����VLOG

AVESTAN LANGUAGE, the language of the Avesta, an Old Iranian language.

i. The Avestan script.

ii. The phonology of Avestan.

iii. The grammar of Avestan.

iv. Avestan Syntax.

i . The Avestan Script

The Avestan script is known from manuscripts written in Iran (at Yazd and Kerman) and in India (in Gujarat, e.g., Cambay, Broach, Ankleshwar, Surat, and Navsari). The earliest manuscript dates from A.D. 1288. The script consists of 14 (or 16) letters for vowels and 37 letters for consonants, see Table 2. In printed texts the letters ȧ, ġ, ŋᵛ, ń, ��̨, and ẏ are not used. The transliteration given in Table 2 differs in some points from that almost universally used until recently. Thus, it has been usual to use ḣ for ��́ ; č and ǰ for c and j; w for β; n for both n and ṇ; š for š, š′, and ṧ; y for both y (ẏ) and ii; v for both v and uu. The signs for ą̇, ġ, ŋᵛ, ṅ, ṇ, ��̨, š, and ṧ were not used at all until recently.

The letters are written from right to left and are not connected. Ligatures (e.g., šk, šc, št, ša) are rare and clearly of secondary origin. A point (dot) is used to indicate the end of a word or the end of the first member of a compound, no distinction being made between the two. The letters have almost the same shapes in all manuscripts. Only some Indian manuscripts show peculiarities: H2 (A.D. 1415), S1 and J9 (14/15th century A.D.).

The large number of letters used suggests that their invention resulted from an attempt to record an orally recited text with all its phonetic nuances. For that reason the Avestan script must have been the deliberate invention or creation of a scholar or of a group of scholars (see, e.g., Morgenstierne, “Orthography and Sound-system,” pp. 31-33; Henning, “Disintegration,” p. 44).

The Avestan script is based on the Pahlavi (q.v.) script in its cursive form as used by theologians of the Zoroastrian church when writing their books. The earliest Pahlavi manuscripts date from the fourteenth century A.D., but the Pahlavi cursive script must have developed from the Aramaic script already in the first centuries A.D. This is proved for example by the fact that an early inscription on the lid of a sarcophagus found in Istanbul that for archeological reasons can not be dated later than A.D. 430 already shows the characteristic written forms of the Pahlavi cursive script with two insignificant exceptions (k and s). (See the bibliography in Ph. Gignoux, Glossaire des inscriptions pehlevies et parthes, Corp. Inscr. Iran., Suppl. Ser. I, London, 1972, p. 14.) In the Pahlavi cursive script almost all the letters represent several different sounds. This ambiguity is due in part to inadequacies of the Aramaic alphabet from which it developed, in part to the phonological development of the Middle Persian language (“historical spelling”), and in part to the graphic coalescence of signs. In addition, many individual letters of a word are joined to one another, with the result that extremely ambiguous ligatures occur.

Apart from the Pahlavi cursive script as used in the Zoroastrian church there was a still older kind of script that was to some extent less ambiguous. This script, called here the “Psalter script,” is known to us from a manuscript from the seventh or eighth century A.D. containing a “Christian” Pahlavi translation of the Psalms. (See D. N. MacKenzie, A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary, London, 1971, pp. xi, xiii, for tables of the Pahlavi and Psalter scripts; and Aramaic, i.)

The creator of the Avestan script took over from the Pahlavi cursive script the letters a, i, k, t, p, b, m, n, r, s, z, š, and ��ᵛ to represent the same sounds as in Pahlavi. The sign (28) for d derives likewise from the unambiguous Psalter script. In Pahlavi the sign for k (17) represented both the sounds k and γ, because k had developed to γ in word-interior position. In the Psalter script the sign for k differed from that of the Pahlavi cursive in that the Psalter sign ended in a flourish towards the right. The creator of the Avestan script made use of this variation in the shape of the letters by assigning to the Pahlavi form (17) the fixed value k and to the Psalter form (23) the fixed value γ. In this way the flourish could be reinterpreted as a diacritical mark, which the creator of the script put to further use. The Pahlavi Psalter sign (25) for c/j/z/ž had a similar flourish and was accordingly adopted to represent the voiced sound j. By removing the flourish the creator of the script obtained the sign (24) for c, which has a different shape in the Pahlavi cursive script. Pahlavi p represented the sounds p/(f)/β. It was retained unchanged in Avestan for p (31) while an initial flourish converted it into the sign for β (34). The addition of a flourish to Pahlavi t (26) either initially or finally was not used, as might be expected, to represent δ but to represent a word-final ��̰ (30) that was probably implosive. The Pahlavi alef was adopted as a (1) in the Avestan alphabet.

In Pahlavi, alef had coalesced graphically with h, from which it was still distinguished in the Psalter script. Thus, Pahlavi had only one sign to represent alef, h, and x. In order to represent the sound ��ᵛ in Avestan, use was made of an ambiguous Pahlavi ligature (20) of ʾ/h + w/n/r, which among many others had the value xw. The shape of the ligature hw adopted for Avestan ��ᵛ not only is characteristic of the Pahlavi books but is found already in the inscription on the sarcophagus lid from Istanbul, whereas the ligature has a different shape in the Psalter script. In the Avestan script a flourish was added to distinguish ��́ (19) from ��ᵛ (20). An unusual diacritic in the form of a loop at the end of a curved flourish was used to distinguish h (53) from a (1). The loop may have been a secondary addition providing graphical resemblance to p (31), since a variant form of h (53 in brackets) without the loop is found in such manuscripts as H2 and J9. By extending the curve further upwards than in the unlooped variety of h it was possible to distinguish x (18) from both a (1) and h (53). The curved upwards flourish was further used to create Avestan f (32) out of Pahlavi p (31) and is seen in the voiceless fricative θ (27). The basic shape to which the curved upwards flourish was added in the case of θ is to be seen in the form taken by final s in Pahlavi words such as ��ʾ�� for Avestan ����&�ٳ��ٲ�;��, in which s represents Avestan θ (MacKenzie, Pahlavi Dictionary, p. xiii, the second s, to the right).

The Avestan letter �� (2) is also derived from the Pahlavi script, where this sign was used for ʾ�� at the end of a word (already in the Istanbul sarcophagus inscription). However, as early as in Middle Persian inscriptions from the third century A.D., ʾ�� was used to represent the final -�� of foreign names as in swlyʾ�� for (Greek) Sū��í��, and the Pahlavi Psalter confirms that this convention continued to be adopted as the Psalter itself has the spelling ʾpltʾ�� for Syriac ʾ�����ʾ, that is (Greek) Ephrathá (Bethlehem).

The Avestan letter o (11) corresponds in graphic shape to a special form of Pahlavi l that is found only in Aramaic heterograms. The commonest of those heterograms is the preposition ʿ�� “to, at,” which was read in Middle Persian as ō (MacKenzie, Pahlavi Dictionary, p. 187, left column, 3rd line from the top). It looks as though the creator of the Avestan script used this special form of l without the initial ʿ����� to represent the sound o. The letter e (9) seems to have a similar origin. Pahlavi ŧ�� “one” was probably pronounced simply as ŧ already at an early date. This pronunciation is actually attested in the later Pahlavi literature. Avestan e differs from the Pahlavi ligature ŧ�� only by the absence of a small initial hook which was indispensable for Pahlavi but unnecessary for Avestan. (Words with initial ŧ��-/ŧn- in MacKenzie, Pahlavi Dictionary, pp. 232f.)

The original (Aramaic) letters n, w, r, and ʿ (ʿ�����) coalesced in a single short vertical stroke in Pahlavi. This sign was taken over unchanged for n in the Avestan alphabet (38). A slight bend in the stroke was made to distinguish Avestan u (15) from n since Pahlavi w was used in internal position also to designate the sound u.

The Pahlavi script had very inadequate means to designate the vowel sounds. By contrast the creator of the Avestan script quite clearly invented a special sign for every vowel distinguished in the oral tradition. No doubt the Greek script had provided a model; the Greek script was well known in Iran as is shown by the fact that already under Š��pū�� I (241-72 A.D.) Greek translations accompanied the royal inscriptions. Thus Avestan ə (7) could have been adopted from Greek minuscules, which had a comparable form already in the fourth century. The sign for �� (2) probably came directly from Pahlavi but the letters for the remaining long vowels were evidently formed by adding diacritics to letters for the corresponding short vowels. ə̄ (8) was accordingly formed by adding to ə (7) a flourish to the left, while ŧ (10) was formed by adding to e (9) a flourish to the right. The letters for ō (12), ī (14), and ū (16) were distinguished from the letters for the corresponding short vowels by the addition of a short vertical stroke at the bottom. It is likely that the creator of the script based the sign for ō (12) on the Pahlavi heterogram ʿ��, which was pronounced ō, by placing the ʿ�����, the vertical stroke on the right, under the L. The sign for the short vowel was then formed by treating the vertical stroke as a diacritic denoting length. The same stroke may subsequently have been used by analogy in order to differentiate between ī and i and between ū and u.

As yet few plausible statements can be made concerning the origin of the remaining letters of the Avestan alphabet, but it must be accepted that the creator of a script is free to invent letters or diacritics arbitrarily.

��̊ (4), which looks like a ligature of �� + ə, was differentiated from ��. Short ȧ (3) has been found in one manuscript only (Pd, where it is used instead of ą before ŋ��; see Salemann, “Parsenhandschrift,” p. 510). ą (5) seems to be a free invention. In some manuscripts (e.g., Mf4, ed. in facsimile by K. M. JamaspAsa) ą̇ (6) is found instead of ą (5). There is some slight evidence that ą and ą̇ were not just graphic variants but two different letters. ą may have been a nasalized long ą̄, and ą̇ a nasalized short ə. The original form of ą̇ may have been the left variant of no. 6 in the table.

The Avestan script originally possessed also the letter ġ (22). All the known Avestan alphabets, most of which are very corrupt, begin with the letters g, ġ, γ (21-23). ġ is seldom found in the manuscripts but relatively often in final -ə̄ṇġ, especially in the manuscripts S1 and J3. This suggests that ġ was implosive, like ��̰, the only other final stop in Avestan.

Avestan g (21) may be a modification of the corresponding Pahlavi letter. Neither of the forms of δ (29) appears to be based on Pahlavi letters.

Among the nasal signs ŋ (35), the labialized nasal ŋᵛ (37), and the uvular nasal ṇ (40) appear to be free inventions. Both forms of palatalized ń (39)—that on the right in the table is found only in MS K7—are modifications of n (38). The voiceless ��̨ (42) is simply m (41) plus a diacritic.

The sign for initial ẏ (43) and v (44) are free inventions.

The left part of ž (50) resembles the Pahlavi ligature ʾ�� (written like 53). The reason for that could be that c in Pahlavi ʾ��ydhʾk was pronounced by theologians in agreement with Avestan ��ž��-dah��ka- as až(i)dah��γ (for genuine Middle Persian azdah��γ).

&���������Dz�;ˊ (51) is simply š (49) plus a diacritic. In Indian manuscripts initial ẏ (43) is replaced by initial y (52), which looks like š (49) with a slightly different diacritic. If the sign originally had the phonetic value palatal ž, that may in fact have been its origin. Even ṧ (46) could be a modification of š (49) if the sound it represents was already some kind of š sound at the time the script was invented (see on phonology below).

It is generally considered that the Avestan script dates to the Sasanian period (224-651 A.D.). The evidence of the Istanbul sarcophagus inscription (before A.D. 430) suggests that it may have been invented already by the fourth century A.D., perhaps even under Š��pū�� II (310-379 A.D.). Note, however, that none of the letters of the alphabet used in the monumental Mid. Pers. inscriptions seem to have been borrowed for the Avestan alphabet (table in MacKenzie, Pahlavi Dictionary, p. xi).

It may be assumed that the Avestan texts were written down shortly after the invention of the script, which was designed to provide a special sign for each sound used in the traditional pronunciation of Avestan. In this first notation of the Avestan texts, the so-called “Sasanian archetype,” the aim of the inventor of the script must have been put into practice.

In the post-Sasanian period there took place a serious deterioration in what had become a manuscript tradition. There must have been numerous errors even in the manuscripts written in the ninth or tenth century, from which ultimately the extant manuscripts descend. Thus, for example, the letters š, &���������Dz�;ˊ, and ṧ were only in part correctly employed and ŋ�ܳ� or ŋ�� was written instead of ŋᵛh. The manuscripts themselves constantly betray a marked deterioration in the pronunciation of the vulgate. 

Bibliography:

C. F. Andreas, “Die Entstehung des Awesta-Alphabetes und sein ursprünglicher Lautwert,” Verhandlungen des XIII. internationalen Orientalisten-Kongresses, Hamburg, September 1902, Leiden, 1904, pp. 99-106.

W. B. Henning, “The Disintegration of the Avestic Studies,” TPS, 1942, pp. 40-56 (Selected Papers II, Acta Iranica 15, pp. 151-67).

Idem, “Mitteliranisch,” p. 52.

K. Hoffmann, “Zum Zeicheninventar der Avesta-Schrift,” in Festgabe deutscher Iranisten zur 2500 Jahrfeier Irans, Stuttgart, 1971, pp. 64-73 (Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik I, Wiesbaden, 1975, pp. 316-25).

A. V. W. Jackson, The Avestan Alphabet and its Transcription, Stuttgart, 1890.

K. M. JamaspAsa, Manuscript D90: Yasn�� with its Pahlavi Translation I-II, Shiraz, 1976 (facsimile of Geldner’s ms. Mf4).

G. Morgenstierne, “Orthography and Sound-system of the Avesta,” NTS 12, 1942, pp. 30-82 (Irano-Dardica, Wiesbaden, 1973, pp. 31-79).

C. Salemann, “Ueber eine Parsenhandschrift der Kaiserlichen Oeffentlichen Bibliothek zu St. Petersburg,” Travaux de la troisième session du Congrès international des Orientalistes 1876 II, St. Petersburg and Leiden, 1879, pp. 508-19.

G. Windfuhr, “Diacritic and Distinctive Features in Avestan,” JAOS 91, 1971, pp. 104-24 (somewhat speculative).

See also J. Duchesne-Guillemin, Kratylos 7, 1962, pp. 4-9.

 

ii. The Phonology of Avestan

Attested forms and stages of development. Avestan is attested in two forms, known respectively as Old Avestan (OAv.) or Gathic Avestan and Young Avestan (YAv.). They differ from each other not only chronologically but also dialectally. Avestan, which is associated with northeastern Iran, and Old Persian, which belongs to the southwest, together constitute what is called Old Iranian. It is possible to some extent to reconstruct Proto-Iranian by comparing Avestan with Old Persian. This Proto-Iranian is closely related to the Vedic language of ancient India. Both Proto-Iranian and Vedic go back to Proto-Indo-Iranian or Proto-Aryan, which in turn descends from Proto-Indo-European.

By comparison with Vedic, whose phonemes are consistently recorded, Avestan in the form in which it has been handed down in manuscripts from 1288 A.D. onwards is attested in a very irregular notation. Apart from errors introduced in the post-Sasanian period, the essential features of the manuscript tradition of the Avesta must have been present already in the Sasanian archetype. When the Avestan texts were first recorded, perhaps as early as the fourth century A.D., each sound of the current Avestan pronunciation was designated by a special letter. The fact that a phonetic notation was used rather than a phonemic one means that it is possible to assess the linguistic significance of the individual spellings with regard to both the synchronic description of the language and its historical development.

Every Avestan text, whether composed originally in Old Avestan or in Young Avestan, went through several stages of transmission before it was recorded in the extant manuscripts. During the course of transmission many changes took place.

For Old Avestan the following stages may be assumed: 1. The original language of the Zarathustrian G��th��s, the Yasna Haptaŋ����iti, and the four sacred prayers; 2. Changes involved by the practice of slow chanting; 3. Changes due to transmission by YAv. priests, who introduced many YAv. sound forms into the OAv. texts; 4. Deliberate alteration of the text in the course of an orthoepic revision (“School text”); 5. Continued transmission of the OAv. texts along with the YAv. texts.

Young Avestan went through the following stages: 1. The original language of the composers of grammatically correct YAv. texts; perhaps in Marv or Herat; 2. Dialect influences as a result of the transfer of the Av. texts to Southeast Iran (Arachosia?); 3. Transfer of the Avesta to Persis in Southwest Iran, possibly earlier than 500 B.C.; 4. Transmission of the Avesta in a Southwest Iranian theological school, probably in Eṣṭaḵr: Old Pers. and Mid. Pers. influences, the insistence on fantastic pronunciations by semi-learned schoolmasters (Av. aŧθrapaiti-), the composition of ungrammatical late Av. texts, the adaptation of portions of texts taken from other regions where they were recited; 5. The end of the oral transmission: phonetic notation of the Avestan texts in the Sasanian archetype, probably in the fourth century A.D.; 6. Post-Sasanian deterioration of the written transmission due to incorrect pronunciation (Vulgate); 7. In the ninth and tenth centuries A.D. the manuscript copies of individual texts were made on which the extant manuscripts are based; 8. Earlier manuscripts were copied in manuscripts dating from A.D. 1288 till the nineteenth century by scribes who introduced errors and corruptions. These are the manuscripts extant today.

Many phonetic features can not be ascribed with certainty to a particular stage since there may be more than one possibility. Every phonetic form that can be ascribed to the Sasanian archetype on the basis of critical assessment of the manuscript evidence must have gone through the stages mentioned above so that “Old Avestan” and “Young Avestan” really mean no more than “Old Avestan and Young Avestan of the Sasanian period.”

The vowels. The Proto-Indo-Ir. vowels a, ��, i, ī, u, ū and the diphthongs ai̯, �徱̯, ����̯, ��u̯ ( = Vedic e, ai, o, au) remained unchanged in Proto-Iranian. Proto-Indo-Ir. i that arose from Proto-IE. ə (the vocalization of a consonantal laryngal H) is attested by such forms as Av. pitár- “father;” OAv. sī&���������Dz�;�� “teach,” cf. Vedic ś��ṣa��, from Proto-IE. *��̂ə����-; OAv. -��������ī, cf. Vedic -mahi, 1 plur. verb ending, from Proto-IE. *-med^hə. But Proto-IE H was maintained under certain accentual conditions in Proto-Ir. and was lost in Av. Hence we find such contrasting forms as Av. draonah- “possession” beside Vedic ���&�������ܳٱ�;����ṇa��-; OAv. ��ܲ�ə�岹��- “daughter” beside Vedic duhitár-; OAv. və��əṇtŧ “he wishes” beside Vedic ��ṛṇī�ٱ�; OAv. ��ə&�����ٲ�;��ō�� “to the father” beside OAv. piθrŧ. Proto-Indo-Ir. sonant ṛ ( = Vedic ṛ) became in Proto-Ir. and Av. ə�� but before š the tradition introduced the YAv. spelling ar(š) also into OAv. texts. The corresponding long vowel ṝ from Proto-IE. ṛH developed in Proto-Ir. and Av. to ar whereas Vedic had either ir/ur or ī��/ū��.

There is a wide variety in the representation of the vowels in the manuscripts. Most of these features were already present in the Sasanian archetype.

Numerous anaptyctic vowels, represented mostly by ə but also by a, ō, and other vowel signs, were used to simplify consonant clusters especially after r : ����ə&�ٳ��ٲ�;��-, karapan-, ��īž��������ō, &�ٳ��ٲ�;&����ٲ�;����ōž��ū��, etc. These anaptyctic vowels were introduced during the course of transmission in order to account for the pronunciation used in the slow chanting of the texts.

A late feature, perhaps arising in Southwest Iran, is the use of epenthetic i before consonants that are followed by i, ii or ŧ/ĕ: aiti, mrūitŧ, irista-, iθiiejah-. This epenthesis is not found before ń, ŋ́, st, št, m, hm, but it does occur before rm: zairimiia- “house,” cf. Vedic harmⁱyá-; airime “quiet” beside armaŧ^o. Anaptyxis and epenthesis may occur together: YAv. kə��əiti-; OAv. daibit��.

Epenthetic u occurs only before ru, ��ṷ: �ܰ���&�ٳ��ٲ�;&����ٲ�;����ə, pouru. It is a genuine YAv. development in the case of -uri- arising from older *-u��ṷi-: YAv. paoiriia- “first” from *�貹ṷr����̯��- from older *pa��ṷi��̯a-, cf. OAv. paouruuiia-; YAv. ��ū����������- “father’s brother” from *��ə�ܰ�����̯��- from older *tə��ṷi��̯a- and ultimately from Proto-Indo-Ir. *����ṛṷ����̯��-, cf. Vedic �辱��ṛvⁱya-. (On the phonological status of epenthetic i and u, see Morgenstierne, “Orthography and Sound-system,” pp. 55-58 par, ix.)

There is a consistent pattern in the representation of the quantities of the vowels a, ��, ə, ə̄, i, ī, u, ū, e, ŧ, o, ō in final position: in OAv. they are always long, that is, both original a and �� are written ��, etc., while in YAv. they are always short, except for -ō, -ə̄ (the YAv. final -ą is always long) and in monosyllabic words. The short vowels were probably closed, the long open, as in Attic Greek. Hence in the Sasanian archetype short and long vowels were often used to indicate degrees of openness of the vowels rather than their quantities. Thus we find ��ī���貹- “all” with ī indicating a (short) open vowel: cf. Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;ś����-. Similarly explainable are the spellings of ahura- “lord,” with (long ?) closed u, beside the derivative ����ū������- with (short ?) open u (through dissimilation with the closed i ?); note also ao from *��ṷ beside aŧ from *����̯.

Qualitative changes are seldom found in the case of ī/ĭ and ū/ŭ but note OAv. ə̄��ə���پ�- from *ə�Ծ����پ�- and ���ə���ܳܲ�ṇt- from *����ܲ�ṷa�Գ�-. As in East Iranian dialects, Av. *-īṷ- became -��ṷ- in juua- “living,” cf. Vedic ��ī��&�������ܳٱ�;-, and ���ܳܲ�ṇt- “how much, how big” from *čīṷa�Գ�-.

Proto-Ir. a suffered very many changes: to ��, ə, ə̄, e, o, ō. These came about partly due to phonological development caused by the surrounding sounds, partly due to the liturgical chanting, and partly due to dialect influence. Before final -n and -m, a always became ə̄/ə̆. This was originally the case also in word-interior position but ə was often replaced by a in this position in YAv., from where it was introduced also into OAv. Thus both OAv. and YAv. have ��ə������- beside manah-. Before -ŋ��- (-ṇg��-) where the nasal is etymological (-ŋ��- from *-ns-), OAv. has only ə̄/ə̆ in ��ə̄ṇg��- “pronouncement,” cf. Vedic ś&�������ܳٱ�;ṁs��-. But before -ŋ��- where the nasal is secondary (-ŋ��- from *-s-), OAv. has only a, e.g. in manaŋ����, cf. Vedic mánas��. In both cases YAv. has a: saŋ��a-, manaŋ��a. In final position *-ans became -ə̄ṇg in OAv. and -ə̄ in YAv.

In YAv. ə developed further to i after ��̯, č, ǰ: YAv. yim beside OAv. ��ə̄��; YAv. drujim, beside OAv. �������ə̄/ə̆��. Postconsonantal *-��̯ə- became first *-��̯i-, then YAv. -ī/ĭ-, which was introduced from YAv. into OAv.: YAv. ainim, OAv. ���Ծ���ə̄��, ������ī��, cf. Vedic anyám “other.” Similarly *-ṷə- became -ṷu and then ū/ŭ: YAv. ��ū��, OAv. �ٳܳ�ə̄��, cf. Vedic tvám “you.” Note that -ai��̯ṷə- became -ō������- by umlaut: YAv. ō�����ܳ� from aŧuua- “one;” YAv. vīdō�����ܳ� from vīdaŧuua- “abjuring the devils;” YAv. Harō�����ܳ� beside OPers. Haraiva-. An exception is daŧum (not *dō�����ܳ�!) from daŧuua- “devil.” Proto-Av. *����̯ə, *�徱̯ə, *��ṷə, and *��ṷə before n, m were reduced in YAv. to the disyllabic diphthongs aŧ, ��i, ao, ��u respectively: YAv. aem beside OAv. ������ə̄�� “this;” YAv. daŧn��- “religion” (from *d����̯ən��-) was introduced into OAv.

Before *-ṷi-, a became ə: ��ə�ܾܳ�&���������Dz�;�ٲ�- “strongest,” cf. Vedic ś&�������ܳٱ�;����ṣṭ��-. In certain environments a became e: between ��̯ and j, cf. iθiiejah- “abandonment;” between ��̯ and a syllable containing ī/ĭ, ii, or ŧ/ĕ, cf. yesne, loc. sing. from yasna- “veneration.” In some environments a became o: between p, m, ṷ and a syllable containing u (but not ṷ): pouru “much;” ����&���������Dz�;ū “soon;” vohu “good,” but there are exceptions: vaŋ��uš “good;” pasu- “cattle;” maδu- “wine.”

Proto-Ir. *��/ăn became ą before spirants x, θ, f, s, z, š, hi: ��ą&�ٳ��ٲ�;����- “sacred utterance,” cf. Vedic mántra-; ą����- “party,” cf. Vedic &�������ܳٱ�;ṁśa-; ��ą���ٲ� “he thought,” cf. Vedic ����ṁs�ٲ�; ą��ō “narrowness,” cf. Vedic &�������ܳٱ�;ṁh����-; ��ą��&���������Dz�;�ٲ�- “most versed,” cf. Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;ṁs��ṣṭ��-; ��ą�� “he prevailed” (from *ṷ��nst); ��ą��t�� (2 plur. imv.) “appear,” cf. Vedic á-ch��ntta; �ڰ�ą&���������Dz�; “forward” (from *pr��ŋ^kš).

In OAv. final -ah (cf. Vedic -��ḥ from -as) became -ə̄ but it has in most cases been replaced by YAv. -ō. That even YAv. originally had -ə̄ (cf. Khot. -ä[ə] from *-ah) is indicated by such forms as YAv. ������ə̄��ī&���������Dz�; (instr. plur.) based on nom. sing. OAv. ������ə̄ (= Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;����ḥ).

We often find long, that is, open (back) �� instead of closed (front) a in initial position: ��rmaiti- “right-mindedness,” cf. Vedic arámati-; k��uuaiiō “princes,” cf. Vedic �첹��&�������ܳٱ�;�ⲹḥ “seers;” sr��uuahiieitī “he desires fame,” cf. Vedic ś������������&�������ܳٱ�;�پ�; h���ą�� (gen. plur.) “of the existing (ones),” cf. Vedic sat��ˊm. Note also �� for a after i and u: vii-��darəsəm “I have seen,” cf. Vedic ���岹��ś����; və��əzii���ą��, nīdii���ą��, vi&���������Dz�;ˊii��t��, hə̄mii��saite, paitii-��mrao��̰, aiβii-��ma-, drəguu��t��, drəguu��itŧ (but ���ə���ܳܲ���ō), etc.

Proro-Ir. *����̯ usually becomes aŧ in open syllables (vaŧd��/ă “he knows”) but ō�� in closed syllables (��ō��st��/ă “you know”). In final position it appears as -ō�� in OAv. but as -e in YAv. The spelling -ŧ in OAv. is due to YAv. YAv. has -ō�� only in ��ō�� and mai’iiō��. The dat. sing. forms OAv. axtō��iō�� and YAv. ���Գܳ�����ə̄�� point to an original *-ə̄/ə̆��̯ə̄/ə̆��̯ from Proto-Indo-Ir. *-����̯����̯, cf. Vedic. -aye.

Proto-Ir. ��ṷ became ao, but before final -š it usually became ə̄�� in OAv. and YAv.: gə̄��š, mańiiə̄��š, mə��əθiiaoš. In final position -��ṷ became sometimes -ṷō, sometimes -ō (cf. Vedic -o): OAv. ��ܳ�ō “yonder” (from *h��ṷ, cf. OPers. hauv); ə��əzuuō (voc. sing.) “O straight one;” ��ܳ�����ٳܳ�ō (voc. sing.) “O skilful one,” cf. Vedic sukrato; but �������Ծ���ō (voc. sing.) “O spirit,” cf. Vedic manyo; aŋ��uuō (loc. sing.) “in the life;” g��tuuō “in the place;” daŋ́��ܳ�ō “in the land” beside �岹ŋ́��ō; haŧtō “on the bridge;” &���������Dz�;ˊ��tō “in peace;” ����&���������Dz�;��ō “in the wish;” ��əṇtō “in gain,” cf. Vedic sánitau.

Many changes are found in the case of Proto-Ir. ��, e.g. ą: �ܰ��ܳ�ą��ō “souls” beside uruu���ō (in final position always ą��, ą��); ǡ: ������ǡṇtə�� (acc. sing.) “great;” mǡŋ��əm (acc. sing) “moon;” e: ���������ī “I shall go,” cf. Vedic ay��ni; zbaiiemi “I call,” cf. Vedic hvay��mi. Final -��h became -ǡ (cf. Vedic. -��ḥ from -��s); s��s��ǡ “commandments” (by analogy also s��s��ǡs-ca “and commandments”).

Original �� is often shortened, as in d��taras-ca beside d��t��rō “creators;” -aną��, gen. plur. ending with disyllabic -ą��, cf. Vedic and OPers. -��n��m; aŧtaŋ��ą��, cf. Vedic et��ˊs��m: -a��̰.haca (instead of *-���̰.haca), but -��a��̰c��/ă in aš��a��̰c��/ă.

Before a vowel, �徱̯ and ��ṷ are often shortened to ����̯ and ��ṷ, a feature shared by Avestan with East Iranian dialects such as Sogdian: vaiiu- “wind,” cf. Vedic v��yú-; zaiiata “he was born,” cf. Vedic j��yata; -������ǡ, gen. sing. fem. ending, cf. Vedic -��y��ḥ; -aii��i, dat. sing. fem. ending, cf. Vedic -��yai; nauu��za- “boatman,” cf. Vedic n��v��já-; �ⲹ�ܳܲ�ṇt- “as great, as much,” cf. Vedic y��vant-; aṧauu�� “righteous,” cf. Vedic ṛt��v��.

The consonants: (a) Semivowels. In the Sasanian archetype the semivowels ��̯and ṷ were always written ẏ and v in word-initial position. These sounds probably represent an intermediate stage in the development of initial ��̯ and ṷ to ǰ and b as seen in NPers. In the Indian manuscripts ẏ is replaced by y, whose original value was probably palatal žˊ. In medial position the manuscripts have ii, uu and not y, v as earlier transcriptions seemed to indicate, (e.g., vayu- for vaiiu-). The graphs ii and uu are to be interpreted phonetically as i��̯ and ��ṷ: friia “dear,” cf. Vedic priyá-; druua- “firm,” cf. Vedic dhruvá-. The fact that jiia “bowstring” and kuua “where” were disyllabic in YAv., cf. Vedic jⁱy��ˊ and k^uvà respectively, is proved by their being written with a short final vowel, since the final vowel of monosyllables was regularly written long in YAv. i��̯ and ��ṷ may have developed in West Iran under the influence of Old Persian, where every postconsonantal ḭ and ṷ became iy and uv respectively: Av. ��ń������- (from *����ḭa-, cf. Vedic anyá-) like OPers. aniya-; Av. hauruua- (from *ha��ṷa-, cf. Vedic sárva-) like OPers. haruva-. Even intervocalic ��̯ and ṷ are sometimes written iy and uv in OPers. Thus Av. d��raiia- and bauuaiti correspond to OPers. ad��raiya and bauvatiy. Note too that intervocalic ii and uu may even be etymologically justified: OAv. ��ii��t from *��i��̯��t, cf. Vedic iy��t, Av. sraiiah- “more excellent,” cf. Vedic ś��&�𲹳��ܳٱ�;�ⲹ��- (from Proto-Indo-Ir. *śr����̯H��̯as-); gauu��striia- “belonging to the cattle pasture” from *g��ṷ-ṷ��striia-. In the manuscripts the sequences -iiuu (from *-��̯��ṷ-) and -uuii- (from *-ṷi��̯) are usually simplified to -iuu- and -uii- or else expanded to -iiauu- and -uuaii-, but the original spellings are sometimes still attested: mańi��̯��ṷǡ, that is, *mańi��̯��ṷǡ, from *mań��̯^uṷ��h “of the two (evil) spirits;” paouruuiia-, that is, *paour��ṷi��̯a-, from *pau��ṷi��̯a- “first,” cf. OPers. paruviya-.

Internal ��̯ was lost in YAv. before e: YAv. �������ḥī- (fem.) “the better,” from *ṷah��̯e��ī-, cf. Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;���ⲹ��ī-; -ahe, gen. sing. masc. ending, cf. Vedic -asya; kaine “girl,” cf. Vedic kanⁱyˋ��; b��zuβe “with both arms,” from *b��zuβ��̯a, cf. Vedic b��húbhy��m; YAv. -ə̄��, dat. sing. ending, cf. Vedic -aye.

A late but consistent change is that of -��ṷe (from earlier *-��ṷ����̯ and *-ṷ����̯) to -uiie: OAv. mruiiŧ, YAv. mruiie “I say,” cf. Vedic bruve; OAv. vīduiiŧ “to know” from *ṷi��ṷ����̯.

In some cases Proto-Ir. ��̯ and ṷ combine with a preceding consonant. Proto-Indo-Ir. *č��̯ became *&���������Dz�;ˊ��̯ in original OAv. and then &���������Dz�;ˊii in the Sasanian archetype. In original YAv. it became &���������Dz�;ˊ but is mostly written š or ṧ in the manuscripts. Thus we have: OAv. &���������Dz�;ˊii��ta- beside YAv. &���������Dz�;ˊ��to (mostly written š��to or ṧ��tō).

Proto-Ir. h��̯- from Proto-Indo-Ir. -s��̯- remained unchanged in original OAv. but became -hii- in the Sasanian archetype. After the change of h to ŋ��, Proto-Ir. -��ḭ developed in original YAv. to -ŋ́��- from *-ŋ��̯-. Thus we have: OAv. �����󾱾�ō beside YAv. ����ŋ́��ō (wrongly written vaŋ��ō), cf. Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;���ⲹḥ “better.” In the same way Proto-Ir. -��ṷ- (from Proto-Indo-Ir. -��ṷ-) developed into OAv. -huu- (from -��ṷ-) and original YAv. -ŋᵛh- (often written -ŋ�ܳ�- or -ŋ��- in the MSS): OAv. gūšahuu��; YAv. pə��əsaŋ��a (often written pə��əsaŋ�ܳ�a, pə��əsaŋ��a). Initially *��ṷ- became in Av. ��ᵛ-: ��ᵛafna- “sleep,” cf. Vedic svápna-. On ��ᵛ see also under (f) below.

After certain consonants Proto-Ir. ṷ underwent further changes. Proto-Ir. śṷ became sp in Avestan and Median: aspa- “horse,” cf. Vedic &�������ܳٱ�;ś����-. Proto-Ir. źṷ became zb in Av. and Median: zbaiia- “to call,” cf. Vedic hvaya-, from Proto-Indo-Ir. *j^hṷ����̯a-. Proto-Ir. &�ٳ��ٲ�;ṷ became θβ in Av.: caθβ��rō “four,” cf. Vedic catv��ˊraḥ, Sogd. and Parth. ���ٴ�ʾ��. Proto-Ir. &�����ٲ�;ṷ became in YAv. δβ (ə��əδβa- “upright” beside ə��əduua- from *ə��dṷa-) but initial *��ṷi- became OAv. dbi- (daibišiiant- but duuaŧšah-, cf. Vedic �屹&�𲹳��ܳٱ�;ṣa��- “hatred”) and YAv. ��̰bi- (��̰bišiiant- and by analogy ��̰baŧšah-). From initial *��ṷi- YAv. has also bi- perhaps by dissimilation; bitiia- “second” beside OAv. daibitiia-, cf. Vedic �屹����īˊ�ⲹ-.

Initial *ṷr- was metathesized to *��ṷ- and written uruu- in Av.: uruuata- “commandment,” cf. Vedic vratá-.

(b) Liquids (only r).

Consonantal r and original syllabic *ṛ fell together in Avestan, syllabic *ṛ becoming ə��. After t the ə was usually dropped: ��trə̄m (acc. sing.) “fire” from *��tə��əm; ���ٰ�ə̄&���������Dz�; (acc. plur.) “stars” from *stə��ə̄š; striia- “to sin” from *stə����̯a-, where the ə must have been lost before i-epenthesis could take place. Immediately following the Proto-Indo-Ir. accent rk became hrk and rp became hrp: mahrka- “destruction,” cf. Vedic márka-; ��ə����첹- “wolf,” cf. Vedic ��ṛ&���������;�첹-; ��ə�����ə�� “body” from *��ṛ&���������;�貹��. Instead of the expected *hrt from *rt we find ṧ: ����ṧi����- “man,” cf. Vedic mártⁱya-; ����əṧa- “immortal,” cf. Vedic ����ṛ&���������;�ٲ�-. From the third century A.D. Mid. Pers. loanwords from Av. are attested which have hr/hl for Av. ṧ: Mid. Pers. ʾ����� [ahlaw] from Av. ��ṧa�ܳܲ�. ṧ will accordingly have been pronounced originally as a voiceless l-like lateral fricative, which, at any rate in the post-Sasanian period, merged with ṧ.

(c) Nasals.

On the whole the nasals n and m remained unchanged in Av., but they are regularly written ṇ before t, d, k, g, c, j, b. The letter ṇ probably represents a uvular nasal that was articulated just by lowering the soft palate. It is indicated in this article by N in reconstructions. The same sound no doubt occurred in OPers. but it was not written: Av. ��ṇt����ə “inside” but OPers. a-ta-ra [aⁿrar]. The dorsal nasal was, however, retained in YAv. �貹ŋtaŋ��um “a fifth” from *�貹ŋ^kta��ṷəm. An unusual metathesis is attested by YAv. mə��əγənte “he destroys” for *mə��əŋte from *��ṛŋ^k�ٲ�ḭ. Proto-Indo-Ir. ns before ��/ă resulted in Av. ŋ(g)h: YAv. saŋ��a-, OAv. ��ə̄ṇg��-, cf. Vedic ś&�������ܳٱ�;ṃs��-.

For discussion of Av. -aŋ��a-, -��ŋ́��-, ��ŋᵛh��, and -��ŋ́��- see above under (a) and below under (f).

Before ḭ, n was palatalized to ṅ but in the manuscripts ṅ is usually replaced by n: ��ń������-, cf. Vedic anyá-. The manuscripts often have ṃ instead of hm, which makes it probable that ṃ was a voiceless m. Final -m is found for -n when the syllable in question had a labial initial: OAv. d��mą��, n��mą��: YAv. uruθβą��, &�ٳ��ٲ�;����������ə��, aṧ��um (from *aṧ��ṷən).

Phonetically Av. ą was probably nasalized ə̄. Not only did it develop from Proto-Indo-Ir. ��/ăn (��/ăN) before s and š as seen above on the vowels but it occurs also in OAv. ə��ąš from *-ə��əNš from older *-rNš: nə��ąš, m��tə��ąš, mə��ąždii��i. Note also mə��ą&���������Dz�;ˊii��ṱ from *mə��əN&���������Dz�;ˊḭ��t from older *mṛṇčḭ��t. As in the case of the OAv. and YAv. acc. plur. endings -ī&���������Dz�; and -ū&���������Dz�; from *-iNš and *-uNš, the nasalization is not attested in the acc. plur. of consonant stems in YAv.: nə��ə̄š, ���ٰ�ə̄&���������Dz�;, and pairiiaŧtrə̄š-ca. In the manuscripts these forms are often miswritten, e.g., nə��ə̄��š for nə��ə̄š.

(d) Occlusives.

The Proto-Indo-Ir. occlusives p, t, k, became f, θ, x in Proto-Ir. before a consonant. Proto-Indo-Ir. p^h, t^h, k^h also became f, θ, x before a vowel. However, Av. shows certain peculiarities. After s and š it has only p, t, k. Moreover, Av. has pt instead of the expected *ft; fδ and xδ for expected *fθ and *xθ; &���������Dz�;ˊi and &���������Dz�;ˊe for expected *xi and *��ḭaḭ in ha&���������Dz�;ˊi and ha&���������Dz�;ˊe corresponding to Vedic sákhi and sákhye.

It is characteristic of OAv. that it has preserved b, d, g from Proto-Indo-Ir. b, d, g and b^h, d^h, g^h. In YAv., b, d, g are retained only in initial position while in medial position they were replaced by the voiced fricatives β, δ, γ except after a nasal or a sibilant. Thus, OAv. ��ܲ�ə�岹��- “daughter” contrasts with YAv. duγδar-. There are, however, a number of exceptions. Note OAv. -&����ٲ�;ž- and &����������;ž-, YAv. &����������;ž-, &����������;ə��-, and &����������;ə��-. Proto-Ir. -dn- became -n-: OAv. and YAv. ��ū/ŭ�Բ�- “bottom,” cf. Vedic budhná-. Proto-Ir. dm- was retained in OAv. but became nm- in YAv.: OAv. dəm��na- “house” beside YAv. nm��na-. In YAv., γ was lost before u and ṷ: Mourum, cf. OPers. Margum; raom, cf. Vedic raghúm; ����ܳܲ�ṇt- from *�����&����������;ṷa�Գ�-, cf. OAv. ���ə���ܳܲ�ṇt-. In YAv. �����&����������;ū�� “pauper,” the γ was restored by analogy with other forms of the paradigm such as gen. sing. driγaoš.

The YAv. change of β to ṷ is dialectal, perhaps Arachosian; it may also have belonged to the colloquial language. Examples are: ��ə�ܰ��ܳܲ�������- “to seize” from *gəṛβ��ḭa-, cf. Vedic gṛbh��yá-; the prep. auui “to,” which is also written aoui, aoi, from *aβi contrasting with aiβi in nominal compounds, cf. OAv. ������ī and Vedic abhí; the adj. uuaiia, uuaŧm “on both sides,” cf. Vedic ubháya-; uua “both,” cf. Vedic ubh��ˊ (mase. dual); uiie from *��ṷe, cf. Vedic ubhé (neuter dual); nə��uiiō “to the men” beside nə��əbiiō, cf. Vedic ��ṛ&���������;����ⲹḥ; ��ṧa�ܳܲ�oiiō “to the righteous” from *aṧ��ṷaβḭō. In some cases the spellings seem to be arbitrary: YAv. m��uuō��ia “to me” from *m��ṷḭa from older *����&����ٲ�;ḭa, cf. OAv. maibii��; huu��uuō��ia “to (your)self” from *h��ṷ��ṷḭa from older *h��ṷaβḭa, cf. original *-ṷḭ- in h��uuō��ia (inst. sing.) “with the left (hand)” from *h��ṷḭ��, cf. Vedic savy��ˊ.

The occasional replacement of δ by θ appears also to be dialectal, perhaps West Iranian. In the athematic daδ��iti “he puts; he gives,” cf. Vedic dad(h)��ti, δ is retained but in the thematic new formation daθaiti earlier δ has been replaced by θ. The gen. sing. of �岹&�����ٲ�;�ܳ�ǡ “creator” is �岹&�ٳ��ٲ�;��&���������Dz�;ō, which is confirmed by dathousa (in Greek script) in the Cappadocian calendar. Note also h from θ in Parth. dh-, NPers. dah- “to give.” θ is attested also in East Iranian in Khot. par��th- “to sell” from *par��-daθa-, cf. Av. para.daθa-.

Proto-Indo-Ir. t was lost before s: Av. masiia- “fish,” cf. Vedic mátsya-. Similarly, Av. has st from *-t^st- from t/d + t as in vista- “found” from *ṷi��^stá-, cf. Vedic vittá and zd from *-d^zd^h- from d^h + t as in və��əzda- “grown” from *ṷṛ��^zd^há-, cf. Vedic ��ṛd���&�������ܳٱ�;-.

Final -t was lost after n, probably already in Proto-Indo-Ir., and also after s. Examples are: YAv. ��s “he was” from *��st; OAv. cinas “she assigns” with -s from *-st; ��ą�� “it prevailed” from *v��n-s-t; OAv. ��ą�� “it seemed” from *��ś��nd-s-t. However, both -st and -št are also found: OAv. urū��aost “he wailed (?)” from *ruraud^st; YAv. n��ist “he cursed” from *n��id-s-t; OAv. vaxšt “he made grow,” cō��št “he assigned,” t��št “he shaped.” In all other cases -t became -ṱ (probably an implosive): YAv. ��������ṱ, OAv. ��ō��əṱ from *č������; OAv. �ⲹ�Dz�əṱ “he harnessed” from *ḭa�ܲ��� (?) from older *ḭa�ܰ��. The graph -��ə�� may represent an implosive -k / -g in YAv. �貹������əṱ “apart from,” cf. Vedic pár��k; YAv. ��ṧi&���������Dz�;.h��gəṱ “following Aṧi;” OAv. �貹���پ������Dz�əṱ “responding.”

(e) Affricates.

The palatal affricates of Proto-Indo-Ir. č, ǰ, ǰ^h, which in Vedic became c, j, h, survived in Av. as c, j, j. On the development of Proto-Indo-Ir *čḭ to OAv. &���������Dz�;ˊii and YAv. &���������Dz�;ˊ see above on the vowels. The YAv. change of j to the palatal *žˊ, always written ž, is dialectal, perhaps Arachosian: �����ž��- “to deceive” from *�������ḭa-, cf. OAv. ��-������ᾱ����ṇt-; snaŧža- “to snow;” �����ž��- “to hold;” �岹ž��- “to burn;” ����ž��- “to distribute;” naŧnižaiti “he washes.” It occurs very rarely in nouns: ��ž��- “snake;” �پ�ž��-^o “sharp;” snaŧžana- “slavering;” a-družą�� (gen. plur.) “of the deceitless” (otherwise only druj-).

The primary palatal affricates of Proto-Indo-Ir., namely ć, ��ˊ and j^h from Proto-IE. kˆ, ĝ, ĝ^h, developed via Proto-Ir. ś, ź, ź to Av. s, z, z corresponding to Vedic ś, j, and h respectively: Av. ������ə�� “hundred,” cf. Vedic ś����&�������ܳٱ�;��; zaoša- “pleasure,” cf. Vedic ��&�Dz����ܳٱ�;ṣa-; zaotar “priest;” cf. Vedic hotár-. Before t, d^h, and b^h, ć and j′ developed already in Proto-Indo-Ir. to š and ž respectively: OAv. ����&���������Dz�;��ī “he wishes” beside ������ə��ī “I wish,” cf. Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;ṣṭ�� beside ��&�������ܳٱ�;ś����; OAv. ����ž�����- “pulling” from vaz- “to pull,” cf. Vedic ����ḍh&�������ܳٱ�;��- “draught (i.e., pulling) animal” from vah-; OAv. and YAv. ��īž��������ō, abl. plur. from ��ī��- “tribe,” cf. Vedic ����ḍb���&�������ܳٱ�;ḥ from ��&�������ܳٱ�;ś-. In initial position ź��- became ž��- in YAv. ( = OPers. xšn-): žn��tar- “knower,” cf. Vedic jñatár- “knower,” OPers. xšn��- “to know;” ž�Գ�- “knee,” cf. Vedic jñu-^o. Internally both ś�� and ź�� became šn: YAv. frašna- “question,” cf. Vedic praś��á-; YAv. baršna “in height, depth” ( = OPers. baršn��) from *barź���� from older *b^harj^hn��. But sn is found instead of šn in some cases due to the influence of other forms: OAv. vasn�� “according to wish” ( = OPers. vašn��) from vas-; OAv. and YAv. yasna- “veneration” (cf. Vedic yajñá-), from yaz-.

The Proto-Indo-Ir. clusters ��ć and &���������Dz�;ć from Proto-IE. sk developed via Proto-Ir. ��ś and &���������Dz�;ś to Av. s ( = Vedic ch): Av. pə��əsa- “to ask,” cf. Vedic ��ṛc��&�������ܳٱ�;-. Similarly, ć&���������Dz�; and ��ž^h, from Proto-IE. kˆs, kˆρ and ĝ^hs, ĝ^hρ respectively, developed via Proto-Ir. ś&���������Dz�; and źž to Av. š and ž: Av. šō��θra- “dwelling-place,” cf. Vedic ��ṣ&�𲹳��ܳٱ�;�ٰ���-; �ܳ�-�ܳܲ�ž��ṱ “he drew out,” cf. Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;��ṣa�� (subj.) from Proto-IE. ṻ���^h-se- (see next paragraph).

(f) Sibilants.

Proto-Indo-Ir. s and z were maintained in Av. before n and occlusives, and after t and d, which were lost in that position as noted above. Thus we find: YAv. sn��uuarə “sinew,” cf. Vedic sn��ˊvan-; asti “he is,” cf. Vedic asti; masiia- “fish,” cf. Vedic mátsya-; YAv. mazga- “marrow” from Proto-IE. mozg^ho-; YAv. aspas-ca “and the horse,” cf. Vedic &�������ܳٱ�;ś����ś-����; OAv. ����ī (2 sing. imv.) “be,” cf. Vedic edhi, from Indo-Ir. azd^hí; və��əzda- “grown” from *ṷṛ��^zd^há-, cf. Vedic ��ṛd���&�������ܳٱ�;-.

After Proto-Indo-Ir. ī/ĭ (ḭ), ū/ŭ (ṷ), r (ṛ), kˆ/ĝ/ĝ^h, and ć/j/j^h (from Proto-IE. k/g/g^h), Proto-Indo-Ir. s and z became š and ž: Av. vī&���������Dz�;a- “poison,” cf. Vedic ����ṣ&�������ܳٱ�;-; ��īž�岹- “reward,” cf. Vedic ��īḍh&�������ܳٱ�;-; zušta- “loved,” cf. Vedic ���ṣṭ��-; aršti- “spear,” cf. Vedic ṛṣṭi-; uxšan- “bull,” cf. Vedic �ܰ�ṣ&�������ܳٱ�;ṇ-; OAv. aoγž�� “you say” from *��ṷg^h-sa; ����&���������Dz�;ī “you wish,” cf. Vedic ������ṣi, from Proto-IE. ṻ���-����; tašan- “fashioner,” cf. Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;��ṣa��-, from Proto-IE. tékρon-. In Proto-Ir. this development took place also in clusters with labials. Thus Av. has fš from *ps and *��ś: Av. drafsa- “banner,” cf. Vedic drapsá-; fšu- from *��śu- to pasu- “cattle.” Similarly Av. has &����ٲ�;ž from *bz^h: di&����ٲ�;ža- “to deceive,” cf. Vedic dipsa-, from Proto-Indo-Ir. d^hibz^ha-; va&����ٲ�;žaka- “wasp” from *ṷa����^ha- from Proto-IE. uob^hso-.

In all other positions Proto-Indo-Ir. s became Proto-Ir. h. This h was kept initially before a vowel: hafta “seven,” cf. Vedic saptá. But *hi became ��́ ii- in OAv.: ��́ ii��ṱ “he should be,” cf. YAv. hii��ṱ, Vedic sy��t; and *��ṷ became ��ᵛ in both OAv. and YAv.: ��ᵛafna- “sleep,” cf. Vedic svápna-. Medial h was unchanged only before i and u: ����ī/ĭ “you are;” uhura- “lord.” In OAv. medial h remained unchanged also before ḭ and ṷ: OAv. ahii��, cf. Vedic ásya: gūšahuu�� with the ending -ahuu�� corresponding to Vedic -asva. In the sequence ��/ăha, h probably became voiced and resulted in ŋ��: aŋ��aṱ, cf. Vedic ásat; ǡŋ��arə, cf. Vedic ��ˊsur. That this ŋ was phonemically significant is shown by the fact that it was extended from the gen. sing. vaŋ��ə̄��š from *ṷah��ṷš ( = Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;����ḥ) to the nom. sing. masc. vaŋ��uš although it is not found in the neuter ���dz�ū/ŭ or when m or n follow as in ���dz�ū�� and vuhuną��. In medial position ��ḭ and ��ṷ developed in YAv. to ŋ́�� and ŋᵛh; see (a) above. (See also Hoffmann, Aufsätze II, pp. 595-96).

In OAv. the gen. sing. ending -ahii�� is always written with ��́ before enclitic -c�� “and:” -a��́ ii��-c��. This pronunciation may reflect the secondary accentuation *a��ḭá-ca. -��́ ii- is also found elsewhere for -��ḭ-: OAv. da��́ iiə̄��š “of the land” but YAv. daŋ́ə̄��š; both OAv. and YAv. da��́ iiūm (acc. sing.) and da��́ iiuną�� (gen. plur.).

The use of -��ᵛ- for internal -��ṷ- in YAv. Hara��ᵛaitī- “Arachosia” and OAv. nəma��ᵛaitī “respectful” may be dialectal, perhaps Arachosian. The same applies to the use of ��ᵛ for unaccented syllabic h��ṷ- in the following: Xᵛ��str��-, name of an Arachosian river, from *hu-ṷ��str��-; OAv. ��ᵛ��θra- “welfare” from *hu-��θra-, cf. duž-��θra “discomfort;” ��ᵛə̄ṇg (gen. sing.) from *h��ṷə́ŋ�� to ��ܳܲ���ə “sun,” cf. Vedic suvár; ��ᵛaŧta- “easy to walk along” from *hu-��-ita-; ��ᵛīti- “easy walking.” (See also Hoffmann, “Das Avesta in der Persis,” pp. 92-93.)

Proto-Ir. hm is retained internally as in ahmi “I am” but the h is lost in initial position: mahi “we are,” cf. Vedic smasi. Proto-Indo-Ir. sr appears to have become θr in YAv. in initial position: θraotō.st��c- “flowing in rivers,” from *srautas-t��č-, cf. Vedic srótas- but OPers. rautah-. Medially hr became ŋ�� in YAv.: aŋ��a- “evil,” cf. Vedic asrá- “painful;” daŋ��a- “knowing,” cf. Vedic dasrá-. These forms were introduced from YAv. into OAv., where one also finds the spellings ��ṇg����- and d��ṇg����-.

For the loss of final -h see above on the vowels.

Bibliography:

Chr. Bartholomae, in Geiger and Kuhn, Grundr. Ir. Phil I/I, pp. 1-48, 152-88.

W. B. Henning, “The Disintegration of the Avestic Studies,” TPS, 1942, pp. 40-56.

London, 1944 (Selected Papers II, Acta Iranica 15, Leiden, 1977, pp. 151-67).

K. Hoffmann, “Altiranisch,” in HO IV, 1, Leiden and Cologne, 1958, pp. 1-19 (Aufsätze I, pp. 58-76).

Idem, “Das Avesta in der Persis,” in J. Harmatta, ed., Prolegomena to the Sources on the History of Pre-Islamic Central Asia, Budapest, 1979, pp. 89-93.

Idem, Aufsäfze zur Indoiranistik I-II, Wiesbaden, 1975-76.

G. Morgenstierne, “Orthography and Sound-system of the Avesta,” NTS 12, 1942, pp. 30-78 (Irano-Dardica, Wiesbaden, 1973, pp. 31-79).

(This was the only comprehensive phonetic and phonemic analysis of Avestan until 1979.) H. Reichelt, Awestisches Elementarbuch, Heidelberg, 1909, pp. 28-89.

S. N. Sokolov, “Yazyk Avesty,” in V. J. Abaev, ed., Osnovy iranskogo yazykoznaniya I: Drevneiranskie yazyki, Moscow, 1979, pp. 136-60.

G. Windfuhr, “Diacritic and Distinctive Features in Avestan,” JAOS 91, 1971, pp. 104-24.

Idem, “Some Avestan Rules and Their Signs,” ibid., 92, 1972, pp. 52-59.

See also J. Duchesne-Guillemin, Kratylos 7, 1962, pp. 4-11.

J. Kellens, ibid., 16, 1971, pp. 4-6; 18, 1973, p. 1.

 

iii. The Grammar of Avestan

The morphology of Avestan nouns, adjectives, pronouns, and verbs is, like that of the closely related Old Persian, inherited from Proto-Indo-European via Proto-Indo-Iranian (Proto-Aryan), and agrees largely with that of Vedic, the oldest known form of Indo-Aryan. The interpretation of the transmitted Avestan texts presents in many cases considerable difficulty for various reasons, both with respect to their contexts and their grammar. Accordingly, systematic comparison with Vedic is of much assistance in determining and explaining Avestan grammatical forms.

Old Avestan (OAv.) or Gathic Avestan, the language of Zarathustra, the founder of the Zoroastrian religion, is particularly archaic. Young Avestan (YAv.) is the language of the later texts, the earliest of which may date from the sixth century B.C. It already shows numerous innovations when compared with OAv.

A particular difficulty of Avestan is caused by the fact that many sound changes took place which obscure the original structure of the forms. Note that words ending in -��, -ī, -ū, -ŧ are OAv., while those ending in -a, -i, -u, -e are YAv. Forms that are otherwise identical in OAv. and YAv. are indicated by -��/ă, -ī/ĭ, -ū/ŭ, -ŧ/ĕ. Apart from forms with these endings, forms that are common to both OAv. and YAv. are not specified.

1. Nominal inflection.

Like Vedic and Proto-IE., Avestan distinguishes three genders: masculine, feminine, and neuter. Words designating male and female beings are masculine and feminine respectively, but also many words that designate inanimate objects and concepts are masculine or feminine and not neuter as might be expected. Avestan has three numbers: singular, dual, and plural. The dual is used to refer to two persons or objects. Avestan has eight cases: nominative for the subject, accusative for the direct object, dative for the indirect object, genitive to indicate possession or relation, instrumental to indicate means or association, ablative to indicate separation, locative to indicate location, and vocative used in addressing a person, less commonly, a thing.

The basis of the nominal inflection is the noun stem, which not only conveys the lexical meaning but in most cases also the gender. In general, inflectional categories are marked by endings, most of which indicate at the same time number, case, and, in part, gender. Thus a particular ending may be characteristic of the genitive sing. masc. Neuter nouns are inflected like masc. nouns, except that they have different endings in the nom. and acc. for all three numbers. The nom. and acc. of neuter nouns are always identical. Some noun stems remain unchanged throughout the paradigm, whereas others have different ablaut grades according to the case.

The paradigm followed by a noun or adjective is usually determined by the final sound of its stem. Thus, there are masculines and neuters in -a-, feminines in -��-, -ī-, -ū-, masculines and feminines in -i-, -u-, masculines in -n- and -r-, neuters in -man- and -ah-, and words of all three genders ending in consonants (e.g., -p-, -t-, -k-, -g-, -s-).

The addition of the case ending to the final sound of the stem often involves special sound changes. Thus, the original Proto-IE. ending of the nom. sing. masc. and fem. of most noun stems is -s, and this -s is retained in the case of -a- stems before -ca “and” (in sandhi), but otherwise -as developed via -ah to -ō. After -ī/ĭ-, -ū/ŭ- and some consonants, -s became -š, e.g., gairiš “mountain,” aŋ��uš “life,” v��xš “voice” ( < *ṷ��k + s).

a-stems. The thematic stems in -a- are particularly numerous. Examples are masc. nouns: ahura- “lord,” ����ṧi���� “mortal,” yasna- “worship,” vī��a- “man,” zasta- “hand;” neuter nouns: ��ṧa- “truth,” uxδa- “word,” xšaθra- “rule,” &���������Dz�;ˊiiaoθna “action;” and adjectives: aka- “bad,” aniia- “other,” hauruua- “entire.”

The masc. a-stem inflection is as follows. Sing.: nom. ����ܰ�ō, yasnas-ca; —acc. ����ܰ�ə�� (����ṧī�� < *����ṧi��ə��; haurum < *�󲹳ܰ���ə��), —inst. ahur��/ă; —dat. ahur��i, OAv. ahur��i; —abl. yasn��ṱ, yasn��aṱ-ca, -��ṱ haca; —gen. OAv. ahurahii��, -a��́ ii��-c��, YAv. ahurahe; —loc. yesnŧ/ĕ (zastaiia < *-��ḭ + ��); OAv. ō��; —voc. ahur��/ă. —Dual: nom. ahur��/ă; —inst./dat./abl. ahuraŧibiia; —gen. vī��������ǡ; —loc. OAv. zastaiiō. —Plur.: nom. maṧii��, maṧiiǡŋ��ō, ahura-ca; —acc. OAv. ����ṧi��ə̄ṇg, ����ṧi��ą��-����, YAv. -ą/-ə̄ (��������ə̄); —inst. zast��iš; —dat./abl. OAv. -ō��biiō, YAv. -aŧibiiō; —gen. yasnaną��; —loc. ����ṧi����ŧšū, YAv. -aŧšuua ( < *-aišu + ��); —voc. OAv. ahurǡŋ��ō.

Neuter a-stem inflection differs from masc. a-stem inflection only in having special forms in the nom./acc., e.g. sing. ��&���������Dz�;��&�ٳ��ٲ�;��ə�� “rule;” dual OAv. &���������Dz�;ˊiiaoθ��ō�� “the two actions;” plur. uxδ�� “words.”

��- and ī-stems. The inflection of fem. ��-stem words, e.g., gaŧθ��- “living being,” daŧn��- “religion,” and the inflection of fem. ī-stem words, e.g., n��irī- “woman,” ��ṧa�Dz�ī- “righteous” (fem. adjective from ��ṧa�ܳܲ�n-) are largely parallel.

The fem. ��-and ī-stem inflection is as follows. Sing.: nom. daŧn��/ă, n��irī; —acc. daŧną��, ��ṧa�Dz�ī��; —inst. daŧn��/ă, daŧnaii��/ă, -ii��/ă; —dat. daŧnaii��i, ��ṧa�DzԾ�i��i; —abl. YAv. -aii��ṱ, YAv. -ii��ṱ; —gen. daŧn������ǡ, n��iriiǡ; —loc. ����ī�ܳܲ������� “on the neck;” —voc. daŧne, sū��a, ��ṧa�DzԾ�. —Plur.: nom./acc./voc. gaŧθǡ, ��ṧa�Dz�ī��; —inst. gaŧθ��bī&���������Dz�;; dat./abl. gaŧθ��biiō, ��ṧa�DzԾ�biiō; —gen. gaŧθaną��, ��ṧa�DzԾ�ną��; —loc. gaŧθ��hu, gaŧθB��huua, -išu, -išuua.

i- and u-stems. Similarly formed are the paradigms of masc. and fem. stems ending in -i- (e.g., ��ṧi- “reward,” axti- “pain,” gairi- “mountain,” paiti- “master”) and in -u- (e.g., aŋ��u- “life,” xratu- “mental vigor,” da��́ iiu-/ daŋ́��u- “land, country,” mainiiu- “spirit,” vaŋ��u-/vohu- “good”). The stem final shows the ablaut grades -i-, -��ḭ-, -��ḭ- and -u-, -��ṷ-, -��ṷ- respectively.

The i- and u-stems inflect as follows. Sing.: nom. ��ṧi&���������Dz�;, xratuš; —acc. ��ṧī��, xratum; —inst. ��ṧī, �������ū; —dat. ( < *-��ḭ-��ḭ) OAv. axtō��iō��, YAv. ^o�貹��ə̄��; ( < *-��ṷ-��ḭ) vaŋ��auuŧ; —abl. YAv. garō��ṱ, ������ٲ���ṱ; —gen. ( < *-��ḭ-š) patō��š; ( < *-��ṷ-š) xra��ə̄��š; —loc. (*-�� < *-��(ḭ)) gara; vaŋ����u; —voc. ( < *-��ḭ) paite; ( < *-��ṷ) �������Ծ���ō. —Dual: nom./acc. paiti, �������Ծ���ū; —inst. aṧibii��, ahubii��; —gen. �������Ծ��ܳ�ǡ ( < *mańḭ��ṷ-��h); —loc. aŋ��uuō ( < *ah��ṷ-��ṷ). —Plur.: nom. ( < *-��ḭ-ah) ������������ō; ( < *-��ṷ-ah) ������ٲ��ܳ�ō; —acc. ( < *-i-Nš) gairī&���������Dz�;; ( < -u-Nš) �������ūš; —dat. ����������������ō, daŋ́��ubiiō; —gen. gairiną��, vohuną��; —loc. vaŋ��ušu.

The nom./acc. of neuter stems in -i- and -u- has in all three genders the endings -ī/ĭ and -ū/ŭ respectively.

The only i-stem word that is declined irregularly is paiti- in the sense of “husband,” which in the dat. sing. has the ending -ḭ-��ḭ instead of -��ḭ-��ḭ: YAv. paiθiiaŧ-ca, paiθe (Vedic pátye). Several u-stem words have exceptional forms: nom. sing. OAv. darəgō.b��z��uš “long-armed;” inst. sing. xraθβ�� (Vedic krátv��); dat. sing. xraθβe (Vedic krátve), OAv. aŋ��uiiŧ, YAv. ��ŋᵛh�� ( < *a��ṷ-��ḭ); loc. sing. daŋ́��ܳ�ō, daŋ́��auua ( < *da��ḭ��ṷ + ��, cf. Vedic dásyav-i) reflecting the ending *-��ṷ (+ ��).

Root nouns, etc. A large group of masc. and fem. nouns are monosyllabic “root nouns” (that is, nouns whose stem consists of the root alone), and other nouns, not all monosyllabic, that end in -��-, -ī-, -ū- (e.g., x��- “source,” ə��əžə-jī- “right-living,” �ٲ���ū- “body”) or in a consonant (except -n- and -r-). The case endings are the same in almost all paradigms. As mentioned above, the original ending -s of the nom. sing. appears in various forms: -�� + s > -��h > Av. -ǡ (raθaŧ-štǡ “charioteer”); -ī + s, -ū + s > Av. -ī&���������Dz�;, -ū&���������Dz�; (ə��əžə-jī&���������Dz�;, �ٲ���ū&���������Dz�; ); -p + s > Av. -fš (afš < ��/ăp- “water”); -k (g) + s > Av. -xš (vaxš < v��/ăc- “voice,” druxš < druj- “lie”); -ś + s > Av. -š (vī&���������Dz�; < vis-, Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;ś-, “settlement”); -t (d) + s > Av. -s (hauruuat��s < hauruuata!- “completeness”).

The other endings of this group are: Sing.: acc. -ə�� (��pən, v��cəm), -im (drujim); —inst. -��/ă (visa = Vedic viś��); —dat. OAv. -ō��, -ŧ, YAv. -ŧ = *-��ḭ (��ī���� = Vedic ����ś&�𲹳��ܳٱ�;); —abl. (OAv. = gen.), YAv. -��ṱ (��ī����ṱ); —gen. -ō < *-ah < *-as (��ī��ō = Vedic ����ś&�������ܳٱ�;ḥ); —loc. -ī, -iia < *-i + �� (��ī����, ��ī����ia; Vedic ����ś��). —Dual: nom./acc. -��/ă (ratu-friia “delighting the Ratus”); —inst./dat./abl. -bii��/ă (����&����������;ž����������); —gen./loc. -ǡ (amə��ət��tǡ). —Plur.: nom. -ō < *-ah < *-as < Proto-IE. *-es (��pō); —acc. -ō < Proto-IE. *ṇs (��ī��ō); —inst. -��ī/ĭ&���������Dz�; (vaγ`ibiš); —dat./abl. -������ō (��īž��������ō); —gen. -ą�� (vīsą��); —loc. -hu/-šu < Proto-IE. *-su (nafšu “among the grandsons” < *napt-su).

In a number of paradigms the noun stem shows ablaut. The “strong” cases are the sing. nom., acc., and loc.; the dual nom.-acc.; and the plur. nom. The remaining cases are “weak,” that is, they show zero grade or a short vowel in the stem. Thus, among the root nouns, we find nom. sing. ��fš, v��xš; acc. sing. ��pəm, v��cim, but inst. sing. apa, vaca.

Ablaut is particularly well preserved in the case of the possessive suffixes *-ṷa�Գ�- / *-mant- “having,” which in the “weak” cases appear as *-ṷa��- / *-mat- ( < Proto-IE. *-ṷṇ��- / *-��ṇt-). Thus, OAv. has acc. sing. ���ə���ܳܲ�ṇtə�� but gen. sing. ���ə���ܳܲ���ō from ���ə���ܳܲ�ṇt- “deceitful.” The same ablaut is found in the case of the participles of athematic temporal stems (*-ant- / *-at-) and in the case of the adjective bə��əzaṇt-/bə��əzat- “high.” The nom. sing. masc. takes various forms. The participles have -ą�� in OAv. ( < *-ant-s: pə��ə��ą�� “asking,” ��ą�� “being”) but usually -ō in YAv. (pə��əsō, bə��əzō), only rarely -ą (��ą “being”). The expected form *-ṷ�ȴ / *-��ą�� ( < *-ṷa�Գ�-s / *-mant-s) is attested only in OAv. θβ��uuąs “like you” and in YAv. ���ܳ�ą�� “how big” ( < *cī-ṷa�Գ�-s). Elsewhere it is replaced by *-��ṷǡ / *-��ǡ ( < *-ṷ��h / *-m��h): OAv. ���ə���ܳ�ǡ, YAv. ����ܳ�ǡ “deceitful” ( < *drugṷ��h); YAv. ������ٳܳ�ǡ “having mental vigor.”

Stems in -an- and -ar-. Masc. and fem. stems in -an- (-man-, -ṷa��-) and in -ar- (-tar-) form the nom. sing in -�� (YAv. -a) < Proto-IE. *-ŧ/*-ō with loss of the final consonant, e.g., taš�� “carpenter” (Vedic tákṣ��, Greek ��&�𲹳��ܳٱ�;���ō��); OAv. pt��, YAv. pita “father” (Vedic pit��ˊ, Greek �貹��ḗr). In the other “strong” cases we find both -an-, -ar- ( < Proto-IE. *-en-, *-er-) and -��n-, -��r- ( < Proto-IE. *-on-, *-or-), e.g., OAv. taš��nəm (Vedic tákṣ��nam, Greek téktona); OAv. �貹�ٲ���ə��, YAv. �辱�ٲ���ə�� (Vedic pitáram, Greek patéra). In the “weak” cases the stem ends in simple -n-, -r- before an ending beginning with a vowel but in -a- ( < Proto-IE. *-ṇ-), -ə��- ( < Proto-IE. *-ṛ-) before an ending beginning with a consonant, e.g., dat. sing. tašne (Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;��ṣṇ��); OAv. aṧ��unŧ (Vedic ṛt��ˊvne) “to the righteous one;” OAv. ��ə&�����ٲ�;��ō��, OAv., YAv. piθrŧ/ĕ (Vedic pitré); —dat. plur. ��ṧa�ܳܲ�biiō (with -ṷa������ō < *-ṷṇ-��^hḭo��); YAv. ptə��əbiiō (Vedic �辱��ṛ&���������;����ⲹḥ). The rare gen. sing. YAv. -arš ( < -ṛ-&���������Dz�;) corresponds to Vedic -ur: zaotarš “of the sacrificer” = Vedic hótur.

Neuter n-stems have in the nom.-acc. sing. -��/ă ( < Proto-IE. *-ṇ), e.g., YAv. ną��a “name” (Vedic n��ˊma, Latin ��ō�����), in the nom.-acc. plur. both -ə̄��ī/ĭ, e.g., n��mə̄nī/ĭ and -ą�� (-mą��/-mą��), e.g., n��mą��. A peculiarity of the nt. n-stems is the formation of the gen. sing. in OAv. -ə̄ṇg, YAv. -ą[n] ( < *-ə�Գ� < *-an-s), e.g., ����&���������Dz�;��ə̄�Բ� < cašman- “eye;” barəsmą�� < ������ə�������� “bundle of twigs.” Note also YAv. ����ū gen. sing. of zruuan- masc. “time,” from *zr��ṷū < *zr��ṷə̄ < *zr��ṷəŋ��, and abl. sing. ������ə����ə�� < *-man + t.

Neuter r-stems are well attested in Avestan in the nom.-acc. sing. with the ending -����ə, e.g., ����������ə “day”, Vedic áhar), �첹��&���������Dz�;�ܳܲ���ə “continent,” y��karə “liver” (Vedic yákrt, Greek hŧpar), �����岹��ə “weapon” (Vedic vádhar). The remaining cases were formed from an n-stem in Proto-IE. and Proto-Aryan. Only a few such forms are attested in Avestan, e.g., OAv. r��zarə “directive” has n-stem forms in the inst. sing. (r��šn��), gen. sing. (r��zə̄ṇg), and gen. plur. (r��šną��); ��ܳܲ���ə “sun” (Vedic súvar) contrasts with gen. sing. OAv. ��ᵛə̄ṇg (disyllabic, < *h��ṷəŋ��), YAv. ��ū ( < *h��ṷū < *h��ṷə̄ < *h��ṷəŋ��); YAv. ����������ə “day” contrasts with gen. sing. aiią�� ( < *aḭəŋ��); *azar “day” (Vedic áhar) contrasts with dat. sing. asne (Vedic áhne) and gen. plur. asną�� (Vedic áhn��m). In the nom.-acc. plur. we find both -��rə and -ą��, -ə̄�Ծ�, e.g., OAv. aii��rə “days,” YAv. aiią�� (cf. Vedic áh��ni).

h-stems. Neuter h-stem words with -ah- < *-as- have in the nom.-acc. sing. the ending -ō < *-ah, e.g., ������ō “thought” (Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;�Բ�ḥ, Greek ménos). Before endings beginning with a vowel, -ah- usually becomes -aŋ��-, e.g., inst. sing. manaŋ����, dat. sing. manaŋ��e, gen. sing. manaŋ��ō. Noteworthy are: nom.-acc. plur. OAv. ������ǡ with -ǡ < *-��s, inst. YAv. ������ə̄����&���������Dz�;, and loc. plur. YAv. ą������� “in distresses” (Vedic &�������ܳٱ�;ṁh������). When ah-stems are used as masculines, e.g., in the case of the comparative suffix -ḭa��-, the nom. sing. ends in -ǡ < *��h, e.g., OAv. va��́ iiǡ, YAv. naŋ́��ǡ < *ṷa��ḭ��h “the better one.^” Contrast the neuter sing. O.Av. �����󾱾�ō, YAv. ����ŋ́��ō, Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;���ⲹḥ.

The suffix -ṷ��h- of the perfect participle active takes the form -uš- in the “weak” cases. Sing.: nom. masc. OAv. ��ī��ܳ�ǡ “knowing” (cf. Vedic vidv��ˊn); —acc. YAv. vī’uuǡŋ��əm (Vedic vidv��ˊṁsam); —dat. OAv. vīdušŧ (Vedic ������&�ܲ����ܳٱ�;ṣe); —gen. OAv. ��ī���&���������Dz�;ō (Vedic ������&�ܲ����ܳٱ�;ṣaḥ). —Plur.: nom. YAv. vī’uuǡŋ��ō (Vedic vidv��ˊṁsaḥ).

Irregular nouns. For historical reasons a number of words are inflected irregularly. The most important are:

Mazd��- (Ahura-) “the Wise (Lord).” Voc. Mazd��, nom. �Ѳ�����ǡ, acc. Mazdą��, dat. Mazd��i, gen. �Ѳ�����ǡ. The last three cases have disyllabic endings -ą��, -��i, -ǡ.

paṇt��-/paθ- “way, path.” Sing.: nom. �貹ṇtǡ (cf. Vedic pánth��ḥ), acc. paṇ��ą�� (cf. Vedic pánth��m), inst. paθa (Vedic path��ˊ), gen. �貹&�ٳ��ٲ�;ō (Vedic patháh), loc. �貹��&�ٳ��ٲ�;ī (Vedic �貹�ٳ�ī). —Plur.: acc. �貹&�ٳ��ٲ�;ō (Vedic �貹�ٳ�&�������ܳٱ�;ḥ), inst. padəbī&���������Dz�; (cf. Vedic �貹�ٳ�&�������ܳٱ�;����ḥ), gen. paθą�� (Vedic path��ˊm).

kauuaii- “seer” and hax��ii- “companion.” Sing.: nom. kauu��, huš.hax��, YAv. haxa (Vedic sákh��); acc. kauuaŧm, huš.hax��im (Vedic sákh��yam); inst. YAv. haša (Vedic sákhy��); dat. YAv. haše (Vedic sákhye). —Plur.: nom. OAv. k��uuaiias-cīṱ (Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;�����ⲹḥ), YAv. �󲹳油����ō (Vedic sákh��yah); gen. YAv. kaoiią�� ( < *k��ṷḭ-��ˊm), hašą�� ( < *sák��ḭ-��m).

*����ḭi- “wealth” has “weak” stem *r��ḭ-. Sing.: acc. YAv. raŧm (Vedic rayím), inst. YAv. raiia (Vedic r��y��ˊ), gen. OAv. r��iiō (Vedic r��yáḥ). —Plur.: gen. YAv. raiią�� (Vedic r��y��ˊm).

��iiū/ŭ “life” (nom.-acc. sing. nt.) has oblique forms in OAv.: inst. yauu��, dat. y���ܳ�ō��, yauuŧ, gen. yaoš.d��uru “wood” (Vedic d��ˊru) has gen. sing. YAv. draoš (Vedic ���&�Dz����ܳٱ�;ḥ). z��nu “knee” (Vedic j��ˊnu) has abl. plur. YAv. ž�Գܲ���������-����ṱ.

gauu- masc. fem. “ox, cow.” Sing.: nom. g��uš (Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;��ḥ), acc. gą�� (Vedic g��ˊm), inst. gauua (Vedic gáv��), dat. OAv. �����ܳ�ō��, YAv. gauue (Vedic gáve); abl. OAv. gə̄��š (Vedic ��&�Dz����ܳٱ�;ḥ), YAv. ������ṱ, gen. gə̄��š (Vedic ��&�Dz����ܳٱ�;ḥ), voc. YAv. ������-����əṇt��. —Dual: nom. g��uu�� (Vedic g��ˊv��). —Plur.: nom. YAv. �����ܳ�ō (Vedic g��ˊvaḥ), acc. ��ǡ (Vedic g��ḥ), inst. gaobī&���������Dz�; (Vedic ��&�Dz����ܳٱ�;����ḥ), gen. gauuą�� (Vedic gáv��m).

zam- “earth,” ziiam- “winter,” dam- “house,” ham- “summer.” Sing.: nom. ��ǡ (Vedic kṣ��ˊḥ), ������ǡ; acc. zą�� (Vedic kṣ��ˊm), ziią��; inst. YAv. zəm�� (Vedic jm��ˊ), hama; abl. YAv. ��ə����ṱ; gen. ��ə��ō (Vedic �᳾&�������ܳٱ�;ḥ), ������ō, OAv. ��əṇg (Vedic dán < *dám-s); loc. zəmŧ (Vedic kṣmay-��ˊ), ��ə���� (Vedic ��ṣ&�������ܳٱ�;����), OAv. dą��, YAv. dą��i.

-yan-/-γn- “striking,” in və��əθra-jan- “breaking the resistance.” Sing.: nom. masc. və��əθra-j�� (Vedic vṛtra-h��ˊ); acc. və��əθr��-janəm (Vedic ��ṛt����-��&�������ܳٱ�;�Բ���); dat. və��əθra-γne (Vedic ��ṛt����-�����&�𲹳��ܳٱ�;).

YAv. span-/sun- “dog.” Sing.: nom. sp�� (Vedic śv��ˊ); acc. sp��nəm (Vedic śv��nam); dat. ��ū�Ա� (Vedic ś&�ܲ����ܳٱ�;�Ա�); gen. ��ū��ō (Vedic ś&�ܲ����ܳٱ�;�Բ�ḥ). —Dual: nom. sp��na (Vedic śv��ˊn��). —Plur.: nom. sp���ō (Vedic śv��ˊnaḥ); gen. suną�� (Vedic śún��m).

nar- “man" and star- “star.” Sing.: nom. OAv. n��, acc. �Բ���ə�� (Vedic náram), YAv. st��rəm; dat. OAv. �Բ���ō��, YAv. naire (Vedic náre); gen. OAv. nə��əš, YAv. narš; voc. YAv. �Բ���ə. —Plur.: nom. OAv. �Բ���ō (Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;����ḥ), YAv. st��rō; acc. OAv. nə��ąš, YAv. nə��ə̄š, incorrect nə��ə̄��š (cf. Vedic ��ṝ&�����ܳٱ�;��), YAv. ���ٰ�ə̄&���������Dz�;, incorrect strə̄��š; dat. OAv. nə��əbiias-c��, YAv. nə��əbiiō, nə��uiiō (Vedic ��ṛb��ⲹḥ); abl. stə��əbiiō; gen. YAv. narą�� (Vedic nár��m); OAv. strə̄m-c��, YAv. strą��.

��tar- masc. “fire” has been remodeled from an old neuter. Sing.: nom. OAv., YAv. ��tarš ( < *��tṛ-š); acc. OAv. ��trə̄m, YAv. ��trəm (<*��tṛ-m); inst. OAv. ��θr�� ( < *��θr-��); dat. YAv. ��θre; abl. OAv. ��θras-c��, YAv. ��θraṱ; gen. OAv., YAv. ��θrō; voc. OAv., YAv. ��tarə ( <*��tṛ). —Plur.: acc. ( < nom.) YAv. ��taro; inst. YAv. ��tə��əbiiō; gen. YAv. aθrą��.

Pronouns. The irregularity of the Avestan pronominal inflection is almost entirely inherited from Proto-Indo-Ir. and Proto-IE. Thus the personal pronouns for the first and second persons have in all three numbers stem forms in the nominative differing from the stems of the remaining cases (cf. English I : me, we : us). In the case of the personal pronouns no distinction of gender is made, but masculine, feminine, and neuter are distinguished in the demonstrative, relative, and interrogative pronouns.

Personal pronoun for the first person (“I, we both, we”). Sing.: nom. ����ə̄��; acc. mą��; dat. OAv. maibii��, ������������ō, YAv. m��uuō��ia, m��uuaiia-ca ( < *m��ṷḭa < *����&����ٲ�;ḭa); abl. ����ṱ (OPers. -ma); gen. OAv. mə̄.n��, YAv. mana (OPers. man��). Enclitic forms: acc. m��; gen., dat. OAv. mō��, YAv. mŧ (OPers. -maiy). —Dual: nom. OAv. v��; acc. ��uu��. Enclitic gen. n��. —Plur.: nom. vaŧm ( < *ṷaḭəm, cf. OPers. vayam); acc. OAv. ə̄hm��, YAv. ahma; inst. OAv. ə̄hm��; dat. OAv. ahmaibii��; abl. OAv. ah����ṱ; gen. YAv. ahm��kəm. Enclitic forms: acc. OAv. ��ǡ, YAv. ��ō; gen., dat. OAv. ��ə̄, YAv. ��ō.

Personal pronoun for the second person (“you”). Sing.: nom. OAv., YAv. ��ū, OAv. �ٳܳ�ə̄��, YAv. ��ū�� (OPers. tuvam); acc. θβą�� (OPers. θuv��m); inst. θβ��; dat. OAv. taibii��-c��, �ٲ���������ō; abl. OAv. &�ٳ��ٲ�;&����ٲ�;��ṱ; gen. tauu��/ă. Enclitic forms: acc. θβ��; gen., dat. OAv. tō��, YAv. tŧ (OPers. -taiy). —Dual: gen. YAv. yauu��kəm. —Plur.: nom. ��ūžə��, OAv. ��ū&���������Dz�;; inst. OAv. xšm��; dat. OAv. xšmaibii��, YAv. xšm��uuō��ia; OAv. ��ū&���������Dz�;maibii��, YAv. ��ū&���������Dz�;m��oiiō; abl. OAv. xš����ṱ, OAv., YAv. ��ū&���������Dz�;����ṱ; gen. OAv., YAv. xšm��kəm, YAv. ��ū&���������Dz�;m��kəm. Enclitic forms: acc. OAv. ��ǡ, YAv. ��ō; gen., dat. OAv. ��ə̄, YAv. ��ō.

Personal pronouns for the third person (“he, she, it; they”) are represented by various forms of the stems i-, h(i)-/š(i)-, di-. All forms are enclitic except for OAv. ��ī (sing. nom. fem. and dual nom. nt.). Sing.: acc. masc. fem. ī��, ��ī��, YAv. dim (OPers. dim); gen., dat. OAv. ��ō��, YAv. hŧ/šŧ (OPers. -šaiy). —Dual: acc. OAv. ī. —Plur.: acc. OAv. ī&���������Dz�;, OAv., YAv. ��ī&���������Dz�; (OPers. -šī&���������Dz�;), YAv. ��ī&���������Dz�; (OPers. -��ī&���������Dz�;). —Neuter forms: acc. sing. OAv. īṱ, YAv. ��ṱ, d��ṱ: plur. YAv. ī, ��ī. —Reflexive sing. dat. YAv. huu��uuō��ia ( < *h��ṷaβḭa).

Demonstrative pronouns: ta- “this,” aŧta- “this,” auua- “that one over there (yonder);” relative pronoun ya- “who, which;” interrogative pronoun ka-/ca- “who, which” (when followed by the enclitics -c��/ă, ��ī/ĭṱ, this becomes an indefinite pronoun “whoever, whichever”). The case endings of all these pronouns are largely the same in the masc. and nt. as those of the a-declension nouns and in the fem. as those of the ��-declension nouns. Examples: masc. sing. nom. OAv. ��ə̄, ��ə̄, YAv. ��ō, ��ō; acc. ��ə̄��, ��ə̄m, OAv. ��ə̄��, YAv. yim, aom ( < *��ṷəm, OPers. avam); gen. YAv. aŧtahe, auuaŋ́��e, OAv. yehii��, YAv. yeŋ́��e, OAv. kahii��, cahii��, YAv. kahe, kahii��-c��ṱ; —plur. acc. OAv. ��ə̄ṇg, ��ą, YAv. ��ə̄, ��ą, YAv. ���ܳ�ū, ��ū ( < *��ṷə̄).

Characteristic pronominal forms are, e.g., masc. sing. (from the pronoun ta-, aŧta-) YAv. h��, ��ō (Vedic sá), YAv. aŧšō (Vedic ��ṣ&�������ܳٱ�;); (from the pronoun auua-) OAv. ��ܳ�ō ( < *h��ṷ), YAv. h��u ( = fem.) (OPers. hauv); —inst. kana; —dat. aŧtahm��i, yahm��i, kahm��i, cahm��i (Vedic yásmai, kásmai); —abl. aŧtahm��ṱ, yahm��ṱ, kahm��ṱ (Vedic yásm��t); —loc. aŧtahmi, �ⲹ��ī/ĭ, kahmi, cahmi (cf. Vedic yásmin, kásmin). —Plur. nom. OAv. tō��, YAv. tŧ, aŧte (Vedic té, eté), auue (OPers. avaiy), OAv., YAv. ��ō��, ��ō�� (Vedic yé, ké); —gen. aŧtaŧšą�� (OPers. avaiš��m), yaŧšą�� (Vedic yéṣ��m). —Neuter sing. nom./acc. OAv., YAv. �ٲ�ṱ (Vedic tát), YAv. ���ܳܲ�ṱ, OAv. �󾱾���ṱ, YAv. �ⲹṱ (Vedic yát), �첹ṱ (Vedic kát). —Fem. sing. nom. h��, aŧša (Vedic s��ˊ, eṣ��ˊ), YAv. h��u (OPers. hauv); —inst. aŧtaiia (Vedic etáy��); —dat. YAv. auuaŋ́����i ( < *��ṷa��ḭ��i); —abl. auuaŋ́��aṱ; —gen. aŧtaŋ́��ǡ ( < aitaḥĭ��h, Vedic etasy��ḥ); —loc. yeŋ́��e ( < *ḭa��ḭ��, cf. Vedic etásy��m). —Plur. gen. YAv. aŧtaŋą�� (Vedic et��ˊs��m).

A special pronoun with the meaning “this one here” is based on the stems a- and i-/��ḭ-: masc. sing. nom. OAv. ������ə̄��, YAv. aŧm (Vedic ayám); —acc. YAv. ����ə��; —inst. an�� (OPers. an��); —dat. ahm��i (Vedic asmai); —abl. ahm��ṱ; —gen. OAv. ahii��, YAv. ahe, aŋ́��e (Vedic ásya); —loc. ����ī/ĭ, ahmiia. —Dual nom./acc. ima; —dat. ��biia; —gen. ������ǡ. —Plur. nom. ime; —acc. ima; —inst. OAv. ��iš, an��iš, YAv. aŧibiš; —dat. aŧbiiō; —gen. aŧšą��; —loc. aŧšu, aŧšuua. —Neuter sing. nom./acc. i����ṱ. —Plur. nom./acc. OAv. ī, im��/ă. —Fem. sing. nom YAv. ī�� (< *��ḭəm, Vedic iyám); —acc. imą��; —inst. OAv. ō��i��, YAv. ��/ăiia (Vedic ay��ˊ); —dat. OAv. a��́ ii��i, YAv. aŋ́����i (Vedic asyái); —abl. aŋ́����ṱ; —gen. aŋ́��ǡ; —loc. aŋ́��e ( < a��ḭ��). —Dual dat. OAv. ��bii��. —Plur. nom./acc. ����ǡ; —inst. OAv. ��bī&���������Dz�;; —dat. ��biiō; —gen. ǡŋ��ą�� (Vedic ��s��ˊm); —loc. ���ū, ��huua.

In addition to the interrogative pronoun ka-/ca- there is a stem ci- (ci- + c��/ă “someone,” naŧ-ci- “no one”): sing. nom. masc. ciš, ciš-c��/ă, naŧ-ciš (Latin quis, quis-que, ��ī��ܾ���); —acc. cī��, naŧ-cim. —Nom./acc. nt. c��ṱ (Latin quid), naŧ-c��ṱ. —Plur. nom. masc. ��������ō, caiias-c��; —nom./acc. nt. cī/ĭ-c��/ă.

The possessive pronouns OAv. ma- “my,” OAv. θβa- “your” (sing.), and OAv., YAv. ��ᵛa-, YAv. hauua-, huua- “one’s own” also have some pronominal endings, e.g., masc. sing θβahm��i, θβahm��ṱ, &�ٳ��ٲ�;&����ٲ�;����ī, ��ᵛahmi. —Plur. nom. θβō��. —Fem. sing. nom. θβō�� ( < *tṷ�� + i), ��ᵛaŧ-c�� ( < *sṷ�� + i); —inst. maii��; —dat. OAv. ��ᵛa��́ ii��i; —gen. θβa��́ iiǡ. Note also the pronominal endings used with aŧuua- “one,” aniia- “other,” and ��ī���貹- “all:” sing. aniiahm��i, vīspəm��i ( < *-əhm��i, Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;ś������������), aŧuuahm��ṱ, aŧuuahmi. —Plur. aniie, ��ī����� (Vedic anye, ��&�������ܳٱ�;ś����), aniiaŧšą��, vīspaŧšą�� (Vedic anyéṣ��m, ��&�������ܳٱ�;ś����ṣ��m). —Fem. sing. gen. aŧuuaŋ́��ǡ.

2. Verbal inflection.

Many Avestan verbal forms have counterparts in the Vedic language. Since Vedic is attested by an extensive literature that enables its grammatical forms to be determined with exactitude, it is possible to establish the complicated Avestan verbal system with considerable certainty by comparing it systematically with Vedic. With the exception of certain nominal forms such as participles, every verbal form terminates with a personal ending. The personal endings determine the first, second, and third persons in singular, dual, and plural. In addition, they indicate at the same time the diatheses active (e.g., English “I praise”) and middle (e.g., English “I praise in my own interest, we praise each other, I am praised”). The middle may be reflexive, reciprocal, or passive, etc. There are four kinds of personal endings: the primary and secondary endings, the imperative endings, and the perfect endings. The secondary endings indicate only the person and the diathesis whereas the primary endings indicate also present time (e.g., English “I am praising”). The special perfect endings indicate, together with the perfect stem, the state arrived at as a result of an action (“I have praised”). The basis of a verb form is the so-called “verb root,” which conveys the lexical meaning of the verb. By means of changes of the verb root or by the addition of suffixes the so-called “tense stems” are formed. These are known as the present, aorist, and perfect stems. The future stem is typologically a present stem.

When an imperative ending is added to a present stem the verb form expresses a command (imperative present). The addition of a primary ending to the present stem results in an indicative present whereas the addition of a secondary ending to the present stem results in an injunctive present. The injunctive present is used to mention an action without reference to time, one which is general or adhortative, past or future. The preterite is expressed by the imperfect, which is formed by prefixing to the verbal stem the augment a-. Whereas the augment a- is common in Vedic and OPers., it is seldom found in Avestan.

Originally the aorist stem was used to indicate the perfective aspect of an action, that is the view of a completed action in its entirety, but this function of the aorist is usually no longer evident in the Avestan texts. The aorist stem can take only imperative or secondary endings. With secondary endings the aorist is known as the injunctive aorist, which has functions corresponding to those of the injunctive present. The aorist stem with prefixed augment a- and secondary endings forms the indicative aorist, which has preterite meaning.

The moods of the verb are: indicative, injunctive, imperative, subjunctive, and optative. The subjunctive expresses volition and futurity. It is characterized by the addition of the suffix -a- to the high-grade present, aorist, and perfect stems. The subjunctive may take either primary or secondary endings, no difference in meaning being discernible. The optative expresses volition and potentiality. It is formed by adding to the low-grade tense stems the suffix -ḭ��-/-ī- and the secondary endings.

The present system. Since the Proto-IE. period, present stems have been formed in many different ways, but it has in most cases not been possible to determine the reason for any particular formation. From the point of view of morphology two broad groups can be distinguished: the thematic and the athematic present stems. The thematic present stems end in the thematic vowel -a-, which with certain variations is retained before the personal endings. In the case of the athematic present stems the personal endings and the suffixes for subjunctive and optative are added directly to the various present stems instead of being preceded by the thematic vowel.

Thematic present stems. To the full or zero grade of the verb root is added the thematic vowel -a- alone or a suffix ending in -a-: -ḭa-, -��ḭa-, -sa- ( = Vedic -cha-). Examples: bar-a- “carry,” spas-iia- “espy,” kir-iia- (passive) “be done,” xš-aiia- “rule,” vaxš-aiia- (causative) “make grow,” ja-sa- “come” ( = Vedic gáccha- < Proto-IE. g^wṃ-����&��������;&�𲹳��ܳٱ�;-). The root can receive an infixed -n-, e.g., kə��əṇta- “cut” (Vedic ��ṛ-��-�ٲ�-). The desideratives are characterized by reduplication and the addition of the suffix *-sa- (-ha-, -ša-), e.g., ����-����ū-&���������Dz�;��- “wish to hear.” In some cases the present stems look quite different from the root, e.g., sixša- (Vedic ś����ṣa-) “wish to be able (sak), learn,” di&����ٲ�;ža- (Vedic dipsa-) “wish to cheat (dab).” The future stem in *-��ḭa- (-��ḭa-, -&���������Dz�;ḭa-) can also be classified as a thematic present, e.g., vax-šii�� “I shall say.”

Inflection of the thematic present stems. Active: indic. pres. sing. 1. bar��mi (OAv. pə��əs�� “I ask”), 2. barahi, 3. ������������ī. —Dual 3. ����������ō. —Plur. 1. bar��mahi, 2. -aθ��, 3. ������əṇt��. —Inj. pres. sing. 1. ������ə��, 2. ������ō, 3. ��������ṱ. —Dual 3. -����ə��. —Plur. 2. -ata, 3. ������ə��. —Subj. pres. sing. 1. bar��ni, 2. bar��hi, 3. -��iti, bar��ṱ. —Dual 1. -��uua, 3. bar��tō. —Plur. 1. bar��ma, 2. ��θ��, 3. ������ǡṇt��, barą��. —Opt. pres. sing. 2. ������ō��š, 3. ������ō��ṱ. —Plur. 1. -aŧma, 2. -aŧta, 3. ������������ə��. —Imv. pres. sing. 2. bara, 3. baratu. —Plur. 2. barata, 3. ������əṇt��. —Part. pres. ������əṇt-.

Middle: indic. pres. sing. 1. baire, 2. -ahe, 3. baraite. —Dual 3. baraŧte. —Plur. 1. bar��maide, 2. OAv. ��īdraγžō.duiiŧ “you wish to fasten” ( < *-��-��ṷaḭ, Vedic -a-dhve), 3. ������əṇt��. —Inj. pres. sing. 1. baire, 2. -aŋ��a (< *-a-sa), 3. barata. —Dual 3. -aŧtəm. —Plur. 3. -əṇt��. —Subj. pres. sing. 1. -��i, ��ne, 2. -ǡŋ��e ( < *-��haḭ), 3. -aite.-Plur. 3. -��ite. —Opt. pres. sing. 2. -aŧša, 3. baraŧta. —Plur. 1. -ō����������ī, 2. -ō��δβəm, 3. -��������ṇt��. —Imv. pres. sing. 2. bar��ŋᵛh��, 3. OAv. və��əzii���ą�� ( < *-a-��ą��). —Plur. 2. OAv. ��ū&���������Dz�;ō��ܳ� “listen” ( < *-��-��ṷəm), 3. -əṇ��ą��. —Part. pres. ������ə��na-.

Athematic present stems. In the case of the athematic present stems the personal endings are added to the root or to the present suffix directly, that is, without the intervention of the thematic vowel -a-. The most important classes of these present stems are: 1 . the root presents; 2. the reduplicated presents; 3. the present stems containing infixed -n-; 4. the present stems ending in -n��-; 5. the present stems ending in -nu-. These present stems are affected by ablaut: they have the full grade of the root or the infix or suffixes in the case of the active singular forms of the indic., the inj., and, in part, of the imv. as well as throughout the active and middle paradigms of the subj. The remaining forms have the zero grade as far as that is phonologically possible.

1. The root presents. In this case the pres. stem is identical with the verb root, e.g., ah-/h- “to be” (Vedic as-/s-), mrauu-/����ū- “to speak” (Vedic bravⁱ-/����ū-); vas-/us- “to wish” (Vedic ����ś-/��ś-). A subgroup has the long grade in the act. sing. indic. and inj. and otherwise the full grade, e.g., st��uu-/stauu- “to praise,” t��š-/taš “to fashion;” aog- “to speak;” s��h- “to instruct.”

Active inflection: indic. pres. sing. 1. ����ī/ĭ, �������dz�ī/ĭ, ������ə��ī; st��umi, 2, ����ī/ĭ, ����&���������Dz�;ī/ĭ, 3. ������ī/ĭ, mraoiti, ����&���������Dz�;��ī; t��šti, s��stī. —Dual 1. usuua��ī, 3. ����ō (Vedic ��-�ٲ�ḥ), ����ū��ō. —Plur. 1. m����ī/ĭ < *hmahi (Vedic s-masi), usə̄ma��ī (Vedic úsmási), 2. st�� (Vedic s-tha), ušt��, 3. ��əṇtī/ĭ (Vedic s-ánti). —Inj. pres. sing. 1. mraom, 2. mraoš, 3 ��������ṱ; t��št. —Plur. 2 mraot��, ušt��. —Subj. pres. sing. 1 anh��, mrauua, mrauu��ni, 2. aŋ��ō, 3. aŋ��aṱ, aŋ��aitī, ��������ṱ. —Plur. 1. ǡŋ����m�� (< *aŋ����ma), 3. aŋ��ən, ������ə��. —Opt. pres. sing. 1. OAv. ��́ iiə̄m (Vedic s-y��ˊ-m), 2. ��́ iiǡ, �����ܾ���ǡ, 3. ��́ ii��ṱ/YAv. hii��ṱ, usii��ṱ, s���īṱ. —Plur. 1. ��́ ii��m��, 2. ��́ ii��t��, 3. YAv. hii��rə. —Imv. pres. sing. 2. OAv. ����ī (<*s + d^hi) “be!,” ����ū��&������ܴ�;��, 3. as��ū, mrao��ū/ŭ. —Plur. 2. staota, 3. ��ə̄ṇt��. —Part. pres. ��ṇt- (sing. nom. masc. ��ą��, acc. ��əṇtə��, gen. �󲹳�ō. —Plur. gen. h���ą��. —Fem. stem h��/ăitī-), �ܲ���ṇt-; stauuat- ( < *����&�𲹳��ܳٱ�;ṷ-ṇt-).

Middle inflection: indic. pres. sing. 1. mruiie ( < mr��ṷaḭ); aojō��, 3. ����ū���ٱ�. —Plur. 1. mrūmaidŧ; aogəmadaŧ-c��, staomaide, 3. aojaite (Vedic óhate < *-ṇt��ḭ). —Inj. pres. sing. 1. ������ī, 2. aoγž�� ( < *��ṷg^h + sa), 3. OAv. aogəd�� ( < *��ṷg^h + ta), YAv. aoxta, staota. —Subj. pres. sing. 1. aoj��i, mrauu��ne, stauu��ne. —Opt. pres. sing. 2. mruuiša, 3. �����ܳ�ī�ٲ�; ������īta. —Part. pres. mruu��na-, aojana-.

2. Reduplicated present stems. The commonest such verb is *da-d��-, which continues both Indo-Ir. d�� “to give” and d^ha “to put.”

Active inflection: indic. pres. sing. 1. da’ą��i, 2. daδ��hi, 3. dad��itī, daδ��iti. —Plur. 1. dadəma��ī, YAv. dą��mahi, 3. �岹�岹����ī (Vedic dád(h)ati with -ati from *-ṇt��). —Inj. pres. sing. 1. daδam, 2. OAv. �岹��ǡ, 3. OAv. dad��ṱ, YAv. daδ��ṱ. —Plur. 3. �岹�岹ṱ ( < *d(^h)a-d(^h)-ṇt). —Subj. pres. sing. 1. daθ��ni, 3. OAv. �岹�岹ṱ, YAv. �岹&�ٳ��ٲ�;��ṱ. —Plur. 1. daθ��ma, 3. �岹&�ٳ��ٲ�;ə��. —Opt. pres. sing. 1. dai’iią��, 2. dai��ī&���������Dz�;, �岹��&�ٳ��ٲ�;����ǡ, 3. OAv. dai��īṱ, YAv. �岹��&������ܴ�;īṱ, YAv. dai’ii��ṱ, daiθii��ṱ. —Dual 3. �岹��&������ܴ�;ī��ə��. —Plur. 3. daiθiią��, daiθii��rəš. —Imv. pres. sing. 2. dazdi ( < *d(^h)a-d(^h)^z-d^hi), 3 dad���ū. —Plur. 2. dasta. —Part. pres. daδat- (sing. nom. masc. �岹&�����ٲ�;ō, �岹&�ٳ��ٲ�;ō).

Middle inflection: indic. pres. sing. 1. dadŧ, daiθe, 3. dastŧ (Vedic datté), dazdŧ ( < *d^ha-d^hz + tai). —Plur. dadəmaidŧ. —Inj. pres. sing. 3. dazd�� ( < *d^ha-d^hz + ta), dasta. —Subj. pres. sing. 3. daθaite. —Plur. 3. dadəṇtŧ. —Opt. pres. sing. 2. daiθī&���������Dz�;a, 3. dai��īt��, �岹��&�ٳ��ٲ�;ī�ٲ�. —Imv. pres. sing. 2. dasuu�� (Vedic d(h)atsva). —Plur. 2. ��ą��-�岹����ū�� (<*d^ha-d^hz-d^hṷa��) “bear in mind!” —Part. pres. daθ��na-.

3. Present stems containing infixed -n-. In the act. sing. forms of the indic. and inj. and throughout the subj., -na- is infixed but elsewhere only -n-, e.g., vi-na-d-/����-ṇ-��- “to find,” ci-na-h-, ci-na-s-/cī&���������Dz�;- ( < ci-N-š-) “to assign,” mə��ə-ṇ-c- “to destroy.”

Active inflection: indic. pres. sing. 1. cinahmi, 3. cinasti, vinasti. —Plur. 1. cī&���������Dz�;ma��ī, 3. ����ṇdəṇt��. —Inj. pres. sing. 3. cinas. —Plur. 3. ����ṇdə��. —Opt. pres. sing. 3. cī&���������Dz�;ii��ṱ, mə��ąsii��ṱ ( < *mṛṇčḭ��t). —Plur. 3. čī&���������Dz�;iią��. —Imv. sing. 2. cīž��ī.

Middle inflection: indic. pres. sing. 3. mə��əγəṇte ( < *mə��əŋ(g)te). —Plur. 1. cī&���������Dz�;maide, 2. mə��əṇgəduiiŧ ( < *��ṛn��-��^hṷaḭ), 3. mə��əṇcaitŧ (with -aitŧ < *-ṇt��ḭ). —Opt. pres. sing. 3. mə��əṇcīta, viṇ��īta. —Part. pres. viṇd��na-.

4. Present stems in -na-. In the act. sing. forms of the indic. and inj. and throughout the subj. the affix -n��- is used but elsewhere only -n-, e.g., frī-n��-/�ڰ�ī-��- “to delight,” gə��əβ-n��-/gə��əβ-n- “to seize,” pə��ə-n��-/pə��ə-n- “to drive away,” və��ə-n- “to choose.”

Active inflection: indic. pres. sing. 1. frīn��mi, 3. gə��əβn��iti. —Plur. 1. friią��ma��ī ( < *frinmahi), 3. �ڰ�ī��əṇt��. —Subj. pres. sing. 1. frīn��ni, 3. frīn��ṱ. —Plur. 3. gə��əβną��. —Imv. plur. 3. �ڰ�ī��əṇt��.

Middle inflection: indic. pres. sing. 1. və��ənŧ, 3. və��əṇtŧ. —Inj. pres. sing. 3. və��əṇta. —Plur. 3. OAv. və��ən��t�� (with -��t�� < *-ata). —Subj. pres. sing. 1. �ڰ�ī�Բ���, pə��ən��ne, 3. pə��ən��ite.

5. Present stems in -nu-. The suffix appears in the full grade as -n��ṷ- in the sing. forms of the indic. and inj. active. In the subj. it takes the form -n��ṷ-a- and elsewhere it appears as nu- or -��ṷ-. The commonest such verb is kar “to make, do.”

Active inflection: indic. pres. sing. 1. kə��ənaomi, 3. kə��ənaoiti. —Plur. 3. kə��ənuuaiṇti. —Inj. pres. sing. 3. (a-)kə��ənaoṱ. —Subj. pres. sing. 1. kə��ənauu��ni. —Plur. 3. kə��ənaon (with -naon < *-�Դ�ṷɵ�). —Opt. pres. sing. 3. kə��ənuii��ṱ. —Imv. pres. 2. kə��ənūi’i. —Part. pres. kə��ənaṇt-.

The aorist system. As shown by Vedic, the aorist stem indicates the perfective aspect. Apart from the consideration of aspect, the inj., subj., opt., and imv. forms of the aorist have the same functions as the corresponding forms in the present system. The indic. aor. is formed by prefixing the augment a- to the injunctive. The indic. aor. is restricted to the past. Three types of aorist are found in Avestan: 1. thematic aorists, 2. athematic root aorists, 3. sigmatic aorists.

1. The thematic aorist. There are three kinds of thematic aorist. The thematic vowel may be added to the full grade of the root (e.g., taša- “to fashion,” Vedic ��&�������ܳٱ�;��ṣa-; hana- “to acquire,” Vedic sána-) or to the zero grade of the root (e.g., sī&���������Dz�;a- “to instruct,” Vedic ś��ṣa-, from the root s��h, Vedic ś��s; xša- “to rule” from the root xš��, Vedic kṣ��; xsa- “to look” from the root xs��, Vedic ��ś��) or to the reduplicated root (e.g., vaoca- “to speak,” Vedic vóca- < *ṷa-ṷč-��- from vac).

The thematic aorist inflection corresponds to that of the thematic present stems. Noteworthy forms are: active inj. ��-xšō “look at,” �ٲ�&���������Dz�;��ṱ “he fashioned,” ��-uuaoc��ma (Vedic á-voc��ma) “we spoke.” —Subj. han��nī “I shall acquire,” fra-uuaoc��m�� “we will proclaim.” —Opt. sī&���������Dz�;ō��ṱ “may he instruct,” hanaŧm�� “may we earn.” Middle inj. m�� . . . xšəṇt�� “they shall not rule.” —Subj. xs��i “I shall look.” —Opt. xšaŧt�� “may he rule.” —Imv. xšəṇ��ą�� “let them rule.”

2. The athematic root aorist. Thirty-seven verbs use the verb root as aorist stem without the addition of any further morphological feature. Their inflection is largely the same as that of the athematic root present stems. The following examples are attested forms of d�� 1. “to give,” 2. “to put” and gam “to go.”

Active inflection: inj. aor. sing. 3. d��ṱ. —Plur. 2. d��ta, 3. dą��, ����ə��. —Subj. aor. sing. 1. jim��, 2. d���ī, 3. d��itī, d��ṱ, �ᾱ��������ī, ji����ṱ. —Plur. 1. d��m��, 3. �岹��ṇtī, dą��, �ᾱ��ə��. —Opt. aor sing. 1. OAv. diią��, 2. �Ჹ������ǡ, 3. dii��ṱ, jəmii��ṱ. —Plur. 1. jamii��m��, 2. d��iiata, 3. YAv. jamiią��, jamii��rəš. —Imv. aor. sing. 2. d��i��ī, gai��ī, 3. d���ū. —Plur. 2. d��t��. —Part. pres. �岹ṇt-.

Middle inflection: inj. aor. sing. 2. dǡŋ����, 3. d��t��. —Dual. 1. duuai��ī ( < *d^h-ṷa��^hi) “we two destined.” —Subj. aor. sing. 1. d��nŧ, 2. dǡŋ��ŧ, 3. d��itŧ. —Dual 3. jamaŧtŧ. —Plur. 2. daduiiŧ ( < d^h-a-d^hṷaḭ), 3. dǡṇtŧ. —Opt. aor. sing. 1. dii�� ( < *d^h-īḭa), 2. ��ī&���������Dz�;��. —Imv. aor. sing. 2. d��huu��.

Some special forms for the 3. sing. passive also belong to the root aorist: a-uu��ci “it has been called,” sr��uuī “it has been heard;” ə��əž-ucam (imv. sing. 3.) “it shall be cortectly told” (from the root vac).

3. The sigmatic aorist. Whereas the thematic aorist and the athematic root aorist can be distinguished from similarly formed present stems only on the basis of comparison with Vedic, the sigmatic aorist is clearly marked. Proto-IE. -s-, which may appear in Avestan as -h- or -š-, is affixed to the verb root. The root has the long grade in the indic. and inj. but the full grade elsewhere. The inflection is athematic. About twenty-seven verbs have attested sigmatic aorists. The following verbs have been selected to illustrate the inflection: xšnu “to satisfy” (xšn��uš-/xšnaoš-), dis “to show” (d��iš-/dō��š-), fras “to ask” (fraš-), man “to consider” (��əṇg��-, ��ą��-), van “to overcome” (��ə�Բ���-, ��ą��-), varz “to work” (varš-), r�� “to present” (r��h-, rǡŋ��-), uruuaj “to walk” (uruu��xš-), sand “to appear” (��ą��-, Vedic ch��/ănts-).

Active inflection: inj. aor. sing. 2. d��iš, 3. xšn��uš, ��ą��. —Plur. 3. uruu��xšaṱ (with -��ṱ from *-ṇt). —Subj. aor. sing. 1. dō��š��, 3. ��ə̄nghaitī, ��ə̄nghaṱ, ������ə&���������Dz�;�����پ�. —Plur. 3. ��&���������Dz�;�Բ���&���������Dz�;ə��. —Imv. aor. 2. dō��šī ( < �岹��ś + ši). —Plur. 2. ��ą��t�� ( < ��ś��nd-s-ta).

Middle inflection: inj. aor. sing. 1. �ڰ���&���������Dz�;ī, mə̄ṇg��ī, 3. frašt��, mąst��. —Plur. 1. (a-)məh��������ī. —Subj. aor, sing. 1. mə̄ṇgh��i, varəš��nŧ, 2. rǡŋ��aŋ��ō��, 3. varəšaitŧ. —Plur. 2. maz-dǡŋ��ō.dūm. —Imv. aor. sing. 2. fə��ašuu��. —Part. aor. maŋ����na-.

The perfect system. The perfect originally designated the state arrived at as the result of an action but it came to be used as a preterite tense. It is found with fifty-six verbs in Avestan. In the perfect stem the verb root has the full grade in the sing. forms of the active and throughout the subj. but elsewhere it has the zero grade. With the one exception of vaŧd/vid- “to know” all the perf. forms are reduplicated, that is, the first consonant of the root followed by the vowel -��/ă- (occasionally -i-, -u-) is prefixed to the root. The perf. differs from the present-aorist system also in having special endings in the indic. active and middle. The following are examples of perf. stems: ��h- ( < ah “to be”), dad��-/d��/ăδ- ( < d�� “to give; put”), mamn- ( < man “to think”), yaiiat-/yaŧt-, ��ō��t- ( < yat “to take a firm stand”), v��uuarəz-/v��uuə��əz- ( < varz “to work”), vaŧd-/vid- ( < vid “to know”).

Active inflection: indic. perf. sing. 1. vaŧda, 2. ��ō��st��, dad��θ��, 3. vaŧd��. —Dual 3. yaŧtarə. —Plur. 1. ��ō��θm��, 3. ǡŋ��arə, ��ī&�����ٲ�;����ə. —Opt. perf sing. 1. dai’iią��, 3. vīdii��ṱ. —Dual. 3. aŋ́����ṱ.təm ( < *��h-ḭ��-t��m). —Part. perf. (suffix -ṷ��h-, -uš-, fem. -��&���������Dz�;ī-) sing. nom. masc. ��ī��ܳ�ǡ, �岹&�����ٲ�;�ܳ�ǡ, gen. ��ī���&���������Dz�;ō, �岹���&���������Dz�;ō, fem. ��ī&�ٳ��ٲ�;��&���������Dz�;ī-.

Middle inflection (rare): indic. perf. sing. 3. v��uuə��əzō�� “it has been worked.” —Dual 3. mamn��itŧ. —Opt. perf. plur. 3. �����dz�����ə�� “they would have driven” (from root vaz). —Part. perf. mamn��na- “having thought,” v��uuə��əz��na- “having been done.”

Infinitives. Infinitives are formed by the addition of various suffixes either directly to the root or to a tense stem: *-ai: OAv. pō�� ( < *pH-aí) “to protect,” YAv. buiie ( < *b��ṷ-ai) “to become;” *-ṷaḭ: OAv. d��uuō�� “to give,” vīduiiŧ (<*ṷi��-ṷai) “to know;” *-ṷa�Բ�ḭ: OAv. vīduua��ō�� “to know;” *-�ٲ�ḭ: OAv. itŧ “to go,” mrūitŧ “to say,” ����ō�� “to be;” *-ah: OAv. ���ܳ�ō “to aid,” və��əziiō “to work;” *-����ḭ: OAv. vaocaŋ́��ŧ “to say” (from aorist stem vaoca-), sr��uuaiieŋ́��e “to recite” (from caus. stem sr��uuaiia-), *-d^hḭ��ḭ (Vedic -dhyai): OAv. jaidii��i “to be killed” (from root jan), di&����ٲ�;žaidii��i “to be deceived,” və��əziieidii��i “to do, be done.”

Verbal adjectives. Verbal adjectives ending in -ta have almost always passive meaning, but there are exceptions such as gata- (= Vedic gatá-) “gone.” If phonologically possible the root appears in the zero grade, e.g., -uxta- “said” (Vedic uktá- < vac); vista “found” (< *ṷi��^z-tá-, cf. Vedic vitttá- < vid); və��əzda “increased” (Vedic ��ṛd���&�������ܳٱ�;- < *ṷṛ��^zd^há- < *ṷṛ��^hz-tó-); jata- “slain” (Vedic j��tá- < han) from root jan; z��ta- “born” (Vedic j��tá- with -��- < ṇH-) from root zanH. Roots ending in -��- do not show ablaut, e.g., d��ta- “given; put” (But Vedic hitá < *d^hə-��&�Dz����ܳٱ�;-).

Bibliography:

Chr. Bartholomae, Awestasprache und Altpersisch, in Geiger and Kuhn, Grundr. Ir. Phil. I, pp. 188-241.

A. V. W. Jackson, An Avesta Grammar in Comparison with Sanskrit, Stuttgart, 1892, repr. Darmstadt, 1968, pp. 62-200.

H. Reichelt, Awestisches Elementarbuch, Heidelberg, 1909, repr. Darmstadt, 1967.

H. G. Herzenberg, Morfologicheskaya struktura slova v drevnikh indoiranskikh yazykakh, Leningrad, 1972.

S. Sokolov, “Yazyk Avesty,” in V. I. Abaev, ed., Osnovy iranskogo yazykoznaniya I: Drevneiranskie yazyki, Moscow, 1979, pp. 161-94.

E. Benveniste, Les infinitifs avestiques, Paris, 1935.

J. Kellens, Les noms-racines de l’Avesta, Wiesbaden, 1974.

Idem, Le verbe avestique, Wiesbaden, 1985.

On other aspects of Avestan grammar, not treated here, consult the works listed above. On composition see J. Duchesne-Guillemin, Les composés de l’Avesta, Liège and Paris, 1936.

See also J. Duchesne-Guillemin, Kratylos 7, 1962, pp. 11-38; J. Kellens, ibid., 16, 1971, pp. 9-17; 18, 1973, pp. 1-2.

K. Hoffmann, Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik I-II, Wiesbaden, 1975-76 (consult the index pp. 688-704).

 

(K. Hoffmann)

Originally Published: December 15, 1987

Last Updated: August 17, 2011

This article is available in print.
Vol. III, Fasc. 1, pp. 47-62

Cite this entry:

K. Hoffmann, “AVESTAN LANGUAGE i-iii,” Encyclopædia Iranica, III/1, pp. 47-62, available online at http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/avestan-language (accessed on 30 December 2012).