Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 34




(second version, November 2003)

To the memory of Edzard Johan Furnee



1. The phonemic system of Pre-Greek
2. Characteristic sound(group)s
1. au; 2. b; 3. bd; 4. gd; 5. gn; 6. dn; 7. kt; 8. kc; 9 mn; 10. ou; 11. pf; 12. rd;
13. rkn; 14. rn (rd, nd); 15. s; 16. sb; 17. sg; 18. sk, st; 19. stl; 20. tq; 21. fq;
22. cm, cn; 23. w; 24. geminates
3. Prothetic vowel
4. s mobile
5. Variations: consonants
5.1. Voiceless / voiced / aspirated stop
5.2. Prenasalization
5.3. Nasalization
5.4. Labial, m and u!
a. p, b, f/m
b. p, b, f/(#)
c. m/(#)
5.5. Stops / s(s), t or stop + s, t
5.6. Velar / labial / dental: labio-velars
5.7. Dentals / liquids (a. r/l; b. d/l; c. t,q/l; d. n/l; e. d/r; f. n/r)
5.8. Simple / geminate
5.9. s- / zero, (before consonant and) before vowel
5.10. K-, T- / zero
5.11. n-, l- / zero
5.12. Metathesis, and aspiration shift
5.13. Secondary phonetic developme nts
5.14. Other variations
6. Variations: vowels
6.1. Single vowels, timbre
6.2. Long / short
6.3. Single / diphthong
6.4. Rising diphthongs?
6.5. Secondary vowels (or syncope)

1. Reduplication
2. Suffixes
The material: -ab-, -ag-, -agg-, -ad-, -aq-, -ai-/e(i)-, -ai(#)-o, -aib-, -aiq-, -ain-, -, -air-o-, -ak-, -al(l)-o-,
-amb-, -amn-, -am-o-, -an-, an-, -and-, andr-, -anq/t-, -ann-, -ax-, -ap-o-, -ar, -ar-, -as-a/o-;ass-, -at-,
-aur-a/o-, -ac-, -gda, -gr-, -ed-, -ez-a, eir-o-, -ell-a/o-, -el-a/o-, -em-o-, -emn-o-, -enn-a, -er-a, -et-o-, -eur-,
-eut-, -hb-, -hq-, -hk/c-, -hl-, -hn, -hr, -hr-, -hs(s)-, -ht-, -htt-, -hy-, -q-o-, -qr-, -ib-, -igg/k/c-, -id-, -idna, -iq-,
-ik-, -il-, -ill-, -imn-, -in-, -in-, -ind-, -inq-, -is-, -it-, -ic-, -kn-, -m-o-, -n-, -x-, -op-, -or-, -oss-a, -ott-a, -oul-o-
, -our-, -ous(s)-a, -pn-, -pt-, -r-, -rg-, -rd-, -rn-, -sk-, -s-o, -ss-, -st-, -stron, -t-o-, -tt-, -ub-, -ugg-, -ud-, -udna,
-uq-, -ui-a, -uk-, -uk-, -ul-, -um-, -umb-, -umn-, -un-, -und-, -unq/t-, -unn-, -ux-, -up-, -ur-, -ur-, -us-, -ut-, -uc-,
-fq-, -f-o-, -wk-, -wl-, -wm-, -wn-, -wp-, -wr-, -wss-, -wt-.
3. Word end
3.1. in vowel: 1a. -a; 1b. -i, -ij; 1c. -u, -uj 1d. -euj 1e. -w, -wj
3.2. in -r: 2a. -ar; 2b. -ir; 2c. -or; 2d. -wr
3.3. in -x, -y 3a. -x 3b. -y
3.4. in -n
3.5. in -aj


[I am indebted to professors Melchert and Ruijgh for their comments.]
In 1956, Kuiper wrote a study on Greek substratum words which opened a new chapter in the study of the
field. Furne!e then wrote a dissertation on the subject (1972), in which he presented twenty years of research and
which is up to now the handbook for the subject. As Kuiper was also my promotor, I knew the book from the
beginning (see my review in Lingua 36, 1975). The short overview which follows here is based on Furne!e's material
and on my own research during thirty years.
Furne!e's book met fierce criticism and was largely neglected. [An exception is R.A. Brown's Pre-Greek
Speech on Crete, 1985.] That was a major mistake. Pre-Greek words often show variations which are not found in
inherited words. It is obvious to study these variations. That is what Furne!e did. It appeared, as Kuiper had shown,
that these variations show certain patterns, so that they can be used to recognize Pre -Greek elements. Two points of
criticism on Furne!e are possible. One is that he considered almost all variations as expressive, which is certainly
wrong. It is evident that the variants are due to the adaptation of words of a foreign language to Greek. We shall see
below that in this perspective many variations can be understood. The second objection to Furne !e is that he
suggested etymological connections between Greek words, as variants of a Pre -Greek word. When several possible
variations are used, many combinations become possible, and here Furne !e has gone too far in a number of cases. We
can hardly reproach the author in these cases, however, as he was exploring new ground: it is only to be expected
that in such a situation one goes sometimes too far. The method, however, was correct; what we have to do, as
always in the case of etymology, is to see which suggestions are proba ble and which are not. Of course, in many
cases we cannot reach certainty, but this is no objection. On the whole, Furne !e's material is indeed Pre-Greek with a
very few exceptions, and so we have a large corpus of material. His index gives 4400 words; as many derivatives
and variants are given (and a few Indo-European words that were discussed in the text), I guess that it contains some
1000 Pre-Greek etyma. Also, Furne!e often adduces new material, (even now) not mentioned in the etymological
dictionaries (mostly glosses from Hesychius).
I have in general given only a few names, and no material from outside Greece and Asi a Minor. The
comparison with Basque or Caucasian languages has not been considered as this is not my competence; I think it
possible that there are such connections, but that must be left to others. My suggestions for reconstructions are not
essential. One may ignore them and just consider the variations themselves. Often these variations are explained as
incidental phenomena (assimilations, influence of other words, etc.), and such explanations may be correct in some
cases. But if we know which variations frequently occur, we are warned to consider Pre-Greek origin if we find
them. The existing etymological dictionaries often seem to `avoid' the conclusion that a word is a substratum
element. It is remarkable that Chantraine was quite aware of the question in his Formation, but has very often
withdrawn his - in my view correct - evaluation in his dictionary. It seems as if substratum elements were not
A question that is a real problem, is that a word is often called a loan from an Anatolian langua ge, while it
may be just as well a word from the substratum in Greece. It is generally accepted, on the basis of the place names,
that the same language was once spoken in Greece and in (western) Asia Minor. [A point for further study is to
establish how far to the east related names are found. It is my impression that such forms are found in the south as
far as Cilicia.] But it is mostly impossible to distinguish between substratum words and - (mostly) later - loans from
Asia Minor. A word may have been taken over through commerce etc., as happens between two neighbouring
countries, or in the time when Greeks settled in Asia Minor, which happened probably as early as in the 14th
century. I think that, from a methodological point, it is better to consider su ch words as Pre-Greek, and only to take
them as - normal - loan words when there is reason to do so, but it is clear that here we may often make mistakes. A
good example is tolu/ph `clew, ball of wool ready for spinning'. The word is clearly related with Luw., Hitt.
talupa/i- `lump, clod'. The Greek word is typical for Pre-Greek words: CaC-up- (with a = o before u); there is no IE
etymology (Melchert, Orpheus 8 (1998) 47-51 does not convince). So it is Pre-Greek / Anatolian. [I shall abbreviate
this, when necessary PrGrAn.] Also, `clew...' is not a word that you bring home from overseas; it is an everyday
word, which the Greeks took up at home. I completely agree with Furne !e's interpretation (35 n. 33) that the word
was brought to Greece by the settlers from Anatolia who brought their language, which, from another perspective,
we call Pre-Greek to Greece. So it is a loan fron an Anatolian language, but from the one that was al so spoken in
Greece before the Indo-European speaking Greeks arrived there.
The essential point is that it should be recognized that substratum words are a frequent phenomenon. One
may regret this, for example because Indo-European words can be much bet ter explained, but this is irrelevant; it is
simply a fact that has to be accepted. My approach is rather that it is fascinating that in this way we can learn
something about the old languages of Anatolia, and of the role of Anatolia in early history. And, of course, it is part
of the oldest history of Greece.
As to `Pelasgian' and related theories which assume an Indo-European substratum in Greece, these theories
have failed, and I no longer mention them (in my etymological dictionary). The theory has bee n extensively
discussed by Furne!e (37-68). `Pelasgian' has done much harm, and it is time to definitely reject it. The latest attempt
was Heubeck's `Minoisch-Mykenische' (1961 Graegraeca), where the material was reduced to some ten words; the
theory has been tacitly abandoned, I think. (Another matter is the problem of su~j / uj and the z-, for which Ruijgh
assumes an Indo-European para-stratum. Here the evidence seems so clear that an explanation of this kind may have
to be assumed.)

1. The phonemic system of Pre-Greek
The consonants.
The fact that voiced, voiceless and aspirated stops interchange shows that voice and aspiration were not distinctive
in Pre-Greek. On the other hand, the Mycenaean signs for rjo, rja and tja show that palatalization probably was. This
is confirmed by the sign pte which will go back on p
e. (In our material cf. qa/pta. I wonder whether
krosso/fqon points to p
> pt but then realized with aspiration.) Further, the signs two, twe, dwo, dwe, nwa, swa,
swi point to labialization as a distinctive feature, i.e.: t"o, t"e, d"o, d"e, n"a, s"a, s"i. Note that palatal and labial
forms are found with resonants and stops. The existence of labio-velars is confirmed by qasireu basileu/j, etc. (See
further Beekes, Glotta 73 (1995/6) 12f.) This results in a system:

p p
t t
k k
c c
s s
r r
l l
m m
n n

Of course, it is possible that one or more of the supposed phonemes did not occur (e.g. m
: a palatalized m is a rare
We can now use this insight in explaining forms. Thus, da/fnh - daucn(a)- can now be explained as
dak"n-, in the first form giving a labial (this time aspirated), f, in the other being rendered by -uc- with anticipation
of the labial feature, while the velar remains a velar. Then we can understand au'ch/n - Lesb. amfhn from *ank"e#n;
the latter form is directly understandable (with f from the labio-velar); the first went through *an"ke#n (or *a"nke#n)
giving au'chn (with loss of the nasal, a development known from Armenian). Perhaps also possible is *ak"e#n >
au'ch/n with prenasalized *ank"e#n > amfhn. Such interpretations may in individual cases be wrong, but that is no
reason not to try it. On the other hand strange variations become underst andable if we start from a limited set of
The palatalized phonemes may explain other developments. Thus I wonder whether ll might continue l
we know that *ly gave ll in Greek. Thus in Achilleus. [Chantraine's treament of this name is charac teristically
averting; and in the Addenda (CEG 4) this is not corrected.] Note also that Achileus with one l occurs only in
Homer. This may show that earlier the variation was greater; as is only to be expected. In a similar fashion an
have given ain, and ar
air, and also eir (with colouring of the vowel; see on the suffix). This is confirmed by the
fact that double l is very frequent (Fur. 387: "Dutzende von apellativische Beispiele"), whereas double r, n and
m are much less frequent or rare. The idea is nicely confirmed if Hitt. Appaliunas is the forebear of Apollo (Beekes,
JANER 2, 2003). Also we have -air-, -ain- but no *-ail-. Thus as
may have given ais, cf. ka/baisoj, which has a
v.l. ka/basoj. In rendering such a foreign word, the palatalizati on may one time have been represented, another time
have been neglected. This is a phenomenon we often find - it was the main cause of the variations in Pre-Greek
forms. The interpretation is further confirmed by the parallel development of labialized cons onants. Thus I suppose
that ar" resulted in aur (s. the suff.). In this way, we may understand kalau~roy (beside kolo/r-ob-on) as
kalar"-op-. Another form which shows the remarkable interchange a/au is a'rasca/dej - au'rosca/j. Here one
might assume ar"ask-at-. (Note that the labial element would at the same time explain the o as a variant of a.) I think
this gives the solution for the hopeless etymon alox, aulax, wlax, eu'la/k-a. I assume al"-ak-. It gives aulak-
through anticipation, alok- through colouring; thus the first two forms, which are best attested, are directly clear.
Further au/eu/w interchange frequently. Also o'lok- is unproblematic. [Homeric acc. wlk-a is hopeless; it is the
only form which has no vowel between l and k, and therefore may be due to some accident of the tradition; does it
stand for *o'lak'(a), *w'lak'(a)? Or is it w'lk- < *wlak- with syncope?]
I do not know whether in suffixes of the structure VC a diphthong is allowed. Cf. the forms in -ai#oj.
Otherwise one might think of -ay"-, or even -aw
-, but such sounds are rather rare in the languages of the world. Cf.
Lak-ed-ai!m-wn, if it should be thus analysed (for -ed- cf. Te/nedoj, Le/bedoj). An instance of -ai- due to a palatal
consonant may be e'xai/fnhj - e'xapi/nhj - afnw (a brilliant combination by Furne!e 158 etc.) which may contain
- (the palatalization was ignored in the last form). (Comparable to the development in the second word is
knw/y - kinw/peton, from k
n-? with u < i before ou in kunou~pej?)
There is evidence for an affricate, somewhat like [t
]; I shall note it with /c/. See on the variations B 5.5
(esp. on the forms of Asklepios). We may suspect a series c, c
, c".
There may have been a sound like the Hittite h$. It may have been present in a cluster h$s, which was
represented by x. See B 5.5. But I do not see what it may have become in another position.
The language probably had a y and a w. Initial ya- will often have lost its y-, but it may sometimes be
represented by i'a-, iamboj, 'Ia/swn (?, long a) [but Iason ( Argoj) from i#waso-, with long i]. The ending
-uia may have been -uy-a (a Pre-Greek y may have had a different development from inherited y.) In the same way,
-aia < *-ay-a? with a variant -eia (note that there is no -oia). Cf. Phnelo/peia, Persefo/neia. Perhaps the y
disappeared in some cases, giving gai~a : ga~ (see on the suffix -ai-/-e(i)-).
Initial *w may often have been lost (anax). But wa- may also have been rendered by oa-, as in 'Oaxo/j,
Cret. #axo/j. Thus also 'Oileu/j (which has been considered as identical with the root of Iloj). We find ua-
(which became automatically u`a-) in u`a/kinqoj, Cret. #a/kinqoj. [Furne!e 377 assumes a prothetic u- in the latter
word, which seems improbable to me.] Thus perhaps also ua/eloj. The diffrences will be due to the time when the
loan was borrowed, and whether the Greek dialect stil had a u!; many possibilities arise in this way. - Still another
treatment we see in the word for `truffle', for which we find ouiton, oidnon (-tn-), udnon (-tn-), or iton. I think
that these are all renderings of *wit-. [Again Furne!e 184 assumes a prothetic vowel, #it- / o'#it-, which does not
seem to be the right solution. He further assumes a variation * wit- / wut-, which seems also impobable to me, though
the variation i/u is attested.] Rather u- is a form of oi-, with the -o- changed under influence of the -i-; cf. Lejeune,
Phonet. 174 with n. 2; note that Greek did not allow -ui- before consonants; of course oi became u in Boeotian in
the third century B.C.; variation oi/u is found more often in Pre-Greek words. The case nicely shows that the
variations in Pre-Greek words are tentative renderings of the sounds of a foreign language, and therefore have to be
taken seriously. bra/kalon: r`o/palon H. probably shows a development *wrak- > brak- [as Fur. 147 remarks on
kalau~roy "Die landla#ufige Etymologie <connecting> r`e/pw ... ist wohl ohne weiteres aufzugeben."]
soro/a: paliou/rou eidoj H. (`sorb-apple') continues *sorw- (Lat. sorbus, Fr. `sorbier'; Fur. 230).
It seems as if there was no initial aspiration. Furne!e has a few words with a`-, e`- (one or two with i`-; none
with o`-, h`-, w`-). Several are doubtful; best is ai`masia/ (ai`moi/). One might conclude that the language had no h.
This would agree with the fact that aspiration is not a distinctive feature in the stops. - The result is remarkable for
hrwj, Ellhnej and Hfaistoj (but note that Myc. apaitio does not have ha-). Of course aspiration can have been
added secondarily in Greek. Cf. the variation in afqa / afqa and e'ledw/nh / e`ledw/nh which is a variant of
deledw/nh. But Prof. Ruijgh points out to me that Mycenaean had place names ( haratua) and personal names
(hakumijo) with initial h-; it occurs also in inlaut (pihala, korihadana); cf. further emaa
(/Hermaha#s/ `Hermes') .

The vowels.
I think that this language had only three vowels, a, i, u. The Greek words have very often e and o, but this
would not be surprising: the three vowels have a wide phonetic range, and the phoneme / a/, e.g., may often have
sounded as [e] or [o]. What makes me think so is in the first place the fact that the suffix -system has a, i, u, but not e,
o. E.g. we have ag, ig, ug; agg, igg, ugg; and aq, iq, uq; anq, inq, unq but no forms with eg(g), og(g) etc. (I saw
`Rh/skonqoj; and olonqoj, but as a variant of olunqoj, and mhlolo/nqh with a variant mhl(ol)a/nqh.) This cannot
be due to chance. The idea is confirmed by the fact that variations a/e and a/o are (both) very frequent (while
e/o hardly occurs). It agrees with the fact that the prothetic vowel is only a- (B 3.). Also the palatalized and
labialized consonants will have influenced the vowels. - Furne!e (340) has a rule a > o before o, w, u (kalubo/j /
kolubo/j); this can now be understood as the o-like realization of /a/ before high rounded vowels in the following
Further I doubt that there was phonemic length. Greek quite often has only a form with a long vowel, but
this can be due to the fact that in Greek length is distinctive: a vowel must be long or short, interchange is (normally)
not tolerated. Vacillation is found, as in qrina/kh - qri~nax (see B 6.2). Cf. obrimoj - brimo/j, bri! mh (though this
could be explained differently). A quite different argument is the following. acuron and pi/turon both mean
`chaff'; it is therefore probable that they contain the same suffix -ur-; but in the first word the u is short, in the
second long.
This idea is confirmed by the fact that it explains the foi~nix-rule of Greek accentuation. T$% The
nominatives in -ix, -ux are properispomenon (if possible) though the suffix has a long vowel elsewhere, e.g.
foi/nikoj. If there was no distinctive length, the phonetic length was determined by other factors, e.g. short before
two consonants, long(er) before a single consonant (as we find also in the Germanic substratum words). It agrees
with the fact that the suffixes -ik, -uk- were of Pre-Greek origin. (We don't have it with -ax, perhaps because i and
u are shorter than a; also we find hesitation between long and short vowel in Pre-Greek words more often with i and
u than with other vowels; see 6.2.)
A difficulty may seem the names in -w(j); they may continue *au (cf. Tlw/j, Hitt. talawa-) I suggest that
the diphthong was contracted early, whereby the u/u! disappeared. For -euj (from *-huj) one would also posit *au.
That /a/ was realized / heard as [e, e] is no problem. [The length may come from prevocalic * au. The e-colour may
partly come from a preceding palatalized consonant (' Acilleu/j, 'Odusseu/j?)]. (Are we allowed to compare a >
Ion.-Att. h?) For the feminine in -Myc. -eja I agree with Ruijgh, Etudes $ 212, that it is an independent Pre-Greek
suffix, cf. Kuqe/reia, Phnelo/peia. Another point is that suffixes often have a long vowel ( -in-, -is-, -as(s)-): they
are often found in the pre-final syllable) and standing before one consonant; were they stressed? I counted long a's
in Furme!e's index, which gave only 13 instances; anyhow whis asks for an explanation. Note that an h often
represents a (gaqulli/j / ghq-), and as our knowledge of the relevant dialects is rather limited, we often simply do
not know whether h is an old a or e. If we did not have si/daroj we would not know that it is an old a. Few people
know that Lh~mnoj represents La~mnoj. Note Krh/th. Note the suffixes -hl-, -ht-. Well known words with h = e:

I assume two diphthongs, ai and au. If there were no e and o, other diphthongs are not to be expected. The
diphthong eu is rare (Fur. 353 A5; I found some 12 instances in all of his material); it interchanges with au. Furne!e
(339 A2) calls ei "(in mehreren Fa#llen) nur eine Nebenform von ai". oi is also rather rare; we find ou perhaps more
often, but interchanging with other vowels. See on the variants of the vowels (B 6.1).

I noted hesitation in: abramij / -mi/j, ai'gw/lioj / -io/j, acuroj / -o/j, acwr / a'cw/r, ko/rudoj / korudo/j,
koru/daloj / korudallo/j, me/dimnoj / medimno/j, si/kuoj / sikuo/j, uriscoj / u`risso/j. Note also near-identical
forms like lukayo/j / lu/koyoj. This may not mean that the language had no clear stress; it may just be that the
Greeks who took a word over were not always sure about the stress. But the phenomenon may be important
heuristically: inherited words only seldom show such variation.

2. Characteristic sound(group)s
In Pre-Greek words we find some sounds or clusters that are rare in PIE words. The words may be checked in
Furne!e. (In brackets I give variants.)

1. au
Of course, au occurs in PIE words, but only when it derives from *h
eu (mostly in initial position) or eh
u (which
is rare).
Exx. blau~dej, brau/kaj, grau/kalaj, ka/naustron, kasau/ra, trauxa/na; Labraundo/j.

2. b
As is well known, *b was rare in PIE. In Pre-Gr. words it seems to occur relatively more often.
Exx. ablaroi, ablaj, a'bur/bhloj, arbaloj, a'rbo/n, a'rbu/lh, a'ta/rbaktoj, ba/rbiloj, busso/j, qo/ruboj,
It is often found word initially. - We know that b may also go back to a Pre-Greek `labio-velar' (labialized velar):
basileu/j < Myc. qasireu.
3. bd
The cluster is possible in PIE words, but it is rare; see on b.
Exx. abdellon, abdhra, abdhj, ibdhj, au'to-ka/bdaloj, ki/bdhloj, kuba/bda, si/bda, ti/bdainon; Kombdilipia.
[Note that mo/lubdoj rather continues -wd-; Beekes, MSS 59, 1999, 7-14 .]

4. gd
Cf. Fur. 318 n. 5. There is nothing against PIE gd, but it is infrequent. Of course, the group is reminiscent of bd.
Exx. agduj, a'mugda/lh, gdoupe/w (cf. ktupe/w), igdh, kri/gdanon, lu/gdh, ma/gdwloj.

5. gn
Exx. i'gnu/j (i'knu/j). - On cn, fn see on the suffixes.

6. dn
The sequence is rare in IE words, where it can only arise at a morpheme boundary.
Exx. a'kidno/j, a'lapadno/j, a'ra/cidna, lepadno/j (la-), si/pudnoj. 'Aria/dnh.

7. kt
The group is regular in PIE, but in Pre-Gr. it is found with variants; see B5.5.
Exx. a'bi/ukton, ba/ktai, di/ktu.

8. kc
The group can hardly be of IE origin, but it is not frequent. I noted: ba/kcar, la/kca, sa/kcar, sukca/j; Ba/kcoj,
Bri/akcoj, Bu/kcij. -kc is the geminate of c. Cf. on pf, tq.

9. mn
The group is quite possible in PIE words, but it is frequent in Pre -Greek.
Exx. a'mfi-ke/lemnon, #edimnoj, iamnoj, basumnia/thj, krhmno/j (Beekes), krimno/j, la/mna, lwrumno/n,
me/rimna, prhmna/j, r`o/damnoj, si/gumnon, si/drimnon; 'Atu/mnioj, Kartemni/dej.

10. ou
The diphthong is of course perfectly IE (but not in suffixes), but it is found several times in Pre -Greek.
Exx. sendou/kh, ski/ouroj, strouqo/j, ta/gcouroj, tou~foj, fa/ndouroj, fasi/ouloj (o/w), fou~skoj, clou/nhj.

11. pf
The group can hardly be of PIE origin, but it is rare in Pre -Greek words too. Like kc it is the geminate of f.
Exx. a'rciza/pfhj (?); Sapfw/ (Yapfw/).

12. rd
On a morpheme boundary the group is possible in PIE.
Exx. a'ge/rda, kapard-eu~sai, kardama/lh.

13. rkn
A rare group. Perhaps there is no reason to speak of a group.
Exx. abarkna, berkni/j.

14. rn (rd, nd)
Exx. ki/sirnij (-nd-), a'ce/rda (-na), skape/rda. See on the suffixes.

15. An s occurs both word-initially and between vowels, where is has disappeared in inherited words. (Of course,
in a few cases Greek got a new s.)
Init.: sa/rutta, sagu/rion, sa/naptin, sa/ndalon, sa/ndux, sarrufqei~n, sekou/a, se/linon, sibu/nh, si/gumnon.
Intervoc.: a'gasulli/j, agcousa (egc-), aiqous(s)a, ai`masia/, aisakoj, ai'sa/lwn, ai'simna/w (-umn-), a'i/sonej,
ai'suhth/r, aisuloj, ai'su/f(i)oj, aleison, dro/soj, ka/dousa, kasalba/j.
After resonant: alsoj, ba/lsamon, gelso/n, ge/nsimoj, ma/rsi/uppoj.

16. sb
The group is hardly known from inherited words ( sbe/nnumi is problematic).
Exx. asboloj, qi/sbh, Asbetoj. -sb- may continue Pre-Gr. -sg"-: Myc. tiqajo may be /thisg"aios/ Qisbai~oj.

17. sg
Again this group is hardly known from IE words. It may sometimes continue -cg-, as in a'musge/la,
'Asgela/taj (see 5.5).
Exx. a'lisge/w, u`sgi/nh, fa/sganon, a'musge/la, a'sga/ndhj, pisgi/j; 'Asgela/taj.

18. sk, st
These groups are well known from IE, but mostly in word initial po sition. See on B 5.5.
Exx. be/skeroi, bu/stax, ku/steroi, lastagei~.

19. stl
Though the cluster contains nothing that could not be IE, it occurs more often in substr. words (?).
Exx. astliggej, stleggi/j.

20. tq
The group can hardly be of PIE origin. I n Pre-Greek, it is a variant of tt and ss (see 5.5). It is sometimes clearly the
geminate of q: 'Atqi/j : 'Aqh/nh.
Exx. i'tqe/la, ko/tquboj. Petqaloi/.

21. fq
The cluster is possible in inherited words.
Exx. na/skafqon.

22. cm, cn
Rather rare in IE; Fur. 110 assumes that the nasal caused the aspiration.
Exx. daucmo/j, daucna-, saucmo/n.

23. w
The w is of course perfectly IE, but occurrence of *o was very restricted. Otherwise, it must represent vowel +
laryngeal (eh
, oH) which are only possible in certain circumstances.
Exx. a'makrw~tij, amwton, anqrwpoj, a'nwni/j, a'pofw/lioj, a'rrwde/w, a'skalw/paj, a'skamwni/a, a'skw/lia,
#askw/ndaj, a'smwlei~n, ballwth/, kasswri/j, kinw/peton, laimw/rh, metw/pion, lwrumno/n, us(s)wpoj,
fa/gwroj, fasi/wloj

24. geminates
See also B 5.8 on single / gemin.
Indo-European had no geminates. Of course, there arose geminates in Greek, but they are not very frequent. I doubt
whether Pre-Greek had geminates, but there occur several in Pre-Gr. words. (I compare e.g. Brixhe, Dialecte grec de
Pamphylie, 1976, 95, that there were no geminates in this language.)
As Pre-Greek had palatalized phonemes, I wonder whether l' was (often) represented by ll in Greek. And then
perhaps also n' as nn, r' as rr. For ss and tt see B 5.5. Unclear dd, kk, pp, and mm (palatal m' is a rare sound).
I note some exx.
Stops dd: addai, addix, - kk: a'kkaloj, be/lekkoj, la/kkoj(?) - pp: agrippoj, lou/ppij - tt: bi/ttakoj, la/tta,
ka/ttoj, ma/ttaboj, me/ttej, mi/ttoj; Pittako/j. We must also recall the instances of kc, pf, tq (above).
Liquids ll: a'lla/bhj, a'llopi/hj, a'mi/llakan, ballwth/, ba/tella, bde/lla, bi/llin, pa/tella, - mm: klemmu/j, -
nn: a'ga/nna, ble/nnoj, gi/nnoj, laca/nna; Di/ktunna, - rr: a'rra/baka, bi/rrh, bi/rrox, karro/n
Sibilants ss: aiqous(s)a, afrissa, gi/ssa.

3. Prothetic vowel
The definition is `initial vowel that is present or absent in (nearly) identical forms'; for we cannot say
whether the vowel disappeared or was added under certain circumstances; still another possibility is that it
represents a kind of laryngeal sound, that was sometimes heard as a vowel and and sometimes not. The vowel is in
most cases an a'-. The numbers by Fur. 368ff. are as follows:
a + 90, o 10, e 5, i 3, u 0, h 6, ai 2.
(For u I have excluded u`a/kinqoj and usswpoj, for ai I have excluded ailinoj, which is a cry.) Note that - in
general - a varies with o, e, ai. Indeed we have cases where proth. o varies with a; also for e (ei'kl- : ai'kl-, e`yi/a :
a'yi/a). The h interchanges three times with a. ai interchanges once with a, once with o. Though not all other cases
can be removed, it is clear that the phenomenon regards, originally, a only - which agrees with my assumption that
the language had no e and o.
Exx. a'gasulli/j : ghqulli/j, a'kiri/j : ki/rrij, a'kornoi/ : ko/rnoy, a'cradamu/la : cramadoi~lai, a'nari/thj :
nhri/thj, a'ska/laboj : (s)kalabw/thj, a'cu/nwy : ku/nwy.

4. s mobile
A large number of words shows an initial s- before consonant, which is absent in nearly identical forms. It
occurs before stop or m (so not before r, l, n); the stop is mostly voiceless, sometimes aspirated. Fur. 390f.
Exx. ge/lenoj / sce/linoj, (s)kida/fh; ki/keroj : ski/gkoj; (s)kordu/lh (u); ba/taloj : sp-; pe/leqoj : sp-;
fatta/ghj : sp-; qrigko\j (trigco/j) : stri/gco/j; topei~on : stuppei~on; (s)mh/rinqoj; (s)mu/raina.
A prothetic vowel may appear before an s- mobile (Fur. 390 n. 8): a'ska/laboj : skalabw/thj :
kalab/a/j; a'sfa/ragoj : sfa/ragoj : fa/ragx; a'ska/lafoj : ka/lafoj. (Uncertain is: skuri/ttw : a'gkuri/ttei.)

5. Variations: consonants
5.1. Voiceless/voiced/aspirated stop
This is the most frequent phenomenon. Furne!e devotes a hundred pages to it (101-200).
Examples: bu/stak- / bu/stag, ge/rsumon / ke/rsimon, ktu/poj / gdoupe/w, a'ca/rnaj / a'ka/rnax, isklai /
i'scala/w, ki/clh / ki/gkloj, kre/muj / cre/muj, ble/n(n)a / ple/nna, broko/j / pro/kon, kalau~rop- / kollo/robon,
kupa/thj / kuba/lhj, agrippoj / agrifoj, ku/proj / ku/feron, ompnh / o'mfu/nein, baska~j / faska/j,
kinabeu/esqai / kinafeu/ein, skolu/bra / skolu/fra, a'tra/faxuj / a'dra/faxuj, kaia/taj / kaia/daj, konto/h /
kondo/j, bru/qakej / brutiggoi/, qro/na / tro/na, qrugona/w / trugona/w, ge/lgiq- / ge/lgid-, ko/ruqoj / ko/rudoj,
spu/raqoj / sfura/d-.

5.2. Prenasalization
Before a stop a nasal may appear. This `prenasalization' is one of the most typical phenomena of
Pre-Greek, and it is found very frequently.
Exx. Fur. 267-291. a'cu/nwy / a'gcu/nwy, gi/glumoj / gi/gglumoj, gou~roj / aggouroj, ka/cruj / ka/gcruj,
ku/cramoj (i/) / kigkra/maj, usplhx / usplhgx, fa/ragx -ggoj / (a')sfa/ragoj, kolu/bdaina / kolu/mbaina,
korufh/ / ko/rumboj, sala/mbh / sala/bh, tra/fhx / tra/mpij, a'tra/faxuj / a'ndra/faxuj, ki/dafoj / kinda/fh.
Often the nasal is followed by the voiced variant of the stop (Fur. 271 n. 16), but an aspirate is also often found (cf.
-inqoj). [Prof. Melchert notes that in western Anatolian voiceless stop became voic ed after nasal, which could be
due to substratum influence.] This was the reason that a sound law aspirate > voiced after nasal was assumed for
(inherited words in) Greek (Schwyzer 333), which is incorrect.
A prothetic vowel (above B 3.) and reduplication (section C 1.) create the possibility for prenasaliazation;
examples are given at the places indicated.

5.3. Nasalization
Nasalization is called the process whereby a stop is replaced by the nasal of its series, i.e. a dental by n, a
labial by m. In the case of the velars, there is the problem that Greek had no sign for a velar nasal; the Greek spelling
in this case could not distinguish between nasalization and prenasalization. The case of the labials ( p/m etc.) is
discussed in the next section. The phenomenon is less frequent than prenasalization.
Examples for the dentals are (Kuiper 216; Furne!e does not discuss the phenomenon): ki/dafoj (kinda/fh) /
ki/nadoj, kidafeu/ein / kinafeu/ein, kla/doj / klw/n (klw~nax), ka/qoj / kani/aj, flhdw~nta / flh/nafoj.

5.4. Labials, m and u
There are three interchanges: labial stop / m, labial stop / # and m/#.
Labial stop / m. The variation is a case of nasalization discussed above (5.3). Fur. 203 -227. The stop is
mostly b.
Exx. a'rbu/lh / armula (n. pl.), ba/rbitoj / ba/rmitoj, burro/j / mu/rsoj, kubernh/thj / kumernh/thj, ku/mindij /
ku/bindij, luka/baj / luka/maj, ma/skh / ba/ska, mu/stax / bu/stax, sko/lumoj / sko/luboj, sti~mij / sti~bij,
fa/rmakon / fo/rbanta; a'ph/nh / a'mana/n (acc. sg.), spa/roj / smari/j, sfa/ragoj / sma/ragoj.
Labial stop / #. Fur. 228-242.
Exx. te/qhpa, qa/poj / qau~ma, ko/baloj / kaualo/j, kassaba/j / kasau/ra, kra/mboj / krau~roj, le/paj / la~aj(?),
si/bda / si/dh.
The variation m/#. Fur. 242-247. A difficulty here is, of course, that Greek mostly did not preserve a #, so
that we often just find zero and the # must be reconstructed, which gives uncertainties. - In this case we must
perhaps reckon with a development u! > b (as in mo/lubdoj, Myc. moriwodo).
Exx. basumni-a/thj / basun-i/aj, kri/mnon / kri/non, me/dimnoj / #edimnoj, si/gumnoj / si/gunoj (si/gunnoj). The
evidence comprises 8 or 9 words in -mnoj. It is found six times word initially: mh~lon / hlon, monquleu/w /
o'nquleu/w; note me/roy / a'e/roy (eiroy), where the latter forms could continue *a'-#eroy, *e'-#eroy. Note further
ku/amoj / ku/mhca < *ku#-am-, *kum-hk-. A few other instances are less clear.

5.5 Stops varying with s(s) or stop + s, t
This kind of variation is quite complicated. I distinguished no less than 11 (or 16) different types. They may be
presented as follows (C = consonant):

a. labials b. velars
1. C/Ct p/pt k/kt
2. C/Cs p/y
3. C/sC (p/sp) k/sk
4. Ct/Cs pt/y kt/x
5. Ct/sC kt/sk
6. Cs/sC (y/sp) (x/sk)
7. Cs/ss x/ss
8. sC/ss sk/ss
8c. C/ss k/ss
9. t/ss t/ss
10. t/st t/st
11. ss/st ss/st

Interpretation. We are not concerned with stops simply extended with an s or t, as this would (mostly) not have led
to variants; also extension with an s or a t, in further identical forms, would be linguistically quite strange. Also the
fact that mostly exactly an s or a t is involved is a fact that must be explained.
The most complicated instance is 5., showing kt/sk. As one might expect, the most complicated
phenomenon gives the most information and can be best solved. One expects in this case a cluster with k, i.e. a
consonant before or after the k; one of the two resulting clusters will then have had metathesis. As Greek had
metathesis tk > kt (and no metathesis of sk or x), we may assume that this worked here too. Thus we reconstruct
for an earlier stage an interchange sk/tk. And this interchange can be easily explained by assuming a consonant,
probably unknown to Greek, which resulted either in s or t. This is of course a dental affricate, i.e. a sound like [t
For convenience I shall note it as c (without a diacritic). May be it was a c%, but as long as we have not shown that
there was a distinction between c and c%, we can disregard this. E.g. a'musge/la / a'mugda/lh will have been
*amucgala, represented in the first instance as *amusgala or *amudgala, the latter giving *amugdala. Thus
Asklepios was called 'A(i)sklapio/j or 'A(i)glapio/j. I think that he name was *Acklap-, giving *A(i)sklap- or
*A(i)dglap-; in the latter form metathesis did not operate because *Agdlap- was not tolerated in Greek. Of course,
often we will find only one variant. The strange feature or phoneme may also be dismissed altogether, as in
dikei~n beside di/skoj and di/ktuon.
Now one might suppose that all variants in this group are due to an affricate, but this seems less probable to
me, as consonant clusters are rather rare, and notably as there are no suffixes beginning with a consonant (except n, r
etc.). Of course, we may not be able to identify in each case what happened exactly. I will shortly review the 11 (16)
types (I call the labials 1a etc., the velars 1b etc.).
1a. pt may represent a single phoneme p
, as we saw in B 1.
Exx. (Fur. 315ff): gnup- / gnupt- (gnupet-), kolu/mbaina / kolu/bdaina, ki/baloj / ki/bdhj, lu/ph / lu/pta;
without variants note kro/ssofqon, sarrufqei~n. Note that mo/luboj / mo/lubdoj continues *moliwdos.
1b. kt is most probably explained like 5b, discussed above (so 1b is a part of 5b).
Exx. (Fur. 319ff): arakij / a'ra/kthn, moge/w / mocqe/w, peleka/n / spe/lektoj, a'kaki/a / ka/ktoj.
2a. y may result from *pc. (It is remarkable that there is no 2b. k/x, as x is unproblematic in Greek.)
Exx. (Fur. 324ff): bi/ttakoj / yi/ttakoj (si/ttakoj), de/fw / de/yw(?), kanbi/on / kanyh/j, pw~roj / ywri/thj.
3a, b. (p/sp, k/sk) Both can come from *cp, ck.
Exx. (Fur. 292 n. 2): qi/sbh / qi/bij.
(Fur. 295ff.): be/koj / be/skeroi, icla / isklai, ma/kella / ma/skh (ba/skh), mu~koj / mu/skoj, fa/kelon /
4a, b. pt/y and kt/x can continue *pc, kc and belong together with 2a, b.
Exx. (Fur. 263 A3): difqe/ra / diya/ra, (Fur. 318, 324): calubdiko/j / Ca/luyoj.
(Fur. 263 A3): mo/rocqoj / mo/roxoj.
5b was discussed above. Note that it is no surprise that there is no *pt (5a.), as there is no regular
metathesis *tp > pt in Greek; from *tp the t may have been simply lost. [However, a metathesis tp > pt may have
operated in pto/lij.]
Exx. (Fur. 301 A2): a'musge/la / a'mugda/lh, (Fur. 279, 319): di/skoj / di/ktu(on).
6a, b. (y/sp, x/sk). Furne!e (393) simply considered the interchange as due to metathesis, which is of
course possible. *sp, *sk can represent *cp, ck.
Exx. (Fur. 393): a'spi/nqion / a'yi/nqion, o'sfu~j / yu/ai.
Exx. (Fur. 393): isci/on / i'xu~j, fou~skoj / foxo/j.
7b. x/ss. If x represents *kc, the k may have disappeared in other cases (which did not give x) after which
*c became ss.
Exx. (Fur. 130 n. 59): krixo/j / krisso/j, (Fur. 317): si/bda / xi/mba; (Fur. 286 n. 72): trau/xana, trw/xanon /
trau/sanon, i'xa/lh / i'sa/lh (i'sse/la, i'tqe/la). Ou'li/xhj / 'Odusseu/j.
8b. sk/ss can be explained parallel to 7b: *ck > sk, or with loss of the k, *c > ss.
Exx. (Fur. 300): uriscoj / u`ri/ssoj.
I added 8c. for da/lagcan = qa/lassa. We have dalac- (with prenasal.) / qalass-, and I suppose that it had a *k

(this is a case where a cluster seems improbable).
9. t/ss. This is the well-known element that gave ss/tt. Furne!e does not dicuss it under that heading,
because his system is to dicuss one phoneme (`letter') and its variants; thus he discusses sk/kt under k/kt. Also the
situation is different as here we have a distribution among the Greek dialects. This is the only time, I think, where
we can attribute the different rendering of these loan words to Greek dialects. But the fact that a foreign element was
rendered in different ways is the same as with all other phenomena we discussed. Furne!e has the heading (253) t, d,
q / s(s), z; I think it can better be stated as t (d, q), tt (tq) / s (z), ss, i.e. t with its usual variants d, q; or the
geminated tt (with its expected variant tq, which is the Greek form of geminated qq) interchanging with s or ss; if
the z was [sd] it does not fit in well. As to its interpretation, it could represent single *c, which was rendered tt or
ss, or single s, t ( the variant z would then fit in, but one would also expect a variant st). Here again, however, it is
difficult to decide between *c or *k
or *t
Exx. (Fur. 253ff): kitto/j / kisso/j, kro/tion / kro/ssofqon, mu/rti/nh / mursi/nh, teu~tlon / seu~tlon, ti/lfh /
si/lfh, ga/doj / ga/zaj, a'smwlei~n / a'dmwlh\.
10. t/st may be from *ct giving st, or with loss of the t, *c > ss.
Exx. (Fur. 301ff): ballwth\ / ballau/stion [does this point to a c"?], ma/trulloj / ma/strulloj, mu/tij / mu/stax,
pati/lh / pasti/lh,
11. ss(tt)/st can be *ct > st, or with loss of the t, *c > ss.
Exx. (Fur. 304 A1, 329): yitta/kion / pista/kion.
As we saw it is very difficult in each case to indicate exactly what happened; on the other hand it is clear
that with few assumptions probably all variations can be understood.

5.6 Velar/labial/dental: labio-velars
There is limited evidence for variation velar and labial, velar and dental, and between labial and dental; and between
all three classes (Fur. 388ff.). We find:

k/p,b k/t, d p/t
g/b g/d b/d g/b/d
c/f f/q c/f/q

It is remarkable that mostly the variants agree in voice/aspiration (this shows that there is a large degree of regularity
in these variations).
Exx. k/p: kla/nion / plani/j; g/b: bra/kalon / r`o/palon, gle/pw / ble/pw; ca/lij / falikro/n.
k/t: a'ska/ndhj / a'sta/ndhj; g/d: ga/latmon / a'dalto/mon.
p/t: bapai/nei / batai/nei; b/d: sa/mbalon / sa/ndalon; f/q: gnufai/ / gnu/qoj.
g/b/d: ge/fura / be/fura / de/fura;
It is tempting to assume labio-velars in these cases, but some cases may have a different origin (bra/kalon /
r`o/palon could be just dissimilation in the first word). On the existence of labio-velars see above on the phonemic

5.7 Dentals / liquids
There are some instances of variation between dentals (including n) and liquids (l, r), and between liquids. These
variations are incidental. We find:
1. d, t, q, n/l; 2. d, n/r and also 3. l/r
1. Exx. (Fur. 387f.). d/l: ablaroj / bdaroi/ (330 n. 27); da/fnh / la/fnh; 'Odusseu/j / 'Olusseu/j. Cf. Myc. gen.
ritojo /daburinthojo/ - labu/rinqoj; kala/minqa / Myc. kadamita.
[d/l and the fact that Mycenaean has signs for la, le, li etc., which Lejeune explained by assuming a specific,
unusual sound d, might point to a dental fricative, &.]
q/l: qa/pta / la/tta; n/l: ni/tron / li/tron.
2. d/r: si/bda / xi/mbrai. n/r: blh~cnon / blh~cron.
3. l/r: a'zhri/j / a'zhli\j, kri/banoj / kli/banoj, krw~max / klw~max.

5.8 Simple / geminate
Beside a few isolated cases we find this interchange in n/nn but notably in l/ll. On t/tt and s/ss see above 5.5.
Fur. 386f.
Exx. n/nn: anhqon (t) / annhqon (t), thmeni/j / th/benna. Note the suffix -unn-.
l/ll: bal(l)h/n, quli/j / qulli/j, spe/leqoj / spe!llhxi (dat. pl.), make/lh / ma/kella (so this will be -al
Note gei~s(s)on, sa/risa / sa/rissa.
Note the case of ('Aqh\nh) - 'Atqi/j - 'Attiko/j.

5.9 s-/ zero
We discussed s / zero before consonant, under ` s mobile', above section B 4.
An -s- from Pre-Greek is normally maintained. The only instance where it may have disappeared I know of
is (Fur. 241) su/ricoj, su/rissoj / u`rico/j (-i/skoj, -i/scoj, -i/ssoj). Perhaps `Ella/j beside Selloi/ belongs here.
Another instance seems apion, which is cognate with Lat. pirum which points to -pis-. [Prof. Ruijgh points to
Li/gu-eh < *Ligus-ej, cf. Ligustiko/j.]

5.10 K-, T- / zero
There are instances where a velar or a dental may be absent in initial position (Fur. 391, and 131 n. 59). Dentals may
also be absent in inlaut.
Exx. k / zero: ka/ndaroj / anqrax, kalinde/omai / a'li/ndw, ko/gcnai / ogcnai, kanqh/lion / a'nqh/lion.
g / zero: gi/nnoj / i'nno/j 'but this form may be a late notation/development).
As an explanation one could think here of a uvular, q.
t / zero: ta/gcouroj / agcouroj, th/ganon / hganon, ti/fuon / ifuon (with i);
d / zero: deledw/nh / e`ledw/nh (e'-).
Loss of the dental in inlaut: ne/twpon / ni/wpon, i'qouli/j / iouli/j, a'si/daroj / a'si/aroj. (This is reminiscent of
Dutch neder > neer etc, which was a normal sound law.)

5.11 n-, l- / zero
n- and l- can also be absent (Fur. 391f):
na/fqa / afqa (a-).
laiyhro/j / ai'yhro/j, lamph/nh / a'ph/nh, latmenei/a / a'tmh/n.
Of a different type is gna/mptw / ka/mptw
Perhaps it concerns palatal n
, l
, which are pronounced very `light'.

5.12. Metathesis, aspiration shift
There are instances of metathesis. It mostly concerns r, sometimes l.The consonant changes to the other side of the
vowel or the consonant:
kirso/j / krisso/j, krixo/j, te/rminqoj / tre/miqoj. Cf. Termi/lai / Tremi/lai.
arpix / a'pri/x, ke/dropa / ke/rdopa, na/qrax / na/rqhx.
It is mostly unknown what was the original configuration. (In a case like erbwj / eurwj, where b may stand for - or
continue - #, I would think that the # was anticipated. It may concern an original r".)
The cases of sp/y and sk/x are discussed in 5.5. above.
Aspiration shift is sometimes found: qrigko/j / trigco/j, a'qrage/nh / a'ndra/cnh. In the case of fa/tnh /
pa/qnh the metathesis seems to have occurred late in the history of Greek (Beekes in Bammeberger -Venneman,
Languages in Prehist. Europe).

5.13 Secondary phonetic developments
We may assume secondary phonetic developments, either in Greek or perhaps already in the original
language. One might consider:
bd > br: bde/llion, bre/llion (Fur. 308)
bd > bl: bdaroi/, ablaroi. For this case cf. 5.7b d/l.
gd- > d-: gdou~poj, dou~poj
dn > gn: dno/foj, gno/foj
km- > m-: kme/leqron / me/laqron,
y- > sp-? yendul-? / spondu/lh. See 5. above.
y- > s-: ye/faj / sei~fa, yi/ttakoj / si/ttakoj; cf. Yapfw!, Sapfw/

5.14 Other variations.
There are a few instances with - isolated - puzzling variations. I mention just one, the word for `night',
where we have ye/faj, kne/faj, dno/foj, zo/foj. I think that in some of these cases the solution may be found in a
cluster. E.g. Carian allows an initial cluster kbd-. Such clusters would have been simplified in Greek. (In IE we have
the parallel of Lat. pecten, Gr. ktei/j, supposed to continue *pkt-.) If we assume in our example a cluster *kdn-, it
may have been reduced to kn- or, with loss of the first consonant, to dn-. (The process is of course the same as the
reduction gd- > d-, above 5.13.) Such variant simplifications are typical of loan words. In this way we could connect
two of the words; but I see no way to connect the other two.

6. Variations: vowels
6.1 Single vowels (timbre)
The vowels show many variations. I will discuss them in the following order: first a, then e and o; and
within each of these groups first the short vowel, then the diphthongs, then the long vowel (and the long diphthong s,
but these hardly occur). Note that a variation x/y is not repeated under y.
1. the vowel a.
1a. a/e has 80 occurrences in Furne!e's material (347).
Exx. agcousa / egcousa, arusoj / erusoj, ga/linqoi / ge/linqoi, zakelti/j / zekelti/j, kai/ata / kaie/taj,
ka/mpoj / ke/mpor, ka/cruj / ke/gcroj, sa/ndux / sendou/kh
1b. a/o. These vary also very often. Fur. 339 mentions that he found 80 instances.
Exx. a'xouggi/a / o'xu/ggion, a'rrwde/w / o'rrwde/w, gra/bion / gobri/ai, h'pi/aloj / h'pi/oloj, ka/bax / ko/baktra,
kalu/bh / ko/luboj, lukayo/j / lu/koyoj.
1c. a/ai Fur. 336ff. a'kraifnh/j / a'krapnh/j, a'su/fhloj / ai'su/fioj, la/gmata / lai/gmata.
1d. a/au. Fur. 302 n.37. kanau/stron / ka/nastron, mna/sion / mnau/sion; alox / aulax.
1e. a/w kla/doj / klw~nax.
1f. ai/ei. Fur. 352 A4; 339 A2. Exx. kairi/a / keiri/a, ku/pairoj / ku/peiroj, laiai/ / lei~ai.
1g. au/eu. Fur. 353 A5. laukani/h / leukani/h, pe/tauron / pe/teuron; aulax / eu'la/ka.
1h. au/w, o. Fur. 301 n. 32. kasau/ra(j) / kaswri/j, qau~ma / qw~ma, sau~sax / sw/sikej, bau/kalon / bw~koj,
kalau~roy / kollw/robon / kollo/robon.
1i. a/ai Fur. 338. lh/qargoj / lai/qargoj, lhka/w / laika/zw, ph/ganon / fai/kanon.
1j. v/a: lvdoj (lV/dion) / la~doj (lh/dion)

2. the vowel e.
2a. e/a see under a.
2b. e/i. Fur. 355ff. bli/tux / ble/tuej, e'bi/skoj / i'bi/skoj, de/paj / Myc. dipa, entubon / intuboj, kello/n / ki/llix,
killi/baj / kelli/baj, ku/tesoj / ku/tisoj, le/sfoj / li/spoj (f).
2c. e/i/u. Fur. 354 n. 55. kecra/moj / ki/cramoj (kigkra/maj) / ku/cramoj.
2d. e/eu. Fur. 115. argetoj / arkeuqoj
2e. ei/ai see ai.
2f. ei/h. Fur. 339 A2. kei/qion (cei/tion) / kh/qion, ceiramo/j / chramo/j.
2g. eu/e see e/eu.
2h. eu/au see au.
2i. e/h. Fur. 358 n. 42. enustron / hnustron, me/rmeroj / me/rmhra, ya/kelon / ba/khlon, mh/dea / me/dea (me/zea);
Phlago/nej / Pelago/nej.
2j. h/i. Fur. 171 n. 114. blh~ton / bli/ton, skh~noj / ski/nar, yhmu/qion / yimu/qion.

3. the vowel o.
3a. o/a see a.
3b. o/i. Fur. 191 n. 37. akonoj / akinoj, i'bri/kaloi / o'bri/kala, Onoglin / oniglin.
3c. o/u. Fur. 358ff. olonqoj / olunqoj, skolobre/w / skolubro/j, sku/th / -ko/tta, kudw/nion / kodw/nea, kurse/aj
/ korsi/j, pru/tanij / pro/tanij, topei~on / stuppei~on.
3d o/ou: Fur. 359 bro/koj / brou~koj, kolote/a / kolou/tea (lu, lw).
3e. o/w. Fur. 279 gnote/ra / gnwte/ra, kollw/robon / kollo/robon, fasi/wloj / fasi/oloj (-ouloj), wruggej /
orux -goj; w'scoi/ / osch.
3f. oi/u. Fur. 127 cramadoi~lai / a'cradamu/la (a'kramu/la).
3g. oi/ou. Fur. 358 + n. 65. kolouti/a / koloiti/a (kolote/a), you/dion / yoi/qhj?
3h. ou/u Fur. 120 n. 29. ktu/poj / gdoupe/w, krou~nai / gruno/j.
3i. ou/w. Fur. 133 mwka/omai / moukh/zei, 148 lou/phj / lw/bhx, fasi/ouloj / fasi/wloj (-oloj).
3j. w/h. qrw~nax / a'nqrh/nh.
3k. w/u Fur. 302 n. 35 zw/gioj / zu/ggioj, usswpoj / i``ssu/poj, lwbeu/w / luba/zein.
3l. o/e. gorgura / gergura

4. i/u. There is some variation between i and u. I do not know how to interpret this.
Exx. Fur. 364ff. ai'sumna/w / ai'simna/w, a'nqri/skoj / anqruskon, bi/dhn / budoi/, briko/j / bruko/j, zu/gastron /
si/gistron, kinw/peton / kunou~pej, ku/besij / ki/bisij, ma/rsippoj / ma/ruppoj.
[Prof. Melchert points out to me that an interchange i/u is sometimes found in Anatolian; as in kiklu/ipa- 'steel',
i&qaru/ih$); see his Anat. Hist. Phon. 178.]

5. u/e. gurgaqo/j / gergaqoj
The behaviour of the diphthongs may be summarized as follows:
ai - ei and (vice versa) ei - ai
au - eu, w eu - au
further oi - u, ou
ou - u, oi, w

All these variations are perfectly understandable in terms of adaptation from a three-vowel system.

6.2. Long/short
I doubt whether Pre-Greek had a distinction of long and short vowels (see B 1). We do find h and w, but
not often, and the latter has several variants. On the other hand, the variations w/o and h/e are not very frequent (in
this case also the difference in timbre may have been important, depending on the Greek dialect). Variation between
long en short i and u is frequent, especially in suffixes: gh/quon / ga/qia, ku/besij / ki/bhsij, qi~bij / qi/bij, kri/mnon
/ kri~mnon, qri~nax / qrina/kh; yhmu/qion / yimu! qion, spondu! lh / spondu/lion. Cf. ka! raboj / kara/mbioj (cf.
khrafi/j), fenaki/zw / phnhki/zw `deceive'; Wghn(-)/ Wgen(-). gnote/ra / gnwte/ra.
There is some evidence for short + CC : long + C: mu~koj / mu/skoj; La/risa / La/rissa; and see B 1 on
-ix, -ux.

6.3. Single vowel / diphthong
There are several instances where a diphthong varies with a single vowel. They can be found above (6.1). Most
frequent is a/ai. We further find a/au, e/eu, and ou/u and oi/u. In two cases we find diphthong / long vowel: ai/a,
ei/h. Examples were given above.

6.4. Rising diphthongs?
Relatively frequent are sequences of a more closed followed by a more open vowel, sequences that are not
found in IE. They would be risi ng diphthongs if they formed one syllable, but in fact we may have to do with two
ea: seagw/n (si-, su-)
ia: batia/kh, qi/asoj, qri/amboj, si/alon, fia/lh, fiaro/j. Note siagw/n (se-, su-).
iu: i'ugh/
ua: bruali/zwn, gu/alon (gue-), ku/amoj, pu/aloj, pu/anon, suagri/j,
ue: gue/lion (gu/alon), pu/eloj (pua-)
Remarkable is also the sequende -wu-:
wu: pw~u(g)x; mwu/j?

6.5. Secondary vowels (or elision)
Sometimes words show a vowel which is absent in near identical forms. It mostly concerns vowels between a stop
and a resonant. It is often not clear whether the vowel is secondary, or its absence.
Fur. 378-385. Exx. bragcia / baragcia, ske/rboloj / ske/rafoj, knu/za / (s)ko/nuza, sko/rodon / sko/rdon,
tonqoru/zw / tonqru/zw, 'Arepui/a / Arpuia, knw/y / kinw/peton / kunou~pej, Koru/bantej / Ku/rbantej.

1. Reduplication
Some forms seem to have reduplication (often we cannot demonstrate that it is reduplication). Most
frequent is partial reduplication, where only the first consonant + a vowel is repeated. The vowel is mostly e or i.
Exx. be/brax, be/(m)broj, ga/ggamon, gaggli/on, gaggrai/na, gi/garton, gi/gglumoj, ki/-kuboj, se/-suf-oj /
Si/suf-oj (cf. a'-su/f-hloj); me-mai/kulon (mi-); neni/hloj; se/seli(j); si/sura (-urna); membra/j?; perhaps
ki/kumoj, ki/cramoj (ke-, ku-, kigk-); dendru/w. Cf. Ke/kroy; Pepa/rhqoj, Titarh/sioj; here also Le/-leg-ej? With
prenasal. tenqrhd-w/n, tenqrh/n-h cf. a'nqrhdw/n, qrw~nax. Different vowels in: la/lamij (cf. lai~lay); ko-kru/j;
also ghgh~lix?. Reduplication of a syllable in: mo/rmoroj (mormurai/a), marmarugh. More difficult are: ge/lgij :
a'gli~j (< *ge-gl- : a'-gl-?), ke/rka : akrij (< *ke-kr- : a'-kr-?). Also Membli/aroj : Bli/aroj (cf. membra/j)?;
Membli/j = Me/loj, also Mimalli/j.
A completely different type perhaps in a'm-a/maxuj, cf. a'maxi/j; also a'mamiqa/dej?

2. Suffixes
It seems to me that most suffixes have the same structure. They contain a consonant; i f this is a stop, it can be
prenasalized, i.e. b - mb, q - nq, etc. The stop, of course, has its usual variants, b/p/f etc., though mostly one of these
is dominant. Then the group is preceded by one of the three vowels of the language, i.e. a, i, u. In this way we find
e.g. agg - igg - ugg, anq - inq - unq etc.
A different structure have the suffixes with n (+ vowel) following a consonant: e.g. ku/dnoj, pisa/kna,
mo/lucnon, fenakni/j, satarni/j. In this way the groups rn, dn, kn, mn will have arisen. With mn we find again the
three vowels: -amn-, -imn-, -umn-, so this is almost certainly a/i/um-n. The well known groups -mn- and -rn- then can
be explained in this way as essential elements of this language. (See also on the suffix -rn-.) These groups are very
important as they are found in Etruscan, which further shows little agreement with our language; mn is found as far
as Cappadocian (Beekes BiOr 2002, 441f.). Did the groups ann, inn, unn also arise in this way? Also other sounds
are found in this position: -r-, -d-, -g-, -l- (rarely): yudro/j, ku/riqra, panagri/j, fa/lakroj; skape/rda;
la/qargoj; oniglin. (Note mo/lubdoj, which seems to continue moliwd-, Beekes).
Probably the character of the consonant can be seen. Thus -ain- could render -an
-, while al
seems to have
resulted in all (or -ell- with colouring). Thus eir could come from ar
, air becoming eir. A nice confirmation
could be aur, if this represents ar" (cf. au'rosca/dej beside a'rasca/dej, if this form had *ar"-). Cf. B 1.
Another type of suffix has s followed by a dental: ka/nasqon (-stron), laistro/n or another stop
enqruskon, au'rosca/j, kannabi/ska; these forms may have been partly adapted to Greek suffixes ( -tron). See
below on the suffix -st-.
A form like -eut- is deviating; we do not often find a diphthong before the consonant. Does it stand for
*-aut- from -at"? Cf. -aiu!- in elaion, where we may suspect ay" or aw
(but it may be part of the root). See on B 1.
Not seldom we find long and short vowel with a suffix (= consonant), e .g. iq - iq, uk - uk. The explanation
is perhaps be that length was not phonemic. In the case of ur one might think again of ur' > uir, though r
is a rare
phoneme (like m

The Material
The examples are mostly taken from Furne!e, to whom I refer for details. Words can also be checked in GED. In
brackets variants are given. I added geographical names (GN) from Fick, Vorgr. Ortsnamen (+ more material, w. ref.
to pages).

1. -ab- (Fur. 107)
a'gra/kaboj, a'l(l)a/bhj, araboj, a'ska/laboj, a'tte//le/aboj, ka/kkaboj, ka/nnaboj, ka/raboj, ko/llaboj,
me/s(s)abon, latrabo/j, ma/ttaboj.
GN Katta/bioj (Rhodes 47), Ka/staboj (Caria)

2. -ag-
a`rpag-; cf. Cha. Form. 397ff.

3. -agg-

4. -ad-

5. -aq-
a'spa/laqoj, gurgaqo/j.
GN `Urna/qion (Epidauros)

6. -ai-/-e(i)- (See also 6b.)
There are words in -aia/-e(i)a, like grume/a/grumei\a (or grumei~a)/grumai/a (note the hesitation in the
accentuation). Frisk notes "die Bildung hat kein na#heres Gegenstu#ck." I suggest that the suffix was -ay-(a), which
was pronounced [-a'y-a, -ey-a] (we saw that ei often varies with ai); the suffix was identified with Gr. ai or
ei (before vowel), but the -y- could also be lost; in this way the three variant forms can be explained. Further we
have koloite/a/kol(o)ute/a; korcure/a (korko/drua H. is prob. an error); kw/deia/kw/dea [note the short a]
(kw/duia/kwdi/a are not clear to me; but cf. Ama/quia/Ama/qeia).
I wonder whether this can give the solution for gh~ (<ga)/gai~a: from *gaya the i was retained or lost (as in
-ea above), which gave ga#. (The i-less rendering, which gave -aa- > -a, being as old as the rendering gai~a; this
means that the a became h Attic, not a as in the result of later contractions Another question that might be solved in
this way is Athena's name Aqhnai/h. I always found this form, supposedly derived from the adjective, rather
strange, as well as the coexistence with Aqh/nh (Homer uses both forms). The last form is often explained as a
development from the form in -aia, according to an Ionoic-Attic rule ai > a; however, this rule is unclear: "Aucune
explication satisfaisante n'a e!te! donne! jusqqu'ici de ces faits." Lejeune, Phonet. 1972, 247. And it is impossible, as
the rule, supposed to be Ionic-Attic, i.e. post-Mycenaean as Mycenaean already has At(h)a#na# (potnia) [the
interpretation as gen. Atha#na#s is to be rejected]. Note that Ga is also already found in Mycenaean (in the Thebes
tablets, Ma Ka). [I hesitate to add Ma~ - Mai~a, as one generally considers Ma~ as primary.]
I further think that this *ay-a is the same suffix as -eia which makes feminine names, Ama/lqeia,
Phnelo/peia, Ifime/deia. Ruijgh also assumed that this suffix was Pre-Greek (Etudes $ 212 [Prof. Ruijgh wrote me
however that he abandoned this view.]). ( Note that in Myc. Ipemedeja the -j- is preserved; cf. Ruijgh, El. Ach. 155
n.3.) - There are of course many place names in -eia: Kadmei/a, Kalau/reia, Keru/neia, Mi/deia, Skelerdei/a,
Leba/deia etc.
Often the final was adapted to -ai/a (with long a) after the dominant type, derived from the adjective in -
ai~oj (Chantr. Form. 91, type a'nagkai/h; [Chantr. speaks of "Le suffixe fe!m. -ia" but that has a short a]); cf.
bruktai/a, dirkai/a, sibai/a,
We also find -ei/a used in nouns: daurei/a, zalei/a, kouluba/teia, ...
Nouns with -eo- are very rare; we find: gwleo/j, ei'leo/j, koleo/n, niku/leon, sufeo/j(?), fwleo/j. Further it
may be found in Wke/anoj < *-kay-an- (there was probably no /e/, and the hiatus is also remarkable; note the forms
Wghn, Wgen-).
Beside -aia, eia we may expect -ai-oj/n; we find it e.g. in di/rkaion, sph/laion, yifai~on; grayai~oj,
(*skarabaioj reconstr. by Fur. 169), ... (See also 6b.)

7. -ai(#)-o- (Fur. 233 n. 22, 255 n. 32. Partly from -ai#o-; it is often impossible to establish whether a form had a
# or not.) See also 6.
a'kulai~on, a'raio/j, bagai~oj, balaio/n, di/rkaion, elaion (Myc. era
/rawo), ma/taioj, messai~on, si/raion;
GN A'stupa/laia (58)

8. -aib-
GN Perraiboi/ (Thess.)

9. -aiq-
GN Su/maiqa (Thess.), Peraiqei~j (Arc. deme), Kelaiqei~j (Thess. deme), Kunaiqei~j (Arc. deme)

10. -ain- (Fur. 171 n. 117)
akaina/on, boli/taina, ga/ggraina, kolu/bdaina (-umb-), koru/faina, mu/raina, smu/raina, tri/aina, fa/zaina.
fa/llaina, fw/kaina.

11. -air-o-
ku/pairoj (-eiron, -hrij, -eroj).

12. -ak- (Fur. 158 n. 64)
a'burta/kh, aulax, batia/kh, e'riqa/kh, qrina/kh (qri~nax), kauna/kh, qula/kh, pista/kh, fa/rmakon.
GN Za/rax, -hx (Lac.)

13. -al(l)-o- (Fur. 254 n. 28)
Exx. a'ru/balloj, ai'gi/qal(l)oj, bu/ssaloi, ko/kkaloj, koru/dal(l)oj (-o/j), pa/rdaloj.
[Prof. Melchert suggests that these words may have been taken from IE Anat. languages, where -alla- is very
productive. I think that it was PrGrAn., as it is frequent in Greek; cf. on tolu/ph in the introduction.]
GN Kastali/a (Phoc. source), Fa/rsaloj, Stu/mfaloj (Arc.),

14. -amb- (Fur. 184)
diqu/ramboj, qri/amboj, iamboj, kara/mbaj, sh/ramboj.

15. -amn-
GN Se/damnoj (Crete),

15. -am-o-
GN Ki/s(s)amoj (Kos), Pe/rgamon, Kw/gamoj (Lydia), Ku/amon (M Kydon.), `Udramoj (Kydon.)

16. -an-
GN 'Ia/rdanoj (R Crete, Elis), 'Apidano/j (R Thess.), 'Hridano/j (R), Ka/ntanoj (Crete), #Andanoj (18),
Dra///kanon (Kos, Ikaria),

17. -an-

18. -and-

19. -andr-
GN Th/landroj (51), Tu/mand(r)oj (Pamph.), Mui/and(r)oj (53), Fole/gandroj,

20. -anq/t- (Fur. 191 n. 35; 216 n. 71. -ant- unless otherwise stated)
a'li/baj, a'ska/nqhj (ska/nqaj), killi/baj (but kelli/bat-), o'kri/baj, fa/lanq/toj, Abantej, Me/lanq/t-,
Pei/ranq/t-, Uanq/t-, Gi/gantej, Koru/bantej.
GN Babra/ntion (Chios), Amuklant-, Lh/lanton (Eub.), 'Eru/manq/t- (Arc.)

21. -ann-

22. -ax-
GN Kurta/rpaxon (Crete), Dana/rpaxon (Crete),

23. -ap-o- (Fur. 235 n. 31)
arnapoj, gausapo/j, mo/napoj.
GN Messap-ioj (Crete 24)

24. -ar (Fur. 134 n. 75: mostly neuters)
iktar, ku/dar, ne/ktar, ski/nar, su~far; afar(?); adj. ma/kar; anim. oar, da/mar (gen. -rtoj; Myc. dama / duma).

25. -ar- (Fur. 257 n. 36)
askaroj, bassa/ra, ba/ssaroj, ga/daroj, gi/gglaroj, ki/sqaroj, ku/ssaroj, ku/ttaroj, lesca/ra, fa/lara. Also
GN Aptara (Crete, Lycia), Pa/tara (Lycia), Pi/nara (lycia), Me/gara (75), 'Allari/a (Crete), Kuari/a (Caria)

26. -as-a/o- (Fur. 157 n. 57)
ka/rpasoj, krau/gasoj, kamaso/j (ka/baisoj), pa/gasa.
GN Ku/rbasa (Crete), Me/dmasa (Crete), Ph/dasa (Mess.), Pu/rasoj (Thess.), Pagasai/ (Thess.)

27. -ass-
GN Rutiasso/j (Crete), Kruasso/j (Crete), Muka/lhsso/j Tafiasso/j (32)

28. -at-
GN Kai/ratoj (Crete), Mi/latoj (Crete 27),

29. -aur-a/o-
(a')fau~roj, flau~roj, (a')mauro/j, aglauroj, kasau/ra (-aj), la/stauroj, pe/tauron (eu);
GN 'Epi/dauroj.

30. -ac-
bo/tracoj, ku/mbacoj.

31. -gda
aprigda (adv.).

32. -gr- (cf. on -r-)

33. -ed-
GN Te/nedoj, Le/bedoj. (Lakedai!mwn?)

34. -ez-a see -is-.

35. -eir-o-
aigeiroj, ku/peiron, sa/beiroj (sape/rdhj); Ka/beiroi.

36. -ell-a/o- (Cf. 28 -el-a/o-)
a'kro/spelloj, ba/tella, bde/lla, pa/tella, pe/lla.

37. -el-a/o- (Cf. the foregoing)
Exx. a'musge/la, a'sfo/deloj, bri/keloj, dru/yela, (e'pi)za/feloj, qike/lion, i'tqe/la, ku/bela,
stufelo/j (stu/floj), duspempeloj?

38. -em-o- (Fur. 151 n. 42)
i'a/lemoj (a), koa/lemoj (a), p(t)o/lemoj (or IE?), qelemo\n.

39. -emn-o- (Fur. 151 n. 44)
a`mfi-ke/lemnon, Kartemni/dej.
GN Se/lemnoj (95)

40. -enn-a (I wonder whether n
could give nn)
th/benna. Cf. ble/nnoj.
Cf. Lat., from Etruscan, (doss-)ennus, Porsenna.

41. -er-a
difqe/ra, a'ske/ra (-hra).
GN 'Wleroj (Crete)

42. -et-o- (Fur. 115 n. 4)
kaieto/j, kai/petoj, ma/speton, ne/petoj, thlu/getoj?
GN Xupe/th (Att.), Taleto/n (Lac.), Taugetoj,

43. -eur- see -aur-.

44. -eut- (Fur. 173; 181 n. 7)
baskeutai/, krateutai/.

45. -hb-
GN Ka/ndhba, Te/ndhba, Torrhbo/j all in Lydia.

46. -hq-
GN Pepa/rhqoj, Sesa/rhqoj (67), Kiku/nhqoj (Pagas.), Ka/nhqoj (M Chalkis), Ainhqoj (M 68), Pa/rnhj, -hq-
(Att.). Cf. -aq-.

47. -hk-, -hc- (Fur. 199; 245 n. 70)
bh/rhx, da/ndhx, ku/bhx, lw/bhx, na/rqhx, ph/lhx, tra/fhx, fh/lhx; ku/mhx / ku/mhca.

48. -hl- (Fur. 115 n. 5)
a'bro/khloj, a'bu/rbhloj, arbhloj, a'su/fhloj, ba/khloj, qa/rghloj, ka/bhloj, ka/phloj, ki/bdhloj, kich/la,
neni/hloj, tra/chloj, fa/shloj.
GN Kudrhl-eioi (Kos), `Udrhla (Caria)

49. -h/n (Fur. 172 n. 118)
a'dh/n, a'tmh/n, a'ttagh/n, au'ch/n (amfhn), bal(l)h/n, doqih/n, e'ssh/n, kamash/n (-aso\j), kufh/n, seirh/n, swlh/n,
tagh/n, tibh/n.
Qhrh/n (Crete ++31, 63), Troizh/n, 'Aradh/n (Crete)

50. -hn-

51. -hr
spi/nqhr; Ai'gla/hr?
GN Poqhreu/j (Crete), Ku/qhra

52. -hr- (Fur. 204 n. 10)
abdhra, andhra, ai'yhro/j, a'ska/lhron, a'skhra/ (-e/ra), mu/khroj; i'mbhrij, ku/phrij, lebhri/j.

53. -hs(s)- Cf. -ass-.
Ma/rphssa (M Paros), Mukalhsso/j (Boe. +80); 'Ardhtto/j (Att.), `Umhtto/j (Att. +85)

54. -ht- (Fur. 172 n. 118)
a'l(l)a/bhj, ka/nhj, kw/nhj, le/bhj, ma/sqlhj, mu/khj, ta/phj (Myc. tepa). Here also: an(n)hton (-qon, -son)?
GN Ma! shta (71), Mu/hj, -htoj (Caria)

55. -htt- see -hss-

56. -hy-
GN Aidhyo/j (Eub.), Galhyo/j (Thrac.)

57. -qoj
See Cha. Form. 368; cf. -nqoj.
bre/nqoj, kanqo/j, spe/leqoj, mi/nqoj,

58. -qr-
ku/riqra, ma/raqron; GN Li/bhqra R.
On -aqron Fur. 303 n. 39: ka/n(n)aqron, me/laqron, spa/laqron. Cf. on -str-on.

59. -ib-, -ib-

60. -ig-

61. -igg-, -igk-, -igc-
astliggaj, brutiggoi/, elmiggoj, qri/ggoj (-igk-, -igc-), qw~migx -ggoj, sa/lpigx.

62. -id-; cf. -ind- (Fur. 324 n. 7)
balbi/j, gelgi/j, krhpi/j, sfragi/j

63. -id-na
This will be a combination of two suffixes. Cf. on -n-.
a'ra/cidna (cf. arakoj, -c-)

64. -iq-, -iq- (cf. -ind-)
aglij -iq-, ai'giqaloj (short i), ai'giqoj, a'spi/qion, ga/liqoi, ka/liqoj.

65. -ik-; cf. -ic- (Fur. 226 n. 102)
ka/likon, ku/rnika, le/(i/)krika, nw/rikon, sw/sikej

66. -il-, -il- (indicated)
ai'gi/lwy, mari/lh, (s)pati/lh (-il- = pasti/lh
GN Skandi/lh (Kos)

67. -ill-
argilloj, amilla, arilla, asilla

68. -imn- (Fur. 246 n. 71)
me/dimnoj (i/), me/rimna, si/drimnon

69. -in-
a'po/linon, ba/kinon, gossu/pinon.
GN Mu/rina (Lemn.), Si/kinoj (Cycl.), 'Arpina (Elis)

70. -in-
ku/minon, puti/nh, r`hti/nh, se/linon, foxi~noj, fori/nh; Salami! n-

71. -ind-; cf. -inq- and -id-, -it-.
ku/bind-ij, kumi/nd-ala, alindon; cf. mi/ndij;
GN Krausi/ndwn (R), Pu/rindoj (Caria), Brugi/ndara (Rhod. +46)

72. -inq-; cf. -ind-.
aiginqoj, a'spi/nqion, kalami/nqh, labu/rinqoj, li/minqej, mh/rinj
GN Kh/rinqoj (Eub.), Ko/rinqoj (+74), Sh/rinqoj (?)

73. -is-
arpisa (-eza), ku/tisoj
GN La/risa, Kedriso/j, Khfiso/j (-isoj = -issoj 25, 61), Tuliso/j (Crete)

74. -it-; cf. -id-, -iq- (Fur. 163)
ba/rbitoj, bo/l(b)iton, po/rfiton
GN Su/brita (Crete)

75. -ic-; cf. -ik-

76. -kn- (Probably a combination of -n- with a preceding sound; see on -n-)
abarkna, doru/knion, pisa/kna, fenakni/j, fida/knh

77. -m-o-
GN La/tmoj (Caria), Pa/tmoj

78. -n- (Fur. 132 n. 65.) Sometimes a preceding velar beco mes aspirated
a'ra/cnh, daucna-, ke/rknoj, ku/dnoj, kuli/cnion, mo/lucnon, peli/cnh, satarni/j, sfa/gnoj, yu/dnoj; Ka/barnoj.
GN Ku/qnoj (Cycl.)

79. -x-
amaxa, a'tra/faxuj, koti/xij, kuni/xeij, moroxo/j (cq), saba/xaj (kt), so/rnixa

80. -op- (Fur. 107; often there is a variant with -ab-)
el(l)oy, kalau~roy, -poj (-o/fij), ko/lloy, ska/loy
GN Koro/ph (Thess.), Kassio/ph (Corc.), Panopeu/j (Phoc.)

81. -or- (See also on word end)
acora (-ura), le/porij

82. -oss-a, -ott-a
GN `Ermwnossa (Chios), Adrotta (Lydia), 'Aziott-hnoj (Lydia), Molssi/a?

83. -oul-o-
fasi/ouloj (-wloj)

84. -our-
indouroj, ka/bouroj, liggou\rion (lo-, lu-), pali/ouroj, pa/rouroj, pa/ndoura, ta/gcouroj, ski/ouroj.
GN Luko/soura (Arc., the oldest town of all; +93)

85. -ous(s)-a (Fur. 197 n. 55)
agcousa (e-), aiqous(s)a (aidwssa), ka/dousa, nh/qousa; 'Aki/dousa, Empousa, Khlou~sa (Kh/lwssa M
Fur. 197), Me/dousa.

86. -pn- (This may rather be a suffix -n- after a stem)
qera/pnh, ompnh

87. -pt- (this suffix will have consisted of one phoneme, so p
marupto/n, pe/ssu(m)pton, sa/naptin

88. -r- (Fur. 124 n. 37; 215 n. 62)
ba/lagroj, gh/ligroj, si/grai, ta/randroj, ca/landron; 'Idagroj (Lyc. ida~kre?).
Compare also on -rn-, -rg- and -gr-.

89. -rg-
la/qargoj (ai, h)

90. -rd-
GN Ku/arda (Caria)

91. -rn- (Fur. 48 n. 126; 215 n. 62)
a'karna/n (a'ka/rnax), akorna, kuberna/w, liperne/w (lif-).
We find variants without the -n-:
si/surna : si/sura, kuberna/w : kumerh~nai, satarni/dej : satari/dej, ki/sirnij : ki/ssirij.
So probably the cluster arose through the addition of the suffix -n-. Note that -rn- is found in Etruscan and already in
Cappadocian; Fur. 48 n. 126. See also on (single) -r-.
GN Fala/sarna (Crete), 'Alasa/rna (Kos); Le/rna; `Ali/kurna (Aet.)

92. -sk-
u`ri/skoj (c, ss)

93. -s-o- (Fur. 254 n. 27. In several cases this seems not a suffix but the end of a root; cf. -as-, -is-, -us-)
alsoj, ka/baisoj (as), mu\soj, pi~soj, mi~soj, fa/rsoj
GN Pri/ansoj (Crete), S(a)ranso/j (Crete), 'Ialuso/j (Crete)

94. -ss-
ku/passij, kupa/rissoj, sa/rissa

95. -st-
a'la/bastoj, qemist- (cf. Myc. temitija / timitija [Ruijgh]), lepasth/, plata/nistoj;
GN Ka/rustoj, Lu/kastoj (Crete), Faisto/j, 'Ogchsto/j (R Thess.)

96. -stron; cf. -qr-.
a'la\bastron, de/pastron (l-), enustron (h-), zu/gastron, ka/nastron, lai(s)tro/n, si/gistron
[Prof. Melchert writes me that he thinks that the suffix may be Luwian ( -as-tar-ra/i-), as in de/pastron, where
de/paj is of Luwian origin; see Melchert in FS Manaster Ramer.]

97. -t-o-
asfaltoj, atraktoj, aflaston

98. -tt- (see 5.5 on tt/ss)
kurittoi/, proko/tta; Fe/refatta

99. -ub-
entubon, qo/ruboj, intuboj (oub), si\lluboj, si/ttuboj, sko/luboj (m), skolu/bra (-ob-), ca/luy; cf. o'cqoibo/j

100. -ugg-
la/rugx, pi/suggoj (i), fa/rugx

101. -ud-
a'mu/j -doj, korudo/j

102. -udna
GN Kaludna/ (Kos)

103. -uq- with long and/or short u
a'gnu/j (u), lh/kuqoj (short u)

104. -ui-a
aguia, kw/duia; Arpuia
GN Kadui/h (18, 24), Kindui/a (Crete, also Kindu/h 18, 24)

105. -uk-
ampux, idux
GN Na~rux (Locris), Babu/ka (Lac.)

106. -uk-
kh~rux, -ukoj

107. -ul- (Fur. 205 n. 14)
a'rbu/lh, batu/lh, da/ktuloj, kanqu/lh, kotu/lh, krwbu/lh, mimai/kulon (me-), sfo/nduloj (sp-) with short u.

108. -ul-
(s)kordu/lh; sfondu/lh (sp-),
GN Kardamu/lh (Mess.)

109. -um-
ge/rsumon, gi/gglumoj
GN Si/duma (? 33), Ka/rumai (Crete), Lw/ruma (Kos)

110. -umb-
iqumboj, ko/lumboj

111. -umn- (Fur. 243 n. 66 on -umn- in Etruscan and Cappadocian)
ai'sumna/w, basumnia/taj (a), si/gumnoj

GN `Ri/t/qumna(Crete), Ma/qumna (Lesb. +28), La/rumna (Locr.)

112. -un-. See also on -unn-.
bo/qunoj, sigu/nh (cf. -unn-), la/gunoj
GN Go/rtun (Crete)

113. -und-; cf. -unq/t-
GN Kamund-ioj (Rhodes), Ka/lunda (Caria)

114. -unq/t-
bo/lunqon, koloku/nqh, olunqoj; Bereku/nq/tai,
GN 'Ama/runqoj, Za/kunqoj(+88), Ti/runj

115. -unn-
si/gunnoj, Di/ktunna
See on -un-.

116. -ux-
GN 'Olo/fuxoj (Athos)

117. -up-
issupoj (older usswpoj), ma/rsuppoj, oi'su/ph, tolu/ph.

118. -ur-
a'h/suroj, acura (-ora), laiqur-a/zein, maukuro/n, o'nur-i/zetai, satu/rion, si/sura
GN Eluroj (Crete). Aisuroj (Bith. ++18), Aiguron (+30), Koi/nura (Thrac.), Te/gura (Boe.), N/i/suroj (Kos)

119. -ur-
agkura, a'na/guroj ( o'no/-), ge/rgura (go/rg-), pi/turon,

120. -us-

121. -ut-
GN Lagina/puton (Crete), Kolluto/j (Crete)

122. -uc-
GN Mo/suc-lon (Lemn.)

123. -fq-
krosso/fqon, la/kafqon, mo/lofqoj, na/(s)kafqon, sarrufqei~n

124. -f-o- (on -af-o- Cha. Form. 269)
a'rge/lofoi (il), mastrofo/j (-po/j), se/rifoj, se/sufoj

125. -wk-
GN Koqwk-i/dai (Att. +70)

126. -wl-
a'pofw/lioj?, ma/gdwloj, fasi/wloj (-ouloj, -oloj), fa/skwloj
GN Ki/mwloj (Cycl.)

127. -wm-

128. -wn- (Fur. 303 n. 39)
a'lkuw/n, h'i#w/n, sandw/n, sindw/n, scadw/n

129. -wp-; a variant is -oup-
ai'gi/lwp-, ku/nwy, kinw/peton (kunou~pej).
GN Eu'rwpo/j/a (Crete), Kassw/ph (Epir.)

130. -wr- (Fur. 211 n. 50)
a'cw/r, a'ma/nwr, bia/twr, i'cw/r (i), lei/twr
GN Pi/lwroj (Chalc. +22), Khskw/ra (Crete), Asswron (M Samos)

131. -wssa see -ous(s)a
GN Dirfwsso/j (Eub.), Pidwsso/j (Caria +26)

132. -wt- (Fur. 283 n. 83; 384 n. 132)
a'skalabw/thj, ballwth\, -kaudwto\n, kibwto/j, kra/mbwton, mo/nwtoj, oi'spw/th
GN Qesprwt-oi/

Add. -inna (Cha. Form. 205),

3. Word end
Word end is interesting as some original finals of the Pre-Greek language may have been preserved. Of
course, Greek endings must be removed, notably -oj, -on. Thus -ion, -uon may often continue original -i, -u. (Cf.
Myc. dunijo beside duni.) The words in -vqoj have almost displaced those in -nq (Ti/runq- etc.).

1. in vowel
1a. -a. A short -a can in Greek only result from *-ya < *-ih
; in other cases we may have to do with an original,
Pre-Greek short -a. (It is often difficult to see whether an -a is short or long; the material must be further studied.)
Exx. abarkna, a'ga/nna, a'ge/rda, adalta?, aikouda, abdhra, akara, akorna, a'ko/stila, a'kta/ra, alara,
a'moucra/, arda, a'staga/na, afqa, brou/ka, go/da, go/la, da/xa, da/rda, qa/pta, mo/da, r`o/mixa, sa/tta, so/rnixa,
sou~a, ke/dropa (c-), etc. Note forms in -ua: arua,...and -enna.

1b. -i. IE words (i.e. neuters) in -i are very rare in Greek.
Exx. za/kti, ko/ri, ta/guri (tagu/rion), a'kari/. We can safely assume, I think, that words in -ion, -uon originally
ended in -i, -u.
-ij is also frequent. Note that this situation is only to be expected if the language had only the vowels a, i, u.

1c. -u. a'baru/, ko/ndu, mw~lu, ... See the foregoing on -uon.
-uj is also found several times: agduj, arpuj, a'tra/faxuj, bi/qun, ble/tuj, i'luj (i), -me/nduj, mi/markuj, mwu/j,
phlamu/j, r`a/puj.

1d. -euj. Though the ending may also be an IE heritage, in many words the ending is clearly of Pre -Greek origin.
basileu/j (Myc. qasireu); 'Acil(l)eu/j.

1e. -w. Gellw/ koqw/, ko/rqw, motw/, titw/, ... The suffix makes fem. names in -w/: Lhtw, Sapfw/. Words in
-wj are masculine: a'carnw/(j), hrwj; Mi/nwj, Ta/lwj.

2. -in -r
2a. in -ar
asar(on)?, a'kca/ntar, ba/kar, e'li/mar, ku/dar, ne/ktar, nw~kar, seli/ar

2b. -ir
Exx. [sullir is Lac. < -ij]

2c. -or
Exx. a'digo/r, a'kko/r, kakko/r, ke/mmor (mp), pi/sor.

2d. -ur
Exx. yi/qur, (Dor.) ma/rtur,

2e. -wr
Exx. acwr, i'cw/r, ke/lwr, yo/qwr

3. Several words end (in the nom.) in -x or -y.
3a. -x, stem in -k-, is found quite often:
-ax: abax, a'ka/rnax, ambax, a'ndra/fax, anqrax, bu/stax, ma/lbax, sau~sax. anax has a stem in -kt-.
-ax: fe/nax, r`a/x, sfh/x,
-hx: da/ndhx, bh/rhx,
-ix: addix, a'nqe/rix, a'pri/x, ko/lix, arpix,
-ox: be/brox, bi/rrox,
-oux: brou/x,
-ux: bli/tux, go/rtux; Pnu/x, Stu/x.
Note acc. ba/lleka; and acc. bri/gka.

3b. -y have:
la/tray, lai~lay, aliy, ko/riy, ai'gi/poy, ko/lloy, me/roy, gu/y, mo/nwy. Monosyll.: cre/my.

4. in -n: (Kuiper 217)
ballh/n, karba/n; Wgh/n.
ki/ndun, mo/ssun, r`w/qun-ej,

5. Several words end in -aj (a-stems ):
a'ba/j, ablaj, aqraj(?), a'mfi/aj, a'skalw/paj, a'skwndaj, a'ttaga~j, bada/j (bata~j), baska~j, bu/aj, kalaba/j,
kasa~j; 'Aqa/maj, 'Asgelataj (a).
With a stem in -ant-: a'li/baj (nt), luka/baj (-nt-) etc.; see on the suffix.
With stem in ad-: a'cra/j, bounia/j, prhmna/j; see on the suffix.

I think that the material itself shows that we have largely to do with one language, or a group of closely
related dialects or languages. Of course, we cannot in every case demonstrate that the words that are non -Greek
belong to this same language. And it is a priori probable that there are loanswords from other sources, but the bulk
of the known non-Greek words seems to fit the general picture we have of `Pre-Greek', the Pre-Greek substratum.
E.g. ko/tquboj / ko/sumboj shows not only the element ss/tq, well-known from geographical names, but also the
suffix -ub- with prenasalization. kro/ssion / kro/tion also shows the ss/t, but kro/ssofqon has a suffix that is also
typical for this language. The word dala/gcan beside qa/lassa (-tta) has again the suffix ss/tt but also the
prenasalization. astligx / ostligx has both the typical (prenasalized) suffix -igg- and variation a/o. In mh/rinqoj /
smh/rinqoj we have the `mobile s-' and the well known suffix, while me/rmij, -iqoj has the unprenasalized variant,
and smh/riggej has another Pre-Greek suffix. In a(m)bruttoi / bru/ttoj (bru/ssoj) we have prothetic vowel and
prenasalalization combined.
Other languages may well have existed in the area. Thus it is not certain that Hieroglyphic Minoan
expresses the same language as Linear A. Further, Eteocretan has not yet been connected with other elements and
seems isolated.
Another matter is that (non-Indo-European) loan-words from old Europe may have enter ed Greece cf.
Beekes, 125 Jahre Idg., 2000, 21-31. And these may have been adopted already in Pre -Greek, as is suggested by
e're/binqoj. Still another category are Anatolian (?) loanwords that entered Greek, and sometimes also other IE
languages very early, like pe/lekuj.
However, I think that it is methodologically better to start from the assumption that non -Greek words are
Pre-Greek; and we have now a set of criteria to confirm this. Only when there is reason to assume that they have a
different origin we should accept this possibility.

Our knowledge of Indo-European has grown so much, especially in t he last thirty years with notably the
growth of the laryngeal theory, that we can in some cases say that an Indo -European reconstruction is impossible. A
good example is the word gna/qoj. To explain the -a- of this word we need introduces a `second laryngeal' ( h
However, a preform *gnh
dh- would have given Gr. *gnaq- with a long a. One might think the assuming *h
would remedy the problem, but *gnh
edh- would give *ganaq-, so we would have another problem. The conclusion
is that no Indo-European proto-form can be reconstructed, and that the word cannot be Indo -European. There is no
problem in assuming a Pre-Greek word (though the word has no typical characteristics of Pre -Greek). - Another
example is the word krhmno/j `overhanging bank', for which a connection with kre/mamai `hang (up)' seemed
evident. However, we now know that long vowels cannot be postulated at random, and here it is simply impossible:
there is no formation type that would allow a long vowel. The objection is confirmed by the fact that there is no
trace of the expected a < *h
(as in kremamai < *kremh
-). Positively one can say that features of the landscape are
often loanwords from a substratum. The inevitable conclusion is that the word is P re-Greek.
The more we know about Indo-European, the less is possible. As our reconstructions become more and
more precise, they have to conform to all the rule we have established by now. This holds for all etymological work:
in a way, then, it becomes more difficult. This also regards Pre-Greek, as indicated: for some forms an Indo-
European origin is no longer possible.

F. Geographical names
One question that rises when one adduces geographical names is to how far in the east such names can be
adduced. I have simply followed Fick. I noted that his names go as far as Ciclicia. I noted the following sites in
Cilicia mentioned by him:
9 Kwru/kion
24 Kidrolla~j
32 Mallo/j
37 Knw/j
43 Ka/sai, Sa/roj, Ka/rpaqoj(?)
47 Kasta/bala, Lae/rth
59 Dalisando/j
64 Kalu/kadnoj
70 Ke/skoj
72 S(a/)ra/nsoj, Kele/nderij,
74 Ku/inda
77 Pindenisso/j
79 Kastali/a
84 Adana