Proto-Italic language

Obstruents

• Palatovelars merged with plain velars, a change termed centumization: *ḱ > *k, *ǵ > *g, *ǵʰ > *gʰ
  • Sequences of palatovelars and *w merged with labiovelars: *ḱw, *ǵw, *ǵʰw > *kʷ, *gʷ, *gʷʰ
• Perhaps *ke > *ka, or, in other words, *e > *a in front of pure velars. Given the existence of Oscan carneis and Umbrian karu beside Latin carō ("flesh, meat"), this sound change may date back to Proto-Italic. The linguist Peter Schrijver also explains Latin scelus ("an evil deed") as a derivative of a root *(s)kh₁el-, which would indicate that this sound change predated the loss of laryngeals between a consonant and a vowel, in which case the development would still be early. De Vaan, however, alternatively reconstructs the root of scelus as *skel-, arguing that the reconstruction preferred by Schrijver is unjustified.
• *p...kʷ assimilates to *kʷ...kʷ, a change also found in Celtic. It is possibly an Italo-Celtic development, or perhaps an independent innovation. The development of quercus ("an oak"), which reflects PIE *pérkʷus, appears to showcase that the assimilation of *p to *kʷ precedes the development of *kʷu to *ku. Alternatively, it is possible that the dissimilation of *kʷu to *ku was already a PIE development, in which case Italic must have regularly undergone the assimilation in the oblique cases (i.e. gen.sg. *pr̥kʷéw-), which then spread analogically to the other case forms. If this theory is accepted, then this particular lexical item provides no information regarding the relative chronology of these sound changes.
• Two adjacent dentals become two adjacent sibilants (TT > TsT > ss).
• Obstruent consonants become (unaspirated) voiceless before another voiceless consonant (usually *s or *t).
• *-kn- > *-gn-. This development appears in both Latin signum ("sign") and Oscan segúnú ("statues").
• Possible development of *k > *χ before an obstruent, followed by the loss of the nasal before the fricative and compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel. As an example of this development, Meiser cites Oscan saahtúm ("sacred"), Umbrian sahatam, and sānctus ("sacred"). According to Meiser, these terms reflect a pre-form *sanktos, which developed into *sānxtos. Alternatively, the linguists Alessandro De Angelis and Annamaria Chilà reconstruct a development of *-Vnkt- > *-Ṽːkt-, adducing as evidence certain dialectal Latin terms that appear to showcase the loss of *-n-, such as sactus, which is attested in Minturnus. However, according to the linguist Ollie Sayeed, South Picene forms such as deíktam showcase that spirantization must postdate Proto-Italic. Moreover, Sayeed argues that the lengthening must have operated after the Common Italic period, as otherwise it would have been affected by Osthoff's Law, and also since—according to Sayeed—terms such as anhēlō ("to breathe out") show that it must postdate the specifically Latin a-weakening. Sayeed further notes that the spirantization rule operates in different conditions within the various Italic languages: In Sabellic, for instance, *pt sequences are affected (e.g. Umbrian screhto beside scriptus), whereas in Latin the development exclusively applies to *-nkt- sequences. Moreover, a change of *kt and *ks to *χt and *χs would then require a subsequent shift of *χt and *χs back to kt and ks in Latin.

• *tl > *kl word-medially. The existence of Sabellic forms such as Oscan sakaraklúm ("sanctuary") indicates that this development was shared between Latin and Osco-Umbrian, implying that it occurred at an early date. In Latin, the suffix *-klom was later modified by epenthesis, producing -culum (e.g. curriculum, "a race"). This development, however, may not have occurred in Venetic, where forms such as klovetlo perhaps shows the unchanged suffix *-tlom, in contrast to the Italic languages. The Etruscan form putlumza is probably related to Latin pōculum ("drinking cup"), from which it may have been borrowed, though it is also possible that it more specifically derives from an unattested equivalent word in another Italic language. In any case, the Etruscan form appears to have been borrowed at a stage prior to the shift of *tl > *kl.
• Final *t became *d. Bakkum posits that this development occurred prior to the apocope of final *i. Thus, the PIE secondary ending *-t became Proto-Italic *-d, but the primary ending *-ti became Proto-Italic *-t.
• Initial /mC/ > /bC/.
• CCCC > CaCCC. This development did not apply to word-initial position, as indicated by the development of PIE *n̥bʰrís to Latin imber ("rain") not *amber. Chronologically, it must have occurred after the vocalization of the syllabic resonants, as otherwise PIE *h₂ŕ̥ǵn̥tom ("silver") would have yielded *h₂ragnto-, which should have produced Latin *ragentum instead of the attested form argentum ("silver"). Nevertheless, the *ə that emerged from the vocalization of syllabic nasals would still develop into *a when followed by three consonants, thus PIE *h₂n-n̥-ḱ-y > *h₂n-ən-ḱ-y > Latin nancīscor ("to meet with"). The sound law also must have occurred after the shift of CRHC > CRəHC, thus explaining the development of PIE *ǵn̥h₁tós ("begotten") to nātus ("born"). Additionally, it must postdate the development of CRHTC > CRaTC, as otherwise PIE *gʰl̥Hdʰ-ro- would have yielded *gʰlaHdʰ-ro-, which would have produced *glāber instead of glaber ("smooth"). In any case, Schrijver suggests that the *a was probably not phonemic until after the vocalization of *CHC > *CaC.

Vowels and sonorants

• V̄LV́ > V̆LV. Otherwise known as Dybo's Law, this sound change maintains that post-PIE long-vowels shortened before a liquid and a stressed vowel. Thus, PIE *wiHró- yielded Proto-Italic *wiros ("a man"). This sound law is common to Italic and Celtic, perhaps allowing for the possibility that it dates to the Italo-Celtic period. The conditions for Dybo's Law require that *VH had already yielded *V̄ beforehand, which would naturally indicate that this development is also of Italo-Celtic date.
• V̄RC > V̆RC. Otherwise known as Osthoff's Law, this sound change predicts the shortening of a long vowel prior to a resonant followed by a consonant. Thus, PIE *h₂wéh₁-n̥t- yielded *wēnto-, whence later *wento-, ultimately producing ventus. However, alternative explanations exist for ventus. According to Sayeed, the PIE sequence *eHRC should have been syllabified as [*eHR̥C], which could undergo the loss of the laryngeal without any other developments, as laryngeals in Proto-Indo-European only induced compensatory lengthening when in coda position. Thus, the sequence [*eHR̥C] could yield *eR̥C, which may itself evolve directly eRC, thereby negating the need for Osthoff's law. Alternatively, it is still possible that speakers would preserve the weight and duration of the vowel in *eR̥C, thus prompting a shift to *ēR̥C, in which case it could then still undergo Osthoff shortening to produce eR̥C. Forms such as Oscan stahínt (< PIt *sta(j)ēnt) may actively contradict the existence of Osthoff's law, though it is alternatively possible that the vocalism of this term in particular was analogically introduced from the third-person singular form staít.
• *RDC > *RaDC. This rule explains the development of Proto-Italic *magnos from PIE *mǵ-no-. This sound change date back to the Italo-Celtic period.
• *owV > *awV in pretonic position. Otherwise known as Thurneysen–Havet's law. Since PIE *ew did not yield Latin *av, this sound law must predate the change of *ew > *ow. Furthermore, since this sound law requires a mobile accent to function properly, it most likely occurred at an extremely archaic date before the word-initial accent of Proto-Italic. The Umbrian term sauitu ("to wound"?), which might reflect PIE *ksow-éye-ti, perhaps serves as additional evidence for this development in Italic.
• *mo > *ma and *wo > *wa in open syllables. This development explains terms such as Latin mare ("sea"), which reflects PIE *móri. Terms such as mola ("millstone"), which may reflect PIE *molh₂éh₂, and vorō (" devour"), which is potentially a denominative to *gʷorh₃éh₂, perhaps do not show this sound change as the syllable was originally closed before the word-medial laryngeal. If this proposition is accepted, it would imply that these sound changes occurred prior to the development of *CHV > *CV.
• Possible apocope of final *i in certain conditions. This change seemingly affected the PIE second and third-person endings of verbs *-si, *-ti, and *-nti, all of which became -s, -t, and -nt. Such apocope was not limited to verbs exclusively; it is also, for instance, present in Proto-Italic *et ("and"), from *éti. There are, however, certain attested forms that may showcase the preservation of final *-i. In the Carmen Saliare, there appears an archaic Old Latin form tremonti, which possibly continues the original PIE third-person plural ending *-nti. Another inscription composed in the possibly Italic Elymian language includes the word εμι ("emi," "I am"), which contradicts the first-person singular form *ezom reconstructable for the other Italic languages. The linguist Michael Weiss thus doubts whether the apocope was truly a Proto-Italic development, suggesting that it was perhaps alternatively a "diffused change."

The apocope was perhaps conditioned by accent placement; the unstressed verbal endings, for instance, underwent this sound change, whereas it did not affect terms such as ante ("before"), which is cognate with Ancient Greek ἀντί (antí, "opposite"). In the case of a term such as pede, the ablative singular of pēs ("foot"), the retention of final *-i is explained as the result of inheritance from a PIE locative singular form *pedí. If this theory is accepted, then it would imply that the sound change occurred prior to the development of word-initial stress in Italic. However, the linguists James Clackson and Geoffrey Horrocks argue that not all locative singular forms contained a stressed final *-í and Latin neuter nouns such as mare ("sea," from *mori) most likely never placed the accent on the final *-i. As noted by the Indo-Europeanist scholar Helmut Rix, one problematic term is the ablative singular form genere, which belongs to the noun genus ("race, kind"). The ablative singular form specifically should reflect *ǵénh₁esi, the expected outcome of which—according to the accent-conditioned theory of the apocope—would be *genis. To resolve these issues, the theory would have to rely on a widespread analogically motivated restoration of final *-i throughout multiple inflectional paradigms.

• Possible loss of *w after labial obstruents. This development is attested in probus ("good"), Oscan prúfatted ("to approve"), and Paelignian pros, which all derive Proto-Italic *proβos, from earlier *proβwos, probably from PIE *probʰHwós.
• Developments concerning *y:
  • *-mj- > *-nj-. Chronologically, this sound development must have occurred at a period where the consonantal yod remained after *m. This development is exemplified by the change of *gʷm̥yóh₂ to *gʷenjō, which ultimately yielded Latin veniō ("to come"). The rule did not, however, affect dormiō (< *dr̥m-yé-ti), probably as a consequence of PIE syllabification laws. The sequence *gʷm̥y-, with a syllabic *m̥, yields veni-, whereas *dr̥my-—with a syllabic *r̥—yields dormi-. Had the original PIE form been syllabified as *drm̥y-, the expected Latin outcome would have been *dreniō. Certain linguists have expressed doubt regarding the existence of this sound law—the philologist Benjamin Fortson IV notes that is essentially only supported by veniō, with the possible additional example of quoniam (< *kʷom-jam?), though this conjunction is not necessarily ancient. Both of these examples have alternative explanations: quoniam may result from a labial dissimilation and veniō perhaps underwent remodeling after the PIE aorist *gʷémt ("to step, come"). Another theory, posited by Sihler, attributes the sound change of *gʷem- > *gʷen- to a dissimilatory development. Furthermore, Fortson argues that the rule is potentially contradicted by the derivation of moveō ("to move, set in motion") from *myewh₁- ("to move"). To resolve this issue, Weiss postulates separate developments for word-initial and word-medial *mj, with the former yielding Latin *m- and the latter evolving into Proto-Italic *-nj-.
  • Possible assimilation of *-gy- to *-yy- and *-dy- to *-yy-. Oscan terms such as mais (< *majjos < *mag-jos) provide evidence that the sound shift of *-gy- to *-yy- also occurred in Sabellic, thereby indicating that this development is of Proto-Italic date. The Umbrian term aiu may provide additional evidence of this sound development in Sabellic, though the etymology of this term is unclear. However, this sound law is perhaps contradicted by fugiō ("to flee"), which may reflect PIE *bʰug-yé-ti. Schrijver interprets this form as further evidence for his proposed class of athematic i-presents, arguing that this issue is easily resolvable if it is presumed that the formed lacked consonantal yod. Alternatively, Sihler suggests that it may have been formed innovatively within Italic after the operation of the sound law. There is also evidence for the shift of *-dy- to *-yy- in Oscan, as indicated by the term oiim ("hate"), which may reflect *ojjom, from *odjom. This development must have occurred prior to the Latin shift of word-medial *dʰ > *d, as it does not affect Latin medius ("middle").
  • Treatment of *j following a consonant. In the prehistory of Latin, all *-Cj- evolved into *-Cij-. This sound development perhaps occurred over two different stages, with the first phase exclusively affecting consonantal yod when situated after heavy syllables. Latin showcases a second anaptyxis during which all remaining *-Cj- sequences still eventually vocalized to *-Ciy- (e.g. *médʰyos > Latin medius ("middle"). Sabellic, however, may showcase the preservation of other *-Cj- clusters. In the scripts of the Osco-Umbrian languages, the glide *-j- is perhaps transcribed orthographically by the grapheme -i-.
  • *j is lost between vowels. The resulting vowels in hiatus contract into a long vowel if the two vowels are the same. For an example of this sound change, Meiser cites Oscan trís and Latin trēs ("three"), both from PIE *tréyes. According to Nishimura, it is possible that the intervocalic *j, though lost phonemically, was possibly retained allophonically.

• Possible developments leading to the differentiation between the third-conjugation iō-verbs and the fourth conjugation:

• Possible reduction of unstressed *-ey- to *-iy-. The linguist Brent Vine posits this rule to explain the development of fourth-conjugation denominatives to thematic nouns in Italic. According to Vine, a verb such as *serwiō ("to observe") reflects *serwiye-, itself from *serweyé-, which was itself formed as a standard denominative in *-yéti to a thematic noun. Moreover, this rule also justifies his proposed derivation of sōpiō ("to put to sleep") from *swṓp-eye-ti, which—according to Vine—first evolved into *swṓp-ije-ti before eventually contracting into the attested form sōpiō. If accepted, this rule would have to operate at an extremely early period, prior to the establishment of fixed initial stress and the loss of intervocalic yod.
• Epenthesis of *i before *y after, according to Weiss, a heavy syllable. Such a sound law is partially evidenced by the distribution of third conjugation iō-verbs and fourth conjugation terms according to syllable structure—All verbs of the former class, in Latin, have short root syllables (i.e. of the shape CVC), whereas all terms of the latter type have long roots (i.e. of the shapes CVCC, CV̄C, CVi/uC). Weiss argues that since, according to this rule, syllables ending in a sonorant behave like heavy syllables, it is probable that syllable-final sonorants were moraic, but obstruents in the same position were not. Chronologically, this sound change must have preceded the assimilation of *-gy-, as otherwise PIE *séh₂gyeti ("to seek out") would not have yielded Latin sāgiō ("to perceive"). According to this sound law, PIE *gʷm̥yési should yield early Proto-Italic *gʷenijesi and PIE *sént-ye-si should yield early Proto-Italic *sent-ije-si. This development is reminiscent of Siever's Law, though it is perhaps a separate, albeit similar phenomenon unique to Italic.
• Development of *-Cije- to *-Cī-. Weiss proposes a model whereby *-Cije- syncopated to *-Cij-, which eventually contracted to *-Cī-. However, it has also been proposed that the *e in *-ije- sequences assimilated to the preceding *i in an open syllable when in an unaccented position, thus allowing for a development of *-ije- to *-iji-, which nevertheless still contracted to *-ī-. In any case, early Proto-Italic *gʷenijesi yielded *gʷenīs, whence Latin venīs. If Oscan diíviiaí is connected with Latin dīus ("radiant, divine") and derived from Proto-Italic *dīwijos, from PIE *diyew-iyo-, then it would imply that this reduction had occurred prior to the shift of *ew > *ow. Furthermore, if Gaulish diíiuion is connected to the aforementioned forms, then it might illustrate that this reduction is of Proto-Italo-Celtic date.
• In open syllables, *-Cje- became *-Ci-. Thus, early Proto-Italic *fakjetōd became later *fakitōd, which developed into Oscan factud and Latin facitō. The linguist Reiner Lipp supports a model by which, in open unstressed syllables, *-Cje- reduced to *-Cji- and then developed into *-Ci-. According to Lipp, such a development necessitates that the fixed initial-stress system had already emerged. Weiss, however, explains this development as the result of the syncopation of the *-e- after *-i- in an open syllable. The sequence *-Cjo- does not appear to have been affected by a similar change, as indicated by the genitive singular ending -osio in archaic Latin and Faliscan (i.e. Faliscan kaisiosio), in which case forms such as Latin capimus (<*kapjomos) must have emerged analogically after other terms such as capitis. Vine extends the ruler to closed syllables, arguing that syncope also occurred in the sequence *-eyes, which he suggests developed into *-ijes according to his proposed reduction rule, before syncopating into the archaic nominative plural -īs (e.g. in Marrucinian pacris). However, Fortson doubts the operation of this syncope in open syllables, citing participle forms in -iēns and gerunds in -iendus, as possible counterevidence.

Many of these sound changes explain the split between the third conjugation iō-type and the fourth conjugation in the Italic languages. Thus, if accepted, they are thus at least of Proto-Italic date, considering that both Latin and Sabellic contain these two separate conjugation classes. However, Schrijver rejects the aforementioned developments, arguing that certain terms imply the preservation of consonantal yod in *ye-presents up to the Proto-Italic period. For instance, Schrijver cites the verb sepeliō ("to bury"), from earlier *sepel-jV, must have retained the nonsyllabic post-consonantal *j to explain the non-operation of Exon's Law, a sound development in archaic Latin whereby tetrasyllabic sequences with two light medial syllables (e.g. sequences of the shape *XX̆X̆X) in Proto-Italic underwent the syncopation of the second vowel. One method to resolve this issue in accordance with the theory of i-epenthesis is to presume that the verb was originally third conjugation but later remodeled into a fourth conjugation form. Schrijver further argues that the theory of epenthesis fails to account for the coexistence of third and fourth conjugation verbs containing roots ending in the resonant -r, such as the third conjugation verbs morior ("to die") and pariō ("to beget") and the fourth conjugation terms operiō ("to cover") and feriō ("to hit, strike"). Weiss tentatively explains this variation as the result of some analogical development, noting that many of these verbs belong to the same semantic field. For instance, the verb pariō can be construed as the causative to orior ("to rise, be born"), to which morior is an antonym.

De Vaan also disputes the notion that third-conjugation iō-verbs are connectable with the PIE thematic *ye-suffix, instead opting to derive verbs of this type from an ablauting athematic PIE *i-present class of the shape *CC-éy-ti ~ *CC-y-énti. According to this theory, the zero-grade suffix was generalized throughout the paradigm, and the original athematic first-person singular and third-person plural endings were thematicized. For instance, regarding the example of Latin capiō ("to take, capture"), Schrijver reconstructs a Proto-Italic form *kapiti ~ *kapienti, and De Vaan further connects the verb to a PIE form *kh₂p-i- or *kap-i-. The LIV, however, connects this verb to *kh₂pyéti ("to be grasping"), whence also Ancient Greek κάπτω ("káptō," "to gulp down") and Gothic hafjan ("to lift, raise"). According to Schrijver, the athematic i-presents were thematicized to ordinary ye-presents in compounds, thus explaining the existence of many simplex third conjugation iō-verbs beside compounded fourth conjugation terns. For example, pariō ("to bear, give birth") exists beside forms such as comperiō ("to learn, discover"). Furthermore, in the case of orior, De Vaan notes the existence of third conjugation forms such as oritur beside fourth conjugation forms such as orīrī, which he explains as the result as of an original athematic i-present *h₃r-i-. In this particular example, De Vaan further cites Hittite a-ra-a-i (< *h₃r-oi- ~ *h₃r-i-) as evidence for an original PIE ablauting i-stem. Weiss, however, argues that the proposed phonological changes motivating the distinction between the third conjugation iō-type and the fourth conjugation are attested in other words not related to any verbal paradigm, rendering it uneconomical to posit an entirely new morphological class to justify developments already explained by sound law.

• *ew > *ow. This sound change is attested for both Latino-Faliscan and Sabellic. However, there a select few odd forms that appear to lack this sound development. For instance, the term Leucesie appears in the Carmen Saliare, though De Vaan argues that it cannot overrule the other evidence for the Proto-Italic nature of the *ew > *ow shift, on account of its uncertain meaning and etymology. The forms neuen and neuna, which are attested at Ardea and Tor Tignosa respectively, also seemingly contradict this sound shift, though it also possible that they underwent a secondary development of *ow > *ew, which has also occurred in British English. Weiss notes that all of the unusual forms contain the -eu- after a coronal consonant, thereby allowing for the possibility of a dialectal change of *ow > *ew in front of a coronal.
• *l̥, *r̥ > *ol, *or. This sound change seemingly also occurred in Venetic terms such as murtuvoí ("dead"), which may reflect PIE *mr̥twós.

Laryngeals

The laryngeals are a class of hypothetical PIE sounds *h₁, *h₂, *h₃ that usually disappeared in late PIE, leaving coloring effects on adjacent vowels. Their disappearance left some distinctive sound combinations in Proto-Italic. In the changes below, the # follows standard practice in denoting a word boundary; that is, # at the beginning denotes word-initial. H denotes any of the three laryngeals.

The simpler Italic developments of laryngeals are shared by many other Indo-European branches:

• *h₁e > *e, *h₂e > *a, *h₃e > *o
• *eh₁ > *ē, *eh₂ > *ā, *eh₃ > *ō
• *iH > *ī, *oH > *ō, *uH > *ū
• Sometimes CHiC > Cī
• *H > *a between consonants. This development also occurs in Celtic and is therefore possibly of Italo-Celtic date.
• Possible development of *HTC > *aTC. There are only two potential examples of this sound change: aiō and apiō, both of which have somewhat contentious etymologies. Nevertheless, if accepted, Schriver suggests that it is comparable to the sound change of *RDC > *RaDC.
• Laryngeals are lost word-initially before a consonant.
• Laryngeals are lost word-medially between stops. Given the correspondence between Oscan futír and Gaulish duxtir (< PIE *dʰugh₂tḗr), this sound law is perhaps of Italo-Celtic date.
• Possible delabialization of *h₃ before *w. According to this sound law, the laryngeal *h₃ lost its labial quality prior to *w, thus shifting into *h₂. Schrijver posits this rule to explain forms such as octāvus ("eighth"), which may reflect PIE *h₃ḱteh₃-wo-. If accepted, it must have occurred at an extremely early date, as it requires that *-eh₃- and *-ō- remained distinct. It has also been suggested the sequence *-eh₃w- evolved into *-ōw-, which then unrounded to *-āw-. However, such a development would not explain the vocalism of ōvum ("egg"), which continues PIE *h₂ōwyóm. There is another formulation of the *-ōw- > *-āw- shift whereby the development was stress conditioned and thus only affected non-initial syllables.

More characteristic of Italic are the interactions of laryngeals with sonorant consonants. Here, R represents a sonorant, T a plosive, L a liquid, and C a consonant.

• #HLC > #aLC. This development appears in Latin argentum, from PIE *h₂ŕ̥ǵn̥tom. The Oscan term aragetud ("money") attests to an identical sound change in Sabellic. However, Latin ursus ("bear"), which reflects *h₂ŕ̥tḱos, conflicts with this development. Schrijver notes that, even if one assumes a regular sound change of *HLC- > *oLC, the form ursus would still be unusual as *orsus would be expected. This particular word was possibly affected by some sort of tabooistic distortion, such as the kind potentially also present in lupus ("wolf," from *wĺ̥kʷos). Given the extreme irregularity of the formation, Schrijver sees fit to discard it as evidence for the standard development of PIE *#HLC sequences. The vocalism of orior ("to rise, get up") and ortom ("risen"), which perhaps reflect *h₃r̥-yé-ti, may also conflict with this sound law. To remedy this issue, Schrijver notes that there are other full-grade ye-presents, such as sāgiō ("to perceive"), thereby also allowing for the possibility that orior continues the e-grade of the PIE root. Nevertheless, Schrijver suggests a possible double reflex of *#HLC wherein *#h₁LC and *#h₂LC yielded #aLC and *#h₃LC yielded #oLC, perhaps via a development of *#h₃LC > *#h₃aLC > #oLC. There are other examples that seemingly contradict a rule *#h₃LC > oLC, such as arbor ("tree") (< perhaps from *h₃r̥dʰ-ōs) and arduus (< *h₃r̥dʰ-wó-s), though Schrijver considers the etymology of both these terms to be problematic. For a possible reflex of PIE *#h₁LC, Schrijver cites ariēs ("ram"), which may reflect PIE *h₁r-i-(e)t-, though the Umbrian cognate erietu has problematic e-vocalism and De Vaan allows for the possibility of a Proto-Italic pre-form either of the shape *ariēts or *eriēts.
• There was possibly a triple reflex of PIE *#HNC. If accepted, the following developments would have occurred:
  • *h₁NC- > *h₁əNC- > *əNC-. Schrijver suggests that *h₁ was lost a segment prior to the sound law *CəCCC > *CaCCC, as this is necessary to explain the development of Latin ignis. According to Schrijver, it follows a development of *h₁n̥gʷni- > *h₁əngʷni- > *əngʷni- > ignis.
  • *h₂NC- > *h₂əNC- > *aNC-. For example, PIE *h₂m̥bʰí ("around") > PIt *amβi- > La. ambi- and Um. am-.
  • *h₃NC- > *h₃əNC- > *oNC-. The examples unguis ("fingernail"), which may reflect *h₃n̥gʰ-u-, and also umbilīcus ("navel"), which may reflect *h₃m̥bʰ-, the zero-grade of *h₃nóbʰōl ("navel"), are considered by the linguist Stefan Höfler to constitute particularly compelling evidence for the operation of this sound law in Latin. Nevertheless, Höfler suggests that these forms may instead reflect schwebeablaut rather than the PIE zero-grade, though—in both cases—Schrijver argues that schwebeablaut is unlikely as the phenomenon would not have operated within a single paradigm.

This sound law is contested by Höfler, who argues that the syllabic resonants merely vocalized normally to either eN or oR. Höfler cites examples such as ēnsis ("dagger"), which may reflect *h₂n̥sís, though the etymology of this term is controversial.

• CLHV > CaLV. There is some evidence, albeit scant, attesting to this same sound development in Sabellic: Compare Umbrian carsitu to Latin calō ("to call"). This sound change must have occurred prior to the development of *l̥, *r̥ > *ol, *or, as otherwise *CLHV should have yielded *CoLHV, which itself would have produced CoL(V). Moreover, it occurred after the vocalization of syllabic resonants and the loss of laryngeals.
• h₂s# > ks# after an unstressed vowel. This sound law was proposed by André Martinet to explain senex ("old") and -trĩx without the need of an additional *-k- suffix of unknown meaning that would only be seen in Italic. The lengthed vowel in the suffix -trĩx could be explained by a restoration from a lost **-trī suffix. If this law were to be accepted, it would be the only example of a laryngeal being realized as a consonant in Italic.

Morphology

• General loss of the dual, with only a few relics remaining.
• Loss of the instrumental case.
• Formation of the subjunctive in imperfect subjunctive in *-sē-.
• Formation of the imperfect indicative in *-βā-.
• Creation of the gerundive.

Consonants

• [ŋ] was an allophone of /n/ before a velar consonant.
• The voiced fricatives [β], [ð], [ɣ], [ɣʷ] and [z] were in complementary distribution with word-initial voiceless fricatives [ɸ], [θ], [x], [xʷ] and [s], and were thus originally simply allophones of each other. However, at some point in the Proto-Italic period, the allophony was somewhat disrupted by the loss of the voiceless allophones [θ] and [xʷ], which merged with [ɸ]. Scholars^[who?] disagree on whether to reconstruct Proto-Italic with the phonemes /θ ~ ð/ and /xʷ ~ ɣʷ/ still present (hence assuming that the merger with [ɸ] was a later areal change that spread across all extant dialects, possibly occurring simultaneous with or after the loss of the corresponding voiced fricatives), or to reconstruct Proto-Italic with the phonemes' voiceless allophones merged into /ɸ ~ β/, and their voiced allophones becoming independent phonemes /ð/, /ɣʷ/. Both of these sounds are relatively uncommon cross-linguistically, and eventually they were eliminated in all later languages, but differently in each.

Vowels

• The Proto-Indo-European syllabic nasals *m̥ and *n̥ appear in Latin as *em, *en or *im, *in, but also as *am, *an in Osco-Umbrian alongside *em, *en. On the basis of these discrepancies, Meiser reconstructs a nasal vowel /ẽ/ as this prop vowel, citing how Old French /ẽ/ evolved to modern French /ɑ̃/ as a parallel. Word-initial *n̥- in Proto-Indo-European evolved into Sabellic an- and Latin im-, leading some linguists to reconstruct *n̥- as a distinct syllabic resonant at the Proto-Italic stage as well. Older research by the philologist James Wilson Poultney instead suggests that Proto-Indo-European *m̥ and *n̥ evolved into *em and *en.

Proto-Italic had the following diphthongs:

• Short: *ai, *ei, *oi, *au, *ou
• Long: *āi, *ēi, *ōi

Osthoff's law remained productive in Proto-Italic. This caused long vowels to shorten when they were followed by a sonorant and another consonant in the same syllable: VːRC > VRC. As the long diphthongs were also VːR sequences, they could only occur word-finally, and were shortened elsewhere. Long vowels were also shortened before word-final *-m. This is the cause of the many occurrences of short *-a- in, for example, the endings of the ā-stems or of ā-verbs.

Prosody

Proto-Italic words may have had a fixed stress on the first syllable, a stress pattern which probably existed in most descendants in at least some periods. In Latin, initial stress is posited for the Old Latin period, after which it gave way to the "Classical" stress pattern. However, fixed initial stress may alternatively be an areal feature postdating Proto-Italic, since the vowel reductions which it is posited to explain are not found before the mid-first millennium BC. Furthermore, the persistence of Proto-Indo-European mobile accent is required in early Proto-Italic for Brent Vine's reformulation of Thurneysen-Havet's law (where pre-tonic *ou > *au) to work.

Nouns

Nouns could have one of three genders: masculine, feminine and neuter. They declined for seven of the eight Proto-Indo-European cases: nominative, vocative, accusative, genitive, dative, ablative and locative. The instrumental case had been lost. Nouns also declined for number in singular and plural. The dual number was no longer distinguished, although a few remnants (like Latin duo, ambō) still preserved some form of the inherited dual inflection.

Adjectives

Adjectives inflected much the same as nouns. Unlike nouns, adjectives did not have inherent genders. Instead, they inflected for all three genders, taking on the same gender-form as the noun they referred to.

Adjectives followed the same inflectional classes of nouns. The largest were the o/ā-stem adjectives (which inflected as o-stems in the masculine and neuter, and as ā-stems in the feminine), and the i-stems. Present active participles of verbs (in *-nts) and the comparative forms of adjectives (in *-jōs) inflected as consonant stems. There were also u-stem adjectives originally, but they had been converted to i-stems by adding i-stem endings onto the existing u-stem, thus giving the nominative singular *-wis.

Pronouns

Declension of Personal Pronouns:

Note: For the third person pronoun, Proto-Italic *is would have been used.

Declension of Relative Pronouns:

Declension of Interrogative Pronouns:

Declension of Demonstrative Pronouns:

*is "this, that"

Numbers

Verbs

To mark the imperfect, a new past indicative suffix of *-βā- was created in the Italic languages. This morpheme is continued in Latin terms such as portābant and possibly by the Oscan form fufans ("they were"). It is also potentially present in the form profafạ-, which appears on a broken inscription in the Vestinian language. The new suffix was itself perhaps from the combination of the root *bʰuH- ("to be") and the same *ā-extension found in the imperfect forms of the verb sum (i.e. erās).

During the transition from Proto-Indo-European to Latin and Sabellic, the subjunctive and optative were merged, resulting in the general Italic subjunctive. However, the linguist Frederick Kortlandt disputes whether the optative had been lost by the time of Proto-Italic, noting that the continuation of optative forms may be attested in terms such as Latin faxīm, which perhaps continues the Proto-Indo-European athematic optative infix *-yéh₁-. It is possible that the original Proto-Indo-European optative forms the basis for the mood known in Latin as the subjunctive, whereas the original Proto-Indo-European subjunctive paradigm gave rise to the standard Latin future. The Italic languages innovated an imperfect subjunctive marker *-sē-, as reflected by Paelignian upsaseter, Oscan patensíns, and the Latin panderent. It is, however, unattested in Venetic or Umbrian. In Latin, the suffix underwent rhotacism, thereby surfacing as -rē- (e.g. amārēs), though the form essēs perhaps preserves the original sigmatic nature of the morpheme.

Proto-Italic may have developed a type of sigmatic future formation, which is itself possibly reflected in the Old Latin and Sabellic sigmatic futures. For instance, compare the Old Latin sigmatic future form faxō to the standard Classical Latin non-sigmatic future faciam. The ultimate source of the sigmatic forms is unclear. The Old Latin sigmatic future has been related to a Proto-Indo-European s-desiderative suffix. There is semantic precedent in other Indo-European languages for a shift from a desiderative to a future meaning—compare the Ancient Greek s-future, such as in the Ancient Greek future form δήξομαι ("dḗxomai"), which may derive from the desiderative suffix *-(h₁)seti. The sigmatic future indicative may have derived from the subjunctive of a Proto-Indo-European sigmatic aorist, and the Latin sigmatic aorist subjunctive may have derived from the optative of a Proto-Indo-European sigmatic aorist. If this theory is accepted, then the first sigmatic forms may have emerged prior to the aorist-perfect merger in Latin.

During the transition from Proto-Indo-European into the Sabellic and Latino-Faliscan languages, the aorist and perfect merged into a single tense, referred to as the perfect in Latin and Sabellic grammar. In Latin and Sabellic, the perfect tense of a verb consists of a unique perfect stem to which the inflectional endings are affixed. To form these perfect stems, both Italic branches often reused original aorist or perfect stems. In addition, there were some new innovations within the perfective aspect, with the -v- perfect (in Latin amō, amāvī) and the -u- perfect (moneō, monuī) being later innovations, for example.^{[citation needed]} Latin more typically preserved original sigmatic aorists, such as in the case of dīx-, whereas Sabellic often preserved original root aorists. However, neither Italic branch exclusively preserved one type of aorist or perfect stem: The Latin perfect stem dīx- continues the Proto-Indo-European s-aorist *dḗyḱst, but the perfect stem peper- continues the Proto-Indo-European reduplicated perfect *pepórh₃e, and the perfect stem iēc- continues the full-grade k-aorist *(H)yéh₁kt. Moreover, the chosen stems in the two Italic branches are usually opposite: Where Latin continues an original perfect form, Sabellic typically preserves an aorist, and vice versa. According to Rix, if a verb stem is present in both the Latino-Faliscan and Sabellic branches, the present stem is identical in 90% of cases, but the perfect in only 50% of cases.

Due to the vast array of morphological distinctions between the perfect in Sabellic and Latino-Faliscan, it is generally held in the field of Italic linguistics that the aorist-perfect merger was completed independently in the Italic daughter languages, thereby preventing the branches from inheriting one unified system common to Proto-Italic. Furthermore, since Latino-Faliscan and Sabellic consistently continue opposite perfect and aorist stems, Meiser argues that most Proto-Italic verbs likely had both perfect and aorist forms. Meiser concludes that—in Proto-Italic—these stems may not have differed significantly in meaning, and thus, a given form was selected for preservation in the daughter languages based on morphology rather than meaning. However, the linguist Reuben Pitts proposes that Old Latin, Faliscan, and the Sabellic languages shared far more morphological similarities than linguists such as Meiser suggest. If these theories are accepted, then this may indicate a later date for the divergences between the Sabellic and Latino-Faliscan perfect systems.

Footnotes

Bibliography