Historische
Sprachforschung
(HistoricalLinguistics)
bisher
Zeitschrift
fürVergleichende
Sprachforschung
BegründetvonAdalbertKuhn
In Verbindung
mitClaus Haebler
und unterredaktioneller
Mitwirkung
vonSabineZiegler
von
herausgegeben
und GünterNeumannf
AlfredBammesberger
118. Band (2005)
Vandenhoeck& Ruprechtin Göttingen
ISSN 0935-3518
INHALT
A. Bammesberger/ D. Ruprecht,
Günter Neumann (31.5.1920-24.1.2005)
C. García Castillero, Bilabialer Nasal vor velarem Verschlußlaut im
Urindogermanischen?
G. Keydana, IndogermanischeAkzenttypenund die Grenzen der Rekonstruktion
E. Rieken, Neues zum Ursprungder anatolischen ¿-Mutation ....
I. Yakubovich, Lydian Etymological Notes
V. Blazek, Tocharian A kji, B klyiye„woman" < *$gleH2ui-H}en-}.
A. Cantera, Adverbal-prädikativeAdjektive im Indoiranischen....
A. Blanc, L'adjectifgrec èrnietavóç et la racine sanskriteAV- „aider".
M. Beckwith,Volscian sistiatiensand the Osean -¿¿-Perfect
1
3
19
48
75
92
101
130
145
J. F. Eska/A. O. Mercado, Observations on verbal art in ancient
160
Vergiate
P. de Bernardo Stempel, Indogermanischund keltisch„geben": kontinentalkeit.Gabiae, gabi/gabas, keltib. gabizeti, altir. ro-(n)-gab
185
und Zugehöriges
S. Neri, Riflessionisull'apofonia radicale di proto-germanico*namõn
201
„nome"
S. Johnsen, The historical derivation of Gothic aba and its »-stem
251
anomalies
R. Woodhouse, Three Germanic Etymologies
S. Patri, Observations sur la loi de Winter
263
269
294
I. Igartua, On the Origin of the Genitive Dual in Lower Sorbían . .
P. A. Poptawski, Two West Slavic words in the light of etymology
303
(Kashubian tuka „asthma", Polish dialectal tuka „leucoma") ....
306
Buchbesprechungen(M. Mayrhofer,A. Bammesberger,S. Ziegler) .
319
In eigener Sache
Richard-Strauß-Str.
48, D-85072 Eichstätt,erbeten.
Beiträgewerdenan Prof.Dr. AlfredBammesberger,
BesprechungenkönnennursolchenWerkenzugesichertwerden,
welcheder Herausgebererbetenhat.
werden,wenn sie bis zum 1. 12. vorliegen.
Abbestellungenkönnen nurberücksichtigt
Diese Zeitschrift
und alle in ihrenthalteneneinzelnenBeiträgeund Abbildungensind urheberrechtlich
bedarfder
geschützt.JedeVerwertungaußerhalbder engen Grenzendes Urheberrechtsgesetzes
Zustimmungdes Verlages
Eichstätt.
derMaximilian
mitUnterstützung
Gedruckt
Bickhoff-Universitätsstiftung,
®Hubert& Co, Göttingen
Druck-undBindearbeiten:
derivation
ofGothicaba
The historical
and its//-stem
anomalies
1. Introduction
The Gothicnounaba generallyfollowsthe«-stemdeclensionof that
formsthatset it aside fromtherest
language,butit has certainirregular
have recentlyled
of the«-stemsof thesame gender.These irregularities
to imaginativeideas aboutits morphology,
but as thispaperwill show,
theysimplyreflectolder regularpatternsousted elsewhere.The morin
of aba does in anycase revealan archaicformation
phologicalhistory
theIndo-Europeanlanguages.
Gothicaba is used in Wulfila's translationof the Bible to translate
Greek avf|p "male person; husband",and this word only.1That the
Gothicwordmeans"vir,male person;husband"(and never"ävöpccmoc,
but
homo,Mensch") is clearnotonlyfromtheGreekwordit translates,
also fromthe factthatpracticallyall passages withaba show an oppositionbetweenthiswordand qëns, qinõ "woman,wife"or magaps*
"youngwoman".2
aba is amplyattestedin the singular,whereit declines as a normal
masculine«-stem,witha nom.sg.in -a, acc.sg. -an, dat.sg.-/«,and gen.
are muchfewer,withonlyone attestation
sg. -ins.The pluralattestations
in the nom.pl.(abans), two in the dat.pl. (abnam), two in the gen.pl.
(abnë), and none in the acc.pl.3The pluraldeclensionis not the usual
one fora m. «-stem,as theseotherwisehave a dat.pl.in -am and a gen.
pl. in -anë,withthesole exceptionof auhsa* "ox", whichhas a gen.pl.
auhsnë(Luke 14,19).4
1
withmanna,wairandguma,see Meid1999forthesemantic
àvf|pis also translated
differences
ofthesewordsintheGothicbible.
arenolessclear:Galatians4,27barnapizõsaupjõnsmaispau pizõs
Theexceptions
aban "thechildren
ofthelonelyone[are]morethanthoseoftheonehaving
aigandeins
an aba", Luke 1,34(whentheangeltellsMarythatshewillgivebirthtoJesus)haiwa
sijaipata,pandeiabannikann?"howis thattobe,whenI don'tknowanyabaT'
Fortheattestations,
see SnaedalII: 7.
Giventheidentical
formation
ofthegen.pl.auhs-neandab-ne,onecouldspeculate
whereasthe
thattheirpl. declension
was thesame.The acc.pl.of aba is notattested,
ofauhsa*is theacc.pl.auhsnuns.
Theacc.pl.ofaba therefore
onlyotherpl. attestation
thereadingauhsnunsis notcertain,
it is
mayhavebeen*abnuns.Although
nowadays
thepreferred
one (see Ebbinghaus
backedby theProto2003: 21-22),and is further
252
SverreJohnsen
The standardreference
grammarforGothic,Braune's GotischeGrammatik,has in its previouseditionsbeen contentwith classifyingthe
declensionof aba as "[begründet]auf abweichendemSuffixablaut".5
The muchawaitednew editionhas includedSen 2002 as the singlerei.e. an originalneuterr/nference,whereaba is treatedas a hétéroclite,
the
abnam
on
the
sole
basis
that
stem,6
dat.pl.
correspondsstructurally
withthedat.pl.watnam(nom.sg.wato)1"water",whichis an old hétéroclite in Germanic.Immediatelythegenderand meaningof aba present
could
forthisinterpretation.
First,thePIE hetero-clites
greatdifficulties
notdenoteanimatebeings.Second, as a masculinenounwiththemeaaba mustbe an old animatenoun,i.e. a mas-culinen-stem.
ning<xvf|p,
2. The Germanic«-stem
The aberrantuse of the suffixform-n-,as seen in the dat.pl.abnam
in Gerand gen.pl. abnë, can, althoughit is quite rare synchronically
in olderstagesof theGermamanic,be seen to have been morefrequent
nic languages.If one looks widelyand deeplyenough,itsuse can in fact
Germanic(PG) reconstruction
(cf. footnote17). Since we do not know the nom.pl.of
auhsa*, a claim that Gothic paired a nom.pl. -ans with an acc.pl. -nuns would be
althoughfarfromimprobable.
speculative,
3
1981: §108 Anm. 1.
Braune/Ebbinghaus
6 In
(PIE) the hétérocliteshad a stemfinal *-r in thenom./acc.
Proto-Indo-European
sg. (and probably*-/in the word for 'sun', cf. Wächter1997) and *-n in the oblique
cases, particularlyevident in Hittite,e.g. nom.sg. wãtar, gen.sg. witenas "water",
nom.sg.pahhur, gen.sg. pahhuenas "fire" (for the hétéroclitesas such, see Schindler
1975 and Meier-Briigger2002: 205-206). The heteroclitictype has left few, but
unambiguoustraces in Germanic,e.g. Gothic gen.sg. watins "water" vs. Old High
German(OHG) wajjar, Gothic nom.sg.fon, gen.sg.funins "fire" vs. OHG fuir, and
Gothicnom.sg.sauil "sun" vs. nom.sg.sunna, dat.sg.sunnin.For otherpossible traces
in Germanic,see Krahe/Meid1969 III: §80 and Friedman1999.
of hétéroclites
7 The retainedr's in thelocativeadverbshar and
par in Gothicshow thatthereis no
probablynot a reflectionof a
generalr-loss in PG. The ending-õ in watõ is therefore
collective formation*watõr (vel sim.). The regularPG neuternomVacc. sg. n-stem
ending*-õnhas notyieldedtheexpectedending*-a in Gothic.The surfacingending-õ
has probablyarisenby analogywiththeregularsg./pl.relationshipin theneutera-stem,
i.e. a-stemsg. waurd- pl. waurd-a= «-stemsg. X - pl. hairtõn-a,X=*hairtõn.The loss
of the final *-n could be analogical fromthe m. and f. n-stems(the on-, In- and anstems),wherethe nom.sg.ends in the suffixformappearingin the nom.pl.withoutthe
final-n,i.e. in -õ, -ei and -a. Accordingto Neri 2006: 229, thefinal*-nwas lostafter
a long vowel in unaccentedposition.This requirescertainassumptions,however- e.g.
thatthisdevelopmentprecedesthe loss of shortvowels in finalpositionin thethirdor
later syllable (e.g. f.acc.sg. õn-st. *X-õn-u > X-õn, infinitive*X-õn-a > X-õn), a
developmentthatseems to be PG (cf. footnote23), and it mustfollowtheremakingof
the 3.pl. optativeending-eina < *-ïn#+ -a (an assumptionthatcannotbe provenor
disproven).
Thehistorical
derivation
ofGothicaba andits«-stemanomalies
253
be seen to once have been thenormalone. These traceswill be outlined
in thissection.
The PIE animaterc-stems
could eitherbe amphi-or hysterokinetic.8
In
bothof theseablauttypes,a noun's suffixappearedin thezero-gradein
theweak cases, whichin our case would leave us with*-n-.Traditional
examples include Latin nom.sg. caro, gen.sg. carnis "meat" (amphikinetic),Vedic gen.sg.rãjnah,gen.pl.rãjnãmto rajan- "king"(amphikinetic)and Greekápf|v"lamb" < *w£hiën,
gen.sg.ápvóç < *wi"hrn-ós
PIE
n-stems
inherited
from
would thus provide an
(hysterokinetic).
abundantinputof zero-gradesuffixformsintoGermanic.Generally,the
Germaniclanguageshave a generalization
of either*-en-or *-an-in the
sg. weak cases, and *-an-in thepl. cases.9 Remnantsof thezero-grade
suffixformscan nevertheless
be found,as will be seen below.
a mixtureof synchronie
n- and consoa) The wordfor'man' portrays
nantstemfeaturesin Old English(OE) and Gothic.10The best way to
understand
thedeclensionof thiswordis to presumean originalm. nstem,withthe zero-gradeof the suffixin the weak cases {*man-n-).n
From the weak cases, a new root *mann-was created: PG nom.sg.
8Cf.
2005:217.
e.g.Harõarson
The generalization
of *-en-in the weak cases originates
in the loc.sg. (cf.
Benediktsson
1968:30), where*-én(i)wouldhavebeentheendingin boththeamphiandhysterokinetic
of *-an-is probably
from
theindividualizing
type.Thegeneralization
*-n-was affixed
wherethesuffix
toa thematic
basein *-awithout
aw-stems,
anyablaut
use was especially
2001: 526-531).This individualizing
(forthistype,cf. Schaffner
inGermanic,
cf.Krahe/Meid
1969III: §91.
frequent
1W
OE nom.sg.manna(«-stem),dat.sg.menn(cons-st.)(Campbell1959:251-252)=
Gothicmanna - mann.
11 Casaretto's
(2004: 45) suggestionof "[zwei] Wörter[...], die bereits
miteinander
kontaminiert
wordensind, indemkonsonantische
voreinzelsprachlich
an denObliquus*man-nIn theend,thereis actually
traten"
is unnecessary.
Endungen
no difference
betweenthissolutionand theone explainedabove,sincetheoriginal
stemswereexactlythesame.A
grammatical
endingsof the«-stemsand consonant
ofthezero-grade
ofthesuffix
without
alteration
oftheendings
generalization
allomorph
wouldthenbe identical
to a "consonant
stem"*mann-withconsonant
stemendings,
theconsonant
stemform
(2004: 44) viewstherefore
exceptforthenom.sg.Casaretto
Germanic(NWG) as the original.The sg.
nom.sg.*mann-zseen in North-West
declensionin the NorthGermaniclanguagesdoes not followthe consonantstem,
butinsteadthea-st.In addition,
thenom.sg.
madris inanycase a lateanalogical
though,
creation
for*mann,
whichwouldbe theregular
formfrom
both*mann-z
and*manna-z.
The WG consonant
stemnominative
formscouldhavebeencreatedby analogyfrom
otherconsonant
stemsduetotheseemingly
consonant
and
stem-looking
dat.sg.*mann-i
whereas
bothGothicandOE mannaas beinginfluenced
gen.sg.*mann-iz,
explaining
by
then-st.guma"man"(Casaretto
2004:45) is unlikely
anduneconomical.
254
SverreJohnsen
*manô n - gen.sg. *manniz- ►*mannô- manniz> Gothicmanna mans.XÌM
in theplural
b) The wordfor'ox' showsthezero-gradeof then-suffix
in Gothic,OE and ON. ON uxi has in itspl. nom./acc.yxn,gen.yxna,]5
dat.yxnum,
and OE oxa has pl. nom./acc.0xen,16gen.oxna,dat.oxnum.
Gothichas, as alreadymentioned,a gen.pl.auhsnë.The zero-gradehas
been generalizedfromthe weak cases, e.g. gen.pl *uhs-n-on,instr.pl.
*uhs-n-miz.xl
c) The neutern-stemfor'name' appearswithsimilardeviantformsin
Gothicnamõ and ON nafn,wherebothhave generalizedthezero-grade
in theplural:18
Gothicnom./acc.namna,gen.namnë,dat.namnam~ ON
nqfn,nafna,nçfnum.19'20
12The
n-stemendingis an issue,however.See recently
originalPG m.nom.sg.
Haröarson
2005:224-229andNedoma2005withreferences.
manshas regularshortening
of thegemination
befores. The examplegivenin
< *ur-runns
Braune/Heidermanns
2004: §80, ur-runs
is probably
however.
erroneous,
suchas OE ryne"flow"< *runizandOld Norse(ON) run"bankofstone
Counterparts
whichthewatermayflow"<*runa-(andfurther
between
twowatersthrough
Lehmann
formed
withonlyone *n,andthat*nn<
1986:R33) showthatthenounwas probably
*nw(Seebold1970:376) /*nH(Liihr1976:78) belonged
totheverb*rinnan-.
Lehmann'
s (1986:M23) reconstruction
ofthegenitive
as *man-en-iz
mustbe false,
sinceonlyPG *manniz
wouldgiveGothicmansas wellas provide
theanalogicalbasis
forthenewdative*man-n-i
(for*man-in-i).
Therareby-form
uxnamentioned
notexist,
byNoreen1970:§401.2doesprobably
cf.Benediktsson
1986:76-77.Thev-is generalized
from
thenom./acc.
The 0- is due to an earlygeneralization
of thevowel *o- in theparadigm
(cf.
Cf. further
Campbell1959:§196). Theexpectedformwouldbe *yxen.
Bammesberger
1993.
17The
add theacc.pl.
acc.pl. was a weak case in PG, and we can consequently
4 and23.
totheexplanation.
Cf.footnote
*uhsnnz
18The PIE neuter
hada proterokinetic
in whichthe
inflection,
(me)n-stem
singular
suffixform*-(m)n-wouldnotoccur(only*-(m)nin thestrong
cases). By meansof
internal
thesestemswouldhavean amphikinetic
2005:
derivation,
however,
(Haröarson
2001: 576, a formation
thatlatercouldbe
217) or hysterokinetic
plural(Schaffner
replacedbyan amphikinetic
byanalogy).
The Gothicdat.pl.-am is analogicalfromthea-stem,or possiblyfromother
an-stems
witha dat.pl.*-an-mizwithan assimilation
> *-mm*-nmindividualizing
1969 I: 114). The regularendingwouldhavebeen *-numor *-um(see
(Krahe/Meid
footnote
between
cf.Gothic
23). ON doesnotdifferentiate
original*-am(z)and*-um(z),
-bairam,herum,
bárum,dçgum,sunum.ON
dagam,sunumas opposedto ON herum,
-urnshould,however,
whereitmatches
Gothic-am,
agreesherewiththeWG languages,
to -urn-beforethelabial in unaccented
be derivedfromPG *-am-withrounding
as quite
It is notdue to a specialdevelopment
of PIE *-om-in thisposition,
position.
s
oftenclaimed(amongothersKrahe/Meid1969 I: §45). Neitheris Haröarson'
whenheexplainstheNWGdat.pl.
(2001: 102-103)particularly
convincing,
explanation
stems,andthel.pl.pres.-urnfromthe
ending-urnas comingfromtheu- andconsonant
*-me/os.
athematic
First,by usingthese
ending*-me/oswiththe Sievers-variant
he separateswhatseemsto be one phenomenon
intotwo,andsecondly,
explanations,
ofGothicaba anditsn-stem
Thehistorical
derivation
anomalies
255
of some «-stemsto w-stemsin ON requiresforms
d) The transition
withthe zero-grade-n- to account for it. The special featureof this
is thatthen-suffix
has become a partof thenew rootin theutransition
21
stem.Thereforeari "eagle" n-stem- > çrn w-stem,^*beri "bear" - ►
bjçrn. The only way by whichthe requiredelement*-nu-could have
followedby a syllabicnasal
arisenis withthezero-gradeof then-suffix
>
which
could
have
occurred
(*-nN- *-nuN-),
onlyin theacc.pl. *-n-nz
> *-nunzand possiblyin the(datV)instr.pl
*-n-qiz> *-numz.2223
theformswith*-am-(whichaccording
to Harõarsonshouldbe keptas such)would
outnumber
theforms
with*-um-,
andthisanalogywouldthenrequirea further
greatly
ifcorrect.
Itis difficult
tosee why*-umshouldbe morphemically
reasoning
preferable
thiswouldbe theonlyinstance
of a Sievers-treatment
of
to *-am-.Andmoreseverely,
thatthesevariants
neverexisted.
ImiinPG,whichinitselfsuggests
inON. Andsincenom./acc.pl.
Fromthepluralforms,
a stemnafn-wasgeneralized
of a normal¿z-stem
Içnd"lands",vçtn
nçfnhas theappearance
(e.g. bçrn"children",
thenewsingular
formsbecamean a-stem,nom./acc.sg.
"waters"),
nafn,justas barn,
land,vatn.
(Jt.thet. rt-stem
bera she-bearandthe«-stemsinUb bera,UHU bero bear.
" Ci. vanHelten19U5:
19Ò8:11,Liihr1988:2UUandJohnsen
225, Benediktsson
2004: 121.
23 Since the NWG
betweenoriginal*-am(z)and
languagesdo not differentiate
This
19),thevowelofthisdat.pl.endingis of littleimportance.
*-um(z)(see footnote
showsthattheacc.pl.was a weakcase in PG, sincethevowel*u is neededtoaccount
to thew-st.declension.
Thatthedat.pl.*-(n)umz
is regularin PG is
forthetransition
stemsmênõpum
"months"
and
shownbytheGothicdat.pl.ending-urnintheconsonant
2004: §117.2). Thisendingcannothavecome
bajõpum"both"(Braune/Heidermanns
andswistar
fromthe«-stem.The transition
of theconsonant
stemsbrõpar"brother"
declension
oftheacc.pl.
"sister"tothew-st.
(onlyinthepl.) is becauseoftheregularity
Theotherconsonant
stemsinGothichavereplacedtheacc.pl.
in-unsanddat.pl.in-urn.
withthenom.pl.-s,e.g. acc.pl.mênõpsm.,fijandsm. "enemies",
baurgsf. "towns".
ofdat.pl.,
mênõpswouldthennotshareanyendingwiththe«-stemwiththeexception
tocomefrom
thew-stem
thendisappears.
andtheveryreasonforthisending
has developedfromolder *-miz/*-mazwith
The consonantstemending*-#*z
of *i/*ain thethird(or later)syllable(Krahe/Meid
1969 II: 12) (but
syncopation
> OE pœm,twcèm
retained
in thedissyllabic
with/-umlaut,
andin
*twai-miz
*pai-miz,
> ON premrwitha-umlaut).
wouldeither
Then-stem
*t>ri-maz
endings*-nmiz/*-nmaz
thesamesyncopation
andhencedevelopto *-ni%iz
inPG beforeanyanaptyctic
undergo
vowelwouldarisebeforesyllabicrésonants,
ordevelopto *-unmiz/*-maz
before
already
to *-m(m)andgive*-umz.An indithevowelsyncopation
andthenassimilate*-nmis theGothicdat.pl.brõprum
and
cationthatthesyncopation
precedestheanaptyxis
whosePG transponats
are *brõprqiz/*duhtrrpz,
unlesstheyare analogical
dauhtrum,
< *brõpurrpz
< *bropfmiz.Tremblay'
recreations
of *brõpurum
s (2003: 43,137)
ofthedat.pl.brõprum
as comingfrom*bropurmiz
withmetathesis
*«r> ru
explanation
is ad hoc.Itis difficult
tosee howHarõarson
(2001: 102-103)cancause*sue-s[t]f-mis
"sisters"and *(h3)or-n-mis
and
"eagles"to regularly
giveGermanic*swe-stru-m(i)z
Krahe/Meid
1969II: 41) whenPG *#gives*uR,not*Ru,
*ar-nu-m(i)z
(andsimilarly
otherthaninclearlyanalogicalcases suchas Gothic
"first"
after
(OE fyrmest)
frumists
forwards".
fram"from,
T>
.
.
._
..
_
_
.
-
_
_
256
SverreJohnsen
e) Internallyin NG, thereare some m. n-stemsthathave by-forms
bearwitnessof an
eitherwithor withouta rootfinal-n-.These by-forms
older unitedparadigmthatunderwenta split.Convincingpairs of this
vs. sjafni"id." < *sef/bnan-,
sortare ON sefi "mind"< *sef/banapfrom
and the amphikineticpair
*séf-an-/seb-n-'
parentlyoriginating
',
hjarsi "crownof the head" < ^hérs-an-vs. hjarni"brain"< *herz-nwhichshowstheeffectof Verner'slaw. A hysterokinetic
pair seems to
be presentin thepair ON orri"heathcock"< *urzén-vs. Old Swedish
'
orni"boar"< *urzn- (cf. Greeképaf|v"themale" < *h¡rsen24).25
can be seen in
of thezero-gradedn-suffix
f) A moreindirectreflection
the consonantgeminationin Germanic«-stems,a geminationthatis
generallyconsideredto be caused by thesequence *-Tn-(> *-7T-),26in
otherwordswherethe finalobstruentof the rootwas followedby the
zero-gradedsuffix*-n-,e.g. OHG knabo "boy" < *knában-vs. knappo
"id." < *knabn-'.These cases are extensivelytreatedby Lühr 1988:
198ff.
the-na in kvinna,thegen.pl.of ON kona "woman",has
Traditionally,
been said to reflectthe zero-gradeof the «-suffix,as only an original
sequence -nC-could be responsiblefortheraisingof *-e-(*kwen-n-on)
to -i-.27As Harõarson1989: 88 argues,sincethiswordis extendedfrom
we expectthe õ always to be presentin the
a PIE eh2-> PG õ-stem,28
suffix.Least of all we expecta zero-grade,kvinnacould ratherhave a
raisingof *e to */beforea secondarycluster-nC-,afterthesyncopeof a
Thereexistsa
medialvowel,29althoughgood parallelsarehardto find.30
24For thisPIE reconstruction
and épof|v^ äpoT|v"id.", see Peters1993.
For these and yet anotherpair, see Benediktsson1968: 11 and lurtherdetails in
Schaffner2001: 546-549.
^ For this
law, see thediscussionin Lühr 1988: 189-196.
¿l Noreen 1970:
§162.1, followed by Benediktsson1986: 31, Lühr 1988: 199 and
Schaffner200 1:372.
All Germanicf. ow-stemsare probablysecondarilyextendedfromo-stems(when
not productivelycreatedwithinGermanic,of course), cf. Harõarson 1989: 84-85 and
Jasanoff2002:41.
The ON f.gen.pl.-na cannotcontinue*-onowithsyncopationof *-o-,as thiswould
have given *-ana, cf. f.gen.sg.skipanar "order"< *skipõnõR/-ãR
(cf. Harõarson 1989:
88-89), buthas theending*-anõ fromthem./n.This feminineendingmaybe attestedon
theTune-stonein theformarbijanõ "of theheirs"(Syrett1994: 212), butthegenderhas
been disputed(Nielsen 2000: 86). The gen.pl. in -na is presentin all f. and neuternstems. It is additionallyused in some masculines (mainly in poetry),and thenoften
spread analogicallyto the entireplural paradigm,as withuxi (Noreen 1970: §401.3).
This -na probablycontinuesin mostinstancesthesyncopatedgeneralizedgen.pl.ProtoNorse (PN) *-anõ,thesame endingas in mostGothicm. and neuter«-stems.
" Harõarson
(1989: 9U) suggeststhe 1.pl.pret.Jingumot fa "get as a parallel, mis
form,originallybeing reduplicated,did not have PG *-enC-, but the phonologyand
Thehistorical
derivation
ofGothicaba andits«-stemanomalies
257
by-formkvenna, but this should be considered as a younger
developmentregardlessthe origin of kvinna,since this latterform
cannotbe explainedby analogy.31'32
Even thoughone of theprimeexamplesof thezero-gradeformof the
^-suffixshouldbe rejected(kvinna),thereare stillso manyresiduesof
thisfeaturein the Germaniclanguagesthatabnam, abnë constitutea
of this,and requirein themselvesno extraordinary
merecontinuation
to
account
forit.
explanation
3. Derivational historyof aba
We will finallyaddressthe issue of whatthehistoricaloriginof aba
mightbe. First,otherGermanic«-stemcognatesare dubiousand,in any
case, add nothingto our knowledgeof the PG form,33
since,as shown
at thePN stagearestillopaque,so we cannotknowifitis
structure
ofthesepreterites
with*kwen-an-on.
Haroarson's
otherexample,
theOld Swedishpl.spinnar
comparable
sinceitis another
«-stem.As a result,
onecouldclaimthat
(p. 90-91)is notpersuasive
cluster*-nn-(e.g. gen.pl.
thei in thisformhas beenraisedfrom*e beforean original
*spen-n-ôn).
kvennais, accordingto Harõarson(1989: 87), alreadypresentin the oldest
it continues
an analogyat a latePN stage
It is difficult
to say whether
manuscripts.
insteadof *kwinnõ
aftertheobliquestem*kwen-)or if it is madefroma
(*kwennõ
of
form
as Harõarson
Thereare,ofcourse,a number
kven-,
(loc.cit.)thinks.
composition
formswith-enC-in ON, e.g. brenna"burn",f.dat.sg.hendi"hand",butthesee 's
PN *a.
continue
a split
Harõarson
(1989: 86-87)claimsthatkvinnaandkonaultimately
represent
givingPG nom.sg.*kwenõnand *kunõn.These later
paradigmfrom'E*gwen-h2,
in ON, butthishappenedat a relatively
late stage,as he sees
combinedparadigms
in tworunicinscriptions
fromc. 1000(p. 92-93).
remnants
of theparadigm*kwenõn
he makesuse ofonlyone
Thisis also theexplanation
ofNoreen(1970: 168),although
attested
outside
oftherunicinscriptions
(§162.1). Butthezero-grade*kun-is nowhere
Thenhe
thatthisis an inner-Nordic
theNordicarea,whichmight
suggest
development.
> koma"come"),on
toko-(cf.*kwemanhastorejecttheideathat*kwe-hasdeveloped
an ¿z-umlauted
thebasis thatkonarepresents
form,and that"es diese Lautregelnie
gegebenhat"(p. 8723).ButtheOld Swedishobliqueformkununeednotbe theoriginal
butmight
have-unufrom-onu(Bjorvand/Lindeman
2000:474,cf.
non-umlauted
form,
to myknowledge,
a-umlaut
with
evenON kana< kona(Noreen1970:§121)). Further,
an intervening
nasalis moreabsentthanpresent,
cf.thefollowing
exampleswherewe
wouldexpectumlaut:bruna,duna,gruña,muna(õ-verbs),
una (¿-verb),hunang,
run,
uñad(n. a-stems),
andespecially
bruni,
duni,funi,runi,-spuni,uni(m.«-stems),
duna,
a f. «-stem.Andtherunicforms
kuinuandkuino(see Harõarson
footnotes
37 and40)
As
kvinnu
than*kvenu.
(arisingfromparadigm
splitofkona- kvinna)rather
represent
All inall,I see littlereasontocreate
we know,therunecarvers
wrotegeminates.
rarely
a PG zero-grade
rootjuston thebasis of konainsteadof assuming
thatthePG form
whichpopsupinall theGermanic
hasdeveloped
tokona.
*kwenõn,
languages,
The ON afi "grandfather;
man"is in themeaning"grandfather"
surelyfroman
olderavi andthusnotrelatedtoaba. Whether
themeaning
"man"is thecontinuation
of
*aban-mustremainopen.The OHG nameAbo mightultimately
be from*aban-too
258
Sverre
Johnsen
n-stem*aban- or
above, it has to be a PG amphi-or hysterokinetic
*aben-. It has long been connectedto the PIE root *h3ep-.34This
approachhas, on the otherhand,been a pure rootetymologywithout
any explanationon how the Germanicwordwas actuallyformed.PIE
domains.One
*h3ep-seemsto occurin two semanticand morphological
is centeredon a verbalroot *h3ep-"do, make",35whereastheotherhas
its ultimatebase in an aerostaticheteroclitic^h^p-^h^p-n- "wealth,
riches".36
Withthisbackgroundin mind,aba is best takenas a pre-Germanic
base *h3óp-f/*h3ép-ninternalderivativefromtheheteroclitic
"wealth,
riches,possession"of thesame sortwe see in *h3reg-f/n"power"(Old
'
Avestan razara) - ► *h3rëg-on-/*h3rëg-n"having power" - ►king"
This wouldgive an amphikinetic
(Vedic rõjãn-/rajn-).
*h3ép-on-/*h3ep'
'
n- "havingwealth,riches,possession"> PG *áfan-/*abn-"paterfamiline goes from
lias".37In a patriarchal
societywherethemainhereditary
forwardassumptionthata noundenotingthe
fatherto son,it is a straight
possessorof therichesis theman of thehousehold,thehusband.Other
Germanicderivativesfromthe heteroclitic*h3óp-x/
*h3ép-n-are PG
<
and
*abramaterial"
*h3ep-n-iio-3S
"strong"<
*af/bnija-"stuff,
*h3op-r-o-.39A0
(Förstemann1900: 10-11, Kaufmann1968: 19). Note thattheybothappear as normal
masculinen-stems.
34See
e.g. Uhlenbeck1900: 1 and recentlyCasaretto2004: 216 withliterature.
35 Attested
only in Italic, cf LIV 298-299. From this, nouns such as the s-stem
*h3epo/es-in Vedic ãpas-, Latinopus "work,act" are thenderived.The Germanicverb
*õbijan- "perform,practice" is usually placed here withoutany explanationof the
to a non-attested
Germanic
formation.This could be an iterative/causative-formation
primaryverb *afan-(prêt. *õf-)of the 6thclass, wherea directcontinuationof a PIE
of theverbal stem). A denoverb *h3ep-would end up (aftertheregularthematization
continuation
of a rootnoun *h3ép-is less likely.
froma non-attested
minativeformation
Fromthisis deriveda multitudeof formsin Anatolian,e.g. Hittitehappar- "trade;
payment",happiriya- "town" < *"market",happina- "rich", happiriya- "sell", cf.
Latin opulentus"rich" (Szemerényi1954: 277-281)
Rieken 1999: 315-318, and further
and Vedic ápnas- "property".
For thisinternalderivation,cf. also ^¡ouHcf-r/n- "udder" (Greek ovSap, Vedic
'
udhar withgeneralizedü froma secondaryweak stem *h]uHdh-n-?) - ►*tri-h1éuHdhon-/*-h,uHdh-n'"having threeudders"(Vedic tri-üdhán-)(Widmer2004: 67-69).
38Rieken's
(1999: 318) claim thatthemeaning"wealth,riches"of thehétéroclitehad
"material"
notbeen specialized alreadyin PIE because of theGermanicforms*af/bnijaand *af/bnijan"perform,
prepare"is too bold. The Germanicverbcan easilybe derived
in gettingfrom*h3ép-n-"riches,
fromthenoun,and thereis no greatsemanticdifficulty
>
"that
of
to
"stuff,material".
possession"
*h3epni¡oproperty,
property"
ON afr-(h)endr"strong",Gothic abrs "severe, heavy < strong (the Gothic
use), by a possessive
adjective and the adverb abraba have a purely intensifying
derivation*h3óp-r"possession, wealth" - ► *h3opr-ó-"having possession/resources/
derivation
ofGothicaba andits«-stemanomalies
Thehistorical
259
in tworespects.
It has been shownherethatGothicaba is noteworthy
First,aba retainstheuse of thezero-gradeof the«-stemsuffix,a feature
thathas been leveledout in mostotherGermanicn-stems.Accordingly,
aba maybe placed amongtheotherlimitedremnantsof thezero-grade
of this suffixin Germaniclisted above. Second, aba appears to have
arisenas an internalderivativeof the PIE hétéroclite*H3óp-x/*h3ép-n"riches,possession".This means thatwe can add a Germanicwordto
once again provingthe
the list of internalderivativesof hétéroclites,
archaic nature of the Germanic branch and its usefulnessfor our
knowledgeabouttheIE proto-language.
verb*afan-"do,make"is
froma PG primary
A directra-formation
power"> "strong".
froma 6thclass verbis
as theonlysureexampleof sucha formation
less probable,
"be awake,awaken"(morecommonfrom1stclass
*wakra-"awake"to *wak(n)anverbs).
more
butrequires
ofaba cannotbe excluded,
A pureinner-Germanic
development
verb*afan-(which
A 6thclassprimary
itssemantic
development.
regarding
assumptions
couldmakean nis neededforthedeverbative
practice"
Abijan-)"do,make,perform,
Thereare
noun *afan-"maker,performer".
stemnomenagentisor individualizing
from6thclass verbs,andtheyall showtheaabundant
examplesof«-stemderivations
"sea-traveller"
"travel"),Gothicufar{Ufarangradeof theroot,e.g. OE mere-fara
swara "perjurer"
gliding
(*swar(j)an-"swear"),OE snaca "snake"< "thesneaking,
thesehadnoablautintheirultimate
one"(*snakan-"sneak,glide").Mostlikely,
origin,
indiviTheseanapophonic
to o-stemadjectives.
as theyseemto be «-stemformations
declineas amphi-or hysterocouldclearly,however,
secondarily
dualizing¿m-stems
thealreadytreated
andfurther
2001: 527 withreferences,
kinetic
stems(see Schaffner
*beran-(OHG bero)vs. *bern-(ON Bjarni,bjçrn)"bear"< "thebrownone"<- preOS/OHGmanCf.alsoOE man-slaga,
*bhëroGermanic
slago"man-slayer"
"brown").
of thevoicedVernervariantvs. theverb*slahan-"slay".The
forthegeneralization
musteitherbe "performer;
semantic
(cf.Lehmann1986:Al
worshipper"
development
culor"worker,
> "paterfamilias",
chiefwhohadtocarryoutritualactivities")
"family
semantic
Theintermediate
> "paterfamilias".
> "farmer"
tivator"
stagesareall attested
-♦
in thedeverbative
practice;worship;cultivate"
*õbijan-'OHG uoben"perform,
farmer"
cultivator,
(see Köbler1993: 1183et passimfor
(-)uobo,uobãri"worshipper;
cf.ON bóndi"farmer;
> "paterfamilias",
For"farmer"
theattestations).
paterfamilias,
husband".
outwhether
wouldnotleaveus anyhintsas tofinding
derivation
Aninner-Germanic
Jasanoff
2002: 3 notesthataba "preserves
thestemwas amphi-or hysterokinetic.
would
inflection
features".
Since an amphikinetic
distinctive
regularly
hysterokinetic
reasonedin theetymology
havegivenabnë andabnamas well,theclaimis probably
1980: 381, whereaba is seen as a possessive*we«-formation
proposedin Jasanoff
andtheydo
toIndo-Iranian,
moreorlessrestricted
wen-stems
are,however,
*h3op-wên.
2001: 517-518claimsan original
notseem to existin Germanicat all. Schaffner
anyreasoning.
amphikinetic
type,butwithout
260
SverreJohnsen
References
Alfred(1993): Das Pluralparadigma
von urg. *uhsen-,in AngloBammesberger,
Saxonica.BeiträgezurVor-undFrühgeschichte
derenglischen
SpracheundzuraltLiteratur.
HerausFestschrift
englischen
fürHans Schabramzum65. Geburtstag.
Wetzel.p. 415-423.WilhelmFink
gegebenvonKlaus R. GrindaundClaus-Dieter
Verlag.München.
Hreinn(1968): On theinflection
of the«-stemsin Indo-European,
in
Benediktsson,
Norsktidsskrift
22. d. 7-31.
forsprogvidenskap
Hreinn(1986): Olcel. oxe, uxe: morphology
and phonology,
in NorthBenediktsson,
Western
Furopeanlanguageevolution.
Vol.7. p. 29-97.
Fredrik
Otto(2000): Varearveord.Etymologisk
ordbok.
Harald/Lindeman,
Bjorvand,
Novus forlag.
Oslo.
1981 = Braune,Wilhelm(1981): GotischeGrammatik
mitLeseBraune/Ebbinghaus
stücken
undWörterverzeichnis.
vonErnstA. Ebbinghaus.
19.Auflageneubearbeitet
MaxNiemeyer
Verlag.Tübingen.
Braune/Heidermanns
2004 = Braune,Wilhelm(2004): GotischeGrammatik
mitLesestücken
undWörterverzeichnis.
20. Auflageneubearbeitet
vonFrankHeidermanns.
MaxNiemeyer
Verlag.Tübingen.
withcorrections.
1969.
Campbell,Ahstair(1959): Old Englishgrammar.
Reprinted
Oxford
attheClaredon
press.
dergotischen
Casaretto,
Antje(2004): NominaleWortbildung
Sprache.Die Derivation
derSubstantive.
Winter.
Universitätsverlag
Heidelberg.
ErnstA. (2003): Gotica.KleineSchriften
Herauszurgotischen
Ebbinghaus,
Philologie.
Meid. Innsbrucker
gegebenvonPiergiuseppe
ScardigliundWolfgang
Beiträgezur
Sprachwissenschaft.
Ernst(1900): Altdeutsches
namenbuch.
Ersterband. Personennamen.
Förstemann,
s Verlag.Bonn.
Zweite,völligumgearbeitete
aufläge.P. Hanstein'
in Proto-IndoFriedman,
Jay(1999): A lexicalanalysisof simple*-r/n-heteroclitics
studies.Volume1. Editedby VyacheslavV.
European,in UCLA Indo-European
IvanovandBrentVine.p. 31-69.Los Angeles.
des Germanischen
JónAxel (1989): Die ow-Feminina
undderGen.Plur.
Harõarson,
inActalinguistica
Anord.kvinna/kvenna,
Volume21, number
2. p. 79Hafniensia.
9T
derschwachenVerbaauf-yiaimAltisJónAxel(2001): Das Präteritum
Harõarson,
ländischen
undverwandte
Problemeder altnordischen
undgermanischen
SprachInnsbrucker
zurSprachwissenschaft.
wissenschaft.
Beiträge
JónAxel(2005): Der geschlechtige
Nom.Sg. undderneutrale
Nom.-Akk.
Harõarson,
Pl. der«-Stämme
imUrindogermanischen
undGermanischen,
in Sprachkontakt
und
Akten
derXI.Fachtagung
derIndogermanischen
17.-23Sprachwandel.
Gesellschaft,
vonGerhard
MeiserundOlav
2000,Halle an derSaale. Herausgegeben
September
Hackstein,
p. 215-236.Dr.LudwigReichert
Verlag.Wiesbaden.
van Helten,Willem Lodewijk(1905): Grammatisches
LXIV. Zur entwickelung
+ «-, in Beiträgezur gegermanischer
langerconsonanzaus kurzemconsonanten
schichte
derdeutschen
30. Band.p. 213-232.
sprächeundliteratur.
of«-stemsinGermanic,
mAmerican
Jasanoff,
Jay.H. (1980): Thenominative
singular
Indianand Indoeuropean
studies.Papersin honorofMadisonS. Beeler.Editedby
Silver,p. 375-382.MoutonPublishers.
The
Klar,Margaret
Kathryn
Langdon,
Shirley
York.
Hague/Paris/New
in Verbaetlitterœ:
Jasanoff,
«-stems,
ExploJayH. (2002): Thenom.sg. ofGermanic
rationsin Germanic
languagesand Germanliterature.
EssaysinhonorofAlbertL.
The historicalderivationof Gothicaba and its «-stemanomalies
261
Lloyd. Edited by Alfred R. Wedel and Hans-Jörg Busch, p. 31-46. Linguatext.
Newark,Delaware.
Johnsen,S verre(2004): Review of RobertNedoma Kleine Grammatikdes Altisländischen (2001) in North-Western
European language evolution.Vol. 45. p. 119-123.
Kaufmann,Henning(1968): AltdeutschePersonennamen.Ergänzungsband.Wilhelm
FinkVerlag.München.
Köbler,Gerhard(1993): Wörterbuchdes althochdeutschenSprachschatzes.Ferdinand
Schöningh.Paderborn.
Krane/Meid1969 = Krähe,Hans (1969): GermanischeSprachwissenschaft.
I. Einleitung
und Lautlehre. II Formenlehre.III Wortbildungslehre.
7. Auflage bearbeitetvon
WolfgangMeid. Walterde Gruyter.Berlin/NewYork.
Lehmann,Winfred(1986): A Gothicetymologicaldictionary.Based on thethirdedition
of VergleichendeWörterbuch
der GotischenSprache by SigmundFeist. Withbibliographypreparedunderthedirectionof Helen-JoJ.Hewitt.E. J.Brill. Leiden.
LIV = Lexikon der indogermanischenVerben.Die Wurzelnund ihre Primärstammund verbesserteAuflagebearbeitetvon MartinKümmel
bildungen.Zweite,erweiterte
undHelmutRix. Dr. Ludwig ReichertVerlag. Wiesbaden.2001.
durch Laryngal, in
Lühr, Rosemarie (1976): Germanische Resonantengemination
MünchenerStudienzur Sprachwissenschaft.
Heft35. p. 73-92.
Lühr,Rosemarie(1988): Expressivitätund Lautgesetzim Germanischen.Carl Winter
Universitätsverlag.
Heidelberg.
Meid, Wolfgang(1999): wair und andereBezeichnungenfür"Mann" im Gotischen,in
P. Lehmannon the
Language change and typologicalvariation:In honorof Winfred
occasion ofhis 83rd birthdayI. Editedby Edgar C. Polomé and Carol F. Justus,p. 39144. Washington.
Michael (2002): IndogermanischeSprachwissenschaft.
8., überarbeitete
Meier-Brügger,
und ergänzteAuflageder früheren
Darstellungvon Hans Krähe. UnterMitarbeitvon
MatthiasFritzundManfredMayrhofer.
Walterde Gruyter.Berlin/NewYork.
Nedoma, Robert (2005): Urnordisch-a im NominativSingularis der maskulinennStämme,in Papers on Scandinavianand Germaniclanguage and culture.Published
in honour of Michael Barnes on his sixty-fifth
birthday,28 June 2005 - NorthWesternEuropean language evolution.Vol. 46/47.p. 155-191.
Neri, Sergio (2006): Riflessioni sull'apofonia radicale di proto-germanico*namõn
'nome', in HistorischeSprachforschung118. p. 201-250.
Nielsen, Hans hrede (2000): The early Runic language of Scandinavia. Studies in
Germanicdialectgeography.Universitätsverlag
C. Winter.Heidelberg.
Noreen,Adolf (1970): AltnordischeGrammatikI. Altisländischeund altnorwegische
Grammatik(Laut- und Flexionslehre)unterBerücksichtigung
des Urnordischen.The
of Alabama press.
University
Peters,Martin(1993): Ein weitererFall fürdas Rixsche Gesetz, in Indogermanicaet
Italica. Festschrift
für HelmutRix zum 65. Geburtstag.Herausgegebenvon Gerhard
Meiser,p. 373-405. Innsbrucker
Beiträgezur Sprachwissenschaft.
Rieken, Elisabeth (1999): Untersuchungenzur nominalen Stammbildung des
Hethitischen.HarrassowitzVerlag.Wiesbaden.
Scharrner,Stetan (2001): Das Vernersche Gesetz und der innerparadigmatische
grammatischeWechseldes Urgermanischen
imNominalbereich.Innsbrucker
Beiträgezur
Sprachwissenschaft.
Schindler,Jochem(1975): L'apophonie des thèmesindo-européensen -r/n,in Bulletin
de la société de linguistiquede Paris. Tome 70. p. 1-10.
Seebold, Elmar (1970): Vergleichendesund etymologischesWörterbuchder germanischenstarkenVerben.Mouton.The Haeue/Paris.
Sen, Subhadra Kumar (2002): Heteroclisis in Gothic, in North-WesternEuropean
language evolution.Vol. 40. p. 105-107.
262
SverreJohnsen
to biblicalGothic/-//.
of Iceland
Snaedal,Magnus(1998): A concordance
University
press.Reykjavik.
Martin
vowelsofProto-Norse.
Odenseuniversity
(1994): Theunaccented
press
Syrett,
in-ulentus,
inGioita33. p. 266-282.
Oswald(1954):TheLatinadjectives
Szemerényi,
en -ter-.
Xavier(2003): La déclinaison
des nomsde parenteindo-européens
Tremblay,
Innsbrucker
zurSprachwissenschaft.
Beiträge
Wörterbuch
dergotiC. (1900): Kurzgefasstes
Christianus
Uhlenbeck,
etymologisches
Johannes
Müller.Amsterdam.
schenSprache.Zweiteverbesserte
Auflage.
Wortfür'Sonne' unddie angebliche
Rudolf(1997): Das indogermanische
Wächter,
Grunne
der//w-Heteroklitika.
inHistorische
Snrachforschune.
110.Band.n.4-20.
Feldes.Interne
Derivationskette
Paul(2004):Das Korndesweiten
Derivation,
Widmer,
im UrindogeundFlexionsklassenhierarchie:
Wortbildung
Aspekteder nominalen
zurSprachwissenschaft.
Innsbrucker
rmanischen.
Beiträge
of Linguistics
Department
BoylstonHall, 3rdfloor
HarvardUniversity
Cambridge,MA 02138
U.S.A.
edu
e-mail:Johnsen
@fas.harvard,
Sverre Johnsen