Linguistic Society of America

On the Development of the Greek IntonationAuthor(s): Jerzy KurylowiczReviewed work(s):Source: Language, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Sep., 1932), pp. 200-210Published by: Linguistic Society of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/409650 .Accessed: 28/01/2012 05:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Linguistic Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language.

http://www.jstor.org

ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GREEK INTONATION

JERZY KURYLOWICZ

UNIVERSITY OF LWoW

[An attempt is made to show that the intonation designated by the Greek circumflex is not inherited from IE, but is produced partly by specifically Greek contractions, and partly by the analogical extension of the intonation thus arising to morphologically similar forms.]

The traditional theory of the Indo-European origin of Greek intona- tions is founded on the comparison of Vedic with Greek and on the comparison of Lithuanian with Greek. As to Slavonic, it seems to pre- sent a development more recent than Lithuanian and therefore its testi- mony regarding intonations is hardly to be accepted as an independent one (cf. my article, Le probl~me des intonations balto-slaves, in Rocznik Slawistyczny 10. 1-80). Streitberg thought that certain phenomena concerning abbreviation or conservation of final long vowels in Germanic were related to the corresponding phenomena in Lithuanian and were to be explained by original differences of intonation. But if, as has been shown in the article just quoted, these Lithuanian phenomena have nothing to do with intonation, although this language offers a distinc- tion between two intonations, the existence of similar phenomena in Germanic, even if complete parallelism between Germanic and Lithu- anian has been proved, does not involve the existence of intonations in Protogermanic. It is possible that the rather complicated treatment of final vowels in Germanic depends not only upon the phonetic cir- cumstances (whether the vowel is short, long, or a diphthong, whether it is final or followed by a consonant, whether this consonant is an oc- clusive, s, or a sonant), but also upon the functional value of the pho- netic elements in question (accounting for secondary arrangements). In his book Sprachkorper und Sprachfunktion, Horn has shown how differences of phonetic treatment are to be explained by different de- grees of functional value. This, however, does not interest us for the moment. The chief point is that there are so many principles explain- ing the differentiation of finalvowels that to introduce a new and a prob- lematic one is to complicate the matter still further.

200

ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF GREEK INTONATION 201

A survey of Vedic dissyllabic vowels (cf. my article, Quelques prob- lImes metriques du Rigvyda, in Rocznik Orjentalistyczny 4) shows that on the whole their dissyllabic character is etymological. But not all vowels proceeding from contraction are dissyllabic in the Rigveda. We find only seven examples (five different words) of the ablative ending -dt scanned as two syllables (Arnold, Vedic Metre 99) and not one case of a dissyllabic -d- in dya (dative sing. of a-stems), which etymologically must be the result of a contraction. There is no sure example of a dissyllabic -ds (nominative pl. of a-stems) or of a dissyllabic -ais (in- strumental pl. of a-stems), where prehistoric contractions seem also pretty sure. We find no sure case of the dissyllabic character of the optative suffix -e- (< -oi- < -o + i-), or of the subjunctive suffix

-d- (< -j/5- < -e/o- + -e/o-), etc. The only case where a dissyllabic Vedic ending corresponds to a Greek ending with circumflex intonation is the -Jm of the genitive pl. (Greek -cv). It is, however, to be re- membered that the Greek ending -cw is never dissyllabic. There is also no trace left of the originally dissyllabic character of the dative ending -w, of the optative suffix -o0- or of the subjunctive suffix -7/w-. All these contractions must have been effected before the limitation of the accent to the three last syllables. We have X'yo suE, XMyflrE and not *XEIoL-E, *XEYr-r < *XEyb-6-~y., *XeY)-e-rE, otKWV and not *0 K;V <

*o•K6-WV. Even the long vowel of the second member of compounds

like WA-77or is never dissyllabic, although it is of a more recent origin than the long vowels just mentioned.

But the apparently weightiest argument that has been advanced in favour of the Indo-European origin of Greek intonations, was that of Bezzenberger, BB 7.66 ff., who compared systematically the flexional endings of Greek with those of Lithuanian. The Lithuanian difference between algd and algos is, according to Bezzenberger, genetically the same as the Greek difference between aXpi and &Xpis. It is not our task to dis- cuss here the reasons of this fundamental error of Bezzenberger, which has influenced Indo-European linguistics for generations. Suffice it to observe that the possibility of such a comparison between Greek and Lithuanian is swamped by the recent results of Slavonic linguistics (I refer to the above mentioned article in RS 10). In his Litauische Mundarten 2.201, Specht has formulated a law according to which there is no distinction of intonation on the last syllable of Lithuanian words, because the long vowel or diphthong of the final syllable may show only the so-called circumflex intonation. But under the influence of current ideas concerning certain secondary phonetical phenomena

202 JERZY KURYLOWICZ

(as accent-shift and special abbreviation of final vowels) Specht admits that a previously existing distinction of intonation on final syllables has been eliminated in a prehistoric period of Lithuanian.

In reality the comparison between Lithuanian and Greek in the matter of intonations is as specious as etymologies based on similarity of sounds. Bezzenberger had been the victim of an illusion consisting in the using of the term intonation for two functionally' different things (as one and the same sound may be functionally different in two different languages); even the usage of the same symbols for both languages (' ' ') may have contributed to this illusion. Moreover comparisons estab- lished between Lithuanian finals and Greek finals do not yield homo- geneous results in all cases. If algos, tos correspond to

aX,?ps, ris, then

algq, til should correspond to *•daXpi, i*rv, which is not the case. If

algd corresponds to aX'pi, the ancient locative (now adverb) anksti should correspond to Greek locatives in *-ol instead of -ol. The final combination vowel + nasal is susceptible of intonation in Lithuanian, but not in Greek etc. But we will not insist on detail. The principal thing to be remembered is that not details of systems, but systems must be compared, as has ever and ever been repeated by Meillet. But as far as we know no attempt has been made till now to understand the

system of Greek intonation, i.e. the Greek intonations in relation to their functional value. There are grammatical categories in Greek where such functional value is apparent (see below), but they have not re- ceived the attention they deserve.

We shall not lose any words on the strange constructions based upon the simultaneous admission of the Indo-European character of Greek, Lithuanian, Germanic, etc. phenomena. Compare, e.g., Brugmann, KVglGr.1 54: the circumflex intonation in Indo-European is due either to contraction (as in Greek r7tA < -d + ei), or to loss of the second member of a long diphthong (as in Lithuanian akmu6 compared with Greek aK.' cV), or to loss of a syllable (as in Greek 7r qa < -d + so).

It seems to us that if we succeed in understanding the intonation system of the Greek language we will find it impossible not only to trace that system back to the Indo-European period, but even to any period much older than the oldest Greek documents (Homer). For the de- termination of the function of Greek intonation it is sufficient to explain the role of the circumflex intonation; the acute intonation is nothing else than a lack of circumflex intonation, i.e., it indicates the normally

1 The function of the intonation in Lithuanian is described in the article re- ferred to (RS 10), for Greek intonation cf. below.

ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF GREEK INTONATION 203

accented vowel not subjected to special phonetic or morphological con- ditions. The question of the physical description of both intonations is, for our purposes, an irrelevant one, because it is clear that by the fundamental linguistic (or rather psychological) law of contrast a rela- tion such as, e.g., lack of intonation descending intonation may at any moment, by internal opposition, develop into rising intonation

"descending intonation. The Greek' circumflex is conditioned in the penult and does not exist

in the antepenult. Distinction of intonation in unaccented syllables occurs only in final syllables containing diphthongs, but not in final sylla- bles containing simple long vowels, and not in the penult. But it is chiefly in final accented syllables and in monosyllabic words that the Greek circumflex is autonomous.

A first superficial analysis of the whole available material referring to autonomous circumflex, leads to the following tripartition3:

(1) Circumflex due to a historic contraction: do os > (pcas, E•byev•os >

El'ryov-s, etc. (2) Circumflex due to a morphological reason (see below): 0P (aorist

of faLvw), Kp 'heart', etc. (3) Circumflex ascribed to prehistoric phonetical reasons: KaX ,

7r~SI, fois, etc. Compared with the groups (2) and (3) the group (1) representing his-

toric contractions is by far the largest. A great part of Greek mor- phology presents the phenomena of historic contraction, paradigms of declension and conjugation as well as processes of derivation. We have contracted paradigms in all the three declensions (types OvKI, 'EpAsis; 7rXov s; ye'vos, IYEVI, K ai&vSw, s, oo-Obdo - 7rt~j, 7r6Xts, 3aaoXEb03, 7 etc.), monosyllabic contracted substantives of all three genders (e.g. ral~, Xas,

Op , ols, oi~, ~cp&s, Kps, a7p, Yppp, etc.,), case-forms which are always contracted even in otherwise non-contracting paradigms (rCo&v < ,rqa'wi , -w < -ao in the corresponding masculine type, &tpnrov < tw6p roo), contracted derivatives in -ovs, -aLos, -ido, -o1io, -cn < -fos,

-aios, -4ios, -bi'os, -ecw', contracted pronominal forms (like A.oi, ooi, oi,

2 The Greek dialects are not being considered in this paper, the data concerning their systems of intonation being too fragmentary and uncertain.

3 Several cases of autonomous circumflex have been disregarded because of the uncertainty of the tradition. Adverbs in-i seem to be in reality adverbs in -5 (datives). Grammarians disagree about the intonation of LxOvs, pvs, b opvs, and itvs; and the intonation of Homeric Z71v and Bov is scarcely sure enough to be treated on a level with cases like iaX5, rLjLjS, 0o6s, etc. The endings -E L,-E L of the the- matic verb have been disregarded because of the uncertainty of their etymology.

204 JERZY KURYLOWICZ

W-Esl, t tC, typiZv,

, etc.), contracted presents in -a4, -w , -b and futures in -4w, verbal forms which are contracted even in otherwise non-contracting paradigms (rTOLdiat, reOdihat; CPpov, Epfpn < 'VPipEo, (pfpeat; (p~pELt < (ppeev), contracted subjunctive and optative forms (of the -yt verbs, of the aorists in -n77, -tvP, of the medio-passive perfects like

0#E3'XOuaL), etc., etc. We can safely admit that in view of the important r'le played by contraction in Greek grammar, groups (2), (3) of our classification contain only a very small part of all cases of autonomous circumflex intonation.

The groups (1) and (2) are generally explained as properly Greek phe- nomena. The difference between the two groups consists in that the circumflex of (1) is phonetically conditioned, whereas in group (2) it is morphological. But in our opinion a deeper interpretation of its mor- phological character throws a light also on the circumflex of group (3), and seems to suggest, that there is no fundamental difference between group (2) and (3). But if it is so, if the circumflex of group (3) is also morphologically conditioned, then there is no reason whatever to sup- pose that the Greek intonations have been inherited from Indo-European.

Let us therefore examine, item by item, group (2): All monosyllabic neuters of the third declension offer the circumflex,

if the radical vowel is long or a diphthong, e.g. Kip, 7•rp,

OwKp, etc. This rule appears as if a corollary of the rule that all polysyllabic neuters of the third declension shift the accent as far as possible towards the initial syllable of the word (there is no exception to this rule), cf. 6voya, &XEupap, oVELbos, r'Xayos, aivart, etc. The two morae of the monosyllable act as two syllables. The simplest explanation of this phenomenon is the fol- lowing: in all contracted dissyllabic neuters the circumflex is phonetic because they must have been paroxytone before the contraction (as pahos > ope, ppbap > ppip, iosr > ois etc.). That is, if we disregard the small group of inherited monosyllables like Kip, the neuters of the third declension presented either the recessive accent or the circumflex. After the contraction had been effected, the inherited monosyllables followed the general pattern.

The proportion Zeb : Zei = avp : vep (as concerns accentuation) implies that the diphthong of the monosyllable is treated as if resulting from contraction (which in fact is not the case). But if it resulted from contraction then of course the difference of intonation between ZEbS and ZeM would be phonetically justified. As above we must admit the influence of really contracted forms, that is the working of the following formula: the vocative presents either the recessive accent or the circum-

ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF GREEK INTONATION 205

flex (if the word is a contracted monosyllable). Hence the analogical transfer of the circumflex to monosyllables which never have been sub- ject to contraction.

The monosyllabic forms of the personal verb (with long vowel or diph- thong) have always the circumflex, e.g. /i <

*gadt (athematic aorist). As in the preceding cases the old uncontracted forms (03i etc.) adopt the pattern of contracted forms (ara- < asre etc.). The circumflex of the latter is phonetic, because all personal forms of the Greek verb have the recessive accentuation.

All these examples show, for certain grammatical categories, an inti- mate relation between the recessive accent in dissyllabic and polysylla- bic words, and the circumflex intonation of monosyllables. For the two last cases this relation has been pointed out by Vendryes (Traite d'accentuation grecque 47). Our task will be now to show not only that this formula applies to a certain number of other cases, but that, conveniently enlargened, it covers practically all cases of group (3).

The monosyllabic stems of fos~, aPs and ypaDs (genitive pobs, vabs, ypabs) must be compared with dissyllabic u-stems. In fact the exist- ence of case-forms like po-(F)6s, j0-(F) , po-(F)Cov, etc. as opposed to the nominative P3o?, etc. suffices to make the speaking subject conceive the latter as fb-v-s (va-v-s, ypad-v-).4 But it is known that all substantive u-stems have an inherent recessive accent in Greek (only the oblique cases of u-stems are oxytone, if dissyllabic, e.g. yov6~F, 5opF's beside Iyb6v, 56pv). Therefore poos, vabs, ypavs (with circumflex intonation) are nothing else but the result of an interpretation *pb-v~-s, *d-v-s, *ypa-v-s (and not *po-b-s, *va-'-s *,pa-b-s). The same is true for the monosyllabic stems of 6s(a-s), j1is and pDts (genitive br, orbs, ivbs, apvbs), conceived as *i-v-s, *0b-v-S, * b-v-s, *5pb-v-s. There is a very instructive difference between these four stems and the derivatives in -5- and -rS-, like txo-'v, qr7v's etc. Whereas in a prehistoric period the u-stems had obtained a recessive accent, all u-stems had remained oxytone. There was no pattern to change the intonation of '77rv's (gen. 5Tirbos) to a circumflex, because the accented suffix -(t)$- had always been felt as a unit and as different from the unaccented suffix -u- and did not, therefore, admit an analysis -(t)u + u-. The analysis -u + u- was possible only with root-monosyllables like bs, where the oblique cases were oxytone, because the oblique cases of u-stems are either oxytone (like yovFUr, aopFbs) or else have recessive accent (like pAOvos, rfeXKvos); l-stems, on the other hand, accent always the suffix, never the ending

SCf. the secondary length in Pv7vs, ypqvs.

206 JERZY KURYLOWICZ

or the root. The oblique cases of -(t)ii-stems, where -uy-

is always accented, could not therefore have been associated with the correspond- ing cases of u-stems, where u is never accented.

Our explanation is confirmed by the paradigm of Zebs where the lack of case-forms beginning in ZEF- (as

*ZEF6• corresponding to Vedic dy6hh)

sufficiently accounts for the lack of circumflex intonation in the nom. Zebs.

All substantive stems in - t- have the recessive accentuation. There- fore the monosyllables KI~ 'curculio' and Xis 'lion'5 (gen. KLbS, XL6t), conceived as *KL-L-s, *XLt--S, have the recessive accent, hence their circumflex intonation; cf. bFL s: FF = KLS, XL6 *K-LS, *XL-L. But "1s "force" has no circumflex because its genitive is

'v6•s and not *W~s

and therefore its nominative cannot be conceived as a contraction from

The indefinite adverbs wrj, Rwc, w&s, rol are enclitic and oxytone, the corresponding interrogatives, dependent interrogatives, and relatives are all perispomena. If we compare dissyllabic adverbs which have differ- ent accentuation according to their function, we remark that they are oxytone when indefinite (as 6ri, wor7, Yrodv) and paroxytone when inter- rogative, etc. (i-re, R6re, wrt6ev). We may assume that the influence of the forms with recessive accent on the monosyllables was made pos- sible by monosyllabic forms resulting from contraction (as roD, ob). Some of the Greek grammarians distinguished also viv from vvY, confin- ing the former to the strict sense of time, the latter to that of sequence or inference (= 5' or o3v).

The difference between an oxytone monosyllable with indefinite meaning and corresponding perispomenon with definite meaning exists also, in our opinion, in the case of JEs 'one', which is oxytone when used in the sense of 'anyone' in the compounds Aq-eds, obi-els. The relation of els to ,LA?7els is the same as that of i to 9reei. The circumflex of eTs is of course secondary (like that of ri5, r 6, w~7s, ro). It must be rela- tively recent, being posterior to the passage of *bs• > Eis. The inter- esting detail is that the functional value of the circumflex intonation creates new circumflexes which have nothing to do with any kind of contraction.

Like els the nom. sing. ris is of a relatively recent origin (<*rdhvs).6

5 All grammarians agree about the circumflex intonation in the accusatives. As to the nominative, Herodian and Aischrion seem to admit KSS, X~s against Aristarchos (Chandler, A practical introduction to Greek accentuation2 162).

6 In the Septuaginta we also find a late acc. sing. irav (after the nom rais).

ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF GREEK INTONATION 207

Its circumflex intonation corresponds to the recessive accent found in certain cases of the paradigm. Whereas the genitive ravr6s and the dative ravnr are regularly oxytone, the forms r&ivrotv (gen.-dat. dual), irawrov (gen. plural) and riro- (dat. plural) have the recessive accent. As in all the preceding categories it is not our task here to investigate what the reason of this recessive accentuation is. All we allege is that the primary phenomena of accent-shifts in dissyllabic and polysyllabic forms are reflected, as in a mirror, by intonation-changes in closely related monosyllables.

The long vowels of eIs and iras do not result from contraction but from compensatory lengthening after the disappearance of v (or after the loss of nasalization). In general such long vowels have the acute in- tonation, if there is no particular reason for the circumflex intonation (as in the two preceding cases). This is very clear in the case of the acc. plur. where we have -obs and -a's in the two first declensions, but -oos, -eEl (< -b6v, -f's : eirevei < *e&Cyieps if this explanation of Wackernagel's is correct) in the third declension, because the intonation of the corre- sponding nominatives in -ovs, -CEs (< -bes, -4s) has been introduced into the accusative. In the two first declensions such influence has been impossible, because the endings of the nom. plural are -o0, -al. Com- pare also the acute intonations of the nom. sing. of the participles in -obv, -eLs, -&'s, etc. Goiob, 6'vros, a6vTL, a6vra, etc., (the accentuation is not recessive, but columnal7 cf. &rosobs, &dro66ro3 and not *&rb7ovs, * rborvros).

The formula concerning the relation between recessive accentuation and circumflex intonation may be generalized as follows: Whenever, in a grammatical category, forms accented on the final syllable coexist with forms accented on the penult, the former obtain the circumflex intonation, if the final syllable contains a long vowel or a diphthong and if it may be conceived as a contracted syllable. It is clear that our first formula becomes only a special case of the general formula, because a monosyllabic word may be considered as a word accented on its last syllable. Examples:

The ending of the dative sing. of the first decl. (-? or - ) and of the dative sing. of the second decl. (-Cp). In the 3-d decl. the oxytone stems have either the accented ending -i (only with monosyllabic stems) or a complex consisting of accented suffix + unaccented t (-f&, -pL, -15t, -6at,

-dr7r etc.), or, finally, a long syllable resulting from contraction

(-ed < -4-? in e&-yevet, -o! < -6-L in al=oL). As the ending of the dative

7 For the meaning of this term see below.

208 JERZY KURYLOWICZ

sing. of the first and second decl. contains the characteristic element i which appears also in the contracting group (type

e'•reve), it is conceived

as resulting from a contraction and obtains the circumflex. In other words: elyeveZ has a phonetic circumflex, because -eZ was once dissyllabic and accented on the first syllable (-4-t), and KaXw3 has a morphological circumflex, because it is modelled on the pattern of the type

eyeve•. The ultimate reason why the monosyllabic complex -c has the circumflex intonation on its last syllable is that the dissyllabic complexes -C', -lat, etc. have the recessive accent within their two syllables. But this pattern of the dissyllabic complexes has worked only through the medium of the contracted types (-e6 etc.).

It is not because they result from an Indo-European contraction, but because they are modelled after forms proceeding from Greek contrac- tion, that the endings -a and - c have the circumflex intonation.

The accentuation of oxytone nominal stems may be either 'columnal' or 'marginal' (we use the expressions introduced first by de Saussure in his famous article on Lithuanian accentuation, cf. Recueil des publica- tions scientifiques 532): an oxytone paradigm has columnal accent- uation if the accent is always on the same syllable counting from the beginning of the word (e.g. 7art-p, rarpbs, WraTepa, rarp&o-,s where the accent is always on the second syllable), and if the shortest form of the

paradigm is oxytone (arwT"p).

Another example: ~XTls, eXTrios, XrtL•a, etc. An oxytone paradigm has 'marginal' accentuation, if all its forms are accented on the last syllable, e.g., KaXbs, -oi, -4, etc. or rut, -1s, -1, etc. The following rule applies to Greek oxytone paradigms: forms with marginal accentuation have the circumflex, if there exist corre- sponding forms with columnal accentuation. For instance, 7rt/ 7 and KaXw have the circumflex intonation, because there are corresponding forms with -t ending and columnal accentuation (as irotpit, XTr•irt, etc.). The same is true of rtEtis (s-ending as in rotzivos, c'XrLa0s, etc.). This correspondence between columnal and marginal paradigms has of course been established through the medium of contracted paradigms. For instance the direct model of -is (< -ps) is the circumflex of cases like -ois < -6bos, -4(o)os, -6(t)os, the indirect model is the columnal accentuation of cases like -Evos, -ipos, -5os, -•bos, -Amros, etc.

The same is true of the genitive pl. ending -wv which must have the circumflex every time it is accentuated (KaXMv, robov), because there are

corresponding forms with columnal accentuation (rotphvwv, X'Xriwv, etc.). In adverbial formations the ending escapes from this influence

s We disregard of course the peculiar accentuation of the vocative.

ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF GREEK INTONATION 209

of barytone forms and offers the acute intonation: cIrro0WV, 7rpo-roCbv,

qz•'obw'V, fba

-rw'V. The adverbs in -ws are accented as the genitive plural of the corre- sponding adjective, i.e., they retain the accent of the adjective. If the latter is oxytone, we obtain the three types rvx60rwS, E•byEvYiL

(> ebyEvYls) and KaXWs with circumflex intonation after eibvrGjs (the type with mar- ginal accentuation resulting from columnal accentuation by means of contraction). Originally the -os suffix must have been restricted to the o-stems, as it is probably related to the Indo-European ablative- ending, but the spreading of -ws over all consonantal stems must ante- date the circumflex intonation of the type KaX•s. One may make the same remark with regard to the adverbs in -ot (originally only with o-stems). The attaching of -ot to other stems (cf. also i~v8o, 'ot) and the subsequent contractions, e.g. lHaLavoZi (<

Hllaav•a), Illepatoi

(< Il•Epat•eis), IIvtoi (< IIv06) caused the -ot of forms like ,vyxoZ (< livx6s;

'in the interior') to be interpreted as resulting from a contraction of a dissyllabic complex with the first syllable carrying the accent.

The optative suffix -ot- of the thematic verbs is treated as if it had the circumflexed intonation (raL~ebots, raicebot and not *wraLEvoLs, *ralaevoL). This is easily accounted for by the fact that the optative element -1- was still productive after the period of the limitation of accent: rL0eEepv, t56oAe-V <

r-ti---~~,y, 6lab-j-eUl and not *rLWELjEv, *~iowev. The exist- ence of such forms was sufficient to make the speaking subject decompose -oL- into -o + t-.

In summing up we may say that it is unmethodical to draw a dis- tinction between group (2) and group (3). In (2) we have the cases where the morphological circumflex is quite clear and generally accepted. But if we try to apply the corresponding morphological principle to group (3) we find that there is not one case left for which it would be necessary to recur to Indo-European. The morphological principal is the following: monosyllabic forms become circumflex, if related dissyl- labic and polysyllabic forms offer the recessive accent. Last syllables of dissyllabic and polysyllabic words become circumflex if these syllables correspond to dissyllabic paroxytone complexes in related forms. In this manner recessive intonation in the syllable corresponds to recessive accent in the word. This equivalence between circumflex and recessive accent (which, as one knows, holds good for really contracted forms), could have been established only after the first contractions, i.e., after the disappearance of intervocalic a and t. It cannot be essentially older than Homer, because the Homeric text knows both contracted

210 JERZY KURYLOWICZ

and uncontracted forms; therefore the main bulk of the text was com-

posed when the first vowel contractions had already begun. A counterproof is furnished by the innumerable cases where a final

long vowel or a final diphthong has the acute intonation, because it cannot be conceived as resulting from the contraction of a form with recessive accent.

The dual endings -&, -a' (in the first two declensions) do not show any trace of the ending -e and are therefore not conceived as resulting from contraction (contrast -4,

-.3, -is, where the elements -L, -s characteristic

of the dative and genitive, have been recognized). The same is true of the endings -ol, -at of the nom. plural (no final -s). From the Greek

point of view, to take another example, the verbal endings -lia, -aat,

-rat, -vraL cannot be analyzed and interpreted as products of con- tractions and are therefore treated as having the acute intonation, i.e.

they admit the proparoxytonesis of the corresponding verbal forms. This applies also to infinitives in -vat, -(a)al, and to adverbs like xaiac where the t- element has ceased to be felt as connected with the dative- locative ending t because of the special function of these forms.

It seems that besides the forms proceeding from contraction there is

only one morphological group owing its circumflex to a phonetic and not to a morphological reason, the vocatives fo6, -ypai, IA,

iXTV, 3atLXEv,

7xoZ, Zei, etc. As a rule all such vocatives, unless influenced by for- mally identical nominatives (as in the case of tfb7P, alcv,

•bX•'p's, 7rotAfV,

bor p etc.) present the circumflex intonation. Of course the peculiar falling intonation of the vocative became phonemic and morphological only after the opposition between acute and circumflex had arisen. A

very instructive parallel is found in Serbo-Croatian, where every voca- tive has the falling intonation on the first syllable, regardless of the accentuation and the intonation of all the other forms of the paradigm (compare also the accentuation of the Indo-European vocative, which

very often does not agree with the vowel-degrees of the suffix and of the

root). Such details prove that the 'natural' intonation of the vocative is so rooted in actual pronunciation as to resist the analogical action of related forms. This explanation of the circumflex of ZED seems to me

preferable to that given by Vendryes (47d). The Greek intonations seem thus to be a linguistic phenomenon

properly Greek, not inherited, independent of apparently similar phe- nomena in Balto-Slavic. Their origin was purely phonetic, but, like the vowel-degrees of Indo-European ablaut, they were soon charged with a grammatical function in certain morphological categories.