The Scottish Celtic review

:104 The Laws of Aushmt in Irish.1. The nom. and ace. dual of the stems in u.Of this case very few examples are quoted by Zeuss (pp. 240241) ; but dd atarcud (duo relationes ; nom. sing, atdrcud,relatio Z. 882, with -ud for prehistoric -atu) is certainly, as toits formation, to be compared with Skr. iln'i (the two thighs).Of Ebel in Beitr. ii. 73, 74.2. The dat. sing, of the stems in it. This case I mention here,but only with hesitation. From is'tn bluth (in mundo ; nom.hith), it is evident that, in prehistoric time, this case terminatedin u (biuth for prehistoric hit-u). In the other examples mentionedby Zeuss (239), it does not differ in form from thenominative. Also, the dat. sing, of the masc. and neut. a- stemsis distinguished 1iy u, e.g., don fiur (viro). See B. XI. 9, andB. XVII. There is, moreover, a coinciding of the a- and v-stems in the ace. plural, as, e.g., in fru = Goth, vnircmfs andmugu = Goth, maguns (A. I. 1). But as the u- steins nowhereshow any tendency to pass over into the inflection of the (istems,I might, likewise, regard the agreement in the dat. sing,as accidental. If we, therefore, try to explain organically theu of biuth, I think we must leave out of view u-i or av-i (withslender vocalic termination) ; for this would be the only caseknown to me, in which an i in the termination has been lost,without a trace remaining. It appears, therefore, that the onlyother alternative is to try the instrumental u-d, vd- (Ved. madhvdfrom madhu). The phonetic combination ud (u6 ?) is representedin the monosyllabic cii (hound) — Skr. fr« (see Excursus iii. 2)by long v.. Such a ^t might, in the auslaut of a polyisyllabicword, have easily disappeared, without leaving a trace except itsreflex in the preceding sjilable. Supported by the Old Bactrian,we may even assume a very ancient instrumental formation ofthe u- stems in il (like the i- stems in i and the a- stems in d)Old Baktr. hhratiX, instrumental of khratu (wisdom) ; dauhu,instrumental to danhu-s (district, province). See Justi's Handb.der Zendspr. p. 390.If, finally, we would assume for hiuth a ground form hitvd, wewould then have another example in support of the loss of vd inthe auslaut: Ir. drd (high) goes back in the fem. to a groundformardhvd = Lat. ardua (cf Old Baktr. eredhwa, Skr. 4rdhva,Gr. opQo^).^ By this hypothesis, the u preserved in biuth would• In other words, however, b{bh) has originated from -ras,vd, after a single consouaut:Ir. tarb = Gaul, tarvos, Ir./ec/6 = Lat. vidua (cf. Stokes in Beitr. ii. 101).