Chapter I: Phonology

10. _The Latin Accent._--It will be convenient to begin with some
account of the most important discovery made since the application of
scientific method to the study of Latin, for, though it is not
strictly a part of phonology, it is wrapped up with much of the
development both of the sounds and, by consequence, of the inflexions.
It has long been observed (as we have seen § 4, iv. above) that the
restriction of the word-accent in Latin to the last three syllables of
the word, and its attachment to a long syllable in the penult, were
certainly not its earliest traceable condition; between this, the
classical system, and the comparative freedom with which the
word-accent was placed in pro-ethnic Indo-European, there had
intervened a period of first-syllable accentuation to which were due
many of the characteristic contractions of Oscan and Umbrian, and in
Latin the degradation of the vowels in such forms as _accentus_ from
_ad_ + _cantus_ or _praecipitem_ from _prae_ + _caput_- (§ 19 below).
R. von Planta (_Osk.-Umbr. Grammatik_, 1893, i. p. 594) pointed out
that in Oscan also, by the 3rd century B.C., this
first-syllable-accent had probably given way to a system which limited
the word-accent in some such way as in classical Latin. But it
remained for C. Exon, in a brilliant article (_Hermathena_ (1906),
xiv. 117, seq.), to deduce from the more precise stages of the change
(which had been gradually noted, see e.g. F. Skutsch in Kroll's
_Altertumswissenschaft im letzten Vierteljahrhundert_, 1905) their
actual effect on the language.

11. _Accent in Time of Plautus._--The rules which have been
established for the position of the accent in the time of Plautus are
these:

(i.) The quantity of the final syllable had no effect on accent.

(ii.) If the penult was long, it bore the accent (_amabamus_).

(iii.) If the penult was short, then

(a) if the ante-penult was long, it bore the accent (_amabimus_);

(b) if the ante-penult was short, then

(i.) if the ante-ante-penult was long, the accent was on the
ante-penult (_amicítia_); but

(ii.) if the ante-ante-penult was also short, it bore the accent
(_cólumine, puéritia_).

_Exon's Laws of Syncope._--With these facts are now linked what may be
called Exon's Laws, viz:--

_In pre-Plautine Latin_ in all words or word-groups of four or more
syllables whose chief accent is on one long syllable, a short
unaccented medial vowel was syncopated; thus *_quínquedecem_ became
*_quínqdecem_ and thence _quíndecim_ (for the -_im_ see § 19),
*_súps-emere_ became *_súpsmere_ and that _sumere_ (on -_psm- v.
inf._) *_súrregere_, *_surregémus_, and the like became _surgere_,
_surgémus_, and the rest of the paradigm followed; so probably _validé
bonus_ became _valdé bonus_, _exterá viam_ became _extrá viam_; so
*_supo-téndo_ became _subtendo_ (pronounced _sup-tendo_), *_aridére_,
*_avidére_ (from _aridus_, _avidus_) became _ardére_, _audére_. But
the influence of cognate forms often interfered; _posterí-die_ became
_postrídie_, but in _posterórum_, _posterárum_ the short syllable was
restored by the influence of the trisyllabic cases, _pósterus_,
_pósteri_, &c., to which the law did not apply. Conversely, the nom.
*_áridor_ (more correctly at this period *_aridos_), which would not
have been contracted, followed the form of _ardórem_ (from
*_aridórem_), _ardére_, &c.

The same change produced the monosyllabic forms _nec_, _ac_, _neu_,
_seu_, from _neque_, &c., before consonants, since they had no accent
of their own, but were always pronounced in one breath with the
following word, _neque tántum_ becoming _nec tantum_, and the like. So
in Plautus (and probably always in spoken Latin) the words _nemp(e)_,
_ind(e)_, _quipp(e)_, _ill(e)_, are regularly monosyllables.

12. _Syncope of Final Syllables._--It is possible that the frequent
but far from universal syncope of final syllables in Latin (especially
before -_s_, as in _mens_, which represents both Gr. [Greek: menos]
and Sans. matís = Ind.-Eur. _mntís_, Eng. _mind_) is due also to this
law operating on such combinations as _bona mens_ and the like, but
this has not yet been clearly shown. In any case the effects of any
such phonetic change have been very greatly modified by analogical
changes. The Oscan and Umbrian syncope of short vowels before final
_s_ seems to be an independent change, at all events in its detailed
working. The outbreak of the unconscious affection of slurring final
syllables may have been contemporaneous.

13. _In post-Plautine Latin_ words accented on the ante-antepenult:--

(i.) suffered syncope in the short syllable following the accented
syllable (_bálineae_ became _bálneae_, _puéritia_ became _puértia_
(Horace), _cólumine_, _tégimine_, &c., became _cúlmine_, _tégmine_,
&c., beside the trisyllabic _cólumen_, _tégimen_) unless

(ii.) that short vowel was _e_ or _i_, followed by another vowel (as
in _párietem_, _múlierem_, _Púteoli_), when, instead of contraction,
the accent shifted to the penult, which at a later stage of the
language became lengthened, _pariétem_ giving Ital. _paréete_, Fr.
_paroi_, _Puteóli_ giving Ital. _Pozzuoli_.

The restriction of the accent to the last three syllables was
completed by these changes, which did away with all the cases in which
it had stood on the fourth syllable.

14. _The Law of the Brevis Brevians._--Next must be mentioned another
great phonetic change, also dependent upon accent, which had come
about before the time of Plautus, the law long known to students as
the _Brevis Brevians_, which may be stated as follows (Exon,
_Hermathena_ (1903), xii. 491, following Skutsch in, e.g.,
Vollmöller's _Jahresbericht für romanische Sprachwissenschaft_, i.
33): a syllable long by nature or position, and preceded by a short
syllable, was itself shortened if the word-accent fell immediately
before or immediately after it--that is, on the preceding short
syllable or on the next following syllable. The sequence of syllables
need not be in the same word, but must be as closely connected in
utterance as if it were. Thus _modo_ became _módo_, _voluptatem_
became _volu(p)tatem_, _quid est?_ became _quid est?_ either the _s_
or the _t_ or both being but faintly pronounced.

It is clear that a great number of flexional syllables so shortened
would have their quantity immediately restored by the analogy of the
same inflexion occurring in words not of this particular shape; thus,
for instance, the long vowel of _ama_ and the like is due to that in
other verbs (_pulsa_, _agita_) not of iambic shape. So ablatives like
_modö_, _sono_ get back their -_o_, while in particles like _modo_,
"only," _quomodo_, "how," the shortened form remains. Conversely, the
shortening of the final -_a_ in the nom. sing. fem. of the
_a_-declension (contrast _luna_ with Gr. [Greek: chôrã]) was probably
partly due to the influence of common forms like _ea_, _bona_, _mala_,
which had come under the law.

15. _Effect on Verb Inflexion._--These processes had far-reaching
effects on Latin inflexion. The chief of these was the creation of the
type of conjugation known as the _capio_-class. All these verbs were
originally inflected like _audio_, but the accident of their short
root-syllable, (in such early forms as *_fúgis_, *_fugiturus_,
*_fugisetis_, &c., becoming later _fúgis_, _fugiturus_, _fugeretis_)
brought great parts of their paradigm under this law, and the rest
followed suit; but true forms like _fugire_, _cupire_, _moriri_, never
altogether died out of the spoken language. St Augustine, for
instance, confessed in 387 A.D. (_Epist._ iii. 5, quoted by Exon,
_Hermathena_ (1901), xi. 383,) that he does not know whether _cupi_ or
_cupiri_ is the pass. inf. of _cupio_. Hence we have Ital. _fuggire_,
_morire_, Fr. _fuir_, _mourir_. (See further on this conjugation, C.
Exon, _l.c._, and F. Skutsch, _Archiv für lat. Lexicographie_, xii.
210, two papers which were written independently.)

16. The question has been raised how far the true phonetic shortening
appears in Plautus, produced not by word-accent but by metrical
ictus--e.g. whether the reading is to be trusted in such lines as
_Amph._ 761, which gives us _dedisse_ as the first foot (tribrach) of
a trochaic line "because the metrical ictus fell on the syllable
_ded_-"--but this remarkable theory cannot be discussed here. See the
articles cited and also F. Skutsch, _Forschungen zu Latein. Grammatik
und Metrik_, i. (1892); C. Exon, _Hermathena_ (1903) xii. p. 492, W.
M. Lindsay, _Captivi_ (1900), appendix.

In the history of the vowels and diphthongs in Latin we must
distinguish the changes which came about independently of accent and
those produced by the preponderance of accent in another syllable.

17. _Vowel Changes independent of Accent._--In the former category the
following are those of chief importance:--

(i.) _i_ became _e_ (a) when final, as in _ant-e_ beside Gr. [Greek:
anti], _triste_ besides _tristi-s_, contrasted with e.g., the Greek
neuter [Greek: idri] (the final -_e_ of the infinitive--_regere_,
&c.--is the -_i_ of the locative, just as in the so-called ablatives
_genere_, &c.); (b) before -_r_- which has arisen from -_s_-, as in
_cineris_ beside _cinis_, _cinisculus_; _sero_ beside Gr. [Greek:
i(s)êmi] (Ind.-Eur. *_si-semi_, a reduplicated non-thematic present).

(ii.) Final _o_ became _e_; imperative _sequere_ = Gr. [Greek:
epe(s)o]; Lat. _ille_ may contain the old pronoun *_so_, "he," Gr.
[Greek: ho], Sans. _sa_ (otherwise Skutsch, _Glotta_, i. Hefte 2-3).

(iii.) _el_ became _ol_ when followed by any sound save _e_, _i_ or
_l_, as in _volo_, _volt_ beside _velle_; _colo_ beside Gr. [Greek:
tellomai, polein], Att. [Greek: telos]; _colonus_ for *_quelonus_,
beside _inquilinus_ for *_en-quelenus_.

(iv.) _e_ became _i_ (i.) before a nasal followed by a palatal or
velar consonant (_tingo_, Gr. [Greek: teggô]; _in-cipio_ from
*_en-capio_); (ii.) under certain conditions not yet precisely
defined, one of which was _i_ in a following syllable (_nihil_,
_nisi_, _initium_). From these forms _in_- spread and banished _en_-,
the earlier form.

(v.) The "neutral vowel" ("schwa Indo-Germanicum") which arose in
pro-ethnic Indo-European from the reduction of long _a_, _e_ or _o_ in
unaccented syllables (as in the -_tós_ participles of such roots as
_sta_-, _dhe_-, _do_-, *_st[schwa]tós_, *_dh[schwa]tós_,
*_d[schwa]tós_) became _a_ in Latin (_status con-ditus_ [from
*_con-dhatos_], _datus_), and it is the same sound which is
represented by _a_ in most of the forms of _do_ (_damus_, _dabo_,
&c.).

(vi.) When a long vowel came to stand before another vowel in the same
word through loss of _^i_ or _^u_, it was always shortened; thus the
-_eo_ of intransitive verbs like _candeo_, _caleo_ is for -_e^io_
(where the _e_ is identical with the [eta] in Gr. [Greek: ephanên,
emanên]) and was thus confused with the causative -_eio_ (as in
_moneo_, "I make to think," &c.), where the short _e_ is original. So
_audiui_ became _audii_ and thence _audii_ (the form audivi would have
disappeared altogether but for being restored from _audiveram_, &c.;
conversely _audieram_ is formed from _audii_). In certain cases the
vowels contracted, as in _tres_, _partes_, &c. with -_es_ from
_e^ies_, *_amo_ from _ama(^i)o_.

18. _Of the Diphthongs._

Changes of the diphthongs independent of accent.

(vii.) _eu_ became _ou_ in pro-ethnic Italic, Lat. _novus_: Gr.
[Greek: neos], Lat. _novem_, Umb. _nuviper_ (i.e. _noviper_), "usque
ad noviens": Gr. [Greek: (en-)nea]; in unaccented syllables this
-_ov_- sank to -_u(v)_- as in _denuo_ from _de novo_, _suus_ (which is
rarely anything but an enclitic word), Old Lat. _sovos_: Gr. [Greek:
he(w)os].

(viii.) _ou_, whether original or from _eu_, when in one syllable
became -_u_-, probably about 200 B.C., as in _duco_, Old Lat. _douco_,
Goth, _tiuhan_, Eng. _tow_, Ind.-Eur. *_de^uco_.

(ix.) _ei_ became _i_ (as in _dico_, Old Lat. _deico_: Gr. [Greek:
deik-nymi], _fido_: Gr. [Greek: peithomai], Ind.-Eur. *_bheidho_) just
before the time of Lucilius, who prescribes the spellings _puerei_
(nom. plur.) but _pueri_ (gen. sing.), which indicates that the two
forms were pronounced alike in his time, but that the traditional
distinction in spelling had been more or less preserved. But after his
time, since the sound of _ei_ was merely that of _i_, _ei_ is
continually used merely to denote a long _i_, even where, as in
_faxeis_ for faxis, there never had been any diphthongal sound at all.

(x.) In rustic Latin (Volscian and Sabine) _au_ became _o_ as in the
vulgar terms _explodere_, _plostrum_. Hence arose interesting doublets
of meaning;--_lautus_ (the Roman form), "elegant," but _lotus_,
"washed"; _haustus_, "draught," but _hostus_ (Cato), "the season's
yield of fruit."

(xi.) _oi_ became _oe_ and thence _u_ some time after Plautus, as in
_unus_, Old Lat. _oenus_: Gr. [Greek: oinê] "ace." In Plautus the
forms have nearly all been modernized, save in special cases, e.g. in
_Trin._ i. 1, 2, _immoene facinus_, "a thankless task," has not been
changed to _immune_ because that meaning had died out of the adjective
so that _immune facinus_ would have made nonsense; but at the end of
the same line _utile_ has replaced _oetile_. Similarly in a small
group of words the old form was preserved through their frequent use
in legal or religious documents where tradition was strictly
preserved--_poena_, _foedus_ (neut.), _foedus_ (adj.), "ill-omened."
So the archaic and poetical _moenia_, "ramparts," beside the true
classical form _munia_, "duties"; the historic _Poeni_ beside the
living and frequently used _Punicum_ (_bellum_)--an example which
demonstrates conclusively (_pace_ Sommer) that the variation between
_u_ and _oe_ is not due to any difference in the surrounding sounds.

(xii.) _ai_ became _ae_ and this in rustic and later Latin (2nd or 3rd
century A.D.) simple _e_, though of an open quality--Gr. [Greek:
aithos, aithô], Lat. _aedes_ (originally "the place for the fire");
the country forms of _haedus_, _praetor_ were _edus_, _pretor_ (Varro,
_Ling. Lat._ v. 97, Lindsay, _Lat. Lang._ p. 44).

19. _Vowels and Diphthongs in unaccented Syllables._--The changes of
the short vowels and of the diphthongs in unaccented syllables are too
numerous and complex to be set forth here. Some took place under the
first-syllable system of accent, some later (§§ 9, 10). Typical
examples are _pep_E_rci_ from *_péparcai_ and _ónustus_ from
*_ónostos_ (before two consonants); _concIno_ from *_cóncano_ and
_hosp_I_t_I_s_ from *_hóstipotes_, _legImus_ beside Gr. [Greek:
legomen] (before one consonant); _Sic_U_li_ from *_Siceloi_ (before a
thick _l_, see § 17, 3); _dil_I_g_I_t_ from *_dísleget_ (contrast,
however, the preservation of the second _e_ in _negl_E_g_I_t_);
_occ_U_pat_ from *_opcapat_ (contrast _accipit_ with _i_ in the
following syllable); the varying spelling in _monumentum_ and
_monimentum_, _maxumus_ and _maximus_, points to an intermediate sound
(_ü_) between _u_ and _i_ (cf. Quint. i. 4. 8, reading _optumum_ and
_optimum_ [not _opimum_] with W. M. Lindsay, _Latin Language_ §§ 14,
16, seq.), which could not be correctly represented in spelling; this
difference may, however, be due merely to the effect of differences in
the neighbouring sounds, an effect greatly obscured by analogical
influences.

Inscriptions of the 4th or 3rd century, B.C. which show original -_es_
and -_os_ in final syllables (e.g. _Veneres_, gen. sing., _navebos_
abl. pl.) compared with the usual forms in -_is_, -_us_ a century
later, give us roughly the date of these changes. But final -_os_,
-_om_, remained after -_u_- (and _v_) down to 50 B.C. as in _servos_.

20. Special mention should be made of the change of -_ri_- and -_ro_-
to -_er_- (_incertus_ from *_encritos_; _ager_, _acer_ from *_agros_,
*_acris_; the feminine _acris_ was restored in Latin (though not in
North Oscan) by the analogy of other adjectives, like _tristis_, while
the masculine _acer_ was protected by the parallel masculine forms of
the -_o_- declension, like _tener_, _niger_ [from *_teneros_,
*_nigros_]).

21. Long vowels generally remained unchanged, as in _compago_,
_condono_.

22. Of the diphthongs, _ai_ and _oi_ both sank to _ei_, and with
original _ei_ further to _i_, in unaccented syllables, as in _Achivi_
from Gr. [Greek: Achaiwoi], _oliivom_, earlier *_oleivom_ (borrowed
into Gothic and there becoming _alev_) from Gr. [Greek: elaiwon]. This
gives us interesting chronological data, since the _el_- must have
changed to _ol_- (§ 16. 3) before the change of -_ai_- to -_ei_-, and
that before the change of the accent from the first syllable to the
penultimate (§ 9); and the borrowing took place after -_ai_- had
become -_ei_-, but before -_eivom_ had become -_eum_, as it regularly
did before the time of Plautus.

But cases of _ai_, _ae_, which arose later than the change to _ei_,
_i_, were unaffected by it; thus the nom. plur. of the first
declension originally ended in -_as_ (as in Oscan), but was changed at
some period before Plautus to -_ae_ by the influence of the pronominal
nom. plur. ending -_ae_ in _quae?_ _hae_, &c., which was accented in
these monosyllables and had therefore been preserved. The history of
the -_ae_ of the dative, genitive and locative is hardly yet clear
(see Exon, _Hermathena_ (1905), xiii. 555; K. Brugmann, _Grundriss_,
1st ed. ii. 571, 601).

The diphthongs _au_, _ou_ in unaccented syllables sank to -_u_-, as in
_includo_ beside _claudo_; the form _cludo_, taken from the compounds,
superseded _claudo_ altogether after Cicero's time. So _cudo_, taken
from _incudo_, _excudo_, banished the older *_caudo_, "I cut, strike,"
with which is probably connected _cauda_, "the striking member, tail,"
and from which comes _caussa_, "a cutting, decision, legal case,"
whose -_ss_- shows that it is derived from a root ending in a dental
(see §25 (b) below and Conway, _Verner's Law in Italy_, p. 72).

_Consonants._--Passing now to the chief changes of the consonants we
may notice the following points:--

23. Consonant _i_ (wrongly written _j_; there is no _g_-sound in the
letter), conveniently written _^i_ by phoneticians,

(i.) was lost between vowels, as in _tres_ for *_tre^ies_, &c. (§ 17.
6);

(ii.) in combination: -_m^i_- became -_ni_-, as in _veniö_, from
Ind.-Eur. *[g]^u _m^io_, "I come," Sans. _gam_-, Eng. _come_; -_n^i_-
probably (under certain conditions at least) became -_nd_-, as in
_tendo_ beside Gr. [Greek: teinô], _fendo_ = Gr. [Greek: theinô], and
in the gerundive stem -_endus_, -_undus_, probably for -_en^ios_,
-_on^ios_; cf. the Sanskrit gerundive in -_an-iya-s_; -_g^i_-, -_d^i_-
became -_^i_- as in _maior_ from *_mag-ior_, _peior_ from *_ped-ior_;

(iii.) otherwise -_^i_- after a consonant became generally syllabic
(-_i^i_-), as in _capio_ (trisyllabic) beside Goth. _hafya_.

24. Consonant _u_ (formerly represented by English _v_), conveniently
written _^u_,

(i.) was lost between similar vowels when the first was accented, as
in _audiui_, which became _audii_ (§ 17 [6]), but not in _amaui_, nor
in _avarus_.

(ii.) in combination: _d^u_ became _b_, as in _bonus_, _bellum_, O.
Lat. _d^uonus_, *_d^uellum_ (though the poets finding this written
form in old literary sources treated it as trisyllabic); _p^u_-,
_f^u_-, _b^u_-, lost the _^u_, as in _ap-erio_, _op-erio_ beside Lith.
-_veriu_, "I open," Osc. _veru_, "gate," and in the verbal endings
-_bam_, -_bo_, from -_bh^u-am_, -_bh^uo_ (with the root of Lat.
_fui_), and _fio_, _du-bius_, _super-bus_, _vasta-bundus_, &c., from
the same; -_s^u_- between vowels (at least when the second was
accented) disappeared (see below § 25 (a), iv.), as in _pruina_ for
_prusuina_, cf. Eng. _fros-t_, Sans, _prusva_, "hoar-frost." Contrast
_Minérva_ from an earlier *_menes-^ua_, _s^ue_-, _s^uo_-, both became
so-, as in _soroor_(_em_) beside Sans. _svasar-am_, Ger.
_schwes-t-er_, Eng. _sister_, _sordes_, beside O. Ger. _swart-s_, mod.
_schwarz_. -_^uo_- in final syllables became -_u_-, as in _cum_ from
_quom_, _parum_ from _par^uom_; but in the declensional forms -_^uu_-
was commonly restored by the analogy of the other cases, thus (a)
_ser^uos_, _ser^uom_, _ser^ui_ became (b) *_serus_, *_serum_,
*_ser^ui_, but finally (c) _ser^uus_, _ser^uum_, _ser^ui_.

(iii.) In the 2nd century A.D., Lat. _v_ (i.e. _^u_) had become a
voiced labio-dental fricative, like Eng. _v_; and the voiced labial
plosive _b_ had broken down (at least in certain positions) into the
same sound; hence they are frequently confused as in spellings like
_vene_ for _bene_, _Bictorinus_ for _Victorinus_.

25. (a) Latin _s_

(i.) became _r_ between vowels between 450 and 350 B.C. (for the date
see R. S. Conway, _Verner's Law in Italy_, pp. 61-64), as _ara_,
beside O. Lat. _asa_, _generis_ from *_geneses_, Gr. [Greek: geneos];
_eram_, _ero_ for *_esam_, *_eso_, and so in the verbal endings
-_eram_, -_ero_, -_erim_. But a considerable number of words came into
Latin, partly from neighbouring dialects, with -_s_- between vowels,
after 350 B.C., when the change ceased, and so show -_s_-, as _rosa_
(probably from S. Oscan for *_rod^ia_ "rose-bush" cf. Gr. [Greek:
rhodon]), _caseus_, "cheese," _miser_, a term of abuse, beside Gr.
[Greek: mysaros] (probably also borrowed from south Italy), and many
more, especially the participles in -_sus_ (_fusus_), where the -_s_-
was -_ss_- at the time of the change of -_s_- to -_r_- (so in _causa_,
see above). All attempts to explain the retention of the -_s_-
otherwise must be said to have failed (e.g. the theory of accentual
difference in _Verner's Law in Italy_, or that of dissimilation, given
by Brugmann, _Kurze vergl. Gram._ p. 242).

(ii.) _sr_ became _þr_ (= Eng. _thr_ in _throw_) in pro-ethnic Italic,
and this became initially _fr_- as in _frigus_, Gr. [Greek: rhigos]
(Ind.-Eur. *_srigos_), but medially -_br_-, as in _funebris_, from
_funus_, stem _funes_-.

(iii.) -_rs_-, _ls_- became -_rr_-, -_ll_-, as in _ferre_, _velle_,
for *_fer-se_, *_vel-se_ (cf. _es-se_).

(iv.) Before _m_, _n_, _l_, and _v_, -_s_- vanished, having previously
caused the loss of any preceding plosive or -_n_-, and the preceding
vowel, if short, was lengthened as in

_primus_ from *_prismos_, Paelig. _prismu_, "prima," beside
_pris-cus_.

_iumentum_ from O. Lat. _iouxmentum_, older *_ieugsmentom_; cf. Gr.
[Greek: zeugma, zygon], Lat. _iugum_, _iungo_.

_luna_ from *_leucsna_-, Praenest, _losna_, Zend _rao[chi]sna_-; cf.
Gr. [Greek: leukos], "white-ness" neut. e.g. [Greek: leukos],
"white," Lat. _luceo_.

_telum_ from *_tens-lom_ or *_tends-lom_, _tranare_ from
*_trans-nare_.

_seviri_ from *_sex-viri_, _eveho_ from *_ex-veho_, and so
_e-mitto_, _e-lido_, _e-numero_, and from these forms arose the
proposition _e_ instead of _ex_.

(v.) Similarly -_sd_- became -_d_-, as in _idem_ from _is-dem_.

(vi.) Before _n_-, _m_-, _l_-, initially _s_- disappeared, as in
_nubo_ beside Old Church Slavonic _snubiti_, "to love, pay court to";
_miror_ beside Sans, _smáyate_, "laughs," Eng. _smi-le_; _lubricus_
beside Goth, _sliupan_, Eng. _slip_.

(b) Latin -_ss_- arose from an original -_t_ + _t_-, -_d_ + _t_-,
-_dh_ + _t_- (except before -_r_), as in _missus_, earlier *_mit-tos_;
_tonsus_, earlier *_tond-tos_, but _tonstrix_ from *_tond-trix_. After
long vowels this -_ss_- became a single -_s_- some time before Cicero
(who wrote _caussa_ [see above], _divissio_, &c., but probably only
pronounced them with -_s_-, since the -_ss_- came to be written single
directly after his time).

26. Of the Indo-European velars the breathed _q_ was usually preserved
in Latin with a labial addition of -_u_- (as in _sequor_, Gr. [Greek:
epomai], Goth, _saihvan_, Eng. _see_; _quod_, Gr. [Greek: pod-(apos)],
Eng. _what_); but the voiced [g]^u remained (as -_gu_-) only after
-_n_- (_unguo_ beside Ir. _imb_, "butter") and (as _g_) before _r_,
_l_, and _u_ (as in _gravis_, Gr. [Greek: barys]; _glans_, Gr. [Greek:
balanos]; _legumen_, Gr. [Greek: lobos, lebinthos]). Elsewhere it
became _v_, as in _venio_ (see § 23, ii.), _nudus_ from *_novedos_,
Eng. _naked_. Hence _bos_ (Sans. _gaus_, Eng. _cow_) must be regarded
as a farmer's word borrowed from one of the country dialects (e.g.
Sabine); the pure Latin would be *_vos_, and its oblique cases, e.g.
acc. *_vovem_, would be inconveniently close in sound to the word for
sheep _ovem_.

27. The treatment of the Indo-European voiced aspirates (_bh_, _dh_,
_gh_, _[g]h_) in Latin is one of the most marked characteristics of the
language, which separates it from all the other Italic dialects, since
the fricative sounds, which represented the Indo-European aspirates in
pro-ethnic Italic, remained fricatives medially if they remained at
all in that position in Oscan and Umbrian, whereas in Latin they were
nearly always changed into voiced explosives. Thus--

Ind.-Eur. _bh_: initially Lat. _f_- (_fero_; Gr. [Greek: pherô]).

medially Lat. -_b_- (_tibi_; Umb. _tefe_; Sans, _tubhy_-(_am_), "to
thee"; the same suffix in Gr. [Greek: biê-phi], &c.).

Ind.-Eur. _dh_: initially Lat. _f_- (_fa-c-ere_, _fe-c-i_; Gr. [Greek:
thetos] (instead of *[Greek: thatos]), [Greek: ethê-ka]).

medially -_d_- (_medius_; Osc. _mefio_-; Gr. [Greek: messos, mesos]
from *[Greek: methios); except after _u_ (_iubere_ beside _iussus_
for *_iudh-tos_; Sans. _yodhati_, "rouses to battle"); before _l_
(_stabulum_, but Umb. _staflo_-, with the suffix of Gr. [Greek:
otergêthron], &c.); before or after _r_ (_verbum_: Umb. _verfale_:
Eng. _word_. Lat. _glaber_ [v. inf].: Ger. _glatt_: Eng. _glad_).

Ind.-Eur. _gh_: initially _h_- (_humi_: Gr. [Greek: chamai]); except
before -_u_- (_fundo_: Gr. [Greek: che(w)ô, chutra]).

medially -_h_- (_veho_: Gr. [Greek: echô, öchos]; cf. Eng. _wagon_);
except after -_n_- (_fingere_: Osc. _feiho_-, "wall": Gr. [Greek:
thinganô]: Ind.-Eur. _dhei^gh_-, _dhin^gh_-); and before _l_
(_fig(u)lus_, from the same root).

Ind.-Eur _guh_: initially _f_- (_formus_ and _furnus_, "oven", Gr.
[Greek: thermos, thermê], cf. Ligurian _Bormio_, "a place with hot
springs," _Bormanus_, "a god of hot springs"; _fendo_: Gr. [Greek:
theino, phonos, pros-phatos]).

medially _v_, -_gu_- or -_g_- just as Ind.-Eur. [g]u (_ninguere_,
_nivem_ beside Gr. [Greek: nipha, neiphei]; _fragrare_ beside Gr.
[Greek: osphpainomai os]- for _ods_-, cf. Lat. _odor_], a
reduplicated verb from a root _[g]uhra_-).

For the "non-labializing velars" (H_ostis_, _con_G_ius_, G_laber_)
reference must be made to the fuller accounts in the handbooks.

28. AUTHORITIES.--This summary account of the chief points in Latin
phonology may serve as an introduction to its principles, and give
some insight into the phonetic character of the language. For
systematic study reference must be made to the standard books, Karl
Brugmann, _Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der
Indo-Germanischen Sprachen_ (vol. i., _Lautlehre_, 2nd ed. Strassburg,
1897; Eng. trans. of ed. 1 by Joseph Wright, Strassburg, 1888) and his
_Kurze vergleichende Grammatik_ (Strassburg, 1902); these contain
still by far the best accounts of Latin; Max Niederman, _Précis de
phonétique du Latin_ (Paris, 1906), a very convenient handbook,
excellently planned; F. Sommer, _Lateinische Laut- und Flexionslehre_
(Heidelberg, 1902), containing many new conjectures; W. M. Lindsay,
_The Latin Language_ (Oxford, 1894), translated into German (with
corrections) by Nohl (Leipzig, 1897), a most valuable collection of
material, especially from the ancient grammarians, but not always
accurate in phonology; F. Stolz, vol. i. of a joint _Historische
Grammatik d. lat. Sprache_ by Blase, Landgraf, Stolz and others
(Leipzig, 1894); Neue-Wagener, _Formenlehre d. lat. Sprache_ (3 vols.,
3rd ed. Leipzig, 1888, foll.); H. J. Roby's _Latin Grammar_ (from
Plautus to Suetonius; London, 7th ed., 1896) contains a masterly
collection of material, especially in morphology, which is still of
great value. W. G. Hale and C. D. Buck's _Latin Grammar_ (Boston,
1903), though on a smaller scale, is of very great importance, as it
contains the fruit of much independent research on the part of both
authors; in the difficult questions of orthography it was, as late as
1907, the only safe guide.