The Tower of Babel

Sergei Starostin's Home Page

Russian
<< Home Page << Articles and Books


    1.1.2. Vocalism.

    The only attempt to reconstruct the PEC (Proto-Daghestan) vocalism was made by E. A. Bokarev, who had reconstructed an original system of five vowels, based on a small number of examples from Avar, Lak, Dargwa, Lezghian and Tabasaran (see [Bokarev 1981]). At the present time the data of the reconstructed PN, PA, PTs, PD and PL languages call for a total revision of the correspondences established by E. A. Bokarev. It must be also noted that it now seems pointless to reconstruct nasalized vowels (on their secondary development in PTs as a result of the fall of medial resonants, see above), as well as the pharyngealized ones (on their origin, see section 1.1.3); however, we have reasonable evidence in favour of the distinction between long and short vowels.
    The reconstruction of vowels is made generally on the basis of nouns (see below on the behaviour of vowels in verbal roots). We should also note that vowels behave quite differently in medial and word-final positions.

    1.1.2.1. Medial vocalism.

    In medial (non-final) position we reconstruct 9 vowels for PNC (or 18-vowels, considering the length feature);

*i¢    *–    *µ¢    *¶       *—¢    *˜       *u¢   
*e¢    *Œ                *    *Ž       *o¢   
*„    *…                            *a¢   


    In the tables below we demonstrate three types of reflexes: 1) reflexes when there is no labial w adjacent to the vowel; 2) reflexes of the vowel after the labial w; 3) reflexes of the vowel before the labial w. Such a division is necessary, because labialization in North-Caucasian languages has significantly influenced the development of vowels.
    The development of vowels is also influenced by pharyngealization (that appears as a result of the fall of laryngeals, see below), as well as by nasalization in PTs (that appears as a result of the fall of medial resonants, see above). We list the nasalized variants of PTs reflexes after the main ones in square brackets. See below for more detailed comments on the development of vowels in East-Caucasian languages.
    In West-Caucasian languages, the original PNC vocalism system has been totally destroyed (as we know, most modern West-Caucasian languages possess bi- or trivocalic systems that have developed from the initial PWC bivocalic vowel system). The main principle of the reflexation of vowels in PWC is as follows:
    a) front vowels are reflected as the palatalization of the preceding consonant, being themselves transformed into neutral */a; if the preceding consonant is labialized, it becomes palatalized too. This gives rise to the specific series of "palatalized-labialized" consonants (on their development in West-Caucasian languages, see below).
    b) the labialized back vowel *u is reflected as the labialization of the preceding consonant; thus, the reflexes of non-labialized consonants before *u merge with the reflexes of labialized consonants. The vowel itself is also transformed into neutral * or *a.
    c) the mid vowels *—, * as well as back *o, *a are reflected in PWC as neutral * or *a;
    d) long vowels in PWC merge with short ones, but preceding consonants become tense (strong). This gives rise to the specific series of PWC tense (so-called "preruptive") consonants.

    Generally speaking, all the listed rules of vowel reflexation in PWC can be reduced to one: the transfer of qualitative and quantitave features of vowels onto the preceding consonants. As a result of this rule, the system of vowels in PWC was drastically reduced, but the system of consonants was significantly increased (because of the appearance of palatalized, "palatalized-labialized" and "tense" phonemes). We must note that the height opposition of two PWC vowels (*-*a) still cannot be connected with the respective opposition in PEC. High vowels were probably originally reflected as *, mid and low vowels - as *a, but afterwards, under the influence of ablaut, the connection of PWC vowel height with the corresponding Proto-North-Caucasian phonetic categories became obscured.

    In the table given below we do not list PWC reflexes (which were basically described above).

PNC,PEC    PN       PA       Av       PTs1    Lak       PD          PL          Khin
*i¢          *a¢       *i       i       *i[i~]2    i3    *i¬a4    *i          i
*(Cw)i¢    *u¢¬o¢    *Cºi    Cºe       *Cº—       Cºa¬    *Cu¬       *Cºi       Cu¬Cºa
          /a¢       ¬*Cu5 ¬Co                 Cu       Cºa
*i¢(Cw)    *u¢/a¢    *iCº    i¬u       *iC(º)¬    VC(º)    *iCº¬aCº    *iCº
                    ¬uC             uC[e~]
*–          *Œ/ƒ    = *i¢    = *i¢    = *i¢       i       = *i¢       = *i¢       = *i¢
*(Cw)–    *¡¬³/ƒ    = *i¢    = *i¢    = *i¢       Cºi¬Cu    = *i¢       = *i¢       = *i¢
*–(Cw)    *¡/ƒ    = *i¢    = *i¢    = *i¢       iCº¬uC    = *i¢       = *i¢       = *i¢
*µ¢6       *o¢¬i¢    *i       e¬i       *a[a~]       u¬a       *a(¬u)    *e¬„
*µ¢(Cw)    *u¢¬i¢    *iC(º)    o¬i       *e[¥~]       u¬a       *a          *e¬„
*¶          *¡/ƒ    = *µ¢    = *µ¢    = *µ¢       = *µ¢    = *µ¢       = *µ¢
*µ(Cw)    *¡/ƒ    = *µ¢    = *µ       = *µ¢       = *µ¢    = *µ¢       = *µ¢
*e¢          *a¢7    *o8    a8       *¥[o~]9    a       *e/a10    *e¬„11    i12
*(Cw)e¢    *o¢/a¢    *Cºi¬    Cºa¬       *Cº¬C¥    a¬u       *Cºe¬       *Cºe¬       u
                    Cºo       Cu       [Cº~¬C¥~]              Cºa       Cº„
*e¢(Cw)    *o¢¬e¢    *iCº¬    a          *¥[¥~]       a¬u       *eCº¬aCº    *eCº¬       u
                    oCº                                               „Cº11
*Œ          *Œ¬–/ƒ    *i       e13    *—(¬?)14 a       *e¬i15    *e16       i
*(Cw)Œ    *¡¬Œ    *Cºi¬    Cu¬       *C(º)—       Cºi¬    *Cºe¬       *Cºe       u
                    Cu       Cºe,Co13             Cu       Cu15
*Œ(Cw)    *Œ/ƒ    *iC(º)    e¬o       *—C(º)       a¬u       *eC(º)¬    *eCº      
                                        [o~C]                 *iC(w)
*„¢          *i¢17    *i       i18    *i[i~]19    i20    *i21    *„22       —(-u)
*(Cw)„¢    *i¢       *C(º)i    i¬       *C(º)—[—~]    CºV       *Cu¬Cºa    *C(º)„¬   
                              u18                                     Cºe
*„¢(Cw)    *i¢       *iC(º)    a¬u       *i          i¬u       *iCº¬uC    *„C(º)
          (¬u¢,o¢)
*…          *¡/ƒ    = *„¢    =*„¢23    *¥[¥~¬e~]    = *„¢    = *„¢       = *„¢ —¬i
*(Cw)…    *ƒ       = *„¢    = *„¢       *C(º)e       = *„¢    = *„¢       = *„¢
*…(Cw)    *ƒ       = *„¢    = *„¢                    = *„¢    = *„¢       = *„¢       i
*—¢          *a¢24    *o       a          *—[e~],-u    a       *u          *—(-i?)    —¬u
*(Cw)—¢    *o¢/a¢    *Cºo/    u¬Cºe    *C(º)—       Cu¬       *u¬a28    *Cu¬Cº—29
                    Cºi25 /Cºa26 [e~]27    Cºa
*—¢(Cw)    *a¢       *oC(º)    u¬o       *—C(º)[e~]    aCº¬    *aCº¬uC    *uC¬—Cº31
                    ¬iC(º)    (¬a)30             uC
*˜          32    *i       i          *—[¥~]33    u¬i       *i¬u       *—(*ji-)    i¬—¬u
*(Cw)˜    *³/ƒ    *C(º)i    u¬i34    *C(º)—       u¬i       *C(º)i¬    *Cº—¬       i
                    ¬Cu                 [C(º)—~]              Cu          Cu35
*˜(Cw)    *ƒ       *iCº¬    i          *—          u¬i       *i¬u       *—Cº
                    oCº
*¢          *o¢/a¢    *i36    o          *o[¥~]37    a(-u)    *a          *a(*ja-) „¬a,o
*(Cw)¢    *u¢¬o¢    *Cºo    o          *o¬¥       u       *u¬a38    *Cu¬C(º)a39
*¢(Cw)    *o¢       *iC(º)    o¬u       *o[¥~]       iC(º)    *a          *aC(º)
                    ¬uC                             ¬aC(º)40
*Ž          *Œ/ƒ    *i36,41 = *¢    o[a~¬o~]42 = *¢    = *¢       = *¢    = *¢
*(Cw)Ž    *¡/ƒ    *C(º)i    = *¢       *u¬¥       = *¢    = *¢       = *¢
                    ¬Cu
*Ž(Cw)    *Œ¬¡/ƒ    *iC(º)    = *¢       *o¬¥       = *¢    = *¢       = *¢
                    ¬uC
*u¢          *o¢¬u¢/a¢    *u       u          *o¬u       u       *u          *o       a(?)
*³          *¡¬³       *u       u          *—¬i       u       *u          *o       a(?)
*o¢          *o¢       *i       e¬i44    *¥[a~¬o~]45 u       *a¬u       *a       —(?)
          (/a¢)43
*(Cw)o¢    *u¢       *Cºi¬    u          *¥          u       *u          *Cºa
                    Cu                                       (*CºaI-)
*o¢(Cw)    *o¢       *iCº¬    u          *¥          u       *iCº       *aCº
                 uC                                    (*-aICº)
*¡          *ƒ(-o) *i46    e¬i       *—[i~¬~]47 u       *a/i48    *o          a¬„
*(Cw)¡    *¡/ƒ    *Cºo       C(º)e    *Ce¬Cº    u       *Cºi       *o         
                                    [e~¬a~]
*¡(Cw)    *ƒ       *oC(º)    i                   u       *iC(º)¬    *oC(º)
                 ¬iC(º)                                uC
*a¢          *a¢       *a       a/e50    *a¬e       a(-u)    *a          *a(*ji-)    „¬a
          (-e)49                     [a~¬¥~]                                    (-u?)51
*(Cw)a¢    *o¢/a¢    *Cºa       Cºa/       *Cºa¬Cºe    Cwa¬    *Cºa53    *Cºa       a¬o
                           Cºe52    [a~¬¥~]       Cu
*a¢(Cw)    *a¢       *aCº       aCº¬eCº    *a¬e       aC(º)    *aC(º)    *aCº
*ƒ          *Œ/ƒ    *a       a          *—¬i       a(-u)    *a54    *a(*ji-)
                                     [i~¬~]
*(Cw)ƒ    *Œ¬¡/ƒ *Cºa¬    Cºa¬       *C(º)i¬    C(º)a    *Cºa       *C(º)a    a¬o
                 Cu       Cu       Cu          ¬Cu
*ƒ(Cw)    *ƒ       *aC(º)    aC(º)¬    *—(i)¬u    aC(º)    *aC(º)    *aC(º)
                           uC


    Comments.
    1) In Proto-Tsezian-Khvarshi (PTsKh) we observe a phenomenon of splitting the reflexes of some PTs vowels (see below), which causes us to reconstruct two series of vowel phonemes (series A and series B) of the first syllable: *iA-*iB,*eA-*eB,*—A-—B,*A-B, *oA-oB, *uA-uB. In the table we have not taken into account this distinction, the origin of which seems to be caused by prosodic reasons. Indeed, in all the rows of correspondences listed above we observe an exact correspondence of Tsezian series of vowels to Avar accent paradigms:

PEC vowel    PTs series    Avar accent paradigm
*i             A             B¬C
                B             A
*µ             A             B¬C
                B             A
*             A             B¬C
                B             A
*a             A             B¬C
                B             A
*e             A             B¬C
                B             A
*„             A             A¬B¬C
                B             B¬C
*—             A             (A)¬B¬C
                B             B¬C
*o             A             A¬B¬C
                B             B¬C


    From this scheme we see that the PTs series B corresponds to Avar barytonal accentuation if the root vowel goes back to PEC *i,*µ,* or *a, while the same PTs series B corresponds to Avar non-barytonal accentuation if the root vowel goes back to PEC *e, *„, *— or *o. On the contrary, the PTs series A corresponds to Avar non-barytonal accentuation if the root vowel goes back to PEC *i,*µ,*,*a, but to different Avar accent patterns if the root vowel goes back to PEC *e,*„,*— or *o. It is not to be excluded that the reconstructions of PEC vowels * and *— should be swapped; in that case we would have a general rule according to which the PTs series A corresponds to non-barytonal paradigms when the root contains an original narrow vowel (or the neutral *a), and to any paradigm when the root contains an original wide vowel; on the contrary, the series B corresponds to the barytonal paradigms if the root contains an original narrow vowel (or the neutral *a), and to non-barytonal paradigms if the root contains an original wide vowel. However, the phonetic articulation of the vowels * and *— could probably vary in time, and by now we would rather preserve the reconstruction presented in the table (see above). The reasons why non-barytonal accent paradigms correspond to both PTs series (A and B) are to be examined additionally. But the correspondences given above evidently confirm the suggestion of a connection between PTs vocalic series and prosodic factors (ultimately with fallen laryngeals, see below).
    2) The vowel *i develops in a different way adjacent to laryngeals, where *Hwi- > *H¥- [Ho~-] and *-CwiH > -aI(j).
    3) In Lak the initial sequence *wi¢- >ba- (cf. *Cwi¢- > C(º)a-), and in final position *-iw > -uw.
    4) In Dargwa e can appear in the place of *i in the sequence *CiCa > *CeCa as well as before the resonant in the sequence *CiRC- > *CeRC-. Other specific features of the development of *i in Dargwa: we usually observe *u after labials, as well as in the sequence *-iw > *-ub; before the final laryngeal widening occurs: *-iH > *-eH.
    5) In PA after h(w), widening occurs: *h(w)i- > *h(º)a-.
    6) Labialized high vowels *µ and *u are more rarely encountered than other vowels and their secondary character is not to be excluded. Besides that, the vowel *µ is characterized by an extreme instability of reflexes (as a result, the reconstruction of *µ and not, for example, *£, is rather tentative). Up to now, however, we do not see any means to eliminate these vowels from the PEC system (i.e. any other way of interpreting the existing correspondences).
    7) In PN *e¢ > *o¢ after and before labials (though after *m a non-labialized reflex *a¢ also occurs). Besides, the development *e¢ > *a¢ apparently does not occur before laryngeals and in final position after labialized consonants.
    8) In PA and Avar the medial sequence *-e¢m- > *-um-.
    9) In PTs *me¢Cw- > muC-; *-¥œu > -eœu.
    10) In Dargwa in this row we observe a complicated distribution between the reflexes e and a (e after labials, dental explosives, hissing sounds, before “; a after hushing, velar, uvular, laryngeal consonants); *e¢ with pharyngealization (caused by fallen laryngeals) > aI.
    11) PL also has a reflex i after r-, j- and some laryngeals.
    12) In Khinalug i is the most frequent reflex; however, we also meet other vowels as descendants of *e¢.
    13) Avar has a after m-. The vowel *Œ after front labialized consonants is here usually reflected as u, while after back labialized consonants it is either preserved or develops into o (*Kwe- > Ko-; the latter rule reflects an already quite late process).
    14) Before and after hushing consonants PTs has i instead of —.
    15) In Dargwa, before pharyngealized uvulars, widening occurs: *-eQI > -aQI. After labialized front consonants and lateral fricatives *Œ > u, after labialized back consonants e is preserved.
    16) In PL, before pharyngealized uvulars, widening occurs: *-eQI > -„QI (cf. above about a similar process in PD).
    17) After labial consonants in PN *„¢ > o¢. In a few cases (after “, after labialized consonants in final position) *„¢ > a¢.
    18) Sometimes we also observe Avar e (it happens, in particular, regularly after Av. ). Labialized front consonants before *„ lose their labialization (*Tw„- > Ti-); after back labialized consonants *„ > u.
    19) In a few cases PTs has *— as a reflex of *„¢ even without adjacent labialization. The distribution rules are not quite clear yet.
    20) In the case of pharyngealization in Lak, *„ > iI, but *„Cw > aICº. After front labialized consonants we usually have i here (with the loss of labialization of the preceding consonant); the sequence *Kw„- usually gives Ku- or Kºa-.
    21) In PD before pharyngealized uvulars, the development *-„QI > -aQI occurs (see above, comm. 15), and *„ > e before “. Adjacent to -w-, *„ behaves as follows: *Tw„- > Tu-, *-„Tw > -uT(º); *Kw„- > Kºa-, *-„Kº > -iKº.
    22) In the case of pharyngealization in PL, *„ > aI, but in the sequence *„Cw, „I is preserved. The sequence *Cw„- usually gives Cºe- (but C„- the in case of delabialization). The reflex e is also present before labialized laterals. After PL *j- *„ > a (the *a - *„ distinction is neutralized in this position).
    23) Judging by Avar ma› 'nail', the sequence *m…- is reflected as ma- in Avar (just like *mŒ-, see comm. 13).
    24) The sequence *-—¢w- gives u¢¬o¢ or a¢w here.
    25) In PA Cºi occurs after velar and lateral fricatives.
    26) In Avar C(º)a occurs after labialized front consonants; after labialized back consonants we observe the reflexes Cu¬Cºe (with a later development Cºe>Co).
    27) In PTs *—¢ develops into u after labial consonants.
    28) In Dargwa u occurs after front consonants and fricatives; a in other cases.
    29) The reflex Cº— is observed after PL front fricatives; in other cases *Cº—¢ > Cu.
    30) We see the reflex a in Avar in the case of early delabialization of the consonant.
    31) In PL — is preserved only before combinations of the type RCw; in other cases *—¢Cw > uC.
    32) Judging by PN *l(”)¡® 'waste of corn', the medial combination *-˜wis reflected as ¡ in PN.
    33) After labial consonants *˜ (just as *—¢, see comm. 27) develops into u in PTs.
    34) In Avar i occurs in the case of an early delabialization *Cw˜ > *C˜.
    35) The reflex Cº— is observed after PL front fricatives; in other cases we have Cº— as well as Cu (with a not quite clear distribution).
    36) The reflexes of * in PA are modified before the following m: *-m- > -um-¬-im-, *-mV > -omV.
    37) In PTs *¢ gives the normal reflex o after labialized consonants, unlike *Ž (see comm. 41); however, after m- we meet a labialized reflex u.
    38) In PD *Cw > Ca, if C is a front fricative (in rare cases the same development occurs after other dental consonants as well). In other cases *Cw > Cu. We must also note the variation a¬u in the reflexes of the medial combination *-m-.
    39) In PL *Cw > C(º)a, if C is a front fricative (cf. the same development in PD, see comm. 37).
    40) The variation i¬a in Lak is also observed in reflexes of the medial combinations *-w-, -m-.
    41) The different development of the sequences *Cw¢ and *CwŽ in PA is established on the basis of rather little material; this rule can probably be neglected (we may simply state a variation of the reflexes of *¢¯ after labialized consonants); in this case we should admit that the reflexes of short and long * are distinguished only in PN and (somewhat less) in PTs.
    42) In PTs *Ž is reflected as u after labial consonants (except m); after *m-, however, we meet the non-labialized reflex a.
    43) After m- and b-, PN also has a more narrow reflex u¢.
    44) After initial nasals Avar reflexes are somewhat modified; after *m we have a or o (though *mo¢Cw- > miC(º)-).
    45) After initial *m- we have the variation ¥¬u in PTs.
    46) The medial combination *-¡w- > PA o (cf. *-¡Cw > -oC(º)).
    47) The medial combination *-¡w- (in *h¡wš[ƒ] 'pea') > PTs *e(?).
    48) After back and laryngeal consonants (as well as in the case of pharyngealization) we see the reflex a in PD; after labial and front consonants, the reflex i (though sometimes we meet e instead of i).
    49) The vowel *a¢ becomes a front e¢ in PN, if it is located in final position or before the laryngeal ‚. It is interesting that, adjacent to labial consonants, the non-labialized reflex a¢ is preserved in PN (unlike some other cases, where we see the labializing influence of labial consonants, see comm. 2,8,17). Still, in the combination *-a¢wthe vowel is labialized and *-a¢w- > o¢¬u¢.
    50) In Avar the fronting *a¢ > e usually occurs before the resonant *-m-(afterwards lost).
    51) In Khinalug the reflex i is encountered as well (in i»er 'many', ™iz„ 'hare': in both cases we deal with a pre-accent position in a bisyllabic word).
    52) In Avar a is preserved if the previous labialized consonant is a back one; after front labialized consonants we observe both a and the fronted reflex e.
    53) However, the sequence *Twa¢ (where T is a dental consonant) is reflected as *Tu- in PD.
    54) Before the laryngeal “ in PD fronting occurs: a > e.
    In conclusion, we must pay attention to the rather frequent PN reflex a(ƒ); this reflex is missing only in the reflection of the PEC vowels *µ¢, *„¢. To explain this phenomenon, we must point to the rather productive Nakh V/a ablaut, which involves a change of any vowel present in the direct nominal stem to a (ƒ) in the oblique one. In some cases the vocalism of the oblique base could probably have influenced the direct base, which led to the appearance of the "ablaut" a in many rows of correspondences. For more details on the PEC ablaut, see below.

    1.1.2.2. Final vocalism.
    In most of the subgroups of North-Caucasian languages, word-final vocalism is represented by reduced systems compared to medial vocalism. Except vocalic end, in most languages the consonant end is represented as well (it is virtually missing only in PA, where the consonant /resonant/ end is allowed only in stems of the type CVCVC, where -VC usually is a word-formative affix, as well as in some monosyllabic pronominal stems). There is reason to believe that the consonant end was not allowed in PEC and PNC; there is a very small number of stems that have a uniform consonant end in all subgroups (except, of course, PA, where, as we mentioned above, it is not allowed at all), and the reflexes of the last consonant in such stems in PWC are usually labialized or palatalized, which points to the fact that in the protolanguage they had some labialized or front final vowel.
    The comparison of final vowels in Avar, Lak, PD and PL allows us to state the presence of seven main types of vowel correlations in final position and to reconstruct the following system:

*i       *—       *u
*e       *       *o
*a


    The distinction of long/short vowels in the final syllable is missing in all modern languages, including Nakh (in some Lak dialects the opposition of final short/long vowels is noted, but this phenomenon has not been sufficiently described yet and therefore is not taken into account). However, there evidently are some reasons for reconstructing such a distinction in PEC and PNC. In fact, many rows of correspondences of final vowels (see below) contain somewhat different reflexes, depending on whether the corresponding word in Avar belongs to the accent paradigm B (the scheme of this paradigm: accent on the second syllable in Gen. Sg., and on the second syllable in Nom. Pl.) or to the accent paradigm C (the scheme of this paradigm: accent on the second syllable in Gen. Sg., but on the first syllable in Nom. Pl.). The accent paradigm A (its scheme: accent on the first syllable in Gen. Sg. and Nom. Pl.) is irrelevant here (this paradigm, as a result of the fall of emphatic laryngeals, or the influence of the preserved emphatic laryngeals, probably combined the words that originally belonged to paradigm B as well as to paradigm C; see below, section 1.1.3). The final vowel is often preserved if Avar has paradigm B, but is lost if Avar has paradigm C.
    The described situation may be interpreted in two ways: we can either think that Avar preserves old accent characteristics and reconstruct for the Avar paradigm B a type of stems with the accent, e.g., on the second syllable, and for the Avar paradigm C a type of stems with the accent on the first syllable; or we may think that in final position there also existed a contrast between long and short vowels. The long ones were subsequently shortened, but have caused an accent attraction to the long syllable in the Avar plural paradigm. As for short vowels (Av. paradim C), they never caused the shift of accent to the second syllable and were more often subject to reduction. The second solution seems more likely to us, because it receives a convincing affirmation in PWC, where the behaviour of long vowels in final position is similar to that in the medial position, i.e. they cause the strenghtening of the preceding obstruent.
    The correspondences between Pl, PD, Lak and Avar may be shown in the following scheme:

PNC,PEC1    Av. acc. par.    Av       Lak2    PD             PL3
*-i¢             C             -0       -i       *-i¬-04       *-e
*-–             B             -0       -i       *-i¬-04       *-e
*-e¢             C             -0       -0       *-i(-a)¬-04    *-„
*-Œ             B             -i5    -i       *-i(-a)¬-04    *-„
*-—¢             C             -0       -0       *-0             *-—
*-˜             B             -0       -a¬-u    *-a             *-—
*-¢             C             -0       -a¬-u    *-a             *-a
*-Ž             B             -a       -a       *-a             *-a
*-a¢             C             -0       -a       *-a             *-„
*-ƒ             B             -a       -a¬-u    *-a             *-„
*-u¢             C             -u6    -0       *-0             *-—
*-³             B             -u6    -a¬-u    *-a             *-—
*-o¢             C             -0       -0       *-0             *-a
*-¡             B             -0       -u       *-0             *-a


    Comments.

    1) The system of final vowels is by now reconstructed only on Av., Lak., PD and PL evidence. The rules of the development of these vowels in PN, PA and in PTs (as well as in Khinalug) are still to be specified, and therefore they are not examined here. As for PWC, here final vowels generally behave quite like non-final ones (see the rules on page 73); the only difference concerns the vowel *o, which in final position, unlike the medial one, causes the labialization of the preceding consonant (this vowel was probably more labialized in final position than otherwise). The phonetical characteristics of PEC and PNC vowels are basically reconstructed on PL evidence (though here some phenomena, not typical for the medial position, also occurred: the shift in height *i > *e, the delabialization *u > *—, the shift in row *a > *„ - though the last rule is rather "orthographic", because the precise phonetic nature of the PL final *„ is rather obscure, see below). However, this reconstruction is also confirmed by West-Caucasian data, where quantitative and qualitative vowel features leave their traces on preceding consonants.
    2) Lak reflexes are generally not strict (though a certain correlation with the data from other languages is surely observed); let us note that in virtually every type of correspondences Lak may have a zero reflex, i.e. a consonant auslaut (besides the reflexes presented in the table above). The reasons for such a frequent reduction of the final vowel in Lak are not clear yet.
    3) In this table we give the PL vowel system that is reconstructed for the oblique nominal stem (see below, page 170). In the direct stem (i.e. in nominative) PL suffered a total reduction of final vowels, only one of which has been preserved (*-„, probably pronounced in the direct stem as /-a/).
    4) In the case of pharyngealization we have PD *-aI in these types of correspondences. Instead of -i we also sometimes meet the PD vowel -u, but it apparently represents a later development of *-i after labialized consonants.
    5) After labialized consonants Avar has -u, not -i.
    6) Together with -u we also meet a wider reflex -o in Avar; however, -u and -o are apparently not really opposed to each other, but represent dialect variants of the same final vowel.
    In general we may state that during all the history of North Caucasian languages the final vowels were dynamically weaker than the medial ones (they are more prone to reduction and have a tendency to disappear completely; in the latter case they are preserved only if some formants are joined to the stem, i.e. in the oblique stem).

    1.1.2.3. Ablaut.

    The vowel gradation in nominal and verbal stems is rather widespread in modern North-Caucasian languages. However, a big part of it appears to have had a quite recent origin: thus, vowel gradation in the Avar nominal paradigm is almost completely caused by the phenomena of vowel reduction and assimilation in preaccented syllables; most vowel alternations in Nakh paradigms are explained by rather late umlaut, etc.
    However, a proper ablaut system (i.e. vowel gradation in different morphological categories) can still be reconstructed in PN, PL and (in a relic shape) in PTs. Apparently there is a connection between the ablaut in these languages and the PWC ablaut */a.
    The verbal ablaut (judging by the situation in PL and PN, see below) was apparently very complicated and its reconstruction is a self-standing task (hard to be separated from the task of reconstructing the whole PEC and PNC verb paradigm).
    As regards the ablaut in the nominal system, the situation is somewhat easier. In a number of cases it is possible to link the vowel gradations in PTs, PN and PL. In most cases we are dealing with the gradations of mid and high vowels: *e/*i, */*— (it is not yet clear whether a similar gradation *u/*o had existed). The vowels *e and * characterize the direct nominal stem, and the vowels *i and *— - the oblique one. The PWC ablaut */a probably reflects the ancient vowel height gradation as well (both types of ablaut mentioned above are reduced to this type after the loss of vocalic quality characteristics).
    Here we must emphasize that all cases of the PN ablaut *V/*a in nouns cannot be explained by just these two types of ancient gradation. Therefore it is possible that vowel gradations in PEC were even more widespread (though a secondary joining of many nouns with originally non-alternating vowels to the PN ablaut system is probable as well).
    Of course, all these introductory notes cannot play the part of a full model of the PEC (and PNC) ablaut system, which can be constructed only together with a careful reconstruction of the PNC morphological system.

    1.1.3. Root structure and prosody.

    1.1.3.1. Nominal root.

    The nominal root structure in PEC and PNC can, in general, be characterized as CVCV, where C is a consonant or a combination of consonants, and V is a vowel. A typical feature of the PNC root (both nominal and verbal) is the fact that at least one obstruent must be present in it; roots containing only resonants were not allowed. A specific structure (CV without any consonant restrictions for C) could be possessed only by auxiliary (grammatical and pronominal) morphemes.
    The system of vowels, simple consonants and medial combinations of consonants was characterized above. Only the problem of initial consonant clusters requires special examination in this section.
    In most modern East-Caucasian languages, initial combinations of consonants are not allowed; the situation in such languages as Lezghian or Tabasaran, where in some cases, as a result of reduction of narrow vowels of the first syllable, new initial clusters have appeared, is certainly secondary. However, initial combinations of consonants are well represented in Nakh languages (see below); though some of them go back to ancient labialized consonants (i.e. clusters with -w-), which we examined above, there is still a very important group of combinations left - i.e., the combinations of the type CH- ("consonant"+"laryngeal").
    The Nakh situation is apparently very archaic. We can suggest that PNC and PEC possessed a class of initial combinations of the type *CH-, that were preserved in PN, but disappeared in all other subgroups. The fallen laryngeals could have caused the appearance of the barytonal accent paradigm A in Avar (cf. above on the connection of this paradigm with initial emphatic laryngeals), and in some other North-Caucasian languages - the appearance of a prosodic feature of pharyngealization. We establish four main types of correspondences between PN initial combinations and prosodic features in other languages:

PNC,PEC    PN          Av. acc. par.    Lak, PD, PL pharyngealization
*Ch-       *C”-             C/B                   *V
*C”-       *C“-/*C‚-       C/B                   *V¬VI
*C“-       *C”-             A                      *V¬VI
*C-       *C-             A                      *V¬VI


    Let us go over some details of the reflexation of these types of combinations in separate subgroups.
    First, it is necessary to note that in PN the clusters "uvular + laryngeal" are not allowed (unlike all other types of combinations). These rather frequent clusters are therefore reflected as simple uvulars in PN. In some - very rare - cases PN loses its laryngeals in combinations of the type "resonant+laryngeal" as well. It is not to be excluded that in these cases PEC had clusters of resonants with € or ‚ (missing after initial obstruents), but this question is still open because there are too few examples. In reflexes of the combination *C”- PN has the laryngeal “ after voiceless consonants, and ‚ - after voiced, glottalized and resonant consonants.
    Pharyngealized vowels in Lak, PD and PL usually correspond to each other rather well and can be traced to PEC fallen laryngeals (not only in initial combinations, but in medial clusters as well, see above). Pharyngealization is preserved best of all close to uvular consonants; on the contrary, in the vicinity of front consonants, this prosodic feature often weakens and disappears. Labial and velar (sometimes hushing as well) consonants occupy an intermediate position in their "pharyngealization attraction". As a result, systems often appear, in which pharyngealization is only or mostly combined with the uvular series; such systems would be better regarded phonologically as systems without prosodic or vocalic pharyngealization, but rather with a special local series of uvular pharyngealized consonants.
    All of the above means that in the rows of correspondences given above, in PL, PD and Lak pharyngealization is best preserved after uvular consonants, but it has a tendency to disappear after consonants of other local series; on the contrary, in PN laryngeals are not preserved after uvulars, but are well preserved after the consonants of other local series. Thus, PN and Lak-Dargwa-Lezghian data complement each other and help to reconstruct the PEC system as a whole (which is also confirmed by Avar accentological evidence).
    A characteristic feature of PL is the specific development of the initial combination *rH-; in those (rather rare) cases, when Nakh data requires the reconstruction of this combination in PEC, PL has got the initial reflex r- (unlike the normal development *r- >j-, see above). The accuracy of this rule is confirmed by a similar development, *Hr- > r-, see below.
    In addition to Lak, Dargwa and Lezghian languages pharyngealization is also present in PTs and PWC (where, on the basis of Ubykh, we reconstruct the series of labial and uvular pharyngealized consonants, see below). Its origin, in this case, is also probably connected with the process of the fall of laryngeals (in many cases it corresponds to pharyngealization in East-Daghestan languages), but many details require further examination.
    Besides the examined types of roots there is another group of nominal roots (stems) with very specific correspondences in different languages. We mean roots whose reflexes have an initial resonant consonant in some languages and a laryngeal one in others. In the latter case the reflex of the resonant may be present too, but already in medial position. In some of these cases we may be dealing with a secondary metathesis of the resonant from the medial into the initial position; this process is going on regularly, e.g., in Avar in the initial sequence "€+narrow vowel+RC". However, in most cases such an explanation cannot be suggested. It is probable, that here we are dealing with the development of PEC initial combinations of the type *HR-, that in some cases are simplified into R-, and in other cases are simplified to H- with a transfer of resonants into the medial position (*HRVCV > *HVRCV). The examination of the material allows us to state that roots with initial combinations of the type *HR behave in two ways, depending on the Avar accent paradigm - i.e., on the brevity/length of final vowels (see above):

PNC,PEC

PN          PA       Av       PTs       Lak       PD          PL       Khin

1.*HRVCV¢

a)(R=r,l)

         

b)(R=m,n)

*RVC(V)    *RVCV    RVC(V)C *RVCV       t:VRC(V) *dVRC(V)    *HVRCV HVnC(V)
                                        ¬dVC(V)
*RVC(V)                        *RVCV       RVC(V)              *HV(N)CV

2.*HRVCV¯

a)(R=r,l)

b)(R=m,n)

*HV(R)C(V) *HV(R)CV HV(R)CVB *HVCV(-V~-) t:VRVC(V) *dVRVC(V)    *RVCV RVC(V)
*HV(R)C(V) *HV(R)CV HV(R)CVB *HVCV(-V~-) RVC(V)    *(HV)RVC(V) *RVCV RVC(V)


    It is worth noting that in type 2 roots (*HRVCV¯), the initial combination *Hrgives r- and not j- in PL (though the normal reflex is *r- > j-); thus, we establish a general rule according to which initial combinations *rH-,*Hr- > PL *r(see above, page 83, on *rH- > PL *r-). Therefore, the only source of PL initial r- are PEC combinations with laryngeals. The development *Hr- > r- is certainly connected with a very specific Lak-Dargwa reflection of PEC *Hr- ( > Lak. t:Vr-, PD *dVr-). It must be noted, however, that in some numerals and adjective roots the initial dental explosive may be missing in Lak and Dargwa.
    Very complicated reflexes in North-Caucasian languages are characteristic for a subtype of roots with *HR-, namely, for roots with a medial resonant of the type *HRVRCV (this type is rather frequent). Here, when the initial cluster is being eliminated, a "collision" of two resonants in medial position can happen. As a result, one of them is pushed out by the other; besides, in individual reflexes mutual assimilations of resonants sometimes occur (described above, see pp. 42, 45, 55, for simple roots of the type *RVRCV). These roots may appear as a "merry-go-round" of resonants and laryngeals around a single obstruent and are very hard to examine. The most frequent sequences here are represented by the types *HrVNCV and *HNVrCV (N=n,m):

PNC,PEC

*HrVNCV¢

*HNVrCV¢

      

*HrVNCV¯

*HNVrCV¯

PN       PA       Av       PTs       Lak    PD          PL    Khin
*nVwC(V) *NVCV    NVC(V)C *NVCV       NVC(V) *(HV)NVCV *RVCV
*RV(N)CV *HV(N)CV HV(R)CVC *HVCV(-V~-) NVC(V) *NVRC(V)    *RVCV
                                                            ¬*mVrCV
*HV(N)CV *HVNCV    HV(N)CVB *HV~CV       t:VrVCV *dVrVC(V) *RVCV *RVCV
*HV(R)CV *HV(N)CV RVCVB    *HVCV(-V~-)        *HVNCV    *RVCV


    Other types of resonant combinations are not frequent. It must be noted that the type *HrVNCV¢ - because of the preservation of the initial resonant in PL - could be interpreted as *rHVNCV¢ (except those sporadic cases, when Dargwa preserves the initial laryngeal).
    Another interesting type of roots are those which in some languages reveal the structure CVRV, and in others - HV(R)CV. By analogy with the roots of the previous type it seems quite probable that in this case we are dealing with old structures of the type *HCVRV. In some languages this structure is simplified into CVRV (cf. *HRVCV > RVCV), while in others it develops into *HVCRV (cf. *HRVCV > HVRCV), and afterwards - because combinations of the type CR are generally not allowed - into HVRCV (with a possible subsequent loss of the medial resonant). According to their behaviour in descendant languages these roots can also be divided in two subgroups correlated with Avar accent paradigms and therefore with the brevity/length of final vowels:

PNC,PEC

*HCVRV¢

*HCVRV¯

      

PN          PA       Av       PTs          Lak    PD    PL    Khin
*RVCV       *HV(R)CV HV(R)CVC *HVCV(-V~-) CVRV *CVRV *CVRV RVC¬CVR
a)*HV(R)CV *CVRV    CVR(V)B *CVRV       CVRV *CVRV *CVRV CVR(V)
b)*mHVCV


    We should note that the reflexes of the structure *HCVRV¯ differ from the reflexes of simple roots of the type *CVRV¯ only in PN, where we see the structure HV(R)CV with front resonants, and a special structure mHVCV with the labial m. It must, however, be stated that in the last table we have on purpose somewhat simplified the transcription of the root structures; in reality medial resonants in descendant languages rather often disappear, which suggests that the structure *HCVRV, while transforming itself, developed not just into *CVRV, but rather into *CVRHV or *CVHRV (on the development of the medial combinations *RH and *HR see above, pp. 69-71).
    In PWC, owing to the general rule of dropping laryngeals and (in most cases) resonants, most root types listed above are reflected as the monosyllabic structure CV. However, in rather many cases PWC has a prothetic consonant before C (usually a labial b or p - depending on the voice/voicelessness of C, more rarely a dental t or d). The nature of this consonant is not quite clear yet. It is not to be excluded that West-Caucasian languages preserve an important archaism - i.e., the prefixed class markers, that were preserved by PEC only within verbal word-forms (most of the "class markers" that some researchers discover in a "petrified" shape within East-Caucasian nouns, are, as seen from what was said above, organic parts of the root and have nothing to do with class agreement) and within a small number of nouns, mostly kinship terms and names of "inalienable" body parts.
    All the variants of the CVCV structure that have been examined above (we have not said anything only about two very hypothetical structures *HCVCV and *RCVCV, the reconstruction of which is yet dubious) are characteristic for PEC (PNC) non-derived nominal roots. In some cases we can probably regard the initial *H- as a prefixed element (e.g., the noun *hwmi¢_½³ "honey", that is probably a derivate from the adjective *mi¢½_V "sweet"), but in most cases we cannot find any deriving roots (verbal or adjectival) with a simpler structure. The contrary is correct as well: an absolute majority of non-derived PEC (PNC) nouns has the phonetic root structure CVCV (where C, as has been noted above, is a consonant or a consonant combination of one of the examined types). The following cases must be specially noted:
    1) There is a rather numerous class of nominal stems of the structure CVCVCV, where the last consonant is usually a resonant. It is quite possible that all such stems are derived from obsolete simple roots of the structure CVCV, because virtually all of the resonants in PEC could act as derivative or inflectional suffixes. However, the final solution in each individual case depends on deeper inner reconstruction or external comparison.
    2) There is a small number of nominal stems with the structure *-VCV and a variable initial class marker. As we said before, these are nouns denoting some kinship relations or inalienable body parts (e.g. face, belly, etc.) These words - both by their semantics and their shape - in a way occupy an intermediate position between nouns and verbs (on the verbal root structure, see below). There is no doubt that in PEC this class of nouns was not much more extensive than in modern Caucasian languages. It is not to be excluded, however, that in the original PNC system the class markers could be prefixed not only to verbal structures of the type *-VCV, but to noun structures of the type *CVCV as well. On one side, it is indicated by some facts of West-Caucasian languages (see above, page 85), on the other side, we meet occasional prefixation of the syllable rV- or €Vr- with an obscure meaning to some nominal roots of the type CVCV in individual East-Caucasian languages. It is probable that a very archaic situation of this type is reflected in ancient Hatti texts (see [Ivanov 1985]). However, this problem still requires a fundamental elaboration.
    Summing up, we may state that for an absolute majority of nouns we can reconstruct an original two-syllable root structure. The extreme point of view of some authors, who think that the PNC and PEC root had a monosyllabic structure and consisted of one obstruent+vowel must therefore be considered insubstantial. The semblance of "monoconsonantism" is created here, on one side, by the pseudo-"monoconsonantism" of the West-Caucasian root (whose secondariness was already noted by N. S. Trubetskoy, see [Trubetskoy 1930, 281] ), on the other side, by the stability of the reflexes of PNC oral obstruents, opposed to the general instability and active assimilative/dissimilative processes within the subsystems of laryngeals and resonants. There is no doubt that many nominal stems contain old derivational morphemes, but the number of these stems is very much smaller than is often suggested.

    1.1.3.2. Verbal root.

    One of the main tasks of the comparative grammar of North-Caucasian languages must be the reconstruction of the PNC verbal paradigm. Up to now we have a very approximate notion about the system of PEC and PNC verb conjugation. However, such a reconstruction has been established for some intermediate protolanguages (e.g. PL), and we can already draw some preliminary conclusions.
    The verbal word-form in PNC was apparently represented by a rather long chain of class and aspect/tense markers, with the verbal root in the middle. Unlike the nominal root, it was apparently never isolated, without auxiliary morphemes; such a situation is still preserved in most North-Caucasian languages. The interaction with prefixes and suffixes has probably conditioned the specific structure of the PNC verbal root.
    The structure of the PEC (PNC) verbal root was already outlined by N. S. Trubetskoy (see [Trubetskoy 1929]), who had noted that it looked like -VCV(R), where C is an obstruent, V - alternating vowels and R - some resonant. The position of the initial consonant in the PEC verbal root was usually occupied by interchanging class (agreement) markers. We can now make this conception somewhat more detailed, by noting the possible presence of initial laryngeals (usually lost in descendant languages after prefixed class markers - see above on the development of the combinations CH-, - but preserved if prefixed morphemes are missing) as well as medial clusters of the type -RC- (see below for more detail on their reconstruction in PL) in the PNC (PEC) verbal root. Therefore, the full structure of the PNC (PEC) verbal root looks like *(H)V(R)CV(R); in PWC, owing to the phonetic processes of dropping laryngeals and resonants (mentioned above), most verbal roots acquire the monosyllabic structure CV.
    The nature of the initial syllable *HV- in the PNC verbal root is not quite clear yet. It is possible that more profound internal reconstruction and external comparison will in many cases allow us to regard this syllable as prefixed (having arisen in some cases between the class indicator and the initial root consonant in order to eliminate a forbidden initial cluster; in some cases reflecting some ancient deictic or locative markers). It is also quite probable that ancient root structures of the type *RVCV, finding themselves in a position after the prefixed markers, were transformed into *-VRCV, while the ancient structures *CVRV in such a situation developed a prothetic vowel > *-VCVR-. However, on today's level of knowledge we may talk only about the known structure *(H)V(R)CV(R).
    We should pay attention to a virtually complete (with very rare exceptions) lack of verbal roots with two oral obstruents of the structure CVCV. We can only guess about their fate in PNC (they could, even before the division of PNC, have been transformed into roots with the structure -VCCV with a later simplification of the forbidden consonant combination; or they could completely lose verbal functions, becoming nominal roots).
    We will now sum up our knowledge of the behaviour of individual elements of the PEC verbal root in descendant languages (in PWC it was in most cases reduced to the simple structure CV, see above; a similar simplification of the verbal root structure has apparently come to pass in Khinalug, but material on it is rather scarce and it is too early to make any exact conclusions).
    1. The initial consonant. This position in verbal roots is occupied only by laryngeals (for their reflexes, see above) that, in most cases, disappear after prefixed (class or locative) morphemes. Therefore, for most verbal roots we can regard the position of the initial consonant as not filled (thus following N. S. Trubetzkoy).
    One of the as yet unclear questions of the reconstruction of the PEC verbal paradigm is the problem of the so-called "prefixless" conjugation, attested by some verbs in Avaro-Andian languages (it is not connected, of course, with the later process of dropping class markers in some Lezghian languages). It is not to be excluded that in PEC (and PNC?), class agreement could be absent in some aspect/tense forms, as a result of which the vocalic root beginning turned out to be "not covered". In such a situation initial vowels (especially narrow ones) could easily be lost, and the structure -VCV(R)- could be reduced to a more simple structure CV(R)-. This phenomenon could explain the presence of a rather large number of doublet forms in Avar-Andian languages, which can be characterized as two states of root. Cf. in Avar: state 1 - =u»:- "to rake, shovel", =us:- "to crumble, cut", =e®- "to pull, to pluck fruits", =at- "to be"; state 2 - »:a- "to shovel up, to rake up", s:u - "to slit", ®e - "to tear down", te - "to leave", etc.
    It is not yet clear how the described phenomenon is related (and whether it is related at all) to the distinction of "strong" and "weak" series of class indicators in PL, where the "prefixless" conjugation is absent (on this opposition, see Àëåêñååâ 1985).
    2.V1†. In many cases first syllable vowels are related to each other in different languages by the same rules as the first syllable vowels of nominal roots (see above). However, in verbal conjugation an undoubtedly significant role was played by ablaut, which was much more productive and diverse here than in the nominal system. The reconstruction of ablaut rows is by now made only for the Proto-Lezghian language (see below), and not transferred to more archaic stages. Because of that the exact reconstruction of the first syllable vowel for most verbal roots characterized by active vowel gradation is still unclear.
    3.R1†. The clusters with medial resonants in the verbal root are reconstructed in PL (see below), PD, PA and PN. However, reconstructing the system of medial resonants in the verbal root is somewhat harder than in the nominal one, because here, due to several reasons (reduction of the initial vowel, a possibility of secondary infixation of some originally suffixed morphemes), root resonants are often reinterpreted as auxiliary morphemes and therefore can disappear (in some verbal forms or even in the whole paradigm). If one also considers the general phonetic instability of resonants in clusters of the type RC in North-Caucasian languages (on the development of these clusters in nominal roots, see above), it becomes clear why, in many cases, medial resonants are preserved only sporadically as archaisms.
    Nevertheless, a careful comparison of the reconstructed intermediate protolanguages, as well as the consideration of phonetic rules (in clusters of the type -RC-, obstruents behave in the same way as in nouns, and the analysis of the correspondences between obstruents often allows us to make a conclusion about the presence of a resonant before them in PEC and PNC), allow us to reconstruct in verbal roots, on the whole, the same system of medial -RC-clusters as in nominal ones (see above).
    It must be noted that in PL and PA verbal roots, the medial nasals -m- and -nare completely missing. These medial resonants can be reconstructed only on the basis of PD data (-m- is preserved in PD) and indirect evidence of the Lezghian and Andian languages. As a matter of fact, both PL and PA have a so-called "n-conjugation", generally going back to PEC roots with a final *-n (see below on final resonants). But in some cases the n-conjugation in PL corresponds to the resonantless conjugation in PA, and vice versa. We may think that the dropped medial nasals may have left behind a nasalization that also spread over the second syllable of the verbal root, resulting in the mixture of roots with original final nasals and roots with medial nasals. Judging by the correlation of known cases with Dargwa and PTs evidence (PTs reflects medial nasals as the nasalization of the vowel V1†), the medial -m- disappeared in PL without any trace, but was reflected as the "n-conjugation" in PA, and, vice versa, the medial -n- disappeared without any trace in PA, but was reflected as the "n-conjugation" in PL.
    4. C. The root obstruent is the most stable element in the verbal root. For the verb we reconstruct the same system of obstruents as for the nominal root (on the correspondences, see above). We must pay attention only to the extreme rarity of labial consonants in verbal roots (in fact, within the whole bulk of North-Caucasian and East-Caucasian roots we know of only one root with a labial). In addition, we must note that the root obstruents can be laryngeals which easily disappear or are consumed by adjacent consonants, as a result of which in some languages "zero" verbal roots can appear.
    5. V2†. Significant vowel distinctions in the second syllable of the verbal root are found in Lezghian languages (for the PL reconstruction of V2†, see below), in Lak, in Avar-Andian and probably Nakh languages. In other languages the differences among second syllable vowels are generally neutralized. Judging by the data from Lezghian and Nakh languages, vowel gradation (though of a somewhat different kind and with different functions than in the first syllable) was also present in the second syllable. However, the system of PEC verbal vowels in the second syllable is not yet clear; we can draw some conclusions about the PNC system by comparing the PL system with the behaviour of root obstruents in PWC (because they are apparently subject to the same modifications in the verb as in the noun). However, this problem needs special investigation.
    6. R2†. Final resonants in verbal roots are attested in PA, PD and PL. We can quite reliably reconstruct *r, *l (perhaps *š as well, judging by the PA data, though there are few examples on this resonant), and *n for PEC. The question of the reconstruction of the final labials *m, *w (> PA m, b) is still open, because their PL and PD correspondences are not clear; however, their presence in the original system seems quite possible. In other languages final resonants are lost. This process was apparently caused chiefly by morphological reasons: final resonants in the verbal root are easily reinterpreted as suffixal morphemes and therefore are separated from the root. This process is active, for example, in modern Lezghian languages and dialects (see below).
    PEC final resonants *r, *n are well preserved in PL and PD. PA stems in "state 1" (see above) preserve only -n and lose -r; in "state 2" -r, -n are usually preserved. PEC final *l is preserved in PA in "state 2" and in PL; in PA "state 1" and in PD this consonant probably merges with -n. In addition, in PD roots with the original final *r, but containing a medial -l- are transferred into the n-conjugation (probably as a result of the process *-VlCVr > *-V(l)CVL > *-V(l)CVn). However, these rules have many exceptions as a result of different analogical processes, taking place in individual cases.
    On the whole we may say that, though we know the general structure of the verbal root, there are still very many gaps in our reconstructions, for the filling of which more careful research in the field of North-Caucasian verbal morphology will be needed.

    1.1.3.3. Other types of roots.

    Besides nominal and verbal, there are also some intermediate types of roots. We have already examined above nominal roots with variable class markers that are formally rather similar to verbal roots. They are adjoined by adjective roots, the structure of which partially resembles the verbal one, partially the nominal one. It should be noted that there are some adjective roots with a typical nominal structure (e.g. CVRV), that can obtain class prefixation and change the root structure: *CVRV > *=VCRV and (owing to the inadmissibility of -CR- combinations) > *=VRCV. It is possible that such (or similar) was the original process of the formation of verbal roots in North-Caucasian languages (see above, page 87, on other possibilities).

    1.1.3.4. Prosody.

    The PEC and PNC prosody is still little known. We have all reason to think that the PNC word was characterized by tonal accentuation; this is confirmed by the data of the PWC accent system reconstructed by V. A. Dybo (see [Dybo 1977, 1989]), as well as by the discovery of tonal accent systems in modern East-Caucasian languages (see [Kibrik-Kodzasov-Starostin 1978]). However, the PNC accent reconstruction is still very far from completion; for some preliminary observations on tonal correspondences in Avar-Andian languages see [Starostin 1978]. A successful solution of this problem still requires much field research and the creation of intermediate accent reconstructions for PTs, PA and PL protolanguages. Therefore all such questions are not examined in this work.
    Some prosodic phenomena in North-Caucasian languages (namely: pharyngealization, the split of vowel reflexes in Tsezian languages and Avar mobile accent) were already examined above - being by their very nature connected with segment factors (the system of laryngeal consonants and the brevity/length of vowels).
    There is, however, one more question that is closely linked to the root structure, the consonant system and probably the original prosodic system in PEC and PNC. It is the problem of the so-called "geminates" (on their reflexes in the subgroups, see above).
    If we examine the bulk of the reconstructed PEC and PNC roots with the structure AV(R)AV (where A is an affricate or fricative, R - a resonant), we will discover the following regularity: 1) roots with the structure AVAV allow either the combination of two plain affricates (CVCV), or two "geminates" (CCVCCV), but nothing else; 2) roots with the structure AVRAV allow either the sequence CVRCV (where both the affricates are plain), or CVRCCV (where the first affricate is plain, and the second one is geminated). (Possible exceptions are some reduplicated structures). Thus, roots with two affricate (or fricative) consonants are divided exactly in two subgroups: a) roots containing only "plain" consonants; b) roots, where both consonants are "geminated" if the first syllable is open, but where only the second consonant is geminated if the first syllable is closed (in short, roots, where only the consonant in the open syllable is geminated). If we suggest here the activity of some prosodic factor (e.g. phonation or tone), whose presence caused the strenghthening of affricates and fricatives in the open syllable, we can in fact eliminate all the "geminates" from the reconstruction. However, this possibility is still hypothetical; to confirm this hypothesis we would have to link the described distinction with some actually witnessed prosodic features.