This paper is meant to show that the widely accepted theory of the augment being completely absent in Mycenaean Greek is untenable. There is one example in the linear B documents in which the presence of the syllabic augment is undoubtful and two more in which it is probable. The lack or presence of the augment cannot be regarded as a dialectal feature in the sense of E. Risch's distinction between mycénien normal and mycénien spécial. The augment is a morphological innovation of a group of Indo-European languages, which was still spreading at the time of the documents and its rare occurrence can be regarded as one of the features that characterize Mycenaean as “a milestone between Indo-European and Historical Greek” (O. Szemerényi).
The paper deals with two questions of the Vedic augment. Firstly, the
Vedic forms with an apparently long syllabic augment are re-examined and the
conclusion is drawn that these forms are due to phonological and analogical
processes and do not form evidence in favour of an original long variant of the
syllabic augment. Secondly, the temporal augment of vowel-initial roots is
considered, which consists of the vrddhi of the initial vowel. An important
analogical support for this general Old Indian rule is pointed out, namely the
influence of those verbal stems that began with *Hei-, *Heu- or *Her-
and had full or lengthened grade roots in the preterit tenses and therefore had
phonetically regular vrddhi vowels in their augmented forms.
This paper is meant to re-examine the relative (and, at some points, absolute) chronology of some Early Greek changes of the occlusive phonemes (i.e. devoicing of Proto-Indo-European voiced aspirates, assibilation and palatalizations) and to point out some apparent questions and problems concerning the occlusive system as a whole.