Smart law

Kluge's law is a controversial sound law of the primitive Germanic that was drawn up by Friedrich Kluge . This attempt, the origin of the Primitive Germanic long consonants * kk , tt * and * pp - the Urindogermanische lacked a phonemic length differentiating consonant - based on the assimilation of * n to a preceding voiced plosive be explained under the condition that the same * n to an in Belonged to Urindo European Stressed Suffix . The term "clever law" was coined by Kauffmann (1887) and revived by Frederik Kortlandt (1991). According to the research status of 2006, this law has generally not been recognized by historical linguists.

The resulting long consonants are said to have been shortened later - unless they followed a short vowel - which is undisputed for * ss , as this consonant has a different origin. Advocates of Kluge's Law use this argument to explain the occurrence of short * p , * t or * k at the end of many primitive Germanic roots - especially in strong verbs - although their likely cognates in other Indo-European languages are based on final primitive Indo-European consonants besides the the expected * b , * d , * g or * ǵ . In fact, non-Germanic evidence for Urindo-European * b is so rare that * b may not have been a phoneme; however, the occurrence of * p in the original Germanic at the beginning of the word is just as unusual.

Similar to Verner's law , Kluge 's law would have formed many consonant alternations within the grammatical paradigm of a word, which would have meant that these changes could only have been partially predicted. Analogous simplifications of these complexities are suggested to explain the many cases in which closely related - and otherwise identical - words indicate short, long, plosive, fricative, voiceless, or voiced primitive Germanic consonants in other related Germanic varieties.

assimilation

The origin of ancient Germanic * ll , * rr , * nn and * mm had already been explained at Kluge's time as a result of the assimilation of consonant clusters across earlier morphemic boundaries : * ll from the original ( pre-Germanic ) * ln , * rr from the earlier * rn , * nn from the original * nn and * nw , * mm from the previous * zm and * nm . Today this is considered undisputed - with the exception that * rn did not necessarily lead to * rr every time . Some examples with * -n are:

Urgermanic * fullaz <Urindo-European * pl̥h₁-nó-s > Sanskrit pūrṇá- (all meaning 'full')
Urgermanic * wullō- <Urindo-European * h₂wl̥h₂-neh₂- > Sanskrit ūrṇā- (all meaning 'wool')
Ur- Germanic * ferrai 'weit' <Ur-Indo-European * perH-noi > Lithuanian pérnai 'last year'
German wave , Old High German wella <Urindo-European * wel-neh₂- ( e-level ); Russian волна <Urindo-European * wl̥-neh₂- (zero level) (all meaning 'wave')

Kluge (1884) tried to justify * pp , * tt and * kk in the same way (examples from Kroonen 2011):

Urgermanic * lappōn- <Urindo-European * lHbʰ-néh₂- > Latin lambō (all meaning 'lick')
Middle Dutch roppen , Middle High German and later plucking <Urindo-European * Hrup-néh₂- > Latin rumpō ('break')

Ur- Germanic * buttaz (genitive singular) <Ur-Indo-European * bʰudʰ-no- > Sanskrit budʰná- , Latin fundus (all meaning 'soil')

Ur- Germanic * stuttōn- <Ur-Indo-European * (s) tud-n- > Latin tundō (all meaning 'to encounter sth.')

Ur- Germanic * likkōn- <Ur-Indo-European * liǵʰ-n- > Ancient Greek λιχνεύω lichneuō , Latin lingō (all meaning 'lick')

Urgermanic * þakkōn- ' patting ' <Urindo-European * th₂g-n- > Latin tangō 'touch'

Without Kluge's Law, ** - bn- , ** - pn- , ** - dn- , ** - tn- , ** - gn- and ** - kn- in the Germanic forms according to Grimm's and Verner's law would be closed expect.

Foreseeable exceptions

Clever Law did not work behind stressed vowels, but only in the same environment as Verner's Law. Some examples according to Kroonen (2009, 2011) are:

Ur- Germanic * ufna- 'oven' <Ur-Indo-European * úp-no-

Urgermanic * tafna- 'offering', 'meal' <Urindo-European * dh₂p-no- > Latin damnum 'damage', ancient Greek δαπάνη dapanē ('expenditure')

Urgermanic * swefna- <Urindo-European * swép-no- > Sanskrit svápna- , Latin somnus 'sleep', 'dream'

Urgermanisch * aþna- < Urgermanisch * h₂ét -no- > Latin annus (every 'year')
Ur- Germanic * watn- <Ur-Indo-European * wéd-n- 'water' ( * -r- in the nominative, * -n- in the genitive)
Urgermanic * laihna- 'lent goods' <Urindo-European * lóikʷ-no- > Sanskrit rékṇas- 'heritage', 'wealth'
Ur- Germanic * wagna- <Urindo-European * wóǵʰ-no- 'Wagen'

Even if this condition was met, Kluge's law did not affect the descendants of the primitive Indo-European * s - or the primitive Germanic * z according to Verner's law. The following examples are also from Kroonen (2009, 2011):

Ur- Germanic * razna- 'house' <Ur-Indo-European * Hros-nó-
Ur- Germanic * twizna- 'double thread ' <Ur-Indo-European * dwis-nó-

Ur- Germanic * liznōn- 'learn' <Ur-Indo-European * lis-néh₂- 'make oneself aware' (a mediopassive causative)

Urgermanic * aznō- 'to work' <Urindo-European * h₂es-néh₂-

Ur- Germanic genitive singular * uhsniz , genitive plural * uhsnō ⁿ , accusative plural * uhsnunz <Ur-Indo-European * uks-n-és , * uks-n-óHom , uks-én-n̥s 'des Ochsen, der Ochsen, die Ochsen'

Shorten long consonants into long syllables

The rise of long consonant phonemes resulted in three types of syllables in Prägermanic:

In short: with a short vowel followed by a short consonant in the next syllable.
Long: With a long vowel, a diphthong or a short vowel + * l / * m / * n / * r followed by a short consonant with a long vowel in the next syllable; or a short vowel followed by a long consonant segmenting the syllable boundary.
Overlong: With a long vowel, a diphthong or a short vowel + * l / * m / * n / * r , followed by a long consonant segmenting the syllable boundary.

In other words, syllables could be long either because of the specific vowel - or a subsequent * l / * m / * n / * r - or because of a long consonant appearing in the next syllable. If both possibilities were true, the syllable was considered to be excessively long (see the concept of Mora , which indicates that such excessively long syllables are rare across languages).

Any excessively long syllables were then converted into long syllables by shortening the long consonant. This is undisputed for * ss , which is derived from the Urindo-European * tt , * dt and * d ^h -t clusters across morpheme boundaries:

Without abbreviation (short vowel followed by a long consonant): Urgermanic * wissaz ' gewiss ' <Urindo-European * wid-tó-s 'known'

With abbreviation (long vowel followed by an originally long consonant): Urgermanic * wīsa- 'wise' <Urindo-European * weid-tó- > Latin vīsus 'seen'

With abbreviation (diphthong followed by an originally long consonant): Urgermanic * haisiz 'command' <Urindo-European * káid-tis 'calling'

Kluge (1884: 183) intended to develop this explanation further in order to apply it to cases in which primitive Germanic roots consisting of long consonants ended with * p , * t or * k . However, other consonants at the same points of articulation would have been to be expected due to apparently related roots - in Primitive Germanic or in other Indo-European branches. The following examples come from Kroonen (2011):

Ur- Germanic * deupa- 'deep', as if it were derived from Ur -Indo-European * -b- ; Lithuanian dubùs 'deep', 'hollow' from Urindo-European * -bʰ-

Urgermanic * skēpa- 'sheep', but * skaban- 'scratch / shear / scrape'

Ur- Germanic * hwīta- , as if it came from Urdindo-European * -d- ; Sanskrit śvetá- , śvítna- from Urindo-European * -t- (all meaning 'white')

Urgermanic * wantu- 'glove / mitten', but * windan- 'turn'

Ur- Germanic * dīka- 'dam / dike', as if it were derived from the Ur -Indo-European * -g- or -ǵ- ; Ancient Greek τεῖχος / ˈtêːkʰɔs / 'wall' from the Urindo-European * -gʰ- or * -ǵʰ-

Ur- Germanic * taikjan- , as if it came from Urindo-European * -g- or -ǵ- ; Ancient Greek δείκνῡμι deiknymi from Urindo-European * -k- or * -ḱ- (all with the meaning "show")

Effects on the ancient Germanic morphology

Clever law has a remarkable impact on ancient Germanic morphology . Due to its dependence on ablaut and accent, the law only affects some forms of declension and conjugation, which leads to alternations of short and long consonants in both nominal and verbal paradigms. Kroonen (2009, 2011) compares this change with the grammatical change and, in particular, with the level change in the neighboring Baltic Finnish and Sami languages. This is most noticeable with the nouns of the n -stems and with the néh₂- present verbs - imperfective verbs, which are derived from perfective verbs by adding the primitive Indo-European suffix * néh₂- / * nh₂- - but it can also be used with mn stems and observe directional adverbs.

Nouns of the n -stems

Kluges Law generates long consonants in the genitive singular - which end in Urindo-European with * -n-és - and in the genitive plural ( * -n-óHom ). It does not apply to the dative plural: Although the * n of * -n̥-mis was right next to the root in Ur-Indo-European, this was a syllable-forming element, which is why it developed into * -und before the emergence of the original Germanic and thus the influence of Kluges Law prevented.

The following tables are a schematic representation according to Kroonen (2009: 32), in which C corresponds to the initial and final consonant of the root and G represents its variant according to Verner's law - if available:

Paradigm of the n tribes	Urindo-European	Urgermanic
Nominative singular	C_́C-ō	C_C-ō
Genitive singular	C_C-n-és	C_CC-iz
Locative> dative singular	C_C-én-i	C_G-ini
Accusative singular	C_C-ón-m̥	C_G-anu ⁿ
Nominative plural	C_C-ón-es	C_G-aniz
Genitive plural	C_C-n-óHom	C_CC-ō ⁿ
Dative plural	C_́C-n̥-mis	C_C-ummiz
Accusative plural	C_C-on-n̥s	C_G-unz

Example:

"Fever"	Urindo-European	Urgermanic
Nominative singular	kréy t -ō	hrī þ ō
Genitive singular	kri t - n -és	hri tt iz
Locative> dative singular	kri t -é n -i	hri d i n i
Accusative singular	kri t -ó n -m̥	hri d a n u ⁿ

This leads to three different types of consonant changes (examples from Kroonen 2009):

	Friction + voicing + length	Friction + length	Length only
Nominative singular	tō g ō	rī h ō	we k ō	ste r ō
Genitive singular	ta kk iz	ri kk iz	wu kk iz	stu rr iz
meaning	Tail / branch, prong	Stringing bar, row	wick	sterile animal

So it became difficult to predict the nominative singular of plosive roots in cases affected by Kluge's law. In addition, the pure length opposition, since it was not limited to plosives, occurred more frequently than the other two possibilities.

Nouns of the mn tribes

In Urindo-European such words would have received a nominative singular with * -mḗn and a genitive singular with * -mn-és . However, the * -m- of the genitive singular seems to have already dropped out of the middle of the resulting three-consonant clusters in Urindo European, which has led to the fact that mn -stems looked like n -stems: Urindo-European * bʰudʰ-mēn , * bʰudʰ-mn- és > * bʰudʰmēn , * bʰudʰnés ('soil')> Greek πυθμήν pythmēn from the nominative, but Sanskrit budʰná- and Latin fundus from the genitive. This would have allowed the assimilation of * n to the preceding consonant. Kroonen (2011) suggests that this must have taken place in such words, which led, for example, to Ur- Germanic * bu d mēn , * bu tt iz ('floor').

Directional adverbs

In addition to prepositions, which express a relative position - for example in or on - which Proto-Germanic has a large number of Richtungsadverbien: locatives with meanings as within or on , allative with meanings as into or up and Ablative with meanings as from the inside to outside or top to bottom . Many - but not all - of these forms had long consonants. Kroonen (2011, 2012) reconstructed examples like this and attributed them to Kluge's Law:

	preposition	"Locative"	"Allatives"	"Ablative"
Urgermanic	* u b a	* u pp ai	* u pp e or * u pp a	* u b anē
Urindo-European	* u p ó	* u p - n ói	* u p - n é or * u p - n ó	* u p ó- n eh₁
meaning	over	on	up	from above down

néh₂-present verbs: iteratives

néh₂ -presentia	Urindo-European	Urgermanic
3rd person singular	C_C-néh₂-ti	C_CC-ōþi
3rd person plural	C_C-n̥h₂-énti	C_G-unanþi

chronology

The law has sparked debates about its chronology in relation to Grimm's and Verner's Law. The problem is that the traditional order - 1. Grimm, 2. Verner, 3. Kluge - cannot prove the absence of voicing in the ancient Germanic Geminates. Accordingly, a reorganization of the events was proposed in order to equate the loss of voicing of the primitive Germanic Geminates with the transformation of Mediä into Tenues as a result of Grimm's Law. This would mean that Kluge's Law occurred before Grimm's Law - or at least between different phases of it. Should this assumption be accepted, this would have further effects, since Verner's law would actually have to precede Kluge's law, because otherwise an explanation of the influence of Kluge's law on the Urindo-European voiced aspirated plosives as well as on the unvoiced plosives would not be possible. Hence, from a chronological point of view, this would put Verner's law first, Kluge’s law second, and Grimm’s law third.

After this expansion, the processes can be summarized as follows:

Pre-Proto-European	-tʰnV́-	-dʱnV́-	-dnV́-	All three series of plosives appear before stressed suffixes.
Verner's law	-dʱnV́-	-dʱnV́-	-dnV́-	Voiceless plosives after an unstressed syllable are voiced.
Smart law	-dːV́-	-dːV́-	-dːV́-	Plosive + * n becomes a geminata before a stressed vowel.
Grimm's law and accent shift	-tːV-	-tːV-	-tːV-	Voiced plosives are hardened and the accent is shifted to the initial syllable.

criticism

Shortly after the first publications (Kluge 1884), Kluge's law was viewed by several authors as a superfluous hypothesis. Most introductions - with some exceptions - have ignored the law and other detailed works on the Proto-Germanic have declined in a few words: "[I] t has been seriously challenged Throughout the 20 ^th century, and nowadays even borders on the uncanonical in Both Indo -European and Germanic linguistics "(translation:" It was strictly questioned throughout the 20th century and today even borders on the uncanonical in both Indo-European and German studies ") (Kroonen 2009: 53).

Lack of evidence

Many authors - first Trautmann (1906) and then, for example, Kuryłowicz (1957: 133–134), Fagan (1989: 38) and rings (2006: 115) - have stated that there are few or even no examples in which one primordial Germanic root with a long plosive corresponds to a primitive Indo-European root with an n suffix.

Lühr (1988) and Kroonen (2011) counter this opinion with long lists of examples - especially of nouns from the n -stems.

Expressive gemination

Onomatopoietic roots in Germanic languages often end with a long plosive. Among them, for example (Kroonen 2011: 125) . klappa 'clap', okka 'sigh' and skvakka 'make a clucking sound', old swed. kratta 'scratch' and nhd. scratch , nine orw. tikka 'tap', af. kloppa 'knock' and nhd. knock as well as ae. cluccian 'cackle'. Long consonants are generally ubiquitous in Germanic nicknames, such as ae. Totta from Torhthelm , Beoffa from Beornfriþ , Blæcca for a black-haired man - note the short / k / in blæc -, Eadda - and German Otto - from all names with urgerm. * Auda- (Gąsiorowski 2006) [14], a long list of Gothic names whose speakers are usually difficult or impossible to reconstruct ( Ibba , Faffo , Mammo , Oppa , Riggo , Wacca etc .; possibly also atta 'father', German names like - proving the second sound shift - Fritz ( * Fritta (n) - ) from Friederich , Lutz (* (H) lutta (n) - ) from Ludwig and Sicko (* Sikkan- ) from Si (e) gmar as well as Isl. Solla from Sólrún , Magga from Margrét , Nonni from Jón , Stebbi from Stefán , Mogga from Morgunblaðið and lögga 'Bulle' from lögreglan 'Police.' In addition, Gąsiorowski (2006) tried the otherwise puzzling English words dog 'dog', pig 'pig', frog 'frog', stag 'deer', ( ear ) wig 'catchy tune' as well as ae.sucga ' Heckenbraunelle ' and * tacga ~ * tecga 'lambs' - not used in the singular - as nicknames formed on the basis of different nouns and adjectives. Some authors - such as Trautmann (1906) and Fagan (1989) - have tried to use all primitive Germanic long plosives of the expressive Attributed to gemination based on the assumption that the roots contained in these plosives were related in terms of meaning to emotions, including intensity and iteration. This hypothesis, first put forward by Gerland (1869), was accepted, for example, by the influential Indo-European etymological dictionary (Pokorny 1959) and in the specialized works by Seebold (1970) and Kluge / Seebold (2002).

Lühr (1988) contradicts this approach by claiming that most nouns with long plosives or with signs of a change of level do not have meanings that would correspond to this hypothesis. The same works show that the expressive gemination does not explain why a large number of these nouns are n -stems. Furthermore, expressive gemination cannot explain the many cases in which urgerm. * / p: t: k: / uridg. * / bʱ dʱ ɡʲʱ ɡʱ / correspond - as for example with ae. liccian 'licking' from uridg. * leiǵh- , where ** licgian would be expected in Old English (Gąsiorowski 2012: 17). Furthermore, expressive gemination cannot provide an explanation for the cases in which urgerm. * / ptk / uridg. * / bʱ dʱ ɡʲʱ ɡʱ / correspond - as for example with ae. dēop from uridg. * dheubh- (Kortlandt 1991: 3; Kroonen 2011: 128; Gąsiorowski 2012: 16) - and in which urgerm. * / ptk / uridg. * / pt kʲ k / correspond - as with mnl. token 'press' from uridg. * duk- , while Kluge's law with subsequent analogy does not pose a problem for such phenomena (Kroonen 2011: 125). Kroonen (2011: 125) added: “Moreover, the Expressivity Theory [sic] seems to contain a critical theoretical fallacy. It is a priori implausible that a completely new range of phonemes (ie geminates) could be introduced into a linguistic system by extra-linguistic factors such as charged semantics. In this respect, some versions of the Expressivity Theory are truly comparable to what in biology is known as Aristotle's generatio spontanea hypothesis [...], which revolved around the idea that living organisms, such as flies and eels, come about spontaneously in decaying corpses "(translation:" In addition, the theory of expressivity seems to contain a critical theoretical fallacy. A priori it is implausible that a completely new selection of phonemes - i.e. geminates - could have been introduced into the language system on the basis of extra-linguistic factors such as charged semantics. There are a few in this regard Versions of the theory of expressivity are truly comparable with the hypothesis Aristotle, known in biology as generatio spontanea , which says that living organisms such as flies and eels arise spontaneously in rotting carcasses ”). Finally, the nicknames have long consonants - including got. Atta - n -stems. Nicknames with n -stems also appear in other Indo-European branches - such as Latin Catō , Varrō and Nerō as well as Gr. Platōn and Strabōn . In addition, the Germanic language has many personalizing or individualizing n -stems, which are structurally identical to the hypocorisms, such as ahd. Chresso "moth" to chresan "crawl" (Kroonen 2011: 82).

Most of the ancient Germanic long plosives are voiceless; however, despite their rarity, the reconstruction of long voiced plosives is necessary in some cases. The hypothesis of expressive gemination can hardly explain this, as Trautmann (1906: 66) admits when rejecting Kluge's law: “ Of course , I don't know how we should explain the coexistence of, for example, kk- gg- k- g- . "Kroonen (2011: 124), however, asserts:" The only existing theory that is powerful enough [to explain] such root variations, is the one that acknowledges consonant gradation and the underlying mechanism of the paradigmatic contaminations. The co-occurrence of ON riga 'to lift heavily': MLG wriggen 'to twist': ME wricken 'to wiggle', for instance, implies two different expressive formations within the Expressivity Theory, the choice between a voiced and voiceless geminate being arbitrary , erratic, or, in other words, scientifically unfalsifiable. By reconstructing a paradigm * wrikkōþi , * wrigunanþi < * uriḱ-néh₂-ti , * uriḱ-nh₂-énti , on the other hand, the only irregular form is * wrigg- , which can be readily explained by contamination of * wrig- and * wrikk- "(translation:" The only existing theory that is convincing enough to explain such root alternations is the one that recognizes the level change and the underlying mechanism of paradigmatic contamination. The common occurrence of an. riga "heavy lifting" : mnd. wriggen "rotate": me. wricken "wiggle" presupposes, for example, two different expressive formations within the theory of expressivity, whereby the choice between a voiced and a voiceless Geminata is arbitrary, erratic or in other words scientifically irrefutable Paradigms * wrikkōþi , * wrigunanþi < * uriḱ-néh₂-ti , * uriḱ-nh₂-énti , on the other hand, is * wrigg- the only irregular shape that is caused by the Kontam ination of * wrig- and * wrikk- can be easily explained ”).

Similarly, Gąsiorowski (2012: 21) thinks that it is methodologically unreasonable to invoke psycholinguistic factors and other hypotheses of irregular development until a regular law - like Kluges' - has been tested. Kroonen (2009: 53) points out that the hypothesis of expressive gemination, due to its first publication in 1869, basically dates from the time before the rise of the young grammatical theorem of the invariance of the laws of sound.

Substrate interference

As already mentioned, there were no long consonants in Urindo-European and many Germanic roots have a long consonant in some ancient languages, but a short consonant in others - often together with a short or long vowel. This led the Leiden school to take the view that Germanic roots with long plosives were not inherited from Urindo-European but from a substratum .

While the existence of a substratum with geminates or even the triggering of Kluge's law through the inclusion of speakers of this substratum in the primitive Indo-European dialect, which ultimately became known as Germanic, is by no means impossible, Kroonen (2009: 62) does not find any evidence for such hypotheses and therefore stresses that a long consonant in a Germanic root cannot be taken as evidence of the adoption of the same root.

Schedule

Long plosives are very rare in Gothic language material. Apart from the nicknames mentioned above - including atta - long plosives are only used in skatts "money", smakka "fig" ( n- stem) and in the Latin loan word sakkus "sack" (Kroonen 2011). That is why Kuryłowicz (1957) and Fagan (1989) claim that long plosives were absent in Primitive Germanic and only emerged in Primeval Northwest Germanic, which is why Kluge's law - if it exists at all - must have worked between Primeval Germanic and Urnorthwest Germanic and not between Urindo Germanic and Primeval Germanic.

Lühr (1988) and Kroonen (2011) have pointed out that strong verbs with / ptk / and a preceding long vowel, diphthong or sonorlaut occur frequently in the Gothic Bible and that many of these verbs with the iteratives with long consonants, which are occupied in northwest Germanic languages are clearly related. Furthermore, Kroonen (2011: 82, 111) draws attention to the fact that the Old Saxon Hêliand only three words with long plosives - skatt "treasure, money", likkōn "lick", upp / uppa / uppan "auf / auf / von top down ”- contains potential primitive Germanic origin, while such words are omnipresent in Middle Low German. For this reason, he refers to Kuryłowicz's (1957: 140) hypothesis that words with long plosives were viewed as stylistically inadequate for Christian works, as these sounds often appeared in nicknames and were accordingly too colloquial.

Individual evidence

↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e Kluge, Friedrich (1884). "The Germanic consonant expansion". Paul and Braune Contributions to the History of the German Language and Literature (PBB). 9 : 149-186.
^ Kauffmann, Friedrich (1887). "On the history of Germanic consonantism". Paul and Braune Contributions to the History of the German Language and Literature (PBB). 12 : 504-547.
↑ ^a ^b Kortlandt, Frederik (1991). "Kluge's law and the rise of Proto-Germanic geminates" (PDF) . Amsterdam contributions to older German studies. 34 : 1-4.
↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f rings, Don (2006). From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-928413-X .
↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k Kroonen, Guus Jan (2009). Consonant and vowel gradation in the Proto-Germanic n -stems . Doctoral thesis, Leiden University.
↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ ^o ^p ^q ^r ^s ^t ^u ^v ^w ^x ^y Kroonen, Guus (2011). The Proto-Germanic n-stems: a study in diachronic morphophonology. Rodopi. ISBN 90-420-3293-6 . Updated and extended version of Kroonen (2009).
^ Sievers, Eduard (1878). "On the theory of accents and sounds in the germanic languages". Paul and Braune Contributions to the History of the German Language and Literature (PBB). 5 : 63-163.
↑ ^a ^b ^c Moulton, William G. (1972). "The Proto-Germanic non-syllabics (consonants)". Pages 141-173 in van Coetsem, Frans (Ed.): Toward a Grammar of Proto-Germanic . De Gruyter.
↑ Kroonen, Guus (2012). "Consonant gradation in the Germanic iterative verbs". Pages 263-290 in Nielsen Whitehead, Benedicte, Olander, Thomas, Olsen, Birgit Anette & Elmegård Rasmussen, Jens (Eds.): The Sound of Indo-European - Phonetics, Phonemics, and Morphophonemics . Tusculanum Museum. [Presented to the conference "The Sound of Indo-European - Phonetics, Phonemics, and Morphophonemics" in Copenhagen in 2009.]
↑ ^a ^b ^c Trautmann, R. (1906). Germanic sound laws in their linguistic-historical relationship. Tooth & Baendel.
↑ ^a ^b ^c Kuryłowicz, Jerzy (1957). "Morphological gemination in Keltic and Germanic". Pages 131–144 in Pulgram, Ernst (Ed.): Studies presented to Joshua Whatmough on his sixth birthday . Mouton.
↑ ^a ^b ^c Fagan, Sarah MB (1989). "Geminates in intensive and iterative Germanic Class II weak verbs". Paul and Braune Contributions to the History of the German Language and Literature (PBB). 111 : 35-58.
↑ ^a ^b ^c Lühr, Rosemarie (1988). Expressivity and phonetic law in Germanic. Winter.
^ Gąsiorowski, Piotr (2006). "The etymology of Old English * docga". Indo-European research. 111 : 278-284.
↑ ^a ^b Gerland, G. (1869). Intensiva and Iterativa and their relationship to one another. Leipzig: Publisher not cited by Kroonen (2009).
^ Pokorny, Julius (1959). Indo-European etymological dictionary. Francke.
↑ Seebold, E. (1970). Comparative and etymological dictionary of Germanic strong verbs. The Hague: Publisher not cited by Kroonen (2009).
^ Kluge, F. & Seebold, E. (2002). Etymological dictionary of the German language . Berlin: Publisher not cited by Kroonen (2009).
↑ ^a ^b Gąsiorowski, Piotr (2012), The use and misuse of evidence in linguistic reconstruction. Presentation given at the 43rd Poznań Linguistic Meeting, 2012.

[:0-1] Kluge, Friedrich (1884). "The Germanic consonant expansion". Paul and Braune Contributions to the History of the German Language and Literature (PBB). 9 : 149-186.

[2] Kauffmann, Friedrich (1887). "On the history of Germanic consonantism". Paul and Braune Contributions to the History of the German Language and Literature (PBB). 12 : 504-547.

[:1-3] Kortlandt, Frederik (1991). "Kluge's law and the rise of Proto-Germanic geminates" (PDF) . Amsterdam contributions to older German studies. 34 : 1-4.

[:2-4] ↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f rings, Don (2006). From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-928413-X .

[:3-5] ↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k Kroonen, Guus Jan (2009). Consonant and vowel gradation in the Proto-Germanic n -stems . Doctoral thesis, Leiden University.

[:4-6] ↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ ^o ^p ^q ^r ^s ^t ^u ^v ^w ^x ^y Kroonen, Guus (2011). The Proto-Germanic n-stems: a study in diachronic morphophonology. Rodopi. ISBN 90-420-3293-6 . Updated and extended version of Kroonen (2009).

[7] Sievers, Eduard (1878). "On the theory of accents and sounds in the germanic languages". Paul and Braune Contributions to the History of the German Language and Literature (PBB). 5 : 63-163.

[:5-8] Moulton, William G. (1972). "The Proto-Germanic non-syllabics (consonants)". Pages 141-173 in van Coetsem, Frans (Ed.): Toward a Grammar of Proto-Germanic . De Gruyter.

[9] Kroonen, Guus (2012). "Consonant gradation in the Germanic iterative verbs". Pages 263-290 in Nielsen Whitehead, Benedicte, Olander, Thomas, Olsen, Birgit Anette & Elmegård Rasmussen, Jens (Eds.): The Sound of Indo-European - Phonetics, Phonemics, and Morphophonemics . Tusculanum Museum. [Presented to the conference "The Sound of Indo-European - Phonetics, Phonemics, and Morphophonemics" in Copenhagen in 2009.]

[:6-10] Trautmann, R. (1906). Germanic sound laws in their linguistic-historical relationship. Tooth & Baendel.

[:7-11] Kuryłowicz, Jerzy (1957). "Morphological gemination in Keltic and Germanic". Pages 131–144 in Pulgram, Ernst (Ed.): Studies presented to Joshua Whatmough on his sixth birthday . Mouton.

[:8-12] Fagan, Sarah MB (1989). "Geminates in intensive and iterative Germanic Class II weak verbs". Paul and Braune Contributions to the History of the German Language and Literature (PBB). 111 : 35-58.

[:9-13] Lühr, Rosemarie (1988). Expressivity and phonetic law in Germanic. Winter.

[14] Gąsiorowski, Piotr (2006). "The etymology of Old English * docga". Indo-European research. 111 : 278-284.

[:10-15] Gerland, G. (1869). Intensiva and Iterativa and their relationship to one another. Leipzig: Publisher not cited by Kroonen (2009).

[16] Pokorny, Julius (1959). Indo-European etymological dictionary. Francke.

[17] Seebold, E. (1970). Comparative and etymological dictionary of Germanic strong verbs. The Hague: Publisher not cited by Kroonen (2009).

[18] Kluge, F. & Seebold, E. (2002). Etymological dictionary of the German language . Berlin: Publisher not cited by Kroonen (2009).

[:11-19] Gąsiorowski, Piotr (2012), The use and misuse of evidence in linguistic reconstruction. Presentation given at the 43rd Poznań Linguistic Meeting, 2012.