Armenian is an Indo-European language, but it is known for harboring many words that are not inherited from Proto-Indo-European. This PhD dissertation takes a close look at three distinct, early... Show moreArmenian is an Indo-European language, but it is known for harboring many words that are not inherited from Proto-Indo-European. This PhD dissertation takes a close look at three distinct, early loanword layers in Armenian: words from Hurro-Urartian languages, from Kartvelian languages, and from at least one language that also loaned words to other Indo-European languages. By scrutinizing these three groups of loanwords, we learn more about the contact events that shaped the early history of Armenian, but also about the population movements that brought speakers of Armenian into their historical homeland in the highlands south of the Caucasus. Show less
The East Baltic languages, Lithuanian and Latvian, are well known for their conservative phonology with respect to Proto-Indo-European. This has led to a stereotype that these languages have... Show moreThe East Baltic languages, Lithuanian and Latvian, are well known for their conservative phonology with respect to Proto-Indo-European. This has led to a stereotype that these languages have developed in relative isolation without much contact with other languages. In this dissertation, I take a deep dive into the East Baltic lexicon, peeling away the layers of prehistoric borrowings in the process. As well as significant contact events with known languages, like the Russian dialect of Novgorod-Pskov, Gothic and the ancestors of modern Finnish, Sámi and Mordvin, the lexicon also reveals evidence of contact with unattested languages from which earlier populations must have shifted upon the arrival of the Balts in the Baltic region. The fragments obtained not only shed light on the linguistic features of these lost languages, but also provide a new perspective on the sociolinguistic scenario which led the earlier populations of the region to undergo language shift. Show less
Since the so-called “Ancient DNA Revolution” of the past decade, which has yielded many new insights into the genetic prehistory of Europe and large parts of Asia, it can no longer be doubted that... Show moreSince the so-called “Ancient DNA Revolution” of the past decade, which has yielded many new insights into the genetic prehistory of Europe and large parts of Asia, it can no longer be doubted that the Indo-European languages spoken in Europe and Central and South Asia were brought there from the late fourth millennium BCE onward by population groups from the Pontic–Caspian steppes who had belonged to the archaeologically defined Yamnaya culture.1 We may therefore assume that the population groups bearing the Yamnaya culture can practically be equated with the speakers of Proto-Indo-European, the reconstructed ancestor of the Indo-European languages of Europe and Asia, and that the spread of the Indo-European language family is a direct consequence of these migrations of Yamnaya individuals into Europe and Asia. Show less
This article studies Young Avestan forms in -āiš (formally instr.pl.m./n. of a-stems), -ā ̊ (formally nom.-acc.pl.f. of ā-stems) and -īš (formally nom.pl.f. of ī-stems) that are used in contexts... Show moreThis article studies Young Avestan forms in -āiš (formally instr.pl.m./n. of a-stems), -ā ̊ (formally nom.-acc.pl.f. of ā-stems) and -īš (formally nom.pl.f. of ī-stems) that are used in contexts where neuter nom.-acc.pl. / collective forms in -ā ̆(a-stems) and -ī ̆(consonant-stems) are expected. It is argued that these forms in -āiš, -ā ̊ , and -īš are secondarily created pluralizations of original neuter collectives in reaction to the syntactic change according to which their original singular verbal concord is in Young Avestan times changed to plural verbal concord. The choice for forming these newly pluralized collectives with the endings -āiš, -ā ̊ , and -īš lies in the fact that these are the plural variants of the singular endings -ā ̆(instr.sg.m./n. of a-stems), -ā ̆(nom.sg.f. of ā-stems) and -ī ̆(nom.sg.f. of ī-stems), respectively, which are formally identical to the collective neuter endings -ā ̆(a-stems) and -ī ̆ (consonant-stems). The ‘collective plural’ forms in -āiš, -ā ̊ , and -īš can thus be explained through a simple four-part analogy. Show less
After giving a concise overview of all members of the Anatolian language family, this chapter offers an in-depth discussion of the family’s phylolinguistic make-up. It discusses all major... Show moreAfter giving a concise overview of all members of the Anatolian language family, this chapter offers an in-depth discussion of the family’s phylolinguistic make-up. It discusses all major linguistic arguments on the basis of which it can be determined that Anatolian is a single branch within the wider Indo-European language family, as well as the linguistic arguments that can be used for drawing a family tree of Anatolian. It is argued that the first split in the Anatolian branch is between the Hittite branch and a branch that comprises all other Anatolian languages. In the latter branch, first Lydian and then Palaic split off, after which the remaining language develops into Proto-Luwic, the ancestor of the Luwian and Caro-Lycian branches. This phylolinguistic reconstruction of the Anatolian family includes a discussion of the possible dates of all nodes in its tree and of its Proto-Anatolian ancestor language. The chapter also assesses the place of Anatolian within the Indo-European family as a whole on the basis of a discussion of possible closer relationships between Anatolian and other branches of Indo-European, as well as of the Indo-Anatolian hypothesis. Show less
My postulation of a phonemic glottal stop in Hittite as the outcome of PIE *h1 (Kloekhorst 2006, 2008, 2014) has been criticized by several colleagues. In the present paper I will reassess the... Show moreMy postulation of a phonemic glottal stop in Hittite as the outcome of PIE *h1 (Kloekhorst 2006, 2008, 2014) has been criticized by several colleagues. In the present paper I will reassess the evidence and argue that most of the points of criticism cannot withstand scrutiny, and that Hittite did indeed contain a phonemic glottal stop in the environments /°VʔV°/ and /ʔV°/. Moreover, it will be argued that the spelling practices employed by the Hittite scribes to note down the glottal stop in these environments perfectly match the Old Babylonian scribal practice for indicating an ’aleph (= [ʔ]) in these positions. Show less
The agent noun suffix in -ntsa belongs to a complex of Tocharian B agent noun formations,similar in form, function, and inflection. Of these, two suffixes are widely believedto be related to -ntsa:... Show moreThe agent noun suffix in -ntsa belongs to a complex of Tocharian B agent noun formations,similar in form, function, and inflection. Of these, two suffixes are widely believedto be related to -ntsa: the productive agent noun in -ñca and the lexicalised agent nounin -nta. The suffix -ntsa forms occupational titles to eleven verbs in Tocharian B andcan be reconstructed for Proto-Tocharian through comparison with Tocharian A. Inthis paper, it is argued that the suffix originated in the feminine of the PIE active participlein *-nt. This is substantiated by the fact that several ntsa-nouns refer to primarilyfemale professions, as well as the existence of the relic forms Bpreṃtsa ‘pregnant’ andBlāntsa ‘queen’. Furthermore, it is proposed that the masculine is reflected in the suffixes-ñca and -nta and that the disintegration of gendered inflection in the participleled to its development into several agent noun formations. Show less
Attested in cuneiform, hieroglyphic and alphabetic texts dating to the first two millennia BCE, the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European language family is intriguing already by itself. But... Show moreAttested in cuneiform, hieroglyphic and alphabetic texts dating to the first two millennia BCE, the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European language family is intriguing already by itself. But Anatolian is also of central importance for the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European, the last common ancestor of the Indo-European language family. Not only is it the earliest attested branch, it has also long been suspected that Anatolian reflects an earlier stage of the proto-language than that underlying the rest of the family.Focusing on the three best-attested Anatolian languages, Hittite, Luwian and Lycian, this book aims to further our understanding of Anatolian, and by extension Proto-Indo-European, by offering in-depth analyses of essential issues in Anatolian historical morphology and semantics. Various well-known as well as several newly adduced topics are scrutinized to determine whether the innovations leading to the discrepancies with the rest of Indo-European took place on the Anatolian or on the non-Anatolian side.The present study suggests that Anatolian is in many respects closer to the ancestor of the other Indo-European languages than is often claimed. Nevertheless, the investigation has also led to new evidence in favor of the hypothesis that Anatolian was the first branch to split off from the family. Show less
Inspired by earlier work on the distribution between the sign kán and the sign sequences k/g/qa-an in Hittite texts (Frotscher forthcoming), this article investigates the Hittite usage of three... Show moreInspired by earlier work on the distribution between the sign kán and the sign sequences k/g/qa-an in Hittite texts (Frotscher forthcoming), this article investigates the Hittite usage of three more cuneiform signs of the structure CaR (pár, ḫal and tar) vis-à-vis their corresponding Ca-aR spellings (pa-ar, ḫa-al, t/da-ar). It is argued that the distribution between CaR and Ca-aR spellings is not random, but etymologically determined: consistent spelling with CaR reflects PIE *CR̥ and *CeR[C], whereas alternation between CaR and Ca-aR reflects PIE *CoR. This is interpreted as evidence for a synchronic phonetic / phonemic distinction between the two types of spelling: consistent CaR renders the vowel /ə/, whereas alternation between CaR and Ca-aR denotes the vowel /a/. Show less
Tocharian is the name given to two closely related Indo-European languages, Tocharian A and Tocharian B, known from manuscripts discovered in the Tarim basin. Despite its late attestation,... Show moreTocharian is the name given to two closely related Indo-European languages, Tocharian A and Tocharian B, known from manuscripts discovered in the Tarim basin. Despite its late attestation, Tocharian has proved to be archaic, particularly in some sections of the morphology. However, the exact relationship of Tocharian with the other Indo-European branches remains an unresolved issue. The problem is that a strong impact of language contact and internal drift has resulted in an intricate combination of archaisms and innovations that are often difficult to be disentangle.Examining the category of gender, this thesis contributes to the investigation of archaisms and innovations in Tocharian nominal morphology. It aims at providing a comprehensive treatment of the Tocharian gender system, describing how it historically derived from the Indo-European proto-language and why it typologically deviates from most of the other Indo-European languages. Show less
This article starts with the observation that the Hittite 3sg.pret.act. form šipantaš, šipandaš (OH/MS) ‘(s)he libated’ can hardly be analysed as consisting of a tarna-class inflected stem šipant... Show moreThis article starts with the observation that the Hittite 3sg.pret.act. form šipantaš, šipandaš (OH/MS) ‘(s)he libated’ can hardly be analysed as consisting of a tarna-class inflected stem šipant/da- + the 3sg.pret.act. ending -š, since the OH/MH verbal paradigm of ‘to libate’ contains no other tarna-class inflected forms. It is therefore argued that šipantaš, šipandaš should be analysed as consisting of the consonantal verbal stem šipant- + -š, which implies that the a in šipantaš, šipandaš is an empty vowel. In order to explain the spelling -ntaš, -ntaš vs. the spelling -nza, which is commonly used to note down the sequence /-nts/ < PIE *-nts, it is argued that -ntaš, -ndaš denotes /-ntːs/, the regular outcome of a PIE sequence *-nds. Show less
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the phonetics and phonology of the Hittite dental stops, which is especially based on a detailed treatment of the usage of the cuneiform signs TA... Show moreThis article provides a comprehensive analysis of the phonetics and phonology of the Hittite dental stops, which is especially based on a detailed treatment of the usage of the cuneiform signs TA and DA in all positions in the word, and in all chronological stages of Hittite. Show less
In the late 1950s, a number of manuscripts were discovered in Odisha. They contained one of the oldest collections of Vedic texts, the Atharvaveda, dating to the late second millenium BC, in a... Show moreIn the late 1950s, a number of manuscripts were discovered in Odisha. They contained one of the oldest collections of Vedic texts, the Atharvaveda, dating to the late second millenium BC, in a recension, the Paippalāda, that was thought to have survived only in a very corrupt Kashmirian manuscript. Given the importance and antiquity of the text, this discovery sparked the enthusiasm of Indologists, historians, anthropologists and linguists eager to dive into the new material. This, however, hinged on the production of a philologically reliable edition of the text. Selva’s dissertation is a further step in this direction: it focuses on the 17th book of the collection, containing a variety of material in both poetry and prose: magical spells to exorcise demons who threaten women and children, curses against enemies, and remedies against nightmares. One section illustrates a ritual observance consisting in the imitation of the behaviour of a bull, a practice that can be traced back to prehistoric Indo-European cultural models and that was re-elaborated by the Pāśupatas, the earliest-known ascetic sect devoted to the god Śiva. The edition is equipped with a critical apparatus, a translation and a commentary that discusess philological problems and attempts at an interpretation. Show less
Following Rieken’s 2008 establishment that the Anatolian hieroglyphic sign *41 (CAPERE/tà) denoted the syllable /da/, with lenis /d/, Yakubovich (2008) argued that the sign’s phonetic value was... Show moreFollowing Rieken’s 2008 establishment that the Anatolian hieroglyphic sign *41 (CAPERE/tà) denoted the syllable /da/, with lenis /d/, Yakubovich (2008) argued that the sign’s phonetic value was acrophonically derived from the Hittite verb dā-i /d- ‘to take’. In the present article it is argued that this view can no longer be upheld in view of new proposals regarding the phonetic value of sign *41 (rather [ða]) and the interpretation of Hitt. dā-i /d- (rather [tʔā-]). It is proposed that the value of sign *41 has instead been derived from the Luwian verb ‘to take’, lā-i /l-, which from a historical linguistic perspective must go back to earlier *ðā-i / *ð-. This acrophonic assignment of the value [ða] to sign *41 must then be dated to the beginning of the 18th century BCE at the latest, which implies that already by that time the Anatolian hieroglyphs were in use as a real script that made use of phonetic signs. Show less
In this article it is argued that the Hittite ts-sound spelled by z-signs was not a monophonemic affricate /ts /, as is often assumed, but that Hittite instead contained several clusters of dental... Show moreIn this article it is argued that the Hittite ts-sound spelled by z-signs was not a monophonemic affricate /ts /, as is often assumed, but that Hittite instead contained several clusters of dental stop + sibilant. We can distinguish four of such clusters in intervocalic position: (1) lenis /t/ + lenis /s/, which is spelled Vz-zV; (2) lenis /t/ + fortis /sː/, which is spelled Vz-šV; (3) fortis /tː/ + lenis /s/, which is spelled Vz-zV; and (4) fortis /tː/ + fortis /sː/, which is spelled Vt-šV. Show less
In this article it will be argued that the Indo-European laryngeals *h2 and *h3, which recently have been identified as uvular fricatives, were in fact uvular stops in Proto-Indo-Anatolian. Also in... Show moreIn this article it will be argued that the Indo-European laryngeals *h2 and *h3, which recently have been identified as uvular fricatives, were in fact uvular stops in Proto-Indo-Anatolian. Also in the Proto-Anatolian and Proto-Luwic stages these sounds probably were stops, not fricatives. Show less
The article discusses the development of the Proto-Indo-European sequences *-eum and *-eh2m. The former produced *-ēm, allegedly through loss of *-u- with compensatory lengthening of the preceding... Show moreThe article discusses the development of the Proto-Indo-European sequences *-eum and *-eh2m. The former produced *-ēm, allegedly through loss of *-u- with compensatory lengthening of the preceding *-e- ("Stang’s law"), while *-eh2m allegedly produced *-ām within the proto-language ("extended Stang’s law"). The evidence for both claims is scrutinized, with special emphasis on the acc.sg. and acc.pl. endings of the ā-stems in Indo-Iranian and Baltic and the Proto-Indo-European paradigm of the word for ‘cow’. It is concluded that "extended Stang’s law" cannot be maintained and that "Stang’s law" is probably incorrect, too. Alternative explanations for the attested forms are given. Show less
Although for some scholars the very possibility of syntactic reconstruction remains dubious, numerous studies have appeared reconstructing a variety of basic elements of Proto-Indo-European syntax... Show moreAlthough for some scholars the very possibility of syntactic reconstruction remains dubious, numerous studies have appeared reconstructing a variety of basic elements of Proto-Indo-European syntax based on evidence available particularly from ancient and/or archaic Indo-European languages. The papers in this volume originate from the Workshop “PIE Syntax and its Development” (Thessaloniki 2011), which aimed to bring together scholars interested in these problems and to shine new light on current research into ancient Indo-European syntax. Special attention was paid to the development of the hypothetical reconstructed features within the documented history of Indo-European languages. Show less
