shape exists in many IN languages. In Old Jav. the WB kan has been combined with the formative syllable pa-, in Sund. with ha-. — The IN lexicography of the future must perform this part of its work more precisely than has been the case hitherto.
343. In reality the occurrence of phonetic phenomena in IN is certainly not attended by any greater irregularity than it is in IE. We observe in IN the strictest regularity in a very great nmnber of cases. Brugmann KvG, § 19, 7, remarks: “That certain phonetic changes take place in regular conformity with some law, is often enough an obvious fact, e.g. the change of Original IE -m at the end of a sentence into -n in Greek” . We can say precisely the same of the treatment of Original IN -m in Hova, for it appears there invariably as -na = n + the supporting vowel, e.g. in inuna < Original IN inum, “to drink” .
344. Though on the one hand we observe in many cases the strictest consistency in IN, yet on the other we also sometimes observe the contrary, but such instances are not more frequent than in IE nor do they dift'er in kind from IE cases.
345. There is a series of phonetic phenomena, in IN as in IE, in which science neither can, nor does, expect absolute invariability. Such are metathesis, assimilation, dissimilation, and the like. But even here IN not infrequently displays a thorough-going consistency (see § 241).
346. A strikingly large percentage of the IN vocabulary is of onomatopoeic origin ; and it has already been observed in § 17 that onomatopoeic formations may evade the operation of phonetic laws. For the actions of beating, tapping, and pounding, there are in the various IN languages the interjections tuk or duk or puk or bug. Now from these interjections are derived a large number of WB's, whose meaning preserves the fundamental idea of beating or the like, or has diverged from it by transference. Examples: Karo tuktuk, “to knock”; Gayo tumbuk, “to beat” ; Malay tumbuq, “to pound”; Old Javanese gebug, “to beat”; Karo batuk, “cough” ; Malagasy