Addendum to pg.13, fn. 23

To the resources for the Sabellic languages add Crawford 2011, which refers to the epoch-making three volume Imagines Italicae, a corpus of almost all the inscriptions in the Italic (i.e. what I call Sabellic) languages—the Tabulae Iguvinae are not included.  Most texts are illustrated with a photo and there are many new readings based on autopsy.  

Crawford, Michael H. 2011. Imagines italicae: a corpus of Italic inscriptions. London: Institute of Classical Studies, University of London.

The earliest notation of geminate consonants, p.29

On pg. 29 I wrote "Geminate notation appears for the first time around 250 BCE (COTTAS, ILLRP 1277).". Although this date is the one that Degrassi gave for this inscription from near Corleone in Sicily, following the suggestion of Di Vita's that the Cotta mentioned in this milestone was C. Aurelius Cotta, the consul of 248 BCE, it seems more probably for a number of reasons that the Cotta involved was the consul of 144, L. Aurelius Cotta.  This means that the earliest graphically indicated gemination of consonants is HINNAD, from 208 BCE (ILLRP 295).

See Keiler, Bernd. 2011. "Zwei Meilensteine des Konsuls Aurelius Cotta." Epigraphica 73:109–16.

Addendum

To the Basic Latin resources quoted on pg. 15 fn. 34 add Liesner, Malte. 2012. Arbeitsbuch zur lateinischen historischen Phonologie. Wiesbaden: Reichert.  This book will be a great complement to my book if you are teaching a class in the historical grammar of Latin and your students know German.  It's got great problem sets and exercises and I'm sure that anybody who worked her/his way through this book would have a very solid knowledge of Latin phonology. Since U.S. students almost never know German, you might find it useful to translate some of the exercises for them. 

More on perfect 3rd sg.

On pg. 393 I discuss the evidence for an Old Latin 3rd sg. perf. ending -īt, but I didn't say anything about an interesting phenomenon in Classical Latin poetry which has recently been studied by Marina del Castillo Herrera. In Ovid there are 42 examples of 3rd sg. perfects ending in -iit before a vowel which scan as -iīt and no examples of the prevocalic scansion -iĭt.  This contrasts with the treatment in Vergil where 20 examples of -iĭt and one (maybe two) of the scansion -iīt (Alcides subiit, haec illum regia cepit Aen. 8.363).  The probable explanation is that the one example in Vergil is  a metrical lengthening on the Ennian and Homeric model whereas Ovid's usage suggest a real (i.e. not metrically lengthened) long vowel.  The probable explanation for Ovid's -iīt is that -iit contracted to -īt, a form attested already in Plautus, and that -iīt is a conflation of the contracted and uncontracted forms.

See del Castillo Herrera, Marina. 2009. "Las formas de perfecto de indicativo en -iit." Cuad. Fil. Clás. Estud. Lat. 29.2:5-20.

Earliest Italic gen. sg. in -i

On. pg. 234 fn. 10 I mention that the form MORAI from a 4th century inscription from Signia or the Ager Signinus (the place is called Signia not Signum as I write there and is modern Segni about 60 km southeast of Rome) is the earliest example of gen. sg. -ī in any stem class. However, this is no longer true. In Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 168, 2009, pp. 273–7 Maria Cristina Biella ("Una nuova iscrizione falisca di VII a.C.: Un sostantivo con tema in -o e genitivo in -i") has published a 7th century Calix from Falerii with the inscription TITI. This form is most probably a genitive of the common praenomen Titos and  might be taken as more evidence that the original locus of the -ī genitive was in names.

Corrigenda varia

pg. 201, ln. 6 Correct the Serbo-Croatian vocative of 'woman' from žȅna to žȅno.


pg. 211 The content of note (l) about the origin of the Lith. instr. sg. -mì should be moved to note (j)

pg. 249  In the chart of PIE endings for the u-stems beside the lengthened grade endingless locative in
*-ēu (or *-ēu̯ as I probably should have written it) add the ending-ful locative *-eu̯-i.

In the index on pg. 633 under the heading pius ~ purus rule add 142 and change 198 to 191.

Thanks to Thomas Olander and Ben Forston for pointing out these mistakes.

Corrigendum

Ben Fortson points out that on p. 446 n. 81 I say that Gerhard Meiser in Veni Vidi Vici 2003:57 compares the Latin passive infinitive in -ier with the Vedic gerundive in -ya, but this is not an accurate presentation of Professor Meiser's views.  In fact, he prefers the idea that a form like *amā-đyēr, with the  cognate of Umbrian passive infinitive suffix -fi, Osc. -fír, was transformed into *amā-zyēr (> amārier) after the active *amā-zi (> amāre). This idea is certainly worthy of serious consideration. Meiser did uphold the comparison with the Vedic gerundive in 1998:225.