colarusso - phyletic links between proto-indo-european and proto-northwest caucasian

1 I

PHYLETIC LINKS BETWEEN PROTO-INDO-EUROPEAN AND PROTO-NORTHWEST CAUCASIAN

John Colarusso McMaster University

Introduction In 1964 Paul Friedrich (1964209) in a review of Aen Kuipers work on Kabardian (Kuipers 1960) first made the informed suggestion that Proto-Indo-European (henceforth PIE) might be phylogenetically related to Proto-Caucasiant Friedrichs suggesshytion was based on the emerging typological similarities between PIE and some of the Northwest Caucasian languages The Northwest Caucasian look of PIE a look which set it widely apan from any of its daughters had first emerged under the work of intemal reconst(Uction done by Benveniste (1935) and Lehmann (1952) The typological parallels between this early PIE and a Caucasic2 language were first noticed by Aen Kuipers (1960) for Kabardian and were later taken up by W S Allen (1965) when he discussed Abaza vocalism Kuipers devoted a chapter of his monograph to the parallels between PIE and Kabardian vocalism which is very similar to the vocalism of Abaza I myself (Colarusso 1981) have examined typological parallels involving consonantism panicularly matters regarding the so-called laryngeals of PIE and their possible typological correlates among consonants of the Nonhwest Caucasian languages Typological parallels betwen PIE and the South Caucasian family Proto-Kartvelian were also put forward in the 1960s (Gamkrelidze 1967 1966 Gamqrelije and Macavariani 1965 but note Kuipers 1983) suggesting that at the least PIE formed an areal grouping with the ancient Caucasic languages In 1987 after I had presented a reconstruction of Proto-Northwest Caucasian (henceforth PNWC) (Colarusso 1989a) Eric Hamp suggested to me (personal conununication) that I endeavor to determine if PIE and PNWC might be genetically related The following paper presents my first results suggesting that PIE and PNWC are genetically related at a phyletic level

Proto-Pontic I shall term the language from which PIE and PNWC may have descended Proto-Pontic or simply Pontic after the classical name for the Black Sea Pontus Euxinus which I assume was near to

1

20 21 JOHN COLARUSSO

the homeland In the past twenty years the archaeological work of Gimbutas (1985 1980 1977 1974 1973 see also Mallory 1989 ch 6) has placed the most likely PIE homeland in the Northwest Caucasus More recently Gamkrelidze and Ivanov (1985 1984) have argued that it lay just south of the Caucasus in eastern Anatolia In either case a phyletic link with a Caucasian family is plausible My own work in comparative mythology (Colarusso 1989b 1984) has suggested cultural contacts with the Caucasus at a period of Indo-European unity Whether or not Proto-Pontic is in fact Proto-Caucasian or Proto-North Caucasian in other words whether or not PNWC enjoys a special phyletic Hnk with PIE not enjoyed by other Caucasic language families rests upon further workmiddot in historical Caucasic linguistics The genetic links between PNWC and Proto-Northeast Caucasian (PNEC) now seem quite plausible (see for example Chirikba 1986 Abdokov 1983) Thus if the present study seems a worthy start then the reader should be prepared to view PIE as one of an ancient complex of cognate languages centering about the Caucasus In my opinion time will show that PIE is closest to PNWC in fact sharing certain innovations with the northern dialect area of PNWC1

Diagram (1) gives a rough idea of the links that I shall explicitly put forward

(1) Proto-Pontic

PONTIC

A PNWC

~-----P-Circ P-Ubyx P-Abxaz-Abaza

I ~ various daughters WCirc ECirc Abxaz dials Abaza

Time Depth and Types of Evidence For such remote phyletic links as Pontic questions of time depth and types of evidence must be

PHYLETIC LINKS BETWEEN PIE AND PNWC

addressed While it is in principle impossible to establish exact dates based upon linguistic facts alone I have nevertheless put forward a tentative time frame in (2) which seems to permit room enough for the type of differentiation required for both PIE and PNWC

(2) Tentative Time Depths 1 3000 - 4000 BC Comparatively reconstructed PIE 25000 - 6000 BC Internally reconstructed PIE 32000 - 4000 BC PNWC 4 7000 - 9000 BC Pontic

At such a time depth of nine to eleven thousand years standard cognate evidence will not loom as large as in more conventional reconstructive effort Accordingly I shall examine three types of evidence First typological parallels (of phonological inventories) suggest not only an areal grouping of PIE and the Caucasus but also show some strong defects in the PIE inventory even as revised by Gamkrelidze Ivanov (1973 1972 1967 ) and Hopper (1982 1977a 1977b 1973) I have made modifications to the PIE inventory which make it far more plausible typologically to provide a basis for correspondence sets Second I examine morphological cognates (compare Goddard 1975) Such morphotactic cognates are strong in the case of nouns but a bit weaker in that of verbs One of the strongest sets of data involves the homonymy of morphemes Indeed the ability of Pontic to explain long-standing homonyms or confusions in morphology within PIE is most striking and is at this stage of work the strongest argument for the cognacy of PIE and PNWC Odd relict forms within NWC are also explained by Pontic with much more than chance success Many of these morphological investigations produce transparent explanations of PIE morphology at the level of Proto-Pontic This is another very powerful argument for the cognacy of PIE and PNWC Third lexical cognates can be expected to be few at such a time depth Nevertheless a simple search found twenty basic items of good quality (64)-(83) Many more await the resolution


of a few details befQre they too can be published I tum now to these various categories of evidence

Typological Evidence The phonemes of Classical PIE are shown in (3)

(3) Classical PIE p bh (b) m w t dh d s n r k gh g Y kW gh gh ~(E) ~l(A) ~3(O) ~4(A but not in Hittite in Anlaut) vowels e - 0 (plus tonal stress)

Typological arguments based not only upon inherent plausibility but also upon problems in the development of the PIE system in certain of its branches (Colarusso 1981) have led to a suggested modification in (4) that makes PIE look more like a Caucasic language

(4) New-PIE (Gamkrelidze-Ivanov-Hopper) plus palatals pb (p) bmw tb t d s n r kay kY t y kh k g khw k g ~(E) ~l(A) ~3(O) ~4(A but not in Hittite in Anlaut) ~ -- a (plus tonal stress)

There are some unrecognized problems with (4) however that I attempted to point out in an earlier work (1981) First there are not enough spirants (apart from some of the laryngeals) Second there are not enough rounded segments for a vertical-vowel system language Such systems evolve by a rare but natural process in which the features of the syllable core are reassigned to the consonantal syllable periphery Rounding is one of the most stable of these once so


reassigned Third we now know enough about the effects and history of the laryngeals that any presentation of PIE needs at least feature specifications for them Therefore in (5) I present a typologically more accurate form of PIE which I term fortified PIE and which I shall write in phoneme slashes 1 I

(5) Fortified PIE (after Colarusso 1981)

ph b m w tft d t s n r kAY gY kY (kb g k) kh g k qh qh

-_

q q

x x

IJ IJ

y y

h

-~ a (plus tonal stress)

The Laryngeals In (5) I have given substance to the laryngeals based upon detailed considerations of PIE phonology (Colarusso 1981) I cannot repeat these here but try to summarize my arguments by an eightfold way Any phonologically realistic account of the PIE laryngeals must account for these eight facts

First in oldest PIE some true laryngeals produced instances of inherently long vowels schematically shown in (6)

(6) Earliest Laryngeal Loss Giving Inherently Long Vowels e =~I (~I) 0 =~W a1 (~) 8 =~h ah (~) perhaps also e = ~-~ 0 = a-al [aJ or [poundJ (contrast 8 lt ~h ah =

[a])

1


(parallel PNWC h gt a)

Second at this stage the other segments destined to become laryngeals would have persisted as segments without obvious effects into the period of unity The best candidates for such segments are in (7)

(7) Earliest Persistent Laryngeals Ix y xw yWIt ~ Itw ~I

Third with a shift from pharyngeal to true laryngeal in the period of early differentiation the [+Constricted Pharynx] memb~rs of (7) would have colored vowels as in (8)

(8) Vowel-Coloring Era fbIgt hI f)1 gt 14 (~2) fbwl gt hw f)wl gt IQ (~3) (parallels Abx fbI gt hI f)1 gt 14 f)wl gt Iyw)

Fourth once these segments had become true laryngeal glides they were dropped with compensatory lengthening post-vocalically even throughout Anatolian by means of the natural rule in (9) This would have been a period of early dialect formation

(9) Rule of Laryngeal Loss in Early Dialect Period [-syll +low] gt [+Iong] I V__ (phonemes in (8) were lost) (parallels eirc lahl gt [0] Abx 1(Ja)~1 gt la4 gt [0])

Fifth in Anatolian some sort of segments persisted in some postshyvocalic positions in Anatolian ( Hitt pabtmr fire mebur season sebur urine filth) Significantly similar segments gave velars allophones in Italic Lat senalus senex These would have been the old velar or uvular spirants as in (10)

(10) Old Persistent Laryngeals of Anatolian Ix y (~12) XW yW (~3)1


(parallels persist in Circassian and Ubykh)

Sixth outside Anatolian these same segments were lost with vowelshycoloring and compensatory lengthening as in (11)

(11) Loss of Persistent Laryngeals Elsewhere Ixl gt hlyl gt 14Ixl gt hwyWI gt 191 (steps 8 and 9 again) (parallels similar history in Abx-Abz eg NIgt til gt 14)

Seventh there is ample evidence that all the laryngeals caused source feature effects These are of the three types seen in (12) The scheme in Fortified PIE (henceforth simply PIE) neatly acccounts for all of these effects in the simplest way possible

(12) The Three Source Feature Effects (a) Olottalization (Voicing) _pbW_1 gt _pw_1 gt -bo- Sk

pibali he drinks Ir ibim Ok rttvw (b) Voiceless Aspiration -tlt(fI)-1 gt Ind-Iran -lhshy(c) Voiced Aspiration _tb~(W)_1 gt Ind-Iran -dh-

Eighth and last laryngeals seem to have caused apparently contradictory lowering in some cases but raising in others as in (13)

(13) Apparently Contradictory Laryngeal Effects Ok auyclrrlP Sk duhilci only [+CP] with its low strong F can do both (parallels Bzyb Abx f)1 gt IW f)wl gt lyW Iy)

This can only be understood if one realizes thatthis is a pharyngeal signature in which an acoustic assimilation produces the opposite effects of an articulatory assimilation (Colarusso 1985) Pharyngeals have a formant structure with a low and powerful first formant This gives the impression of a high front vowel At the same time they are made with tongue root retraction and often with tongue root lowering which results in approximation of the epiglonis over the adytus (opening

27

1 26 JOHN COLARUSSO

of the larynx) Such pharyngeals or adytals~ produce low vowels by articulatory assimilation

The phonology of the PIE laryngeals is complex but can now be explained by phonological theory and must not be dispeUed by elaborate arguments involving leveling and other arbitrary gestures as is now so often the case One of the few workers who tries to utilize realistic laryngeals and foHow them whither they lead is Eric P Hamp (see for example Hamp 1990) This gives many of his reconstructions a distinctly Northwest Caucasian cast

Morphological Cognates The form and position of morphological peculiarities can be enormously useful in retrieving ancient phyletic links so much so that this effect can compensate for the relatively limited phonemic inventory usually associated with morphology In the present matter there is a good case for nouns (both PIE and PNWC had N-(suffix)m) and a less strong one for verbs Pontic seems to have been moderately isolating much like a NEC language Subsequent history led the verb to be highly inflected but in different ways in the two families NWC (prefix)m-V -(suffix)n IE (prefix)lshyV -(suffix)n Nevertheless morpheme cognates are good evidence for two reasons First bound morphemes are unlikely to be borrowed outside the forms in which they occur Second PIE and PNWC morpheme cognates show a high congruence in otherwise unmotivated homonymy In some cases PNWC forms can explain peculiarities of PIE inflection

Sample of Nominal Suffixes I tum now to an actual presentation of morphological cognates starting with the noun (and adjective)and treating primarily derivational affixes Abbreviations in the following are Bzh = Bzhedukh (W)Circ = West Circassian PC = ProtoshyCircassian Kab =Kabardian (East Circasian) Ub = Ubykh Abx = Abkhaz Abz =Abaza A-A = Abkhaz-Abaza I have followed the usual abreviations for the Indo-European languages Others are V = verb N =noun preY =preverbal particle Each entry is headed by its PIE form first in its classical representation and thenwithin parentheses by its fortified one

PHYLETIC LINKS BETWEEN PIE AND pNWC

(14) Athematic -11 (1-111) thematic -elo- (I-~ -al) (a) PIE Gk ftivce lord lt wanakt-s vs Xoyomiddots word lt

log-o-sl (b) PNWC tendency of some languages to produce roots with

vowelless allophones or even underlying forms Bzh WCirc l~h~1 brother Iza-~b_xba-rl all-brother-pl-abs = the brothers (coil) Ipql bone frame gt [pq~]w-pq-xha-rl gt Ip-pq-xba-rl your-bone-pl-abs = your body Ub Itxl shoulder backgt [tx~] la-txl the-shoulderback Itx~-pq~1 back-bonea-tx-pq~1 the-back-bone vs Bzh WCirc Ipsadashyxba-rl word-pl-abs = (the) words

(15) PIE -(e)w- (I-(~)wl) in Adjs (a) PIE Gk noX-us much Sk pur-u~ Gothfil-u (b) PNWC I-u I-~wpredicative and adverbial Circ Iy~nshy

~wl big-pred Ipsta-wl all-adv Ub 1~-dya-~-bya-w-n~1 3shywhen-3-see-adv-gerund =when he saw him

(c) Pontic middotI-w

(16) PIE -yo- (I-ya-I) Abstract Adjs -iyo- (I-iya-I) (see collectives (30raquo

(a) PIE Sk gdv-ya-~ bovine asv-iya-~ of the horse horse-like arya- Aryan

(b) PNWC I-gal gt Circ lad~gal Circassian Abz I-nat peopleI-yatgt WCirc Ida-a-yal nut-con-one of =nut tree [-iye] vocalization of I-yal common in Ub and A-A

(c) Pontic middotIlt~)gal people (see (30raquo I-yal the one of adjectival suffix

(17) PIE -yo- (I-ya-I) opposition with other terms (a) PIE Lat alius the other Gk SEeOmiddotS the right one Goth

nill-ji-s the new one (b) PNWC middot1-gYal and Ub I-gal and Circ I-~yl and (of

clauses) Abz l-gY-1 ahd (preV) (c) Pontic I-geand (of pairs)

29

-1

28 JOHN COLARUSSO

(18) PIE -en- (I-Jn-I) used in oblique cases (a) PIE Goth guma man gumin-s gen Lat homo homin-is

id (b) PNWC 1-nI or I-ml oblique case genitive formation Circ

11middot~-m J_qWI man-obi his-son (c) Pontic I-m (rather than I-n because the former is

typologically more marked so the shift ml gt nl may be explained as a typological simplification)

(19) PIE -no- (I-na-I) secondary NPs (a) PIE Lat Luna Praenestinian losna lt Iowks-no- Av raoca~

light lamp Sk plir-1a-t something full (b) PNWC I-n~- frozen derivational suffix in Circ Bzh

1~a~-n~-n~qWal night-n~-half = midnight so-called syllabified connective in Aa-n)-stascissors Isa-n)-yal know-nJ-ness =knowledge (so by this last form-nJ-1 cannot be an old genitive)

(c) Pontic I-na-I I-n~-I

(20) PIE -eno- (I-~na-I) -ono- (I-ana-I) paniciple in Germanic (a) Gmnc Goth itan eaten bit-an-s killed (b) PNWC Abz I-~npro-tense replaces tense in concatenated

or subordinated (dependent) forms Is-~a-nl I-eat-dep Ub l-n~ I-nat old gerund la-Ia-s~-n~ -dya--bya-w-na -y~-qa-qal she-there-sit-ger him-when-she-see-adv-ger

it-she-say-past = she was sitting there when she saw him [and] she said

(c) Pontic I-Jna old paniciple ending

(21) PIE -(ter (I_(th-~rl) old kinship suffix (a) PIE swesorgt Lat soror sister E sister Arm k-Vyr Pers

xllhar p(~)rSr(s gt Gk naT~p Sk pitar Lat pater Arm hayr Ir athir Gothfadar father


(b) PNWC X-f-Jrl X-be-pan(iciple) = the one who is X X-Jr X-pt = the one who is X the X

(c) Pontic I-f-Jrl -be-part I-~rl -pan

(22) PIE -er (I-~rl) in nom-acc sg neut -en (I-~n) in obliques (a) PIE Sk lidhar breast u-dhna~ gen (b) PNWC I-~r in abs(olutive) (if neuter [-agentive] one will

not have an ergative role) I-~ml or I-~nl in obl(ique) cases Circ 11~-rl man-abs 1middot~-ml man-obi Ub It-jtl man(abs) It)t-~nl man-obi

(c) Pontic I-~rl absbull I-~ml obJ (note (17 craquo

(23) PIE -yes-I-yos-I (I-y~s-I or I-yas-I) Comparative -i-s-t(hoshy(I-y-s-fa-I or I-y-s-da-) Superlative

(i) Comparative (a) PIE Sk svd-d-1yas- sweeter Gk ~5lw id (b) PNWC I-y-chl -dir(ection)-be excessive gt Bzh WCirc 1_51 excess Ub lea-I comp

(ii) Superlative (a) PIE Sk sva-d-i~tha-h but Gk fllhoTO-S (flB-wBos

odd) (b) PNWC superl =comp + exactly I-y-cb-(d~)da whencegt I-y-cb-fal gt PIE -y-s-to or I-y-t-dal gt PIE [-i-z-dho] (I-i-s-dhol) (c) Pontic (-y-a-)CI (-dir-dat(ative)-) be excessive (PIE -yas) (_y_)eftl (-dir-) be excessive (whence the Circassian form) eh-al be excessive-dat (whence the Ubykh form)

(24) PIE -ter- (Imiddott~r-I) -tel- (I-t~middotI) Agents (a) PIE Gk YEVE~P YEVETWP OCS bljustelJl observer NB

Hilt has only -1- (b) PNWC Abz I-la-I instrumental Iqaca-lal man-instr = by

means of the man in the nonh this is I-r(a)- Kab Iwa-r-kYa you-instr-instr =with you(r help)

1


(c) Pontic (-tb~-)l_1 instrumental PIE 1_th~_1 is probably an innovation based upon the extension of the genitive as an oblique case (cf Abz Ipoundlaca-tal man-gen = of from the man ) note part of PIE also shares an isogloss (111 gt Ir) with northern PNWC

(25) PIE -tro- (I-tta-I) -tlo- (I-tbla-I) -dhro- (I-dra-I) -dhloshyI-dla-I) Instrumentals (a) PIE Sk mdn-tra-~ prayer Lith (pa- )men-klas lt men-tlashy

monument Lat po-cilium lt po-tlo-m drinking cup OIr ce-tal lt kan-tlo- song OHG sta-dal lt sta-pla bam Gk jtve-9Ao-v dpo-tpo-v plough Lith dr-kla-s id Czech rd-dlo id

(b) PNWC I-la-I (same as (23raquo Abz lIJapoundlW-lal rock-instr = with he rock Circ ll~-~-zl one-by-one Bzh WCirc IcentJ-z-ashyr-a-xayW~-ya-xb3-reciprocal-dat-instr(umental)-dat-see-pastshypi =they saw one another

(c) Pontic I-ta-la-al -gen-instr-dat (like Circ reciprocal) gt PIEI-tla-I I-dla-I (with assimilation) or I-tra-I I-dra-I in more northerly fonn

(26) PIE -men- (I-m~n-) nominal action affix (a) PIE Sk bhdr-ma bhdr-j-man- action of carrying Gk 4gtep-l1a bull (b) PNWC Kab Iw~-mal strike-mal (old affix) = wooden club

for hammering (c) Pontic I-m(a)n-I

Other Endings I tum now to some other endings such as participles abstracts cases and such

(27) PIE -ent -ont -1 (I-~ntl I-antl I-nt) Active Participle (a) PIE Lat dens dentis (gen) tooth (lit the eater) Gk

b8ous OSOVTOS (gen) ) Lith dantis Goth tunjJus (b) PNWC Abz I-n Ub l-n~ I-na old participles plus Circ

1-t1 durative (distributed) tense


(c) Pontic I-(a)n-t-I participle-durative

(28) PIE -welos (I-I1alas) -welot-(I-w~atb_1) Perfect Active Participle

(a) PIE Gk -(flOs- neut nom-acc ([lOT-OS gen (b) PNWC I-w(a)-I aspect sfx Kab I-w-I progressive asps-ashy

w-~xl I-pres-prog-eat = I am eating Abz I-w(a)-I id Is-(a)-w(a)-nl I-eat-prog-past = I was eating Abz I-w(a)shyz+~nl of dependent past duratives-c(a)-w(a)-z+ml I-eatshyprog-past-dur-dep = that I was eating (for a period of time)

(c) Pontic I-wa-z-th-I gt PIE I-wasth-I gt I-wos-I I-wot-I by dialect splitting

(29) PIE -a -y-a (I-~~i I-y-~~) Feminines and Abstracts (a) PIE a long scholarly history examining the homonymy of

feminines and abstracts (b) PNWC I-xa woman gt Ub Ixa-vwal you-sfx = you (free

woman) w-xa-s~mcat gt Bzyb Abx l(a-)I)W(ssa) Ashxarwa Abx IQW(s-jsa)1 PNWC nal hand gt PC Iqal (N V) gt I-qa-I (preV) I-yal (N-sfx) hand or belonging to being in hand or -ness (= abstract suffix)

(c) Pontic I-xal feminine and I-qal abstract suffix have coincided in PIE

(30) PIE -ya (I-p~J) Collectives (a) PIE Gk 4gtP(HPl([ OCS bratrlja fraternal groups (b) PNWC old collective in Abz Iwa-ial man-coil lt flwa-ia

(cf Abz l(a)i~man Bzh WCirc 1(~b~_)w~1 (horse-)man Ub Iw~d~1 devil laquo w~-d~1 man-derivational sfx) lt PNWC guo w-g~- man Whence also Abz I-ial coil laquo I-gal)

and the Igal in PNWC r~ga people Circ lad~ga Ub la-d~gat Circassian Abz I-na people

(c) Pontic I-gal gt PNWC I-gal man(kind) collective Pontic I-ga l-aSt gt PIE 1-yay(-y~d2) gt l-yW by levelling

1


(31) PIE Cases

PIE PNWC ace -m-n I-rn (obi in Circ)I-n (obi in Ub) genlabl -(~a)s (athematic) I-~ I(old genitive) gen -o-s(y)o (thematic) I-~-y-al gt I-~YI obi of pronouns in

WCirc abl -0 (thematic) Ub l-xYa A-A l-xYa place or a-al

vowel-in as with final-ain Circ I-yshya-p~-al -3-dat-look-in

dat I-y-(a-)I dir-(dat-) Circ preY-~y-

loe -i Circ preY I-y-I direction old Bzh WCirc dat of pronouns I-ylinst -e -0 I-~-al gt I-~I () I-a-al gt I-a

with -a the same as in the thematic ablative

Pontic aee 1-011 oblique case gen 1-~(-y-a)1 or I-y-~-al old oblique of pronouns or old

genitive abl I-y-(a- )91 -dir-(dat-)place dat I-y-al -dir-dat loe I-yl -dir inst I-al -dat

(32) Demonstratives (i) anaphora

(a) PIE Is-a nom sg N-al oblique (b) PNWCsawhat th~where Bzh WCirc Isas~dl what N~da where (c) Pontic s-a what-dat It-a where-dat

(ii) deixis (a) PIE I-w-Igt Sk asau


(b) PNWC w~-I that (near hearer) (c) Pontic w~-I deixis (near hearer)

(iii) relative (a) PIE ya-I (b) PNWC y~-I Bzh WCirc Iy~-I optional absolutive verbal index Abx-Abz Iy-I relative initial verbal index (c) Pontic y-a-old relative particle-dat

(33) Personal Pronouns

PIE PNWC nom obi

sg 1 ego (n~k-lw-I) (e)mshy 01-1 that near me lt Pontic n~-k-I n~-m-I

2 tu (tAw) tewtw-It- w-I lt Pontic Itw-I cf A-A Ib-I you (fem) lt tb-I lt Pontic Itw- by regular A-A sound developments

nom obi pi 1 ways nasnas (recent innovations in NWC

Bzh WCirc It-I Ub I~Y-I A-A IQ-I)

2 yus wiiswas PNWC su- w-s~ WCirc IS-I

Hitt ~ume~ OIr swes Ub Is-I Bzyb Abx Ptw_1

Pontic Isw~1 gt PIE swa is shaped by 2nd sg but swa gt late PIE woslwos is shaped by lst pi

Preverbs (old nouns) Remarkably the preverbs show some strong parallels between PIE and PNWC


(34) PIE per~ (Ip~r--Ij before (a) PIE Loc per-~-i gt Gk nepl

Gen-Abl pr-~-o- gt Gk napos Inst pro- pro- gt Lat pro- proshy

(b) PNWC pba-r-(a_y_)1 front-along-(dat-dir-) E ford is usually grouped here as a verbal fonn but cf Bzh WCirc I-px~-II-p~~-I -through-along-crawl- =to crawl through something (such as underbrush)

(c) Pontic pb~X~_II_1 through-distributedgt PIE pe~ (with metathesis of -xr-j Pontic pb~_II_1 front-distr gt PIE per(~j_

(35) PIE ell- (JiJn-Ij interior (a) PIE Loc en-i gt Gk EVl EV Goth inshy(b) PNWC Abz I-n-I in In-ca-ral in-place-inf =to place inside

PNWC (l(a)-Igt Ub IqaJ hand WCirc I-q(a)-I preY denoting action in hand A-A I-qa-ca-I-hand-set- =to do

(c) Pontic (~-)n-I (hand-)in-

(36) PIE et- (JiJr-lj without outside (a) PIE Loc Gk ETl

with deictic w-I Goth ur- Sk utshy(b) PNWC Abz 1+1 from inside out from below upwards

It-ga-ral out-drag-inf = to drag something out (c) Pontic (~- )~-I (hand-)out-

(37) PIE final s (a) PIE Dor Gk EVS (An is) Goth ttl- US-

(b) PNWC old oblique in I-s (c) Pontic I-~I old oblique on nominal ancestors of preverbs

Particles Particles are so short as to make comparative study extremely difficult but even here two fonns show such close parallels between PIE and PNWC that they can be taken back to Proto-Pontic


(38) PIE r and (a) PIE Gk ap pex apex Lith ir (b) PNWC I-ra Cire I-ral and (c) Pontic I-ra

(39) PIE ge (lk~1) because tenninus (a) PIE Gk Y Hilt ok Goth mi-k to me au-k because

(from that) (b) PNWC 1-y-kl -dir-instr PC 1-kYaI gt WC l-kYaI l-gYaI

l-cmiddotYa (c) Pontic k-Jbecause arising from issuing from

Verbal Desinences (change vowel grade of stem) and Sumxes Even though the subsequent history of the verb in PNWC tended toward massive prefixation and that of PIE tended toward suffixation there are numerous parallels between the two families so that a strong case for a Pontic verb can be made

(40) AthematicThematic (a) PIE athem Sk (id-mi I am eating them rodmiddota-mi I am

crying (b) PNWC

(i) basic verbs athem () I-~-I to be I-w-k -I -valenceshykill- Ub leI-s-kmiddotqa it-I-kill-past = I killed it

(ii) verbs with stem-final la-I showing thematic conjugation WCirc Ips aa fal word It-zara-psafa-a-Yal we-reciprocalshyconverse-th v-past = we talked

(c) Pontic CVC-afx fonns vs CVCa-a-afx fonns with thematic vowel

(41) Intensive Reduplication (a) PIE Sk dedi~-te he teaches and teaches OCS gla-gol-jq I

speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO

(b) PNWC WCirc I-sa-sa-I -fall-fall- = to fall (as of leaves) (old athematic) I-Aa-Aa-I -hang-hang- =to dangle

(c) Pontic CVC- gt CV-CVC-

(42) PIE themes with -e- -0- -dshy(i) (a) PIE men- (m~n-) to have in spirit

(b) P-A-A -ma-I to have to do (now only in prohibitive form)(c) Pontic I-m~n-I I-man-I

(ii) (a) PIE -mll-e- (I-mn-~-) stative sense OCS mlneti he thinks Gk pav~middotval to be maddened

(b) PNWC-qa-V-I -horizon-V- =V that is of interest to the speaker

(c) Pontic -a-V- -V-~a- in hand affix for action of intimate concern to the speaker

(iii) (a) PIE -mn-d- (I-mn-~~2-) iterative =to recall (b) PNWC -x- iterative Abz n-ca-x-ral in-place-againshyinf (c) Pontic I-mn-~x-I

(iv) (a) PIE -mn-o- (I-mn-~~)-) Gk faA(rval to be taken (b) PNWC I_qWa_ excess WCirc -sx~-a-I eat-too much

(43) PIE -eyo- (I-~ya-I) -i- (I-)~-I) -y- (I-y-I) Causative Iterative

(a) PIE Ved sdd-aya-ti he made him sit he sat him down (inherently long vowel pattern)

(b) PNWC Vb I-aay-I again finally (NB laal [a] perhaps involved with root lengthening in PIE)

(c) Pontic I-aya-I I-~ya-I iterative resultative

(44) PIE Sigmatic Aorist -sshy(a) PIE Ved ve~-s-i I have won Gk ETTauo-a he has stopped (b) PNWC -z- Circ -z-I stative or accomplished past panicle

with past pt Bzh Circ fa-d-~y-z for-be like-past ptshycompletely = he was completely like him Abz s-~(a)-


w(a)-z-t-~nl I-eat-prog-past-distr-dep = that I was eating (for an interval) and other forms

(c) Pontic I-z-I past ending of full effect

(45) PIE n-Infix Presents (CVC-C- gt CC-n~-C-) (a) PIE Hilt bar-k- perish be destroyed bar-ni-k-zi he destroys

bar-ni-k-anzi they destroy (b) PNWC Vb I-nl dynamic present 10-fa-0-biatW~-nl it-downshy

he-hang-pres =he is hanging it (c) Pontic I-n- n-infix dynamic present

(46) PIE Primary Active 3rd Plurals in -nshy(a) PIE 3rd sg -ti (-ti) 3rd pi -( elo)-n-ti (-(~a)-n-ti) (b) PNWC Vb 3rd pi -na- 0-fa-0-biatmiddot~-na-n them-downshy

he-hang-pl-pres =he is hanging them (c) South Caucasian Old Georgian km-n-nal make-pl-3rd past

= he made them (d) Pontic -na- third person plural infix of actives

(47) PIE Middle Voice in -dh- (I-d-I) (a) PIE Dor and Hom Gk Eo-9-w lt e8-9-w I am eating (Sk

ad-mi) Goth wal-d-a I dominate OCS vla-d-Q (b) PNWC Abz optative of self-interest s-~a-n-da I-eat-depshy

middle =0 if I could eat (c) Pontic -da-I self-interest forms

(48) PIE Perfects in -k- (I-e-I) -g- (I-k-I) -gh- (I-g-I) (a) PIE Gk TP ~-y-w I cut TETP~-K-a perf v~-x-w I swim

Att Gk E~11lt-a he placed it Phrygian a8-8a-K-ET he has

made it (b) PNWC -qa past Vb -qa WCirc -yal ECirc (Kab)

-ay gt [A] (c) Pontic -qa -ya- with dialect variation just as in NWC

today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO

(49) PIE Optative in -ye- (I-Yd-) -y~- (I-y-I) (a) PIE es- (~s-) to be Sk as-ti he is s-y~-t1 gt Sk

s-ya-t may he be

(b) PNWC I-~yl optative concessive Kab 10-xaaba-ma-~yl 3-wann-if-even = even if it be wann

(c) Pontic 1-y~1 optative even

(50) Primary Active Present Athematic - (I-yl) (a) PIE 1st sg I-m-il 1st pi I-m~s-il

2nd sg I-s-il 3rd sg I-nth-il 3rd pi I-(~a)nt-il

(b) PNWC -y- present Abz dynamic s-i~-y-t1 I-writeshypres-def =I am writing s-i~-t I-write-def =I wrote

(c) Pontic -y- active present affix

(51) PIE Relic Impersonals in r (a) PIE 3rd pi Sk fe-re Av soi-re they are lying down

Brythonic impersonal Annorican Breton new gueler one does not see me Passive OIr berir he is carried Umb ier one goes Lat i-tour one goes Middle Tokh B kal-t-r he stops

(b) PNWC -ra optional present Kab 3rd pi (occasional impersonal nuance) Ima-a-k~+a(-r) 3-pres-go+intrans(shypres) = they are going~ interrogative force in non-affinnatives 0-y-a-gYa-ra he-it-dat-read-pres = is he reading it 0-y-ashygYa-r-q~m he-it-dat-read-pres-not = he is not reading it (cf 0-y-a-gYa-SI he-it-dat-read-affinnative = he is reading it) Shapsegh WCirc 3rd past intrans ld-kmiddot~+a-al 3shygo+intrans-past =he went A-A 3rd pi non-initial verbal index -r- y~-qa-r-ca-t it-hand-they-set-def =they did it

(c) Pontic ld- third plural indefinite person -ra- nonshyassertive present


(52) PIE s-Movable (a) PIE sph-r ph_1 Sk spds- to spy pasyafi he sees st-r t- Goth stauta I strike Sk tudali he strikes sk-r kh

_ OHG skeran to shear clip Gk Kdpw I shear sm- - m- OHG smelzan to melt Gk plMw I melt

OHG malz malt s-r w- Gk euroAKW lt OEAKW I drag pUll Lat sulcus

furrow laquo solkos) Lith velklOCS vllkq I pull lt PIE sw~l-kh_

(b) PNWC (_y)_-h_1 gt PC _y_sh_ -dir3-deixis- gt PC _~hY_1 there entirely optional on verbs Ub I-la-t -deixis-be- = to be there exist

(c) Pontic _Jh_ there (deixis on verbs)

(53) Personal Endings not much but note

(a) PIE s-loss Gk l)o-t-w sweeter lt swed-(yo-s Av mq-jro prayer lt man-tras Gk llaT~p father lt pdt-er-s

PIE thematic 1st sg primary active present -0 (I-al) lt -0-5 (-a-s)

(b) PNWC -s-a- -I-pres (active)- Bzh WCirc s-a-tx~+a 1shypres-write+ intrans = I am writing

(c) Pontic -a-s thematic vowel-first person

(54) Futures in -(i)s(y)e-I-(~)s(y)o- (I-(~)s(y)~-I or -(-y)s(y)a-I)

(a) PIE Sk vak-~-yd-mj I will speak Gk AEitJw I will leave (b) PNWC -~- gt Abz -~- fut Is-c(a)-w(aH-t I-eat-fut-def

= I will eat -x-~- gt Abz stative futures s-bz~y-x-w--t I-good-afx-prog-fut-def = I shall be good

(c) Pontic -~- -future- I-x-~- -stative-fut-

(55) Intensives in -sk(elo)- ( -sk~~a)-1) (a) PIE Hitt endings -skj-z-j -intensive-3 sg-present -~k-an-z-i

-intensive-pl-3-pres

40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

(b) PNWC I-~xol gt PC I-HI gt Shapsegh WOrc I-r-I Natukhay Circ l-sxI Bzh WCirc 1-~kI Kab 1-~xI

Confined to nouns but note other adjectives such as Ibal much that can play adverbial roles Kab Is-q a-mshykw+a-z-fa-n-w-ta-bal I -hor-not -go+intransitive-back -ableshyfut-def-irrealis-much I shall not be able to go back again then even so

(c) Pontic 1-sx1 gt PIE I-skb-I (with special cluster development as seen also in Circassian)

(56) The Augment e- (1 J-I)

(a) PIE -I marks the past as in Ved Sk a-bharat he carried Hom Ok lhpEpE but it attracts stress as though it were orignaUy a word as in Ok napEoxOV (napToxov)

(b) PNWC (a)gt PC q(a)1 gt Bzh WOrc with preV loss of ejective feature IfJ-q-w-a-s-t-yl it-hor(izor of interest)shyyou-dat-I-give-past = I gave it to you (accomplished transfer of ownership expressed through I-q-) bx I-qa-ca-I shyhand-set- = to do

(c) Pontic (a) (in) hand originally an independent adverb before the verb denoting accomplishment of action The development in PIE suggests links between it and northern (Proto-Circassian) PNWC

Stem Formation (a 18 Benveniste) One of the oldest patterns in PIE is that of vowel-loss in roots or stems as suffixation proceded CtVC2-C)- C tCl-VC)- C Cl-C)-VC4 (Benveniste 1935) Parallel to this is the vowel reduction pattern of Circassian morphemes in pre-root position in verbs as in (57)

(57) Pre-Root Vowel-Reduction in Bzhedukh West Circassian (a) Iw-qa-s--ay-yl you-hor-I-see-past I saw you


(b) Iw-q-fJ-ah-da-s-~ay- yl you-hor-3-pl-with-I-see-past I saw you with them (c) Iw-q-fJ-ah-d-s-y-ya-~ay- yl you-hor-3-pl-with-I-he-cause-see-past He showed me you together with them

If the pattern in (57) is old and is any way related to the PIE patterns then in some verbs one might expect C VC2- to be prevebal components while C) proved to be a root In the conventional view one should expect etymologies for C as suffixes to a root Etymologies for C have proven to be hard to find (though not for C4) Taking the PIE and Circassian pattems to be related one might look for cases therefore in which C) proved to be the root In (58) and (59) there may be just such a pair (Benveniste 1935 151)

(58) ter-~I- (ItfJr-7-1) Ok TEPETPOV borer vs tr-h l - (tbr-fJ-) Ok TP~OW I bore

(59) ter-~2- (tbfJr-b-) Hitt tarb- to conquer vs tr-h2- (Nr-fJl)-) Lat mire to cross upon -mins across

It is hard to imagine what root Itr-I in conjunction with what enlargements would produce the resulting meanings in (58) and (59) If the first morpheme is not a root but rather a preverb however while the enlargements are in fact distinct roots then (58) and (59) would not only present a plausible situation but would find straightforward cognates in PNWC (60)-(63)

(60) PNWC 1-tb-ro-w-7-1 -surface-distr-valence-stick- = to stick into a surface WCirc I-th

( -y-a)-- -surface( -dir-dat)-stick- = id

(61) Pontic I-t-ro-7-1 -surface-distr-stick- gt PIE thfJr--I NrshyfJ-I

I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO

(62) PNWC I-thgt-~-ba-I-surface-distr-enter- = to enter on something or someone to conquer (NB PNWC has the same range of senses for this form as PIE) WCirc I-th

( -y-a)-ba-I -surface-(dirshydat)-enter = id

(63) Pontic -thgt-~-ba-I -surface-distr-enter- gt PIE r~r-b-l trshy~b-I

Many of the odd homophonous roots or semantically skewed derivations of the son of (60) and (61) may be amenable to a solution of this type Further work in this area promises to reveal some of the more obscure cognates between these two families as well as to throw light upon some of the more difficult laryngeal developments within Indo-European history

Conventional Cognates In the following 1 conclude this study with a list of some of the best and simplest cognates of a conventional sort While they do not bulk large in this study because of the time depth for Proto-Pontic they nevertheless can be found Many are of a very striking and forceful character both phonologically and semantically In these I give first the Pontic reconstruction followed by the PIE and then the PNWC histories

(64) fire (that which descends (from heaven) ie lightning) (a) Pontic pba-xgt-rl down-fall-absger = that which falls

pa-xgt-n-il down-fall-obl-dat = in the fire (b) PIE paxgt-r Hilt pabbtlr fire (nom-acc) pabbweni in

the fire (dat)

(c) PNWC _pha_1 down to descend WCirc l-pba-AaAa-1 -down-dangle- Ub I-fa-I to ignite I-xgt-I to fall WCirc I-fgt-I ECirc I-xgt-I

(65) period of time season day (a) Pontic mgtsgt-(w)1 interval-predicative


(b) PIE mgtxgt-rl season-abs Hitt meour day season with Circassian-like development of I-s-w-I gt I-x-I

mgtxgt-Ial time-instr Ooth mel day Imgtxgt-ta-I time-gen Lat mitior to measure out (c) PNWC mgt1gtJIgt PA-A msgt1 day mgtsa-wl time-predicative = day gt Kab Imaaia Vb Imgtxa

id (msa)

(66) sour caustic liquid (a) Pontic saxul (b) PIE sxw-rl Hitt Jebllr urine OIce saurr semen

impurity filth soggr SUIT sour OE seaw Ok un Tokh B siiwaJ it rains

(c) PNWC saiu Kab Isaxwlime quicklime

(67) people (a) Pontic ~-ga3rd impersonal-collective (b) PIE a-~gal the-peoplegt haryo-I Hitt arwa- free man

laquo arya-wa- Ind-Iran arya- Aryan Ok aptGT Runic arjostiz Welsh irr charioteer OIr Airem a god (guardian of the Aryans ) lt aryaman-

(c) PNWC (a-)~gal gt Circ ladga Vb la-d)gal Circassians Abz I-rial people

(68) house family (a) Pontic gunahouse (b) PIE guna-ta-qbal gt PIE wuna-tb_qbal house-of-belong

Dor Ok ftiva~ faVaKTl lord (Le head of the family) Tokh A niitiik Phrygian fa vaKT n id guna-qba-ya-xagt PIE wuna-qh_Yab Dor Ok fa vaGGa lady Tokh A niW id

(c) PNWC gunagt PCirc wgtnal house Abz inal guna-tha-I gt PA-A gna-ta-gal house-gen-person = family gt Abz inatCjaI

1


(69) man (a) Pontic Wd-gd-male class marker-man- = man (b) PIE wd-gd- gt PIE wdy-I Lat 1r Ir fer Goth wair

Lith vyras man Sk myas strength (c) PNWC wd-gd-I gt PC god gt WCirc I(~hd-)wd

(horse-)man Vb IWd(d~) devil wd-gd-I gt PA-A Ifdl gt ywdl gt 101d1 gt Abz la101d1 man -11 agent wd-gd-agt Ub I-yat sf- on pronouns

(70) giant (a) Pontic Ydn-ral gigantic-gerund =the one who is big (b) PIE Ydn-ral Sk Indra (hero of the Rig Veda) Av indra

a demon Hitt innara a goddess (odd semantics of the PIE term are explained by Pontic)

(c) PNWC Ydn(-ra)l Cire Ydnd big IYdnd-i big-evil = giant Abx la-ynarl the-gial)t

(71) to say (a) Pontic I-(wd-)qa-I-(valenee-)say- =to say (to talk) (b) PIE wd-qa-I gt PIE wd-qha- -talk-belonging-() gt

dw_qhW_I Av aok- to speak W-dqh_ Ved vf-vak-li Vak$ Lat ltOX Umb vepurus Gk (fJEnos

(c) PNWC I-(wd-)qa- gt WCirc -a- Kab I-a-I Ub I-qa- Abx-Abz I-t)middota-Ito say

(72) mouth (a) Pontic middottid-cha-I edge-mouth = lips mouth opening (b) PIE a-Wd-1d-cha-1 the-male-edge-mouth gt PIE lha1-s-

lhaw1-s- Hitt aif- iUa- (obl) Luw aJ Lat os- aus- Sk as- o$iha-

(c) PNWC Wd-1dgt PC middotdl mouth lips edge

PHYLETIC LINKS BElWEEN PIE AND PNWC

tid-cbagt P-Ub 1~a gt ~a gt I(fa-)cal (nose-)mouth = face

id-cbdgt PA-A i(P1 gt ~dl gt Abx I(a-)C~I (the-)mouth Yd-1d-Ca gt P-Ub i~a gt ~a gt Ica mouth

(73) cattle (a) Pontic Wd-1d-(Wd-ya-)1 male-cowcattle-(being-one of-) =

a grazing animal (b) PIE Wd-1d-(Wd-ya-)gt PIE 1dW-y- Hitt bawis sheep

Luwian bawl- Hieroglyphic Luwian hawis Lat ovis E ewe Ann hoviw shepherd

(c) PNWC Wd-1d Circ dS)1 food feed wd-1d-a Circ na cattle pen

(74) to be to be well (a) Pontic ~-I to be (b) PIE dCd-1 gt PIE ds-I to be Sk ds-thi Lat est Goth

ist s-dwl be-Adv = good well Gk EU- Sk su- (with lengthening of preceding vowels)

(c) PNWC dCa-1 gt ca gt Ub Ica good by influence of the preverb fonn I-dca-wd-I gt P-Ub I-ca-I gt I-sa-qa-I -good-say- = to speak well of someone dCd-wd-Igt PC cd-I WCirc 15dl good Kab Ifdl id

(75) two (a) Pontic Itqol (b) PIE tqol gt PIE td Itd1 gt dwo dol with

levelling to dwo Sk dvd dvau OCS duva Gk suw QUO

E two (c) PNWC tqol gt PC td P-Ub tqdl gt Itqa orig

twice PA-A It1d1 gt Abz 1-11 Bzyb Abx l-yl

(76) six (a) Pontic (W-)SdXCdI (masc class marker-)six

46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

(b) PIE (w-)s)xcdl gt PIE sw)ks Gk bull fE~ laquo sw)ks) Lat sex Goth saihs (both lt s)ks) Ann veqlaquo w)ks) OPruss uschts sixth laquo wks-to-) Av xIwaI lt SIIaS (cf xSnati lt zlnat he knows Gk yvwn E know) but perhaps by metathesis lt lwaxY lt sweks

(c) PNWC s)xcdl gt PNWC (s)xcdl gt PA-A xc)1 gt Abz Ic-I PC xcdgt 115)1gt Circ 11)1 (w-)s)xcdgt P-Ub xmiddotcw)1 gt scmiddot)1 gt Ub If) PA-A xmiddotcmiddot)gt 8middotC)1 gt Abx If-I

(77) (hard) metalmiddot

(a) Pontic 1(w-)y)-(ca)1 (grammatical class marker (1)-) metal-(hard)

(b) PIE a-ymiddotcmiddota gt hawcmiddota gt )PWSO- gt Lat aurum gold a-ymiddotcmiddota gt haymiddotcmiddotal gt ft)Jso- gt Lat orum id

(c) PNWC ymiddot)-(ca)gt Bzh WCirc Iymiddot)-ca hard-metal = iron Iywa-a-p-a metal-conn-red = copper Vb Iw)cmiddot8 iron Abz fiWa(-ta)1 copper

(78) metal (object) (a) Pontic y)ia (b) PIE a-yfa gt hayia gt hayYagt )4ay-SO- Jy-es- gt

Lat aes Sk dyas- metal Av ayah- metal object Goth aiz metal money

(c) PNWC a-yJia gt Abx la-ayxa Abz layxa iron metal

(79) son child foster child (a) Pontic pa

(b) PIE pa-w-Igt Gk mifl6os gt nals child naupos little Latpuer boy Skputra son Osc puklUm Paelignianpuclois Gothawai few

(c) PNWC pa-w-flS-1 gt PC 1-paS-1 gt Bzh WCirc l_pw)_1 to rear

pa-w-la-I gt PC I-paa-I gt Bzh WCirc Ip1wa foster


child bull pa-y-fl)-I gt Vb (northerly) l-pqY-1 to rear pa-fl)-I gt Vb (southerly) paySgt pyS1 gt 1laquora)pxS1 foster child pa-flat gt PA-A px-at gt I(qw)-)px-at gt Bzyb Abx I(a-)x-middotpbat foster child

(80) son nephew (a) Pontic I(n)-)pa-(t-)I (lower-)son-(beinglstanding) =

nephew (b) PIE n)pat-I gt Lat nepos Rumanian nepot Ir niae OE

nea OHG nevo (c) PNWC pa son

(81) to sit (down) (a) Pontic (a-)SQ-(ta-)(change of state-)sit-(down-) (b) PIE 1)s-1 gt Gk ihlal if-OTal Hitt e-eS-zi Sk iiste

1s-Jt-I gt Lat sedere Ir saidm Lith sedet Sk sad- Goth sitan

(c) PNWC 1(1a-)s)-(ta-)gt Bzh WCirc l-qa-s)-ta-I-change of state-sit-down- = to sit down (with deglottalization of affixes) Vb I-s-I to sit be situated as in la-s-qa-y-a-sl it-my-hand-dir-dat-sit = it is in my hand (Vogt 1963167 1457)I-tmiddota-s-Imiddot-down-sit-middot = to sit (down) (withpreposing of affix)

(82) to lie down to fall down (a) Pontic I-~-(g-y--)I -lie-(on-dat) = (1) to lie on (2)

to fallon (b) PIE 1-I)gY-1 gt Hitt faki causes to fall lagari falls (mid)

Gk AEx-ollal Hom Gk AEKTO Lat lectus bed Ir laigim Goth ligan OCS leiati

(c) PNWC 1---1 gt PC 1---1 to lie be prone Bzh WCirc Is-a--I I-pres-lie = I am lying down for 1-gY)-1 note Ub l-gYJ-1 on (preV)

48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

I--a-l -fall-dat- gt PC I-la-I gt Bzh WCirc Is-y-a-la-a-YI I-dir-dat-fall-th v-past =I fell down with the same split in meaning as seen in PIE

(83) sister6 (a) Pontic (w-)s~mca (class(I)-)woman (b) PIE sw~s-arwoman-kin afx gt Sk svasar- Lat soror Ir

siur Goth swistar OCS sestra (c) PNWC (w-)s~mca gt Ub Is~mcawoman Bzyb Abx

IOt)ssa WCirc IszI Ipsaasa girl lt p-SJmcal childshywoman

Conclusions First PIE and PNWC are remotely related at a time depth of roughly 10000 years

Second the sound system for the parent Proto-Pontic is likely that in (84)

(84) Proto-Pontic ph p b m w tb t d t n r

b

3 zc c c s e C ~ c ~ Z yh A kb

qb k g k x g q q X Y

b i h

u e 0

a

More work will have to be done to confirm all the vowels The voiceless unaspirated series of stops is motivated by PNWC and seems to have fallen in with the voiceless aspirated stops in PIE It is


possible that this early loss led to later shifts and renewals in the source features of the voiceless stops in the various branches of Indo-European Much more work is needed to trace out more complex sound laws For example there are some sets where a labial-lateral cluster in NWC seems to correspond to a labiovelar in PIE such as Circ IpI Ub Ipa A-A Ip~1 all four(which behaves as though it were a single segment in A-A violating as it does the PA-A cluster rule C1Cz gt Cz) compared with PIE Itetwer (lkhfwr or Jkhfrl) four It would seem from this vantage point that PIE was a gross simplification of Proto-Pontic The history of the velar uvular pharyngeal and laryngeal spirants and 111 has already been delineated in (6)-(13) The affricates and spirants all seem to have fallen together into s though further work is likely to show this to be an artifact of an overly simple image of PIE The laterals seem all to have gone to 111 though here too further work is likely to yield interesting results

Third with its grammatical class prefixes (Colarusso 1989a) ProtoshyPontic looks very much like a Daghestan or Northeast Caucasian language and in fact further work is bOWld to show that PIE shares a phyletic link with PNEC as well probably through Proto-North Caucasian and perhaps with Proto-Kartvelian as well (Harris 1990)

Fourth despite its NEC-look PIE was spoken contiguously to PNWC with some forms of PIE sharing some isoglosses with the more northerly portion (Proto-Circassian) of PNWC

Fifth the PIE homeland was most likely along the northeast shore of the Black Sea extending partially into the northwest region of the Caucasus where its phyletic cousin dwelt Proto-Pontic itself was likely to have been in the northwest Caucasus extending up into what is now the Crimea and southern Ukraine The steppe offered opportunities to exploit the horse in a nomadic economy and this opportunity set the ancestors of the Indo-Europeans apart from their kinsmen in the mountains and launched them upon the stage of history

50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES

IThe amateur archaeologist Geoffry Bibby suggested in 1961 that PIE was a Caucasic language that went north and blended with a Finno-Ugric tongue This guess seems to owe more to the old notion that the Caucasus was the source for many of the peoples of Europe than it docs to an informed notion of PIE of any Caucasic languages or of Finno-Ugrian Friedrichs conjecture therefore takes historical precedent

21 use Caucasic rather than the more traditional Caucasian to avoid any naive confusion that somehow these are white mans languages

Given some of the recent publicity (Ross 1991 Wright 1991) surrounding the revival of the late ninetcenth-century notion that every language is ultimately related to every other (Pedersen 1931 338-339) I wish explicitly to dissociate myself from any such efforts In fact most such notions try to link North Caucasic languages with those in Asia such as Sino-Tibetan or Yeniseian or even more remotely with the Amerindian Na-Oene while linking PIE with Uralo-Yukaghir South Caucasian (Kartvelian) or Elamo-Dravidian and Afro-Asiatic (Ross 138-139) The plausibility of what follows simply shows the folly of such grand lumping schemes

4There is one Northeast Caucasian language the Richa dialect of Aghul which actually contrasts these types of sounds (Kodzasov 1987) In the back of the mouth it contrasts uvulars pharyngealized uvulars pharyngeals adytals V = a pharyngealized V xil house iawl nut tJawl udder Qac apple yad hammer fibstack fianbeUy iakwUght [my re-transcription

$There are a number of resemblances between PIE and Proto-Kartvelian (Howard Aronson personal communication Alice Harris 1990 Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1967 Gamkrelidze 1966) so much so that an investigation similar to this one is warranted Phyletic links between PIE and Proto-Kartvelian would of course establish PIE as an outlier of an ancient Proto-Caucasic

6Eric Hamp (personal comunication) has suggested that the root here is merely sar-I with sw~-I being the reflexive His argument is based upon the Latin pair soror laquo SWlsar-) vs uxor wife This has a parallel in VajU Albanian r-yashywoman-diminutive- =wife vs var-ya- sister-diminutive- with v-ar- lt sw~shysar- If the Albanian form is not a parallel built upon Latin influence but rather derived from Indo-European patterns then it would suggest that the PIE was sWlshysar-own-woman =sister uk-sar-outer-woman =wife and this Pontic match would have to be rejected

PHYLETIC LINKS BE1WEEN PIE AND PNWC

REFERENCES

Abdokov A I 1983 0 zvukovyx i slovamyx sootvetstvijax severokavkazskix jazykov Nalcik EIbruz

Allen W Sidney 1965 On One Vowel Systems Lingua 13111-124 Benveniste Emile 1935 Origines de la fonnation des noms en indo-europeen

Paris Adrien-Maissonneuve [1962 reprint) Bibby Geoffrey 1961 Four Thousand Years Ago New York Alfred A Knopf Brugmann Karl 1888 Elements of the Comparative Grammar of the Indo-Germanic

Languages Joseph Wright (trans) Strassburg and London Trilbner amp Co Buck Carl Darling 1949 A Dictionary of Selected Synonyms in the Principal

Indo-European LanguagC$ Chicago University of Chicago Press Cirikba Vjaceeslav Andrejevic 1986 Sistema svistjdcix soglasnyx v abxazoshy

adygskix jazykax Moscow Institut jazykoznanija AN SSSR Colarusso John 1981 Typological Parallels between Proto-Indo-European and the

Northwest Caucasian Languages In Yaal Arbeitman and Allan R Bomhard (eds ) Bono Homini Donum Essays in Historical Linguistics in Memory of J Alexander Kerns vol 2 pp 475-558 Amsterdam John Benjamins

__ 1984 Paral1els between the Cirtassian Nart Sagas the Rg Veda and Germanic Mythology in V Setty Penda1cur (ed) South Asian Horizons vol I Culture and Philosophy pp 1-28 Ottawa Carleton University Canadian Asian Studies Association

__ 1985 Pharyngeals and Pharyngeaiization UAL 514 366-368 __ 1989a Proto-Northwest Caucasian or How to Crack a Very Hard Nut In

Howard I Aronson (ed)The Non-Slavic Languages of the USSR Linguistic Studies University of Chicago Chicago Linguistic Society pp 2()55

__ 1989b The Woman of the Myths the Satanaya Cycle in Howard I Aronson (ed) The Annual of the Society for the Study of Caucasia 2 3-11

Diakonoff Igor M 1990 Language Contacts in the Caucasus and the Near East In T L Markey and John A C Greppin (cds) When Worlds Collide Indo-Europeans and Pre-Indo-Europeans Ann Arbor Michigan Karoma Publishers Inc Pp 53middot65

Friedrich Paul 1964 Review of Phoneme and Morpheme in Kabardian (Eastern Adyghe) Aert Kuipers (Janua Linguarum Studia Memoriae Nicolai Van Wijk Dedicata No VIII) The Hague Mouton and Co 1960 124 pp appendix bibliography tables f 16 American Anthropologist 66205-209

52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

Gamkrelidze Thomas V 1966 A Typology of Common Kartvealian Language4269-83

Gamkrelidze Thomas V and Ivanov V V 1967 KartveUan and Indo-European a Typological Comparison of Reconstructed Systems In To Honor Roman Jakobson vol 1 pp 700-717 The Hague Mouton

~ 1972 Lingvis~skaja lipologija i rekonstrukcija sistemu indoevropejskix smy~nyx Working Papers of the Conference on the Comparative-Historical Grammar of the Indo-European Languages (12-14 December 1972) Moscow pp 15-18

---1973 Sprachlypologie und die Rekosntruktion der gemeinindogermanischen VerschlUsse Ph~etica 27150-156

-- 1984 IndoeVropejskijejazyki i indojevropejcy Thilisi Tbilisi University Press

---1985 The Ancient Near East and the Indo-European Question [and] the Migration of Tribes Speaking Indo-European Dialects JmS 133-91

Gamqrelije [GamkreUdze] Tamaz and Matavariani GM 1965 Sonantta sistema da ablauti kartvelur enebii [The Sonant System and Ablaut in the Kartvelian Languages] (In Georgian with Russian summary) Thilisi

Gimbutas Marija 1973 The Beginning of the Bronze Age in Europe and the Indo-Europeans 3500-2500 BC JIES 1 163214

--1974 An Archaeologists View of PIE in 1975 JIES 2289308 ---1977 The rlTSt Wave of Eurasian Steppe Pastoralists into Copper Age

Europe JIES 5277338

--1980 The Kurgan Wave 2 (c 340()32OO BC) into Europe and the FoUowing Transformation of Culture JIES 8273315

--- 1985 Primary and Secondary Homeland of the Indo-Europeans JIES 13185-202

Goddard Ives 1975 Algonquian WiYOl and Yurok Proving a Distant Genetic Relationship In M Dale Kinkade Kenneth L Hale and Oswald Werner (eds) Linguistics and Anthropology In Honor of C F Voegelin pp 249262 Lisse The Peter de Ridder Press

Hamp Eric P 1990 The Indo-European Horse In T L Markey and John A C Greppin (cds) When Worlds Collide Indo-Europeans and Prelndo-Europeans Ann Arbor Michigan Karoma Publishers Inc pp211226


Harris Alice C 1990 Kartvelian Contacts with Indo-European In T L Markey and John A C Greppin (eds) When Worlds Collide Indo-Europeans and Premiddot Indo-Europeans Ann Arbor Michigan Karoma Publishers Inc pp 67-100

Hopper Paul J 1973 Glottalized and Murmured Occlusives in Indo-European Glossa 7141-166

__ 1977a The Typology of the Proto-Indo-European Segmental Inventory JIES 541-54

__ 1977b Indo-European Consonantism and the New Look Orbis 2657-72 __1982 Areal Tupology and the Eraly Indo-European Consonant System In

Edgar C Polom6 (ed) The Indo-Europeans in the Fourth and Third Millenia Ann Arbor Michigan Karoma Publishers pp 121-139

Jasanoff Jay 1978 Stative and Middle in Indo-European Innsbrucker BeiUiige zur SprachwissenschafL

Kodzasov Sergei V 1987 Pharyngeal Features in the Daghestan Languages Proceedings of the XIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences vol 2 pp 142middot144 Tallinn Estonia

Kuipers Aert H 1960 Phoneme and Morpheme in Kabradian The Hague Mouton __ 1975 A Dictionary of Proto-Circassian Roots Louvain Belgium Peeters __ 1983 Review Thomas V Gamkrelidze and Givi I Ma~avariani

Sonantensystem und Ablaut in den Kartwelsprachen Eine Typologie der Struktur des Gemeinkartwelischen Miteinem Vorwort von Georg Tsereteli Ins Deutsche iibersetzt bearbeitet und mit einem Nachwort von Winfred Boeder [Ars Linguistica 10 Conunentationes analytica et critica] TUbingen Gunter Narr Verlag 1982 [160 pp] Studia Caucasica 598-102

Kury10wicz Jerzy 1964 The Inflectional Categories of Indo-European Heidelberg Carl Winter

Lehmann Winfred P 1952 Proto-Indo-European Phonology Austin University of Texas Press

Lindeman Fredrik Otto 1990 Is There Any Conclusive Evidence for a Triple Representation of Schwa in Annenian Annual of Annenian Linguistics 11 25-30

__ 1987 Introduction to the Laryngeal Theory Oslo the Norwegian University Press the Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture

Mallory J P 1989 In Search of the Indo-Europeans Language Archaeology and Myth London Thames amp Hudson

Martinet Andr6 1986 Des steppes aux oc6ans Lindo-eurocenten et les IndoshyEurop6ens Paris Payot

54

r JOHN COLARUSSO

Meillet Antoine 1922 [1964 printing] Introduction 1 I etude comparative des languages indo-eurocentennes University of Alabama Press

Pedersen Holger 1931 The Discovery of Language Translated by John Webster Spargo Bloomington Indiana University Press 1962 edition

Pisani Vittore 1947 Crestomazia indeuropea Torino Rosenberg amp Sellier Ross Philip E 1991 Hard Words Scientific American vol 264 no 4 April pp

138-147

Vogt Hans 1963 DictioMaire de la langue oubykh Oslo Universitetsforlaget Watkins Calven 1980 Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans Guide to the

Appendix Indo-European Roots In The Houghton-Mifflin Canadian Dictionary of the English Language pp 1496-1550

Winter Werner (ed)196S Evidence for Laryngeals The Hague Mouton ___I970 Some Widespread Indo-European Titles In George Cardona Henry

M Hoenigswald and Alfred Senn (eds) Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press pp 49-54

Wright Robert 1991 Quest for the Mother Tongue The Atlantic vol 267 no 4 April pp 39-68

FOCUS IN YUKAGHIR (TUNDRA DIALECf)

Bernard Comrie University ofSouthern California

ABSTRACT A number of extensions and funher generalizations are made to Krejnovi~s (1958) account of focus in Yukaghir Krejnovi~ distinguishes subject object and predicate focus a fourth type neutral focus must be recognized in particular where some element other than one of these three (eg bull an adverbial) is in focus Interrogative words are necessarily in focus Focus oppositions are neutralized in nonfinite subordinate imperative and negative sentences These funher generalizations enable Yukaghir focus to be integrated more fully into crosslinguistic studies of grammaticalized focus

One of the characteristics of the Yukaghir language as described by Krejnovic (1958) is the existence of a rich system of morphological means for the encoding of the focus of a sentence where focus is understood as the essential new information conveyed by the sentencemiddot The aim of this article is to systematize and elaborate Krejnovics discussion of this phenomenon The material on which the discussion is based is restricted to the material presented in Krejnovic (1958) more specifically to his material on the Tundra dialect of Yukaghir including both illustrative paradigms and sentences from the body of the book and examples from the text on pages 255-262 Examples from Krejnovic (1958) are identified either by page number (for sentences from the body of the book) or by the abbreviation T followed by the sentence number (for sentences from the text using Krejnovics numbering) My indebtedness to the late EA Krejnovics work will be evident at every turn and I hope that this article may stand as a small token of appreciation for his work

1 The basic system According to Krejnovic clauses may appear in three variants in Yukaghir predicate focus subject focus and [direct] object focus intransitive clauses of course may appear only in the first two variants Focus is shown by a rather complex interplay of verbal and nominal morphology for the verbal morphology see

1


the homeland In the past twenty years the archaeological work of Gimbutas (1985 1980 1977 1974 1973 see also Mallory 1989 ch 6) has placed the most likely PIE homeland in the Northwest Caucasus More recently Gamkrelidze and Ivanov (1985 1984) have argued that it lay just south of the Caucasus in eastern Anatolia In either case a phyletic link with a Caucasian family is plausible My own work in comparative mythology (Colarusso 1989b 1984) has suggested cultural contacts with the Caucasus at a period of Indo-European unity Whether or not Proto-Pontic is in fact Proto-Caucasian or Proto-North Caucasian in other words whether or not PNWC enjoys a special phyletic Hnk with PIE not enjoyed by other Caucasic language families rests upon further workmiddot in historical Caucasic linguistics The genetic links between PNWC and Proto-Northeast Caucasian (PNEC) now seem quite plausible (see for example Chirikba 1986 Abdokov 1983) Thus if the present study seems a worthy start then the reader should be prepared to view PIE as one of an ancient complex of cognate languages centering about the Caucasus In my opinion time will show that PIE is closest to PNWC in fact sharing certain innovations with the northern dialect area of PNWC1

Diagram (1) gives a rough idea of the links that I shall explicitly put forward

(1) Proto-Pontic

PONTIC

A PNWC

~-----P-Circ P-Ubyx P-Abxaz-Abaza

I ~ various daughters WCirc ECirc Abxaz dials Abaza

Time Depth and Types of Evidence For such remote phyletic links as Pontic questions of time depth and types of evidence must be


addressed While it is in principle impossible to establish exact dates based upon linguistic facts alone I have nevertheless put forward a tentative time frame in (2) which seems to permit room enough for the type of differentiation required for both PIE and PNWC

(2) Tentative Time Depths 1 3000 - 4000 BC Comparatively reconstructed PIE 25000 - 6000 BC Internally reconstructed PIE 32000 - 4000 BC PNWC 4 7000 - 9000 BC Pontic

At such a time depth of nine to eleven thousand years standard cognate evidence will not loom as large as in more conventional reconstructive effort Accordingly I shall examine three types of evidence First typological parallels (of phonological inventories) suggest not only an areal grouping of PIE and the Caucasus but also show some strong defects in the PIE inventory even as revised by Gamkrelidze Ivanov (1973 1972 1967 ) and Hopper (1982 1977a 1977b 1973) I have made modifications to the PIE inventory which make it far more plausible typologically to provide a basis for correspondence sets Second I examine morphological cognates (compare Goddard 1975) Such morphotactic cognates are strong in the case of nouns but a bit weaker in that of verbs One of the strongest sets of data involves the homonymy of morphemes Indeed the ability of Pontic to explain long-standing homonyms or confusions in morphology within PIE is most striking and is at this stage of work the strongest argument for the cognacy of PIE and PNWC Odd relict forms within NWC are also explained by Pontic with much more than chance success Many of these morphological investigations produce transparent explanations of PIE morphology at the level of Proto-Pontic This is another very powerful argument for the cognacy of PIE and PNWC Third lexical cognates can be expected to be few at such a time depth Nevertheless a simple search found twenty basic items of good quality (64)-(83) Many more await the resolution












-_

q q

x x

IJ IJ

y y

h





[a])

1





















27

1 26 JOHN COLARUSSO



















29

-1

28 JOHN COLARUSSO




























1



























1


(31) PIE Cases
















PIE PNWC nom obi






























crying (b) PNWC





speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147






















-_

q q

x x

IJ IJ

y y

h





[a])

1





















27

1 26 JOHN COLARUSSO



















29

-1

28 JOHN COLARUSSO




























1



























1


(31) PIE Cases
















PIE PNWC nom obi






























crying (b) PNWC





speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











1





















27

1 26 JOHN COLARUSSO



















29

-1

28 JOHN COLARUSSO




























1



























1


(31) PIE Cases
















PIE PNWC nom obi






























crying (b) PNWC





speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











27

1 26 JOHN COLARUSSO



















29

-1

28 JOHN COLARUSSO




























1



























1


(31) PIE Cases
















PIE PNWC nom obi






























crying (b) PNWC





speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











29

-1

28 JOHN COLARUSSO




























1



























1


(31) PIE Cases
















PIE PNWC nom obi






























crying (b) PNWC





speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











1



























1


(31) PIE Cases
















PIE PNWC nom obi






























crying (b) PNWC





speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











1


(31) PIE Cases
















PIE PNWC nom obi






























crying (b) PNWC





speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147
































crying (b) PNWC





speak

36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











36 37

JOHN COLARUSSO
































today

39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











39

-I

i

38 JOHN COLARUSSO


s-ya-t may he be





























40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











40 41

~

JOHN COLARUSSO



















I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











I 43

I

42 JOHN COLARUSSO








the fire (dat)






id (msa)










1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











1





























46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











46 47

~

JOHN COLARUSSO


























48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











48 49

~

JOHN COLARUSSO








b



b i h

u e 0

a







50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











50 51

~

JOHN COLARUSSO

NOTES








REFERENCES














52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











52 53

~

JOHN COLARUSSO










Europe JIES 5277338





















54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











54

r JOHN COLARUSSO




138-147











colarusso - phyletic links between proto-indo-european and proto-northwest caucasian

Documents