-
On the Indo-Iranian Accusative Plural of Consonant
StemsAuthor(s): Hans Henrich HockSource: Journal of the American
Oriental Society, Vol. 94, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 1974), pp.
73-95Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/599732 .Accessed: 22/01/2011 15:43
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of
JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's
Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have
obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of
a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this
work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
.http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aos. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the
same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of
such transmission.
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].
American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofthe American
Oriental Society.
http://www.jstor.org
-
ON THE INDO-IRANIAN ACCUSATIVE PLURAL OF CONSONANT STEMS
tIANS HENRICH HOCK UTNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
The predesinential 0-grade of the Indo-Iranian accusative plural
of consonant stems has by most earlier linguists been considered
inherited from Proto-Indo-European. In more recent publications,
however, the view prevails that it must be of secondary origin. The
purpose of this paper is (a) to show that the latter view is more
likely to be correct and (b) to give a more plausible morphological
motivation for the secondary nature of the predesinential 0-grade
than offered in previous publications.
1.1 As Is WELL KNOWN, Indo-Iranian1 regularly forms the
accusative plural of the consonant stems with a predesinential
0-grade, as can be seen from the following partial paradigms:
N sg. rajd pita A sg. rfjanam pitdram N pl. rajanas pitdras A
pl. rajnas pitrn. 1.2 This contrasts with the situation in
Greek,
where in the only class of consonant stems which preserve the
Proto-Indo-European paradigmatic ablaut alternation between
extended, full, and 0-grade, namely the kinship r-stems, the accu-
sative plural regularly is formed with a prede- sinential full
grade, as in the following partial paradigm:
N sg. pater A sg. patera N pl. pateres A pl. patdras
1.3 Concerning this discrepancy between Indo- Iranian and Greek,
two major views have been advanced. According to one, espoused
mainly by earlier writers on this subject, Indo-Iranian pre- serves
the original state of affairs; cf. sections 2.1-12 below. A second
view, which appears currently
1 Although what will be said in the discussion of this paper
would seem to hold true both for Sanskrit and for the ancient
Iranian dialects, examples will be drawn al- most exclusively from
(Rig-Vedic) Sanskrit, since in that dialect they are more numerous
and readily available and since the problem of the marking (or
fate) of length in Avestan, the better-attested ancient Iranian
dialect, would render the data from that dialect not sufficiently
reliable for some of the more important arguments of this
paper.
to be more widely accepted, gives historical pri- ority to the
Greek full grade; cf. 3.1-9 below.2
1.4 The purpose of this paper is to show that the second of
these two views is more likely to be correct and to give a more
plausible motivation than previously offered for the secondary
nature of the predesinential 0-grade in the accusative plural of
Indo-Iranian.
2.1 The first linguist to have attempted to ac- count for the
predesinential 0-grade of Indo- Iranian seems to have been Pott.
According to him, the Indo-Iranian state of affairs arose in
Proto-Indo-European as a result of the 'heavy' ("gewichtvoll,"
"schwerfillig") phonetic nature of the accusative plural ending -ns
(1833: 52) or -mas (1836: 15). Unfortunately, however, Pott's view
on the subject cannot be considered consistent, for in a different
passage (1833: 61) he claimed that the 0-grade of the accusative
plural serves to distinguish that case from the nominative plural
with its predesinential full grade. In addition, Pott does not seem
to have tried to account for the Greek state of affairs.
2 There is yet a third attitude toward the mentioned discrepancy
between Indo-Iranian and Greek, an attitude which however can only
be described as equivocating on the issue of historical priority.
This attitude can be dis- cerned in Hirt 1927: 68-9. It is found
even as recently as in Szemerenyi 1970, where on p. 147 the
accusative plural is considered an original strong case, while on
p. 151 and 154 the original accusative plural of the n- and nt-
stems is given both with predesinential full grade and with
predesinential 0-grade ("dnt-ns (dont-zns?)" and "-(e)n-ns"), and
on p. 156 the original accusative plural of the r-stems is given
only with predesinential 0-grade ("-r-ns").
73
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
Because of his failure to account for Greek, because of his
inconsistency, and especially because his views on the phonetic
origination of the 0- grade can no longer be maintained in view of
our present knowledge about Proto-Indo-European ablaut, Pott's
views on the subject cannot be considered satisfactory. It should
however be noted that his claim that the 0-grade found in the
Indo-Iranian accusative plural served to distinguish that case from
the nominative plural will turn out to be quite plausible; cf. 2.3,
2.4, 3.1, 3.8 below. But, as the discussion of this paper will
show, this differentiation must have taken place in Indo-Iranian,
not in Indo-European.
2.2 Apparently without knowing of Pott's views, also Osthoff
(1876) claimed that the Indo-Iranian predesinential 0-grade is
inherited from Proto- Indo-European. Unlike Pott, however, he did
try to account for the Greek predesinential full grade, as well as
for isolated (Rig-Vedic) Sanskrit ac- cusative plural forms with
predesinential full grade (such as uksd.nas), as secondary
replacements of the original 0-grade formations. In addition, he
offered a more plausible phonetic motivation for the (origination
of the) predesinential 0-grade; for according to him, it is
intimately tied up with the fact that in the regular formation of
the San- skrit accusative plural, it is the case ending -as which
carries the accent. That is, both in terms of accentuation and in
terms of stem formation, the Sanskrit accusative plural regularly
is a weak, not a strong case (35-6).
As for exceptions like Skt. vacas and Gk. opas, with accent on
the predesinential element, rather than on the ending, Osthoff
believed that they can owe their existence to a general
Indo-European tendency to shift the accent forward, away from the
ending. An additional motivation for this particular instance of
accent retraction lay, in his opinion, in the common influence of
the nominative on the accusative (36). The possible alternative
proposal that the 0-grade of the accusative plural, as well as its
accentuation on the ending, may be a secondary phenomenon,
motivated by an at- tempt to differentiate nominative and
accusative plural,3 must in Osthoff's view be rejected, since such
a differentiation would be without precedent
3 This is, of course, what Pott had proposed (for Proto-
Indo-European). But as pointed out earlier, Osthoff ap- parently
was unaware of Pott's views.
(ibid.). Osthoff saw further confirmation of his interpretatioii
of the Sanskrit evidence in the Rig-Vedic coexistence of the
accusative plural forms uksnds and uksdnas:
"jenes, ukshn-ds, ist die altere, vom nom. plur. noch erheblich
abstehende, dieses, ukshdn-as ..., die dem nomin. ved. nkshdc.-as
vollig gleich gemachte form." (37). Concerning the predesinential
full grade in forms
like Gk. pateras, Osthoff believed that one must assume that the
attempt to make the accusative plural more similar to the
corresponding nomina- tive must have taken place quite early in
'Euro- pean', resulting in the fact that in common 'Euro- pean' the
accusative plural was a strong case (37).4
Osthoff found corroborating evidence for the correctness of his
hypothesis in the fact that it permitted him to account for the
'European' difference between the vocalism of the nominative plural
ending (-es) and that of the accusative plural ending (Gk. -as), a
difference which he be- lieved would otherwise be inexplicable; for
the absence of any trace of a nasal in the accusative plural ending
-as of Sanskrit, "wo doch dergleichen spuren durchaus zu erwarten
wdren," makes the (then) usual assumption of a Proto-Indo-Euro-
pean ending -ans unlikely. In Osthoff's opinion, both the
nominative and the accusative plural endings are to be derived from
a Proto-Indo-Euro- pean ending -as, with "weakening" of a to e in
the unaccented ending of the nominative plural, but with that
weakening blocked in the accented ( ) ending of the accusative
plural (38-9).
4 "Zwei ganz vereinzelte, aber auch ganz unsichere
spuren" of the original state of affairs may, in Osthoff's view,
be seen in the Greek accusative plural forms kunas and drnas (38;
cf. also 75-77). In view of the fact that also the corresponding
nominative plural and accusative sin-
gular formations have predesinential 0-grade (cf. kines, drnes
and kina, drna) and that in these formations, which beyond any
doubt were strong cases in Proto- Indo-European, the predesinential
O-grade must be
secondary, generalized from the oblique forms of the
paradigm, Osthoff was certainly correct in considering kdinas
and drnas very uncertain evidence for the assump- tion that the
accusative plural originally was a weak case. For like the
predesinential 0-grade of the nominative plural and accusative
singular, that of the accusative
plural may be secondary.
74
-
HOCK: Indo-lranian Accusative Plural
2.3. Osthoff's views were attacked in the same year by Brugmann
(1876) who raised the follow- ing, generally quite valid,
objections.
(1) In Vedic, the ablauting nouns frequently show the accusative
plural in the strong form, both in respect to accentuation and in
respect to ablaut; cf. dpas beside apds, ukscinas beside uksnds,
vfsanas beside vtfsnas. In nonablauting monosyl- labic nouns, Vedic
sometimes accentuates the ac- cusative plural as a strong case,
sometimes as a weak case; cf. vacas beside vacds (289).
"Nun entspricht dem ved. ukshdnas haarscharf got. auhsans und
vakas ... eben so dem gr. 6pas . Wenn demnach ALLE idg. Sprachen
den ace. plur. als starken Casus kennen und nur das Arische neben
dem all- gemein indogermanischen Verhaltniss noch ein anderes, ihm
eigentiimliches aufweist, so ist von vorn herein die
Wahrscheinlichkeit daftir, dass diese rein arische und in den
arischen Sprachen nicht einmal regelmassig auf- tretende Bildung
die unursprtingliche ist." (ibid.). (2) It is unlikely, and without
any Greek pre-
cedent, that the accent on the accusative plural ending *-as
should have prevented a "weakening" of a to e. As a matter of fact,
the "weakening" of a to o in the genitive singular ending *-as,
where both Sanskrit and Greek agree on having the ac- cent on the
ending, as seen in Skt. vacds: Gk. op6s, clearly militates against
Osthoff's view (289- 90).
(3) The ending of the accusative plural must originally have
been -ams, that is, the accusative singular ending -am plus a
plural marker -s. This is especially clearly shown by the Greek
evidence (290).
(4) Beside accent retraction from the ending to the stem, which
Osthoff had considered to be such a common tendency that it would
plausibly ac- count for forms like Gk. 6pas, one can also en-
counter accent shifts in the opposite direction, as can be seen by
Greek proper names like Dexa- menos.
"Es liegt hier sehr nahe die Annahme, das Altindische habe,
nachdem durch den lautgesetzlich notwendigen Wegfall des Nasals
[which is the main subject of Brugmann's famous paper] die Form des
ace. plur. und die des nom. plur. zusammengefallen waren, den
Accent im ace. plur. nach der Analogie anderer casus obliqui auf
die Schlussilbe geworfen, um dadurch eine Differenzierung
herbeizufiihren, wie doch wol auch [Gk.] Dexamends gegeniuber
[pple.] dexdmenos auf einer solchen Differenzierung beruht."
(291).
(5) Finally, Brugmann did not consider very cogent Osthoff's
argument that the common tend- ency is to make the accusative
similar to the nom- inative and that therefore it is unlikely that
the predesinential 0-grade owes its origin to differ- entiation of
the accusative plural from the nom- inative plural. For other
circumstances, which to be sure are not at all clear as yet, may
have favored the assimilation of the accusative plural to the
weak-grade oblique forms of the paradigm (292).
2.4 To Brugmann's arguments against Osthoff's hypothesis may be
added the following.
(1) Osthoff's claim that an attempt to differ- entiate
nominative and accusative (plural) would be unprecedented cannot be
accepted. Witness the well-known Slavic differentiation of accusa-
tive and nominative in the animates by the re- placement of the
accusative by the genitive, a process which began in the o-stems
where phono- logical developments had led to the formal identity of
nominative and accusative. Compare Kurylo- wicz 1964: 221-5 for
some of the details and the syntactic motivation of this
development.
Surely, if phonological merger of nominative and accusative
(singular) can lead to a remaking of the latter category in Slavic,
so as to differ- entiate nominative and accusative, then an an-
alogous phonological merger of nominative and accusative plural in
the Indo-Iranian consonant stems may well have led to an analogous
differ- entiation (although, of course, the details of the
phonological and morphological developments in the two language
groups may differ considerably).
(2) The fact that accusative plural forms like Sunds (from
Suvdn-) show the accent on the case ending is not necessarily
probative. For whether the weak-grade accusative plural be original
or secondary, in the accusative plural of most char- acterized
consonant stems with underlying stem- final accent (such as
suvun-), there is no other place for the accent to go but on the
case ending, since the stem-forming suffix (-n-) appears in con-
sonantal shape and thus is not capable of bearing the accent. And
it is only in the characterized consonant stems that the case
ending regularly carries the accent. In the (nonablauting) root
nouns, the accent can in Vedic be found both on the root and on the
ending; cf. Brugmann's ex- amples. As a matter of fact, in
nonablauting root nouns, the accent regularly falls on the root;
cf. de Saussure's view in the following section of
75
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
this paper, as well as the discussion in Kurylowicz 1968: 27,
for which see section 3.8 below.5
What is especially important is the fact, in- dicated in
Debrunner-Wackernagel 1930: 24-5, that where in the nonablauting
root nouns "neben den stammbetonten Formen auch endungsbetonte
vorkommen, sind diese gew6hnlich seltener und SPATER [my emphasis]
. . ." In some cases, such as RV hrutas (6.4.5) and srdcas (1.144
1), the forms with accent on the ending first occur in Atharva-
Veda; cf. hrutds (AV 6.51.1) and srucds (AV 18.4.2). Moreover,
according to Debrunner-Wackernagel (ibid.), PSanini prescribes end
accent for forms like niSds. That is, as the extant historical
evidence of (Vedic) Sanskrit shows, the root-accented forms clearly
are archaisms in the language, archaisms which slowly are replaced
by the synchronically more regular forms with end accent (which in
addition to being more regular have the virtue of being
differentiated from the corresponding nom- inative forms).6
2.5 Brugmann's view in turn soon came under attack by de
Saussure (1879: 208-9) who agreed with Brugmann on only one point,
namely that the Sanskrit accentuation of the accusative plural
ending -as is most likely to be secondary, con- sidering that in
the Rig-Veda, the accusative plural forms of root nouns are more
frequently accented on the root than on the ending, and that Greek
always has root accent in the accusative plural of root nouns.
Concerning the question whether the accusative plural originally
was a strong or a weak case, how- ever, de Saussure asked
"Comment cet affaiblissement systematique de toutes les espices
de themes sanskrits a l'accusatif plur. serait- il dfi au hasard
d'un remaniement secondaire? Com- ment, en particulier, expliquer
la forme des themes a liquides, pitFn? Cette forme ... ne se
concoit qu'en partant de l'indo-eur. pAtr-ns ... Dans la supposi-
tion de M. Brugman on ne pourrait attendre en san- skrit que
'pitrds' (pour '*pitdras', '*pitdrns'). Ain-
5 Note in this respect that the accusative plural pitrif
actually shows the accent on the stem-forming suffix, and not on
the ending. But, of course, here as in the case of forms like
gunds, the placement of the accent is merely a consequence of the
surface phonetic structure of San- skrit.
6 For the very different conclusions reached by De- brunner and
Wackernagel concerning this chronological distribution of forms,
cf. fn. 12 below.
si ... (l)a syllabe pred6sinentielle etait AFFAIBLIE MALGRE
L'ACCENT [de Saussure's emphasis] ..." (208).
As for the n-stems, de Saussure asserted that their accusative
plural should originally have been uks.ns or perhaps rather
uksnnns. And the latter form may well be reflected in Vedic
uksdnas. 'En tous cas uksnds n'est pas un type pur.' (208-9).
2.6 Although de Saussure's agreement with Brugmann's view that
the case ending was not ori- ginally accented in the accusative
plural must be welcomed as a step in the right direction, the re-
mainder of his argument is open to serious ob- jections.
First of all, it is difficult to see why the Proto-
Indo-European accusative plural of the n-stems should have been
*uksns or rather *uksinnns, if that of the r-stems is taken to have
been *patfns. Should one not equally expect an n-stem accusative
plural *ukshns, with nonsyllabic, rather than syl- labic,
accusative plural ending *-ns?
Secondly, de Saussure's claims notwithstanding, it is quite
possible to consider Skt. pitfns and similar Iranian forms (such as
Av. niatdrFs) to be secondary replacements of an earlier type
*pitrds, which in turn might be an innovation for an earlier
*pitdras (whether along Brugmann's or some other lines). For, as
Bartholomae (1894: 123) has shown, a new accusative plural in
*-r-ns could be created on the model of the i- and u-stems:
I pl. *-i-bhig : *-u-bhi ' ,: *-r-bhi L pl. *-i-su : *-u-su :
*r-Su A p. *-i-nS : *-u-n? : X = *-r-nS.
In Indic, but not in Iranian, the accusative plural formations
of the i-, u-, and r-stems additionally came under the influence of
the a- and i-stems, leading to the lengthening of the stem-forming
suffix and to the secondary gender distinction between masculine
*-i-ns, *-u-ns, *-r-ns and fem- inine *-i-S , *-, --.-Bartholomae's
proposal appears quite attractive, especially considering the
following facts which Bartholomae failed to adduce in favor of his
hypothesis. (1) The r- stems share with the i- and u-stems the
feature of being the only synchronic resonant stems, withl regular
surface alternation between vocalic and nonvocalic resonants, while
the n-stems, with their surface alternation between a and n, no
longer follow this pattern. (2) Beside the i and u of the i- and
u-stems, the (a)r of the r-stems is the only inherited stem-forming
suffix which conditions the change of a following s to s (in
accordance
76
-
HOCK: Indo-Iranian Accusative Plural
with the ruki-rule). (3) Additional evidence for this close
affinity between the r-, i-, and u-stems can be seen in the later,
exclusively Indic, transfer to the r-stems of the genitive plural
ending -narm from the i- and u-stems (where it was in turn
secondarily introduced from the a-stems). That this transfer was
rather late is seen by the ex- istence in Rig-Veda of the relics
nardm and svus- ram and by the fact that the ending -nam is lacking
in the Iranian inflection of the r-stems.7
De Saussure's argument that the type pitfns must be inherited
and that the type uksnas must be secondary thus cannot be
considered cogent.
2.7 By 1892, Brugmann had changed his mind about the original
shape of the accusative plural of consonant stems. He now believed
that the predesinential 0-grade of Sanskrit is more archaic than
the full grade of Greek, as seen by corre- spondences like Skt.
catuiras = Li. keturis (A pl.), Gk. Aeol. pisuras. "Doch ist diese
Frage vor- laufig noch eine offene." (671-2).
Brugmann reiterated this view in 1904: 294, fn. 1, and 1906:
32.8 In the latter publication, Brug- mann became quite explicit
about the fact that he believed Skt. caturas, Li. keturis, Gk. Hom.
pisuras to be relic formations. And apparently because of this
belief, he now presented without any of the previous qualifications
his view that the accusative plural originally was a weak case.
2.8 Brugmann's view that the set caturas, kIe- turis, pisuras is
a set of relics and thus proves that the Proto-Indo-European
accusative plural of con- sonant stems was a weak case cannot be
accepted.
In Sanskrit, caturas simply follows the regular synchronic rule
that the accusative plural is made from the weak grade of the stem.
And if it can be shown that that general rule is an Indo- Iranian
innovation, then catiras is an innovation, just like rajnas and
pitfn. That is, caturas can- not be considered any more probative
than any
7 On this transfer of the ending -nam to the genitive plural of
the r-stems, cf. Debrunner-Wackernagel 1930: 209-11 with references
to earlier literature.
8 For some unexplained reason, Brugmann in these two
publications credits Osthoff 1907: 117-8 (fn.) with having pointed
out the probative nature of forms like Skt. catdras, Li. keturis,
Hom. pisuras. However, the pas- sage in Osthoff referred to does
not make any such state- ment, nor did Osthoff make any such
statement elsewhere in his paper.
other weak-grade accusative plural of consonant stems. It cannot
be accorded the status of IN- DEPENDENT evidence in favor of the
view that the accusative plural originally was a weak case.
Considering that in the Lithuanian inflection of the numeral
'four', the stem ketur- occurs throughout the whole paradigm, even
in the nom- inative (plural) keturi (m.), keturios, it must be
concluded that in pre-Lithuanian there was level- ing of the
0-grade stem alternant throughout the paradigm. The accusative
(plural) masculine ke- turis therefore need not be any more
original than the corresponding nominative (which definitely is
not).
Even in Greek, it is not at all certain that pisuras must be
considered an archaism. For in addition to pisuras (Hom. I1.
15.680, 23.171, 24.233; Od. 22.111), there is also a nominative
pisures (Od. 5.70, 16.249).9 It is true, the nominative is re-
stricted to the later Odyssey, and it might there- fore be claimed
that it is a later, artificial forma- tion built by an Ionic poet
on the model Ion. tessaras: tessares = 'Aeol.' pisuras: X. However,
the restriction to the Odyssey may well have been accidental, for
in relation to the occurrences of the usual Homeric stem tessar-,
the occurrences of the stem pisur- are extremely limited in the
Homeric poems. Apparently the latter stem was favored only under
certain metrical conditions; cf. Chantraine 1942: 260.10 In
addition, as long as we do not precisely know what the nominative
corresponding to pisuras was at the time of the composition of the
Iliad, it is simply impossible to tell whether or not the
pisur-dialect had leveled the weak stem throughout the paradigm,
just like Lithuanian and, more importantly, just like all the other
Greek dialects (with their uniform tes- sar-, tesser-, or tettar-
depending on the dialect). The form pisuras thus cannot be
considered reli- able evidence for or against Brugmann's view.
9 Other forms of the stem pisur- are restricted to later (epic)
poetry.
10 As a matter of fact, instead of merely claiming that the
nominative pisures of the Odyssey is a poetic artifact, it might be
claimed that ALL Homeric occurrences of the stem pisur-, not only
those in the Odyssey, are poetic artifacts, part of the Homeric
'Kunstsprache,' and owe their existence to metrical considerations.
That is, it could be claimed that possibly none of these
occurrences may reflect the original paradigmatic distribution of
the stem pisur- in the "Aeolic" source dialect.
77
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
2.9 Also Debrunner and Wackernagel (1930: 20, 60, 276) believed
that the accusative plural origin- ally was a weak case.ll Unlike
de Saussure, how- ever, they were of the opinion that it was the
ending, rather than the predesinential element, which carried the
accent. Apparently the reason for their belief that the accent
originally was on the ending is the fact that this would motivate
the preceding 0-grade (in terms of the by now established usual
correlation of 0-grade and lack of accentuation). However, as
Debrunner and Wackernagel themselves pointed out, what is dis-
turbing is the fact that the case ending -ns appears in the
0-grade, in spite of its being accented.
As for forms like Vedic uksdinas beside uksnds, Debrunner and
Wackernagel do not consider them valid counterevidence to their
hypothesis. For in their view they are to be explained as
reflecting an earlier *-nn- (> -an-). In support of this view
they referred to Wackernagel 1896: 11, where the crucial
environment for the occurrence of *-nn-> -an- in these forms is
given as follows:
"Hinter Konsonantengruppen und sonstiger langer Silbe:
kl[assischl regelmaissig im ersteren Fall in den schwachen Kasus
der Stiamme auf -van- -man- . v[edisch] oft auch hinter langem
Vokal z.B. rtav(a)n-e, auch bei Suffix -an-: raj(a)n-d omdn-a ...
sowie ver- einzeltes an (auch bloss n geschrieben) in der
v[edischen] Flexion derer auf -an: v.rsan-as vrs(a)n-as
aryam(a).n-e mah(a)n-a ..." 2.10 Concerning the hypothesis
advocated by
Debrunner and Wackernagel, the following ob- jections must be
raised.
2.10.1 The view that the usual desinential ac- centuation in the
accusative plural of Sanskrit characterized consonant stems is
inherited cannot be considered acceptable. For, as shown by the
regular Rig-Vedic root accentuation in the ac- cusative plural of
nonablauting root nouns, the accusative plural must originally have
had pre- desinential accentuation; cf. sections 2.4 and 2.5 above,
as well as the arguments in Kurylowicz 1968: 27, for which cf.
section 3.8 below.l2
l1 This view was accepted by Schwyzer (1939: 567-8). 12
Debrunner and Wackernagel were aware of the
regular root accentuation of the nonablauting root nouns.
However, they considered this accentuation innovated. In their
opinion, the nonablauting roots gave up their original accentuation
on the ending in favor of the root accentuation of the
corresponding nominative plural forms
That is, if the usual view is correct that in ablauting
morphemesl3 there is a regular correla- tion between accentuation
and full grade, then the accusative plural would as a matter of
fact seem to be more likely an original strong case than a weak
one. However, in light of the fact that the genitive/ablative
singular of the r-stems shows the form Skt. pituir, from *palts,
with ac- cented 0-grade of the ablauting suffix *-(e)r-, this
argument is perhaps not as powerful as it might appear at first
blush.l4 Still, in light of the strong evidence in favor of an
original prede- sinential accentuation it cannot be considered war-
ranted to posit an original accent on the case ending and to
consider the predesinential 0-grade a consequence of the original
lack of accentuation on the predesinential element.'5
2.10.2 Leaving aside the accusative plural forms vfs(a)nas and
uksd.nas, uksnds, which will be dealt with in section 2.10.3,
(Debrunner-)Wackernagel's evidence for a prevocalic 0-grade
alternant (*-nn- >) -an- even in the simple n-stems, occurring
after a single consonant, preceded by a long vowel or even by a
short vowel, is very slim indeed.
omdnai really is not a simple n-stem, but rather a man-stem
(from av-); cf. Mayrhofer 1956: 133. It thus follows the
overwhelming Rig-Vedic pat- tern of man-stem inflection, with
prevocalic *-mnn- > -man- after long vowel in the 0-grade forms
of the paradigm.l6 The form therefore
"weil sich der Akk. nur durch den Akzent vom Nom. P1.
unterschied..." (1930: 24). However, as the discus- sion in section
2.4 above (which incidentally was based on relevant data assembled
in Debrunner-Wackernagel 1930: 24-5, the same passage as the one
referred to above) has shown, the extant historical evidence of
(Vedic) San- skrit indicates that the root accentuation is an
archaism, rather than an innovation. The alleged earlier stage with
end accentuation is, as Kurylowicz (1964: 201) correctly observed,
"fictitious".
13 In nonablauting morphemes, syllabic resonants (i.e.
"0-grades") do not infrequently occur accented; cf. PIE *wjkwos,
*septrm.
14 For further discussion of the type pitfir, cf. section 3.7
below.
15 For additional arguments against the view that the usual
desinential accentuation of Sanskrit (characterized) consonant
stems must be an archaism, cf. section 2.4 above.
16 Only damdn- 'gift; giver' consistently has prevocalic -mn-;
cf. damna (5x). The stems premdn- and loman-
78
-
HOCK: Indo-Iranian Accusative Plural
cannot be considered evidence for simple n-stem inflection.
Wackernagel's aryam(a).ne (RV 4.3.5) may well be an unnecessary
and unwarranted emendation for the aryamner actually found, a form
which recurs twice in Rig-Veda under metrically un- ambiguous
conditions. For Arnold (1905: 300, ad locum) plausibly suggested
that the line in which it occurs, namely RV 4.3.5a, is a Gautami
verse, which would accommodate the unamended form quite well,
perhaps better than the emended form would fit into a Tristubh
verse. In addition, the fact that there are two (or perhaps three)
other instances of Gautami verse in this hymn would seem to furnish
ample precedence for the assumption that also this line is in
Gautami meter.-Even if the emendation to aryamane were to be
accepted, however, the form cannot be con- sidered prime evidence
for the inflection of the simple n-stems. For whatever its
historical origin -and neither of the two proposed origins involves
a simple n-stem-,17 synchronically the stem arya- man- would no
doubt have been interpreted as a man-stem. As a man-stem form,
however, arya- mane would be comparable to Ab/G mahimcinas (RV 2x),
with sporadic generalization of the pre- vocalic 0-grade alternant
-man- even to the en- vironment after short vowel. And the
relationship between aryamane (lx) and aryamne (2x), ary- amnds
(6x) would thus mirror the relationship between mahimdnas (2x) and
unremade mahimnds (2x), mahimne (lx), mahimna (lx), mahina
(35x).
Wackernagel's mah(a)na is attested twice in Rig-Veda (4.2.1 and
10.6.7) and might, as a genuine n-stem form, thus be considered to
strong-
also show only -mn- (>-n-) in the forms prena and lomno-
lomnas; but each of these forms is attested only in a single
passage. The stems (-)naman- and bhumdn- have forms both in -mn-
and in
-man-; cf. namnd (Ix), nam[a]nd (lx; with metrically
unambiguously required emendation of -mnd to
-mana), dhindmndm (Ix), suhdvitundm[a]ne (lx); bhamdnd (lx),
bhimna (2x). All other -man-stems with a root-final long vowel show
only forms in -man-; cf. omdnd (lx), tramane (lx), d'mane 'giving'
(Ix), -manas (lx), dam[a]nas 'strick, rope' (lx), dhamand (2x),
-mane (5x), -manas (2x), bhumand (lx), -manas (4x), yamanas (lx),
Satdydm[a]nd (lx), dnusraydm[a]ne (lx), pravddyd- mand (lx),
viomanas (lx), sam[a]nd 'song' (lx), -m[a]nas (3x), susam[a]ne
(3x), sam[a]ne 'Erwerb' (2x), sydmand (Ix), hemdnd (lx). That is,
out of 49 (or 50) occurrences of relevant forms, 38 show prevocalic
-man-.
17 On this matter, cf. section 2.10.3 below.
ly argue in favor of Wackernagel's hypothesis. However, both
these attestations are metrical e- mendations for actually attested
mahna, a form which is attested elsewhere 32 times in metrically
unambiguous environments. In the case of the at- testation in RV
10.6.7(a), the emendation to ma- hana actually seems to be
unnecessary and un- warranted; for as Arnold (1905: 318) observed,
the line in which the form occurs is most likely to be a Pentad
verse which would well accommo- date the attested mahna. The
occurrence of eleven other Pentad verses in this hymn, including
line 7b, the line immediately following the line in which mahna
occurs, furnishes ample precedence for the assumption that also
line 7a is a Pentad verse. As for the occurrence in 4.2.1, it is
true that met- rical emendation to a trisyllabic form with the
pattern uul - is inevitable. However, it is an a priori assumption
that the result of that emenda- tion must be an otherwise
unattested mahana. Considering the semantic closeness of (the in-
strumentals of) the two stems nahan- and mahi- mdn- and considering
the actual and frequent attestations of the instrumental mahina
(cf. above) which would fit the metrical requirements perfect- ly,
Arnold's emendation to mahina (1905: 300, ad locum) would seem
highly preferable to the nonce- form emendation mahana.
Finally, as for Wackernagel's raj(a)nd (RV 10:97:22b; cadence of
Epic Anustubh), written rajfia,' I accept Lanman's (1877:525)
inter- pretation that metrical emendation is not ne- cessary, since
unemended rajnia would be ac- ceptable in the cadence of a
cateletic verse. There would be ample precedent for such a
catelectic interpretation, for, as Arnold (1905:323) showed, there
are three other catelectic verses in this hymn (14c, 15c, 19c), in
addition to two further instances of (less typical) heptasyllabic
verses (13a, 20a).
2.10.3 As for the accusative plural forms uksdnas (10.86.13)
beside uksncs (ibid. 14,10.28. 11) and vftanas (4.2.2)19 beside
vfsnas (8.7.33,8.20.20). the following two points are of
importance.
18 Beside this form, there are eleven attestations of the
expected, regular weak stem rdjii-. However, none of these happens
to be an instrumental singular.
19 According to Grassmann (1872: s.v.) there is also an
accusative plural vfr'nas (8.7.33) which is to be read as vfsanas.
However, an alternative and metrically prefer- able emendation of
this line in Arnold 1905: 311, ad locum, renders Grassmann's
reading unlikely.
79
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
(1) None of the other synchronic weak-grade forms of these two
nouns shows -an- in prevocalic environment. The stem vfsan- shows
the following forms: G/Ab. vfsnas (40x), I vfsnd (2x), D vfsne
(34x). Similarly, the stem uksan- shows the gen- itive singular
uksnds, not uksdnas*.
This distribution is of paramount significance. For if the
accusative plural of these forms really had originally been a weak
case and if the -an- forms of the accusative plural owed their
existence to (generalization of) the effects of Sievers-Edger-
ton's Law after heavy syllable, one should surely expect to find
similar traces of the effect of Sievers- Edgerton's Law in (some
of) the forms of the other weak-grade cases. The absence of such
forms and the fact that at least in vfsan-, with its light syllable
preceding the stem-forming suffix, there would not have been any
motivation for the ap- plication of Sievers-Edgerton's Law, would
seem to indicate that the accusative plural originally was
different from the (other) weak-grade cases. And this difference
presumably and most likely consisted in the fact that the
accusative plural originally was a full-grade case, especially con-
sidering the evidence adduced in sections 2.4 and 2.5 above in
favor of the view that the accusative plural originally had
predesinential accentuation. The forms uksnds and vfsnas would then
have to be considered remakings of the more archaic uksdnas and
uvsanas, so as to conform to the pro- ductive synchronic pattern
according to which the accusative plural is a weak-grade formation,
with accent on the ending (except for the r-stems, which accent the
stem-forming suffix).
It might be objected that the sole occurrence of uksdnas is in a
rather late hymn (10.86.13) and that the form therefore can hardly
qualify as an archaism. However, also the alternative form, uksnds,
occurs only in late hymns (10.28.11 and 10.86.14), one of which is
identical with that in which uksdnas is attested. That is, we can
at least reach the negative conclusion that uksnds does not have
any greater claim to being archaic than uksdnas. In the case of
vfsan-, however, the attestation of the full-grade form vfsanas
occurs in a quite early hymn (4.2.2). And considering the
synchronic aberrancy of this full-grade, prede- sinential-accent
accusative plural form of a char- acterized consonant stem, as well
as the arguments in favor of original root accentuation in the ac-
cusative plural of the nonablauting root nouns, this early
attestation of vfsanas can hardly be
anything but an archaism.
(2) What is equally important in the evalua- tion of the
accusative plural forms of uksdn- and vtsan- is the fact that these
two stems are aberrant not only in the formation of the accusative
plural, but also in the formation of the accusative sin- gular and
nominative plural, categories about whose status as original
full-grade formations there cannot be any doubt.
The stems uksdn- and vfsan- belong to a small group of n-stems
which form their accusative singular and nominative plural in a
synchronically aberrant fashion, by having guna, rather than the
usual vrddhi, in the stem-forming suffix. It is true, just as
alternative forms with synchronical- ly regular predesinential
0-grade can be found in the accusative plural of uksdn- and vtsan-,
so also in the words belonging to the small aberrant class of
n-stems under discussion (including uksdn- and vfsan-) there are
occasional alternative accusative singular forms with the
synchronically regular vrddhi of the stem-forming suffix. However,
except for one stem, namely anarvdn- (which may well not belong
into this group to begin with, cf. below), there are significantly
no such alternative vrddhi forms occurring in the paradigmatically
more pivotal nominative plural.
Before discussing the significance of these facts, it will be
good to have a look at the stems belong- ing to this class and at
the relevant attestations of these stems.
anarvdn-: A sg. anaruvdnam (10.92.14, Jagati cadence) beside
anarva.nam (1.37.1, opening of Gayatri; 1.51.12, opening of Jagati;
1.136.5, opening of Jagati verse of Atyasti; 1.190.1, opening of
Tristubh; 2.6.5, cadence of Gayatri; 6.48.15, opening of Jagati;
7.97.5, break of Tristubh and first syllable of cadence; 8.92.8,
cadence of Gayatri)-N pi. anarvdaas (5.51.11, cadence of Jagati;
8.31.12, cadence of Gayatri)20 beside anarvanias (1.190.6 opening
of Tristubh; 8.18.2, opening of Gayatri in Us- 0ih)-G pl. anarvdinm
(10.65.3).-Arnold proposed to emend three occurrences of the
accusative anarvanam to anarvdnam, namely those in the Gayatri
cadences (2.6.5 and 8.92.8) and the occurrence in the break of a
Tristubh (7.97.5); cf. Arnold 1905: 297, 310, 315, ad loca. The
proposed emendations would of course make these ac- cusative plural
forms fit better into the regular metrical
patterns expected in the respective environments. How-
ever, they do not seem to be strictly necessary, for the
20 These two attestations of the nominative plural are not
listed in Grassmann 1872. They are listed in Debrun-
ner-Wackernagel 1930: 267.
80
-
HOCK: Indo-Iranian Accusative Plural
unemended forms would fit metrical patterns which, though rarer
and irregular (cf. Arnold 1905: 160 and 165), do occur elsewhere
and which are characteristically, although not exclusively, found
in early hymns. And, as Arnold himself pointed out (p. 165), one of
these hymns, namely RV 2.6, is a hymn of the archaic period.
Leaving aside these three forms, we find that of the remaining ten
occurences of accusative singular and nominative plural forms, five
attestations fit the regular metrical patterns expected in the
environments in which they occur; that is, they may possibly have
been secondarily adapted to fit the (regular) meter. These
occurrences are: anarvdnam (10.92.14) and anarvcdnas (5.51.11 and
8.31.12) in Jagati and Gayatri cadences, anarvanam (1.37.1) and
anarvanas (8.18.2) in Gayatri openings. Note that this set of forms
which may possibly consist of metrical adaptations in- cludes all
of the three relevant guna forms of the accu- sative singular and
nominative plural. The remaining five attestations, namely
anarvanam (1.51.12, 1.136.5, 1.190.1, 6.48.15) and anarvdnas
(1.190.6) occur in Tristubh or Jagati openings. What is significant
about that en- vironment, however, is the fact that the third
syllable of the opening is metrically 'free', both -and u being
possible. The fact that this free environment shows only prede-
sinential vrddhi forms would seem to make it quite certain that the
stem anarvcn- really regularly has pre- desinential vrddhi and that
the guna found in anarvadnam and in the two occurrences of
anarvdnas owes its existence to metrical considerations. (As for
the genitive plural anarvdnam, it merely shows the usual
Sievers-Edgerton's Law alternant -van- after consonant.)
aryamdn-: A sg. aryamdnam (15x), D sg. aryamne (2x), aryamane
(lx), G sg. aryamnds (6x), N/A/V du. aryamdna (lx), N pi. aryamdnas
(lx). No forms with predesinential vrddhi occur in Rig-Veda; some
occurrences of guna forms are found in metrically free
environments, such as aryamdnam (4.2.4, opening of Tristubh); for
the dative form aryamane, cf. section 2.10.2 above. In addition,
notice that even in post-Rig-Vedic times, relevant guna forms
occur, such as aryamdnam (AV 19.1.17); cf. Lanman 1877: 532. There
can thus be no doubt about the fact that aryamdn- regularly has
guna in the stem-forming suffix of the strong cases. Since de
Saussure (1879: 220, fn. 1), this has generally been explained as
due to the fact that aryamdn- is a compound of arya- plus the root
man-, and that the inflection of the compound follows the (guna)
root noun inflection exemplified by -han-, for which see below in
this section. Compare Debrunner- Wackernagel 1930: 267 and
Kurylowicz 1956: 56 for reiter- ations of this view. A different
interpretation, however, was offered by Thieme (1938: 135-41) who
convincingly demonstrated that aryamdn- can just as well be
considered an original man-stem. This view was accepted as
prefer-
able to de Saussure's view in Debrunner 1954: 4. In ad- dition,
as pointed out earlier (section 2.10.2 above), syn- chronically the
stem aryamdn- was no doubt interpreted as a man-stem, whatever its
origin may have been. After all, it is hard to believe that, even
if the word were an original compound, speakers of the language
would still have been aware of its original compound character.
There is thus no reason against believing that, at least
synchronically, aryamdn is a bona-fide member of the set of n-stems
with aberrant (guna) inflection in the accusa- tive singular and
nominative plural.
uksdn-: A sg. uksanam (1.164.43) beside uksdnam (4x), G sg.
uksnds, N pl. uksdnas (llx), A pl. uksdnas (lx) beside uksnds (2x).
The accusative plural forms, as well as the (genuine) prevocalic
0-grade form of the genitive singu- lar, have already been
discussed earlier in this section. Since the full- and 0-grade
forms of the accusative plural are metrically incommensurate,
because of the difference in the number of syllables, it is
impossible to determine whether one or the other of these forms may
owe its ex- istence to metrical considerations. However, in the
case of the vrddhi and guna forms in the synchronically strong
cases, it is possible to show that the vrddhi form of the
accusative uksanam (1.164.43) may well be metrically motivated,
while the guna forms uksdinam and uksd.nas are genuine. For not
only does uksanam occur in a late, 'popular' hymn (cf. Arnold 1905:
273), more important- ly, it occurs in the opening of a Tristubh
verse and its predesinential vrddhi conforms perfectly to the
length expected in the second syllable of that metrical environ-
ment.21 On the other hand, there is at least one attesta- tion of a
guna form (ddhoksdno, 8.1.33) with the pre- desinential guna
occurring in a metrically free position, namely in the third
syllable of a Tristubh opening. The stem uksdn- therefore can be
included in the set of aber- rant n-stems with regular guna
inflection in the accusative singular and nominative plural. Notice
that, as in the case of aryamdn-, this exceptionality continues
into post- Rig-Vedic times, as can be seen by uksdnam (AV 3.11.18)
beside uksanam (VS 28.32, Ait. Br. 1.15), N pl. uksdnas (AV 4.24.4)
beside uksanas (Katy. gr. Sitr. 23.4.7, 8, 11), and even A pl.
uksd.nas (Bhag. Piir. 10.83.13); cf. Lanman 1877: 532, 538,
540.
-ksan- (?) in rbhu-ksan-: A sg. rbhu-klsdnam (4x), N/V pl.
-ksdnas (12x). Considering that the nominative (and vocative )
singular of this noun appears as rbhuksas (17x) and that, as the
discussion in Debrunner-Wacker- nagel 1930: 309 shows, the
n-inflection outside the nom- inative/vocative singular is suspect
of being modeled on the inflection of the rhyming uksdn-, it is
doubtful whether the word should be included in the set of aber-
rant n-stems. However, if the n-inflection of rbhuksdn- is indeed
modeled on that of uksdn-, then the pervasive
81
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
guna of the attested forms of rbhuksdn-, some of which occur in
metrically free environment (cf. rbhuksdcinam 1.111.4, opening of
Jagati), would seem to lend further support to the view that in
Rig-Veda, the strong cases of uksan- regularly have guna of the
stem-forming suffix.
jdman- (?): du. jdmana (?) (10.106.6). The hapax oc- curs in a
stanza of extremely difficult interpretation which Geldner (1923)
leaves untranslated and on which he corm- ments "Die Kunst des
Dichters besteht ... in eineii Aufwand von unverstandlichen und
seltsam klingenden Wortern .. ." Under these circumstances, it
would seem dubious to include jeman- in the set of aberrant
n-stems.
pusdn-: A sg. puisdnam (21x), I sg. piusrni (Ix), D sg. puisne
(4x), G sg. pa.snds (5x), N/A/V du. pusadnc (lx), somapuscand(u)
(3x), indrdpusdnd (lx), Npl. pisasdias (lx; or is this form
nominative singular of pCusdna- ?). No forms with predesinential
vrddhi are attested. Forms like G sg. pusnds show that the word is
a (regular) ab- lauting n-stem. And attestations like pu.sdnam in
RV 1.186.10, with the guna stem-forming suffix in the metri- cally
free third syllable of a Tristubh opening, show that the guna forms
are genuine. The stem pusdn- therefore is a bona-fide member of the
set of aberrant n-stems. And as in the case of the other bona-fide
members of this set, so also with puisdn- one finds post-Rig-Vedic
at- testations of guna forms, namely puisd.nam (AV 11.6.3, 18.2.53)
and N/A/V du. indrdpusadna (AV 6.3.1); cf. Lanman 1877: 532 and
537.
yosdn-: N pl. yosd.nas (8x). No other forms of this n- stem are
attested; but compare the related noun stems ydos-, y6sand-,
yosddn-. Considering that the originality of the n-stem nominative
plural still is a matter of dispute (cf. Mayrhofer 1964: 27), it
must at present remain an open question whether yosdn- can be
included in the aber- rant ni-stems.
v.san-: A sg. vrsacamn (9.34.3, 10.89.9) beside v.rsanam (55x),
I sg. vfsnad (2x), D sg. v.rn.e (34x), G/Ab. vrsnas (40x), N/A/V
du. vfsana(u) (57x), N/V pl. vfrsanas (38x), A pl. vrsa.nas (lx)
beside vrsnas (2x). The accusative plural forms, as well as the
(genuine) prevocalic O-grade forms of the singular oblique, have
already been discussed earlier in this section. As in the case of
uksdn-, the full- and 0-grade forms of the accusative plural are
metrically incommensurate, making it impossible to determine
whether one or the other of these forms may owe its existence to
metrical considerations. However, just as in the case of uksdn-, it
is possible to show that the vrddhi forms of the accusative
singular may well be metrically motivated, while the guna forms of
the strong cases are
genuine. The attestations of vfranam (9.34.3 and 10.89.9) have
the vrddhi stem-forming suffix occurring in the second syllable of
a Gayatri opening (vursalaQn vrsabhir) and in the fourth syllable
of a (delayed) Tristubh opening
(v'san vrsadnamn). In both environments, a long syllable is
definitely preferred.21 On the other hand, guna forms can be found
in environments where a short syllable, though not imipossible, is
definitely less regular than a long syllable, such as vrsanas
(1.177.2), with the guna stem-forming suffix in the fourth syllable
of a (delayed) Tristubh opening (ye te vfrsano). The stem Vl'f'Sta-
therefore can be included in the set of aberrant n-stems. Again,
like the other bona-fide memibers of this set, it shows guna forns
in post-Rig-Vedic timies. Compare N/A/V du. v.sanda (AV 7.73.1. 2;
7.110.2) beside v.rsunsla (AV 19.13.1), and even an accusative
plural form, v'sanas (AV 11.2.22); cf. Lanman 1877: 524 and 537.
The only post-Rig-Vedic accusative singular and nominative plural
forms listed in Lanman 1877: 532 and 538, however, all have
predesinential vrddhi, cf. v.r.sdnam (VS 20.40; Sat. Br. 1.2.5(15))
and vrsdanas (Sat. Br. 13.3.3(7)).
-lian- in vrtra-hdn- and 27 other compounds: A sg. -hdnam (17x),
I sg. -ghnil (2x), D sg. -ghln (6x), G sg. -ghnds (3x), N/A/V du.
-hdnd(L) (8x), N pl. -lhnas (3x). No forms with predesinential
vrddhi are attested; and there are occurrences of guna forms with
the stem- forming suffix occurring in metrical environments which
are either free or where a long a would actually be prefer- red,
such as vrtralzcinam (1.59.6), early break of a Trislubll verse
(plus first syllable of cadence). Though not in origin an n-stem,
but rather a root noun, -han- has been entirely integrated into the
n-stem inflection (of the aber- rant variety), as can be seen by
the fact that the nominative singular ends in-ha (94x); cf. the
similar conclusions reach- ed in Debrunner-Wackernagel 1930: 238.
The fact that the inflection of -han- only shows guina forms in the
ac- cusative singular and nominative plural confirms the existence
of an aberrant guna n-inflection in (pre-)Rig- Vedic. And as of
Rig-Vedic times, -harn- must definitely be considered a member of
the set of aberrant n-stems under discussion. Interestingly, as in
the case of the other bona-fide imembers of this set, so also in
the case of
-han-, post-Rig-Vedic gulia forms are attested; cf. A sg.
raksohdcnan, marnohdnzam, sapatnahdnlam, each attested once in
Atharva-Veda; N/A/V du. vrtrahdCnd (AV 2x); N/V pl. matsyahdnas
(Sat. Br. 13.4.3(12)), yajrahdcnas (TS 3.5.4.); cf. Lanman 1877:
480-1. Even more inter- esting and important for the present
discussion is the fact that there are post-Rig-Vedic guna
attestations of the accusative plural; cf. raksohdno valagahdno
vaisnlavuna (TS 1.3.2; 5x) beside saiaghnds (AV 3.15.5); cf. Lanman
1877: 481. (According to Debrunner-Wackernagel 1930: 238,
accusative plural forms in -hdnas are also found in the Vajasaneyi
Samhita.) Notice, however, that there is
21 Also Lanman (1877: 532) thought that the d of uksadoam and
vrsa.nam "may be ascribed to the metre."
82
-
HOCK: Indo-Iranian Accusative Plural
also one post-Rig-Vedic occurrence of a guiia form in a genuine
weak-grade case, namely G sg. brahmahanas (Manu 11.101.128), where
Lanman suspects that the anomaly may be "due to the metre" (ibid.:
478); for -ghnas occurs in Manu 8.89. Elsewhere in post-Rig- Vedic,
the genuine weak-grade forms only show the 0- grade of the
stem-forming suffix; ce. I sg. vrtraghna (AV 3.6.2), D sg.
makhaghne (TS 3.2.4(1-3)), bhrtinaghnle (TBr. 3.9.15(3)), G sg.
vrtraghinds (AV 4.24.1; 6.82.1); cf. Lan- man 1877: 480.
Considering the late date of the colm- position of the Laws of
M'lanu, the possibility of metrical adaptation, as well as the
overwhelmling evidence of Rig-Vedic and post-Rig-Vedic literature
in favor of a genitive singular -ghnds, it seems best to consider
Manu's brahmahanas a late aberration, of no significance for the
discussion of the Vedic inflection of -han-. As for the accusative
plural forms of the Taittiriya Samhita, however, the rather early
occurrence in a (repeated) FORMULA would seem to make such an
interpretation highly unlikely. It rather seems that we are here
dealing with genuine formations, comparable to the (post-)Rig-
Vedic accusative plural forms uksd.nas and vr.salias. And just as
the latter coexist with the presumably innovated 0-grade forms
uksnds and vrsnas, so beside -ldnas one also finds
-ghnds. Debrunner and Wackernagel, to be sure, suggest that the
accusative plural forms in -hdnas are formed "nach dem Vorbild der
vielen unverander- lichen Nomina agentis"(1930: 238), i.e.,
according to the model N pl. -dfsas: -hdnas = A pl. -dfsas: X.
However, the fact that -hdn- is not "unveranderlich", but rather is
ablauting, the fact that the model of the nonablauting root nouns,
with their regular 0-grade of the root, should more likely have
brought about a generalization of the 0-grade than of the full
grade,22 and the undeniable synchronic membership of -hdn- in the
(ablauting) n- stems (cf. N sg. -ha) render the view of Debrunner
and Wackernagel unlikely. We may then safely conclude that, from
the synchronic point of view, -hdn- is a bona-fide member of the
aberrant n-stems and that, like two other members of this set, it
shows traces of a presumably more archaic accusative plural with
predesinential guna (coexisting with innovated, synchronically more
regular 0-grade accusative plural forms).
There are then five bona-fide members of the aberrant set of
n-stems with guna in the accusative singular and nominative plural,
namely aryamdn-, ukscsn-, pusdn-, vfsan-, and -hdn-. Three of
these
22 Such a secondary nominative plural with 0-grade of the root
on the model of the 0-grade root nouns is actually attested once in
Rig-Veda, namely divas (9.108.11) for regular dyavas.
(uksadn-, vtsan-, and -hdn-) show the additional aberrancy of
having accusative plural forms with guna of the stem-forming
suffix, beside syn- chronically more regular forms with
predesinential 0-grade. The other two members of the set un-
fortunately have no accusative plural forms at- tested. However,
even in the absence of that evidence, it would seem reasonable to
suppose that the two mentioned aberrancies are not just linked up
by accident, but rather that they are intimately connected and that
both aberrancies are ulti- mately to be explained in the same
fashion.
In the case of the accusative plural formations of uksdn-,
vfsan-, and (implicitly) -hdn-, it has been argued above that the
synchronically aber- rant guna accusative plural forms are more
likely to be archaisms than the corresponding 0-grade forms, since
the latter can be accounted for as in- novations, conforming to the
synchronically pro- ductive pattern of ablauting consonant stem in-
flection.
Similarly, in addition to the metrical arguments offered so far,
it is also possible to argue on purely linguistic grounds that the
predesinential guna in the accusative singular and nominative
plural of the aberrant n-stems must be an archaism, com- pared to
the occasional vrddhi found in the ac- cusative singular. For not
only is it easier to ac- count for the vrddhi forms as secondary,
modeled on the inflection of the regular n-stems.23 What is equally
significant is the fact that in the bona- fide members of the
aberrant n-stems, the nomi- native plural, the paradigmatically
more pivotal form, never shows any forms with predesinential
vrddhi.
However, before we can be completely certain that the aberrant
behavior of the n-stems under discussion is indeed an archaism, it
is necessary to show that there is a MOTIVATION for these words to
retain an archaic type of inflection.
According to Kurylowicz (1956: 56 and especial- ly 62), the
difference in formation of the accusative
23 As a matter of fact, in some of the metrical environ- ments
in which the vrddhi accusative singular forms oc- cur, the
LINGUISTIC pressure of the regular n-stem in- flection may have
been stronger than metrical consider- ations in motivating the
predesinential vrddhi. Compare v.sdnam (10.89.9) and vrsanas
(1.177.2) whose stem- forming suffixes both occur in the fourth
syllable of a (delayed) Tristubh opening where length is definitely
preferred, but where a short syllable evidently is possible
also.
83
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
singular and nominative plural24 between the aber- rant n-stems
and the regular n-stems is due to the fact that the former are
Proto-Indo-European en-stems, while the latter reflect
Proto-Indo-Euro- pean on-stems. In Proto-Indo-European, how- ever,
this difference between en- and on-stems followed a definite
pattern. While the en-stems were synchronically "unmotivated," i.e.
nonder- ived, the on-stems were "motivated," i.e. derived. And, "si
l'on fait abstraction des theses hasarddes (p. ex. ursen- <
*uers- 'arroser'), aucun de ces mots [i.e. of the aberrant n-stems]
ne se laisse de- river d'une forme-base connue par ailleurs." On
the other hand, original on-stem forms like Skt. "tdksa, tdiksanam
< tksati ..." are clearly derived.
"Dans certains cas la motivation nous 6chappe, soit qu'il s'agit
d'un vocalisme o primitif soit que le mot- base a disparu: sgv,
svanam ([Gk.] ktin) . . . En re- vanche, tous les derives en -man-,
-van- allongent la voyelle suffixale aux cas forts en garantissant
un vocalisme o, qui est confirme par le grec (-mon, -won)." Though
Kurylowicz's view that the difference
between predesinential guna and vrddhi reflects a
Proto-Indo-European difference between en- and on-stem inflection
is no doubt correct, his argu- ment that in turn the difference
between en- and on-stems was in Proto-Indo-European motivated by
the fact that the on-stems were derived, while the en-stems were
nonderived, must be considered dubious. For even if the usual, and
in my opinion not all that "daring," etymologies of vrsan- and
uksdn- as derived, via 'emit semen, inseminate', from *wers- '(let)
rain' (cf. above, as well as Mayrhofer 1970: 251) and *ug-, *uks-
'sprinkle, moisten' (cf. Mayrhofer 1956: 98) may ultimately prove
to be wrong, the fact that aryamin- most likely is a derived
man-stem (and Kurylowicz claimed that the derived nature of the
on-stems persisted into Sanskrit) not only is in conflict with
Kurylowicz's claim that the aberrant n- stems are nonderived, but
also with the claim that the Sanskrit man- and van-stems guarantee
o- vocalism for the ancestral Proto-Indo-European suffixes; for the
lack of vrddhi in the strong forms of aryamcin- clearly points to a
Proto-Indo-Euro- pean suffix *-men-. Moreover, even Greek shows at
least one men-stem about whose derived nature there cannot be any
doubt, namely poimgn 'shep- herd'.25 Finally, note that there still
remain underi-
24 In this book, Kurylowicz did not try to account for the
aberrant accusative plural forms.
25 Like Lith. piemuo, G sg. piemeiis 'shepherd boy',
vable on-stems like PIE *k(u)won-. Kurylowicz's suggestion that
they may contain a "primitive" o, which I can only interpret to
mean a nonapo- phonic o, cannot be considered acceptable. For as
Skt. pdti- and dvi- from PIE *poti- and *owi- (the latter from
earlier *Oewi-) show, an original nonablauting o does not undergo
Brugmann's- Law lengthening in open syllable, while the *o of
*k(u)won- does (cf. A sg. s(u)vdnam).
A more likely explanation would seem to lie in the assumption
that in Proto-Indo-Iranian times the inflection of the
Proto-Indo-European on-stems began to become generalized. The
motivation for this generalization presumably lay in the fact that
in the original full-grade cases of the accu- sative singular and
nominative plural (for the ac- cusative plural, cf. section 4.2
below), PIE *o had become a by Brugmann's Law and that the re-
sulting vrddhi of the stem-forming suffix was more marked than the
guna of the original en-stems. The generalization of the more
marked vrddhi of the original on-stems then led to the effective
transfer of most original en-stems to the inflection of the
original on-stems, since after the merger of nominative *-e(n) and
*-o(n) into a the two classes of inflection had already merged in
all the other forms of the paradigm.
with secondary -ud in the nominative singular, Gk. poimen is no
doubt derived from *poAy-, a pseudo-root abstracted from the
*peA-derivative *poA-yu- 'pro- tector; protection, etc.' (cf. Skt.
pdyu- (m.) 'protector,' Gk. poii (n.) 'herd') which was
reinterpreted as *poAy-u-. (For the difference in meaning, accent,
and gender between the Sanskrit and Greek reflexes of *poA-yu-, cf.
the well- known difference between Skt. brdhman- (n.) 'formulation,
etc.' and brahmdn- (m.) 'formulator, etc.'.) Incidentally, the
phonological development of *poAy-men- = [po- Aimen-] to *poymen-
via *poimen-, with loss of inter- vocalic laryngeal, would to my
mind most convincingly illustrate the impossibility of deriving the
preconsonantal alternants of the so-called Schulzian bases, as in
Skt. patra- 'drinking vessel', Lat. pdculum 'drink', PIE *po-tlo-
(from the root *po(y)/pi-), from original forms of the type
*peOy-tlo-. For poimenlpiemu6 clearly shows that such a sequence
would yield Skt. petra-*, Lat. piiculum*. Compare also the similar
interpretation of the *poy- in Gk. poimen advanced by Kurylowicz
(1968: 218-20) who, however, seemed unaware of the fact that this
obvious DERIVATION of Gk. poimen from secondary *poy- is in
conflict with his view of 1956 that the Proto- Indo-European
ancestors of the Sanskrit man-stems were (derived I) mon-stems, and
not men-stems.
84
-
HOCK: Indo-Iranian Accusative Plural
What preserved the aberrant n-stems, which in light of their
pervasive guna no doubt are original en-stems, from the transfer to
the inflection of the original on-stems must then have been not
their alleged nonderivability (since at least one of them clearly
is derivable), but rather their mean- ings: In the case of the
religious terms aryamdn- and pusdn-, and in the case of -hdn- with
its strong legal and religious connotations, it is the general
conservatism of religious and legal terminology which can be
considered responsible for the pre- servation of the original
en-stem inflection in the accusative singular and nominative
plural. As for uksdn- and vtsan-, there are of course also certain
religious connotations in the Vedic hymns. How- ever, I believe
that the key factor in their preserva- tion of en-stem inflection
lies in the fact that in the cattle-raising society of the early
Indo-Irani- ans, words referring to the male of the species,
especially the bull, belonged to the central, basic part of the
vocabulary which notoriously is most resistent to analogical
remaking.
No doubt the same SEMANTIC motivation ac- counts for the
aberrant accusative plural forms of uksdn-, vfsan, and -hdn-,
although the FORMAL explanation of the difference between
productive 0-grade and archaic full grade (guna) in the stem-
forming suffix of the accusative plural, for which compare section
4.2 below, will turn out to be quite different from that of the
difference between vrddhi and guna in the accusative singular and
nominative plural.
2.11 The most recent reiteration of the view that the accusative
plural originally was a weak case seems to be found in Bailey 1969:
81-2, with reference to Osthoff 1876. Although accepting the view,
Bailey was clearly, and I believe justly, troubled by the fact that
"it is not clear why the original uter [= masculine/feminine]
accusative plural formation had a zero stem vowel, while the
corresponding singular had a normal [ = full] grade stem vowel",
considering that the accusative plural ending evidently is that of
the accusative singular plus plural marker -s.
2.12 The view that the accusative plural ori- ginally was a weak
case must be considered quite dubious, considering the evidence in
favor of ori- ginal predesinential accentuation, which might very
well entail a predesinential full grade, as well as the direct
evidence for a predesinential full grade in the otherwise archaic,
aberrant n- stems. However, Bailey's observation, already
adumbrated by Brugmann (1876: 290, cf. sections 2.3 and 3.1 of
this paper) and Burrow (1955: 235 and 1965: 235, cf. section 3.6
below), that the ac- cusative plural, being evidently derived from
the full-grade (I) accusative singular by the addition of the
plural marker -s, should be expected to have predesinential full
grade too, is valuable and lends further support to the arguments
of sections 2.4 and 2.10 in favor of the hypothesis that the
accusative plural originally was a predesinentially accented,
full-grade case.
3.1 The first linguist to have suggested that the
Proto-Indo-European accusative plural ori- ginally was a strong
case and that the usual San- skrit predesinential 0-grade is
secondary seems to have been Brugmann (1876).
His positive arguments in favor of this view, which were already
included in the evaluation of Osthoff's view of 1876 (cf. section
2.3 above), can be summarized as follows: In Vedic, the ablauting
nouns frequently show the accusative plural in the strong form,
both in terms of ablaut and in terms of accent; cf. dpas beside
apcis, uksd- nas beside uksnds. Also in the other Indo-Euro- pean
languages, the accusative plural is a strong case; cf. Gk. 6pas,
Go. auhsans. That is, strong forms of the accusative plural are
found in all Indo-European languages, while weak forms are limited
to Indo-Iranian and are therefore suspect of being a regional
innovation. The motivation for the Indo-Iranian remaking of the
accusative plural must have consisted in the fact that by regular
sound change, nominative and accusative plural had become
synonymous. The remaking of the accusative plural thus led to a
differentiation of nominative and accusative plural, although the
precise circumstances which brought about this remaking are as yet
unknown. (An additional argument in favor of the view that, like
the ac- cusative singular, the accusative plural must ori- ginally
have been a strong case, was only adum- brated by Brugmann when he
stated that the ori- ginal accusative plural ending was evidently
that of the accusative singular plus the plural marker -s; for the
obvious corollary to the assumption that there was an original
identity in the endings of the two cases would seem to be that also
the preceding stems originally were identical.)
3.2 Brugmann's arguments certainly are gen- erally quite cogent,
although the claim that the accusative plural of ablauting
consonant stems is a strong case in ALL the non-Indo-Iranian
Indo-
85
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
European languages must be considered exagger- ated. Only in the
Greek inflection of the kinship r-stems do we find convincing
evidence for the claim that the accusative plural of the consonant
stems is a strong case (as opposed to the weak cases of the
genitive and dative singular and plural). Elsewhere, levelings of
various kinds have led to the identity of the accusative plural
stem with that of (most of) the other forms of the paradigm, as in
Gk. poimenas = poimenes, poimenon, etc.
As a consequence, the argument that the Indo- Iranian
predesinential 0-grade, being limited to that dialect area, must be
a regional innovation, loses its force. Other evidence in favor of
con- sidering the Vedic strong forms of the accusative plural to be
archaisms must be found (along the lines of the discussion in
sections 2.4 and 2.10 above).
Finally, Brugmann did not succeed in finding a plausible model
for the presumably secondary 0-grade forms of the accusative
plural, a fact which considerably weakens his hypothesis.
3.3 Hillebrandt (1878: 314-6) essentially agreed with Brugmann's
view of 1876. However, he believed that it is the original "length"
of the ac- cusative plural ending -ans (vs. the "short" ending -as
of the nominative plural) which was responsible for a shift of the
accent from the predesinential element to the ending in HISTORICAL
TIMES, a change which was not yet completed in Vedic, as can be
seen by the coexistence of forms like A pl. dpas and apas.
Considering that in Vedic, where this change allegedly was still
taking place, the ending of the accusative plural of consonant
stems -as is not any "longer" than the nominative plural ending
-as, Hillebrandt's view must be rejected even in the framework of
Proto-Indo-European recon- structions which he employed. (Needless
to say, today's reconstruction of the accusative plural ending as
*-ns, which is just as short as the nom- inative plural ending -es,
renders Hillebrandt's views entirely untenable).
3.4 Following a tentative suggestion of Brug- mann (1876: 292,
fn. 7 [on p. 293]), Bartholomae (1894: 131) attempted to motivate
the discrepancy between the Indo-Iranian predesinential 0-grade and
the (Sanskrit) accent on the case ending by postulating two
Proto-Indo-European accusative plural endings, namely *-ens
[presumably with predesinential 0-grade] and *-ns [presumably with
full grade]. In Indo-Iranian, the ending *-ens was
replaced by *-ns > -as which, however, retained the end
accentuation [and presumably the prede- sinential 0-grade] of the
ending *-ens.
Considering the absence of any unambiguous evidence for an
ending *-ens in any of the (other) Indo-European languages,26
Bartholomae's hy- pothesis must be considered to be without any
foundation and therefore to be rejected.
3.5 Also Thumb (1905: 150) expressed doubt that the
predesinential 0-grade of the Sanskrit accusative nlural is
original, since "das Griechische und andere Sprachen bilden den
Ace. Pl. von der Hochstufe." This view was repeated in subsequent
editions of his book; cf. for instance Thumb- Hauschild 1959: 5-6.
However, no motivation or model for the secondary origin of the
predesinenti- al 0-grade is offered. In addition, note that, as
already pointed out in section 3.2 above, outside of Greek no
(non-Indo-Iranian) language shows convincing evidence for the
assumption of an original predesinential full grade in the
accusative plural of consonant stems.
3.6 A more substantial argument in favor of considering the
accusative plural an original strong case was presented by Burrow
(1955: 235 and 1965: 235).
According to Burrow, "The acc. pl. is a weak case in Sanskrit,
that is to
say the termination is accented and the stem appears in its weak
form. This is in contradiction with the fact that the termination
itself appears in the weak grade and it is therefore in all
probability an innovation. If IE -ns in this case is derived from
-ms the form can have arisen by the addition of the plural sign -s
to the ace. sg." 3.7 Like almost all the other linguists who
argued in favor of the view that the Indo-Iranian predesinential
O-grade is secondary, Burrow un- fortunately failed to provide for
a motivation and model accounting for the secondary nature of the
O-grade.
In addition, one might raise the following ob- jection to his
view that the double 0-grade (of predesinential element and ending)
found in the
26 The Latin accusative plural ending -es is of course
ambiguous, derivable just as well from the *-ns indicated by the
other Indo-European languages as it is derivable from the alleged
*-ens. Being ambiguous, it cannot in good conscience be considered
probative evidence for the reconstruction of an otherwise
unattested *-r7s.
86
-
HOCK: Indo-Iranian Accusative Plural
regular Indo-Iranian accusative plural must be secondary: As is
shown by the genitive/ablative singular of the r-stems (cf. Skt.
pitur < *-r-s), such double 0-grades, though rare, do occur
else- where in nominal inflection. It is true, Burrow considered
also the latter double 0-grade to be secondary. He believed that
*-r-s most likely was a replacement of earlier *-er-s which in his
view is found also in Lithuanian G sg. -ers, as well as in Av.
nars, zaotars, sastarg. According to Burrow, this replacement was
brought about by the general- ization of the 0-grade of the
stem-forming suffix (*-r/r-) from the other oblique forms of the
para- digm. (1955: 243, 1965: 243).
This explanation of the double 0-grade of the genitive/ablative
singular, however, must be con- sidered doubtful. For the
Lithuanian genitive singular ending -ers reflects an earlier -eres,
at- tested in Old Lithuanian (cf. Senn 1966: 140-1 for references).
As for the Avestan forms, it must be kept in mind that an Avestan
ar(9) is not always and necessarily a good indication of an
original full-grade er (or or), since, as is well known, ar(9)
(rather than "regular" ard) appears also in (other) 0-grade
formations, whether this be due to phonological merger or some
other process; cf. most notably the -ta-participles of the type
darasta-: Skt. drstd- beside barata-: bhrtd-, as well as the fos-
silized and therefore even more valuable asa- : rtd-. In this
respect note especially that beside the narg cited by Burrow, there
is also a Gathic nardS. Thus, the best thing that can be said about
the Avestan forms is that they are ambiguous, per- mitting both a
reconstruction *-r-s and a recon- struction *-er-s, the latter
however being without any (direct) support from any other
Indo-Euro- pean language. On the other hand, note that Old Norse
ofQur and OE fador seem to furnish quite convincing
non-Indo-Iranian evidence for an ori- ginal ending *-r-s. It is
true, on the evidence of n-stem genitive singular forms like Av.
xvTng, ddng (< *suHen-s, *dem-s) and Old Irish anm(a)e 'of a
name' (< *n-men-s), it might still be con- sidered possible to
reconstruct also original r- stem genitive singular forms in
*-er-s. In that case, Burrow's proposed Indo-Iranian replacement of
this *-er-s by a form with the 0-grade of the rest of the oblique
would probably have to be assumed to have taken place already in
(dialectal) Proto-Indo-European, with subsequent remaking of the
anomalous *-r-s to the more usual *-r-e/os in the majority of
Indo-European dialects. How- ever, that reconstruction would seem
far too specu-
lative to be made the basis of an argument in favor of
considering the double 0-grade of the Indo-Iranian accusative
plurals unprecedented and therefore no doubt innovated.
More convincing is Burrow's adumbration of the view that as a
pluralized accusative singular, the Proto-Indo-European accusative
plural should be expected to have the same predesinential ablaut
grade as the accusative singular; and there can be no doubt that
the Proto-Indo-European ac- cusative singular was a strong case.
This view had already been adumbrated by Brugmann (1876: 290); cf.
section 2.3 above. It was clearly stated in Bailey 1969: 81-2,
although Bailey nevertheless accepted the view that the accusative
plural ori- ginally was a weak case; cf. section 2.11 above.
3.8 According to Kurylowicz (1964: 200-1 and 1968: 26-7), the
predesinential 0-grade and the usual concomitant end accentuation
of the Indo- Iranian consonant stem accusative plural is an
innovation, motivated by the attempt to differ- entiate the
accusative plural from the nominative plural with which it had
become identical through the merger of *-ns and *-es to -as. Relics
of the older accusative plural with predesinential full grade are
found in forms like RV A pl. uksd.nas.
In Kurylowicz's view, the innovated prede- sinential 0-grade of
the Indo-Iranian r-stems came about on the following model of
"closed" i- and u-stem inflection.
i-stems: N pl. -ay-as : A pl. -i-ns i-stems: -av-as: -u-ns
r-stems: *-ar-as27: X = -r-ns.
The accusative plural forms of the remaining con- sonant stems
came about on the model of an alter- native pattern of "open" i-
and u-stem inflection:
i-stens: N pl. -ay-as : A pl. -y-as u-stems: -av-as : n-sterns
(etc.): *-an-as27:
-v-as
X = -n-as etc.
The concomitant end accentuation of the ac- cusative plural then
first spread to the ablauting root nouns
"bei denen er [i.e. the end accent], wie in den eben an-
gefiihrten Stimmnen, einen Wurzelablaut begleitete . . .
27 I have put the asterisks into these formulae to indicate that
in order for the model to have the proper phonological motivation
(-dy-as : -dv-as : -dr-as, not -dr- as*), it must be assumed that
Brugmann's Law had not yet brought about predesinential vrddhi in
the (majority of) r- and n-stems.
87
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
In Wurzelstimmen ohne Ablaut ist dagegen die Bary- tonese des
Akk. P1. noch ziemlich gut bezeugt, vgl. RV VI, 4, 5 Akk. P1.
hrrftah 'Feinde' ..., wogegen der AV schon hrutdl . .. hat." (1968:
27). 3.9 Kurylowicz's argumentation represents a
definite improvement over earlier views that the predesinential
0-grade is an innovation. For he furnished both a motivation and a
model for the origination of the secondary 0-grade. In addition,
the observation that the spread of end accentua- tion to the root
nouns was tied up with whether the root undergoes paradigmatic
ablaut or not will turn out to be of considerable interest; cf. 4.2
below.
However, even Kurylowicz's hypothesis is open to a number of
objections.
First of all, it would have been desirable to indicate, as I
have done in section 2.10 above, on what grounds forms like uksdnas
can and must be considered archaisms, rather than aberrant
formations with secondary generalization of the
Sievers-Edgerton's-Law alternant -an- of the stem- forming suffix
in its prevocalic 0-grade shape.
Secondly, it is difficult to see why one type of consonant
stems, namely the r-stems, should have been remade on the model of
the "closed" i- and u-stem inflection, while all the other
consonant stems were remade on the model of the "open" inflection.
One would expect at least some fluc- tuation between the two types
of inflection, in at least some consonant stems. Witness especial-
ly the fluctuation actually found in the u-stem ac- cusative plural
pacsn (RV 5x) beside pasvds (5x). However, no such fluctuation is
found in any of the consonant stems.28
Thirdly, considering that the "open" type of i- and u-stem
inflection is clearly moribund in Indo-Iranian, it is difficult to
see how it could have been the model for the remaking of the
MAJORITY (I) of the consonant stems.
28 It is true, this particular objection could be met by
claiming that the remaking of the consonant stems took place only
on the model of the "open" i- and u-stem inflection and that the
accusative plural *-r(n)? owes its existence to a later remaking on
the model of the pro- ductive (!) "closed" i- and u-stem inflection
along the lines suggested by Bartholomae (1894: 123), cf. section
2.6 above. However, I believe the next two points of the discussion
in this section will show that this modifica- tion of Kurylowicz's
hypothesis would not be sufficient to salvage it.
Finally, and most importantly, there is evidence that the "open"
i- and u-stem inflection originally had predesinential 0-grade not
only in the ac- cusative plural (and the singular oblique), but
also in the nominative plural; cf. Skt. RV N pl. dryas (16x),
mddh(u)vas (4x), as well as Gk. Hom. oles (< *ow-y-es) and huies
(*
-
HOCK: Indo-Iranian Accusative Plural
(1) A remarking of the nominative plural on the model of the
accusative plural is a priori un- likely, since the former is the
"forme de fondation" in relation to the latter. And, as Kurylowicz
(1945: 164) correctly pointed out, in morphological remaking it is
the "forme fond6e" which is remade on the model of the "forme de
fondation", not vice versa.
(2) Considering that in the consonant stems, In- do-Iranian
secondarily differentiated (rather than identified) nominative and
accusative plural, it is quite unlikely that the two cases should
have been secondarily identified in the "open" i- and u- stems, at
least in those of Indo-Iranian.
(3) As in the case of the members of the aber- rant n-stems, so
also in the case of the nouns with bona-fide "open" i- and u-stem
inflection, it is possible to show that their meaning makes it
likely that (all of) the aberrant inflection of these nouns is an
archaism.
In Rig-Veda, the following forms can be found:29
dri-: D sg. draye (lx), G/Ab. sg. dr(i)yas (39x), N pl. dryas
(16x), A pl. dryas (8x).
dvi-: G/Ab. sg. dvyas (13x). pdti-: D sg. pdtye (8x), G/Ab. sg.
pates (lx) beside
pdtyur (lx), N pl. pdtayas (16x). In light of the well- known
influence of the kinship r-stems on the inflection of the stem
pdti- in the kinship meaning 'husband' (cf. the genitive/ablative
singular pdtyur) and considering that all eight occurrences of the
dative singular pctye are instances of pdti- 'husband', the
possibility that the predesinential 0-grade of this form is modeled
on the predesinential 0-grade of the kinship r-stems cannot be
excluded. The stem pdti- therefore cannot be considered a bona-fide
member of the i-stems with "open" inflection
rayi-: D sg. raye (62x), G/Ab. sg. rdyds (105x) beside rayas
(3x) whose accentuation is probably modeled on the (secondary)
"root" accentuation of the nominative plural, N pl. rayas (20x),
evidently with secondary "root" accentuation on the model of the
(ablauting) root nouns, A pl. rayas (4x) beside rdyds (22x) where
again the root accentuation is probably secondary. For a discussion
of the derivation of this paradigm from a stem *reE-i- with "open"
inflection, with predesinential 0-grade
29 Feminines, as well as the rare occurrences of root nouns
without the usual t-extension (exemplified in stems like ji-t-),
are excluded from this list; the former because of the well-known
mutual influence between i- and i-, u- and a-stems, the latter
because of their tendency to follow the usual nonablauting pattern
of 0-grade root nouns.
throughout the paradigm, cf. Szemerenyi 1956: 170-5, with
earlier literature. However, note that on purely phonological
grounds, the dative singular and nominative plural of this stem
could also be reconstructed with prede- sinential full grade, since
both *reE-ey-ey, *reE-ey-es and *reE-y-ey, *reE-y-es will equally
yield Sanskrit rdye and rayas.
sdkhi-: D sg. sdkhye (9x), G/Ab. sg. sdkh(i)yur, etc. As in the
case of pdti-, the inflection of this word has been influenced by
the kinship r-stems. The prevocalic 0-grade of the dative singular
therefore cannot be con- sidered probative evidence for an original
"open" in- flection (in the singular).
*krtu-: Attested only in the fossilized accusative plural krtvas
'times; Germ. mal' (2x).
krdtu-: D sg. krdtve (llx) beside krdtave (lx), G/Ab. sg.
krdtvas (2x) beside krdtos (lx), N pl. kratdvas (5x), A pl. krdtun
(lx).
nau-: G/Ab. sg. ndvds (lx), N pl. navas, with secondary "root"
accentuation comparable to that found in N pl. rayas. For a
discussion of the derivation of this paradigm from a stem *neA-u-
with predesinential 0-grade through- out the paradigm, cf.
Szemerenyi 1956: 185-6, with earlier literature. Notice however
that the nominative plural is phonologically ambiguous and can be
derived both from *neA-ew-es and *neA-w-es.
pasd-: D sg. pasve (3x) beside pasdve (lx), G/Ab. sg. pasvds
(10x), N pl. paddvas (lx), A pl. pasvds (5x) beside pasun (5x).
pitu-: G/Ab. sg. pitvas (9x). mddhu-: D sg. mddhune (lx), G/Ab.
sg. mddh(u)vas
(83x) beside mddhunas (lOx) and mddhos (14x), N pl. mddh(u)vas
(4x).
madhydyd-: N pl. madhydydvas (1.173.10). Considering that
-yu-derivatives regularly have "closed" u-inflection and that
the word is a hapax legomenon, occurring in the generally late
first book of the Rig-Veda, in a group of hymns which Geldner
(1923: vol. 1, p. 237) character- ized as containing "Viele seltene
Worter oder hip[axJ leg[omena]", it is more likely that the form
under discus- sion is a hyperarchaism than a precious relic of
original "open" inflection.
mitrdyd-: N pl. mitrdyivas (1.173.10). Like the pre- ceding
form, with which it cooccurs in the same stanza, also this hapax
legomenon is most likely a hyperarchaism.
sisu-: D sg. sisve (lx) beside sisave (2x), G/Ab. sg. sisvas
(lx) beside gisos (lx), N pl. SiSavas (lx).
sramayzi-: N pl. sramayuvas (1.72.2). Like the other two
-yu-forms in this list, this form is a hapax legomenon and
occurs in the first book of Rig-Veda. The group of hymns in which
it occurs was described by Geldner (1923: vol. 1, p. 86) as being
characterized by "die Haufung der oft gesuchten und abstrakten
Vergleiche, eine uber-
89
-
Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.1 (1974)
triebene Geistreichelei. Viel Alliteration." It is therefore
most likely that also this form is a hyperarchaism.
In (Homeric) Greek, the following forms are found:30
6is: G sg. dios (3x) beside oids (5x) with accent on the case
ending on the analogy of the root nouns (?),31 N pl. dies (5x), A
pl. dis (7x) from *owins (cf. Argolic owins apud Schwyzer 1939:
573); for attestations cf. Gehring 1891: s.v.
gonu: G sg. gounds (2x) beside obviously remade gott- natos
(lx), N/A pl. goiina (12x) beside gotinata (56x), etc.; cf. Gehring
1891: s.v. For a discussion of the value of these forms, cf. the
next entry in this list.
ddru: G sg. dourds (19x) beside doziratos (Ix), 1) sg. douri
(152x) beside dourati (lx), etc.; cf. Gehring ibid.: s.v. At first
glance, the inflection of gdnu and ddru would seem to be excellent
evidence for an original "open" reflection with genitive singular
in *-w-os. It might be objected that, since compared to the
Indo-Iranian type Skt. janu: ji6s*, daru: drds (Av. draos), sanu:
sn6s, Av. dyii: yaos, the full grade of the root in the Greek
genitive singular and other oblique forms must be secondary,
generalized from the nominative/accusative singular, the suspicion
arises that also the combination *-w-os of the stem-forming suffix
plus case ending is innovated com- pared to the *-e/ow-s of
Indo-Iranian. This objection might in turn be countered by the
observation that the productivity of the type in *-elow-s and the
moribund state of "open" inflection in Indo-Iranian make it
more
30 I do not include in this list the dialectal type pdlis, G sg.
pdlios, N pl. pdlies. The virtual limitation of this type to the
i-stems, combined with the fact that the stem- forming suffix
always appears in vocalic shape (i), never as *y, makes it quite
likely that Schwyzer (1939: 571) was correct in viewing this type
of inflection to reflect a secondary transfer of the i-stems to the
i-stems. Com- pare the similar developments in Sanskrit, where the
transfer however remained largely optional and limited to the
feminines.
31 Schwyzer (1939: 573) believed that the genitive singular form
6ios is "fiilschlich" for oids. The reason for this belief
apparently lay in the oxytone accentuation of the genitive plural
oidn. However, the constant root accent of Sanskrit duis, dvim,
dvyas, combined with the Greek root accentuation in 6is, din, pl.
dies, dis, as well as the actually attested root accentuation in G
sg. 6ios, makes it more likely that also the Proto-Indo-European
paradigm of the word for 'sheep' had root accentuation throughout,
and that the end accentuation found in (some of) the Greek genitive
singular and plural forms is secondary.
likely that the Indo-Iranian "closed" in