No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 April 2026
[The author argues that Hittite is not a continuation of Indo-European, but that both Indo-European and Hittite are developments of one and the same language, which he terms Indo-Hittite. The basis of the argument is that there are a number of phenomena in which Hittite is more archaic than Indo-European.]
1 See Forrer, Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 61.26; Sturtevant, Lang. 2. 25–34, TAPA 60. 25–37.
2 BSL 32. 1–28 (1931).
3 AJP 53. 193–212 (1932).
4 See JAOS 50. 125–8.
5 See Lang. 7. 115–24.
6 AJP 50. 360–9.
7 Probably the Hittite suffix tar is connected with the IE instrumental suffix dhro; cf. especially the Av. infin. haraϑrai ‘to guard’.
8 op. cit. = BSL 32. 1–28.
9 Lang. 6. 164–93.
10 AJP 51. 251–72.
11 Lang. 8. 18–26. Kent neglects to point out that his doctrine enables us at last to connect Goth. waist directly with Gk. o
σϑα ‘you know’, both from IE *woitstha.
12 Madd. 126 and ffnn. 1–5.
13 IF 40. 57–61; Sturtevant Lang. 6. 223.
14 Lang. 8. 1–10. Cf. Gray, Lang. S. 191 f.
15 I assume that the root of this verb was dhēi. There are several Hittite forms with original long diphthong and Skt. presents the aorist forms adhītam, dheyam, dheyur, adhīmahi, dhīmahi, adhāyi, dhāyi.
16 For the first two classes of verbs, see Delaporte, Gramm. 49, 51; Sommer, Ahhiyava-Urkunden 229 and references; for the verbs in na, see Sommer, BoSt. 10. 22; Götze, Madduwattas 129 f.; Sturtevant, Lang. 7. 167–71.
17 Wiedemann, Handbuch der Litauischen Sprache 123; Brugmann, Grundriss 22. 3. 74.
18 Rocznik Orjentalistyczny 6. 201–4.
19 See JAOS 52. 10 f.
20 IF 37. 227 f.