Sound Synthesis in Indo European Indo Iranian and Sanskrit

Author(s): Satya Swarup Mishra
Publisher: Ashutosh Prakashan Sansthan

Page 45

INDO-IRANIAN SOUND SYNTHESIS
27
25. Theoretically also it may be assumed that because IE 1>t in IIr, the contraction of IE + >į was replaced in IIr by ! ++>, which also represents IE !+">7. Bot. sure examples cannot be cited even for IE +-*> aad. 1+1>į as shown above (vide 9).
26. IE m, >IIr ā. Consequently in sound-synthesis IE , A fell together with the Sandhi of ătă>a. Thus IIr ă (<IB ă, ě, o, m, ķ) +Ilr å(<IE ă, ě, , i, A)>IIr a. This type of Sandhi was responsible for certain peculiar formations which are not justifiable from IE point of view, To take one example Skt nom-acc pl jāņ<stem jā (<IIT *ã<IF ĝ7) + nom pl ending -as (<IIr -as <IE -es) or accusative pl ending -as (<IIr -as <IE •ņs). But these forms are apparently anomalous since in such forms the [E type was nom pl ĝnn-es & acc pl ĝnn-ns; cp Skt dhiyah <IIr dhiyas <IE dhiy-es & dhiy-ns in nom & acc respectively. Thus the IIr forms here are clearly innovations, 27. IIr Innovations in Consonant Synthesis . In consonant synthesis IIr shows a few innovations, Some of them are due to changes in individual sounds; o.g. IE s--9/9" followed by palatal vowels (ěst)>štc in IIr, because 9,9">c. Some of the innovations are extension of voicing of voiceless plosives from one situation to another situation. In IE the voicing of voiceless plosives occurred before voiced plosives only. But in I'Ir the voicing was effective even before vowels and consonantal secondary vowels?. But this extension was not effective in internal sandhi.
These innovations in IIr are presented below with: suitable illustrations. 7. y, w, r; l, m, n are consonantal secondary vowels (vide
CGSGH p. 15).