Zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache By Wilhelm Scherer. New edition with an introductory article by Kurt R. Jan-Kowsky (review)

BOOK NOTICES 885 other grab-bag), and the genitive plural of some nouns which are not easily predictable. Verb entries contain valency (nominative, ergative), meaning, and references to their employment in the texts as well as idiomatic expressions. All entries where borrowing has been established or is highly probable include the language of origin and the word in that language. Although this is a pioneer effort, the author has conceptualized the presentation of materials for a grammar of Hunzib in an outstandingly easy-to-use and rational manner. Even if a reader is not interested in Hunzib or East Caucasian languages, this book should be of interest as a model of how to write a superior grammar for any language that needs archiving . Lincom Europa is to be thanked for publishing manuscripts which are important to only a select few specialists (or broad comparativists)—in a paperback version that is priced affordably. In fact, the only small negative comment I would make about this book is that a better binding method should be found since even casual use causes pages to become detached from the spine. [Partrick C. Ryan] Zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache. By Wilhelm Scherer. New edition with an introductory article by Kurt R. JanKOwsKY . (Amsterdam classics in linguistics 16.) Amsterdam & New York: John Benjamins, 1995. Pp. 492. Wilhelm Scherer's Zur geschichte der deutschen Sprache appeared to mixed reviews in 1868: InRevue de linguistique et dephilologie comparée 2, Honorée Chavée offered an enthusiastic "Bravo!" while Adalbert Kuhn in KZ 18 claimed (understatedly in the light of the rest of his review) that S's analysis of his far-reaching data was 'nicht immer den richtigen'; Hermann Paul, despite a 'devastating review' of the second edition of 1878 m Jenaer Literaturzeitung admitted that 'die deutsche Grammatik und auch die weitere vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft sehr gef ördert ist' (cited by Jankowsky, xxiv). In his introductory essay (ix-xxx), J does an admirablejob of situating S's work both within its linguistic context and within the general intellectual and cultural movements of his time, particularly in relation to the work of Grimm and Schleicher. 'It was Scherer who first developed and applied a methodology for a rigorous and meaningful investigation of analogy as an important factor in language change' (xviii); the same could be said for his use of contemporary phonological analysis. J's introduction concludes with listings of 'Selected writings of Wilhelm Scherer'; and 'Secondary literature on Wilhelm Scherer', including the reviews mentioned above, followed by an invaluable list of 'Works referred to in Scherer (1868)', supplied by J to flesh out the abbreviated references given within the text by S himself and an 'Index of biographical names' listing scholars mentioned by S. S's work is divided into two sections: 'Zur Lautlehre ' and 'Zur Formenlehre'. The first contains an 'Einleitung' (3-5), followed by discussions on 'Ablaut ' (6-31), 'Grimm's Gesetz' (32-91), and 'Die germanische Auslautsgesetze' (92-166). Of these the most interesting is the discussion, based on Brücke's Grundzuge der Physiologie und Systematik der Sprachlaute (Vienna: C. Gerold's Sohn, 1865), of phonological underpinnings to Grimm's Law, which S takes to be a pull-chain reaction instigated by the 'Lockerung des Mundcanalverschlusses und Aufhebung des Kehlkopfverschlusses' (84) resulting in the shift from voiceless stop to voiceless fricative. The discussion on ablaut focuses on the environments in which the base vowel a changes to e or o, which theory was already outdated at the time of writing. This is attributable to S's tendency, rightly criticized by Kuhn, to give predominance to Sanskrit and Avestan over equally pertinent data from Greek in his reconstructions. The section on auslaut includes a discussion of the shift to root-accentuation in Germanic; S takes this as a pyschological addition of 'Intensität und Lebhaftigkeit' (156) to the morpheme bearing the primary semantic load, attributing the accent shift, at least in part, to the alliterative structure of Germanic poetry. The discussions in Section 2 deal with issues of 'Zur conjugation' (171-212; this section particularly aroused the scorn of Kuhn, who suggested that the book would be better ifit were omitted), 'Das Personalpronomen ' (213-361; under...