See Jamison, Stephanie. 1988. ‘The quantity of the outcome of vocalized laryngeals in Indic’. In A. Bammesberger, ed., Die Laryngaltheorie und die Rekonstruktion des indogermanischen Laut- und Formensystems, 213–226. Heidelberg: Carl Winter. Jamison argued that ī is the regular development of an interconsonantal laryngeal in a final syllable, while i is the regular development elsewhere. If I'm not mistaken (I don't have a copy of the paper now) she argued that the length of ī in the weak stem of 9th class verbs was in order to distinguish the (synchronic) stem-final vowel from the (synchronic) "linking-vowel" i. That might account for its appearance in non-present forms of 9th class verbs (although once again I don't remember her argument).

In Middle Indic the outcome i seems to be more general (Prakrit gahia- for Sanskrit gr̥hīta- etc.), though I remember vaguely that early scholars took this to be a secondary (accentual) development from the Sanskrit forms. In principle they could represent the "regular" outcome of the PIE laryngeals.

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 9:07 AM Madhav Deshpande <> wrote:
Pāṇini' rule "ग्रहोऽलिटि दीर्घ:" [७।२।३७] prescribes the lengthening of "i" in forms like गृहीत, गृहीत्वा etc.  Is there a historical explanation of this lengthening?

Madhav M. Deshpande
Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies
Adjunct Professor, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, India

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]
INDOLOGY mailing list --
To unsubscribe send an email to (messages to the list's managing committee) (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)