thinks  that  i  and  u  did  not  have  this  effect,  cf .  nom.  dual,  Gr.  iyp^y  Lith.  butu
ssoUf  and  explains  fi&if  by  a  rather  complicated  process  of  analogy.  It  may  be
worth  while  pointing  out  that,  in  Lithuanian,  where  in  the  interior  of  a  word  u
has  been  lost  after  i?  (=o),  the  accent  is  the  acute  (gestossener  accent) — kU'piu,
kU'pti  *  to  heap*:  kaitptiy  *to  heap,*  kaupaa  *heap*  ;  azl&ju^  azlffti  *to  wipe,'
8zlh'ta  *  besom*.*  -pTet.  szlaviadj  Gr.  kK^Cu;  dU'bti  *  to  hollow  out*;  dubU
'become  hollow,*  guati  'bewail':  gaustiy  *wail,*  gattdits,  *  pitiful*;  d&'iis*
'breach*  :  daUzH  {dauzti  Leskien),  'strike  hard.*  On  the  other  hand,  so  far
as  I  have  observed  o  in  such  cases  appears  with  the  circumflex  (geschliffener
accent)  kopti  'heap,*  by  kd'pti;  glodinu  'make  smooth,*  glodua  n.  glddu
'  smooth,*  by  glaudusy  glaudu  '  smooth.*  Does  this  indicate  that  the  loss
took  place  at  different  times?    Perhaps  some  Lithuanian  scholar  will  give  an

explanation.
1  Ebel,  K8B.  II.  163.
*  Latemiache  Lehnworter  im  Iriaehen  41  n.
'  Schrader,  Sprachvergleiehung  und  Urgeachiehte^j  316.
«  Cf.  Holder,  Altkeltiacher  ^aehaehatz  60,  164.
PROF.   8TRACHAN.  223

80  that  they  are  in  their  valleys,'  LL.  95^  11)  may  stand
for  *vdgnO'  or  *vd<mo- :  ^udg,  udk,  Fick  I.*  123 ;  W.  gtcaen,

*  plain^  meadow/  pi.  gtoeunydd  points  to  ^vigno-  or  *i>dcnO'}

3.  atn  >  an.
tdnaise  '  secundus/  imthanu  *  alternation '  (imthanu  aidche
^noctis  vicissitudo,'  ML  21®  3;  inna  imthanad  gl.  proprias
vices,  Ml.  93°  7;  innimthdnad  gl.  talionem,  Sg.  181*  6)
=i*tO'atn'f  ^amhi'to-atn- :  Vat  'go/  Skr.  a^,  with  which
Schulze  ^  has  connected  Goth,  apn  '  year.'  From  the  same
root  may  be  derived  Jr.  amm  *  time  ':=*at8men.
