It is well known that the Anatolian languages have virtually no attestation of simple thematic verbs in *-
e/
o-, but thematic verbs with a suffix are abundantly attested in Hittite and the other Anatolian languages. Five types of thematic verbs will be discussed in this paper, i.e. Hittite verbs in -
ške/
a-, Hittite verbs in -
ie/
a-, Hittite denominative verbs in -
āi-/-
ā-, Hittite causatives in -
e/
a-, and Cuneiform Luvian verbs in -
i-/-(
i)
ia-.
According to the communis opinio, Hittite active thematic verbs in -
e/
a- reflect the Proto-Indo-European alternation of the thematic vowels *-
e- and *-
o-, i.e. 1 sg. *-
o-mi, 2 sg. *-
e-si, 3 sg. *-
e-ti, 1 pl. *-
o-meni (vel sim.), 2 pl. *-
e-teni (vel sim.), 3 pl. *-
o-nti. But there does not seem to be any compelling evidence for reconstructing the thematic vowel *-
o- in pre-Hittite or further back in Proto-Anatolian. The Hittite thematic vowel -
a- in the active paradigm of the above five types of verbs does not go back to PIE *-
o-. It is historically derived from *-
e- by a phonological rule that changed Proto-Anatolian *
e to
a in Hittite in post-tonic open syllables before sonorants except in the 3 pl. present -
anzi, the
a timbre of which is explained by a different phonological rule that changed Proto-Anatolian *
en to
an before a dental as evidenced by Hittite
anda 'in(to)' in contrast to Latin
endo 'id.'. Likewise, the thematic vowel
a in Cuneiform Luvian verbs in -
i-/-(
i)
ia- is either a phonological outcome of original *
e or of mediopassive origin.
Complete lack of the thematic vowel *-
o- in Hittite and Cuneiform Luvian is a linguistic feature that does not receive a straightforward historical explanation by what would be reconstructed from the traditional Indo-European point of view. Whether the persistent *-
e- in the active thematic paradigm is a PIE inheritance or an Anatolian innovation is a problem which must be reserved for a separate future study.
View full abstract