Luwian and Sanskrit action nouns in *- i ̯-eh2 -

TheLuwiannominalclassof commongender a -stems,whichhasbeenarguedtoreflect Proto-Indo-European stems in *- eh2 -, has not yet been explored to a full extent. In Cuneiform Luwian, a number of action nouns in - a - c. derived from verbs in - i(ya) - (< *- i̯e/o -) have been noticed by scholars, but a larger analysis of all examples including Hieroglyphic Luwian is still lacking. It is the goal of the present paper to fill this gap. After a synchronic analysis of all examples, their stem formation will be compared to a similarderivationalprocessfoundinSanskrit.Consequently,thecomparativeevidence will shed light on the function of the suffix *- eh2 - in Proto-Indo-European, including Anatolian.

In this section, Luwian verbal abstract nouns in -iy-a-c.and their derivational bases will be extensively analyzed in both the Cuneiform and Hieroglyphic Luwian corpora.Sasseville (2014-15: 106-07) argues that the Luwian nominal class of non-mutated a-stems should be equated with the Lycian class of a-stems going back to common gender stems in *-eh2-(likewise Norbruis forthcoming).The lack of i-mutation in this class is the prime argument for the equation.The second argument is the Luwian dative singular in -a, which is equivalent to the Lycian locative singular in -a, both being confined to nonmutated common gender a-stems.2Therefore, while investigating the Luwian suffix -iya-c., it will be important to pay attention, first, to whether it ever takes i-mutation and, second, with which dative singular ending it is inflected.In the remainder of this section, action nouns in -iya-c.with an attested deriva-Indo-European Linguistics 8 (2020) 275-288 tional base will be discussed first, followed by those without an attested base.
We begin with the clearest examples.
From a Luwian perspective, tarāwiya-c. is clearly a derivative in -a-c. of the Luwian verb tarāwi-(ti) 'to hand over, to give over (to a god)' .The verb can be used in the negative sense of 'handing an enemy over'  or in a positive sense of 'handing (offerings) over to the gods' (KUB 35.54 ii 35′-36′).Therefore, since it can be interpreted formally as an action noun with positive semantics, a meaning such as 'the action of handing offerings over to the gods' or in other words '(religious) commitment' is suggested here.On the other hand, the meaning 'control' suggested by Melchert in the sense of 'management' or 'administrative control (over the land)' cannot be excluded.Until further attestations in different contexts are discovered, the passage cited above may be tentatively translated as: They must generate in the land goods, commitment (or control?), peace, goodness and growth.
Based on the few attested forms, one can notice that neither i-mutation nor contraction occurs in the derivational sequence -iya-(< *-i̯ -eh2-).

2.6
Walliya-/ BONUS-li-ia-c.The substantive walliya-c.is found once in a Hittite context and translated as 'glory' (Kloekhorst 2008: 948, HEG W-Z: 260): gen.sg.wa-al-li-ia-aš (KUB 19.13 i 48).It also occurs once in a Hieroglyphic Luwian inscription, in which servants incised someone's name with glory or pride: abl./instr.BONUS-li-ia-ti (ANCOZ 8, §7).The derivational base is surely the verb walli-(ti) 'to raise' attested in Cuneiform Luwian.Thus, walliya-c.can be interpreted as an action noun in -a-c.derived from the verb walli-(ti) 'to raise' with the meaning 'raising, exalting' → 'glory' .However, the two attestations available do not tell us anything regarding the presence or absence of i-mutation in this noun.Furthermore, no dative/locative singular form is attested so far.Therefore, the morphological interpretation of this lexeme as an action noun in *-eh2-is dependent on the other examples presented here.

2.10
Zaršiya-c.The last potential action noun in -iy-a-c., which was also adduced by Starke (1990: 37), is zaršiya-c.'guarantee, safe conduct' found solely in Hittite contexts: nom.sg.za-ar-ši-ia-aš (KUB 14.3 ii 63), ii 1), zaar-ši-ia (KUB 14.3 ii 65), za-ar-ši-ia (KUB 8.79 rev. 4).This substantive shows a dative singular in -a and a lack of contraction or i-mutation in the sequence -iya-.Morphologically, it can be interpreted as an action noun derived from an unattested verb *zarši-(ti) '? ' .6Based on the preceding analysis, verbal abstract nouns in -a-c.are derived from verbs in -i-(ti) (< *-i̯ é/ó-) or in -iya-(i) (cf.Hitt.-āi-/-i(ya)-( ḫ i)).The large number of examples demonstrates that this process is highly productive in Luwian.As to the prehistory of the suffix -a-, the lack of contraction and of Indo-European Linguistics 8 (2020) 275-288 i-mutation combined with the dative/locative singular ending -a speaks for an origin in PIE *-eh2-.Consequently, there is now evidence for a derivational chain creating verbal abstract nouns in *-eh2-based on verbal stems in *-i̯ e/o-in Anatolian.In the next section, a parallel derivational chain in another branch of the Indo-European family will be addressed.
There is an existing view that the derivational chain described above owes its existence to a primary suffix -ya-or -yú-, which was derived directly from verbal roots (AiGr.II, 2: 243).For example, Stüber (2012Stüber ( : 127-28, 2015: 113) : 113) takes as prototype Skt.sarvavidya-f.'all-knowing' ← ved-(against older-looking vidaf.AiGr.II, 2: 247) and śayya-f.'warehouse' ← śay-'to lie' (against older śaya-in śayasu AiGr.II, 2: 247), because she posits that the origin of the abstract suffix *-i̯ eh2-lies in the collective form of the neuter suffix *-i̯ o-.However, sarvavidya-is much more likely to represent a late formation instead of an inherited process, which would indicate that the suffix was metanalyzed from -y-a-to -ya-within the history of Indo-Iranian.In the next section, we will turn to the origin of the process and address the Celtic data cited by Stüber.
In sum, having established the process *CR̥ C-i̯ -eh2-for Luwian, Sanskrit and additionally Old Irish, its genesis can be posited for the Proto-Indo-European stage.The development of the morphological process can be postulated as follows:

Conclusion
The derivational chain of deradical *-i̯ e/o-+ *-eh2-building verbal abstract nouns occurs in at least three branches of the Indo-European family, i.e.Anatolian, Indo-Iranian and Celtic.On the basis of the comparative data adduced above, the creation of this derivational chain is argued to have begun already 14 LIV2: 217.For the Old Irish verb, see Cowgill (1980: 49-59). in the Proto-Indo-European period.Two further developments of this derivational type can be observed in these languages.In Luwian and Sanskrit, the suffix *-eh2-was extended to denominal verbs in *-i̯ e/o-, and then, in Sanskrit and Old Irish, it seems to have been metanalyzed to *-i̯ eh2-.These two innovations must however be considered late and independent.