Proto-Indo-European desiderative

There were several distinct types of Proto-Indo-European desiderative formations. Many daughter languages, such as Ancient Greek or Latin, converted the original desideratives into future formations. However, the original desiderative meaning is still preserved in Indo-Iranian.

*(h₁)se-desiderative

Ordinary

This thematic suffix formed desiderative verbs, meaning "to want to do". Ringe reconstructs for this formation the ablaut paradigm *(é)-(h₁)s-eti ~ *(é)-(h₁)s-onti, which contains the accented full grade of the root. Ancient Greek future forms such as δείξω (deíxō)—the future form of δείκνυμι (deíknumi)—suggest that, in Proto-Indo-European, the desiderative suffix was applied to the bare root, not the verbs themselves. The Proto-Indo-European desiderative is the source for the future tense in a variety of daughter languages, with only Indo-Iranian retaining the original desiderative meaning. In Latin, certain third-conjugation verbs likely derive from original desideratives, such as vīsō ("to look at, see"), which probably reflects a Proto-Indo-European verb *wéydseti ("to want to see"), itself from the root *weyd- ("to see").

Despite the reconstruction of a laryngeal in the suffix, numerous verbs within Ancient Greek form their future paradigms purely via the addition of a thematic s-suffix, which may result from the deletion of the laryngeal between stops and the *-s-. The linguist Jaan Puhvel suggests that standard Greek sigmatic future forms may reflect the deletion of the laryngeal when placed between two nonsyllabic consonants. If this theory is accepted, then a term such as "ἄξουσι" ("áxousi") could still be explained from Proto-Indo-European *Heǵ-Hsonti. However, in Ancient Greek, verb stems ending in nasals or liquids generally create futures utilizing the suffix -έω (-éō), likely as a consequence of the e-coloring laryngeal *h₁ in the desiderative suffix. Future forms such as μενέω (menéō) may derive from earlier *menehō, itself from *ménh₁seti. According to Puhvel, the laryngeal likely remained present when placed subsequent to root-final *r, *l, *m, and *n, thereby allowing for the preservation of the laryngeal in hypothetical pre-forms such as *ménh₁seti. Further evidence for an original laryngeal perhaps appears in Celtic, where the Old Irish s-subjunctive has been derived from an *-(a)se- morpheme, which itself perhaps resulted from the vocalization of the laryngeal as *a.

Reduplicated

In Sanskrit, there exists a particular type of thematic desiderative class formed via í-reduplication and a sa-suffix. For instance, consider the desiderative term nínīṣati, which belongs to the root √nī-. However, roots marked by the vowel -u- typically formed desideratives utilizing u-reduplication, such as the term jughukṣati, which belongs to the root √guh-. Whereas the Sanskrit reduplicated desiderative was typically marked by a weak root vowel, certain roots with a final resonant produced lengthened grade desideratives. Puhvel suggests that these formations regularly reflect a Proto-Indo-European sequence of the shape *-RHs-, in which the resonant and the consonant *-s- were separated an intervening laryngeal. For instance, the Sanskrit desiderative cíkīrṣati can be construed as the expected outcome of Proto-Indo-European *kʷí-kʷr̥-(h₁)s-eti. Regardless, this specific type of desiderative may have existed at the Proto-Indo-European level, as it also possibly the source of certain Old Irish and Ancient Greek reduplicated futures. In Ancient Greek, there exist terms such as Homeric "δεδέξομαι" ("dedéxomai"), a future form of δέχομαι ("dékhomai"). Such reduplicated futures also appear in Attic Greek—Aristophanes, a 5th-century BCE Athenian playwright, utilizes the reduplicated future form "κεκλαύσεται" ("keklaúsetai"). In Old Irish, numerous verbs showcase s-futures with reduplication, such as guididcode: sag promoted to code: sg —the future form of which was gigseacode: sag promoted to code: sg . However, the linguist Frederik Kortlandt argues that the endings of the Old Irish reduplicated s-future are indicative an originally athematic paradigm, in contrast to the thematic nature of the Sanskrit reduplicated desiderative.

*sye-desiderative

Ringe reconstructs this paradigm as *(∅)-sy-éti ~ *(∅)-sy-ónti, though Lundquist and Yates instead reconstruct *h₁s-ye-ti. According to Jasanoff, there is evidence in Sanskrit for a laryngeal within the suffix, namely the -i- present in the future forms of roots ending with a resonant. For instance, the Sanskrit root kṛ- ("to do, make") forms a future of the shape kariṣyáti, where the -i- perhaps reflects an earlier *h₁ laryngeal. However, Sanskrit roots that do not end in a resonant also generally do not form futures using the suffix -iṣyáti, such as the root vac- ("to speak, say"), which produces a future of the shape vakṣyáti. This verbal formation is reflected in the Sanskrit future-forming suffix -syáti and possibly also the Lithuanian future paradigm. Given the restriction to one specific area of the Indo-European world, it may have been a dialectal regionalism within the proto-language. However, the *sye-suffix is perhaps attested in Gaulish future forms such as pissiumi ("I shall see").

*s-presents

Athematic

There is evidence of a class of athematic s-presents in Hittite that showcases *CéC-ti ~ CØC-énti ablaut, as reflected in terms such as kane/iššzi ("to recognize"), which—according to Kloekhorst—derives from *ǵnéh₃-s-ti ~ *ǵnh₃-s-énti. Jasanoff instead opts to reconstruct a type of Narten s-present characterized by *ḗ ~ *é ablaut, citing the -i- in Lithuanian dual and plural sigmatic verbs such as dúosime ("to give"), Latin optative forms such as faxim, and certain Old Irish unreduplicated s-aorists as evidence. Ultimately, Jasanoff proposes that the imperfect of this Narten s-present class was the source of the later sigmatic aorist formations in the various daughter languages. Kloekhorst, however, suggests none of the Hittite s-verbs display any evidence for acrostatic Narten ablaut, and instead, where the original ablaut pattern is recoverable, it always shows *é ~ Ø alteration in mi-verbs and *ó ~ Ø gradation in ḫi-verbs. Moreover, Kloekhorst notes the existence of alternative explanations for all of the aforementioned evidence from the non-Anatolian branches adduced in support of Jasanoff's theory.

According to de Vaan, it is perhaps possible that the Latin term ignōrō is an s-present that may continue the same pre-form as Hittite kane/iššzi. The linguist Reiner Lipp suggests that the athematic s-present class gave rise to the sigmatic desiderative of Ancient Greek, though—during the transition towards Greek—the paradigm underwent thematicization. Another Hittite s-present form, tákšzi ("to devise, endeavor"), which possibly derives from *téḱ-s-ti, may parallel the Latin s-present texō ("to weave"). These forms are collectively assigned to an earlier athematic s-desiderative by the LIV, which argues that the Hittite term underwent a semantic shift from "to desire to weave" to simply "to undertake, strive." However, according to the linguist H. Craig Melchert, neither the Latin nor Hittite forms reveal any evidence for original desiderative semantics.

Jasanoff contends that the original Hittite athematic s-present class may have simultaneously expressed desiderative, inchoative, and iterative semantics, arguing that these three verbal senses are generally similar and that it is common for desideratives to evolve into iterative or inchoative verbs. In particular, Jasanoff suggests that Hittite kane/iššzi probably reflects an earlier inchoative meaning such as "to come into awareness," which was perhaps later assumed by the later *sḱé-present *ǵn̥h₃sḱéti. However, Jasanoff also argues that the root *h₂eys- ("to search"), which—according to Jasanoff—had an inherently desiderative meaning, also reveals evidence of specifically desiderative verbal formation. Namely, according to Jasanoff, the full-grade vocalism of Old Armenian haycʻem ("to ask, supplicate") and the lengthened-grade of Old Lithuanian ieszku ("to seek")—both of which are cognates with the zero-grade verb *h₂isḱéti—suggests analogical remodeling under the influence of a sigmatic desiderative from the same root. Kloekhorst has criticized Jasanoff proposal of a simultaneously iterative, inchoative, and desiderative meaning, denigrating the ideas as premised exclusively upon "circumstantial" evidence.

Thematic

Ringe additionally reconstructs a type of thematic s-present, for which he supplies the ablaut paradigm *(é)-s-eti ~ *(é)-s-onti. There are a scant number of terms in the Indo-European languages that attest to this formation, though Fortson cites examples such as ἀέξω ("aéxō"). Kölligan and Jasanoff, however, explain this form as derived from an original sigmatic desiderative. Kölligan provides numerous other examples of supposed lexicalized desideratives, such as Old High German blāsan, which he derives from a PIE form of the shape *bʰleh₁(s)-, though Kroonen alternatively ascribes the term to an original sigmatic aorist. In certain cases, the lexicalized desiderative may have provided the basis of an entirely new root. For instance, the root *ḱlews- ("to hear") perhaps emerged via the reanalysis of the desiderative *ḱléwseti ("to listen"), itself from the unextended root *ḱlew- ("to hear").

sā-nominals

The linguist Alan Nussbaum argues for a particular type of morphological process wherein s-desiderative presents produced deverbal nouns. For instance, the Old Latin s-present verb capsō ("will take") coexists with the nouns capsa ("box") and capsus ("enclosure"). Nussbaum argues that this process remained productive in other Indo-European languages, citing the Sanskrit reduplicated desiderative jigīṣati (“to desire victory”), whence the noun jigīṣā́ (“desire for victory”). These nouns formed the basis for later denominative verbs, such as axō ("to name"), which ultimately derives from an s-enlargement of the root *h₁eǵ- (“to say”) that is also continued by Tocharian B ākṣäṃ (“will announce”).

See also

• Proto-Indo-European language

• Proto-Indo-European verbs

References

Bibliography

• Adams, Douglas Q. (2013), A Dictionary of Tocharian B: Revised and Greatly Enlarged, Leiden Studies in Indo-European, vol. 10 (2nd ed.), Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi, ISBN 978-90-420-3671-0
• de Vaan, Michiel (2008), Lubotsky, Alexander (ed.), Etymological Dictionary of Latin, Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series, vol. 7, Leiden: Brill, ISBN 978-90-04-16797-1, ISSN 1574-3586, OCLC 225873936, OL 23157929M
• Fortson, Benjamin W. IV (2010), Indo-European Language and Culture (Second ed.), Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 978-1-4051-8896-8
• Giannakis, Georgios (1992-08-01). "Reduplication as a morphological marker in the Indo-European languages: Reduplicated presents". WORD. 43 (2): 161–196. doi:10.1080/00437956.1992.12098298. ISSN 0043-7956.
• Jasanoff, Jay H. (2019-12-02). "The sigmatic forms of the Hittite verb". Indo-European Linguistics. 7 (1): 13–71. doi:10.1163/22125892-00701001. ISSN 2212-5884.
• Jasanoff, Jay H. (2019b), "Doing Things with Word Equations: A Retrospective on Hittite and the Indo-European Verb Since HIEV", in Goldstein, David M.; Jamison, Stephanie W.; Vine, Brent (eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, vol. 35, Hempen Verlag, ISBN 9783944312767
• Kloekhorst, Alwin (2008). Lubotsky, Alexander (ed.). Etymological Dictionary Of The Hittite Inherited Lexicon (PDF). Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series. Vol. 5. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-16092-7. ISSN 1574-3586.
• Kloekhorst, Alwin (2009). "Hittite kane/išš->zi 'to recognize' and other s-extended verbs". Protolanguage and Prehistory.
• Kocharov, Petr; Shatskov, Andrey (2018). "Towards a classification of PIE root extensions". Historische Sprachforschung / Historical Linguistics. 131: 210–226. doi:10.13109/hisp.2018.131.1.210. ISSN 0935-3518. JSTOR 27032364.
• Kölligan, Daniel (2018-12-05). "A new look at the Greek desiderative". Indo-European Linguistics. 6 (1): 95–116. doi:10.1163/22125892-00601006. ISSN 2212-5884.
• Kortlandt, Frederik (January 1, 2007), Italo-Celtic Origins and Prehistoric Development of the Irish Language, Leiden Studies in Indo-European, vol. 14, Brill, doi:10.1163/9789401204170_018, ISBN 978-94-012-0417-0, retrieved 2025-12-12
• Kortlandt, Frederick (2008), Kulikov, Leonid; Rusanov, Maxim (eds.), "The Origin of the Indo-Iranian Desiderative", Indologica, Orientalia et Classica (20), Moscow: Russian State University for the Humanities, ISBN 978-5-7281-1028-6{{citation}}: CS1 maint: work parameter with ISBN (link)
• Kroonen, Guus (2013). Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic. Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series, 11. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 978-90-04-18340-7.
• Lazzeroni, Romano (1998), "Sanskrit", in Ramat, Anna Giacalone; Ramat, Paolo (eds.), The Indo-European Languages, Routledge, doi:10.4324/9780203880647, ISBN 9781134921874
• Lipp, Reiner (2023-04-24). "The Latin future tense formation of the type faxō and its Italic background". In Machajdíková, Barbora; Eliášová Buzássyová, Ludmila (eds.). Greek – Latin – Slavic: Aspects of Linguistics and Grammatography (1 ed.). Gunter Narr Verlag. doi:10.24053/9783823395270. ISBN 978-3-8233-9527-0.
• Lundquist, Jesse; Yates, Anthony D. (2018-06-11), Klein, Jared; Joseph, Brian; Fritz, Matthias (eds.), "122. The morphology of Proto-Indo-European" (PDF), Volume 3 Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics, De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 2079–2195, doi:10.1515/9783110542431-043, ISBN 978-3-11-054243-1, retrieved 2025-10-14{{citation}}: CS1 maint: work parameter with ISBN (link)
• Melchert, Craig H. (2018), "Semantics and Etymology of Hittite takš-", Farnah: Indo-Iranian and Indo-European Studies in Honor of Sasha Lubotsky (PDF), Beech Stave Press
• Nussbaum, Alan J. (2021). Tarsi, Matteo (ed.). "Spēs Exploration". Studies in General and Historical Linguistics Offered to Jón Axel Harđarson on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday. Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft. 166. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck. ISBN 978-3-85124-753-4. ISSN 1816-3920.
• Pozza, Marianna (2016-11-30). "Traces of "Weaving" in Hittite: A Brief Overview" (PDF). Athens Journal of Philology. 3 (4): 227–238. doi:10.30958/ajp.3.4.2. Archived (PDF) from the original on April 30, 2019.
• Puhvel, Jaan (1953). "Laryngeals and the Indo-European Desiderative". Language. 29 (4): 454–456. doi:10.2307/409954. ISSN 0097-8507. JSTOR 409954.
• Ringe, Don (2006). From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic (PDF). A Linguistic History of English (1st ed.). New York City: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-928413-9. OCLC 64554645. OL 7405151M. Wikidata Q131605459.
• Rix, Helmut (2001) [1998], Lexikon der Indogermanischen Verben [Lexicon of Indo-European Verbs] (in German), L. Reichert, ISBN 3-89500-219-4, OCLC 47295102
• Schmidt, Karl Horst (1997), "Archaism and innovation in Proto-Celtic?", in Hock, Hans H. (ed.), Historical, Indo-European, and Lexicographical Studies: A Festschrift for Ladislav Zgusta on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs [TiLSM], vol. 90, New York: De Gruyter Mouton, doi:10.1515/9783110809718, ISBN 978-3-11-012884-0, ISSN 1861-4302
• Sihler, Andrew L. (1995), New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-508345-8
• Stifter, David (2024). "The rise of gemination in Celtic". Open Research Europe. 3: 24. doi:10.12688/openreseurope.15400.2. ISSN 2732-5121. PMC 10446051. PMID 37645509.
• Weiss, Michael (2010), "Morphology and Word Formation", A Companion to the Ancient Greek Language, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp. 104–119, doi:10.1002/9781444317398.ch8, ISBN 978-1-4443-1739-8, retrieved 2025-10-14{{citation}}: CS1 maint: work parameter with ISBN (link)
• Weiss, Michael L. (2022). "Italic". In Olander, Thomas (ed.). The Indo-European Language Family: A Phylogenetic Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-49979-8. Retrieved 2025-11-12.
• Yamazaki, Yoko (2022). "The prehistory of kláusti, klausýti, and their related forms revisited". Lietuvių kalba. 17 (17): 49–60. doi:10.15388/LK.2022.4.