Etymological dictionary of the Kartvelian languages. 2nd edn. By Georgij A. Klimov. Ed. by Werner Winter and Richard A. Rhodes (review)

BOOK NOTICES 475 Etymological dictionary of the Kartvelian languages. 2nd edn. By Georgij A. Klimov. Ed. by Werner Winter and Richard A. Rhodes (Trends in linguistics 16.) Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1998. Pp. xiii, 505. This is a revised and substantially expanded English -language version of the late author's Etimologicheskii slovar' kartvel'skikh iazykov (Moscow: RAS Institute ofLinguistics, 1964). It contains about 1,400 lexical entries as opposed to the 954 included in the 1964 version. Much of this expansion was made possible thanks to the appearance of such works as A dictionary ofGeorgian dialects (Aleksandre Glonti, Tbilisi: Ganatleba, 1984) and Old Georgian dictionary (Zurab Sarzhveladze, Tbilisi: Tbilisi University Press, 1995), which permitted the comparison of many forms not found in the lexicon of standard contemporary Georgian. The reconstructed head words, given in Latinized transcription arranged in an order corresponding to the contemporary Georgian alphabet, represent one of two successive stages in the development of the Kartvehan language family . Forms marked CK (fewer than 500 entries) are based on cognates found in all three branches of the family (Svan, Zan, and Georgian) and represent a protolanguage (Common Kartvelian) assumed to have been spoken earlier than 2600 bc Forms marked GZ are those reconstructed from cognates found in Georgian and Zan only and represent a protolanguage spoken after Svan had broken off but before Georgian and Zan began to diverge in about 600 bc Over 1,200 of the entries have daughter forms in both Georgian and Zan (Mingrelian or Laz), in contrast to only 480 cognates involving Svan and Georgian and 415 involving Svan and Zan. A minority of entries deals with grammatical morphology, but the dictionary's primary focus is lexical, and no attempt is made to provide a detailed overview of the phonology or grammar of either Common Kartvelian or Georgian-Zan. In addition to the wealth of Kartvelian lexical information provided here for the first time in English, this book also amasses new materials comparing Common Kartvelian and Proto-Indo-European on the one hand and Georgian and Armenian on the other. Although the Georgian-Armenian lexical parallels are obviously due to historically documented contact, the many IE-Kartvelian parallels unearthed by the author are as yet unexplained. Ifdue to contact, these parallels could shed light on the location of the IE and Kartvelian homelands; if due to descent from a common source, this material may prove to be a valuable first step in documenting a deep genetic relationship linking IE with at least one other language family. The dictionary is extremely well edited and attractively printed. A foreward (v) by Werner Winter explains how the book was brought to print despite the untimely death of its author. A preface (vii-xiii) discusses glottochronological evidence supporting the breakup of Common Kartvelian at about 4600 bp and Georgian-Zan at 2600 bp, as well as evidence placing the location of Common Kartvelian in the central and western portion of the Caucasian foothills , from where it expanded southward, absorbing various languages presumably related to present-day North Caucasian; more recently, Georgian later expanded westward at the expense of Zan languages. Most of the book consists of the etymological dictionary proper (1-345) followed by a list of sources for the forms cited in the comparisons (347-48) and an extensive bibliography of other works dealing with diachronic Kartvelian linguistics (349-62). Several indexes are also provided for easy cross-referencing with entries in the dictionary: an alphabetized list of Proto-Kartvelian words, stems, and affixes (363-80); an English-language list of concepts documented in the Proto-Kartvelian lexicon (380-98); and alphabetized listings of the Georgian (398-438), Mengrelian (438-63), Laz (463-81), and Svan (481-97) lexical elements represented in the dictionary. A final section (497-504) lists the ProtoIndo -European words and stems, as well as words from Armenian and a variety ofother languages mentioned in the dictionary. Publication of this dictionary, compiled by seminal figures of twentieth century linguistics, is destined to have a major impact on the study of Kartvelian languages outside the former Soviet Union. [Edward T. Vajda, Western Washington University.] Studies in endangered languages. Ed. by Kazuto Matsumura. (International...