ACTA
LINGUISTICA
LITHUANICA
XLV
(2001),
145-150
Li huanian
and
Indo-Eu opean
Phonological
Pa allels
WILLIAM
R.
SCHMALSTIEG
The
Pennsyl ania
S a e
Uni e si y
I
is
p oposed
ha
he
monoph hongiza ions
cha ac e is ic
o
Li huanian
dialec s
(and
o
many
o he
languages)
a e
a
kind
o
epe i ion
o
monoph hongiza ions
which
ook
place
wi hin
Indo-
Eu opean.
Simila ly
o
he
‘impu e’
diph hongs
o
mode n
Li huanian
he
old
Indo-Eu opean
sequences
o
owel
plus
nasal
o
liquid
we e
also
ea ed
as
diph hongs.
In
a
ecen
a icle
(Schmals ieg
2000)
I
ha e
ied
o
show
how
he
syn ax
o
con-
empo a y
Li huanian
may
shed
ligh
on
he
in e nal
de elopmen
o
Indo-Eu opean.
In
his
a icle
I
hope
o
show
how
Li huanian
phonology
can
gi e
us
a
clue
as o
he
in e nal
phonological
his o y
o
he
common
Indo-Eu opean
language.
I
is
well
known
ha
linguis ic
changes
end
o
be
epea ed
in
he
cou se
o
ime.
A
well
known
example
o
his
is
he
ecu ing
pala aliza ions
o
ela s
in
Sla ic.
He e
I
plan
o
conside
ce ain
o
he
monoph hongiza ions
which
I
ha e
assumed
o
he
common
Indo-Eu opean
p o o-language
and
which
a e
known
o
ha e
been
epea ed
in
he
his o y
o
he
Bal ic
and
many
o he
languages.
In
ac ,
An kowski
(1956:
50)
w o e
ha
he
p ocess
o
monoph hongiza ion
o
diph hongs
was
a
p ocess
exis ing
in
he
his o y
o
all
he
Indo-Eu opean
languages.
I
should
like
o
sugges
he e
ha
he
eco ded
his o y
o
Li huanian
in
compa ison
wi h
ha
o
se e al
o he
Indo-Eu o-
pean
languages
can
gi e
us
an
insigh
in o
a
possible
in e nal
econs uc ion
o
he
P o o-Indo-Eu opean
language.
Zinke icius
(1966:
92)
no es
ha
he
Eas e n
High
Li huanian
Pane ézi8kiai
in
inal
ci cum lex
and
uns essed
posi ion
change
ai,
ei,
au
espec i ely
in o
he
monoph hongs
¢, e,
2
(o
in
places
9).
Thus,
e.g.,
in
Bi Zai,
o
a ikai
we
encoun e
he
da ./loc.
sg.
uj-ke
( o
he,
in
he)
hand’,
o
d obei
we
encoun e
da ./loc.
sg.
d é-b’e
‘( o
he,
in
he)
linen’,
o
u gaus
we
encoun e
gen.
sg.
uy-gos
‘(o
he)
ma ke ’.
One
can
compa e
he
La ian
Tahmian
dialec
monoph hongiza ions
epo ed
by
Rudzi e
(1963:
166):
mé ?
<
mei a
‘daugh e ,
gi l’
and
loks
<
lauks
‘ ield’.
Examples
o
he
monoph hongiza ion
o
ai
o
e
and
au
o
o
a e
encoun e ed
in
Tocha ian
A
(as
opposed
o
he
o iginal
diph hong
e ained
in
Tocha ian
B):
(A)
ne ici
‘ce ainly’
=
(B)
nai
‘well,
yes’;
(A)
we
( em.)
‘ wo’
=
(B)
wai
‘and’
<
Indo-Eu opean
*duai
(Van
Windekens
1976:
30).
Compa e
also
Tocha ian
A
ola
wi h
Tocha ian
B
aula e
‘companion,
com ade’
(Van
Windekens
1976:
32).
In
Vulga
La in
an
o iginal
146
|
WILLIAM
R.
SCHMALSTIEG
La in
ae
(olde
ai)
me ges
wi h
an
ea lie
sho
e
a es ed,
e.g.,
in
Pompeian
insc ip-
ions,
c .
he
2nd
sg.
p es.
que is,
2nd
pl.
p es.
que i e
beside
classical
quae o
‘I
seek’
(ea lie
q ai o)
(see
Rohl s
1970:
24).
Compa e
also La .
causa
‘cause,
eason’
which
becomes
F ench
chose
‘ hing’.
Ancien
G eek
ai
‘yea,
e ily’
is
p onounced
in
Mod-
e n
G eek
as
[né].
When
Go hic
o hog aphic
ai
is
de i ed
om
Indo-Eu opean
*ai,
*oi
o
*ai
many
schola s
would
asc ibe
o
i
a
p onuncia ion
@,
e.g.,
in
he
da .
sg.
gib-
ai
‘( o
he)
gi ’
and
in
he
in ini i e
/aisjan
‘ o
each’
(B aune
&
Ebbinghaus
1981:
29-30).
In
ce ain
en i onmen s
his
diph hong
is
monoph hongized
in
Old
High
Ge -
man
also,
e.g.,
be o e
-
in
OHG
/é en
‘ o
each’,
c .
Go hic
Jaisjan
(B aune
&
Egge s
1975:
42).
Simila ly
he
Go hic
o hog aphic
sequence
au
is
usually
in e p e ed
as
a
long
open
o-sound
(B aune
&
Ebbinghaus
1981:
33-34).
Ge manic
au
is
equen ly
ende ed
by
Old
High
Ge man
long
6,
e.g.,
hoh
‘high’
beside
Go h.
hduhs
(B aune
&
Egge s
1975:
45).
The
Sla ic
me ge
o
Indo-Eu opean
*oi
and
*ai
wi h
*é
and
e en ual
passage
o
é
is
well
known,
c .
OCS
da ./loc.
sg.
ec-é
‘( o
he,
in
he)
hand’
which
can
be
compa ed
wi h
s anda d
Li h.
ank-ai
and
dialec
(see
abo e)
uj-k-e
wi h
a
pa allel,
bu
la e
monoph hongiza ion.
Simila ly
he
Sla ic
passage
o
*au
and
*ou
o
u
is
well
known,
c .
he
*-u
s em
gen.
sg.
med-u
‘(o
he)
honey’.
Indo-Eu opean
*ai,
*ei
and
*oi
all
me ged
as *é
in
Sansk i ,
hus,
e.g.,
om
Indo-
Eu opean
*yoid-
we
ha e
Sk .
ed-a
‘I
know’
beside
ancien
G eek
oix,
Go h.
wai .
Simila ly
Indo-Eu opean
*au,
*eu
and
*ou
all
me ged
as
*6
in
Sansk i ,
c .
he
*-u
s em
gen.
sg.
madh-o-h
‘(o
he)
honey’.
One
can
compa e
he
Sansk i
*-u
s em
geni i e
singula
ending
-oh
wi h
he
Li huanian
dialec
*-u
s em
geni i e
singula
ending
-os
and
he
Go hic
*-w
s em
geni i e
singula
ending
-aus
(whe e
he
sequence
-au-
is
p onounced
as
a
long
open
o-sound).
Bu
hese
mo e
o
less
na u al
phonological
p ocesses
a e
no
by
any
means
lim-
i ed
o
he
Indo-Eu opean
languages.
Thus,
o
example,
he
Classical
A abic
koiné
diph hongs
/ay/
and
/aw/
e ained
in
he
Zahle
dialec
a e
monoph hongized
o
/e:/
and
/o:/
espec i ely
in
many
dialec s.
Fo
example,
we
encoun e
in
Zahle
/bay /
‘house’
and
/lawn/
‘colo ’
s.
/be: /
and
/lo:n/
espec i ely
in
Ty e,
Sidon
and
Bei u
(Cado a
1979:
19).
In
ac ,
i
one
belie es
in
linguis ic
uni e sals,
one
would
ce ainly
say ha
monoph hongiza ion
is
a
linguis ic
uni e sal.
I
a
language
has
a
su icien ly
long
e-
co ded
his o y,
i
seems
likely
ha
a
monoph hongiza ion
will
be
encoun e ed.
The e-
o e
I
would
ind
i
su p ising
i
in
he
his o y
o
Indo-Eu opean
he e
had
no
been
any
monoph hongiza ions.
Bu
since
he
econs uc ion
o
monoph hongiza ions
in
Indo-Eu opean
is
in e nal
econs uc ion
o
a
language
which
is
i sel
al eady
econ-
s uc ed,
he
e idence
is
likely
o
be
small
and
di icul
o
in e p e .
One
ob ious
eason
o
he
di icul y
in
he
econs uc ion
o
monoph hongs
is
ha
acco ding
o
he
heo y
he e
would
be
no
diph hongs
le
in
au osyllabic
posi ion.
The e o e
he
phonological
e idence
mus
come
om
mo phemes
which
may
occu
al e na i ely
in
p e-consonan al
and
p e- ocalic
posi ion
such
ha
he
second
elemen
o
he
o iginal
diph hong
may
some imes
be
ende ed
by
a
co esponding
consonan ,
i.e.,
/i/
by
/i/
o
/j/,
lu/
by
/u/
o
/ /,
e c.
I
an
e ymological
p e ocalic
a ian
o
he
o iginal
diph hong
LITHUANIAN
AND
INDO-EUROPEAN
PARALLELS
_
|
147
is
lacking,
he e
can
be
no
a es ed
phonological
e idence
a
all
o
an
o iginal
diph-
hong.
Thus,
I
p opose
ha
he
Indo-Eu opean
oo
*dou-
‘ o
gi e’
in
p e-consonan al
posi ion
passed
o
*d6-
>
Li h.
in .
diio- i,
Gk.
1s sg.
p es.
(81)-3e-u ,
Sk .
(dé)-da-
mi
‘T
gi e’
(see
Schmals ieg
1980:
150-157).
The
e lex
o
he
old
p e- ocalic
o m
*dou-
is
encoun e ed,
howe e ,
in
Li h.
da -é
‘ga e’,
he
G eek
Cyp io e
in ini i e
do e a
‘ o
gi e’
and
he
Umb ian
3 d
sg.
impe a i e
(pu )do- i- (u)
=
La .
pe ici o
‘may
he
sac i ice’
(see
Schmals ieg
1980:
151-157).
Ob iously,
i
he e
had
been
no
p e ocalic
occu ences
o
e ymological
*doy-,
he e
would
ha e
been
no
way
o
e-
cons uc
he
diph hong,
since
all
he
p e-consonan al
e lexes
would
be
*-6-.
Fu he mo e,
in
my
iew,
con amina ion
and
emodeling
o
a ious
ablau
o ms
o
he
same
oo
*do-,
*dou-,
*du-
a e
encoun e ed
in
he
nume al
*duo
‘ wo’
(c .
La .
duo,
Gk.
3bw,
Li h.
di ,
Sla ic
de a)
and
*dudu-
(c .
Sk .
d a-w).
The
e b
de i ed
om
*dou-
‘ wo’
o iginally
had
he
meaning
‘ o
make
in o
wo,
o
di ide’
which
led
o
he
no ion
‘ o
sha e’.
Fo
example,
he
English
exp ession
‘ o
sha e
some hing
wi h
somebody’
can
mean
‘ o
gi e
a
po ion
o
some hing
o
someone’.
The
meaning
‘ o
di ide,
o
hal e
( his
o
someone)’
came
o
mean
hen
‘ o
gi e
( his
o
someone)’
(Schmals ieg
1987:
17).
A
easonable
ques ion
a ises:
I
he
e ymological
Indo-Eu opean
diph hongs
we e
all
monoph hongized
in
closed
syllables,
wha
is
he
o igin
o
he
a es ed
diph hongs
in
closed
syllables?
I
p opose
ha
new
closed
syllables
a ose
in
Indo-Eu opean
when
an
o iginal
uns essed
owel
was
los
in
ce ain
sequences.
Thus,
o
example,
he
Indo-Eu opean
sequence
encoun e ed
in
he
*-u
s em
geni i e
singula
ending
*(medh)-ous
(c .
Li h.
medaiis
‘[o
he]
honey’)
had
he
o m
*-duos,
wi h
he
s ess
occu ing
on
he
i s
syllable
o
he
ending
and
loss
o
he
second
owel.
The
e ymo-
logical
P o o-Indo-Eu opean
*-u
s em
geni i e
singula
ending
could
also
occu ,
how-
e e ,
as
*-ouds
o
as
oo
s essed
*-ouos
(i.e.,
wi hou
any
s ess
on
he
ending)
in
which
case
he
ou come
is
*- os.
In
la e
imes
o
*-u
s em
nouns
he
ending
*-ous
was
o
he
mos
pa
gene alized
and
o iginal
*-wos
was
o
he
mos
pa
los .
Ne -
e heless
e lexes
o
bo h
o
hese
-w
s em
geni i e
singula
endings
a e
a es ed
in
Sansk i .
Acco ding
o
Macdonell
(1968:
296,
n.
7),
in
he
Rig
Veda
he
-u
s em
gen.
sg.
mddh- as
(in
my
iew
om
*[medh]-uos
<
*[médh]-ouos)
occu s
67
imes
and
mddh-os
(=
Li h.
med-a is,
Sla ic
med-u,
in
my
iew
om
*[medh]-ous
<
*[medh]-ouos)
occu s
13
imes.
E idence
o
he
c ea ion
o
diph hongs
comes
also
om
ela ed
oo s,
one
o
which
has
he
oo
owel
a e
he
sonan
and
he
second
o
which
has
he
oo
owel
be o e
he
sonan .
Thus
wi h
he
oo
owel
a e
he
sonan
/
he
nom.
sg.
Sk .
dyduh
‘day,
hea en’
and
Gk.
Zeuc
a e
de i ed
om
*diéy-
acco ding
o
Thumb-Hauschild
(1959:
73).
The
o m
*diéy-
in
u n
could
be
de i ed
om
ea lie
Indo-Eu opean
*deiéu(o)-s.
Ano he
o m
o
he
same
oo
wi h
he
oo
owel
be o e
he
sonan
j
is
ep esen ed
in
OP
deiws
‘god’,
La .
deus,
Li h.
dié as,
Sk .
de ah,
e c.
<
*deiy-(6)-s
o
*déiu(o)-s
<
P o o-Indo-Eu opean
*deiéu(6)-s
o
*déiéu(o)-s.
The
si ua ion
is
somewha
simila
o
he
Sla ic
si ua ion
wi h
he
loss
o
he
je s,
excep
ha
in
Sla ic
when
he
je
is
los
he
p eceding
sonan
may
no
become
a
owel,
148
|
WILLIAM
R.
SCHMALSTIEG
c .,
e.g.,
Mode n
Russian
(gen.
sg.)
bojca
‘(o
he)
igh e ’
<
*bojeca,
o
o ca
‘sheep’
<
Old
Russian
o eca,
al hough
in
mode n
Slo ene
and
Uk ainian
- -
be o e
a
conso-
nan
may
be
p onounced
somewha
like
he
English
-w-.
In
my
iew
he
ea men
o
owels
ollowed
by
nasals
in
closed
syllables
in
Indo-
Eu opean
can
be
compa ed
in
some
espec s
o
he
ea men
o
simila
sequences
in
Li huanian.
In
o he
wo ds
he
Indo-Eu opean
sequences
wi h
owel
plus
*-n,
*-m,
*_1,
*-
plus
consonan
we e
‘impu e’
diph hongs
jus
as
hey
a e
in
mode n
Li huanian.
In
s anda d
Li huanian
in
wo d- inal
posi ion
and
in
au osyllabic
posi ion
be o e
a
spi an
a
sho
owel
plus
-n(-)
is
leng hened
and
he
nasaliza ion
is
los ,
e.g.,
acc.
sg.
dié q
‘god’
and
3 d
p es.
gés a
‘goes
ou ,
is
ex inguished’.
No e,
howe e ,
he
analogi-
cal
es o a ion
o
his
sequence
in
he
u u e
conjuga ion
in
s anda d
Li huanian
whe e
we
ha e,
e.g.,
gy énsiu
‘I
shall
li e’
e c.
I
p opose
hen
ha
du ing
he
in e nal
his o y
o
Indo-Eu opean
a
sho
owel
plus
*_N-
(N
=
m
o n)
in
au osyllabic
posi ion
always
passed
o
a
long
owel,
p obably
by
way
o
a
long
nasal
owel
wi h
la e
loss
o
he
nasaliza ion,
e.g.,
*-oNC
(C
=
any
conso-
nan )
>
*@C
>
*-6C.
In
wo d- inal
posi ion,
howe e ,
ei he
because
o
accen ual
con-
side a ions
o
because
he
ollowing
wo d
may
ha e
begun
wi h
ei he
a
consonan
o
a
owel,
he e
de eloped
a ian s
ha ing
ei he
a
long
owel
o
a
sho
owel
plus
nasal
consonan .
Thus
wo d- inal
*-oN
could
become
ei he
*-6
(pe haps
i
i
was
uns essed
o
pe haps
i
he
ollowing
wo d
began
wi h
a
consonan )
o
emain
as
*-oN
(pe haps
i
i
was
s essed
o
pe haps
i
he
ollowing
wo d
began
wi h
a
owel).
I
gi e
he e
wo
examples
o
he
mo phologiza ion
o
he
o iginal
au oma ic
al e na-
ion
be ween
*-oN
and
*-6
in
he
a es ed
Indo-Eu opean
languages.
I
ha e
in
mind
he
di e ence
be ween
he
seconda y
Is sg.
ending
*-om
a es ed
in
La .
sum
<
*e-
som,
he
Is
sg.
impe ec
Gk.
gego ,
Sk .
dbha -am
‘I
ca ied’
and
he
p ima y
Is
sg.
ending
*-6
a es ed
in
he
Is sg.
p esen
La .
e -o,
Gk.
géow,
Sk .
bha -d-mi
(wi h
seconda y
addi ion
o
he
a hema ic
ending
-mi)
and
Li h.
nes-w
‘I
ca y’
(see
Schmals ieg
1980:
41;
1998).
Many
Indo-Eu opeanis s
de i e
he
p ima y
Is
sg.
ending
*-6
om
a
owel
plus
la yngeal
sequence
and
ci e
as
e idence
he
Hi i e
1s
singula
endings
(2nd
conjuga ion)
-ah-hi
and
(mediopassi e)
-ah-ha,
bu
in
he
a -
es ed
non-Ana olian
Indo-Eu opean
languages
he
ending
*-6
is
encoun e ed
in
he
ac i e
oice
o
he
e b
whe eas
in
Hi i e
he
1s
sg.
ending
-ah-ha
is
encoun e ed
in
he
mediopassi e
conjuga ion.
The
meaning
o
he
-ah-hi
conjuga ion
is
no
clea
and
ypically
no
explana ion
is
gi en
as
o
exac ly
how
-ah-hi
could
pass
o
*-6.
Conse-
quen ly
I
conside
a
de i a ion
o
he
p ima y
Is
sg.
ending
*-6
om
he
seconda y
*-oN
much
mo e
likely
han
om
a
owel
plus
la yngeal.
Re lexes
o
wo d- inal
*-oN
and
*-6
a e
also
encoun e ed
in
he
*-o
s em
da i e
singula
p onominal
and
nominal
endings,
c .
he
e ymological
de ini e
o ms
Li h.
-am-(ui),
Sla ic
-om-u
whe e
he
e ymological
*-om-
is
p o ec ed
by
he
ollowing
owel
o
he
inal
membe
o
he
de ini e
p onoun.
The
e ymological
*-6
is
ep e-
sen ed
in
he
nominal
*-o
s em
da .
sg.
La .
Jup-6,
Sk .
kaya
(wi h
seconda y
addi-
ion
o
he
elemen
-ya),
Gk.
A0x«,
Li h.
ilk-ui
‘( o
he)
wol ’
(wi h
la e
analogical
addi ion
o
*-i
in
G eek
and
Li huanian).
Fu he
examples
o
his
al e na ion
a e
gi en
in
Schmals ieg
(1980:
41-42).
LITHUANIAN
AND
INDO-EUROPEAN
PARALLELS
|
149
The
co-exis ence
o
a
simple
wo d- inal
owel
al e na ing
wi h
a
sequence
o
wo d-
inal
owel
ollowed
by
a
nasal
would
ha e
a
pa ial
pa allel
in
he
si ua ion
desc ibed
by
Zinke icius
(1966:
77)
o
ce ain
wes e n
Li huanian
dialec s
(Klaipeda,
e c.)
in
which
he
geni i e
plu al
ending
has
he
a ian s:
sak-a-n
o
Sak-a-
‘(o
he)
b anches’
( he
la e
o m
wi hou
he
inal
nasal).
Acco ding
o
Zinke i¢ius,
pe haps
unde
he
in luence
o
he
oo -s essed
ype
he
second
a ian
is
mo e
cha ac e is ic
o
he
younge
gene a ion
and
in
places
in
he
eas
has
comple ely
ous ed
he
i s
a ian .
The e
is
e en
a
hi d
a ian
wi h
a
inal
-m,
Sak- i-m,
which
is
assumed
o
be
a
esul
o
he
gene aliza ion
o
he
o m
which
occu ed
be o e
a
ollowing
labial.
Zinke icius
(1966:
76)
no es
he
Samogi ian
double s
o
s anda d
Li h.
skgs i
‘ o
complain’
and
[s i
‘ o
c awl’
which
a e
op ionally
skii.i¢ i
o
ski-S i
o
l’.n.C i
o
l’'S i.
The
mo phologiza ion
o
o iginal
au oma ic
a ian s
*-oN
and
*-6
condi ioned
by
phonological
en i onmen s
has a
pa ial
pa allel
in
he
his o y
o
English.
In
con em-
po a y
Ame ican
English
he
use
o
he
o ms
o
he
inde ini e
a icle
a
and
an
is
condi ioned
pu ely
au oma ically
by
he
na u e
o
he
ini ial
phoneme
o
he
ollow-
ing
wo d,
e.g.,
a
book,
bu
an
apple.
In
a
simila
way
he
di e ence
be ween
my
and
mine
was
o iginally
also
qui e
au oma ic,
bu
nowadays
his
o iginally
phonologically
condi ioned
di e ence
has
aken
on
mo phological
signi icance,
and
in
mode n
s an-
da d
English
my
is
only
a
possessi e
adjec i e
and
mine
is
only
a
possessi e
p onoun.
Today
one
would
say
only
my
book
(apple)
o
he
book
(apple)
is
mine
wi hou
ega d
o
he
e ymological
phonological
condi ioning
(see
S ang
1970:
198).
I
hope
o
ha e
sugges ed
he e
ha
he
ecu ing
na u e
o
linguis ic
change
makes
i
p obable
ha ,
as
in
Li huanian,
he e
occu ed
in
he
in e nal
his o y
o
Indo-Eu-
opean
monoph hongiza ions
o
he
‘pu e’
and
‘impu e’
diph hongs.
Fo
mos
Indo-
Eu opean
languages
monoph hongiza ion
is
a
common
ecu ing
phenomenon,
much
mo e
common
han
he
loss
o
some
pu a i e
la yngeals.
REFERENCES
ANTKOWSKI,
F.
1956:
La
ch onologie
de
la
monoph ongaison
des
diph ongues
dans
les
langues
indo-
eu opéennes.
Poznan:
Pans wowe
Wydawnic wo
Naukowe.
BRAUNE,
W.,
EBBINGHAUS,
E.
1981:
Go ische
G amma ik,
Tibingen:
Max
Niemeye
Ve lag.
BRAUNE,
W.,
EGGERS,
H.
1975:
Al hochdeu sche
G amma ik,
Tibingen:
Max
Niemeye
Ve lag.
Capo a,
EJ.
1979:
In e dialec al
lexical
compa ibili y
in
A abic,
Leiden:
E.
J.
B ill.
MACDONELL,
A.A.
1968: Vedic
g amma ,
Va anasi—Delhi:
Indological
Book
House.
ROHLes,
G.
1970:
F om
Vulga
La in
o
Old
F ench:
An
in oduc ion
o
he
s udy
o
he
Old
F ench
language.
T ansl.
by
Vincen
Almazan
&
Lillian
McCa hy,
De oi :
Wayne
S a e
Uni e si y
P ess.
Rupzi e,
M.
1963:
La iesu
dialek ologija.
Riga:
La ijas
als s
izde nieciba.
SCHMALSTIEG,
W.
R.
1980:
Indo-Eu opean
linguis ics:
A
new
syn hesis,
Uni e si y
Pa k
and
London:
The
Pennsyl ania
S a e
Uni e si y
P ess.
SCHMALSTIEG,
W.
R.
1987:
A
s uc u al
and
ypological
iew
o
some
Indo-Eu opean
monoph hongiza ions.
Poznan:
Adam
Mickiewicz
Uni e si y.
(Ins i u e
o
Linguis ics,
Wo king
pape s,
23.)
SCHMALSTIEG,
W.
R.
1998:
La in
sum
and
he
Sla ic
i s
pe son
singula
p esen .
His o ische
Sp ach o schung
111
(2),
286-295.
SCHMALSTIEG,
W.
R.
2000:
Li huanian
and
Indo-Eu opean
Pa allels.
Jou nal
o
Indo-Eu opean
S udies
28,
385-398.

150
|
WILLIAM
R.
SCHMALSTIEG
STRANG,
B.
1970:A
his o y
o
English,
London:
Me huen
& Co.
TuHums,
A.,
HAUSCHILD,
R.
1959:
Handbuch
des
Sansk i .
Vol.
2,
Heidelbe g:
Ca l
Win e .
VAN
WINDEKENS,
A.
J.
1976:
Le
okha ien
con on é
a ec
les
au es
langues
indo-eu opéennes.
Vol.
1.
La
phoné ique
e
le
ocabulai e,
Lou ain:
Cen e
in e na ional
de
dialec ologie
géné ale.
ZINKEVICIUS,
Z.
1966:
Lie u iy
dialek ologija,
Vilnius:
Min is.
William
R.
Schmals ieg
Gau a
2001
07
23
The
Pennsyl ania
S a e
Uni e si y
School
o
Languages
302
A
Bu owes
Bldg.
Uni e si y
Pa k,
PA
16802,
USA
[email p o ec ed]