^{page 165 note 1} Stolz, , Lateinische Grammatik, pp. 52, 280Google Scholar. Sommer, , Handbuch der lateinischen Laut- und Formenlehre, pp. 176, 609 sqqGoogle Scholar.

^{page 165 note 2} Stolz and Sommer, l.c. For another theory, cf. Solmsen, , Studien zur lateinischen Lautgeschichte, pp. 177 sqqGoogle Scholar.

^{page 165 note 3} Stolz, l.c.; Sommer, l.c.; and Stolz, Kuhn's Zeitschr. 38, p. 428.

^{page 165 note 4} Sino is the only verb and has such forms. This is a striking case of the exception proving the rule. For the occurrence of forms like sirim serves to emphasize the entire absence of forms like audirim. Sirim is probably an s aorist with rhotacism.

^{page 166 note 1} So Sommer, l.c.; Solmsen, l.c.; and Kuehner, , Lateinische Grammatik 2 (index), p. 814Google Scholar.

^{page 166 note 2} Engelbrecht, , Wiener Studien, 1885, pp. 234 sqq.:Google Scholar In Terence ‘ivi,’ etc., does not occur at all; in Plautus only (and these rarely) the simplex and compounds with ‘ex-’ and ‘amb-.’ (That is, where the operation of the Iambic Law did not prevent the formation of a long second syllable, as it did in abiisti.)

^{page 166 note 3} The first instance is C.I.L. I., 38—PETIEI—in an elegiac couplet in honour of the Scipio who was praetor in a.u.c. 615. The absence of audiit in Plautus and Terence is especially significant, as it makes a convenient close for iambic and oatalectic trochaic verses.

^{page 166 note 4} Engelbrecht, l.c., shows that the MSS. are very unreliable in this respect, often giving two i's where a form is undoubtedly present tense and one i where the metre requires two.

^{page 167 note 1} l.c., p. 606.

^{page 168 note 1} Sommer, , l.c., p. 617Google Scholar.