A Comparative Linguistic Study of the Verbal Morphology of Indo-European Languages in Ancient Anatolia

在小安纳托利亚语言（楔形文字、象形文字和吕西亚语）的一个Luvian群体中，似乎没有优选的中间形式，这并不是偶然的。直到3sg。和3个pls有关，这可能是由于主动结尾被相应的中间结尾正式取代。在原始安纳托利亚晚期重建的3个活跃的优先词尾是^<**>-er, ^<**>-r__o和^<**>-an （< ^<**>-ant）。在这些词尾中，^<**>-er被推广为赫梯语中mi和*i的结合形式。另一方面，在一个Luvian群中，特征不明显的^<**>-an被中间的3个字母^<**>-anta所取代，取代了^<**>-er和^<**>-r__o，成为普遍首选的标记（楔形文字Luvian- nta，象形文字Luvian-^nta，吕西亚语-^nte， -^nte^^-）。在3sg的情况下。，中间的优先级结尾[^<**>-ta]或[^<**>-da]被添加到mi-动词中，这是没有尽头的，因为普通Luvian失去了最后的齿音。牙齿的质量，有限制的或无限制的，是由相应的当前形式的质量决定的。类似的重构也发生在3sg上。首选*i共轭，其中原来的^<**>-s被未标记的中间结尾[^<**>-ta]所取代。这一观点最自然地解释了为什么每个半动词在其结尾形式的牙科性质上是一致的，以及为什么在*i变位中没有观察到lenited和unlenited dentals之间的对比。

The seeming absence of preterite middle forms from a Luvian group of the minor Anatolian languages (Cuneiform Luvian, Hieroglyphic Luvian, and Lycian) is not due to chance. As far as the 3sg.and 3 pl.are concerned, it is probably attributed to the formal replacement of the active ending by the corresponding middle ending.The 3 pl.active preterite endings reconstructed for late Proto-Anatolian are ^<**>-er, ^<**>-r__o, and ^<**>-an (< ^<**>-ant). Among these endings ^<**>-er was generalized to bo the mi-and *i-conjugations in Hittite. In a Luvian group, on the other hand, the undercharacterized ^<**>-an was replaced by the 3 pl.middle ^<**>-anta, which, ousting the ^<**>-er and ^<**>-r__o, came to serve as a general preterite marker (Cuneiform Luvian -nta, Hieroglyphic Luvian-^nta, Lycian-^nte, -^nte^^-).In the case of the 3 sg., the middle preterite ending [^<**>-ta]or[^<**>-da]was added to the mi-verbs, which were endingless because Common Luvian lost final dentals. The Quality of the dental, lenited or unlenited, was determined by that of the corresponding present form. A similar kind of remodelling also occurred to the 3 sg.preterite of the *i-conjugation, where the original ^<**>-s was replaced by the unmarked middle ending [^<**>-ta]. This view most naturally explains why each mi-verb is consistent in the dental quality of its ending form and why the contrast between lenited and unlenited dentals is not observed in the *i-conjugation.