Verner’s Law 427
Hüllen W (2005a). Kleine Geschichte des Fremdsprachen-
lernens. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.
Hüllen W (2005b). ‘Englische, Grammatikographie
zwischen Bullokar (1586) und Sweet (1898).’ In
Schmitter P (ed.) Geschichte der Sprachtheorie, vol 6.
Tübingen: Narr. 200–238.
Hüllen W & Klippel F (eds.) (2002). Holy and profane
languages. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Jones R F (1953). The triumph of the English language.
Stanford: University of Stanford Press.
Kristol A M (2000). ‘Les premières descriptions grammati-
cales du français.’ In Auroux S et al. (eds.). 764–770.
Lapidge M (1982). ‘The evidence of Latin glosses.’ In
Brooks N (ed.) Latin and the vernacular languages in
early medieval Britain. Leicester: University of Leicester
Press. 99–140.
Law V (2002). Gedächtnis und Grammatikschreibung im
Mittelalter.’ In Hüllen W & Klippel F (eds.). 31–75.
Lindeman M (1994). Die französischen Wörterbücher von
den Anfängen bis 1600. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Marazzini C (2000). ‘Early grammatical descriptions of
Italian.’ In Auroux S et al. (eds.). 742–749.
Michael I (1970). English grammatical categories and
the tradition to 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, Reissue 1985.
Moulin-Fankhänel C (1994). Bibliographie der deutschen
Grammatiken und Orthographielehren 1: Von den
Anfängen der Überlieferung bis zum Ende des 16. Jahr-
hunderts. Heidelberg: Winter.
Müller P O (2001). Deutsche Lexikographie des 16. Jahr-
hunderts. Konzeptionen und Funktionen frühneuzeitli-
cher Wörterbücher. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Niederehe H-J (2002). ‘Die ‘Gramática de la lengua castel-
lana (1492) von Antonio de Nebrija.’ In Hüllen W &
Klippel F (eds.). 129–140.
Osselton N E (1990). ‘English lexicography from the begin-
ning up to and including Johnson.’ In Hausmann et al.
(eds.). 1943–1953.
Padley G A (1976). Grammatical theory in western Europe
1500–1700: the Latin tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Padley G A (1985). Grammatical theory in western Europe
1500–1700: trends in vernacular grammar I. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Verner’s Law
J Bourns, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
ß 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Among the most dramatic achievements of early
Indo-European scholarship, the elucidation of
Verner’s Law (VL) heralded a turning point in the
history of the young discipline. This famous sound
law owes its discovery to Karl Verner, the Danish
Paulsen F (1919, 1920). Geschichte des gelehrten Unter-
richts auf den deutschen Schulen und Universitäten
(2 vols) (3rd edn.). Leipzig: Veit.
Pausch O (ed.) (1972). Das älteste italienisch-deutsche
Sprachbuch. Eine Überlieferung aus dem Jahre 1424
nach Georg von Nürnberg. Wien: Böhlau.
Pfister M (1990). ‘Die italienische Lexikographie von
den Anfängen bis 1900.’ In Hausmann et al. (eds.).
1844–1863.
Polenz P von (1991). Deutsche Sprachgeschichte vom Spät-
mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart. 1. Einführung. Grundbe-
griffe. Deutsch in der frühbürgerlichen Zeit. Berlin: de
Gruyter.
Robins R H (1998). A short history of linguistics (3rd edn.).
London: Longman.
Rössing-Hager M (2000). ‘Frühe grammatische Beschrei-
bungen des Deutschen.’ In Auroux S et al. (eds.).
777–784.
Stammerjohann H (1996). Lexicon grammaticorum: who’s
who in the history of world linguistics. Tübingen:
Niemeyer.
Stegmann T D (ed.) (1991). Vocabulari Català – Alemany
de l’any 1502 / Katalanisch-deutsches Vokabular aus dem
Jahre 1502. Frankfurt: Domus Editoria Europaea.
Stein G (1997). John Palsgrave as a Renaissance linguist.
Oxford: Clarendon.
Swiggers P & Vanvolsem S (1987). ‘Les premières
grammaires vernaculaires de l’italien, de l’espagnol et
du portugais.’ Histoire. Epistémologie. Langage 9(1),
157–181.
Tavoni M (1998). ‘Renaissance linguistics.’ In Lepschy G
(ed.) History of linguistics III. London: Longman. 1–148.
Verrac M (2000). ‘Les premières descriptions grammati-
cales de l’anglais.’ In Auroux S et al. (eds.). 771–777.
Vorlat E (1975). The development of English grammatical
theory 1586–1737: with special reference to the theory of
parts of speech. Leuven: University Press.
Vorlat E (1996). ‘Bullokar, William.’ In Stammerjohann
(ed.). 144–146.
Watson F (1968). The English grammar schools to 1600.
Their curriculum and practice. London: Cass.
scholar whose article of 1877 provided the first prin-
cipled account of the conditions underlying apparent
exceptions to Grimm’s Law (GL). Through meticu-
lous analysis and lucid argumentation, Verner bril-
liantly eliminated one of the most vexing cases of
‘irregular’ sound change. Hailed as decisive evidence
in the main controversy of the day, Verner’s insight
immediately became the centerpiece of the Neo-
grammarian argument that sound change operates
428 Verner’s Law

‘blindly’ and does not admit exceptions. Above all, Table 1 Strong verbs in Germanic
Verner’s approach exemplified the explanatory power Infinitive Pret.first Pret.first Past
afforded by scientific rigor, thereby setting a high person person ptcp.
standard for research to come. sing. pl.
According to part of GL, the pre-PGmc voiceless
OE weor ðan wear ð wurdon worden ‘become’
stops *p, *t, *k (< PIE *k, *k̂), *kw give the PGmc OE snı̄ ðan sn ð snidon sniden ‘cut’
voiceless fricatives *f, *þ, *w, *ww. In word-initial OE tēon tēah tugon togen ‘pull’
position, these reflexes are consistent and basically (< *teohan)
00
uncontroversial. Similarly, in noninitial position, (¼ OHG ziohan zōh zugum gi- )
zogan
Germanic often displays the expected outcomes:
OHG lı̄han lēh liwum gi-liwan ‘lend’
Go. hafjiþ, OE hef(e)ð ‘lifts’ : Lat. capit ‘takes’ (<* (< * (< * (<*
Go. brōþar, OE brōðor ‘brother’ : Lat. frāter, -hW-) -hW-) - W-) - W-)
Gk. phrátēr, Skt. bhrātā
Go. wairþan, OE weorðan ‘become’ : Lat. uertit,
Skt. vartate ‘turns’
Go. tiuhiþ, OHG ziuhit ‘pulls, draws’ : Lat. dūcit For decades, the apparently unconditioned dual out-
‘leads’ comes of pre-PGmc *p, *t, *k, *kw, and *s were taken
as indisputable evidence that sound changes like GL
These forms reflect Gmc *f, *þ, *w (> *h) < *p, *t,
reflected mere tendencies and nothing more. Even as
*k, as predicted.
further sound laws were discovered and independent
In other cases, however, the pre-PGmc voiceless
evidence for the regularity of sound change accumu-
stops seem to give voiced reflexes:
lated, it seemed inconceivable that a principled expla-
Go. uf-habaiþ ‘lifts up’ : Lat. sus-cipit ‘takes up’ nation could account for the glaring exceptions to GL.
Go. fadar, OE fæder ‘father’ : Lat. pater, Gk. patē´r, The crucial insight was made by Karl Verner, who
Skt. pitā observed a correlation between the Germanic facts
OE we wurdon ‘we became’ : Lat. uertimus, Skt. and the position of the accent in Vedic Sanskrit.
vāvrtima ‘we turned’
Verner noted that, where the Vedic accent directly
OHG˚gizogan ‘pulled up, drawn’ (ptcp.) : Lat. ductus
preceded a voiceless stop, that stop corresponded to
‘led’ (ptcp.)
a voiceless fricative in Germanic, as predicted by GL.
As a comparison with the set above shows, these Where the Vedic accent followed a voiceless stop,
words reflect Gmc * , * , * instead of the predicted however, this stop appeared in Germanic as a voiced
*f, *þ, *w (> *h), thus corresponding to the voiced fricative. Greek comparanda tended to validate this
fricatives * , * , * resulting from PIE*bh, *dh, *gh insight:
by part of GL.
Especially striking are the last two examples in Go. brōþar : Ved. bhrā´tā : Gk. phrā´tēr; but
Go. fadar : Ved. pitā´ : Gk. patē´r
each of the groups above in which ‘regular’ and
‘irregular’ outcomes are distributed predictably Decisive proof lay in the accentuation of Vedic
among different inflectional forms of the same verb. verbal forms, which, as Verner showed, correlated
A comparison of further strong verbs in Germanic precisely with the grammatischer Wechsel displayed
confirms that when the root of a Proto-Germanic by Germanic strong verbs. Where Vedic presents cor-
verb ends in a voiceless fricative in the infinitive, the respond in stem formation to Germanic presents, the
present tense, and the preterite singular, a voiced root syllable is accented. In the Vedic perfect, which
fricative is found in the preterite plural and the past corresponds to the Germanic preterite, the accent falls
participle (see Table 1). on the root in the singular, but on the personal endings
The examples in Table 2 reveal that -s- and -r- in the plural; the Vedic perfect middle participle
participate in the same pattern. Comparative evi- in -āná- is accented on the suffix. The accentual pat-
dence confirms that the -r- of OE and OHG goes tern of Vedic may be seen in the following forms of
back to a Gmc *-z-, which occurs here instead of the vr t- ‘turn’ and jus. - ‘enjoy,’ the cognates of OE
expected *-s-. ˚ ðan and cēosan, respectively (see Table 3).
weor
In descriptive terms, then, the rule is that voiceless In attested Germanic languages, the accent is fixed
fricatives are replaced by voiced fricatives in the third on the root syllable, as it still is in the native part of the
and fourth principal parts of strong verbs. In the Ger- English lexicon. Yet, as Verner realized, the Germanic
man philological tradition this alternation became situation did not necessarily reflect the accentual sys-
known as grammatischer Wechsel (‘grammatical tem inherited from PIE. He therefore assumed the
change’), a designation later borrowed by English. following:

Table 2 Germanic strong verbs with -s - and -r-
Infinitive Pret.first Pret.first Past
person person ptcp.
sing. pl.
OE cēosan cēas curon coren
(¼ OHG kiosan kōs kurum gi-koran
OE wæs wǣron — ‘was/
OHG was wārum —
. The Vedic accent, which could in principle fall on
any syllable of the phonological word, faithfully
reflects the PIE situation. The accentuation system
of PIE was inherited into pre-PGmc.
. At some point after the shift of *p, *t, *k, *kw to *f,
*þ, *w, *ww by GL, all word-internal voiceless fri-
catives as well as the sibilant *s were voiced when
the closest preceding syllabic segment did not bear
the accent. This sound change is known as Verner’s
Law. This development generated new instances of
* , * , * , * w, which merged with the * , * , * ,
* w resulting from part of GL.
. Following the operation of VL, the movable accent
inherited from PIE was replaced by the later Ger-
manic system of fixed root stress.
As a result of Grimm’s and Verner’s Laws, the
obstruent system of early Proto-Germanic com-
prised far more fricatives than stops, an unnatural
distribution from a typological perspective. Later
changes served to repair this asymmetry, in particular
the development of voiced fricatives to stops in cer-
tain environments. Before the dialectal breakup of
Proto-Germanic, * , * , * , * w had already devel-
oped to *b, *d, *g, *gw after nasals, and * and *
had probably become *b and *d word-initially
as well. In the dialectal period, PGmc*z regularly
became*r in most Germanic languages.
Interesting relic forms confirm that VL also applied
to underlying word-initial fricatives when these oc-
curred in intervocalic position after a composition
vowel or reduplicated syllable; for example, OHG
mezzirahs ‘Messer, knife’ < PGmc *mati-zawsa- <
*-sókso- or *-soksó- (cf. OHG mezzisahs, OE mete-
seax, with analogical -s- after the simplex *sawsa-);
OIcel sera ‘I sowed’ < PGmc*se-zō < PIE*se-sóh1-h2e.
Although Gothic was generally quite conservative
in its treatment of the Germanic consonant system,
expected VL outcomes were much obscured by inner-
Gothic developments. In the principal parts of Gothic
strong verbs, analogical remodeling all but neutra-
lized the inherited grammatischer Wechsel in favor
of the voiceless fricatives of the present tense; cf. OE
drēosan, drēas, druron, droren ‘fall’: Go. driusan,
Verner’s Law 429
Table 3 Accentual pattern of Vedic
Pres. third person Perf. first person Perf. first Perf. mid.
sing. sing. person pl. ptcp.
vártate vavárta vavr tmá vāvr tāná-
˚ ˚
‘choose’ jós. ate jujós. a jujus. má jujus. ān. á-
00
)
were’
00 00
draus, drusun, *drusans; OE snı̄ðan, snāð, snidon,
sniden ‘cut’: Go. sneiþan, snaiþ, *sniþun, sniþans
‘(cut), harvest.’ Verner effects were also undone by
so-called Auslautsverhärtung (devoicing word-finally
and before final -s); cf. Go. dauþs ‘dead,’ gen. daudis
(-d- ¼ /2/). The full picture of VL in Gothic is far more
complex; a valuable, thoroughgoing investigation of
the problem may be found in Berhardsson (2001).
The past several decades have seen significant ad-
vances in our understanding of Indo-European accent
and ablaut patterns, with VL effects helping identify
mobile paradigms and derivational processes asso-
ciated with the proto-language. Important recent
scholarship has demonstrated the diagnostic value
of grammatischer Wechsel in recovering the under-
lying inflection and derivational history of Germanic
nominal forms, as the following forms illustrate:
. Proterokinetic inflection; for example, strong stem
PIE *pér-tu- m. ‘passage, crossing’ (> PGmc *ferþ/
u- > OIcel fj rðr m., Norw. fjord) : weak stem PIE
*pr-té - (> PGmc *fur u- > OE ford m. ‘shallow
˚
crossing’); PIE ĝénh1-ti- f. ‘birth, origin’ (> Gk.
génesis, Lat. gēns) : ĝnh1-té - (> PGmc *kundi-
˚
> OE gecynd n. ‘kind, nature’)
. Amphikinetic inflection; for example, strong stem
PIE *k̂áso-n- m. ‘gray one’ (> PGmc *wasan- >
OHG haso, NHG Hase) : weak stem PIE *k̂aso-n-0
(> PGmc *wazan- > OE hara, Engl. hare)
. Root-accented singular vs. suffix-accented collec-
tive plural; for example, pre-PGmc *pélth2o- n. >
PGmc *felþa- n. ‘field, expanse’ (> OHG feld n.
‘field’) : pre-PGmc *plth2áh2- > PGmc *ful ō(n)- f.
‘earth, ground, land’ ˚(> OE folde f. ‘earth’)
. Substantivization by accent shift of the type Gk.
leukós ‘white’ ! leûkos ‘whitefish’; cf. PIE
*bhorsó-‘stiff, erect’ (> PGmc. * arza- > OHG
(Bav.) parr ‘erectus’) ! *bhórso- m. ‘bristled one’
(> PGmc * arsa- m. > OHG bars, OE bærs m.,
Engl. bass).
Detailed, insightful surveys of the Germanic
material are presented in Schaffner (2001, 2003).
See also: Germanic Languages; Indo–European Lan-
guages; Neogrammarians; Sound Laws.
430 Verner’s Law
Bibliography
Bernhardsson H (2001). Verner’s law in Gothic. Ph.D. diss.,
Cornell University.
Rooth E (1974). Das Vernersche Gesetz in Forschung und
Lehre. Lund: Gleerup.
Schaffner S (2001). Das Vernersche Gesetz und der inner-
paradigmatische grammatische Wechsel des Urgerma-
nischen Nominalbereich. Innsbruck: Innsbrucker
Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft.
Schaffner S (2003). ‘Der Beitrag des Germanischen zur
Rekonstruktion der urindogermanischen Akzent- und
Vietnam: Language Situation
D H Nguyen
ß 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
This article is reproduced from the previous edition, volume 9,
pp. 4932–4933, ß 1994, Elsevier Ltd.
Vietnam is the crossroads of many civilizations. In
addition to the majority language spoken by the
ethnic Vietnamese (who call themselves ng i Viê. t,
ng i kinh), there are 53 ethnic minorities. The
languages of Vietnam have been classified into four
major families.
Language Families
Austroasiatic Languages
This family (ca. 51 184 000 speakers) makes up over
97% of the population and comprises 36 nationalities
belonging to five different language groups:
1. The Viet–M ng group (ca. 46 776 000 speakers)
makes up 88% of the population and four nation-
alities – Vietnamese, M ng, Th , and Ch t. The
686 082 speakers of M ng are spread over north
and central Vietnam (provinces of Hà S n Binh,
S n-la, V nh-Phú, Hoàng-liên-s n, etc). Th is
spoken by over 24 000 people in Thanh-hoá and
Nghê-t nh provinces, and Ch t counts almost
3000 speakers.
2. The Mon-Khmer group (over 1 300 000 speakers)
makes up 2.4% of the population and 21 ethnic
minorities – Khmer (Cambodian), Bahnar, Sedang,
K ho, Hrê, Mnong, Stieng, Bru, Khmu, Katu,
Taoi, Ma, Co, Jeh, Sinmun, Chrau, M ng,
Kháng, Rmam, Brau, and du. Of the total num-
ber (717 291) of Khmer speakers, 297 862 live in
Hâ. u-giang province. The remainder are highlan-
ders formerly referred to as ‘montagnards’ of
Central Vietnam.
Ablautklassen.’ In Tichy E, Wodtko D S & Irslinger B
(eds.) Indogermanisches Nomen. Derivation, Flexion
und Ablaut. Bremen: Hempen. 203–218.
Verner K (1877). ‘Eine Ausnahme der ersten Lautverschie-
bung.’ Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung 23,
97–130.
Verner K (1967). ‘An exception to the first sound shift.’ In
Lehmann W P (ed.) A reader in nineteenth-century his-
torical Indo–European linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press. 132–163.
3. The Miao-Yao group (760 040 speakers) makes up
1.5% of the population and is composed of three
minority languages – Hmong (Miao ¼ Mèo), Mien
(Yao ¼ Mán), and Pà-th n – spoken primarily in
mountain areas of north and central Vietnam.
4. The Tay-Thai group (2 344 000 speakers) makes
up 4.4% of the population and is composed of
eight minority languages – Tày (901 802 speakers
spread over 23 provinces, with Cao-bǎ`ng as their
main habitat), Thái (766 720 speakers scattered
over seven provinces, especially S n-la), Nùng
(559 702 speakers scattered over 12 provinces,
including La. ng-s n), San Chay (77 104 speakers,
nearly half of them in Hà-tuyên), Jeh (27 913
speakers in Hà-tuyên, Lai-châu, and Hoàng-
liên-s n), Lao, L , and Bo-Y.
5. The Kadai group (over 12 000 speakers) consists
of Lachi, Laha, Co-lao, and Pu Péo, the latter
subgroup having only 300 speakers.
Austronesian Languages
This group, formerly called Malayo–Polynesian,
counts 467 000 speakers (0.9% of the population) and
is composed of five ‘montagnard’ languages – Jarai,
Rhade, Cham, Roglai, and Chu-ru – among which
Cham is spoken in coastal provinces, particularly
Thuâ. n-h i province, by descendants of the ancient
Kingdom of Champa.
Sino–Tibetan Languages
1. The Han or Chinese group (over one million
speakers) is composed of Chinese (¼ Hoa) – it is
the most important minority language, spoken all
over the country and numbering 475 739 speakers
in Saigon alone – Sán Dı̀u and Ngái.
2. The Tibeto–Burman group (over 20 000 speakers)
is composed of six minority languages – Hani, Phù