The Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben (LIV, "Lexicon of the Indo-European Verbs") is an etymological dictionary of the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) verb. The first edition appeared in 1998, edited by Helmut Rix. A second edition followed in 2001. The book may be seen as an update to the verb entries of the Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (IEW) by Julius Pokorny. It was the first dictionary fully utilizing the modern three-laryngeal theory with reconstructions of Indo-European verbal roots. == The LIVs hypothesis about aspect == The authors of the LIV assume a dichotomy between telic verbs (terminated: for example, 'to light up') and atelic verbs (ongoing: for example, 'to shine') in early stages of Proto-Indo-European. Before the daughter languages split off, aspect emerged as a new grammatical category. Telic verbs were interpreted as aorist forms, and the missing present was formed with various suffixes (for example, ) and the nasal infix (), all of which are supposed to come from old grammatical forms of uncertain meaning. Atelic verbs were interpreted as present forms, and the missing aorist was formed with the suffix -s-, yielding the sigmatic aorist. This hypothesis is used to explain various phenomena: Some verbs in Indo-European languages form root presents (Latin 'I pull, I lead', from PIE ) and derived sigmatic aorists (perfect forms in Latin: 'I have pulled, I have led', pronounced dūksī, from ). Other verbs form root aorists (Latin 'I have won', pronounced wīkī, from ) and derived present forms ( 'I win', from , with nasal infix). For many PIE verbs, various present forms can be reconstructed without discernible differences in meaning (like and above, both forms have attested reflexes in IE languages: Greek 'I shine' and Proto-Celtic 'to shine, burn', respectively). In addition to the present and the aorist, the following aspects are assumed: Perfect Causative-Iterative Desiderative Intensive (repetition) Fientive (onset of a new state) Essive (persistent state) Entries The lexical part contains for each verbal root the conjectured meaning, reconstructed stems with their reflexes in the daughter languages, extensive footnotes (with references, remarks on alternative and dubious reconstructions, etc.), the page number of the corresponding IEW entry. Indices The book includes a regressive root index, an index of reconstructed primary stems, sorted by aspect and formation rule, an index of reflexes in the daughter languages, sorted by language. Reception and criticism Seebold claims insufficient evidence for roots reconstructed from a single daughter language. Helmut Rix