Article published In:
Journal of Historical Linguistics: Online-First Articles

The Ossetic transitive preterite

Typology, evolution, contact

ORCID logo | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
In contrast to most Middle and Modern Iranian languages, which have developed a preterite based on an ergative construction with the Old Iranian past passive participle, Ossetic has distinct formations for the intransitive and transitive preterite, and the latter has no close correlate in any other Iranian language. It is argued that only a periphrasis with Old Iranian *dā- ‘put’ can adequately account for the formal peculiarities of the Ossetic transitive preterite, namely its geminate dental and person-number endings. Despite its formal resemblance to the periphrasis reconstructed for the Germanic weak preterite, this construction probably did not arise via contact between the Sarmatian tribes and Germanic peoples in the first centuries CE.
Keywords: Iranian, Ossetic, Germanic, preterite, periphrasis, grammaticalization, language contact
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The Ossetic preterite
  • 3.Previous analyses of the Ossetic transitive preterite
    • 3.1 Miller (1903): Past participle + subjunctive endings
    • 3.2 Abaev (1949): Past participle + copula subjunctive
    • 3.3 Christol (1990): Past participle + *dā- ‘put’
    • 3.4 Tremblay (2005): Agent noun + copula
    • 3.5Past participle + *dār- ‘hold, have’?
  • 4.From Old Iranian to Ossetic
    • 4.1The periphrastic construction
    • 4.2Person-number endings: Singular
    • 4.3Person-number endings: Plural
    • 4.4Summary
  • 5.Wider implications: The fate of *dā- in Iranian
  • 6.A contact-induced innovation?
    • 6.1Iranian to Germanic
    • 6.2Germanic to Iranian
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Additional abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 18 June 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.23032.kim
References (128)
References
Abaev, V. I. 1949. K istorii osetinskogo sprjaženija [On the history of Ossetic conjugation]. Osetinskij jazyk i fol’klor [Ossetic Language and Folklore], Tom I1, 561–566. Moskva & Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.Google Scholar
1964. A Grammatical Sketch of Ossetic. Translated by Steven P. Hill. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press; The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1965. Skifo-evropejskie izoglossy na styke Vostoka i Zapada [Scythian-European Isoglosses at the Junction of East and West]. Moskva: «Nauka».Google Scholar
Abaev Dict.: Abaev, V. I. Istoriko-ėtimologičeskij slovar’ osetinskogo jazyka [Historical-Etymological Dictionary of Ossetic]. I1: A–K’ (1958). Moskva & Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR. II: L–R (1973). III: S–T’ (1979). IV: U–Z (1989). Leningrad: «Nauka» (Leningradskoe otdelenie). V: Ukazatel’ [Index] (1995). Moskva: Rossijskaja Akademija Nauk, Institut Jazykoznanija.
Ajbabin, A. I. 2011. Archäologie und Geschichte der Krim in byzantinischer Zeit. Mainz: Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum.Google Scholar
2016. Alany i germancy v Bosporskom Carstve vo vtoroj polovine III v. [Alans and Germanic peoples in the Bosporan Kingdom in the second half of the 3rd c.] Antičnaja drevnost’ i srednie veka 441.10–23.Google Scholar
Axvlediani, G. S. 1963. Grammatika osetinskogo jazyka [Grammar of the Ossetic Language]. I1: Fonetika i morfologija [Phonetics and Morphology]. Ordžonikidze: Severo-Osetinskoe Knižnoe Izdatel’stvo pri Sovete Ministrov Severo-Osetinskoj ASSR.Google Scholar
Bagaev, N. K. 1965. Sovremennyj osetinskij jazyk [The Contemporary Ossetic Language]. I1: Fonetika i morfologija [Phonetics and Morphology]. Ordžonikidze: Severo-Osetinskoe Knižnoe Izdatel’stvo.Google Scholar
Bailey, H. W. 1943. Zoroastrian Problems in the Ninth-Century Books. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Bailey, H. W. & A. S. C. Ross. 1961. Path. Transactions of the Philological Society 601.107–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belyaev, Oleg. 2020. Indo-European languages of the Caucasus. The Oxford Handbook of Languages of the Caucasus, ed. by Maria Polinsky, 573–639. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1929. Essai de grammaire sogdienne. Deuxième partie: Morphologie, syntaxe et glossaire . Paris: Librairie Orientaliste, Geuthner.Google Scholar
. 1959. Études sur la langue ossète. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
. 1960. «Être» et «avoir» dans leurs fonctions linguistiques. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 55:1.113–134.Google Scholar
. 1962. Hittite et indo-européen. Études comparatives. Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve.Google Scholar
. 1963. Interférences lexicales entre le gothique et l’iranien. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique 581.41–57.Google Scholar
. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale I1. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bielmeier, Roland. 1989. Sarmatisch, Alanisch, Jassisch, und Altossetisch. Compendium Linguarum Iranicanum, ed. by Rüdiger Schmitt, 236–245. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Bogoljubov, M. N. 2005. K sakskomu sprjaženiju [On Saka conjugation]. Hr̥dā́ mánasā. Sbornik statej k 70-letiju so dnja roždenija professora Leonarda Georgieviča Gercenberga [Studies Presented to Professor Leonard G. Herzenberg on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday], ed. by N. N. Kazanskij, 73–74. Sankt-Peterburg: «Nauka».Google Scholar
Boley, Jacqueline. 1984. The Hittite hark-Construction . Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., William Pagliuca & Revere D. Perkins. 1991. Back to the future. Approaches to Grammaticalization, ed. by Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine. Vol. II1: Focus on Types of Grammatical Markers, 17–58. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cheung, Johnny. 2002. Studies in the Historical Development of the Ossetic Vocalism. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
. 2007. Etymological Dictionary of the Iranian Verb. Leiden & Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Christol, Alain. 1986. Des Scythes aux Ossètes. Handout distributed at CLELIA 1986. [ non vidi ]Google Scholar
. 1990. Introduction à l’ossète: éléments de grammaire comparée. LALIES: Actes des sessions de linguistique et de littérature 81.7–50.Google Scholar
Cowgill, Warren. 1968. The aorists and perfects of Old Persian. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 82:2.259–268.Google Scholar
De Chiara, Matteo & Daniel Septfonds. 2019. Le verbe pashto. Parcours d’un territoire. Du verbe simple à la locution verbale. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Durkin-Meisterernst, Desmond. 2004. Dictionary of Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian. Turnhout: Brepols.Google Scholar
. 2009. Khwarezmian. The Iranian Languages, ed. by Gernot Windfuhr, 336–376. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Emmerick, R[onald] E. 1968. Saka Grammatical Studies. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Emmerick, Ronald E. 1989. Khotanese and Tumshuqese. Compendium Linguarum Iranicanum, ed. by Rüdiger Schmitt, 204–229. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Erschler, David. 2019. Ossetic. The Languages and Linguistics of Western Asia: An Areal Perspective, ed. by Geoffrey Haig & Geoffrey Khan. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 861–891.Google Scholar
. 2020. Iron Ossetic. The Oxford Handbook of Languages of the Caucasus, ed. by Maria Polinsky, 641–685. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
EWAhd 6: Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Althochdeutschen, unter der Leitung von Rosemarie Lühr erarbeitet von Harald Bichlmeier, Maria Kozianka, Roland Schuhmann und Laura Sturm. Band VI1: mâda–pûzza. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017.Google Scholar
Fähnrich, Heinz. 2007. Kartwelisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Leiden & Boston: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fries, Simon. 2021 [2023]. Why and how do new tense formations arise? – On the emergence of the Vedic so-called periphrastic tā́-future. Historische Sprachforschung 1341.96–165.Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew & Keith Johnson. 2013. Phonetic bias in sound change. Origins of Sound Change: Approaches to Phonologization, ed. by Alan C. L. Yu, 51–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gercenberg, L. G. 1965. Xotano-sakskij jazyk [Khotanese Saka]. Moskva: «Nauka».Google Scholar
1981. Xotanosakskij jazyk [Khotanese Saka]. Osnovy iranskogo jazykoznanija. Sredneiranskie jazyki [Foundations of Iranian Linguistics. Middle Iranian Languages], ed. by V. S. Rastorgueva, 233–313. Moskva: «Nauka».Google Scholar
Gershevitch, Ilya. 1991. The Ossetic 3rd plural imperative. Transactions of the Philological Society 89:2.221–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grammont, Maurice. 1939. Traité de phonétique. 2nd ed. Paris: Delagrave.Google Scholar
Grenet, Frantz, Nicholas Sims-Williams & Étienne de la Vaissière. 1998 [2001]. The Sogdian Ancient Letter V. Bulletin of the Asia Institute n.s. 12 (= Alexander’s Legacy in the East: Studies in Honor of Paul Bernard ), 91–104.Google Scholar
Greule, Albrecht. 1980. Neues zur Etymologie von nhd. Pfad. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 941.208–219.Google Scholar
Gudjedjiani, Chato & Letas Palmaitis. 1985. Svan-English Dictionary. Edited with a preface and index by B. George Hewitt. Delmar, NY: Caravan Books.Google Scholar
Haig, Geoffrey. 2008. Alignment Change in Iranian Languages: A Construction Grammar Approach. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harðarson, Jón Axel. 2005. Der geschlechtige Nom. Sg. und der neutrale Nom.-Akk. Pl. der n-Stämme im Urindogermanischen und Germanischen. Sprachkontakt und Sprachwandel. Akten der XI. Fachtagng der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, 17.–23. September 2000, Halle an der Saale, ed. by Gerhard Meiser & Olav Hackstein, 215–236. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
. 2017. The morphology of Germanic. In Jared Klein, Brian Joseph & Matthias Fritz (eds.), Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics, Vol. 21, 913–954. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, Martin. 1982. The ‘past simple’ and ‘present perfect’ in Romance. In Nigel Vincent & Martin Harris (eds.), Studies in the Romance Verb: Essays Offered to Joe Cremona on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday, 42–70. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2011. On S, A, P, T, and R as comparative concepts for alignment typology. Linguistic Typology 15:3.535–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2006. The Changing Languages of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hintze, Almut. 1994. Der Zamyād-Yašt. Edition, Übersetzung, Kommentar. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Hoffner, Harry A., Jr. & H. Craig Melchert. 2008. A Grammar of the Hittite Language. Part 11: Reference Grammar. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Humbach, Helmut. 1991. The Gāthās of Zarathushtra and the other Old Avestan texts. Part 11: Introduction – Text and Translation. Part 21: Commentary. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Humbach, Helmut & Klaus Faiss. 2010. Zarathushtra and His Antagonists. A Sociolinguistic Study with English and German Translations of His Gāthās. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Inglese, Guglielmo & Silvia Luraghi. 2020. The Hittite periphrastic perfect. Perfects in Indo-European Languages and Beyond, ed. by Robert Crellin & Thomas Jügel, 377–410. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Insler, Stanley. 1975. The Gāthās of Zarathustra. Leiden: Brill; Téhéran & Liège: Bibliothèque Pahlavi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isaev, M. I. 1966. Digorskij dialekt osetinskogo jazyka [The Digor Dialect of Ossetic]. Moskva: «Nauka».Google Scholar
1987. Osetinskij jazyk [Ossetic]. Osnovy iranskogo jazykoznanija. Novoiranskie jazyki: Vostočnaja gruppa [Foundations of Iranian Linguistics. Modern Iranian Languages: Eastern Group], ed. by V. S. Rastorgueva, 537–643. Moskva: «Nauka».Google Scholar
Jacob, Daniel. 1994. Die Auxiliarisierung von habere und die Entstehung des romanischen periphrastischen Perfekts, dargestellt an der Entwicklung vom Latein zum Spanischen. Habilitationsschrift , Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg.Google Scholar
. 1998. Transitivität, Diathese und Perfekt: zur Entstehung der romanischen haben-Periphrasen. Transitivität und Diathese in romanischen Sprachen, ed. by Hans Geisler & Daniel Jacob, 105–126. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jasanoff, Jay H. 2019. The Germanic weak preterite. Historische Sprachforschung 1321.146–167.Google Scholar
Jügel, Thomas. 2020. The perfect in Middle and New Iranian languages. Perfects in Indo-European Languages and Beyond, ed. by Robert Crellin & Thomas Jügel, 279–309. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kambolov, T. T. 2006. Očerk istorii osetinskogo jazyka [Outline of the History of the Ossetic Language]. Vladikavkaz: «Ir».Google Scholar
Keydana, Götz. 2023. Language change and the actuation problem: grammaticalization in Vedic Sanskrit. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 10:1.1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Ronald I. 2007. Two problems of Ossetic nominal morphology. Indogermanische Forschungen 1121.47–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. On the prehistory of Old English dyde . Þe comoun peplis language, ed. by Marcin Krygier & Liliana Sikorska, 9–22. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2022a. Crimean Gothic sada ‘hundred’, hazer ‘thousand’. NOWELE 75:1.81–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2022b. Numerative and numeral inflection in Ossetic. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana 18:1 (= Maria Kazanskaya, Petr Kocharov & Andrey Shatskov (eds.), Colloquia Classica et Indogermanica VII. Miscellanea in honorem Nikolai N. Kazansky septuagenarii), 147–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2023a. The prehistory of Ossetic verbal inflection (I): present indicative and imperative. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, November 5th, 6th and 7th, 2021, ed. by David M. Goldstein, Stephanie W. Jamison & Brent Vine, 153–171. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
2023b. The prehistory of Ossetic verbal inflection (II): the copula. Chatreššar 4:2.19–28.Google Scholar
Kluge, Friedrich. 1889. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. 4th ed. Straßburg: Trübner.Google Scholar
Konow, Sten. 1932. Saka Studies. Glückstadt & Hamburg: J. J. Augustin.Google Scholar
Korn, Agnes. 2011. Pronouns as verbs, verbs as pronouns: demonstratives and the copula in Iranian. Topics in Iranian Linguistics, ed. by Agnes Korn, Geoffrey Haig, Simin Karimi & Pollet Samvelian, 53–70. Wiesbaden: Reichert. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Looking for the middle way: voice and transitivity in complex predicates in Iranian. Lingua 1351.30–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. A partial tree of Central Iranian: a new look at Iranian subphyla. Indogermanische Forschungen 1211.401–434. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Grammaticalization and reanalysis in Iranian. Grammaticalization Scenarios. Cross-linguistic Variation and Universal Tendencies, ed. by Walter Bisang & Andrej Malchukov. Volume I1: Grammaticalization Scenarios from Europe and Asia, 465–498. Berlin & Boston: de Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroonen, Guus. 2013. Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic. Leiden & Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
Kümmel, Martin Joachim. 2000. Das Perfekt im Indoiranischen. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Kümmel, Martin. 2017. Partizipien und Verbaladjektive als Prädikate im Indoiranischen. Verbal Adjectives and Participles in Indo-European Languages – Adjectifs verbaux et participes dans les langues indo-européennes. Proceedings of the Conference of the Society for Indo-European Studies (Indogermanische Gesellschaft), Paris, 24th to 26th September 2014, ed. by Claire Le Feuvre, Daniel Petit & Georges-Jean Pinault, 141–158. Bremen: Hempen.Google Scholar
Kümmel, Martin Joachim. 2020. The development of the perfect within IE verbal systems. An overview. Perfects in Indo-European Languages and Beyond, ed. by Robert Crellin & Thomas Jügel, 15–47. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Heiko Narrog & Seongha Rhee. 2019. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lazard, Gilbert. 1992. Subjonctif et optatif en ossète. Studia Iranica 211.57–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leumann, Ernst. 1912. Zur nordarischen Sprache und Literatur. Vorbemerkungen und vier Aufsätze mit Glossar. Straßburg: Trübner. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lowe, John. 2017. The Sanskrit (pseudo)periphrastic future. Transactions of the Philological Society 115:2.263–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lubotsky, Alexander. 2015. Alanic Marginal Notes in a Greek Liturgical Manuscript. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron. 2007. The borrowability of structural categories. Grammatical Borrowing in Crosslinguistic Perspective, ed. by Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel, 31–73. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Language Contact. 2nd ed. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mayrhofer, Manfred. 1970. Germano-Iranica. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 84:2.224–230.Google Scholar
Miller, V. F. 1882. Osetinskïe ėtjudy [Ossetic Studies]. Čast’ 21: Izslědovanïja [Part 2: Investigations]. Moskva: Tipografïja A. Ivanova.Google Scholar
1887. Osetinskïe ėtjudy [Ossetic Studies]. Čast’ 31: Izslědovanïja [Part 3: Investigations]. Moskva: Tipografïja E. G. Potanova.Google Scholar
Miller, Wsewolod. 1903. Die Sprache der Osseten. Grundriß der iranischen Philologie, hrsg. von Wilhelm Geiger und Ernst Kuhn. Anhang zum ersten Band. Straßburg: Trübner. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Németh, János. 1959. Eine Wörterliste der Jassen, der ungarländischen Alanen. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
Nyberg, Henrik Samuel. 1974. A Manual of Pahlavi. II1: Ideograms, Glossary, Abbreviations, Index, Grammatical Survey, Corrigenda to Part I. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Pisowicz, Andrzej. 2020. Gramatyka osetyjska (dialekt iroński) [Ossetic Grammar (Iron Dialect)]. Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rasmussen, Jens E. 1996. On the origin of the Germanic weak preterite. Copenhagen Working Papers in Linguistics 41.161–168.Google Scholar
1999. Selected Papers on Indo-European Linguistics, with a Section on Comparative Eskimo Linguistics. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum.Google Scholar
Ringe, Donald A., Jr. 1988–90 [1991]. Evidence for the position of Tocharian in the Indo-European family? Die Sprache 341.59–123.Google Scholar
Ringe, Don. 2017. A Linguistic History of English. Volume I1: From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ritter, Ralf-Peter. 1976. Bemerkungen zur «Jassischen Wörterliste». Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 30:2.245–250.Google Scholar
Rix, Helmut (ed.). 2001. Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben: Die Wurzeln und ihre Primärstammbildungen. Zweite, erweiterte und verbesserte Auflage bearbeitet von Martin Kümmel und Helmut Rix. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Robson, Barbara & Habibullah Tegey. 2009. Pashto. The Iranian Languages, ed. by Gernot Windfuhr, 721–772. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rostovtzeff, Michael. 1922. Iranians and Greeks in South Russia. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Schuhmann, Roland. 2016. Zur Endung der 3.Sg.Ind.Prät. der schwachen Verben in den Runeninschriften im älteren Futhark. »dat ih dir it nu bi huldi gibu«. Linguistische, germanistische und indogermanistische Studien Rosemarie Lühr gewidmet, ed. by Sergio Neri, Roland Schuhmann & Susanne Zeilfelder, 407–418. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Sims-Williams, Nicholas. 1985. The Christian Sogdian Manuscript C2. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
. 1989. Sogdian. Compendium Linguarum Iranicanum, ed. by Rüdiger Schmitt, 173–192. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
. 1990. The Sogdian fragments of Leningrad II: Mani at the court of the Shahanshah. Bulletin of the Asia Institute n.s. 4 (= In honor of Richard Nelson Frye: Aspects of Iranian Culture ), 281–288.Google Scholar
. 1997. The denominal suffix -ant- and the formation of the Khotanese transitive perfect. Sound Law and Analogy. Papers in Honor of Robert S.P. Beekes on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday, ed. by Alexander Lubotsky, 317–325. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. The Sogdian Ancient Letter II. Philologica et Linguistica. Historia, Pluralitas, Universitas. Festschrift für Helmut Humbach zum 80. Geburstag am 4. Dezember 2001, ed. by Maria Gabriela Schmidt & Walter Bisang, 267–280. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.Google Scholar
. 2023. The “Ancient Letters” and other Early Sogdian Documents and Inscriptions. With contributions by Frantz Grenet. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar
Sjögren, A. J. 1844a. Iron ævzagaxur, das ist Ossetische Sprachlehre, nebst kurzem ossetisch-deutschen und deutsch-ossetischen Wörterbuche. St. Petersburg: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
1844b. Osetinskaja grammatika s” kratkim” slovarem” osetinsko-rossijskim” i rossijsko-osetinskim”. Sanktpeterburg”: Tipografïja Imperatorskoj Akademïi Nauk”. (Russian ed. of Sjögren 1844a.)Google Scholar
Skjærvø, P. Oktor. 1987. On the Tumshuquese “Karmavācanā” text. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1987:1.77–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Squartini, Mario & Pier Marco Bertinetto. 2000. The simple and compound past in Romance languages. Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, ed. by Östen Dahl, 403–439. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stiles, Patrick V. 2010. The Gothic extended forms of the dental preterit endings. NOWELE 58/591 (= The Gothic Language: A Symposium ), 343–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ščukin, M. B. 2005. Gotskij put’. Goty, Rim i černjaxovskaja kul’tura [The Gothic Way. The Goths, Rome, and the Chernyakhov Culture]. Sankt-Peterburg: Filologičeskij Fakul’tet Sankt-Peterburgskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta.Google Scholar
Ščukin, M., M. Kazanski & O. Sharov. 2006. Des les goths aux huns: Le nord de la mer Noire au Bas-Empire et a l’époque des grandes migrations. Oxford: Hedges. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tedesco, Paul. 1926. Ostiranische Nominalflexion. Zeitschrift für Indologie und Iranistik 41.94–166.Google Scholar
Thordarson, Fridrik. 1989. Ossetic. Compendium Linguarum Iranicanum, ed. by Rüdiger Schmitt, 456–479. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Tremblay, Xavier. 2005. Die Bildung des chotansakischen agentiven Präteritums (Beiträge zur vergleichenden Grammatik der iranischen Sprachen IX). Hr̥dā́ mánasā. Sbornik statej k 70-letiju so dnja roždenija professora Leonarda Georgieviča Gercenberga [Studies Presented to Professor Leonard G. Herzenberg on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday], ed. by N. N. Kazanskij, 75–80. Sankt-Peterburg: «Nauka».Google Scholar
Vernadsky, George. 1951. Der sarmatische Hintergrund der germanischen Völkerwanderung. Saeculum 21.340–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vydrin, Arseniy. 2013. Ossetic verb – Iranian origin and contact influence. Handout, 46th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Split.
. 2014. Glagol v osetinskom jazyke [The verb in Ossetic]. Vostokovedenie 301 (= Pamjati akad. M. N. Bogoljubova ), 25–81.Google Scholar
Weber, Dieter. 1982. Das Perfekt transitiver Verben im Khotansakischen. Die Sprache 281.165–170.Google Scholar
. 1983. Beiträge zur historischen Grammatik des Ossetischen (II). Indogermanische Forschungen 881.84–91.Google Scholar
Wendtland, Antje. 2011. The emergence and development of the Sogdian perfect. Topics in Iranian Linguistics, ed. by Agnes Korn, Geoffrey Haig, Simin Karimi & Pollet Samvelian, 39–52. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Winford, Donald. 2003. An Introduction to Contact Linguistics. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Yoshida, Yutaka. 2009. Sogdian. The Iranian Languages, ed. by Gernot Windfuhr, 279–335. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar