Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-ggg9q Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-06-01T15:39:02.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The source of the gothic fourth weak conjugation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2026

G. Lee Fullerton
G. Lee Fullerton*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The traditional assumption of a cognate relationship between the Gothic 4th class of weak verbs and the Sanskrit athematic 9th class necessitates heavy dependence on analogical leveling in deriving the Gothic present indicative paradigm. Saussure and Benveniste have shown that Sanskrit 9th-class stems reflect ‘form 2‘ verbal roots with nasal infix and laryngeal suffix. This results in the stem-final sequence IE *-nVH-, where V stands for the ablaut alternation e ~ o ~ ϕ. In Sanskrit and other Indo-European languages, the zero grade of these stems can also appear with thematic conjugation. If such a thematic conjugation is posited for Germanic as well, the Gothic present can be derived without recourse to analogical leveling. The Gothic preterit is equally regular if the full grade is posited for V of *-nVH-.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , June 1971 , pp. 375 - 380
Copyright
Copyright © 1971 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

Annerholm, Hjalmar. 1956. Studien över de inkoativa verben på na(n) i gotiskan och de nordiska fornspråken. (Stockholm studies in Scandinavian philology, 14.) Lund: Blom.Google Scholar
Bammesberger, Alfred. 1969. Germanic *-hug-di-z. Lg. 45. 532–7.Google Scholar
Bennett, William H. 1962. The parent suffix in Germanic weak verbs of Class III. Lg. 38. 135–41.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1935. Origines de la formation des noms en indo-européen. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve.Google Scholar
Cowgill, Warren. 1959. The inflection of the Germanic ō-presents. Lg. 35. 1–15.Google Scholar
Kieckers, Ernst. 1928. Handbuch der vergleichenden gotischen Grammatik. Munich: Hueber.Google Scholar
Krahe, Hans. 1967a. Germanische Sprachwissenschaft. 6th ed., vol. 2. (Sammlung Göschen, 780.) Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Krahe, Hans. 1967b. Historische Laut- und Formenlehre des Gotischen. 2nd ed. by Elmar Seebold. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Krause, Wolfgang. 1968. Handbuch des Gotischen. 3rd ed. Munich: Beck.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy. 1956. L'apophonie en indo-européen. Wroclaw: Polska Akademia Nauk.Google Scholar
M killet, Antoine. 1934. Introduction à l'étude comparative des langues indo-européennes. 7th ed. Paris: Hachette. (Reprinted 1964, University of Alabama Press.).Google Scholar
Pedersen, Holger. 1893a. r-n-Stämme. Studien über den Stammwechsel in der Declination der idg. Nomina. KZ 32. 240–72.Google Scholar
Pedersen, Holger. 1893b. Das Präsensinfix n. IF 2. 285–332.Google Scholar
Prokosch, Eduard. 1939. A comparative Germanic grammar. Philadelphia: LSA.Google Scholar
Puhvel, Jaan. 1960. Laryngeals and the Indo-European verb. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1879. Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes. Leipzig. (Reprinted 1968 by Georg Olms, Hildesheim.).Google Scholar
Streitberg, Wilhelm. 1896. Urgermanische Grammatik. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Wright, Joseph. 1910. Grammar of the Gothic language. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar