ITALO-CELTIC ORIGINS AND PREHISTORIC
DEVELOPMENT OF THE IRISH LANGUAGE
Frederik Kortlandt
CONTENTS
Introduction..........................................................................................
ix
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings and questions of
relative chronology [1978]....................................................................
1
More evidence for Italo-Celtic [1980]...................................................
25
Phonemicization and rephonemicization of the Old Irish mutations
[1981]....................................................................................................
51
Old Irish subjunctives and futures and their Proto-Indo-European
origins [1983]........................................................................................
65
Posttonic *w in Old Irish [1983]...........................................................
75
The origin of the Slavic imperfect [1983].............................................
81
Lachmann’s law [1985].........................................................................
87
Absolute and conjunct again [1993]......................................................
91
The alleged early apocope of *-i in Celtic [1995].................................
99
Thematic and athematic verb forms in Old Irish [1996].......................
107
Old Irish ol ‘inquit’ [1996]....................................................................
113
On the relative chronology of Celtic sound changes [1997].................
117
Lachmann's law again [1997]................................................................
121
Three notes on the Old Irish verb [1999]..............................................
125
Old Irish feda, gen. fedot ‘Lord’ and the 1st sg. absolute ending -a in
subjunctives and futures [2002].............................................................
129
More on the Celtic verb [2006].............................................................
133
Italo-Celtic [2006].................................................................................
149
Appendix: Old Irish verbal paradigms..................................................
159
References.............................................................................................
179
Index......................................................................................................
195
INTRODUCTION
The night after my first arrival in Dublin in 1978 I met David Greene at
the Greek restaurant on Upper Baggot Street which no longer exists. During
the following weeks we discussed various topics of common interest, in
particular the development of verbal categories in Celtic. When I explained
my ideas about the relative chronology of sound changes and about the role
of the thematic inflexion in the verbal system (cf. Kortlandt 1979a, footnotes
15 and 18), David asked me to prepare an article for Ériu, which appeared the
following year (1979b). This article is reprinted here as the first chapter of the
present volume.
In the summer of 1979 I visited Warren Cowgill at Yale University in
order to exchange views about the Celtic verb. As it became clear that the
work of Dybo and Illič-Svityč was practically unknown in the West, I decided
to write another article for Ériu clarifying what progress had been made in
Moscow (1981a). At the same time I felt that it was necessary to treat the
development of the consonantal system in more detail, which resulted in my
presentation at the International Conference on Historical Linguistics in
Galway in April 1981 and in my following article in Ériu (1982b). During that
conference and later that month in Dublin I had the opportunity to discuss
many problems with David Greene, including the continuation of Celtic
Studies in the Netherlands, which at that time faced major budget cuts.
When I came back to Dublin in the summer of 1981, the sad news that
David had passed away shocked me deeply. At that time Daniel Binchy,
Ernest Quin, James Carney and my dear friends Heinrich Wagner and
Proinsias Mac Cana were still alive. The economy was in bad shape in those
days, and further budget cuts and administrative problems prevented me
from attending the meeting of the Indogermanische Gesellschaft in Berlin
(1983) where Warren Cowgill criticized my views (1985a, 1985b). When these
contributions were published, Warren had passed away, which made it
difficult for me to answer his objections. In the meantime I had written two
more articles for Ériu, clarifying my views on the Indo-European origins of
the Old Irish subjunctives and futures (1984) and on the development of
x
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
posttonic *w (1986a). At the same time I wrote my article on the Slavic
imperfect (1986b), which is of major importance for a correct understanding
of the Old Irish ā-preterit, and later on the occasion of the 1985 Pavia
conference my little contribution on Lachmann’s law (1989a), which is
relevant to the problem of Italo-Celtic.
In those days we had a bright young student named Peter Schrijver who
specialized in Latin and was going to write a dissertation (1991a) under the
inspiring guidance of my Indo-Europeanist colleague Robert Beekes, who had
been teaching Old Irish since 1981. Of course, we did everything we could to
stimulate Peter’s interest in Celtic, and I felt that I should refrain from
publishing on this branch of Indo-European for a number of years and give
him room to develop his own line of thought. When he had clearly gone his
own way (1994), I resumed my series of publications on Celtic (1994, 1996a,
1996b, 1997a, 1997b, 2000) and wrote another little contribution on
Lachmann’s law (1999).
The present volume contains not only articles published earlier, which
are reprinted here in the order in which they were written (as indicated in the
table of contents), but also discussions of additional topics and some
revisions of my earlier views. Patrick Sims-Williams’ analysis of feda, fedot in
the Cambrai Homily (1999) has enabled me to simplify my account of the
phonological and morphological development of Old Irish somewhat. I have
added a chapter on the newest scholarly literature, dealing with infixed
pronouns, athematic i-presents, original aorists and perfects, suffixed
pronouns, phonological developments not discussed earlier, Continental
Celtic data, middle endings, and points where I have changed my opinion.
The final chapter provides a discussion of the Italic data which are essential to
a reconstruction of Proto-Italo-Celtic. In the appendix I present my
reconstruction of the Old Irish verbal paradigms given by Strachan (1949)
and Thurneysen (1946).
The publication of this volume owes a lot to David Greene, who asked
me to start publishing on Celtic, to Proinsias Mac Cana, who welcomed the
idea of putting things together in a single volume, to Heinrich Wagner, who
was a great partner in discussions of wider issues, to Fergus Kelly, who
granted me hospitality at the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, to my
Leiden colleagues Rob Beekes and Sasha Lubotsky, who were always ready
Introduction
xi
to discuss my views, and to my wife Annie, who supported me throughout
the years. I am indebted to the publishers of Ériu (Royal Irish Academy,
Dublin), Études Celtiques (CNRS Editions, Paris), Münchener Studien zur
Sprachwissenschaft (J.H. Röll, München), Historische Sprachforschung
(Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen), Fs. Bräuer (Böhlau, Köln), Fs. Beekes
(Rodopi, Amsterdam), Fs. Lehmann (Institute for the Study of Man,
Washington D.C.), and the Pavia volume (Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin) for
permission to reprint my work, to Tijmen Pronk for editing the present
volume, and to Heleen Plaisier for compiling the index.
Frederik Kortlandt
Leiden, November 18th, 2006
THE OLD IRISH ABSOLUTE AND CONJUNCT ENDINGS AND
QUESTIONS OF RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
*
1. Introduction. 2. Cowgill’s theory. 3. Chronology. 4. Loss of *-i. 5. 2nd sg. 6. Thematic
flexion. 7. Greek. 8. Baltic. 9. Slavic. 10. Tocharian. 11. Latin. 12. Irish. 13. u-diphthongs.
14. i-diphthongs. 15. *ē. 16. Shortening. 17. Palatalization. 18. Raising. 19. u-infection.
20. 1st sg. 21. Shortening. 22. 2nd sg. 23. 3rd sg. 24. Plural forms. 25. Lowering. 26.
Apocope. 27. Syncope. 28. Subjunctive. 29. Secondary endings. 30. Future. 31. Passive
preterit. 32. Relative forms. 33. Etymology. 34. Slavic je. 35. Slavic jest.
1.
Recent years have brought a considerable improvement of our insights
into the prehistory of the Celtic languages. Cowgill has decisively shown how
the distinction between absolute and conjunct verbal endings came about
(1975). Rix has clarified the historical relation between the s-subjunctive and
the a-subjunctive (1977: 153). Besides, Greene has solved a number of unclear
points in the historical phonology of Old Irish and established a relative
chronology of the main developments from the rise of lenition up to the end
of the Old Irish period (1974 and 1976a). In this article I intend to eliminate a
number of difficulties which have remained after Cowgill’s discussion of the
absolute and conjunct endings and to show their chronological implications
for the history of the Celtic verb.
2.
Elaborating a line of thought which had been developed by Strachan,
Thurneysen, Dillon, and Boling (1972), Cowgill comes to the conclusion that
“the endings of the Insular Celtic present indicative, conjunct as well as
absolute, come entirely from the Indo-European primary endings, and the
differences between the two sets derive solely from the placement of the
particle *(e)s, following Wackernagel’s Law, second in its clause: after the
verb, if that was the first word, otherwise after the first preverb” (1975: 56). I
have the impression that those colleagues who have not been convinced by
*
Ériu 30 (1979), 35-53.
2
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
Cowgill’s demonstration do not attach sufficient weight to the fact that
analogic change requires not only a model, but also a motivation. The latter is
conspicuously absent in the case of the absolute and conjunct endings, which
are in complementary distribution: the choice between them depends entirely
on the position of the verb in the clause. The massive analogic spread of a
redundant morphological distinction is simply not credible. Since Cowgill has
been quite explicit about this point, I shall not take it up here.
3. Accepting the view that a particle *(e)s was incorporated in the verb form,
one may wonder if the fusion can be dated in relation to other developments
which have been established for the Celtic languages. The following paradigm
offers two chronological indications:
fo-ceird ‘puts’ < *wo-s kerde
fa-ceird ‘puts him’ < *wo-s-en kerde
fom(m)-cheird ‘puts me’ < *wo-s-me kerde
fot-cheird ‘puts you (sg.)’ < *wo-s-tu kerde
fob-ceird ‘puts you (pl.)’ < *wo-s-swis kerde
The retention of t in the form with 2nd sg. infixed pronoun shows that the
phonetic law which changed PIE *st into Celtic *ss had ceased to operate at
the time when the particle was incorporated. The presence of b in the form
with 2nd pl. infixed pronoun shows that the cluster *ssw was simplified to *sw
before the lenition. Moreover, this simplification must have been anterior to
the assibilation of *k in the medial cluster of seisser ‘six men’ < *sweks-wirom.
Thus, the rise of the difference between absolute and conjunct verb forms can
be dated to the period between the progressive assimilation in *st and the
regressive assimilation in *ks.
4. The weakest point in Cowgill’s analysis is the ad hoc assumption that there
was an early loss of -i in third person verb forms. According to his theory, this
Proto-Celtic apocope affected 3rd sg. and pl. conjunct forms (p. 57), but not
the corresponding absolute forms (p. 59). This amounts to saying that the
absolute form continues the primary ending and the conjunct form the
secondary ending in third person verb forms: the only difference from the
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
3
traditional doctrine is the view that the redistribution of the endings came
about as a result of a morphologically limited phonological process. The
conjectured apocope is not supported by any additional evidence. Moreover,
Cowgill suggests that the early loss of *-i affected the 3rd sg., but not the 3rd
pl. relative form (p. 59). It seems preferable to say that the relative forms
remain to be explained.
5.
The 2nd sg. forms are not satisfactorily accounted for either.
Conjunct -bir can phonetically represent both *bherei and *bheresi, as Meillet
pointed out already (1908: 413). The latter reconstruction, which Cowgill
adopts, leaves the endings of the present classes AI, AII, AIII, BII, BIV
unexplained. While AIII conj. -taí ‘are’, -gní ‘do’, -soí ‘turn’ can be regular
from *tāsi, *gnīsi, *sowesi, Cowgill is forced to regard abs. cíi ‘thou weepest’
either as an irregular spelling or as an analogical formation on the basis of the
corresponding conjunct form (p. 61). On the other hand, he has to suppose
that AII -léici ‘leave’ and BII -gaibi ‘take’ are levelled absolute forms, to be
derived from *lēggīsi-s and *gabisi-s. The problem is even more considerable
for the AI and BIV ending -(a)i: “The apparent contrast between -(a)i from
*-asi in 2sg. pres. as-renai ‘impendis’ Ml 44a 6 and zero, preceded by vowel
raising and consonant palatalization, from *-ai in tuil is hard to work into a
plausible chronology. The solution requiring the least amount of analogic
change seems to be to suppose that -renai is originally an absolute form,
leveled into conjunct position also, and analogic for *rini < *rinīh < *rinais <
*rinasi-s, with /en/ for */iń/ after the rest of the present indicative” (Cowgill
1975: 57, fn. 13). Thus, all sounds of -renai except the initial consonant are
analogic.
6.
The difficulties in Cowgill’s theory can be eliminated if we return to
Meillet’s view that the difference between conjunct and absolute endings
reflects in part the distinction between the thematic and the athematic flexion
of the proto-language (1907). Since the thematic paradigm, with the exception
of the 1st sg. form, adopted the athematic endings in Indo-Iranian, Italic, and
Germanic, the evidence from these languages cannot be used for the
reconstruction of the original thematic flexion. Such a reconstruction must
necessarily be based upon Celtic, Baltic, Slavic, Tocharian, and Greek, all of
which point to a 3rd sg. ending *-e. The combined evidence of these
4
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
languages also points to a 2nd sg. ending *-eHi and a 3rd pl. ending *-o in the
thematic paradigm. Moreover, the supposition that these endings once
existed in Italic eliminates the necessity for an ad hoc assumption that *-i was
lost in finite verb forms.
7.
In Greek, the endings of the thematic present are: 3rd sg. -ei, 2nd sg. -eis,
3rd pl. -onti. The 3rd sg. ending is best explained as PIE *-e plus an additional
i from the athematic flexion (cf. Chantraine 1967: 297). The motivation for
the enlargement can be found in the obliteration of the distinction between
primary and secondary endings as a result of the loss of final *t. The 2nd sg.
ending is derived from *-ei plus an additional s from the secondary endings,
which was also added in the athematic present. The additional -nti in the 3rd
pl. ending was apparently borrowed from the athematic flexion on the basis
of the secondary ending *-nt, which was common to both flexion types.
8.
I shall be brief about the Baltic and Slavic material, which I have
discussed in detail elsewhere (1979a). The Lithuanian endings are: 3rd sg. -a,
2nd sg. -ì, 3rd pl. -a. The remarkable correspondence of je/o-verbs in Baltic
with e/o-verbs in Slavic and Sanskrit can be explained if we assume that the
3rd sg. ending has replaced earlier *-e. The 2nd sg. and 3rd pl. endings are
phonetically regular. I cannot share the widespread view that the original 3rd
pl. form was lost in Baltic. If the nt-endings once had the same extension here
as in the southern and western Indo-European languages, their disappearance
would be totally unmotivated. On the other hand, the addition of *-nti to an
original 3rd pl. ending *-o in Indo-Iranian, Greek, and Germanic is a trivial
innovation.
9.
The Slavic material is complicated. The 3rd sg. ending *-e has been
preserved in all dialects except those of western Macedonia, which include the
dialect of the Old Slavic translation of the Gospel, and the Russian dialects on
which the standard language is based. Its antiquity is evident from the
Novgorod birch bark documents. The 2nd sg. form of the copula esi must be
derived from *esei, where -ei represents the original thematic ending (cf. Van
Wijk 1916: 111f.). The Old Bulgarian ending -ši resulted from a blending of the
athematic and the thematic ending. The original 3rd pl. ending *-o was
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
5
enlarged with *-nti from the athematic flexion, as in Greek, but the earlier
form can still be inferred from the chronology of the Slavic developments.
The addition of *-nti must have taken place at a relatively recent stage because
it was posterior to the generalization of the secondary ending in the so-called
semi-thematic present. For the details I refer to the article mentioned above.
10. Tocharian preserves the 3rd sg. ending *-e in B āśäṃ (A *āśäs) ‘agit’,
where -ṃ(-s) is an enclitic element (cf. Pedersen 1941: 142). The 3rd pl. form B
ākeṃ ‘agunt’ contains the ending *-o before the clitic. The ending cannot be
identified with PIE *-ont, which is preserved in kameṃ ‘came’ and lateṃ
‘went’, because the distinction between primary and secondary endings was
not lost in Tocharian and *-nti is preserved in A -ñc. The latter dialect added
*-nti to *-o in ākeñc, which therefore shows a deceptive similarity to the
corresponding ending in Greek and Slavic, but preserved the original ending
in a considerable number of instances, e.g. tāke next to tākeñc ‘will be’ (cf.
Sieg c.s. 1931: 326ff.). The short forms are especially frequent in the
Maitreyāvadānavyākaraṇa, which is archaic for other reasons as well: it still
uses the śä-doublet, which was apparently eliminated in the other texts
because of its resemblance with the ṣä-doublet and the ya-sign (Pedersen
1941: 19), and writes krañc and lāñc for kraṃś and lāṃś, also krañcän for
krañcäṃ, and often ī, ū for i, u (Sieg c.s. 1921: viii).
11.
The endings of Latin agit, agis, agunt cannot be derived from *-eti, *-esi,
*-onti because *-i is not lost in this language, cf. mare, loc. pede, inf. amāre.
The simplest assumption is that the secondary endings *-t (*-d), *-s, *-nt were
added to the original thematic forms in *-e, *-ei, *-o. This hypothesis also
accounts for the form esed ‘erit’ on the cippus from the Forum Romanum
(circa 500 B.C.), where the final consonant remains unexplained in the
traditional doctrine. When the athematic present endings lost their *-i on the
analogy of the corresponding thematic (and secondary) forms, the 2nd sg.
and 3rd pl. endings merged in the two paradigms. The 3rd sg. endings became
confused in the fourth century. The theory advanced here may also explain
the difference between Umbrian tiçit ‘decet’ < *-ēti and heri ‘vult’ < *-ie.
6
12.
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
A different development must be assumed for Celtic. The thematic 3rd
sg. ending *-e is preserved in fil ‘there is’, as Watkins has convincingly argued
(1969: 168). The corresponding absolute form, which represents *wele-s, is
attested in Wb 11d 2 fil ní de as fír ‘there is something thereof which is true’.
This form shows that the ending had no final *t and that the 3rd sg. relative
form beres ‘who carries, that he carries’ cannot be derived from *beret-sa(n).
The other thematic verbs inserted *-ti from the athematic flexion before the
absolute suffix *-s, e.g. berid ‘carries’ < *bere-ti-s versus -beir < *bere. As
Cowgill pointed out already (1975: 59), the absolute form cannot be derived
from *beret-es because the latter reconstruction would yield the wrong final
vowel in the form with 3rd sg. suffixed pronoun beirthi ‘carries him’ < *bereti-s-en. Since the reason for the insertion of *-ti before the absolute suffix *-s
must be sought in the interaction of the thematic and the athematic flexion
which originated from the shortening of long final vowels, I have to make a
digression on the historical phonology of Irish here. I shall refer to the stages
of Greene 1974 as G1-G11.
13. Earlier investigators have observed that the loss of intervocalic *s was
anterior to the monophthongization of the Indo-European u-diphthongs (cf.
Jackson 1953: 313 and Greene 1976a: 27), e.g. tauë ‘silence’ (Welsh taw) <
*tawia < *tausiā. The loss of intervocalic *s was probably posterior to its
reduction to *h as a result of the lenition. On the other hand, the rise of *ō2,
which resulted from the monophthongization of the u-diphthongs, must have
been posterior to the split of *ō1 (PIE *ō) into *ū in final syllables and *ā
elsewhere. (Note that ó1 and ó2 of Greene 1976a: 28 correspond with my *ō2
and *ō4, respectively.) The development is similar to what we find in Slavic,
where the u-diphthongs were monophthongized into *ō2 (later u) at a stage
when *ō1 (PIE *ō) had become *ū (later y) before nasals in final syllables and
*ā (later a) elsewhere, e.g. kamy ‘stone’ < *akmōn, dati ‘to give’ < *dōtei. Thus,
we arrive at the following relative chronology:
(1)
Lenition (G2): rise of *h from PIE *s.
(2)
Loss of intervocalic *h.
ANTE (3) Split of *ō1 into *ā and *ū.
(3)
Monophthongization of u-diphthongs: rise of *ō2.
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
7
14. There is no reason to separate the monophthongization of the idiphthongs chronologically from that of the u-diphthongs. In stressed
syllables, *ē2 from *ei did not merge with *ē1 (PIE *ē), which was raised to *ī.
The development is typologically comparable to what we find in certain
varieties of Dutch, where ei is monophthongized to [ε:], while ee remains
close [e:]. Stressed *ai and *oi were not affected by the monophthongization,
which suggests that the u-diphthongs had merged into *ou before the rise of
*ō2. In unstressed syllables, the i-diphthongs merged with *ē1 and *ī, e.g.
nom.pl. fir ‘men’ < *wirī < *wiroi, dat.sg. tuil ‘will’ < *tolī < *tolāi. Since *-āi
from *-āsi did not merge with PIE *-āi (see below), I assume that the latter
had been shortened to *-ai before the loss of intervocalic *h. However, *-ōi
did not merge with *-oi, e.g. dat.sg. fiur < *wirū < *wirōi. It is therefore
reasonable to suppose that the shortening of long final diphthongs was
posterior to the raising of *ō1 to *ū in final syllables. This hypothesis is
supported by the Gaulish dat.sg. ending -ui. I find no evidence against the
merger of *-ei and *-esi, cf. especially dat.sg. tig ‘house’ < *tegī < *tegesi. Since
there is no evidence for a different treatment of prevocalic and
preconsonantal *ei, the loss of intervocalic (consonantal) *i must be dated
after the monophthongization. We now arrive at the following relative
chronology:
ANTE (1) Split of *ō1 into *ā and *ū.
(1)
Shortening of long final diphthongs.
(2)
Loss of intervocalic *h.
(3)
Monophthongization of i-diphthongs: rise of *ē2.
POST (3) Loss of intervocalic *i.
15.
I do not share the common view that *ē1 had been raised to *ī in Proto-
Celtic times already. An early merger of *ē1 and *ī would have yielded a
phonological system where the vowel height oppositions between the short
vowels outnumbered those between the long vowels. Though such a system is
by no means impossible, it is not probable that it would have remained in
existence over a longer period of time. Moreover, Gaulish shows e for *ē1 in a
number of instances, e.g. Dubno-rex. It seems better to connect the raising of
*ē1 with the development of the i-diphthongs in the separate languages.
8
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
The development of PIE *-oi and *-āi into *-ī suggests that *ē1 and *ē2 merged
in unstressed syllables before the raising of *ē1 to *ī. I find no evidence for e
from *ē1 in final syllables. In particular, carae ‘friend’ < *karēh < *karants does
not contain *ē1. This *ē, which I shall write *ē3, is also found in fiche ‘twenty’ <
*wikēh < *wikent and gen.sg. abae ‘river’ < *abēh < *abens. I conclude that the
rise of *ē3 from *en and *an before a dental consonant was posterior to the
raising of *ē1 and *ē2 to *ī in unstressed syllables. It was also posterior to the
raising of *ē1 in stressed syllables because *ē3 merged neither with *ē1 nor with
*ē2, e.g. cét ‘hundred’ < *kenton versus íasc < *peiskos: *ē3 was apparently
lower than*ē2, just as the latter was lower than *ē1. The open character of *ē3 is
not unexpected since *en and *an merged, e.g. géis ‘swan’ (Latin ānser). The
long vowel of cét shows that the loss of the nasal in *nt (G1) cannot have been
anterior to the lenition (G2). The nom.sg. athair ‘father’ for *aither < *patēr is
easily explained as an analogic form. I assume that the word underwent
palatalization metathesis so as to conform to the pattern of the i-stems. Thus,
we can add:
(4)
Raising of *ē1 to *ī.
(5)
Loss of *n before dentals and velars: rise of *ē3.
There is evidence for *ō3 (which apparently merged with *ō2) in trícho ‘thirty’
< *trīkont and cano ‘poet’ < *kanonts. It should be clear that final *ē3 and *ō3
cannot represent PIE *-ent and *-ont because final *t had been lost at an early
stage, as is evident from the merger of the perfect with the thematic aorist.
The restoration of final *t in the secondary 3rd pl. ending, where it had been
preserved before PIE clitics, was apparently posterior to stage (5). Another
source of *ē3 is found in the absolute 2nd pl. form beirthe ‘you carry’ <
*beretēh < *beretes-es.
16. Greene assumes that unstressed long vowels were shortened except in final
syllables ending in *h (G3). It is typologically improbable, though not
impossible, that distinctive quantity was preserved during a considerable
period of time in closed final syllables only. Moreover, the history of the
verbal flexion is more easily accounted for if we assume that vowel length in
medial syllables was preserved up to a later stage. Thus, I suggest that the
early shortening of long vowels was limited to word-final position. The
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
9
raised vowel in dat.sg. tuil ‘will’ < *tolāi shows that the shortening was
posterior to stage (4). There is no direct evidence for its chronological
relation to stage (5) because word-final *ē3 did not arise phonetically. A
cogent argument can be derived from the 1st sg. conjunct ending of the asubjunctive, e.g. -ber ‘I carry’. As will be pointed out below, this form must be
derived from *berason. When *-an from PIE *-ām had merged with *-en, e.g.
in acc.sg. túaith ‘people’ < *tōten < *teutām, earlier *-on developed into *-an.
After the loss of intervocalic *s (2), the form contracted to *berān in the same
way as *beretes-es yielded *beretēh. Since the latter contraction cannot have
been anterior to the rise of *ē3 (5), the former must not be dated earlier either.
When *n was lost before dentals and velars (5), the nasal mutation became a
morphological process (G8c). Incidentally, this chronology explains why *n
disappeared before initial *w: the latter was still a resonant at this stage. The
shortening of the long vowel in *berā n- can now be identified with the
general shortening of long final vowels, which is consequently posterior to
stage (5). The resulting short vowel was apocopated at a later stage (G8a). I
conclude that we can add:
(6)
Long final vowels were shortened.
I also assume that final *e was lost after a long vowel, which can be viewed as
a corollary of (6). This rule affected the 3rd sg. conjunct form of weak verbs,
e.g. -marba ‘kills’ < *-ā < *-āe < *-āie and -rádi ‘speaks’ < *-ī < *-īe < *-eie.
This loss of *-e, which requires the preservation of distinctive quantity in the
prefinal syllable, must have been posterior to stage (6) because it
reintroduced word-final long vowels. The loss of intervocalic *i must be dated
between (3) and (6).
17. The rise of palatalization in Irish has largely been clarified by Cowgill
(1969) and Greene (1974). I summarize their findings as follows:
(7a)
All consonants were palatalized between front vowels and before
stressed front vowels.
(7b)
Dentals were palatalized before posttonic *i.
(7c)
Labials and velars were palatalized before posttonic *i unless
they were preceded by a back vowel.
10
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
Examples: (7a) -beir /b’er’/ ‘carries’< *bere, caíche ‘blindness’ < *kaixia <
*kaikiā, (7b) -ráidiu ‘I say’ < *rādīu < *rōdeiō, tuirem ‘enumeration’ <
*torīma, calad ‘hard’ < *kaleθah (Welsh calet), (7c) -gaibet ‘they take’ <
*gabiot, gábud ‘danger’ < *gābiθuh, tugae ‘cover’ < *togia.1 As is clear from
these examples, long *ā was a back vowel at this stage, whereas short *a was
neutral with respect to the opposition between front and back vowels.
Following Thurneysen and Cowgill, Greene assumes that a preceding short *u
did not block the palatalization of dentals by a following *e (G5b). This
assumption forces him to date the vowel height assimilation in stressed
syllables before the rise of palatalization, cf. sonairt ‘strong’ < *sunertih and
muinél ‘neck’ < *monixlah. On the other hand, the vowel height assimilation
in unstressed syllables must be dated after the rise of palatalization, as is clear
from the same examples. For the intermediate period, this chronology
requires the simultaneous existence of a five-vowel system in unstressed
syllables and a three-vowel system under the stress, which is a very unlikely
reconstruction. Moreover, it does not account for the absence of
palatalization in Iudei ‘Jews’, gen. Iudae. If this word had not yet been
borrowed into the language at this stage, the unpalatalized obstruent would
be all the less comprehensible in view of the rising tide of palatalization, cf.
aiccent < Latin accentus, where e palatalized the preceding velar. Cowgill
adduces two instances in support of the hypothesis that *u did not block the
palatalization of a following dental by *e (1969: 35): do-fuisim ‘pours forth’
and tuisel ‘stumble’, which he derives from *to-uss-semet (with analogic f) and
*t-uss-swelas, respectively. But the first word has evidently taken its
palatalized obstruent from do-essim ‘pours out’ < *to-ess-seme, where it arose
phonetically, and the etymology of the second word is probably incorrect
because *-ssw- yields -b- in the 2nd pl. infixed pronoun, e.g. fob-ceird ‘puts
you’ < *wo-s-swis-kerde. I conclude that the formulation of the palatalization
rule given above is not only simpler and more natural, but also closer to the
facts than earlier formulations.
1
Intervocalically, I write *t and *d where other authors use *d and *δ, or *dd and *d,
respectively. I write single and double consonants for intervocalic lenis and fortis
resonants, but single consonants in those positions where fortis resonants are not in
phonemic opposition to lenis ones.
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
11
18. Certain vowel features diffused through the preceding consonant to the
vowel of the preceding syllable. The opposition between high and mid short
vowels was neutralized if the following syllable contained a high vowel (G4).
When the phonemic contrast was reintroduced in stressed syllables, the
product of the neutralization merged with the corresponding high vowel, e.g.
biru ‘I carry’ < *berūh, muinél ‘neck’ < *monixlah. I see no evidence for a
different treatment of stressed and unstressed vowels except for the fact that
the raising of unstressed *e to *i was blocked by a preceding unpalatalized
consonant, a situation which did not occur in stressed syllables, cf. sonairt
‘strong’ < *sunertih, where the lowering of *u to o shows that non-high *e had
been preserved up to a later stage (see below). This is the origin of the
difference between the vocalic alternation in cingid ‘steps’ < *kingeθih, 3rd pl.
cengait < *kingatih and the constant vocalism of bongid ‘breaks’ < *bungeθih.
The raising of *e and *o to i and u before high vowels was certainly posterior
to the rise of *ē3 (5), cf. sét ‘way’ < *sentuh versus rind ‘star’ < *rendu. It was
probably posterior to the rise of palatalization (7) because *i is likely to have
palatalized a preceding consonant before it affected the vowel of a preceding
syllable. If one accepts that the raising was not limited to stressed syllables, a
cogent argument can be derived from sonairt, where the nasal would have
been palatalized if the vowel of the medial syllable had been raised before the
rise of palatalization. Thus, I add:
(8)
Raising of short *e and *o before a high vowel in the following
syllable.
19. Not only the vowel height, but also the rounding of *u affected the vowel
of the preceding syllable. The resulting u-infection became phonemically
relevant in those instances where the conditioning factor was lost as a result
of subsequent phonological processes after having sufficiently affected the
preceding vowel. This was the case in gen.sg. caurad ‘warrior’ < *karuθah,
where au was phonemicized as a result of the lowering of *u to *o (see below).
It was also the case when the vowel of the prefinal syllable was short and final
*u was apocopated at a later stage, e.g. in dat.sg. fiur ‘man’ and the conjunct
form -biur ‘I carry’. The latter word suggests that the raising of *e to *i was
anterior to the u-infection. When the final vowel was not apocopated, the
infection was not phonemicized, e.g. acc.pl. firu ‘men’ < *wirūh and absolute
biru < *berūh. As Greene has demonstrated (1976a: 29),
12
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
intervocalic *w also produced u-infection, e.g. auë ‘grandson’ < *auweah <
*awios. The word nuë ‘new’ < *nuweah < *nowios shows unequivocally that
the u-infection was posterior to the raising of *o to *u before *i in the
following syllable, cf. gáu ‘falsehood’ < *gouwa < *gowā, gen. gue < *guwiāh <
*gowiās with *-iās replacing original *-ās. I therefore add:
(9)
u-infection (G7b).
20. Here I have to discuss the 1st sg. form of the consuetudinal present biuu,
-bíu ‘am wont to be’. Thurneysen and Greene write bíuu, but the form in Wb
16d 8 biuu-sa, to which Thurneysen refers, is written without an accent mark
in the Thesaurus. The vowel must originally have been short, as is clear from
Welsh byddaf. In Irish, there is no reason to assume an intervocalic glide
since the elimination of consonantal *i between stage (3) and stage (6), cf.
above. At the time of u-infection, it is reasonable to suppose that a
subphonemic u-glide developed before postvocalic *u, so that we can write
*biuūh, *-biuu, also *-gnīuu ‘I do’ < *gnēiō. Both the fact that the glide did not
merge with *w and the u-infection before *w suggest that *w became a
fricative around this time. When final *u was apocopated (see below), the uglide in *-biuu and *-gnīuu became phonemically relevant in the same way as
the u-infection in -biur. The regular lengthening of the vowel in the former
word yielded the historical form -bíu, with the same vocalism as -gníu, cf. also
clé ‘left’ < *kleah < *klios, dat.sg. clíu < *kliuu, and béu ‘living’ < *beuw <
*biuwah < gwiwos, dat.sg. bíu < *biuw < *biwu. Thus, I agree with Boling
(1972: 100) that the form -gníu is phonetically regular. The absolute form biuu
differs from biru in the presence of u instead of r only and can hardly be
analogic because there was no motivation for a morphological innovation. I
see no evidence for a different treatment in posttonic syllables, cf. centarach
‘hither’, comparative centarchu < *k’enoθerax’u < *k’enoθerax’iuu <
*kinoθerāxiūh: this word underwent the lenition at stage (1), the palatalization
of *k and *x at stage (7), the rise of the u-glide at stage (9), the shortening of
*ā at stage (10), the lowering of *i in the initial syllable at stage (11), the
shortening of *ū at stage (14), the loss of the second *i at stage (16), the
syncope of *o and *a at stage (19), and finally the delenition of *θ and the
depalatalization of *x’. The word toimtiu ‘opinion’ < *tomet’u < *tomētiu <
*to-mentiō underwent the raising of *ō before stage (1), the loss of *n and rise
of *ē3 at stage (5), the shortening of final *ū at stage (6), the
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
13
palatalization of *t at stage (7), the rise of the u-glide at stage (9), the
shortening of *ē at stage (10), the apocope of *u at stage (15), the loss of *i at
stage (16), the palatalization of *m at stage (18), and the syncope of *e at stage
(19), cf. below. In the same way, the 1st sg. abs. and conj. endings of weak
verbs AI -u < *-āiō(-s) and AII -iu < *-eiō(-s) and the BII ending -iu < *-iō(-s)
represent phonetically regular developments, cf. also -táu ‘am’ < *stāiō.
21. We now arrive at the shortening of posttonic long vowels in non-final
syllables. This shortening must have been posterior to the u-infection because
the latter did not affect comet ‘preservation’ < *komētuh < *komentus, cf.
tomus ‘measure’ < *tomeus < *tomessuh, where *e was lost at stage (16). The
u-flexion of comet is evident from Ml 55d 6 a-chometa ‘of his protection’.
Thus:
(10)
Long vowels in medial syllables were shortened.
As a result of this shortening, the thematic flexion of class AI (*-āie-) merged
with the athematic flexion of class BIV (*-na-) in a number of forms. The
thematic flexion of AII verbs (*-eie-), which had merged with the athematic
flexion of AII verbs (*-ē-) in a number of forms as a result of the shortening
of final long vowels at stage (6), now merged with the thematic flexion of BII
verbs (*-ie-) in the remaining forms. The obliteration of the distinction
between thematic and athematic flexion led to a reshuffling of the two sets of
endings.
22. The PIE 2nd sg. ending has been preserved in BI -bir ‘carry’ < *beri <
*berei, abs. biri < *-īh < *-ei-s, AI -marbai ‘kill’ < *-āi < *-āiei, abs. marbai <
*-āīh < *-āiei-s, AII -rádi ‘speak’ < *-īi < *-eiei, abs. rádi < *-īīh < *-eiei-s. The
latter endings replaced the athematic AII endings *-ī < *-ēsi and *-īih < *-ēsi-s
after the shortening of long final vowels at stage (6) and merged with the BII
endings *-ii < *-iei and *-iīh < *-iei-s when the medial long vowel was
shortened at stage (10). The latter shortening may have evoked the analogical
replacement of the BIV endings *-i < *-asi and *-īh < *-asi-s with the AI
endings *-ai, *-aīh. More probably, however, the characteristic vowel *-a- of
class BIV had already been reintroduced on the basis of the other athematic
verbs at an earlier stage. The substitution of the thematic for the athematic
ending was apparently total. The absence of
14
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
raising in Ml 110d 9 do-eim ‘protectest’ shows that the form replaces an
original athematic present *ēsi, with *ē3 from *en since stage (5). The forms cíi
‘weepest’ and -taí ‘art’ represent the regular development of the thematic
ending. Only the copula at < *ē-tu with *ē2 < *ei < PIE *esi preserves the
original athematic ending.
23. On the basis of the foregoing paragraphs we arrive at the following
reconstruction of the Irish present tense at stage (7).
1st sg. abs.
2nd sg. abs.
3rd sg. abs.
1st sg. conj.
2nd sg. conj.
3rd sg. conj.
1st sg. abs.
2nd sg. abs.
3rd sg. abs.
1st sg. conj.
2nd sg. conj.
3rd sg. conj.
*bere- ‘carry’
*marwāie- ‘kill’
*bina- ‘strike’
berūh
berīh
bereh
beru
beri
bere
marwāūh
marwāīh
marwāeh
marwāu
marwāi
marwā
binamih
bin(a)īh
binaθih
binami
bin(a)i
binaθi
*gabie- ‘take’
*rōdeie- ‘say’
*rudē- ‘redden’
gabiūh
gabiīh
gabieh
gabiu
gabii
gabie
rādīūh
rādīīh
rādīeh
rādīu
rādīi
rādī
rudīmih
rudīīh
rudīθih
rudīmi
rudīi
rudīθi
At this stage, the final *e of *gabie was apparently eliminated on the analogy
of the weak verbs. The two types of ī-flexion merged through the
generalization of 3rd sg. abs. *-īθih and conj. *-ī. The element *-θi was
perhaps reinterpreted as a clitic, which was incompatible with the conjunct
form. The athematic conjunct ending may have been preserved in co cóic
séotu cingith ‘it extends to five chattels’ (cf. Binchy 1971: 160). When medial
long vowels were shortened at stage (10), the absolute ending *-θih spread to
the BII and AI verbs on the analogy of the AII and BIV verbs. The spread of
*-θih to class BI may have taken place at a relatively recent stage: the original
absolute ending has been preserved in Wb 11d 2 fil ‘there is’.
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
15
24. The plural endings cannot be reconstructed with the same chronological
precision. The thematic 3rd pl. ending *-o was replaced with the secondary
ending when the corresponding 3rd sg. endings had merged as a result of the
early loss of word-final *t. The phonetic reflex *-on of PIE *-ont was later
replaced with *-ot, which was the reflex of *-ont- before a clitic. The latter
replacement was posterior to the rise of *ō3 < *-ont at stage (5), e.g. in trícho
‘thirty’ < *trīkont. It follows from this word, where the rise of final *t was
posterior to the loss of PIE final *t, that the ending of -berat ‘they carry’
cannot be derived phonetically from PIE *-ont. The final consonant of dét
‘tooth’ < *dents, -bert ‘bore’ < *bert, do-r-ét ‘has protected’ < *dē-ro-ent
(*em-), do-rósat ‘has created’ < *to-ro-uss-sent (*sem-) is also due to
restoration. It is clear from these examples that the creation of the t-preterit,
which was apparently posterior to the loss of interconsonantal *s (cf. echtar
‘outside’ < *ekster) and to the assimilation of *st to *ss, was anterior to the loss
of final *t. The new 3rd pl. conj. ending *-ot spread to the athematic flexion in
accordance with the general tendency toward generalization of the thematic
endings. The original athematic ending has been preserved in the copula it <
*ēti < *senti. In the absolute forms, the generalization of *-otih must be
viewed in connection with the substitution of 3rd sg. *-θih for *-eh in the
weak verbs. The model of 1st sg. *-mih, 2nd sg. -īh, 3rd sg. -θih, and 3rd pl.
*-otih evoked the replacement of the 1st pl. ending *-moeh < *-mos-es with
*-moih, e.g. bermai ‘we carry’. The latter development did not affect the 2nd
pl. ending *-θēh < *-tes-es, which had received a long vowel at stage (5), e.g.
beirthe ‘you carry’. The lenition after nídan ‘we are not’ suggests that we have
to reckon with an earlier ending *-mo next to *-mos, the distribution of which
can no longer be ascertained.
25.
After the shortening of posttonic long vowels in non-final syllables, the
opposition between high and mid short vowels was neutralized if the
following syllable contained a non-high vowel (G4-6). When the phonemic
contrast was reintroduced, the product of the neutralization merged with the
corresponding mid vowel, e.g. fer ‘man’ < *wirah, cloth ‘fame’ < *kluθan,
sonairt ‘strong’ < *sunertih. Here again, I see no evidence for a different
treatment of stressed and unstressed syllables. The lowering was blocked by
an intervening palatalized consonant, e.g. voc.sg. fir < *wire, fiche ‘twenty’ <
*wixēh. This is the origin of the difference between the high vowel in cingid
16
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
‘steps’ < *kingeθih and the lowered vowel in 3rd pl. cengait < *kingatih, bongid
‘breaks’ < *bungeθih, conj. -boing < *bunge, nom.pl. coin ‘hounds’ < *kuneh.
The palatalization in the latter words had not yet come into existence at this
stage. (The argumentation of Kortlandt 1978b: 297, n. 18 cannot be
maintained.) The lowering of *i and *u to *e and *o was obviously posterior to
the rise of palatalization at stage (7), cf. aile ‘other’ < *aliah/-ia < *alios/-iā
versus calad ‘hard’ < *kaleθah, acc.sg. máthair ‘mother’ < *māθeren. It was
also posterior to the raising at stage (8), e.g. uile ‘all’ < *oliah/-ia, muinél
‘neck’ < *monixlah. The raised vowel was not lowered in these words because
the medial vowel was not distinctively non-high at the time of neutralization
and because the intervening consonant was palatalized. The lowering can
even be dated after the shortening of long vowels in medial syllables (10)
because it affected the medial vowel of the suffix *-tūt- before the gen.sg.
ending *-ah and the acc.sg. ending *-en, e.g. oíntu ‘unity’ < *oinoθūh, gen.
oíntad, acc. oíntaid. The absence of lowering in the first syllable of uilen
‘elbow’ < *olīna does not provide counter-evidence against this chronology
because the word is of the same type as muinél. Thus, I add:
(11)
Lowering of short *i and *u before a non-high vowel in the
following syllable.
26. Following the course of events we now approach the apocope. The loss
of short final vowels was preceded by their merger into some kind of schwa,
as a result of which long final vowels lost their distinctive quantity. The
colour of the short vowels was partly preserved after their merger because
front vowels palatalized the preceding consonant and the latent u-infection of
a preceding short vowel became phonemically relevant. I conclude that we
can add:
(12)
Palatalization of all consonants before *i and *e in final syllables
(G7a).
(13)
Reduction of short vowels in final syllables: rise of schwa.
(14)
Shortening of long vowels in final syllables (G8b).
(15)
Apocope: loss of final schwa (G8a).
Examples: ball ‘member’ < *ballah, gen. baill < *ball’i, dat. baull < *ballu, voc.
baill < *balle, -cain ‘sings’ < *kane, canaid < *kaneθ’ih, luib ‘plant’ <
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
17
*lubih, nom.pl. lubai < *lubīh. The loss of final *h and concomitant rise of
lenition as a grammatical process (G8c) can be dated anywhere between stage
(6) and stage (14). I think that it was a gradual development. The lenition of
initial *s was already grammaticalized simultaneously with the nasal mutation
at stage (5) because eclipsed *s merged with unlenited *s, so that the choice
between initial *h and initial *s was no longer dependent on the presence or
absence of a preceding vowel.
27. Since the subsequent developments are of minor significance for the
history of the absolute and conjunct endings, I list them here without
comment and refer to Greene 1976a: 31ff.
(16)
Reduction of vowel sequences and coalescence of preverbs.
Example: tomus ‘measure’ < *tomeus < *tomesuh.
(17)
Loss of fricatives before resonants and compensatory lengthening (G9): rise of *ē4 and *ō4.
Example: muinél ‘neck’ < *mun’exl < *monixlah.
(18)
Reduction of short vowels in medial syllables to schwa with
partial preservation of the vocalic timbre in the preceding consonant (G10).
Example: gen.sg. toimseo ‘measure’ < *tomeso < *tomesōh.
(19)
Syncope: loss of schwa in weak syllables (G11).
(20)
Loss of intervocalic *w.
(21)
Diphthongal shift.
(22)
Reduction of hiatus.
The palatalization assimilation in consonant clusters can be dated after stage
(19).
28. Both the s-preterit and the t-preterit are most easily derived from 3rd sg.
aorist forms, to which the primary thematic endings were added in order to
supply the 1st and 2nd sg. forms (and also the plural forms of the s-preterit).
The PIE secondary thematic endings have been preserved in the asubjunctive, which is historically identical with the s-subjunctive (cf. Rix
18
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
1977: 153). The characteristic vowel of the a-subjunctive represents the final
laryngeal of seṭ-roots before the suffix of the s-subjunctive. Since the
subjunctive mood had thematic endings, *s was lost between the reflex of the
laryngeal and the thematic vowel at stage (2). The flexion of the s-subjunctive
was evidently reshaped on the pattern of the s-preterit. The original 1st sg.
absolute ending has been preserved in the s-future, where it was supported by
the other future paradigms.
29. When final *t was lost in Proto-Celtic, the secondary 3rd sg. ending *-et
merged with the primary thematic ending *-e. As a result of this merger, the
absolute form *beraeh < *berase-s was replaced with *beraθih in the same way
as *marwaeh was replaced with marwaθih after stage (10). The conjunct form
*berae was replaced with *berā on the analogy of *marwā. The derivation of
the 2nd sg. ending from both *-ases and *-ases-es presents no difficulties: after
the regular development to *-aeh and *-aēh and the apocope, which yielded
*-e and *-ae, the endings merged into -e at stage (16). The 1st sg. conjunct
form -ber cannot be derived phonetically from *berām because *-ām yielded
*-en, cf. acc.sg. túaith ‘people’ < *tōθen < *teutām. As I pointed out above, the
form can represent the regular development of *berason, which was reduced
to pre-apocope *bera n- as a result of the loss of intervocalic *s at stage (2), the
lowering of *-on to *-an and its coalescence with the preceding *a into *-ān,
the rise of the nasal mutation at stage (5), and the shortening of *-ā at stage
(6). The suggestion that the absolute form bera originates from a reshaping
on the basis of the conjunct form is not convincing because there is no
motivation for such an analogic development. I consider it more likely that
we have to start from the hypothesis that the absolute suffix was *s after
vowels and nasals and *es after obstruents. This rule is typologically
comparable with the elision of e in Latin -a est, -um est. The form *berason-s
developed into *beraōs at stage (5), and the latter may have yielded the
expected pre-apocope form *berāh at stage (6).
30.
The future paradigm requires some discussion because the origin of the
weak f-future has not finally been elucidated. According to the most plausible
theory, -f- is the phonetic reflex of intervocalic *-bw- (Sommerfelt 1922). The
suffix before the thematic ending must have been *-ibw- or *-ībw- in
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
19
view of the palatalization in such instances as Wb 14a 8 ainfa ‘I will stay’ <
*anibwāh, cf. anaid ‘stays’ < *anaθih, which is to be compared with Skt. ániti
‘breathes’. In accordance with the rules given in section 17 of this article, the
consonant was not palatalized in such forms as Wb 12d 3 -tucfa ‘he will
understand’ < *to-ukībwā. The cluster *bw became palatalized before the
front vowel of the 2nd and 3rd sg. endings, but not before the 1st sg. ending.
When *w became a fricative around stage (9), the cluster merged with
intervocalic *hw < *sw into fortis *w, which can be written *ww. The latter
caused u-infection in the same way as lenited *w. If we assume that the ffuture had the same endings as the a-subjunctive, we arrive at the following
reconstruction of the two paradigms at stage (10):
1st sg.
2nd sg.
3rd sg.
abs.
-iuwwōh
-iuwwēh
-iuwweh
conj.
-iuwwa n-iuwweh
-iuwwe
abs.
-āh
-aēh
-aeh
conj.
-a n-aeh
-ae
It is probable that the 1st sg. ending *-iuwwōh was replaced with *-iuwwāh
around this stage. The 3rd sg. ending *-iuwweh was replaced with *-iuwweθih
when *bereh was replaced with *bereθih. This leads us to the following
reconstruction at stage (16):
1st sg.
2nd sg.
3rd sg.
abs.
-’ufa
-’uf’e
-’uf’eθ’
conj.
-’uf
-’uf’
-’uf’
abs.
-a
-e
-eθ’
conj.
-Ø
-e
-a
At this stage, the 2nd and 3rd sg. conjunct endings of the a-subjunctive,
which were used in the reduplicated future and the ē-future already, replaced
the zero endings in the corresponding forms of the f-future. There is no need
to connect the u-infection in the 1st sg. conjunct form with the primary
thematic ending. The 3rd sg. conjunct ending *-a was also restored in the
subjunctive of all verbs, e.g. -lécea ‘leaves’, cf. the phonetic development in
gen.sg. guide ‘prayer’ < *-iāh (pace Cullen 1972: 229). The 1st sg. endings are
likewise due to restoration in the subjunctive of this class.
31. Thus far I have left the relative forms out of consideration. One of the
most remarkable facts about the relative forms is their coincidence with the
20
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
absolute form in the passive preterit, but with the conjunct form in the other
passive and deponent paradigms. Greene has recently drawn attention to the
interesting syntactic homonymy which results from this coincidence (1976b),
e.g. digéni cummen cétaig ríthae friéladach, which can be translated either
‘Cummen made a coat which was sold to Éladach’ or ‘Cummen made a coat.
It was sold to Éladach’. I cannot share Greene’s conclusion that the relative
form came to be used in absolute position. On the contrary, I think that it
supports Cowgill’s tentative etymology of the absolute suffix *es as an enclitic
form of the copula *esti (1975: 66). When *es came to be used obligatorily in
second position, its occurrence after a non-initial participial form received
the status of a relative particle. Thus, to Cowgill’s examples brethae in fer ‘the
man was carried’ < *britos est sindos wiros and ní-breth in fer ‘the man was
not carried’ < *nēst britos sindos wiros we can add in fer brethae ‘the man who
was carried’ < *sindos wiros britos est ‘this man, he was carried’. I conclude
that the absolute form came to be used as a relative rather than the other way
round. The hypothesis advanced here is supported by the possibility of
substituting absolute for relative forms in nasalizing relative clauses, e.g. Wb
23d 25 hóre ni-ro-imdibed ‘because he had not been circumcised’, which is
especially common in clauses containing the copula.
32. In this connection it seems appropriate to reconsider the other relative
forms. There are several obstacles to the common view that the relative
ending -e reflects an uninflected particle *io < PIE *iod. First of all, the relative
particle does not palatalize a preceding consonant, cf. sóeras ‘who delivered’,
tías ‘who may go’, giges ‘who will pray’, and all of the passive and deponent
forms. Palatalization is limited to those cases where the relative particle was
preceded by a front vowel, e.g. téte ‘who goes’ < *tēxti-,2 luide ‘who went’ <
*lude-, and the prepositions imme- ‘about’ < *embi- and are-‘for’ < *ari-.
Secondly, it is not clear how the PIE relative pronoun *ios came to lose its
inflection. When the antecedent is the subject of the relative clause, one
would expect gemination rather than lenition if the relative particle is to be
derived from *ios. Finally, the relation between *io and the relative
prepositions such as cosa n- ‘to which’ remains to be explained. All these
2
I assume that *x was eliminated in téte on the analogy of the 3rd sg. abs. and conj.
(and 2nd pl. conj.) forms, where it was lost phonetically in the position between a long
vowel and a tautosyllabic t around stage (17).
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
21
problems vanish if we identify the relative particle with the PIE anaphoric
pronoun *so, fem. *sā, and assume that it occupied the same position in the
clause as the absolute particle *es, e.g. in fer téte ‘the man who goes’ < *sindos
wiros steikti so ‘this man, he goes’. The nasalization in relative clauses where
the antecedent is not the subject of the verb points to an acc.sg. form *san,
which was created on the analogy of *sa. When *bereh was replaced with
*bereθih after stage (10), the relative form *berea < *bere-so/-sā was replaced
with *beresa on the analogy of the relative copula as < *esa < *est-so/-sā, cf.
Breton so. The original thematic relative ending has been preserved in file
‘which there is’. The plural relative forms were apparently created on the basis
of the 3rd sg. form, which was originally used for both numbers when the
relative particle represented the subject, cf. Ml 124b 3 ní sní cet-id-deirgni ‘it is
not we who have done it first’, where -deirgni is the 3rd sg. perfect form of dogní ‘does’.3
33. Cowgill has not gone into the original function of the absolute particle *es
and the reason for its coexistence with the copula is < *esti. The etymological
identity of the two is supported by the presence of a copula form in Bergin’s
law constructions, e.g. ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung ‘although I reap
blistered seaweed’. Thieme has drawn attention to the similar co-occurrence
of asti with a finite verb form in Sanskrit (1965: 90f.), e.g. pr̥cchati: asty atra
kāṃcid gāṃ paśyasi ‘asks: is it (that) you see a certain cow here’. If we
suppose that the absolute particle may have grown out of this type of usage,
the bifurcation of the copula remains to be explained. In this connection I
want to point to the comparable existence of two forms in Slavic, which can
also be derived from *est and *esti. Here I shall list the 3rd sg. forms of the
copula in the oldest Slavic texts, the Freising Fragments (unmarked) and the
Kiev Leaflets (KL). These texts are of particular interest because they were
written in a dialectal area where the coexistence of je and jest was more
persistent than in the Bulgarian and Russian territories.
3
Cf. the comparable construction in Russian: te, kto ne xočet prinjat'sja za rabotu,
mogut otdat' svoi rasčetnye knižki 'those who do(es) not want to get down to work, can
(pl.) return their pay-books'.
22
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
34. The short form, which is written ie or ge in the Freising Fragments, is a
clitic and is used with a verbal predicate (l-participle or infinitive):
II 79 ese ge ... stuoril ‘quod fecit’,
II 93 pozled ge pozstavv(il) ‘postremo constituit’,
II 94 i ucazal ge ‘et monstravit’,
I 8 da mi ie ... iti ‘mihi eundum esse’,
I 9 imeti mi ie sivuot ‘mihi vita habenda est’,
I 10 imeti mi ie otpuztic ‘mihi remissio accipienda est’,
II 71 nu ge stati pred stolom bosigem ‘sed ante thronum Dei standum est’,
II 86 nu ge pred bosima osima stati ‘sed ante oculos Dei standum est’.
To these instances can be added two cases where je was deleted after the
reflexive pronoun se (written ze):
I 16 ese mi ze tomu chotelo ‘quod concupivi’,
II 59 i nam ze modliti ‘et nobis exorandus est’.
In the Codex Suprasliensis, which is the only Old Bulgarian text where the
short copula occurs more than three times, it is used 5× with a verbal
predicate, 1× in the construction jakože je podoba ‘ut decet’, 2× with a
nominal predicate, and 8× after čto ‘quid’. The only examples of the short
copula in the Codex Zographensis (2×), the Codex Assemanianus (2×), and
the Savvina Kniga (2×) are found after čĭto (čto) ‘quid’.
35. The long form, which is written iezt, iest, gest in the Freising Fragments, is
used with a nominal predicate (noun or n-participle):
I 35 ese v(i) iezt ugotoulieno ‘quod vobis paratum est’,
II 64 ese iest ugotouleno ‘quod paratum est’,
II 90 ise gest bali ‘qui est medicus’,
KL VI 7 äko balĭstvo estŭ ‘medicinam esse’.
The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings
23
Besides, the long form is used instead of the short form if there is no
orthotonic word in the neighbourhood:
II 75 i gest ze pred bosima osima ... izbovuedati ‘et ante oculos Dei
confitendum est’.
In the Old Bulgarian texts, the long form of the copula is used almost
exclusively.
ABSOLUTE AND CONJUNCT AGAIN*
Lediglich Meillets Theorie bietet einen
passenden Rahmen für -ō als konjunkte
Endung (nicht jedoch für abs. -u). (Meid
1963: 17)
Dagegen scheint mir, daß die Annahme, -s
habe sich von irgend einem bestimmten
Ausgangspunkt
Endungen
ausgebreitet,
derselben
aus
der
auf
verschiedene
absoluten
Flexion
Gestalt
mancher
die
gut
erklären
würde.
(Thurneysen 1914: 30)
In 1978 David Greene asked me to submit an exposition of my views on
the development of the Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings and their
chronological implications. The resulting article appeared the following year
(1979b). In 1983 Warren Cowgill criticized my views at a conference which I
unfortunately could not attend. When the proceedings of the conference
appeared (1985), the great American Indo-Europeanist had passed away and I
did not feel like answering his criticism. As the publications which have come
to my knowledge since I wrote the original article have not given me reason
to change my opinion on the principal issues, I think that it is time to take the
matter up again here.1
Let me first of all emphasize again (cf. 1979b: 35) that I cannot accept any
theory which builds on an analogical differentiation between absolute and
conjunct endings. If there was any interaction between the two sets of forms,
the only result can have been the replacement of one by the other, as indeed
happened in later Irish. The distinction between absolute and conjunct
*
1
Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 55 (1994), 61-68.
I shall not discuss McCone's theory, which Cowgill has refuted in a conclusive way
(o.c.), nor the variants proposed by Sims-Williams (1984) and Koch (1987), which are
open to similar objections.
92
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
endings must originally have been motivated semantically, as morphological
distinctions always are. After the loss of the semantic element there can have
been no such thing as the massive spread of a redundant morphological
category.
Following Thurneysen (1897, 1914), Cowgill hesitantly derived the
difference between the two sets of verbal paradigms from the presence versus
absence of an enclitic copula (1975: 66). I am more convinced now than I was
before (cf. 1979b: 51, 1984: 182) that we have to start from an enclitic focus
particle *est ‘it is (the case that)’ which distinguished the absolute and
deuterotonic from the conjunct and prototonic forms. There actually seem to
be traces of the original meaning in Archaic Irish. Following Mac Cana
(1973), Greene has drawn attention to the difference between what he called
Tmesis III and a cleft sentence (1977: 24f.): manip fri fasach fuirmider sceo
fursantar fír Féine ‘unless the truth of Irish law be fixed and illuminated by
precedent’ (lit. ‘unless be by precedent fixed and illuminated the truth of Irish
law’), as opposed to *manip fri fasach fo-ruimedar sceo for-osnathar fír Féine
‘unless it be by precedent that the truth of Irish law is fixed and illuminated’
(lit. ‘unless be by precedent it is fixed and illuminated the truth of Irish law’).
When the particle became a fixed constituent of initial phrases in statements,
its absence was limited to responsive and cohortative (imperative, emphatic
future) usage, e.g. Laumur ar dochondaib dílsi caille ‘Let me venture for (the
benefit of) the immature (to state) the immune things of the forest’ (Binchy
1971: 157, Greene 1977: 18), as opposed to ‘(It is the case that) I venture (…)’.
Cowgill assumes an early loss of final *-i in 3rd person verb forms (1975:
57, 1985b: 109). Even this restrictive formulation does not work because this
early loss of *-i affected the 3rd sg. but not the 3rd pl. relative form (Cowgill
1975: 59) and does not account for the 2nd sg. forms (cf. Kortlandt 1979b: 36).
McCone has tried to turn the rule into a general phonetic apocope of *-i
(1978). It seems to me that neuter i-stems like muir ‘sea’, the dat.sg. form déit
‘tooth’, and especially the isolated form inn-uraid
Absolute and conjunct again
93
‘last year’, which must be identified with Gr. πέρυσι and Arm. heru, suffice to
show that his view is mistaken.2
The gen.sg. forms anmae ‘name’ < *-ens and sléibe ‘mountain’ < *-esos
suggest that we have to start from a zero loc.sg. ending in dat.sg. ainm and a
long ending *-esi in sléib. Like Cowgill (1975: 57, 1985b: 113) I think that loc.sg.
*tegesi developed via *tegī into dat.sg. tig ‘house’ because *-s- was lost at an
early stage (cf. OW. tig, MW. ty). The loss of intervocalic *-s- must be dated
before the monophthongization of the Indo-European u-diphthongs, as is
clear from tauë ‘silence’ (W. taw) < *tawia < *tausiā (cf. Kortlandt 1979b: 39).
It follows that the original nonzero loc.sg. ending of the neuter s-stems
merged phonetically with the original zero ending of the neuter n-stems,
leaving as its only trace the raising of the root vowel in tig. As a result, the two
types of ending may have been subject to redistribution after stage (6) of my
chronology (1979b: 41).
When we reconsider the material presented by McCone (1978), it
appears that the distribution of “short” and “long” dat.sg. forms of consonant
stems in the glosses reflects a distinction of inanimate versus animate: on the
one hand oíntu ‘unity’, toimtiu ‘opinion’, tíchtu ‘coming’ and other abstracts,
further tene ‘fire’, cin (acc.) ‘fault’, traig (acc.) ‘foot’, cathair ‘city’, talam
‘earth’, brú ‘breast’, and on the other hand r- and nt-stems such as athair
‘father’ and carae ‘friend’, further coimdiu ‘lord’, fili ‘poet’, rí ‘king’, brithem
‘judge’, feichem ‘creditor’, fiada ‘witness’, also menmae ‘mind’. The absence of
short dat.sg. forms of cré ‘clay’ and lie ‘stone’ seems to be accidental. From the
Blathmac poems McCone cites the short forms cathir, talam, brú, crí ‘clay’,
aitite ‘recognition’, also druí ‘magician’, and long forms of coimdiu, brithem,
and trú ‘doomed man’. It follows that his material cannot be used as evidence
for a general apocope of *-i.3
2
Note that the addition of inn- is recent, as it is in in-dé ‘yesterday’ (W. ddoe); cf. also
the substitution of in fecht-so for ind-echt-so ‘this once’.
3
It could be argued that the “short” and “long” forms represent the locative and the
dative, respectively, a possibility which McCone does not consider (cf. 1978: 35). This
version of the theory would still be unacceptable to me in view of the objections stated
above (muir, déit, inn-uraid). Since “it is hard to discern a powerful motivation
towards the creation of a separate dat.sg. form” anmaimm ‘name’ (McCone 1978: 32,
94
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
The early loss of intervocalic *-s- solves two problems which
Thurneysen perceived already in the earliest beginnings of the particle theory.
Firstly, “rucad neben ro hucad (mit bedeutungslosem h) Sg. 174a 1 zeigt, dass
ro von u- durch kein gesprochenes h getrennt war” (1897: 3). This is an
unfortunate example because “forms like ro-ucc ‘has brought’ are hardly ever
elided to **r’ucc, whereas the preverb ro in ro-icc ‘reaches’ is often elided,
giving r’icc” (Sims-Williams 1984: 143), but Cowgill admits that the latter type
of elision is a real difficulty in his theory (1985b: 111). The reason is that he
evidently limits the early loss of intervocalic *-s- to the position between
unstressed vowels instead of viewing it as a general phonetic development
which was obscured by the regularization of a morphophonemic alternation
(cf. Kortlandt 1982b: 77). It is only natural that the restoration of ro- was
earlier in the perfective particle, e.g. ro-ucc, where it carried a clear
grammatical meaning, than in the preverb, as in ro-icc, where it expressed a
lexical meaning in combination with the root, distinguishing it e.g. from doicc ‘comes’.
Secondly, though the 3rd sg. copula is does not lenite, “doch ist eine
vokalisch schliessende Grundform (*issi *essi aus *esti) nicht nur aus
etymologischen Gründen wahrscheinlich, sondern wird, wie mir scheint,
durch eine eigentümliche Wortverbindung direkt bewiesen” (Thurneysen
1897: 5), viz. is inse ‘it is difficult’ from *essi anassion, cf. ní anse ‘it is not
difficult’ from *nīs anassion. The general absence of lenition after is, from
which Thurneysen infers that “sich also etwa nach *nīh vor dem Wirken der
Auslautsgesetze *issih für *issi gebildet hat” (1897: 6), suggests that the
aphaeresis in *isi ’nasia was conditioned by the loss of intervocalic *-h- (my
stage 2 in 1979b: 39f.). The absence of lowering in the initial vowel of inse
points to a reanalysis as *is inase after my stage 11 (1979b: 47).
Unlike Cowgill, I am convinced that there was in Indo-European a
fundamental distinction between the thematic and the athematic present
endings which is reflected in Indo-Iranian (Beekes 1981), Greek, Armenian
(Kortlandt 1981b), Baltic, Slavic (Kortlandt 1979a), and perhaps all other
major branches of the family. In Old Irish we expect thematic endings in BI
fn. 27), I think that this is an original plural form (cf. Pedersen and Cowgill apud
McCone).
Absolute and conjunct again
95
berid, -beir ‘carries’, BII gaibid, -gaib ‘takes’, AI marbaid, -marba ‘kills’, AII
rádid, -rádi ‘says’, and athematic endings in BIV benaid, -ben ‘strikes’, AII
ruidid, -ruid ‘blushes’, also BI -tét ‘goes’ (see below), BI/II -said ‘sits’ (cf.
Kortlandt 1990: 8), BI/III -cing ‘steps’ (cf. Kuiper 1937: 168), BIV/V -gnin
‘knows’. I reconstruct 3rd sg. *-e in the thematic and *-ti in the athematic
flexion, after which *-s was added in the corresponding absolute forms. As a
result of the lenition the regular 3rd sg. endings became BI *-e(h), BII *-ie(h),
BIV *-aθi(h), AI *-āe(h), AII *-īe(h) and *-īθi(h), while *-ti was preserved in
*tēxti(h) ‘goes’. This fairly transparent system collapsed when *-e was lost
after a long vowel, which yielded a zero ending in AI *-ā and AII *-ī, but not
in the corresponding absolute forms in *-āeh and *-īeh (cf. Kortlandt 1979b:
41, 45). The zero conjunct ending evidently spread from the weak verbs to BII
*-i for *-ie, further to AII *-ī for *-īθi, and eventually to BIV *-a for *-aθi.
Such a development could not take place in the absolute forms because there
was no model.
It is in my view essential that there was no interaction between absolute
and conjunct endings because they were in complementary distribution after
the loss of *-es as a clear meaningful element until the later Irish
disintegration of the system of two sets of endings. The generalization of the
athematic 3rd sg. present ending *-θih in the absolute forms was motivated by
the merger of the present and preterit (sigmatic aorist) endings in the weak
verbs. While the conjunct endings AII *-ī(e) and *-īh < *-īs remained distinct
up to the apocope, the corresponding absolute endings merged into *-īeh as a
result of the loss of intervocalic *-s- in the preterit. The present ending was
therefore replaced by the available alternative *-īθih. In a similar vein I think
that the absolute present ending AI *-āeh was replaced by *-āθih for
differentiation from the subjunctive ending *-āeh < *-āses (cf. Kortlandt 1984:
182). When the functional distinction between primary and secondary
endings was lost and after the shortening of long vowels in medial syllables
(stage 10 of Kortlandt 1979b: 44), the subjunctive ending *-aeh was in its turn
replaced by *-aθih for differentiation from the preterit ending *-aeh < *-ases
(cf. Kortlandt 1984: 183). The replacement of the latter ending by *-aseh was
probably motivated by the introduction of primary endings in 1st sg. *-asūh
and 2nd sg. *-asīh on the analogy of the present tense. The absence of *-θih in
the paradigm of gabsu, gabsai, gabais ‘I, you, he took’ suggests that this
element was still absent in the present BII gaibid ‘takes’
96
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
when the primary endings were introduced into the preterit. It follows that
the spread of *-θih to BI berid ‘carries’ was a recent development.4
It appears that the original athematic conjunct ending was preserved
in -tét, Wb. -téit (Thurneysen 1946: 376) < *tēxti ‘goes’, where the root-final
consonant was lost in the position between a long vowel and a tautosyllabic
plosive after the apocope (Kortlandt 1979b: 50, fn. 2). Following Thurneysen
(1946: 377), I assume that the athematic conjunct ending spread to -fet ‘leads’,
-rét ‘rides, drives’, *-ret ‘runs’, prototonic -tet, -at, -rat, and then to other
verbs with a root-final dental plosive such as ad-fét, -adbat ‘relates’, arnëat, -airnet ‘expects, sustains’. The root sed- of the latter verb probably had
an athematic present *sediti ‘sits’, as in Germanic (Kortlandt 1990: 8). Note
that the depalatalization in *-tēxt is regular, as it is in secht ‘seven’ and the
oblique case forms of deacht ‘divinity’ (Thurneysen 1946: 101). There is no
reason to assume an irregular syncope (Meid 1972: 351) or apocope (Cowgill
1985b) which does not explain the alternative forms -feid, -réid, -reith.
Another athematic conjunct form may be attested in co cóic séotu cingith ‘it
extends to five chattels’ (Binchy 1971: 157, Greene 1977: 18). The form cingith is
actually an emendation of cingit (Binchy 1971: 153), which may represent
*kingiti or *kinixti ‘steps’. The semantic affinity with *tēxti may have played a
role in the preservation of the athematic ending.
I shall be brief about the passive and deponent forms. As I have pointed
out elsewhere (1981a: 18f.), I think that the conjunct forms ended in *-ro with
the exception of 2nd pl. -d < *-dwe and that the relative and absolute forms
were derived by adding the particles *so and *es, respectively. Since the latter
particle took the shape *-s after a vowel and intervocalic *-s- was lost in the
former before the shortening of long final vowels, the absolute
4
It is of course conceivable that the introduction of the new preterit endings was
earlier, which would render the introduction of *-θih in the subjunctive less wellmotivated. This chronology seems less plausible to me because it makes the
preservation of secondary endings in the subjunctive and the future difficult to
understand (cf. Kortlandt 1979b: 48f. and 1984: 182). The absence of raising in the
subjunctive and the preterit of thematic AII verbs (Thurneysen 1946: 385, 419) shows
that these paradigms had adopted a different suffix at my stage 8 (1979b: 43). This
yields a terminus ad quem for the generalization of *-θih in the AII presents. I
withdraw my agreement (1979b: 38, 46) with Watkins’ view that the thematic 3rd sg.
ending *-e is preserved in fil ‘there is’ (cf. Thurneysen 1946: 479).
Absolute and conjunct again
97
forms ended in *-rah and the conjunct and relative merged into *-ra at stage
(6) of my chronology (1979b: 41). This explains “a number of curious features
which have never received any serious attention” and are “not explicable on
the basis of any of the many theories which have been put forward to account
for the absolute and conjunct endings”, as Greene put it (1977: 28). Thus, I
think that we have a relative form in atáit secht fuili la Féniu fertar ‘there are
seven bloods which are spilt in Irish law’ < *-ntoro-so and an absolute form in
ó thestaib córaib cengar ‘one proceeds from proper witnesses’ and brechtaib
ban mberar ‘he is taken by the spells of women’ < *-oro-s. The original
absolute deponent ending was preserved in 1st sg. -ur < *-ōro-s and 2nd
sg. -ther < *-toro-s. The final palatalization in the regular 3rd sg. and pl.
endings -thir, -dir, -tir and 1st pl. -mir was evidently taken from the active
paradigms after the apocope.
THREE NOTES ON THE OLD IRISH VERB*
“Il est étrange que, pour éviter d’admettre des traitements phonétiques qui ne
contredisent aucun traitement connu des mêmes phonèmes placés dans les
mêmes conditions, on ait recouru à des hypothèses analogiques qui sont ou
arbitraires ou invraisemblables, comme si les difficultés morphologiques
étaient, par nature, chose moins grave que les difficultés phonétiques”
(Meillet 1914: 8). Here I shall give three examples where scholars have in utter
despair proposed to assume suppletive formations because they could not get
the sound laws right.
1. bá, boí ‘was’ < *bhōuAccording to the traditional view (Thurneysen 1946: 483), 3rd sg. boí
“could go back to *bhowe, an unreduplicated perfect, or alternatively to
*bhōwe (whence Celtic *bāwe); but this would leave unexplained the ā of the
other forms, which show no trace of w.” I have argued (1986: 90-92) that
these forms are compatible if we start from an original full grade root aorist
*bhāw- < *bheH2u-, 1st sg. -bá < *bām < *bhāum, 3rd sg. -boí < *bau-e <
*bhāut with added *-e on the analogy of the perfect. On the basis of
Armenian boys ‘herb, plant’, busanim ‘grow’, I now reconstruct *bhōw- <
*bheH3u- (note that the timbre of the laryngeal cannot be established on the
basis of Germanic bō-, Slavic bav-, or Vedic bodhí ‘be!’). This renders the
derivation of Welsh bu ‘was’ < *bōu < *bhōut straightforward but implies a
difference between OIr. -bá < *bōm < *bhōum and cú ‘dog’ < *kuō, which
shows the regular development of polysyllables (cf. Thurneysen 1946: 58).
My theory has been disregarded by McCone, who wrongly attributes a
quite different view to me (1991: 128): “Although phonetically unobjectionable
on its own, Kortlandt’s derivation of OIr. 1/2sg. -bá ‘I was, you were’ < *bāwa(s) < full grade *bheh2w- is hard to square with 3sg. *bow(e) implied by MW.
bu and OIr. boí,” as he puts it. On the contrary, I
*
Études Celtiques 34 (1998-2000), 143-146.
126
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
would maintain that McCone’s reconstruction *bāwa(s) yields OIr. **báu >
**báo > **bó (cf. now Uhlich 1995). The monosyllabic forms of the original
root aorist have been preserved in the preterit of the copula 1st sg. -b(sa) <
*bōm, 3rd sg. -bo < *bōu. McCone’s derivation of boí < *bowe < *buwe is
phonetically unobjectionable on its own (cf. Kortlandt 1979b: 46f.) but does
not explain the stem form bá- of the other persons in the paradigm.
2. níta, ní ‘am/is not’ < *nēst (de es-)
This paradigm is evidently based on ní < *nīh < *nēst (cf. Thurneysen
1946: 487). I find it impossible to separate negative níta from positive -da,
which must be derived from *d(e) es-, 3rd sg. -t < *-d(e)h < *d(e) est, thus níta
< *nīh d’ e- < *nēst d(e) es-, 3rd pl. nítat < *nīh d(e) (h)ēt- < *nēst de senti,
Welsh antevocalic nyt ‘not’ < *nīh d(e) < *nēst de (cf. Kortlandt 1996a: 96).
While the athematic flexion is preserved in the absolute paradigm am <
*esmi-s, at < *esi-s tu, is < *esti-s, the leniting 1st and 2nd sg. conjunct
forms -da, níta suggest that the flexion was thematicized to *-eu, *-ei, as if
from *esō, *esei (cf. Kortlandt 1979b: 45). We find complementary
distribution between absolute *es and relative *so, and also between the
connectives *de and *kwe, e.g. relative nád < *na-so-de, nách < *na-so-kwe,
MW. nat < *na-so-d(e) with -t from nyt, MBr. nac ‘who (does) not’ < *naso-k but nag-a ‘do not go!’ < *na-k age (cf. Kortlandt 1996a: 96).
Schrijver derives OIr. nítat ‘are not’ < *nent-, “whatever the ultimate
origin of *-nt- may have been” (1997: 158), and identifies MW. nyt with OIr.
ní, allegedly from *ne et(i). He thus separates the negative from the positive
paradigm of the copula, which I find unacceptable. Apart from the objections
to a derivation of the absolute particle *es < *eti which Schrijver discusses
(1997: 156-158), the main points against his theory are that it requires massive
analogical spread of apocopated *-i which cannot be motivated (cf. Schrijver
1994: 175-177 and Kortlandt 1996a: 95) and that it presupposes the absence of
the particle in verbs with a telic Aktionsart (cf. Schrijver 1997: 123-128), which
in my view disqualifies the theory in a fundamental way. These problems
vanish if we do not derive *es from *eti but from *est, which is also preferable
for functional reasons. As I pointed out a long time ago (1982b: 76-78),
original intervocalic *-s- was lost at an early stage and *-h- was restored on
the basis of the anteconsonantal reflex as the regular
Three notes on the Old Irish verb
127
alternant of *-s-. As a result, the particle *es was lost phonetically before rootinitial vowels. Schrijver objects (1997: 123) that it is difficult to find a model
for the restoration of *-h in such instances as a h-ech ‘her horse’. This is a
consequence of his lack of chronological perspective: while the loss of
intervocalic *-h- can be dated to stage 2 of my chronology (1979b: 39f.) and
the rise of the nasal mutation to stage 5, final *-h was evidently preserved up
to the apocope at stage 15 in such instances as nant ‘that it is not’ < *-d(e)h
and arimp ‘in order that it may be’ < *-b(e)h, which leaves plenty of time for
the restoration of *-h before initial vowels (see further Kortlandt 1982b:
79-82).
Before the infixed object pronoun masc. *en, neuter *e, the particle *es
was lost after a vowel (before class A pronouns) and reduced to *-e- after a
consonant (before class B pronouns). Since the nonzero reflex merged with
the object pronoun, the forms were disambiguated by the insertion of *d(e)
before the infixed pronoun, as happened again to protect the object pronoun
*-e- from elision before the root-initial vowel in Wb 5b 40 cotd-icc ‘he can do
it’ < *kon-s-d-e-d-, similarly nachid- < *na-so-kwe-d-e beside nách- < *na-sok-e ‘who ... not it’ (cf. Kortlandt 1996a: 96). Thus, I reconstruct *-s- in class A,
*-es-de- in class B, and *-so-de- in class C. Schrijver’s reconstruction of the
masc. relative subject pronoun *yo beside object *en < *em and neuter *e <
*ed (1997: 129) can actually be adduced in support of my view that we must
reconstruct *so instead of *yo. The complementary distribution between
absolute *es and relative *so may then support Pedersen’s derivation of *es
from a resumptive subject pronoun (cf. Kortlandt 1984: 182). For the time
being I stick to a derivation of *es from *est ‘it is (the case that)’ because there
seem to be traces of the original meaning in Archaic Irish (cf. Kortlandt 1994:
62).
3. tíagu, téit ‘go(es)’ < *steighAccording to the usual view, 3rd sg. téit is a form of the root *ten‘stretch’, unlike the other forms of the paradigm, which clearly represent the
root *steigh- ‘step’ (Bergin 1938: 227f., Thurneysen 1946: 473). Schrijver
proposes to derive téit from a nasal present *stingh- (1993: 44). I would prefer
to derive the whole paradigm from a single stem, which can only have been
*steigh-, so that abs. téit, conj. -tét, Wb. -téit reflect *steighti(-s),
128
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
thematicized in 1st sg. tíagu, -tíag < *steighō(-s). I have therefore suggested
that *x was lost after a long vowel in *tēxt′ (1979b: 50). The problem with this
chronology is that the voicing of the final dental stop is no longer automatic
after the apocope (cf. Kortlandt 1982b: 78f.). It is therefore preferable to date
the loss of *x between stages 5 (loss of *n before dentals and velars) and 15
(apocope) of my chronology (1979b), probably after the palatalization of the
cluster [xt] between front vowels (my stage 7). As a result of this
development, the 3rd sg. form *tēti(h) escaped the thematicization of the
paradigm of *tēg- around stage 10 (cf. Kortlandt 1979b: 44-46). This explains
the isolated character of the 3rd sg. present tense form. Note that the
preservation of [x] in téchtae ‘proper, right’ suggests that the palatalization of
[x′] was a prerequisite for its loss in téit, as might be expected on phonetic
grounds.
OLD IRISH feda, GEN. fedot ‘LORD’ AND THE 1ST SG. ABSOLUTE
ENDING -a IN SUBJUNCTIVES AND FUTURES
Patrick Sims-Williams has argued (1999), to my mind correctly, that the
Old Irish forms nom. feda, gen. fedot ‘Lord’ in the Cambrai Homily represent
an older stage of the later forms fíado, fíadat. This simplifies my account of
Old Irish historical phonology (1979b) and morphology (1984).
In my relative chronology of Old Irish sound changes, I distinguished
between *ē1 < Indo-European *ē, *ē2 < *ei, and *ē3 < *en before *t/s, and
between *ō1 < Indo-European *ō, *ō2 < *ou, and *ō3 < *on before *t/s, and
argued that the more recent vowel was lower than the earlier one (1979b: 40).
I followed the earlier view (cf. Greene 1976a: 27) that the loss of intervocalic *s
preceded the monophthongization of the u-diphthongs and noted that there
is no reason to separate the monophthongization of the i-diphthongs from
the latter development. Stressed *ai and *oi were not affected by the
monophthongization, which suggests that the u-diphthongs had merged into
*ou before the rise of *ō2. In unstressed syllables, the i-diphthongs merged
with *ē1 and *ī, e.g. nom.pl. fir ‘men’ < *wirī < *wiroi, dat.sg. tuil ‘will’ < *tolī <
*tolāi. The split of *ō1 into *ū in final syllables and *ā elsewhere must have
preceded the monophthongization of the diphthongs, e.g. dat.sg. fiur ‘man’ <
*wirū < *wirōi.
I do not share the common view that *ē1 had been raised to *ī in ProtoCeltic times already. An early merger of *ē1 and *ī would have yielded a
phonological system where the vowel height oppositions between the short
vowels outnumbered those between the long vowels. Though such a system is
by no means impossible, it is not probable that it would have remained in
existence over a longer period of time. It seems better to connect the raising
of *ē1 with the development of the i-diphthongs in the separate languages.
The development of Indo-European *-oi and *-āi into *-ī suggests that *ē1 and
*ē2 merged in unstressed syllables before the raising of *ē1 to *ī. In final
syllables we find *ī < *ē1 in the paradigm of méit ‘quantity’ (cf. Schrijver 1991a:
388f.). The *ē3 of carae ‘friend’ < *karēh < *karants is also found in
130
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
fiche ‘twenty’ < *wikēh < *wikent and in gen.sg. abae ‘river’ < *abēh < *abens.
Another source of *ē3 is found in the 2nd pl. absolute form beirthe ‘you carry’
< *beretēh < *beretes-es. I conclude that the rise of *ē3 from *en and *an before
a dental consonant was more recent than the raising of *ē1 and *ē2 to *ī in
unstressed syllables. It was also more recent than the raising of *ē1 to *ī in
stressed syllables because *ē3 merged neither with *ē1 nor with *ē2, e.g. cét
‘hundred’ < *kenton versus íasc ‘fish’ < *peiskos. The open character of *ē3 is
not unexpected because *en and *an merged, e.g. géis ‘swan’, Latin ānser
‘goose’. Thus, we arrive at the following relative chronology:
(1)
(2)
Lenition and rise of *h from Indo-European *s.
Loss of intervocalic *h.
(3)
(4)
(5)
Monophthongization of i- and u-diphthongs and rise of *ē2 and *ō2.
Raising of *ē1 to *ī.
Loss of *n before *t/s and rise of *ē3.
At this stage, the nasal mutation became a morphological process (cf.
Kortlandt 1979b: 41). It follows that the acc.pl. ending of the consonant stems
-a cannot be the phonetic reflex of syllabic *-ns, which should yield *-ē3. The
attested ending evidently has an analogical long vowel after which the nasal
consonant was lost at an earlier stage. For the next developments I refer to my
earlier work (1979b: 41-48, cf. also Schrijver 1991b: 23):
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
Shortening of word-final long vowels.
Palatalization.
Raising.
u-infection.
Shortening of long vowels in medial syllables.
Lowering.
The apocope is dated to stage (15), the syncope to stage (19), and the loss of
intervocalic *w to stage (20) of my chronology.
In my earlier contribution (1979b: 40, 46) I stuck to the traditional view
that *ō3 merged with *ō2 in trícho ‘thirty’ < *trīkont and cano ‘poet’ <
*kanonts. It now appears that *ō3 yielded -a word-finally and -o- in medial
syllables. I pointed out already that final *ē3 and *ō3 cannot represent IndoEuropean *-ent and *-ont because final *-t had been lost at an early stage, as
Old Irish feda, gen. fedot ‘Lord’
131
is evident from the merger of the perfect with the thematic aorist (cf. also
Kortlandt 1996a: 91f. and 1997a: 135). The 3rd pl. thematic present ending *-o
had been replaced by the secondary ending *-on(t) when the 3rd sg. thematic
present ending *-e merged with the secondary ending *-e(t), with *-t before
clitics, as in French a-t-il ‘has he’ beside il a ‘he has’. At this stage, the 3rd sg.
ending was *-e in the thematic present and aorist and in the perfect, *-to in
the imperfect and the imperative, *-(t)ro in the deponent, and *-toro in the
passive, while the 3rd pl. ending was *-on(t) in the thematic present and
aorist, *-r in the perfect, *-nto in the imperfect and the imperative, *-ntro in
the deponent, and *-ntoro in the passive (cf. Kortlandt 1981a: 17-20). The
elision of the first vowel in the 3rd pl. ending -atar of the suffixless preterit,
which continues the thematic aorist and the perfect, suggests that *-on(t) was
replaced by *-onto before the added -r (cf. Thurneysen 1946: 434), and the
same replacement may be assumed for the 3rd pl. conjunct ending of the
thematic present -at, which is -ot in the archaic forms tu-thegot ‘who come’
and tu-esmot ‘who pour out’ of the Cambrai Homily (cf. Sims-Williams 1999:
473, who mistakenly assumes *-i instead of *-o in these and other forms). This
development can be dated before or to approximately the same stage as the
reshuffling of thematic and athematic endings (cf. Kortlandt 1979b: 44-46 and
1997a).
In my earlier studies I argued that the absolute endings originated from
a particle *es which was reduced to *-s after vowels and nasals (1979b: 49 and
1984: 182f., cf. also 1994). The Indo-European secondary thematic endings 1st
sg. *-om and 2nd sg. *-es have been preserved in the a-subjunctive, which is
historically identical with the s-subjunctive of roots with a final laryngeal (cf.
Kortlandt 1979b: 48 and 1984: 182f.). The conjunct forms 1st sg. *berahon <
*-asom, 2nd sg. *beraheh < *-ases yielded pre-apocope *bera n- and *beraeh as
a result of the loss of intervocalic *-h- at stage (2), the lowering of *-on to *-an
and its coalescence with the preceding *-a- into *-ān, which became *-ā n- by
the rise of the nasal mutation at stage (5), and the shortening of *-ā at stage
(6) of my chronology, resulting in 1st sg. -ber and 2nd sg. -berae after the
apocope. The absolute forms represent 1st sg. *berasom-s and 2nd sg.
*berases-es, which became *-aō3h and *-aē3h at stage (5) and then developed
into pre-apocope *berāh, *beraēh, yielding the historical forms bera, berae.
Thus, the 1st sg. absolute ending -a is the regular outcome of *ō3 < *-ons and
does not require any additional
132
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
assumptions (cf. Kortlandt 1979b: 49). The same endings are found in the ffuture, where the suffix represents the future of the verb ‘to be’ *bwias-, as in
the formation of archaic Middle Welsh 3rd sg. deubyd ‘will come’ (cf.
Sommerfelt 1922 and Kortlandt 1984: 185f.). The u-infection in the 1st sg.
conjunct form, e.g. -léiciub ‘will leave’, must be derived from *-ww- < *-bw-,
not from a primary thematic ending for which there is no evidence and which
is at variance with the 1st sg. absolute ending -fa. The u-infection
subsequently spread from the f-future to the s-future, e.g. -gigius, -érus of
guidid ‘prays’, do-érig ‘abandons’. The reconstruction of *ō3 and *ē3 in the
absolute forms of the future of the substantive verb 1st sg. bia and 2nd sg. bie
enables us to identify the formation with its Brythonic counterpart.
APPENDIX: OLD IRISH VERBAL PARADIGMS
<...> = lost by analogy; [...] = substituted or added by analogy. This is to be
understood in the sense that the reflex of the indicated segment (not
necessarily the segment itself) was lost or added at some stage in the
development from Proto-Celtic to Old Irish. I have left out the delenition of
*m in the 1st sg. and pl. endings and more often than not the restoration of
lost segments (or their reflexes) in the reconstructions. The suffix of the ffuture is given as *-bwas- for *-bw<i>as- (cf. Kortlandt 1984: 185). Following
the order and classification of Thurneysen 1946, I have adopted the format of
Strachan 1949, with the absolute forms on the left hand side and the conjunct
forms on the right hand side, followed by a formal reconstruction of the
respective Insular Celtic endings:
absolute
< PIC *
conjunct
< PIC *
Examples: marbaid ‘kills’, léicid ‘leaves’, berid ‘carries’, gaibid ‘takes’, benaid
‘strikes’, labrithir ‘speaks’, suidigidir ‘places’, midithir ‘judges’, -cuirethar
‘puts’, téit ‘goes’, guidid ‘prays’, ro-fitir ‘knows’, canaid ‘sings’, -gainethar ‘is
born’, do-moinethar ‘thinks’.
PRESENT STEM
present indicative active
AI
1 sg.
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
marbu
marbaim
marbai
marbaid
marbas
-āiōs
-ā[mi]s
-āieis
-ā[ti]s
-ā[s]so
-marbu
-marbaim
-marbai
-marba
-āiō
-ā[mi]
-āiei
-āie
160
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
marbmai
marbmae
marbthae
marbait
marb(a)te
-āiomos[i]s
-āiomoses
-āieteses
-āiontes
-āionteso
1 sg.
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
léiciu
léicim
léici
léicid
léices
léicmi
léicme
léicthe
léicit
léc(i)te
-īōs
-ī[mi]s
-īeis
-ī[ti]s
-ī[s]so
-īomos[i]s
-īomoses
-īeteses
-īontes
-īonteso
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
biru
biri
berid
beres
bermai
bermae
beirthe
berait
bertae
-ōs
-eis
-e[ti]s
-e[s]so
-omos[i]s
-omoses
-eteses
-ontes
-onteso
1 sg.
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
gaibiu
gaibim
gaibi
gaibid
gaibes
-i[ō]s
-imis
-isis
-itis
-i[s]so
-marbam
-āiomos
-marbaid
-marbat
-āietes
-āiont[o]
-léiciu
-léicim
-léici
-léici
-īō
-ī[mi]
-īei
-īe
-léicem
-īomos
-léicid
-léicet
-īetes
-īont[o]
-biur
-bir
-beir
-ō
-ei
-e
-beram
-omos
-berid
-berat
-etes
-ont[o]
-gaibiu
-gaibim
-gaibi
-gaib
-i[ō]
-imi
-isi
-i<ti>
AII
BI
BII
Old Irish verbal paradigms
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
gaibmi
gaibme
gaibthe
gaibit
gaibte
161
-imos[i]s
-imoses
-iteses
-intes
-inteso
-gaibem
-imos
-gaibid
-gaibet
-ites
-int[o]
-benaim
-benai
-ben
-ami
-asi
-a<ti>
-benam
-amos
-benaid
-benat
-ates
-ant[o]
BIV
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
benaim
benai
benaid
benas
benmai
benmae
bentae
benait
bentae
-amis
-asis
-atis
-a[s]so
-amos[i]s
-amoses
-ateses
-antes
-anteso
present indicative deponent
AI
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
labrur
labrither
labrithir
labrathar
labrimmir
labrammar
labrithe
labritir
labratar
suidigim
suidigther
suidigidir
suidigedar
-āi[ō]ros
-āietoros
-āietr[e]s
-āietroso
-āi[e]mor[e]s
-āiomoros
-āie[tes]es
-āi[e]ntr[e]s
-āiontroso
-i[mi]s
-itoros
-itr[e]s
-itroso
-labrur
-labrither
-labrathar
-āi[ō]ro
-āietoro
-āietro
-labrammar
-āiomoro
-labraid
-labratar
-āiedwe
-āiontro
AII/BII
-suidigur
-suidigther
-suidigedar
-i[ō]ro
-itoro
-itro
162
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
suidigmir
suidigmer
suidigthe
suidigitir
suidigetar
midiur
mitter
midithir
midethar
midimmir
midemmar
mitte
miditir
midetar
-imor[e]s
-imoros
-i[tes]es
-intr[e]s
-introso
-i[ō]ros
-itoros
-itr[e]s
-itroso
-imor[e]s
-imoros
-i[tes]es
-intr[e]s
-introso
-suidigmer
-imoro
-suidigid
-suidigetar
-idwe
-intro
BII/AII
-cuiriur
-cuirther
-cuirethar
-ei[ō]ro
-eietoro
-eietro
-cuiremmar
-eiomoro
-cuirid
-cuiretar
-eiedwe
-eiontro
present indicative passive
AI
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
marbthair
marbthar
marb(a)tir
marb(a)tar
-āietor[e]s
-āietoroso
-āi[e]ntor[e]s
-āiontoroso
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
léicthir
léicther
léc(i)tir
léicter
-īetor[e]s
-īetoroso
-īontor[e]s
-īontoroso
3 sg.
rel.
suidigthir
suidigther
-itor[e]s
-itoroso
-marbthar
-āietoro
-marb(a)tar
-āiontoro
-léicther
-īetoro
-léc(e)tar
-īontoro
AII
AII/BII
-suidigther
-itoro
Old Irish verbal paradigms
3 pl.
rel.
suidigtir
suidigter
163
-intor[e]s
-intoroso
-suidigter
-intoro
-berar
-oro
-bertar
-ontoro
-gaibther
-itoro
-gaib(e)tar
-intoro
BI
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
berair
berar
bertair
bertar
-or[e]s
-oroso
-ontor[e]s
-ontoroso
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
gaibthir
gaibther
gaibtir
gaibter
-itor[e]s
-itoroso
-intor[e]s
-intoroso
3 sg.
3 pl.
mittir
miditir
-itor[e]s
-intor[e]s
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
benair
benar
bentair
bentar
-ar[e]s
-aroso
-antor[e]s
-antoroso
BII
BII/AII
-cuirther
-eietoro
BIV
-benar
-aro
-bentar
-antoro
imperfect indicative active
AI
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
-marbainn
-marbtha
-marbad
-marbmais
-marbthae
-marbtais
-āiema[m]
-āieto-āieto
-āiemos[te]
-āie[t]e-āiento[ste]
164
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
BI
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
-berinn
-bertha
-bered
-ema[m]
-eto-eto
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
-bermis
-berthe
-bertis
-emos[te]
-e[t]e-ento[ste]
imperfect indicative deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
AII/BII
-suidiginn
-suidigthea
-suidiged
-suidigmis
-suidigthe
-suidigtis
-ima[m]
-ito-ito
-imos[te]
-i[t]e-into[ste]
imperfect indicative passive
AI
3 sg.
3 pl.
-marbthae
-marbtais
-āieto-āiento[ste]
-berthe
-bertis
-eto-ento[ste]
BI
3 sg.
3 pl.
3 sg.
3 pl.
AII/BII
-suidigthe
-suidigtis
-ito-into[ste]
Old Irish verbal paradigms
165
imperative active
AI
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
marb
marbad
marbam
marbaid
marbat
-ā<ie>
-āieto
-āiomo
-āiete
-āionto
AII
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
léic
léiced
léicem
léicid
léicet
-ī<e>
-īeto
-īomo
-īete
-īonto
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
biur
beir
bered
beram
berid
berat
-ō
-e
-eto
-omo
-ete
-onto
BI
imperative deponent
AI
2 sg.
3 sg.
2 pl.
3 pl.
labrithe
labrad
labraid
labratar
-āieto[es]
-āieto
-āiedwe
-āiontro
2 sg.
3 sg.
2 pl.
3 pl.
suidigthe
suidiged
suidigid
suidigetar
-ito[es]
-ito
-idwe
-intro
AII/BII
166
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
BII/AII
2 sg.
3 sg.
2 pl.
3 pl.
cuirthe
cuired
cuirid
cuiretar
-eieto[es]
-eieto
-eiedwe
-eiontro
imperative passive
AI
3 sg.
3 pl.
marbthar
marbtar
-āietoro
-āiontoro
3 sg.
3 pl.
léicther
léicter
-īetoro
-īontoro
AII
AII/BII
3 sg.
3 pl.
suidigther
suidigter
-itoro
-intoro
3 sg.
3 pl.
berar
bertar
-oro
-ontoro
3 sg.
3 pl.
cuirther
cuirter
-eietoro
-eiontoro
BI
BII/AII
Old Irish verbal paradigms
167
SUBJUNCTIVE
present a-subjunctive active
AI
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
marba
marbae
marbaid
marbas
marbmai
marbmae
marbthae
marbait
marbaite
-asoms
-aseses
-a[ti]s
-asso
-asomos[i]s
-asomoses
-aseteses
-asontes
-asonteso
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
léicea
léice
léicid
léices
léicmi
léicme
léicthe
léicit
léc(i)te
-īsoms
-īseses
-ī[ti]s
-īsso
-īsomos[i]s
-īsomoses
-īseteses
-īsontes
-īsonteso
-marb
-marbae
-marba
-asom
-ases
-[ā]
-marbam
-asomos
-marbaid
-marbat
-asetes
-asont[o]
-léic
-léice
-léicea
-ī<som>
-īses
-īs[ā]
-léicem
-īsomos
-léicid
-léicet
-īsetes
-īsont[o]
-ber
-berae
-bera
-asom
-ases
-[ā]
AII
BI
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
bera
berae
beraid
beras
-asoms
-aseses
-a[ti]s
-asso
168
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
bermai
bermae
berthae
berait
bertae
-asomos[i]s
-asomoses
-aseteses
-asontes
-asonteso
-beram
-asomos
-beraid
-berat
-asetes
-asont[o]
present a-subjunctive deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
AII/BII
-suidiger
-suidigther
-suidigedar
suidiger
suidigther
suidigidir
suidigedar
suidigmir
suidigmer
suidigthe
suidigitir
suidigetar
-isōros
-isetoros
-isetr[e]s
-isetroso
-isomor[e]s
-isomoros
-ise[tes]es
-isontr[e]s
-isontroso
labrar
labrither
labrithir
labrathar
labrimmir
labrammar
labrithe
labritir
labratar
AI/BII/AII
-asōros
-corar
-asetoros
-coirther
-asetr[e]s
-corathar
-asetroso
-as[e]mor[e]s
-corammar
-asomoros
-ase[tes]es
-coraid
-as[e]ntr[e]s
-coratar
-asontroso
-isōro
-isetoro
-isetro
-suidigmer
-isomoro
-suidigid
-suidigetar
-isedwe
-isontro
-asōro
-asetoro
-asetro
-asomoro
-asedwe
-asontro
present a-subjunctive passive
AI
3 sg.
rel.
marbthair
marbthar
-asetor[e]s
-asetoroso
-marbthar
-asetoro
Old Irish verbal paradigms
3 pl.
rel.
marb(a)tir
marb(a)tar
169
-as[e]ntor[e]s
-asontoroso
-marb(a)tar
-asontoro
-berthar
-asetoro
-bertar
-asontoro
BI
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
berthair
berthar
bertair
bertar
-asetor[e]s
-asetoroso
-asontor[e]s
-asontoroso
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
suidigthir
suidigther
suidigtir
suidigter
-isetor[e]s
-isetoroso
-isontor[e]s
-isontoroso
AII/BII
-suidigther
-suidigter
-isetoro
-isontoro
past a-subjunctive active
AI
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
-marbainn
-marbtha
-marbad
-marbmais
-marbthae
-marbtais
-asema[m]
-aseto-aseto
-asemos[te]
-ase[t]e-asento[ste]
-berainn
-bertha
-berad
-bermais
-berthae
-bertais
-asema[m]
-aseto-aseto
-asemos[te]
-ase[t]e-asento[ste]
BI
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
170
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
past a-subjunctive deponent
AII/BII
-suidiginn
-suidigthea
-suidiged
-suidigmis
-suidigthe
-suidigtis
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
-isema[m]
-iseto-iseto
-isemos[te]
-ise[t]e-isento[ste]
past a-subjunctive passive
AI
3 sg.
3 pl.
-marbthae
-marbtais
-aseto-asento[ste]
-berthae
-bertais
-aseto-asento[ste]
BI
3 sg.
3 pl.
AII/BII
-suidigthe
-suidigtis
3 sg.
3 pl.
-iseto-isento[ste]
present s-subjunctive active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
tíasu
tési
téis
tías
tíasmai
tíasmae
téiste
tíasait
tíastae
-s[ō]s
-s[ei]s
-ses
-sso
-somos[i]s
-somoses
-seteses
-sontes
-sonteso
-gess
-geiss
-gé
-som
-ses
-s
-gessam
-somos
-gessid
-gessat
-setes
-sont[o]
Old Irish verbal paradigms
171
present s-subjunctive deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
messur
messer
mestir
messimir
meste
messitir
-s[ō]ros
-[i]storos
-str[e]s
-s[e]mor[e]s
-se[tes]es
-s[e]ntr[e]s
-fessur
-fesser
-festar
-fessamar
-fessid
-fessatar
-s[ō]ro
-[i]storo
-stro
-somoro
-sedwe
-sontro
present s-subjunctive passive
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
gessair
gessar
gessitir
gessatar
-stor[e]s
-storoso
-s[e]ntor[e]s
-sontoroso
-gessar
-storo
-gessatar
-sontoro
past s-subjunctive active/deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
-gessinn
-gesta
-gessed
-gesmais
-gestae
-gestais
-sema[m]
-seto-seto
-semos[te]
-se[t]e-sento[ste]
past s-subjunctive passive
3 sg.
3 pl.
-gestae
-gestais
-seto-sento[ste]
172
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
FUTURE
f-future active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
léicfea
léicfe
léicfid
léicfes
léicfimmi
léicfimme
léicfide
léicfit
léicfite
-ībwasoms
-ībwaseses
-ībwa[ti]s
-ībwasso
-ībwasomos[i]s
-ībwasomoses
-ībwaseteses
-ībwasontes
-ībwasonteso
-léiciub
-léicfe
-léicfea
-ībwasom
-ībwases
-ībw[ā]
-léicfem
-ībwasomos
-léicfid
-léicfet
-ībwasetes
-ībwasont[o]
f-future deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
suidigfer
suidigfider
suidigfidir
suidigfimmir
suidigfide
suidigfitir
-ibwasōros
-ibwasetoros
-ibwasetr[e]s
-ibwas[e]mor[e]s
-ibwase[tes]es
-ibwas[e]ntr[e]s
-suidigfer
-suidigfider
-suidigfedar
-suidigfemmar
-suidigfid
-suidigfetar
-ibwasōro
-ibwasetoro
-ibwasetro
-ibwasomoro
-ibwasedwe
-ibwasontro
f-future passive
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
léicfidir
léicfider
léicfitir
léicfiter
-ībwasetor[e]s
-léicfider
-ībwasetoroso
-ībwas[e]ntor[e]s -léicfiter
-ībwas[e]ntoroso
-ībwasetoro
-ībwas[e]ntoro
secondary f-future active/deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
-léicfinn
-léicfeda
-léicfed
-ībwasema[m]
-ībwaseto-ībwaseto
Old Irish verbal paradigms
173
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
-léicfimmis
-léicfide
-léicfitis
-ībwasemos[te]
-ībwase[t]e-ībwasento[ste]
secondary f-future passive
3 sg.
3 pl.
-léicfide
-léicfitis
-ībwaseto-ībwasento[ste]
reduplicated future active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
cechna
cechnae
cechnaid
cechnas
cechnaimmi
cechnaimme
cechnaithe
cechnait
cechnaite
-asoms
-aseses
-a[ti]s
-asso
-asomos[i]s
-asomoses
-aseteses
-asontes
-asonteso
-cechan
-cechnae
-cechna
-asom
-ases
-[ā]
-cechnam
-asomos
-cechnaid
-cechnat
-asetes
-asont[o]
reduplicated future passive
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
cechnaithir
cechnathar
cechnaitir
cechnatar
-asetor[e]s
-asetoroso
-as[e]ntor[e]s
-asontoroso
-cechnathar
-asetoro
-cechnatar
-asontoro
ē-future active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
béra
bérae
béraid
béras
-asoms
-aseses
-a[ti]s
-asso
-bér
-bérae
-béra
-asom
-ases
-[ā]
174
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
bérmai
bérmae
bérthae
bérait
bértae
-asomos[i]s
-asomoses
-aseteses
-asontes
-asonteso
-béram
-asomos
-béraid
-bérat
-asetes
-asont[o]
ē-future passive
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
bérthair
bérthar
bértair
bértar
-asetor[e]s
-asetoroso
-asontor[e]s
-asontoroso
-bérthar
-asetoro
-bértar
-asontoro
s-future active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
gigsea
gigse
gigis
giges
gigsimmi
gigsimme
gigeste
gigsit
gigsite
-soms
-seses
-ses
-sso
-somos[i]s
-somoses
-seteses
-sontes
-sonteso
-gigius
-gigis
-gig
-s[ō]
-ses
-s
-gigsem
-somos
-gigsid
-gigset
-setes
-sont[o]
s-future deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
messur
messer
mïastir
mïastar
messimmir
messammar
mïastae
messitir
messatar
-s[ō]ros
-[i]storos
-str[e]s
-stroso
-s[e]mor[e]s
-somoros
-se[tes]es
-s[e]ntr[e]s
-sontroso
-fessur
-fesser
-fïastar
-s[ō]ro
-[i]storo
-stro
-fessamar
-somoro
-fessid
-fessatar
-sedwe
-sontro
Old Irish verbal paradigms
175
s-future passive
3 sg.
rel.
3 pl.
rel.
mïastair
gigestar
gigsitir
messatar
-stor[e]s
-storoso
-s[e]ntor[e]s
-sontoroso
-fïastar
-storo
-gigsiter
-sontoro
176
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
PRETERIT
s-preterit active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
léicsiu
léicsi
léicis
léices
léicsimmi
léicsimme
-iss[ō]s
-iss[ei]s
-isses
-isso
-issomos[i]s
-issomoses
léicsit
léicsite
-issontes
-issonteso
-léicius
-léicis
-léic
-iss[ō]
-iss[ei]
-iss
-léicsem
-issomos
-léicsid
-léicset
-issetes
-issont[o]
s-preterit deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
-suidigsiur
-suidigser
-suidigestar
-suidigsemmar
-suidigsid
-suidigsetar
-iss[ō]ro
-istoro
-istro
-issomoro
-issedwe
-issontro
t-preterit active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
birt
bertae
bert(at)ar
-tes
-teso
-tonto[ro]so
-biurt
-birt
-bert
-t[ō]
-t[ei]
-t
-bertammar
-bertid
-bert(at)ar
-tomo[ro]
-tete
-tonto[ro]
Old Irish verbal paradigms
177
reduplicated preterit active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
cechan
cechan
cechain
cechnammar
-as
-<t>as
-es
-amo[ro]s
cechnatar
-a[nto]r[o]s
-cechan
-cechan
-cechain
-cechnammar
-cechnaid
-cechnatar
-a
-<t>a
-e
-amo[ro]
-ate
-a[nto]r[o]
reduplicated preterit deponent
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
1 pl.
2 pl.
3 pl.
génar
génar
génair
génammar
-a[ro]s
-<t>a[ro]s
-[ar]es
-amo[ro]s
génatar
-a[nto]r[o]s
-ménar
-ménar
-ménair
-ménammar
-ménaid
-ménatar
-a[ro]
-<t>a[ro]
-[ar]e
-amo[ro]
-ate
-a[nto]r[o]
ā-preterit active
1 sg.
2 sg.
3 sg.
rel.
1 pl.
rel.
2 pl.
3 pl.
rel.
gád
gád
gáid
gáde
gádammar
gádammar
-as
-<t>as
-es
-eso
-amo[ro]s
-amo[ro]s
gádatar
gádatar
-a[nto]r[o]s
-a[nto]r[o]so
-gád
-gád
-gáid
-a
-<t>a
-e
-gádammar
-amo[ro]
-gádid
-gádatar
-ate
-a[nto]r[o]
preterit passive
AII
3 sg.
3 pl.
léicthe
léicthi
-itoses
-itois
-léiced
-léicthea
-itos
-itās
178
Italo-Celtic origins and prehistoric development of the Irish language
BI
3 sg.
3 pl.
brethae
brithi
-toses
-tois
-breth
-bretha
-tos
-tās
REFERENCES
Beekes, Robert Stephen Paul
1981
“The subjunctive endings of Indo-Iranian”, Indo-Iranian
Journal 23, 21-27.
Bergin, Osborn
1938
“Varia I”, Ériu 12, 215-235.
Binchy, David
1971
“An archaic legal poem”, Celtica 9, 152-168.
Boling, Bruce D.
1972
“Some problems of the phonology and morphology of the Old
Irish verb”, Ériu 23, 73-101.
Chantraine, Pierre
1967
Morphologie historique du grec, Paris.
Cowgill, Warren
1969
“A note on palatalization in Old Irish”, Festschrift für
Konstantin Reichardt, Bern, 30-37.
1975
“The origins of the Insular Celtic conjunct and absolute verbal
endings”, Flexion und Wortbildung, Wiesbaden: Reichert,
40-70.
1985a “The personal endings of thematic verbs in Indo-European”,
Grammatische Kategorien: Funktion und Geschichte,
Wiesbaden: Reichert, 99-108.
1985b “On the origin of the absolute and conjunct verbal inflexion of
Old Irish”, Grammatische Kategorien: Funktion und
Geschichte, Wiesbaden: Reichert, 109-118.
Cullen, John
1972
“Primitive Irish vowels in final syllables following i̯”, Ériu 23,
227-229.
Dybo, Vladimir Antonovič
1961
“Sokraščenie dolgot v kel’to-italijskix jazykax i ego značenie
dlja balto-slavjanskoj i indoevropejskoj akcentologii”, Voprosy
slavjanskogo jazykoznanija 5, 9-34.
Greene, David
1974
“The growth of palatalization in Irish”, Transactions of the
Philological Society 1973, 127-136.
1976a “The diphthongs of Old Irish”, Ériu 27, 26-45.
1976b “Formy passivnogo preterita v drevneirlandskom jazyke”,
Teorija jazyka, anglistika, kel’tologija, Moskva, 265-269.
1977
“Archaic Irish”, Indogermanisch und Keltisch, Wiesbaden:
Reichert, 11-33.
Illič-Svityč, Vladislav Markovič
1962
“K istolkovaniju akcentuacionnyx sootvetstvij v kel’toitalijskom i balto-slavjanskom”, Kratkie soobščenija
Instituta slavjanovedenija AN SSSR 35, 63-72.
Jackson, Kenneth Hurlstone
1953
Language and history in early Britain, Edinburgh: University
Press.
Koch, John T.
1987
“Prosody and the Old Celtic verbal complex”, Ériu 38,
143-176.
Kortlandt, Frederik
1978b “On the history of the genitive plural in Slavic, Baltic,
Germanic, and Indo-European”, Lingua 45, 281-300.
1979a “Toward a reconstruction of the Balto-Slavic verbal system”,
Lingua 49, 51-70.
1979b “The Old Irish absolute and conjunct endings and questions
of relative chronology”, Ériu 30, 35-53.
1981a
“More evidence for Italo-Celtic”, Ériu 32, 1-22.
1981b “On the Armenian personal endings”, Annual of
Armenian Linguistics 2, 29-34.
1982b “Phonemicization and rephonemicization of the Old
Irish mutations”, Ériu 33, 73-83.
1984
“Old Irish subjunctives and futures and their ProtoIndo-European origins”, Ériu 35, 179-187.
1986a “Posttonic *w in Old Irish”, Ériu 37, 89-92.
1986b “The origin of the Slavic imperfect”, Festschrift für Herbert
Bräuer zum 65. Geburtstag, Köln: Böhlau, 253-258.
1989a “Lachmann’s law.” The new sound of Indo-European: Essays in
phonological reconstruction (ed. Theo Vennemann), Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter, 103-105.
1990
“The Germanic third class of weak verbs”, North-Western
European Language Evolution 15, 3-10.
1994
“Absolute and conjunct again”, Münchener Studien zur
Sprachwissenschaft 55, 61-68.
1996a “The alleged early apocope of *-i in Celtic”, Études Celtiques
32, 91-97.
1996b “Old Irish ol ‘inquit’”, Études Celtiques 32, 143-145.
1997a “Thematic and athematic verb forms in Old Irish”, Sound Law
and Analogy: Papers in honor of Robert S.P. Beekes on the
occasion of his 60th birthday, Amsterdam-Atlanta: Rodopi,
133-137.
1997b “On the relative chronology of Celtic sound changes”,
Historische Sprachforschung 110/2, 248-251.
1999
“Lachmann’s law again”, Language change and typological
variation: In honor of Winfred P. Lehmann on the occasion of
his 83rd birthday, vol. I: Language change and phonology,
246-248.
2000 “Three notes on the Old Irish verb”, Études Celtiques 34,
143-146.
Kuiper, Franciscus Bernardus Jacobus
1937
Die indogermanischen Nasalpräsentia, Amsterdam: NoordHollandsche Uitgeversmaatschappij.
Mac Cana, Proinsias
1973
“On Celtic word order and the Welsh ‘abnormal’ sentence”,
Ériu 24, 90-120.
McCone, Kim
1978
“The dative singular of Old Irish consonant stems”, Ériu 29,
26-38.
1991
The Indo-European origins of the Old Irish nasal presents,
subjunctives and futures, Innsbruck: IBS.
Meid, Wolfgang
1963
Die indogermanischen Grundlagen der altirischen absoluten
und konjunkten Verbalflexion, Wiesbaden: Reichert.
1972
“On two points of Celtic morphology”, Études Celtiques 13,
346-352.
Meillet, Antoine
1907
“Sur l’origine de la distinction des flexions conjointe et
absolue dans le verbe irlandais”, Revue Celtique 28, 369-373.
1908
“À propos de v.irl. beri”, Mémoires de la Société de
Linguistique de Paris 14, 412-415.
1914
“De quelques finales slaves”, Rocznik Slawistyczny 7, 1-8.
Pedersen, Holger
1941
Tocharisch vom Gesichtspunkt der indoeuropäischen
Sprachvergleichung (= Historisk-filologiske Meddelelser 28/1),
København: Ejnar Munksgaard.
Rix, Helmut
1977
“Das keltische Verbalsystem auf dem Hintergrund des indoiranisch-griechischen Rekonstruktionsmodells”,
Indogermanisch und Keltisch, Wiesbaden: Reichert, 132-158.
Schrijver, Peter
1991a The reflexes of the Proto-Indo-European laryngeals in Latin,
Diss. Leiden, Amsterdam-Atlanta: Rodopi.
1991b “The development of Primitive Irish *aN before voiced stop”,
Ériu 42, 13-25.
1993
“On the development of vowels before tautosyllabic nasals in
Primitive Irish”, Ériu 44, 33-52.
1994
“The Celtic adverbs for ‘against’ and ‘with’ and the early
apocope of *-i”, Ériu 45, 151-189.
1997
Studies in the history of Celtic pronouns and particles,
Maynooth: Dept. of Old Irish.
Sieg, Emil & Siegling, Wilhelm
1921
Tocharische Sprachreste, Berlin-Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter.
Sieg, Emil, Siegling, Wilhelm, Schulze, Wilhelm
1931
Tocharische Grammatik, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Sims-Williams, Patrick
1984
“The double system of verbal inflexion in Old Irish”,
Transactions of the Philological Society, 138-201.
1999
“Old Irish feda (gen. fedot): a ‘puzzling’ form in the Cambrai
Homily and its implications for the apocope of /i/”, Studia
Celtica et Indogermanica: Festschrift für Wolfgang Meid zum
70. Geburtstag, Budapest: Archaeolingua, 471-474.
Sommerfelt, Alf
1922
“Le futur irlandais en -f-”, Mémoires de la Société de
Linguistique de Paris 22, 230-233.
Strachan, John
1949
Old-Irish paradigms and selections from the Old-Irish glosses,
Dublin: Royal Irish Academy.
Thieme, Paul
1965
“Īśopanisad (= Vājasaneyi-Saṃhitā 40) 1-14”, Journal of the
American Oriental Society 85, 89-99.
Thurneysen, Rudolf
1897
“Ueber einige Formen der Copula im Irischen”, Zeitschrift für
Celtische Philologie 1, 1-6.
1914
“Review of H. Pedersen’s Vergleichende Grammatik der
keltischen Sprachen 2 (1913)”, Anzeiger für indogermanische
Sprach- und Altertumskunde 33, 23-37.
1946
A Grammar of Old Irish, Dublin: DIAS.
Uhlich, Jürgen
1995
“On the fate of intervocalic *-w- in Old Irish, especially
between neutral vowels”, Ériu 46, 11-48.
Watkins, Calvert
1969 Indogermanische Grammatik 3, Formenlehre 1, Geschichte der
indogermanischen Verbalflexion, Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Wijk, Nikolaas van
1916
“Zur slavischen und baltischen Präsensflexion”, Archiv für
slavische Philologie 36, 111-116.