Traces of O-Grade Middle in Baltic and Slavic- Villanueva Svensson

Traces of *o-Grade Middle Root Aorists in Baltic and SlavicAuthor(s): Miguel Villanueva SvenssonReviewed work(s):Source: Historische Sprachforschung / Historical Linguistics, Bd. 119 (2006), pp. 295-317Published by: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht (GmbH & Co. KG)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40849390 .Accessed: 11/05/2012 23:24

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht (GmbH & Co. KG) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Historische Sprachforschung / Historical Linguistics.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=vandrupr

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40849390?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

Traces of *o-Grade Middle Root Aorists in Baltic and Slavic

1. Baltic and Slavic show a large number of verbs with root vocali sm *-o- (Lith. -a-, OCS -o-) that in many cases must go back to Indo-Euro- pean verbal formations with apophonic or invariant *-o-grade.1 Leaving aside causatives and iteratives, denominatives or verbs of obscure origin, some subgroups can be established which presumably reflect different Indo-European origins.

2. Some verbs are stative in meaning and almost certainly go back to Indo-European (dereduplicated) perfects. Relics of athematic inflection are still preserved in OCS 1 sg. vëdë, OPruss. 2 sg. waisei „know" or in the present participle OCS gorçst- „burning", but old perfects usually surface as *-i-presents in Balto-Slavic: Lith. gariù, garëti, OCS gorjç, gorëti „burn", OCS bojç, bojati sç „fear" (cf. Ved. bibhãya „fear"), OCS poljç, polëti „flame", boljç, boleti „be sick", Lith. galiù, galëti „be able, can", perhaps Lith. stoviù, stovëti „stand"2 (cf. Ved. tastháu, Gk. 8GTT|Ka, Lat. stetí).

3. A second, relatively coherent group of *-o-grade verbs are transitives that express some type of violent or iterated action and can be re- presented by such examples as Lith. barii, bárti „scold" (: OCS borjç, brati „fight"), kalu, kálti „forge" (: OCS koljç, klati „slaughter"), kapiü, kàpti „cut down, fell" (: OCS kopajç, kopati „dig")» malù, malti „grind" (but *-£-grade in OCS meljç, mieti „grind") or OCS bodç, bosti „pierce" (*-e-grade in Lith. bedù, bèsti „stick"). Cognates of these presents usually show variation in the root apo-

phony between *-o-, *-e- and zero. Within Balto-Slavic one may com- pare Lith. malü with OCS meljç or Lith. bedù with OCS bodç. Outside

1 Of course, *-a- is phonetically also possible, but given the scarcity of non laryngeal colored */a/ in Indo-European it should only be assumed if it is supported by strong evidence. One of these cases is the thematic present Lith. magù, magëti „please", OCS mogç, mosti „be able", from an athematic middle present *mágh-o(r) still preserved in Ved. make RV 7.97.2 „is able" and implied by OHG magën „be able" < *mag-ai(-f?). *lal in this root is assured by Gk. uáxoum „fight".

The athematic present stovmi (Ruhig) is a secondary neologism, cf. Stang (1942: lOlff).

296 Miguel Villanueva Svensson

Balto-Slavic Lith. malü agrees with Goth, malan and Hitt. malli, OCS meljç with Oír. melid, while zero grade is found in Arm. malem, Umbr. kumaltu and MW main, Lat. molo being ambiguous. *-#-grade is espe- cially prominent in Baltic, Slavic and Germanic, but examples are found all over the family. Cognates in Anatolian regularly belong to the hhi- conjugation.

The historical explanation of the malù/meljç type is disputed. Two basic approaches can be distinguished:

Some authors would subsume the variants with *-e- and zero grade under a 'normal' athematic present (*mélh2-ti, *mlh2-éntï) and assume some type of derived verbal formation at the origin of the *-6>-grade variants, such as reduplicated presents (*mé-molh2-ti) or intensives (*mélh2-molh2-tï). In Balto-Slavic and Germanic these formations would have been regularly dereduplicated and eventually would have elimina- ted the basic athematic present from current use.3

Another approach unites the apophonic variants into a single (athematic) paradigm *molh2-l*melh2-l*mlh2- or *molh2-l*melh2- (?m'h2- being a renewed weak stem). Jasanoff (1979, and later publications) em- phasizes the systematic correlation between presents of the malù/meljç type and /i/n'-conjugation verbs in Anatolian as evidence for a particular Indo-European '^¿-conjugation', functionally active, but characterized by middle- and perfect-like endings (1 sg. *-h2e, 2 sg. *-th2e, 3 sg. *-e) and root apophony *-o-/*-e- (with a strong tendency to replace *-e- by zero as the weak grade or to generalize one of the vocalisms). This is not the place to argue at length my acceptance of Jasanoff s

proposal or why I consider the type *mólh2-e(i), *mélh2-¡-s (yel. sim.) to be restricted to the present stem in Indo-European.

4. An inherited perfect or a '^¿-conjugation' present (or, for that matter, a reduplicated present or intensive) can explain reasonably most of the Balto-Slavic *-o-grade primary verbs with a chance of being inherited from the parent language, but not all verbs enter naturally into these explanatory schémas. In particular, *-o-grade is found in some intransitive 'inchoative' verbs like Lith. tàpti, tampa, tapo „become" or OCS pasti, padç, aor. padt „fall", which will be the object of the present article.

5. OCS pasti, padç, aor. padh „fall" (Russ. past', padu, etc.) probably owes its lengthened grade to Winter's Law (*pod- > *põd- > *pãd-). In principle both the present padeth or the aorist pade could be old, and we

3 So, for instance, Stang (1942: 39ff, 1966: 333), Klingenschmitt (1982: 1466), Schae- fer (1994: 48ff), UV (1998 passim).

Traces of *o-Grade Middle Root Aorists in Baltic and Slavic 297

can assume that either the present is back formed to the aorist or the aorist to the present. The root *ped- is well known from the noun for „foot" *pod-l*ped-.

As a verb it is also found in Indo-Iranian, Germanic, Armenian and Latin pessum ire „sink to the bottom; be destroyed". The Germanic re- gular strong verb (ON feta „step; proceed in", OE ge-fœt „fell") is of little interest for comparative purposes. Vedic pad- „move, fall" shows a characteristic anticausative paradigm: present pâdyate (Av. paiôiiãite), 'passive' aorist 3 sg. apodi, 3 pl. apadran, perfect papada. A middle root aorist is secured for Indo-European by the Vedic 'passive' aorist apãdi and so is the perfect, which presumably underlies the Germanic paradigm. As for the present stem(s) of this verb, Ved. píbdamãna- „ab- wechselnd fest auftretend" and Arm. hiwcanim „grow lean, languish" (< *pi-bd-ie/o- < *pi-pd-ie/o-f point to a reduplicated present in the parent language. The Indo-Iranian present *pad-ya-m could be inherited or else could have been created in this family according to a productive pattern for anticausatives.

As for Slavic, Vaillant (1966: 153) derives the thematic aorist pade- from the perfect *pepód-e, the thematic present being derived from the aorist. A perfect, however, is badly compromised with the inchoative value of pasti „fall". Rasmussen (1988: 3622) starts from an Indo- European intensive *ped-pód-mi, the aorist pade- being a dislocated im- perfect. Machek (1968: 425) and Klingenschmitt (1982: 217) explain the vocalism of OCS pade- as a cross of *põl- „fall" (Lith. piati, púolu „fall") and *ped- „fall". Obvious ad hoc solutions like this, however, should only be considered when all possible systematic explanations have been definitely ruled out. Schirmer LIV 413 rightly places pa dh under the aorist, but is unable to explain the *-<9-vocalism. While an Indo-European athematic middle aorist seems to be the best option from a semantic point of view, OCS pade points to *põde(-t) or *pode(-t) (with Winter's lengthening) as the immediate preform, both strongly in contradiction with the standard reconstruction of the Indo-European root aorist (*-e-/*-0- in the active, *-0- in the middle). I will anticipate here my proposal: OCS pade makes a perfect word equation with the Vedic 'passive' aorist apãdi and permits as to start from an Indo-European middle root aorist (3 sg.) *pod-e.

6. Lith. tàpti, tampa, tapo (dialectal also tape), Latv. tapi, tùopu, tapu „become" were successfully etymologized by Stang (1952), who related them to Lith. tèpti, tëpa, Latv. tept, tepju „smear", OCS teti, tepç „beat"

4 Cf. Klingenschmitt (1982: 217).


(from earlier *„smear"). Lith. tàpti shows also the meaning „become infected",5 which favors this connection, as observed later by Stang himself (1966: 347).

As for the origin of Lith. tàpti, Latv. tapt, Stang starts from an Indo- European perfect *(te)tóp-e *„ist kleben geblieben, ist fortwährend, bleibt", with a semantic shift *,,bleiben" - » „werden", tàpti, however, shows no stative meaning at all, and an inchoative value of this verb must be relatively old to account for the by-meanings „become infected" in Lithuanian and „arrive" in Latvian, which bear all the appearance of semantic archaisms. It thus seems preferable to start from an original inchoative value of tàpti and to look for its origin in an Indo-European verbal formation other than the perfect. A middle root aorist *tóp-e, perfectly parallel to *pód-e, would fit both formally and functionally.

The Lithuanian dialectal preterite tãpè points to another type of present later replaced by tampa : *tapti, *tapa or * tapia. As argued by Barton (1980: 270ff), both *tapti and *tapa are problematic from several points of view. Tãpè is not easier accounted for as the preterite of *tapti than as the preterite of tampa, cf. liekti : llko. While formally more promising, a thematic *tapa is contradicted by the preponderance of transitives among raa/ö-presents, a feature which seems to be inherited in this class. In addition, *-ë-preterites to raa/ö-presents seem to be a specific Lithuanian innovation.6 *tapia is formally without problems, since *-^/(9-presents are paired with *-ë-preterites as far back as we can trace Proto-Baltic. Because *-^/o-presents are productively transitive in Baltic, the replacement of the putative *tapia by tampa is well motivated, but because of this same reason it must be considerably old and certainly pre-Baltic. An intransitive *-^/ö-present can also be made responsible for the irregular *-ê-preterite of Lith. mire {mirti, mìrsta „die") and girne (gìmti, gìmsta, OLith. gema „be born").7 The conjugation pattern we recover here is, of course, Indo-European in date. It was established for the prehistory of Slavic by Tedesco (1948). It is thus not too problematic to reconstruct a present *tapia „becomes" on the evidence of tãpè. Internal evidence thus permits us to start from a Pre- Baltic paradigm près. *top-ie/o-, aor. (3 sg.) *top-e (- ► *top-e/o-), the vocalism of the present *top-ie/o- being taken from the aorist.

5 Cf. LKZxv 835. 0 Cf. Stang (1942: 107, 1966: 380), Schmid (1967: 1 19). 7 Cf. Barton (1980: 267ff). In both cases a *-^/o-present is secured for Indo-Euro- pean: Ved. mriyáte, Lat. morior, Slavic *mbr-je- in Zo umbreth, Slov. mrjèm; Gk. ßaivco, Lat. veniõ.


7. In OCS pasti „fall" and Lith. tàpti „become" we have found two verbs that can be reasonably traced back to Indo-European middle root aorists with *-o-vocalism and a 3 sg. ending *-e. OCS pade finds a perfect counterpart in Ved. apodi, while the antiquity of Lith. tãpoltãpè is only supported by some tenuous internal arguments.

The root vocalism and the 3sg. ending of *pód-e and *top-e, both strongly in contradiction with the classical reconstruction of the middle root aorist Huk-tó, will be discussed below (§10). On the other hand, OCS pade and Lith. tãpoltãpè do not only contradict the classical reconstruction of the Indo-European middle root aorist, but are also isolated within Balto-Slavic as well. Our proposal builds on the assumption that inchoative verbs as the 2nd Class in Slavic and the nasal infixai and -sta- presents in Baltic are genetically related to the Indo-European middle root aorist in a number of cases, still to be observed in a remodeled fashion in the Slavic thematic aorist and the Baltic *-ã-preterite. These formations, however, usually show zero grade of the root and thus agree nicely with the morphology of middle root aorists and active thematic aorists in Greek and Indo-Iranian.

If our proposal for OCS pasti and Lith. tàpti is correct, we have to account not only for Indo-European *pód-e, *tóp-e, but also for the anomalous preservation of *-6>-grade in these particular verbs. What *pód-e and *tóp-e have in common is their root structure TET-. Since TET- and (T)RET-roots are well known for their resistance to analogical extension of a weak, zero-grade vocalism,8 we can formulate the hypothesis that *pód-e and *tóp-e owe the maintenance of the old *-ö-vocalism to their root structure.

8. Our explanation of OCS pasti, Lith. tàpti invites us to search for other TET- or (T)RET- inchoative *-ograde verbs in Baltic and Slavic that may derive from Indo-European middle root aorists. The number of potentially ancient *-tf-grade verbs of this type is not large. In addition to Lith. tàpti and OCS pasti I have found the following candidates:

8.1. The nasal present of Lith. ràsti, randa, rado, Latv. rast, rùodu, radu „find" is quite unexpected in a transitive verb. A very reasonable explanation is brought forth by Stang (1961: 77, 1966: 348): the meaning „find" would be secondary, due to polarization vis-à-vis the refle- xive ràsti-s „happen, become; appear, be found". We can hence start from an intransitive *rasti.

Cognates of this verb include Latv. rads „relative, kinsman", OCS rodh „race" and the causative *rodh-éie/o- in OCS roditi, rozdç, Latv.

8 Cf. Schindler (1972: 35ff).


radii „give birth". Stang adds Slov. redíti „nähren, durch Nahrung erhal- ten; sich wachsen lassen" as evidence of *-e-grade in this root.

According to Stang (1961: 76ff ,1966: 347ff) ràsti *,,happen, become; appear, be found" would continue a perfect *(re)rodh-e *„ist hervorge- wachsen, entstanden, geworden, ist vorhanden". As in the case of OCS pasti and Lith. tàpti, however, the semantic bridge between the putative perfect and the inchoative value of ràsti(s) is difficult to account for, while a middle aorist *ródh-e would fit perfectly both formally and functionally.

8.2. Lith. skàsti, skañta, skãto „spring, hop" is usually linked to Lat. scatëo, -ere (-Õ, -eré) „gush (forth)". Lat. scatëo could point to a root *skat-, but Schrijver (1991: 432) argues for a Latin Sound Law *e > *a after plain velars. If this is the case, we can start from Pre-Latin *sceteõ or *scetõ, from a „normal" ablauting root *sket-. The morphology and meaning of Lith. skàsti is clearly compatible with a middle aorist *skót-e. LKZxn 764 also gives a dialectal preterite skãtè, which reminds us of tãpo/tãpè and could point to an earlier intransitive present *skatia.

8.3. Lith. (su-)pràsti, -prañta, -prato, Latv. (sa-)prast, -prùotu, -pratu „understand" is obviously cognate with Goth, frapjan „understand" (6th Class). It is not clear whether OPruss. issprestum „understand", 1 pl. poprestemmai points to a real *-e-grade *pret- or stands for *prat-? A verbal root *prat- is in any case necessary to account for OPruss. prãtin „Rat" (for *prãtan), cf. Lith. prõtas, Latv. prats „mind, intelligence" (circumflex intonation!). If OCS prosit „ànkovç, étaúSepoç; òp9óç" (Russ. prostój „simple", etc.), Lith. prãstas, Latv. prasts „simple" is a fossilized participle of this verb, as per Stang (1966: 345), *prat- must have been present as a verb in Slavic as well, but this etymology of Slavic prosth is disputed.

Nominal forms of this root are well attested not only in Baltic (Lith. prõtas) and Germanic (Goth, frapi „mind, understanding", frops „intel- ligent, wise"), but also in Tocharian: Toch. B eprete „resolute", Toch. A pratim „decision, resolution" (borrowed into Toch. B as pratim).10 The inclusion of Lat. interpres „intermediary, agent; interpreter" in the set is more problematic.

Both. Lith. pràsti and Goth, frapjan are usually derived from a perfect *pre-prót-e,u but this explanation doesn't account neither for their semantics nor for their morphology (6th Class -ja-present in Gothic).

9 So Smoczynski (2000: 173, 2002: 49). 10 Cf. Adams Í1999: 90. 410). 11 Cf. Stang (1966: 345), L/V444.


Once again, the recourse to the perfect is determined by the *-o-grade, but is unsatisfactory from other points of view. A middle root aorist *prót-e is a reasonable solution. The *-o^/9-present of Goth, frapjan would be difficult to explain within Germanic. We have already seen that the concurrent *-ë-preterites in tãpoltãpè, skãtolskãtè can be explained through earlier *-^/o-presents *tap-ia, *skat-ia, later replaced by infixai or -sta-presents. A similar paradigm present *prot-ie/o-, aorist *prot-e(-t) can therefore be assumed for -pràsti on the evidence of Goth. frapjan, the vocalism of the present being borrowed from the aorist.12

8.4. Lith. kàkti, kañka, kãko „set out, start, go", used mostly with pre verbs, Latv. kakt „zu Ende kommen". Stang (1961: 74) establishes an original meaning „(er)reichen", that would have derived from a perfect *„ist angelangt, hat das Ziel erreicht". The perfect *(ke-)kók-e would survive either in the preterite *kakã or as an athematic present *kakti. Some athematic forms are actually attested in Old Lithuanian (pakakti in Dauksa, iskakti in Bretkünas), which could favor the later view, but given the secondary nature of many athematic presents in Old Lithua- nian and the scarcity of attestations of -kakti, the weight of these examples must be regarded as doubtful. On the evidence assembled so far in favor of *-6>-grade middle aorists in Baltic, it is tempting to posit a middle root aorist *kók-e at the bases of Lith. kàkti. Old Lithuanian -kakti, however, counsels caution in this particular case. Outside Baltic, Stang (1961: 75, 1966: 346) suggests relating kakti to Slavic cekatil cakati „wait",13 with a semantic development ^„reichen, strecken, greifen" - > *„nach etw. greifen, sich nach etw. strecken" - > * „erwarten" - » „warten". Turning now to Slavic, the place where we should look for verbs that

may have inherited Indo-European *-o-grade middle root aorists is obviously Leskien's Class II. Here Vaillant (1966: 25 Iff) gives three verbs with *-o- vocalism „qui retiennent l'attention": OCS kosnçti sq „touch", moknçti „get wet", OCS u-tonçti, „sink". All of them belong to roots of the shape TET- or (T)RET- and, accordingly, can be regarded as serious candidates to join the type of verbs we are studying.

8.5. OCS kosnçti, kosnç sç, aor. kose sç „touch" (Russ. kosnút'sja, etc.) is etymologically isolated. A connection with OCS cesati, ceso „comb", Hitt. kiss-mi „comb", Lith. kàsti, kasù „dig", frequently posi-

12 The vocalism of Goth, frapjan suggests that a process similar to the one we are describing in Baltic and Slavic took place in Germanic as well (cf. Goth, ga-daban „happen" or wahsjan „grow", as potential examples), but this possibility will not be pursued at length here.

13 Cf. ÈSSJA 13, 36 for the data.


ted,14 is not particularly clear from a semantic point of view. In addition, neither the nasal present nor the *-ovocalism of OCS kosnçti sç find a good explanation within this etymology. The morphology of kosnçti is not easy to reconcile with the meaning of this verb, since verbs of Class II are characteristically inchoative. Under the argumentation of this article, I consider a reasonable possibility to derive kosnçti sç from an Indo-European middle root aorist *kós-e with an original meaning *,,got in touch", „came near" (vel. sim.). 8.6. Slavic moknçti „get wet" (imperfective, Russ. móknut', Poi.

moknqc, etc.). The root is well attested in Slavic (mociti „wet", mokrh „wet", moca/mocb „urine"), Baltic (Lith. [maku, [maketi „in den Sumpf hineingehen", makóti, maknóti „walk, wade; soil, dirty with mud", maknotas „covered with mud", makõnè „mud") and perhaps in Alb. make „Haut (auf Flüssigkeiten)", but only the vocalism *mok- (or *mak-) is attested with certainty. We cannot be sure that moknçti goes back to a middle root aorist *mók-e, but this remains in any case a possibility. 8.7. OCS u-tonçti, -tonç, aorist 3 pl. -topç „sink, drown (intr.)" (im-

perfective, Russ. tonút', Pol. tonqc, etc., cf. ÈSSJ 19 129-130). The causative topiti means both „sink, drown (tr.)" (OCS u-topiti, -topljç, Russ. topit', u-, za-topit^) and, closer to the original meaning of this root, „heat, melt" (OCS ras-topiti „éicoepiiaíveiv", Russ. topit', etc.). -tonçti is usually considered a secondary inchoative to topiti, or in any case having adopted its vocalism. Although this is conceivable, it is also possible that -tonçti is old and that it reflects an Indo-European verbal formation with etymological *-<?-grade.

Outside Slavic the verb is attested in Lat. tepeõ, -ère „be warm", which could also be a Caland system denominative,15 and Indo-Iranian: Vedic present tápati „make hot; heat, burn"16 and tápyateltapyáte „heat, become warm; suffer, perform austerity", 'passive' aorist átãpi, perfect

14 Fraenkel LEW 227, Vaillant (1966: 251), ÈSSJ 1 1, 136, 148, UV 3 17. On the other hand, I doubt the standard equation of Lith. kàsti, Latv. kast „dig" with OCS cesati and Hitt. kiss-"11 „comb" to be correct. Although conceivable, the semantic bridge is not very easy to cross. Lith. kàsti clearly belongs to a group of presents that regularly correspond to verbs of the /i/n-conjugation in Anatolian, as we have seen in §3. The equation of Lith. kàsti with Hitt. kiss-mi would be fully anomalous, while Hitt. kiss-™ and OCS cesati, ceso undoubtedly point to an Indo-European athematic present *kés-ti, *kes-énti. 15 Typical Caland-system nominal formations of *tep- are fairly well attested: Ved. tápu- „hot"; Slavic tephltoph „warm"; Ved. tápant- = Oír. té, pl. téit „hot"; Ved. tápas- „heat" = Lat. tepor, -õris „warmth", etc. See Nussbaum (1976: 23-24, 50, 52).

Originally intransitive „heat, burn , the transitive value „make hot (already well attested in the RV) is probably secondary, cf. Goto (1987: 159-160).


tatãpa, causative tãpáyati (AV), YAv. tafsa- „become hot", causative tãpaiieiti „makes hot". The intransitive character of this root is beyond doubt, but it is not entirely clear whether we are dealing with a presential root „be hot" or with an aoristic one „become hot". Advocating for the later (passive aorists are almost exclusively derived from aoristic roots in Vedic), I propose to relate directly the Vedic passive aorist átãpi with Slavic to(p)ne-, tope-, both from an Indo-European middle root aorist *tóp-e.

8.8. Finally, one should mention the possibility that a middle root aorist with *-6>-grade stands at the origin of OCS u-gasnçti, -gasnç, aor. -gase „go out, be extinguished" (as shown by Tedesco 1948: 368-369, gas-ne- replaces and older present *gas-je-, cf. près. pple. ne gasçst- „not quenched"). The vocalism of gasnçti, as universally assumed, was taken from the causative OCS u-gasiti, -gasç „put out, quench". The -a- of -gasiti itself can be explained as a derivational neoablaut to roots which were felt to have invariant *-0-vocalism (< *-o- or *-a-) in Baltic, Slavic and Germanic and thus be compared to examples such as OCS paliti „burn (tr.)" (: polëti „burn (intr.)"), Lith. ródyti „show" (: ràsti(s) „happen, become; appear, be found"), ON fera „bring, send" (: Goth. faran „go").17 OCS gasiti could also be explained as an inherited Narten(-Klingenschmitt) causative *gwõs-ie/o-,]S but no Narten presents of this root are actually attested and this possibility is slightly contradicted by the accentuation of Russ. gasif, SCr. gasiti (contrast that of Russian plávit', Serbo-Croatian pläviti „float", whose derivation from an Indo-European „Narten" iterative *plõu-ie/o- finds direct support in Gk. ttXcoco „swim" and OE flõwan „flow", a Narten present *plëu-l *pléu- being secured as well by Toch. B subj. plyewäm „will float" and the acute intonation of Lith. pláuti, pláujulpláunu „wash").

The original vocalism of gasnçti, however, is usually taken to be *ges- (*zes-). Apart from the difficulty of explaining a hypothetical *gos- under the current theories of Indo-European verbal ablaut, the Baltic material is often quoted as indirect evidence in favor of *ges-. Here we find *-e-grade both in the transitive Lith. gesyti, gesaü (dialectal also gesiù), Latv. dzèst, dzèsu (and dzest, dzesu) „put out" and in the intransitive Lith. gèsti, gçstù, Latv. dzist, dzlestu „go out". Baltic and Slavic would then fit into a system causative *gõs-(e)je/o- : inchoative *ges-ie/o- (later replaced by nasal presents), Slavic generalizing

17 Cf. Stang(1942: 148). Ot the type ̂suop-^e/o- „put to sleep (Lat. sopire „cause to sleep , UN soja „kill ),

established by Klingenschmitt (1978).


*gõs-, Baltic *ges-. While this seems eminently possible, the Baltic inchoative could also be a secondary formation built to an earlier transitive *-ie/o-present *ges-ia. A verbal root *gwes- „tr. put out, quench; intr. go out, die out" is very

well attested in other branches (Indo-Iranian, Greek, Armenian, Gothic quist < *gwes-ti- „destruction"), but with some irregularities in the first consonant that make it even doubtful whether we are dealing with one single root or more than one. In Vedic, where jas-fdas-19 „becomes exhausted" is exclusively intran-

sitive, we find an active -jfl-present ni-jasya-tl „disappear, get lost", {-)dásya-tl „waste, become exhausted" pared with a thematic aorist dasat, jásamãna-, dásamãna- in a recurrent pattern.20 The antiquity of the -ya-present, however, is not assured. Jamison (1983: 59) argues for an intransitive -¿rya-present dasayanta RV xl, dasaye TS xl „becomes exhausted" as an older, synchronically unmotivated present of this root. Although usually taken from *gwes-, the constant root shape oijas-ldas- could point to a root with palatal *ges- (so Mayrhofer EWAia I 581- 582).

The Greek paradigm (près, oßewuui „put out, quench", -um „go out", fut. oßea(a)a>, aor. tr. eoßeGOt, Gßeooai, intr. £Gßr|v, perf. eoßr|Ka) is clearly based on the aorist tr. oßeo(a)ai, intr. cßfjvai. Greek stands alone in apparently representing *sgwes-, with „mobile s". This reconstruction, however, is problematic not only because of the isolation of Greek, but also because mobile s is extremely uncommon among roots beginning with a voiced stop, if it occurs at all. In addition, the intransitive aorist aßfjvai is difficult to account for under this reconstruction. In spite of its general modern abandon, I still consider a plausible solution that the initial cluster oß- originated in the „passive" aorist (which probably has replaced an earlier middle root aorist) *gws-e- > *ßor|- > aßrj- (with metathesis), aß- being later adopted by the active sigmatic aorist *gwes-s- > *dzes-s- - ► Gßea(ö)-.21

19 Das- is a dissimilated variant of jas-, cf. Hoffmann apud Mayrhofer EWAia 1711. Clearly innovated are the causatives dasayati „exhausts" (AV), jãsayamasi „we

make disappear" (A VP) and the associated reduplicated aorist aßjasas (also A VP), cf. Jamison (1983: 141), Kulikov (2001: 401). Also to be explained within Vedic is the perfect jajãsa, dadãsa (cf. Kümmel 2000: 199, 236-7), without of course it being possible to exclude the possibility that it is a formal and functional renewal of an inherited, stative perfect. 21 Cf. Schmidt (1968: 8651), with former literature. Schmidt also mentions some examples of a thematic middle aorist (icaxeaßexo, avveaßexo, a7teaßexo, awaTieaßexo, cf. Schmidt, loe. cit. for references). These are, however, of late attestation. I will not dis-

Traces of *oGrade Middle Root Aorists in Baltic and Slavic 305

Tocharian A/B käs- „come to extinction, be extinguished, go out; tr./act. quench, extinguish" shows the following paradigm in Tocharian B:22 Class VIII (*-se/o-) present act. kesäm, mid. kestär, Class I (athematic) active subjunctive Inf. kastsi, Class III (-e-) middle subjunctive ksemar, ksentär, Inf. ksetsi, Class III (sigmatic) preterite act. kesasta, mid. kessante. Tocharian B seems to have generalized kes- to all the paradigm, but the Tocharian A present 2sg. käst (< *g(w)es-se/o-) shows this to be an innovation. Paradigmatically kes-/ käs- belongs to a closed set of verbs that in Tocharian A oppose an active sigmatic preterite to an *-6>-grade middle root preterite (nakäs : nakät, see below 10.2.). Since the middle preterite has adopted -s- from the active in Tocharian B, it is possible to reconstruct an original middle root aorist *gwos-e on the basis of Toch. B kessante, pared with an active sigmatic aorist perhaps already in the parent language.

If this is the case, we can propose the following evolution for the putative Indo-European aorist system active *gwës-s-/*gwés-s- „put out", middle *gwós-/*gw(e)s- „went out". The pattern is essentially preserved in Tocharian. In Greek the middle root aorist has generalized the zero grade and adopted the inflection of the productive intransitive -r|-aorist (cf. 8JIIKTO - > éjiíyri, etc.). In Vedic the active system has been entirely lost, while the middle root aorist has generalized the weak stem *gwes- and has been thematized from the 3sg. *jas-a - ► *jas-a-t, as in ã-dat, ákhyat and other thematic aorists. A similar development has perhaps taken place in Slavic, if the middle aorist generalized the *-6>-grade *gwós-e (also adopted by the present *gwós-ie/o-). Later, an innovated causative *gwõs-eie/o- was created to the intransitive *gwós-ie/o- : *gwós-e(-t), which finally adopted the vocalism of the causative gasiti itself. In Baltic the reverse has taken place, the inchoative *gens-a- being built to the transitive *ges-ia- (later replaced by gesyti and still later by gesinti), which probably has inherited the active system of this root.23 Whatever the pros and cons of this scenario, it goes without saying

that for Baltic and Slavic it is just a possibility among other. In addition, the uncertainties in the first consonant cast some doubts on the validity

cuss here other forms of this root in Greek (Hesychian Çeívau£V Gßewuusv, Çóaaov aßeaov, etc.), see L/V492ff, with literature. 22 Cf. Adams (1999: 177). The present Toch. B kesäm, Toch. A käst is best taken as Class VIII than as Class II (as usually assumed), cf. Jasanoff (1998: 31453). Li Interestingly, Maziulis PKEZ 1 328-31 interprets OPruss. gasto „Stucke" EV 238 as a participle *gas-tã- *„uzgesinta (zemè)", thus providing a potential cognate to the root vocalism *gas- we have postulated for Slavic gasnoti. It goes without saying, this interpretation of OPruss. gasto is just one among several possibilities. Smoczynski (2000: 187-8) advocates for a German borrowing.


of the standard grouping, in spite of its semantic coherence. Thus, lack of forms with **gas- in Vedic and with **/cm- in Tocharian may point to another root *ges-, without that being entirely sure.24

9. In the preceding sections we have studied ten verbs with *-o-vocalism in Baltic and Slavic. They all are intransitive inchoatives ('anticausative') that exhibit the current morphology associated with this functional domain. There is no reason to suppose that they have been secondarily formed within Baltic and Slavic. Quite the opposite, they bear all the appearance of inheritance from the parent language. If some of them are doubtful or could have acquired their vocalism from another source, this doesn't hold true for the entire set. It is important to observe that they all share a common formal feature: a root structure TET- or (T)RET-, notoriously reluctant to adopt zero grade in Indo-European and the daughter languages. It is also important to observe that inchoative verbs of this type with another root structure do not present *-6>-vocalism.25 Although rarely discussed together, these verbs show obvious affini-

ties both formal and functional and can be studied together in search of a unitary explanation. As we have seen, they are usually taken to continue Indo-European perfects, cf. specially Stang (1952, 1961, 966: 346ff) and Vaillant (1966: 77ff, 153, 251ff). The problems linked to this explanation, however, are almost prohibitive.

The clearest examples of inherited perfects in Balto-Slavic are clearly Stative in meaning and belong to other conjugation types (athematic or *-i-presents). With the exception of some isolated preterito-presents (and the past participle) the Indo-European perfect has simply been lost in Balto-Slavic. If verbs like Lith. tàpti „become" and OCS pasti „fall" continue old perfects we are postulating a functional shift from stative to inchoative that is by no means easy to motivate and lacks secure parallels. At best, one could imagine that some Indo-European perfects were preserved with the expected stative value and (presumably)

24 If we assume a root *ges- for Indo-Iranian and Tocharian, Hitt. kist-ari „be extinguished, die out" could belong here as well, as frequently assumed. In any case, if kist-ari is in fact a root enlargement of *ges- it must have formed a different, inde- pendent paradigm from *ges- in the parent language.

Notice that the converse is not true. Some obviously inherited inchoative verbs to TET- and (T)RET-roots show *-e-grade: OCS sèsti, sçdç, aor. sèdb „sit down", lesti, Içgç, aor. legh „lie down". The LIV derives two Baltic inchoative *-ö-verbs to TERT- roots from the perfect: Lith. kársti, kárstu (also kársiu) „grow decrepit, grow old" (*fo?r£-), tarpti, tarpstù „thrive, prosper" (*terp-). I think they are both clear denominatives, cf. karsùs, -ì „decrepit, old aged", tarpa „thrift", tarpus, -i „thriving, ranky" (so for tarpti also Smoczynski 2002: 48).

Traces of *ö-Grade Middle Root Aorists in Baltic and Slavic 307

athematic inflexion (with a tendency to become *-i-presents), and that later new inchoative verbs were built to them according to productive patterns of the language.

This possible scenario is implausible for several reasons. First, the putative Stative *-6>-grade verbs simply do not exist. Secondly, there is plenty of evidence showing that the actual (present) morphology of verbs like Lith. tàpti or OCS pasti has replaced a former, from the point of view of Baltic and Slavic unmotivated present stem. First of all there is the thematic present in OCS padç „fall", but even here a transfer to the «e-presents is found in some languages (Pol. padnie, Cz. padne). An earlier *-7e/o-present for OCS gasnç „go out" is still attested in ne gasQst- „not quenched". In Baltic the aberrant dialectal preterites Lith. tape „became" and skãtè „sprang, hoped" are clearly compatible with earlier presents *tap-ia, *skat-ia, while Gothic frapjip, also unmotivated within Germanic, suggests that su-prañta „understands" has replaced an earlier *prat-ia as well. Finally, the imperfective value of Slavic to(p)nçti „drown, sink" and moknçti „get wet" also argues in favor of their being old, because -ne-presents are productively perfective in Slavic. The picture that emerges, therefore, is not that of a creation of new verbs, but that of a morphological renewal of primary verbs with obsolete morphology. The earliest morphology we can gaze at, it is important to emphasize, is not that of an old perfect and cannot have been created recently.

Both Stang and Vaillant assume that the presents tampa, randa, padç, tonç have been back formed to the preterites tapo, rado, padt, toph. While I agree that the preterite should be given a central role in the prehistory of these verbs, a direct derivation of Lith. tapo, rado or OCS padh from Indo-European perfects *te-tóp-e, *re-ródh-e, *pe-pód-e would be totally in contradiction with what we know about the prehistory of the Slavic aorist and the Baltic preterite, a depository of old aorists and imperfects where the perfect appears not to have played any role at all (relics of the Indo-European perfect in the Slavic aorist or the Baltic preterite are otherwise unknown to me).

Later Stang (1966: 345ff) seems to have changed his view, assuming that *te-tóp-e or *re-ródh-e were first preserved as athematic presents *tap-ti, *ras-ti. The change of present stem in tampa, randa would be due to an earlier shift of function from stative to inchoative. While that could be conceivable in a given case, the shift of function is still difficult to accept for the whole set. In addition, this explanation is in- compatible with the evidence in favor of older intransitive


*-ie/o-presents for many of the verbs under consideration, for that is unexpected within Balto-Slavic and clearly inherits an intransitive conjugation pattern *-ie/o-present : athematic aorist that goes back to the parent language.

In brief, the recourse to the perfect is linked with too many difficulties to be convincing. The main reason for the relative success of this theory is, I believe, the apparent absence of serious alternatives in the Indo- European verbal system as usually reconstructed. Since Lith. tàpti or OCS pasti are intransitive and show *-6>-grade, and since the perfect is the only category believed to have shown these features in the common language, there seems to be no other possible choice. But this choice is quite unsatisfactory both formally and functionally. In addition, the restriction of *-o-vocalism among inchoatives to TET- and (T)RET- roots is left unaccounted for.26

Alternatively, since starting from the perfect is not a satisfactory solution, one could give more or less ad hoc individual solutions for every single item, such as Machek and Klingenschmitt' s cross of *pöl- and *ped- in Slavic pad-e- or the influence of old causatives like *wdh-éie/o-, *top-éie/o- in the vocalism of their inchoatives. That would be perfectly possible, but the recourse to an analogical solution always implies that a more systematic one is not possible. As I have tried to show, there is a systematic correlation between root vocalism, root structure and meaning in the verbs we are studying, a systematic correlation that makes a systematic explanation desirable.

As we have seen, there is evidence indicating that the morphology of the verbs under consideration is an innovation, at least in the present (in Baltic hence also in the preterite, which is dependent from the present stem in this branch), reflecting the productivity of nasal infixai and -sta- presents in Baltic and of -ne-presents in Slavic as a marker of inchoative verbs. As for the *-o-grade, it cannot have originated in the present. As I am arguing in this article, verbs like Lith. tàpti, OCS pasti continue Indo-European middle root aorists *top-e, *pod-e as the oldest form, the present being back formed from the aorist according to a productive pattern for intransitives in late Indo-European and sooner or later adopting the vocalism of the aorist because of a root structure that was reluctant to show the expected zero grade.

26 On the other hand, that there exists a systematic correlation between a given root structure and inchoative *-o-grade verbs has, to my knowledge, never been observed before.


10. Powerful as internal arguments might be, had we but a handful of isolated verbs in Baltic and Slavic it would be clearly too rash to postu- late a new apophonic type for the parent language. Fortunately, evidence for both *-o-grade (alternating with *-0-grade in the plural and dual) and a 3 sg. *-e (pared with a 3 pl. *-re, *-ëre vel. sim.) in the Indo- European middle root aorists is by no means limited to these families.

That dentalless middle endings were once also present in the middle root aorist is a theory that goes back at least to Wackernagel's (1926) classical explanation of Vedic ãdat „took" from an earlier middle aorist *ã d(H)-a. It was extended as a general scenario for the creation of active thematic aorists by Watkins (1969). The theory that the middle root aorist (or a subtype of middle root aorist) displayed a perfect-like ablaut *-tf-/*-0- in the parent language is much more recent, mainly due to Jasanoff (1992, and other publications). Jasanoff builds his theory on the evidence of three families: Indo-Iranian (the passive aorist), Tocha- rian (Class V subjunctives; Toch. A nakät „perish", pakät „ripen, cook") and Anatolian (some /z/zZ-conjugation verbs). In what follows I shall briefly comment on these data.27

10.1. The Indo-Iranian 'passive'28 aorist is formed with a 3 sg. -/ ad- ded to the verbal root, originally with *-o-grade as evidenced by Brug- mann's Law: Ved. ábodhi „awoke", ájani „was born", ákãri „was made", GAv. srauuï „was heard", as if from *é-bhoudh-i, *é-gonh¡-i, *é-kwor-i, ^ídou-i. Because of its paradigmatic isolation and morphological oddity, the passive aorist has been generally dismissed in general treatments of the Indo-European verb. It is sometimes thought to be of nominal origin,29 but the evidence of neuter *-/-stem nouns with *-6>-grade that would serve as the basis is scanty to say the less and it is hard to imagine how such a formation could have found its way into the aorist system of such an archaic branch of Indo-European. Indeed, several facts speak in favor of its antiquity. First of all, it was discovered in the sixties that pãdi, ábodhi, áyoji, ádarsi are paradigmatically

27 At present my (still tentative) views on this topic differ in some important respects from those of Jasanoff, but this doesn't touch the central point that if not all the category, at least a subgroup of Indo-European middle root aorists (or of intransitive '^¿-conjugation' aorists, as per Jasanoff) was characterized by dentalless endings (3 sg. *-e. 3 pl. *-re and/or *-ere) and an ablaut pattern *-o-/*-0-.

28 The term 'passive' is a misnomer. Passive aorists contrast in function with the regu- lar middle, but we find both simple intransitives ('anticausatives': ábodhi „awoke" ájani „was born", ápãdi „fell down") as well as passives {ákãri „was made", ádarsi „was seen", srãvT, OAv. srauuï „was heard"). We can assume that the passive value has evolved from the intransitive (anticausative). 29 Cf. Kümmel (1996: 14ff) for a modern defense of this view.

310 Miguel Villanueva S vensson

associated with a 3rd plural -raml-ran (injunctive -anta) with zero grade of the root (ápadran, ábudhran, áyujran, ádfsran),30 a fact that almost automatically points to an inherited middle paradigm of the most archaic type (cf. present 3 sg. sáye, duhé : 3 pl. sére, duhré). This is confirmed by the obviously inherited nature of deponents like pãdi, ábodhi or ájani and by the likewise obviously inherited pattern of conjugation that entails a middle -ya-present and an (active) perfect (pádyate : pãdi : papada; jãyate : ájani : jajñé). It is therefore safe to attempt a direct derivation of the Indo-Iranian passive aorist from the Indo-European middle root aorist. The 3 sg. *-/ probably arose through a proportional analogy with the 1

sg. *-/, as clearly seen by Insler (1968: 324ff). The model was provided by the perfect and passive-intransitive presents with zero grade of the type still preserved in GAv. sruiië (: passive aorist srauuî) and Ved. cité (: aceti),31 that no doubt had a larger presence in earlier stages of Indo- Iranian: près, lsg *-£*(/) : 3sg *-#(/) = perf. lsg *-¿* : 3sg *-¿z = aor. lsg *-/ : X, X = *-/. The *-o-grade of the 3rd singular, on the other hand, cannot be reasonably explained as an Indo-Iranian innovation. If the Indo-Iranian passive aorist is inherited, as internal evidence clearly suggests, we can't avoid positing ablauting middle aorists * pód-el *Ped-ré, *bhóudh-el*bhudh-ré for the common language. Outside Indo-Iranian, Tocharian provides both direct and indirect evi-

dence in favor of an ablauting middle root aorist *louk-l*luk-. 10.2. Tocharian A shows a small group of exclusively intransitive

middle athematic preterites with *-#-grade pared with active, transitive sigmatic aorists with the expected *-ë-grade. Paradigmatically they occur besides Class VIII presents, Class I active subjunctives and Class III middle subjunctives. In Tocharian B the middle preterite has taken -s- from the active, but preserving the old vocalism: Toch. A tamät, Toch. B temtsate „was born" (act. Toch. B tsemtsa „begot"), Toch. A tsakät, Toch. B 1 sg. tseksamai „burned" (act. Toch. B 3 pl. tsekär „burned (tr.)"), Toch. A nakät, Toch. B neksate „perished" (act. Toch. A nakäs, Toch. B neksa „destroyed"), Toch. A lyokät, Toch. B lauksãte „shined" (act. Toch. A lyokäs, Toch. B lyauksa „light up"), Toch. A pakät „ripened, cooked", as well as Toch. B 1 sg. nemtsamai „bowed" (act. Toch. B 3 pl. nemar „bent") and 3 pl. kessante „was extinguished" (act. 2 sg. kesasta „extinguished"), where the preterite is not attested in Tocharian A but belong to the same type of paradigm. The opposition of

30 Cf. Narten (1964: 24ff), Insler (1968: 314ff). 31 Cf. Kümmel (1996: 13, 38, 152ff).

Traces of *oGrade Middle Root Aorists in Baltic and Slavic 3 1 1

an active, transitive sigmatic aorist and an intransitive (middle) root aorist recurs in Greek and probably inherits an Indo-European pattern of conjugation. The dental endings of the Tocharian A middle aorists can easily have replaced earlier dentalless endings. As for the *-ograde, I think it is best taken at face value, reflecting a real *-o-grade generalized to all the paradigm.32

10.3. Indirect evidence comes from the subjunctive. Class V subjunctives are characterized by a suffix *-ã-, probably adopted from the Class I preterites with which they correlate, and frequently display ablaut (active singular Toch. B -ai-, -au-, -ã-, Toch. A -e-, -o-, -a- : active plural and middle -/-, -u- or -ä-). Class V subjunctives are systematically associated with deponent presents of Class III and IV as well as with nasal presents. Since the Tocharian subjunctive is, historically speaking, a dis- placed indicative, it seems safe to search for an inherited indicative as the source of Class V subjunctives. The Indo-European perfect has of course been frequently invoked, but Class V subjunctives consistently lack the expected reduplication (well preserved in the past participle: Toch. B keklyausu, Toch. A kaklyusu „heard") and show no special preference for a stati ve meaning.

A clue is provided by the systematic correlation of Class V subjunctives and Class III and IV deponent presents with zero grade of the root (wik- „disappear": près. Toch. B wiketär, Toch. A wikatär : subj. Toch. A wekas, Toch. B wikatär). We have already encountered this pattern in Indo-Iranian (present Ved. cité, GAv. sruiië : passive aorist Ved. aceti, GAv. srãuuí) and we will find it, again in a transformed fashion, in Anatolian (see below footnote 34). It is therefore reasonable to derive the Tocharian Class V subjunctive from Indo- European middle root aorists with *-o-/*-0- ablaut and, probably, dentalless middle endings.

10.4. When studying the lexical composition of the middle voice in Anatolian, I was surprised by a curious and, to my knowledge, still unnoticed fact. Middle verbs correlating with Indo-European middle aorists are extremely few and in most cases arguably secondary. Hitt. ar-ta „stand" (: Ved. arta, Gk. copio), luk-ta, lukka-tta „grow bright, dawn" (: Ved. ároci, Toch. A lyokät), par(a)ktaru KUB 33.68 ii 2 „let him rise" (: Arm. barjaw, Toch. B opt. pärkoytär) are certainly old, but

32 Pace Ringe (1990: 215).


neither for arta nor for lukta is accent in the endings possible.33 Apart from that, middle forms corresponding to aoristic roots are found in some old intransitive active aorists that have adopted middle inflection within the history of Hittite (mer-lmar-mi - » mar-tari, mer-tari „disappear", neku-mi - » neku-tta, neku-ttat „become twilight", maybe supp-mi „fall asleep" - » suppatta, suptãri, suppari) or are oppositional middles that could have been formed or reformed from the active at any moment and for the most part are of late attestation (ãrr-hhl „wash" : arra-ttat, karp-mi „lift" : kar(a)p-tari, ëpp-/app-mi „take" : appa-ttat, da-hhl „take" : da-ttari, da-ttat).

The scarcity of Indo-European middle root aorists is rather surprising in a branch like Anatolian, notorious for its preservation of Indo-Euro- pean root presents and aorists. Conversely, in the /z/zZ-conjugation we find a fairly good number of secure or probable aoristic roots, mostly intransitive or with a meaning compatible with those of the middle voice: ãr-hhl „arrive" (: Ved. árat „reached, arrived"), hãt-hhl „become dry" (: Gk. aÇojiai „become dry"), sarap-hhl „sip" (: Arm. arbi „drank"), dãk-/ takk-hhl „resemble" (: Gk. ôéicco „took", Arm. tesi „saw"), arãi-/ariy-hhl „rise" (: Arm. ari „rise up!"), ãk-/akk-hhl „die", dã-hhl, CLuv. la-, HLuv. tai, lai „take" (: Ved. ãdat „took"). Verbs like these contrast in function with the Mi-conjugation root verbs corresponding to presential roots, that are usually transitive or in any case show no special preponderance of meanings associated to the middle voice (the type Hitt. malli „grind", paddai „dig", etc.).34

Both facts find an easy explanation if we assume that the middle aorists inherited by Anatolian were characterized by *-o-/*-0- ablaut and dentalless endings 3 sg. *-e, 3 pl. *-re, *-ëre (yel. sim.). Formally they contrasted with the middle presents, which regularly lacked inner paradigmatic ablaut and had a 3 sg. *-o(r) or *-to(r) and a 3 pl. *-(e)nto(r). Since the formal characteristics of the middle aorists were the same as those of the active /i/n-conjugation, they were subsequently

33 According to the principles of appearance of -ri in the present middle endings of

Hittite established by Yoshida (1990), *Hr-tó, Huk-tó would have given **ar-tãri, **lukk(a)-ttãri.

A small group or -ftm-conjugation verbs correlating with aoristic roots are transitive. I assume that their transitive value is due to polarization vis-à-vis old presents with zero grade of the type Ved. cité, GAv. sruiië and the Tocharian Class III and IV presents. So, for instance, lak-hhl „bend" (: Gk. eÀ£Kxo, OCS -leze „lay down") : lagãri „lie, be laid" (: OCS lezit-b, lezati, Fai. <lecet> „lies"), wãrai „kindles" (: Lith. viré „boiled") : urani „burn" (: OCS Vbrith, vbreti „cook"), harrai „crush" (: Toch. B ara, Toch. A ãr „cease, come to one end") : *harhãri - ► harratta(ri) „get spoiled, go to waste" (: Toch. B orotär „cease, come to an end").


reinterpreted as Wn'-conjugation verbs.35 A fuller treatment of the Anato- lian data will be presented elsewhere.

10.5. There is thus solid evidence for the reconstruction of ablauting middle root aorists in Indo-European. Indo-Iranian and Anatolian clearly point to dentalless, perfect-like endings 3 sg. *-e, 3 pl. *-re, *-ëre (vel. sim.).36 The paradigm of a middle root aorist like Heuk- „shine", then, would run as follows:

1 sg. *lóuk-h2e 1 pl. *luk-médhh2 2 sg. *lóuk-th,2e 2 pl. *luk-dhué 3 sg. Hóuk-e 3 pl. Huk-ré or luk-ëre

The almost universal tendency to generalize the zero grade is easy to understand as a formal subordination to the active aorist.

Further evidence for a 3 sg. *-e in the middle root aorist comes from the active thematic aorist, if originated in a post-Indo-European redun- dant addition of the 3 sg. active *-t to an already obsolete 3 sg. middle *-e. As it is well known, this formation shows a marked preference for ac-tive morphology, specially in Vedic, even if it frequently shows charac-teristically middle semantics or occurs in verbs of predominant or ex-clusive middle morphology.37 I will not go here into a detailed defense of this theory, see Watkins (1969: lOOff) and, specially, Hollifield (1977: 57ff).

Since thematic aorists take zero grade of the root, it follows that the general tendency to introduce zero grade in the middle root aorist must have preceded the tendency to replace the 3 sg. *-e by the more recent and productive *-to. Traces of the old, ablauting middle root aorist, in point of fact, were allowed to survive into the historical period only in a transformed and specialized fashion (Indo-Iranian passive aorists, Tocharian Class V subjunctives, some Anatolian ̂/-conjugation verbs) or under very specific conditions (the Tocharian nakät-type).

35 Of course, inasmuch as other factors were not at play. So, for instance, *lóuk-e > - > lukta preserved its middle voice because it was morphological subordinated to the active lukke-mi „kindle" < Houk-éie-ti.

36 Although authorized adherence to the new reconstruction has been expressed by

some authors, the communis opinio still holds the middle root aorists to have presented regularly zero grade of the root in Indo-European. Well founded as it might seem, however, this view leaves a growing number of data unaccounted for.

E.g. Ved. ãdat „took" (: ã datte), áhuvat „invoked" (: huvé; hávate), ákhyat „looked" (: caste), Gk. expacpov „grew up" (: ipécpoum), exparcov „turned" (: xpercoum), r|pi7TOv „fell down" (: épeírcoum), etc.


It goes without saying, there is much that still needs to be worked out in more detail about the reconstruction of the Indo-European middle aorist as outlined in this section. The general patterns of evolution within each separate branch have been more complex than usually assumed, entailing several layers of analogical changes, categorial splits and morphological renewal. Whether the type *lóuk-el*luk-ré was the general pattern of conjugation for middle aorists in the parent language or just a subtype of conjugation (for instance, opposed to self-benefactive aorists with zero grade) is a question that future research will hopefully aid to clarify. The central point that perfect like ablaut and endings were once present in the Indo-European middle root aorist, in any case, seems to be founded on safe ground.38

11. After this rather lengthy excursus we are now in a position to return to the Balto-Slavic material. As we have argued, some Slavic thematic aorists as OCS pade „fell" or tope „sank" and some Baltic preterites as Lith. rado „found" or su-prãto „understood" are likely to continue Indo-European middle root aorists with *-ö-grade in the singular and a 3 sg. ending *-e (*pód-e, *tóp-e, *ródh-e, *prót-e). The preservation and spread of the *-6>-grade to the plural and later to the whole paradigm, both facts exceptional in Baltic and Slavic, have been motivated by their root structure TET- or (T)RET-, which was reluctant to adopt zero grade. The present of these verbs is in almost every single instance of clear innovative nature and in a number of cases can be argued to have replaced earlier intransitive *-^/ö-presents. The middle aorist as the source of the *-ograde of these verbs is in a sense the default hypothesis, since a perfect fits bad both formally and functionally and *-/f>/o-presents certainly didn't show *-ö-vocalism in the parent language. This theory has only become possible after extensive revision of the morphology of the Indo-European middle root aorist in recent years.

The comparative value of the examples we have studied is unequal. OCS pade „fell", tope „sank" and -gase „went out, was extinguished" can be equated with *-o-grade middle aorists elsewhere in Indo-Euro- pean (Ved. pãdi, átãpi, Toch. B kessante). Lith. skãtolskãtè „spring, hop" and su-prãto „understood" show cognates that at least guaranty the

38 1 will not address here the question of why middle root aorist displayed a different morphology from that of middle presents or how the prehistorical relationship between the middle, the perfect and the "•'-/^¿-conjugation' (= Anatolian /i/w-conjugation) is to be understood. Whatever the answer to these questions might be, the reconstruction of *-o-/*-0-ablaut and dentalless endings 3 sg. *-e, 3 pl. *-re, *-êre for the middle aorist is based on real data, not on theoretical expectations.

Traces of %-Grade Middle Root Aorists in Baltic and Slavic 3 1 5

presence of a verb in the parent language (Lat. scatërelscatere „gush (forth)", Goth, franjan „understand"). Although secure cognates are restricted to Balto-Slavic, the same is probably true for Lith. tãpoltãpè „became" or rado „found", but it is merely a guess that OCS kose sç „touched", Lith. kàkti „set out, start, go" or Slavic mokngti „get wet" should be explained in that way and not otherwise. On the other hand, I do not claim to have exhausted the evidence. It is possible that more potential examples will come to light in the future.

Our proposal for the type OCS pasti „fall", Lith. tàpti „become" gives their aorists pade, tapo a central role in the prehistory of these verbs, their present (both the older *-ie/o- or thematic presents and the more recent inchoative Slavic «^-presents and Baltic nasal infixai and sta -presents) being originally of a secondary, derived nature. The same must hold true for Baltic and Slavic inchoative verbs as a class. An indeterminable number of Indo-European middle root aorists were thematized and came to be pared with some characteristic type of presents. Nasal presents would eventually win its place as the correlate of thematic aorists in a new and productive class of inchoative verbs in Baltic, Slavic and Germanic. The explanatory power and the details of this scenario remain a task for the future, but it cannot be argued at length here. In addition, the synchronie verbal systems of these branches as we know them deprives us of most of the evidence. Thus, it is a reasonable assumption that thematic aorists were once present in Baltic and Germanic in a distribution broadly similar to that of Slavic, but this is, strictly speaking, impossible to prove. Within Slavic, the theory accords well with the functional domain and

paradigmatic properties of thematic aorists (almost exclusive restriction to Leskien's Class II). A significant number of Slavic thematic aorists can be equated with middle root aorists or formations that replace them in other Indo-European languages. In addition to OCS pade (: Ved. pãdi), tope (: Ved. átãpí) and -gase (: Toch. B kessante) one can mention sesti, sçdç, sédh „sit down" (: Ved. ásãdi, ásadat, Gk. eÇeio), lesti, Içgç, legt „lie down" (: Hitt. lak-hhi „bend",39 Gk. exício), both significantly pared with an infixai nasal present, vbz-btnçtirbhnç, -bbdh „awake" (: Ved. ábodhi „awoke", Gk. 87Tü9ó|lIT|v „learned"), drbznçti, drbznç, drbzt „dare" (: Ved. dhrsãná- „daring"), pri-lbnçti, -Ibnç, -Ibp-b „stick" (: Toch. B subj. lipätär „remain, be left over", Ved. alipsata), pro-mhknçti, -mhknç, -nvbkb sç „push, move" (: Ved. ámoci „became free"), vyknçti, vyknç, vykh „learn" (: Arm. owsaw „learnt"),

39 See above, footnote 34.


*svbt-nç-ti „dawn" in ORuss. svbnuti, SCr. svànuti (: Ved. svitãná- „bright"). More examples could be adduced for which an Indo-European middle

aorist is conceivable, but given the limited array of secure etymologies and the productivity of Class II presents in Slavic the comparative evidence cannot be overrated. Preference should be given to internal arguments as those we have tried to offer for the small set of inchoative *-o-grade verbs exemplified by OCS pasti and Lith. tàpti. As for these, it has been possible to argue that starting from Indo-European ablauting middle aorists *pód-e/*ped-ré, *tóp-el*tep-ré as the ultimate origin provides a reasonable solution of their formal and functional properties. Albeit modest, the type OCS pasti, Lith. tàpti adds a new piece of evidence to the reconstruction of Indo-European middle aorists with perfect-like ablaut and endings.

References

Adams, D. Q. (1999): A dictionary ofTocharian B. Amsterdam / Atlanta. Barton, Ch. R. (1980): Notes on the Baltic Preterite. IF 85: 246-278. ESSJ= O. N. Trubacev, Etimologiceskij slovar' slavi anskixjazykov. Moscow 1974-. Fraenkel LEW = E. Fraenkel, Litauisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg 1962-

Goto, T. (1987): Die „I. Präsensklasse" im Vedischen. Untersuchung der vollstufigen thematischen Würze Ipräsentia. Wien.

Hollifield, P. H. (1977): On the System of Conjugation in Indo-European. Ph.D. Dis- sertation, Harvard University.

Insler, S. (1968): The origin of the Sanskrit passive aorist. IF 73: 312-346. Jamison, S. (1983): Function and Form in the -áya- Formations of the Rig Veda and

Atharva Veda. Göttingen. Jasanoff, J. (1979): The Position of the ¿/-Conjugation. In: E. Neu & W. Meid, Hethi-

tisch und Indogermanisch. Innsbruck: 79-90. (1992): Reconstructing Morphology: The Role of the o-grade in Hittite and

Tocharian verb Inflection. In: E. Polomé & W. Winter, Reconstructing Languages and Cultures. Berlin / New York: 129-156.

(1998): The Thematic Conjugation Revisitated. In: J. Jasanoff, H. Craig Melchert & L. Oliver, Mir Curad. Studies in honor ofCalvert Watkins. Innsbruck: 301-316.

Klingenschmitt, U. (1978): Zum Ablaut des indogermanischen Kausativs, ÄZ yz: 1-13. (1982): Das altarmenische Verbum. Wiesbaden. Kulikov, L. (2001): The Vedic -yã-presents. Dissertation, Leiden University. Kümmel, M. (1996): Stativ und Passivaorist im Indoiranischen. Göttingen. (2000): Das Perfekt im Indoiranischen. Wiesbaden. LIV = H. Rix, M. Kümmel, T. Zehnder, R. Lipp and B. Schirmer, Lexikon der indoger-

manischen Verben. Die Wurzeln und ihre Primärstammbildungen. Wiesbaden 1998. LKZ=Lietuviii kalbos zodynas I-XX. Vilnius 1941-2002. Machek, V. (1968): Etymologicky slovnik jazyka ceskeho. Praha.


Mayrhofer EWAia = M. Mayrhofer, Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen. I- ///. Heidelberg 1986-2001.

Maziulis FKtZ = V. Maziulis, frusti kalbos etimologijos zodynas. I-IV. Vilnius 1^88- 1997.

Nussbaum, A. (1976): Caland's „Law" and the Caland System. Ph.D. Dissertation, Har- vard University.

Rasmussen, J. E. (1988): Zur Herkunft des slavischen Imperfekts. [Selected Papers on Indo-European Linguistics. K0benhavn 1999: 359-364].

Ringe, D. (1990): The Tocharian Active ¿-Preterite: a Classical Sigmatic Aorist. MSS 51: 183-142.

Schaefer, C. (1994): Das Intensivum im Vedischen. Göttingen. Schindler, J. (1972): L'apophonie des noms-racines en indo-européen. BSL 67: 31-68. Schmid, W. P. ( 1 967): Baltische Beiträge V. IF 72: 116-1 22. Schmidt, V. (1968): Sprachliche Untersuchungen zu Herondas. Berlin. Schrijver, P. (1991): The Reflexes of the Proto-Indo-European Laryngeals in Latin.

Amsterdam / Atlanta. Smoczynski, W. (2000): Untersuchungen zum deutschen Lehngut im Altpreussischen.

Krakow. (2UU2): Zur Schreibung im apr. hnchindion, 111: enterpo. baltistica 3 /: 4^-M). Stang, Chr. S. (1942): Das slavische und baltische Verbum. Oslo. (1952): Litauisch tàpti. [Opuscula Selecta. Oslo 1970: 185-188]. (1961): Zum baltisch-slavischen Verbum. [Opuscula Selecta: 73-80]. (1962): Die athematischen Verba im Baltischen. [Opuscula Selecta: 196-205]. ( I voo): Vergleichende Urammatik der baltischen Sprachen. Uslo. Tedesco, P. (1948): Slavic rce-Presents from older ye-Presents. Language 24: 346-387. Vaillant, A. (l^bo): urammaire comparee des langues slaves, lome III. Le verbe, raris. Wackernagel, J. (1926): Kieme Beiträge zur indischen Wortkunde. [Kleine Schriften.

Göttingen 1953:417-433]. Watkins, C. (1969): Indogermanische Grammatik, HI/1: Geschichte der indogermani-

schen Verbalflexion. Heidelberg. Yoshida, K. (1990): The Hittite Mediopassive Endings in -ri. Berlin / New York.

Vilnius University Vytautas Magnus University

Miguel Villanueva Svensson

Vileisio 14-35 LT- 10306 Vilnius Lithuania e-mail: miguelvillanueva @ yahoo, com

Documents

Traces of O-Grade Middle in Baltic and Slavic- Villanueva Svensson