[Criticism of Kurylowiez' development of the theory that IE ǝ was a consonant. His studies have led to a number of acceptable etymologies; but these can be explained on the earlier assumptions, while a number of others are inconsistent with the theory, which as a whole cannot be maintained. Hittite h is the continuant of an Indo-Hittite consonant that was lost in Indo-European.]

[The Indo-European affinities of the Hittite language being now generally accepted as proved by the inflectional forms and most of the usual criteria, the primary desideratum of linguistic scholars is the further association of Indo-European etymologies with the known Hittite vocabulary, which has so far proceeded more slowly. The subjoined etymologies are offered in the hope of adding something to our identification of the elements in the Hittite word-list.]

[Attempts to reconstruct complete paradigms for IE personal pronouns fail, not because the forms have shifted in manifold ways during the development of the separate languages, but because such paradigms were not then in existence. The parent language had for these pronouns only a number of stems used either by themselves or in combination with various particles, and with little, if any, differentiation of case usage. The development of paradigms, parallel to those of nouns and other pronouns, comes only at a later time.]