The ruki sound law, also known as the ruki rule or iurk rule, is a historical sound change
that took place in the satem
branches of the Indo-European
language family, namely in Balto-Slavic
. According to this sound law, an original changed to (a sound similar to English "sh") after the consonants , , , and the semi-vowels (*u̯) and (*i̯), as well as the syllabic allophones , , and :
: > / _
Specifically, the initial stage involves the retraction
of the coronal sibilant
after semi-vowels, , or a velar consonant
, or . In the second stage, leveling of the sibilant system resulted in retroflexion
ष and Proto-Slavic
), and later retraction to velar in Slavic and some Middle Indic languages
. This rule was first formulated by Holger Pedersen
, and it is sometimes known as ''Pedersen's law'', although this term is also applied to another sound law
concerning stress in the Balto-Slavic languages.
The name "ruki" comes from the sounds (r, u, K, i) which triggered the sound change. The law is stated as a mnemonic rule because the word ''ruki'' means ''hands'' or ''arms'' in many Slavic languages or genitive
of a single form (as in ''"rule of hand"'').
Applications to language groups
The rule was originally formulated for Sanskrit
. It was later proposed to be valid in some degree for all satem
languages, and exceptionless for the Indo-Iranian languages
. (There appears to be one exception at least in some Nuristani languages, however.) In Baltic
, it is limited or affected to a greater or lesser extent by other sound law
s. Nevertheless, it has to have been universal in these branches of the IE languages, and the lack of Slavic reflex
es before consonants is due rather to their merger with the reflexes of other sibilants.
Exceptions in Slavic languages
In Slavic languages
the process is regular before a vowel, but it does not take place before consonants. The final result is the voiceless velar fricative
, which is even more retracted than the . This velar fricative changed back into before a front vowel
or the palatal approximant
Exceptions in Indo-Iranian languages
In Indo-Iranian *''r'' and *''l'' merged, and the change worked even after the new sound; e.g. Avestan ''karš-'', Sanskrit ''kárṣati'' 'to plough' < PIE .
This has been cited as evidence by many scholars as an argument for the later influence of Iranian languages
. There are obvious drawbacks in the theory. First, the two sounds must have been very close (''r''/''l''), so that both could have triggered the change in Indo-Iranian. Second, there are no real examples of this change working in Slavic, and it is also doubtful that only this change (ruki) and no other such change of sibilants (e.g. > ''h'') was borrowed into Slavic.
The syllabic laryngeal
*H̥ becomes *i in Proto-Indo-Iranian, and this also triggered RUKI.
A later extension of RUKI was particular to the Iranian languages: *s, *z shift to *š, *ž also after the labial stops *p, *b, including even secondary *s from Proto-Indo-Iranian *ć < PIE *ḱ.
The Ruki rule also displays a rather different behavior in Nuristani, conditioned by the following factors:
* The reflex of the Proto-Indo-European sequence *ḱs is Nuristani *c (pronounced ͡s
, the same as that of plain *ḱ, thus in this context there is no evidence of the operation of RUKI. E.g. the word for 'bear', reflecting Proto-Indo-European *h₂ŕ̥tk̂os (Sanskrit ''rkṣa'' "bear", Avestan ''arša'') shows a dental affricate in most Nuristani languages as ''ic'' or ''oc''.
* Proto-Indo-European sequences *ks and *kʷs become Nuristani *č. Thus Proto-Indo-European *ksu-ró "razor" reflects as ''kṣurá'' in Sanskrit, and ''churi'' ("sickle") in Kati, and ''čūr'' ("large knife") in Waigali.
* Various cases where the Ruki law failed to operate after *i and *u in Nuristani exist. Hegedűs notes that these all seem to trace back to PIE etyma where the *us and *is sequences were earlier *uHs and *iHS, meaning the laryngeals seem to have blocked the operation of Ruki. For example, PIE *muHs "mouse" > Sanskrit ''mūṣ-'', Avestan ''mūš'', but Kati ''mussā'', Prasun ''mǖsu'', while the Waigali word is of dubious etymology, and the Ashkun form shows a variation in articulation due to secondary phenomena.
* Proto-Indo-European *rs and *ls merge into a Nuristani *ṣ, thus after *r we ''do'' actually see proper Ruki-like behavior in Nuristani.
According to Orel (2000: 62), Albanian shows a limited RUKI-like development, where ''*s'' becomes ''sh'' only after PIE *y, *w (including their vocalic counterparts ''*i, *u''). E.g.
* ''lesh'' 'wool, fleece, hair' < *laysa, cf. Slavic *listъ
'leaf' < *leys-to-
* ''dash'' 'ram' < *dawsa, cf. Germanic *deuzą
* ''pishë'' 'pine' < *pisā, cf. Latin ''pīnus'' 'pine' < *pi(t)snos
* ''prush'' 'ember' < *prusa, cf. Latin ''prūna'' 'ember' < *prusnā; Sanskrit ''ploṣati'' 'to burn' < *prews-
This differs from the development of ''*rs'', ''*ks'', and of ''*s'' after other vowels, e.g.
* ''djerr'' 'fallow land' < *dersa, cf. Greek ''χέρσος'' 'dry land' < *ǵʰers-
* ''hirrë'' 'whey' < *ksirā, cf. Sanskrit क्षीर / ''kṣīrá'' 'milk'
* ''kohë'' 'time' < *kāsā, cf. Slavic *časъ
'time' < *kʷeh₁s-eh₂
However, this view of Albanian is controversial. Firstly, the words in question that Orel bases this theory on have shaky etymologies. ''Dash'' has a disputed etymology, with rival versions attributing the word not to Proto-Indo-European *dʰews-om but instead *dʰeh₁-l-, or *demh₂ from *dmh₂ "to tame". ''Pishë'' meanwhile is argued to not be inherited from Proto-Indo-European at all; rather it and its soundalikes in Greek and Latin are in fact substrate vocabulary. ''Lesh'' is alternatively attributed instead to Huelh₁- "wool", making it cognate to Latin ''vellus''.
Meanwhile, no RUKI-like rule is included in other studies of Proto-Albanian diachrony. Michiel de Vaan (2015) instead has a Proto-Albanian *ʃ emerging from different means, which barely resemble a RUKI law: Indo-European *ks shares the fate of simple *s in becoming *ʃ before *t (as occurred for ''jashtë'' "outside" and ''gjashtë'' "six", but not other cases with *ks where *t did not follow), with *t as the conditioning factor, rather than the prior *k.
Meanwhile, the development of *s itself is highly disputed, but in contrast to Orel's view that it was conditioned on a RUKI-like phenomenon, De Vaan
[ prefers Kortlandt's] [Kortlandt, Frederik (1987). Reflexes of Indo-European consonants in Albanian. ''Orpheus 8'' (Georgiev Memorial Volume): 35−37.] view that *s became *ʃ when either followed by an unstressed vowel or intervocalically, regardless of the quality of nearby vowels.
* Charles Prescott.
Germanic and the Ruki Dialects