PHONOLOGY 9 1 forms testifying to the existence of z instead of d as in Iranian : debt impv, • give 1 beside daddhi, cf. Av. dazdi, and dheki 4 put both with e out of earlier az according to the rule below. Either this is a case of dialectal divergence, or the type dehi (<dazdhi) represents the regular phonetical treatment which has been re- placed in the majority of cases by new analogical formations. §15. Combinations Involving the Palatal Series The second palatal series is simple in the matter of consonant combination, since all that is involved is the retention of the original guttural before a consonant, which then combines according to the rules given above ; vac- ‘ to speak ' : uktd -, yuj- 4 to join ' : ynktd yoksydmi , dah- 4 to burn ' : dagdha Combinations of the old palatal series are much more com* plicated. In the early Indo-Iranian period s, z and zh were changed to / and z before dental occlusives (with aspiration and voicing of the occlusive in the case of zh according to the rule given above for dagdha -, etc.) : the resulting sibilants were identical with those that arose from Indo-European s, z after i, u, etc., and their subsequent history is the same. In Sanskrit $ became cerebral s and cerebralised the following dental and z , after undergoing the same process, was elided leaving cerebral d : e.g. vdsti 4 he wishes ' (1 ms-) Av. vasti, Hitt, wekzi , cf. Gk. ckwv ptc. 4 willing J ; astau ‘ 8 1 (cf. asiti- ' 80 ’), Av. asta, Lat. octo , etc. ; Skt. mrdtka- 4 pardon Av. mzrdzdtka- (mrg-d t cf. Skt. mrj- ‘ to wipe away 1 and Pers. dmurztdan ' to pardon ') ; Skt. udhd 4 carried 1 for *uzdha- < uzdha- [yah- 1 to carry 1 from vazh -< IE vegh-) ; Av. g&rvzdd *' complained 3 sg. aor. mid. from gar 9 z- = Skt. garh- ; Skt. Udhi ' licks ' ( lzh-) t etc. The same change was liable to take place in contact with other consonants : cf. Av. fsumant- 4 possessing flocks ' ( pasu Skt. paid-) ; Av. frasna - 4 question Skt. prasnd- ; Av. vtzibyd, Skt. vidbhyds (vis-). In these combinations there is not complete agreement between Indo-Aryan and Iranian, but in the case of the latter example at any rate an Aryan *vizbhyas is attested. The Sanskrit development through vizbhyas to vidbhyds is exactly the same as that seen when z (z) was out of IE s, e.g. in viprudbhyas for *vipnizbhyas ( viprus - 4 drop '), When immediately followed by s these palatals appear as k in Sanskrit in intervocalic position ; and the treatment is there-
