1. GEIGER, in his SghG., § 21, remarks “Vowel-levelling rests on the same tendency of making the vowels of a word uniform as the vowel-assimilation. It is the equalization in two successive syllables of a —i (e) and i (e) —a to e —e, and of a — u (o) and u (o) — a to o — o.”

This term “Vowel-levelling ” is redundant, for if this term is to be used it should apply equally well to vowel-assimilation. It is clear that, for instance, a — e: e — e or a — o: o — oisas much vowel-assimilation as, for instance, i — u: u —u or u —i:i —i. It is also difficult to reconcile the fact that a — i, which was shown to become i — i [cf. § 14], or i —a, which was shown to become a —a [cf. § 18], should also become e — e, and again that a —u, which was shown to become u — u [cf. § 15], or u —a, which was shown to become a —a [cf. § 21], should also become o — o. This e —e and o —o are not direct developments in Sgh. but are the result of contaminations which are discussed under the various categories given below, and therefore Geiger's theory of “Vowel-levelling ” falls to the ground. These contaminations are due on the one hand to the influence of loan-words and on the other to the instability in the development of Sk. s and Sk. h in Sgh.