'The submitted work attempts to prove that the theory of the change of Latin short vowels in medial syllabes in the archaic period conditioned by the presupposed existence of archaic Latin accent on the initial syllable (...), in the way it has traditionally been formulated, is no longer sustainable. There is in fact no convincing evidence of the presumed original forms (...) in the archaic Latin inscriptions. Consequently, we cannot talk about a general, mechanical chnage of all latin short medial vowels. In view of the fact that it is precisely on this presumption that the theory of archaic Latin accent bound on the first syllable was constructed, we must, having rejected at the same time general vocalic changes, query the whole theory as unfounded. Nevertheless, in Latin there undoubtedly exist - although not general - vocalic alternations in roots and stems, which now must be newly explained. According to the hypothesis offered in the present work, the 'reduced' vowels (mostly í' in open syllables and 'e'in closed syllables) stand in place of the original zero grades, be it in the root or in the sem, and as such they could represent either the vocalization of an interconsolantal laryngeal, an unstressed sonant, or root syllables 'without 'nucleus' (e.g. *sd- to the full grade *sed-). (...) What the new hypothesis is concerned with is, again, the stressed and unstressed character, and the difference between 'older' and 'younger' compounds - all, however, in an entirely different period of development.' (LUCIE PUTROVÁ, Summary, p.153). From the library of the late Dr. Dirk Panhuis.