stelle
(VIII, 19. 34) kw.wpan api hato
Del' Vokalwechsel a: u weist aut austl'oasiatische Herkunft
hin (vgl. oben bhrakn(t- :' bhrtikn('t-).1 Für die Bestimmung des
,Vurzelelementes ist es wichtig, dal3 in del' Morphologie del' austro-
asiatischen Spl'achgruppe ein n-Infix sehr gebrauchlich ist zur Bildung
von Nomina die teils Ver balabstracta, teils Bezeichnungen des In-
struments o~er des Resultats sind. Eine bequeme Übel'sicht über
die verschiedenen Funktionen gibt P. VV. Schmidt, Die Mon-Khmer-
Véilker 44, vgl. auch Grundz. einer Lautl. d. Khasi-Spr. 707 und
Maspél'o, Gramm. de la langue khmere 221. Als Beispiel sei genannt
santo kanaso ,a pleat, tl'ill' zu kaso ,to plait'. Fal3t man kal.wpa-Z¿
als eine inuO'ierte Ableitung von kap auE, so lii.l3t es sich mit khm~r
k~p ,couper" d'un coup, trancher, abattre', p1'akap " U
,coupel', tal ~r,'
k'ilp milt ,blesser avec un instrument tranchant' verbinden. 2 Schmldt,
Die Mon-Khmer-Véilker 81, halt diese Wéil'ter, wofür sich auffalliger-
weise noch keine genauen Entsprechungen aus den verwandten
Sprachen haben nachweisen lassen, für identisch mit bahnar, stieng
kap ,béi13en', vgl. sakei kop-kap ,Zahne' und nikobar. op-kap-hªt:
,b ellJen.
·() , Ob dies richti"O' ist, wird sich vorderhand kaum mlt
1 Daher nicht zur idg. WzI. qel (Walde, VgI. Wb. I, 435).
2 ,Vie das ~ im Sanskrit-Wort aufzufassen ist, bleibt unklar. Zwar kommt
in den Mon-Khmer-Sprachen in ahnlichen F;tlIen haufig ein zerebrales 1'1 vor, aber
Schmidt halt es für sekundar (siehe Grundz. einer Lautl. d. Mon-Khmer-Spr. 129 sqq.,
Gr. LautI. Khasi-Spr. 739).
144
Indoiranica. 299
Sichel'heit bestimmen lassen, ob",oh1 es wegen des semasiologischen
Verhaltnisses yon lato fin do ,spalten' zu got. beitan ,beil3en' (altisl.
bíta) angels. bítan auch noch ,schneiden' von YVaffen) jedenfalls seh1'
gut méiglich ist. Daneben findet man weiter santali kqpi ,a battle-
axe', mUJ,lQ.al'i kapi ,a kind oE axe', die auch zu dieser Gl'uppe zu
rechnen sind: in morphologischer Hinsicht stehen sie mit santo gqpi
,a great talker', mundo gapi ,a talkative' (zu santo gap ,ta1king,
verbjage') auf gleicher Linie. Ob auch khmer kapi ,Sch",e1't ó in
ahnlicher Weise von kap abgeleitet werden kann, méigen Sachkundige
entscheiden. Diese Etymologie lal3t für die Bedeutungsbestimmung
von lcaTJapa-~ mehrere Méiglichkeiten offen¡ das Paji (vgl. ka1)ayagga
,the point of a spear') stützt die Bedeutungsangabe des P\V.
Ahmer kung. Die Heranziehung von santali kqpi erfordert
eine nahere Rechtfertigung, weil verschiedene Fo1'scher wiedel'holt
die Ansicht 'i'erteidigt haben, dal3 anlautendes k im Santali zu h
gewol'den sei. Vgl. P. W. Schmidt, Die Mon-Khmer-Véilke1' 92,
Przy1uski, MSL XXII, 209, BSL XXV, 70, Journ. As. 1926, 1, 26,
28, 32, 34. Wenn man sieht, dal3 in Boddings Wéirterbuch die mit k
anlautenden "'\Vorter 229 Seiten einnehmen, mul3 diese Auffassung
wohl auffallen. Natürlich ist dies auch Schmidt nicht entgangen¡ er
nimmt dal'um, wie aus gewissen Bemerkungen 1 und aus del' "'\YeÍse,
wie el' die Liste von Wéirtern mit Guttura1-Anlaut (S. 94 sqq.) zu-
sammengestellt hat, ldar hel'vorgeht, okkasionellen "'\Yandel von k zu h
an, ohne sich sonderbarerweise zu vergegenwal'tigen, dal3 dies mit
den Prinzipien del' Sprachwissenschaft unvereinbar ist. So identifi-
ziert el' einerseits santo hgf¡ ,kurz' mit stieng ka1i ,Grenzen', anderer-
seits santo kic-kic ,kotig, schlammig' mit stieng ki6 ,schlarnmig'.
Przyluski verflihrt, prinzipiell betrachtet, ganz lihnlich, wenn el'
santali hol' ,a man, a human being, a wife', herel ,a man, a husbandó 2
für identisch halt mit leora ,a boy, a young man', kuri ,a girl' einer-
seits und mit e¡'a, erat ,wife, female' andererseits, so dal3 nach ihm
1 Vgl. Die Uon-Khmer-Volker 94 A.2.
2 Mit 1'! Vgl. hepel ,man', also vielmehr aus *hel gebildet (vgI. Konow,
Ling. Surv. IV, 40).
145
 F. B. J. Kuiper.
300
drei Stufen eines Lautwandels nebeneinander in derselben Sprache vor-
·
l legen (Journ..
As 1926 " 1 26) .1 In den meisten Fallen, die für den
Lautwandel angeführt werden, kannte es sich um alten Prafixwechsel
k : h handeln. 2 So entspricht den :MuJ}J¡a-Wartern für ,Ratte'
santo hon, mund. hooni s in den meisten hinterindischen Sprachen
eine Form mit k: mon kni, bahn. kone, khasi khnai usw. Aber ein
Palauno'-Dialekt hat auch hne (Schmidt, Khasi 799). Gegenüber
santo X:und. hon ,Sohn' stehen khasi khün, khmer kün, mon kan,
bahnar kon, stieng kan. Grundform ist aber *k(e)wan, vgl. Palau~g
kll.:an, kuan, nikobar. koªn, lavé me kuan, khasi (dial) khian. Be-
l'uht sant hon auf 'iIoh(e)wan?4 Die meisten Beispiele, die Schmidt
anfühl't , sind wohl anders zu beurteilen. Gegenübel' Bildungen wie . Xun gibt es tatsachlich in den Prakrits Beispiele für den
santo kt¿kurbah (von kUl'bañ) ,gebogen', km' cap, karsa1' U. dgl., worm
offenbal' das bekannte austrische Prafix ka(1')-' kU(1} vorliegt, ist
ihl'e Beweiskraft gering. 5
1 EbensoweniO'HiBt sich seine Gleichsetzung von santo ato ,Dorf' mit
malayo kota ,Stadt' :ufrechterhalten (BSL 1926 = Pre-Aryan and Pr~-Dravidian
in India, S_ 143). Der Auslaut o, u (mund. hii/u) beruht wohl auf alt~r.em. ~u,
vgl. bulu ,Schenkel' (khmer bhlau, bahnar, stieng blu, nikob. pelO, berslsl be:uh,
bleu, sakei, semang belu, belO, blO). Daher zu mon datau ,stehen'? (so Schmldt,
Mon-Khmer-Viilker, S. 99, 131).
2 V"l. khasi kia,' neben py-hial' (khm. hier, bahn. hial') ,strecken, ausdehnen',
von yar ,:reit" oder, in den Wa-Sprachen, angkú him ,Dorf': mong lwe kim.
3 ? So M. B. Bhaduri, A Mundari English Dict. S. v_
4 So auch Konow, Ling. Surv. IV, 219 wegen des Verhliltnisses santo hon:
kllrkü kan. Das Kürkü (mit Kharia und Juang) hat oft le gegenüber h de.r
Kherwari-Gruppe, z. B. kürkll kaku: santo hako, mundo hai ,Fisch'. Ander~ Bel-
spiele erwlihnt Konow, op. cit. 169, der auch eine Lo.utentwicklung anlllmmt:
It therefore seems probable that Kherwarí in this respect represents a la ter
~tage of phonetical development' (S. 22). Andererseits nimmt er nicht nur in hon,
kürkü lean (S. 219), sondern auch in santo hor: kllrkll kara (S. 18) alten Prlifix-
wechsel ano Man beachte, daB es sich nicht um eine feste Entsprechung handelt:
dem santo he ,yes, to agree' entspricht kürkii he, gegenüber mund. h~tü (~ant. ato)
,Dorf' (nach Przyluski aus *katlí) hat das Kllrkü ah~. So dr.angt ~lCh ~le Frage
auf, ob nicht in allen Flillen morphologische E.rschem~ngen l~ Splele slUd.,
5 Sant. kupa ,a skin vessel for bolding oIl' zu stleng kuop ,Raut, FeIl ~de~
aus hindi kuppa? Oft kann man zweifeln, ob nicht Rückentlehnung aus ~I1n~l
oder Bengalí anzunehmen ist. Ursprünglích scheint mir santo kukru ,kraben.
146
Indoiranica. 301
7.Ai. gehá-m ,Haus', gehya-m ,Hausrat',t gehinI (Kl.) ,Hausfrau'.
Die altere Gestalt von gehá-m (VS, Manu, Mhbh. U. Sp.) hat
sich in pali gedha ,Spelunke' Ang. N. 1, 154 (s. Kern, Toevoegselen
op het IVoordenboek van Ohilders 1, 129) erhalten. Seit del' altesten
Zeit (JJS, VS) sind die Wartel' dieser Sippe neben grhá-m ,Haus,
Familie',2 grhú.ü ,Hausfrau',3 denen sie sowohl in Fol'm als Bedeutung
sehr nahe ,stehen, gebrauchlich gewesen. V gl. paji gehmh, geho,
pkr. ge'ha ,Haus', hindi geha ni. ,an edifice, house, dwelling mansion'
(neben grha l\I. ,a house, dwelling, famUy, wife'). Es kann daher
nicht wundel'nehmen, daG man yon alters her nahere Beziehungen
zwischen den beiden W ortgruppen nachzuweisen vel'sucht hato
Lautwandel l' > e, Z. B. geJ.lhai (ai. grh1yUi), talave'IJ-ta aus talaqnta-
(siehe Jacobi, Ausgew. Erzahl. in Maharashtrí: § 3), pa. gheppati,
pkr. gheppa'i ,el'greift' (aus gh1'P-?), pa. gedha ,Begiel'de' (siehe Geiger,
Pali 44). Auf Grund solchel' Falle el'blickte Lassen, Instit. Ling.
Pracr. 118 ("gl. S. 130), in gehá-m ein ,vestigium similis mutationis
in.lingua sacra'. Es gibt aber sonst im eigentlichen Sanskrit und
Vedischen 4 kein einziges stichhaltiges Beispiel fül' diese Lautent-
wicklung. N'eben gehá-m hat man dafür noch édhate geltend gemacht,
das aus rdh- entstanden sein sollte. 5 Aller IVahrscheinlichkeit nach
gehort edh- aber zu gr. 8(}'{}.'),Ór; ,tüchtig, gut, edel' und zu aw. azdyiJ
,wohlgenahrt, feist', bezieht sich somit auf eine \V ul'zel *ezdh-, welche
Verwandt, aber nicht identisch damit ist ai. kulckuta-q, ,Rahn' (aus *kUl'kufa-; 'gl.
santo kOl'l~ot neben kokol ,to gather weeds'). Daraus mit Angleichung an die Tier-
namen auf -bha-: kukkuiJha-q, ,wilder Hahn', das kaum cine alte Bildung ist (so
Brugmann, Kurze vgl. Gramm. 331). Das Wort für ,Rahn' in den Himalaya-
Sprachen (Ling. Surv. IlI, 1, 540 sqq., Bailey, Ling. Stud. from tbe Rim. 73)
stammt aus hindi kukkar, lcukar, kukrü.
1 Vgl. SayaJ;la zu ~S III, 30, 7b gehyam: grhe,ubhavarp, lcanakapa.§t'adikam.
2 Für die Bedeutungsverhiiltnisse siehe Charpentier, KZ XL, 468.
3 Daneben wird auch gehi1)'i angeführt, das man, falls die Angabe richtig
ist, nach Aind. (j:ramm. I, 194 (§ 173) zu beurteilen hato
• Siehe Wackernagel, AL Gramm. I, 39 sq.
5 Pott, Etym. Forsch. JI, 162, Uhlenbeck 36.
147
 Indoiraniea. 303
302 F. B. J. Kuiper.
den iranisehen "\Yortern, ein Formans dZ .
:Nomina nad O' . . - 10-, das blsher nur in weniO'en
vielleicht dh-Erweiterung von es- ,sein' ist (Walde, V gl. Wb. 1, 161).
lbewlesen worden 1St siehe Grundr. 112 1 472 sq i
morphologisehe Parallele für ge~d-m r t '
\Veiter ist noch ved. jéhamana-lJ, ,gahnend, den Mund aufsperrend'
" . me
zu erwiihnen, das von Bohtlingk und Roth (PVV nI, 131) und von G tt ' leg m aw. sa1'aoam 1 N A t
a ung
• •
vor, das nieht von sar- F 1:T •• •
• , v erelm O'un O' Gemems 1 ft' - .
., 1',
Brudke, ZD1IG XL, 682, auf jl'bh- zurückgeführt wurde,t aber viel- ,verernlO'en' zu t . lO b' e la ,sa1'ade
b rennen 1St, vgl. aueh ved. sdrdha-h M ' "dh h ,~
mehr mit got. faihugeigo ,Habsucht', ahd. gíngo ,Verlangen' zu ver- ,H eersehar Trup ,(. 1 . . ., sal a., ~~.
" ' pe sle le welter '\Yalde Vgl. 'Yb I 424) Eb
binden ist. 2 Q'ehoren ved . 'dh 7 , . , ' enso
b • rmye a-~¡, aw. myazdo O f ' . , zu del' m . ved.!' .
Die alte Zusammenstellung von gehá-m und gr há-m ist also _ '. ' p el spelse
aw. am:s- (JoUl'n. As. 1936 1 247) r " • a-ml~,
aus lautlichen Gründen ausgeschlossen, denn wir haben keinen Teil wird d F " ,olhegenden Wurzel *mi~-. Zum
as ormans -dho- wohl aueh dem 1 . h
Grund, in dem bereits im Vedischen vorkommenden vVort, das grunde liebO'en y 0'1 z B t 'd fi s aWlse en -do- zu-
, b' . . Vl0 o rmus' ( b }.
seitdem immer neben g?'há-m existiert hat, die mind. Lautgestalt HaO'el' ( ' , n e en lt. tv'irtas) g1'ad-
ZU "'1' Xéll//(X St . ')
, b
b' <:1'" , e1n, braz d a Furehe' ( , ' .0

des letztgenannten Wortes zu suchen. s sédo ,grau' (daneben sé?'o dass.), iSndo '\~und '( z~ ~r. ~(X{¿Or; dass.);
Das "\Vort lii(3t sich aber sehr gut als altes Erbwort erkliiren. Le slave eommun 303 V d ' 1 V' el' zu C!ltt), sIehe Meillet,
. ,on ra e, gl. sI. Gramm. I2 600 \ ~
Das Awestische hat bekanntlich ein vVort gae~a ,Gehoft, Haus und dem Germamsehen sind B'ld d , s q q . n.U::o
1 ungen es Typus O'ot . d S
Hoí, Hab und Gut', womit ap. gai~a ,fahrende Habe' identisch ist. (zu ai. ?'asati) zu vergleiehen. b . 1 az a , prache,
Beide Worter gehoren zur Wzl. *g':.eí- ,leben'. Eine iihnliehe Be-
deutungsentwieklung findet man bei ved. gáya-Z¡ M. ,Haus, Hausstand, 8.. Ai. campü-l}. ,eme
. b es t immte Literaturgattung'.
Eigentum',4 hom. ~lo'Cor;, ~lor; (Hes. Att. NT) ,Leben, Vermogen',
Eme del' nachsten AufO'aben f" .
rusS. zivotiJ ,Habe und Gut' (russ. zivót U. a. ,Leben'), vgl. altruss. na methodisehe UntersuehunO' 1 0 . ur, er~e .aueh nur einigermaLlen
zizno Vseslaviju ,gegen die reiehen Güter V seslavs' (im Slovo po Sansk't . d . .. b del austloaslattsehell Lehnworter im
n Wlr sem, ermge Klarheit zu sehaff .
polku Igoreve). - Auf dieselbe Wurzel *g':'ei- dürfte nun aueh versehiedenen \Yeisen ~r' d ' S . en m bezug auf die
, .. le as ansknt d A 1
gehá-m zUl'ückzuführen sein: es enthiilt aber, in Abweiehung von '\Vorter dem Oharakt ' d ' en us aut del' entlehnten
el el' eIgenen Spraehe angepaLlt hato
Ieh besehranke mieh auf e"lmge B emerkunO'en F" . k
Zustimmend Uhlenbeck 103, Charpentier, Desiderativbildungen 125.
1

Lidén, Studien 45 A. 1. Daroit ist vollig iro Einklang, daB jéhate im

2
sonantiseh auslautendes 'Vort ist d' . fIlO' ur em -on-
den a-Stammen zu fiel f le em ac lste Methode, es nach
Dhlltupatha nuch in der Bedeutung p¡'ayat71e (,streben, sich bernühen') angeführt
karpüra-h. Ofters . (dlerben, z'. B. lailgala-m (aus *lw'¡gal), karpasa-lJ.
wird und pa. abhij¡]¡a71a ,das Streben nach etwas' (Scho!. vil'iyakara1)a Jat. VI, 373)
. Wlr a el' em Suffix anO' f" t "\Y'l '
bedeutet, siehe H. Kern, Taal en Letteren IX, 190. den austroasiatisehen S I ' be ug . el Suffigierung
3 Thurob-Hirt, Handb. d. Skr. 2 72, Henry, Précis de grarnmaire palie 130
ae
allgemeinen fremd ist pt len: wemgstens in Hinterindien, noeh im
(geha sei eine ,forme pracritisée de grha'), Charpentier, KZ XL, 466 A. 3, "1 d- S ' cann Sle yor etwa 2000 Jahren in den P "-
468, J. Bloch, L'Indo-Aryen 35. Nach Wackernagel, Ain. Grnmm. I, XVIII A.3, ~\. un.. a- praehen k aum eme . Rolle gespielt haben Sie ra.
ist die roind. Herkunft ,nicht sichcr crweisbar'. Auch Hertel, Die aw. Herrschafts- eme NeuerunO' des Alt' d' 1 . . . muI3 somlt
lO m Ise len sem. So entsprieht d .
uud Siegesfeuer 81 A. 1, hiiJt ved. gehya-m für mind.: ,Da der Begriff des Haus- ,Rhinozeros' im S t l' d em al. ga?l(¡'a1'a-~
gerüts aber den Nomaden frerod war [1], so fand der Dichter des Liedes iro weshalb B . an a 1 ga~l. gQr •• Das, Suffix ist offenbar ariseh
U1

Vedischen kein Wort dafür und entlehnte das entsprechende Wort der Volkssprache
_____
agehls ohnehin unwahrseheinliche ErklarunO' b
,~
(P re- ~"1.I'J'an,
seiller Zeit, die eben Prakrit war.'
ü
, Neisser, Wb. l, 83, leitet in Nachfolge von Grassmann gáya-l¡, und gaiJS 1 Daneben 8arad- F. = ap. {fa¡,d-.
von ji- ,gewinnen' ab. 1lit Unrecht, wie die Parallelen zeigen.

149
148
304 F. B. J. Kuiper. Indoiraniea.
306
and Pre-Dravidian XXVI) abzuweisen ist. Besonders haufig ist 6'egeben zu haben. Daíl ai. tambüla-m ,Betel'
dem Austroasiatischen
aber Suffigierung bei ursprünglich vokalisch auslautenden Wortern, ~nt1ehnt worden ist, hat man langst erkannt. Vgl. Lafeber, Vero-eli '_
wobei man offenbar ort das Bedürfnis emprunden hat, den vokalischen kende klankleer van het Niasisch (1922) 144 d " b , J
E 11 sqq" er es fuI' eme
Auslaut zu bewahren. So wahrscheinlich bei attllla-~ und attalaka-ll, n:~ mun_ aus dem Indonesischen halt, und Przyluski, BSL XXYI
g
~ebenrormen von atta-~ ,vVachtturm', vgl. santo ata ,a platform rroro (\9~D), 2D5 sqq~ (mit viel Unzugehorigem). Das austroasiatische
whieh wild animals are shot, an ambush', und bei uq,umbara-b neben "ort muíl -belu, -balü gelautet haben, woneben es (mit dem be-
goéJ,umba. Oft wird also -,'a- oder -la- angefügt. Hierher gehoren kannten \Vechsel a : lt) -bulü- cregeben haben ka Off b .
d b nn. en al' 1st
,many words ending in la ... or obscure etymology', worauf sehon as ,ausl;tutende ü abgestoílen worden für O'edehntes ,-' t- b-l
1 'b U m arn u a-m
\Vhitney, Graromar § 1189, aurmerksam gemacht hato So dürfte vg , ka1'cüra-b, ka1'}Jüra-Zz. Del' Bete1crebrauch b . d H' d
s "t ft d (S b , el en In us erst
aueh kapola-~ ,'Wange' mit sakei kapo, semang kapo, nikobar. tIJpOIJ pa au reten peyer, Stud. about the Kathasaritsacrara 42 sq 1
Ke ) . t . h b " nac 1
zu yer binden sein. vVenn aur Hemaeandras Angabe kapoli ,Knie- rn, IS austnsc nach Ohatterji TiJ' dsehr B t G
LXVIII " a ay. enootschap
seheibe' überhaupt etwas zu geben ist, gehort es roit pa. kapo1J,i ,88. - 'VVenn ai, bija-m ,Samen'l mit khasi pyrg'e' ,. d
'b "b '. z, pyget o el'
,Ellbogen' zusammen. Unbefriedigend Marstrander, IF XX, 553 mlt erSISl 1JBh, sakei b'íjéh uSW. zu verbinden ¡st hat d 1
A l " es en a ten
(-ola-, -ota- weist meist aur Entlehnung hin). Viele vVorter aur -'ira- us aut aufgegeben. Auch andere Falle leO'en d' y
d íl . h ' " b le ermutung nahe
und -üra- (Typus kU7''ira-b, kul'iraka-ll, kumbh'ira-lt) dürften so ent- a mc t lmmer Uherführung in die i-Deklinatl'on '
h stattgefunden
standen sein. Aur Yerwendung yon -ka- weisen Z. B. sam'ika- neben at (wie bei bh1'uku{t-: santo kuti). So lieíle sl'ch
ai, kuvinda-f¡
sam'i (ygl. sarnira-b, sllrn'ila-~), sambüka-Zz (§ambuka-~) neben sambu-~, ,'Veher' mit santo bindi ,Spinne' verbinden Daíl d' S'
~ " . . le pmne Ihren
.
kambu-lz ,.JIusehel'. Neben pU1J,éJ,m''ilca-rn ,weiJ3e Lotusblüte' erwabnt Á amen In Ylelen Fallen ihrer Tatigkeit als ,1,Veberin' verdankt .
del' Amarakosa pU1J,(larya-m ,ein bestimmtes gegen Augenübel an- bekannt V 0'1 hd S' ( . ,1St
, ,. ,b' n. . pt.nne : spmnen), Spinnengewebe, ai. ü1'l)avtibhi-h
gewendetes Heilkl'aut' (= prapau'f!,éf,ar'ika-m), das aur einer kÜl'zel'en ,Spmne (mgentheh: ,dIe 'Volle webt'). Ahnliches crl'lt f" h 'l '
F ' b ur p a a-m
, rueht (sehon yedisch), wenn es mit khmer phle hah
Form *pUt1éJ,ar't- zu beruhen scheint. Natürlieh kann auslautender r. , nar p l"et, sÍlen cr
Vokal eventuell auch als Stammyokal aufgeraílt werden. V gl. neben p et, palaung ploe zu verbinden sein sollte Aber Entlehn D b
'1 . ung aus ra-
samí, sambu-l! aueh bJ¡~lcut't- (siehe oben S. 295). n\ a-Spraehen seheint nieht ausgesehlossen (siehe Bloch BSL XX1:T
17 M . E . , ..( \,
Offenbar darf man weiteraus dem Verhaltnis ai. ka?iiya-ll d , anslOn, sqUlsse d'une histoire de la 1. ser . 80-) , n u d 17 \ ersuc h e,
,zusammenziehend (vom Gescbmaek)' zu santo kasa ,bitter, astringente as 'Vort aus dem Indogermanischen zu erklaren, sind zahlreieh. 2
schlieílen, daíl nach a aueh y zur Hiattilgung gebraueht worden ist,
wie dies bekanntlieh aucb sonst sowohl im Alt- als iro rrlittelindisehen : Neup. vi} (U~Ienbec,k) existiert nicht nach Hom, Grundr, neup. Etym, XIX,
bisweilen del' Fall ist, vgl. Wackernagel, Ai. Gramm. 1, 208, 338, t Vgl. Moulton s Verbmdung mit WrpEUW (zustimmend Wackerna"el DehnunO's
gese z 1889, 50, skeptisch ders" Ai. Gramm, I, 1896 120' -,<71 au"ch 'H ff b -
Geiger, Pa.li 76, Jacobi, Ansgew. Erzahl. XXII. Viele WOl'ter auf BB XVIII 15-) . , ' '" . o mann,
, (), dIe mIt germ. fallan und sphalati Dhp (Noreen· Ab '8
Lautl 119 d' , . , , n urgerm,
-aya- (z. B. kuvalaya-m ,blaue vVasserlilie', kisalaya-m ,Blattknospe', . ), le mIt phalati ,berstet' (PW, Uhlenbeck) mit lat fi l' (
Brurrm K ' , a aum so noch
kul'ipaya-lz ,ein besti mmtes vVassertier') dürften in dieser vVeise aus V ~ áa;:n, urze vgl. Gramm, 151), mit aksl. plado (MeilIet nach Bloch' aber ,gI
on r ,VgI. s!. Gramm. 12, 369, 495, Scheftelowitz, ZDMG LIX 700)' m't d '
Grundwortern auf -a weitergebildet worden sein. WzI bhel (Walde V 1 Wb ' ,1 er
, . ' g. . II, 176 sq.) oder mit phalati ,mlirchati' (Lüders, KZ'XLII
Bisweilen seheint man aber, um ein vVort in das altindische 198 sqq" zushmmend Johansson, ZII IU, 232 mit weiteren L't t b'
Nominalsystem einfügen zu konnen, alten vokalisehen Auslaut auf- Siehe auch Whitney, Roots 105. lera uranga en),
Acta orientalia XVI.
20
150
151
 F. B. J. Kuiper.
306
Bis so weit war hauptsachlich von ,Yortem mit altem vokalischem
Auslaut die Rede, weil die konsonantisch auslautenden im allg'emeinen
durch Anfüo'uno- von a oder lt leicht del' altindischen Deklination
e "
angepaf3t wurden, vgl. ai. nüpurct- M. N. ,Fuf3ring' gegenübel' santali
lipur. Doeh muf3 hiel' gerade für die einheimisehen \Vorter auí -U?'
eine Ausnahme gemacht werden. Für die Bedeutung ,bunt, gefleekt'
verfügt das Sanskrit über die folgenden Formen: km'bara-b, karvant-Q,
ka'J'bura-b, kctmbm'a-Z~, kabara-Z~, * sm'val'(t- (in 3m'val'r), sabala-b
(sabara-Z¡ Lex.) und karbu-b. Dazu gehol't weiter samb(tra-Z~ ,eine
Hirschart'.l Del' Prafixweehsel ka, ka?', kam, sa, sar, sam, welcher
von Uhlenbeck, \Vb. 47, sehon erkannt wurde, weist unzweideutig
aur austroasiatisehe Herkunft. 2 Mit Ausnahme von karbu-b weisen aUe
Formen das ,Vurzelelement bar, bU?' aufo Dazu stimmt santo kabar,
mund, kltbltr ,spotted, variegated'.3 Interessant ist aber nur die
Form karbu-Zl, die sekundar seín muf3. '\Vie sie entstanden ist, liegt
aur del' Hand. ::::\eben der thematisierten Form hat man die austro-
asiatisehe Form km'bu?' aueh in unveranderter Gestalt entlehnt und
als eine Sandhi-Variante von ka?'bu-b reintel'pretiert.
1 Solehe Tiernamen kornrnen übrigens auch als Personen- und Starnrnnarnen
vor. Miitaitga-~ ,Elefant' bezeiehnet bekanntlich ~uch einen CaI).Q.ala-Stamrn (vgl.
Kadarnbari, Peterson 10, 13; 11, 16). Eine Dienerin in Subandhus Vasavadatta
(S. 251, 3 Hall) heiBt "JIatailgikii und wird sornit (wie die Dienerschaft überhaupt)
als nichtarisch gedacht¡ so hat Bal).a dem Sabarafürst in seiner KITdambari den
Namen Matailgaka-~ verliehen. Zusammen mit den Sabaras werden oft die Pulindas
erwiihnt, vgl. Ait. Br. 7,18, 2, Pulinda§a(m)bal'a~ Mhbh, XII, 151,8 u. a. So wird
Pulindm.aja8undañ Vasav. 95, 5 im Kommentar mit Saba'l'áilganá erkliirt. Vgl.
auch Gonda, Bijdragen Taal-, Land- en Volkenk. XC, 167 sqq. Dei diesen Pulindas
findet man die Personennamen Sámbal'a-~ ,Hirsch' und Sa1'anga-~ ,Antilope' irn
Brhatkathlislokasarpgraha (S. Levi, Journ, As. 1923, II 26). :Man pflegt in solehen
Namen bekanntlich Anweisungen für Totemismus zu vermuten (siehe Oldenberg,
Rel. d. Veda 82 qq,), der sich noch jetzt bei diesen Stürnmen nachweisen liiBt. Es
liiBt sich vermuten, daB so auch die Saba¡·a8 ihren Narnen erhalteri haben. Auf-
!alIend ist der bereits in dcr ~ksarphitIT auftretende Narne von lndras dii.monisc!Jem
Gegner Samba¡'a-~, was an ii.hnliche andere Fülle erinnert, wo Dürnonennamen
ursprünglich Starnmnamen von Aborigines gewesen sein kannen (pi§aca-~ U. dgl.).
2 Verfehlt daher Lidén, Studien zur ai. u. vgl. Sprachgesch. 50, 93.
3 Die Nebenform santo kabl'a M., lcq,bl'i F., mund. kübra, kabri ist aus einer
neuindischen Sprache rückentlehnt worden, vgl. hindi kabl'a, kab'l''i..
152
Indoiraniea. 307
In dieser 'Veise wird Ofters das r hinter u (und i?) abgestof3en
worden sein. Ai. kañcuka-~ bedeutet U. a, ,Sehlangenhaut' und muI3
eine Ableitung von *kañcu- sein, wofür keine befriediO'ende
e
ErklarunO'
t>
gegeben worden ist (vgl. Z. B. Fick 14, 22, 181, 381, l\fuller, Altit.
'Vb.68). Aber santali krpícU?' ,Sehlangenhaút' beweist seinen fremden
Ursprung.
Die Frage drangt sich auf, ob vielleicht aueh das W ort
lCiJigüla.-m ,Sehwanz' aur diese 'Veise morphologiseh durehsichtiger
wird. Es moge hier kurz erortert werden, wegen des unsieheren
Oharakters seiner Er klarung aber unter allem Vorbehalt. Morpho-
logiseh erinnert das ,Yort an lai¡gala-m ,Pflug', womit es Przyluski,
BSL XXIV, 118 sqq. (in del' engl. Übers. S. 8 sqq.), denn aueh ver-
bunden hato 'Yeil beide \Vorter auch ,penis' bedeuten, zieht er
,,'eiter noeh liJiga-m heran, so daf3 in den zwei ersteren "\Yortern
ein austroas. Suffix -üla-, bzw. -ala- vorliegen müf3te. :Man muf3 es
bedauern, daf3 Przyluski sieh nieht auf die Bespreehung von liti¡gala-m
besehrankt hat: jetzt maeht del' Aufsatz einen wenig befriedigenden
Eindruck. Suffigierung für die Pra-M:uI,lQ,a-Sprachen anzunehmen.
ist nieht erlaubt, solange ihre Existenz - von vornherein unwahr~
scheinlich - nicht unzweideutig feststeht. Lú'lga-m hat jedenfalls
auszuscheiden! Aus del' Grundbedeutung ,Kennzeiehen' HWt sich
sowohl ,Beweismittel' als ,Phallussymbol' (und weiter ,mannliehes
Glied') durch Bedeutungsspezialisierung erIelaren, wahrend die ent-
gegengesetzte Bedeutungsentwieklung ausgesehlossen ist. Liilga-m
gehort mit aw. hapto,i1'inga- ,Ursa maior' zu del' Gruppe yon
"\Yortern ohne indogermanische Etymologie, die nur dem Indo-
iranischén eigen sind. l An Zusammenhang von UNlgula-m und ltl1'¡-
gala-m ist ebensowenig zu denken. Daf3 das W ort für ,Pflug' auch
sexuelle Bedeutung erhalten kann (die dann sekundar ist), erklart
sieh ohne weiteres aus dem Vorstellungskreis, del' U. a. in ai. ksetra-m
seinen Ausdruek findet. DaI3 andererseits Worter für ,Schwanz'
1 übrigens bilden stJeng k-lau, bahnar k-la o keine Stütze für die An-
nahme von austro lak, ganz abgesehen von der Frage, ob aus lale durch Infigierung
(in der Wurzelsilbe!) lili Mtte entstehen konnen, wie Przyluski annimmt.
20*
153
308 F. B. J. Kuiper. Indoiranica.
309
auch das mannliche Glied bezeichnen konnen, ist aus dem idg. Bemel'kungen losen das Problem nicht kan
auf dem man del' LosunO' nah k ' n.ten aber den \Yeg zeigen,
Sprachgebiet bekannt, vgl. neben nhd. Schwanz auch lato cauda. • v o er ommen wIrd.
Die Bedeutungsübereinstimmung zwischen UU¡güla-m und li1i¡gala-m 1 . . Al. langüla-, ohne Zweifel eine Entlehnun o' .
aSIatlschen Sprache laBt . h '. o aus emer austro-
beruht somit auf Konvergenz, beweist aber nicht ihre Verwandt- , SIC , sowelt Wlr vorlaufi 1
HeranziehunO' von Forme 1\1 1 g se len, nur durch
schaft. o n aus .l. a akka S h
Zugehorigkeit Von sant ku . t . - prac en erklaren (den n
Für lrj¡igüla-m hat Przy1uski schon auí ein vVort hingewiesen, . r IS zu unslcher um et b .
konnen). Wenn d' b , w a s ewelsen zu
das auí Ma1akka und in Indonesien den Schwanz bezeichnet: V gl. le o en vorgeschlao'ene De t cr
ist! gilt fUr sie dasselbe A h f" 1:> d . u U~I:> von kapola- richtig
jareil o'k1¡', radé kü (Journ. As. 1905, 1, 325), auf Ma1akka ekm', k1tr, 'tlrT • uc ur as m mataliga h .
n urzelelement tan liefer 11 - nac gewlesene
ikur, ikul (in Blagdens Liste T 5), malayo ekor, bato ik1w usw, Ob
santo kur ,hinter, nachfolgend' damit identisch ist (Schmidt, Die Mon-
sprechungen. Damit tri~ ::r d:r e:r~~o~~:~akka-Sp~achen die Ent-
geographische EntfernunO' aIs z -'t F °klschen Dlstanz noch die
Khmer-Volker 127), sei dahingestellt. 2 Für die Annahme, daB das E o 1\ eler a 'tor de' VO"n' .
\Vort für ,Schwanz' auch in Vorderindien ursprünglich r hatte, 1a13t l'gebnisse fast unerreichbar erscheinen laBt ~ ~ h 19 slChere
bar mit del' Tatsache zu reeh d n '. oc at man offen-
sich mit mehr Recht hindi lai¡gü1' ,the long-tai1ed b1ack-faced monkey, nen, al.) gerade dIe O' t S
viel altes Sprachgut bewahrt h b 1 " oenann en prachen
the baboon' geltend machen, das sowoh1 in Form als in Bedeutung 3 • r a en. ch mochte daher f" -
eme 'Vermutung vol'traO'en die m" ur campu-Z¡
bemerkenswert ist und (gegenüber lalig1il) eine spatere Eñtlehnung Ai cam _ .0' Ir werugstens erwagensw-ert scheint
unmittelbar aus einer :JYIulJ.Q.a-Sprache sein konnte. . . pu-~ bezeIchnet eine besondere Art d - .
DlChtungen O'ehoren in d 'T' es Kavya, zu del'
Dagegen weicht nicht nur das Sanskrit-vVort mit l ab, sondern o "enen \ erse m kunst II V
die Pali-Entsprechung naliguttha (neben naJigula, lai¡gula) macht ~unstprosa miteinander abwechseln, ohne da;o d~n ers~aBen und
dIe prosaisehe Form d U" b ' le metl'lsche oder
das Problem noch komplizierter. 1m Wb. der Pali Text Society . as ergewlCht hatte' D A d
1st nicht erklart' (Wi t .·t G . , el' us ruck campü
wird vermutungsweise Entstehung aus *nal'¡gu~hya, nañgülya erwogen, 1 d cr • n elm z, esch. del' indo Lit. nI, 374 mit A 3) 1
was nicht befriedigt. Zugrunde liegt eher *nañgu~tha-, wofür sich ~ °oermamsche Herkunft scheint ausgesehlossen Da ...
mehrere morphologische Pal'allelen finden, Z. B. aligu§tha-l¡ ,Daumen' em Wol't cq-mpUl', das auch keine Erklarun cr liefert' E ~ Santah hat
,ersonnen' (cam'YlU1' katha l O ' s edeutet U. a.
(aw. angusto, np. angist, vgl. Pedersen, KZ XXXIX, 393), §aMu§tha-~ • r a om 1'01'a e "hl . h .
zahlung' Oam be11) cr " • • ,rza e me teme ersonnene Er-
VadhS. (Oaland, Act. 01'. IV, 204, 211), máñjilJtha-l),. Dies setzt Boddin cr) B p . ' ~.ewohnhch aber ,scherzen' (Oampbell, Addenda
einen Stamm *laligu- voraus, aus dem sich auch ltlilgüla.-m erklal'en o . oddmg ubersetzt campur katha . . '
Dagegen zeigen aueh in diesem 'Fall d' nut ,Jocular language'.
lal3t, das dann wie kapo-la- gebildet ware. Die Ableitung aus la¡'¡gu-
eine auffallige E t I ' e .!:.e Malakka-Sprachen wieder
ermoglicht es, ein austroas. * laizguT zugrunde zu 1egen, das sich n spree lUng m sakei (Ulu K
campor, cam'Ylor misehen' v ampar) campul', tembi
in mol'pho1ogischel' Hinsicht zu -hIT del' Malakka-Sprachen verhalten r, , seman cr campo' ( » •
selbe Wort ist im Ind .} o cmpu ,verwIrrt'. Das-
wül'de wie *lailgal ,Pflug' zu *kal (khmel' a¡,¡-klíl usw.). Diese oneslsC len bekannt z B l' .
miseht' D' . . , . . ma ay. t.JampU1· O'e-
.
. les 1st eben die Bedeutuncr o'
dl'e man f"
ur cam'Yl- h V lo
1 Wenn überhaupt die Grammatikerangaben zuverlassig sind. Für lartgala-m
mlt Prosa gemiseht' (p ) 2 :rUDO , el'se
w erwartet. DaB das Sanskrit-vYol't, das
ist diese Bedeutung nur voro Trik¡;h).(la:le~a bezeugt.
1 Ebenso Keith, A· Histor .f S '.
2 Vgl. cam aka, ikil, das auch im allgemeinen ,Hinterteil' bedeutet.
unknown sense'.' . y o anskr¡t LIterature (1928) 332: ,a name of
3 Vgl. ai. goZartgllla-/], pa. gonaligula ,eine Affennrt' mit dem Prafix go-, das
t Vgl. tamil kalamba .
aus gorjumbii (godattrf.a-?) U. dgl. bekannt ist. gam ,eme Art geruischte Poesie' (kal- ,mischen').

154
155
 j

310 F. B. J. Kuiper, Indoiranica. 311

a15 nicht ererbtes"ort doch wohl aus dem Austroasiatischen stammt, Yel'bindunO' mit Pra b' 1 B
diese Bedet> t vJer¡ len a s ewegungsverba gebraueht. Es ist
damit identisch ist, laJ3t sich freilieh nicht streng beweisen. Doch u unO' \Ve c le a h ' d "
scheint mir die Übereinstimmung zu auffallend, als daJ3 ich sie ohne wahrt gebliebe:' ist, vgl. n;~ s::an e: n~ull~~~lschen D,ialekten be-
weiteres als eine rein zufallige betrachten mochte. Vielleicht wird Ein nasalinfigiertes P " d" ur. cum, afgh. SVI}l ,gehen'.
I rasen s zu leser 'Vurzel war yon Haus
es bei Erweiterung unserer Kenntnisse del' 1rluI).Q.a-Sprachen einmal gr. 'KlJlV{lCtL ,sich beweO'en' d b' aus
• I ),. b' as e enso WIe die verwandten F .
moglieh seín, die Rypothese dureh mehr Material zu stützen. Das -ü, "l.lJléúJ, 8XLOV und '. , . OImen
, • <TIlVúJ, (J8V0f.UX¿ m eíner del' índoiranischen
das im Sandhi nur vor l' (campur rO) berechtigt .ware, findet sich sprechenden BedeutunO' o bO'eb" raue JI'
1 le
h war. ent-
Ofters in Lehnwortern. .
Neben dieser a11o'e' a melllen
B e d eutUllO'ssphare weist b d
Ob man dieser Erklarung zustimmt odel' nicht, eine auffallende Indlsehe in seiner altesten Pe .od ' b a el' as
Tatsache ist es jedenfalls, daJ3 ein einheimischer Name gerade für nuance auf: an einigen SteU:: d:l~lTIe ganz ~b_weíchende Bedentungs-
·l" . xV. ~k-SaIJ1hlta bedeutet cyávati (-te)
eine so verfeinerte Kavya-Kunst gewah1t worden ist. Dies setzt, wie ,mo d In,) IllS , . " erle setz en, se h a ff en, machen', vglI, 165 10 d (1 d.
mir seheint, die Existenz einer verwandten einheimisehen Literatur- re et: yam cycívam índra íd isa e~arn . h ' n 1a
b 't . ,was le unternehme da'
gattung mit Notwendigkeit voraus. Rat man anfanglich einem emelS ere !Ch, Indra' und IV, 30 22, ' , .!. • ,s
primitiven akhyana-artigen Prototyp diesen Namen beigelegt und ist samaná, indm gópatih ' t!. ,,_'. .' sa gJwd utasl, vrt)'ahant,
, yas a Vlsvam czcyusé du bist h d
er erst spater auí die hohere Kunstform übertragen worden? Sein Kuhbesitzer, VrtratOter lndra del' ., noc erselbe
hast' V 1 h 1 , d u das alles zustande gebracht
ziemlieh spates Vorkommen - nach dem PVV zuerst im Kavyadarsa . g. auc ,48 2 b VIII 45 25 h A
und TrikaJ}.Q.asel?a, also um das 7. Jahrh., wahrend z. B. die Jata- YerwendunO' in diesem " ' " , . uf einstige haufige
, b Smne WeIsen auch die nominalen Ableitun O'
kamalá, die, wenn auch nicht formell, dennoch wesentlich schon ved. cyavana-m und cyautná rn ~..
- ,seIlwlenges Unternehmen Be "h
b en

eine Art eampü ist, um das 4. Jahrh. datiert wird (R. Fick, Festg. Yeranstaltung' hin. ' mu ung,
Jacobi 148) - spricht nieht dafür. Hat man aber den Namen erst Dieselbe Bedeutung weist das Verb . A .
auch h' " '. um 1m westIschen auf und
gewahlt, als diese Kavya-Kunst schon voll entwickelt war, so kann '1 . ler auffalbgerwelSe in den altesten Texten. In den Gatl-
dies nur geschehen sein, weil ihr in den einheimischen Sprachen gl t Sle dann aber aus h 1 . las
3 9 0 A1s B' . 1 d' na ms os, slehe Andreas, Gott, Kaehr. 1931
etwas entspraeh, das, wenn auch nieht gleichwertig, doch wenigstens - . elSple lene Y 33 8' b f - -' ( ,
a voh-' _. " rO.mOl f?'a)voizdüm anSa ta
nicht allzu roh und barbariseh sebien. Deutet dies auf eine gewisse
kulturelle Entwicklung gewissel' Pra-MuJ}.Q.a-Stamme? "\Vie dem aucb
Y

Yerw d
u syavaz mana1iho, nehmt m' V '
die ich betreibe,I wahr'. V'O'I auch
' " ó •
;t"
29' ~~ mAeme ~ngelegenheiten,
<. ueh 1m Aw. hat diese
'

sei, das \Vort campü-~ ist in vie1erlei Hinsicht merkwürdig.

• en ung III emlgen Nomina ihren Ausdruck gefunden ,0'1 0'3 .
syaoman- Tat \iV l' . ' t>' o' TI •
, , el' \:, gJaw. syaoSna- ,"\Verk TatiO'I-el't xxr' k '
9. Eine alte Bedeutung von ved. cyávati. Als T . ' b \. , l \ lr en.
. d 1 erml~~s del' reJigios-poetisehen Sprache hat sich somit
Die allgemeine Bedeutungsspbare von ai. cyávate JaJ3t sich lU en a ten herlJO'en Te X t en eme
' B edeutun O' erha1ten f" "
,
lU de '" Sb b , ur me SIC 1
'1
mit den deutschen Verben ,schwanken, fol'tgehen, sich entfernen,
n Jungeren prachperioden woh1 !caum mehr Be1eO'e nach .
sehwinden, herabfallen' einigermaf.\en umgrenzen. Ebenso kommt die Iassen . Man Wlr 'd
wo
h1
nicht fehlgehen wenn man i d '
o welsen
G
Form asiyava in den altpersischen Aehameniden-Inschriften überaus braueh eine R' d ' .' n lesem e-
",pUl' er uranschen Dichterspraehe zu erkennen oO'laubt ,
haufig VOl' zur Bezeichnung des militarischen 1Iarsehes und werden
im Awestischen die verschiedenen Prasensbildungen 1'on s(y)av- in 1 VgI. dazu Z, nltir. Wb. 140.

156
157
 F. B. J. Kuipel'. Indoiranica. 313
312
von der sieh bekanntlieh aueh sonst Spuren naehweisen lassen in 'iVir Snden hier somit genau dieselbe Bedeutun er wieder weleh
d "It T I : > ' e
den haungen Übereinstimmungen der vedisehen und awestisehen m en. a esten exten des Indoiranisehen gebrauchlich ist. Das
g:rmamsche Verbum, das auf *qiou-ilJ beruht, kann eine alte Iterativ-
poetisehen Diktion.
blldung zur 'iVurzel *qjeu sein.
Interessant ist diese Verwendung vor allem dadureh, daf3 aueh
auf3erarísche Venmndte auf das hohe Alter dieses Wortgebrauehs
10. Vedisch pürdhí, PPJ.ÉW ,geben'.
hinweisen. Zunaehst ist an einige attisehe Prasentia zu erinnern,
" § 1. Seit langem ist es Gemeingut der etymologisehen Worter-
welehe man sehan VOl' langem mit cyávate verbunden hat: 'r8v'rá~w
bucher,
, daf3 ved. pÜ1,tá-rn und pürtí-h. ,Gesehenk , Lohn' mI't gr.8rcoeov
"
(u. a. Plato und Lue.) ,sieh fortwahrend womit besehaftigen', vgl.
't8V'rá~u' (Ji<8VW(!8Í ... , OW'rel{J8L, o~ 08 rpeO)!'rí~8L Hes. und 'rBWct1;wv'
rr8~(!w't"aL zu verbillden sind, vgl. Hirt, Ablaut 83. "\Veitere An~
1

knupfung fehlt aber bisher fül' diese Worter, Boisaeq Diet 't 804
n(!anW 't"8VÓ(-L8Voq;, Evow't"(!l{Jwv Timaeus, Lex. Plato Zugrunde liegt 1. h "' . e ym. ,
verg ele t gr. ~8íew (,faire que qc. parvionne a qn. ou qq. part
ein Verbalnomen *'!8V't"Óq;, worauf die Glossen 'r8v'rfi' 't"8XV&~8L und
pr,ocul'er, fourlllr')" aber ratew enthalt eine anit-\Vul'zel, die mi~
d'!8V'!wg.1 drpeov'!L(J'!wg Hes. hinweisen. Auf eine nominale m-Bildung
né:n:(!w'raL,
" •
pürtá-m nieht vereinbar ist. 2 Fiek ' verl
'l:>'
\Yb • 2 118 , ,el
- 'b an d
(vgl. gaw. syaoman-) geht dagegen atto 't"8vf-Lctof-LaL (bei Antimachos,
8nOeOV mlt ved, pípa1,ti, das neben ,fullen' naeh den 'iYorterbüehe n
vgl. 'r8vf-Léi't"aL' 't"8xvá~8L Hes.) zuruek.
aueh ,reiehlieh spenden, verleihen' bedeutet, wogeeren Ourtius Grundrz
Eine vlel treffendere Parallele laf3t sieh aber im Germanisehen
g.r Et
!m. 4. 283 ,anfuhrte,
" daf3 der Nebenbegriff 1:>"
del' Reichlichkeit
naehweisen. vVeil hiel' i naeh anlautendem Konsonanten sehwand
den g~leehls~hen 'iVo.rt~rn ganz fehle, Übrigenswar diese Erklarung
_ eine Annahme, die ieh an anderer Stelle naher zu begrUnden
aueh m lautlreher Hmsleht unhaltbar, so daf3 Fiek sie spater (14 476)
hoffe _, muf3te *qi w - lautgesetzlieh als heu- erseheinen, das in dem
2 aufgegeben hato Doeh lag Fieks Vermutung ein unverkennbar ric~tio-er
sehwaehen Zeitwart aislo heyja, ags. hégan vorliegt. Wie im Indisehen
wird es aueh hier oft von Streit, Heldentaten u. dgl. gebraueht. V gl.
~edanke zugrunde. J~denfalls bestand für das indische Spraehgef~hl
em Zusammenhang z.wlsehen pÜ1,tá-rn, pÜ1'tí-Z¿ und dem Prasens pn¡áti
z. B. Helgakv. Hundingsb. 44 (47) gunni at heyja ,Kampf zu fUhren'
- weleher Natur dIeser war, ob ursprüno-lieh oder sekundar
oder Beow. 503 sqq.:
fOl' pon pe he ne úae pret ámig óael' man
vorlaufig dahingestellt bleiben. Vgl. Z. B. is
X, 107, 3 ab : ,mag
daív'i pÜ1·tÚ' dák§i1.üi devayajyá
Ú'fl'e rnóJl'aa pon má middangeal'des
ná kavii1'íbhyo nahí té p¡¡,lánti
gehédde under heofenum 'jJonne he sylfa
,die dak~i:Q.a, diese gottliehe Gabe dieses Opfer fUr die G"tt (d' )
,weil er (Unfera) nieht gonnte, daf3 irgendein anderer Mann je mehr nieht d
~ en
G' '. ' er, lent
eI2ílgen,' denn solehe geben niehts' (siehe Oldenbel'g,
°
Heldentaten verrichtete auf Erden als el' selbst'.
:\.oten) oder TS I, 2, 3, 2 má pn¡án pÜ1,tyá ví riidhi. Berechtigt
1Konjektur von Vossius für das überlieferte chnw,. dle,s UDS, aueh pr1.1áti in der Bedeutung ,geben' auf die 'iVurzel *P1'O
2 Die traditionelle Verknüpfung mit gr. UXEiío" aksl. p¡·'ékutiti ,zieren, (nérceWr:aL) zu beziehen? Bisher hat man an seiner Identitat mit
schmücken', cech. skutek ,Tat, Wirkung' (Zupitza, Germ. Gutt. 122, vgl. Boisacq 874,
1 Waldes Alternativvorsehlag (Lat. et Wb 2 -63) k 1 ..
Berneker I, 654, Walde, Vgl. Wb. I, 130, n, 546) ist in morphologischer Hinsicht gangen werden. .". . . '. ;) ann a s wertlos uber-
uuwahrscheinlích (semasiologisch líeBe sich allenfalls got. taujan ,tun' : ud!. tooien
2 Daran .. d
,schmücken' vergleicheu), Verwandtschaft mit aisl. hZggva usw. ,hauen' (Fick In" 66, . . an ern aue h Perssons Betraehtungen (siehe Beitr. id .... Wortf 641'.
1m wesenthehen niehts. o· ..'
Falk-Torp.Davidsen 426) jedenfalls abzulehnen.

159
158

314 F. B. J. Kuiper.
prr;¡áti ,füllell' níe gezweifelt und ,geben' aus einer pragnanten Be-
deutung ,anfüllen, vollpacken mit, mit vollen Handen spenden,
reichlieh spenden' el' klart (siehe Geldner, 81ossar); tatsaehlich schien
del' altind. Sprachgebrauch diese Ansicht zu stützen (siehe unten § 5).
Es lohnt sieh, dennoch etwas naher auf die Frage einzugehen.
§ 2. proáti ,geben' 1tnd P1'1.1áti ,jüllen¡ nieht identisch.
siehtlieh del' Frage, ob die zwei Prasentia prr;¡áti als identiseh zu
betraehten sind, ist zuerst darauE hinzuweisen, daJ3 den beiden
zugehorigen Nominalformen pÜ7"r;¡á-~ ,voH' und pÜ7·tci-m ,Lohn' nur
je eine del' zwei Bedeutungen eigen ist,l und dieselbe Erscheinung
tritt bei den anderen Nominalbildungen auí: ved. páp(71)7'i-~, von
Roth und Geldner (81oss.) gleichíalls von pr ,füHen' abgeleitet,
bedeutet nur ,freigebig, spendend'. Beide Bedeutungen stehen ohne
irgendwelehe vermittelnde Nuance nebeneinander. Nun konnte man
freilieh bei den nominalen Ableitungen noch an sekundare Bedeutungs-
spezialisierung denleen, aber auch beim Verbum laJ3t sich kein
Bindeglied zwischen beiden Bedeutungen nachweisen. An den Stellen,
wo ,geben' zu übersetzen ist, HiJ3t sich eine Nebenbedeutung ,füllen'
nur in ganz gezwungener vVeise, meistens aber überhaupt nicht
hineininterpretieren. Oh leommt prr;¡áti ,gibt' in Verbindung mit
pra yacchatí (l;lS 1, 42, 9'; X, 107, 4° vgl. 3 ed ; AS XVIII, 4, 2g e)
oder mit dádati (l;lS 11, 30, 7 e) vor, offenbar in fast derselben
Bedeutung. 2 Ein 10'aftigerer Beweis ergibt sich aber aus del' Tat-
sache, daJ3, wahrend das Prasens prr;¡áti beide Bedeutungen aufweist,
in den anderen 'rempora del' Bedeutungsunterschied mit formellen
Verschiedenheiten verbunden ist. So bedeuten die Aoriststamme pra-
una pras- nur ,füllen', PÜ7'- dagegen nur ,geben', so daJ3 beide Aoriste
nebeneinander stehen konnten, ohne daJ3 irgendein MiCverstandnis
zu befürchten war, vgl. l;lS 1, 42, 9' b sagdhí pürdhí prá yaT{tsí ca
1 Ohne Grund nimmt Geldner, Glossar 113", iür pürtH!, das er von pí'
,füllen' ableitet, neben ,Lohngewlihrung' eine zweite Bedeutung ,Lohnerfüllung'
(in VI, 13, 6 e) ano
2 Freilich auch P!,1.1ásva ,fülle' neben práyaccha VS 5, 19.
160
Indoiraniea. 315
sis¡,hí p1'ásy 1tdá1'am ,b emu"11 d'le,
h gl'b'm Fülle 1 und spende, gib
emen Ansporn, fülle den Bauch' (Geldner).
N eben diesen formeHen Unterschieden, die mit del' übliehen
Annahme, naeh weleher es si eh nur um eine einzige vVurzel handelt,
kaum v~reinbar sind, laf3t sich aber weiter noch ein schwerwiegendes
syntaktlsehes Bedenken gegen Identitat beider Verba geltend machen:
prr;¡áti ,geben' wird ganz wie dádati u. dcrl.
b konstruiert , z . B • 11 • 3(\el,'~e
Hin-
yó me pn.ád ,'wer mil' gibt', 1, 23, 21" pr1./ttá bhe~ajám ,spendet
eure Arzenei'.
\Vil' haben somit statt drei \Vurzeln pr (Whitney, Roots 100
zuletzt Chatterji, Z11 IX, 39) vielmehr deren vier anzunehmen:
Indessen muC dies jetzt noeh naher am Material nachgewiesen werden.
§ 3. pürdhí 1m7' ,gib',. apárat. Zuerst moge hiel' del' alte
Imperativ pül'dhí besprochen werden, del' als versteinerter Rest
eines yorhistorischen athematischen Paradigmas nur noch in del'
l;lksa:qlhita - und auch hiel' nur in einer einzigen Form - Yor-
kommt, den jüngeren Sa:qlhitas aber 'sehon fremd ist.
DaJ3 in l;tS X, 73, 11 ed
ápa dhvantám Ü1'1.lUhí pü7'dhí cák$1l1',
rnum1tgdhy asmiÍn nidháyeva baddhán
,decke auí das Dunkel, gib uns das Vermogen, (klar) zu sehen.
befreie uns, die wir wie in einero Retz gefangen sind' die Bedeutun;
,geben' vorliegt, ist klar (,schenke' Roth, Grassmann). Ludwigs Übe:-
setzung ,fülle das Auge' gibt keinen befriedigenden Sinn. In YIIL
6~ ,~7~), l~ed dinásy~ va magltavan sámbhrtasya va pürdhí yát'asy~
kaswa bezleht LudwIg pürdhí auf háste in b: ,fülle ... sie Getreides'.
Dafür. lieCe si eh allerdings VS 5, 19 7lbhá hí hásttl vás1tna pr7J. ásv a.
verglelChen. Aber del' Genitiv, nach Yerba des Füllens immer sehr
gebrauehlich, kommt im Vedischen auch bei Verba des Gebens und
Nehmens VOl' (Delbrüek, Synt. Forseh. IV, 40, Speyer, Ved. Skr.
. 1 ,in FüIle' fügt Geldner überaIl auf Grund vermeintlicher Verwandtschaft
mlt pr ,füllen' hinzu.
161
 I

F. B. J. Kuiper. Tndoiraniea. 317

316
del' Übel'setzung ,gib mil' eine Handvoll, du Gaben- Aber noeh eÍne andere Schlu13folgerung ergibt sieh aus dem
Synt. 19), so da13 1t (?) Gerste' (so mit Roth Ergebnis, da13 pÜl'dhí nur ,geben' bedeutet, denn damit falIt die
b 'tt oder O'esamme el' .
reieber, abgesc m ener b "b r b . d VII 24 6ab Grundlage für 'Vackernagels Vermutung, daG in ~S T, 143, 6b
nd Grassmann) niehts im vVege steht. A n le Slll "
hwít ... kámam avál'at ,wird er unsern 'Yunscb erfüllen?' avá1'at
u evá na ind1'a vá?'yasya pÜl'dhi,
ein Fehler für apárat sei (Festg. Jaeobi 9). Xach 'Yackernagel lage
pl'á te mahirrt sumatírrt vevidama
dann in párat der zu pürdhí gehorige Konjunktiv vor. Doch steht
G t oO'en wir deiner grol3en Spenden dieser Annahme, so besteehend sie auf den ersten Bliek seheinen
,gib uns so, Indra, kostbares ,u, m b. fülle') und VIII, 84 (95), 4 ed
teilbaft werden' (Rotb ,spende, Gr. L .. , mag, .vi eles entgegen: Erstens ist párat nur eine ersehlossene Form,
suvtl'yasya gómato die nirgends in der altind. Literatur vorkommt und wofür sich aueh
l'ayás pürdhi maháfí asi im Altiranisehen keine Entspreehung naehweisen la13t. Zweitens kann
t Sobne nebst Rinder und Reiehtum, 'Vaekernagels Berufung auf pÜl'dhí, selbst wenn man die Bedeutungs-
sebenke uns eine Sehar gu el' VII 4 6 ( 0'1 I 129 7. frage auGer Betraeht laGt, nieht als bereehtigt anerkannt werden,
, .' 13" '-yáh Genitiv ist wegen " Vo " "
du blst Ja gro ," o la
III, 26, 3; YII, 16, 12;
ix 11 9) Dal3 an dieser Stelle die Be-
, " . X 122 4 d
weil es sieh hierbei um einen erstarrten TermÍnus der liturgisehen
, . bt füllen' (Ludwig) vorhegt, 1ehrt , , Spraehe handelt, der in der lebenden Sprache del' rgvediseben
deutung ,geben, me , ' , d G tt del' dem Spendenden Periode sehon langst del' Neubildung proáti (K1iheres unten § 4) hatte
pl'7}ánta rrt devám p]'1.wte suvíryam ,en o,
weiehen müssen. Da13 sieh neben dem Spraehfossil pÜl'dhí in der
He1denkraft gewahrt'. , f t spaten Periode des ersten MaJ,l¿¡ala, und zwar in einem ganz jungen
·· ,"{TIII 95 4 d die Bedeutung , ,sehenken es,
Steht a bel' f ur v , " b d t O"b Lied (Arnold, Ved. M. 273), noeh ein Konjunktiv párat erhalten
36 12 a l'ayás pÜl'dhi svadhavo e eu en: '0 1
dann muG aueh I, 'l' h '1 Ob Gen SO' oder Akk. Pl. vorliegt, hatte, ist kaum denkbar. 1
uns Reiebtum, Se1bstherr le el'. . o'
Aueh hier wird woh1, wie bei so zahllos vielen vermeintliehen
HiGt sieh nieht entscheiden. , h d'
b 'für Emendationen der ~S, am überliefel'ten Text festzuhalten zu sein.
.A f I 42 9&, wo die Bedeutung ,ge en , . ' h le
pÜ1'dht durc
u '.' , . und den GeO'ensatz zu pl'ast gesle ert Del' Anklang an avára~ ,du hast erwahlt' VIII, 13, 21 a; 19, 300 fallt
Verbindung mIt pra ya'T[Lst . ° auf, hilft freilich nieht weitel'. Bemerkenswert ist l\Ihbh. 13, 90, 47b,
.lS t , wurde oben (§ 2) sehon hingewlesen. wo unter den unnützen Gaben erwahnt werden:

In spracbO'esehieht1icher Hinsieht ist die Wurzel~exion, di; tatha dattarrt nal'tane gayane ca,
° 1
sieh in pÜl'dhí noeh erha ten a,
b t darum besonders lllteressan,
. d G del' yar¡~ can]'te dak§Í?lam aV}"l,lOti
. E " g unO'en anzunehmen 1st, a
weil auf Grund allgemelller rwa . '" d s auf einen athe- ,sodann dasjenige, was bei Sang und Tanz ,"ersehenkt worden und
. d d . chis che aorlstuS seeun u
aL a-Aonst un el' gne . V f D' .dO' Nasal- die dakE}iJ,la, welehe man einem Unwürdigen gewahrt' (KIlak. apiit1'e
. rückO'ehen (slehe er., le 1 o'
matisehen FlexlOnstypus zu. b 1 "í o. O'enüber l!XA.VOV noch p1'ayacchati, apl' iti supatham). Aber auch diese Stelle mit unsieherer
. 76 ) Eb so Wle z. B. gr. Xl'vt'if~ geb
praSentla sq.. en 1 . h d pü1,dhí ZU 0'1' l!7tOeov. Lesart kann die rgvedische Form nicht erlautern.
den alteren Typus vertritt, verha t SIC ve. °.
. und Oldenberg, SBE 46, 32; ,hliufe die 1 Das aw. Partizip fi·ant· ,fUIlend', das zu einem athemat. Prasens gehOren
1 ,füUen' nach Grassmann, Lu dWlg kann, kann fUr diese Konjektur natürlich keine Stütze biIden.
Schiitze an' Geldner.

162 163
318 F. B. J. Kuiper. Indoiraniea,
319
l\1an hat wohl auszugehen von a l'1Joti in 1, 30, 15 bo el kámar¡¡ Besonders haun ocr l'St d as P al'tIzlp
" }J,1'I,lán, III d el' R"
1 1 .'::; mít Aus-
jaritrlyim n¡ÓI' ,(indem) du auf den Wunsch der Sanger eingehst' na lme Von 1, 11, 11 ¡mmer in der BedeutunO'
' hb d o ,Ereígehig', so neben
(Geldner) und V, 74, 5 0d g1elc e eutendem pápw'i-h 1 125 4 0d Oft
AS 1 b
" ,. substantiviseh z, B,
yúva yád'i krtháZ¿ púnar , 27, 4 vdlwtar¡L Ptl.lató grhán ,carry to the house of the
á kámam 1'TJve vadhval¿ bestower', VI, 142, 3 e pl'l,iánto ákoitah. sal/tu ,thy
~ bestowers be
,als ihr (die Asvin) ihn wieder jung machtet, befriedigte el' die unexhausted', vgl. TS 1, 2, 3, 2 u, o, ..
Begierde seiner Gattin'.l Daneben ware als Aorist kámam el arat Das Prasens prnáti 'd E b
, , , ', Wlr o t a solut venyendet: RS I 12- - b
zu erwarten, was aber unerlaubten Hiat ergeben würde. Nun hat ya(l prlJ.att sá ha devésu gacchati' n 30 7 o ' ', ' D, O
yo, m"b o'dh at' VI 47 15a ' ¡, , - ' " yo me prnild
., yó dádad
sich aber zwischen rlJ.óti und vrlJ.óti eine semantisehe Konvergenz , " ca 't~ stavat kci(l ]J}'I,lat kó yajate (E I h
entwickelt, insoweit vi 1'lJ.oti und apa l'1Joti die Bedeutung der ent- Gl'assmann: ,sattigt'); X, 107, 4 0 (vgl. AS XVIII 4 99'e)' , a ~c .
,' , 7, , , ,- ye ]J1'1wnü
sprechenden Zusammensetzungen von vl'lJ-oti angenommen haben (siehe P,1a c~ yacc 1~llt¡ sar¡lgarné; X, 117, 5 a prtHyád ín nádlwmilnaya ;á'vyan
Cm CInem Lled über die F . b' k '
aueh Renou, Parfait 30 A. 1). Offenbar hat dieses Verhaltnis den '" rClge 19 eIt, dessen StichW'orter dádati
un d prtw,t¡ smd),
Dichter ,on 1, 143 zum vVagnis einer Augenblicksbildung avál'at
statt i'i árat veranlal3t. Ein auf3eres nfel'kmal Yon pl'náti O'eben' ist ( b d
von p" b') , "0 ne en em FehIen
. ,raver la der Kasusgebrauch, del' ganz mit dem 1-on dádati "b
§ 4. PTIJ-áti ,geben'. D'I3r Wurzelaorist, zu dem pürdhí gehort hat, emSÍlmmt; ein Akkusativ oder Dativ schlie13t d' B d u er-
ist sehon in vorgesehichtlicher Zeit aul3er Gebrauch geraten. Für aus, z, B. RS X 117 9 d ' __ ' " le e eutung ,füllen'
, , ' , , Jnatí Clt santau ná samám J?J'nUah aucll
alle Formen auf3er dem Imperativ verwenden die alteren Sarp.hitas zwel dIe V dt' d ., "
, " erwan ,e sm , geben nicht das gleiche' AS XX 127 lId
ein Prasens pl'lJ.áti, das von Prt!iíti ,füllen' del' Form nach nur insoweit SW'va ü te p' - d '7,' d " ,
21.la an,¿ ,Je er Geizige (?) wird dir schenken' I 23 '21" b
yerschieden ist, dal3 es keiner Komposition fahig ist. Das Prasens ist (= X 9 7 a b AS 1 6 3 a b) .L " ,
, '" " apa~ pnütá bhe§ajám, várfltham tanv'
natürlieh eine einzelsprachliche Neubildung: nicht nur hat keine der mama (,bestow'), Jlfit Genitiv wohl aueh VII 6- 4 od , ' e
,D, '
verwandten Sprachen ein entspreehendes Nasalprasens, sonclern aueh
p1'áti vtlm át1'a vá1'am ti jdnaya
aus allgemeinen morphologischen Gründen ist ein hohes Alter für ein
pnütám udnó divyásya cdroZz,
na- Prasens zu einer VV urzel *PI'O (nén:Qon;at) ausgeschlossen. 2
In e ist woh1 mit OldenberO' Note '"l7 b
Auch im Prasens P1'l.láti ist der Wurzel pr kein langes Leben d 13 ' o' n, em \ el' um zu erganzen, so
a dIe Padas selbstandige Satze biIden' Euch f '1 h b'
beschieden gewesen, Zwar ist es sehr gebrauchlieh in del' :B,S, findet zum B " ru e le 1 el' el
si eh auch noeh in AS und TS, aber in del' VS ist es bereits aus eS,ten der Jlfenschen, spendet (uns) vom liebIiehen, himmlischen
W asser,
clem Spraehleben gesehwunden, so dal3 weiter nur pürtá-m noch die
Erinnerung an die alte idg. \V urzel *pro bewahrt. 3 , Die zwei letzterwahnten Stellen sind aueh in formelle' H' 'h
lllteressant w'l ' d' 1 1 lllSle t
, el sle le mperati vformen p1'llitám d
1Vgl. Grassmann, Geldner, Gloss. und tlbers. zu l, 30, 15. haIt d" , '. un Pl'FUá ent-
en, le m CInem Suppletivverhaltnis zu pZl1'dhí stehen müssen,l
21\.hnliches gilt bekanntlich auch für p!''Qáti ,füllen' (Wzl. ple).
3 Mit iip!,'Qoti, nach Nílakal).tha die gute Lesart in Mhbh. 13, 90, 47 1 Der Bedeutungsunterschied zwischen Pr" ,
(= p¡'ayaahati), ist nichts anzufangen; ¡ilteres Pl'1;liiti steht irnmer ohne Prüvcrbium indischen auBerhalb des l, d'k t' b asens und Aonst spielt iro Alt-
Delbriick, AL Synt "73 B n ¡ a ¡VS ekanntlich keine erkennbare Rolle, V¡;l.
und -noti für üIteres -niiti würe gegen die allgemeine Tendenz der Sprache (Wacker-
28 A, 2, ,~ , rugmann, Grundr, IP, 3, 824, Renou, BSL XXXIII,
nagel, Festg, Jacobi 2),

164
165
 Indoiranica. 321
320 F. B. J. Kuiper.
prajaya ma pasubhi1' a P?'lJ.a ,fülle mich mit Nachk h f
Weil pürdhí von der AS an nieht mehr gebrauehlieh ist, lieGe sieh Vieh' (Caland). ommense a t und
seitdem an seiner Stelle p'fl.1ihi erwarten. 1m Refrain von AS XVII,
. ~pates. pÜ1'ayati ,mit Gaben übe~haufen, beschenken' im Katha-
6-19 und 24 tvcír¡~ na~ PTlJ.ihi pasúbhir visvárüpai~ Mnnte man das
santsagara 1st aber kaum eine Fortsetzung dieses Gebrauchs so d
korrupte l\Ietrum sogar als Stutze anfuhren fUr die Vermutung, dal3 wohl . P , n ern
~lt W IV, 473 aus der klassischen Bedeutung ,überschütten'
hier altes pürdhí dureh die jUngere Form ersetzt worden sei (so
abzuleIten.
Whitney und Lanman). Der Instrumental sehlieJ3t aber hiel' diese
Mogliehkeit aus: die Stelle ist also wie ApSS 24, 12, 9 prajaya ma
. § ,6. píparti nie ,geben'. Auch für pípa1'ti ,füllt' hat man üfters
pasubhir a ptl}-a u. dgl. (vgl. unten § 5) zu beurteilen. eme Bedeutun'" "'ebe'
• . b 'b n angenommen, wozu erstens natürlich die
Das thematische Prasens pT1.wti, das seit urindoiraniseher Zeit
~nalogle . mIt p?'1J.áti, das beide Bedeutungen zu haben schien, und
an die Stelle des urspraehlichen "I.¡V urzelprasens getreten ist, seheint
dIe kl:sslsehe Verwendung von pürayati (siehe oben), zweitens die
nur in del' Bedeutung ,fullen' gebrauehlich gewesen zu sein. Dal3
~nsehemen~ analogen Bedeutungsverhaltnisse bei p1'c (z. B. T, 47, 8"
ti pr1J. ati allein im Pada ti tlÍ SÜ7'í~ P?'1.wti t{¿tujano VI, 37, 5 ,ver-
d

~:am p.rñcanta .'~peisegen~J3 in Fulle gebend', Geldner) und sehlieil-

leihen, gewahren' bedeutet, wie Ludwig und Grassmann in bewuGter heh dIe TradltlOn der mdisehen Kornmentatoren AnlaG b
Abweichung vom g-leichlautenden Pada VI, 29, 5° (wofür Oldenberg, hab D' S gege en
en mago le aehlage war hier aber yom AnfanO' an beso d
Noten, zu vergleiehen ist) Ubersetzen, ist daher unannehmbar. An r • l l' . t> n ers
,derwlC d'ce t,h msoweIt an mehreren Stellen die dunkle A us d rue I '
CSWeIse
beiden Stellen liegt die Bedeutung ,fullen' VOl'.
el' ve lse en Texte aueh eine Abgrenzung gegenüber del' Formen-
gruppe
6 von ' píparti ,führt hinaus ' l'ettet' reeht sehWlerw . . mach t.
§ 5. püryáte, püráyati nur ,jilllen', Weil die Verbalformen fters zwe~feln aueh die indisehen Kommentatoren, welcher d:r beiden
von P7; ,geben' nur noeh in den altesten Sarp.hitas vorkommen, ist '"\Vurzeln eme bestirnmte Form zuzuweisen sei. So g'ibt MahIdh
es a priori unwahrseheinlich, daG in der spateren Literatur noch zu VS .18, 57 t§. . t'o agmr , '
áhutal¡ pipa7'tu na istám havíh f l ara d
E 'lel'.. ... . o gen e
hierher gehorige Formen nachweisbar seien. Eine Stelle wie SB 14, 1 _arung : agm1' asmakam abhila§ita7(l. pürayatu dadatv ity a1'thah'
5, 1, 15 sá yá etám evám uplÍste pi¡ryáte prajáya pasúbhir, wo der asman p-l a aya tv ~'t't va; p1'- palanapü7'a1.layo~ lot (vol Dhatup, 25 4). 1,
Gedanke an ein Passivum ,beschenkt werden' aufkommen konnte, be- Vt>"'1 • aueh den m . d'lse h en }7~ommentar zu pipa1·tana b TS II ' 4 3 .9
ruht auf del' besonderen Bedeutungsentwieklung von pÜ1'yáte apyá- = (anders . . 1"
zu RS 156 .3) A h"
uc moderne Ubersetzer sind ' üfters
, , in
yate ,sehwillt an,l wird reieh an'. Die Stelle lal3t sieh demnach Zwelfel, vgl. Whitney-Lanmall zu AS IX, 10, 23 und XII, 1, 12,2
mit E-S X, 8, 20 AS XVIII, 3, 17 e uSW. apyáyamanaQ p1'ajáya dhánena
d
vergleichen. V gl. auch E-S 1, 64, 14 • • • 1 Bezeichnend für die ganz willkürlichen Bedeutungsbestimmun en der

In kausativer Bedeutung erseheint daneben pÜ1'ayati in TS 111, mdlschen ~omme~tat~ren ist .M:ahídharas Erklarung von VS 5, 34. g
2
_ Fur Zwelfel 1St übrigens an diesen Stellen kaum Raum' IX 10 23d
2, 5, 5 uSW. apfl.1'Y a stlzá ma pürayata prajáya ca dhánena ca, (- ~S I, 152, 3 d ) rtá¡¡t pípa¡·ti kann nur ,schützen' bedeuten (vgl z B' UT 'k ' 1
SañkhSS 8, 8, t1 apu1'a sta ma prajaya pasubhir pürayata und FestO' Jac b' 12) W . . . n ac erna"e
o. o l . egen pipa¡·tu XII 1 1'> 0'1 t " •
a VII 20 40 té _.~ , , ~'", un en S. 325 A. 2. Auch in
sogar ap¡'1).ati in Sii.ilkhSS 1, 15,16 ApSS 24, 12, 9 apT1.lO 'si sar¡1pr1J. l,! d' 'B ; na no.. yaJná¡¡t piprhi (Wh-L ,therewith fiU our sacrifice') lieCft wohl
d le13 d'e eutung ,schutzen'
, _ .ya~ñá
vor- (vgl " ¡¡tpa- .. R~ "
,::' III,9,6; VI, 40, 5): ,dadurch
a em Name lelcht anzurufen ist , . . sollst du unser Op fer schützen' (weg '
1 So vom wachsenden Mond neben iipüryate Kii~V. SB I, 1, 3, 1 u. o. (vgl.
yat ••• tena siehe Delbrück, Altind. Synt. 583). en
(jpfl¡'yamá¡.lapal.:~e usw.) auch ápyáyate $aQ,v. Br. 4, 6, 1. Acta orientalia XVI, 21

167
166
322 F. B. J. Kuiper.
Indoiranica.
323
D' k am~en m . den mo dernen ÚbersetzunO'eno derjenigen Stellen,
bedeutet píparti nur ,füIlen', nie ,schwellen machen' O. dgl. Es liegt
lS rep ben' vorlieO't deuten schon auf den
wo angeblich die Bedeutung ,ge " . o , In RS VI 60, 12 also wohl pípa1·ti ,schützen, bewahren, fordern' VOl', das der Wurzel
unsicheren Charakter dieser Erklarung hm. . ,
pi, pya - auf piprtam neben á pyayantam in 1, 93, 12 wurde schon
td no vdjavatír í~a hingewiesen - begrifflich nahe genug steht,1
a§iÍn piprtarn árvataZ¡ 2
Die zweite SteIle, wo man píparti durch ,geben' übersetzt
índram agnír¡¡, ca vó~have hat, ist ~S I, 166, 68b
d Ludwig einstimmig ,schenken, yüyá7(t na, ugl'a mal'utal¡., sucetúniÍ-
übersetzen zwaJ' Grassmann un t h dem entO'eO'en. Erstens
'b h ere Bedenken s e en o o ri§tagramal¡ 8umatím pipartana.
spenden, a el' me r " k' RS I 93 12 ab : ágn'i,§oma.
d' V b' d nO' mit árvatah zuruc lO, , ,
kehrt le , er m u .!.o ayantam usr¡ya . ,_ havy asúdah. , wo die Bedeutung Auch in dieser Verbindung wechselt piparti mit pinvati, vgl. AS VII,
tám
pipr arvato na, a py hl en ist (palayatam 20, 4, wo der (stark abweichende) Paippalada-Text Folgendes hat:
de~~an~n
Zusammenhang ausgesc oss
,geben' durch "ttigt Ludw., helft durch Gdn.), besonders tena tva7(t sumati7(t devy asma
Say., lasset gedel, en r., .sa _ _ antam wichtig ist. Auch in Ver- i§a7(t pinva vi§vavara7[l suviram.
aber der Parallehsmus mlt a pyay .. G ann und
. , i arti nicht dle lhm von rassm Die Übersetzung der ~S-Stelle ist davon abhangig, wie man sumatí-l¡.
bindung mlt u}a~ kann p P b d die AotÍstform par§at in
d . b' O' 1 oO'te Bedeutung ha en, enn 7) auffaI3t. Nimmt man es hiel' als Bezeichnung der gottlichen Gunst,
Lu WIg eloed e d ' _ .táh süríh (Naheres unten § .
ns I 186 3 ísa§ ca par§a angu1.. _ . h dann kommt man zu Úbersetzungen wie ,spendet uns WohlwoIlen'
.... , , . . ,
schlieI3t Zusammenhang mIt ptpar ~ , t' füllen' (Aor. Sto pras-,
_) pra,
1
Sle e (Ludw.) o.der ,schenket uns wolrlwollend eure Gnade, eure Fülle'
. 6) d - O'eben' (Aor. Sto pur- aus. (Geldner). Bekanntlich kann das Wort aber auch eine Handlung
Oertel, Festg. Jacobl 2 o er pr 'o. . m Verbum des Gebens
Neben haunger Verbindun :::
oder Bringens 2 kommt oft auch p ,
g
in i
;8::
: _
als stehender Ausdruck
'nvatam VI 63, 8 b
oder Haltung Von seiten des Menschen bezeichnen, in welchem Falle

B I 34 3 ed t1'ír vájavati1' ~§o asvma ... p~ "" 1 Roth hat für einige StelIen eine BedeutungsentwickIung ,füUen' > ,s1ittigen,
vor, Z. . , , ' - m U 34 8 maroto ... dhenur na nahren, aufziehen' angenommen, aber fast überalI handeIt es sich um piparti
dhenúr¡¡, na í§am pinvatam asakra '. 'VI' 39 5. VU 24 6; 99, 6 ,schützen', so ganz klar AS XII, 1, 12 parjányal¡, puá aá u nal¡, pipartu ,P. ist
'sam Vgl weIter , " , ,
sí§ve ... ptnva e ... ~..
. t Vater, der soU uns schützen' (,Gedeihen schenken', Lindenau, Festg. Jacobi 250).
VgI. V, 28, 5 b agníl¡, pipa/·tu neben a: bhf¡m~ tua piUu; ebenso VI, 53, 1 b pipa/.tu
. A d k pipyúsím ísam. Es liige
1! k menden us ruc ~.
und den haung vor om , t' füllen' zu neben piUu in d; V, 28, 2 d parayanta, weiter z. B. VS 5, 34; 18, 57; 29, 38 =
h 11{ I30' be dieser Stellen an ptpar t ,
nahe genug, nac J.ya oa 'h _ -h IX 93 3& ge- 1,tS VI, 75, 1. Die übersetzung ,füUen' (so fragendWhitney) ist hier ausgeschlossen._
denken - Wle . uta, pra' pip ya ádhar ag nyaya. _ ,, , dhar , X
.!. Auch dort, wo von Mutter und Kind die Rede ist, ist an der Bedeutung ,sehützen'
d Kuh' steht neben pur?J-am u , festzuhaIten, Z. B. AS V, 26, 5 matéva putl·á7Jl. piprtehá yuktdl¡, (verfehIt Whitney
schwollen ist das Euter el' (. h ben) dem entO'egen. Úbrigens ,as a mother her son, 1m ye here, joined'), wofür n, 28, 50 mátévéiama Adite .fárma
100, 11 o - , stünde nicht par§at Sle e o b
yaccha ,gewahre ihm, A. wie eine Mutter Schutz' und besonders Prasn. Up. 2, 13
mateva putran /'a~aaua zu vergleichen ist. VgI. übrigens die Konkordanz unter
·t Unrecht Grassmann, Wb.778 . UnrichtiO' übersetzt
AS IX 1 20 d téno 8é~am Ülj a1lt
b b , •
1 Zweifelnd, a er mI V miiteva put/·a7Jl. bibhrtapsv ff., dazu WackernageIs Bemerkung über den WechseI von
. d "b' ns ganz dunkeln ers , , 2"
auch Whitney m em u rige f h . t' VgI besonders 1,tS IX, 63, pr und bhr in der Bedeutung ,bewahren' (Festg. J acobi 11; siehe auch OIdenberg zu
pipa¡·ti ,with this it lavishes good (and) re res men. .
VII, 33, 14). Wie AS XII, 1, 12 erkIart sich auch IX, 1, 50 tá1ltjatá7Jl. táru1,l 7Jl. piparti
íqam iÍl:jam ca pinuaae und VI, 70, 6". h t-t 96 8 rli8ate nI, 53, 1 i a
2 Z. B. VIII, 43, 15 dehi, I, 48, 15 prá yace a a " , matti (unrichtig Whitney ,filIs'), ebenso 1,tS I, 156, 3 b pipa/.tana (,heget' GeIdner).
b
Wegen píparti I, 46, 4 vgI. dagegen OIdenberg, Noten, S.46 A.!.
V, 79,8; _ x', 40, 4 (a) vaho, I, 12, 11 á bhal·a.
2 Den dunkeIn Vers AS IX, 1,20 (siehe oben) Iassen wir weiter auBer Betracht.
21*
168
169
 Indoiranica. 325
324 F. B. J. Kuiper.
1
áti va' yo mm,uto rnanyate
, no
es ungeHihr mit ,Gebet' übersetzt werden kann. Die Paippalada-
b?'áhrna va yá~ k?'iyárnanam nínitsiit
Stelle, wo letztere Bedeutung gemeint sein mul3, legt auch für den
tápü'f]~l}i tásrnai vljináni '8a~tu
in Frage stehenden E-S-Vers diese Auffassung nahe. Vgl. Grassmann
brahrnadví§am abhí tá1]l socatu dyaúh
,erfüllet unser "unschgebet' und Max Müller ,fulfill our prayer'. we '
Es gibt also keinen zwingenden Grund,· für diese Stelle piparti , r uns, o lVIarut, verachtet oder
verrichtet wird schm"ht d . wer unser Gebet, das (hier)
die Bedeutung ,geben' zuzuerkennen. Ob aber die letzterwahnten , a , ero Se! boser Bra d d F'
Gebetes treffe die Gl t d H' n, en elnd des
Úbersetzungen das Richtige treffen, ist andererseits auch zweifelhaft. u es lmmels' D h' d
tan a mit schützt G b . anac Wlr surnatírn pipar-
11üller beruft sich zwar auf haufiges kámam á pr7}ati (á apra~, a
, unser e et' zu übe t .
also nirO'ends das P " rse zen sem. Ved. pipartí ist
püpuranta) ,einen Wunsch erfüllen', aber pr ,füllen' komrot in dieser
o rasens zu pürdhí ,gib'.
übertragenen Bedeutung fast nur mit dem Praverbium a (Simplex
§ 7. par§at usw. níe geben' D A '
nur in pIparat II, 20, 4 e) und in Verbindung mit kámam (nur IX, einer anit-Wurzel k ' , . er Ol'lst aparl}arn gehort zu
. ,ann sorolt schon a l tI' h
72, 5e krátün) ,oro Der Ausdruck sumatím pipartana würde sich
e
,geben, schenken' (W 1* _ us au IC en Gründen nicht
also in zweierlei Hinsicht besonders ausnehmen. Auch 1, 86, 7 92 7 ( _ IX urze 'Pro) bedeuten,l So bedeutet RS VIn
, d - ,1, 3 e usw.) pá1'§i rádho rnaghónam . h .' "
yásya práya.r¡lsi pá¡'l}atha (ebenfalls in einero Lied an die Marut) tum den Herren' (Roth IJ'II b mc t ,glb RelCh-
,~l e randt) sond b h
steht nahe· genug, um Anknüpfung an pr ,füllen' zu widerraten. (Grassroann, Geldner GI )"' .' ern , ewa re, behüte'
Vielroehr dürfte S1~matím pipartana inhaltlich verwandt sein mit , , oSS,. iVeruger klar ist freilich 1, 186 , 3 ed .•
dhíyam avati ,beschützt, begünstigt die Andacht' (vgl. IV, 50, lib, ~sad yátha no váru7}al¡, suk~1'tír,
0b
VII, 41, 3\ I, 34, 5 b ; 117, 13 b),2 VIII, 74 (85), 9 gíro ... právatam ~l}a§ ca pa?'l}ad a1'igürtált sürí~.

,fordert meine Lieder', X, 97, 14 d právata váca~, I, 17, 9° yám Begreiftich ist, dal3 mehrere F '
e (Roth, Grassm Úb .orscher hIer ,schenken' übersetzt haben
rdháthe sadhástutim ,die ihr erfolgreich machen solltet', X, 77, 8 ., ers., zWe!felnd im Wb G I d " .
té no vantu ... man'i,l}ám ,mogen unser Gebet befordern' U. dgl. So selben ErwaO'unO'en . b ( ., e ner, Ubers.). DIe-
o o me o en § 6) bei VI 60
hier eine BedeutunO' b h ' , 12 machen aber auch
in einem Marutlied (VII, 36, 7 a b) : o , ewa ren' oder f" d ' (
In 196) h h' . ' or ern so LudwiO' 1 208
utá tyé no marúto mandasaná , wa rsc emhch. 2 o, ,
dhíya1]l toká1]l,ca vajíno 'vantu.
1 Etwaiges ursprachliches N ebeneinand
Auch hier würde für píparti die Bedeutung ,schützen, bewahren' Persson, Beitr, idg, Wortf. 641) hat im er von aet- und anit-Formen (siehe
Sprachen kaum mehr eine Roll ' lt geschlossenen Verba1system der historischen
gut passen. 3 Wie man sich den Schutz der Marut zu denken hat, b e gesple -Auf Ka:'
, esprengen' (aecane) wie aBe d ' syapas Angabe, daB par~ati neben
h b , a n eren Grammatik b
lehrt VI, 52, 2: a e (Westergaard zu Dha:tup. 17 5")' , ,er ange en, auch ,geben' bedeutet
1 Geldners Bedeutungsangabe im Glossar ,gutes Gedenken, Hochachtung,
Interpretation der in diesem P , [), 1St lllcht vlel zu geben. Sie mag auf falscher
aragraphen besp h
Lob, Lobgedicht' basiert offenbar allzusehr auf SayaJ).a (su~tuti): ,prayer, desire' d aher meine VermutunO' Acta O XII roe enen Stellen beruhen (verfehlt
.le erstere Angabe wenn r.. ' 266 A.2). S eh r ver t rauenswürdig ist dageuen
ergibt sich aus ~Iax lI1üIlers Behandlung der BelegsteIlen (SBE 32, 221).
b'
d , welllgstens das Ver b .
schlossen ist. Vgl. weiter Uhlenbeck 174 w um nICht aus pf~an u, a. nur er-
o
, Vgl. übrigens Neisser, Z. Wb. des Rv. 1, 126 sq.
3 VgI. besonders neben dem allgemeineren Ausdruck, Z. B. in VII, 61, 2· 2 B '1" fi ' alde Vgl Wb 11 "O
el au g erwiihnt sei 1 86 7 , . , ,[) .
.{~,
yásya bl'áhmii;(li suL'1'atil á1Jlitha ,dessen Gebete ihr befordert', den Gebrauch von piÍti y~lIa p¡'áyliTf!8i pál'lfatha wo
' , aubhá9ah Bá p .
b ' .
'
¡ aya;ya'CO, máruto astu mál'tyah

in VII, 28, 2 b bráhma yát piÍsi saDasinn t~ír.liim und VI, 52, 3 b¡'áhma'(lo gopiÍ~, nehmt') ebenso wie Max' Mül;:: (en zwar a,usgeschlossen ist, aber Ludwig (,hinw~~
,carry off , vgl. dazu SBE 39-, 157) eme . unwahr-
Epitheton des Soma.

171
170
326 F. B. J. Kuiper.

Darüber, dail pari?at in E,S 1, 100, 14° sá pari~at krátubhir

mandasanál]. (Roth ,geben', Grassmann ,füllen') zu pr ,hinüber, zu
gutem Ende führen' gehort, herrscht seit langem einstimmiges Urteil.

§ 8. kamam aproati ,Wunsch erfüllen'. Da13 man so lange

die Existenz der Wurzel pf ,geben' verkannt hat und die hieher- Indoiranica.
gehoriO'en Formen zu pr ,füllen' gestellt hat, beruht neben anderem Von

(siehe 6) wohl darauf, dail der stehende Ausdruck kám~m pr ,ei~en

§ F. B. J. Kuiper, Batuvia (Java),
Wunsch erfüllen' für die ,ermeintliche BedeutungsentwlCklung eme
Stütze zu bieten schien. Da!3 in diesem Fall wirklich pr ,füllen'
vorlieO't, erhellt schon aus dem thematischen Imperativ in der liturgi- 11. Ai. Mandakini ,EN. verschiedener Flüsse<.
schen b Formel kámam á proa, vgl. Y. 28, 10 d aeibyo p'Jr'Jna apanai§
lJlandakin'i kommt als Namo vel'schiedene!' FIUsso (u. a, oines
kam'Jm ,denen erfülle durch Erreichen (?) ihren Wunsch'. Das aus
Al'lnes dos Ganges) im Epos unu in del' splltel'en Litomtul' VOl', 111
der urindoiranischen Periode stammende thematische n-Prasens be- del' Pl1li-Literatul' bezeiclmet es oinen der sieben gro13en Seen ¡m
deutet, im Gegensatz zu proáti, das moglicherweise erst im Indischen
Himalaya, Die Geogl'aphie und das verhaltnismlWig spato Auftreton
als einzeIsprachli~he N eubildung entstanden ist, nur ,füllen'. Au.f pr in del' Literatur sind wiehtig: sie führen uns naeh jener Gegend,
füllen' weist auch die Verbindung von kamam mit den AOrlsten
11'0 die al'isehen Inder el'st in naehvedischer Zeit dio dort allsassige
~ püpuranta, apral]., piparat, das Adjektiv kamaprá-l]. ,:Vun~ch er- Bevolkerung besiegt haben. Indogermanisehe Fluf3namen kann man
füllend' (dazu Oldenberg, Xoten zu X, 100, 11); welter m der
hiel' nieht mehr erwarten. Sehr unwahrsehoinlieh ist daher Pisanis,
jüngeren Sprache der Gebrauch von pürayati ,erfüllen' (zuerst AS III,
RSO XIV (1933) 308, Deutung- als manda + alea, dessen zweiter Teil
10, 13° káman asmiÍkam püraya, vgl. 29, 2a, dann ep. und klass.) und mit lat, aqua idontiseh ware, Doeh moehte ieh an seinem Gedanken,
- h ,er f"llt'
purl]-a-. u (z.B. Raghuv . 2 , 72 sveneva pürnena
. manorathena).
. da13 eín W ort für vVasser in diesem N amon zu suehen ist, festhalten.
Vergleiche schlieillich die unbeholfene Umschreibung des Kausahvums
Bekanntlieh lautet das Wort fül' ,Wassor' fast über das ganze austro-
in Mhbh.I, 152, 13 kuru pÜrT).atp, vaco mama. asiatisehe Spraehgebiot da7~, 'Vgl. santo dale', tuund, da (aber dag in
Ortsnamen, lIuttlbdag, Jamuadüg), cbenso in fast allon anderen
MUQQ.ii.-Spraehen dak' (da, iJ,IM) , nikob. mon iJ,ak, khmor dzle, bahnar
dale, stieng da}~ und aus Malakka palon, ulu indau dale, bersisi doh,l
Ein gallz anderos WOl't haben nUI' das Khasi, die Palaung-, "\Va-
und Riangsprachon und oinig'o Malakka-Spl'achell, BekaIlutlieh ist
dies eines del' drei Wortel', die Schmidt früher für seh1' alte austro-
asiatisehe ]~ntlehnungen aus dem Sanskrit hielt, eine AUIIahme, an
scheinliche Geldner eine grammatisch unmogliche tl"bersetzung bietet (,voll machen
, • ah' AS VII 20 4-
werdet'). Mir scheint mit Rückaicht auf VI, 40, 5- d ya;ñám ••• p l, .• ' 'n'
yajñá7[l- piprhi usw. (oben S. 321 A. 2) mit Grassmann (Wb., tl"bers.) zu ubersetze . 1 Ai. pli. daka- N, ,Wasser' wird man trotzdcm nicht von udaka-m zu trenncn
haben,
,dessen Opferfest ihr schützt'.
Akt. ol'ientalin XVII. 2

172 173
 d

18 F. B. J. KuipeJ'. Indoiranica. 19
die er auch selbst kaum mehr glauben wird. Abgesehen von del' vel'wenden ? Tats"ac hl"le 1 sm
. d Anzeiehen daf" d f.\ h'
lautlichen Seite, sind doch ,Bein', ,Blatt' 1 und ,Wassel" keine Begriffe, Sprachen H' t . . nI', a auc m den
, ID er- und Vordermdlens diese Fnnktion nieht unbekan t
1 Ma ia klCII- Sprachen besitzen zahlreicln
ful' welche die einheimische Bevolkerung die passende Bezeichnung gewesen
• 1st,• vorhanden • D'e
in Indiens heiliger Sprache zu suchen hiLtte. lmt ma- geblldete Adjeetiva, siehe Sehmidt, Sprachen del' Sakei un);
Spl'achliche Untel'suchungen auf dem austroasiatisehen Gebiete Semang 509. 1m Khmer hat sieh dasx m-Pl'afi llUI. ID. O'anz wenJO'e
.
'\V" ,
stehen noch in einem primitiven Anfangsstadium, so dan man ortern el'halten; vielleieht darf ma n ab ' b
el' In muen frnits aeid b n

bezuglich der Lehnwürter im Sanskrit fast ganz auf Sammlung del' ('1'"
Iservant
k de
.condiments'
. von C1¿ "aiOTe'
b II "SpOI'O,
G'ramlll. de esla
am meisten auf del' Hand liegenden Wortgleichungen ang'ewiesen
ist _ eine Al'beit, die in sprachwissenschaftlicher Hinsicht kaum
~iO':~:~:f~,9)6) Cl e
D : al.m1ie.he, Verwendnng suchen (etwa ,mit sanre~
u t:> h f" .. a1J WIr me lt fehlO'ehe
t:> n, wenn WII' .. dIese Funktion
weitere Perspektiven zu bieten vel'mag. So liL13t sich übel' die Be- a e nr dIe alten Spmehen del' vorderindisehen :\.b .. .
nehme b . , • oIlgmes an-
deutung des PriLfixes mano, das auch aus vielen anderen Lehnwortern n, eWClst eme del' uberzeuO'endsten D t
B k l' l I t : > eu ungen von Przyluski
wohlbekannt ist, niehts Sicheres ermitteln, und zwar um so mehl',
d' le. 1 lat dieser in ai . mat·
He annt l El efant' das Element taft'
allga-,!,
wen in den heutigen Sprachen dieses Prafix fast unbekannt ist. Es ,an wledergefunden. 1m 1ndonesischen bildet man so l'
findet sieh, soweit ich sehe, nur noch im Stieng und_ in den Malakka- Hand' d W l' ( von ¿ma
,. I3' as ort
. tman ' Elefant' . Die B d
e eutung mul3 sein mit
Sprachen. Vielleicht dad man aber eine Vermutung wagen. In man- eJner.land
. (emem R"nsse1) verse Ilen', was bestittiO't . d d' h
steckt jedenfalls das PriLfi;" '1lla-. Das VerhiLltnis man- : ma-, das an su hasti neb b' b I t : > Wlr ure
~ - . en el emer ct ein interessantes Beispiel für Lehn-
indonesisehe Pl'iLfixe mit ,PriLnasaliel'ung' erinnert (sogenannte ,zweite 1m Sanskrit. 1 In den p."
ti ersetznng
d' lb 1a-1i\IUl}.d-a- Spraehen hat ma- als
Stufe del' Pl'afixbildung' nach Sehmidts 'l'erminologie), ist aus dem tese e Bedeutung gehabt wie im 1ndonesischen.~
Diesel' Fall ,';
Austroasiatischen bekannt genug; sogar das Santali zeigt trotz del' welehe Forderung man künftighin fuI' das Studl'um del' austroasiati-
ze¡g ,
Erstal'l'ung del' Prafigierung in den MUl}.Q.ii.-Spl'achen noch manches se Ilen Morpholoo'ie
t:> von d en za hll osen Lehn",ol'tern des S k'
Beispiel: mq,r iau : mrf/lJij,iau, marom : m a'IJ4om, madoli : mandoli. Nun erhoffen . darf, welehe uns eine Vorstellung VOIll Austroasia:i::h:~
bildet das Prll/ix ?lut- ¡m Altjnvltllischcn u. n. Adjectiva mit ucr goLodn, W,lC es VOl' otWlt zweitausend Jahrcn in VOl'ucl'indicn "e~I)l'oehen
Bedeutung ,versehen mit' (vgl. Kern, Verspreide Geschriften VIII, IVol' en 1st. t'> •.

201 sqq.), und eine iLhnliche adjektivbildende Funktion hat man in Darf man
.t d 1 diesel be Bedeutung aueh für man- anTlohmen? Es
vielen Sprachcn del' J>hilippincn, im Malmssarisehcn und Bnginesi-
sehen, in del' Batak-Spraehe und auí Bali nachgewiesen, vgl. Adriani,
,w: red' alln. a 1s ma- IDit Prltnasaliel'llllD' del'
t'>,.
'V urzelsl'l1 e au fzu fassen
VIe
K' leS un
S1 . ndonesischen tatsiLehlich vorkomult . 13.\ U f G l'nn d yon'
Sangireesche Spraakkunst 106,110. Darf man aber, weil die heutigen mta- a {el mentm'¿ ,Elefant' , wo das. P I,l ·¡'fi X' 1 .
na lezu dleselbe Be-
austroasiatisehen Spraehen keine positiven RUcksehlusse auf den
I Die Frnge drilngt si eh auf, ob man auch nieh' .
alteren Zustand gestatten, dieses weiter ab liegende Material dazu dor Pflanzen- und Tierwelt (
IlU8 . t 111 VICien anderen Namon
zu SUChCll hato z. B. nyagl'odha-(t, áiilchiimrga.(t) Lehnübersctzungen

I Schmidt, Die Mon-Khmer-Volker 23, hat bci der Besprcchung dieses WortNI
2 Den Hinweis aui altjav ma- zur D t
santo sarlak' ,a splinter of wood' übersehen (ebenso übrigens Gonda, Acta Oro X, Dr. Ir. K. J, Cowan. PrzYlusk" '3 f' eu ung von miitaJi,qa-(¡ verdanke ieh
I \Vel ür ma- nur emphat' 1 B d
332 sq.), das für die austroasiatische Herkunft des Sanskrit-Wortes entscheidend zuwoisen (BSL XXVI 99 M d O ISC 10 e eutung nach-
aber die Bcd t " o n e r. XXVIII, 141: ,préfixe augmcntatíf'), was
ist. Vgl. auch sOl·loF u. a. ,to pierce, as a thorn or any olher sharp pointed object' eu ung von miltmiga-?! nicht auflwJlt V I
(und Bulq,k ,a kind of hairpin'?). ,RUssol': ¡'iin-e-sJ(n) eigentlich H d . . . g. das Savara-Wort fUr
, , un elDes Elefalltell'.
2*

174 175
20 F. B. J. Kuiper. Indoiraniea.
21
deutung haben wil'd wie in matailga-Zt,l lieGe sieh dies vermutung¡;· bunden,
, , z . .B . 'l'S VI" 3 4, 7 yajilélla vaí devált '
weise annehmen, in welehem Falle mandakiní etwa ,wasserreieh' ayan, te manyanta' mamlsya' , "bl.' . Suva¡'gar¡l lokám
. . no nVa laVl~ya¡ t't' t' J
bedeuten wlirde; 2 wenn sehon das Grund wort mandaka- etwa ,Strom' 3 snvargá7(t lokám áyan t' f .!. : , l ~ l, e yttpena yopayitvá,
. ' am. ~ayo yupenawanu prá' - "
bedeutet hat, ware auf srotovah·, s1'otavaha, srotasvini u. dgl., besonders yüpatvárn. Áhnlieh :Madhy. SB I 6 ._ , !Jan~n, tad yUpasya
. , 'bl.lavann átlta yád ' ,2, 1 ya,}lIam yü:pen . ,
aber auf den FluGnamen Oghavati hinzuweisen. Dies sind nur vage t ¿ro ' ,. a yopayltva
en~na yopayams Msmad.!. ,
Vermutungen, wie es aueli nieht anders moglieh ist, da ja tiber die flji1Ji1:rn ánus1'utam lisa AB 2 1 1 '. yupo nama iád vd
, " t a m Va-¿ yüpen . -
Bedeutung del' Priifixe noeh die gl'oGte Unsieherheit herrseht. Doeh yad yüpenaivayopayar¡ls tad _. awayop aya 1JI s, lar¡?,
muO die Frage naeh ihrer Bedeutung sehon jetzt gestellt werden.
4 t;iaQ.v. B: 4 4 11 t d 1 .!up~sya yilpatvam. Allders ft'eilich
" e eva~¡ praJapattm u adhavan -
a1'opayanty ayodhayanti e t d _ 'P yupena praharanty
. . a, a yupasya yüpatvam.1
12. Ai.yúpa~.Q ,der Pfosten, an den das Opfertier gebunden wird'.5 Dal3 es sICh hlerbei Ílur um et l'
wie sie die Brahman . d A ymo oglsehe Spielereien handelt
Bekanntlieh wird das W ort in den etymologisehen W ort- .as Je en uO'enbli 1 b' t . '
deutungen del' Brahmanen reg'elmiiGig mit yopáyati ,verwiseht' ver- Bloomfield, AmJPh. XII 419 b e e le en, 1st ldar und hat aueh
, sq., sehon darO'etan 11 1 .
wundern daG trotzd d" b' an cann sleh nur
1 Schmidt, Die 8prachen der Sakei und 8emang 513, weist darauf hin, daB
, em le melsten europais 1 F
Etymologie festO'ehalten hab . d . e len orseher an dieser
?llan-, min- nur in vier Tiernamen vorkommt. Aber das Verhültnis von ml'ncOl' lo en, III em SIe von e' . G dI.
,Hund' zu temhe taOl', sakei cuo usw. ,Rund' setzt fUr diesen Fall eine ganz nndere ,gesehliehtet O'eO'lattet' a . mer run uedeutung
, lo lo usgmgell vO'l PvV VI 179
Funktion des Pritfixes vomUB als in miitail!Ja-~1 ,Elefant' : ta1' ,Rand'. \VaekernaO'el Ai Gr I 92' b' " Gmssmann 125
lo' • amm., ,Uhlenbeek Wb 240 111 '
I FUr feminine FluBnamen vgl. DelbrUck, Vgl. Synt. I, 94, 8chulze, 8b. BerI.
Ved. Gramm. 127 A 11 Ab . I , . , ~f aedonelI,
Aknd. 1910, 796 sqq., Lohmann, Genus und 8exus 47. , . . wele lend nul' Fa A JPl
der yüpa-h mit yuyói; t e t' 1 y, m 1. XXVI, 400,
3 Auf mandlika- ,8trom, 8tromung', das von Ujjvnladatta (frUhestens um . • , r nn ver {nüpft . 1
KernbeO'riff.!. e, was SIC 1 kaum empfiehlt.
1250 n. Chr., vgl. H. 8kold, Untera. zur Genesis del' ni. etym. IJit. 6) erwühnt wird, lo von yupa-Zt muG del' des Bi d . .
ist freilieh kein VerlaB. aueh Mallinatha zu Rao'huv 13 61 d W n ens sem, Wle denn
, Jeh verweise noeh auf ma'1J.Q,apa- ,ofrene llalle, ein naturlicher, aus Büumen pasubandhanii1.J¡0 d~. . : : as Ol't el'klart als ein sar{t81cl'taZt
gohildetllr l'avilloll', IInoh Troyer zu Hiijntar. J, 544 ,un (I(li/lcedont le toit plnt al uVl"e~a~t. Ebenso ist d b 0'. •
stehende \VOI.t alanrt-1n I'f . as ebl'lffheh nalle-
est Boutellu par !les eololllles, et dOllt Ull cM(\ soulollwnt OBt couvurl'. Vgl. plt. ,osten, an den elll PI f t 1
ma'1J.ljapa ,a temporary ahed 01' hall ereeted on special or festive oeeasions' und wie LUdel's, KZ XXXVIII 431 ' e ~Il ge mnden wird',
das javan. Lehnwort p(1)gliplt, pe1)Q.ltplt ,ein auf Silulen oder hOlzernen Pfühlen ¡Llteren adána-m (AS VI 10'4 la sqq., naehgewIesen 11at, aus dem
ruhcndes, naeh allen Seiten ofrones Gebitude'. Grundbedeutung mag demnach ,mit , , , 2 a 3 e XI 9 3 b) d
Fesseln' herzuleiten . d 'dS .',.''''' , as Binden,
einem Dneh versehen' gewesen sein, vgl. vielleicht santo dap' ,to eover, to thatch', . o sIn myat¿ (md¿tam ns V 2 7a) .
mundo diib ,to thateh, to cover with tiles' und mit abweichendem Vokalismus (stehender Ausdruek i d B h ." ,mY1lnakti
. n en ra manas z B AB 7 16 .
santo ladop' ,to be eovered by the leaves of any elimbing plant, as a tree', nikob. (yüpe~u niyatam Ram. I 13 33) b' _.. . ~, 1), myacchatl
kendup ,BlütterhUlle', bahn. dop, dlip ,bedeeken', stieng dup ,verbergen', welehe die V'b " " adlmat¿ (z. B. Asv. GS 4 8 15)
el a, dIe m Vel'binduncr 't .!. ' ,
Worter Sehmidt (u. a. Die Mon·Khmer·Volker 84,104sq.) zusammengestellt hato Etymologie kann d lo .ml YUP~-Zt gebraueht werden. Die
Santnli ma1)rtwq" ma1)f/,h(w)q, ist einer neuindischen 8prache entlehnt, vgl. hindi ... emnaeh meht zlVeIfelhaft .. ~
mal,lf/,(u)wa, mailQ,hii, maildh(a)wa ,au open shed or hall adorned with fiowers'. llldt Wle dhüpa-h W'h h' . sem. yupa-Zt ent-
., el raue , stüpa-Zt ,Sehopf, Haarbuseh',2 dipa-Zt
& Naehstehendes war, wie die meisten dieser Aufslitze, sehon vor mehreren

Jahren geschrieben. Die seitdem erschienene Untersuehung von Batakrishna Ghosh, I AlBO "an_ kont ..
amllllert aus "0 - u d '
nuclt ¡m Vildh!lla-8ütrn (Act O VI P n '!Jodh~. DIe gcwohnliche Erklürunn'
<1 :L'
Les formations nominales et verbales. en p du sanscrit, Paris 1933, konnte ieh
, . . r. , 110 sq.). o
nieht einsehen. Inwieweit meine Bemerkungen durch dieses Werk UberflUssig ge-
Whltney, RootB 193, Sehmidt, Pluralb 219A •
worden sind, kan n ieh leide-r nicht beurteilen. l)eraBon, Beitriige 309 714 W Id . . , Waekernagel, Ai. Gramm I 9<>
, , a e, Vgl. Wb. lI, 620. . , ~,

176
177
 Indoil'anica. 23
F. B. J. Kuiper.
22
17' und bO'ehort ZU yaúti sowohl lautlich als begrifflich vollig zu aw. axtis ,Leiden, Schmerz,
,B1ume' ein p-J! ormans
,Lampe', pú~pa-7lt Krankheit', was somit eine \Vorttrennung S'iTIJ-akti- nahelegt. In
,bindet'. sir§-akti- konnte die schwundstufige Stammform von sÚ'as- yorliegeni
. . K n 'den Kopfschmerz'.
13. Ai. sír~aktí-1;l, siroktl-1;l, op el , I d' r 1 . del' als Bildung lieGe es sich dann den \VOl'tern mandhátá1'-, sátpati-
Das Wort S'irlJaktH¡ ,Kopfschmerz' ist bisher
h' worden v 0'1 1, 12, , "
1a
,
~&lg ~~ 1; U. dgl. (Brugmann, BSGW XLIX, 35, Wackernagel, Ai. Gramm. n,
54 sq.) an die Seite stellen. Freilich verstoGt dies gegen die Regel, daH
Atharvasan:hi~~b~a: ;;~te~::e Ableit~ng bs~r$alctimán ,ano Kop~weh in der vorklassischen Sprache als Vorderglied von Zusammensetzungen
XII, 2, 19 , " D b findet man mlt O'lelCher
. TS II 6 9 2 vor ane en o die Stamrilform si1'lJa- verwendet wird (siehe Ai. Gramm. II, 56). Eher
leidend' hegt ", . 10 d IX 8 1 a 1 s'ir$asoká-Z¡
'7 AS V 4 & un ", dUrfte daher UnterdrUckung des Auslautsvokals des Vordergliedes
Bedeutung S'i,1·§amaya-.! " _. 4 14 Es muG
-. XIX 39 10&2 und jUnger síl'ljavyathá RaJat., . (Wackernagel, Ai. Gramm. 1, 318 U, 130) anzunehmen sein.
A:5 " f" L' d Schmerz' stecken. Den bis-
1 . s'irsaktí-h ein W ort ur , el , . Bemerkenswert ist die Lesart oS'i1'~aktyarp, AS IX, 8, 1" in del'
a so m .. . aber m W. nicht gelungen, eme
herigen Erklarungsversuchen 1st es • 1\1 . Williams 1011 Paipp. Rezension, weil sie an don EN. Axtyü im Awesta erinnert,
O' des W ortes zu geben. otller . So heiGt namlich Yt. 5, 82 der Zauberer, welcher den Menschen
befriedigellde Deutun b 1 Ha 10100'ie aus sírlJa-sakti- elltstandell sei;
vermutete, dan es durc 1 P b XXXV. AmJPh. XVII (1896) neunundneunzig Ratsel aufgab und diejenigen, die sie zu lOsen nicht
so auch M. B1oomfield, JAO~ XGVI, p. 1 280' Anders Knauer, IF imstande waren, totete, siehe Lommel, Die Yasht's 39 A. 1. Auch
3 1 W k rnagel Al. ramm., . . . dieser Name ist wohl mit -akti-(t, axtis etymologisch zu verbinden,
416; vg. ac e , ' l l . volksmedizlm-
225 llach welchem sÍ1'$akt~-Z¡ ,wo 1 em Siehe weiter fUr die in diesen Wortern vorliegende Wurzel *aq'!.
Anz. VII, , *'- J, ti- (vO'l. vl'kati-) gekürzt
,\ d l' O'ewesen und aus I>~r$a ca b ,schadigen' Ved., Glotta XXI, 282 sqq.l
scher rl.US ruc \: b 'lll U Hch ist Eine dritte
ist was in lautlicher Hinsicht ganz W1 ( r. . XLI' X (1897) 50 Obigos dUrfte uns auch die richtige Erklarung der korrupten
, . B S"chs Ges W1SS. ' , Lesart in Man. GS 2, 1, 10 an die Hand geben. Die Stelle lautet:
Erklarung hat Bohtlmgk, ero a . . k h' SB beleO'ten
A O'et nd von der neben -a na-o 1m b
vorges chlagen. us b le n _ Rl1<'.ht 01' in sí'rqalctí-ZI, das ,eine sise rnalimlucamalte sÍ1'omi(?)m upauarlta/.!e
Pnrti~ipil\lf()rll\ -aktll-Zt (\V ~1. a e), . .. lcti- Hic"'ulI'" ct1JyiZm aSI:Wyilm 7I/.l'lIt"astam l)1'(Jtlt slIdilwwa[l.
1,11'\stl7cti' soi, oin Nomon nctwlllS (t . , _n b'
Conh'l1ction von 1> d l' pfes Knauer halt selbst die Lesung ái1'omim, worin dann *ami- (= amiva-)
, eine krankhafte KrUmmung es \.0 ,
u
Krl1mm ng, so dan es , . O' Ko fe' bedeutet habo. stecken sollte, fuI' unsicher. Varianten sind sÍ/'osim und Sil'optim,
d. i. ein stoifer Nnckon mit zur Selte gebo~onem z b~friodiO'end gelten, wofur Bohtlingk siro'1·tirn (von arti-[t) vermutet hato \Vackornagel,
Keino dieser Erklarungen kann a s gan b k
.. O' f anderem Wege naherzu ommen, Ai. Gramm. U, 56, halt d,ies mit Recht. fUr eine ganz unsichel'e
so dan ein Versuch, der Losun au o . d 't Vlortteil
t Nun stllnmt er zwel e Konjektur. 2 Statt dessen schlug Caland VOl', áÍ1'oktirn zu lesen, was
nicht unberechtigt sein d Ur f e.
1 Neben den dort angeführten Parallelen für den Bedeutungsilbergang ,Seha-
1 Dieser Ver s lautet:
áí¡'~aktím 8t¡'~ámayá1!l kal'7,lasfllá1!l 'lJilohitám h >
den' ,Krankheit' ist noeh auf aw. daiwil, schweiz, Leibe88chaden (Sehwyzer, Oriento
8á¡'v 1!l
a
'áJl'~a7,lyá1!l te r(~gam bah(¡' 'IlÍl'1nantrayáma 6 Stud. Pavry 445 A. 1) hinzuweisen. Vgl. weiter unten S. 34sq. und S,44sq.
I übrigens ist áiro'rti-J.¡, wie aueh von B1ihtlingk selbst apliterhin (BSGW
Die paipp. Rezension liest hier §ll·~aktyallt •
. h Wh't y Lanman z, d, Stelle. XLIX, 51) unerkannt wurde, nur uua spliten Quellen bekannt (Sehol. zu Plil}. 3, 3,
, Konjektur, Sle e 1 ne - Bl freId uffection of the head' 108). Wegen des Sandhi (nicht frilher als das Epos!) siehe Waekernagel, AL
, h B d utunO' wilre nach oom ,
, Die ursprüng1IC e e e b • h f AS 1 12 3" beruft). Grumm. 1, 323,
t on' wofür B. SIC IlU "
gewesen (zu Bac- ,f as en up ,

179
178
22 F. B. J. Kuiper.
,Lampe', pÚiJpa-m ,Blume' ein p-Formans und gehort zu yaúti
,bindet'.
13. Ai. sír~akti-1J., sirokti-lJ. ,Kopfieiden, Kopfschmerz'.
Das Wort sIr~aktí-~¡ ,Kopfsehmerz' ist bisher lediglieh in del'
Atharvasalphita naehgewiesen worden, vgl. I, 12, 3&, IX, 8, la,
xn, 2, 19 d, 20 b i 5, 23. Eine Ableitung sir§aJetimán ,an Kopfweh
leidend' liegt TS n, 6, 9, 2 VOl'. Daneben findet roan mit gleicher.
Bedeutung si1'§amayá-Z¿ AS V, 4, 10- und IX, 8, 1",1 sir$a§oká-b
AS XIX, 39, 10 02 und jUnger §i1'ljavyatha Rajat. 4, 14. Es muG
also in síriJaktí-Z¿ ein Wort fuI' ,Leid, Sehmerz' steeken. Den bis-
herigen El'klarungsvel'suehen ist es aber m. Vol. nieht gelungen, eine
befriedigende Deutung des Wortes zu geben. :Monier Williams 1011
. So heil3t namlieh Yt. 5, 82 del' Zauberer, welcher den Mensehen
vermutete, da13 es dureh Haplologie aus sir§a-sakti- entstanden sei i
so aueh M, Bloomfield, JAOS XVI, p. XXXV; AmJPh. XVII (1896)
416;9 vgl. Wáekernagel, AL Gramro. I, 280. Anders Knauer, IF
Anz. VII, 225, naeh welehem si?'§aktí-Z¡ ,wohl ein volksmedizini-
seher Ausdruek' gewesen und aus *fir$aleati- (vgl. vl'leati-) gekürzt
ist, was in lautlicher Hinsieht ganz willkürlieh ist. Eine dritte
Erklarullg hat Bohtlingk, Ber. Sii.ehs. Ges. Wiss. XLIX (1897), 50,
vorgesehlagell. Ausgehend von del' neben -alena-l) im SB belegten
Parti?Ji pin,1form -a}¡,tlt-Z¡ (\V?JI. al'! c-), fH1cht 01' in .4'i:r$a Jetí-b , das ,oino
Conh'aetion von sI1·utJ}Ca' soi, oill Nomon aetionis aJea- ,Hiog'ung,
Krummung', so da13 es ,eine krankhafte KrUmmung des Kopfes,
d. i. ein stoifer Naeken mit zur Seite gebogenem Kopfe' bedeutet habe.
Keine dieser Erklarungen kann als ganz befriedigend gelten,
so da13 ein Versueh, del' Losung auf anderem Wege naherzukommen,
nieht unbereehtigt sein dUrfte. Nun stimmt del' zweite Wortteil
1 Dieser Vers Iautet:
áÍl'~aktíl!1 .;i¡·~amayá1]l> ka¡'7)aáfilá1]l> 'lJilohitám
8á¡'va1]l> ál¡'~a1}yá1]l> te rr!gam bah{¡, ní¡omantrayamahe
Die Paipp, Rezension liest hier §JI'~aktya1!t.
s Konjektur, siehe Whitney-Lanman z. d. Stelle.
3 Die ursprilngliche Bedeutung ware nacll Bloomfield ,nffection of the head'
gewesen (zu sac- ,fasten upon', wofür B. siell nuf AS l, 12, 3" beruft).
178
Indoil'aniea. 23
sowobl lautlieh als begrifflieh vtillig zu aw. axtis ,Leiden, Sehmerz,
Krankheit', was somit eine \Vorttrennung sír!}-aleti- nahelegt. In
¿¡n}-aleti- konnte die schwundstufige Stammform von sÍ?'as- yorliegeni
als Bildung lie13e es sieh dann den ",Vortern mandhatá1'-, sátpati-
u. dgl. (Brugmann, BSGW XLIX, 35, Wackernagel, Ai. Gramm. n,
54 sq.) an die Seite ste11en. Freilich versto13t dies gegen die Regel, daH
in del' vorklassisehen Spraehe als Vorderglied von Zusammensetzungen
die Stammform si?'!}a- verwendet wird (siehe Ai. Gramm. n, 56). Eher
dÜl'fte daher Unterdrüekung des Auslautsvokals des Vordergliedes
(Waekernagel, Ai. Gramm. 1, 318 n, 130) anzunehmen sein.
Bemerkenswert ist die Lesart oSi?'!}aktyaT{l- AS IX, 8, 1 a in del'
Paipp. Rezension, weil sie an den EN. Axtyü im Awesta erinnert.
neunundneunzig Ratsel aufgab und diejenigen, die sie zu losen nieht
imstande waren, totete, siehe Lommel, Die Yasht's 39 A. 1. Aueh
dieser Name ist wohl mit -aleti-Zt, axtiá etymologiseh zu verbinden.
Siehe weiter flir die in diesen Wortern yorliegende Wurzel *aq'f.
,sehadigen' Verf., Glotta XXI, 282 sqq.1
Obiges dürfte uns aueh die richtige Erldarung del' korrupten
Lesart in Man. GS 2, 1, 10 an die Hand geben. Die SteHe lautet:
sIse ??talimlucamalte si?'omi(?)m 1tpabarha/,le
lU!yi/.m asittiyiZm 7I/.l'íltl!astam J)1'eftt slldtlwwal,.
Knauer halt selbst die Lesung si?'omim, worin dann *ami- (= amwa-)
steeken soHte, ful' unsieher. Varianten sind §ú'osim und si!'optim,
wofUr BohUingk áiro'1'tim (von árti-l¡) vermutet hato ",Vaekernagel,
Ai. Gl'amm. n, 56, balt d,ies mit Recht flir eine ganz unsichere
Konjektur. 2 Statt dessen sehlug Caland v~r, si?'oktim zu lesen, was
1 Neben den dort angeführten Parallelen fUr den BedeutungsUbergang ,Seha-
>
den' ,Krankheit' ist noch auf aw. daiwiá, schweiz. Leibes8chaden (Schwyzer, Oriento
Stud. Pavry 445 A. 1) hinzuweisen, VgI. weiter unten S. 34 sq. und S. 44 sq.
2 übrigens ist áidrti-l}, wie auch von Bolltlingk selbst spliterllin (BSGW
XLIX, 51) anerkannt wurde, nur nus spiiten Quellen bekannt (Seho1. zu PlIl}. 3, 3,
108). Wegen des Sandhi (nicht frilher als das Epos!) siehe Wnckcrnagel, AL
Grnmm. l, 323.
179
24 F. B. J. Kuiper.
aber Knauers Bntrüstung erregte: ,Die Konjektur 9Í1'olctirn kann
aber nur das Kind eines grausamen Augenblickes sein. Zwar die
graphische Seite hat sie fuI' sich, auch befriedigte die ihr gegebene
Bedeutung; wie so11 sie aber etymologisch gerechtfertigt werden? 1 •••
Dagegen entspricht gÍ1'o1,tirn im PW"2 allen Bedingungen einer VOl'-
züglichen Konjektur und ieh habe sie in den Textmeiner demnachst
erseheinenden Ausgabe blol1 darum nieht aufgenommen, weil mogliehel'-
weise in der genannten Stelle etwas anderes als "Kopfleiden, Kopf-
schmerz" steckt' (IF Anz. VII, 225). Mit Recht hat aber Bohtlingk,
als el' noeh einmal auí die Fl'age zuruckkam,l auf die engen
Beziehungen von Man. GS 2, 1, 10 zu AS XII, 2, 19 sq. hingewiesen,
welche es 8ehl' wahrseheinlich machen, dal1 auch in erstel'er Stelle
ein vVort fuI' Kopfsehmerz zu suchen ist. Vgl. v. 20:
sise mála1!l sildayitvá s'ir§aktím ltpabárhatte
ávyilrn ásiknyilrn ml'§tvá suddhá blzavata yajñíyal¡
,naehdem ihr Unreines auf dem BIei und Kopfschmerzen auf dem
Kissen hingesetzt und es auf das schwarze Schaf abgestreift habt,
seid ihr rein, zum Opfer würdig'. Bohtlingk schlagt jetzt vor,
anstatt del' verdorbenen Lesarten einfach s'ír§aktim in den Text
aufzunehmen. Eine so gewaltsame Textanderung wird aber kaum
oinen Anhiíngor' linden. Dagogon rnul1 dio oben geg-ebelle Analyse
von 8i1'!}aktí-~t notwendigerweise auch Calands Vorschlag wieder zu
Ehl'en bring'en. Nichts steht ja del' Annahme von fJiro'ktilt als
Nebenform von §~r§aktí-l¿ im Wege. Dann ist sÍ1'okti-~ das fruheste
Beispiel fuI' Verwendung von siras- im Vordergliede, zunachst viel-
leicht in Anlehnung an Dvandvas wie áirog1'¡Vam (siehe weiter
Wackernagel, Ai. Gramm. n, 56). Vgl. die epischen und klassi-
schen Synonyme siro'bhitilpa-[t, s-i1'oruj(a), sira[lsüla-rn, siroduJ¡,kha-m
usw., m1i.harii.~trI si1·a1·ogo. Die Lesal't Si1'optim statt des nicht mehr
verstandenen sirolctim naeh j'ópi-J¡, ,reil3ender Schmerz', ropatta-[¡
u. dgl.?
1 Der. Sachs. Ges. Wiss. XLIX, 51.
180
Indoiranica. 25
14. Ai. asfdati ,nahert si eh' und Verwandte.
vVenn ai. syándate ,lauft, flie13t, fi:thrt' seiner Her kunft nach
ein altes llasalinfigiertes Prasens ist, wie ich an andere1' Stelle nach-
zuweisen ve1'sucht habe,l ist man aus theoretischen Grunden berechtigt,
daneben eine nasallose Wurzelform *sied- anzunehmen. Dal1 diese
'Yurzelgestalt noch in ved. sydda-Zt M. ,das Laufel1, Fahr'en' vorlíege,
ist moglich! abe1' nicht sicher. Es fragt sich aber, ob diese vVllrzel-
form rÍicht den zahlreichen 'YUrtern zugrunde liegt, welche man
bisher immer auf eine 'Yurzel sed- ,gehea' bezogen hato Dal1 diese
Wurzel mit sed- ,sitzen' identisch sei, haben die "ielen Versuche,
das semasiologische Vel'haltnis naher aufzuklaren, nicht wahrschein-
Jich machen konnen. Pott, Etym. F. 1 t, 248, nahm U1'spl'üngJich als
Grundbedeutung an: ,sinken (del' Richtul1g del' Schwerkraft folgenY,
spater (12, 48) ,stUtzen'.2 Meistens geht man ab'el' von der Bedeutung
,sitzen' aus: sed- ware dann sekundar ,auch mit dem Begriffsübel'-
gange wohin gehen, um dort einen Sitz zu llehmen' (Gmssmann,
Wb.) gebraucht worden. Ahnliche Ver'suche bieten Brugmann, IF
XIII, 84 sq., und Walde, Vgl. Wb. II, 486, del' die Bedeutung
,gehen' einerseits aus ,sitzen' in Verbindung mit Pr'afixen herleiten
will, sie aber andererseits wegen gr. ó06~, alcsl. ollodo fut' schon
ursprachlich halt, ohnc aher zu beachten, dan 1¡cide AUl1ahmen un-
vereinbar sind, weil Vel'balpriifigierullg in del' ,Ul'sprache' noch nicht
mUg'lich war. s
Betrachten wir zuerst die hierhel'gehorigen indoiral1ischen Verbal-
formen etwas naher. Allgemein uekanl1t ist, dal1 aSldati, asildayati
in derepisehen und klassischen Literatur ,gelangen zu, erreichen,
sich nahern' bedeuten. Jung kann diese Bedeutung, fuI' die das PW
hauptsachlich Belegstellen aus del' spateren Literatur anführt, schon
I Die indogermnllischcn Nnsnlpritscntio. 144 sq. Wegcn der Aunallme einer
*
Nebenform aled- sei auch auf dieses Werk verwiesen.
! XItere IJiteratur verzeichnet Curtius, Grundz. d. gr. Etym. Nr. 281.
8 Daher kann aksl. eh, falls díes in Zusammensetzung entstanden ist (Pe.
dcrsen, IF V, 62), für die Bedeutungsentwicklung nichts beweisen.
181
 F. B. J. Kuiper.
26
deshalb nieht sein, weil upasidati sehon In del' ~ksa!p.hitá ,mit
Verehrung nahen, herantreten' bedeutet, z. B. ~S 1, 72, 5"
sa1'(tjananá úpa s'idann abhijñú
,eines Sinnes geworden, nahten siel kniebeugend'. Vgl. upasanna-b
,herangetl'eten, genaht', p?'asidati ,gerat in jmds. Gewalt' (Maitr. S.,
Ait. Br.).2 Es lal3t sieh, wie mil' seheint, aueh fül' a-sad- dieselbe
Bedeutung sehon in der ~S nachweisen. Die Bedeutung ,gelangen
zu' geht ja leicht in ,erlangen' übel'. So finden wir bereits in del'
~S (1, 89, 2 c):
devana1'(t sakhyám úpa sedima vayám
,der Gottel' Freundsehaft haben wir umwol'ben' (Geldnel'; ,erworben
haben, besitzen' Grassmann).s Ebenso VIII, 47, 16"
tádannaya tádapase tám bhagám upasedú~e
,zu ihm, del' sich davon nahrt, der solehes sehafft, del' solehen Anteil
verdient' (Hillehrandt). An eine Bedeutungsentwieklu~g, wie sie in
lato possidere, nhd. besitzen vorliegt, ist hier nieht zu denken. Eine
ahnliehe Bedeutungsentwieklung weist ás'idati, asadayati bekanntlieh
im Epos auf. Dal3 sie aber viel alter ist, beweist ~S IlI, 30, 18 b
sá1'(t ylÍn mall'ir ílJa llsátsi pürvib
,wonn du viele grol3e Speisegenüsse in Besitz nimmst'. Dies setzt
nueh fUI' llsidati cinc alto Bedcutung ,sieh nahcrn' voraus. Zuerst
filldet diese sich, wi~ es seheint, AS VI, 28, 3'
yá~l p1'athamáll pravdtam asaslÍda
,ho who first attained the slope [of heaven]'.
Beí ut-sad- ist die Bedeutung ,entwischen, sich entziehen, ver-
schwinden' alt, vgl. TS JII, 4, 10, 5. Oldenberg, Noten, erwagt nueh
fUl' ~S VIII, 52 (63), 2· b
,they revercntially approached him' (Oldenberg, S BEY.
1
Interessant ist daneben p¡'aiidati in der Bedeutung ,gut vonstatten gcheu,
2
gelingen' in Raghuv. 3, 29 (MallinlItha: phalati), weH es nur aus ,vorrücken' ent-
standen sein kann. Vgl. lato bene cede¡'e, bene (P¡'ospel'e) p¡'ocedere, aueh absolut
.'Ii proc/)$ait (wie viele Hss. lesen) Cie. in Yerro !II, 98, 227.
3 Vgl. Raghuv. 5, 60 ii8edu~o1} Bakhyam (= p¡'apta'IJato1) MallinlItha).
182
Indoil'anica. 27
divó mlÍna1'(t nót sadan
sómaprlJthaso ádrayalt
eine ahnliche Übersetzung
.
(wie übrigens aucl! sehon Roths AuffassunO'b
war): ,es hatten sich davongemacht, waren unerreichbar geworden'.
Auch im Awestischen findet sich, wenn auch vel'einzelt, eine Spul'
dieser Bedeutung in Yt. 19, 56
a tal xVa~ni'i frazgaoata
tal xVar~ni'i apatacal
tat xVa/'~ni'i apa. h¡oat
nach Lommels Übersetzung: ,da eilte del' Glückso-lanz b vorwal'ts',
dieser Glücksglanz entwich, dieser GlUcksglanz entkam'.l
1m 1ndoiranisehen ist sidati in dieser Bedeutung von sad- ,sitzen'
fOI'mell nicht zu unterscheiden, vgl. á satsi, úpa sadema, útsadan
(~S), asasáda (AthS), asedu(¡ (Mhbh.) uSW. Es frabcrt sich abel' ob
· urspl'ünglich ist und oh nicht vielmehr sekundar zwei yel'schie-
dles '
dene W urzeln hier (und nur hier!) zusam mengefallen sind. Nicht
nur auf Grund der semasiologischen Yel'haltnisse durfte sich diese
Annahme empfehlen, auch fuI' morphologisehe Schwierigkeiten liefie
si eh auí diese Weise eine, wje mil' scheint, befl'iedigende Erldarung
finden. Ai. sldati, aw. hioaiti (d. i. *hioati, vgl. mp. nis'iy, np. niSinad,
zuletzt Henning, ZII IX, 169) 2 weisan auf ein urinuoiranisches
Pl'iLsons sldati ,sotzt sich' hin, das sich bokanntlich, :tlloa seharf-
sinnigen Erklal'ungsversuchen zum Trotz (siehe Waldo, Vgl. Wb. 11,
484), auÍ' keinerlei Weise aus idg. *sed· ableitén liU3t. Litge ein
¡'edupliziertes Prasens VOl', wie in gr. ~,Cú, lato sido (aus *sizdü) , so
hatte dies ai. *srif,ati, aw. *hizdaiti ergeben müssen.
Diese auffallenden semasiologischen und morphologisehen Ver-
haltnisse fühl'en uns auf die Yermutung, dal3 in uriadoiraniseher Zeit
*siZdati ,el' setzt sich' mit einem Pl'asens sidati ,el' goht', dem es
1 Bartholornae, Wb.: ,sieh wegsetzen, wegrilcken, ausweieheu'. Man beaehte
a.ber, daB &(pt'ávw, *abaldo, *abaideo irn Griech. und Lat. nieht literariseh belegt
8JDd. (In diasidel'e wird noch ,sitzen' gefilhlt.)
2 Die h¡¡ufig vorkorn'menden Vnrianten mit hao· beruhen auf Defektiv-
schreibung.
183
 F. B. J. Kuiper. Indoiraniea. 29
28
. 't P '''verbien boO'rifflieh ziemlieh nahe gestanden des Wegs' (aus *aiwi·a-zd-ti- na eh dem Altir. Wb. 97 sq.) kann als
in Vel'bmdung mI la o d . der Weise daG im
nO'efallen ist, un zwar m , *aiwi-yas-ti- eine s-Erweiterung yon ya- ,gehen' enthalten. V gl.
haben mag, zusamme o d Tempora sad- alleinherrsehend yed. §ru-I}'f,í-~ ,Willfahrigkeit', aw. axsnu-s-to ,nicht zufriedengestellt',
-d in den an eren
Prasensstamm St -, d' 1 ndstufiO'e 2 vVul'zelform von ':h·ao-s·tis ,Ende' (Acta 01'. XII, 273). FuI' azis ... uspa/¡hiiÓo virai,-
d 1 1 81dati laO'e dann le se nvu o ,
wur e. n . oh eh die anderen bisher auf *sed- ,gehen haoo Aog. 78 nimmt Bartholomae Thematisierung eines Stammes
01< • d VOl' woraus SIC au W.. t
sle, .. lassen Die zahlreiehen aw. 01' el', *asparihad-, *vir'arihad- ,Manner, Krieger ano, Uberfallend' an, was
bezogenen Wol'ter el'klaren V· aus *sed- O'ehen' herleitet,
nach Bartholomaes organg 'o , weder in formeller Hinsicht noch del' Bedeutung nach befriedigt.
welc1le man . '1 Gaw asna- jaw. asna- ,nah VielleiQht ist an Geigers Verbindung mit ai. sadhati festzuhalten.
sind freilich alle anders zu beurte1l en. d n' o'eho;en zu _asnaoiti 3
auf *a-zd-na- zurUc e, son el' o . ,4 Eine Desiderativform yon "'sed- ,gehen' suchen weiter Andreas und
O'ehen 1caum 't' "hert sich errelcht.
Wackernagel, Gott. Nachr. 1913, 383; 1931, 327, in gaw. hisasat
o . 1 t' benso wie auch asnaot t ,na ,
,gelangt zu, erreiC 1 , e d Bartholomae als Kausativum
Y. 32, 13 a ,wird gelangen, wird erreiehen', das sic mit Rücksieht
Aw. pazdayeiti ,versche~cht' wur e ~;nDenominativum von *pazda-
auf das Metrum als falsehe Schreibung statt ltissal auffassen. Nun
von *pazdati el'klart, 1st aber wo . . . . BildunO'
. d' 1 daneben dIe JUngele al. o ist freilich keine del' anderen fUr hisasal gegebenen Erldarungen sehr
,verstoGen' (eigentl. ,absltzen ,vg. . _ tis Bahn Zurueklegung
Jaw. aW)!J<lS , , wahrscheinlich. Vgl. Geldner, KZ XXV, 381 A. 3 (dagegen LommeI,
h AusO'estoGener').ó
apaBa da-., o
Festschr. Andreas 102), Bartholomae, Wb. 1171, Scheftelowitz,
. en der Kon. Akad, v. Wetenschappen, aid. ZDMG LIX, 711 sq., Festg. Jacobi 28, Charpentier, Desiderativ-
Kern, Verslagen en Mededeehng
1 tet daS in den Epitheta
Letterk. 4° R. 7" dI. (Amsterdam 1905) S. 227 8¿;.~:~r;:1)a:ya8át (l.'t S IV, 40, 2ab) bildungen 66. Andel'erseits folgt aus del' metl'ischen Struktul' der
des mythischen Pferdes Dadhikravan t~l.a~lyasb k mit Reeht weil die aeht Zeite keineswegs mit Notwendigkeit, daG die überlieferte Fo¡'m zu
d t' .., ht' vorhe 17 t, a er aum ,
das Wurzelnomen von si a' ,,,,e . '" 't nd' enthalten. Das letztere . andern ist: kommen doch Z. B. isasoil und isasCf;s beide in einer
desselben L¡edes -sat ,SI ze
anderen Zusammensetzungen d' Ub setzt jetzt Renou, BSL XXXVII,
Wort nach Kero etwa ,im Fluge sehnell gehen, er át nach Kern mit tW'aY(lga-lJ, Zeile VOl', wo eine Silbe zuviel vorhanden ist, wahrend dennoch
37, ,c:lui qui siilge auX places d'honneur'. Aber tW'a1)Yas , . dreisilbige Lesung fUr diese Formen dureh isasa Y. 31, 4 feststeht
bl 'bt h wie vor unklar. . .
CTleiehbedcutend, el nae p t ' . ,.... lmd b080nders vya;- : Vl)- (so fiuch jetzt Lommel, Gott. 'Naclll'. 1935, 149). Dan UberziLhlige
., flq< n· I"~" -0'
s Wegon 1 vgl. iq- : 1,-, puq-: , 1 92 snq
S · h W ckernngol Ai. Gramrn., '1 • Zeilen in den GMhas ebensogut als im Veda vodwmmen, betont
(Nnsalprilsentia 53). le e a , W k agel Giltt Nachr.1911, S.11,
A d s und nc ern , . mit Recht Bartholomae, Z. altil'. Wb. 240; Heidelb. Sb. 1919, Abh. X,
o Gaw. asna- steht naoh n fea U 1 d nn die Prüposition ii-
- DnsWortw ne a
mit defektiver Schreibung flir (uma-. l ' 'hi hat (Wackernngol, S.9. Man kann weiter die l!-'rage, wie híSasat zu erkHiren sei, auf
ft d'e Bodeutung l es al. a"
enthalten, welche ¡lO Awest. o I An t' (aAnot') gelangt zu, erreicht', abhyiiáa-7} sich beruhen lassen, weH eine sichere Deutung dieser einmaligen
Sb. Ber!. Akad.1918, 400). V gl. aL abhya, o ~ k' l w'el7s aus17esehlossen ist, daLl die
. . ht . h r weIl es emes b
Nahe'. Doch ist dICs OlC SIC e , .'
'"
N"h s Uber á als Wiedergnbe
Form kaum moglich ist. Nur seí darauf híngewiesen, daG nach dem
, 't d' richtI!Yo 1st. a ere
Gllthn.awestische Lesung mi a lO '" Verhaltnis von did1'agzo. duye zu d1·¡mjaiti auch hisasal eine ganz
von a unter 17. á&aiti (S. 36).
, 1 e ntar 1
440
,neue
rdings z B. H. I,ornrne1, Zs.
. normale Desiderativform zu *hyand- (aí. s!Jand-) ware.! Die Schrei-
4 So sehon Splege, ornme '. liber amaoiti vgl. ya8na-,
A 1 FUr das 8 In ama- gegen I bung § statt ay kommt bekanntlich haufig VOl'. Nur muGte man
lndol. u. lran. lII, 177 . , . . b U lich dor Behandlung des Pulata s
\Jama-. Die dialektischen VerhilltOlsse amd ez g dann annehmen, daC3 hyand- im Awestischen noeh eine allgemeinere
. t Gramrn du v. p. 72.
unklar, vgl. Meillet-BonveOls e, " >10' • .1 Nest' und aw. vyliZdo
· . or in Id". na-;«L-O-, altetes Uber pazdayeiU bei Wa,ckernagel, Aj. Grnrnm. I, 37, der aber spüter (Sb. Berl,
~ Ahnliehe Bildungen l legen v " _ id t' l.'tS X 85, 32 b hinweist.
. ., , fü Bnrtholomao auf a8 an l , • V . Akad. 1918, 405 sq.) ved. Pedú-!¿ andera erkl1irt hato
,Iauernd, mSldloSUS, wo r .' xsa&¡'am niBadayat y, 9, 24. er
I Ai,sisyantsati (nur Plit¡.. 7, 2, 59) jst eine jUngere jndische Bildung wegon des n.
V gl. o.ueh die verwandte Ausdruckswelse 10 alla.

184 185
30 F. B. J. Kuiper. Jndoiraniea. 31
Bedeutung hatte als im Altindisehen, welehe Vermutung zwal' erlaubt deutung aufweist, el1tlehnt worden sei. Dan dieser Aufsatz allgemeine
ist aber sieh nieht beweisen HWt. . Anerkennung gefunden hat,l kann angesiehts der grUndliehen Be-
, Gr.ov <.t6g, Weo"o liWt sieh olme Sehwierigkeit aus *Slodó- herletten f handlung des literarisehen MateriaIs und der damit zusammenhanO'en-
o
und kann mit ai. syáda-l) (siehe oben) identiseh sein. Verwandtseha t den historisehen Fragen, auf die el' gegrundet ist, nicht wundel'-
mit got. sa71djan, von Bopp, Oonjugationssy~tem :16 A""angenommen, nehmen. Wenn ieh im folgenden auf einen Gesiehtspunkt, den Stein
.t f dl'ese Weise letzten Endes moglieh (slehe N asalpras. 1. c.). Hom. meiner Meinung naeh nieht gentigend bertieksichtigt hat, etwas
-lS au . B .. ,
.:1"6 ).J ~ G f"h te Diener des A.' ist naturlieh .
VI:> g ./.l er¡og , e a r ,
Dleht , . elsltzer,. naher eingehe und so zu einem von Steins Ergebnissen ganz ab-
• -UT Id
wle Vf a e, "lT\ ocrl . Wb .11, 486 , will , sondern es enthalt den. Stamm .
emes weichendell Resultat geIangen werde, so moehte ¡eh hier dankbar
-BeweO'ungsver bums 1 u d ist in Abweiehung
n von der ubhehen
.Auf- anerkennen, dan seine Untersuchung dureh ihl'e reiehhaltige Material-
o
fassun oO' als *siodio- von M6g abzuleiten, vgl. got. gasinpja v~n st~J;s. sammlung eine fruehtbare Erorterung der Frage Uberhaupt erst
~ ~ . *k *k'
Lat. cedo, aw. syazd- konnen sehon dal'um Dleht aus e-, le- moglieh gemaeht hato
und -zd- zusammengesetzt sein (WaIde, V gl. Wb. 11, 486; vgl. W ~l~e- Betl'ltehten wir zunachst die Frage, ob es zwisehen gr. (fVetrS
H ofmann, L a.t et .Wb. ,
8193) weil urindocrermanisehe VerbalkomposltlOn•
o und ai. surU'ilga irgendwelehe historische Beziehungen gegeben hat,
ausO'ese11 . t 1I.l "heres über diese Würter Acta Oro XII, 236 sqq.,•
1 ossen lS . .l.~ a etwas llaher. Daran, dan das griechische 'Vort aus dem Osten
we;en des Schwundes von j naeh anlautendem Konsonanten vgl. hen: stamme, ist jedenfalls nieht zu denken, denn seine versehiedenen
ai. hyá[t und vielleieht sentio (Nasalpras. 144). Bedeutungen lassen sieh alle unsehwer aus einer GrundbedeutunO'
o
LeO't man *sied- zugrunde, so kann aksl. 81Jd'b PPfA ,gegangen' ,Rohre' erkIaren. Bei ai. surUJiga sind die Verhaltl1isse weniger Idar.
aus *ard-o erklart ~ werden, wahrend III . u"t
x'd'b ,cpv,,!ág' alte Vollstufe
. DaG es kein altererbtes Wort ist, ist zwar sehr wahrseheinlich.
des Wurzelvokalismus (*seid-) vol'liegt. Auf die alte F¡'age, wle d~r Suruitga war offenbar ursprUnglieh 2 ein Faehausdruek fUr das-
Anlaut von aks1. chod'b, choditi ,gehen' zu el'klaren ist, brauehen wa' jenige, was im allgemeinen Spraehgebrauch mit bilam (Mhbh. r,
hiel' nieht einzugehen. 2 Jedenfalls stehen diese Wül'tel' del' Annahme 148,18 und 150,8), mahabilam (J, 147,16; vgl. atimaltad bilam 17)
einer Wul'zel *si,ed llicht im "Voge. uaw. bozeiehllet wurde. 8 Stntt 81tl'1d/gürp, kamyitva tu. (v. 1. til)
Viduret¡a pl'acodital¡ I, 2252 O., J, 61, 22 B. in der ausfUhl'lieheren
15. Ai. surunga ,ein unterirdischer Gang, Mine, Bresche'.
Version del' beiden alteren Ausgaben hat Sukthanlcars Text J, 55, 18
Úber dieses Wort hat vormehreren Jahren O. Stein, Z11 JII Vidul'asyaiva vacanat khanit1'i vihita tata~. Stein suchte den Ur-
(1925), 280-318 (vgl. IV, 345 sqq.), eine umfangreiehe Untersuehung spl'ung von sU1'miga, wie sehon bemerkt, in Gl'ieehenland. Die
veroffentlieht, in weleher er die versehiedenen Belegstellen aus. del'
ai. Literatur eingehend behandeIt und versueht ha~, nachz~welsen, 1 Siehe B. Liebich, BSOS VI (1931), 432 (mit Lit.), Scheftelowitz, Die Zeit als

SchicksaIsgottheit in der indischen und iranischen Religion 28, Keith, A History

daG das vV ort aus dem Grieehisehen, wo (fvQtrs eme ahnhche Be-
1 VO'l. die Synonyme ai. anucal·á-Z¡, aaciua-Q" aaháyá-Q, usw., gr. dot1(nl~?í(b
drrclwv: &ft~trroi.o" lato comes, 80ciua (:se'luol'), got. gasin}da, ags. gefé¡'a, secg (:aocma),
nhd. Gefah¡·te. V '>4 LI "21 229
51 Siehe Meillet, MSL XIX, 299, und Brückner, KZ XL , . , ,. ,
(unwahrschcinJich).
of Sanskrit Literature (1928), 25, P. Thieme, ZDMG XCI, 88 sq.
, FUr das Weiterleben in jUngeren Sprachperioden, was auf allmilhlich all-
gemeinere Verwendung deutet, siehe unten.
3 Dies scheint auch aus Nilakal)thas Erlauterung zu I, 147, 16 hervorzu-
gehen: pal'ilchi1pa!'¡~lcal'auylijena bilan mrdam utki¡'an (= bahii¡ k~ipan) mahabila1[l.
BUl'a1lgakhya1[l. caká¡·a. übrigens hat Stein S. 306 schon auf die normale Verwen-
dung von bila-m hingewiesen.

186 187
32 F, B, J, Kuiper,
lndoiranica, 33
Moglichkeit, dal3 es sich um ein aus del' Sprache del' einheimischen fissure', (tu?:U1i ,a heavy piece oE wood with a hole throuO'h 't
Bevolkerung stammendes W ort handle, hat el' dagegen nicht ernst- . t h' h '" 1
In o W le the foot of a criminal is plaeed and then wedO'ed tiO'htly'
lich in Betracht gezogen: nur eiumal macht el' (S, 301) den Vor- mundari '?) werden wohl hierher gehoren.
. . ,t o pIeree
1'uráng . l:> b
Da.13,
behalt: ,falls SUl'u¡'¡ga nicht als aus einer dritten Sprache stammend al, 8urunga aus del' Kultursphare del' nichtarÍschen AboriO'ines
angesehen werden sollte', Es scheint mil' jedoch, da3 nur in dieser stammt, dUrfte demnach nicht zweifolhaft sein, Weitero Verw:ndte
Richtung eine befl'iedigende Losung del' Frage erwal'tet werden be,st~tigen, da3 es sich hierbei um eine allgemoin vorbreitete austro-
darf, Zunli.chst ist darauf hinzuweisen, dal3 sich bei SU1'W'¡gá del' aSlatlSehe W ortsippa handelt, vgl.:
ohen bespl'ochene a: u-Wechsel wiedel'findet: die Bomb, Ausg, des
khmer': 1'I:l1i (naban rU1i) ,Loeh in del' Erda; hohl'
Mhbh, hat sowohl sU1'a¡'¡ga (1, 148, 12; Nrlakal}.tha zu 1, 147, 16)1
khasi: 8ynrm'¡ ,Hohle'
als surtli¡ga, vgl. 1, 2, 104 B. (= 1, 379 e,), wo auch Sukthankar
8arm'¡ ,hohl'
(= 1, 2, 83 b) mit einer Anzahl Hss, 8u1'wiga liest, wli.hrend die
bersisi: 8~ron batuk ,cavity (in rock)'
uhrigen sU1'a1iga haben, und J, 61, 22, Siehe dazu PW VII, 1118,
8~r01'¡, 1'on ,pite
pw VII, 160, In jilngerer Zeit hat dann die Form SU1'ar¡ga den
itero'" ,deep' 1
Sieg davongetragen, Vg'l, im MaharM,tl'¡ SU1'a¡'¡ga (Jacohi, Ausgew,
alak, bolovon, lavé, niaho'n: t1'om ,trou'
Erz, 6 8,19.2°) 2 und hindr surai¡g ,a hole dug through a wall for the
sué: pr01i ,trou'
purpose of house hl'eaking, a mine, a subterraneous passage, a tunnel,
crau, stieng: t1'um ,trou'
a gallery', surMtgi, Sttra¡'¡giya ,a miner, house-breaker, burglar', Die
kon-tu: troJ! ,tomboau'
vokalischen Verhli.ltnisse berechtigen uns also zur Frage, ob sich
sué: r01i
dasWort als ein Lehnwort aus den austroasiatischen Sprachen del' "
cam: 1'U1i ,creux, trou, ouvertul'e, eavité'
Aborigines erklliren la3t,
1jrU1'¡ , tunnel, souterrain' s
Tatsachlieh findet sich im Santali ein Wort 8U1'U¡'¡ ,to bore a
holo in a rock for blasting; a holo bOl'od in a roek for blasting', Aus dom indonesischon Sprachgobioto ist zu orwahnen malai,
womit W. Schmidt, Die Mon-Khmor-Volker 112, schon lli.ngst khmor dj01'ong (auf Java tjorong) ,a name given to funnols and eertain
rü¡i ,hohlen, hohl', stieng ru¡'¡ ,Hilhlo', cond1'uri ,Holzwurm', mon funnol-like objects', das mit den hintol'Índischon Wortern zusammen-
ka¡'o¡'¡ ,Grube' vereinigt hat,S Aueh sant, J¿q.lld1'U1'¡ ,a hollow, g'ap,
Ungen konnte,
, Daneben fin don sieh in den Sprachon Hintorindiens mahrare
1 Einige Hss, haben aueh hier 8U/'UT¡gil. Der Passus ist übrigens interpoliert,
siehe Sukthankar zu 1, 136, 9. slllnverwandto Wl.h·ter, welehe abor taHs im Anlaut, teHs im Auslaut
2 Jacobi S. XXV nimmt Dissimilation aus 8uruilga an, aber die Mehrzahl der abwoiehon.
für diese Lauterscbeinung geltend gemachten Beispiele hat austrisebe Wortgestalt. .. Sollte ~iese. Erklarung von 8U1'U1'¡ga ,Mino' das Riehtigo treffen,'
KannaQ.a 8urai¡ge, 8U1'Unge ist wohl eine frUhe Entlehnung.
3 Ganz andera W. J, de Hevesy, BSOS VI, 192, DaS Scbmidts Etyrnologien
so fallt damlt dIe fUr Stein bestohende Notwendigkeit, die MahA-
sehr oft falsch sind oder auf willkUrlicben Annabrnen beruben, liiSt sich freilich
~ Schmidt, Die Spracben der Sakei und Semang 426.
nicht leugnen. Sein Vergleiehsmaterial (das ieh für verschiedene Spracben be- Cabaton, Journ, As, 1905, J, 881sq.
nutzt habe, ohne es leider kritisch naebprilfen zu konnen, so z, B, fUr das Nikobar)
a E, Aymonier et A, Cabaton, Diction, cam-frangais.
.erweist sicl!, wo Prilfung moglich ist, oft ala unzuverliiasig, Doeh hat Schmidt
• W.ie die ,Pflan,zennamen turanga-!), 8urangi ,Moringia ptcrygosperma' zu
zweifellos den ricbtigen Weg gezeigt, erkll1ren smd, sel dahmgeste!lt: mit turu71ga baben sie jedenfalls nichts zu tuno
Acta.orientalia XfU. 8
188
189
34 F. B. J. Kuiper.
bhll.rata-Stellen als jüngere Úberarbeitungen zu erklaren, und ver-
liert das Vorkommen von sU1'uñga im Kautilíya Arthasll.stra den
ihm von Stein beigelegten Wert für die Datierung dieses "\Verkes.
Die FraO'e nach del' Herkunft von ai. surui¡ga ,Mine' hat
übrigens ein a~lgemeineres Interesse, weil damit die kulturhistorisch
sehr wichtige Frage nach dem Umfang del' kulturellen und sprach-
lichen Beeinflussung, welche lndien seitens des Griechentums er-
fahren hat, aufs engste verknüpft ist. Als eine solche hatte scbon
Stein die Frage erfaf3t. Seitdem ist del' zusammenfassende Aufsatz
von B. Liebich erschienen,l del', von Steins Untersuchung ausgebelld,
mehrere andere Beispiele für jenen Einfluí3 geltend macht. Für
kramela-lt konnte dies zwar zutreffen, über kampana- hat aber VOl'
einigen Jahren O. Stein, BSOS VII, 61-68, eine neue eing~hende
Untersuchung veroffentlicht, aus welcher klar hervorgeht, Wle vel'-
wickelt Fragen dieser Art sind. Man wird sich jedenfalls davor zu
hüten haben, den sprachlichen Einfluf3 des Griechischen zu über-
schatzen.
16. Jaw. azahva-, azana-, ayra, ayostis ,Namen von
Krankheiten'.
Oben (S. 22) wurde in ai. §ir~alctí-Q. ein mit aw. axtis ,Leiden,
Schmerz, Krankheit' identisches Nomen -akti-Z¡ nachgewiesen, das
Nur sei darauf hingewiesen, daS die Ubliche Zerlegung in HU + rañga·1; ,F~rbe'
(so noch Stein, s. 300) kaum richtig ist: einerseits flnden si eh ~uch neben .dle~en
Formen wieder sol che mit u (SUI'u7Iga-1;, aiehe PW a. v.), andererselta lassen sle slch
von den Pflanzennamen '1liirail!Ja-1; (volksetymologisch zu niigaranga-1; umgestaltet)
und mUl'ai¡gi, muruilgi ,Moringia ptei.-ygosperma' nicht trennen. Ob diese W¡¡rt~:
vielleicht mit santo mundo ¡'an, ron ,to colour, to dye, to stain', khmer "un
,brilliant' usw. zu verbindenseien - der Name HU"aflgi soH jo. de~ "ak~aJobhiiñja'1la
die rote Moringia pterygosperma' bezeichnet haben -, wage ICh Dlcht zu ent-
~cheiden. Santo nar(a)ngi ist ofienbar rückentlehnt. Auch in den in~onesisc~en
Sprachen flndet sich dieser Pflanzenname wiedcr, Z. B. mal. malouilga (slehe welter
de Clercq, Nieuw plantkundig woordenboek voor Nederl. Indie, Nr.2345). Nach
van Ronkel, Tijdsch. Batav. Genootschap XLV (1902), 115, atammt er aus dem
Tamil, wo der Name mUl·!.nigai lautet.
1 BSOS VI (1931), 431 sqq.
190
lndoiranica. 35
etymologisch zur vVurzel *aq~ ,schadigen usw.' g-ehort. Nun hat
das lndoiranische daneben eine fast vollig synonymische vVurzel ag~h
besessen, welche z. B. in ai. 'aghá-Z!, aw. aro ,schlirnm, bose, gefahr-
Hch' vorHegt. Unsichere weitere Verknüpfungen konnen wir hiel'
beiseite lassen. Bemerkenswert ist aber, daG auch diese vVurzel
einige Namen für bestimmte Krankheiten geliefert zu haben scheint.
Vendo 20, 3 nnden wir namlich unter einer Anzahl Bezeichnungen
für Ktankheiten und Gebrechen auch die Worter azana- und azahva-,
von denen das erstere die in solchen Abstrakta ganz regelmal3ige
Palatalisierung des Gutturals zeigt (si eh e Wackernagel, Festg. Jacobi 5),
letzteres aber auf einem s-Nomen azah- beruhen muG. Für das
sekundare Formans -va vergleiche man upaosa¡'!hvo ,ostlich' von usah-.
Zu diesen Namen gesellen si eh weiter noch arra, das Vendo 20, 9
eine Krankheit bezeichnet,l und arost.is, das in ahnlichem Sinne
Vendo 7, 57 vorkommt.
Letztere Form, welch.e Bartholomae, Wb. 48, als ,das schlechte
Sein' erklart,' wonach es mit ai. abhí~ti-b- ,Beistand, Hilfe' U. dgl.
(Wzl. as- ,sein') zu vergleichen ware, steht übrigens unmittelbar
binter sárastis (Vend. 7, 57). Weil sarastis aucl! an anderen Stellen
noch vOl'kommt (Yt.13, 131 und thematisch V. 20, 3), arostis dagegen
nur hier, hat man del' Moglichkeit Rechnung zu tr'agen, daf3 es
sich nm eine bewuGte oder unbewuGte Heimwortbildung handelt
von del' Art, wie sie z. B. Wackernagel, Festg. Jacobi 7, behandelt
hat (,suffixale Angliederung').
17. Jaw. a{)oaiti ,verdirbt' (intrans. und trans.).
Es gibt bekanntlich einige Falle, die Andreas, Gott. Nachr.1911,
13, zu del' Annahme genotigt haben, da13 bisweilen anlautendes a del'
Oberlieferung einem etymologischen a entsprechen konne, z. B. ar-
maitis, dem in del' vedischen Sprache arámati·~ entspricht. s Es fragt
sich, ob die Zahl solcher Falle nicht erheblich grof3er ist, als Andreas
1 Siehe dazu Bartholomae, Z. altir. Wb. 100.
! Verfehlt WUst, GGA 1934, 24 A. 2.
3*
191
36 F. B. J. Kuiper.
damals einzuraumen geneigt war. So ist z. B. gaw. aya~ Y. 31, 20 a
kaum anders denn als aya~ aufzufassen (siehe Meillet, Journ. As. 1920,
1, 199), und atara.&ra, das an zwei Yast-Stellen vorkommt, kan n nur
ala *atara.&ra erklart werden (Air. Wb. 317, Meillet, op. cit. 200).
Wenn man neben gaw. jaw. asna- ,nahe' im Jung-Awestischen auch
die Form asna- findet,1 so kann es sich nur um eine graphische
Erscheinung handeln, wobei das Oathn-Awestische,. das ja im aH-
gemeinen Plenarschreibung bevorzugt, trotz Andreas, Oott. Nachr.
1911, 11, wohl die richtige Form bietet. AIs Grundform ist nicht
*a-zd-na- (Altír. Wb. 220, Meillet, Journ. As. 1917, II, 185), sondern
idg. *1;lk-no- (zu ai. asnoti usw.) anzusetzen (vgl. aber ohen S. 28
A. 3). Wegen aw. nazdistiJ, worauf sich Bartholomae beruft, ist
Acta Oro XII, 218 zu vergleichen. Dagegen enthalt das verwandte
jaw.Prasens asnaoiti ,geht heran, nahert sich', das jedenfalls mit
ai. asnoti zu verbinden ist,S das Praverbium a, weil an metrischen
Stellen eine viersilbige Form gefordert wird (siehe Lommel, zn III,
177 sq.). Vgl. ai. asnoti (schon rgvedisch) ,gelangt zu, erreicht'.s
Unsicher ist die etymologische Erklarung von aste ,mit' V. 5,
59, das man als *1.1s-to- mit ai. násate ,gesellt sich Hebend zu' usw.
verknupfen mochte.'
Wenn aber anlautendes {j, der Vulgata ein etymologisches a
vertreten kann, lassen sich auch mehrere ande re Wl:lrter, fuI' wolche
roan bisher kompositionelle Vl'ddhi anzunehmen pflegte, vi el befrie-
digender erklaren. Neben jaw. arstís, das wegen ai. l'~WI¡, als *grfJstis
aufzufassen ist, findet sich die Zusammensetzung jaw. arsty{j.biJriJzan-
,von Klafterhohe'. DaG in Zusammensetzungen dieser Art Vrddhi
1 Nur in iilmalléa Yt. 17, 2. Daneben lWIall-rall8o V. 18, 46, 48" IWIIl H.2,
2.20 P 21.
I So schon Spiegel, Commentar I, 440 (,trotz des langen Anlauts'), verfehIt
Bartholomae, GrIrPh. 1 a, 198, Air. Wb. 1755.
3 Gaw. liZdyéii Y.51, 17. mit zweisilbiger Messung, das nach Bartholomae
li + Il' enthlilt (zustimmend M. W. Smith), bleibt unklar (siehe jetzt Lommel, GN
1935, 160).
, Vgl. fUr die Bedeutungsverhllltnissc Verl., Die idg. Nasalprlisentia 51 A.4.
Die einmalige Form ist aber sehr unsicher, siehe Altir. Wb. 340.
192
Indoil'anica. 37
vorliege, ist kaum anzunehmen. Die Vel'mutung dl'angt sich somit
auf, daf3, ebenso wie im Inlaut a1'iJ bisweilen fuI' l' stehen kann
(z. B. uzarfJsva Y. 33, 12 a , siehe Gütt. Nachl'. 1911, 12), so auch hiel'
a1'styo- als *l'stya- aufzufassen ist. DaG in Komposita wie ¡¡iti.mar a-,
aiti.nmana-, die übrigens von Fallen wie paitivaka-, paú'ivuza-,
upaú·i.saena- nicht zu trennen sind, keine alte Vrddhi vorliegt, hat
schon Horn, KZ XXXVIII, 292, erkannt. In V'iJ1'iJzyüt usaiti noit
unusaiti hat Nlrangastán einmal a gegenuber sonstigem anltsant-
,widel'willig'. Ebenso wird die Vokallange in jaw. avoya ,wehe' neben
avoya, gaw. avoi wohl nur graphisch sein (anders Gütt. Nachr. 1911,
11). Dal3 dann aber weiter ainivan-, Epitheton des Windes, wofür
Bartholomae uur zweifelnd Verwandtschaft mit an- vorschluO'o, als
ani-van- mit. ai. anití ,atmet', anilá-(¡ ,Wind' zu verbinden ist, liegt
auf der Hand. Klar ist auch del' g¡'aphische Oharakter des an-
lautenden a in á,[fravan- neben a.&au1·van-, ai. átharvan-. Mit RUck-
sicht auf die Tatsache, daG die ai. Nomina auf -it (z. B. Sa1'ít) immer
vollstufigen Wurzelvokalismus zeigen,l dUrfte dann auch jaw. asit-
,genieGend' als *asít- (ai. *asit-) zu lesen sein. SchlieGen wir diese
Aufzahlung, die sich Ieicht vermehren lieGe, mit aw. ahíto ,beReckt,
verunreinigt', wofur BarthoIomae, vVb. 345, uur eine vaO'e VermutunO'
o b
bietet. Neuerding's hat Pisani, Riv. Stud. 01'. XIV, 85, die ganz nahe-
liegende Vel'lmUpfung mit ai. asita-(¡ ,dunkel, schwarz' ("gl. Z. B.
Fick. 1", 171, Leumann, Et. Wb. 27, Lommel, Die Yast's 28) wieder
aufgenommen, erIelarte dabei abor das a des awestischen Wortes
durch Vl'ddhi. Auch in diesem Falle wird es sich aber um graphische
vViedel'gabe von '" ahíta- handeln. 2 vVeitel' envahne ich noch
agrfJmaití(S) Yt. 17, 6 ,entgegenkommenden Sinnes'. Geldner, Drei
Yasht 102, verband a-gra- mit gm' ,preisen' und ihm folgt Bai'tholo-
mae, Wb. 310. Aber aw. arai1'ya~ ,wil'd gepriesen' Yt. 13, 50 steht
begrifflich nicht nahe genug, um fuI' diese Erklarung eine SWtze
hilden zu konnell. HerteIs Deutung (Indoiran. QuelJen und FOl'sch.
I,indner, AItind. Nominalb. 58, Whitney, Grnmm. § 383 d.
I
!Freilich kann éi in diesem einmaligen Wort VOll der gebrüuehlicheren
Zusummellsetzung anéihita- herrühren.
193
 F. B. J. Kuiper. lndoiranica. 39
38
VII, 44 A. 3) als ,herabstrahlend' gehOrt zu den vielen nieht disleu- wahrsel~einlieh ist, ist also statt A,9iyaballsna- (Air. Wh. 323 i Meillet-
tableu Annahmen dieses Gelehrten. So seheint die Auffassung als Benvemste, Gramm. du v. p.2 69) vielmehr A3-iyab O zu lesen. 1
ag"a-mati- ,n:e6,9vf.lo~, pronus' wenigstens nahere Erwagung zu ver- Es fragt sieh, ob wegen ycd. pranaáyati CB.S X, 146 lb SBM IV~
dienen. FUr A:m'ü1'o ,EN. eines Glaubigen' (Yt. 13, 137) verweist 324
'. ,
,,)
U. o. un
d aw. jra ... paiti apa.:fa (Yt.19 " JMV. pqst-o.,
, 48)"III

Bartholomae auí den u. a. aus dem Harivalpsa bekannten ai. EN. j1'a,9aMwm nicht ein Nomenf1'ií3-alt- (fra-a3-alt-) zu suchen ist. Man
Akrüra'{I. Sose11r im allgemeinen Vorsieht beí Eigennamen geboten d Pllsto.j,·a:fa¡ih-am dann als Akk . So'
leann o' el'nes AdJ'elet'tVS au ffassen

ist, so seheínt hiel' Identitat del' beídell Namen doeh wohl siehm·. :~. ya/fa ya¡ 1.. pq....fra/iaM'"' kam,,.,J,,,, k'....uya¡ V. 18, 1¿
Die sonstigen Falle bereehtigen uns, auch hiel' das a als a aufzu- urde demnach zu übersetzen sein: ,als ob er sich den Kopf hautlos
fassen. Bisweilen wird aueh ií in Verbalformen nur das Augment a nrle h V .3, 20). Zugunsten dieser Annahme sprieht Yt. 19
maehte' ("h
bezeiehnen, z. B. in lílc-a,";mvo Y. 9, 15 (entgegen Altir. Wb. 447), 44 :fJm Ja~{il
naú'e.mantt K-arfJsaspo ava apanfJm gayelte j1'aSiin-am~
ak-aron-am V. 22, 1 (vgl. ·Wb. 453). us.tanalte ,Ihn tOtete del' mannlieh gesinnte K., zu einem Absehlu13 3
Auf Grund dieser Eigentumliehleeit des awestisehen Vulgata- semes Lebens, zu einer Verniehtung seiner Lebenskraft'. Bartholo-
Textes laGt sieh wahrseheinlich aueh fUr a3-aiti ,verdirbt' und die mae, Air. ·Wb. 1001, verbindet (f1'a)san-am mit ai. -cltana-. Wegen
zugehorigen Nomina a3-is, a3-1·is F. ,Verderben, Unheil, Leid', die des.oben angefuhrten Wortes jra:fah. liegt es aber nahe, (f1'a)sanfJm
als etymologisch unklar gelten,1 eine llefriedigende Erklarung geben. (d. l. jr{js~,nfJm:)4 zu les en und es auf die Wurzel *nek- zu beziehen.
Diese Worter sind nieht zu trennen von vina3-aym V. 3, 20; 9,49, ~as :erhaltms von j1'a3-ah- (*pra-asas-) zu *frasana- (*pra-aáana-)
das weiter mit ap. viyana.( 3-a)ya, soghd. panesat ,verderbt' (von 1~13t slCh dann dem von sarasti- (von *áaras-) zu sarana- (= *sarana-
*apanasaya-), sak. panass (Tedesco, ZII U, 283, vgl. Lommel, ZU IlI, . slehe unten) U. dgl. ,rergleiehen. '
164, Reiehelt, ZIl IV, 245), ai. nasayati zusammengehOrt: vina:tay-all
2
bedeutet: ,sie sollen verniehten'. 1m Ansehlu13 an die oben besproehenen Falle mit anlautendem jj.
A,9aiti entsprieht d:i.nn aber einem ai. Prasens del' 6. Klasse a~s . graphiseher Wiedergabe von etymologisehem a mogen hier no eh
Pa.~íllis ("".lk-éti).3 DaB os otwa mit dOIll Pl'itvorhium li- zusnmmon- clmge
• • Bomol'llUngen über a im Inlaut foluen
O. Iel 1 bespt'eehe nur
gesetzt seí, ist sehon wegen del' Bedeutung von a wenig wahrsehein- el~lge Falle, ohne Vollstandigkeit zu beabsiehtigen. Von mehreren
lieh (anllsa] Y. 53,7° gehort wohl mit ai. ana1f/sa zusammen). AuGel'- ~eIten hat man sehon darauf hingewiesen, da13 die awestisehe Úbel'-
dem kommt aber nehen ai3-is, i1:i{Hm (Y. 48, 9 b ; Yt. 10, 37 in allen heferun bu uns zwi ng,t auc h'm auderen als den von Andreas, Gott
Hss.) die Lesart ai3-is (Y. 32, 1Gb in zahlreiehen Hss.), ai3-ivant-am Naehr. 1911, 12, anerkannten Fallen 5 a als graphische Wiedergab~
(H. 2, 17; aber ai3- 0 Aog. 28) V01,.4 Wenn del' ap. Eigenname A:tiya-
busn- hiet'hergehort, was tt'otz J usti, lF Anz. XVII, 106, immerhin I Die altpersisclle Keilschrift unterscllel'det im Anlaut bekanntlich nicht
•
zWlschen a und ti,
2 Konjektur von Bartholomae; ... 8¡¡wm in den Hss,
I So nocll Cho.rpllntier, Oriento Stud. Po.vry 80 A.3.
t So mit Recllt lIerte1, Beitr, z, Metrik d. Aw. u. d.1;tV 88 A, 2. Ge1dner, ava.apawm;
a =A.6
feuer 47 V I ' so _mit Recht . . Herte,1 D'le o.w, Herrscllafts- und Sieges-
Sb. BerI. Akad. 1903, 433 A. 5, 1egt der Pahlavi-Obersetzung zu vie1 Wert bei, . g . al. par!Japno/i ,bnngt zum Absch1ull macht ein Ende' u d 1
1 • M't
l S C1Irel'bung der.mo.ter lectionis in der zweiten
, .
Silbe etwa g.
um Ver-
a Vgl. ved. aáati neben naáati ,erreichen'.
• So liest auch jetzt wieder Duchesne-GuilhmlÍn, JOUrll. As. 1936, 1, 247, esung 0.18 ¡rama- vorzubeugen. ' '
á9-ivantam in seinem wiederhergestellten Aog¡¡mo.daiica-Text. 5 Veraltet Bartllolomae, GrIrPll. 1 a, 154 (§ 268, 3).

195
194
40 F. B. J. Kuiper.
von a aufzufassen. Vgl. B. Geiger, Die Amasa Spantas 30 FuJ3n.
(dagegen prinzipiell ablehnend Lommel, ZIl III, 171 A. 2), 1 Meillet,
Journ. As. 1920, J, 188 A. 1,202 sq., Verf. Acta 01'. XII, 249. Das
Material ist ohne Zweifel sehr heterogen, und ofters HiJ3t sich nicht
mit Sicherheit bestimmen, ob graphische Erscheinungen vorliegen
oder ,sprachliche', d. h. Verwendung mítteliraníscher Stammformen
oder Endungen in awestischer Lautgestalt. Als mitteliranisch be-
trachtet Wackernagel, Sb. Berl. Akad. 1918, 392, das a in upaú'i.saena-
(vgl. mp. apat'8en) und ebenso erklart Andreas, Gott. Nachr. 1931,
325 sq., die bekannten Kausativformen ohne kausativischerEndung
uz:jámoit_ , sol! buroJ3ziehen' und ástaraiti
. (neben seltenem ástarayeiti)
,macht sündig' im Vendrdad und jüngeren Texten. Letzteres mag
wegen del' Art del' Belegstellen (u. a. NIrangastan) zum Teil richtig
sein, ob es aber für aUe in Betracht kommenden Stellen zutrifft,
scheint mil' zweifelhaft. Jedenfalls sind in V.4, 5 cva1 aeso miS7'o
aiwi. d,'ureta astáraiti yo vacahino ,in welchem MaJ3 macht solch Ver-
trag - del' durch das (bloJ3e) Wort geschlossene - sUndig, wenn
el' verletzt wird?' als Varianten auch ástarayeiti, -te (u. a. in del'
wichtigen Hs. L4,) überliefert. Es handelt sich offenbar um den be-
kannten Fehler del' Textuberlieferung, der sich auch an vielen anderen
Stellen nachweisen liíJ3t. V gl. neben agílurvayeiti V. 4, 18 die V. 1.
ilg(J'-ílvaiti (einmalige Schreibung des y). Yt. 8,59 sind als Varianten
gílurvayoi1, g'rJurvaya1 und gfJU1'Vi1(l) uberliefert (vgl. die Varianten
zu !purvaya1 Yt.14, 52). Vend. 19, 28 haben sieben Hss. raoéayeiti (-te),
nur zwei raocaiti, woran aber Lommel beí seiner metrischen Ein-
renkung del' SteUe (ZII lII, 178) festhiílt. Vgl. weiter sravaema
(v. 1. statt srávayaema) Y. 49, 6 und aoJaete(neben V. 1. aoJayaeti,
yaozayeiti) Yt. 14, 62. So haben statt paiti.,-aéCayeiti V. 5, 8 zwei
Hss. -1'aecaiti, was offenbar ein Fehler del' Abschreiber ist. Danach
ist auch upa.1'ae.:fwaiti V. 10, 1 (so Geldner und Bartholomae mit L4,)
zu beurteilen, vgl. -1'ae.:fwyeit,¿ Mf2 , -?'aM}wayeite Jpl' -raMfwaya , , .
K 1&. Sonst steh t uberall im Ven dI dad rae.:fwayeiti (ohne wichtige
1 Die von Geiger, Festschr. Andreas 96, in Aussicht gestellte Behandlung
dieser Frage ist mcines Wissens nie erschienen.
196
Indoiranica. 41
Varianten): V.5, 28.33; 18,62 und 19,20 (dl·eimal). Durch Kon-
jektur stellt Meillet, Journ. As. 1920, J, 199, in Y. 31, 14 b statt {tia, aité
del' Hss. den zu erwartenden Konjunktiv ayeití wieder her. Teils
kann Haplographie del' Kopisten die U rsache soleller Fehler sein
(vgl. Geldner, Prolegomena XL VIII b), teils kann ein y des U rtextes
in sassanidischer Zeit fiílschlich als Wiedergabe des epenthetischen
Vokals (-aiti statt -yati) aufgefal3t worden sein. "Venn wÍ!' also einer-
seits á~ta1'o,iti finden statt astat'ayeiti, andererseits in Nil'. 12 statt
llsta?'ayeiti del' Úberlieferung ástryeiti zu les en haben, wie auch V. 5,3
neben richtigem ast?'yeiti die Varianten ástáryaeiti und ástti.1·ayeiti
(beide in zwei Hss.) uberliefert worden sirid, so kann die schwankende
Orthog-raphie in den spiíten Texten rein graphischer Natur sein. Die
. Erkliírung von asta1'aiti als Mitteliranismus liíJ3t sich nicht wider-
legen, notwendig scheint sie aber (auch mit Rücksicht auf die anderen
Falle) nicht.
Welche Rolle del' W ortkorper bei solchen Schreibungen spiel t,
ersieht man am klarsten aus den zu nam- g-ehorigen Formen. Lommel
(brieflich) mochte auch hiel' EinfluJ3 von mp. a-Mm, fra-nam an-
nehmen. Einegenauere Betrachtung- ergibt aber, dal3 fUr *namaiti
als Simplex nílmaiti überliefert ist, dageg-en in Zusammensetzung mit
ft·a die plenare Schreibung- franamtiite, weil hiel' die Verlesung *fran-
maite g-anz nahelag: tatsiíchlich ist Yt. 9, 4 (= 17, 25) frilnmane
uberliefert, wofUr Hertel, Indoiran. Quellen und Forsch. VII, 32 A.10,
mit Unrecht metrische Vokalelision annimmt. 1 Besonders lehrreich ist
eine Stelle wie Y. 57, 18 (vg-l. Yt. 17,25), wo nebeneinander f?'anlimaite
(ein Wortl) und f?·a ... n.ílmante (getrennt) stehen. Welches Gesetz
beí nam~ Plenarschreibung bedingte, ist also klar. Mitteliranischen
EinfluJ3 nur fUr die eine Form anzunehmen, ware daher ein willkül'-
Hches Verfahren. Vgl. auch Turfan-Pahlavi pl'nm'nd. Diese Sachlag-e
warnt uns, nicht zu leicht mit Mitteliranismen zu operieren, weil es
sich hiíufig um rein orthographische Eigentum1ichkeiten des Awesta-
Textes handeln kann.
1 Offenbnr gediJ.chtnismüBig schreibt J~ ji'anamne statt ji'aniimliite Y. 57, 18.
197
42 F. B. J. Kuiper.
So kann mieh die Erklarung, die Andreas und Waekernagel
fUr atilpaiti V. 9, 41 ,warmt' vorschlagen, keineswegs überzeug~n:
In del' Bedeutung ,hei3 werden' kennt das Awestische nur tafsa~t~,
wahrend fUr ,hei3 machen' in den Yasts tápayeiti gebrauchlieh l~t;
Daneben beO'eO'net einmal im jungen Vendídad aval lwa1'fJ a. tapatte
,die Sonne ~o;t warmt'. Zunaehst sind die ehronologisehen Verhalt-
nisse in Betraeht zu ziehen: tapayeiti steht u. a. in Yast 17, der
naeh Ohristensen wahrscheiolich im 4. Jahrh. v. Ohr. verfa/3t worden
,r.
ist, wahrend del' Vendídad nach ihm erst um 150 Ohr. entstandell
ist.1 Die Lesart atapaiti bieten die zwei grundlegenden Hss. des
Pahlavi-VendIdad Kl und L 4, und Geldner hat sie in seinen Text
aufO'enommen. Alle Hss. des Vendídad sade aber, darunter die zwei
seh; wertvollen iranisehen Hss. Jpl und Mf2 , haben atapayeiti (-cite,
-cmte), was zu dem ahnlichen Passus (lWa1'<J) •.. tapa~eiti Yt. 6, ~
(zweimal); 7, 4 stimmt. Da gestattet uns unsere Kenntms des awestI-
sehen SpraehO'ebrauehs doch nur die Schlu/3folgerung, da/3 an unserer
Stelle ohne ;eiteres atapayeiti aus den persischen Hss. in den Text
aufzunehmen ist und da/3 die Lesung von Kl und L4 ein Fall ist
von derselben Art wie paiti.raeéaiti, v.l. von paiti.1·aecayeiti V. 5, 8
(siehe oben). Da/3 altes $atapaiti (das im Altiranisehen unbekannt
ist und wofur man sieh nur auf ai. atapati berufen kann) unter
mitteliranisehem Binfluf3 zu lItápait'i umgestaltet wOl'den sei (G5tt.
Nac h r. 1931 , 326), ist in Anbetracht des junO'en
l:>
Sprachcharakters
des VendIdad eine willkUrliehe Annahme.'
Mit diesem Fall zeigt uzjll.moil groBe Ahnliehkeit. Auch hier
fin den wir wieder die volle Form jamayeiti in Yt. 17, 20 (vgl. Jama-
yaiti AfrIn. 4, 6), woneben im Vendidn.d die kUrzere Form erscheint:
V. 14, 16 bis hapta pu:h:lJ:m gaotVlJ:1n uzjamüil ,zweimal siebon junge
1 Christensen ~tudes sur le zoroastrisme 44 sq. Freilich beruht seine Da-
tierun'" von yt. 17 ~uf den Strophen 7-14 (vgl. S. 9), die aber grilJ3tenteils nach
einem li ter arischen Vorbild gedichtet worden sind (B. Geiger, Die Amasa Spentas
111 sqq.). Ihre Beweiskraft dürfte somit nicht hoch anzuschlagen sein.
I llllrtholomaes Versuch zur sprachhistorischcn Rechtfertigung der Form
(Wb. 6S2) braucht heutzutage nicht mehr widerlegt zu ",erden.
198
Indoiraoica. 43
Hunde son er gl'of3ziehen'. Doeh kann man III diesem Fall wohl
mitteliranisehen Einfluf3 (Andreas S. 326) annehmen, wofür die Über-
einstimmung mit raeS't/)ayeiti sprieht: letztere Form steht überall in
den Yasts, daneben kommt ?'aM}waiti yor, abor nur im Vendidad
und NIrangast~n.l Ebenso wird 1'iimoiow~7n Y. 65, 9 zu beurteilen sein
(vgl. mp. ?'ameneo, np. iirámlid).
Dagegen begegnet uns in Sa1'amnO Y. 32, 2, sarfmte y, 51, 3
wieder . eio .Fall, der weder nach den von Andreas, GN 1911, 12,
formulierten Regeln noeh als Mitteliranismus sich leieht erklaren la/3t,
Andreas hielt anfanglich streng an seiner Formulierung fest, so da/3
er sogar sprachgeschiehtlich unmogliehe Formen wie hata (ai. sata)
Y. 32, 6°, J¡ait'im 9 d (ai. satim) in seinen Text aufnahm (Gott. Nachr.
1913, 379. 381). So fa/3t er denn aueh die überlieferte Form Sa1'fJmÜ
als sa"'1'omono auf (S. 377). Lommel, der mil' VOl' mehreren Jahren
auf meine Anfrage freundliehst seinen Standpunkt zu diesen Fragen
mitgeteilt hat, war geneigt ---.,. vorausgesetzt, da/3 wirklich Plenar-
schreibung vorliege und es sieh nieht um eine alte Lange handle -,
die Sehreibung' det' mater lectionis aus dem Bestreben zu erklaren,
Verles ungen wie *sramnü, *srumno (statt sa1'fJmnü) und *sravante,
*S¡'uvante (statt sa1'<Jnte) auszuschlie/3en. 2 'Vie dem auch soí, jedenfalls
fitllt es auf, da/3 das' ,y urzelnomen, das haufig in der gathischen
Spraehform uberliefert ist, kurzes a hat (,9a1'~ y, 49, 3, sa1'{ji Y. 44,
17) und daB, eben infolge der Nichtsehreibung der mater leetionis,
hierbei denn auch falsche Lesungen mehrfaeh überliefert sind. Vgl.
neben sw';¡ Y. 49, 3 die Lesart S1';¡ (io fUnf Hss.), neben IW1'üi Y. 44,
17: s1'üi, S1'O (fUní Hss,), neben sm'o Y. 31, 21: S1'O (füní Hss.), neben
8a1'1Jm Y. 49, 9: sr¡jm (vier Hss.). Diese Formen sind alle zweisilbig,
WOdlll'eh die M5g1iehkeit zu Miilverstlindnissen ziemlich gOl'Íng ge-
I Obrigens ist auch im Vendidlid nur ra¡¡:hcat V, S, 14 sieher, denn upa,
raiJ:hcaiti V. 10,1 ist ",ertlose Variante (siehe oben). Freilich ",iasen ",ir nicht,
welche Rolle nachtragliche Textrevision bei etwaiger Ausmerzung von in den Text
gedrungenen Mitteliranismen gespielt hato
t Die Formen mit ¡¡ ~etzen natlirlich die Riehtigkeit von Andreas' pal1io-
graphischer Ablcitung von ¡¡ aus , yornus, die von JUllkcf, Das Awestnalphabet 46,
bestrittcn worden ist.
199
44 F. B. J. Kuiper.
wesen sein mago In nichtvokalisierten Formen "Oil drei oder vier
Silben war diese Gefahr aber erheblich grafier, und dies mag Schrei-
bung des Aleph in den Verbalformen veranlafit haben. Freilich kannen
8á1'~mno, sárlJnte, woful' sich keine mitteliranischen Entsprechungen
nachweisen lassen, Formen mit a wiedergeben, aber wegen verschie-
dener Parallelfalle ist dies zweifelhaft.
Leider lafit die unsichere Etymologie es ratsam erscheinen,
sprachhistorische Erwagungen auf.\er Betracht zu lassen. Dagegen
dUrfte die Annahme, daf.\ sarfJmno zu lesen ist, eine Stutze erhalten
durch aw. sari- ,Vernichtung' in del' Zusammensetzung sairi.bao'),a
Yt. 14, 57 ,aus dem Untergang rettend'. Daf.\ hiel' alte Dehnstufe
vorliege (v. Blankenstein, Untersuchungen 33, Brugmann: ~rundr .. IP,
1 168), ist unwahrscheinlich. Das Altind. hat neben §nwt~ ,zerbncht,
, . 1
zermalmt' nur eine Nomínalbildung mit a: -§aru7ca-Z¡ ID den Brá 1-
mal}as, das sich dem bekannten Typus bhavUka-Z¡ anschlief.\t und
somit nichts beweist.~ Dehnstufe beí Nomina auf -i ist uberhaupt
nicht normal (vgl. Lindner, Altind. Nominalb. 56 sq.). Wenn, ;vie
maglich ist, ein uridg. Neutrum auf -i zugrunde liegt, ist von *7córi
auszugehen. Das awestische' vVort ltann aann sogar mit gr. )tÓ{lL~
,Wanze' identisch sein. 2 Wie dem auch seí, die Berechtigung, 8airi-
als lIari. aufzufassen, duden wir del' eillzigen Stelle entnehmen, wo
das 'WOl't nls Simplex vod\Ommt: V. 8, 8ó haben nlle guten Hss.,
sowohl die Vertretel' des Pahlavi-VendIda,d (Ku , PtJ) als die iranischen
des VendIda,d sa,de (Jpl' Mfg), einstimmig 8airinqm. DerogegenUber
fitllt das Zeugnis des indischen Vulgata-Textes nicht ins Gewicht.
Mit RUcksicht auí die oben (S. 23) g'egebenen Deutungen von
ai. -a7cti-ZI, aw. azalzva- usw. darf man dann auch sarana- V. 20, 3,
Bezeichnung einer Kran~heit, als sa'rana- auffassen und mit ai. 8t'lJ áti
verbinden. AL sm'atw-m kommt erst sehr spat VOl', aber §arál.li-~
1 Biehe die Zusammenstellung bei Whitney, Roots 176. FUr §iÍr¡-l.! ~S T, 112, 16 .
siehe Geldner, 'Obers.
2 Vgl. rp9-({f! ,Lana' von rp&f(f!W und das Verhliltnis von rt¡J zu ¡:·wrop.cH und
von lato tinea zu (Jtyop.(I.~ u. dgl. Ober "óf!¡~ o.us *klíl'i siehe Benveniste, Origines
de lo. formo.tion des noms 75.
200
lndoiranica. 45
. AS VI, 43, 3 ,offense' (?) und besonders vi§ará- AS lI, 4, 2 (Komm::
sañ1'avisara7)am) ,eine Art Krankheit' bestatigen diese Auffassung
in morphologischerwie in semasiologischer Hinsicht. V gl. noch ~S X,
28, 11 d svayám bálani tanvaQ §r'l}anó.~ ,selbst die KriHte ihl'es Karpers
vernichtend'. Auf sara8tis Yt. 13, 131; V. 7,57 (thematisch V. 20, 3)
,Name einer Krankheit' wurde sehon oben anlal3lich del' Besprechung
von arastis hingewi~sen. Bartholoroae dachte auf Grund del' Pahlavi-
Erlauterung an Zusaromenhang mit sarota- ,kalt'. Das Wort wird
aher wohl mit 8ilrana- zu verbinden sein und enthalt das Suffix -astí-,
das besonders für Krankheitsnamen charakteristisch ist (arostis,
kapastis). Auch dieses Wort wird als sarastis (von einem Neutl'um
sarah-) zu deuten sein. Vgl. Brugroann, Grundr. 112, 1,439.
Mitteliranisch kannte dagegen das a iro Worte ftir ,Kopf' sein.
Obwohl dio Erklarung unsicher ist, mage es wegen seiner sprach-
historischenvVichtigkeit hiel' erwahnt werden. Einerseits linden wir
einen Stamm sarah-, der mit ai. §írall- identisch ist, in Yt. 10,40,
wo Fl das eineMal sara hu, das zweite Mal srahu hat, mit del' be-
kannten Verlesung, die wir oben auch beim Nomen sar- fanden.
Daneben begegnet aber ein Stamm liara- in pfJsu.sáro ,dessen Kopf
verwirkt ist', ji"a.lla,·a ,mit lehhaftem Kopfe', IItara.sara ,EN. eines
Gebirges', asara ,ohne Oberherrn', silraVilro ,Relm', vereinzelt auch
als Siroplex: lIilrfJma Yt. 5, 77 1 (unk.lar sarahe NII" 42). Dazu rop. silr-
var, np. sl1buksil1' (gegenUber np. sil" ,Kopf'). Ob hiel' altes il oder a
I ••• mil avava~ daeuayamanqm núatam ya&a 8ill'3ma var8anqm barami ,so viele
von den Teufelsanbetern habe ich erschlagen, ala ich Haare auf dem Kopf trage'.
Sehwierigkeit roacht 8al'ilma, wie Fl ho.t, denn an einen Akkusativ mit Postposition
zum Ausdruck einer Lokativbedeutung (etwa wie lit. 'ViÍl'u08e : u)ÍrUs) ist im Ira-
nisehcn doch nicht zu denken. Anfitnglich zweifelte aueh Bartholomae (GrIrPh. T a,
122). Das Material, das er (Wb. 301 oben) für diese Konstruktion anführt, hat
den n aueh kaum einige Beweiskraft. FUr Y. 44, 12 hat jetzt Lommel, Gott. Nachr.
1934, 86 (vgl. auch Oriento Stud. 283), die schone Deutung von a •.. ua al8
gr.1¡{ gegeben. FUr Nir.65 da8inam a ua gaonavato bal'ilSIIVO 'Va paiti lIayoanahe
,auf der rcchten Seite des Haarigen oder oben auf dem Kopf' seheint dann aber
cine lihnliehe Auffasaung moglich, in dem Sinne, dall katiil'ilm hier fehlt und <l va
dann iro Jungaw. zusammengerUekt wiire wie gr.1¡{¡ dasinam kann adverbial aein
wie in Yt. 10, 126. Dann verbleibt aber nur 8al'3ma, wofür ieh keine Erklitrung sehe.
201
 F. B.J. Kuiper.
46
vorliegt, konnten nur sprachhistorische Erwagungen entscheiden, aber
O'erade in diesem Falle liiJ3t uns das Vergleichsmaterial im Stich.
iwar la13t sich auf dem ganzen idg. SprachgeLiet keine verwandte
Form mit langem vVurzelvokal nachweisen,l aber die unerweiterte
Wurzel ist nur au13erst selten vertreten: gr. xáQ und armo sar ,Hohe,
Gipfel', eine thematische Weiterbildung (aus ""kero-). Auch das awesti-
sche Wort muG durch sekundare Thematisierung aus dem Grundwort
entstanden sein. Wenn wir als solches mit Benveniste, Origines de la
formation des mots 24, ein Neutrum ke1', kr ansetzen duden, ist alte
Dehnstufe in sa1'a- sehr unwahrscheinIich und mu13 das a graphisch
oder sekundar sein. 2 Obwohl mitteliranischer Einflu13 sehr gut denkbar
ist, fallt es andererseits auf, daJ3 das \Vort fast nur in Zusammen-
setzungen belegt ist, wo man, weil hier das Wortbild durch Kon-
sonantenhaufung leicht unklar wurde, haufig eine mater lectionis
schrieb, vgl. oben franamaite: n¡Jmaite. s
Aw. nasaite uSW. in der Bedeutung ,erreichen' und ,umkommen'
laJ3t keine sichere Erklarung zu.'
1ch übergehe die anderen Falle dieser Art, die sich, soweit
es nicht Mitteliranismen sind, nur zum Teil als Versuche zur Vor-
beugung von VerIesungen erkIaren lassen, teils aber olme irgend-
einen fUr uns erkennbaren Grund eine mater lectionis enthalten zu
ho.ben scheinen.
1 Gr. xft(!a(3o. ,Krebs' (WoJde, Vgl. Wb. I, 406) stebt begrifflicb zu weit ab
und ist kaum ein idg. Erbwort.
I Hertcl, Indoiran. Qucllcn ulld Forsch. VII, 166, licst sw-:lm' stntt sil¡'am
yt. 14, 46, was zwar überliefert ist, aber keinen textkritiscben Wert hato A~f
Grund dieser Form iindert er auch aail'i.baoyam (siehe oben) in aara-baoy9m mlt
unannehmbarer Erklarung (S. 170 A.l).
8 Vielleicbt erkliirt es. sicb auch bieraus, daB, wabrend die überlieferung
gewllbnlicb '!JaraS/'aJan- hat, in den. um eine Silbe lüngeren F.ormen die mater
lectionis aescbrieben wird: 'lJ9l'JSl'a]ano u. a. Bemerkenswert 1St das entgegen-
gesetzte V:rhii.ltnis bei einsilbigen Wartcrn (noi~, yoi), siebe Lommel, Glltt. Nacbr.
1934, 96. _.
, Y. 9, 30 nií8amnili steht nach Mcillet, Journ. As. 1920, I, 202sq., für nasyamnal,
Parto Fut. Auch andere Auffassungen sind aber denkbar, siehe Lommel, ZII III, 163,
Verf. Acta Oro XII, 249 sq.
202
Indoiranica. 47
Auffallend ist das haufige Vorkommen von a nach h. Ob gerade
die Stellung nach h wesentlich ist, sei übrigens dahingestellt. Dem
ai. satiim entspricht im Awestischen hatqm, das ohne Varianten an
vielen Stellen überliefert ist, ygl. Y. 12,4; 19,11; 27,15; 35,3.8;
41,2.4; 44,10; 65,6; Vr.12, 4; Yt. 13, 21. 152. So lesen in Yt.13,
21 die meisten Hss. haitis (ai. satiZ¡) und findet man neben haitim
Y. 19, 9,1 Had. N. 2, 14 auch haiUm Y. 32, 9, ",eiter neben haitinqm
Yt. 13,·91. 92 mit Lange haitinqm Y. 12, 9. Andreas hielt anfangIich
an diesen unmoglichen 2 Formen fest (Gott. Nachr. 1913, 379. 381),
hat aber spater, wie aus Gott, Nachr. 1934, 83 hervorgeht, Plenar-
schreibung angenommen, die del' Verwechslung mit hito- und huto-
vorbeugen sollo Damit wird freilich nicht die regelmaJ3ig neben hama-
,gleich' und ,jeder' vorkommende Schreibung hama- erklal't, die auch
in Zusammensetzungen vodiegt, z. B. hamo.gaona- (v. l. in Yt. 8,58),
hamo.taxma- Yt. 10, 124, hamo.gatu- V, 5, 27; ofters in gering-
wertigen oder schlecht uberlieferten Texten, Z. B. hamo. nafa- Vyt 37
gegenUber hama.nafaena- Yt. 5, 13, hamo.gaodana- N. 64 (y. 1. hamoO).
Man vergleiche auch die Schreibung hqm- statt h¡Jm- odel' hamo. Das
Alt-, Mittel- und Neupersische, weisen fastnur Formen mit a auí:
np. ltamun ,Ebene' steht weiter ab und kanll fUr das Awestische die
Existenz von Doppelformen mit a und a ebensowenig annehmbar
machen wia aksl. sam7, ,ips&, solus' (Wackarnagol, Ai. Gramm. 1, XXI,
Meillet, Intl'oduction 7 158, Walde, Vgl. Wb. lI, 492) oder pali samwp,
.(Vgl. Wb., Bloch, L'Indo-Aryen 14).3 DaJ3 hama- nur oine graphische
Variante ist, kann nicht zweifelhaft sein. 1m Nlrangastitn Snden sich
noch von lta3-'1'l1nlc- und lta:h'alca- Formen mit hMf,.-. Auch falsche
Schreibungen wie a7t(a)mya statt Itamaya scheinen wenigstens zum
1 V. 1. haitfln in K,.
~ VerfehIter Erklii.rungsversucb in GrlrPb. I a, 221. 43 (a aus
ti). Vgl. auch
S.171. Spli.ter hat Bartholomae, IF VII, 73 sq., anerkannt, daS hátqm uSW. von
der spracblicben Seite her unerklürbar waren.
3 AL saman- stebt, \Venn es Uberbaupt verwandt ist, nur in einem ent-
fernteren Zusammenhang und aama-m (im PW nur aus Lnty. angefUhrt) schcint
ein jüngercs Wort zu sein.
203
48 F. B. J. Kuipel'.
Teil auf alter Schreibullg der mater lectionis hinter 11 zu beruhen,
siehe Lommel, Festschr. Audreas 100.
In diesem Zusammenhang drangt sich die Frage auf, ob hliirisi
,Weib' nicht als "'harist aufzufassen ist, wenn auch, wie es scheint,
keine Variante mit a überliefert ist. Es gehort etymologisch zu der
W urzel *ser- (Vgl. Wb. n, 500),1 die also nicht auf die europaischen .
Sprachen beschrankt war, und geht jedenfalls auf *ldi7is- zurucl~.
Dehnstufiger Wurzelvokalísmus ware aber bei einem Nomen auf -d
cine Anomalíe, vgl. Brugmanll, Grundr. 112, 1, 532 sqq., Lindller,
Altind. Nominalb. 60, Bartholomae, GrIrPh. 1 a, 95, Benveniste, Ori-
gines de la formation des noms 33 sqq.2 Letzten Endes liegt wohl
ein Neutrum *sorí zugrunde.
1m WOl,tinlaut steht ha als graphische Wiedergabe von ha in
pardM¡al Y. 9, 11, wo nach Meillet, JOUt'll. As, 1920, 1, 188 A, 1, im
Urtext das Aleph gesetzt war, um die Lesung von Vokal a zu
sichern, s Freilich laf.lt sich, wie Lommel (brieflich) bemerkt, nicht
recht sehen, wie die Form bei defektiver Schreibung anders hatte
gelesen werden konnen, aber die Schreibung mit Aleph scheint
immerhin fuI' die verschiedenen F9rmen mit ha statt ha festzustehen.
Wenigstens scheint del' Zusammenfall del' Schriftzeichen fuI' a und h
¡m spa.teren Buchpahlavi keinen Erklarungsgrund fuI' das a del'
Úberlieferung liofern zu ktlnnen.
AIs prinzipielles Resultat scheint sich aus Material von del' Art,
wie hiel' angefUhrt wurde, zu ergeben, daJ3, wenn auch Andreas und
Lommel wohl mit Recht warnen, dall Plenarschreibung ,nie ohne
besonderen Grund' geschah (Gott. Nachr. 1934, 83), dennoch dieser
Grund fuI' uns in vielen Fallen nicht erkennbar ist, so daJ3 wiI' im
1 Mit Rücksicht nuf diese Etymologie hatte ieh vor Jahren schon Material
fUr a nach anlautendem h gesnmmelt. Was die etymologische Erklilrung betrifft,
stimmt dies in glUcklíeher Weise zu Benvenistes Behandlung des Wortes in einem
mir leider unzugilnglichen Aufsatz (BSL XXXI, 104 sq.) und zu GUntert, Oriento
Stud. 130 sq.
• Von den von Benveniste erwllhnten Beispieten ist ¡¡vil mehrdeutig, wllhrend
ai. limi,- zu streichen ist (siehe Acta Oro XII, 234).
a Freilieh nimmt Nyberg, Oriento Stud. 348, eine Konjunktivform ano
204
Indoiranica. 49
allgemeinen mit del' Moglichkeit, daf.l a del' Überlieferung em ety-
mologisches a vertreten kann, 1'echnen müssen.
So konnen auch die awestischen Formen del' 3. Person Plural
auf -airf} und -ai7'e, die angebliche il'anische Entsprechung der ¡atei-
nischen Endung -ere, nicht fuI' sprachvergleichende Zwecke verwendet
werden. Bekanntlich nimmt man, in Nachfolge von Bartholomae,
Studien II, 199, allgemein an, daf.l die Endung -aÍ1'e in a1'dtai"e (,sie
sitzen')¡ !1'dllWavaire und 'IliY¡'ai1'e mit lato -61'e identisch sei, vgl. z. B.
Brugmann, IF XXVIII, 379 sqq., Sommer, Handb. 2 578, Meillet-
Vendryes, Traité § 520, St01z-Schmalz, Lat. Gramm. 5 338, Odé, De
uitgangen met 7' van het deponens en passivum 25, 27. Die Form
j"am1'avaú'e Yt. 13, 64 beweist aber nichts, weil nach v meist das
Aleph geschrieben wird. Zu niyraÍ7'e Yt. 10, 40 sind !reine Varianten
überliefert. Wenn die griechische Stammform fl'Ar¡-, mit der man yrli-
zu identifizieren pflegt, a1t ist, steht -yra-re mit soí-re, at se-,'e, welche
ebenfalls vokalischen Wurzelauslaut haben, auf gleicher Linie.!
NEiben l1i¡hilire Y. 9, 23 s bieten die Hss. auch die Lesarten
anhaire, 11j'¡haú'i, l1ñharf} u. a, Weil die Überlieferung sonst aus-
schlie/3lich -are kennt (vgl. caxrm'e V. 4, 46 =ai. cakriré) und auch
die ai. Entsp1'echung asire die Endung -p'ai enthalt, mull mit {t¡'¡haÍ7'e,
da ja Schreibung dar mater lectionis weiter auch noch in del' Endung
-a7'f} vorkommt,ll einfach &,¡,¡hai"(J (*altarai) gemaint saino Die ir:l.l1i-
1 Vgl. auch Bartholomae, GrlrPh. 1 n, 79 (§ 142), der in aBen drei Formen
erweiterte Stllmme auf a Bucht, und Kurylowicz, Étrennes de linguistique 59.
s Zu derselben Form in yt. lO, 45 scheinen keine Vnrianten Uberliefert
worden zu sein.
a Die Optativformen haben immer -yar<J (hyli¡;) = ni. :ryúl}) oder -yiira§ (dies
nur ¡m Jung-Awestischen, siehe GrIrPh. 1 a, 212). Wie aus einer Randbemerkung in
Andreas' Hnndexemplar des Grundrisses (l. c.) hervorgeht, fallte Iluch dieser -yal;)8
ala -yU1'8 auf. Dazu stimmt, dall die einzige Form mit dieser Endung, welche
kein vorhergehendes y enthitlt, auí -rl hinweist: gaw. cik'Oi/ar<J6 ,sie sind bedaeht'
(ai. cilcitúl}), In den Fallen, in denen keine mater lectionis geschrieben wurde,
ftnden sich aftere Spuren fehlerhafter Lesung: die Variante ciix1'e in BlI neben
c/im'are V. 4, 46 beruht, wenn nicht einfach Haplographie des Kopisten v.orliegt,
allf falscher Lesung oder Schreibung von *c'rm'(r)y des Urtextes. Neben ~nha¡;)éli
Y. 45, 7 .1iegen die Lesarten finhr<Jéá, añlll~éá (u. a. H I ) vor, neben adara Y. 43, 15
die Form lidl'a L 1 (daneben auch adlira in SI)'
Aeta orlentlOlia XVII. 4
205
50 F. B. J. Kuiper.
sehen Formen konnen demnach fuI' die Frage, wie lato dixere als
Nebenform von dix7Jrunt zu erklaren sei, nichts lehren. 1
18. Jaw. fraspat~ ,IGasen, Pfühl'.
Die Richtigkeit dieses Bedeutungsansatzes wird durch np. farasp
,Teppich', das auf die Nominativform *fraspas zurUckgeht, bestatigt.
l~ine etymologische Erklarung ware beí diesem vollkommen durch-
sichtigen Worte kaum notig, wenn nicht Bartholomae, Air. Wb. 1003,
das Wort als unaufgeklart bezeichnet hatte, oqwohl el' GrIrPh. 1 a,
99 bereits die einzig mogliche Etymologie gegeben hatte. Das vVort
ist mittels des Formans t von spa· (*k'!fa-) ,schwellen' gebildet, vgl.
(mit demselben Praverbium): fra ..• s'fspfJmna Yt. 5, 127; 17, 10
f1·a ... sispata Yt. 5, 7. Da!3 im Altindischen das Formans t nur
hintel' kurzvokalischem W urzelauslaut vorkommt (Aí. Gramm. n, 174),
beruht auf indischer Neuerung, siehe Frankel, Nom. Ag. 1, 74. 104,
Brugmann, Grundr. 112, 1, 423, Specht, KZ LIX, 72. Das Jaw. hat
z. B . .:Jraotostat-, hai¡uhm'fJ.stat-, tara.oat-, dami.dat- (?); vgl. weiter
gr . .:J~g, n;Awg, Wf'ofl(!wg, drvwg und (mit einer Praposition wie f 1'as pat-)
n;(!o(1')..~g; lato sacerdos, loctlples; osk. Ante1'statai (-stiH +a), umbr.
Prestate. Einer morphologischen Analyse fra-spa-t- (nicht -sp-at-, wie
Bartholomae, Gr1rPh. 1 a, 99, annahm) steht also nichts ¡m Wege.
FuI' die Bedeutungsentwicklung las sen sich ala Parallelen anfuhren
z. B. ved. upabdrha'l)a-m, upabd1'ha'IJ-'i ,Decke, Polater', aw. barfJzi§-
N. ,Polster, Kissen', np. balis ,Kissen' zu *bheigh- ,sehwellen' (Walde,
V gl. Wb. n, 182), gr. -r:v')..r¡ ,Wulst, Kissen' (zu *te'!fá ,sehwellen'),
lato pulvinus ,Polster, 19ssen' (wahrseheinlieh zu polleo ,stark sein',
pollex ,Daumen', eigentlieh ,del' dieke Finger'), toruSJ ,Wulst, ge-
polstertes Lager' ¡ ano bolstr ,Kissen', nhd. Polstm' (zu *bhelgh-, siehe
1 Wegen der tocharischen l!'ormen, deren Endung man mit lato -~re zu iden-
tifizieren pfiegt, sei bemerkt, daS neben weoore aak,lire auch Formen auf -al'e
vorkommen, siehe Meillet, MSL XVIII, 2 (der auch über die Natur der Vokallange
nichts Bestimmtes zu sagen wagt). Auch die aakische Endung der 3. P. PI. Med.
al'e (aiehe Tedesco, ZII n, 288 A. 2) ist mehrdeutig. So scheinen wir hinsichtlich
der Frage nach der Herkunft der lateinischen Endung -el'e noch ebenso weit von
einer Losung entfernt zu sein wie zuvor.
206
1ndoiranica. 51
oben), dan. Pl¿de ,Kissen' (zu sehw. dial. puta ,aufgeblasen sein';
ostfries. püt ,Sack, Beutel, Geschwulst'), s-kr. blctzina ,Kopfkissen,
Polster' (zu *bhel§h). Verwandt sowohl in Form als in Bedeutung ist
aw. spaya- im Kompositum nistm'CJto. spaya- ,mit hingebreiteten Kissen',
das Geldner, KZ XXV, 517 sq., sehon mit fraspat- verbunden hato
Übrigens ist dies nieht del' einzige Fall, wo Bartholomae auf
Grund irgendeiner Theorie eine alte riehtige Erklal'ung aus seinem
Worter-buch verbannt hato So setzt el' (A ir. Wb. 760) auf Grund der
Formen gaw. d¡¡bqzaití (Konj.) Y. 44, 6 e, jaw. bqzaiti V. 13, 9 eine
\Vurzel dfJbqz- ,unterstUtzen' an, welehe aus Ul·iran. *d'!fanz- hervor-
gegangen seÍn sollo Eine etymologisehe Erklarung fuI' diese Wurzel
vermag el' aber nieht zu geben. Nun kommen die Formen mit d
nur im Gatha-Awestisehen VOl', und zwar au!3er in dfJbqzaiti nul'
noch im Nomen dabCf;zah- Y. 47, 6 e • FUr die Erklarung des Verhalt-
nisses von dfJbqz- zu bqz- ist daran zu erinnern, dan anlautendes d
VOl' einem Konsonanten, ahnlieh wie t, oft keinen etymologisehen Wert
hato Man denke an Falle, wie fra-o-baoye, vi-o-baoye, ofJjama.spo Y. 51,
18 a, welehe mit lkaeso, vi-l-kaeso U. dgl. (GrIrPh. 1 a, 178) vollig ver-
gleiehbar sind, besonders aber an gaw. daibitim gegenUber jaw. bitim
(ap. duvitiyam) und gaw. daibis;mtt" daibisyant- gegenüber jaw.lbaesa-
yiJ,1, 1bisyant- (mp. beSitan), aus welehen Fallen (GrIrPh. la, 37) das d
wohl sekundal' auf solche mit altem b ubertragen worden ist. Dann
kann abar die 1dentitat mit ai. ba'lflh- ,befestigen, starken', wie Spiegel,
Commentar J, 300, sehon riehtig erkannt hat, nicht zweifelhaft sein.
19. Jaw. vyusil Ha8. N. 2, 7 und apa.asav~n Yt. 19, 84.
Die gewohnliehe Konstruktion von aw. saoayeiti ist, wenn es
nicht absolut gebraueht wird, bekanntlieh die mit einem Adjektiv
oder mit einem Partizip, womit die Verwendung von 3adayamiy im
Altpersisehen im allg'emeinen ubereinstimmt. Als Beispiele fUr die
Verbindung mit einem Adjektiv seien genannt xOarfJnm'¿M, me sadayehi
Az 1, Vyt 1 ,du erseheinst mil' herrlieh', abdaca ioa ... sadayál yal
ioa pas~us anumayehe- paofJm vaenaite ,und unbetretbar wird es
(naml. daihltus) erseheinen, wo jetzt del' Tritt del' Sehafe zu sehen
4*
207
52 F. B. J. Kuiper.
ist' (Altir. Wb. 96). Vergleiche damit ap. hauvtaiy gasta ma :tadaya
Dar. NR a 6 ,das son dir nicht widerwartig erscheinen' (vgl. auch
Bh. 4, 8) und aus dem Indischen J;tS X, 32, 3& tád ín me c/¡antsat
vápUfO vápu§taram ,das scheint mil' schoner als die Schonheit selbst'.
Die Konstruktion mit einem Parto PdLs. oder Perf. Act. lii.l3t
sich dagegen nur im Awestischen nachweisen,l hiel' aber in haunger
Vel'wendung, Z. TI. Haa. N. 2,7 a dirn vaW upa.vávo saoayeiti ,darauf
ist es, als ob ein Wind sie anwehe', 8 t>Jm viít>Jm n;J,lIhaya uzg1'>Jmbayü
saoayeiti ,es ist (del' SeeIe), als ob sie diesen Wind mit del' Nase
einziehe'. Ebenso liegt in V. 3, 32 hqm.urvisv;J,¡'¡ho sada:qeiti ,infugam
se convertisse videntur' wohl ein Parto Perf. VOl', wie auch Bartholomae
ursprUnglich angenommen hat (GrIrPh. la, 198); formal gehort die
Form zu den von Brugmann, Grundl·. II 9, 3, 432, behandelten Fallen.
Nun gibt es aber neben diesen ganz klaren Stellen auch einige,
wo dem Verbum eine Verbalform auf -q(m) vorangeht, z~ B. V. 18, 19
ava me azis .•. pariJi1 pairi:twm mihvqm [ava]d>J1'fJnqm sadayeiti ,es
kommt mil' VOl', als ob del' von den Teufeln el'schaffene Azi meine
SeeIe von ihrem Lebensfaden losreifien wolle' (Geldner, SBBA 1903,
425, vgl. KZ XXV, 483 und Religionsgesch. Leseb. 38). Spiegel,
Commentar I, 390 U 674, nahm fUr diese Stellen eine Art Kom-
position an, obwohl ihm die Konstruktion nicht klar sei. Eingehend
hat dann Wilhelm, Muséon VII, 29 sqq. (SA.), die bei saoayeiti ge-
brauchlichen Konstruktionsweisen erortert, ohne aber fUr die in Frage
stehenden Falle zu einem bestimmten Ergebnis zu gelangen; offenbar
hielt el' sie fUr Infinitive (,des formes en {in au lieu de l'infinitif'),
welche Ansicht spater Ba.rtholomae, GrIrPh. la, 144, Air. Wb. 1559,
und Reichelt, Aw. Ellem. 198, 340, vertreten haben: die Formen
a.uf -C{; seien akkusati\rische Infinitivformen, welche demnach mit
ved. Aúbham, yúdham, vipfccham zu vergleichen waren.
1 Sélbst wenn JI'Ct.8ta in Dar. Sus. 7 (vgl. Dar. Sus. a 9) adam huya 'lJiaahya
fralta ~adayamai'Y ,tnoge ieh (dem kUnftigen Beobachter meiner Werke) wunder-
bar (1) erscheinén' ursprUnglich ein Parto Perf. Pass. gewesen ist, so hat es doch
als Verbalnomen vom Anfang an einem Adjektiv begrifflich ganz nahegestanden.
Wegenfi·alta vgI. Andreas und Wackernagel, GN 19111,319, und Kent, JAOS LI, 215
208
Indoiranica. 53
Gegen diese Annahme liene sich kaum etwas einwenden, wenn
nicht eine auffallende Besonderheit del' betreffenden Belegstellen ge-
eignet ware, Zweifel an ihrer Richtigkeit zu erregen: an aUen diesen
Stellen steht die angebliche Infinitivform unmittelbar VOl' dem Vel'bum,
vgl. Haa. N. 2,7 vyusq saoayeiti, Yt. 10, 71 rfJ1ur:m saoayeiti, V. 18, 19
dfJrmqm sadayeiti. Del' Orthogl'aphie des Auslauts darÍ man be-
kanntlich keinen Wert beilegen. So hat an del' zuletzt erwahnten
Stelle die Neuausgabe ava. d>J1';mqn (nach JPl! Mf2 ), die von Bartholo-
mae bevorzug'te Lesart d>J1'>Jnqm stammt aus L" wlihrend die von
WesteJ'gaard angefertigte DUl'chzeichnung des alten Mitro-apan-Kodex
Kl av. dfJr>Jnq hato Die Schreibung -C{;n oder -qm ist wohl erst in
jüngerer Zeit durch Buchstabenhaufung entstanden (Bartholomae,
. GrIrPh. I a, 158, Fr. Altheim, ZII IU, 34), so dan wir von ranq uSW.
als del' altesten orthographischen Gestalt ausgehen konnen. Nun
bat man bekanntlich fUr den alteren Awesta-Te1tt scriptio continua
anzunehmen, demzufolge die Regel, dan Schrcibung von Doppel-
konsonanz vermieden wird (GrIrPh.Ia, 159,182, Reichelt, Elem.31sq.),
nicht nur für den W ortinlaut, sondern au~h fuI' den Auslaut im
Sa.tzsandhi gegolten hato Da3 zahlreiche Fehler in dem uberlieferten
Text auf diese Gewohnheit zurUckzufUhren sind, ist bekannt. 1 Danu
liegt es aber auch ganz nabe, zumal del' altpersischen und altindischen
Entsprechung von saoayeiti die Verbindung mit einem Infinitiv fremd
ist, in Úbereinstimmung mit dem sonstigen Gebrauch auch in diesen
Stellen cin Partizip zu suchen, also in V. 18, 19 d>J1'fJnqs sadayeiti.
In Yt. 10, 71 ist demnach etwa zu lesen
naicJa manyatai jaranvah 2
naioa cim rnq¡s saoayati
1 Vgl. z.B. Y. 46. 19 a ya.moi statt '!}am moi, andererseits 1Jlapam mili, tu\hat.tam
fUr 'lJi8pamlii, ~{¡hatam U. dgl. (Bartholomae, Z. altir. Wb. 129 sqq. 136, GrIrPh~ 1 a,
158, Meillet, JAs 1920, I; 193).
2 So ist Jayn'l!ti wegen ved. jaghanuiln nattirlich zu lesen; ai. jaghniviln,
worauf sich Bartholomae, G.rIrPh. 1 a, 87 bericf, ist erst seit dcn BrllhmaQas belegt
und sichtlich eine indische Neubildung. Ebenso Yt. 8, 11 )aymyqm für Jayamyqm
(Bertel, Beitr. Z. Metr. 50 A. 2).
209
54 F. B. J. Kuiper.
,nicht vermeint er, gesch1agen zu hnben, und es ist ihm nicht so, a1s
ob el' einen Sch1ag fahre', so dal3 hiel' bewul3ter Para11elismus der
Satzteile vorIiegt.
Es fragt sich, ob diese Erklarung auch fUr die dritto Ste110
zutrifft. Haaoxt Nask 2, 7 erzlihlt, was del' ,SeeIe des Mannes' in
del' dritten Nacht nach des sen Verscheiden widerfahrt: .:frityi1 xsapo
.:fraosta vyusq saoayeiti yo '1la1'S asaonü 1t1ova urvárahuca paiti+
baoioiséa v'idio{j~mno saoayeiti. Drei Nlichte hat die SeeIe des Ver-
storbenen neben dem Leichnam gesessen im VollgefUh1 einer G1Uck-
seligkeit, wie sie das Leben nicht zu• 1:>"'ewahren verma'" o' 1m' Aus-
gang del' dritten Nacht endlich, a1s del' Lebensfaden, del' die SeeIe
noch ans irdische Leben band, von den Daevas zerrissen ist, da
fühlt sich die Seele des Gerechten und Frommen wie in ein Paradies
versetzt. Was heil3t dann aber vyusq saoayeiti? Dail auch in vyusq
eine Partizipialform zu suchen sei, mu3 bei einer oberflachlichen
Betrachtung wohl ausgeschlossen scheinen. BestimmÉmd fuI' die Auf-
fassung dieser Ste11e ist del' inhaltlieh verwandte Passus Vendo 19, 28,
wo Ahura Mazda in Antwort auf die Frage, wo del' Mensch den
Lohn fuI' seine guten Werke erhalt, vom Übergang ins Jenseits
folgende Schilderung gibt: pasca para. iristalze masyehe pasea fra-
saootalte masyelte pasca pairi~n~m d~1~ninti daéva drvanto duzdr1flho.
.:f1'ityi1. ~§ap~ viusaiti uái raocaiti bamya, gai1'in~m aáaoovlt[f1'an~m
a8~naottt mt.:fr~m huzaénam, lt1Ja~oo8aet~m uzyoraiti ,nachdem del'
Mensch gestorben ist, nachdem del' Mensch die Zeit (del' drei
Nachte) überstanden hat, aIsdann sehneiden die von del' DruJ be-
sessenen, arglistigen Daevas den Lebensfaden abo Da Ieuchtet in
del' dritten Nacht die helle, strahIende Morgenrote auf; 1 Mithra mit
schonen Waffen kom~t heran über das Gebirge,a wo die wahre
GIUckseligkeit wohnt, die herrliehe Sonne geht auí'.
In ahnlichem Sinne hat man auch Haa. N. 2, 7 (und 25) auf-
fassen wo11en, aber hiel' bietet del' WOl'tlaut des Textes erhebliche
I Textgestaltung naeh LommeI, ZII IlI, 178.
2 WohI genit. Ioei (ReieheIt § 507), vgl. Yt.l0, 13 (MU}¡'o yo) tal'O harqm á8rlaoiti.
210
Indoiranica. 55
Schwierigkeiten. Fast alle Forseher verbinden vyusCf: a1s eme Art
Infinitiv mit dem foIgenden saoayeiti, was angesichts der oben be-
sprochenen Ste11en Yt. 10, 71 y~n~m saoayeiti und V. 18, 19 dfmnqn
sadayeiti jedenfalls das natUrlichste ist: ,when the dawn appears'
(Darmesteter), ,il parait devenir clair' (Wilhe1m), , ... siebt man
die Morgenrote aufleuchten' (BarthoIomae, Wb. 1479, Reiche1t, Av.
Reader 178). Gegen diese Auffassung, durch welche vyusq saoayeiti
von den folgenden W orten getrennt und zu einem seIbstandigen Satz
erhoben wird, las sen sich aber mehrere Bedenken geltend machen:
1. usaiti, viusaiti wird an den zwei anderen Be1egste11en Yt. 14, 20
ayrqm usaitim u§i1f¡h~m und V. 19, 28 (siehe oben) nieht unpersonlieh
verwendet, sondern mit einem Subjekt, und die s mag die alte Ge-
'brauchsweise gewesen sein. So hei.l3t es auch im Vedischen be-
kanntlich fast immer u§lÍ vyucchati; sogar ved. vyú§Í, das naeh
Bartholomaes ErkIarung vyus~ am naehst~n stande, wird mit Aus-
nahme von ~S VI, 62, le immer mit einem Genitiv verbunden. 1
Man vermi3t daher in del' Haa. N-Ste11e das Subjekt uM. 2. sCfoayeiti
kommt in HN II haufig VOl', aber mit Ausnahme von 11 und 12
ya:Ja yal me (te) sadayehi (-mi) immer in Verbindung mit einem
Partizip, und zwar in gleiehem Sinne, wie lato videri fUr Traume
und Visionen verwendet wird. Vgl. 7 vldioá~mno saoayeiti, váto
upa. vavo saoayeiti, 8 1tzg~mbayij saoayeiti, 9 f"rn~nta saoayeiti
(worüber Naheres unten). Úberall handelt es si eh um visionartige
Erlebnisse del' Seele seIbst. 3. Sieht man von den Schwierigkeiten
formeller Art ab, so bleibt es gegenüber V. 19, 28, wo das Auf-
leuchten del' Morgenrote a1s reine Tatsaehe erwahnt wird, doch
auffallend, da3 hiel' del' Tagesanbrueh nach den drei Naehten a1s
eine subjektive Empfindung beschrieben wird: ,il parait devenir
clair'. Zwar nimmt BarthoIomae 2 fUr diese eine Stelle die Bedeutun'"
o
1 In FlilIen wie ekeuyli7[l- 1Jyu#liyam ,am Morgen des zweiten Tages' (Baudh.
KS), l/U1}yu,eliyam (se. u,aai) Jaim. Br. 1, 5 liegt naturlieh iihnliehe eIliptische Aus-
drueksweise vor wie in udite, eutamite (sc. aflrye).
i Darmesteters ühersetzung (siehe oben) luOt sich grnmmatiseh kaum rceht·
fertigen.
211
56 F. B. J. Kuiper.
,man sieht' an, aber dann zeigt sie nicht nur eme formelle, sondern
auch eine semantische Abweichung von den anderen Belegstellen,
was um so mehr Vel'dacht erwecken muG. 4. Ein schwerwiegender
Grund gegen die ubliche Übersetzung scheint mil' aber VOl' allem,
daG man dann einen zerrissenen, abnormalen Satzbau anzu-nehmen
h~itte. Nach Bartholomae hat man folgendermaGen zu lesen: .&rityll
xsapo .[}raosta vyusq saoayeiti. Yo nars asaono U1'va urvara!tuca
paiti baoioisca vidioa1'amno saOayeiti. Zunachst fallt es auf, daG
man dann hinter paiti noch ein Part. hqs (von ah- ,sein') hinzu-
denken mUGte, das zusammen mit vidioa1'amno vom zweiten saoayeiti
abhangig ware: ,del' Seele des Glaubigen ist es so, als ob sie auf
Wiesengrund (stehe) und WohlgerUche empfinde' (Altir. Wb. 402).
Auch stilistisch nimmt sich del' Satz sonderbar aus: sonst fangt ja
jeder neue Satz in dieser Schilderung mit einem kraftigen Adverb
oder Demonstrativum an: a dim vato 1 •• • aal tiJm ,vatiJm ... ahh/1
dim ... aal lam ... aal he. Anderseits steht ein gekUrzter Relativ-
satz des Typus yo na1'S asaono ur'va regelmaJ3ig hin ter dem Verbum
(oder irgendeinem allgemeinen Ausdruck): 8 uzgl"iJmbayo saoayeit'i
yo nars asaono U1'va, 9 j1'?i1'iJnta saoayeiti ya hava daena, 10 aoxta
p'élriJSO yo nars asaono w'va, 11 paiti.aoxta ya hava daena, 15 paoÍ1'zm
gama frabaral yo nad a. u. und weiter z. B. Yt. 5, 61 tqm yazata
pau1'Vi'J ]/0 Vifl'Ü nalJaZa; 17, 19 uiti davata Ita ya duzd(~ aiwo mainyus;
17, 16 pita te ya altul'o mazdd; 17, 65 aat mqm j1'aguzayanta yüi
apiJr'élnayu tauruna. Siehe noch Yt. 17, 26, 2S. Dies wird auch
Geldner, Religionsgesch. Lesebuch 43, wohl zu seiner abweichenden
Übersetzung gefuhrt haben: ,1m Ausgang del' dritten Nacht, wenn
del' Morgen graut, glaubt die Seele des rechtglaubigen Mannes unter
Baumen zu sein, und sie glaubt WohlgerUche zu unterscheiden.'
Geldner trennt also vyusq von saoayeiti, das el' mit Recht mit dem
1 ii dim val o upa.viivo aaoayeiti ,darauf ist es, als ob ein Wind sie anwehe'.
Natürlich ist lid dim (lid 'im) zu lesen, vgl. Caland, KZ XLII, 173. Bartholomae
nimmt ii-upa .vlivant- an (Wb. 309, 1406), aber ü hatte dan n der bekannten Regel
gemii/.l an zweiter Stelle stehen sollen. VgI. paiti a .Jasa! N. 82, pair!laslayeiti N.44,
pait!lli8tiá vyüdü und pa¡'a nu ahmli{ arostal V. 9. 53. VgI. indisch úpa p"ó'yobhi¡'
á galam ~S 1, 2, 4 U. dgI. (Delbrtick, Aind. Synt. 47, 437).
212
Indoiranica. 57
folO'enden
1:>
Sa,tzteil verbindet, wodurch das oben (unter 3) geauGerte
Bedenken hinfallt. Sonst ist damit aber nicht viel gewonnen: man
muG jedenfalls }¡qs hinzudenken, und vyusC{; Hi.J3t sich grammatisch
kaum rechtfertigen, denn als Absolutivum wUrde es si eh auf das
Subjekt des ganzen Satzes heziehen.
AUes scheint mil' darauf hinzuweisen, daG wit, als Ausgangs-
punkt fUr die Übersetzung enge ZusammengehOrigkeit von vyusC{;
mit dem •
nachfokenden
loo
Satzteil anzunehmen haben. Dann haben
wir es mit einem Partizip zu tun, das, wie dies auch sonst uberall
del' Fall ist, unmittelbar VOl' saoayeiti steht. 1 Es kann sich aber
nicht um v!.Usaiti ,leuchtet auf' handeln, denn von del' Seele des
falschglaubigen Mannes wird HN 2, 25 wortlich dasselbe gesagt,
was den etwa aufkommenden Gedanken an eia ,Aufleuchten' del'
Seeie ausschlie13t. 2 Was ist dann aber mit vyusrt gemeint'? Bis so-
weit scheint mil' das Ergebnis, so negativ es auch scheinen mag,
ziem1ich sicher. Die positive Losung des Prob1ems, d. h. die richtige
Übersetzung del' Stelle kann leider nicht eine gleiche Sicherheit
beanspruchen, zumal die Überlieferung schwankt. 3 Folgende Über-
setzung, die ich ubrigens nur unter Vorbeha1t vortrage, hat sich mil'
als die wahrscheinlichste ergeben: ,1m Ausgang del' dritten Nacht
ist es del' Seele des rechtglaubigen Mannes so, a1s ob sie sich (vom
Korper) lüse und auf Wiesengrund WohlgerUche unterscheide.'
Vyusq(s) ist dann = ved. viyúcc}¡an,' vgl. Z. B. lJS TI, 18, s" ncí ma
índ1'e1!a sakhyá1(l. ví yo~ad ,nicht so11 meine Freundschaft mit lndra
auseinandergehen'. Durch diese Übersetzung wird del' Zusammen-
1 Dadurch fallt die Erwiihnung des Aufleuchtens (siehe oben V.19, 28 viusaiti
ull ... bamya) an dieser Stelle hin. Sie ist aber entbehrlich, vgI. Aogam. 8, wo
einfach von hOlIbiim i sit¡kal' (Irliyadivase Skr.·üb.) gesprochen wird.
s J!'reilich kommen im zweiten Teil, der tiber den falschgHiubigcu Mann
handelt, formelhafte Wiederholungen vor, vgl. 34.
8 An der ParaIlelstelle HN 2, 25 hat die eine lIs. visllm, die andere Vil/qm,
wofUr Haug, The book of Arda Viraf 295, aber vyusq eingesetzt hato übrigens
liegen il.hnliche Varianten auch zu dem zweifeIlos richtigen viuaaiti Y. 19, 28 vor,
und zwar in guten Hss. (l1üaiti Kl L" v'l8aite Jpl Mf2).
, Freilich Bcheint das PrUsens yuochati in Verbindung mit v; nicht belegt
zu sein (vgI. Oldenberg zu ~S IV 55,2), ¡¡ftera dagegen mit p"á in der ~S.
213
-,.....,-----~-~----
58 F. B. J. Kuiper.
hang mit der Parallelstelle V. 19, 28 nicht gelockert, sondern vielmehr
bekrliftigt. Dort sind es die Daevas,l die den Lebensfaden lOsen
(dlJrfJninti), hier wird dasselbe als Erlebnis der Seele geschildert: sie
empfindet nur, da13 das Band, das sie wahrend der vorangegangenen
drei Naehte noch an den Korper band (vgl. Aogam. 51), nunmehr
gelost wird. Das zweite ca hinter baoioi§ habe ieh gestrichen¡
falsehliehe Doppelsehreibung von éa, auch sonst im Awesta nieht
ungewohnlieh, mag hier dureh jUngere Erklarungsversuehe der spater
nieht mehr verstandenen Stelle veranlailt worden sein.
Mit dieser Erklarung fallen alle Beispiele für Verbindung von
saoayeiti mit einem lnfinitiv hin, den n Vend. 9, 51 cís hau as, Altura
Mazda, yo me asadayai, jradaS-am apa. barat, va1'lJda{j()m apa. bar,ai,
yasklJm apa.bw·ai usw., wofUr Bartholomae ii-sand- mit lnfinitiven
annahm, enthalt einfache lmperfekta. Eine Reihe von Relativsatzen
sehlieilt sieh ohne Wiederholung des Relativpronomens an yo me
asadayat ano Ein lihnlieher Satzbau liegt Z. B. in Yt. 14, 62 vor.
Eine kurze Bemerkung über das oben bereits erwahnte jr?h'lJnta
HN 2, 9 moge sieh hier noeh ansehlieilen. Es wird dort das 'person-
liehe Gewissen des Mensehen besehrieben, das in der GestaIt eines
jungen Madehens an die SeeIe herantritt: ahlu! dim vatayll jr'Jr-anta
saoayeiti ya hava daena kain'ino k-ahrpa sri1'ay& xsoíSnyll usw.
GowUhnlich Bueht man in j1''JrfJnta ein Substantivum: Haug, '1'he
book of Arda Viraf 311 A. 3, hielt es fUr einen lnstr. Sg., wahrond
Bartholomae, Wb. 1023, fUr diese Form ein Nomen jr'{jr<Jntís ansetzt,
dessen Lok. Sg. hier vorliege. Statt dessen wUrde man dann aber
vielmehr jrfi1'lJtis erwarten, welehe Form tatsaehlieh zweimal vor-
kommtj ein Subst. jrfirmtis ist dagegen morphologiseh ein Unding
und befriedigt aueh syntaktiseh nieht, weil man vor saoayeiti eine
Partizipialforro erwartet. Diese liegt tatsaehlieh an der Parallelstelle
iro Vist¡¡,sp Yast vor, wo j1'fi1'mti (NS. Fero.) uberliefert ist.
Weiter ist viitayll kaum Gen. Sg. eines sonst unbelegten Femi-
ninums viitii (so Bartholomae, dagegen sehon Spiegel, Commentar n,
675), sondern vielmehr als *viitiyll, Gen. Sg. des femin. Partizips
1 Vgl. den iiz(i dae1Jo.dlito V.18. 19 (oben S.52).
214
lndoiranica. 59
(ai. veíti), aufzufassen. 1 Offenbar ist mit dero Wind, der die Wohl-
gerüche heranfuhrt, die Daena selbst geroeint, die sich, bevor sie
sichtbar wird, sehon dureh ihren Wohlgeruch bemerkbar maeht.
Ahh/1 weist voraus auf die erganzende nomínale BeifUgung (Air.
Wb. a-, n 2, 2), und dim, das als Enklitikon hinter dem ersten Wort
. des Satzes steht, gehort als Objekt zu j1'~rlJnta (= j1·7J1''anti). Die
auffallende Wortfolge, infolge deren ai¡h/1 so weit von bh1'pa ab-
O'eruckt. wird , wurde \Vohl hauptsachlich durch die Notwendigkeit
b
veranlal3t, lcainino wegen der langen sieh an dieses Wort an-
schlieilenden Reihe von Epitheta ganzans Ende zu setzen. 1eh
ubersetze diese schwierige Stelle demnaeh: ,In der Gestalt desjenigen,
das da (seine Wohlgeruehe) heranweht, namlich eines schOnen,
herrliehen ... Madehens, scheint ihre Daena an sie 2 heranzutl'eten.'
Einen Nom. Sg. Mask. des Parto Prits. Akt. auí -q hat es be-
kanntlich im Awestisehen nieht gegeben, siehe GrIrPh. 1 a, 221.
3
Au13er den oben besprochenen Formen dUrfte hier jedoeh noch eine
Ausnahme zu machen sein: Yt. 19, 84, das im allgemeinen aus 3oeht-
silbigen Zeilen besteht,. endet mit
yai imqm daenCf:m astaota
dusmainyüm sizdyo daevqn apa. asavqn.
Die lotzton zwoi Worte waren fUr Bnrtholomne, Aie. vVb. 254, un-
verstandlieh, ihre Bedeutung soll naeh ihm etwa ,vertreibend (o. dgl.)'
gewesen sein. Daher ubersetzt W olff: ,so da13 er sich dieser Religion
1 Wegen ty statt {}y vgl. 1Jii1'ilntyA, Dra8l-i1ltyAyt. 16, 10 und im allgemeinen
GrIrPh. i a, 230.
,¡ D. h. die Seele des Mannes. .ahnlich übersetzt schon Spiegel, 1. c. ,sie
glaubt, daB zu ihr komme', ohne aber n!ther zu erklüren, wie el' ¡¡jl'anta auffaBt.
3 AIs Partizipformen auf -q führt Rertel, Indoiran. Quellen .und Forsch. VII,
213 A. 1, freilich wieder die schon von Geldner, Studien I, 152, dafUr geltend ge-
machten Formen JaUyq(m) V, 3, 1 und hq(m) Yt. 13, 129 ano Aber Jaió'yq(m) steht
an einer dunklen Stelle, beweist daher wenig. Die Auffllssung als Infinitiv (Air ..
Wb. 603) ist freilich auch h~pothetischi hqm, das Geldner, I(Z XXV, 561, aus metri-
Bchen Gründen hllt streichen wollen, kllnn Akk. PI. N. des Partizips von ah- seín
(Air. Wb. 274 u.).
215
 60 F. B. J. Kuiper.
angelobte, den Übelgesinnten zUI'\ickscheuehend, die Daeyas ver~
treibend'. Reichelt, Avesta Reader 132, lieG die letzten Worte da~
gegen unUbersetzt, wahrend Lommel, Die Yaiít's des Awesta 185,
an asavan- anknlipfte: ,damit el' diese Religion preise, die Ubel-
gesinnten 'Teufel von dem Frommen abwehrend'. Ihm folgt zum Teil
Hertel, Die aw. Herrschafts- und Siegesfeuel' 56, nur fal3t dieser asavqn
als Fehler f\ir asava (Nom.) auf, was somit folgende Úbersetzung
el'gibt: ,indem el' als Besitzer des Lichtes-des-Heils die basgesinnten
Daeva von sich abwies',1 Die neueren Úbersetzungen haben offenbar
das Metrum nicht berUcksichtigt. Eine del' alteren Úbersetzungen
des Zamyad Yast, die Bartholomaeische, hat dagegen, weil das Metrum
von dusmainyfi.:m an in Unordnung ist, diese Worte gestrichen (Al'.
Forsch. I [1882] 140), und Geldner, Drei Yasht (1884) 55, hat aus
demselben Grunde die Worte ,indem el' ihren Feind vertrieb und
die Damonen verjagte' eingeklammert. In del' Tat hat man von
del' Tatsache auszugehen, dal3 die Stelle, wie aus dem Metrum
und asavqn mit ziemlich groGer Wahrscheinlichkeit hervorgeht,
irgendwie verderbt ist. Es fragt sich, ob es maglich ist, nachzu~
weisen, worin die Verderbnis besteht und wie sie in den Text
hineingeraten ist.
Eine achtsilbige Verszeile lal3t sich wiederherstellen, indem man
apa. asavqn fltr'eicht und etwa dusmaniyüm liest. Aher diese Form
stimmt nicht zul' Pluralform daevqn. 2 Man künnte daher entweder
dusmainyü lesen, welche Foem fuI' den Akk. PI. auch A. 1, 11 und
Az. 7 bclegt ist (siehe GrIrPh. 1 a, 229, Aie. Wb. 754)8 - wobci
freilich das Herantreten des m nicht genügend erklarbar ware -
oder man hat von del' von Lommel, Die Yast's S. XI, beobachteten
1 Spiegel, Commentar II,666, las apaaoavan (Stamm; apa.aJava~), das ein
Kompositum wie apax8aSra~ soin sollte. Justi vermutete, daS asavabyo zu lesen sei.
, Hertels Vorschlag, dusmainyün (Akk. PI.) zu lesen (S. 34 A. 9), was der
vedischen Endung entsprechen sollte, iat sprachhistorisch unmoglich.
3 Vbrigens hat diese Form natürlich weder textkritischen noch sprach-
historischen Wen. Aus den Variantcn zu Afríngll:n 1. 11 dad man schlieflen, dall
die Form eine graphische Verstümmelung von duámainya'/Ja (dusmainyavo) ist.
216
Indoiranica. 61
Tatsache auszugehen, dan v und n in dem auf uns gekommenen
'l'exte bisweilen verwechselt worden sind. 1
Lommel beruft sich nur auf das einwandfl'eie Beispiel pairis-
hanána- ,Keltergerat' (V. 14, 7), das fuI' pai1'ishavana- steht (vgl. paú'is-
havanis). Auch ist hiel' an hunati zu erinner)l, wofür Andl'eas und
Wackernagel, Gott. Nachr.1911, 31, huvati einsetzen machten, obwohl
dies nicht mehr als eine unsichere Vermutung ist. Weitel' sei noch auf
Haa. N. 2,1,2 hingewiesen, wo man, weil die Daena hiel' (im Gegensatz
zu 11) von ihrer eigenen GraBe usw. redet, statt ava masanaéa usw.
ana masanaca zu les en hat, da ava- immer Jener-Deixis hato Die rich-
tige Sehreibung hat P 42 ana masanaéa ,durch diese meine GraBe'.
Úbrigens kann es sicl! hiel' um einen Fehler del' Kopisten handeln.
Zwei andere Beispiele fuI' Vertauschung kannen in V. 19, 30
vorliegen. In 29 wird beschrieben, wie VtZa1~so daévi5 nqma die
Seele des Drugglaubigen fortfuhrt. Hierauf nimmt eine Interpolation
in 30 Bezug mit den W orten: ha (líes: hav) drvatq¡m + ayqm urvano
t~mi5. hya nizar~saite ,del' zerrt del' Drugglaubigen schleehte Seelen
in die Finsternis hinab'. Weil del' Name durch mp. Vizis feststeht,
das Vel'bum aber durch die Pahlavi-Umschreibung nizarsét in einer
ganz jungen Hs. (Air. Wb. 1684) nicht genUgend gestUtzt wird, liegt
die Vermutung ganz nahe, dan in del' Glossc, die ja offenbar nur
den Eígennamen erkliil'en so11, ViZa1'~8aite (entweder altes *zl'sate,
Air. Wb. 1471, odeI' *zarsate, Acta 01'. XII, 284) zu lesen ist. Ebenso
machte man das dunlde nivavaiti a. a. O., eines del' Epitheta del'
jungfraulichen DaenD. (siehe Spiegel, Commentar I, 443), mit RUcksicht
auf x8oi:Jnyl1 in der parallelen Schilderung Haa. N. 2, 9 als *vibavati
(aí. *vibhavati) ,glanzend, herrlich' auffassen. Das Awestische kennt
nur das Vel'bum vibati (siehe auch Benveniste, BSL XXXII, 86 sqq.),
auch im Altindischen kommt -nibha- erst spat vor, vibhá dagegen
sehon l;tS X, 55, 4 8 • Wahrscheinlich ist vibiivati im A westischen sogar
belegt, wenn Bartholomae recht hat, dal3 vyavaiti (-ant~m) banubyo
1 Ausführlicher handelt Lomme! jetzt über diese FlI.lle in Gott. Nachr.1935, 145.
Vg!. Reichelt, Stand und AÍlfgaben 207, und Indo-Iranian Studies-Dastur Parab
Peshotana Sanjana (über niim~nJ,f).
217
 62 F. B. J. Kuiper.
Yt. 17, 6; 8, 2 fUr *viwavant- steht (Wb. 1479), wofUr er treffend
J;tS X, 6, 2 bhanúbhir vibháva vergleicht (anders Hertel, Indoiran.
Quellen und Forsch. VII, 27 A. 8).
Ahnlicherweise kl:innte nun auch daevCf:n fUr ursprung'1iches
daenCf:(m) stehen; in diesem Falle wUrde die Stelle einen befrie-
digenden Sinn erhalten: dusmaínyüm ist dann Akk. Sg. Fem. (vgl.
Ai. Gramm. III, 138) und daenq 1 geht, wie in aya daena (V. 18, 9)
und in nasistCf:m daenqm daevayasnanqm Y. 72, 11 auí die daevische
Religion, die als Widersacher der va¡'mh'i daena (Y. 53, 1) auftritt.
Die Úbersetzung von Yt. 19, 84 würde demnach lauten:
,welches dem Kl:inig Vistaspa zuteil ward,
damit er gemlU3 der Religion dachte,
gema/3 der Religion redete,
gema/3 der Religion handelte,
so da/3 er sich dieser Religíon angelobte,
die feindliche Religion vertreibend.'
Ob man aher in dayanCf: andert oder an daevqn der Úberlieferung
festhalt,2 soviel scheint wohl festzustehen. dan apa asavq,n nicht in
den Text gehl:irt. Dies steht durch falsche W orttrennung fUI' apasavl!n,
ebenso wie V. 9,11 ava.anta1'f) (Kh , L t , Mil) neben avanta1'~ (Jpl'
Mf») Uberliefert ist, siehe Geldner, Prolegomena XL VIII b. Die Form
apasavCf:n ist nun offenbar nichts anderes als eine in den Text ge-
ratene Glosse zu .9itdyü, muJ3 also als Nom. Sg. des Pat·t. aufgefa13t
werden, wie schon von Geldner, Drei Yasht 56, angedeutet, von
B"artholomae 1. c. aber mit Unrecht abgelehnt wurde. Mit asavan- hat
die Form, wenn spateren Abschreibern dieses Wort auch vorgeschwebt
haben mag, nichts zu tuno Die Endung -qn statt -Cf:S konnte auf den
dlirftigen sprachlichen Kenntnissen des Kommentators beruhen, ob-
wohl dieser andererseits die Bedeutung von sitdyü noch sehr gut ge-
kannt hat; wahrscheinlicher ist aber, daJ3 jUngere Abschreiber das
1 Mit dreisilbiger Messung: dusmainyum Biidyo dayanq.
t Sonst wird freilich meist die Verscheuchung der Dai'ivas erwilhnt (vgl. 80,
8t, 95), aber die grammatisch sich empfehlende Textllnderung hat inhnltlich eine
Stütze in 68, 69.
218
Indoiranica. 63
nicht mehr verstandene Wort als Adjektiv oder Apposition zu daevCf:n
aufgefaJ3t und die Endung daher der von daevCf:n angeglichen haben.
20. Aw. sa ,wehren'.
Auí die aw. vVurzel sa- bezieht Bartholomae, Altir. ,Vb. 1569,
zwei Verbalformen, die angeblich ,wehren' bedeuten. Eine etymo-
logis che Erklarung vermag Bartholomae freilich nicht zu geben, und
auch "Waldes, Vgl. Wb. II, 541, Vermutung, daJ3 sa- mit ai. chyáti
,schneidet abe U. a. (idg. *sqei- ,schneiden, trennen, scheiden') zu
verbinden sei, kan1\. nicht als eine befriedigende Losung gelten.1
Nun beweist an und fuI' sich das Fehlen einer etymologischen
Erklarung natürlich nichts gegen die Richtigkeit eines Bedeutungs-
ansatzes oder einer aus dem Satzzusammenhang gewonnenen philo-
logischen Interpretation, und in anderen indogermanischen Sprachen,
wo mehrere sehr gebrauchliche Wl:irter, welche aUem Anschein nach
indogermanischer Herkunft sind, noch immer einer etymologischen
Erklarung harren, würde dies kaum auffallen; im Awestischen jedoch,
wo man schon oft einer oder zwei mil3verstandenen Verbalformen zu-
liebe fiktive Wurzeln angesetzt hat,2 muG die s wohl Verdacht erwecken.
Tatsachlich lassen beide in Frage kommenden Stellen eine andere
Erklarung zu, beí welcher man nicht zu einer Wurzel, deren Existenz
durch nichts gewahrleistet wird, seine Zuflucht zu nehmen hato Y. 48,
7· ist, wenn man die durch das Metrum geforderte Textgestalt wieder-
herstellt, folgendermaJ3en zu lesen:
ni aes~m{J dyatqm paiti r~m~m syodüm
nach Bartholomaes Úbersetzung: ,Del' Raserei soU Einhalt getan
werden! Gegen die Grausamkeit wehret euch', und iihnlich neuer-
dings Lommel, GN 1935, 130: ,Gewalttat wehret abe. Es kann nach
del' Casur ein sechs- oder siebensilbiger Versteil foIgen; ob wir aber
von *syadvam oder von *siyadvam ausgehen, macht fuI' die Etymo-
logie nichts aus. Jedenfalls handelt es sich um eine Form, die, ins
1 Wegen des a. n. O...hernngezogenen fi'aslin9m vgI. oben S. 39.
! Z. B. lih (Air. Wb. 345), kav (442), alSa (1521), ¡'lio. (1521), ¡·Üz (1526),
yaokars (1228), sav (1707, vgl. Lommel, KZ L, 267 sqq.).
219
64 F. B. J. Kuiper.
Altindische ,ubersetzt', !lts('t)yadhvam lauten mulHe. Nun bedeutet
ai. s¡yate nicht bloJ3 ,ausfallen', sondern in ZusammensetzunO" b mit
Praverbien hat es die allgemeine Bedeutung von lato cedm'e,l z. B.
atisiyate ,herauskommen aus, verlassen, discedere', upasiyate ,hinzu-
kommen, 2 accedere', Die Zusammensetzung pratisiyate, wie die alt-
indische Entsprechung von paitt- syodüm hatte lauten mUssen, ist freilich
nicht belegt, aber die awestische Form erklart sich leicht aus del' Be-
deutung ,gegen, entgegen, wider', die paiti als Praverbium eigen ist
(ReicheIt, Aw. Elementarb. 272), vgl. Y. 49, 11· paiti ... [pait]yeinti
,gehen entgegen' und in feindlichem Sinne V.13, 1 hazanraJa aiwo.mai·
nyu8 paiti.Jasaiti ,es wendet sich tausend totend gegen die dem bOsen
Geist angehorigen (Geschopfe)'.s Es hat demnach pati siyatai etwa ,ent-
gegentreten, occedere' bedeutet, weiter mag es dan n aber, ebenso wie
z. B. accedere, aggredi, gr. smivat ,angreÍfen, entgegentreten', auch in
feindlichem Sinne verwendet woi'den sein. Statt ,Gewalttat wehret ab'
ist dann zu übersetzen: ,wendet euch gegen die Grausamkeit'.
Bartholomaes zweite Belegstelle flir sa- ,wehren', namlich Y. 31,
l8 f a:tll is sazdüm snai:tisa ,drum wehret ihnen mit del' Waffe',4
enthalt vielmehr eine athematische Verbalform von sad- ,kranken ,
verletzen', das in aw. Sad1'fJm ,Leid, Qual', sasto ,qualend, grausam',
gr. )(~Oltl ,kranke, verIetze' vorliegt (idg. *ked-, *kfJd-).6 FUr die Über-
setzung ,verwundet sie mit del' Waffe', die sich hieraus ergibt, ist
hinzuweisen auf die ParalleIe in E 404 8¡; -rÓSOU¡W "Un1}oa :taov¡;, o'i
"OAVft'ltOV 8XOVO't
" (A'mels-Hentze-Cauel': ,verletzte, verwundete').
1 Für die etyrnologischen Beziehungen zwischen áiyate und c~deJ'e siehe Verf.,
Acta Oro XII, 236, Die idg. Nasalpr. 40, 168. Hier mllchte ich noch nachtragen,
daB die Annahrne eines B-Prasens *áyáemi, *áiqmá(¡. durch den athern. Optat. atiá¡~yat
I;lai}.v. Br. 2, 10, 12 gestUtzt wird.
t Baudh. KS XXI, 14 (Caland, tJber das rito Sntra des B. 63), vgl. Jairn.
Br. I1, 81 (Caland, Ausw. Nr. 129 Z.2, 4, 5, 9).
3 So nach Bartholornae¡ Geldners, KZ XXIV, 407, tJbersetzung ,auszieht'
ist zu blaB.
4 Ahnlich Andreas und WackernageI, Gi:itt. Nachr. 1911, 26, und M. W. Srnith.
Geldner, Religionsgesch. Leseb. 5, hat ,züchtiget' (also zu 8ad· ?).
6 Wegen gr. ICExád'OllTO vgL Walde-Hofrnann, Lat. et. Wb. 3 128.
220
THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS AÑC-jAFÚ-
By
F. B. J. KUIPER, Leyden.
The object of the following study is to show that there are in Sanskrit three
pairs of roots, each of them consisting of the variants añc- and afijo, which may
be distinguished as follows: 1. "to bend, bow." 2. "to go." 3. "to show,
manifest, mark, adorn." While 2. a1ic- and 3. añe- are usually confounded with
1. año- " to bend," 3. mij- is regarded as identical with añj- "to anoint." It is
desirable that future lexica should number the three roots añe- and añj- respectively
in such a way as to bring out the parallelism existing between the members of
each couple. The question whether there has also existed a root variant añe-
"to anoint" is discussed in §7. In classical Sanskrit there cxists a group of
intransitive compounds of -añeati derived from various sources, for which it is
not advisable to maintain a strictly etymological arrangement. They are herc
treated together and have be en classed as belonging to 1 a. a·ñc-. A ddl.nitive
arrangement of them will not be possible until aU the relevant materials have been
gathered from the late classicalliterature. It is hopcd, however, that the following
discussion of the problems connected with añc-jañj- will provide a useful basis for
the work that will have to be performed by the editorial board of the future Sanskrit
lexicon.
As the materials contained in the existing dictionaries are quite insufficient
to illustrate the use of the various verbs it was necessary to communicate in full
the evidence upon which the conclusions are based so as to tacilitate a critical re-
examination of the facts. It need hardly be said that completeness has not been
aimed ato
This papel' has been written some ten years ago (1941-1942) and little has been
added since. It was intended to clear the way, on a single point of modest interest,
fol' the editol's of a future Sanskrit Thesaurus. Therefore, it is matter of gratifica-
tion that thefirst steps have since been taken towards the accomplishment of
such an undertaking.
For the sake of an easy orientation the contents are summarized in the follow-
ing synopsis :
1. añc-jañj-: § 1. l.aric- "to bend, bow." § 2. 1.añj-" to bend,
bow."
2. añc-jañj-: § 3. 2.añe- and mijo "to go."
1 a alie- (intrans. verbs in -añcati): § 4. 1 a añc-: udañcati "arises".
§ 5. 1 a añe-: udalicati used of music, etc. § 6. 1 a añc-: the other compounds.
221
 THE THREE SA.."ISKRIT ROOTS ANC-jAg¡- F. B. J. KUIPER
37 38

3. añe.jaiíj." to show, manifest, mark, adorno llOnoul'.": § 'i. 3. aiíe. different from akta-, iikta-, nyakta-,2 samakta- (root añj-), but only udakta-. Without
"to mark, charactcrizc, adorn, ctc." § 8. 3. alle·: lId.aile., sam.ud·aiie., and a prefix akna- occurs only in the compound jiinv-akna-(Apast. Bhiiradv.), jiinv-
otller compounds. § 9. Sur,'cv . of the mcanillas
" , . .§ .
of ud·ailc· ~
10 3 . alle.· ak1;¡,a- (SBKál)v.), for whi~h SB~ádhy. uses janv-iikna- (in accordance with the
t~c past participle ai/cita· " insigllis." § 11. 3. aI/c: romiiilcita. and pulakiiií: common use of ii-añc-, cf. acyiijanu ~S. :0, 15, 6, dak~i1Jarhjiinv iieya SB., Sáilkh.
clta-. § 12. 3. ailj.: the nominal derivatives ail')·i. and aktll. . § 13. . ~.
3 anJ.· Ar. 12, 8, etc.). The form .ak1Ja- in SBKal)v. (nyak1Ja:, samak1Ja-, jiinvak1Ja-,
verbal forms in Ycdic. § 14. 3. alij-: the compound vy.aI1j- in Vedie: see Caland, Satapatha Brahmal)a, Introduction, p. 36) has been ascribed to Pra-
ktitic influence by Oertel, G5tt. Gelehrte Anzeigen 1934, 187.
4. añj. "to anoint": § 15. The compound sam·aiíj. in Yedie
Conelusion § 16. Linguistic Remarks . Instead of this participle the pO'lt-Vedie language uses añdta-, which points
to a present añcati.· This however is almost unknown in the older language. The
Rksarhhita has only forms of acati (with ápa, úd, pári, vi, sám), the Atharva Sarhhitá
1. 41VC-jAlVJ." TO BEXD, BO"·."l
has beside ud acati (4) and vi acati (2) only one instance of á aiícati in 11, 10, 16
viiyúr amítriir;tiim i§Vagrár;ty áñcatu "let Váyu bend up the arrow-points of ~he
§ 1. 1. alic- " to bend, bow."
enemies." In the Satapatha Bráhmal)a this stem is restricted to the imperfect,
This wel~.~now:n r?ot presents but few difficulties. In the Vedic language while the corresponding present has the normal stem ac-; cf. 3, 4, 3, 2 and 4 sarhtaram
the past parbclple 1S elther akta· 01' akna., both beina used onh- in compound angulir iiñcanta, sarhtariirh mekhaliirn "they turned in their fingel's more tightly
· b e .
Th e ch ~lce s.
etween them was determined, according to Piil)ini 8, 2, 48, bv the and drew their zone tighter " (Eggeling) as contrasted with 3, 4, 3, 3 and 5 sarhtariim
synta.ctJcal use: .~kna. being employed when the word was not combined with aa angulir acate, ,sarhtariirh mekhaliim (: sarhkocayati Káty. SS 7, 3, ~; cf. sarhtar'ám
ablatlve (anapada~l~). _ Th~ or~gin of this empirical rule appears from the examples mékhaliim samayacchate TS. 6, 2, 2, 7). Perhaps we may compare S1i.iJ.kh. Al'. 11, 1
q~oted by the ~aslka~'rtb, VlZ. udaktam ~¿dakmh küpcit; llddhrtam üy arthalJ (on where Cowell (cf. Deussen, Sechzig Upanishad's 22) and Keith (Aitareya Aral)yaka,
Pal). 6, 4, 30; ./. 2, 03) and samaknau sakunelJ padall; tasmat pasavo nyakniih Oxford 1909, 318) read Prajiipatir vii imarh puru~amudañcat but where the reading
(~n 8,_ 2, 48), whlC~ has ~een taken from Kath. 29, 9 (p. lí6, 1) ta asmad abibhayu;, adarhcata (lioth in the Bodleyan and Berlin MSS. and in a Leyden MS. not utilized
ta nyacyan.ta. tasmat pasavo nyakniilJ. In reality, akta· setms to have been replaced by Keith) might suggest udiiñcata. 1 am unable to explain this queer difference.
by -~.~n~: m al! c~s~,where there would have been homonymy with the partieiple In later texts ac- is ousted by añc-, cf. e.g., Yaska Nir. 2. 28 anko ' 11catelJ and 5, 28
of anJ- to anomt. Rence we find akna., iikna., nyakna. and samakna-, as ankuso' ñcate/;!.; iikucito bhavatiti vii, and the Kasiká on Pal). 7, 2, 23 añcitvii jiinu
juhoti. 3 To the same tendency añcita- must owe its origino For the re¡,t the use
1. The ~bbreviations used, apart from those that may be expected to be generalIy known of the stem ac- must have been so universal as to give rise to the analogical forma-
are the Collowmg : . ,
tions nyácam and udácam which are used as gerunds in SBM 3, 3, 2, 14 ff.
Classical Li/erature J"edic Litera/uTe
Bhm. : Bhii.ratarnañjari. AS: Atharvaveda Sarhhitá. The strong forro of the root is also found in the nominal derivatives, e.g.,
BhV. : Bhii.minivilii.sa.
Bkm: B,hatkathii.mañjari. Bloomfield: Hyrnns of the Atharva Veda udáñcana- " a bucket for drawing water out of a weU" (since ~S 5, 44, 13) and
SBE. Yol. 42.
Caurap.: Caurapañcasikii.. Gdn. : Geldner. Der Rigveda 1, (1923). udanka- m., "a leather vessel, not used for water" (Mán. SS 1, 1, 2); cf. Kásika on
Das. : DaSakumii.racarita, ed. Agashe.
DharmaS. : DharmaSarmii.bhyudaya. G~~. Glossar: The same, Rigveda in Auswahl Pan 3 3 123 which quotes tailodanka- as opposed to udakodG/1cana-, and Pa.
Gopii.l: GopiUakelicandrika.
Gr: : Grassmann, Rigveda, übersetzt, etc. u!~nk~- ;, ladl~, spoon," Pkt. udanka- "bucket." But owing to the influence of
Harac. : Haracaritacíntii.mal)i.
Harav. : Haravijaya. Grill: G., Hundert Lieder des Atharva: Veda the corresponding verb ud-acati " draws water out of a well," a new noun udacana-
(2nd edn.).
Kii.d. : Kadambari. 1IilIebrandt H. : Lieder des Rgveda has arisen by the side of udañcana-, see Schm. N. On the other hand, we find in
PW. : Béihtlingk anñ Roth, Sanskrit "'éirter- Ludwig, Der Rigveda . • the classical period also a present ud-añcati used instead of the Vedic form ud-acati.
buch. .
l\!a~donell : )1., Hy~~ from the Rigve¡la.
p~. : Béihtlingk, Skt. Wb. in kürzerer Fassung.
Nelsser: N., Zum "orterbuch des Rigveda It will be discussed below, p. 48.
Ragh. : Rii.ghavapii.l)gaviya. vols. 1 and n. '
Rghv. : RaghuvarilSa.
Sil.h.D .. : Sii.hitya Darpal)a (Nirl). Sagar Press, OIdenbe~g: O", Rigveda, Textkritische' und Since the present of 1. añc- is in general c!early characterized by the weak
Bombay}902). exegetlsche ~oten, vols. 1 and n. grade of its root-vocalism it is not liable to be confounded with 2. añc- and 3.añc-.
Renou: R., Hyrnnes et Prieres du Veda.
Schm.N.: R. Schmidt, Nachtriige zum Sans- Roth :. Vedi.c !nterpretationa in PW~ The only form calling for a mOre detailed account i8 the past participle añcita-
krit Wéirterbuch. RS. : RksaIhluta.
V~rad. : Varadámbikii.paril.layacampü. Whitney: Translation oC the Atharvasarhhitii.
Vas. : Vii.savadattá. . . 2. nyakta-(quoted in PW. S.V. ae-) belongs exclusively to añj-, see § 12.
Vikr.,~·. Vikramiiñkadevaca¡-¡ta (ed. Bühler). 3. But §iro 'ñeitvá Bhatt. 9, 40, which Béihtlingk and Apte derive from añe- "to bend,"
Yasastil. : Yasastilaka. belongs to 3. añe- " to honour'" (see below, p. 66).

222 223
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-/AN1- F. B. J. KUlPER
39 40

sinc~ ~t has thu: far ne~'er been rlistinguished from its homonym aiícita-, past netrayugalam lUiiñcita-bhriUatam Sak. stanza 164, ed. Pischel. lt should be.
part1C1ple of 3.anc-. It 1S necessary, therefore, to examine more closelv its u~ noted that the compound liliiñcita- may also beused in a quite different sense; as
• oe.
in gate~u lilañcita-vikraTllefu Kumaras. 1, 34 (see p. 71). Further this use should
Alicita. "bent" is used:
not be confounded with udañcita-bhrü- Vikr. 2, 76, etc., nor with the bahuvrihi-
(a) of the bending of a bow: compound añcitabhrü-, which the Sabdakalpadruma rightly renders by sundara-
iikar7JiÍlicitagii1:uliva- Bhm. 3, 1645; 7, 534'. bhrüyuktaniiri (see p. 54 and p. 74 resp.). For the sense "curved " which añcita-
has in the aboye instances, we may· compare such synonymous expressions as, e.g.,
éikun)iilicitakodar;u!.a. Bhm. 3, 288 4 ; 7, 602; Bkm. 2, II, 153.
kÚrJitabhrülo.tiintalJ YaSastil. 1, 359, 1, mahipiile kimcid iilcuñcite bhruvi (read:
tatk~arJiilicitaSal'iisanacar:ulalJ (vi~ame~ulJ) Dharnias. 15, 27. ákuñcitabhruvi) Bklll. 3, 168, ~Ialatim. IV, 2 (cf. l, 30), natabhrüJ.¡, etc.
dOl'dar;¡iJiifícita.calldl'aSekhara.dhanul'dar;¡iJiivabhangodyata. (e) of the glance of the eyes:
sah. D. 183, 11 (comm. iikuilcitalJ). añcitapadmá~am (mukham) ::\Ihbh. 1, 211, 25 Bomb. (7703 Cale.).
Compare aJicana., n. "stringing of the bow," e.g., -ciipéiíicanacatura. Yasasti!. ciirv-añcitapadmá~am (mukham) Ram. 4, 1, 110.
l, 602, 1, pl'erarJiikar~a7JillicanailJ Bhm. 19, 882. piirthivasre#ha?l prthuciirv-añcitek~a7JalJ l\Ihbh. 3, 64, 45 Bomb. (Nala 2, 32)
(b) of a creeper : liliiñcita-nilaniraja.darsanii Das. 124, 20 "mit den spielend seitwarts
v{ftñíicitalatéibhujailJ Kathiis. 81, 88. hergewendeten Blaulotusaugen " (J. J. l\Ieyer).
drsam tiryak kirhcid añcitiim samciirayanti Das. 121, 13.
(e) of the head 01' neck:
sitkiirañcitalocanii Amarusataka 36 (ed. Kavyamala 18), Comm.: sit/cara.
ü/'dhviiíicíta-sirogrivii l\fhbh. 1, 165, 31 (ed. Poona).
pürvakam vilasadaSii3parsena kÜ7Jite locane yayii, sa.
(nrpéilJ) prarJiimiiñcitamaulayalJ Bhm. 2, 237.
Note. Instead of om first instance Bohtlingk (PW.) quotes a variant reading,
vyupiiyacintiibharayogiilicitamül'dhni Harav. 15, 3, comm.:
of little value for the rest, añcitapattrii~am ",ith nearly the same meaning, el'.
ca BharatoddesalJ: kimcit piirsvñnatagrivam siro vijl1eyam añcitam.
padmapattre~ar;ta?l Ram. 4, 3, 12, etc. This use, different from udañcaya dr sam
sarhjivako 'yam vr~abhalJ sviimidrohe samudyatalJ Bhm. 19, 922, and from alicitii~i (see p. 56 and p. 74) may be compared with such
yathéi vakriiíicitagl'ivalJ sarhgriimiil'thiva lak~yate Bkm. 16, 304 (cf. 390: expressions as ariilanetrii?l Yikr. 10, 63, tiryakkü7Jita.netratribhiigena Har~ac. p. 148
dr~tvii samkocakuíicitiim gríviirh vr~asya). (ed. Parab 2 ). The meaning of trrJiiñcita- in:
tato heléiñcitag/'ivam I~ad unmilya locane Bhm. 3, 1020. This use should be sarvathii jivitabhramse bhiravo bhayaviklavii?l
distinguished from such cases as udvelahelibicitapiidaciiralJ Yikr. 10, 70, which trrJiiñcite ' pi nayane milayanty evo. kiital'ii?l Bhm. 13, 1692, obviously is
contains the past parto of 3. añc-, see p. 71 (and 54). "bent down (01' sideward) like blades of grass," cf. 19, 462 tr7Jiiñcane' pi ka saktis
(d) of the eye.brows: tvcim vinii pal'ame~thinam.
añcitabhru vilokitam Vikr. 10, 33. (j) of the eye.lashes :
(Cf. añcitabhrü?l " aliGite, utkr~te bhmvau yasyalJ sii, balmvrihilJ," Sabdfl' a.ñcita-pa~iilltam (mukham) l\Ihbh. 1, 203, 23 crit. ed.
kalpadruma).
añcitii~ipa~ii Rghv. 5, 76.
bhruvañcitam Har~acarita 234, erroneously explained in the commentary pramliiniiñcita-puta,tiim uriilakesya·
with 1Jhlücalitam, hence Thomas, JRAS 1899, 502 "moyement of the brows"
bibhriir;tii nipatita.tiirakiibhiriima (dr#iM Hara". 17, 101, comm. 'pramliinety.
(but " raised eye·brows" in the translatión, p. 205). As for this error see below,
ádinii sriintiikhyii dr#ir r:arrJitii, yasyii lalc~arJam " sramapramliinitaputa syiimiintaff.
p. 45 Parab's edition (p. 209, 5) has bhl'üvañcitair;5 bhrücalitaih' bhrüvañcitaih
citalocanii .... ~ .etc." ; añcitau: prasrtau.
iti piithe, unnataikabhrü~iptair ity arthalJ. . , .
.lilañcitabhrülata Das. 104, 14. The first quotation is a variant of the tirst instance sub e. As regards the
second instance, ::\Iallinatha glosses añcita· with ciintIJ, and Bohtlingk quotes
4. The printed text has erroneously akal1liiñcita-. 8undaraJ.¡ from another commentary; these renderings may have induced Renou to
5. Read bhruv- tran~late "aux cils charmants"; but, although 3. añcita- "beautiful" is found

224 225
 THE THREE SANSJeRlTROQTS: ANc-/.1Nl- F. B. r. KUlPEk
41
~n aiic~ta/~,Yi, -añcitapak,YmasobhaJ.¡, (see p. 74 and p. 75), Bohtlingk is no doubt right "versteckte sich unter den Weibern" (hid away among thc women). Cf. Z.
m asslgnmg the sense "bent, curved" to the word in the Raghuvamsa passag • Wb. d. RV. lI, 11 (likc Roth: "schlüpfte cin, versteckte sich "). Since ny-añc-
cf. aku#lapak,Yman- Sak. stanza 179 (ed. Cappeller). e, and ny-añj- are used in quite the same sense, their identity cannot be doubted.
(g) of the knee, etc.: Consequently ny-añj- must be separated from 4. añj- " to anoint," as the meaning
"he anointed himself among the women" (still defended by Oldenberg, Noten)
añcitasavyajanuJ.¡, Rghv. 18, 50 (51), Mall.: iikuñcitaJ.¿. is clearly unacceptable. It should be noted that ni- + 4. añj- oceurring in passages
añcitadak,Yir;wruJ.¡, Bhatt. 2, 31, comm. sankocitaJ.¡,. like sdhasririt pU#Íln nyankte Kath. S. 7, 7 (: p. 68, 11), which Neisser rightly
pinañcitaguruSrottiJ.¡, Ram. 5, 18, 25 Gorr. (PW). translates "heftet tausendfaches Gedeihen an sich" is an altogcther different
(h) of the hand : word, both the object and the eontcxt showing it to be a middle form of 4. añj-
(see § 12). Of eourse, Oldenberg must also have been aware of thé. difficulties
. lilañcita-karaSiikhii Das. 128, 4; Meyer; "lieblich gebogenen zweigegl . involved in his interprctation but the circumstance that the translation "hid "
. h h er fi ngers gracefully waved." Compare aboye, b.
lche n R"an d en, " P et erson:, "wIt el in his opinion necessitated a text-emendation ny-ánace withheld him to from
(i) of the ears : accepting this far more satisfying interpretation.
vi,Yamañcita-karttatalair Bhm. 2, 332. On aceount of ny-acati Sato Br. "bellds down," intrans. ny.acyate (e.g
Kath. S. 29,9) we maY eonclude that nyáiícana- denotes a place where one eould
Notice the. difference between vi,Yamdñcita- and vi,Yamodañcad-ekakarnam Bhm
S, 1258 and 1610 (see p. 54). . . hid~ in a stooping position. Nyáñcani- in AS. 5, 5, 2 seems to be the sa!lle word,
which has adopted the feminine ending in accordanc~ with thc eontext."~ Here,
(j) of the hairs, "crisped, curIed": the plant áilad is addressed with the words bhartri hí sáávatám asi, jálldnam ca.
svasitañcitamurdhajd ~Ihbh. 1, 6.7, 158 B. (2192 C.), -nyáñcani "for thou art the supporter of all successiye (gencrations), the rcfuge of
men" Bloomfield; (" hiding-place" Whitney) .. The translation "Iap" (Roth,
. prakin;u'iñcitamurdhaja_ Ram. 2, ~6, 25 Gorresio, as corrected by Boht. Grill, )Ionier-Williams) has little to commend it. Thieme, Kuhn's Zeitsehr. 611,.
lmgk, PW, V, 859. But for the first instance the crit. ed. has asitayatamurdhaja 1951, 209, n. 1 no\\" proposes to rcad *nYa/1jani- "Anstrich, Sehminkc" (paint)
and for the second the Bombay text (2, 64,27=26 Schlegel) reads prakirniijina: but the parallelism with bhartri makes us rather expect some metaphórical expres-
vdsasam. Cf. kuñcitamurdhajaJ.¡, lVIhbh. 10, 7, 26 B. (cf. Ram. 1 .Ú; 41) sion (ef. Id sá det'ániim asi svásd, 7e apám así svásd liik~e). By his knowlcdge of the
kutilakuntalaJ.¡, Rar~ac.112, 3 (ed. Bomb-) Bkm. 9, II 529, ku#ldlakormi- Dha~mas' secret names and the mysterious nature of tlle plant man may exert his influence
4, 58, kuñcitasyiilakasya l\Iudrar. V, 23, kuntalaiJ.¡, kuñcitdsitaiJ.¡, KathiLs. 55: on it and eompcl it to aid him. Nyáñcani- is likely, therefore, to express thc same
47. etc.
idea as pada b of the same stanza: trilyase púru~a/n tvám. As a semantic parallel
§ 2. l.Añj." To Bend, Bow" for nyáñcana- (-i-) may be quoted Mon cabui "refuge": thabui "to crouch."

A:mong the nomina~ derivatives of l.añc-with the strong gradeofroot-voéalism The Rigvedie form ny-ltnaje is aceordingly an arehaism, whieh in the younger
there IS also a word nyañcana., n., which occurs for the first time in l,tS. 8, 27, 18 texts has been replaced by ny-acyate. The existence of a root añj- " to bend " is
ájTe cid asmái krttuthii nyáñcanam durgé cid á 8Usara~6m confirmcd by the nouns a11jalí-m. " th~ two hollowcd hands put together," angúrí-,
angúli-, f. " Dnger,,, aligú§tha-, m. "thumb," and probably also ánga-, n. "limb,
",even in the plain· you make for him a refuge, even in inaccessible places an .member" '(in spite of g'átra-, whieh might suggcst a connexion with 2. añj-
-opportunity of getting on easily." SimilarIy AS. 4, 86, 6cd. .. to go"; ef. Nir. 4, 3 angam anganiid añcaniid vii). The origin of prciñjala.
ávánaJ.¡, simhám iva dr#vá "straight" (Pañeat. 5, 67, 14 Bomb. ed.) is obscure. Cf. Ved. pra-rñj-?
té ná vindante nyáñcanam
§ 3. 2.AliJC-IAliJJ- "TO GO, l\IOVE."
" as do~ who have seen a líon, thesc (seil. the piádcas) do not ~da refuge." Neisser In l,tS. 4, 6, 9 Agni's horses are described as being l'óhitiisa rjválicaJ.¡, sváñca?t.
z~~ "\orterbuch des RV. 1, 18, translates this word "Unterschlupf ,; (haunt, The last word, sváñc- or sváI1cas-, occurs se\-eral times and is' used of horses, spies,
hldmg-place) and connects it with añc- "to bend" but thr l' 'b'I'
( un der anJ-
-. "
to anoint") he quotes J;tS. 1, 161, 4
ee mes e OW
6. For this phenomenon, w!lich is rather common in the yedic Sarhhitas, see in ge~eral
P. Thieme, Untersuehungen zur" ortkunde und Auslegung des Rlg\'cda (1940), p. 32 f( (especlally
tid ít tv~ta gnásv antár ny (maje p. a-i).

226 227
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-/ANJ-
43
Pü~an and Agni. Roth and Grassmunn rendered it " beweglich, gewandt " (veI'satile)
as they held the primaI'Y mcaning to have been "sich leicht wendend " (turning
easily) 01' " sich leicht (nach einem Ziel) hinrichtend." But 1. aJ1e· "to bend,"
to which they I'eferred this word, cannot be shown to have ever been used in that
sense and for rjváñc. this explanation is altogether improbable. For the last ~~ord
-even Roth and Grassmann could give no other translation than "geradeaus
gehend " (gOillg straightforward). Of course, svái'íc· must then be translated in
an analogous way. As a matter of fact Gcldner's translation of 4, 6, 9 has" die
Rotfüchse mit strackem, seh511em Gallg" (cf. Glossar s.v.) and Xeisser also renders
it" gut laufend " (rullnil1g well). Evidently these words are deriyed from a I'oot
.añe· " to go," which also enables us to account foI' the Rigvedic word ak/'á· "I'ace.
hor8e," cf. 7. 56. 16 átya.so ná yé manUal; sváfíco. The meanil1g " horse " (Geldner,
Ved. Stud. 1, 168 j Der Rigveda übeI'setzt ... ad 1, 143. 7), though sometimes
questioned (Sieg, G5tt. Gel. Anzeigen 1925, 130) gives by faI' the most plausible
translation and has been adopted by Oldenberg, SBE. 46, 159 etc. and Neisser
1,7 f. If Pkt. akko "dütal; " (Ddiniimamiila 1,6) is from ak/'a., its primary meaning
may have been " runner" although it is hard to believe that this isolated gloss
preserves the trace of an independent semantic development, parallel to that of
the Vedic word. According to Sheth's dictionary the Pkt. word is not attested
in literature.
Tho meallÍng of áci~tu. VS. 20. 44, Uaitr. S., Kiith. S., etc. plahidhara:
.acanasilal; sarvatra gatal; moving j cf. also tva#iiram aci~tum c.plikam Kiith. S.
XV. 13 : p. 220, 10) is quite uncertain. It may be a parallel formation to vani~t(h)
·U·, he#u. (cf. nar~·tli.). See Renou, Monographies sanscrites n, 11.
Except foI' these scanty nominal derivatives the root afie. " to go " has totally
died out in Sanskrit. Neverthelcss the Dhiitupiitha attributes this sense to three
presents, viz. acatí, añkayati [cf. 1 915 añc· (ac.) " gatau ylicane ca," 1, 203 añc.
"gatipüjanayol;," 10, 382 aM· "pade lak~ar;¡,e ca"]. However the rp.eanings added
to the roots of the Dhatupiitha are posterior to Patañjali and thf circumstance
that neither acatí nor añkayati is attested in this sense whereas añcati " go("s " is
but rarely used and occurs only in late works of the classical period warn9 us against
taking these verbs as a linguistic reality.
As Renou, Journ. As. 1939,321. fr., has shown, many Ve die words revive
in the classieal literature, then howevcr being used in a sense that was quite
arbitrarily assigned to them by the Nighar:ttus and the eomm~ntal'Íes on the
Veda. As a matteI' of faet, Nigh. 2, 14 quotcs acatí " gatíkarmli " whieh can only
refer to 1. añc. "to bend" since no other verh acati oeCUr3 in the Rigveda.
Consequently Sayar:ta nearly alway:> glosses Lañe· with gacchati or, when a
transitive verb is required, with gamayaa. Cf. 5. 5.J.. 12 sáln acyanta
(: sarhgatdJ.¡,), 5.83.8 mahántarh kósam úd acá (: udgaccha, udgamaya vd), 9. 91.54
4plicíto acetál; (: apagamaya, acatir gatikarmá), 10, 119. 5 ahárh tá#ei.'a vandhúram
páry acámi hrd'á m!lUm (: slidhukaral,ldya parigacchdmí), and 5.78.6. Similariy
228
F. B. J. KUIPER
SaokaI'a on B~h. Ar. Up. 5. 1 pÜI'r;¡,lit .pür~am udacyate (: udríeyate, udgacchati).
When Yaska,. ~ir. 11. 25, explains parácail; by paráñcanair acita~ he probably
means " bent " but Durga glosses acítalJ, with gctf..al;. It is po~sible that the assump-
tion of a I'oot añc· " to go ': is also based on an early interpretation of rjváñc. and
s¡;áñc· but, although Siiyar:ta's explanations rju, akutilarn añcanti, gacchantUí and,
su~thu gacchantalJ are quite correct, it appears from 6. 58. 4 sváiicam ( : svañcanam,
8u#hu gacchalltc.m) and 9, 73, 7 svár1cal; ( : sobhanii11canlil;) that hi~ interpretation
is based upon 1. aií.c. "to bend."
The circumsta~ce that (/ñcatí " ¡¡¡oes " originallyhad no linguistic reality but
owed its existenee to an incorrect meaning assigned tu acatí "bends" may account
for the faet that both meanings sometimes are combined in the Dhiitupiitha. Thus
in 1, 829 and 830 mentions two verbs akati and agatí " ku{ilciylirh gatan " and Piili
aggati is defined as " kutilagatiyarh " or "gatikotille" j see S. l\I. ICatre, Indian
Culture IV, 48!). who e,'en assigns the same meaning, viz. "moves in a curve"
to Skr. alikate and añkayati too. It is interesting that the BhaWkavya, seems to
use Gñcati in the same restricted sense but in the late classieal works is cOllsidered
a 3ynonym ('tf gacchati.
As a matter offact, from the standpoint 01 classical Sanskrit we·have to assume
a root añc· " to go " which, though standing in no historieal relationship to the
Yedic root, still in a certain way funetions as its suceessor. In commentaries and
lexicographieal works it is oftm mentioned, e:g. comm. on puli/!l'iJ1cítayii Hara" .
30,80: pulillam al1cati, prasal'pati, puliniiñci. See also p. 47. The only installces
kno'úl to me from literaturc are the following:
tvam apsarliyamiir;leha svatantrá katham al1casi Bhatt. 4, 22
vamam linalicur yajñíyii mrgal; Bhatt. 14, 99 (Comm. gatavantal;).
u¡Jasi pratipa~akáminisadanad antikam m1cati prive BhV 2, 62 (Bergaigne :
.. a!' approche de son bien.aimé rcvenant a. l' aurore de la demeure de sa rivallf. ")
srirabhliglintarapli~ipadll!abaddhaprati~tho 'l1cati piilicajanya?¿ Harav.· 9, 21
(comin. vrajatí).
As regards smilkocam añcati and similar I:xpressions whi~h Bi:ihtliJlgk referred
to alicatí " gocs " see p. 66. 'l'hc sam( scholar al so rceords a meaning " n.rfahren,
!ZU. Werke gehen" (pw.I, 12), which weshould have to connect with 2. añc- rather
than with the other roots. The only installce of this use, however, occurs in the
commentary on Taitt. :Br. 2, 1, 4, 2, where the words e~'á vii ávlicy áhutil; are in-
terpreted_ a& . follows :. avam<>rh k~i~arh, yathá bJui.vati tathdñcati, p/'aval'tata ity
artha~ . . E,idently the oüly object of the eommelltatol' was to explain the adjective
ávdlic. by referring it to a yerbal root, and.the pürported meaning "pravartate,"
chosen with a "iew to this etynl010gieal explanation, is probubly nothing but a
paraphase of "gatan." In the same way K~irasviimill, in his commentary on
Ama~a 3, 1, 71. paraphrase.s nymlc. with 1/iyatam al1cati (see belo\\', p. 60). ~ o
<.'onch.lsion as-to the .real scnf>e of al1catí can be drawll from such explanations.
229
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-JANJ-
The nominal derivativo a/icana-, which tilo Sabdakalpadruma gives in the
meaning "gamanam," occurs in Vas. 213 2 (cd. Gray) payodhare~la vak~alJ,phala_
kañcanena (Gray: "going, movement "). The same word is used by Sayal)a in
Jvañcana- and sobhc.nañeana-, see aboye. But Yaska who, among various sugges_
tions for the otyroology of anguli-, also mentions api vii 'bhymicanad (Nir. 3, 8)
means no doubt "bending," although Durga renders it mechanically by abhi.
mukhyena gamanad. (For the rest, Laksman Sarup's critical edition reads abhyañ_
janad instead). Another derivative, viz. c¡ñeita- is quoted from Rarav. 40, 3-6
(comm.: gmnanam). But in bhruvañcita-, Rar~ac. it has, in spite of the commentary
(: bhrüealitam) and Thomas' analogous rendering (see aboYe, p. 39) rather the
normal sens€' of 1. añc-. añeati- and G.1ikati- " viiyulJ, " are only known from lexico.
graphical works. Uovement (gatilJ,) is oíten mentioned as a characteristie featufe
oí the wind, e.g. Ram. 3, 65, 5.
A root-,-ariant añj-, ang- is mentioned by the Indian grammarians, e.g.
Dhatupatha i, 21 alij- "vyaktimrak~a'l)(lkiintigati~u " and 1, 155 ailg- "gatya/'thalJ,".
Oí the first root no vorbal forms occur; it obviously owed its origin to Vcdic
passages where añj- "to anoint" was misinterpreted in this way, er. 10, 62, 1
yajñéna dá~ir:laya sámaktalJ, (Say. sarhgatalJ,), 3, 38, 3 k~atráya ródasi sám alijan
(Say. sarhgatam akiir~ulJ,). In Pali however, we find an interesting instanc( of a
root añj- in the passage aiíjo. kü(a, vahassa küta Jat. 1 192 "lauf, Luder; zieh
Luder " (see Xeisser 1, 14). The first word seems to be a petrified impt,rative of a
vcrb *añ.iati "goes." As we find in Vedic a noun alijas- "course, road " and Alijas;-,
name of a rÍver, dérived from the samo root. the etymological explanation of PaU
*at1jati which is given in the Dictionary of the Pali Text Society is unlikely to be
correcto Equally inadmissible, on the other hand, is the usual eonnection with
4. añj- "to anoint," which is still advocated by Xeisser, 1, 13-14.
Is alija really the only trace of yerbal function of mij- "to go " that may be
detected in the Indian tradition? Seeing that this form still subsists as late as
Pali, the question may be raised whether alij- -has perhaps also ldt sorne traces
in the older language. Or coursc, thc passages where Sayal)a int~rprcts sam-aiij-
by sarhgaeehati must be understood in a different way, ~ce § 15. \ But although
the religious conceptions connected with the act of anointing certainly allowed
4. añj- " to anoint " to be used in most various ways, therc are sorne passages where
it seems hard to take sam-añj- in that sense and which, therefore, might be suspected
to eontain añj- "to go." Thus, e.g., Maitr. S. 3, ll, 2 (: p. 142, 3), Taitt. Br.
2, 6, ll, 5.
(~é) asvínd sarhjdndné (supésasa) sám añjate sárasvútya. Is here the comment.
ary on TBr. perhap3 rigbt in glossing it with sarasvatyii saha samañjate, samyag
;Iacehantyau? But cr. I;tS. 1, 188, II and see below p. S6f and p. 9Iff).
The root-variant ang- is found in sorne nouns as angana- " going," Nir. 4, 3
(Durga: "gamanam") j Rarav. 13, 75 (comm.: upasarpaJ.lúm). The words
angana-, aJiga~- "eourt" and prangana-, lJriinga~a- "courtyard" evidently
230
46 F. B. 1. KmPER·
contain the sarne root. Their exact meaning is according to Boht1ingk, Sitz. ber.
Sachs. Ges. Wiss. 50 1898, 76 ff., "Tummelplatz."
Verbal forms from alig- are found in Vedic, in (vi) palyaligayate SR\l., and,
with reduplieation (see p. 96), iil ingáyati J;{S, samingayati, SR\I, vipaliligayate
SBK,íngati Ep., Class. The same reduplication is also met with in some forms of
añj-, as in -iñjayati Brh .•h. Up., Pali iJijatí "shakes," ilij ítam " shaking movement."
They proye that the root was also used in a more general sense " to moye," which
may have been its primary meaning.'
§ 4. la. Aiíe-: Udalicati "Arises," Etc.
In the Ka\"y~ works of the classicalliterature thore occurs a class of presents
in -c.,icali of whose importance tile scanty quotatiollS in the lexica fail to gi \'e an
adcquate idea. Thúr use may be best illustratcd by the fact that insteacl of
málla-parag-mdaniipi Rh y 2, 49 " turning off her hcad out of anger," thc Calcutta
edition reads : lIliina-pal'lilicad-vadwliipi. It is true, the latter reacling is eYidently
incorrect as it blunders against tho metre. But the only thing that concerns us
in this connexion is that the scribe who, perhaps unwittingly, substituted this
variant reading eYidtntly knew two synonymous forms, viz. an adjecth-e pariiñc-
and a participle para/leant- (from paral1catí), which could be used promiscuously.
Like para/ieant- we fincl also nyañeant-, udaiícant- etc., all of which hayc some
general traits in common :
(1) unlike 1. ai1c-, they are always intransitive.
(2) unlike 1. a//c-, they always show the strong grade (alic-) of the root-
syllable.
(3) unlike 2. a/ie-, causatives are forroed from many of these verbs.
(4) they are only peculiar to the late classical literature.
(5) although finite forms occur, they are pre-emintntly used as active
participles.
As regards the intransitive, non-causative presents of this group, thcy were later
taken as compounds of añe- " to go " as is shown by the testimony of the commenta-
torsj cf.
r. Sinee 1. añc- .. to bend " is also used in a more general sense as in úd aeati " draws water
C~om a well," ápa acati .. pushes off, removes" (but eC. Greek anakámpsei '/lUpostrepsai poiesei) and
slnce the lE prototype. oC both.1. añ~- and 2. a~c- must have becn H 2enk: (see p. 06 ), it is possible
that both roots are ultJmat 7ly _Identteal. . In \"Iew oC the adjeeti\'es in -añc- various attempts ha ve
b:en mude to conneet aca/¡ wlth the notlOn oC movement, as .. na eh einer bestimmten Riehtung
blegen, dem Gegenstande eine bestimmte Riehtung geben " (Grassmann Worterb Brugmann
Be~ift der Totalit¡¡t.,21) or .. (~urch Druek) in Bewegung setzell" ("!ackernag~i-Debrullller:
Altlnd. Gramm. III. -30). But If any such connexion ",ith 2-ailc- should have exlsted it rather
concerns the lE. prehistory than Sanskrit. As may be inCerred from Greek áñkos a~d ángelos
tsee p. 00) the Vedie language had inherited both meaninO's Crom the lE mother.tongue and
rom the lndian point oC \'iew we must accordingl:' cOllsider i. añc-( a/ij- and 2. a/ic-( añj- as two
sepnrntc roots.
231
 THE THREE SANSK~IT ROOTS ,'¡YC-jANI--'
nyañcati BhV. 2, 45 (comm. ni?tSe~e\la gacchati $ati).
nyaiícatk¡¡ñcimanoj/i¡¡~ Ragh. 1, 26 (com. lIyañcanti, calantE ya kañc'l).
nyañcadbhücakrabharoclvahana- Ragh. 9, 25 (comm. adho gacchan).
prauifhodaricatkare1Ja Ragh. 9, 15 (comm. ur<fhrarh gaechan);
udañein- SrikaI).thacarita 7, 61 (comm. urdhvaeilrin-).
ah Ilpodañea~ YasastiL 1, 439, 4 (comm. ka~(/yamst/'¡¡d [r] ive~odgamaM.
The instances from the Raghavapal,lq.aviya are particularly significant since
the commentary is from the atühor's hand alld thus refiects his own notions.
l\Ioreover such instance;; as udañeadindusakalam Bkm. 5.1 instt:ad of ud (a) yadindu.
or udañeadl'omañea~ YasastiL I, 586, 6, as cúmpared with l'omodgamar, sanmdgata.
pulakotkaral;, etc. (see p. 76) show that uda/ieati was used as a synonym of udeU;
udgaeehati. Benfey, in the glossary, of his "Sallskrit·Chrestomathie " was right,
therefore, in rendering ud·alicati as "aufwarts gehen." The origin and deYelop.
ment of these ncw presents, howevcr, constitutcs a rather intricate problem. It
cannot be denied that, although the use of a/icati in thesense of " going " is duc
to a misinterpretation of Yedic passages, and thúugh the fictitious root originally
had no linguistic reality, since the Amarakosa (c-irea 500 A.D.?) and the Bhattikiiyya
(probably cil'ca 600 A.D.) authors gradually began to employ it in lit erar y works,
the new verb then begiuning to live ite¡ own life. _llthough it~ use rema.ins restricto
ed to the refined modo of expression of kavya authors, its existenee nevertheless
becomes a real fact of the language. In spite of al! this, the connoxion of nyañcati
and añcati .. goe3," as found in tho later commentarie3, must be seeondary as
other facts point to a different conclusion.
It should first be stated that in the later literature we find a "causativo"
udañcayati used alongside of udañcati. Thus ndalieita-bhru (Iatikil)- Vikr. 2, 76;
9,84 cannot bo separated from uda/ieati bhrülatikii Dharmas, 12, 12, ·uda/1cibhrülata
Vikr. 8, 76; similarly udañcayan kim8ukapu~pasUei~ (said of the dak~i1JamilrutalJ)
Vikr. 7, 52 seems to belong to udañeat· in udm1catkamale ' pí palvale Dharmas.
17, 50. The origin of udañcitu· is not doubtful. When we compare, e.g., udañci.
tavilmapadam dadhiJ.nii Vikr. 12, 3 with ekaikam eva pcIdam t¿daeya ti#hati (asvalJ)
Sato Br. (1\Iiidhy.) 5, 1, 4, 5, it is clear that udañcita· belongs to l.añe- "to bend."
As has been stated aboye (Íl. 37), even in the Yedic language the use of the
participle akna- ii; confined to the compound jiinv.aklla.; in the later language
it hás entirely been ousted by añeita·. The same holds good for the compounds
witha prefix; hence, instead ofthe Vedic udakta- the classical authors use exclusive·
ly udañcita-. As this form is the result of a natural deYelopment of the living
speech, it would not be surprising if udañcita- could be proyed to occur as carIy
as the epies, but, so far as 1 know, no 'such instances ha'-e thus far been l'e'corded,
the first occurrence being in tlle BhaWkiivya (uda1ie;ták~a~ '2, 31), accordingly
about 600 (01', at the latest, 650) A.D. See for this date Jacobi, Sitz. ber. BerI.
Akad. Wiss. 1922, 216 f.; 1928, 656. Now itis a well.knowll fact that O~\:jllg to the
eXlstence of participIes in -ita- many new prescl\ts in -ayat; haye come· ifiLO use, sea
232
48 F. B. J. KUIPER
~I. Leumann, Indogcrm. Forsch. 57, 215 ff. Thus from rak~ita-, the past participle
of ra~ati, a new present l'a~ayati has been derived. In the samc way udañcayati
which in the late classicalliterature takes tho place of Vedic úd aeatí, could have
arisen by the side of udañcita-. It should be noted that the earliest instance of
the finite verb udañeayati that I know of occurs in Rajasekhara's Viddhasalabhañ-
jika (about 900 A.D.) while udañcita- is attested somo 300 years earlier. At thc
same time with udalicita- however, wc also find the intransitive udañcati aIread y
in eXÍstence. This must be a new formation, which probably also has ariscn by the
side of the participle in -ita-. s Instances of this kind are comparatively rare, it
seems. To denote the state of being romilñcita- Sanskrit has created a verb romiiñeati
(p. 76) ; phalati means " it is phalita-," and pu~pati denotes the being pu~pita.,
garvati thc being garvita-. Row much this conncction between an intrans.
present in -ati and a past participle in -ita- was felt as a linguistic reality appears
most clear!y from umnülita- "uprooted" (ptcle of unmulayatif): unmülati "he
is uprooted " (as ear!y as I;laq.v. Br. 5, 12, 2 mahiidrumd umnulanti). See Leumann,
p. 22 f. Perhaps the analogy of unnamita- (since Susruta): intrans. unnamati
has also played a role in the creation of udañeati (note the common use of unnamat-
in compounds, like udañcat.). From a semantic and historical point of view,
therefore, the late udañeayati is nothing else than a causative to udañeati. In
the case of nyañcati such a causative scems evcn to be ful!y wanting.
It is possible that udañeayati has already been used before 900 A.D., but this
is not eertain. There are, indced, some indications to show that during a ccrtain
pedod between 600 and 1000 A.D. the transitive present, corresponding with udañeita-
was not yet udaiieuyati but udañeati, which accordingly was the immediate successor
of Vedic úd aeati. Since the Vedic period this verb has obviously been in common
use as a technical term for the drawing of water out of a wel!. Now in the Dasa-
kumaracarita we find a transitive verb udañcati used in the same sense, cf. udañ-
cantameatamkii.pad apa~, p. 109, 7 (Agashe). It is true, Wilson, p. 152, 5, as weH
as Kale (Bombay 1900), p. 158, 5, and Godbole-Parab (Bombay 1917), p. 217, 10,
read udañeayantam. but the apparatus eritieus of Peterson-Agashe does not record
any variant reading and in the passage asya me prii1Jiipahárit;tim pipiisilm pratikartum
udakam udañeann iha küpe ko'pi ...patita~ (Agashe p. 129, 4-5), the other editions
agree in reading likewise udañean, cf. Wilson, p. 180, 2, Kale, p. 186, 11 and
Godbole-Parab, p. 250,6. The exact date of the Dasakumaracarita is disputed,
but in spite of Agashe, who on many grounds assigns to it as late a date as the
eleventh or twelfth century (see thc Introduction to his edition, Bomb. Skt. ser.),
Jacobi may be right in placing DaJ.)q.in about 700 (or 700-750) A.D. (See Sitz. bcr.
Ber!. Akad. Wiss. 1922, 210, n.l and 215; Keith, Indian Studies in honor of Ch. R.
Lanman, Cambr. )[a8s. 1929, p. 1840 who assumes even an earlier date: "some
8. For the semantic development cC. un-namali .. to rise, ascend" (: ava-namati, to bend
down) from Mm- .. to bend" (intrans.).
233
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-/ANJ-
49
time before 600 A.D.")sa. Our supposition that the transitiye verb udañcati (past
ptc. udañcita-) has not been replaced by udañcayati (p. p. udañcita-) until a
comparatively late date seems to be confirmed by a passage of the Yasastilaka (about
950-1000 A.D.), which however in view of its isolated character, cannot be utilized
without reserve viz., l, 503, 5 ity upade~tukiima iva hastam udañcati viyati vurano
(comm. utk~ipati). As a matter of fact, the finite verb udañcayati does not occ~r
in common use, it seems, before the eleventh century (Bilhal).a, K~emel.ldra), as
the occurrence in Rajasekhara's Yiddhasalabhañjika (circa 900 A.D.) is isolated.
At aH events, in the technical meaning of drawing water udañcati has a good' chance
to be much older than udañeayati and to continue the Ved. úd acati. As stated
aboye, udañcati owes its form to udm1cita- (and perhaps to udañcana-, m., since
I;lS, also Dasak. 109, 7). The isolated gloss udakam añcanti in the Pali Jatakas
explaining udañeani, is obviously worthless.
To a similar conclusion points the evidence of the intransitive present nyañcati
"bends down, sinks." The participle nyañcita- is for the first time (it seems)
recorded by Halayudha (4, 83).8h About the same time (10th century) we find the
first occurrence of nyañcati in the Yasastilaka. Since we have no right to as sume
the cxistence of a finite verb nyañeayati at that time (it still being doubtful, whether
it has ever been used at aU), nyañeati must have been created by the side of nyañeita.
on the analogy of udañcati: udañcita-. Cf. also the intransitive verb romiiñeati,
derived from romañcita- (§ll).
The conclu:;,ion seems justified, accordingly, that the intrans. verbs udañeati
and nyañeati have been developed from the root l.añe-" to bend." Less evident
is the case of avañcati: the past participle aviiñcÍia- occurs for the first
time (according to the materials available) in the Dharmasarmabhyudaya (9th
century), whereas the intrans. present participle occurs twice, along with udañeant-.
in the very first passages where udañeati is attested, viz. in Subandhu's Vasavadatta
(about 620 A.D., see e.g. Scharpé, Bal).a's Kadambari, Louvain 1937, p. 5). Ava
aeati is not known from the earlier(Vedic and post.Vedic) literature, nor do es
aviiñcati occur in the later literature; for K~irasvamin's gloss on Amara 3, 1, 33
(aviiñcatyaviin, aviicino 'pi), which merely represents his usual method of etymolog-
izing the adjectives in -añc· (see below), cannot be taken as a proof of the actual
existence of this verbo Hence, judging from the evidence now available, the
expression udañcad-aviil1cad- seems to be an individual creation of Subandhu,
which has had no consequences in the later literature.
Although ud-añc. and ny-añc-,accordingly, must have béen derived from 1.añe.
lO to bend," still they cannot be t!ntirely separated, it seems, from the secondary
8a. See also Winternitz, Geschichte der indischen Literatur, nI, 641; Scharpé Bii.nB's
Kii.dBmbari (one passage in the Kii.vyii.dacia imitated by Bii.Qa in hls Kii.dambBri. A~cording
to Jacobi 1922, 213 ff, howe\'er, DaQ<:lin is the imitator), and S. K. De, A Volume oC Studies in
Indology presented to ProC. Kane (1941), !l18 p. History oC SBnskrit Literature Vol. 1 (1947)
pp. 207-209 (DaSak. perhaps contemporBlleous with l\Ifcchaka(ikii.). ' ,
ab. CC. Vedic nyacali, nyacyate (Kii.th. S., S. Br. etc.).
Vak.-4
234
50 F. B. J. KUlPER
root añc- "to go." It is difficult, however, to determine at what time ud-añcati
has come to be taken as a synonym of ud-eti, ud-gaeehati. The fact that Dhanam-
jaya in the commentary on his Rághavapal).q.aviya (which was wTitten between
1123 and 1140) explains udañcat- as ürdhvam gaeehan (see aboye) points to the
conclusion that in thetwelfth century .añcati in these compounds could be taken
in the sense of "going." In earlier texts, however, where uda/lcati occurs there
is nothing to show that it was already used in the strict sense of udeti. On the
other hand, the first inqubitable compound of añc- "to go " is met with in the
tenth century, viz. prii'ñeati in Yasastilaka l, 534, 2 priiñean (comm. desiintaram
gaeehan). lt-is true, this hapax legomenon belongs to the very particular vocabularv
oC Somadevasüri but in spite of its isolated character it shows that about this tim"e
(e. 950-1000 A.D.) compounds of añcati "goes" could be used. Hence the
possibility oC interpretillg udañcati, nyañeati in this way may have existed about
1000 A.D. 1:nfortunately no conclusion can be drawn from the middle form
anvañcamunii" following, going behind " in Bhag. PUl'. 10, 9, 10 as this text cannot
be dated with any approximate certainty (13th cent.? 10th or 6th cent.?).
While the secondary connexions between 'udañcati and añcati " goes" have
hardly been important, an additional characteristic feature which sorne other
com:pounds haye ultimately developed calls for notice. As has been observed
aboye, the variant reading pariiñeat- for pariic. in the late Bhiimini Vilasa (17th
cent.), though of no textcritical value, points to an equivalence of intransitive
participles in -añeat- and adjectives in .añc-. Since the verbs in -añeati were pre.
eminently used, since their first occurrences in Subandhu and Bál)a, as participles
forming part oC compounds, nyañcant- "sinking down, declining" could easily
occur in a context where it was nearly equivalent to nyal1c- " directed downwards,
going down," cf. e.g., nyañcad-anga'" Yasastil., which the commentary renders
nicairbhavatpha1JÜ.1na1pJ,alasahasra"'. Once that both words, though unrel¡lted
(see § 16), had come to be regarded as synonymous in consequence oC a convergent
histodcal development, the linguistic feeling' could easily be led to regard them
as related too. One circumstance may have strongly contributed to this develop-
ment: in classical Sanskrit any new verb can be created by simply adding the
personal.endings and if necessary, the thcmatic vowel to a nominal stem .. Panini
does not yet know this type oC formation but Katyayana in a 'varttika rec~rds
sorne examples and Patañjali extends this use to more instances until it eventually
became systematized by the later grammarians (see Renou, Grammaire sanscrite
485,according to which authority these verbs were always used actively). Not
before the twelfth century, however, are clear references to this equiv~lence to
be found in lexicographical works. Earlier scholars only quote the simple vcrb
añeati in explanation of the adjectives in -ailc- but still ignore its compounds.
!aska, in his discussion of pariicaí", (Nir. 11, 25) even uses the noun pariiñeana.
IDstead of a '-erbal formo The Amarakosa (about 500 A.D.?) is the first to refer
the nouns in ·añc· to a vcrb a/icati, cf. 3, 1, 34:
235

THE THREE 9ANSKRIT ROOTS .4XC-IANI-
51
deL'all aiicati devadryan, t'Í~t'adl'ya?i t'i~rag a I/catí
yalJ salta 'I/catí sadltrya1í sa, sa tirymí yas tiro 'I/cati.
A century later (circa 650 A.D. or later, see Liebich, Zur Einführung in die indische
Sprachwissenschaft 1, 15) we find again, in the Kiisikii on Piil)ini 6, 3, 92, vi~vag
añcatiti vi~vadryañ. This has long been the usual method of explaining the words
in -añc-; we still find it in Siiyal)a (e.g., on devadryan ~S. 1, 93, 8) and in the
commentary on Taitt. Br. 2, 1, 4, 2 aviici ( : avamam ... añcati). It is not before
14irasvii.min's commentary on Amara, which was composed sorne years before
1138 A.D. (see Liebich, 14iratarailgil)i 203) that we find this correlation clearly
stated in the words parli11catiti paran and aválicaty aván, avácino 'pi (on 3, 1, 33).
But the testimony of these lexicographical works has of course only a restricted
value for the reconstruction of the linguistic development in the actual literary
usage. As for avañcati it has been stated abo'-e that, in spite of the non-occurrence
of Ved. ava aeali, avaiicad- in the Vasavadatta must be connected with l.mic-
" to bend." On the other hand, it is far from certain that ~irasvamin's verb,
which ob,iously is only a grammatical construction, has anything to do with the
rare word avaluad- which Subandhu had used 500 years ·:!arlier. A similar character
has, of course, pariiñcati: since new verbal compounds with para- can hardly be
supposed to have arisen in the twelfth century, it cannot be doubted that pariiJicati
is a theoretical constructi.on which allowed K~irasYamin to derh'e parañc-
from a veroal root. It is however clear that such a denominatiye formation from
parañc- could arise at any time on the analogy of nYUlicati: nyañc- ; still it did
not come into use, as far as we know, before the 17th century when Jagannatha
émployed it in his Bhamini Vilasa. Analogous yerbal deriYatives from pral/C.
and pratYaJic- do not appear to haw existed (for prañean in the Yasastilaka see
above). Para/ieati must have differed from udañeatí etc. in thát no causative
could be formed from it. Still it wlll be advisahle to class it iuto one and the
same group with nyañcati because fo the secondary associations which conneeted
them.
The urgent need of comprehensive lexicographical materials (which only the
future Sanskrit Thesaurus can furnish us) for the exaet reconstruction of the linguis-
tic development is particularly manifest in studies like the present.ln the absenee
of such e,idence, our reconstruction must be a proYisional one, although it is
hoped that its main lines will prove to be correcto At the same time it demonstrates
the neeessity of accurately recording all the earlier occurrences of the type udaiícati
for the new leXicon: a single new quotation may change our ,iews regarding the
Hnes along which the historical development has runo According to our present
knowledge we may fix the tempus post quod for the intransitive verb udalicati at
620 A.D. As this verbal type is still unknown in Kfilidasa, the 1\1udrarak~asa,
aIl~ the )Ircchakatika-Bo~tlingk indeed almost ignores it in PW. and pw.-it
niay -have come lnto existence between 450 and 620 A.D. but an attempt to
determine more exactly thc date of its first appearancc with the help of epigraphical
evidenee has not yet led to any r~sult. The Gupta inscriptions dating from that
236
-------------------------
52 F. B. J. KUIPER
period (eollected by Fleet in the Brd vol. of the Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum)
afford no instances of uda/1cati although a great many of them are composed in
a very elaborate kavya style.
The absence of the type udañcati from a given text might be used as a means
to determine its date (e.g., ~Ircchakatika!). were itnot that its use seems to have been
dominated to a large extent by stylistic considerations. On account of the highly
!iterary charaeter whieh udañcati has had from the outset it occurs nearly exclusive-
Iy in kavyas, eampüs and natakas of a comparatively late date. In the Pañcatantra
for instance, no instances are found, while in the rather simple narrative 'style of
Somadeva's Kathasaritsagara it seems to be but rarely used. His compatriot
and contemporary ~emendra, on the other hand, employs udañcati at least six
or seven times in his Bharatamañjari. It must be observed that 1 do not pretend
these statements to be absolutely reliable. They may however serve to gi:ve us an
approximate idea of the relative frequency. Now it is a well-known f~ct that
K~emendra's style is less simple and natural than Somadeva's. It seems reasonable,
therefore, to assume that this may account, to sorne extent at least, for the more
frequent use he makes of udañcati. In fact, this supposition is apparently
supported by the circumstance that still another Kashmirian of those days, viz.
Bilhal)a, whose style i8 in sorne degree comparable with K~emendra's, also frequent-
ly employs this verb in his Vikramij,ilkadevacarita.
But probably things were not so simple as that after aIl. In the Bharata-
mañjari K~emendra deals with the sacred stories of the Mahabharata and Bilb.ana's
object is to extol the exploits oí' king VikramaI'lka. Hence the subject of both
works required the choice of impressive words. In the Brhatkathamailjari, on
the contrary, where K~emendra narrates the same light-hearted stories as Somadeva
does in his Kathasaritsagara, the type udañcati is, if I am not mistaken, only
twice met with, notwithstanding the fact that the style of this work is equally
artificial (use of long compounds, etc.). 1 must confine myself to these general
remarks (merely based, be it noted, on subjective impressions) as to the stylistic
use of udañcati etc. Stylistic inquiries as well as statistical accounts are beyond
the scope of this lexicographical study. It is to be hoped that in future stylistíc
investigations in the field of classical literature the frequeney of udañcati will be
examined more closely.
The following survey only contains the illustrative materials for the use oí
ud.añcati, whereas the remaining compounds will P(l discussed in § 6.
Udañcati is used :
(a) of plants (=ud.bhid., ud-gam.) :
sa1hkocodañcad uccakesarakotisa1hkatakusesayo-(' darakotaraku t ira k u ti 1as a y i n i
~atcara1J.acakre)
Vas. p. 172, 2, ed. Gray.
uda/1catkamale 'pi .. .palvale Dharmas. 17, 50.
237
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-jANI-
.udañeayan kimsukapu~pasüci~ (dak~i'(lamiirutaMTikr. 7, 52 (but here it mi ht
posslbly be referred to 3.añc· "to show, manifest "). ,g
(b) of blood, waves, the wind, etc. (=ucchalant.):
mürdhacchediid udañcadgaladhamanisiriiraktagí'(lgirapi'(lq.a~
caritaIn v. 32 (comm. nirgacchataM.
udañcadvicimiiliichalena Dharmas. 8, 16.
udañeadugrakalpiintaviitapratima~ Bhm. 4, 203. Cf. also 13 1782 (?).
(e) of rays, lightning, etc.:
uda~acc~rucü4iirru:r;¡,imaricicakrae~mbiny uttamiiñge Kád. 221, 20 "on his
head WhlCh klsses the Clrcle of theflashmg rays of his crest jewels " (Miss Ridding's
trans1.) j comm. ulla$ad·.
udañeatil catulenii 'rhsujiilena Har~ac. p. 32, 1.2 from the bottom (ed. Bomb. 2)
"upward.streaming flickering radiance" (Cowell.Thomas, p.' 262).
tatair udañcanmar;¡,imar;¡,4aliirhsucehatair Dharmas. 7, 3l.
(ulkiim) udañeajj(y)otirjvaliidipitii8iirh patantim Dharmas. 20, 9.
udañead.ueea7J4ata4itkara~ Vikr. 13, 29 ".with his threatening hand, the
lightning, uplifted."
It is likewise used about the rising moon, e.g.
tvañg~dgait.gam udañcad-indusakalarh vellatkapiiiakulam payiid val). Svasadan.
gadorubhuJagarh ea'(lq,ipates tii'(l4avam Bkm. 5, 1, and eYen in a wider sense
the world (in a stotra of Devi) : ' udañcitaliingülal¡. comm. on Ram. 6, 27, 42.
jayaty udañcad·brahmiindarh ladaddamarukodbhatam
kri4iikalitakankiilakaral~'m bhair~v'ivapulJ, Bkm.· 9, 1, 6-t8.
(d) of the head, hairs, ears, breasts, brows, horns, etc.
, abhimukham ueeair udañcadbhir ... khurail¡. Har~ac. p.23, 6 (ed. Bomb. 2) "áS
it advanced its high prancing hoofs" (Cowell.Thomas)
madiid udañeae.chiral¡. (samiikuñcitaphullaghotwm) Dharmas. 7, 49.
vrddhasya kar'(liintagatii jareyarh
hasaty uda1ieat.palitacchalena Dharmas. 4, 56,
" manifesting itself through the grey hairs which beco me yisible," this use is closely
related to a, cf. palitañkural¡. Yasastil. 1, 255, 8 j 56, 1 j 252, 6 j 389, 2(Schm. N.:
.. herauskommen JI).
SUSTUvur vi~amoda1icad-ekakarr;¡,arh kurañgakal¡. Bhm. 3, 1258.
srr;¡,vanto vi~amoda1icad-ekakarr;¡,arh yayur hayal¡. Bhm. 3, 1610.
The difference from vi~amiiñcita-karr;¡,atiilail¡. Bhm. 2, 332 (l.añe-) should be noticed.
udañcad.uccail¡.stanavapraSiilinas tadangakandarpavilasavesllUlno
varoruyugmam ".""" vyarajata Dharmas. 2, 4l.
238
54 F. B. J> KUIPER
9aromdñcodañcat.kucakalasa-nirbhinna-vasana~ Sáh. D., p. 582
udañeati bhrülatikii muhur rnuhu~ Dharmas. 12, 12.
(Cr. kirhcit-savibhramodmici-bhrülata Vikr. 8, 76).
udañcadbhrüvibhanga- Bhm. 3, 1769
udañcitabhrül¡. Vikr. 2, 76.
udañcitabhrülatikiipatiikam (mukham) Vikr. 9,84.
As has been observed aboye, udañcitabhtül¡. Vikr. 2, 76, etc. is to be distinguished
from -liliiñcita.bhrülatii Das. 104, 14, alicitabhru Vikr. 10, 33, etc. (l.añe-), as weH
as from añcitabhrol¡. "a woman with beautiful brows " (3.añc-, see p. 74). Al-
though the close resemblance of these words may occasionally have provoked some
confusion, we have no reason to suppose that BilhaI).a, while using these various
expressions, should already have confounded their meanings. For the brows are
as weH said to be "raised " (-udmieital¡.) as "curved " (·añcital¡.), compare, e.g.
unnamitaikabhrülatam iinanam Sak. sto 58 (p. 32, 1. 11 ed. Cappeller), unnamitaika.
bhrülata Har~ac. p. 9, 1. 4 (ed. Bombay 2), i~adunnamitaikabhrül¡. Bhm. 13, 1085,
samunnamitabhrur,tii mukhena, comm. on Kámasütra 2, 3, 18: i~adiikuñcitaika­
bhrúl¡. Bhm. 3, 1569, kirhcidiikuñeitaikabhrül¡. Haracar. 23, 75, muhur iivalitaika-
bhrütr?] Bkm. 7, 331. '
prauq,hodañcat-karer,ta Ragh. 9, 15 (comm. udañcan: ürdhvarh gacchan), cf.
also under e: udañcaduccar,tq.ata4itkaral¡..
sahelodañcitakara- Kathas. 55, 40 (rarely used in this work for utk~ipta., cf.
lilotk~iptakara-55, 163, utk~iptaliiñgülal¡. 60 196. 200, utk~iptabiihulatika 104.,93).
kri4aty udañcad.ghanapalikasrñgam (vanasairibhar;¡,iirh vrndam) Dharmas. 10, 32'
udañcad-anandajalaplutek~ar,tal¡. Vikr. 2, 55 (cf. e.g. b~podgatil¡. Yasasti1.
1, 619, 1 j 119, 5).
udañcad-romallca~ Yasastil. 1,586,6 (comm. ullasan) j Sáh. D. 139, 3 (comm.
pradurbhavanto romavikiiriil¡.).
We may further compare udarici-rorniiñcata Vikr. 2,54, and romiiñcodañcal¡. Yasastil.
1, 578, 8. The same verbs which denote the coming up of plants are also used
with respect to the erection of the hairs on the body, compare romodgamal¡. Amarusa·
taka 40, udbhinllaromapulakail¡. Caurapañcásika 35 (BoHensen), samudgatapulakot-
karaQ. Varad. 7'0, 5, romaricodgatariiji1'niin Hariv. (se'e pw. in vocem) 9. It will be
noticed that udañcadromiiñcal¡. is not accordingly to be confounded with,
e.g., pulakotkariiñcital¡. Vikr. 17, 50 (see below, p. 75f.).
While in udaricadromiirical¡. and the related expressions the intransitive verb
udañcati is used, the causative is, found in the commentaries on Das. 92, 10 (Agashe)
where the words hr~itiini tanümhiir,ti (hr~itiis tani"truhii.Y in thc other editions) are
9. Similarly IIdQricadbhTlivibhatiga-: bhruku!ir udabhidyata Har~ac. 183, 16.
239
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-¡ANI- 66 F. B. J. KUIPER

explained in the Padacandrika and the Bhü~al)a as fo11o\\"s: hr?ita uda,lcitiih.
hr?er udaiícane 'rlhe. Xow in normal use udaiicita- can only be the past participl~
of udm1cayati " to lift up, raise." It may be doubted, howeyer, if this causative
could be used in good Sanskrit as a designation of such an inyoluntary process as
the erection of the hairs. Perhaps we may therefore infer from th1s passage that
udañcita· occasionally was also employed asa past participle of udal1cati, accordingly
in an intransitive sense "arisen." For the rest it remains questionable whether
much value should bc attached to the linguistic use of such sources. Further .
evidence of thi8 meaning of udaiícita- is wanting, for gatrodu¡lcita./,oma¡1caJ:¿ Varad.
50, 5 belongs in my opinion to 3.aire- (see p. 67).
(e) of feelings :
uda¡1eatmátsarya- Gangalahari 6 (Apte, Dict.)
nikatasthitameghagambaraiJ:¿ suraeapair iva tais turc¿1hgamaiJ:¿
yad udañe:J.yati .lma stidhvasarh jagattim vajranípata-lli?thuraiJ:¿ Yikr. 15, 36.
"when he inspired terror."
Perhaps also
vidürtid eísea¡:yastimitam, atha kirheit paricaycíd
udaiíeaectiñcalyarh, tadanu paritaJ:¿ sphcíritaruci (nayallam ¡ha sarangadrsaJ.¡¡
Bhy. 2, 74.
In accordance w1th the compounds ascaryastimítam and spharitaruci, udañcac_
etiñealyam may be taken as one word meaning "wherein unsteadiness arises."
On the other h!l.nd 3.a,1c- is also more than once connected with words expressive
of a state of mind. It 1s therefore equally possible to take it as two words udaiicac
cáñcalyam "showing traces of, manifesting" (3.ai'íc-). ..\.8 regards the other
compounds with udañeita- quoted below, p. 67, it i5 pret'erable to ref~r them
to 3.mlc-, the more so as la.aiic- (udaikati)seems but seldom to han been used in
this sense. But since couYincing criteria for the distinction between both roots
in this respect will not easily be found, difference of opinion is possible.
Ce. finally Varad. 145, 9 tqsya ... darsaniit prabhrtí karma kim api kÍlhcid
udal1cati.sma (which is not quite cle¡¡.r to me), and udañcati " sich erheben " quoted
by Bohtlingk from the BalaramayaJ;la (p. 208, 1. 4 from the bottom), which is not
accessible to me.
In addition to the instances airead" mentioned aboye the followinO' mav
illustrat€. the use of the causatÍ\'e uda11~ayati. " •
uda/icitak?aJ.¡ BhaH. 2, 31 (comm. utk?ipte ak?i{li yena sa), not to be confounded
viith á7iciták?i Haray. 26, 28; 27, 74, which contains 3.a/k-, see below, p. 74.
nYa1icítam syad adho k?iptam
k?iptam ürdhvam udmicitam K~irasvamin on Amara 3, 1, 113.
uda'icitaJ:¿ " emporgehoben " Halay., Hemacandra, SKDr. ( : ürdhvalc?iptam).
udañcitiiñjaliJ:¿ Harac. 24, 5; mukutodañcittiñjaliJ:¿ Harac. 5, 21; 7, 25.
udañcitavtimapadarh dadhiinti Vikr. 12, 3 (said of the vratam ekapadam).
pratisubhatakapálapii#alleíya dviradam udañcayati sma riijasünuJ:¿ Vikr. 6, 81
'raised the elephant."
svam lingarh tad uda,icayasva bhagavan pün;tiidvayátma svayam .. .Harac. 11, 1.
udañcaya drsam deva, vilokaya vadhüjanam Bhm. 19, 922.
ndañcaya mukharh maniik Viddhasalabhañjika 3, 27 (quoted by Apte, Dict.)
niltibje cd'tanudalacayodañcite Yasastil. 1, 618;,3, " the ~ye~ ~lue like ~otuses
that were turned up with their mass of large petals (comm. udanctte : upandhrte).
but see § 9, sub. III, Remark.
ttdailcayan dhvajam im vikramasriyo Ragh. 4, 21 (comm. uttolayan).
Nominal derivatives: From udaiíeati an a:tive verb:l adj:c~ive ~~al~in-. has be.en
'. d ,"hich is nearlv
derne. • equivalent to udancant-. CL. udanctromancata . Vlkr.
,,_ 2, 1>4,
savibhramodañcibhrülatti Vikr. 8, 76 and udañcin- (comm. ürdhvaciinn-) ;:mk. 7, 61
(Schm. N. ).
The verbal noun udañca- is likewise associated with the intransitive presento
1t is found, several times in the Yasastilaka, e.g.
devasyii 'mátyadaityánám ákalpoda11eaJ:¿ pratikriyeíprapañcas ca 1, 439, 4 (comm.
ka?iiyavastrád(r)i ve?odgama~).
vañcanodañce 1, 444, 3 (comm. prattira1).otkar?e).
asurtinvayoda/1cam I1, 352, 5 from below.
romtiñcodañcadak?dJ.¡ 1, 578, 8 (comm. prádurbhiiváJ.¡).
It is equivalent to udbheda-, cf. romiiñcodbhedavant. Das. 93, 21, s'phuradromodbheda~
Prabodh. 11, 16 (Brockhans).
From the causative stem a regular verbal noun udañcana- has been derived
which is not recorded in pw and Schm. N. but is given in S~Dr .. as mea~g ü:dhva-
k~epa1J.flm. It occurs as earlv- as Har~ac.
- -.
104, 1 (ed. Bomb. ) akhtlarasakupodancana-
.. - . "H' . ht
ghatiyantramiiltirh iva rudriik?amalam dak?t1J..Cna.p~1).tna bhramayantam .. IS rlg -
hand shook a rosary, l¡ke a Persian wheel contammg the buckets for ralSlng water
from the wen." Cf. also kurvan sitottariyasya puna~ punar udañcanam Bhm.
"10
5, 21, .. while he repeatedly lifted up his white upper garment.
There are two compounds of udañcati:
(a) pary-udañcati in
sMvata_saullianasya-prasasya-nija-niJ:¿svasita -maru(t) -paryuda iíca d -amoda-
b/¡ara-prapa¡1ca- Varad. 102, 7..
10. ce. svavll$lrolkar~al).llm raja krlavan ~lhbh. 2. 4~. 4. Bomb. O.n account o~ such an in-
'd 1 't (cf abo ve -udañce = -ulkarse) Prakrlt grammarmns quote anc- as a verbal
el enta synonyml
substitute y (Hemacandra,
Cor Skr. kr~- . Desin. 1,20, an d'..., 187• ce. a lso anc
- h'lam' " a-k r~.am
I "1 ,1')
" •

240 241
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-/ANJ-
The noun paryudalicana- " nl-am " (see Schm. N.) is hardly related to ·it.
(b) samudañcati is quoted in the additions to yol. V of pw from the
karl).amr ta 5, 33 with the meaning " sich erheben," and, in the additions to vol
IV, from BhV. 2, 45 with the meaning "anbrechen, beginnen." This . pañcamodañcane kiile kokila~ kokilo bhavet Kuvalayanandakarikas 99,
samudañcali tarumal,ti sudrsaQ" means according to Bergaigne: " la jeunesse
men~nt" while the commentary renders iivirbhavati sati. Since however
dalicati is here opposed to nyaricati which denotes the " decline" of a period ofl'r
(see below), it mu>t be meant here bythe author in the sense of the " rising tid~ ~
of a ne\\' stage of lit'e. But, of course, the meaning "to begin, commence"
easily deyelop from the notion of rising, cf. Latin oríor, Skr. a-kram-, etc.
udañcati could actually be used in that sense is borne out by the following passage
kadiicid api sotka'lJ.-tho bhagavann iibhavad bhat'dn . sound" ; Lassen translates "quem incinit ille modulum quinturn" (see also his note
adhuna punar utka'lJ.-thtirh kim u tyaktum udañcati Harac. 4, 8.
The same meaning might even be supposed for udañcac-cdñcalyam BhV. 2, 74,
howeyer p. 55 and p. 67.
Prod-añ.c- occurs only in prodañci- " bulging " (of a garment), see Schm. N.
§ 5. 1 a.a'ñc-: udañcati used of music, etc.
:\. special use is made of udañcati with reference to musical tones and especiall
to the paiicarna~ which denotes both the pitch note of the musical scale and y
cert~in music~1 ~ode (rag~M. It ~eans "to r:soun~ " (" ertonen," PW V, 955)
and 1tS causatIve lS accordmgly equlvalent to vadayatl, uccarayati. The intransi_
th~e ~alue of udañ:ati, the existence ~f a causat~ve and its late occurrence agree in
pomtmg to 1 a.anc-. Some quotatIOns may lllustrate its use:
bhukt-ottar-ocit-odañcat-pañcmna-sthana-cari'lJ.-aQ,
vamsai rligyavise~asya datte sthane tataQ, sanaiQ, Rajat. 5, 363.
Troye:: "~uand,par de dou~e~ fhltes, ~ut donnée l'intonation de ce genre de
mélod1e qUl parcourt avec préCIsIOn des d1verses modulations jusqu'a la cinquieme
note" ; Ranjit Sitaram Pandi~ (The River of Kings, Allahabad): "when the
choristers had produced andante the musical note of the special Raga-rising to
the Pan cama key-etc."
In other passages there is no special reference to high notes l l as in
añcita-rna'lJ.-i-vipañcikii-gu'lJ.--odañcita-svaraprapañcalJ, Varad. 127, 3. " the
tones resounded by the strings of the lute which was adorned with brilliant jewels,
(jr,
-nakhañcala-samudañcita-vipañci-prapañcita-pañcmna_madhurim-odaiícana-
kasvara-ka1)lha-svaraya) Varad. 179, 12:
11: C!. Javanese myuluk lO to aseend" : suluk" song" ; Tarnil eLu- .. to rise (Ofs~unds)"
e.g. Tlru...·aeakarn 49, vv. 44 and 49.
12. cr. L'ipañcipañcamadhvani?! Vikr. 8, 53.
242
F. B. J. KUIPER
58
"the striking-up of the sweet palicama mode which then was further developed
by the lute resounded by the tops of the finger-nails" .12 The modern commentary
g!osStS with viidita~. The Yerbal noun udalicana- occurs in an analogous sense in
R. Schmidt: "In der Zeit, da das Singen des fünften Tones (gehOrt wird),
dürfte der kokila kokila sein." P. R. Subrahmanya Sarma (Ca!cutta 1903, p. 137,
footnóte) has: 'In the season in whichpanchama note becomes manifest," probably
on account of Asadhara's cornmentary where udañcana scems to have been con-
íounded with 3.ll/ic- '.' to show, manifcst " as he paraphrases it with pl'akatanam,13
Harim ... ... anugliyati klicid udañcitapañcamal'iigam Gitagov. 1, 39. B6htlingk
(PW, pw): "(ausstossen). ertOnen !assen", Apte "to utter, send forth, cause to
on this passage). The most natural \Vay of interpreting these words is doubtless to
take palicmnarligaQ, as the technical designation of the mode that is to be sung in
autumn and is often alluded to on account of its erotic character, as in SaÚlgitadar-
pal}.a 2, 30 pwicamas tu fafha geyo riigilJyii saha sarade and in 2, 133-134, where the
ragalJ, palicamaka~ is said to be srngararasapürakam, 8tj¡garayukta~ and kokilamali-
jltbhli~i. In the same sense pa/icamaQ, occurs also in Gitagov. 10, 13. Lassen's scho!-
iast A, howeYer, holds it to mean" a rliga wherein the voice rises to the pañcama-
note (the pitch note of the musical scale)," and other commentaries since published,
consider this possible too. a If this were so, we should ha\"c to compare such phrases
as e.g., gUaril sphll1;atpmlcanUII/1. Yikr. 10, 33. 1 do not belien, however, that this
interpretation is correcto It may be noted that elsewhere too the commentaries
are unable to distinguish between both meanings of pañcamalJ" cf. -pmicamdlaptipal-
lavitavirahavirudhi Yasastil. 1. 1003, which is said to mean palicama/lilmagl"limarciga-
vise~a~, saptamal], smra ¡ti yrimt, though on1)' the first rendering is correct as is
shown by yatriiyaln virahas ca pal1camaruciQ, I, 591, 1 (comm. yatm, vasante, ayarh
v¡rahavrk~al], palicamaruci~, pal1cmnaragabhilti~i vartate).
§ 6. The other compounds of the intrans. -añcati
1Iost oC the remaining compounds of the intransitive -aiícati are only occa-
sionally met with.
13. Koils singing the pañcama mode are often referred to, e.g. Sril~arabhü~al)a, p. 3, l. 1 and 8
(paTabhrld~ prtidllrbhavat-pañcamaM. \Vhen the koil is said to sing in the p. tone (e.g. ~iirndiya
áik~ii, 1,5,4) this is due (as van der Hoogt, The Ve die Chant, p. 38, ri~htlv explains) to nn atternpt
being rnade to crea te a series oC equations sueh as is regularly found in fhe lJpanishads.
14. Sehol. A: llnnila~ pañcamasraro ya/ra, /am rdgam anugciyati. That unnita?! does not
mean" anstirnmen .. (as was supposed by Bohtlingk on aeeount oC this passage) is proved bv the
two eornrnentaries sinee published in the Bornbay edition of :\1. R. Telana and W. L. Pansikar,
one oC whieh, vi:. the Rasikapriyii. explains thc words in question as Collow;: ti ttircivadhy ilrdhram
ni/a?! pañcamarago yena t·ci Ildalici/a~ pañcamasmropa1aklJi/o rugo t'ti (then ndding sorne more
alternatives); the other, named Rasamañjari, renders lirdlwam mici/ah pmicamcikhyo rUdo ya/ra.
AII oC the three eomrnentaries take Ildmicita?! in a meaning whieh is clo'scly related to th~t found
in lldañcayan/mn. ca /mn. klipad apQ~ Das. C' auCheben. in die Hahe ziehen "). 1 do not enter
• into a diseussion oC thc scho)iast D (allllbllddhikr/apmica ,lila? > rcidcikhyasya) which can in no
case be meant as a literal interpretation oC the texto o
243
 TIlE TIlREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-/ANJ-
.60 P. B. J. KUlPER

(a) anv-añcate" follows " in Bhiig. Puro 10, 9, 10 nyañcati vayasi prathame BhV. 2, 45, contrastillg with samudañcati taru1J-imani
anvalicamana janani brhaccalacchro1Jibhariikraniagatif.¡, sumadhyama d s'ah discussed aboye (§ 4" end). It denotes the declining of a certain s~age
sU r ' " . , h l' h
javena visramsitakesabandhanacyutaprasúlliinugatif.¡, pariimrsat f ¡'fe coinciding with th-:: risi,ng of a new one. Nelth~r the, sc o last w o para-
o l , .
s it with nihsesena gacehati, nor the modern mterpreters ( B ergalgne : "1 e
'
On account of the middle form (and the chronology, if the text is earlier than the h
p" rase'er age passé " Bohtlingk:
. . "verstreichen, verge hen, "Apte: "to d'HUlms,
. .h
eleyenth celltury) this is rather a compound of aiícati " goes " than a denominative preIDl, ,. "S' h d E d
formation from anvañc- " going after, following " but in the absence of decisive pass away") seems to have c¡uite caught the exact meamng, lC em n e
criteria the nature of this hapax legomenon remains somewhat doubtful. zuneigen, hinsinken " ,,"ouId ha ve been more correcto
The past participle nyañcita- "bent do";vn" (Halayudha 4, 83, Remac.
(b) aó'ñ.ñcati" is a verted" :
Abhidh. 1482) occurs in:
samkoe-oda¡lead-,avañcad-kesara_koti_sankata - kuse8aya-kosa -kotara. kutira-sayi_ nijata/:u!aváq.ambaramardab/¡aranyañcitena bhuvanena Kathas. 100, 44.
ni ~ateara1J-aeakre Vas. 172, 3·4 ed. Hall pasyoda¡lcadaviil1cadaiícitavapuf.¡, PaSciird_
dhapürvarddhabhtik Vas. p. 103 Hall, p. 158, 1. 14 Gray. mukhena liliilavanyalieitakarhdharetla Vikr. 9, 53 (cf. above the quotation from
the Subhá~ita\'ali).
It is a curious fact that in the southern recension added as an appendix to Gray's
nyañcitam syiid adhok~iptam K~irasvamin ad Amar 3, 1, 313.
translation of the Vasavadatta, which contains many interpolations and indubit.
ably represents a less authentic text than the shorter northern recension of Hall's (d) parañcati .. turns away" (intrans.) from parañc- "directed away,
edition avañcad- is wanting in the first passage. The reading of Gray's text is turning from ") (see § 4).
confirmed by a Grantha nIS. of the Kern Institute (Leyden), which reads (27recto, mana-parañcad-vadana 'pi Bh Y. 2, 49, a variant reading of the Calcutta ed.
line 5) samkoeodañcaduecakesara_ (like Gray). In the second passage, however, COl' mana-parag-vadana 'pi.
all authorities agree in reading udalicadaviillead- pIS.: 17r, 3). From here vidu~iirh vadaniid vficaly, sahasa yanti no bahiF-
avañcad- may have been inserted in the first passage. Gray translates the second
yiitfis een, na paraiie8.nti dviradanam rada iva Bh V. 1, 64,
passage as follows: "Behold this lion with his sinew)' frame, now rising high
high behind and now before " (p. 72), which is better than " with his bending body Bergaigne: "elles n'y rentrent pas "; Apte, Dict. "to turn back or go, back."
bending up and bending down " (Introd. p. 26); but a/lcita- may rather mean But the comparison with the elephants' tusks requires a different meanmg, the
.. graceful " (see § 10, b 5). sense of this passage ob\'iously being: "Words do not come rashly out o: the
uth O f the wise' but if once started, they go straightforward (do not fhnch)
avañeaty aviin avacino 'pi, Ko\lirasyamin on Amara 3, 1, 33 See aboye, p. 51, roo, 'h .
Jike the tusks of elephants." The commentator rightly glosses Wlt mvartante
kirhcidaviiñcitasyaly, Dharmas. 7, 45. (cf., e.g., s-ii,rar;¡.am anivartinam, "unflinching heroes" Savitryop. 7, 12-:llhbh.
smitam upagatam iilirh dr#vii salajjam aviilicitmh 3, 299, 12 Bnmb.).
kuvalayadrsaf.¡, smerarh smerarh smariimi tad iillanam Siih. D. p. 151, 1-2 (comm.: (e) ?sam-añeati, meaning doubtful.
.allamitam).
(yaJ.¡) ceto nikuiíeati, saJnalicati vrtta~n ~ccaif.¡, y~sas,til. ~,269, .10. C~n:m,
(e) ny-añcati .. bends down, inclines." ya (atma) .. .uecair (atisayena). vrttarn (eantram! Sa1,~allcat,t (s~magacchat:, p~atlpa~a­
yati). The opposite nikuñeah suggests a meanmg to ralse for sanu:nca,~t ucca¡f.¡,-
nyañcatkalici-manojñaf.¡, s'ulalitanuidhuriif.¡, kUlltalair ullasantyal; Ragh. 1, 26
but smnañcita: means " marked, designed " (see § 8, end) and a meanmg to show
{comm. nyañcanti: calanti; but avalambini ,,"ould be a more suitable rendering).
with pride" would equaUy be possible here, Ras the a.ut~or misunderstood
nyañeadbhücakrabhtirodvahanaparigatayiisa_dikkumbhikumbharh Ragh. 9, 25 BhaHik. 9, 40, uceaif.¡, ... siro ' lieí/veva sarhvahan (where UCCalf.¡, IS to be c~nn~cted
{comm. adho gaeehan). with samvahan)? See § 7, sub. l. In the artificial vocabulary of the YasastIlaka
nyañcaceipitanasika Kathits. 20, 108. such a misunderstanding ",ould not be surprising,

ya te nyañcati padayor varadayof.¡, so. kamd/¡arii kamdhara, Subhii~. 216; "das 3. ANC-,AÑJ-" TO SROW, :\IA~IFEST, :lIARK,"
1St ein wahrer Nacken, der sich zu deinen alle Wünsche gewahrenden Füssen neigt"
(Bohtlingk, Ind. sprüche, 2nd ed. 5554). See belo\\'. § 7. 3. alle- "to mark, charactcrizc, a,dorn, etc."
kürmaf.¡, patalamúlarh srayati p/¡a1Jipatif.¡, pirp!ate nyañcadangaf.¡, Yasastil. 1, The thiud root,.aric- seems to have never been recognized as an independent
.599, 6 (comm. nicairbhavatp/¡a1J-am.arp!alasahasraJ.¡). root, distinct from l.añe- and 2,alic·. This somewhat amazing fact may perhaps

244 245
 THE THREE 9ANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-JANJ-
61
be partly explained by the great authority of the Petersburg Dictionary which
combines a.añe- with the two other roots, partly by the relatively small numbel'
of instances of finite verbal forms. Whitney too, though diverging sometimes
from the statements of PW, acknowledges but one root mic- "bend" in his " Roots
Verb-forms and primar y Derivatives,' p.l. Attempts to explain the rather start:
ling semasiological relations between "to bend " and "to adorn, show " haye but
seldom been made. Sorne scholars as sume that the connecting link was "to
reverence (with inclined body)" from whieh the sense "to honour" deYeloped
(see l\Ioruer Williams, Dict.); others start froln the participle añcita- "bent,"
whieh was oíten used in conneetion with sueh words as bhl'ü- (see p. a9), ap_
parently supposing that the meaning "arehed and handsome (as eyebrows)"
has in this way developed to "honoured, adorned, graeeful " (Apte, The Students'
Sanskrit-English Dietionary). Only Bohtlingk scems at first to have presumed
l' sorne relations bi!twei!n añ~- and alijo, sinee he refers in PW (in vocem añcay-) to
I Illl.ist ha,-e existed by the side of 2.anka- " mark, sign" a cognate word anku-,
the root añj-. But afterwards he too, while combining micay- with mico, has
abandoned this 'liew (vide pw).
The unanimousness of the modern lexicographers, both Western and lndian,
in eombining the three roots añc- is the more remarkable as the aneient grammarians
and lexieographers note the existenee of a root alic- whieh by its speeial meaning
and morphologieal peeuliarities was cIear1y distinguished from l.añc-. Thus
Yaska, ~irukta 5, 17, observes añcitam eviiñkitarh bhavati, which Laksman Sarup,
in the, Indiees oí his Nirukta edition, erroneously renders "eurved." This is
probably the earliest oecurrenee of the root. Piil)ini 6, 4, ao notes a differenee
between l.añe- " to bend " and a.añc-, defined with "püjiiyiim," in that the latter
has no weak stem ac- 15), whereas its past participle and gerund are formed with i
(7, 2, 5a). 'But, although Pal)ini was evidently aware of the faet that our third
root añc- was not identieal with añc- (acati) " to bend " on aeeount of its morpho.
logieal and semasiologieal eharacteristics, his sueeessors used to refer both verbs
to one root with various meanings (anekiil'thalJ). The most interesting diseussion
of a.añc. is howe'ler found in Patañjali 8, 2, 48; here it is stated that the root añj.
in vyaktam is synonymous with añc- in the sense of prakiisanam, and sorne nominal
derivatives from both roots are diseussed, viz. anka~ and vyañjanam. lt is to be
regretted that his words añcatiJ.¡, prakii~ane vartate haye not met with more attentive
eonsideration, although it appears from the context that Patañjali also identifies
and eonfounds two homonymous roots, viz. a.alij. and 4.mij. "to anoint" (see § 12).
Cf. further Dhátupatha 1, 20a añc- " gatipújanayoJ.¡,," 10, 198 añc. "vise~Ot1Je"
and, from the later lexicographical works, Amarakosa 3, 1, 98 pújite '1icítaJ.¡, and
the Sabdakalpadruma, which moreover quotes a noun alicanam " vyaktikara1Jam."
A difference similar to that existing between the Yerbal forms may also be
observed with respect to the noun anka·. It seems neyer to have been 110ticed
15. Xevertheless Durga in his commentary on Xir. 3, 8 (anglllayaQ) ankana bhavanliti va,
~ñcana bhavantili va writes: aMir acyale, püjyate gandhadibhir deva ia, , :Engl. Diet. X.XX\'III, eC. Alfred )laster, JBBRAS n.s. V (1020). llO.
246
62 F. B. J. K.UlPER
that there exist in Sanskrit two diffel'ent words, viz.: (1) anká- .. a curve, hook,
etc." (sine e ~S, ef. sam-anká- AS? )16 and (2) anka-" mark, sign; stain, spot,
stigma; numerical figure."1? The only attempt, 1 know of, to connect these
various mearungs was made by Lanman, Sanskrit Reader, p, 112, who tried to
aceount for the supposed scnse-development "hook" > "mark, sign" by comparing
Engl. pot-hook. It calillot, however, be doubted that the seeond word belongs
etvmologically to a.a/le-. Patañjali already arrived at thc same conclusion; after
h;ving discussed the use of añc· and añj- in the sensc " prakiiSane he observes:
evam tal'hy alicater O/iko, , rikas ca prakiisanam. ankita giiva ity u-cyate, 'nyiibhyo
gobhya~ prakiiáyallte.
We may add that, just as there exists by the side of l.anká- "hook" a noun
ariku- " cun'c " (? er. ~Iiin. GS 1, la, 4 and Avestan anku. pasinnna- " adorning
oneself with bueklcs," with the denominative anküyati, ~S, and ank!tsá-), so there
to be inferred from lIyáñlw- "a kind of antelope" (since VS 24, 21), the proper
meaning of which must ha,'c been "spotted, of variegated colour," cf. éta-,
pr~afa-, sambara., kiliisi, Tamil pu!!í-miin (pu!.li "mark dot,") etc. (see also
Lidén, Stud, z. altind. u. vergl. Sprachgeschiehte, p. 68).
Aeeording to the PW the second word anka- " mark, sign " is not met with
until the epies and ::IIanu, which is in perfeet agreement with the chronology of
the verbal root a/lc·. For, if we may rely upon the statcment of sueh a widc-read
scholar as Bohtlingk, the past participle añcita- " marked, honoured, etc." though
known to Yiiska and Piil)ini is only attested in literature as late as the epies, whercas
finite forms of the same root (of which Bohtlingk could quote oaly one instance)
are met withfor the first timc in the Dh'l.rmasarmábhyudaya (9th cent, )-at
least according to the eYidencc available at presento '"Ve must obviously concluelc
that the finite yerbal forms, whicI! probably werc still known to Pal)ini (see aboye),
had since gone out of use and that añcatí and a/1cayati of the late classicalliterature
are new.formatiollS which, like man)' others, haye been dcriyed from the past
participle (a/icita-). Cf. romiiiícatí from romiiñcíta-, uda/icayati from udalicita-
etc. (See aboYe § 4).
It cannot bc questioned, on the other hand, that a.añc- is an ancient, authentie
verbal root. It has been observed aboye that in Vedic the root-variant alij. is
used instcad o'f a/le·, the existence of which is only testified there by the noun
nyá,nku-. Apparcntl~~ the difference between both roots was a stylistic or dialect-
ical one, the variant mlc' having been avoided in the saered language of the ritual-
istic texts and belonging to the speech of lower classes only. It eannot be doubted
16. Samanká· AS. 1,12, 2c (beside anká-) "h?ok"? . Cf',llloomfield, S~E 42, 251, Wack-
ernagel. Altind. Gramm. 1I, 1, 'i3. In AS. 6, 50,1 lts meamng 18 fully uneertum (see Bloomfield,
pp. 142, 486 and \\'hitney).
17. For añka- •• aet oC a play" see S. Leyi, Le theátre indicn 58, and "'intcrnitz IlI, 1U" n-
2. Erroneous attempts to explain mika- as a Dravidian word: Kittcl, Ind. Ant. 1, 235, Kanna~la.
247
 THE THREE S'ANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-jANI-
63
that the Veruc language avoided the use of partícular words or meanings of wo d
h· h 'd
W .IC •• were conSl e~ed to be vulgar. Such words, though originating from ther s
pnmltIve Indo-Iraman language, remained confined to the low speech until .
.I
c~nsequence of ~he socIa, and the corresponding cultural, evolution which gave
' In
rIse ~o Br~hmarusm, lower social ~trata came to participate in cultural life. .'lc.
cordmgly m the oldest documents of Brahmanism viz. the epics and lIIanu
. fl f l' " . 1 k
111 ux o new 1I1gmstlC matena s too' place which to some extent altered th
' an
as~ec.t of the lang~age.18 The late appearance of aiic- "to show, etc." suggest:.
a SImIlar expl~atlO?, the more so as the testimonies of Yaska and PaI;lini, quoted
aboYe, prove lts ex¡stence long before it made its entran ce into literary work
It i8 eVen possible that this root occurs in a few Vedic and ATestan words in -añc~'
We must insert here a brief excursus on these words. . ghr tal1c - with the Indo-Iranian group of words that may contain -mic- " showing,
_Th~ Yedi.c proper nam~ Dadhyái¡c-/Dadhic-, though inflected like pratyáñc_{
prat¡c-, IS unhkely to contam the formatiye element -allc- "directed towards "19
A~c?rding to an old myth Dadhyañc has shown the madhu of Tva~tr to 'the
As:ms (~S. 1, 116, 12cd; 119, 9d; cf. the rítualistic yersion in SB. 14, 1, 1, 18.24
Jarm: B~. p. 253, 4 .ed. Cal~~d). ~s dadhi-ál1c- a formatíon of the same type a~
dadht-krG- and does lt mean showmg the curdled mílk "? In the híeratic lan _
uage of the Rigvedic poets, indeed, mádhu may stand for any sort of rasa (see 1:.
Ronnow, Trita Aptya, Uppsala 1927, p. 64 ff.). In that case the weak stem dadhic~
must be analogical. This conjecture ",... ould seem to be supported by Avestan
hunairyaOne- "youthful "20 which is .deriyed ~rom *hullarya- " youthful' str,ength "
(~n abstraet ~ou~ from hunar-, ef. "\ ed. 8Ü1l1:ta- and Grcek euénor). The forma.
tlOn of hunatrya ne- has not been sufficiently explained. 21 Its mcanina must
have been something like !' characterized by, or possessing, hunarya-,,,"which
would be clear ir we trace it back to *hunarya-anc- "manifesting youthful
strcngth ".22
. Perhaps th~s ~an exp!ain :~e ,~bseure ~or~ gh:/[¡c¡-. For this word the assump-
tlOn of a root ,arlant anc- anJ- to anomt .. m¡ght seem tempting but, although
18. Skt. lák~an. (=Av. laJan -, Greek teklon occ;urs onl;.- once in the Rigveda in an a •
pended .hym!l (9, 112, 1), everywhere el se lá~!ar. bemg used for it. Skt. abhy asyati " studiesP"
must prI~arily have meant "to acquire power over something by a mystie knowledge of it "(eC
Ved. abhl'~- " f:<> rule, overcome, eonquer") but as a similar semantie development occurs i~
Ayestan (Nlrang¡stan 52 ; ef. A. Waag, Nirangistan pp. fl5, 122) it may be old (see Acta Oriento
al!a,. ~ol. 17,,,p. 304 fl.). The faet that. the type bhasmasdl kr-, though taught ex Ii~itl bv
PaI:l1ll1 5, 4, 5~ and 53, oeeurs for the first time in the ?lIhbh., is Iikewise explained by its •.Pprofa~e ;,
charaeter (Renou, BSOS IX, 47).
19. "den ~Iilehtriinken zu.ewandt. reieh daran" Grassmann'" eurdward" 'th
" poss.essing " ?~ " fond of " " curdled milk ", ~lacdonell, Vedie 3Ivt'hology 142 Oth:;\\'i~~
Bergalgne, Rehg¡on Vedique n, 157 : " uni au lait " (united with mÜk). . (udalicati). I am .unable to verify the last quotation. As regards the other two
20. For the .meaning of this word see Xoropi lIhalkloi ()Iededelingen Koninklijke Xede;.
landsche Akademle, afd. Letterk. ::-.I.R., Vol. 14, Xo. 5, Amsterdam 1951), pp. 16, 23 .
. 21. See Bartholomae, Grundriss !rano Phil. r, 178, 389, Altifan. Worterb col 1832
RelChelt, Awest. Elementarb. 511. . . .
~,2. Althou~h the traditional translation oC viro'lIyd'lIc (e.g. "gegen die ~Ianner aufpral.
!end Lommel) IS open to doubt, the word does not allow a certain conclusion.
248
64 F. B. J. Kú1PER
ghrlá- is sometimes used with ai¡j- (2, 3, 4 barhir ...ghrténaktám, 10, 118, 4 ghrtén -
ágní~ sám ajyate) the common rit!lalistie phrase is góbhir mijo. Moreover in the
words ghrta8cú~-, ghrtasnú-, g/¡rtasri- the final component has' a transitive meaning
(" dropping ghee," etc.). If ghrt~ci- would contain *añc- "anoínt," it ,,"ould be
equivalent to with ghrténa-arljati (type aritra-páratla-, cf. Waekernagcl, Altind.
Gramm. II, 1,199), thus belonging to a different type of compounds. On the other
hand, though ghrtiici- is seldom used wlth the same words that have the epithets
ghrtávant- etc. (7, 60, 3 haríta~~ .. .ghrtáci~: 4, 6, 9 harito ghrtasnáM, it seems some-
times to convey the rather vague meaning of "rich in ghee," e.g., yuvatílJ, hav~mati
ghr/áci 7, 1, 6.· Since the assumption of a root variant añc- " anoint " is not sup-
ported by further e\idence, it seems safer, for the reasons mentioned, to conneet
manifesting. "
Different is the case of svityáñc- (7, 33,1; 83, 9)/svitic- (femsviaci 1,123,9).23
Sinee svití- (Siti-) is the eomponent form of svitrá- (Ath. S.)2\ svíty-ár1c- must
be a bahuvrihi compound like Ved. siti-p'ád- "white-footed," Avestan spití-
dóíthra- "clear-eyed." For the accent of svity-álic- see Wackernagel, Altind.
Gramrn. II, 1, 296. "Ve should h3.v~ to assume, aceordingly, a noun añe- "ap-
pearance" (synonymous with *Haku- of the oblique cases) but the inflection
8vítyál1c-{8vitic- is likely to hav~ been created on the analogy of pratyáñc-jpratrc-,
and \Ve have no means to determine whieh of the two stems ís old, and whieh is
the analogical one.
From tho'! follo\,ing quotations it may be inferred that the princípal meaning
of al1c- is approximately signare, significare," just as anka- means "signum"
lO
while añcita. may oft~n be rendered "insignis." From this basic meaning the
following senses may be derived:
(1) "to manifest, show,betray."
(2)" to mark, disti~guish" (German "auszeichnen "), henee :
(a) of persons: "to honour."
(b) of persons 01' things: "to adorn."
Bohtlingk (pw) also assumes a tneaníng "erregen, bewirken" on aecount
.of a few passages which had been explained otherwise in PW., viz. Gitagov. 10, 11
(aceording to l?W: "entfalteri an den Tag bringen, erzéug-en "),Caurapañcasikii...
(PW. VII, i689: "aussern, an den Tag legen ") alld Prasannar. 136, 1 from below
passages, it will be sho\\Jn that the meaning." erregen, bewirken" is to be discarded.
23. A seeondary masculine form is ~'vilicáya~ 10, 46, 7.
24. cr. Wackernagel, Altind. Gramm. II, 1, 59, and for siti- Debrunner, Indogerm. Forseh.
56 (1038), 171 ff., Archiv Orientalní 17 (1940), no f.
249
 THE THREE SA~SKRIT ROOTS ANC-{AN1-
As has been remarked aboye, instances of finite verb-forms are comparatiYel
scarce, whereas those of the past participle are numerous. The latter will therefo;
be discussed in aseparate paragraph on account of their particular importanc e
e.
(1) "to manifest, show, betray":
ca1)4i tvam eva mudam aiícaya Gitag. 10, 11.
That aiicaya is the correct reading, is rendered probable by the sound-group añe_
of the follow~ng word paií~abd?acar:u!ti~a~ The nriant reading udvaha, probably.
an old margmal gloss, Wh1Ch· 1S mentlOned by Lassen's scholiast A, has unjustly
been adopted by 1\1. R. Telang and W. L. Pansikar in their edition (Xif1).aya Sagara
Press 1899), page 134. V\Testergaard, Radices, rendered "evoh-ere, explicare,"
Lassen: "para tibi laetitiam," B6htlingk, P\Y: "entfalten, an den Tag ·bringen.
erzeugen." \\llile Lassen's translation is based on .his scholiast A, \Vho explain~
mudam tipnuhi (cf. the Rasamañjari: pl'tipnllhi), Westergaard and B6htlingk
probably referred this form to l.aiic- "to bend" (hence "to fold, unfold ").
Compare 1nlUlam sumuda11cati (§ 8).
uccail;¡, ... sil'o 'iicitveva sariwahan Bhattik. 9, 40 "as if he showed it proudh'.'
The sense generally assigneel to it (PW "biegen, krümmen," Apte "to bend-")
cannot be meant by the author. The comméntator rightly obserns anamratvat
püjayitveva siro bibhrii1)alJ and the Kasika on Pal).. 6, 4, 30 also quotes aiícitam im
siro vahati in illustration of mic- "pújtiyiim." The use of iva should be noted
which shows that al1citam must be different from ürdhvtilicitasirogl'ivil Mhbh:
1, 165; 31 (crit. eel.), see § 1, c. For sama11cati vrttam uccailJ Yas. 1, 269, 10 see
§ 6 (end) and § 8 (cnd).
ilkul1citiigram. abhirdmadalüllubandham
ilriimasimni navakirh8ukam aricatí silla
pt1nthtighandghanapayódharasaila.Yr ñ g a _
. sarhghattantid atanusastram iv(itiku1)tham Yarad. p. 151
(stanza 130), " At the border of the garden tlle fresh kirhsuka flower displayed.tlte
10Yely corolla of its petals, the tips of which were bent like an arrow of the God of
Loye which has been entirely blunted as it bumps against the breast (hard like
the top of a mountain) of a lonely woman whose husband is on a journey." The
modern commentary renders sobhate, but al1catí is hardly eYer used intransitively
(see p. 67). .
tipedil'e 'mbarapatharh parítalJ l)ata1igti
bhrng(¡ rastilamukultini samMrayant~
sarhkocam ar1cati, sara$, tmyi dil/a dillo
mino nu hanta katlL1niiril gatim abhYllpaitu? BhY. 1, 16.
Bergaigne translates: "Les oiseaux Otl.t pris dans tous les s'ens le chemin des
airs ; les abeilles noires se réfugient sur les boutons du manguier; mais le mal.
heureux poisson, ou cherchera-t-il une retraite. maintenant, <3 lac que ton lit se
resserre?" On accoullt of this passage B6htlingk, pw. 1, 13, assigns to mic- the
Vak.·5
250
F. B. J. KUIPER
meaning " kommen in, teilhaft werderi " and Apte follows him. Analogous ex-
pressions as sarhkocam etya Kathas. 90, 65, sarhkocamupagate~u 103, 214, it is true,
seem to support this view. If however we take into account the other passages
of the Bhamini Vilasa where alic- is used, it appears that we have here to do, not
with 2.añc- but with 3.afie-. Cf.
tvam ced aiicasi lobham, ambuja 1, 4 " si tu t'en montres avare, <3 lotus ! "
tas-minn adya ... da8dm daiviit krsiim aiicati 1, 47 "maintenant que le destin
l'a réduit a un état misérable." Taken in itself this instance has no conelusive
force since it mayas wdl be compared with dasilrh priipat Dha.rmas. 4, 50, priipa
dasam svam eva Bkm. 16, 24 and the like, as with karsyam asau vyanakti Dharmas.
4, 48, kiir.§yam adarsayae ca Vikr. 9, 9.
vidhubhiivam al1catitamiirh tavananam
nayarul sarojadalanin:íse~atilm 2, 108 "ton visage ... devient pareil a la lune,
et tes yeux aus pétales du lotus."
autsukhydt parimilatdrh, trapaya sarhkocam añcatilrh ca muhulJ 2, 43 (of two
lovers) " le desir les fait se rencontrer et la pudeur les ferme tour a tour."
dyotante haridantard1J.i, suhrddrh vrndarh samdnandati
tvarh ced aiicasi, kiiñcanilrigi, vadanilmb/¡oje vikiisa.sriyam 2, 70 "si tu laisses
s'épanouir dans toute sa beauté le lotus de ta bouche."
This remarkable use of aiícati is peculiar to the author of the Bhamini Yilasa.
no instances thus far being known from other sources. Hence we are no doubt
justified in interpreting all these passagcs in the same way. Now, though it is a
remarkable fact that nevcr alicayati 01' sam-ud-añc- (§ 8) is used instead of alicatí,
this is no sufficient proof for 2.al1c- being meant here. On the- other hand, only
the last quotation has conclusive force, its literal translation being " when thou
showp.~t on the lo tus of thy faee the splendour of its blossoming." Both the
loeative vadandmbhoje and the eompound vikiisasriQ, point to 3.añc- and exelude
the sense proposed by B6htlingk (cf., e.g., vikiUarh gata Gopii.l, 80, 7). We may
safely infer that the other passages, ambiguous in themselves, contain the sam0
verbo
2 (a)" to honour" (cf. Prakrit arhcai, p.p. amcia- " to worship, honour ").
An instance from the Rii.Yal).arjuniya will be quoted below, p. 74.
2 (b)" to adorn."
alica sraja kabaribharam Gitagov. 12, 26,
"Comas abundantes honora corona" Lassen. The Rasamañjari explains less
correctly kabaribhare, cikurasamilhe srajalh, millyam alicaya, prilpayya.
madhur alicati kiinanam Dharmas. 11, 7, is rightly rendered alarhkaroti by
R. Durgaprasad and K. P. Parab in their edition (Kii.vyamii.lii. 8).
251
 THE THREE 9ANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-fANJ- F. B. J. KUIPER
67 68

Sometimes the indigenous commentators assign an intransitive sense to Besides ud-añc. there oecur two other compounds of 3. añc-, viz. praty-añc-
añcati, e.g. prakiisate (Prakasa on Prabodhacandr. 1, 12 Br.) or sobhate (on Varad. and sam-añc-. The former is quoted by Bohtlin:gk from Bhiig. Puro 5, 15, 9 in the
stanza 130). This is probably due to the identification of 3.añc- with the intransi_ sens e 'honoured." The second OCCllrs in a passage where the various gaits of a
tive verb micati " goes" (mic- "gatipiljanayoJ.¡, "). It is possible that this errOr horse are mentioned:
has incidentally also led to an incorrect use of añcati in literary works, as an instance
iiskandita-dhaurftaka-roeita-valgita-plutabhidhiina - samañeita - dhlira - pañcaka-
of which perhaps may be adduced, añcat-trisülaparimarpf.itavdmahastaJ.¡, Samgi_
prapañcaka-s~:ncar~lJe/la Varad. 115,. T~e interpretation of the comme~t~ry
tadarpal).a. 2, 54, where the ,"ulgate text has bhiisat-. A. A. Bake's translation
(añcitaJ.¡, : PÚJltalJ) IS hardly correcto As lt call1iot be pro ved that samanctta-
in "Bijdrage tot de kennis der Voor-Indische muziek," p. 45, viz. "with a bent
could be used as an adjective (as añcita- in añcitdbhyiim gatdbhyam, Rghv. 2,18,
trident" is hardly correcto As it stands, it can only mean "the adorning
comm . caruJ.¡" .sundaraJ.¿) the meaning probably is "the five variousgaits
trident" but the lectio facilior bhiisat- points to the sense of prakiisate.
designed by the names iiskandita, dhauritaka, etc." There is only one more
occurrence of sam-añc- in Yas. I, 269, 10 (yaJ.¡,) ceto nikuñcati, samañcati
§ 8. 3.añc-: ud-mic-, sam-ud-añc-, and other compounds. vrttam ucca1.J.¡" but the meaning is uncertain (see §6, end).
The compounds udañcati and samudalicati (-ayati) have the same meanings as
the simple verbo They are however treated apart because of the difficulties of §9. Survey of the meanings of ud-añc-.
interpretation arising from their homonymy with 1 a. ud-alle-.
As there are at least three different compouncls ud-alic- it seems advisable to
ity udaricitaviliisarasanam ...... subhruviim Yikr. 11, 6í, "of the fair women
give hel'e a short synopsis of their respective meanings.
showing the viliisarasa."
giitrodañcitaromiilicaJ.¡, Varad. 50, 5, I,-1.añc- + ud- (udaeati, p.p. udalcta-).
"an erection of the hairs manifesting itself on the body." Cf. t'yaktaromodgatatvam (1) " to lift up, raise " : kósam l,{S. 5, 83, 8 j pddam SR.\-!. 5, 1, 4, 5, etc.
Malav. IV, 1. It is to be distinguished from udallcadromiillcaJ.¡, Siih. D., see §4.
(2) " to draw water out of a well " : )IS. 4, 2,5 (27, 4.5), accorcling to Caland's
ko na mudarh samudañcati visati 1I1ukunde 'niara lirdayam Gopal. 46, 4 " Who emendation, see ZD:\IG. 70, 10;· ApSS. 4, 10, 4 and 13, 7, 13; Kii;sika
will not show his bliss when Kr~l)a enters his heart?" This is an imitation of on PaI,lini 7, 2, 53 ancl 8, 2, 48, etc.
añcaya mudam Gitagov., quoted above.
Remark. In this meaning the post-Veclic langllage seems to have used a
samu,dañcitamamnatha-, in the Southern recension of the Caurapañcasikit transitive present udaiícati (twice in Das.). 8ee further PW l, 59, V, 955.
(PW VII, 1689), may be compared with vyaktdllurdgaJ.¡, GitagoY. 1, 25 (from the
root-variant arlj-). - . l.añc- + sam-ud-.
Only samudakta· " raised " in Amarakosa 3, 1, 90: samudakloddhrle same.
~arva;i-rama1;!a-kira1;!a' ñeala-paroa -álrvd1;!a -1/ irvrt í - sam udañeitá-cafícuúikdre~u
cakore~u Varad. 175, 1, "cakoras whose bills were characterized by., .... "
II.-2.añc- + ud-o
In Varad. 166, 6-7, the text must probably be amended as follows :
Apte's statement that ud-añc· means "1. to go up.-2. to rise, appear."
nirantar-endind irasarhdo!w -jharhkdra-sitk(ira -samuda 11 eíta -bii1amukuia -mi~e1Ja reflects the view of later commentators. The intransitive present of 1. añc- must
sflrhkucitllP.ii1;!ilJ:" a hand contracted as if it were a young bud consp~cuous. by the secondari1y have been intel'preted as a compound of the (fictitious) root 2. añc-:
humming and buzzing of uninterrupted swarms of bees." The Lahore cdition (see §4). .
reads -jhañkiirasitkiira samudañcita-bdlamukula- and the commentary takes the
second word to mean nirgatairbiilamukulai~L. But· then we !¡hould rather ~wect IH.-la. añc· + ud· (udañcati, causative udañcayati).
samudañcad- (1 a. añc-), sec §4.··
(1) "to rise, be directed upwards."
As for udalicac-cdñcalyam BhV. 2, 74, see § 4, e.
(2) "to come out, appear,. beco me visible."
In the sense " to honour " h StémS tu be used in k~iilltatayii k~aIJiin(ardya­
karaIJiiya samudalicayann iva Yarad. 100, 12-13, (of a bee) "'honouring as it (3) "to resound " (of music).
were (the youngmaiden) with·its indlllgence:" (4) with an infinitive, approxima.tely " to sta1't, commence."

252 253
 THE THREE S'ANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-/AN1- F. B. J. KUIPER
69 70

Causatiye: (b) when used as the prior member of a compound, and sometimes also as
(1) "to raise, lift." an independent word, it has an adjectival value and means ;
(2) "to make resound." (5) "conspicuous, beautiful, charming, graceful."
Remark. Udañcita- " hr~itatt " is doubtful. (6) "distillguished, standing out, honoured."
la. am- + pary-ud-. It may be doubted if the authors when using añeita- in its adjectival sense,
" to rise, spread " (of odour). had always a very clear notion of its exact meanings, the more so as in connexion
with múrdhaja-, etc. it means " curly " (1.añe-). Probably it was felt as a somewhat
la. mie- + vy-ud-. vague epitheto1J, ornall-s of the !iterary language, the general meaning of which may
Causo vyudañcayati "lifts, raises " in Viddhasalabhañjikakhyaniitika 76, 13 best be designed by Latin insignis.
(pw).
la. añc- + sam-ud-. al) "distinctly yisible, clear, plain, manifest."
" to rise," Saduktika. (pw); of the rising of a new period of life, BhV. In this sense a/leita- is quotecl by Patañjali, 8, 2, 48 añeatitt prakasane vartate :
Causatiye: "to play on a musical instrument," Yarad. " añcitam gaeehati " ; praklisayaty atmanam iti gamyate. But he observes that this
is not the common meaning of a/icitam; this is, according to him, rather samahito
IV. S.aiie- + ud- (udaiíeati and 1tdmieayati, p.p. lIdmlcita-). bhútvti gacehati (Bohtlingk:" behutsam, aufmerksam" - careful, attenti\'e).
el) "to sho,,", manifest, betray." However that may be, the meaning " plain, distinct" is probably also founcl in
Ksirasvamin's commentary on Amara 3, 1, 113 : spa~te 'citam, which 1 strongly
(2a) "to honour" (cf. püjtiyiim Pa!).). su~pect to be a misprínt for spa~te 'rheitam.
(2b) "to adorn."
a2) "marked, characterized by."
Remark. A common meaning of ud-aile- was probably " to mark, distinguish,
charfl,cterize," but it is thus fal' only attested in smn-~ld-al1e- and in the p.p. aikita-, añgeti k~iprantimti, '/leitam evti'ñkitam bhavati ¡-¡ir. 5, 17. Yaska's Hne of thought
see §10, a 2. is here far from clear. 0ne should expect a gatikarman (as, indeed, Durga explains
his words) but añkitam points in a different direction. In 3, 17 añgdrd añkanlil),
S.a/le- + sam-ud-. and in 3, 9, where arigulayal), (beside other etymological speculations) is explained
(1) "to show, manifest, betray." by añkana bhavantiti vd, Yaska obviously uses ank- in the sense of " marking. "
(2) "to characterize." Hence it may reasonably be supposed that a/icítam in the passage quoted above
(S) "to honour." means "marked." If so, this is the first occurrence of this word in Sanskrít. The
meaning " bent," which Lakshman Sarup in the indices of his edition of the Nirukta
assigns to añcítam and añkitam can hardly be correcto
§ 10. S.añe-: the past participle aiieita- "insignis."
sitiisaktamand mando madañcitagatir babhau Ram. 5, 18, 19. This is the reacl-
. By far the commonest form of S.mie- is the past participle arieita-, which
ing of Krishnacharya's text (Bombay 1912), with the commentary madotkatal),
occurs much earlier than the finite verbal forms. It is employed in yarious ways:
vyaktamadal)" and of the )Iadras edition of 1933. The well-known Bombay edition
(a) when used as an independent word 01' as the final member of a compound, of the Nirnaya Sagara Pl'ess (1902) reads in accordance with the Tilaka mandañ-
it preseryes its participial function and means ; citagatir where añcita- accordingly must be taken as an adjective (ef añeitabhyam
(1) "distinctly visible, clear, plain, manifest" (like vyakta- from 3aHj-), gatabhyiim Rghv. 2, 18). The PW. quotes more Ram. passages from Gorresio's
edition which is inaccessible to me.
(2) "marked, characterized by "; cr. samuda/ieita-, samaiíeita-, quoted
aboye. gate~1t lila/leitat'Íkrallw~l¿ (v. 1. -vibhrall!e~u ) Kumaras. 1, 3.J.; ~Iallinatha :

(3) in a weakened sense; "proYided with, with" (almost synonymous lilabhir (vilasair) a/leitaJ.¡ (püjitti) vikramiiJ.¡ (ptitlanytisli) ye~u te~u.2~a
with anvita-). 24a. cr. añcilat:ikramam Raghv. 9, 2-1. (see p. 75) and, on the other hand -añcilavibhrama
(4,) "adorned." Harav. 26, 82; 27, 26 (see below).

254 255
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-IANI- F. B. }.KUIPER
'12

atavi-sulabha -sdlakusumastabaka' ñcita-navakhiita -kupi ka 'p k th l'eading may be a /ectio facilior which, owing perhaps to a confusion between the
(ed. Bomb. 2) 228, 4. a at!. a- charactel's for c and v (mv), has been substituted for añcita-. (Thus we find the
°kiiñcakiiñcigu7Jd't1cita_ Harljac. 113, 11. V'ariant readings kllswnanvitailJ, and kusumiicitailJ, in Mhbh. 1, 64, 12 Crit. ed.
anel bahuratniisitam, y.!. -anvitam 1, 15, 9: -ratna/1cita- Bhm. 1, 886), The fact
udvelahela'/1citapadaciiralJ, Vikr. 10, 70 " whose gait ,,"as mark d b - that B5htlingk at first changed al1cita- into ankita· (Indische Spl'üche, 1st ed., 962)
wantonness." e ) excessi\'e
and afterwards into iicita- (pw V, 95.t, Ind. Spr" 2nd ed., 2385) is probabIy due to
ar:e~av_art;tañcitam (indrakiirmukam) Vikr. 13, 21 (see also a4) the use of añc- thell still being imperfectly known. For the same reason -acita-
has no doubt been misread (or miswritten) for -m1cita. in many other passages,
v~vldhayudhasthairyacaryañcitasamara_ Das. 4, 14.
e.g., pulakiicitena Sak. 55, 7 Pischel (which, according to Cappeller, Introd. to his
kopiiñcitamukha- Bhm. 5, 20. eel., p. XV, is a 'gloss' to kat;ttakitena) for pulakañcitena (see p. 76).
mukham dadhaniilJ, pulakotkaraíicitam Vikr. 17, 50.
Yet one more remal'k may be inserted here 011 account of sayakañcitasarvañgalJ,.
pnlakotkarañcitatanulJ, Sahitya Kaumudi p. 59.
In much the same meaning we find also añkita-, the past participle of the denom-
bhagadattiistra-ni~krtta.viravaktrañcitiilh mahim Bhm. 7, 85. inatiye añkayati "to mark," in api dr~tas tvaya mdrge kurañgo macchardñkitalJ,
-yogii/icita-sthitibhrt Harav. 2, 59. Bhm. 1, 168. A similar parallelism is met with in camikarañkitam ivii 'mbaram
sodaryatal1cita-rasena Harav.31, 13. Varad. 22, 7 (comm. cihnitam) and camikarañcita-patavrta-gatra-áobha Gopal.
125, 30, where the Leiden :Ms. clearly reads -añcita· (Caland: -al1jita-). Cf. also
á['ñgiirañcita-rasaSalitam vahanti (rambhoJ'Ür) Rara\-. 17, 79. in the BrahmavaiyartapuraQ.a pulakañcitasarviiñgi (.t, 69, 11) and pulakiiñkita-
vibbokii!1cita-vinihiJ1citottamanga (?) vamorür. Rara," . 17 ,-,1.
-"'0· sarvdñgi (4, 15,38; 55; 138, etc.), pulakañcitavigrahalJ, (4, 14, 36) and pulakdñki-
iivirbhavad-ratarasiiñcita-vibhramabhilJ, - tavigrahalJ, (4., 16, 128).
stribhir yad ¡¡su vijahe sahajiipi lajja Rarav. 27, 26. A similar use of the noun añka- occurs in e.g. JUindratnaprabhiiñkeva devi
iivirbhavan-madhu-madal1citavibhramaniim
. .. (hrdayiil/I')
.. R arav. 26, 82. rohil,labhübhrtalJ, Bhm. 19, 439 (cf. Bkm. 14, 332b), which may be compared with
na bhavantl ke cana bhavadgunaJ1jitiih (read' iiñcit Oh) R kañkat;takeyüra-ratniil1cita-bhuja¡ícalalJ, Bhm. 1, 886; and in citravar'};tiiñkalJ, Bhm.
_, . . . '- a. ara\'. 6, 107. 13, í34., parallel with anekavarttd'¡ícitalJ, Vikr. 13, 21. cr. also kanakojjvaliiñlca
sphuradasll~tapak~niigrii mukulordhvaputiiñcita
Buddhac. 1, 11.
sukhamilitatdra ca mukulii dr~tir ucyate
A quotation from Bharata in the comm. on Rara\'. 15, 4. a3) in a weakene~ sense: "provided with, with" (=anvitalJ" vyaptalJ,).
siiyakiil1cita-sarviiñgalJ, Bhm. 7, 216. unnidrakandaladaliintaraZiyamiina-
guñjadmadandhamadlmpa/1citarneghakale, Sarngadhara's Paddhati (Aufl'echt,
Note.-In the cOl'responding passage of the :'IIahiibharata . ZD:'IIG. 27, 79) "In this rainy season marked with its drunken becs, which are
Bomb. ed., we read matsiiyakiicitiiñgah. But in • 1 1 . ,V¡Z. 7, 119, 23
- . h' . se, era ot ler lllstances ' 1 fi humming hidden in the petals of the blossomed kandala ftowers" (Aufl'echt: "In
aClta. lIlstead of añcitalJ" probably through the 1 f th _ \\e a so ud
the word was no longer known to later cOpyl' t ossJ o e .anus\·ara and beca use dieser Regenzeit, wann trunkene Bienen .. , ... )."
s s. ust as III the
Amara, quoted aboye undel' al), we must probabl,r enle d h :ommentary on antalJ, áakuntibhir iva 'l1citam antari~am Ragh. 8, 26 (comm. vyaptam iva
B"h l' k n ere1natsayak-· ·t-· h
o t mg -,on the contrary, held in several cases acita t b tI qncI anga,. "full of birds "), lit. marked.
añcita-. Thus in Amal'~sataka 78 the d' k - ? e le correct reading for
, , rea lIlg va -tram svcdakanii· 't . dviida$aram tatha cakram kumarailJ, ~arJ,bhir añcitam Bhm. 1, 63 " a wheel with
us of a slllular compound with ali'J'i in Y d' . 'd _ ., IlCl am remmds
. h - ,. - e lc. VIZ. st'e al1ji- " cO\'ered (l't k d six boys."
Wlt_ .sweat." But the text of the Ka\') ama '~l-a-e d't'
r
1 IOn (stanza 84) h
1 • mar e )
d k
?,tal/v/tam (comm. kanacitam) 25 Ko\\' it 1 b b as sve a a- patim ...... ciriilicalair al1citiim Gopal. 67, 6" a cloth with strips of bark."
h 1 . " las een o sern'd aboye tI t ··t
w en usec in a weakened sense, is nearlv equh' 1 t t la anCI a-o
. a en o am'ita-. Rence the latter It is of course impossible to draw a rigid Hne of demarcation between this
25. cr. Btus, 1. 7.. sL'cdacita-, and on the other hand R -, "
use and those discussed under a 2) and a 4). Cf. a 2) bhavadgu'I,I(ilicitalJ, and, e.g.,
mbhaJ;¡-ka!ldñcitaiJ;¡ ,pal'allaiJ;¡. ¡¡Jat.• ,124 Hardyatana-sopdlla.kf¡dlaná_ áilagltl,liinvitas, en, nI, p. 276.

256 257
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-jAN1-
a 4) "adorned."
As an independent word it is found in :
ye/la bhinnakarikumbhaviskhalan_
mauktiklivalibhir a/icitli mahi BhV. 1, 50,
"(le lion) qui a déeoré le sol de rangées de perles tombées du front brisé des élé_
phants" (Bergaigne).
..... .eakasire kelivaniintarli'f./,i
viyogininlilh kavalikrtilniirh suval'1'}aktil1cibhir ivil '11eitiini Vikr. 7, 50.
As the final member of a compound it oceurs in
sthiiniiny atyiidararaeitanrtyagitareaniilieitani kriyantilm Das. 127, 19.
Radhii kunkumapitüngi Haripitapat(ilieita Siih. Kaum. 7. p. 199.
kanka1'}akeyüraratnü/icitalihujillieala_ Bhm. 1, 886.
anekavar'{la/icitam (indrakannukam) Vikr. 13, 21.
b 5) "conspicuous, beautiful, charming, graceful" ( = comm.
darafl, manoharafl).
sudirghiiñeitaWrigülafl Ram. 6, 27, 42 " with a long and beautiful
Sri Govindaraja's comm. it is incorrectly rendered udañcitallingülafl.
mwitalangülafl Bhatt. 9, 40 (comm. püjitam).
añeitotthitaprthunitamba- Das. 104, 21,
,aceording to Peterson "as she rose gracefully." J. J. ~Ieyer understands the
passage in a different way but translates also " praehtig " ; cf. Bhü~al.lii : samyak.
ubhiiv alameakratur añeitabhyam
tapovanavrttipatham gatabhyam Rghy. 2, 18,
Mallinatha: earubhyam, likewise Renou: "l'un et l'autre ornaient de leur har.
monieuse démarehe la route qui rammene du bois de pénitence." Incorrect
interpretations in SKDr. (püjitaM, PW (" ausgezeichnet") and Westergaard
Radices. ' b 6)
alicitavapulJ, Vas. p. 108 Hall (see p. 59). alicitamat,li- vipañcikti Varad. 127,3.
vatavyadhütapallavakarañcitace~titena Varad. 163, 2,
~'with a graceful gesture of the shoots, being as it were its hands, which were
'Stirred by the wind " (comm. sprha'{liyaM.
pa'{linci parimrsann abalorustambham añcitakalapagut,lena Dharmas. 15, 48,
" with his hand (adomed with) a beautiful bracelet.,"
a/icitodari Dharmas. 12, 42, cf. krsodari etc.
258
F. B. L. KUIPER
añeitak~i Harav. 26, 68 j 27, 74.
añcitabhrüJ.¡, Harav. 27. 12 j 27 30; 29, 22.
Thís eompound is to be distinguished from aí'icitabhrü-, -lilüí'ícitabhrülatii (1. añe-),
as wdl as from udañcitabhrü-J.¡, (la.añc-), whieh have been diseussed aboye. Compare
also kutilonnamitcilicitabhrülJ, Harav. 11, 6, where kuf.ila- eorresponds to 1. aiícita-,
aud unnamita- to udañcita-. It may be obscrved that thc Haravijaya makes a
frequent use of atwita- but nearly exclusively in the meanings a 2) and b 5). Hence
añcitabhrü is equivalcnt to ccirubhrü-, vcimabhrü-, subhrü. The Riijanirghal)tu
(quoted in SKpr.) r.ight1y renders it sundarabhrüyuktantiri.
hiyam abhrta divakaralJ prabhiite gaja iva bhinnakarciladhiiturodhaJ:¿
sphuradaru1'}akartibhighatabhagnapracuratamtilasadañcitatanusriJ:¿ Harav. 28, 87
(comm. sobhamanii 'nalpa ca, srir yasya and sampüjitiinalpalak~mrJ:¿).
sphutcik~atailcitakha-( citorJ,usciratam uptigate ... ambare) 29, 36,
(comm. ruciram).
vistciraScili-rnadhurci-'ñcitapak~rnasobham 26, 14, applying to utpalam and ak~
niiryalJ, (comm. manoharair dirghais ca) j cf. añcitak~ipak~mti, p 40f.
earufl, sun.
nycistirhSatci-viracita-' Iwita-madhyamci-' lpa-glindhiira-bandhuratarasthitim .... " 5i
93 (comm. nycisabhidhilmsarüpatvena racito yo 'fícitaJ:¿, pra1'}tiSlibhtiviin manoharo,
madhyamasvara.s etc.).
sucitayci 'nugata 'licitaSrilJ, (vli~i) 13, 10 (comm. ramyci püjitci ca).
digbhitti-bhtiga-racitci-' Iwita-sthitiJ:¿ 14, 10.
Compare furthermore Harav. 16, 67; 16, 49 and 40, 33.
pethe na stutir alwita, na racitas (citrarh) gut;!e~v atijaliJ:¿ Bkm. 18, 42.
Perhaps añcitam as a technical ter m for a certain kind of kiss may also be connected
with this meaning manoharaJ:¿. Cf. Kamasütra 2, 3, 25 samam pirJ,itam aricitam
mrdu Se~cinge~u cumbanulh sthcinaviSe~ayogticl iti cumbanavise~iiJ.¡,. R. Schmidt
renders this as folJows: "an den übrigen Korperteilen sei del' Kuss, je nach de
Stelle, auf die el' gedrückt wird, massig; gepresst, gcbogen (?) oder sanCto "
"distinguished, outstanding, honoured" (: pújitaJ:¿).
añcita- frOID añc- " pújciycim" is taught by Piil)ini 6, 4, 30 and 7, 2, 53. The
KiiSika on 6, 4, 30 quotes in illustration of the rule that n is not lost in this form :
añcitci asya guravaJ:¿ and al1citam iva Siró vahati. In illustration of 7, 2, 53, whilc
repeating the first example, it adds añcitva jünu juhoti which be10ngs to 1. añe-
" to bend " and has nothing to do with Pal)ini's rule. The Rii\-al).iirjuniya illus-
trates this sütra with the stanza
tviim añcitam arya dehabhtijcim niiñcitvci sa gato yudhe dasiisyalJ,
manye vipad asya tena jata, na sreyn gurubhaktivarjitaniim.
259
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-¡AN]-
It is not clear why paJ.lini has chosell the designativll " p12jiiyiim " illSt,r>ad
of the eommon meaning "prakiisane" whieh Patañjali substituted for it. Ir
it was thus used in PaI:1ini's times, it must SOOI1 have lost this sense. Although
the lexieographers still refleet the old tradition (ef. Amara 3, 1 98 püj itl' ' ilcitaM
it is but seldom found in literature wlth this meaning as in ai'ícitavikramam Rghv.
9, 24, (Mallinatha püjitaparakramam, R enou ">.'" l'h"erOlsme v énere. ' ''') H arav.
3,51 (vrajam) añcitalañgalikam has a double meaning,. viz., sre~thii ltiñgalikd (o~adhi.
vise~o) yatra and püjito lt'iñgali (Maladharu) yatra (cf. also the eomm. on·13, 10 and
28, 81). Perhaps the sen se "sre~thal¡." may also be assigned to aiicitadhiyal)
Harav. 14, 21.
§ll. 3.añc.: romiifícita- an d pulakiiíicita-
The same partieiple añcita- oeeurs as the final member of the eompounds
romiiñcita- and pulakafícita- "wlth the hair ereet or thrilled with joy." Beside
romiiñcita- there exists also a no un romiiñca- (=romahar~a-) "bristling of the hair."
The origin of these words has not yet beenreeognized. ~Iost explanations start
from the noun romañca-; thus Monier-Williams renders -ama- as "eurling (of the
hairs of the body), thrill or rapture"; and Uhlenbeek, Kurzgefasstes etym.
Worterbueh 255 f., equaIIy holds " Krümmung der Korperharehen " to have been
the proper meaning. In the same way Gildemeister, in the glossary on Lassen's
anthology, refers pulakiiñr:ita- to a no un pulakiiiica- " motus pilorum" (2.aíic-?)
Bohtlingk's subtle linguistie feeling is evideneed by his not having joined these
tentatives though he was unable to offer another explanation instead. He left
-añca- unexplained (PW 1, 16) and proposed, while rightly rejeeting the assumptioll
of a noun piJ,lakañca-, to read pulakacita- instead of pulakamita- (PW Y, 954 ; 958).
Since reeent' publications still eonneet romañcita- with añcíta- "gekrauselt"
the following remarks are perhaps not superfluous.
It must first be stated that the no un -añca- is found exclusiyely in the eom.
pound romañca- (Rghv. 6, 81, Rar~ae. 191,3; 248, 3), whereas even *pulakiiiíca.
does not oeeUr. It cannot be doubted that romiiñca- has been derived from romiiñ.
cita-o Just as udañca- owes its origin to udañcati (la. aíic-) the direct source of
romiiñca- is probably the present romiiñcati, Gitag. 4, 19, which, again, is a new
formation arisen from the "past participle " romiiñcita-, see Renou, Grammaire
sanscrite 485, and Leumil.lln, Indog. Forsch. 51, 228. It may be added that,
owing to the existence of this present, the adjective romiifícita-has adopted a real
participial function in vrk~air ...... romiiñcitam Dharmas. 2,11. The verb romáñ.
catí further gave rise to a verbal noun rómiiñcin- Kad. p. 252, 1. 1 from the bottom;
cf. udaiícin- from udafíca,ti (above, p. 56).
Now the meaning uf romáñcita- cannot be anything clse than "marked by
erection of the hairs of the body " (cf. pulakotkariifícita- Yikr. 11, 50) .. When
corresponding substantive had to be built,añka- "sign, token" could not be
as such, since it occurred nearly exclusively in bahuvrihi-compounds of the
sasiiñka-. Moreover ramáñc· seems soon to have been felt as a unit which did
260
16 F. B.J.. KUIPER
aIlow fmther analysis, as is shown by the existenee of romáiícati. Rence one had
reco urse to romafíca·. These forms could of course only arise in eonsequenee of
the original sense of r01Twlleita· having fallen into oblivion. This is, in fact, confirm-
ed by the curious eompound I'omiifícáñcitiiñgi, Rarav. 18, 60, and the explanation
romáñco: romavi!t;riyii in Sáh.D. 138, 5. Cf. also the commentary on the last
passage: rom~o vikriyii, udgamal¡., and on p. 139, 3 : romiiñcci, romavikiirál¡..
Sinee, then, romalleita· i5 akin to añkayati " to mark," it becomes clear why
pulaka. is more frequently composed with añkita. than with mwita-. Thus the
Pañeatantra (B.ombay edition) has .har~aromiiñcita.gátra. 2, 24,4, but pulakáñkita-
sarvagcItral¡. 4, 26, 2, pulakiiñkitatamtl¡. 4, 19, 16. Cf. pürJ.labhadra's text, p. 149,
5·6, and see aboye, p. 72, where instances from the BrahmavaivartapuráI:1a
have been quoted. As pulak(ilicita- had not eoaleseed to sueh an indivisible unit
as romtillcita- and was still analysable, añkita· was mostly substituted for -ailcita.
in order to obtain the sequence of two syllables with k, in aceordance with .the
demands of the classical style. And, sinee -añka· is regularly used in the same
wayas añkita· (se e p. 72). pulak(iñka. is also met with, as in pulaktiñkakapola-
Bhm. 19, 712. These comr;ounds are, therefore, due to the same tendency, as,
e.g., pulakiiñkura-, pulakútkara-, pulakc7ñkurotkara., Rarav. 14, 26, etc., which
are of frequent oecurrence in classical poetry.
Accordingly the two compounds udal1cadl'omiiilca· (see § 4, d) and pltlakiiñcita-
though expressing the same idea, eontain two different. roots. While the first
word is equi....alent to such terms as, e.g. samwlgatapulakotkara. Yarad. 70, 5, iiliñga-
nodgatavapul¡.pulaka- Yasastil. 1, 235, 5, udbhinnaromiiñca. Das. 112, 13, udbhin-
noddtimaromiil1cakallcuka- Dharmas. 19, 48, udbhinnapinapulaka. Rarav. 26,
82, prodyadvipulapulaka. Yikr. 18, 4, etc., the seeond eompound i3 rather compar.
able with pulakiilalhkrtcikrti- Bhm. 6, 431, and similar expressions.
A very strange compound is hr~ta-romiifícita.tanül'uhal¡. Rarav. 32.6, which
may be compared with hr;~t(,. tanúruha. }Ihbh. Ram., hr~yattanüruha. (and hr#atanu.)
Bhag. P.; r01/uilicita- may properly be used only of tanü- but not of the hairs.
The author seems to ha,-e attempted an artificial combination of the expressions
har~al'omiii¡citatanu. and hr~tatallüruha. in one word.
§ 12. 3.aíij-: the nominal derivatives al1jí-, nyaligá-, and aktú-
Like the two other roots, 3.afíc. has a root·variant aiij-" to show, re,-cal,
manifest," whieh, howe'-er, has hitherto completcly been ignorec1. Just as 3.allc.
is nearly always identified with 1.anc-, so its variant aHj. is gene rally confounded
with the root alij- " to anoint," which has gi\'en rise to man)' artificial interpreta.
tions. It is clear that the meanings " show " amI" anoint " cannot be connected
but by means of 11l0st hazardoús explanations, cf. e.g. Grassmanll. Lexieon. in
vocem alij-. Likewise Lanman. in the glossary Oll his Sanskrit Reader. assumes
the various senses to be connectecl as follows: "1. anoint 2. adorn; and 80, bring
261

THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS. ANC-I AN]-
to notice." It may be granted that even such explanations might hit the mark
if they were based upon Vedic materials alone, as wlth regard to met~phorical
locutions .. the impossible has become possible" in the Vedic- style. 26 Since
however the root aiíj- "show" is al so 'commonly used in c1assical Sallskrit, its
meaning cannot be explained by the abstruse stylistic procédés of Vedic poets.
Nevertheless 'Vestern scholars have in various waystried to connect it with 4.ailj.
" to anoint." Thus the ample discussion of Bergaigne, Études sur le lexique du
RV, 1, U-20, eventually results in his taking "débarbouiller" (to wipe off) to
be the proper sense of vy-añj- (page 19). And eYen ~ejsser, Zum Worterbuch des
RV, 1, 13, though forced to admit, on account of related words with the meanillg
.. manifest" in another Indo-European language, that this sense "is inherent
to the meaning of the (lE) root," nevertheless tries to explain the sense-develop.
ment in Vedic itself by assuming (in accordance wlth Roth) a prime meaning
«herausputzen." The contradiction between both statements is obvious and
·can only be explaüled from the great authority of the Petersburg dictionary, which
prevented even sueh a conscientious scholar as N'eisser from seeing the plain faets.
So Roth's view, mainly based on Vedic eyidence, stands aS unchallenged in Our
-days as it stood in 1855.27 It is advisable, therefore, to start from the use of añj.
in the post-Vedic language in order to gain a more solid base for our inquiry.
In the epical and c1assicallanguage vy-añkte and vy.añjayati mean" to make
dear, bring to notice, betray." The past participle vy.akta- "manifest, c1ear"
is frequentIy met with, just as the nominal deriyatives vyañjana. " manifestation,
betrayal, mark, sign, attribute " and vyakti- "appearance, manifestation." The
use of añj- in the c1assicallanguage seems to haye been restricted to this cOlJlpound;
though añkfe is mentioned by the grammarians, it is but seldom found; cf. without
the prefix (see §13).
añj- " t'Yaktimrak~a1Jakiintigat~u," Dhatupatha 7, 21 (K~iratarailgiI).i vyakti.
mra~a1Jagat~u, Candra-Dhatupatha 7, 17 vyaktau).
añga- "pade lak~atw ca" 10, 382.
añjanii (comm. vyaktilJ) Harav. 43, 184.
It is significant that, so far as the c1assical language is concerned,we never
find it used in a sense suggestive of any connexion with añj. "to anoint." Side
by side with angayati, Dhatup. 10, 382 mentions ankayati in the same sense (ire,
notare, Westergaard) and añkate " lak~a1Je " (1. 8i), representing the root-variant
-añc.. And, aboye aU, the use of vy.alij- in the literary sources is perfectly clear '
and unequivocal. .On the other hand it cannot be denied that Patañjali has
already fallen a victim to the same error which has led astray modern scholars.
For, in his interesting discussion of vyakta. which, whilebelonging to añj., has the
26. See Oldenberg. Noten 1, Preface p. III f. (but cf. Thieme's critical remarks 00
these ,,"ords in "Untersuchungen zur Wortkunde und Auslegung des Rigveda " 1949, p. 9,n. ,4.
27. Since this was written 1 found that Dr. Katre quotes añc-lañj. as an
root variation in the Annals of the BORI., Vol. 20, p. 80.
262
F. B. J..KUIPER
sens e of añc· "prakiisanam" we read: katham anJlr aiicatyarthe variate? -
nekiirthil api dhdtavo bhavanti.-asti punalJ kvacid anyatrdpy ailjir añcatyarthe
~artate? -astity dha. añjer añjanam añjanmh ca prakiisiillam. añkie 'k~itti ity
ucyate yat tat sitam. ciisitarh ~a~tat prakiisayati (8:.2, 48).. Fro~ the words añkle
'k$ini " she anoints her eyes' It appear.s that anJanarn IS nothmg but the well-
k~o~ word fol' collyrium to which Patañjali assigns a prime meaning prakasanam.
In his opinion there was but one and the same root añj- with different meanings,
(anekiirthaM. But though theoretical .arguing wa~. unable to acc.aunt ~or the
apparent difference in sense, the fact remams that vy·anJ- cle¡¡ ely contams a dlfferent
root.
No more than classical Sanskrit does Vedic evidence lend any support to the
traditional connexioll o f vy-anJ- -' '"t o anOlll
_." t o s h OW " Wl'th anJ- . t". 1n VI.ew of
the difficulties which the interpretation of Vedic texts presents, it wil! be best to
start from the nominal derivatives as their use is in general more homogeneous and
more distinctly outlined. The following discussion is in the main confined to the
1.lgveda and the A.tharvaveda·Sarhhitá w~ich afford sufficient evidence to allow a
trustworthy conclusion to be based on It.
As regards aiijí-, afijí,.their mcaning has been convincingly defined by Hille-
brandt, Liederdes RV., p. 144, n.1, and Neisser, Zum Worterbuch des RV. 1, 14 sq.,
with" Schmuck. Zier," resp. "Putz, lichte Zier .. and Sáyal).a likewise paraphrases
with alam.kara7J.am, alam.kiiralJ 01' iibhara1Jam. It is. in particular used of the orna-
ments of the )Iaruts (cf. especially 5, 56. 1. ga7J.árn pi~tálh rukmíbhír añjíbhilJ); when
the añji of L~as is mentioned we have accordingly to assume the same sense. TI~c
usual translation "aufgeschminkte Farbe" which even Neisser still adopts, 15
exclusively based on the supposed etymological relationship to afij- "to anoint "
and is not supported by the context. 28 It may be noted in this connexion that
vyañjana-, occurring once in 1.lS 8, 78(67), 2, has the same meaning "ornament,"
whereas its common sense in latel' literaturc is " mark, sign."
From a few Rigyedic passages Hillebrancl.t and Ncisser i'lfer the e:xistence of
an adjective aiíji· "notable, distin/;{uished," accordlllgly wIth the very i'neaning
that'could be expected a priori on ac'count of 3.alij-. This adjecti\"e'occurs also
in'the compound alijisukthá- . "gefl.ecktc Hüften habcnd" VS 24, 4 (:\[ahidhara :
añji, pU1)cJram sakthnor, urvor yasya sa) and probably insvédilliji- "schweissbedeckt"
RS 10 67 6 "ihich reminds us of svedaka1Jiilicita- in Amarusataka see p. 71. A
s·ini.ila~ prim~ry meanillg, viz. "mal'k" must 8.1s·0 be assigned tó the substanth'e
aflji. on account of the following compounds occurring in VS 2.J.-, '4 :
"s Thlls Geldnel' Ved. Studien l, 273., ," Schminke, besonders, die Augensehminke" wit!;
reCe;e'nee to ela!s. añjalla-, cC. Glossar, .. das mit farhiger Salbe allfgetragene Schünheitsm~l :'
(reCe rrinC1 to :\Iahidhara's commentary on VS 29, 59), and in his translation, c.g. 1, 113, 14. SUIlI-
larly Be~gaigne, Etudes. 22, holds c\"erywher.c'" .ongucnt "_ ~o h~ meant._}i011 the eorrcct
etvmologv is given bv SiivaQa, e.g. S, 29. 1 ablm:ya)ya/e, prakasyale nene/y anJI, abharm;Zam, etc.,
añd Max ~Iüller H\"rnns:to the :\laruts (1869), 60, had already vindicated the sense • ornament '
° n account oC t1;e ¿ame Rigvcdic verse (arijy ailkle' hirat;lyáyam) cC. SBE. Vol. 32. 307.
263
 ----------- - ---------------------
THE THREE SANSKRIT RQOTS ANC-/ANJ-
álpliliji- "schwachgefleckt" (PW).
kr~7)áiiji- "schwarz gezeichnet" (l\iahidh.: km:wpu7)ljl'alJ).
mahái'íji- "breit gefleckt."
Accordingly )1ahidhara renders afíjí- as pUtLijram "mark, esp. mark on the forehead"
In the same w.ay róhitiiiiji. " rotscheckig " Vs 29, 59 is rendered l'ohito, I'akto 'i¡ 'ís'
tilako yasya salJ,. 'J ,
:lIahidhara's explanation is doubtless correct and aIl modern scholars transl t
s;cordingly. It enables us t~ account als~ for the remarkable usage of añjí.ai~
"\ S 23, 21 and the correspondmg passages m the related texts which ele al with th
Asvamedha ritual. We there read: e "etwas Anklebendes, hangen Bleibendes." It is true, in Ait. Br. 4, 19, 5 sauryam
sám añjím clirayéi vr~an and in TS 7, 4, 19, 1, Kath. (As\'.) 4, 8 (p. 164, 13):
111ijím údafijim ánv aja.
It cannot be doubteel that aliji- here elenotes the male organ, whereas údafíji_
must refer to sorne part of the feminine sexual organ. The former word further
occurs in, aíi¿ivá- AS 8, 6, 9, which is rendereel " mit elem grossen Penis " (J. J.
l\I~yer, W ZI\..l\I 46, 1939, 132).29 But this being taken for granted, the question
arlses how we are to account for this use from an etymological standpoint. Roth
-ex~laineel it as a special deveIopment from a primary meaning "schlüpfrig, lubricus"
(slippery) anel Bergaigne Études 23 sq. n. 3, who refuses to recognize for al1jí- any
other sense but " ointment " stresses that here also that same meaning is founel
l'e~e~ring to ~S 1031, 10. Neisser, Z. Wb. el. RV.l, 15, suggests that the word
ongmally may ha ve had the sense " gleitenel," whereas )Ieyer, Trilogie eler Vegeta.
tionsmachte III, 242 (with n.l), translates the passages quoteel aboye" setze d
Einsalber (añji) in Bewegung, Manneskl'aftigel''' anel ¡, treib den Einsalber a:
Emporsalber (el.h. am Kitzler) entlang." Though the technical interpretation of
these slippery passages as given by l\ieyel' is no eloubt more correct than the one
founel in the lndian commentaries, the indigenous commentators, on the other
hand, were stil! aware of the proper meaning of these words, whereas al! lVestern
scholars have been led astray by the homonymous root alij- " to anoint." Thus
Mahidhara (on VS 23, 21) explain& : añjim, lingam samctiraya; anakti, vyanakti
pu~tvam it~ añ~ir, l!ngam. !:i.kewis~ the comrnentarj- on TS 7, 4, 19, 1 : ajyate
.stntvam, abhwyaJyate nenety anJtr, yomlJ,; tathii pumstvam abhivyajyate 'neneti medhro
'py añjilJ, sarvonnatas céiséiv a'ñjis cety udaíijil,t. This etymology is doubtless cor~ect
as the word cannot be separated from ai'íji- " mark," the sellse-development b~ing
supported by such parallel cases as linga- "l.mark, sign 2. phallic symbol, the male
·organ," la~atta· "1.mark, sign, attribute 2. the genitals," vyañjana- " mark, sign
(esp. of gender 01' puberty)," lex. dhvaja-, Pali nimittam (see Kern, Toeyoegselen
-op het woordenboek van Childers l, 30) Tamil kuRi " mark, sigIÍ., token; generative
29. "'hitney:" slippery." Otherwise but hardly correct Tarapada Chowdhury, JBORS.
17 (1931), 59 r.
264
F. B.J. KUIPER
80
organ," poRi " mark sign, token; male organ." As regarels the passage ~S 10, 31.
10, quoted by Bergaigne in support of his view, it is unlikely that ajyamiinéi belongs
to aíij- "to anoint ,. (see Oldenberg, Noten). Consequently Ved. 'añjí- is to be
separated from al/ákti ;; anoints " and the lE worels for butter, with which manuals
011 lE comparath-e linguistics usual!y connect it cf. e.g. Walde-Pokorny, Vgl.
Wb. eler idg. Spr. l, 181. But tradition is powerful in rebus etymologicis and 1
haye líttle doubt that for the next decennia dictionaries will cóntinue comparing-
alijí- "mark, ornament" with OPruss. anctan "butter,' etc. 30
As for nyarigá-; a word of the Brahmanical literature,31 the PW translated
")Iarke, Abzeichen, Art, Sorte, nota," which the pw has rightly changed into
pa8l1m allymigast'etam suvaniyasyopiilambhyam iilabheran "They should olfer as
the victim to Sürya (an animal) without blemish and white " (Keith), it is tempting
to assume a worel I/yangá- "stain, spot " from 3. afij. , cf. t'yanga- and nyáriku-.
The commentary, incleeel, explains nyangam, val"l;UllltarelJ.a samp(idita1h cihnam ;
tad ya~ya m/slí so ·llyaligalJ ... VartlfintarelJ.cimisritalJ,. But the proper sense of
/lyaligá- may bc "a smear" (4:.añj-) ancl this is confirmeel by its normal use.
LeaYing aside this particular passage, the word nyangá- has in the BrahmaI).as
a double application. It is firstly used to denote that a text contains a certain
worcl, e.g., Ait. Br. 2, 39, 9jc7tavedasyam purorucaJh samsatijütavedonyangam Keith :
"He recites the Puroruc to Jatavedas, with an allusion to Jii.tavedas" (comm.
jtitavédalJ,8abdarilpUliz nymigam, nitaram angam, cihnmh yasyc7lJ, ... ); 6, 30, 14 sa
hOi:ilcaindmm e~a vi$1111l1yaligmj¡ samsatu, Keith: "He said Let mm recite (a hymn)
¡
to Indra with a reference to Yi~I).u " (comm. vi~r./'ulingopetam): cf. Kaus. Br. 18. 3
slÍryanymiga-(Keith: al! that is connected witli Síirya") 22, 1 'ma;unnyanga-
(" there is a reference to the )Iaruts ,in it "). Alongside with it we find nyakta-
in Taitt. Br. 1, 3, 1, 4: agninyakUilJ, patnisarhyilj'ániim rcalJ, syulJ,; ténligneyálh sán:am
bhavati " Yerse, in denen das Wort Agni ellthalten ist" (Roth, Neisser); comm.
agnipadena 1Iuktii. agninyaktc/lJ,.
Secondly nyaligá- and nyakta- .are used as designatioIls for something whiclt,
in the sacral sphere, is iclentical with a certain deity 01' deified power, such as Aglli
or Soma, and is regarded as, representing it .. It accordingly expresscs much thc
same notion as rüpá-, pratima-, 01.
which words sce Oldenberg, Die Weltanschauung
30. C.f. the ~edic l'roper n~me Vr~adañj~- (see Wa~ker~agel, Altind .. Gramm. n, 1, 64) and
the late "ord añ)ana=medhra m Hara". 44, 12 (Schmldt ~achtr.) Beslde class vyailga- spot
~tain " there must have been a word ailga- '.' spot " because of vyatiga- (AS 5 2'2 6)" spotted'
cover~d wit!:t ~P?ts " ~~üd~rs, Ph,i,lo!ogica Indica 433-4~?; CU\Iundari dilgi " sta'in o~ a cloth " ?)~
~ut I~ke .'!l'!UIIJana-. .. stamle,ss (:\llll)<;l. Up:, S¡~etasv."Up.) this will rather belong to añj-
,anomt· 5mce there 15 no eVldence of·a meamng mark (but cr. mijisaklhá. " having spottcd
hlps" and lIyáliku- § 7j.
~ 3L For thi~ word see also Geldner's note (Gbersetzung, ad 1, 101,4): "Rückstand, SpUI"
Ahnlichkcit, Ersalz"
265
 THE THREE· SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-IANJ-
der Brii.hma1.la-Texte, p. 114 f. Cf. SBM 4, 5; 10, 2 dvayáni vaí phlilgunfini, lóhita.
pu~pdlJi cdrur;uJpul~pdlJi ca, sá, yány .(J,rulJápu~pdlJi phdlgult'fini {ány. abhí~ulJuyiid
e~á vaí sómasya nyangó yád arulJápu~pdlJi phdlgunáni, Eggeling " .•.... for they, th~
brown-flowering Phli.lgunas, are akin to the Soma-pla}lt" (similarly 4, ~, 10, 5);
1, 8, 1, 27 (with reference to the 1q.ii.) yád evá mitrauárulJdbhydm samagacchata,
sá evá maitrdvarulJó nyangó, Egg. "this 'MaitraYa.ru1.la nature' (is hers) because
she met Mitra and Varu1.la "; 1, 6, 3, 17 sá vaí mé 'nnam edhiU, táthéti, tárii dvedh'án.
vabhinat~ tásya yá~ saum1{ám nyaktam ása32 tám candrá1nasam cakd/ álha yád asyii.
suryam lisa ténemáJ.¡. praja udárelJdvidhyat, " ...... He accordihgly cut him in twain ;
and from that (part) of his which was of the Soma nature, he made the moon, etc."
2, 1, 1, 1 yátra yatrdgnér nyaktam tátas tatal;¿ sámbharati" " In whatever (objects)
sorne of (the nature of) Agni is inherent, therewith heequips (the fire)." From
such paraUel passages as Kath. 25, 6 (p. 111,·1 and 4) yad eviMydtra sli~tam yan
nyaktam tad etais sambharati we must infer that nyakta- means " sticking to, hang.
ing on."
Ny-añj- "to anoint" has regularly as its object the·substance with which
the a~ointing is accomplished, e.g., AS 18, 3, 11 várcasd 1n'fim sám anaktv agnír,
medham me v~lJur ny anaktv iMán, "Let Agni anoint me completely with splendour,
let VilglU anoint wisdom into my mouth," Kath. 25; 10 (p. 117, 1. 17-18)
eva loka úrjam nyanak.i and praj.asv evorjam nyanak.i, 7, 7 and 8 (pp. 69, 11 and
70, 13), sdhasrim eva pu~tirh nyankte "heftet tausendfaches Gedeihen an° sich "
(Neisser). A noun nyangá- which corresponds to this employment of the verbal
forms occurs Ín Taitt. Br. 3, 7, 6, 20.
trí~ phalikriyamdlJdndm / yó nyangó avasí~yate /
rá~asdm bhdgadhéyam I EJpas tát právahatdd itál;¿,
where the meaning "etwas Anklebendes, hangen Bleibendes" is quite fitting
(comm.: ta1J4uldndm sambandhi nyango, nikr#drhsal;¿ kalJddirúpo, yal;¿ svalpo
'va8i~yate, etc.). It is not quite clear, howeyér, how a verb which is nórmally
combined with such objects as rnádhu, medhá, váreas- u/jo, pu~tí-, has come to be
used in sÓ1na8ya nyaktam, etc., although it must of course be due to the belief that
the essence of something 'can be transferred on somcthing else by anointing (see
§ 15).
An attempt to define the meaning of Ved. aktú- inyolyes sorne specific difficult.
ies. For a more detailed information reference mar be made to N'eisser, Probe
eines" Altindischen Wurzelworterbuches (Jahresber. d. Schlesischen Gesellschaft
für yater1. Cultur 1902), p. 3, Zum Worterb. d. RV, 1, p. 5 ff,. p. 204; Renou,
Monographies sanserites' n, 6 (" rayonnement "). In most of the passages (if we
exclude those containing aktú- " night," which is a totally different word) we find
it used in the sense " light, ray" (pw: "Licht, Glanz "), e.g., 7, 79, 2 (u~ásaM
32. Kii.Qva reo. yát saumyó nyatigá ása.
Vak.-6
266
82 F. B. J. KUIPER
vyañjate divó ánte~u aktun (ef. 1, 92, 1 bhdn4m añjate" etc.) 8, 92 (81), 31 sUro
aktú~u, 1, 50, 7 áhd mímdno aktúbhilJ, (said of Sürya: "die Tageszeiten messend
lllit dem Licht," Gdn.). This translation of aktú- is also supportedbyGoth. úhtwo
" dawn, " whieh represents IE*vk-tw-en-, a deriva tive from the stem*Vk-tu- ( = aktú-).
JIence it is reasonable to eonneet aktú- with 3.añc-jañj- "to manifest, etc.".
Against Geldner, Glossar, and Neisser, 1, 633 (with note 1), who render " Schminke "
(paint), the same objections must be raised as made abo ve with regard to añjí-.
In three passages, however, we find aktú- eonneeted with añj- "to an()int,"
e.g., 3, 17, 1 sám áktúbhir ajyate "(Agni) wird mit Salben gesalbt" (Geldner,
N'dsser), and particularly 9, 50, 5 (of Soma) góbhir añjdnó aktúbhih. 34 On aceount
oí these passages Roth assumed a primary meaning " ointment." Seeing that in
13 other passages any indication for sueh an etymologieal connexion with añj-
"to anoint " is wanting, 1 think it unjustified to attaeh too mueh value to these
seeming counter-instances though Neisser, 011. the eontrary, holds them to be of
decisive importance. It eannot be denied, however, that these passages in aU
likelihood eontain the same word and have to be interpreted in aeeordance with
the other ones. They will be diseussed below (§15). Oldenberg's eontrarious
view (SBE 46, 276 and Noten on 1, 94, 5) is no longer valid, once that the tradi-
tional etymology has been abandoned. As to aktú- "night," Latin noctü, etc.,
although they may of eourse be eonneeted with aktú- "light," 1 leave them aside
as 1 am unable to believe in sueh a relationship.
There remain sorne obseure passages, esp. 2, 30, 1 aktúr apám and 6, 65, 1
tá?nasas cid aktUn, in view of which it will be prudent not to deny categorically the
existenee of a third word aktú- from 4. añj- "to anoint." The only objeet of the
foregoing rerrurks is to estaJlish that aktú- "light " is a derivative from 3. añc-/
añj_.35
§13. 3.añj-: Verbal forms in Vedie.
In spite of the erroneous identifieation with añj- "to anoint " it eould not
completely be ignored that 3.añj- is used in a widely different sense. Thus Geldner,
Glossar, takes it as meaning " markieren, hervorheben, in die Erseheinung treten
las sen " in the hymn to Kii.la, AS. 19, 53, 2 :
sá imEt víSvd bhúvandny añján
kalálJ, sá iyate prathmnó nú devál;¿:
33. Similarly Thieme in his recent publication "Untersuchungen zur Wortkunde und
AusIegung des Rigveda" (Halle 194.9), p. 18.
34: Grassmann, 'Vb .• quotes aIso 7, 79, 2, which however must be an error. His transIation
oC thls passage has "Glanz."
% 35. For añjQ1ul, which is sometimes transIated " cIearIy" (e.l!. Senart's transIation oC Brh
n r • up. 4, 4, 15) 1 refer to Neisser 1, 131. - .
267
 1'HE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-/AN1-
The rnanuscripts, it is true, read añját, anyat and the like, but since the Paippaliida
recension has a'lijarh and the cornrnentary añjan, we rnay safely ínfer that the tr~e
reading is añjan, which has also been adopted by LeRoy Carr Barret, JAOS. 46.
38, in his restora ion of the Paippalada texto As to the translation of this passage,
only Whitney's need be taken into account, all the previous renderings being based
upon an unacceptable text-ernendation. Whitney ventures to read bhúvana
nyañján "including (?) all those beings." Geldner's interpretation iS,obviously
prcferablc, hence " Er bríngt die Dinge alle zur Erscheinung " (H. von Glasenapp.
Die Literaturen Indiens 61).
In VS. 8, 30
purudasmó vÍ$urüpa índur
antár mahimánam iinañja dhtraQ"
we have probably to do with the sarne rneaning. Such is at least Mahidhara's
view who observes in his comrnentary: garbhadaivatyarh yajuQ" indurupe1,!a garbhah
stuyate; induQ" kledanarupaQ, somasadrso garbho, rnahimiinarh, mahattvam iinañjd,
vyaktikarotu; añjater, vyaktikara'/;tiirthasya ... antar, udare sthitaJ:¿. Hence 'Wester.
gaard, Radiccs 108: "manifestare." Roth and Neisser translate "in sich
aufnehrncn," but the circurnstance of an active forrn having been used here pre.
vents us frorn taking it in the sense of nya'likte " atta ches to oneself" (see p~ 81).
The sarne rneaning is found in :¡;tS 1, 124, 8 :
vyucchánti rasmÚJhiQ, sUryasyii
'ñjy a'likte samanagá iva vráQ,.
In nearly all translations this is rendered "adorns herself" (schrnückt sich) and
the like. 36 Only Geldner's version has been influenced by thc presurned identity
of a'likte with 4.añj. "to anoint," cf. Glossar: "durch Salbe auftragen, ·überh.
anlegen" and his translation: ," legt siesich Schminke auf." It has been shown.
however, that the grarnrnarians assign to anakti also the sense of vy-anakti "to
show, rnanifest etc." and thus it is used in Bhattikiiyya 9, 49 mii niiñji rilk~asir
milyilQ, (cornrn. mil niiñjiQ" mil na vyaktikuru, api tu vyaktikurv ity arthaQ,). In the
sarne way SayaI).a intcrprets a'likte as anakti, prakilsayati. It can hardly be doubted
that thisis the true rneaning: añjí is the object of the rniddle present añkte
Gk. epideíknutai) " she shows off her ornarnents." Once again, we, are i~d back
to the indigenous interpretation.
86. Kaegi: u putzt sich mit der Sonne StrahI'en heraus," Grassmaim: "schmückt sich'mit
Schmuck," Gaedicke, Der Accusativ im Veda 238: ulegt sich Schmuck an (schmückt sich
Schmuck)," Ludwig: u ziert sie mit Schmuck an die Scharen" (but see the alternative in his
cornmentary, vol. VI, p. 14), Bechtel, Gott. Nachr. 1894, 396 u sie schmückt sich," ftnalIy Neisser,
Z. Wb. d. RV. 1, 14. But E. Brandes, Ushas og Ushashymneme (1879) 105"sq., has: u gryende
med Solens Straaler salver hun sig med Salve," rejecting Kaegi's and Ludwig's translations.
Similarly Delbrück, Altind. Syntax 168 (U salbt sich Salbe an, schmückt sich mit Schmuck n)
and Oldenberg, Gott. Nachr. 1918,63 (U sie salbt sich mit Salben ").
268
F. B. J; KUIPER
Likewise in 8, 29, 1 (of Soina)
babhrúr éko ví~u1;taQ, súnáro yrÍ,vii
'ñjy a'likte hira1;tyáyam,
"shows off his ornarnents." Kaegi and Grassrnann: "verziert mit goldnern
Schmucke sich," sirnilarly Ludwig and Hillebrandt; more correctly SayaI).a
abhívyañjayati. The sarne expression añjy a'likte (which was fully discussed by
Bechtel, GOtt. Nachr. 1894, p. 397-402, though with unacceptable conclusions)
recurs in 7, 57, 3 samiinám añjy añjate subhé kám " they show off the sarne orna·
ments "37 and 4, 58,' 9 kany'á íva vahatúm étavá u añjy añjanti abhí cakasimí. 3B
That a'likte actually is identical with class. Skt. vya'ñjayati is moreover
clearly shown by such passages as 1, 64, 4
citraír añjíbhir vápu~e vy añjate
vák~assu rukm'á,;¡ ádhí yetíl'e subhé,
where even Geldner translates "rnit bunten Zieraten schmücken sie sich zur Pracht,"
thereby correcting his previous staternent in the Glossar. Likewise Gr., L., Hillebr.
and Renou. See further p. 86ff.
Hence one should expect that in 1, 92, 1
et'á u ty'á u~ásaQ, ketúm akrata
púrve árdhe rájaso bhiinúm añjate
the purport is fully clear. The object bhiinúm is also regularly found connected
with Brí-, as in stanza 2 rúsantam bhiinúm áru?ir asisrayuQ, and in stanza 5 citrárh
divó duhitá bhiinúm asret. So we may unhesitatingly translate "they show
their lights" (Gk. epideíknuntai tó sélas).39 Oldenberg, however, in a note
on 1, 92, 5, assurnes that the Ul?as anoint their lights and Geldner translates
"legen sich Licht wie Salbe auf." ,Likewise Hillebrandt, Chrestorn.: "sich
schminken mit." The fact that it is especially these erninent Vedic scholars that
clLtg to this presurned literal' translation, is syrnptomatic j those who are rnost
intirnately conversant with the peculiarities of the Vedic style, are most easily
37. Sii.yal,la ábhara(lam. svakiyávayave$u abhivyaklikurvanti, Westergaard, Rad. 108 "mani·
festare," Max ;\Iüller, SBE. 32, 379 and Macdonell "they brighten themselves with the same
brightness." Likewise Kaegi: "und tragen alle gleichen Staat zur Ausfahrt," Delbrück, Altind.
Synt. 168: "sic kleiden sich in gleichen Schmuck," cr. Ludwig. Only Grassmann translates
"mit gleichem Glanze salben sie zur Pracht sich." This passage and 8, 29,1 render it improbable
that añjy should anywhere stand for añji (Instr. fem.) as Lanman, Noun. Inftection in the Veda
p. 377, Wackernagel- Debrunner, Altind. Gr. lII, 146, hold possible. Note the different
syntactical construction with vy-añj- in 1, 69, 4.
, 38."" Sii.yal,la dbhara(lam tejo vá vyañjayantya~, Renou, Hymnes et Prieres: .. qui s;oment
dornements," Neisser" mit Farbe geschmückt," Gdn. "die Salbe auftegen" Oldenberg Gott.
,Nachr. 1918,65:" die" sich p u t z e n . " " "
39. Similarly Ludwig" breiten sie Glanz aus " Neisser 1 13' offenbaren ihr Licht " Sii.vana
prakasam vyaklikurvanti .. "But the erroneous co~nexion with 4. añj-'" to anoint" i; fouñd
early. as Yáska, who undefstood it to mean samañjate bhiinuná.
as
,
269
 THE THREE 9ANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-fANJ- 86 F. B. J. KUIPER

inclined to connect by way of a metaphorical interpretation even such words as ktúbhir vyaktam "distinguished by days, waters and rays," but in the former
have a totally different origino It is, therefore, no mere coincidence that.l, 86 at za it is not so much a natural and permanent quality of Agni's that is referred
13 yád añjíbhir viighádbhirvihváydmahe is translated by Geldner "mit salbungs: san
t as rather a special cult acto On aecount of 3, 11, 1 sam . te "he 1·s
, ak tu'bh'Ir aJya
vollen Priestern " and by Oldenberg, SBE 46, 82, "with our worshippers and with a~ointed with rays " (see §15) and 1, 188, 11 (agnír) gáyatrér.z.a sám ajyate, we must
ointments," though añjí' probably means " distinguished " here and at any l'ate i8 obviously take it in thesense "anointed.' See p; 90 and Oldenberg, ZD~IG 55,
unrelated to 4.añj- " to anoint." In such cases the errors whieh a strictly philo. 294.
logical interpret.ation is apt to make because its etymologies are founded upon too Similar renderings have also been given of 6, 4 6
narrowa basis may only be corrected by utilizing the results of linguistic research
(See Oldenberg, Vedaforsehung 37 ff., and Neisser, Zum Worterbueh des RV., J, citró nayat pári támdrhsy akt~1J.
Introd. p. XI f).IIO socí~¡j pátmann ausijó ná diyan,

G " mit" Glanz geschmückt," L. "farbig selber geschmückt." Since the

As to the past participle aktá- " marked," fuUy clear instances 6f it are want: e.g. onl
r. ' al act of magically strengthening Agni is an indispensa ble cond't' f h'
1 IOn 01' 1S
ing. But in 1, 62, 8, where the night is said to be km.lébhir aktá (vápul'bhir), and cerem h b . t d"
1 tary act the poet probably meant" now that (or, since) he as een anom.e .
U~as l'úSadbhir, we have i~ all likelihood to interpret " marked, charaeterized by
darle (colours)." Cf. kr§r.zaiiji- "with darle spots," YS 24, 4 and 7, 77, 3 u§iiadarSi
~:ewise Oldenberg, ZD.MG. 55, 292: "Del' Lichte, gesalbte führe (uns) um die
Finsternisse herum."
ra8míbhir vyaktd. Neisser translated "mit schwarzem verputzt" (which Was
aecepted by Sieg, GGA 1925,130), connecting it,like Geldner, with añj. "to anoint"¡ § 14. 3.aiíj-: the compound vy-añj- in Vedic-
but aktá. may eorrespond to class. SkI'. añcita.
As regards the compounds of 3.añj-, it s.eems advis~ble to start .from the le~s.t
The same partieiple possibly occurs in 10,177,1 (of the Sun.bird) blematical one viz. vy-añj-. As in classICal Sansknt, the meanmg of vy-anJ-
patarhgám aktám ásurasya mdyáyd p
in ris,o
Vedie , for one particular passage, everywh ere " t o sh.0W'.'
except " It·s 1 com -

hrd'á pa8yanti mánasd vipascítab-

Gr. "der Vogel, del' geschmückt ist durch des Gottes Kunst," (similarly von
c~~: "
b' d both with the accusative and with the instrumental, denotmg m the former
to show something which belongs to oneself~'
(middle voiee), in the latter
"to manifest oneself by means of (or, with) "(reflex1vely). Cf. e.g., 7, 79, 2
Bradke, Dyaus Asura 56), L. "Den mit eines Asura Übernatürlicher Kraft verherr_ vy a/1jale divó ánte§v aktun
lichten Vogel." Perhaps aktám means "distinguished by"41 but in view of the viSo ná yuktá u§áso yatante
various ways in wruch añj- "to anoint " is used (see § 15), it is also possible to
refer it to that root. "they show off their raY8," SayalJ.a tejdrhsi ... vyaktikurvanti (Cf. Neisser 1.13).43
Hence the passage 8, 7, 25
Most of the passages, at any rate, that are held to contain aktá- "adorned,"
must rather be referred to 4.añj.. In 6, 5, 6 (to Agni) áíprah sir~án hirar,tyáyilJ,
mbhrá vy añjata hiyé
yác chasyáse dyúbhil' aktó vácobhis
táj ju~asva jaritál' ghó~i mánma, may be translated "they show off the bright gold crests 01\ their heads, for
glory "43 Say.: vyañjayanti vyaktikuroanti, dharayantity arthab-.
Gr. translates "wenn líchtgeschmückter, man dieh preist rnit Sprüchen," L.
" rnit Strahlen geschmückt." It is tempting to compare 10, 19, 9 áhobhir adbhír Likewise 1, 81, 1
jú~tatamd.so nitamd.s?añjíb~ir.
40. As my sole purport is to prove the existence oC 3.añj- ." to show, manifest," 1 do not vy anajre ké cid U81'a iva sttbh*
enter into a discussion oí passages, the interpretation oC which is. too uncertain to allow oC a
relatively valid conelu~ion (but ef. 10, 85, 28 and Oldenberg's note}. Ineidentally, however, atten.
ce
~. d~ea~tr~hle~~alen sie"nus."
CId Hen • L'Agnistoma 443: .. sur les horizons du eiel elles se colorent de leurs
ncc!lsat.~vt; ~ed Be~htel, GO~i N~ehrl/~D:',
tion may drawn to 8, 20, 8 g6bhir vá7)6 ajyate s6bhari7)dm which perhaps may mean" is distinguish- '>
ed," since the other passages, where gobhir is connected with 4.añj-, show a different eharacter. far¿;:.> L. The akltm
Grassmann and Oldenberg, understand "is rewarded." Ambiguous is 8, 51, 9 túbhyet 86 aiya~ 306 a~d 308, to the pretended grammatical rendermg sle schmückcn Ihrc Strn en w IC 18
Tayí~ (H gesalbt "=gesehmückt," Thieme, Der Fremdling im Rigveda 71). evidentIy wrong. ..
41. . ViSva Bandhu S.iistri. A complete Etymol\)gkal Dictionary of the Vedic Lallgua8~ 43. Macdonell" For glory, bright, they deck th~mseh'es," Gr. ~~tzten aul das Haupt
(Bórhbay 1929), p. 14 renders vyakla~, abhi'/!yakla~, prakala~. . ." , .. Qich" (similarl)'. Hj. Frisk, Monde Oro 30, 80) L. Bchmücken alch.

270 271

THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-fANJ-
means " ornamentis se ostentant " (German " sie tun sich hervor mit ihren Ziera.
ten.")U Say.: nabhasi vyakta drsyante.
For the past participle vyakta-, which is of frequent occurrence, Geldner
Glossar, gives the following meanings : "markant, in die Augen fallend, handgreif:
lich, deutlich." Thus, 10, 127, 7 (úpa mal kr~1;!ám vyaktam asthita, Hillebr. "an
mich trat das schwarze wahrnehmbar heran,"45 Sayo spa#ariipam; and probably
AS 20, 34, 16 jaló vyaktal;1. pitrór upásthe (said of Indra), which must mean" mani- .
fest, visible for every one " ·(cf. I,tS. 4, lB, 5 áthód astMt svayám átkarh vásana á
ródasi apmaj j'áyamanafJ,).
Like vyankte, the participle vyakta- is occasionally combined with an instru"
mental; compare the same construction with class. Skt. añcita- "distinguished
by." It is thus found in 10,14,9 (A3 lB, 1, 55)
áhobhir adbhír aktúbhir vyaktarh
yamó dadaty avas'á.z.am asmai
"Yama bestows on him this place to rest in, a place by waters, days and nights
distinguished" ()Ia.cdonell) 46. Sayo vyaktam, samgatarh suddhanimittail;1. lealoda_
kii.dibhil;1. sodhitam. ity arthal;1..
With añcita- it has also in common the sense-development to "adorned,"
which mast be assumed on account of B, 56, 4 (Val. B) tátro ápi pr'áf,!.iyata pütá-
kratayi vyaletd " thither was also led Pútakratu's consort decked with her orna-
ments" (see Oldenberg's note)47 and 7, 56, 1 ká irh vyaleta náral;1. sáni!a "who are
these decked out (arrayed) men?" (Say. kantiyutiilJ. (8) A closely related meaning,
vil!. "beautiful " must probably be acknowledged in 10, B6, 5 (kapír) vyakta vy
adtüdu~at " the ape has spoilt the beautiful things." B.lt in 9, 71, 7 vyakto aru~ó
divál;1. kavír the precise meaning is uncertain (Gr. "geschmückt," L. "aus-
gezeichnet ").
We may conclude this survey by pointing out the remarkable use ·in 10, B5,
21 any~m iccha pitr~ád.am vyaktam "look for another maiden who still lives in her
father's house .. " .. ," where t'yakta evidently means "marked as marriageable,"
referring, like the noun vyañjana- in the later language, to the hair on the privy
parts; accordingly vyakta is here synonymous with romas~ (1, 126, 7; 8, 91, 6,
44. Gr." haben sich herausgeputzt," L ... haben mit Schmuck sich geziert," Gdn ... haben
Bich ... mit Zieraten herausgeputzt."
45. Líkewise· Macdonell .. hAs, palpable, come nigh to me," Geldner, Ved. Stud. 2,281 (in
accordance with Sii.yaJ).a) .. greifbar." Otherwise Kaegi and Renoll .. (les tén~bres et) le noir
décor dont elles se parent."
46. L." eine mit ..... verherrlichte Einkehr," Hillebr... eine durch Tage ... ". ausgezeichnete
Ruhestat.te," Whitney (and Lanman, Skt.. Reader 378) .. adorned with days ...... ," Oldenberg
.. ~ der Wasser, del' Tage und Niichte Schmuck prangend " (Re!. des Veda 575)-
4.7. But cC. Renou, Etudes gramm. sanscrite. 135.
48. 1I1ax Mül1er: .. these resplendent men"; Gr. lO die schonen Manner," L •. " die glii.n-
zenden MlLnner." .
272
F. B. ¡'. KUIPER
88
andef.l\1eyer Trilogie derVegetationsmachte III, 179 f.). Hillebrandt, ZDMG. 40,
711 renders " bride " (cf. Whitney ad AS. 14.2.33).
From the various translations quoted aboye it may be inferred that, generáHy
spea.king, authorities agree in rendering vy-añj- by "adorn " and similar expres-
sions.· Nevertheless a rather circumstantial examination of the details was in-
dispensable as this agreement is based on an unsound foundation, the general view
being that the meaning "·adorn "is due to a sense-development out of " anoint.':
Hence, in a recent translation by a distinguished Vedic scholar, the words u~a
adarsi raSmíb~ir vyakta (7, 77, 3), could erroneously be rendered "L'.,\urore s'est
montrée toute ointe de rayons." The foregoing discussion has shown, it is hoped,
thliot in Veruc as W'eH as in classical Sanskrit, vy-añj- is never used in that sense-
with a single exception that proves the rule.
In J¡tS 9, B6, 43 (AS 18, 3, lB)
añjáie vy añjate sám añjate
kráturh rihanti mádhuniibhy añjate,
vy-añj- is used in a context which shows it to be m¡:ant as a compound of añj- " to
anoint." It is useless to try and define its precise meaning here. With a view to
the magical effect which the mere sound of his words is expected to provoke on the
cult-act, the poet heaps up a series of various expressions with añj. which need not,
therefore, have been actually in· use .. As for vy-a·ñj-, we are entitled to deny
this peremptorily. The supposed magical power of the sacral poetry alone is to be
held responsible for this hapax legomenon. 49
§ 15. The compound sam-añj- in Vedic.
Although the compound sam-añj- too is often rendered " adorn," its different
character already appears from its being regularly connected with ghrténa, mádhva,
mádhuna, dhenúbhilJ, etc. This do es not preclude, of course, the theoretical possi.
bility that another verb sam-añj- (from 8.añj-) existed side by side with it. The
following examination will show, I think, that such is not the case, the supposed
sense " adorn " being merely due to a misinterpretation of the text ..~o
It may first be stated that the noun samañjana- (in samañjanavánt-) means
" anointing." In AS 7, 36, 1 a~yau nau mádhusarhkase, ánikarh nau samáñjanam,
the parallelism of the padas suggests an adjective with the sense "anointed ".51
4.9. In 8, 78 (67), 2 : fj no bhara vyáñjanaln gám áSvam abhyáñjanam, though the combination
ol the two compounds is no doubt intentional, we may translate: .. bring us ornaments, cattle,
horses and ointment." This case thereCore, is not identical with that discussed aboye. As Cor
Dyañjana- "consonant," see Renou, J. As. 1941-42, p. 153 (properly" chose qui suggere, signe
visible").
, 50. The same holds good, oC cciurse, for the simple verb añj- in such paSSB¡;(eS as 9, 45, 3
tvam... g6bhir arijmo máddya kám, which has been translated .. we adorn thee to enjoyrnent"
(Hopkins, Transations Am. Philol. Association 37, 1906, 106).
q{ R~th: '~~um Schmuck dienend, schrnuck." Grill and Whitney take it as A substantive.
273
 THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-j ANJ-
89
The statement ofthe Kausika Sütra as to the ritualistie use made of this stanza
should be noted in this eonnexion.
The verb sam-añj-, too, means everywhere "to anoint." For the interpreta_
tion of the relevant passages, however, it is essential that the ritualistie practiees
which are believed to endue, through the act of anointing, a person or a thingwith
" magical " power should be kept in mind. 52 The following passa.ges may illustrate,
this belief. Just as a god is said magiea11y to " refresh " the roads with madhu
and ghee, e.g. As 5, 27, 2 deválJ, pathó anakti mádhva ghrténa,53 so the royal power is
" anointed," that is, reinforced and filled with supernatural power by means of
ghee, e.g., AS 18, 1, 8 sárh te r~trám anaktu páyasa ghrténa (ef. Taitt. Br. 2, 5, 2, 2,
vi no r~tram unattu payasa svena). Another term denoting the " powerful sub-
stance " is várcalJ, " brightness," see the excellent diseussion of .the words mádhu,
várcaQ. etc. by Kasten Ronnow, Trita Aptya, 1, 116, 120. Henee it is llot surprising
that persons are said to be anointed with "brightness," e.g., AS 18, 8, 10
várcasa m.ám pitáralJ, s011ly'ásO
áñjantu devE: mádhunii ghrténa
and 8, 22, 2
dev'áso vísvádhiiyasas
té miiñjantu várcasa.
Again, the transition from "powerful essence" to its effects or nÍanifestations,
viz. prosperity and glory-which are also regarded as substances-is but one
step. Hence we find also AS 19, 81, 18 pu~tír así pu~tya ma sám añdhí, 10; 3, 17-25'
téjasa ma sám uk~atu yásasa sám anaktu ma (cf. e.g. TS 6, 3, 4, 2-3) and 18, 3, 11
várcasa m.ám sám anaktv agnír
medhám me v~tlur ny anaktv asán.
After these preliminary remarks we shall examine more closely the use of
sam-anJ-. Roth assigned a number of various meanings to it, viz., 1) " besalbenY '
2) ,"zubereiten, ausrüsten " 3) " ehren " 4) " zusarnmenfügen, verbinden" 5) Hmit·
sich'verbinden, verschlingen, verzehren." However, the first meaning suffices to
account for 0.11 the passages in which the verb occurs.
Let us start from 1¡tS 3, 17, 1
samidhyámanalJ, pratham'ánu dhárma
sám aktúbhir ajyate viávávdral¡,
where the sole difficulty lies in the noun aktú-. The verb sam-aiíj- ,must at any
rate refer to the pouring of ghee intothe fire, which was regarded as a form of
52. Compare also Crawley. in Hastings' ERE 1, 550r. and 554C. (s. v. "Anointlng '!,) 6nd
l\Iaodonell, ibid.VIII, 818 (s.v. "lI1agic"). ' apparently deriving sámakta from añc- (see § 3). Thc Angirascs, howcvcr, have
58. See Kasien Ronnow, Trita 'Xptya 116, on HS 4, 45; 8. Unacceptable is NeisseI"s inter:
pretationu'die Wege sc~m¡eren ':'(Z.,Wb•. d. ·RV·. 1, 14 n.l).
274
00 F. B. J. KUIPER
a.nointing; cf., e.g., lO, 52, 8 samáñjanti: 6 aúk~an ghrtaír. In our verse, where
Agni is given the epithet ghrtánirlJ-ij- "clothed in ghee," it might perhaps seem
tem¡;.ting, therefore, to render aktú- as "ointment" (Gdn. "er wird mit Salbe
gesalbt "). In a11 passages, however, where the meaning of aktú- can be ascertained
it denotes .. light, ray." In like manner sám aktúbhir ajyate may apply to the
bright flame caused by the ghee, the effect being mentioned instead of its cause
(more insta!lces of which will be quoted below). Cf. the words vár~i~tham rátnam
akrta svadhajhir, occurring in the same group of hymns (3,26,8), which seem equa11y
to refer to the flame (" seinen schonsten Schmuck hat er durch die svadha-Spenden
geschaffen," Ronnow, op. cit., p. 134). In the same sense we find also the simple
verb añj-, as in 6, 5, 6 yác chasyáse dyúbhir aktó vácobhilJ, where (in spite of Grass-
ma.nn: "wenn, lichtgeschmückter, man dich preist mit Sprüchen "), Agni is
said to be "anointed with light and words," fresh power being transmitted to him
by means of ghee and sacred formulre; and in 9, 50, 5 góbhir añjiinó aktúbhilJ"
where Soma is referred to as " anointed with milk and brightness " (Gr. " gesa.lbt
mit lIilch und he11em Glanz)." It should be noted that in the religious sphere
" light " is identical with the vital essence and, as such, is regarded as a powerful
substance (cí. aboye the passages with várcas,- and the identity of light and life
in the cosmogonical myths).
Hence it may be understood that, just as in the Atharva-Samhita. the gods are
implored to bestow light (várcalJ,) on the men through anointing, so aktúbhil¡ sam-
añj- is used not only with regard to Agni but also to the sacral hymns which fortify
the gods with their potency. Cf. J;tS 6, 69, 3 (in a hymn to Indra and Vi~l}.u):
índravi¡flJ-ü madapati madaniim
á sómam yiitam drávilJ-o dádhdna
sám vam añjantv'aktúbhir matinám
sám stómiisalJ, sasyámana$a ukthaílJ,
.. our praises may a.noint you with the light (strengthening force) 'of our hymnl
(mati)." Similarly Sa.yal}.a: tejobhiQ. samardhayantu. Neisser's translation "soIs
mit dem Putz der Lieder euch putzen .. fails to do justice to the meaning of
both the noun and the verbo The notion expressed by sám añjantv aktúbhir is
accordingly different from that of aktúbhir vyaktam, lO, 14, 9.
Geldner, Glossar, renders " zieren, a.uszeichnen " in lO, 62, 1
yé yajñéna dák¡ti1Jaya sámakta
índrasya sakhyám amrtatvám iinasá
tébhyo bhadrám a1igiraso vo astu.
Similarly Gr. " mit Opfer und mit Opferkuchen verschn," L. " mittels opfcrs mit
der dak~iQ.a. geziert," Roth "zubereiten, a.usrüsten." . Sayal.\a rcndcrs samgata/,l.,
attained immorblity (or rather, ·life) by means of the .. supernatural ". power
275

THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-/ANJ-
which they had acquired through their sacrifices and gifts. Instead of this power
itself, which the Angirases were " anointed " with, the ritualistic practices which
have engendered it are mentioned which, for a les s analytical way of thlnking,
made little difference. Thus 1 understand also AS 7, 74, 4 vraténa tvárh vratapate
sámakto, as the Lord of vows, concentrating in his persl n, and embodying, the
power of all vratas, may be saíd to be invested (" anointed ") with it (Whitney
" adorned ").
The passages for which Roth, PW 1, 78, assumed the sen.se "ehren " (to hon_
our) are to be interpreted in the same way. Taitt. Br. 3, 1, 2, 10 mádhvii sámprkta
yáju~il sámaktau (asvínau) means "anointed with the potency of the sacrificial
formula." In 3, 1, 1, 10
tán nalj, prajám virávatirh sanotu
góbhir no ásvailj, sám anaktu yajñám
the nak~atra is implored to bestow on the sacrificer offspring, cattle and horses.
As the sacrificer hopes to acquire through the sacrifice the yital force, which mani.
fests itself in wealth of cattle and horses, he prays that this force may be giyen to
the sacrifice, in other woids that the sacrifice may be effective (comm. samrddharh
karotu). In the same line of thought the nak~atras themselves, which haye the
power to endow this potency, may be said to be " anointed " with its manifesta_
tions, cf. 3, 1, 2, 2 góbhir nák~atrarh paSúbhil), sámaktam (comm. sarhbaddham)'
In the other passages quoted by Roth sam.añj- has devfm as its object and means
"to strengthen the gods by means of the sacrifice," cf. YS 20, 44 (of Tyá~tar)
vi:~ii yájan v'úattam bhuriretii / múrdhán yajñásya sám anaktu dev[m (l\:[ahidhara
rightly ren~ers bhojayatu ... a11;aktír atra bhojanilrthal),) and ~ 2, 3, 7 (of the daívyil
hótaril) devan yájantilv rtuth'á sám añjato. Gr. translates "tranken," (to make
drink), which is far more correct than" vereinen" (unite) , Gdn. Thís use of
sam-añj- approaches that of vardhayati.
In I,tS 3, 38, 3 (to the Adityas)
ní ~im íd átra gúhyii dádhiinii-
utá k~atráya ródasi sám añjan,
Gr., L. and Gdn. translate in much the same way "adorn" ("sie schmückten beide
Welten zur Herrschaft aus" ; Roth:" zubereiten, ausrüsten" =to equip). But
in 10, 80, 1 the same expression recurs with reference to Agni, viz. agni ródasi ví
carat samañján (PW V, 958 " verschonern," = to embellish ; Gdn. Glossar: "beloh-
nen, beschenken" = to reward) and this passage, again, beco mes clear by comparo
ing AS 18, 3, 11 várcasii márh sám anaktv agnír. Just as Agni is said to fortify wlth
the potency of brightness, 80 the A.dityas bestow the blessing light of Aditi54 on
heaven and earth through the act of anointing. S¡¡'ya~a's interpretaÚono~adibhi~
Prthivirh devais ca ,divarh sarhgaúim akiir~uh, although transposing thc archaic
54. el. as '1',82.10 avadhrámjyótir ádite~, and fo; 36;3 ;4,25,3 j 1,185,3.
276
- ----------------
F. B. f. ,KUIPER
92
notíons into a' more modern way of thinking and though based upon: an incor~ect
etymology (see aboye §3), still rendas fairly well the poet's thoughts. The correct-
nes s of this interpretation is. borne out by 10, 76 1 (to the pressing.stones)
á va rñjasa úrjám vyiJ,§ti§v
índram mal'úto ródasi anaktana.
The stones, which are elsewhere said to be supivásalJ, "very fat" (10, 94, 11),
are here-exhorted to anoint Imlra, the )Iaruts and heaven and earth so as to aug.
~~nt their forces. ,The bdng anointed wíth Soma has the same effects as the
drinkingof it. - Caland-Henry, L'.tgni~toma 27'1, rightly translate "Je veux vous
choyer au Jever des vigueurs nourricieres : oignez Indra, les Maruts, le ciel et la
terre " (SayaI}.a: vyañjayata). .-\.s may be inferred from the last instances, sam-
añj. may also be used without a noun in the instr. case, the mere verb sufficing to
denote the fortifying with ' mana.' -- Thus also 10, 85, 43 't1 nalJ, prajám janayatu
prq,j'ápatilJ, í iijarasáya sám anaktv aryamfz "May Prajapati -generate offspring for
us, may 4ryaman anoint thee so that thou mayest be protected from growing old."55
In the.samewaywe may account for 9, 34, 4 sárh rüpaír ajyate hárilJ, where the
verb is taken to mean" is adorned."56 But Oldenberg, Die Weltanschauung der
Bráhma¡;¡.a.Texte, p. 103, f. has shown that rúpá- do es not denote the body alone
but is a term for the form (Gestalt) which is animated by mysterious life. To it,
like to náma, the vital essence is believed to be attached. Hence rúpá. is some-
times said to be anointed with force, as in 1, 188, 9 tvá~tii rúpár;tí hí prabhúlj, /
paSUn visviin samilnajé, which 1 understand to mean " Tva~tF, verily, who has the
power thereto, has endowed all forms, all cattle with vital essence.'57 Now, in 9,
84.,4, Soma is in a somewhat different mode of expressioil, said to be anointed with
these forms themselves: for the ritualistic mean:íng which rúpá. may have here, see
Hillebrandt, Vedische )[ythologie, 2nd ed. 1, 454 who also refers to ii-siñc. 8, 61
(72) 13.
The same expression is even used with regard to daysan~ nights which, like
the year, are held to exercise their infiuence upon human life:- . Hence it is said in
AS 14, 2, 20 ahoriitrtwhyiirh sám anaktu aryamtJ ,¿ may Aryaman anoint (us) with
days and nights." The fact that thisstanza is a variant of I,tS -10, 85, 43 do es not
of 'Conrse, involve that it is therefore senseless.
-In ,a double sense the verb seems to be used in 1, 64, 1
55; For iijarasÍiya see Thieme, Der Fremdling im Rigveda l 125 n. ,2. but sam·añj- is not "mit
der ~Isalbung schmücken." Similarly 47 sám añjantu víSve deva~ stJm apo hfdayani nau (wrongly
Geldner i Übers., note ad 2.3.2: "\'ereinen," to unite).
-56. Gr." :\Iit Schonheit wird das Ross geschmückt," L. " mit Farben ist der Grelle geziert."
See however the ritualistic practices connected with this bymn.
57. Roth" zubereiten, ausrü~ten," Gr. " hat geschmückt," L. " hat gestaltet," Gdn. "hat
tertiggemacht," Oldenberg, S,BE 46, 179 u the p.minent (god} has shaped all form~1 aU ce.ttle.. ..
277

THE THREE SANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-j.m¡-
apó ná dhiro mánasii suhástyo
gíralJ, sám alije vidáthe~v iibhúvalJ,.
Various translations haye been proposed. 58 SáyaI).a's rendering samyak vYakt¡¡,~
karomi cannot be correct as in the same group of Nodhas.hymns we find also
índriiyiirkárh juhvlJ sám añje (1, 61 ,5), where juhu:, the wooden·ladle, proves that
the act of anointing, or rather a libation, which accompanied the recitation oí the
mantras, is referred too Cf. 2, 27, 1 im7JgíralJ, ..juhv'aJuhomi, and see Pischel, Ved •.
Stud. 2, UO ff. What is however the tertium comparationis in this verse? Accord.
ing to Geldner it is máll<lsii alone: "Mit Nachdenken-wie ein verstandiger,
handfertiger (Künstler)' sein Werk (macht)-so salbe ich die Lobrede ... " . In
the other Nodhas.hymn, it is trúe, thepoet says that he constructs (sárh Jiin01M)
the stóma· as the carpenter makes a chariot (1, 61,4), but sánt áñje in our verse does
not mean" 1 construct " but denotes a religious acto It would appear, therefore,
that the parallelism here referred to is a more fundamental one. In archaic societies
the artisan is credited with supernatural powers', which he is able to transmit to the
products of his labour. In the Rigveda it is not the blacksmith (as elséwhe're)
but the cartwright who is especially renowned as such. Perhaps this is due to the
outstanding importance of the ritual chariot·races in the Vedic society. It should
be noted that the word dhird. "wise, skilful," an epithet of the gods and :ij~is,
is especially applied to the divine artisam¡ (:ijbhus, Visvakarman) -Geldner
even simply translates it " Künstler " (2,38, 4)-and hence by extension to their
earthly representatives, the cartwrights. In this application it occurs thrice in the
formula rathárh ná dhiralJ, svápii atak~am or ata~i~ulJ, (1, 130, 6; 5, 2, 11 and 29,
15), where his work is paralleled with the poet's. There can be no doubt, there.
fore, that with dhira. in 1, 64, 1, the tá~tr' of 1, 61, 4 is meant (Note also apó:
svápiiQ,). If so, sám añje may also apply to him, though in a different sense. The
translation would accordingly be: "Just as a skilful, divinely inspired cartwright
(dhira.) fills his work, through his mánas, with potency, so 1 offer my songs with
libations (that they may be) effective at the sacrificial meetings."59 This interpreta.
tion is indirectly supported by VS 34, 2, where it is said that through the mánas
" the wise men, skilful artisans, perform their work in the sacrifice and in the rités."
In this way man may be said to be anointed with fortifying words, cf. 9, 10, 3 ab
rájiino ná práSaStibhilJ, sómaso góbhir añJate. Hillebrandt's conclusiori' that the
milk was looked upon as an ornament (Ved. :\Iyth. 2nd ed. 1 454 n. 5) is accordingly
incorrecto Nor has the "anointment" of hymns anything to do with a "beautiful
appearance" (Oldenberg, Gott. Nachr. 1918, p. 69).
58. Roth" zubereiten, ausrUsten," Max lIIüller (Rik Samhita 1, 1869): "1 join together,"
(SBE 32 106): .. I prepare songs," Gr... leh sehmüeke aus," L ... mache ieh sehon," Gdn. Glossar,
.. kunst~ol\ zusammenfügen, diehten," transI. .. besalbe ieh die Lobrede" (with note: .. d.h.
glatte oder versehonere ¡eh "), Hillebrandt" so vollende ¡eh Lieder," Renou .. Ainsi je farde avec
adresse les prieres effieaees."
59. For übhú·, see Geldner, Glossar, and Neisser;' viddtha· has lastly be en diseU9Sl'd_·by
Ronnow, Trita Aptya 1,174-178, See now Thieme, Untersuchungen zur Wortkunde und Ausle-
gung des Rigveda, Halle 1949, 35ft. (esp. p. 49,n.2).
278
F. B. J. KUIPER
94
We may conclude that sam·añJ-, though occurring 30 timcs, as opposed to
120r 13 occurrences only of vy.añj-, never means " adorn.". Thi~ st:temen~ has
to guide us with regard to the last passage that calls for mentlOn, vtz. r, 2, 5 (m an
Ápri.hymn)
sviidhyo ví dúro deváyantó
'áihayú rathayúr devátiitii
púrvi áíáurh ná miitárii rihii1Jé
sám agrúvo ná sámane~v añjan,
where sam.añj: is ge'nerally taken in the sense of adorníng, e.g., Gr. " sie schmücke.n
sie wie Braute zu del' Hochzeit," L. "wie Unvermii.hlte zu Festversam?Üung sle
schmücken," and Pischel, Ved. Stud. 2, 123, who with regard to this stanza
remarks: "Die agrúvalJ, sind Madthen ...... die sich zu den Festversammlungen
aufputzen, um einen ~Iann zu bek?mmen.:' Pischel apparently ha,s bee~.led astray
by 1, 124, 8 añjy añkte samanaga iva vra~ but the active form sam anJan cannot
of course mean "sich aufputzen."
The circumstance that the gilt gates of the sacrificial ~lace, v:hich are opened
by the priests, figure in the Apri.hymn~ as goddesses (.dvaro deviM, _a~c~unts ,for
female beings having been chosen as obJects of compal'lson, here (matára, agruvo)
as well as in 10, 110, 5 (jállayalJ,). Now, just as the roads are anointed (cf. 10, lIO,
2 and AS 5, 21, 2, both Apri.hymns), so the gates are anoint~d and dri~ with ghee
(1, 188, 5 dúro ghfl{¡IIY ak~aran) that the~ ~ay be supr:ya1J.alJ,,60, that lS, that .the
gods may have an easy áccess to the SaCl'lfiClal place (10 ,?,
.5). SlllC~ the e~ect¡ve­
ness of the sacrifice depends on the presence of the gods, lt 1S of the h1ghest lmpor~­
ance that the gates should open well " to our aid" (na útáye 5,.5, 5). He~ce 1~
is elear that sam.añj- means " to anoint," d. SáyaI).a adhvaryava iiJyerta; s~manJantt.
Now the two posts, dripping with ghee, remind the poet of two cows hckmg a calf,
whil; on the other hand the priests who are engaged in anointing the posts evoke
the comparison with the wedding ceremonial, in thé course of which the bride was
bathed and anointed. 61 We may therefore translate: "Thoughtful, the priests
have opened the gates-(each of them), while wishing.for ch~rio~s, thetwo ~oddes­
ses-and they have anointed the many (posts), (which drlp wIth ghee) hke two
.cows licking a' calf, just as people anoint brides in the wed_di~g assemblies.': ~ It
maybesurmised that, as there were several gates (cf. 3, 4, 5 puro$lJ" ~, 1~8, ~ banv.M,
each of the officiating priests was opening one gate (3.4.5) and anomtmg l~S posts,
while the ghee trickled on him as he stood between them. Hence the smgulars
60. cr. 2, 3, 5; 5, 5, 5; lO, 110, 5 and prayaí devébhyo 1, 142, 6.
61. The bride is anointed by the jdnya-(jáne mitro nd ddmpali anakti lO, 68, 2; e.f: lO,
85 47 and Gobh 2 20 15) or bride and bridegroom anoint each other (Par. Gs. 1, 4, 14 S~nkh.
G.S. 1,12, 5, Kh~d¡ra ¿s. 1',3,28.30 cC. Kauá. S. 79, 2), or the bride is al!-?inte~ by her girl.. frl~nds
as in Kiil. Sak. 43,23 ed. Cappeller (mangalasamtilambhanam). See "mtermt~, r:~s altl,dlsche
Hochzeitsritual 46 fr. HilIebrandt Ritualliteratur 64 f., 'l'hieme, Der Fremdhng 1m. Rlgveda
125, eC. Kathil.s 104, 68 etc.
279
 THE THREE 9ANSKRIT ROOTS ANC-jAN¡-
95
rathayú,/.l and sí$um, and the duals devátiítii, pürvi and mdtárii, denoting each p:dest
resp. each gate and its posts. ',
It remains to add a few words about the other compounds. As to ud-añ'
which Roth, PW. V, 958, assumed for I;tS 4, 6, 3, assigning to it the sense " ausstet
le.n, da:bieten" (expose) nlost scholars, as Oldenberg, Bloomfield, Geldner and
Sleg (Gott. ?el. A~z. 1925, 130), now agree in sepal'ating úd from the following verbal
form anaktt. Nelsser who at first referred this form to ud-añc- (Z~ Wb. des RV.
~, 12) has .af~erwards ,also adopted this view. The compound d-añj- in I;tS 7, 44, 5
a no dadh~kra/.l pathyam anaktu, which has been rendered by "gliitten, zuricnten "
(Roth), "ebnen" (Gr.) = level or "schmücken " (L.) = adorn, of course refers
to the common notion of roads being anointed. Thus, e.g. Hillebrandt, Lieder
101. Cf. TS 5. 1. 11. 1 ghrténciñjánt sám pathó devay~niin, etc. ' if we maintain the traditional counexion of the e1ement-añé- in úddñe-, ápiiñc-
Consequently the only Rigvedic co~pound belonging to 3.añj- is vy-añj-t
whereas all other compounds are excluslvely to be referred to 4.añj- " to- anoint ti
(and l.añj-).
§ 16. LINGUISTIC RE:\URKS
The foregoing examination of the philological facts has led us to assume three
couples of roots, each of them consisting of the variants añc- and añj-. Root.
variants of the kind are not rare in Indo-E..tropean, cf. *deik- (e.g. in Latin dico and
Gothicgateihan) and *deig- (in Latín digitus and Gothic iaikns). This root-variation
must mainly have arisen in the athematic verbal flexion where the final consonant
?f th~ root was as~imila~ed to the various personal endings, (e.g., indh-é, 2nd pers,
wt-sc, 3rd pers. wd-dhe). Many 01 such root· variants must have arisen in
proto- lE., e.g. *slung- J *slunk· (from *slu-n-ég-mi, *slu-n-ék.si, etc.) in Greek
luñglL7wmai: luñkai7W and in Irish loingid "he drinks": slucim "1 devour."
Indo. lranian instances are Ved. ~ip.: Avestan xSviw- and perhaps Ved. raMo
(rambh-) " to lean on "62 : Avestan rapo, id. es As Dr. Kat.re has already pointed
out (Annals BROI 20. 280) añc- and añj- show the same variation, thus reflecting
an athematic inftexion *anáj-mi; *anák-~i, etc.
In the caseof l.añj- a trace of this inflexion is still found in ny-anaje, which
can only be explained from a present *anájmi. As regards the lE analysis of this
type of present-formation it should be noted that the old view which held these
presents to contain a nasal infix e.g. *H 11J'·n-égu .mi. (see Keller, KZ 39,147 ff,)
Brugmann, GrW1driss II2, 3, 278, recently again Bt!nnniste, Origines de la forma-
tion des noms en indo.européen 161) cannot be correct in yiew of the..etymology
of several of these verbs and the parallel formation of tanóti. An ample discussion
of the type anájmi will be found in my book "Die indogermanischen Nasalprii.
sentía," p. 85 f., p. 121 ff., and p. 91 ff. (on tallóti). On the strength oí the
62. See my note in .. Die indogel'manischen Sasalprasentia (Amsterdam 1937), p. 148.
~3. But for vij-/vie- "prlhagbhiive" (Wackernagel, Altind. Gr. 1, 116, Lüdern, Philologica
Indica 376 n. 1) see now Paul Thieme, Kuhn's Zeits. 69 (1951), 213. . .
280
.96 F. B. I.KUIPER
Ill'guments just mentioned we must as sume that the presents of the. typeanájmi
contain formative e1ements, -ajo, -as- arid the like, whichhave been ad.ded. to.9. root
ending in ·n.
According1y 1.añe.Jañj- is to be derived from an lE formative present *H2tJn
ég-mi, 2nd sing. *H2!1n-ék-si, etc. Cf. Gr. 6ñkos, Latin uncus, Skr: anká- '" hbok"
from lE *Hz0nko-; Ved. 'áñkas-, Gr. 'áñkos from lE. *Hzénkes-; Latin ancua
frorn "'Haénko.,whereas the root-variant occurs in Ved,'áñga-m, Lat. angulus, etc.
Jlán:s Hendriksen, Untersuchungen über die Bedeutung des HethitischeÍl für die
Laryngá.1th~orie 28 f., compares Hitt. hi-in-ik-zi "beugt sich, erweist seine Reverenz"
but since' hink· must then reflect lE *H2eng- we shou1d rather expect *harik-. In
view of Wackernage1-Debrunner, Altind. Gramm. III 230, it may be added that,
with Latin prop-inquus, long-inquus (se e the authorities quoted by Brugmann,
Die Ausdrücke für den Begriff der Totalitii.t in deu idg. Sprachen 21, u.l, Neisser,
1,13 n.l), it must cousequent1y be kept apart from 1.añe- " to bend "on aC.count
of the different gutturals. See a1so Brugmann, Grundriss IIz, 1, 144 n.1. For
further details reference may be made to Wa1de-Pokorny, Verg1eichendes Worter·
buch der idg. Sprachen 1, 60 ff., Pokorny, Indog. etym. wb. 1, 45 ff. .Though,
·,on theoretical groW1ds, w..e must assume that the present "'H2t1n-ég-mi contains
· a basic root "'Haen-, specu1ations as to further cognates would be useless.·
As regards 2.añc-jañj- "to go," an indica~ion as to its lE initial souud is
furnished by Gr. ángelos "messenger"M, which Jarl Charpentier, )IondeOrienta1
· 13, 22 f., has connected with sorne Indo-Iranian derivatives from this root. Ac-
cordingly we have to start from lE *HatJn-ég-mi. By the side of anájmi there
must have existed a reduplicated present *H2i-Ha1J.n-ég-mi, plur. *Hai.Hang-més
· which has left its traces in the root iñg-, iñgáyati ~3 "to move, trans." sam-iñgayati
SB)-r etc. For the shortening of i before ñg, of dhúnk~d " white crow (VS) : dhüñk~d
. (KS), see Wackernagd, KZ; 59. 23 n.l; iñg. stands to añg- in the same relatiou as
ir- (from iyarti, irte, lE "'H¿-Hr-) stands to aro. cí. also Die.indogermanischen
Nasalprii.sentia 136 f. (with bibliography). In the same way iñkháyati " swings,
'shakes" is related to añkháyati, both pointing ultimately to an older' from añk-
(vi~iñk- for vi-iñg. occurs in Taitt. Br. and Pañcar Br.).
Since the words for " foot " are often derived from verbs of going (e.g., Skr.
· ptit, cárfZ~" Lith, kója, for which word see Bezzenberger, KZ 47, 82), it is pcissib1e
that ailghri- .. foot" contains a,lOther root-variant angh- " to go." Cf. Dhii.tupatha
1, 109.angh· "gatyiik?epe" and 1, 166 arhh- "gatau." It is interesting, in this
· respect, that Pali has, by the side ofiñjati, an interjection irhgha, the proper mean-
ing'of which is supposed to have been "come on, go on," see Rhys Davids and
Stede, Pali.English Dictionary 118.
(u. ce. Pkt. akko .. dúta{l "? See {J. 43.
281
 THE THREE SANSKRlT ROOTS ANC-jANI-
97
From the morphological analysis it foIlows that the basic root *H2en- may
also occur in other roots, but any attempt to trace such further etymological
connexions (e.g., in Skr. ádhvan- " road," wherefore see the recent discussion by
Pisani, Rendiconti del Reale Instituto Lombardo di Scienze e lettere, cl. di Lettere
vol. 75, fase. 2 (1941-42), p. 29) would be mere guess-work. ' For mahi-mán- is an abstract noun derived from maha-, mahi- "great." In the
The third root añc-Iañj- "to show, manifest" has faithfully preserved its
athematic inflexion in Vedic and, as regards vyañkte, in the later language. It
may be added that Vopadeva mentions also an athematic optative añcyiit (see PW).
Unfortunately few cognates of it have thus far been found outside the Indian.
In the Old-Iranian dialects it is only represented by YAyo vyiia:tis "ornament,','
which Caland, KZ 88, 808, was the first to identify with Skr. vyakti-. The chief
representatives in the other lE branches are Gr. ,aktis "ray," Goth. uhtwo
" dawn," Lith. añkstas " early time," ankstus " early," and probably Middle Low
German enkede, enket, etc. "1. offenkundig, sichtbar, apparens, manifestus: 2.
unzweifelhaft, sicher, genau, zuverliissig, etc." Modern Low German enken, enke
(mostly adyerbial) "1. genau, sorgfiiltig: 2. kaum, mit genauer Not." See Heinrich
Schrader, Ablautstudien, p. 12 f. If this conne>.:ion is correct, enked represents
lE *ongitó-. Other word-equations are too uncertain to aIlow any conclusion. Thus
Scheftelowitz, KZ 58, 185, compares O.Ir. éig, ésca, Gael. easaga " moon " with
Gr. akds, Skr'. aktú-, but the same words have also been connected with Gr.
phéñgos (Strachan), "\\;'th Lat. idus (Meyer-Lübke, Walde), and with Skr. más-
(Pedersen). Hertel, Indo-Ir. Quellen u. Forsch. VII, 88, follows Charlotte Krause
in deriving agní-, Lat. ignis " fire " from añj-, to which he attributes the sense of
" irradiate ": but the lE inferential form *?tgní- stand s on no firm base, see Walde-
Pokorny, 1, 828.
It is impossible to infer from the few cognate words whether the root had
originaIly an initial laryngeal and, if so, which of the three laryngeals it was. It
may however be pointed out that the basic root *en- or *Hen- possibly also occurs
in Latin nota and notare, whose meanings agree fairly well with that of añc-. The
pejorath'e meaning which nota often has is also found attached to Gr. ónomai
" 1 rebuke, bIame," the original sense of which probably was " to mark, denote."
It is this \'ery sense which is still found in ónoma "name" (properIy "denota-
tion ").
It is true, the lE words for " name " show various ablaut-grades whiéh induced
Meillet, Etudes sur l'étymologie et levocabulairedu vieux sIave 424, to regard them
as unanalysable: "On n'a aucun' moyen de séparer une racine et un suffixe: on
est en présence d'un mot un." Ben\'eniste, Origines de la formation des noms
en indo-européen, 1, 181, assurries a lengthened root "H 1en-m- and a suffix ~elh
But, in spite of Meillet, l.c., several Vedic words in -man- still show traces of the
lE ablaut in the "élément présuffixal." Cf. ,iitmá, Instr. t-máll(i (lE *eH 1t-mó :
*H1t-m.'I-), andjánima (Xom. Acc.) against Instr. jánmanii. Dat. jámnane, Abl. Gen
Vak.,'
282
98 F. B. J. KUlPER
jánmanal,l. That jámnan- cannot be explained from lE *gen-, a purported side-
forro of *genH1 - (as supposed by Persson, Beitriige zur idg. Wortforschung, p. 684
ff.) is proved by mahná, the ancient Instr. of mahimná " greatness" (which is partIy
replaced in the l.{ksamhita. by the analogical new forI:?ations mahiná, mahimná).
weak cases the laryngeal was consonantal and has disappeared (cf. Notes on Vedic
Noun-Inflexion, p. 21 f.; 27). Likewise the vowel of the second syIlable of ónoma,
which is wanting in Balto-Slavonic, leads us to as sume a root *enHa-and this very
root occurs in the root present ónomai.65 In view of this perfect accord-
ance the doubts expressed as to their relationship (see Boisacq 705, Walde-
pokorny 1, 182) seem to be unfounded. It only remains obscure how the two strong
stems *enHa-(Gr. énuma, OPr. emmens, emnes, Alb. emen.) and *neHa-(Skr.
nfiman-, Lat. nOmen, Hitt. la-a-ma-an)may have occurred in the same paradigm.
The sole point howe\'er, which concerns us in this respect, is that the Hittite word
shows no trace of an initiallaryngeal: see Hans Hendriksen, Untersuchungen über
die Bedeutung des Hethitischen für die Laryngaltheorie 50.
Since in my opinion verbs of the type bhanákti represent lE formative presents
anájmi from lE *?tn-ég-mi (2nd sing. "?tn-ék-si, etc.) leads us (as stated aboye)
to assume a basic root *en-. If we as sume, therefore, as a provisional working
hypothesis, that "en-eg- (in 8.añj-lañc-) and *enH 3 - (in Gr. ónomai, from *~nHa-)
are ultimately related (which is not unreasonable in view of their meanings,
whichare nearly identical), we may suppose that the root of anájmi had no initial
laryngeal. 66
65. Duchesne'Guillemin, BSL 41,173, compares Toch. AB en "to command, punish."
66. Skr. nagná- " naked " with its lE cognates, compared by Neisser, Probe eines Altind.
Wurzelworterbuchs 6, Zum Worterb. des RV. l, 13, is too obscure to allow any convincing etymo-
logical connexion. The same holds good, in my opinion. for lE "'noql- " night " (with which Walde-
Pokorny n, 338 r., combine aklu-, aklis, ühlwo), and for Goth. anaks (see ::-;eisser, and Rhys
Davids,Stede in vocem añja). Skr. vyiija- " deceit, fraud, pretext" (since the :\lhbh.) has been
derived from r:y-añj- by Bohtlingk (PW) and Uhlenbeck but, judging from vyakla- "clear mani-
fest," we should then expect a totalIy different meaning. There is no indication whatev~r that
its semantic evolution has been the samc as in várpas- .. assumed appearance, image, form art
stratagem." :\loreover its formation, would then rernain obscure since the only paralIel fo~ th~
loss oC the radical nasal would be Ildiicam SB:\I from l.añe-, which however is a new forrnation
due to the present ud-aeati. On the other hand, vici- .. deceit .. (?RS lO, lO, 5), though bearing
sorne vague resemblance to L'yája" is hardly related (see Duchesne Guillemin, BSL 41 175 and
Couvreur, Rev. belg. de phi!. et d'hist. 23 (19.J..l,) 235). It would be tempting to SUppose timt vy-aj-
.. to drive asunder" had come to mean" to lead astray" (Gerrnan irreführen) but this is not
supported by any evidence.
283
-------
SHORTENING OF FINAL VOWELS IN
THE RIGVEDA
BY
F. B. J. KUIPER
Abbreviations: Benfey: Die Quantitatsverschiedenheiten in
den Samhita- und Pada-Texten del' Veden, Vierte Abhand-
lung (three papers with separate pagination, published in the
Abhandlungen del' historisch-philologischen Classe del' K6n.
Ges. del' Wiss. zu G6ttingen, vol. XXV, 1879).-Oldenberg:
unless otherwise stated the name refers to his articles in the
vols. 55, 60 arrd 62 of the Zeitschrift del' deutschen morgen-
landischen Gesellschaft (1901, 1906, 1908)- Wackemagel:
Altindische Grammatik, vol. 1 (1896).-Zubaty: Del' Quanti-
tatswechsel im Auslaute vedischer W6rter, published in the
vols. 2-4 of the Wiener Zeitschrift ffu die Kunde des Morgen-
landes (1888-1890).
1. It is a well-known fact that in the Sarnhita-text of the Rigveda
short final vowels are often lengthened. The rhythmical character
of this lengthening is apparent from the circumstance that it is
restricted to those cases where a short vowel was followed by a
single consonant, i.e., ,where the vowel could be considered to
stand in an open syllable, e.g., srudM-hávam. It is excluded,
accordingly, at the end of a pada and in vocatives, in which cases
the word was followed by a pause. 1) The editors of the Rigveda-
text were still acquainted with these rules for when they sub-
stituted for *visváhii siiima (as the metre requires in VII. 21. 9)
their own pronunciation visváha syiima the final -ii was duely
replaced by -a, because it now came to stand before two con-
sonants. 2) The Padakara did not acknowledge these long final
vowels and read everywhere the corresponding short vowel, but
this is his normal procedure even in those cases where the form
1) See in general Wackemagel 1, 311, l\Iaedonell, Ved. Grammar 62 f.,
where also other exceptions are mentioned. For the pause after the voeative
see India Antiqua, A Volume 01 Oriental Studies presented by his Iriends
and pupils to Jean Philippe Vogel, Leyden 1947, p. 210. It should also be
noted that a voeative at the beginning of a sentenee is treated as extraneous
to it, the verb which immediately follows it being aceented as though it
were the first word; see Delbrüek, Altind. Syntax 33, Maedonell, op.c. 105.
2) See Waekernagel 1, xü.
253
284
2
with a 8hort vowel has hardly ever been in use. 3) For the explana-
tion of this lengthening reference may be made to Wackernagel,
p. 312 f.; the chief difficulty consists in its being frequent in sorne
cases, while it is very rare in others, irrespective of the Indo-
European origin of the vowels concerned. The theory of vowels
of "middle quantity" liable to lengthening in certain cases 4)
presents difficulties froID a phonematic ,P0int of vi~w. .
It has long been recognized that a few mstances wlth alternatmg
-ii and -a, though formerly indiscriroinately treated together with
the cases qf lengthening 5) have a different character as they show
the lona final -ii also in positions where lengthening is excluded,
viz. in the pause and before initial consonant groups. Wackernagel,
p. 3U, rightly set them apart froro the other cases and suggested
that here the alternation must have a morphological character
, (which probably means that h~ trac~d the al~ernati?n back ~o
different LE. endings). In the hght of recent dlscovenes made m
the field of LE. phonology, however, it proved to be possible to
account for this alternation as a purely phonetic phenomenon. 6)
The old hYlJOthesis that LE. long vowels which do not owe their
origin to vrddhi have al'Ísen from short vowels followed by a con-
sonantal eiement appeared to be confirmed by several LE. langu-
ages of Asia Minor and the adjacent countries, which, to a greater
01' lesser extent, have preserved sorne guttural sound 01' h in
positions where such a consonantal element could be expected on
theoretical grounds. These guttural sounds (and h) were sub-
sequently detected in Hittite, Lycian and Armenian. They could
be readily explained as developmentis froro lary?geal sounds, ~he
existence of which in proto-LE. had been surm1Sed as a workmg
hypothesis sorne fifty years before. Now, by substitu~ing for, e.g.,
tihe endíng -ti of the instrumental the older form *-t~H (where H
dcsignn.tos fL lfLryngoal sound), it bec?mes .clear ,~hy t~is be~a.me
-ti before a following eonsonant: ameo t WfLa m tlns pOSltlOll
followed by two consonants, it was long by position un~i~ the
laryngeal ceased to be pronounced; at .that moment the traditl~nal
quantity of the vowel was preserved by a compen.satory l~ngther;l?g.
'rhis development, which was quite normal m medIal posltlOn
3) E.g. i~ rtávan -, which is the cornmon Indo-Iranian form, ef. Avestan
a.§áuné (dative), Old Persian (a)rtává. Although the form rtavan- has nev~r
been used in the whole Sanskrit literatura (one occurrence of rtav~nt- ~n
the Bhag. PUl'. is of course artificial) the Padakara takes the RIgvedlC
word to stand for rtá'van-. .
4) Cf. Oldenberg' 60, 117; 62, 478 (reply to Amold's critieisms), Colmet,
J.As. 1909 n, 395 ff., etc.
5) But ef. Oldenberg, Prolegomena 394 n.l.
6) India Antiqua 198~212.
254
285
 3 4
(e.g., "'nili-tá->nítá-, *z7}li-tá->jatá-) is [1ccordingly also found
in sandhi. On the other hand, when -tilI was followed by a word
>1<
with an initial vowel the syllabic trench separated i from H, which
now was pronounced with the initial vowel of the following word.
As a matter of fact, the Vedic metre still shows that trivi~ti was
pronounced with a short final i in pári trívi~!y adhvarám IV. 15. 2[1
(which must be read trivi~tí adhvarám) because, even after th({
disappearance of the laryngeal from the language the habit of
using a short vowel in this position was maintained in the linguistic
usage for sorne time: the 10ss of H did not change the traditional
quantity of i in this position. This, again, may be paralleled with
such instances of -iH- in medial position as, e.g., pri(y)á- (from
*pri¡Há-) against pritá- (from "'priH¡tá-). In the same way it was
further possible to account for the fact that -ti became -ti also in
pausa: in fact the long -i, being due to a compensatory restoration
of the quantity of *-iH + consonant, was originally a mere sandhi-
variant; whereas in pausa, where the vowel of *-iH was not long
by position, it kept its original quantity even after the laryngeal
was dropped. The Rigveda still preserves some interesting traces
of this prehistoric sandhi. In the course of time, however, the
sandhi-variant -ti was generalized and from the point of view of
the later language the forms in -U must be considered to have
shortened final vowels. The notion of shortening is not new: it is
met with in studies on these sandhi-phenomena since the middle
of the last century 8), and only the impossibility for the historical
phonology to account for it has led to its abolition by comparatists
since circa 1890. The use of this term has since been avoided in
grammatical works until quite recently, when it made its reap-
pearance. 9)
7) For a rather complete bibliography see Zgusta, Archiv Orientální
10 (1051) 420-437 (to whom Dutoh alld 13olgíl1ll contl'í1.l\ltíons to tho thoory,
such as Edgar Polomé's articles, had been inl1ccessíblo).
B) Benfey, J(urze Sanskrit-Grammatik (1855) 306, Quantitatsverschieden-
heUen (1879) IV, 1, 5 and IV, 3, 27 & 29; Grassmann, Wiírterbuch zum Rig-
Veda (1873) 8. vv. McM and óám'h Lanman, Noun-Inflection in the Veda
(JAOS. 10, 1880), 539; Ernst and Julius Leumann, Etymologisches Wiírter-
buch der Sanskrit-Sp1'ache (1907) S.v. MeM. (Arnold, Vedw Metre 145 uses
the terro "shortening" in a quite different sense). OnIy Grassmann does
not explieitly use the terro "Kürzung". From the viewpoint of historieal
phonology this notion presented serious diffieulties, whieh indueed J oh.
Sehmidt to rejeet it (Die Pluralbildungen der idg. Neutra 1889, p. 277),
whereas Waekernagel avoided the term in 1896 (Altindische Grammatik 1,
p. 311). It is interesting that Leumann nevertheless maintains the notion
of shortening in 1907.
9) L. Renou, Grammaire de la langue védique (1952) 86 admits an "abrege-
ment en position rythmique favorable ou indifférente". It should be noted
255
286
The work of the editore, who tried to establieh the text of the
Rigveda according to fixed norme, did not leave these traces of
old eandhi intacto In the case of the ending -ti their procedure ie
clear: owing to the development of the k?aipra-sandhi i?- the pos~­
Rigvedic language and the disappearance of the speCl~e sa?-dhl-
variant in pausa they obviously knew only two eandhl-vanante,
viz. -ti before co~sonants and -ty before vowels (excepted i), .the
former of which they naturally regarded as the true endmg.
Consequently, whenever of a given word a form in .-ti was attes.t~d
in the Rigvedie corpus, this ending was also Substltuted for -t~ tn
pausa: OnIy for the words of which no case-form in -ti was handed
down did they not dare to alter the traditional pause-form in -ti.
Before other vowels than i- the modern k~aipra-form in -ty was
introduced. 10)
2. As a result of the historie al development briefly sketc.hed in
the preceding seetion the Padakara was confronte~ wlth an
exceedingly intricate situation and we eannot expect ~l~ to have
been successful in fulfilling the hopeless task of estabhshmg some
order in the chao s handed down to him. Since the old sandhi-r~les
were no longer known at his time h~s only method was t~e analoglCal
argumento This alone can explam why t~e Padapatha renders
antevocalic -ti in dhity ágre 1. 164. 8b and m?ty akrata l. 20. 4c by
dhitt mstt but suvrktí in suvrkttndriiya, suvrktíndra 1.61. 4c, 16ab by
suvrktí:"f~r the látter word a long termination was not, indeed,
attésted. When a word oeeurred only in antevoealic pos.it~o~ its
metrieal quantity is maintai~e.d in ~he Padapatha, e.g. trt~t?tt fo~
trivi?tí (eti) IV. 6. 4d, and trtm~ty (ad~varám) IV. 15. 2a; upaSrutt
for úpaSruty (Mvinii) VIII. 8. 5a(b), upaSruty (ukthé?u) VII~. 34.
lla(b) , upa-ábhrti for upábhrty (ayá) l. 128. 2d(e). SometImes,
howev~r the short vowel appears in the Padapatha eyen though
a variant with -ti is attested in the Rigveda. Thus not only apr?'tí
(at the end of a pada) and ~praty Me read as apratí, but tWl0e
that these words are not meant to provide an explanatio~ o~ the phenomen0I?-'
Since his work intends to give a synchronieal deS~rlptlO~ of ~he Ve?w
language, the author could ignore both the t~~oretlca~ dif!icultles whwh
the notion of shortening presented to the tradltlOnal ~18torleal phonology
and the solution that had been proposed on the bas18 of the laryngeal-
theory. . h'ID t h e p .."da b" . le
l0) See India Antiqua 211: -t~ occurs Wlt elore SIDg
consonante (39) as well as eonsonant groups (2), and at the end of a.p~a
(12)' -ti oecurs only at the end of a pMa (14), see Zubaty 3, 310. Slffi~lar
case~ ofnormalization are, e.g., 1!lihi for yliM (Ol?enberg 60, 150 f.), ~yant­
forvasuyánt- (ibid. 160 f.), pipliya for pipá,ya (infiuence of the reduphcated
aorist' Oldenberg 55, 299), óímivant- for óímivant· (Grassmann, Amold,
Vedw Metre 127, Oldenberg 60, 156).
256
287
 5 6
even apratt (in the middle of a pada) has been taken as a leng-
thening of the same form, viz. in índro vrtr(1)-i aprati jaghána
(resp. jaghanván) VI. 44. 14b, VII. 23. 3d. 11)
3. Although the instan ces of final shortening are not very
numerous, and although they can mostly be easily recognized
with the help of comparative linguistics, it is desirable to have
sorne formal criterion for the distinction between shortened and
lengthened final vowels. One such criterion has been mentioned
above: while lengthening does not occur before an initial consonant
cluster of the fo11owing word, words originally ending in -aH, -iH,
-uH natura11y have a long final vowel in this position. However,
the practical value of this criterion is restricted because instances
of this kind are but seldom found: out of 80 occurrences in -ti
only two show -ti before a consonant group (ratio 1 : 40). In
Zubaty's statistical account of verbal forms ending in a vowel,
only 154 out of a total number of 4952 occurrences stand before
an initial consonant group.
A far more practical criterion, however, can be found in the
different treatment of lengthened and shortened vowels before
the caesura of Tril¡l~ubh and J agati. It has long been known that
lengthening is but seldom met with in this position. 12) In order
t? determine its relative frequency, 1 have examined in Zubaty's
lIsts all the verbal endings in a vowel with the exception of a few
endings where variation between long and short vowels is virtually
absent. 13 ) Nominal forms, the historical origin of which is often
far less clear, have not been included, since the sum total of 4952
verbal forms (not included the cases where sandhi had made the
ending ambiguous through contraction or change of i into y) was
large enough to allow sorne conclusions. The following list shows
the frequency of short and long vowels before the caesura of
Tri~~ubh and J agati, the total numbers being added within brackets:
-tha 12 a : /) a (sum total 97 : 49).
-thana 1 a : nil (12 : 4).
-ma (perf.) 9 a : ni! (34 : 63).
-ma (sec. ending) 140 a : nil (547 : 36).
-ta (sec. ending active) 150 a : 4 a (474 : 165).
-tana 5 a : 1 a (102 : 12).
11) See, e.g., Zubaty 4, 4.
11) Waekernagel I, 311. Zubaty 2, 315 states that lengthening in this
place oeeurs "ziemlieh haufig, viel haufiger als am Sehlusse einer Vorder-
zeile" but founds this statement primarily on the exeeptional instanee 8thlt
(see below). ' Oldenberg takes as an imperative (Prolegomena 417, and Noten), but WhICh
18) Viz. -ti, -á (1st pere. Bingo subj.), -va, and -ta, -nta (seeondary endings
of the middle), whieh Zubaty, too, leaves out of aeeount.
257
288
-dhi, -hi 89 i : nil (806 : 56).
-a (imper.) 180 a : 2 a (808 : 414) 14)
-a (1st sing. perf.) 4 a : nil (25 : 4).
-tha (2nd sing. perf.) 33 a : nil (137 : 7).
-a (3rd sing. perf.) 121 a : nil (555 : 21).
-a (2nd plut. perf.) 3 a : 1 a (38 : 7).
-sva 97 a : nil (425 : 52).
There are, accordingly, onIy 13 instances of lengthening before
the caesura against 844 cases with a short vowel. Among these
13 instances, however, we find four times stha (against two occur-
rences of 'atha). Such monosyllabic words seem to be governed by
special rules: of the particIe sma there are 63 ?c~urre:r:ces with -a
against 31 with -a, but before the caesura the ratIo ::s sma 17 : sma 2!
Similarly the total numbers of occurrences of -tha and -tha before
the caesura are 5 : 12 (which agrees with the sum total of v -thá
and -tha in a11 places of the pada, viz. 49 : 97), whereas stM, as
stated aboye occurs in the ratio of -a 2 : -a 1 (see Zubaty 4, 109).
It cannot be' questioned, therefore, that the case of stha is except-
ional: Zubaty 3,91, who was the first to recognize this fact, rightly
attributed it to its monosyllabic character. If we excIude the
six instances of stha and stha, there remain 9 cases of lengthening
before the caesura against 842 cases of a short vowel in this place.
Lengthening before the caesura accordingly occurs in the ratio
of 1 : lOO!
On the other hand, the éildings which origina11y must have
contained a laryngeal are never shortened before the caesura. The
total number of occurrences of the instrumental ending -ti (ex-
cIuding 19 passages where it is contracted with a following vowel)
amounts to 80 (-ti 65 : -ti 15). This total includes 12 cases of -ti
before the caesura, where the Sarilhita-text has throughout the
long vowel: the sole instance of shortened -ti before the caesura
(lOcurR in tho Athnrvn-Snthhitii (1Iád á.qmrti cakrmá Mm, cid aa ne
VII. 106. la). 'fo the same conclusion points the distribution ?f
Bámi and sámi, which is the instrumental case of an old stem 111
a laryngeaI 15 ): four times it stand s before the caesura and every-
whereit has -í. Of. I. 110. 4a, IV. 22. 8b; IX. 74. 7c, and X. 92. 12d
(if we accept the emendation dhiyá sámi nahu/}i asyá bodhatam for
saminahU/}i; cf. dhiyá áámi n. 31. 6d).
The practical value of this criterion may be estimated by the
fact that out of a total number of 495,2 verbal forms as many as
U) I have not ineluded bhará IX. 103. le (Padapa~ha bhara), wh~eh
is translated as a 1st pers. Bing. by Geldner and others.
15) India Antiqua 210.
258
289
 7 8
860 stand before the caesura (whereas the number of occurrences
before a group of consonants is only circa 154). On the average,
accordingly, 17 per cent. of the occurrences of a given word may
be expected to stand before the caesura (against an average of
3 per cent. of the occurrences standing before an initial consonant-
group).
Although the results of lengthening and shortening coincide in
many positions (the short variant in both cases occurring before
vowels and at the end of a pada, and the long one within a pada
before single consonants), it is consequently possibleto state the
following rules:
We must assume that a short vowel has been lengthened when
the long variant occurs only within a pada, whereas the short
vowel stands before the caesura of Tri~~ubh and Jagati. In these
cases the short ending is as a rule far more frequent (although
there is a considerable divergence among the individual endings,
which cannot be explained), and sine e the Vedic prose texts the
lengthened ending ceases to be used.
On the other hand, when the short ending is exclusively confined
to the position before vowels and at the end of a pada, while the
long variant occurs before consonant-groups and before the
caesura of Tri~~ubh .I1nd Jagati, the word must originally have
ended in a laryngeal. In these cases the long variant is as a rule
remarkably frequent. The testimony of the later language is for
the majority of these endings irrelevant because they are no longer
in use in the post-Rigvedic language.
The Gerunds in -yd and -tyd.
4. For a right understanding of the phenomenon of shortening
it will be necessary to examine more closoly tho details of sorne
ondings. We shaIl start from tho gorunds in -y(/. amI -t!lii. Hinco tlw
gorunds aro a compl1rativoly rocent now formation of 1,110 Vedic
language, it is not surprising that 46 out of a total number of 76
instances of -ya belong to the first and the tenth mal)<;lala. If we
exclude 18 occurrences where -ya is contracted with a following
vowel 16 ) there remain 58 instances, viz. 38 with -ya 17) and 20
with -ya. In most positions both endings occur, which requires a
more detailed analysis 18):
1) at the beginning of a pada: 13 instances of -ya, 11l0stly, of
16) To the. 17 instances enumerated by Zubaty 3, 298 add X. 109. 2d.
17) Aocordmg to Zubaty: 30, but this is an error for 39 (into which X.
109. 2d has erroneously been included).
18) For exact references see Benfey IV, 3, 32-41, Zubaty 3, 297 f.
259
290
course, with a 11l0nosyIlabic preverb (12 times). The three excep-
tions with -ya are confined to the 1st and the 10th mal)<;lala
(prásya r. 121. 13c, sammUya r. 161. 12a, and abhivftya X. 174. 2a),
whereas the distribution of -ya is as follows: P, 112, IUI, VIII!, X3.
It seems that the practice of the family collections represents the
older state of things.
2) before the caesura: mostly -ya (9 instances), distributed as
follows: P, 112, VIII, VIIP, X2. There are three exceptional cases,
which are confined to the first mal)<;lala (abhivlágya r. 133. 1c,
arábhya r. 57. 4b, ni~ádya r. 177. 4d). This shortening of -ya before
the caesura in the first mal)<;lala reflects a later stage of the
linguistic development (see below). .
3) after the caesura (only of stylistic importance): he~e we ~nd
5 instances of -ya after a disyIlabic preverb or substantIve, WhlCh
causes -ya to stand in the 8th syIlable of Tri~~ubh. Distribution:
12, V!, X2. There are two exceptions with -ya before consonant in
the 9th syllable of Tristubh and J agati (where the metre demands
a), but they are confliJ.ed to the 10th mal)<;lala, viz. abhipádya
X. 71. 9c and anudf8ya X. 130. 7c. Zubaty, 3, 298 holds these
cases to be due to metrical exigencies. The primary cause, however,
is rather to be sought in the later linguistic development, which
enabled the poets of this period to use -ya also in anteconsonantal
position. .
4) in the cadence: -ya stands always (10 times) at the end of the
first and the third pada (unless this is an avasana), whereas -ya
stands always (12 times) at the end of a stanza or before avasana.
Since the theory upon which this distribution is based is characteristic
of the editors the distribution itself must be editorial and the
existing text do es not, therefore, reflect the original d~str~but!on.
As a matter of fact, although áccha shows the same distnbutlOn,
nothing similar is found in the other endings with final laryngeal
(-ti, sami, and -i, -ü).
Bonfoy, IV. 3. 34, was tho first to point out that this distribution
of -ya and -ya prevents us from taking -ya as a case of normal
lengthening. Oldenberg, Prolegomena 418, n. 3, Zubaty, 3, 297
and Wackernagel 1, 311 have rightly accepted his conclusion.
Although there is no corroborative evidence of -ya before an
initial consonant group (which criterion, as pointed out aboye,
is too rare to be of practical value) the Rigvedic facts point clearly
to an older ending -yaH.
The gerunds in -tyd show a similar distribution. There are only
16 non-contracted instances, -tyii occurring 12 times against 4
instances of -tya. There is one occurrence of -tya in a position
before a consonant, where -tya would have been demanded on
260
291
 9 10
historical linguistic grounds, but where the metre indeed requires
a. short ayllable (in .the 5th syllable of a Gayatri pada). The
Clrcumstance that thla stanza again belongs to the 10th mandala
(sárva?z, sarhgátya virúdha?z, X. 97. 21c) is an additional corrobor~tion
of our conclusion that in the la1Jest period of the Rigveda (1st and
10th. maI).galas) the linguistic development had already made
posslble the use of -ya and -tya in a11 positions (as is the rule in
the post-Rigvedic language).
The remaining occurrences show the following distribution:
-tya occurs:
1) within the pada, either as the first word (where -a in the 3d
syllabl~ of Gayatri and Tri¡¡¡tubh padas was not required by
~r~so~cal rul~s _as the preceding syllable is always long), viz.
agatya 2, prat~tya 1; 01' after the caesura, where -a was required
in t~e 8th syllable (only one occurrence in sá pravolhfn parigátya
dabhiter U. 15. 4a).
2) before the caesura: six occurrences distributed as follows:
F, UF, VUI, VIUI, X2. In this case the rule of the family col-
lections is maintained in the 1st and the 10th mandala without
exception. ..
3) at the end of the 3rd pada: only apítya U. 43. 2c and vihátya
V. 4. 5c. On the other hand we find:
-tya only at the end of a stanza 01' before an avasana, viz. abMtya
IV. 32. lOe, IX. 55. 4b, avagátya VI. 75. 5b. For the sole exception
sarhgátya see aboye.
~gB;in it cannot. be doubted that the long ending sub 3 is
~d~t~rIal, the readmgs of the Urtext having been *apítya and
mhatya. However, although the editors rejocted the short onding
at the ond of the odd padas on account of their theory oí the
metrica~ structure oí the stanza (e.g. Waekernagel 306f.), they
were stIll aware oí the pause-íorm ending in -a. For tho Pn.dakiira
tho long onding. ~as obviously an arcliaism, which he did not
know from the h~ng speech. ~o he misinterpreted -ya and -tya as
?ases of lengthenmg and Substltuted everywhere the short endings
m the Padapatha.
Somo irregularities in our text, however, have not been intro-
d~ced ~y th~ editors but are due to the tendeney in the late
RIgvedie perIod to replaee -ya and -tya by -ya and -tya. It can
hardly be doub~ful what has indu?ed this later linguistic develop-
mento The ereatlOn of gerunds, WhICh are unknown in Old Iranian
must be an inn?vation of the Indian branch of Aryan, owing
no doubt to the mfluenee of a Dravidian substratum. 19) For the
19) E.g., Jules Bloch, Structure grammaticale des langues dravidiennes
(1946), 67, lOO, and India Antiqua 211 f., P. Meile, L'Inde Classique r, 119.
261
292
funetion of gerunds Sanskrit has made use of nominal forms (eí.
Ved. kar'(W{Jfhya, padagfhya), and most scholars agree in taking
-tva, -ya and -tya as old instrumental endings. 20) The use oí in-
strumentals for the íunction ofthe gerund is also found in Munda 21)
and in Italian, e.g. cantando "singing" (from Latin cantando "by
singing"). Now the normal place of the gerund in Sanskrit, like
in Dravidian, is at the end of the subordinate word-group.22)
That it was followod by a pause in the spoken language is not
only likely a priori, but is also apparent from the fact that tho
"principal sentenee" after the gerund is often introduced by átha
01' the pronoun tá-. 23) In such pauses in the sentence the rules oí
sandhi were not applied in spoken Sanskrit, nor, as a rule, in prose
inscriptions. 24) It soems, accordingly, that the exclusive uso of the
pause-forms in -ya and -tya must already have been common in
the spoken Vedic Ianguage at a time when the rulos of sandhi-
shortening were still valido Their introduction into the hiera tic
language, in positions where tho moro stringent rules of the older
poetry would have demanded -ya and -tya, is an indication oí the
increased influence of the popular language in tho 1st and 10th
mal).galas.
Vedic áccha and sámi.
5. In connection with the traces of oditorial rehandling of the
text which are maniíest in tho distribution of -(t)ya and -(t)ya
the parallel caso of áccha deserves mention. For details reference
may be made to Benfey IV, 1, 4--10 and Zubaty 4, 13 f. There aro
129 occurrences of áccha and 32 of áccha. The distribution in the
relevant positions is as íollows:
20) E.g., Macdonell, Ved. Grammar 412, Renou, Gramm. de la langue
védique 313 f. We are not concemed here with the formal problems involved
in this theory but it should be noted that monosyllabic -tvá cannot be
dorivod from a Atom in -tü- (as Honou Aug¡¡;ests). 'rhe different root-fonns
in. e.g., hántmn ltnd hatvd Boem to roOoot, (1 prehistorio paradigmatioal
ablaut, but this theory do es not remove aU diffioulties.
21) Cf. India Antiqua 211.
22) See the instanoes from Vedio prose texts in Delbrück, Altind. Syntax
406-409.
23) In tho Satapatha Brahmal}.a, see Delbrück 409.
24) See Wackemagel, p. 308, and especially B. Liebich, Zur Einjilhrung
in die indische einheimische Sprachwissenschaft r (Abh. Reid. Ale Wiss. X,
1919, 4) p. 16, who observes that the sandhi-rules are not applied auto-
matically "sondorn durch den Sinn und die Zusammengeh6rigkeit der
W orte reguliert worden, zumal beim Sprechen im Gegensatz zur Scltrift,
in der der Sandhi eine Sache der Orthographie ist, und ausserhalb der gebun-
denen Rede, in der die Rücksicht auf das Metrum überwiegt". Liebich
refers to Taitt. Pratis. 5, 1 (according to which authority there is a sandhi-
pause before every breathing-space), Bhaf;lya ad Pal}.. 1. 4. 109 & 1l0, and
Bhandarkar, J.Bo.Br.RAS 16, 329.
262
293
 11
ácchii stands 1) at the end of the padas a and c (20 times).
2) before the caesura (25 times).
áceha stands 1) at the end of the pádas c and d.
2) within the pada only in two isolated occurrences,
viz. índram áceha sutá imé IX. 106. la and áeeha
yahy á vaha aaívyarh jánam 1. 31. 17c.
Although there is no disagreement among modern Vedic sc1101ars
as to the editorial character of this distribution, the historical
background of this sandhi-variation has mostly been misuader-
stood. Benfey p. 10 was already inclined to read the long ending
a1so a~ .the end of the. hemistichs, and Oldenberg 55, 275 n. 2,
Textknttsehe und exegettsehe Noten 1, p. vi, n. 1 considers it rather
certain that áeeha in b and d is due to "editorial arbitrariness" (as
Wackernagel, p. 311, put it). 25) Since tl10 criterion of the cáosura
leaves no doubt as to the original ending -aH we must rather
conclude that, .just.because -a is the true ending of áeeha, only the
shortened endrng IS oorrect in pausa. The arbitrariness of the
editors ac?or~gly consists, not in their maintaining the correct
pause-endrngs rn b and d;/but in their replacing áeeha bv ácehii
at the end of a and C. " *manas-H (with oonaonantal laryngeal), Greek pive-a, Latin
The long ending survives in the later Vedic prose in acehiivaká-
m. "name of a certain priest" (cf. RV. áeehii-vae-). Just as in th~
case of the ge~unds t~e testimony of the Padapatha, whi0h every-
where reads Meha, IS worthless, and etymologies based on the
latter form cannot be correot (e.g., Bartholomae, Stud. Z. idg.
Sp:,aehgeseh. 1, ~5 n. 2, II, 55 f., Mayrhofer, K~trzgefasstes etym.
Worterb. des Altt~. s.v.). Perhaps áeeha is morphologically parallel
to Old Pers. pasa, see further Scheftelowítz, ZII. 6, 97 (with
references).
Since it is e~sent~al, with regard to the following disoussion of
t~e plural en~rng~ rn -í an~ -ü, to have a cloar insight into the
role of the edItorIal rehandlmg of the text, the details of the in-
strumental form sámt (su8ámt) may be added (see Zubaty' 3
310f.): " of the endings of ndma and dand, while in the stems in -í and -u
sámí: always before the caesura, viz. I. llO. 4a, IV. 22. 8b, IX.
7~. ?c, and P!obably also X. 92. 12d (see aboye p. 6).
su8am~: always In the anapaest after the caesura, viz. VII. 16. 2c,
X. 28. 12a.
sámi: always at the end of the stanza, viz. II. 31. 6d, VIII. 45.
27c (Gayatri), X. 40. Id.
susámi: at the end of the first pada in V. 87. 9a.
26) In India Antiqua 211 Wackernagel's statement has inadvertently
been misrepresented.
263
294
12
The last isolated instance is againat the practice which the
editora have followed with regard to the gerunds and áceha. 'I'he
Padakara seeIúS to have been perplexed: sámi oould not be taken
as a case of lengthening (like áeeha) , so he followed the Sarnhita-
text wherever it has the long ending. On the other hand he had
to acoept alsosámi, which he seema even to have regarded as the
true form, forhe transoribes sámy (with short i before vowel,
1. 87. 5c, III. 55. 3b) with sámi. With su8ámi may be oompared
su8astí at the end of the first pada in 1. 186. 1, against 11 instances
at the end of b, and one at the end of c (Gayatri).
The neuter plural forms in -í and -ü. 26)
6. We are now in a position to study a problem which has a more
general importance as oertain theories about the proto-Indo-
~uropean n~un-infleotion are oonnected with it. From a oompara-
tIve standpomt we must assume that the LE. ending of the neuter
plural has been -H; cf. Skt mánarhs-i as contrasted with Avestan
*manah (written man&-) , which points to proto-Indo-Iranian
gener-a, etc. With atems in -i and -u the ante-consonantal sandhi-
variants reaulting from -iH and -uH became -í and -ü in Sanskrit
(as in Latín tri-ginta), e.g., sing. vásu, plur. vásü. An innovation of
Sanskrit has been the creation of an analogous plural to the neuter
stems in -no Thus, beside sing. náma: plur. náman-i (= Avestan
namqn, Latin nomin-a, cf. Goth. namn-a) there arose a new
formatioll náma on the analogy of Bingo vásu: pIur. vásü. The
doublets náma and námani again gave rise to similar doublets in
the plural of other neuter stems in vowels: Ved. danáni beside
daná (plural of daná-m), vásüni and bMri?}i beside vásü and bMrí
are olearly analogioal formations which owe their existence to the
occurrence of two rival endings in the class of náman-. In the case
of d(ind tho analogicaJ now formation was provoked by tho identity
the parallelism between the singulars náma, vásu, bMri and the
plurals náma, vásü, bMri must be held responsible for the oreation
of vásüní, bMri?}í parallel to námani. Since aH these doublets
which are based on the paraHelism of náma and ndmani are un-
26) See Benfey IV, 2, 34 ff. (pur1Í), MahlQw, Die langen Vocale AEO in
den europ. Sprachen (1879) 73, Lanman, Noun-Inflection (1880) 377, 394,
406, 415, 538 f., Joh. Schmidt, Die Pluralbildungen der idg. Neutra 276 ff.,
Delbrück, Vergleichende Syntax IlI, 243, Zubaty 4, 3-5, Oldenberg 55,
272-278, Macdonell, Ved. Grammar 286, Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altínd.
Gramm. IIl. 161 f.
264
295

13
known in Avestan and Old Persian it cannot be doubted that they
are an innovation of the separate lndian branch.
An exception, however, is generaHy made for the double plural
endings námani and náma themselves. It seems nevar to have
been doubted among Avestan scholars during the last sixty 01'
seventy years that Avestan had similar double endings for the
stems in -n as we find in Vedie. This was already the opinion of
earlier scholars but the same statement is still found, though with
considerable restrictions, in Bartholomae, Grundriss !rano Philol.
l, 225 and Reichelt, Awestisches Elementarbuch 178, 192. Vedic
scholars have not questioned the correctness of this view, on the
strength of which they traced the Vedic doublets back to proto-
Indo-Iranian; cf. MacdoneH, Vedic Grammar 203, and Wacker-
nagel-Debrunner, Altind. Gramm. III (1929) 277. This again
entailed attempts of comparatists to explain both endings as
doublets of primitive Indo-European. It would seem, however, that
the situation is not so complicated in itself, but that a single
preconceived idea has prevented us from seeing the plain facts. To
demonstrate this it will be necessary for us first to examine more
closely the Avestan evidence. Joh. Schmidt, Die Pluralbildungen
der indogermanischen Neutra 89 ff., enumerates the following
instances of Avestan plurals in -a: nqma, dqma Vend. 19. 6 & 8,
maesma Vend. 8. 12, taoxma Yt. 12. 17 and bar'Jsmaea Yt. 12. 3,
and from the Gathic dialect zaemaea Y. 44. 5 and rámacá vástr'Jmcá
Y. 35. 4 (Yasna Haptavhaiti). This evidence, which Schmidt
probably has taken from Spiegel, has been responsible for a good
deal of controversy and confusion in comparative studies. Still,
in view of the circumstance that analogical forms such as dánáni,
vásuni and bh{¡,ri1Ji of Vedic are unknown in Aves tan, it would
not have been unreasonable to have asked, if the Avestan forms
of the type nqma, if correct at aH, might possibly be innovations
that had arisen at a comparatively late period in the individual
Avestan language alone. However, even apart from such general
considerations it is clear at a glance that all examples with one
exception must be cancelled. The word dqma is used in the Ven-
di dad in the collective sense of "ereation", e.g. ima~ dqma yat
ahurahe mazdll Vend. 19. 14; i~ is, therefore, doubtless a singular
form in me (mana) dqma Vend. 19, 5-8 (thus Bartholomae and
Wolff). There are, however, two more oeeurrenees of dqma in
plural function. The first is rather ambiguous: in bva~ dqma (vv.
11. dqmi, dámi) alava yaoZda{}r'fJm y& h'fJnti sp'Jntahe mainy~uS
Yt. 6. 2 "(then) a purifieation takes place of the holy creatures
(or the ereation)" it remains doubtful whether dqma aBava is
meant as an aec. sing. (Bartholomae, Altir. Wb. 736) or as an
265
296
-- - f
14
aee. plur. (ibid. 252, 1892); this depends on whether we have to
take the relative clause as referring to dqma alone 01' also to the
preeeding nouns (the clause might even be referred to a singular
noun dqma, cf. yói h'fJnti sp'Jntahe mainy~u8 dqma dát'fJm Vend..;
13. 1). In any case the normal plural form .0ccuIs in,. e.g.,. av:!,
dámqn aBavanó (for acc. plur. neuter!) yazama~de ya h'Jnt~ pao~ryo.
dátá Visp. 7. 4 (cf. Y. 16, 3 etc.). In .the _see.?~d ~ecurrence t_he
form is clearly used as a plural form, VIZ. v~spaca dama mazdaCJata
aBaoniS yazamaide yá . ... asaoni aBavabyó Y. 71. 6 "We worship
all the holy creatures created by Mazdá, whieh are holy for the
faithful". The spelling dáma for the regular dqma should be note~.
For the rest this formula is handed down, here as well as m
parallel pass~ges, in a grammatieal form whieh is beyond descrip-
tion. In the same Yasna we meet again with this formula in § 10,
where it is written as follows: vispe te ahuró mazd& hvapó vavuhiS
dámqn asaoniS yazamaide; ef. further. sp'Jntó.dátái! d~mqn as::va::~
yazamaide Visp. 19. 1, uStatát'fJm mmravanta, mspa sp'fJnto.datá
dámqn Yt. 13.93, yim vispáis paitiSmar'Jnte yáis sp'Jntahe mainy~uS
dámqn Yt. 8. 48. In spite of the radical eonfusion of all gram-
matieal endings all these passages have the regular plural form
dámqn. Even Bartholomae, Grundr. iran. Philol. 1. 225 has not
ventured to posit a plural form dáma. on the str~~gth of one
oecurrenee in Y. 71. 6. - As for taoxma m yqm upa~n urvaranqm
vispanqm taoxma niCJaya~ Yt. 12. 17, it may hav-e "?een used eolleetive-
ly: "on whieh rests the seed of all plants". Nor lS there any reason
to assume a plural form in avi átr'fJmea bar'fJsmaca Yt. 12. 3 (ef.
át(a)r'fJmeabar'fJsmaeaNir. 68, Vepd. 5. 39)'v~rf~rzae~::~alertness"
and ráma- "peaee" in k!J hvápa x~a:fn'fJmca oo! ~e'7:aca y. _44~ v~
"What artifieer ereated both sleepmg and waking and ramaca
vástr'fJmea Y. 35. 4 (ef. also ráma xViistr'fJm Y. 68. 15 etc.). None
of these instances indeed has been maintained by Bartholomae
and Reichelt, ex~epted ~qma. The use of thi~ form i_n plural
function is however confined to a single formula m the Ram-Yast,
the ungrammatieal charaeter of which is notorious (see Bartho-
lomae Altiran. Worterb. Introd. p. xxii and col. 1358, Reiehelt,
Eleme~tarb. 14).27) It is eurious that Bartholomae ha~ no hesitat~on
in explaining some dual forms in -a (dqma and daema) as bemg
.97) This of course refers exclusively to the linguistic 8tateof the existing
text of thi~ Yast and does not exclude the possibility that either the first
half of it (Christensen, Etude8 sur le zoroastrÍBme de la Per8e antique 41, Les
Kayanides 16), or the second half (Nyberg, -!.A8. 1931, II 199 f.), or ~ven
the whole of it (Wikander, Vayu 13) is old in ItS contents. See alBo B. G61ger,
Die AmfJsa SpfJntaB 79, 1).. 1. .
266
297
 15
formally singular forms (Grundr. p. 225) but on the other hand
considered the isolated form nlpna in t&siSa mé n(pna zbayaésa
"invoke these names of mine" (Yt. 15.49-51) a genuine Old Iranian
formo If we take into consideration that su eh parts of the Avesta
as show a more correct use oí the grammatical endings have the
normal plural form namq(m) (.Y. 38. 4; Yt. 19. 6), and that the
late parts, on the other hand, show a tendency, owing to Middle
Iranian influence, to drop entirely even such case-endings as -qs
of the nomo sing. of the participles (for which the manuscripts
sometimes read merely -a), few of those acquainted with the
Avestan text-tradition will feel inclined to attach any weight to
this hapax legomenon nqma. It is either a corruption of the plural
form 01', rather, simply the singular form (like dqma and daéma
referred to above) incorrectly used for the plural. - Similar to the
case of nqma is maésma, which J oh. Schmidt adduced as one of
the examples of a plural form in -a. This word occurs (apart from
one 01' two text fragments) exclusively in the Vendidad, where it
is used in the instrumental case of the singular in a fixed formula
gfjus maésmana 6, maésmana gfjuS 5, and in the accusative aéte
maésma 4. The latter form, which was formerly taken as a plural
form of the stem maésman-, Bartholomae and Reichelt (Avestan
Reader 250) refer to a different stem maésma-, m. This testifies to
an excessive confidence in the correctness of the text of the
Vendidad: why would the authors always have used maésman-
in one case and maésma- in the othed The author of Vend. 8.
11-13 uses aéte maésma both as an accusative plural (in 11 and
13) and as a nominitive plural (in 12: éayó aa{ aéte maésma
avh,m ... yaéibyó . .. "Which is the urine wherewith ... ). In
this case, as in that of nqma, the singular alone was in normal use
and the singular forms must accordingly have been more familiar
to the authors of these late Avestan texts. ThiR accountR for the
fact that in the exceptional cases where a plural form was required
they simply used the singular formo
rrhis examination of the Avestan evidence leads us to conclude
that the correct parts of the Avesta have only one ending of the
neuter plural of the stems in -n, viz. -qn (-q, -qm). We are
accordingly entitled to state that neither in proto-Indo-European,
nor in the common Indo-Iranian language a prototype of the
Vedic plural form námii has existed. The theory which traces this
form back to proto-LE. *nómón. (with LE. loss of n after the long
vowel) 28) must be discarded. For the rest, the theory was already
28) Joh. Schmidt, op.c. 99, Bartholomae, Grundr. iran. Philol. l, 133,
225, Reichelt, Awestisches Elementarbuch 178.
267
298
16
quite problematical because the Indo-Iran. form must have been
*námanH. 29) •
Since the editors of the Sarnhita-text have treated the sandhl
of the plural forms in -a (like náma) differently from those in -i
and -ü we shall first confine ourselves to a study of the latter. This
will provide asolid foundation (as I venture to think) for a dis-
cussion of the type ndma.
7. A few general remarks may serve as an introduction to the
discussion of the Rigvedic evidence.
It is a well-known fact that earlier authors, su eh as Mahlow
and Joh. Schmidt, assumed that neuter singular forms were often
used in plural function. Schmidt's position is based on two pre-
mises: a) he excludes a priori the possibility of shortening of long
final vowels (cf. op. C., p. 277: "Verkürzung von -i, -Ü, -a ware
nicht zu begründen"); b) although admitting that the ~adakar?,'s
estimation of the Sarnhita-forms is based upon certam theones
(as Lanman had made clear) he still clings to the authority of
both pathas in that he consider~ only those occurrenc~s as in-
dubitable instances of short endings, where the Padapatha and
the Sarnhitapatha agree in reading -i, -u, -~. It mus~ be ~ck~ow­
ledged that at his time it would have been vam to have mqUlred mto
the correctness of the Sarnhita-text itself. On the other hand our
great admiration for one of the classics of. comparative linguistics
must not blind us to the fact that this part of Schmidt's theory
does not rest upon a solid foundation and, therefore, requires
reconsideration.
Oldenberg, while criticizing Schmidt's ?,rgu~ents h~s s.tres~ed
the importance of the metrical consideratlOns m the distnbutlOn
of iji and üju. From a study .of these endi~gs in the Sarnhita-text
he infers that the short endmg was consldered the normal one,
it being used unless the metre demanded a long vowel. Re accord-
ingly proposes to connect the occurrence of short and long plural
endings -a, -i and -it with the lengthening of final vowels. Oldenberg
assumes that the opposition of si~g. vásit : plur. vás~ was felt. as
p8:rallel to srudhi : srudhi,. etc., WhICh then cause~ the mtroductlOn
of the short singular endmg (e.g. vásu) as a vanant of the plural
ending also. Ris disposition of t~e fac~s .is clear as uSll:al~y. ~ever­
theless it would appear that, whl1e stnvmg after an ehmmatI~n of
any linguistic prejudice (se~ p. 273 n. 2) he ~as .not entrrely
succeeded in escaping the pItfall of another preJudIce.
29) For the loss of finallaryngeals in Ola lranian see roy Notes on Vedic
Noun-In{lexion 26.
268
299
 17
Both Schmidt and Oldenberg have started, as was natural,
from Lanman's account of the Rigvedic case-endings as exposed
in his classical study "On N oun-Inflection in the Veda". Both,
however, have in different ways neglected a general remark of
Lanman's on p. 538 f. He there writes as follows: "The forms in
-i and -u would appear to be simply shortened from -í and -ú;
but in fact, for the great majority of the latter forms, the 1Jada
has -i or -u. Both texts agree in having long -í only in the words
krúdhm1-, yúcí, and trí'; in no case do both texts have long -ú. The
pada and Prat. regard the long -í and -ú of the sarhhitá as a leng-
thening of -i and -u. Perhaps, however, it is better to set aside
their authority, in view of the analogy of the forms in -á from
a-stems (whose long -á is surely organic), and to consider. the í
and ú-forms as original, and the i and u-forms as secondary."
Lanman's conclusion is indubitably correct but, sin ce this short-
ening could not yet be accounted for at that time, Schmidt (who
quotes in full Lanman's words) had to reject this solution of the
problem. Now that we are able to reconstruct the whole historical
process and to determine the conditions under which this shortening
took place we can state, with greater. confidence than Lanman
could at that time, that the readings of the Padapatha have not
the slightest authority for us as they are based on the assumption
that short vowels have been lengthened in certain positions,
whereas in reality the genuine quantity has been preserved just
there, the long vowels having been shortened in other positions.
For reasons of methodology, therefore, we are obliged further to
ignore the readings of the Padapatha as far as these neuter endings
are concerned.
At this point, however, there arises the far more serious question
as to the trustworthiness of the Samhita-text itself, which has
hardly been considered in earlier studies on the fmbject. ao) Olden-
berg, it is true, tried to avoid any prejudication by basing his
conclusions on the existing Saluhita-text. As a rule this is, no
doubt, a correct procedure but he has himself also indicated its
limits when he wrote: "Aber je langer ich mich mit ihr [viz. the
tradition] beschaftige, um so viel starker wird doch mein Gefühl
von ihrem sehr hohen Wert überall da, wo nicht Grammatiker-
weisheit einer selbstgeschaffenen Regel zu Liebe sie gefaIscht
hato .. ".31) Now with this very restriction we are confronted
30) A stray remark of Oldenberg's will be found in ZDMG. 55, 275 n. 2;
ef. also 60, 154 n. 2.
31) ZDMG. 62, 482. Of. also 55, 269; 60, 118 f., 126, 147; 62, 482 and
the eonelusion: "1m grossen und ganzen dürfen wir auf die Überlieferung
bauen, im einzeln nirgends auf sie sehw6ren" (60, 154).
269
300
18
when studying the plurals in -i and -ü and since the traditional
text can be shown to be unreliable in this respect linguistic con-
siderations become a necessary means for a right evaluation of
the text-tradition.
The two main indications of an editorial rehandling of the
Samhita-text are to be found in the circumstance that it confines
the long ending within the pada to the position before a single
consonant but reads the short ending before consonant-groups
as weIl as before the caesura; cf., e.g., ur'iÍ váriirhsi VI. 62. Id, X.
89. 2a against urú jyótirh§i IX. 91. 6c; TI:is obviously ~Il?~s but
one conclusion, viz. that not only the Padakara and the PratIsakhya,
but also the editors of the Samhita-text regarded ~i and -ü as
instances of final lengthening and accordingly "corrected" the
text as they found it in accordance with the rules prevailing for
lengthening. Now, not only does historical gram;nar ~ntitle ~s to
discredit the editors in this respect, but the Rlgvedic text Itself
leaves no doubt, as is generaIly admitted 32), that the plural
endings cannot be due to lengthening. Since these endings w~re
already extremely rare in the Atharva-Veda, we may rea~Ily
assume that they had died out in the living language at the tIme
of the editors. So to them the forms of the Samhita-text were
merely archaisms, with regard to ~hich they were guided by
analogical arguments alone. These m~uced them. to read t~e
short ending wherever this was posslble, sometlmes even m
defiance of prosodical exigencies. Consequently Oldenbel'g's c?n-
clusions, too, being based upon this altered texto and thus .reflec~mg
in a degree the editors' misconceptions, reqUlre reconslderatlOn.
8. Our task, accordingly, wiIl be to examine t? what extent our
text deviates from the norm. For an ideal solutlOn of the problem
it would be necessary exactly to trace the theo~ie~ which guided
the editora in their rehandling of the texto 'l'hu'l ldcl11, howevcr,
scems unattl1inable. It certl1inly strikes us that they have trel1te~
the shortened endings -i and -u differently from the cases of áccha
and the gerunds in -(t)yii, since -i and -u .ar~ preserved at t~e end
of every pada; but we are unable to explam ]ust why_they dld not
substitute the long endings at the end of the odd padas, as th~y
did in the other cases. So one element of the problem must remam
unexplained. This much is clear, however, that the editors have
82) Of Lanman Noun-Infiection 377, 394, 406, 415, 530 f., 539; Zubaty
4, 3; Oldenberg 55, 275 f., and Waekernagel-I?ebr~er, filtfnd. Gramm.
In 161. The ratio of i : i in the singular endmg lS 1 : nil, m the plural
23 ; 25 (or 21 : 24 aeeording to Zubaty); for u : ü these numbers are 413 : 14
and 45 : 29 respeetively..
270
301
 19
maintained every short ending where they must have found it in
the oIder text, while in many passages they must have replaced
a long ending by a short one. They acconlingly regarded the
ahort ending as the correct one. Whatever may have been the
theory that induced them to treat -¡; and -ü differently from áccha
and -(t)ya, it must in any case have manifested the inadequacy
of their empirical method in dealing with these archaic features
of the texto
It is evident that a restoration of the pre-editorial text-form
according to a linguistic norm is only justified if the sandhi-rules
for endings which originaIly contained laryngeals were no archaisms
only incidentaIly applied but still formed part of the living language
of the Vedic poets. Experience alone can teach us, how far this is
right. If our explanation of the abnormal use of -(t)ya in a few
passages of the 1st and the 10th mal;H;lala is correct this would
indicate that the law of shortening in pausa still operated even in
the popular language of the Rigvedic periodo On the other hand
there are two Rigvedic passages which clearly conflict with the
norm since the short ending here stands in the 2nd syllal 1le after
the caesura:
asyá mádepurú várparhsi vidván VI. 44. 14a
ápamlulctam bahú lcrcchrá cárantam X. 52. 4b 33)
It is doubtful how these exceptions are to be accounted fol'. Among
the 24 instances of shortening in -ti there is also one occurrence
in an abnormal position, viz. nítilcti in nítilcti yó vam'l!ám ánnam
átti VI. 4. 5a. The reading nítilcti would be prosoc1icaIly admissible
here, but since the editors have only substituted -ti fol' -ti, it is
very unlikely that they would have altered the long ending in
this position if it had stood in the pre-editorial texto The reading
has every chance of being. authentic amI if it is due to "con-
fusion" 34), this must have been on the part of the poet hinlRelf.
'rIw caso of pu.rú amI bahú is somewhat diffcront bccause the
editors have often replaced -ü by -it, but here the analogy of the
lengthened vowels provided no argument for such an emendation,
supposing the poeta had here uscd the rare prosodical type v -
after the caesura. 35) It has sometimes been suggested that the
short ending of purú is due to the heavy first syIlable of the
following word (against pur-á váriirhsi VI. 62. 2c where the long
33) In áva sthirrÍ tanuhi bMíri sárdhatám VIII. 19. 20e, the word bMíri
is a singular form, ef. áva sthirrÍ tanuhi yiitujiÍnám IV. 4. 5e. Geldner trans-
lates: "Entspanne die Kriifte der viel zu Ubermaehtigen".
34) "Einzige, leieht aus Verwirrung erklarliehe Ausnahme" (Oldenberg
60, 154 n. 2).
35) For this prosodieal variant see Oldenberg, Prolegomcna 59.
271
302
20
-ü is foIlowed by a light syIlablo). 36) This idea (which is of cour~e
based upon the supposition that pur-á has a lengthene~ v~wel) .1S
refuted by pur-á várparhsi asvina dádhana l. 117. 9a, WhIC~ lS bUllt
just like pur-á várarhsi ámita mímana VI. 62. 2c, and WhICh has a
long -ü befare varp- although the metre did not d~m~n~ .it:
Obviously the poot of VI. 44. would also have .used puru va;rpams~
if motrical exigencies had not prevented hlm from domg so.
Since thoso two passages aro the only cases whe.re ~ho .metre
compels us to admit exceptions to the norm, there lS,. l?- vlew of
their incidental character, no reason to doubt the vahdlty of ~he
specific saildhi-rules for the Vedic poets in general. The fol~owmg
categories of shortening agai~st t~e rule maJ:' therefore be attnbuted
with some confidence to editonal rehandlmg:
a) before consonant-groups:
jamí bráhma?Jy u~ása8 ca devt~ VII. 72. 3b
jamí bruva?Já áyudhani veti X. 8. 7d 37)
sárh na~ k~étram urú jyóti~i soma IX. 91. 6c
bMri jyótirh~i sunvató VIII. 62. 12d
vrtrá bMri nyrñjáse VIII. 90. 4b .
Note: Rere, as weIl as in the other categones we can~ot exclude
with certainty the chance that in one 01' two ex;ceptlOnal cases
the poet himself is responsible for the short endmg but on the
whole we can be sure that the short endings in this position are a
product of "the grammarians' wisdom" ref~rred to ~~ov~. !.~us
in vrtrá bh-ári nyrñjáse (where the metre reqmres V. bhun m-rnJG;se)
the 'shortened ending is an editorial emendation of the same kmd
as viSváha syama for *visváha siama VII. 21. 9a (see Oldenberg,
Noten a.l.). For urú jyóti~i cf. yúyü~ata~ (resp. sá. s{¡ryaJ:¿) páry
ur-á várarhsi VI. 62. Id, X. 89. 2a. No long ending lS attested at
all for jamí (2) and bMri (15).
b) before the caesura:
8parhá vásu manu~!Já dadimah.i II. 23 .. 9b.
vás1t mdI.mté ráJan'/, tvé VI . l. 13b. )
38
(puriÍ?Ji . .. 8anty) ágne
1
tvé vásu susanandni santu VII. 12. 3c
-
vísva vásu histayor iidádhana~ IX. 90. Id
vísvii vásu dadhire váryii?Ji X. 45. 11 b
tríh 8aptá sánu sárhhita girinám VIII. 96. 2b
Oldenberg, 55, 273 and Noten (ad VII. 1.2. 3) held vásu t~ be the
genuine reading before the caesura (agamst Amold, Vedw Metre
8S) Wackernagel, Das Dehnungsge8etz der griech. Oom,P0sita 13 f. (see
Oldenberg's restriction 55, 274 n. 3), W.-Debrunner, Alt~nd. Gramm. III,
16!7') ef. the singular in iámí bruvata rÍyudham VIII. 6. 3c.
38) Parallel to vásúni in b.
272
303
 - ---~------- -----------~-
21
317, 320). It must however be due to the tendency of the editors
to delete any trace of a long ending -i or -ü within the piida. There
is only one exeeption but this rather corroborates our convietion
of the artificial nature of the short ending before the eaesura: it
has never been doubted that purá in
tvám purá sahásrar,¿i satáni' ca VIII. 61. 8a
íollows the analogy oí the nine passages where purá sahásra
stand s at the beginning of a pada (see below). This single instanee
of -ü before the eaesura is aecordingly the eounterpart of the
well-known example of an artificial lengthening in
imám me varuna srudhi
hávam adyá ca' mr?aya 1. 25. 19ab
where srudhi has a lengthened vowel at the end of a pada on the
analogy of 13 oecurrenees of srudhi hávam within a pada (ef. e.g.
Oldenberg, Prolegomena 420 f., Zubaty 3, 283, MacdonelI, Ved.
Gramm. 63, n. 2).
c) before a short third syllable and after a short second syllable:
bhári cid ánnii sám íd atti sadyálJ, VII. 4. 2b
bMri hí te sávana mdnU§ie~u VII. 22. 6a 39)
sánu girir;u1m tavi~ébhir ürmíbhilJ, VI. 61. 2b
surabhí no múkhii karat IV. 39. 6c
The exceptional eharaeter of the first two oceurrences was
already' stressed by Oldenberg 55, 275. Since a suecession of two
short syllables is eschewed in these places of the pada 40), it seems
probable that in these passages, too, the pre-editorial text had
the long endings whieh the linguistie theory postulates. This
renders it probable that also in the following passages, where this
metrical indication is lacking the short ending hails from the
editors:
vásu divyáni párthiva VI. 59. 9b
vásu gavyáni dhiirayalJ, IX. 22. 7b
vásu rátnii dáyamiino ví dii8ú~e III. 2. lId 41)
rjú mártC{Ju vrjiná ca pá8yan IV. 1. 17<1, VII. 60. 2<1
bMri cakra marutalJ, pítryar,¿i VII. 56. 23a
bMri dák~ebhir vacanébhir fkvabhilJ, X. 113. 9a
bhári náma vándamiino V. 3. lOa
bhári náma maniimahe VIII. 11. 5b
Parallel to bhári cid:
vi~ú cid dr~há pitáro na ukthaír 1. 71. 2a
( dr~há) vi/ú cit sahi~imáhi VIII. 40. 1d
39)The singular form stands in b: bhári mani~t havate tvám ít.
40)See, e.g., OIdenberg, Prolegomena 16 f., 18 n. 2, 53 f., 55, 400 ff.,
and ZDMG. 60, 147.
U) Probably plural on aeeount of IV. 8. 3e, VIII. 103. 6a, IX. 36. 5a¡
273
304
ParaIlel to surabhí no:
asthürí no gárhapatyan~ sa1!'tu VI. 15. 19c (hapax) _ .
tridhátu rayá á suva vasüm III. 56. 6a; cf. tndhatum VIII.
39. 9a 42)
In these passages long endings ar~ postulated. by the linguistic
theory. Since there was no prosodlCal rule WhlCh prevented the
Vedic poets from using long vowels in both the 2nd and the 3rd
syllable of the pada 43), we must conclude, again, that .the short
endings have been introduce~ i~to ~he tex~ by t~e editors. The
Rigveda ~till preserves s~~e mdicatlOn~ WhICh pomt ~o the same
conclusion. The word vilu lS attested wlth a long ending before a
vowel (against the rule!) in vi~á utá prati~kabhé 1. 39. 2b, whieh
will be discussed below. It may be argued that, if .th~s ending was
used before vowels, i~ must be expected a fortwn b.efor~ con-
sonants. It should further be noted that the long endmg lS also
often attested in the 2nd syIlable, e.g.:
purá sahásra jánayo ná pátnir 1. 62. 10c
purá sahásra sárva ní barhit IV. 28. 3d
and similarly V. 37. 3d, VI. 18. 13e, X. 23. 5b, 28. 6e, 48. 4e
purá yó dágdhási vána V. 9. 4e
purá yát ta indra sánty ukthá V. 33. 4a
purá vára1hsi ámita mímiinii VI. 62. 2c
purá várpa1hsy aSvinii dádhiinii 1. 117. 9a
purá sádmiini sukrátulJ, 1. 139. 10g
purá cárann ajáro mánU§ia yugá l. 144. 4d
purá rája1hsi páyasii mayobhúvalJ, 1. 166. 3d
purá vásüni prthivt bibharti III. 51. 5b
purá dá1hsarhsi bíbhrata V. 73. 2b
purá ca vrtrá hanati ní dásyün VI. 29. 6d
purá rétarhsi pitfbhis ca siñcatalJ, X. 64. 14d
purá cid asmayús tirá V. 74. 8e
súci vo havyá marutalJ, súciniim VII. 56. 12a
With onIy three exceptions (viz. 1. 81. 7e, VIII.. 61. 8a and III.
58 ua which iR a variant of the last passage wlth purá quoted
ab~ve)' aIl the 22 oceurrenees of purá 44) appear to stand in the
64. 60.. Tho singular form stands parallol to rátnam in sá rátnam mártyo vásu
l. 41. 6. See Oldenborg 50, 2,73 ~. 6._
42) Contraetion in sWMtv apanhvrta VI~I. ~8. 8e. . '"
43) "Das Metrum aber perhorresziert Ja meht, Wle zwel Kurzen, so
aueh zwei Langen" (Oldenberg 60, 151).
(4) See Zubaty 4, 6. Grassmann .has 24 in~t~nees of purá¡ but V. 3. 4b
should be eaneelled, and tirá'" PU~ c~d a~vá,~)~?nván X. 10. lb, although
apparently imitating tiráh purá cid a8v~ná raJams~ III. 58. :;a may :p~rhaps
have utilized the form aS a neuter singular, which stands In apposltlOn to
artW-vám (?) See alBO OIdenberg, Noten.
274
305
 23
very p~sition w~er~ the editors m~st have shortencd the ending
of bhun, et~. ThlS Clrcumstance, while on the one hand supporting
our supposltion that the pre-editorial text had the long ending in
the qther cases also, on the other hand confronts us with three
problems, ,?z. 1~ why have the editors altered the endings of the
older text m this place of the pada? 2) why ha ve they done so
without any method or consistency? 3) why has purú been excepted
from this procedure?
As to 1) and 2) we may refer to Oldenberg, Prolegomena
4?3. A study of the lengthening of final voweIs made it clear to
~m that the cases of l.engthening in the 2nd syllable of the
pa~a have suffered consIderable alterations from the editors,
WhlCh however have been executed without any consistency.
Oldenberg, therefore, strongly inclines to the opinion that
modern textual c~itici~m is. fuIly entitled to restore on a large
~c~le the long endmgs m thIS place of the pada. In later studies,
It IS true, .he has ~ade s~me restrictions (cf. ZDMG. 60, 147 f.),
but re~arding the Impera~lVe forms of the type yéihi, for instance,
he arrlves at the concluslOn that for some unknown reason ("aus
welchem Grund auch immer") the long final vowels have been
lost in the course of time (60, 160). Since we know that the editors
mu~t have put the cases with final shortening on a level with those
wh¡c~ h~d len?t,hening of the final vowel it is clear that the reading~
bhun, vasu, V2~U, etc. form part of a more extensive category of
words with artificial shortening of the final vowel, which is due
to a general theory of the editors. So there remains the exceptional
character of the oc currences of purú. Does this reflect a mere
theory or r~ther a lin~uistic reality? 45) I refrain from suggesting
a?- explanatlOn and WIIl only observe in passing that in the pre-
hIstOrIC stage of the Vedic language the structure of the last
syIlable of purú was somewhat abnormal: while Vedic Múri vásü
and urú retlect the earlier forms "bhúHriH "(H )vásuH "v~rúH
the analogous form o~ the stem 1?ur~- I?ust havo been ;purHúH:
The mode of for~atlOn. ~f puru- I~, ~nde.ed, im,mediately olear
when we cO,mpare.lts felllimne stem purvi- wlth urvi-, the analogous
stem of uru-. While the latter has arisen from "vurvíH (LE. "ur'!,i-
íHs), the long ü of pürvt- points to an older form "purHv-íH (tE.
45) !,ince it is far frOID certain that the long ending of purá hails froID
~he edltors we cannot exclude a priori the theory of lengthening owing to
mfluence of the word·accent. Wackernagel rejected it but see his references
(p. 313), and cf. Zub~ty 2, 136; 3, 153; 4, 6, Oldenberg 55, 275 n. 3, 62,
481 n. 1, Arnol?, Vedw Metre 145.,ln connection with the prosodical aspect
of the p~oblem lt may be noted that ·á is 13 times followed by a light syllable
snd 6 times by s heavy one. See also Oldenberg 55, 274 n. 3.
275
306
24
"pIH¡1j.-iH2).46) As a matter of fact purú- is a derivative from
the root "pleH-, the formative -u having been added to the laryngeal
of the root as in prthú-, fem. prthi-v-i- (LE. *pltH2 -1j.-íH 2 , Greek
nAa-r:a(.f)tat). [In this connection the question may b~ ~aised
whether the much disputed root vowel of Greek nOAV¡; IS an
instance of the laryngeal umlaut, which has been discussed in
India Antiqua (1947) 199 and by Lehmann, Proto-Indo-European
Phonology (1952) 94. The Greek word would, in~eed, be qui~e
regular if reflecting LE. *pIHa-ú-, fem. "pIHa-1j.-~H2-' _but thlS
would imply that it has to be separated from Latm plenus etc.;
cf. Walde~Pokorny, Vergleich. Worterb. der idg. Sprachen II, 64 f.
The theory of an o-grade of vocalism has wrongly been defended
on the strength of Old Engl. feala. For the laryngeal umlaut cf.,
e.g., Greek 1!¡WAOY from "e-mIH a-o-m: {3Awa"OJ from *ml.eH a- sk -o].
Now this different structure of purú must have had an lmportant
consequence in the pronunciation of the pre-Vedic (and partly,
perhaps, even of the Vedic) period, inasmuch as the last syIlable
of bhúri vásü and urú then was -riH, -suH, and -ruH, whereas
that of Purú was -HuH. Since the syllabification *pur-HuH stands
firm on account of the 1st sing. perf. cakára (whose short radical
vowel shows that it must originally have stood in a closed syIlable,
the syllabic trench having been after th~ r, cf. LE. *~ue-~uór /H 2e) 47),
our inference seems irrefutable proVIded the prmClples of the
laryngeal theory are accepte~. Did .the presence of ~W? laryngeal~
in the final syllable result m a different pro.nunClatlO~ of. pum
even at the time of the editors? It would certamly be un]ustIfiable
to affirm this, since purú was no longer used in the post-Rigvedic
language (onIy one occurrence of purú in Ath. S. XIX. 49. 4d).
Still it seemed worth while to draw attention to this aspect of the
problem.
9. In the preceding section the passages have been discnsaod
whioh HOOJIl to mílitn,to Itgltiust tho linguistio norm, but whoro tho
short endings may be explained from an editorial rehan~ling of
the Sarnhita-text. It now remains to usbriefly to exammo the
passages where tho existing text has preserved the. old shorte?-od
endings -i and -u. 'l'his is only the case in the followmg catogorIos:
a) before a vowel:
mahálj, pitúm papiváñ cdrv ánnéi 1. 67. 7b
? á janghanti sánv ~éim VI. 75. 13a
48) For parv. froID *purH7J.. (I.E. *p1H l 7J.·) see IDy f!-0te o~ the laryngeal
urnlaut in Sanskrit (Acta Orientalia 20, 33 f.; cf. Indw Anttqua 202). .
47) Kurylowicz, Symbolae grammaticae in honorem Ioannis Rozwadowski
(1927), l, 203.
276
307
 25
In the ]ast passage sánft is apparently a plural form as it stands
parallel to jaghániim in b (jaghánam úpa jighnate) , but the quantity
of -u is ambiguous. Judging from the statisties, whieh Oldenberg
has published for the eadenee of the first pada of the Anu¡¡¡tubh
in his Prolegomena p. 28, the odd~ are in favour of a long ending -ü.
The same irregularity is also met with in vi?1Í úta prati{1kabhé I.
39. 2b, and probably also in (cyautnáni) hrdá vir/v adharayalp
VIII. 77. ge (Gayatri); see the statisties in Prolegomena, p. 14,
and note the lengthening of the singular pur1Í in this very position
in V. 73. le, VIII. 2. 32b; 16. 7b, IX. 15. 2a. However that may
be, the, tradition is no doubt correet in vi!1Í úta (without eon-
traetion!) as the metre requires a long 2nd syllable before the
short 3rd syllable. It is not olear how this -ü is to be aeeounted
foro Perhaps its use was even eorreet from a historieal point of
view, sine e many words with an initial vowel of Sanskrit must
originally have had an initial laryngeal. So if this was al so the
case with the pronominal stem u-, av- (from whieh úta is derived)
the word group *vi'fr/úH Húta would have eontained the ending
-uH in anteeonsonantal position. However, even if it would be
possible to demonstrate that úta has had an initial laryngeal in
an earlier period, this explanationwould only be aeeeptable on
the supposition that the poet of the eomparatively late hymn l.
39 has imitated the phraseology of a mueh older poet: for the
very prehistorie sandhi-eombination whieh we suggested as a
mere hypothesis for vi?1Í úta underlies the only eertain example
for sandhi-shortening of the plural ending before a vowel in the
Rigveda, viz. cáru/(H) ánnii. On the strength of Hittite 48) as
well as Greek 49) evidenee it has been argued that the LE. root
represented by Skt. ádmi, Latin edo etc. was *H l ed-, but no trace
of this laryngeal can be found in the sandhi of ánna in I. 67. 7b.
Every new theory engenders new problems: even if these eannot
110 Rolvotl MI yob, it may ho nsoful to drltw n.t.t,olltioll t,o tholll.
b) at the end of a pada:
For the sake of eompleteness the oeeurrenees of short -i and -u
in pausa wiII be enumerated. No distinction is made between t.he
pii.das a and con the one hand, and b and d on the other (as Zubaty,
4. pp. 3-5 did), beeause neit.her the poets nor even the editors
recognized any differenee in this respeet. The word apratí has
been exoluded from this Iist (as from the other lists aboye) as it
will be dealt with separately in the next seetion. The number of
48) E.g. Hans Hendriksen, Untersuchungen über die Bedeutung des
Hethitiachen /ür die Laryngaltheorie (Meddelelaer ... K0benhayn 1941) 45.
49) Cf. Greek lc5r¡t5a (India Antiqua 199).
277
308
26
the words that lent themselves to the use at the end oí a pada
was very small. It comprises the íollowing words:
bh1Íri (7 oeeurrences): ahávanani bh. VII. 8. 5a (the same, but
contraeted, in VII. 1. 17a), vrtráni janghanava bh. y~II. 100. 2d,
X. 83. 7b, duritá 'ti par{1i bh. VIII. 97. 15b, tánayam bh. IX. 91.
6b, yudhényani bh. X. 12~.. 5b, pratimániini bh: 6!>.
purú (U oeeurrences): YOJana p. II. 16. 3d, várya p. IV. 55. 9b,
V. 23. 3d, VI. 16. 5a, VIII. 1. 22a; 23. 27a; ~O. l4d, kávya p. VIII.
39. 7e; 41. 5d, vi{1pitá p. VIII. 83. 3a, duntá p. IX. 62. 2a.
vásu (10 oecurrenees): l. 81. 7d; 176. 3b, IV. 8. 3e, 31. 2c & 8e,
VII. 32. 15'b; 59. 6b, VIII. 103. 6a, IX. 36. 5a; 64. 6a. Two passages
with eontraetion of the final vowel (VIII. 103. Ua and IX. 57.
4a) might also be inoluded in .this eo~~ting.. .
mayobhú: one instanee of thlS transltIon íorm m (bhe{1aJá) yá
sámtama vr{1a1Jo yá mayobhú II. 33. 13b. ,,,..
suhántu: perhaps in tvám vrtrá~i ra,ndhaya suhantu GI~ df~
Feinde in (unsere) Gewalt, das s SIC lelCht zu ersehlage~o Selen.
VII. 30. 2d; but see Oldenberg's note on VII. 19. 4d. )
10. Owing to the íaet that the long endings within the pii.da
must have been replaeed by their short variants on a rathe; large
scale the number oí instanees oí -i and -ü in aecordanee wlth the
linguistie rules is eomparatively small. Cf.:
, subhró vah sÚ8mah krúdhmi mánamsi VII. 56. 8a
YÚyÜ{1atal~' pá;y ur1Í váramsi VI. 62. Id 51)
sá s1Íryalp páry ur1Í váramsi X. 89. 2a
sám grbhaya pur1Í satá I. 81. 7e
tiráh pur1Í cid asvinii rájamsi III. 58. 5a 52)
tvám pur1Í sahásra1Ji satáni ca VIII. 61. Sa 53)
avír gü?há vásü karat /
8uvéda no vásü karat VI. 48. 15de
suvéda no vásü krdhi VII. 32. 25b
Apratt.
11. Most authors inolude into the diseussion of the neuter plurals
in -i and -ü also the form apratt, e.g. Zubaty, 4, 4. However, on
aecount oí so me speeial eomplications, whieh have been analysed
50) But mádhu VIII. 7. lOb (Zubaty 4, 5) is rather a singular form, ef.
Geldner's translation.
51) This is the reading of the second edd. of Max Müller and Aufrecht,
and of the Bombay edition (Saka ISIl).
52) For X. lO. lb see aboye note 44.
58) The sole instance of a long í or ü before the caesura, see aboye p. 21.
278
309
 27
by Neisser, Zum Worterbuch des Rigveda 1, 60, it seemed advisable
to keep it apart from the other adjectives. We shall here confine
ourselves to the data of the Rigveda alone. These are as follows:
there is an adjective apratí-, once used in the nomo sing. (V. 32.
3c), often in the ntr. plur. apratini (IF IVI VP VIP VIIP). The
last form is mostly used in the. phrase apratini hanti (or harhsy
apratini) withthe object vrtrá(r,¿i) , cf. IV. 17. 19b, VII. 85. 3d,
VIII. 90. 5e. In the same eontext we find also the shorter forro
aprati in:
índro vrtrdr,¿y aprati jaghana VI. 44. 14b
índro vrtrdr,¿y aprati jaghanvdn VII. 23. 3d
lnstead of it the short ending oeeurs at the end of a pada in:
yát ' karáve dása vrtrdr,¿y apratí
barhí~mate ní sahásrar,¿i barháya7y, l. 53. 6ed
índro vrtrdr,¿y apratí
jaghána jaghánac ca nú IX. 23. 7be
The eircumstance that the Padapatha reads apratí for apratt (as
though the latter form were an instance of final lengthening) will
not mislead uso The short ending is obviously the normal pause-
variant with shortening of final -Í, There is not the slightest reason,
therefore, to separate apratí in the last two passages from the
other instances and to take it here as an adverb (as Neisser does).
Still Neisser's view seems to be supported by two passages
where apratí cannot be explained as an adjective, viz.:
índravarur,¿a vadhánabhir apratí
bhedárh vanvántii prá suddsam avatam VII. 83. 4ab
satárh varcínah sahásrarh ca sakárh
hathó apraty &,sumsya virdn VII. 99. ficd
This use is not restricted to the Rigveda: N eisser quotes A th. S.
VII. 50. 1bd (where apratí stands at the end of the padas) and
apraty (before vowels) from the Yajurvedic prose. It is clear that
this adverbial employment eannot give any support to the theory
that apratí originally was an adverb, which only Aocondaríly has
come to be treated like an adjective. Not only is there not the
slightest indication in the Rigvedic usage suggestive of a secondary
character of the adjectival employment, but even if we were to
assume that the two Vasi:¡¡tha-hymns have preserved the rare
traces of the genuine prehistoric use of apratí, there remains the
principal difficulty that apratí cannot be the negation of the
adverb práti. Such negative forms are, indeed, non-existent in
Sanskrit. Accordingly the only possible starting-point is a bahuvrihi-
compound a-pratí- "without resistance". This is also confirmed by
its opposite tuvipratím "having a mighty power of resistance"
(hapax in 1. 30. 9b). See in general Wackernagel, Altind. Gramm.
279
310
28
n, 1, 123 f. 54) As for the adverbial use of a,pratí, the circ~mlstan~e
that it is only attested with the short endmg, and that ltS use m
the Rigveda is restricted to two hymns of the 7th maI,l~ala, renders
it unlikely that it is an old formation. One of the V aSl~thas seems
to have mistaken the sandhi-variant apratí as the neuter singular
in adverbial use, and his use of the word in this new acceptation
appears to have found a few imitators in the later Vedic literature.
The plural oi the neuter stems in -ano 55)
12. In addition to the preceding sections on the plural-forms in
-i and --ü a- few remarks will be made on the plurals in -a. It should
be noted that in many passages it cannot be decided with certainty
whether a form is plural 01' singular (Zubaty, 3, 311). The Pada-
patha is remarkably inconsistent with regard to th~ plv-~al-forms
(ibid. 312) but its readings will be left out of conslderatlOn. The
distribution of the short and long endings in singular and plural
leaves no doubt that the long plural ending cannot be due to
lengthening. 56) As a matter of fact, the ending in long -a (which
must have been created in the pre-Rigvedic period as it is in com-
mon use throughout the Sarhhita) must represent -aH of the
older language (see § 6). As for the short ending we can now
dispense with the explanation proposed by Oldenberg, 55, 278,
and Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altind. Gramm. III, 277, who
suggested that the use of the singular forms in -a had been analogic-
ally extended to the plural. We have no reason to question that
at the time of the analogieal creation of -a (-aH) the laryngeal
was either spoken 01', at any rate, still perceptible in the resulting
sandhi-rules. -
Accorcling to Zubaty, 3, 312, there are about 100 occurrenccs of
plural forms (exclusive of the contracted sandhi-val'ianbs). The
numbel's of the long and the short ending amount to approximately
44 and 55 l'espectively. Although there seems to have becn a
tondoney 11hlO here to AubAtit,uto tl~o Ahort onuing for .-ii of tho pro-
ellitorial t.oxt, wo find also somotllues tho long enumg where we
should expect -a according to our norm. The devia,tions from this
norm may again be classified as follows:
a) short vowel before a eonsonant-group:
imd bráhma brahmavahah IlI. 41. 3a
b) short vowel before the c~wsura:
64) B6htlingk-Roth explained apratJ as a loeative of aprati-; ef. also
Mayrhofer, Kurzgef. etym. Wb. des Altind.
55) Zubaty 3, 311 f.; 4, 1 ff., Waekernagel-Debrunner III, 64, 277.
M) E.g. Lanman, Noun-Inflection 530 f., 539, Zubaty 4, 2, Oldenberg
55, 275 f.
280
311
 29
Zubaty, 4, 1, has counted 29 cases 57), against a single instance
of -a in pará cíe ehiri}á vavrju8 tá indra I. 33. 5a.
c) short vowel within the pada before a single consonant:
sá majmána jánima mánui}a'IJ-am VI. 18. 7a
purú vísva jánima mánui}a'IJ-am VII. 62. lb
trimsád dháma ví rajati X .. 189. 3a
bMtri náma manamahc VIII. 11. 5b
várma s1,vyadhvam bahulá prtMtni X. 101. 8b
priyá sárma pitf'(UÍm VI. 46. 12b
ánv áha mása ánv íd vánani X. 89. 13a
In a11 these passages the long ending has apparentIy to be restored.
It is reqJlired by the metrical structure in náki}ad dMia pári sádma
mitá yán 1. 173. 3a. On the other hand the short vowel is supported
by the metre in a single passage, viz. stotfbhyo mitramaha!¿· sárma
yaeeha 1. 58. 8b. 58 ) For dháma and várma the Atharvavedic
version reads the variant in -a.
The rather exceptional character of these passages hecomes
clear when we contrast them with the 36 passages where (ar,cording
to Zubaty, 4, 2) the long ending stands within the pada before a
single consonant.
d) long vowel at the end of a pada (Zubaty, 4, 1):
ci}á víSvany abhy (¿s tu bMtma II. 4. 2c
yá éka íe eyaváyati prá bMtma IV. 17. 5:1
sá paprathanó abhí páñca bh'Ó,ma VII. 69. 2a
samidhyámanalJ, prathamánu dhárma III. 17. la
sá dütó vísvéd abhí vai}ti sádma IV. 1. 8a
víSva ca no jaritrn satpatc áha VIII. 61. 17c
samvartáyanto ví ca vartayann áha V. 48. 3d
At first sight, the occurrence of -a at the end of a pada, ",here -1,
and -ü are never found, may seem rather unexpected indeed.
However, by combining the va.rious data which Zubaty com-
municates, we get a picture of the situation which is far more
intelligiblo. AH tho passages just quotod (oxceptcd tho last one)
belong to the odd padas (a and e). On the other hand, 12 out of
the 14 instan ces of -a at the end of the pada occur in the padas
b and d. 59) Wo so got tho following distribution:
Padas a and e Padas e and d
-a 2 -a 10
-a 7 -a 1
57) Ineluding áha 1. 92. 3 (Benfey, Zubaty 4, 1, Oldenberg 55, 273 n. 3).
68) But áárma (after the eaesura) in l. 174, 2b VI. 20. lOe (Zubaty 4,
1 f.) is rather a singular form (ef. Geldner).
59) See Zubaty 4, 1, to whom referenee may be made for the oxeeptions
párva VII. 103. 5e and bráhma VI. 35. la.
281
312
30
In spite of the three exceptions we may concludo that the great
majority of the 20 instances betrays the very principIe of distri-
bution, aecording to which also other categories in -a, viz. the gerunds
in -(t)ya and áceha (see § 4 and § 5) have been treated b~ the
editors. This distribution is accordingly editorial and the expenence
gained in studying the former categories entitles us to restore the
short onding -a everywhere at the end of a pada.
In conclusion it may be stated that only by utilizing the results
at which we arrived in the former sections it has been possible to
detect the part which the editors have taken in the constitution
of our vulgate text, and so to restore the pre-editorial forms.
Taken in itself the evidence for the neuter plural s in -a would
hardly have pe;mitted any conclusion. Among the many exceptions
which, as a result of the editorial rehandling of the text, now
confuso the issue, the 29 instances of shortening before the caesura
constitute by far the largest category. So our criterion of the
caesura (the correctness of which is warranted both by the smal~er
categories and on linguistic grounds) has been of no use wlth
regard to the neuter plurals in -a, nor to those in -i and -ü.
13. Some of the categories discussed in the preceding sections
had already been recognized as being different from the cases ?f
lengthening, viz. áceha, instrumental s in -ti and the gerunds m
-ya and -tya (see Wackernagel, p. 311). To these we have now
added the plural forms in -a, -i and -ü (e.g., náma, bhári, and
purá). It does not seem likely that many more. instances with
final shortening wiIl be found. For two words WhICh re~arkab.ly
often end in -a this explanation may perhaps seem temptmg, VIZ.
sma and adyá. The first word, which has been dealt with at great
length by Benfey 60), seems to me exceptional on account of its
monosyllabism: as a matter of fact, monosyllables show a strong
tendency towards lengthening of the final vowel (see also Zubaty
3, 91 on sthá, and cf. aboye § 3). To facilitate a judgment on adyá
we add the analogous data of áeeha 61) :
a) within the pada, before a single consonant:
. adyá 47: adyá 36 áccha 2: áeeha 84
b) idem, before a consonant-group:
only adyá 6 ni!.
60) See Benfey IV, 3, 26-29, Zubaty 4,·14 f., Oldenberg, Prolegomena
412-415 and 60, 138 f.; 62, 486.
61) For adyá see Benfey IV, 1, 11, Zubaty 4, 15-16, Oldenberg Prole-
gomena 417 f.; 60, 152 n. 1. I here reproduce the figures of Zubaty's very
useful synoptieal list (4, 111).
282
313
 . .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
31
c) before the caesura:
adyá 56: adyá 4 áccha -: áccha 25
d) at the end of a pada: ., _ . It occurs in the singular forms of brávi-mi (1st pers. plur. brü-málJ),
onlYadyá 30 (a, c 15; b, d 15) áccha 30 (m b, ~): acchu 20 (m a, c)
Oldenberg (Prolegomena 418) and Arnold (Ved¿c Metre 145) w~re
right, accordingly, in considering the short vowel as the genu~ne
ending, whatever its linguistic explanation may ~e. T~e 9-UOtl?-g
of the rhythmical sandhi-variant in the etymologICal dictlOnanes
(cf. Leumann, Uhlenbeck and Mayrhofer) can only lead to mis-
conceptions.
'14. Since this study is a continuation of former publications on
laryngeal problems 1 take the opportunity ~o a.dd a. brief re~~rk
on a crucial problem, which also recent pub.hcatlOn~ m my opm1:0n
have failed to elucidate. While the precedmg sectlOl1S dealt wIth
shortening in connection with final laryng~als we shall .n0w have
to speak of the lengthening of the SanskrIt representatIVe of the
laryngeals. . . .
As Wackernagel points out, sandhl-Iengthe~mg of fin~l -~ and
-u is in general rare. 62) Wackernagel mentlOns eSI?eClalIy. th~
verbal endings but the same is true also of the neuter smgnlar m -~
(where no long sandhi-variant is attested at all) and -u, where
the ratio is -u 413 : -ü 13 (puní 12, uní 1). If the particularly
frequent use of pur1Í should be due to the special phonetic structure
of its last sylIable -Hu (see § 8) there would remain only a single
instance of lengthening out of a total number of 256 occurrences
in -i and 414 occurrences of -u. This striking fact remind3 us of a
similar phenomenon in Latin, where vowel-Iengthening ac~ording
to Lachmann's law is foundin, e.g., actus (root (Lg-), but not m roots
with the radical vowels i and u (e.g., strtctus : strtg-) , which, on
account of their cIosed character, lent themselves far less to
lengthening. 63) In the light of these paralIel cases it is _ha~dl.y
surprising that the ending -i of the neuter plural (e.g. náman-~) lS
never lengthened. This rnay also be due to some. extent to rhyth-
mical conditions, the preceding syllable always bemg long (Wacker-
nagel, op.c. 312). It remains doubtful, thercfore, that the absence
of a long variant of -i is to be attributed to its descendance from a
consonantal laryngeal of proto-Indo-Iranian. 64)
62) Waekernagel I, 311, ef. Benfey U, 80, Oldenb~rg, Prolegomena .394 f.
63) See in general Meíllet, Etudes sur l'étymologte et le vocabula~re du
vieux.slave 121 ff., MSL. 15, 265, Mélanges de SaU8sure 98. .
64) This seems. implíed in Waekernagel's remark, p. 313, lme 1 f. For
the derivation of Skt. i (: Avestan zero) from a eonsonantaI IaryngeaI see
Notes on Vedic Noun-Infiexion 25 ff.
283
314
1
32
On the other hand, Skt i from H (mostly a vocalic H, it is true)
appears to have been lengthened in many cases within a word.
which clearly reflects a normal athematic inflection of proto-Indo-
European, viz. *mlé1jB -mi : *mluH -més; and in the plural (befor~
endings with an initial conson~nt) of the 9th class, e.g. gr?h-'(I4-"!I'~'
plur. grbh-?Ji-málJ, (correspondmg to ~he Greek v~r?al mfle~tl~n
of the type Oáf-l-yr¡-f-ll: Oáf-l-ya-w;v) wlth the partICIple grbh~-ta-,
which corresponds to Avestan g'Jr'Jpta- [grpta-], from *ghrbhH-tó-.
Many explanations have been proposed, ofte~ .base~ on ~ather
divergent theories about the LE. ablaut. A cntICal dlS?USS~on of
them would involve, therefore, a more profound exammatlOn of
their theoretical foundations than is possible within the limits of
this brief note. However, since the Avestan correspondences teach
us that the development of the consonantal H to i is a peculiarity
of the Indian branch alone, it seems certain that Skt. i, at least in
so far as it represents a consonantal laryngeal of proto-I~do­
Iranian cannot have arisen but at a rather late date. ExplanatlOns
which trace i back to a group of phonemes IfH in proto-~.E. 66)
have, therefore, little chance of being correcto Nor can, m my
opinion, the ~heory of the excI.usively c~~sonantal. character o~ {~,
which makes lt necessary to derIve every ~ ID SanskrIt from 1. E.~, )
overcome the overwhelming mass of difficulties that arise f~om it:
e.g., grbhitá- must then reflect (in spite of the. Ave~tan ev~dence)
*ghrbh-i-H-( + -tó-), whereas a stem *ghrbh-eH-~- (wIth the mverse
order of the phonemes H and i) must be posited to account for
grbhiiyáti (which is, in reality, a ya-present based on the non-
infixed root grbhii-) 67); and amaritf- must then be traced bac~ to
-iH-tr- despite the clear indications contained in the Vedic paradl~m
amúri-lJ" gen. amúr(H )-alJ" which preserves the traces of a para~lg­
matical interchange of vocalic and consonantal H. 68) Acc~rdmg
to another theory tho long i in -iman- is tho result of a comphcated
(and, 1 am afraid, very improbable) recast of an older type of
declension, in which a short i is supposed to have occurred only
before the consonant-group -mn- in the weak cases. 69) As far as 1
can see, however, this supposition lacks any sup~ort of facts: t~e
Rigvedic evidence rather speaks in favour of Just the ?pposlte
conclusion, viz. that -i- must originally have been restncted to
tIIl) L. L. Hammerieh, Laryngeal before Sonant (Meddelelser ... Kobenhavn
1948) 68.
tIIl) Burrow, "Shwa" in Sanskrit, Transact. Phil. Soco 1949, 43, 53.
67) Die indogermanischen Nasalpriisentia (1937) 13, 88 n. 3, 231 f.
68) India Antiqua 202.
69) Kurylowiez, Rocznik Orientalistyczny 15 (1939-1949), 15 ff.
284
315
 ----------------_._-_
33
the strong cases, where it stood before -ma(n). 70) Wackernagcl's
exposition 71), though written nearly sixty years ago, compares
favourably with these modern theories but is unable to remove
the main difficulties,' since for brávi-ti, ami-ti, vrr;,i-té, and grbhi-tá-
the ablaut-:type -ay- : + does not provide an explanation.
Although the following remarks do not pretend to solve the
riddle, they may perhaps contain a useful hint for future research
in this field. First it may be observed that the evidence seems to
fall into two groups: the first category comprises the words, which
(more 01' less) belong to the common language and which continue
'to be used in later times, whereas the second is made up of words
that are specifically poetical and characteristic of the hieratic
language of the Rigveda. Although the delimitation of both groups
may present difficulties if we should try to draw a rigid line of
demarcation this does not diminish the essential difference which,
1 think, exists between them.
Many of the words of the first group have a common feature
which has not yet been noticed, as far as 1 know: the i is preceded
(01', sometimes, followed) by a sonant labial sound, cf. ámiti,
bráviti, taviti, Br. sami~va, grbhitá-, mimite. When contrasted with
snath-iti, aniti, jani~va, staniti, svasiti, this would seem to be
hardly incidental. There are certainly also counter-instances
which show a short i in the same position, e.g. vamiti, samitf-, savitf-
(but prasavitf-, see below). But the possibility of lengthening
seems to be conditioned by a labial sound (and sometimes r, e.g.,
sárira-~).
The second group consists of such noun categories as amaritf-,
etc., váriman-, sáviman-, etc., tari~ár;,i-, etc. The i is without
exception preceded by a sonant continuant (mostly v 01' r, seldom
n). In several instances there is a vacillation between short and
long i according to metrical exigencies: thus váriman- is always
used in the anapaest after the caesura, while váriman- occurs in
the cadence; and prasavitá stands (like prataritá, amaritá) after
the caesura, which required lengthening of i, whereas i remains
short in savitá, which could be used in the same place of the pada
without a change of its vowel-quantity.72) So, on the one hand,
there are words which would not have suited the exigencies of
prosody without lengthening, e.g. prasavitá and prataritá, which
would otherwise have produced a sequence of three short sylla-
70) India Antiqua 203 ff.
71) Altind. Gramm. l, 19 f.
72) See India Antiqua 204.
285
316
... --
34
bIes 73); whereas, on the other hand, certain types oí noun-forma-
tions had come to be habitually used in a specific place of the
pada, e.g. the locative forms oí páríman-, sáviman-, stáriman- and
háviman-, whieh oecur exclusively in the cadence of the Jagati-
verse. Their specifie rhythmieal nature is accordingly determined
by the exigenoies of this eadenee. 74) Similarly tuvi- ( < l. E.. *tuH -~-!)
remains unchanged before a long syllable of the word wlth WhlCh
it is composed: tuv-imanyu-, tuvimiitrá-, tuvimrak{lá-, tuvirádhas-,
tuvívaja-, etc. However, whenever it is followed by a short syllable
the i is lengthened: tuvimagha-, tuviráva-, cf., e.g., .
vidmá hí tvá tuvikürmím
tuvíde{lr;,am tuvimagham /
tuvimiitrám ávobhih VIII. 81. 2
All this however, is 'matter of poetical technique: the words
eoncern~d .are all typical products of the hieratie langua~e and
have hardly ever been used in the language of every-day }¡fe; so
the poets, though utilizing a real tendency of the living language
to make the w0rds suit the metrical exigencies, were apparently
free occasionaUy to use the non-lengthened variant if necessary.
Thus we find, in the anapaest:
práryá stU{le tuvimaghásya dd1l4m V. 33. 6d.
Such metrical doublets, however, are remarkably rareo .
On the whole the lengthened i from H seems to have been far
more frequent in the poetical idiom than in the common language.
With regard to words appertaining to the latter the poets were
apparently less free: this is at least the conclusion which a com-
parison of áávira- and sthávira- suggests to uS. Both words show
the same mode of formation (cf. áávira-: á'iÍra- = sthávira-:
sthürá-) but Bthávira- which probably was in common us~ (as,
indeed, it has remained ovor since) díd not allow an altemtlOn of
its rhythmical pattern. Therefore, it is ueed exclusively after the
caesura (16 times, most frequently as -aya, -aBya). On. tho .o~her
hand Bávira- sooms to have boen peculiar to the poetlCal ldlOm
alone' as it is not attested outside the Rigveda. It occurs only
twice' in a Gayatri-stanza (nára ááviraya dhiyá 1. 3. 2b and i{l~
yatam ááviraya I. 30. 7b). Has it been used here because the long ~
allowed this, 01' has tho i primarily been lengthened because sorne
poet had at one time wished to use it in a Gayatri-verse1 At any
rate, the long i, in so far as it is confined .to the vocabulary of the
Vedie mantras has never been fuUy sanctlOned by the later gram-
73) Against the type coditf-, ninditf-, rak?itf-, vanditf-, etc. (with analog-
ícal i, it is true), which have never long i.
74) India Antiqua 205.
286
317
 35
marians. The word stáriman-, for instanee, is quite isolated in the
Vedie literature itself and never u.sed in post- Vedie works: there
is one oecurrence in adve~ó adyá barhí?a stárímar;¡,i X. 35. 9a, and
the adj. su~táriman- is found in Vaj.S .. and Taitt.Br. The ~ad~kara
accepts the long i in this word (and m the other :vords l? _-~ma~¿­
which are exclusively used in the cadence of JagatI, e.y. sav~rnam),
porhaps because the long i in theso words w~s considercd a
eharaeteristic of a separate noun-elass. In prasamtd, OH the other
hand, although it is related to sávíman- and although .i~s i is due
to the same prosodical lengthening tho analogy of samtr- was too
strong to take -itf- as a characteristic of a separate word-group
(with prataritd, arnaritd): so he takes the i in this word as a
lengthening of i (see also Pratisakhya 589, 2). Others, however,
could arrive at the same conclusion with regard to stáriman-. As
a matter of faet, starirnán- quoted in the UI).adisütra can hardly
be different from the Vedic word (in spite of the divergent accent).
J ust like the lengthening of i within a word owing to prosodical
exigencies, the sandhi-Iengthening of fin~l vowels has ~ad a more
01' less occasional character. The questlOn may be raIsed, then,
whether the absence of lengthening in the infiexional endings in -i
(from H) mayalso be due to the circumstance that this -i is only
seldom preceded by sonant continuants, excepted n. 75)
Conclusions.
1) The Sarhhitá-text oí the Rigveda preserves the traces of an
interesting type of sandhi: long final vowels that have arisen írom
a combination of a short vowel + a laryngeal (Ji) wero only
used beforo a consonant of tho following word; in the positions
before a vowel (with sorne restrictions) and in pausa the short
vowel remained after tho loss of H. Since the ante-consonan tal
sandhi-variant has later been generalized, the short ending may
be called a "shortened" variant of what in the later language is
the normal ending (§ 1).
2) Most studies on the subject havo suffered more 01' less from
the difficulty of drawing a line of demarcation between the
phenomena oí lengthening and shortening since at the end of a
pada we find in both cases a short vowel, and within the pada
before a single consonant (often, resp. always) a long one. There
are only two criteria, viz. a) the position before a consonant-group
b) the position before the caesura. In these positions the old com-
7~) Note the ending .taTi, where -í 8eemB to repreBent I.E.~í: but -nimáQ.
-nithá etc. (against namani, etc.) remains unoxplained.
287
318
36
binl1tions of vowel -1- Il aro reprosüllted by long vowols, wherolts
lengthening oí short vowels is here prohibited 01' avoided (§ 3).
(In this oonnection we may stress the need of an examination of
the sandhi of the feminine nominative endings -a and -i: why
has the "laryngeal-sandhi" thus far only been íound in instrumental
forms in -ti and -(t)ya~).
3) The original sandhi, as briefiy sketched sub 1. has not remained
fuUy intact in the existing Sarhhita-text. Because the editors
equated the cases oí shortening with the common phenomenon of
final lengthening, they have applied the rules prevailing for the
latter· category to the former also. This procedure, however, has
not been carried out consistently: the endings in -lt have been
more thoroughly changed than those in -~ and -11" particularly át
the end of the padas a and c, where the pause-form in -a has be en
replaced by -a (§§ 4, 5, 12).
4) For a renewed study of the Rigvedic evidence, which can
now be undertaken from a íresh viewpoint a re-arrangement oí
the relative materials is required since in íormer studies they have
been more 01' les s coníounded with the instances oí lengthening.
5) While tho long onding oí tho gerunds in -ya and -tya at tho
end of tho odQ. padas is duo to an editorial rehandling oí the text
(see sub 3), seven instances with an anomalous short ending in
the mandalas l and X refiect the later stage of linguistie develop-
ment: th~ generalization oí the pause-endings -ya and -tya aeeord-
ingly dates írom the late Rigvedie period and shows that the
specifie sandhi-rules were still applied in the popular language oí
that time (§ 4).
6) Although it has long been recognized that the neute: plural
forms in -i I1mI -1¿ cl1nnot bo rogarded Ita longthened Vltrlants of
-i and -u, they havo novel' been eonsidored in conneetion with the
problem oí shortening. From ~ comparative ,:"iewpoint .the~ must
contain the normal plural endmg -H, and thlS eoneluslOn lS con-
firmed by tho Rigvedie sandhi. The long ending must originally
have been the ante-eonsonantal sandhi-variant, ef. Latin tri-
ginta (§ 6). _
7) The plural ending -a of the neuter stems in -n (e.g., náma
beside ndmiin-i) , is due to an innovation of Sanskrit on fuo
analogy of the neuter endings in -i and -ü: while ndmiin-i is an
l.E. formation (ef. Gothie haírtóna), ndma is quite isolated. The
very few Avestan instanees of plural íorms in -a cannot be utiliz~d
for eomparative purposes. The existonco of tho doublets náma :
ndmiini gave riso to similar analogical now íormations (dand :)
dandni, (bMri :) bMriry,i and (vásü :) vásüni, whieh are unknown
in Iranian (§ 6).
288
319
 37
~) '1'ho editors .have changed the regular cndings -í, -17, and -a,
m accordance wlth the endings with final lengthening, in certain
places of the páda (viz. 2nd and 3rd place, po sitio n before the
caesura and, as far as -a is concerned, at the end of the pádas
a and c) as well as in certain sandhi-combinations (viz. in the
position before a consonant group) (§ 8).
1)) Neisser's explanation of aprati is incorrect, the use of apratí
as an adverb being secondary (§ ll). . F. B. J. KUIPER
10) Leng~hening of i (from H) within a word is partly a feature
of the ordm~ry l.anguage (e.g., bráviti, amíti) , partly it is peculiar
to the ~oetlCal ldi~m alone (e.g., ~tárima'ifi, prasavitd). In both
cases thIS lengthenmg was determmed by a preceding sonant
continuant (in particular a labial Bound) (§ 14).
[Additional note on p. 10, n. 3: For the gerunds in -ya amI -tya see
also Wa?ke~agel-Debrunner, Altind. Gramm. lI, 2 (1954), 781, whose
e.xplanatlOn dlsregards the speClfic sandhi in pa.usa. It should be noted that
hke Zubaty, 1 ta:ke the occurrences in -tiya as a separate category becaus~
they never end m a long vowel. They have therAfore bcen excluded from
my account, which consequentIy differs from Debrunner's.]
289
320
AVESTAN MAZDA-
by
Leiden
l. The use of the adjective mazda- as an epithet of God in the Avesta
(resp. as part of the name of the highest God in Old Persian) has given
rise to sorne theories concerning the development of religious concepts
in Iran. Sten Konow cquated it to the Vedic abstract noun medhlÍ-
"wisdom" (which had already been envisaged as a possibility by Jackson,
Grundr. iran. Phi/., U, 632), and suggested that Zarathustra, on the lines
of his divinizing such abstract concepts as "proper thought", "good
mind", had proclaimed "wisdom" as the highest principIe, the proper
meaning of ahuró mazda being "Lord Wisdom".l In Konow's opinion,
according!y, the 01d lranian ending -ah of the nominative singular must
be secondary for older -a (p. 220). It may be noted in passing that
Konow's theory disregarded an observation made many years earlier by
B. Geigcr, who in his important work Die Amasa Spanlas, p. 213, con-
cluded from the parallclism betwecn ásurab prácefab (\'i.\'vávedlib, etc.)
in the Rigveda and Ahuró mazda in the Avesta that the concept of the
"Wise Lord" has belonged alrcady to the religion of the common
Indo-lranian periodo Kaj Barr further developed Konow's theory in
0st og Vest (Copenhagen, 1945), p. 136, whereas Duchesne-Guillemin,
Zoroastre, p. 293, objected that the Old Persian genitive (-)mazdaha in
his opínion proved that a nominative in -ah must have existed already
in the oldest (pre-Zoroastrian) stage of Old Iranian. Seeing that such
far-n~aching theories as to the origin and development of the Iranían
religious concept of the Highcst God have been based on a single word,
there is sorne reason to consider this more c\osely from a linguistic
point of view.
1 Sten Konow, "Medha and Mazda", l/lO Commemoralion Vo/ume (Poona, 1937;
article written in 1932-33), pp. 217-222, esp. p. 221. This view differed frorn that held
by Maria Wilkins Srnith, Sludies in Ihe Synlax 01 the Gathas 01 Zaral/¡I/shtra (Philadel-
phia, 1929), pp. 26 r., 44 r., who distinguished between an adjective mazdiih- "wise"
and a noun mazdii/¡- "wisdorn", the forrner of which she held to represent the original
word.
321
 AVESTAN MAZOÁ- 87
2. There can be no doubt as to the stem of maulli- being in -ii-. A stem
mazdiih-, posited by Bartholomae has not, indeed, the slightest support
of evidence. It owes its origin to a long-forgotten theory. In 1871
Aurel. Mayr had shown in a brilliant study published in the Sitzungs-
berichte del' !mis. Akademie del' Wissensch. zu Wien, vol. 68, pp. 751-780,
that the genitive-ablative mazda, the dative mazdai, and the accusative
mazdqm are prosodically trisyIlabic in the GiHhas, whereas the nominative
mazda and the vocative mazdií are disyllables (op. cit., p. 774). For the
genitive and the dative this statement was confirmed by sorne passages
in the later Avesta (see Geldner, (Jber die Metrik des jiingeren Avesta
(1877), pp. 9 f.). When Bartholomae in 1879 published his critical
edition of the Gathas he accordingly read 2 *mazdayham for mazdqm
(28.3b, 29.5b, 30.5e, 45.8d), *mazdll!1he for mazdiii (28.5bS, 31.1 e, 6c,
33.14b), and "mazdáfJhü 1'01' lIIazdd, mazdlis(Cá) (28.4b, 30.IOc, 32.1 b,
4c, 33.2c, 51.19c,4 53.2b, 3c). In one passage he even assumed a trisyllabic
form for the nominative. 5
Bartholomae's chief reason for adopting these emendations was 110
doubt the existence of a genitive (-)mazdiiha in Old Persian. Besides,
Roth and Grassmann recorded a Rigvedic adjective sumedhás-, which
led sorne scholars to equate Av. mazdah- (sic!) with Ved. medhas- (Jackson,
Grundr. iran. Phi/., I1, 632). In later publications Bartholomae abandoned
this idea (as well as other bold theories of his early studies), but continued
nevertheless to quote the stem as mazdiih-. The A vestan case-forms
mazda, mazdiii, and mazdqm he now explained as secondary formations
due to the analogy of root-nouns in -ii-; cf. Grundr. iran. Phi!., r, paras
382 fin., 414, Altiran. Worterb., 1162 f.6 As usual in Bartholomae's later
scientific work, this explanation totally disregarded the prosodical facts.
In this respect, one feels, the hazardous theories of his juvenile studies
were superior to the resignation of his later publications.
3. Other scholars, however, while accepting without further inquiry
the stem mazdiih- in spite of its obviously weak foundations, mad(~ new
efforts to account for the trisyllabic character of most of its case-forms.
• Die Gafi'ta's und die hei/igen Gebetedesaltiranischen Volkes(1879), pp. 7, 8, 97,171.
3 But si/vistai sraosi/m mazdtii is probably a mistake for [savistahya srausam
mazda'ah], see Lornrnel, Festse"r. AI/drcas (1916), pp. 105 r. cr. Yt. 10,89 (Sirnilarly
Lesoy, Festschr. Winternitz (1933), p. 14). . 8
~ See, however, Lornrnel, GoII. Nachr., 1935, p. 160.
• 10 Y. 51.2Oc should be read (agaiost Bartholornae, 1879, p. 62): [yazamna"a/,
namallii mazdli" rafS. ram {agda"l, er. Aodreas-Waekernagel, GolI. Nachr., 1931, p. 310.
• Sirnilarly, e.g., Reiehelt, Awest. Elementarb., p. 474; Meillet-Beoveoiste, Gram-
maire du vieux-perse, p. 162; Kent, Old Persian Grammar, pp. 64, 165.
322
88 F. B. J. KUIPER
Andreas' theory about the graphical tradition ofthe Avesta, and Lommel's
subsequent discovery of traces of graphical confusion of h and ii in the
vulgate text, opened a prospect of explaining the Gathic forms as graphical
e-rrors. Thus Meillet, J. As. (1920), p. 198, proposed to read the Gathic
genitive mazda as [mazdiihah], and Lommel, who in 1916 (Festschrift
Andreas, pp. 105, 106) still followed Andreas (e.g. Gott. Nachr. (1909),
p. 47) in writing muzdó for it, la ter also declared [mazdoho] to be the
genuine Gathic form meant by the reading mazdli of the MSS.; see
Worter und Sachen, N.F. 4 (1939), pp. 238, 240, 247. The explicit graphical
expIfll1ation of the inflexion of mazdáh-- was given by Tedesco, ZIJ, 2
(1923), pp. 50-53 (but cf. Tavadia, Indo-Ir. Studies, n (1952), p. 10).
4. These explanations, however, disregarded the simple fact that the
whole evidence of A vestan points unanimously to a stem mazdti-; cf.
especially the vocative mazdti and the compound mazdii-vara- Y. 37.3.
(To some extent, therefore, Morgenstierne was right in taking mazdiii to
represent phonetically mazdtii, but phonologically mazdiiai, cf. NTS., 12
(1942), p. 76.) As for Ved. sumedhásam X, 65.l0c and the voc. plul'.
sumedhasaf:¡ X. 62.1d-4d, they are clearly new formations created to the
nomo sing. sumedhdf:¡ on the analogy of, e.g., sumánti/:t: sumánasam
(Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altind. Gramm., III, pp. 284 f.). If similar
analogical forms had existed in the Gathic dialect, the genitive would
certainly have been written *mazdaljho (Iike, e.g., humana!JIIO, gen. of
humaflll). As rol' the graphical confusion between h and ii in the Avcstan
text tradition, it has given rise to incidental misreadings ollly (e.g. asii¡
for asahyti) but not to consistent errors. The existence of a stem mazdiih-
was therefore rightly rcfuted by Holger Pedcrsen, La ciflquieme déclinaison
latine (Copenhagen, 1926), p. 72, Konow, Jha Commemoration Volume,
p. 219, and Pisani, Riv. Stud. 01'., 19 (1940), p. 81 (who also refers to
Collitz, BB, 7, p. 180). They all assume a stem mazdli-, which was also
given already by Kanga, A practical Grammar of the A vesta Language
(Bombay, 1891), p. 75.
5. The stem mazdii-, however, does not account for the trisyllabic forms
ofthe Gathic dialect. The Gathic words with a disyJlabic ti mostly belong
to special morphological classes, e.g. ytih-, which must be read as [yaah-]
in ya1Jh6 Y. 30.2c, yiihi 46.14c, 49.9d. 7 Whatcver its exact meaning may be,
7 But ef. Gersheviteh, JRAS, 1952, p. 178.
B cr. Sehaeder, ZDMG., 94 (1940), p. 403 n. 2; Humbaeh, Miinch. Stl/d. Spraclllv.,
2, pp. 13 f., 17.
323
 AVESTAN MAZDÁ- 89
it is no doubt an -ah-derivative of the root ya-o Similarly /¡udal)ha
and duzdal)hó, e.g., in Y. 30.3c asca hudal)hó aras visyata naif duZdaljhó
[ayás ca hudaahah [S vi cyata, naif duZdaahah] are compounds of a noun
[daah-], which is a similar derivative of the root dá- 9 as manah- is of
man-. While these cases, and their Vedic parallels bhds-, bhdsvant-,
ddsvant-,lO concern the word-formation, others show the same phenome-
non in inflectional endings, e.g. L. Av. pantqm [pantaam], Ved. pánthám.
It is a well-known fact that two theories have been advanced to explain
these "vowels with disyIlabic value".l1 According to the older view they
reftect an "abnormal intonation" (Schleifton) of proto-lndo-European,
traces of which are also found in final syIlables of Greek, Germanic, and
Balto-Slavonic. 12 The curious restriction of this Schle{/ioll to final
syllables in the other branches of I.EP might be attributed to the particu-
lar development of their phonological systems. Yet the theory of extra-
long ("trimoric") vowcls railcd to cxplain satisraclorily thc Vcdic (ami
Avestan) evidence, which, as Oldenberg (Prolegomella, pp. 180-184)
emphasized, allows no other concIusion but that á was really pronounced
as iíá. On the other hand, this double vowel was perrectly explained by
the second ("laryngeal") theory, which by referrillg, e.g., Av. da- Ved.
da-) to proto-I.E. *deH- made it possible to account for [daah-] as
reflecting a still uncontl'acted P.LE. *déH-es-. 14 Since, howevel', this
theol'y did not apparentIy apply to such cases as the ending of the
genitive plural -ám (Greek -c;,v, Lith. -ü), it had the disadvantage of not
covering the total mass of facts (as the older theory cIaimed to do).
6. The laryngeal theory (if we may comprise under this general term
the rather divergent attempts at an elaboration of what essentially is still
a theory in statu nascendi) has not met with general acceptance. This
makes it necessary for us briefly to resume the main facts upon which
the assumption of a consonantal laryngeal for proto-Indo-Iranian is
based. Sorne distinguished scholars, indeed, though not rejecting the
laryngeal theory in itself, think that the laryngeals may at best have
• lt is not necessary for our purpose to enter on a discussion of these words.
10 Oldenberg, Die Hynmen des Rigveda, 1 (Prolegomella), pp. 172 f., Noten ad VII.
1. 28, 23. 11, X. 37. 8, etc.
n Oldenberg, Prolegomella, pp. 163 ff.: "Vocale mit zweisylbiger Geltung".
12 ~f. e.g., Brugmann, Grundriss der vergl. Gramm. der idg. Spracllen, 12, p. 948;
StreJtberg, Urgerman. Grammatik, p. 159 f.
13 Cf., e.g., A. Campbell, Trans. Phi/ol. Soc. (1936), pp. 11, 13,37.
" See Kurylowicz, Prace Filologiczne, 11 (1927), p. 221, etc.; Rocznik Otjentalistycz-
ny, 4 (1926-28), p. 200; Etudes indo-européenes, 1, p. 35,42.
324
90 F. 11. J. KUIPER
belonged to an early stage of the proto-l.E. phonemic system, which
would excIude the possibility that they can explain any particular detail
in the historical languages. This view is obviously incompatible with
that expressed by Holger Pedersen, according to which numerous
historically attested facts in the various LE. languages cannot be traced
back to an identical prehistoric formula unless one assumes the laryngeals
to have continued unchanged far ¡nto the period in which the separate
tongues developed. 15
The choice between such fundamentally opposed views cannot be
det~rmined by any a priori reasoning but only by concrete observations.
As far as Indo-Iranian is concerned, these seem to point to the following
conclusions: the existence of a consonan tal laryngeal in proto-Indo-
Iranian seems warranted by 1) the development of the aspirate surds as
a new c1ass ofphonemes (with the restrictions mentioned in India Antiqua,
p. 202, Lingua, 5, p. 320 n. 1); 2) the absence of lellgthening of a in
syllables which must originally have been c10sed OWillg to a following
laryngeal (e.g., 1st pers. cakára < *k"ek"or/ He against the 3d pers.
caktÍra < *k"ek"o/re); 3) the disappearance of a sound in cases where
vowel elision is excluded (e.g., Av. draonah-Jaor- against Ved. drávi11aS-,
pitr-, etc.).I s That a consonantal laryngeal still existed in the separate
/ndian brand1 may be inferred from the phenomenon of laryngeal umlaut
in Sanskrit,H whereas the shortening in pausa of -lí, -í, -1Í in the Rigveda
would seem to allow no other conclusion but that in (;ertaill sandhi
positions the consonantal laryngeal had continued to be spoken till (01'
till shorlly before) (he llis/orical Vedic {Jeriocl. IH Fnr (hese rcasons it
seems unjustilied, as far as Lhe Vedic language is concerned, to loo k tlpon
the assumption of a laryngeal consonant as a nebulous theory.
The same is true of the archaic Gathic dialect, which differs essentially
from the Rigvedic idiom in that it apparently represents the language of
one man, whereas the Vedic hymns belong to widely different ages.
1ñ H. Pedersen, Hi/lilisclt I/nd die anderl'n indol'l/ropiiíschen Sprachen (Copenhagen,
1938), pp. 179, 185. . .
16 For the lndo-Iranian evidence see the resumé "Traces of Laryngeals In Vedlc
Sanskrit", India Antiqua (Leyden, 1947), pp. 198 ff. (with detailed rcferences), an~ for
the last point especially Notes on Vedic NO/ln-Infiexion, pp. 24 ff. (Mededeeltngell
Neder!. Akad. Welensch., N. R., 5, 1942, pp. 184 ff.). A useful account of the laryngeal
theory generalIy will be found in W. P. Lehmann's Proto-Indo-European Phon%gy
(Austin 1952), pp. 30 ff. See further L. Zgusta, Archil' Orienlá/ní, 19 (1951 j, pp. 428-472.
17 See Acta Orientalia, 19 (1946), p. 29 ff.
18 See S/lOrtening of final VOlVels in the Rigveda (Mededelingen del' Kon. Neder!.
Akademie V. Welensc!;., Ald. Letterk., N.R. 18, pp. 253 ff.). Note especially the gerunds
in -yá, -tya, where the shortening or final -ci must be due to the operation of the law
of shortening in the popular speech of the Rigvedic period (p. 2(2).
325
 AVESTAN MAZDA- 91
While the inconsistencies in the disyl!abic pronundation of a in the
Rigveda show it to be a mere archaism of the .hieratic language, the
Gathic prosody points consistently to a hiatus in an the cases where two
identical vowels may be supposed to have been originalIy separated by
a laryngeal. As faf as 1 can see, indeed, nothing would prevent us from
assuming that Zarathustra still pronounced sorne laryngeal sound in
these positions.¡9 We shall here transcribe such double vowels with
hiatus as [a'a], etc.
7. In 4 out of its 31 Rigvedic occurrences the accusative singular
pánthiim must be read as [pánthaam].20 In two of the oldest Yasts the
metre also points to a trisylIabic pronundation [pantaam],21 which is
indirectly confirmed by the Gathic [pa{}a'am] 31.9b (with the weak stem
paj}- slIbstitlltcd for fll/I/I-, Meillet, J. As., 1917, 11, p. ISR). Thc inf1cxion
01' this word has been clllddated by Holger Pedersen, KZ, 32 (11\91),
p. 269, La cinquieme déclinaison latine (1926), pp. 54, 64 n. I (cf. also
Wackernagel, KZ, 55 (1928), \08, Kurylowicz, Etudes indoeuropéellnes,
1, p. 47, Konow, Jha Commemoration Volume, p. 220). It represents an
antique type of infiexion (stilI extant in Lat. vate-s, gen. vat-is) and
continues proto-LE. *pónteH-s, gen. *p~ttH-ÓS.22 The trisyIlabic character
of the accllsative singular in the Veda and the Avesta shows that
*pónteH-m must have beco me *pantaH-am in proto-Indo-Iranian, with
regular -am from *-'11 after the consonan tal H (although this H may here
be due to a spedfic lndo-Iranian innovation). Similarly the nomo plur.
*pónteH-es became Ved. [pállthaab] (with analogical th from the weak
cases) in sugd rtásya pánthiib VIII. 3 J.I 3c. The comparatively rare
occurrence of disyllabic li in the Veda pro ves that it was aIread y an
archaism. In the normal speech of the Rigvedic period aa had been
contracted to li, which caused the nomo plur. pánthab to fal! together with
the nomo sing. An indirect indication of it is the new formation pánthiisab
1. IOO.3b (and from the Ath. S. downwards pállthiinab, see Wackernagel,
I.c., \05, \07 = Kleine Schr(ften, 1, pp. 332, 334).
An analogous explanation applies to the oblique cases of mazda-.
u mazdJscii ahurJy¡hó [mazdiis ca ahuriihah] 30.9b, 31.4a means "Mazda und die
Herren" (as Justi already translated it in Handbuch der Zendsprache, 1864, p. 223).
•• 1. 27. 6 bis, V. 10. Id, VIII. 68. 13b (Kuhn, Grassmann, see Oldenberg, Prolego-
mella, p. 187, Notell ad VIII. 68. 13).
21 Yt. 8.7, 10. 86, see Geldner, Ober die Metrik des jÜIIgeren Avesta, p. 17.
ti Since Ved. pathíbhib corresponds to Gathic padi/bis 51.16b it cannot represent
lE. i (Meillet, lndian Sludies in honor of Charles Rockwell Lanman, Cambridge Mass.,
1929, pp. 3-6; Benveniste, Origilles de la formation des noms en i.e., 1, p. 62).
326
92 F. B. J. KUlPER
This represents an autique nomen agentis *mt~z-dhéHl_, 23 whieh bears the
same relation to the abstract noun Ved. medhá- "wisdom" as Gathic
zraz-dii- "faithful" does to Ved. §rad-dhd- "faith". 80th types of nDuns
were originally infiected as root nouns (ef. Waekernagel-Debrunner,
Altind. Gramm., lI, 2, p. 35 f.; IlI, p. 127 f.). As such they showed the
same opposition of strong and weak stems as, e.g., Lat. vate-s, gen. viit-is
and Ved. pántM-l), gen. path-ál). The old dative of §raddhd- is still
preserved in §raddh-é (abhicák$e sraddhékám l. 102.2d), and the corre~­
pon.ding.adjective oceurs both in §raddhá ít VII. 32.14c (for §raddltab
"der Gl1iubige", Oldenberg, Wackernagel-Debrunner In, 128) and, as a
nominative plural, in Y.31.1 c alCil aeibya vahista yai zrazda al)han mazdiii,
which must evidently be read [at Git aibyah vahista yai zrazda'ah ahan
mazdlí'ai] "but the best (words) for those who are faithful to the Wise Oue".
8. This allows us to reconstruct the original infiexion of mazdii- as
follows:
P.LE. A vesta n
nomo *m1;Jz-dhéH¡-s [mazdah]
acc. *m1;Jz-dhéH¡-m [mazda'am]
gen. *m1;Jz-dhH¡-ós [*mazd-ah]
dato *mttz-dhH¡-éi [*mazd-ai]
As for the accusative, the general tendency in Indo-Iranian to generalize
the long ii of the nominative in all the strong cases (except in a few words,
such as sumánasam, vr/rahálJam, pitáram) makes it possible that the
accllsativc hall bccomc [*IIl~I:dlÍ'(/m]. This original typc of inflcxion,
which is still faithfully prcscrvcd in L. Av. [panlah, pan/aam, pal}ah],
instr. plur. [padbis] and in Gathic maza, mazai (genitive and dative of
maza-), has been abandoned in the weak cases of mazda-. The trisyllabic
forms mazda (gen.) and mazdai (dat.) cannot represent anything else
than [mazda'ah] and [mazda'ai]. As in some other words (to be discussed
in §. 9), the stem of the aceusative has accordingly been extended to the
weak cases, on the analogy of such root words as, e.g., sar- (acc. saram,
gen. sara, dato sarai). In Later A vestan these forms were regularly
contracted to [mazdiih] , [mazdái]; their incidental pronunciation as
trisyllables (Geldner, Metrik, pp. 9 f.) must obviously be regarded as an
archaism. In passing it may be noted that the gen. sing. mazda [mazda'ah]
23 Cf. "mens-dlteH1 - in Av. mqz-dii- "to be mindful", Ved. mandhiitf- (from "malls-
dhiitr-) "devout man" (see Wackernagel-Debrunner, Allilld. Gramm., n,. 1, pp. ~4 ff.,
lI, 2, p. 37). The ratio of the ablaut "m1Js-: "mens- (from the nOUn "men-es-?) IS not
quite c1ear.
327
 A VESTAN MAZDÁ-
and the nomo plur. zrazda [zrazdd'ah] indirectly preserve the true endings
-ah, for which the Vulgate text mostly reads -o.
As a result of the contraction [mazdd'ah] > [mazdah] the genitive,
which in the Gathic dialect was c1early distinct from the nominative
[mazdah], became formally identical with it both in Later Avestan and in
Old Persian. While in the liturgicallanguage of the Avesta the old form,
sanctioned by sacred tradition, was maintained, it was again differentiated
from the nominative in the living speech of Old Persian by the addition
of a fresh genitive suffix -ah (mazdah-a). This correct interpretation of
the Old Persian form as the result of an accumulation of endings we owe
to Pisani, Riv. Stud. 01'., 19 (1940), p. 82. Kent, who stigmatized it
as "very improbable" (Grammar of Old Persian, p. 64 n. 3), failed to
understand the problem owing to his total neglect ofthe Avestan evidence.
9. Whereas this analysis leads us to reject the theory of mazda- having
been an abstract noun in origin, it confronts us with the general problem
of Zarathustra's poetical idiom. Little has been written about it from a
linguistic point of view except for the fundamental study by Meillet,
J.A., 1917, 1I, pp. 183-195. Generally it may be stated that this idiom,
though mainly based on a single dialect, was a Kunstsprache inasmuch
as it made use of dialectally different forms. This is most c1early illustrated
by the use of pif7re 44.7c besidefaoroi 53.4a. Since the Gathic dialect has
generalized the weak stem ptar- (ptara-, faor-), e.g., nominative [pta]
44.3b, accusative [ptaram] 31.8b, the form pif7re must have been taken
from a different dialect, which had inversely generalized the stem pitar-
ofthe strong cases. 24 It is tempting to explain in the same way the anomal-
ous neuter plural forms varaéahi 32.14b, afsmani 46.17a (beside anafsmqm
in b!), and saxY JlIi 53.5a, as there are no indications to show that the
ending with -i has been a sandhi variant in Zarathustra's idiom. However,
incidental forms with -i are also met with in the later dialecto
Apart from these few traces of dialectal variation, however, the Gathas
reflect a homogeneous dialect which, in spite ofits very antique character,
shows a much stronger tendency towards .simplification of the noun-
inflexion than is found in Later Avestan. ef., besides Gathic ptar-/faor-
(as against L. Av. pitar-/faor-), the genitive forms xratJus, pasJus (new
formations for xraf7wo, pasvo, which are still extant in Later Avestan), 25
and Gathic vispIJl)hiJ, vispanqm, dative sing. vispaí as against L. Av.
:: See Not~s on Vedic NOlln-Injiexion, pp. 21 f. Cf. [tanúm] 33.lOc: [tanll'am] 46.8 d.
See Medlet, J. A., 1917, I1, pp. 187 /f., and my Notes on Vedic Noun-Injiexion
pp. 44,51 f.
328
93 94 F. B. J. KUIPER
vispe, vispaesqm, vispamal Yt. 10.5 etc. 26 (The Vedic forms krátvab,
pasváb, vísve, víSve~am, vísvasmai correspond to those of the later
dialect). The Gathic accusative singular [pa&a'am] has been explained
as a new formation (based on the stem of the weak cases) for [panta'am],
which again survives in Later Avestan (see aboye p. 91). .
In sorne cases the older inflexion has been simplified by the extenslOn
of a strong stem (mostly, of course, that of the accusative singular) to
the weak cases. A clear instance is the genitive singular maratano 30.6c
(also aCGusative plural in 32.12a), for which the later Avesta still uses
mar~{)no (Y. 23.2, etc.): [martall-] was a common word in Old Iranian
for "(primeval) man" and the generalization of the stem [martan-] of the
27
accusative is evidently an innovation of the Gathic dialect alone.
Less cIear is the accusative plural asJno [asanah] "heavens" 30.5b as
against the genitive singular asno Yt. 13.42, 86 (= Ved. ásnab). The
weak stem of asman- may be expected to be either aSlI- (from *asmn-)
or asman- (with a representing a reduced vowel grade). Although the
analogical stem asall- must be rather old (cf. Ved. asáni-, f. "t~under~olt"),
its use in the accusative plural is likely to be due to an mnovatlOn of
the Gathic dialecto The later dialect uses the nominative plural asano
for the accusative. Among the designations of priests in -an- (which
may be comparatively recent formations) mq&ran- deserves notice,
because the Gathic idiom substitutes mq&riino, mq&rane for *mantaran6,
*mantarallé, whereas the later dialect preserves kara.lil- as the weak stem
of karapan-. . . .
FuJly parallel to tlle normalized paradigm of l1Ia::dü- IS the \I1llexlOll
of iida- "accounting". The metre requires trisyllabic fonns in spjnistii
mainyü mazdii l'al)huyá zavo ilda [spanista mallyü, mazda, vahuvi'li ::al'ah
ada'a] 33.12b "As (1) the most beneficent spirit, O Wise One, (grant me)
strength through (1) the good accounting", and in sraotli.moi maraídiitü.
moi adiii kahyaéi! paiti 33.llc "hear me, pity me, at the accounting to
each". Since adili must be a locative (as in cihü al paiti ádiil!ü 40.1 "at
these accountings"), we must probably read [ildil'i], which presupposes
2' See Meillet, J. A., 1917, 11, p. 190; Wackernagel-Debrunner, Allil/d. Gr., \11,
p. 581; and for vispi/mai Tedesco, ZII, 2, p. 42. . '. .
!7 The context of 30.6 ¡eaves no doubt as to mari/tano bemg a gemltve smg. (For
the interpretation of this passage see, e.g., Schaeder in Reitzenstein-Schaeder, SIl/dien
zl/m anliken Synkretismus aus Iran I/nd Griechel/land (1926), p. 213, n. 2.) The gra.m-
matical objections which must have induced Andreas, GolI. N.acll/:., 1909, p..48 (hke
Humbach, Miinch. Stl/d. Sprachw., 2, p. 9) to take it as a nommatlve plural dlsregard
' the dialectal peculiarities of the Gathic idiom.
329
 AYESTAN MAZDÁ-
an accusative *[ádá'am] with analogical a. 2M 011 the other hand, in
vatJuhi iida gaidi m6i, ii.m6i trapa 49.lc "As (?) the good accoul1ting
come to me (and) give me support", where the prosody demands a
disyllabic form, aH the modern translators (Bartholomae, M. W. Smith,
Andreas-Lommcl, Duchesne-Guillemin) take ada as an instrumental
singular (cf. Bartholomae, BE. 17, p. 347 n.). Since older forms some-
times occur in the Giithic dialect alongside of new formations (e.g.,
Jnraoj: mravaj, dJbiil'ayaj: diibayeiti, Meillet, J.A., 1917, 11, p. 191), the
existcnce of ada (from *a-dH-a, cf. Ved. pratidh-d, Bartholomae, Grundr.
iran. Phi/., la, p. 123) beside [iida'a] is in itself possible. However, an
instrumental va!luhi [I'ahvi] for I'a!/huya [vah(u)l'i'ti] 33.12b, 51.10c would
also be quite isolated in the Gathic dialect (cf., e.g., K. Lichterbeck, I<.Z,
33, pp. 189 n. A single instance in the later dialect occurring in a rather
corf'lIpt tcxt (ao'va!/u!witi ... lalll'a Aog. 48) cunnot slIpport this intcr-
pretation of Y. 49.lc, which accordingly involves two anomalies. There-
fore the possibility of taking iida l'atJuhl as a vocative (cf. mazda) should
be considered. Geldner, BB, 15, p. 259, Religiollsgesch. Lesebuch, p. 12,
interpreted it as a 110minative.
In the 1ight of these faGts the inftexion of A v. maida- would have sorne
importance for the history of the lranian religions, if we were to assume
that this normalized inftexion formed part of the specific innovations of
the Gathic dialect. In that case the Old Persian genitive *mazdah (pre-
supposed by mazdah-a) might be taken as a reftex ofreIigious propaganda
expanding from East Iran. However, the extension of the strong stem
in -ti- to the weak cases has rather been a common tendency of the Old
Iranian dialects, which could manifest itself at different periods and in
different regions. ef. in Later Avestan the genitive ,.a~aéstl1 and the
dative ra~aestai-éa beside a single occurrence of the old locative form
,.a~6isti.29 The accordance between Old Persian mazdah- and Gathic
[mazdd'ah], therefore, rather points to the conclusion that the name of the
Highest God had already lost its weak case-forms in a pre-Zoroastrian
'periodo
•• Short a + i is regularly contraeted to ae [diJ, ef. *raHi-vall(t)- in Ved. revál/t-
(always disyllabie), L. Av. raevan- (disyllabie, exeept for Yt. 14.20; see Geldner,
Metrik, p. 8).
21 Bartholomae, Grtm({,.. iral/. Phi!. la, pp. 121, 235, Altirall. Wb., 1506 f.
330
95
Rigvedic sahasiivan
1. The word sahasavan- is only used in the ~ksamhita, where it
occurs 13 times. Besides there is one occurrence of a vocative sava-
savan, which is mostly, but without apparent reason, referred to a stem
savasav.ant-;. cf., e.g., Grassmann, Worterbuch des RV, col. 1387 (but
cf. 1729b!), Macdonell, Vedic Grammar 195, Wackernagel- Debrunner,
Altind. Grammatik UI, 258 (but cf. U,2, 901!). The formation of sa-
hasavan- has not yet been explained. Wackernagel, Kuhn's Zeitschrift
46,272 (=Kleine Schriften I, 291) refrained from expressing an opinion.
The following brief note does not claim to present a solution to the pro-
blem, its mere object being to state more precisely the problem itself.
It is clear that the sole normal adjectival derivative of sáhas- is sáhas-
vant-, which occurs 19 times in the ~ksamhita, and has a close parallel
in Avestan hazahvan-. There is no possibility to connect sahasavan- with
this word, nor is it likely at all that a purely linguistic explanation can
be proposed. For several reasons, indeed, it must be doubted that sa-
hasavan- has ever belonged to the normal speech of the Vedic periodo
Not only its abnormal mode of formation (as against sáhasvant-) and its
restricted úse (only in the archaic Rigvedic idiom), but also the fact that
no other case-forms but the vocative sahasavan are attested suggests the
idea that sahasavan is an artificial creation of the Rigvedic poetic idiom
alone. As for the hapax legomenon savasavan I.62.11d, its occurrence
in the first maJ!<;lala might perhaps be due to its being a late incidental
imitation of sahasavan.
2. If this conclusion is correct, the prosodical character of sahasavan
(v v-"') must be taken into consideration as a possible factor of impor-
tance. The natural place for a word of this rhythmic pattern is after
the caesura of a Tri~tubh or J agatI stanza: as a matter of fact, in the
11 passages where sahasavan occurs in such a stanza, it always stands
at that place. This, however, is also the normal place for the adjective
sahasaná-, whose 4 occurrences in Tri~tubh padas always stand after the
caesura. Since sahasaná- is not used in the vocative, it may be stated
that from the viewpoint of poetical technique sahasavan functions as the
vocative of sahasaná-.
Retyped from Kuiper's original manuscript.
331
 However, it is not clear why no vocative of sahasiiná- should have
been used; its absence from the Rigvedic hymns might, indeed, be at-
tributed to the small number of occurrences. As a matter of fact, there
is one word of quite the same structure which also stands, in 7 out of
the 9 occurrences, after the caesura and which is employed thrice in the
vocative case, viz. savasiina (L62.13c, VII.93.2a, VIIL68.8a). There is,
however, one great difference which shows that a technical problem of
versification is involved in the use of these forms: while savasiina stands
in all the three passages before a consonant, the vocative sahasiivan is
followed by a vowel in 8 out of the 13 occurrences (L91.23b, Vl.15.l2b =
VIIA.9b, VIL4.6c, 43.5b, X.21Ab, 93.11b, 115.8a). This fact can hardly
be merely incidental. Since there was no special reason for the poets to
prefer words with initial vowel after sahasiivan (as will be shown be-
low), it would seem that the articifical form owes its origin primarily to
the poets' need of a suitable antevocalic variant of *sahasiina. In our
text, however, it also occurs before consonants, and since the majority
of these cases (L189.5d, IIL1.22a, V.20Ap, VII.1.24c, 19.7a) belong to
the family collections, we must conclude that the use of sahasiivan has
formed part of the poetical technique downfrom the earliest historical
times. That -iivan is a mere prosodical variant of -iina is clearly illustra-
ted by savasiivan in sprsánti tvii savasiivan manf~iL~ L62.11d as against
sunfth7Lya na~ savasiina nodh7L~ in 13c.
These observations, however, do not explain the origin of the forma-
tion sahasiivan. In the absence of other words in -iivan (besides sahasiivan
and savasiivan) an analogical explanation can hardly be considered. It
is even extremely doubtful whether the analogy of other adjectives in
-van- generally could be taken into consideration. To demonstrate this,
an excursus is needed.
3. It is a well-known fact that the Rigvedic voeative forms in -an and
-in, although written -ann and -inn before vowels (in aeeordanee with
the rule of the classieal language), must often be read as -an and -in
in this position. On metrieal as well as linguistie grounds Benfey and
Oldenberg held the readings with -nn in our text to be due to norma-
lization by later editors. Oldenberg, it is true, later modified this view by
introdueing the theory of vowels of intermediate quantity to aeeount for
sorne apparent ineongruities (Zeits. Deutseh. Morgenl. Gesellseh. Vol. 62,
1908, pp. 486-490). Waekernagel and Debrunner, Altind. Gramm. 1,330,
III, 275, however, were obviously not convinced. The following results of
an inquiry made independebtly from Oldenberg's and based upon a dif-
ferent system of classificatión would seem to confirm Benfey's theory.
The synopsis is confined to the vocative form in -an (except for magha-
332
van, which will be discussed in a separate section) and considers only the
cases where 1001g and short syllables can be distinguished with sufficient
certainty (5th syllable of Gayatrl and 9th syllable of Trii?tubh-J agatl).
An attempt has been made to explain the evidenee without having re-
course to the theory of 'halflong' vowels. There is a total number of 143
occurrences aceording to my countings (-an 106, -man 26 and -van 11,
including sadiLvan I.24.3c).
The ending is short:
a) in the 5th syllable of Gayatrl padas:
iyám te pii~,ann iighrr:e III.62.7a
vémi t~ii pii~ann rñjáse VIIIA.17a
asmiLkam pii~ann avitiL VIIL4.18c
áta~ parijmann iL gahi 1.6.9a
vy asvadiivann iyate V.18.3d
prá visvasiimann atrivád V.22.la
b) in Trii?tubh and J agatl padas with caesura after the 5th syllable:
vrtrám yád vajrin vr~akarmann ubhniL~ 1.63Ab
sá no návyebhir vr~akarmann ukthaí~ L130.10a
índram tám sumbha puruhanmann ávase VIII.70.2a
diiniLya mána~ somapiiV'ann astu te I.55.7a
The ending is probably long:
Only in one late hymn of the tenth maI).qala, whose poet deviates
from the old type of versification and uses visvakarmann in a pada with
the eaesura after the fourth syllable:
yiL madhyamiL visvakarmann utémiL X.81.5b.
4. Quite different, however, is the case of maghavan. With sorne 10
exeeptions it stands always after the eaesura (about 132 times, whieh
number comprises 38 oeeurrences before a vowel). If the eaesura is af-
ter the 4th syllable, we find mostly the fixed phrase maghavann indra
(I.178.5a; IV.29.5a; VL44.18a; 46.10e; VII.32.23e; VIII.3.14c; 18e; 4Aa;
51.6a; 52.8a; 53.le; 61.14e; 100.6b; X.33.3e). There are 7 exeeptions
whieh for the most part belong to the two lfl,test mal~qalas (L84.lge;
102.7a; I1I.53.5a; VIL20.9b; X.I02.3e; 103.10a; 147.3a). The remaining
passages have maghavann in the syllables 6-8 with eaesura after the fifth
syllable: (I11.32.le; 36.10a; 43.5b; 47Aa; VL44.10a; 17b; VII.19.8a; 9a;
29.ld; 32.25a; VIIL36.2a; 54.7e; 90Aa; 97.la; 8e; X.131.5d; 167.3e).
In all passages maghavan stands in a place where the metre requires
a long final syllable. Sinee there was a ver y strong predileetion to put it
after the eaesura, the two possible types of verse strueture were:
333
 x x x x maghavann - v-><
X X X x maghavann v_'-'
Strictly speaking, accordingly, the poets would only have been able to use
the word if followed by a consonant. Liturgical considerations however
may have demanded that formulae like maghavann indra sho~ld find ~
place in the hymns. Here sheer necessity has compelled the poets to
use maghavan before vowels, although its last syIlable was, no doubt,
short: Oldenberg rightly reads maghavan indra instead of the traditional
reading.
5. T~e cas~of sahasiivan is obviously different from that of maghavan.
Pro~odlcally lt belongs to puruhanman, v[fjakarman, somapiivan (see
sectlOn 3); so we should expect to find it, like these words, after the
caesura, in the places 6-9 of the pada. It may also be noted that sahasiiná-
always stands in this place when the final syllable is short, but in 5-
8 when that syIlable is long, e.g. prá vo devárñ cit sahasiinám agním
VII.7.1a, as against jñeyiz bhiigárñ sahasiinó várena II.I0.6a.
CUl~iously enough, this is not the case. In aIl 'the 11 passages where
sahasavan stands after the caesura, this caesura is aftel' the fourth syl-
lable so that a long value is required fol' -van. Nevertheless the poets use
-van before vowels in no less than 7 passages, viz.
tvám u na~ sahasiivann avadyizt V1.15.12b, VI1.4.9b
tvayiz vayárñ sahasiivann izskriih VII.43.5b
miz tvii vayarñ sahasii,vann avir'a(~) VII.4.6c
itrjo napiit sahasiivann íti tvii- X.115.8a
kitcit sániarñ sahasiivann abhífjtaye X.93.11b
riiyó bhiigárñ sahasiivann abhí yudhya 1.91.23b
Probably also in X.21.4b (metre: astarapankti).
_Since .the poets were free to use the word, like puruhanman etc., in
padas wlth the caesura after the 5th syIlable, the circumstance that
the~ did delib.erately not aIlows but one conclusion: the ending of sa-
hasa~an was dlfferen~ from that of the vocatives in _an. 1 Oldenberg twice
substltutes the readmg sahasiivan for sahasiivann (Noten ad 1.91.23b,
VI.15.12b), but this must be a mere lapsus.
6. The implications of this prosodical statement are clear: if -vann is
consistently used as a long syIlable before vowels, the ending must histo-
ricaIly represent -n plus a consonant (probably -t). However, the form
101~en?erg, ZDMG 62,489, considers this a possible conclusion but refrains from
acceptmg lt.
334
sahasiivan cannot be referred to a stem in -vani-, since the Rigvedic ad-
jectives in -vant- have always a vocative in -va~. The three exceptions
mentioned in our manuals (e.g. MacdoneIl, Vedic Grammar 195, Wacker-
nagel- Debrunner, Altindische Grammatik III, 268, Renou, Grammaire
de la langue védique 198) do not stand a critical examination: arvan oc-
curs in two hymns where the corresponding nominative is árvii, not árviin
(1.163.12a, VI.12.4c), satiivan may equally well be referred to a stem in
-n (Oldenberg, note ad VI.47 .9b), and savasiivan belongs, together with
sahasiivan, to a separate class. We are bound to conclude that such vo-
cative forms in -van do not occur before the Atharva Samhita. 2 Since
sahasiivan, ~m the other hand, belongs to the oldest stock of the Rigvedic
language, it is impossible to refer it to an adjectival stem in -vant-.
Accordingly only one possibility would seem to remain, viz. to as-
sume a participialnoun in -ant-, which would involve that sahasiivan is
the product of re-interpretation of a group of two words *sáhasii'van,
01' rather *sáhas7L 'van. Only reluctantly will one accept this explan<¡ttion,
not so much because vocatives of participles in -ant- are unknown 3 (for
in this case ávan might have been a nominative) as rather because this
hypothesis aIlows no demonstration and is, therefore, devoid of further
interest. Moreover, sin ce the phrase *sáhasii avati is unknown and unli-
kely to have existed, this would presuppose an older model in analogy to
which sahasiivan would have been created (e.g. * ávas7L 'van, cf. yásminn
izvith7Lvasii duro'rfe X.120.7b). Such a theory is plainly unsatisfactory but,
if our preceding conclusions are corred, the chance that the true expla-
nation can still be found is slight.
2S ee Wackernagel- Debrmmer, Altind. Gramm. IlI, 258.
3Satifvan VI.47.9b (Lanman, Noun-fuflection 509) and sádavan I.24.3¿ (Pada-
patha) are probably both adjectives.
335

AVESTAN AINITA- "UNHARMED"
by
F. B. J. KUIPER
Leiden
Bartholomae explains Av. ainita- "nicht vergewaltigt, - gekrankt" (Yt.
13.34; 51; 63) and ainiti- "milde Behandlung, Milde" from *an-iliita-
resp. *~n-initi-. (o".'ing to haplology, see Attiran. W6rterb. 125 f.). Thi~
theory IS the lllevItable consequence of his positing an Avestan word
[initi-] "VergewaItigung, Krankung", supposed to be attested in the
Instr. Sg. in~i- Vendo 18.61 and in anaiti Y. 30.11 b. If howevcr [initi-] had
reaIly been III use both in Giithic and in Latcr Avcstan, it would be hard
to conceive how its opposite *an-initi- could have become [aniti-], since
the Avestan speaker, in that case, must always have been aware of its
origin as a mere negation of [initi-]. Besides, a participle *inita- would be
anomalous in several respects. In the first place the present inaoiti
[inauti], corresponding to Ved. inóti, must be referred to a root i- as there
is no indication to show that from the stem i-nau- a secondary ro~t in- had
been created in Indo-Iranian. The participle -inita-, only twice attested in
a co~paratively late Vedic text (úpenita- Sat. Br. III) is certainly an
occaslOnal new formation' of Sanskrit. The Indo-Ir. noun Ved. énas-
Av. aenah- "act of violence, crime, sin" contains the lE. suffix *-nes- and
is derived direct from the root (cf. Ved. réb;.as-, Av. raexanah- from the
root ~raik-). As for Ved. íná- "strong, mighty, fierce", there is no reason
why lt should rather be analysed as in-á- (e.g. Lindner, Altindische
Nomína/bildung, p. 33) than as i-ná-: the nominal stem derived from the
present stem is, indeed, -invá- (Wackernagel, Altind. Gramm., n, 1,
p. 181). Secondly Bartholomae disregarded the fact that while in Sanskrit
participles in -ta- with an anal?gical "connecting -í-" a~e quite common,
they.are completely unknown III Old Iranian. This is apparently due to
the Clrcumstance that the lE. formation in *-H-tó- contained a consonantal
larynge~l, which vanished in lranian while being secondarily vocalized in
the lndlan branch. l Thus to Ved. grbhitá- (with a specific Indian lengthe-
1 See No/es on. Vedic Noun-Inflexion, p. ~7. (M~ded. Ned. Akad. We/ensch., NR.,
5 [1942], p. 187), Acta Or., 20, p. 34. Av.lr/(hta- (tu iitariJ.lriOita- "loved by the Fire")
336
138 F. B. J. KUIPER
ning of i<H after a labial sonant)2 corresponds garapta- in Avestan. s
The mutilated Old Persian form agrbi ( ... ) in Dar. Beh. 2.73, for which
Bartholomae, Tolman, and Kent4 read ágarbita "seized" (p. p., with a
long il), is more likely to stand for agrbi<ya> (: Ved. agrhyata).
Accordingly Fravrtis agrbi<ya> anayatá abiy mám means "F. was
seized (and) led to me" (cf. 2.88).5 As far as the noun [initi-] is concerned,
the fact should be stressed that even in Sanskrit the "connecting _i_" is
confined to the participles but do es not, as a rule, occur in the verbal
nouns in -ti-. 6
Barthólomae's explanation of ainita-, which appears to be generally
accepted,7 is the result of a vicÍous cÍrc1e. For the Gathic word ánaiti-
in xViticá ánaiti Y. 30.11 b, which indeed earlier scholars were at a loss to
explain, 8 Bartholomae has given the evident1y correct interpretation in
Arische Forschungen II (1886), p. 134, where he took it as a "dvandva-
compound" [hu-iti an-iti] (Du.), lit. "guter Gang, schlechter Gang".
Since such combinations of opposites are a stylistie peeuliarity of the
Gathas (e.g. gaemCá a¡yáitimcá Y. 30.4b), and sínce xViti- : ánaiti- is
paralleled by Ved. suvitá- : duritá- the correctness of this interpretation
can hardly be questioned. For -ca ef. asicá ármaiti (Du.) Y. 31.4b, and
for the curious spelling ai for i ef. husaitis Y. 29.lOb and áskaitim Y.
44.17c. 9 Andreas-Waekernagel and A. Christensen10 have rightly accep-
represents lE. o-ilo-; the Acc. darSitam may be from darsit-, and masita-, zairita-,
raoi6ita-, spaéitita- are probably secondary thematizations, cf. Av. masil- and Ved.
harlt-. In any caso their modo of formation is differont from that of tho participles in
°-1110-.
a Seo SllOrll'lIll1g o[ filial VOWI'{S 11/ Ihe Rigvcda, p. 33 (Meded. KOl/. Ned. Akad.
Wetensch., NR., 18 [1955], p. 285). Similarly Ved. gablzirá- : Av. Jalra- (cf. Mayrhofer,
Ind. Ling., 16, p. 39), parallol to slhávira- : Av. staora-.
I Bartholomae's explanation in Sludien z. idg. Sprachgesch., 11 (1891), p. 171, may
now be considered obsolete. Cf. e.g. Die indogerm. Nasa/priisentia, p. 232 (with
references).
, See respeetively WZKM, 22, p. 65, Andent Persian Lexicon, p. 88, and Old Persian,
pp. 73, 78, 183. Similarly Meillct-Benveniste, Gramm. dll v.-p., p. 121.
• K. Hoffmann, Münch. Stl/d. Spraclllv., 8 (1956), p. 18.
See M. Leumann, IF, 58, p. 22.
I
7 Cf. Reiehelt, Aw. Elementarb., pp. 79, 419, 431, Aveslan Reader, p. 216, Walde-
Pokorny, Vgl. Wb. der idg. Spr., 1, p. 1, Pokorny, Idg. etym. Wb.,p. 10, Debrurtner,
BSOS, 8, p. 487 (ef. Altind. Gramm., Nachtr. ad 1, p. 278, 34).
• Cf. Spiegel, Commentar über das Avesta, Il (1869), p. 231.
• Bartholomae, Arische Forschungen, III (1887), p. 60. The reason ofthis orthography
is unknown.
10 See respectively Gott. Nachr., 1909, p. 49, and Avesta, p. 6. M. Wilkins Smith,
Studies in the Syntax 01 the Gathas (1929), p. 73, and Duchesne-Guillemin, Zoroastre
(1948), p. 240, follow the A1Ural/. Wb. A different interpretation was proposed by
337
 AVESTAN ail/ita- "UNHARMED" 139 140 F. B. J. KUIPER

ted this explanation. Darmesteter however, while taking andíti- as a avoided in the hieratie Vedic language and, therefore, are not attested in
positive synonym of [hu-iti-] "bonne marche", connected it with ainiti- literary use before Manu and the Epics. Its opposite is in Sanskrit
"cIémence", resp. "sans rancune" (Y. 58.4, Pursisniha 26).11 This in- niriti- (Raghuv. 1.63, cf. niritika- Ram. 1.30.26), owing to the existence of
duced Bartholomae to reconsider his former view. He accepted a-níti- "bad conduct"; but Pali has aniti- "sound condition, health,
Darmesteter's theory in a modified form (since anditi in Y. 30.11 b safety" (and anitika- "free from injury or harm, healthy, secure"), which
apparently expresses a negative concept) and took ainiti- "Milde" as the corresponds to Av. ainiti-. Their semantic relation is that of"unharmed":
negation of anditi- "Vergewaltigung", which he equated to inti. Now, this "harmless".16 The lE. root may have been *eiH-,l7 The meanings ofVed.
last word has be en the source of all confusion. inóti, ínvati and Geldner's translation require a critical re-examination,
The text of Vendo 18.61 in Geldner's Neuausgabe reads as follows: which however is beyond the scope of this brief note.
ahura mazda... asaum, kó Owqm yim ahurdm mazdqm mazistayanti
inaoiti, kó mazista lbaésalJha lbaésayeiti "Who grieves thee with the sorest
grief? Who pains thee with the sorest pain?" It is cIear that in mazista-
yanti a verbal noun of inaoUi must be hidden. Westergaard conjectured
mazistaya inti, which was accepted by SpiegeP2 and Bartholomae,13
Curiously enough, the latter's preconceived idea that inti- is the same
word with Gathic anditi- and represents [initi-] prevented him from
considering that 1) the root of inaoiti can only be aé-, not aén-; 2) the
corresponding verbal noun of Ved. inóti is attested as iti-, f.· "plague,
ealamity"; 3) the evidence of the' Avestan manuseripts points to an
analogous Avestan noun-formation. Indeed, while Geldner's reading is
based on two MSS. only (L" P l' ef. mazistayeinte Kl ), nine MSS. (in-
cluding the two famous MSS. JPl and Mfa) read mazistayaiti instead,
whieh is only a scriptio continua for mazistaya iti [mazistaya itiJ.
E. Leumann was right, therefore, in explaining Av. ainiti- as [an-iti-J,14
and ainila- must accordingly represent [all-ita-]. The solc differencc
betwccn 01Uhic iJnaili- [an-ili-] "falschcr Wandcl" and L. Av. ainili-
[an-iti-J "Milde" was the vowel quantity. Skt. iti- "plague, ealamity",
attested since the AdbhutabrahmaI,la ofthe Sac;lv. Br. (5.5.2), is a word of
the earIy cIassieal language (Mhbh. Ram. Susr. VarBS. Kalid.).15 It
obviously belongs to the group of ancient Indo-Iranian words that were

Geldner, KZ, 28, p. 205 (rrom an- "to live": "zu eurem Wohlergehen und Lebens-
glück"). Like Andreas also Tavadia, Indo-Iranian Studies, lI, p. 26.
11 Le Zend-Avesta, 1(1892), p. 224, n. 39, III (1893), p. 64, n. 12.
11 Commentar liber das Avesta, 1 (1865), p. 405.
13 Altiran. W6rterb., 367. Similarly Reichelt, Av. Reader, p. 63. No comment on
the text in Geldner's translation in Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad., 1903, p. 429.
" Etym. W6rterb. der Skt.-Sprache (1907), p. 34.
u From agnés cikitra u$ásam ivétayal;z SV. H. 332, JS. III. 28. 4, PB. XIII. 2. 3 Visva-
bandhu Sastri wrongly infers anoun !ti-. cr. RS. X. 91. 5 u$ásam na ketával;z: 4 u$ásam 18 cr. e.g. an-amayá- "noi injuring" AS. IX. 8. 13 fr.: "healthy" in the c1ass. language,
ivétayal;z (= á-iti-? see Oldenberg, Noten). Note however ¡tya-, which Baudh SS.H. 5 and amayiMn- "injuring": "diseased" (see Wackernagel, Kleine Schriften, p. 327).
(: p. 40, 3) mentions among the papmans. 17 Or *eiH-j.yeH-? cr. Av. yata- "bodily injury" (and ydtu- "sorcery"?).

338 339
 BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS 205

by stüpaya$(ib on the strength of Avad. 387, 10-11, where (in a passage

parallel to 370,4, 378,2, and 383,6) we read tán1 patiikám stüpaya${yám
baddhvá, this emendation 4 not only disposes of the "unexpected" com-
pound yüpaya${P and of the theories 'about a possible difference between
BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS
yüpaya$fi- and ya$fi- in the description of the Divyavadana, but also has
a consequence of more general importance. The reading yüpaya${i-,
YOPAYA$T!- (DIVY. 244,11) indeed, has given rise to the assumption, on which most modern dis-
cussions of the construction of the stüpa are founded, that the stüpa
contained, besides the ya${i- (explained as a "pinnacle"), also a separate
In Studia Indologica (Festschr. W. Kirlel), p. 9 ff., AIsdorf gives a con- element, the yüpa-, which is taken to be the "central post". 6 Now, it
vincing new interpretation of the well-known passage in Divy. 244,7 ff., would seem that the emendation proposed entitles us to discard this
where the enlargement of a stüpa is described. The sentence tatháv¡(iham archaeological theory.
ca bhúpasyár)(jam krtarh yalra sii yilpaya${ir abhyantare pratipáditá he , Already suggested as a mere guess by de la Vallée Poussin, HJAS, 2 (1937), p. 281:
renders as follows: "Und die Kuppel des Stüpas Cread: stúpasya] wurde "Pourquoi ne pas lire stüpaya$(i (ou bhüpasyiílJeja .,. bhüpaya$(i?)?" ..
6 "elle est certainement inattendue", de la Vallée Poussin, l.e., p. 280; "la composltlon
so gemacht, das s darin die Yüpaya~ti ins Innere eingelassen war" (p. 15),
inattendue, si elle est exacte, de yüpaya$(i", G. Combaz, Mél. chino et bouddh., 4, p. 52,
which must mean that a hole was made for the Iater erection of the n. 1.
ya${i-, referred to in the words ya${yiiropm:zam krtam. IncidentalIy, • B.g., G. Combaz, Mél. chino et bouddh., 2, p. 201, 4, p. 49 tr.; Paranavitana, The
Slüpa in Ceylon (Memoirs Archaeol. SurveyofCeylon, 5,1947), p. 361f.; F. D. K. Bosch,
tatráviddham would make better sense but is too hazardous a guess.
The golden Germ, p. 169.
AIsdorf's· inference tha1 the yúpaya${i- is identical with the ya${i- is
obviousIy correct, but one wonders what a yilpa- may have to do with it.
Besides, the use of sá in sá yilpaya${ir (vv.I1. sáyilpa${ir, sápaya$fir)
remains unexplained (cf. AIsdorf, p. 14). Now; the final sentence of this
passage, viz. var$asthále mahámm;lÍratnáni tány áropitiini (1. 13), suggests a
comparison with Avad. 370,4 tan mm:ziratnam vipascinab stüpavar$asthiil-
yiim upari nibaddham and 383,6... caitye var$asthiilyiim [caitya-?]
samaropítam. It is tempting, therefore, also to equate sti yilpaya,v/ír to the
stilpaya,vli- mentioned in Avad. 387, 11 (cf. aboye stilpa-var$astMIi-). As
for the possible implications of the statement anupilrve1;la ya$fyiiropa1;lam
krtam (see AIsdorf, p. 15), attention may be drawn to the extra-ordinary
religious importance attached to the erection of a stúpikf/a-,l the cere-
monies of which are described at Iength in Manasara 18.340 ff., and
analogies to which might be sought in the erection of Indra's banner at
the Indramahotsava 2 and on the stage before a dramatic performance. 3
If, then, we replace the reading sá yilpaya$!ib (sápaya${ib) of the MSS.

1 As for the stüpikilapratinhii (Manas. 18./69) it may be noted that it is placed into a
hole (etad gartasyopari sthiípya 18.199). In sorne respects the shape of the stüpikila
was strikingly similar to that of the yüpa (cf. 18.74).
l A vivid Prakrit description of it occurs in the story of Domuha (Jacobi, Ausgewiihlte
Erziihlungen in Malulrashfrf, p. 40, 15 tr.). Cf. also J. J. Meyer, Tri/ogie altindischer
Vegetationsmiichte, 111, p. 104 tr.; F. D. K. Bosch, The golden Germ, p. 152 tr.
• Konow, Das indische Drama, p. 23.

340 341

SVÁV~$TI-, ~s. I. 52. 5a, 14c
by
F. B. J. KUIPER
Leiden
1. In ~S. X. 38. 5ab
svavfjam hf tvám ahám índra susrávii
'niinudám vr~abha radhracódanam
"1 have heard, that thou art svavfj-, O Indra, one who do es not give way,
O Bull, and who encourages the weak" the word svavfj- is most1y rendered
by "appropriating to oneself". This interpretation, as well as Geldner's
divergent translation "thine own lord", is based on the assumption of an
etymological connection with the verbal root vrj-, and with the words
svávrkti- and svávrj- in particu1ar. 1 As for the first of these words, the
context in X. 21. 1ab ágním ná svávrktibhir hótiiram tvii vrlJfmahe do es not
suggest a close semantic connection with svavfj-.2 Since it is apparent1y
used in somewhat the same way as suvrktíbhib (e.g. VI. 15. 4 agním
hótiiram mán~ab ... suvrktíbhir ... rñjase), svávrkti- has sometimes been
taken as a variant of that word. 3 In that case the etymology su-rkti-;"
1 Roth: "sieh aneignend, für sieh nehmend" (id. Mon. Will.), Grassmann: "in seine
Gewalt bringend, an sieh reissend" ,Ludwig: "ein selbst sich Rettender", Oldenberg,
Nofen: "wer etwas als seinen Besitz an sieh reisst", Geldner (ad. X. 12.3): "über sich
selbst verfügend, sein eigener Herr" (otherwise Ved. Sfl/d., 1, p. 154, but ef. Oldenberg).
Rcnou, Efl/des I'édiques ef flli(linécfIIles, IV, p. 39, is disinclincd lo scparate it from
sl'lh.,.kfi-.
• Roth: "Aneignung, s.v.a. aussehliesslich für uns", Grassmann: "cigene Darreichung
(an Licd und Opfer)", Ludwig: "vermoge cigcner Zurüslung", Gcldncr: "aus eigcncr
Berechtigung (oder: aus freien Stücken)".
• Por sva-/sl/- see Wackernagel, Alfind. Gramll/" 1, p. 81 with Nac/llrage, Ronnow
Trita Apfya, 1, p. 153 f., Renou, Ef. véd., 1, p. 6 n., IV, p. 39 (sl'áfal'as-), p. 81 (svák$afra-
V.48. 1), Minard, Enigmes, 1, p. 190 (svagá YV.). Debrunncr,IF, 63, p. 99 f., may be
right in contesting sorne instanees, but el. svasfha- (aeeording to Roth and Debrunner
"in seinem natürliehen Zustande sich befindend") can neither be a bahuvrihi, as a
noun *sfhá- in the sense of avasfhá- is unknown, nor a determinative eompound, as
sva- in eomposition with nomina agentis has a different funetion (see below). In faet,
the supposed meaning is expressed by prakrtisfha- (Dasakumarae.). The oeeurrenee
of lE. *swe- "wel\" in Goth. swikunps and in Lat. sospes (if from *swe-splf-t-, see
Mededelingen Kon. Ned. Akad., NR., 14/5, p. 23 n. 2) should be noted.
• Roth, Mélanges asiafiques, VII, p. 612, and PW, Oldenbcrg, SBE, 46, p. 203 f.,
Geldner, Glossar, p. 199, Neisser, Z/I, 5, p. 289 ff., Janert, Dhási, p. 59.
342
60 F. B. J. KUIPER
questioned by several authorities,5 would have to be abandoned. How-
ever, it seems hardly possible to determine the exact meaning of svávrkti-
from this sole passage. The second word, svávrj-, is also a hapax lego-
menon, which occurs in X:
12. 3ab svávrg devásyamftam yádi g6r áto
jatáso dhiirayanta urvt. As it cannot be separated from the verb ii-vrj-
"to appropriate, etc.", most scholars agree in assigning a meaning
"easily (or, self-) acquired" to it,6 and Geldner translates the whole stanza
as follows: "Wenn der Nektar der Kuh in der eigenen Gewalt des Gottes
steht, so erhalten die aus dieser (Kuh)· geborenen (Maruts) die beiden
weiten (Welthiilften)." Sínce this word is generally assumed to be closely
related to svavfj-,7 it is instructive to compare sviiyúj- (in sviiyújo áru~fr
gá l. 92.2) and svayúj- (e.g. vátiiso ná svayújab X. 78. 2), whose meanings
are fairly similar, notwithstanding the fact that su-ayúj- has not the
same prior member as sva-yúj- has. s In marked contrast with these
words svá-iivrj- in X. 12. 3 svávrg ... amftam do es not show any appre-
ciable semantic connection with svavfj- in the stanza quoted aboye.
2. Although the meaning of svavfj- cannot be inferred from the sole
passage where this word·is attested, aH interpretations are rightly based
upon the assumption that -vrj- is a nomen agentis. 9 As to the semantic
relation of sva- to vrj-, however, opiníons differ. Since the verb vrj- is
sometimes used with reference to Indra,lO such verbal nouns as samvfj- in
n. 12. 3 samvfk samátsu sá janiisa índrab "A conqueror in fights: he,
O men, is Indra" can easily be accounted for,u A similar explanation,
however, can hardly be applied to svavfj-, since a dative function of sva-
• M. MlHlcr, S/J/J: n, p. 109 (Ollllccount of I/(JIII(}I,/,kfl-), Foy, KZ, 34, p. 243, Oldcn-
berg, ZDMG, 55, p. 29tl: "gute Herziehung (des Goltes zum Opfer)" (but cf.llloom-
field, JAOS, 35, p. 278), Renou, Ef. véd., 1, p. 5 n. 2 (: sóm . .. vrñja uklhaf/.l X. 61. 17),
IlI, p. 69 ("poem" from the technique of barhir vrj-, like Müller; but cf. Neisser,
p. 291). Charpentier, Brahlllan, p. 124 n. 1, aecepts the meaning "barhí~" for sorne
passages.
• Roth and Grassmann (sl/-ávrj-!): "Ieicht anzueignen", Ludwig: svávrg devásya "den
Gott stark anziehend, mit Erfolg gewinnend", Oldenberg (svá-ávrj-!): "wobei bz.
wovón eigne (d.h. eignen Besitz sehaffende) Aneignung stattfindet", Geldner: "zur
Verfügung, in der eigenen Gewalt stehend".
7 Roth and Grassmann, Oldenberg and Geldner (ad X. 12. 3).
8 Unless svayúj- is equivalent to suyúj- (Ri:innow, Trita Aplya, 1, p. 153); not discussed
by Debrunner, IF, 63, p. 99.
• Cf. in general Waekernagel, A/find. Gramm., II/l, p. 174 ff.
10 1.63. 7c barhír ná yáf sl/dáse Vrfhá várg, VI. 18. 8e vnJák píprlllh sámbarariz sÚ$1;Ialll
índra/.l, 26. 3b tvám kúlsáya .fú$1;Iam dású$e vark.
11 Cf. also tví$al,z saml'rk VS. 38, 28 (VSK. 38. 27). But dháfá vidháfá paramó nlÍ
samvrk KS. 18. 1 (p. 265,5) is eorrupt fór paralllofa salñdrk KapKS. 28. 2 (p. 121, 12),
MS. TS. VS. ~S. For this stanza see Janert, ¡¡J, II, p. 92. Cf. Lüders, Phi/o Ind.,
p.375.
343
 ------------------
SVÁ VR HI-, RS. 1. 52. 5a, 14c 61
in compounds, presupposed by such renderings as "für sich nehmend"
(Roth), "appropriating to one's self" (Monier-Williams) would be un-
paralIeled. Oldenberg, therefore, too k sva- as denoting the object of vrj-,
viz. "wer etwas als seinen Besitz an sich reisst", but this finds no justifica-
tion in the Vedic idiom either. In ali compounds, indeed, whose last
member is a nomen agentis 01' a participle in -tao, sva- functions as the
stem of svayám, its meaning being "himsélf", resp. "by oneself". Cf.
svasft- "running of one's own", svaráj- "self-ruling", sva-síc- "pouring
out spontaneousl:y", sváyata- "self-guided", etc. lt is a well~known fact
that the first traces of a tendency to replace sva- by svayam- are found
as earIy as the Rigveda. 12 The sole instance where svayam- expresses a
dative-relation to the second member is, it seems, svayámpápa- (svayálh-
pápa-) "injuring oneself" TS. 11. 2. 8. 3. As for sva-, not before the
Bhag. Pur. does it express an object relation in composition with a nomen
agentis (svakrt- "doing one's own"). Cf. svakaralJa-, n. "making one's
own, marrying" Pal).. 1. 3. 56. So sva- in SVaV!1- must denote the subject,
but since "appropriating of one's own (or, personalIy)" wou1d hard1y
yield a reasonable sense, we are driven to the conclusion that -vfj- cannot
be the verbal noun of vrj- "to bend, turn, appropriate".
3. Since the purely formal connection of svavfj- with svávrktibhil;
X. 21. 1 is not supported by the contexts in which both words occur, that
with svávr~fí- is certainly preferable to it, because this word is also used
with reference to Indra. 13 (Cf. e.g. svayúj- X. 78. 2: sváyukti- I. 119. 4
"self-yoked.") This word occurs twice in T. 52, viz.
5ab aMI sl'ávr,\·tim lIIáde mTa yúdhya{o
rag}¡vfr iva pravalJé sasrur ütáya[¡
and
14 ná yásya dyáváprthívt ál/u vyáco
ná síndhavo rájaso ántam ánasúb
nótá svávNtim máde asya yúdhyata
éko anyác cakr~e vísvam ánu$ák
lt was formerly he Id to refer to Vrtra (01' Dyau~) and derived from vNtí-
'rain",14 which however was "merely a mythological speculation" (Olden-
berg). Moreover, it is now gene rally admitted that the context suggests
12 See WackemageI-Debrunner, Altind. Gramm., 111, p. 481.
18 Neisser, ZII, 5, p. 29In., separated them. See below, n. 21.
H Roth: "den Regen füe sich behaltend" (likewise Grassmann, Bergaigne, Re!. véd.
II, p. 186, etc.), Ludwig: "Selbstregner" (vol. V, p. 475: Dyaus), Ronnow, op. c.,
p. 154: "reichlíchen Regen besitzend" (sva-/su-).
344
------
62 F. B. J. KUIPER
a reference to Indra, rather than to Vrtra. Now rain is se1dom mentioned
in the Indra-myth15 and Lüders, who lastIy discussed the evidence in
VarU1;IG 1, p. 196 ff., wise1y refrained from drawing any conclusion from
svávr$!i- (see p. 199 n. 2). This difficulty induced Ge1dner to connect
-vr$ti- with vár$man-, n. "height, top", vár$i${ha- "highest" (and with
vf~an-, Vr$lJí-!) and to assign the meaning "Eigengrosse" to it,16 Irre-
spective of the question, whether such a meaning is plausible in itself and
in the context, this explanation is unacceptable because -vr${i- is likely
to be a verbal noun, whereas var~- "high" is not used in verbal function
in Indo~European.17
In proto-Indo-Iranian, however, there must have existed a noun
*vrsti- "act" (from *vri- "to work"), cf. Av. varosti- Nir. 29. So the
Rigvedic words svavfj- and svávr$ti- can be compared to Av. hvaroz-
"whose acts are good" Y. 9. 16 and hvarosti- "good work" P. 28. While
the last word refiects the importance of good action ([hu-vrsti-]) in the
Zoroastrian theology, the majesty of the Vedic god is characterized by
his "acting on his own accord" (sva-vfj-). ef. the Homeric epithet of
Apollo !K&epyo~ "acting of his own will". Has this notion perhaps been
inherited from the Indo-European religious poetry? As for the two
stanzas of 1. 52, they would seem to be not so obscure as Geldner (ad
X. 23. 4) declared them to be. In the fifth stanza Indra's "aids" (ütáyal;)
are said to rush to his "spontaneous (personal) action", just as they
"assist him in breaking down the resistance" in the preceding stanza,18
and st. 14 may be rendered as follows: "Thou, whose expanse Heaven
and Earth cannot (encompass) - (as?) the rivers do not reach the end
of the sphere -, nor (hy spontancous action, whilc thou art fighting
intoxicated by this (Soma)19 -, thou hast by thyself accomplished all
other things in continuous order." The emphasis laid upon Indra's
acting by himself (éka-), in connection with his svávr~ti-, should be noted.
4. The question may be raised, if this interpretation can also throw
sorne light on a passage that has often been compared with the two
stanzas of 1. 52, viz. X. 23. 4 (AS. X. 73. 5):
16 Oldenberg, Re/. des Veda, p. 140, HilIebrandt, Ved. Myth., 112, pp. 164, 184 n. 3,
J. J. Meyer, Trilogie der Vegetationsmiíchte, IlI, p. 116. Note the comm. on TB. 11.
8. 9. 2: yad etad lINtinimittaril ja!aril tad etad indrel,lotptiditatvád indrasya sariram, etc.
16 See his note ad l. 52. 14 (and Neisser, ZIl, 5, p. 291 n.) and ad l. 169. 3.
17 cr. Walde-Pokomy, Vergl. Wb. der idg. Spr., 1, p. 268: "verbale Anwendung rehlt
unserer Sippe überhaupt".
18 cr. 4c tdril lIrtrahdtye dnu tasthur ütdyaf¡.
10 cr. sto 10 mdde sutdsya.
345
 SVÁVR1.lTI-, RS. I. 52. 5a, l4c
só cin nú vr~tír yüthyli svá sácaní
índral;z smásrüIJi háritiíbhí pru~IJute
If yüthyli is a neuter plural (Oldenberg), só cin nú vNtÍr must probably
be taken as a separate sentence, which it would be hard to interpreto If
however the whole first pada is taken as one sen ten ce, we might compare
such welI-known passages as VII. 19. 5a táva cyautnáni vajrahasta táni
and VIII. 77. 9a etá cyautnáni te krtá,20 but it would be impossible to
account for yüthyli in this contexto Since this passage does not furnish
any corr~borativ~ evid~nce for the meaning of svávr~ti-, it is not necessary
to enter mto a dlscusslOn of it. 21
'0 In Avestan t~e normal verbal noun of varaz- is syaoO(a)na-, a reminiseenee of the
use ofIE. *kyeu- m.th~ lE. poetical.idiom (cf. Olee!. heyja, OEng!. hégan, see Acta Or.,
!¡6, 1938, p. 312). S¡milarly Benvemste, Oriento Suec., IV (1955), p. 25 f .
. On sváVNfi- see lastly Renou, Etudes sur le vocabulaire du R V., I (1958), p. 33 n. l.
Nelsser, Z~I, 5, p. 291 n., contemplated the possibility of connecting svávr~fi- with Av.
varazo, whlch Foy, KZ, 34, p. 253, had already conn~ted with svavfj- (rejected by
Oldenberg, Vedaforschung, p. 34 n. 2). Semantically svavrj- "acting on his own accord"
m~y ~ paralleled with svardj- "self-ruling", another epithet of Indra (see Meyer
Trllogle, UI, p. 210).
346
63 [1] 159
THREE NOTES ON OLD PERSIAN
1. OP. ()atiy
As a result of Cameron's re-examination of the Bisutün
inscription the text of DBI IV. 52 ff. is now almost completely
certain. 1t runs as follows: ()a#y Darayavauf xsaya()iya nüram
()uvam vrnavatam taya mana krtam ava()a kamhya radiy ma
apagaudaya yadiy imam ha(n)dugam naiy apagaudayahy karahya
8ahy Auramazda ()uvam dauSta bíya .... . (57-58) yadiy t'mam
ha(n)dugam apagaudayahy naiy ()ahy karahya Auramazdatay
ja(n)ta bíya. .. ,which Roland G. Kent, Old Persian, p. 132, transla-
tes as follows: « Saith Darius the King: Now let that which
has been done by me convince thee: thus for the people's sake
do not conceal it: if this record thou shal t not conceal, (but)
tell it to the people, may Auramazda be a friend unto thee ...
If this record thou shalt conceal, (and) not tell it to the people,
may Auramazda be a smiter unto thee ... ». The text first for-
mula tes the King's order and then goes on to state the con se-
quences, according as this order is obcycd or disohcycd. In thcse
conditional clauses this order is stated in a ncgativc, as wcll as a
positive, fonn (do not conceal, tell). The same specific way of
expression recurs in IV, 71 ff:: « do thou not destroy them, (but) ...
protect them ... If thou ... shal t not destroy them and shal t
protect them ... If thou ... shalt destroy them and shalt not
protect them ... ». N ow, just as in the last passage the con di-
. tional clause yadiy . .. nat'ydif vikanahy . .. paribaraMdif 2 refers
to the order mataya vikanahy . .. pan'bara « do not destroy them,
I DB = Inscription of Darius at Bisutün.
' 2 Not parabaréihadiS, see A. Meillet-E. Benveniste, Grammaire du vieux-
perse, Paris 1931, p. 95, E. Benveniste « Bul!. Soco ling. ,), 47 (195 1), p. 23·
347
 160 F. B . .f. KuiPer [2J
(bu t) ... protect them», quite so in the former passage the order
referred to in the words yadiy ... nazy apagaudayahy karahya
Oahy must be contained in the words karahya radiy ma apagaudaya.
This conclusÍon is confirmed by the Elamite translation of the
words avaOa karahya radzy, which according to Cameron means
« thus (or this) to the people tell » '. From the fact tha t the same
Elamite verb tu-ru-/ti-ri- is used to translate radzy as well as
Oahy in Hne 55 Kent in a later article 2 right1y inferred that radzy
here must be an imperative form, corresponding to the subjunctive
form Oahy. However his attempt to explain radzy as a suppletive
form, derived from ra- e to give' (> e to transmit '?), is clearly
unacceptable. As to the true reading there can be little doubt.
Kent himself remarks in a note on the text: « Cameron's karahya
[:J radzy, with ra of radzy slight1y doubtful, is to be accepted,
though Cameron finds in Elam. 3.74. e to the people tell (it) , for
the phrase ». The true imperative of Oatiy can only be Oadzy,
just as that of *patzy is padty (Skt. pahí). King and Thompson
had only been able to read a vertical hasta before . .]cidzy, which
must have belonged to the character for « ea ».
Taken in itself this reading is too obvious to need further
comment. After this was written 1 found that Benveniste 3 had
arrived at the same conclusion, though wrongly equating Oadzy
to Skt. fádhi (whose OP. equivalent would have been *Oaztlzy).
Now, sorne twenty-five years ago it has been pointed out that
beside the Indo-Iranian root *sas- (Skt. fasti, Av. sasti) a trace of
a root *sa- has been preserved in Avestan, where the agent noun
is both Sfls-tar- e rule!"' and s(i-tar-~. Recently Ge!"shevitch
separated both words on the ground that satar- means every-
where ' tyrant '5. Be that as it may, it should be observed that
, ({ Then speak to the troops >;, Herbert H. Paper, The Phonology and
.MorPhology o/ the Royal Achaemenid Elamite, Ann Arbor 1955, p. 73 n. 15.
2 See ({ Journ. Amer. Oriento Soco >;,72 (1952), p. 13.
3 See ({ Bull. Soco ling. >;,47 (1951), pp. 27 ando 50.
4 See ({ Acta Orientalia », 12 (Leyde 1934), p. 196 .
5 I. Gershevitch, The Avestan Hymn to Mithra, Cambridge 1959, pp. 18 5,
259· Cf. however also H. Güntert, Uber die ahurischen und dai'vischenAusdrücke
im Avesta, ({ Si tzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften »,
phi1.-hist. K1., 1914, 13. Abh., p. 30.
348
Three Notes on Old PersiaJl I6!
also sástar- is often used in the same deroga tory meaning. Besides,
the form,ula sáOraséil hamo· xsaOrahe kam8r8oiJ -jano aurvalze Y t.
10. I09, 1 1 1 is a close parallel both to sas!aro aurva Y t. IO. 14 a.nd
to sásta dai&!tJus hamo·xsaOro Yt. 13.18, 69, 14. 13, 15.5°, WhlCh
shows both words to have been mere « Wechselformen». Whatever
different meanings may have been attached to thcse words by later
poets for w hich Gershevi tch' s ample discussion should be consul ted,
it ca~ hardly be contested that they represent a traditional for-
mula of' the Old Iranian poetry. Thercforc Gershévitch's sugges-
tion to derive satar- from the root *}a- e to sharpen' (attested
in Vedic fifati) ra ther than from *sá- e to order, to rule', w hose
existence in Old Iranian is proved by OP. Oatíy, would seem
rather unattractive. The occurrence of this root in the two Old
Iranian dialects points to the conclusion that the root *sas- is
an s-extension of *sa- (as is also probable a priori on purely
theoretical grounds).
Thís cxplanation, however, cannot be said to h~ ve found
wide acceptance. Only Burrow accepted it', but whlle. B.env~­
niste now also derives Oatiy from a root Oa-, Brandenstem 10 hls
new manual of Old Persian silentIy rejects this interpretation
and sticks to Kent's explanation of karahya radiy 2. The reasons
for this reluctance are obvious. OP. Oat7~Y e he says' is almost
universalIy taken as a contraction of *Oalzatiy on account of the
preterite forms aOaham, aOaha, etc. If this were :~r~ect, the
only possible form of the impera ti ve woulcl be *Oaha. 1 hls thcory
ís howcvcr contrndictcd by too many countC'rinstanccs to be
acccptnhlc. As a rule alza rcmains uncontrnctcd, e.g, in (ivahalllzm
e village " abaraha e they bore', ahat(y e tha t he be', etc. 3 The
only form where contraction might be considered is ahy, mostly
taken to stand for the subj. form *alzahy (Skt. ásasi) and accord-
ingly transcribed as ahy. It occUrs exclusivcly in the phra.ses
tuvam ka xsayaOiya haya aparam alzy « thou who shalt be kmg
, «(Trans. of the Philol. SOCo », 1949, p. 40. .
2 See W. Brandcnstein, Antiguo Persa, Madrid 1958, pp. 83, 127. Incl-
dentally, the quotation.ktirahyd rddiy S. v. rádiy (p. 127) should be ~eleted.
3 See the list of OP. words with alta in Roland G. Kcnt, Old Perslall, 2nd
ed., New Havcn 1953, p. 46 . .
349
 r62 F. B. J. KuiPer
hereaften (DB IV. 37, 68, 87; ()uvám DSt 10) and in yává da()-
a(n)s ahy « as long as thou art vigorous» (DB IV. 72) '. Tt has
fonuerly been suggested that, just as we find in the phrase « (smite
the ... ) anuy which shall (do es) not call itself mine» both káram
... haya maná naz'y gaubátaz'y (subj.) and ... haya maná naz'y
gaubataiy (indic.)., so ahy may be the indicative fonn used side
by side with the subjunctive in the 3rd sing. ahatz'y. It must be
admitted, however, that such an interchange between the two
modes wouId be rather improbable in tuvam ká xJáyaOz'ya haya
aparam ahy, martt'ya haya drauJana ahatz'y hayavá zürakara ahatt'y
avaiy má dauJtá biyá ufraJtádz'y prsá « thou who .shalt be king
hereafter, the man who shall be a deceiver or who shall be a doer
of wrong, unto them do thou not be a friend, (but) punish them
well» (DB IV. 68 f.). It cannot weIl be a mere coinciden ce that
wherever we might expect the fonu. *ahahy, the inscriptíons
have ahy. Although haplography seems to occur sometimes, e.g.
perhaps in hamátá hamapz'tá DB 1. 303, ahy cannot be the regular
spelling for « *ahahay» since a sequence of two similar characters
in one word is not avoided (e.g., udapatatá, hamahyáyá). So
ahy is more Iikely to reftect a phonetical phenomenon, viz. the
avoidance of two subsequent syIlables beginning with h, which
may be compared with the dissimilation of aspira tes in Greek
and Sanskrit. An additional instance would be máhyá (Kent,
pp. 4 6 , 203), if we should accept Gray's theory of a contracted
genitive *máhahyá; but this fonu is at best ambiguous, and we
have no reason to depart from the interpretation of this fonn
as a locative sing., corresponding to Ved. más! « in the
month ».
On the other hand, ()átz'y is now fuUy clear as a root present
, For the restoration of this passage see Gershevitch, op. cit., p. 197 ff.
2 DB 11. 84, !II. 86 as against Ir. 21, 31, SI, IIr. 15, 59. Cf. e.g. A.
Meillet-E. Benv'eniste, op. cit., p. 14I.
3 It is hard to conceive that in this phrase the first word should con-
tain a different prior member from the second word (either ha-, A. Meillet-
E. Benveniste, op. cit., p. 168, or/tam-, M. Mayrhofer, {(A.LO.N. sez. ling. », 1
[1959], p. 13 f.), nor does haplology (e.g. Kent, op. cit., p. 45) seem likely in
this particular case, where hama- could be restored at any moment owing to
the parallelism with hama-pitti.
350
[5] Three Notes on Old Persiall
~---------------- ---------------------
of ()á-. N one of the various sound laws, indeed, tha t ha ve been
fonuulated by Foy, Benveniste, Kent and Brandenstein' could
account for the contrast between ahatiy and ()átiy, if the Iatter
were a contraction of *()ahatz'y. This explanation besides removes
the difficulty of the weak grade in OP. ()ah- .contrasti~g wi.t~
the ful! grade in Skt. sa¡Ílsati and probably m ~ v. smghaztz.
Indeed if the root ()ah- is only used (apart from tts occurrence
in the 'passive and the infinitive) in the prete:ite f~nns aOaham,
etc., .these are Iikely to represent a thematlc aonst of ~anh-:.
The oIder athematic aorist froID which this has developed IS stIlI
attested in sám . . .iÍ . .. sasta RS IV. 37. 8 .
This explanation of ()átiy, it is true, involves the _ne:essit y
of assuming a paradigmatic suppletion of ()ah- and ()a- In O~d
Persian. Apart from al! other consíderations, the fact th~t m
ava()á kárahyá ()ádiy the verb ()á- is attended by a (datlve-)
genitive, just as it is in kárahyá ava()á a()aha « thus he toId to
the people» (DB 1. 75, etc.) and in Skt. sa¡Ílsa me « tel! me», shows
that ()átz'y really functions as the suppletive present of ()~h-.
On the other hand, ()ah- is used both in the sense of Skt. sams-,
e.g. vayam Haxámanz'Siyá ()ahyámahy « we are called Achae-
menids» (DB 1. 7), and in the sense of Skt. sás- « to order», e.g.
tayaSám ha'éama a()ahya ava akunava « what was ordered by me,
that they did» (DNa 20), tayaSám adam a()aham ava akunava
« what 1 ordered them, that they did 1) (DNa 36) 2. Indeed, the
meaning of *sa¡is-, viz. ' to declare solemnl y " could easi! ~ develop
into that of 'command' 3, and the Avcstan noun sastz- means
, See W. Foy, « Kuhn's Zeitschriít ,), 35 (1899), p. 14 n. 1, p. 67 (~n~~ence
oí the word-accent), A. Meillet-E. llenveniste, op. cit., p. 82 (<-ah a- .mltlal et
intérieur (non -aha final), se contracte en -ti-»), R. G. Kent, op. CIt., p. 46
(only ahah is contracted, ()titiy being due to the analogy of ()til¡y), W. Branden-
stein, op. cit., p. 33 (only -ahahy is contracted). For further references see
« Acta Orientalia », 12, p. 19I. . .
2 Kent's translation {( what 1 said to them » masks the dlfference oí me~n-
ing between ()ah- in these passages and in DB 1..75 etc. (.cf. the translatlOn
«ce que je leuraiordonné», A. Mei11et-E. Benvcnlste, op. CIt.,. p. 118 f.). The
Elamite v'ersion fo11oW's the OP. text in using the same verb m a11 these pas-
sages.
3 See also {<Acta Orientalia »,12, p. 195 and cf. p. 206 f.
351
 F. B. J. Kuzper
both ' praise ' and ' command '. Still, the consequence of having
to assume a paradigmatic suppletion may have been the reason
why the explanation of (Jatiy as a root present of (Ja- has been
almost completely ignored. The athematic imperative form (Jadzy
may now be considered a definitive confirmation of its correctness.
2. OP. ma stabava DNa 60.
A1though Meillet I has correctly explained this form and
nothing essential could be added to it, most modern manuals
misrepresent his explanation by contradictory statements. Cf.
Meillet-Benveniste, Grammaire du vt'eux-perse, p. 128 ma stabava
(but p. 117: sta(m)bava), Kent, Old Persian, pp. 74, 75, 77 sta-
bava" (but p. 73 sta"'ba-va h ), Benveniste, « Bull. Soco ling.», 47
(1951), p. 29 ma stabava (but sta(m)bav-), W. Brandenstein, An-
tz'guo Persa, pp. 68, 76, 130 stambava. Therefore, a brief discus-
sion of the formal problem involved may not be out of place.
At an eady stage of Indo-European linguistics Adelbert
Kuhn drew attention to such Vedic forms as grbhayáti, mathá-
yáti, stabhayáti occurring beside the infixed presents grbh~¡áti,
mathnflti, stabhntiti 2. 1t has long been recognized that they
are secondary ya- presents derived from the non-infixed stems
grbh-a- (root grabh-), math-a- Croot manth-), and stabh-a- (root
stambh-). The roots, when lengthened by means of the forma-
tive element -a-, have always the weakest grade of vocalismo
The same is true whcn they are lengthened with -eu-. Instructive
instances of this prehistoric typo of prcsont-fonnation 3 aro, o.g.,
Root « Root-extension »
'*kei-: Gr. e:XLOV non-infixed: '*ky-eu-: Gr. O'eúw
infixed '*ki-n-eu-: Gr. x(VU¡'l.IXL
I See « Journ. asiat. l>, 19II/II, p. 637.
2 See « Kuhn's Zeitschrift l>, 2 (1853), pp. 392-398.
3 For the lE. eu-presents see A. Meillet «Mém. Soco ling. l>, 16, p. 246,
K. Brugmann, Grundr. vergl. Gramm. IP, 3, (1916), p. 156f., 269ff., 273 (with
references), Kurze vergl. Gramm., Strassburg 1904, pp. 503, 537, P. Persson,
St1ldien zur Lehre V07& der Wurzelerweiterung, Upsala 1891, p. 122, Beitrage zur
indogerm. Wortforschung, Uppsala 1912, p. 748 ff.; H. Hirt, Indogerm. Gramm.
III, p. 249, E. Frankel, Mélanges Boisacq, 1, Bruxelles 1937, pp. 355-381.
352
[6] Tltrfe Notes on Ole! Pcrsi,m
non-infixed '*str-eu-: Goth. straujan
infi;xed '*str-n-eu-: Skt. st(1,1óti
*HJer-: Lat. ortus non-infi;xed '* HJr-eu-: Gr. i5pouO'oc
infixed '*HJ{-n-eu-: Skt. P,lóti, Gr. i5P'iUfLL.
Since the Indo-Iranian ya-presents have often taken the
place of older athematic presents we may presume that in proto-IE.
there. existed present-formations of the types '*st/!lbh-fi-mi by the
side of *stmbh-n-a-mi, and *ky-éu-mi by the side of *ki-n-éu-mz·.
Cf. Ved. ;yáv-ana-, Gr. O'ei)"t'IXL. Traces of thisancient verbal
system are still extant in Indo-Iranian, e.g.
Root « Root-extension l)
*dhabh-: GAv. dabayeiti, non-infixed *dhbh-au-nd: GAv. djbavaya[,
Skt. á-dab-dha- Skt. á-dbhu-ta-
infixed *dhbh-(a)n-au-mz': GAv. d8b,maot(]
(2 pI.)
N ow the Rigvedic language has, parallel to stabhayáti, a
present stabhü-yáti, which entitles us to posit a present *sta-
bhau-mi, even though the existence of a corresponding infixed
present *stablt-n-au-nd (cf. A. Kuhn, loe. cit.) is not warranted
by ástabhnuvan in later Vedic texts (SB, PB). Owing to the
tendency of Old Persian to thematicize the athematic verbal
forms (e.g. akunav-a n , kunav-anaiy, vrnav-atam), the original forms
of tho hnperfoct *astablwv-am, *(/stablll7u-J, *l7stllblum-t must
have become *astabav-am, *astabav-a. Sincc it is this thcmatic
form that 1S used as an injunctive in ma stabava « do not rise in
rcbellion >J, it is cIear that '* sfambava is ruled out for morpholo-
gical reasons, not to mention Kent's analysis of this fonn as
stafflba-va" (p. 73).
3. OP. kunautiy.
That the Indo-Iranian present *krnauti 'he does, makes)
(Ved. liru óN, Av. k,wmaoiN) has survived also into Old Persian
may be inferred from (martiya) krnuvaka 'work-people', which
seems to be derived from a noun *krnva-, comparable to Ved.
353
 r66 F. B. J. K uiPer
(viSvam)-invá- from inóti, ínvati ' . Inthe language of the inscrip-
tions, however, the present kunautiy has lost the r of the root, in
contrast with such forms as krta- ' done " akriya(n)ta 'were done'
éartanazy , to do', etc. The origin of this stem ku-, which has
secondarily been extended to the aorist forms r pI. akumá, 3 sg.
mido akutá has not yet been satisfactoríly explained'. The sugges~
ted analogy of *tunautzy , is powerful' (to be inferred from the
adj. tunuva(n)t- ' powerful ') 3 hardly pro vides a plausible solution
as this verb (no doubt itself a new formation of Old Persian, cf.
Ved. tavi#, OP. távayatzy) must have been much less frequentIy
used than *krnauti, w hereas a close semantic connection between
both verbs, which alone could account for the supposed influence,
is far from obvious. Meillet-Benveniste may be right in principIe
in suggesting « un traitement abrégé de mots accessoires» but
they must admit that the stem kun-, which they hold to have
developed as earIy as proto-Indo-Iranian, has arisen « par des
proces encore obscurs» 4. Indeed, the verb *krnauti cannot be
said to function as a « mot accessoire» in Indo-Iranian. The
same objection must be raised against Schaeder's incidental cha-
racterization of kunautiy as an alIegro fonu of *k(?zauti 5. This
theory, though fundamentalIy correct, fails to explain why only
in this particular case the aIlegro form has been able to supplant
the regular present formo It would seem that the problem ad-
míts of a more. exact solution.
1 See 11. Il. Schaetler, (, Zeitschr. fUr tlie Veutsche Morgen!. Gcsel!.~.
97 (1943), p. 33 1, who however derives it írom the participle krnvant-. A
different etymoIogy oí krnuvaka- is proposed by R. G. Kent, Old Persian,
p. 180.
, See al so Chr. Bartholomae, Grundr. iran. Philol., 1, Strassburg 1°95,
p. 168, K. Brugmann, Grundr. vergl. Gramm., 1',1897, pp. 454, 460. The stem
kUJz- occurs in most Iranian languages, e.g. Sogd. kwn- (: ptc. 'krt-), Yagnobi
kun- (: ptc. ikta), sec c.g. P. Tedesco, (,Monde Oriental,), 15 (1921), p. 223, í., R.
Gauthiot, Essai de gramm. sogdlenne, 1, Paris 1923, p. 94 f., E. Benveniste, Essai
de gramm. sogdienne, n, París 1929, p. 17 f., G. Morgenstierne, AnEtym. Vocab.
of PasMo, 0510 1927, p. 34, V. 1. Abaev, Istoriko-etimologil:eskij slovar' osetin-
skogo jazyk.a, 1, Moskva-Leningrad 1958, pp. 579-81.
3 R. G. Kent, (, Language », 18 (1942), pp. 79-82, Old Persian, p.27.
4 A. Meillet-E. Benveniste, op. cit., p. 55.
5 See loe. cit.
354
[9] Three Notes on Old Persian 16 7
In classical Sanskrit karoti/kurmaft has taken the place of
Vedic kntóti/kn¡umá!z. What strikes us, is the fact that in a
verb which was most frequentIy used a fuIly regular conjuga-
tion has been replaced by a quite anomalous system of fonus.
The first traces of this development are met with in the tenth book
of the Rigveda, viz. 2 sg. impero kuru X. I9.2, 145.2 and 1 pI. indo
kurmáft X. 51. 7. 1t has long been recognized tha t the fact tha t
among the earliest traces of the la ter type of inflection there
are two dccurrences of kuru cannot be due to mere coinciden ce.
Only the existence of an imperative form kuru for kn¡u can ac-
count for the later development of the anomalous present karotij
kurmaft l. The singular of the imperative is indeed, owing to
the special circumstances in whích it is often used, the sole fonu
that is liable to a « functional weakening» and accordingly to
abnormal phonetic developments. The imperative of the Rus-
sian verbs keeps íts ending -i only when this is accented (e.g.
kupí 'buy', inf. kupít'), but the unaccented endíng shows an
irregular shortening sínce the I 3 th and 14th cen turies (e. g. ver'
, trust', inf. vérit') 2. The ending of Gr. i~oü 'see!' was shor-
tened when the word was used as an interjection. The frequent
use of Lat. fac also accounts for its being sanctioned by the
literary usage (although dic, duc, and fac have arisen accordíng
to the sound laws).
If Jules Bloch's ex:planation of Ved. múhu 'suddenly, in a
moment' from *mrhú « ~P()(XÚ» 3 is correct, this word shows a
vocalization of r to u after a labial sound and before an u in the
. 1 For the oIder literature on the subjcct see W. Wüst, IndiscJz (Gese/I.
der idg. Sprachw., Il/4X, Berlin 1929), p. 104, and cí. J. Wackemagcl, Altind.
Gramm., 1, 1896, p. XIX (and p. XXVIII), [= Introductian générale, pp. 42/ 13
with n. 33 and 178], K. Brugmann, Grundr. vergl. Gramm., 1', 1897, p. 458,
Kurze vergl. Gramm., 1904, p. 133, H. Lommel, (' Zeitschr. für Indo!. und !rano »,
8 (1931) p. 267, n.' 1, L. Renou, (, Bul!. Soco ling, », 33 (1932), p. 18, Gramm. de
la langue védique, París 1952, p. 266 (with A. Debrunner's criticisms in (, Kra-
tyIas 1), I [1956], p. 43), M. Leumann, (,Indogcrm. Forsch. ,), 57 (1940), p. 2 13.
• See W. Vondrák-O. Grünenthal, Vergl. slav. Gramm., IP, Gottingen
1928, p. 121, and see in ,general for shortening oí imperative forms Wilhclm
Hom, SjrachkOrjer und Sjrachfunktion', Leipzig 1923, p. 32 ff.
3 See J. Bloch, Donum natalt'cium Schrijnm, Nijmcgen 1929, p. 369.
355

168 F. B. J. K uiPer
next syIlable r. N ow Ved. kpju (beside k!'(lUhí, Av. kmmüioi) prov-
ides a fairIy similar case, although there is no reason to sup-
pose that the k was stilI rounded in the Vedic periodo So k((lU
must have become *kU~lU as the aIlegro form of commands. It
should be observed that the common view that k((zu has be-
come *ku~u in a « Vedic Prakrit dialect» lacks any factual
evidence. Apart from víka!a-, whose etymology is open to de-
bate', there 1s no indicatíon to show that in the rare cases of
vocaliza tion of r in the Rigvedic language a foIlowing den tal
was cerebralized, whereas Hthz'rá- and kitavá- (if rightly ex-
plained from *srthz'rá- and *krtavá-) speak against it. As for
Práska~1Va-, name of a descendant of Ká~¡va-, this can hard-
ly be derived from a present pra-sk!'(lOti 3. N ot only is the pho-
netic development nz> m.t unwarranted for the Rigvedic lan-
guage, and is skr- only attested after parz'- and sam-, but it is
also unlikeIy that the name of Ka!).va's descendant shouId have
been derived from a different form of the root kr-. Since there is
sorne reason to suppose a non-Aryan origin of the Ka!). vas and
sin ce Ká~lva- itself is likely to be a foreign name because of its
1}, Práskm.zva- must rather be explained as a Sanskritízation
of *pra-kka~va-, just as táskara- must stand for *takkara-, gu~pitá-­
for *guppita-. Cf. pí~pa!a- beside píppa!a-, etc. 4. As for pra-,
this occurs in several words of unknown origin, where it may
represent the Austro-Asiatic prefix p'ér- (like bhra- for *bh'ér-
in bhraku!i-/bh{ku!i, bhrakulhfa-/bhrkulhfa-), Cf. prámaganda-:
maganda- (Nir. 6,32) and perhaps prapharvt- 5.
So tj *ktt~11t has ariscn as aIlcg-ro form of Vedz'c k/'(m, it must
llave containC'd thc nlIophone of 11, which hc¡'c carnc to function
as a phoneme (as in dü~¡áfa-, dü:difa- from *du;~'dfa-). .
1 For the vocalization of r see also J. Bloch, «Bull. de l'Ecole Fran~aise
de l'Extreme Orient», 44 (1951), p. 43 ff.
• See Festschrift A. Debrunner, Bem 1954, p. 247 n. 2 (and abo Fest-
schrift W. Kir/el, Bonn 1955, p. 171).
3 See K. Hoffmann, «Worter und Sachen», NF. 3 (1940), p. 155 f.
4 See Festsc/trift W. Kir/el, pp. 168 ff., 160 f. and 144, and {( Kratylos~,
4 (1959), p. 166 f.
5 Sec M. Mayrhofer, Kurzgej. etym. Worterb. der altind. Spr., II, Hei-
delberg 1953, p. 365 f.
356
~------------------------------------~-----
[IOJ [!I ] Three Notes on Old Persimt
Since thc form *ktt~tt had bccome kuru in the colloquial
speech of the late Rigvedic period, there is no .reaso~ fo: suppos-
ing any historieal connection with Pkt. kU(laZ, WhlCh IS a Pra-
kritic continuation of Ved. k!'(lóti. On the other hand the ques-
tion may be raised whether apre-Vedic *kunu and OP. kunau-
tiy might be traced back to a common origin, which then ~uslt
have been a colloquial form of spcech of proto-Indo-Iraman .
Although OP. krnuvaka- suggests thc idea that kunat~tiy is ~a:~er
a late new formation of the separate OP. dialect, thlS posslblltty
cannot definitely be ruled out. In any case, thc Vedic evidence
points to the inference that also the OP. present kunautiy has
arisen from the 2 sg. impera ti ve.
Addenda
P. 160 n. I: As H. B. ToIman points out (Ancient Persian
Lexicon and Texts, NashvilIe 1908, p. 27 n. 2), also the Akkadian
version according to Weissbach's reading has: «and declare (?)
the true record to the peopIe». - P. 160 n.3: Herzfeld has been
the first to recognize, on the basis of the Akkadian version and thc
OP. context, thc true reading Oádiy(Altpersische lnschriften,
Berlín 1938, p. 336). - P. 160 n. 5: For the identity of sátar- and
siist;r- see also E. Herzfcld, op. cit., p. 302. - P. 161 n. I: See now
al so A. Thumb-R. Hauschild, Handbuch des Sanskrz't, 1/2, Heidel-
berg 1959, p. 252. Vcry doubtful is T. Burrow's interpretati.on of
Rigvcdic fmasi as 'we proclaim' (from Ni ); sce «Annals ofOncntal
Rcscan:h», 13 (Ccntcnary Nr.), Mac\ras 1()57. no pagc. --- P. 162
n. I: For daOa(n)s, King-Thornpson anel Tolman already rcad
da(?)tas(?). - P. 162: For miihyá scc A. Meillct-E. Bcnvcnistc,
op. cit., pp. 148, 18I, 214 f., as contrasted with F. C. Andrcas-
J. Wackemagel in « Gottinger Nachrichten.», 193 I , p. 3~7. ~
P. 167: As in the case ofLatinjac, the Slav011lc vowcl-reductlOn In
OChSl. tbcz' 'run! " rbci ' say !', contrasting with the indicative
forrns feka '1 run', reky '1 say', was phonctically determined
(hy the following affricate, as against e.g. nesi, impera ti ve of
r See al so A. MeilJet-E. Bcnv'eniste, loc. cit.
357
 17° F. B. j. Kuz'per [12]

nes9 '1 bear' where the e was not altered). ef. W. Vondrák,
Vergl. slav. Gramm. 1", Gottingen 1924, p. 61, N. van Wijk,
Geseht'ehte der altMrehenslavz'sehen Spraehe, 1, Berlin-Leipzig 193 1 ,
p. 94· On the other hand, the fact that this reduction of ee to
be was restricted to these imperative forms must be due to their
Zur kompositionellen Kürzung im Sanskrit
functional weakcning. - P. 167 n. 1: See also thc referenccs in
A. Thumb-R. Hauschild, op. cit., p. 267 f. Alfona Nehring
zum siebzigsten Geburtstag

Abkürznngen; Ai. Gr.: Wackernagel (-Debrunner), Altindische Gramml1tik. N.:

F. B. J. Kuiper. Nachtrlige zu der liJinleitung uncl den Blinden I und n/1 desselben Werkes.

1. Es roacht sich in den letzten Jahren in Kritik und Referaten von neue-
ren auf die Laryngaltheorie gegründeten Erklarungen bisweilen eine gewisse
Gereiztheit beroerkbar, welche verrat, daB ein Kreis von Fachgenossen offen-
bar nur als das Ergebnis sinnlaser Neuerungssucht empfindet, was sich an-
deren als bci eincr bestimmtcn historischen Betrachtungsweise unumgang-
liche SchluJ3folgerungen aufgedrangt hato Diese unverkennbaren Symptoroe
eines mangelnden Verstandnisses unter Fachgenossen für die gegenseitígen
roethodischen Voraussetzungen verdienen v6llig ernst genoromen zu wel'den.
Da wir annehroen dürfen, daB roan sich auf beiden Seiten del' so entstande-
nen Scheidelinie in gleichero MaBe uro die Erkenntnis del' Wahrheit beroüht,
sind es VOl' aUero solche MiJ3verstandnisse, welche einer dringend gewünsch.
ten sachlichen Er6rterung des Für und Wíder iro Wege stehen. Es sei uns
.daher gestattet, zunachst auf einige Aspekte del' Laryngaltheorie etwas
naher einzugehen. Dabei wollen wir glottonische Spekulationen v611ig auJ3er
Acht las sen und uns auf einige für altindische Spracherscheinungen vorge-
Hohl,tgollO ErldiirullgolI j¡ofwhl'ii,nlwl1. Froilieh hat Kurylowicz neuordiJlgA
jm !1l1gollloinoll dio Vonilloho z¡jr l~)'klii,l'\IJ1g oinzolHpmohliehol' L'l'oblollll\ mit
Hilfe del' Laryngaltheorie abgelehnt, mit del' Begründung, sie seien "aptes
a discréditer la théorie"l. Diesel' Einwand leuchtet jedoch keineswegs ein.
Die Laryngaltheorie ist ja eine Arbeitshypothese del' historisch-vergleichen-
den idg. Sprachwissenschaft. Da nun letztere sieh VOl' eine ganze Reihe von
nicht oder ungenügend erklarten Tatsachen gestellt sieht, kann roan nícht
recht einsehen, weshalb es methodisch unerlaubt ware, für die Erklarung sol-
eher Tatsachen eine Arbeitshypothese anzuwenden, deren Richtigkeit oder
Unrichtigkeit sich nur aus eben dieser Anwendung auf das Material ergeben
kann.
Versuchen wir z.B., uns das Verhaltnis zwischen ai. dirghá- und aw.
dar<Jga-, altpers. darga- klarzuroachen, so k6nnen wir schwerlich umhin, in
del' urindoiranischen Grundforro dieser W6rter ein besonderes Phonem an-
zunehroen. Einerseits steht ja fest, daJ3 wir es roit einer gewissen Modifika-
tion von r zu tun haben, ,vahrend doch r selbst hiel' ausgeschlossen ist; an-

1 J. Kurylowioz, L'Apophonie en indo-européen 169, A. 8.

358
359
 Zur kompositionellen Kürztmg im Sanskrit 15
derseits müssen wir, da ja nichts sich im alteren Indogerrnanischen mit sol-
chem zahen Konservatismus zu behaupten pflegt wie die Silbenquantitat,
aus den iranischen und indischen Vertretungen schliel3en, dal3 das t hier
entweder durch Position oder von Natur lang gewesen ist 2 • Nun sind aber
bei der üblichen Annahme eines Langvokals f3 die indischen Vertreter ir
und ür (von denen nur der erstere im Anlaut vorkomrnt und daher als del'
normale zu gelten hat, wahrend ür bIoB cine durch vorhergehende Konso-
nanten bedingte Variante ist)4 "nicht vollig aufgeklart"5. Es ernpfiehlt sich
daher die Annahme einer Lange durch Position, die uns dann weiter erlaubt,
ai. ir als das Resultat cines rein-indischen Laryngalumlauts zu erklaren: *rH
ware demnach zu *irH, und vor Konsonanten weiter rnit Ersatzdehnung zu
ir geworden, und für pür1Já- ware dementsprechend eine Entwicklung von
*pIH1n6- zu urindoiran. *prHná-, und dann weiter (mit Vokalrúndung
durch den Labial) zu vorindisch *purHná-, ved. pür'lJá- anzunehmen (Acta
Oriento 20, 33f.). Beilaufig sei hiel' bemerkt, dal3 B ail ey, Transactions Phi-
101. Soc. 1954, 139 A.4, eine ganz abweichende Erkliirung vorgeschlagen
hat: el' geht offenbar nicht von idg. *plHn6- aus, sondern von *polHn6-, also
von einer Form mit reduziertem Wurzelvokalismus, die dann im Indischen
zu *polln6- und weiter zu *p oln6- geworden seí, wahrend im Iranischen
*plHn6- zu [ppui-] geworden sei "by syllabification of 1 and extrusion oí
consonantal H". Doch laBt sich dagegen nicht nur del' Einwand erheben,
daB sich weder für die vorausgesetzte Assimilation von H an einen vorher-
gehenden Konsonanten, noch auch für die Kürzung des "Doppelkonsonan-
ten" mit sekundarer Dehnung des Reduktionsvokals ein einziges glaubhaf-
tes Beispíel anführen la13t - gesetzt den Fall, da13 es überhaupt je cine solche
tauto-syIlabische Geminata gegeben hat! -, sondern auch, was weit
wioht¡igOl' iHt, dld3 dio iraniHohon EntR]lroohungol1 von il'/17r lIn7.w<1idontig
damuf hillwcisen, da13 die durch vorhergohonde Labiallauto horvorgcrufcllo
Rundung des in *rH entstandenen Vokals auf einer rein-indischen Entwick-
lung beruht und folglieh nicht auf vorindische Sprachstufen zurückgeführt
werden darf6.
2 Unrichtig ist die Auffassung von daraga- ala rein graphische Wiedergabe
von [drga -], so z.B. Wackernagel, Kl. Schriften 357, und Ai. Gr. 1,28, 16f.
N. (nach Andreas, vgl. G6tt. Nachr. 1911, 5ff.).
3 Meistens freiJich nur als rein graphisches Symbol gewertet; siehe z. B. Ai.
Gr. 1, 28, 12 N.
4 Aber kürdati, kürpara-, kürpéi8aka- und wahrscheinlich kürmá- aind fremder
Herkunft.
5 Wie Wackernagel, Ai. Gr. 1, 28, mit Recht feststellt.
6 Wahrend in iran. [darga-] einfach lautgesetzlicher Schwund des konsonan-
~is~hen Laryngals mit gleichzeitiger Erhaltung der Silbenquantitat vorliegt, ist
m rran. [prna-] statt des zu erwartenden [parna-]die alte Quantitat von urin-
doiran. *prHná- (idg. *plH1nó-) verloren gegangen. Es bildet somit eine Aus-
nahme, wofür die Annahme von Elision (Bailey) keine Erldarung bieten kann,
da sie gerade der zu erklarende Punkt ist.
360
16 F. B. J. Kuiper
Da die Hypothese eines indischen Laryngalumlauts uns in diesem Zusam-
menhang nicht weiter beschiiftigen wird, sei hiel' nur vorübergehend darauf
aufmerksam gemacht, da13 im Gegensatz zu den westlichen idg. Sprachen,
wo vokalisches H meistens a-Farbung hat, im indischen Zweig sich die ur-
indoiranisehe Tendenz zu i-Farbung (vgl. ai. aw. ap. pitar-: lato pater) auch
weiterhin manifestiert, und zwar in der sekundiiren, reiri-indischen Vokali-
sierung des konsonantischen Phonems H (ai. támisrü'-: aw. tqOra-; ai. drá-
vi1Jas-: aw. draonah-, usw.), in den Fallen mit reduziertem Vokalismus wie
timira-, stimita-, wo -im- nur aus *-emH- (mit Umlaut) erklart werden kann,
und schlieBliQh in del' Entwicklung von *-rH- vor Konsonanten zu *-irH- <
-ir-, die ruan als einen Sonderfall der i-Farbung reduzierter Vokale betrach-
ten darf. Dagegen hat *rH in antevolmlischer Stellung die i-Farbung mit
dem Vertreter von *r in die ser ·Stellung gemein, so da13 hiel' lmine sichere
Deutung der Vokalisierung moglich ist: vgl. etwa ved. tirál,¡" purál,¡, (aw.
taró, paró) gegenüber tir1Já-, p1Írva-, die auf *trH-, *prH- hinweisen. Doch
stützt sich die Annahme von rH nicht so sehr auf die Hypothese eines La-
ryngalumlauts (die vielmehr nur eine willkommene nahere Bestatigung lie-
fert) als auf gewisse andere lautliche Erscheinungen im Vedischen, die die
Weiterexistenz von H als einem Sonderphonem bis in eine verhaltnismaBig
spate Periode des vorhistorischen Indischen hinein wahrscheinlich machen.
Anderseits stimmt Z. B. die auffallend abweichende Vertretung in lato gra-
num, lána, die cine für das Lateinische charakteristische und auch im Um-
laut von magnus « *me{jH2-n6-s) an den Tag tretende a-Farbung zeigen
(entgegen got. kaúrn, wulla) eher zur Annahme del' Grundformen *{jtH-n6-
> *graHno- ulld *wlH2-ná- > *wlaHná- als zu *{jfn6- und *wlná-, welche
die a-Farbung unerklart lassen. Auffallig bleibt nur der Vokalnachschlag in
*-raH-, *-laH- entgegen dem Vorschlag in 01', ol (aus t, 1, vgl. z.B. lato tollo
/llIA *t{-n-éJl 2 -mi, ahor l¡U1/,8 aus *tIJl2 -tó-.q). Sowoh 1 das Gormal\ischo wio das
13altoslavischo zeigt hier Vokalvorschlag, wouul'ch (abgesehen von lutona-
tionsunterschieden) die Vertreter von tH, IH in diesen Sprachgruppen mit
denen von r, 1zusammenfielen7 •
2. Gedanken wie die im Vorhergehenden entwickeIten sind schon Ofters
von verschiedenen Seiten geauBert, und m. W. niemals widerlegt worden.
Mu13 man aber für eine vorhistorische Periode des Altindischen noch tH an-
setzen, so kann man kaum umhin, für den Vertreter des "langen" nasalis
sonans auch aH anzunehmen. Tatsachlich dürfte sich als die ungezwungen-
ste Erklarung für die rigvedische Pausa-"Kürzung" des auslautenden -á in
den PluraIlormen niÍmá usw. die Annahme· einer Endung -aH ergeben,
welche dann den vorauszusetzenden Endungen -iH und -uH in den Plural-
formen del' neutralen i- und u-Stamme entsprechen würde. An dieser An-
7 Wegen altlit. gerusche/ ellenis, amif3inas amuf3inas, siehe van W ij Ir, Die
baltischen und slavischen Akzent- und Intonationssysteme 82 (mit Lit.).
361

Zur kompositionellen Kürzung im Sanskrit
nahme von aH (die sich mehreren Forschern als logis che SchluBfolgerung
aufgedrangt hat) hat aber Debrunner AnstoB genommen, wie die mehr-
mals von ihm hinzugefügten Ausrufezeichen zeigen8 • Es ist also auch diesem
hervorragenden Forscher der logische Zusammenhang zwischen dieser An-
nahme und den allgemeinen Voraussetzungen der Theorie nicht klar gewor-
den. Denn die logis che Folge einer in sich geschlossenen Lehre kann man
bestreiten, AnstoB und Árgernis aber erregt das Unverstandene. Einige er-
lauternde Bemerkungen dürften daher nicht überflüssig sein.
Obwohl die Laryngaltheorie uns für die Kürzung von ,z. B. -í « *-iH)
sowohl in Pausa wie in der Stellung vor ungleichen Vokalen eine befriedi-
gende Erklarung bietet, konnte man doch einwenden, daB wenigstens für
die antevokalische Kürzung auch eine andere (u. a. von Oldenberg, Pro-
legomena 469, vertretene) Auffassung moglich sei, namlich, daB Ín dieser
Stellung ein Teil des Vokals in den Halbvokal übergegangen, und als voka-
lisches Element eine Kürze übriggeblieben seí. Ware dies aber wirklich der
Fall gewesen, so hatte man im Vokativ der í-Stamme einfach den Stamm-
auslaut (also *deví, *vrkí) erwarten müssen. Da nun aber devi, vrki nur als
Pausaformen von *daiviH, *vrkiH erklart werden konnen, und dieser Ab-
fall des Laryngals wegen des im Rigveda noch lebendigen Wechsels der
Sandhivarianten im Parallelfall des Ntr. Plur. (Vá8Ü, puní, aber in Pausa
Vá8U, purú) kaum in eine allzu ferne Vergangenheit hinaufgerückt werden
darf, liegt es nahe, auch die Kürzung der Nominativ-Endung -í, z.B. in
1. 40. 3 prá devy etu 8ünr'tá auf -iH zurückzuführen 9 • Doch kann man
anderseits den Wegfall des H auch nicht allzu spat datieren, da die an-
tevokalische Kürzung der Nominativendung der in-Stamme offenbar als
eine indische Analogie-Erscheinung erklart werden muB; vgl. z.B. sipry
ándha8al), VIII. 33. 7, 92. 4, vájy ar~ati IX. 86. 4, 107. 510 • Die genauere
]?ixiornng dor Chronologie des Laryngalschwundes wird bosonders dadurch
erschwert, daB wir nicht imstande sind, festzustollon, \Vio lango sich nach
dem Wegfall des H die Kürzung in Pausa und vor vokalischem Anlaut rein
8 Ai. Gr. IIJ2, 564 und I, 31i, 45 N.
9 Kurylowicz, Etudes indo-européennes 28f., 33f. (Siehe die Literaturnach-
weise in India Antiqua 208, A. 40). Damit ware Joh. Schmidts Ansicht, dia
Brugmann, GrundriJ3 12, 495, abgelehnt hat, mit einer gewissen Modifikation
wieder zu Ehren gebracht. Beilaufig sei hiel' darauf hingewiesen, daJ3 "Laryn-
gal" nur eine rein-formelle Bezeichnung ist für verschiedene nicht-orale Pho-
neme des ursprachlichen Lautsystems, wahrend für die vorhistorische Phase des
Altindischen derselbe Ausdruck das konsonantische Phonem bezeichnet, worin
idg. H 1 , Ha und H3 offenbar zusammengefallen waren, ohne daJ3 damit über
dessen phonetischen Charakter etwas ausgesagt werden sollo
10 Vgl. z.B. vájy akramit IX. 64. 29, V. dstMt IX. 87. 4, V. agne VI. 7. 3, V.
áhrayo l. 74. 8, V. ávrta?z, 1. 133. 7, VIII. 32. 18, V. dsya VII. 90. 2, V. árvá 1. 163.
12, IV. 38. 10, V. 44. 4, v. akt¡á!¡ IX. 97. 45, v. ak~á?z, X. 34. 4. Beachte áipri-
yandhasa?z, JS. I, 297.
2 uDía Sprache"
362
,
17
I 18 F. B. J. Kuiper
traditionell, als "synchronisches Lautgesetz" , erhalten haben kann. Für d~n
Wortinlaut und für altere vor-indoiranische Sprachstufen fehlt vollends Je-
"
des Kriterium: muB z.B. die idg. Gestalt der in ved. svit-ic-~, vorl'legend en
Bildung als *-iktl-iH oder als *-iHku-iH angesetzt werden 1 (Siehe aber
S.30.) . d
Nehmen wir aber für die Endung von deví, auf Grund des VokatlVs un
analog der neutralen Pluralendung in bh1irl, eine vorhistoris.che .Aus~prache
-iH an, so erhebt sich die Frage, ob wir auch für den Nommatlv Smg. der
u-Stamme als altere Gestalt -aH anzunehmen haben. In dem Falle konnte
die traditionelle Kürzung, Z. B. in X. 22. 5 tvá'rh tyá cid viÍtasyáSviÍgá (zu
lesen viÍtasyiÍ 'sva iÍgál), 1), letzten Endes auf *á8vaH iÍgál), zurückgef~hrt, und
die entsprechende Kürzung z.B. in VI. 24. 5, VII: 40. 3 paryetiÍstt (paryetá
asti) durch Analogie erkliirt werdenl l . Zugunsten dleser I;fypothe~e darf man
sich darauf berufen, daB die ganz iihnliche antevokahsche Kurzun~ von
ácchá in VI. 41. 16 evayiÍ marúto ácchoktau (zu lesen áccha-uktau)12 nur m Zu-
sammenhang mit der Pausa-Kürzung zu áccha (am SchluB der pádas b ~nd
d) betrachtet werden darf, welche letztere sich .nur durch ~nnahme CIner
alteren Endung -aH erkliiren liiBtl 3 • DaB auch dIe Endung -a, entgegen der
landlaufigen Annahme, für vorhistorische Sprachperioden als -aH ~nzuset­
zen sei ware man aber nur dann anzunehmen berechtigt, wenn slOh auch
hier di~selbe Pausa-Kürzung wie in ved. devi, lak~mi, vadhu (Vokativen zu
deví, lak~míl)" vadh1il),) nach,:eisen. lieBe. Nu~ laBt ~ns frei1ic~ das Alt-
indische in dieser Hinsicht 1m StlOh, aber fur gr. VU[J.tpIX, O'U~W'\'IX um~r.
Pre8tota und aksl. zeno bietet die Herleitung aus Pausaformen.auf -aH CI~e
viel wahrscheinlichere Erklarung als die übliche Annahme emes paradlg-
1l1ltt,ischol1 AhlalltoA á : ;J, wovon SOIlAt jodo Spur fehIt l4 • Doch lehren unA
dieHe l¡'Ormell, mogen Aje alloh eine ursprüngliche Vokativondung *-nJl
(*-eH 2 ) erweiscn, nichts über die Zeit, wan~ der Laryng~l im ~uslaut ge-
sohwunden ist. 1st aber unsere auf den vedlschen Sandhl gegrundete An-
nahme, daB dieser Schwund nur einzelsprachlich stattgefunden haben ka~n,
richtig, so würden diese Vokativendungen in den verwandten Sprachen In-
direkt für eine vorhistorische Stufe des Altindischen eine Endung -aH er-
weisen. Auf Grund diescr Brorterungen wird man (trotz Oldenbergs ent-
11 Siehe A. Kuhn, Kuhns und Schleichers Beitrage zur vergleichenden Sprach-
forschung III, 121, und besonders Oldenberg, Prolegornena 466f., dazu aber
seina Noten zu X. 22. 5.
12 Vg1. auch ~{au VI. 21. 8 für a-i~{au, K~hn 1. C. •
13 Siehe Shortening of final Vowels in the RIgveda 10f. (= Mededelmgen Kon.
Neder1. Akad. V. Wetenschappen, NR. 1~, 1955, 262f.).. ,
14 Eina Schwundstufe nirnmt z.B. MeIllet,IntroductlOn al étude. compara-
tive des langues i._e. 8 319, an; dagegen scheint Br~gmann, Grund~lJ3 del' vgl.
Grarnm. Ira, 2, 134, absichtlich eine exakte Formuherung zu verrnelden. Oben-
stehende Deutung wurde in India Antiqua (1947),210 A. 53, vorgeschlagen (vgl.
auch Burrow, Skt. Language 234).
363
 Zur komposítíonellen Kürzung ím Sanskrit 19
gegengesetztem Urteil, Prolegomena 469) die Auslautskürzung von -a nach
dem Gesetz "vocalis ante vocalem" als mit der Kürzung von -i, -ü letzten
Endes identisch betrachten müssen.
3. 1m AnschluB an die oben kurz referierte Erkliirung gewisser Vokativ-
formen des Singulars magen hier einige Bemerkungen über die ai. Dualen-
dungen als ein Exkurs eingeschaltet werden. Bekanntlich wird die Dual-
endung -a bisweilen vor Vokal kurz gemessen. Daf3 VI. 63. 1 puruhütMyá
als puruhütá adyá zu lesen ist, hat schon Kuhn erkanntl 5 • Nun kannte dies,
an nnd für sich betrachtet, ebenso wie z.B. paryetásti (siehe § 2), auf dem
Gesetz "vocalis ante vocalem" (also, nach der hier vertretenen Ansicht, auf
einer analogischen Verallgemeinerung der "Kürzung" in -aH, -iH) beruhen.
Doch liefert auch in diesem Fall der Vokativ des Duals niiheren Aufschluf3
über die idg. Dualendung der o-Stiimme und somit über den Ursprung der
Kürzung. Es steht ja auf3er Zweifel, daf3 es für den Vok. Du. der ai. d-
Stiimme ursprünglich eine eigene Form gegeben hat, die auf kurzes -a en-
dete. Siehe Ai. Gr. nI, 53f. ("im iiltesten RV."). Daf3 diese Endung auch in
den Sandhikontraktionen steckt, hat Sommer, Stand und Aufgaben der
Sprachwissenschaft 260f., wahrscheinlich gemacht. Es ist jedoch bisher
nicht gelungen, für diese Endung eine plausible Erkliirung zu finden. Weder
die Identifizierung mit dem Vokativ des Singulars (so zuletzt wieder Renou,
Gramm. véd. 225), noch die Verknüpfung mit der idg. Dualendung -e der
Konsonantenstiimme liif3t sich irgendwie begründen. Ebenso beruht De-
brunners Annahme einer ursprünglichen Endungslosigkeit des Vokativs
(Ai. Gr. nI, 44f., nach Wackernagel, Sb. Berl. Ale 1918,409) schlieBlich
nur auf glottogonischen Spekulationen, die (trotz Delbrücks Versicherung
des Gogonteils, Vcrgleichonde Syntax 1, 189) nichts weniger als "sichor"
sind. Nieht Violo wordon hontznt,ago noch borcit soin, ammllohmcll, daB sich
im Veda noch Spuren einer prii-indogermanischen unflektierten Stufe der
Sprachentwicklung nachweisen lassen. Wenn aber die Vokativendungen von
devi, lak~mi und vadhu auf Pausa-"Kürzung" von -iH und -uH beruhen,
muf3 für die dualischen Vokative Mura l. 151. 4, aditya VIL 85. 4 usw. die
Maglichkeit einer iihnlichen Kürzung erwogen werden. Nun haben wir nicht
den geringsten Grund, in Pausa eine analogische Ausdehnung der soge-
nannten "Kürzung" der Endungen -aH, -iH, -uH auf laryngallose Endun-
gen anzunehmen: eine Verallgemeinerung, wie sie in antevokalischer
Stellung stattgefunden hat (wo sie, von den Fiillen *-a/H a-, *-i/H a- aus-
gehend, zum allgemeinen Gesetz "vocalis ante vocalem" geführt hat), hat
hier offenbar nicht stattgefunden. Wir kannen also nicht umhin, die En-
dung des Vok. Du. Mura aus Pausa-"Kürzung" von -aH zu erkliiren. Dies
führt somit zu der historisch nicht unwichtigen Erkenntnis, daf3 der Dual
15 Kuhns und Schleichers Beitrii.ge z. vgl. Sprachforschung JII, 120. Siehe
weiter Oldenberg, ZDMG. 60, 757f., AL Gr. IJI, 45; 46.
364
20 F. B. J. Kuiper
der idg. o-Stiirnme nicht aus o +
e kontrahiert worden ist (siehe AL Gr. III,
48f.), sondern die Endung -H enthiilt, was auch besser zum Sto13ton del'
Endung -(5 in historischer Zeit stimmt. Weiter stimmt dieses Ergebnis zu
del' Endung del' NADu. del' i- und u-Stamme, für welche das Indoiranische,
das Baltoslavische und das Irische einstimmig ·i und -ü erweisen. Aus
·í + e, -u +e (Ai. Gr. III, 50) kannen diese Endungen aber nicht kontra-
hiert sein, da diese Lautgruppen zu jeder Zeit nur *-(i)je, *-(u)we hiitten er-
geben kannen. Dagcgcn beweist auch hiel' del' Vokativ Du. prthivi (zweimal,
AL Gr. III, 54) wicderum, daB die Endungen ·i und -ü auf *-iH (bzw. *-iH
-H) *-uH bcruhen müsscn16 •
Kehren wir jetzt zu unserem Ausgangspunkt zurück. WiI' haben vcrsucht
nachzuweisen, daf3 wenigstens in gewissen Stellungen die Annahme von VOl'-
historischem -aH statt idg. *-a nicht abwegig, sondern vielmehr geboten ist.
Um so mehI' trifft dies für das aus sogenanntem langem nasalis sonans ent-
standene a zu. Es verdient dabei Beachtung, da13 schon die Diskrepanz
zwischen lato granum : ai. jirtW- einel'seits, und lato -gnatus : ai. jatá- andel'-
seits entschieden gegen die Annahme von ursprachlichen Langv6kalen i
und ~ spricht. 1m Lateinischen, wo 1} nicht vokalisiert wurde, entwickelten
sich *rH und *1}H VOl' Konsonanten ganz parallel zu *raH > ra und *naH
> na. 1m Urindoiranischen dagegen wurde 1} schon früh zu a vokalisiert,
wodurch r¡;H sich zwangsliiufig als aH weiterentwickeln muf3te, und daher
16 Unklar ist, weshalb die Form prthivi als "metrically shortened", "abrégé
métriquement" erklii.rt wird (Lanman, Noun-lnfiection in the Veda 391, Mac-
donell, Vedic Grammar 276, Renou, Gramm. véd. 217), da ja in n. 31. 5 und
nI. 54. 4 der Anapii.st prthivi nach der Zasur gerade ganz normal gewesen ware.
Unsicher ist mahi IV. 56. 5, X. 93. 1, siehe AL Gr. JII, 54 und Renou, a. a. O.
Unerklart bleibt, weshalb die Kürzung im Vokativ 80 sparlich belegt ist. Frei-
lich korn m t, auch -n nur "im iiltflAten RV." vor. Bei don í·St,iimmon iAt offenbar
do!' alto Volml,iv 1'1,,11011 bu Hi¡¡;vodlt nahO:t.1l VOIlHUtlldi¡¡; von dOl' NOIllilln.t.ivfol·1ll
verdriillgt wOl'den. lIwl1!' iet in den 20 mil' belmuuten Delegen eineA Vokl1t.íVR I\uf
-í die Liinge sehr oft durch das Metrum nicht genügend gesíchert, da das Wort
entweder vor der Zasur (devi IV. 55. 6, prthvi X. 178. 2, rodasí l. 185. 3, VI.
50. 3, 62. 8, IV. 55. 6, ftavari III. 54. 4), oder am Pada-Ende (devi IX. 98. 9,
rodasi 1. 52. 10, 105. 1, VI. 70. 2, 3, manavi IX. 98. 9) steht. Doch gibt es auBer
úrvi ná prthvi X. 178. 2 (am Versanfang) eine ganze Reihe von Belegen für
dualisches prthivi nach del' Zii.sur, wo das Metrum eine Lange fOl'dert oder be-
günstigt, z.B. dyáva rák'latam prthivi no ábhvat I. 185. 2ff., asm4bhyaiñ dyava-
Pl'thivi Bucetúna I. 159.5, (cf. JI. 32. 1, VII. 52. 1, VIII. 42, 2). Es wird also zu
jener Zeit die Lii.nge auch im Vokativ schon die Regel gewesen sein. Ob auch
gr. Mo und airo fel' (falls aus *wiro, siehe Meillet, MSL. 22, 53) als Pausa-
Varianten erklii.rt werden dürfen? Dagegen ist an Herleitung der antevokali-
schen Endung -av a- aus *_oR8 a- (analog Martinets Erklii.rung von gr. 8oféVCtL,
&:y'io(f)éCll in Word IX, 1953, 256) bestimmt nicht zu denken, obwohl es die
Pausa-Endung -a (entgegen -au als Pausa-Endung des Lok. Sg. del' i-Stii.mme,
Ai. Gr. JII, 47) erldiiren würde. Das Awestische weist, wie das Griechische und
Baltoslavische, auf eine Endung -ó (einzige Ausnahme al'ollná im Frahang i oim).
365
 Zur kompositionellen Kürzung im Sanskrit
VOl' Konsonanten schlieBlich zu ti wurde. Dies ergab hiel' somit für ~H eine
ganz andere Entwicklung ale für rH, das anfanglich im Urindoiranischen
unverandert erhalten blieb, spater aber im iranischen und indischen Zweig
eine ganz verschiedene Behandlung erfuhr.
4. Es k!1nn nicht wundernehmen, da/3 hinsichtlich dcr Chronologie del'
kompositionellen Kürzung die gleiche Unsicherheit besteht wie in den oben-
erwahnten Fallen. Auch hiel' ha.ben wir esja zum Teil mit dem Schwund
jenes Phonems zu tun, d!1s man als 'J (Sclnv!1) oder !11s H ansetzt. Nachdem
Joh!1lllles Schmidt, KZ. 25 (1881), 54ff., auf die Erscheinung zum ersten
Mal hingewiesen h!1tte17 , l!1g für die dam!1lige spmchhistorische Denkweise
del' Schlu/3 g!1nz 11!1he, d!1/3 hiel' eine ursprachliche Lautontwicklung vorlioge
und z. B. ved, bhága-t-ti mit lato vicissim 18 !1uf idg. *-d-ti- (aus alterem
*.d'J-ti-, Wzl. do- "geben") zurückgeführt werden müsse. Nun lafit sich frei-
lich die Moglichkeit eines ursprachlichen Schwundes von -'J- (-H-) nicht
prinzipiell bestreiten. Da wir aber daneben auch einzelsprachliche Elision
annehmen müssen, z.B. in [gaw. f'Jí5roi (d. i. [f8rai] < urindoir. *phtr-ai <
¡dg. *pH2tr-ei)19 und] ved. j'ánmana{¿ usw. (vonj'ániman- )20, und da weitaus
die Mehrzahl del' ffu die kompositionelle Kürzung angeführten Beispiele
dem indischen Sprachgebiet angehoren, muB man sich doch fragen, inwie-
fern die Annahme eines ursprachlichen Phonemschwundes eigentlioh be-
rechtigt und durch die Tatsachen geboten ist. Unsere Grundvoraussetzung
ist ja, daB sich wenigstens ein Laryngalphonem noch in den gesonderten
iranischen und indischen Zweigen des Indoiranisohen erhalten hat, bevor es
in diesen zu verschiedenen Zeiten schwand. Nun legt aber das Schwanken
i¡i und u¡u in den verschiedenen idg. Sprachen, und besonders im Indo-
iranischen, den Gedanken nahe, daB es sich hierbei wenigstens zum Teil um
17 Vgl. Joh. Schmidt, KZ. 25, 54ff., 26, 380 A., 32, 378f., Pluralbildungen
dor idg. Neutra 205, 219 A. 1, 255f., Brugmann, Grundri/3 12, 50lf., Kurze
v¡.(1. Ol'mnlll. 14:1f., Ai. 01'. l, 82, 8:1 (Lit,.), 9:U., n/l, 07f., II/2, 1í61, 564, 550,
Kurylowicz, L'Apophonio 172,108.
18 "das in Abwechslung Bringen oder Setzen", Brugmann, IF. 12, 182f.,
KVG.143f.
19 Theoretisch muE man für Gaw. DSg.joórói, Jaw. APl.joóró, DPl. ptOrobyó,
und hujor5ris ,,€urrcmfpEL!XL" eine uriranische Grundform [jer-] ansetzen (mit j <
ph < *pH2 ), woneben es VOl' vokalischem reine Stammform [jtr-] in [jtrbyah]
gegeben haben muE, die dann Iautgesetzlich zu [ptr-] wurde. Denkbar ware frei-
lich, daJ3 die überlieferten Formen nicht unmittelbar daraus, sondern aus *per-,
*ptr- (mit analogisch wiederhergestelltem p nach pitar- in den starken Kasus-
formen) entstanden sind, da ja sekundares *per- auch spaterhin wohl zu *jer-
gewol'den, und dann mit uril'anischem -jer- (aus urindoiranischem -ptr-) zusam-
mengefallen sein mag (vgl. Gaw. rajodraí < *raptraí, Jaw. najoóró < *naptras).
Die Stammfol'm ptar- in Gaw. NSg. pta, ASg. ptar8m beruht jedenfalls auf einer
einzeldialektischen Neuerung del' Gatha-Sprache.
20 Ebenso wie aw. JOÓI'O ist auch ved. mahnti (aus *mazhmna, idg. *merfH2.
mn-e) zu el'klaren, setzt mithin ein bis in die urindoiranische Periode hinein er-
haltenes H voraus und schlieJ3t idg. Elision des konsonantischen Laryngals aus.
366
21 22 F. B. J. Kuiper
jüngere Entwicklungen handelt. Sehen wir von den ganz dunkeln Fiillen
wie idg. "'wíro- "Held, Mann" und *sunu- "Sohn"21 ab, so kann man doch
auf aw. p'Jr'Jna- "voll" (np. pur) statt des auf Grund van ai. pur'(!á- zu er-
wartenden "'parna- hinweisen. lnnerhalb des Iranischen steht ebenso aw.
kam'Jr'Jí5a- "Kopf" gegenüber phI. kamiíl, sak. kamala-, yidgha kYemalyo,
welche auf *kamard- beruhen und daher die regelrechten Entsprechungen
von ai. murdhán- (idg. *mlHdhon-) sind. Ebenso steht dem aw. vit'Jr'Jta- (in
vit'Jr'Jtó.tanu-) ein paiti.tar'Jtayae(ca) gegenüber, wenn letztere Form mit RS.
(prá)turtaye und psht. (w)liir, wanechi wiytir "ging" (aus *vi-tarta-) histo-
risch zusammengehort 22 • Vollig regellos (wie in aw. p'Jr'Jna-) ist die Kürze
offenbar' auch in aw. kati- "lubens" (dessen Vokalquantitat jetzt durch
"eteotach." XLí50, xe:í5o ,,8ehr" bestatigt wird), wenn es wenigstens etymolo-
gisch zu ai. kiiti- gehOrt 23 •
Aus diesen Gründen wurde in einer früheren Besprechung del' ai. Falle,
wo der vorausgesetzte indoiran. Konsonant H nicht zu i geworden, sondern
geschwunden ist, von kompositioneller Kürzung vollig abgesehen und ein
Versuch gemacht, alle Falle aus einem spezifisch indischen Schwunde von H
zu erklaren. Es wurde dabei festgestellt, dafi dieser regelwidrige Laryngal-
schwund nur in nachfolgenden Stellungen stattgefunden hat:
1. zwischen Dentalen: iÍtta-, bhágatti-, datthá, usw.
2. zwischen Dental und Nasal: dadmá{¿, dadhmá{¿, uSW.
3. zwischen Nasal und Dental: jantú-, vantár-
4. zwischen Nasalen: j'ánmana{¿ (gegenüber j'ánima
mit altem vokalischem H 1).
Da dieses konsonantische H im nachstverwandten Iranischen immer Jaut-
gesetzlich schwinden muBte, liegt seine indoiranische Vorgeschichte ganz
im Dunkeln. Sowenig ja del' Parallelismus zwischen ai. bhágatti- und lato
?Jici,~Rim einen urApmchlichen Schwund des H erweist, Aowenig konnon auch
21 M. Leumann erwog emphatische Dehnung in den Vokativen *wire und
*suneu (Kleine Schriften 362). 1st aber *wi-r6- eine Ableit~ng :on *wi- "Kra~t"
(etwa wie ved. dhtra- "weiee" von dhí-, Ai. Gr. II/2, 855 mlt Lit., 857), so blelbt
die sekundare Kürzung im Lateinischen, Germanischen usw. vollig unverstand-
!icho Ffu ai. 8Ünú- usw. hat Pedersen, Etudes !ituaniennes 1933, 21ff., sekun-
daren Ablaut (statt *séunu-s, GSg. *8unéu-s) el'wogen. Weitere Lit. in Ai. Gr.
II/2, 742. Expressive Dehnung in *wiro- (Vendryes, Choix d'études 112) dürfte
duroh vír~áh- I. 35. 6, das auf Laryngalschwund hinweist, widerlegt wel'den.
u Einige Einzelheiten aus dem Neuiranischen habe ich einem Briefe G. Mor-
genstiernes vom 15. 12. 1952 entnommen, dem ich für Auf~Iarung .über. die
alt- und neuiranischen Vertretungen zu groJ3em Dank verpfhchtet bm. Slehe
weiter Bartholomae, Z. Kenntnis mitte!iranischer Mundarten VI, Sb. Heidelb.
Akad. XV/6 (1924/25), 3Off. und ffu p'Jr'Jna- S. 42ff. (Kompositionsform). Be-
achte auch Jaw. var'Jzvant-: Gaw. var'Jzi (Humbach, IF. 63, 48, besonders S. 49
A. 26: Vollstufe gegenüber ved. -árj- 1).
23 Für das "eteotoch." Wort Biehe Mari e q, J As. 1958, 357f., del' auch auf khot.
kide, kiide hinweist.
367
 Zur kompositionellen Kürzung ím Sanskrít 23
aw. dasta "gibt" und altlit. deste "ihr legt" etwas für die Vorgesehiehte von
ai. da-t-ta und dha-t-tha beweisen, da in jenen Spraehen das H in Mittel-
silben lautgesetz1ieh gesehwunden ist, wahrend man im Altindisehen even-
tuell *da-di-ta und *da-dhi-tha hatte erwarten k6nnen: vgl. etwa die 1. Plur.
Perf. da-di-ma (das aber woh1 analogisehes i hatIJo Lal3t man a180 vorlaufig
die M6g1iehkeit eines verhaltnismal3ig spaten, spezifiseh indisehen Laryn-
galsehwundes offen, so brauehen wir do eh keineswegs den alten Gedanken,
dal3 dieser Sehwund dureh Komposition und Reduplikation hervorgerufen
sei, zu verwerfen. Da es ja gekünstelt ware, ihn in átta-, bhágatti-, datthá
dadmál; anders zu erklaren als in áni~trta- (: stirz¡á-) und carkrtí- (: kirtí-),
müssen jánmanal;, jantú- als Sonderfalle ausseheiden, in denen der Sehwund
dureh andere Momente bedingt gewesen sein mul3. Es sind also im Veda in
solehen Gegensatzen wie z.B. VS. áva-t-ta- "abgesehnitten" gegenüber ~BK.
di-tá- "gesehnitten" einige Reste von Kurzformen in Komposition bewahrt
geblieben, die sonst meistens sehon dureh Neubildungen ersetzt worden
sind24 •
Prínzipiell bliebe damit freilieh die M6gliehkeit offen, die genannten Bei-
spiele mit J. Sehmidt und Brugmann aus einer urspraehliehen Lautent-
wieklung zu erklaren, wenn nieht gewisse Einzelheiten uns bereehtigten, den
Laryngalsehwund wenigstens in einigen Fallen mit ziemlieh grol3er Be-
stimmtheit der altindisehen (h6ehstens der indoiranisehen) Spraehperiode
zuzusehreiben. In einigen Komposita auf -tta- und -tti- erseheint namlieh
ein gedehntes i in der vorangehenden Praposition: vgl. ápratitta- AthS.
VI. 117. 1, páritta- VI. 92. 2, VS. IX. 9 (~B. PB., áparitta- MS.), páritti-
TB. n. 2. 5. 5. Diese Dehnung kommt also zu haufig vor, als dal3 man sie
für bedeutungslos halten k6nnte. Rhythmisehe Dehnung aber, sonst gerade
in pári- und práti- nieht ungew6hnlieh (Ai. Gr. n/l, 130f.), kommt nur vor
EinzelkonAonanten vor und iAt híer a180 ausgesehlossen. So bleibt fiir die
Dehnllng in iÍpratitta- mnv. nur eine Erldiirungsm6gliehkeit iibrig, namlieh
dureh Laryngalmetathese: aus *prati-dH-ta- (mit konsonantisehem H) mul3
*prati-Ht-ta- geworden sein. Es sei hier beilaufig darauf hingewiesen, dal3
aueh andere Momente (wie vorhergehendes v, bh, m) sekundiire Dehnung des
ai. i aus *H hervorgerufen haben. Da nun aber die Verbindung von prati-
und da- mit der Bedeutung "zurüekgeben" wahrseheinlieh erst auf indi-
sehem Boden entstanden ist (das Awestisehe gebraueht paiti da- in anderer
Bedeutung), mul3 aueh im Indisehen noeh der Laryngal in -dH-ta- existiert
haben, ehe er in Wegfall kam. Dann kann aber der Sehwund in Kompo-
sition, wenigstens in diesen Fallen, nur die Folge einer rein-indisehen Ent-
wieklung gewesen sein.
24 So vielleieht RS. VMu-dhiti- (meistenp freilieh adjektiviseh gebraueht) ne-
ben Vá8u-tti-, wenn dies zu dha- gehort (statt -ddhi-, siehe Sehwyzer, Zs. f. slav.
Philo!. 15, 318 A. 1).
368
24 F. B. J. Kuiper
5. Da eine eingehende krítisehe Bespreehung des altindisehen MateríaIs
dureh den Zweek dieses Aufsatzes nieht gefordert wird, genügt eine Zu-
sammenstellung der wiehtigsten Beispiele.
A. Weehsel i/i und u/ü:
dtdivi- "seheinend" (Ai. Gr. II/2, 292), su-dtditi- "seh6n strahlend" (II/2,
629) entgegen diti- in su-dítí-, dass. Vielleieht aueh im Imper. di-di-M und
im Parto di-diván. Siehe aber Ai. Gr. I, 47,17. und 47,22 f. N. über sekun-
dare Quantitatsanderungen in reduplizierten Verbalformen, und vgl. didihi
(zehnmal, neunmal am Verssehlul3, J. Sehmid.t, KZ. 32, 380 A. 1, Ai. Gr.
I,96).
di-dhi-ti- "Andaeht": dhití- (Ai. Gr. II/2, (20).
ánisita- "rastlos": ']'S. ni,1itil- (Id. nisitha-).
sú~uti- "leiehtes Gebaren" X. 39. 10: InI. s1itave, Fut. sñ~yanti-, TB.
sáti-, usw. Nieht überzeugend dagegen Olden berg, Noten I, 257 A. 2. Vgl.
Ai. Gr. n/1, 98, n/2, 629 (su~üti- Kas. zu Pan. 8. 3. 88).
ved. niyút- "Verleihung" (TB. prayút-) : yü-thá- "Herde" Ai. Gr. n/l, 94
(aber zweifelhaft ist -yuta-, siehe I, 93f., II/2, 564).
Zweifelhaft oder unriehtig Aínd folgende BeiApiele:
prásiti- "Wurf", oft mit sáy-aka- "Wurfgesehol3", aisl. sülr "demissus"
verbunden (Ai. Gr. I, 94, Kurylowiez, Apophonie 198, naeh Persson);
dagegen als "Andrang, Ausdehnung" zu sa- "binden" (Ai. Gr. II/2, 629);
s~irá- "hohl" , nieht von sirá- "Strom" (Ai. Gr. 1. 94, n/l, 98, zweifelnd
Olden berg, Noten 1, 257 A. 2), sondern von su~i- (Ai. Gr. n/2, 857, 939,
wo aber ChU. nI. 13. 1 übersehen worden ist); Instrumentale wie práyukti
(Ai. Gr. I, 95, Brugmann, Grundri13 12, 501) beruhen auf Pausa-Kürzung
(siehe India Antiqua 211 A. 56, Shortening of final Vowels in the Rigveda,
6 = Meded. Kon. Ned. Almd. NR.18, 1955,258). Falseh aueh Brugmann,
GrundriJ3 IJ2, 3, 299 (miniíti/miniíti). Wegen ved. brhádraye (Ai. Gr. I, 94,
olltgOgCll1 rayé allA *ml/y-é) lllld NPl. rdhlÍd1'llyll?¿ Aiohe AL Gr. II/I, 100,
nI, 140, wegen (krsá)gu- siehe unten A. 29. Dagegen wird dhi-jú- "begei-
sternd" (entgegen jü-, n/l, 98) wie subhru-, prábhu- zu erldaren sein. Siehe
Sommer, IF. 36 (1916), 211, Ai. Gr. nI, 195. Zweifelhaft sind áhuti- (viel-
leieht ausschlieBlieh zu hu- "opfern"? Oldenberg, Noten I, 257, A. 2) und
try-udhán- "drei Euter (üdhán-!) habend", da in RS. nI. 56. 3 utá tryudhá
purudhá prajáván Grassmann und Oldenberg tryúdhá lesen m6ehten.
Junge Neubildungen sind suta- und ep. dhuta- (statt ved. dhütá-), die naeh
suvati und dhunoti gebildet sind, Ai. Gr. n/2, 564.
B. r : ir, ür
RS. ástrta- "unüberwindlieh", RS. áni~trta- "nieht niedergeworfen" :
stirz¡á- "ausgebreitet" (barhís). Vgl. Sehmidt, KZ. 32, 379. Trotz dem Be-
deutungsuntersehied geh6ren die Formen etymologiseh zusammen, vgl. 1.
129. 4 nahí tvá sátru stárate, strtW~i yám, VnI. 41. 8 sá máyá arcínií pa-
dástrtuit. Die laryngalhaltige Wurzel *sterH- ist alt (lat. strá-tus, stra-men).
369
 Zur kompositionelIen Kürzung im Sanskrít 25
Ebenso wie es neben ámaritr- ein gleichbedeutendes Wurzelnomen ámúri-h
GS. ámúr-aJ:¡, gab (India Antiqua 202), wird man zu den neben stári-ma~~
:o~k~~menden DSg. ni~túre, NPl. ni~túraJ:¡, "zu Boden werfend" einen NSg.
n~~furt-J:¡, ansetzen müssen (idg. *sterfI-s, GSg. *strH-és). 1m Aw. gibt es
freIllCh nebeneinander star'Jta- Yt. 13. 27 usw., jrastar'Jta- Yt. 2. 9, V. 3. 15
usw., hustar'Jta- xVaini.star'Jta-, nistar'Jto.spaya- Yt. 10. 30, star'JtaeSi- (1
Humbach, MSS. 6, 47 A. 18) und st'Jr'Jta- "zu Boden gestreckt" Yt. 19. 34
usw., ast'Jr'Jta-, jrast'Jr'Jta- Yt. 10. 137 usw., psht. st'Jrai (aus *strta-, Mor-
genstíerne, Etymological Vocabulary 71, Nr. 206). Ai. strta- ist' jung.
RS. ca.rkrt!- "Ruhm, Lob" : RS. kirtí- (Schmidt, KZ. 32, 1892, 379f.).
RS. plprtam (3. Du.), wozu der Singular plparti llSW. (statt *pi-prá-ti,
7t(fL7tA'l)O"L) wohl sckundiire Analogiebildung nach bíbharti : bl:{¡Jmnrih ist. Ur-
sprachlicher ~chwund des H in den Dual- und Pluralformen wird durch gr.
7t(fL7tAC(fLe:v kemeswegs bewiesen (SchuIze, KZ. 27, 424, Schmidt KZ.32
380), da dies jüngere Analogiebildung sein kann. In keinem Fall' kann e~
als Beweis für eine ani{-Wurzel (H. Krahe, Idg. Sprachwissenschaft 13,61)
geIten.
Unklltr ist ved. Id. srtá- "gekocht" neben ved. sriítá- (siohc AL Gr. II/2
557, 566f.). Jung ist niprta- neben pürta- (Aí. Gr. II/2, 564 und OhatterÚ
Jubilee VoIume 103).
C. Worter auf -t-ta- und -t-ti-:
Zuerst von J. Schmidt, KZ. 25 (1881), 56 nachgewiesen. Vollstiindigste
Zusammenstellung in Ai. Gr. II/1, 82, II/2, 561 (vgI. Mayrhofer Kurzgef.
etym. Worterb. II, 14), bzw. II/1, 82, II/2, 629, wonach für Ei~zelheiten
verwiesen seí.
da- "geben": ved. ánu-tta- "nachgebend", devá-tta- von den Gottern ge.
geben", AS. VS. vyá-tta- "das geoffnete (Maul)", AS:' VS. pári-tta- iiber-
gebcn", AS. áprati-tta- "nicht zurückgegeben", TS. prá-tta- "hingeg~ben",
usw.
da- "schneiden": VS. áva-tta- "abgeschnitten", buddh. Skt. pari-tta- be-
schnitten". " bhyas- (gesehrieben bhiyá8am II. 28. 6, IX. 19. 6) zu messen ist. Vgl. das
N omina auf -ti-:
dá- "geben": ved. bhága-tti- "GIücksgabe", maghá-tti. "das Geben von
Ge~ch.enken", !S. P:~~tti- "Hingabe", TB. pári-tti- "übergabe", SB. sam-
pra-tt~- "Vermachtms . VgI. auch das Desiderativ ved. dí-t-sati.
. d~- "schne.iden, teilen": MS. KS. TB. niráva-tti- "Abfindung" (zu TS.
n~r-ava-da- "Jmdm. seinen Teil geben" Aí. Gr. II/2, 940).
dha-: vielleicht vásu-tti- "Gutschenken, reiche Beschenkung" (GeIdner'
~~~~. *vasu-ddhi-1 Vgl. vásu-dhiti- und Schwyzer, Zs. f. sIav. Phil. 15, 318
stha-: vielle~cht Br. an:u~thyá "sogIeich" von *an~th-ti- (Aí. Gr. 1, 60; 82) 1
ParalleIe BIldungen 1m Lateinischen sind vielleicht COn8US (*kom-d-to-,
Osthoff, PBB. 13,425) neben condí-tus, und vicissím (siehe A. 18).
370
26 F. B. J. Kuíper
D. Schwer abzugrenzen sind die Fiille mit Laryngalsehwund in der Niihe
von Sonanten in Komposita, von denen wir hier einige als eine Sonderkate-
gorie zusammeníassen. Auí Vollstiindigkeit ist von vornherein verzichtet
worden. Auí altem paradigmatischem Ablaut (wie z. B. in sujánman- mit
Schwundstufe neben jánima, GS. jánmanaJ:¡,) konnten beruhen RS. právan-
tave (entgegen Ai. Gr. II/2, 649, siehe 1, 82, 24 N.), RS. sutárman- (II/2,
763f.) und TS. TB. ándSvams- (op. e. II/2, 913). Besonders sehwierig ist aber
der Schwund des H in Verbindungen wie -iHa-, -uHa-, da wir in diesen
Fallen aueh mit "Tilgung aIten Hiats" in der jüngsten rigvedischen Periode
reehnen müs¡¡en, wíe in den vereinzelten Formen der vrkt-FIexion NPI.
nadyaJ:¡, VII. 50. 4, ASg. staryam VII. 68. 8 und arayyam X. 155. 2 (Aí. Gr.
III, 170). Doeh bleibt es vollig dunkel, weshalb neben sehr haufigem huve
usw. die augmentierten Formen mit wenigen Ausnahmen (ahuve 1, ahuvanta 2)
immer áhve, ahvat usw. gesehrieben werden, die naeh Grassmann aehtmaI
als ahuv-, zehnmaI als ahv- zu lesen sind. Vom gleichgebildeten bhuvam usw.
(idg. *íJhuHe-, *bhuHe-) ist dagegen kein bhva- belegt; freilieh sind die über-
lieferten rigv. Formen mit einer Ausnahme alle unaugmentiert. Beachte
aueh RS. avyat, 2. PI. ávyata (von vya-). Sekundiire Thematisierung von Wur-
zelaoristen (wie in akhyam, Maedonell, Ved. Grammar 371) ist wohl aus-
gesehlossen. Wieder anders ist ved. á-d-yati "bindet an", wofür gewohnlieh
Kürzung von d'J- zu d- in Komposition angenommen wird. Nun ist aber Verbal-
komposition im ldg. offenbar eine relativ junge Erseheinung, was somit für
den Wegfall des H einen interessanten terminus a quo ergiibe. Dagegen dürfte
.spiit-rigvedisehe Allegro-Ausspraehe in der ziemlieh jungen Stelle 1. 94. 11 ádha
svanád utá bibhyuJ:¡, patatritw vorliegen, wo statt des theoretiseh zu erwarten-
den *bibhiyuJ:¡, (auB *bhi-bhiH-r, Wzl. *bheiH- !)26 ein zweisilbiges bibhyuJ:¡, er-
seheint. Der alte Hiat in *bibhi'ur spielte zu dieser Zeit sehon gar keine Rolle
mehr, und daB diese Allegro-Ausspraehe von iy als unsilbisches y nieht etwa
dureh die Redupliklttion bedingt war, zoigt das verwandte unreduplizierte e8-
Nomen, das 13mal als zweisilbiges bhiyá8- (-a, -e, -am), dagegen zweimal als
obenerwahnte zweisilbige staryam aus *stariH-am. Da solehe Allegroformen
aber nur ausnahmsweise auftreten, und z.B. svar "Sonne, Himmel" (indoir.
*suHar, für idg. *seuH2el) immer als súar zu lesen ist, fiillt es sehwer an die
Erklarung des immer zweísilbigen RS. ábhva- "Unwesen" aus a- + bhü- +
-a- zu glauben (trotz AS. abhva-, Aí. Gr. II/2, 91). Schwund des H wegen
a- (vgl. ástrta-) 1
Wir wollen uns hier aber auí zwei Sonderfiille besehranken. In RS. tuvi-
25 Entgegen Walde-Pokorny II, 124 und Pokorny, Idg. etym. Wb. 161,
Biehe ZII. 8, 254. Die Formen bibhimah, bibhiyát (Sehmidt, KZ. 32, 1892, 379)
gehoren der Bpateren Sprache an (RS. l. 41. 9 bibhiyát, aber bibhyW¡á, -e neben
bibhivánl). Stattjigiván ist biBweilen víelIeicht *jigiván zu lesen (Oldenberg,
ZDMG. 55, 324).
371
 Zur kompositionellen Kürzung im Sanskrit 27
gr-á- r. 140. 9 und tuvi-gr-í- n. 2l. 2liegt jedenfalls eine Wzl. gf- VOl', gleieh-
viel, ob sie "viel versehlingend" oder "laut sehreiend, -rufend" (letzteres
naeh Geldner) bedeuten. Man würde also normalerweise -gira- (aus *girHa-
< *gUrHo-) erwarten. Einerseits kann nun die Sehwaehung erst na eh del'
Bildung des Kompositums eingetreten sein, anderseits muB sie zu einer Zeit
eingetreten sein, als sieh VOl' dem r noeh nieht dureh Laryngalumlaut ein
Vokal i entwiekelt hatte, so daB das zweisilbige *-gr/Ha- zu *-gra-, *-gra-
werden konnte.
Eine iihnliehe Kürzung seheint nun aueh in RS. pápri- (-s, :~ clreimal) ent-
gegen pápuri- (-s, -m, -, viermal) "reiehlieh spendend" vorzuliegen. Da die
Wurzel *preHa- (gr. 7térCp(tl-'t'IX~) ist, erwartet man nur pápuri- aus *pa-pr/
H-i-. Dann muB also die Nebenform pápri- auf Sehwund des Laryngals be-
ruhen26 • Dies wurde aber von De brunner, Kratylos In, 31, bestritten, da
statt dessen aueh übertragung vom Anlaut her (Ai. Gr. T, 29) und Vermi-
sehung von set- und anit- Wurzeln als mogliehe Erldiirungshypothesen in
Betraeht zu ziehen seien. Doeh ist gerade RS. strtá- : stirz¡,á- (Ai. Gr. n/2,
556), auf das el' sieh beruft, kein Beispiel für eine "Vermisehung" zweier
Wurzeln, da im Vedisehen -strta- nur als Hinterglied auftritt. Zudem maeht
es doeh einen Untersehied, ob versehiedene Partizipialbildungen des Typus
B. kl. dirz¡,á- : Ram. drta- nebeneinander vorkommen (von denen dann mei-
stens eine als analogisehe Neubildung erkliirt werden kann), oder ob es zwei
vollig identisehe reduplizierte Nominalbildungen auf -i- nebeneinander ge-
geben habe, die beide in demselben iiltesten vedisehen Text vorkommen,
von denen abar die eine von pro, die andere aber von einer sonst vollig un-
bekannten Wurzel pr- gebildet sei. Ebenso wenig versehliigt aber del' Hin-
weis auf eventuelle übertragung (von puro) vom Anlaut her, da es solehe
Formen neben pürdhí (das sehon in del' rigvedisehen Spraehe ein Spraeh-
fossil war, Aeta 01'. 17,317) überhaupt nieht mehr gegeben hato Für De-
brunner war die Hauptfrage, "ob man zu Konstrnktionen mit Laryngalen
Zuflueht nehmen muB." Mil' seheint es vielmehr nebensiiehlieh, oh man das
eigentliehe Problem in del' Terminologie del' Hirtsehen Ablautslehre oder
del' Laryngaltheorie formuliert. Hauptsaehe ist ja, daB aueh Debrunner
als normale antevokalisehe Vertretung von pr- nur pur- erwarten konnte
(Ai. Gr. 1, 22; 28; 94, n/2, 72), und daB, wenn man für pápri- eine besondere
Kürzung dureh die Reduplikation, wie etwa dureh Komposition in tuvi-gr-í-,
anni~mt, die Nebenform pápuri- giinzlieh unverstiindlieh bleibt. Analogi-
sehe Anderung, die in Verbalformen wie ved. jajanulJ, nebenjajñulJ, vielfaeh
im Spiel sein kann, kommt in diesem Fall ja nieht in Betraeht. Wenn dies
26 Siehe aueh Liebert, Die indoeurop. Personalpronomina 13. Das von
Debrunner, Ai. Gr. II/2, 293 und Kratylos III, 31, naeh Whítney zitierte
SV. púpuri ist belegt SV. 1. 6 (3). 1. 1 (= ArS. 1. 1), also Variante für pápuri
RS. VI. 46. 5. Die Jaiminiya-Samhita liest hiel' (II. 4. 10) pápuri in Raghu
Viras Ausgabe.
372
28 F. B. J. Kuiper
nieht überhaupt ein Seheinproblem ist 27 , seheint nur VeraIlgemeinerung von
ursprünglieh paradigmatiseh verbundenen Ablautsvarianten eine Erklii-
rung liefern zu konnen.
6. Für ein riehtiges Vel'standnis des zngl'undeliegenden Problems emp-
fiehlt es sieh, zunaehst einmal auf den Aufsatz zurüekzugl'eifen, in welehem
Johannes Sehmidt im Jahre 1881 anlaBlieh seiner Bespreehung von "Skt.
jiÍnu jñu- und diÍru, dru-" das Material für die kompositionelle Kül'zung
zum'el'sten Mal zusammengestellt hato El' faBt es hiel' in die folgenden zehn
Kategorien zusammen (KZ. 25, 54ff.): 1) gaúlJ, : krságu- 2) naúlJ, : ati-nu-,
bhinna-n'l!- 3). rai-: ati-ri- 4) padam: upa-bdá- 5) da- "geben": dev,á-t-t~-
6) da- "absehneiden" : áva-t-ta- 7) stM-: savya-sth-(t)ar- 8). gOOs-: sa-gdh~-
9) PaSu- : aw. mat.fsu- 10) dyaúlJ,: anyedyúlJ,. So wertvoll diese Erkennt~Is
des Berliner Altmeisters aueh war, so laBt sieh doeh nieht leugnen, daB dIe-
ses Material deutlieh heterogen ist. So ist Z. B. die vierte Kategorie, aueh
naeh del' traditionellen Formulierung del' Ablautsgesetze, wesentlieh ande-
rer Al't als die fünfte, denn del' Sehwundstufe -bdo von pad- würde -di- von
da- nieht aber -d- entsproehen haben. Wie immer, ist Waekernagel sieh
die~er Sehwierigkeit offenbar vollig bewuBt gewesen, el' hat sieh aber damit
begnügt, ságdhi-, upabdá- (Ai. Gr. 1, 76; 95) getrennt zu behandeln, und
war übrigens dureh seine Anordnung des Materials gezwungen, aueh Zu-
sammengehOriges wie devá-tta- (1,82, n/1, 98) undástrta- (1, 94! zu tre~nen28.
Das gl'undlegende Problem, das dureh seine DarstellungsweIse som.~t ver-
sehleiert wird, hat erst Meillet mit aller Seharfe hervorgehoben. Wahrend
namlieh in -bda-, -gdhi-, -fsu- und -dyu- normale Vokalsehwaehung vorliegt,
handelt es sieh in -tta- um Sehwund eines Phonems 29 , ungeaehtet ob man
dieses als Sehwa oder als H ansetzt. Sehmidt glaubte noeh, beide El'sehei-
nungen aus del' Betonung erkliil'en zu konnen. Vgl. K.Z. 25, 54 "Das ersehei-
nen del' kiírzeRten At,iimmn in (lieRer lago herllht, allí mnem botonllngRgoRet,Z(l
<1(11' 11 I'K pl'lLoI}(I , <I(\HH(II\ lI'il'kllllg(lll Hpitt.(1\' IlHliH[. \\'i(I(I(I\' ILIIHg(lglioh(l1l /Lh(\!'
trotzdcm noeh ill genUgclldcr ltllzahl erhaltell sind, mll das gesetz crkellllcn
21 pápri- "hinüber führend, rettend", dessen Existenz d~lreh_ VIII; 1? 11 sá
nál~ páprif¡, párayati 8vasti l1avá puruhüt~lt un~ 1. ~.l. 21 p~·tanC:8u papl'~m "d?r
in den Schlachten heraushilft" gewiihrleIstet 1St, konnte vlOllewht ."orJ¡e~en m
VI. 50. 13 apám nápad avatu dánu páprilt "soIl uns h?lf~n, uns liber dIe G~­
wnAser hinüberführend" (?vgl. Gaedicke, Del' AccusatIv 1m Veda 188) und In
JI. 2:1. 10 t1'fí1/ii .•. ptÍpn:1,11í stÍ.mina 1/ujrí "Ilnrch Ilich, den rettonden und loh-
nenuen (?) V~rbündeten". Mohrdoutig bleibt I. 52. 3 8fÍ!ti pár:l'il' ándhasalt, ~as
aber trotz VIII. 2. 1 keinesfalls mit Geldner zu übersetzen 1St, "denn el' fuIlt
sich mít Soma". . ..
28 Weniger seharfsíchtig ist die Behandlung in Ai ..Gr. II/2, 6~9, .wo d.~e W.or-
ter auf -ui- und ságdhi- wieder (wie beí Joh. Schmldt) al.s BeIsplele fuI' Tlef-
etufe del' Wurzel vor dem Morphem -ti- zusammengestellt sind.
29 Unentsehieden bleibe die Frage, ob in gaúf¡, (aus *gUoHus) und naúf¡, (aus.
*naHus, für idg. *neH z6u 1) noeh ein H gesprochen wurde, als k?,ságu- usw. ge-
bildet wuruen. Dyaú!t hat niemals einen Laryngal enthalten.
373
..... -----.~--
Zur kompositionellen Kfuzung im Sanskrit 29
1.u lassen"; 32, 379: "Ein durch unmittelbar folgenden hochton gesclnviich-
ter vocal verliert noch eine more, wenn ein betontes compositionsglied da-
vortritt. Meine vermuthung, daB in solchen fiillen jedes del' beiden compo-
sitionsgliedcr cine haher betonte silbe gehabt habe und dnrch die auf ein-
ander folgenden wirkungen beider del' 1.wischenliegende vocal doppelt ge-
schwiieht sei, ist durch die accentbe1.eichnung des yat. br. bestiitigt, welche
composita mehrfach mit 1.wei accenten versieht." S. Macdonell, Ved.
Gr.20!
Gegen verwandte Anschauungen wandte sich mm Meillet, MSL. 12
(1903), 221 mit den folgenden Worten: "M. Hirt (Ablaut, § 802) considere
la chute de 9 dans skI'. jánma, gr. aépf"lX, comme un fait phonétique de date
indo-enropéenne: i.-e. 9 serait tombé la ou le mot dont il faisait partiti de-
venait enclitique. Mais cette hypothese d'une chute de 9 dans les enclitiques
est toute gratuite. L' i.-e. 9, c'est-a-dire le phoneme qui joue par rapport
a á, e, ó le meme role que i, u, r, 1, r¡¡" 'lt par rapport a ei, eu, er, el, em, en,
doit etre bien distingué de la voyelle réduite 0, qui apparait a coté de e dans
des eas tels que lato quattuor ... ; ce n'est en aucune maniere un ,,8va" de-
stiné a faciliter la prononciation d'un groupe de consonnes, mais, ainsi que
l'a reconnu M. F. de Saussure, un élément du mot aussi réel que les sonantes
i, u, r, 1, m, n. Il n'est sujet a tomber, en indo-européen, que dans un cas
bien défini: quand il est devant voyelle ... On sait en effet que 9 en syllabe
intérieure tombe en germanique et en letto-slave: le caractere dialectal de
la chute de 9 en letto-slave est universellement reconnu depuis le bel article
de M. F. de Saussure (M. S. L. VIII, 424 et suiv.) ... "
Diese 1.iemlich ausführlichen Zitate waren natig um ldarzulegen, in wel-
chen alten und wichtigen Prinzipienstreit man sich 1.U verwickeln droht,
wenn man das Problem der kompositionellen Kür1.ung wieder in Angriff
nimmt. Sio diirftoll 7.uclom 7.eigoll, (lafl dol' gl'lludlngnndo Gngnllfmt7. nicht
ot,\\'a d(l(' ~,\\,j¡.WI\(\1I Heh\\'a- 1I11d Ln.I''ylIgn.lt,!wol'i(1 iHt" HOlld('I'11 d('(' l\\\'iHell(\1l
einor nioht-phonologisohon Spmchbotl'achtung und den phollologhwhen An-
schauungen avant la lettre, die hiel' von Meillet vertreten werden. Was niim-
lich im vorliegenden Aufsat1. beabsichtigt wird, ist nicht, mit del' Neuerungs-
sucht eines Laryngalisten eine ganz neue Lasung zu verteidigen, sondern
nur, für Meillets Standpunkt eine technische Modifizierung vorzuschlagen.
Denn Meillet hatte ohne Zweifel darin recht, daB er den vermeintlichen
Parallelismus zwischen Vokalschwiichung und Phonemschwund, und im
allgemeinen den ursprachlichen Charakter des let1.teren, leugnete. Dagegen
muB sein Versuch, jánman-, dadmasi und devá-tta- analogisch (b1.w. nach
jána-, dád-ati und dadmasi) und 1.ugleich aus dem Streben nach Vermei-
dung einer Folge von drei kur1.en Silben 1.U erldiiren, als miBlungen gelten,
schon deshalb, weil er den 1.wischen dadmasi und piprtdm, carkrtí-, sú~uti­
obwaltenden Parallelismus verkannt hato Seine spiitere satzphonetische For-
mulierung, das 9 sei geschwunden in einem W orte "groupé plus ou moins
374
i
-------~--- .
30 F. B. J. Kuiper
nettement ave e un mot pl'éeédent" (MSL. 20, 288, vgl. Hirt!) trifft 1.war
für fraoor9nte, -st9r'Jta- USW. zu, ist aber 1.U allgemein gefaBt, weil el' auch
Fiille wie Gaw. hvó ptá mit einbeziehen wollte. Auf die anderen Falle kann
nun die neue Theorie vieIleieht einiges Lieht werfen.
Fassen wir zunaehst noeh einmal 1.usammen, was uns 1.U Gunsten eines
spe1.ifiseh indisehen Laryngalsehwundes 1.-,~ sprechen seheint: 1) Nahe1.u aIle
Beispiele sind dem Vedisehen entnommen. 2) Urspraehlieher Laryngal-
sehwund ist eine offene Frage, da wir keinen Grund haben ihn an1.unehmen,
freilieh aueh kein Recht ihn 1.U leugnen. 3) Dagegen seheint in einigen Fallen
ein solc.her Sehwund für das Altindisehe vorausgesetzt werden 1.U müssen:
wenn wir im allgemeinen hiel' sekundiire Vokalisierung eines konsonanti-
sehen Phonems H (1.. B. in aw. draonah- : ai. drávÍ1;ws-) annehmen müssen,
diese Vokalisierung dagegen unterbleibt im Paradigma NASg jánima,GSg.
jánman-a~, das offenbar auf demselben paradigmatischen Weehsel 1.wisehen
vokalisehem H und konsonantisehem H (in den sehwaehen Kasus) beruht
wie aw. pitar: :far-, so darf man doeh sehwerlieh in diesem nicht-1.usammen-
geset1.ten Wort ursprachlichen Wegfall von H in den sehwaehen Kasus
annehmen, und es kann sein Sehwund nur als eine indisehe Erseheinung
betrachtet werden. 4) Zu einem ahnliehen Seh1uB führte uns die vorausge-
set1.te Laryngal-Metathese in pári-tta-, usw. (siehe oben S. 23). 5) Andel'-
seits muB man, wenn man nicht in groBem Umfange Ana10giebildungen
annehmen will, vorausset1.en, da13 1.U del' Zeit, in del' carkrtí. und sú~uti.
gebildet wurden, noeh ein gesondertes Phonem H gesproehen wurde. Es
kann ja nicht kraftig genug betont werden, daJ3 wir es nieht mit einer pho-
netisehen Vokalkür1.ung 1.U tun haben - dann ware -kirti- 1.U *-kirti- gewor-
den -, Bondern mit dem Sehwund eines Phonems, so da13 aueh s~uti- nur
aus *s~uHti-, nicht aber aus *s~üti- erklart werden kann. (Vgl. -grao,
S. 27.) Nun darf aber für diese Worter lmum Ul'Rpraehliehe Herkllnft in
AnRpl'llOh gellommon w('l't!on. O) l'amm."Kiirzung" im vediAeholl SaIHlhi
legt den Gedanken eines verhaltnismaJ3ig spaten Sehwundes nahe (S. 17).
Für diesen einzelsprachlichen Sehwund eines Laryngals in Komposition
1iiBt sieh nun in del' süd1ichen Spraehgruppe del' Munda-Spraehen eine in.
teressante und, wie es seheint, lehrreiche ParaIlele naehweisen. Zu den Pho-
nemen des Sora gehart namlich ein glottaler Konsonant, del' in Komposi.
tion in WegfaIl kommt 30 • Die Morphologie dieser Spraehe erlaubt ja die
Bildung von sehr komplexen Zusammenset1.ungen, wobei die einzelnen
Worter oft sehr stark gekür1.t werden. Der Gebrauch solcher kompositio-
neller Kurzformen ist wahrseheinlieh ein austroasiatisches Erbe, da sie aueh
im Khasi gefunden werden, aber die komplexe Wortkomposition des Sora
mu13 auf einer spezieIlen Entwicklung dieser Sprache beruhen. Beispiele
30 Vgl. Rao Sahib G. V: Ramamurti, A Manual of the So:ra: (01' Savara)
Language, Madras 1931, 5 und 69.
375
 Zur kompositionellen n..u~>zcLI1g
für den Verlust des glottalen Konsonanten in der Kurzform sind z.B. b'ab-
(KF. bObo) "Kopf", j'en- (KF. jen-) "Bein", j'i- (KF. ji-) "Zahn", m'ad-
(KF. mad-) "Auge". Diese Regel scheint ausnahmslos zu gelten. In Kom-
position findet roan daher kembud-sün- "des Biiren Haus" (: s'ün- "Haus"),
sindi-nlb- "Dattelbauro" (: en'eb- "Baum"). Nunist es eine interessante Be-
sonderheit, daB dieser glottale Konsonant sich erst einzelsprachlich, mei-
stens aus verlorengegangenen Konsonanten wie k, entwickelt hato So ent-
spricht dem (') in b'ab- "Kopf" auch in den nahe verwandten Sprachen
ein k (juang bokob, kharia boko'b), und sora o'an- (KF. ano) "Sohn" ent-
spricht korku kan. Ebenso einzelsprachlich, aber ohne erkennbaren Grund
ist das Phonem in s'ün- "Haus"31. DaJ3 das nahe verwandte Kharia seine
Kurzformen in ganz selbstiindiger Weise bildet (z.B. boko'b: KF. bo' ent-
sprechend sora b'ab-; KF. bOb_)32, und der Verlust des glottalen Phonems
bisweilen rein fakultativ ist (z. B. so'lui neben solui "Haar")33 deutet auch
auf den verhiiltnismiiJ3ig rezenten Charakter die ser Entwicklung.
Wenn wir auch über den phonetischen Char¡¡,kter des hiel' rein formell als
Laryngal bezeichneten vorindischen Phonems nicht genügend unterrichtet
sind, so scheint doch die Annahme, daB es den glottalen Konsonanten des
Sora und des Kharia nicht allzu ferne gestanden hat, und daJ3 es in einer
vorhistorischen Phase des Altindischen in liingeren Worteinheiten in eben
derselben Weise geschwunden ist wÍe das glottale Phonem im Sora, nicht
abwegig.
[Korrektur-Nachtrag: Siehe jetzt auch Evidence fol' Laryngeals, ecI. by W.
Winter (Austin 1960), S. 23ff. (ai. -tta- < *-dHeto- nach Hoenigswald) und
S. 206 A. (drta- ursprachlich wegon drti- nach Hamp).]
Leiden F. B. J. Kuiper
31 Hoillz-.Hil·gl'n Pinnow, Vel'sl1ch oinol' hístorischcn Lal1tlohl'o dor Kharia-
Sprache (Wiosbaden 1959), 220.
82 Pinnow 218. Vgl. weiter aua der f'üdlichen Dialektgruppo parengi báb'
(? báb, báb', bap', bhá geschrieben), bondo bOb', gadaba 'mbOp' (bok').
83 Das zugrundeliegende, nicht mehr selbatiindig gebrauchte Wort *80' ist aua
*80k entstanden (Pinnow 215).
376
THE INTERpRETATION OF CHANDOGYA
UPANISAD III. 1. 2
F. B. J. KUIPER
University of Leiden
1. ·The'text of the first khalfr;1.a: of ChU. III runs as follows:
(a) Orit. Asau vii iidityo devamadhu, tasya dyaur eva tira.seina-
vamso, 'ntarik~am apüpo, mar'iearya'Q, putrii'Q,.
(b) Tasya ye priiñeo rasmayas, m evásya priieyo madhuml~ya,
rea eva madhukrta, rgveda eva p~pa1n, UÍ; amrtii apas. Ta.
vii cm realJ,.
(c) etam rgvedam abhyatapC1trhs, tasyii 'bhitaptasyCIJ yasas teja
indriyam viryam annadya1n raso 'jiiyata. .
(d) Tad vyak~arat, tad ádityam abhito ' srroyat, tad vii etad yad
etad ádityasya rohitam '/'Üpam.
In a modern authoritative translation this passage is rendered as
follows (Hume, The thirteen principal Upanishads 2 , 1934, p. 203):
The sun as the honey extracted from aH the Vedas.
(1) Verily, yonder sun is the honey of the gods. The cross-beam
[from which the honeycomb hangs] for it is the sky. The
honeycomb is the atmosphere. The brood are the particles
of light.
(2) The easterÍl rays of that sun are its eastern honey-cells.
The bees are the Rig verses. The flowers is the Rig-Veda. The
drops of nectar fluid [aros e as follows]
VeriIy, these Rig verses [3] brooded upon that Rig-Veda;
from it, when it had been brooded upon, there was produced
as its essence splendor, brightness, power, vigor, and food.
(4) It flowed forth. It repaired to the sun. Verily, that is what
that red appearance of the sun is.
It has long been recognized that the late arrangement of the
text in paragraphs is wrong in par. 2, where the words tii vii ero realJ,
belong to par. 3. The parallel passages Ill. 2.2 and 3.2 leave no
doubt as to this point. For this reason alone Max Müller's transla-
tion cannot be correcto The real difficulty of this text, however, líes
in the words rgveda eva pu~pam, tii amrtii iipa~b. What follows is a
36
377
 CHANDOGYA UPANI$AD III. 1.2
synopsis of the various renderings of these words occurring in some
well-known translations:
Max Müller (1879): "the Rig-veda (sacrifice) is the fiower, the
water (of the sacrificiallibations) is the nectar (of the fiower)."
Bohtlingk (1889), in English translation: "the fiower is the
¡;tgveda, and also the iromortal water is this".
Deus'sen (1897), in English translation: "the flower is the ¡;tgveda,
the nectar fluid is this, that those ¡;tig-verses [3] brooded upon the
¡;tgveda ... " (paraphrased in the words: "this is gained as immortal
nectar, what flows as juice from the Vedas").
R. R. Mitra and E. B. Cowell (1906?): "[the ceremonies enjoined
by] the ~g-Veda form the flowers, and the fluids [used in their per-
formance] are nectars".
Senart (1930), in English translation: "the ¡;tgveda is the fiower;
there are also liquors of immortality" (with a note suggesting that
tál), must here be taken in the sense of tatra).
Papesso (1937), in English translation: "the fiower is the ¡;tg-
Vec;la. The ambrosialliquid is this (produced as follows): these rc's
brooded upon this ~g-Veda ..... "
. the cosmic egg on the one hand, and that of the egg fioating on the
What emerges from this synopsis is the curious fact that out
of a11 these eminent Sanskrit scholars only Bohtlingk appears to have
recognized in the words ta amrta iipal), the well-known attraction
discussed by Delbrück, Altindische Syntax, p. 90. An instance of it
occurs in this very passage in til evasya pracyo madhunilr).ya(I),),
where ta, though referring to rasmayalJ, (masc.), has adopted the
gender of the noun of the predicate madhuná{iyal),. Cf. further, e.g.,
ChU. IlI. 5.4 tilni vii etilny amrtilniim amrtilni "these (viz. ete rasill),)
are the necturs of the necturs", RS. 1.89.10 áditir miita sa pitii sa
putrál), "Aditi is the mother, she is the father, she is the son" (cf. also
1. 95.8 with Geldner's note), etc.
The correct translation of the words rgveda eva pU$]Jam, ta
amrtii iipal), in IlI.1. 2 is accordingly: "the ¡;tgveda is a flower, it is
also the water of Life". The pronoun til is here (as often) used in
the sense of Latin idemque.
2. The passage, thus translated, obviously requires some com-
ment, since the amrtii ilpal), do not fit into the picture of the cosmic
bee-hive. Senart rightly points out this difficulty and remarks that
the western translators, by rendering amrta as "nectar" easny evoke
the wrong association with the nectar of flowers. This is certainly
true of Max Müller's translation.
As a matter of fact, the association which has brought about the
37
378
F. B. J. KUIPER
curious diversion from bee and fiower to the "immortal waters" can
only have been evoked by the word madhu. It is a well-known fact
that in the potential idiom of the Vedic singers mádhu could denote
the essence (rása) of the cosmic waters, which was identified with
sóma and amrta. See Kasten Ronnow, Trita Aptya 1, pp. 68 f., 97 f.,
109 ff. With regard to our ChU. passage it is further interesting to
note that this essence of the waters is sometimes said to be contained
in the sun, e.g., VS. IX. 3 apil1n rásam údvayasam súrye• sánta1h
samahitam "the waters' invigorating essence, being contained in the
sun".
The 'second association which forms a link between the ideas
"flower" and "cosmic waters" is the concept of world-creation by
brooding. It occurs also in the Chandogya Upanio\lad, cf. II. 23.2
Prajapatir lokiin abhyatapat, tebhyo 'bhitaptebhyas trayi vidyil
sa7hprilsravat "Prajapati brooded upon the worlds. From them, when
they had been brooded upon, issued forth the threefold knowledge".
Although this passage must have been written by a different author,1
it proves that the notion of a cosmogonical brooding was familiar to
the circles in which the various parts of the ChU. have gradua11y
arisen.. Owing perhaps to an association of the idea of brooding' on
cosmic waters on the other (cf., e.g. JB. III.360), we also meet with
the idea of Prajiipati brooding on the waters. Cf. AA. II. 4.3.7 =
Ait.Up.I.3 (quoted in footnote 1).2
This enables us to reconstruct the chain of associations which
underlie the passage under discussion:
(a) Owing to the "cosmic character" of these speculations, the
idea of a bee which, hidden in a flower, seeks its madhu, pass es into
that of a bee brooding on a flower for madhu. '
(b) in this form the idea is considered· equivalent to Prajapati's
creation act of brooding upon the waters, which also contain madhu.
(c) if the Rigveda is the flower which yields madhu, it accord-
ingly is also the cosmic waters.
It follows that Sankara's ritualistic interpretation of the
"waters" as referring to the sacrifice (tál), karma1;ti prayuktal), somil-
jyapayoriipii agnau prak?iptas tatpilkiibhinirvrttá amrtil amrtarthat-
~"adatyantarasavatya, apo bhavanti) must be rejected, as it has indeed
been given up by the most recent translators. The epithet amrta
given to the "waters" occurs, along with the association apal),: mádhu,
in RS. IV. 3 .12ab:
rténa dev'ir amrtá ámrkt<i
á1"(tobhir ilpo mádhumadbhir agne
38
379
 CHANDOGYOPANI$AD III. 1.2
However, although the expression itself has been taken from the
ancient religious poetry, the meaning here attached to it may perhaps
have been somewhat equivalent to amrtasyar<ipal), "waters of Life".
3. In the preceding discussion we have confined ourselves to
the task of reconstructing the associations evoked by the word
madhu. It is obvious that there remains a more general, and per-
haps more important, problem, which has not been touched upon so
far, beca use it has no direct bearing on the interpretation of ChU.
IrI .1. 2. Indeed, since the various ideas occurring in this kha'l){la
alI have sprung from the basic notion of a devamadhu, it might fur- -
ther be asked, if the conception of the sun as the "honéy of the
gods" (devamadhu) itself can be explained. There is certainly sorne
reason for asking this, since one of the foremost interpreters of the
Upanishads has caIled this concept "grotesque" (Deussen, Sechzig
Upanishad's des Veda, p. 100). However, an attempt to answer this
question would carry us far beyond the limits of this brief contri-
bution.
Therefore, it can only briefly be pointed out here that, whatever
may have been actually meant by the poet of RS. 1.154, his- words
ví~ol), padé paramé mádhva útsal), (st. 5d), when combined with
átrliha tad urugayasya vr~al), paramam padam áva bhati bhüri
(st. 6cd), may easily have given rise to the conception of the sun as
mádhva útsa'"'J-, that is, as devamadhu. It should be noted in this con-
nection that according to VS. IX. 3 the rása of the waters is contained
in the sun (see aboye, p. 38).3
NOTES
1. It is a weIl-known faet that only the first two prapathakas have a eIear Sama-
vedie charactcr (cf., e.g., Renou, Etudes védiques et pit'(tinéennes I, p. 94). In this
third prapiithaka, fol' instance, the treatment oí the Siimaveda in 3.2 does not
difier from that of the three other Veda in 1.2, 2.2, and 4.4. A formal argumcnt
for a difierent authorship in III (in contrast with II) is the rather uncommon
genitivus originis (see Minard, Trois Énigmes II, § 767 fi.) in IIr. 1.3 (2.2; 3.2;
4.2; 5.2) tasyii'bhitaptasya .... raso'jiiyata, instead of the normal abIative,
which is found in II. 23.3 and further in, e.g., AB. V. 32.1 tebhyo'bhítapte-
=
bhyas tri'(ti jyoti1'Í1.{ly (etc.) ajiiyanta, AA. II. 4.3 ( Ait. Up I. 3) so'po'bhya
tapat, tiibhyo'bhitiiptabhyo mürtir ajiiyata, JB. IIl. 2636- 7 ye'bhitapyamiiniid
asrjanta te'ru'(tii, ye'bhitaptiid asrjanta te babhravo.
2. A difierent concept is, of course, that of his sexual union with the watcrs, SB.
VIII. 2.2.7.
3. Cf. aIso the Iater idea of the sun as the sourcc of rain, c.g. Manu III 76, Mhbh.,
etc. (see Ronnow, op. c., p. 123).
39
380
POSTSCRIPT ON AJÁ
On p. 6, 14 Horsch accepts the current view that the Rigved~c occurrences
of ajá- partly belong to ajá- "he-goat" and partIy to a dlfferent word,
which means "unborn". In most discussions of the word(s), however,
the purely formal aspects have insufficiently been considered. ef. Neisser,
Zum Wb. des RV., I, p. 11, II, p. 11, Sieg, GGA, 1925, p. 130, etc.
In Grassmann's retrograde word index of the Rigveda there are 28
words in -já-. The number of their occurrences amounts to 54, which
are distributcd ovcr (hc ten books as follows: (111 (1Ir. IV 7 V2 v(r, Vilo
VIIP IX2 X14. For this general survey Grassmann's data have been
accepted without further inquiry, except for tapoján X.154.5.
Thcmatic forms in -já- are, according to the same source and Lanman,
Noun-Injlection in Ihe Veda, p. 438: sana-já nom.sg. f. 111.39.2, ptirvajé
duo f. VII.53.2, and further ekajám 1.164.15, voc. ekeja X.84.3, ptirva-
jébhyas X.14.55, udanyajá duo X.106.6, tapojdn X.l54.5 and sákmnjánám
I.164.15. As for adhrijas V.7.1O, this is notoriously obscure (see Geld-
ner's note). It follows that the only thematic forms occurring i~ the
family books are sana-jd (for *sana-jás), which is in accorda~ce ';lth ~
general tendency to replace -ás in the nom.sg. f. by -á (e.g., prajd, svagopa,
Macdonell, Ved. Gramm., p. 251, Wackernagel-Debrunner, Alti~d.
Gramm., III, p. 126), and púrvajé (du.), which may be due to t~e amblg-
uous character of su eh plural forms as girijás f., V.87.1. Masculme forms
based upon a stem in -já-, accordingly, do not occur before the maI)Qa~as
1 and X. That these are the first traces of a later (mostly post-Rigvedlc)
development, is apparent from the considerable increase of such fo:ms
in the -Atharvaveda and the later Vedas. Macdonell, p. 254 f., glves
fourteen instances from the AS. (ekajás, jaráyujás, nijás, prathamajás,
samudrajás, stambajás, ntr. prathamajám, masc. ekajám; asthijásya,
tantijásya, pI. tantijás, tapojds, ntr. prathamajá; dvijdnám) an~ a few
more from the VS. and the TS. (prathamajám, pürvaján, sahaján).
On the other hand, there are 22 occurrences of ajá-, distributed as
follows: 15 112 UF VJ3 VII2 VIII2 X7. This stem cannot, therefore,
stand for *ajá-, which is, indeed, completely non-existent. It ~s tr~e
that sorne old thematic derivatives of roots in -á- seem to be an mhen-
381
 tance from prehistoric stages of linguistic development. ef. gO$fhá-,
m. and Old lcelandic nau-st (see the references in fU, 1, p. 311 n. 12).
However, the derivatives of roots in -ani-, such as gO$d- and gojd-, which
are almost exclusively used in the nom.acc.sg. and the nom.pl., have
taken the place of gO$áni-s (AS., VS., TS.) and *gojáni-s and are the
result of a specific lndian development. See Notes on Vedic N oun-
Inflexion, pp. 71-86. So he re thernatic forms in -sá- and -já- could not·
arise before the end of the Rigvedic periodo
Prom a purely formal point of view, therefore, it is impossible to
+
ana1yse ajá- as a jd-. It follows that the word must everywhere mean
"he-goat", and that the meaning "unborn", which was later attached
to it, is the result of a re-interpretation.
F. B. J. Kuiper.
382
I
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. vlr
by
F. B. J. KUIPER
Leiden
In memory of Jakob Pieter Smit
t 28.8.1965
1. The origin of the final -{ in the nominatives of noun stems in S, j, and
h (representing proto-Indo-European k, g, and gh) and of the corre-
sponding ¡j befo re the case endings -bhiJ.¡ and -bhyaJ.¡l is not merely one of
the minor problems of the historical grammar of Indo-Aryan. 2 Since it
has often been assurned that the retroflex stop indirectly reflects a pala tal
stop [1'] or an affricate [t5] in proto-Indo-Iranian,3 it is also of sorne
importance for the reconstruction of the prehistoric development of
Iranian, and especially for the interpretation of Old Persian (),4 for the
1 For the Vedic forms in -1 see Lanman, Noun-Injlection in the Veda (= JAOS, 10)
(1878), pp. 463, 490, 499; MacdonelJ, Vedic Grammar (1910), pp. 183, 237, 239.
2 See Wackernagel, Altindische Grammatik, 1 (1896), pp. 173ff., 176 and Nachtrage,
pp. 92-94; III (1930), pp. 232f., 253 f.
• Cf., e.g., F. Müller, Wiener Sitzungsberichte, 89 (1878), p. 5: "Consonanten-
Diphthonge" (tI etc., different from affricates, see WZKM, 9, p. 138 and Bartholomae's
comment, ZDMG, 50 [1896], p. 705 n. 1), "im Indischen richtiger 15"; Meillet, MSL,
8 (1894), p. 284, J. Bloch, L'Indo-Aryen (1934), p. 53 (ts> 1$> O, Kurylowicz, Actes
du 4e Congres des linguistes (Copenhagen, 1938), p. 63 (ks> 1$> f), Comptes rendus de
la Société des Sciences el des Lettres de Wroclaw, IlI/l (1948), p. 5, L'Apophonie (1956),
p. 373f. (ks> t'$> 1$).
t But OP. Badayati can only be explained on Ihe assumption ofproto-Iranian ·s or
or ·s, see Hübschmann, KZ, 23 (1877), p. 397, Nyberg, Studia lndo-Iranica, Ehrengabe
rür W. Geiger (1931), pp. 213-216, Leumann, IF, 58 (1941), p. 3 (= Kleine Schriften
[1959], p. 329f.). It is hard, in the Iight ofthis evidence, to accept Ihe view that Kafiri
[ts) corresponding to Av. s and Skt. S, is decisive proof for the existence of affricates in
proto-Iranian. See for the evidence of Kafiri Morgenstieme, NTS, 13 (1945), p. 225f.
and the theories based on it by Pisani, Archivio Glottologico Italiano, 33 (1941), p. 71,
Rysiewicz, Studia Jr¿zykoznawcze (1956), p. 290, V. V. Ivanov, Voprosy Jazykoznanija,
VIl/4 (1958), p. 14. As for Oss.f,met "axe", which Hübschmann was the first to draw
attention to, this may be a loan-word; see Abaev, Osetinskij jazyk ifol'klor (1949), p.
139f. As for *ih the possibility that I!asanna "race-track" in the Kikkuli-text stands for
prehistoric (Indo-)Aryan *vOihana- should be noted (see Benveniste, Hittite et Indo-
Européen, p. 9 and Mayrhofer, IIJ, VII [1964], p. 210, Die Sprache, 10 [1964], p. 175),
whereas for *i (he renderingby z (as in -!lOza = Ved. vája-) is instructive. The evidence
of Kafiri (which may have split off in the common Indo-Iranian period, see Morgen-
stierne, p. 235) has no clear suppcirt in either Iranian or Indo-Aryan.
383
104 F. B. J. KUIPER
PIE. reconstruction of the phonemes traditionally denoted by kj; or k S ,
etc.,5 and for the relations between centum and satem languages. 6 In
view of the far-reaching theories which, partly at least, have been based
upon the final -( of Sanskrit it may be useful to reconsider the problern.
Before entering into a discussion ofthe general problem itself, however,
1 should like to make some remarks about a point of detail. Many of the
explanations proposed start without further discussion from the assump- .
tion that a (proto-Indo-Iranian) affricate [ts] had beco me a retrofiex
cluster [t~] in sorne prehistoric period (which most authors omit to
specify sufliciently). Thus Jules Bloch writes that in [tS] "le prernier
élément tendait a s'assimiler au second, done a prendre la forme céré-
brale".7 If, however, the proto-Indo-Iranian representative ofPIE. k still
was [tS], the question necessarily arises whether this has actually become
[t~] in any position, no matter at what time this must be supposed to
have taken place. If so, the prototype of Skt. satám "hundred" must have
been *f$atám, with an initial t which even in classical Sanskrit was ex-
tremely rareo A second objection that must be raised concerns the cluster
[t~], which is, in some way or other, the basis on which most of the more
recent explanations have been founded. This cluster, however, is entireIy
non-existent in the phonemic system of Sanskrit in historicaI times, the
only comparable clusters that actually occur being ts and (s. A third
objection concerns the obvious fact that the assumption of retrofiex
phonemes for proto-Indo-Iranian is fully unwarranted. In oId Iranian
such retroflexes are entirely lacking, and in Indo-Aryan the genesis of
these phonemes is in al1likelihood a comparatively late process which
must have taken place in the separate branch owing to foreign infiuence in
the Indian linguistic area. 8
A theory, therefore, which presupposes the existence of such retrofiex
phonemes at an early date, either in proto-Indo-Iranian or in proto-Indo-
Aryan, would for this very reason seem a priori implausible. It is curious
that so little attention has been paid to these quite obvious difficulties by
the advocates of the theories in question.
2. To get a better insight into the prehistory of the enigmatic final -( it
may be convenient first to consider more closely the problem of the long
5 T. Burrow, JAOS, 79 (1959), pp. 85-90; cf. pp. 255-262.
• V. V. Iyanoy, Voprosy Jazykoznanija, V1I/4 (1958), pp. 12-23.
7 L'Indo-Aryen (1934), p. 53f. He here follows Meillet, MSL, 8 (1894), p. 284. Cf.
a1so F. Müller, Wiener Sitzungsber., 89 (1878), p. 5 (see aboye, note 3). Wacker:nagel,
Alfind. Gramm., 1 (1896), p. 176, accepted t$ as the preyious stage of {, Bartholomae,
ZDMG, 50 (1896), p. 704, rejected it.
8 See aboye, uThe Genesis of a Linguistic Area" (p. 81 ff.).
384
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. ví{ 105
sibilant in Sanskrit. Here the long ("geminate") s occurs only in cases
where one morpherne ends in -s and the folIowing begins with it. It is a
well-known fact that in these cases we find three different representations,
viz.:
a) In the phonemic system of proto-Indo-European a long s seems
always to have been shortened: 9 cf. PIE. *ési for *éssi "thou art", as re-
fiected by Skt. ási, Av. ahí, OP. ahiy, Gr. sl:, etc. Sorne last traces of this
shortening are found in the noun-infiection of the oldest Indo-Iranian
texts: Skt. apásu, loc. pI. of apás- "active" (RS. VIII. 4.14), ámhasu, id. of
ámhas- "narrowness" (AS. VI.35.2), Avestan qzahu, id. (Y. 10.7, etc.).
The same shortening is found in word-final position (in accordance with
the general rule) in such Rigvedic forms as áviveb, vivéb (for *vi-ve$-s),
etc,l° In view of the explanation of vicjbhib that will be put forward
below, the OP. instr. pI. raucabis for *raucazbis deserves mention in this
connection. It is true that a similar anomaly is found in such an appar-
entIy recent compound as OP. zürakara- "evil-doer" for *züras-kara-
where the Iranian stem form zürah- seems to function as the first mernbe;
of the compound. The contrast with Vahyaz-data- should be noted. In
the case of raucabis, however, it is possible that the analogy of the corre-
sponding case forms ofthe n-stems, e.g., *nama-hu : *nama-bis, has given
rise to a new form rauca-bisby the side ofthe loc. pI. *raucahu (analysed as
*rauca+hu). In that case, a parallel instance in Sanskrit would be the
instr. pI. áho-bhib which, owing to a different analogy, has been created
by the side of the loc. pI.. áhasu. ll However, this explanation, first pro-
posed by Bartholomae,12 is far from certain. The chief difliculty is that
the corresponding Avestan forros point to [-ah-bis], which can be due
either to a proto-Iranian innovation or to one of Avestan alone. As far as 1
can see, the most important evidence in this respect is the Gathic form
hudábyo Y. 34.13 (also occurring in Later Avestan). Owing to an in-
co.rrect interpretation ofits stem form Bartholomae was led to explain
thlS as an analogical formation. 13 Since, however, á in the vulgate text is a
graphic representation of [ah], and since the stem must have been
[huda'ah-] in Zarathustra's dialect,14 it can hardly be doubted that the
words hyaJ ca vista hudabyo in Y. 34.13c stand for [yat caiSta huddahbyah]
• Cf., e.g., WackemageI, Altindische Grammatik, 1, p. 111, III, p. 289f.
10 See Bartholomae, KZ, 29 (1888), p. 575.
:: WackemageI-Debrunner, Altind. Gramm., 111, pp. 290, 310.
13 Gr~ndr~ss der ir~~. Phi!ologie, 1, 1 (1895), p. 215.
Alllramsches Worterbuch, col. 1824 n. 1 (not mentioned by Reiche1t Awestisches
Elementarbuch [1909], p. 180). '
H See IIJ, I (1957), p. 89.
385
106 F. B. J. KUIPER
in Zarathustra's dialeet. 15 It is probable, therefore, that the Gathie instr.
pI. raocabis Y. 30.1e, 31.7a (ef. 58.6 and raocaby6 Y. 19.6) stands for
[raucahbis]. As sueh it can support the theory that final -a in the Gathic
dialeet is merely a graphic representation of [-ah ].16 Sinee the oeeasional
spelling with -6bis (thus probably in gar6biS Y. 34.2e) is due to the
seeondary intrusion of LAv. 6 for a into the Gathic orthography,17 it is
impossible to assume any historical eonneetion between Avestan -6bis
and Vedie -obhil),18 whieh refleets the eharaeteristie Indo-Aryan develop-
ment of _az_. 19 In the light of this Avestan evidenee it is qúite possible
15 For ciJviSta (Geldner civista) = ·cáista, see Darmesteter, Le Zend-Avesta, I (1892),
p. 336, Tedesco, ZIl,1 (1923), p. 48 n. 2, Kurylowicz, Traces de ¡aplace du ton engathique
(= Bibfiotheque de {'École des Hautes Études, fase. 244) (París, 1925), p. 21, L'Apo-
phonie en indo-européen, p. 164, Humbach, MSS, 2 (1952), p. 11. Bartholomae's
reading eiJvista (Alliran. Wb., col. 442) has been corrected in col. 1889.- The reading
hudaby6, found in the best manuscripts, has right1y been accepted by most authorities
ever since Westergaard, Zendavesta, 1(1852-54), p. 67, in spite of Geldner, who reads
hudiibyá.
u See H. F. J. Juoker, Das Awestaalphabet (= Caueasica, 11) (1925), p. 46ff., Nyberg,
JAs., 1931,11, p. 43f. n. 1. p. 202 n. 1 (fraeariJ a pausa form of "'fraearah; but in Irans
Fornlida Religioner [1937), p. 486, he takes a different view), Karl Hoffmann, Iranistik
1, p. 8: "-3 (ffu auslautendes -ah, ved. -ab aus -as)". Wikander, Vayu, p. 70, took _3 ~
representing a visarga (= -ah, -ih). However, even if intervocalic h was voiced in Old
Iranian, there would not seem to be any need for a particular term for a voiceless h in
final position (Reichelt, Awestisches Elementarbueh, p. 83), which was, in any case,
merely an allophone of the phoneme /h/. See below, note 20. For different opinions
on iJ see Andreas, Gott. Naehr., 1911, p. 2 (iJ = w), H. W. Bailey, Zoroastrian Problems
in ninth-eenlury Books (1943), p. 192f. (iJ = y), Jos. Markwart, Das erste Kapitel der
Gap¡¡ u.stavali (= Orien/afia, No. 50) (1930), p. 15ff.
11 K. Hoffmann, I.c., who thereby corrects the older theory of GAv. 3 standing for á
(e.g., Bartholomae, GrIrPhi/., 1, 1, p. 154, Reichelt, Aw. Elementarb., pp: 33, 180).
The explanation of LAv. á for ah in final position and for a in compounds remains a
crux (see also Markwart, l. c.). The explanations proposed by Gauthiot, La fin de mot,
p. 117 (ah >qh > (!h >6) and W. S. Allen, $andhi (1962), p. 107, fail to convince. See
Hoffmann, p. 9, and note LAv. qzahu, usahva beside LAv. raueáhva [= raucahva],
rav6hu, tiJmáhva, like LAv. aoja7)hvat beside GAv. aojánghva{, aoj6nghvantiJm (Bartho-
lomae, GrIrPhi/., 1, 1, p. 174), which point to the conclusion that á is merely graphical.
The traditional explanation (e.g., Reichelt, op.e., p. 83) is unacceptable.
18 Bartholomae, GrIrPhil., 1, 1, pp. 173 f., 215, 225, ZDMG, 50 (1896), p. 708f.
("vorindisch"), Reichelt, Aw. Elementarb., p. 180, Kent, Old Persian, pp. 41, 63,
Thumb-Hauschild, Handbueh des Sanskrit, 1/1, p. 333 ("-obhis vielleicht schon urarisch"
like WackemageJ, Altind. Gramm., m, p. 289; similarly Scheftelowitz, IF, 33 [1913-141'
p. 153: "Ber~its in der arischen Grundsprache scheint inlautendes z vor bh zu h ge:
worden zu sem, welches den vorhergehenden a-Vokal zu o trübte und dann in der Aus-
sprache mit dem nachfolgenden bh zusammenfiel... 1m Awesta ist dieses sekundiir ent-
standene o durch 3, 6 wiedergegeben ... " Against this view Meillet Les dialeetes indo-
européens (1908), p. 30, stressed the fact that the o in Skt. -obhib a~d that in Av. -ábis
"sont done deux phénomenes radicalement indépendents I'un de l'autre".
19 Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altind. Grammatik, 111 (1930), p. 289, rightly reject the
older theory of Benfey, Bartholomae and Brugmann, who explained -adbhib and
-adbhyab as the regular phonetic developments oC -azbhib, etc. In 1913 ScheCtelowitz
386
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. l'ít 107
that OP. raucabis also stands for *raucahbis. 20 In that case the substitu-
tion of -ahbis for *-azbis might have been an innovation of proto-Iranian.
However that may be, this innovation is mostly explained as an intrusion
of the nominative form (or a sandhi variant of it) into other case forms,
which would be parallel to, e.g., véiyzibyo [= vayzbyah] for *véigby6; ef.
the nomo sing. véixs. In view of the mutual influenee exereized by the
singular and plural forms of the instrumental (see below, Ved. *ir;lbhih -4
ir;ld -4 ír;lábhih) the stem-form of [raucahbiS] might as well be explained
from the instr. sing. *raucahá.
bJ Th~ normal representation in Sanskrit, however, is the long s,
whieh has analogieally been restored. 21 The loe. pI. of the nouns in -as-
is, from the Rigveda downwards, in -assu (or -ahsu),22 e.g., rájassu,
srávassu, and similarly havÍ$$u of a stem in _i$_.23 The explanation by
analogy implies a (more or les s eonscious) effort on the speakers' part to
mark off the morpheme -su as a separate element of the word. In the
same way the loe. pI. of más- "month", viz. masú TS. Vn.5.2.2 was
replaced by méissu KS. 33.1 (p. 27, 8), PB. IV.4.l, TB., etc. A parallel
phenomenon in the verbal inflection is the long s in StÍssi SB. (etc.), asse
ChU. 24 No instance of a monosyllabie root morpheme with a short vowel
is reeorded. See below, p. 109.
e) The third representation, viz. ts for ss, oeeurs only in sorne verbal
stems of the roots ghas- "to eat" , vas- "to dawn" , vas- "to dwell", and
vas- "to clothe". It is restrieted to the stems of the future and the s-aorist
hadalready combated it (lF, 33, p. 153). In this connection the evidence of Ved.
mayobhá- andpurobhCt-, which are Cu1ly parallel to rak$ohán-, manojá-, etc., would seem
oC particular importance.
20 With los5 of the voiced h according to Kent, Old Persian, pp. 41, 63, or merely
graphic for [raueahbis] according to Brandenstein-Mayrhofer, Handbueh des Altper-
sisehen, p. 61. For a different explanation of OP. raueabis, which seems equally possible,
see Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altind. Grammatik, 111, p. 289. They assume that the
nomo sing. had already become "'rauea in OP. and that in raucabisthis nominative form
had been introduced. lo this connection it may be observed that Meillet's assumption
(apud Meillet-Benveniste, Grammaire du vieux-perse, p. 261) of an implosive s in the
OP. endiogs -a' and -a' is certainly incorrecto As the genitive mazdiih-a (with a new
genitive endiog added) shows, the ancient Iranian genitive [mazda'ah] of the Gathic
dialect must have survived io Old Persian as *mazdah (with a final h) up to a certain
time, no matter hpw these -ah and -ah had come to be pronounced in the períod of the
Achaemenids in the S.W. dialect. As far as I can see, final -as and -as must have be-
come -ah and -ah in the common proto-Iranian language.
21 See, e.g., Wackemagel(-Debrunner), Altind. Gramm., I (1896), p. 111, III (1930),
p.289f.
II Cf. Lanman, Noun-Injieetion in the Veda, p. 567, Macdonell, Vedie Grammar,
p.233.
28 Cf. Lanman, op. c., p. 573.
u See Naehtriige ad Altind. Gramm., 1, pp. 111, 38 and 178,39.
387
 108 F. B. J. KUIPER
and sorne desiderative formations like upa-vivatsu- "wishing to fast", but
does not occur befo re the personal endings -si and -se. The most com-
plete list of forms attested is to be found in Debrunner's N achtrage, p. 96
(ad Altind. Gr., I, p. 178, 39; add vatsyan lB. I, 1681°). The explanations
proposed for this particular development are essentially of two types :2.
The first group of explanations is based on the supposition that ts is the
result of an analogical innovation, which may date from either the proto-
Indo-Iranian or the Indo-Aryan periodo Bartholomae explained the t
in the aorist a-vat-s-am AB. as due to the 3 sing. a-vat (from vas- "to
dwell"). It has, however, long since been recognized that such forms as
AS. vy-avat (from vi-vaso), Br. a-sat (root sas-) are themselves compara-
tively recent new formations, due to the fact that in the corresponding 2
sing. the s in -as (e.g., aghas AS. XX. 129.6, for *a-ghas-s-s) could easily
be re-interpreted as the personal ending (like a-pa-s : a-pa-t).26 Besides,
this theory (which Bartholomae later put forward with the greatest
reserve, ZDMG, 50 [1896], p. 711), can hardly account for such forms as
jighatsat KS., vivatsyáti MS. A different theory was developed by L.
Bloomfield and M; Leumann. 27 They assumed that (apparently in proto-
Indo-Iranian) ts had become ss, e.g., in *sarvátat-s > *sarvátas, fut.
*pat-syati> *passyati, patsú > *passú. This is, indeed, the development
that is found in Iranian. In Indo-Aryan, however, ts is supposed to have
been resto red "aus Gründen etymologischer Durchsichtigkeit", which
accounts for Ved. sarvátat (for *sarvátat-s), datsva, patsyati and patsú,
contrasting with Av. haurvatas, dasva, etc. Now, it is on the analogy of
this restoration of ts in patsyati (supposed to stand for *passyati) that
vatsyati for *vas-syati (future of vas- "to dwell") can be explained. Row-
ever, as Leumann rightly observes, this analogical explanation fails to ac-
count for Ved. mátsya- : Av. masya- "fish", where such an analogy cannot
have worked. 28 Leumann's main reason for maintaining the theory, in
spite of the numerous analogical new formations which it presupposes,
is Ved. dehi from *dazdhi, corresponding to GAv. dazdi. In this isolated
case the group d-dh must have become (via regular *dzdh) zdh, before dh
developed to h in Vedic. Rere, accordingly, *dz seemed to have become
z, which is still extant in Avestan. Rowever, this isolated instance of zdh
at a prehistoric stage of Indo-Aryan has since satisfactorily been ex-
2. See Wackernagel, Altind. Gramm., 1, p. 179 with Nachtriige.
•• For exact references see Wackernagel, l.c.
27 See resp. AmJPhil., 32 (1911), p. 55 and IF, 58 (1941), pp. 12-14 (= Kleine Schrif-
ten [1959], pp. 336-338).
'8 No inference, it seems, can be drawn from Rigvedic tsáru-"a crawling animal".
388
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. ví! 109
plained as the resuIt of dissimilation (either in PIL. or in PIA. *dadzdhí).29
Rence the only support for the supposed phonetic development in
Indo-Iranian has been eliminated.
The second group of theories tries to explain ts as the result of a
phonetic development of ss. The possibility that this has taken place in
proto-Indo-European (Joh. Schmidt, Pisani) must be rule~ out .because
ss was itself an innovation of Indo-Aryan. 30 Indeed, not a smgle Instance
of ts is found in the Rigveda, the earliest occurrences apparently being
avatsib 2 andjíghatsati 2 (withjighatsú- 2) in the Atharva- Veda. Therefore,
the develo'pment of ss to ts, far from dating back to PIE., must rather be a
(comparatively late) secondary development of the separate Indo-Aryan
branch. Nor can it be a regular development, such as can be formulated
in a phonetic law. Attempts to formulate such a law have failed because
vatsyati (for *vas-syati) cannot possibly be explained from such ~n
ausnahmsloses Lautgesetz. The ten Rigvedic instances of a loc. pI. In
-assu (as against one instance in -asu) show that as a rule the long ss,
when it was analogically restored, remained intacto There was, however,
one difference between the loc. pI. of disyllabic stems in -aso, such as
árnhasu, rájassu, and the future stem of such a monosyllabic verbal root
as vas- "to dwell". While the first category remained sufficient1y identifi-
able as case forms of words in -aso, even if the long ss was not restored
(as in árnhasu from árnhas-), the normal development of *vas-syamí to
*vasyami would have resuIted in a lack of morphological clearness as it
would have suggested an analysis va-syami. The conscious will of the
speakers to counteract the normal phonetic tendency of their language,
and their effort to over-emphasize the s of the tense morpheme -sya-
apparently led to a realization of the second s as the affricate [ts], to
mark off the beginning of the morpheme from the preceding S. After-
wards the cluster [sts] in [vas-tsyami] must have undergone the same
dissimilation that is found in the future of vrasc- "to hew down, fell, cut to
pieces", viz. *vrask-$yami > vrak$yamí. 31 Something ofthis kind Wacker-
nagel must have had in mind when he wrote that ts is due to the fact "dass
man den zugehorigen Formen zu lieb dem s ein zweites s vorschob; dann
wurde s-s zu tS."32 Bartholomae, it is true, rightly objected that this did
to K. Hoffmann, MSS, 8 (1956), p. 21.
30 E.g., Waekernagel(-Debrunner), Altind. Gramm., l, p. 179, m, p. 251 (on the loe.
pi. in -tsu; cf. p. 289 on -dbhil}, etc.: "nur jungvedisch und ganz selten"); Bartholomae,
ZDMG, 50, p. 711.
81 See Wackernagel, Altind. Gramm., 1, p. 270. er. also the external sandhi of ádha
k~áranti/:t VII.34.2 and /:t for s in satákratu/:t tsárat VIII. 1.11 (Macdonell, Ved. Gram-
mar, p. 71).
u Altind. Gramm., 1, p. 178f.
389
 110 F. B. J. KUlPER THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. vÍ{ 111

not happen in Ved. sassi, massu, sádassu, etc.,33 but this objection is only isolated instances of -dbhib, -dbhya{l are due to a secondary development
valid in so far as it pro ves that ts from ss is not the result of a regular of Indo-Aryan. In 1930 Wackernagel and Debrunner (Altindische Gram-
phonetic law. A more exact definition of the process is found in Brug-
matik, IlI, p. 289) rightly abandoned the older theory of zbh > dbh
(vol. I [1896], p. 179) and explained dbh as analogical. The starting point
mann's Grundriss, 12 (1897), p. 735 in the words: "Vermutlich ent-
probably was, in all cases, the loe. pI.
wickelten sich in den Geminatae -ss-, -ss-,
die auf zwei Silben verteilt
waren, t und k in der Silbenfuge ... 1m Loc. PI. ist diese Entwicklung
3. The idea that ts is the result of a conscious elfort of sorne speakers in
durch Systernzwang gestort worden." However, apart from the fact that
son:e cases to.over-emphasize the second part of the long s after the syl-
$+s > k$ (dvek$i) is the result of a fundamentally different pro ces s (see
lablc tren~h, IS no novel one. Ed. Schwyzer has studied a similar phe~
below, p. 112), Brugmann, too, was still thinking of a normal phonetic
nomenon m modern Greek. 37 On p. 234 of his article he makes the fol-
law. On the other hand, he was right in stressing the importance of the
lowing remark: "Das neugriech. Nebeneinander von s, ss, und ts llisst
syIlabic trench.
auch .die Annahme unverfiinglich erscheinen, einerseits sei idg. ss zu s
A confirmation of the view that the development of s to the affiícate
reduzlert, anderseits (restituiertes) ss übertreibend zu ts geworden." Apart
[ts] was determined by the monosyllabic character of the preceding root
from the fact that Schwyzer here seems to as sume (O! at least, not to
morpheme can be found in mádbhí!;t RS. 1, madbhyá!;t AS. 2, the instr.
~xclu~e) a process in the Indo-European proto-Ianguage, his explanation
and dat.-abI. pI. of mas- "month".34 1 think Leumann is right in ex-
IS an Improvement upon Brugmann's, who still operated with a regular
plaining these forms as new formations based upon a loc. pI. *matsú. 35 Just
phonetic law.
as in the parallel cases discussed below, the form of the loc. pI., which
~he int1uence o~ such an emphasis on what would be the regular pho-
alone can account for those of the instr. and dat.-ab!. pI., is not attested.
netlc development IS !oo well-known to require an ample discussion. Thus
The lower frequency of the loc. forms in the Rigveda (1546 occurrences)
Berger has pointed out that the accent of éka- "one" and vísva- "all" on
as compared with those of the instr. and dat.-ab!. pI. together (3847
I . the first syllable (illstead of the older accentuation *eká- and "'visvá-
I occurrences in total)36 sufficiently explains the non-occurrence of *matsu
which is still normal in composition, e.g. eká-manas-, viivá-rupa-) refiects
in our text. Thus, of the words of kindred meaning dív- "day" and
the emphatic pronunciation which almost automatically results from the
sarád- "year" there are 19, resp. 2 occurrences of dyúbbi!;t and sarádbhi!;t meanings "one" and "all".38
but not a single of their loc. pI.
In this connection long consonants are particularly interesting in cases
Of the disyl1abic stems there is only one isolated instance of u$ádbhi!;t
where shortening might cause a lack of morphological clearness. In more
in one of the last parts of the Rigveda (I.6.3), and svátavadbhya!;t in
than one language they apparently constituted a specific problem. In Old
Yajurvedic texts. As for u$ádbhi!;t (also AS. 3 in bk. XX), it is fully
English, for instance, this is manifest in the length ofthe preceding vowel.
obscure why *u$óbhi!;t has gone out of use. The animate nouns in -as-
Long vowels in stressed syIlables were indeed shortened before long con-
have the normal ending (ángirobhi!;t, ángirobhyal;t). The Vajasaneyi Sam-
sonants but this process did not happen ifthe long consonant belonged to
hita, which uses the normal form sa-jó$obhyam, has u$ábhyam, on the
tw~ different morphemes. Thus OE. *majJJJUm "treasure" (Goth.
analogy of the acc. sing. u~ám VS. 2 AS. 2. See Altind. Gr., m, p. 283.
~~aip~s) became mappum, but the long vowels in the past forms rfid-de
In the líght of these facts it can hardly be questioned that the few
a.dvIsed", met-te "met" remained long. As Kurath puts it,39 there is in
33 ZDMG, 50, p. 710. thls case a structural difference "between I{¡cc-vl with a contrastive long
u Macdonell, op.e., p. 221 n. 9, Wackemagel-Debrunner, op.e., 111, pp. 250, 289.
35 IF, 58 (1941), p. 13 (= Kleine Sehriften, p. 337). Taken by itself, rruidbhf!;l RS. 11. 31 "Díssimílatorische Geminatauflosung als Folge von Úbersteigerung" KZ 61
24.5 could have been provoked by sarádbhi!;l, whích precedes it immedíately (Scheftelo- (1934), pp. 222-252. ' ,
witz,IF, 33 (1913-14), p. 154), but it is somewhat hard to believe that miidbhyá!;l in the :: MSS, 3 (1953), p. 1 tr., 32 (1958), p. 5 ff., especíaUy p. 20ff.
AS. could have been created on the analogy oC the Rígvedic hapax and have nothíng Lang~age, 32 (1956), p. 436 n. 5. Cf. also the Englísh pronunciation of n in income
to do with the parallel forms in -(ibhi!;l (see below). co?eord (m contrast with,·e.g., conquer) whích, as Kruisinga rightly observes "i~
34 The exact figures are (according to Lanman's statistical account in Noun-Infleetion eVldently due to the speaker' s consciousness of the elements of the compound w~rd"
in the Veda, Table 1, opposite p. 582) 3360 for the instr. pI. and 487 for the dat.-ab!. (A Handbook of Present-day English, P, p. 143, par. 401).
pI.

391
390
112 F. B. J. KUlPER
consonant belonging to the same morpheme, and JVvc-cv/ with a sequence
of identical short consonants belonging to different morphemes ... where
OE. retained long vowels". In terms ofthe classical historical grammar it
might be stated that the long vowel was here analogically resto red in
accordance with the normal type of past forms like mielde. Either
definition ultimately refers, not to a phonic difference between jJjJ and
dd, tt but to·a specific attitude of the speakers. This may (but need not
necessarily) have resulted in a particular articulation of the long conso-
nants so as to bring out more elearly the trench between the root mor·
pheme and that of the past tense. The introduction of external sandhi in
Vedic mánab-su for mánassu (the manuscripts and the editions of the
Rigveda vary in this respect) may be due to the same tendency.
In Old Tamil a rule of external sandhi demanded that a sentence like
mu! títu "a thorn is (a) bad (thing)" should become muttitu but an optional
rule allowed this to be pronounced as muh (itu in case the first word was
monosy/labic and had a short vowel. The latter restriction is irrelevant
since after long vowels the long consonant was regularly shortened. The
first condition, however, is essential, for the basic problem with which we
are here concerned is that of "Sprachkorper". It is harder, indeed, to
recognize monosyllables as individual words than to identify polysyl-
lables. 40 This i8 no doubt the reason why Vedic ná "like" is never con-
tracted with any following vowel, nor ád "then" with a preceding _a. 41
The conclusion that the emphatic pronunciation of ss in *matsú,
vatsyámi was conditioned by the monosyllabic character of the noun stem
and the verbal root is confirmed by the evidence of the stems and roots
ending in -$. This will be discussed in the next section.
4. In cases where a final $ of a stem or root was followed by an s of a case
or personal ending or a tense morpheme the result in Sanskrit was either
$$ (shortened to $ in final position and sometimes medially), e.g.,:
jó# (*jÓ$-si), haví$$u; áviveb, vivéb, yaub,42
or it was k$, e.g.:
*dve$+si > dve/qi; *dve$ +syami > dvek$yami;
*advi$+sam >ádvik$am.
40 For this interpretation of the Old Tamil eyidence see IIJ, II (1958), p. 197.
u See Maedonell, Vedic Grammar, p. 61.
.. er. bhai/J in the Jater language, Bartholomae, KZ, 29 (1888), p. 574, Brugmann,
Grundriss, la (1897), pp. 725, 812. In dévi$ ~al X. 128,5 there is a different sandhi.
392
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. vit 113
Int,~ances of this seeond representation are extremely rare in the Rigveda,43
and in the later language they are limited to the verbal infiection. Never,
indeed, has -k$u for -$$U been introduced in the loe. pl. of the noun in-
fieetion. These faets point to the conclusion that k$ for $$ is a compara-
tively late, mostly post-Rigvedie, innovation of Sanskrit. It is, accordingly,
neither an 01d,44 nor a regular 45 development in Sanskrit, and it can
hardly be doubted that Wackernagel's analogical explanation is correcto
He assumed that, as a result of the merger in the 3 sing. preso of -$+Ii and
-s+ti into -$fi (ef. dve${i and va$li from dvi$-, vas-), the 2 sing. in -$+si
(e.g,,· *dvé$+si) merged with that in -s+si (e.g., *vas+si), which was
represented by -k$i. The 2 sing. dvek# was, accordingly, ereated on the
analogy of vak$i.
In the noun infieetion the normal phonetic development in the paradigm
of dví$- "enemy" would consequently have be en as foIlows:
nomo sing. *dvi$+s > *dvi$$ > *dvíb (ef. vivéb).
instr. pI. *dví$+bhíb > *dvi~bhíb > *dvirbhib (ef. havírbhib).
loe. pl. *dvi$+su > *dvi$u (-+ *dvi$$u), with a shortening of the long $$
which was properly a PIE., rather than an Indo-Aryan, deveIopment.
It was assumed aboye that by the side of masú, massu, whieh represent
the non-emphatic pronunciation of the case ending of the loe. pl., there
has existed a variant *mas-tsu > *matsu, due to an optional emphatic
articulation of -su, just as in modern Greek s, ss, and ts occur side by
side as variants. To the same emphatic pronuneiation must be due
*dvi$+tsu> *dvi$tsu > dvitsu, which is actually attested in the classical
language. The contrast with the disyIlabic form haví$$u RS. is the very
thing that must be expected if -(su owes its origin to an optional emphatic
articulation after a monosyllabic stem. Since t after $ always becomes t in
Sanskrit, whereas s after f is never retrofiex,46 this would seem the only
explanation that is in fun accord with the phonetic laws of the language.
In the same manner the nomo sing. *dví$+S must have become *dví$fS >
*dvífS at a prehistorie time, before consonantal clusters lost their last
components in final position. Afterwards *dvífS regularly became dvíf.
4a Waekemagel, Altind. Gramm., 1, p. 137 with Nachtriige, Maedonell, Vedic Gram-
mar, p. 25.
.. Thus Brugmann, Grundriss, P, p. 735 ("1m Loe. PI. ist diese Entwicklung dureh
Systemzwang gestort").
(6 Burrow, JAOS, 79 (1959), p. 87. See below, p. 123.
(8 For the incorrect assumption of t~ in proto-Indo-Iranian or proto-Indo-Aryan
(e.g., J. Bloch, L'lndo-Aryen, p. 54, who followed Meillet's lead, Burrow, JAOS, 79,
p. 87), see aboye, p. 104.
393
-.~ .. _ ----
114 F. B. J. KUIPER
The forms attested in the Veda are: -dví( RS. 1, viprú{ AS. l,priívff MS. 1,
KS.1.
The forms *dvirbhil; and *dvirbhyal; are not attested although their
former existence must be postulated on account of havírbhil;, from *-i¡;-
bhis (cf. Av. snai8izbya). Instead of such forms in -rbhil; there are a few
instances offorms with -lj- before the endings -bhil; and -bhyal;. The same
analogy that gave rise to the instr. pI. madbhíl; RS. and the dat.-abI. pI;
madbhyál; AS. also accounts for viprúljbhil; VS. and viprútjbhyal; SR. The
correctness of the reconstruction *dvirbhíl;, etc., however, is guaranteed
by the isolated form dorbhydm VS. 1 of dO$- "fore-arm".47
In this connection the root noun í$- "prosperity, vigour, strength"48 is
particularly interesting. In proto-Indo-Aryan the instr. sing. of root houns
was not formally distinguishable from that of the stems in -a-. As a result,
there occur some forms of the instr. pI. in -ábhil; which are based on a re-
interpretation of the instr. sing. in -d: cf. k$ap-dbhil; IV.53.7 (: k$ap-d
IX.99.2), k$íp-abhil; IX.97.57 (: *k$ip_d).49 Inversely the instr. sing. has
been remodelled after the instr. pI. in the infiection of í$-, which can be
reconstructed as follows:
nomo sing. *í$+S > *i${s > *í(s > *í(.
instr. pI. *i¡;+bhil; > *irbhil;,
-+ instr. sing. *ir-d -+ nom.sing. íra, ánirií RS. etc. (íriím AS. 2, etc.)
loe. pI. *i$+su> *i$(su > *ifSú,
-+ instr. pI. *iljbhil; -+ instr. sing. ilj-d
In the RS. the last for~ i!d 1.128.7, IlI.24.2, 27.10 has not ousted i$d
RS. 26, AS. 6, but the new instr. pI. í!abhil; 7 -+ instr. sing. í!aya 5 must
soon have called into existence the noun í!a 16, acc. ífam 9, gen. ífayal; 5,
whieh continues to be used in the later Vedas (loe. íljayam VS. 3). The
word is equally frequent in the family books and in I and X (12 IP IIP
IVI Vl VIP VIIP IXI X3).50 The word íra 1 (íriívant- 5) is much less fre-
" Wackemagel-Debrunner, Altind. Gramm., III, p. 248. Wüst, Altindisch (1927),
p. 79, still defended both :¡bh > r/.bh (strongly questioned by Tedesco, Lg., 19 [1943],
p. 18) and zbh > dbh.
(8 For the inflection of í$- see Wackemagel(-Debrunner), Altind. Gramm., 1, p. 212,
I1I, p. 323.
See op.c., vol. III, p. 324, II/2, p. 260, resp. III, p. 241.
(9
50 Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altind, Gramm., III, p. 323, questioned this origin of
ícfii-, but see II/2 (1955), p. 259 and HI, p. 248. As for íra- see Lüders, Philologica
Indica, p. 552, Neisser, Zum Worterbuch des J3.gveda, I, p. 163, and Nachtriige ad
ATtind. Gramm., 1, p. 24, 5. For the interplay of the dec1ensions of i$- and ir/.- see
Lanman, Noun-Infiection in the Veda, p. 493; for nouns in -4- repIacing oIder stems in
a consonant, cr. Altind. Gramm., III, p. 323, U/2, p. 260, and IIJ, 1, p. 155, II, p. 307ff.
394
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. ví{ 115
quent, and it remains rare in the later texts (íram AS. 2, írayai VS. 1). The
differentiation between the three words (for their meanings see Neisser,
Zum Worterbuch des lJ.gveda, 1, 11, 1924-1930) obviously dates from pre-
Rigvedic times. From the same time must date the shift of accent in
k$Ípabhil; (: k$apábhilJ), í!abhil;, íra-. The aberrant accentuation irá in
AS. XV.2.19 is hardly a trace of an oIder accentuation.
The inference that may be drawn from these facts is that, in spite ofthe
survival of the isolated instance dorbhyám in VS. 25.3 (with dor- in
compound~, from the SR. onwards), the outcome ofthe historical devel-
opment can be stated in the morphophonemic rule that monosyllabic
stems in -N-, -i$-, and -U$- change $ into t# befo re consonants and in
final position.
5. The declension ofthe Sanskrit root nouns in -SO, _jo, and -h- (from PIE.
k, g, gh) was originally quite different from that of the stems in -$-. It
cannot be questioned that the regular representation of PIE. ks (for
k+s, g+s, gh+s) was s in Iranian and k$in Indo-Aryan (as represented by
Sanskrit). There is no reason, therefore, to question that the Vedic loe.
pI. forms of vís-, f. "clan" and dís-, f. "direction", viz. vik$ú (RS. 48 AS.2)
and dik$ú (AS. 9, VS. 1), represent the normal development of PIE.
ks in Indo-Aryan. The Avestan form nasü "in straits" Y. 38.5, which
apparentIy stands for PIE. *neksú,51 furnishes additional corroboration
for the conclusion that proto-Indo-Iranian had in the loe. pI. the normal
representation of PIE. *-ksu, no matter how this pre-stage of Indo-Aryan
k$ and Iranian s is exactly reconstructed. 52
It follows that also in the nomo sing. the PII. forms must have been a
direct continuation ofPIE. *wíks and *díks. Although the corresponding
Avestan forms are not attested,53 such parallel forms as spas "spy",
paro.dars, name of a cock ("looking forward"), bars "mountain", ovar!
"working" (in duzvarStavars, gavastravaras, hvaras, aya varaS) show the
same representation of PIE. ks as is found in the loe. pI. niiSü.54 The
regular Sanskrit form, accordingly, would have been *vík$ > *vík. Such
nominative forms in -k actually occur in stems with r or r immediately
61 Cf. Latin nex, necis. For Av. 4 in n{¡sü, see BarthoIomae, Al/ir. Wb., co!. 1057 n. 1.
51 er., e.g., Bartholomae, GrlrPhil., 1,1, p. 12 (§27, n. 2), Kent, Old Persian, p. 34
(§ 92 with n.). Most important is the evidence of $or/.Juf < *~a:¡r/.Juf < *s(v)as(s)+dJuf
(cf. AI/ind. Gramm., HI, p. 354f.).
51 Av. vis Y/. 13.2, which according to Bartholomae, Altir. Wb., col. 1456, is a nomi-
native of viso, means rather "bird" (as in V. 2.42). See W. Henning, Asia/ica, Fs. Weller
(1954), p. 291. However, the existence of a nominative • vis is indirectly proved by the
dat.-ab!. pI. viiiby6, see p. 118.
6& See BarthoIomae, GrlrPhil., 1, 1, p. 216, ZDMG, 50 (1896), p. 705
395
116 F. B. J. KUIPER
preceding the final consonant (as in svar-dfk, etc., and upa-spfk from
stems in -SO, viSva-sfk MS. from a stem in _jo, and perhaps gartii-rúk from
one in _h_),55 or with the syllable beginning with a dental (as in dík).
The exact conditions under which -k occurs instead of -{ are hard to
determine because there is some vacillation in Vedic. Hence the different
formulations that have be en proposed for the rule. 56 Such cases as the
verbal forms asriik TS. : asrii{ MS. are characteristic of the uncertainty
that existed among Vedic speakers regarding these forms. In later times
-f is, indeed, found even after r (dhiiniibhrt "parching grain", müla-Vrf
"tearing out roots" Pal,1ini), where it stood traditionally in priivff "rainy
season" MS, KS (stempriivf,l'-). It cannot be doubted, however, that the
phonemic system of Indo-Aryan tended to avoid a retroflex stop in the
immediate neighbourhood of a vocalic or consonantal r. 57
In the light of the preceding remarks on the restriction of ts (for ss) to
the position after monosyllabic stems and roots, the fact that -k is also the
only ending that occurs in disyllabic words like bhi,l'ák "physician" RS.
358 and U,l'1)I'k "name of a metre" AS. 1 may be relevant. In rtv-ij- "sacri-
ficing at the proper seasons, a priest" the nomo sing. rtvík RS. n.5.7 may
be due either to the fact that -ij- had early ceased to function as the root
noun of yaj- "to sacrifice"59 so that rtvij- was no longer considered a
compound, or to the preceding t.
6. Since there can be no doubt that -k was the regular representation, the
problem is how the anomalous nominatives in -f are to be accounted foro
•• For the stems in s see Lanman, Noun-Infiection in the Veda (= JAOS, 10) (1878),
p. 490; for those in j, see Lanman, p. 463, Waekernage1-Debrunner, 111, p. 232f.;
and for those in h, Lanman, p. 499, Waekernagel-Debrunner, p. 253 f. The neuter form
puruspfk indirectly proves the existence of a nomo sing. mase. *purusprk "coveted by
many" (root sprh-, ef. Av. spilrilz-vant-); sraj- in híralJya-srak X.6.4 "having a golden
wreath" is ambiguous; for viSva-srk see Nachtriige ad Aland. Gramm., 1, p. 173,40.
•• Cf., e.g., Meillet, IF, 18 (1905-06), p. 417ff.: nominative in -k after r/r (-drk, árk
YV.), after dental (dík, rtvfk), and after a retrofiex (bhi~ák,u~J;lÍk); Rysiewicz, Studia
J~zykoznawcze (1956), p. 290: -k also after i and u (like Ed. Hermann, KZ,41 [1907],
p. 43! accepted by V. V. Ivanov, Vopr. Jazykozn., 1958/4, p. 17, but the whole Rigvedie
evidence is confined to the words dík, rtvfk, and víf). Quite differently Thumb-
Hausehild, Hb. d. Skt., 1/1, p. 310.
57 Waekernagel, Altind. Gramm., 1, pp. 166, 173; ef. also jinvar ávrt TS., Sanskriti-
zation ofjinva ráva( MS., ete. (Vedic Variants, 2 [1932], p. 88).
68 bhi~ák occurs lX.ll2.1 and 3, X.97.6, but bhi~áktamam 11.33.4 shows that -k must
have been generalized before consonants at an early date. Cf. bhi~ákti VIlI.79.2 for
·bhi~á~(i, and abhi~lJak X.l3U: avoidance of ( after retrofiex ~ (Meillet)?
69 Cf. deva-yáj- VS., whieh may have been inherited from PII. (: LAv. daévayaz-),
divi-yáj- RS., upa-yaj- ApS., and in the classical language -yáj- (Renou, Grammaire
sanscrite, p. 323). There are no further traces of _ij_; Av. aibis is fully obseure (abi-iz-'1
but see Bartho10mae, Zum altiranischen Worterbuch, p. 106, Nyberg, MO., 35 [1931],
p. 197 n. 2). [For rtv-íj- : yaj- see however Oldenberg, Noten ad 1.1.1.]
396
THE SANSKRlT NOM. SING. vif 117
The Rigvedic evidence comprises the following forms:
stems in -so: v(l, spát. ef. ,I'á{ from *swéfes;
stems in -jo: bhrdt (vibhrdt), rd! (and compounds);
stems in -h-: abhi-,I'd{ (and other words in -,I'd{),
havya-vdt (and other words in -vd?).
Besídes, the retroflex occurs before -bhil; in pacjbhíl; IV.2.12,60 ~acjbhíl;
n. 18.4 and, in the ¡ast books, in vícjbhfl; X.28.8 and sará{lbhyal; r.
112.21 (with a disyl1abic stem).
The nomo sing. of PIE. stems iu -lc-, -g-, and -gh-, which ended in -fes,
is found intact in Lat. (haru)-spex, Av. spas. In contrast with the latter
form Ved. spát cannot directly represent PIE. *spélcs. 61 However, in the
light of the explanation proposed for dvft the form spáf is perfectly c1ear.
In accordance with a well-known morphophonemic rule s+t is repre-
sented by ,I'{. If, therefore, it can be made plausible that in proto-Indo-
Aryan the inherited nominative form *spálU; (from PIE. *spefes) has been
replaced by a new formation *spas-s (with the normal antevocalíc re-
presentation of fe by s), the further development *spasts > *spá~{s >
*spáfs>spát is much the same as in *dvi,l'-s>dvít. 62
The motive for this substitution of the stem spáS- for *spak- may have
been the tendency to treat the stems in the sibilants s and ,1' in an analogous
way. In Avestan this parallelism was the natural result of the phonetic
development of PIl. *s-s and *s-s to s; cf. spas and *is (of the stems spas-
and is-) contrasting with viixs, gen. vac-ó. In Indo-Aryan the normal devel-
opment would have yielded *spák, gen. spaS-ál; and vdk, gen. viic-ál;, con-
trasting with *í{, gen. i,l'-ál;. In the loc. pI. this contrast (-k,l'u vS. -(su) was
maintained, but in final position -k was replaced by -t owing to the intro-
duction of a new nominative form *spas-s.
The real difficulty is not,. however, this nominative but the ínstr. and
dat.-ab!. plural. For proto-Indo-Iranian these case forms of the stem
"'viS- must be reconstructed as "'vii-bhis and *vii-bhyas. They have, how-
ever, been replaced by new formations in all the oIder dialects: Old
Persian has viObiSfor *vidbis, Avestan (in both dialects: Y. 53.8, V. 13.10f.,
:: But see Alti~. Gramm., III (1930), p. 247, Nachtriige ad 1 (1957), p. 172, 1-17.
-, was explamed as the result of a regular phonetie development (against Waeker-
nagel, Altind. Gramm., 1, p. 173) by, e.g., Meillet, MSL, 8 (1894), p. 284, IF, 18, p.
!17f., Ed. Hermann, KZ, 41 (1907), p. 40f., Bloeh, L'lndo-Aryen, p. 53f.
. Hermann Jacobsohn, Arier /lnd Ugrofinnen (1922), p. 146, also assumed substi-
tutlO~ of the antevocalic stem form (which he writes as "'spat'-) for "spák(~), but tried to
explam spá! as the normal development of a nomínative ·spát' (without s) whieh is
hardly possible. Similarly Meillet, MSL, 8 (1894), p. 284! '
397
118 F. B. J. KUIPER
17f.,40) vizibyó for *vizbyah, and Ved. *vüjbhíl) (see aboye for pacjbhíb).
The latter form must have taken the place of the regular representation of
PIE. *wigbhis (probably with elimination ofthe voiced hushed consonant
and lengthening of the preceding vowel: *víbhíl) cf. perhaps the nomo
sing. puro#l), stem purocjds-, from the ínstr. plur. *purocjd[i]-bhil)?). This
statement calls for some comment.
Wackernagel-Debrunner, although rightly rejectíng the oIder theory of
-zbh- becoming -dbh-,63 still hold on to the corresponding assumption
that -";?bh- has become _cjbh_. 64 However, Bartholomae's view that PIl.
z
s and i had beco me s and before stops65 is not sufficiently supported by
the evidence. As far as 1 can see, there is no reason to doubt that in
Avestan PIl. s and i are also before stop s regularly represented by s and z:
LAv. vispaitis, corresponding to Ved. vispátil) "chief of a community"
points to the existence of a word *vispáti- in the common Indo-Iranian
proto-language. It must, therefore, be an old inheritance in Avestan. As
such it is very unlikely to have been transformed secondarily, with sub-
stitution of vís- for *vis-. The same is true of GAv. mazibis [= mazbiSJ,
instr. pI. of maz- "great", which stands for PIl. *maiHbhis. 66 On the
other hand, for the only counter-instance, viz. viZibyo (mentioned aboye),
an anaIogical explanation would seem quite natural. The form should
obviously be paralleled with the corresponding forms of viik- "word",
viz. vayZibis N. 41, 67, 103, and vJyzibyo Y. 16.1, Yt. 10.88, Vr. 6.1, etc.
In the light of viixs.b::Jr::Jti- "offering of a prayer" and paralIel formations
Bartholomae was no doubt right in explaining vJyz- as the form of the
nomo sing., which here has taken the place of the stem. 67 In quite the
same manner viZibyo is likely to stand for *vizbyah (cf. vispaitiS) and to
contain the nomo sing. *vis.
It is impossible to determine what the regular development of *viibhis
03 A/tind. Gramm., III (1930), p. 289.
e. Altind. Gramm., 111, p. 246 (*purocjii?bh- > *purocfiitjbh-) with reference to vol. 1, p.
173ft'. Similarly Thumb-Hauschild, Handbuch des Sanskrit, 1/1 (1957), p. 299, 1/2
(1959), p. 92, where cJbh is explained from PIl. 1bh .
" See GrlrPhil., 1, 1, pp. 12 and 18, Reichelt, Aw. E/ementarbuch, p. 48. Also
Kurylowicz, L'Apophonie en indo-européen (1956), p. 372, assumes a proto-Indo-
Iraman development "k devient $ devant occlusive".
u The representation before continuants (e.g., Reichelt, op.c., p. 48) is of course a
dift'erent problem: sn and sn reflect different dialectal developments, see Meillet-
Benveniste, Grammaire du vieux-perse, p. 72 (otherwise Hans Hartmann, OLZ 1937
col. 156). For vispáti- see also Altind. Gramm., U/I, p. 242.
67 See Bartholomae, Altiran. Wb., col. 1335, and cf. druxs.manah-, biizus.aojah-,
vispa(Ja-, Bartholomae, GrlrPhil., 1, 1, p. 150, Altira". Wb., col. 781, etc., (but cf.
Duchesne-Guillemin, Les composés de /'Avesta, pp. 15f., 186), Debrunner, Altind.
Gramm., lI/2, p. 724.
398
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. vil 119
would have been in Indo-Aryan. The other voiced sibilant and the cor-
responding hushed consonant, viz. [z] and [:?J, were mere allophones of
the phoneme Is/. The first disappeared in Indo-Aryan in aH positions with
compensatory lengthening of the preceding yowel, the second disap-
peared before cj(h), V and became r in other positions. The same is true
of the representatiyes of li/ and /ih/ before dentals and n, where they
merged with ~, e.g. *muih+ta- > *muzdha- > *mu";?cjha- > múcjhá-. In
aH positions before vowels and continuants /ZI became the palatal stop j,
e.g., ajati, jñu-, jmal), jrayal), jvalati. Immediately before stops, however,
j does not'occur in Indo-Aryan. Since the evidence ofIndo-Iranian points
to the former existence of a phoneme /i/, parallel to /s/, *vii-bhyas must
have existed in proto-Indo-Iranian, as *vispati- did. In Indo-Aryan voiced
sibilants and hushed sounds were never preserved in this position. Per-
haps, therefore, /i/ was dropped in *viibhyas in proto-Indo-Aryan.
However that may be, it is clear that in the stems in s,j, and h the stem
was replaced by the nominative sing. 68 before the endings -bhil) and
-bhyab. Hence it is that digbhil),69 digbhyál) (AS. 3 VS. 6) are the forms
corresponding to the nomo sing. dík, whereas vicjbhíl) RS. 1, vicjbhyál)
AS. 1 (RS. Khila) are those corresponding to the nomo sing. vif. In trus
way the parallelism between
vít, gen. vis-áb : vicjbhil), vicjbhyál)
and
dvít, gen. dvi~-ál) : dvicjbhib, dvic¿/bhyaf¡
had become almost complete, the only exception being the loe. pI. vik~ú
as against dvitsu. The latter form, though not attested, it seems, before
the classicallanguage, probably dates back to a much earlier periodo The
fact that in the classicallanguage also vik$u was replaced by vitsu shows
that the tendency for paraHelism continued to operate in later times. If
prayátsu TS. VS. for prayák~u AS. indirectly proves the existence of
·prayátsu, this would be the earliest instance of this new formation.
The use of this secondary stem in t/cJ as the first member of compounds
is (except for ~át-) not found before TB. vit-pati-, AsvS. vit-kula-"house
of a Vaisya". Some more instances are attested from Manu onwards:
prlicj-vivaka-"judge" (for which the earlier language uses prasnaviwlká-
VS.), vit-pavya-. The Mahdbhiirata has priicj-viviika-, the Riimayava
"
88 Either the original nominative form in -(s, or the stem in -f that was inferred from
t?at nOI?inative, or the later nomo in -t. The relative chronology cannot be determined
smce thlS must have happened in the prehistoric periodo
ID er. RS. susa,h-dfgbhi~.
399
120 F. B. J. KUIPER
furrushes vit-súdra-,70 and Kalidasa has vüj-ojas- (beside virjaujas-, which
is not morphological1y clear). SimilarIy parivrá{- in compounds (GalJa-
páfha), from parivráj- which itself is not attested before the epics.
7. An analogous phenomenon is well known from the 2 and 3 sing. ofthe
s-aorist and the root infiection. The forms attested in the Rígveda are the
following:
2 sing.: s-aorist (for *-as+s-s), from the root yaj- the injunctive form
ya( 1 (but indicative ayal,z 2); from the root vah- the indicative form
ávli( 1. From the root aorist (for *-as-s) tina{ (lina!) 2 from the root naso.
3 sing.: s-aorist (for *-as+s-t) aprlit 1 (root prs-), like asrli( MS. from
srj- (but RS. asrlik 2, like adrlik from drs- in the Brahma1J.as).71 Root
forros of bhrlij-, raj- and nas-: ábhra{ 2, rtit 1, tina{ (anat) 24, abhí naf 1
(but pralJak 4).
In these cases the regular ending would have been -k (from -*k,l'[s]) in
the 2 sing., but -a,l' (for *-~{) in the 3 sing. Of this original situation no
traces are left. The ending of the 3 sing., with final -$ after a, could not
remain intact, since the rule& of Sanskrit do not allow the occurrence of
this final consonant in this position. In the 2 sing. -k might have been
preserved but here a tendency for c1arity caused the personal ending -s to
be over-emphasized. The whole course of events can be reconstructed as
follows:
1) Owing to the need of emphatic articulation of the personal ending -s
in the 2 sing. the root could not be maintained in its inherited form with k
befo re s, but was pronounced with voice1ess palatal s before s. lt is un-
likely, however, that in the s-aorist such a pre-form like *ayak$-s has at
any time be en replaced by *ayas+s-s. Rere the ending -( of yat is rather
due to the analogy of the root forms.
2) -sos became -sts and further, in accordance with a morphophonemic
rule which dates back to proto-Indo-Iranian, -sts.
3) A fundamental change in the consonantal system of Indo-Aryan,
which is the earliest trace ofthe genesis of an lndian linguistic area, caused
*-sts to become *-$fs.
4) As the result of dissimilation *-${s became "'-{s.
5) In this final consonant cluster the -s was dropped.
This analysis of the various stages of this process gives us an insight into
their relative chronology. At sorne time the old morphophonemic rule
70 Ram. l. 6.21 in the Eastern and N.W. recensions. Cf. the critica! ed., vol. J, p. 53
(248*, 17ab).
71 See Nachtriige ad Attind. Gramm., 1, p. 174, 37.
400
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. vÍ! 121
"s+t > st" has been replaced in Indo-Aryan by "s+t > ${". It cannot be
determined whether or not the new formations of the type *abhrás-s were
anterior to the introduction ofretroflex phonemes. Apart from this detail,
the relative chronology of the various stages would seem unquestionable.
This leads to the following conclusions.
First, as Bartholomae has right1y pointed out,72 the final -f in the verbal
and nominal forms must date from a period of Indo-Aryan when lil
and lih/, representing PIE. g and gh, had not yet merged with IJI and
IJh/, the results of a particular PIl. palatalization of PIE. g, g" and gh,
g"h.· Secand, the further development inevitably presupposes the intro-
duction of a new series of retroflex phonemes, which again can only have
taken place after proto-Indo-Aryan had come to be spoken in the Indian
linguistic area. Third, aH developments must have taken place at a time
when final consonant clusters had not yet lost their last components.
Not befo re the ending of the 2 sing. had become a single -! could this
ending also be adopted for the 3 sing., in accordance with the general
formal identity of these two forms after the simplification of final clusters.
The conclusion resulting from this analysis of the historical process is,
accordingly, the very opposite ofWackernagel's.73
EXCURSUS ON BURROW'S THEORY OF PIE. TK < Skt. K$
In the introductory section it was pointed out that the problem under
discussion, a1though of minor importance when taken by itself, has sorne
consequences for problems of much wider interest. Orre of these is
Burrow's theory of the origin of those Indo-European words for which
the traditional Comparative Grammar used to posit such phonemes as
*kjJ, *ghO, *gUhO, etc. Since his theory seems to have found more or les s
~e~eral acceptance, it may be useful to summarize the main objections to
1t, In so far as they are implied in the preceding article. An exhaustive
critical analysis of this theory is not, however, aimed ato
Burrow's interpretation of the evidence is to be found in two articles in
JAOS, 79 (1959), pp. 85-90, resp. pp. 255-262. In thefirst article he
studies the words commonly supposed to represent sorne modification of
PIE. palatals (*kjJ and ghO or *k 8 and *gh Z), in the second a few words
with a PIE. labiovelar ("'gUhO). Since the conclusions of my article have
7. ZDMG, 50 (1896), p.709
73 See Attind. Gramm., 1, (1896), p. 174. As for the 3 sing. Wackernagel's reserve
should be noted: "In der 3. scheint -{ aus ~f: ig. -k(s)tlautgesetzlich".
401
122 F. B. J. KUIPER
a bearing on the first ofhis artic1es only, 1 shall here mainly confine myself
to this one. Burrow's argument is as follows:
1) It should not be taken for granted that the ~ in Skt. fk~a- "bear"
stand s for PIE. sor p, since in Ved. k~umánt-, Av. ¡sumant- "possessing
cattle" Skt. k~u- stands for PIl. *psu- (from PIE. *pku-). In other words,
s
PIl. (from PIE. k) can be represented, under eertain conditions, by ~.
2) Skt. k in k~ derives not only from the three PIE. guttural series but
also from "the internal sandhi of ~+s". It follows that Burrow explains
dvek$i as the result of a phonetic development. It is not c1ear, however, if
he considers this the only regular development or rather a sporadic
development, by the side of haví~$u. This is a problem which he do es not
discuss.
3) On the other hand, in vít and dvít, which he takes to stand for *víf~
and *dvít~, the combinations s+s and ~+s are represented by t~ (> t).
From this fact he conc1udes that U was the earlier stage of k~, dvek$i
having passed through a stage *dve($i. The development ~s > t~ is said
to be paralle1 to Skt. ss> ts, where "the first s is replaced by the corre-
sponding (dental) occ1usive". In quite the same way the word fk~a- (Av.
arsa-) is explained from *rt~a-. In final position -t~ lost its last component
before t~ became k~. Only in cases like -dfk "the change took place earlier
so as to affect the group even in final position".
4) "The S, ~ seen in Av. fsumant-, Skt. k~umánt- is an instance of a
widespread tendency in Tndo-Iranian to replace the palatal series (s, i, ih)
by the cacuminal or cerebral sibilants when these palatals were in contact
with other consonants. Similar examples are Seen in Av. sas'Kustama-
"who understands best" (sak-), Av. viziby6, Skt. vitjbhyás< *vi;bhyas
(vís-), Skt. cak~- "to see" (kas-), Av.frasna- "question" (but Skt.prasna-)."
5) In this way Skt. fk~a- "bear" can be explained from *rt~a- < *rtsa- <
PIE. *Hrtko-, and similarly Skt. k~am- "earth" from *t~am- < *tsam- <
*diham- < PIE. *dhghom-.
As far as 1 can see, the first four points do not justify the conc1usion
drawn sub 5. They will be discussed separately.
As for the first point it should be observed that PIE. *kuk regularly be-
carne *kS in proto-Indo-Iranian, as is shown by the root extension PIE.
*kuk-eH-, which became xsii- in Avestan, and ksii- in Vedic. This is
almost exclusive1y attested in the Maitriiya1)iya Sarhhitii, viz. aksat 1. 8.9,
Il. 1.4 (ef. also MiiS. III. 3.6, VI. 1, 1; 15). In the other Vedas it is re-
placed by khyii-, but in KS. 7.10 (p. 72, 2) anuksiityai - anu vii akhyan
the older form is still used side by side with the later dialectal form. ef.
also 19.2 (p. 2, 20). Only in a few corrupt variant readings k$ is found for
402
THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. vít 123
khy (rather than for the original form with kM-), cf. KS. 4.2 (p. 30,
16) avak~at for avakhyat, 16.10 (p. 231, 18) ak~ar for akhyad (but 16.9:
p. 230, 20 akhyar). Inversely, the same text sometimes reads khy for
k~, cf. 13.16 (p. 199, 8), akhyabhi/,l, V. 1. for ak~abhi/,l. See also IIJ, IX
(1966), p. 222.
The case of k~umánt- is different because the proto-Indo-Iranian form
must still have been *psu-mant-. In proto-Iranian *ps seems to have
merged with *ps into *fs, cf. PIl. *nap(t)su > Av. nafsu, and PIl. *psu- >
Av.flumant-, modo Persian suhiin "herdsman".74 In Indo-Aryan the fol-
lowing róunded vowel plus m caused the preceding labial p to be dissi-
milated, just as in *ploman- (Greek 1tA.SÚllcov), which became klóman-
"the right lung". Similarly after the labial phonemes pu- in *puru-psu-
"possessing (or, consisting of) many cattle", which became puru-k~ú-.
In this comparatively late and specifically Indo-Aryan development *ks-
was replaced by the current combination k~. Although it is impossible
to give a fully satisfactory explanation of the ~ in this isolated case of
normalization, this much seems certain that it cannot be a basis on which
to found such general statements as Burrow did. Skt. ~ does not stand
s
for except before t (where it reflects a PII. development).
Burrow's second thesis to the effect that dvek~i represents a phonetic
development ~+s >k~ seems to disregard Ved. haví~~u and ávive/,l. If he
has not actually overlooked these counter-instances he must have meant
a "sporadic" phonetic law (see below, sub 4). Since he do es not mention
Wackernagel's analogical explanation, his reasons for his silent rejection
of a generally accepted theory are not c1ear. In the absence of any argu-
mentation it is difficult to see what may have induced Burrow to sub-
stitute for Wackernagel's theory a novel one, for which little support can
be found in the evidence.
From the third thesis it must be inferred, although this is not explicitly
stated, that both Skt. k~ and Av. s derive from *t~. If this is correct,
Burrow attributes t~ to the phonemic system of proto-Indo-Iranian.
However, the assumption of a retroflex phoneme ! in PIl. lacks any
foundation, and the additional assumption of a retroflex ~, allophone of s
after the retroflex {, is not even supported by the evidence of Sanskrit.
See aboye, p. 104. These assumptions, ill-founded in themselves neces-
sitate the further assumption of different chronological stages 'for the
change *t~>k~ in -drk on the one hand, and in víf on the other, which
adds a new complication to the theory.
As for the last thesis, Burrow's rather vague reference to "a v.idespread
76 Bartholomae, GrlrPhil., 1, 1 (1895), pp. 11, 13.
403
124 F. B. J. KUIPER THE SANSKRIT NOM. SING. vít 125

tendency" involuntarily evokes reminiscences of the long-forgotten and urva-f-caém 80 , arana-f-caésa- 81 ; (b) before b :fra-o-baoye, vi-o-baoye,
notion of "sporadic sound laws". Burrow is, indeed, quite aware of the GAv. dabqz- (: LAv. bqz-, Skt. bamh-)82; (c) before k: jkaésa-, vi-j-kaésa-.
fact that he is not dealing here with a "normal" phonetic law. The From the viewpoint of Avestan text tradition there is, accordingly, no
tendency is supposed to have left just sorne occasional traces, sometimes reason to propound a different explanation for the d in dajij.arata- than
only in Iranían but not in Indo-Aryan. In fact, none of the examples for the other cases with o before palatals, like vi-o-caista-, and to reject
quoted can support the assumption of a change s> s before consonants silently the interpretation of the spelling daj- for j- given by Geldner,
in the widest sense of the word. Av. saskustama-, which contains the Bailey, and Karl Hoffmann. 83 Nor would the traditional equation of
perf. ptc. of the root sak- (Skt. sak-) probably stand s for *sa-sk-uS-. Un- Skt. k$ar-, Pkt. jhar- with Av. yiar- seem to be invalidated by the new
like Bartholomae 75 1 think sask- is rather due to the influence of the preso theory which, though testifying to its author's acumen, is nonetheless un·
ptc. sasqs (Geldner saxsqs). The present sasaiti « *sacyati) may also acceptablé.
account for the perfect preterite sa-sk-an. For Av. viiibyo see aboye,
p. 118. The brief reference to "Skt. cak$- 'to see' (kás-)" seems to imply
that Burrow accepts the theory which explains cak$- as the reduplicated
perfect stem ca-k$-. In spite of Leumann's tempting analysis of the noun
cák$u$- "eye" as the stem of perf. ptC.,76 this is, 1 am afraid, impossible
because of Av. caSman- "eye", which shows the root cas- to be an s-present
of Av. kas- (ákasaj "he noticed, perceived").77 As for Av.frasna- "ques-
tion" by the si de of yasna- (with s, root yaz-), it has long been recognized
that this is not an instance of a sporadic phonetic development but rather
a dialectal (more particularly, S. W. Iranian) form; cf. OP. vasna-. 78
It must be stated, accordingly, that none of the four theses upon which
Burrow's explanation of Skt. fk$a- and k$ám- is based would seem to
stand a critical examination. Therefore, it is impossible to derive these
words from PIE. *Hftko- and *dhghóm- in the way proposed. Since these
critical remarks are confined to the Indo-Iranian evidence, 1 can only
incidental1y point out that also the thesis of a phonetic development
kt >ks in Latin (Burrow, p. 88) is open to grave objections. So the ex-
planation of Lat. ursus from PIE. *Hftko-, which is based on this thesis,
lacks a solid foundation.
A single remark may be added on the second article, which gives an
ingenious explanation of GAv. dJjiJ.arata- (LAv. jiJ.asa-) and GAv.
dJjámáspa- (: LAv.jámáspa-). However, Burrow omits to mention that
this explanation iso lates these two words from the other words where lI1l Geldner, Studien zum Avesta, 1 (1882), p. 55.
d and J are found 79 (a) befo re palatals: vi-o-coista-, superlative of vi-cira-, 81 er. B. Geiger, Die Amasa Sprmtas (1916), p. 217 D. 1, Kuiper, Acta Or., 12 (1934),
p. 280 D. 2, Humbach, MSS, 2 (1952), p. 10 n. 13, P.Thieme, Mitra ami Aryaman (1957),
15 Arische Forschungen, II (1886), p. 52f., GrlrPhil., 1,1, pp. 17,92, A/tiran. Wb. col. p. 53 n. 39, Gershevitch, The Avestan Hymn lo Mithra (1959), p. 186.
1553. ' SI Spiegel, Commentar über das Avesta, 1 (1865), p. 300, Kuiper, Acta Or., 17 (1939),
1. Morph%gische Neuerungen im a/tindischen Verbalsystem, p. 33 [= Mededelingen p. 51, Duchesne-Guillemin, BSOS, 9 (1937-39), p. 864f., Morgenstierne, NTS, 12
Kon. Ned. Ak. v. Wetensch., Afd. Letterk., N.R., 15, 1952, p. 105]. (1940), p. 70. For LAv. dMista- see Mayrhofer, Kurzgef etym. Wb., 11, p. 513 n.
11 See Acta Or., 12 (1934), p. 243. 88 See Geldner, op.c., p."" 54 ("ungenaue pleonastische Schreibung"), Bailey, Zoro-
18 See Meillet-Benveniste, Grammaire du vieux-perse, p. 71 f. astrian Prob/ems in the Ninth-cenlury Books (1943), p. 191 (j = dtbroken up by a vowel),
19 Bartholomae, GrlrPhil., 1, 1, p. 158. K. Hoffmann, lranistik, 1 (1958), p. 11.

404 405

F. B. J. KUIPER
VI DAY ATE AND VIDATHA-
J/1 memory of
Acharya Dr. Vishva Bal1dhu.
1. There are in Sanskrit at least six different verbal roots da-o Since
this fact is not sufficiently recognized, it may be useful to preface this
study by a brief survey of these roots, arranged according to the three
laryngeals *HI *H2 and *H3 which are contained in them. The first is da-
« to bind" (present, á, ní, sál1l, -dyati), as it stands for PIE. *deH I-. The
next root, da- « to cut off (plants) ", present dati, is only tentatively put
in the second place as it is impossible to determine, on the basis of non-
Indo-Iranian evidence, which laryngeal it contains. Johanna Narten, Die
Sprache 14 (1968) p. 130, has rightly pointed out that this verb is different
from 3.da- « to divide, separate ", present lÍva dyati, aorist avádat. As for
this verb, its root must be reconstructed as PIE. *deHr , on account of
Greek *arxúu « to divide" (in Hom. ade:'t'OCL ~'t'op cte.), a~(J.or;, Doric aiX(J.oc:
«district, country, Iand », &.aoc't'or;· OCaLOC(pE't'Or; (undividcd) Hcsychius, amI
perhaps of M'Jor; «gift, present, loan, debt )l. The fourth root occurs in
the Vedic present dáyate « to distribute ». Traditionally 3.da- and 4.da- are
considered to be one and the same root. However, even the idea of a
remo te etymological relationship in Proto-Indo-European is not suppor-
ted by the evidence and in Sanskrit, at any rate, the presents -dyati and
dáyate must be considered separate verbs. The fifth root dlÍ- « to pursue,
chase, treat as an enemy)l has been detected in SV. JB abhidati, RS.
abhidasati l. If Greek (j~w (from *das8) « to find, meet with » is a cognate,
the PIE. root is again *deHr . The sixth root is the well-known da- « to
give» (present dádati, aorist ádat) from PIE. *deH3-. As for 7.da «to
c1ear », it is not necessary for our present purpose to enter into details.
1. See JOHANNA NARrEN, KZ. 78 (1963), p. 56ff., Die sigmatischen Aoriste im Veda
(Wiesbaden 1964), p. 140.
406
122 F. B. J. Kuiper
See PW., Whitney, Roots, p. 72, and Mayrhofer, Kurzgefasstes etymolo-
gisches Worterbuch n, p. 35. Since its etymology is unknown, it is here
quoted as an addendum.
From the present stems quoted it appears that homophony is rare:
the various verbs are not only differentiated by their present fol'mations
but to sorne extent also by their verbal pl'efixes.
In other Indo-European languages diffel'ent formations from the
corresponding roots are met with. In this connection attention may be
drawn to two es-presents. The Indo-Iranian instances of this formation
were studiéd forty years ago, on the basis of a l'emal'k of Holgel' Peder-
sen's, in Acta Orientalia 12 (1934), p. 190ff. At that time it was impossible
to explain the diffel'ence between the l'econstructed pl'esents in *-és-mi
on the hand and Ved. sás-ti, 3 pI. sás-ati on the other, the latter of which
seemed to have no ablaut. Johanna Narten has since shown that sás-ti:
sás-ati is a proterodynamic present and stands for *sáHs-ti: *sáHs-ati 2.
Since, on the other hand, Old Persian oatiy, oadiy and Avestan satar-
prove that sasti is an s-present, the proterodynamic present *keH-s-ti
can be contrasted with the -és-presents, which have zero grade of the root
vowel but full grade of the morpheme -és- and are, accordingly, hystero-
dynamic presents.
The latter type is actually met with in Greek. The root *deH¡- «to
bind, tie, fetter », is here represented by a reduplicated present (j(j't)(J.L
and by Mw, which apparently stand s fol' *dHI-és-mi, cf. (jEO'[J.6r; «band,
bond ». Since the morpheme -és- was originally a specific characteristic
of the present stem, the future (j~O'w and the aorist ~(j"l]CJCI. are derived
directly fmm the root. OriginalIy they must have been paradigmaticalIy
connected with the rcduplicated root prcscnt, as in 1t!(J.7'Ckl)[J.~: ~7'CA't)CJOC.'
The Greek cognate of 4.da- « to distribute», present dáyate, is also
an és-present, viz. *dH2-és-/*dH2-s- in (jo:(o[J.CI.~ (for *das-yo-mai) « to distrib-
ute », (jO:CJ(J.6<; « division of spoil, tribute, etc », MCJ(J.O:'C'O: • (J.e:p(O'(J.oc'C'o: Hes.
In this case the aorist is formed on the basis of the (prehistoric) present
stem, viz. E;(jOCCJO'tÍ(J.'t)'J. The non-extended root is extant in the denominative
present (jCl.'t'€o[J.GU « to distribute », which has been derived from the past
participle (joc'C'6r;. The current explanation of the Greek verb forms 3 is
plainly incorrect and should be revised.
2. Vedic (ví) dayate « to distribute» stands for *dH2-éy-e-toi. As we
have seen, its formation is different from that of Greek (jOC(O(J.Cl.L with
2. See Pratidanam, p. 15.
3. See e.g., WILHELM SCHULZE, Kleine Schriften (Gottingen 1966), p. 350, n. 1,
HJ. FRISK, Griechisches etymologisches Warterbuch 1 (Heidelberg, [1957-]1963), p. 341f.
407
 Ví dayate and vidálha- 123
which it is usually considered identical. Since -ay- is a morpheme of the
present stem, the aorist must have been formed direct from dilo. While no
forms with vi-dil- are attested in Vedic, in Gatha-Avestan there occurs a
noun vidilti- « assigning of shares » (Y 31.19, 47.6). It is particularly inte-
resting because of Vedic dati-, which will be discussed below 4.
Before examining, however, the problern of the aorist of dáyate, let
me first illustrate the use of dáyate by quoting sorne passages from the
Rigveda:
a) without ví
1.10.6 índro vásu dáyamilnah, I.68.6 (Agni) yás túbhymh dasad yó vii te
síksat tásmai cikitviÍn rayím' dayasva, I.130.7 (Indra) mahó dhánilni dáya-
ma'na ójasil, vísvil dhánany ójasa, II.13.6 (Indra) yó bhójanarh ca dáyase
ca várdhanam, V.49.3 adatrayá dayate váryéi1:zi pü~a blzágo áditir, VII.16.7
yé maghávano jánilnam ürvan dáyanta gónilm 5, VII.21.7 índro maghani
dayate vi~áhyé 'ndram wijasya johuvanta siltaú, VIl.8.4.4 (VaruIfa-Indra)
prá vá adityó ánrtil mináty dmita suro dayate wíSÜ11l, VIIl.2.31 (Indra)
vája;h élw vájrahastaJ:t, sanád ámrkto dayate, VIlI.103.6 .(A~ni) ló vísva
dáyate vásu hóta mandró jánanam, X.147.S (Indra) pttvo na dasma
dayase vibhaktá.
b) with ví
1.84.7 (Indra) yá éka íd vidáyate vásu mártaya dasú~e, IH.2.U (AgnO
vaisvilnaráh prthupája ámartyo vásu rátnil dáyamano ví dasú~e, VI.37.4
(Indra) vá~i~tho asya dák~i1:zam iyart! 'ndro maghónam tuvikürmítamaJ:t,'
yáya vajrivaJ:t pariyásy ámho maghá ca dhr~l.1o dáyase ví sürtn, VII.23.4
(Indra) tváliz !ti dhI/Jhír dáyase ví vájiIl1, VII.37.2 (Visve DevaJ:¡) ví no
rtidlliililsi matí/Jl1ir dayadhvam (cf. 23.4), IX, 90.2 (Soma) vánli vásüllo
várutw ná síndhün vi ratnadM dayate váryéZl:zi, X.23.1 (Indra) ví sénü-
bhir dáyamáno ví rádhasil.
In these passages the following words occur as objects of dáyate:
magh,t(ni), vásu, vásüni, vásu rátnil, dhánani, rayím, rádhümsi, vctjiln
and váryilni (apart from those in II.13.6 and VH.16.7, which passages
have a special character). Sorne of these words are also sometimes (but
not frequently) the object of dádilti « to give », e.g., vásüni, vásu, vájam
and rayím. Most of them, however, including váryam, váryiltti, occur as
the object of the verbal forms dilti, diltu, e.g., V.48.S yáto bhágaJ:t savitá
dáti váryam (cf. iti the following hymn V.49.3 dayate váryill,1i pÜ$á bhágo
áditir), VII.1S.11 bhágas ca di1tu váryam, 12 devás ca savitá bhágaJ:t,
4. LAv. vi13iifu- «decomposition, dissolution» seems to be related to Vedic
ava-dyati «to separate" and has, therefore, been left out of consideration.
S. For dayanta see KARL HOFFMANN, Der lnjunktiv im Veda (Heidelberg 1967),
p. 258, n. 296.
408
124 F. B. J. Kuiper
dítis ca dilti váryam, VII.42.4 (Agni) sá visé dati váryam, V1.24.2 viljt stutó
vidáthe dilti vájam, IV.8.3 (Agni) dáti priyá~1i cid vásu. Since in all these
passages the form dliti is used without the verbal prefix ví, one may
hesitate to which of the roots 4.dil- and 6.dil- it should be assigned.
Geldner clearly formulates the problem in a note on his translation of
1.10.7. He here draws attention not only to the object váryam but also
to the past participle -data- in tvá-dilta- and to the verbal nouns -dilti-
(in havyádi1ti-, dátivilra-) and dátu-. From these various forms he infers
that dilti is a root present of dü- « to distribute », which is synonymous
with day-. Actually, however, as we have seen, dayate is the very present
of this root and dilti must accordingly be interpreted as the subjunctive
of the aorist (see above V.48.S: 49.3). As for the verbal noun -dliti-,
Geldner's explanation is confirmed by Avestan vidi1ti-, which has indeed
the verbal prefix that often characterizes dayate in the Veda.
The correctness of the assumption that dilti is a subjunctive form
is, it seems, proved by a parallel form in Gatha-Avestan. In Zarathustra's
idiom injunctive forms of the type dilt can still be distinguished from
subjunctive forms such as dilti, because the former stood for *daHt and
were monosyllabic, whereas the latter stood for *daH-ati. Although the
Vulgate text reads dilití [dati] with contraction, the metre shows unequiv-
ocally that Zarathustra still pronounced a hiatus [a'a]. Such a forro
occurs in Y. S1.6bc
. . . . . . . at ahmili akilt asya
y:J Mi nait vidilitl ap:Jme anMus urvaese
which may, in a rough reconstruction of Zarathustra's language, be tran-
scribed as follows:
. . . . . . . .. ilt ah mili aküt asyah
yah hai ltait vida'ati apamai ahaus vraisai 6
« blll lhe worse than bad lo him who will not distribute to him at tho
last turning-point of the world». As this reconstruction shows, Bartho-
lomae's interpretation of vidiliti as a subjunctive of vid- « dienend ehren »
(Altiran. Worterbuch, col. 1320) is phonetically impossible. An additional
objection is that Vedic vidh-, on which Bartholomae based his assump-
tion of Avestan vid-, is certainly not of Proto-Indo-Iranian origin 7.
Hanns-Petel," Schmidt has long since right1y explained vidiliti as a subjunc-
tive: « wer ihm nicht verteilen sollte» 8. He, however, connected vi-dil-
with Vedic vi-dha-. More probably the Avestan form [vida/ati] is the
counterpart to Vedic dilti, with the verbal prefix added which is omitted
in Vedic. In that case the two verbal forms Av. vidilia and Ved. dilti can
be paralleled with the verbal nouns Gathic vidilti-: Vedic dáti-.
6. For the decision to write vr-, rather than rv-, see IIJ. 8, p. 76, n. 3.
7. For Vedic vidh- as the result of a specific Indian development see PAUL
THIEME, Untersuchungen zur lVortkunde und Auslegung des Rigveda (HallefSaale
1949), p. 36 and KARL HOFFMANN, Die Sprache 15 (1969), pp. 1-7.
8. See IIJ. 1, p. 167.
409
 Ví dayate and vídátha· 125
For the occurrence of an active aorist diiti by the side of the middle
present dáyate in the Rigveda d. pádyate: padiiti, vártate: ávrtat,
syándate: ásyiin. See Delbrück, Altindische Syntax, p. 235.
3. Middle aorist forms are, however, also attested. They occur by the
side of the Yajurvedic present (nír) avadayate « to give (Rudra or another
god) his share in order to get rid of him, to appease, satisfy». Seman-
tically this verb is clearly parallel to ava-yaj- « to get rid of, or remove, by
means of a sacrifice». In the Rigveda avadayate is only attested in the
aorist form in IIJ3.5 áva stómebhi rudrá1il di$iya, which Geldner trans-
lates « ich mochte den Rudra mit Lobliedern abfinden ». Grassmann listed
the form under dii- «to give » but Geldner (ad locum) right1yremarks:
« ava-dii, nir-ava-day ist das Verb für die Abfindung bes. des Rudra durch
Opfer» (with quotations from the Yajurveda). Apart from the fact that
Geldner, as we have seen, failed to recognize the identity of his roots dii-
and day-, he was no doubt fully right in referring áva di$iya to avadayate.
In the Yajurveda forms of a root aorist occur in áva rudrám adimahi
(VS.), áviimba rudrám adimahi (MS. KS. TS.), which are the middle coun-
terparts to Rigvedic diiti discussed above. Besides ava ... adiistha is attes-
ted in ApGS. These fonns, and their relation to the s-aorist, are amply
discussed by Johanna Narten, Die sigmatischen Aoriste im Veda, p. 138ff.
However, like PW. III, col. 578, she does not keep them separated from
ávadyati, aor. avádiit (3.da-) «to separate ». Not only is this semantically
and formally different from avadayate but the verbal prefix has a differenf
meaning as well: in áva-dyati it means «(to separa te one thing) from
another », whereas in avadayate it means « (to give a share to a god in
order to remove him) from oneself ». The same dilTerence of relation to
the subject is found in Latin de-seciire «to cut 01T» versus de-precllri
«to pray that a thing may not happen», Greek &7to-'d[Lve:w versus
&7t-e: ÓXe:cr8OCL, German ab·schneiden versus ab-bitten. While Roth, PW. III,
col. 519, rightly recognized the same verb in AS. XVI.7.11 tásmiid enam
áva daye «from that 1 try to avert him », Whitney ignored Roth's inter-
pretation and translated «from that do 1 cut him off», which is for
formal reasons impossible.
Another compound of dáyate occurs in AS. XIX.57.6 (5) dU$vápnya1il
sárvarh dvi$até nír dayiimasi « we give away all our evil-dreaming to him
who hates us ». Cf. XVI.7.8 iimu$yiiym:zé ... du-?vápnyarh mrje «on him of
such·and-such lineage 1 wipe off (my) evil-dreaming ».
Most of the passages for which Roth (l.c.) assumed a semantic devel-
opment « zutheilen» > «als seinen Theil haben, besitzen» (Grassmann:
«verfügen über») are now interpreted in a different way. There remain
one or two passages which, as far as 1 can see, are still obscure. In IIJ3.
410
126 F. B. J. Kuiper
10 árhann idárh dayase vísvam ábhvam the translations stick to the tradi-
tional interpretation: Geldner rendered in the first edition « mit Fug und
Recht besitzest du diese ganze Riesenerscheinung» (d. Vedische Studien
3, p. 119) but in the second« mit Fug und Recht verfügst du über all diese
Gewalt », and Renou, Etudes védiques et pii¡:zinéennes 15, p. 41, has
« posséder par répartition ». This leaves us with a semantic crux, just as
in I.120.3 prárcad dáyamiino yuváku1;z «ayant des parts a lui allouées »
(EVP. 16, p. 22). Neither the formula «posséder par répartition», nor
«zur Verteilung bereit machen» > «verfügen über» (Grassmann) does
actually explainhow a meaning « distribute » can develop into «possess ».
Perhaps dayase in II.33.10 means « thou destroyest » (as Oldenberg, Noten
ad VII.100.1 suggests), but this is not a meaning one would expect in
connection with árhan. It does, however, suit the object ábhvam and
Renou, EVP. 15, p. 159, translates accordingly « tu ~étruis ».
For VH.100.1 ná márto dayate sani.~yán yó ví-?¡:zava urugiiyáya dasat
most diverse interpretations have been proposed: «Reue empfinden»
(Roth, Grassmann), «wird belohnt (?)>> (Geldner), «wird zunichte (?) »
(Oldenberg). The fact that the metre invites to scan da'iyate does not help.
Oldenberg refers without any comment to MS. IV.13.8 (210,5), KS. XIX.13
(16,3) návena párvarh dáyamiinii1;z syáma purii¡:zéna návam (= rak-?anta1;z,
kusüliidi-?u sthiipayanta1;z, comm. on TB. III.6.13.1, but d. also dáyamiine
VS. 28.16, VSK. 30.16, TB. II.6.10J).
4. While diiti « to cut off » is generally (but wrongly) connected with
dyati « to divide, separate», and the latter again with dáyate, we have
actually to do with three different verbs. To make confusion worse
confounded, there occurs in the Rigveda another present dáyate «to
destroy » which al so optionally takes the verbal prefix ví and in formal
rcspect cannot be distinguished from (vi) dayate «to distributc». Thc
following quotations from the Rigveda may illustrate its use:
VI.6.5 k-?lltír agnér durvártur bhimó dayate vániini, X.80.2 agnír
vrtrá¡:zi dayate puráni and, with ví: HI.34.1 (Indra) vidádvasur dáyamiino
ví sátrün, IV.7.10 (Agni) sthirá cid ánnii dayate ví jámbhai{l, VI.22.9
dhi-?vá vájrarh dák-?i¡:za indra háste, vísvii ajurya dayase ví mllyá1;z. See
also Geldner, Glossar, p. 79 for TB. II.8.8.2 kó mám ánnarh manu$Yo
dayeta.
This verb has generally been regarded as identical with (ví) dayate
« to distribute ». Cf., e.g., Roth and Grassmann S.V. day-, Renou, EVP. 15,
pp. 4lf. 159, who assumes «assigner, répartir> mettre en pieces» and
«'détruire', d'apres ví-day-» respectively. Similarly Mayrhofer vol. II,
p. 21. For Wilhelm Schulze's divergent opinion see below. It should be
noted that virtually all attemps to explain the alleged identity of the
two verbs are based upon a-confusion of 3.dii- and 4.dii-: they start from
a meaning « to divide », which is supposed to have developed into «de-
stroy ». In fact, áva dyati « to divide» is an entirely different verbo The
411
 Vi dayate and vidátha- 127
real problem is whether in the text a semantic link can be found be-
tween « to distribute» and « to destroy». This, however, does not existo
There are, besides, reasons to suppose that dáyate «to destroy»
represents an entirely different type of formation. Pal)ini VI.4.63 gives
a rule concerning a root dI (present dIyate) , which according to the
Dh1Uupatha has the meaning k$aye « zu Grunde gehen» (PW. lII,
col. 641). With this verb dIyate Bohtlingk (l.c.) connected dilUí- « scarce,
scanty, weak, feeble, miserable, wretched». Although this word is
seemingly isolated in Sanskrit, it cannot well be analyzed in any other
way but as dI+ná-, a verbal adjective from a root dIo, and in view of Skt.
k$IIJa-, Greek &A()(,rt()(,3v6~ « weak », the derivation from dI- « to destroy » is
semantically quite possible. If so, dIyate stands for *diH-ye-toL Only in
passing it may be observed that AS. XlI.4,3 kaIJáya dIyate svám can be
interpreted as « by a one-eyed (cow) his possessions are ruined» but
since dIyate may be a eorruption of jiyate (ASPaipp. XVlI.16.3) it has no
evidential value. Whitney's and Bloomfield's interpretations of the pas-
sage are improbable.
Long ago it has been pointed out that dIná- can as well be connected
with Ved. dáyate « to destroy» and further with Greek 3EtA6~ « vile,
worthless, miserable, wretched» 9. As Wilhelm Sehulze has shown, in all
but three of the Homeric oeeurrenees * 3EEA6~ can be read for 3EtA6~. His
explanation of 3EtA6~ from *dwey-e16s, however, cannot be eorrect. Frisk,
who euriously still sticks to it lO, did not eonsider, first, that the meaning
« eowardly », virtually only post-Homerie and mostly attested in Attie,
has obviously developed from « vile», instead of the other way round
(ef. the similar development in x()(,x6~); second that Homer 3EtM~, in
eontrast with 3e:tv6~, shows no trace of an oId initial cluster [dw]: in
E 574 -rw (L€V &p()(, ·3Ee:AW the long last syIlable of &p()(, should be explai-
ned as in Úrte:LP rlA()(" lpdo(LEV (Chantraine, Grammaire homériqtle, p. 101);
and third, that -eye- has been eontraeted in pre-Homerie Greek -rpe:~~'
xdvo~ so that *3e:EAO~ must stand for *deiH¡-16s, with the same repre-
sentation of the laryngeal as in Hom. ye:VETI¡ 11.
From this analysis it follows that dáyate« to destroy» stands for PIE.
*déiH1-e-toi. In morphological respect, aceordingly, it is entirely differ-
9. See Kuiper, ZII. 8 (1931), p. 251ft ef. BOHTLINGK, PW. IJI, col. 645 «Das Wort
wird als partic. von der sonst unbelegten Wurzel 4. di angesehen" and col. 642
sub 4. di- «zu Grunde gehen» (with a reference to PaQ.ini 8.2.45), and WHITNEY, The
Roots, Verb-Iorms and primary Derivatives 01 the Sanskrit Language (Leipzig 1885),
p. 72, where diná- is Usted under 3. dil, di «bind ».
10. See FRISK, Griechisches etymologisches WorterllUch 1, p. 367. ~
11. See in general R.S.P. BEEKES, Tite Development 01 the PIE. Laryngeals in
Greek, p. 228f., who, however, does not discuss lleLA6~.
412
128 F. B. J. Kuiper
ent from dáyate « to distribute », which must be analyzed as *dHréy-e-toi.
The present diyate, still known to Pál)ini, apparently outlived the Rig-
vedic form dáyate and is the corresponding passive form *diH-ye-toi.
That in the Rigveda dáyate itself could function as a passive (Oldenberg,
Noten n, p. 66 n. 1) is most unlikely. AIso the proposed connection with
Greek M'I)'t'()(,t 12 must given up.
In conclusion a few words must be said about the hapax ádyu- in VII.
34.12 ádyum kn10ta sá1'nSan1 ninits6J:¡. Its meaning is uncertain but Geld-
ner translates «. machet die (üble) Rede des Tadelsüchtigen unsch1id-
lieh! » and refers to Avestan aidyu-, to whích he also assigns the meaning
« unschiidlich, harrnlas ». Geldner's transIation malees gaod sense in the
Vedic and Avestan passages, much more so than « sans éc1at» (Renou,
EVP. 4, p. 93), which does not fit the Avestan passages. A1though Geldner
presented his interpretation with sorne diffidence, apparently because he
eouldnot give an etymologícal justifieation for it, it has since been poin-
ted out that á-dy-u-, if actually meaning « harmless », can be connected
with dáyate «to destroy» and diná- 13. If so, the Vedic word has lost
íts laryngeal in eomposition, in accordance with the general rule 14, but
Avestan aidyu- (for 'ka-diH-u-) must have been trisyllabic in the Gathic
dialecto
5. A third present ddyate « to pity» is remarkably rare in the older
literature. Cf. RS. VII.23.5, AS. XX.12.5 (Indra) éko devatrá dáyase hí
mártan « thou alone amongst the gods pitiest the mortaIs », AS. VIII.1.5
tvlÍm mrtyúr dayatam « death shall pity thee», VIII.2.8 imálh dayasva
« pity him ». Thc carlicst occurrcnce of dayá- «pity» is in the ErlUld-
Ar.-Up., but adayá- in ~S. X.103.7 adayó víraf7. satdmanyur índraJ:¡ appa-
rently mean s « pitiless »: the variants aday6 TS., aday6 MS. are c1earIy
corruptions. The verb is mostly eonsidered identical with dáyate « to
distribute ». Cf., e.g., Mayrhofer II.20: «teilt zu, hat Anteil, nimmt Teil-
nahme, ist mitleidig», and Renou, EVP. 15, p. 42. I see no possibility of
conneeting it with dáyate «to distribute». Its rare occurrence in Vedic
(~S. X, AS.!) is rather due to stylistic reaSOl1S, since the traditional word
in the Vedic poetic idiom was mrláti. The original meaning of dáyate,
which is probably an oId verb, may have been wider. Cf. Class. Skt
dayita- «beloved » and l'ak$ati in Sáyal)a's commentaries.
12. See WILHELM SCHULZE, KZ. 29, p. 258 = Kleine Schriften, p. 363.
13. See KUIPER, Museum 59 (Leiden 1954), col. 118.
14. Lilce dbhva-, see Lingua 11, p. 225ft'. See further IIJ. 15, p. 199.
413
 ----------------------~----~
Ví dayate and vidátba- 129
6_ Agni is said to be sudátra- (VII.8.3) and suvidátra-_ This raises the
question as to whether the epithets are synonymous. As for the fonner, it
is mostly taken in the sense « well-giving » 15 and it would be attractive
to interpret the second in the same way. The deceased Fathers are called
suvidátra- (X.14.10, 15.3, cf. 17.3), which reminds us oE AS. XVIII.3.70,
. where it is said of the dead « that he may sit in Yama's abode, announ-
cing distributions of wealth (vidátha-) ') 16. As for durvidátra-, it is the
epithet of Nírrti, the detaining regressive force of nether world (X,36.2),
and of the inauspicious detaining power of « Not-giving ", Ariiti- (X.63.12).
Geldner's translation « leicht aufzufinden" and « unzugahglich " for suvi-
dátra- and durvidátra- respectively is far from self-evident. Still, Renou
follows him in rendering « agréable a trouver", respectively « funeste a
rencontrer ". In EVP. 15, p. 58, it is true, he prefers « qui donne ou distri-
bue de maniere heureuse ", but on p. 108 he returns to « agréable a trou-
ver" and in 16, p. 125 he derives suvidátra- from vid- « to find ". As far
as I can see, «well-dispensing", respectively «ill-dispensing", are the
only meanings that suit the contexto In that case Renou's dilemma « qui
donne ou distribue" can easily be solved, sínce (with the sole exception
of a variant reading in one recension of the RamayaIJa, I.13,39 Gorresio)
vi-dadati do es not occur in Sanskrit. So -vidátra- can only be derived
from ví dáyate and must be analyzed as vi-d(H)-átra-. Cf., e.g., r(H)-átna-,
dh(H)-ána-. Agni's epithet suvidátra- may accordingly be compared with
III.2.11, where the same god is said to be vásu rátna dáyamano ví dasú-?e.
7. This leads us, in conc1usion, to a consideration of vidátlza-. Conjec-
tures as to its meaning have been based on different etymologies, whith
have aptly been summarized by Minard 17: from vid- «to know", vid-
« to find", vidh- «to adore» and vidh-, vi-dlu7- «to distributc». Therc
scems now to be a con sen sus about its meaning being « distribution of
wealth» but dcrivation from vidh(a)-, a1though now gene rally accepted,
is impossible. As Max Müller, SBE. 32 (1891), p. 350, has argued with
good arguments, and Wackernagel, Altindische Grammatik I (1896), p. 128,
states as a rule, an aspirate in the root morpheme never loses its aspira-
tion before -(a)tha. Cf. prothátha-, sadhástha-, avab1zrthá- 18. This was obvi-
15. Vedic dátra- and Avestan daOra- « gift »? See WACKERNAGEL, Altindische Gram-
matik 1 (Gottingen 1896), p. S, and again HUMBACH, MSS. 2, p. 10. If tbis is correct,
dátra- cannot be explained as *dad-tra- (DEBRUNNER, Altind. Gramm. II/2, p. 170).
16. yáthá yamásya sltdana ásiitai vidáthá vádan is the reading of all editions
in accordance with the Padapátha. No doubt vidáthá 'vádan is meant.
17. BSL. 59.2 (1964), p. 52/f.
18. WACKERNAGEL, Altind. Gramm. J, pp. 125, 128, MACDONELL, Vedic Grammar,
p. 23, Renou, Grammaire védique, p. 48, mention vidátha- as the only exception of
this kind. The only argument is the authority of BARTHOLOMAE, Studien zur indoger-
manischen Sprachgeschichte, 1 (Halle a.S. 1890), p. 41, whose second instance is also
incorrecto (For ducchúná- see MANU LEUMANN, Kleine Schriften, Zürich-Stuttgart 1959,
p. 339).
414
130 F, B. J. Kuiper
ously the reason why Oldenberg, while discussing in 1900 the close
semantic connection between vidh- and vidátha-, contented himself with
the vague statement that also phoneticalIy the words can « very easily »
be connected 19, A comparison with the confident words which he had
written only three years earlier 20 shows that his reticence was of set
purpose. What he avoided c1early to say was stated explicitly by Thieme
in 1949, viz. that Oldenberg assumed a dissimilation of aspirates 21.
The meaning of vidátha- leaves Httle doubt about the origin of the
word. Thieme in his exceIlent study 22 distinguishes the following shades
of meaning: al), distribution in general; a2) distribution of prizes on the
occasion of horse-races; a3) distribution of the booty after the battle;
a4) distribution of food, drinks and presents on the occasion of enter-
tainments; b) arranging distribution, arrangement, regulation, ordinance
(<< anordnende Verteilung, Anordnung, Bestimmung ,,), Sorne of the pas-
sages which Thieme discusses under b) are certainly most difficult, prob-
ably because they contain cosmic speculations with reference to social
phenomena the exact nature of which cannot be fully grasped. In other
passages the meaning would seem simply to be « distribution». Leaving
aside the few difficult place s where the exact meaning is obscure, I think
it can be said that the meaning of vidátha- is « distribution ». It is a for-
mation of the type uc-átha- and vi-d-(H)-átha- is obviously the verbal noun
to ví dayate « to distribute ».
Although this will not considerably alter Thieme's interpretation of in-
dividual passages, it may c1ear the way for a better understanding of the
basic problem. What indeed remains to be determined is the exact nature
of the distributions as a social phenomenon. The verb ví dayate is mostly
used with reference to Indra and Agni. When it is said of maghávana1:t
(VII.16.7), this means that people reiterated (presumably on the occasion
of a special festival) Indra's function of maghávan-. An indication of
thc date is possibly contained in 1.31.6 tvám agne vrjinávartanirh nárarh
sakman pipar$i vidáthe vicar$aIJe, yá1:t sárasata páritakmye dháne ... hámsi
... « Toi, ó Agni, tu sauves l'homme (qui s'est engagé dans) la voie tortueuse,
(l'homme) en détresse, lors de la répartition-sacrale, ó (dieu) qui circules
au loin; toi qui, quand il s'agit de gagner (la bataille entre) héros, quand
la course (touche) au terme, quand l'enjeu (est mis), détruis ... »23. For the
second line I would prefer the translation « thou, who slayest ... when the
prize is put at the turn of the year, when the winning of heroes [sons] is
at stake ... ». Renou himself rightIy refers on p. 77 to plÍrye diví « on new
year's day ». Who has good sons, has the prestige which is necessary for
19. ZDMG. 54 (1900), pp. 608-611 = Kleine Schriften, pp. 108-111.
20. See OLDENBERG, SBE. 46 (1897), p. 27.
21. See PAUL THIEME, Untersuchungen zur WOl'tkunde und Auslegung des Rig-
veda, p. 31, n. 1.
22. See op. cit., pp. 3549.
23. RENOU, EVP. 12, p. 5.
415
 Ví dayate and vidátha- 131 132 F. B. J. Kuiper

«announcing a vidátha-)}: I.117.2s, II.12.1s, VIII.48.14 suvtraso vidátham Asvamedha and Vajapeya of the Vedíc ritual, wrote: «they are rare and
iÍ vadema «May we, who have valiant sons announce a vidátha-)}. Verbal costly occasions, whích were a pretext for lavish celebrations, like potIa-
contests and bragging take place during a vidátha-: 11.1.16 bfhad vadema ches in character, which are carefully recorded in c1assícal inscriptions 25.
vidáthe suvtral;z «May we, with our valiant sons outtalk (our rivals) )}, Others have raised objections to the use of the word potlatch with refe-
VII.18.13 jé$ma pürúrh vidáthe mrdhrávacam « May we during the vidá- rence to the Vedic ceremonies 26. It would seem c1ear that vidátha- is the
tha surpass Püru who speaks injuriously)}, cf. 1.167.3 sabhávatf. vi- specific Vedic term for a potlatch-like distribution of wealth and that it
dathyeva sárh vák «lilee the word thatis spoken in the sabhá, onthe is largely matter of terminology and definition, whether or not the term
occasion of a vidátha )} and I.162.1 yád vajíno devájatasya sáptel;z pravak- potlatch is used with reference to it. This decision may be left to cultural
$yámo vidáthe víryaIJi « when we shall proc1aim at the vidátha the anthropologists. Lexicographical studies will be no great help in this
performances (?) of the divine race-horse ». Chariot-races formed parí respect because such controversial issues can only be decided by a study
of the vidátha-: the rích man who arrives first with his chariot and is of the total cultural pattern. The terms can only correctly be defined ir
a distributor of goods is praised at the vidáthas, cf. II.27.12 sá reván yliti we know how the phenomena which they denote fit into that pattern. It
prathamó ráthena, vasudáva vidáthe$u prasastál;z «that rich man wins is hoped that the preceding analysis of the terminology may induce
the chariot-race (cf. ajírh ya-!), he is praised at the vidáthas as a wealth- others to undertake such a study, which must be based upon, but at the
giver )}. Wealth given away at a vidátha lends prestige to the giver: V1.8.5 same time transcend, the traditional philological text-interpretation.
vidathyam ... rayírh yasásam. To announce a vidátha- is a manifestation
of vitality: AS. XII.7.30 átha jíváso vidátham á vadema (after the funeral
rites, at a moment when the vitality of the community is traditionally
stressed) «May we then, living, announce a vidátha-)}, B-S. X.8s.27 (to
the newly-weds) ádha jívrí vidátham á vadlithal;z « then you will between
you (even) in old age announce a vidátha)} (but in v. 26 á vadasi is
directed to the wife alone!). Aman who is vidathya- and sabhéya- has
won prestige by his distributions of wealth and as a speaker in the
sabhá: 1.91.20 vírám ... vidathyarh sabhéyam. Cf. I.167.3 sabhávatí vida-
thyeva sárh vák quoted above and see IIJ. 4, p. 265ft for sabhéya-.
The vidátha- also had a cosmic aspecto As a reiteration of the creation
it aimed at the winning of water and the sun: 1.151.1 vidáthe apsú « at the
distribution of wealth, when the water is at stake", V.63.2 vidáthe
svardfsa (said of Mitra and Varur:ta, who are « sun-seers » at the vidátha-),
AS. XVIII.1.1s, where the mythologícal source (útsa-) is called vidáthmh
svarvídam « a sun-finding distribution)}. For svard!,s- see IIJ. 8, p. 114
n. 97. The contests whích aimed at the acquisition of valiant sons, of
of water and sun, etc. on New Years's day have been studied in IIJ. 5,
p. 169ff. With mahadhané (p. 177) cf. V.S9.2 antár mahé vidáthe, X.96.1
mahé vidáthe.
In former papers the resemblance of the Vedíc «distribution of
wealth )} to the potlatch-ceremonies as discribed by Mauss 24 was pointed
out. Similarly Renou, while discussing such sacrifices as the Rajasüya,

24. According to Kaj Birket Smith, Mauss's explanation of the potlatch insti-
tution as an exchange of goods between sibs can no longer be maintained (see Sludies
in. Cir~umpacific Culture Relations, Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab,
HIst.-FIIos. Meddelelser 46,2 [1973], p. 72). Be that as it may, the Vedic ceremonies
aim am?ng other things at social prominence and prestige, just as the potlatch
ceremomes described by the same author in Illustrierte Kulturgeschichte der Welt
(n.d.), pp. 140, 188, 309.
25. RENOU, Religions 01 Ancient India, p. 31.
26. See HANNS-PETER ScHMIDT, Brhaspati und Indra (Wiesbaden 1968), p. 192,
n. 54 (and my reply in IIJ. 13,p. 286) and J. GoNDA, The Vedic God Mitra (Leiden
1973), p. 105: «There is, as far as I am able to see, notwithstanding the signification,
in India, of the gift as understood and described by Mauss, no reason whatever for
assuming for Vedic antiquity the existence of the institution known as potlach ».

416 417
 F. B. J. KUIPER
AHURA MAZDA 'LORD WISDOM'?
Although the general opinion has always been that the name Ahura Mazdii
means 'the wise Lord', this interpretation has been questioned or disputed
from time to time. Thus, in the beginning of this century, Edv. Lehmann
interpreted the name as "visdommens herre" or "den herre visdom" (Zara-
thustra JI, Copenhagen 1902, p. 33) and about the same time A. V. Williams
Jackson wrote more cautiously "Der Name Ahura Mazda ... bedeutet 'weiser
Herr', der 'Herrscher' (ahura), welcher 'weise oder die Weisheit' ist (mazdah,
Skt. médhas)" (Grundriss der iranischen Phüologie JI [Strassburg, 1896-
1904] ,p. 632). The idea was taken up in later years by Benveniste, by Maria
Wilkins Smith (1929) in the context of a very personal theory,1 and by Sten
Konow {l932-33, published in 1937).2 The latter's theory was further
developed in 1945 by Kaj Barr 3 who, however, abandoned it in later years,
and in 1960 by Paul Thieme. 4 It has recently found sorne supporters. 5 Since
Maria Wilkins Smith, Studies in the Syntax of the Gathas of Zarathushtra together
with Text, Translation, and Notes (Language Dissertation No. 4),1929, pp. 25-28.
From Bartholomae she took over the idea thal 'wise' was the original meaning (p. 26).
A few years earlier (in 1926) Benveniste, in the first Ratanbai Katrak lectures translated
the name as 'the Lord Wisdom' and said "His abstract name, Mazdiih, is prior to lhe
reform, to which he does not even owe the essential role which has devolved upon him.
Against the hypothesis of an entirely Zoroastrian origin, one can bring forward both
internal and external evidence." See The Persian Religion according to the Chief Greek
Texts, Paris 1929, p. 40.
, Sten Konow, 'Medhii and Mazda' ¡hii Commemoration Volume, Essays on Oriental
Subjects, Poona, 1937, pp. 217-22.
3 In ifJst og Vest, Copenhagen 1945, p. 136. But later Barr has retumed to the tradi-
tional view, see Avesta, Copenhagen 1955, pp. 37, 208 and in Asmussen-Lressif¡e, Jllus-
treret Religionshistorie, Copenhagen, 1968, p. 277.
'Die vedischen Adityas und die zarathustrischen Am~Sa Sp~ntas', see X. Jnter-
nationaler Kongress für Religionsgeschichte, 11. -17. September 1960 in Marburg/Lahn,
Marburg, 1961, p. 145f. The text has been published in: Zarathustra, herausgegeben von
Bernfried Schlerath (Wege der Forschung, Bd. CLXIX), Darmstadt 1970, SS. 397-412:
"Die vedischen Aditya und die zarathustrischen Am~Sa Sp~nta."
, E.g., B. Schleralh, Antiquitates lndogermanicae, Innsbmck 1974, p. 204: "Ahura
Mazda bedeutet eigentlich 'Lord Wisdom'" (but he translates Mazdii everywhere by 'o
Weiser'); Hanns-Peter Schmidt, in: Neue Methodologie in der Jranistik, herausgegeberi von
Richard Frye, Wiesbaden 1974, p. 318: "As the name of God the appellative mazdii
'Wisdom' appears throughou t personified. mazdii is accompanied by lhe word ahura
'Lord' ... "; W. W. Malandra, JAOS. 95 (1975), 266: "on the basis of semantic consist-
ency."
Jndo-Iranian Journal18 (1976) 25-42. All Ríghts Reserved
Copyright © 1976 by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht-Holland
418
26 F. B. 1. KUIPER
in an article on Ahura written for the Encyclopaedia Persica 1 could only
briefly mention the existence of this theory, it may be useful to discuss it at
sorne greater length.
It is hardly possible in this connection to enter upon difficulties arising
from basically different approaches to the phenomenon of religion. 6 Since
from the point of view of an historian of religion such an Aryan figure as ~tal
Ala can be studied as an entity in its own right,7 comparable with Greek'
1hémis and Egyptian Ma-a-t, the hotly disputed question as to how rtá should
be translated in a modem European language would seem to be oflittle rele-
vanee to fue archaic reUgion itself. Nor am 1 able to accept, 1 am afraid,
Thieme's statement to the effect that the main concern of the historian of
religions is "Menschen, die sich Gottheiten ersinnen und dann an sie
g1auben."s Since the results of modem research do not seem to contradict the
working hypothesis that archaic religions have a systematic character, the
proper object of research is the total system and the function of a certain
entity in it. For such a study the etymology of a name is in the majority of
cases of Httle help,\1 just as the etymology of the name Christ explains next to
See IlJ. 3 (1959), 207-212.
7 See, e.g., JJJ. 8 (1964), 96-129.
• Zarathustra, p. 397. er. G. van der Leeuw, Phiinomenologie der Religion, Tübingen
1933, p. 133: "Zu Unrecht wird oft die Gestaltung durch den Namen verwechseIt mit
der AlIegorese, wie wir sie kennen."
• To iIlustrate Thieme's different point of view attention may be drawn to p. 400,
where he refers to Indra as a god whose name was, "possibly airead y for the Vedic poets",
nothing but a proper name. It is certainly tme that proper names are "an und für sich
sinnlose Etiketten" - one might say, it is their very function simply to indicate, not to
describe - but Thieme then characterizes Indra's nctivity in the words "es ist das Wirken
nlcht elner nllseitlR erlcbtcll Nnlurkmft, sondcrn cincr nur crschlosscncn übcrmcnschlich-
menschlichen Planung, die scinen Anhiingern zugule kommt." These words are here
quoted, nol to discuss the question of their correctness - they were written in 1960-
but because they iIlustrate what consequences in Thieme's opinion the etymological
obscurity of a name has for the interpretation of the nature of a godo Cf. on the other
hand p. 411: "Von ehemaliger 'Identitiit' der Figuren kann man ... nur dort sprechen,
wo neben Vergleichbarkeit einzelner Züge und Funktionen ein identischer Name und
damit ein fester Kern nachweisbar ist" and p. 412, where a typological relationship
bctween gods is conlraslcd with "die historische Vcrwnndtschnft, die durch dic Vcrglci-
chung von Namen a1lein sicher feststellbar wird -, es ist die 'Verwandtschaft' zwischen
dem griech. Zeus padr und dem vedischen Dyaus pitii ~Vater Himmel', auf die man ohne
nachweisbare ursprüngliche Identitiit des Namens kaum kommen konnte." The last
remark is true but then, the Mediterranean pantheon of the Greeks is so much different
from what must have been the Proto-Indo-European one that an isolated name is the
only reminiscence of the Indo-European pasto For comparative religion the historical
identity of the names do es not help mucho The Old Iranian and the Vedic religion cannot
be equated with the Greek religion and here the possibility of taboo must be considered.
See 111. 5, 55, 8, 109, n. 68.
419
 AHURA MAZDA 'LORD WISDOM"? 27
nothing of what He stands for, either in Christian theology or in the mind of
the believer. Agni, for instance, is no doubt a central figure in the Ve die pan·
theon but our knowledge that the appellative noun agn( means 'fire' does not
explain the importance attached to God Agni, nor his particular functions and
qualities, such as his wisdom. The same is true of Soma. It is necessary to stress
that a methodological approach which starts from the meaning 'fire' and then
tries, in an accumulative way, to explain the various aspects of the god from
this 'basic idea' would lead nowhere: most likely, the starting point would
induce the student to overlook sorne of the fundamental aspects.
-
11. MAZDA
According to the theory put forward by Sten Konow (p. 220) mazdii "is
originally an ¡¡·base and if it is identical wi th Indian medhii, it must from the
beginning be a feminine noun, meaning 'wisdom' or 'prudence', formed in the
same way as the old word sraddhii, 'faith'. And then the Iranian h-termination
must be secondary." Since, furthermore, the andent Aryans looked upon
abstract conceptions "almost as substances, which had their own independent
existence" (p. 220), "it is a priori not unlikely that 'prudence' was hypo-
stasized in a similar way. There is, it is true, scarcely anything in the Rigveda
which points to such a state of things. Medhii is usually spoken of more or
less as a personal asset ... " (p. 221). In the pastoral and agricultural milieu to
which Zarathustra belonged, however, things may have been different.
Zarathustra's "system bears a strongly personal stamp, and it seems probable
that his own inspiration prompted him to proclaim mazda as the highest
principie, as the Lord Mazda ... " (p. 221). Konow finally points to the Vedic
god Varu~a: "But we have not the slightest indicalion lo the effect that this
great god was designated as medhas, mazdah. It seems more probable that this
combination is due to Zarathustra" (p. 222). In Konow's view the historical
process was simple: "He [Zarathustra] singled out mazdii 'prudence', among the
mental and moral forces ... , characterized it as the Lord, and so the god
Ahuramazda became the only one. And this led to mazdii itself being con-
ceived as a god, and the masculine nominative termination h was added." As
will be shown below, sorne of Konow's assumptions, such as the meaning
'prudence' and the masculine character of the ending oh, were incorrect.
In 1960 Thieme accepted Konow's theory with sorne modifications,
which, I am afraid, were not improvements. He suggested that the feminine
abstract noun mazdii- had intentionally be en transformed into a masculine
noun with the new inflection: nomo sing. [mazdah], acc. [mazdiiam] , gen.
[mazdiiah] , dato [mazdaai]. In doing so he rejected an explanation proposed
420
28 F. B. 1. KUIPER
a few years earlier (JIJ. 1 [1957] "p. 92], according to which in the old root
declension *mazdaH-h, acc. *mazdtiH-am, gen. *mazdH-ah, dat. *mazdH-ai
the genitive and dative forms had been replaced by the new formations
mazd'ii(H)-ah and mazd'ii(H)-ai on the analogy of the accusative mazdli(H)-am.
At the same time Helmut Humbach, WZKSOA. 1 (1957), p. 81ff., arrived at a
similar conclusion regarding the type of inflection of mazdii-, also recognizing
the historieal implications of the disyl1abic endings of the acc., gen., and
dative. However, he did not place this paradigm in its Proto-Indo-European
context and ignored the traces of a laryngeal. As will be shown below, the
analogicru simplification of the paradigm which must be assumed in order to
account for the gen. mazdlz and the dato mazdiii in the Gathas is entirely in
Hne with the general trend of Indo-Iranian noun-inflection. On the other hand,
Thieme's alternative is entirely unparalleled and inconceivable. lt implies that
a regular inflection has been replaced by a completely irregular one, for
whieh no model can be found: there is no instance in Indo-Iranian of a mascu-
line noun of the type *mazdha-s, acc. *mazdha-am, derived from a feminine
stem. How feminine abstract nouns were actually treated when used as
epithets of gods is shown by the Rigvedic vocative VIIl.46.20 súnrta, from
súnrta-, f. See (Wackernagel-) Debrunner, Altindische Grammatik I1I, p. 122,
Il/2, pp. 589,619. Besides, the presence of a laryngeal to which the hiatus in
[mazd'ii(H)-am] , etc. unmistakably points, cannot simply be ignored. Such
Greek proper names as Bpóv1"r/<:; and 'LrepÓ1T1¡<;, names of Cyclopes derived
(with change of the accent) from ~povri¡, f. 'thunder' and areporri), f. 'flash of
lightning', cannot be cited as parallels because only in Greek there existed a
masculine noun-class in '7)<; (-a,), w'hich made the derivation of.Bpóvr7)<:; and
'Lrepárr7)<:; possible.
Against the reconstruction of an adjective *mazdhiiH-s 'wise' Thieme
(p. 408) objected "dass wir von mazdii- keine Spur der von Kuiper selbst
rekonstruierten Grundformen des Gen. und Dat. Sing. (Jaut Kuiper: *mazd-ah,
*mazd-ai) haben ... " The problem of adjective and substantive stems wíll be
discussed below. As for the formal aspect, ii had been pointed out in Indo-
Iranian Jouma/l, 94, that of the root noun adii- 'retribution' (,accounting' in
M. W. Smith's translation) there occurs a regular instr. sing.ad(H)·a by the
side of an analogical new formation iidii(H)-a (written iida) and the locative
adii(H)-i, both trisyllabie forms. Thieme's theory tIlat the trisyl1abic character
of the latter two forms is the result of the personification of the notion
"retribution"IO and of the concomitant change of the inflection, lacks any
.0 Thieme, Zarathllstra. p . .409: "Ganz gewiss aber dürfen wir uns auf die Flexion von
oda- f. berufen: auch hier wird es sich um eine Sonderflexion handeln. die die (weibliche)
Personifikation iída· von dem (femininen) Abstraktum unlerscheidet." [1 withdraw Ihis
argument, as disyllabic iídií is a noun. (H.-P. Schmidt, Pratidiinam 173).1
421
 29
AHURA MAZDA 'LORD WISDOM'?
fOllndation, as may be seen from a comparison of disyllabic iídii in Y.49.1
with trisyllabic iidii in Y.33.12. Konow, whose grammatical analysis of the
inflection of mazdii- (p. 219) was as correct as was possible in the thirties,
rightly pointed to the parallel evolution in Later Avestan words in -Uii-. As an
instance may be quoted raOaé!tii- 'warrior fighting from a chariot': nomo sing.
raOaeUa (for *raOaHtiiH-h), with the regular dat. sing,u raOaíUe (for
*raOaHtH-aí), whereas the gen. sing. raOaéUa (raOaHtiih] is a new formation,
being a contraction of *raOaHtOH-ah. These forms and those of iídii~ (to
which Humbach had also referred) confirm from a purely formal point of
view the explanation of the genitive mazda [mazda{H)-ah] and the dative
mazdiii [mazdfi(H)-ai] as standing for older forms *mazdH-ah and *mazdH-ai.
The Gathic evidence thus points unambiguously to a root noun in a laryngeal;
with retention of the endings of the consonant stems, as in Vedic w:kt-~ 'she-
wolf, acc. vrkí(H)-am, gen. vrkí(H)-as, dato vrkí(H)-e.
Such a r~ot noun could b~ an abstract no~n as well as an agent noun. In
Vedic, however, the abstract nouns came at an early time to be inflected like
the derivative stems in _ii_,12 e.g. sraddhá·, f. 'faith', medhá- 'wisdom'. The last
few traces of the older inflection are preserved in the Rigvedic nominative
forms XA.l prapiÍ(lJ) 'a place for watering cattle' and VIlI.48.14 nidrá(~)
'sleep' .13 The root inflection with a nominative in -s consequently became the
exclusive characteristic of the agent nouns, e.g. VIl.32.14 sraddhá(~) 'faithful'
(cf. Gathic zrazdfi(H}-), and in general the type gopiÍ-~. It follows that Vedic
medhá, f. 'wisdom', although undoubtedly a continuation of Proto-Indo-
Iranian *mazdháH-s, id., proves as Httle for the meaning of Avestan maza'á(H)-
as Vedic sraddhá, f. 'faith' does for the meaning of Avestan zrazda(H)-
'faithful' .
1Il.
At the base of most discussions on Ahura Mazda there are sorne assumptions
which are seldom explicitly stated. Konow (p, 221) assumed that Zarathustra
took most of his moral and reHgious conceptions from the prevailing notions
of his people, whose chief aim was peaceful husbandry, e.g. lirmaiti 'proper
thought', vohu manah 'good mind', and similarly mazdli 'prudence', which he
made the highest principie. This theory obviously presupposes quite a 101.
First it implies the idea that a prophet can create a new highest God, creator
11 For the dative ra{)o{ste (variant reading: ra{)iiísfi) see J. Kellens, BSL. 69 (1974), 881.
l2 But sraddhé in RS. 1.102.2 abhícákse Sraddhé kám is an infinitive and cannot be taken
as a rest of the old root inflection (see'Wackernagel-Debrunner, pp. 120, 128).
t3 Oldenberg, Prolegomena, p. 384f., Wackernagel-Debrunner, Altíndische Grammatik
m, p. 128f.
422
30 F. B. 1. KUIPER
of heaven and earth, more or less ex niltilo by simply pel'sonifying an abstract
notion such as Prudence (which is not the meaning of mazdli!). Konow him-
self, it is trpe, pointed out that there is nothing in the way Vedic medhii is
used that could throw a light on the process of deification of mazdli. Secondly,
it implies that the term Mazdli is used in the sanie way as Armaiti, Voltu
Manalt, which is not true (se e p. 39). Last but not least it presupposes that
the characterization of Ahura Mazda as 'Zoroaster's God' is actually justified.
In Thieme's opinion it is an argument in favour of Konow's explanation that
it gives 'Zarathustra's god' a real name (instead of 'the wise Lord' which
Thieme disqualifies as SUCh).14 The ancient Iranians were of a different
opinion: While Ya~t 1 enumerates twenty odd names for God, they designated
him (according to Nyberg) as anlimaka 'the Nameless One' in their calendar.
As for the first two objections raised aboye to Konow's theory, it must be
remarked that the role of such entities as Armaiti, Voltu Manalt, etc. in
Zarathustra's theological system may well be the result ofhi8 reform but that
the creation of a new highest God is an entirely different thing. The name
of the !atter also differs from those of the entities because they had invariable
names, whereas Zarathustra addressed his God by such various terms as Altura
or Mazdli alone, or Mazdli Altura, or Altura Mazdií (see below, sub VI). That
Mazdli in the binomial form of the name specifies the highest god as a parti-
cular Ahura is apparent from Y. 30.9, 31.4 mazddscii alturarrtltO "the (O) Wise
One and the (other) Ahuras", and especially from Y. 33.11 ya savi~ta altura
mazddscli "(O Thou,) who art the mightiest Ahura and the Wise One."15 So
Altura alone must have meant 'the Ahura par excellence. '
Most decisive among Konow's silent assumptions, however, is the idea that
the whole conception of a highest God Ahura Mazda was a creation of
Zarathustra's. This has often be en denied. It confronts us with the problem of
the occurrence of Auramazdli as the name of the highest god in Persia and,
thus, with the old dispute as to whether the Achaemenids were Zoroastrians.
In 1926 Benveniste, in the first Ratanbai Katrak lectures, argued that they
14 Thieme, p. 409: "Für diesel be spricht, dass sie allcin es erlaubt den Gott Zarathuslras
durch einen Namen, namlich 'Weisheit' benannt zu verstehen, stat; glauben zu müssen,
der Prophet habe den von ihm verkündeten 'Herrn' nur durch ein Adjektiv niimlich
'weise' ... bezeichnet." '
IS This is the only natural interpretation of these words, cf. Humbach, Die Gathas des
Zarathustra 1, p. 103, Lommel, Die Gathas des Zarathustra (1971), p. 76. Older transla-
tions ignore ca, e.g. Bartholomae,Altiranisches Worterbuch col. 1576; cf. col. 572.
Nyberg, [rans forntida Religioner, p. 106, tried to account for ca. In Y. 28.5 ahurai and
sav,'stai . .. mazdai are separated (see Lommel, Gathas, p. 22) but later the two epithets
were combined in the formula ahurahe mazdd yasniii savTStahe asaono (Y. 56.1, 15.3, see
Schlerath, Konkordanz, p. 18).
423
 AHURA MAZDÁ 'LORD WISDOM'?
were not. 16 In my articie on Mazda 1 took the same stand. 17 Thieme, who
right from fue beginning of his articie adopted Konow's view of 'Zarathustra's
god' (the term is Thieme's), without even questioning the solidity of its
foundation, seems to have been unaware of the relevance of this controversial
issue to the discussíon in general, and to Humbach's and my rejection of
.Konow's conciusions in particular. My arguments, which were different from
Benveniste's, were published in 1960. 18 The most cogent in my opinion is the
use of fue word rtava in XPh 54-56 (cf. 47-48) hauv uta jlva 'Siyata bavatiy
uta mrta rtava bavatiy "he beeomes happy while living, and rtavii when dead."19
Most Iranists, owing to their neglect of the Vedic evidenee, have failed to
20
grasp the historie al implications of these words.
In the Rigveda rtiÍvan is the epithet of Gods, the departed Fathers and the
initiated seers. This is quite in line with the belief that knowledge of the
cosmic order (rtá) was withheld from ordinary mortals -, a belief that W.
Brede Kristen~en in his various studies has shown to exist in the religions of
Egypt, Babylon and Greece. As the Gathas show, Zarathustra had reinterpreted
this andent religious tradition. His use of the word a'Savan with reference to
the faithful implies ,fuat they became a'Savan during their life-time. In his
eschatological vision they had all to be initiates,21 either by meditation or,
perhaps, by the mere act of their choice, or by both. This conviction has
remained a tenet of orthodox Zoroastrianism and is stm reflected by the
tenninology ofVendidad 5.61 jivasci! noi! bava~ a'Sava, maSasci[ noi! ba:daiti
vahmahe ar¡h5u'S "He does not become a"Savan while living, and does not par-
" publíshed in E. Benveniste, The Persian Religion according to (he Chief Greek Texts,
Paris 1929. pp. 35-49.
" IIJ. 1,95: "TIte accordance between Old Persian mazdiih- and Gathic [mazdii"ah.j,
therefore, rather points to the conclusioll tha! the name of the Highest God had a1ready
lost its weak case-forms in a pre-Zoroastrian period." The pre-Zoroastrian character of
Ahura Mazdii had also been assumed by J. H. Moullon, Early Zoroastrianism (1926), p. 31
and Antoine Meillet, Trois Conférences sur les GiithO de ['Avesta. Paris 1925, p. 25f.
.8 See IIJ. 4, 183-188.
•• For the implications of the use of ;tavá see a1so lIJ. 4, 185. Gershevitch (Journal of
Near Eastern Studies xvm (1964), 18), a1though accepting this interpretatíon, neverthe-
less conc1udes tha! Xerxes was "a Zarathustrian in intention" (p. 20). I do no! think it is
possible to evade the logical conc1usions from the evidence by introducing such unknown
elements as the king's intentions.
,. See, e.g., H. H. Schaeder, ZDMG. 95 (1941),449: "Die Bedeutungsverschiebung von
arta van gegenüber gathisch asavan, das die Bekenner der Wahrheit ohlle Rücksicht darauf
bezeichnet, ob sie leben oder gestorben sind, Hisst sich nur innerhalb des Zoroastrismus
erkl1iren ... " (with a reference to the judgment of the souls of the departed in after-Iife);
similarly H. Hartmann, OLZ. 1937, col. 151 (seeIlJ. 4 (1960), 185f.) and Gershevitch,
Hyrnn to Mithra, p. 156. TIte opposite is tfUe and the Vedic evidence shows that rtiivan
has nothing to do with a judgment of souls.
II See l/J. 3,215,8, 129.
424
31 32 F. B. 1. KUIPER
take in fue best existence when dead." The parallelism between this passage
and that of the Old Persian Xerxes inscription is unmistakable and can hardly
be due to mere coincidence: they both obviously reproduce an old formula
of the ",ligious tradition which contrasted happiness in this life and a blessed
existence in after-life. The more interesting, therefore, is the characteristie
difference in the use of the word rtavan:a'Savan. The Old Persian usage is
entirely in accordance wifu fue Rigveda and represents, accordingly, the pre-
Zoroastrian stage of Iranian religion. The inscription, therefore, has preserved
the original form of the formula. Late Greek authors (Hesychius and
Stephanus of Byzantium, c. 600 A.D.) state that in Persia the deified Fathers
were caBed apraiot, which must stem from a much older source because of rt.
The word seems somehow to stand for rtavan, but fue Greek ending -aio"
not uncommon in Persían proper nam€;s, still presents difficultíes (see Hans
Schmeja, Antiquitates Indogermanicae 1974, pp. 380-82 (for OP. -aka-).
In the passage of the Vendidad, on the other hand, the state of bliss in after-
life is expressed with a term of Zoroastrian theology ('the best existence') and
there can be no doubt that the whole phrase is a transformation of the andent
formula, the use of a'Savan for a living man being due to Zoroastrian theology.
Only much later, in the ninfu century Pahlavi literature, traces of the non-
Zoroastrian usage can be pointed out in Zoroastrian literature. The historie al
background of thls evolu tion cannot be reconstructed any more. 22 This con-
ciusion is confirmed by the Old Persian name Auramazda, which is indepen-
dent of the older Zoroastrian tradition (see below, sub VI). Zarathustra has
consequently adopted the Old Iranían god in the theological system of his
reformed religion.
" For references see lIJ. 4, 186 and cf. P. Menasce, Vivre et penser 3 [= Revue biblique
52 (1944), 126ff., to which Prof. Hanns-Peter Schmidt kindly drew my attention. TIte
most important passage is M(!flok-i Xrat 44.34 u kii mírend. ahrav hand "and when they
die they are ahrav". See further J. de Menasce, ibid. on ahravenTtan and H. H. Schaeder
ZDM? 95 (1941),272, note 1, on ardiiyeh 'künftige Seligkeit' in the inscription of '
Karder. TIte only thing that ~an be said at the present moment is that this usage departs
~rom ~he ~rthodox Zoroastnan one. Me~asce al so refers to Avestan ~iita 'happy' and ~iiti
happmess but they do not prove anythmg for the problem under discussion. In
Zarathustra's idiom (Y. 51.8) they denote happiness during one's life-time as in Old
Persian, but in Later Avestan they were also used with reference to the ha;piness in after-
life. Cf. Pursilníha 24 Siit:Jm dat9aiti urviimm a~aono irírit9iinahe "he makes happy the
soul of the a~avan who has departed", 35 ya! irírit9iin(ah)e aSa(o)no ~iit~m dat9aiti urviimm
"~hen(?) he givesjoy to the soul of the a~avan that has departed", Ha6. N. 2.2 upa
aetgm xsapan:Jrn avava[ ~iitois urva i~aiti yat9a ... "In that night the sou! experiences as
much happiness as ... " In contrast with these two words, which could be used indis-
cri~inately for this Jife and after-Iife, rtiivan was from the outset Iinked up with the
notlon of nether world. A m.ore recent article by J. de Menasce, 'Vieux-perse artÍÍVan et
pehJevi ahrav', Mélanges Ch.-H. Puech, París 1971, to which Pror. H. P. Schmidt drew
my atten'tion, was inaccessibJe to me.
425
 AHURA MAZDÁ 'LORD WISDOM'? 33
34 F. B. J. KUIPER

IV
although "their k~atrá is great among the Devas",32 the Devas are said to have
There is an almost general agreement on Ahura Mazda being historically iden-
given them their k~atrá or asurya. 33 VaruIJa and the Adityas in general are
tical with Varu.r:ta. It is not necessary to sum up again the arguments which
dreaded because they act in secret. 34
have led scholars in the past and present to accept this conclusion. It may be
Although in such a situation taboo can be expected to occur, this does not
sufficient to point to the ancient metrical formula Mi1Jra Ahura barazanta in
account for the term 'wise Asura' by which Varuna is addressed. 35 It is instruc-
the Avesta and to Old Persian "'Mk;a-Auramazdii (in Mesoromásdes mentioned
by Piutarch) as the Old Iranian counterparts ofVedicMitrá-Várunii. A basic
tive in this connection to compare the epithets oi
Agni. He is also called
Asu ra (9 times )36 and 'wise': viSvávedas (10 times, cf. viSvavíd 4 times),
difficulty is, however, that VaruIJa, although sometimes referred to as an
médhira (8 times, cf. sumedhii 4 times) and prácetas (21 times).3? When used
Asura, is primarily a Deva. This point is gene rally ignored because the funda-
in the. singular these adjectives are mainly epithets of Agni or Soma, whereas
mental dualism of Asuras versus Devas as found in the brmmanas is con-
in the dual they are usually epithets oC Mitra and VaruIJa, and in the plural of
sidered a later invention of the priests. Since, however, the cos~1ic dualism was
the Adityas. This is due to the fact that in the cosmogony Agni and Soma,
a characteristic of the Indo-Iranian religion, it is hard to accept this view. 23
like Varu.r:ta, had gone over from the primordial world of the Father Asura to
This dualism had its origin in the cosmogony, which can be reconstructed on
the 'foreign lineage' of the Devas. In the ordered cosmos they are related to
the basis of the Vedic data. As a result of Indra's creation of the dual cosmos
the upper world as well as to VaruIJa's nether world. In India, just as in the
sorne of the Asuras of the primordial world, such as Varuna, Agni and Soma
religions studied by W. Brede Kristensen, wisdom had a cosmic character, as it
(~S.X.124.4), went over to the world of the Devas and b~came deviÍ ásuriih,
is knowledge ofthe cosmic law (~S. VIII.6.10 medhám rtásya), which was
in contrast with the rest of the Asuras, who remained ásuriÍ adeviÍh (RS. .
conceived as hidden in the netherworld (seeJIJ 4,185,187;8, 120V 8 In so far
VIII.96.9) and were driven away into the nether world. This terminoiogical
as Agni and Soma are denizens of that world they are Varu¡;¡ic (varu'!adevatya,
distinction has only been preserved in the Rigveda, as a last trace of how in
viirulJá). As such they are 'gl.lardians of the cosmic law' (rtásya gopfi~, 5 times),
the prehistoric Indo-Iranian religion the relation between Asuras and Devas
no less than Varul}a (X.8.S) or Mitra and Varul}a (V.63.1, VII.64.2).
had been looked upon.
As he is incorporated in the ordered cosmos, VaruIJa is in the Rigveda
about twenty times referred to as devá, 24 sorne times as ásura, 25 and rarely as
devá ásura. 26 His asurya 2 ? 'Asuric sovereignty', depends on his character of J2 V.68.3 máhi variJ k~a/ráin devé~u, cf. 67.1 vár~i~/hain ksatrám asa/he.
devá and 011 his being aryá, 28 which seems to imply a contrast with the ásurii .ll V1.67.5 vf.fve yád váin lIlainhálla málldamiináh ksatráin'deváso ádadhuh sa¡f'sáh
adevá~¡. Still, fue incorporation of Mitrá- Váru,!ii in the group of Devas was V11.66.2 yá dháráyallta dev;il! s/ldák~ii dak:,ápita;ií. ~sllry~ya prámahasa. 1;1 VIú.s:3,
not so complete as to blot out all traces of their foreign origino Their different however"the Waters are said to have made Varul)a and Indra Devas, which is hard to
explain (apa~ ... índrain várurJain deváta dhu~ "ont mis au rang des dieux"). Indra malees
character was recognized by the poets: "Owing to your greatness you do not Varul)a an ádhipati in his realm, and as apám ádhipati~ "overlord of the waters" (AS.
line up with the Devas",29 The Devas cannot harm Varuna's and Mitra's V.24.4, 1'5. IlI.4.5.1) Varul)a is incorporated in fue ordered cosmos. It is not c1ear how
vratas. 30 Aditi has given birth to Mitra and VaruIJa "for ~surya"31 but, the Waters, which originally were fue primordial world, could confirm Varuna (and
Indra!) as a Deva. .
34 VIl.60.10 sasvás cid dhí sámrtis tve~y e~alll aplcyima sáhasa sáhante, yusmád bhiyil

23 See IIJ. 3,211. vr~a~1O ré¡amiíJla dák~asya elJl mahlna mr!áta nal! "En vérité, e'cst cn cachcttc (qu'a Iíeu)
le ~eurt formidable de ccs (dieux): ils cxcrcent-Ieur-force par une force mystéricuse. Nous
RS. 1.25.1, 14; 152.7, 11.28.1, IV.41.2, V.66.1; 67.1, 68.4, 85.8 (: 5 asuró), VI.68.6,
qUl tremblons de peur devant vous, o taureaux, prenez pitié de nous par le pouvoir meme
14
8,9, VII.60.12 (= 61.7), 82.7, 85.3. Cf. VIIl.69.12 sudevó asi.
" 1.24.14,151.4,11.27.10,28.7, VIll.42.1, X.132.4. de DaIe~a!" (Renou, EVP. 5. 85).
" 1.24.14 asura praceta rajan, cf. V.71.2 v(ivasya hí pracetasa váruna mítra rájathah
26 VlII.25.4 dev~v ásura, cf. VIl.65.2 deviÍniim ásura.
Vm.4 2.1 ásuro viSvávedah. . .,
'7 y.66.1 sukrá~ü devaú: 2 asuryam asa te, VII.65.1 yáyor asuryam áksitam: 2 ht ti 36 11.1.6 tvám agl/e rudrb ásuro mahó divás, V.12.1 pra 'gnáye brhaté . .. ásuraya mánma,
devanam ásura tiiv aryii The asurya is parallel to ksatrá, cf. V.66.2: 67: 1,68.3.
15.1 ghrláprasatto ásu~a~ susévo rayó dhartá dharúrJo vásvo agnih, 27.1 ánasvanta
'8_ ~e? note 27 and cf. VIl.86.7 ácetayad acíto de~ó aryó, Renou, Etudes védiques et sátP,atir mamahe me gava cétiyho isuro maghóna~, VIl.2.3 ~ény~in vo ásurain
panmeennes 7, 61.
sudak~am . .. agn(m, 6.1 prá samrtijo ásurasya práSastim ... , 30.3 l/y agnliz sidad ásl,lro
29 .VI.~1.10 n~kir devébhir yatatho mahitvft (referring to Mitra and VarUl)a) "par votre
ná hóta, X.11.6 tavi~yáte ásuro vépate maht and IV.2.5 asura (voc.). .
~aJeste vous, al~g.nez n~lIe~e~~ avec les (autr~s) dieux" (Renou; oth,eTwise Geldner).
37 Cf. m.25.1 ágne divá~ sünúr asi práeetas tánií prthivyá utá viwávedah.
V.69.4 na ~am dt;va amrta a minanti vratani mitra·varuna dhruvan¿
38 For rlá as a hidden mystery see lIJ. 15, 23lf. . .
31 VIII.25.3 tá matii viSvávedasa 'Suryaya prámahaso, mahljajanÍl 'ditir rtávarl

426
427
 AHURA MAZDÁ 'LORD WISDOM'? 35
For the same reason that the epithet 'wise' is attributed to Agni and Soma,
Varuna is also called viSvávedas,39 médhira40 and prácetas. 41 In a Yajurvedic
form~la Pracetas occurs as the name of a god. 42 According to the commen-
taries Varona is mean t, which is confirmed by the use of Pracetas as a name of
Varona in classical Sanskrit. 43 This use of an epithet to denote the god may
be due to a taboo.
V sont des personnifications de la justiee, et a Rome Venus, de la griíce
Thieme has argued that Ahura Mazda, as 'Lord Wisdom', must be explaiñed, in
analogy with Aryan *asura Mitra 'Lord Contrad, as a deification of an
abstract notion. It need hardly be pointed out that *asura Mitra is a modern
construction, which does not occur in the Veda. As for Varo~a, it is certainly'
troe that he is sometimes addressed as Asura or called 'the wise Asura': cf.
1.24.14 va/Una . .. asura praceta rájan, Il.27.10, 28.7 varw}a . .. asura,
X.132.4 asu;a, VIlI.42.1 ásuro viSváveda~. Nowhere, however, do the texts
contain the slightest indication in support of the .ffiodern theory that Varury.a
is the result of a deification of an abstract notion. It would be vain to specu-
late on the original meaning of the name Váru~a, which is unknown to us as it
was to the Vedic Indians. Varona is in this respect conspicuously different
from those other Ádityas the appellative meaning of whose names was still
known and in use in the Veda.
Since it appears that the basic problems are not always sufficiently under-
stood sorne words may be added to c1arify the issue, In Bartholomae's
Altiranisches Worterbuch, which was completed in 1904, Avestan mWra-/
,. VIIL42.1 ásuro V/SVál'('diilr, VIIL25.4 tiÍ molá V/SI'ál'cdasii 'sllryaya prámalrasá, ,,!ahf
jalan/¡ 'ditir rtáva,r(Mitra-Va~ul)a), V.67.3 vÜve hÍ viSliávedaso vánllJo milró aryama and
VIlI.18.11,47.3, said ofthe Ádityas in general. The synonym visvavtd is only used as an
epithet of Agni and Soma. .. I
40 1.25.20 tváin vlSvasya medhira divás ca gmá$ ca rajasi, parallel to V.71.2 vlsvasya hl
pracetasa vánlna mUra rá¡athah. For the meaning "initiated into the cosmic mystery" see
IIJ. 4, 187f., f;r its form 8, p. '105, note 39. sumedh/i does not occur as an epithet of
Varuna.
4' 1.i4.14, eL V.71.2 (see note 30); the plural is an cpithct ofVarul)a, Mitra, Aryaman
(1.41.1, VIlI. 83.2), of the Adityas in general (vocative VlII.67.17, 83.5, nomo 47.4) but
also of the vrsve Devá~ (including Mitra and Varul)a): X.63.8, 66.1, 85.17. In 11.23.2 the
grammatical construction is not certain., ,,! _ ." _ Meillet, however, adds cautiollsly: "toute affirmation est impossible puisque
., In mánojavas /vii pitáro dak~ilJatá~ piintu, pracetiis Ivá mdral~ pascal patu, vlsvakarma
tva 'ditya{r uttarat (uttaralá~) palu, etc., KS. 2.9 (14, 20), KKS. 2.3 (16, 18/19, 22), TS.
1.2.12.2, VS. 5, 11, SE. IlI.5.2.5. Cf. TA. 1.20.1, TS. V1.2.7.5. But MS. 1.2.8 (18,3) reads
mdras Iva prácetasah pasdl piintu. There is a strange shift in this passage, where one
might expect "Som~ with the Rudras, Varul)a with the Adityas, etc.", as, indeed, is the
version of SB, IlI.4.2.1.
" Kiilidiisa, Harivainsa (see PW.), Biil)a, Kadambarl p. 217line 2 (edd. Peterson and
Vaidya), who elsewhere uses the common name.
428
36 F. B. 1. KUIPER
Mif)ra- was stated to be an appeIlative which meant 'Vertrag, Abmachung,
Kontrakt' and the name of an Ifanian god who represented an Aryan solar
deity. The question as to whether or not the meaning 'treaty, contract' was
correctly attributed to the appellative noun is not relevant in the context of
this study. Three years later, as rnight be expected, Meillet drew the conclusion
frorn the Avestan facts that Mif)ra, Vedic Mitrá is the personified contraet:
"Mitra- est la personnification du contrat, comme en Grece e€¡.w; et .t.l.Ú<7)
férninine:' (p. 145). He was no doubt right in rejecting the 19th century
nature rnythology, which had explained Mitra as a solar godo Did his own
approach, however, contribute much to a better understanding of the god? If
e€¡.J.tI:; is merely a personification of justiee and nothing more, how is one to
explain that she was in fact a goddess of the earth, who represented the cosmic
order, which was val id for gods and men (W. Brede Kristensen, Symbool en
Werkelíjkheid, p. 118ff.)? As for Mitrá, the notion of 'contraet' is not as
unambiguous as Meillet assumed. In 1946 Kristensen drew attention to the
religious and cosmic character of 'contrad in several archaic religions and
explained MWra in this ligh t. 44
As faf as 1 can see, a structural approach to Vedic mythology brings to Iight
a fundamental and systematic contrast between the nether world, represented
by the gods Mitra, Varo~a, etc., and the upper world. For such a dual cosmic
system parallels can be found in other religions. 45 In the light of such an
analysis of the Vedic data it appears to be possible to explain Mif)ra's nature
as being that part of the dual deity Mitra- Vá/Ul}a which functions as deliverer
and mediator between the nether and upper worldS. 46
Meillet, however, conc1uded that, because Mitra is just an Indo-Iranian
personifieation of 'contract', the name of his Vedic companion Va ro 1). a must
have a similar sense ("doit avoir un sens analogue", p. 156). The word 'must'
deserves special notice. He further remarks that the word group with which
Varu~a, on aecount of his rOle as guardian of the cosmic order and the
contracts, must be connected ("doit etre rapproché", p. 157) is Skt vratám
'divine will, law', etc. and Old Chureh Slavonic rota 'oath', etc., the possible
meaning of the appellative noun *vá/U1}a then being 'loi, contrat.' Again, the
word 'must' which presents the conc1usion as logically inevitable, is revealing.
4' 'Het Mysterie van Mithra', Mededeelingen der Koninklijke NederJandsche Akademie
van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, N.R. de el 9 (1946), p. 27 (= Symbool en Werke-
lijkheid (1954), p. 126).
4' See, e.g., G. W. Locher, J7ze Serpent in lhe KwakiutI Re/igion (1932), H. Scharer.
Ngaju Re/igion, The Hague 1963; 1st ed. 1946.
•• SeeI!J. 5 (1961), 46ff.
429
 AHURA MAZDA 'LORD WISDOM'? 37
le mot n'est conservé nulJe part avec cette valeur de nom commun." A clearer
demonstration of the consequences of a false premise is hardly possible. In
fact, Mitra is much more than just a personified contract. He is (also) a deliverer,
a god of deliverance, delivery and evacuation of excrement (see IlJ. 5, pp. 46-
54) -, traits which cannot be explained [rom 'contract' and are, therefore,
ignored by those who start from the personified contracto This unconscious
procedure is the natural consequence of the belief that the god is simply the
personification of an abstract notion, and that this notíon, as the semantic
nucleus, must (automatically, as it were) explain all aspects of the godo So,
instead of studying VaruI).a on the basis of the data fumished by the texts,
Meillet starts looking for an appelJative noun*váru':la, for which no certain
instance can be quoted and whose meaning, therefore, is a matter of pure
speculation. Nevertheless, he needs a meaning and therefore chooses an
etymology, but sínce the name Váru':la admits of many etymological explana-
tions, as many different meanings are possible.
It is curious that Thieme should have been unaware of the dubious method
underlying this approach. In Mitra and Aryaman (Transactiolls of the
Conneetieut Academy of Arts and Scienees 41 (1957), 1-96) he writes
(p. 60): . we must assume that the name Varul}a is likewise" (p. 61). It need hardly be
Just as the etyrnologieal analysis of mitrá 'contraet' is of no bearing on the nature of Cod
Contraet ... , the etyrnologieal analysis of várnna is irrelevant for Cod Varuna ... There
is OIuy one difference. The original appellative ~eaning of mitrá/milJra ean be aecurately
established frorn the contex ts in which lhe word is used ... Thal of várU/}a is not equally
certain. We have to risle a conjecture, for which an investigation of the etyrnological
possibilities rnay furnish a starting point.
These words call for sorne comment. An uninformed reader may be misled by
a reference to 'the' etymological possibilities, after which only two out of the
ten or more possible etymologies 47 are discussed. Others have argued on
similar grounds that Varul}a was the 'binder'. Therefore, the etymology,
which remains pure guess-work, cannot provide a basis for any conclusion
regarding the meaning. Secondly, it is a euphemism to say that the meaning
of *várurya 'is not equally certain'. As Meillet rightly admitted, it is entirely
unknown. Thirdly, the etymology of the name Váruna is certainly irrelevant
for an historian of reJigion 48 but not so for Thieme, ~ho needed an etymology
on which to base the meaning 'True Speech', tentatively assigned to Váruna.
And this meaning, in tum, he needed as a basis for his interpretation of the
41 See Mayrhofer, Kurzgefasstes etymologisches Worterbuch de; Altindischen III,
pp.151-53.
4' See P. Thierne, Mitra and Aryaman (1957), p. 60. [Cr. now Thieme, 'King Varul)a',
German Scholars on India (Varanasi 1973), pp. 333-49. J
430
38 F. B. J. KUIPER
god 's character, the correctness of which, again, had to be demonstrated by an
analysis of the texts. For a lexicological study this would be a legitimate
procedure but the study of a god does not belong to lexicography.
In 1941 Thieme had proposed a different etymology for *váruna, but in
1957 he followed Meillet. Instead of 'law, order', however, as coniectured
(p. 61) by Meillet, he 'tentatively proposes' 'true speech', because it suits
Lüders' identification ofVarul}a with 'oath' better. He adds that "certain
functions of Varul}a ... would anyhow reach beyond the rather narrow
borders given by a definition as 'oath'" (p. 61). This is true, but 1 fail to see
that the définition as 'true speech' accounts for the god's cosmic functions
any better. It is hard to see that such an assertion of a poet as "Wise are the
creatures by his greatness ... " "acquires significance and, indeed, becomes
profound when Varul}a, referred to by 'he', is the god of true speech", as
Thieme writes on p. 64: it would be as true (or wrong) if one of the other
etymologically conceivable meanings would be put in the place of 'true
speech'. In Thieme's view, however, it is the consequence of his method that
the lexicograph1cal meaning must explain all functions of the god: "After
recognizing that the name Mitra is used with its appellative sense everywhere,
stated that in the traits of Varul}a's character as depicted or silently pre-
supposed in the Sarhhitas and bráhm3l}as, no justification can be found for
the theory that he is 'True-Speech'. It is sufficient to read the pages in which
Renou summarizes the Rigvedic data (Ét. véd. et pan. 7, pp. 4-7) to see that
this notion is here entirely absent. It seems to prove that Meillet's and Thieme's
guesses are at least irrelevant.
While Meillet's etYlllological approach thus beca me an indispensable link in
Thieme's argumentation, the latter's conception of VaruI).a was from the out-
set also strongly influenced by Lüders. By stressing the role of the oath and by
interpreting ~tá in the light of the Indian 'Act of Truth', however, Lüders had
based his conclusions to a large extent on an arbitrarily chosen starting point.
It has, indeed, been objected that Varur,ta's unambiguous association with the
oath is the natural consequence of his representing the waters of the nether
world, that is, the Indian Styx. As for~ta, whatever translation one may
prefer for it, it is primarily a cosmic potency.
Recent discussions with a colIeague on this subject made me realize that it
was necessary to clarify my own position and toindicate my reasons for
rejecting the conclusions referred to aboye. It will be cIear to the reader that
the object of the preceding pages was not to criticize persons but to analyze
processes of thought. I hope these remarks have shown that the theory dis-
cussed was more or less based on a circular argument, since the etymology
whích was to support the interpretation of VamI}a had been eh osen on the
basis of a preconceived idea about the godo
431
 AHURA MAZDA 'LORD WISDOM'? 39
VI
After these remarks we can now retum to Iran where, as the result of a special
development,49 the Ahuras had become the only gods. Ahura Mazda was their
chief, just as in the ordered world of Vedic mythology Varu~a was the chief of
the Ádityas, a group of "Asuras who had become Devas." Owing to this
specific Iranian evolution, however, Ahura Mazda, although still the highest of
the Ahuras (or, "the greatest of the Bagas", as he is called in the Old Persian
inscriptions), rose to the rank of the highest godo To many scholars the idea
has occurred that Zarathustra's creator god, the Ahura Mazdli of theGathas,
combines the characteristics ofMi(}ra and Ahura (= Varu~a), just as in many
Rigvedic passages the name Varu~a seems to refer to the dual deity Mitr1Í-
Váru~li. In any case, there can be no doubt about the god's awe-inspiring
character, an inheritance from the ambiguous and inauspicious Asura of
prehistoric times, who had become a *Daiva. It is not unreasonable, therefore,
to expect that, just as in Israel, taboo may have forbidden to utter the god's
proper name. In this connection it is instructive that the name Ahura Mazdá
itself was later in the two Iranian calendars replaced by aniímaka 'the Nameless
One' and Da(}u~ 'Cre¡¡tor'.
From the Avestan terms MWra Ahura and ahuraolita "made by Ahura"so
it can be iMerred that in the pre-Zoroastrian religion of Iran the simplest
designation of the highest god was the single word Ahllra 'the Ahura par
exeellenee.' More than a century ago, Tiele drew attention to a passage in the
Yasna Haptar¡háiti: "Him we worship with the holiest Muric name, which
pleases the Wise One."SI This can hardly mean anything else but that the lit/e
Ahura was the God's holiest 'name', to which Mazdli could be added as a
specification. Our conclusion is, accordingly, that the thcory of 'Lord Wisdom'
lacks every foundation, whereas the traditional interpretation of the name
Ahura Mazdá as 'Wise Ahura' has the full support of Vedic ásura prácetas,
áSllra visvávedas. Cf. the use of the adjective médhira (which in Vedic has
taken the place of *medhft- = mazdá-) in 1.25.20 tvám v(svasya medhira divás
ca gmás ca rájasi "Thou rulest, O Wise One, over all things, heaven and
earth."S2
•• See JIJ. 8,119.
50 See E. Benveniste-L. Renou, Vrtra et V[~ragna, París 1934, pp. 42,47-49.
J. Kellens, Acta lranica 3 (1974),145 note 27, states thatahura6iita and mazda6iita
both stand for *ahura-mazdii-6áta. About the middle of the nineteenth century, however,
Spiegel already pointed out that the two terms are not used promiscuously but are
strictIy kept aparto He has been quoted by Tiele (see note 51), p. 198f.
5\ C. P. Tiele, De godsdienst van Zarathustra, Haarlem 1864, pp. 120, 136. The passage
(Y.37.3) reads as follows: tam ac iihuiryá nam~n¡ mazdá. vara sp~ntjj. t~mii yazamaidi!.
[But namáni is a plural according to Humbach 1, p. 26, 11, p. 93.]
5·] Cf. B. Geiger, Die Amasa Spantas, Vienna 1916, p. 213. Thieme, in his study on the
432
40 F. B. J. KUIPER
The Iranian religious tradition from which Zarathustra inherited the two
separate designations Ahura and mazdli cannot have differed much from the
Vedic poetic idiom. Only the way in which he uses the two words conjointly
calls for sorne comment. In Vedic prose the normal place of an adjective is
before the substantive. 53 In the Gathas proper Mazdá Ahura is, indeed, the
most common word order. On the basis of the quotations in the Altiranisches
Worterbuch 1 counted 67 times Mazdli ( ...) Ahura as against 45 occurrences
of Ahura ( ...) Mazdli. These numbers comprise the places where the two
words are separated by one or more other words as well as those where one of
them ·stands immediately after the other. The result is somewhat different
from C. P. Tiele's statistics, S4 as I have followed Bartholomae in mechanically
counting all places where the two words occur in the same case-form in one
and the same stanza. It is obvious that this procedure is fully arbitrary, at least
in those stanzas where the two words stand in different lines. Objective
criteJia to decide where, and to what extent, Zarathustra used the two words
as parts of one name are entirely lacking. In Yasna 46, for instance, le mazdá
x~nao"§iíi ahurli and 5e mazdli xrnnyli{ ahurli may give the impression that the
poet here uses the name Mazdli Ahura but in the third and the seventh stanza
of the same Yasna the words mazdli . .. ahurá stand so wide apart (3a-e, 7a-d)
that there is not sufficient reason to take them as parts of one name. A elear
instance is also Yasna 44. In 19 of the 20 stanzas the first line has the words
ar~~ moi vaoeli ahllrií, while mazdli follows twice in the second line, twice in
the third line, three times in the fourth line, 6 times in the fifth line and 7
times not at al!. It is more realistic, therefore, to consider mazdli and ahura as
two distinct dcsignations of God, which could occasionally be combined but
are prefcrably scparatcd. Instead of gíving arbitrary statistics it is bctter to
study more closely those passages where mazdli ahllra and ahura mazdá are
not separated by any other word.
'Aryan' gods of the Mitanni treaties in JAOS. 80 (1960), 30lff. (Kleine Schriften,
pp. 396-412), completely disregards taboo as the possible reason for the absence of the
older Iranían name of Ahura Mazd¡¡ (p. 308f.). As has been pointed out in IIJ. 8, p. 109,
note 68, this need not have been Várul,la which may itself have been a taboo substitute.
In the context of the present study, however, the reconstruction of prehistoric names is
irrelevant.
53 See B. Delbrück, Syntaktische Forschungen 3 (1878), 35-39, Altindische Syntax
(1888), p. 19f.
54 In De Godsdienst van Zarathustra, Haarlem 1864, p. 198 Tiele gave as numbers 53
occurrences of Mazdá (...) Ahura as against 17 of Ahura (... ) Mazdii, but in 'Iets over
de Oudheid van het Avesta', Verslagen en Mededeelingen der Nederlandsche Akademie,
Afd. Letterkunde, Derde Reeks, XI/3, Amsterdam 1895, p. 379, he gave instead 69
against 23.
433
 AHURA MAZoA 'LORD WISOOM'? 41
In these cases the predominant role of the metre is obvious. In the
Ahunavaitl GiHJli (Y. 28-34) and the Vohwda{}ra Gii{}ii (Y.S 1), where there
are seven syllables before the caesura, mazdii ahurii always stands before the
caesura: 28.2, 10, 11;31.5,9, 16, 17,22;32.16(x~ay~smazdiiahurii),all
with the vocative, further 28.3 (mazdflm ahuram) and the nominative mazdtl
ahuro in 51.16, 17 (x§ayc¡s mazdtl ahuro), 22. In the UUavaitt Gii{}ii (Y. 43-46)
and the Spantii.mainyü Ga{}a (Y. 47-50), with four or five syllables before
the caesura, mazda ahura always stands at the end of a Jine: 45.11; 46.10; 47.5,
6; 50.1,4,10 (vocative), 45.5, 6; 46.17 (nominative) and 45.8 (accusative).
These cases are numerous enough to justify the conclusion that the poet had
sorne predilection for the use of mazda ahura in certain well-defined place s of
the lines but it is difficult to see what motives may have guided him in prefer-
ring /sraotü mazda ahuro in Y. 45.6 against /mazda sriivl ahuro in the 10th
stanza of the same song.
It has long been noticed that against these 24 occurrences of mazda ahura
there are only five (or perhaps four) places where ahura stands immediately
before mazda, and that in all these passages without exception the two words
are separated by the caesura: 55 cf. Y. 28.9,33.6 (ahura / mazda), and 29.6,
51.15 and 53.1 (ahuró / mazda). In 28.9a, however, which consists of7 + 10
syllables, mazda is probably an interpolation. As for 33.l1aya sav¡1to ahuro /
mazdlisca, here the syntactical relation is different (see aboye, p. 30).
The reason why the poet consistent1y separated the words by the caesura
wherever mazda stood after ahura may have been that this was a contrastive
word order, which marked the Ahura as distinct from the other Ahuras.
According to DelbrOck the adjective, when exceptionally following the sub-
stantive, stood in apposition and was separated from the preceding word by a
short pause. 56 I t seems that the caesura between ahura and mazda in the
" Sce Theodor Baunack in: J. und Th. Baunack, Studien aut dem Gebiete des
Griechischen und der arischen Sprachen, Leipzig 1886, p. 347, where he compares the
statistics of the Yasna Haptar¡háitís with those of the Gathas; Bartholomae, Altiranisches
Worterbuch, col. 290. The case of vohu manah is significantly different: four times there
is inversion (49.10 mano vohü, 28.11 manascá vohü, 51.18 manar¡ho var¡haus, 33.14
manar¡hascá vai¡háus)
16 Cf. Delbrück, Syntaktische Forschungen 3, 36: "Wo das Adjcctivum nach dem
Substantivum steht, da hat es oft den Sinn der Apposition, d.h. das Adj. und Subst.
werden nicht in einem Athem ausgesprochen. sondern es findet nach dem Substantivum
ein Abschnitt des Sinnes und a1so auch der Aussprache Statt so dass das Adjectivum eine
sclbstandigere Stellung einnimmt, sei es, dass es einem Substantivum iihnlich wird, sei es,
dass es wie ein Participium eine Nebenhandlung auszudrücken bestimmt ist." On p. 37
(and in Altindlsche Syntax, p. 20) Delbrück points to epitheta perpetua, such as agníT]
svi!fakft, agnír ácyuta~, agn(r annádá~. In these word groups the contrastive function.of
the word order is particularly clear. They can explain how in a time when several Ahuras
(such as Mi.?ra) were worshipped in Ancient Iran the designation Ahura Mazdá was
434
42 F. B. 1. KUIPER
Gathic verse reflects the pause in normal speech. If this is true, it follows that
the absence of a caesura between mazda ahura, mazdií ahuro, etc., in all 24
places where they occur not separated by other words, is a direct proof that
the interpretation as 'Wisdom, the Lord' (in which word group Ahura would
have been an apposition) cannot be correct.
Never, as far as lean see, has it been asked how in Later Avestan the con-
ventional name of the Zoroastrian God carne to be Ahuro Mazda, with the
exceptional word order. It has been inferred aboye from Old PersianAura-
mazda that in the non-Zoroastrian religion of Ancient Iran, at a time when
Ahura Mazdli was still contrasted with the Ahuras instead of the Bagas, this
inverted word order had become usual. The only conceivable reason for the
departure of the Later Avestan texts from Zarathustra's usage is that in this
respect, just as in many others, later Zoroastrianism had adopted the tradition
of the non-refonned religion of Iran. Kaj Barr and Helmut Humbach left the
question open as to whether Zarathustra, while adopting the title Ahura from
the older religion, might himselfhave created Ahura Mazdli. The question can
now be answered in the negative. 57
Prehistoric
Ahura (+Mazdéi)
/
I I
non-Zoroastrian Zara thustra
f1tAhura Mazdéi Ahura,Mazdfi
Mazdfi Ahura
Later Zoroastrianism
Ahura Mazdéi
Achaemenids
Auramazdfi
l'ig. 1.
coined. The difference with mano vohü (note 44) then is, that the inversion of the latter
was merely due to poetic license, whereas Ahura Mazdá was in actual use outside
Zarathustra's theology.
17 See Kaj Barr, D1ustreret Religionshistorie, p. 277: "Om karakteristikken ved mazdá,
den vise, er tilfpjet af Zarathustra, eller han har forefundet den frerdigprreget, lader sig
nreppe afgpre med sikkerhed", H. Humbach, Die Gathas des Zarathustra 1, p. 74: "Den
Ahuraglauben hater von seinen Vorgiingern übernommen. Wohl hat er ihn umgestaltet,
hat vielleicht den Namen Ahura Mazda geschaffen ... " It is not clear to me on what
grounds C. Colpe writes "Die Namensbildung wiire sicher ohne Zarathustra nicht
moglich gewesen" (in: Asmussen-Lresspe-Colpe, Handbuch der Religionsgeschichte,
Gottingen 1974, p. 343).
435
C. NOTES ON VEDIC NOUN-INFLEXION
>'f

NOTES ON VEDIC NOUN-INFLEXION

BY F. B. J. KUIPER

CHAPTER 1

l. The i~ and u.. dec1ension

. The paragraphs 1-5 contaín sorne íntroductory

rernarks to the rnain subject. víz. the Vedic i~ and u-
declensions. After a short exposition of Pedersen's
theory regarding the two fundarnentaIly different sys~
terns of lE. noun-inflexíon (§ 1). Benveniste' s explan-
ation of the i- and u-declensions is shown to be un-
satisfactory (§ 2). Then there follow sorne general
rernarks on the original accentuation and vowel-grada-
tion in the lE. noun-infIexion (§ 3) and sorne corree-
tions and additions to Pedersen' s explanation oí the
types vfkl-IJ and taná-IJ (§ 4). Finally traces of an
andent paradigrnatical ablaut are pointed out in the
declension of Ved. atm'ti and Av. pita (§ 5). In an
additional note sorne conclusions with respect to the
representation of the laryngal sounds in Indo-Iranian
and the relative chl'onology oí sorne sound-laws con-
nected with thern are laid clown.

§ 1. Pl'otel'odynamic and hysterodYllamic illflexion.

In the Indo~European noun-,declension thel'e may essen~
tial1y be distinguished two types of inflexion which show
a fundamental difference. The normal type in. the oldest
recorded languages is represented by Gr. naTl}(]. 'l'larSe a ,
'l'lar(]6c; or Skr. l'iÍjá. acc. l'iÍjanam. gen. l'iÍjTia/:t; here the
suffixes ~tel'~ and ~enp appeal' in a11 cases of the singular.
except the nominative .and accusative. in their weakest form
(~tl'p. ~n~). whereas the case-ending of úhe genitive is ~e/os.

161
439
 2
The weak cases of the stems in ~ip 'and "11~. on the contrary,
are formed accoI1ding to an entirely different principIe, the
suffix here Slhowing its strong grade (eijoi or eujou)
whereas the case~ending of the gen~tive has its weakest
form ~s. e.g. Skr. sÚTlúpf:¡jsünó~f:¡, Goth. sunu.~sjsunau~s.
Lith. sünu~sjsünai1ps. These different types oí inflexioll
however were not originally confined to definite noun~
classes. Though most lE languages show for Dhe stems in
i and u an inflexion of the type SkI'. sfmúf:¡jsúnóf:¡, which in
Classical Sanskrit is the only one jn use, yet Vedic nas.
genitives oí vhe type na'rf!ór; as well, d. arípf:¡jary~áf:¡,
krátu~f:¡jkrátv~af:¡. Likewise the stems in i show both the
type SÜTlÚ~f:¡ (in dev~tjdevpyfi~Q, pya~ being the strong grade
oE i) and the type na'r1}f! (in vrkt~QjvrlcípaT:t).
Accordingly we may expect úhe type siinúpQjsiltlóQ once
to have Ibeen in use also with vhe stems in r and n,' hut
genitives in ~ens by the side of the normal type dtjii/
l'¡fjñ~a~! (Gr. ae~YIa.e')!~ór;). are very rareo Bartholomae.
however, Wlho in his Arische Forschungen 1 (1882) 25-96
has given a Idetailed examination of the parallel declensions
of the stems in n, r. i and 11, has discovered 'Such a geni,tive
in pens in Av. xu~nB 'of the sun' (from Indoplranian
"stp:ms).
Pedersen, in his paper entitled 'La cinquieme déclinaison
latine' (Det Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, Histo~
risk~filologiske Meddelelser XI, 5: 1926), p. 23, wthile
opposing nat1}e!na:cf!ó!; to si1núp~jsünó~ and Skr. sákhii, dato
sákhy~e to 8gní h, dato agnáye, '8ssumes that these original
p
types of in,flexion ha'l1e ibeen partly eliminated by younger
normalized inflexions which Jl'ave analogically levelled out
either the strong 01' the weak stem~form; so e.g. Skr. sast¡
sa.sína~l whkhhas taken the place of an oM para'digm with
alternating stem~forms (~iójin~os). Likewise Ved. usfif:¡¡
162
440
3
u~ásaQ, Gr. ~wr;/~óor; show the normalized strong stem~form
u~ás~, r¡ó(J~; but traces of t;he original inflexion ,llave been
preserved in the Vedie gen. sg. u~áQ (from *u~s~ás, U$S~
being the weak stem~form of u~ás~) and in bhi~iÍ, an old
instrumc.'1tal of bhiyás~. T,he original paradigm must have
been lE * bMh~ós, aec. * bhih~ós~1[L, gen. * bhih~s~ós 1). But
in the Bksa11lhita the normalized instrumental bhiyása,
occurring 11 times, has already become the eommon form.
. T,bis tendency towards normalizing must already have
been at work in very early prehistoric times. It may be
supposed that the inflexion with alternating stem~.forms
(types nat17f! and sünú~T:t), though in historie times con~
fined to certain classes of nouns, reflects the original state
of affairs. But of course the evidenee even of the oldest lE.
languages do es not furnish sufficient proof for taking
this hypothesis as an established fact, since a11 of them
have considerably deviated from llhe inflexional system of
primitive Indo~European. Pedersen dbserves (p. 23-24):
'Quant aux lois qui ont régi ces variations, il est difficile
d' endire 'grand' chose. On entrevoit que la répartition des
1) 1 write here h instead of the commonly used <l, though 1 should
have preferred to follow the common practice. But <l is wholly unfit as
a designation of laryngal sounds and cannot but give rise to wrong
ideas with the outsiders. Pedersen, who fo,rmerly used the symbol Sf
(Keltischc Grammatik 1, 1909, 177) now prefers H (Hittitisch und dic
andcrcn ¡.e. Sprachen, Det Kgl. D. Vidensk. Sclsk., 'HistAil. Meddelel-
ser XXV, 2; 1938; p. 180 n. 1) which has also been adopted by Johan-
sson. 1 must confess that the use of a capital in the midst of sma))
letters strikes me as typographically ugly while it is disturbing and
wearisome in reading, and c1umsy in writing. As it is desirable to main.
tain sorne modification of H, the symbol adopted by sorne distinguished
scholars and as Q cannot be cómbined with the designation of a syllabic
function (h), the most convenient symbol seems to me to be h, which
o
is c1ear and not liable to be mutilated through the los5 of the diacritical
mark.
163
441
 4
degrés rvocaliques a dépendu, des l'orígine,de l'accent, et
on peut soup<;onner qu'il a existé, dan s la flexion des noms,
deux différents schémas de l'accent et du jeu des alter~
nances vocaliques. Mais tout essai d'en faire une théorie
complete semble etre condamné a rester hypothétique. Car
il est évident que, ,déja dans la langue~mere indo~euro~
péenne, des innovations et des actions analogiques nom~
breuses avaient croisé le développement phonétiqUe et en
avaient si souvent détruit les effets, particulierement dans
le domaine des noms, que ce n' est guere une exagération de
dire que <fout le systeme a été refait.' Pedersen then cau~
tiously suggests that oríginally there may have been two
accentual types, ,viz. 1) the type sünú~lJ.: nom.~ -/gen.
~~-2) the type nanJe: nomo -~/gen. --~. For these
types he creates the terms 'Hexio.n protérodyname' and
•flexion hystérodyname' respectively, M)')!apt~ denoting the
combination of strong vowel~grade and accent (p. 24 n. 1).
The terms are a little pompous to my taste, hut it will be
best to retain them. As to tlhe accent ~nd the vowel~grade
of the root~sylléllble and the suffix there are Ihowever many
exceptions. A clear instance of the proterodynamic inflexion
is, forinstance, Ved. s§.nu/snólJ.. In 'accol'dance with the
short case~ending ps in the genitive, one might expect ~i
instead of pai, ~ei for the dative. But in Indo~Iranian ~ai
has already beengeneralizedas a dative ending. In the
plural cases t'he forms to be expected would have been
1< snóbhilJ., 1< snó~u 'etc., but the Ve;da has snúbhilJ., snú~u.
Apparently llhe proterodynamic type of inflexion has been
remodelled in the plural cases according to the hystero~
dynamic one. And, in fact, the original forms in --obhilJ. etc.
have been preserved in an isolated, anomalous paradigni
(see p. 34). It must he emphasized that in investigations
of this kind the 'originar, ol' at least the pre~historic in ..
164
442
5
flexion can onIy he deduced from the scanty remnants
that subsist as anomaIies in historical times.
In his 'Etudes lituaniennes' (1933). p. 21 sqq.,Pedersen
shortly formuIates again his hypothesis, while referring Skr.
mati~1J. to an lE. paradigm * ménti~sj* mQtéi~s and likewise
Skr. sünú~1J. to lE. *séunu~sj* sunéu~s. Now the represent~
atives <;>f this word in the various Ianguages show a remark~
a.ble .opposition: cp. Skr. stinú~IJ., Lith. siínus, OChSl.
syn'6 (from *siínJ.l~s) on the one hand and Goth. sunus,
Olcel. sanr, Ags. sunu (from 1< siínu~s) on the other. It was
a felicitous idea of Pedersen' s (op. c. 54-55) to explain
the ti as a phenomenon of secondary abIaut, of the same
kind as, e.g., in &[;WVflt (: ~EÍW)!v¡.tf.J!), which stands for an
oIder * Oet";'VEVpt (: ~ftY.YV peY ). As to Skr. matí~IJ., we should
remember that the Vedic words in ~ti~ have as a rule the
weak vowel 'gra1de in their root syllable (which must be due
to secondary normalization) 1) but show no definite rule
of accentuation, being accented partly on the root syllable
and partIy on the suffix. Both accentuations may occur in
one and the same word, e.g. matí~1J. (in Mantra literature):
máti~1J. (S'B., Piinini). This clearly points to an olcler para~
digm with shifting accent (s. Meillet, Intradllctian R 317).
Pedersen has not worked out his idea. Two other recent
attempts at elucidating the principIes of the lE noun~in~
flexion started from a different standpoj,nt and ignored his
observations.
Benveniste's theory will be discussed in § 2. Kurylowicz,
Etúdes inda-européennes, I (1935) 131 sqq., gives in his
chapter on the nO,un~inf1exion a comprehensive synthetic
construction in order to explain úhe inflexional system in its
connexion with the chronology of the various ablaut~pheno~
mena. However admirable ,his work is, still, 1 think, a more
1) See B. Lindner¡ Altínd. Nominalbildung, 76-79.
165
443
 6 7
modest, inductive investigation may have its raison d'étre.
As Indo~Iranian and Greek appear to contain sorne in~
teresting ~vidence in support of Pedersen's idea, 1 propose
to discuss here those facts from t:he i~ andu~declension that
seem to contain more or less valuable indications for the
reconstruction of the preMstoric inflexional system. If we
can reconstruct with sorne probability the state of ,affairs,
immediately preceding the attested facts of Vedic, A vestan
and Homeric Greek, a more salid foundation will be laid
for furóher investigations Hke those of Kurylowicz. Perhaps
it will then also he possible toexplain the fundamental'
principIe accol'ding to which sorne nouns decline like nar{¡e
and others like sünú~h-.
§ 2. Some remarlcs on Benveniste's theory.
In the fourth chapter of his book, entitled 'Origines de
la formation des noms en indo~européen' Benveniste has
propounded an ootirely different view concer~ing the .i~
and u~declensions. According to him the Vedlc stems tU
~u~ with a genitive in ~~ah- (e.g., mádhu!mádhvah-) derive
from neutral consonantal stems in ~~, e.g. lE. *médh 1J.!
*médh1J.~os. By the si de of these neuters there existed
der'¡vative vowel stems in ... eu.... comprising nouns of the
animate gender and adjectives, e.g. *süneu.... A similar
analysis ,is given for the stems in ... i... , the ending ...! of the
neuters Ibeing caBed an 'élargissement' whereas the ending
... ei ... according to Benveniste is a 'suffix' (see p. 73 and
74) 1).
1) It is desirable that this distinction should be given up as no sh~rp
line of demarcation can be drawn between them (cp. Persson. Beitrage
zur idg. Worlforschung 558). WhUe Meillet. Introduction 8 176.app lies
the term 'élargissement' to such formative elements as occut 10 both
verbal and nominal forms (as contrasted with nominal al'ld verbal suf
fixes) and compares the 'élargissement' JekJ in Gr. ¡rAéxw. Benveniste
p. 148 uses the term for suffixal elements showing no trace of vowel
166
444
It may be stated as a fundamental objection to this
theory that it is bascd upon a rather normal type of inflexion
mádhujrnádhvah though there is no evidence whatever that
this type is older than the others and reflects any more the
original inflexional system. Accordingly Benveniste is unable
to aceount for the interesting type d¿t'Ujdróh, siinujsnóh.
though this archaic type admittedly preserves sorne scanty
reHes of the prehistoric inflexion: on account of mádhul
inádhvah- he assumes an original paradigrn *dónJ/*dón.!~os.
and likewise *§ón1,!/*gónl)~os (cp. Gr. (5óev!ooveó<;, yóvv/
/,ov'I'6<; ). But the Greek genitives can easily beexplained
as new formations, sine e in Greek owing to a rearrangement
of the noun~inf1exion nearly a11 substantives of the: tJ.~
decIension have a genitive in ~vo<; (~Fo;). As compared
with the anomalous genitive:s dról;, * jñóf; they eannot be
oId and must evidentIy be innovations of Greek. Latin has
also genüs, not *genuis. It may be added that lllominatives
like *gónl,!, *dón}, dhéll,!, *póil,! (Orig. 53) are unacceptable
from the standpoillt of lE. phonology. But Benveniste
needed these forms in order to save his proposition that
the genitive ending was pS after a vowel and Fe/os after a
consonant (p. 64, 68). This statement cannot however be
correcto The gen. sing. gn¿~h- 'o! the wife', which seems
to be formed from a vowel-stem gná~. derives in reality
from *g!!neh 2 S where -s follows after a laryngal consonant.
F
alternation. In thís way Melllet, Mélanges de Saussure 101, explains
the absence of 'vowel alternation in the s- aorist by calling s an 'élar-
gissement' and Benveniste, Origines 1. 159 gives a similar explanation
for the infix n. It wiII be clear that, since the definition of 'é¡arg¡sse~
ment' has been derived from the very facts which afterwards are ex-
plaíned by lt. these explanations are mere tautologies. And as both -s-
and -n- really admit ablaut-grades( d. Ved. á-bhai-~-u~: áJbhy-asJetám
J
and Ved. trQátti: Lith. tréndu) the dístinction ís incorrect too. So it 15
preferable to 'use only such general terms as 'formatlve element' or
'suffix', ep. also Persson. op. c. 959.
167
445

And Av. xV'áng 'of the sun' (from 1<s~an~s), which Ben~
veniste, p. 66, in vain tried to -dispose of, remains a clea!
instance of a genitive in ~s after a nasal.
There are sorne additional difficulties of equal import~
ance arisin9 from Benveniste's starting~point mádhuj
mádhval}.. The paradigms oE such words as gaú.~Q, naú.~Q
which on account oE their archaic inflexion are undouotedly
ancient, must then be explained as the result oE. a fortuitous
mixing up üf two different stems in ~l,! and in ~eu~. Other
paradigms like those of Ved. dyaú~Zl and pánthá~l}. are
according to B. composed of three stems. Noattempt is .
however made at an explanation of this strange phenomenon.
lt remains obscure why, e.g., the genitive oE *glJofJ
had to be taken from a derivative stem 1< gl!~eu~ (p. 58),
whereas *médhfJ has the regular form 1omédhl,!~os; and yet
this abnormal blending is believed to have occurred regular ...
1y! So the theory appears to be inadequate to explain the
really antique para-digms in a convincing way 1) .
Apart from the morphological difficulties it maybe objected
that B. is forced to assume that not only "ave;, {Jove;, yÉ"ve;
but also adjectives like {)ij~vc; (p. 56) and such masculine
nouns as at'Í~l}. 'enemy', sákhii 'friend', páti~Q 'hushand',
sátru~Q 'enemy' originally were neuters (p. 56, 61, 62 etc.).
In fact, Benveniste holds the grammatical gender in lE. to
1) The Vedic facts are as foIlows. There are but 9 stems forming
a gen. in .·va~l. Two of these are adjectives fl'equehtly used as a neuter
(mádhu, vásu). whereas pllSÚ-~ is only once used as such. There is no
evidence whatever that, e.g., krátu-~/krátva/:t or parasúdQ/instr. parasvti
originaJly were neuters no!' that this type of inflexion was in any way
connected with the neuter gender. Apprt from PMU there are but 5
neuter substantives in ·-u, viz. tigu, ktfú, ¡tinu, dáru and sfinu but their
gen. ending is -o~ (k~ó/:t, dró~, snóQ) and nearly al! neuter adJectives
are dec1ined in the same way. Of y'ásu, a neuter according to SayaI}a,
no singu'lar form occurs.
168
446
9
be a re1atively young phenomenon (p. 57, especially p.
59-60). But though we shaIl never know what psychic
reality 'originally' corresponded to the lE. system of
nominal classification, this system evidently dates back to
a remo te prehistoric pasto There is no evidence whatever
that the grammatical gender in lE. results from a late
development, since the Hittite genus commune apparently
is an ínnovation of that language (see H. Pedersen, Hitti~
tisch' und die anderen i~e. Sprachen 13-19).
The merits of Benveniste's well~known book made me
dwell upcn rhis theory. 1 must confess that the fourth
ch"lpter seems to me the least successful oE the whole work.
§ 3. Generall!'emarks.
As the proterodynamic and hysterodynamic inflexions
require úhe oppositioñ of a root~syllable and a suffix, mono~
syIlabic root~nouns like Ved. dht~Qjdhiyál}., bhrú~l}.jbhru[JáQ
have to be left aside (d. Bartholomae, Arische Forschungen
1, 25, Pedersen, La cinq. décl. lato 22). Trhey are comparable
with the common type oE root~nouns mú.tjmudá~l (with
normalized weak stem~form). On account of OHG. and
OS. bráwa. Ags. brrew, Olee!. brá (from * bhre(!~) by the
side of Ags. brú., it may be supposed that the original
paradigm was not * bhruh~sjbhruh~os but nomo * bhreuh~s,
acc. * bhréuh-T[l, gen. * bhruh~ós, loe. pI. *bhruh~sú.. On
the other hand monosyllabic nouns containing a lengthened
root show both types of inflexion. Thus Av. hvar'djxV~ng
is clearly proterodynamic whereas, e.g., zyajz'dmo represents
the ,hysterodynamic type. the Indo~Iranian prototypes
being *sú~ar¡* sv~án-s and *1hy-:a( m) -s¡Zhi~m-ás respec~
tively. For the latter word see p. 87. It must be observed,
however, that even such a monosyllable as lE. *dó(m)s!
*dém-s (GAv. d'áng, Gr. OfO~) is opposed to lE. *§hZó(m)s¡
169
447
 10
1<§hZm_és (Ved. k~iÍ~l(k~máf:¡, Av. za(z-amó) in an analogous
way.
One general tendency may be discovered in a11 new
formations of the lE. languages: aS a rule the vowel alter-
nation in the root-syllable has been eliminated (cp. Peder-
sen. Etudes lit. 22). So out of the old paradigm 1< jáni-s(
1< gniÍs Vedic and A vestan havealready developed· two
differen~ words jáni-f:¡fjány-uf:¡ (Av. Jainyóis) and gniÍ-f:¡.
acc. gna-m.
The original accentual oppositions' have been discarded
and in general it will be safe to draw no conclusions from
the accent. Ver y often the nominative of the proterody-
namic flexion seems to have adopted the accentuation of
the oblique cases. for instance. súnú:..h instead of *súnu-h
(lE. 1< séunu-s) according to the gen. ~únó-f:¡, matí-f:¡ owing
to matéf:¡ 1). Since the hysterodynamic stems were aIso
oxytones. the majority of the words in -u and -i may thus
have come to aceent the final syIlable. which HnalIy became
a rule for the adjectives in -lh
Another complication arose from the general tendency
to throw back the accent of a neuter. standing alongside of
an oxytone mascuHne 01' feminine. e.g. vHQí-f:¡, m.: vt~TJi,
n.: mahii.m. BCC. m.: máhi. n.; Gr. 1jWC; f.: {'el'uc; n.; Lith.
skaudils m.: skaiídu n. See Wackernagel-Debrunner. Alt-
indo Gramm. 111. 16. Pedersen. Etudes lituaniennes 58. So
by the side of the hysterodynamic noun pasú-f:¡jpasváf:¡
(from lE. 1< pekéu-s/* pekIJ.-ós) a neuter form pásu is found
BS. 3. 53. 23. lts accent agrees with the one presupposed
by Goth. faíhll, OS. fehu. Accordingly the accent of bhe
hysterodynamic adjectives mádhu-f:¡ and vásu-f:¡ may be
due to the frequent use of the neuter forms mádhu and
vásu. On aeeount of their inflexion the lE. prototypes must
1) As to the accentual opposition Skr. bahú-~l: Gr. ni'íxuq, compared
by Pedersen, La cinq. décl. lato 24 n. 2, see below p. 46.
170
448
11
have been 1<m edhéll-sl*m edhlJ.-ós and *l}eSell-s/*~teSlJ~ós.
There is admittedly sorne reason for assuming that
suffixes with the o-grade of the voealism have been un-
aeeented. ep. IJón;w(!: (JóT11(!, nár(!w~ (-óus): olxev; (-eus).
Now SkI'. biihú-f:¡ (from lE. *bhen 2 §héu-s, ep. Av.
-bazaus) is oxytone in aeeordanee with its e-grade (cp.
Ionic n1xw~). But Skr. sákha. which is also clearly hystero-
dynamic. has the o-grade like Gr. né¡,¡?W (aee. sákhay-am
'with a from o aeeording to Brugmann's law). Perhaps its
unexpected aceentuation (see Pederse.n. La cínq. décl. lato
24) may be explained in' this way. But the interrelations
between these various factors (opposition of ñhe cases,
opposition of gender. e- ancl o-grade of vocalism and
accent) remain obscure.
For a methodical researeh it is important to Jlote that
Vedic and A vestan have already largely generalized the
proterodynamic inflexion of the stems in -i- and -u-o In the
post-Vedic language the type krátu-f:¡jkrátvaf:¡ has entirely
died out and in the BS. this proeess can already be
observed: at the side of the nt1'. gen. mádhvaf:¡ occurring 67
times the form mádhoZl is found 13 times (mádhunaf:¡ 9
times), likewise at the side of vásvaf:¡ (38 times): vásof:¡
(8 times) and vásunaIJ. (11 times): See Macdonell, Ved.
Gr. 296 n. 7 an? 8. Aecordingly no eonclusions can be
drawn from words of the type súnú-f:¡jsünó~l. unless there
are spedal indications proving such a word to have been
proterodynamic of old. The few Vedic words of the type
Icrátu-f:¡jkrátvaf:¡. on the other hand, which have resisted the
general normalizing tendeney. may be relied upon.
On the eontrary in the Greek inflexion of the substantive
stems in -U-. the hysterodynamic type -v;(vo;; (01' -w(- Fu~)
has heen generalized. No argument can accordingly be
based tlpon them unless it can be proved that they eontinue
lE. prototypes. Consequently this investigation will mainly
deal with the anomalous forms.
171
449
 12
§ 4. The origin 01 the Vedic class vrkt~h-fvrky~¿¡J.
tanú~Qjtanv~¿Q.
Before we proceed to examine the stems in ~i~ and ... u ...
Pedersen' s statements about th~ infIexion of tanú"'Q,
vadhú"'Q etc. may be corrected in sorne details. The recon~
struction of the hysterodynamic type is more problematic
tnan that of the proterodynamic one, since the latter has
mainly eliminated the ablaut~alternations in the root ... syIláble
(e.g. sanujsanoQ replacing sanujsnóQ) but has for the rest
remained unaltered, whereas the hysterodynamic type must
have introduced important changes in its case... endings. So
the whole j.nfIexional system of this class has been remod ...
elled. On account of ¡ral11e/¡rareór; the hysterodynamic
stems in ... u must nave declined: nam .... ~u (s), acc .... érpp.,
gen . ... -¡,tós. T,hough this type of inflexion does- not subsist in
Indo~Iranian as an independent class, there is however
sufficient evidence to prove that this infIexion, which may
seem somewhat phantastical at first siglit, really exists.
Compare Ved. dyaú~Qjdiv ...áQ (see p. 38), Av . ... baziius!
... bázvó (p. 44) and probably in Hittite the stems in ... i ... like
za66aisjza6&ijas 'battle' (p. 59), which correspond com~
pletely to Skr. rajalrajñ~aQ or u~aQju~(s)~áQ. But .apart
fram these scanty remnants of the old paradigm the
hysterodynamic stems in ~i... and ... ll~ have adopted a new
nominative and accusative ending in ... u ...s and ... u~m on the
analogy of the proterodynamic paradigm.
A similar normalization seems to nave changed the nomo
and acc. of the type vrkí~QjvrkY¿Q which by its genitive
ending is clearly characterized as a hysterodynamic noun
(as opposed to the type devíjdevyaQ). In view of Ved.
biihú"'~l: Av. ~bazáus or Ved. bhrú"'Q: lE. *bhreuh~s (see
p. 9) we may assume the following paradigm:
nomo *-¡,t!q!! ... t~1i ...s > *vrk~ya ...s
acc. * -¡,t!q!!~téIH[L > * vfk ... yá ...am (~am)
lí2
450
13
and gen. * -¡,t!qg ... ih ... ós > * v[k ... i...ás
loe. pI. *-¡,t!qlJ . . ih ...sú > * v[k~i~~ú
In Vedic this inflexion has been normalized by extending
the weak stem with ~ih ... to all cases and by levelling out
the accentuation of the strong cases: vfkt... h-fvrkíaQ, loe. pI.
vrkt~u 1). All nouns of this class are oxytone thus pre ...
serving ,the oId hysterodynamic accentuation. The new
accusative was * vrk ...rh ...am = vfkíam. There is no reaSOl1
for supposing that the original form ended in ·... im (Peder ...
sen, La cinq. décl. lato 39 sq.). The form in ...íam is fully
clear, (mudáQ : múdam =
vrkíaQ : vfkíam) and analogical
formations in ... im do not appear until the AthS. (nadím,
see Macdonell, Ved. Gr. 274 n. 5). Latin vim, quoted by
Pedersen, is a monosylléllbic root ... noun and has as such to
be left out of consideration 2) .
It wilI be noticed that in the above paradigm the general
symbol h has been usoo. We must suppose that the class of
vfkt"'Q comprises both words with h 2 ('stems in ...ta ...') and
words with h i (' stems in ...te ...·), cp.. Skr. naptt"'Q: Lith.
nept'é. with 'intonation douce' pointing to ... é < *... iie;
similarly vfkt"'Q: Lith. vilké 3).
In the ~S. the hiatus resuIting from the loss of the ínter-
vocalic h has been preserved throughout: the forms vrkyam,
vrkyaQ, vfkye etc., are always to be read as trisyIlables:
vfkíam, vrkíaQ etc. There are but 3 exceptional cases (see
Wackernagel-Debrunner, Ai. Gr. 111, 170) 4).
1) Cf. Pedersen's remark on the accent of pitrliu, nurlláat in La cinq.
décl. lato 38 n. 1 and Kurytowicz. Etuck3 índo~eul'op. l, 140.
2) Like bhrá~1J « lE. *bhreuh~s, page 9), Ved. dhl~1;t presupposes
a paradigm *dMih~s, acc. *dhéih~t¡I, gen. dhíh~ós. lt consequently derives
from a different source but in Vedic its normalized inflexion feH together
with vrk¡~I;t.
3) As to the accent of vi/ke (instead of *vilke 01' vi/Icé), see
Pedersen. Etudes lítuaniennes 58,. who assumes anaIogicaI vfddhí.
4) A lrace oí.oId paradigmatical ablaut is perhaps to be found in
173
451
 14
j
After these introductor)r remarks the explanation of the
type taná-lJ.jtanvalJ presoots nodifficulties. It clearly
reflects the ancient hysterodynamic paradigm with the
same normalization as in che type vrkí~lJ. J. Schmidt, Die
Pluralbíldungen der idg. Neutra 56 sq., and Pedersen, La
cinq. décl. lato 41. however as sume at the side of it a pro-
terodynamic inflexion parallel to devljdevyd.1J (lE. *déilJF
ih 2/* dilJ-íét¡2~s) . 1t wilI be rememhered that Classical
Sanskrit has in fad a paradigm vadhü-lJ/vadhválJ that
would very well fit in with this hypothesis. As however
this type of inflexion is unknowJ1 in Vedic, Pedersen is
forced to assume that the Classical paradigm is as oId as
the Vedic one (taná-lJjtanvalJ) but belongs to a different
dialecto This view is clearly untenabIe as the type vadhá-IJ,/
vadhvd.1J can be proved to be of a late date and to have
come into existence in about the same period whoo the
noun~ciass of vrkt-IJ, 'gave up its own inflexion and adopted.
that of dev1. In morphology too, a tendency towards sym-
metry may be ohserved though in a less degree than is the
case in phonology. At the outset Vedic had. the following
types of inflexion:
devljdevyalJ: vrkt-lJjvrkíalJ,
tanú-lJjtanúalJ
The type vfkt-IJ stood in opposition to devt 'and in
correlation to tanú-IJ,: tanú-IJ however had only a correl-
ate 1) but no opposite type beside it. Accordmgly when
Ved. sámi 'endeavour; effort' whlch in spite of its accent probably
belongs to the hysterodynamic inflexion on account of its Instr. sámiii
(twice) pointing to -ih-ii. Besides sámiii, símiii (1. 151. 1) occurs once,
cp. símiviin. The original inflexion may have been *khem·i~hI*k~m4
ih.ós. The genitive is however sámyiilJ. (once) instead of *sBmiBIJ., so
the word seems to have been remodelled after the type devildevy-g1J. in
consequence of its asigmatic nominative.
1) lt may be noted that tBnú.1J. and vfki.1J. are entirely parallel both
in inflexion and accentuation (Macdonell, Ved. Gr. § 3~4, a, b, c;
174
452
"
16
vrkt~1J and devl coincided in the classical paradigm of
nadi, tanú~f;¡ would have lost its correlate type also hut for
the influence of the correlate v[kl-IJ and the tendency
towards symmetry which were so strong as to change the
inflexion oE tanú-l) likewise. So in Classical Sanskrit we
find a new correlation:
nadijnadyálJ: vadhü~lJjvadhválJ
A similar tendency may be observed in Greek where
:rcijXVi; and :rcé2e'),v~ have developed into a correlate class of
:rc6Al~ (see p. 45 sq.). Pedersen's objection (p. 41) is un-
justifioo.
Sci the original infIexion of tanú-IJ must have been:
*ten-lJ-eh2- (s) > *tanva(s)
'1< ten-lJ-éh2-rp. > *tanváam, -d.m
* t en-a-'h2-ós > *tanuás
'* t ell-U-h2·SÚ > *tanü~ú
This infIexion has beoo normalized in the 'same way as
v[kt-IJ. The hiatus in tanú-as, tanú-e has been preserved,
wioh a few exceptions onIy (11 VIIIl IXl X2) which are
evidently of recent origin (Ai. Gr. lIt 188). The acc.
tanúam is like vrkíam the oId form; for new formations in
-úm occurring first in AS. and VS., see Lanman 408, Mac-
donell, Ved. Gr. § 384, e and W.-Debrunner 111, 189 sq.
1m view of GAv. tanv~m the form tanüm (Gathic and
y A v.) is pwbahly mere1y graphical.
It is interesting that we find the original paradigm pre-
served in an isolated mstance. By combining the Avestan
forms which Bartholomae quotes S.V. hizü- and hizvá
'tongue' we obtain the paradigm
W.-Debrunner, Ai. Gr. 111, 189). This is sufficient reason why the
theory of R. Norton Albright, The Vedic dec/ens'Íon 01 the type vrkis,
cannot be accepted ..
175
453
 16
nomo YAyo hizva <"le sigh~l}~eh2
acc. YAyo hizvé!m <"le sigh~l}~éh2~rr
instr. GAv. hizva 1) < "le sigfz~u~h2~é
gen. GYAv. hizvo 2), hizvas~ 3) < "le sigh~u~~2~ÓS
loe. GAv. hizvo
instr, pI. GAv. hizubis (= "le hizübis) <"le sigh~u~h2~bhís
In compounds as well as in the derivative hizuma-, m.
'mouth' the stelÍl hizii- is used. In Vedic the paradigm has
been normalized by extending the strong stem ta all
cases: jihva, instr. jihváya, gen. jihv&yalJ, instr. pI. jih-
v&bhi!;z, From the close agreement between Ved. svasrú-!;z,
Lat, socras and OChSl. svekry it may be inferred' that the
nouns with a sigmatic nominative have been normalized
in the late lE. period, whereas those with anasigmatic
nominative became influenced, in the same period 01' later,
by the normalized a-declension. Cp, Ved. sárva, Lat. salva,
but "le S eluh~ in salü-t~ (Meillet, Etudes sur l' étymologie et le
vocab, du v, slave, 269).
In view of this A vestan paradigm which fortunately has
been preserved the correctness of the inflexion *ten~l}~
eh2~ (s) . etc. reconstructed aboye c'annot, 1 believe, be
doubted, the less so since it is in perfect accordance with
the other hysterodynamic paradigms like dyaú~~l. Indirectly
Av, hizva confirms our view that ,the parallel type v[kt-!;z
represents lE. "le t,f!qIJ+eh- (s) 4).
1) Probably trisyllabic (hizua) in y, 31. 3e.
2) Trisyllabic in Y. 31, 19 d ,
3) TrisylIabic in y, 51, 13c (read: xvaiS syáUl'}n"l1is hizuasca) ,
4) Perhaps Ved, apu'fi 'a kind oE disease' (apue R,.S. 10, 103, 12b,
apu'fim AS, 9, 8, 9) originalIy declined in the same way. The supposed
etymological connection with pú- 'to purify' is improbable (see the
various renderings quoted by Neisser, Z. Wb. d. RV. 1, 61); the word
is presumably related to Av, alsa- 'Schaden, Verlust', Lith. opus 'weak,
invalid' (Walde-Pokorny 1, 47), cp, Av.8xtiS 'disease' ("leh2eq!!~ 'to
damage'), daiwis 'kind of disease' (*dab- 'to damage', cp, Swiss Leibes-
176
454
17
Conseguently, against Pedersen's supposition, no evi ..
dence in support ofan oId proterodynamic paradigm in
....!...uh/l}éh2~S can be found in Indo~Iranian. As to OChSI.
svekr'óvamo, svekr'óvami cand svekrovax'ó, it is very im-
probable that these forms should continue the original
weak stem in ~~léh2'( ~v,a-) as Pedersen, op. c. 41, supposes.
They are in aIllikeliho?d new formations for "lesvekrovbmo
.etc .. like O. Czech materám etc. taking the place of
mater;;m'ó. See Vondrák-Grünenthal, Slav. Gramm. II2,
44, van Wijk, Gesch. der aksl. Spr. I. 182. But though
the evidence is very poor (Gr. neéafJa and Skr. amúlJ,
according to Schmidt, Pluralbildungen 57) we must assume
on theoretical considerations that once a declension
-f-uhfl}éh~s, SkI'. ~ü/~vas (parallel to -i/yas) has existed
too. Meillet's scepticism (Etudes 267) is unjustified.
It may be stated as a general fact that the protero-
dynamic inflexion has Ieft but few traces except for the
i~ and u"¿edension, In the s--declension it presented the
greatest diHiculties, as it obscured the case-endings: from
"le gen~es- the paradigm would have been nomo "le gén-s/gen.
"le gnés~s. As opposed to the hysterodynamic type, which at
most affectecl the radical syllable (e.g. U?&s/u?(s)-ás) , the
proterodynamic s~declension therefore has been eliminated
in the prehistoric' periodo There is but one instance of a
proterodynamic stem in -n- 1), whereas those of the stems
in liguids an<d explosives are totalIy wanting,
schaden)' azahva-, azana-, ayra, ayostis 'id: (cp. ayó 'dangerous')
sárana- 'id.' (=Ved, visará- 'id:: sn1'tJti 'breaks, hurts'), tbaesah- 'id:
etc, See Schwyzer, Oriento Stud, Pavry 445 n. 1. Kuiper, Glotta 21.
284, Acta Ot'ient, 17, 23, 34. 44; Lommel, ZII. 5i 3 sq. Similarly from
*hep 'to harm, to damage': *hep-l)eh/*h e p-u-h-ós > apv'fi/*(a)puás.
But no weak cases occur. As to GAv. afSman-, which is no doubt
unrelated, see Nyberg, lrans lorntida religioner 268, 511.
1) But cp, alsoGAv,dáng (see p, 9).
177
455
 18 19

Survey. The types nadHz, tanúpQ. etc., though normalized, han

been c1assed among the hysterodynamie stems because
Proterodynamic H ysterodynamic
Normalized t¡'cir oblique cases still reflect rather faithfully the pre p

(type sünúpQ.) (type naníe)

historie inflexional system.
l1~iihlu~áQ.
§ 5. Ved. ¿tmájtmána and the original inflexion of
stems in nasal ~ (hvara ) jxU;jng (50ní el oon/e o.; Ved. pité..
or liquid
ján ipQ.jgn ii ... Q. ...stM~Q.jsth ... áQ. vasiijvaSiíyaQ. Like the proterodynamie stems (e.g. dárujdróQ.) the
( 1< g!!én~fj2 ...sj (1< st ... éh 2...sj hysterodynamic ones must also once have had vowel-
1< st ... h
gradation in the root-syllable in accordance with the place
1< g'!n ... éh2~s) 2 ós)
p

of the accent. In the nomo and acc. we might expect the

stemsin ~iá~ devtjdevyii~t nadt".h!nadíaQ. vidyiijvidyiiyaly. reduced grade, whieh however can hardly be distinguished
( 1<deíIJ. ... ih 2 j ( "ned... féh 2... sj from the normal grade. The other cases of the singular
1< dilJ ... iéh2"'S) " ti ed... ih2"'ÓS ) have the weak or reduced grade. Thus the difference
Gr. yAwnaj between Gr. xrcí<;!xu,}'6c; and Lat. pectenlpectinis may be
*ylaaaij,; 1) explained as resulting from a paradigm nomo *Pekté, acc.
Av. hizvajhizvó jihviij jihviiyaly. * p ektén-rrz, gen. 1< pkt ... en-ós. A nominative in -:e being feJt
stems in ~(,!a" n(!éafJa?
as anomalous, pecten has adopted the -n ... of the oblique
p1. arriti~l ? tanú",Q./tanúaQ.
( "ten ... (,!éh",sl cases. In Greek the monosyl1abic stem was generalized and
consequently the o11ominative became sigmatic according to
"t en"'l1h2"'óS)
the general rule for the monosyllabie stems (d. Schwyzer,
stems in ~ep [Lat. terrígena Lat. vatesjvatis L. fides/fídei Griech. Gramm. 1, 159). Likewise the difference between
Ved. go~áT}i... Q.] Ved. retodhii... Q./ Gr. })w~, Lat. aurora on the one hand and Ved. l1~áQ. on the
retodhpáQ. other may only be accounted for by positing a paradigm
stems in ~ie" vrkt",Q.jvrkí8Q. L. malcríes '" eh2US ... os/*h211S-S~Ós. 1011 Indo-lranian the vocalism of the
( "1,!!q!!"'i éh 1...s, weakcases has beeo11 generalized.
Lith. vilke) A striking instance of this pamdigmatieal ablaut is to be
found in Ved. átmiijio11str. tmána, whieh has not yet been
stems in ~~le .. nAr¡ {}fJ,; j :11;).r¡ {}vor; L. plebes/plébei
explained hitherto (see Wackernagel, Ai. Gr. 1, 61; II, 1.
( 1< pichidhliéhrsJ
12; III 490). The forms with tm-, though occurring only in
... *dhl1h 1 ... ós) 2)
the mantrie litera tu re, must have. belonged td the living
speech since they appear al so in Prakrit, e.g. PaJi tumo,
1) . See Pedersen, La cinq. décl. lato 30. tumassa etc. (Bloch, L'1ndo~Aryen 83). The original para-
2) See Pedersen, La cinq. décl. lat. 62 sq. digm was evidently as foIlows:

li8 179

456 457
 20
nomo * /!lt~m~ó > atma
acc. * ehlt~m~ón~f!l > atmanam 1)
gen. * hlt~m~ en~ós > tmánaQ.
So K.' F. Johansson was fully right in supposing tm~ to
be due. to paradigmatical vowel~gradation 2), though in
1897 it was of course not yet poss~ble to demonstrate it
satisfactorily. The connection of atma with ániÚ 'breathes'
(PW., Bartholomae, Stud. Z. idg. Sprachgesch. 2, lOO,
otherwise Altir. Wb. 359; Thumb-Hirt, Hb. des Skr. 71
etc.) cannot accordingly be upheld 3). Ved. atma is related
to Ags. ream, OS. ¿thum 'breath' and may further be con~
nected with Hom. l71O(! 'heart' and with Av. XUa{}ra~ (from
*su~atra~, a thematic derivative stem like Gr. {Mºoc; from
fJ<5wº). The original meaning of xUa{}ra~ is accordingly
'evfJvpJa' rather than 'good breatlling' (as supposed by
Bartholomae in: his dictionary).
If Kurylowicz,P,race filolog. 11. 236, is right in referring
Ved. mata. Gr. ,¿fin7º to lE. *meh2~ter~. the genitive would
probably have been * ml}2trós. but no trace of it has sur~
vived. The inflexion of pita, on the contrary. still pre~
serves sorne remarkable traces of old paradigmatical ablaut.
which it is worth while examining more closely.
As is generally admitted. both pita, nar~(! and duhita,
1?vyárr¡º contain lE. *h 2. Scholars nowadays equally agree
that h (and especially h 2 ). when immediately following
a tenuis, has combined with this preceding sound in the
Indo~Iranian period to form an aspirate tenuis. Sanskrit
pita however has no aspirate but points to lE. *pl}2tér~ with
1) Instead of the normal form iitm'tinam there is cine instance of the
analogical formation tmánam (1, 63. 8).
2) In his paper entitled 'Bidrag tilI Rigvedas tolkning' (1897), p. 34.
3) A discussion of various other views will be found in Keith,
Aitareya AraT)yaka 231 n. 11.
1RO
458
21
vocalic h 2 • Consequently we are justified in concluding that
the syIlabic Q2 did not affect a preceding tenuis.
In the Indo~Iranian word for 'daughter' the lE. 9
(1?vy án7º) has admittedly become gh owing to a similar
influence of the foIlowing h 2 1). which must accordingly
have been a non~vocalic fJ 2 (dhugh'2tér~). In Gathic the
form *dhughtar.~ has become *dhugdhar~ > dugdar: owing
to the law of Bartholomae. which must have operated as
éarly as the primitive Indo~Iranian period '2). Consequently
9 11 had already become gh in a still earlier period of primo
Indo~Iranian.
On the other hand the i in Ved. duhitá originating from
a vocalic Q2 (as in pita) points to an I~I form "dhugQ2tar~.
W e have evident1y to assume an old paradigm having in
sorne cases "dhugQ2tar~ (> "dhugitar~). in others *dhug112~
tar~ (> .. dhughtar~ > * dhugdhar~) 3). The problem in
which cases the first stem was used and in which the
second. can only be soIved with the help of the Y ounger
Avestan paradigm of pitar~.
Here we find
the stem f<3(5r~ in:
the stem pitar~ in:
nomo sing. pita acc, pI. f<3(j.r6 « .. ftras) .
acc. sg. pitar<3m dato pI. pt<3r<3by6 « .. ftrbyas)
nomo duo pitar<3 compound huf<3oriS « .. hu~ftri~)
derivative tiiiry6 « .. (p) t[vyas)
Evidently in the weak cases the vowel i was wanting
1) See Cuny. Revue de phonétiquc 11 (1912), 118-120, H. Peder-
sen, La cinq. décl. lat, 48 n. 1, Kurylowicz, Etudes ¡.e. l. 53.
2) See Bartholomae, Ar. Forsch. 1, 10 ('mindestens indo-iranisch');
GrIrPh. 1, a 20 ('ursprachlich'); Brugmann, Grundr. 12 625 and Kury-
lowicz, Etudes I. 50/1, 53.
3) Similarly J. Schmidt, KZ. 25, 34; Bartholomae, IF. 7, 53 sqq.
181
459
 22 23

owing to the non~syllabic character oE h 1). Accordingly The only exceptions in Y ounger Avestan are the nomo
the dat. sing. p¡{}re Y t. 14, 46 must be an analogical new sing. pata Yt. 13, 83; 19, 16 1 ) and the nomo plur. pataró
formation and, in fact, beside pWre Y. 44, 7 Gathic still has (in a quotation of the Pahlavi translation oE V. 7, 72).
f-dorói Y. 53, 4, which no doubt is the original form 2). They may be taken either as reminiscences of the Gathic
So the paradigms may be reconstructed as follows: dialect (where pta. and ptarám are often written pata,
patal':ám) or rather as reposing on a defective notation
Nom. *P1j.2~t~ > n. *pitá
without the matee lectionis and standing for pita and
Acc. * p1j.2~tér~T[L > n. * pitáram
pitaró·. Thus a variant reading patar:am is attested for
Gen. * pI12~tt~s > n. * phtfs 3)
píta~am Yt. 10, 117. Similarly víxaOa ís written Jor "* vixioa
Dat. * ph2~tr~aí > 11. * phtraí 3) etc.
(Wackernagel, KZ 59, 30) and pouru. paxsta~ for ·pouru.
Nom. *dhug1j.2-t~ > 11. *dhugitá pixsta~ (Benveniste, BSL 29, 106 sq.). On the leaving out
Acc. *dhug1j.2~tér~T[L > n. *dhugitáram .
of the mater lectionis in general vide Andreas, Gott. N achr.
Gen. *dhugI12~tt~s > n. *dhugdhts 1911, 9 sq.
Dat. * dhugh2~tr~aí > n. * dhugdhraí etc.
If we haye succeeded however in reconstr1..lcting the oId
In Avestan [t~ « *pht~) became pt~ before the syl1a~ paradigmatical abIaut, the question remains to be answered
bic r (see Bartholomae, GrlrPh. I a 165, Reichelt, Aw. Ele~ how we have to ínterpret it from él phonological stand~
mento 40), whereas [tr~ became * [{)r~ > [or~, cp. pi'ar:abyó point. Now the relations between the syllabic 1j. (with
as opposed to [:a oró. vocalic function) and the non~syllabic 11 are one of the
Younger Avestan has been chosen as a starting~poiJlt most difficult problems that have arisen from the new
because the Gathic dialect has extended the stem ptar~ theories so ingeniously developed by Kurylowicz. Kury~
to the strong cases too 4). In this respect as tn many lowicz himself assumes that h (in both functions) as a rule
others (see Meillet, Journ. Asiat. 1917 n 187 sqq.) has disappeared in Avestan and Armenian (p. 56) but
Younge.r Avestan is more archaic than the Gathic dialect 5 ). that 'en syllabe initiale ;:) s' est conservé en iranien dans
certaines conditions favorables' (p. 67). So according to
1) Por thls reason MeiJIet's explanation (MSL. 20, 286 sqq., Les K. * pnta. became pta, but • pntraí developed to p¡{}.ré. 1t
dialcctes i.c. 66) is to be rejected as it does not account for this distinc~
has however been shown that the Y ounger Avestan para~
Hon between both stems in the paradigm. .
2) Kurylowicz, Etudes i.e. l, 67, on the contrary regards pi/he as digrn, being constructed according to a well~defined principIe,
the older form. But as fa{jroi is evidently the anomalous variant and has on the contrary pita, pitaram (cf. NP pidar) but an
pi{)re the normalized form (d. OP. pita/gen. pi~a!). fa{jroi cannot but acc. pI. [:aoro! So his conclusion,based upon the normalized
be the original form. Gathic Eorms is to be rejected. But apart from the condi-
3) These forms seem to have been analogicaIly restituted for *pthfs,
*pthraí (according to Bartholomae's law) which would have given
* f{)aras etc. whe.reas Persian du:tt, duxtar apparently represents dltgtar~ (a blending
4) GAv. nomo ptii, ta; acc. ptar:im, dato fa{jroi and p¡{)re. l withdraw of dugital'~ and dugdhar~) > duMar > duxt (al') .
my note in Acta Oriento 12, 239 n. 3. 1) Tbe normal form pita occurs Y. 9, S; 11,4; Yt 17, 16; V. 12, 1
5) It may be noted that both dialects have generalized *dhugdhar~ (wl'itten pitó) and 12, 3.

182 183

460 461
 24
tions which may have facilitated the transition 11 > i, there
remains the general, question: from what modification of
11 has the vowel i (a in European languages) deveIoped?
Kurylowicz couId not accept the idea that the laryngal
consonant has been vocalized (see Prace [ilol. 11, 233)
and, since Ji became Skr. ti (as he has convincingly demon~
strated, Etudes i.e. 56-57), the only remaining possibility
seemed to be: i < 11e (op. c. 58). It is true, Skr.sthitá~
may accordingly be expIained as a regular development
from *st11eto~ (p. 46) buUhen *p11etér~ would have become
Skr. phitár~! Kurylowicz's view as to the origin of i cannot .
therefore be accepted; his notation he (~e) must be given
up and we have to acquiesce in the fad that h couId occur
in a syIlabíc function (whatever its precise phonetic realiz~
ation may have been) 1) and then Ibecame Skr. i.
In fact, Pedersen who has proposed a number of impor~
tant amendments to Kurylowícz's theories takes syIlabic 1].
as the reduced grade, consonantal 11 as the weakest grade
('Schwundstufe') of eh (Hittitisch 185). This agrees very
well with the Y A v. opposition pitar, (in, the strong cases):
[br~, ptr~ (in the weak cases) as compared with the corres~
ponding opposition titmán~ « * ehltmón~, reduced grade):
tmán~ « *hltmen~J weakest grade).
Note on the l'epresentation o[ h in II and the relative
chronology ol some sound~laws.
From the fads discussed sorne conclusions may be drawn
as to the representation of h in Indo~Iranian. From the
paradigm of pitár~ it apparently follows that the 10ss of h
in Avestan merely depends on its phonetic functian, the
syIlabic ~ being preserved. It is consequently impossible
1) In a personal communication 'Prof. B. Faddegon suggests that Ij
was a whispered voweI. the vocalic timbre of which was deafened by
the larynga! noise.
184
462
to formula te a sound~law which can explain aH instances.
In trisyHables the laryngal has often disappeared in
a medial syllable. It is a' weIl~known fact that several
scholars have formulated a sound~Iaw, according to which
every h has been lost in this position, on the strength of
such instances as dugddar~ (Skr. duhit¿) , ze,.t}a~ (Skr.
janit¿) , aibijar~tar~ ( Skr. jar:ít¿) , draonah~ (Skr. drávi~
1J.af:¡) , staor:a~ ( Skr. sthávira~f:¡) , mraoiti (Skr. bráviti),
taJ)ú~ (Skr. tamisra~m), asti~ (Skr. átithi~f:¡). See J.
Schmidt, Festschr. Roth 183, and Meillet, Les dialectes
indo~européens 65 sq. There are however several contra·-
rious j.nstances 1) which cannot be dismissed as being
'sans valeur' (Meillet), e.g. ainivan~, 'epithet of the wind'
(Skr. áni~la~f:¡, ániti), t~visi (Ved. távi~i), y~zivi (formed
Hke Skr. prthivt), zavisi '1 was called' (eL Ved. hávi~tave)
and perhaps xsnávisa Y. 28, 1. For the Iast two forms
Meillet Z) had recourse to an is~ aorist which, however, is
unknown in lE. It is obvious that both developments must
be acknowIedged 3).
From the different developments of h Pedersen con~
eludes 'dass H bis ins Einzelleben der verschiedenen
Sprachzweige hinein bestanden hat und sich nachher nach
verschiedenen Lautgesetzen entwickelt hat' (Hittítisch
185). He apparentIy assumes that the syllabic fJ has onIy
1) See Bartholomae, IP. 7, 52-65: 72 GrIrPh. I a 28 and 73. who
contests Schmidt's assumption, and Hübschmann, IPAnz. 10, 45 sq, Av.
vyiimrvitii Y. 12, 6 identified with SkI'. abrüta (3d p. sing. imperf. med.)
is highly questionable (probably opto med.); c3viSi (GrIrPh. 1, a, 87,
Meillet, Mél. de Saussurc 100) = *c6isi, see Kurylowicz, Traces de la
place du ton en Gathique 21; and vaozir;¡m (Bartholomae, KZ. 29, 273,
GrIrPh. la 66, Geldner, Drei Yasht 48) has been explained as an opto
aor. by Waekernagel (see Lommel, Die Yiist's 183 n. 5).
2) Mélanges de Saussure 100, Les dia/eetes i-e. 65.
a) My statement in Die idg. Nasa/priisentia 66 is accordingly in~
correcto
185
463

26
late arisen from 11 in the various languages. The details
seem however to be rather intricate.
Jt mllst first be stated that die opposition between voca~
Hc h and consonan tal h has been inherited from the parent
lE. o langllage as is shown by the paradigm of Av. pita.
Conseqllently both sounds (or their repres.entatives) must
have existed as early as primo 11.
In initiaI and final syllables the laryngal is often repre-
sented by i in Avestan, e.g. pita (O P. pitá), sísóit (from
sáh~), avakanis (cp. Skr. khánitum, khátá~h), Jainis
« * g'!énh2~s) and at least sorne of the neuters in ~is, e.g.
t~vis (from lE. *te~lh~). Av. mraot which is often to be
read as dissyllabic mravat (Meillet, JAs. 1917, n, 190 sq ..)
may be a thematic new formation like Skr. bruvadhvam
(Mhbh.) or a 'subju.nctive~present' oE the type karati. On
account of the opposition pita: f~orói we must assume that
in a11 these instan ces Av. i represents lE. fJ· That fJ had
already developed to i in primo n. is shown by the fact
that, when n. -is~ became ~is~, the sound~group ~is~ < lE.
-hs- underwent the same change, e.g. Ved. si~at, Av. sisóit
á~artholomae, ZDMG. 50, 699). Evidently as early as the
primo n. period i < fJ had become fully identical with the
ancient i.On the other hand in the neuter plural the Avestar.
form corresponding to Ved. márúirylsi is mana which can
only be aCl.:ounted for by assuming that the n. prototype
was * manásh (with consonantal h). Here the Sanskrit i
must élccordingly be due to a younger development oE the
Indian branch.
In medial syllables the laryngal, as stated aboye, became
sometimes i both in Sanskrit and in Avesta-n, e.g. áni~la~:
áini-van- or prthiví: y~zivi. In these instan ces i must date
back to primo 11. and evidently represents lE. fJ. But very
often the laryngal disappeared in Avestan whereas Sanskrit
has i, cp. Ved. vr'fité: Av. v~rante etc. As n. i has always
been preserved in Avestan we must conc1ude that in these
lRfi
464
9-
_1
instances the primo 11. sound was still 11, the vocalization
fi > i being a more recent sound-development peculiar to
Sanskrit alone. For, though we may occasionally account for
the difference by a paradigmatical alternation of 1] and 11
(Skr. duhítá: Av. dugdar-) it is incredible that Sanskrit
should always have generalized fJ and Iranian always h.
Now Wackernagel. Ai. Gr. 1. 142, has drawn attention to
the fact that in Ved. okiván (from uc-) and tigitá-h 'sharp'
. (frcm tij-) the k and g have not been palatalized before i.
Accordingly at the date oE the 11. palatalization (le> c,
g> J) the syllables ok~ and tig- were not yetfollowedbythe
vowel i but, probably, by a consona,ntal h. Jt is, of course,
theoretically possible to assume that this i represents 11. ~.
which the-n would imply that 11. fJ has developed into n. i
at a date posterior to the n. palatalization. But in view of
the fact that no participle.s in -ita~' « fJto-) occur in
Avestan 'it is more likely that those participles ended as (\
rule inU. -hla-, cp. Ved. grbhitá-h: Av. garapta- < n.
*ghrbhtHa~. Then tigilá~h (and consequently also okiván)
must contain an i from 11. consonan tal h.
So therdifference between '1] and h has more faithfully
been preserved in Iranian than in Sanskrit, where traces of
consonan tal h are mainly found in the position between
dentals: átta-~l, bhágatti-l:t « - *dh-to~, - *dh-ti-) as con-
trasted with hitá'-h « *dh~rtó-) etc. But compare also
paTJí~h 'hand' from 11. * parhni~, lE. * pelhni-, which Meillet.
MSL. 20, 289, was at a,loss to exp1ain. As to Skr. duhitá
< *dhughitar- (adduced by WackernageI. l.c.), the
deve10pment of gh into h is admittedly a comparatively
recent phenomenon peculiar to Sanskrit, vide Bartholomae,
ZDMG. 50, 698 sq.
We thus arrive at the foIlowing chronological synopsis
of the soundlaws concerned:
1) JI. fJ > i in initial and final syIlables (and probably at
the same time in medial syIlables too).
187
465
 28
2) n. s > S after í etc. (síSÓít).
3) 11. palatalization k > e, g > j.
4) the Indian development of h > i.
It has further been observed aboye that gh has become
gh in primo n. before Bartholomae's law ceased to operate.
It seems reasonable, therefore, to as sume that the aspirate
tenues have arisen at about the same periodo In fact Kury~
lowicz has modified his' former view (Praee filoZ. 11,205)
in this sense; cp. Etudes 'í.e. 1, 51. It has however been
stated that Skr. kh never becomes eh before palatal vowels
(Wackernagel, Ai. Gr. I. 140). >which suggests the idea
that in the 11. period when k and g became palatalized, kh
was still felt as a combination of two phonemes. In Iranian,
it is true, the representative of kh 4as become palatalized
like the other gutturals (dat. sing. hase = sakhye) 1), but
this may be due to a particu~ar development in Iranian,
where theguttural spirant x (nom. sing. haxa) coitld easily
develop into a front spirarit xr. (> sr.). Presumably the 11.
aspirate tenues are of later date than the palatalization; if
this is so, we may imert in the aboye synopsis after 3) the
following n. odevelopments:
3a) the combinations of tenuis (and media) with sub~
sequent h became one phoneme (aspira te).
3b) Bartholomae' s law 2) .
In all the positions mentioned h had already lost its
character of a separate phoneme in primo 11. On the other
hand it remained as such chiefly in intervocalic position
(Ved. bháas~1 Av. yaah~ with hiatus) and in the position
1) See Bartholomae. ZDMG. 50, 696-8.
~) It is a remarkable fact that in ráthia-(z and sakhiá-m syllabic
restonation of -ya- is mostly required (Arnold. Vedic Metre 84), which
might suggest that rath- and sakh- were heavy syllables (d. hávia-,IJ
'invocandus' < gheuh2-io- as against havyá-m 'drink offering' <
* f¡he!!-io-; jánia-IJ < * iJenhl-io- etc.). If our argumentation is correct,
ráthia-~z and sakhiá-m must be exceptions Iike dhánia-h, nária-Q, mádia-l;z.
188
466
29
between consonant and vowel (see Prace Filol. 11. 206
sqq.). In the last mentioned position however 11 must also
have disappeared in a late period of primo n. on account of
go~aTJalJ (p. 85) 1).
§ 6. The proterodynamie u-declension.
The Ved. u-inflexion is treated in the par. 6-11.
The proterodynamic type is still to be found in Ved.
stInu, gaú-Q etc. (§ 6). The hysterodynamic type.
though in general normalized in various ways (§ 7)
has remained intact in Ved. dyaú-f:¡ (§ 8). The com-
mon normalized types Ved. kl'átu-Nkl'átva~l, Gr.
"¿XV; /vtxvor;, and :rrííxv; / :níxroc; and their connection
with the ancient type subsisting in Av. biizi'lUs!biizvo
are discussed in detail in § 9. After an excursus on the
origin of the two locative-endings in -aví and in -au
and that of the feminines in -vi as compared with Gr.
-Bia (§ 10) the norrnalized type of OP. dahyiiu~ and
Gr.· [n:rreÚ;; is briefly reviewed in § 11.
The general characteristics of this type have already
be en discussed at length in § 1. For the reconstruction of
the original paradigm no other data are at our disposal
than those presented by the paradigms sünú~IJ, matí-IJ and
dev1. As compared with the hysterodynamic type, which
can be reconstructed by means of data. mmíe this is a
serious ,draw-back. The oblique cases of the plural appar-
ently have been remodelIed on the analogy of t:he hyste-
1) After 1 had finished this treatise (I-XI, 1941). 1 received Hans
Hendriksen's study 'UntersuchuTlgen über die Bedeutung des Hethi-
tischen für die Laryngaltheorie' (K0benhavn 1941) wherein he arrives
at sorne Irnportant conclusions concerning the chronology of the deve-
lopment of lE. h (p. 87 sqq.). Though we hold different views on sorne
minor points - e.g. in my opinion the loss of h in Lith. ántis etc.
(p. 93) ought to be kept apart from the Indo-Iranian facts since the
developrnents concerned have taken place in the separate languages -
on the whole. 1 am glad to state. our results agree fairIy weIl. I find
no occasion to change my aboye note.
189
467
 30 31

rodynamic inflexion, e.g. snúbhiJ; for "~óbhiJ;, preserved Ved. ddru, gen. dról;z lO, 101. 10; YAyo dauru, gen. draos
in góbhil;z (see below). As to the nomo pIur. ít is impossibIe V. 5, 38. Nirang. 100. A thematic derivative from the
to determine with certainty how it was formed origi,nally. stem~fol'm dt'e,*~ has been recog,nized in b(joó¡l' IOXi'(!ó¡'
ft is true tha t Ved. nomo acc. pI. devtJ; « "dei1l-~ih2~S) Hes. and Goth. triu 'tree'. Accordingly Goth. kniu
would point to "séunu~s, the nomo pI. being homonymous 'knee' proves the existence of an lE. ge,nitive "gneu-s.
with th:e nomo sing., but it is unlikeIy that devHt is a Ved. "jñól;z, the g'enitive oE j¿nu, is accidentally not
direct continuation of the lE. formo EvidentIy t,he feminine attested. But jñu~ occurs as prior or final member of
class of devt has been influenced by the feminine a~ compounds (like ~snu~J;, dru~). It is therefore un-
declension (vas¿: nomo acc. vaSéÍJ; =
devt: nomo acc. 'guestionabIe that the original inflexion was jtmuj* jñóJ;.
devtJ;). Thus the onIy remaining data are g¿vaJ;, f36ec; (see An additional corroboration is to be found in A vestan
below) and Gr. 1]oé(F)ec;, which point to "suné1l-es. If so, inüm (acc. sg., for zanu on the anaIogy of * inaos) ;
the proterodynamic and the hysterodynamic types must abI. pI. inubyas(Cit). MP. snük and NP. zanü reflect
have had the same ending in the nom plur. 1). :different case~forms of the old paradigm. As to Gr.
~Ó(!v/~OV(!Óc; and YÓVV/YOV1 JÓC; see p. 7 1).
Paradigms.
GAv. ayüjyaos. It is curious that no one seems yet to have
Nom. "séunu~s "dóm
noticed this paradigm, hidden in the Altiran. Wb.
Acc. "séunu~m "dóru
under the two words ayu~, n. and yu~, n. 'Dauer'
Gen. " sunéu~s "dréu~s
(op. c. 333, 1265). That the two stems were really fdt
Dat. "suné1l-~ (a) i "dré,*~(a)i
to belong to ane paradigm may be ínferred from
etc. dar;)Ffim ayü (acc.) Y. 31, 20 c as compared with
Dual. " séunu~h2 dar;)gahya yaos Y. 43, 13 d • Benveniste, BSL. 38, 103,
PI. Nom. "suné1l--es? assumes two stems "h2éi,*~ and "h2i~eu~, the a in ayü
Acc. "sunu~ns?
Ibeing explained by an 'allongement des noms racines'
Gen. * suné-¡,t~l}m (d. Origines 1. 157). It will however be clear that we
Loe. "sunéu~su
are concerned with a noun of the same structure as
The evidence comprises severaI neuters: d¿m, OÓ(jv. So the correct reconstruction must be
Ved. siÍnu (sometimes the acc. siÍnum is used); gen. snóf? "h2Óiurh2iéu~s. The Avestan paradigm is as fallows:
4.27.4, instr. plur. snúbhiJ; 5 times; loe. pI. snú~u VS. nomo acc. ayü (= "ayu)
17, 4. Many younger forms occur like gen. siÍnof? instr. (adv.) yav§.
1.1 0.2, loe. sánavi (fol' "snávi). dato yavót yav~
gen. yaos
1) On the other hand the dual in ~ü (Ved. haM, dhenú) must be of 1) Walter Couvreur, Archiv Orientální 10, 304, quotes Hittite genul
proterodynamic origin, the hysterodynamic form ending in ~e!!~e (see genuwas, but according to Friedrich, Heth. Elementarb. 19. genuwas is
page 44 sq). A dual * séunu-hz however requires a plur. *séunu-s gen. plur. (beside nomo acc. genuwa). In any case the form cannot
(* séun!!-es?) . support the assumption of an lE. gen. 5g. *f¡en!!ós.

]90 ] 91

468 469
 32
The Vedic inflexion oE ayu has been normalized (ioe.
ayuni etc.). The adj. Ved. ayú~!), Av. ayus 'lively,
mobile' stands to ayu Ln the same relation as Ved.
payú~!) to Gr. nwv 1). It has sinee long been noticed
that nwv shows the same structure as dacu, ayu, viz.
*PÓh2i~u(* pf¡.kéu~s ( ef. * poh2i~men~ in Gr. nOlfuí v,
Lith. piemuo). The old declension (gen. *na(t)ev¡;- or
*mev¡;- etc.) has· however been discarded and nwv
follows the inflexion of aarv.
The Avestan ease~forms yavÉi, yave, yaos, which are
usually reckoned among the root~declension, are entirely
parallel to the eorresponding cases of the word for 'cow',
viz. insto gava, dato gavói, gave, gen. g~us. So we should
expect a nominative * gá~us (lE. * ggó~usl* g'l~Oú~s) paralleI
to ayu. It is true that Ved. gaú~!), Av. gaus ate generally
regarded as root~nouns but· the aeeentuation Ved. gáva,
gáve, gávi proves this to be an error 2). Thus the morpho~
logical' analysis leads us to the same eonclusion arrived at
by Kurylowicz, Prace filoi. 11, 229-30, on other conside~
rations: the ~dg. word for 'eow' is a stem in ~u~, formed
from the root *gIJoh (or *ggeh 3 ?). Exeept for the acc. gam
(see § 15), the 'anomalous' paradigm is nothing eIse than
arare specimen of the regular proterodynamic inflexion:
nomo *glJóh~u~s
gen. *glJh~óu~s
dato * glJh~ólf~ai
nomo pI. *gl}h~ót"t~es
gen. pI. *glJh~ólf~~m
loe. pI. *gl}h~óu~su etc.
The nomo sing. became n. *ga(h)us according to Brug~
1) Perhaps we may compare a1so Ved. dtiru 'wood': Ved. dárú~f:r.
'breaking'.
2) Debrunner, Ai.Gr. III. 22, erroneously regards this accentuation
as an innovation.
192
470
33
mann's law, whereas Gr. pó(h)v; eontraeted to (Joik. The
aeeentual opposition {Jovc; : ZeVC; is eonditioned by the
different strueture of these words (see p. 39; unsatisfactorily
Schwyzer, Griech. Gramm. I. 377). Kurylowicz assumes
the vowel to have been ó (lengthened grade) on aecount oE
OS. kó, Latv. gUOlJS, but o6ev, I'ÓVV stand against it. The
long vowel may at any time haven arisen in normalized
paradigms like * gIJoh~us(* 9~of¡lf~os (> *g!!ÓlJ~os) 01' have
bee~ tborrowed from thé aec. *gIJó~n; (see § 15). Only the
voealism of the suffix remains obseure: the nomo plur.
gava!), different from súnáva!) (~ét"t~es). may be due to
Brugmann' s law, ep. Gr. {J6e¡;-. But gálJam (: {JOW1J) and
gáve (: Lat. bovi) suggest that gava1)(gávam is analogical.
in accordanee with páda!)(padam. On aecount of *dóru¡
*dréu~s (Goth. triu) we should indeed expeet * gl}ÓhFU~sl
* gl}h~éu~s 'hut then {Joóc;. {Jot must have adopted the vowel
d the nomo sing. Por the rest the e~ and o~grades may have
alternated, ep. Goth. sunaus, sunau: sunjus « * et"t~es),
suniwe. Apart from this obscure detail the paradigm is, 1
believe, fully clear.
In Greek and Latin the oId dative (loeative) subsists in,
{Jo(FH. bOlJi. The oldgenitive *f3ovc; would have beeome
identicaI with the nominative, so a new formation {Jo(F)6c;
took its place, which became accented Hice (nov.; :) ;>"tabó.;,
The normal instr. ending of the Vedic mase. and ne:uter
stems in ~u~ is ~una (Av. ~ii). On the strength of Ved.
gáva, Av. yava we may eonc1ude that the original instru~
mental of súnú~!) was * sr1náva.
Similarly the loe. gávi proves that the rare ending ~ávi,
oceurring only in the B-S. (17 times) belongs to the oId
proterodynami~ inflexion. In fact we find súnávi 8, 68
(57), 15, and sánavi with normalized radical syllable and
accentuation, standing for *snávi. See § 10.
As has been.observed aboye, p. 30. the plural góblli!),
193
471
 34
góbhyaf:¡, gávám, gÓfju present the very forms which
Pedersen, La cinq. décl. lato 25, conjectul'ed for the pre~
historie inflexion. Pl'obably such forms as Ved. súnúbhih,
sntíbhih, snúfju, Av. inubyasCít are analogical new fOl'ma~
tions. In this l'espect the accent of sntíbhif:¡, snúfju (fOl'
.., snóbhif:¡, '" snófju) is interesting.
In Greek the adjectives have faithfully preserved the
pl'oterodynamic paradigm: ~r3~}q, aec. 1]r3VV, gen. 1íM(F~)oc;
(standing for "'17¿¡BV~C;), dato ~¿¡é(F)t. Whether the dual
fJoé(F)s and the nomo pIur. fJM(F)sc; reflect the original
endings, l'emains uncertain. As this inflexion has been
generalized in Greek and has become a characteristic oE aH
adjectives, no conclusions can be drawn from single in~
stances. If fJov,; (Skr. svadtí~h) is' an oId proterod. word it
must be refel'red to an lE. paradigm '" s1J.éh2du~s/* suh?d~éu~s
but it may derive 'Írom '" SlJeh2d~eu~s as ·well.
Gr. nOAv,; (: Skr. purtí~h) as opposed to fiaev,; (: Skr.
gurtí~h) may refleet lE. '" pó[h~u~s 1), which presupposes a
genit. '" plh~éups 2). If Buttmann and Thurneysen are right in
regarding Hom. :rrJée,;, aec. ;T¡:¡léac; 'more' as morphological1y
a positive, these forms would represent the ancient plural
.forms (normalized Hom. nOAée,;, noUwv, :noUa,;). This,
however, is far from certain (s. Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. 537 n.
6). Perhaps an old neuter of the type y6vv, genu underlies
1) As to Ags. [cala quoted by Meillet, Introd. 8 162, 261, in support
of it, see Sievers, Ags. Gr. 3 51, Kluge, Ucgermaníseh 3 146. Cf. north.
feoltt = Goth. filu.
2) The I need not necessal'ily become a sonant in this position as
may be inferred from Av. hvaca/x u5ng. Though hV8ra is a monosyIlable
in the Gathic dialect, Vedic :nas SÚ8t', which points to an n. paradigm
"súh~8r/* sl)h-áns. Apparently ¡f, t etc. before a consonantal h in ante-
vocalic position had also consonantal value themselves if the syllable
was unaccented. 1 do not enter into the question whether the initial
sounds hv and X U in Avestan still reflect the difference between the
supposed n. prototypes.
194
472
35
the various forms, see Brugmann-Thumb, Griech. Gramm. 4
53 n. 2, Schwyzer 584, Walde-Pokorny 11, 65.
Gr. aorv (Hom. aouo,;, aom) is also ambiguous: Att.
aotBw,; may be dl,le to the influence of nÓABw<; (Schwyzer
I. 573) and does not prove the existence of a stem aon]F-.
The long radical voweI of Ved. vástu ( gen. vástof:¡)
'dwelling, home', though unexpected, may point to paradig~
matical ablaut vástuj'" vastóf:¡ and consequently to a pro p
'terodynamic paradIgm. But it should be noticed that m7xv,;
is inflected in the same way while undoubtedly deriving
from a hysterodynamic paradigm. Jt may be added that
from derivatives like FaotFLO'; (Benveniste, Origines I.
72) no conclusion can be drawn. They may belong to pro~
tero~ and hysterodynamic words alike. Attic has in fact
aotBio,; 1).
The infinitive iri ~tu~ with its derivatives presents many
difficuIties. We should expect (from ei~ 'to go'): '" éi~tu~s,
acc. '" éi~tu~m, dato '" i~télJ.~ (a) i, gen. '" i~téu~s. In fact
Gr. páetv~eoc; has been explained as deriving from the
weak stem oE '" smértu~s/* smrtéu~s (Schwyzer I. 506). But
Ved. (étum), étave, étoh show an analogical extension
of the strong stem with its accent. The gerunds oE the type
itvá (VS.), krtvá have also often Ibeen connected with these
stems in ~tu~. They are probabIy oId instrumentaIs but can~
not possibly be derived from '" éi~tu~s as '" itává then wouId
be required (cp. p. 53). As to the gerundives in ~tva~, they
are derived Erom the strong stem (kártv~a~). Hence the
1) Greek a- must be due to the influence of h2 in *fi2/J-es- (from
<
*h2eu, d. lavro *h2i~ h2eu-mi). A parallel is to be found in Latin cras
'to-morrow': beside the adverb *kuh2-és (l}S. suáQ. '4 times. SVá~1
3 times) there has been a stem in 1', *kúh2-er, cp. the derivative stem
*kúh2~ro~ in Av. süram ·mane'. Lat. eras probably derives from
*kúh2-er with the same ending -es as in Gr. X{}Sq etc. Then *k/J02r-és
must have become*k(/J)rh2-és through metathesis of Q.
195
473
 36 37
general resolution kártua~l) etc., owing to the fact that the u~ós a new nominative and accusative 1) have been formed
preceding syIlable is always a heavy one. See MacdoneIl, ~n the analogy of the proterodynamic stems. This type,
Ved. Gr. 407, Arnold, Vedic Metre 88, 95. ,While comprising only 9 nouns in Vedic, became normal in
Greek for nearly aH substantives.
§ 7. The hysterodynamic u~inflexion and its normalized
n. Type in ~üs, ~üm. According to a cIever 'observation
representatives.
made by Pedersen, Etudes lituaniennes 54-55, the secon~
While the proterodynamic nouns have mainly normalized dary ablaut, bccurring for instance in Gr. aró(]l'vftl as
the ablaut~variations of the root~syIIable, theancient contrasted with Skr. str7J.ómi (·IE. ~*néu~mi) or in Hom.
endings in general being left intact, the hystei:odynamic
f~p..éV' (= Ved. áyamal)), is found in other lE. languages
paradigm has undergonea more important transformation,
too. Similarly traces of the lengthened grade in ~eu~s and
which entirely disturbed the original infIexion. As has been .
the strong grade in ~él)~'!l stilI subsist in the Homeric
stated aboye, p. 12, the analogy of uk~á, uk~á7J.am,
llk~7J.ál), Gr. a(]1ív/a(]lIÓ~ or pitá, pitáram, (dat. pitré) , Gr. dialect, e.g. nomo "éy,'[j~ from *nekeus (Av. acc. nasaum).
nanl(] , nad(!a, nar(!ó~ Ieads us to assume a paradigm
Perhaps Sanskrit too has preserved one or two instan ces of
él secondary ending ~ü~l).
Sing. nomo
.L
~ell~S
~II. While the weak stem has generally been extended
acc:. ~élJ~'!l to \he nomo and acc., in sorne words on the contrary the
gen. ~!!~ÓS strong stem of the nomo has gone over into the weak cases.
An instructive example of this kind is OP. dahyau8.'
Plur. nomo ~él)~es

~t,.M]S 1) Indo~lr. OP. Avestan Vedic.

acc.
gen. ~!!~om
.L
Nom . *dasyáus dahyaus daiiJhus dásyU~1

loe. ~u~sú Acc. *dasyávam dahyaum daiiJhaom dásyum

(= ~avall!)
Dual. nomo acc. ~é~l~e Gen. *dasylwás dahyaus dásyol)
\ daiiJhiwó
Important traces of this type of infIexion are to be found (but loe. dahylwa) . Yt. 9, 31
in Indo~Iranian and, for the corresponding infIexion of the ( daiiJh~us
stems in ~i~, in Hittite. Probably the ancient infIexional PI. Nom. *dasyávas dahyava daiiJhavó dásyaval)
system was stilI more or less intact in primitive Indo~ Neither in Old Persian nor in A vestan has the strong
Iranian, but at an early date it underwent several trans~ stem entirely ousted the weak one. In Greek, however, a new
formations which eventuaIIy led to its destruction. These
type of inflexion ¡has come into existence by generalizing
innovations may be divided into four groups:
the stropg stem throughout, e.g. Lnlll,lJc; /ímuj(F)uc;, íj(]wc:¡
1. The most common type is represented by krátu~l)1
f;(]w(F)o~. This noun~formation admittedly underlies the
krátval), Gr. nírv~/nírvoq. Side by side with the gen. in
1) YAv. xra{)w;¡m Yt. 18, 1 as opposed to GYAv. xratüm Y. 25,6;
1) See Brugmann, GrundriB II2, 2, 222.
28, 1; 32, 9. Yt. 1,28; 17,2 V. 18,6 is evidently of no value,
196 J!)7

474
475
 38
verbs in ~evw, ~éÍw «~elf-ió?), cp. the Slav. verb~class
m iluj<¡J , inf. milovati « -ol)-ió).
IV. Instead of the strong stem of the nomo sing. in -eu~,
. the stem in -é~k (of the acc. sing., the nomo and acc. dual
and the nomo plur.) has occasionalIy been 'generalized in
the weak cases. An instance of the kind will be discussed
below (Gr. nijxvc:;).
We sha11 now examine successively:
a) an instance of the orIginal hysterodynamic infIexion
(§ 8).
b) the new formations of the types 1, II and IV taken .
together (§ 9),
e) the type III (OP. dahyaus, Gr. ínnevc:;) in § 11.
§ 8. Ved. dyaú~h.jdiváb and naú-h./naváh..
The interesting infIexion/of Ved. dyaú~h./diváh. has since
long enga'ged the attention of Hnguists. Recently Kurylo-
wicz, Pcace filoZ. 11, 230 sq., and Benveniste, Origines 1,
59-60, have advanced their views on it. In spite of Ben-
veniste' s obj ection (p. 59 n. 2)a philological examination
of the facts must precede any attempt at a linguistic inter-
pretation. These facts are the fo11owing.
In the B.S. the paradigm shows a strong stem dyau- in
the nomo sing., the nom.-acc. dual and in the nomo plur.
(dyaú-h., dyáva, dyáva/y. respectively); a11 the remaining
cases contáin the weak stem div~/dyu~. Apart from this
normal inflexion some scholars quote also the forms dato
dyáve, gen. dyóf:¡, loc. dyávi. It must be objected that
dyáve is attested neither in the B.S. nor in the AS., whereas
the gen. dyóh. occurring only 6 times (1 1 IV2 VI2 Xl)' as
opposed to divá/y. which isattested more than 400 times, is
evidently a new formation. This may be concluded not so
much from its infrequency as from the fact that dyó/y. may
be easily 'explained as an analogical formation (súnúbhi/y.:
súnóh.= dyúbhih. : dyóh.). Av. dyaos Yt. 3, 13, the only
198
476
39
form attested in Avestan, cannot therefore be adduced as
a proof oE the antiquíty oE dyóf;. As to .the loe. dyávi,
judging from rcajani, fajñi this form might be oId. It is,
however, comparatively infrequent, occurring 12. times
(I3IIll Vi VI2VIII3IX 2 X 2, besides twice in dvandva) as
agaLnst diví which occurs 118 times. But even if it might
prove to be oId it does not follow that dyaúpf; was in~
~lect~d as; a proterodynamic noun. The dual dyavi occur~
ríng once instead of the usual forro dytwa is clearIy young.
ConsequentIy dyaú~f; was originally infIected as a
hystel'Odynamic no un of the type sákhajsákhyuJ:¡ 01' nanJQ,
nad(}a, JW7:(}óc:;, viz. *dieu~srdil)~ós. This is confil'med by
Gl'eek Zevc:;, Lltóc:;, Lld, whereas the LaUn inflexion is based
upon the vocative. Accordingly the nominative has the
lengthened grade and there is no reason whatever for
assuming a heavy root *die~t,f (*diehl~l~) as supposed by
several scholars.
There are, however, two irregular forms. Since the para~
digro seems to have had no forms with 0, the nom.~acc. dual
and the noro. pIur., dyava and dyavah respectively, must
stand for *dyáva and *dyávaf;. Cf. baháva p. 44. But the
same phenomenon may be observed in the Greek type
lnnevc:;, nomo pI. ínnijec:; and perhaps in OP. dahyava, YAyo
daif.lhávó if it contains lE. e. Appal'ently the long diphthong
of the nominative has been gooeralized in a11 strong cases.
The acc.sing. dyam will be treated below (§ 15).
It is now also possible to account for the inflexion of Ski".
naú~h., Gr. vavc:;: Kui:ylowicz, Prace filoZ. 11. 229, Etudes
i-e. 1, 38, started froma stem in ~u~, * n e h2 us (1< neh2~: Lat.
nace). But both Sanskrit and Gl'eek point to a stem * naif!
* nau~ which cannot be explained from a proterodynamic
pal'adigm analogous to that of gaú~f:¡ (p. 32). The lE.
normalized paradigm indicated by aH .:ognate languages
may only be accounted for by starting from an original
hysterodynamic inflexion:
199
477
 40
n eh2eu-s/* n e h 2 1J.-ÓS (> Ved. rúiv-ás). Evidently the
'1<
paradigm naú-h/naváfJ arase as early as the primo lE.
period by generalizing the weak stem-form. So notwith-
standing its different appearanee its inflexion is essentialIy
identical with that of krátu-h/lcrátva~l, the onlydifferenee
being that in naú-h u has been eontracted with a before a
consonan tal endíng. The nominative oecurs only 5, 59, 2b
where it is dissyllabic. Probably~ '" n e h 2 -éu-s, after having
been normalized to '1< nanus, has adopted the long a of the
other cases.
Pure1y hysterodynamic paradigms like dyaú-h/diváfJ
have become extremely rare in the lE. languages. In Vedic
and Greek they were already felt as entirely anomalous.
But it is only these anomala that can teach us something
about the prehístorical í,nflexional system.
§ 9. The normalízed types, Ved. krátu-~/krátlJa~ and
Gr. 1r~XV<;/1r'íxw<;, and their relation to the ancíent hysterod.
type AlJ. bazaus/bázlJó.
Pedersen, in his 'Etudes lituaniennes' p. 22, quoted .Av.
uyra:..bazaus as an instanee of a hysterodynamic nominative
but was rather sceptical as to the possibility of demon-
strating that this nominative actually formed part oE' a
hysterodynamic paradigm: 'mais on en ignore l'aeee!ltua-
tion, et on ne peut pas prouver qu'un'nominatif en -aus ait
été 'aecompagné d' un génitif en -lJÓ (i.-e. '1< w-os ) '. The
same 'scepticism we mect with in his earHer publication (see
aboye, .p. 4). On a closer examination, however, the Indo-
Iranian languages prove to eontain more evidenee in sup-
port of the supposed prehistorical types of inflexion than
Pedersen apparently was aware of. 1 give first the forms
attested accofiding to Lanman and Bartholomae, GrIrPh.
la, 227-9 (with sorne necessary correetions and additions).
200
478
41
Vedic.
The forms occurring belong to' 8 stems, kftu-fJ, krátu-fJ,
pasú-fJ (pásu), pitú-fJ, parasú-fJ, mádhu-Zl (mádhu), vásu-fJ
( vásu), sísu-h. The forms are classed accordíng to their
case-ending.
Instr. sing.: lcrátva (krátuá 1 ) 1), pasvá, parasvá, mádhva,
sísva.
Dat.. sing.: lcrátve, pásve (n.), sísve 2).
Abl.-gen. sing.: krátvah, pasvá~, pitváh, mádhvafJ (mád-
hua~l'2), vásvah, sísva~.
Nom.-aee. dual: páslJa (10, 106, 3b).
N om. pI. m.: lcrátavah, pasálJab, vásauah 3).
Voc. pI. f.: satakratlJa~.
Ace. pI. m.: kftlJa~, pasváfJ.
Beside these forms there are alrea'¿y many instanees of
'transition-forms' 'aecording to the type sünú-Qfsünó~ (ep.
p. 30). So we Hnd for instance instr. pasúna 1 (: pasvá'2) ,
dato pasálJe 1 (: pásve 3 ), aee. pI. pasiÍn 5 (: pasvá~4).
Iranian.
Nom.: with the ending -aus, GAv. hi'Oaus, YAyo uzbazáu~
(u)'ra o etc.); with the ending -us: bázusca Yt. 13,99,
xratus, vahus etc. OP. dahyáu5.
Aec.: with the ending -avam: YAyo ardnáum, gardmáum,
pdrdsáum, nasaum; with the ending -avam: fradat.
fsaom, dai6haom 4), frazdánaom; with the ending
1) . As to krátva 7, 21, 6, see Meillet, Du genre animé en vieux
slavc 8, and Oldenberg, Noten.
2) Sahásrabiihue 8.45.26 is according to Oldenberg and Sommer,
¡P. 36, 222, a locative (of sahásrabiihva~).
. a) As to már;lhva~l quoted by several authoritics as nomo pI. m. f.
and acc. pI. f., see Wackernagel-Debrunner, Ai. Gr. IIl, 159.
4) DaíT5h'yúm Y. 62, 5; Yt. 10, 112; 87; 18; V. 8, 103.
201
479
 42
~vam: xra.-&w'dm, raom 1): with ~um: nasiim, xratüm,
pasiim etc. O P. dahyaum 2) .
lnstr.: GAv. xra{)wa (beside xratü). YAyo xra{)wa, yMh{'a.
Dat.: GAv. ahuye, YAyo aTJhve, afJhllye, ra{)we, xra{)we,
rasnvaeca, °hallrve.
AbL~gen.: the ending ~avo in Y Av. nasav6 (thrice), daif.l~
hávo Yt. 9, 31 (Wb. 708): the ending ~vo in GAv.
['ds'dratvo, YAyo ra.-&wo, xra{}w5, aurusabázvo, pasvo.
The ending ~áus sometimes occurring (e.g. m'dr'd.-&yaus,
GrlrPh. la, 157) is partIy graphicaI: but in bazálls
Yt. 13, 136, it may he due to the influence of the
nomo Likewise OP. dahyáus.
Loe.: YAyo daif.lhó, daif.lhvo etc., bazvo.
Dual: YAyo bázava; pasu.
Nom. pI.: with the ending ~ávo YAyo daif.lhavo, nasavo;
with ~avo GAv. xil'atav6. YAyo ratavo. yatavo. [with
ending ~vo YAyo <;r'dZVO, pasvasca?]
OP. dahyava.
Ace. pI.: with ending pavo YAyo daifJhavo 4); with ending
~avo: YAyo yátavo (~va), bazava? 3), with ending ~vo
y Av. pasvo (beside pasiis) , p'dr'd.-&wo, vibázva. But ep.
GAv. pasüs, p<;r<;tiis, xratüscá, YAyo daiiJhus.
Gen. pI.: YAyo pasvéJ..m, °xra{}WéJ..m, vafJhvéJ..m. ya'-&wéJ..m,
°haurvéJ..m (besides yátunéJ..m etc., cp. OP. dahyünam).
It is interesting that three of the nine Vedic stems have
a corresponding infIexion in A vestan, viz. vásu~l;, krátu~1;
and pasúFI;. This clearly proves that their inflexion dates
back to a remo te prehistorical pasto As to the paradigms.
those of Avestan eertainly show a strange intermixture of
l} See MeilIet. JAs. 1920 1 195.
2} 'Das einzige altarische Wort mit einem consonantischen Vocal
vor schlieBendem m', Bartholomae, Ar. Forsch. 1, 40-41; GrlrPh. 1 a
228.
3} V. 18, 70; bazva according to Geldner's texto
4} Yt. 8. 56. but cp. dair5hus. Yt. 8, 9.
202
480
43
different casepforms. But the endings to be expected from
the scheme of page 36 can easily be detected: nomo páus,
acc. Favam, gen. pVo, nomo plur. ~avo. acc. (~llS and) ~vo.
gen. ~vam. The instances with different endings can easily
be accounted for as analogicaI formations. In the acc. sg.
~avam, occurring in daiiJhaom etc., has been superseded
partly by Favam (with á on the analogy of the nominative,
unless it derives from lE. o), partly by Fllm (parallel to ~us
in tl~e nominative). The instrumental and dative show only
the expected endings. whereas the genitive has some in p
stances of ~avo (always corresponding to a nomo in ~aus
and an accusative in ~avam). Evidently Avestan has taken
a first step to build a normalized type like Gr. ínm;v¡;,
ínnij( F)a, ínnij( F)o¡;. but has failed to carry it through.
In the nomo plur. GAv. xratavo rep>resents the old in~
flexion; pávo is only found in those words that have this
ending 'also in the gen. sing. (nasav6, daí6havo). As to the
ending ~vas, ·Sommer. IF. 36, 167 n. 1. disputes its very
existence in Vedic. The vocative satakratval; (once) is due
to the influence oE the weak cases of the singular. See
Wackernagel-Debrunner. Ai. Gr. 111, 158-9. The Avestan
instances are no more certain. The form (ca.-&waro) <;r<;zvo
V. 6, 43; 9. 6 has probably beep. wrongly vocalized. perhaps
under the influence of the gen. 'dr<;zvo V. 6. 10: 12; 14. The
correct form (ca.-&waro) <;r'dzavo occurs V. 9. 29. The nomo
pI. pasvas~ occurs several times in the phrase pasvasca
staoraca, which perhaps must be read as a metrical line of
8 syIlables. The reading pasa vasca is given by two good
manuscripts in V. 2, 8 and 9: 3, 5. Apparently the n.
normalized type krátu~1; differed in this respect from its
parallel Ln the i . . declension. Ved. arí~l;. nomo pI. aryál;. But
in the dual this normalization has reaIly been carried
through, op. Ved. pásva.
In the acc. pI. A vestan has both ~us (from * ll~ns) and
203
481
 44
~vó (from * ~lJ.~T}S ). Vedie kttval), whieh is a petrified form,
renders it probable that 11. ~vas is old. If this conclusion is
correct, the other ending must be due to the analogy of the
normal 11. type sünú~l)lsünól). This is more probable than
a possible assumption that ~vas is due to generalization of
the weak stem of the singular. The forms in themselves do
not prove anytMng, cp. YAyo pasvó: GAv. pasüs, Ved.
pasvál)4: pasún 5 • It is indeed remarkable that the Gathie
dialect has only the ending ~üs: <lrazüs, xratüs 2 , pasüs,
par<ltüs 1). But it is a welI~known fact that the Gatha~
dialect often refIects a younger stage of linguistie devel~
opment than the Younger Avesta. Just as GAv. has the
genitive xrat~us instead of the older form xra{}wó (preserv~
ed in Y Av.), it may have introduced the analogieal form~
ation xratüs for the original. 'form xra{)wó. Compare also
Gr. vÉxva;, n~xea;, ndÉxea;.
We shalI now proceed to a discussion of sorne single in~
stances. It will be best to begin with Ved. bahú~Q. as it
shows most clearly the features of this type. The only
singular forms in Vedie are: nomo ugrábahu~Q. etc., acc.
bahútn, whieh must be new formations sine e Avestan has
uzbazaus (darayó. o, as. o, uyra O,), gen. aucu:Sa. bazvo
('besides analogieal bázaus, daragó . bazaus Y. 38, 5), acc.
pI. vibazva. These forms furnish together a conclusive proof
for the assumption that the gen. in * ~vas realIy belongs to
a nomo in ~ * aus (whieh on account of the accent of báhú~1)
must have been oxytone). But Vedie itself preserves also
a relic of its old infIexion in the dual báhává (2, 38, 2;
5, 64, 2; 7, 62, '5) occurring. by the si de of the younger
form bahú (20 times), vájrabahü 1, 109, 7, Ved. bahává is
identical with Av. bazava (Yt. 5, 7; 5, 65; 10,42; 10, 104).
Although in the first three passages a variant reading biizva
1) Karl Lichterbeck, Die Nominalflexion im Gathadialekt (Gütersloh,
1893), 26.
204
482
45
has been handed down, the metre requires in all of the 4
passages bázava. The Ved. and Avestan forms correspond
to Gr. mJxe(F)E (lE. 1< bheh2§'h~é~ke). Like báhú~l), bahúm
and báhú, the acc. pI. bahún (for * bahvál)) has adopted
the proterod. ending owing to the infIuence of the nomo
plur. bahával) (lO, 103, 13, ugrábáhaval) 8, 20, 12), and
on the analogy of sünával): sünún. PaJi and Prakrit baha
(d. Ai. Gr. 1I1. 328) can hardly be connected with the pre~
'historie paradigm.
The concordance between the Vedie and A vestan data
aIlows us to reconstruct the folIowing original paradigm of
nijxv; :
~ *n17xéFe;
( *m¡xFúr;
\ o*nr¡x F{jJ1'
( *m¡X lÍat
The only forms still in use are duo míxee and pI. míxw;.
Owing to the frequency of the ·dual its stem nr¡xeF~ was
generalized in the weak cases: n~xw; (since Herodotus) o
míxei'o m¡XÉoo'. míxea~ (Hdt.) and n17XÉW)o. ConsequentIy
Ionie has no trace of a stem in ~11F~. So Schwyzer's view
(Gr. Gr. I. 463; 573) that the Attie gen. míxew; is to be
connected with Av. bazav~ is hardly correcto Gr. nijxv;
represents the fourth type of normalization aIluded to aboye
p.38.
The gen. míxew~ is ev~dentIy an Attie innovation ando
like aarew;, due to the' analogy of n6J.ew;. With the i ..
declension nijxv; had many endings in common (,dat. n~xel.
duo míxet. nr¡xÉotv. pI. n~xet;. nr¡xÉwv Hdt. or míX Ewv • mJXBaL).
By changing ~w; in ~BW; the Attie dialect has succeeded
in creating an u~declension that was entirely paralIel to
the i~declension. Apparently a tendency towards morpho~
logical symmetry (see p. 14) has operated here too. This
205
483
 46
is of course a hypothesis hut one important fact can only be
accounted for on the strength of it: the small group of
nfíxv<; (néA6xvS', EYXdv<; and neéaf3vS') is characterized by
a harytone accent (like the class of n6Atd which cannot be
explained from a paradigmatical shifting of the accent (as
supposed by Meillet, Intlfoduction 8 317, Pedersen, La cinq.
décl. lato 24 ,n. 2). This is a strong indication in favour of
the assumption that nfíxv<; C.S. have been remodelledso as
to form the counterpart of the type n6AI,<;. Another indica~
tion may perhaps he found in the acc. sing. mjxvy (A 375
N 583 ifJ 166), which has supplanted the older form
* nr¡xéF al), whereas fnnfíFa has maintained itseIf.
The samegeneralization of the stem in ~eF~ is shown by
:rré),6XV<; which has the following plural forms in Homer:
(:neUXé'l<; ),acc. ndéxEa<;, gen. neUxewy dato ndéxeaal. The
accusative occurring thrice hoth in the Iliad and the Odyssey
might be read neUx'U<; (Schwyzer, Griech. Gramm.,1. 463),
but there is no reason for supposing thís to be the earlier
formo Like nf¡xé'O<; the Ionicgenitive ndéxw<; is no doubt
older than Attic ndéxew<; (Euripides). That néAexv<; has a
similar origin as niíxv<; is proved by the Vedic instr. parasvA
1, 130, 4, which points to a hysterodynamic inflexion. In
the genitive, however, instead oE the older form *RarasvMJ.
only the new formation parasóf:¡ 5, 84, 4 is found. Just like
biihú~Q, Ved. parasú~f:¡ has preserved the original accentu~
ation of *pe[ekeu~s/*pelekIJ.~ós. While Meillet, Introduc~
tion 8 317, assumes the opposition néAexv<;: parasú~Q to be
due to an oId paradigm with shifting accent, Schwyzer,
Griech. Gramm. 1, 381 (cf. p. 463), reEers to the fact that
the word has been borrowed from Accadian pilaqqu.
1) Cp. the acc. plur. Jl~XEa¡;, stilI used by Hdt. The variant reading
Jl~X8a furnished by the two oldest and best manuscripts in e 38 cannot
be relied upon as it stands in a common formula for which elsewhere
Jl~xe8 is always used.
206
484
47
N either oE these explanations is satisfactory, for Meillet' s
view would involve that the word was inflected according
to the proterodynamic type (lE. *pé[eku~s/* pele7céu~s) ,
which is disproved by Ved. parasvA; whereas the circum~
stance of its having been borrowed does not alter the fact
that the Vedic and Greek forms clearly point to a distinct
lE. word with a well--defined inflexion: lE. * pe[ekeu~s/
. '/( pel (e) kIJ.'"'ós. The most interesting evidence is furnished
by the nomo and acc. with 'U in Homer (néAexD<; r
60,
néAex'Uy P 520), standing for the original forms in ~eu~s,
,",éIJ.pfll. The ancient stem of the weak cases underlies the
thematic ,derivative néAexxoy 'shaft of an axe' (írom
'/( pelekIJ.~o~) and ndexxáw 1). AccoI"dingly the accent of
né),exv<; is due to an innovation of Greek and caused by the
tendency to create an inflexion parallel to that of n6AtS'.
Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. L 463, it is true, explains v in no."x'U<;,
~'Uy as oue to metrical lengthening. There are, however, no
counter~instances proving that forms oE :rrü"xv<; with a
short v existed at all in the Homeric dialect, whereas a
parallel instan ce clearly speaks in favour of our view, viz.
Hom. véx'U<;, m.
This word has in Homer the normalized infIexion, but its
nominative has v [Z 180, X 386), which is evidently to be
connected with YAv: acc. nasaum, nomo pI. nas'ávó. The
original paradigm must have been *nJeu~s/*f}k~l~ÓS (cf.
Ir. éc, M. Welsh angheu 'death' from * f}ku~). It is interest,",
ing that the acc. plur. is véxva<; (11. 6 Od. 4 , only once véx'U<;,
ro 416) corresponding to Ved. kttvaQ, Av. xra{}wó. It will
be clear that the usual connection of yéxv<; with the Sanskrit
ü~declension of the type tanú~f:¡ (eL Pedersen, La cinq. décl.
[at. 43; Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. 1, 571) is erroneous.
1) Ved; pársl1~Q. "sickle' (AS., TS.) is not clear but it probably
derives from the weak cases (*pefk!!~ós?). Cp. al so p8r8SI)8dh8~Q. Ep.
207
485
 48
The same remark applies to Gr .. XÜVq, ~vo; 'tortoise' (d.
hymn to Hermes 33 Xo.Vq, 153. XtÁV1'). The Slavonic
languages point also to a word *zely (ChSI. zelovo, Russ.
zolv" etc., Trautmann, Balt.~Slav. Wb.84) which induced
Meillet, Etudes 268, to the erroneous assumption of a stem
*gheluh 2 , * ghelr;.eh 2 • But Gr. XeJ..ÓJvr¡ (hymn to Hermes 42,
48; Hdt., Aristoph.) and xe).{;va (Sappho) point to a noun
of the type Av. *nasáus which is actually attested in
xe).evq • xt1')á(]a Hes. (d. XtÁewv 'shell of a tortoise' Aratos,
Nicander). The underlying paradigm may have been
*ghelóu~s, acc. *ghelér;.~1Jl, gen. *ghelr;.~ós (d. Lat. Nerio,
acc. N erienem, Lith. piemuo, acc. píemeni). It is obvious
that the various derivatives cannot be explained as deriving .
from a paradigm oE the type tanúA:z, which would have
produced Greek *XeAFa~¡*XeAV~. In Slavic the ending ~éu~s
i5 found represented, in the same way as in Greek, by ~y
« ~ús); Russ. ChSl. zelva is younger taking the place of
an older nominative in ~ús like Old Russ. zólva (for *zoly
'yá),wq'), Serb. Wkva (: OChSI. loky 'Aáxxoq').
The same relation as exists between * zely and Russ.
ChSl. zelva i5 to be found between Lith. pelús, f. (m.) pI.
and 'Latv. pelvas, f. pI., OChSI. plevy, f. pI. 'chaff'. Meillet,
Etudes 267, and Brugmann. Grundr. 11 2 , 2, 229. referred
the various forms to a stem *pelü~ (= *peluh2~)' But
Latvian has al so pelus and pelavas. the latter of 'which
resembles Skr. paliiva1:z. m. pI. 'chaff'. Evidently the
paradigm underlying ~ll these forms was * p elóu~s/* P(e)lr;.~ós
(stem in ~u~). The long vowel in Latv. pelüdé (ep. Lith.
pelridé) perhaps reflects a normalized stem *pelü~.
It remains obseure how Lith. gérvé (OPr. gerwe). Russ.
ChSl. zerav;" (SKr. zdralj from * zbravlb) and Lat. grús
stand to each other. Pedersen, La cinq. décl. lato 70 sq .•
compares gérvé : grús with Lat. plébés: Gr. ¡f).r¡-e.úr;
(deriving according to 'him Erom a proterod. paradigm
208
486
49
* plédhü/* plédhr;.és ). In view oE the Slavonic words I should
prefer to assume a hysterod. stem *g eróu~s/* grW~ós, from
which * g erow~iá (* z:,ravl b) was derived, but Lith. gérvé
could only be explained by means oE suppositions which
cannot be verified.
Another example of a nomo and acc. with ü reflecting
lE. eu is Gr. yévv<; (acc. rÚ'Vl' Euripides). Skr. hánu~1:z
cannot teach us anything about the original inflexion but
. Goth. kinnus points to a hysterodynamic paradigm. Just as
Goth. fa tus 'foo1' has become a stem in ~u~ through the
accusative~ending in fotu < * pod1Jl. kinnus is to be ex~
plained from the acc. kinnu < *§(h)en-r;.-1Jl. This form is
only intelligible if we start from *§(h)enéu~s, *§(h)enéW~1Jl,
*§(h)enw-ós 1). While in fotus the' strong stem has been
géneralized throughout (the lE. prototype of fOtu being
*pódr[t. Gr. 1lóda). here the weak stem genr;.~ seems to have
. been levelled out.
Sanskrit instances of ú reflecting lE. eu are scarce. But
beside párSu-1:z. m. f. 'rib' a form parSü~1:z is mentioned in
Gal).apatha 244. 11 (on Pál).ini 5, 2, 97). It is interesting
sine e in the Vendidad the acc. p'dr'dsáum occurs 7 times.
As the dual par"<Jsvi may be taken as * p'dr"<Jsvi (ar'd being
regularly written for "<Jr'd in Younger Avestan) Av. *ppáus
and Skr. parSü~1:z are probably to be referred to lE.
*p J'¡,éu~s/* prkr;.-ós.
Ved: agregu-1:z 'first~going' seems to be only attested in
agregúva1:z. nomo plur. f. in VS. and SB. hut the stem in
,:,ü~ is given by PataI1jali and in the Candravrtti (Renou,
Grammaire sanscrite 332). It represents an old hysterody~
l1amic word as is proved by Gr. 1r(]éaflvq. This word belongs
to the small group oE mjxvq (which accounts for its accent)
1) Even if we should start from a normalized nomo *§(h)enus
which through contamination with the weak stem has become
*g(h)en~lU-s the assumption of a hysterod. inflexion is inevitable.
209
487
 50
and has a genitive :n:(!éafhw,; meaning 'ambassador' (Ar.
Ach. 93 and inscriptions). Beside the plural forms :n:eiaf3E/';,
~EWV. ~Eat an older nomo :n:(!Eaf3ijE'; is attested in Hes. Se.
245 (d. dual :n:(!wf3íj Aristoph. fr. 495 D.); Schwyzer,
Gr. Gr. 1. 573, regards :n:eeaf3f¡E'; as an analogical formation
due to the infIuence of :n:6A1JE'; and refers the younger
forms (Boeot. :n:etaf'ElE'; etc.) to a postverbal noun
:n:eEaf3Ev,; (= :n:eeaf3wT1í,;. from :n:ewf3EVW). Though this may
hold good for such forms as :n:eEaf3EV(Jt (Lycophron), the
older forms in all likelihood continue lE. * glJeu~s, acc.
*g!!é!!-~'!l, gen. *g'!lJ.~ós,· cp. Hom. :n:(!éaf3v~ and Hes. :n:(!Eaf3f¡E';
(r. :n:(!éaf31JEd) standing to each other in the same relation
as, e.g., Av. daif¡hus and daiphauo. Ved. purogauá~Q.
(B-S., AS. etc.) is a thematic new formation derived from
the acc. stem. The words have of course nothing to do with
{JOVq as Boisacq erroneously supposes.
Another instance of ~ü~ may be inferred from Ved.
dámünas~ 'belonging to the house', which is formed like
drávi1Jas~ and contains a suffix ~nas~. The stem damü~ is
probably to be connected with Gr. ofufJ,;fopw(F)6,; 'slave'
(lit. 'belonging to the <56po,;') which is a normalized repre~
sentative of lE. * d emóu~s/* dm'IlJ.~ós. This interpretation is
corroborated by the Vedic proper name fjünas,:, (Válakh.
4, 2). Though Ved. rjú~Q. has no traces of a hysterod.
infI~xion (dat. rjávc twice) , in Avestan we find the adv.
<lr<lzvo 'forsooth' (perhaps a genitive of the adv. <lr<lzus)
and the substantive <lr<lzus, pl. 'finger' with the gen. <lr<lZvo.
We may accordingly compare:
dámünas~ *damú~Q. < *demou~s
fjünas~ *rjü~Q. < *r§e/ou~s
XfAúva xüvq < *§helóu~s
In Hom. vl'Úq 'son' no traces of the old infIexion seem
to have been preserved. The oldest Greek inflexion is
5!lO
488
51
evidently t'IV<;, VLa, vlo,;, Vll, pI. t'(/':<;, vla,; etc. 1), which
corresponds to the normalized infIexion krátu~QllcrátuaQ. In
Homer vla (7 times) is older than v/éa (N. 350); the aec.
*su~iélJ.~'!l. evidently hadbeen eliminated in prehistoric
Greek and vléa is an innovation (víia : víio,;= Ev(!ia: Eveio,;)
Like vív,; Erom * su~ieu~s/* su~i1)~ós "Ie/lV'; has been formed
from * gre1i2~!eu~sl* gr1J2~N~ós, see Sehwyze~, Le.
Ved. pasú~Q, m. (pásu, n.), Av. pasus, m. aIlow oE sorne
. interesting eonclusions as to the original paradigmatical
ablaut. In both languages the paradigm underwent. sorne
changes, so for instance in the dual: Ved. pásua (once)
and Av. pasu must be new formations standing for *pasáva,
*pasaua (d. baháua, Av. bazaua). The analogical for~
mations in Vedic due to the influence of the normal type
sünú~~l have already been pointed out aboye (p. 41). In
Avestan we find likewise beside old forms, as the gen. pI.
pasvéfm, new formations like the gen. sg. pasáus, Y. 31, 15;
50, 1; Afrin. 3, 3; V. 2, 24; 9, 38, the old form pasv5
curiously being preserved only in Nirangistán 65 aevahe
pasuo. In view of Benveniste' s argumentation (Origines 1.
55) it must be stressed that notwithstanding the fact that
the Gathic dialect uses pas~lls no conclusion can be drawn
from this formo
For the relation of
Ved. pasváQ. (11 times). ¿~ y A v. pasuo
~ ( G.YAv. pasáus
is just the same as that of
Ved. kr~tvaQ. (twice) ( ~ YAyo xra{}w~
kratoQ. (once) ) ( GAv. xratáus
On the strength of the Vedic evidence we must conclude
that in this respect the Gathic dialect represents a later
1) See Schwyzer's detailed discussion (Gr. Gr. r. 573-4).
211
489
 52
stage of linguistic development than Younger Avestan. Cp.
in general Meillet, JAs. 1917 1I, 187 sqq.
The original paradigm must have been lE. * p Jeu~s/
* pkl)~ós. Like Ved. jñu~ (in mitá~jñu~Q., asita~jñú~Q.) the
weak stem * pku~ only subsists as the final member of com~
pounds, the stem *pJ > pas - being generalized in the
paradigm of the simple. These compounds are:
acc.sg. mat.[sum 1 ) H.1, 14.
[radar. [saam 2) Y. 2, 4 (variants: o [saóm,
o [saum, o [süm).
dato sg. [radar. [save Y. 1, 4 (var. o [saave, o [sve).
nomo pI. haurva[savó 3) Y. 58, 6.
The first form which must represent a neuter is evidently
of no value; it probably stands for *mato [su having adopt~
ed the ending of the preceding and the subsequent word 4) •
The remaining forms are identical with those of daii3hus
(acc. dait5haam Yt. 10,2 and 26, dato dait5have Yt. 13,66;
16, 9) 'and represent o [savam, o [suve (or o [save on the
analogy of the normal u~declension)' and o [savó. The
same weak stem probably underlies Ved. k~umd.n and
puruk~ú~Q., fuIly discussed by N eisser, Zum W orterb. des
RV, 11, 76 ii). So we are justified in regarding as the
original inflexion: nomo *paSd.u~s, acc. *pasávam, gen.
* psvas. Beside * pasaus there. existed of old a neuter pásu
(cp. Lat. pecu, Goth. [aíhu) attested in BS. 3, 53, 23. Cp.
Ved. mahiÍ.~m: ntr. máhi. This neuter, however, has the
same hysterodynamic inflexion (p. 10) and, in spite of Ben~
----
1) 'sarnrnt den Tieren'.
2) 'Narne einer Gottheit, die die Kleinviehherden rnehrt'.
3) 'des Haustiere unversehrt sind'.
4) The passage runs as folIows: kBrSvara yat XUBnlrBfhm mato
tsum mato ra{}<Jm. Bartholornae, GrlrPh. la 229, Air. Wb. 1121. gives
a different explanation,
5) As to ápsu~Q. ¡and BrU1:zá~psu~Q., see op. c. 1, 62 and 1, 103-4
respectiveIy.
212
490
53
veniste, Origines 1, 55; 179, it differs fundamentaIly from
diÍ.ru/dróQ..
At the end of this paragraph a brief note may be added
on the gerunds of the type itvd.. It has been stated above
(p. 35) that they cannot be connected with the infinitives
( étum), étave, étoQ.; nor is it possible to derive them from
stems in ~Uh2~ (cp. Hom. eor¡rÚc; etc.1) since then *itua
would have been required. Now the gerunds in ~tvd. occur
. 21 times (from 9 roots) 1) and the closeIy reIated forms in
-tviÍ.ya 10 times 2). In 14 of the 21 instances (66 %) ~tvd.
folIows a heavy syIlable, likewise -tvd.ya in 5 of the 9 cases
(55 % ). N evertheIess the resolution AviÍ., -tuáya, which
according to Arnold, Vedic Metre 95, occurs 'very fre~
quently' in the Atharva Sarphita seems to be whoIIy want-
ing in the BS. It is difficult to account for this absence,
but the conclusion seems to be unavoidable that itvd., krtvá
etc. originated from a hysterodynamic paradigm (* eiteu-sj
*itl)~ós) whioh may also account for Ved. kftvia-Q. 'active,
laborious' and the Greek nouns in ~.fJc;, still obscure in
origin (Schwyzer, p. 350 and 507). But here arises another
problem which it is not yet possible to solve: which is the
principIe causing one noua to be inflected as a pro tero-
dynamic and the other as a hysterodynamic word?
§ 10. The arigin a[ the lacatives sing. in -avi and -au
and a[ the [eminines a[ the stems in ~u-.
It has been stated above thatthe regular proterodynamic
10cative ended in ~avi (gávi, sünávi). The normal 10cative~
e:nding is however ~au ~hich has not yet sufficiently been
1) The instan ces are pitvII (7). bhittvfi (1), bhütv'f¡ (1), mitvfi
(mih 1), yuktvfi (4). vrtvfí (1), srutvli (1). hBtvfi (3), hítvfi (hih 2).
moreover in 8, 57, 1 (Valakh. 9) probably yuktvfi is to be read, see
Grassrnann, Wb" and Oldenberg, Noten.
2) These are gatvliya (1), jagdhvfiYB (1), dattvfiya (1), dHtl/áya
(1), bhaktvliya (1) ,yuktváya (1), hatvfiya (2), hitvfiya (1).
213
491
 54
explained (s. Wackernagel-Debrunner. Ai. Gr. lIl.
155-6). The question arises whether it may be proved
that ~au was originally peculiar to the hysterodynamic in~
flexiono The inquiry is thwarted by the circumstance that
in the B-ksa:tphita ~au is already on the way to super~
sede the ending ~ávi wholly. Of 27 nouns (19 mase .•
8 neuters) a locative in ~au is attested. whereas not more
than 8 nouns (7 mase .• 1 neuter) have ~ávi (ratio 3. 5: 1).
The numbers of the instances (~au 58: ~ávi 1J.) show the
same ratio. viz. 3. 4: 1. The use of ~ávi is confined to the
B-S .• as younger texts have exclusively ~au (Ai. Gr. 111,
154). So it is to be expected that many proterodynamic
nouns had already adopted the latter endIng in the Rig~
Vedic periodo If we examine those words that show suffi~
cient traces of either a proterodynamic or a hysterodynamic
inflexion we arrive at the following result:
1 Proterodynamic nouns: súnávi 1. siÍnavi 9: siÍnau 10.
iÍyau 1). manaú 3 (with normalized accent mánau
Valakh. 3. 1 and 4. 1) 2)' pú~tigau 1. srú~tigau 1.
11 Hysterodynamic nouns: krátau 1. pútákratau 1. pár~
sau 1. pasaú 1. mádhau 4. vásau 3: dásyavi 1, trasáda ..
syavi 1.
That ..ávi was the original proterodynamic ending is
beyond question. SiÍnavi standing always at the end of
a pada is an .altertümliche Forme!' (Debrunner); 'ffyau is
an innovation of Sanskrit for *yávi as proved by Avestan.
The proper names Pú~tigau and Srú~tigau occur in Valakh.
3. 1 (lbeside Ntpatithau and Médhyatithau!) and are clearly
young as against rúsad~gavi 5. 64. 7b (Ai. Gr. 111. 219).
On the other hand the nouns of the hysterod. type have
nearly exclusively ~au the only exceptions being dásyavi 8.
1) R,.s.1. 114.8 (the text has erroneously ayaú). s. Neisser. Z. Wb.
d. RV. n. 37 n. 2.
2) Ved. mánu~f:r., is taken as proterodynamic on account of its
shifting accent.
214
492
55
6. 14 and trasádasyavi Valakh. 1. lOa (both at the end of
a pada). In these two instances however the dying case-
ending seems to have supplanted -au! Perhaps the poets
aimed at an archaizing mode of expression and imitated
the use of siÍnavi at the end of a páda.
Probably the origin of the ending -au must be sought in
the hysterod. paradigm. The question may be raised
whether the locative-ending -an in GA V. casmfmg, y A V.
i:asmqm though occurring in a proterod. infIexion has like-
wise its origin in a hysterod. paradigm (see Brugmann.
Grundr. 11 2 • 2. 178 and DeJhrunner, Ai. Gr., 111. 275). But
a solution oE these vexed problems is beyond the scope of
this paper.
The feminines in -in2+ien2- formed from stems in -u-
are based on the strong stem in Greek: 1j/Jsia <
*/í(jeF-ta
(corresponding to the 'genit. ~M ( F) -o; ): whereas in Indo-
Iranian the weak stem is gen~rally used: Skr. svad~v-t Av.
(Jatmh¡ (= *vahvi. corresponding to the Ved. genit.
vásvah) .
This opposition must be due to a younger generalization.
for Greek has still sorne traces of the lI. formation. From
the verbal-root *p!th 2- (pres. indo *pft-éh'rmi. subj. *plét-
n2 -0 1) ) an adjective * plótn 2 -us!* p!tn 2 -éu-s (Lith. platus:
Gr. nJ.an~;. Ved. prthú-h) 2) has been derived. The femi-
nine * p!tf}rlJ-ih2 (with syIlabic ~2) has been preserved in
Gr. nJ.árata = Ved. prthivl, which. however, in normal use
has been ousted by n2auia.
'Apparently Indo-Iranian has 'generalized the feminine
form of the hysterod. inflexion. whereas in Greek the cor-
responding proterodynamic form carne to be used exclusively.
1) Skr. *prtá-: práthaf.c. Cf. matha- (yáti) : mánt/¡ati from *mQt~éh2-
mi : *1J1ént~h2~6.
2) The assumption of a formative element -h2-U (Pedersen. H ittitisch.
194) is unacceptable.
215
493
 --y
56
§ 11. The normalized type. OP. dahyau8 and Gr.
mn8Vq; Gr . ¡tr¡'t(2vlá.
The inflexion of OP. dahyau8 has been discussed aboye
(p. 37); the strong stem has not been generalized through~
out, d. loe. dahyuvá, gen. pI. dahyúnam, loc. pL dahyuJ
suva; nor is such the case in the corresponding Avestan
words. The nomo plur. OP. dahyáva, Av. daiiJhavó may
have adQPted the long diphthong from the nomo sirig. 01'
else ~ava1 reflects lE. ~ó~es (d. sákháyaQ. < ~oies).
In Sanskrit this type is wholly wanting, for ádhrigavaf:¡
B.S. ·1, 64, 3; 8, 22, 1, nomo plur. of ádhrifiu~Q. 'not poor,
\rich' 1) is due to the influence of the compounds of gaú~f:t.
An independent noun~class has only been developed in
Greek, e.g. ínn8Vq < *ínm7vq (see Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. !,
476-8). It faithfully preserves the accent of the oId hys~
terodynamic inflexion, as all nouns are oxytone. From this
heavy stem also feminines have been derived, e.g. Nr¡(2r¡Fír;,
comparable with Ved~ Manav~1. In Sanskrit the connection
with the hysterod. type must have been lost at an early
date owing to the extinction of this type, and feminines in
~avi have been derived from proterod. stems like mánu~f:t
too. The forms Tvovq, Nr¡(2vr; occurring on Attic vases
had perhaps 'Ü like YEX'Üq.
The meaning of many old words in ~8Vq is 'mit einer
Sache, Handlung, an einem Ort beschaftigt', d. ínnevr;,
í8(28Vq, OlX8Vq, '}'(!a¡t¡tat8Vq. A similar meaning, viz. 'be~
longing to, related to' is characteristic of the words in
~Óu~s, e.g. ná't(2wqjná't(2w (F) oq (lE. * ph2ti~óU~s/ph2tr~~~ós)
'related to the father', OIUVq¡o¡tw(F)6q 'belonging to the
house' (olxevq), see Schwyzer 1,.479-80. These words
1) As to ádhrigave 1. 61, 1 for which Grassmann and Lanman 409
proposed to read ádhrigiive see Neisser, Z. Wb. d. ,RV. 1, 29, and
Oldenberg, Noten on 8, 22, 11. GAv. has drigaovc (var. dragavae)
Y. 53, 9.
216
494
57
are particularly interesting as they preserve some traces of
the original paradigm.
While Lat. patiuos 'father's brother' is probably form J
ed from the acc. *ph2ti~Ó~~rrz, the weak stem occurs in
the derivatives with .~io~ Skr. pitrvya~f:t 1), Av. túiiya~
(= *trvya~), OHG. [atuieo from lE. *ph2tr~~I~íio~.
In su eh derivatives, however, we should expect the
weakest stem with non~syllabic h (page 24); this is actually
'attested in Avestan (p) trvya~.
Gr. ¡t1)7:(2Vlfí 'mother's sister' from f.11t(!Wq 'mother's
brother' is general1y put on a level with pitrvya~f:t etc. It
may ,be questioned whether this view is correct for the
correspondent form Ags. módrie < primo Germ. * moáiü~
ió(n) points to another formation than OHG. [atureo
< primo Germ. * [aáurlJ~ian~ and suggests the following
expla,na tion.
Just as the feminine of
*medhéu~s/*m(e)dh~~ós is * m edhlJ~eh2~s/* m edhu~ft2~ós,
( Ved. mádhu~f:tlmádhvaf:¡) (y. madhú~f:¡ AS. 7, 56, 2b )
the feminine of
* m ej¡2tr~óu~sl* m eh2tr~~I~ÓS (cp. Gr.
1l11r:(!Wq 'mother' s Ibrother') must be
* m ..h2tr~l)~éh2~sl* m (e) h2-ti~uh2~ÓS 'mother' S sister'.
From a comparison of ná7:(2wq, Lat. patmos with the
adje<;tives (used as substantives) pitrvya~f:¡, OHG. [atureo
meaning all of them 'father's brother' it follows that the
adjectival derivative may be used in the same sen se as the
base~word. Accordingly 1J,17t(!Vlfí, Ags. módrie may be the
feminine form of the adjective * meh2ti~uft2~io 'related to the
mother's sister' being derived not from IUí7:(2wc; but from
*tneh2ti~~~éft'rs 'mother' s sister', This explanation may
1) This is the correct accent, see WackernageI. Festschrift Andreas
5-6.
217
495
 58 59

seem rather intricate but only in this way, 1 believe, we can The scarceness of these materials is compensated to sorne
account for the difference between primo Germ. * fadurt}~ian~ extent by the interesting evidence fumished by Hittite. The
and * moddi~ió (n) ~. singular of the adjectives and substantives is here declined
Gr. JfLdJq/(~fUIJÓ~ probably reflects lE. *demóu~sj*dm"l"l~óS, as foIlows:
cp. Ved. dámünas~ (see p. 50). Ad j ectives Substantives

§ 12. The pratero~ and hysterodynamic i~declensians

Nom. sallis 'great' zabl]ais 'battle' tuzzis 'army'
in Hittite. Acc. sallin zabl]ain tuzzin
. Gen. sallajas zaGbijas tuzzijas
For the stems in -i- the data furnished by Vedic and
Avestan are comparatively meagre. which, however, is DatAoc. sallai zaGbija tllzzija
compensated by the interesting e.vidence of Hittite, Ab!. sallajaz zabl]ijaz(a) tllzzijaz
examined in § 12. Then the proterodynamic and
The very antique Vedic survivals like d¡irll/dróf:¡ are
hysterodynamic paradigms are discussed in paragraphs
13 and 14 respectively. Finally in an excursus the
unknown in Hittite. There is, however, no reason for
irregular accusatives dy'tim and gflm are explained as supposing that Hittite represents the lE. state of affairs for
being analogical formations. it is undeniable that here the original system has undergone
In the i~declension the opposition between the two él complete rearrangement. As in Greek, where the protero~

types of inflexion is in general much less distinct than in
the u-declension. The anomalies are more rare and
our discussion accordingly wilI be shorter. Just as the
u~decIension, the stems in -i have adopted the protero~
dynamic inflexion in Indo-Iranian, in Germanic and in
Lithuanian, d. agllí~f:¡jagné-f:¡, Goth. anstsjallstais, Lith.
ugnisjugnies. In Greek we find, on the one hand, a normal~
ized inflexion (of the type krátll-Qjkrátvab, nírv; I ntrvo;)
in Ionic n61.1~, gen. nÓAwr;, pI. nÓJ.tcr;. nÓJ.tac;. noJ.[w)'.
This i~declension is generalIy regarded as identical with
the lE. i- (ih~r) -decIension, thus recentIy Schwyzer 1, 571.
It is no doubt possible that the hysterod. stems in ~i- have
fallen together with those in -i~ and perhaps sorne datives
in -i like y.J'ljaTÍ A 640 contain the locative~ending of Ved.
nadt (see the discussion by Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. 572 n. 2).
On the other hand sorne traces of the proterodynamic
inflexion appear to survive in the genitives Pamphylian
Nqono).El;, Zelean 1:1Jr; nol.Etr;, Hom. n(!oná(!odh n6A.tr;
B 811 (Schwyzer 572 n. 4}.
dynamic inflexion is reserved for the adjectives (ljJvqNMo;)
and the hysterodynamic infIexion has been generalized for
nearly alI substantives (nírvr; / níwor;). in Hittite the adjec~
tives and substantives have come to be characterized by
special infIexions. Since in Greek this distinction between
the two types of infIexion is evidently due to a recent
innovation. it is unlikely that a similar differentiation in
Hittite shoul~ be old. Pedersen, Hittitisch 37 n. 1. rightly
rejects this assumption.
In zaGbais/zabl]ijas we may recognize the lE. hystero-
dynamic type. d. Av. bázflllSjbázvo. Pedersen 1), it is true,
has propounded a totalIy different view taking -ais as lE.
¡Has (derivative from an lE. stem in él) which occasionally
combined with a genitive of a stem in ~i. In view of such
regular correspondences. however, as l]urtais, l]urtainj
burtijas, lengais, lengainjlenkijas, manijal]bais, manijabbainl
manijal]l]ijas, sagais 5againjsakijas, ~aklais, saklainjdat.
1) HHtitisch, p. 39. [Recently Hans Hendriksen. Bedeutung des
Heth. fiie die Larynga/fhcorie 66, assumes -ais < -*eh~-í-s.l

218 219

496 497
 60
~aklija, zasl].ais, zasl].ainjdat. zasl].ija 1) it cannot be doubted
that zal].l].aisjzal].l].ijas represents a normal type of inflexion.
Occasionally we Hnd a 'genitive in -ajas and a dative in
-ai, e.g.
~
~ linkijas linkija.
d ato 1
acc. lingain, gen. (lingajas engato.
The normálized forms have probably arisen owing to the
influence of the nomo and acc. (Friedrkh, Heth. Elementarb.
17) and may accordingly be compared with Av. nasávo,
daiíahavo, Gr. ínnij(F)or;.
On the other hand an accusative in -in instead of -ain is
occasionally found, e.g. zal].l].in. Probably the second type
of substantive-inflexion tuzzisjtuzzijas has arisen in this way
and represents a normalized paradigm like Ved. krátu-lJj
krátoalJ. Both types stand to each other in the same relation
as Av. -bazausj-bazvo and Ved. biihú-1:z.
The inflexion sallis/sallajas has given rise to most
divergent explanations and it seems for the present impos-
sible to arrive at a positive resulto It is a priori likely that
this paradigm reflects the lE. proterodynamic type: accord-
ingly Benveniste, Origines 1. 69, referred -ajas t~ lE. -eios,
standing for -ei-s and a similar 'view was held by Pedersen.
Hittitisch 37. who assumed -ejos to have been phonetically
developed into -ajas. In view of Goth. gen. anstais, dato anstai
(and sunaus, sunau) we may start from -ojos (and analogic-
ally -oj-es in the nomo plur.) as well. In that case sallajas
would have another origin than lingajas « -ej-os, see
above). But W. Couvreur, Archiv Orientální 10, 295-307,
considers this explanation to be phonologicaIIy inadmissible
and sees in sallajas the ending -ej-os. Though I cannot
accept Couvreur's interpretation of this ending (which he
----
1) See W. Couv.reur, Archív Oríentální lO, 305. A fulL exposition
of all the materials available is given by Sturtevant, Mélanges
H. Peders.en, p. 58-60, whose explanation do es not differ much from
that given here.
220
498
61
connects with the locat. in -ei, explaining in the same way
OP. dahyaus, Gr. ínnévr;). I am unable to decide whether
his proposition that -ajas must contain a long vowel is
correct. Not until the sound-laws of Hittite will be known
with more certainty a solution of this vexed problem can be
hoped for. It may be added that Sturtevant holds -as
(contracted) to be the oldest form, -ajas (and -awas) being
analqgical new formations. So for the present there is still
á perfect disagreement among authorities 1).
§ 13. The proterodynamic i-declension.
In Vedicand A vestan the ,normalized proterodynamic
inflexion has become regular for the stems in -i. This
process has almost totaIIy effaced the few traces that may
give a faint idea of the original inflexion. The words
in -ti- have in general the reduced of weak grade of
root vocalism (see B. Lindner, Altind. Nominalbildung 76
sqq.). In the different accentuation of máti-1J (SB., Pal)..):
matí-1:z (B-S. +) we find a sllght trace of the shifting accent
in *ménti-s/* m1'}téi-s. Likewise vr~tí-1:z 'rain' and bhútí-1:z
'welfare' are oxytone in the B-ksarphita as against vf~ti-1J
and bhúti-1:z in a11 other texts. Pal).ini 3, 3, 96 enumerates
sorne more words that were oxytone in mantric t~xts, but
owing to the small number of accented texts handed down
to us several of these words are not actually attested as
such. Cp. however pákti-1:z VS. as against paktí-1J in the
B-S and Black Yajur Veda. See Paul Thieme, Pal).ini and
the Veda, p. 39-41.
The word for 'bird' declines in Vedic like a root-noun:
ví1:z, vím, vé1:z: pI. nomo váya~2, acc. vayá1:z. víbhi1:z, víbhya1:z.
1) Fór the rest Couvreur has shown that the distinction between the
two types of inflexion admits of many exceptions, the oldest texts uSing,
for instance, suppíjas as well as suppajas (from suppis. adj. ·pure·).
This confiríns our view that the distinction made between the inflexion
of adjectives and substantives must be of later date.
221
499
 62
viniim. Side by side with the nomo VíZl there occurs also Vé/.l
which Debrullner, Ai. Gr. 111. 144, regards as the original
form ('ursprüngliche Vollstufe des orthotonierten Stamm~
auslauts'). This would be correct if it could be proved that
this word is of hysterodynamic origin, although the form to
be expected would then rather have been * vai~fJ.. The
genitive cannot prove the inverse as it may be a new
formation, but Lat. avis clearly indicates an original
inflexion *h2étfi~s/*h21}éi~s. Like.in matí~fJ. and a11 the nouns
in -ti- Vedic has generalized the weak grade of the root~
vocalism; an additional cause may have been that * ávi-fJ./véfJ.
'bird' and ávi-fJ./ávyafJ. 'sheep' (Lat. avis and avis) might
have given rise to misunderstandings. Consequently ví~fJ.
must be older than vé~fJ., though their occurrences (ví~fJ.
6 times: 11 IV2 IX2 Xl; vé~fJ. 5 times: 11 HU VIl IXl Xl)
do not a110w any conclusion. It remains obscure to what
kind of analogy the nominative vé-fJ. is due. It is clear that,
once ví-fJ. had taken the place of * ávi~fJ., the paradigm has
been remodelled after the root~inflexion (nom. pI. váyafJ.:
acc. pI. vayáfJ. like piidafJ. : padáfJ.). But if any want would
have been felt of a lllominative more clearly characterized
as such, we should expect * ví~fJ. rather than vé-fJ.. At any
rate the lack of body ('W ortk6rper') of ví-fJ. was probably
the principal cause of its having been eliminated.
No anomalous neuters of the type diiru/drófJ. have been
preserved in the i-declension. Nevertheless some faint
traces of their previous existence are still, 1 believe, to be
discovered in Vedic. It is a well~known fact that hfd~
'heart' has in Vedic a heteroclite inflexion, the nom.~acc.
being Mrdi. Scholar~ use to emphasize the fact that the
suffix -i is strictly limited to these two cases. But we find
in Indo~Iranian al so a noun hfdaya~m, Av. z3r30aem, which
evidently is a thematic derivative from * hrday~. The most
remarkable feature of this stem is the weak grade of its
radical vocalism which induces us to as sume that in the
222
500
63
prehistoric period -i was not confined to the nom.-acc. but
had its correspondent in a genitive in -ais: hiirdij* hrdéJ:¡. It
is true that the long a is diHicult to be accounted for hut
we have found a similar instan ce in viistuj* vastóJ:¡ (p. 35).
It has long been noticed that likewise Ved. ásthi AS. (gen.
asthnáT.l AS, pI. asthii, asthábhiJ:¡ BS.) is to he connected
with Gr. voré WO/'. We may assume an inflexion *h'}.óst-h-ij
*h 2st-h-éi-s 1). Both instances seem to be rather trustworthy
witnesses. An unexpected complication however arises from
Hittite which has a neuter nomo acc. lJastai (dat.-Ioc. lJastai,
instr. lJastit, gen. pI. lJastijas). It belongs to the hystero~
dynamic class of zafJ[wis (see p. 59), but even as su eh it
deHes a11 rules. On account of Ved. malúim (acc. m.):
máhi (ntr.), pasú-h, m. « * pekéu-s): pásu etc. we must
assume that the hysterodynamic neuters ended in -i and ~U.
It is unlikely, therefore, that the nomo fJastai dates back to
the primo lE. periodo Its parallel, the ,neuter 1.Jarnau may
have been remodelled according to fJarnaus, lJarnain (genus
comm.), but for fJastai 1 am unable to oHer a satisfactory
explanation 2). It is however noteworthy that the dat.-loc.
l]astai does not belong to the inflexion of zalJlJais (dat.
zalJl]ija) but to that of the adjectives (sallis/dat.~loc. 5allai) ,
which probably in one way or another represents the
proterodynamic inflexion. Perhaps this dat.-loc. is a rem-
nant of the oíd inflexion which 1.Jastai had to give up when
it became a characteristic of the adjectives 3).
1) Compare Gr. ¡;OT.eaxov : aOTeáyaAo",. The aspirate shows that
* h2ost-h-i has been derived from a no un *h;!.ost-eh just as síraQI§¡r~-
(*krh-s) from a stem *ker-ef;z, represented by Gr. xlÍer¡.
2) Pedersen, Hittítisch 37, holds oodov to represent the lE. formo
from which baStai has analogicalIy been developed. This is however
highly improbable. Couvreur's remark (Archiv Oriento 10, 305 n. 1)
does not solve the problem.
3) Besides htdaya-m Vedic has al so kultlya-m 'texture, web, nest,
case' but it is a weak support for the assumption of neuters in -Ci-.
22.3
501
 64 65

§ 14. The hysterodynamic i~declension. (= ~ayam), nomo plur. GAv. kávayas(Cit) , YAyo kav':
The scheme of the original endings is as foHows: (= ~aya), gen. pI. YAyo kaoyé[m. But the genitive sing.
Sing. Plur. * kavyÓ has already been discarded for kavÓis (often in Y t.
13) and Ved. kaví~J:¡ has adopted the normal inflexion
Nom. ~~i(~s) ~éi~es
throughout (dat. kaváye, gen. kavéJ:¡ etc.).
Acc. -éi~f!1 +T}s
The old Avestan accusatives in ~ayam mentioned aboye
Gen. +ós +óm
are not beyond aH doubt since ~aém may be purely graphi~
(Loc. ~i~sú) etc.
cal a,nd stand for ~lm. They are:
In the i~decIension the old infIexional system has to a ;avanhaém Y. 2, 3; 18, name of a deity. The dato savaTJháe
larger extent been normalized than in the u~decIension. and the vocative savaTJhe are regular. The name occurs
Avestan has preserved sorne accusatives in ~ayam but the only in the late texts Y. 1 and 2.
corresponding genitives end in ~ais. The few Vedic words ka:r'Sáim Yt. 4, 4, 'furrow' apparently the acc. of a noun
on the contrary with a genitive in ~yas (instr. in ~yii etc.) * kar'Sis. cp. kar'Si~vant~ 'ploughman'. Both forms may
have a nomino and accusative in ~is and ~im. The original represent * krsi~, cp. with kar'Sáim karayeiti the Vedic
connection betwee.n the acc. in ~áyam and the genitive in phrase kHím íd kr~asva BS. 10, 34, 13. Though the
~yas has not been preserved in Indo~Iranian hut in one reading karsáim is not absolutely certain, its ending
word, viz. Ved. sákhá, Av. haxa 'friend'. Like ásthi agrees with GAv. hus . haxiiim. With due caution we
« * hóst~h~i) it is. a derivative of a stem in ~eh2~' viz. may assume JI. * krsáis, gen. * krsyás.
* s oqlJ~éh2/ * s oqlJ~h2~ (d. Gr. o¡ra.~( F) wv) 1). dar'dya. arstaém Yt. 10, 102, dar'dya. iirstaém Yt. 17.12
(the latter with á in consequence of the aleph heing
Sing. Nom. sákhá < *Soq'1~h2~ói
written at the beginning of the second member of the
Acc. sákháyam < * soqlJ~h2~ói~f[L
compound) 'with a long shaft or lance'. The nomo plur.
Dat. sálchye < *Soq'1~h2+aí
is dar'dya . arstaya Yt. 10, 39 which shows the stem to
Plur. Nom. sákháyaJ:¡ < *Soq'1~h2~ói~es
be dar'dya . arSti~ (as against Bartholomae). It may be
Loc. sálchi~u < * Soq'l~h2~i~sú
questioned whether the reading with ~aém has any
In the same way is decIined Av. haxa, 'acc. GAv. huso value. In tiii . arstim dar'dya . arstaém (so aH good mss.,
haxaim, dato hase « * haxyai), nomo plur. haxayÓ, gen. a variant reading ~im in Yt. 10, 102, ~'dm in Yt. 17.12)
plur. hasé[m (ca) . we should expect the same ending in the first word as
A similar infIexion is also shown by Av. kavi~ 'prince, weH if it should represent an old linguistic tradition.
king' 2): nomo GAv. kava YAyo kava, acc. YAyo Icavaém The simple shows the normal inflexion 1), but cp.
ar'StyÓ. bar'dza Y. 9, J.1, probably to be r.ead rstáya-
1) Cuny, Symbolae gramm. Rozwadowskí 1, 90, assumed a hetero-
clitic paradigm *soqlJoh > *sakii, * soqlJ-h-í-bhis> sákhibhil} but as barza.
the paradigm of sákhii is clearly hysterodynamic the long voweI of 1) In the I}S.: HtíQ, plur. -áyaQ, -rl}, -íbhiQ -í~u. In Avestan: aritiS,
the nomo sing. must be due to lengthening. -im, -ois. plur. -ayas. -inélm. Cp. the proper name para{)vadtois asaono
2) Christensen, Etudes sur le Zoroastrísme 29, 32. Yt. 13, 101.

224 225

502 503
 66
T,he normalized type corresponding to krátu~l:lkrátval: is
only represented by arí~l: 'enemy' and pátí~l:, the former of
which has even remodelled the nomo plur. (see p. 43). The
forms attested are: arí~l:, arí~m, (dat. aráye once, d. Neis~
ser, Z.Wb. I, 98 n. 1 ),gen. aryál: 36 (ariál: 3), nomo plur.
aryál: (masc. 16,· fem. 2), acc. aryál:. The nomo sing.
art~l: VS. 6, 36 is probably analogical,due to the influence
of ratht~l: (gen. Irathyal:), rather than being a paralleI of
parSü~l:, *damü~l: (p. 49 sq.) 1).
The word páti~f:¡ 'husband, .lord', notwithstanding its
irregular accent (from the vocative?), has faithfully pre~
served the hysterodynamie inflexion, only the nomo and ace.
sing, having been normalized.
Avestan
Nom. pátil} paitis
Acc, pátim' paítim 2)
Instr. pátya 4 (pátiná once) paiti
Dat. pátye 8 (patáye AS.) paí{}yaéca, pai{)e
Gen.~Abl. pátyul} (pátel: 'lord' once) paítóís
Loc. pátyau 2
Dual páti, Nom. pI. pátayal: 16, Dat.~AbI. pátibhyal:
Though the oldest lE. form with the meaning 'himself
seems to have been uninflected, the noun denoting the
'master of the house' must be very oId (cp, recently Peder~
sen, Hittitisch 78), Its original nominative must have been
*potei~s (gen, *poti~ós ) ,
Without entering into the problem whether the instr.
ending ~i in A v. paiti is older than ~yá of pátyá, it may be
stated that ~ya instead of the normal ending ~ina (which
1) Aryám B-S. 8, 33, 14 is no acc. sing. but stands 'probably for
ary'tim (gen. pl.), see Grassmann and OIdenberg, Noten on 5, 75, 7.
2) As haí{}im Y. 9, 23 for paítlm is an oId textual error the {} may
be merely graphical and does not indicate an acc, *patyam.
226
67
has been adopted by both proterod. and hysterod. nouns)
is al so an indication of hysterod. inflexion. Apart from
sákhyá and pátya the ending ~ya occurs in three words,
viz. ürmya, pavya and rayya. Ved. ürmí~f:¡ 'wave' do es not
allow of any conc1usion (ürmia 1, 184, 2 but ürmí1)a 9 times
in the ninth mal).c;lala). If it has been hysterodynamic at a11,
no decisive evidenee of it subsists (gen. ürméf:¡). Ved.
paví-:l: 'tire of a whe~l etc.' is only attested in such forms
ás may continuea hysterod. paradigm (sing. pavíl:, ~ím,
~ya 11 V2, plur, ~áyal:, ~íbhíl:, íbhyal:, ~í~u). The accent too
points to an old inflexion * pavaís¡* pavyás.
The forms of rayí~l: 'wealth' have often been diseussed,
see Lanman 431, WackernageI~Debrunner, Aí. Gr. 111, 214.
The accusatives ram 10. 111. 7.b (usua11y compared with
Lat. rem) and ral: SV. 1, 323d are ne.w formations, ep. Av.
raem = Ved, rayím (Debrunner p. 215). The word is,
like rátna~m, undoubtedly related to the verbal root ra~
'grant, bestow', which excludes the ex plana tion s based
upon the assumption of a root raí (lE, reí), The only
satisfactory explanation has been given by Kurylowicz,
Prace filoZ, 11, 230 n, 1. Etudes i~e. 36-37, who aecounts
for the opposition rayí~f:¡/rayál: by their prototypes * rahí~sl
*rahjas. As the paradigm is clearly hysterodynamic we
must assum~ that the nominative has be en * r ehl~eis, acc.
* r e hl~éí~m gen. * r ( e ) h~i~ós. The Vedic forms are: rayíf:¡,
.. " ' ...
rayím, raya 39 (rayíQa Xl rayya Xl), rayé 62, ráyál:
(rayal: 3); plur, ráyal}, rayál: 22 (rayaf:¡ 4), '1'ayíbhil: 1.
fáyám 1 (rayi1)am 41). Apart from rayam 9, 108, 13 the
oId gen. plur. ~yam was in Vedic eompletely supplanted
by ~inam, cp, sákhinám: Av. hasqm, By chanee this one
instan ce of it has heen preserved. The nomo plur, rayal: has
arisen from * r eh1~éi~es which explains its aeeent 1) .
1) Kurylowicz p. 37, assumes Ved, yayí~/:t 'running, hastening' to
be built in the same way (*ieh2-h from the· root ya-), It is, however,
227

504
505
 68
The antique character of the inflexion a(Ji~Q, m.L •sheep',
gen. ávyaQ is confirmed by Gr. a(F)tc:, gen. óló~
(< * ol,!i~ós). Instead of the nomo pI. atee; (t 425) we should
expect * (jee~ « * ol,!~éi~es). The corresponding Vedic
form is not attested. See Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. 1, 573.
§ 15. The irregular accusatives dy¿m, giim etc.
The hysterodynamic inflexion involves the use of· three
differe.nt stem~forms in one paradigm, e.g. narf¡(}, nad(}~a,
nat(}~óc;. This rather complicated system has been simplified
in different ways. While in Greek the weak stem has in
general been eliminated (AtIMí)', AtfJ-f:Va, Al/tÉVOC; etc.: aelJ¡',
a(}va is arare exception), Sanskrit tends to generalize the
stem with a lengthened vowel in the acc. sing., etc.: the type
uk~ii, uk~áfJ.am, uk~fJ.áQ has in Vedic nearly died out and
iája, riijanam, rájf¡aQ has come to be the regular type; the
same process has taken place in the r~dec1ension.
But apart from this simplification the old form of the
accusative remained as such in Sanskrit as well as in Greek.
In the stems ending in ~i~ and ~u~ diphthongs, however, the
nominative seems often to have been sigmatic and may then
have been felt as being analogc;>us to the other vowel~stl!ms.
This analogy has provoked a new ending for the accusative
in accordance with ~os/~om, ~is/im (proterod.), ,",us/~um.
Such new formations apparentIy have arisen at very
different periods. In Hittite th.e noun~c1ass of zabbais has
an analogical accusative zabbain. There is but one isolated
instan ce of a noun in ~aus in Hittite, viz. barnaus. When it
gave up its old accusative it adopted also the new form in
~ain: barnain. Likewise in Old Persian the old accusative
of dahyaus, still preserved in Avestan dai6haom (= *dahy~
much more probable that yayí~Q. is a formation like cákri~1J 'active',
jághri~1J 'sprinkling about' pápri~1J 'bestowing', bab/¡rí~lJ, ·carrying'.
Accordingly ít represents *ie~ih2~í~.
228
506
69
avam), has been supplanted by dahyaum which betrays its
late character by the exceptional sound combination ~aum.
And in Attic the same process gave rise to a new accusative
)'avv in accordance with the nomo ¡'av~, instead of )'ija used
in Homer.
Similar analogical new formations must occasionalIy
have arisen as early as the primo lE. period, for Ved. dyám,
Gr. Z11v and Lat. die m point unequivocalIy to an lE. proto~
type *diem, accusative of *dieu~s (p. 38-39). Unlike OP.
dahyaum, which is a late formation of Old Persian alone,
the lE. new formation *dieum which superseded *diél,!~f!l
could not rema in as such and was changed to *diem in
order to avoid the sound~group ~éum. Instances of the kind
are very rare. Ved. rám 10, 111, 7b which is usualIy
compared in the same way with Lat. rem is a late Vedic
new formation (from * ray~m) for rayím (Oebrunner p.
215) and is not historicalIy connected with the Latin formo
As to naú~Q., its inflexion probably was normalized in primo
lE. (see p. 39) and Ved. návam, Gr. Y¡j(F)a, Lat. navem
point to lE. *n/¡2l,!~f!l. It seems therefore out of the
question that Gr. ),riv should date back to the lE. periodo
There is besides dyám but one additional instance of the
kind, viz. Ved. gám, Oor. (Ju))' (once in Homer, H 238)
pointing to lE. * guóm. It presents, however, far greater
difficulties since the inflexion of *g'}óh~u~s must have been
of the proterodynamic type (p. 32): nomo .. gl}óh~u~s, acc.
.. g'!óh:u~m, gen ... gl}h~éu~s. Now .. g'lom, like * djem, can
only be explained as a new formation due to a mono~
syllabic nominative .. guous. A prototype .. g'!óhl,!s with a
kind of falling triphthong is theoreticalIy admissible in view
of Av, X"3ng from *slJ"háns (see p. 34, n. 2). But on the
other hand we find, e.g., Ved. purú~Q, Av. parus pointing
to .. prrú~ « .. p!hú~), or Ved. suáQ. which reflects lE.
"kuh~és (p. 35, n. 1). Ved. yayí~Q (p .. 67, n. 1) is ambi~
229
507
 70

guous as it may represent a syllabification * ie~!h2~i~ (> ya~

yí~) as well as *iei~hi~ (> yai~i~). The details of the sound-
devdopment * g\!óhus > *g~óhlJ.s accordingly remain
obscure 1). In the ~S. g&m has six times dissyIlabic value.
Wackernagel-Debrunner, Ai. Gr. 111, 223, take it as an CHAPTER n.
indication of the lE. circumf1ex accent of *g\!i5m. Cp. ZiJl'
as opposed to Zevq. So dissyllabic g&m (gaam), being due The Vedic type 90~&~/:t 'getting cattle'.
to the circumstance that the long i5 in *g'1i5 (u) m had become
trimoric through compensation lengthening, differs essenti- The new formation go~f¡-{¡ originates from the nomo
ally from such instances as pánthaam (4) < *p ont-eh~r¡t 2) • and acc. sing. When in the old paradigm gO-liáQi-l;z/gen.
go-~áQ-a~ (from lE. *senQ1-s/* senh1-os) the cases
We may compare however the acc. k~&m 'earth' which is without i were no longer felt as belonging to the
four times dissyllabic. It will be discussed in the foHowing nominative, the analogy of *vrtrahfH¡ (nom. pI.
chapter. vrtraháQa~ etc.) 'gave rise to a new paradigm
gOlili-Q/gen. go~áQal). As however the relation of the
1) Compare al so *ehus-os > *áusos (p. 19). In fact, according
two nominatives go~áQi-l:t.: gOliti-l) was felt to be
analogous to the relation khaní-~ : -khti-~ (acc. khtim) ,
to several scholars the long diphthongs ei. eu, etc. have developed from
an aec. go~fim arose analogically. Thus the nomo and
ehi, ehu, see e.g. Kurylowicz, Etudes i.-e. 40, Hans Hendriksen,
acc. (go{fil), .jm) were again detached from the stem
Untersuchungen über die Bedeutung des Hethitisehen für die Laryngal-
gOlian- and carne to form an independent vowel-stem,
theorie 10. Acco,rdingly, if this view should prove to be correct, the
cp. the superlative vajastitama-I;z.
development * gIJóhus > *g\!OUS would be quite normal. Apparently,
in the position before i and u, h combined at an earLy date with the 1881: "Es bedarf noch eingehender untersuchungen um
preéeding vowel so as to form the long vowels e, o, etc.: in other die ...... frage in aUen punkten endgiltig zu
sound-combinations, however, h preserved its consonantal function beantworten."
until a late perlod, slnce Vedic and Avestan' prosody still shows sorne J. Schmidt, KZ. 26, 405 sq.
traces of the original hiatus in the group -a(h)a-. Hence, if n8ú~ 5,
59, 2 should be a dissyllable, it would rather point to a prototype 1926: "Mais iI est difficile de déterminer quel role ce
*naháus, lE. *neh2~us than to a normalized form *nahus (p. 40), since type a ¡oué dans la langue-mere."
the latter form would be represented by a monosyllable, just as Ved. H. Pedersen, La cínquieme déclinaison latine,
gaú-~. But the dissyIlabic value of naú~ is questioned by Ol~enberg. p. 53, n. 1.
2) Kurylowicz, Etudes i-e I, 35.
§ 1. The nominative and accusative of the root~nouns
jan.. and san .. , which occur in Vedic only as the final
member of compounds, end In ~¿/:t and ..¿m, e.g. sahasras¿-/:t,
acc. sahasras¿m (stem sahasrasán-) 'winning a thousand'.
A f~w instances of other case~forms are attested. Avestan
has only a genitive sing. [süsi5 of the stem [süsan .. and a
gen. pI. [razéim, which however suffice to prove the Indo~
Iranian origin of the type.

231
508 509
 í2
According to the generally accepted view 1), a (from lE.
{! ), which originalIy occurred only in certain case~forms,
has analogically been extended to all the other cases and
the words in ~siÍ~h have consequently passed over into the
root~inflexion of' the type rathe~thiÍ~f:¡ (Av. ra¡')aesta).
Though at first sight this explanation may seem quite satis~
factory, it presents several serious difficulties. Vedic
sahasrasán~, go~án~ etc. are derivatives of the se{~root
san (ih Now de Saussure after having first called attention
to the Ved. words in ~váni~ and ~sáni~ in his 'Mémoire sur
le systeme primitif etc.' (cp. Recueil des publications scien~
tifiques 231) has studied the nominal derivatives of such
set~roots in an article entitled 'Sur les composés latins du
ty~e agrícola' (Mélanges Havet 1909, p. 459 sqq.; Recueil
585 sqq.). In accordance with the results he arrived at, the
regular Sanskrit type to be expected would be 'sahasra~
sáni~. As a matter of fact, this formation is not who11y
unknown in Indo~Iranian. Vedic has beside vajasiÍ~f:¡ also
vajasáni~f:¡ and in A vestan zantu~sánó (acc. plur.) and
sorne other compounds, a11 of them found in Yt. 13, 151.
similarly point to a stem in ~n. Moreover the simple saní~f:¡,
which has passed over into the i~declension, is common in
Vedic. \
These forms seem to presuppose a prehistoric paradígm
with ahlaut~gradatíon, traces of which would have be en
preserved in the Vedíc forms go~iÍ~f:¡, acc. go~iÍm and
go~á1Jim, gen. go~a1Jaf:¡. If this distribution of the stems ~sa~
and ~san~ were to be consídered original we should have to
assume the weak grade * ~s1j-s to underlie the nominative
form 2) which, however, in a paradigm with alternating
stem~forms is impossible. N either Wackernagel-Debrun~
1) c~. Wackernagel-Debrunner, Ai. Gr. lII. 127.
2) Thus, for instance, Brugmann, GrundriB II2, 1. 139, and Pedersen,
La cinquj¡~me déclinaison latine, 53, n. 1.
232
510
73
ner, Ai. Gr. 111, 127 and 239, nor Písani, Grammatica
dell' antico indiano 325 sq., mention thís difficuIty. Joh.
Schmidt, KZ. 26, 405 (1882) 'considers it at the least not
to be impossible' (to quote his own words) that beside
~sani~ a root~variant ~san~ should have existed so that· the
nominative ~siÍ~f:¡ might he explained as having developed
from * -san-s. It is obvious that such an attempt to force the
issue does not give a satísfactory result. any evIdence for
the existence of an anit~root san~ being wanting. Quite
phantastical, on the other hand, is Hirt's view (Indog.
Gramm. 11, 39) who supposes an acc. * -senm to have
developed into * -sem (Ved. ~sam). Both the assumed form
* -sen~m from a se{-root and the presupposed sound-devel~
opment areutterly unfounded.
The only cases where in the original inflexion á (from
1j) could be expected to occur are the middle cases, accor-
dingIy before the endings -bhyám, -bhif:¡, -bhyaf:¡ and ~su.
Are we then to assume in accordance with de Saussure,
Mémoire 247, 254, and Kurylowicz, Etudes indoeuropéen~
nes I. 62-3, that the inflexion go~iÍ~f:¡, acc. go~iÍm, dato
(pasu) ~é has arisen in consequence of the transition of a.
into the strong cases? An answer to this question may be
given by the fo11owing synopsis of the case~forms actua11y
used in Vedic, which is based upon Lanman's excellent
work 'Noun~Inflection in the Veda'l).
1) As to the nouns in -san-, the instances of the acc. sing. fem. are
open to a double interpretation as they may be referred to a thematic
stem in -sa- as well. In accordance with Lanman 1 have enlisted them.
Theyare the following ones: asvas'lim, dhanastlm, vajasnm, svar~tim
and urus'lim, each of them occurring once.
Respe~ting the instances of -jan- 1 leave jti and prajti (supra/tí-) out
of consideration and give only the adjectives corresponding to those
in -san-o As to the nomo sing. f., only the forms in -jÍJ.-h are enlisted
whereas those in -Iti. of course had to be omitted. The ambiguous acc.
233
511
 74
nomo and acc. sg., m. and f. (go~á/:t, etc.) 63 times
nomo pI. m. (dhanasá/:t etc.) 5 times
dato sg. (pasu~é 1. 127, 10) once
acc. pI. (pasu~á/:t 5, 41. 1) once
nomo and acc. sg., m. and f. 37 times
.nom. and acc. dual thrice
nomo pI., m. and f. 18 times
acc. pI. f. twice (AS~
Consequently the middle cases from which according
to several scholars this declension must have developed, do
not oceur at all! From the evidence given aboye it may be
safely inferred that the remarkabledeclension of the type
gO~áFIJ. has arisen from the nomo and acc. si.ng. to which
cases the use has be en principally confined. Apart from
thero only the nomo plur. appears to have oeen used to sorne
extent. It should be noticed, however, that out oE the 18
instances oE Fjá/:t, 7 occur in the AtharvaFSatphita only,
which may indica te that this use is due to a later extension.
In any case we cannot hut assume that the nomo and acc.
sing. are oId and accordingly contain the strong grade of
the stems sa ja This is eonfirmed by the superlatives
F , F •
vajasátama~1J. (attested 10 times). sahasrasátama~/:t (5
times) etc., where also the stronggrade was required. The
stem sa- cannot therefore be referred to the setFroot sani-
hut apparently represents an independent ro~t. For the
explanation of the mutual relations between the two roots
we must first examine another similar phenomenon.
§ 2.
Pal].ini 3, 2, 67, while formulating the rule that the
compound adjectives containing as their final member the
sg. f. occurs only once in svajlim. Forms containlng n Iike go~al)a~l,
go~ál)im do not concern 'liS in this connection and have accordingly not
been enlisted.
234
512
75
roots jan- and san- change Fan into Fa-, mentions in this
connection also the root khan F 'to dig'. As a matter of fact,
in the BS. there occurs once the noun bísakhá-/:t 6, 61, 2
'digging up Hbres oE the lotusplant'. But though the
linguistic feeling oE the lndian grammaria.n may have con-
nected bisakhá-/:t with that verbal root, a morphological
analysis leads us to a different conclusion. In Vedic there
occurs also an old root-noun kháF 'source, Eountain, well',
twice attested in the acc. khám. Its .nominative must have
been *kháF/:t, as proved by Avestan xá Yt. lO, 4, of which
the Eollowing forms are moreover attested: nomo pI. xá, acc.
pI. xa (xaah) and gen. pI. xéf.m 1). As independent words
such root-nouns in Fa F have nearly died out in Vedic hut in
compou.nds they are still in use, cp. reto-dháFQ, nomo pI.
reto-dháF/:t, or avaFyáFQ, acc. avaFyáFm 'expiation, concili
ation'. Accordingly the compound bisakháFIJ. must in the
same way he referred to a root khaF.
The Vedic root khan~ 'to dig' is a wellFknown instance
oE a setFroot, ep. p.p. khatá~/:t, nomo ag. khaTlÍtár- etc. As it
may be considered a wellFestablishedfact that the Sanskrit
aspirate tenues have, developed from original tenues
followed by h, the root khan(i)F must accordingly have
evolved from *qhenh In Iranian, however, the related
F •
forms show kan F instead of *xan- (which would have been
1) The dissyllabic value of the acc. xA is evident in Y. 42, 1 which
is partly built up of decasyllabic verses. Arranged in its metrical form
the passage runs as follows:
a. yazamaide vá amasa spanta
b. yasnahe hapta13MtoiS handiítií
e, aPllmcií' x~ yazamaide
d. aPllmcií paratüs yazamaide
In e apqm is trisyIlabic (as often), so a dissyIlabic xA is required.
As to the form xllm (not mentioned in GrlrPhi/. 1 a 226), Reichelt.
Awest. Etem. 185, takes it as an acc. sing. This is probably an error
since its connection with haza13ram in V. 21, 7 necessitates Its being
taken as a gen. plu~.
235
513
 76
the regular correspondent form). ep. Av. kanti in alpl
kanyat 3d sing. opt., avakanta 3d sing. impf. mido OP.
nikantuv 3d sing. impero etc. These forms have lost the h in
the medial syIlable (n. * khanh~); in Persian the new pre~
sent gave rise to a participle kata~ (in the noun katam Dar.
Susa 1, 25, NP. kad). The origin of Y A v. i'Skat3m (Bar~.
tholomae, GrlrPhil. 1 a 9) is obscure.
This difference between the Sanskrit and Iranian initial
sounds is due to the fact that the present * qhenh~ti contains
a formative element ~en~ which often occurs in the lE.
Ianguages 1). I t may therefore be analysed as * qh~en h~ + the eommentary 'a trap-fall'. Compare thematic agregá-IJ.
and the proper root is consequentIy *qeh/qh~. According
to the rules stated in the quoted work the corresponding
subjunctive must .have been *qéh~n~h~ó, which would have
been represented in Iranian by * kana. Owing to the in~
fluence of this original subjunctive' the indicative has
apparently discarded its aspirate in Iranian whereas it
subsists in the root~noun xan~ (only attested in the deriva~
Uve x~nya~). It may be observed in this connection that ver~
bal stems with various formative elements are frequent in
Sanskrit as weIl as in the cognate languages, cp. Skr.
agamat : agat (lE. * glJ~em~ : *g!!~eh2~) and Greek f;(5Qa/u;:
JlJ(Ja (lE. *dr~em~: *dr~eh2~)'
The interesting point in this morphological analysis of
khan~ is, however, the fact that its phonetical aspect compels
us to assume a base-root * qeh~. It is even possible to
determine the precise nature of the final laryngal sound by
comparing the Av. noun cat~ 'Brunnengrube' (loc. caiti
V. 13, 37), which Bartholomae has already connected with
khan-. It reflects a prototype *qe-t~ and thus shows the
root to be * qeh r . The real existence of this root is more~
1) For a more detailed diseussion of such presents with -en- and
their subjunctives let me refer. the reader to my· book .. Die indogerma-
nischen Nasalprasentia", p. 64 sqq.
236
514
77
over proved by some more words which only in this con-
nection become fully clear. Skr. akhú~IJ. 'mole, mouse' (sincc
the B.S.) has since long been reeognized as a derivative of
a root kha-: it is a formation of the same kind as yú-IJ.
'going' (from ya-), agregú-IJ. 'first-going' (from gii-) ,
anu~thú 'directly' (from stha~). Compare al so Latin astú,
praestú (see Charpentier, ¡P. 32, 98; Vendryes, MSL. 22,
106) .
Besides the derivatives in ~u~ we find also a thematic
formation in akha~IJ. TS. 6, 4, 11, 3, meaning aeeording to
(RS.) oeeurring by the si de of agregú-~. The same thematic
st~m *qh~o- is found in Ved. khá-m 'hole, hollow', sukhá-IJ.
'easy, eomfortable, happy' and perhaps in akha-rá-IJ. (B.S.,
AS.) 'eovert' 1). Several seholars being unable to explain
in what relation kha.~ stands to khan-, regard the nouns in
,khu- and -kha~ as analogical new formations, ep. Walde-
Pokorny, V gZ. Wb. 1, 399. It is obvious that they must be,
on the eontrary, very old as they derive direetly from the
base-root *qeh r .
Besides these nominal derivatives of the base-root kha-
the 11. languages possess also a noun-formation from the
seeondary verbal root * qh l .... en-~~. Its Iranian representative
is kani~, cp. Av. avakani'S, OP. adukanais (gen.) 'name of
a month, li<t. the digging out.of eanals' and in Vedic khaní-IJ.
AS. 16, 1. 7, thematic khaná-IJ. 16, 1, 3 'digging' 2). It is
1) Ved. iikhará-I;t is probably a seeondary del'ivative from 'fikha-~l,
d. pii,!!surá 1), mw!kará-I;t, siirikurá-I;t. But as it is tempting to assume
a lengthened root *qh-el- for Olee!. hol, n. 'hollow, eavity', hola, f. 'hole,
hollow', there is a theoritical posslbility that akhará-{l derives from
*qh-el- like iikhaná-I) (PaI,l, 3, 3, 125) from *qh-en-.
2) From *qhen(h)-o-. It may be questioned whether the acc.
avakanam in Avestan (V. 15, 39 beside the nomo avakaniS, and V. 8, 8)
is to be taken as a thematic form .sinee it may be merely graphical.
denoting avakanim. But ep. the loe. hankaine paiti Yt. 5, 41 'under-
ground shaft'. In Aog. 66 Geiger's text reads frakinam 'hole, dug-out'
237
515
 78
interesting that Ved. khaní~/:t has the same meaning as
~khA.~/:t
in bisakhA.~/:t. In the classicallanguage khani~/:t means
'mine' (PW.) or 'hole of a mouse' (Bharatamañjari 13, 270).,
So it may be inferred that in Vedic there existed two
paradigms side by side:
khaní~/:t kh§~/:t
khaní~m
These forms afford conclusive proof for the assumption
that kh§-IJ. and khA.~m contain a vowel~stem kh'á~. Its
original infIexion must have been: *qÓ1il~s, acc. * qehl~f!l,
gen. *qh 1 -ós, dato *qhraí. Bartholomae was consequentIy
wrong in referring xa, xqm etc. to a stem xan~. Avestan
has, it is true, an adjective xqnya~ 'fontanus' which Bar~
tholomae connected with xa. It is, however, 'a Vfddhi-
derivative from * xani- (like Ved. k§vya~/:t from kaví-/:t) 1)
which, on account of its x-, dates back to primo Indo-
Iranian, whereas the compounds with ava< han~ and fra~
are Avestan new formations or have been remodelled in
A vestan according to the verbo
§ 3. It is obvious that the conclusions drawn from the
parallel formations khaní~/:t and khA.~/:t are of immediate
import for the type go~á~/:t. As has been shown aboYe, the
only caseforms generally used are the nomo and acc. sing.,
e.g. go~á-/:t, go~á~m, which can only be explained as
formed from a stem in ~a~. Side by side with the stem in
-S8- there existed a formation in ~sáni- with the same
meaning. Compare:
while the glossary (p. 139) quotes [rakan3m. It is not c1ear whether
frakin3m is the reading of the mss. (see Bartholomae Lv.); jf it is, it
points evidently to *frakainim. In any case it must be an acc. sing., see
Duchesne-Guillemin, JAs. 1936, 251.
1) Ved. khanya-I;r. (see Thieme, PlllJ.ini and the Veda, pp. 20, 22) is
no parallel, sin ce it is a ge,rundive.
516
79
Nom. vájasáni~/:t (< * ~sén~l~s) gO~á~~l « *" -sefoh-s)
Acc. go~áT)i~m (< *~sén~l~m) go~á~m « * * ~sefoh~f!l)
Gen. go~aT)~a/:t (< * ~s en1irós)
The parallelism with khaní~/:t and khá~/:t is striking and
confirms our view that go~§~/:t contains a vocalic stem.
Similarly gojá~/:t and the other derivatives in ~j§~/:t must
derive from a stem in ~á.
. But this being gra.nted the question arises how we are to
interpret from a historical standpoint the reconstructed
prototypes * se1i~s and *ge1i~s. A,nalysing the lE. roots
*sen1i r 1) and * gen1il~ in like manner as * qhl~en~h~ seems
out of the question. An indication in favour of the assumption
of a root * se1i~ might be seen in Ved. sáman~ 'acquisition,
property, wealth'. But theexistence of a third word s§man~
beside the two well~known homonyms, though admitted for
some passages by Oldenberg, Noten on lO, 59, 2, is questi~
oned by Geldner in a note on his translation of BS. 1. 147,
1. In this connection we must also consider an idea of
Pedersen, Le groupement des dial. i.-e. 53, who compares
Ved. já~/:t' 'offspring' with Gr. ef3á{)r¡' eYlly)'f¡ih¡ Hes. This
would involve the assumption of a root *glJeh. Consequently
we should have to separate #-/:t from the root * genh 1
'gignere', with which the lndian grammarians used to con~
nect it (cp. paJ?. 3, 2, 67). This evidently cannot be right.
It is also unlikely that Vedic had still another word #~/:t =
jáni~/:t 'w¡,fe', which might be inferred from j§spáti~/:t as
compared with gnáspáti~/:t 'the husband of adivine wife'.
So there is no sufficient reason for assuming that the
roots *se1i~ and *geh~ really did exist in primo IE.It is
indeed anything but certain that the type go~§~/:t actually
dates back to the primo lE. periodo In Avestan it is very
scantily represented, the only instances being a gen. sing.
1) With hl onaccount of Ir. con-sní, see Pedersen, Hittitisch 185.
239
517
 - sc;a;y,
80
fsúsó and a gen. plur. frazé!;.m (cp. Skr. praj§.nam) 1).
Anyhow the type seems to have existed in A ves tan, whereas
in the other lE. languages no traces of it have been found.
The stems sa~ and ja.~, therefore, cannot have come into
~xistence until the primo Indo~lranian periodo It must be
observed in this connection that the predominant use of
the compounds in ~s§.~/:t as against those in ~sáni~/:t seems
to be a peculiar feature of the B-S. Here the followi,ng in~
stances are found 2): asvas§.~/:t 4, uru~§.~/:t 1, urvara.s§.~/:t 2,
k~etra.s§.~/:t 1, go~§.~/:t 5, dhanas§.~/:t 7, nr~§.~/:t 1, pasu~§.~/:t 2,
va.jas§.~/:t 13, satas§.~/:t 6, su~§.~/:t 1, sadas§.~/:t 4, sahasras§.~/:t
19, svaq§.~/:t 11, amounting to 77 instances as opposed to 8
insta·nces of ~sáni~, viz. úrjasani~/:t 1, go~á1J-i~/:t 2, pitu~á1J-i~/:t
1, vajasáni~h 3, hrdafJ1.sáni~/:t 1. But in other Vedic texts
1) The gen. plur. fraZllm, referred to a stem trazan- (Ved. praitl-)
by Bartholomae, occurs Aog. 48. The meaning is beyond doubt on
account of the Pahl. and Skr. translations (frazand and jataka~
respectively). Instead of trazqm, trazllma as given by the Mss., Geiger
conjectured trazainti, thus substituting the common word for ·offspring'.
Recently Duchesne-Guillemin, JAs. 1936, 248, has adopted it in his
metrical arrangement of the text without taking notice of its very
uncertain character and of Bartholomae's objections to it. The passage
runs as follows:
cím aosapf¡tJ aosapuhaíti
qst;}m ísaítí tanva
cim urtl'la cim trazllm
Cim va gac{}a!wo mahrkas;}m.
This may be rendered, somewhat different~y from Duchesne-Guille-
min's translation: 'How can a mortal wi'sh eviL to a mortal with r~gard to
his body, or with regard to his soul, or (evil) befalling his children
(litt. of his ch.)' etc. While tanva and uruna evidently are instrumentals
with the function discussed by Reichelt, Aw. Etem. § 453, the genitive
denotes a different relation. Its use seems therefore fully justified.
Though the form is isolated In more than one respect, the gen. xllm may
be compared in its support. The metre shows that H is a trisyllable
(frazaam) ,
2) The thematic forms Iike go~átama~ are included in the reckoning.
240
518
81
many additional instances of ~sani~ are found, cp. abhaya~
sáni~h VS., abhrasáni~h TS .. asvasáni~/:t VS., atmasáni~h
VS., (gosáni~h AS. VS. TS.), dhanasáni~/:t AS., ChUp.,
pasusáni~h VS., praja.sáni~h VS., lokasáni~h VS., vHti~
sálli~h TS. Kath, satasani~/:t SvBr. ParGS., sahasrasani~h
SB. ~vBr. AB. AsvGS. ParGS. The Peto Lex. quotes also a
compound stanayitnusani~h, but without giving an authority
f.or it. Nothing shows more the exceptionaI character of the
Rigvedic use than a comparison with the·numbers of occur~
rences in the Atharva and Vajasaneyi Satphitas. In the
former text 3 instances of nouns in ~sii~ are found
(dhanas§.~/:t, sahásra~satama~/:t 1), svar~§.~/:t) and two in
~sáni~, viz. go~á1J.im and dhanasáni~/:t. In the VS. nouns in
~sa~ occur 7 times hut 5 instances are B-S~citations 2).
Against the remaining 2 occurrences (v¿jas§.~/:t VS. 9, 5
and 6) the 7 nouns in ~sáni~ quoted aboYe form a striking
contrast 3) .
Consequently the predominant use of the nouns in ~s§.~
is a peculiarity of the Rigvedic Ianguage. As a matter of
fact it cannot be doubted that the type go~á1J-i~/:t is very oId.
It is a noteworthy fact that the by~forms in ~a.~ are, even
in the B-k~Satphita, confined to the two roots san~ and jan~.
Of the set~roots svan~ and van~ onIy the derivatives
tllv4vá1J-i~/:t, mahi~vá1J-i~/:t and upama.tiváni~/:t, vasuváni~/:t,
vr~tiváni~/:t are met with in B-S., whereas compounds in
~sva.~ or ~vii~ are unknown in Vedic. On the other hand,
though five of the nouns in ~sáni~ quoted aboye occur onIy
in one passage of the VS. (19, 48), this does not invoIve
that they are new formations of a younger Vedic periodo
1) With an irregular accent.
2) These are sahasrasf¡-~ VS. 9, 17 = ij.S. 10, 64, 6; sahasrastlm
3, 16 = ij.S, 9, 54, 1, svar~'lim VS, 13, 15 and 15, 23 = ij.S. 10, S. 6;
VS. 34, 20= ij.S, 1, 91, 21.
3) An eighth instance úajasánim VS. 20, 79 has not been included
as it is taken from ij.S.10: 91, 15,
~41
519

The fact is significant that of the two forms asvas&.ph- B-S.
and asvasáni~h- VS. which Vedic texts exhibit, it is the
latter that is found in use as early as the Hittite horse~texts;
for Pedersen's suggestion (Hittitisch 138,2(0) that a~as~su~
us~sa~an~ni is eguivalent to Ved. asvasáni~h- is doubtless
correct.
A further complication arises from the fact that, while
from san~ derivatives' both in ~sáni~ and in ~s&.~ occur, from
the root jan~ exclusively nouns in ~j§~ are formed. Nouns
in * ~§én1jl~' which have even been preserved in Lat.
indigena etc., are fulIy wanting in Indo. . Iranian. The reason
of their having been lost is no doubt that there existed both
in Vedic and A vestan still another noun alongside, viz.
jáni~h- (Av. jainis) 'wife' from lE. *gl!én1j2~s. If, however,
our conclusion is correct that the nominatives in ps&.h- and
~j§.h- are new formations, it follows that once there existed
nouns in ~jáni~h- too.
As to the inflexion of the nouns in ~váni~, ~sáni~ and
~sv¿nh theforms attested are nearly exclusively limited to
the nomo acc. m. and n. (~ih-, ~im, ~i). Transitional forms
according to the i~declension are very rare, the only
instan ces being, from the B-S.: voc. úrjasane 1 , gen. pI.
tuvisváninam 1 and mahisváninam 1 and from the VS.: voc.
lJas~lJa~e (often), dato vr~ti~ánayel. The B-S., on the other
hand, still preserves a few forms of the old paradigm with
loss of the laryngal 'before endings with initial voweI. These
forms are of particular interest for our problem. They are
the following ones:
gen. go~aTJ.~ah- « ~senhros )
1\'
loe. tuvi~váTJ.~i « * ~s1J.enh~i)
voc. pI. tuvi~vaTJ.~ah- « *~s1J.enh~es)
Gp. Av. acc. pI. zantu~san.,ó « *~senhl~.T]s)
There still remains one difficulty: though the parallelism
between khaní~h-: kM~h- and go~áTJ.i~h-: gos&.~h- is striking,
242
520
83
it is very unlikely that the former two words, which are
comparatively rare, can have had such an infIuence as to
provoke a commonly used word as, e.g. Ved. praj§~h-, Av.
fraza.~. Other paraIlel roots which stood to each other in
the same relation as khá~: khan~ (e.g. Skr. Av. ka~: Skr.
kan~, can~, Av. can~ 'to be liked, to love, desire') cannot
be proved to have formed root~nouns of the same kind as
bisakM~h-. In order to explain the origin of the type go~&.~h­
\ve must still look to another group of nouns.
§ 4. The derivatives of the anít~root han~ 'to slay,
to kill', differ from those of the roots jan~ and san~, in that
they fo11ow the normal type of infIexion of the stems in
n, e.g. nomo v[trah&., acc. v[traháT)am etc. Since, however,
the root~nouns in a nasal have as a rule a sigmatic nomina~
tive we should expect for the nominative the ending *~a(n)s.
So Debrunner is evidentIy right in explaining the nomina~
tive in ;'há as an i';novation according to the numerous
words with suffixal ~an~ (see Aínd. Gramm. 111. 238).
Avestan, in fact, do es not agree with Vedic but has a
·different formation v3r3{)raja of rather frequent occurrence.
It is found Y. 9, 16.20; 57, 3 (= Yt. 11,8). 14.22; Yt.
5, 61; Az. 2,6. In Y. 58,4 Geldner and Bartholomae read
v3r3{)rajá hut the variant reading v3r3f}.raja handed down
(among others) by such manuscripts as Jp2K5 4Mfl 2 and
Jpl is no ,doubt preferable. The form v3r3{)raja is attested
in sorne passages of the Younger Avesta (Yt. 13, 129;
V., Vr., Vyt.) , cp. in GAv. v3r3{}r3m.já Y. 44,16b (cp.
Bartholomae, KZ. 29, 496); the sameending further occurs
in kam3r30aja V. 4, 49, asavaja Y. 65, 8, Yt. lO, 2,
aspa.viraja Yt. 10, 101 and viraja Yt. 14,37, Aog. 78, a11 of
them belonging to the Younger Avesta. In non e of these
passages a variant reading with ~ja is found. On account
of these instances 1t might perhaps seem doubtful whether
v3r3{}raja is to be regarded as an ancient formation. It is
243
521
 84
however remarkable that in Aog. 57 a word is handed
down in the various forms zil'ija, zal'aia, zil'aia that on
account of the Pah1. and Skr. translations must contair.
pjan p (like vi raja in 78) and is accordingly translated
'murderer of old men' by Nyberg, JAs. 1931, 11, 44 and
Duchesne-Guillemin, JAs. 1936, 250 sq: (reading zalt'ija).
These readings confirm the authenticity of val'affraja. It is
also noteworthy in this connection that another compoi.tnd
in Aog. 80, quoted by Bartholomae as aevaja, is written in
a11 manuscripts of Geiger aeva ja1Jh, which perhaps denotes
~jah (cp. Junker, Caucasica 2, 77 sqq.; see however Mar~
kwardt, Gátha Ustavaiti 3 sqq.).
The ending ~ja must have been felt as anomalous
so that vat'dffraja can easíly be explained as an analogical
new forníation in the saine way as Ved. v[tl'ahii. 1 faíl to
understand why Debrunner, Ai. Gl'. 111, 239, has given up
this who11y natural explanation already proposed by Bar~
tholomae, Gdl'Phil. 1 a 114, for the supposition that the
type val'affl'aja has adopted the ending of the type
gojá~Q 1). It may be observed that the only instance of this
type to be found in A vestan is flraza~ and that neither its
form nor its meaning or inflexion could have given rise to
the nomo v3l'a1'}l'aja.
If, however, v3l'atkajA represents the original form in
Av,e,stan, we may suppose that the corresponding form
.
* vl'tl'ahá~h. once existed in Vedic too. Though no trace of
it has been preserved, an indirect argument in support of
this supposition is furnished by the inflexion of Ved.
rbhuk~á~Q 'epithet of Indra and the Maruts', acc. rbhu~
k~áTJam, nomo pI. [bhuk~áTJaQ. Etymological1y this word is
1.) Debrunner, l.c., it is true, states a rule according to which a
nominative in ~iis was only formed from se~~roots. This rule is based
upon the type go~'fi~IJ, goj'li~1J but against it instances like, e.g., k?'Ii~,1J
from k~am~ (an ani~~root, cp. k?á~piiviin) may be adduced.
244
522
85
related to k~áyati 'to rule, be master over' which accounts
Ior its nominative~ending (Debrunner, p. 309). The other
cases have apparently been modelled after * v[tt'aM~Q,
v[tl'aháTJam, both words being peculiar to the religious
language 1). In the same way in Avestan the plural and
dual of sóifft'a~pa~ and pasu~pa~ end in ~panó, ~pana, un~
doubtedly on the analogy of val'affraja, acc. varaffl'aja~
nam 2). The regular root~inflexion is found in l'anapó, nomo
duo of l'anapa~.
There remains but one important question: how is this
nominative in ~ás to he accounted for? The answer has
already been given by Johiilnnes Schmidt in an article
entitled 'Heteroklitische nominative singularis auf ~as in
den aÍ'ischen Sprachen', KZ. 26, 401-409 (dated septem~
ber 1881). Here a11 the relevant facts have already been
admirably arranged and with his usual acumen the great
linguist has in aH essential points given the correct explana~
tion. The ending ~as derives from ~ó (n) s with prehistoric
'loss oI the nasal after the long voweI. Though sorne details
remain obscure (cp. Goth. mimz, Ved. maf!1sá~m : Ved.
mi1s~), the correctness of this statement cannot be doubted.
Bartholomae, GrIl'Phil. 1 a 31, has rightIy accepted it.
Thisenables us to account for the type gO!fá~~1 too.
When in a late period of primo Indo~Iranian a) the laryngal
. was dropped before the endings with initial vowel the
paradigm became too irregular to be maintained as such.
As the cases in ~iQ, ~im were felt to belong to stems in
~i~, the oblique cases, being regarded as formed from a
stem .in ~n~, could no longer be connected with them 4) .
1) See also Debrunner, l.c. and Pisani, Grammatica del/' antico
indiano 393, with unconvincing suggestions.
2) Bartholomae, KZ. 29, 496, erroneously infers from these forms
ancient asigmatic nominatives in ~pa.
3) See page 29.
4) Likewise the !exica use to assume two different stems iimúr~ and
245
523
 86
Compare:
instr. * go~á1J.~ii
acc. dato *go~á1J.~e
gen. go~á1J.~a/:t
As a matter of fact, 'apart from two or three forms of the
oblique cases, only the nomo and ace. are still used in
Vedic. To suit the other cases a new nominative was formed
on the analogy of the sole analogous instance to be found
in Indo~Iranian, viz. the root~noun vrtraha~Q., acc. vrtrahá1J.~
am, dual vrtrahá1J.~á, nomo acc. pI. vrtrahá1J.~a/:t. In this way
a nominative go~a~/:t carne into existence but this was
rendered possible by the circumstance that primo Indo~
Iranian possessed a ruodel for the parallelism go~á1J.i~/:t :
go~a~/:t in the nouns khaní~/:t: kh8.~/:t 'digging'. And t~is
model also accounts for the fact that beside the nomi,natIve
an .accusative go~a~m carne to be used and that --sá-- the?-
became interpreted as a vowel~stem (cp. pasu~é, vajasa..l
tama~/:t etc.). Thus the new nominative likewise beca~e
soon isolated. Our conclusion that the type go~a~/:t
origina tes from the nomo and acc. sing. accordingly proves
to be correcto
§ 5. The few root~nouns in ~m-- that have been pre~
served in Indo~Iranian 1) have a nomo sing. in ~as and an
amúri- 'd~stroyer', occurring in the forms amúra~t (nom. and acc. p1.)
and amúrim respectively (see, e.g., Grassmann, Wb. and Neisser, Z.
Wb. d. RV. 1, 152), which may correspond to the linguistic feeling of
the Rigvedic period, But originally both stems were identical (amdrn-,
cp. limaÑtár-). . 8,265, Lommel, Goft. Nachr. 1935, 1,31, Nyberg. lrans [omt. rel. 519).
1) Of the many instan ces quoted by Bartholomae, Al:,r. W~. 19~6
(cp. GrlrPhil. 1 a 224, Karl Lichterbeck, Die Nom,~~lflexlOn .,m
Gathadialekt, 1893, p. 20) the majority do not stand a crltlcal examm-
ation; severa! instan ces are too doubtful to allow any conclusion: hadam-
in hadamoi (Ioc.) may al so be thematic, *sfll-dmo- like Gr. P8C16-('p7J.
The proper name usiM Y. 19, 2. 66, acc. uSidqm Yt, 1, 28, is referr~
to a stem in -da m- on account of a problematical etymology but lt
may represent the Ved. type retodh'tl-~I, retodh'tl-m as well. The acc.
246
524
87
acc. in ~am, cp. Ved. k~a~/:t, acc. k~a~m (stem k~ám~), Av.
za, acc. Zélm (stem zam-) 'earth'; Av. zya, zyas(Cít), acc.
ZYél m 'winter'. These rather irregular case~forms seem in
general to have been eliminated at an early date. Of severa!
mouns only the oblique cases are still in use in Vedic, the
place of the nomo and acc. having been taken by a new
formation. So the old nomo *hya--/:t 'winter' (Av. zya) has
been. given up in Vedic for híma and instead oE *da~/:t, acc.
'1< da~m (cp. 'gen. pI. damam, gen. sing. in pátir dán) we find
the thematic noun dáma~ used in the acc. sing. dámam,
whereas Avestan has introduced a derivative noun
d<Jmana~, nmana--.
T'hough nominatives 01 the type k~a~/:t are only found in a
few Indo~Iranian instances 1), it cannot be doubted that they
represent the original lE. Eormation. The Greek nomina~
tives X{}wv and XtWl' are admittedly new formations that
have supplanted the old nominatives in ~W;, cp. Schmidt,
KZ. 26, 404. and Schwyzer. Griech. Gramm. 1, 569. Lat.
hiems is likewise young. see Specht, KZ. 53, 307-308. As
yqm Y. 49, 8< is rather to be taken as a relative referring to saram
(Geldner, Relig. Leseb. 213, M. W. Smith, Studies in the Synfax 01
fhe Gathas 142, Andreas-Lommel, Goft. Nachr. 1935, 144. Nyberg.
Irans lomtida religioner 272). AVllyam- 'averting' and its compounds
are identical with Ved. avay'fi-Q, f. 'expiation, conciliation' (root yii-.
Whitney. Skr. Gr. § 406 and note on AS. 2, 32, 1, Oldenberg. Noten
on 1. 165, 15, Neisser, Z. Wb. d. RV. 1, 128). Instead of vyam- the
forms vyqm and vyahva point to a noun viyii or vaya (Kuiper. zn
Finally instead of maiayoiJam- a stem maióyoiJ<Jma- must be assumed
since al1 the attested forms are thematic (Frisk, Zur indoir, und griech.
Nominalbildung p. 56).
1) Unless we should accept the interesting suggestion of Pisani.
IF 53. 38, that the cult name L1dJq (hymn on Dem. 122) is to be
connected with k~'f1-Q (cp. also Rendiconti deIIa R. Accad. N azion. dei
Lincei, Olasse di scienze morali, storiche e filo l., serie VI, vol. 5 (1929),
~~ ,
247
525
 88
to Toch. A. tkarrl, gen. tkanis and Hitt. te~e~kán, it is im~
probable that they are related to k~á~1:t (see Benveniste,
Mél. van Ginneken 195-6) and Phryg. Toar is likely to
be analogical like Gr. X{}ÓJy.
V ed. k~á~1:t has a very irregular paradigm, several of its
cases apparentIy being formed from a stem in ~á~, ep. ace.
ksá~m, dat. !c~é 1), aee. pI. k~á1:t, loe. k~ásu. The other cases
a~e formed from k~am~ (k~amá, k$má1:t, k~ámi). As k~á~1:t,
ksá~m remi.nd us of khá~1:t, khá~m the question may arise
;hether the paradigm k~áp1:t/ gen. k~má1:t refIeets perhaps
an oId heterocIite type of inflexion. Hazardous though this
supposition may be, there are several phenomena on aeeount
of which it should not be rejected without a closer examina~
tion. Heteroclite paradigms are anything but rare in the
lE. nominal and pronominal inflexion, ep. vidván/vidú~a1:t
(Pedersen, Etudes lituaniennes 51), údhar/údhna1:t'udder',
dó1:t/do~T}-á1:t 'fore~arm' etc. A formative element ~eh2~'
limited to the nomo and the aee., is found in Att. iD xáea,
Ionic xáer¡ beside bú xáe, see Sehwyzer, Gr. Gr. I, 583.
From *ker~eh2 has been derived *ker~h2~es~, Skr. sírah¡,
sirs~n~áh. So it is theoreticalIy possible that beside, for
ins·ta~ee·. Av. zay~an~ and zy~am~ 'winter', a st~m *zy~ah~
was used in the nomo and aeC'. The foIlowing points
would be of interest in this respect:
1) While the nomo k~a~1:t is always a monosyIlable, the
aec. 1csa~m, 1c~a~1:t and Av. zqm are often dissyIlabic. In
Vedic 'dissyUabic 1c~aam, required in 4 of the 17 oeeurre.nces,
can hardly be explained as a ehanee irregularity of metre
(Arnold, Vedic Metre 82) and must eonsequentIy reflect a
linguistic reality. DissyIlabic zqm is found e.g. in Y t. 19, 34
1) Perhaps in k!jé brávaf:t ij.S. 4, 3, 6e • The metre being corrupt
numerous conjectures ha ve been proposed, see Oldenberg. The reading
of the text is however, corroborated; as Geldner observes in his
'translatíon, by'prthiVyaí brávaf:t in Se. SiiyaI}a explains with prthivyai.
248
526
89
nidárat upairi zqm (ep. Bartholomae, Arische Forsch. 1,
112; otherwise Hertel, Die awestischen Herrschafts~ und
Siegesfeuer 23). The often reeurring phrase antar;) zqm
asman;)mca also requires zaam in Yt. 8, 8; 13, 43; 19, 43
(but the equaIIy frequent loeution paiti zéf.m ahuraoátéf.m
has a monosyIlabic zéf.m). The Ved. aee. pI. k~á1:t oeeurring
twice is once t~~e read as a dissyIlable. These phenomena
would be clear if we could assume the prototypes nomo
*'§hzÓh~s, aee. *§hzóh~1J.l and * §h z oh~TJs.
2) In the same way the enigmatic Greek word 06) would
beeome clear as representing *dóh (neuter).
3) The two paralIeI formations Ved. k~áman~ 'earth'
(see Oldenberg, ZDMG. 55, 293 n. and Noten on 4, 19,4;
6, 51, 11) and Gr. bajIta (see Sehwyzer, Griech. Gramm.
I, 524) eould then be explained as derivatives from stems
in ~h~: *§hzóh~men~ and *dóh~men~.
4) Beside Gr. el~ (* sem~s) we find an enigmatic 1 )
form Ved. simá~1:t '( my) self, (him) self') 2). It has nearly
the same meanings as Gr. aViÓq; (ep. simásmai 1, 155, 4
'für ihn', Oldenb. and Hillebrandt), and might be a
superlative like adhamá~h, apamá~h etc. from * sh~ (: *soh~
in OChSI. sam"6 'himself'). Lith. and Latv. sa~ (: sam~)
and Gr. onaieO~ etc. might likewise be explained from
*sh~o~, ep. Sehulze, Quaest. ep. 295 sqq., Büga, Kalba ir
Senové I, 279, and Kurylowicz's attempt at explaining Ved.
samá~1:t (Prace filoZ. 11, 215-6) might be modified in
this way.
5) F inalIy it would be possible to aeeount in a natural
way for the irregular thematic derivatives antári1c~a~m
'atmosphere' (ep. su~1c~m~á~h, Av. aoairi~z;)ma~, xrüidi~
~) Unacceptable is the view of Persson, Beitr. Z. idg. Wortf. 144-5,
and of Walde-Pokorny, 1, 489, 492.
2) Cp. Geldner, Ved. Stud. 2, 188 sqq. and Glossar; Oldenberg,
Noten on 1, 95, 7.
249
527
 90
'sma~) and Av, xVairiz~mca Yt 10, 14 'Chorasmia' (cp. OP.
uvára~zmip), which remind us ofakha~Q., sukhá~Q. etc. from
kM~Q.. Similarly we find beside Gr. dO) the stem el'(jo~ (in
l!vdOJ', /fJ'dOl'ft, 61'diJ'u 'intestines', see Vendryes, MSL. 15,
358-60).
Nevertheless we have evidently ta retain the usual
explanation. While the nomo k~a~Q. doubtless represents the
lE. prototype, the same cannot be proved for the accusatives
k~a~m, Av. Zqm, zyqm. They are probably innovations of
Indo~Iranian which have taken the place of the oIder forms
*¡¡hZóm~rrz etc. Ved. u~am, Av. uSqm often adduced in sup~
port of this assumption cannot, indeed, be taken as Indo~
Iranian new formations 1). But analogical accusatives of
the kind may have arisen 'at any historical and prehistorical
period and it has been shown that similar new formations
must have existed even in primo lE. (e.g. *djém, see p. 69).
Accordingly the starting~point for the forms with ~a~ must
have been the nomo k~a~Q. (from lE. *¡¡hZóm~s). If this is
so, the dissyIlabic value of ~a~ in k~am, Av. Zqm must also
originate from the nominative where ~a~ was trimoric owing
to the los s of the nasal after the long voweI. It is true, the
5 occurrences of k~a~Q. show no trace of disyIlabic value but
since gam is trimoric in only 6 of the 40 occurrences (15 % )
and, lc~am ion 4 of the 17 occurrences (23,5 %), a trimoric
k~aQ.\ could hardly be expected to occur. For the rest it is
1) J.
Schmidt, KZ. 26, 401, Wackernagel-Debrunner, Aínd. Gr. IlI,
242. While u~~sam occurs 11 times and u~ásam 32 times, the form
u~jm is only found' twice in the two youngest mal,19ala' s ('l1 Xl) and
once in the Atharva-Sal!1hWi. It must be, therefore, relatively late and
but rarely used. On the other hand Av. uJqm is only attested in the
late Giih Gasiinbar 5, 5 (beside uMnh;,m!) and in Frahang i oim
27 b usqm sürqm in which phrase even rhe Ven di dad still uses the
regular form, cp. uMnh;,m yqm sürqm V. 18,' 15. So a historical
connection between the Ved. and Av. forms, as supposed by Schmidt
and Bartholomae, GrlrPhil. 1 a 118, seems out of the question.
250
528
91
possible that root~nouns like lcMm have al so exercized
some influence on the accusatives.
The acc. pI. k~aQ. is a Vedic innovation (ep. Av. z~masca)
due to the analogy of the acc. sg., d. kMm: *lcMQ. (Av.
xa) and gam : gaQ.. Accordingly the loe. pI. * k~á~Sll (cp.
k~á~pavan) became k~asu (Neisser. Z.Wb.d,RV. 11, 74,
should not have repeated the wholly obsolete theory of
Roth, PW. 11, 539 and Grassmann). But antáriksa~m
remains obscure 1). The most probable hypothesis is that
it has arisen through hypostasis from * antári k~am, ep.
such phrases as Av. anta~ Zqm asman~mca and (from a
different standpoint) Aristoph. Av. 187 ev ¡tÉaC{J d11nov{}EI'
a~Q eart yijq. Av. xváirizamca perhaps stands for *xvairi~
zam [~m] ca which may denote * xVarizmim, in (partial)
accordance with the OP. formo
Greek (JO) is also obscure. The other lE. languages point
to a mase. or fem. root·-noun, the nomo of which may be
supposed to have been * dg~s (acc. * dóm~rrz). It is probable
that the Greek neuter is connected in one way or étnother
with *dÓ~s but in the absenee of sufficient evidence it is
impossible to account for the details. Gr. l!1'(~OV is unlikely
to contain the word for 'house'. Hittite anda(n) 'within'
shows that it had already in a remote past an abstraet
meaning and probably stood in no relation to *dom~.
1) Most scholars agree that antárikl!a-m contains k~ám-, cp. Lanman.
Noun-Inflectíon (1880), 448, J; Schmidt, KZ. 26 (1881-2) 404, Bartho-
lomae, BB. 15 (1889) 27 n. 3, Leumann, Etym. Wb. 73, and Wacker-
nagel. Aínd. Gr. n.,312 (but in IlI, 242 the word is not mentioned).
The only attempt at explaining the formal details was made by
Bartholomae, who assumed an elJiptic dual ,. antári k~aú or kl!é to
underlie the word (but the dual actually used in Vedic is ks~ma.
occurring six times). Cp. antár dytivii 1, 35, 9, dy:ivliprthívI antár 1,
96 5. dyáviiks. 'fjma .. antár etc. and the dual ksfima 'hea~en and earth',
.
Mhbh. 1. 58, 6 Bomb. kha'!l ca gii'!1 ciintarii, Ovid.Met. 5, 644 medium
caelí terracque per aera vecta est etc.
529
 --------------------------------------------~----~------.~~.

96 531

WORD INDEX
by A. Lubotsky and M.S. Oort

1 INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES
1 Proto-Indo-European
2 Proto-Indo-Iranian
3 Indo-Aryan: 3.1 Old Indo-Aryan (Kikkuli); 3.2 Sanskrit; 3.3 Pali; 3.4
Prakrit; 3.5 Modern Indo-Aryan (Hin di)
ADDENDA. 4 Iranian: 4.1 Avestan; 4.2 Old Persian; 4.3 Middle Iranian (Middle
Persian); 4.4 Modern Iranian (Modern Persian)
Page 39: The new formations dyilva. and dyilvaly. are due
5 Greek
to a general tendeney of Sanskrit to substitute 6 Germanic: 6.1 Gothic; 6.2 Northern Getmani<; (Old Icelandic); 6.3 Old
the strong stem~form of the nominative singular EngIish; 6.4 Low German (Old Saxon); 6.5 High German (Oíd High
for the original one with a short vowel, see page German); 6.6 East Frisian
68. Ae(:ordingly~ from the poiont of view of Sans~ 7 Balto~Slavic: 7.1 Slavic (Old Church Slavonic); 7.2 Baltic (LitlilÚinian)
krit noun~inflexion, they are quite regular. 8 ltaIic (Latin)
9 Old Irish
Page 53: In support of the explanation given of the 10 Hittite
gerunds in ~tvil, it may be noted that hystero~ 11 Armeriian
dynamic nouns in ~tu~ really oeeur, ep. pitú~Q./ 12 Tocharian A
pitvály. and kftu~Q. (p. 41). 13 Phrygian

II DRAVIDIAN LANGUAGES
14.1 Tamil; 14.2 Kannada; 14.3 Other Dravidian languages (TeIugu)

III AUSTRIC LANGUAGES

15 Munda: 15.1 Santali; 15.2 OtIler Munda languages (Mundari)
16 Mon-Khmer: 16.1 Bahnar; 16.2 Bersisi; 16.3 Khasi; 16.4 Khmer; 16~5
Mon; 16.6 Nicobarese; 16.7 Sakei; 16.8 Semang; 16.9 Stieng; 16.10
Other Mon-Khmer languages
17 Austronesian: 17.1 Cham; 17.2 Malay; 17.3 Other Austronesian Ian-
guages

The order oí Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, and Greek words is that oí the

native aIphabets. Otherwise, the words are given in the order oí the
Latín aIphabet.

The compilers wish to express their gratitude to Mrs. M. Boere, Mrs.

'256
H.H.C.M. van Kuik, and K. Jongeling íor their assistance in preparing
the indexo

530
532 533

1 INDO-EUROPEAN anghri- 281 AñjasÍ- 230 abhivlágya 291

LANGUAGES ácil?tu- 228 añjí- 263ff abhíl?ti- 5, 191
ácchit 291ft', 313f, 363 añjisakthá- 265 abhÍka- 128
1 PROTO-INDO-EUROPEAN áccha + J vac- 294 aHa- 150 abhyasana- 3
J *ezdh- 147 acchavaká- 294 aHala(h)- 150 abhyasa- 184
J *gWei- 148 ajá- 38lf átithi- 463 abhyasa- 3, 21
J *kyeu- 346 °añc- 281 áthit 135 ábhva- 371
*ni-zd-o- 184 J añc1- 'to bend' 221ft': átharvan- 193 ámlti 316
v' *sed- 181, 183f acati, añcati 223ft', 228ft' ádabdha: 353 amlÍl;t 455f
J *sied- 181, 184 °akna-, °akta- 222f ádbhuta- 353 ambhal).a- 85
*swe- 342 akl).a- 223, añcita- 223ft' ady~ 313f ambh~l).á- 85
ud-añc- 23lf, 236ft' ádyu- 413 am~ta- 378
2 PROTO-INDO-IRANIAN
ava-añc- 234, 236, 244 ád(r)ukl?l).a- 56 ámhasu 385
*sizdati 183
para-añc- 23lf, 236, 245 ádhit 135 ayám 133, 139
*~a- 348f
J añc 2- 'to go' 227ft': ádhrigu- 494 áya 139
*~iis- 348f
añcati, akati 229 a,dhríjas 381 arámati- 191
*v~sti- 345
anu-añc- 244 anáya 139 arayyam 371
*v~i- 345
ava-añc- 234, 23~, 244 an[ 134ft' arí- 440, 456, 481, 504
3INDO-ARYAN ud-añc- 23lf ánasvams- 371 arul).ápsu- 490
3.1 OLD INDO-ARYAN (Kikkuli) ny-añc- 234, 244f aniti 193; 316 Árbuda- 9f, 10, 15
°lJaSanna 383 para-añc- 23lf ánira 394 árvan- 335
°lJaza 383 pra-añc- 235 ánila- 193, 463 arvil?a- 10
sam-añc- 245 ániáita- 369 Arvuda- 7
3.2 SANSKRIT
J añc3- 'to manifest' 245ff: áni*ta- 368f alasá- 121
°akti- 190 ánika- 128
(sam) ud-añc- 252ft' alat~l).á- 85
aktú- 266ff, 274-( aniti- 339
añcana- 224 ávatta 368
akrá- 228
añcita- 254ff anudfsya 291 avabh~thá- 414
Akrura- 194
añcitabhru- 224ff, 239 anul?thy[ 370 avay[- 525
agreglÍ- 487, 515 anéna 133ff
aghá- 191 J añk 'to bend': ny-~naje 227 antaral).a- 131
avasá- 121
anká- 247 J añj2- 'to go': ávi- 500, 506
ánkas- 281 agati 229
antarayati 131 J aá-:
(pali)angayate, (vi-pali-, sam-) antárikl?a- 527, 529 asnoti 192
anku- 247 andol[yati 124
ankusá- 247 Ingáyati 231, 281 anarpÉa 194
áparitta- 368 abhy-aánoti 184
ankháyati 281 sam-añjate 230
apás- (apásu) 385
ánga- 123, 227, 281 J añk 'to manifest' 261ff: apasada- 184
aááni- 329
angal).a- 123 vy-añj- 262f, 271ft' asvasáni- 520
J añk 'to anoint' 265ff: apratI-" 310 ~atara- 81
angana- 123f, 230
angana- 123ff a-añj- 280 ápratitta- 368
,1
J as- 'to be':
sam-añj- 274ff apva- 454 ási 385
angayati 124
añjana- 262 ápsu- 490 stM 289
angúri- 227
añjalí- 227 ,abhipádya 291 sánt- 203
angúli- 227
añjas~ 230
abhivftya 291 abhi-asyati 3, 248, -asta- 3
angúl?tha- 154, 227
534 535

V as- 'to throw': asse 387 upabdá- 373 kátuka- 82

abhy-asyati 4 lihuti- 369 upama- 45 ka~á- 57f
ny-asati, ny-asyati 6 Vi- 5, 130: upavivatsu- 388 kaI).apa- 143:ff
vy-asyati 4 inóti 336, 338, 354 upasptk 396 kaI).apayin- 144
asita- 193 ínvati 354 lÍpenih- 336 kaI).aya- 143
asura (voc.du.) 364 astam-ayate 5, 131 V u/?- 211 KáI).va- 356
asta- 127 (abhy-)astam-eti 129 u/?ás- 441, 450, 455:ff, 528: kathana- 129
aStagamana- 127 udayate 130f u/?libhyam 390 kathayati 129
ástam 128 (abhy-)ud-éti 129 u/?ádbliil). 390 kadall- 124
astam V gam- 127 palayate 5, 130 U/?I).ík 396 kadruka- 53
astam V i- 5, 129, 131 palyayate 130 iÍrj- (iÍrk) 396f V kan- (can-) 521
astamana- 126f, 129ff i~1i 387, 394 urI).avlibhi- 151 kanapa- 143
astamayá- 127 í~abhil). 387, 395 urmí- 505 kandali- 124
astamáyana- 126f, 130 íti 88, 91 V-r-: Kanva- 16
ástamita- 128 itihasa- 6 -rI).óti 164, 353 kapola- 150, 154f
astamlké 128 itvli'491 apa--rI).oti 164 lmpoll- 150
áste 128 iná- 336 a--rI).oti 164 kabara- 152
ást-rta- 369, 373 °invá- 336 tk/?a- 402, 404 kamatha- 142f
ásthi- 501 íra- 394f -rjú- 488 kambara- 152
áhasu 385 íravant- 394 tjunas- 488 kambu- 150
áhobhi~ 385 í/?- 394 -rjváñc- 228f karli 57
likha- 515 Vi/?- 184 -rtá- 419 karkata- 143
akhará- 515 í/?am V pi- 168 -r tám V pt- 167 kar~ana- 54
akhú- 515 i/?Ii 394 -rtlivan- 424 kartá- 54, 81, 85
litta- 367f, 465 IIikháyati 281 -rtvíj- (-rtvík) 396 kártva- 473
atmán- 282, 457f lti- 338 V -r dh- 147 karpasa- 149
lid 392 ltya- 338 -rdhádrayal). 369 karpura- 149
adlina- 177 VI/?- 184 -rbÍsa- 10 karbara- 152
aditya (voc.du.) 364 vuk/?- 114 -rbhuk/?Ii- 522f karbu(ra)- 152
adhrá- 132 uk/?án- 474, 506 -r/?tí- 192, 503 karvara- 152
abhú- 278 u~umbara- 150 vedh- 147 kalidru(ma)- 54
amarltt- 315f, 370 udaka- 173 ená 140 kalinda- 54
Ii-mil? 149 udanka- 224 ena- 133, 137 Kaval?a- Ailu/?a- 84
amúr- 370, 523 udañca- 241 -ena 140 kaví- 503
amúri- 315, 370, 524 udañcana- 223 enam 133, 138 kal?aya- 150
ayú- 470 udañcin- 241 énas- 336 V ka- 521
liyu- 446, 469,492 údañji- 264 enli 133, 135:ff katá- 54, 81, 85
liraI).a- 7 udlicam 223, 283 enlim 133, 136 kati- 367
arábhya 291 udhrasnati 54 enena 138 kamaprá- 172
alana- 177 upaku~ya 52 okiván- 464 Hmam V pf- 172
vas-: upabárhaI).a- 206 ,OghavatI- 176 karú- 63
(sam)upa-aste 4 upabárhaI).I- 206 kañcuka- 153 kitavá- 356
536 537

kila- 58 kura- 55 k¡¡umánt- 402f grapsa- 121

kisalaya- 150 V kiÍrd- 112, 360 k¡¡etra- 153 V ghas- 387:
kíkata- 81 kurpara- 360 k¡¡éplyan 132 jighatsat 388
klrín- 63f kurpasaka- 360 V k¡¡vel- 58 jíghatsati 389
klrtí- 368, 370 Vk~-: khá- 515 gh~tiicI- 248f
kukUla- 53 k~I;1óti 357 V khan(i)- 513f V cakl!- 402:
kukkuta- 147 kuru, kurmál). 355 khaní- 515f cák~ate 114
kukkubha- 147 k~I;1u(hí) 356 V khad- 112 . cákl!ul!- 404
kukkula- 53 cakriré 205 khiim 513 caI;1qila- 53
kúta- 81 kftu- 479, 482, 530 V khid- 112 caná 134f, 140
kuti- 141 k~tvii 93, 491 gaqu- 53 candrila- 53
kutIra- 57 kftvya- 491 gaI;1á- 83 campu- 149, 155
kuHanI- 57 k~l!í- 503 gaI;1qara- 149 cáraI;1a- 281
kuttara- 57 kéni:t 134, 140 gadruh- 53 carkrtí- 368ff
kUI;1apa- 143 kévata- 81 gabhlrá- 337 cal!iila- 81
V kUI;1q- 53 kevarta- 13 gáya- 148 cipita- 57
kUI;1qana- 53 koti- 54 gárta- 50, 85 clpuqu- 54
kUI;1q~I;1iicI- 85 kotlra- 57 gartarúk 396 clpúdru- 54
kútas 81 kola- 56 girijiis 381 Coqra- 53
kudrlcI- 54 Kaúsurubindi- 14 °gu_ 369 cyávana- 157
kubja- 58 krátu- 440, 446, 449, 474f, 478f, guqucI- 54 V cyu- 156:
kubhrá- 57 489 gUl!pitá- 356 cyávate 158
kumull- 53 V krlq- 58ff gftsa- 121 cyávana- 353
kumbhlta- 150 krlqí- (krllí-) 60, 64 V grbh(i)-: cyautná- 157
kuraÍlga- 27 krI1á- 64 g~hI;1ati 147 V cha-:
kurlra- 57, 150 krI1ú- 59, 64 grbhI;1Imál). 315 chyáti 219
kuliiya- 501 V kruq- 51, 58 g~bhayáti 352 jaghniviin 209
Kulinda- 16 k( r )uqayati 56 grbhrtá- 315f, 336 V jan(i)-: janil!va 316
kullpaya- 150 krura- 55 g~há- 147f jáni- 448, 456, 517
kullraka- 150 kroqá- 51, 56 g~hiI;1I- 147 janitár- 463
kulharika- 53 klóman- 403 gehá- 147ff ján(i)man- 282, 366ff
kulharI- 53 kl!apiibhil). 394 gehinI- 147 jantú- 367f
kuvalaya- 150 V kl!ar- 405 gehya- 147f jaritár- 463
kuvinda- 151 kl!iil). (k¡¡mál).) 402ff, 448, 525ff gojii- 382 jála¡¡a- 81
Kuvinda- 14f kl!iiman- 527 goqumba- 124, 150 jii- 517
kusa- 11 V kl!ip- 280 gopii- 422 jatá- 365
Kusabindu- 11, 14f kl!ípabhiJ;¡ 394f golaÍlgala- 154 jiinu- 446, 469
Kusur(u)binda- 10, 14 kl!iprá- 132 go¡¡áI;1i- 456, 510ff, 517 jamÍ- 303
Kusurubinda- Anddalaki- 10 kl!II;1a- 132 go¡¡ii- 382, 509ff j iispáti- 517
Kusurubindu- (Kusuruvindu-) 11 kl!Irapa- 144 gOl!thá- 382 jighatsú- 389
V kuq-: k¡¡Irapayin- 144 gaú- (góJ;¡) 468, 470ff, 492, 507f jihvii- 454, 456
ku<;láyati, kUlayati 84 kl!ú 490 gnii- 445, 448, 456 jIrI;1á- 365
538 539

J j¡;bh- 148 trivi~tÍ 286 d[tu- 409 dadhmáq 367

jéhate 148 J trut- 55 daná- 295 adhi~i, dhi~Iya, dhi~e119
jéhamana- 148 truti- 55 d[ru- (dróq) 445f, 469f dhanabh¡;t 396
jñu- 469, 490 trotaka- 55 dliSa- 12 dMyas- 109
J tarps- 114 troti- 55 dasa- 8, 12 dhasÍ- 109
takarÍ- 57 tryudhán- 369 ditá- 368 dhÍ- 447, 451
ták~an- 248 tv[data- 409 dÍvasa- 121 dhIjú- 369
tagari- 57 tsáru- 388 diviyáj- 396 dhItí- 369
tátha 135 daka- 173 dís- (dik$ú) 395 dhÍra- 278, 367
taniÍ- 450, 452f, 456 dal!9-á- 82 digbhiq, digbhyáq 399 dhIvara- 12
tamisra- 463 Dal!9-aka- 53 J dI-: dhúnk~a- 281
támisra- 361 dátra- 414 didiv[n, didihí 369 dhuta- 369
tarl~ál!i- 316 Dadhyáñc- 248 dÍdivi- 369 dhUpa- 177
tavás- 109 Dandraka- 53 dÍdhiti- 369 dhrasnati 54
tavi~á- 109 dáma- 525 diná- 132, 412f ná 'like' 392
távi~I- 463 dámünas- 488 dipa- 177 nagná- 283
tavIti 316, 354 dáyate 'to destroy' 411ff: dIrghá- 112, 359 nadf- (nadyaq) 371, 435
távya- 109 diyate 412 duritá- 337 naptÍ- 451
t~tar- ,248 diná- 132, 412f durvidátra- 414 nárya- 466
táskara- 356 dáyate 'to pity' 413: duvanyasát- 184 J nas- (cf. J as-) :
tambüla- 151 dayita- 413 duhitár- 458ff, 463 [nat, abhí nat 400
talav¡;nta- 147 dávlyan 132 dÜl!áSa- 356 pra-nasyati 195
tigitá- 464 dásyu- 475,493 dÜl![Sa- 83, 356 pranak 400
timira- 361 J da 1- 'to bind': dürá- 132 nasayati 194
tiráq 361 [-dyati 371, 406 J d¡;s-: adrak 400 J nas-: násate 192
t1rl!á- 361 ní, sárp.-dyati 406 devátta- 373 J nath-:
tlvara- 12 J da 2- 'to cut off': Jevamadhu- 380 nathate 132
tÚl!9-ika- 55 dati 406 devayáj- 396 nathitá- 132
tumba- 124 J da3 - 'to divide': devÍ- (devi) 363, 440, 452, 456 °nathá- 132
tural!yasát- 184 áva dyati, av[dat 406, 410f dorbhy[m 394f J nadh-:
tuvi- 317 J da4- 'to distribute': dola- 124 n[dhamana- 132
tuvigrá- 371 dáyate 406ff, dati 408f dolayate 124 nadhitá- 132
tuvigrí- 372 (nír) ava-dayate 410 dyaúq (diváq) 450, 476f, 507, 530 n[man- (n[ma(ni)) 283, 295
tuvipratí- 310 áva di~Iya 410 drapsá- 121 naranga- 190
t¡;l!añcita- 225 ví dayate 415 Drami9-a- 56 nítikt1302
tén~ 134, 140 J da5- 'to pursue': drávil!as- 325, 361, 463,488 nidr[- 422
tailapa- 144 abhi-dati, abhi-dasati 406 drekkal!a- 55 nip¡;ta- 370
tailapayin- 144 J da 6- 'to give': J dvis-:'
dveksi
, 402f nibi9-a- 57
totaka- 55 dádati, ádat 406 dví~: dvít 402, dvitsu 399 nibirIsa- 57
°tta- 370 datthá, dadmáq 367f d(h)ák~at 113 niyút- 369
°tti- 370 dehi 388 phánya- 466 nirañjana- 265
tmána 457f d[tivara- 409 J dha-: nirIti(ka)- 339
 ......

540
541

nisita- 369 pitFya- 495 p:p).ásva 160 Binda- 3, 14, 211

nisltha- 369 píppala- 356 puryáte 166 bindu- 11
nii?ádya 291 pí~pala- 356
puráyati 166f, 172 birÍta- 81
ni~ada- 1lf pip~ya 287
V p'f- 'to give': bila- 187
nii?túr- 370 pUIf~arika- 150
NIf~ti 159ff bisakh~- 513ff
nupura- 152 pUIf~arya- 150
~ p~Ifati 170 bija- 151
V n~t- 61, 63f puttika- 75
NIfitá, PWitám 165 b~hádraye 369
n~tú- 61 púpuri 372
P~Ifih.i 166 bekan~ta- 81
nai~ada- 12 puráJ: 361
p~Ifánt- 165 baindá- 11
naúJ: (naváJ:) 477f, 508 Púraya- 7
purdhí 161ff, 171, 372 bolayati 55
nyakta- 265 purú- (purtt) 302ff, 472, 507 Pedú- 185 V bru-:
nyakna- 222 puruki?Ú- 403 prataritr- 316 bráviti 315f, 463
nyáriku- 247 purudhi 135 prátika- 128 bhágatti- 366ff, 465
nyarigá- 265 purusprk 396 práturtaye 367 bharaIfda- 142
nyáñcana- 227 purogavá- 488 prap~- 422 bharuIf~a- 142
nyáñcani- 227 puroMs- 398 prapharvÍ- 356 bh~- 109, 324
ny~cam 223 purobhú- 387 prámaganda- 356 bh~as- 109
paktí- 499 pulakañcita- 260f prayák~u 399 bh~vant- 324
pa~bhíJ: 397 Pulindarajasundari- 152 prayátsu 399 bhiyás- (bhi~~) 109,- 371, 441
páti- 446, 504 Pulindai'Ía(m)baraJ: 152 prayút- 369 bhiy~ 109
pántha- 324, 326f V pUi?- 184 právantave 371 bhii?ák 396
páp(u)ri- 160, 165, 372f pú~pa- 178 prai'Ína- 402 bhi~ákti 396
parai'Íú- 446, 479, 484f purIfá- 160,172 prai'Ínavivaká- 399 V bhi-: bibhyuJ: 371
parasvadha- 485 purtá- 159f, 164, 370 prasaritr- 316 bhimá- 109
paraké 128 purtí- 159f prasavitr- 318 bhi~má- 109
parivraj- (parivrat) 400 pÚrva- 361 prásiti- 369 bhuruIf~a- 142
páritta- 368 purvajé 381 PráskaIfva- 356 bhusUJ).~hI- 143
páritti- 368 Pü~án- 184 prarigaIfa- 230 bhütí- 499
páriman- 317 VP~-: prarigana- 230 bhúrI 295, 303
PárIfaka- 9 pip~tám 168 prañjala- 227 bh~kuJTlsa- 141, 356
ParIfáya- 9, 15 pari?at 168, 171 pra~vivaka- 399 bh~kut~ 141, 143, 356
párSu- 485, 487 pári?atha 171 pravri?- 396 bherUIf9.a- 142
pal~vaJ: 486 apárat 161 pr~ya 291 bhrakuJTli'Ía- 141, 356
paví- 505 parii?at 172 prothátha- 414 bhrakutI- 141, 144, 356
pai'Íú-, páSu- 446, 448, 482, 489f V p~c- 167 phála- 151
Nthú- (p~thivÍ-) 365, 463, 493 vbhraj- 112: ábhrat 400
parÍlsú- 54 phalati 151 bhr~t 397
paIfí- 83, 465 V p~s-: aprat 400 vba~- 207 V bhras- 112
papa- 48 V p'f- 'to fill': bál ittM 92
píparti 159, 167ff, 370 bhrií.kuJTlsa- 142
payú- 470 barhís- V v~j- 343 bhrükut~ 141, 144
V pi- 169 pip~t~m 370
balivanda- 54 bhrú- 141, 447, 450f
pitár- 325, 458ff P~If~ti 159ff, 172
balivarda- 54 makara- 125
pitú- 479, 530 (~) p~Ifati 166
bahú- 448, 482f maga,nda- 356
 -~.

542 543

maghavan 333 yat, ayal). 400 1~nga1a- 125, 149, 153f vi<;laujas- 400
ava-yaj- 410 l~ngüla- 125, 149, 153ft' vidátha- 414ft'
mal).í- 83
mal).<;lapa- 176 upa-yaj- 396 1ata- 142 vidathya- 416
matanga- 155 yajñárp V pf- 167 1inga- 153 vidyli- 456
matí- 443, 448, 499 yátha 135 1i1añcita- 225, 239 viprú~-: (viprú<;lbhil).,
mátsya- 388 yayí- 505 V 11- 112 viprú<;lbhyal).) 394
mathayáti 352 y~ti- 340f vatürín- 81 vibhli- 217
mádya- 466 yMu- 446 vadhlÍ- (vadhu) 363, 450, 452f vibhrlit 397
mádhu- (madhlÍl).) 379, 444ft', 479, yahI 287 °váni- 508, 519ft' vira~ah- 367

495 V yu- 178: yucchati 213 vantár- 367 vís- (vít, vi<;lbhíl).,
mánas-: mánarpsi 464, V yu-: yuyóti 177 vamiti 316 vi<;lbhyál)., vik~ú) 395ft', 402
mánal).su 392 yú- 515 várIman- 316 visará- 201, 455
mánu- (manavÍ-) 492,494 yu~mlin 136 V árul).a- 430 vispáti- 398
manojlÍ- 387 yüthá- 369 várcas- 274 visvakarman 333
mandaka- 176 yüthy~ 346 várpas- 283 visvádh~ 135
MandakinI- 173, 176 ylÍpa- 176f, 341 vár~í~tha- 345 visvaminvá- 354
mandhatf- 327 yüpaya~ti- 340f vár~man- 345 visvasfk 396
mayobhlÍ- 387 yüyám 136 vaSli- 456 visváh~ 303
mahlim, m~hi 365, 448, ;190, 501 yén~ 134, 140 V vas- 'to dwell' 387f: V vi~-: vivél)., ávivel). 385
mahimán- 283 yopáyati 176 vatsyati 388f ví~ul).a- 131
mahnli 366 rak~ohán- 387 avatsIl). 389 vIci- 283
V ma-: mimIte 316 rájas- (rájassu) 387 V vas- 'to clothe' 387 V vIj- 184
marpsá- 523 rathÍ- 504 V vas- 'to dawn' 387 vI¡lÍ 305, 308
mañji~tha- 154 ráthya- 466 vivatsyáti 388 vu<;lita- 55
matanga- 175f V ra(m)bh- 280 vy-avat 388 V vJ;-: vi-vJ;l).óti 164
Matanga- 152 rayí- (rlim) 505, 507 vásu- (vásU) 295,303, 448f, 479 avárat 163f
Matangika- 152 rása- 379 vásutti- 368 vJ;kÍ- 422, 450ft', 456
matár- 458 rasati 149 vásudhiti- 368 V vJ;j-: a-vJ;j- 343
mlis- 'meat' 387, 523 V raj-: rlit 400 vasüyánt- 287 vJ;trahán- 521ft'
mlis- 'month': masí 350, rlij- (rli~) 88, 397 V vah-: ávat 400 vf~an- 345
madbhíl). 390, 394, rlil).<;lya- 54, 84 °vlit 397 VJ;~tí- 344, 499
madbhyál). 390, 394, rlindrya- 54, 85 vasa- 121 °VJ;~~i- 345
mas(s)u 387 rlisna 112 vlistu- 473, 501 VJ;~l).í-, vf~l).i- 345, 448
Mitrá- 429 V ri~- 184 ví- (vél}) 499f V vf-: vJ;l).Ité 464
Mitrli-V árul).a 426 VrI~- 184 víkata- 82, 356 vaisantli- 13
miyédha- 149 rékl).as- 336 víkiri<;la- 54 vyakti- 262
murangI- 190 rel).ú- 54 víkiridra- 54 vyánga- 265
múhu- 55, 355 retra- 54 vitku1a- 399 V vyaj- 184
mürdhán- 112, 367 romañca- 231, 260 vitpal).ya- 399 vyáñjana- 262f, 273
mü1avJ;~ 396 romañcita- 260 vítpati- 399 vyasana- 2
medhli- 321, 327,422 1ak~á- 121 vitsüdra- 400 V vya-: avyat, ávyata 371
V yaj-: lak~mi 363 vi<;lojas- 400 vyaja- 283
 --~

544 545

J vrasc-: vrakl?yami 389 a-sat 388 sákhi- 446, 449, 502 sukhá- 515
J vrl~- 58 slis- 120 sakhya- 466 suta- 369
vru~ita- 55 sasá- 120 ságdhi- 373 sutárman- 371
J sárp.s- 107: sarp.sati 351 siÍ-sa- 120 samgátya 292 sudátra- 414
sankul?tha- 154 siÍ-sya- 120 J sad- 182 (cf. J syand-): sudüí- 369
saI).á- 83 sithirá- 112, 356 asadayati 181 sudÍditi- 369
satavan 335 Símlvant- 287, 452 aSldati 181, 184 sumatí- 169
sátru- 446 Símya 452 ut-, upa-, pra-sad- 182 sumánas- 323
sabara- 10, 152 Síras- 179, 201, 501, 526 sadiÍ-vaIi 333 sumedhás- 322f
Sabarangana- 152 siraso 180 sadhástha- 414 suyúj- 343
sabala- 152 sirokti- 178ff sanajiÍ- 381 suranga- 189
J sam(i)-: sam1l?va 316 siro 'rti- 179 °sáni- 508ff, 517ff suranga- 188
samitf- 316 Sísu- 479 Sabindu- 10, 15 surangl- 189
sáml- (sámI) 150, 289, 294, 452 J si~- 11 Off, 114 sabha- 38 surunga- 9, 190
samlka- 150 Sí~ant- 464 sabhéya- 416 suvitá- 337
s amir a- 150 si~tá- 111, 120 samanká- 247 suvidátra- 414
Sámbara- 6 °si~- 120 samañj ana- 273 suv~ktí- 342
sambu- 150 si~tva 120 sámana- 130f susámI294
sambiíka- 150 si~ya- 120 samayá- 130 su~i- 369
saraI).a- 200 J sl-: sere 205 samlká- 128 su~irá- 369
saráI).i- 200 slyate 220 sammÍlya 291 sú~uti- 369
sárJ:ra- 316 slr~aktí- 178ff, 190 sara~bhyal¡. 397 susamdfgbhil¡. 399
sárdha- 149 sJ:r~aktimánt- 178 sárva- 454 J su- 369
sarvarl- 10, 152 sJ:r~avyatha- 178 savitf- 316' sunú- 367, 440ff, 448, 468, 471
Savara- 14 sJ:r~amayá- 178 sávlman- 316f sunfta- 248, 421
savasana 332 s~tá- 370 sahasaná- 33lf suryastarp.-gamana- 127
savasavan 331, 335 snathiti 316 sahasavan 331f, 335 Sfñjaya- 9
sávlra- 317 smasi 357 sáhasvant- 331 Sfbinda- 3, 14ff, 28, 211
saSín- 440 sraddhiÍ-- 327,422 J sa- 369 somapa- 144
J sa-: sisati 349 srávas- (srávassu) 387 °siÍ-- 518 somapayin- 144
sakunika- 12 sratá- 370 J sadh- 112: staniti 316
sakta- 109 srúti- 109 sadhati 185 J sta(m)bh-(i):
samlla- 150 sru~tí- 109, 185 siÍ-nu- (siÍ-nií, snól¡.) 308, 446, stabhayáti 352f
Sambara- 152 svál¡. 473, 507 450, 468, 472, 492 stabhüyáti 353
saruka- 200 svasrú- 454 sama- 203 ástabhnuvan 353
J sas- 107, 109, 111ff, 121,351: svasiti 316 siÍ-man- 203, 517 stáriman- 317f, 370
slisti, siÍ-sati 113, 348, 407 svityáñc- 249 siÍ-yaka- 369 starya- 371
slissi 387 ~át (~a~bhíl¡.) 88, 397 Saranga- 9, 152 stimita- 361
sadhi 348 o~iÍ-t 397 sarasti- 191 stlrI).á- 368f
slisat- 113 ~o~M 88,395 J sidh- 112 stúpa- 177
sasta- 111 °l?váni- 519f simá~ 527 stupaya~ti- 340f
slisati 113f samvfj- 343 slriÍ-- 369 stupiklla- 340
546 547

stüpiknaprati~tha- 340 haví~~u 387, 402 1angu1a- 154 tang~I 57

stp:¡.óti 353 hávIman- 317 samarp.203 tangaq.l (Mar.) 57
sthávira- 317, 337,463 havyádati- 409 truHan (Lahnda) 55
hastin- 175 3.4 PRAKRIT trutl}.u (Sindhi) 55
°sthii- 456 akka- 228
sthitá- 462 híma- 525 bhiuqi (Mahar.) 141
híral}.yasrak 396 agaqa- 54 mal}.q(u)wa 176
sthlÍl}.a- 83 arp.eai 251
spát 397 huye 371 malkinia (Oriya) 126
h~d- (hiirdi, hf~ayam) 500f uvama- 45 mhal}.un (Mar.) 91
spha1ati 151 kUl}.ai 357
sm[ 289,313 h( r )iÍqu- 56 1angur 154
kUl}.qaya- 53 surang 188
syáda- 181, 186 3.3 PALI kullaqa- 53
v' syand- 181: sisyantsati 185 suranga (Mahar.) 188
aggati 229 khatta- 54
v' s~j-: asrat, asrak 396, 400 añja- 230 khujja- 58 4 IRANIAN
sva- 344 atthagamanam 127 khuqqia- 57 (A1phabet: a, a, ~, 'l-' b, ~, e, d,
svakaral}.a- 344 attharp.gaeehati 127 kheMai:58 0, e/e, 8/8, f, g, " h, i/I, j, k,
svak~t- 344 attharpgato 127 kheW) al 58 1, m, n, U, % , p, r, s, S, t, !, e,
svák~atra- 342 attharpgamo 127 u/u, v, w, x, xv, y, z, z)
gaqa- 54
svagii- 342 anatthamite 127 gel}.hai 147 4.1 AVESTAN
sváñe-, sváñeas- 228f anIti- 339 geha 147 aoairi 104
svátavadbhyal! 390 anItika- 339 gheppal '147 aoairiz8ma- 527
svátavas- 342 astam eti 127 jhar- 405 aenah- 336
°svani- 519f irpgha 281 ta1avel}.ta 147 aIsa- 454
sváyata- 344 iñjati 231 aIsman- 455
svayám 344 iñjita- 231 3.5 MODERN INDO-ARYAN aIsmanI328
svayámpapa- 344 kal}.aya- 143 (Hindi) a,a- 191, 455
sváyukti- 344 kal}.ayagga- 145 agi1 (Singh.) 70 a,osti- 190f, 201, 455
svayúj- 343f katheti 129 angna 123 a,ra- 190f, 455
svariij- 344, 346 kaphol}.i 150 angna'l123 v' ah- 105:
svardfk 396 kukku!a- 53 aqaya (Singh.) 70 ahi 385
svavfj- 342ff kUl}.qaka- 53 abin (Singh.) 70 aiwi-ah- 4
sváv~kti- 342ff . kurangamiga- 9 angan 123 Ahura- Mazda- 418
sváv~~ti- 344ff khujja- 58 karptha i42 aibijar8tar- 463
svasíe- 344 gaeehati 127 kabra 152 aibis 396
svasft- 344 gedha- 147 kabrI152 aidyu- 413
svastha- 342 geham 147 kahei (Mahar.) 129 ainita- 336f
svadú- (svadvÍ-) 472, 493 geho 147 kavaq (Mar.) 142 ainiti- 336ff
svayúj- 343 gonangu1a- 154 kuka~ 147 aieivant8m 194
sviiv~j- 342f gheppati 147 kukka~ 141 aiwisant- 4
hánu- 487 tumassa 457 kuk~a 147 aiwisti- 5
harít- 337 tumo 457 kuppa 146 aiwyasti- 184
harmuta- 143 nanguHha- 154 ko!I (Mar.) 15 aiwy!uha 6
havirantaral}.e 130 nangu1a- 154 , kOrl (Sindhi) 15 anaIsm'l-m 328
havís-: havírbhil! 394, mal}.qapa- 176 geha 147 ana 135
 -- -tlüiiii~

548 549

anahita- 193 azahva- 191, 455 bars 395 d8bltzah- 207

an?Sa~ 194 azana- 191, 455 °bazaus 450, 479f, 482f d8b8naota 353
alJha- 6 adar8205 bazu- 479 d8jamaspa- 404
alJh[ 215 ada- 329f, 42lf bazus.aojah- 398 d8jl~.ar8ta- 404f
angusta- 154 adra- 132 .¡ bltz- 405 d8mana- 525
anku.p8s8mna- 247 ag8urvayeiti (ag8r8vaiti) 196 d8bltzaitl 207 d8ng 447, 455
anusant- 193 agr8maiti- 193 d8bltz- 207 .
d8r8nam 209

..
aojaete 196 a¡airya~ 193 baz- 405 d8r8ninti 214
aojIta 116 .¡ ah-: upa-ah- 6 bazaiti '207 draonah- 325, 361, 463
apa.asavltn 216, 218 ahita- 193 bitlm 207 drigu- 494
apa.hioa~ 183 ainivan- 193, 463f .¡ can- 521 druxs.manah- 398
apana- 131 aiti.ma¡a- 193 casai~ 118 dugdar- 459ff, 463
*apélSavltn 218 aiti.nmana- 193 casman- 404 dusmainyum 216
apisman- 120 akasa~ 404 casm8ng 493 duzd[lJho 324
apisma.xYar- 120 amis 149 -ca 337 dyaos 476
ar8na~.caesa- 405 anusaiti 193 cat- 514 8n8iti- 336ff
ar8nu- 479 armaiti- 191, 422 caxrare 205 8r8ZU 481, 488
ar89n[ 365 arstya- 193 c8vIsl463 f8or- see s.v. pitar-
arsti- 192, 503 arstyo.b8r8zan- 192 cikoit8r8s 205 f8s8ratu- 480
as8no 329 asit- 193 cin1i 134f fraobaoye 405
aSlst8m 111, 120 askditlm 337 daevayaz- 396 frakin8m 515
aSlstls 118 1isna-'184, 192 daevltn 218 framravaire 205
asman- 329 asnaoiti 184, 192 daibis8ntl 207 frant- 163
asnae-raeso 192 astaraiti (astarayeiti) 196f daibisyant- 207 frasan8m 195
aspalJhaoo 185 aste 192 daibitlm 207 fraspat- 206f
asti- 463 atara9ra 192 dailJhu- 475, 477, 479, 494 frasna- 402, 404
Asa- 419 atar8.fri9ita- 336 daiwi- 179, 454 frazahl~ 117
asavan- 216, 424f a-tapaiti 198 dar8ga- 359f frazltm 509, 518
°asnaoiti 184 a9aiti 184, 191, 194 darsit8m 337 frazdanu- 479
a9aurvan- (a9ravan-) 193 a9i- 194 délSin8m 201 franam1iite 197
aya 217 a9ivantam 194 da9ra- 414 franmane 197
ava.apan8m 195 a9ri- 194 .¡ da-: fr8r8nta 214f
ava.d8r8nltn 209 1ivoya 193 dasta 368 fr8r8nti 214
avakani- 464, 515 Áxrura- 194 dazdl388 fri9ita- 3.36
avayam- 525 aya~ 192 daidl~ (daiol~) 116 °IsU- 479, 490
avoi 193 ayu- (yaos) 469 nidaiols 116, 118 Isumant- 402
axsnuta- 109 azdyai 192 dabayeitl 330, 353 IsUSO 509, 518
axsnusta- 109, 185 [lJhar8ca 205 damltn 297 gae9a 148
axti- 179, 190, 454 [lJhaire 205 dami.dat- 206 gar8mu- 479
AxtyQ..179 ltzahu 385 dltma 296f garobls 385
ayu- 470 bar8smaca 296f , dboista- 405 g8r8pta- 337, 465
azdya- 147 bar8zis- 206 d8bavaya~ 330, 353 pnltm 209
550 551

¡zar- 405 vi kan- 513f nam1tn 295 pi9re 328

hama.nafaena- 203 kana 135 nasaite 202 pt;:}f<:¡byo 366
hankaine 515 kanit 134 nasu 395 f8or- 325
hant- 203 kapasti- 201 n1tma 296ff f8oroi 328, 366
hauuhar8.stat- 206 karapan~ 329 nidaiols 117 f8oro 366
hapto.iringa- 153 vi kar(s)- (+pairi) 109 nidai9lta 117 pouru.paxsta- 461
hauru- 480 karsi- 503 nidai9nn 117 rae9wa(ye )iti 196, 199
haxi- (hase) 466, 502 karsta- 109 nioayaeta 117 raex8nah- 336
hazahvan- 331 kati- 367 ni¡raire' 205 raf8drai 366
hairiSI 204 kavi- 502 nisadaya~ 184 raoca(ye )iti, -te 196
hitma- 203 ka 134f nistar8to.spaya- 207 raoc8bls 385
hamo.gaodana- 203 vi ka- 521 nivavaiti 217 raoc8byo 385
hamo.gaona- 203 karayeiti 109 nizar8saite 217 raoioita- 337
hamo.gatu- 203 k8r8nuioi 356 nmana- 525 vi rap- 280
hamo.nafa- 203 maesma 298 pad8bls 326 ratu- 480
hamo.taxma- 203 manit 295, 464 pairis-hanana- 217 ra9aesta- 422
h1t(m-) 203, 215 mar8tan- 329 pairis-havani- 217 ra90isti 330
hioaiti 183 masit- 337 paiti 220 . rama( ca) 296f
hlsasa~ 185 masita- 337 paiti- 504 ramoiow8m 199
hi9u- 479 masya- 388 paiti.raecayeiti 196 rasnu- 480
hizu- 454, 456 maSyo.sasta.sastot8ma- 108 paiti.tar8tayae( ca) 367 vi ra9- 112
huditbyo 385 ma~.Isu- 373 pantam 324
¿ vi ri9- 112
hudituhO 324 maz- 398 parituha~ 204 sa~ayeiti 207f, 212ff
huf80rls 366 maza- (maz8, mazoi) 327 paro 361 sahya~ 118
hunairyitnc- 248 mazda- 321ff, 327ff, 420ff paro.dars 395 sairin1tm 200
hunati 217 mazibis 398 pasu- 328, 480ff, 489f vi sau h- 107
hus8itls 337 mazista- 338 paSne 120 sar- 149, 327
hvar8 (xV 8ng) 440, 447, 456, 472, m1t9ran-' 329 pazdayeiti 184f sara- 199
507 m1tz-da- 327 vi pa- 120 sarah- 201
hvar8sti- 345 m8nhana- 120 vi pah- 120 sar808m 149
hvar8z- 345 mélrélncainls 117f pairivaza"': 193 sar8ta- 201
inaoiti 336, 338 mi9ra- 428 paitivaka- 193 sasaiti 404
inti- 336 vi mru: mraoiti 463, p'tSto.fra9auh8m 195 sas1ts 404
iti 338 mrao~ 330, 464 p8r8na- 367 sasti- 351
jafra- 337 mrava~ 330 p8r8SU- 479, 487 saskust8ma- 402, 404
jaioy1t(m) 215 myazda- 149 p8r8tu- 480 vi sa- 219f
jani- 448, 464 naf8oro 366 p8supa- 523 vi sad- 220
jamayeiti 198 naIsu 403 pistra- 120 sadra- 108, 220
jamaspa- 404 nasu- 475, 479ff, 485 pisyeiti 120 vi sah- 107, 119
ji~.aSa- 404 naSY8mnai 202 pitar- 361, 459ff °sah- 120
kainlno 215 nazdista- 192 pta 366 sahl~ 116
kamélréloa- 367 naidyit 132 ptar8m 366 sairi- 200
552 553

sairi.bao¡a- 200, 202 syazd- 186 vaxSa- 121 Vxsviw- 280

sara- 202 syodüm 219 vac-: va¡zibis 398 xVairiz~mca 528f
°sara- 201 soi8rapa- 523 v[¡zibyo 387, 398 x Va8ra- 458
saJ;aite 149 syaoman- 157 vatayli 214 x"lti- 337
sarana- 195, 200f, 455 syao8na- 157, 346 vaxs.b8r8ti- 398 yasna- 404
sarasti- 195 Vs(y)av- 156 V8r8zvant- 367 ya 134
saravara- 201 tafsaiti 198 V8r8llte 464 yah- 323
sar8mo 199 tanü- 453 v8r88rajan- 202, 521 yasta- 111
sar8ma 201 taoxma 297 296 vibati 217 yatu- 480
sar8mno 199f tara.oat- 206 vibavatI 217 y8zivI463f
sar8nte 199f taro 361 vicira- 404 yüsmaibya 136
sasta- 220 ta 134 vIdaitI409 zaema( ca) 296f
sastar- 108, 348f, 357 tapayeiti 198 vIdati- 408f zairita- 337
sastI348 t?-8ra- 361, 463 vIdIs8mnai(s) 119 zantusano 510, 520
°sasto 111 t8vIsI463 vioatu- 408 zavisi 463
satar- 108, 348f, 357, 407 tüirya- 459, 495 viobaoye 405 zli (z~mo) 448, 525ff
savalJhi- 503 tbaesah- 455 vwcoista- 404 z?-8a- 463
saxv 8nI328 ~baesaya~ 207 vina8aY8n 194 z8r8oaem 500
sazdüm 220 ~bisyant- 207 vIro.nylinc- 248 zrazda- 327, 422
slilJh6 120 tkaesa- 405 vIspa- 328 zyli (z~mo) 447, 525
znubyasci~ 469, 472
V s?-h- 119 8raosti- 185 vIspaiti- 398
s~nghaitI, -te 118f, 351 8raotostat- 206 vIs 395 4.2 OLD PERSIAN
sIsa 114, 120 u¡rabazaus 478, 482 vispa8a- 398 abaraha 349
slsoi~ 120, 464 uiti 88 vlt8r8ta- 367 adukanais 515
snai8Izbya 394 upalJha- 6 vi~kaesa- 405 agrbi<ya> 337
VsI-: soire 205 upaosalJhva- 191 vIusaiti 211, 213 ahatiy 103f, 349f
spaeitita- 337 upa.rae8waiti 196 vIxaoa 461 ah(i)y 106, 349f, 385
spasya 120 upairi.saena- 193, 196 VIzar8sa- 217 akriya(n)ta 354
spas 395, 397 urva~.caem 405 vIziby6 395, 398, 402, 404 akuma 354
spasitaeo( a )ca 120 usaiti 211 vohu- manah- 422 akunavan 353
sp8r8zvant- 396 usah- 528 vyamrvIta 116, 463 akuta 354
spiti-doi8ra- 249 usioli 524 vyaxti- 282 aniyana 134
sraosa- 121 uzjamoi~ 196, 198 vyazda- 184 apariyaya 104
srava(ya)ema 196 vahu- 479 vyus?- 209ff Arsada- 106
staora- 337, 463 vainII117 xli 513 asiyava 156
star8ta- 370 valJuhI330 x?-nya- 516 A8iya-busn- 194 .
°star8ta- 370 vaozir8m 463 xraozdista- 51 A8iyabausna- 195
stavas 114 var8cahI 328 xraozdyah- 51 a8aha 349
st8r8ta- 370 var8sti- 345 xratu- 328, 475, 479f, 482, 489 a8aham 103, 349
°st8r8ta- 370 var8Z- 346 xrüzdisma- 527 Auramazda 423, 425
stüna- 83 var8zl 367 xruzdra- 51 avana 134
sür8m 473 °vars 395 xsn8vIsa 463 avahanam 349
554 555

cartanaiy 354 4.3 MIDDLE IRANIAN sv¡¡tl (Pashto) 157 Oópu 445, 469, 471
dahyu- 475, 477,479, 494, 506 (Middle Persian) wiya~ (Wanechi) 367 OO¡;~P 449, 456

darga- 359 aparsen 196 (w)la~ (Pashto) 367 OW 527, 529

duvitiyam 207 anam 197 oW[J.O: 527
5 GREEK
frasta 208 besItan 207 ~w~ 525
CXn~AO~ 231, 281
gai9a 148 franam 197 OW¡;WP 449
CX¡XO~ 231, 281
hamapita 350 In (Phlv.) 136 t~ó:9T] 517
&¡vo(r)Éw 365
hamata 350 kamala- (Khot.) 367 tOT]¡;Ú~ 491
&¡VW~ 206
krnuvaka- 353, 357 kamal (Phlv.) 367 E[J.OAOV 307
&Oo:¡;O~ 406
krta- 354 kade (Khot.) 367 EVOOV 528f
CXT][J.l 115
kunautiy 353f, 357 kedo, kido (Bactr.) 367 EVXÜU~ 484
&X¡;~ 282
kunavanaiy 353 kide (Khot.) 367 E7tOpOV 159
&AO: 1t(XOVÓ~ 132
mahya 106, 350, 357 'krt- (Sogd.) 354 tUÉvwp 248
&[J.O: 131
paranam 131 kwn- (Sogd.) 354 tX9[wv 132
&p~v 440, 474, 506
paribarahidis 347 nisIy 183 tX9pó~ 132
&p¡;o:iOl 425
pasa 294 panass (Khot.) 194 T¡Mo: 493
&(j¡;pÓ:¡<XAO~ 501
padiy 348 panesat (Sogd.) 194 T¡0ú~ 472, 497
cxcr¡;U 470,473
pitar- 361 prnm'nd (Turfan-phlv.) 197 ~¡;OP 458
&¡;W¡;W~ 158
raucabis 385, 387 rameneo 199 1ípw~ 475
~[o~ 148
sarvar 201 ~w~ 441, 448, 457
V ra- 348 Vizis 217
~[O¡;O~ 148
radiy 348 ~AWcrXW 307 Z~Ú~ 471, 477
rtavan- 424f 4.4 MODERN IRANIAN ~oü~ 446, 471 ~wcr¡;ó~ 111
stabava 352f (Modern Persian) ~POV¡;~ 421 9iíAU~ 446
tavayatÍy 354 angist 154 Bpóv¡;T]~ 421 9~~ 206
tunuva(n)t- 354 aramad 199 ~wv 507 9u¡Ó:¡;T]p 458f
tyana 134 aw-dolun (Oss.Dig.) 124 ¡Évl¡~ 446, 487 io:úw 473
9adayarniy 207 balis 206 ¡AW¡;¡;<X 456 iooü 355
V 9ah- 351 cuIn (Kurd.) 157 ¡ÓVU 445, 469, 471 ~~w 183
V 9anh- 107 duxt, duxtar 461 OO:[O[J.<Xl 120, 407 i9ú~ 112
V 9a- 106f, 349ff: farasp 206 o<X[w 406 l7t7t~ú~ 475, 481, 494
9ahy 348 frerret (Oss.) 383 Oó:vo~ 406 xÓ:[J.[J.O:po~ 143
9atiy 103, 348ff, 407 hamun 203 Oó:cr[J.O:¡;<X 407 . xÓ:[J.[J.opo~ 143
9adiy 348, 352, 357, 407 ikta (Yaghnobi) 354 oo:cr[J.ó~ 407 xó:p 202
uvarazmi- 528 In 136 oO:¡;ÉO[A-<Xl 407 xÓ:pT] 501, 506
Vahyazdata- 385 kun- (Yaghnobi) 354 oel~<x~ 114 xÉAO:oo~ 112
vaSna- 404 kYemal¡o (Yidgha) 367 o~lAó~ 132 xwÉw 157
vi9bis 397 nisInad 183 o~cr[J.ó~ 407 X[VU¡J.o:l 157, 352
Vivana- 106 pur 367 Ofí[J.O~ 406 x:A.Ü9l 162
viyana(9a)ya 194 sabuksar 201 o~w 406 XÓpl~ 200
vrnavatam 353 sar 201 OlOT][J.l 407 x¡;d~ 457
yanaiy 134 st()~ai (Pashto) 370 , o[J.w~ 488, 494, 496 Al[J.~V 506
zurakara- 385 sudan 157 OOrÉV<Xl 365 AUnÓ:VO[J.O:l 280
556 557

Au¡xcdvw 280 7tAW~ 206 faíihugeigo 148 6.4 LOW GERMAN (Old Saxon)
f-Lcx.Acx.XÓ~ 112 7tO~f-Lf¡v 470 f6tus 487 ando 132
f-LÓ:pcupo~ 473 7tÓA~(; 484, 496 gateihan 280 athum 458
f-LEOÓOf-L'/) 524 7toAú(; 472, 307 kaúrn 361 brawa 447
f-L~1:pOV 108 7tp~o~cx. 455f kinnus 487 enkede (MLG) 282
7tp¿O~U(; 484, 487f kniu 469 enket (MLG) 282
f-Lr¡1:pWX 495f
7tpO~Af¡(; 206 lailean 60 ka 471
f-Lf¡1:PW(; 495
vcx.Ü(; (viiv) 446, 477f, 507 7tWU 470 mimz 523 tooien (Dutch) 158
OEÜ1:cx.~ 353 razda 149
V~XÜ(; 475, 482, 485
OEÚW 157,352 sandjan 186 6.5 HIGH GERMAN
N'/)pr¡l(; 494
OXEÜO(; 158 straujan 353 (Old High German)
Nr¡pu(; 494
01:Ep07tf¡ 421 sunus 440, 443 fallan 151
VÚf-LCflcx. 363
I.:1:EpÓ7t'/)(; 421 swikunps 342 fatureo 495
vw6pó(; 132
01:pcx.1:Ó(; 353 taikns 280 gingo 148
6Qó(; 181, 186
ou~w'tcx. 363 taujan 158 hadara 112
6~ó(; 186
oüp\'y~ 186f triu 469 Polster (German) 206
o60f-Lcx.~ 132
0Cflcx.Pcx.¡~0f-Lcx.~ 112 ühtwo 282 sedal 108
OtXEÚ(; 449, 494
1:cx.pcx.xf¡ 112 wairpan 105
O~(; 506 6.6 EAST FRISIAN
1:EUf-LeX0f-Lcx.~ 158 wulla 361
ovof-Lcx. 282 püt 207
1:EU1:ii~ 158
oV0f-Lcx.~ 282
1:EU1:eX~w 158 6.2 NORTHERN GERMANIC 7 BALTO-SLAVIC
07tcx.1:pO(; 527 (Old Icelandic)
Tuou(; 494
07teXwv 502 bíta 145 7.1 SLAVIC (Old Church Slavonic)
1:ÚA'/) 206
opvuf-L~ 353 blazina (SCr.) 207
6~ú(; 488f bolstr 206
opouocx. 353 brazda 149
CfleXP0(; 149 fj90r 108
001:~OV 501 chodo 181, 186
Cfl~nO(; 282 heyja 158, 346
001:pcx.xov 501 eudo 149
Cflf¡f-L~ 115 h9ggva 158
7teX1:pW(; 449, 494 Cfll1:p0(; 108 hol 515 euti 149
7tE~6w 449
XEAEÚ(; 486 hola 515 grado 149
7tElpw 159 X~AÜ(; 486, 488 leika 60 loky 486
7tiAcx.¡O(; 112 XEAWV'/) 486 naust 382 miluj9 476
7tÜEXXOV 485 x~pcx.oo~ 112 Pude (Danish) 207 nyzda (PoI.) 132
7t~AEXU(; 453, 482, 484f n9diti 132
X~Pf-Lcx. 149 síor 369
7tfíxU~ 449, 453, 482ff X6~~ 473 n9zda 132
7tlf-L7tAcx.f-LEV 370 X6wv 525 6.3 OLD ENGLISH plevy 486
7thu~ 474, 497 X~wv 525 anda 132 plodo 151
7tAcx.1:cx.(F)~cx.l 307 wf-L0~pw~ 206 béom, béo 105 pojasati 111
7tAeX1:cx.~cx. 493 WrpEA~W 151 bítan 145 prekutiti 158
7tA~E~ 472 brú 447 Tbci 357
7tA~Uf-LWV 403
6 GERMANIC eom, eart 107 samo 203, 527
7tAr¡6Ó~ 486 6.1 GOTHIC feala 307, 472 sed'b 149
beitan 145 , hégan 158, 346
7tAf¡f-L'/) 109 sern 149
úf¡of-Lr¡ 109 faíhu 448 módrie 495f skutek (Czech.) 158
 -
558 559

svekry 454f ancus 281 pater 361 11 ARMENIAN

sbd'b 186 angulus 281 patruos 495 sar 202
tvrbd'b 149 Anterstatai (Osc.) 206 pecten 457
pecu 490 12 TOCHARIAN A
tbci 357 astü 515
pas- 120
ustro 109 aurora 457 plebes 456, 486
tkarp. 526
usid'b 186 avis 500 plenus 307
utro 109 cantando 293 praestü 515 13 PHRYGIAN
zólva (ORuss.) 486 castIgo 121 Prestate (Umbr.) 206 Gdan 526
zelva (Russ.Ch.Sl.) 486 castus 121 Presto-ta (U mbr.) 363
zehv'b 486 catus 121 proceres 121 II DRAVIDIAN
zeno 363 cauda 154 propinquus 281 LANGUAGES
zeraVb (Russ.Ch . Sl.) 486 cedo 186 pulvInus 206
Zivót (Russ.) 148 conditus 370 rem 507 14.1 TAMIL
Consus 370 sacerdos 206 ahkatiya 19
7.2 BALTIC (Lithuanian) cras 473 salUs 454 ahkinar 24
anctan (OPr.) 265 dIco 280 salva 454 ahku- 20, 24, 27
añkstas 282 diem 507 sentio 186 aht' 22ft'
ankstus 282 digitus 280 sIdo 183 aht'ilar 21
bús'ts 114 fac 355 sospes 342 aht'i:!:antu 21
delsiu 124 fides 456 strictus 314 aht'imel21
esu, yra 107 findo 145 terrigena 456 aht'um 21
gérve 486f. folium 151 tollo 361 aht'evan 22
gerwe (OPr.) 486 °gnatus 365 torus 206 aht'evano 2lf
guovs (Latv.) 471 granum 361, 365 trIginta 295 aht'oppatil 21
júosmi 111 grüs 486 ursus 404 aht'oruvan 21
júostas 111 haruspex 397 vates 327, 456 ahtu 19
kója 281 heri 186 vicissim 366f, 370 ahte tUIj.ai 21
nepté 451 hiems 525 vim 451 ahtai 28
pelude 486 Idus 282 volo, vIs 107 aMiJ:¡.ai 19
pelüde (Latv.) 486 ignis 282 ahriJ:¡.ai 26
pelus 486 9 OLD IRISH
iste 136 akam 68
piemuo 470, 486 cáin 121
ita 88 akil70
sa- 527 cath 121
lana 361 akutu 30
skaudus 448 éig 282
latus 361 anke 68
stostas (OPr.) 136 ésca 282
locuples 206 atai 70
sünus 440, 443 loingid 280
longinquus 281 atar 48
tréndu 444 slucim 280
magnus 361 atu 29
tvirtas 149 materies 456 10 HITTITE at-um 24
vesti 121 Nerio 486 hi-in-ik-zi 281 attai 28
vHke 451 nomen 283 la-a-ma-an 283 anta 36
8 ITALlC (Latin) nota 282 suppis 499 apin 70
actus 314 ortus 353 te-e-kán 526 appiyasam 3
 ---- ---

l I
560 561

aru- 26 eupeu 73 ci.r.r-atieil 26 Netu (Ne~u) 66

alku- 27 eudu 40 ei.r.r-il 26, 74 nerntatu 36
a!avuja!apu 45, 67 emu 70, 75, 89, 91 ei.r.r-iupam 26 pah.rakaippu 20
aupu 36, 73 ettu- 75 eiu-ür 26 pah.rÍI!-ai 20
atu 60 euu- 75 ciu-eli 26 pah.r61 20, 22
ar-uyir 26 ohku- 27 el.r-il 26, 74 paka137
a.ru 28 otukku- 27 el.r-ür 26 pakavati 71
a.rukaHu 46 otunku- 27 el.r-eli 26 pakavau 71
iht' 23ff oru 26, 28f eeyei 38 paeu- 26
ikal68 olku- 27 eeyvaht'e 24 paee-irumpu 26
ikutu 30 oudu 40 eelavu 23 paee-ilai 26,74
itu 69 omu 75 eerntu 36 patar-vi-ttava1 67
iyalpu 39 6r-atai 26 eer-vi-ttal 67 parieu 38
iru- 26 kaheu 24 C61a-nattu 46 pae-aval 26, 74
iru-patu 26 kahtitu 19 C6lau 54 pap 48
iuai-vi-ttal 67 kallItu 19 takappau 72 pampu 48
iupam 39 kanke 68 taku- 76 pi.raku 41
imaikku 70. Kavuti (Kavu~i) 66 takam 68 pUIfar-vi-ttal 67
lr-aintu 26 kuHanatu 46 timeu 73 putu- 26
uka- 76 kUIfti 49 tuku 76 putu-6tu 27
ukir 68 kuru 26 tuku- 76 putu-p-pattauam 46
uIf-teu 73 ku.ru- 74 tuyar- 76 putu-p-per-ür 46
uIfpeU 73 kuu-eluttu 26 tuyaram 76 Putuvai 46
uruvujurupu 45, 67 kumu 75 tuvalai 76 putt' 26
uva- 76 kütal 57 - tekil- 76 putt-el 26
uvakai 76 kütu- 57 tekuHu- 76 putt-6tu 26
uvappu 76 kü155 tekku- 76 puuu 75
uvama-k-ki!avi 45 kohrer 20 teviHa176 puuauaHv 46
uvama-t-tokai 45 kottuvittavaujkotupitavau 67 teviHu- 'to reaeh' 76 püuai 36
uvar 76 koHuvittaujkotupita 67 teviHu- 'to ehew' 76 peru- 26
uvar- 76 kottuvitt6ujkotupit6u 67 tevvu- 76 petieam 38
uvauu- 76 kolu 26 toku- 76 per-ulakam 26
uvi- 76 kolumpah .raIf 20 TOIfti 46 per-ür 26,74
ehk'atauiu 24 Ko.rkai 47 t6pan 72 p6ka 68
ehkam 21 k6ti 46 nakam 68 makat 72
ehkatinam 22 k6J;-ilai (k61-ilai) 26, 74 natpu 39 makau 36, 69, 72
ehkiu 22 k61-arai 26 naua-tolaar 23 manke 68
ehku 21, 24 eankatam 46 natu 46 marumoa 72
ehku- 20 eapai 38, 69 nikamam 46 marumoen 72
ehkutaiyar 24 earpu 39 ni.rka 75 Mueiti 77
ehkupatai 22 eiranta 36 netu- 26 Mueiri 47,75
eua (OldTamil) 90f eiru- 26, 74 neH-eluttu 26 muhtItu 19
562 563

muHItu19 biqe (Tulu) 56 kaso 144 Mi 146

muppaht' 18 Müqu-galinga 47 katap' katap' 142 hatü 146
yaru 28 surunge 188 kic-kic 145 he (Korku) 146
vantan 36 kokot 147 hon 146
varavu 23 III AUSTRIC LANGUAGES kondoram 56 hooni 146
valiyaka 37 kOJ;a 145 kabar 152
vaypatu 39 15 MUNDA
kOJ;am 56 kabra 152
vili- 56 15.1 SANTALI korkot 147 kabri 152
vilivu 56 ata 150 kuqu 5'6 kaku (Korku) 146
vehkanmin 24 ato 146 kuk~u 146 kapi 145
vehku- 20, 24 bindi 15, 151 kuku~ban 146 kan (Korku) 146
VeHatai (Vetaqai) 67 campur 155 kupa 146 kara (Korku) 146
veki 36 dak' 173 kur 154 kuam (Ho) 56
dap' 176 ku~ban 146
14.2 KANNADA kuda-/kul- (Sora) 53
d~u~ 54 ku~i 145
aqu- 60 ku~am 56
dh~u~ 54 kuti 143
ukkisu- 76 m(lnte 91
era 145 ladop' 176
ukku- 76 ran ron 190
erat 145 lipur 152
uga~- 76 ru~ang 189
gaqa 54 mar;tqw~ 176
uqugu- 27 gar;tq g~~ur 149 16 MON-KHMER
manga~ 125
endu 89 gap 145 mat' 142 16.1 BAHNAR
kaqqa 54
g~pi 145 m(lnte 91 akan 125
kur;tte 49 gunduc' gusuc' 142 met 'kuti 143 dak 173
kur;tqe 49 guni gurib 142 mundarimat' 142 dop (dap) 176
küta 57 hako 146 ran ron 190 drakan 125
tege- 76
h~n 145 sarlak' 174 hiar 146
puttu 75
h~ndrun 188 sorlok' 174 kap 144
biqiya 56
hepel 145 sul~k 174 k-lao 153
surange 188
herel 145 surun 188 kon 146
surunge 188
hon 'rat' 146 thar;tqgat' 142 kone 146
14.3 OTHER DRAVIDIAN hon 'son' 146 thut~ 55 plei 151
LANGUAGES (Telugu) ho~ 145f tur.un 189
ani 89 kabar 152 16.2 BERSISI
15.2 OTHER MUNDA belüh 146
aqu- 60 kabra 152
LANGUAGES (Mundari) bijeh 151
o~k- (Kota) 27 kabri 152
ahu (Korku) 146 bleu 146
o~g- (Kota) 27 kanaso 144
bindil (Korku) 56 dah 173
kütami 57 k~lÍcur 153
da 173 gera n 189
küqu 55 k~pi 145
dab 176 ron 189
küqu- 57 karcap' 146 gaqa 54
tokkata 76 karsa~ 146 seron batuk 189
gamle (Sora) 91
pihereju (Kui) 28 k~ruc' b~ruc' 142
gapi 145 16.3 KHASI
pered (Parji) 28 kasa 150
ga~a 54 kalynkor 125
564 565

khian 146 kikanª 126 16.10 OTHER MON-KHMER 17.3 OTHER AUSTRONESlAN
khnai 146 koªn 146 LANGUAGES LANGUAGES
khün 146 menkana 126 akan (Kon-Tu) 125 dak (Palon, Dlu lndau) 173
kiar 146 menkona 126 campor (Tembi) 155 ekor (Mala~kka) 154
pygei 151 op-kap-hata 144 him (Angkú) 146 ikul (Malakka) 154
py-hiar 146 pelo 146 hne (Palaung) 146 ikur (Malakka) 151
pyrgei 151 tapoa 150 ikon (Angkú, Mong Lwe) 126 lme (Dlu Petani) 125
saran 189 kan (Alak, Hin, Sué) 125 knie (Dlu Kelantan) 125
synran 189 16.7 SAKEl kenah {Senoi) 125 kü (Radé) 154
belo 146 kuan (Palaung) 146 kur (Malakka) 154
16.4 KHMER belu 146 o'ku' (Jaren) 154
kwan (Palaung) 146
ankaJ 125 b'íjeh 151
kela (Chrau) 142
bahnar 146 blo 146
kim (Mong Lwe) 146
bhlau 146 campur 155
la (Boloven) 142
cu 175 kapo 150
Hit (Tareng) 142
dIk 173 kenah 125
me kuan (Lavé) 146
hier 146 kop-kap 144
ploe (Palaung) 151
kan 125 menton (Kinta-Sakei) 175
pron (Sué) 189
Üp mut 144 telay 124
ron (Sué) 189
kapi 145
16.8 SEMANG tran (Kon-Tu) 189
kün 146
belo 146 trom (Alak) 189
mocu 175
belu 146

1111111~lllll
phle 151 17 AUSTRONESlAN
praÜp 144 blo 146
LANGUAGES
ran 189 campo' (cmpu') 155
kapo 150 17.1 CHAM
run 190 640481119X
kenah 125 akak 142
rün 188
telui 124 akan 142
16.5 MON teluwi 124 ikak 142
datau 146 ikan 142
k'na 125 16.9 STlENG kamei 142
karon 188 blu 146 kumei 1.42
kni 146 condrun 188 í?-run 189
kon 146 . dak 173 run 189
wen 126 dup 176
kan 145 17.2 MALAY
16.6 NlCOBARESE kap 144 bijasa 3
c;lak 173 kié 145 djorong 189
enkanª 126 k-lau 153 ekor 154
enkeana (Teressa) 126 kan 146 kota 146
enkona 126 kuap 146 lima (lndon.) 175
enwin 126 plei 151 liman (lndon.) 175
kan(ª) 125 run 188' marunga 190
kendup 176 trum 189 tjampur 155
566

ERRATA

6,2b read: Bartholomae

9,14b for f1}ánn read: rÍ1!,ánn
53,7 read: origin of these words is unknown, but there can be little doubt
as to their
64,10 read: pre-
95,15b read: IN THE RIGVEDA
150,12 read: kapho'f}i
165,19 read: RS 1.23.21
172,13 for 92 read: 103
224 reverse the order of lines 7 and 8
229,16 read: it is considered
233,14 read: unmülati "it
247,3b read: dialectal
330,16 for ¡¡d¡¡ vavuMread: vavuM ¡¡d¡¡
379,3 for potential read: poetical
383,19 for Sprachkéirper read: Wortkéirper
407,13 read: on the one hand
523, n.4 for use to read: usually