Melanie Malzahn

Surprise at length of Tocharian nouns

Abstract: The Tocharian languages exhibit many examples of the lengthened
grade in roots of nominal stems. We find forms that, on the one hand, descend
from PIE paradigms in which lengthened grades are expected given our current
understanding of ablaut patterns, e. g. TA śanweṃ ‘jaws’, which descends ei-
ther from an acrostatic u-stem or from a PIE denominative o-stem that denoted
appurtenance and was formed by vṛddhisation. On the other hand, there are
lengthened grades in Tocharian nouns that do come as a surprise as is the case
with TB ñem/TA ñom ‘name’, if this goes back to a protoform PIE *h₁nḗh₃-m.
These unexpected lengthened-grade forms will be discussed especially in the
context of the so-called Narten system.

Keywords: Tocharian, nominal word formation, vocalism, lengthened grade,

Narten system

Melanie Malzahn: University of Vienna; melanie.malzahn@univie.ac.at

When it comes to reconstructing details of PIE nominal morphology, Tocharian

does not take pride of place. Nevertheless, there are quite a few Tocharian nouns
showing what seems to be a pre-Proto-Tocharian (pre-PT) lengthened grade in
the root or in a nominal suffix.1 In this paper, I tackle what seem to be inherited
lengthened grades of roots reflected in Tocharian nouns.2

1 Thematic nouns and what may be derivatives

from thematic nouns
Lengthened grades found in root syllables of both thematic nouns and athematic
nouns that may have been derived from thematic nouns (such as *-i-, *-n-, and

1 There are plenty of such pre-PT lengthened grades in the Tocharian verbal system; see Malzahn
2010 passim.
2 As for suffixal ablaut, e. g., TB maśce ‘fist’ evidently forms an equation with Proto-Indo-Iranian
*musti- ‘fist’, but seems to attest to a quite unexpected PIE nom.sg. ending *-tē(y) > pre-PT *-tēs
instead of the regular *-ti-s met in Indo-Iranian.

10.1515/if-2014-0014
Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library
Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
260 Melanie Malzahn

*-eh₂- stems) come as no surprise, as PIE had denominative o-stems which were
formed by vṛddhisation of the root vowel of the base noun (i. e., addition of an e-
or o-vowel) and denoted appurtenance. Derivatives of such a morphological struc-
ture were probably used in order to substantivize adjectives, as well (as per Weiss
2007: 261). Both TB yente/TA want ‘wind’ < *h₂wēh₁-t-o- (sic, as per Schindler
1994: 399; Widmer 1997: 28; evidently analyzed as a substantivized variant of a
participle with Narten root ablaut *h₂weh₁-t- by Schindler; somewhat differently
Widmer)3 and TB yerpe (> TA yerpe) ‘orb’ < *h2/3 ērbʰ-o- (see Adams 2013: 548; ana-
lyzed as the result of a “substantivization by vṛddhi” of a verbal adjective *h₃erbʰ-
ó- ‘turning’ by Weiss 2007: 260f.) seem to exhibit precisely this process. As far as
leges artis are concerned, TB śer(u)we/TA śaru ‘hunter’ may be interpreted as the
vṛddhi derivative of a solid-looking basic noun as well, i. e., for an adjective of
appurtenance based on PIE *ḱerwo- ‘stag’, as suggested by Jasanoff apud Nuss-
baum 1986: 8 (other etymological analyses have been proposed, however).4 In a
similar vein, it is tempting to construe TB ṣpel ‘mud’ (masc.), which, on the claim
of Adams (2013: 731), belongs with Gk. πηλός ‘mud, clay, dung’ and is derived
from *spēh₂l-,5 as a masculine endocentric substantivization in *-i-6 of a vṛddhi
adjective *(s)pēh₂lo- ‘muddy’ based on the noun *(s)peh₂lo- ‘mud’, a direct reflex
of which we would possibly have in the Greek word for ‛mud’.
The following Tocharian nouns that also seem to show a lengthened grade in
the root may have started out as (derivatives from) thematic vṛddhi formations as
well, but here such an analysis is less attractive to account for the morphological
structure and/or semantics:
– TB ariwe* ‘ram, male goat’ (Adams 2013: 24: < *h₁ōreywo- ~ Skt. āreya- ‘ram’),
– TB āntse, TA es ‘shoulder’ < PT *ānsæ usually derived from a preform *ōms-o-
(Adams 2013: 46; but see also Hackstein 2002: 190f. on the root ablaut),

3 Actually a protoform *h₂weh₁-to- lacking vṛddhi would in my view have resulted in Late pre-PT
*wento-; see Malzahn 2011: 97, fn. 32.
4 See Adams 2013: 695; alternatively, Pinault (2006: 179–181; cf. 2008: 588f.) takes the Tocharian
word to be a borrowing from a non-Indo-European Central Asiatic language.
5 *-h₂- should be set up because of the Doric evidence pointing to Proto-Greek *-ā-; but note
that for the Greek word, Meillet suggested (see Meillet 1905 and Ernout & Meillet 1985: 645) a
completely different account. It is also possible to analyze TB ṣpel as acrostatic *l-stem (possibly
once basic to the Greek noun, if this had started out as an adjective itself). As for the root involved,
one might entertain the possibility that it is the *√speh₂ said to underlie Ved. sphāyate ‘become
fat’ and Hittite išpai-i /išpi- ‘to get full, to be filled, to be satiated’ by Nussbaum apud Jasanoff
1994: 160, fn. 19 and Jasanoff 2003: 108f. (in this case, the original semantics of Gk. πηλός may
have been “(earth) satiated with water”); alternatively, these verbs could be derived from a root
*√sph eh₁ “wunschgemäß geraten, gelingen” (LIV²: 584).
6 See Nussbaum apud Vine 2006: 151.

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
 Surprise at length of Tocharian nouns 261

– TB yepe ‘knife’ < PT *w’æpæ, cf. Goth. wēpn, etc. ‘weapon’ (according to
Adams 2013: 547 from a pre-PT *n-stem “*wēb-en-”),
– TB yerkwanto ‘wheel’, according to Hilmarsson 1986: 275 a vṛddhi formation
*h₂wērg-wt-ōn- with individualizing -ōn-,7
– TB yetse ‘skin’: according to Adams 2013: 549 just like German Aas ‘carrion’
from *h₁ēd-so- *‘that which one eats’, with a semantic development first to
*‘flesh’ and then to ‘skin’,
– TA yṣaṃ ‘trench, moat’: from *sēd-n-o- > PT *ṣænæ according to Pinault 2008:
208,
– TB sāle ‘ground, basis’; said to derive from a PIE *sōlo- by Adams 2013: 748.

Here may finally also belong TB yerter ‘wheelrim, felloe’, although this noun
looks at first sight rather like a stem with a suffix *-tor- (such as *h₂wērg-tor-, as
set up by Adams 2013: 548) or *-or- (such as *wērt-or(-), as set up by Widmer 1997:
47f.). According to Pinault (2011: 165) it is in fact a denominative in *-wer-/wen-
derived from a lengthened-grade formation *h₂ēr-to- ‘joint’.

2 Athematic nouns
As for lengthened grades of roots in athematic nouns that are not obvious deriva-
tives from thematic vṛddhi formations, some of them are completely unremark-
able (at least for followers of the Schindler School), e. g., the TA dual form śan-
weṃ ‘jaws’, which evidently attests a lengthened grade *ǵēn-, and can be derived
from the paradigm of an acrostatic u-stem that had an *ē-grade rather than an
*o-grade of the root in the strong case forms (as per Nikolaev 2010a: 1–18, esp.
4f. with refs.8 ; for this type of u-stems in general, see again Nikolaev 2010a: 221,
327f. and also Nikolaev 2010b: 195f.). Similarly, the *ē-grade i-stem TB yel, TA wal
< *wēl-i- ‘worm’ is reminiscent of the Greek abstract i-stem δῆρις ‘battle, contest’,
which also shows an *ē-grade.
Elsewhere, however, lengthened-grade nominal roots in Tocharian do come
as a surprise, in particular in the case of one of the most famous Tocharian nouns,

7 But see also Malzahn 2010: 17, fn. 21 on the possibility of secondary palatalization. For other
ways to cope with the TA equivalent wärkänt having -ä- instead of expected -a-; see Adams 2013:
547f.
8 Here is also made mention of an alternative account by Klingenschmitt, who tried to explain
the form as the continuant of a thematic vṛddhi formation based on the very u-stem. This reference
had to be omitted in the English summary on pages 300–305.

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
262 Melanie Malzahn

TB ñem/TA ñom ‘name’. This noun is now often derived from a lengthened-grade
protoform PIE *h₁nḗh₃-m (allegedly backed by evidence from Uralic languages),
above all by Neri 2006: 213, 236. However, there are also many scholars who deny
that Tocharian ñ- has to be explained by reconstructing a pre-PT root vowel *-ē-;
see above all Pinault 2008: 194. Now it is certainly true that a lengthened-grade
protoform *h₁nḗh₃-m would be unwelcome, since neuter men-stems typically in-
flect proterokinetically and not acrostatically. However, the same can be said of
neuter -wer-/-wen- stems, whereas Hittite mēhur ‘time’ and šēhur ‘urine’, as ana-
lyzed by Eichner (1973), are acrostatically inflected nouns as well. Eichner’s anal-
ysis is bolstered by genitive forms in -unas, i. e., we do not find in these two nouns
a genitive in -waš or -wenaš from typically proterokinetic *-wen-(o)s. These two fa-
mous etymological analyses have, however, recently been called into question by
Kloekhorst (2008: 568) and Kümmel (2011).9 Finally, at least Anatolian seems to
attest to the existence of some acrostatically inflected neuter s-stems (see above
all Rieken 1999: 187–190 and most recently Melchert 2010), which flies into the
face of Schindler’s well-known claim that the neuter s-stems had also inflected
proterokinetically only.

3 Narten forms?
Whereas there are no principled reasons against assuming acrostatically inflected
-men-, -wer-/-wen-, and -s-stems that existed beside proterokinetically inflected
stems built with the very same suffixes, the TB form yesti ‘piece of cloth’ < *wḗstoy
(Malzahn 2004) is truly bizarre, since it combines ē-acrostatic root ablaut with a
suffix ablaut typical of holokinetic nouns.
In cases like these, I think one should turn to Schindler’s suggestion (Schindler
1994: 398f.) that such irregular lengthened grades or full grades of roots found
in nouns are conditioned by the existence of verbal Narten forms, i. e. verb forms
that differ from that of the normal type in that they have a lengthened grade or
a full grade where the normal type offers a full grade or a zero grade, respec-
tively.10 To be sure, Schindler’s original claim11 was much too strong and should

9 Note that according to Melchert 1983: 9, fn. 23, Hittite pankur, pankunaš also belongs here
(differently on pankur, Puhvel 2012: 104–109).
10 See also Jasanoff 2003: 109.
11 “Verbalen Nartenformationen entsprechen systematisch Nominalbildungen mit analogen
Ablautverhältnissen. Das läßt auf zwei ursprüngliche Wurzeltypen schließen, Standard- und
Nartenwurzeln.”

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
 Surprise at length of Tocharian nouns 263

nowadays be abandoned, as Kümmel (1998) has shown that from one and the
same root both Narten and non-Narten verbal paradigms could be built in Indo-
European;12 by the same token, if one is determined to preserve the idea of verbal
Narten formations (differently, e. g., de Vaan 2004), it is indeed reasonable to
assume that as a consequence of the principle of analogy, lengthened grades and
full grades found in verbal (so-called) Narten paradigms could be transferred into
respective nominal forms at least sporadically, i. e., precisely non-systematically.
As far as the principle of introducing the root ablaut of certain verbal forms
into cognate nominal forms via analogy goes, it may suffice to mention some ex-
amples from Ancient Greek, e. g., Forssman’s claim that Greek βίος ‘life’ is due
to the analogical reshaping of a regular o-grade abstract *boos that came under
the influence of aoristic βιῶναι ‘live, survive’ (Forssman 1977: 81, fn. 8). Similarly,
the quite regular replacement of the archaic Greek type πῶμα ‘drink’ by the more
recent type of πόμα that was recently discussed by Gunkel (2011) was probably
due to analogical influence from the forms of the 1.sg. perfect middle, as first sug-
gested by Solmsen (1901: 241).13 I myself exploited such a strategy before, above
all in my paper on TB ñyās ‘desire’, TB ñāsso*, obl. ñāssa ‘share’ (Malzahn 2004),
where I tried to connect the obvious pre-PT root vowel *ō of these two nouns with
evidence for respective (non-denominative) verbal forms with *ō (Malzahn 2004:
237), and furthermore with the unexpected pre-PT *e-grade of the verbal stem in
-sk- TB ñäsk- ‘to seek, desire, demand’.
As for TB yesti ‘piece of cloth’ from pre-PT *wḗstoy, I have already pointed
out (Malzahn 2010: 897; Malzahn 2012: 236, fn. 11) that there are good reasons to
derive the pre-TA present stem *w(’)æs’ä- ‘don (tr.)’, witnessed by the forms TA
waṣlaṃ and TA wassi, from a pre-PT (secondarily thematicized) athematic active
present paradigm 3.sg. *wḗs-ti, 3.pl. *wés-ti;14 of the attested forms, at least wassi
militates against deriving the TA present from the PIE “causative” *woséye/o- that
was no doubt the ancestor of Hittite wašše/a- ‘clothe’ (see, e. g., Melchert 1994: 130
with refs.).
Note that precisely on account of the Tocharian evidence I also set up (again
in Malzahn 2010: 897) a non-Narten root aorist *us-to for this very root, thereby

12 Which, incidentally, once must have been Schindler’s view as well. As early as 1975, he
(implicitly) assumed that from a root *√h₁ed ‘bite’ both a Narten present *h₁ēd-ti/*h₁ed-ti and a
non-Narten aorist, which is continued only by its PIE participle formation *h₁dont- ‘tooth’, had
been formed in PIE; see Schindler 1975: 62.
13 It is also rather obvious that the lengthened grade met in Gk. γῆρας ‘old age’ was taken over
secondarily from verbal forms (cf. Pinault in his talk at the Leiden Arbeitstagung).
14 See also Pinault in this volume.

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
264 Melanie Malzahn

clearly denying that there were special “Narten roots” from which no zero-grade
forms were (at least originally) built at all.
Finally, I would like to argue that a weak version of Schindler’s explanatory
principle can indeed help to explain TB śerkw ‘cord, string’/TA nom.pl. śorkmi
‘strings’15 , which Hilmarsson (1984a: 25; 1986: 134) plausibly suggested to belong
with the Tocharian verbal root kärk- ‘to bind, tie’16 and to derive from a pre-PT
*kērg-w.17 If one accepts such an analysis, it may be best to derive such a pre-
PT noun from a *-wer-/wen- stem by assuming that expected *kērg-w had been
turned into *kērg-w by a sort of morphology-induced (or at least morphology-
backed) phonological dissimilation of *-r...r 18 into *-r...n19 (in pre-PT, there did
exist other neuter stems with a nom.-acc. sg. in *-, at least such ending in *-m,
see, e. g., Hilmarsson 1984a: 25; 1986: 134f.). Alternatively, one may derive TB
śerkw/TA nom.pl. śorkmi as well as TB taṅkw/TA tuṅk ‘love’, TB ṣaṅkw/TA ṣuṅk
‘throat’, TB sakw/TA suk ‘luck’ from neuter stems with a nom.acc.sg. in *-m,
which will be done best by assuming that pre-PT *-m- could develop into PT *-w-
also if positioned immediately after a (labio)velar and in front of a vowel.20 This

15 Twice-attested TA śorki may belong here as well; see Malzahn forthcoming.

16 TB present gerundive kärkaṣṣäle, abstract karkäṣṣälyñe, PPt kärkau, PPt kekkärku (MQ); TA
subj. 1.sg. kärkñam, 3.sg. kärkñäṣ, opt. 3.sg. kärñiṣ, s-pret. 3.pl. + pronoun śarkr-äm, PPt kakärku;
cf. Carling 2009: 132 and Malzahn 2010: 572–574.
17 Some time later, Hilmarsson (1996: 87f.) set up the respective verbal root as “*kergw h-”, with
the odd claim that the “labiovelar is shown by the rounding in A śorkmi ‘strings’ [...], while the
preterite A śarkr-äṃ has preserved non-umlauted -a- due to morphological analogy” (see also
Hilmarsson 1996: 217 on “B śerkw, A śorkäṃ*”: “The vowel A -o- shows that the form had a
labiovelar”), as if in his later view the following -m- would not have been able to account for the
-o- anymore; as for the reconstruction of the root-final labiovelar as media aspirata, his motivation
here may have been the Baltic cognate, which does not show lengthening of the root vowel, as he
may have expected from a root ending in a non-aspirated media on account of Winter’s Law. Note,
however, that a root-final media aspirata is extremely unlikely in view of the root-initial tenuis.
18 For similar dissimilatory processes in Greek, see, e. g., Blanc 1999: 320f.
19 Differently, Hilmarsson (1984a: 25; 1986: 134) assumed that *-w in the nom. had spread from
a gen.sg. *kerg-w-s by analogical levelling within the paradigm of an inherited acrostatically
inflected neuter *-wer-/-wen- stem. One could also entertain the idea that the pre-PT stem in *-w
had started out as the archaic neuter of an inherited possessive adjective in *-we/on- which was
internally derived from an acrostatically inflected *-wer-/-wen- stem; but I think it is quite unlikely
that what we have here is the reflex of an inherited acrostatic formation. See immediately below.
20 As for original neuter -men- stems showing a sound change pre-PT *-m- > PT *-w- between
two vowels, see Malzahn 2005: 396–399.

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
 Surprise at length of Tocharian nouns 265

strategy is recommended by the presence of -m- in the respective plural forms of

most of the nouns mentioned above.21
Given that (1) neuter *-wer-/-wen- and neuter *-men- stems were as a rule pro-
terokinetically inflected nouns in PIE (as stated above sub 2.), (2) pre-PT *-w > PT
*-wär 22 and above all its variant pre-PT *-wor > PT *-wær must have been a quite
commonly used suffix (viz. to form verbal abstracts) even before the latter variant
finally turned fully productive after having become associated with the preterit
participles in PT *-wæṣ-,23 (3) a quite similar argument can be applied to pre-PT
*-m > PT *-m/wäy,24 and (4) the PT root *kärk- ‘to bind’ seems to have formed a
fully inflected verbal paradigm (with pre-PT lengthened-grade forms quite likely
and even seemingly included),25 I think it is quite unlikely that we are dealing here
with a noun inherited from the proto-language with unexpected *ē-acrostatic in-
flection (as precisely suggested by Hilmarsson in his paper on this noun). In my
view, it is instead more plausible that this noun was just an inner-Tocharian for-
mation that owed its pre-PT *ē-grade of the root to the respective pre-PT *ē-grade
preterit that seems to be evidenced by the TA active Pt III 3.pl. form śarkr-äm.26

Abbreviations
LIV² Helmut Rix (2001). Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben. Die Wurzeln und ihre
Primärstammbildungen. Unter Leitung von Helmut Rix bearbeitet von Martin J.
Kümmel, Thomas Zehnder, Reiner Lipp, Brigitte Schirmer. 2nd ed. Wiesbaden:
Reichert.

21 Especially for this reason, Hilmarsson (1984: 25f. 1986: 134f.) also tried to explain both TB
ṣaṅkw/TA ṣuṅk and TB sakw/TA suk (but not TB śerkw/TA nom.pl. śorkmi) as outcomes of a neuter
*-men- stem, but in a completely different way. The final -i of TA śorki that I derive from PT *-yæy <
*-wæy in Malzahn forthcoming may then ultimately be traced back either to pre-PT *-won (possibly
dissimilated from *-wor) or rather to pre-PT *-mon.
22 See Hilmarsson 1984b: 44f.; 1986: 208–210.
23 See van Windekens 1979: 73 and 130f.
24 See Malzahn 2005: 393–399 on evidently not inherited Tocharian verbal abstracts formed with
this very suffix.
25 See footnote 16 above.
26 Possibly the noun then had started out as a formation showing the full grade or the zero grade
of the root, and the lengthened grade crept in secondarily under the analogical influence of the
verbal stem that eventually turned into a Pt III, but this is impossible to prove. At any rate, within
this scenario the lengthened-grade allomorph would be required to have played a rather crucial
role in the verbal paradigm.

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
266 Melanie Malzahn

Bibliography
Adams, Douglas Q. (2013). A Dictionary of Tocharian B. Revised and greatly enlarged. 2 vols.
Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.
Blanc, Alain (1999). “Étymologies homériques (1. χαλίϕρων; 2. ἄκμηνος; 3. ἀβληχρός)”. In: Bulletin
de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 94.1, 317–338.
Carling, Gerd (2009). Dictionary and Thesaurus of Tocharian A. Vol. 1: a–j. Wiesbaden: Harras-
sowitz.
Eichner, Heiner (1973). “Die Etymologie von heth. mehur”. In: Münchener Studien zur Sprachwis-
senschaft 31, 53–107.
Ernout, Alfred & Antoine Meillet (1985). Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine. Histoire
des mots. Quatrième tirage augmenté d’additions et de corrections nouvelles par Jacques
André. 4th ed. Paris: Klincksieck.
Forssman, Bernhard (1977). Review of: van Strien-Gerritsen 1973. In: Kratylos 20, 77–82.
Gunkel, Dieter (2011). “The emergence of foot structure as a factor in the formation of Greek verbal
nouns in - μα(τ)-”. In: Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 65, 77–103.
Hackstein, Olav (2002). Die Sprachform der homerischen Epen. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
Hilmarsson, Jörundur (1984a). “East Tocharian śorkäm ‘peg’ or ‘string’?” In: Die Sprache 30.1,
16–28.
— (1984b). “Tocharian B krorīyai (obl. sg.), A kror ‘crescent, horn of the moon’ ∼ Hitt. karawar
‘horn’ ∼ Arm. ełǰiwr”. In: Die Sprache 31.1, 40–47.
— (1986). Studies in Tocharian Phonology, Morphology and Etymology with Special Emphasis
on the o-Vocalism. Proefschrift Rijksuniversiteit te Leiden. Reykjavík.
— (1996). Materials for a Tocharian Historical and Etymological Dictionary. Reykjavík: Málvísin-
dastofnun Háskóla Íslands.
Jasanoff, Jay H. (1994). “Aspects of the internal history of the PIE verbal system”. In: Früh-, Mittel-
und Spätindogermanisch. Akten der IX. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft
vom 5. bis 9. Oktober 1992 in Zürich. Ed. by George E. Dunkel et al. Wiesbaden: Reichert,
149–168.
— (2003). Hittite and the Indo-European Verb. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kloekhorst, Alwin (2008). Etymological Dictionary of the Hittite Inherited Lexicon. Leiden & Boston:
Brill.
Kümmel, Martin J. (1998). “Wurzelpräsens neben Wurzelaorist im Indogermanischen”. In: His-
torische Sprachforschung 111, 191–208.
— (2011). “The conditioning for secondary h in Hittite”. In: Eighth International Congress of
Hittitology, The University of Warsaw, Faculty of Oriental Studies, Warsaw, 5–9 September
2011. Abstracts.
Malzahn, Melanie (2004). “Toch. B yesti nāskoy und der Narten-Charakter der idg. Wurzel *wes
‘(Kleidung) anhaben’”. In: Die Sprache 43.2, 212–220.
— (2005). “Westtocharische Substantive auf -au und einige Fortsetzer von idg. men-Stämmen
im Tocharischen”. In: Indogermanica. Festschrift Gert Klingenschmitt. Indische, iranische
und indogermanische Studien dem verehrten Jubilar dargebracht zu seinem fünfundsechzig-
sten Geburtstag. Ed. by Günter Schweiger. Taimering: VTW, 389–407.
— (2010). The Tocharian Verbal System. Leiden & Boston: Brill.
— (2011). “Speaking on tongue – the Tocharian B nouns with an oblique singular in -a”. In:
Tocharian and Indo-European Studies 12, 83–109.

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
 Surprise at length of Tocharian nouns 267

— (2012). “Archaism and innovation in the Tocharian verbal system: The case of valency and the
case for a conspiracy theory”. In: The Indo-European Verb. Proceedings of the Conference of
the Society for Indo-European Studies, Los Angeles 13–15 September 2010. Ed. by H. Craig
Melchert. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 235–240.
— (forthcoming). “TA śorki ‘fear’ and two other TA scary words”. In: Tocharian and Indo-
European Studies 15. In press.
Meillet, Antoine (1905). “Att. πηλός, dor. παλός”. In: Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique de
Paris 13, 291–292.
Melchert, H. Craig (1983). “A ‘new’ PIE *men suffix”. In: Die Sprache 29, 1–26.
— (1994). Anatolian Historical Phonology. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.
— (2010). “The word for ‘mouth’ in Hittite and Proto-Indo-European”. In: International Journal
of Diachronic Linguistics and Linguistic Reconstruction 7, 55–63.
Neri, Sergio (2006). “Riflessioni sull’apofonia radicale di proto-germanico *namōn ‘nome’”. In:
Historische Sprachforschung 118, 201–250.
Nikolaev, Alexander S. (2010a). Issledovanija po praindoevropejskoj imennoj morfologii. Studies
in Proto-Indo-European nominal morphology. St. Peterburg: Nauka.
— (2010b). “Time to gather stones together: Greek λᾶας and its Indo-European background”.
In: Proceedings of the 21th Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference. Ed. by Stephanie W.
Jamison, H. Craig Melchert & Brent Vine. Bremen: Hempen, 189–206.
Nussbaum, Alan J. (1986). Head and Horn in Indo-European. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter.
Pinault, Georges-Jean (2006). “Further links between the Indo-Iranian substratum and the BMAC
language”. In: Themes and Tasks in Old and Middle Aryan Linguistics. Papers of the 12th
World Sanskrit Conference (Helsinki, 13–18 July 2003). Ed. by Bertil Tikkanen & Heinrich
Hettrich. Vol. 5. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 167–196.
— (2008). Chrestomathie tokharienne. Textes et grammaire. Leuven & Paris: Peeters.
— (2011). “Let us now praise famous gems”. In: Tocharian and Indo-European Studies 12, 155–
220.
Puhvel, Jaan (2012). Ultima Indoeuropaea. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachen und Literaturen der
Universität Innsbruck.
Rieken, Elisabeth (1999). Untersuchungen zur nominalen Stammbildung des Hethitischen. Wies-
baden: Harrassowitz.
Schindler, Jochem (1975). “L’apophonie des thèmes indo-européens en -r/n”. In: Bulletin de la
Société de Linguistique de Paris 70.1, 1–10.
— (1994). “Alte und neue Fragen zum indogermanischen Nomen”. In: In memoriam Holger
Pedersen. Kolloquium der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft vom 26. bis 28. März 1993 in
Kopenhagen. Ed. by Jens E. Rasmussen. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 397–400.
Solmsen, Felix (1901). Untersuchungen zur griechischen Laut- und Verslehre. Strassburg: Trübner.
De Vaan, Michiel A. C. (2004). “‘Narten’ roots from the Avestan point of view”. In: Per aspera
ad asteriscos. Studia Indogermanica in honorem Jens Elmegård Rasmussen sexagenarii
Idibus Martiis anno MMIV. Ed. by Adam Hyllested, Anders R. Jørgensen & Jenny H. Larsson.
Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachen und Literaturen, 591–599.
Van Strien-Gerritsen, Magdalena (1973). De homerische composita. Assen: Van Gorcum.
Vine, Brent (2006). “An alleged case of ‘inflectional contamination’: On the i-stem inflection of
Latin civis”. In: Incontri linguistici 29, 139–158.
Weiss, Michael L. (2007). “Latin orbis and its cognates”. In: Historische Sprachforschung 119,
250–272.
Widmer, Paul (1997). Nartennomen. Lizentiatsarbeit, Universität Bern.

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18
268 Melanie Malzahn

Van Windekens, Albert Joris (1979). Le tokharien confronté avec les autres langues indo-
européennes. Vol. 2.1: La morphologie nominale. Louvain: Centre International de Di-
alectologie Générale.

Bereitgestellt von | Vienna University Library

Angemeldet
Heruntergeladen am | 12.07.17 15:18