Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-shngb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T05:17:42.885Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Phonologic Effects of Pre–Gothic Juncture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2026

William H. Bennett
William H. Bennett*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to the conventional formula, IE /e/ is expected to appear in Gothic as ai /e/ only when bearing primary or secondary stress and occurring before one of the consonants h h r. This formula per se fails to explain Go. ai in reduplicating syllables of preterits like fai-falþ, sai-so, lai-lot, which contain no h, h or r. The evidence presented below suggests that ai in all Gothic reduplicating syllables reflects an exactly definable process of assimilation. The same may well be true of au /o/ in aufto ‘perhaps’.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 43 , Issue 3-Part1 , September 1967 , pp. 661 - 665
Copyright
Copyright © 1967 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bennett, W. H. 1967. Merger and split in the Pre-Gothic vowel system: Historic Gothic ai/aj, au/aw, iu/iw. Linguistics 32. 5–11.Google Scholar
Bezzenberger, A. 1873. Untersuchungen über die gotischen Adverbien und Partikeln. Halle, Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses.Google Scholar
Braune, Wilhelm. 1966. Gotische Grammatik. 17th ed. by Ernst A. Ebbinghaus. Tübingen, Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Brugmann, K. 1904. Die Demonstrativa der indogermanischen Sprachen. Abhandlungen der Königlich Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse, 22.5.Google Scholar
Argenteus, Codex. 1927. Codex Argenteus Upsaliensis: jussu senatus Universitatis phototypice editus. Uppsala, Almquist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Feist, Sigmund. 1939. Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der gotischen Sprache. 3rd ed. Leiden, Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grienberger, Th. v. 1900. Untersuchungen zur gotischen Wortkunde. Vienna, Gerold.Google Scholar
Hirt, Hermann. 1932. Handbuch des Urgermanischen, vol. 2. Heidelberg, Winter.Google Scholar
Kluge, Friedrich. 1953. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. 16th ed. by Götze, Alfred. Berlin, de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, Wolfgang. 1953. Handbuch des Gotischen. Munich, Beck.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehiste, Ilse. 1960. An acoustic-phonetic study of internal open juncture. Phonetica, Supplementum ad Vol. 5.Google Scholar
Lehiste, Ilse. 1964. Juncture. Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences 171-200. Basel and New York, Karger.Google Scholar
Moulton, William G. 1948. The phonemes of Gothic. Lg. 24. 76–86.Google Scholar
Prokosch, E. 1939. A comparative Germanic grammar. Philadelphia, Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Streitberg, Wilhelm. 1920. Gotisches Elementarbuch. 5th-6th ed. Heidelberg, Winter.Google Scholar
Twaddell, W. F. 1948. The prehistoric Germanic short syllabics. Lg. 24. 139–51.Google Scholar