So?inds and Inflections of the Cyprian Dialect. 3 1 



12. i+i in the Bronze Tablet does not contract, but becomes 

 iji (in accordance with § 18, i, c), vir:. in tttoXiJl Coll. 60, 6. 



Aa' Berl. Phil. IVoch., 1886, No. 41, ix. remains uncon- 

 tracted after the disappearance of the f. Elsewhere i + i con- 

 tracts to I, z^/^. in rVlaipi (for rco 'Oalpii) Coll. 45 ; 'Oaipt 

 /2. Hall {yonr. Am. Or. Soc, xi., p. 216, 222) now reads rw 

 'Ovacript and 'Ovacript, in these inscriptions, which however 

 does not affect the question of contraction. 



13. + contracts to «, frequent in the gen. sing, of -o- 

 stems ; e.g: apyvpco (for *upyvpoo) Coll. 60, 6 ; Tt/xoSd/jLO) 23, 

 3 ; Tft) 29 ; 31, ct pass ; KarepopKwv (for *KaTe/:6pKoov) 60, i. 



14. \6e Coll. hi ; ^apew 133 ; x^^^ ^^' ^ > (t^ToSaKcSv 103 

 are all too uncertain to be taken into consideration in this 

 connection. 



15. 



Compensative L engthening. 



The extent to which this prevailed in Cyprian is uncertain, 

 owing to the nature of the syllabary, which does not distin- 

 guish the long and short vowels. 



The question of compensative lengthening presents itself 

 chiefly in the development of the group -avs and -ovs, and here 

 the problem is still further complicated by the fact that the 

 nasal is regularly omitted in Cyprian before a consonant in 

 the same word (see § 23, i). Hence the syllables -a' se' can 

 stand for -ds, -ds or even -avs- So also -o ' se ' may stand for 

 -OS, -ws or -ovs. 



Under these circumstances it is perhaps simplest to follow 

 the model of the closely related Arcadian and write a{v)6p(o- 

 TTo?, ace. plu., Coll. 60, 3 {cf. Arcadian to'^ avvLcrTafxevo<i, 

 Coll. 1222, 51) ; so kcitto'^ 60, 30; r6<; 60, 3, 10, 11, 23, 30; 

 Kacnyvr]ro<i 60, 3, 1 1 ; l-yj^aiJiivo<i 60, 3 ; fut. ind. e^o{v)aL 60, 

 31 ; l'co{v)cn 60, 31 {cf. Arcadian Kplvcova-i, Traperd^wvaL Coll. 

 1222, 5, 15) ; ace. plu. of -d- stems, ra'^ 60, 28, 29; 71 ; raahe 

 60, 28, 29, 30 ; Fpi'jTd^ 60, 28, 29. 



If htix(oo'i<i (for 8i/jicoa-oL<i, see § 20, 2), Deecke's reading in 

 Coll. 69, were certain and the inscription really a hexameter, 



161 



