To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
I have tried to show (Language 3. 109–22) that Hittite h occurs where the Indo-European languages have bh initial, and I can now make two or three additions to the material there presented. In Language 4. 122 f. I have connected halanta ‘head’ with Greek φαλός·λευκός, φαλακρός ‘bald’, and Sanskrit bhālam ‘forehead’, on the assumption that the original meaning of the Hittite word was ‘bald’. Hittite haš-, hašh- ‘open’, must be identified with IE *bhosos ‘naked’, whence Lithuanian bãsas ‘bare-foot’, Old English bær, etc. The verb pihiš-, which, accompanied by the adverb arha, means ‘strike off, cut off, take off’ or the like, contains the verbal prefix pe-, while hiš- is an extension in s of the root which appears in IE *bhei- ‘strike’ (Old High German bīhal ‘axe’, etc.), and whose extended form *bheid- means ‘split’ (Sanskrit bhinadmi, Latin findo, etc). Another instance of h = bh after the verbal prefix pe- is pehar(k)- ‘hold towards’ (Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi 4. 2. 2. 25, Keilschrift-Urkunden aus Boghazköi 13. 4. 4. 37) beside har(k)- ‘have’ on which see Language 3. 117 f.
The fact that most writing is the graphic representation of vocal-auditory processes tends to obscure the fact that writing can exist as a series of morphemes at its own level, independent of or interacting with the more fundamental (or at least more primitive) vocal-auditory morphemes. Recognition of visual morphemes is also hampered by the controversy, not yet subsided, over the primacy of the spoken versus the written; the victory of those who sensibly insist upon language as fundamentally a vocal-auditory process has been so hard won that any concession to writing savors of retreat. Yet, so long as a point-to-point correspondence is maintained, it is theoretically possible to transform any series of morphemes from any sensory field into any other sensory field, and keep them comprehensible; the only condition is that contact with the nervous system be maintained at some point. More than theoretically: it is actually done for the congenitally deaf-and-dumb reader of Braille, who ‘reads’ and ‘comprehends’ with his finger-tips. Just as here is a system of tactile morphemes existing with no connexion (other than historical) with the vocal-auditory field, so there is nothing unscientific in the assumption that a similarly independent visual series may be found.
[A discussion of conventional popular statements about language and of certain characteristic reactions called forth when these are brought into question.]