Kulikov Kassian Dybo 2011 Ya Prs

7/28/2019 Kulikov Kassian Dybo 2011 Ya Prs

1/40

6 (2011)

2011


2/40

Russian State University for the Humanities

Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Journal of Language Relationship

International Scientific Periodical

N6 (2011)

Moscow 2011


3/40

:

. . (-) /

.

(). . ()

. ()

. ( )

. . ()

. - (-)

. . ()

. ()

. ()

. . ()

. ()

:

. . ( )

. . ( )

. . ( )

. .

. .

. . . .

. .

. .

, 2011


4/40


5/40

81(05) 815

: / . . .-; . . . - ; . . . . ., 2011. 6. xxvi + 260 . ( : ; .; 16(78)/11).

Journal of Language Relationship: International Scientific Periodical / Russian State Uni-

versity for the Humanities; Russian Academy of Sciences. Institute of Linguistics; Ed. byV. A. Dybo. Moscow, 2011. No. 6. xxvi + 260 p. (RSUH Bulletin: Scientific Peri-

odical; Linguistics Series; No. 16(78)/11).

ISSN 1998-6769

http://[email protected]

: . . Add-on symbols by S. G. Bolotov

29.07.2011. 6090/8.. .

. 1050 .

-

, . , . , 126. 42-29 23.12.99


6/40

Table of Contents /

Table of Contents / . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viiContributors / . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ixNote for Contributors / . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x

80 (30 2011 .) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiA loccasion du 80me anniversaire de Vladimir Antonovitch Dybo (30 avril 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii . . / Bibliography of V. A. Dybo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvi

Articles /

Kirill Babaev. On the reconstruction of some tense/aspect markers in Proto-Mande . . . . . . . . . 1[. . . ]

John D. Bengtson, Vclav Blaek. On the BurushaskiIndo-European Hypothesis by I. aule . 25[. , . . - . ]

Alexei Kassian. Annotated 50-item wordlist of the basic lexiconof the Ancient Greek language (the idiolect of Herodotus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65[. . . 50-

( )]

Ilia Peiros. Some thoughts on the problem of the Austro-Asiatic homeland . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101[. . . ]

George Starostin. On Mimi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115[. . . ]

Gbor Takcs. Lexica Afroasiatica XI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141[. . Lexica Afroasiatica XI]

Miguel Valrio. Hani-Rabbat as the Semitic Name of Mitanni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173[. . - ]

Discussion Articles /

Leonid Kulikov. Drifting between passive and anticausative.True and alleged accent shifts in the history of Vedic yapresents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185[. . . :

-ya-]

Alexei Kassian. Some considerations on Vedic -ya-presents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198[. . -ya-]

. . . .-. ya- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200

[V. A. Dybo. On Vedic -ya-presents]

Leonid Kulikov. Reply to replies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210[. . . ]


7/40

Table of Contents /

Book reviews /

. . , . . . :

, 2010

(. . / Mikhail Zhivlov) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

Angela MARCANTONIO (ed.). The Indo-European Language Family:

Questions about its Status, 2009(. . / Ilya Yakubovich) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227

Periodic reviews /

The Journal of Indo-European Studies. Vol. 37, 34, 2009

(. . / Tatyana Mikhailova) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234

Reports /

. . ,

, , 2425 2011 . (. . / Lyubov Klimenchenko) . . . . . 238[The 6th Traditional Conference in Memory of S. A. Starostin, Moscow, RSUH, March 2425, 2011]

80- . . , , , 5 2011 .

(. . / Evgeniya Korovina) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241[Conference in honor of the 80th jubilee of Vladimir Dybo, Moscow, RSUH, May 5, 2011]

VII - ,

, , 79 2011 . (. . / Ivan Kotoedov) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243[7th International Workshop on Balto-Slavic Accentology, Moscow, RSUH, July 79, 2011]

, , 34 2010 .

(. . / Kirill Prokhorov) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247[Isolates in Africa, Lyons, Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, December 34, 2010]


8/40

. . , . .

-

(), [email protected]

-

, , [email protected]

. , ,[email protected]

-

-

, [email protected]

. , .-.

, .


. . , . -

- -


. . , .

, .. -

(),[email protected]


-



. . , Ph.D. (-

); ;


. , .

- (), [email protected]

. . ,

-

c (), [email protected]

. , -

(-, ), [email protected]

,

. (-),

[email protected]

. . , . -

(), [email protected] -

, , [email protected]

. ,

();

Ph.D. (Linguistics and Near Eastern Studies, University of

Chicago), [email protected]

ContributorsKirill V. Babaev candidate of sciences (Philology), lead re-

searcher, Department of Comparative Studies, Institute ofLinguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow),

[email protected]

John D. Bengtson Association for the Study of Language in

Prehistory, Minnesota, [email protected]

Vclav Blaek professor, Masaryk University, Brno,

[email protected]

Vladimir Dybo doctor of sciences (Philology), corresponding

member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Head of Cen-

ter for Comparative Linguistics, Russian State University for

the Humanities (Moscow), [email protected]

Alexei Kassian candidate of sciences (Philology), researcher,

Center for Comparative Linguistics, Russian State Univer-

sity for the Humanities; researcher, Department of Indo-European Studies, Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy

of Sciences (Moscow), [email protected]

Lyubov Klimenchenko student, Institute of Linguistics, Russian

State University for the Humanities (Moscow),

[email protected]

Eugenia Korovina student, Center for Comparative Linguistics,

Russian State University for the Humanities (Moscow),

[email protected]

Ivan Kotoedov student, Institute of Linguistics, Russian State

University for the Humanities (Moscow), [email protected]

Leonid I. Kulikov candidate of sciences (Philology), Ph.D. (Lei-

den University); associated member and lecturer at Leiden

University, Institute of Linguistics; doctorant of Institute ofLinguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow),

[email protected]

Tatyana Mikhailova doctor of sciences (Philology), professor,

Department of Germanic and Celtic Philology, Faculty ofPhilology, Moscow State University (Moscow),

[email protected]

Mikhail Oslon candidate of sciences (Philology), Department

of typology and comparative linguistics, Institute of Slavic

Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow),

[email protected]

Ilia Peiros doctor of sciences (Philology), visiting researcher,

Institute of Santa Fe (New Mexico, USA), [email protected]

Kirill Prokhorov researcher, Department of Africa, Peter the

Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (St. Peter-

sburg), [email protected]

George Starostin candidate of sciences (Philology), Head of

Department of the history and philology of the Far East, In-stitute of Eastern Cultures and Antiquity, RSUH (Moscow),

[email protected]

Gabor Takcs researcher, Department of Egyptology, Eotvos

Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary, [email protected]

Miguel Valrio M. A. student of Archaeology, Faculty of Social

and Human Sciences, New University of Lisbon,

[email protected]

Ilya Yakubovich candidate of sciences (Philology), research as-

sociate, Institute of World Cultures, Moscow State Univer-

sity; Ph.D. (Linguistics and Near Eastern Studies, University

of Chicago), [email protected]

Mikhail Zhivlov candidate of sciences (Philology), researcher,

Department of Uralo-Altaic Studies, Institute of Linguistics,Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow), [email protected]


9/40

Note for Contributors

Journal of Language Relationship welcomes submissions from everyone specializing in compara-

tive-historical linguistics and related disciplines, in the form of original articles as well as re-

views of recent publications. All such submissions should be sent to the managing editor:

G. StarostinInstitute of Oriental Cultures and Antiquity

Russian State University for the Humanities

125267 Moscow, Russia

Miusskaya Square, 6

E-mail: [email protected]

Articles are published preferably in English or Russian, although publication of texts in other

major European languages (French, German, etc.) is possible. Each article should be accompa-

nied with an abstract (not exceeding 300 words) and keywords.

For more detailed guidelines on article submission and editorial policies, please see our Website at:

http://www.jolr.ru or address the editorial staff directly at [email protected].

- , , , -

. -

:

125267

, . 6

.

E-mail: [email protected]

, -

(, . .).

( 300 ) -

.

,

. . : http://www.jolr.ru, -

([email protected]).


10/40

Journal of Language Relationship 6 (2011) Pp. 185215 Kulikov L., 2011


Leonid KulikovLeiden University / Institute of Linguistics (Moscow)

Drifting between passive and anticausative.

True and alleged accent shifts in the history of Vedic -ya-presents

This paper focuses on the system of the Vedic present formations with the suffix -ya andmiddle inflexion, paying special attention to the attested accent patterns. On the basis of astudy of the paradigmatic and syntactic features of this verbal formation we can concludethat the traditional analysis of some members of this class in terms of the passive/non

passive (anticausative) opposition is inadequate. I will offer a short overview of the history ofthis class, concentrating, in particular, on several accent shifts which account for a number ofexceptions to the general correlation between the semantics and accent placement (passives:accent on the suffix vs. nonpassives: accent on the root). Some of these shifts can be dated tothe prehistoric (Common IndoAryan?) period (cf. suffix accentuation in such nonpassivesas mriyte dies), while some others must be features of certain Vedic dialects, dating to theperiod after the split of Common IndoAryan.

Keywords: Sanskrit, Vedic, gveda, Atharvaveda, Yajurveda, IndoEuropean, passive, anticausative, middle voice, accentuation, accent shift.

1. Passive, reflexive, anticausative:preliminary remarks and definitions

The distinguishing between closely related intransitive derivations, such as passive, reflexive,anticausative (decausative), is one of the most intricate semantic and syntactic issues in languages with polysemous intransitive markers. Both anticausative and passive derivations en

tail the promotion of the initial direct object (= Patient) and the demotion of the initial subject(= Agent). This common syntactic feature accounts for their similar morphological marking inmany languages (see e.g. Comrie1985: 328ff.; Haspelmath 1987: 29ff.). In the cases where themarkers of the passive and anticausative (at least partly) overlap, passives without an overtlyexpressed agent can be distinguished from anticausatives only by semantic criteria. This semantic opposition is characterized, for instance, by Comrie (1985: 326) as follows:

Passive and anticausative differ in that, even where the former has no agentive phrase, the existence of someperson or thing bringing about the situation is implied, whereas the anticausative is consistent with thesituation coming about spontaneously.

This general definition is also relevant for a description of the system of intransitive derivations in a number of Ancient IndoEuropean languages, such as Ancient Greek or (Vedic) Sanskrit.


11/40


186

In what follows I will focus on the Vedic verbs with the suffix -ya-, particularly on thegenesis of their accentuation. Generally, the -yapresents with the accent on the suffix are passives (kriyte is made, ucyte is called, styte is praised, hanyte is killed), whereas the-ya-presents with root accentuation behave as nonpassive intransitives (cf.pdyate falls, bdhyate wakes, ryate flows). However, a few -yaformations are generally regarded as exceptions to this regularity. The parade examples include mriyte dies (root m) and its semanticcounterpart jyate is born (rootjan).

2. Nonpassive -ya-presents with suffix accentuation:the type mriyte

One of the most debated Vedic verbal formations relevant for a study of the accentualhistory of the -ya-presents is mriyte dies. While its semantic opponent, jyate (on whichsee next Section), is regarded as a passive by meaning, nonpassive by form, mriyte is takenas a passive by form, but nonpassive by meaning, being quoted in all Vedic and IndoEuropean grammars as a handbook example of the nonpassive usage of a -ya-present withsuffix accentuation.1 A few attempts to analyse this present as a passive proved unsuccessful. For instance, Negelein (1898: 38) treated it as the passive of the transitive m (


12/40

Leonid KULIKOV. Drifting between passive and anticausative. True and alleged accent shifts in the history of Vedic -ya-presents

187

1)verbs denoting changes of state3 (mostly of spontaneous and noncontrollable character):jani be born jya-te RV+,py fill, swell pyya-te RV+, budh ()4 (a)wake bdhya-te

RV+, l() dissolve lya-te RVKh.+;2)verbs of motion and body posture: pad fall, move pdya-te RV+, 1y drive, speed

ya-te RV+, rwhirl, swirl rya-te RV, VS1, l() adhere -lya-te Br.+;3)verbs of mental activities, constructed with the accusative: k long (for), yearn

kya-te RV1, budh () perceive bdhya-te AV+, man think, respect mnya-te RV+,m forget mya-te RV+.

No doubt, the similar morphological marking of these presents reflects their semanticaffinity within the Vedic verbal system. Note that for all these semantic types, middle voicemarking is typical in the world languages (see Kemmer 1993; 1994: 182f. et passim). In spiteof the small range of classes (13), their relevance within the Vedic verbal system is obvious.These types determine which meanings are productive (and, hence, morphologically influential) in the class of middle -ya-presents, and which are not. For instance, the relevance oftype (2) may account for the secondary and more recent usage of bdhya-te, which originally(in the RV) could only be used in the intransitive usage(), meaning (a)wake; after the RV,when the class I present bdhati perceive disappears, bdhya-te takes over its function, thus

being grouped together with such present formations as mnya-te think, respect or mya-te

forget.All verbs of the type mriy-te perfectly fit the three semantic classes listed above. mriy-te

denotes a change of state (note, particularly, the parallelism with jya-te, which will be discussed at length below, in Section 3);5dhriy-te (together with the hapaxesghriya-te and -sriya-te)

belongs with verbs of motion and body posture; -driy-te refers to a mental activity. Moreover,even the secondary meaning of dhriy-te () decide, determine, attested from Middle Vedic

(Brhmaas) onward, perfectly fits class (3), too. Thus, within the verbal system, all theseCriy presents belong with the middle -ya-presents, and even their later developments aredetermined by the semantic skeleton (13), as shown in Table 1 below:6

Thus, the suffix (passive) accentuation in the first three presents of the type mriytemust be of secondary origin. All these formations are derived from C roots and, together with-y-passives of the same structure (kriyte is made, bhriyte is carried etc.), represent a specific development of before the present suffix -ya-. Most likely, the regular reflex of *CVwas such that it disturbed the morphological transparency of the formation (for instance,**mryate).7 The only way to preserve the transparency of the form was to introduce the accenton the suffix: *Ca Criy (i.e.: *ma mriy etc.). Here the type kriyte (where -ri goes

usually regarded as mere misunderstanding (see e.g. J. Schmidt 1875: 244ff.; cf. also Benfey 1866a: 198f.). In fact,however, the segmentation mriy is the only possible synchronic solution of the descriptive conflict betweenthe passive form and the nonpassive meaning of these presents: class VI is the only thematic present with theaccent on the thematic vowel (cf. ki dwell kiyti).

3 See Levin 1993: 240ff., with bibl.4 Hereafter I use Greek characters (, ) to refer to different meanings of polysemous -ya-presents.5 Cf. M. Leumann 1940: 232 [= Kl.Schr., 323]; Gonda (1951: 92): the two verbs [= mriyte andjyate. L. K.]

formed a pair and influenced each other.6 This must also hold true for the presents ghriya-te drip and -sriya-te stretch, which do not occur accented,

but, by virtue of their phonological structure can only bear accent on the suffix: *ghriy-te, *-sriy-te.7 Cf. drv < *deH (Lubotsky 1997: 148, with fn. 29). Note that the -ya-presents (including -y-passives) de

rived from roots ending in long sonants (such as prya become full < *pHa-) are not discussed in this paper.On the Avestan reflexes of *C (Crii-,Cirii-), see Beekes 1999: 64.


13/40


188

Table 1. The main semantic classes of the middle -ya-presents

and the corresponding presents of the type Criy-te

passives

(yujyte, dyte, hanyte, kriyte, )-y-presents

mriytedhriyte (), sriyate,ghriyate

driyte, dhriyte ()

change of state (jyate,bdhyate (), )

motion and body pos

ture(pdyate, ryate, )

mental activities

(mnyate, bdhyate (), )middle-ya-presents

(1) (2) (3)

back to the accentless - before --) may have served as a model. Due to this accent rule, presents of the type mriyte, which originally belonged with middle -ya-presents, formally fell together with -y-passives.8

3.j yateis born anticausative or former passive?

According to the opinion widely spread in earlier IndoEuropean and IndoIranian stud

ies, jyate (as well as its OldIranian cognate, Avestan zaiieiti) is the original passive, with thesecondary accent shift in Vedic. Whitney in his seminal Sanskrit grammar (1889: 273, 761b)called it altered passive; likewise, Macdonell in his Vedic grammar (1910: 333, 444a) claimsthat the original passive has been transferred to the radically accented ya class: *jyte

jyate. Similar statements can also be found in later studies.9 There is no sufficient evidence forsuch a hypothesis, however. Although a passive interpretation (is born by smb.) is possible

per se, it cannot be supported by the syntactic features of jan. Witness the following examplesfrom the gveda and atapathaBrhmaa:

(1) RV 6.7.3a

tvd vpro jya-te vjy gneyou:ABL poet:NOM.SG bearYA3SG.MED prizewinner:NOM.SG fire:VOC.SGFrom you, o fire, is born the poet, the prizewinner.

8 For a detailed discussion of this morphological type, see Kulikov 1997. On the secondary accent shift in mri

yte, see also Szemernyi 1964: 184, fn. 1. It is worth mentioning that a number of IndoEuropeanists and Sanskritists, without explicitly formulating the conditions of this process, have suggested the secondary character ofthe suffix accentuation in this present type; cf., for instance, the remark by Kellens (1984: 121, note (8)): Le sens nepermet pas de considrer mriy comme le passif de mra: laccent suffixal parat donc secondaire. On the partialoverlapping of the -yastems built on some C and CRroots (vacillation CRya/CRiya-), see Kulikov 2005.

9jyate is qualified as an original passive, e.g. in Mayrhofers grammar (1965: 93, 93), albeit not consistently;see Hauschild 1965: 216; cf. also Hartmann 1954: 186f.; Etter 1985: 215, fn. 290; 245; Kellens 1984: 126ff., note (15);Werba 1997: 288 (intr. Pr. [=Pass.]).


14/40


189

(2) B 5.3.5.17agnr vi dhm jya-te,fire:ABL.SG verily smoke:NOM.SG bearYA3SG.MED

dhmd abhrm abhrd vismoke:ABL.SG cloud:NOM.SG cloud:ABL.SG rain:NOM.SG

Verily, from the fire the smoke arises, from the smoke the cloud, from the cloud the rain.

The most important piece of evidence for a nonpassive analysis of jyate is the lack ofconstructions with the instrumental of the agent (= the one who begets), which would be typical for a true passive construction (see Hock 198586: 90, fn. 5), as in (1a):

(1a) *tvy vpro jya-teyou:INS poet:NOM.SG bearYA3SG.MEDThe poet is born by you (o fire).

Besides, there are no good phonological reasons which could explain the supposed accent shift: *jyte jyate. Most likely, jyate belonged with anticausatives, not with passives, from the very beginning, meaning come into being, arise. Then, how the widelyspread passive analysis ofjyate can be explained? I presume it may have emerged under theinfluence of the passive morphology of its translations in European languages, such as Engl.is born, Germ. ist geboren, Fr. est n. Note, incidentally, that the Russian translation of this Vedic verb seems to be free of such dangerous side effects: Rus. be bornis a nonpassive intransitive (anticausative), which cannot be employed in passive constructions ofthe type X is born by smb.

4. -ya-presentswith fluctuating accentuation

There are some twenty Vedic -ya-presents attested with boot root and suffix accentuation,cf. mcyate/ mucy-te be released, become free, kya-te / ky-te perish, disappear, etc. (hereafter referred to as y-presents). According to standard Vedic grammars, this fluctuation isnot random only in case ofpacyte is cooked vs.pcyate ripens (as in RV 1.135.8pcyate yvathe barley ripens). In what follows, I will concentrate on synchronic features and diachronicorigins of this verbal class.

4.1. Historical distribution of accentuation in Vedic texts

As noticed above, the accent fluctuation of the type mcya-te / mucy-te does not followany semantic regularity (except for pcy-te). The few attempts at explaining the place of thestress in terms of the passive/nonpassive distinction (cf. Gonda 1951: 98f.), parallel to theoppositionpacyte is cooked vs.pcyate ripens clearly faltered. We find forms with different accentuation in nearly identical contexts and even parallel passages which differ only inaccentuation; cf. RV 10.152.1jyate = AV 1.20.4 jyte. The accentuation of the -y-presents isnot random, however, as Table 2 below shows (the numbers in superscript indicate the num

ber of accented occurrences):


15/40


190

Table 2. Accentuation of the -ya-presents with fluctuating accentuation in Vedic texts

-y-presents-ya-

attestations with root accentuation-y-

attestations with suffix accentuation

Verbs of destruction and destructuring (entropy increase)

dhyte is successful; + vloses TS1, 1 1, MS1, B1, BK1

kyte perishes RV1, TS2, 2 ( ), T (act.)1 AV1, B6, 1

chdyte breaks, is cut off TS1, 1 MS2, B3

jyte suffers loss RV1, RVSV1, TS1, 1 ( ) AV3, MS2

dryte cracks, is split TS2, + 2 B4

pryte becomes full RV1, 1, TBm2, T (act.)2 MS1, B12, 1

bhdyte breaks RVKh.1, TS2 MS2, B10, BK1, Kah1

myte is damaged, perishes RV2

, TS7

, TB3

, T2

MS4

, B1

mcyte becomes free RV1, RVKh.1, 1, TS2 AV3, B9, BK3

rcyte is emptied;

+ ti, pr surpasses; is left overTS7, TB9, (+T1 (?)) MS6, MSKS1, B12, BK5

lpyte is damaged, torn TS1 AV1, m1

yte is left over + 1, TS2, TB3 MS1, B10, BK4

yte falls (off) TSTB1, 2, 1, TB1 B1, m3

ryte breaks, collapses 1 ( ) MS1, KS1

hyte is left, abandoned TS4, 1 MS2, B2

Verbs of heating

tpyte heats; suffers VS (act.1, med.1), TSm1, m1, 3, TB2 AV6, m1, B4

dhyte burns RVKh.2 1, MSKS1, B4

pcyte is cooked; ripens,

is digestedripen: RV1, +RVKh.1, B1, TB1

is cooked: RV1, RVVSTS MS1, RV

AV1, AV2; ripens: MS1, B11, BK1

The simple regularity, which immediately follows from the above table can be formulatedas follows:

in the gVeda (together with the RVKhilni) and in the texts of the Taittirya school(TaittiryaSahit, TaittiryaBrhmaa and, probably, Taittiryarayaka), -y-presents show root accentuation;

in the AtharvaVeda, Maitrya Sahit, atapathaBrhmaa and, most likely, in thetexts of the Khaka school, -y-presents show suffix accentuation.


16/40


191

While evidence provided by the RV, AV, MS, B and the accentuated texts of the Taittirya school is quite sufficient to make decisive conclusions on the accentual patterning ofthe -y-presents in these texts, the case of the Khaka (KS) is less clear. The overwhelmingmajority of the -y-presents occur in the unaccentuated parts of the text in ed. Schroeder;evidence consists of only three attestations (dahymn KS 10.5:130.67, atiricyte KS14.10:209.6, apiryte KS 35.16:62.2). Yet, in spite of the scarcity of attestations, the three accented occurrences (to which one form in the Kaharayaka may be added) as well as theclose affinity of the language of the Khaka and Maitrya schools lead to the assumptionthat the corresponding dialects belong together as far as the accentual patterning of the-y-presents is concerned.

Still more problematic is the position of the dialect of the Vjasaneyins. The only -y-present which occurs accented in the VS is tpy-te (tpyamnya VS 39.12).10

The aforementioned distinction holds foremost for the larger semantic class of -y-presents, which includes verbs referring to (spontaneous) destruction and some related processes(for a detailed semantic analysis of the -y-presents see Section 4.4 below). More intricate isthe case of the second, smaller, semantic class, which includes verbs of heating. In the RV,the place of the accent inpcy-te depends on its meaning (be cooked/ripen). The B and MShave generalized the suffix accentuation (except for one rootaccented occurrence in the B),as in the case of the verbs of destruction; the root accentuation of the only accented occurrence in the TB matches both its semantics (ripen) and the rule of accent placement in theTaittirya and therefore does not prove anything. Likewise, dhy-te (unattested in the RV) essentially follows the model of the verbs of destruction, except for one occurrence in the TS.Most complicated is the situation with tpy-te. In the AV, all the accented forms bear accenton the suffix, whilst in the TB the accent is on the root, which meets our rule. The accentplacement in the Sahits of the Yajurveda (TS, MS) seems to be random; note, however, that

both occurrences which do not meet the rule (TSm

3.2.8.2 anutapymna anutpyamnaMSm 2.3.8:37.1) appear in a mantra that is, in the older language (which may represent anearlier situation as compared to what we observe at the later stage of the development of thesame Vedic dialects, in Vedic prose). All the three rootaccented occurrences attested in theB are imperatives (met with in one passage), while the suffix accentuation is attested in indicative forms.

From the rule formulated above it immediately follows that (i) the suffix accentuation ofthe -y-presents in the AV, MS and B does not suggest their passive value or any particularsemantic difference from the corresponding forms with the root accentuation attested in theRV(Kh.) and Taittirya contra Gonda 1951; (ii) there are no good reasons to emend the suffix

accentuation in these texts on the basis of nonpassive semantics (cf. Insler 1987: 62f. on AVkyte). The accent fluctuation does not depend on the semantics of the -ya-presents in question, but represents a difference between Vedic schools/dialects.

4.2. Exceptions to the general rule

Exceptions to our rule are relatively few among the entropy increase verbs (shown withthe outline letters in Table 2 above); for convenience, they are summarized in Table 3 below:

10 The nonce formation tpyate (dat.sg. act.prt.), attested in the same passage, is a secondary replacement of

the class I active participle (tpate) and thus cannot serve as evidence for the accentual patterning of tpy-te in thistext; moreover, it may even have triggered the root accentuation of the adjacent tpyamnya.


17/40


192

Table 3. -ya-presents with fluctuating accentuation: exceptions to the general accentual pattern

-y-presents

-ya-

root accentuation instead of theexpected suffix accentuation

-y-

suffix accentuation instead of theexpected root accentuation

Verbs of destruction and destructuring (entropy increase)

dhy-teis successful;

+ vlosesvydhyai B 2.1.2.4 dhyte TS 1.5.2.2

ky-te perisheskyate B 14.4.2.28,kyeta B 14.4.3.7

apakyte TB 1.5.10.5

chdy-te breaks, is cut off vyavachdyai BK 2.8.3.18

jy-te suffers loss jyate B 14.4.3.23

dry-tecracks, is split +dryeta MS 2.1.82 : 9.14, 15

pry-te becomes full pratipryeta MS 3.2.2:17.11 pryte TB 1.5.10.5mcy-te breaks mcytai AV 8.8.6

lpy-te is damaged, torn lupyte TBm 2.8.8.2

y-te is left over +ucchytai AV 2.31.3

y-te falls (off)atiyante MS 2.6.12 : 64.1, 6,avayante B 3.2.6.8

avaynte TBm 3.12.7.233

ry-te breaks, collapses ryate B 14.6.9.28 etc.

hy-te is left, abandoned hyate B 3.6.2.14 3.6.2.15

Verbs of heating

tpy-te heats; suffersanutpyamn MSm 2.3.8:37.1,tpyadhvam, tpyasva2 B 6.1.3.24

anutapymn TSm 3.2.8.2

Most exceptions fall into one of the following types:(1) eleven nonindicative forms with suffix accentuation instead of root accentuation:

subjunctives: vydhyai B 2.1.2.4, +vyavachdyai BK 2.8.3.18, mcytai AV 8.8.6, +ucchytai AV 2.31.3;

optatives: kyeta B 14.4.3.7, +dryeta MS 2.1.82 : 9.14, 15,pratipryeta MS 3.2.2:17.11; imperatives: tpyadhvam, tpyasva2 B 6.1.3.24.The tendency to bear the accent on the root in the nonindicative forms of -y-presents in

the AV, MS and B was by no means a strict rule, however: we find subjunctives and optativeswith the accent on the suffix as well, cf.jyta MS 1.6.10:103:2, dryta B 4.5.10.72, bhidyytm

BK 4.9.4.15, etc. On the assumption that in the corresponding Vedic dialects the accent wasretracted from the suffix to the root, the rootaccented forms listed above can be regarded aspreserving the original accentuation (see Section 5.2 below).


18/40


193

(2) six occurrences attested in the YVic mantras: anutpyamn MSm 2.3.8:37.1 anutapymn TSm 3.2.8.2, lupyte TBm 2.8.8.2,11avaynte TBm 3.12.7.233. One may assume thatthe accent shift in some YVic dialects was completed by the beginning of the Brhmaa period, while the mantras attest the transitional period and vacillation in accentplacement.

(3) four exceptions in the last chapters of book 14 of the B [= BU] ( kyate B 14.4.2.28[= BUM 1.4.28], kyeta B 14.4.3.7 [= BUM 1.5.7],12jyate B 14.4.3.23 [= BUM 1.5.23 =BUK 1.5.15], ryate B 14.6.9.28 [= BUM 3.9.28] = B 14.6.11.16 [= BUM 4.2.6] = B14.7.2.27 [= BUM 4.4.27]) must be due to the late character of the text, which not infrequently gives erroneous accents; cf. ymna Bv 14.7.1.14 [= BUMv 4.3.14], manysai B14.6.9.26 [= BUM 3.9.26], manyte B 14.9.2.7 [thus mss.; ed. Weber mnyate], sjyate B14.6.9.28 [v.l. apud ed. Weber].

(4) for ya-te, there may have existed additional semantic rules which determined accentplacement in some usages, see Kulikov 2011, s.v. for details.

(5) only four exceptions seem unmotivated:dhyte TS 1.5.2.2, hyate B 3.6.2.14 3.6.2.15, apakyte and pryte in TB 1.5.10.5.

4.3. Instances of semantically motivated accent shift

To sum up, for the majority of -y-presents the accent fluctuation does not involve anysemantic or syntactic features. Thus, the standard explanation of the accent shift in -y-passives as motivated by the nonpassive (reflexive or anticausative) syntax13 finds no or littlesupport in the linguistic facts. The only clear instance of an opposition correlated with theplace of accent ispcy-te, employed in the sense be cooked or ripen, depending on its accentuation (on the suffix vs. on the root; for references, see Kulikov 2001, 2011, s.v.). This

correlation seems to hold true only for the language of the RV, however (where, incidentally,the root accentuation is attested only once, at RV 1.135.8, against three instances of suffixaccentuation). Note, furthermore, that the semantic opposition be cooked ~ ripen doesnot amount to the passive / nonpassive distinction, but suggests an idiomatic change (lexicalization).

Another instance of semantic motivation may be dhy-te, which occurs with the root accentuation in the RVKh. (burn [by itself]) and with the suffix accentuation in the Vedic prose(TS, MSKS, BK) (be burned [by fire]), but this semantic distinction is too subtle and evidence rather scant. Besides, four of the five occurrences follow the accentual patterning attested for verbs of destruction, the only exception being TS 5.5.2.3 dahymn.

4.4. Semantics of the -y-presents

The middle -ya-presents with fluctuating accentuation represent, in a sense, a bridgebetween -y-passives and nonpassive middle -ya-presents. This small class reveals a remarkable semantic and structural similarity.14

11 The suffix accentuation of lupyte could also be triggered by the adjacent -y-passives appearing in the

same passage.12 This occurrence belongs to the first group of exceptions as well.13 Cf. Pinis stra 6.1.195 aca kart yaki before [the passive suffix] -ya [in verbs with the roots ending] in a

vowel (aC-) [the root optionally bears the accent if the verb is employed] in the reflexive [usage].14 For a discussion of the semantic features of the -y presents, see Kulikov 1998a, 1998b.


19/40


194

The main subclass of the -y-presents can be defined in semantic terms as follows.A good deal of these verbs denote processes of spontaneous destruction: breaking, bursting(in the Brhmaas often said of sacrificial vessels), splitting, as well as destruction in general(disappear, perish, etc.), cf. ky-te perish, disappear; chdy-te break, cut off; dry-te crack,split, burst; bhidya-te break, split; my-te damage, perish; lpy-te damage, tear; ry-te

break, collapse. The definition of another subclass (mcy-te, etc.) poses some problems. Intuitively, the meanings of mucyate becomes free, yate falls, iyate is left over, etc. arerather close to the semantic domain of destruction, but their common denominator is difficultto capture. Yet, one may argue that they all denote a process when an element ceases to be incorporated into a system or structure for instance, some part(s) of an object break off andfall down which, ultimately, results in the destruction of a system. Specifically, mucyate becomes free, is released can be determined as ceases to be bound, included into a bound system; iyate is left over and hyate is abandoned, is left over remains outside a structure;yate falls (out) ceases to be included into a structure through falling out of it. At firstglance,dhyate is successful, fulfilled, goes well does not belong to this semantic type; but itsmeaning changes to the opposite in compounds with the preverb v: is deprived of [a property], loses, i.e. ceases to be connected with some (structural) elements; cf.jyate suffers loss,which is very close. ricyate belongs here both when employed as a simplex (is emptied isdeprived of its content) and with the preverbs ti, pr (surpasses, is redundant goes beyond the scope of a structure; is left over). For this subgroup I propose the tentative labelverbs of destructuring.

In my view, we are able to determine an even more general semantic feature which encompasses the meanings of both destruction and destructuring. All these verbs denotespontaneous fatal processes which result in destroying some natural or artificial system ororganism, and, to put it in general terms, in the entropyincrease.15

In this semantic perspective, instructive is the present y-te

, whose semantics does notamount to falling down. In one of its usages, y-te refers to a particular kind of falling, whichaccompanies natural decay, growing old: falling out of hairs, teeth, etc., i.e. typical instances ofentropy increase. Cf. also JB 1.1 bhasmvayate some borings fall down [from the piece of kindling wood being churned], on which Bodewitz (1973: 21f., note 4) comments that bhasma refers to wooden dust falling of the wood sticks during the churning, a product of erosion [emphasis is mine. L. K.] again, a typical instance of entropy increase.

The verbpfill cannot be included into the class of entropy increase verbs in any of itsusages. Yet, in the compound with the preverb it functions as the counterpart of an entropyincrease verb, k(with the preverb pa): pwax and pakwane denote opposite changes

of the halfmoon.The semantic affinity of the entropy increase verbs is also supported by the fact thatthey often cooccur in texts. To mention a few passages: TB 1.5.10.5, B 1.7.2.22, 2.1.3.1,2.4.4.18, 19, 8.4.1.10, 10.4.2.17 (cooccurrence of pak and p); PB 6.7.15 (avachid, vydh,

j); TS 7.2.1.4, MS 1.6.10, 1.8.7, AV 10.1.32 (muc, h); B 3.1.1.3 ((abhy)tiric, i), TS 3.2.9.5, AB6.2.6 (lup, h).16

The second, smaller, semantic class of -y-presents includes three verbs of heating: tpy-te

heat, suffer, dhy-te burn,pcy-te cook; ripen.

15 For a detailed discussion of this semantic feature, see Kulikov 1998a.16 Cf. Gonda 1959: 204.


20/40


195

4.5. Paradigmatic features

The most remarkable paradigmatic feature shared by the -y-presents of entropy increaseis their opposition to transitivecausative presents with nasal affixes (cf. kyte kiti, kiti,chdyte chintti, lpyte lumpti, etc.). By contrast, the three -y-presents of heating areopposed to class I presents (tpy-te tpati, dhy-te dhati,pcy-te pcati); for details, see

Kulikov 2011, chapter C.III.2.It seems that the paradigmatic similarity of the -y-presents could be an important fea

ture of this verbal class, which supported their semantic affinity and, in some cases, could eventrigger the rise of secondary transitive presents with nasal suffixes for some yapresents of thisclass; cf. such formations as ini, iati.

4.6. Phonological similarity

Some types of phonological structures are particularly common among the -y-presentsof entropy increase, while some others are unattested. Specifically, five stems (one third) show

the structure Cya, four stems belong to the type CiCya-, three stems show the structureC/rya-. By contrast, all the three verbs of heating are derived from CaC roots, uncommonamong verbs of entropy increase. It is of course impossible to posit a strict correlation between phonological structures and semantic classes; however, the phonological similaritycould additionally support the structural affinity of the verbs in question 17 and cause accentshift in some -ya-presents of similar structures, even in spite of different semantics, in particular, in vyante are impregnated TS 6.1.7.1 (vy/v), ymna speeding, driving (y) MSm

2.6.11:70.12, v.l. [three mss.], Bv 14.7.1.14 = BUMv 4.3.14); cf. esp. the parallelism vy/v,y/~jy/j.

4.7. Accent fluctuation of the type mcya-te/mucy-te in a diachronic perspective

The features shared by the -y-presents (semantics, nonpassive syntax, opposition totransitive nasal presents, partial phonological similarity) belong to different layers of the language structure and are essentially independent of each other. This implies that the similarityof -y-presents cannot be mere coincidence, and they form a morphologically relevant verbalclass, rather than a random group. Their semantics (entropy increase, heating) seems to be themain parameter organizing these verbs to a structural class and, eventually, determining theirproperties. For instance, this feature could trigger the emergence of the nasal presents ini,iati (Br. +), built as transitivecausative counterparts of y-te.

The entropy increase semantics could also influence the accentual behaviour of a-ya-present even in the cases where it was registered only with some preverbs; cf. dhy-te besuccessful, which changes its meaning to the opposite (be deprived, lose) in compoundswith v, and therefore follows the accentual pattern of the verbs of entropy increase. The sameexplanation probably holds true for the suffix accentuation of the nonpassive vilipyte (MS)comes unstuck [and falls off] (~ simplex lipya-te stick, smear).

17 Recall the old theory of rimewords and rimeideas (Reimwortbildungen) (Bloomfield 1895; Wood 1907/

1908; Gntert 1914: 30ff. [on chid/bhid]; 65f. [on k/m]). Note, incidentally, that the first of Woods lists of rime

words (op.cit., 142f.), labelled dwindle group, includes all the five aforementioned Cy presents of the entropyincrease: kyate, [jyate] (Wood gives only the nasal present jinti), yate, myate, hyate (though Wood does notmention accent fluctuation).


21/40


196

Furthermore, the parallelism between p wax and pak wane (the latter of whichbelongs to the entropy increase type) has probably triggered changes in accent patterning of-pry-te, in spite of the fact that this present does not show any meaning related to entropyincrease.

On the other hand, some middle -ya-presents with the root accentuation were not groupedwith the -y-presents (and hence did not change their accentuation) if their semantic affinitywith the entropy increase class was not supported by other features. Thus, for instance,pdya-te

fall, albeit similar to y-te in meaning, does not show other features of the yapresents referring to entropy increase (note, in particular, the root structure CaC and the lack of a transitivecausative counterpart with the nasal affix) and does not change topady-te in the dialects ofthe AV, MS and B.18

The intermediate position of -y-presents between -y-passives and nonpassive middle-ya-presents probably results from their peculiar semantics. Judging from their nonpassivemeanings and syntax (see above) as well as from their root accentuation in the gveda, originally these formations probably belonged with the class IV presents. Later on, in some contexts they could be reinterpreted as passives (in accordance with the scenario: breaks is

broken [by smb.]; becomes free is released, or the like) and, due to the increasing productivity of the -y-passives, undergo accent shift in several Vedic dialects in particular, inthe dialects of the AV, MaitryaKhaka and B.19

The great number of exceptions in the Yajurvedic mantras and the root accentuation oftpyamna in the VjasaneyiSahit as against the prevalent suffix accentuation in the atapathaBrhmaa, which belongs to the same Vedic school (White Yajurveda), may point to thefact that the accent shift from the root to the suffix in the corresponding Yajurvedic dialectswas only completed by the period of Vedic prose (Brhmaas properly speaking).

5. Concluding diachronic remarkson the accentual history of Vedic -ya-presents

5.1. The original accentuation of (middle) -ya-presents

It is commonplace in Vedic studies to assume that all -ya-presents, irrespectively of accentuation and diathesis (i.e. both -y-passives and class IV presents), go back to onesource,20 and the correlation between accentuation and the passive/nonpassive distinction is

18 Not counting three occurrences with suffix accentuation in the late B (books 11 and 14).19 Our knowledge of the Vedic dialectology is still rather poor (for a systematic treatment of the issue, see

Witzel 1989), and we are thus far unable to draw any decisive conclusions on the localisation of the dialects inwhich this accent shift was operative. Nevertheless, relying upon Witzels preliminary outline, one might tentatively assume that one of the centres of this process was the Kuru region (KS, early B), whereas the dialect(s) of thePacala (where the TS can be tentatively located) were more conservative and have preserved root accentuation.

20 I will not discuss here at length the highly controversial issue of the origin of the present suffix -ya-. Sufficeit to mention that the morpheme -ya must be historically identical in the middle class IV presents (with root accentuation) and -y-passives, while some of the active -ya-presents may go back to a different (denominative?)source. For a survey of possible sources of the present suffix -ya (resp. PIE *-e/o-), see, in particular, Lubotsky 1985(who demonstrates that the PIE source of Ved. u, i.e. *H2sus, must be an adjective, not a verbal root); Barton 1986:

143, fn. 27 (many of the *e/ointransitives are doubtless denominal in origin); Rasmussen 1993: 480ff.; and Kortlandts (1981: 127f.), who advocates the genetic relationship between Vedic -iaorists, -yacausatives and-y-passives: the former may go back to a deverbative noun of the type * kwori [> Ved. ()kri. L. K.], which could


22/40


197

an IndoAryan innovation. See, for instance, F. M. Mller 1864: 582; Delbrck 1874: 168;J. Schmidt 1875: 256f.; Hillebrandt 1880: 342f. [= Kl.Schr., 606f.]; Speer 1896: 49, 168; Brugmann 1902: 527f.; 1916 [Grundr.2]: 185; Reichelt 1902: 80; M. Leumann 1940: 231ff. [= Kl.Schr.,321ff.]; Gonda 1951: 721 et passim; 1971: 90f.; Thumb/Hauschild 1959: 333ff.; Strunk 1967: 78.This assumption, based, above all, on the intransitivity of the majority of -ya-presents, immediately raises the question on the original place of accent: did they bear accent on the suffix or on the root? Evidence is controversial: the zero grade of the root may betray the original suffix accentuation, while the increasing productivity of -y-passives and the archaicnonproductive character of many class IV presents rather point to the root accentuation.Most scholars considered the root accentuation in the class IV presents secondary as againstthe suffix accentuation in -y-passives; see already Benfey 1865: 1783 [= Kl.Schr. II, 141]; 1866:196; Saussure 1877; Froehde 1881: 172; Diels 1913: 4.22 Very plausible is Kuryowiczs (1952:114f.) assumption that accent retraction to the root in class IV presents was due to the influence of class I presents with phonologically regular full grade root, thus: *asy sya-,*pay pya-, etc. on the model of *gachti gchati, where a < * has been reanalysed asfull grade (Saussure 1879: 174 [= Rec., 163]);23 cf. also Gonda 1951: 92 (the accentual differentiation of the -yaverbs was attended by a partial leaning towards other thematic rootaccented presents); 1971: 91.

On the other hand, Delbrck (1897: 435f.) argued for the opposite development ( -ya -y-); cf. also Kmmel in LIV 637, note 2 [ad got.aursjan* drsten] s.v. *ters-.24 No doubt, thesystem of -ya-presents was subject to a number of analogical accent shifts of both kinds (-ya -y-), even within the historical period; see Section 4 on -ya-presents with fluctuating accentuation and Kulikov 2011 on the supposedly passive origin of -igya-te (-gya-te) move, stirand rya-te move.

The difference in accentuation between (middle) class IV presents and -y-passives is

clearly secondary. We can only speculate why the passive subclass has generalized the suffixaccentuation (which probably was original), while nonpassives have retracted accent to theroot. This accent shift may have started in a few old nonpassive -ya-presents, in which zeroand full grade could not be distinguished (cf. mnyate), or where the full grade was introducedinstead of the phonetically impossible zero grade (as inpadyate **pdyte) or in order to avoidmorphological opacity (nahyati/-te **ahyti/-te < *hti/tai (?) or asyati/te *sti/tai).25 Theroot accentuation could be introduced for such presents in accordance with Saussures rule(reformulated by Kuryowicz for -ya-presents, see above) and subsequently generalized for allnonpassives.

5.2. The genesis of accentuation of -ya-presents: a possible scenario

A possible relative chronology of accent shifts in the Vedic middle -ya-presents can besummarized as follows:itself be used predicatively, whereas causatives and -y-passives are supposed to be derivatives from this noun.For a comprehensive survey of existing hypotheses, see also Kulikov 2011.

21 everybody knows the intimate connection between the -y class and the 4th presentclass.22 Saussure (1879: 234 [= Rec., 219], with fn. 1) even assumed that the active -ya-present rayti (with the ir

regular suffix accentuation) might be a trace of the original accent placement in this present type.23 Essentially the same hypothesis was already proposed by Froehde (1881: 172), albeit in a less explicit form.24 Offenbar *tse mit verschobenem Akzent wie im Ved. (oder deutet dieser Fall auf grundsprachliches

Alter des Wurzelakzents bei primrenePrsentien?).25 Cf. LIV 227, note 2 s.v. *Hnedh and LIV 242f., note 4 s.v. *h1es .


23/40


198

Proto-Indo-Aryan

I. Accent retraction -te

in nonpassive -ya-presents.

Accentual differentiation

of -y-passives and (middle)

nonpassive -ya-presents -te a-te(e.g. hanyte is killed) (e.g. mnyate thinks)

II. Accent shift

in the type mriyte:*Ca Criy -te Criy-te a-te

(hanyte) (mriyte) (mnyate)

Old Indo-Aryan (Vedic) dialects

III. Accent shift in some

(middle) nonpassive

-ya-presents (in the dialects -te Criy-te -te a-te

of the AV, MSKS and B) (hanyte) (mriyte) (mucyte AV, MS) (mnyate)

Alexei KassianInstitute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow)

Some considerations on Vedic yapresents

The paper by L. Kulikov consists of two parts: 1) detailed discussion upon the peculiarities of some specific Vedic verbal stems, and 2) reconstruction of theyapresent pattern for ProtoIndoAryan. Below I willtouch upon the second comparative portion ofthe paper (5).

Kulikov discusses two functions of the Vedic yasuffix: medial present tense of the 4th class with nonpassive intransitive function, i.e. the yate pattern(however, the frequent active yati pattern is excluded from the analysis) and the regular passiveforms of the yte pattern. The author concludes thatthe original ProtoIndoAryan pattern of the middlevoice was *yte, which later split into two accentualand semantic types.1

1Kulikov labels this protolevel as ProtoIndoAryan, but,in fact, some OPers. and Avest. evidence may prove that the

The only explication of such a split proposed byKulikov is J.*Kuryowiczs idea that nonpassive mid

grammaticalization of theya-suffix as an exponent of the passivevoice goes back to the ProtoIndoIranian level. On the contrary,

if we reject OPers. and Avest. data, an accurate term should be

ProtoVedic, not ProtoIndoAryan in general. On the other

hand, the Dardic language Shina shows the same grammatical

ized passive voice in -izh- (= ij-), Bailey 1924: 29, Schmidt & Ko

histani 2008: 145 ff., 194 f. This fact should prove the ProtoIndo

Aryan antiquity of such a grammaticalization, if Shina -izh- does

indeed contain *-ya- (as is suspected by V. A. Dybo, see his reply

below, although I would rather suppose that Shina -izh- reflects

an innovative formation in Dardic). Below, for the sake of con

venience, I will use Kulikovs term ProtoIndoAryan in re

gard to the grammaticalized passive voice in -ya-.

*

In any case, it is important that such a grammaticalization isan inner IndoAryan (or IndoIranian) innovation. E.g., in the

BaltoSlavic group (the closest linguistic relative of IndoIranian)

-praesentia normally seem to be associated with transitive or


24/40

Alexei KASSIAN. Some considerations on Vedic yapresents

199

dle verbs of the shape *yte changed into yate under the influence of the verbs of the 1st class (a repetition of Saussures rule, which explains the shift6th class > 1st class for roots with the synchronic vowela). It is not clear, however, why this accent retractionaffected nonaroots (like bdhyate (a)wakes) and

why aforms with the passive semantics (like hanyteis killed) retained their suffixal accent.Strictly speaking, Kuryowiczs theory implies a

rather complicated scenario, whose additional iterations have been omitted by Kulikov in his schema:

1)at the first stage all aforms acquire root accent,regardless of their passive or nonpassive meaning; i.e. *hanyte > *hnyate, but nonaformslike *budhyte remain untouched.

2)the passive voice then starts to grammaticalize,during which process, for some (e.g., statistical)

reasons, the *yte

pattern is chosen for the passive meaning. That is, the system ofyaverbs becomes rebuilt again: *hnyate > hanyte is killed and *budhyte > bdhyate (a)wakes.

On the other hand, if one feels obliged to reduce, byany means, the ProtoIndoAryan yaverbs to a singleaccentual pattern, an alternative solution with *yaas a starting point could be more likely.

1)Passive yastems are a productive and semantically transparent group of verbal forms with an

innovative semantics (the passive voice is not reconstructed for IE), therefore, it is natural thatthe new marked pattern (namely, yte) was introduced specifically for these forms rather thanfor the heterogenous and semantically variousgroup of nonpassiveyaverbs.

2)As is shown by Kulikov himself (4), the shiftfrom the ya pattern to the yte one for nonpassive forms is attested in available Vedic data(if one assumes that the RV dialect is more archaicthan the AV one). In the light of this, *yate as a

starting point is a more economic scenario than*yte.3)Another IndoAryan branch, represented by the

modern Shina language, normally demonstratesroot accent in *yaforms see the reply by V. A.Dybo below.

In actual fact, however, attempts to reduce theProtoIndoAryan yaverbs to a single accentual pat

agentive intransitive verbs. Thus, as per 2006, in Mod

ern Lithuanian ca. 65% of verbs with the present and past tensesin - are transitive and ca. 30% agentive intransitive; in their

turn, ca. 80% of transitive verbs and ca. 90% of agentive intransi

tive verbs form the present and past tenses with -.

tern seem unsupported by any positive evidence. It iswell known that, in regard to their accent, the verbalsystems of Ancient Greek and Old Indian are almosttotally levelled. This means that normally the place ofaccent of any verbal form is predictable from itsgrammatical features. On the contrary, BaltoSlavic

languages demonstrate the opposition of two accentual paradigms (immobile and mobile) in almostall verbal types.2 In such a case the standard comparative approach is to consider the BaltoSlavic situationto be more archaic and Ancient Greek and Old Indiansystems to be the results of various secondary processes. It is therefore possible that the Vedic yapresence is a unique case where relics of an old accentualopposition within the OInd. verbal system can betraced.

Unfortunately, less than half of the OInd. yaverbs

with the accentual fluctuation listed in 4 possess reliable BaltoSlavic cognates, and only in a couple ofcases the BaltoSlavic data are sufficient for accent reconstruction. Out of them one root possesses thedominant valency:

1)OInd. tpyte heats; suffers ~ Slav. *topiti towarm (trans.), a.p. b2 (: 113 and V. A. Dubo,pers. com.)3.

On the contrary, one root is clearly recessive:2)OInd. dryte cracks, is split ~ Slav. *drati, *dr

to tear, a.p. c ( 1982: 215; : 62).

The following cases are unclear:3)OInd. dhyte burns ~ Balt. *dega to burn

(trans., intr.), Slav. *eg, *eet (also *gati,*g) to burn (trans.). The Baltic morphological type does not permit to establish the originalvalency of the root. In Slavic languages thematicverbs with the obstruent final also underwent aheavy accentual unification, but S. L. Nikolaevsupposes that some new data may speak in favor

of the original accentual paradigm c ( 1: 50).2Particularly it concerns the Slavic -praesentia, for which

three accentual paradigms (a, b and c) are reconstructable in the

case of roots with the nonobstruent final (: 6263); but the

mobile accentual paradigm was indeed eliminated in verbs with

the obstruent final, where only a.p. a and b are reconstructable

(: 64). On the contrary, V. A. Dybo (see his reply below)

supposes that Slavic present stems of the a.p. c such as *u-- to

chew, *ku-- to hammer etc. (: 63) are secondary forma

tions based on the more archaic forms *ov-, *kov- etc. If it is

really so (I am not sure, however), the Slavic present suffix

o-/-e- can be assuredly reconstructed as a dominant morpheme.

3A.p. c in Old Russian ( 1985: 140), where the olda.p. b2 & c fell together.


25/40


200

In my opinion, however, the Slavic data is alsounrepresentative in such a case.

4)OInd. pryte becomes full ~ Balt. *pilna full(Lith. plnas [secondary 3], Lett. pins), Slav.*pln, accentual paradigm a full. The BaltoSlavic stem *pin is indeed dominant, but ac

centual characteristics of the suffix n can hardlybe established, and, therefore, the valency of theroot remains unknown.

5)OInd. mcyte becomes free ~ Balt. *maka(trans.), *smaka (trans.), *munka (intr.) (verb

of motion), Slav. *mknti, *mati, *mykati (verbof motion). Both Baltic and Slavic morphologicaltypes do not permit to establish the original valency of the root.

6)OInd. rcyte is emptied ~ Balt. *lik ~ *lika toleave. The Baltic morphological type does not

permit to establish the original valency of theroot.

Thus, the available material is too scant for farreaching conclusions.

. . ()

.. -ya

. . -ya . ?

. , . , -ya IV , , -ya () . ,

, , . :

. , (Wheeler 1885)., , . ,

, & 1978.

1:

1. .. ankh m., n. Muschel ~ . m., f. ; KEWA III, 290291; Frisk I, 889890;

2. .. yen m. Raubvogel, Adler, Falke,Habicht ~ . KEWA III, 385; Frisk I, 719;

3. .. ak m. Biegung, Haken ~ . m. Widerhaken des Pfeils, Klampe, KEWA I, 19; Frisk II,347;

4. .. ntrm n. Eingeweide ~ . n. , pl. ; .

*nr pl. n. [> .. innr,ir pl. n. ]; . *tr > *tr KEWA I, 74, 36, 35;Frisk I, 524525; Barber 1932: 46; . 1963: 122;

5. .. kumbh m. Topf, Krug ~ . m. Hohlgef, Schale, f. KEWA I, 234; Frisk II, 48;

6. .. cakr m., cakrm n. Wagenrad~ . m. , , pl. ;

1 . . .

1: 70 .

.


26/40

. . . .. ya

201

. *ula < *kklo (.. hjl, .. hwol), . hjul [ju:l] KEWA I,366; Frisk II, 4445;

7. .. udr m. ein Wassertier ~ . m. , f. ; . dra(1) , . *vdr (.. a) : .

,. , . , . , .; . . dras, nom. pl. dra (3) (Ti, II, 474), . drs dris KEWA I, 104; Frisk II, 957;

8. .. kandar m., -m n., -, - f. Hhle,Schlucht~ . , (Hes.) , ; KEWAI, 152;

9. ..gandharv m. Name eines mythischenWesens ~ . m. ( , ,

) KEWA I, 321; Frisk I,819820;10... arabh m. eine HirschArt ~ .

(Hes.) Fuchs KEWA III,305; Frisk I, 857;

11... kapan f. Raupe ~ . f.Kohlraupe, Seidenraupe (< *kpen, KEWA I,154) KEWA I, 154; Frisk I, 774;

12... stup m. Schopf, Haarschopf ~ . f. Werg, grober Flachs, = ( Gal.) KEWA

III, 516; Frisk II, 814;13... darbh m. Grasbschel, Buschgras ~. , (Hes.) Korb( *, Gntert1927: 347) KEWA II, 23; Frisk I, 350;

14... jy, ji f. Gewalt, Macht ~ . , f. Kraft, Gewalt KEWA I, 448; Frisk I,235;

15... dhk m. Behlter ~ . f.Behltnis, Kasten, Grab KEWA II, 96; Frisk I,670;

16... divy, diviy adj. gttlich, himmlisch ~ . adj. zum Himmel gehrig,gttlich KEWA II, 43; Frisk I, 396397;

17... saptam adj. ~ . adj. der siebente KEWA III, 431;Frisk I, 435;

18... katar welcher von zweien ~ ., . welcher od. wer vonbeiden?; . *aaraz ~ *earaz (< *araz~ *araz)adj. pron. (. aar wer von beiden; .. hwer, hweer; .. hwear,

... hwedar wer von beiden?); .*ktor > *kotr KEWA I, 148; Frisk II, 586;Orel 2003: 199; Feist 1939: 283; 2: 679680.

: .. dhm m. Rauch~. m., n. Thymian ( . m. Geist, Mut,Zorn, Sinn) KEWA II, 109; Frisk I, 693. .

, , , . fmus m. Rauch, Dampf, Qualm,Brodem .

[ .] , , -i -u, ,

, , .

. . , I () , , , I (), . 1: 53 . ,

, , , . . . . nomina activa nomina passiva, , , ( , ):

( + )

I I oxytona barytona

I II barytona barytona

II I barytona barytona

II II oxytona oxytona

: ,

I ., , .


27/40


202

( . Lubotsky 1988 1991. . ,, .)

,

II , ( 1: 69). . . , , ,, , : 1) . *ula < *kklo ( . m., pl. , .. cakr m., n. ), 2) . *nr pl. n. ( .

, pl. , .. ntr n. entrail, , RV, antr n.), 3) .*araz ~ *araz ( . , . welcher od. wer von beiden?, .. katarwelcher von zweien).

(Shina, i) . , , , . ( )

(Bailey1924). 1972 ( 1972). , , , ,

, , . , ( , 2).

2 ,

, . ,

,

( [ .]).

( ) [Bailey1924] 90 , , 50 , . [Bailey 1924] . , , , , ,

, , . , , . 7 , , .

, , , . , , 3.

1. Sh. (jij.) i entrail~ .. ntr n. entrail,, RV, antr n. Sur. (... ntara der innere, nhere) .

. , pl. ;. *nr pl. n. [> .. innr, ir pl. n.]; . *tr > *tr [. jtra, . . () jtra pl. n. ; . jtra] Turner I, 53 (1182);KEWA I, 36, 35; Pok. 313;

2. Sh. Gil. crk, gen.sg. crki, pl. crk, gen. crkom. , ,

. ,

( . . ).

3 [ .];

.


28/40

. . . .. ya

203

[crkio, m., spinningwheel, wheel, machine for sharpening sword]~.. cakr m., n. . . m., pl. , ; (pl. ); , ,; , . *ula < *kklo (.

. hjl, .. hwol), . hjul [ju:l] , . kklas (4 .. .., . 1963: 50;, kkl 1755 ., , 2 ..) Bailey 1924: 135a; Turner I, 246 (4538);KEWA I, 336;

3. Sh. Gil. , pl. m. [, m., otter] ~ .. udr m. ( ) (. ..

udn, loc. udni, gen. udn Wasser ~ ., loc.sg. , gen.sg. Wasser) . . m. , f. , . dra (1) , .*vdr (.. a) : . ,. ,. , . , . ; .. dras, nom. pl. dra (3) (Ti, II,474), . drs dris Bailey 1924:168; Turner I, 96 (2056); KEWA I, 104, Frisk II,957959;

4. Sh. Gil. , gen.sg. i, pl. , gen. o adj.; n.,m. , , ; , , [io, adj. n.m., cloud,rain, wet, damp], [Radl. II, 59: e rains]; pales.u ~ .. abhr n. ( m.) cloud, rainyweather RV . . m. Regen,Regengu, Gewitterregen; Regenwasser; dasNa < *mbhros (. . imber, -bris m. Regen,Regengu, Platzregen) Bailey 1924: 130b;Turner I, 25 (549); KEWA I, 43; Frisk II, 384385; WH I, 680681;

5. Sh. Gil. k, gen. ki m. , , [kgen. -i, m., wood] ~ .. khm( kham KEWA) . . (< *kalstom, ., < *, ) Bailey1924: 146b; Turner I, 159 (3120); KEWA I, 205;

6. Sh. Gil. p, pl. p m. , [p, m., back]~ ..phm n. ,, , . .pitas , (2 .., , n., . 1963: 52), .

*prst (.. d b, . 1963:128) Bailey 1924: 158; Turner I, 474 (8371);KEWA II, 338; Fraenkel I, 598;

7. Sh. Gil. gri, pl.gryf. [griy, f., rock( is long)]~ .. gir m. , . . ar m. (barytonum, *r),. *gora (.. b): .., . . hra,.gra, .giri (2) , .gr (2)

Bailey 1924: 141a; Turner I, 223 (4161); KEWA I,335; Fraenkel I, 153;8. Sh. Gil. jip, gen.sg. jbi, pl. jb, gen. jbo f.

[jip -bbibo, f., tongue (not used forlanguage)]~ .. jihv f. (. ..juh f. Zunge) . . baf. (< *zba < *zba < *hzb < *hzv, , ) Bailey 1924:145; Turner I, 288 (5228); KEWA I, 436437,442;

9.

Sh. Gil. bi, pl. by f. [bi -y, f.,sleeve] ~ .. bh m. (f. lex.) arm RV,bh f. U. . m. ,; . . wz f. (, 2,134 .), (), , Bailey 1924:133b; Turner I, 521 (9229); KEWA II, 429;

10.Sh. Gil. yr, gen. yri, pl. yre, gen. yro f. (), [yor (nasal vowel) yr-e -io f., large watermill], [Buddr. 1996: yr f.

Wassermhle]; . Dm. n , ~ . ..yantr n. [yam-] controlling device RV, anyimplement or contrivance MBh., yantraka n.handmill Hcat.; . 1: 5960 (3 ); (2000: 264, 514) Bailey 1924: 169a; Turner I, 602(10412); KEWA III, 7; EWA II, 398;

11.Sh. Gil. bi f. [bi, f., fineweather], [Sh. (Lor.) bii f. clear sky, jij. bi] ~.. vdhr n. clear sky, sunshine AV.;vdhrya relating to the clear sky VS., dhrya TS 4, 5, 7, 2; *vdhrisya-; *vaidhriya-. vi + dhr . , - f., m. (reine) Luft, (klarer)Himmel , . anznden :.. inddh entzndet, entflammt, dham. Brennholz = . m. Brand.

, Sh. jij. bi .. vdhr-, Sh. Gil. bi


29/40


204

*vaidhrya Bailey 1924: 133a; Turner I,697 (12051); KEWA III, 237 I, 88, 95, 128, 557;EWA I, 205; II, 568569; Frisk I, 3738;

12.Sh. Gil. crk, gen.sg. crki n., m. [crk, adj., sour, acid (1

st

rather narrow): asn., c., or tI c. masc., yeast : crki, leavened],[Turner: rk m. yeast] ~ .. cukrsour, sharp to the taste; m. a sour fruit drink(esp. of tamarind), vinegar Sur.; name ofvarious sharptasting plants, e.g. sorrel< *quqr (KEWA .. kucti zieht sich zusammen, krmmtsich) Bailey 1924: 136b; Turner I, 264 (4850);KEWA I, 393, 219220;

13.Sh. Gil. bgbr, pl. bgbrem. [bgbe, m., leopard] ~ .. vyghr m. tiger AV.; . vaggha m. tiger. : (vi-)ghr = . blagelb. , Wackernagel (Unt.234f.), . . m. Blsse, ( 35) * n., *-ro Bailey 1924:130b; Turner I, 706 (12193); KEWA III, 274; EWAII, 593; Frisk II, 11531154;

14.Sh. Gil. nr, pl. nrem. [nr - -e, m.,nail (finger or toe)], [Buddr. 1996: noro m.Fingernagel. Pl. norye th. sich die Ngelschneiden] ~ . .. nakhar shapedlike a claw B, m., n. claw Pacat., nailscratch Cat. .. nakhar ( ) nakh m., n. nail (of finger or toe), claw RV. *-ra- Bailey 1924:155a; Turner I, 397 (6920); KEWA II, 124; EWAII, 4; Frisk II, 398399; WH II, 818819;Fraenkel I, 478479; Pok. 780;

15.Sh. Gil. sr, pl. sr m. [sr -, m., pig]~ .. skar m. boar, , RV. skarf. sow Yj. *sk *-ra-. . *su < *sx f. sow (.. suguf. Sau; .. suga; ... soge Sau,. zeug) Bailey 1924: 164; Turner I, 780(13544); KEWA III, 490; EWA II, 738739; Orel2003: 385; Holthausen 1934: 329; Franck & vanWijk: 818; Pok.: 1038.

16.Sh. Gil. h, pl. hy f. [hy, f.,udder] ~ . .. krn yielding milk;. khri-, f. i-.

*-in kr n. . . : ..r Milch, . r , ., . r; . xsyr / xsir , .xro, . xr m. ; , (

), xra m.milk (Mrst. II, 270); .apaxr ., . xvd m. Milch (-v-, , xvipta-), *kra , , *-ra-. . . *xay , . xayeti herrscht, besitzt

= .. kyati herrscht, besitzt; : .xata Adj., f. xin licht, strahlend, glnzend, herrlich Bailey 1924: 136a; Turner I, 192(3704); KEWA I, 290, 287; EWA I, 433, 438; IV 241242, 233234, 235;

17.Sh. Gil. yp, gen.sg. ybi f. ( ) [yp, gen. ybi, f., watercoursefor irrigation] ~ .. yavy f. streamNaigh. (in yavyvat Name eines Flusses RV.6,27,6, PB 25, 7,2). KEWA (III)

*yusich bewegen -y-, . , , ( 2..) Bailey1924: 168b; Turner I, 604 (10442); KEWA III, 11,19; EWA II, 405; Pok. 507, 508, 511;

18.Sh. Gil. b, bh, gen.sg. bi, pl. bi, gen.bo m. () [b(h)-iio, m., chenar tree], [Turner: Sh. Gil. bh,b m. planetree] ~ .. vk m. tree

RV.; mlvaccha m. an ornamental shrubor tree. vla m.Schling, Trieb, Zweig RV. . vk -sa- Bailey 1924: 133b; Turner I, 698 (12067);KEWA III, 242; EWA II, 572, 526527;

19.Sh. Gil. p, gen.sg. pi m. , [p-, gen. -i, m., half a month],

[Turn.: fortnight] ~ . .. pak m.wing, feather, fin, shoulder, side RV, side of abuilding AV., party, troop MBh.; pkas n.


30/40

. . . .. ya

205

side RV, side of door VS., pakaka m. sidei., fan Gal. , < *pagsa : . pax :.paksis Hausecke, .pag (.pae, .. podpaa), . *poxy f. (. , pl., ; . pl. ; . pl.; .

pochva, pochvy pl.; . pochwa). . , . Bailey 1924: 155b; Turner I, 429 (7627); KEWA II,184; EWA II, 62;

20.Sh. Gil.j, gen.sg.ji f. [j, gen. -i, f., ringworm] ( < *dradr < dadru-)~ .. dadr m. cutaneous eruption Sur., r P. vrtt., dard-,dardr U. com.; daddu n. a skin disease;

. daddu m. ringworm ( .-. *der()-;KEWA .. dti birst, machtbersten, sprengt, zerreit) Bailey 1924: 144b;Turner I, 351 (6142); KEWA II, 14, 59; EWA I,701703;

21.Sh. Gil. nr, gen.sg. nri f. [nir (i veryshort), gen. nri, f., sleep] ~ . ..nidr f. sleep RV. .. drti schlft.

, Bailey1924: 155a; Turner I, 411 (7200); KEWA II, 76;EWA I, 757758;

22.Sh. Gil. do, pl. dm. , [do, m., handle (of polo stick, golf club, axe,carpenters tools] ~ .. da m. stick,club RV, handle AB, control ManuSm.,punishment PB., stalk, stem MBh.; daa stem of tree, stick, handle, punishment;. daa-, a m. stick, &c.; , < *dandr .

n. Baum, , , . , . Bailey 1924: 138b;Turner I, 350 (6128); KEWA II, 1112; EWA I,691692; Frisk I, 365366;

23.Sh. Gil. dut, gen.sg. dti m. [dut gen.-i, m., milk] ~ . .. dugdh n. milkAV. [duh-]; , . duddha n.; part. praet. pass. dgdhi

melkt, melkt heraus, ziet heraus ( ) Bailey 1924:139a; Turner I, 365 (6391); KEWA II, 66; EWA I,747748;

24.Sh. Gil. dn, pl. dne m. [dne, m.,bull], [Buddruss 1996: donei gen.sg. des Och

sen] ~ .. dnt tamed TB, m. tamedox Rjat.; part. praet. pass. dmyati ist zahm; bndigt, bezwingt;. bndige, bewltige ( ) Bailey1924: 138b; Turner I, 359 (6273); KEWA II, 3334, 35; EWA I, 698;

25.Sh. Gil. n m. pl. [n dok, dance(n is m. pl.)] ~ . .. ntt n.dancing AV. [nt-]; part. praet.pass. ntyati tanzt (

) Bailey 1924:154b; Turner I, 427 (7580); KEWA II, 177178;EWA II, 2122;

26.Sh. Gil.gon m. , [gon, m., smell]~ .. gandh m. , , . , .. dhmgandhi nach Rauchriechend RV, sugndhi wohlriechend : ..gaiti f. bler Geruch,dugaiti belriechend, stinkend, .gndgstinkend, .. .. gand Ges

tank. .. -dh Bailey 1924: 141; Turner I, 214215 (4014);KEWA I, 322; EWA I, 461462;

27.Sh. Gil. phll, gen.sg. phllyi, pl. phllye, gen.phllyo f. [phll -ye -yi -yo, f., ant]~ . .. pipl m. ant RV, laka mlarge black ant ChUp., piplik f. small redant AV.,plaka m. ant lex.; *piphla-, *pippla-,*pipphla-, *pippa-, *pilla-. Bailey 1924: 157b;

Turner I, 463 (8201); KEWA II, 284285; EWAII, 132133;28.Sh. Gil. bn, pl. bni m.

, , [bn -i, m., joint in body, infinger or toe (but not phalanx itself), in bamboo, sugarcane, etc.] ~ . .. bandhm. bond RV, damming MrkP., custodyMn., deposit, pledge Rjat. badhnti bindet, . baitti wird gebunden, bindet sich (< *badyati, Konow 1941:

55), , , I () .


31/40


206

() Bailey 1924: 131a;Turner I, 515 (9136); KEWA II, 407, 406; EWA II,208; Pok. 127;

29.Sh. Gil. m, pl. mf. [m -, f.,lentils] ~ .. mudg m. the bean Phaseo

lus mungo VS.; , . mugga m. Phaseolus mungo; La. mug. ..mudg < *muzg-, .. mudgara m. Hammer . moditi zerschlagen (:. , , (); . , - , (). . *mozg.. d [ 1: 230233] Bailey 1924: 153b;

Turner I, 588 (10198); KEWA II, 653; EWA II,361;30.Sh. Gil. bk, gen.sg. bki, pl. bk, gen. bko m.

[bkio, m., branch] ~ ..valk m. bark of a tree, TS.; .vakka n. skin, bark. . *volknon. (.. b) Bailey 1924: 131a; Turner I, 666(11417); KEWA III, 164; EWA II, 525526;

31.Sh. Gil. b m. , ; [b, m., poison], [Turn.: Sh. bi m. poison, aconite] ~ .. vi n. poison RV, ein Aconitum ; ,

. visa n. (. m.); . vi n.Gift, Giftsaft, va n. Gift (Bartholomae 1961:1472); . m. ; ; . vrus, - n.zhe Flssigkeit, Schleim, Saft; bes. Gift; Schrfe, Bitterkeit; . vx (. , . .. ; . .[winia] wesz, . . [svinsk] ve; ). . .. vis n. aconite, poison;

. vi n. Gift, Giftsaft; . vx . , , Sh. Gil. b m. , ; , . .. vis ( ), Bailey1924: 133a; Turner I, 692693 (11968); KEWAIII, 227228; EWA II, 563564; WH II, 800;

& 2002: 517539;32.Sh. Gil. k, pl. km. (.) [k -,m., kidney] ~ .. vkk m. du. kidneys

AV., vkya TS., vkk f. heart lex.; *vrakka-,bukka n. heart; vakka n. kidney; .wk, uwk Bailey 1924: 169b; Turner I, 698(12064); KEWA III, 241242; EWA II, 571572.

, ,

, . XIII [ 2003] , , , ; , ,

, . , , () , , , .

, ,

, , (. 1974).

. :

, , . . ., , ,

; ,


32/40

. . . .. ya

207

, ( ) . (

.. a .. b), ( ) ( ; ).

: ( ), , , , .

? *-k (. [ 1981:259; 2009: 5859], , , -k , ( , ) :

, . , . *fraz *kljuj .. b (. . kliuti ; .kat , ; . , .

; . clvus , clvis ); .lj, gen.sg. *lja > *luj .. b (. .. rok; . *lauaz < *lauxs m. flame, 4);. mj, gen.sg. mja > mj. (. . mnkyti, ; . mkt ).

, . -ya (< *-o/e-) 5. , ,

-ya-, , . . . . , , , [ 2003: 150153].

, , . , -ya .

. . . 4 . nomina activa:

*lauaz < *lauxs m. flame (.. leygr flame, fire; ..

li flame, lightning, .. loga flame, fire; ... loug

id.) nomina passiva: *lauxaz < *luxas m. open space, meadow

(.. l clearing (in the woods), meadow; .. lah

meadow, open space; ... lo bush, ... lh

grove, bush; . . . *lakas (2) [

1963: 3435])5 . : 64, .

(: 6263) -

(, ), (, , ), . 2000: 227

303, 377396.


33/40


208

:The passive is formed by adding -izh to the root ofthe active and conjugating like a verb of the 2nd conj.(Bailey 1924: 29). , , (

) (. . -izh-). -izh, , -ya-.

-ya

a) ( IV ):

1. Sh. Gil. blzhi [bliizhk zhi d IImelt (intr.)] (Radl. II, 61: bilajam I will melt)~ .. vlyate vilyate AV. lst sich auf

( KEWA III, 102 sub v. linti, , .-. *li-. EWA II, 474475 sub LAY sich schmiegen, anhaften, , .-. *leiH-. . : .. ryate ( . . : I, 853 nu ryateghtm ( ()); I, 302 nimn n ryate ,

(), ; X 538: manvat ryate (); X 409: ryante sndhavo , ( ,)); vi -ya . Turner I, 688 .. *viryate is melted(11862), , , , . viri intr.melts; M.(arah) vir intr. to melt; Si.(nhalese) virenav, viryannav to become liquid,melt . . (Got 1987: 279)

-laya -lya-, , , AV. . LIV, l-, . (Hes.) . *linnanan ; ( , R. Lhr nn < *-n -nn < *-nH-, , ,

). , .

Kulikov 2001, 2011 ( ..), L: 1 , ( vi pra: vlyate, prlyate), 2 , ,

. vi r l:. viri intr. melts; M.(arah) vir intr.to melt; Si.(nhalese) virenav, viryannav tobecome liquid, melt ., . Turner I, 688(11862, sub *viryatis melted). R(ryate) ( . . , ,

LIV: 305, ), , : RV , ; . . ( i .); *l *r Bailey 1924: 133a; Turner I, 690 (11906);KEWA III, 102; EWA II, 474475; Dybo 2002:

371372, . LIV: 406; Got 1987: 279; Kulikov2001; 2011;2. Sh. Gil. dzhi ( . .) [dazhk

dzh dd, II, v. intr., burn (wood, etc.)] ~ .. dhyate RVKh.to be burnt. . .. dahyte Bailey 1924: 138a; Turner I, 362 (6325Sh. ); Kulikov 2001; 2011;

3. Sh. Gil. dzhi [dzhk dzham dts( in dts is long), II, fall] ~ .. dyati Bailey 1924: 138b; Turner I, 364 (6364);

Werba 1997: 295;4. Sh. Gil. nshi [nashk nshamnas, II, be lost] ~ .. nyati ,, Bailey 1924: 154b; Turner I,403 (7027);

5. Sh. Gil.przhe , [przhk- zham - ds, II, hear, understand] (Radl. II,61: parjam I will hear) ~ .. *paribudhyate, . : .. bdhyate , Bailey 1924: 156a; Turner I, 443

(7848);6. Sh. Gil. pshi , [pashk psham pash gas, II 1 ac., see] ~ .. pyati


34/40

. . . .. ya

209

sees RV. [pa-] Bailey 1924: 156b; Turner I,452 (8012);

7. Sh. Gil. mi [omk -om -ls,be tired], [Bailey 1924: 46: mam, omk, get tired,

] ~ .. rmyati , Bailey 1924: 163a; Turner I, 736 (12693);8. Sh. Gil. shshi [shushk shshi

shk, II, bekome dry], ~ .. yati Bailey 1924: 162a; Turner I, 728 (12559).

b) ( ):

1. Sh. Gil. avzhe , [avzhkzhid or -zhlu, be proper or necessaryor advisable, necessary, ought: II]; avzhok to

be proper or necessary or advisable ~ ..badhyate, , padyate < *bdhyate; . :.. badhyte ; Bailey 1924:130a; Turner I, 55 (1221);

2. Sh. Gil. bzhi ; [bzhk -bzhibd, II, freeze (used with gmk, ice: g. bd,it became ice] bzhk (of water) to freeze ~.. badhyte is bound, (. bajjhati , , .bajjha); Bailey 1924: 132b; Turner I, 515

(9134);3. Sh. Gil. bzhi , ( , ), ;[bizhkzhils ( long), -ds, II, sink,set (of sun, moon, stars) also sink in water, etc.;bk to make sink [bk, I, cause to sink(in water, etc.)] ~ .. *buyate (causat.*boayati, . lex. bolayati); . buasinks, bua sunk Bailey 1924: 134a; Turner I, 524 (9272);

4. Sh. Gil. chji , , [chjk chjamd, II, be separated: see chzhk]; hk to be separated ~.. chidyate is cut, is split, chijjati,. chijja Bailey 1924: 135b; Turner I,276277 (5042);

5. Sh. Gil. dzhi ; [dazhk dzhi dd,II, v. intr. burn (wood, etc.)] ~ .. dahyte, (dahyte TS, MSKS, B).. .. dhyte Bailey 1924: 138a; Turner I,357 (6248); 2001; 2011;

6.

Sh. Gil. miri ( , . );

[mirk miram ms, to die] (Radl. II, 61:miram I will die) ~ .. mriyte 6, miyyati, myati, . mijja; Bailey1924: 152b; Turner I, 599 (10383);

7. Sh. Gil. mzhi (

, . ) mk. [mizhk, mizham mls ormds, II, be mixed or associated (int. of nextword)] mk < .. mirayatimixes KtyS., adj. mirmixed RV. ( : , -ra , ), *miyate, *mzhi,

mzhi Bailey 1924: 153a; Turner I, 583(10137);8. Sh. Gil. ri is cooked, past part. rd [raz

hk, rzhi, rdu, II, be cooked (in pot)] < Sk.*radhyate is softened (act. radhyatu let himsubdue AV.), raddh subdued RV. [Cf. randhiimper. subdue, radham inj. may I submit,radhr weak RV, randhayati cooks MnGS. RANDH] Bailey 1924: 159a; Turner Nep.532a; Turner I, 614 (10611).

IV : IV . , IV , , IV . , , .

, , , , IV .

6 . . ,

( dhriyte driyte)

*a > * (. Kulikov

1997). ,

. ,

, , ,

.


35/40


210

, . ,

CvCvCv , CvCv#, .

Leonid KulikovLeiden University / Institute of Linguistics (Moscow)

Reply to replies

Replies of V. Dybo and A. Kassian offer a number ofinteresting historical observations, placing the issue ofthe history of the main accentual type of -yapresent ina new perspective. I will not enter here into a generaldiscussion of the comparability of evidence providedby BaltoSlavic accent and Vedic verbal accentuation,which represents quite an intricate issue on its own,but goes far beyond the scope of the current discussion. Rather, I will confine myself to a few more specific remarks on the data and their interpretation provided by the discussants.

As rightly noticed by A.K., the explanation of several subgroupings within the system of the -yapresents in Vedic (largely) based on Kuryowiczs analogical scenarios is not free from complications and several back and forth developments in the accentualhistory of the -yaformations. Putting the accentualpatterns in direct connections with the tonal schemesof the morphemic sequences in accordance with theiraccentual types (dominant/recessive) may, at firstglance, spare some of such redundant changes of myscenario (as outlined by A.K.).

Yet, this alternative explanation is not free fromheavy problems either, while the lack of comparativeevidence, quite unfortunately, makes this analysis lessfalsifiable than the (more traditional) explanation.

Let us take a closer look at the rule that forms thecore of Dybos tonal theory of the genesis of the Vedicaccentuation as applied to the accent patterns of the -yapresents (see p. 207): (i) the -yapresents derived fromthe roots of the dominant tonal type should bear the accent on the suffix, whilst (ii) the -yapresents derivedfrom the roots of the recessive type should have the ac

cent on the root. How could then this purely phonological distribution be dephonologized, so that, ultimately, the place of accentuation becomes conditioned

by the semantic types of -yapresents? Developing thebasic idea of V.D. and A.K., one might assume the following historical scenario: (I) a certain (semantically influential?) group of the -yapresents of the former type(dominant roots = accent on the suffix) were mostlyused as passives and therefore have formed the coregroup of the -ypassives, whereas (II) a certain (semantically influential?) group of the -yapresents of thelatter type (recessive roots = accent on the root) mostlyoccurred in nonpassive usages and therefore havegiven rise to the Old Indian class IV presents, i.e. to the

nonpassive -yapresents with the root accentuation.Subsequently, the first group attracted those -yapassives which, by virtue of the tonal type of the rootmorpheme (recessive) had accent on the root (with theconcomitant accent shift from the root to the suffix, inanalogy with the core members of the class: *ya >y-), while in another class we expect the oppositedevelopment: nonpassive -yapresents with the rootaccentuation attracted other nonpassive -yapresentsthat had accent on the suffix, with the concomitant accent shift from the suffix to the root, in analogy with the

core members of the class: *y > ya-).Unfortunately, as noticed by A.K. (p. 199), the

BaltoSlavic material furnishes as few as two reliablecognates of the Vedic -yapresents that can be used forthe reconstruction of the original tonal pattern of theVedic stems. One of them, Slav. *topiti warm, makewarm (the exact cognate of the Vedic causative tpyati id.) must testify to the dominant type of theroot, which, in accordance with Dybos rule, shouldresult in Vedic suffix accentuation tapyte heats; suffers. This accentuation is attested from the Athar

vaveda onwards, alongside with the root accentuationtpyate, which is met with, in particular, in the Yajurvedic mantras; see p. 190 above. Another direct com


36/40

Leonid KULIKOV. Reply to replies

211

parison is Slav. *drati (~ Ved. dryte cracks), with arecessive root, which should point to the root accentuation (dryate, attested in the Taittirya and Maitrya Sahits of the Yajurveda, alongside with thesuffix accentuation dryte found in the atapathaBrhmaa). Obviously, evidence is too scant for any

decisive conclusion however attractive the tonalhypothesis might appear for the explanation of theinitial split of one single type into two accentual classes.

More substantial evidence for hypothesizing aboutthe original accentuation of the (Old) IndoAryan -yapresents is, allegedly, provided by the Dardic language Shina, which, according to V.D., preserves theoriginal accentuation (on the root) in the cognates ofall -yapresents, irrespectively of the accentuatio

Documents

Kulikov Kassian Dybo 2011 Ya Prs