C98)v

. Ew
THE G-EEEK
VERB
ITS STRUCTURE
a:N"D DEVELOPEMENT
By GEOEG CUETIUS
PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OP LEIPZIG
TEANSLATED BY
AUGUSTUS S.
WILKINS,
M.A.
"
PROFESSOR OF LATIN AND COIIPARATIVE PHILOLOGY I;^ THE OWENS
COLLEGE,
1LA.NCHESTER
AND
EDWIN B.
ENGLAND,
M.A.
ASSISTANT LECTURER IN CLASSICS IN THE OWENS COLLEGE MANCHESTER
LONDON
JOHN
MUERAY,
ALBEMARLE STREET
1880
All
rights
reserved
351
~f 7"
1
PEEFACE.
The
following
work is
a
translation of
'
Das Verbnm der
Griecbiscben
Spracbe
seinem Bane nacb
dargestellt,' publisbed
in
two volumes
(Vol.
I.
Leipzig 1873,
Vol. II. ib.
1876).
For tbe
first volume
we were
able to
use
tbe second edition
(Leipzig 1877):
for tbe second volume Prof. Curtius
was good enougb
to furnisb
us
witb
a large
number of corrections and
additions, prepared by
bim for tbe second edition, now going tbrougb
tbe
press.
Professor
Curtius desires to
express
bis indebtedness for
some
of tbese to
notices
by
Prof. A. Nauck in tbe
'
Bulletin de 1'Academic
imperiale
des sciences de St.
Petersbourg
'
Tome
xx.
pp,
481-520 and in
tbe
'
Melanges
Greco-Romains
'
Tome iv.
p.
58 ff. We cannot
reproduce
tbis
acknowledgment
witbout
expressing our great
regret
tbat Prof. Nauck sbould bave
tbougbt
fit to
adopt
in tbese
articles
a
tone and
language
wbicb,
it
migbt
bave been
boped,
belonged entirely
to
a past generation
of scbolars. We bave added
from tbe second edition
an important excursus as an appendix.
In tbe
preface
to Vol.
I.,
Prof. Curtius writes
:"
'
I
was
first led to make tbe Greek verb tbe
subject
of
a
detailed examination in tbe
following
way.
My
work "Die
Bildung
der
Tempora
und Modi im Griecbiscben und
Lateiniscben,"
wbicb
appeared
in tbe
year
1846,
bad been for
some
time out of
print.
Tbe
progress
made
by
tbe science since tbat time would
at least bave necessitated
very
considerable
cbanges
in
a new
edition. Besides tbis I
bardly
felt called
upon
to make
a
fresb
examination of tbe structure of tbe Latin verb. Tbe
object,
indeed, witb wbicb tbat work of
my younger
days was
undertaken
was
to
present
classical scbolars witb
a
critical
compendium
of tbe
[fi]
PKEFACE.
actual results
arrived at
by
the
comparative study
of the verbal
structure,adding
thereto investigations
made
by myself.
It seemed
to me
tliat after so long
an
interval I could not
approach
the
same
subject
unless I treated
the whole verb at
once more succinctly
and moie
in detail,
and to this end I
saw
I should have to confine
myself
to the
single language
to which
my
specialstudy
has
always
been directed.
Of
course Latin,
like
any
other
cognate
language,
has been examined
wherever it
promised
to throw
light
on
Greek.
'
I have taken
specialpains
here to
present
as
far
as
I could a
complete
list of
actually
occm-ringforms, though
this
was
far from
my
object
in the
composition
of the
"
Tempora
xmd Modi." It
seemed to me no disadvantage
that certain sections of the
present
work should in
consequence
be little
more
than lists of forms.
For it is of the
greatestimportance
for the correct
understanding
of these forms that
we
should know to what extent
they were
current and in what
periods.
In the case
of the formation of the
present
tense stem for instance all the information
we
had as to
the occurrence
of its manifold varieties
was
extremely
defective.
None of the various indexes of verbal
forms,
among
which Veitch's
"
Greek Verbs
irregular
and defective"
(3rdedition,
Oxford
1871)'
deserves still
as
always
to be held in the
highest consideration,
could
fullysupply
the
need,
since
they were undertaken with com- pletely
different
objects
in view. At the
same time,
after Lobeck's
Rhematikon,
where however
we
have
constantly
to
regret
that the
different
periods are not
distinguished,
it is to this work and to
Kiihner's
new edition of his
"
Ausfiihrliche Grammatik
"
to which
I
owe
by
far the
greater
number of references
on
this head. In
the
case
of Homeric
Greek,
which had
always
to be treated
separately
of
course,
I
have,
besides Seber's well-known
Index,
made
use of
a
complete
collection of verbal forms made
by a
_'
'
I am indebted
to the kindness of the author for the information that the
Edinburgh edition of
1800, by
which I was led to call the edition of 1871
(styled
on Its
title-pagea
"
New Edition
")
the
fourth,was one in which he had no hand,
Mr. Veitch
recognises only
three editions as authorised" those of
1848, 1865, and
^v
^"~^
^"^^^ /*^''^
oi)portunity
of
mentioning
a work
composed
with the same
object, I.e.
'AvuifiaKa ical
iXkivri
(i7}fxuTa Tre^wv
avyypacpiwv kcu
"noi7)rwv rf/s'Y.W-qviKTjS
y\u(r"Trji
Jmh
A. A.
^aKfXXapiov, KaOnyVToC toO iv
'he^vais B'
yvjxvaffiov,
''EKdo(ns
ir.MTTT, 8\a,j
/.fTfppue^ia-iueVTj,
'Ev
'AOvfais
1877, which was
kindly
sent to me by
the autlior while I
was
engaged on this second edition."
PREFACE.
[7]
former
pupil
at
my
suggestion.
From
Hesychius'sLexicon,
which
I have
gone
through
in the
course
of
my
investigations,
I have
been
able,
while
rigidlyexcluding
all
foreign
and doubtful
matter,
to extract
many
remarkable forms. The rich
treasury
too
con- tained
in Lentz's Herodian has been laid under contribution. For
all
that,
such is the
astounding
wealth of forms which Grreek
possesses,
that,
with the best of
intentions,
I have fallen far short
of absolute
completeness,even
within the limits here
proposed.
Still I
hope
it will
now
be
approximatelypossible
to ascertain the
extent to which the
phenomena
discussed
by
me were
in
living
use.
It is now
and then
surprising
to
find,
in the
course
of this
enquiry,
how
forms,
which
boys
at school learn
as
the
proper
and
regularones,
either have
no
authority
whatever
or
only
occur
in
some out-of-the-wayplace,
and stand
quite
alone.
*
There is
nothing so
prejudicial
to an
insight
into the real
structm-e of the Grreek verb
as
the
notion,
still
widelyprevalent,
that
every
verb must admit of
beingconjugatedthroughout.
In
reality,
not
only
does each
singlegroup
of forms make
a
separate
whole,
but
very
often
one
such
group
is formed from one
and the
same
stem
many
centuries earlier than the
other,
and "
leaving
the latest stratum of derived verbs out of the
question
" almost
every
verb shows
us,
so
to
speak,
a
separatefamily,
with its
own
family history
and
a
quite
individual
stamp
of character. It
may
be doubted if there is another
language
which has
developed
this
tendency
towards
indwiduality so
far
as
that of the Greeks.
'
Next to the formation of
a
complete
collection of the charac- teristic
forms from Grreek itself I have made
a
point
of
com- paring
with them whatever forms
can
be
directlycompared
from the related
languages.
It is
no
slighthelp
towards
an
insight
into the
origin
and ramification of forms of
language
if
we can see
clearly
how often in two
languages,
e.g.
Greek and
Sanskrit,
or even
in
more
than
two, precisely
the same
form has
come
from the
corresponding
stem. In the
case
of the
present-
tense formations
no
comprehensive attempt
of this kind had
ever
been made. All that had been done
was
to
point
out similarities
of formation without
taking
the trouble to consider the stems in
which
they appeared.
It
may
surprisemany
scholars to find how
extensive the
agreement
between the
languages is,even
in the
[8]
PREFACE.
case
of forms of such
comparatively
late
stamp
as
the derived
verbs.
'
The oftener
we are
led
by investigations
of this kind into
regions
in which the
ground
is
slippery,
the
greater
the
importance,
f
think,
which must be attached to such bare collections of
un- doubted
facts about which it is
hardlypossible
there should be two
opinions.
For the
etymologist
I have undertaken the collection
of such facts in
my
"
Principles
of Greek
Etymology."
The
present
work is intended to
provide,
in
a
similar collection of
verbal
forms, a
firm basis for the
investigation
of their
origin.
On this head I have
only
ventured with
some reluctance
upon
the
very
difficult
.questions
of the
genesis
of verbal forms. These
questions
must be dealt with
by analysis
and combination
" a
provincequite
distinct from that of the
comparison
of
parallel
forms. I have
expounded
elsewhere
("
Zur
Chronologie
der indo-
germanischen Sprachforschung,"
2nd edition
1873)
my
views
ou
the
origin
and
developement
of the Indo-Grermanic verbal struc- ture.
These
views,
which I still
hold,
in
spite
of
some amount of
opposition,
are
naturally
those
on
which J
proceed
in the
present
work.^ With
regard
to the main
questions they are
the
same
views which
began
with
Bopp's
foundation of
our
science in the
firm structure of his
"
ComparativeGrrammar,"
which
were eluci- dated
and corrected
by
Schleicher's
systematising,though perhaps
now
and then too
logicalcondensation,
and
may
be
regarded
as
the universal doctrine of
Comparative
Philology.
No reasonable
man
will
imagine
that this structure is
satisfactory
at
every
point.
It has its weak
sides,
and it is the
strengthening, perfecting
and
correction of these to Avhich the science must devote itself
as it
advances. Hard
problems meet
us,
in which
we have often to
content om-selves with the indication of
a
greater
or
smaller
degree
of
probability,
and
we must not
fancy
that
we can
settle
every
thing once
for all. But I confess that the attacks
lately
made from different
quarters on the foundations of this structure
seem to
me not at all
likely
to shake
them.
'
The
principal
works used for the second edition have
been,
=
[A statement of those
views, revised
by Professor
Curtins,will be found in
the article
on the Greek
Language in the
'
Encyclopaedia Britannica,' vol. xi.
(ninth
edition).]
PREFACE.
[9j
before
all,
Delbriick's
"
Altiudisches Verbum
"
(Halle 1874),
Johannes Schmidt
"
Ziir Geschichte des Vocalismus
"
Vol.
II.,
Grust.
Meyer
"
Die mit Nasalen
gebildeten
Prasensstamme
"
(Jena 1873).'
In the
preface
to Vol.
II.,
Professor Curtius writes
:
"
'
This second half of
my
description
of the structure of the
Greek verb has not led
me so
often
as
the first to the ultimate
and most difficult
questionsas
to the
origin
of the earliest Indo-
Germanic verbal forms. I have had to deal
rather,tliough
not
by
any
means
exclusively,
still for the most
part
with the
completion
and
carrying
out of
primitive types by
the Greeks
; although
these can
be understood
onlyby bringing
out the
special
charac- teristics
of the Greek verb from the
common
back-ground.
Much
however that bears
upon
this has
now
presented
itself to me
in
a
different
light
from what it did
formerly;
and the doctrine of the
perfectespecially,
which in
consequence
of the
peculiarstamp
and varied ramification of this tense takes
up
a
very
considerable
part
of this second
volume,
is stated here in
a manner which in
many
respects
is
new.
For the
perfect
I have
very
thankfully
availed
myself
of the researches of old
pupils,
of which some are
collected in the
"
Philological
Discussions
publishedby
G. Curtius's
Grammatical
Society
"
(Leipzig1874),
others are
printed
in the
"
Studien,"
while Windisch's
description
of the Irish
perfect,
which I have found instructive
on
many
points,
has been
printed
in Kuhn's
"
Zeitschrift
"
Vol. XXIII. But
many
other
chapters
too,
e.g.
that
on
the Verbal
Nouns,
and
specially
the doctrine of
the
Infinitive,
and the
description
of the
Sigmatic Aorist,
contain
views
differing
from those most
generallyadopted.
I trust
they
may
recommend themselves to the
unprejudicedjudgment
of other
investigators.
I
cannot,
I
think,
be
charged
with
having clung
obstinately
to doctrines which I
previously
advanced. On the
contrary,
I believe that I have
never
refused to
accept
more
recent
views and
tendencies,so
far
as
they appeared
to me
at all
justified,
without however
deviating
from the fundamental
principles
which
I followed in
my
first discussion of the Greek Verb
thirty
years ago.'
The translation of the first volume has been executed
by
Mr.
England,
that of the second
by
Mr.
Wilkins,
but
every page
has
;[10]
PEEFACE.
been
carefully
revised
by us
both,
and
we are jointly responsible
for the whole. The
very
full indexes to the
original
work
were
prepared by
Dr. Vani^ek of Neuhaus
:
the task of
adapting
them
to the
present
translation, involving as
it did the verification and
alteration of
more
than
5,000 references,
has not been
a light
one :
but it is
hoped
that
they
will
prove
of
great
value in
facilitating
the
use
of the book.
Tlie numbers in the
margin
refer to the
pages
of the second
edition of Vol. I. and of the first edition of Vol. II. in the
original.
It
may
be convenient to notice that the second edition
of Vol. I. contains
eight
pages
more
than the
first, while the
second edition of Vol.
II.,
in
consequence
of the insertion of the
excursus
at
p.
33,
will
probably
contain about
twenty
pages
more
than the first. Hence
e.g.
a
reference to
p.
206 of Vol. I.^ will
answer
to
p.
211 Vol. I.^
(p. 143 of the
translation):
p.
370
Vol. I.i
=
p.
376 Vol. 1.2
(p.
258 of the
translation):
p.
100
Vol. 11.2
=
p.
84 Yoi^ jj^i
(^p^ 329 of ^^y^q
translation).
The
kindly welcome
given
to
our
translation of the
'
Principles
of Greek
Etymology
'
leads
us
to
hope
for
an equally
favourable
reception
for
a
work which has been
universally recognised as a
not less
important contribution to the
cause
of
a
sound and
scientific
knowledge of the Greek
language.
Manchester
:
Chnstmas, 1879.
TABLE OF CONTENTS,
CHAPTER 1.
PAGE
INTRODUCTION
. . . .
1
CHAPTER II.
THU PEBSONAL TERMINATIONS
. . .
24
.
Active
...
24
First Person
Singular
....
24
Second Person
Singular
31
Third Person
Singular
.37
First Person Plural
41
Second Person Plural
44
Third Person Plural
45
Dual
50
II. Middle
...
55
First Person
Singular
57
Second Person
Singular
59
Third Person
Singular
60
First Person Plural
61
Second Person Plural
63
Third Person Plural
64
Dual Forms
67
Excursus
on
the aB
68
CHAPTER III.
THE AUGMENT
72
A)
The Syllabic Augment
. ,
76
1) Double Consonants
following
the
Augment
77
2) Syllabic Augment
before a Vowel
78
B)
The Temporal Augment
87
C) Absence op the Augment
i)l
D) The Position of the Augment
94
[12]
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER IV.
PAGE
PRESENT STEMS WITHOUT A THEMATIC VOWEL
.
96
I. Monosyllabic 96
II. Stems of Two oe Three Syllables 105
CHAPTER V.
AORISr STEMS WITHOUT A THEMATIC VOWEL
. .
125
I. Monosyllabic
126
II. Disyllabic
133
CHAPTER VI.
THEMATIC PRESENTS FORMED WITHOUT ANY FURTHER
STRENGTHENING OF THE STEM
. . .
138
CHAPTER VII.
STEMS WHICH LENGTHEN THE VOWEL IN THE PRESENT
.
150
I. Diphthongal Intensification
.
153
II. MONOPHTHONGAL INTENSIFICATION
. 156
CHAPTER Vin.
THE T- CLASS
160
I. Labial Stems
164
n. Guttural Stems
. .
.
168
III. Vowel Stems
168
CHAPTER
IX.
THE NASAL CLASS
169
I. Presents
in
-rw, -vofxai 173
II. Presents in
-a-vw, -a-vo-fiai I80
III. Presents
in
-va"a and -ai/aco
^ ,
I83
IV. Presents in
-vew, -veoixai
I84.
V.
Presents
in
-w,
which point to an older -utu
. . .
.185
CHAPTER
X.
THE
INCHOATIVE
CLASS
187
I. -"r""j ADDED
DIRECTLY TO VowEL
EOOTS
192
II.
-(TKO) ADDED TO CONSONANTAL
RoOTS
WHICH HAVE BECOME VOCALIC
BY Metathesis
193
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
[13]
PAGE
in. -tr/co) ADDED TO VoCALIC STEMS OP TWO OR MORE SYLLABLES.
.
194
IV. -a-KUi
AFFIXED AFTER THE ADDITION OP A SHORT VOWEL
. . .
19.5
V. -ffKCJO ADDED IMMEDIATELY TO CONSONANTAL ROOTS
....
196
VI. A TRANSFORMED -CKa)
197
CHAPTER XI.
TB'F I- CLASS
201
I. Presents in -iw
207
n. Presents showing the Effects left by an earlier
-ju . .
211
A)
Verbs in -Ww from
-\ju 211
B)
Verbs with
Epenthesis
of i 213
C)
Presents in "ra-
(tt) 218
D)
Presents in ^ 222
APPENDIX TO THE I- CLASS
. . . .
229
Denominative
Verbal Formation
229
I. Vocalic Division 234
1. Verbs in
-acj, -oico,
-a^a)
234
2. Verbs in
-ooi, -oiu,
-o^ai
238
3. Verbs in
-ea", -eiw,
-eCw and -i^oi 239
First Excursus. " On the
Interchange
and
Meaning
of the Verbs in
-aw,
-ow,
-eco
.............
244
Second
Excursus. " On the Inflexion of the Contracted Verbs
. . .
246
4. Verbs in
-iw
and -iCo 249
5. Verbs in -vu
and -v^a" 250
6. Verbs in -euco
and -ova) 251
U. Consonantal
Division
253
1. Derived Verbs in
-co) 253
2. Derived Verbs in
-pw
255
3. Derived Verbs in -\o"
, .
255
4. Derived Verbs in -aau (-ttw) 256
CHAPTER Xn.
THE E- CLASS AND THE RELATED FORMATIONS
.
258
1. Presents in -ew with Forms from a shorter Stem in other Tenses
.
262
2. Presents without an -e by
the side of other Forms with
e or
tj . .
263
3. Both Formations side
by
side in the Present
268
4. E-Formations in other Tenses tlian the
Present,
where the Present-
Stem is
expanded
in some other
way 270
APPENDIX TO THE E- CLASS
. . .
.273
[14]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER XIII.
PAGB
THEMATIC AORISTS 275
I. AORISTS WITHOUT
REDUPLICATION 278
II. AORISTS WITH Reduplication
288
CHAPTER XIV.
THE MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM. 296
I. Imperative 296
A)
Second
Singular
Active 297
B)
Second Person Middle 304
C)
Third
Singular,
Active and Middle 305
D)
Third Plural,
Active and Middle 306
E)
Dual Forms 310
IT. Conjunctive 311
III. Optative
. . . .
'
324
CHAPTER XV.
VERBAL NOUNS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST
STEM
838
I. Infinitives 338
IT. Participles
351
CHAPTER XVI.
THE PERFECT STEM AND THE FORMS CONSTRUCTED
FROM IT
354
I. Reduplication in the Perfect
356
A)
With an
Initial Consonant
356
B)
With an Initial Vowel of the Stem
365
C)
Loss of
Reduplication 37q
D)
Position of the
Reduplication
373
II. ThE' Active Perfect
38i
A)
Personal Terminations of the Indicative
381
B)
Formation of the Stem
386
a. Relics of the
Primary Formation
386
h. Formation of the Stem
by an added Vowel
. . . .
388
c. Changes
in the Vowel of the
Stem-Syllable
. .
.395
d. Consonantal
Changes
in the Stem-
Syllable
. . . .
403
e.
The Perfect with
k
408
TIL The Middle Perfect
4I6
IV. Moods of the Perfect
422
V. Verbal Nouns
of the Perfect
424
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
[15J
PAOB
VI. Tendencies towards Sigmatic Perfect Forms
....
427
VII. The Pluperfect
....
428
A)
Active
Pluperfect 428-
B)
Middle
Pluperfect 434
Vin. The Future fkom the Perfect Stem 435
CHAPTER XVII.
THE SIGMATIC A OR 1ST 437
A)
Relics of a Primitive Formation 445
B)
The Ordinary Formation
449
C)
Irregularities 460
CHAPTER XVIII.
THE FUTURE
467
I. The Sigmatic Future
468
II. The Future without a
475
A)
From stems in
A/ij/p 475
B)
From other Stems
478
C)
Other Futures without
e 483
III. Moods and Verbal Nouns of the Future
485-
OHAPTER XIX.
THE PASSIVE STEMS
488--
I. The Passive Stem in
-t? 491
n. The Passive Stem in -677 498
e elsewhere than in the Passive Stem
500-
A)
Presents in -Qa" 501
B)
Formations further derived
503^
C) Meaning
of these stems 504
Similar Formations in other Languages
506
Origin of the Syllable e-n (de)
in the Passive Aorist
. . .
507
CHAPTER XX.
THE VERBAL ADJECTIVES
. . . .
511
CHAPTER XXI.
IRREGULARITIES OF THE VOWEL STEMS IN THE FORMA- TION
OF THE PERFECTS, FUTURES,
PASSIVE
AORISTS
AND VERBAL ADJECTIVES
61ft
[16]
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER XXII.
PAGE
THE ITEBATIVES
527
CHAPTER XXni.
/~
BESIDERATIVES,
INTEN8IVES AND
FREQUENTATIVES
.
533
CHAPTER XXIV.
ANOMALIES
538
EXCURSUS.
On
some
Recent
Explanations
of the Vocalism in the Thematic Aorist
. .
545
INDEXES.
A. Greek
B. Italic
C. Sanskrit
D. Iranic
E. Teutonic
. 5gj.
F. Letto-Slavonic
584
^- Keltic
'
.
!
585
553
578
581
583
THE GEEEK VEEB,
-oOja"io-o-
CHAPTER I.
I NTR ODUCTIO X.
The term vei-b is not
always
used
by grammarians
in the
same sense.
1
We hear, on
the
one hand,
of the verlD in
a sentence,
and
ttetce or 'idi]K(.
is said to be
a
verb
;
on
the
other,
the
same
term is used to denote
the
numerous
forms which
along
with this
ueice or tdiiKe belong
to one stem,
and
we
hear of the verb aEilur, or
the verb nderai.
Dionysius
Thrax used the word in the former
sense
when he thus defined
the notion of the verb
: pij/ja tan
\itiQ
Karrjyopi^jxa (rr)f.iaivov(Ta
(Bekker,
'
Anecd.' ii.
672). Schoemann,
in what he
says
about the nattu-e of the
verb,
at
p.
16 of his ti-eatise
on
the Parts of
Sj)eech,
agrees
with this
definition. It is in the
power
of
making an assertion,
i.e. in the union
of
a subject
with
a predicate
within
one
and the
same word,
that the
peculiarity
of
this, as opposed
to other
parts
of
speech,
consists. For
our
present purposes
we
shall have to distinguish more carefully
between
these two uses.
We do not call
aeice or eOriKE verbs,
but verbal
forms,
and
only use
the term verb
collectively,understanding by a
verb
a more
or
less
extensively ramifying system
of
forms,
all of which
possess
the
power
of
making an assertion,
and
come
from
one
stem, or are at least
held
together Ijy
the bond of
a common meaning. Again,
all Greek verbs
join
to form that
higher unity, which, as
the
sum
and substance of the
whole
mass
of kindred
phenomena, we
may
call
'
The Greek Verb.'
If
we proceed
to consider
a single
verb
or system
of verbal forms
from
a,
so to speak,
statistical
point
of
view,
this
system
at
once
falls 2
into two main
groups,
which have at all times been
kept distinct, though
the
origin
and nature of this difference
may
not have been understood
:
these
are
the verb
finite,
and the verb
infinite.
It is
only
the forms of
the verb finite which
are capable
of
expressing a complete assertion,
or,
in
other
words,
of
making
little sentences which
can
be conceived
as standing
alone. In the forms of the veiij infinite there is
always an incom^^tleteness
in the
assertion,
which needs to be
supplemented by a
form of the fiist
kind.
Infinitives, participles,
and verbal
adjectives
bear the foi-m of
nouns,
and
belong by right
of
origin
and structure in most instances to
the class of noun-forms. But since the
language as preserved to
us
makes
a
distinction of
use
between these forms and those called
noun-
forms,
in the strict sense
of the
term,
and since
they
have several charac- teristic
distinctions of foim in
common
with the verb
proper,
they
make
B
2
INTRODUCTION. cii, i.
"lu
iiiterrralpart
of the
verbal
system,
and
ought
not to be considered
"ii.art
from
it" a
fact not always
recognised
m
Comparative
Grammar.
Tlieir
double
nature was
well set
forth in the old name
fitroxv
(partici-
pium)
"
the only pity
is that
this name was
confined to a
part only
of the
.'rouT)
'
We shall
find it
best to speak
of the whole class as
verbal
nouns.
'^
The elements
of meaning
which find
expression
in the Greek verb
finite are
of six
kinds: 1),
Person; 2),Number; 3),
Relation borne
bv the action to
the
sulsject,
the difference,i.e.
between
Active, Middle,
"nid Passive,so
well named l)y
the ancients ^u'lBeaic
; 4),
Kind of Time
\Zeitart),
by
which I mean
the varieties of the
continuous,momentary,
and completed
action perceivable,
i.e. in 'iXve,IXyrre,
and LXeXvku
respec- tively
"
n),
Grade
of Time (Zeifstufe),
or the difference between
present,
past,
and future
;
and
6),
Modality.
The verbal nouns
have
no means
at
ail'for
expressing
the first element,
but
they
can
all
express
the thii-d
and fourth.
Of the fifth,
the
grade
of
time, they never
had
any
mark,
3
though,
in the case
of the
participle,
a peculiarshifting
of function has
enaljfed
the distinctive
mark of the kind to do
duty
for that of the
grade
of time
;
and besides this,
the latest born of the
tense-systems,
that of the
future,
has
produced
verbal nouns
of its own. Participles
are
of
course
the
only
verbal nouns
which can
mark number
(2),and, being
real
adjec- tives,
they
mark
gender
and
case as
well. Even
modality (6)
is not
entir'elv
absent from the meaning
of Greek verbal nouns
;
the
particle
liv
is added to
infinitives
and participles
with a use analogous
to that with
verb-forms
proper,
and in this
way
some
modal differences at least find
exjjression
outside
the verb finite.
The
array
of forms,
which this calculation shows the
complete
verbal
system
in Greek to
possess,
is astonishingly large.
As it is seldom
or
never seen
in all its
force,
it will be worth while to
pass
the
long
list
under review^
Considered
genetically,
the whole of the forms of the
Greek verb divide themselves
into
seven
groups,
which, as
all the forms
in
a
gi-oup
have a common
unchangeable
kernel or
stem,
we refer to
seven%temii,
or,
more accurately,
tense-stems.
In
reviewing
these in
this statistical
manner,
we
will for the time
preserve
the order
given
in
my
'School Grammar,'
i.e.:
1),
Present-stem; 2),Strong
Aorist-stem
(Aor.
II.); 3),
Future-stem
; 4),
Weak Aorist-stem
{Ao7\
I. act. and
middle);
5),Perfect-stem ;
6), Strong
Passive-stem
{Aor.
II.
2)ass.) ;
7),
Weak Passive-stem
{Aor.
I.
pass.).
Of these
seven
groups
those
called
strong
and weak are
seldom both
developed
in the
same verb, so
that,
with
comparatively
few
exceptions,
each verb
can^
actually
show
only five
groups,
the active and middle aorist
being
either
strong
or
weak,
and the
passive
stem
likewise. These five
groups,
however,
may
be found
entire,
but for a
few
gaps,
in a
great
number of
verbs,
and so f:xr
in
ciu-rent use
that we
may
confidently
affii-m that there is no
single
form
belonging
to one
of these
groups
that
a Greek,
when Attic
was at
its
}n'ime,
could not have used if he liked.
That
our
present attempt
at
reviewing
the numerical
strength
of this
store of verb-forms
may
give us no deceptivephantom results,
but a real
4
idea
of the number of
actuallyoccurring
forms distinct in sound and
meaning,
I shall
proceed
on tlie
followingprinciples.
In the first
place,
all
'veryrare forms, e.g.
the first
person
dual of the middle
tenses,
the
feminine dual of the
partici])les,
the moods of the active
perfect,
have
been left out
altogether.
Next,
all forms which
though
of different
CH I.
NUMBER OF VERBAL FORMS.
meaning
are phoneticallyidentical,
e.g.
the nom.
and
ace. neuter
parti- ciples,
and
even
the
phonetically
identical
ace.
sing.
masc. and
nom. and
ace.
plnr.
nent. of the active
participles (e.g.Xuorro),
and the identical
ace. sing,
and
nom.
and
ace. s. neut. of the middle
(e.g. Xvojitrov), always
count for
a single
form. But where some classes of verbs
or certain
dialects have varieties of
formation,or
where the examination of their
origingives
us
clear evidence that there
was a
variety
on
Greek
groimd,
in such
cases no
later
or
accidental identification has made
us
reckon
as
one
what the
language occasionally does,or at one
time
did,regard as
distinct. For
instance,
tXvor is reckoned
once as 1st
pers. sing,
and once
as
3rd
pers.
phu\,
for the Dorians
distinguished
between 'iXvov and
iXvov,
and all Greeks between
e(pr]i'
and
hpav or
ecpaaav.
Avio,
it is
true,
is
1st
sing,
for both ind. and
conj.,
but as
there
are
in Homer forms in
-ii)
-/u
for the
conj.,
there was once a
distinction between the two forms.
Avi]
is in Attic at once
3rd
sing.conj.
act. and 2nd
sing.conj.
middle
;
but Homer
distinguishes
between
Xvtjai
and
Xvrjai,
and
even Attic at
one time between
Xvr)
and Xvei. The
aor. I. inf. act. and the 2nd
sing.
imp.
aor.
I. mid. are at
any
rate
occasionally distinguishable by
their
accent,
e.g.
Traicevaai
and Traicevaai " reason
enough
for
counting
each
form
separately.
On the same
principles
the 1st
sing.
fut.
act.,
e.g.
Xvnuj
for
XvfTiu),
has been
distinguished
from the 1st
sing.
aor. I.
conj.
Xvaw.
On the other
hand,
it cannot be shown that there
ever was a
phonetic
distinction in Greek itself between
Xverov,
Xveadov as
2nd dual ind. and
imperat.,
or
between
Xvtre,
XvEade as
2nd
pi.
of the two
moods,
and
therefore such forms are
only
counted
once.
In this
way
we
get
the
following
result.
From the
present-stem
are
formed "
Pr. Ind. Pr.
Conj.
Pr.
Opt.
Pr.
Imp. Impf.
Act. '7 7 8 4 8
Mid. 7 7 8 4 8
that
is,
68 forms
belonging
to the verb finite. Besides these there are .5
2 infinitives and 2
participles
with 19
each,
that
is,
40 forms of the
verb infinite" in all 108.
From the future-stem
come "
that
is,
30 forms of the verb
finite,
and then there
are 2 infinitives
and 2
participles
with 19 case-forms
apiece.Altogether
from the future-
stem 70 forms.
From the
aorist-stem,
either the
strong
or the
weak, come "
Ind.
Conj. Opt. Imi^,
Act, 8 7" 8 6
Mid. 8 7 8 6
In addition to these 58 come the 40 forms of the infinitives and
parti- ciples
" in all 98.
Under the
perfect-stem
we omit
entirely
the rare
conj.,opt.
and
imp.
of the
active,
but not the
imperative middle,
which is
more frequent.
We thus
get
"
B 2
INTKODUCTION.
"
ch. i.
a
Perf. Ind.
Imper.
Pluperf.
Fut,
Mid. 7
4 8
Ind.
7, Opt.
8
..Itofjetlier
49 forms of the verb finite
;
and to this have to be added
3
infinitives
and 3
participles"
in all 109.
The
passive-stem,
strong
or
weak
as
the
case
may
be, gives
"
Aor. lad. Conj.
Opt. Imp.
8 7
8 6
^
Fut. Ind. Opt. [
44
7
9 J
which,
with the 2 infinitives
and the 38
participial forms, give
a
total
of 84.
'
The verbal
adjectives,
which
belong
to no
tense-stem,produce
38
case-
forms.
In all,then,
we
may get
from
a complete
verb "
249 forms of tlie verb
finite,
and
258 forms of the verb infinite
altogether
507.
G A
glance
at the Latin verb is
enough
to show
us
how much
poorer
it
is than the Greek. The Latin vei-l^al forms
may
be referred to two
tense-stems,
of which the
second,
that of the
perfect,
does not extend
beyond
the active.
The
jjresent-stem
has "
Ind. Conj. Imi^er. Imjierf.
Ind.
Imperf. Conj.
Fut,
Act. 6 6 5 6 6 6
Mid. 6 6 4 6
'
6 6
altogether
69 forms of the verb
finite,
to which must be added 2
infinitives and
a
participle
with 8 diflierent
case-forms,
and the
gerundive
with 12 case-forms' " that
is,
91 forms in all. The
perfect-
stem has "
6 forms for the indicative
perf.
6
" "
conjunctiveperf.
6
" "
indie,
pluperf.
6
" "
conj.pluperf.
1 form for the fut.
perf.
for it is
only
the 1st
pers. sing,
that is diflferent from the
pei^fconj.
" in
all 25 " which with the addition of the inf act. make 26.
Besides these there is the fut.
part.
act. with its 1 2
forms,
the
perf.
pass. part,
with the same
number,
and the 2
supines"
in all 26.
The verb finite reckons
altogether
94
forms,
the verb infinite 49 "
total 143.
Everything
besides is
periphrastic.
In Gothic the resources are still
more
meagre.
We
can
here
only
compare
the verb
finite,as the declension of the
participles
is
so
much
more
complicated
that their
sum cannot be
cleai-ly
stated. The
strong
verb in Gothic
as
in Latin falls into two
groups,
here called
present
and
past.
The
present
gi-oup comprises
in the indicative 7
forms,
the
'
I have counted the same form
only once when it does duty
for more than
one case,
as
e.g. legendifor
gen.
s. and nom.
pi.
CH. I.
NUMBEE OF VERBAL FORMS. 5
3rd
sing,
and the 2nd
plur.being identical,
in tlie
conjunctive8,
in the
imperativeonly 1,as 3 forms
are identical with the
corresponding
indie,
forms
;
then there are 6 middle foi'ms. The
past
has 8 for the indicative
and 8 for the
conjunctive.
The entire sum is therefore 38.
The
language
that
comes nearest to Greek in wealth of forms is 7
undoubtedly
Sanskrit. Hei'e all the three numbers have their three
persons complete,
so
that each mood and tense shows 9 forms. Of
moods and tenses there
are
9, as
the tenth
system
of
forms,
that of
the
participialfuture, being peiiphrastic,
cannot be reckoned here.
We thus
get
81 forms of the verb iinite in
active,middle,
and
passive
respectively
" in
all, therefore,243, as
against
the 268 of Greek.
Then there are the
conjunctive
forms and several
optativespeculiar
to the dialect of the
Vedas,
in which
dialect,however,
many
of the
later forms
ai-e
wanting.
Still the verbal
system
in Indian is on
the
whole, as
Delbriick remarks
('
Altindisches
Verbum,'
p.
1.5),
not
very
sharplydefined,so
that it
hardly
admits of this kind of calculation.
Owing
to the fact that
many
verbs have alternative forms of the
present-
stem
fi'cely
current side
by side,
the number often mounts
up
excessively.
There
are,
for
iastance,
from the rt. kar
make, accordiug
to Delbriick,
336 foi-ms of the
present
verb finite alone in Vedic Sanskiit. At
a
later
stageagain
the
language
has
a
much smaller store to show than Greek.
No doubt it would be the other
way
if we reckoned the
caiisative,
intensive,
and desiderative formations
as
well. These count m
Sanskrit
grammar
for
integralparts
of the
regular
verbal
inflexion,
whereas in
Greek,
where
they
are
far less
numerous, they
are
separate
verbs. Since
each of these derived formations
goes
through
all
persons
in the three
voices,
and has
only
the
perfect
formed
by periphrasis,
for
every group
of 81 forms of the
primitive
vex-b we
get
one of 72 " in
all,
that
is,
216
for each derived
formation,
and 648 for all the three. Add to these the
forms of the
primitiveverb,
and there results the
gigantic
total of 891
genuine
verbal forms. Still
we
should
no
doubt
go wrong
if we treated
each and all of the forms in this tabulated
grammaticalsystem
as actually
existing.
The whole list
may
be found
convenientlyarranged
in Max
Miiller's
'
Sanskrit Grammar
'
(London 1870,
p.
245
flf.).
This much
may,
I
believe,
be
positively asserted,
that in the number of vei-bal forms in
livinguse
Greek
hardlycomes behind Sanskrit. This is in
part
con- nected
with the fai-finer distinctions of
meaning
which are to be found 8
in Greek. Without doubt both tense and mood
systems
are
in the latter
languagemore developed
and
more compact.
If after this detailed
survey
of the extensive stock of Greek forms we
now
try
to understand how all this wealth
oiiginated,
the first
certainty
we can arrive at is that its formatioii
was a
process
of time. Of this
fact
we
get
some
few but
important
indications from the
period
of the
language'shistory,
which
may
in the nari-ower sense
be called historic,
that,namely,
which has left
us written
specimens.
One of the most in- genious
formations of the Greek
verb,
the weak
passive
future,
is
entirely
wanting
in Homeric
Greek,
and of the
strong
passive
future there is but
one
certain
instance,
iiiyijaeaOai,
which
only
occurs
at K
365,
for
oo/ycro-
fxai
has not the
rightmeaning.
These
forms,
therefore,
were clearly
not
made till the time
subsequent
to that in which the Homeric
Epic
was
in
its
prime. They
were
evidently
made to
supplement
the
long
cm-rent
passive
aorists and
on
the
analogy
of the other futures. There had
long
6
INTRODUCTION. ch. i.
been
by
the side of
tj^ ftrjt'cu
a /3v"To/L(ca, by
the side of
rXipai TXijao/jat,
by
the side of
yoii/^Eyai
yoiiaerat
"
why
should not
/ity"'//xercu
have
fiiyi)-
ffofuiil
and kter
on,
why
should not
Kivrjdrjpcu
have
KiynOliffo/^iail
espe- cially
as
these forms
gave
greater
facility
for the
expression
of
passivity
than was
aflbrded
by
the middle forms
^"/io/xoi Kiriiaof.iui.
The future
optative
likewise is unknown to Homeric Greek. For
no doubt La
Roche is rio'lit in
altering
the
completely
isolated and not even well
attested aXvioi at
p
547,
and
reading
ohci kI
tiq
dararoy
kcu KijiJciQ uXvE."i
after the
analogy
of other
passages.
This late
gi-owth
is
veiy significant,
and teaches us
much of the nature of the verb. While the
system
of
cases
not
only
receives no
addition whatever in the
period
known to
us by
^vi'itten
records,
but is
actuallycurtailed,
and while
very
con- siderable
losses can
be discovered within the limits of Homeric
Greek,
in
the verb the
power
of
putting
out new
shoots lasted much
longer.
In
the
use
of the cases
then it is remarkable to find older and nicer distinc- tions
of
meaning
often
replacedby a
less deKcate
accuracy,
and
one case
assuming
the functions of another as
well as its
own.
With the
verb,
9 however,
the case
is the
reverse
;
here we
can,
so
far at least
as
tenses
and moods are concerned,
discern here and there the
stamp
of
a
gi-eaterdelicacy
and
a more thoroughgoing completeness.
We find
analogy
to be the means by
which a
still
living
creative foi-ce attains its
ends,
and
we
may
conclude that
analogy
was also
a material element in
producing
the results of
yet
earlier times. The
impulse
to
carry
through
to the end what is once
begun,
to fill
up
the
gaps
in what
was
at first
an
isolated
gi'oup
of forms after tlie
pattern
of older
types,
is
one
which is
specially
chai'acteristic of the Greek
language.
Hence it
was
comparatively
late that the marvellous
system
we see before
us
reached
its full
completeness.By
the side of this
process
of
completion
of the
whole
we can
also trace a
few less
important
innovations
as
they aiise,
e.g.
the formation of the
aspu-atedperfect,quite
unknown to Homeric
Greek,
the extensive
use
of the
k
in
making
the active
perfect,
of which
again
we see
orily
the
beginnings
in Homer. Other Greek dialects
are
of considerable
use
in
many
directions in
helping
us to ascertain what
we can
of the
phonetic
relations of
an
older time before the division into
dialects had taken
place.
But these
are
all isolated
phenomena compared
with the
mass of forms which
are
unquestionably
as
old
as
Greek
itself,
and which
prove,
by
the wide extent to which
they
accord with
pheno- mena
in related
languages,
that
they
were the
common
inheritance of all
or at
any
rate several of the Indo-Germanic
tongues.
The
task,therefore,
which
we
have to
perform,
if we are to understand
the
structui-e of the Greek
verb, can
only
be done
by going
back to
the relations and conditions of the
language
in
a
pre-Greekage.
The
main
parts
of the structure
were the
work,
not of
Greeks,
but of Indo-
Germans far
away
in
antiquity.
Oiu-
investigationtherefore,
whether
we are
examining a
singlephenomenon or
constructiuga
whole out of
many,
must
always
be of two kinds " reconstructive and constructive
as
well. The former is the easier task. Reconstruction has to take the
forms of the several
languages
and conclude from them what the
primi- tive
Indo-Germanic form
was,
and to obtaiu
by a
systematic
combina-
] 0 tion of such
primitive
forms
a
completeimage
of the structure such
as we
may conjectureit to have been before the first encroachments of deface- ment
and
decay.
On the side of
constrtcction
we have to ask with what
CH. I.
GROWTH OF THE INDO-GERMANIC VERB. 7
notion was this
primitive
structure invented " how did it arise 1 In so
doing
we
try
to
transport
ourselves in
thought
to
periods
which
are still
more ancient,
when the
language
bears still less direct resemblance to
that of later times. A clear
perception
of this twofold nature of our task
is
indispensable.
There
are cases where the two sides
are,
so
to
speak,
at
odds,
where it is
a
question
whether the
surplus
shown
by
one
language
or
dialect
compared
with others is of
primevalgrowth,
or an extraneous
imitation of
some
other similar form
" a
question
we
shall have to
raise,
e.g.
in the
case
of the full termination
-jui
in the 1st
sing,optative.
In the
same
way
it is sometimes not
easy,
in the
case
of
a
sound
by
which
a
form
in one
language
is
distinguished
from the form
equivalent
to it in
another,
to see at once whether this sound has
always
had
a
share in
marking
the
significance
of the
form,
and
consequently
is to be
explained
construc- tively,
or
whether it
may
not have arisen
through
a
later
dulling
and
special, purelyphoneticdevelopment.
In the latter case a reconstruc- tion
is
necessary
before
we can
arrive at the older sound.
Hence, though
in
theory
it
may
be
possible
to
keep
these two sides distinct in the treat- ment
of individual
cases,
it is
practically inexpedient.
What is of i-eal
importance
is rather that we
shoxdd
never
lose
sight
of either.
"Stil],
since the examination of the details of the Gi-eek verbal structui'e cannot
fail to be
a
distraction to the due consideration of the
whole,
and
as at
the
same time it is of
great importance
that
we
should view the whole
collectively,
it will be
expedient
to summarise
here,by
way
of introduc- tion,
the most essential
points
of what
seems
to me
ascertainable aljout
the
gi-adualorigin
of that verbal
system
which
we
may
regaixl
as
already
complete
before the
sepai-ation
of the Indo-Germanic
languages.
To this
may
well be added
a
short examination of such
objections
as have been
I'aised
against
some
of the main
points
in this collective
view,
and
a
shoit
estimate of the
interpretations
" some
of them
diametricallyopposed
to
each other " which have been
suggestedby
its
opponents
in its stead.
To
begin
then with the
positivepart
of these considei'ations
;
of this
much
we
may
be
sure,
in the fii'st
place,
that the Indo-Germanic
verb,so
far
1 1
as we can
by
reconstruction arrive at its fundamental
outUnes,
no more
came
into
being
all at once
than did the Greek, It did not
beginby being
a
ready-made system
of all kinds of
form,
each with its
clearly
defined
function
assigned
to it at its birth.
Every attempt
to conceive of the
verb
as a definite
entity,
after the fashion of the
philosophising gram- marians
of earlier
times,or to show how it needs must follow this
pattern
and
no other,
is
a
mistake. This
huge system
of verbal
forms,perhaps
the
most marvellous creation
"
of the
language-making
mind of
man,
is
a
stratified
formation. The science of
language
has
long
devoted its atten- tion
to the
right
discrimination between these various strata of forms
lyingone above the
other,
of which the
younger
always
presupposes
and is
qualifiedby
the older. I have discussed these
problems
before in
my
treatise,
'
Zur
Chronologie
der
indogermanischen Sprachforschung,'
2nd
edit.
Leipz,1873,
but I must here
repeat my
main
points.
All foi-mal structure in the
languages
of our
stock consists
essentially
in the union of two
elements,one
with
meaning
and the other without
;
that
is,
to
adopt
the usual
phraseology,
in the union of verbal roots with
pronominal
stems. Of this union two
kinds are possible.
Either it is
attributive,
that
is,
the
pronominal
stem is added to the
more significant
root Vv'iththe
same
force with which at a
later
stage
of the
language
an
8
INTEODUCTION. ch. i.
adjective
or
pronoun
i.ssaid
])ygi-ammarians
to be
joinedattributively
to
a
'substantive
:
tliat
is,a"j-a
(Clk."y-o(-c)), ag-man (Lat.ag-men)
is
like 6
aviip,
or ov-oq o atn'ip.
The added
pronoun
lias here
no
other
force than that of
pointing,
like a
local adverb
'
there,'
to the notion
expressed
in the root,
and
bringing
it into
prominence just
as an
article
mi'dit. This kind of union is the main source from which arise the
formative suffixes and some
of the case suffixes,especially
those of the
nominative
and accusative. The other kind of union is the
jyredicative,
the
essence
of which is that the added
pronominal
stem does
duty as
subject,
and
consequently
turns the
significant
stem to which it is added
into the
predicate.
In the clear
separation
of the
predicative
con- nexion
from the
attributive,
while in then-
origin
the two were
hardly
1 2
distinguishable,
lies the
chef
d'oeuvre of the Indo-Germanic formal struc- ture.
By
the more
detailed
arguments
of the treatise above mentioned
I believe I have shown that the
predicative
connexion
was
probably
the
one
that was
developed
ffi-stin this stock of
languages.
Now herein lies
the
germ
of the verb. When once a root like da
was
united to a
prono- minal
stem like ta in such
a
way
that this combination da-ta meant that
man giver,
or
he
giver,
and
nothing else,a
verbal form had been
made,
and when
presentlycorresponding
forms
were
made for the other
persons
too,
the
primitive
foi-ms
being da-ma, da-tva,
there existed
a set of such
forms,a
small
paradigm,
with the consciousness of their inter-connexion
as a
necessary consequence.
And
as
men's minds
were
ali^eady
awake to
the
necessity
of
avoiding
confusion,
and
care was
taken to
keep
these
forms distinct in sound from the attributive
compounds,
the verbs as a
separatepart
of
speech
now
existed
once for all. The further
steps
taken
before the end of this
primitiveperiod,
"
the
expression
of the
pliu'al by
the union of several
pronominal elements,
and the
expression
of the
middle voice
by
a
different combination of the
same,
the
prefixing
of
yet
another
pronominalstem,
the
augment
as it is
called,by
which the
grade
of
past
time
was
marked off
cleai-ly
from the
grade
of
present,
" all these
Ave shall
see moi-e
clearly
when
we come
to the examination of the details.
What
we have to do here is rather to
get
a
bii'd's-eye
view of the
process
of
dcA^elopmentas a
whole.
This first stratum of vei-bal forms thus
given
in outline
comprehends
only
such forms
as
occur, say,
in the
present
indicative and
imperfect
of
the Greek verb
^///u.
There is
only one verb-stem
here,
and that as
yet
quitea
simpleone. Next to the indicative
apparently
the
imperative
was
formed, as we shall
see further
on,
and its characteristic mark
lies,
as in the
indicative, only
in the
personal
terminations. But of
any
other
mark of distinction of mood
or of the kind of time there is not a trace.
The
capitalgain
of the first verbal
period
is
essentially this,
that there
were now two sets of
clearly
stamped personal
terminations for active
^
and
middle,
and
an
augment.
These
possessionswere
lasting,
and the
13
distinctions thus struck out
were made
use of in all
subsequently
formed
strata. The
augment,
where it
was wanted, at the
beginning,
aiid the
personalterminaxions at the end of the word
made, as it
were,
the firm
framework for all
new
productionswhatever within the verb finite.
Tt is at this
point
that the
language
appears
to have made
use, very
early
in its
progress,
of
a means which it
employs
in the most varied
ways
for the
em]ihasising
of
a
syllable,
namely,
repetition
or
reduplication.
Instead of the
simplestem,
e.g.
da,
there
might
appear
within the same
CH. I.
GEOWTH OF THE INDO-GERMANIC VERB. 9
verbal framework the
reduplicatedstem,
e.g.
dada,
and
so
instead of da-ta
dada-ta
;
and, as
this
happened rightthrough
all the
forms,
there
arose a
twofold series
: da-ma, da-tva,da-ta,kc,
and
dada-ma, dada-tva,
dada-
ta. These two series could
hardly
fail to be
distinguished
in
meaning.
In
many
cases
the diiference
was this,
that the first series
was
employed
to denote
momentary action,
the second with its fuller forms to denote
continuous. Here then
we
haA'e the fii'stmaterials for markincf what I
O
have called the kind of time.
Any
fiu'ther formative
power
therefore had
hai-dly
room to exert
itself either at the
bewinnino; or
end of the word, but had to confine itself
exclusively
to the interior. If we
would understand other
expansions,
we must I'emember
always
that the verbal stem forms the
predicate
to
the
shiftingsubjects
denoted
by
the terminations. Now this
predicate
may
in
a
certain
sense be
compared
to the later
noun-stems, although
c[uite
at the
beginning
" that
is,
before the creation of verbal forms " the
distinction between
noim
and verb did not exist. No doubt
evexy
rendering
of
piimitive
Indo-Germanic in
language
of
a
later
development
can be
only approximative;
for there is in the essence of this oldest
mode of
expressionan
indistinctness which must of
necessitygive
way
to a
gi'eater
distinctness in the case
of
a
language
which has
been
actually
handed down
by
tradition. But if we are conscious that
we are
only very imperfectlyreproducing
the real
meaning
of those
primitiveformations,we
may
perhaps
render da-ma
by giveI,
da-ta
by
givehe,
and
conjectui'e
that the
predicativesyllablegraduallyacquired
a
force which
was not
very
difiereut from that of the afterwards
clearly
distinguishedparticiple
or nomen
agentis,
e.g.
giving,giver.
The idea 14
that
a coimla
is needed bei'e
appears
completely
untenable
even when
viewed from the
position
of
a
later
development
of the
language;
for
sentences like
ovk ayadbv TtoKvKinpaviri
have not been
wanting
in
any
period,
and
no
doubt
they were
for
a long
time the
only
kind of
predica- tions
in use.^ The next
expansion
of verbal forms then was
brought
about, we conclude,by way
of the
more elaborate
speciali^sation
of the
forms and functions of the
predicate.
The means
used was exactly
the
same as in the
case of the noun-stems
just mentioned,
i.e.
expansion of
the stem. As
noun-stems,
even
in
periods
of the
language
which
are
known to
us, appear
now
without
any
sufiix,now
with
several,so
the
verb-stem can he used without addition
as
well as
with the addition of
a
suffix. The commonest and shortest suffix is the vowel a.^ Instead of
attaching
the
personal
terminations
directly
to the i-t,
cu/
the nomi-
stem
aga
is formed from
it,
and this
aga
is then
connected,
e.g.
with the
sign
of the third
pers.
sing,fa,
later ti
(^aga-ti:=ayeL, agit),
in the same
wav
in which later the
sisjn
of the nominative case
is added to the same
stem
attributively (a^a-s=ayd-c),
An
imaginable
1st
pei's.
plur.ag-mas
would l)ear to the
actually
deducible
aga-masz=zayof.uc,
agimiis,
the same
relation as that borne
by
the Lat. noun-stem
ag-men
to an agi-men
^
[Cp.
Roby's Latin Grammar,
ii.
p. xxii.]
^
Fick's
attempt
to
dispute
the existence of the suffix a {Beitr.
:. K. der IiuJo-
Germ.
Sprachen,
vol. i.
p.
1
ff.)
seems to me
unsuccessful. Nor can I see what
gain
is
expected
to result from
dividing, e.g.
*bha-ra instead of bJiar-a, since it
makes both
syllablesquite unintelligible.
There is nothing
to
prove
the
priority
of the verbal form. It would be
just
as la\\-ful to deny
that
na
and nu are
nominal suffixes.
IQ
INTEODUCTION. ch. i.
Avhich the
analogy
of
re(ji-men
will
readilysuggest.
These "-stems
so
(jutf-rew
the older stratum in
numbers,
as time went
on,
that
they
de-
cideclly
formed the rule and turned the firststratum into a
group
of
more
or
less anomalous
exceptions.
The orio-inal
property
of
forming
stems
possessedby
this
a
served
to five to the stem
still more
of the character of
a
noun,
and thus
to
mark the action denoted
by
it as a continuous,lasting
one. This
15 explains
the fact that this
a,
represented
in Greek
by
e or
o,
and
Ien"^thcned in the 1st
sing,
to
w,
belongs especially
to the
present-stem
"
that
is,
to that
group
of forms intended to
express
the action in its extent
" and duration.
By
the side of this a
appear
two more
expansions
of stem
which a comparison
of the related
languages
shows to be
primitive,
i.e.
the
syllables
na
and
nu,
about which little else
can be said than that
they
are
used to make other stems
beside verb-stems. The
syllables
in the
middle of
aKil-va-i.iev, op-yv-i.i"i'
are
compared
to the
stem-forming
elements in
vTr-vo-c (=
Skt.
svdp-na-s,
Lat.
som-nu-s for
sojy-nu-s),
in the
Skt.,Goth.,
and Lith. su-nu-s
son,
in the Skt. dhrshnu-s
bold,
with
which we
may
directly
connect dhrshno-mi I
am
bold
(rt.
dharsh^^Qrk.
Oapa).
It is hard to see
any
peculiarity
in these
expansivesyllables
distinguishing
them from the vowel
a.
Nor is it
easy
to find
any
further
points
of
analogy
between
special
forms of
present-stems
and
noun-stems of a
similar
grade
of formation. After these forms had
established
themselves,
nominal and vei-bal stem-formation went each their
own
way.
The intrusion of these
stem-forming syllables
into the
framewoi'k of the verb can
only
be
explainedby supposmg
that at the
time of its
occurrence
the forms had not
yet completelyset,
so to
speak,
and that there stillexisted
a sense that the terminations were the sub- jects
and the stem the
predicate.
Of marks of
case or
number these
noun-foi'ms show not the faintest
trace,
and hence
we
conclude that the
inflexion of the
noun arose later. It is
only
in the
period
of stem-
formation that the verb and the
noun have
anything
in common. In
this both
are alike. Bvit
as soon as
the noun-forms turned themselves
by
fresh
sufiixes,
and
especiallyby case-terminations,
to
polysyllabic
formations,
they
became
wholly
unfit to be made
straight
into verbs.
Reduplication
is
an internal,
and the attachment of sufiixes an
external
expansion
of the stem. But the two methods
may
be com- bined.
The stem that has been
expanded externallymay
be
inwardly
strengthenedas well. We find
reduplication
and
lengthening
of the
stem- vowel side
by
side with the attachanent of
a suflix,especially
of
an
a,
and the
latter,
i.e.
lengtheningor intensification,
becomes an
important
16 distinction between
difierent
tense-stems. When a
distinction arises
between
a stem
hhuga
and
hhauga, lipa
and
laipa,
we
have
again
a
twofold series of
forms,and to the old
binary
stem-formation
(thesimple
and the
reduplicated)
is added
a new means of
distinguishing
continuous
action
{fevyew,
XetTrtw)
from
momentary {qwyi'ir, Xnve'iv).
Meanwlule
I'eduplication, sometimes in
conjunction
with the sufiixed
a,
sometimes
without
it,
furnishes the
means of
expressing
the
more intense,
the com- pleted
action,and thus when
specially developed
becomes the source
of
the
perfecttense. All forms characterised
by
the
expansion
of the stem
by
a siiffix
we
may distinguish
from
primitive
forms under the name
thematic.
But in Greek
grammar
it is advisable to restrict the term
theniatic
to those forms which show the vowels
i
{r,, si)
and
o (w,ov)
in
regular
interchange, or in other
words,
which
belong
to what has
always
CH. I.
GROWTH OF THE INDO-GERMANIC VERB. 11
been called the
conjugation
in il. This
same interchange
of vowels
may
be
seen
in the
conjunctivethroughout,
and this is
enough
to show that
this mood is
a
2:"roduct
of the
period
we
have
just
been
describing.
But
since
a portion
of the so-called verbs in Ml
follow,as we
saw,
in their
present
stems in
-ru
and
-rv
the
same
pr-inciple
of
formation,
the term
thematic is found
inadequate.
We shall find it more correct to call this
class,as
opposed
to the
primitive
or
radical
stratum,
the
secondary,or "
in
so far as we here use
the word stem in the
sense
of the
ah-eady
moulded
and modified stem " the stem-strattim.
Besides
these,however,
there is
yet
a
third
gi-oup
of verbal
forms,
the
analysis
of which shows fresh elements in addition to those common to all
verbal forms alike. The
a
in 'i-Xvrra and
Xvaw,
and the Q in
iXvOrji'
do
not
belong
to the
root,
nor can
they
be
compared
with the
expansive
stem-sivffixes used in the verb after the
analogy
of noun-stems. No
noun-stems show
anythingcorresponding
to these elements. The som-ce
from which noun-suffixes
are
drawn is
pronominalstems,
but with these
the
syllables
in
question
have li^le
or
nothing
in
common.
Then-
origm
must therefore be
sought
elsewhere.
Bopp
in his time
recognised
in
them
auxilia7"y verbs,
and
accordinglyregarded
the vei-bal forms
so
originated
as
compounds.
This last
expression,
now
in univei'sal
use in
comparative
grammar,
must be
taken,
it is
true,
in
a
limited and
special
17
sense,
since in the fullest sense of the word all verbal forms
are com- pounds.
But whereas in
(prj-ini,
diiK-yv-iuer, XeiTro-fisy
we
have
a
single
verbal stem in connexion with
one or more
pronominal stems,
thei-e
are
in
e-\v-(Tn-i.iei', i-Kv-di]-v
at least two verbal
stems,
and we can
thu"s^^
call the latter
compound
verbal forms with the
same
propriety
as
Xoyoypa(po-c,
Xvai-iroroQ can be called
compound
nominal forms.
Still,
to denote them more
exactly,
we
shall find it better to use
the
more
sigrdficanf expressionauxiliaryforms,
or
auxiliary
stratum,
Tliis third stratum of
necessitypresupposes
the other
two;
for if
there
wei-e no verbs there could be
no
auxiliaries to use. Auxiliaries
are
nothing
but verbs which have lost their full
meaning.
It is the
rule in
language
that the
full,
the
significant,
and the lifelike
precedes
that which is
empty, inexpressive,
and lifeless
;
and
every
verb that has
degenerated
into
a
shadowy auxiliary
must have fii-st
enjoyed
full
powers
and
an
independent
life of its
own. Of this the
auxiliary
verbs in
every
language
afford the clearest
pi-oof
in their
etymology.
In
periods
of
which the
language
has
come down to us verbs which
originally
had
most
clearly
defined
meanings,
such
as stand
(stare,
Fr.
ete^=status),
remain,
become
(Germ,werden, orig.turn),
to be bound
(Germ,sollen),
have,
dwell
(Goth,
wisan
[Eng.vxis'\,
Skt. i-t.
vas, dwell),
have become
mere auxiliaries,
and
are sometimes
nothing
more
than
a
copula.
The
Indo-Germanic
tongue
must have
possessed
at least
one verb that had
degenerated
into
a
copula
before the
separation
of the
languages,
i.e.as-
mi I
am. It
had, however,
other verbs as well,
most
likely,
which
already
had such small
specific
force that
they
could be used to
express
an
action
by conjunction
with another
stem,
there
being
no doubt a shorter
way
of
saying
the
same
thingby
the
use
of
one stem
only.
We
can,
how- ever,
distinguishclearly
the first and second strata in the inflexion of
the
auxiliary-forms.
The
aorist
tXvdr^i' corresponds
to
'idrjv,
that
is,
the
auxiliary
element here is
primary or radical in its inflexion.
"JL-Xv-rra,
on the other
hand,
like the
simpleto
for
eiTa=era7n,
shows
an
expanded
stem
having
the
a
added to its root. There must have
long
existed
an
12
INTEODUCTION.
ch. i.
ftra,
or rather,
as
the whole formation
belongs
to the Indo-Germanic
18
period,
an
asa,
before tXyrra arose.
We see from this that the third
stratum
presupposes
both the first and the second. The rt.
ic,
moi-eover,
must,
before entering
into this
combination,
have
passed
from the full
meaning breathe^live,
which it is
highlyprobable
it first
possessed,to
the
empty
one
which makes us give
to etyai
the
name of verb substan- tive,
or even simplecopula.
There must in fact have
already
existed
a
verb substantive,
inflected
according
to the ride of the first or second
stratum,
before the forms of the thii-d stratum arose.
If these
hyi^otheses
are granted,
there is
nothing extraordinary
in
our theory. Every
form of the verb finite is
a
little sentence.
Up
to
this time
speakers
had been content with sentences without
a
copula,
in
which the connexion between
subject
and
predicatewas
expressedby
the mere juxtaposition
of the
two,
and
now it
was
extremely
natural to
follow the
analogy
of sentences where the
copula
stood
separate,
and
have a copulaexpressed
inside the verb itself. While
'iSoy,
i.e.
a-da-nt,
translated into the
language
of later
tim^s,
would be tU7n
dantes,I'bo-ffar,
i.e. a-da-sa-nt,
would be turn dantes erant. Two
pointsonly
must be
presupposed
: fii'st, a
kind of
fluidity
about the verbal
forms,
in
con- sequence
of which the
sense
of the
origin
of the
predicativesyllables
and
their
analogy
to noun-stems had not
yet
been lost
;
and
secondly,an
absence of mai-ks of case
and number at the time that the coinbination
took
place.
An uninflected
dik,
uniting
in itself the
meanings showing
and
show,
could
easily
combine with
a
following
asmi I
am,
to make
dik-asmi,
shortened dik-smi
; so, too, asa-mi,
the later
by
-form of
as-mi,
could combine with the same nominal stem to make
dik-asami,
shortened
dik-sami,
from which
was formed the
past
tense
a-dik-sam,
i.e. Skt.
ddiksham^ehit^a
.
Besides the rt. as we
find two other verbal roots used in the
same
way
:
the rt. dha
do,
and the rt.
ja
go.
Later
periodsgive us
in- structive
instances of the
periphrastic use
of these two roots. Inasmuch
as
every
verb
expresses
an action,
every
verbal form
can be
replacedby
the
periphrasis
of
an abstract
noun and the verb
'
do.' The infinitive
occm-s oftenest in this connexion
; cp. e.g.
the German
er
thut
kommen,
the
English
hmo do
you
do ? The rt.
ja, on the other
hand,
is
exactly
19
adapted
to
express
cii'cumstance,
inasmuch
as
go
is
equivalent
to
go
about,
versari in
aliquare.
Standing separately
it has this force in the
Lat.
infifiasire,
and the German
sjxtzieren gehen {to
go
a walking).
Inasmuch,
again,as there is in
going
the idea of motion towards
a goal,
go
"
cp.
the Fr.
je
vais
/aire" can
acquii-e
the
meaning strive,
jjursue,
and thus become the
source
of marks of mood and of the futiu-e tense.
Finally,
it
can be used for the
passive,as we
have it used in
venum ire,
as
the
opposite
of
venum dare. For
go
is
an
intransitive
verb,
and
as
such stands in
a kind of
opposition
to
doing,
and the notion
'
to
get
into such
and such
a
plight,' suppliesa link between it and the
expression
of
passivity .
Since two
or more
auxiliary
elements of this kind
can be
combmed,
there arises the
possibility
of
a
large
number of forms which
partly
serve
to
supply
the deficiencies of the older
strata,especially
in
cases where
phoneticdiflicultieshave
arisen,partly
ofier
an
opportunity
of
conveying
various
meanings
wliich the
means at hand
are
quiteor
partially
unable
to
express.
In the
course of time this third stratum
outgrew
the two earlier
ones.
CH. I.
OBJECTIONS TO THE AGGLUTINATIVE THEORY. 13
Of
coiu'se
the
ongin
of the
auxiliary
elements
was soon
lost to
view, just
as
in the second sti'atum the
sense
of the
way
in which the stems had
been
expanded
had
soon disappeared.
But these
syllables, beginningas
they
did with
a
consonant,
and
capable
of
symmetrical adjustment
to all
kinds of
stems,
met the wants of what
were
relatively
late
periods.
There was not so much force wanted for theii^ articulation
nor so gi'cat
a
nicety
of distinction
requiredas
there was for the
production
of the
more
delicate and finer formations of
a preA'ious
age,
which, now
that
they
had
themselves
provideda
pattern
for the
younger
generation
of
formations,
became more
and
more antiquated,though foi'tunately they were too
numerous ever to become
entirely
obsolete.
This short sketch of the
gradualgenesis
of the Greek verbal forms is
on
the whole in accordance with the views which since
Boj)p's
time have
obtained
among comparative grammarians,
and which have
only
been
modified in
singlepoints
here and there
by
further
investigations,
among
which those of Schleicher
may
be named
as the most conclusive and com- prehensive.
It is
scarcelysurprising
that in
so
difficult
problems
there 20
have been difierences of
opinion on
certain
points. Still,
since the
ap- pearance
of
Bopp's
'
Conjugations-system
'
the main outlines have received
generalrecognition.
Such
independentenquirersas Pott, Benfey,
and
Schleicher have been here
completely
at one
with
Bopp.
Jacob
Grimm,
who is
repeatedlyspoken
of
by
the below-mentioned
opponent
of the
received
theory
as
opposed
to
Bopp,
expresses
himself
('
D. Gr.' i.1051
ff.)
as essentially
of the same
opinion.
Those who ti-eat the
philosophical
side of
language
take the same view. For this it is
enough
to refer to
W.
V.
Humboldt's treatise
'
Ueber das Entstehen der
grammatischen
Formen'
('Ges.
Schr.' iii.
pp.
290, 297),
and to Steinthal's
'
Charakteristik
der
hauptsachlichsten Typen
des
Sprachbaues
'
(p.
285
ff.).
As we
shall
see later
on,
even
before
Bopp,
Buttmann
was of the
same
view with
respect
to one of the main
points,
i.e. the
origin
of
personal
terminations
from suffixed
pronominal
stems. This
really
remarkable
unanimity
has
been met
by
a
very
decided
opposition
from two sources :
first from
"VVestphal
in his
'
Philosophisch-historische
Grammatik der deutschen
Spi'ache,'
and later in his
'
Methodische Grammatik der
griechischen
Sprache,'
in both of which books the view we
have
adopted
is called
'
die
Bopp'sche Aggiutinationstheorie,'
and most
emphatically
denounced as
erroneous.
The second attack has been made
by
H.
Merguet,
who in his
book
'
Die
Entwickelung
der lateinischen
Formenbildung
'
(Berl.1870)
makes radical
objections
to several of the main
j^oints."*
A scientific
oppo- sition
to
widespread
views is itself
a
useful stimulus and
may
lead to
greater
21
certainty
if it can be shown to be
ill-grounded.
I think therefore that
it is worth while to make
a
brief examination of these
objections,
and for
"*
Merguet
has since
given repeated expression
to his views, but, as far as I
can
see,
without
going more deeply
into the
question,
or subjecting
the views he
combats to a
thorough
examination. I
may
refer
specially
to his latest work,
TJeher den
Eiiijlvss
der
Analogic
iind
Differcnzining aiif
die
Gegfaltung
der
Sprach-
formen, Konigsberg,
1876. " f?imilar doubts have been
expressed,though
with more
reserve, by Bergaigne
in the Mevioires de la Societe de
lingvistique,
vol.
iii.,who
partly
follows Alfred
Ludwig {Der Infinitiv
iin Veda
; Agglutination
oder
Adap- tation').
A. H.
Sayce, who,
in his
Principles of Comparative Pldhlogxj(2nd
ed.
Lond.
1875), opposes Bopp's theory
in
many imijortant points,still,
at
p.
294,
accepts
its
explanation
of the
personal
terminations.
14
INTRODUCTION. ch. i.
a moment to look the new
theories
of
our opponents straight
in the face.
In
so doinjT
we
must treat
separately
the
origin
of the
personal
termina- tion
and the construction
of
compound
verbal forms.
As far then as
the
personal
terminations are concerned, Westphal
acknowledges
the
phonetic
similarity
between them and the stems of the
ijersonal
pronouns,
but he
adopts
the view
advanced, though
not
very
positively, by
Karl Ferd. Becker, according
to which the
personal
ter- minations,
and, as "Westphalholds,
the middle
ones,
came first,
and the
personalpronouns
were
afterwards formed from them. The
positive
part
of his view we
shall have to examine later
on,
but first of all
we
must
enquu-e
into its
negative
side. What
are the
gi-ounds
then which
decide
Westphal
to abandon
a theory
that is
so
widespread and, as it
seems
to
me,
so
well considered? It almost looks
as
if he
thoiight
the name
'
Agglutinationstheorie
'
enough
in itself to arouse a
feeling
of
abhorrence in
every
thoughtfulmind, as
in fact the
expression
'
Boj^p's
Agglutinationstheoiie
'
" for
Bopp'sname
others with
equalcapriciousness
put
Schleicher's" has
subsequently
been vised here and there in
a like
contemptuous
sense.
The reasons
casually
adduced
by Westphal are
mightilymeagre.
In
spite
of
repeatedperusal
I have
only
been able to
discover three definite
objections.
The first rests
on
the difference
between the termination of the 1st
sing.
act. mi
or m
and the nomina- tive
of the first
personalpronoun.
'
Those,'
he
says ('
Philos. Gr.'
129),
*
who take the view
contraiy
to mine and
explain
the termmation of the
first
person
in the verb
by supposing
the attachment "f
a
word which
already
had its
own meaning
of
/, are forced into
a
grave
self-contradic- tion,
for the stem 7na
to which
they
have
recourse
has
no meaning
but
me,
to
me,
and never
that of /.' This
objection
is not
hard,
I
think,
to
disable. It-seems
to me that the difference between the nominative and the
oblique
cases is one
which
language
took
cognisanceof,
not when stems
were formed,
but after inflexion had
begun.
No
one ever
said that
a nomi-
22
native
ma was
the
source
of the tei'mination
mi,
but a stem
ma,
which, like
every
other
stem, possessed
the
faculty
of
producing
various
cases
in
a
periodsubsequent,
as I think I have
shown,
to that of the
origin
of verbal
forms. That
a
stem should in itself be
adapted only
for
a
certain set of
cases
and not for others
seems
to
me as
inconceivable
logically
as
that
a
verb-stem should be
adapted only
for certain
persons,
moods, or tenses.
All these
thingsare
merely
accidents
affecting
the substance of the stem
after it has taken
shape,
not before. There is
nothing
of the kind to be
seen in the
pronominal
stem tva for the second
or ta for the third
person.
If then in the
language
of later times the stem ma
forms
no nominative,
it must be held in
so
far defective
:
it must have left off"
forming
a
nomi- native.
We find
something
similar in the
case
of the stem tci. This
stem
developesno nom.
sing.masc.
and fem. ta-s ta, as an independent
pronoun,
but the
nom.
plur.ta-i,
tus is
enough
to show
us
that there is
no
conceivable obstruction
pi-oducing
this
defect,
and
compound
forms like
av--(')-c and iste
prove conclusively
that there is
no
svich
thing as
the
creation of stems for
obliquecases
alone.
Westphal,
it is
true, regards
the
assumption
that the stem
ma
may
once have had the
power
of
denoting
the
subjectas an hypothesis
that
we
have
no
right
to make.-^ But how is it
possible to discuss the first estab-
^
How litUo
scruple Westphal
has to assume even for Greek forms not
sup-
CH. I. OBJECTIONS TO THE AGaLUTINATIVE
THEORY. 15
lislinient of
linguistic
forms whicli
undoubtecUy
took
shape
in
very
early
times,
if
we
do not use li}^3otlieses
1 Does
Westphal
then make
no
hypotheses
when he
assumes a language
without
personal
pronouns,
assumes
personal
terminations to have arisen from
'
essentially meaning- less
'
vowels and
consonants,
taken
quite
at will and
presumed
to
'
occur
naturally
'
to the
jDrimitive
In do-Germans ? I think these such violent
and
improbable h^'potheses
that
by
theii- side the
assumption
that
ma
was defective
seems
perfectly
innocent.
Why,
where
are we to look for 23
a language
without
personal
pronouns
? How
are we ever to conceive of
a verbal structm-e so elaborate,
with the most accurate
means of
denoting
the
I,thou,
we, "c.,
if the
language
was not at the
same
time able to ex- press
the
corresponding
persons
when
standingby themselves,able,
how- ever
imperfectly,
to
express
'
to him
'
or
'
him,'
'
to thee
'
or
'
thee
'
some- how
or
other ? On
Westphal'shyjjothesis
this must haA'e been
impossible
until this
process
in the A-erb was completed.
And how is
it,
if the
per- sonal
terminations
really
did fall like
drops
from the
body
of the middle
voice,or
like
I'ipe apples
from its
branches,
that
notwithstanding
there is
so
very
little likeness between
e.g.
the
plural
of the middle tei'minations
and that of the
personal
pronouns
"?He is
obliged
to admit in his
'
Greek
Grammar,' i.
p.
391
ff.,
that even after
applying
all the
'euphonic'
sounds,
'
fulcra,'"c.,
which he has at his
beck,
he finds the stem of the
second
person plural
'
completelyunintelligible.'
But if it is
necessary,
before
we can explain
the
production
of the
independent
pro
noli ns in the
plural,
to find other tendencies at work than those which
are discernible
in the
personal
terminations of the
verb,
the whole of
Westphars hypo- thesis
falls to the
ground.
A second
objection
deals with the relation of the
secondary
to the
primary
terminations.
Westphal
will not allow
us
any
right
to derive
the former from the latter
by
loss of sound. In the
j)i-eterite,
he
says,
we never
find
mi, si,ti,nti,
and
are not
justified
in
assuming
it to have
had these forms once. But
here,too,
the received
theory
is
supported
by analogies
which
-are
beyond doubt,
and which
even
Westphal
cannot
reject.
If the
poetical
ifral had not been
preserved
we
should not have
a single
Greek second
person
singiilar
with the full termination
;
in all
other
cases
the
i
has
disappeared.
In Latiji there is
no mi, si,
ti. The
i has been
completelylost,
with the
exception
of
a
single
trace in the
Carmen Saliare. In the first
person
plural
it is
only
Yedic Sanskidt in
its
-masi,
whicli there
occurs more
often than
-mas,
and the Zend
-mahi,
which have
kept
the
i,
which we
must
undoubtedlyassume
for the
original
Indo-Germanic
tongue.
In the
perfect
active in Sanskrit the
pei'sonal
termination of the 1st and 3rd
sing,
has
disappeared,
the
piimary ending
24
of the 3rd
plm\ (resby
the side of
antl)
is
considerably
abbreviated. In
short,the
rejection
of final
vowels, especially by polysyllabicforms,
is
among
the best-established facts of the
history
of
language,
and since it
is
quite impossible
to understand the verbal
system
without some recon- struction,
there is
no excessive boldness in
presupposing
similar
processes
to have
happened
in the earliest
period
of the
genesis
and first estab-
ported by any authoritymay
be seen from what he
says
at
p.
75 of vol. ii. of his
Gk. Gr.
:
'
We must assume that there was at an earlier
stage
of the Greek
language not
only a xiy^r^
say ye,
"c.,
but also \k-yov
I should like to
say,
and
Kiyo^ivwe want to
say.'
IQ
INTEODUCTION. ch. i.
lishment of these
forms when we
have such clear
analogies
to
guide us.
Tlie moderate assumption
of such
losses,
even
for
so
early times,
is
justihedby
the fact that
all inflexion not
only
allows but necessitates
some
de"i"ee of weakening
of the constructive elements added to the
body
of the
word.
A third arf^iiment,
on
which our
opponent lays stress,
deals with the
71
of the 3rd
pers.
plur.{nti,nt,
'
Clk. Gram.'
p.
79).
He holds that
'
it
is
impossible
to discern a
mai'k of the third
person
in each of the two
elements n
and t so as to
giveprobability
to what
analogy
would show to
bo the
primaiy
meaning,'
i.e. he and he. We shall
see below, however,
that the
pronominal
stem an pi-ovides
us with
a
satisfectory explana- tion,
and this was i-ecognised long
since
by Schleicher,tliough
to this
the author of the
'
Methodical Grammar
'
did not choose to
pay any
attention.
I have not been able to discover
any
othei-
objections
to the received
theoiy.
It would rather seem
that this
scholar,
who
many years
since showed himself,by
his valuable
investigation
of the laws of final
letters in
Gothic,
to be an
acute
enquu'er,
but who has
paid
little atten- tion
to the litei'ature of
linguistic
science since that
time,
has been
really
driven,by a
line of
ai-gument
that does not touch the Indo-Gei-manic
languages
at
all,
to
represent
the construction of Indo-Germanic
speech
as
different to what all
previousenquu-ers
have
thought
it. In the
pi-eface
to his
'
Philosophisch-historische Grammatik,'
p.
xii,
he
says
:
'
Thei-e is no
self-evident
gi-ound
for the
assumption
that all
phenomena
of the oldest and most
primitive
store of Indo-Germanic and Semitic
inflexions must
necessarily
have arisen
by agglutination,
and admit of
25
absolutely
no
other
explanation
or analysis.'
With
respect
to the
possi- bility
of inflexions of
a
different
origin,
he
appealsespecially
to
Arabic,
saying
that
we
have here
'
a
class of inflexions of the noblest and oldest
kind,
and here not even an
attempt
can be made to refer the inflexional
endingsa,
i,u, an,
in,un
(for
this
tiiplet
of
pure
vowels is the basis of
the later terminations which were
dulled
by
e and
o)
to
pronominal
or
significant
roots.' But we must not be too sxu-e of this. It is main- tained,
e.g.
by Dillmann, a
scholar of some note
('Aethiopische
Gramm.'
p.
254),
in
spite
of
Westphal'sveto,
that the
a
of the
ace, by
the side of
which there occurs in
Ethiopian
lia as well,
is
a
primitive'impersonal
demonstrative
particle, meaning
liei-e, thei'e,
identical with the Hebrew
n"
of direction.'
Besides,
these elements
belong
to the formation of
cases,
othei'S adduced
by Westphal
to that of moods
;
and
so even if
they
coidd not be shown to have arisen fi'om the adhesion of
originally
independentstems,
this would
prove nothing
about the
pei'sonal
termina- tions.
That these
arose in Semitic from
pi-onominal
stems seems
generally
admitted
(cp.e.g.
Gesenius,
'
Hebr. Gr,'
(21sted.),p.
80
;
Dill-
mjvnn,
'
Aethiop.
Gr.'
p. 161),
and is with
respect
to
many
of the ter- minations
so evident
as
hardly
to admit of
a doubt, esj)ecially
as the
Semitic terminations share with the
independent
pronoun
the
power
of
marking gender,a
power
which
no other verbs
possess.
This last fact
proves clearly
that
here, as shown
by Schleicher,
'
Ueber Nomen und
Verbum
'
(Abh.
d. k. Siichs. Ges. d. Wissensch.
hist.-philosoph.
Abth.
iv,^ p.
514
ff.),
the distinction between
noun
and verb has not
yet
been
quiteclearly
drawn.
This
theory
of
agglutination
which
Westphal
attacks is
suj^ported
CH. I.
0BJECTI0:N^S to the agglutinative THEORy. 17
by
an
almost incalculable number of
facts,
and takes account
throughout
of
tangiblemagnitudes.
It is
a
fact that in a large
number of
languages
the
personal
terminations are absolutely
identical with the
possessive
suffixes.
Compare, e.g.
the
Magyar (Schleicher,
ut
supra,
527)
"
vdrt-nm I have waited hal-am
my
fish
vdrt-ad thou hast waited for him hal-ad
thy
fish
rdrt-a he has waited for him
"
hrd-a his fish
vdrt-unk we have waited. hal-unk
om*
fish.
Who can
doubt here that in both
cases
the terminations
were
in them- 26
selves
nothing
but
expressions
of the different
persons
1 I and
my,
thou
and
thy,
are
here
completelyidentical,so
that we are justified
in trans- lating
the verbal foi'ms as
viewed
by
the
Magyar language by my
having icaited,thy having icaited,
"c.
;
and it will
hardly
be
supposed
that this
agglutination
took
place
in the verb sooner
than in the
norm.
Exactly
the same
pi-ocess
can be discerned in
many
other
languages,
as
may
be
conveniently
seen in Schleicher
(utsupra),
e.g.
Ostjakish(p.535).
j)(me-7n
I laid
ime-ni
my
wife
pane-n
thou laidest
ime-n
thy
wife
pane-t
he laid.
ime-t his wife.
Jakutish :
hyst-yni
I cut bas-ym
my
head
byst-yu
thou cuttest bas-yuthy
head
byst-a
he cut.' bas-a his head.
If,then,Westphal
bases his view
on
the
very
imperfectly
demonstrated
impossibility
of
explaining
all inflexion to have arisen from the accretion
of
separate
formations,
the
opposite
view is
suppoi'tedby
numerous
actual instances of the
gi-owth
of
personal
terminations otit of
pronominal
stems. Add to this
that,
in later
periods
of
languages
whose stock of
sounds has been mtich reduced and thus made often
undistinguishable
from each
other,personalpronoiuis
are a
second time ttsed with verbal
forms to denote the
grammatical subject,
now of
cotirse not as stems but
as outworn cases : Igive,jedonne, "c.,
and it will
appear
that the
origin
claimed for these terminations "
however diffictiltit
may
be to
explain
some
individual instances^is
really
as
probable
a one as we can ever
expect
to find in the case of
problems
which deal with the earliest
periods
of the life of
language.
It
has, moi^eover,
the
support
of the
gi'and
idea which is so
truly
in
harmony
with the researches of natui-al
science,
that of the
contimcity
of all
linguistic
formation. The
higher
stages
of
language
are not
separated
from the lower
by
an
impassable
gulf,
but
onlyby
a
gi-eaternicety
of elaboration to which certain races
have
never
attained.
Monosyllabicspeech,imperfect
combination
(agglu- tination),
perfect
combination
(inflexion),
these
are
the three main
27
stages,
the third of
which,
if I am not
mistaken,
is
beingevery
day
found
to be
more like the second.
These
self-consistent, clear,
and
simple opinions,
which
more or less
explicitly
form the basis of the whole
mass
of modern
linguistic science,
wiU,
I venture to think,
find
no
difficulty
in
holding
their
own against
the
diametrically opposite
view
expounded by Westphal,especially
in his
'
phUosophitch-historische Grammatik,'
e.g. p.
94 ff. It does not fall
c
18
INTEODUCTION. ch. i.
within onr province
to examine his
general
considerations,
which
are so
suf^festive of tlie
natural
philosophy
of earlier times. To
many they
"vviTflie
unintelligible,
as
I confess
they are
to
me.
Westphal regards
the
linfniistic
structure
of the Indo-Germanic stock as
'
an architectural work
of art
endowed
with endless
magnificence
and la\ash
gi-andeur.'
'
The
lofdco-constructive categories
followed
by
the Indo-Germans in the for- mation
of their
language
are
the same
categories
which have
sway
in
the Cosmos,
in
the macrocosm
and in the microcosm alike
;
the
same
that
underlie
sidereal life and the various forms of telluric
existence,
whether inorganic,
vegetable,
or
animal.' I
readilyadmit, and
perhaps
more
readers
than one
would do the
same,
that I find theories of such a
vast
sweep
brought
no nearer to
my comprehension by
the
following
somewhat extraordinarycomparison. Westphal
goes
on to
say,
'
Our
primitive
Indo-Germanic
ancestors followed these
categories
with the
same perfect
unconsciousness as
when
they
snatched at the first food to
noiu-ish
their
bodies,
or
when the first Indo-German
man embraced for
the first time the first Indo-German
woman, who, though
he did not
know it
yet,
was
to
produce
him
a man
like himself.' From this
'
dialec- tic
of celestialintelligence
'
we are at
length
conducted to the world, with
which we are directly
concei-ned,
the world of
sounds,forms,
and
linguistic
expression.
But here on
the threshold
we are met
by
assei-tions for
which no support
is
even attempted
"
*
a
is the vowel which
came, nearest
to his
(the
Indo-German's)organs.'
Since
Westphal
himself admits that
the
primitive
Indo-German had i and
u at command
as well,
it is
quite
im-
28
possible
to see by
what rule he measui-es the
nearness to the Indo-German
of these diiferent vowels. What is meant
by
'
coming nearer
"? If it
means
'
being more
easy
to
pronounce,'
the
history
of
language
and
physi- ology
both
give
the assertion a flat contradiction. The vowel
a
demands
a greater
tension of the
organs
of
speech
than i
or
m,
and
hence, as is
well
known, a
tends
everywhere,
as
langiiages
go on,
to become
more
like
% or u.
And
yet
it is
upon
this undefined notion of
'
coming nearer,'
which
sui'prises
ns as we
pass
from the
macrocosm
to the
origin
of lan- guage,
that all
Westphal's subsequent system
rests. He
confidently
applies
the same
notion of
approximation
to the consonants as
well
:
'
The nasal is the consonant that
comes nearest to the
organs
of
speech,
the dental mute and the sibilant
are more remote,*^
hence in the inflex- ional
system
the former is the
representative
of what
comes nearer to
the
speakeramong
the dialectical series of definite
conceptions,
the dental
mute or
the dental
sibilant,
which takes its
place,
the
expression
of
some- thing
more
remote.'
Here, as we
see,
this
ambiguous conception
is
turned to
practicalaccount, by being
made to
serve as an
explanation
of
the
])ersonal
terminations
m, s,
t.
I have
thought
it not
superfliTous
to add these
samples
of the
positive
side of
Westphal's teaching,though
I confess that while
reading
these
theorems I have at times doubted whether the author
was
in
earnest,
or
only
wanted to
tiy
how much
nonsense
superficial
readers could be made
to
accept.
I Avill leave each reader to take his choice between the much-
abused
'
agglutination
'
and this
new
philosophy
of the nearest.
Another
point
of
importance
in the
representationcursorilygiven
"
Gk. Gr.
p.
80 :
'Of consonants tliose that come nearest are
the nasal and the
mute which is
interchangeable
with the dental sibilant.'
CH. I. OBJECTIONS TO THE AGGLUTINATIVE THEORY. 19
above of the
way
in which verbal inflexion
arose
is the
question
of
com-
j)0VMd
teiises.
It is
xiniversally
admitted that
composition,a soiu-ce of
word-making
from wliich the Indo-Germans have
gained so much and
various
help
for the
noiui,
is to be found at work in the verb
as well.
Who could fail to
recognise
even in Latin forms like
pot-ero,
Gothic like
soki-dedum
(we
did
seek),
the
presence
of two verbal
stems,
the second of
29
which takes
a position
of
subserviency
to the first% But
Westj)hal('
Philos.
Gr.'
107)
looks on
the whole
phenomenon
as a
comparatively
late
one.
His view is that
compound
verbal foi-ms
are
uniformly
combinations of
inflected
noun-forms with
inflected
verbal
forms,as
is the
case,
e.g.
ia the
Slit,
periphi'astic perfect
of the verbs of the 10th
class,
e.g. JcorajdnJcakdra,
properly
'I made theft' for 'I
stole,'or
Jcorajdmdsa, Tcorajdin hahJiuva,
properly
'
I was
theft.' As infinitives
agaiu
are
universally
held to be
petrified
case-forms,Westphal
is content if he
can find
an infinitive in
the first half of such a
verbal
compound.
A
compound
therefore like
the French fut. aimer-ai, properly
'
I have to
love,'
he finds
no
stumbling-
block. On the other hand,
he denies that
an uninflected
or bare verbal-
stem can
be
compounded
with an iufiected verbal
form, which is the
assumption made,
e.g.
by Bopp
and others in order to
explain
the Skt.
d-dik-sha-m =
Greek e-ceiEa.
Here
Westphal
and
Merguet are
quite
at
one,
with this
exception,
that
Merguet
goes
farther than his
predecessor
in his
unqualified objection
to the received
theory.
The difierence between us
here is
by
no means so fundamental
as that
discussed above. It is an actual fact that
many
vex-bal
compounds
are
of the kind allowed
by
both
scholars,
and hence the
question
must be
asked in each
case,
whether or not there
can
be found in the verbal-stem
a noun-stem
capable
of inflexion. This
question
we shall
not fail to
investigate
below when we come to the forms concerned. We
may,
however,
notice two
pointsby
the
way.
Great mistakes
are often made
by
those who look for inflected noun-forms
or infinitives in the interior
of verbal
compounds.
For
instance,
while
Westphal (p.
Ill)
assei'ts that
'
before this old
perfect
too of the verb to do
(soki-da,etc.)
there
7nzist
have been
an
infinitive
originally,'
he makes not the faintest
attempt
to
establish this
by
the
investigation
of the Teutonic
languages.
"WTiat is
the
good
of this
*
must
'
if he leaves the
question
in such
an
imperfect
state 1
Again,
in
spite
of his
uni,villingness
to
recognise
bare
stems in
verbal
compounds, Westphal
admits on
the
same
page
that in the Latin
forms
e7-am,
erim
(legeram, legerim)
'
it
certainly
looks
as if the
auxiliai'v
30
form in
question
had been added to the
simpleperfecf-sfem, though
these
combioations
are too obscured to admit of
a clear
insight
into their
genesis.'
In such
a case we
may
be sure
of
so much at
least,that
on his
own
showing
there
are
still some
obscurities left in
Westphal'stheory.
Merguet
expresses
himself more
strongly
still. At
p.
199 of the
above-mentioned work he
passes
a
final
judgment on all such
formations
in the
following
words
:
'
We must not
forget
that stems with
no inflex- ion
can
only
be assumed to have existed
as
independent
words in
a
period
antecedent to the
appearance
of
inflexion,
and must hav^e
ceased to exist
as such
as soon as
inflexion
arose.
Now the
auxiliary
verb
assumed to be
the second
component appears
in
an
inflected
form,
and
therefore
presuiD-
poses
the existence of inflexion. So that
we should have to
suppose
two
words to be here
combined, of which the former could
only
have existed
before inflexion
began,
while the latter owed its
existence
to inflexion
c 2
20
INTKODUCTION. ch. t.
itself. These two words consequently
could not both have been in
iise
at once
and the
supposition
of their combination involves
a contradic- tion.'
Liui^uistic
science
would indeed be in an
evil
plight
if it had
been mainhxining
for half a century
doctrines which
a couple
of sen- tences
could
so completelyupset.
It is a pity
that
Merguet
did not make
himself a
little better acquainted
with the views he attacks before
writing
these
words. He talks throixghout as
if what he calls inflexion had
burst
upon
the woi-ld all at once
like some
natural
phenomenon,
revolu-
tionisino-
all the
previous
order of
things,
and
introducing
in fact
just
the
inflexions
of verbs and nouns
which
are to be found in the school-books.
But
all
linguistic enquiry,
as
I have
repeatedlypointed out,
assumes
forms to have arisen
gradually
and in strata. Where inflexion
was
of so
gradual a growth,
thei'C is no absurdity
at all in
svipposing
that
by
the
side of and in
comjiosition
with inflected forms there
appeared
formations
belonging
to a previousstage
of
development.
In
my
treatise
'
Zur
Chronologic,'
to which he
occasionally refers,
I
have endeavoured to
prove
that inflexion in the nouns did not take
place
till
some
time after the three main
stages
had been reached- in the inflex- ion
of the verb. If this was
so,
there
wei-e, e.g.
no case-forms of the
noun-
31 stem
dik for a long
time after the
production
of
a
verbal form asmi
or
asami I am :
that
is,
there was a
bare stem then in
use.
And
why
should
it be
thought impossible
that these two forms should have
come
together
with
a
small
change
into
dik-sami,
and that this d ik-sa mi- shonld make
a
preterite
a-diksa-m as
dadd-mi made a-dadd-in 1
Merguet
himself
(p.64)
is oblisred to
admit that the vocative is
an uninflected stem-form. There
is here
nothing
like the anachronism
or
*
self-contradiction
'
which
Merguet imagines
he has found.
Again,
what
are we
to
say
to
com- pounds
like
7rvp-(pdpo-Q, -!rai'(r)-(jn(pn-c, Xoyo-Trow-cl
In all these
cases we
most
immistakeably
find uninflected
uniting
with inflected stems to make
organic
wholes. Or are we
to
suppose
that in all these
cases case-termi- nations
have been lost 1 Who would venture to
try
and establish that ?
In answer
to
objectionsMerguet
has
published
a second
work,
'
Die
Ableitimg
der
Verbalendungen
aus
Hilfsverben
'
"c.
(Berlin,1871).
At
p.
33 of this work he is
already
on
the road to the
discovery
that if
we
want to understand the nature of
compounded stems, we -must
transport
ourselves to that
period
in which words
'
had the form of bare stems.'
Without doubt
even
at that
early
time
types
had been
pi'oduced
of
every
kind of
composition,
and
among
othei-s of the
composition
of
predica,tive
stems with the
auxiliary
verbal forms which I
suppose
to have been
already developed.
We
are,
in
fact,brought
back
constantly
'from all
directions to the fundamental
truth,
that in all
linguistic
life
we
find
older strata side
by
side with
younger, cropping
up
hei-e and
there,
and
reaching over from an
earlier into
a
later
period.
What
Merguet
goes
on to
say
in his first work about the
improbability
that
auxiliary
verbs
were older than others is still less to the
point.
ISTo one ever said
they
were :
it is
universallyheld, on the
contraiy,
that auxiliaries
are
weakened verbs of
independent meaning.
Forms then with auxiliaries
in them do
certainly
presuppose
older strata of verbal
foi-ms,
but there is
nothing
that forbids us to
suppose
that
later,
after
a
number of verbs
32 which
originally
had
a
full
meaning
had become auxiliaries in
separate
use,
the
attempt
was
made to
use
them in
compounds
as well,
and that
CH. 1.
OBJECTIONS TO THE AGGLUTINATIVE THEORY. 21
too when
they
were bare
stems, just
as they
were
used in later times
after theii- stems had been
expanded
and even provided
with case-intiex-
ions. In
my
treatise
'
Zur
Chronologic,'
e.g. p.
55 f.
(2nd edit.),
I have
called attention to all
this,
and
pointed
out how vast are
the
periods
which the consideration of all these strata one
upon
another reveals to us.
And in fact I cannot see how what I have there said " and
Merguet
nowhere examines
more closely
"
is in the
very
least refuted
by
the
con- tradiction
he
says
he has discovered.
Still less successful
are
the
attempts
made to find another
explanation
for the forms in
question, Westphal,
inasmuch as
he is unable to
explain
the whole
mass
of forms
by
the aid of the elements which he
I'egards
as
primitive,
assumes a
twofold series of
adjuncts by
which what
'
he takes to have been the
primitive
formations wei'e expanded.
To the
first series of
adjuncts
he
assignsmeanings,
e.g.
to the i of the term, mi,
wliich "
although by
his
theory
i is a
'
more
remote
'
vowel " comes
nearest,
i.e. is the
right
one to
express present time,
to the
s
of the
aorist,
to which,
for
some
unknown
reason,
he ascriljes an
intensive
force,
and to the
a
which he
says
occasionally
denotes the
plural.
To this list
must be
added,
if I understand
Westphal i-ightly,
those
expansives
to
which he
gives
the name
'
fulcra,'
e.g.
the
syllablesas
and
jtis
in the
pronominal
stems
as-ma, jtes-ma,
and
perhaps
too some
of what he calls
'
streng-thenings,' or
'
secondaryadjuncts,'
e.g.
the
k
in
o-k.
All these
sounds and
syllables,
of which he nowhere
gives any
explanation,can
according
to his
theory
be
introduced,even
after the
primary
structui-e
of the
language
has been
established,as a
kind of second instalment or
reserve
force from the divine
tKi^uty
fwi' of
forms,
at the
beginning,middle,
or
end of words,
A second series of
subsequently
introduced
adjuncts are,
on
the
conti'ary,
held to be
pui-elyphonetic.
It contains
'
euphonic,'
'
pui-ely
euphonic,'
'
piu-elyphonetic
'
vowels,
and consonants as well,
the latter,
where
they
appear
between
vowels, being
entitled
'
dividing
consonants,'
.
the exact
counterpart,
that
is,
of the well-known and still favourite
'
connecting
vowels.' In this latter
pointWestphal
and
Merguet
are at
one. Both credit the
'
fuga hiatus,'
that
is,
the disinclination to let two
vowels
come into dii'ect
contact,
with the
production
of a goodlyrow
of 33
consonants which
Merguet
supposes (p.205)
to have arisen
'
out of what
was
originally
a
very
indistinct
aspii'ation.'
To criticise these
views,
which
Merguet
advances less
positively
in his second
work,
is not here
our
object.
There
are
only
two
points
to which I wish to call attention.
The fii'st
is,
that
by
such
assumptionswe are reallytransportedbodily
back to the old
grammarians' point
of
view,
which it
was hoped was
left
behind for
evei-.
It is notorious that then*
explodedetymologieswere
indebted for then* existence to the freest
possible
use
of the
wXtni'aaiuoi;
of
single
sounds and whole
syllables.
What
are
these
'
fulcra,'
A:c. but
the
naively
admitted
pleonasms
of the ancients *? If
fulcra,streng-then- ings,
purelyphonetic adjimctsare to be allowed
everywhere,
it will be
hard to set bounds to the most
extravagant caprice.
Tlie second
point
is
the marvellous
inconsistency
with which
language
would be
chargeable,
if it had
reallyproduced
forms in the
way
supposed.
On this head we
shall confine ourselves
exclusively
to
Westphal. According
to this
scholar,
the Greeks had a considerable
troop
of sounds at command for
22
INTRODUCTION. en. i.
the
piiriDOse
of
preventing
vowels from clashing; e.g.
r {'
Gk. Gr.' i.
p.
117),
which is
used,
among
other
things,
to form the 'locative'
"-7--i
from the stem t ,''ic,
introduced in the
perfect
active
'
to avoid
a hiatus,'
r
in
Ti-r-vc,
ri-i'-i
(ii.
409),c
in eXttI-S-oq
(i.254, 266),
d in
Kopv-O-oe
(p.274),(TT
in
BiiJLi-aT-oQ (p.
254),t
in o"iko-l-o for o'iko-o
(p.145).
In
many
of these forms there is not the
slightest
warrant for such
assump- tions
;
u)
and
vo are
in no
way
such combinations as were
avoided
(cp.
nTvyio",
^uKpvoy,eXvofiey).
Another
question
that arises elsewhere
is,
Avhy
were
these
auxiliarytroops put
to so
little
use
] It would have
been
perfectlyeasy
to
pi'event
vowels from
clashing
at all. How is
it,
then,
that we
get
such
strange
forms as
yevtoc,
yirei,yirea, Xiknieai,
in
all of which an o-
had to be
rejected
before the
clashing
was
possible?
How is it to be
exj)laiiied
that the same language which, as Westphal
himself
allows,
often throws
out^'or i
between two
vowels,
e.g.
(ii.132)
in
dok-pv-u)
for the
presupposablerla^pv-tw,
and in all the verbs in
nw, ow,
34
eu",
has in other cases actually
introduced the sound
j
afresh'.' On the
one hand, as no one denies,jxiaQo-iu)
becomes
ixiado-w;
on the
other,as
Westphal
says,
o'ii^o-obecomes o'iko-i-o ! And elsewhere the
case
is the
same.
The 6 in
ap-d-jj.6-c (i.184)
is said to be
'eujihonic,'
whereas the
same
group
of sounds
was
found
so objectionableby
the Greeks in
TriTredl.f^iai
that
they changed
it to
izi-Ktia-y.ui.
Are we
to think the
Greek
ear
varied so waywardly
that in
one
century
it wanted to haA^e
a
d before
an
^,
and in another wanted to
get
rid of it ?
It must not be
forgotten
in this
controversy,
that
assumptions
like
these of
Westphal's
have in individual instances found
support
even
among
the
representatives
of
comparative
grammar.
I once thought
myself,
with
Westphal
e.g.,
that the
k
in the
perfect
was euphonic,though
I have
long given
up
the idea. A more
connected and
thorough
examina- tion
of the matter in hand has led
me to the conclusion that the admission
of
purelyphonetic
elements in the life of
language
is
only
to be made
with the
greatest circumsjoection.Language
is
penetrated everywhere
with
significance.
Its forms
can
at first have contained
nothing
but
what served for the instinctive
expression
of
an
idea or conception.
It
is true that sounds have
a
life of their own
which is in
many respects
independent.
Their
changes can
be established for each
language
accord- ing
to its
own
prevailinganalogies.
It
must,
e.g.
be allowed that out of
the vocalic element contained in
every
continuous sound a
vowel
may
in
some circumstances
aiise,
and
that, conversely,a special
articulation
may give a vowel
a nasal
pronunciation,
and that this nasal echo
may
develope
into
an
independent
nasal. Similar
phonetic growths
of no
meaning are to be allowed to but
a
very
limited extent
(e.g.hr-c-p-oo),
and in all such
cases the
germ
of the sound is in
realityan outgi-owth
from the sounds
already
there. But
nothing can justify
us
in
going
farther than this and
admitting
the
possibility
of the
geiieratio aequivoca
of
a sound out of
nothing
at all.
In these
principles
I believe I
am at
one
with the
great majority
of
my
fellow
enquii-ers.
Oiu-
object
is to
explain
the
phenomena
of
We should have
just as much
right
to call
tt euphonic,
and thus
explain
a.-Tr-6
to be from the stem a. (perhaps originallya-Tr-or),
and so arrive at an
ablative.
CH. I.
OBJECTIONS TO THE AGGLUTINATIVE THEORY. 23
language according to the
phonetic
laws and tendencies of individual
languages,
and to refer them in all
cases
to elements which had
once a
meaning,
and which
were
created in
early periods
of the
linguistic
life.
We
are certainly
far from
our goal as yet,
but it is of the fu'st
importance 35
to be
sure
of
oiu*
way ;
and
so
it
appeared to
me fitting
that at the outset
of these
investigations
I should make
an ex]jress
avowal of these main
fundamental
principles.
24 THE PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS. cu. ii.
CHAPTEE II.
THE PERSONAL TEBMINATI0N8.
I. ACTIVE.
BuTTMANN,
illhis
time,expressed
himself
as
follows on
the
subject
of the
origin
of the
personal
terminations
(Ansf
Gr. i.'^
496,note)
:
'All these
syllabic endingswere,
as the
analogy
of oriental
languages clearlyproves,
marks of the three
persons,
and
originated
in attached
pronouns ;
they
lost,however,
their
original
force
as
the
language
took
shape
and
opened
the door to the
smoothings
and
roundings
which find their
way
into lan- guage
owing
to the desire for
rapid
and
euphoniousspeech.'
This
judgment
has been in
every way
established and confirmed
by compai-ativephilo- logy.
It
must, no doubt,
be admitted that even
those who ai-e sure
that the
principle
of this
explanation
is the
right
one
find
gi-eat
difiiculty
at
many
points,especially
in the
dual,
the
plural,
and the whole of the middle.
But
we
may assume,
I
think,
to
beginwith,
that in this
primitiveregion
of the
genesis
of forms
weakenings
and
dullings
of
primary
forms were
more
frequent
than
elsewhere,
and that as a
result of this
we cannot
always
arrive at
certaintyas to what the
origin
was.
Our
purpose
de- mands
that
we should
mainly try
and find what relation the
given
Greek
forms bear to the
primary
forms which
may
with
more or
less
probability
be
presupposed.
In
so
doing
we
may
most
certainly
start with the
assumption
that the forms of the Greek
personal
terminations which
are
fullest,
in
so far
as
they can
be reconciled with those of the related
36
languages,are also
relatively
the
oldest,
while those which are
less sub- stantial
have been weakened from them. This
truth,
which has been
established
by
the researches of
Bopp (Yergl.
Gr.
"
434
ff.)
and
Schleicher
(Comp. "
269
fi".),
has not been
upset
by
Friedrich Miiller's
opposition. The last-named scholar
(Sitzungsberichte
der k. Akad.
Philol. Hist. CI. vol.
xxxiv.,
and
again
vol. Ixvi.
Oct.)
was
for
starting
not
from
mi, si,ti,
but from
m, s, t,
and
regarding
the i,strange
as
it
may
seem,
as a mark of the
present
tense. The difiiculties
encountered
by
such
assumptions
have
already
been
pointed
out
by Misteli,
Ztschr.
xv.
2S7,
and I have
defended the received view
myself
in
my
'
Studien
'
{vol.
iv.
p.
211
flf.).
We hold fast to this
then, that,
to
begin
with the
singular,
those
personal
terminations in it
are
the oldest which
approach
most
nearly
to the
personalpronoun-stems ma,
tva,
ta.
First Person Singular.
Accordingto Schleicher the termination of the 1st
sing,
has
splitup
into
two
essentially
distinct
forms,
the
originalma
having
on one
side lost the
m and become
a,
on the other weakened the
a to i and taken the form
firstof ml and then of
simplem
(Gk. i),
the former
(")appearing
in the
en. II.
FIRST PERSON SINGULAR,
ACTIVE.
25
perfect,
the latter
(/uior m)
in all the other tenses.
In Schleicher's
view then the
a
in
yiyoi'-a
= ^ht.
(faydn-a
is
essentially
distinct from that
in the aor. "0"t^a
;
in the former it stands
for
ma,
in the latter it is
part
of the
tense-stem,
after
which, as
is shown
by
the Skt. d-diks/ia-m,
the
personal
termination
disappearedonly
on
Greek soil. If this could be
proved,
the 1st
pers.
perf.
would be remarkable at once
for its
greatantiquity
and its
strange
transformation. As far as
its
antiquitygoes,
which is shown
in the
preservation
of the
primitivea,
we
have a parallel
to the 1st
sing.
in the tha of the
2nd,
which we
cannot but derive
straight
from the
pro- nominal
stem
tva;
and herein
evidentlylay
the maiii
ground
for
Schleicher's view. We should
actually
be able to ascend to a
still older
system
of
vowels,
inasmuch
as
Kuhn
('
Ztschr.' xv.
405)
adduces from
the Vedas forms like
(fa-grdhhd(I grasped),bi-bhdjd(I feared),
^
and 37
from Zend ia-tashd
(I
framed
; cp.
Justi's
Lexicon);
and Justi
re- cognises
the form -td in Zend for the 2nd
pers.
as
well
(v6ig-td=oi(Tda).
There
is,however,
a
difference between these two
persons
as
well as a
resemblance. In the tha
or
ta,
Gk.
da,
of the 2nd
sing,
the consonant
has been
carefully preserved;
and where it clashes with the final con- sonant
of the rt. the
difficulty
is
adjusted:
Skt. vet-tha for ved-t/ia=oifT-tia
for olE-Oa,
but the consonant in the termination never
disappears
to make
way
for that in the root. On
looking
further we
find the same
process
occm--
ring throughout. Everywhere
in Greek the consonant of the termination
is the
determining
and the
persistent
one. Perspicuity
demanded that this
should be
so,
for since the
pei-sonal
tei-minations are distinguished
from
each other
essentially by
their initial consonants
only,
if the
opposite
process
had taken
pi-ecedence,
it would
really
have led to the annihila- tion
of the
newly
created
personal
terminations.
And Schleicher holds,
in
fact,
that the Skt. 3rd
sing.perf.
veda came
from
ved-ta,
and thus
coincides with what
was originally
ved-ma in the 1st
sing.
It is ti-ue that
for this
expulsion
of the consonant of the term, we
have
one
certain in- stance,
of
which,
of
course,
Schleicher was thinking
when he formed his
views. The 1st
sing,
of the middle loses its
m throughout
in Skt. and
Zend, as
does the 3i'd
sing,
of the middle
perfect
its
t,
and the result is
that both
persons
of this tense in these
languages
coincide. But since
Greek has in this instance
preserved
its
/./ot
and
tul everywhere
without
exception,
and since in
Gothic,too,
-da survived all
along,
we
have no
right
to
assign
this
strange
mutilation in Skt. and Zend to a period
ante- cedent
to the
separation
of the
European languages
fi-om the common stock,
but
ought
rather
on
every
account to
assign
it to no
earlier
pei'iod
than
that in which Indians and Ii'anians made
a
distinct smaller
gToup.
Con- sequently
the above-mentioned
analogy
does not hold when we
look more
closely
at it. It
might
prove
something
for oriental
languages,
but not
for Greek forms
;
but since the Skt.
yaydna
can hardly
be
separated
from the Gk.
yiyova,
we must
giveup
the idea of
establishing
for the
oriental
languages,
that the
a at the end of the 1st
sing,
is
a
cvirtailed38
ma.
For these
reasons I hold to the view that the
perfects,
in the 1st
as
in the 3rd
sing.,lost then' termination not
before
but
qftei-
the
a,
which
we
shall afterwards
see still
stronger
reasons
for
consideiing
to
belong
to the
stem,
and that this loss took
place
at no
very
earlyperiod.
I
refer
yiyova
to
yeyoya-m,
and
(jagdna
to gagana-mi,
and believe we
ought
to
regai'd
the
agi-eement
between the two
languages
here
as
of the
2Ci
THE
PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS. ch. ii,
Kamekind as
that between
the 1st
sing,
in
w
and the Zend
presents
in
a,
e'er
pererd (I ask)
=
Skt. prJcBd-mi.
In the case
of these latter
we can
liardly
doubt that,as
will be
shown more at
length
cUrectly,
in the time
Ijefove
the
separation
of the
languages,
the mi was
still intact
m the
present
and hence that the
special
correspondence
between Greek and
Zend hei-e is the result of later development taking place independently
in the two languages,
and due to kindred causes.
And this is
just
the
conclusion to
which we
must come
about the above-mentioned
perfect
forms.'
In
support
of this view we can
adduce an
isolated but well
attested perfect
form,
the ^olic
fui"r]-fii
= Folca
(Ahrens,
Aeol.
136).
Why
should we
not think that here the
jdi
is
just
as
much
a
relic of
earlier
times as
in other cases? This
foicT]-fii brings
us to an
Indo-
Germanic
vaida-mi. The vowel before the termination will have to be dis- cussed
later. Here we
have
only
to do with the termination itself. If
our
conclusions are correct,they prove
that there is no
evidence of
any
form
for the 1st
pers.
sing,
older than -7nL We
now
turn to the considera- tion
of the
-fii
retained in Greek,
then of its loss and its transformation.
1)
fXL
in the 1st
sing,
pres.
ind. of
primitive
verbs.
The number of the verbs which
get
their name
from the fact that
they
retain their old termination is not a
very
gi-eat
one.
We shall learn
39 more
about them in the foui-th
chapter.
All have occasional
by-forms
of the
ordinaryconjugation,
which
are specially
numerous
in the case
of
the verbs in
-rvfii,
though
from Homer downwards
they
do
occur
in
other verbs
besides,
and
justify
the conclusion that this class of forma- tions
was alreadybecoming
obsolete at the earliest
period
of which we
have
any
record.
Many only
exist in isolated forms.
Perhaps
we
may
find in the fact that
a
small number of verbs of
uncommonly frequent
use,
like
e//"'
^V''TldrijJLi, cuwjjli, 'Iffrrjfxi, 'iTjfji, (pr]j~ii, ^eiio'v^ii,
ui^rvfji,
re- mained
true to the older
fashion,
the
reason why
others of less
frequent
use were
able to withstand the main
tendency
of verbal inflexion and
preserve
their old forms intact.
2)
More extended
use
in Aeolic.
We have the
repeatedtestimony
of the old
gi-ammarians
to the fact
that the
conjugation
in MI was more extensively
used in the Aeolic
dialect than in the others
(Ahrens,
Aeol.
134).
In
single
instances
we actually
find forms with the fuller
personal
termination
peculiar
to this
conjugation,
as
kcWtj-^l(Sappho,1, 16),
oprj-j^ii
(ib.2, 11),aaviiTij-i^i
(Alcaeus,18,
1
Be.),
anrj-i^i
(Pind.
fr.
132,
4
Be.),a'iyrj-fxi (Hes.0pp.
683),iTTcili'Tj-^i (Simon.Ceus,
fr.
5,
19
Be.^).
We have too the direct
testimony
of Herodian
(ed.Lentz,
ii.
463, 930, 825)
to the forms
yeXai/xi,
iraXaifii, nXayaifii,loKifxiiJfxi,
and the Boeot.
rapjjttfxi,
nuieifxi,(plXeifjii.
Most of the
examples,however, belong
to formations which dififerfrom
those of other
dialects,
not in their
terminations,
but
only
in their
'
Brugman's
attempt (Stud.
ix. 314
ff.)to
represent
the vowel which stands
before the
personal terminations in the
perfect as a mere production
of the
nasal, and make tlie vowel of the 3rd
sing. e.g. (fagana = yiyopf
rest on mere
formation
by analogy,
does not convince
me in the least.
CH. II.
FIEST PERSON SINGULAR,
ACTIVE. 27
internal vowel,
e.g.
3
pi.tTrtppoi-ijietm (Sappho 2),
'ieiai
(ib.16),part.
(HKSic
(Ale.69),TiOtig
(ib.34),t:a\i]f^itroc, cnrEi\i]Tr]i', (Tvi'arrtj^rjv, (pofjij-
{.levai.
Here the dialectic difference lies in the different treatment of the
vowels which clash in the contracted
verbs,
and this must be discussed
elsewhere. I
only
mention this fact
now
because it serves to refute
an
assumption
made
by
Ludw. Hirzel
('
Zur
Beurtheilung
des aeolischen
Dialekts,'
p.
56
ff.),
and
supported by
several
scholars,
that in their
oprifii,
"c.,
the Aeolians
were not
preserving
a
relic of older
language,40
but had
only
at a late
period applied
the fuller terminations ia
lai-ger
numbers on
the
analogy
of the verbs like
(orjj^f,
Tidrji.ii, hcw/jii.
Forms like
"pop{]f.t"da (Ale.
18,4),Ku\i]f.i"i'oc, (f)i\t]rTda, "c.,
prove
that the
analogy
which
is
sought
in the forms of the
ordinary
Greek verbs in Ml did not exist
at all. For authentic Aeolic forms like
uirvcoiJerai,
oiOi^ieyat(Ahr. 141),
TTEpdeiJiEi'wv (Sappho 64),kniaTajxh'a (ib.70),
are
markedly distinguished
from those
given just
above
by
their short
vowels, as
I have shown at
greater length
in
my essay,
'
Ziu- Geschichte der
griechischenzusam-
mengezogenen
Verbalformen,'
Stud, iii, 379 ff. Thus
regarded
these
Aeolisms
againassume
the character of
gi-eatantiquity;
and of this
we
are
the less entitled to doubt because we have
yet
other traces handed
down to us
of the better
preservation
of the
genuine
full
personal
terminations,especially
from the Homeric
dialect,
and to these traces we
will now tiu-n.
3)
The termination
jut
in the
conjunctive
was,
after
a
few scattered notices of the old
grammarians,
fii'stintroduced
into
oiu- Homeric text
by
Gottfr. Hermann
(De
Emend. Eatione Gramm.
Gr.
p. 263)
and F. A.
Wolf,
while the M.SS. have in its
place
the
ordinaryoptatives, which, however,
in
many
places
violate the
syntax.
(Cp. Buttmann,
Ausf. Gr. i.^ 351
;
Matthiae,
i.
453;
G.
Hermann, on
Hymn,
in
Cererem, v.
123.) Bekker,
Hom.
Blatter,
i.
218, recognises
the
following
ten instances
:
"
i2 717
kwr)v
ayayiofii
cofxoi'h (Et.
M.
p.
54, 43)
E 279 e'i
(ce
rvxt^fit (cod.
Yen. A and
Harlei.)
T
490 OTTTToV
ay aWag ^^(vag
iv
fxeyapOKTiy ejioiQ
KTe'ivwfxi yvi'oi-
KUQ (thesame M.SS.)
I 397
Tudjv iji'
k'
i6i\(i)f^n "pi\rii' Troirjaofx'
iwoitlv
(Apollon,
de
Conjunct.; Bekker,
Anecd.
p. 516)
H 243 and
x
7 e'i
ke
tOxmi-u(Eustathius,
p.
1279,
48)
A 549
uv CE K
Eywi'
cnrdi'EvdE veCjv
eOeXmjxlvoi)"jai
(p
348
ft K
(.QeKwhl
X
392
(j(j)pa
eVoc
E'nru'jXL
to
jjlolKaTctdvfiior
eotlv
S 63 ctAX
Et^ ocppa'iCLjfxi (piXovtekoq
while,
instead of
'/icw/u (piX-qv
ig
Trorp/cayalar, as
has been written at
41
I
414,
instead of the MS.
'iKwiuai (piXrivor
'iKoifiL (piXiji',
we must with
Brugman ('
Ein
Problem,'
71)
read
'iKtjfxai e)jv.
That the full form
belonged
of old to the
conjunctivejustas
much
as to the indicative is
a
fact that calls for no remark. As the Gi-eeks had
universally
abandoned
the
yui
in the indicative of
barytoneverbs,iOiXufii
had the
advantage
of
being readilydistinguishable
from the indicative. Still
a
glance
at the
forms
justgiven
is
enough
to show
us
that it would be rash to
regard
28 THE
PERSONAL TERMINATIONS.
ch. it.
the desire for distinctness as
the
determining
power
in
retaining
the
fxi,
for
except iOiXw/jit
all the forms that
are
preserved belong
to the
aorist.
4)
/xt
illthe
optative.
In all
persons
but the 1st
sing,
the
Optative
shows the
secondaiy
personal
terminations.
Here it takes the
primary
fu,
but
only
in the
so-
called verbs in
-w,
and
among
these,as we
shall
see
dii-ectly,
there
are
others
besides tlie contracted verbs which do not have it in all
tenses,
while in the
contracted verbs the fuller form in
uj-i' completely
follows the rule of the
secondary
forms. Hence
Bopp's
doctrine
(Vergl.
Gr. ii.^
259,
iii.^
17)
that
the termination
ijn
in the 1
sing.opt.
is
'
unorganic'
Schleicher
(Comp.^
648)
teaches that
/ai
has forced its
way
into the
optative'just
as the
pri- mary
forms
always easily
drive out the
secondaiyones
by
the force of
analogy.'
All the
same,
I do not know
one instance at all
corresponding
to this. The
generaltendency
of
language
has i-ather been the
opposite
to this " weaker and
clipped
forms have been
prefeired
in time to
stronger
and
more
distinctive
ones
" and for this
reason it would be less
surprising
if the reverse was
the
case.
When
we talk of
analogywe are bound to
find
a near
relation between the
cases said to be
analogous. We
can
understand how the
analogy
of the
nom.
pi.ttuXeic can
produce
the
same
form in the
ace.
pi.,-
because the
language
often treats nominative and
accusative as one
and the
same
case,
or
how
///jflg
takes the
rough
breathing
on the
analogy
of
i//l/"7c.
But what
analogy can exist between
(pepoii-ii
and such
exceptional
forms
as
'ian^fjn, ciowjXL,
or even
leiKwui
1
42
Neither the form
nor
the
meaning
has
any special
i-esemblance at all.
It would be more
likely
that
we should
get
an
*"'a/^a,
as
such
a form
would be more
closely
related to
ridii^i, 'h]i-u,
than
fepoifii.
Biit
we find
nothing
of the kind. The
linguisticsense of the
Greeks could
hardly
fail,even
before the time of
grammatical consciousness,
to see
the
com- plete
analogy
that existed between the
optative
and the
preterite,
an
analogy
which must have been most
perceptible
to the
ear in the marked
contrast shown in the middle between
^uj/r, ao, to, rro,
and
/xnt, o-ut, tcu,
I'Tui.
Why
then this variation ? It is
precisely
the absence
of
all
analogy
for it that is
so
striking.
For this
reason,
in
my
treatise
'
Ziu- Chro-
nologie,'^
p.
61,
I
came to the conclusion that 'This
singleexception
seems explicable
in
one
way only,
and that is
by supposing
that it is
a
relic of
inconceivable
antiquity.
For that which difiers
entirely
from the
prevailing
rule lies
always
vmder the
presumption
that it itself follows
an older rule still' Hence I concluded that this
^i
had survived from
a
time when the
optative
still
possessed
the full
primary
terminations in- tact.
The
same conclusion
was arrived
at,
at the
same time, by Benfey,
in his treatise
'
Ueber
einige Pluralbildungen
des
indogermanischen
Verbum,'
p.
43, though
it
seems
that the 8kt. forms which he adduces
in
support
of it
are
doubtful,and that
we must not attach much
weight
to Pali forms like
jxik'/tejjami (which might
appear
in Skt. as
*2)ak'aja-
janii
for
pakejam. Cp. Delbriick,Altind.
Verbum,
p.
23).
5)
fXL
lost.
In the fii-st
pers. sing,
of the
principaltenses of thematic formation
the
indicative
never shows a
fxi
at all. The Greek
fifjw,
Dor. fut.
cwaiw,
CH.ii.
flEST PEESON SINGULAE,
ACTIVE. 29
.
are
the
representatives
of tlie Skt. bhdrd-mi
(Zd.bard-mi)
and
ddsja-mi.
How are we
to
regard
this "? At one
time it was thought enough
to
say
the termination
pi
had been lost
;
but later researches have led to
very
diiferent
views,
and
especially
to doubts as to whether the Graeco-Italic
0
is
reallyquite
the same thing as
the d shown
by
oriental
languages
before the -ini. In this direction Scherer has
gone
farther than
anyone.
He maintains
(Ziir
Gesch. der Deutschen
Spr.
p.
229)
that
'
the "-stems
have in their d
presei-ved
the older
form,'
i.e. that Gk.
0f'pw
is to be re- 43
ferred to a primary
form
hhard,
to which at a
later
period
a
mi was
added in Skt. after the
analogy
of other vei-bs. Scherer
attempts
to
prove
this
by appealing
to the
unanimity
of the
Eui-opeanlang-uages
and the
movable nature of the term
-mi in Zend
(e.g.perec/i
I ask = Skt.
prMlid-mi). Kuhn,
in his
searching
review of Scherer's book
(Ztschr.
xviii.
325), actuallygives
new
instances of similar shorter forms of
conjunctives
from the
Vedas,
e.g.
sfdvd for
stavd-ni,pra-hravd
for
pra-
bravd-ni,
which are
remarkable as being anticipations
of
Em^opean
forms
;
but he at the same time
proves
most
convincingly
that the conclusion
which Scherer bases on
such forms is
quite
unwarrantable. Delbriick
(Altind.Yerbum,
p.
23)
is no
doubt
right
in
regarding
an
isolated
"Vedic
1st
sing,
in -dn as an
intermediate
stage
between -dmi and -d.
It is in fact inconceivable that the thousands of verbs of the so-called
first main
conjugation
in Skt. should owe
the -"?i of their first
pers, sing.,
as
Schei-er
thinks,
to the
'
transference
'
of it from the far less
numerous
verbs of the so-called second main
conjugation. Again,
the Homeric
conjunctives
like
idiXu)ni,
"c.
(cp.
also
idiXrim),
when
comparetl
with the
afterwards universal
e9"\w,
as
well as
the
gradual tendency,already
noticed at
p.
15,
towards
uniformity
and
a
curtailment of the termina- tions,
which influenced the whole of Greek verbal
formation,speak
most
decidedlyagainst
such
suppositions.
Even on
European
soil there are
not
wanting traces,
if not of the full termination mi in thematic
verbs,
still of a more or less
clearly
discernible
nasal,
which
we are quitejusti- fied
in
regarding
as
the remains of the full termination.
In
Latin,
it is
true,
traces of this
kind,
such as Bergk (Ztschr.
f.
Alterthw.
1835,
p.
297
;
Philologus,
xxi.
597)
discovers in the older
language,
are not well authenticated. Plautine criticism and Corssen
too
(i.2267)
count
faciom.,
dicom,
videom and the like
mere copyists'
blunders. But the Slavo-Lettish
languages show, as
Kuhn has most
clearlyproved,
the efiects of the term, -mi in this
place
in the nasal vowel
a
(pronounced
like the Fr.
on),
e.g.
Ch.-Sl.
vezq^iljat. ve/io,
find also in ti
in the Lith. veM which is to be
explainedas
the result of the
dulling
influence of the nasal. It thus becomes
extremelyprobable
that Greek 44
too has lost a
nasal after the
w,
and that this nasal came out of the
fuller term,
mi, just
as
the s
of the 2nd
sing,
did from si.
Another
controversy
has arisen on
the
qiiestion
of the
original
quantity
of the o-sound before the term, was dropped.
We have
no
right
to assume jn-imafacie
that the
long quantity
we find in the Indo-
Iranian vowel
belonged
to Greek as
well. Even
Bopp (Yergl.
Gr.
" 434)
thinks it
possible
that the Skt. bhard-mihsid a
Gk.
(^e'po-^t, just
as
the 1st
pi.
bhard-mas had
a
(pepo-jjec
corresponding
to
it,though
he
prefers
himself to assume a
(pipcj-i^i.
Ascoli
('
Di
un
giaippo
di desinenze
indo-europee,'
Istituto Lombardo, Apr. 1868)
does not hesitate to
regard
the form
Bopp
held
possible
as
the real one
;
and it cannot be denied
3Q
THE
PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS. cu. n.
that in that case
the parallel,
not
only
between
singular
and
plural,
but
also between
active
and middle, comes
out more clearly,nor
that of the
European
languages
there is not one
that shows
any
distinct evidence of
a
lon"' vowel existing
before
the termination was
dropped.
At the same
time
ft
is not
easy
to explain
this
long
vowel. Ascoli
conjectures
that the
presupposable
a-mi took first the form of
a-vi,
then that of
a-v,
and
finallv of
a-n,
and so w.
But the
change
of
m to
v
is not
sufficiently
established
for
this
period
and this branch of
languages,
any
more
than
is the
orio-in of
a
Grseco-Italico
from av.
More
particularly, however,
is it hf rd to see why
the same
consonant on
should when
fulfilling
the
same
function
have
met
with thre;?
separate
fates,
i.e. of
being preserved
in
(ffrrjjut,
eOi\wi.u,
tOiXoi/xi
as
in the Lat.
su-m, inqua-m,
of
changing
to
V
in the above-mentioned forms,
and to v
in the Greek
preterite: 'iarr-j-v,
i'lOeXo-r.
I therefoi'e
think it more probable
that between the fuller
*ii)ii)o-i.i
and the actual
(pipu)
there came a
form
something
like the Ch.-Sl,
in
(f
(bera),though,
beyond iywj',"yw
= Skt.
ahctrn,primary
form
agham,
which has been alreadycompared by others,
there is
no certain instance
of the chano-e
of a
final om
to o.
The Homeric
cw,
which
we might
be
tempted
to derive
from
lofi(Joh. Schmidt,
Yoc. i.
11.3).
is better re-
""arded as an
abbreviation
of
c
i7)/i",
i.e.
cefx-i.m,co^i-^a. Why *fEpo-iJ
did
not become *(l)ipov,
as l-fipo-jx
became
(.-([)ipo-y,
I cannot
say.
45
"
6)
The
secondaryv.
In a
considerable
number of
languages we
find the four
secondary
endino-s
7n, s,
t,
nt confronting
the
primary vii, si, ti,
nti with the
Greatest regulai'ity
in the three
persons
of the
sing,
and in the third of
the
plural.
After this has been set forth
so
completely
and
synoptically
in the
works of
Bopp
and
Schleicher,
it
would,
I
think,
be
superfluous
to
prove
it over again.
The fact that no singlefamily
of the whole stock is
quite
withoiit this distinction between
j)rimary
and
secondaryendings,
as
may
most easily
be seen
from Schleicher's table affixed to
"" 269-277,
and
that the
primary
forms
always
attach themselves to the indie,
present
and
perfect,
and the
secondaiy
to the
preterite,
and
are fond of
showing
thems 'Ives in the
potentialor optative,
leaves
no room for
a
doubt that
this twofold formation existed before the
language
of
our stock ceased to
be one. Bopp,
when
(ii.^ 270)
he
expresses
the
opinion
that the weaken- ing
of mi to m
and the same
process
in the
case of the other termina- tions
belongs
'
not to the time in which the
linguistic organism
was
still
in all
parts
at its
prime
of health
'
or,
as
he
says
dii-ectly afterwards,
'
not to the
youth
of the
stock,'
may
have been
thinking only
of
periods
before the
separation
of the
languages.
What
a
variety
of
changes
the
organism
of the
primitive
Indo-Germanic
language
must have
gone
through
before it arrived at the
shape
which
was the
prevalent
one im- mediately
before the
separation,
I have shown in
my
treatise
'
Zur Chro- nologic.'
Moreover,
it is
only
when the
object
of
a
form
begins
to be
frustrated that we
have
any
right
to talk of want of health and freshness
in
language.
Now the
power
of
marking
the first
pei-son
singular
is not
impaired by
the
weakening
of mi to m
any
more than
by
the earlier
weakening
of
ma to mi. On the
conti-ary,
the nice distinction between
mi and
rii
is evidence of most
vigoi-ous
mind in the
language,and,
inas-
CH. II.
SECOND PEESON
SINGULAE,
ACTIVE. 31
much as
the former takes its
place
iii the
pi*esent
and the latter in the
preterite,
this
weakening
is made
use of to
satisfy
the need for distinctions.
Still,no
doubt the fii-stmotive for the
change was,
as
Bopp conjectured,
a phonetic
one.
The extra bmxlen of the
augment
at the
beginning
of
the word
brought
about
a lightening
of the end
:
dadd-mi=li?ijj-fii,
but
d-dadd-7n=t(itcii)-i'. It is
possible
that the shorter
endings
then
gradually
46
spread
farther from the
preterite.
We have
ali'eadyseen
that
they
did
not
always prevail
in the
optative.
Greek
phonetic
laws demanded that
a
final
m
should become
v, or,
to
speak
more correctly,a
mutable
nasal,
which
only
remained
a
labial
before
a
labial initial in the next
word, as
iiruBofx ttoXv,'^
and
guttui-al
before a guttural,
as
"0vyoy
K-a/cdi',
and dental before
a dental,as
eXeyov
t6-",
and dental also before
vowels, as
evpor af^ieiror,
and at the end of
a
sentence. Outside the
preteritep occurs as the termination of the 1
sing.
in the
optative,
without
exception
in that of the verbs in
yiu
{eh]-i)
and
those
analogous
to them
(0(/\o/";-r),
and but seldom in the
ordinary
verbs
with the thematic vowel. The old
grammarians, as
Lobeck
(El.
i.330
fF.)
tells
us, regarded
those 1st
persons,
like
rpecjwu',
which
were
known to
them, as syncopated
" from
Tfjtcpoirjy.
Lobeck
quite
agi-ecs
with this doc- trine
(El.
ii.
140); although
the
presupposed '"^'rpecpoh]}' or
the like
never
occurs,
and it is
only
in the contracted verbs and in the
peifect
that it is
to be found
(^pwrjr, i.Kirtiptvynb]y, Soph.
0. R.
840; Matthiae,
i. 442
f.).
Far more
correct is the
insight
shown
by
Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. i.^
355)
and I. Bekker
(Hom. Blatter,
i.
p.
Ill),
both of whom
saw,
what
was
indeed not
very
hard to
see,
that this form in
otv was more
regular
than that in
olj.u.
Still there
are only
two clear and undoubted instances
of this form:
Euripides
in the E. M.
s. v.
rpefpoLv,iK^pwr
av eh]i-,
el
TpicpoirTCI Twv TriXac,
and Cratinvis
ap.
Suidam
s. v.
aj-iaproir, Trocaizaq
vfjdg
elvai
(pd(TKwr, w
^eipaKeg
ovk au
a/jiapToii' ;
with the remark
icai ciXwg
(rvi'rjdec: uvtoIq to toiovto.
Besides these there
are
the
more or less
pro- bable
conjectures
of G. Hermann
on Eurip. Helena, 271, of
An/?o")'
for
the
iTumeaning
XnftElv
of the M.SS.
(Kirchh.Xuftav) ;
of
Dindorf,
Eurip.
fr.
362,
of the
same
for the
same Xaftelv
of the M.SS.
;
of
Nauck, Aristoph.
Byz.
p.
v.,
of the like forms in other
passages.
Second Person Singular.
47
In this
person
there is
considerablygreater variety
in the forms
as- sumed
by
the
termination,
and theii" true nature is therefore far harder
to fathom.
We must start from
fva,
the stem of the
pronoun
of the 2nd
pers.,as
the
original
termination. As this
syllablewas a
heavy one
for
a termination
and the dental before the
v
altered in
many ways,
and
as
the vowel too
sometimes
remained,
sometimes weakened itself to
^,
and in the end dis- appeared
altogether,
there
arose,
it
appears,
a
series of
phases
of the
same
primary
form which
may
be
represented
to the
eye by
the
following
tree
:
"
^
The habit the Greeks had of
accommodating
the nasal to the
following
word
is well known to be richly attested
by
inscriptions
and
manuscripts,
and needs
no further notice.
Cp.
inter alia
KiiLner, Au^'.
Gr. i, 22^.
32 THE
PEESONAL TERMINATIONS.
[dhva]
CH. II.
[thva]
I
Skt. tha
[dha]
I
Gk, (Tea dlii
(Gk. eo
[sva]
[svi]
si
(
Gk.
(Ti)
s (Gk. s)
The
purely
conjectural
forms,some
of
wliich,however, we shall meet
again
in composition
with
others,
are
in
square
brackets,
the rest
actually
The tv
has been transformed in three
ways
:-
occur.
1) By
the
simple
loss of the v.
The form ta
appears
in the formation
of the 2ncl
sing, imperat.
in M-"=Lat. to-d
:
Skt. vdha-td-t=vehi-td d.
We shall have some
traces to show of this formation in Greek when
we
come
to the
imperative.
The -fa occurs again
in the 2nd dual.
2) By aspiratibii,
and
that,
it
seems,
in two different
periods:
a)
It is
highlyprobable(cp.Principles,
II.
21)
that there
was onlya soft
aspirate
in the In do- Germanic
period.
As then
softening
went hand in
hand with
aspiration,
tva became at that
early
time dhva and later
d/"a,
48
dhi. This is how it
happens
that in the
imperativea
Gk. di is confronted
by
a
Skt. dhi
{u\v-di=^gru-dhi).
b)
At the same
time the tv seems to have survived in certain forms
intact. In this
way
there arose on
oriental soil
thva,tha,on Greek
0a,
on Latin ti
(2 sing.perf.act),
and
on
Teutonic t
(Goth,
nam-t thou
takest).
This
aspu-ation
is
explainedby
Pott
(Zahlmethode,
p.
216) by
reference to the
aspiratingpower
of the
v
in Zend
(Justi,
p.
364, " 86),as
the result of
which,
e.g.
the
possessive
of the
pron.
of the 2nd
pers.
tii-m
(=Boeot.
Tov-r)
takes the form thva.
3) By
assihilation. In this
way
tva became
sva, just
as this
pro- nominal
stem
appears
in the Gk, dual
as
o-^w,
a form which
can only
have come
from tva
by
way
of
an
intermediate
sva.
The
a
degenerated
to i and
so arose
svi,
with loss of the
v si,
and
finally
the
secondaiys.
The
multiplicity
of these transformations is
startling
at fii'st
sight.
But the fact that the same consonauts recur
in the structiire of the
plural
in the active and in that of the 2nd
persons
in all numbers of the
middle will reassm-e us.
Most
probably
the various main
phasesarose
at different times and took
shape
in one
way
or another iinder somewhat
vaiying phoneticconditions,
thus
fiu-nishing
in their
variety
itself the
means
by
which later
generations
could mark the distinctions
they
needed.
This
practicalutility
secured them all
a
permanent existence,
and that
the
more readily
because all consciousness of then*
origin
must
by
this
time have been lost.
In Greek we
have to deal
mainly
with three
phases
of the
oiiginal
termination
; m, c,
and 6a. The
fourth,
the 6i of the
imperative,
we
may
leave till we come to that mood.
1) (TL
retained.
In
Sanskrit,
Zend and Church- Slavonic the termination has survived
with but
very
small
phonetic
modifications
:"
CH. II. SECOND PERSON SINGULAR,
ACTIVE. 33
Skt. bhdra-si=Zd.
bara-hi,
Oh.-Sl. 5ere-si:=Gk.
(pipeic.
In Clreek it is
only
the verb substantive that has the full
tei-mination,
and even
this almost
exclusively
in
Homer, where, however,
its metrical
convenience secui-es its
frequency.
It
occurs,
moreover " and this is
a fact
49
which deserves notice in connexion Avith other
antiquated
forms of the
Homeric dialect
^
" at four different
places
in the verse :
"
a)
most
frequently
in the weak
caesiira
in the thii:dfoot
A 176
")(^diaroQ
ci
ftoi
Irrai
SioTpe(j)i(or j3affL\r'icj)' :
cp.
E 890
A 178 el
i^aXa KuprepuQ
Icrffideoc
ttov
aol
to
y
kcixJKey
b)
at the end of the
vei'se
E 645
ovc ""( /ia\a t^u^TtpuQ-kaat
c)
in the second foot
Z 123r(c c" (TV
kaai
(peptaTE ;
'
d)
in the fifth foot
"
Z 215
"'/
pa
I'u
jLioi
4f7)'oe
TTCirpMioc
irrm iraXuioc.
The form
"",
which
arose from the
weakening
of euai
im,
and which
was
later the
commonest,
does not
occ.ur
as eai-lyas Homer,
while
tic,
or,
as
the better authenticated accentuation for
antiquityis,
eiq,
enclitic
elg
(La
Roche Homer.
Textki-itik,
p.
241),only occurs in
places
where laa'
would be admissible
:
T 21/
K-pei(TTii)i'
els ifiedey
n 538
XeXafTfxevoQ
elg
eniKovpwv
"l"150
TtQ
hoBev
eIq
nvSpwi';
So too at n
515,
Q.
407, u 207,
t^
371, u,
257.
p
388
neplizavn^v elg
lA)'r](TTiipwy
is the
only place
where it would not. This
fact,
noticed also
by
Leo
Meyer,
Ztschr. ix.
374,
is
no
doubt the
reason
why
Ahrens in his
Griechische Formenlehre does not mention the second foi-m at all. Some "
scruplesare,
it is
tiaie,
raised
against
the
atterapt
to exclude the form
eig
altogether
from Homer
by
the fact that it is
undoubtedly
New-Ionic
(Bredow
de dial.
Herodotea,
403),
and
consequently
may
occur
in the
Homeric
poems by
the side of the older
errai,
just as
possiblyas
several
other later forms
by
the side of earlier
ones.
It should be
remarked, moreover,
that eaai was also
Syracusan,
and
that the
apostrophised
itrtx'
occurs in
Epicharmus (fr.
125
Ahr.,
Ahr. Dor.
318).
In
Pindar, Theocritus,
and
Theognis
Earri
may
be
regardedas a
remuiiscence of
Epic
usage.
The
personal
tei-mmation has been
completely
lost in tJ thou
art,
and also in the Attic eJ thou' wilt
go,
whether
on the
analogy
of the
former,
or,
as seems
to me more
probable,by
the
same
expulsion
of the 50
a : *tl-(7i,
*eI-i
eJ,
I cannot decide.
For the loss of the
o-
in these forms we have
a
completeanalogy
in
the Lithuanian. This
language
has but
very rai-ely
retained the termina- tion
-si
(Schleicher, Comp.^ 658),
while
as a
rule it
has,
after the
expulsion
of the
s,
contracted the
preceding
thematic vowel
e
with the i of the
termination into the
diphthongc.
*veze= veh is
(we
may
conclude from the
reflexive vez(i-s^=veheris that *vez6 did
exist)^
and thus is
a formation
completelyparallel
to the Gk.
el,
and bears to the Ch.-Sl. veze-si the
very
same relation borne
by
el to the
eat
which
we deduce from iaai.
*
Cp.
Leskien on the Genitive in
oio,
Jahn's Jaljrb.
1867,
p.
1 ff,
D
34 THE PERSONAL TERMINATIONS.
ch. ii.
Tlie effect
produced by
the final
t
in the
diphthong
in the
pi'eceding
syllable{"pip(ic)
will have to be discussed later in connexion with the
thematic vowel.
2)
A
simplesigma.
The
simplesigma belonged
no doubt
originallyonly
to the
secondary
forms : "-0E^"-c=Skt.
d-hhara-s. But there
are other
languages
in which
it takes the
place
of
si,as
in the Lat.
veM-s,
Goth,
vigi-s.
Hence we
need not be
suiprised
at
riBrjQ, 2/^wc,
and
Sekwc
;
the less
so
that if the
tei-mination had been i-etained
entire,
the lonians at least would have
had
no means
of
distinguishing
the 2nd
pers. sing,
from the third.
The loss of the final
t
after
o-
riiay
be
compared
with that in the dat.
plur,Xoyoig
for
Xo-yoLfTi.
3)
0a
or
cr9a.
This
antiquated
termination has
long
since been
compared
with the
tei'm. -tha,
which in Sanskrit is
confined,
it is
true,
to the
perfect.
In
Greek the use
is
a
far moi'e
extensive
one.
The termination
Ou,
which
always
has
an o-
before
it,
extends to the
following
forms
:
a)
The
perf.olrrda,common
Greek=Skt.
vet-tha,
Zd.
voi^td,
Goth.
vais-t.-
b)
12 Homeric
conjunctives, namely
"
e.dE\i]fTOa
A .554 and 15 other times in Homer in
phrases
like
yv
lOeXijrrda, uy k ideXijada(cp.
Hes.
"Epy..392)
eiTrr)ada
Y
250,
X
224,
x
373.
51
All the rest occur
but
once, namely
"
paXifrrQa
fi
221
IMvXivtjrrOa
I 99
CrjBiiyijffda /^
121
'
ivci]a6a
6 445
'
'
'
ex"l(ri)a
T 180
'
"
'iijaOa
K 67
TTudrjaOa
^551
TTUpe^tXacrrjaBa
'^ 344
Tru]aBa,
Z 260
airivor]ffBu c
591.
c)
5
Epic,
4
Aeolic,
1 Doric indie,
pres.
and 1 indie, future.
riBnTBa I 404, w
476
(priffBa
^ 186, " 149
clcoierBa
(Bekker,^^l^wffBa)
or ci^o'icrBa
(La
Roche
Textkritik,
225)
T 270
flaOciK
450, r 69, UeiaBa
v
179
t-)(^(irrBa Saj^pho
fr. 21
B.^,
for which
perhapsBergk
in his note
to this
passage
is
right
in
conjecturing ex^crBa,
cp.
Theogn,
1316
"pi\j]irBa
ib. fr, 22
IBiXiiuBa or iOeXrjaBa
Theocr.
29,
4
TziiBoprjfrBd
ib.
6,
8
Xi'tjaBa
used
by
the
Megarian
in
Aristoph.
Ach. 778
(iX'/Teio-fla (cod.axh'Jii'jBa) Hymn,
in Cer.
366..
CH. n.
SECOND PEKSON
SINGULAE,
ACTIVE.
'
35.
"
d)
5 indicative
preterites
fftrOacommon
Greek
;
here
perhaps
there has been an
interchange
with the
perfect
form which is dsitha in Skt.
efrjirOa
A 397 and elsewhere in
Homer,
and then common Attic.
The
corresponding
form seems to have been Aeolic
as
well
ace.
to
Apollon. Soph. p.
162,
25 s. v. (piinda : cii'svSe
rov i
ypairrioy,
Eirel Ka\ o'l AloXelg
(f)i(j6a Xiyovmv
iivTi rov
fXeyec,
where
perhapswe ought
to read
(parrda.
rjeiffda quoted only
from
Plato, Euthyphr.
4
eiri^eiffda,
Tim. 26
CirjetfrOa.
^CT}ffd'
T 93,
ycrjfrOa
in Attic
writers,
with the less well aitthen-
ticated variant i'jcetirOa.
i)pn(ni"Tda
Ai-chil. fr.'94, 3 B^.
52
e) Optatives.
flaXoLrrda
O 571
KXaioirrda ii 619
Trpo(f"vyoiTOa
^
325
eiijaOa Theogn.
715, fl\eirii7da=(idXoi(7da
Et. Gud.
p.
103,
38.
This enumeration was
necessary
Lf
we want a sure foundation for
the
analysis
of the form. Of these 33 forms there are but 2 in which the
a
before the 8
can belong
to the verb-stem
: ycxBa
from the rt.
ec,
and
oliT"a from the rt. fid. In all the rest the
a belongs
to the termination.
This fact
goes
dead
agaitist Bopp's
view
(Vgl,
Gr. ii.^
292),
which has
lately
received what seems to me an
inconclusive defence from Osthoff
(Ztschr.
xxiii. 320
ff.),
that these two forms
gave
as it were the
pattei-n
on which the others were
formed. Still less shall
we be content to
accept
the view of the old
grammarians
and those who have
ranged
themselves with them in later
times,
that the -9a is
a mere
appendage
assumed
by
the 2nd
person
when
ah'eady
formed. This doctrine is
developedby Lobeck,
Elem. ii. 266
ff.,
with no hint of
doubt,
under the
liead of Prosehematismus. It
can be traced back to
Herodian, who, -n-fpl
fioin'ipuvQ
Af'tfwc
(ii.950,
1.
28,
ed.
Lentz),givesolada,
which he
regards
as
sjTicopated
"
from o'ica(T-tia "
among
the
devrepa-
Trpoawira
kta-tTajiivu.
In later
gi-ammarians,
e.g.
in
Gregorius
Corinth,
p.
581
(Konig),
we
hear of the
TrpofrdijKr) rj/f
Oa
(7ii/\\a/3"|t-,
and the note to this
passage
contains references to later discussions of these forms. The ancients
regarded
this
Trpo(70i]Kr]
as
Aeolic
(Ahrens,
Aeol.
129).
The
same
doctrine has been
expanded \)y
Thiersch
"
216 into
a new
theory.
He
talks of the addition of the adverbialtermination -6a. In such
a form
even
Bopp (ut sup.)
does not
give
it
an
unconditional denial
:
'
If
we
are,
as Thiersch
supposes,
to
regard
the -0a in all second
persons
as an
added adverbial
termination,
I should think I
saw in it the Sanski-it
suffix -ha
(fordha)
and the more
frequent
Send
dha,
to which at
"
420 we
referred the Gk, -9a in
li'da,
eiTuvOu. We should then have to
suppose
that the
pronominal
stem to which the suffix
-da,
in forms like
rlOyja-da,
53
?i"Tda would
belong(possilily
the i of the Send
i-dlia,
here
p. 241),
had
been
suppressed,
and that the adverb had lost its
meaning.'
But in what
other
place
is there
a trace to be found of such
ajjpended
adverbs 1 Un- like
the
nouns,
in which there
evidently
I'esides
an exuberant
power
of
D 2
36 THE PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS. ch. ii.
producing repeated
derivatives
by a
process
we
call
exi3ansion,
the
verbal forms are
finished and self-contained. With the
exception
of the
evident
reduplication
in the
imperative
and the
composition
in the middle
terminations,
the
personal
terminations took no
additions to their
oiigiualsliape,
and
they
did not
go
beyond
their own resources
either for
the
reduplication
or
the
composition,
but selected terminations from
among
themselves.
Every expansive
suffix must of
necessity
have inti-o-
duced confusion. Besides,
this
theory
would
compel
us to
sepai'ate
olaOa
and
yjada
from the
corresponding
Sanskrit and Zend forms with which
they
so strikingly
accord,
for vet-tha and dsitha have th and not dh,
and
can certainly
not have the same
origin. Lastly,
the
analogy,
which has
still to be
examined,
between the Gk. (xBa and the Lat.
sti,
and the Goth.
t or
St must be
abandoned,
i.e. we must
give
up
all that
gives
us most
promise
of a
firm
standing-ground.
Buttmann showed in this
question,
as in so
many
others,a nice
per- ception
of the
origin
of
linguistic
foi-ms. In his Ausf. Gr.
(i.^
344
note),
he attacks the view of the old
gi-ammarians
that -6a was
appended,
and
prefers
to consider
'
-ada
as
the
original
termination which
was subse- quently
worn
down to -So.' So much at least is
past contradiction,
that
the
a
is an integralpart
of the
termination,
and that the
assumption
of
an unmeaning appendage
is in itself iri'ational. But where did the
o-
of
the other 31 forms come from ? Schleicher
(Comp.^ 655) regards
-da
as
the
representative
of the Skt. -tha
(originally -tva),
and ventui'es an
expla- nation
for the
precedinga
which to a
certain extent is like that of the
old
grammarians.
'It seems that to the
ordinary
form
(e.g.t^no)
this
-ta was
fiu'ther
added,
and that after
c
it became -B(i. Tliis formation
must be
a
late
one,
and
perhaps
dates from the time when the
peifect
still
generally
i-etained its
original
-ta which has siu'vived
e.g.
in olffOa.'
If
so,
we
should
certainly
have
no
idle
appendage,
bxit
a
reduplication
of
54 the termination
;
but for this theie is no
apparent inducement, and it is'
altogetlier improbable
that in
Greek,
where
only
one true
i^erfect-form
of
the kind
sui'vives,
the
analogy
of the
perfect
had
so
much force.
Another
explanation
may
be
suggested.
In other
cases in which
we
find
an a
in vei'bal forms
we are accustomed to trace it to attached forms
of the rt. Ig be. No^Y -trOa could
just
as
well be a
shortened "(7-(^a
as the
-o-(()
in
tcofTur a
shortened
effar. If
-aav can make its
way
from its
originalposition
in the
preterite
into
optatives(cuirjaar)
and
imperatives
(tCT-wo-ar), why
should not ierOa into
conjunctives, optatives,
and
preter- ites
1 This view would find
especialsupport
in the Lat. -stt of the
perf
e.g.
vuH'Stl,which,
moreover,
has its
corresponding plural
-stis. This
explanation
seems the
more natural in the
case of the Lat,
perf.
from the
feet tliat it is
imiversally
allowed that the 3rd
jjI.
in
-7'unt owes this ter- mination
to
composition
with
-sunt.
In-
fact,we cannot but
accept
the
Lat. -stl and the Gk. -af^a as identical,
-st/i,
in O. Lat. also
-stei,must be
i-eferred to a
]:)re-Italic -sta,
whose
a we
may
venture to
compare
with
that oiveitha
{forvett?ia)=Fo~i"T-da, a
Vedic form of which
we
have
a
not
quite
isolated
example (Kuhn,
Ztschr.
xv.
406).
In Zend
we
find
correspondingforms,
such
as
vvir^-td, frd-dadd-thd
{2yro-didi-stt), where,
it
is
true,
the
long
final vowel has been referred to the habit of the Gatha
dialect to
lengthen
all final vowels. Of
our
right
to
regarda
Lat.
t (ei)
as the
representative
of an
original
a,
I have treated in
'
Studien,'
i.
1,
247
;
CH. n.
THIED PEESON SINGULAE,
ACTIVE. 37
vldl
by
the side of the Aeolic
Poth}-/.a
is
a proof
of it which can
hardly
be
gainsayed. Cp.
besides
Walter,
Ztschr. xii. 413.
I believe
then,
whatever view is taken of the
origin
of the termina- tion,
that we
may
conclude that there was
in the 2nd
sing,
a
fuller ter- mination^
tvd,
to which we
shall find
parallels
as we
go
on
in the forms
of the dual and the
imperative.
If we
suppose
the
a to have been
long
from the
beginning,
we have less
chfficulty
in
explainingwhy
this vowel
55
appears
in Greek
as
o,
and not as t or i
instead.
Again,
there can be jio
doubt that
a
third
European language conesponds
here with Gi-eek and
Latin,
and that is Teutonic. The Goth, saiso-st thou sowedst would
form"
a complete pai'allel
to a
*sesi-stl
(likededi-sti),
which Latin
usage
would
readily
allow iis to
imagine.
It is well known how this
-st,
in the
course
of the
history
of the Teiitonic
language,graduallyprevailed
over
all others.
Still,
however
sure
I
am
of these
comparisons,
I am
far from
claimingcertainty
for
my
suggestion
that the tei-m. -ada arose out of
a
presupposed
*taOa thou art. The main
objection
I
see
to it is that -aO
occiu-s in some
other
personal
terminations
besides,
e.g.
in the 1st
plur.
middle
fjt-ada,
and in the middle infinitive in.
-aOai,
where the
primary
form shows a
simpleaspirate.
We shall have to return to the trd fui-ther
on.
If
our
refutation of the
appendage-theory
holds
good,
it follows as
a practical
result that the
(
in
conjunctives
in
ijada
has
ci-ept
in
by
mis- take.
In.
""(7r/;r, as we
shall
see
further
on,
the
t owes its existence
solely
to the echo
in'
the
precedingsyllable
of the
i
of the fidl termination
-"7t.
Now, as ei7rj)o-0a never
had an
i,
it is clear that, it could have had no
echo
of one.
There
are left,
it is
true, one or two
strange
formations about
which we
have
no
choice
beyond
either
regarding
them as
copyists'
errors
or as
anomalies due to a
mistaken imitation of Homeric forms. The for- mer
view is
sviggested by Bergk, Lyr.^
p.
885,
for the indicatives
ix^Krda
(Sappho 21,Theogn,1316),^xf/TEiffOo (Hymn,
in Cer.
366),
for which he
holds
'^x,^ffda
and
(T~xii(Tiada
to be the true forms. It
was certainly
bolder
still with Bekker to alter the Homeric oi^o'irrBaT 270 to
cicajtrOa,
as this
change
cannot be
supportedhj
the
supposition
of
a
mistake in
reading
an
old character. eOeXsirrOa
or edi\7](Tda
in the
Aeolizingpoem
of Theo- critus
(29 V.
4)
comes
under the same head as
the
ex^i-"^da
in
Sappho,
though
it is
more Kkely
than this to have been an antiquarian's
mistake.
The latter
supposition
must without doubt be made with reference to
forms like
7]ffdac, oTadac,
which
occasionally
appear
in
M.SS.,
the former
e.g.
in the Yen. A at E
898,
but
rejectedby
Aristarchus
(Ai-iston.
on A
85,
cp.
La Eoche Homer.
Textkritik,
320
ff.).Notwithstanding,
Nauck
(Eurip.
Stud. ii. 71
ff.)
has
re-adopted
these forms and
actually
tried to 56
introduce them into
Emipides.
Third Person Singular.
With
regard
to Schleicher's view that
-ta,
the
original
termination of
the 3rd
sing.,
appears
sometimes,
in the
perfect
for
instance,
as
-a,
some-
4
The
assumption
of fuller phoneticstructures by
the side of more slender
"ones,formed to
give greater
stress to the word, seems
to me specially
reasonable
in the case of
pronouns.
Sayce, Princi^ilesof Comparative Philology,
London,
1875,
p.
25, regards '"emphasis,'
the
coimterpart
of
'
laziness,'
as an early
factor in
the formation of
language.
The fuller form coiild then be used
subsequently
for
the termination
indiscriminately
with the more
slender one.
38 THE PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS, ch. ii.
times as -ti^
I
may
refer the reader to what I have said on
p.
24 when
dealing
with the 1st
pers.
sing.
I consider -ti to be the oldest mark
we
have of the third
person,
as
-mi is of the
fii-st,
and I see no reason to doubt
that it
grew
out of the
pi-onominal
stem
ta,
which
appears
in Greek
as to.
In the
language
as we know it this stem is not used for "the
personal
subject,
and its
place
is taken
by
sa=Gk.
b;
but this makes
no differ- ence.
When we
find the stem to
in the Homeric and Doric ro/
taking
the
place
in the nom.
plur.
of the later stem 6 of
common Greek,we
may
surely
venture to assume
the like
use
of-the
same stem in the
singular
too
to have
prevailed
in the
primitivepei-iod
in which verbal inflexions had
theii-
origin.Analogies
to this
(Lith.
ta-s this,
Lat.
is-te,
Ch.-H.
tu)are
givenby Bopp, Vergl.
Gr. ii.^132.
The termination ti is treated in three different
ways
in Greek.
Either it remains
imchanged,
or it becomes
at,
or it
disappears.
1) Tt
preserved
intact.
The
only
instance common to all Greek dialects is in
ka-Ti,
where the
preceding
rr
preserved
the
t intact,
as it did in
Tria-TL-c, Truc-rt-c.
The
Dorians,however,as elsewhere,
retained the
r
here to a
greater
extent :
see
Alu^ens,
312. To the forms like
o/cw-rt,Tidtj-Ti,
a(pir]-Ti, 'laa-Ti,
there
adduced from
inscriptions,
fresh instances have since been added fi-om
Delphicinscriptions (Berichte
der k. sachs. Ges. d. Wissensch,
1864,
p.
223).
These forms are of rare occmu-ence in the
poets. ^7-/=r/(T/,
he
says,
is foiuid in Alkman'fr. 139
Bergk^,ifhjTi
in
Pindar,
but
onlyonce
"57 Isthm. ii.9
(Boe'ckh,
Find. i.
2,292),
hicivn in Simonides fr. 18
Bergk^,
Ti'HrjTi
in
Theocritus,
iii.
48,v(j)ir)Ti,
iv. 4.
Matthia,
i.
489,quotes
a
few
instances of anohiEijjTi from the Doric
prose
of Timaeus Locrus.
2)
crt.
a)
There is
no
need to
quote
instances of its
occui-rence
in the indie,
pres.
of the verbs in
-jal
in forms like
(Jjtj-Tt,
-/0"y-(7", dicw-m,6viri]-m,
TriiJ.irXi)-(n^ urj-aL, ei-ai, C^vyvv-ai,
bXXv-at,pi'jyi'v-ai,
which occur from
Homer's time on to the latest
period
of Attic
Greek,though
even here
thei'e are not
wantingby-forms
which follow the usual mode of inflexion.
This formation
may
therefore be said to be Ionic in the fullest
sense
of
the
term,
and it
even penetrated
to Pindar's
language,
while the
Dorians
preserved
the
-ti,
and the Lesbian Aeolians knocked the termina- tion
off"
altogether
and said
tiOi],
as we shall see
presently.
It is
only
in
I'l-ffi
he
says (Sappho,
97
Be.^)^
that we
find
a trace of this termination
'
even
in this stem. "
"
b)
In
conjunctives
the Homeiic dialect often retains the termination
en.
I. Bekker
(Hom.
Bl. i.
218)gives
75
forms,
not
reckoningcompounds
and
synonymous pairs
of forms. Of
presents
of both of the main
conjuga- tions
there
are
ayijo-t,
aeidrjai, lBiKi]ai (also
in
Hesiod),
TtpTryn,
T('i^vr]'n,
i";(T(, i^iedlrjfTt, (prim;
of active aorists of
every
formation,
uyuyrjai, Xajyijm
(also
in
Hesiod),Xudtjiri, sXriai,
Ka^r]m, cwijm
or ciLai,j'lai, navar](rt,
'Te/iixlyjoi.
We
may
add the
perfecttpplyycn,
which Bekker has omitted
(Stier.
Stud. ii.
128,
353).
Sometimes there is a clear connexion between
these
longer
3rd
persons
and the
longer
1st or
2nd
persons
:
39
The number is not much increased
by
later
poets :
piOj'^i
Hesiod fr. 195
(Ezach
Dialekt des
Hesiod,
p.
438),lpid)]ai Hymn,
in Max-tern
(viii.) 14,
tj]cri Theogn. 94,
viroTvi^nTfiriaL
(?)Ai'istoph.Lysistr.348,
Trlw-tja-i
Plato
Com.
ap.
Eustathium ad Iliad,
p.
1161,
vKo-ravii^Ti,
Theocr.
xxiii.,10, 58
daXidijcri
Nicand. Ther.
832, Ka-aKTeiirtai Quint. Smyrn.
G
153,
opcrj^o-t
Apollon.
Ehod. III.
1039, aj-Kpiicrrim Orph.
Lith.
273,
most of which
instances I have taken from
Lobeck,
Elem. ii. 264. Even the forms
already
used
by
Homer
occvir but
rarely
in later
poets.
We
may
add
the forms
given by Lobeck,
Rhemat. 183 from verbs in
-"w :
wTr-au/cri,
oKUDjai
(Arat.795, 864),
and similar rarities of
a stilllater time. Lobeck
upholds
the view of the ancients that all these forms had aiisen
by
tii-iK-affiQ from the
ordinaryones,
and hence he combats the view ad- vanced
as a
conjectm'eby
Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. i.-
352;
cf.
Ki-uger,
Dial.
" 30,
1 note
4),
and
more
confidently by Tliiersch,
Gr.
p.
352 and Gott-
lingon
Hesiod
Theog.
v. 60,
that these forms have
no right
to the
t
sub- script.
It is true that the
authority
of
good manuscripts,
and that of
Herodian
(cp.
on U
359),
is
on
the side of the retention of the
i.
But all
that this
proves
is that the
theory
of
even
the best
grammarians required
it to be written. For it is"certain that in Herodian's time there
was no
difference of
pronunciationbetween.?/
and
/;.
The
authority
of these
men
then would not
prevent
us
from
rejectmg
the
t
here
any
more than
in the case of the 2nd
sing,
forms in
-r]ada
if there were reallyno
way
of
explaining
it. In
my Tempora
und
Modi,
p.
23,
I
expressed
a
de- cided
opinion
that it
ought
to be
rejected,
because I then
regarded
the
epenthesis
as a
transposition
of the
t
from the final
syllable
to the
preced- ing
one. I have since
come to a different,
and as
I
believe,more
coirect
opinion
on the
subject, an
opiuion
which I have stated in
my
Principles
II.
337. I
now
regard
the
epenthesisas an
echo of the
i
in the
syllable
pre-
'
ceding it,which, as
is shown
by
eUa
(from en),
is not
necessai-ily
con- nected
with the
disappearance
of this vowel from its
originaljjlace.
*ayj/-i,
ay)jrTL
are therefore forms
admitting
of
quite
a
simpleexplanation.
They
bear to the
more primitive
*
ciy^/rtprecisely
the relation that the
Zend
conjmictive
form avdl-ti does to the Skt. dvd-tl
(rt.av).
The
epenthesisis,
it is
true,
not a
necessary
or
ii-resistible
affection, ordy one
which
may
attack
a sound,
and
one to which
long
vowels are
less liable
than short
ones.
StiU AeoUc forms like
yiXaijii
for
*
yiXd-jii
and the
like,
"-g- xi^(i--i-(^-fJii-ii)
from
*;j(pa-t-(Tt/.(o
for
*
xr^w-ci/uo, prove
that the
length
59
of the vowel does not exclude the
possibility
of this affection. Now
as
we
have besides the
analogy
of the
indicative,
i.e.
*ay/jrt :
*
ayrjaL
','.
ayzL-Ti
:
ayt-Ti,
I think
we
shall do well to follow the tradition and leave
the
I
subscript
in
undisputedpossession.
c)
An isolated
Optative.
Such,
it
seems,
is
Trapucpdairjcn
K
346,
which is defended
by
I. Bekker
40 THE PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS. cii. ii.
(Horn.
Bl. i. 218
note)against
alterations
(e.g. TrapcKjiOlirjai Thiersch,
La
Ivoche).
The form was perhaps
invented
by
a
hard who
thought -(tl an
addition that
might
he used on
occasion even
in the
optative.
I could
hardly
venture to assume
in the case
of so
isolated a
form in a
lay
of the
Iliad that is
evidently
not one
of the
oldest,
that we
have in the
-o-t a real
old
companion
to the
-/^a
of the 1st
sing.opt. Syntactically
the
conjunc- tive
is
just
as admissible
here as
the
optative,
and hence it is not
impos- sible
that,
as
Job. Schmidt
suggests (Ztschr.
xxiii.
299),(pOahjai
is a
conjunctive
of
a
present *(j)dcu(i}
that
occurs
nowhere else.
d)
Indicatives in
-r]ff(.
It is
very
generally
held that there are
also indicatives in
-ijm
from
verbs of the thematic
conjugation.
It is true that Buttmann
(
Ausf. Gr.
i.2
498)
has
pronounced against
such forms in the Homeric
poems,
show- ing
that all that
were thought
to be indicatives
might
be
conjunctives.
Tliis
appliesparticularly
to
- 111 ff. In
Hymn.
Homer, xxi. 15 the
gap
that
immediatelyprecedes
renders a
decisive
judgment impossible.
In
Ibycus
these indicatives seem to be better established. It is true that
Aristarchus
by
his
'diple'
at E 6
ncifAfaii
yai,
"'/ ?"7r\jy ori
air)
tov
iza^cpairri.
TvXeovat^Ei
U
"IjlvKoc tm rot ourw points
to
nothing
but
a conjunctive.
But
the
TxvxJtt
'Iftvk-euD'
in the
language
of the later
grammarians
and rhe- toricians,
especially
in Aelius Herodianus
(Spengel,
Hhetores
Graeci,
iii.
101),
Lesbonax
(De Figuris,
p.
166
Valcken.),Heraclides,
in
Eustath,,
1.576,20, was
the
specific
name of
a grammatical figure,
that
is,
it was
believed that
Ibycus
used
conjunctive
forms in the sense of indicatives.
Instances of this which
we
actually
find in
our
fragments
are
fr. 7 Be.^
rdfiOQ
iivTrioc
(?)
kXvtuc
apOpog
eyeiprjaiv
nrj^oi'ciQ
and fr. 9
(jyaj-iiv i-^rjm
l^poTO)]'
and in
Bacchyl.
fr. 27
yXvKt't^ aj/iyKU frevoijiva
kvXikuji'
0aA7r"jm
60
6v[i6v.
We must meanwhile admit with
Bergk,
with reference to the
first
passage,
that the
fragmentary
form in which it i-eaches
us
precludes
the
jjossibility
of
passinga
decisive
judgment upon
it. It is
possible
after all that the
grammarians
made
a
mistake and that
they were-
all
the time instances of the
conjunctive
which
was
used in the Homeric
fashion in
a certain kind of .relative sentences. But the statement is
made
so
often and in such
precise
terms that it is hard to believe that
they
were so mistaken.
Buttmann
saw no
objection
to the
supposition
of such indicatives in
-"]ai
in the
'
Dorico-Aeolic
cUalect,'
and
appealed
to some supposed
indica- tives
in
-i]Q
for
-Etc
and
-?/
for
-e".
But the
genuineness
of such forms is suc- cessfully
impugned by
Ahrens
(Aeol.91).
Corssen's
attempt
too to find
a
support
for this
";
in the
'
vowel-intensification
'
of which
so
much is
heard and
so
little
seen,
must be held to have failed.^ It is hard to
imagine
how
a
language
of such nice distinctions
as
Greek
is,
which in
all other
cases
consistently reserves
the
long
vowel for the
subjunctive,
should in this
one
instance have been so cai-eless
as
to
lengthen
the the- matic
vowel in the indicative
as well.
If then we cannot believe in the actual existence in
livmg speech
of
indicatives like
e'x^o'i
we must take
one
of two courses.
Either we must
*
Corssen discusses these forms at
great length
in his
posthumous work,
Bcitriujezur italisehen
S/Jrachhinde, -p. i7d. In his
attempt
to establish
ex^jfrt
anil the like
as real forms of
vulvar Doric,this meritorious scholar
(who,however,
was
too much inclined to make short work of
questions
of
sound-change
in
Greek)
quiteforgot that the Dorians never put a for
t
in the third
person singular.
cii. IT. FIRST PERSON PLURAL,
ACTIVE. 41
adopt
A-brens's view
(Dor. 303)
that these formations were *a
poetis
Homeri locos Dounullos male
interprctatis
per
imitationem
procusa.'(It
must be admitted tbat the
suj)position
of sucb an origin
in the
case
of so
old and so little learned
a
poet
as Ibycus
is rather
a
violent
one.)
Or
"we
must assume
them to be the mistakes of
an earlycopyist.
If
we
do
so,
the most natural
supposition
is that
they represent
forms in
-ikti.
'ix^i-ni, lytlptL-ai are
forms which
analogy
would warrant us
in
assuming.
So
Westphal,
Meth. Gr. ii. 38. Ahrens is
ready,
it is
true,
with
an
objection
to this view
:
'
in Dorica
Eheginorum
dialecto illae formae certe
in
ri
pro
m
exire debebant,'an objection
which
seems to me unanswer- 61
able.
If,therefore,
these remarkable forms
are genuine,
this
dialectologi-
cal
argument
shuts
us
up,
it
seems,
to the
explanationgiven by
Ahrens.
3)
Loss of the termination.
a)
In
present
and
perfect
forms.
The loss of the termination in the verbs in
-f.u among
the Aeolians is
remarkable
(Ahr.138).
The
grammarians
mention
riOi],-yiXui(1 sing.
yiXaifii), diSoL,though
theii-
testimony
varies
a good
deal as to the
diphthong or
vowel. These forms serve as a stepping-stone
to the
ordinary
Greek forms of the thematic
conjugation:
(pepei, ""("(,
which, as
we
shall
see,
arose from
*9"'p"t7-t, *t.)(^tiTi, by way
of
*"pep"iT, *i')(;ei-.
There
was,
I
am inclined to
believe,a reciijrocal
inflvience exercised
by
the
thi-ee
singular
forms
upon
each other. After
one
of them had become
dissyllabic
in these
vei'bs,
the others followed in its train.
In the
perfect
the termination
disappearedthi-oughout
in Greek
as
in
Sanskrit
: ^a-gdna^yi-yove.
So too in
Zend,
e.g.
dd-da)'er^a:=ci-oopK"..
Latin alone in its
ce-cidi-t, pe-piyi-t (
=
7r"-7rr/y"),has pres'erved
the
t.
The
only
trace of
a
3rd
sing.perf.
with
a pei-sonal
termination is the Doric
'icra-Tihe
knows,
which in its stem-formation stands
apart
fi'om other
perfects,
and which will have to be examined
minutely
further
on.
b)
In the
preterite,
and in the
optative
which
goes along
with
it,
the
secondary
t
originally
survived alone
as a
final letter. So in Skt.
e.g.
d-dd-t, d-dadd-t,
d-hhara-t
;
in Zend
dd-t,
hara-t
;
in Latin
era-t.
Greek
phonetic
laws
compelled
the
r to
disappear:"-/3?;, e-clcu),
t-cpepe,
7]t(r).
Kuhn's
conjecture(Ztschr.
xv.
404)
that the - first
changed
to
c
and then
disaj^peared
is
hardlyjustifiable.
It relies
on
the
analogy
of
primary
forms like
rldrjai,
but these are
confined to the Ionic main
dialect,
while the Doiians
never
changed r
to
it
before
i.
The
loss,
of the final
T
in
ordinary
Greek is
completely
distinct from the
change
above men- tioned,
which is confined to a single
dialect. The same
loss has been
sufifered
by
Old Persian
: a-daJd,
a-hara. It is
impossible
to establish
that the
v lijieXKvfTfiKO}'
of
e(pepe-y
is the remains of the vanished
r,
since
nn
the nasal addition is also made to
earu',
cpiirrlf, (pipoviriy, (paalf,
where it is
impossible
that it should have had
an origin
of this kind
(Principles
I.
68).
First Person Plural.
The tei-mination
occurs
vei-y
often
^
in the dialect of the Yedas
as
masi,
which later becomes
mas,
and
again ma.
The' final vowel has
been retained also in the Zend
77iahi,
which shows the
regularchange
of
s to h
: vazd-mahi="ikt.
vdhd-mas{i)J Bopp (Vergl.
Gr. ii.^
271)
had
"
According to Delbriick's calculation, far oftener than
mas.
'
If Joh. Schmidt is
right(
Vocal, ii.
279)
in referring
the 0. H. G. term, -mds
42 THE PERSONAL TERMINATIONS. ch. ii.
not made
up
his mind how Qnasi
ought
to be
analysed.
He could not
dou")t that in the vi was
contained the
pronominal
stem shown in the
singular.
But he was
inclined to
regard
the rest of the termination
eitlier as a jtlural
nominative
termination, on
wliich
view, however,
an
explanation
of the i was imi^ossible,
or as
the remains of the demon- strative
pronoun
siiia,
which
pervadespronominal
foi-ms in
many
shapes.
Pott's
analysis,
however
(Jahrb.
fiir wissensch.
Kritik, 1833,
p.
326),
with which Kuhn
(deconjugatione
in
MI,
p. 29)
and Schleicher
(Comp.^
'651)agree,
is far more
probable.
It divides ma-si
thus,interpretmg
it
as
I
-thou,
i.e. I and thou. This view has
lately
been attacked
by Benfey,
Ueljer
einige Pluralbildimgen
des Indo-Germanischen Verbums,
pp.
10
and 1 4. He
brings
two
objections
in
particularagainstit,
both
.
on
chronologicalgrovmds.
In the first
place,
he thinks the mode of com- position
therein
assumed,
i.e. the
copulative,
which
supplies
the notion
of
an
'
and,'
and was
called Dvandva
by
the Indian
grammarians,
of too
modern a date to be found in so primitivea
termination. But we must
not tie ourselves down here
'
to the
analogy
of nominal
composition,
which,
it is
true, only
shows
cases of dvandva in its later
stages.
Noun
composition
is
altogether
a
compai-atively
late
phenomenon,
bvit the
pro- nominal
stems on
the other hand
clearly
showed from the
very
first a
63
disposition
to run
together
in the most various
ways.
Latin knows no
instance of dvandva in the
noun " if
we
except perhaps
the
loosely
com- pounded
su-ove-taur-ilia " but
pronommal
forms like
quisquis,quot-
quot, utut,
are not
uncommon.
In Greek
a nominal
compound
made
vip
of
a
nominative
joined
to an
accusative
governed by
a verb outside the
compound
is unheai-d
of,
but
pronominal compounds
with their
separate
members in this relation
may
be seen in
ak\-rjXovc, avT-avroy
(Sitzung.sber.
d. k. sachs. Ges. der Wissensch.
1864,
p.
226).
Cases of
dvandva are unmistakeable in nurherals like
cvon
E/ca=c7wo(/(?cr"i =
8kt.
dvddar^an.
The
plui'al
nominatives
(e.g.)
^"-i=Gk. ro-i and
ac^vdsa-s
(i.e.'linroi)
can hardly
be otherwise
explained
than as formed from a
copulative
accumulation of
pronominal stems,
and
Benfey
will have to
renounce
all
hope
of
explaining
the termination anti in the 3rd
pL,
inas- much
as
his
prejudice
in the matter
compels
him to
reject
the
very
simple
one from
an
he and ta
he,
which makes it=/ie and he. Still less
weight
attaches to a second
objection,
which is drawn from the
phonetic
character
of the
syllables,si,Benfey holds,
is
a
comparatively
late
shtipe
assumed
by tva,
and it is incredible that the
language
should have
postponed
the
formation of the
plural
until tva should have
degenerated
into si. No
doubt
;
but
why
cannot we refer ma-si to an
older ma-tva as
easily
as
si
to tva % We
may assume,
I
think,
that this
comparatively
late meta- morphosis
took
place
at about the
same time in the 2nd
sing.,
and in the
1st
plur.
Now of this still older ma-tva we find almost
a superfluity
of
the clearest
traces,as Schleicher and still
more
minutely
Misteli
(Ztschi-.
XV.
3{)())
have
not failed to
point
out. The
tva
of the
sing,
showed
itself,
we found,
in a
variety
of
shapes,
and
among
others as
dhi. And we
meet with the
same consonant in the 1st
plur.middle,
for which, we
may
with
certaintygive
ma-dhai
as
the termination. The Qa of the Gk.
/i"-fV( forcibly
suggests
the Ba in (urr-Ou. Can it be an
accident that we
to
ma-Hx,
*
vmi-si
(with epenthesis),we have a trace left on
Teutonic
ground
of
this fullest form of the suffix of the 1st
plur.act.
CH. II.
FIEST PERSON PLURAL,
ACTIVE. 43
should find the
same
sound here that
we
find in the 2nd
sing.
1
Behfey's
own explanation,
that the 1st
pers.
pluralsprings
from I
they,
and that
of these two the
'
they
'
is
merely
a
mark of the
plural,
somehow in the
way
in which the
English
she is used to mark a
feminine
{shehorse),
is
too
extraordinary,
to
procv^re acceptance,especially as
there is not
even
an
attempt
made to
produce
evidence of the actual use of this si in the
64
meaning
that is assumed foi'it.
Bopp
hasraised another
objection
to our
view. It is based
on
the
nature of the
pronoun
'
we.'
'
When
we
say
"
we,''
'
he
says
with his
usual
acuteness,
'
we
fin-
more
often associate other
companions
with the
I than the
person
or
persons
addressed.' For this reason he looks rather
for
'
I and he
'
in the
'
we
'
than for
'
I and thou.'
"
But it often
happens
that the
spirit
that animates
language
catches at a single
idea and chooses
it with
a
tyrannous capiice
from
among many
possible
ones.
Who
knows whether in one of those
languages
of uncivilised
peoples
which lose
sight
of the essential in a superfluity
of nice
distinctions,
there
may
not
be two
we's,one meaning
'
I and
thou,'
the other
'
I and he.' It
may
be
that ma-tva
may
have had a companion
form ma-ta
;
the latter
may
have
gone
out of
use by some chance,
and ma-tva have done
duty
for
both,
in somewhat the same
way
in which in the dual the masculine
tw
takes the
place
of the
completely
obsolete feminine. Schleicher
(utsupra)
takes
a
similar view.
Tliis
ma-si,
spi'ung,
as we
have
conjectured,
from
ma-tva, regularly
degenerates
in
post-vedic
Sanskrit to
ma-s,
and in the
perfect
and in
secondai-y
tenses we
find
ma.
There is not therefore
quite
the
same
strictness in "the relation of
mas
to
ma,
as
in that between other
pi-imary
and
secondary terminations,
e.g.
mi and
tn,
si and
s. Strictlyspeaking,
ma-si is the
primary form,
of which ma-s is
alreadya curtailment,
which
further
weakening
must be
regardedsimilarly
to that of
ai
to
q
in ceiKwc.
It is
probable
that at the time of the
separation
of the
langviages
there
still existed
a
bhara-masi but an
a-bhara-mas. We need not be
surprised
therefore at
being
unable to discern
any
distinction whatever
between the
piimary
and
secondary
forms in Gi'eek and
Latin,
both of
which
langiiages
have lost all trace of the final
vowel, or
in
any
other
European language
either. The
only
form in
use
in Latin is
77ius,
while
Greek has either
jut
","
or
fxei^
according
to the
jxirticular
dialect.
1) /xe?.
This is the Doric termination
(Ahr.
Dor.
291),
the
only
one
occurring
on
the Heraclean
tables,
and that too in the
secondary
forms
: (rut
t/ut-
rpijcrafiEi- (Nv. 5774, 10),
KaTtTUjjLojiEi:
(ib.14),MiTEauxra^ec,
(ib.
47, 51),
65
eoTc'tcra/uEc
(ib.53),
ETra'E,ii
fitc;
(ib.78),as also
upon
old Theraic and Cretan
inscriptions
in the
primary
forms Nr. 2448
(.^j^aXuvfjLtQ,
2557
tvxufnoiTw-
lj.ec,
and is attested
among
others
by Epicharmus, Sophi'on,
and
by
Doric
passages
of the
Lysistrata
and Acharnians of
Aristophanes.
When
we
find
fXEr
even in strict
Doric,
it is due no
doubt to the influence
of the
poeticallanguage common to
all,or
to that of Atticism. In
Pindar
/xeq
does not occur
(Boeckh,
i.^
291),though
it does in the
more
vulgar
idiom of
Theocritus,
vii. 2
tip7c")j.uc,
12
tvfjofitc;,
ii. 143
ipdoixec.
One
example
has been discovered in
an
Arcadian
inscription (Le
Bas-
Foucart Nr.
328a, 16):
o/ioXoy//t7w/iec,
44 THE PERSONAL TERMINATIONS.
ch. ii.
2)
(xeu.
Among
the Aeolians and lonians this is the
only
form of the termina- tion.
Bopp'sconjecture(Vergl.
Gr. ii.
280),
that the
r came from,
c,
found
an earlyopponent
in Pott
(Et.
Forsch. ii.^
301). Bopp appeals
to
Prakrit,
which shows the form
hi corresponding
to the Skt. hhis in the
instrumental. Whether we have here
a real
change
of
s to a
final
nasalisation I leave an
open question.
But since
we
find not
only
a
movable
i'
in Greek
appearing
often
as a
superadded
nasal
sound,
but
also,as
will
appear
hereafter,an
immovable
one,
it is
a more
probable
supposition
that here too the sibilant
disappeared
and the nasal
was
added
subsequently, especially
as a
du'ect
change
of the sibilant to the
nasal would be difficult to
explain,
and
even
unprecedented,
i^ur
then is
a
termination of the
stage
of the Skt.
ma
and the Lith.
me,
while
juec
corresponds
to mas.
So too Schleicher
Comp.^
652. The view advanced
by
Misteli in his otherwise most valuable
essay
on the terminations of
the middle voice
(Ztschr.
xv.
p.
321),
that the
r,
and in other forms
even the Skt.
m,
is to be considered to be a
compensation
for
a
lost
t,
is
based
on no clear case of such a kind and has
no mti-insic
probability.
The
objection
'
why
did not other forms
ending
in
a vowel,
e.g.
the
voc.
of the 2nd
declension,
i-eceive similar nasal accretions?'
(p.330)
is
removed when
we consider that
language
shows
sporadic
tendencies
as
well
as inviolable laws of sound. The nasal accretion
belongsclearly
to
66 the former class. Greek has
certainly
no disuiclination to a
final
c,
and
yet
Xvere stands
by
the side of the Latin
luitis,
and
as
certainly
none to
a
final
t,
and
yet
iaTtr is found
as
well
as f'or/. Into more
comprehensive
attempts
to
explain
the
nasal,
of which
particularly
Schererls
(Zur
Gesch.
d. d.
Spr.193)
has been
sufficiently
confuted
by Kuhn,
Ztschr. xviii.
349
ff.,
I will not enter here.
Second Person Plural,
On the
pattern
of the
'
I and thou' of the 1st
plur.we
should
expect
a
'
thou and thou
'
for the 2nd
jjlur. ;
a
tva-tva,
that
is,by
the side of
ma-tva. We
find,however, only a
monosyllabictermination,
in which
we
have little
difficulty
in
recognising'
the stem of the
pronoun
of the
second
person.
In Sanskrit the termination is
-tha,preciselyidentical,,
that
is,
with
one of the
singularendings
above chscussed.
Here, as there,we
can detect in the th the i-emains of
a tv. There is
justas little trace of
any
fuller termination in
Zend,
which varies between -tha and
-ta,
in
the Greek
re,
in the Ch.-Sl. and Lith.
-te,
or in the Gothic -th. Latin
here,
with its
ti-s,
wliich
points
to
an
older
ta-s,outstrips
all the sister
languages.
In this termination we
may regard
the
-s,
like that in
mas
{jxt -c, mu-s),
as
the
representative
of the second
pronominal
stem of which
we are in search. There is
a
corresponding
form in the termination of
the 2nd. dual in Skt.
-tha-s,
where the th
givessatisfactory proof
of its
near
relation to the -tha of the
plural.
We shall
constantly
be led to the
conclusion that
plrn-al
and dual forms did not
begin by being
fimda-
mentally
distinct. The second tva
then,we
may presume,
was volatilised
in
exactly
the
same
way
as in the 1st
plur.,
first to
-si,
then to
-s,
and
then to
nothing
at all. It. is
probable
that Schleicher
(Comp.3 659)
is
right
in
seeinga still
more
perfectrepresentative
of the
original
termina- tion
tva-tva in the 2nd
plur.imper.
in
-to-te,
Umbr.
-tu-tu,
in which forms
CH. II.
- THIED PEESON PLUEAL, ACTIVE. .45
both
syllables
are
preserved bodily,
the fii-st
being 'lengthened
for
emphasis.'
Corresponding
to the Latin
tls,
which the te of the
imperative
proves
to be a weakening
of
tes,
we might expect
to find
a
Greek
-ec,
and such
67
a
form has been
actually
maintained to exist in the Homeric
poems.
Thiersch showed
a correct
insight
into what the structm-e of the
language
demanded,
but he
was
wrong,
nevertheless,
in
conjectiu-ing
that there
were traces of this
-ec
left in Homer
(Griech.
Gr.
vorz.
des homer. Dia-
lekts,
3rd edit.
"
163
note). Seeing
that in oiu-
days
scholars have not
always
been able to cU-aw the
boundai-y
between what is Indo-Germanic
and what is
Homeric,
it should cause us
less astonishment that in
Thiersch's time there
was a tendency
to
conjectin-e
the existence in the
text of Homer of what was recognised
to be old and
according
to rule.
The
passages
in Homer
put
forward
by
Thiersch in
support
of his view
- " I.-
403
EpviT(Ta-e j/TTfipoicf,
404 TreXutTfTci-e OTrAn
re
Trarra,
m
215 'lepevaare
orrnt; apifjToc
"
prove
nothing.
There is
nothing
imheard of in the hiatus
after the bucolic caesm-a.
Besides we
have in all three instances to deal
with
imperatives,
and here the
analogy
of the Lat. te would not lead
us
to
expect
a
final
r. Among
the instances
given by
Hoffmann in his
Quaestiones Homericae,
i.
p.
92,
of an hiatus non
excusatus,
there is not a
singleimperative
of the kind. The usual forms in
re,
both in indicatives
and
conjunctives,
of the
principaltenses,
are
established
even in Homer
by
passages
like B 48.5
Trapeu-e
-e
'Ifrre
re
Trarra,
N 120
ro;)(o
h) ri kciko)'
TToujfTETe jXEi^ox',
O 18 'iva I'l^ere
Trarrec.
As
now we
find not
a
trace of
this
primitive
form in
any
other Greek
dialect,we cannot with
certainty
do more
than set down the form tes as belonging
to
a
pre-Greek
age.
For this
pei'iod, however, we are obliged
to assume its
existence,as other- wise
we
cannot find
a common
origin
for the Gk.
te
and the Lat. tis with
its
by-form
te.
Third Person Plural.
The fii'st
question
that meets us
under this head is whether
we are to
regard
an-tl or
n-ti
as
the full
primary
termination. At one time I
followed
Bopp (Yergl.
Gr.^ ii. 299) in
choosing
the
latter,
comparuig
the
plural
nti with the
singular
ti and
regarding
the introduction of the nasal
as
the mark of the
plural.
A moi'e
cai*eful
consideration,however, ren- ders
this
symbolicalexplanation
untenable here as elsewhere. Wilde I
stillhold that
nasalisation,
like vowel-intensification,
and
reduplication68
are used to
give
a
syllableprominence,
I am
also of
ojiinion
that
many
phenomena once explainedby me in this
way
ought
to be
I'egarded
from
other
points
of view. In
-n-i/jTrXyjut, wafjcpairo),e.g., weight
is
un-
dovibtedly
added to the
reduplication by
this accretion of
a
nasal to the
syllable.
But from the nature of the case it is the
syllable
that contains
the nasal that
gains
the additional
emphasis.
Even
granting
then the
plural
form
(pa-r-ri
to have, been made from the
singidar"pa--iby
nasal- isation,
it would not be the termination but the rt.
(pa
that would
gain
emphasis,an emphasis precisely
the
same as
that which
gives
to the
actual root
(pav
in
comparison
with
(pa
its intensified
meaning.
A
(pavri
that had arisen in this
way
might
be
expected
to have
-an intensified
meaning
but
never that of
a plural.
The introduction of
an a too before
the
nti,
shown
e.g. by
the
comparison
of
a
^\it.
j-dnti
with
'i-aiTL,
'luai to
be of
very earlydate,
would be haixl to
explain
on
this
hypothesis. If,
46 THE PERSONAL TERMINATIONS,
ch, ii.
on
the other
hand, we
follow Schleicher and others in
taking
anti for the
primary
form,-
the
only
difficultywe
meet is.in the
case
of the verbs
whose stem ends in
a. Why,
it has been
asked,
do
we
not from hhara
+
anti
get
hhardnti and a
Gk.
*(pipu}vrL'\
But the entire
expulsion
of
one
of two vowels which
come
into collision is
a weakening
that it is not
hard to
explain.
Sanskrit moreover
givesa
hint of this
weakening
when
in this
person
it
expels
even
the
n
in
monosyllabicreduplicatinga- stems,
such as dada,
and
gives
us
ddda-ti instead of
dada-nti,
or,^
we
may say,
dadd-nti. If then
we set down anti
as the real
termination,we
shall
find
an
easy
explanation
of it if
we "
again following
Schleicher " resolve
it into the
pronominal
stem
an,
to be
seen in the Gk.
hd, tr
and in the
ex^Danded
form
ana
in
many
languages
" in Gk.
e.g.
in
liva,ai'w " and
the ti
(fromta)
of the 3rd
pers.
singular.
The two" that
one, he,or some- thing
like it" are to be
imagined
as
joinedcopulatively
with the
meaning
'
that
one
and he
'
or
'
he and he.' There
can
be
no expression
of the
pku'almore simple
than this.^
69
1)
The
primary
avn,
vri.
The various forms assumed
by the,
termination
anti,
nti in Greek
may
be reviewed in the
following
order.
a)
The full unaltered termination has been
preserved
within the
widest
range
by
the Dorians. Here the
difference,
elsewhere
so
sti'ongly
marked,
between the various ramifications does not exist. Ahrens
(p.292)
is loud in the
praises
of the
'
summa constantia
'
of the Dorians
as
shown in the
antiquity
of this
very
form. References to
inscrip- tions
of the different
periods
and
placesare
given by Ahrens,
who
arranges
those of all kinds of forms
togethere.g.
liyorn
"
avayyeXiovTL"
artiTtBeKavTi "
ttoiCjvtl,^la-yi'iJji'Ti
"
E'/FrjXrjdtoji'Ti (
=
"^ft\r;0w(7().
At the
same
place
are to be found the
corresponding
forms from
Epicharmus
and
Sophron.
To these others have been added from
inscriptions
since
"discovered
:
from
Delphian
inscr.
{Ber.
d. sachs.
Ges., 1864,
p.
223) ni'UTidevTi,
E-^nrri, ayovri, (pvXaaaofTi, KphdjVTi,Cwmvtl', BeXtoyri,
at'TiXeyuji'Ti, Tradi^yri,TiXevTaiTO)i'Ti,
TroujaMi'Ti,
"t,eXdii)yTi
;
from Locrian
inscriptions e'wiTt, ftJ'?t)(ct"f(i""'rt, (pvXatra-oyTi (AllenStudien,
iii.
263);
from
the Elic decree in honour of
'
Damokrater
'
(1.28)
/.lerexorTi.
In Pindar
the Doric form of the 3rd
plur.is,ace.
to Boeckh in his edition
1, 2,
p.
358,
and
Peter,
de dial. Pind.
p.
56,
far
commoner
than the Aeolic. In
Callimachus
(Lav.
Pall.
115, 120)we
get ^enryi](T"vrTi,
/.uyevvTi;
in Theo- critus
forms like
fioxOl^ovn(i.38),(Dh'jKcn'Ti
(i.43),
eer-aKayTi,
eyhrevyn
(xv.82).
b)
The form which
comes nearest to the Doric is the Boeotian.
Ahi-ens indeed
(Aeol.208)
founds
on
the form
eyrl,
which
Aristophanes
'
Tliere ai-e two
new
views of the 3rd
plur.
which I
am unwilling to
pass by
unnoticed. BrC^al
(Menioires
de la societe de
tin//
uist. ii.-p. l\)3)i-egavds
the nasal
which
distinguishes the 3rd
plur.
from the 3rd
sing, as a 'particularite
de
prononciation sans
valeur
significative,'
which
only gradually came to be confined
to the
plural.
Until undoubted
singulars are produced
with such
nasals,
this
re- mains
a conjecture without
any
basis of fact.
Quite different
points
of view are
presented
by Brugman's enquiry (,Stud.
ix.
p.
293 ff
.),
where he
suggests
that the
a,
where it is
peculiar
to this
personal termination,
may
have developeditself out
of
a so-called '/I so/ians.' The
question, however,
still needs
a comprehensive
and careful
examination.
CH. II.
THIRD PERSON
PLURAL,
ACTIVE. 47
pnts
into the mouth of his Boeotian at Ach.
902,
and
on a
passage
of
Heraclicles in Eustath.
1557, 41,
where
(hkev-i
and
(plXevri
are
quoted as
Aeolisms,
the
conjecture
that this dialect in the earliest times did not dif- fer
from the Doric in the formation of the 3rd
plural.
As we
have other
instances
preserved
of
very early
coincidences between Boeotian and
Dorian,
this is not
impi'obable.
On
inscriptions, however,
the - has been 70
changed
to W
:
C. I.
1568,
6
'ixmrBi,
1569
a,
35
awocdoavdi,
ib. 46 'iioidi.
(Gp.Beermann,
de dialecto
Boeotico,
Stud. ix.
62.)
This
change
of sovmd
occurs
elsewhere after
a nasal,
e.g.
in the middle form
crwepaXorBo
in
a
Boeotian inscr. in
Rangabe Antiqu.
Hell. Nr. 898
(cp.PrinciplesII.,
Ill),
and therefore cannot be
regarded
as a
link between
r
and
a,
for the
change
of -
to
a,
which is far
more
frequent,
is due to an
influence -exerted
by
the
".
c)
On the other
hand,
there has been discovered in the Arcadian dia- lect
of
Tegea
a
remarkable link in the chain between the
originaltrt
and
the
ai
with
precedinglengthening,
found
commonly
in the Lesbio-Aeolic
and Ionic dialects. On the
insciiption
edited
by
Ad. Michaelis
we
read
(Jahh's
Jahrb.
1861,
p.
585) Kpii'iota-i, t^eXtvwPcrL, -n-aptTaEMyai(1.5, 15,
27).
The forms
are
important,
not
only
because
they
afford
striking
confirmation of
a
formation which
was .before
only conjectured,
but also
because
they
show that it
was not
only
among
the Lesbian
Aeolians,
who
might
be
supposed
to have been influenced
by
the
lonians,
that
7
became
o-
before
i,
d)
Connected
immediately
with the
precedingcomes
the Lesbian
m
with
an t
before it
as compensation
for the -loss of the
"'.
Forms like
"pal(n,-^oXaiffi(^^^^aXwirt),
dixl/cucn,
ETrippofjilDeLcn, TrtTrayatcrt)',
o}k)jitoi(ti,
KpinrToiffi (Ahrens,72, 129, 139),
had
long
been known from the
testimony
of the
grammarians
and the
fragments
of the Lesbian
poets.
But
as
ifiixersoim was
the
only
form attested
by an inscrijition,
and
no
3rd
pi.
conj.
of this dialect
was
yet
known,
it is worth
sjiepial
notice that
on
the
Lesbian
inscriptions
edited
by
Conze
we
read
inrayyiWoicri (xii.a,
33),
and
ypcKp(i)im(vi.11).
Pindar
uses the forms in
-oiai
especially
where
he wants the
help
of a
pai-agogic v,
which is
never added to
m.
Theo- critus
has
(pnpioirr'
in his Aeolic
poem
xxviii. 11.
e)
The lonians show the least
constancy
of all. With them the
v
that falls out before the
-vi
has the most various
ways
of
disappearing.
Aftpr
a
it leaves
a simplelengthening
behind it
:
faai,
after
o a dulling
of the
lengthened
vowel to ou
; (bipovfri.
No one can
doubt that the
steps
next
preceding
these
were
{(xi-vrn
and
(pfpo-ren.
We
see
the
same change
of sound in
f^ii\d-Q
for
fieXar-cyepovtria
for
yepovr-iu, yeporir-ut.
The 71
only
forms that are
problematical
are
those of the
conjugation
in
-yui.
That i'-ao-t
was.
formed fi'om
i-avrt,
e-d(Ti from
e"r-aj^r",
with
an a
that
belonged
to a
primitive
age,
is
put beyond
doubt
by
the Skt.
j-dnti,(a)s-
dnti=the Lat.
{"")s-unt,
and the Germ. s-inJ.
According
to the
ordinary
view, however, Attic forms like
SiSo-affi, ride-aai,
^en^i'v-am are taken as
the foimdations for
hlovm, ridel/ri, deiKviiai,
which
are supposed
to have
arisen fi-om them
by
contraction. But this involves some difficulty.
In
the fii'st
place
Homer
only
knows the
trisyllabic
forms
: nOt'ifftv IT
262,
ft125,
/flffo'r
152,
A "270,'Mcwaiy B 255, T
265,
6
167,
pnyrvTi
P
751,
and these
same
forms
are
pronounced by Bredow,
p.
393,
to be Herodo-
tean, on
the
authoiity
of the best
though by no means consistent manu- scripts.
Anyhow
the foi-ms in
-oiri are not of
very eailyoccuri'ence..
In
48 THE PERSONAL TEEMINATIONS.
ch. ii.
the second
place,
the contraction of
eu to
ei,
ou
to
ov,
va
to
v,
is
anything
but
regular.
The
apparently
similar instances of contractions into
ti
and
u
in the ace.
plur.
are
to be
explainedpartly
as
due to the
analogy
of the
nom. pi.,
and
partly
in
quitea
different
way
(Ix^v-q
from
lxOv-3'c).
Buttmann was
awake to these difficulties
(Ausf.
Gr. i.^
505).
The
as-
sumi)tion
that the
a
in SiSuuai is
an insertion,
which
Matthiae,
i.^
483,
thought a possibleone,
did not
satisfy
him. He was
inclined himself to
follow Landvoigt
in
regarding-tra vti as
the termination in these forms.
On this
svipposition
he was
right
in
compai-ing
them with "laaai and
""^ao-(, as
also with the
preterites
t-fo-o-ar,
i-lico-nuv,
and
we
should in
this case
have to
suppose
cilo-uavTL to be
a compound
with
-0-11)71= tir-
a)Ti=sunt.
But there is this considei-able difierence between the
preter- ites
and the foi'ms in
question:
in. the former the
o- remains,
but in the
latter it does not. If cido-acriand i-lico-aar
were
formed
on
the
same
principle, why
have we not on
the
one
hand
*cic6-(Ta(Ti, or on
the other
*i-cico-av1 The
parallelism
between the
past
and
jiresent
tenses is such
that it is
hardly
conceivable that where
once thei-e was
unanimity
so
striking
a
difierence should have arisen. A closer examination of all
these relations will lead us
after all to
agree
with
Bopp
when
(Vergl.
Gr. ii.'^
299)
he makes use of the remarkable
identity
of Skt. forms like
Tci-nv-anti
they collect,
and
luK-rv-uat,
in order to
give
'a
satisfactory
accovmt
'
of the
u.
The forms
ndi-ajTi,
Si^G-atn which
may
be deduced
from
TiBf-a(Ti, ciCn-am
(cp.
the Homeric
(iifta-aai, yeyu-acn)
must be re-
72 ferred to
a
very
old tradition. "We here have formations of an
older
tyjie
than the Doric
ridi-m,
^ico-m and the
corresponding
Sanskrit dd-dha-
ti,dd-da-ti,
which have
even
lost theii- nasal. It is
doubtfid,on
the other
hand,
whether the Homeric forms
reallyarose
from the Attic ones.
To
take the
simplest
case first,
who could
suppose
ilai contracted from
rao-t
when the well-attested Doric
evti (Ahrens,320)supplies
us
with
so much
simpler an explanation
of it ?
^
It is true
that
TiOe'im,ciCovm, (np/rvffL
were regarded by
the old
grammarians as
contracted
forms, as
their
accent shows. For this
we
have the
testimony
of Herodian
(i.459).
But who knows whether this doctrine had not its I'oot in the mistaken
policy
of
taking
Attic forms as
the
primary
ones ? If
we assimie
the real
accentuation to have been
riOtiai,ciawm, piiyvvai,they
would bear to
the Doric
ridtiTi,
cicoi'n,
the
same
relation
as
that of tlal to
evti. irTrum
(N. 336)
may
well have been formed
on
the
analogy of'iaai,
turn,
and so
be
a conti'action,
imless
we
prefer
to class it with the related verbs and
to accent it 'laTam
(cp.
Skt.
tishthanti,
Zd.
IdsteTiti).
f)
There remains to be discussed
an extraoixlinary
Cretic foim.
Hesychius
has the
gloss
tx"''''
^X"^^""' ^^CW^Q-
It would be
easy
to con- jecture
(as
Ahi'ens
does,
Dor.
293)
that he meant
exoin
.or txovm
as a
dat.
plur.
But it is
just as possible
that this tradition is
a
sound
one,
as Boeckh,
C. I. ii.
404, Stier,Ztschi-.,
vii.
7,
suppose,
e'x'"''
^^7
have
come
immediately
from
*"X(^''''' (cp.l,iyro"^.
The
*i'xo"'"i
thus arrived
at
may perhaps
be taken as deiived
by
assimilation from the
ordinary
*
Cp.
G.
Stier,Ztschr. vii. 1 if. In this
essay,
which takes in mnch matter related
to our
present subject,the foi-m iZn^elai
too is,according
to
an
old
precedent,
again
adduced as Aeolic. Tliis
form, though,
is
only
found in Eustath.
1557, 41,
quoted
from
Heraclidcs, where, however, the whole connexion
clearlypoints
to the
conjecture
made
by
Ahrens
{Aeul. 20'J),
that tSri is
a
mistake for dvTi, a Doric
contraction for
iotni.
CH. 11.
THIRD PERSON PLURAL ACTIVE. 49
Doric
e'xoj'rt.
The Cretans
were
fond of unusual assimilations.
Cp.
e.g.
their transformation of eKXvan' to tXXva-i
r,
Avktoc to Avttoq
(Hey,
De
Dial.
Cretica,
p.
48).
We shall meet with this assimilation of
rr
to
w
directly,
in the final letters of the
secondary
forms.
2)
The
secondary
termination
-ant,
-nt. 73
The Dorians accented
every
3rd
phir.
of the
secondary
forms
as a
paroxytone : eXiyoy,k^ayov, it^aoru',
iXvaar. Ahrens
(Dor.28)
has col- lected
the
testimony
of the
gi-ammarians
on
this head. No
one,
I
think,
will believe
nowadays
that this accentuation
is,as Macrobius
(De
Differ.
p. 310) assumes,
'
discretionis
gratia,'
i.e. meant to
distinguish
the 3rd
ph
from the 1st
sing.
There
was no
'discretio' at all in the
case
of
t(puffa)',
kXvfTar. Ahrens
saw clearly
that the
reason
lay
in the
origin
of
these forms. At the time when nt was
still sounded at the end of these
syllables
the final
syllable
was long by position,
and this affected the
accent. The main
accent,
which had a
greaterpersistency
than the final
consonant,
held fast to the
syllableon
which it had
once
established
itself. The
only question
is whether it
was the old full nt which
was
preserved
in the Lat. e^'ant
(=7i/rap)
that
produced
this
effect,or a
connecting
link between nt and the
simple r.
The former is the view
held
by Ahrens,
and
formerly by myself Misteli,on the other hand
(Ztschr.
xvii.
166),
has endeavoured to show that the latter is the
probable one.
He is
no
doubt
right
in
assuming
that between the
deducible
ycrarT
and the
ordinary
Greek
7}(Tapthere must have come a
form in which
rr
had assimilated itself to
vy,
ijaavv
that
is,
and
aptly
compares
with it the Skt. form dsann which still
appears
before vowels.
For the formation of the
nom.
and
ace. neut. of rr-stems in
-r
also I
believe that I have in Stud. ii. 167 been
right
in
conjecturing
forms in
J')',
e.
g.
(pipovv.
Since then there can
hardly
be
a doubt that the
step
immediately precedmg kXiyor, kcpatravwas not
kXiyorr,
ujKKrayT,
but
kXiyov)',
Eipanrai'v,
it
seems
advisable to find
an explanation
for the Doric
accentuation in this the nearest
step,especially as the Greek law
as to
the final
syllablewas
not
one
of the oldest laws of accentuation and
e.g.
can
certainly
not be held to
apply
to the Graeco-Italic
period
in which
we are
forced to admit esani and the like. There is
even
nothing
im- probable
in the further
assimiption
that the Doric
r
in this
place,
e.g.
in
iXiyoy" as a
kind of fellow to the initial
v
arising
from
or,
and
making
the
o long by position,
in the Homeric
utto
vevpTjcpiy
" had
even
in his- torical
times
a somewhat different sound from that of the
y
in the 1st
sing.
t(pepoy,
and that this
was
the
reason
why
the
analogy
of all
74
verbal accentuation
so
imperious
elsewhere was
powerless
here. When
in the
next
place
the final consonant
was comj)letelyexpelled,
Greek
reached the
same
stage
as
the Sanskrit
:
t-^epo-y:=d-hhm-a-n
and Zd.
hare-n.
A
companion
to the forms in
-am
after vowels above discussed is the
Boeotian
ayiduty,Q.
I.
1588,
i.e.lir-e-Qe-ar
(Ahrens,
Aeol.
211,
Dor.
525).
Ahrens is
no
doubt
right
in
refusing
to
assume
with Boeckh that
an o-
had been
expelledhere,
for hiKujaav
(1583)
shows that the
a
of similar
forms
remained intact. It is far better to
suppose
that
heie,as in the
pei-fectaTvolelo-aydi
(1569a,35),
and the Attic
^i?6-cicri,
Tidi-aai tlie
a
is
50 THE PERSONAL TERMINATIONS.
ch. ii.
an
integralpart
of the
personal
termination.^ This
agreement
between
Attic and Boeotian is
perhaps
not accidental
:
it
may
be
one
of
a seiies
of
phenomena
common to the two
neighboviring
countries.
We have
already
had occasion to
speak
of the
partial
or
sporadic
part playedby composition
in this
person
(p.48).
Few
can doubt that
i-(pa-(jav,
i-ho-aav contain the
preterite
of the rt. as
shortened to
aav and
destitute of
augment (
=
"o-ar),
and the view of the ancients that the
shoi-ter formation
arose from the
longer
may
be
regarded
as
disposed
of.
The direct addition of the
personal
termination to the stem in the
case
of
verbs with no thematic vowel is from the earliest
periods
of the
language
onwards
rarer
than that of the
longer-o-ai'.
In Homer we have "
'darnv A 535
by
the side of la-raaav 2
346
ardv I 193
" ,, Trapecrracrav
H 4G7
ejiavA 391
" "
vnep^aa-aponly
M 469
iSai/A 209
" "
el3rja-av
0 343
ecpavr
161
" "
ecpacrav
O 700
0av (S
337
" "
cjidaav
B 278
cf)6dv only
A
51
eVXai^
ouly
* 608
i'KTav
only
K 526
irpoTidev a
112
(Aristai'chus) by
the side of ridea-av
X
449
decrav A 433
75
"levM 33, nediev(ji
377
by
the side of
aveaav
* 537
rrpoicrav
8 681
[hymu.
in Oerer.
328,
437
e'StSoz/]
bocrap A 162
edvv
A
263
by
the side of
fjta-av
K 197
e(f)vp e
481
" "
'ia-avA 494
Hesiod
iises
Uidor
0pp.
139
(M.SS.
Ihi^wy,
cp.
Rzach,
Dialekt des
Hesiodos, Theogn. p.
439),e^ov, Theog. 30, by
the side of
ecorrav 141,
and the remarkable
7]r=^7]uar,
to be discussed
below,
p.
99. The short
form finds
a
fair number of
representatives
in Doric dialects
;
we
have
the
Argive
aviBev
(C.
I.
29),now
found also
on
the
Ol3Tnpian
nike-
inscription
of the Messenians and
ISTaupactians, cnvearcw,
^tiy'O'' (Heracl.
Tables,
Meister Stud. iv.
420),
to which
may
be added
ecoi'
from the
inscription
from
Tegea,
C. I. 30. From hence
they
made their
way
into
Pindar's
poetry ; KaretTTav Pyth.
i.
35, -KiTvav
Nem.
v. 11,
aveOer Isthm.
viii. 58
(cp.
Simonides
Ceus, 137),
Tidev
Pyth.
iii.
65,
'let-Isthm. i.
22,
efvp, Pyth.
i.
42, by
the side of dEcrav
Pyth.
ii.
39,
eloffav Nem. vi.
10,
and
indirectly, though very
scantily,
into that of the dramatists
: eftay
Aesch. Pers.
18,
inrecpai'
Soph. Aj. 167, KareftavSoph.
Trach.
504,
effrav
Eurip.
Phoen. 1246. The
correspondiug
forms of the
passive
aorists
are
discussed ii. 323. The termination
o-ar,
which
clearly
took
the
place
of
"' more
and
more as
time went
on,
has
perhapsno
counterpart
outside Greek
except
in Old Persian
:
e.g.
2xiti-y-di-sa=:7rpoQ-i'iL-(7av
(Spiegel, AltpersischeKeilinschriften,
p.
168).
DUAL.
The first
person
dual,
which
originally
ended in
-va-si,as is showni
by
the Skt.
va-s,
the Zd.
va-hi,
the Ch.-Sl.
ve,
the Lith.
-va,
andll
which,
it is
highly probable,
differed from the 1st
plm*. only by
thelf
'
Becrmann, de dial. Boootica
(Stud.
ix.
p. 78),
takes another view of
this|
form, wliich he
connects with the Arcadian airu-S6as discussed Verb. ii. 288.
CH. II. DUAL,
ACTIVE. 51
weakening
of tlie
m to v
(Schleich. Comp.^ 653),
has
disappeared
from
Greek witliout
leaving
a trace. We
may
perhaps conjecture
that the
disinclination this
language
showed to a
digamma, especially
in the
middle of
a word,
had
something
to do with
this,especially as
of the two
dialects which did hold to the
/,
the Aeolic had no dual.
There are so
many questions
that touch both
persons
of the dual
equally,76
that we
shall have to consider the second and thii-d
persons together.
The termination of the 2nd
pers.
in the Indo-Germanic
periodappears
to have been
-tva-s,
the nearest
approach
to which is the Skt. -tha-s. It
would
hardly
be
possible
to establish
any
other
analysis
of this than that
into
-fva-si,
i.e.
'
thou
thou,'so that,as
alreadypointed
out on
p.
44,
the
second
person
dual was
oiiginally
identical with the second
person plural.
Notwithstanding
this it is
quite
clear that there
was a
difference between
the two numbers in this
person
before the
separation
of the Indo-
G^rmanic
languages,
for the difference is visible not
only
in Sanskrit and
Greek but Lithuanian
(2nd
du.
-ta,
2nd
pi.-te)
and Gothic
(2nd
du.
-ts,
2nd
pi.-th)
as
well. Now this
primary
termination
has,
it is
true,
dis- appeared
from Greek. But there is
a
correspondingsecondaryfoi'm,
the
Skt.
tarn,
with which the Gk
toi'
is identical. How this twyi is connected
with the assumed
primary
form *tva-s is not
clearly
ascertained. If we
take the Greek
language
as our
point
of view we are inclined to state the
relation thus
:
/.lev
:
/j-eg
: : rov :
*tva-s. It is true that in the 1st
plur.
the nasal is
exclusively Greek,
while in the 2nd and -Srd dual it is Indian
as
well. In the former case
it
can be
explainedby
the
phonetic
ten- dencies
of
Greek,
in the latter it is
a mere
meaninglessphonetic
addition
that admits of no explanation.
We cannot rest content either with
Schleicher's
conjecture(Comp.^ 660)
that
we
ought perhaps
to divide it
t-am,
and
regard
the
cwi as an
accession
'
with
no
clearlydistinguishable
function.' I
am
afi-aid that
we must here and in
some
other
cases leave
this
m
for the
present
as an x to be
explained
in the future.
In the 3rd
person
dual Sanskrit has the
piimary
termination
-tas,
Zend
-to,
in which the 6 is the
regular
and
pm-elyphonetic
transforma- tion
of
as.
It is clear that -fas
'.
-thas
'.
'.
pron.
stem ta
l
tva
(tha),
that
is,
tas
originated
in ta-si
'
he
he,'as
did thas in tva-si. The
syllable
si
then,
which is in most cases the mark of the second
person,
here
belongs
to the
third,being
weakened from
sa,
'
he.'
Bopp'sconjecture
that the
s
isthe remnant of
a
pronoun sma,
which must
evidently
have arisen fi-om
sa-\-ma,
seems to me
less
likely(Ygl.
Gr. ii.^
280),though
on
this
assump- tion,
which would have to be extended to the 2nd dual
as well,
it
might
77
be
possibleto find
an
explanation
for the
enigmaticm
of the
secondary
terminations. It
might
be that out of this
sma
the
primary *tvas, ta-s
kept
the
s and the
secondary
tarn the
m.
No
specific
mark of
duality
has been
retamed in either of the two
persons.
Possibly
it was a
gradually
formed
usage
which restricted them to this
narrower
sphere,
though
at the first
they
denoted indefinite
plurality.
The Gk. termination
-Toi'
is
evidently
related to this -fas
jirecisely
as
the
same termination in
the 2nd dual is to -thas.
By
the side of this
primary
form stands a
secondary.
Here Indian
and
Greek show
a remarkable
accord,
the former
having -tdm,
the latter
-rr)y.
The
length
of the vowel
as
compared
with the short vowel of the
primary
form is
striking.
Misteli in his
essay
on
the terminations of
the
middle
(Ztschr.xv.
329),
believes the
ground
of the
lengthening
is
E 2
52 THE PERSONAL TERjVIINATIONS. ch. n.
to be found in the effort to distinguish
it from the 2nd dual. But this
effort cannot
anyhow
have been
very strong
in
Greek, or the
primary
forms for the two
persons
would not have remained the
same.
I am
more
inclined to think that it
was a
kind of accident which
preserved
the
long secondary vowel,
and that the
primary
vowel
was
long
too at
first,
that
consequently
there stood
originally
tcis tain
side
by side,
and
that this
a was
of the
same
nature as
that in the -tlm of the 2nd
sing.
We have
occasionally
to assume
terminations with
long
vowels for
impe- rative
and middle forms
as
well. The
agreement
between Greek and
Sanskrit in this
point
is the
more
remarkable because Zend here shows
the short vowel
(Schleicher, Comp.^ 670):
here the termination is
-tern,
e.g.
m()n^ae-tem=-l3acrh:oi-rr]r.
The Ch.-Sl.
"e,
both
primary
and
secondary,
does not
help us
much
:
Gothic and Lithuanian
giveus no help
at all.
While the schema
given by
Greek
grammarians
"
2 du.
TOV TOV
3 du.
TOV
Tr]V
derives
powerfulsupport
from these
considerations. Comparative
Grammar
has here much to
say
on the
points
of
controversy
which have
occupied
the students of Gi-eek Grammar in
particular.
In
discussing
the
strange
78
irregvilarities
which meet
us
here
we mav
take the middle forms into
consideration at the
same time, althoughwe
shall have to discuss their
origin
later
on. Anyhow
the
parallel
between
tov
ttji'
and (rOoy
aBrfv
is
visil)le at once.
The
strange thing
is that the rules of the schema
given
us by
tradition
are so
very
seldom observed in
practice.
No doubt this is
partly
because the dual forms do not occur
very
often
anywhere,
and
only
in Attic with
any
frequency.
It is therefore worth
special
notice that the
regular
form in
-rjjr
for the 3rd dual does sometimes
occur in Attic in- scriptions
(Corp.
Inscr, Att. No. 358
avediTriv,396, 374,
and elsewhere
ETzutr]CFarr]v),
and that
we
have in
a
Boeotian
(C.
I. No.
1580)
and in
a
Dorian
inscription(No. 25)
a
3rd dual in
-rur : avEderav,
EirorifTarav
(Ahr.
Dor.
298).
To the
grammatical
rule there
are exceptions
of two
kinds,
which
have been discussed with most minuteness
by Aug. Bieber,
De Duali
Numei'O
(Jena,1864),
p.
20,
who follows in the
steps
of earlier authorities
to whom
we
shall have
occasionally
to refer.
1)
In Homer
--or
takes the
place
of
-Trjv
as
the termination of the
3rd dual in
secondary
forms. Of this
we
have tlu'ee certain
instances,
recognised
as such
b}'-
the old
grammarians :
K 363.
u)s TOV TvSetSj;? rjS'
6
TTTo\'nvop6os
'Odvcrcrevs
Xaov
aTTOTfirj^avTe
8i6)KfTov
efifxeves
dei.
Aristarclius's
attempt
to
get
out of the
difficulty
here
by assimiingan
enallagetemponim
has been
thoroughly
refuted
by Friedlander,
Philol.
vi. 669 ff. No refutation is needed of the view of other
grammarians
that there is
an
enallage
personarum.
N 345.
Tu"
S'
(]fx(j)\s (ppoveovre
8va)
Kpovov
vie
KpaTaioi
\
avhpda-LV
Tjpaecra-iv
iTev)(eTov tiXyeaXvypd,
j
where there is the
entirely
unsuitable variant
rerevxnTO}'.
I
2 582. in
a narrative "
'
TO)
pev ivapprj^avre j3o6s
peyaXoio^oelrjv
" i
ejKaTa
Koi
peXav aipa Xa(pvcra-eTov.
|
)CH. m. DUAL,
ACTIVE. 53
A
passage
in
Hesiod, 0pp. 199,
which used to be classed
\yith
these,
is
too
uncertain to
prove
anything,
for it is
by no means
certain that
'i-of,
which is itself
doubtful,^is to he taken as a past
tense. I.
Bekker,
ia
79
his review of Wolf's Homer
(Horn.
Bl. i,
50),
wanted to
bring
the
three Homeric forms into accordance with the
rule,
and
proposed
to read
hiwKTTjv,
(.rvicTr])', XcKpvKryy,
but since then he has shown
a
wise caution
in not
venturing
to introduce these creations of his own into the text.
In the
case
of
*X(t(pvKTr]v particularly
this would have been
open
to "
objection,as
it would have been
contrary
to all
analogy,
and has no
longer
the
support
CA^en
of
*(7vrcdKTi]r.
For ia
Hesiod,
Scut.
189,
it is no
doubt
right
with the E. M. to read
o-uvaty^jji',
which
Kochly
and Kinkel
have
adopted.
One
or two third
persons
dual ia the middle in -adov for
-ffdrjyare mentioned as variants m our
schoKa
on
N
613,
11
218,
^ .506.
It is clear from this that the
Alexandrians,
and
especially Aristophanes
and
Aristarchus,
had to
fight
for then-
schema,
which has since been held
the
regular
one. We need not be
surprised
at this when we
find that
there
were
actually
those who held that in Homer the dual
might
be
used for the
plural
at
will,a
view
which, although
not without its
supporters
even nowadays,
may
be
regarded
as disposed
of
by anyone
who
will reflect
on
it
(Bieber,
De Duali
Numero,
pp.
39-46).
The leaders "
among
the Alexandrians
no
doubt di-ew from the
superabundance
of the
forms La
-r/?)',
-aOr]!'
for the 3rd
pers.
of the
secondary
forms the correct
conclusion that such
was
the
prevailiag rule,
and
Comparative
Grammar
ia this instance endorses theii- verdict. No
one
I think will
now
accept
Buttmann's decision that
'
the distinction between the dual
endingsov
and
r/y
was not matured till the time of the later
poets
'
(Ausf
Gr. i.^341
note).
But the
question
is how to
regard
these remarkable
exceptions.
Thiersch
(p.
352
note)thought
there
might
have been
a shortening
of
-er7ii'
to -erer
for the sake of the metre. In
support
of this
might
now
be adduced the Zend forms m -tefn. Still
more
artificialand
arbitrary
is Bollensen's
attempt (Ztschr.
xiii.
202).
We have
every
reason
to be
very
careful how
we
alter the text of Homer to suit
grammatical
rules 80
and theories. When we set
agaiast
this the fact that the three verses
occiu-
in
parts
of the Iliad which
are certainly
not
among
the oldest "
the
Doloneia,
the Shield of Achilles,
and ia
a
passage
which Bekker
finds
ground
for
regardingas an interpolation
" we
shall be inclined I
think to attribute the
anomaly
to the want of
proper
liaguistic
instinct
on the
part
of
some
late
rhapsodist.
Thei-e
are
next to no
forms in
-tov
for
-Tr)v
in Attic writers
: Plato,Bvithyd.274, e'^aroi',
Thucyd.
_ii.
86,
where
Classen,though
he follows others in
reading
the
unobjectionable
hexsTO}',
stUl has
a word to
say
for the
luixtTov
of the M.SS. In
Aristoph.
fr. 523 Dind." it is
impossible
to make the words of the
grammarian who cites these
verses
in the Et, M. a sufficient
ground
for
pronouncing KaTuvrifioXtiTov
and
eKfiaivsTov
unaugmented past
tenses.
They are
clearly
historical
presents.
Such
a
state of the
facts is
siu-ely enough
to warrant the alteration of Plato's
efaroi'
into
*
Compare
Hesiodca edd.
Koechly et Kinkel,
who have
adopted 1.Tt)v,
and
Rzach, Der DialeU des Hesiodos
(Jahrbiicher
f. class. Philologie,Siippl.
b. viii.
p. 438).
54 THE
PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS.
ch. ii.
2)
More attention has been
paid
to the
anomaly
which is the
reverse
of
this,
the substitution
of
-rrji'
{-adr]!')
for
-roi' {-(t6oi')
in the second
person
dual of the secondary
forms. Since
Elmsley's
note
on
Aristoph.
Acharn.
733,
and
Em-ip. Medea, 1041, a
small literature has amassed
itself on
this
subject,
out of which I will
only
mention
Buttmann,
Ausf. Gr. i.2 341
;
Cobet,
Mnemos. viii.
408, Koi'toq
Aoyiog 'Epfirjc,
i. 29
ff.,
and Fritsche's most sensible discussion on
Aristoph.
Thesm.
v.
1158. Elmsley
went so
far as to
rejectaltogether
the second
pers.
in
TO}'
in historical tenses even
in
Homer,
and therefore not
only preferred
at O
448,
K
545,
A 782,
Zenodotus's
Ka^eTi]r,
Xafti-rjv, jjdeXirr^i' to
Aristai-chus's
ku^itov,
"c.,
but at 9 456 altered the
metrically
estab- lished
'iKtaQoi' in the most
arbitraryfashion,
and in direct violation of
the
syntax,
into the
conjunctivehy^cfdor.
This
conjecture
therefore of
Elmsley's
has met with no
approbation.
With
respect
to the Attic
writers the case
is different. Here the
sagacity
of the
English
critic and
his followers has established that in. at least six
passages
in
Plato,
includingone
in the
Eryxias
"
Euthyd.
p.
273e
I'vpirrir,
iizECrfjiriaaTrjy,
ib. 294e
i](7Tr]r, Legg.
vi. 735a
kKOivwvqaarrir,SjncQp.
189c
elTrerr]}', Eryx.
p.
199d
eTTETEXeaaTtjy,
in the scholium on
Harmodius and
Aristogiton
in
81
Athen. xv. 695, Soph.
O. R. 1511
eIxett}^,
which is established
by
the
metre, Em-ip.
Ale. 661 Dind.
")X\o^or/;)'
" in nine
passages
that is in
all,
to which
may
perhaps
be added
Aristoph.
Nubb.
1506,
-rjjr
for
-roi'
in
the second
person
is
fully
established. But over against
these nine
or
ten
passages
stand at least thirteen in which the M.SS. have
-rov
for the
second
person
in
secondary
forms
:
Aesch.
Ag.
1207
yXOeToi',Soph.
0. C.
1379
sfpvroy,
1696
ifiriTov,
1746
tXd')(tTOV, Eurij).
El. 1300
rjpKiararov,
Med. 1073
EvhuixovolTor,
Ale. 272
opuJTov,Aiistoph. Yesp.
867
^vyi-
finroy,
Av. 112
Thesmoph.
1155
i\XBEToy,
Pint. 103
kfiiXXEroy,
Plato
Euthyd.
273e fF.
Ei-qroy,
kXiyEToy,
Efaroy
(a
little above comes
EvpErrjy),
Legg.
i.
646b,
Ecfyarov.
In
none
of these
cases
is there the smallest
ground
for
any
alteration,
and
yet
Dindorf
(for
the
past
tenses at
any
rate), Naiick,
'
M6m. de I'Acad. de St. Petersb. T. V
(1862)p.
56
f.,
Cobet, Mnemos. viii,
408,
and
even
G. Hermann
(on
Aesch.
Ag. 1207)
have followed
Elmsley
in
pronouncing
that this
majority
" all well-
attested
passages
" is to be corrected to suit the
minority.
But the
mere
fact that the
exchange
of
-rrfy
for
-tov
in the
passages
from the
poets
is
possible,
and would not
spoil
the
metre,
is
hardly enough
to turn the
scale.
Unfortunatelywe are
left in the lurch here
by
the most trust- worthy
witnesses to
living
visage,
i.e. the
inscriptions,
and there is reason
to fear
we
shall remain
so,
as
there is not much
hope
of
finding
the
second
person
dual
on them. But there is
notliing
to
justify
us
in
regarding
the doctrine of the old Grammarians
on a clearlyimportant
point as a
pure
invention. What but
usage
could have furnished
Aiistophanes
and Ai'istarchus with
grounds
for
so
remarkable
a
rule 1
How did the
clearly
established Homeric 'Ike
ff
dor
get
into the above-
quoted
passage
1 And what
explanation
are we
to
give
of the
complete
accord between this
rule,
which
they
would have
us
believe invented
by
the
Alexandrians
on the
spur
of the
moment,
with the
positively
estab- lished
Indian
usage
^
"
"
Copious instances from the
Rigveda
maj^
be
seen
in Delbriick's Altindisches
Verhm,
pp. 41, 61.
CH, n.
THE MIDDLE VOICE. 55
Skt. 2iid Dual
sec. tarn,
Gk. tov
3rd
"
"
tdm,
"
Trjv
if we are
not to
suppose
tliat these forms
are
of
primitiveantiquity
1
This is not the
only
case
in which the wider
range
of view of the modei-n
Science of
Language
has confii-med the doctrines of the
Alexandrians,82
and refuted the
judgments,
formed with the
gi-eatest
confidence from
insufficient
subject-matter
and with
no regard
to the structm-e of
language by even
the most meritorious of modern
critics, nor
is it the
only
instance in which
Comparative
Grammar has shown itself not
barren of results even in the
region
of textual criticism.^
I
am thoroughly
convinced
myself,
and I would
hope my
readers are
too,
that
(cp,Klihner,
Avisf Gr. i. 542 f
)
in two different
periods
the
Greeks
were
mconsistent in theii-
usage
of dual forms in
verbs,
that at
an earlier
period
the termination
tov
had the
upper
hand,
while in that
of Attic Greek the distinction of the
secondary
from the
primary
forms
which had become the established rule for the 3rd
pers.
dual had' the
efiect of
introducing
a
mistaken observance of the same
distinction
now
and then in the second
person
as
well. The dual
was anyhow
of
propor- tionally
rare
occurrence,
and this fact
helps
us to understand the existence
of such aberrations of the
linguistic
instinct,as
also of the similar con- fusions
of
gender
in the
case
of dual forms in
noims.
II, MIDDLE.
The
personal
terminations which to
a large
extent do
duty
for middle
and
passive
alike
belong originally
to the
former,
and
originated
in an
expansion
of the terminations of the active. These two facts are
all
but
universallyacknowledged.
As to the individual
terminations,
how- ever,
and their relation to the
corresponding
active
terminations,
such
a
complete agreement
does not
yet
exist. In
fact,
there arise here on
some
points
difficult
problems
for which
satisfactory
solutions have
yet
to be found. Our first task is to find in
general
the true
piinciple
of the
relation between the active and middle terminations.
The function of the middle terminations is
essentially a
reflexive
one,
reflexive that is in the broadest
sense
of the
term,
and it
by no means
denotes
simply
the dii-ect
passing
of the action back
on
to the
subject.
It
was a natural and
pertinentsuggestion
that
as
the
subject
bears a
33
twofold relation to the action of the
middle,
it
might
have found
a two- fold
expression
in its form. This idea formed the basis of Kuhn's and
Bopp's analysis.
The full terminations of the three
persons
of the
singularare
found to be
mai, sai,
tai. These
were
referred
by
the two
scholars above named to
ma-\-mi, tva + tvi,ta + ti,
that is to
I-fl,
thou
+ thou,
he
+ he,
the second of each
pairbeing supposed
to be
equivalent
either to
an accusative
or dative.
This view of Kuhn
(De Conjug.
in
:\II,
p.
24)
and
Bopp (Vgl.
Gr. ii.2314
ffi)
I
opposed
in
my
'
Tempera
imd MocU
'
(p.
30
fi".).
But I
have
long
since been convinced that
my
gi-ounds
of
opposition
to the
principle
in
general
were untenable.
My
fii'st
ground
was
this
:
if in the
2nd
pers. plur.
act. the
primary
form *tva-tva attained,
fi-om the
mean-
4
This
question
has been
sensibly
discussed
by
A.
v. Bamberg,
Ztschr.
f
Gi/mnasiahveseii, 1874,
p.
622' f.
56 THE
PERSONAL
TEEMINATIONS. ch, ii.
ing
thou and
thoii,properly
thoit.
thou,
to that of
ye,
how
were we to
believe that this same
thou thou should in the 2nd
sing.
mid. become
thou thee 1
Language
could not,
I
thought,
have associated the
same
pronominal
stems
in
one case as copulativecompounds
" called in San- skrit
Dvandva " where an
and had to be
supplied
in
thought,
and in
another as compounds
where
one was dependent on
the other " called in
Indian
grammar
Tat/pumsha.
This
difficulty, though justified
at the
time
by
the science as
far as
its
light went, disappears
at
present
in
the face of the new lightlately
thrown
on
the
subjectby
the intro- duction
of clearer
chronologicalnotions,
which have led
me more
and
more
to the conclusion that the forms of
langviage
arose stratum
by
stratum
(cp.above,
p.
7
fi'.).
It is
quitepossible
that the
same
elements
which in an
earlier
periodwere
associated
copulatively,
were united in
quite
a
different
way
at a
later time after the sense of the
origin
of the
former
compounds
had
long
been lost. We shall
even
find in the 3rd
pers.
imperativea further and
a
difierent mode of
association,
i.e.
the
emphatic
or
intensive. In
my
treatise
'
Zur
Chronologie
der indo-
germaniscbenSprachfoi-schung
'
I have shown how this
very process,
this
variety
of methods of association of the same elements,
is of
rejieated
occui-rence,
and is
speciallyadapted
to
give us an insight
into the
gi-adualgrowth
of
linguistic
forms.
Other
objections
were
derived from defects in the
explanations
of
84
individual
formations,especially
those of the
pliu'al,
on
which much
fresh
lighthas, as
I
think,
been cast
by
Misteli's
essay
in Kuhn's
Ztschr.
XV.
28.5 fl:and 321 flf.
My own explanation
of the middle terminations which I
preferred
to
that of Kuhn and
Bopp
was
that
they
had arisen from the active
terminations
by
addition of sound
or
vowel intensification. I assumed
mai to have arisen in this fashion from
mi,
sai from
si,
and so on.
But
it is not
likely
that at the time when the middle terminations arose
the
active terminations had
degenerated
from the old
ma,
tva
"c. to
mi,
si
"c., especially
as we have still
j^reserved
in the form -tha
(seeabove,
p.
32)
and in the 3rd
sing,
ttc of the
imperative,
forms with different
vowels.
Moreover,
if mi after
being
once so
weakened did
developeby
intensification back to a
stronger mai,
it was
contrary
to the normal
comse of
a sound's
progress.
There are besides one or two
secondary
forms,particularly
the Ist
sing,
fxriv
and the Skt. 2nd
sing,thds,
which
cannot
possibly
be
explained
on this
hypothesis.
For these
reasons
I
retract
my
former views
on
this head.
Besides
Bopp'stheory,
which has its difiicultiesno doubt,
and the
one
just
mentioned
as
formerly
held
by myself,
there is
a third which has
much in its favour. In the Italian
languages,
in
Lithuanian,
and in
Norse the middle is formed
by
the additi"n of the i-eflexive
pronoun.
What if this should have been the
case in Greek
too,
if
juca
should have
arisen not from
ma +
mi but from
ma -f svi,
i.e.
7na + sva 1 The
possibility
of this
was noticed
as such
by Bopp (Vgl.
Gr. ii.^
321),
and I have often
thought
it
over
myself.
On mature consideration,however,
I have
decided
against
the
theory.
Wilibald
Boeder,
in his
'
Foi-menlehre der
griechischen
Sprache
fin-
Gymnasien,'Berlin,1867,
p.
68,
has
gone
so
far
as to introduce this doctrine into the schoolroom. There is
an attractive- ness
al)out it when looked
at with reference to Gi'eek alone. As far
as Greek
phonetic
laws
go
there is
nothing extraordinary
in the loss of
CH. II.
FIRST PERSON SINGULAR,
MIDDLE. 57
the sv
between ma
and i. But where
are we to find the like in San- skrit
? Yet
here,too,
we have
e,
which must have
come
fi'om
me,
mai,
se,
i.e.
sai,te,
i.e. tai in the 3rd
sing.
The
reduplicationtheory
finds at
all events
support
in one or two
forms,especially
in
-/x??)'
and the Skt.
-thds,
which retain relics of the
repeatedpronoun.
No such
support
can 85
be found for the reflexive
theory.
And
apart
from the fact that it
assumes such an expulsion
of sounds as
could
hardly
have
happened so
early,
it leaves the termination
-[xrji'
altogetherunexplained.
We shall be
driven,therefore,
to come back to the method of
explana- tion
suggestedby Bopp,
which has been
adoptedby
Schleicher
(Comp.^
671),
and adhered to in its essential
points by
Kuhn in his discussion
of the middle terminations
(Ztschr.
xv. 401
ff.),
and shall have to
try
how far it will
help
us in
dealing
with the individual forms.
As to the
bearing
which the
meanmg
has on this
theoiy,
it is
important
to remember the
fact,already
referred
to,
that in
no
language
does the middle coincide in use with that of the active forms followed
by
a reflexive
pronoun
in the accusative. The use of
Xovoj-iui
in the
sense
of \ovu) iixavTovis,as
everyone
knows, one of the rarest. The
same
is
the case in
Sanski-it,
where the nature of this form is so well
expressed
by
the word
atmanepada-m,
i.e. self-form. Now this fact is
quite
in
accordance with the above-mentioned
explanation.
For the
newly
added
pronoun
has not the form of
any
case whatever,
but that of the
stem. As I have
attempted
to show in the
essay
mentioned
above,
the
formation of the middle must be referred to a
much earlier
period
than
that of the formation of the
cases
(cp.Misteli,
Ztschr.
xv. 296).
The
notion of the
accusative,
of the dative Arc.
can
hardly
have been
present
to the consciousness of the Indo-Germans when
they
created the middle
voice. Hence the relation of the
newly
added
pronoun
to the action
was
as
undefined
as
that of most
nouns
in
compounds
of which
they
form a
pai't,
and in which the variation of
meaning
bears the
stamp
of an
early
period.
First Person Singular.
We
may
take the doubled -ma as the
primary
form. The
only
doubt is
whether,as Kuhn
conjectiu'cs
in his acute discussion of all
the forms of this
group (Ztschr,
xv.
401),
we
ought
to start from
-ma- ma
or from the shorter
-ma-ma.
We have
already
encountered more
than
one
instance of
lengthened j^ronominal
stems in the
personal
tei-minations of the
active,
e.g.
on
p.
36 in the discussion of the 2nd
smg,
in -da and
on
p.
.51 in the
analysis
of the 2nd dual in
-rip'.
Hence there
is
nothing extraordinary
in the
assumption
of
a -md-ma,
and we
shall
have to
agree
with Kuhn
anyhow
that the
heavy
Sanski-it
conjunctives
86
in -di
{[m^di, -sdi,-tdi,
-ntdi)
are best
explained
from
primary
forms in
which the first of the two united
pronominal
stems occurs
in
a
lengthened
form. The
same
primary
form
-md-ma
clearlyprovides
the best
ex- planation
for the Greek
secondary
form
-/.t?j)'
too, as tvd-tva
does for the
Indian
secondary
form -thds. But I cannot fall in with Kuhn's other
view that the
ai
in the Greek terminations
-^ai, -aai, -rai,
-rrai
corresponds
to this heavier di and
not,
as was universally
assumed
before,
to the
e which
came from ai. The most conclusive
objection
to this
view hes in the Arcadian tlurd
persons
m -tol
to be discussed on
p.
61 "
forms which Kuhn
says nothing
about "
for
-ol can never
be the
repre-
58 THE PEESONAL TERMINATIONS. cii. ii.
sentativc of id. A further
objection
lies in the fact that these middle
terminations
in
-m are
liable from Homer onwards to
frequentelision,
and this does not look as
if
they were heavy
sovmds. It has been
proved
that the Greek
diphthong
at
does sometimes
represent
an
originaldi,
but it is
just
as
certain that "
e.g.
in ct'iffwfrom the rt. idh
(cp.
Skt. edhas
firewood),
in 7ropo('=Skt,pare
" it sometimes takes the
place
of an
cd
(=Skt. e),
and for this
reason
I still hold to the old
view,
which Kuhn
himself
held
formerly,
that it is not in the fuller but in the shorter
Sanskrit foi-ms that we
have a
parallel
to those of the Greek.
The first
step
on the
way
from *ma-ina to the assumable -ma-i-=Gk.
jxai
we
must
suppose
to have been the
weakening
of the final
a to i.
This
gives
us
the form
*-
ma-mi
by a weakening
which is
jjrecisely
analogous
to that which occurred in the 1st
sing,
active.
Expulsion
of
the second m
turned *-ma-mi into
-ma-i,
at first
sight
a
striking
mutila- tion
of the
termination,
inasmuch
as
the
doubling
which had
previously
taken
place
is thus effaced. But I think I have shown in
my
treatise
'
iiber die
Ti'agweite
der
Lautgesetze
'
(Berichte
der
phil.
hist. 01. der k.
sachs. Ges. d. Wissensch.
1870,
p.
9
f.)
how the
very
function of these
personal
tenninations must have
strengthened
and furthered their
tendency
to efface and to
lighten
themselves. In this instance there is
nothing
but the
i
to
represent
the second of the two
pronouns,
and in
87
the Skt.
e even
the
remaining vi has
gone
too, a
fact which throws
light
on
the similar sound
change
assumed above.
The tei-mination
-/.im
is
common to the
primary
tenses of all dialects
but the
Boeotian,
which
here,as
in other
instances,
had
ri
for
ai.
Still we
only
know
ruTrro/x?/
and the like fiom the
quotations
of the
grammaiians
(Choeroboskos
Bekk. Anecd.
1215,
cp.
Herodian ed.
Lentz,
ii.
352,
Ahrens,
Aeol.
187).
From the
secondary
*md-m
came the Aeolic and Doric
-^ar.
As to
the form used in Lesbian Aeolic
we
have the e^adence of
I'lpafiar (Sappho
fr.
33), aX\6i.iar(fr.
55), i^ae\eE,ai.iai' (fi". 87),
the Doric we
only
know
from the Cretan
inscription
C. I.
2255, 23,
where there is
aweBiiiav,
from
numerous
forms in Pindar
(Peter
de dial. Pind.
p.
9),
from the
choiiises in the
tragedians(Ellendt,
Lex.
Sophocl.
ii.'
xis.),
and from
lyric
passages
in
Aiistophanes.
Thiersch
thought
he had found
a most
peculiar
Homeric
by-form
in
-/xer.
In his
'
Gk. Grammar
especially
of the Homeric
dialect,' " 168, 10,
he
says
:
'
Perhaps
too we
ought
to
write
^"a7-"n^u^e^'
instead of
tcaTeat,afjirfy
N
257,
where there now
stands
tyxoQ
"
icar.eat,ai.iey,
u
Trpiv
'i^iaKov.^
This
conjectiu'O,
which had sunk into
merited
oblivion,
has been
repeatedby
Alfr.
Ludwig
in his
essay,
'
der
Infinitiv im
Veda,'
p.
144, though
Thiersch is not mentioned,
and two
other
passages
are added in which
we are
offered
a singular
verb in
place
of
a
plui-al
which at first
sightseems
out of
place.
A more
careful
consideration, however,
reveals the fact
that,as
has been shown
more
in detail
by
Joh. Lissner in the
Progi-amme
of the
Eger Gymnasium
for
1873,
the
interchange
between
singular
and
plural
in the 1st
person
which
was
frequent
in later
writers,as the scholiasts on
N 257
remarked,
was by
no means unlieard of in Homer.
Compare especially r
358 and
r 440. At
K 99,Kairrov
c' oloi'
vpwidEi'
anu j(doyug
i\'i"Taoi'Ta
maybe easily
explainedon
the
assumption
that while
Odysseus(v.95)
was
the
onlycajotain
that
separated
his
ship
from those of the
others,
he was
not alone either
in the
shipor when he climbed the hill
to
survey
the
country,
and thus
CH. II.
SECOND PERSON SINGULAR,
MIDDLE. 59
at V. 100 he has comrades with him when he sends out after
news. At
fi
198
avTcip
eireih)Tag
ye
TrapyXaffar,
oiid' kr
"7r"ira ^Bo-yyijs'^iipiivwv
rjKovojity
ohli r'
aoiciig
it is true
that,logically speaking,Odysseus
was so
far the
only
one
who could have
heard,
but
by
a
vei-y
natui^l
rapidity
of
thought
the state to which the
eralpoi
returned after
theyotto
Krjpov
eXoito
88
is
anticipated.
Hence
no one
will hold the existence of
a
1st
sing.
mid.
in
-nil'
to have been established.
Second Person Singular.
Here, too,
we can
see,
I
believe,
the traces of
a twofold
form, tva-tva
and
tva-tva.
From the second form
arose
the Skt.
secondary -thd-s,
in
which the tli
came from tv
just
as
in the 2nd
sing,act.,
while the
s
finds
a parallel
in the
secondary
active termination.^ The usual
primary
form
*-s"^
(Gk. (Tui,
Skt.
se)
on the other hand must have come
from
tva-tva,
and
that,as
I
conjecture, by
the
followingsteps: tva-tvi,sva-svi,sva-'i
s-a'i. The
change
of ^ to s
has likewise its
parallel
in the active. I was
wrong,
as
MisteK
(Ztschr.
xv.
296) jjointsout,
in
attributmg
this
change
in
my 'Temp.
u. Modi,'
p.
31,
to the influence of the vowel iinsi.
It is
only
in Ionic Greek that
t
has this
eSect,
while the
s
of the 2nd
sing,
dates from the Indo-Germanic
period.
As in the active the
s must owe
its existence to the
conjunction
with the
spii'antv to
which, as a con- tinuous
sound,
it has
a
closer relation than the
t.
The Greek
secondary
termination
-ao
is to be
compared
with the Skt.
-sva
of the
imperative.
Hei'e the second
pronoim
has
evidentlydisappeared
altogethei",
and the
only question
is how ?
Probably
in no
very
different
way
from that in which
-fxr]y
was formed. I
agree
therefoi-e with
Schleicher
(Comp.^ 673)
in
believing
that at a
time when the s was stiU
sounded
here,sva-s was
developed
from sva-svi
(as
-thd-s
was
developed
from
tvdsvi).
Next this
sva-s turned into
sva,
as in the 2nd
pi.
act.
tva-s into
tva,
or as
in the 1st
i^lur.
act. ma-s
became
ma.
Zend shares
with Greek the loss of the
v
in this
place.
In Zend
we
have
by
the side
89
of the -hva of the
imperative(:=
Skt.
sva) oj^tatives
and
preterites
in
-sa
or
ki.
The disinclination the Greeks had to
a
between two vowels
exposed
both
primary
and
secondary
terminations in Greek to fresh effacement.
In the thematic
conjugation
the
o-
disappearedaltogether.
The sound-
changes
to which this
gave
rise must be discussed later. On the other
hand the sibilant shows the
greatesttenacity
of life in the verbs in
-^i
and in th-e
perfect,
which is of
an
analogous
formation. A clear and
certain
principle
cannot be laid down for the
preservation
of the
a on the
one
hand
or
its loss
on the other. For the indie, and
imperat.present,
as
for the
imperfect,
the forms in
cr are the
regular
ones :
'laraaai
'laracro,
ridtffai, trideao,
but it is
only
in Attic
prose
that this rule is
observed,
the
exceptionsbeing ecvrw, iniffTw, tVp/w.
In Homer beside Ivraaai A 393,
VTTOCajxvcKjai
it 95,
Trapiaraaai
K
279, ot'oaai
p
378,
hih'vcrai
"f)
290, we
*
It would be
very
remarkable if this
terminatiou,
which till
lately
seemed to be "
confined to
Sanskrit,shoiild turn out to have been
preserved,
in
a slightlymodified
form,
in Old Irish as well. Stokes
conjectures
this to be so
in the
Beit7-dge,
vii.
p.
8,
regarding
the 2nd
sing,
in
-tha of the so-called
praesens
secundariirm as the
representative
of the Skt. -thus. It is true that this
rare form has no middle
meaning,
but Stokes shows that there
are probably
other cases where Keltic
languages have
preserved middle terminations with active
meaning.
60 THE
PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS. ch. ii.
have
lli^mi
\
100,
beside the commonly occurringimperat.
Utckto
(e.g.
A
314)
we have
Trap/orao
K 291,i^'iprao
O 475. In the
imperfect
the form
in
-(TO never occui-s
at all in
Homer,
but we find
Ifxapvao
x
228,
and
even
tlic contracted
ttcpe^o}
O 18. As to the
practice
of the other cUalects
our
information is
imperfect.
Still the Boeotian
vpiaao, Aristoph.
Ach.
870,
stands over against
the Doric
eirpid
from
Epicharmus (Ahi-ens,
Dor.
198).
Aorists like ^tdetro seem to have been unheard of. Here we
have nothing
but the Ionic 'iOeo and the Attic eOov. The
trifling
varia- tions
of
post-Homeric
poeticallanguage
and that of Herodotus
possess
but little interest for the student of the structure of the verb.
Cp.
Kiihner,
Ausf. G. i.^
540,
K. W.
Kriiger,
'
Histor.
philolog.
Studien,'
ii.44. It is
noteworthy
that the
language
seems never quite
to have
lost the
sense
that the term,
-aai was the
proper
and normal
one,
and
it has
consequentlygained
a
fresh and
increasingprevalence
in late
vxilgar-Greek.
The form
ijKpodao
in the comic
poet Antiphanes (Bekk.
Anecd. i.
98) ought perhaps,
as Cobet holds
(Yar.
Lect.
365),
to be
accented
?'//.-pd"
(To
and be taken
as a pluperfect,
but
i^avxn(TaL
and the like
occur
in the N.
T.,
and there
are
many
more forms of the kind in modern
Greek
(MuUach,
Gramm. der
gr. Vulgarsprache,
p.
229).
Here Butt-
mann was farsightedenough
to discern the train of
an
unbroken
tradition.
90
Third Person Singular.
In the case
of this
person
Greek
gives
us no
chie to a
primitive
reduplicated
formation. We shall retui'n later to the
imperative,
of
which account
might
be made in
support
of such
an hypothesis.
The
regularprimary
form
-rai=
Skt.
te,
must be held to have been
developed
from the earlier
stages
ta-ta
and
ta-ti,
the
secondary-to (
=
Skt.
ta),
like
-CTo no doubt,
from
ta-t. A
difficulty
meets
us,
however,
in this
person,
as to the
meaning.
Since the
pronoun
of the first and that of the second
person possess
a distinct character of their
own,
a
reflexive
meaning
is
naturallyconveyed by
the
repetition
of either of them
:
'
I " me or
for
me,'
'thou " thee or for thee.' But the
pi-onoun
of the third
person
indicates not the
speakernor
the
person
adch-essed,
but
any
other
person
whatever l)ut these two.
Consequently
ta " ta is
nothing
but
'
he "
he,'
or,
if
one
of the two
pronouns
is taken
as
dependent
on
the
other,
*
he "
him,'
'
he " to him! That the two he's"
subject
and
object
" are
the
same
person
is not
expressed.
It is certain that this middle
form,
in
as far
as oiu'
explanation
of it is the
right one,
arose
at a
time when
there
was as yet
no reflexive
pronoun,
and
language
contented itself here
as elsewhere with
a
dim
indication,
and left it to
usage
and the
adoption
into
a
systematic
series of forms to
provide
it with its
proper
distinctness.
Now this
very process
is to be seen
in
a
much later
lingiustic peiiod,
when the reflexive
pronoun
had
long
existed in full force,
avroq avTov,
(ivTot
TTpoQ avTovQ
"tc. is
a
frequeut
mode of
expressionespecially
in the
Delphic
dialect
(Berichte
der k. sachs. Ges. der Wissensch.
philolog.
histor. CI.
1864,
p. 225),
for
kavrov,
Trpoc
eavrovc
"c.
So, too,
with
one
inflexion for the two
words, av-avrop
"c. We need not therefore be
staggeredby
this
objection
in
adopting
the
explanation
above
suggested.
There is not much that need be said about the
special
Greek forms
of the 3rd
smg.
For the Boeotian form with
rj
for
cu we have in this
person
the evidence of
inscriptions (Ahi-ens,
Aeol.
187)
:
KEKOfnaTr]
(C.
I.
CH. II.
FIEST PERSON
PLURAI,
MIDDLE. 61
1569,
1.
29),vfttXErri(ib.33),yiypa-n-Tti (Ernst Curtius,
Ehein. Mns, ii.
1843,
p.
106,
Keil
Sylloge
I. 1.
10).
On the other hand the
inscription 91
from
Tegea
edited
by
Ad. Michaehs
(N,
Jahrb.
1861,
p.
585
fF.)givesus
eight
forms in
roi :
yei'ij-oi
(1,5),
iiaroi
(1.10, 18, 49),
InKTvi-iaraTOL
(1.16),\vfxaivr]TOi (1.17), Iv^iKa^rjroi (L 36),2i(Co^T?roi (L 37),reraKTOi
(1.45),
yeypuTTToi
(1.53),
which
are of intei-est in
so
far
as
they prove
that the cMerence between
ca
and
oi
is
one of dialect
only.
First Person Plural,
The
analysis
of the
plural
terminations in the middle voice is
a
problem
of the
gTeatestdifficulty.
In these forms
language
had to find
means
of
denoting
not
only
a
reflexive relation but number as well.
Now, as we
conjectured
that in the active
a
conjunction
of two
pronominal
stems had
already
been used to denote the
number,
to be
consistent we must now
expect
to
find,as the result of that
reduplica- tion
which
we assume to be the formative
principle
of the
middle, a
conjunctionoifour pronominal
stems :
I-tJiou "
I-tho^i,
thou-thou " thou-
tliou,
he-he " he-he. Schleicher
actually
makes the
attempt
to be trixe to
this
principle,
and has in
consequence
to eliminate
a
great
deal from his
primary
forms. Misteli's method of
explanation (Ztschr.xv.
298)
seems to me
simpler
and therefore better. He
supposes
that
language
began by simplifjong
her difficult task and
cpntenting
herself with a
single
instead of
a
dovible
expression
of the
pi'onoun
in the second
position; that,
in other
words,
she went to work with three stems
instead of
four,
and
was content to
express
the desired
'
im-%ts
'
hj
I-thoti-thou,
the
'
ye-you
'
by theu-thou-thou,
and the
'
they-them
'
by
he-he-he. If
we
adopt
this solution
we
shall be
brought
to ina-tva-tva^
for the 1st
plur.
weakened
we
may suppose
at an early jieriod
to
ma-tva-tvi. From this second
step
we
proceed
to ma-tva-i
by
the
same
"^
way
as
that which led
us
in the 2nd
j^ers.
sing,
from tva-tvi
through
tva-i to sva-i. But next the tv underwent in this
compound
form similar
transformations to those which took
place
in the
simpler
formations of
the active. In the oriental branch of
oiu"
stock it first became dh
jixst
as
it did in the 2nd
sing,imperat. (dhi).
The term, ma-dha-i is the
earliest form
we can
safelyconjecture
with no
help
but that of
phonetic
laws. It is the
primary
form for the Zend -maide on the one
hand,
and
the Skt. -malie
on the other. The Zend form is to be
explained by
the
epenthesis
of the
%
usual in Zend and the
eqiially regxdar
loss of the
aspirate
;
the Skt. form
by
the reduction of dh to a
simple h,
which
occm's
e.g.
in another
personal
termination drawn from the same
source,
in the 2nd
sing,imperat.
e.g.
juni-hiby
the side of
-p'u-dhi.
As to the Greek forms
we can see at the outset that the
a
of
-j^ieada
or
-jxeda
is
a weak sound
as compared
with the ai of the oriental termina- tion.
It
belongs
to the
same
stage
as
the
secondary
forms.
-fisOa
is
related to a
possible*-iJLt6ai as -to (Skt.ia)
to
-rai.
For this
very
reason
"
I
am aware that
hypothetical
forms
so complicated as
this are
viewed with
much disfavour
by many
scholars, and I
am
far from
proposing
them
as final
results. But still
they are the
products
of a thorough
and consistent considera- tion
of
linguistic structure. And
if, as
is
generally
admitted in
principle,
inflexion is the relic of
agglutination, we
maj"
be allowed to
postulate
for
primi- tive
times
polysyllabic
formations like those which
actually
exist in
agglutinative
languages.
62 THE PERSONAL
TERMINATIONS.
ch. ii.
there is
no
separate
secondary
form in Greek for this
person any
more
than for the 1st
phir,
act. Sanskrit had, however,
besides the
]5rimai-y
-malm, acquh-ed
a secondary -mahi,
which is
evidently
the result of
an
excessive weakening
of *maJia. It is clear then that
-fieOa,as far
as its
vowel
goes,
is intermediate so to
speak
between -make and -mahi.
It is not so
easy
to determine the relation of the Q to the dh of the
-madha thus arrived at. If we conclude without
more
ado that d
came
here as
elsewhere from dh
we
shall find the (tQ of the
poetical-/jefrda a
hard nut to crack. Schleicher,
who takes this
line,as
I
once
did
myself,
is
obliged(p.679)
to call the form
-ixerrOa
'
not a primitiveone,'
which is
as good
as leaving
it
altogetherunexplained,
while Leo
Meyer,
who
(Ztschr.
ix.
430)
ventures to
say
that it is
'
beyond a
doubt that the
fullest form of the suffix
we can
arrive at was onasdhai,'
leaves
us
withou.t an analysis
for this form. We must
try some
other
way
then.
93
A form which, as we
shall
soon
see,
is
amply
attested in Homer has
a
right
under
any
circumstances to be well
weighed
before
we
pass
to the
order of the
day.
If
we
split
up -/.leada
into
-/de-ada
the
/ue
at
once
suggests
the 1st
plvu". act.,
and -(rOa
suggests
the fuller and older form of
the 2nd
sing.
act. discussed
on
p.
35 ff. In the latter
case
the likeness
cannot be
regarded
as
complete,since,as we have
seen,
there
was once
an
i after the
a. Again, we
regarded
-rrOa
on the former occasion
as
having got
its rrd from tv
and not from dh. While
referring
the reader
as
far as
the consonants are concerned to the
excui'sus
in which ad in
verbal forms will be discussed in
general,
I will
only
remark here that
in
consistency
with the view taken above we must not
go
to ma-dhai
but to a
stillolder ma-tva-i for the
primary
form from which
came the
Sanski'it and Iranian form on the
one hand,
and the Greek
on the
other.
The termination
-[xefrda,
which
we are thus led to
regard
as the
oldest,
occurs
very
often in Homer. It is true that in
a large
number of the
forms in which it
occiu-s -fUEda
would unfit the word for the
metre,
e.g.
in
iKOjxeaQa
B
138, yEvofiEada
$
89, /.mx(5/.t"CT6a
E 875
(^tox^w^eOa
T
232),
veixofieffda
M
313, ehivfo/xeadai 153, ^vrajxeaQa
B
343,
Tidifieada
X
3,
oTrXiao/jLErrda
fx
292,
where the
numerous
short
syllables
make the usual
termination
impracticable,
and in
7-e7-t/i///ne(70a M 310, "7ri(Tra//i"(T0a
N
238,
where metiical necessities of another kind exclude
a
short
penultima.
Still there
are also forms like
7rauo-w^iErr0a
H
290,
$
467, (ppni^wfAeaO''
I
112, JD 168,
the
lighter
forms of whiclf in
-fieda
would fit
perfectly
well
into the
verse. In the old
Elegiacpoets -fjerrda
is
only
found
once,
Theogn.
671
(pepoiJEada(Renner,
Stud. i.
2, 23),
in Pindar
(Peter,
de
dial. Pind.
59)
also but once : n7rr(J/,t"flr0o, Pj'th.x.
28. All the three
tragediansuse
this termination
pretty
often.
They
found it
as
handy
for
iambic and trochaic
verse as the
epic poets
did for
dactylic, only
not in
the
same words. Hence in
Aeschylus we
find Prom. 822
alrovfieirda,
Sept.
144
(ch.)ireKa^ojiEaQa,Ag,
850
TrBipaa6/j.E(jda
:
in
Sophocles
ei^vjdEaO^
O. R.
32, EiaofjLEada
O. R.
84, ap^ofXEcrB^
Ant.
63, ETTiaTa-
94
/.uaOa 1092, (V-w^""T0a
O. R.
147, E-^6i.iEad'
El.
253, yvwao^iEada Aj.
677; seldom in other metres as in Philoct. 709
(ch.)rep.6i.i"ffQ\
in
Euripides
Ion 1311
X"Xv7r^^t"(r6',
Phoen. 603
aTraiTovf^iEaff,
608 iUXav-
rofiEada,
583
('nrioXofiEffda,
Alc. 803
EirKTrafXEada,
1157
jUf^vp^tocr^ECT^a.
Aristophaneshas about
as
many
as
the
tragedians:
Plut, 101
eEo/dEada,
330
w(Trt;oju"(T9',
1160
^fjjrojUEfrO', Equ.
565
fjovXofXEffda,
623
y^oiueffda,
CH. II.
SECOND PERSON PLURAL,
MIDDLE. 63
Av. 35
aj'"7rro'/x"CT0',
159
vei.t6fxeffda,
164
-n-idwi-iead',
1577
yp}'ifxeffda.
Many
of these references
may
now
be found in
Gertli,
Stud. i.
2,
256
(cp.
Killiner,
i.^
536).
On Dorian
inscriptions
there is not a trace of a
-Heffda
to be found
(Ahrens,298) ;
on
the other
hand,
the Heracleic
tables have three forms in
-fueda(Meister,
Stud. iv.
420);
there is
no
-fxecrda
in the
fragments
of
Epicharmus,
so
that the statement of
Gregorius
Corinthus that
-[XEada
is Doric can
have had no
support
but
Theocritus,
where it
occurs once or
twice.
Although
then the manifold necessities
of the metre
may
have
helped,
as in other like
cases,
to
preserve
the
termination
-fxefrdu,
wliich dates from the Homeric
epos,
they certainly
did not create it,
and it would be
contraiy
to the whole direction of the
modern Science of
Language
to
regard
the
c as a meaningless
and
un- intentional
insertion. On the other
hand,
there is
nothing
to
prevent
us
from
regarding-^itQa
as a
thinner form of
-/.lerrOa.
An
analogy
is
provided by
the form vTri-deu for
oTria-dev,
Boeot. owirdev. So too 7lir"
for
I'lTTs, i)fxai
for
*i)"j-j-iai.
The Aeolians seem to have known
nothing
of
-jXErrQa.
But
they,
that
is the
Lesbians,
had
a
diiferent
by-form. Apollonius
de Adv.
604,
23
says
:
el
to a eic to e
/xsTaTrecroi,
to Tt^viKuvTa Trpoceiai
ro v
irap
AioXevai
TO XeyofxedaXeyoj-uQev
kcu iravTa to. ToiavTa. Though
we
have not a
singleexample
of this
form,
and
although
on
the
contrary
we
have in
Alcaeus
(fr.18, 4)
a (popii/ueda
which the metre establishes
beyond
a
doubt,
still the
reputation
of a grammarian
of such
weight
is
enough
to
establish the fact
(Ahr. 130).
We
ought
no
doubt to
regard
the
v as a
permanently
attached nasal
addition,
to which
we
shall find numerous
analogies.
Second Person Plural.
95
Following
the line
we took in
treating
the 1st
plur.
in
explaining
the
process
by
which
langviage
arrived at these
forms, we
shall here start
from a primary tva-tva-tva,
whose immediate successor was tva-tva-tvi.
The first stem in the
tripletseems
to have shrunk
fii'st,
and that into
a
simples,
the thii-d suflered the same weakening we
have often observed
before,
and
was
then
representedby
a
simple
i. This
gives
us s-tva-i,
which the
aspii'ation we
have so
often observed in the
case of the
pronoun
of the second
person
turned into
"
s-dhva-i,
and this
we
ought probably
to
regard
as
the
original
form which
immediatelypreceded
the
separation
of the
languages.
Schleicher has discovered
a trace of the
s on
oriental
ground (Comp.^680)
in the Zend
imperatives
in -zcMm
(e.g.
thrd-zdilm
protectye).
H stands in the
place
of
va
;
the
form,
like the more
usual
-dhvem and the Skt.
secondaiy-dhvam,
is of
course a secondaryone,
and stands
on the
same level as the Gk. -rrdov. The usual Gk. -ude
of the
plural
bears to the
primary
-sdhvai and the IncUan -dhve which
has lost its
s
(bhara-dhve=(pipe-(rde)
almost
exactly
the
same
relation
as
that of
-fjLeffda
to the Skt. -make.
Here, as often,
the
secondary
form
does the work of the
primary
as well
as its
own.
If the Skt.
jaga-dhva
=a^"-ade
(Kuhn,
Ztschr.
xv.
403)
is
genuine,
we have in the -dhva
a
completeparallel
to the Gk. -arde. But this -dhva is
doubtful,as it
only
occurs once
(Ev.
viii.
2, 37)
in the
imperative
above mentioned
(Delbriick,
Verb.
48).
The
711
which is heard at the end of -dhvam
(Zd.-dhvem)
is the
same
apparently
that
we observed
on
p.
5 1 f. in the dual forms.
()4 THE PERSONAL TERMINATIONS.
ch. ii.
Third Person Plural.
This, too,
is liest
explained
on
]\Iisteli'.s
theory.
While Schleicher
(Com]).'"' 077)
is
obliged
to
derive the
primary
anta-i from
ant-anti,
according
to Mistcli,
who starts from
an-ta-ti,nothing
has
disappeared
but the second
t,
and that loss was
due to the dislike to excessive allite- ration.
The syllablean soon afterwards lost now its vowel
now its
conso-
96 nant, leaving
either -ntai
or
-atai. Both forms of the termination
appear
pretty
equally
in Sanskrit and
Greek,
wliile
Zend,
which is elsewhere
so
like Sanskrit,keeps
the nasal
always.
It follows
necessarily
from this
that the
rejection
of the nasal did not take
place
till after the
separation
of the
languages,
and it must have
happened indej^endently
in the two
languages
Sanski'it and Greek. In the latter
language
there
are
numerous analogous
cases of the loss of
a
final
nasal,as in.
i.Tvra-s=.saptdn,
i"i;a:=dd(^an,
a privative
= o
r,
but it also
disappeared
from the middle of
a
word in
e-Ka-ro-i' (cp.^dtam)=centu-'ni (primaiy
form
kanta-m).
In
the
place
of the
-I'-ot
of
ordinary
Greek
we find
on an inscription
of
Aegos-
thenai the
strange
termination
-vdr) {wapyii'vwvQi^, Beermann,
Stud. ix.
77),
with the
same
B which
we
have
alreadyseen in the 3rd
pi.
act. The
secondaryan-ta,
with the
by-forms
n-ta and
a-ta,
bears to the
f)rimary
exactly
the same
relation that the
-ta of the 3rd
sing,
does to -ta-i.
More
special
attention must be directed to the
interchange
of
-rrm
and
-vTo on
the one hand,
and
-area
and
-aTo on the ^ther.
If,as is
clearly
suggestedby
the
analysis
of the
forms,
the
a
is
an
originalcomponent
of
the
termination,we
need not be
sui-prised
at
finding
this vowel
even after
vowels. We have seen
something
similar in the 3rd
pi.
of the active.
In Sanskrit it is
a distinguishing
mark of the two main
conjugations
that the
first,
which
corresponds
to the Gk.
conj.
in
w,
has -nte
(from
ntai),
-nta
;
while the
second,
which is to be
compared
with the Gk.
verbs in
-ju,
has -ate
(fromatai),
-ata.
A
precisely
similar distinction
is observable in Greek
too, though
we must
notice,
to
beginwith,
that it
is
only
Ionic Gi'eek that shows
many
of these
forms,
and that Aeolic
shows
none at all. Even
among
the lonians
a
tendency
is to be
seen,
from Homer's time
onwards,-occasionally
to
employ -rrai,
-vto by
the side
of the older
-orot, -oro,
where the tense-stems lend themselves
readily
to
the
-change.
As
yet
we know of
only
two forms in
-area from Doiic.
The
one is
kuitui
(=:KE~irTai),
" so
accented
according
to Ahrens,
Dor.
28,
at 1. 22 of the Cretan
inscription
edited
by
Rich.
Bergmann, Berlin,1860,
" a foi-m of the same stage as the Homeric Ki-arai. The other is
a
compounded form,
the Heracleic
y"ypf(v|/drcu (Meister,
Stud. iv.
432),
i.e.
"yeypu(p-f7ci-cii.
These two isolated instances show that those foims
97 are no exclusive
property
of the Ionic
stem,
but are forms of real
antiquity,
which had
no doubt been
more widely spread
at an earlier
time
even on
Greek
ground.
For Homeric Greek the rule is
a simpleone.
arai,
uro are
necessary
after
consonants and
i, possible
after
v
and
long
hard
vowels, impossible
after short hard vowels whether radical
or
thematic. The
follo-v\T.ng
instances,
among
which those confirmed
by
the metre are printed
in
spaced type,
will
give a
clear idea of this. For our
present purpose
we
need of
com^se make no
difference between the
present or,
it
may
be,
aorist stems and that of the
perfect,
hence the instances are taken
indifferently
from both.
CH. II.
THIRD PERSON PLURAL,
MIDDLE. 65
1) -arat -aro
after consonants
(cp.
Princ. ii.
293).
re-
tv-)^-a~a
I
N
22,
(ly t]y
f p-ad' (plupeif.)
A
211,
eppac-ara
V
354
(rt.pac,
upc),kpr}pil-aTai
"^
284, c'lKfj^t'^ar' (st.
avn^^ef,
later
ciKn^il)
P 637. Here
belonge-arai
T
134,taro
H
414,
which
are
written
ti-urai,
t'l-aro whei'e the
metre establishes
a long syllable.
The former is
identical with the Skt.
as-atc,
and
so was originally *ljff-ii-ut,
and hence it
is
proljable
that in Homer the word which in the old
alpha,bet was
^vl"itten
HKATAl was
wi-ongly
written e'larai instead of
ijarai
when the first
syllablewas
long.
The old
. grammarians
and then* modern followers
conkl not
get
rid of the idea that
ei
is
a mere Ionic
lengtheninor of
e.
"'/!-' in r 153 is
quite
an
isolated
form, perhapsone
of the criteiia of the
late
origin
of the
Teichoskopia.
2)
-arat -aro
after
t.
KEKXI-UTai n
68, C
608. " Eelai-arai
a
23. "
t^araKe iara
i
Q,
5'2T,
/."" t o r o A 162. " In the
optative
the
only
form found is -
1 a r o : yEroiaro
B
340,
anoXoluTO
i 554, Xai^oiciTO B 418,
TrevBoiad^
a 157, j3noaTO
A
467, /^r";T(i"'ay'
B 492, ett
Kppacr
(ra
(uto B 282. The
only exception
is
/nt)(e'o(i-o 'Axaioi
A
344,
which
givesan ugly hiatus,
and Hoffmann is
no
doubt
right
in
replacing
it
by ^axeo/ar'.
A real
exception
in the
case
of Ke~iiTdai is i-EKtivTo
L, 19,
for at "l"427 it is best to write knX
ydovl 93
KiiaT for
KtirTo.
The shortened
Ksurai, keuto,
which
we shall have to
discuss
directly,
also tell in favour of
Ktiarcu,
Ktiuro.
3) -arat -aro
and
-vrai -vto
after
v.
ttpv-arai
A
239,
eipv-aro
X
303,
"(pv-a-()
a
30 " on
the other hand
-yrai,
-iTo
after the
same
letters:
tipvi'To
M
454, vij^vrrat
E
141,
X
387,
XeXvirai B
135, pijyrvi'TO
Y
55,
Ar/j'urro A 281.
4) -arat -aro
after
rj
and
co.
fttftXi]-araiA
657, /3"/3\?/aro/E^
28, ^e^/^"/aro
T
183, kekXijcito
K
195, 7r"7ro-//o-o t
B
90, TTErpofS}) aro
""
206,
kexoXwuto t,
282.
On the other hand
^i^vr}VTo
P
364, iii^fiX-qv-o
S 27.
5)
-VTai -VTO
are found
invariably
after
":
ciirarrui N
634,
lvrn^To N
552,
(aroi'70,
TTETT-u iro I
E
195,
/i
a
p
ret IT o often,as
also after
" : rtdevrai,
Tidei'To, 'iderTo,
and after the thematic
o : -k eiBovTat, yiyui'To,
V
X(l
}" T II
etc.
This
]jrettysimple
rule suljmits
even in Homer to the
modification,
that the
long
vowel
or
diphthong
is
occasionally
shortened before the
"
of
the
termination:
t-arui T
134,
for
y{n)-a-ai,euro
for
ij{a)-aTo
H
414,
KEurai A
826,
"'a-o N
763,
for
iceiarat,
Keiaro. It would be
essentially as
lawful
to write
-y'jaro
here with shortened
?/
as
in
iJEpXijat,
ovc^ iiXwi'
l^iXot
iKfvyei'
A
380,
and
similarlykeuito
with
"t
shortened as
in
iTrft'/,
while there is
nothing
to be said for f'/arai
E'lam,
where
we
should have
to
suppose
the
?;
first shortened to
e
and then
lengthenedagain
and
length-
66 THE PEESONAL
TERMINATIONS.
ch. ii.
ened to ei.
To this
same expulsion
of
i
before
"
is due the
optative
^anvaT
a
248. This
shortening
eflected
by
the
following
vowel became
general
in the
New-Ionic,
where
earui,
'iaro,
KciTeaTo,
Kia-ai
(Archil.170),kiu-o
are
the
only
forms in
use,
though
there
are also
ehciuro,iiyearai, vhe'irai,
"n-tTTdiiuTai,tjieixyiuTO,
Kei^XiuTcu,
/cf/cnt'arcu
(Hippon. 62, 2)
and other
forms of tlie kind
(Bredow,p. 328)
where the
corresponding
Homeric
99
forms have -)juTaiJ
And
as
the New-Ionic dialect has
a
decided
preference
foi-such accumulations of
vowels,
the
-arm,
-aro
not
only
established itself
in such forms as merely
admitted of it in
Homer,
e.g.
in
aweceiKrvaTo,
icpvarat,
and in the above-mentioned
Ktarai,
but even made its
way
into
words in which it followed short hard radical vowels
: riQi-arcn,
Ikcico-
urat,
neither of which are reallymore remarkable than
Tidi-aai,Cico-am,
a
is dissimulated to e :
iiv"
i-uTui,kninri-rxTai, TrtTrrt-arat.
But forms like
tj^ovXi-uro, Kijci-arai
for
qjnuXorTo, K))CoyTai
must be
regardedas
apocry- phal,
since it is
against
all
analogy
that the thematic vowel should be
attenuated to
e
and followed
by -ar"ii, -aro,
instead of
-vrai,
-.to.
This
is the decision arrived at
by
Dindorf
(praef.
p. xxvii.)
and Abicht
(Philol.
xi.
275**),
and now
adopted by
other
'
editors of Herodotus
and students of his dialect
(Stein,Herodotus,
4th
edit.,
Berl.
1877,
p.
57).
In Attic Greek
-arai,
-aro only
survived after
consonants,
and
even
then
only
in the
perfect,
and sex'ved as a distinguishing
mark of the older
Attic
writers,
who therein
closely
follow Herodotus
;
so in Thuc. iii.1 3
EipOaparut,
iv. 31
ctfreroxfco,
v. 6,
vi. 4
e'rera^oT-o, Xenoph.
Anab. iv.
8,5
ai'Tireraxf^Toi,
Plato,Rep.
vii. 533
reTpacparai,
and it has the
testimony
of the
inscription
of Methone which dates from the
beginning
of the
Peloponnesianwar
(Sauppe,InscriptionesMacedonicae,
iv.
p.
7),
where
we find
irtra^aro,ytypiKparai (cp.aiayEypcKpaTat,
C I.
75, 3).
More- over
the dramatic
poets
did not
regard
the
opt.
in
-laro,
the
only
form in
use
with Homer and Herodotus
(cp.
too Simon.
Amorg.
i. 22,
vii,
107,
Charon of
Lampsacvis
in. Ath. xii. 520
(^.e-n-iaTaiaTo), as too outlandish
to be used in theu*
poems
in
passages
where
a tinge
of
antiquitywas not
out of
place,
and
they
found it
very
useful
metrically, especially
at the
end of the
verse. Fischer,
ad
Wellerum,
ii. 418
(cj). Matthiae, " 204,
100
7a),gives
the
following
instances
:
Aesch. Pers. 451
ct^tTio^oiaro,
369
"l"evEoiad^ (both
in
a messenger's speech), Suppl.
754
t\daipotaTo,
Choeph.
484
KTi'CoiaQ\Sept.
552
oXolaro, Soph. Aj.
842
(1)oXolaro,
0. Ii. 1274 6\hoiad'"
yivToiaro(messenger's speech),
0. C.
ce^aaiTo 44,
~ei.i\paiu6' 602,
921
TwOolaro,
945
lit,oiaT%
El. 211 aivoraiaTO
(in a
choral
passage),Eurip.
Hel. 159
arTicwpr)fTataro,
Here. fur. 547
tKniraiarfi,
Aristopli.
Pax. 209
aiaOai'oiaTo,
Av.
1147, Lys.
42
ipya-
aaiaro.
Nub. 1199
viptXoiaTo.
Now that
we have examined the extent to which these forms in
'
The form "n-eir\-f)aTat, used bv Simonides
Amorg. 36,
stands alone.
Cp.
Eenner.
Stud. i.
2,
24.
"
Ace. to Abicht
(cp.Kiihner,
i.
548),though
there
are
anj'
amount of
presents
in
-ovTai,
there are only
three in
-eorai, none of which has the
authority
of the best
M.S., the Medicean.
Among
tliousands of
past tenses, there are only
six forms in
-fUTo which
are attested
by
all the M.8S. But
as
there is not the least
probability
ihat a
prose
writer said
iytyovTo ten times and
changed
it the eleventh to
iytviaro. it cannot be doubted tliat these forms made their
way
often into the
inferitir
M.SS., and
occasionallyeven
into the better
ones, on
the false
analogy
of
the
pluperfects
and
preterites,
like la-Tfaro.
CH. 11. DUAL,
MIDDLE. 67
-arai,
-uto
occur,
it leniains for
us to notice a
view of their
origin
which
may appear
to some not unwarrantahle. In cases
where
-ro/,
-uto come
after
vowels,
and such
cases are
the
majority,
it is not unnatural to con- jecture
that
we
have here the result of
a composition,
and Schleicher
(Comp.^678)
declares this view to be a
tenable
one.
There is
nothing
surpris^ing
in the idea that there should here have been
a
composition
witli the 3rd
pi.
mid. of the rt.
as,
Gk.
tc,
which would be
ta-arui,
f.n-
uTo,
since we meet with such
compounds
in the
active,
and not
only
in
past
tenses like
t-co-ffav, t-tjxt-aai
,
but in \-aa(n-=hc-(TayTi and f.'it(im-=
eiK-iratri.
But for all this it is
onl}^
the Heraclean
yeypaxl/nrat
mentioned
on
p.
64 that could be allowed to be thus
compounded.
The forms with
a c
like the
already
mentioned Homeric
uKij^tc-urai,
epijpic-urai, f\i]\"u-aT(i,
or the Herodotean
iaKEvucarcii, t^tx^opicarcu,
and
again
forms like the
Herodotean
nnlKUTut, anihuro,
exclude all
possibility
of such
an
origin.
Nor is it
any
more
probable
for ea-TaX-aru
(Hes.
Sc.
288),fcpOap-arai
(Thuc.
iii.
13). Phonology
teaches
us
that it is
only
between two vowels
that a a can fall out. Now it is
scai'cely necessary
to
}X)int
out how
unlikely
it is that
/3f/5/\"'/-arca
and
eipv-ciTo
should have arisen in
a,nY
other
way
than the consonantal forms. We had to come to
a
similar decision
on
p.
48 in the
case
of tlie 3rd
pi.
active. We have
justas
little
ground
for
coujectiu'ing
the loss of
a (t
here as in TSiaai or
jxtfiauaiy yeyuum.
DUAL FORMS IN THE MIDDLE VOICE.
The dual of the middle voice has this advantage over that of tlie
active that it has a first
person
to itself. It is true
though
that the termi- 101
nation
-fiiBov
is
by
no means connected
organically
with the
corresponding
Skt. -vahe. The latter is
clearly
to be
referred,on
the
analogy
of the
1st
pi.malie,
to a
precedingva-dha-i,so
that
here,as
in the
active,
the
existence of
a weaker form in
v
by
the side of the
stronger
in
m was
made use of to differentiate the two numbers. In Greek it
was
other- wise.
Between
-fieOov
and
-/^leOa
there is
clearly
no
greater
difierence
than between the Aeol.
-f.iedet'
and
-fieBa.
It is true that the existence of the whole form as such has been called
in
question. Elmsley
on
Aristoph.
Acharn. 741
(733,698),
where he
expresses
the doubt referred to on
p.
54 of the correctness of the usual
schema of the active
dual,
has the merit of
having pointed
out that the
form in
-fjiedov only
occurs
three times in
good authors,
i.e. '^ 485 hv-
p6 VVV
1) TplTTvCOQ TVEpLCW^^QoV "'/"Xtj^tJTOC, Soph.
El. 950
^iOJtt
XeXelfu-
fxiQov,
Philoct. 1079
rw nkv out'
vpf^iiof.ud()i\
In all these three
passages
it has the
testimony
of the best
M.SS.,
but is not demanded
by
the
metre,
for in Homer thex'e would be
nothing impossible
in
a
hiatus
after
Trepilw^keda.
Moreover
Hesychius'sglossivipilwf.uda' nwdi^fiedu
is
evidence that there
was such
a
reading
in this
passage.
To these
wo
must add the w^oiild-be
antiquarianPompeianus
in Athen. iii.
p.
98 "
also adduced
by Elmsley
" who
says
in the address to his slaves
Trpdrepui'
(rv}'TpiiJi]a6fjte0o}',
eTretH'
hvtioq uTtaXovfitdoy.Bieber,
de duali
numero,
p.
18,
shows how often in Homer and the dramatic
poets
the
opportunity
for
using
this form
was neglected,
and that even the
'O^Z/pou 'E7rt/.tEp(T|uo/
in
the Anecdota Oxon. i.
406, actuallygiverii'VfieOnas a
dual. For all
this
Buttmann, A. Gr. i.^
343,
and G. Hermann on
Soph.
El. 937
(950),
and
Kiihner,
i.
543, are no
doubt
right
in
deciding
tliat
Elmsley
F
2
68 THE PERSONAL TERMINATIONS.
*
cii. ii.
goes
too far in
wanting
to
i-eject
this form
everywhere
as an invention of
the Grammarians. A rational ciiticism will
always
be inclined to see a
relic of
antiquity
in
exceptional
forms which rlo not violate
analogy.
How could such forms have been invented 1 It is easier to
imagine
that
a V"y-form
of the 1st
pi.
was by
local
usage,
or
the influence of
a
gi^am-
matical
theoiy,
and not withoiit reference to the
-or
of other dual
forms,
102 ti'ausferred from the
plural
-and
stamped as a
dual. In German
a
syntactical
diflference has
spi-uug up
between forms like ich vmrJe and
ich
ivard,
and in Latin the
distinction,
at first
purelyphonetic,
between
e
and i in certain ablatives,as too that between the 3rd
pi.
in -erunt
and
ere, gained by usage
somewhat the character of
a
distinction
of
meaning.
The second
person
dual
can be dei-ived in the
same
way
from the
2nd
plural. (pipeaSo}'
is no
further from
^iperrde
than
(pepofifBoi'
from
(pepoi^uQu.
The Sanskrit 2nd
plur.
of
secondaiyforms,
if
we neglect
the
Vedic -dhva mentioned
on
p.
63,
is -dhvam
:
hltdra-dhvam. This must
be identical with the 2nd dual
(^tiperjQor.
As the 3rd
dual,
fepicrBoy
bears
exactly
the
same
relation to the 2nd
as
(pipeTov
does in the active. That
is,
the (t8 which arose
in the 2nd dual from the
repetition
of the
pronoun
of the 2nd
person,
arose
in the 3rd dual from the
repetition
of the
demonstrative stem
ta,
no
doubt from
ta-ta-ti,t-ta-t,
t-ta. The Skt.
and Zend forms here
present
so
many
difficulties that instead of
explain- ing
the Greek
they
need
explanation
from them. We must notice
further the
analogy
between the
secondary-rrOtjv
and the active
-rjy.
The
lengthening
is to be
explained
in Ijoth
cases as due to the use of the
lengthened
-td instead of -ta in the latter termination.
Excursus
on
the cr0 in
personal
terminations.
In the
course of
our
investigations we
hav^e
come repeatedly
iipon
forms with nti in
them,
the
etymology
of which
we have not found it
easy
to
explain.
We
may say
that the
right
view of this ffd furnishes
the
key
to
a
whole
row
of
problems
hitherto but
imperfectly
solved. As
a
step
towards the attainment of this let
vis
pass
all these forms col- lectively
under review.
This (tB
occurs in the
followingpersonalterminations, along
with
which
we will consider at the
same
time
some
other forms which will
occupy
us
in
a different connexion later on "
103
1)
2
Sing.
Act. in o-^a
"(e-(/)7;-o-(9a)
2)
1 PI. Middle
"
pi^aOa
8)
2 PL
" "
aOe
4)
2 Dii.
" "
adov
5)
8 Du.
" ,,
adov
6) .3 Du.
" ,,
a-drjv
7)
3
Sing.
"
Imperat.
"
adco
8)
3 PL
" ,, J,
adcov
9) 3 Du.
" " "
a0
(TOOiV
10)
InL
" "
aOai
.
It is
])robableci priori
that the
same
conjunction
of sounds in all these
various forms
arose iii the
same or in
a
similar
way,
and hence that we
may
make
use of such
by-
forms
as there
are
for
any
of them in Greek
dialects
as
analogies
to
explain
the rest. Of
by-forms
there are
these "
CH. II.
50 IN PERSONAL TERMINATIONS. 69
For No. 7 Locr.
xpiiarii"=xpw6io
on
the Locrian
inscription
edited
by
Ross
following
Oekonomides 1.
8,
(.\i(jTu}=-l\iadw at 1. 10 of the
same.
For No. 10 on
the
same
inscr. 1.
1.6
"\i(T-ai =
eXi(TOai,
and
on
the
Locr. inscr. edited later
by
Oekonomides at 1.
19, 23, 26, 28,
xp'/'^'"'"j
1.
32,
33
upiarai,
1.
41,
44
7raiJLaT0"j}aye~i(rTiu.
Again
"
For No. 7 the Cret. nnvj^tfn-addw as
it is
very
probable
we
ought
to "
read at 1. 11 of the
Gortynian inscription
most
lately
discussed
by
Voretzsch and
Savelsberg(
JFleckeisen's Jahrb.
1869,
p.
665
ff.)
for the
recorded characters AIl("/EinAeeO. At 1.40 of the Cret. inscr. edited
by Bergmann (Berlin, 1860)
the traces of a 3
pi.imperat.
in
-TT-\^eO].iii)r
are too doubtful to
prove
anything,especially
as at 1. 11 the
ordmary
ad
appears
in the inf.
a(f)ui\i](Ti(T6ai.
For No. 10 the Cret.
ufaiXiOat, Gortynian
inscr. 1.
4, apparently=
u"
aiXeladai
(Yoretzsch
ut
supra 673).
To this we can now add
roi/air-
(7ai-=TroiiifTan6ai
from the
Olymjjian
inscr. of Damokrater
(1.33).
These dialectic
by-forms
entitle
us
I think to assume two
things:
first,
that the 6 is not an
essential and inherent element in these termina- 104
tions,
but
grew
out of a r
;
in the second
place,
that the aO
belongs
to
a
class of
sound-groups
which have been
considei-ably changed by
dissimila- tion
and assimilation. The examination of the 2nd.
sing,
in -aOa
(p.37)
brought
us to an unaspiratedt,
and in
many
other instances it looked
probable
that
spii'ants
had had
a
hand in the formation of the "Td.
The most familiar
phonetic
laws
serve
thus to account
very simply
for the forms of the
imperative
middle. As Schleicher
says (Comp.-^676),
'
It is
possible
that these forms
spi'ang
from middle terminations in which
the initial consonants of the two
pi'onouus
of the 3rd
or 2nd
person
wei-e
brought
into
juxtapositionby
the
disappearance
of the
interveningvowels,
and that
rr
became
a-
and then (t6.' I think that
we can
explain
the
a8 in the 3rd
sing,imperat.
middle
(No. 7),
e.g.
in
ijmerOi,),
winch
we
shall afterwards I'efer to an older
*(j)U(Ti)ioT, by supposing
it to stand for
rr,
that is
cpcKrOui
for
^m-r-no-r,
in which the connexion of the
exponent
of the 3rd
pers.,
which is doubled for
emphasis'sake,
with the
preceding
r,
which is the
sign
of the
same
person, giveshe-he-himself,
and th.it is
the mark of the
imperative
middle.
The
same explanation serves for the 3rd
plur.
The fact that the
v
of
(/xiff^w)'
is
wanting
in the Doric cUalect shows it to be
no
essential
part
of the
termination,
and
(ba-fjQu), as
will Ije shown
hereafter,
stands
for
*(j)a-(Tdu)--.
We will
postpone
the discussion of the remarkable forms
in -iirrOu}to
a
later section of this book
(ii.
51
ff.).
The 3rd
pi.
of the
imperat.
middle
was
evidently
not
always
identical with the 3rd
sing.,
while in the 3rd du.
imperat.midd.,
e.g. (jx'tado)!- (No. 9)
the absence of
dialectic
by-formsprecludes
the formation of
a
definite
opijiion
about the
final letter. It is
enough
for
our
pui-pose
that
we can
with
great proba- bility
set .down for the three 3rd
persons
of the
imperative
middle the
series"
TT (XT (tO
and
explaui
the
n by cUssimilation, and the 0
as
due to the
aspiration
so
frequent
after
a n (Princ.
ii.
110).
In the Cretan form in fifi we
must assume that after dissimilation had done its work
a retroirressive
70 TIIK PERSONAL TERMINATIONS. ch. ii.
105
assimilation took
place.
This dialect shows other instance.-; of the
ten-
(liMicv to assimilate a
sibilant to a followingexplosive (Hey
de dial.
Crct!
p.
33).
Nearest to these
imperative
forms
come
the 3rd duals in -ffdov
(No. 5)
and
-rrOj/r (No. 6).
We have
seen that there
was no original
and
thoroughgoing
distinction between dual and
2)lural forms,
and so we
must
exjjoct
to find the
same
elements in the rrO of these forms
as in that
of the
imperatives.
Here too then the serie^sis
tt (tt
ad.
Having
thus
disposed
of five of the ten forms, we now turn to the
I'nd
2"crsons
dual and
plural
in -niie and -aOor.
They
difter from the
3rd
per.sons
just
discussed in much the
same
way
as
the 2nd
pi.
act. in
Tt
and the L'nd dual act. in
ror
from the 3rd dual in
-or,
that
is,
the first
dontal sound in these 2nd
persons
is to be referied to the
pronominal
stem
tva,
that of the 3rd to ta.
There is thei-efore
nothing
to
prevent
our
refer-
i-ing
the rrf)in
dx'i-a'lf, (jin-rrOoj'
likewise to a tt.
The three
remaining
forms
are more difficult. The 2nd
^u\g.
in -rrdd
and the 1st
plur.
in
fit-rrOa,
as we saw on
p.
37, are
again
the most
nearly
connected of the three. The
cases hitherto examined will incline
us to
suppose
a
similar
process
of
development
here. In the first
place
analogy,on
all strict rules of
procedure,
leads
us straight
to the
supposi- tion
that
as
-aOto and -nDdi arose
directly
from the authenticated dialectic
by-forms-(Ttw
and
-iTr(((,so
our
-aOa
arose
from
a
*-gt(i. This
step
brings
this
terniina ion
considerably nearer to the Lat. -sfi and the Goth, -st mentioned
on
p.
36. In the next
plaoewe
may conjecture
that
or arose here,as
in
the
cases alreadyanalysed,
from
tt.
This
tt again
can hardly
have
arisen in
any
other
way
than
by progi-essive assimilation,
and
conse-
fpiently
from the tv of the
pronominal
stem tva. It is true that it would
be hard to find
more
than
one
instance of such assimilation in Greek
;
Att.
TfTTHp-ic,
Boeot.
77(Tr(ip-"c
(Ahrcus,
Aeol.
170)
from the
primary
form
kdivar-os,
but this
one,
which is
beyond
a doubt,
is
enough
to corro-
boi'ate the
conjecture
thart
tt might
have
come from 7/. In this
instance,
it is
true,
the
tt
remained intact in older Attic and in Boeotian at
least,
lOG while in the
personal
terminations it undei-^vent further transforma- tions.
But there
are
other
cases in which the
tendency
to
phonetic
lightening
went further in terminations than in
stem-syllables.
If we
assume
then that in the
same period
of the
language
which
saw
forms
like that deduced
on
p.
69 and
*^)((r-w
and
*"paTTf,
the 2nd
pers. sing,
was
i-'hrjrra,
it is not
surprising
that
t-cprjaOa
shonld have
come
from the
latter
by way
of
*t-(/)/;Tra
in the
same
way
as
(pandio
arose
from
*(("drTto
and
(pHfTdf, as
it
appeai-ed,
from
*(j"aTTf.
There remains the infinitive in -frOiu. Here
we
have in addition to
the T.ocrian forms in
-orai
above mentioned
Hesychius's
isolated ItOui
"
KdHiaHi,
for which Mor. Schmidt wants to read t^uOnaOai. The
r
in
this form
may
have
come
from the radical
rr as
in iTTtn
= t(TTia
(Hes.),
and this leaves
us
with -Hai for the
termination,
which bears to the -nljai
of
ordinary
Greek the
same
relation that
-/leOa
does to the Homeric
-fitfrHit.If, as Ahrens 177
holds,^his
form wei-e Boeotian, we
should
expect T]
instead of
ai,
on
the
analogy
of
invDypafErjUti, hh'"xdi](Ahrens
1S7),
l)oth in
in-criptions.
We
may
fnll.jw
Boi)p(Vgl.
Gr. iii.
330)
and Schleicher
(Comp.3 446)
in
making a
comparison
between the middle infiu. termination and the
VeiUc
-'/hjdi,
'/A.
-djCii
or
-J/iJdi, e.g.
in the Skt.
jaja-(:Uijdi-=Gk a^e-adai,
CH. II.
20 I\ PERSONAL TER3IINATI0NS.
71
although
the oriental tt"rniiuatiou
expresses
the action in itself witliout
i-efevence to active
or
middle
meanings. It must be admitted that this
ditlerence in meaning does not amount to
so
much in the
case
of the
iutiuitive,
wliich
seems
from tlie first to have expressed merely the action
as
such and not
a
definite relation to
a subject.
The inquiry
into the
origin
of the termination
we
will
postpone to
a
later chapter.
Here
we
have to
deal only with the i-elation of the Gk. -aOai to tliis -iJlijfii,
and I
think the simplest explanation
of this is the following.
From -dhjai,
when the soft
aspirates generally shifted into hard
ones,
arose -^jai,
thence, by progiessive assimilation, -iHkn, or as
it is ])robably more
correct to write it, -rWai. It would be not at all surpiising
if
we were
to discover
on a
Boeotian
insci-iption
forms like
*ypftf/""r6j; l)y
the side of
the actually existing
(n7()-yf)ct(j"fa0)].
For the
present we
must make what
use we can
of the above-mentioned IrOui. From -rBdi the next
step was
10/
to -ad((i by
the usual dissimilation. A distant analogy
may
be noticed
in the
process
which must be assumed to explain
the Homeric TreTroaOe
(rt-iD'H-Tf,
TrfTTorrre,
-eTTorrBt). Whether the Elic
noiimrmiL came
from
the ordinary -(niifrnrrHai or by
assimilation from
an
earlier form is
a
question
I cannot decide.
Several of the views here
presented owe
their
origin to
a
paper
read
many years ago
in
my
'
Grammatische Gesellschaft
'
by
Di-. Eichard
Klotz,
which he has allowed
me
to
use
here. Other related matter
received
a
similar treatment by Allen, Stud. iii. 243. I differ from
the latter,
who
moreover
deals with
a part only of the forms here dis- cussed,
mainly
in this, that I cannot admit the assumption
that 6 in
these old forms expanded by a purely phonetic
process
into -6.
72 THE
AUGMENT.
"
ch. hi.
CHAPTER III.
THE AUGMENT.
Ko
speci.al
mark is needed to
distinguishpresent
time,
foi-the connexion
of tlic stem
with the terminations
naturally
conveys
the
impression
that
the
subject
and
})redicate
are to be
thought
of as
connected at the time
which is
present
to the
speaker.
Whether
notwithstanding
there
may
have
been
a period
when the
same
forms served for
past
time as well,
may
be
left
an
o])en
question.
It is certain that there arose
very
earlya special
form to designatea
past action,
and that this form was
characterised
by
two
things,
the
augment,
and the
shortei", secondary
form of the
peisonal
terminations. These
secondary
terminations have been
already
discussed
in the first
chapter,
where
we conjectured
that the
weight
added to the
beginning
of the word
by
the
augment
furnished the fii'stinducement to
the
shortening
of the terminations. This is the
phace
at which to treat
of the
augment
as
the
linguistic
element which serves
in its
proper
function,
and
probably
served at first
solely,
to
express past
time.
10'"^
Our word
mt'jment
is a translation of the
avh)friQ
of the later
gram- marians.
Lentz,
Herodian I.
p.
Ixxxviii,following Skrzeczka,
shows
that this term is not to be found in
Apollonius Dyscolus
or Herodian,
who describe the
prefixing
of the
augment
much
more aptly
as a
part
of
the KXirjiv
or
Kivijau-
of the
verb,
whereas the name
augment implies
an
unessential and
purely
external accretion. We
shall,however,
retain
the old term.
The
augment
is
only
found in
Sanskrit, Iranian,
and Greek.' It
consists in the
syllablea,
Gk.
"
" instead of which there are' some traces,
to be discussed
below,
of
a long
vowel " and this
syllable
is
prefixed
to
the verbal
form,
and that
only
in the indicative mood. In the
language
of the Ved.ts
as
in that of the Homeric
poems
the
augment
is sometimes
left out. To conclude from this that it was not an
essential
part
of these
forms
seems to me (so
too
Delbriick,
Altind. Vevbum,
p.
80) rash,
for
there
are other
cases
where
a language
vacillates between a
fuller and a
shoi-ter
form,
and where we are
right
in
holding
the fuller to be the
niore perfect
of the two. As soon as a language has,
with the aid of
its
meagre
store of
elements,
succeeded in
pro^dding
a
distinct
expression
for
any
given notion,one or
another of these elements
may
be discarded
again
without
any
loss of tlistinctness. As an
instance of this take the
way
in which
secondary personal
terminations in
many
cases
take the
])!acc
of
primary ones,
or
that in which the
original
s
of the nom. sing.
'
.Since Armenian
seems proved by
Hiibschmann's investigations
to be
an
indt'ijendent and individual link in the chain of Indo-Germanic languages,
it
deserves to be noticed that there
are traces in this
language
too of an augment,
and that t""o in the form of
c, e.g.
e-di = *i-6t)-v, 6'-i;K= *e-Sa)-"'(Hiilschmaun,
Zischr. xxiii.
p.
34).
CH. in.
OKIGIN OF THE AUGMENT. 73
or
the s
of the 8kt.
ace.
plur.
in
ns
is lost. It is uot to be wondered at
that a
prefix
of such little
weight,
which moreover.
-
in Grreek
espe- cially,
does not
always hel[)
the metre in
poetry,
should
early
have found
its existence
prccai-ious,
and have been discarded
altogether
in the
majority
of the related
languages.
It is
surprising,
on
the
contrary,
that
this element should have survived
as
much
as
it has in.
languages
of
three different families. Without the
assumption
that the
augment
was
at one time
present
in all forms
expressing past time,
the
organism
of
109
tense-forms
seems to me inexplicable.
If,therefore,differing
from Schleicher
(Comp.^ ''38),
we
regard
this
a as
having
formed from the first
an
essential
part
of the
preterite,
we
have to ask next what view is to be taken of its
origin.
On this
point
very
different
opinions
have been
expressed,^
the most
important
of which
we
will
now proceed
to examine.
I)
Buttmann in his Ausfiihrl. Gram. I.- 312
expi-essed
the
opinion
that the
augment
was only
a
curtailed
.reduplication.
Thiersch
agrees
with
him,
saving
at
p.
231 of his
'
Griechische Gr.
vorzuglich
des homer.
Dialekts
'
that
'
the
syllabicaugment
was originally
identical with the
reduplication;' so to a
certain extent does
Pott,
Avho
(Et.
Forsch. II.'
73)
calls the
augment
'
a variety
of the
reduplication,'
and
(Doppelung,
p.
226)
'
an
embryonic reduplication.'
There
are various
jjoints
in the
Greek
use of the
augment
and the
reduplication
which at first
sightseem
to make for the identification of the two. The
reduplication now
and
then
actuallyassumes
the
same
form
as
the
augment
: i'CnTi]-Kai-l,}iri]-aa,
and
althoughagain
the former
seems to
belongproperly
to the
perfect,
it
appears
in aorists like
Xi-Xutl-n-r,-re-nid-o-f,
to be
taking
the
place
of
the
augment.
But
we encounter difficulties
as soon as we look farther.
In Sanskrit the
augment always
appears
in the -form
a,
while the I'edu-
plication always changes
its vowel to suit the stem of the verb
: d-ticda-m
but
tu-toda,
d-hheJa-m but bi-hheda. This
objection,
raised also
by
Bop25(Vergl.
Gr. ii.^
422),might perhaps
be met
by
the not
impossible
suppositionthat,as
has been .soinetimes
argued,
among
others,by Nolting,
in his
essay.'
liber den
genetischenZusammenhang
des Aoristus II. mit
110
dem Pevfectum
II.,'Wismar, 1843,
the
original
vowel of the
reduplication
was in all
cases an a.
The Skt. forms la-hJiiiv-a
(rt.
hJtU
be)
and
sa-siiv-a
(rt.
sil to
bi-ingforth),
and the Old-Latin
perfectspe-posc-i,
pe-jnuj-i{latevpo-jjosc-i, pu-jyitg-i),
are in favour of this
supposition.
A still weaker
point
in this
theory
is the
conjecture
that sitch
a
number of initial consonants should have
disappeared
with
no
sufficient
cause
;
and
yet
this is what
we must
suppose
in order to
get
from
*ha-h.heda-t,
which
we must start from,
to d-bheda
t,
and that too for the
earlyperiod
before the
separation
of the
languages,
when the articulation
was
generallystronglymarked,
for
anyhow
there must have been
an a
then that
was
completely
distinct from the
*ba, *ka,
*ta "c. The
specifically
Greek habit of
putting
i instead of
(tke, mze, nre, i,f,
where the
verb-stem
begins
with
a
double
consonant,
is thei-efore
no
adequate
^
Compare, too, the
Leipzig
doctoral dissertation of Konrad
Koch,
I)c
Augmotto apud
Ilomerum
omisso,
Brunsv.
1868,
the introduction to which
gives
several of the views mentioned below. " To this we
maj-
add P. iIolhem"s careful
work, De
avgmenti apud
Homerum
Herodotumqnc imu,
Lundae,
1876,
and the
accurate examination of Hesiod^c
usage
in Rzach, Ber Dittleht des Hesiodus
(8th supplem, to the Jalivl'dcUer
far
Class.
Philologic'), p.
i31 f.
74 THE AUGMENT. ch. in.
analogy. Again,
the identification of the
reduplication
with the
aug- ment
necessitates in all
consistency
the identification of all
past
tenses
with the
perfect
in their terminations as well,
and it is
clearly
no use to
attempt
that.
The most
important
ohjection,however,
is to be
gained
from the
impress
l)orne
by
the verbal forms themselves. The
augment belongs
exclusively
to the
indicative,
the
reduplication
is excluded from no mood,
not even
from the
participle
and infinitive. The
augment sei'ves,
that
is,
to mark a
past
tense
;
it is the
exponent
of
a
grade
of
time,
while the
i-eduplication
characterises a
tense-stem all
through, attaching
itself
firmly
to
it,
not
confining
itself
exclusively
to the
perfectstem,
bvit
appearing
occasionally
in the
present
and aorist
as
w^ell. From this
it is clear that the
reduplication
was not
originally a
mark of
past
time,
and that the
apparent
substitution of the
reduplication
for the
augment
in certain aorists is not what it
seems, for,as
will be shown
below,
the
augment
occurs
sometimes in these
very
aorists
as a
sign
of
past
time
prefixed
to the
reduplication
which characterises the tense-stem as a
whole: t'-vf-vAE-ro. Moreover the fact that the
pluperfect
shows the
two united is
a
clear
proof
that
we
have here to deal with two
quite
distinct
lingidstic
elements. For these
reasons we
may
regai'd
this view
as
exploded.
It was a
natural
attempt
to
explain
the more difficult form
by
means
of one
which seemed
a somewhat more
comprehensibleone,
but
it
belongs
to a more
backward
stage
of the Science of
Language
than the
present.
Ill
2)
Hoefer in his
'
Beitnige
ziu^
Etymologie
'
(Berlin,1839),
p.
388,
attempts
to connect the
airgment
with the Teutonic
prefixga
((ji, ge),
which seemed in its
application
to the
expression
of the
perfect
to come
near to the function of the
augment.
But the
assumption
that the
initial consonant of this
prefixoriginally
varied between
a
guttural
explosive
and the dental
sibilant,
and then
disappearedaltogether,
will
scarcely
find
acceptance
with
anyone.
Besides,
this
attempt
too rests on
a confusion of the
meanings
of the
perfect
and the
preterite.
3)
A thii-d
explanation
is that
givenby Bopp (vgl.
Gr. II.
^
41.5),
who
takes it to be the
n privative.
This is met at the outset
by an objectionon
the
ground
of the form. The
negativeprefix
is
only o-
before
consonants,
but is elsewhere
ai-,
while there is not a trace to be found of
a
nasal in
the
augment.
In
regard
to
meaning, however,
this
hypothesis
is less
satisfactory
still. It is true that
past
time is not
present,
but it is
highly
improbable
that
language
should have marked it
as not
present.
The
negative
force of the
perfect
in dixi I have said
my
sa.j,fuimus
Troes and
the
like,
to which
Bopp appeals,
is
by no means enough
to
prove
this. In
the first
placewe
have in this
usage
not
a preterite,
but that kind of
perfect
which
we
may
term absolute. The statement of the fuU
com- pletion
of
an action
implies,
it is
true,
that it is
no longercontinuing,
but the
preterite,
which
transports
the action to a section of
past
time
chosen at
will,
does not
present
a conti-adictory opposite
of the
present.
8o far is it fi-om this that the so-called
gnomic
aorist
actuallyputs
before
us
something
done in the
past
as a rule that
applies
to all time
:
tca-Oai''
oyuwr
o r
nipyug ai'i)p o te
ttoWU
iopyur. Again,
a
negationprefixed
to
a verbal
form, as
nescio and the like
show, negatives
the whole
assertion,
not
merely a
comparatively
accidental
qualification
like that of
time, a
qualification moreover which
on
this
showing
is itself
expressedl)y
no
CK. m.
OKIGIN OF THE AUGMENT. 75
special
external mark.
If,then, the a
in d-tudam were negative,
it
would
mean,
as
opposed
to
ttida-mi,
'
I do not strike,'
not
'
I struck.'
For all these
reasons,
this
explanation,
which
Bopp
himself
was so little
satistied with that he
proposed another,
to be mentioned
below, as an 112
alternative,
may
be set down
as eri-oneous.
4) Benfey,
in his Kurze
Sanskritgrammatik,
p.
85,
and the Kieler
]Monatsschrilt, 1854,
p.
733, sees in the
augment,
'as the
original
instru- mental
case of the.
pronominal
stem a,'the
expression
of the relation to
another action. He
quotes
the
vise
of the
present
in Sanski-it with the
particles j)U7-d
'
before,'
and
sma,
which he
supposes
to mean
'
at the
same time
with,'
and concludes that
'
in these
cases
past
time
is,properly
speaking,only
in
so far denoted
as
the action to be
thought
of
as
occui-ring
in it is
repi-esented as having happened alongivith,or before
;
is
represented
that is as
temjnis
relatkmiti,
which is
exactly
what is
expressedby
the old Indo-Germanic
imperfect.'Benfey,too, brings
the
Teutonic
ge
into the
question,
and
assigns
to it
a similar function. But
there is
a
fundamental
ei-ror
here. The
syllable ge
does
mean
'
together','
l)ut
by
no means
the
putting
one action
together
with another
:
it
denotes the collection
together
of all the elements of an action,
and
resembles the
con
in
covficio.
It thus
expresses
not an external but an
internal
connexion,
and
provides
the verl) with
a means
of
expressing
completion,
and for this
very
reason its
temporal
force is
a secondary
and
.not an
essential
one,
and has
only gradually
become attached to it. The
notion of
relativity, moreover,
would at most
only
fit in with the mean- ing
of the
imperfect,
but not at all with that of the
aorist,
and would not
be
a probableaccompaniment
even of the
imperfect,
for in
dealing
with
this tense too we certainlyought
to start from its
use
in
simple
isolated
sentences. The
relativity
is
cleai-ly only a
result of the durative force of
the
imperfect,so aptlyrepresented
in the Gk. name
-KupaTaKTiKoc.
5)
There is but little difference between
Benfey's
view and that of
Scherer,
and it seems to me that both
are equallyunsatisfactory.
The
latter
conjectures(Zur
Geschichte der deutschen
Sprache,
p.
230)
the
primary meaning
of the
augment
to have been
'
near at hand.' It will
not be
easy
to establish the connexion of this
meaning
with the
pro- nominal
stem a.
But
granting
it
might
mean this,
I cannot see
how the
notion of nearness
could be transformed into that of
a
past
time,
which is
anyhow
not next to the
speaker.
It is true indeed that Scherer believes 113
that this
augment
was as
it wei-e
only
an
accessory
indication of what
was
alreadyimplied
in the form
itself,
and ends
by translating
this
a or
a by there,
and thus arrives at a
view which is not far removed from that
to which
we are
coming
next.
6) By
the side of the
explanationgiven
under
3) Bopp
mentions
another which he thinks
a possibleone. Though
he
regards
the two
explanations
as nearly
the
same, they
ai-e really
very
different. On
p.
420 he
expresses
the
opinion
that
language,
in
prefixingan a to
verbs,
may perhaps
'
not have been
thinking
of the
negativea,
and not have
meant to
deny
the existence of an
action in
present
time,
but have used
the
a as a real
pronoun
in the sense of
that,
and
so
have intended
thei-eby
to
transport
the action
"
away
there"
" to the time
lying
in the distance
and behind them.' Schleicher
adopts
this
view,
inasmuch
as
he
regards
the reference to
past
time
(p.749)
as
the function of the
a,
and
so does
Richard Garnet in the
Proceedings
of the
Philological Society,
Vol. I.
76 THE AUGMENT. ch. m.
(1844),p.
2G5,
where various
parallels
not all
equally a})t
are ad- duced
iVom other
languages,
some
of which
are quite
unconnected with
tlie Indo- Germanic stock. It deserves notice
anyhow,
that
languages
of
a less formed character denote
past time,
and futui-e
too, by particles
that
point
to the distance. If the
pronominal
stem a meant tliat
one yonder
as an
actual
pronoun,
in
an
uninflected form it must have
corresponded
to our thare,aiid,tempoially,
to our
then. Schei'er is
unwilling
to allow
that the stem a points
to
something
at
a distance,apd
mainly
for this
reason :
he
recognises
this "same stem in the
a
of ahain
'
I.' It
may
be
doubted whether this stem
always
and
exclusively
had the force of
pointing
to a
distance. Most of these distinctions between 'this' and
'
that,'
'
here
'
and
'
there,'wei^e
probablydevelopedantithetically
in each
separate
lan- guage.
It cannot be
denied,however,
that
a
series of forms
undoubtedly
belonging
to this stem are
used to refer to
something
at a
distance.
Scherer himself mentions the fact that in Zend athra there is contrasted
with itlira here. The 8kt. d-tra when used of
place
means here,
but
when used of time
then,ai that
time,so too a-tas
thereafter,
a-ti oiit
heyond
there
(
=
"-(),
d-tJia
tJien,therefore,at
thereupon,then,
while the
114 preposition a,
which
nnquestionaljly belongs
to the same
stem,
with its
main
meanings
of
to,
up
to,
and
as an
adverb
hither,further,
takes an
intermediate
position.Perhaps
the best
representation
of the
meaning
of the
particle
that is used
as
the
augment
is that it is
equivalent
to the
tida with which the
story
of the
Od_)Sseybegins
:
ivd' llWol
U"U TTUl'TfS OCTOl
(pVyOV
atTTVV o\fdpov
o'lKoi
ecrav.
A reference is made to some
point
chosen at discretion
; present
time
needs
no
such
reference,
and it
was not till later that the need of
denoting
future time
arose,
and so
this there became the there of
past
time. This
view is
only
a
shade different from Scherer's tinal
explanation(p.
2.31).
In
proceeding
to examine the various
phenomena
connected with the
augment, wj
will follow the old
division,
based
on
the nature of the
subject-matter.
A)
The Syllabic Augment,
In the dialect of the Yedas Kiilm
(Beitr.
iii.
463) points
out that a
long a
sometimes takes the
place
of the sliort one.
The
cases,
however,
which
are referred to
by
Delbrlick
(Verb.79)
as well,are
feAv in
number,
and it
may
be doubted whether the
length
is inherent
even
in
them, or
whether it is due to a
kind of
'
position
'
etilcted
by
the
following
con- sonant.
In Greek there
ai-e
three verbs which
occasionally
take
ij
instead
of
a
for
augment
:
/.uWw,
curn/uu,
/wiXo^ai.
The
ancients,
whose
notices of the
phenomenon
have been best collected
by
Fischer ad Wel-
lerum,
ii.
2'J'J,
call the substitution of
"/
for
t
in these verbs an
Atticism
(Moeris
s. v. I'lf^ttXXo)). Properlyspeaking,
we can only
be sure
of the
instances from the
})oets
in Avhich the metre testifies to the
/;,
for the
M.SS. of the
prose
writers vacillate much between the two forms. In
this
way
we
get
the
following
result
:
fxiXXio
has
// according
to Zeno-
dotus "
though
Aristarchus
rejects
his
i-eading
" at M
34,
in Hesiod
(Ihecjg.(5iS8 (iW
or', c//p'i'lfitXXt
Oicir
yXov^wTric'
'AOlirtivritifrdi'i) by
the side of
'i^nXXorat other
places(Ezach, p.
430),
in
Theognis (906
i'l/iiXX
iKTtXirruc
"((.
'Aicuu
"nipar),
in
Al'istophanes(Eccl.
597
-oiiro
yuf)
CH. HI.
THE SYLLABIC AUGMENT. 77
))jUf/\Xo)' t'ywXetstt';
Ran. 1039
rvi'
\(')(p())' iji^ieWtTridiirreij), Cvinfjcii
in
Aeschylus (Prom.
206
ovk i)hvr))^r]v),
and the comic
poet -Philippides
INIein. i"s*.
p.
472 iVftro
(fivauv CvrTrv)(^")c
(Vf:
j/ciu'w.
For
iijjovXeToonly 115
two instances from
poetiy
are adduced, Eurip.
Hel. 752
o Oeoc ovk
ril3ovXeTi",
and Alexis fr. 256 Mein.
ov
n)
-irpuyfi' iiftuvXtTo,
neither of
which
prove
anything.
Since then this
phenomenon
is unknown in
Homer,
where
fidtWe
and
EiwvXe-o
are often established
by
the
metre,
and since it is not till the Attic
period
that its
gradual
establishment
begins,
we must be careful how
we
call it
a primitivegrowth. Anyway
the
explanation
is hard to find. If
we
take the
analogy
of
lOeXui,
OiXw^
it is
only
in the
case
of
jiiiXXu
that
-we
get any
help
from the
etjnnology
of the
word,
which seems to have lost
a a
before the
/i
(Principles,
i.
412),
and
prothetic
vowels are
not unusual before double consonants.
In the
case of
poiiXof^uti,
where the
/3
has
come
from
a'/,we might appeal
to the
prothetic* e
in ie'iKoni for ifiiKOfTL
etc.,
and assume a by-form
epovX(ii.iai,
or we
might
even
attribute the
r;
to the
lengthening
power
of
the /
itself,
which we
find at work in
y-slcri (No.
15
below, Brugman
Stud. iv.
166).
The
etymology
of
divaf^iai
is not clear.
Of the
a,
the usual form of the
augment
in Sanskrit and
Old-Persian,
a few traces have been
preserved
in Greek. Whether such
a trace is to
be found
on an inscription
is not certain,
for the
right-to-left superscrip- tion
on a
helmet found at
Olympia (C.
I. G.
no.
31)
OOIOSMAnOESE""Y
...
may
either be read
/.t' rnrorjae
with Ahi*ens
(Aeol.229),
or
/im Trot/^f
with
Boeckh. The latter
reading
with the
augment missing
assumes that the
inscription
is in
poetry.
But it is
quitepossible
if we
suppose
the
rhythm
to be
dactylic,especially
if with Boeckh
we
take the first word to be
Kwoc and the two last letters to be the
beginning
of
a
pi-ojier
name.
It
is true that
/.ut
for
/.ie
is
unparalleled,
but
Trap
for
irepi
is also known to
us onlv throucrh the
one
old Ehetra of the Eleans C. I.
no. 11, and
Trarnpa
for
TTitrepa
only through
the
lately
discovered Locrian
inscription,
and other
peculiaiities
of the
same
isolated nature are
being
discovered
every year.
Hence this
can
only
be said to be a
possible
and not a cei'tain
instance of
a as an
augment,
and
we
have to
go
for further
cases to the
glosses
of
Hesychius uCfips)' ECEt'pey,n/jpa)^"i'"
j'/x'/te)', (ifTj^errdf hie(p6eipe
Kpiirec.
The doubts
expressed
about these and the alternatives
proposedhq
for them
seem to me of little
weight,
but it must be admitted that this
lexicon has
no
claim to
infallibility. aajyeaSE
I take to be a preterite
like
e(T)(edoi
,
from the rt.
crjjEc[(jfiivrvfii, airftearoc), meaning
exstinxit.
Forms with the
syllabicaugment
are
witnesses in
many ways
to the
older initial of the verbal stems concerned. Cases of this kind fall
into two main classes.
1)
Double
consonants
followino- the
anement.
It is well known that
p
is almost
invariably
doubled after the
aug- ment.
This fact has
long
since been
compared
with the same
pheno
menon
in
compound
nominal
foi'ms,
and it is
impossible
not to see the
parallel
between
'i-ppte
and
-n-epi-ppwoc, epp7]t(i
and
uppJtK-oc.
Buttmann
'
Cp. Buttmann,
Aiisf. Gi'. i. 317.
78 THE AUGMENT.
ch. m.
(i.84)tliou."i;ht
the reason lay
in the fact that
an
initial
p
was
pronounced
like
a
doui)le
consonant,
and
appealed
in
proof
of this to the
rough
breathing
written over
it. Since, however,
the same
doubling
which is
the rule with
p
occurs spoi'adically
in Homer in the
case of other initial
consonants as well, we are compelled here, as
is
now
prettygenerally
admitted,
to
regard
the
doubling
of consonants in the
great majority
of
eases as an
assimilation
(Ahrens,
Formenl.
"
85
; Hoffmann, Quaest.
liom. i. 135).
The verbs
beginning
with
p
are
exhaustively
discussed
Ijy
Leo
Meyer (Ztschr.xv,
1
ff.), where, however,
he is
supportingthe,as
I
think,eri'oneous theory
that in the
case of verbs which
can be shown to
have once
had .*"before
p,
not
only
has Homer's
language
traces of this
somid to
show,
but the sound itself. The assertion made
by
the
same
scholar
(p,3)
that
'
it is
extremely impi-obable
that the Homei-ic /
was ever
assimilated to a following p,'
appears
to me
altogetherun- founded.
In
post-Homei'ic
Greek the
doubling
of the
p
is
undoubtedly
to be
explained
in the
way suggested
above. It should be noticed that of the
verbs which
begin
with
p many
can
be shown to have lost
a
consonant,
117
i-e. either
a / or a ^.
A / is established
by
clear traces in
pe^ai(rt.
/fpy Principles,
i.
221),piirM(ib.
i.
437),
rt.
pe
by
the side of
ep,
ftp (ib.
i.
428),pliyivf^it (ib.
ii.
159),piyiw (ib.
i.
438), pii^ou) (ib.
i.
438),p/Vrw
(i.437); a rr
in
piw (i.439),prxijfd)(i.368),
pu)f)i.iai,pwrivi^n
(i.440).
On the other
hand,
there is
hardly one
Greek root
beginning
with
p
whose
I'epresentatives
in the other
languagesbegin
with
a simple""
too.
Eoots which do
begin
with
r
in these
languagesgenerallycorrespond
to
Greek words in which a
vowel is
prefixed
to the
p
:
ipev-yw
(cp.
rue-tare
Princ. i.
222),
epii^'og
(Skt.ram
i.
404),lptv6"." (i.312), 6ptyw (i.226),
Mpvoj [rumor
i.
444).
Thus we see
that the
doubling
of the
p
is of
great
antiquity.Compared
with it the
appearance
of
AX,
w, f^tfi
after the
aiig-
ment is
an
isolated
phenomenon,
which is to be
explainedpartly
in the
same
way,
as
due to the fact that the root once began
with two con- sonants,
e.g.
in
er)"f)}'
4" 11
(Princ.
i.
396),partly
as
due to
a
mistaken
imitation of such forms made in the conventional
spirit
of
Epic language.
On the
precedent
of iWirrfrt-o,eWifraf^ir))', eWiTaieve,
which
are
perhaps
correctly
formed
(Hoffm.Qu.
horn. i.
145),
writeis ventured
upon
iXXnije
(Princ.
ii.
145),e/(//((0f (ib.
i.
387),
while
Apollonius
Ehodius ii. 1032
was the first to alloAv himself the
use
of tXXine. Much that relates to
this
subject
has been treated
by me at
greater length
in Stud. iv. 479 ff.
Lastly,
the double consonant is to be
explained
in
a
few instances to be
due to an assimilation which has affected the consonant
succeeding
the
initial, as in
auu)
(Princ.
i.
465)
and
ucEKrey
(Stud.
viii.
465,
Pi'inc. ii.
308
note).
2) Syllabicaugment
before
a
vowel.
When
we find
a syllabicaugment
before a vowel, apparently,
that
is,
taking
tlie
place
of the
temporalaugment,
we
may
conclude that
a con- sonant
has fallen
away,
and that the consonant is one of those three
R])irants
which Greek
i"honetic
laws
always
condemned between vowels.
Buttmann
(i.324) recognised
this fact
as
far as
the
digamma was
concerned,only
he
was
obliged
to leave
a few cases doubtful,
which we
are now able to understand
more
clearly.
The forms in
question
here
can
again
be divided into two classes,
accordingas
the svUabic
augment
CH. III.
THE SYLLABIC AUGMENT. 79
is in each
case
present
in its
integrityor
only
felt in its results. To the
forms with the
syllabic
augment
intact
we
have
a remarkable
analogy
in
118
Old-Persian,
i.e. a-i-sta-td
(Spiegel,Altpers. 165),
for *a-/ii-sfa-(d and
still older
*
a-si-sta-td,
which would
correspond
to a
Gk.
*
i-i-aTu-To for
the
regular
"-ura-To. We shall
see
below that where the initial
was
oiiginally a
vowel Old-Persian formed the
augment
in another
way.
a) Syllabic
augment
intact before
a
vowel.
The
following
forms admit of
a
very simpleexplanation:"
1) i-ay-i]v
N 162 ir kuvXui
ectyr/ lo\i-)(uv
capv (F 607),Aristoph.Yesp.
1428
Kui irwc
KaTtayr]
T)jg KtipaXfjc f.ieyn (T(j)6cpa] eu^e II 270 t'l^w o' ctfftzi'c
eate /3u\wj',
A 175
d/c
c' it,
ahyii' 'ia'ie
\a/3wr etc.
by
the side of
Ijle
T
539 7rd(7t KUT ai))("rac?)"eKnl 'iKrariv
(^ 392).
The
/,
which is
con- firmed
by
the
perf.i'oya(Aeol.Hays),
is
clearlyestablished,especially
by
the Hesiodic
Kuvalaig
(0pp. 666, 693).
Pi-inc. ii.
158,
188.
2) e-vac-o-v,
where the
v arose from / or a
still earlier
(rf,
S 340
t-rrei
rv roi
evuhv
ivv)),P 647 i-rrei
vir roi
tvahev
ovnac,
by
the side of the
perf
'iaca
(eutura
I
173).
In the
imperfect
the form
we should
expect,
tajofii'f,
occurs in Herod, ix.
5, 19, though we find
tjicare A
24, 378,
2 510 etc.
(cp.ettd'i
real's
"-
16 and elsewhere in the
Odyssey),
and also
ei'iycave12
25,
y
143 to be discussed
below).
From the
same verbal stem
comes ef-E-an-dev iyeXarjai,
Cie-)(y{)r]aar Hesycli.
i.e.
hpijo-dtj.ray. The
uncompounded
mtTdey is
conjecturedby
Mor. Schmidt with Pearson in
the
gloss
eadev
ix^opntray,
which both
scholars,
with the
alphabetical
arrangement
on their
side,
write '(.acriiey
t\upi]^uy.
For other traces of
the / see
Princ. i. 282.
3) i-a\-ri-v
N 408
Tri
vtto ttcIceciXt],
Y 168
dovpiftaXtf, ta\r}
ck
xa'w'',
278
An'f/ac
r
taXr],corresponding
to which
we
get
2 447
TpCjtQ
i-n-X
TTpv^njany
EiiXeoy and
perfect
forms like
eeXfiei'oi
M 38. Clear
proof
of
the / is
given by
the Doric form
ty-frfXrjOiujyri^iUiXrj^aKn on the
Heraclean tables
(JVIeister,
Stud. iv.
404).
4)
e-nX-tjy first found in Attic
writers,
e.g. Aristoph.Vesp.
355
ore
Na^ot edXu),
while at
x
230 we have
"7//
c ijXu)
ftovX^Upu'i^wvnoXic,
Herod, i. 78. The Lesbian evaXtJKci
given
in the Anecd. Oxon. iii.237
points
to a /
(Ahrens,
Aeol.
37),
and on this is founded the
etymological
combination
given
in Princ. ii.
170,
which
connects
a\/"T(.-ojunt
with the
above-mentioned rt.
faX, feX,
which shows most
clearly
in
ciXvaic,chain, Hg
the notion of
shutting
up
or fettering.
5) e-aycKTo-e
Alcaeus fr. 64 Be.^ kuI
TrXelrrroiQEciyua/re XaoTc,
where
others less
correctly
write
ffayauae,
for
a / in the middle of the word
must have become
v
in Lesbian. On the / of the stem cf Princ. ii.
182,
Angermann,
Stud. iii.117.''
6) e-ti^EAlcman fr. 31 Be.^
-w
le
yvya ra/dlaaipetig
eeit,"
xwpoc.
The
/ of f'tV-o; is established
(Princ.
i.
166).
t) i-enroy, tenrEr,
tenrE (un-EEnrf, /.tf-iiiTTE, irpoaEEiirE),
very
frequent
in
Homer,
e.g.
E
683,
I 173. The/ is
clearlyproved
both
by
Aeolic forms
and
by
the
comparison
of the related
languages.
Princ. ii. 57.^
"*
'Eap5a\rj-eTrArjo-iaore:/ Hesych.
cp. ^ap^riv
"
rh
^id^fadai yvua7Kas 'Ajj.vpaKiunai
(cp. Mor. Schmidt
s. v.)
is too uncertain to be
brought
into the list.
5
"'Eipyov
and the
cognate
forms I
omit,
because'the
present Upyoi {iipyofxivoi
N
52.5)
shows the initial e to be
prothetic.
80
"
THE AUGMENT.
ch. hi.
8)
l-furraTOor e-itranTo
Only
E 295
eq
Aiflvr]y"!
tV)
vqoc
lifTaaro
ttovto--
irnpoio,
wlicre the scholia
i^ive
tcpfanaro
as
the
reading
of Rliianus and
uitiiiraToas that of Zenodotus. The M.SS.
according
to La Roche
seem
all to
point
to the
simple
verb. As tcaOe'ifrtoften occui-s in
Homer,
e.g.
S
204, tfrrrraTo
need not
surpriseus,
related to it as tale to ijlt. The
u
of the rt. tc
is
beyond
a
doubt Princ. i. 297.
Cp. Mayboff
de Rhiani
Studiis Homericis
(Dresden,1870),
p.
36
9)
t-inrraro from the rt. /ec
(ti'i'v/u)
K 2.3
uf.itfi
c'
ETreira
hifpoiroi'
tiiraaro
cipp.aXiorjoQ (
= K.
177),
E, 529,
ap"l"\
ce ^XrtTj'arEefTtraT
oXeia-
vEfxor,
by
the side of
afi(piE/jaTa,
twiifTarrdai,
the latter found
even in
Xenoplion,ETriEiiiit'oc, plupf.Ee"Tro
M 464. The / of tbe root is
as certain
as
any.
PrLnc. i. 470.
10)
E-fierao from the rt.
/t^,
where the /
(Princ.
i.
299)
needs
no
confirmation
:
I 645
izavra ri
jxoi
Kara Ovf^toi'
Eeiaao
fivHiiaafrOai, EEitraro
.E
398
u)i:
\)cv(Tt~i
amrarTToi' eeitcito yala Kai v\r],
"while in eIcoi' the
aug- ment
is oblitei'ated
by
contraction with the stem.
11)
t-i)KE
from the rt.
e originally
it
seems ye,Ja (Princ.
i.
500),
A 8
r/";T lip rTij"M"
6eu")'
EpiCi
Evt'ETjKE
fxcf^^^Etrdai,
A 48
fiEra
o'
tor
etike,
INI 221
Ui}"ap
C
(\(pE7]KE.
120
12) E-ovpr)rr". Et'EovprjrTE
is
pronounced
to be Attic in Cramer's
Anecdota Oxon. i.
446, 17,
and
supported by
a
quotation
from
Eupolis
Autolycus (Meineke,Comici,
ii.
p.
444) :
upa
rrfocp'
Ei'fovprjrTEi'
e'EioXric
yipior;
Hence in Demosthenes 54
too,
four
good manuscripts
have
Trpoa-
Eovpovr.
A
corresponding
formation is the
perfect-formEv-E-dvprjKo-ng
Aristoph.Lys.
402. The
etymological
connexion with Skt. vdri water
and the Lat. ur-hia is discussed Princ. i. 436
;
it is clear therefore that
this verb too had
once a / after the
augment. Only
we ought pi-obably
to follow Ebel here
(Ztschr.
iv.
166)
in
starting
from
E-fop-rjTE,
in which
the J-o as
in
owp-nro-c
for the
originalvar-ana-s (Princ.
ii.
209), was
transformed to ov. The
e
held its
placeeven after this
transformation,
in the
same
way
as
did the
a
in
aur/u'/i'
for
afi-T-i.u']y.
13)
E-wOovi'
hymn,
in Mercur. 305
)(Ep(jh'
iwhfi, E-uan
IT 410 i^ac
d'
cip'ETTi
tjTop.'' EiorrE,
I
181 K(i\
Y^iipETjc aTTEiofjE (but
uTzuifTE
P 649 and clsc-
where),fi-equent
in Attic
: Aristoph.
Pax 637 rlith
/tec ciKpolc
EwOovf
rijy Heoi'
KEKpay^dfTii-, Efiaa, Eiorra/Arji',
Eoj/rdqi'
with the
correspoiiding
perfect
a.;a/xfa,
later 'iioKn as
well. The
comparison
of the Skt. vadh
ferire
(Princ.
i.
323)
establishes the
digamma.
Ebel
sees
here too
only
tbe eifect of this
spirant"
vrttf/i
becoming
u)B. And
we
actually
find in
ii'i'orriynioQ
and
Eii'ofTapvWoc
traces of
an
assimilated
/, so
that
we
are entitled to
give
fuB as
the
root,
while
we
may
at
any
rate attribute
the
lengthening
of
o to
w
to the
operation
of the
graduallyretiring spirant
(Brugman,
Stud. iv.
174).
14)
E-Loravpriv
first to be found in Attic
: Eiipolis
Maricas fr. 15
(Meineke,
ii.
p. bOb) khoxhov
y" /u/r
u'vrac
ewi oi'^/jj/i' iyu).
The
pei-fect
"wi?;/(a( lielongs
to the
same
period.
In the stem mio
the length
of the
w
seems to have
nothing
to do with the
disappearance
of the
digamma,
for
corresponding
to it
we
find the Skt. vasnd and the Lat. veno
also with
a
long
vowel. We must look for the source
of this
lengthening
to the
lost
s,
and
so
regard
/wio as
the stem
(cp.
uifio-i:
"=
c^iro-c),
Princ. i.
400.
15)
In
"/"/?"jc X 280
EK Aioc j/"i^"jc toi'
e/joi' fiopoy,
t
206 ovci ric
av-vy 1I'lEicr]
("f.twioy
we have
a
second instance of what is
apparently"?
for
CH. III.
THE SYLLABIC AUGMENT.
81
"
before a
vowel. There can be no
doubt here as to the rt. /t?. We
should therefore
expect
fptih^c,kuh^c.
As in
t(ik}'ioq
the
disappearing
/ 121
has
produced
a
prolongation
of the
preceding
vowel. The similar
i'jiKrcu
i'liKTo
will be dealt with when we come to the
perfect.
The
following
forms stand
by
themselves
:"
16) i'l-rifje belonging
to
I'ipw
K 499 "ri)rc'
i'laiptv 'ifiani
ku\ l^ijXavi ev
o/uiXov.
The
perfecthpi^u} oc
rr
296 and
hpn,- mnj^m (He.sych.) prove
that
a consonant has been lost. But the
etymology
of the word tells us
of the loss of two consonants
(Princ.
i.
441).
We
may
take the root to be
cf'P,
which in Latin became ser {sero),
and has
preserved
its sibilant in
fTiipu,
while after
a
vowel most
proljablyn
first assimilated itself to the
j^,
and then the fuller sound of the / effected the
lengthening
of
t to
?/.
17)
eojpioy,
not found tillthe Attic
period(Herod.w,jwj), by
the side
of
iijjpaKa (^eoprtKci^,
iiopajjai.
18)
"w"'0^""t
A 3
ifKTCip
eo)io\6ei, v
255 KuXdlc kv
kch eoimf
"h)fO)(^(j"i
?'"
"MeXtttdeiic,
but the form withoiit
an f occurs also,
and it was written
by
Aristarchus with
o (onoxott
A 598),by
others
w'joxo"t (La Eoche,
Homer.
Textkritik,
p. 324).
19) inewyoy
11 221
\ri\ov
c'
airo 7r(r"^'
avftoyer,
O 228
"'/ kui
(pbjpiaiiwv
tTTidtijuuTa
Kf'iX
aie/iyyer,
ai"'wi"
r;
389
dvpac
c' ui'EcoEe
av"liti(iu (Herod.
('irolLt)
to be
compared
with ii 455
-jOflc
c'
ui aolyea-KOi-^EyaXr]i'KXrfica
Ovpau)i\
with the Attic
perf.aisuye,
aiiuKTcn, aitifx^V
i
but. the word is
a
trisyllable
at S 168
r//r
c'
ov Htoc aXXoc
atiLyer (likewio^ofi), more
correctly cirotyj).
The
peculiarity
of the last three verbs is that after the
syllabic
augment
there seems to be the
temporal
as
well. The
digamma
is
again
clearlv the
cause of the
lengthening.
When it fell out the
following
vowel
was
prolonged,
as
in
j-jamXitJc
for
pumXff-oQ.
The nature of
these vowels has been discussed
by
Ebel in the
essay
often referred to
above. Wli ether the
spii'ant
had from the first the
power
of
lengthening
the
preceding
or
the
following
vowel
indifferently
is
a
difficult
question,
to which Ebel's
essay
does not seem to me to have
given
a
satisfactory
answer.
I
am not sure that,as
TOKrioc,iroXTfoc,i
r;"ic,"/oc
are of earlier
occurrence
than
rokiwc, ttoXewc,
I'fwr, ewe,
it
was not the
general
rule
that the backward influence of the
spirant
was
the first
step,
while a
somewhat later
period
reversed the relation of the
long
and short vowel.
The
Attic
h'opTuC,o r can
hardly
be
explained
in
any
other
way
than
by
sup-
122
posing
it to come from
iiopra'Cor (cp.Buttmann,
i.
326);
iwKnuy
(cp96)
and iwKeii
(3?174)
owe their
w,
as
is shown
by hnnn,
to the
augment,
that
is,
i]("
became
ew,
while the reverse of this
process
in the Homeric
iircuitwhich the
metre
proves
to have four
syllybles
at li 25 and
y 143,
and which
we must assume to have
come
by
metathesis of
quantity
from
"/ctvcaje (cp.rjeipe),
is not so
easy
to understand. In
any
case the form is
peculiar,
for the
analogy
of
-oKsa
would lead
ns to
expect
ci and not
?;
in the second
syllable.May
not the
ij
owe its
existence to a mistaken doctrine of nXtoi
aa^idg]
The foi-m
kwnyei,E,
289
Tp(',"t:-rji
ric
ci)ttoXXu /cav'
ai
dpu)Trovc"wpyf(,
is
very singular
indeed.
I.
Bekker here reads
eliljpyii (cp.tiwdei),
while La Eoche in the fiice
of the
M.SS., reads
cudpw-oiniyiwpyei.
The
length
of the first
syllable
might
be
explained
to be the result of
*i-f.-f"',pyei *"c-6pyei,
but there
would then be
no reason to be
seen why
the
""
which is short in
sofiya
should be
longhere,
and
we shouM have to write
elopyti.Brugman
G
"
82 THE AUGMENT.
ch. hi.
(Stud.
iv.
107)
defends the
reading Iwpyeihj supposing
that from
the
primary *i-h-f()i)yti
there came first, by
the influence of the
disappearing
/
(cj). ii-tic)]), *))-t-h')i"yei,
then
*ii-6pyEi.
The latter form he
conjectures
to
be the true reading
at ^ 289, i]-6pytL having
become
i-ujpyei by
metathesis
of
quantity.
In the case of forms found in Homer it is well to remember
that in tlie old
writing
there was no
difference between
o
and
m,
ol
and
w,
and tliat in
consequence
the
authority
for the latter is
always
extremely
small. In
any
case it is worth notice that the New-Ionic
dialect has a
decided dislike to these forms with
an w.
Whatever
may
be the case as to the successive
stages
of these "
pparently
anomalous
jihenomena,
of this
we
may
be
sure,
that tlie
augment points
in all
instances to the loss of
a spirant.
20)
Another form of
a
peculiar
nature is the Homeric
kafpdrj,
the
origin
of which is
a
much debated
question.^
It
occurs
but twice
:
N 543 :
eKklvQr]
8
erepaae
Ktipr],
eVi S' ((cr7r'(S
ia(p6r]
Koi
Kopvs
'
cip.(pl
Se ol 6dvaTos
;^i^to 6vfiopa'L(TTrjs,
123and;=; 419
Xfi-pos
S'
fK^a\fv
f'y^ns, en avrco
S' a(Tn\s
IcK^drj
Kai
Kopvs
"
ap.(JH
8e ol
I3pa)(e
Tev^ea
ttoikiXci
)(akK(0,
Aristarchiis wrote
la(p6r]
with the
spii'itus
asper,
and
iuterpi-eted it,as
Herodian tells us
in
a note
on
the former
passage,
by ETrrjKoXfiudjjfTEi',
and
consequently
derived the form from tTrecfdai. Herodian
(ed.Lentz,
ii.
309)
followed
Tyrannio
in
regarding
CnrTetrBni as
the
etymon,
and inter-
pi'eting
it o'torel
(7vi')i(f)(ir].
Both views have found
supporters among
modern scholars.
Buttmann,
in the
Lexilogus,
ii.
138,
took the side of
Ai'istarchus
; Spitzner,
in the 24th
excursus on
the Iliad
(vol.
i.
sect. iv.
p.
xvii),
followed the other two
grammaiians ;
and since
Buttmann in his Ausf. Gram. ii. 11 7 forsook the side he first
embraced,
the latter view has become the
pi-evailing
one. Buttmann
was quite
alive,however,
to the difliculties in the
way
of the derivation from
ciTrrw.
First and foremost
among
thes? he
placed
the
ii-regularity
of the
augment
as compared
with
iJTTTeTo, d^jJTrrot.
The rt. of
anrw, a(^",
is
proba})ly
to be connected with the Latin
ap-iscor, ap-tu-s,aj)-ex.
If we
except fianToc,
to wliich
we
shall
return,
it shows no trace of
a con- sonantal
initial.
Spitzner,
it is
true,
is able to set this
objection
aside at
p.
xxiv in
a characteristically superficial way ; simply saying
that the
littera
incertissima,as
he calls the
/, never means
much
any way.
As
to the
sense of the
passage,
Buttmann was undoubtedly right
in the
Lexilogus
in
translating
it
*
and the shield fell
on to
him,'
which
exactly
suits the context.
Heyne's interpretation, adopted by Spitzner,
'and
the shield stuck to him,'
is
quite
wrong.
In the first
place,
the aorist
in'-[ii([jOr] can never mean
the
same thing as
the
pluperfecte(i"i}7rro.
Since
it denotes the commencement of
an action,
en) "
ea(j)6i],
if it did
belong
to
f.(puTrTE(jdui,
could
only mean
'
listened itself.' This is how
Tyrannio
and Herodian take tlie word: o'lorel av)'li(l"Oi]
ahro).
They
appear
to
have taken this
rrvtlntiOr]
in the
sense
'
bound
itself,
united its(df
to,'
not
a
very apt meaning,
it seems to me.
AVhat connexion was
established
"
I have Ireated this form at
gi'cater lengtli
in the Commentaiio de Forma
Jlovurica ka.'pQr) that is
prefaced
to the list of the doctors created in the
philoso-
I'bicalfacuhy of
Leipzig
in 1869-70.
CH. III.
THE SYLLABIC AUGMENT.
83
between the head and the shiekl that fell
on
iti Then the whole
idea,
especially
in the first
passage,
'
he bent his
head, to which the shield
and helmet stuck
fast,'
docs not seem natural,
and this is
why
Buttmann, on returning
in his Ausf. Gram, to
nTrrofiai,
preferred
to see 124
in this verb the
meaning
'
injlicta
est,'
'
struck
him,'a
meaning,however,
which cannot be extracted from it. The discussion then
stands,
I take
it,
as
follows
:
in favour of Aristarchus's derivation from
'in-ofidi
there
is first the
context, secondly
the
augment,
Avhich
can be
explained,
though
not
by /, still,as
Buttmann
saw, by
the
cr
which is to
be seen
in
'i-a-Tn-ro, (rnErrOut,as in the Lat.
sequi,
while all that
makes for the deiivation from
a-T(jfiai
is
perliaps
the
o
and the
common aorist form
}j(ptiii.
Both
))ointsceitainlygiA^e
rise to some
difiiculty.
Still for the
o
in the foce of
an e
everywhere
else
we can
adduce the Homeric
eTapq"Bi]v (I.
Bekker
on f 74)by
the side of
Tipnumn,
and
-p(t(j)6rir(ii {o80)by
the side of
rptiru),
while Homer has
i7Tiif(i)UtiTE
(E 575)
where Herodotus has an a {f^aTe(TTpuij)6i]aai'
I
130).
And from
'iiTioHerodotus
has,though
in
a
passivesense, TrfpaqjOrji'
v. 81. And
might
not lunrruc
itself,
for which
some
wonderftil derivations have been
devised,
possiblymean,
not
'
not to be
touched,'
but
'
unsociable,\\n-
a'p'pvodchiihle,
i7itractabilis'1 For 'iir
sir means
tractare,
to deal with
a
thing,/.utliTTEit (a 175)
'
vcrsari,
be
present'(Princ.
ii.
58).
We should
then have
a parallel
for the
a
in
eo(j)6)},
and
a reason
for the absence of
the
)'
in
aaTrroc.
If
our
conclusions
are correct,
the
apparent irregularity
of the
augment
too in the
case of
t(t"l"t!i]
is
satisfactoiily explained.
21)
eiiauro
belonging
to
e't/j-i,
O 415 arr'
A'ltirToc ieitraro,
544
tw
//fc
etiiraoOrjy
cp. ")^
89, we must,
it is
true,
admit to be
an
anomalj^,
as there
is no
hint of
a
consonantal initial here. But then it stands alone
as
such. At Princs ii. 207 this form is
discussed,
and attention is called to
similar mistaken formations in Homer.
b) Syllabic augment
discernible in
a
contraction.
The old
grammarians
seem to have
regarded
the
et,
which
a
number
of verbs show in the
stem-syllable
instead of the
?;
which
was to be
expected,
as
hardly
an anomaly,
but
only
as a not
very
unnatm-al variation.
In the scholion above referred to on N 543
Tyrannio
says acta^fipwc
ro
cnrd ToiJ t
ap^ojAera f)^jj.uTa
e'lMBe t:\u'e(T8ai
Kin cia Tf]c tl
ci(p66yyov
K'ar'125
a^X'/''
'""""'
^'" ^"^
*/"
Buttmann
(ii.323),
who derives the
temporal
augment
from the contraction of the
"
with the initial vowel of the
stem, was consistent in
regarding
"i as
the earliest form of the
augment,
but he does not tell
us
why
in other cases
";
took its
place.
No
explana- tion
whatever
was given
of the fact that the Greeks said
il-^m'
but
i'i6tX()}\It
was
from
Comparative
Grammar that the first
help
came
here. Pott. Et. F. ii.^ 71
gave
a
few
suggestions.
The
first, as far
as I
know, to
give
clear
expression
to the correct
principle, was
Savelsberg
in his doctoral dissertation
'
Quaestiones
lexicales de radicibus Graecis
'
Berol.
1841, where,
at
p.
7,
after an examination of the ".eA'eral
forms,
he
puts
it
as
follows
:
'
e
augmentum
in istis
exeniplisomnibus,
ubi
cum
f prima
radicis vocali in
n contrahitur,vere est
syllabiciim, cum
ejus-
modi contractioni eae
tantum radices sint
obnoxiae,
quae
aut o-
liteiam
aut
digamma
in initio amiserunt.'
Savelsbergonly
omitted the third
spirant
j.
This
was the
very
view which I afterwards established in
my Tempora
G 2
84 THE AUGMENT. ch. hi.
iind
Modi,
p.
136
fF., as
did Ahrens
Foimenlelire," 83,
El)el Ztsclir. iv.
107 ff.
Now;
I
suppose,
no one
doubts it. Kiihner at
p.
498 of the
new
C'llition of his Au.-f. Gi'. mentions it
as
self-evident. It
can,
in
fact,
be
liai-dly accidental,
that of the fifteen verbs with
"t
in the
augment-
syllable twelve show
unmistakable traces of
having oiiginally
had
a
consonant at the
beginning
of their stem. In strict Doiic the diflerence
between the
augment
in
u
and that in
?;
was unknown,
because here
e"
regularly
contracted to
";,
and
they
said
7i\o]', yjXKovas well
as
i'l/rOtoy,
I'lHeX'ir (Ahrens,
Dor.
202).
The several forms
are as follow
:
]) e'utaa,
t'iwv. Both forms are Homeric
("2684,
2
448),
and are
joined
later
by Eta'frjr ;
the
perfect-formsriaKu, eicifiai
also show the
diplithong
in the
reduplicatiou-syllal:)le.
The Homeric
present^forms
f'lu)A 55
by
the side of
f w
0
428,
anory'B 132
by
the side of Imo-i
c 805
(oi/tttium),^
the
conj. tiw/jfr
(j"
260,
the form
'ij^naor
(
= "oo-oj)
said
to be
Syracuscin
and
Laconic,
for which
Gregorius
Corinth. 354 also
126 writes
tuuaoi-,
as also
(V(i = i.n (Ahrena,
Dor.
49),point
to -the loss
of one or more
spirants
after the
e,
so
that the
diplithong
would seem
to l)e the result of
a
compensatoi-ylengthening.
Tliis consideration
has,
it is
true,
not led
as
yet
to a certain
etymology.
Ebel's
(Ztschr.
iv.
169)
derivation of eciw from t'Oc seems to me
improbable as
fixr
as
meaning goes,
Kraushaar's
attempt (Studien,
ii.430
ff.)
to connect it with
thert.
as throw,
from wl ich come s-i)io and " as
is
pointed
out
by Bugge,
Fleckeisen's Jahrb.
1872,
p.
95 " the Old-Latin de-sivare
(desinere
Paul.
Ep. 72),
must be admitted to be
acutely
reasoned
out,
but his
proof
assumes too
many
unauthenticated
stejxs
to be
convincing. If,as we
must
suppose,
the
f(
is the result of
a
compensatoiy lengthening,
it is
accidental that Attic Gi-eek
kept
the
diphthong only
in the
augmented
forms,
and there was formed,
at a time
when, as in
.Homer,
ejc'twand
knu) existed side
by side,
the somewhat
arbitrary
inile of
saying
f'uoi'but
f'f(w,
which
appeared
to bear to each other the same relation
as fJj^or
and
E^w.
Strictlyspeaking,therefore, we
have here to deal with
no
augment-
syllable
at
all
(cp.Kiihner,
Ausf. Gr. i.^
499).
2) dear, ordinary
Greek
along
with
'ifw,'icoijjLi,
Ictir
etc.,
is
one
of the clearest
cases,
for no one will doubt in the face of the
proofs
of
a
/ in this root that it stands for irfi^o-y
(Princ.
i.
299).
The form with
a vocalised /
(cp.
tvat'.oi
)
Evih)i'
occurs
in the
poem
of
Balbilla,
C. I. Gr.
4725,
1. 10
(Ahrens,
Dor.
578)"
BaX: CkXa
Si)
Kci^ev
oicrt novoii
ypomvara
(rafiaipovTa r ocr
eviSt
kuktct
isctKovcf.
These
verses were written
a.d.
150. Birt
Bergk (Lyr.^
p.
879)
is in all
probability right
in
reading
also in fr.
2,
7 of
Sappho
"
as
yap
fvi8ov
Qpoxfus ere,
and Nauck is
perhaps right
in
conjecturing(MelangesGreco-Romains,
Bulletin de I'ac. de St. Petersb.
1863,
p.
409)
that in several instances
where
we now read e'tiihin Homer the
originalreading
of the text was
ivct (e.g.
S
13,
22
235).
The
expulsion
of the/ and the contraction of
ticDv in the Homeric
poems
is,howevei-,
in some
places
established
by
the metre: \ 162 dvI'
i'iccqe'c!
fieycipoim
ywalKti,
A 112 fhi,
or'
fi'Ir^j/c,
while ticoi' or thcov is often
possible.
Bekker's fel^or
is,as
Nauck
saw,
indefensible.
'
The awkward hiatus is here and elsewhere
got
rid of if
we read iluffi and
the like.
CH. III.
THE SYLLABIC AUGMENT. 85
3) Eidi^nr,e'iOiira, I'ldiaOijr
first found in the Attic
period
"
tliougli 127
there is
a
ceiiain variation between
"i
and
??
in the instances
preserved^
to which
may
be added t'idiKu and
iiditTfiai,
once
had
a / in its
stem, as
is
shown most
conclusively by
the Aeolic
perfect
eveOujku
'
e'iuifUi
(Hesych.).
This form
points
to
feOuw,
a
by-form
of
i-"9/4w,
which without its / was
known also to the Dorians
(eBcjku, i'jBioKa,
Ahr.
340).
In
very early
times
there
was a o-
before the
/,so
that
we
get
a root irfel)whose initial double
consonant moreover
gives
the best
explanation
of t'iwBn
(Princ.
i.
311).
4)
I'iXiaao)-. The
only testimony
of Homer to this is
doubtful,as
the
reading
at M 49 varied
even
in
aJitiquity (cp.
Schol.
A.)
between "
0)9 EKrwp av ofiikov
uitv "iK'i(t"t(6'
eralpovs
Tcicfipov irroTpvva"v bia^aivfjxev
and
e\\ifT(7e6',
which is
now
the
generalreading.
In the Attic
period
are found
t'iXtSa,
ttXi-^th]),
and
tiXiyputu,
is found as
early
as Hesiod,
Th, 791. The
diphthongoccurs also,
it is
true,
in the
imaugmented
forms
in Herodotus
(ii.38),
in the
tragedians,
in Plato and
elsewhere,
and
also in the
undoubtedly
related e'lXXw or t'iXXid. We must here
pi-obably
regard
a
prothetict as the somce of the
diphthong.
oSTo
one can douljt
the connexion of these forms with the Lat.
volv-o,by
which the
digamma
is established
(Princ.
i.
447).
5) tiXkor,
unknown in the Iliad and
Odyssey,
where the
only
form is
eX/cor,
first
occiu'S in the
hymn,
in Cerer.
308,
then in Herod,
(i.
31 and
elsewhere),
and is
common
in Attic
^liters,
from
Sophocles (O.
C.
927)
onward, as too the aorists
tlXicvcTa, t'i\Kvadr]if elXKurraiJi]]',
to which
are
to be added the
perfectsuXkvkci, e'iXKva/.iai.
With these forms
!jXt:}]ae,
which is
given by good
M.SS. at X
580,
is in
strange
contradiction. But
La Eoche is
no
doubt
right
in
readingfX^ijcre,
which he
conjectures
to
have been the
reading
of A-i-istarchus. iS ot much
weight,
it is
true,
attaches to the
lengthening
of the
previous
yap
: A);rw
yap
eXktjTe,as a
trace of the
f, as eXkco' shows
no
similar traces
anywhere
else. But the
witness of the related
languages
to this initial" in Lithuanian
{velka
I
draw)
and Slavonic " is
distinct,
and
avXat,=a-fXat. confirms it
(Princ.
i.
167).
6) eiXov, eiX6i.ir]i',
common in
Homer,
e.g.
F 35
u"xp'kre
j^iiv
tIXe 128
TTupfLac,
A
406, ///-ifTc Kai QijpijQecoc elXof^iey eTjruTrvXoio, A 697
e'IXeto,
and in
ordinary
Gi'eek from that time onw^ards. The traces of
a / in
this stem are not
very
numerous.
See Princ. ii. 180.
7) fl-f^iEt', {'i-TE, Ei-rrav, Ei-f-njr^
E'i-6)]-r
from the rt.
E ('iqpi).
In Homer
these forms have
no
augment
"
Eper,
'iaar kc. "
except
at Q. 720
Traph
c'
e'lTav
amcovc,
and at "^ 868
napealt].
From Herodotus onward
(vii.
122 6
arparuc
uTrtidr)vtto
SiptEio)
the
augmented
fonus are
in
common
use :
ai-f7-^"j' Aristoph.Yesp. 574,
ufpelrray
Thuc. vii. 53.
icp-tl-To Soph,
Phil. 619. We have
alreadyseen a trace of
an
initial consonant here
in the form
t-rj-KE
discussed
on
p.
80. We have the same
thing
in the
perf.
Ei-Ku, Ei-pai.
The difierence between
"/va
and
e'l-pev
is
easilyex- plained
by supposing
that the former
was contracted from
erfi.a
as ijXiov
from
Ei'iXojr, ijif
from
tnif. The
?/
is not due to the
augment, but,
like
that in
'i-Bij-kn,
is
part
of the formation of this anomalous aorist. There
is
nothing,therefore,to contradict the derivation of the verb
given
above
from the rt.
ja.
6) i'lTTui,
Ei~".fi7]}
A 706
lipe'ir
j.iey
ru EKCtTra
cieliropiiy,
T 447
c'lpa
c'
8(1 THE AUGMENT. ch. hi.
tliTfT
fu-017-ic,
E 591
Tpujujt'
e'Ittovto
(f,a\ayyec.
The middle
occurs
in
.
oi'dinaryGreek;
and tlio
origin
of tlie
et
is made
as
clear
as can be
by
t-a-6-fi7ir,
i.e.
(Ti-trnr-o-fu]!',
wliicli
gives
ns a rt. (Tf- = Lat.
sequ
in
saqn-or.
It is
hardlynecessary
to refer to Princ. ii. 57.
0) eii"y(i!^('if.n]r, e'lin/afTn/iijv, eifr/arrOijr.
The Homeric
poems
contain
no
certain instance of the
n,
for
though
at
y
435 the M.tSS. have olrjir
-e
"^pvrruy
eifiyai^tro,
the
extraordinary lengthening
of the
-or
points,
not to
]"ekker's/fY'7n";'"ro,
which is
impossible,
but to
Scfiya'CiTc,
and this is
])Oi-ne out
by
the
readingado2)ted
at w
210
: rot o'l
fika epya^oirn.
But
Ib'siodOpp.
151 has
"(py(U'"'''""-
Iw Herodotus's dialect
tJpyaZTfro
and
tlie like
(Bredow, 301) are unknown,
but the
unaugmented
form is
extremely frerpient. Among
the Attic wiiters
again
the
fi
is
very
common, though
in later times
?j
sometimes takes its
place. (Hagev
de
Gi-aecitate
Hyperidea,
Stud. iii.
105,
Wecklein Curate
epigi-apbicae, 36.)
The
f"
is
clearly
due to the / of the rt.
ff.py(Princ.
i.
221).
10) t'tpTToy
/.I
395
as a
3rd
pi.,
with this
exception
not
earlier than
129
the
tragedians;
the comic
poets
also use
the
aor.
up^vaa.
The
n
is due
to the
(T,
with which the word
originallybegan,
and which the Lat.
serjw
shows intact
(Princ.
i.
329).
11) t'ipvTa.
As we
shall
see later,
the .stems
,Pfpu(. )draw,
and
/fpv
guard,
are to be
carefullydistinguished
from each other. To
fepv{c)
draw
belonge'ipiifTciy
6 220,
f'lpurTE /)
389, f}pvaap.i)i' k
165. The traces of
a j- are pointed
out
by Hoftmann, Quaest.
homer, ii 49
; probably
the
Lat.
verro
(forvers-o)
is related.
[But
cp.
Corssen Beitr.
p.
403.]
The
a])pearance
of
an n
in
unaugmented foi-ms,
e.g.
in
e'lpufurm
Hes.
0pp.
"S18,iipvr'uy"Soph.
Trach.
1034,
is to be
explained
in
i)recisely
the same
way
as
in the
case of k
\tiTfTio
(No.4).
In Attic
prose epvb}
is unknown.
12) I'lfTu,
A 392
TTVKii'oy Xoj^oi'
flrrav
ayoiTEc^
H 472
firre
c'
a// nvroy
//fTo-w
^furn/t'liwr,
cp.
Hesiod.
Theog.174,
and then in Herodotus and the
tragedians,
who ahso
recognise
the middle "(Va-o
(^iyi^aDila-nTo, Eurip.
Hippol. 31).
The
diphthong
is to be
explainedas
due to the
originala
of the root
mc,
I?,
from which too came
the form
iincraTu,
discussed
on
p.
80. The
sti'angething
is that it
appears
in forms that have not the
force of a
past tense,
in Homer
only
at
rj
163 I'lrrDy
ararrrija-ac(by
the
side of
fan
r,
eT/rcu),
then in Herodotus
(iii
126
v-fl(Ta',
i. 66
uaaiieidi).
At Thuc. iii.58 Bekker and Classen follow
good
M.SS. in
reading
E^rcrn/it-
j'wr.
The
ti
must have been due here to a confusion,
aided
appai'ently
by
the related
'/;w,Irra,Kcdhaa, Kudiaai^iEyoc (Cobet,
Variae lect.
p.
88).
13) firrrt'iKfiy,
the Attic form of the
pluperfect
as
contrasted with
InriiKti)-,
which is the
only
form in Homer and
Herodotus,
is found first
at Hes. Scut. 269
E"Vr//"/,
at
Eurip.
Here. fur.
925,
and
constantly
in
prose.
Its
origin
from
(."(Tf-a-i)K-ti-yexplains
the
diphthong (Wecklein,
Curae
epigi'aphicae, 36).
14) Etariwy,EifrricifTd, Ei/Trtn(JT]y by
the side of the
perf.Ei(7-iati(it
not
found before the time of Attic
prose,
but
occurring
there
constantly
(Lys. 19, 27,
Xen.
Cyr.
i.
3,
10),
is
explainedby
the fact that Enria
belongs
to the
same root as
the Lat. Vi'sfa
(Princ.
i.
496).
Traces of the
/ are to be
seen
in
Doric,
but not in Homer
(Ahr. 55).
15) fix'"', f(\o/if/r
need no reference to
specialpassages,
as they are
universal from Homer
(l'
123
etc)
onwards. Tlie forms
t-T^o-r,
ff)(//-Tw,
?"w etc show
cleaily
that the root is
(te^,
and
consequently
that
t/'^or
stands for
t-at^^-o-r
(Princ.
i.
237).
CH. iir.
THE TEMPORAL AUGMENT. 87
A review of all these forms shows
us
this result. In seven verbs the
130
loss of a / is
demonstrable,
in five that of
a,
in one (tifitf etc.)
the
evident loss of
a
spirant,jirobably
of
nj.
In
elXot', as we
saw,
the less of
a si:)ii-ant
is not
clearlyestablished,
in eitoy the
n
is not
really
due to the
auijuiont,
and in no single case can
it be established that the root
originally began
with
a
vowel. If
we reckon these foul-teen cases
(m-
cluJiiiiTt'lX'ii-, along
with the
twenty-one
cases
treated under
a),
in which
the syllabic
auijinent
remains
intact,we
oljtaiu
a
total of thirtv-tive
cases,
in which the
augment
has
something
to tell
us
about an
original
con-
sontintal
initial,
and this is
a circumstance not to be overlooked in con-
sideiing,
as we
shall have
presently
to do,
the
question
of the
persistency
of this element of inflexion.
B)
The Temporal Augment.
Buttmann was
able to see
that the
temporal augment
was oiiginally
identical with the
syllabic,
biit he did not state the fact
correctly
when
he
said,
at
p.
323 of vol. i. of his Ausf. Gr.
:
'
From all that has
gone
b.?foi-e it is clear that the
Augmentum tem]Dorale
is
nothing
else than
the
Augmentum syllabicum
i that has been conti'acted with the initial
vowel of the
verb,
e.g. ay
w
t-ayor I'lyoi' ;
and it thus
appears
that the
augment
of the verbs in Text 3 is the
oi'iginal
form
:
")(w, e-exct', ""x"'''
while in the rest of the cases of
amplification
contained in this
paragraph
this
original
contraction has been
replacedby a
simplelengthening
of the
main vowel.' This
change
of
procedure
would be inconceivable in the
case
of the
large
number of verbs
beginning
with
o
in
Doric,
and of
those
beginning
with
e
and
o
in Ionic. For
e-ayuy,
for
instance,
the
only possible
contraction in Doric would be
7iyoy,
lilve
i^pijc
for
fcpeac,
while what
we actually
find is
dyr,
ap;^oy;uii',
amyyffActr,
aEiovi'
(cf.
the Lesbian
(rviuyaye,
the Arcad.
vTrdp-x^e,
the
Cypr. aiwyor,
Ahrens,
129)
;
and in Ionic i-eauy could
only produce elauf,
e-op-ro ovpro.
The
temporal augment
therefore
pointsundeniably by
its form to
an
oldei*
linguistic period
in which the
augment
had not
yet
turned to
e
but
was
still
a.
As to the
period
at which the rules which hold for
Greek
were
settled there are two
possibilities ;
either this
happened
on
1 3 1
Greek soil at a
time when the
augment
was
still
a,
while the stem-
syllable
had
alreadygot
the vowel which was
the
prevailing
one at a
later time. On this
hypothesis
the
augment
in the case
of
a
verb be- ginning
with
a
would be
explainedby
the
followingsteps
:
lyov ayov
Ion.
-qyov
but not in that of verbs in
"
and
o
;
for
though
in Ionic
u-op-To
might
givelopro,
in strict Doric it would
give
ap-ti,
as i^oiwm gives
the Dor.
/5oai-i (Akrens,197),
while *a-"(Tai'would
give*d"rr(j'
in
Ionic,as a-(BXov
gives
at)\"ti'. But
we
have at least
one
clear
example
to
prove
that
o
was
actuallyaugmented
to
w
in strict
Doric,
i.e. the form
wi^ioitu
(Ahr.
3.50)
attested
by
several
inscriptions.
It thus
appears
that the
aug- mented
syllable
in all the three forms of the
original
a (i.e. a, e,
and
o)
shows the
long
vowel
cori-esponding
to the short vowel of the
root,
and
this rule admits of
only one
explanation,
but that is a complete
one.
It is that the
augment grew
one with the initial vowel of the stem at
a
88 THE AUGMENT.
ch. hi.
time
previous
to tliedifferentiation of
a, e,
and
o.
If the Greeks inherited
from
a pre-Greek
time
*
agdmi
*
Cujam
*
asanti
*
dsant
*
arnutai
*
art
a
we can
imderstand
how, as
the a gi"adually split
np,
the sense of the
connexion between the
present
and the
preterite
forms must have led
them to choose for both tenses the
same vowel, differing only
in
quantity,
and to form the
past
tense thus
:
Dor.
ayo)
iiyov
f\a-)auTi,
i'aai
rjcrav (sotoo the Arcad.
^s
=
^v)
OpVVTal COpTU.
The
}j
shown
by
Ionic in the
place
of
a
is
evidently
of late
origin,
and reminds
us
of the
way
in whicli in the
nouns
the
uniformity
of the
a-
declension is marred
by
the
way
in which the lonians sometimes
put
an
"/
into the
place
of an o : ciKt]
Sikyic
"c.
cLti
and
yyot'
stand on
precisely
the same
footing
as regards
theLr
rj.
The fact that we can
definitely
fix tlie order in time of these
phenomena gives
them a special
value.
It is not so
easy
to find
an explanation
of the
augment
in verbs be-
132
ginning
with
i or v.
Here Greek is
considerably
at variance with the
Indian lanijuasjes
in its method of formation. In Sanskrit the addition
of the
augment
turns i
or ^
into
di,
and
u or u
into du :
iUKhd-ti,
he wishes
imperf.
aiWia-t.
ukshd-ti,he
sprinkles
,,
diiksha-t.
This method of formation is
represented
in Greek
by a singleexamide,
which has hitherto not been considered
relevant,^
the
imperfect
of
a/j-i
yia
or
Jju.
In the
singular,
it is
true,
the
rj might
be
explained
in a
different
way ; r/i might
have come by
the
temporalaugment
from
ei,
so
that
"'/("
would bear to uffi
the same relation
as
the unusual Attic
fjkcu'oi'
to
"(\(i;w.
But this
explanation,
which is
given
e.g.
by
Ahrens on
the
conj.
in
/la p.
25,
and
by Klihner,
Ausf. Gr. i^.
662,
does not hold for the
dual and
plural.
For it is shown
by 'intr,
'iror,'iaffi,
that the
diphthong
belongs
to the
singularonly,
and hence from the
analogousfni-^h(/""A'"'',
we
get
in the
imperf.sing."'f'/-"", t"p"]-c,
but
pliu\i'^d^Er, t^a-or.
A
form
;]acu' differmgonly by
its
j;
from *'e'ifTay would be
just
as
anomalous
as
t9";(Toi,
and hence Ahi-ens
(ut svipra)
is
compelled
to
recognise
'an
linorganicdegeneration
of sound
'
{Ablaut).
The
tiasyllabic ]]i(7av
woiild
not be touched at all
by
this
explanation.
That the
?/
really
has the force
of
an
augment
is
clearly
shown
by
f]'i(Tav or fjfTavby
the side of "a-av
the former of which
occurs K
197,
N.
305,
while the latter is
very
common
;
e.g.
A 494
i-rja"u', r
445. The shorter form bears to the
longerexactly
the relation of Inay to "V"''-
^tlrrnr and the
like,
which Aln-ens's view
would lead
us to
expect,
is unheard
of,
unless
appeal
is made to Hesychius's
"
Adalh. Kulin, Be
covjuriatione
in
-p.i,p.
48, notices the
agreement
between tl;e
Greek and Sanskrit
form,
but o")Scnres tlie
insight
thns
gained
into its nature by
comparing);
561J' and the
like,where the
v
is due to tlie F.
Cp. Sonne,
Ztschr. xiii.
431
;
Pott, Wurzeltvortcrh. i. 40.")
;
Leo
Meyer,
Ztschr. ix. 385.
CH. 111.
THE TEMPORAL AUGMENT. 89
o
gloss
ehi'
'
eTropeviro,
which is
suspicious
because it does not
come
iu its
proper place alphabetically.
Herodotus too knows only
{jiu,ijie,i'unai
,
while he never
augments
tl to //'
(Bredow
de dial. Herodot.
309).
Under
these circumstances
we
shall
assxime
the
same
relation to exist in the
singular,
also between
"/t"
A
47,
II
213,
ije M
371,
and
u
T
383,
and
ventm-e
accordingly
to
regardijuior
j/toc
as 1st
sing,
as the exact coun- terpart
to the Skt.
ajam,
the
imperf.
of the rt.
i,
and
i]t("i- as
3rd
pi.
as
that of the Skt.
djaa (for*djant).
To
j/.Tar
there is
moreover an exact 133
parallel
in the Old-Persian
(itiy-oAsa they overstepped, pati)/-disa=:Tro-i-
f]oai- (Spiegel,
D.
Altpers.Keilschriften,
p.
188,
cp.
168).
But how is the
long
vowel to be accounted for in these forms ? It
has been
thought
that it
might
be taken
as a proof
that the
augment
originally
consisted in a
long a.
It would be
strange,
if this
were
so,
that this should be almost the
only
instance of d. Schleicher
(Comp.^
738)
is of
opinion
that there
was
in the Indian forms
no contraction of
a + i,a-\-
u,
which must have
given e, o,
but
only
an
approximation
of
the two letters,
the result of which would have been di and dit. This
explanation
would not suit the Greek forms
anyhow,
for in Greek the
approximation
of
"-fi
very
often leads to
ei,
as
it did in the above-
mentioned dcor. I should be more willing
to believe that the vowels i
and
u produced a
spii-ant
before
them,
which made itself felt later in the
length
of the
a. ijia
would thus stand
on
the
same
footingas
^(^dvtiikjc,
aidfjwTriiioc,
and other forms of the kind which I have discussed at Stud.
ii. 187. However this
may
be,
the
agreement
between
ijia
and the
Sanskrit forms in the matter of
augmentation
may
be set down
as
established.
In all other
cases
the rule is that the initial vowel is
simply
lengthened.
In
incpiii'ing
into the
origin
of this
apparently
i-emai'kable
rule
we must
notice,
to
begin with,
what it is
easy
to
overlook,
that the
whole amount of
cases
affected
by
the rule is
by
no means a
large
one.
In Homer there
are only
four
or
five instances of
an i
made
long by
the
augment
:
'lu/cfro c'
vcwp
/v-
359
(by
the side of 'lah
mt
and the
like),
'
'X'"'
(a'^V"''"^'X'"'' "'^t"'X^
^
29),ETTiqXtv
X
49
(by
the side oi
lirXaWuiy),
iicavE
(fc Xpvmjy
'iKCire A 431, KapTr(iXli.uiic,
c' 'iKiiieBnac fTvl
Tijac 'A^dtiDr
B
17, by
the side of
'imrw, t/vaiet etc.),
'ii^ero
('Iketo nirda^ A
362,
'tKero
cw/.fo
"" 44
by
the side of 'iKta'dai
etc.).
The stems
to^
and It:
once had
a f,
so that the
augmented
forms cannot
be of
a
very
ancient date. The later
pei"iods
will not add
very
much to tliis
list,as
the number of verbs be- ginning
with
t
is small. We
get e.g.
'iKivtvaa, Eurip.
Med. 338. Several
of this small class of
verbs,
e.g.
the derivatives of
icioc Ihnvr, IciaCnv 134
etc.
hai'dly
occur in
poetry.
Some derivatives of
'upoc,
like
upevu)
and
again
Wan
w, ifiaaaw (in
Houier there is
only 'i^arrer), might possibly
furnish
instances,
but I have not been able to find
any.
Of verbs in
v
there is not a sinffleinstance of an augmented
form in
Homer, and even in later Greek
they
need
a
great
deal of
lookingfor,as
the number of such verbs is small. The
following
are certain
:
Aesch,
Prom. 558 kciI
Xix^c oor 'v/^ievalovr,
Anthol. vi. 265
NdO-rricoQ 'viixnei'
Qiv(t)i\\c a liXtuxcic,
to which ISTauck
(Melanges Greco-Romains,
iv.
5)
adds thi'ee
more
from
vpanio,
one from
vyiaiiw (ovx vyiatre
Com.
anon.,
Meineke, iv.
182),
and 'I'Acu-ft
Kvwy (Aristoph.Yesp. 1402). 'vfip'^E":,
Eur. Tro. 1020 and the like do not
count,
as here the
v
may
be
long
in
the
tragedians
in
unaugmented forms, so
that
'iiypic^or might
stand
90 THE AUGMENT. ch. hi.
on the same footing
as I'lfrawj-itiy.
On the whole I do not think it is
going
too far to
say
that the rule which all
grammais
give
is estaljlished
l"ybai-ely
a
dozen verbs altogether.
This fact
puts
the diflerence between
Greek and Sanskrit in
a completely
different
light.
The Greek
usage
is
evidently
tlie I'esult of a comparatively
late
development,
due to the
analogy
of the verbs
beginning
with
a
hard vowel.
Owing
to the lack of
primitive
stems
beginning
with
t
and
v
the old tradition
was
apparently
quite interrupted,
and
i'jiu,
which took
an
anomalous
position
instead
of
serving as a
pattern
for the
rest,
stands alone
as witness to the old
rule.
Another
anomaly
of the
augment
which has not had much notice
bestowed
on
it is the
change
of the
position
of the
aspii-ate.
Inasmuch
as
the
temporal augment originated
in the
syllabic,
in the
contraction,
that
is,
of the
a
with the initial
vowel, we
should
expect
to find this
form of the
augment always
with the
spiritus
lenis. The
asper
shows
tliat the
linguistic
sense had
no
very
lively
recollection of this contrac- tion.
Hence even Homer has
ypei
(P 463),iiTrreTo
(Y 468), ijpfiofrer (P
210),
wpfiaiye, wpj^i^frt,
though
in verbs in which the
spiritus
asper
had
aiisen from
n,
f
,
or
j,
the conti-action could not have been of
very
long
135
standing.
The
sense of the connexion between the
preterite
and the
other verbal forms
was
probably
too
strong
to allow of such
a
difference
as we can
imagine might
have existed between
"7r-"ra"
and
*i]Tr-tT(i.
Still
moi-e
sui-piising
than the
aspiiatedtemporal augment
is the
aspiratedsyllabic
in forms like
eaXwr, kiarTaTo, kwpwv (cf.
above
j^p.
79
and
81).
The
grammarians
defend tliis
strange
usage by
the
peculiar
supposition
that the
f
is not in
KXimwc,
not
inflexional,
that
is,
or,
in
other
words, not an
augment,
but
e/v TrXioyarr/Aov (Herodian,
i.
p.
542).
They
had cases like et^)a in their minds. We
may
learn two
things
from these forms
: first,
the fact that the
spiritus
asper
was
of
a
movable
nature,
and had
no
prominent position
as a
letter
even
in
early
times
;
and
secondly,
the
power
of
analogy
which
was
here the
means
of ob- scuring
so
ordinary
a
linguistic
instrument as
the
augment.
Thei-e is
moreover a noteworthy exception
to this
sui'prising
rule
in the
case of
a
temporalaugment,
i.e. the Homeric
aXao, iW-o,
with its
spiritus
lenis. The forms
are
attested
beyond
any
doubt at n
754,
A
532,
r
29,
A 419 etc. Herodian
expresslyprescribes
the lenis at
A
532,
and
givessome
marvellous
explanations
of it. Other witnesses to
the fact
are collected
by
La
Roche,
Homer.
Textkritik,
185.
Since,as
Buttmann saw
(ii.lfJ9),
the circumflex
points
to a contraction,
it is
best to set down the lenis
as a
relic of the old
pronunciation,
and
take uXto to have
come from
e-uX-to, or,
more
properlyspeaking,
*a-o\-
To.
If this is the
right
conclusion we
have here
a
completely
isolated
instance,
which
can
only
have ai-isen at a
time when the
o
still remained
intact,though
the
original
ff
of the rt. aX
(Princ.
ii.
167)
had
already
passed
into the
spiritus
asper,
the order of the
changes being
different
to that in the
cases of the above-mentioned
tlaauro, kcKjiOij, EipTroi
,
whose
predecessors, *e-ffirTfjuTa, *t-a(i(("6t], ^'t-ntnirai', seem to have known
a
time when the
n
of the
augment
had been weakened to f
,
but at which the
(T,
which
was afterwards
volatilised,
still remained intact. Some doubts
might
certainly
arise about aXru from the fiictthat
a\pf"'oc
often
appears
witli the
lenis,
which does not admit of the
same explanation.
But
might
this not have arisen from
a mistaken imitation of aXro 1 Even
f^ieraX-
CH. in. ABSENCE OF THE AUGMENT.
91
j.inoc
E
33G, t-a\ijtioc
11
260,
and
elsewhere,might
be accounted for
by
the instances
which, though
not
plentiful,
do
occur,
of
an
Ionic
preference
136
for tenuis instead of
asper,
such as kirirrTLor
4 265,
av-ulutv U 449. It
is conceivable therefoi'e that there once was a ciKueyoc
corresponding
to iWro. The
attempt
to
explain
the lenis in
ijuiyfiorov
in the
sauie
way
would find
an obstacle in
!i/.Mpraior
H GS. The
etymology,
and the
re- lated
u3,,or(tUif,
rather
point
here to the lenis as
the
original
initial
(Princ.
ii.
350).
C)
Absence
of the
Augment.
At the
very beginning
of
our investigation
of the
angment
we en- countered
the
question
whether and how far it is
an integral
and
original
part
of the
preterite.^
The fact that the
augment
is
very
often left out
in the Vedas
(Benfey,
Yollst. Gr.
p.
362
;
Kurzc Gr.
p.
85),
that its
omission is not unknown
even in
epic Sanskrit,
and is the rule for all
periods
of the
language
after the
particles
iua (/i///)
and
sma,
taken in
conjunction
with the other fact that the
augment
is un.stable in the
Homeric
poems,
has led to the
precipitate
conclusion that the old
original
Indo-Germanic
language
stood
on
the
same footing
in this
respect
as the
two oldest texts which have
come
down to iis
from India and Greece.
The
coiu'se of the
development
of our science teaches
us caution,
I
think,
most
emphatically.
How
many
centuries do
we
suppose
passed
from
the time when the
Indo-Germans, as we
imagine,
lived
as one nation in
the table-lands of
Asia, to that when the Indians
composed
the oldest
of their
hymns
which
we
possess,
or to that still later
period
of the
Homeric
poems
1 We do not rush in other instances to the conclusion
that because two
languages
agree
in the absence of some element,
it must
therefore have been absent in the
primitivelanguage.
The
Indians, even
the oldest of
them,
said
s-mas
for
as-mas,
and the Romans said
su-mns
;
but
a glance
at La-
f
lev
is
enough
to show
us
that the loss befel these
two
languagesindependently, as on
the other hand erant teaches
us
that
the loss of the t in the Skt. dsan and the Gk.
iiTciv
is of
no
very
ancient
137
date. Who could
deny
that the
language
of the "Vedas has itself been
subject
to most material alterations?
Aphaeresis
is of
pretty frequent
occurrence
in
prepositions
in Sanskrit "
aqn,
for
example
" and in
aphae- resis
we
may
find
a
satisfactory explanation
of the loss of the
augment.
And the Homeric
language
too has its own sj^ecial
weaknesses which
are sometimes corrected
by
the
language
of a
later
time,
and the
Dorians and Aeolians
especially
preserve many
older forms than
Homer. We
may perhaps even venture to maintain that it is the
peculiarity
of old
periods
of
language
that in
spite
of all the treasures
they
preserve
for
us from
a
preceding period,they always
show certain
signs
of
degeneration
which
disappearagain as
the consciousness of the
rule
grows
more defined. For
instance,
it is
only
in Homer that
we
find
pa
and
ap by
the side of
apa,
and in
Homer, though,
in this
case,
not in
Homer
only,we
find
ripdtr
for
'irtpder, though
it is unmistakable that
it
came from
tr. Again,
without
accepting
the
superficial
doctrine of
'
I
am pleased to find that
Delbriick,
Altind. Verbiuti,
p. SO,
agrees
im-
reservedly
with
my
view, that the
augment was
from the first
a
necessary part
of the
preterite.
92 THE AUGMENT. ch. hi.
earlier
times,
which made the metre
responsible
ofF-liand for all
possible
lands of
license,we must admit that where
paiis
of forms existed in the
spoken language,
the
poets eagerly
availed themselves of the fact.
Every
adilitional mode of
expressiongives
additional
facility
in the
fabrication of the verse.
If
then,'as we
assume,
at the time of the
formation of Homeric
language,
or
perhaps
of its
predecessor,
the lan- guage
of those stifter
Epic songs
which must have
precededHomer, /3(;
was
said now
and then as
well
as i[DTj, j^aWf,as
well as "/3o\A",
how
convenient this must have been found
by
the not over
deft versifier of
those
eai'ly
times ! And how could even the more elaborate
Epic
of
a
later
time afford to abandon
so
productive
a source
of useful alternatives in the
arrangement
of the words 1
e/xxXXf
could not
begin
a line,
how
con- venient
to have
jjaWt
at command
as well,
and the same in other like
cases !
Against
the
assumption
that the
augment
existed from
pi'imi-
tive times till
a
little before the
period
of the Homeric
poems,
as a kind
of movable
prefixedparticle,
sometimes
present
and sometimes
absent,
decided
objections
may
be found in the
history
above
given
of the tem-
138
poi"al augment.
We
saw
the
temporal augment
to be a
syllabic
aug- ment
Avhich in
an
eai-lier
period,
befoie Greek
was a
separatelanguage,
had lost its
originalshape.
But if it lost its
oiiginalshape
it cannot
have had
a
separate
existence of its
own :
the two
things
are incon- sistent.
INIoreover the
preservation,
in
sjnte
of
phonetic difiiculties,
of the
"
after the
disappeaiance
of initial
spiiants,
whether it remained
\inchanged
or was conti'acted,
goes
to show that the
spoken langviage
was
by
no means in the habit of
dismissing
the
augment
off-hand.
It seems to me best on
all
grounds
to
suppose
that
shortly
before
the rise of the Greek
Epic
the
augment
became
occasionallyexposed
to
the
same
tendency
towards
wearing
away {Verwitterung),
which the
a
of
opw
and the
t
of
u'tpOe
could not
always
withstand
;
that there
were,
in
short,pairs
of foi-ms then in
iise,
one
with the
augment
and one
without. This
assumption
too will be found to suit the
special
condi- tions
under which the
augment
fell
away,
in reference to which the
following
facts
are to be noticed
:
1
)
The
syllaliic augment
is never
wanting anywhere
but in
poetry,
with three
exceptions.
These
are
XP'^'S
wliich from Herodotus onward
is
more
used than
ixpi'v', iteratives,
with
regard
to which
we
have
only
Herodotus to deal
with,
and
pluperfects.
In the case
of the last-men- tioned
the loss is
quiteexplicable,
and
was
due no
doubt to the
difficulty
oxpeiienced
in the
attempt
to retain the
augment
always
when
coming
before
a reduplication, a difficulty
which made itself felt in the same-
way
in the
case of the
reduplicatedaorists,which, however,
all but
I'lynyot'
and
uTTor,
were confined to
poetry.
The iteratives would
anyhow
have
no
great
need of
an
augment,
as
they
are
preterites
which have no cor-
I'esponding presents
or modal forms. We
may
notice
specially
however
the
well-attested
j]cr/cf^"rTk" in Alkman fr. 72 B^. For
xp'/''?
"^vhich is
post-Homeric,
Ahrens
conjecturesan origiu
from
x"')'ii''=XP^'^ ''''" (^^^
the verbs in
-/.ii
cf
Nauck,
Bulletin do I'Academie de Petersb.
p.
L'8
;
Kiihner,Ausf. Gr. I^
667.)
However this
may
be,
these
exceptionsare,
when
compared
A\ith the thousands of forms that have an
augment,
so
insignificant
that
they help
rather to establish the
general
rule than to
confute it. The fact that the
livingspoken language,
as
far as we can
see,
as
good as never
neglected
the
augment
in its
completestform,
is
CH. III.
ABSENCE OF THE AUGMENT. 93
a strong
confutation of the view wliicli
represents
the
augment
as an
unessential element in the word.
2)
The omission of the
syllal)ic augment
in Homer was
purelya matter
of choice. After all the laborious
investigations
of Grashof
(Programm
of
Diisseldorf,1852),
M. Schmidt
(Philol.ix.),
La Roche
(Homerische 139
Text-Kritik i. Alterth.
p.
423
ff.),
and
others,
very
little else
can be
said than was
said
by Merkel,
Praefatio ad
Apollon.
Rhod.
p.
107
:
'
de
augmento
verborum molestissima est ac
fortassis inextricabilis
quaestio.'
Herodian has told
us (on
9 161) that
'(V;;//
y^pT]mQ
napa.
rw
7ron;r"/
(similarly
on
B
808). Beyond
this we
shall
liardly
advance. No doubt
conventional considerations of the sti'ucture of the
verse and of
euphony
were
in
many
instances used as a
guide,
but it is
scarcelypossible
to re- duce
these to the
shape
of definite
i-ules,
and the
ingenuity
of scholars
who tried to unearth them would be better
emjJoyed
elsewhere.
3)
Post-Homeric
poetry adopts
the
power
of
dispensing
with the
syl- labic
augment
as an
inheritance from its
predecessor,
and makes the
greater
use
of it in
proportion
as
it is removed from the
language
of
ordinary
life. Hence it is
that, as
is shown
by
the careful
investiga- tions
made
by
Renner
(Stud.
i.
2,
18
ff.)
the omission of the
syllabic
augment
is
extremelyrare
in
iambic,
and fai*
more common in
elegiac
and
lyric
verse. Hence, as
is shown
(Stud.
i.
2, 259) by Gerth,
in the
dialogue
of
tragedy
the
range
of this license is
very
limited
indeed,
while
the
majoiity
of instances of it
occur in the
slightlyEpic style
of the
messengei's' sjieeches,
or
still
more
commonly
in
lyric
passages.
4)
The case
of the
temporalaugment
is
altogether
different.
Owing,
no doubt,
to the
phonetic difficulty
with which its
pronunciationwas
accompanied,
it
was at no time
preserved
with strict
consistency.
In
Herodotus, as is shown
by
the careful
investigations
of
Lhardy (Berol.
1844)
and
Bredow,
the
temporal augment
is
very
frequentlyabsent,
especially
before double consonants :
appujctoy, 'ipcui
,
'ipEav, t\Lt]'^h "^"A-
Xaaaerv,just
as in Homer it
disappearsparticularly
often in similar cir- cumstances.
So too before
diphthongs: tiKui^e,evEuto, ev^ov, it'ipee,
nvuro, diKTeips.
It is evident that the same reasons are at work here
as
made the lonians
say
tfrawv
for
ijafrwi,Kpicrawr,fje^uiv
for
Kptiarrwi',
^e/s'w)',
ciTrociEicfor airodeiEic.
Here too we
have not as
yet
discovered
clearly
defined
rules,especially
as
the M.SS. fail
us sometimes, as was
to
be
expected.
The disinclination to
heavy diphthongs
occasioned even in
Attic Greek forms like
avanoi',
ttKai^ov(by
the side of
/j/.c(4oi), evpot,^
and the disinclination to
long
vowels before double consonants
produced
140
fiffroand
eXXijriTdijfrnr.
In all these cases it was not felt to be in
any
way
a
Homeric
or poetic
usage
to leave out the
augment.
The best
expression
therefore of the
impoi-tant
difference between the
omission of the
syllabicaugment
and that of the
temporal
is this
:
the
fo)'mer is
a
poetical
and archaic
license,
the latter is
a
sacrifice to con- venience
of
articulation,
and
was more or less common to all
periods.
Both omissions fall under the head of
weakening,
and at no
time did the
'
Cp.
hoheck. ad
Phryn. p. 140,
and his
note, directed
against Elmsley's crav- ing
for
uniforraitj'{ad
jifed.
IfO), on Aja.r,v. 120. In a note on tliis
verse Din-
dorf remarlis that the
augment
in
elpov
is unknown to tlie La. M.S. of
Sophocles.
Wecklein
{ChiraeEp\gTaph\cae, 33)
finds
inscrijDtional
e\'idence to
r]vp40vfrom
the
year
01.
95, 3,
but no similar evidence to forms without
augment
till
a
later
date.
Still,
the number of
cases
is
on
the whole
veri/
small.
94 THE AUGMENT.
cii. iii.
Greeks lose the
sense
that the
augmented
form
was
the
complete
and
the correct one.
D)
The Position of the Augment.
We shall not enter here into the individual
peculiarities
in
respect
to
the
position
of the
augment
in
compound
verbs. The statistical state- ment
or even
the
general
review of these does not fall within the
province
of the
genetic
consideration of the Greek Yerb. We
may
however call attention to the feet that nice distinctions
were observed,
and definite rules arose
for its
position.
The
guiding principlewas
clearlythis,
that in the
preterite
the
augment
was bound
immediately
to
precede
the real stem of the verb.
Prepositionsare
ti-ansitory elements,
defining
the direction of the verbal notion either in its
original
or in its
metaphoricalapplication,
and
were not
regarded as
belonging
to the
proper
substance of the vei-b. For this
reason
they
stand before the
141
augment,
and outside the frame of the verbal
form,^
and in like
manner complete
freedom of
position
is allowed them in other instances
in the older
language.
Forms then like
Trpoceenre, irepiiljr],
and the
corresponding
Sanskrit forms like
jn-afj-a-voJcat, 2}arj-a-gdf,
prove
incon-
testably
that the vei-bal form had become fer
more
closely
united
to the
augment
than to the
preposition.
There
are
exceptions
and
irregularities
in both
languages.
But the
mere fact that such definite laws
arose,
shows how far both
languages were from
regarding
the
augment
with
indifference. If the
augment really
had for
centuries,
and
up
to Homei-'s
time,
been felt to be
an
entirely
imessential element in the
verb,
it would
be inconceivable that such laws should have
arisen,
and that
men should
not have taken the short and
simple
course of
leaving
the
augment
out
altogether.
Our Sanskrit
grammars give
us
very sparing
information
as to the
practice
of that
language (Benfey,
Vollst. Gr.
p.
361).
We
can
see
this much
however,
that it
was a
refinement
pecidiar
to Greek to
distinguishprepositions
in this
respect
from other
prefixes,
such
e.g.
as
fv
and
cvc.
The striicture of the
language
shows in this
something
of
a
glimmering
consciousness of
grammatical categories
which
was not
developed
till much later into
a
clear
recognition
of their nature.
The
irregularities
in Greek are
specially
instructive in two
ways.
By
far the
greaterpart
consist in
this,
that
even such verbs
as have been
derived from nouns already compounded
with
prepositions
which have
become an integi'al part
of the
word,
allow the
augment, contrary
to the
fundamental
pi'inciple
to follow the
preposition.
The rule is satisfied in
yrui'Tioiii^irir (Thuc.
iv.
89),
but not in
uK-i-o'ifiijrre,
VTr-oj-nrtvor, Tjic-e-
OvfAi'iTo,
and
many
other like
cases,
on
which the reader
may
be referi-ed
specially
to Kiihner,
Avisf. Gr. i.^ 516 ff. These
exceptions
show that the
linguisticsense of the Greeks came
in the
course of time to follow
external instead of internal
analogies,
and took
refuge
in the
simplest
statement of the
rule,
i.e. to
put
the
augment always after
the
^Ji'eposi-
^
It
might even
be said that the
preposition
is not
compounded
with the
verb-stem,
but with the
particular
verbal form. This view resembles tl at
expressed by Apollonius Dyskolos (Herodian,
Ed.
Leniz,
ii.
700) :
ctt! rS:v airb
irpodfffews
apxoiJ.fv(iiv
ylvfrai avvBiCis KKlffeais, i.e.
composition
with the
inflected,
in
tliis
case,
the
au.irmentcd
form. rovTfart kuto. xP^'''^^yivtrai ?';avvSecris. kuI ij
6.VTiy efiroi.
irpwTov
(cAireToi Kol
ovtw cvvrlOiTai,
oiov airb
tov ypd"pio"ylviTO.i ko-tol-
'ypd"pw,
Kal airb
tov typacpov KaTfypa(pov.
CH. III.
POSITION OF THE AUGMENT.
95
tion.
They
carried this
so
far
as
to pusli
the
augment
into the middle
of the word when the word
only ajiparently began
with
a preposition,
saying
cuikovovi'
for the older
Ectavojovr, ctj/-w/u?;j',
and the like.
The second main
exception
is to
some
extent
an
outcome of the
|)rinciple
itself. In
cases
where the
preposition
had
so
far lost its force
as
such that it ceased to be
recognised as a preposition, where, that
is, 142
the
compound
verb formed
a practically
indivisible
whole,
the
augment
took its usual
position : i)(t"uir,
iut'tdevcoy, i]fx"jiierTa.
In the
case
of such
subtle differences it is
only
natm-al that there should have been devia- tions
from the
rule, of which
again
there is
one
kind which
most
deserves
om*
attention. A considerable number of verbs have
a
twofold
augment, one
at the
beginning
and
one
in the middle:
J71
rt/ioArjae
(Ai'ist.
fr. 101 Dind.,
while
we
read ni'rei3oXrifTe at A 809),
Kcir-e-ciyra,
ijiwx^ovy.
As
a
rule the second of these
augments
is the older
one,
and
the fii'st
was
added when the
preposition
had almost ceased to be felt
as
such. Here
again
the almost anxious solicitude not to overlook the
augment, even
in forms of this
kind, shows how little it
was
felt to be
dispensable as a
mark of
past
time.
96 TRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch. iv.
CHAPTER IV.
PRESENT STEMS WHICH HAVE NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
Now that we
have considered the two
expedients
most
widely
used in
the structure of the
verb,
the
personal
terminations which
appear
at the
end of all verbal
forms,
and the
augment
which is attached to the
beginning
of
a
portion
of them, and in
so
doing
have become
accpiainted
with tlie frame which is
common to forms of the most various
kinds, Ave
next tiu-n to the manifold
systems
which
gi'oup
themselves round the
various
tense-stems, beginning
of course with the
simplest.
Now the
sim])lest
verbal forms
are
those of the so-called
conjugation
in
-jut.
Foims
like
(pa-fjiir, i-Qt-f^ur
cannot be said to have
anything beyond
the barest
necessities in the
way
of formal elements. In this
respect they
stand
apart
Ijoth from such forms
as ?p"-o-/u"i, f-Xiir-d-^itr,
and from such too as
7ri^nr\a-i.iti'
and
ctiK-rv-^uv.
For the
purjxjses
of
a
general
review of the
Gi-eek verbal
sti'ucture,however,
it is better to
keep
the old twofold
division which treats
as a
single
class all verbs which know
nothing
143
of the vowel " whether
an o-sound
or an
e-sound " which
we
call
thematic.
The
present-stems
which have
no thematic vowel fall into two main
divisions.
I.
Monosyllabic.
II.
Dissyllabic.
We shall
begin
with the first
division,as
it is the
simplest.
I. MONOSYLLABIC PRESENT-STEMS.
A)
Vowel-stems.
In two of the verb-stems of this
class,0ri
and
i,
we
notice
an
alterna- tion
between forms with
a
short
stem-vowel,
like
cpn-^ir,'i-n,(pa-Hi,
'i-TM,
(pu-f!Ei()-c, 'i-f.uyai^
"-(j)a-fiT]y,
'f.-(p"i-T(i,
and others with
a long
one,
like
the Dor.
(/"a-/u' (Aristoph.
Ach.
736)=Alt. (/)?/-/,(/, (jia-ri (ib.771)=:Att.
qDj-rrl, d-f.ii,
Dor. tl-ri
(Hesych.
tteiri-
et.t\tvatTai)^Att. u-at.
Of the
related
languages
Sanskrit shows
a
most decided
agreement
in
tliis,
but
only
in routs in i and
ti.
e-mi
(from ai-mi)
i-mds
e-shi i-thds i-ihd
e-ti i-tds
j-dnti,
Ivoets in
o,
on
the Other
hand,
whose vowel counts as
radicallylong
in
Sanskrit,
keep
this
long
vowel
throughout,
so
that
though
hhn-mi and
"/K"(-//t
coincide hhd-tiids and
(j-u-i^iic
do not. Some traces of the same
phenomenon
api)eiir
in
a
like
place
in Zend
:
aei-ti=DoT
d-n,
2nd
sing,
imperat.
i-di='i-f)i
(Skti-/^/);
while in Lithuanian the
diphthong
goes
CH. IV.
MONOSYLLABIC STEMS. 97
through
all the
persons
: ei-7ni, ei-sl, ei-ti,
ei-nie
(Schleicher, Comp.^ 783),
The whole
process gains specialimportance
from the fixct that it is
I'epeated
in the
dissyllabic
stems
among
the verbs in
-fii,
and that to a
far
gi'eater
extent and with far
greaterregularity,
and that some traces
of it are to be
seen
in the
perfect-stem
as
well. Various kinds of
explanation
have at times l)eeh
attempted
of this. To
an
earlier
period
in which it had become habitual to
regard
vowel -intensification
as a
dynamic
pi'ocess,
arising
from the efibrt to attach
greateremphasis
to 14-1
certain
peculiarlysignificant syllables,
succeeded
a
complete
revolution
of ideas
on
this
head, lepresented
most
markedly by
Grein
(Ablaut,
Reduplication
und secundare
Wurzeln, Cassel,1862),
and his views
are
more or
less shared
by Benfey
and
Holtzmann,
and also
by
Kuhn
(Ztschr.
xii.
143).
The
teaching
of this school is that all intensification
of sound is of
purely external,
and hence
inechanical,oiigin,
and is
effected
solelyby
the accent. This view relies for
support
on
what is
certainly
a
pretty
formidable series of facts drawn fi'om the vei'bal in- flexion
in
Sanskiit,
which
prove
that there existed in this
language
a
fai'-reaching though certainly
not an
absolutely
unconditional connexion
between intensification and accentuation. To establish this
theory
it is
necessary
to
suppose
that Sanskrit has in all those cases
preservednothing
but the
originalaccent, that,on
the other
hand,
all the other
languages,
and in
particularGreek,
which elsewhere shows much
agreement
with
Sanskrit in matters of
accent,
shifted the accentuation
completely,
and
not
only so,
but that this
shiftijig
had
no
power
to efiect
any
change
in
the
length
of the difierent
syllables,
which
we must
assume
to have been
by
that time
definitely
settled.
Besides,
if we are to be convinced
by
this
docti-ine,
the
process
of
noun
and
case formation must be
thoroughly
examined with reference to this
j^oint,
and
a
like
agi-eement
must be
shown to exist
throughout
these
regions,
or in
a
great portion
of
them,
between the forms assumed
by
vowels and the
position
of the accent.
Even
granting though
that this could be
done,'
this would-be
explana- tion
would not be a
real
explanation
after all. For no answer would be
found to the
questionwhy
the accent shifted in such
a
capricious
way.
Why
not hold the
opposite
to have been the
case,
and find in the inten- sification
itself the
reason why
the accent
clings
to the
stem-syllable,
and
suppose
that where
strengthwas not thus added to it the final
syllable
14.5
had
power
to a^ttract the accent to
itself,
somewhat as
Xtnd)}'
as
compared
with XeiTzwv
may
have owed its accent on the last to this circumstance?
In this
way
one assertion would be met
by
another.
Bopp, again,
did not
altogetheraccept
the
theory
of the mechanical
production
of the
changes
here under consideration. He attributed the
difference between the foi'm with the
stronger
and that with the weaker
stem to the
'
weight
of the terminations.' The
tendency
to
strengthen
the
stem
only
makes itself felt before the
lighter
terminations of the
singular,
while it is coimteracted
by
the heavier terminations of the
'
Since I wrote
this,
the
inquiry
into the effect of the Indo-Geimanic accent
on the form of the words of the several
languages
has been conducted with
decided result and from
quite new points
of view
by
Karl Verner
(Zt.tchr. xxiii.
97
ff.),
and succeeded
by
still further
investigations by
Osthoff
{Beitrdge zur
Gesch. der dentschen
Sjjraclie,iii.)
and
Brugman {Stvdien, ix.). These labours,
however, which are
still fast
proceeding, deal more directly
with other
provinces
than with that which
occupies us at
present.
H
98 PKESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL. ch. it.
dual and
plnral,which, as we
have seen above,
had
never less than two
syllables,
and also
by
those of the middle
; or,
to use
Bopp's own
words,
it is
'
levoked before the
heavy
terminations.' Whether
we are to
suppose
that the fuller form of the stem did
actually
exist at one time in
the dual and
plural
as well, and that it
was afterwards
exchanged
for
the
lighter,
we are not told. Such a revocation
as this would in fact be
extremely i-are,
and could
hai-dly
be
suppoi-tedby analogies.
Holtz-
mann's accentuation
hypothesis,
which is
closely
Ijound
up
with the
still bolder
theory
that the whole
phenomenon
of the Guna
owes
its
existence to the influence of an a
either
present
or
supposed
to have
once
been
present,
is controverted
by Bopp, Vergl.
Gr. ii.^
480,
at which
place
he
expresses
his belief that in the
weight
of certain
terminations
is to be found at once
the
cause of the
shifting
of the accent and that
of the
'
revocation
'
of the intensification. This view has at least this
much in its
favom-,
that it contains
a
uniform
principle.
But
even so
we are
left with
a mass of
difiiculties,
e.g.
in the
imperative,
where
we
should have to
suppose
that the Skt. did had the foi-ce of
a heavy
tei--
mination. For this reason Schleicher has been
very guarded
in his
expressions
on
this
pomt.
Without
going
into the
reasons
of the
pheno- menon
he
merely
notices
(Comp.^ 750)
the fact that
'
the intensification
only
holds before the
personal
terminations of the indicative
sing,
act.'
I would
only
suggest
that instead of
'
holds
'
"
by
which word it is
implied
that in other forms the intensification has lost its hold
" we
should
say
'
takes
place.'
For
no one
will be able to show that in the
place
of i-mas
men ever said
ai-ynas,or
in that of
"i-pectl-p.ec.
For the
146 same reason we
shall have
no right
to
place
this
sporadic
intensification
of the root- vowel without
qualification on
the
same
footing
with that
pei'manent
2
intensification which
provides
the
distinguishing
mark of the
second class of thematic verbs
{Xetww,"j)Evyw).
We should
perhaps
do better
to seek for
a parallel
in the occurrence of fuller stems
by
the side of shorter
ones,
which is to be noticed here and there iii the declension of
nouns,
where we
find
e.g.
stems like ttoXi and
nnXei, aarv
and
arrrEv changing
places
with each other
just
in the
same
way, though no definite
reason
has
as
yet
been found
why
there should be two forms. It is undeniable
that the
linguistic
instinct took
pleasure,
at some time
early
in its
history,
in
adding
gi'eaterversatility
to inflexion
by sup]:)lementing
the efiect of
the variovis terminations
by giving
the stem
itselfthe
power
of
appearing
in
slightly
different
shapes.
We
may
be
sm-e though
that the
weight
of
the terminations had
something
to do with this
change
of
quantity.
The
effort to dwell
on the stem in
pronunciation
was
checked
by
the
greater
weight
and number of
syllables
in the
terminations,
and so far,
it seems
to
me, Bopp's piinciple
is
cori'ect,though
it cannot be said to
explain
everything.
In
any
case I shall not be
wrong,
I
believe,
in
saying
that this
sporadic
intensification is not an expedient employed specially
to form
*
Fr.
Miiller, Die
Vocahteuiervng
der
incioqermanuchen SjJrachen, Vienna,
1871
{SitzMigxhcr.d. k. Alutd.
jjMI.
Jiistoi: CI. vol.
Ixvi.),
has within the shortest
possible
compass
enunciated
propositions
of
a
very
general
nature about these
phenomena. With
ov" of these, i.e. that the Indo-Germanic period
knew but
one
stage
of
intensification, I
entirelyagree.
But I fail to see
siifHcient
grounds
for
the
a.ssumption
tliat in the
case
both of
present-stems
in nu and of
noun-stems
in i and
u, we ought
to start from the fuller forms
na-va, aja,
and
ava.
CH. IV.
MONOSYLLABIC STEMS. 99
the
present-stem.
That it is not so
is
cleaily
evident from the fact that
i-frj-y, (--(pri-c, e-(f)r)
bear
exactly
the same
relation to the rt,
0a
that
"-/37j-i',
e-l3r]-c, t-fir]
do to the rt. /3a,
and that
as
the
long
vowel does not hold
its
place
in the
imperfectso
firmlyas
in the
aorist,
it has
evidently
nothing
to do with the
expression
of a continiions action.
8trictly, then,
i-(pr]-v
is no
imperfect,
but a preterite,
and lacks the marks which distin- guish
the
imperfect
from the indie, aorist. H. L. Ahrens
(Formenl.
2nd edit.
p.
92)
says,
'In truth this
supposed present ought
more 147
properly
to be called
a
2nd aorist with
a
primarium,
and this is made
clear
by
the
purely
aoristic foice of the
preterite.'
'Primarium' is the
term
used
by
Ahrens for the indicatives of the
present, perfect,
and
future
;
as a
rule aorists have
none,
but here is
a case
in which such
a
tense occurs.
It is
just
the
same, however,
with
el^u,
Avhose
participle
(wr actually
follows the
analogy
of the aorist in its accent. Here in the
indicative the
momentary
action in
pi'esent
time shifts its
ground
to the
future, a
process
to which
we
shall hud
analogies
below in the thematic
conjugation.
The forms from consonantal
stems, moreover,
which we
shall take
next,
are
formations of
a
similar kind.
The
presentsbelonging
to this class are as follows
:
1) (firj-j-ii,
conjugatedthrough present
and
pretei-ite
from Homer
onwards. For
i-ipa-v (N 89),(pa-v
(Z 108)
Homer has also the
longer
form
i-cpa-erai' {()700),
(bd-crav
(B 278),formed, as we saw on
pp.
12 and
48, by composition
with
-aai
="f7ar,
^jaat
.
Besides
these,
Homer has
the middle forms
cpa-ade(i;200),
'
(plt-^xivo-g (E 290),^acrdai(I
100),
icpdf^np' (M 165),
and often
'i-(pa-To, (pd-ro,
(pci-vTo.
" The 2nd
sing,
frjc
is
peculiar
:
the
t subscript
has the
authority
of all the old
gi-ammarians
with the
exception
of
Apollonius Dyscolus,
who
preferred
to omit it.
The authorities
may
be fo\ind collected in La Roche's Hom. Text-
kritik,
374.
(prj-c
is most
likely
of
a
like formation with the Ionic
2nd
sing,eic,
that
is,
the
i
of the
original
termination
-ai,
makes itself
heard in the
stem-syllable preceding,exactly
as in Xveic for *\vs'm or in
the Aeol.
yfXoie.
"
If,as Apollonius assiimed,
the 3rd
sing.
pres.
in
an
obscm*e
fragment
of Anacreon
(Be.^41) really
was
^/J,
the termination
-m
must have fallen
away
after the Aeolic fashion
(Ahrens,
Aeol.
138).
2) "l-/(t.
The
only
forms which have
no
expansion
of stem
beyond
that
alreadydiscussed,
which is confined to the
singular,
are
f(-/^i*,
2nd
sing.
el
(Soph.
Trach.
83)
or
slaQa
(K 450), iJ-ai,
't-f.iev, 'i-n,'i-aai,^
and in
the
preterite 'i-rrjv (A 347),
^/-/J"'',y-re
(bothAttic),//-ktoj'(K 197),
iir-143
ytrav
{r 445),
'i-aay
(F 8).
The
expansion by means
of added vowels
will be discussed below.
3)
Of
precisely
similar formation
again
is
a
third
present
which
only
occm's
in the
middle,
the real nature of which has not as
yet
been
generallyrecognised: kni-rrTa-jiai.
The old
grammarians were
greatly
perplexedby
this word. In Choeroboscus's
discussions, given by
Lentz
in his Herodian
(ii,839),we
find three different
explanations
of it.
Apollonius
identified it with
t^tffrufiai,assuming
an Ionic
psilosis.
Such
an
explanation
as
this could not find favotu* with
anyone except
^
A remarkable Latin form of
apparently
like
stamp,
i.e.
*
i?it
iropdoifrai,' has
been
brought
to
light by
Gust. Loewe in his Prodromus
corjjorisf/lossariorum.
Latinorunif'p.
421. from the
'
r/lossae
PMlo.veni' : ?s, "?"?/.",
T#?s reveal themselves
by their
long
vowel as contracted from *e-i-s etc. and are therefore thematic.
B 2
100 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch. iv.
the old
grammariiins,
who saw no
difference between the
psilosis
in
('(-""/,\(wrj;c (Princ.
i.
497),
which is accounted for
by
its
etymology,
and
thiit at the
l)eginning
o{
'l-ffra-fmi (for(n-ara-^ai).
A second derivation
from
*"7r-i(r"-/ua
the middle of
'irrrj-fxi
I
know,
'
TrXforoff^iai tov t,'
may
perhajjs
find
acceptance
again
with the modern advocates of
pleonasm,
but not with us.
The view of
Philoxenus,
who starts from the verbal
adjective
tVroc (rt.fto),
in order to
get
first to *(Vraw and thus to
*"inTi]i-u *"i(rT(tpai,
cannot be reconciled with the shortness of the
a,
which
points
decidedly
to a primitive
formation. Buttmann
(Lexil.
i. 278
note) thought
the case
hopeless,
and
pronounced tTr/irrajuat
to be an
original
woi-d. The correct solution is
given by
Pott
(Wurzelworterb.
i.
.341):
'
With
respect
to the
form,
he
(Buttmann)
has failed to notice
that,though "7r/'crra/^ai
camiot be identified with the
reduplicated
if-
iara-fjiui,
it
may very
well be related to it
as
containing
an un-
reduplicated
form of the same
root,
like the Lat.
sto,
which would
be *aTupaiJ
The Lat. sto is not
completelyanalogous,
for it has
become thematic,
and would be
more
exactlyrepresentedby
a
Gk.
^(TTau) mid.
*aTuofiai.
In the
participial
rrra-fn'o-c
tub
(Germ. Stdnder)
however we
have in Greek itself
an analogy
for such
a formation,
as again
in the O.H.G. stdn and the Ch.-Sl. sta-ti. As to the
meaning acquired,we are
justly
reminded of the German ver-stehn
(O.H.G. fir-stdn,
M.H.G.
ver-stdn)
and the
English
under-staiul. The
three vei'bs seem
to have had in
common
the
meaning
'
step up
to, ap])ly
oneself to
something,'
the
English word,
like the German
'
sich
untersteheii,^
in the
sense
of venti;re
on, being suggestive
of
149 i/7ro(T7"/j'cu or siibire,
while eTiaTaaOai is not to be
separated
from
f.-n-iaruTi]c.
It thus contains the notion of
superiority.
There is
no
very
close connexion between the German vorsfellen
(represent),
sich
vorstellen
(conceive),
or the active
t(j"i(rTaraL
ror lovv
and eTrlirTaaOai.
From Homer onwards
(iwiaTCiidai r 207, kiriaTa^zQa
N
223, etrifrrn-o
E
60)
it is
always
used in the
metaphorical sense,
and hence the
consciousness of its connexion with the rt. rrru was so
completely
obscured that it
altogether
ceased to be
regarded
as a
compound,
and
had its
augment
from Herodotus's time onward at the
beginning:
)/7r/(Traro
etc.
4)
While the three vei-bs
already
mentioned leave the stem-vowel in
many
instances
short,
the stem kei never occiu's
in
any
but the intensified
form. Ktl-rai
correspondsexactly
to the
synonymous
Skt.
"^e-te
and Zd.
";ae-te(Bopp Ygl.
G. ii.2
339;
Pott Wm-zelwtb. i.
.543,
Princ. i.
178).
It
is doubtful whether the rt. ki ever
appears
without intensification. Two
forms which
apparentlybelong
to
it,
the Cret. kiciTai
(Bergmann,
Inscr.
Cret.
p.
11,
line
22)
and
Hesychius's
KtaaBai
must,
I
think, on
closer
inspection
be taken otheiwise. In various Doric dialects
t replaces
an
f
of the other dialects before vowels
(dioc,apiwt)(Hey
de dial. Cret.
p.
12
ft"). Consequently
kic'itcu
corresponds
to the Homeric
Kfarai,
to which
belongs
the
pluperf.KeuTo.
The
t
is
here,
like the
e,
a weakening
under- gone
by
the
diphthong ei
before vowels
(cp.Ktiarai,Kiiaro),
like that in
poVo)=/3o"Vo)'
(Ahr.
Dor.
121).
" The New-Ionic Kteadai
(Ke'trot, e/ctfro)
.stands for
Kiitndai,
and has thus become
thematic,as is the
case
also
with Attic
conjunctives
like
Kti^Tui.
5) XP^U
"sed from Homer onwards
(A 216)
as a
3rd
sing,
with no
personaltermination,
finds its
only analogy
in the above-mentioned
(pi),
CH. IV, MONOSYLLABIC STEMS. 101
but this
analogy
does not extend to the accent. In Attic writers there
are also the
conj.xpf],Opt.
xP^''h
Inf.
XPV'''"'
i^^XP'i''
^V-
Nauck, Eurip.
Stud. i.
7),preterite
fxp'7''
with
irregular
accentuation and
a y
ephelk.,
or
xp"7i'
without
augment,
wliiJe the
part.,xpe'wr,
also with
an anomalous
accent and
indeclinable,
shows
a thematic vowel. These
numerous
anomalies induced Ahrens in his
essay
on
the
Conj.
in
ju", p.
28
(cp.
his
Formenl.
" 195)
to
pronounce xR"l
to be
a
substantive of the same mean- ing
as
the Homeric
xP^'w, xP^f^j
''ind
xp^
to be for
xp')
"], XP^'V
for
XP'/
^'"/
etc.
This, however, by
no means obviates all difficulties. It is
a 150
difficult
question
"
cp.
too W. Dindorf in
Steph.
Thes. viii. 1645 " and
is still in want of a
thorough
examination.
B)
Stems
ending in a Consonant,
6)
Rt.
eg.
We have here to deal of
coui-se
only
with those forms
which contain
absolutelynothing
but the root with the
terminations,
and
pos.sibly
the
augment.
The forms of the rt. ig have been discussed
at
lengthby
Leo
Meyer (Ztschr.
ix. 373
ff.,
423
ff.),
and the 3rd
pi.
pros.
ind. in
particularby
G. Stier
(Ztschr.
vii.
3).
Among
the forms of the
pres.
ind.
we
may
here notice
especially
the
following,
as
giving
rise to controversies in
one
way
or another.
1st
Sing.
It was so
easy,
even without the
help
of the Skt. dstni
and the Lith.
esmi,
to arrive at the
primary
Greek form
*irr-i.u
from
a
consideration of the Greek word
alone,
that
even the old
grammarians
got
as
far
as
this. Choeroboscus
says (Lentz,
Herod, ii.
p.
833, 8)
Su)
arai
Se
to
fajier
tnro ruv i(7fj.i
eli
at.
From this
primary
form wearrive
at the Lesb.
t'/it^u (Sappho,2, 15).
What the strict Doric form
was we
do not know. It
may
be doubted whether the Ionic and moderate-
Doric
"(^"
(Ahr. 318) came
straight
from the
primary
or from the Aeolic
form; most
likely
from the latter. In that
case
eljul
bears the
same
relation to
ef.iidi
that
h'si/tia
does to the Aeol.
'irefxida,
from which it must
have
sprung,
because in all cases of
compensatory lengthening
there must
have been
a consonant lost
immediately
after the
lengthened
vowel.
ia-rri,
ei,
e'lg
have been discussed
on
p.
33.
1st
plur.
Here the Attic
i(7-/div sm^passes
all other forms in
antiquity,owing
its
preservationclearly
to the
special
and often shown
lildng
of the Attics for
ct^"
in the middle of
a word. What
surprises
us is that the 1st
sing,
did not
keep
the
afi
too.
Unfortunately,
we do
not know what the Aeolic form
was,
and there
are some doubts
even
about the
authenticity
of the Doric
ia/xec(Ahr, 320).
The Dor.
e(/^ec
(Find,eifiir)
is of
frequent
occurrence,
and
perhaps
in stricter Doric it
was
?;jLi"e.
Homer knows
nothing
but
ei/uer,
and it is the
same with
Hei-odotus. Herodian
(-rrepl
fior.
\el. ii, 930
Lentz)
has
a
form
^lii'
shortened from
kajiir,
or
dii-ectly perhaps
from
an
imaginableAeolising
*i^(/x")'.
The
passage by
which he
supports
it is elsewhere
assigned
to 151
Callimachus. For all
this,good manuscriptauthority
and
an
entirely
satisfactory sense are not able to secure
acceptance
for
ifxiv
at
Soph.
El.
21.
Cp,
Stud. viii. 322.
Phonetically
the loss of the
er
is
no more
inexplicable
than in the Homeric
irvnuTo-c.
for
Trva-jdciTo-c;
(Princ.
ii.
385),
in
"}juai by
the side of
Jjarui,and
?]/i"i' by
the side of
7](tte.
3rd
plur. Here, as
has been
alreadypointed
out on
p.
48,
there
are
two
primary
form.a which share the various dialects between them
;
102 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch. iv.
*t"r-avTt,
whence comes only
the Homeric
tunn,
and
^eer-vTi,
the
source
of
the Doric
(Ahr. 321),
but also Boeotian
(Ahr.
Aeol.
211) trrl,
from
which
again
arose the New-Ionic and Attic elai. A Gk. form cor-
resiwiuliiig exactly
to the Skt.
s-a7iti,
Lat.
s-unt,
would
give*uvti,*a(n,
or
*u.m.
Among
the forms of the
imperative
we
may
notice
trrdi,
attested
by
Herodian ii. 355 from Hecataeus. This is the
primary
form of the
usual (iT('i(. We find
taao
the middle to this in
Sappho,
i. 28. In Homer
iir^r'occurs
but twice,
and in the same form of words
{" 302,
y 200).
Ahrens
(Formcnl.'^ 101)
without
any
reason sets down the form as an
imperat.
fut. It is
very strange
that this middle form should be so
isolated when
tnTw,
tV-or etc. are so common.
The
participial
stem
t-vr
offers
a
strict
parallel
to the 3rd
pi.
l-v-i.
Both forms a,i-e
Doric
:
Alcman fr. 64 Be.^
napeiTwy,
tab. Heracl. i. 104
eiT-arrai,
117,
178 ii'rec.
Of tlie
preterite
forms the
followingbelong
here
:
1st
sing.7]-}',
where
the
(T was expelledby
the
same necessityas
in the forms
just
discussed
;
2nd
sing.
TjaOa,
where the
a
of the root was
forced to
identify
itself with
that of the
termination;
3vd
sing.")f=the
Vedic
as, long
since vouched
for as Doi"ic,
and
especially
Sicilian
(Ahr.326),
and
now
shown
by
the
inscription
of
Tegea
to be Arcadian
as
well
(Gelbke,
Stud. ii.
40).
^c
is
of
course
for
"/T-r,
as
tlie
entirely
identical Vedic cis is for ds-t. On the
other
hand, j^ras 3rd
sing,
cannot be
placed
in this list because of its
r.
"
In the dual and
plural
there is
a
distinction between the forms which
preserve
and those which have
suppressed
the
o- :
)](7-tov
ijfT-rijyi](T-Te
il'j-av
and
7j-roi'
i]-Tr]y
7]-/.t"i' Tj-teIj-r.
The dual forms with
tr are
accounted
good Attic; i^rjrip'
is Homeric
(E 10),
and
adopted
from
one
M.S.
by
Meineke at Theocr.
8,
3. In the 3rd
pi.
the form with the
a
"
in which the
a
is of course to be
regardedas
the same o as
that in 'i-um
" is the
only one
in common use
along
with the
unaugmented
'irrar.
152 The fact that the a was no more
expelled
here than in the
sigmatic
aorist is no
doubt to be
explainedby supposing
that
aav
had established
itself within
a
wide
area as
the termination of the 3rd
plur.
There is
])ut small
authority
for the form 'is
aav,
v/hich is found in the M.SS.
H. and J. at C 224 instead of the ^crarof the
remaining M.SS.,
and has
l)een received into the text in two
passages
of Pindar
(Nem. 9,
17
;
01.
9, 53),
where the M.SS. i-ead 'ifrar
or iimw.
These
points
and the
frag- ment
assigned by Bergk
to Alcaeus
(fr.
91
Be.^),
'
'Apm^ec taaav
ljn\avi](pnyoi,' are
discussed
by Nauck, Melanges,
iv. 81
(cp.
Stud. viii.
326).
Since we
agi-ee
with
Bopp
in
regarding
this
o-oj' as a
shortened
laur,
and thus
regard
it
as an auxiliary
verb added to the
verb-stem,
iff-o-fu' would
on
this
showing
be a compound
made
by
the rt.
"c
with
itself. Such
processes
are not
impossible,
and cannot be denied to have
taken
place
in the fut.
'ia-frof^iuL
and the Lat.
es-sem,
but here the fact is
not an
established
one.
Not
a trace is to be found of
*"V-/L'f''"
wliich would be the form
analogous
to
"V-/je)',
and the Dor.
"]-/.uc
find the usual
j]-/x"i'
are
all for
which evidence exists. For the 2nd
plur.
however
?i(T-r",
which is set
down
ns
good
Attic in the Lexicon Vindobonense
(ed.Nauck,
p.
98),
and
quoted
from Plato
(Conviv.
p.
176),
has smwived in two
passages
in
Aristophanes(Pax, 821,
Eccles.
1086),
and Ahrens
accepts
it in Theocr.
i.
66, on the
testiimony
of
some
M.SS. The form in
general
use
from
CH. IV.
MONOSYLLAEIU STEMS.
103
Homer onwards
(IT557)
is 7]te.
Leo
Mej^er(Ztschr.
iv.
425)
maintains
that the forms wliere there is no a
before the
r are
contracted for
})t-Tov
i]t-Ts.
It
seems more.
natural to refer the lots of the
a to the
analogy
of
the forms in which the
n
had been driven oat
by phonetic
influences,
like
l\-r7)-i-ier
and the middle form
i'lj-iv,
which occurred
once or
twice
in the Attic
period,
and became later
very
frequent.
The 3rd
plm-.
7]y,
vouched for
by
Hesiod
Theog. 321, 825, Aristoph.
Lysistr.
1260 7iv
yhp Twicpeg
ovk iXnffawc rdc ^a^(/Li(ic,
and several
passages
of
Epicharmus (Ahrens
Dor.
326)
bears to 7](t-ui' exactly
the
same
relation as
"'(a)-i'r/
does to *efT-uvri.
7)
Et. 7/c=Skt.
ds
(Princ.
i.
472).
It seems incomprehensible
that
Kuhner
(Ausf.
Gr. i.
671)
should hold
by
the erroneous
opinion
that
7lj.iai
has
anything
to do with the rt.
ec,
while he at the same
time
compares
the Skt. ds which is a long
way
from sad the Skt.
equivalent
of the rt.
If. It would be
quite impossible
to
explain
the 3rd
plur.eciTci,
'iaro
from the rt. kh,as
I does not fall out between vowels. The final
c
of the
rt.
undergoes exactly
the same
ti-eatment as in the dual and
plural
of 153
7]v:
The 1st
sing.7ia-f.iui
is
only
attested
as a
Dorism
by
Anecd. Paris,
iv.
22,
8
(Ahrens
574),
elsewhere it is 7ipai,
iji.ir]r
like
7]fuej'.
For the
1st
plur.
and the
participle
there are no
forms with
o-,
b\it
only i'j-nidu,
ij-fiet'oc: ya-rai, tja-ro
are the usvial forms in all
dialects,
also
Kudi](TTo
(New-Ionic
Ka-rjfTTo),
while in the
present
the
compound
never has the
o- : Kdd}]Tai.
There is also a preterite
KaOF]To.
These foi-ms throw
light
again
on
those of
?]i'.
The 3rd
plur.
has
only
once
in Homer the ter- mination
beginning
with
v : t/it'(F 153),
elsewhere it has
always arat.
aro.
The formation
corresponding
to
e-ufn
would be
*"/(T-arat, *)j(T-aTo,
and with the
regular
loss of the
o- ij-arai,ij-aro.
In the
place
of these
our texts of Homer have
e'iardi, uaro.
These
foi-ms,
favoured
by
I.
Bekker
(Homer.
Bl. i.
64) were regardedby
the ancients as lengthened
from the likewise Homeric
'i-nrai,
'i-aro. Thus Herochan ii.
268, 497,
'7r/\"orc(^/./w
Tov u
We shall
hardly
be satisfiedwith
this,
and shall be
more
inclined to hold that the old HE AT A
I,
HEATO
ought,
where the
metre
requires
a
long
first
syllable,
to be written
//arat, j/aro ;
where a
short
one,
'karui,
'iaro. 'iarcu is related to
7/arat
as
via is to
rrja,ftaiyiXia
to
ftaai\ria.Hence,
like these
noun-forms,
it is New-Ionic
(/.artarat,
Karearo).
8)
Rt.
^
say (Princ.
i.
496).
The forms
preservedare,
1st
sing.
"'/-^((' (Aristoph.
Pvan.
37,
Nub.
1145),
3rd
sing.
Dor.
r)-r/
Alcman fi-.139
B.3,
Aeol. Ion.
i)-ffi (Sappho
fr.
97, Hermippus
Com. ii.
382,
6
Meineke),
1st
sing.
Pret. 7j'V
in the Attic ""
g'
tyw,
3rd
sing,
t]
in Homer and in
the Attic
phrase
?]c'
or,
"]
c'
ij.
The stem
"}
stands
quite
alone in
having
lost
a guttural
after its vowel.'* The Skt. cih-a I
spoke points
to an
originalgh,
which has been
regularly
shifted to
(/
in the Lat.
ad-ag-ki-m
(Princ.
i.
497).
The final consonant
x
which we
could before
only
infer
to have
existed,
I have shown
(Stud.
iv.
208)
to have been
actuallypre- served
in
"/x-a
"'"-!'"
d-KEv
(Hesych.).
Since the Dorians and Aeolians
had
ri
and not
a
in this
stem,
the Greek root must be
given
as
ix-
Such
an expulsion
of
an explosive
is of
rare occurrence
in Greek. We
may
however
see an analog;)-
in the loss of the same
consonant in the form
(tttX^v
154
""
I
see no
foundation for
Westphal's conjecture{Fm-menl.
ii.
112)
that
pos- sibly
7)
arose
from
/a.
104 PEESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL. ch. iv.
which we
cannot but connect
with
"T7rX"yx"'o-j'.
The
comparison
of the
Skt.
plihan
with
mt\})r gives
a primary
form
mrXaxav,
and with loss of
the second
a aivkuxr (Ascoli,
Ztschr. xvii.
269).
C)
Isolated and Doubtful Forms,
Three vowel
present-stemspresent
the
ajopearance
of
a
non-thematic
formation,
but it is
extremelyprobable
that it is
appearance only.
That
(HLiai, MLii]i',
and
(.KovfiEi',
Xuvrai, Xuvrrai, Xoii/ie
rot once
had the thematic
vowel is
universallyacknowledged,only
Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. ii.
236)
prefers
to refer the contracted forms of Xovu) to
Xow, though
the con- traction
from
Xovofjer,
Xoverai etc. is
phoneticallylegitimate.
Good
reasons
are
advanced
by
Leskien Stnd. ii. 104 if.in
support
of Butt-
mann's view. Another form of the
same
kind is
aev-Tai,
which
only
occurs
at
Soph.
Trach. 645. Nauck follows
Ehnsley
in
writing
aoitrai
(cp.
(TouCT"w
Soph.Aj. 1414).
The stem "tow corresponds
to
Xou,
and so the
Imp.
m.
2nd
sing,aov
make haste
(Ar.Yesp. 209)
with
Hesychius's
Xoii
"
XovfTai, (Tovi'Tcu
Aesch. Pers. 25 with
Xoin'rai,
and the uncontracted
Doric
(TMoi'To
'
wpfiuii'To
(Hesych.)
with the uncontracted Xwovto
(Callim.).
A
present
o-ww
would stand in
exactly
the
same
relation to the rt.
av,
which
appears
in
(tv-to, etravTo,
as
ttXww does to the rt. ttXv.
We have no
hesitation however in
classingcrTevTUL
(F
83
etc.,
Aesch.
Pers. 49 instead of the 3rd
pi.)
and its
imperfectarev-o
(2 191) along
with
aevTcit.
I believe that I was
right
in
referring(Princ.
i.
267)
these
forms to a
stem stav
expanded
fi-om
sta,
and
preserved
also in
(Trav-po-c,
and
aro-a (forrrrcf-u'i),
for which there are analogies
in the related
languages.
To the
same
stem has
rightly
been referred (rrv-efrBai stand
stifl"
(Fick,Indogerm.
Wtb. i.^
246). (ttevtul
then
probably
stands for
araverai.
The Doric
fiwrai
(i^y]TE~t) along
with
pCJrTui,ixojpeda, /uw/itcoc
(Soph.
O. C.
836)
is
quiteanalogous
to
a-wfiai. /./w
can
only
be a
by-form
of
/.at
(/Ke'^ioo, /^"t/.(aw).
Tlie isolated active
^w
as
1st
sing.pres.
is sufficient
evidence of thematic formation. If the verb
really
followed
an
older
1.55
fashion we
should have to
expect *^w/ii
here. The
separate
forms are
discussed
by
Ahrens,
Dor. 349 f.
There are on
the other hand three isolated forms from consonantal
roots,
in the case
of which I
see no
ground
for the
assumption
that the
lack of the thematic vowel is of later
origin
than the forms themselves.
First
ijjjLer
"
ixEiyHesych., completelyisolated,
inasmuch
as there is no
other similar inflexion of the rt.
a(\
as
distinct from the
transposed
ayj.
Next
eCfxirai,
of
frequent
occurrence in
Homer,
and that with
a
de- cidedly
present
force
(cp.
A
345,
E
203).
This mode of inflexion is here
proved
to be
primitiveby
the Skt.
ad-mi,
3rd
sing,at-ti,
Lat. es-t
by
the side of
ed-it,
Ch.-Sl.
ja-mi or
^-mi,
Lith. Sd-mi
(Princ.
i.
296).
We cannot be so sure of this in the
case of the 2nd
plur.Imperat.
0f|O-r" (only
I
171).
For
here,though
the Greek inflexion is
supported
by
tlie Lat.
fer-te(fer-s, fer-tetc.)
and the Skt. has
hhar-ti=fert
(Princ.
i.
373),
the
prevailing
mode of inflexion is
decidedly
the thematic. We
are not obliged,however,
to
regard (pifjTt as
syncopated
from
(pip-t-rt.
"
ciyjuTui(\I147),
on
the other
hand, along
with
MyfieroQ(I 191, more
frequentlyiroTi^eyfieyoc), cp. TrpOTicey^ai'
irpoace^^oi^ai
in
Hesych., is,
to
use
Lobeck's
expression(on
Buttmann ii.
21), an
'
unarticulated
'
pre-
CH. IV.
REDUPLICATED STEMS. 105
sent-form. Lobeck
points
out at the same
place
that the late
poets
made other forms like
it,
e.g. afienrTo=ufieiftiTo (Noniius).
11. STEMS OF TWO OR THREE SYLLABLES.
"We start here with the
present-stems
whose formation is the most
transpai-ent,
those which have two
syllables
in the
presentonly.
In
these
cases
the force of the
expanding syllable
is clear. This
syllable
is
what we
may
call
a
pi-esent-expansion,
and it
serves
to charactei"ise the
continuous action
by
a
greateramplitude
in the form.
A)
Stems
which are made dissyllabic or trisyllabic by means 156
OF THIS PRESENT EXPANSION.
a) Eeduplicatedpresent
stems.
We have
alreadyseen on
p.
8 that
i-eduplication
is
one
of the oldest
methods
employed
to
expand
the verbal
stem,
and thus
give
it addi- tional
emphasis.
The same
method
was used to
sti-engthen
the stems of
other tenses as well,especially
those of the
perfect
and
aorist,so that we
are not able to find in
reduplication
an
original
and
specially distinguish- ing
mark of the
present-
stem. It
may
have
dejoended
somewhat
on
the
individual
meaning
of the
separate
verb,
whether it should
use this
method in one
way
or the
other, or possibly
in sevei-al. Nice distinc- tions
were however set
up
in Greek between the
redui)lication
for the
present
tense and that for the
perfect
or
aoiist. The
present-reduplica- tion
is
always
characterised
by
the
t-sound,
and this is
observable,
though only sporadically,
in Sanskrit
as
well
(Delbriick,
Altind. Verb.
104
f.).
1)
The rt.
/3a
forms its
present-stem
in this
way
in the
participle
ftijyac,
which has
only
survived in certain
phrases,
such
as
iJciKpa
ftijiag
(()307,
H
213),v\piloilJut'Tci(N 371), Kpamrh
noai 7rpo/3t/xtc (N 18),
vwarnricia Trpo^nftavTOQ ([I 609),
in all of which
an
intensive force is
discernible. The same
may
be said of the Laconic
/3//3ar",
which denotes
a
kind of dance
{/5//k"o-(c)
in
a somewhat obscure
passage
in Pollux iv. 102.
What Ahrens
(Dor.312)
says
about the t-sound is not
satisfactory.
It
seems however to establish the Doric
pres.
fiiftu^i.
A
completeparallel
is
furnished
by
the Skt.
yi-gd-ti
from the rt.
gd go,
by
the side of which
there is
^a-gan-ti
from the
synonymous
root
gam. By
a
change
to the
thematic
conjugation
there arose the form
/3(/3w(part.jyijDibi',
an
old
variant for
ftifid";
in
Homer). Cp.
La
Roche,
Horn.
Textkritik,
216.
2)
The rt. It bind is found
only
in two
reduplicated
foims
belonging
to the
present-stem;
3i'd
plur. Imperat.
kv
Iegj^ioIgl Sicii'Twr,
Aris-
tai-chus's
reading
fj.
54,
instead of
hovrujj',
and the 3rd
sing,imperf.hcrj,
A 105.
3)
Common to all Greek is
Si?w/./i
from the rt.
co, corresponding
to
the Skt
ddddmi,
Zd. dadhami. The
long
vowel in the
imperat.
clcw-t^i
(y 380)
is remarkable, as is the
diphthong
in hicovi'cu
(ii425).
The 157
variations in the
length
of the stem- vowel are often
ii-i-egular
in the
Epic
dialect
(cp.Tidi'i/jLeroc, Tidiifievai).
4) hi-l^r^-jxai
is the
Epic
for the later
(iiriw,
which
only occurs once
in Homer {S 258).
It is natural to
conjecture
that
?t-"^7/
bears to
4"/-re
106 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL. ch. iv.
the same
relation that
/3t-/3a
does to
{(\fi(pic)ftr]-TE (Princ.
ii.
262).
That
hi is a reduplication
is made more
clear
by
the Aeol.
cl-rrcj^-^ai {(^iitm
Hesych.).
Tiie latter form bears
exactly
the same
relation to the stem
all]
that the Skt. ti-shthd-mi does to the rt.
stha,
and is similar to that
cifKi-trtu-ii-y sieve to the rt. o-ici.
There is
no more analogy
for 2
as a
representative
of "f
in a reduplication
than there is for
k
for " or it
for
^
(cp.
(pi-\pa\o-c by
the side of
^//uAo-t
).
But
we cannot doubt this
explana- tion
of
ci^i]^(a.
For the
length
of the stem-vowel we
may compare Kelfiai.
If it were not for the
i
in the
reduplication
which
clearly
mar-ks the
present,
it
might
be
thought
to be a perfect. }iL,r]ui (\100),hi:,))idei'OQ (E
168)
are
found in
Homer,
and other
cognate
forms in
Herodotus,
Theognis,Aeschylus {jAi^-qvTcu Suppl. 821).
The future
cii^nerofxet)' {ir
239)
does not
upset
our
theory,
as
is shown
by
the isolated Homei-ic
hcw(T(i).
By
the
adoptionby
the stem-vowel of the
analogy
of the the- matic
formation there arises o/i^w
(even
in Homer fl
713).
5) i-r)'jii.
I have discussed the
origin
of the verb at Princ. i.
500,
where I
adopted
the
derivation,
first
given by Bopp,
from
ji-jd-mi.
It
is evident that 'l-e-aav is related in the
same
way
to e-crai' as
i-Ti-de-rrav
is to
e-Oe-aay,
and
lif^iEvoQ
to
efxtrov
as riB^itrot:
is to
O^ieyog.
Butt-
mann (i.521) recognised
this fact. The
reduplication syllable
is both
long
and
short,
and I have discussed this
m
coimexion with the
partition
of the
different
meanings
between active and
middle,
and the traces of
an
initial consonant in PhUol. iii.5 ff. It
explainseveiything
if we start
from a rt.
J",
Gk.
^'e,
which when
reduplicatedgivesJi-/f.
The hiatus
before
UftevoQ {oIkuZeunivwv
B
154)
is accounted for
by
the
surviving
effect of the initial
j,
and the
length
of the
i
by
that of the second
j,
and
the same
explanation,
as we saw above,
p.
79, accounts for the
syllabic
augment
in the aor.
tTj/ct.
Out of the
meaning
'
go,'
which
belongs
to
158 the ri.
jd,
in
Sanskrit,was developedon one
side the causative
'
make to
go,
send,'on
the other in the middle the
meaning
'
strive,
wish.' None
other of the derivations
attempted
for
'li^ni
is so in
hai-mony
with both
its form and its
meaning as
this. Pott's
energetic
attack
upon
it
(Wurzelwtb.
ii.
2, 288)
is
mainly
based
on
the difference of
meaning
seen
in the active.
Though
he cannot
deny
the
analogy
of
t-crT-rj-yut
and
si-sto to
('-?/-^u
and all the
reduplicatedforms,
he finds
a stumbling-block
in the fact that the
non-reduplicated
forms have a
causative
meaning
too,
and
certainlya"p-E-aav
'
they
let
go
or
sent
'
does not bear com- parison
in this
point
with
uTT-i-rrrr]-rTar they
went
off,nor
iKptina
with
a"pi(TrT]Ka.
But
seeing
the causative
meaning
extends in the
case
of the
rt. oTct
from the
present-stem
to the future and the
sigmaticaorist,
it is
not so
very
much to
suppose
that in that of the rt.
e
it extended
a
little
further still. The German verbs for
'
send,'
schicken and
senclen,are
causatives
too,
the former from the 0. H. G. scehan
(Germ, ge-schehen
happen),
the latter
(in
Gothic
sand-jan)
from *sind-an
(A.S.sinnan)
go ;
and
ire/u-ireiy,
whose
etymology
is
obscure,
shows in
Trofnn]
procession,
and
especially
in the Homeric
^vg-vencp-aXo-Q,
an
epithet
of the
sea,
'
ill
to
traverse,'a
meaniug
which
points
to
an originally
intransitive
force.
lui the inflexion of
'/";//t
it is the
imperfect
which
presents
most diffi- culty.
The 2nd and 3rd
sing.
'/-""-c'i-ei
are
easilyexplained
as having
followed the
analogy
of the contracted
verbs,so that
they
are
contracted
from
'i-t-E-c, 'l-E-e,
but this
explanation
accounts
only
for
one
form of the
CH. IV.
REDUPLICATED STEMS. 107
1st
sing.
i.e.
'lovr,
but not for '/etrwhich
appears
occasionally (Herodian,
ii.
835),
and is countenanced
by
Eridur on an inscription (C
I.
3605,
33).
Boeckh
puts
the
inscription
as
late
as
the first
or
second
century
before Christ. I. Bekker
may
therefore
perhaps
be
right(Horn.
Bl. i.
Til)
in
rejecting Trpoitiv (t88,k 100)
in favour of
-rrpiiir))',
and in
declining,
in
Plato, Euthyd.
293
a,
to follow the
one M.S. which has
i](puir. (Cp.
also
Aoytoe 'Ep/ii^e
i.
p.
355
f.) Possibly
it is
only
that the 2nd and 3rd
persons
have
dragged
the 1st after them. The
analogy
of
ijEty
and the
pluperfects may
also have had
something
to do with it.
6) 'l-crrrj-fji,
like
2/?oi/.u
and
Tidni^u,
common to all Greek. Its
spe- cially
causative
meaning
has been noticed
already.
We
may
perhaps
159
conclude from
si-sto,
wliich is identical with
'ir7ri]yu,
that this
meaning
dates from
a
time when there was as
yet
no
difference in the vowel be- tween
si-sti-mus si-sti-tison one
side and
'1-rTra-j.uc
'i-tT-a-re
on
the
other,
but when
*
si-sta-mas *si-sta-tes were
the forms in
use.
The
peculiarly
Greek transformation of the
s to the
spiritus asper
needs
no further dis- cussion.
The Skt. ti-shtha-ti and the Zd.
hi-gta^ti
differ from
'i-(TTr)-m
in that
they
are
intransitive and leave the vowel short after the fashion
of the thematic verbs.
7) Kiy-Kpa-jj.1
Dor. Ahrens
346, Hesych. Kiytcp^'Klpr^,Sophron.
fr.
2
iyKiKpa.
8)
Ki-xpri-i^ii,
of rather late
occurrence,
i.e.not earlier than the
pseudo-
Demosthenic
speech
Trpoc
^iKorrTparor"
12
(rwi'KTi^ndrwv aoi rwi' ij-iHoi'
Ki\pr}ni
6
TL jjovXei).
The rt.
xP"
shows
a
similar
meaning
in
xptoc,
and
the Lat. ?".s"ra
illustrates the relation between
j^pfjadcu
and these words.
From
Hesychius'sglossKL-^^jpijuEf
cafelaEt we can see that, as
in the
cases
given
under No. 4
{ciiCr^nuL),
the
reduplication
extended
beyond
the
present-
stem,
9) 7r//i-7r\r]-;x(,
from Homer onwards
(""
23
Tviji-TrXaai),
in use
along
with
TrXi'ido) as a
present
form of the rt. 7r\o
(Princ.
i.
344).
The Skt.
pi-par-mi,
I
fill,
agrees
exactly
with the
Gi^eek,
except
that in the latter
a
nasal is
put
in to
strengthen
the
reduplication syllable
as
in
Kay-Ka-ro-y,
lii-^pt(J-)o-y, just
as it is in
a number of Sanskrit intensives. Rich.
Fritzsche
(Stud.
iv. 310
f.),
who is
supportedby
Joh. Schmidt
(Yocal.
ii.
228),conjectui-es
that this nasal is the remains of a
stronger
consonant.
If the
fj.
of
a preposition precedes
the word there is
only a
simplei : i/x-
7r(-7r\?/-^i.
The
long
root-vowel in
ijd-iTrXrjdL
"" 311 is
just
like that in
Sid0)6
1.
10) 7ri^-Trpi]-fii,
a present-formation
unknown to Homer
(who
has
IreTrpijdoi-,
[.
589),
but in all other
respects
a parallel
to
77/^7r\j;/.((,
even
in
respect
of the movable natui'e. of the nasal
:
(.jXTrnrpaoL
(Thuc.3, 74),
av^Tuwpavai.
11) ivi-(i"pr]-jji, only
found in Aristotle Hist. Anim. v.
p.
541
b,
11
:
;](read?p) igitLfpaiuL
eIq tov
fxvKrTipa
tFjq driXetaQ.
In common use
in Attic are
eK-fpt-Q, E--tic-(lipu", lia-tppii-aovm etc.,
on
which I cannot
accept
ISTauek's view
(Bulletin
de I'Ac. de St.-Petersb. T. vi.
p.
424
tf.),
for the
reasons given by
me at Stud. viii. 327 ff. Herodian
(i.463, 160
.1.
14)says (ppiq
is the same as
(pipt.7r/-0p//-//t may
be
compared
with
the Skt. hi-hhar-mi I
carry,
bring,
in
everything
but the metathesis.
12) r/-9?j-^a
=
Skt. dd-dhd-nii
(Zd.
3rd
sing.da-dJidi-ti),
treated in
every respect,
even
in that of the
ei
which takes the
place
of the
"/,
like
'n]j.ii. ri-di'i-fiey(n (^ 83)
and
TL-Oij-fiErog (K 34)
have "been
noticed
ainder
no.
3.
108 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL. ch. iv.
13)
Tt-Tprj-fii
I
bore,
not found before Galen and
Appian (ciaTirp-qai,
CiuTirimmt)
for
riTpaw
ov
Terpah'U). Cp.
Lobeck
on Buttmann,
ii. SOi.
We must add here two
verbs which
are singular
in
every way,
i.e.
14) 'l-TTTa-fini,
a
late
by
-form of
ttcVo^ck,
first
occurring
in the
spurious
part
of
EuripidesIph.
Aul.
(IGOS),
and then in
Babrius, Plutarch,
Moschus etc.
[Aristotle
Hist. An. v.
9],
but
apparently
an
old
form, as
there is no
clear model fi'om which it could have been taken,
i cleaily
stands for
tti here,
as
I in
'i-^io
for
ire (Princ.
ii.
375).
15) 6v-ii'r]-jii which, though
it is
trisyllabic,
and
consequently
must
have been
reduplicated
from
a stem which had
already
two
syllables
(ora),may
for
bi-evity's
sake be discussed here.
Here, as in
oTr-iTr-ae
and uTv-'iTT-Eino
{oTrnrrEvio)
the second vowel has become
i. Buttmann,
Ausf. Gr. ii.
74,
compares
anraWw as well, only
here the
origin
of the
word is obscure. Similar
phenomena
ai-e
displayedby
the
reduplicated
aorist in
Sanskrit,
e.g.
dp-ijJ-a-m
from the causative
dpajdmi (dp
ob- tain),
oi'hrjm
in Homer
only
at i2
45,
ovudtra Plato Phil. 58. For its
origin
see
Pi'inc. ii.
397,
Gustav.
Meyer,
Nasale
Prasensstamme,
p.
42.
The form
hcpavai on
the other hand is
spuriouf^, though Westi)hal
has
brought
it
up again,notwithstanding
that at Thuc. iv. 46 the read- ing
now universallyadopted
on good authority
is
airo^ipuyai,
and there is
no
other credible
testimony
to the word.
b)
Present-stems formed
by
the addition of the
syllable
w.''
The
syllablerv,
which in
a
considerable number of verb; distin-
161 guishes
the
pre-ent-stem
from the verb
stem, corresponds
to the
mc
of
Sanskiit,
where the verbs
belonging
here form the fifth class. In the
Iritnian
languages
too thei^e are
individual instances of this kind of
present-formation (SchleicherGomp. "
293 iv.
a).
These
expanded
pre- sent-stems
are to be
regarded,
as we saw
above
(p.10,
ep. my
Zur
Chronol.^
p.
46
f.,Benfey,
Ztschr. viii.
94),as noun-themes of
a
kind
which has beeii preserved
in Sanskrit outside the verb as well. We
saw
above that in all
probability
such
a
theme in nu had,
when these forms
took
a
definite
shape,
the
meaning
of
a nomen
agentis,
such
as
has
sur- vived,
e.g.
in the above-mentioned Skt. dhrsh-nu-s bold
(which
would
correspond
to a
Gk.
*
dapa-vv)
and in
grdh-mt-s
eager,
from the I't.
gardh.
In Greek there are no nouns
of this
meaning
of such
a
formation. In form
however
Opij-w-Q
is
similar,
from the rt. dhra
(Skt.
d/iar
hold,
sujiport),
only
here the
meaning
'
holding,suppoi'ting,'
has shifted to that of
'
holder,
supporter,' esj^ecially
of the
feet,a
foot-stool. It is clear that the suffix
?iM
is
vei-y
closely
related to the suffix
na.
Present-stems in
nt', and in
na
(9th class)
are
very
often
developed
side
by
side from the
same
verb-
stems. The
syllable
na
apiDeai-s
in Sanskrit in one
special
class of
verbs,
the
7th,
in the middle of the root : ju-nd-(j-mi
from the rt.
ju{).
Kot
unfi'equently
too there
aj^pears,
especially
in the Sanskrit and
Latin,
a simple
n : ju-ii-y-mds
1st
plur.
to the
sing,ju-nd-^-mi,
J^At.
jiiny-i-mus,
'
Rich materials for the discussion of
these, as
for that of all
ijresent-stems
formed with nasal
syllables,are contained in Giistav
Mej-er's work, Die mit
Xusaleii fjchildvten Prd^etisntiimme des
Griechisc/te/i, Jena, 1873, which for
brevity's
.sake I shall refer to as
'
G.
Meyer
n. Pr.'
CH. IV. STEMS WITH A NASAL AFFIX. 109
in which
case
forms with and forms without a
thematic vowel
are
often
interchanged.
There
are several
points
in these
processes
which have
not
yet
been
clearly
made
out,
and such of them
as
do not
occur at all
in
Greek, as
is the
case
with the
peculiarity
of the Skt. 7th
class,we
may
here
pass
by.
But thus much is
unmistakable,
that the
linguistic
instinct mixed these nasal
expansions
of the
present-stem
very
much
with each other. It is therefore
important
when
dealing
with the fol- lowing
Greek formations to notice
anything
at all
analogous
either in
Greek itself
or
in the related
languages,
and
specially
in Sanskrit and 162
Latin.
The formation of the
expanded
stem in
rv
is often
accompanied by
an
intensification of the root-vowel
: i^vyi^evyi'v, c"^-
cciKfv, Tray Ttrtyvv, pay
pTjyi'i
,
Ki Klyv, Ti
Tlrv,
but it cannot be said to be the fixed rule that such
is the
case.
In Sanskrit
(cp.Delbriick,
V^erb.
154)
there
appears
a
faint
trace of such
a
pi-ocedure
in the Vedic
ddr^-no-ti
from the rt.
dac^(cp.
ZaKvu)).
Other
peculiarities
in the formation of these verbs are
noticed
by
Lobeck on Buttm. ii. 68. While in Sanskrit not
only roots
ending
in
a
vowel but also those in all kinds of consonants
[c^ak,d]),tarp,
dharsh,ac)belong
to this
class,
inGreekit is
only
I'oots
endingin gutturals,
nasals,
\
p a,
and
vowels,
that
developepresent-stems
of this
kind,
and the
X in
oWv/ji
assimilates to itself the
following)",
and
conversely
the
r
of
the
expanding syllable
assimilates
a
precedingcr
(cr-i v-yui).
This limita- tion
of an
expedient
which the
languagemight
have
employed generally
if it had
wished,
is
a
feature
peculiar
to Greek,
and
one which we shall
often encounter Elements used to
expand stems,
which in their
origin
had
no
closer connexion with
any
particular
final letter of a stem than
that of derivative
suffixes,
are
found afterwards under the rule of
pru^ely
phoneticanalogies.
By
far the
larger
number of the verbs in
-rv-fji
have
numerous
and
sometimes much
more generally
curi'ent
by-forms
in rvw.^ Even this
phenomenon,
which does not look at first
sight
like
a
very
old
one,
has
analogies
in the East.
Bopp, Vgl.
Gr.
" 519,
and Skt. Gr.
" 343,
notices
correspondingchanges
of form in Sanskrit and Zend
:
Skt. d-dti-
nv-a-sva {diltorment)
for d-du-nu-shva
,
as
it
might
be *ciiK-vv-e-ao
ItiKvvdv for
^EiK-rv-cTo,
Zd. kere-nvo
(primary
form
kar-nv-a-s)
for kere-
natis
thou didst make. Leo
Meyer,
Goth.
Sprache,
p.
203, gives
from
the
Eigveda 6, 2,
6 rnvati
(^=*6prvei)
instead of the usual rndti
(^=op-
vvai). Many more cases
of the kind
may
be found collected
by
G.
Meyer
n. Pr. 39 and
Delbriick,
Verb. 158. We
may
safely
follow Leo
Meyer
and Adalbert
Kidin,
the discoverer of this connexion
(Ztschr.
ii.
460),
163
at least in some instances,
when
they
refer Teutonic
strong
verbs in
na
to a
similar
soiurce,
so that Goth. rinnan=.*
opvvew .
The individual stems
may
be best
arranged
in the
following
three
main
groups
:
I.
vv
affixed without material
change
in
monosyllabicst^ms,
and
that
a)
to consonantal stems
;
/3)
to vowel stems.
II.
vv
with
a V
before it.
*
Lists to show the
comparative frequency
of forms in -vuu and
-vvfjn
are
given
by La
Koche, ZUchr.f. ostein.
Gymn. 1876,
p.
584 S..
110 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch. it.
I, First Group.
1) ("ly-rv-fjti (brecak)
rt.
fay.
Tlie
present-stem
is
pretty
common in
poetry
from Homer onwfii-ds
(M
148
(iyyvTor,
IT 769
ayrv/^tydivi'),
rare in
prose.
If we were
right(Princ.
ii.
158)
in
comparing
the Skt.
bhavif
with the rt.
fay,
both verbs
agree
in
taking
the nasal.
2)
ap-rv-j-iai (get)
rt.
u(),
the same which is the basis of the noun-
forms
up-oc gam, iiiaO-ap-io-c, ep-ido-c (Princ.
i.
42.5).
A 159
n^Z/j'
iiprviiiroi (cp.
a 5),apt'vtrOiji'
3rd du. X
160,
ruiac'
apvv^ai Sojjh.
Ant.
90.3,
in
prose only
used in the
phrase
/it
crOoj'
api'vcrQai (Plato
Prot. 349
a).
It has no connexion whatever with
a'/pw, deipu).
3)
"T(-)v-/iat
(grieve),
one of the
many present
forms of the rt.
a^,
which makes also
a-)(^ o-jj-ai
(cr256,r
129),a^-d-o-fxai^ d)(-tv-(ij,
and in
a
causative sense
ufc-a^-ii^-w (cp.ijKa^ni'). dxrvro
ci
acpivdv/uog
S
38,
commonest of all
dxvvfuvoc,
which shows a relic of itselfin
d^wiiivwc
in
Soph,
Ant. 627. Late
poets
formed from
d-^w
a
passive aorista')()'vj'0);r
Anth, vi. 343. It is a
purelypoetical
verb. Numerous instances of
the insertion of a
nasal in the midtUe of this root
(Skt.ah-u-s,
Germ.
eng narrow,
Lat.
ango)
are
given
at Princ. i. 234.
4) ceiK-rv-pt,
one
of the few verbs of this formation which is
common
to all Greek. The
pure
rt. cik occurs in Greek
only
in
ck-rj,
but is
just
as e\T.dent in the Skt.
dig
and the Lat. die
(causi-dic-u-s),
while the
164 verbal forms are made
throughout
from the intensified Iuk
(Princ.
i.
165).
The latter is in the New-Ionic dialect
partially
attenuated
again
to CiK
(cftii), ictta),
but
preserved
in the
present-stem
: hiKvvc Herod,
ii.
78, so that here there is a fresh
pair
of short and
long roots,
?"*:
and ^tiK. There is not a trace of nasal
expansionanywhere
but in
Greek. In Greek itselfwe
may compare
hik-ai-d-u-nai.
5) lex-rv-^i, quite
a
late
by-form
of
cix-o-fiai.
Parthenius Bekk.
Anecd. 1385
b, Orphica
Lith.
692, mostly
found in the
imperative
6) i'ipy-rv-j.n by
the side of
I'lpyuj.
In Homer we find the
imperf.
lipyrvK
238 Ku-d
avfevlaiyeepyiv,
where it is
impossible
to
say
whether
the first
E
is an
augment
or a
prothetic
vowel before a lost
digamma.
In
any
case
t'ipyiv/^i,
which occm-s in Herodotus and in Attic
prose
(Plato,
Tim.
45),presupposes e-fepy-w-fxi.
The
corresponding
Sanskrit
root
var(f
likewise makes its
presentby
a nasal
expansion:
vr-nd-g-mi
(Princ.
i.
222).
7) i^evy-rv-^i,
like
htKivi^u
in
frequent
use with Greeks of all times
and all
tribes,
is the
primitive
Indo-Germanic verb for the
yoking
and
harnessing
of horses
(Princ.
i.
223).
A
present
formed
by
nasal
expan- sion
occurs
in "Skt.
(ju-vd-(j-mi)
and Lat.
(ju-n-g-o)
as well.
8) Q6p-vv-fxai (copulate)
first
occui-s
in Nicander Ther.
130,as a
by-
form of
BpwaKw,
the
conj.Ooprv'.irrai,
which
might belong
either to
Qopvv^ni.
or
diiinvojiai,
in Herod, iii.109.
9) K-aOiyrvfrdai.
So Lobeck
(on Buttmann,
ii.
68)
writes the word
which
occurs in several
passages
of
Hi])})0crates (Mul.),
and
always
with
the
var.
lect.
KaSirrvrdnt,
and others follow him in so
doing.
No
one
can doubt that the word with the
meaning /.a
ravX/i-f
tr, Kadii^siv,
is con- nected
with the rt. tS. In
spite
of this Lobeck thinks the connexion
CH. IV.
STEMS WITH A NASAL AFFIX. ] 1 1
with
lyi'vc,
lyi'va,
poples,probable,
iu tlie sense of
inofeniciilare.The
two views are
incompatible.
For the latter words
clearlybelong
to
yovv,
and
no
evidence can be shown for the
change
of the
undoubtedly
primitivec
in the rt.
to
to
y ;
and besides the
breathing
of
lyriig
does not
suit that of the verb in
question. Everything points
therefore to the
reading
KaOlrt'vadai with
t
for
e as
in
ic-pv-i."
and
7Cw
(cp.Westphal.
165
Method. Gr. ii.
163).
To this
we
may
add
Hesychius'sglosses
'n
wey
(M.S. Irroiei')' li^adi^eTo,
and hveadui
'
tcurTj^ie'iT,
i^pveadai.
There is no
analog}'
to this formation in the related
language-,
and
moreover this
would be the
solitary
instance of the addition of the
syllablejv to a
dental
explosive. May
it not even be
possible
that
Kadir-w-fjn
arose out
of
KciHi^-rv-idi
1 A similar adcUtion of
a nasal
expansion
to the
already
ex- panded
present
form took
place
in
^ndi^nroi. In that
case the verb
would be
analogous
to the
comparatively
late forms in
i-r to be discussed
below. I cannot see the force of Joh. Schmidt's
new
explanation
of the
form
(Ztschr.
xxiii,
298).
10)
j.uy-rv-jM,
the later
present-form
of the rt.
^xiy,
first found in
Pindar,
then in Attic
writers,
for which Homer has
/uVyw.
The
i,
as
Lobeck shows
(Paralipp.414),
was
long,
and who
can
say
that
'MeitiaQ,
Mft^iafjyc,
for which there is the
testimony
of
inscriptions, were not the
older forms of the names?
^Eiy-w-^t
:
/ity
: : ceiK-rv-fxi :
?iih:
(Pi'inc.
i.
417).
11) o'iy-rv-fxi,
B 809 iraaai
h'
wiy-vv-VTO irvXai,
then Attic
along
with
o'iyu)
in.
compounds.
The
origin
has not been
clearly
ascertained
;
all
that
we can be siu^e of is that / was
the
original
initial.
Cp.above,
p.
81.
12) ojjL-vv-fjLi,
in
generaluse
from Homer
onwards, though
there are
frequentby-forms
in w-m.
The
origin
of the word is obscure.
13) 6-^6py-rv-fii.
E 416 oV
I'^w x^'^"^5
Ofiopyi'v,
\ 527
C(ikpvn
?'
w/jiopyivrTo,
of isolated
occurrence
in Attic.
Compare
the Ved. 3rd
plur.
mid.
mr-n-^-a-ta,
Gust.
Meyer
n.
Pr. 19. The rt.
marg
has
by
means of
a
difference in the vowel and in the formation of the
pi'esent,
splitup
into two stems of different
meaning,
Princ. i. 226.
14) 6-piy-vv-^i, only
A
351,
X 37
xflpuQ opeyrvc
and in later
poets
(Moschus,Anthol.)
opEyivjievoc,
while
opiyo}(along
with
6pe\6iw)
re- mains
the usual foi'm of the
present.
Another kind of nasal
expansion
of the rt. is to be
seen
in
opiy-ya-o-fiai
(Hes.
Scut.
190, Eurip. Theocr.),
by
the side of which there is
a
doubtful trace
(Pollux
v.
165)
of
an
opiy-ra-jiai
or
opiyfo/iai. optyi ao[.iai
bears to
vpiyvv^n
a
relation similar
to that of
ctiKuruo/jai
to
ceiKj'vf^u.
The
corresponding
Skt. rt.
"/"(/
forms
the 1st
sing.
mid.
r-n-g-e
in an
analogous
way
(Princ.
i.
226),
15) vp-i'v-^u
from Homer onwards
(opwOi,
oprvfxti'ai, loprvTo)
in 166
poetry,
entirelycorresponding
to the Skt. r-no-mi
(Princ.
i.
432).
In
opii'w
there is another kind of nasal
expansion,
which however
we
ought
probably
to refer to
op-i-j'v-w.
Other
present-formations are dp-i-or-To
(cp.ortri), opovw,
6po-9-vro).
16) Tn'iy-1'v-f.n. Homer,
who
constantly
has
eVrjse,iirayr],
TreTnjye,
has
no forms of the
present-stem, niiy-iv-m
Aesch. Pers. 496 and after
"
him
repeatedly.
The
by-form TrrjTrii)
is not found till after Alexander.
The Lat.
jya-n-g-o
shows
an analogousexpan.sion
of the
present.
17) irXiy-rv-fji.
The
only
form found is
n\Ey-vv-iitvcQ
in
Oppian
Cyneg.
iii.
213,
Halieut. i. 311. Elsewhere the
pres.
is
always
wMko).
In
spite
of this the Skt.
pr-nd-K-mi(Princ.
i.
203)suggests
the
conjecture
112 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch. iv.
that the late form rests on an
old
tradition,
for
"irXiyrvjxi
'.
ppidK-mi ','.
l^Evyrvjjii
:
jundijmi.
18) TrXi'iy-rv-fii, only preserved
in
(KTrXyyvvixdai
Thuc. iv.
125,
and
yet
it must l)e of
early origin,
since
a
nasal
appears
also in the related
TrXuyxdri(Princ.
i.
345)
and in the Lat.
2)l(^ngo.
19) "n-Tap-rv-jj.m,
Attic;
Homer has
only tTTTapov;
a
later
present
is
"n-ulpw.
The Lat.
stcr-nu-e-re,frequentative stertiutare,
proves
that this
expansion
of the
present
is of old
standing.
This is the
only
instance
in which Latin has
preserved
the
syllable
mi
(Princ.
ii.
372). Cp.
Bugcre
Ztschr.
xx.
37.
20) pi'iy-rv-pi, occurring
from Homer onwards
(3rd plur.
prfyrvffi
P 751,
pijyrvfAeroQ,
pt'iyrvTo, fn'jyrvi'To).
pyjcrfTU),
used in Homer
(S 571)
and elsewhere in the sense of
jmhm'e,
has
certainlynothing
to do with it
(Lobeck
on
Buttmann ii.
287),
but in
Hippocrates
and Diodorus
pt](jau)
occurs
with the
meaning
of
piiyvvfii
(cp.
ttyittw,
ttA/Jkto-w).
If it is
right
to connect
pnyvvj.ii
with,
frango (Princ.
ii.
159,
otherwise Pick Wtb. i.^
772),
we
have in the latter
an
analogousexpression.
21) aTop-vv-jxi
is related to the Skt. sfr-no-mi
(by-formstr-na-mi)
exactly as
vp-rv-fji
is to r-no-mi. Add to these the Lat. ster-no (Princ.
i.
265).
In Homer
KaaTupvvaa p
32. The verb is found besides in the
tragic
and comic
dramatists,
in Hei'odotus and in
Xenophon,
with the
Attic
by-form
oTfiwrm^t
with metathesis like that in the Lat.
strd-tu-s,
167 while
aTop-i-yrv-f.n
was
developed
at
quite
a
late
period (only
found in
the Schol.
on Theocr, 7,
59)
from forms like
en-operra.
22) (ppay-i'v-fxi,
an
isolated
by-form
of the usual
(ppaarru),
Thuc. vii.
74
ciTrecppayivirni',
Soph. Antig.
241
KaTrocppayrvrrcn
(Dind.
airocpupyivffai,
cp.
Siegismund,
Stud.
v. 159).
In Homer there is
no
present-stem
to
(ppu^e, (ppatag, i.(^"puyBr]v
^
cp.
Princ. i. 376.
23) (pwy-vv-jdi,only
found in Dioscoiides
{(jiijyvvTai),
elsewhere
(j)wyu".
24)
cu-rv-jdni
only
in
poetry,
from Homer onwards
:
diro-alrvTat
N
262,
p
322, alrv/ueroci 429,
X
500,
uirnuirvTO
/-i
419,
aVo/ruro O 595.
Beyond
the
present-stem
no forms are
in use.
The
very general
notion
that this verb
belongs
to
n'ipiw
is
hardlytenable,
for the root of
o/(;fw
is
Fop (by-formfeX),
and it is
hardlypossible
to
get
from
*fap-vv-fiai
to
n'nvj.iui.
The hiatus in
aVon/rvjuot
does
certainly
entitle
us to
give
the
word
an
initial
/,
but
'Hairoc,
ntVew
(afrequentative
to
aiiv/jiai)
also be- long,
so
that we cannot
say
more than that the stem was either nl
or J^ai.
25)
ya-rv-fxai,
in
poetry,
from Homer
onwards,
ynrvrm
N
493,
yatvi'Tdi i^i
43. The
present-stem
is also used to form thefutm-e
:
yarva-
(TiTui Is 504. There is no doubt that the root is the
same as
that of
*yrj-6-e-w,ya-i-to(cp.
Princ. i.
211),perhaps
also
as
that of
ya-tog
and
ya-"(uo
shine.
26) yl-j'v-fioi on an
inscription
from
Aegcsthena,
edited
by Boeckh,
Monatsber. der Berl. Akad. Nov. 1857
(Princ.
i.
215). Cp.
below
27) ^al-vv-fu,
Homeric
[^aiyvrra
?
3,
San
v
2nd
imperat.
and 3rd
imperf)
in the middle
(rnn
vrai
()
99)
it occurs
also in other
poets
and in
Herodotus,
1
aor.
ecaiffa, i^aiuafirjy,
related to
daiw, ^aiojjui, daic,
Eai-
cu. IV. NASALISED STEMS.
'
113
TVfiwi' (Princ.
i,
285).
The rt. is
Ba,
and the
i
is itself
an
exj^ansion
of the
present-stem
to which the
rv
is
subsequently
added
as a second.
28)
Kai-i'v-pLCii
onlyEpic (y
282
oq
tKaiiuro
tpvX'urOpwTj-ojt' rfja KulStp-
rfjaai,
uTviKairvro 0
127).
The
more
generally
diffused forms
KtKaafiai,
EKeKuaTo, Koafiog,
lead
us to the conclusion that the root had
a consonant
at the end. Still it is
by no means clear what relation the
cUphthong
bore to the
a.
29) d-i'v-^ai.
Horn.
KlvvfievoQ
K
280, kivvvtu
A
281,
and then not
1G8
till late
poets.
The form in
generaluse
is klvIw. The Skt.
(li-nu-te
is,
identical with d-i'v-rai
except
that the root vowel in the Skt. word is
short. The
pi-esent
kI-w
(by-formki-u-B-o-v)
is of
a
shorter formation.
30)
ro-i/w-r
at, just
like
ya-}'v-Tai,
only
at P
393,
but
ra-vv-u)
is much
commoner.
The
syllablew
makes its
way
into the structui-e of other
tenses as
well
: Tcivvtrna
(r/o'vira), TETurvaTut,
rarvaQtv.
Tu-vv-Tai corre- sponds
exactly
to the Skt.
ta-nu-ti, though as a
rule this is divided
thus,
tan-U'te (8th class).But, as
Bopp
saw
(Skt.
Gr.
" 343),
the
present-
expansion
does not consist in
w but in
nu. Whether, as
he
supposes,
the root had
a
final
n as well, so
that ta-nu-te is for
tan-nu-te,
or
whether the root of this word is the shorter
ta,
may
be left
an
open
question(Princ.
i.
267).
In Zend too there is
a 1st
sing.
pres.
tanva
or tanava
(Justi
Handl).
131),exactly
identical with
rnvvu).
The
more
general
forms of the
present
are rtivij)and
TiTuivw,
each with
a
slightly
distinct
meaning.
31) Ti-i'v-jiui. TXt'vtrai T
260,
T
279,
T^-rvf^")
at
Emip.
Or.
323,
Tipvadai PIdt.
V. 77. The
length
of the
t
is of
just
the
same
kind
as
in
KXvviJLai (29). PerhajDS
this word had
originally
the
diphthong,
which is
actually
found in
reifi}!,
rtlaw,on
old
inscriptions
which show
no
itacism
of
any
kind,
and in
many
other words
as
well
((Troreicrft
tabb. Heracl.
i.
109,
Meister Stud. iv.
387).
Buttmann's view that
we
ought
to write
Tirivf^iaL (Ausf.
Gr. ii.
69)
rests on mistaken
premises.
We
may
com- pare
the related Skt.
Jci-no-mi,
and ci the
correspondingpresent
in Zend
(cp,
Princ. ii.
93). r/rw,
with the
simpler
r/w
(Arcad.
awvTEuruj, cp.
Joh.
Schmidt Vocal, i.
142),
is
closely
connected with
Ti-vv-jiui.
32) \l"ac-j'v-/.ti, only
known to
us from
Hesych. : \pai-i'v-yr"Q.
xpwjjii-
CovTtq,
cp. xpa't-fici' oXiyo)',xpai-pv-tri^a' uXtyor, \pi-i'v-6-io-i'
'
(pXaiipoy,
xpE~i-(T(ti
'
ipw/jitrai.
The root is the
same as
that of the verbs
i//aw, \\^aiw,
and the
adj.^i-Xo-c.Cp. lairv^u
no. 27.
II.
vv WITH AN "' BEFORE IT.
o)
Where the first
v
is
evidently
assimilated from
a.
33)
t3c'i}'-i'v-(rdai,
found in Suidas with the
meaning fth'cy.
The rt.
is
/3Bsc,
cp.
Princ. i. 284.
34)
Er-1'v-f.u.
In Homer this
present-form((.-543,i^28,
E
522)
is
sometimes
replacedby
tt-j/u-jui
(caroetVveraj/
'^
135).
The
latter,which
is also New-Ionic
(Hdt. iirEirvadai), came
by compensatory lengthening
from
Ei'i'vfii
as
e'i^ui
from the Aeol.
Hp-f-ia.
There is the
same
incon- sistency
between
kwoaiyaioQ
and
th-oaicpvWog.
With Attic writers the
older form held its
ground
in
aii"piij'rvf.u.
The rt. is
fet,
(Lat.
ves-ti-s).
Cp.
Princ. i.
470,
and
Leskien,
Stud. ii. 85. The
corresponding
rt. in
Skt.
vas
forms its
present-stem
in
a diflerent
way.
Whether in the
I
169
114 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch.
iv.
Zend vaiih the
nasal,
which remains
throughout,
is to be
compared
with
the
syllablew
I leave an
open
question.
35) 'Cir-rv-fti
as a by-form
of
4ew
is
only
found in Alexander of
Aphrodisias
and Dioscorides. The rt.
iajas(Princ.
i.
471),
and there is
no analogy
for this kind of
expansion
of the
present-stem.
3G) aftir-rv-ni.
Homer's forms ai-e
all from other stems than that of
the
present {^aj^jtaer, fTinrrncti, trrjorj,arrjjEiTToc),
but from Hesiod onwards
aftivvvnL
{rrftirrvw)
is in
general use.
The
u
in the
gloss
l,eivvj.iEV
(Tyjfi'M'/uf
)' Hesych.
isof the same nature as that in
tnv^u,
while aTro'iirrvTui
'
li-Koa\l)ix'rvrai (cp.
Hivti'
ai^tn'^ivrvtr^
reminds
us oi'lvw^t (no.9),
and
Krivyv/uii
(no.38).
The root is obscure
(Joh. Schmidt,
Ztschr. xxiii.
300, Fick,
i.3
603).
/3)
The
remaining dissyllabic present-stems
in
m'.
"
37) '(loyvv^i,
from Homer onwards
[C^ovvwraiw 89, ^dtyrvro K
78,
i^tofrvaKETo
E
857).
A shorter form of the
present
appears
in
^ouo-0w
'(,wyri)fjdio (Hesych.)
i.e. 'Co-i-aBu). The root is
apjDarently
Cwq
(cp.(Mrr-
T)]p),
and this to be
compared
with
jas,
which is deducible from the
Zend and Slavonic words
given
at Princ. ii. 263. The intensification of
the root-vowel is like that in
TrZ/yrvyLK,
CEiKi'vjju.
38)
KTU'-vv-jii,
post-Homeric,
often with the variant
K-Eivvvfii
(Kuhner,
p.
854)
in
good
M.SS. It is clear that the
more
usual KTtiyto
170
has
helped
to make confusion here. Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. ii 227
note)
is
wrong
in
pronouncing
for
KTEiyyvyn
and
comparing
the
ti
to that of
^eiKvvfxi,
for the latter has arisen
by
intensification from
i,
while
Kriyyvp.!.
has for its root
Kva {^aitEKTu, KTUf.iEyai), ktcw,
ktev (Aeol.Kriytw).ktei-)v-
fji
could
only
be a
formation made from
KTEiyw
after this verb had come
into
use (cp.I'Cavw).
That
Kriyyvfii, however,
is
a
veiy
early
form is
proved by
the
synonymous
Skt. hshanomi
(Princ.
i.
192);
it must stand
then for
*KTEy-yv-fxi,
with
weakening
of
e to
i as
in
niT-yrj-j^i
and similar
formations.
Cp.
Gust.
Meyer, n.
Pr. 33.
39) pwyvvfu.
The forms of the
present-stem
are
not found before
Hippoci'ates,
the Locrian Timaeus and writers of the Roman
period.
As
present
to the
universally
common
fppuia-a, Eppwixai,pu"jii]
Homer has
only
ftweaOaiwave,
strive,
for the derivation of which from the rt.
pv
I have
given
reasons
at
length
at Princ. i. 440. At the same place
attention is
called to the difficulties which are in the
way
of Kuhn's
comparison
of
pwyyvfiL
with the Skt. rddh-no-mi
(thrive,succeed)
in
respect
of the
meanings
of the two words. AVe
can hardly venture, therefore,
to discern
in this
present-form
an analogy
to that of the Greek. Is it
possible
that
jow
came from
pwc,
and is thus an expanded
form of the intensified rt.
pv
1
Cp.
Princ. i. 83. We have not
yet
arrived at a
certain
explanation
of
the
yy.
40) (TTpojyyvfiL cp. a-opyviii,
no.
21. We are
still further here from
findinga reason
for the
fii-st^ r. Possibly
the double
v owes
its existence
here and in
pu)iyv[.ii
and in the next verb
only
to the
analogy
of
^ujyyvfii.
41) (TMyyvpi
is
only
inferred from
awyyvM
with the
meaning
of
um^w,
which is
given
in Bekker's Anecd.
p.
114 from the Sicilian comic
poet
Deinolochus. The form is remarkable inasmuch
as trwyyvw as
well
as
ffw^oj
(for(Tw-:4w,
and hence it should be wiitten
ail'Ch))
is
a
denominative
from aiboc.
CH. IV. NASALISED STEMS. 1 1 5
42)
Tpuiyi'vfii
for the usual
rirpuxTKU),
only
inferred fi'om
rpcoi'ivio
givenhj
late
gi'ammarians(Lobeck,
Rhem.
p.
208).
43)
xpwjTu/ii
occurs first in Lucian and Themistius as a
by-form
of
the usual
)(pw;w.
44)
)(W)')'u/.u
for the older
x'"^
(Hdt.,Thuc.)
from the rt.
xv (^fw
cp.
X^vc)seems to be not older than Hadrian's time
(Arrian,
Dio
Cassius),
171
while
xwM'uw
is found
as eai'ly
as
in
Polybius.
It is thus in
just
the
same case as
)(pwi'j v^".
As both verbs have a cr
in the
passive
aorist
(expi^o-dtjv, ix^orrQt]}),
it is
possible
that the first
"/
is a transfoi'med
sibilant.
A
quite
isolated
position
is held
by
"
4.5)oWvfii.
It
comes,
as
everybodyadmits,
from
oX-w-jii,
and thus
has
experienceda forward
assimilation,
the reverse of the backward
assimilation noticed in
tv-vv-jii.
The
present-stem
6\\v is in
general
use from Homer onwards
(oWvvtu, oKXvvTag, oWvfiEiovc). By-form
cXitcio. The Lat. ah-ole-re is related
(Fick,
Ztschr. xxi.
3,
Gust.
Meyer
n. Pr.
34).
y) vrv
added to stems
alreadydissyllabic.
In
answer to the
conjectvxres
of Kuhn
(Ztschr.
ii.
469)
and
Benfey
(viii. 93),
who
connect tlae
following
class of verbs with Sanskrit
adjec- tival
stems in
s?^M or s/i/iw,
Leskien
(Stud.
ii.
110)
has
rightlypointed
out that all these forms
are
post-Homeric,
and in
some cases
" like several
of those
treated
already
" of
very
recent date,^
and for that
reason not
likely
to
reproducetyj^es
of
primitiveantiquity.
It is
clear,however,
that the first
r
in these stems stands in
some
relation to the'o-which
appears
in the
structiu-e of the other tenses of all vei-bs of this class.
Kopii-vv-fxi
is related
to
kKopfadrjv as (7f3evfvfii
is to
kaftiaQrjv.
In the case of
XP*^''
rvfxi,
and
x'^f^vfji too, we felt
compelled
to see a connexion between the
fii'st
J'
and
(7.
We shall have to deal in
Chap.
XXI. with the
growth
of
a
sigma
at the end of stems. This class is
composed
of the
following
six verbs
:
46)
Kiparvvjxi
from Plato onwards. Homer's
presents
to aorist-
forms like
Kepnaat
(e 93),
Kepauuaa
[k 362), by
the side of
eTri-Kpfj-crui
[1]164),are
Kspa-i-w(t:epaie
I
203),
Kipaw,
tcipa/jiai,
Kipvrifjii
(^i^lpii] s 78),
Kipvao) (idpya r] 182).
On its derivation and its connexion with
Kepa-
fjLO-Qcp.
Princ. i.
181, Fick,
Wtb. 204
(Skt.
sam-kir-d'ti he
mixes).
47) Kopiri'vfxi.
Veitch
(p.333)
cites Themistius as
the oldest witness 172
to this
form,while the fut.
Kopiw,
the aorists
Kopirrai(^icopiaaai), KopeaQrji at
and- other forms
are in use
from Homer onwards. The
present
has
a
by
-form
KopiaKw (Nicander,Hippocr.).
48) Kpii^idrrvfjii, since
Plato,
while
KpEnaue, icpefxaaag
are as
early
as
Homer;
the middle
""-|3E^a-//at
occurs
from Homer onwards
[tupe^u)
O
21),
and
Pindar,Eurip.
and
Aristoph.
have
Kpi]i.i-rt]-ni.
There is
nothing
in
the
origin
of this verb to
explain
the formation
(Princ.
i.
190).
49)
TTETciyyvfii
since
Aristophanes(Lys.733)
as
present
to the
already
long-established tteVoo-k,
Trerno-crac,
TvtTaaQr^r,
but
generally
it
prefei's
to
follow the
analogy
of the thematic
conjugation{TviTawvu)).
The
by-
'
Gust.
Meyer n. Pr. 37 calls attention to KUT-e-KevTavvvTo (
= KaTeKevTe'iTo)
and
eiri-irco/idj/rujui (
=
eirnrwixd^ai), remarkable
coinages
of a late
age
fomid
by
Lobeck
(Ehem. 208)
in late
prose
writers.
i2
1 1 () PRESENT STEMS WITII NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
cii. iv
form
Tririrj^n
is as early as Homer,
the mickUe
TTtTafiai
is first found in
Pindar. The noun Triracrfxa
is
note-worthy
on account of its
a.
50) aKtcavtvfjn
:
the first sure
instance is in
Xenophon,
while the
Homeric
present
to the fut.
oKtcuj,
and zKioaane
(P 285),
eKitairdiy is
(Tkil-i'rj-fii (ciarTKiC)'u(ri,
Kict'ctrcii). Hesych.
has the
gloss
/.""? drai
"
cncfcai'-
i'vT(u. KieCaofiat may
have been formed in the
same
way
as
Kepanf^tm
{KifmaaOey
332).
The rt. iTKtc comes
in its vowel nearest to the Skt.
sJxhad and
WtwJ,
but Tchid is
undoubtedly nearly
related
(Princ.
i.
305),
which has nasal
expansion
in Skt.
(li}d-nd-d-m%)
and Latin
(sci-n-d-o).
51) ffTopirrvjii
has been
already
mentioned at nos. 21 and 40.
yjp}]vrvij.ui,
which is cited
by
Lobeck
(Ehem. 208),
has
no
authority
whatever. It rests
only on a
conjecture
in
Theophrastus,
Char,
v,
for
"yjiil
rvi'
ueL
c)
Present-stems made
by
the addition of the
syllable va.
The 9th clafs of verbs in
Sanskrit, which, according
to Delbrlick
(Altind.
Vei'bum,
p.
151)
includes 44
regularly
inflected
roots,
aflixes
the
syllable
na to the root as
its characteristic distinction. It is
only
in
the 3rd
plui'.,
as a rule,
that it
appears
unaltered,
e.g.
str-nd-nti
(cp.
Dor. IT
/r-
1 a-) Tt),
in the
singular
the
""
is
lengthened
to
nd,
e.g.
str-nd-
mi
(cp.
Dor.
irir-jci-fii),
and in the
remaining
persons
there
appears
the
173
(specially
Indian form
ni,
which is
regarded
as a
weakening
of
nd,
e.g.
1st
plur.
str-m-mds. The considerable number of such
present-stems
in
Sanskrit is confronted
by
a
very
small number of
presents
in Greek "
only
seven
" in which the
syllablera reallyseems to make the
present-
.stem,
and to these
may
be added two verbs in which this
syllable,
like
the
rv
in several
cases
cited above under
nos. 25 and
30,
and like the
isolated instance of the
reduplication
in the Homeric
Bicdjau),
has become
fast attached to the verb-stem for all tenses.
Only
two verbs
(4
and
9)
correspond
to an
Indian verb with
a
similarly
formed
presexat.
Still
thei'e are several cases of coincidence with Sanskrit verbs which follow
the 7th or
the 5th class. If
Bopp
is
right(Vergl.
Gr.
" 497,
Schleicher
Compend.^752)
in
conjecturing
that the 7th class in Skt.
owes the
na
which is inserted in the middle of its root to the
transposition
of this
syllable
from the end of the root which
was
its
originalplace,
that
con- sequently
e.g.
Uhi-nd-d-mi arose out of
*khid-nd-nii,
the Greeks would
then have
preserved
in
m:iS-i'7]-/.u
the older
form,
and this would make
the coincidence more
complete
still. The
agreement
between the lan- guages
is increased moreover by
the verbs with
a
thematic vowel like
Kai.li(1),re'^iw,
which, as
will
appear,
arose out of verbs of the formation
now
under consideration.
Finally
the thematic verbs in
arcj
also dis- tinctly
reveal their
relationship
to those of this
class,
inasmuch
as a
number -of verbs of the 9th Skt. class make
by
-forms in
-ana or -dna
instead of
-na,
mostly imperatives(2nd sing.),
e.g. a(^-dna
eat
thou,
but
here and there indicatives as well,
e.g.
from the rt. ish
fling, brandish,
2nd
sing.pres.
ish-nd-si,
while the 2nd
sing,impf
is
ishana-s,
3rd
sing.
isJiana-t,
3rd
plur.
mid. isliand-nta
(Delbrlick,
p.
154).
Both
na
and
ana are comnuin
suflixes used
apparentlyhere,as was
the
case
with the
})resent-stems
in
nu,
to denote the
person acting.
On this
supposition
we have in do.m-ana-s the
counterpart
of the Lat. dom-inn-s. If we
suppose
a by-foim
damna
(cp.TOL.6-^af.n'o-Q Eurip.), h'tf^t-i'-q-f-u
will then
CH.
IV.
NASALISED STEMS. 117
bear
a
similar relation to the forms made
directly
from the i-t.
co/i (e.g.
i-Safx-7]-i) as
that of dominari to domare.
Benfeyis
mistaken,
I
think,
in his
attempt
to make out that the forms in -nd-mi are
real denomina- tives,
that
is,are derived
by
the
help
of the
syllableja
from nominal
stems and are
consequently
curtailed from
-na-jd-mi(Orientu. Occident,
.
i.
425).
Greek
distinguishes
forms like
hturdmi, t^ipidf-iei',
Tr/rrarro in
17-i
t-he clearest
possible
way
from contracted forms which
correspond
to
those of the Skt, verbs in
ajdmi.
I see no necessity
whatever to
regaid
forms of
so
antiquated
a
stamp
as alreadyviolently
reduced in
length,
and forms like
caf.ipuu),
tvlti'uuj
etc. on
the other
hand,
whose
genei-;il acceptance
we can see to have been of
gradual growth,
as
the
older of the two kinds. The
analogy
of
ctiKvvfit
and Seiicrvw also makes
againstBenfey's
view. Schleicher
Comp.^
pp.
779, 7.84,
788
gives
the
Slavonic and Teutonic
analogies
to the
present
stems in
na,
in which
the
vowel, as
in
Kdf.iru} etc.,
has become
entirely
thematic
(Ch.-SLsta-na,
Lith.
ci-niij
Qoih..
fraih-na).
^
a)
I'll
in the
present-stemonly.
1) lafi-v-q-fii.
Common from Homer onwards
(3a^i'r;/Lii
E
893,
caiurrjai
a 100, cdfirarai
E 488, 3a/niaro
A
309)
in
poetry
with
by-forms
in
-rau)
(ciai-iva
\
221, "^o/ira
E
391).
There is also
a
present
^a^idi^w,
in Skt.
ddm-jd-mi, dama-jd-mi
and in the
Rigveda
an
isolated daman-
jd-mi,
the latter form
(cp.dXiTuivw)
with
a
similar nasal
expansion
and the
syllable
j"
as
well
(Princ.
i.
287).
2) Kip-i'r)-/j.i,
a
present
to
KepdfTcii
etc. of
an
older formation than
KEpdi'ivjii
under which
(no.
46 in the
precedingclass)
it has been noticed
already.
Attic
poets
used these
forms,
e.g. tKipyaro,
even,
after those in
I'vfii
had
come
into
generaluse.
"
3)
KptJi-i-rrj-fAt,
Kpr]j.i-rd-rT-iov
Find.
Pyth. 4, 25, Kpr]}ivaiitrdv yf"pz\dv
Aesch.
Sept.
2129.
Cp.
no.
48 of the last class. The
r}
of the root-
syllable suggests Kpiji^i-vo-c,
between which then and
Kpi]i.irqixi
there is a
relation like that which
we supposed
between
*dam(a)na-s
and
cd/irrj-fxi.
4) nip-rri-ixi, poetical
from Homer onwards
{mpvaq
X
45, tripvcKTKt
"1
752, TTtprd^ivoQ
S
292).
The
remaining
tenses have to choose between
the steilLS
mpa
(iTrepaerae, irtpdaac)
and
tt^ki {inpadrp').
Another
present
is
"KiirpdcTKh). irp-la-adai
too is
clearly
related. An
analogous
formation is
the Skt.
pdfia-te
for
par-na-te,
he
buys, wagers=7rf'p)'arat (Princ.
i.
339).
Hesych.
has the
gloss.Trop-ra/xtf
ttwAeI)', apparently
from an
Aeolian
dialect.
5) TriX-ya-fjni, only Epic (7r/A"'arai
T
93,
"nlXraro ^
368). By-forms
175
TTfXaw,
-KiXaQio.
Weakening
of
"
to
i as
in
Kiprrifii
and the two following
verbs.
6) 7r/r-rj;-/i", poetical
from Homer onwards.
Trtrrac
X
392, TrtD/oiro
X
402,
TriTyat=iTriTictiTuy Pind. Nem.
5,
11- The
impf.
Trirya "" 7
belongs
to
ttit-jow, cp.
/c/pra,Ecdpia.
7) (TKlE-irj-jji
has been
already
noticed under
nKtldyyvfii (no.
50 of
the last
class)as an
older
present.
Of the Attic writers
Thucydides
alone
appears
to have admitted it
:
dirocTKilyaadcu vi. 98.
/3)ya
which has
firmly
established itselfin the verb-
8) Iv-ra-ixai,
common to all Greek
(3rdplur.impf.
Hdt.
llvyiaTu)
118 PEESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch. iv.
and from Homer onwards with
fii-mly
established
ra
{EcviniuriTo,
cvraroc,
Cvrafftc, cvj'o^ni:,
trvrijdtp'
and
thvvcKTtirjy,
the latter at ^
465, ^iya.
Ivrafjiiioio only a 276, \
414).
On the
analogy
of all the words of this
class the root
syllable
must be
cv.
Is it not
possible
that it
may
be
identical with that of
cvu)^ cvvw,
cvi
iu)
(Hdt.),
and that
Cvrn/^at
is
really
equivalent
in its
originalmeaning
to
vKoovvai,
vwodveadai in.the
sense of
subii'G, put
oneself under an
obligation,
undertake 1 When
Xenophon
says (Oec.
xiv.
3) ?) /cot
Tavrrir
ti)v cn^ciLoaufrfr av inrocvei CicaiTKeii'
;
vTTo^vei is not so
very
far from Ivvaaut. A similar
suggestion
was made
by
Damm in his Lexicon Homericum
s. v.
cvrafiai.
Delbriick,
p.
79,
compares
the Skt.
ju
draw to oneself,
get
into one's
power.
9)
i^iap-ra-^ui,
poetical
from Homer's time
(^jiapmo
O
475,
fxapvu-
l-iit'oc,fxapraro^
fxapvavro), Only
in the
present-stem. Hesychius
has the
presumably
-Aeolic
by-form
fx(ip-va-i.icu
(cp. TTt"ft-va-j.ur).
A
precisely
similar formation is the Skt. mr-nd-mi
maim,
strike dead
(Princ.
i.
406).
Finally we
ought perhaps to
add
/3fpj'w/x"(^a- K\i]p(i)fTwij.Eda
AaKwyec
which looks
just
like
a
conjunctive
to the indie.
*/3fpra/jf0a,
and at the
same
place
we find the
enigmatic
infinitive
fteppeafKXripwaat,possibly
a
mistake for
pAppai
i.e.
hp-ffai.
The words
stronglysuggest
the Skt.
var
(vr-no-mi)
choose.
176
B)
Stems
which are always Dissyllabic.
What
distinguishes
this division from the
preceding
is the fact that
" in the
case
of the stems
now to be discussed the
sjjecial present-formation
has
nothing
whatever to do with
making
the stems
dissyllabic.
It is
ti'ue that
we cari here often arrive from the
dissyllabic
stems at
a
monosyllabic root,
but
we must seek some other
origin
for the second
syllable.
What this
origin
is it is often hard and sometimes
impossible
to
say.
We will first enumerate the stems of this
kind, arranging
them
according
to their final
letter,
and
try
at the end if not
thoroughly
to
explain
how
they come to be
dissyllabic,
at least to
classify
them accord- ing
to the main features of the
process by
which
they
became
so.
a)
Stems in
a.
1)
ay",
one
of the commonest stems of this kind from Homer
on to
the time of the Attic
prose-writers{riyo^ot
"^
175, ^'lyafirjy
Plato
Rep.
367
e).
The
present
has the
by-forms oya/o^iat(a-yoto/if'jov i^-uku
tpya
V 16),aya'^'w
(Aesch. Suppl, 1062), uydop.ai{o'l
te Becut; uydaffde Trap'
avlpdair tvi'dterrSai
e
119).
Buttmann Lexil. i, 236 has
given a
good
account of the
history
of this stem. The fundamental
notion, as in
^nyaipu)(from f.ieyu";)
is rate
high,esteem,
hence the fm-ther
meaning
of
marvel,
wonder
at,
but also of
envy,
grudge. Throughout
the remain- ing
formations the second
a
remains short
except
in
ayijrnc.
This fact
and the double
a
in
nydrrcraTo
P
71,
lead
Leskien,
Stud. ii.
113,
to assume
a stem
dyac. Anyhow dya}.iui
must be related to
dyav
and
dyavoc,
dyav-po-Q.Cj^.
Princ. i. 211.
2)
lea with the
by
-form
Inn,both, as
I have shown at Princ. ii. 195
f.,to be i-eferred to the
primary
form
c"fo,
which in tui-n is to be
re-
gaided as an
expansion
of the rt. div
appear,
shine.
cmf-u)v khtKi^n^ov,
f.i'oEii^^oy
(Ilesycb.), teo-ro C 242,
tidroi
conj.
pres.
on a Tegeaticinscrip- tion
(above
p. 61).
Aor. IvdfTtraToN
458, S 23, e
474 etc.
CH. IV.
DISSYLLABIC STEMS. 119
3)
"o
for
e(Tfi
is the basis of some
of the forms of the
preterite
of the
rt.
ec,
for instance of the 1st
sing.7jaor
'ia
(:^Skt.dsa-m),ya
E
808,
ed
A
321,
Hdt. ii.
19,
whence the contracted old- Attic
Jji.
For the 2nd
sing.
Hdt. has
iag (i.187).
In this
way
alone is it
possible
to account 177
for the
)'
of the 3i'd
sing.
For an v
after
a vowel that had
always
been
long we
could at most
only
find
an analogy
in
)^^"' (discussed above,
p.
92). )){()')
is to "]aas "CfiE((i')
to ehiEd. The
plviral eot-e
is found
only
in Hdt.
(iv.119, v.
92).
To the
same
class of forms also must
belong
the
imperativer/ro"
for ^earw cited from
Hippocrates.
The stem
ia then became in time
io, i(,
that
is,
the
a adopted
the
analogy
of
the thematic vowel
: 'ioic, 'ioj',
and in all Greek
"wr (st.eo-rr), just as
beside the forms like
lajird-jjitr
discusse'd
above,
there arise such forms
as l-ca^i'ov,
which we shall come to later
(^icHj^m^or Hesych.
Gust.
Meyer n.
Pr.
41).
A
special
group among
the
preterite
forms is made
l)y
those with
a long
second
vowel,
which
occur
exclusively
in Homer
and Hesiod
(Rzach
Dialekt des Hes.
456) :
2nd
sing,erj-ffda
X
435, tt
420, ^ 175,
3rd
sing.0/-1'
or Sjrjr.
The
genuineness
of these forms has
been
questionedby
Leo
Meyer
Ztschr. ix.
386,
and
by myself.
Stud. i.
2,
293. For
eria-duwe
might easily
write eeada and for
erir,
in far the
greater
number of
passages,
'hi: Hartel in his Homer. Stud. i. 46 has
defended the received
forms,
and I have
replied
to him in
my
Stud. iv.
478. It must be
granted
that tbree
passages (r283, \p316, .t. 343)
will
only
admit of
ijrj
r,
and that the
lengthening
of the second
syllable
of
eev
in several instances would be
very
remarkable,
and further that
a
support
can be found for
"r]r,
ipji'
in the Lat.
era
s, erd-mus,
and
possibly
too in
the Skt.
cisl-t
which
seems to have
come
from
an *dsd-t. The
length
of
the vowel would of course be of the
same
kind
as
in
'iXij-di, i-t6}]-r.
Only
the
"'
tcpeX^vrrriKui'
after
a long
vowel which is not the result of
con- traction
is without a
parallel.
4)
epa.
we
""to rill
epa/^iai
F
446,
3
328, ijpafiarSappho,
then in
Pindar and Attic
poets,
with the
by
-form
Ipadj-irn (n
208
fr/e
to Trpivy'
Epaarrde),
that
is,just
like
dyaf^iai.rjpdnuT
II 182 like
it'iydrraTo, I'jpdfffTdTO
Y 223 like
dyiKmaro.
Attic writers have in
prose only Epdw.
The
derivation of this stem is uncertain,
though
there is much to recom- mend
Fick's view
(Ztschr.
xix.
247,
Wtb. i.^
186)
that
Epa
corresponds
to the Skt.
ra,
ram (rdm-a-te,
Ved.
ram-?m-ti),
which
though meaning
'
enjoy
oneself
'
in the
middle,
is often
applied
to the love of
one sex
for
the other. If this
explanation
is the true one the.s would have to be
178
regarded
here
as a prothetic
vowel.
5)
(X". The
only
form
preserved
is the 2nd
sing,imperat.
'iXri-di
(y 380, TT 184)
with the same
anomalous
length
of vowel
as
in
^icmBi,
ffnriwXridi.
'iKaOi,
with
apparently
short
a,
occurs in Simon. C. 49
(Be.^),
and the
a
is
certainly
short at Theocr.
xv. 143,
and
Apollonius
Ehod. iv.
1014,
the latter
having
also the 2nd
phu-.
'i\a-E iv. 984.
By
-forms are
iXdoi'Tai B
550, "/\?//cr;o-i
f
365,
'ikuffKEcrdaiZ 380. d and-
a nrr
after it occur
in
just
the
same
way
as in the case of nos. 1, 2,
and 4
:
iXcKTrreai
(conj.)
A 147. "
That the form
'iWa-di,
2nd
pku".
EWa-re cited from Calli-
machus
^
is identical with the stem
iXa,
is doubted
by
Ahrens Aeol.
284,
and that not without
reason,
as
in
spite
of
Brugman
Stud. iv. 120 the
meaning
is not
quite
the
same.
'iXXa-di
(cp.
Princ. i.
464)
has been
con-
8
[Frag.
121 Blomf.
Cp.
Jacobs Anth. vol. is.
p. 408.]
.120 PKESEM' STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL. en. iv.
nected with the Homeric ovXe and the Lat.
salve,
and the
meaning
suits
this
admirably.
In its formation at
any
rate
iWa-Oi,
which
apparently
stands for *rrtXhi-Oi,belongs
to our
present
class.
G) (vf^a.
The existence of this stem
depends on an accent. The
questionis,ought
we at A 260 to write
keocji'tui as
is
usually
done with
the
approval
of the Schol.
L.,or
with I. Bekker to write
Kepwi'Tcn
1 The
latter suits KffiaaaBe
y
332,
tcEpwi'ro
o 500,
KEp(iu)i'To
6 470. A tliii'd
formation of the stem is to be
seen
in
Kepau
I 203
(cp.ayuio^ni).
Ktpa-
/.tag
also
points
to a
stem
Kepa,
while
Kprirlfp, Kpu-rijp
start from
Kpa
(Princ.
i.
181),
and there are
also traces of
Kep.
iKiparrffe, KtnuauQ
as
in
no. 5.
7) Kin as a
by-form
of
kei only
occurs
in Kiurrdai
'
KtlaBai
Hesych.
Lobeck- Rhemat. 178 distrusts this form.
8)
Kia as a
by-form
of
ki (/cn-v^ua)
is
only
attested
by Hesych.
ikiaro-
etcu'i'iTo. The existence of this stem is to a
cex'tain extent established
by
IJ."T-f-Kla-6-o-y.
9)
Kpf^a.
O 21
iicpi/jw.
In Pindar and the Attic writers
Kpi/jiafiai,
EKpinaTO. Cp.
p.
115,
no.
48
KpBf-uivvv^i.
10) 7r"7-a.
TTETcii^tai
is a
somewhat later
by-form
of
TrtVo^mt,
first in
Pindar,
while the aorist
(.tttuto
is as earlyas
Homer
(N
592, vTripTrruTO
X
275, I'tTTOTTTafjieroc
B
71);
there is also from Hesiod onwards
(0pp.98)
the active
Itztt]}'.
Hei-e then the
present-stemirfra
confronts
an
aorist-
stem Trrn.
179 11)
T^pia.
TrpiciTo
a
430=o 483. With Attic writers the
form,
along
with
Trp/w^nt,irpiainrji',
Trpiacro, Trpiafrdai, Trpiixfiei'OQ,
counts for
an
aorist to the
pres. wyio^ai,
but
belongs
to the aorists which have
obtained theii- aoristic force
onlythrough
their contrast to other forms
(cp.below,
p.
125).
The stem
irp-ia
has
clearly
some
relation to the rt.
irep
in
Trep-vrf-fxi
and
vrpa
in
TTL-irpa-aKw.
It
corresponds
to the Skt.
vj-d-prija-te
he is
occupied.
If
tteo meant sell,
t-irp-ta-fiTji'
meant I
got
sold to
me,
i.e.I
bought.
The
peculiarity
of this
stem, then,
consists in
the addition of the
syllablela,
which reminds
us forcil)ly
of the i-class of
thematic verbs
(cp.below,
Ch. XIV. iii.
1).
b)
Stems in
e.
12)
(\e. The vowel is short
only
before
jt : ae-yr-eg
E 526
(cp.
3rd
plur.asiai
Hes.
Theog. 875),longeveiywhere
else
:
ari-roy
I
5, aiifiEvai
^
214, (u'lyai
y
183,
a^-T"i
"t"
386, (u'li^EyoQ L, 131,
ar)Tai
Aesch.
Choeph.
391. iu came from
ItfE,
and
corresponds
to the Skt. vd
(vd-mi),
Princ. i.
483.
13) C(6.
Cit-VTaL '^
475, OVTWQ
kyliEaay
ra-yEwq
Kvyaq
2
584,
ciwy-cu
P
110,
CtEjiai f^iEy
"yjcipirraadai, CLEfiai
c' riirta
ipaaOai
Aesch. Pers. 701.
A
change
to the thematic
conjugation
accounts for cio-i-ro
p
317,
liu-
fj-eyog
Aesch. Eumen. 385. In the
perf.
M-hin,
Sei-hia
a corresponds
to
the
"
in clE-aa
y,
and that is
why
the
e
appeal's
in the
oj^t.CE-hE-ir] Plato,
Phacdr. 251 a. On the stem
ci,
cu see Princ. i. 291. The Skt.
dijd-mi
I
lly
bears to dUffOai a
relation similar to that of
pri-ja-te
to
irpiuaOai.
14)
OiE
only
found in
Hesych.,
in
dlrj-jjif ttoiu),
Hiiirrai'noiiiaai. Ap- parently,
then,they
are expansions
of the rt 6e. Is this
possibly
another
instance of the
analogy
of the
i-class,
and has the same
addition
(origin- ally
ja)
been made here to the root itself which was
made to the root
e xpanded by c in fa-c-iol
CH. IV. DISSYLLABIC STEMS. 121
15) le,preserved
iu the
general
Greek inf.
li-vni,
in the
opt. ]t-ir]
(T 209),
in the
impf. //to,
contr.
r}a(Plato,Dem.),
where
o
stands
on
the
same
footingas
that of
cticut,
"
jjto-ur
like-eeleirnj'
(cp.v. Bamberg,
Ztschr.
f.
Gymnasialwesen 1874,
p.
37, 623).
Diificulties
are
created
by
the
diphthong ft
in the Attic forms
rj-si-r
(Xen, PL), rj-ei-rrOa(Plato
Euthyphi-.4),
ij-ii
or
^-ei-v(Plato),i'l-ei-fjer (Plato),
7]-ei-T" (Andoc).
Unless it be assumed that this
preteriteadopted
the
analogy
of the
plu- perfect
(Kiihner,
i.
662),
an
assumption
which
gets
no
support
from the
180
meaning,
or
that there
was
composition
with the
preterite
of the rt.
eq
(rjei
for
*/;"-", *//f-o-"
like
i'jCei
for
ijce-e jjct-cre),
there is
nothing
for it but
to take
7/
as
the
augment (cp.above,
p.
88),
and
ei to be the
same
intensification of the
i
which took
place
in
"!-/"", though
the
plurals
y-ei-fi"i',7}-"L-TE
would stillbe
very extraordinaryas
compared
with
'i-fxei',
'i-Tc,
and could
only
be due to
a false
analogy.
Of these three
possible
explanations
the thu-d
seems to me
the best.
Hesychius moreover
has
tf-cTffo
"
l3adiilov(Tn,
eirj-jjiL (Lob."ii^fxi)'
TrtipevojjLai,
eiev'
iTropevErn.
Perhaps,
too,
the remarkable
'i/devai
T 365 is to be refeiTed to an
earlier
U-ijerai,
This would be an
analogous
contraction to that which
we assumed above
for
7ii'.As k is to
/,
so is the Skt.
jd
go
to i. The
adoption
of the
thematic
conjugation
has
produced /wr,
hiit]i', 'ioi^i,
rjo-fitr
(A.22).
16)
KixE.
The whole of the forms
belonging
here:
Kix^'j-rr)}'
K
376,
Kf)(^)]-f.ui'ai
O
274, Ki^iiiai
TT 357, Kiyji-j^uyo-c
E 187 show
a long vowel,
with the
exceptionnaturally
of those which demand
an
e,
such
as
KiyEtf.
n
342,
Ki^Eir]
R
188,
and those which
are
by
nature
indifferent,
such
as
the
conjunctive: /vv^fio^er,
or
perhaps more
correctlyi.tx'V'A'^''
"I" 128. At
w
284 Bekker'-^ is no doubt
Tight
in
readingkIxvc
for the
traditional
iv''x^'^'
^"^-
^'^"'X'?^'-
"
-'-^
may
be
doubted, therefore,
whether
we
have to do with
Aeolising
forms of
a
contracted verb like
"popf}yai
etc. or
with
a primitive
stem
vtx'?-
The root occurs
in the shortei" forms
UTTEKiEaf
Aristoph.
Ach.
869, KlE,aTn'
tvpev,
tXa[3si', ip'tyKEi'.
A still
more
expanded present
is
/"")("
''w. Cp.
a/;^a
(12).
c)
Stems in
o.
17) OJ'O. ovn-rrai
p
378, oi'oyrni
"p
427, oi'Oiro
Q
239,
N
287, ilnovro
(Hdt.).
The
by
-form
ovr-E-ati^t)
of the thematic
conjugation
has been
replaced
at ii 241
by
I, Bekker
by
Aristarchus's
di'oaaai^^E).
The
same
scholar
suggests
the
impf.ujioto
for the
aor. wraro
P
25,
not without
reason,
inasmuch
as
there is no other trace to be found of
a
rt.
or
in the
sense of revile. The aorist is rather
wiorru-jiip'
(P 173,
cp. w/xo-o-o),
partic.6ro(7ffaj.iEvoc,
fut.
orocranncK,
verbal
adj.
Homei'ic
uroarvg,
Pind.
jg^
oroToc,
whence the
frequentative
droro^'ttj'
(Hes.,
Homeric
hymns).
Pick,
Wtb. I.^
126, conjectiu-es
the root to be nad revile.
Unfortunately
the
only suppoi't
for this root are
isolated instances in Zend
{nad-ent
despiser).
That the Skt. nid
{nind-a-ti) despise
is weakened from
nad,
and that the Skt. nad bellow is the
same
verb are
pui-e
conjectures.
Still this
combination,
which would
give
us
the stem ovoZ with
a
pro-
thetic
o as
the foundation of the Greek
forms,
is worth
noticing.
This 2
explains
the
o-c
d)
Stems in
v.
18) arv. BowQ
ci o'l
I'lVVTO
Epyor
e 213,
uvvfXEQ
(v,
lect.
avo^iEq)
122 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch. iv.
Theocr. vii.
10,
t'D^vrai in
Oppian
and Nicander.
Along
with this A 56
ovK
ai'vu),
and K 251 rvE 'dyerai,
tpyoy
'ticotroS
473, I'ji'ov ocov
y
496.
Attic
writers,
l^esides
oi'uw,
and
avw
which is
certainly
derived from
it,
have
ft
)'6--w of the --class. It will not do to start from the last form
and
give,as
has been
suggested,
the series
ayvT-w *cti'u"r-w
uvv-io,
because
r hardly
ever
passes
into o-
before
any
letter but
",
and the
o-
thus
arising
out of
a r never
disappears(cp."pr}ni).
A fresh
complication
is
introduced
by
the fact that hi
vw
is not
only
attested to be
good
Attic
(Herodian
i.
541),
but also derives
su^jport
from the Lacon.
KarrarELc,
i.e.
Ka^avfiQ' uvviiq Hesych (M.S.
Kanupy^ic, cp.
Alirens,
Dor.
37).
Pott
accordingly
concludes his discussion of these forms with
a
'
non
liquet.'
" Since
we are
entitled to start from the
aspiratedform, we
might
possibly
find
something
to
lay
hold of in the Skt.
sanoti,
middle
samite
possibly
in the sense
of
adipisci,
obtiiiere. Still
Hesychius'sgloss
yaireTai
'
drvei which has been altered because of its
peculiarity
into
yaifVTat
or y'aii'VTui, warns us not to be too
sure about it.
19)
eini, pv,
drag,
in Homer
only thematic,so too in Attic.
Hesiod,
however,
has the intin.
elpv-fisi'ai 0pp.
818.
e'lpvroce
(puayuvor
o^v at
X
90
Buttmann,
ii.
181,
is
no
doubt
right
in
takingas a pluperf.
mid.
The Homeric
ahipvanv
and the alternation of
", u,
and
p
in the initial
(pvarai^co, pvTi'jp, pvjjLoc)
leave
no
doubt that the word once began
with a
consonant,
of which thei-e ai-e traces
enough
in Homer's
verse
(Stud.
vi.
266),n(T in the fut. and
aor.
182 20)
tpv, pv
watch, guard,keep,t/pvarcu (Of'/Jtarac')
A
239, r?/a epvrrdai
to watch the
ship i 194, tipvnOai
ukoitlv
y
268, /it'yohCjjia \p151, oloc
yap fT(f)ii' tpvfTo
TTi/Aat X
507, 6c AvKir]v e'ipvro
0
542, "u
pa
yrvXac
eipvvTO
M
454, (u
f-iETrrxpoc TTfp apvuTO
X
303, Soph.
0. R.
1351, Ipvro
Kdiei7U)(rev
(following
K 44
ij tic '^'f
fpixTrrsTdi
?'/"irawo-fi),
epvTo
with
a
passive
meaning
Hes.
Theog. 304, ?/
o' eovt' eh'
'Apijioitriv vnu ")^id6ra.
In the
fut. and aor. we find
rra
and
a
short vowel
(ouav
ye
jjovXac e'lpvrrao
Kpor/wj'oe
^
230).
The shorter
pv
occurs with the
same
meaning
in
pdaBai.
O
141, pilar
S 515. With Ahrens and Kiihner
(i.821)
we
must
altogetherreject
the identification of this I'oot with the
preceding
one,
which Buttmann
(Lexil.
i. 63
fi".)
tries to defend in
a
very
forced
way.
For
a
fuller discussion of this
see Stud. VI. 265 AT.
epuatiai
cor- responds
exactly
in its
use
with the Skt.
var defend,
protect (Pott
W. L.
ii.
575),
from which
e.g.
comes
va7--fi-tdr
averter, protector,
vdr-v-tha
defence,
screen,
shield
(cp. epvj.ia, epvfuoc),
Zd. varatJia
bulwark,
avaretha defenceless. I
regardepv
then
as var
expanded by
the addition
of
u. var
itself has survived without this addition in
ep^u prop.
It is
true the initial / is not
completely
established
(Kncis
'
De
Digammo,'
P-19')-
21)
\\v.
IXvjderoV
ep)("^fi'o"', Trpo/ja/j'otTo He.sych.
This word has
clearly
the same
stem
as eiXi-n-ohc.
It
occurs in
a
thematic form
in
elKvajti]!'
^va-rjroi'eS,eXK(i)i'
iri'tca
Soph.
Phil. 291
(cp. uXvoixeroq
ib.
702).
22) Xat^v. Xd!^vaOai
in
Eiu'ipides
and
Aristophanes
for the Homeric
Xo^eaOfu,occurring
first in the
hymn,
in Merc. 316
tTrt /Bouo-irf/\a;uro
KvSipoi' 'Epfi^y, Xd(va6e Eurip.
Bacch. 503
(Arist.Lys. 209),irpocXai^v-
f^erai
Hec. 64. On the difiiculties in the
way
of
a connexion of these
forms with
C
with those with
/3see Princ. ii. 323.
23)
TTO'v, preserved
in
nirif-TO-Q
and
TTirvi.iivrj' avveri)
ical
TttTrrviiivr]
CH. IV.
-
DISSYLLABIC STEMS.
123
apparently
from vw by
the
spontaneous development
of
an j (Princ.
ii.
404).
When we come to consider the
origin
of these stems and to ask how
they
came to be
dissyllabic,
we
shall have to
distingiiish
between
cases
which are evidently,
of
a
different kind. The vowel which makes the
second
syllablemay
have been added either at the
beginning,
middle, or 183
end of the root. Thus we
get
three classes
:
1)
The vowel was
added at the
beginning,or
in other words the
2nd
syllable
is due to
prothesispossibly
in the stem
epa
(4),probably
in
aJ-"
(12),
and in
(]fo{i^) (17).
2)
The vowel was
inserted
undoubtedly
in
-n-iw (23),perhaps
in
fepv
di'aw
(19),
inasmuch as it
apparently
stands for
J-epva
and this for
ftp/r
(Lat.
verro
for
verso).
The
v
is then of the same
kind
as
that in
KuXinrrcj,
i'jXvOor,roXvTTT],
Princ. ii. 403.
3)
In
by
far the
majority
of these
cases the 2nd
syllablewas
added
to the end of the stem. This mode of
expansion
is
radically
different
from the two
preceding
kinds inasmuch as there the
process
is
a purely
phonetic,
while here it is
a
formative one.
For some of the foi-ms of this
class
Westphal (Meth.
Gr. i.
2, 167) conjectures
a connexion with the
nasal
present-expansion,
more particularly
for
Kpf/;ta-/^oi
which he derives
from
*Kpefiai-ijicii,
so
that the
only
essential difference between it and
Kpij^tvajdcti
lies in the
position
of the nasal. The
only
stems
though
for
which this
explanation
is at all
probable
are such
as
have
by
-forms with
a
nasal
strengthening,
and the
only
other that has this is
Kepa
(6). Trera
(10)
has most
likely no
connexion with
TrErdi't'v/M,
as
the rt.
2)atfly
(Princ.
i.
359)
has
nothing
to do with
TtiTuyvvjjLi.
It is
justpossible
that some of the roots in
v
may
be
similarly
con- nected
with nasalised forms " that
ipv,
pv
guard,
save
(20)
may
have
arisen fi'om
ffp-ru=
Skt. vr-nu
(yrnomi),hprv hecoxamg feppv (cp.
6\Xv
from
oXvv),
and then
feipv (^eipvarai).
Joh.
Schmidt,
Yocal. ii.
262,
assumes vru.
varu,
i-fpv,
all to have been
phonetic
varieties of the I'oot
var.
IXv
(21)
too we might conjecture
to have arisen from
ftX-w,
and
perhaps appeal
to iX-i-vv-uj loiter. A
very
bold
man
might conjecture
for
Xai^v (22) a
form Xac-i'v
sprung
from
Xafj-vv
and correlative to
Xafift-nio.
There
appears
to be at least one
clear instance of
an analogous
gi'owth
of
i^from
ci-,
and that is Cc'*oc
by
the side of
ci'ocpoc,Y)'o(poQ
(Princ.
ii.
372),
but there is no l3r
here.
In
a
few
cases we thought
we might
assume an expanding ia=ja,
i.e.
in
TTp-ta (11),perhaps
in
cie (13),
die
(14).
There is some
support
for
this to be found in
Hesychius'sgloss(pv'Cuvai
'
(pvytli',
ceiXmaai. If
so
it would be
a case
of
present-tense-expansion, only
with the vowel in its 184
more
primitive
form.
On the other
hand,
there are a
number of stems left in which it is
hard
to establish
anything
more about the final vowel than that it con- stitutes
an expansion
of the root. To this number
belong
the two stems
la
by
the side of
e". (3)
and h
by
the side of
/ (15),
in both of which the
correspondence
of Sanskrit
proves
the
expansion
to have been
primitive,
and
again
^ta
(2)
and the'two stems
kui (7
and
8).
It is
possible
that
we
here have to deal with what
were oiiginally
noun-stems in
o,
the
predecessors
and
t}^es
of the numerous a-stems
whose
a
turned
thematic,
and thus in Greek became sometimes
o
and sometimes
t.
On this
assump-
124 PRESENT STEMS WITH NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
ch. iv.
tion this
a
would
come as near
to the thematic vowel
as
the
la
of the
last jianigiaph to the
lo,
jo
which forms the base of the thematic i-class,
eras
the
I'a
of
ctifx-pa-ntv
to the
vo
of
Kafx-vo-^ey
and the
vt
of
Ka^-re-rs.
We should thus have here,
too, a
kind of
present-formation, but
one
with
no
semasiologieal distinction, for
no one
will
try,
I think, to find
a
difference of
meaning
between the Doric }]c he
was
and
")"',
which
we
have assumed to be contracted from
"/ei'.
.CH. y.
AORIST-STEMS WHICH HAVE NO THEMATIC VOWEL. 125
CHAPTER V.
AORISI-STEMS WHICH HAVE NO THEMATIC VOWEL.
AoBiSTS which like
'i^vv,'iftnc,
"y"'w
contain
nothingbeyond
the
necessary
elements of a
vei'bal form wei-e still called
syncopated
aorists
by
Butt-
mann.
It is
only
necessary,
however, to read the note on
p.
2 of vol.
ii.-of the
'
Ausfuhi'l. Gr.' "
a
note with
a special
interest for the historian
of
grammaticalthought
" to see that Buttmann's scientific conscience had
already
broken with such
a
nomenclatm-e. Buttmann himself
saw that
what
"
distinguishes
these forms from such
as 'ikLivor,
tcpaKov
is the fact
18.5
that,as
he
says
at
p.
9,
'
they reject
the
connectingvowel,'
while zXiiroi'
has
one.
On
p.
9, however,
he
expressly
combats the
supposition
that
i^vv
has come from
i(pvov,
and holds that 'in strict
theory
'
it is
possible
to assume
that we
have here
a
thii-d kind of aorist. Buttmann took
here,
that
is,
the same
road
as our
Sanskrit
grammarians,
who
actually
assignseparate
numbers to the two
corresponding
forms in this lan- guage
d-blm-t=(.-(pv,
and
d-lipa-twhich, though
not in its
root,can in
its formation be
compared
with e-Xiwe.
Notwithstanding
Buttmann
directly
afterwards falls in
again
with the
syncope theory,
when he
says
that in forms like
e(j)i]i-, 'icvr,
where
a long
vowel
precedes
the
personal
termination,
'
the
syncope
is not
pure,
for in the
place
of the
connecting
vowel we have here the
lengthening
of the vowel of the stem.' It is an
astonishingtheory,according
to which
something
which
never existed
gets
replacedby something
else. Hence
Lobeck,
in his note on Buttmann,
p.
11
f.,prefers
a
difierent view. He called these foi-ms
'primitive
im- perfects
from the
hypothetical presents/3
"?/."(
etc.,'
or, dii-ectly afterwards,
'
defective aorists of the Aeolic
conjugation.'
There is
no more
ground
for the foi'mer
description
than there would be for
calling
eXittov
an
imperfect
of
a
lost *At7rw. The latter
gives
rise to no
end of confusion
by
the vise of the term
'
aorists.' The difference between
an
imperfect
and
an
aorist is
essentiallya
negative
one. As far
as
form
goes,
all we
can
say
amounts to
this,
that aorist-forms
ai"e such forms of the
preterite,
conjunctive,optative,imperative,infinitive,
and
participle,
to which
there
are no corresponding
indicatives in the
present,perfect,
or
future.
t-(pr}-y
and
e-firi-y are formed in
precisely
the same
way ;
the former is
an
imperfect
because
(prj-fil
is in
existence,
the latter
an aorist because
*pi}iJi
is not and
never
has been. The
same is the
case
with
/3aijjahp' /3j/9i
ftrjtaias
compared
with
"pw (palrfj' fuBi "pai'at.
The Greeks
gradually
accustomed themselves to use all forms of the kind which had
a cor- responding
present,
in connexion with this
present
and with
a chirative,
and to use
those that had not with
an
aoi-istic
meaning.
To tliis im- portant
point
we
shall often have to recur.
It has been the fashion
\QQ
lately
to characterise most of the forms which
come
into considei'ation in
this
chapteras aorists 'which follow the
conjugation
of the verbs in
-fii.'
126 AORIST-STEMS WHICH HAVE NO THEMATIC VOWEL. ch. v.
The aorists in
question
may
be
regaixledas a
i-elic of
antiquity
pecu.liar
to the Greek
language.
If
we
except
some
faint and uncertain
traces in Churcli-Slavonic,
it is
only
in Sanskrit and Iranian that
any- thing
of the kind is found.
Here, however,
the
correspondence
with
Greek forms is
very
extensive. From roots
ending
in
a
vowel
we
get
the
followingcorresponding
aoiists
:
Skt.
d-f/d-m
=
e-l3r]-v, irnpf. d-(figd-m, cp.
/3(/3as (seeabove,
p. 105).
Slit. d-(ld-})i "" *(-8co-v, impf.
d-dadd-m = e-Si'Sw-j/.
0. Pers. a-dd = *ed"o.
Zd. 3rd
pi.
dd-n = 86-v for e-bo-v.
" '
Skt. middle a-di-ta = i'-8o-To.
Skt. d-dhd-m =
*e-dr)-v impf.
d-dadhd-m =
i-ridrj-v.
Middle d-dhi-ta = e-de-ro.
Skt. d-sfhd-))i =
f-(TTr]-v ijn-pf. d-tislifha-7n {'i(TTT]-v),
Skt. d-bhu-t =
"-(f)" (impf.
d-bhava-t different from
e-(j)ve).
Zd. 3rd
pi.
btt-n =
cf)v-v
for
e-cpv-vij).
Skt.
imperat."^ru-dhi
= kKv-Qi.
There is also a single
instance from
a
consonantal root
:
Skt.
c(,r-ta=u)p-To.
When we
reflect that this
antiquated
formation of the aorist is
rare,
the
agreement
in the
case
of
seven forms becomes
very significant.They
are
all from vei-bs in
extremely common
use,
which
clearlykept
the
same place
in Greek and Indo-Persian from the
very
earliest times.
Greek, however,
oiitdoes all the sister
languages
in the extent to which
svich forms occur.
We shall find that there
are more than
fortyprimitive
aorists of this
kind,
while
Benfey (Kui-ze
Skt. Gr.
p.
159)
reckons that
only
eleven verbs in Sanskrit make
use of this
form, though
he does add
that
'
in the Vedas there ai'e such forms from other vei'bs
besides,'
and
Bopp (Sktgr."
374
b) givessome of them. In
Sanskrit,too,
the middle
voice of these forms is
rare,
and
moreover is confined to the
Yedas,
while
the
language
of Homer has
preserved a
particularly large
number of
such middle aorists. The
only
fundamental difierence between the two
lg7
languages
lies in the
quantity.
In the vowel-stems the vowel is in
Sanskrit,
with few
exceptions,^long,
while in Greek it is often
shoi-t,
so
that
though
d-sthd-ta and
t-aTrj-re
coincide in the
length
of the stem-
syllable,
d-dd-ta and
e-cu-re
do not. We shall reserve this
point
for
the
present,
and
proceednow to a review of all the Greek aorists of this
formation,ari'anging
them after the
principlesadopted
in
Chap.
IV. in
the
case
of the
presents,
I. MONOSYLLABIC AORIST-STEMS.
A)
From
the Unaltered Koot.
a)
Eoots
ending
in
"x,
1) "-/3"j-)'.
Dor.
t-ftd-y, common to all dialects and all
periods,
carried
through
aU moods and verbal
nouns : /3w,fiauji', i^t'idi (by-form
/3d in
"
To these
belongs
the above-mentioned
f7'?/"77"'
=
KXi!et,
and also the likewise
already
noticed middle forms ddita, ddJiita,as too d-stJn-ta raiddle io d-s:tu't=
i-a-TTj. There are isolated instances of
d-da-m, dda-s, a-da-t from
u-dd, and
dha-t from the rt. dM, Moreover forms of the 8rd
pi.
like d-dii-s must have
gone
through a stage
in which
they
had a short
a. Cp. Delbriick, Ve7'b.
p.
87 ff.
CH. V. MONOSYLLABIC STEMS. 127
compounds,
Lacon.
Kufjam,
i.e.
KctT-ftdQi), ftiijieycn^ j^r^iai, (iciQ.
The
vr
preserved
the
originalquality
of the
vowel, even in
Ionic,
both in the
participial
stem
/3(("t
and in the 3rd
pi.*t'-/3"-)'r, though
it also made
the vowel short
: fjuvT-uQt-[mv.
The same
effect was
produced by
the
t
in the
optative: fla-ii}-v.
It is to be noticed that Homer varies the
quantity: "/3//-);r
Z
40, /3//rr/i'
M
330,
tS
281,
285" /Sdrj^rA 327, E
778,
1
182, 192,
K
469,f/3"yaoj'
9
343,
A
460,
M
16,
but also
vKipfiaaav
M 469.
2) i-lpa-v(Hdt.i.?p)]}'),
Homer has
only
the
participle cnraSpagir 65,
p
516. The 3rd
pi.dnilpav
occurs
Soph. Aj. 167,
and from this time
onward it was
in
general use. The vowel in
dnicpajxiv (Aristoph.
fr. ii,
1155 Mein.
Com.),d-KocpdiuL
etc. is
always long.
3) dito-KXa-Q,
only
in Anacreon fr, 17 B
: i]pi(Trr]ira
/.lEr
hpiov
Xtirrvv
188
fiiKpoi'
oVo/cXae. K\d-e bears to the
pres.
kXckii
just
the
same
relation
as
that of
cvc
to ^v(i).
4) nXri-ro,(filled oneself)
in Homer and
Aristophanes:
"E" 16
irXrjro
pooc
KeXdcwf
ittli^ul,
'itvku)v re kul di'OpiJjj',
"^ 607
EfxtrXrjsTO, Aristoph.Vesp.
1304
eriwXjjrn
ttoWwv
KdynduJi',
opt. efnrXjJTo, imperat. tixirXij/TO, part.
ifX7rX})jj."t'0Q
also in
Aristophanes.^
5) KaTa-TrTi)-Tr]r, only
in Homer: G 136 rwo' 'iinrix) ceirrai'TE
KaTUTrrti-
TTjv
wtt'
oxsT(pu'.
The stem
nrr]
occurs
elsewhere
only
in the
perf.part.
7r"7rr?/wrfr,
the
pres.
7rr//(T(Tw
is formed from
a stem
tvtuk.
"
dwoTZTu^evoQ
6)
i-(TTr)-v,
like
"'-/3";-i'
in universal
use,
and caiTied
through
all moods
with the infin. and
part..
Dor. and Aeol.
imperat. crrudi,
Dor. inf.
Trpoara/uer.
The vowel is
only
short where it is succeeded
by vr,
in the
3rd
pi. ea-rdi',
(ttuv
which are Homeric
(alsoecmjaar
N
488)
and
Doric
(tabb.HeracL),
and in the
part.ardi'T-uQ,
and before the
i
of the
opt. rrrah]}'.^
7) "-(p6r]-v.
X 58
"(l)diiQ
Tve'CoQ tujv f;
"yw
(Tvv vifi
jjeXaii'i],
II 314
ecpdrj,
A 451
00"7,
3rd
pi. "p6u}'
A
51, part. vTvofQciQ.
The
long
vowel is
as
persistent as it is in
nos. 1, 2,
and
6,
and
so we
have the Attic
'i"t"dm.uv,
efOriaar,
the Homeric
conj.(pOi'ir],
the inf.
(f)6iji""ti
Hdt. and Attic. In
the
middle-,however, we have
(pddjisroQ (N 387),vTzoipda^ivr] o
171 in
contrast to
nXijiueioQ.
b)
Eoots
ending
in
an e.
8)
1st
pi. tl-jjLEv
etc. On the
augment
see
above
p.
85. Without
the
augment
:
ku6-e-ijei' i 72,
dv-E-aav
irpo-E-ffav
S
681, df-i-rrji'
A
642,
opt. df-E-iT], imperat.Tvp6-Ec,
TTpo-e-rw,
Evv-ec,part.ixp-i-i'T-Eg,
inf.
jjud-i-
fiEv,
mid.
E-vTo,
lui'-e-To,
all
Homeric, imperat.
eE-e-o Hdt. There are
many
forms of this kind in
compounds
in Attic.
Excej)t
the
epic conj.
J/J7,
drijri along
with
EcpEiw
etc.,
of which we shall have to
speak later,
and the inf.
eIicii,
where also the
diphthong
needs
a closer
examination,
the vowel is short
throughout.
9)
1st
pi.E-Bt-jjiEv etc.,common
to all
Greek,
3rd
pi.
dr-i-dir C. I.
189
29
(Argolic),
mid.
E-8E-/uT]t'.
The same
may
be said of the
quantity
of the
vowel
as was
said of that of
no. 8.
^
e-TTTa-To, ano-irrd-nevosetc. have been
given already
" ^imder
no.
10
on
p.
]19.
I cannot
accept
Joh. Schmidt's
attempted
identification
{Ztselw.
xxiii.
300)
of
the rts.
TTxa crouch and
ttto fly.
^
We
might
add here tlie
reduplicated
aorist
ire-07j- e^wTj Hesych. Cp.
the
Skt. blul-ti he
appears.
128 AOEIST-STEMS WHICH HAVE NO THExMATIC VOAVEL.
ch. v.
10)
t-fTi3r]-i'. t-rrftt]
I
471,
inf.
KaTii-(rfti)\'ui
and the like
(Hippocr.
dw()(jj3ftc)
from Herodotus onwards. The vowel is
long
wherever it can
be
so (cp.perf.t-aftr]-Ka).
If, as
is made
probable by (rftir-^'v-ju,
the
Homeric
ajlitr-tTui i^i-rrftt-ffa),
(jftifr-irw
(f7j3E-To)),
and the Homeric
a-aftsiT-
roc,
the root
originally
ended in a
sibilant
(cp.
Princ. ii.
197),we
should
have to
suppose
coinpensatory lengthening
here. Doric has the
a :
uirifffia
Theocr.
4,
39
(cp.
Joh.
Schmidt,
Ztschr. xxiii.
300).
11)
2iid
sing,imperat.i/jpe'-f.
Com.
anon. Meineke,
iv. 651 trda
nradtii;
(Itfiic ^i
wf tu
/if
(paki/Wior,
(potq
to
"pepe
Hei'odian,
i.
463,
14
Lentz, part. tTretcfpelgEurip. (Phaeth.)
fr.
781,
46 Dind.
pii
nv'
"II^atoTOf\('"^oj'
ho^ioiviTr"ic(f)peiQ fiiXudpa(jv ^t(^"\il,i] Tvvpi,
inf.
t\c(l)pi)vai
'
ih/iEfti,
(.I'tyKfAi'
Hesych. Nauck,
'das Yerbum
fpiu)^
Bulletin de
I'Acad.
Imp.
de St. Petersb. Tome vi.
p.
424
If.,
tries to
prove
that the
stem
(ppe
is
nothing
else than
a
compound
of
irpo
and
k,
and that con- sequently
(ppic
is the
same as
-n-poEQ
etc. But
ingeniousas are his
argu-
"
ments it is
none
the less
impossible
to find
a
precedent
for the
expulsion
of the
o before ".
Moreover we
have
alreadyon
p.
107 seen that the
present Tri-fpa-vai
is
a
well-attested form. I follow Hei-odian in
regard- ing
the stem
0p"
as identical with
(jyep,
and I believe that
"j)p"Q
bears to
(t)"peprecisely
the same
relation
as that of
o-)(ft^
to
")(",
(tttec
to
("'i'i)"7rf.
The verbs
itcfipeu', E\c(l"epeiy are
by
no means
far removed in their
usage
from the forms under considei'ation. The
compounds
of the Skt. hhar
anu-hJtar,
ava-hJiar mean bring in,
introduce
(e.g.
into the
body),just
like
{.(^TTicpparai
and
elcippiir.
The
same root which in Skt. forms at one
time
h/id)'a-ii=(j"ep"i,
at another
hhdr-tl,as
it
were
*"pep-ri,
has survived
in both forms in Greek
:
(j)"p
with
a
thematic vowel and
^pc
without
one,
and the latter became
an
aoiist like
o-^e.
From
fpe again
was
190
formed
fpew.
As the connexion of
(jjptQ
with
(pipwwas
lost
sight
of
there arose a
fresh aorist of
a
different kind.
Cp.
Stud. viii. 327 ff.
c)
Eoots
ending
in
o.
12) f'-yi'w-)'
common to all Greek from Homer onwards
(t-yrw-froi'
K 397,
yiwrr))' (p
36,
yiwixevai, yrCJvai).
The vowel is
alwayslong
when it
is
possible, o occurs
only
in
yro-i-q-v,
yrou, ,
yi'uvToc,
and the 3rd
pi.'iyroi',
which is demanded
by
the metre at Pind.
Pyth. 4, 120,
and has been
adopted
elsewhere in Pindar
by
Akrens and others as
against
the variant
iyru)}'(Isthm. 2, 23, Pyth. 9, 79),
while the latter
form,
which
anyhow
stands isolated
among
these
primitiveaorists,
holds
a
place
to which it
probably
has
no right,
in
hymn,
in Cerer. Ill ovl'
'iyvuyv^a\eiro\
he
deal
di'tjra'imvopuodm (cp.
Nauck
Melanges,
iv. 2.5
f.)
" There
is,
accord- ing
to
Veitch,only
one instance of
a
corresponding
middle form
avyyro'iro
Aesch.
Suppl.
216.
13) 'i-co-jjiti' etc.,
in
general
use from Homer onwards. 3i*d
pi.
'i-lo-v
Hes.
Theog. 30,
also Laconic C. I.
no. 1511,
middle
E-^u-firjv
etc. The
vowel is short
thi'oughout.
The Aeolic vw-Oi will be noticed
as a
by
-form under irWi. " The word
e^irpto (iS,el3\a0r], lltKOTri] //Kvijaic) only
found in the E. M.
347, 48,
and
*
Joh. Sclimidt's assertion
{Ztschr. xxiii, 301),
that the s of (tx^^,(^^t"
is
thematic falls to the
ground
in the face of the tixed rule that
s
like the Oi of the
2nd
sing, imperat. never occurs
in
connexion with a thematic vowel. All these
form"
belong
to the same class
as Oi-s,'i-s.
CH. V.
MONOSYLLABIC STEMS. 129
discussed
by
Lobeck
on
Buttmami ii.
12,apparentlyequivalent
in
mean- ing
to
ilirpMtTEv {kliti-ii^XwaEr Hesych.),
is
SO
isolated that it had better
not be reckoned in
our
list.
.
.
d)
Eoots
ending
in
t.
14) Iv-KTi-fieyo-g, Homei'ic,by
the side of the
pres.
ktH^u),
$
77,433,
Z
391,
with
passive
force like
icrafiErog,
ftXi'ifieroc.
"
KTifxtvor,
as con-
jectiu-ed by Bambei-gei-,
is
pi-obably
the
rightreachng
at Aesch.
Choeph.
806.
15)
tt'i-Qi
(Horn, tt/e)
in
Eurip. Cycl.
570
(eK-n-ldi)
and in Attic
comedians
(Cratin.,
Mein. Com. ii. 96
rij
rvr,
roSe
Trldt, Aristoph.Yesp.
1489).
Hence the Aeolic ttw-Oi like
yt'oidi,
with the
same
vowel as
iri-irijj-Ka. " All the
remaining
aorist forms
are inflected
thematically
E-TTi-o-i',
TTi-e'ir, except
that at Aiith. xi. 140 there is
Truly as a mono- syllable,
or as
others write it nly.
Similarly
isolated
are
kXvOi,o-^^eV,
and
other
imperatiA^es.
16) e-(f)6i-nr]j'. e-(pdi-TO, conj.(pdUrai
Y
173, Oj^t.anocpdliurju (c 51,
(pdi-i-iero-c, fdi-adcu
in
poetry
from Homer on
(S 100,
0
359,
1
246, Soph. 191
0. E.
962).
The vowel is short
throughout, (pdiadai
bears to the
thematic
efduy
2 446
just
the relation borne
by
tt'iOlto
ettio)'.
e)
Eoots
ending
in
v.
17)
E-^v-y,E-lv-fiEy,
E-Sv-aar in
use
from Homer's
time,
and
par- ticularly
in
poetry.
3rd
pi.
Uvy A
263, conj.
ciw,
opt.
3rd
sing.Evi]
((7348),Imperat.
?vdi,
cv-u,
inf.
iifXEyai
and
cvvai, part, cvq Svyroc,
a
longvowel,
that
is,
when
possible.
18) dv-fiEyo-Qonly
found in the
fragment
of
a
hyporcheme
of
Pratinas "
f'/Lte
Sa
KiKahfiv,
e'fxe
Sei
naraye'iu
av'
opea
Bvfxevov
jxera
NaiaSwi'
as
the M.SS. A and C of Athenaeus have it
(xiv.
617
d)
with the variant
rrvi-iEyoy
in B. "W. Dindorf has
adopted
the
former,
Bergk
and Meineke
the
latter,though Bergk
adds
*
Ov/uEyoy
A. forte recte.' Since
dvfXEyoQ
is
just
as correctly
formed
as
av/ueyos,
and since OvEiy is the
vox
propria
for
the
phrensied
movements of the dviahc
(cp.8ou^Eiy),
there seems to be
good reason
for
holding
it to be the
rightreading.
19) k\v-6i,i^Xv-te, along
with
kekXvOi,
kekXvte
(to
be discussed
later),
common
in Homer and found in the
tragedians.
We have above com- pared
kXiiOi with the Skt.
p-udhi.
"NYe
may
add the middle
participle
KXy^EyoQ
Theocr. xiv. 26 with its Homeric
predecessorVLEpiKXviiEyo";,
which
proper
name must have had the
meaning ttepikXv-oq.
20)
Xv-To $
114, 425,
h 703
etc.,
in the
phrase
Xvto
yovyara, only
at O 1 do
we get
Xvto F
dywr.
To
explain
the
long
vowel here
as due
to the arsis would be as foolish
as
to be
surprised
at
/3a-"/j' by
the side
of
pJi]Ti]y (cp.
Lobeck
on Buttm. ii.
16).
We
may
add the 3rd
pi.
Xvvto
()
435,
vniXvyro IT 341. The active
occurs only
in
XvOi,
used
by Pindar,
according
to the Et. M.
274, 50,
in
a
playfuletymologygivenby
him for
the word
2i6upayu/3oe (cf.
Boeckh
on
Pind. ii.
2, 585).
21) cifi-iryv-TO
A 359
ro^p'"E^-wp
a^mivTo
(cp.
X 475, " 458, w
349),
always
with
a
long u,
like
Xvto,kXvQi, cijieyai.
ufx-TryvTo
bears to the
K
130 AOKIST-STEMS WHICH HAVE NO THEMATIC VOWEL. ch. v.
active
afnrrve
the same
relation as
that of kXvOi to
aKXve,
ttWi to
tTrte,
XiiCTt)to
Xtyf.
22) crv-ro
(i"167
(TVTo
c'
"ufta
KeXatj/f^e'c,
Pind, 01.
1,20,f-(Tu-ro Eurip.
192
Hel.
1133,
(rvfxtvai, iTrKTii/zEi'oc
Aesch.
arrarvo,
t(T(7VTo
may
be
pluperfects
to the
perf.
taavuni,
Innv^ivoc,
but need not be
so,
for Irraeva
(E 208)
has also the double
a
after the
augment.
23) i-(f)v-v
from Homer's time
{"pv,
3
pi.
t"pvi', TrepK^vvai)
in universal
use,
and there is
a
Boeotian
participle "l)ovfra
=
(j)ii(Ta
Corinna.
24) 't--)Qi-To
)(
88,
xvTo
N
544,
frvy^^vTo^ EK-^vTo,
ufxipi^vTo
also Homeric
along
with
xvvto, "yyi^iEvr].
The
tragediansapparently
use only
the
par- ticiple
:
x'^i"^''"^
Aesch.
Choeph. 401,
xvjxevov
Eumen.
263, Eurip,
Heracl. 76.
f)
Eoots
ending
in
a consonant.
In the oldest Sanski-it formations of this kind
are
by
no means
rai'e,
e.g.
3rd
sing,
d-han
(rt.
han
strike),
d-har
(rt.
kar
make).
In the active voice
only
two such aorists have been
preserved
in
Greek
25)
fc'-ya"' only
in
Hesychius'sgloss'iyav
tyerero.
The
analogy
of
tKTci
would lead
us to
expect
e'-ya
for the third
singular.
Musurus
adopted
the
equally
remarkable
^'iyave.
Lobeck
on Buttm. ii. 14
pro- poses
iyae
on the
analogy
of 'ilae. It is not inconceivable that
e-yav
should have been formed in
exactly
the
same
way
as the Skt. 3rd
sing.
d-lian from the rt.
han,
i.e. that the
primaiy *i-yav-Tpassedthrough
^kyavv
to
l-yav,just
as *A/ovr
passed
in the voc.
through
*Atai'"' to
Ala
I'.
There is in the middle the form
yivro
Hes.
Theog. 199,
283
(Ezach
Dial. Hes.
460),Sappho
16
Be.3,liviyivToTheogn.
640.
26)
i-K-av. 1st
sing.
KariKTciv
only
at A
319,
3rd
sing.
'iKra Z
205,
M 46
etc.,
KciriKTa N 170
etc.,always except
at O
432,
at the end of
a
line,
EKTUfitv n
375,
KciTeKrafxep
\p121,
3rd
pi, tKrav
K
526,
the
conj,
(vT"w/(n',
inf.
KTajieyai,
part,ktuc,
and also isolated
forms, especially par- ticiples,
in the
tragedians,
JVIiddle
anEKTaro
O
437,
P
472,
KraaQai O
558,
Kra^ii^'oio yifiorroQ
X
75,
KTUfjiEi'oy, iCTai.iEvoi(n
etc.,
the
participle
in
Pindar and in Attic
poets.
This aorist is
a
very
remarkable one
indeed.
The shortness of the vowel
proves
that the stem ^ra
has been shortened
from
KTuy,
for the
only
1st
sing,
which could have come from
ktci
would
be
EKTCLv
Ion.
EKrrji',
and this
by analogy
would have influenced other
forms, pai-ticularly
the
perfect.
The
complete disappearance
of the
"'
from the end of the 3rd
sing,(primaiyform*"'-KToi'-r), as
contrasted with
2
no
the
(somewhat doubtful)
k'-y a "'
discussed
above,
is remarkable.
Although
then all forms of the root
origmally
ended in
r,
still
KTEWfiEv
and
ktii-c
were
formed from the shortened stem
htu.
The
remainingforms,
which
occur
only m the
middle, are as
follow
;
27)
ak-ao IT 754 in that
verse
of
many
anomalies
wc
e-k\
\\Ejjpi6yij,
YlarpoKXEEc,
uXffa
nEf^icn'oc,
aXro T 29 etc.
rlX/^tEioe.
We have
ah-eady
f
noticed the
peculiarity
of the
breathing
and the
length
of the vowel at
p.
90.
28) (ip-iLiEyo-Q poetic
from Homer onwards.
29)
aa-f^iEi'o-c,
from Homer onwards
(('ktiuevol
ek
dararoio
etc.)
in
poetry,
and also in Herodotus and
Thucydides,
for *"Tfad-^"yo-c
rt. (rftic
{aycf'ivw, fjcouai),
ill
a middle sense
and therefore
coming
-CH. ^.
MONOSYLLABIC STEMS, 131
"neaxest to
//oo/tat.
The
a
is
remarkable, as
the
analogy
of
'ic^ey,
ucfxij
^wocikl riiake
iis
expect
the radical h in Homer. In
K^Kaff^ivoQtoo,
how-
*e^per,
the sibilant
appears
in contrast to the Pindaric
KEKacnivog. .
30) yir-To
he took hold
of, only
in Homer:
yii'ro
^e
hwpt.
N
241,
"ytVro
")'
[jjiaadXrii'
0 43
(N 25),
yevrn
^e
x^'f*'
f"UL(TTi]pa Kparepiji', erepj^^i
de
yevTO Trupaypjji'
S
476,
from a rt.
yej-i,
which
appears
most
clearly
iii
Hesychins'sglosses
aizo-y sfi-e' a^eXioe
and
avyyefiog'
(xvWajji'].
"
Cp.
yipTo
he became under
no. 25.
31)
CeKTO he received B 420 aW
o
ye
ctVro
fxev ipa,
O 88 ^etcTO
ci-wac,
vTredsKTo he undertook I
480, ^"^0
receive T
10, Se'^Scu
A
23,
Pind. Ql.
2,
49
yepac ecskto,
while
lciy^r)vi 513,
/n
230 and the
part,ciynevoqbelong
to the
meaning
await which will have to be discussed in connexion with
liley^ai,^ixarai
when
we come to the
perfect.
32)
eXeXcK-o
belonging
to
eXeXii^eiv
wliii'l round
(cp.eXEXi^afieuoQ)
A
39,
N 558
cp.
Buttm. Lexil. i.
138, Fick,
Ztschr. xix. 252.
33) f (kro
only
in the
fragment
of the
Cyclic
Thebais
quoted by
the
scholiast on
"Soph.
Oed. Col. 1375: evtcro
Ad
ftaaiXfji (oai aXXoic
udava-
TOLcrir.
34)
T/vTo
only
Hes.
Theog.
481 evQa
/jlei'
licrn
(Koechly iVto),
but the
part.'iK/jEi'dQ
ovpoc
A 479 and
elsewhere, literally
'
that has come
'
(cf.
'
welcome'),an
apt epithet
for a favourable wind that has at last
come in
answer to the
prayers
of the sailors. Ahrens's connexion of
'Ikj.ui'oc
with
EuiKci seems
less natural.
35) Kfrro only
Alcman fr. 141 with Doric
v
for
X, belonging
to
104
(CtXo/xat.
36)
Xekto he covmted h 451 Xeicro c'
upiQixuv,
a
middle to the
impf.
Xe'yf
in line
452,
and there is also
tte^tttoq
EXiyjxriv
i 335 with a
passive
meaning.
37)
Xekto he laid himself
(rt.Xe^? ^^X"^)
^453
cTretrct
^e Xekto
kcu
avTOQ,
kciteXekto i
662, I' 75, TrapKaTEXeKTO
I
565, 664, ttpoceXekto
jx
34,
with the
meaning
of
an
imperfect
in Hesiod Scut. 46
irawv^ioQ
c'
ap
eXekto. Also the
imperat.
Xe'^o^ 650
(but
at I
617, k
320 XiUo from
the
sigmaticaorist), K-arakExOaio 394, KaTaXiyiJLf.voQ
X
62,
^
196.
38) fi-LKTo
A
354, n
813, 'Iixikto a
433.
39)
op-,ro
A
204,
E 109
(butopaEo
V 250
etc.),ihpTo
E
590,
Hesiod
Theog.
990
etc.,
also
Eirwpro,
ivivpTo, opdcu
9
474,
op^evoQ
A
572,
-jraXiv
opjiivu)
A
326,'
and certain of these forms occur
also in Pindar and the
tragedians.
40)
7ro\-ro O
645,
"/;-7raXr' Y
483,
ai'tVaXro Q
85,
EKtcaTETrcCXTO T 351.
" There is what
seems to be an
active to this form metathesised in
Hesychius'sglosseEettXij' E^eVfcrei',
formed like
IvuftXif-rix'.
Or
can j'ttX/j
be identical with eVXe
(M 11)
which counts for an
imperfect,
and
so
belong
to the rt. tteX 1
41) TzipBai
for
TTEpB-crdai
U 708.
42) irriKTO, KaTETrrjKTO
A 378.
Forms which
only
occiu- in late
poets,
such as EXenrro
Apoll.
Rhod.
I 45
ov
Se
|U")'
"icpiKXot; ^vXaicrjEvi Ct]p6i' eXelivto^
and
ufjELTrro
Nonn.
Dion. xliv.
241,
and which
are
condemned at once by
then-
diphthong
as
wrong
forms, or rather as mistaken imitations of Homeric forms which
were not
understood,
have not been admitted into this list. Buttmann
i. 318
regards
them
as
pluperfects
without
reduplication.
K 2
132 AORIST-STEMS WHICH HAVE XO THEMATIC VOWEL, ch. v.
B)
Metathesised Aorists.
43) "v/j-/5X //--?; J'
"p
15
Tw
I' ir
Meirm'ii'ri ^v^/3A?/r?ji' uXXiiXour,"-/3\7;-ro
by
the side oi'
ftaXXu,iftaXov
A 410, pXi]To
A
518, ^vfiftXiiro
S
39,
with
the
conj.
ftXyerui,opt.
2nd
sing,(3Xelo(Bekk.ftXyo),
inf.
fiXfjadai, part,
ftXt]/j.eyog, ^vfiftXi'i/dei'og.
44)
TrXf]-To
!S 438
aiiTig
2'
Et,OTzi(TwTrXfjrox^^'^'h iirXr}r~o A
449,
0
16,
7r\j/"'7'o
^ 468
by
the side of
TTtXo'Cb), IniXaaev, TrfXow.
ttX^jtoi
with
present meaning,
Paimen.
v.
8 is doubtful
(SteinSymbola
Pliilol.
Bonn,
p.
803).
So too
7r\r]-(rior by
the side of
TriXag. Cp.
Princ. i. 345.
19.5 45) ('nro-f7KXf]-i'ai, Aristoph. Vesp. 160, arroaKXahj' uiTolrjfjaiyotTO,
I'nroharoi
(Hesych.),by
the side of mciXXw. Other similar
forms,
also
a
KaraffhXiii'cu,
in late
prose (Nauck Melanges
iv.
26).
46) "i't-mr"-g
A
186,
S 470
by
the side of
tvhnt,
from the rt.
ctett,
which
occurs
without
syncope
in
er-rETr-E
for li'-(Ttir-(.Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. ii.
168),
who finds
a
supporter
in La Boche
(Hom.
Textkritik
256),
will not allow the
form,
because
Evi-airt-Q can only
be
explained
as a
compound,
while he wants to establish that
ei'vettw
with all
belonging
to
it is
nothing
but
a
simpleverb, an
idea
which,
in the face of the Latin
in-sec-e and the fut.
ui-a-in'i'fTu) (e98),
I find it
impossible
to
accept.
It
is true that
kvi-ffire-g
only
occui's at the end of
a line,
and that the
only
other
place,except
in
Apollon.Bhod.,
in which it
occurs,
is
a
strophe
of
Sappho
which from its
subject
is
rightly
held to be
spuiious(Bergk^26),
but in its
formation,
which the best of the old
grammarians rightly
compared
with
"7r/-o-;("-e
there is
nothing
remarkable whatever
(Herodian
ed. Lentz i.
467, 25,
ii.
127, 29, 137, 10).
The indicative
eiZ-cttte,
which
Herodian is careful to
distinguish
from the
imperative,
bears to e'tZ-o-tte-c
exactly
the same i-elation that
e'-o-xe
does to
"txe-c.
The
by-foi-m
for the
imperative
iri-mrf. is
natiu'ally
to be
explained
in the same
way,
as
also
are
"Rupa-axe
and the like which often occur in M.SS. but are generally
rejectedby
editors
(Yeitch,p.
257).
That is the
e
which fi-om the
beginningbelonged
to the i-oot has followed the
analogy
of the thematic
vowel. That the old
grammarians
should have
'
invented' a
form like
kvi-aTci-Q seems
to me
altogetherunlikely.
47) ox^-Q
is related to the rt.
a^x
i^^
exactly
the
same
way
as aivi-g
to the I't.(TETT
and is
as
isolated
a
form
as (nri-g,
iov all the other aorist-
foi*ms like
'i-axor, (xxohj-J',
cx^"'
i'^X^'H^^'
^
254)
etc. follow the
analogy
of the thematic
conjugation.
There is all the less reason
then to chal- lenge
the isolated
"rrapa-axf f^cira-crxi,
noticed under
no. 46,
out of sheer
purism,
when there is
good
evidence for them. In the accentuation of
this form I follow
GottlingAllg.
Lehre
vom
gr.
Accent,
p.
45.
48)
i-rXrj-i'
(Dor.t-rXd-r)
common
in
poetry
from Homer
onwards,
1st
pi.rXjj-yuEj',
3rd
pi. e-rXd-i;opt.
rXct-n/-)', imp. -X//-rw,TXij-re
all
Homeric, rXy-di,TXij-i'ai, pait.
rXci-gin the
tragedians.
Homer however
196
has
rroXv-rXa-g which,
like
raXd-c,
is lather
regarded
as an adjective.
There is no
present
in use as a
verbal
form,
but
raX"-c
like
rdX-utT-o-y,
TctX-apo-c, TciXa-o-g (Princ.
i.
272),points
to raXct-w from which it
was
originally a
regiilar participle
of the Aeolic
type.
The
epic
EroXotrcra
(cp.f'-i\f((Tffo)
likewise
points
to
-oX,
while
rE'-7-Xa-/^/"r, ri--Xi]-i:a come
from the metathesised rXci.
49) "-/3Xw
ifdyr],
wxETo,
tffrrj (Hesych.)along
with the
participle
ayxt/3Xwf iipTi
napMr
has
already
been
placedby
Lobeck on
Buttm. ii.
CH. V.
DISSYLLABIC STEMS. 133
12 in the list of aorists of the old
type
and connected with
'i-fioX-o-y,
50) i-fipu)'
efayEi',tcuKe,
^liffircKTsy
Hesych.,
and therefore
belonging
to the rt.
l3op,/3(/3pw(TA,w. Hymn,
in
Apoll,
127
Karefiptjc li/jifipoTov ellap,
Callim.
hymn,
in Jovem 49 ettI Se
yXvKv Ktjpiovij3pu)Q.
C)
The
following
form stands
quite
alone
:
51)
"-7r\w-"' ETriirXwy Hes.
'
Epy. 650, Itt-e-itXwq
y
15,
orr-e'-TrXw^ 339,
"Kap-i-nXio
jj.
69,
part.
ETrnrXwg
Z 291. As ttXww has
come
from
*7r\fJ'w,
and the
w can
hardly
be otherwise
explained
than from
of,
it
may
be
said that
a
defaced consonant stem forms the basis of t-TrAw-r. Whether
the case is the
same with
k'-rpw
mentioned on
p.
128 after
no. 13
(cp.
rpav-w)
I cannot decide.
IL DISSYLLABIC AORIST-STBMS.
Besides these 51
aorists,
which must be
mostly
of
a
primitive
formation,
there are a number of
dissyllabicforms,
akin to them in
inflexion and
use,
which
cleai'ly only owe
theii-
2)osition
as aorists in the
verbal
system
to the fact that the
correspondingpresent
stems have
base-forms
differing
from theirs.
Pi'operlyspeaking
these
dissyllabic
aorists
belong
as little to the above-mentioned
monosyllabic
ones as
do
the contracted verbs of the Aeolic inflexion to the verbs in
jut.
Since
howevei' the said forms are
of various
kinds,are
occasionally
of obscure
formation,
and
only
resemble each other in
this,
that
they are to be
referred to
dissyllabic
stems of aoristic
force,
and that
they
have
no
jgj
thematic
vowel,
it seemed best to
give
them their
place
here.
They are
as follow
:
52) "-ft/\a"-"',
in
common use
from Homer onward
(ind.j/Xwr
cp.
p. 79)
with the
conj.
aXww contr.
a\w, opt. aXtor^v
later
aXoirji',
inf.
aXcoiai, part.aXovc,
almost
exactly
the same as
t-yrw-v
with its moods.
The inchoative
oX-laKo-nai
does
duty
as present. Cp.
Princ. ii. 170.
"-a\oj-i' is
apparently
a contracted
preterite
from the stem
aXw,
inflected
like the Aeol.
E-doKi/j-to-i'
from the stem
doKii-iu). Accordingly
the vowel
is
long
wherever it is
possible.
53) E^-i]fuj3Xw a
late
form,
not
occiu-ring
before Themistius,
instead of
the older
ijfxftXwaE.
It is
quiteenough
to show us
that the
power
of
making
forms of
an
old-fashioned
stamp
on
the
analogy
of old forms
lasted
a
long
time.
iS,afj.ftXov^Ei'
in
Eurip.
Ancb'om. 356 is
a
present.
54) apwd-fXEvoe
not earlier than the
poets
of the
Anthology :
vcpapira-
jxirri (active) Agathias
ix.
619, apira/jiii'rjQ (passive)
Macedonius xi.
59,
evidently
therefore like
(ora-^ea'oc
from
laTu,one
of the
many
evidences
to the
relationship
between the verbs in
aw
and those in
a^'w.
55) imr-uvfia-Q.
eXwv
yap exei
yipag
aiiroQ
anovpaq
A 356 and often
elsewhere in Homer. Pindar too has
cnroupaig
(Pyth.4, 149).
Ahi-ens's
view of this form
now
finds considerable and deserved
acceptance.
It is
that its stem is
reallydissyllabic only
in
appearance,
its ultimate form
being
the
monosyllabicJ-pci,
the
relationship
of which to the rt.
/ep
has
been discussed at Princ. i. 431
(cp.
Sonne Ztsclu*. xiii.
434).
The
only
representative
of the middle is
cnrovpui^Eyog
Hes. Scut. 173 :
cnrovpcifXEvoL
i/'ux"?'
^^ ^^1 ^^" forms
then, as
in
Evade,Kciva^aig
and other forms of
134 AORIST-STEMS WHICH HAVE NO THEMATIC VOWEL,
ch. v.
the
kind,
the / has tuvned to u
vowel. We
may
add to them the fut.
uTTovpliaw,
which is the
reading
of
some
good
M.SS. at X
489, though
the
most and the best M.SS. have
I'nrovpifffrovmi'
from
aTr-ovpl^oj^^acpupti^w.
cnrovpi'ifTovfTi
snits the
sense
far
better,
and is
adopted by
Buttmaim and
I. Bekker. There is
no
hint of
an *a7rai'|0ow.Following Sonne, Brug-
man,
at Stud. iv.
166, conjectures
that the
7j
has been
lengthened
from
e
by
the influence of the
/,
and that
cnrrjupa
came from
*u7r(J-pa,
which
would bear the same
relation to
tnrovpdt;
as
does
airicpu to
Invocpa^.
It
is
hardly probable
however that the / should have had the
power
of
198 lengthening
the vowel after it had become
v.
As
regards
the accent -of
the
jmrticiple"VVestphal,
Formenl. i.
2, 285,
is
perhaj)sright
in
sup- posing
that it
ought by rights
to be on
the final
syllable.
56) k-ftiio-v.
Homer has
ftiujno
0 4'29,ftiCjyai
K 174. The remain- ing
forms
are
in
common use in Attic
: conj. ftno,
opt. fiiu"r]v, part.
jnovc. Apparently c'/^/wr,
like laXwi',is the
preterite
of
a stem which
has
nothing
aoristic aboiit
it, so that there is
no sort of inherent
and
original
difference of stem between these aorist-forms and the
present-
forms
ftiol, jnu)}',
ftiovr.
The
present
is
moreover generallysuppliedby
Cull).
57) e-yi'ipd-y,
from Homer's time
{eyi'ipa
II
148,
yripai-
P
197)
in
very
general
use :
inf.
yijpdrai,hardly yijpdyiu,
which is sometimes
wi-itten,
and is maintained
by Cobet,
Mnemos. xi. 124. Dat.
part. yrjpdyre/Tai
Hes.
0pp.
188. In its formation this stem is
justas
much
a
conti'acted
one
and
just as little of an
aorist
as aXw, /3tw.
The
present
to it is
yijpufTKw.
58)
3rd
sing,dura
E
376, Z 64,
inf.
cvrunevat
"^ 68
ovTafxeruL iiEjxaMQ,
and also
ovrdjiey^
mid.
part. ovrdfitroQ,
kut'
ovrcijiiyijy loTEiXijy."
ye-ovra-
roQ (22536) by
the side of dov-og. There is
a
present
vh-uii)
(ovtcie xaX/cfe
X
356)
with
ovrrjire,
ovT7]dr),
and
an ovtu^uj Y 459
(cp.Hesych. ftwrdCtiv
fidWtu)
with
ovrcKTE
O
528, ovroorat
A
661, ovracrfiiioc
\ 536. Forms
of the latter kind
are not unknown to the
tragedians.
The stem is
a
very
peculiarone. ovm suggests
et^ra,
and this would
point
to a
final
y,
ohrd-
}isyoQ might
be
compared
with
K-dfxeyoc,
or on
the other hand with the
late
dpTrdj^ieyor.
The formation of the
presents evidentlypoints
to
an
*ovTajw.
The
only
related Greek words
are w-eiX))(Hesych. yaretXai'
ovXai). Conjectui'es
have been made
as to related words in other lan- guages
by
Fick Wtb. i.=^. 769.
59) l-wpid-fxrjy
has been
already
discussed
on
p.
120 no.
11.
60)
u)yi]-fir]v, represented
in Homer
by
the forms
dn6yr}To
P 25 and
elsewhere, uTrorcao
LI
556, imperat.oyrirro
t 68, oyi'ifiei'og /3
33. " In later
poets (Theogn. Eurip.)djylif^njy (by
the side of wi'ciade
Eurip.
Here. f.
1368) CjyijfitBa,
in both
poetry
and
prose uruini]r^
uyuaQai. The
quantity
of the vowel is thus
a varying
one. ova
bears a regular
relation to onya
(p.108).
199 I have
purposely
omitted the
(ipovraq
diA
rov ftpoyTi'itrag quoted
in
the Scholium Ven. to P 197 from
Corinna, as
the form
may very
well have
been
an Aeolic
present participle
Hke the Lesbian
yeXaig
tiu-ned
by
mistake into
an aorist
participle.
I do not however
mean to
deny
the
possibility
of
a
jjpovTui:
foi'med in
exactly
the
same
way
as
ytjpdg (cp.
Bergk,
L)T.3
p. 1213).
cu. V.
THE QUANTITY Of THE STEM-VOWELS. 135
Now that
we
have reviewed all the forms belon"[in2fto this class it
will be well to examine in connexion with each other two of tlieii*
characteristics, fii'stly
the
quantity
of the stem-vowels and next the rela- tion
of these aoiists to the
correspondingpresents.
The usual view
as to the stem- vowels is that the short vowel is
more or
less the rule and that
a
long
vowel where it occvirs
is due to
intensification. So
Schleicher,Comp. "
292. We are certainlyjustified
in
starting
from roots which show
a short
vowel,
and those
long
vowels must
be admitted to contain
an
additional element in the
case of which
we can
see
that the
lengthening
is in some
way
subservient to the formative
pro- cess.
But it
appears
that this intensification
was
originally
the rule and
that we are obliged
to
regard
the short vowel in the tense-stem as
histori- cally
the
younger
of the two. We
are,
I
think,
entitled to this assertion in
the first
placebecause,as has been mentioned at
p.
126,
in Sanskrit the
voivel is
as a
rule
always long.
The
case is the
same in Zend. Here a
majority
of forms are like
ddt,stdf,ddmd, ddtd, a
mmority
like bu7i=
t"pvi'(Justi400),
Old-Persian too has
add=*t8i).
In
Greek, even
when
the
prevailingquantity
of the vowel is
long,
it is shortened luicondi-
tionally
before
r-
in the stem of the
participle :
oto-it, yio-rr,
and in
the 3rd
plur.
of the
preterite: i-aru-v
e-yi'o-r,
'i-cpv-i^,
where the vowel
remained short
even
after the
r
had fallen
away,
and
again as a
rule
before the modal characteristics of the
optative: crra-h]-}', yvo-iri-c.
These
very
facts
lead,
I
think, to the
assumption
that the
long
vowel is to be
considered the older of the two. For
we can clearlyrecognisean
induce- ment
to shorten the vowel in the
proximity
of
it
and
i,
while it would
not be
easy
to find
an explanation
which would account for the
lengthen- ing
of
so
many
different
syllables
at a
comparatively
late date. We
may
200
find
a
testimony
to the
power
of
it
and
t
to shorten vowels
m
the Aeolic
inflexion of the contracted
verbs,
where there
can
be
no doubt that the
vowel
produced by
the contraction
was originallya
long one. lyiXav,
yiXavroQ
owe
their
n, tfiXev,^(XeiToc
their
" exclusively
to this influence.
The
proper
chai'acter of a formation
comes out most
distinctly
in cases
where there
are no
external
impechments
in its
way.
We shall therefore
hold
fDt)-T7]i'
to be older than
j3a-T)]i',
and kXii-Oi than the Skt.
grit-dhi.^
The
shortening
of the vowel had
evidently
the
analogy
of the im- perfect
in its
favour,as in that tense it is
long only
in the
singular.
It
was natural that
i-^i-co-re,
which the fixed ru.le in Sanski-it establishes
as
primitive,
should be followed
by t-So-Te,
and k-li-co-aiw
by
'i-co-ffav. This
view
gainssupport
from the relative niimbei-s of the
difterent
kinds of
these aorists in Greek. In
res23ect
of their
quantitywe
may
divide them
into the
following classes.
-"a
*
While the 1st edition of this book was being printed,
J. Rutgers,
in Flec-
keisen's Jahrh.
1872, p. 746, expressed a similar view to that
expressed
in the
text,
while J. Schmidt
{Ztschr.
xxiii. 282
f.) opijoses
it, maintaining
that these
forms showed from the
beginning
the
same variation between the short vowel
that
belongs
to the dual and
plural
in the active and to the whole of the
middle,
and the intensified vowel of the active
singular" that
consequently "-/37j, i-^a-Tt]v
in tliis resemble 'L-aTi), l-a-Td-njv " but that the
long
vowel
was afterwards ex- tended
to the
plural on
the
analogy
of the
singular.
But
why
did not this
same
extension take
place
in the
present
?
Besides, Johannes Schmidt
says nothing
about the forms in the Asiatic
languages,
and it is the consistency
with which
the vowels are long
there on which I base
my
view.
1
1 36 AORLST-STEMS WHICH HAVE NO THEMATIC VOWEL, uh. v.
A)
Forms
wiiicu leave the
Vowel
long where it is possible.
To this class
belong
aXw
(52),ftiu) (which
has
actuallyl3iu7]r, 56),
/3/\r; ('i3), /3Aw (with
even a
part.
/3\wt', 49),(ypio(50),
ynpu
(57),yvoi
12),cpa (2),
cv
(17),ttXi]
fill
(4,
with
even k^iT\i]-o), vXr) bring
near
44),
ttXw
(even ttXwc,51),tttj/ (5),.T/3;y (10),ara (6),
t-Xu
(48),"f"v
(23),
in all 17.
B)
Forms whose Quantity varies.
(3a(1),
K-Xv
(19),
Xv
(20),
di'ct
(60),(pda(7),"^p"
(11),
in all 6.
201
C)
Forms which have the
Yowel always short.
CO
(13),
I
(8),
de
(9),ovra (58),wpia
(59),
a7r" (46),Vv(22),
"tx"
(47),
Xu
(24),
in all 9.
D)
Forms
where there is not enough
Evidence to establish
either Quantity.
And of these there
are
1)
such as
may
be
long
for all
we
know
:
"V'/3A(u (53),
kX"
(.3), oi-pti
(55),
ttI
(15),
TTi'v (21),(t/cX";(45).
And
2)
such as
may
be all short
:
apTra
(54),
dv
(18),kti (14),(/"0( (16),
in all
10,
of which 6 are more
likely
to be
on
the side of the
long
vowel than
on
that of the short.
We thus
see that the
long
vowel has a
decided
majorityon
its side.
When
we
ask in the second
place
what kinds of
presentsgenerally
corresijond
to these
primitive
aorist-stems,we find,
it is
true, a tolerable
diversity
among
them,
but here
again
one
kind
as a
rule
prevails,
and
that is the
reduplicated.
In the
following
seven eases
the aorist has
a
reduplicatedpresent
:
In the two
following
the
present
has become thematic :
yai'
(25) pves.
Stem
yi-yvo
o-Xf
(47)
"
l-a-xo
To these
we
may
add the
present-stems which,
in addition to the
I'eduplication,
show further marks of
strengthening.
It is most natural
to
suppose
that these
were
added
subsequently
to the
reluplication
:
8pa (2)
pres.
stem
8i-8pa-"TKo
yv(o
(12)
,, yi-yvoo-cTKO
8v
(17)
,,
8i-8v-crKo
ap
(28)
,,
dp-ap-i-(TKO
^op (50)
" ^i.-[ipas-"TKO
in
all,that
is,
14.
CH. V.
THE COEEESPONDING PEESENTS. 137
The kind tlaat stands next
numerically
is that made
by
nasal add i-
202
tions
:
follow the thematic nasal
class,
in all 9. The rt.
/3a(1)
vacillates between
the
reduplicatedpresent
and the nasalised form
expanded by an i as
well.
In the 3rd class
numericallycome
the
presents
of the
t-class,
which
is
always
thematic.
They
are "
8 in all. Moreover the rt.
-/")', yev
vacillates between the first and
third classes.
Perhaps
too
cv (17),
\u
(20),
kXv
(19),(j)v(23)belong
to
this 3rd class
by reason of their
vacillatingquantity
" a
question we
shall have to consider later.
But
a
small number of the stems form theii*
present thematically
with an addition to the vowel-sound "
only
the
following
4
: iri'v tti'fo (21),
(TV (TEvo (22),
)(u x^o
(24),
uo r]So(29),
for the last of which thei*e is
ay^afo
as well.
There
are 7
presents
which
are
characterised
by
the thematic vowel
alone,
and
consequentlybelong
to the 1st class of thematic verbs
:
?"k
CEKo or
C"-)(^o(31),
ev)( ew^^o
(33),Xey Xeyo (36),TrepOirepBo(41),Cett
(TETTo (46),
keX keXo
(35),
(TEX (TE)(p
(47).
For the last there is
t'-o-x"
^^
well.
tvXt}(44)
and
tteXu^o,
rXa
(43)
and raXao stand
by
themselves,
and
203
yEv (30),Xex (37)
had
no
present-stem
at all.
The conclusion then to which this
investigationbrings us is,
that
beyond a certain
preference
cUscernible for the
reduplicatingmethod,
there is
no fixed
principle
which
can
be said to have ruled the formation
of the
presents.
We shaU often make this
same discovery
later
on,
and
we
may
formtdate it thus
:
the tense-stems of the Greek verb
are
by
no means
mutually
boiuid
togetherby
fijced and
pervadinganalogies,
but
they
combuie ia the freest
manner to form
a whole,
to
form,
that
is,
a
singlesystem
of verbal forms.
1 38 UNEXPANDED
THEMATIC PRESENTS.
ch. vi.
CHAPTER VI.
THEMATIC
PRESENTS FORMED WITHOUT ANY FURTHER
STRENGTHENING OF THE STEM.
"
In the introduction to this book we found that the vowel which distin- guishes
Ti-Q-jxer,
rl-t-TE from
(-ft"i',
'i-re is
an element
belonging
to the
present-stem
of
a
great
number of verbs. At
p.
9 we
attempted
to
discover its
significance as an
element in verbal
structui-e,
and the
name
we
give
it as
the result of this
investigation
is thematic. Contrasted
with other vowels which in
dealing
with other verbal forms we
have
seen occasionally
arise and make
monosyllabic
I'oots into
dissyllabic stems,
the vowel which we name
thematic kut'
e'^oxm'
is
an
"-sound which from
the first was pi'evailingly shoi't,
but was
occasionallylengthened,
and
was subjected
in
every
Indo-Germanic
language
to the most definite laws
both as to its
quantity
and its
quality.
In Sanskrit the
only change
it
undergoes
is
one
of
quantity.
The
a
is short
as a rule,
and
only long
before m
and v :
Sins".
hhdr-d-mi hhdr-a-si bhur-a-ti.
i
I
o
PI. hhdr-d-mas hhdr-a-tha hhdr-a-nti.
Dual hhdr-d-va hluh-a-fhas hhdr-a-tas.
204
This
change
of
quantitycan,
as Bopp saw {Vgl.
Gr. ii.-
290),hai^Uy
have been
primitive.
In the 1st
pi.
and 1st du. the
long
vowel
aj^pears
only
in Sanskrit and the
nearly
related Zend. All the other
languages
leave the vowel short in the
plural;(pip-o-fiEc, fer-i-mus,
Goth,
hair-a-m,
Ch.-Sl. ber-e-mu,so
do the Lithuanians and Slavonians in the dual
;
Lith.
vez-a-va,
Ch..-^l.vez-e-ve. In the 1st
sing.,as we showed on
p.
29f.,
the
length
of the vowel in
(ptpio
and the Lat.
/ero
has to do with the loss
of the termination. It would be
a
remarkal3le
tiling
that in this one
form the vowel should have been
lengthened
for no discernible reason
before
the
personal
termination fell
away.
For this I'eason we
adopted
Ascoli's
thoi'oughly
established
assumption
that
we must start from
a
primaiy
*hhar-a-mi which in Gi'eek
was once
*(j"Ep-n-fMi.
In
i-espect
of the
quality
of the thematic
vowel, we have to notice a
regularinterchange
of e and o. In this
respect
Greek and Latin almost
entirely
coincide in the ind.
pres.
act. We
may
assume
the
primary
forms to have been "
i
The e-sound then shows itself before
s and
t,
and in this Gothic
(vigis,
vigit/i,
viyitit)
and Church-Slavonic
{veze-si, veze-ti, veze-te)
coincide
as
well,
the o-sound before
nasals,
while in all
cases the vowel remains an a
CH, VI. UNEXPANDED THEMATIC PRESENTS. 139
with the Indians and Iranians. The
same
is the
case
with the two dual-
forms
Xiyiror,iXeyirtii',
with the forms of the
preteritetXeyec,i\e-yi(r)
and
eXeyov as
1st
sing,
and 3rd
pi.
Tlie
only
doubt that could arise is
with I'eference to the 1st
plui'.
in
Latin,
since the
prevailing
vowel here is i.
It
might
be
thought,
in the face of the Skt.
vdhdmas,
Goth
vigam,
Lith.
vezame,
Ch.-Sl.
vezemit,
that the Lat. veld-imts
came from vaha-mas
by
way
of the intermediate
stage
*vehe-mus,
and that it
never
went
through
the
stage
*veho-mus
suggestedby
the
analogy
of
Xtyofjiec
at all. But it
can
hardly
be accidental that
volu-mus,
su-7nus, qtuiesu-mus
have
a tt,
before the termination. It is
probablerather,considering
the
tendency
shown in historical times to attenuate a u before
in
in the middle of
a
word to
i,
that
we
ought
to assume a *vehn-mus,
and
a
still older *vehd-
205
'tmis,
or
perhapseven ^vehu-mas,
for it is hard to
say
what the vowel of
the final
syllablewas at that time. The relation of veJmmis to
'iypf-if-z
would then be the same as
that of
sejitiinus
to
ejSEonog,
We
get
the
same simple
rule for the Greek middle voice from
a
comparison
of "
(pipo-fiai
with
*(p"pf-aai.
's-cpepo-fiT]!/ ,,
*e-(jjepf-(ro.
(pep6"fxf6a
"
(pepf-rai.
cpe
po-VTat ,,
e-(f)eps-TO.
ecf)epo-vTO
with
(jiepe-ade.
(pepo-pepos
"
(p(pe-cr6ov.
e-(pepf-(Tdi]V
aud
cjiepe-adai.
Here
again
the
participle(pepofxeroi
is confronted
by
the Lat.
ferimini,
for
which, as
for
vehimus, we are inclined with
equal probability
to
assume an
older form with
a
heavier
vowel, on
the
ground
of forms like
alu-mmi-s vertit-mnu-s. Attention should be
paid
to the deviation from
this rule that
o comes
before a nasal shown
by
the Homeric infini- tive
active
k\Qi}XEvai,
eiTrefier,
by
which
mealis the fine sense of the Greek
tongue
was able to
distinguish
in the easiest
way
between active infini- tives
and middle
participles.
It is true that the. forms we have here assumed
as
primary are not
always
evident at first. In the 2nd and 3rd
sing,
an t
has become
attached to the thematic
f
.
What is the relation of "
Xeyeis
to the Lat.
leffi's
aud Skt. vdha-si
aud of
Ae'yet
to the Lat.
legit
and Skt. vdha-ti ?
This is
a
question
to which we must now
give
the
answer we deferred
to
give
when
dealing
with the
personal
terminations. As the forms of
the various Greek dialects have
an
importance
for the
propei'
settlement
of the
question,
we will first
give
them
as far as we can.
For the 2nd
sing,
there is
good testimony
for
only
the Doric
by-form
in
"c,
i.e.in
avpinltQ
Theocr. 1, 3, d/iiiXyec 4, 3,
and that of
Apollonius
TTspi dvTiovvfi.
119 to
TvoiEQ.
lu tho last word the
widespreadtendency
of the Dorians to shorten final
syllables
in
spite
of contraction that has
taken
place
and consonants that have been lost
("t|0"'s:=Att. Upzlc,
ceaTvoTUQ
from
^zaTruTdvo)
has
actually
left
only eg
out of the
origmal
Efo-t.
Other branches of
Doric,
if
we
may
judge
from
Aristoph.Lysistr.206
180, 1013,
had the Attic form. " It is established
by
Anecd. Oxon. i.
71,
22 that the Boeotians
pronovmced
it
Xiyiq (Ahrens,
Aeol.
189).
On the
other hand
we cannot be
sure about the Lesbian
r/c
which the M.SS.
sometimes
give,
in
particular
at Alcaeus fr. 52 Be.^
:
ttwitjc,
which
Ahrens
{Aeol.91)
is most
likelyright
in
rejecting, though Bergk (Lyr.^
p. 931) again
defends the
i]q
on the
ground
of
an obscure and
very
140 UNEXPANDED THEMATIC PEESENTS.
ch. vi.
corrupt passage
in
Apollonius Dysc. Bergk regards
botli
j;
and
ei as
lengtheningsconipensatoiy
for the loss of the final
i,
in which
case
the
series would be tfri
eq rjc, eig.
How untenable this
assumption
is
we
shall
try
to show later
on.
For the 3rd
sing,
ei was
Doric
as well,
and is shown
by vei (Ale.
34, 1)
to liave been Lesbio-Aeolic,so that
uCiii^i'ir]=('uiK)'i"i, an isolated
form
occurring
at
Sappho I, 20,
cannot be
trusted,
and has been
rightly
exchanged
for
aciKt]ti. Lastly
the Boeotians
pronounced
it
Xeyi.
These dialectic forms
prove conclusively
that the
primaiy
Greek
forms were "
*\eye(n *\eyeTi.
Xiyeai
lost its
t
and became
Xiyeg as *TiO)]-ffi
became
TtdrjQ.
The Doric
Xiyec
of which the final
syllable
has lost the mark of
a
pi-imarytense,
exactlycorres^^onds
to the Lat.
legis
and the Goth,
vigis.
The Doiians
however
preserve
a trace of the lost
i
in the
accent, provided
the tradi- tion
is to be trusted which
gives
us
o^eXyee, rrvpiacec. Xtyeig
on
the
other
hand, though
it likewise has lost its final
",
did not lose
it,as Bopp
saw,
till
epenthesis
had taken
place. Midway
then between
*Xiyzm
and
XiytiQcame *Xiytiai'.
In the
epenthesisor
anticipatoiy
sound
(
Vork-
lang)
we
have the
same
process by
which kri became elvi and elv
(Princ.
ii. 334
if.).
This
explanation
has it is true been attacked
by Bergk,
who
maintains
(Philol.
xxix,
p. 319)
that in the old
alphabet
the Greeks
wrote
AOKES,
and since then
Bei'gk
has
actually
called attention
(in
ricckeisen's Jahrb.
1878,
p.
190)
to a
form KAAEA0KE2 in
an inscrip- tion
on a vase
found at Locri,
in Southern
Italy,
and
already
edited at
Corp.
Inscr. Graec. iii.
no. 5770. But
so
isolated
a
spelling, occm-ring
in
a privateinsciiption,
is
no
foundation for the
explanation
of
a form,
especially as during
the
periodimmediatelypreceding
the introduction of
the new
alphabet
into Attica " and this is in
.Bergk's
view the date of
the
vase
" the letters E and
EI, representing, as
they did,
sounds which
had then at all events become
very
much like each
othei-,were
often
interchanged(Cauer,
Stud, viii.
230). Moreovei',
the
explanation
that
207
the
ft owes
its existence
merely
to the
'
endeavour to secure
compensa- tion'
"
'
ut damnum resarcirent'
Bei'gk says
in the note on
the
Lyric
poets quoted
above
"
is
one
which
utterly
fails to content
us,
inasmuch
as we now
regard compensatoiy lengthening
not so
much
as
of
an
extei-nal mechanical
natvire,
and
can
assign
more
of
a
definite limit to its
action
by laying
it down that
a
vowel is
never
made
long except by
the
influence of consonants
directlyfollowing
it which have been
gradually
fading
away (Brugman
de
productionesuppletoria
Stud.
iv.).
An
utterly
diffei-ent
theory
as to the
relationship
of these forms has
been
propounded by
Corssen after Alb. Dieti'ich
(Ztschi-.
f. Alteithw.
1847,
p.
710
ff.)
in his work
on
tlie Pronunciation of
Latin,
i.'^
p.
600 ff.
He believes that in the Gk. forms in
tig, tt we
have
parallels
to the foi'ms
scr'ihis, agtt which, though very
rai-e
and therefore
impugned by some,
and otherwise
explainedby others,
do occur in
Latin,
and since it is
impossible
to
explain
these Latin forms
by epenthesis
" for Latin knows
nothing
of
epenthesis
" he
regards
the
long syllable
in both
languages as
the result of
'
intensification.' There are however
good grounds
to be
given
for not
adopting
this view. In the first
place,
there is
no reason
why
the thematic vowel should be intensified at all. It is certain that
CH. Ti.
UNEXPANDED THEMATIC PRESENTS. 141
of all the foi'inal elements in the verb it is that which has least
signifi- cance,
and for this
reason we
have
regarded
its
lengthening,when, as in
d-mi
d-mas,
Gk. and Lat.
o,
it has
actually
taken
place,
as
by
no means
an
intensification due to the efibrt made
by language
to
emphasise
par- ticular
syllables,
but
as a
mechanical
lengthening,one,
that
is,
which
has been
brought
about
by
the influence of the
succeeding
consonants.
Conscious that
ei merely
viewed
phonetically
would
even
in Attic be a
remarkable intensification of
e,
Corssen has
I'ecoiu-se
to Doiic and Aeolic.
But there is
nothing
to be
gainedby
the
production
of what he calls the
Doiic and Aeolic
??,
for,as we have
seen,
the
i]
in these
persons
has but
a
slender
authority.
In the 3rd
sing,
we
actually
find
a
Doric
el
abundantly
established
by inscriptions,
and this strict-Doi-ic
ei
of the
Heracleic tables
(e.g.ecpopevei
tab. Heracl. i.
122,
aiioTtiaEi ib.
109,
(pvTevae'i114, e/u/SaXtf 115, e^t'i130),as
well
as
forms like
jjpi^ti, (ri'Cti,
(pipti
in
Epicharmvis
would
anyway
be
incompi-ehensible
as an
rutensifica-
208
tion of an t.^ Then the assertion
(p.602)
that
'
there
are
other instances
in the Attic dialect of the
appearance
of
an ei
where the Doric and
Aeolic dialects have
?;,
as
the
regular
intensification
or lengthening
of
e
'
is
decidedly
incorrect. Intensification of
an e produces
?;
in all Greek
dialects
except
Boeotian,
which shifts
every ?;
to
ei
"
e.g.
rt.
i-u\perf.
Ixi-jxy^Ke,
rt. kc
EC-i]C-o-Ka.
The Homeric forms
delyc,
On'ri
for
Birjc, Qirj,
which Coissen
brings
forward,
prove
nothing,
for
we
shall
see
below
what slender
support
these forms have. In
Btic,
ndeic to which he also
appeals,
ei
has arisen
by compensatory lengthening,
and hence
Argolic
has
-eye,
Heracleic
-rjQ.
And
granting
that there
were cases
in Homeric
Ionic in which
at
had taken the
jiosition
of
an
older
rj
which
arose
by
intensification,
this
et
would be
absolutely
inconceivable in strict
Doiic,
for it is one
of the
many
characteristics of this dialect to hold fast
by
an
7]
even
when it has arisen from
compensatory lengtheningor contraction,
and all the
more
when it has arisen
by
intensification. "We dealt
on
p.
40 f. with the 3rd
persons
sing,
in
-t/ctj
which
are properlyspeaking
not
'
Doric
'
but are exclusivelypeculiar
to
Ibycus,
and which
are at
variance with all the
testimony
of
insciiptions
as to this
personal
ter- mination.
The Boeotian
XejIc \iyl
do not suit Corssen's
hj^Dothesis
either. Where could
an
7,
which the Boeotians substitute
only
for a
trulydiphthongal
ei,
be
an intensification of
an "
? It is
ei
that is the
Boeotian
representative
of
a primitive
Greek
?;.
There still remains
a
conclusive
argument against
Corssen's view. If
we are not to
suppose
that the
ei
of
Aeye'CjXiyEi
arose
from
an
echo of the
i
which
once was in
the final
syllable,
what
explanation
is to be
given
of the
y
in the
con- junctives
Xi-yricXiyri
1 I do not think
anyone
will
say
that
jj
has been
209
'
intensified
'
to
";.
The
i
here is so
firmly
established,
e.g.
in the
Heracleic
dialect,
that besides
rifxr], "pEpr], Xaftij
there are
also instances
'
The
warm
defence of his
theory
which Corssen has
pi;t
into his
Bcitrdge
zur italisclien
tipracliTiunde (p.
484
ff.)
contains no fresh
grounds
for it. The
sug- gestion
that the et which
appears
at this
place among
all Dorians with the
single
exception
of the above-mentioned forms in
-i\(ji
used
by Iljycus
" which moreover
are suspicious by reason of their a " is due to
'
Attic intiuence,' of which there is
(e.g.)
in
Epicharmus
not the faintest trace besides, will convince no one.
The
statement that
icjiopeveion
the Heracl. tables is
'completely
isolated' has
no foiindation. It is
quite a
mistake to call edeiKe an
'
Aeolic,'
i.e. a Lesbio-
Aeolic form. It is Boeotian. The 3rd
pi.
Xeia-i.in
Sappho
he has confounded with
the 3rd sing. etc.
142 UNEXPANDED THEMATIC PRESENTS.
ch. vi.
of
conjunctives
with what is
apparently?j
shortened to
et,
like
ypu\l/ei,
fiTTodurei,
which serve as
confirmation for the indicatives.
^
There is
no
other
])ossible exjjlanation
of this
t except
that it is
an
anticipatoiy soimd,
an
echo of the
followingi,
and when we consider that
Xiyrjgcon-esponds
to
XiyeiQ,Xiyr]
to
Xeyei precisely
as Xeyrjre
does to
Xiyers,XiyriaOe
to
Xeyefrde,
it cannot be doubted that the
ei
of
Xeyeic,Xeyei
arose in the
same
way
as
the
jj
in
Xiyrjc,Xey)j.
This
brings
us to an
explanation
of the 3rd
sing,
which differs frojn
that which we have
adopted. Schleicher,Comp. " 275,
assumes,
in his
account of the
change
from
*(j"ipe-Ti,
feprj-Ti
to
(pepei,fipr}an intermediate
*(f)ipi-(TL (j)"pr]-(Ti.
This
hypothesis,again,can be
easily
refuted
by a refer- ence
to the dialects. It is
only
the Ionic dialect that shows the
weakening
of
T
before
i
to
a-.
Here then
a
*(jjep"-m
is
conceivable,
and
(pEpr]-ai
and
the like do
occur over
and
over
again
in Homeric Greek. But we must
take
cpiite
another
way
to account for the Doric forms. How are we to
think that the same stems which
produced (jju-rl,
"ktci-tland the like
were faithless to their
t
here 1
Consequently
Schleicher's intermediate
*(pipEm*fepr]fn
cannot be allowed for the Doric
(pepei, cpipr],(peprjiri
is
an old form wliich is
specifically
Homeric and came
directly
from
^Epr)ri.
In other
cases
the final
t,
after it had exercised its influence
upon
the
precedingsyllable, disappeared,so
that the series was as follows
:"
*(pep"-at *(])ep7]-(Ti *cfiepe-Ti *cj)epr]-Ti
*
J J J }
(pepei-fTi *(f)epT]-(ri *(bepeL-Ti *cbeprj-Ti
J J' J
I'
(jiepei-s (pepij-s *cf)"pei-T *(pepT]-r
!
r
(pe'pei 'P^'pH-
:IW
This
explanation
accounts
completely
for all the sounds in the vai'ious
forms. The assumed
^ipepEiri correspondsexactly
to the baraiti oi
Zend,
and the
conj.^ipepyn
to an
avditi
(hemay
go)
in the
same language.
A
Greek
pai-allel
to the
phoneticchangeswe
have assumed is to be found
in the form iroi {=
Zd.
pai-fi)as is
pointed
out
by
Allen Stud. iii.271.
In the Et. M.
678,
44 we read
: ttoI
Trapa
'Apye/otcaiTt rov
TTOTi,
a^aipiaei
tov
t,
dm
ervvolt^,
and there is
something
very
like it in the
Delphic lioLTpoTTLOQ
the
name of a month
meaning XIpocrpoTrioc (suppli-
catorius).
Three instances of the form ttoT are
given
in the collection of
inscriptions
edited
by
Foucart and Le Bas
(vol.
iii.
no. 157).
We thus
get
the
following proportion:
ttoT
: ttoti ::
(pipei
:
''^(pipen.
"
Finallywe
miist, on account of the
similaiity
of their
formation,
call attention to
the Aeolic forms of the 3rd
sing,
of the verbs in
/ji,
discussed
by
Ahrens
Aeol. 137.
Tidr], 'trrrt], IiSm,
which
are given by grammarians, have,
like
(jnpet,Xiyet,
lost the consonants of the
personal
termination. Since
a
final
c
is not in the habit of
disappeai-ing, we must
undoiibtedly
refer these
^
The inconsistencies in the
nse of the i adscriptum,
discussed
by
Ahrens
J9w.
29i,
prove nothing more than that this sound
began to vacillate
early.
There is
a genuine old witness to the i in a-rroBdyeiin the Laconian inscriptionof
Xuthias in the old
alphabet 'ApxaiaKoyiKy]'E"|)7j,uepi$ B, ly.
Who will believe that
tlie
I has made its
way
in here
on the
analogy of some indicative or other? If
the
(t of the indicative
really arose as Corssen
thought,
it would of
necessity
have been written E in the old
alphabet, and in the
conjunctivean EI would be
more
inexplicablestill.
I
CH. VI. UNEXPANDED THEMATIC PRESENTS. 143
to
*rtdi)r,*'i(TTr]T, *}:ilioT,
forms which would stand
on
the
same
footing
as
*(pipELT.
The Lesbio-Aeolic
yiXai, if,as
is
probable,
it
owes its
t
to
epenthesis,
would
exactlycorrespond
to
"i"ip"i, Xiyei.
The
special
character of this kind of
present-formation
appears
most
clearly
in the case of roots which end in
a consonant. In
present-
forms like
oyw, TrXtKo-p.er,
TTtTO-jJiai,
ftXiTre-re,
fxivEL
we are sure
that
nothing
else has been added to the root to form the
present-stem
but
the thematic vowel. The number of such roots is
large. According
to
the
computation given
below it is
109,
and these
may
be
arranged
in
groups according
to their final consonant. Present-stems with
a long
vowel have been
nearly
all excluded from the
list,
because it is
possible
that the
long
vowel
might
be due to intensification.
Eoots in
K.
depKo/jLtti
*"h:(t),
in the
part,hior,eXi^to
Kpf.Kw
dXeVw TrXtkw and
(only
in
Hesych.)tvkcj {krotfidi^w).
"
Total 7.
Eoots in
y.
211
ay
10
a/^iXyu)
a/iepyu)
e'lpyo)Xiyu) (aXiyw) I'vyti (rw Kivrpf TrXriTTei
Hesych.)
opeyio
(rriyuj
arepyu)
rlyyw
(peyyu) (Aristoph.)^Qiyyofxai (pXeyu)
"^iyu).
" Total 14.
Eoots in
X-
ay^w apl)(^ETai ap6-)(tTai explained by yX/'xeraiby Hesych.,
apx'^
ftpiX'^ yXtxo/J-ai^ix^^fxai (Ion.ciKOfiai) iXe'y^w
ev^o/J-ai ej^w
*Ae)(w
or
Xixofiai,
deduced from
Hesychiiis's
KaXix^e'
KariKeiiTo
Ylciipioi,
for which
perhaps
Meineke is
right
in
reading Ka-Xtx^o
i.e.
i^araXexio,
luaxonat
opvx'^
{opvxoL^t^
Arat.
1086) piyx^ ^^^PX'^'^ ""'"'X"'
(Loheck
Rhemat.
67)
rpexoj.
I have omitted
lcix"^,
because it
might
be
thought a
reduplicated
form,
also
epxof^ai
and others because their
x
^^^
apparently
arisen from
the
(7K
of the inchoative class." Total 16.
Eoots in
T.
uvTOjxuL
XiTOfxai(hymn.
Hom.
16, 5, 19, 48, Aristoph.
Thes.
313)
TTErofxa.
"
Total 3.
Eoots in 8.
a'/oo^ai ap^u)tcw
tX^o^ot
/itcw "Kep^of.iai
tnret'diorev^w
(H.es.
'
Epy. .524)
vSo)
(XeyuiHesych.)
and the dovibtful xbidw
(irrpiTru), (ppofTliiwHesych.).
"
"Total 10.
Eoots in 0.
axdajjiaL
"0w
'ixdofiai odofiaiTripdw,
while those whose 6 is
or
may
be
144 UNEXPANDED THEMATIC PRESENTS.
ch. vi.
the cliaracteristic of the
present
"
e.g.
(pi-)(Bu) by
the side of
ipeitcu),
eadu)
by
the side of tdio have been omitted. " Total 5.
Eoots ill
IT.
fiXiTTio Ipiiru) iXtrofxai {lv)inwtwo)
epTrw
daXTrw
Xa/X7rw
XeVw
^ueXttw
TTf'/LtTw Trpineipinw (TKewio (lateby-form
of
C/vETra^w) ripirw
rpf.irij},
"
Total 16.
Eoot in
y8.
/3Xa/3"rat only
T
82, 166, r
34 and Anacreontica
31,
26 Be.
Eoots in
(j".
yXa^w yXij'pu)
ypcK^d)
yplcpio(Hippocr.)ce^w ("7ro)2pi/^w (?)epiffxi}
fiefi(pofJiai arifw (TTp"(pu) rpecpio
xpEC^ei (^cecoike,
\vtve~i
Hesych.),
to "which
we
may
add
rZ/^w,
which a closer examination
(Stnd.
II.
440)
shows to be
not
open
to the
suspicion
of
being
intensified." Total 1 2.
Eoots in
V.
212
/itVw
TTEvofxai
fTdefu)
(T-iyw,
while liyo)
(cj). avvui)
is omitted because
the
V
is
possiblya characteristic of the
present,fdaio)
because its
r
is
certainly
such. " Total 4.
Eoots in
fjL.
ftpifiw
yijjd)
and another
yifiw
in
Hesychius [cnroyEfAE
"
ri^fXcs),
treated
of at Princ. ii.
246, iiiJto dEp/jw,
which
occupiesa peculiarposition
as a
denominative
(cp.dipw
and
dEpfjtoq),
ve^u)
-rijjuo (N 707)
rpEfiw.
" Total 8.
Eoots in
p.
fif'pw dipw,more
often
Qipofiai
opofiai
(IJpovTai,
oporro
^ 104,
y 471)
TTTcipu)
(Aristot.)
for which
some
editors want to read
irraipw,
(pipto
arfpofxai.
" Total 6.
Eoots in X.
floXofiai (Horn.)
deXoj
KeXoi^ai^eXu)
ttcXw. " Total 5.
Eoots in
cr,
epa-u) (Nicander) riptroijiai.
" Total 2.
Eoots in
^.
ai^ioaXi^bJ ocu^u)." Total 3.
Eoots in
\f/.
iixl^ut t"//u;."
Total 2.
CH. Ti. THE PREVAILING VOWEL. 145
I have omitted
'ippu)
because the
origin
of the
pp
is
ambiguous,
as also
cflyyu)
in tlie
y
roots becavise the nasal looks as if it
were a
present
strengthenixig, though
this is
by
no means so
clear in forms like
Teyyoy,
(piyyio, (pdiyyof^iai, eXiy^co,Trej^nroj,fxefi'liofjai.
Our list
might possibly
however suffer
a
loss from this
reason.
It is
very
remarkable how the vowels are divided
among
these stems.
Lobeck noticed this.
Though
he does not confine himself to the class of
verbs now
occupyingus,
he
says,
while further
developing
the remarks
of
some
old
grammarians (Rhemat.50)
:
'
Nulla sunt verba
quae alpha
breve in
penultima
pui'a
habent,
antecedente et succedente
consona
sim-
plici, perpauca
crassioris structurae
/9/\o/3w,
ypafw, (pBavw,nam
plerum-
que
assumitur
consona aiLsiliaris
cd/crw,utttw.
" Creber
vero seciindae
vocalis
[e]usus /Vyw, oreyw.'
As we
should
put
it the statement would
run thus
:
'
Verbal-stems with
an o hardly
ever make
a
present-stem
with
no further addition than that of the thematic vowel, unless the
stem contains
heavy
groups
of
consonants,
and hence
t
is the
more
frequent.'
As
a.
fact 84 of the stems
just given
have
t,
while
a occurs 21-3
only
13 times and the
remaining
vowels almost
exclusively
in out-of-the-
way
and isolated
specimens.
The
linguistic
sense of the Attics
seems to
have discerned this
affinity
between " and the
pi-esentstem,
and hence
irpa-oi'
became the aorist and
tTpewnv
the
imperfect.
The Dorians
pre- ferred
an a next to a
p
:
-puTrto, rpa^w, cr-pufw, rpu-^ii)^
Locr.
(hapta
(Ahi-ens
Dor.
117,
Allen Stud. iii.
219).
Greek shows herein
a note- worthy
agreement
with Latin. In Latin too
presents
like
emo, veho,
tero, are
extremelycommon,
while
presents
like
cdo,molo,
coqno
are rare.
We
can enumerate 16
presents
in which the two South-
European
lan- guages
show the
same vowel;
13 with
e : l3pif.iw=fremo, Si\l/w=:de2)so,
if this is not
a
borrowed
word, ilw=.edo,trreiTe-=in-sece,
eTrof.iai=:sequor,
\iy(i)r=lego, vpiyu)=rego,"!vipcojxai=-2)edo, "7reTo/.iai=zpeto, pirrw
cp. repens,
aTiyio=ztego, Tpi^iw=tremo,"pEpu)=fero ;
two with
a
in both
languages:
ayw=ago, ayyjj}:=ango ;
one
with
o:
Homeric
ftu\oixuL-=volo.
Seeing
that the
North-Europeanlanguages,
which
we cannot examine
here,
show
a
wides^jreadtendency
^
to
change
a
primitivea
in
a
similar
position
to
e
(Goth,ai)
or even to i
(Goth.
""?""= Ch.-Sl.
hercj,,
Goth.
ita,
Lat.
edo),
we
may
ventvu-e to
conjectm^e
that
even
in the
period
before the
sepai'ation
of the
Eui-opeanlanguages
thei-e
was in these
cases
no
pui'e
a
but either an e or an a
that tended to turn into an e.
Cp.
my
essay
'
Ueber die
Spaltung
des A-Lautes.' Ber. d. k. sachs. Ges. d,
Wissensch. 1864. It is somewhat
surprising,
at first
sight,
to find that
in
present stems,
which in
general
are
prone
to fuller
foi'ms,
it is the
weakest of the hard vowels that
prevails,
and that this
prevalence
is
specially prominent
in Graeco-Italic. The influence of the
accent,
which
has
only
in Sanskrit
a
du-ect effect
upon
the formation of the
pre- sent,
will be found
quite inadequate
to
explain
this
phenomenon,
at all
214
events in Greek and Latin. It would be absuixl to
pi-e-suppose
a
*(jjepu)
"=z*fero or a
*i^tpG)^i-=.'^feromi
in order to
get
from the Sanskrit hhdrdini
^
1
am indebted to the kiuduess of A. Leskien for the fact that in Chiu'ch-
Slatonic
out of 73 verbs with an unintensified "-sound 57 have
e,
G
a,
4
o,
and 6 " as
the vowel of the
jDresent-stem.
" Armenian,
in which Hiibsch-
mann's
investigations{Ztsclir.
xxiii.
33)
have shown the vowel
system to
agree
widely
in other
points
with the
Indo-Germanic,
has bnt
rarely
"
e.g.
bcrel bear "
an e at this
jalace.
146 ifi^EXPANDED THEMATIC STEMS. ch. vi.
.
to
(pepu)
aud
fh-o.
I should Ije inclined rather to venture on the
assump- tion
that the thematic
vowel,
which
began early
in most
though
not in all
forms to weaken itself to
e,
exercised an
assimilating
influence
on the
vowel of the root. Then the
weakening
would have
gradually
extended
itself from forms like
*fj"ep"in *(l"ipeTi (l)tperE
" as
is also
conjecturedby
Breal,
M(5moires de la Socio te de
Linguistique
ii. 169" to such forms as
0f'|f"w
for
^cjmpu), (pspoi'Ti
for
''''fapor-i.
If such was
the
genesis
of the
e iu
the root it would be
easy
to see why strong groups
of consonants
were
able to
preserve
the old vowel
e.g.
in
fiyx^, up^w,
liiTo^ai,Xajjnrai.
Even
so,
it is
true, we
do not
get
an adequate explanation
for all in- stances
and this is
a thing we can
hardlyhojie
to do. But it is all the
cleai-er as a
fact in the
history
of
language
that at this
placee was from
very
early
times the favoui'ite vowel.
Besides
the consonantal there
ai-e appai'entlya
very
considerable
number of vocalic roots which follow this rule in their
present-formation.
Omitting entirely
the denominative verbs with the
wide-spi-ead
derivative
terminations
aw im ow
evm,
which the
comparison
of the related
languages
shows
undoubtedly
to have lost a j,we
have so-called
pure
verbs like
^paw i^Eii) utio \vb),
which the old
grammatical theory
reckoned
as
pecu- liarly
primitiveverbs,so
that
e.g.
Lobeck
puts
them at the head of his
Rhematicon,
under the belief that the fuller forms
grew gi-adually
from
simple
formations of this kind
by
the accretion of sounds and
syllables.
The wider A^ews
opened
out to us by
the
comparativestudy
of
languages
oblige
us on
the
contrary
to hold it far from
probable
that two
vowels,
the radical and the
thematic,especially
if
they
wei-e
both
a at
first,
stood
next to each othei- from the
l)eginning.
It would be hard to find forms
in Sanskrit and Zend which could be
compared
with
cputo
as a
primitive
formation. Such
a juxtaposition
of vowels is
probablyalways
due to
the loss of
spii-ants.
The
droj^ping
of
spirants
between vowels is
one
of the most extensive and fundamental characteristics of the Greek lan-
215
guf^ge-
And for a number of such verbs
we can cleai-ly
establish such
a
loss,though
this is not the
only
process
that has been at woi-k. It
is often the case
in the life of
language
that what looks
primitive
turns
out on
closer
inspection
to have been
alreadydefaced,
and so it is here.
A
poi'tion
of these
presents
can be shown to have lost a
present-strength- ening
which
they
had at an
earlier time.
Lastly
we have to consider
the
cases
in which the transition has taken
place
from the
conjugation
ill
-/a
to the thematic
conjugation.
We will discuss the forms in
ques- tion
from these three
points
of view.
We
can
be sure of the loss of a a
in the
followingpresent
-forms
:
1) l3Uiocompared
with the Lat.
vis-io,
Lith. bez-dii
(Princ.
i.
284)
and the substantive
l^hirr-fiu.
2) Cf'wcompared
with the Skt.
J"s (Princ.
i.
471),
OAi.Gr.
jesan,
and
Ci(y-"TEv, i^irr-fia,
(Ea-rvQ.
3) yiofxaicompared
with the Skt.
nas
(Princ.
i.
391)
and
yoff-ro-c,
ri"T-(T()-^i(ii (forI'Ea-jo-^iui).
4) Tpio)compared
with the Skt. trd$d-mi
(Princ.
i.
277)
and
TpifTfTE.
5)
Xciw I
wish, compared
with the Skt.
Idshd-ini,
Lat.
las-civu-s,
Goth, lus-tu-s
(Princ.
i.
450).
6)
The forms of the rt.
eq,
which,
like
ewv,
conj.
tw, opt.
'ioi have
assumed the thematic inflexion.
I
CH. VI.
TRACES OF LOST CONSONANTS. 147
In other
cases
the
same
loss is at least
very
probable,e.g.
in
XP''^^
which shows
a o-
in
xpcftf, Xf"'^'"''^'
^^^
agrees
completely
with the Skt.
(jliarsh
(Princ.
i.
251),
in
(pvuj
draw with
epvacra,
for
which, as
I think I
have shown at Stud. vi. 265
ff.,we
get
a
stem.
J^epvg,
which
only
differs
fi'om the Lat.
vcrro vers
in
having developeda v
between the
p
and the
c.
Leskien
(Stud.
ii. 85
f.)conjectures
the
same
final
e
for other verb-stems
besides,on
the
ground
of the
sigma
which
appears
in aoristsand nominal
forms, as
for
6Xau", kXuio,
fxvu)
(Princ.
i.
419), Eeio,^vw,
tttvw, epaw,
crwau).
Even
though
this
classification,
the
etymologicalinvestigation
of which
we cannot
proceed
with
here,
should be doubtful in
many cases,
of this
much we
maybe sure,
that
a not inconsiderable
portion
of the
pure
verbs
owe the
juxtaposition
of the vowels to the loss of
a
"t,
which
naturally
took
place
at an
earlyperiod
when such
a juxtaposition
was as
yet
not
found
disagi^eeable.
The loss of
a
/ is not so
often demonstrable. It would be the
case 216
Avith
aw
satiate if it
reallybelongs
to the Skt. rt. av
(Princ.
i.
483,
cp.
Fick Wtb.^ i.
24).
The Homeric Xaon'
(Princ.
i.
452)
miist have
come
from
*\o/-wr,
and
(pa-e
from
*^c//-"(Princ.
i.
369).
In
some
other cases we can
conjecture
the loss of
a j,
but the
j
is of
quite
a
diSerent character. Under this head
importance
attaches to the
statement of the Et. M.
254,
14 rd
(pvM
AtoXiKwg (pviio (paalkoi to
aXvto
aXviio,relying
on
which Ahrens
(Aeol.98)
has received
(pvlei
into the
text in Alcaeus fr. 68
(Bergk^ 97). Support
is
given
to this
formation,
as Schleicher
(Beitr.
iii.
248) was
the first to
recognise,by
the Umbr.
fuia (
=
Lat./Moi)andy^ies^
with the
meaning erit,
and
perhaps
in the
phenomena
from Keltic and Teutonic
languages
which Schleicher there
discusses. This
as good
as
proves
that
"pvw
arose
in the
same
way
from
(pviio
as
Ti/juM
from
rij-iajw, cpiXiu)
from
fiXejw.
In
my
Studien iii.398 I
have called attention to the fact that the fluctuations in
vowel-quantity
shown
by
the verbs in
question
must be due to the after-effect of
a
lost
spirant.
This
very
fluctuation is observable in
(pvw.
Homer knows
only
the short
v
in the
present stem,
but at
Aristoph.
Av. 106 we read
"
Trrepoppvei,
kut
avdis
erepa
(pvop,ev,
and there
are more
instances in other Attic
poets.
It is
only apparently
therefore that
^vw belongs
to oru*
present
class
; really
it
belongs
to the
t-class,
inasmuch
as
it
once
had the
syllableja
added to its root as a
present-expansion.
The fact thus established will
serve as an analogy
for similar
conjectures
about other verbs in
-vw,
of which
we now
deal
only
with such
as are root-verbs.
dvM has in Homer
a long v as a
rule
: oicfxanQvior,
lairelov 3'
airav
ciifiaTL Qvtv,
Bve o'
'A6)/i'?/,
but at o
260 it is short
:
iwei
ae
Bvovtcl
Kfxa''w.
On the
quantity
in Attic
poets cp.
Ellendt's Lex.
Soph. (2nd edit.).
Here too the fluctuation of
quantity
is
explained
if we
start from
Qviu),
and this is not
only a
presumable
but an actuallyoccui-ring
form.
Hesychius
has the
gloss
'idvuv
ii^ah'ero,
eTpextr,
and in virtue of this
Ruhnken,
at
hymn,
in Merc. 560 reads Qviwaiv instead of the
manu- script
Qv'iaiotn
v,
and in this later editors have followed him. It is from
this stem too that the
QviactQ
get
their
name.
In accordance with all this
we
shall not
scruple,
even
where the
217
form with
t
is not to be
found,
to refer
irregularities
of
quantity
to the
L 2
148 UNEXPANDED
THEMATIC STEMS, ch. vi.
same
source,
and
especially
in the case
of Xvw and ^vw. That the root-
vowel in \v(o was short is manifest from
XcXftK-a, Xt'Xv/jat, Xvro,iXvQ-qv.
In the
present,by
the side of 'Oovrr^vc Xue
fiwrvyjuc,
'Ittttovq K
498,
Homer
has
ar?pao-iveiKea
Xvei
tj
74. With the Attics the
long
vowel
prevails
in the
present. (Cp. Ellendt,
Lex,
Soph.
2nd edit. s.
v.)
The
case
clearly
stands thus
:
the
present
was originally
*Xwtw after the
manner
of the
"-class,
and the
long
vowel due to the
diphthong
was extended to
the future and the aorist which are always prone
to follow the
present
in the matter of
quantity.
In the
case
of
cuw
the
long
vowel is
some- what
more persistent.
There remains
finally
a
special
class of forms of the kind
;
those
which have in the
course
of time abandoned the
primitive
method of the
so-called
conjugation
in
-fii,
for thematic method of formation which
was
increasinglybecoming
the rule. Forms like
tw,
"loifii,
Iwy can hardly
have existed from the fii'st
by
the side of such as
d/ui,"ifiev,
"ire. The
a
of
7/10,
the
"
of
te'i'rtt, Idrtv,
with which we
had to deal at
p.
121, was
perhaps
not distinct from this
o origmally,
that
is,perhaps
the latter
arose
from the former. Above all however
we
may
conjecturea
propor- tionally
late
origin
for the thematic vowel
whei*e, as
e.g.
in
kpau)by
epufjiai, epvu)
by 'ipvtrdai (cp.above,
p.
122)
and most of all in
cuKrvw by
ceiKt'vfii, dfivvovmby
oyivvatTi,
Kipi'^by Kiprr^iii,
the said vowel added
itself to an alreadydissyllabic stem,
thus
making
it
trisyllabic.
This is
a plain
case of the
gradual spread
of
an analogy.
We
may say
that the
thematic vowel has in such
cases quite
another foiinative
or etymological
value from that which it has in
(pipw,
ex"o
and other
presents
of the kind.
Present-forms such as used to be
given
as
themata from Philoxenus's
time, were not
quiteso rare in the
usage
of the various dialects as might
be
supposed. Hesychius
has
fav
"
Xiyeiv
which Nauck
(Melanges,
iv.
29) regardsas an
infinitive like the
rare
forms
dvr,covu
discussed
by
me
in
Chap.
XV. Of the
same
kind is
TrpoaTav
{"=.Trpor7riii'ai)
in an inscription
218
from
Erythrae.
Lobeck
(Rhem. 5)
discusses the traces of a /3ow
which
appear
most
clearly
in the Heracleic
i-mft^
tab. Heracl. i. 68. We
may
be sure of the forms
TrpojoCJvTEQ
Cratin. Com. ii.
88,
and
tKftibvrac
in
a
Doric contract in Thuc.
v. 77.
Bew=:ridi]i.ii occurs,
iiotwithstanding
all
that has been said about
it,
in the much
disjouted TrpoOeovaw
A
291,
and
perhaps
in ariQu C. I.
no.
1195. iXao) is
abundantly
attested as
Doric
(Ahr. 341).
Whether
or not there
are
many
more
pure
verbs that do not fall into
any
of tliese four
categories
I cannot
say.
It
might
be hard
any way
to
prove
that
presents
like
kXvw, vei,
liojiai are not
just
as genuine
and
unmutilated formation;?
as Xiyu),
uyei,
only even
here
we occasionally
find by-forms which at least make it credible that
a
consonant should
have been lost. To kXvm
correspond
the Lat. cbio and
chieo,
to
?
m^tai
the
Skt.
(lijdmi.
It is
possible
of
course
that in both cases a j
has been
lost which
we
should have to
regard
as a
formative element. Still less
credible must it
a])pear
that such a
harsh hiatus
as
that in j'"w=Lat,
neo should have existed from the
beginning.
As a
fiict O.H.G. in this
instance
gives
the forms
ndjan
and ndican as
well
as ndan. A historical
consideration of verbal
development
makes it
quite
clear that this
fii-stclass of thematic
presents
is like
a
stream, wliich,though
slender at
first, becomes
gi-adually
swollen
by
a large
number of tributaries
poiu-ing
I
CH. VI.
TRACES OF LOST CONSONANTS. 149
into it from left and
right,
until at last it becomes itself
by
far the
broadest stream of all.
Especially
after the immense number of deno- minative
verbs in
aw, "w, ow, vw
had lost theu-j", the
predominance,
tlie
hegemony as
it
were,
of this formation
was
assvu-ed. Still in this
great
river
we are
able at least
partially to distinguish by
theii- colour the
various
tributary
streams that have become united in its bed.
150 STEMS WHICH LENGTHEN THE VOWEL IN THE PEESENT. ch. tu.
CHAPTEE VII.
STEMS WHICH LENGTHEN THE VOWEL IX THE PRESENT.
219 In
a
considerable niimber of
present-forms,
besides the thematic vowel
which attaches itself to the end of the
root, we notice
a strengthening
of
the vowel in the middle of the root
as
well. As
examples we
may
take
Ty]KU)
as compared
with
ayw, Ttvyu)
as
compai-ed
with
y\v"pw.
It seemed
to
us
above
(p.10)
that this
strengtheningwas due to the need
forgiving
a
strongeremphasis
to the root to suit the durative
meaning
it
acquires
in the
present-stem. Vowel-intensification, or addition of
sound, con- stantly
meets us
in
noun-formation,
e.g.
in
Tij^e-cwv, -eu^oc,
as
well
as
in
the
present-forms
above-mentioned
" in 7rei0w as well
as 7re/0w"
though
in Greek there is often
a
shade of difference between the two
kinds,as
may
be seen
from
Xonrog by
the side of
Xeinu),apwydc by
the side of
iipi'r/uj.
It would be
hard, therefore,to find
any
other
principle
under-
Ijdng
this
process
than that of the
tendency
to
emphasise,
and if
we were
right
in
explaining
the
present-stems
with thematic vowels to have
come
oi'iginally
from
noun-stems,
this
agi'cement
between
nouns and verbs
becomes
intelligiljle
at once. In the one case the
language
chose the
lighter,
and in the other the heavier nominal form to denote the
lasting
action. The
choice,howevei',
between the two
foi-ms,
between
the first and second class that
is,was determined
by
certain
phonetic
analogies,
in which Greek
agrees
to
some
extent with Sanski-it. In the
first
place,
intensification
never takes
placeexcept
before
a singleconso- nant.
This is
distinctly
the rule for the Sanskrit Guna. In Greek
intensification would at most be conceivable in the
case of the few verbs
like
a/ix*^) "yX*^'
which would make them
*'a/)xw,' 'nyx^ (though
there is
notliing
to make
us think
they were so intensified),
for vei-bs with
i or v
before two
consonants,
like such Indian roots
as kunth, nincl,nihsh,are
unknown in
Greek,
with the two isolated
exceptionso-^/yyw,
where the
nasal
was evidently
from the fii-st
an
element in the
stem-formation,
and
ffriXj-iw,
where the
t,
as Westphal,
Method. Gr. ii.
94, conjectiu'es,
220
arose
by weakening
from
".
On the other
hand,
both
languages
have
evidentlya dislike to
presents
with the short A'owels
i=i,
iir=v,
and this
has been
already
noticed in the
case of Greek at
p.
145. Forms like
y\i)(^()ficu, \lrof.uH, veto, yXiKpw,anodpvcpui,
which at ^ 187 = ^
21,can
also
be
an
opt.
aorist,
opv-^to
(only
in
Ai-atus),
tvku), vvyw (only
in
Hesych.)
stand
as isolated in Greek
as ai-e in Sanskrit verbs of the so-called
6th class like rihd-mi
(cp.
the rt. lih
lick), vi(^d-mi (enter,
Gk.
k),
vidhd-
mi
(honoiu-, serve),
wm^'a-wii
(loosen,
also
munUd-mi),
duhd-mi
{laW^,
a\"o
doh-mi),
Hul-d-mi. For
a
large
number of Sanskrit verbs
ending
in
nasals,or in
r
shortened from
ar,
or in
A'owels,
which
are
put
into this
class,are of
quite a
difierent
nature,
and
seem to some
extent to l^e
specifically
Indian.
Latin, too,
has but littleof the kind to show. There
CH. VII.
STEMS WHICH LENGTHEN THE VOWEL IN THE PEESENT. 151
is
no
instance of
;i
present
with a short i before
a
simple
consonant with- out
any
expanding present-strengthening,
and
})robab]y
the
only
instance
of
a
short
u
is
fur-o,
whose 1st
pers.
sing.,according
to
Neue,
Formenl.
ii.2
609,
does not occur.
If
Fick,^
i.
163,
is
right
in
comparing furit
with the Skt. hhurdti
(hequivers,palpitates,
is
restless), we should have
here
a
du-ect
agi-eement
even
in the
present-formation.Con-std-o,
in
which the
%i
may
have been weakened from
a,
is
a compomid,
and there- fore
does not concei'n us here.
Tul-o,
which is
given as an antiquated
word,
is
only
found in
conjmactiveforms,
and thei-efore looks more like
a.n
aoristic
form,
of which
more anon. Moreover,
the
ic,
as
tollo and the
Gk. TuX-cLQ show, came from an older a.
The nature of the vowels in
the
North-Eiu'opeanlanguages
is in
harmony
Avith the rule
justgiven.
According
to
Leskien,
there ax-e
in Chiu'ch-Slavonic
only
two instances
of a non-intensilied i which has to
appear
as
%,
and the same number of
a
non-intensified
ii,
which has to
appear
as u (ilt-a-tt
he
coimts, sup-a-ti
he
pours).
Consequently
we can
lay
it down
as a general tendency
of all
languages
of
oiu*
stock to
expand,
either
by
intensification or in some
other
way,
roots with
a
short i or u. This
intensification, however,
does
not
stoj)
here. Even roots with
an original"-sound,
which in the
gi-eat
majoi'ity
of cases leave their voAvel
unchanged, occasionallyget streng- thened
in a
similar
way.
In the
case
of i and
m the intensification is
diphthongal,
to effect which in Greek
recoiu-se is almost
always
had to
e,
while in that of "-somids it is
monophthongal.
We
do, however,
find I
221
and
V
where
we
should
expect ft
and
tv.
To almost all these
processes
exactlycorrespondinganalogiesoccur
in Sanski'it.
A radical i
becoming a
Gk.
ii,
Skt.
e (i.e. ai),
Xnr
Xeittw,cp.
Skt.
sidh,
sedhdmi
(go).
A radical
^(, becoming
Gk.
ev,
Skt. 6
(i.e. au),(j)vy (pevyu),cp.
Skt. ush
oshdmi
(bm-n,
cp.
Lat.
icro),
while the rt.
bhuif(bend),
which
corresponds
to the Gk.
(pvy,
forms its
present hlnKJd-mi
with no
strengthening,
like
an
imaginable
Gk.
^fi/yu).
To
a
radical i
monophthongally
intensified to
^,
such
as we
have in
the Gk.
'f/cw,
I know of
no parallel
in Sanski-it. But
we
find
u as an
intensification of li in
guhdmi (veil) by
the side of the Zd.
yaozaiti
and
KEvdu).
The
lengthening
of d to
d,
which is elsewhere unknown in the
IncUan
present-formation, appears
in kranm-ini
(go,by
the side of
krdmd-mi)
from the rt. kram,
d-Kdmd-mi
(sup up,
by
the side of the
simplekdmd-mi)
from the rt. Kara,
kldmd-mi
(tire),
rt. klam,
with which
we
may compare
the Dor. Xddu)
by
the side of
Xu6,
the
ordinary
Greek
"r//7rw by
the side of
efrdinrir.
Latin has
preserved
but
very meagre
traces of
diphthongal
intensifi- cation
in the formation of the
present,
and even
ia the few instances that
occui-
it is clear that the real
diphthong,especially
in the case
of
ei,
very
early
retu-ed in favom- of the
simple long vowel,
and the Old-Lat. deico
(=Osc.
inf.
deik-um),feido,
douco
[ahdoiccit
C. I. L. no.
30)by
the side
of
causi-dic-u-s, fid-e-s,
gen.
due-is
are
probably
the
solitary
remains of
the
actuallyexistingdiphthongal
formation.
For,
in
caed-o, by
the
side of the I'elated
scindo,scid-i,
the
ae
is
permanent
all
tln-ough
the
verb. On the other
hand,
presents
which show
a long
vowel
as
contrasted with
a
short vowel elsewhere
are
somewhat
more numerous :
152 STEMS WHICH LENGTHEN THE VOWEL IN THE PEESENT.
ch. vii.
liesides
dlco,diico,fvlo,
there is Idbi
by Idhare,
vddere
by vddum,
stdere
by sedere,
nfd)ere
by ^;row"i",
trudere
by trudi-s,a
^lole
for
thi'usting
with. That the
long
i and
ti correspond
to
diphthongal
intensification
elsewhere is
proved by
ttro
by
the side of the Skt. oslid-vii in the
same,
and the Gk.
avu)
in a
related
sense,
and
by
trudo
by
the side of the Goth.
us-thriuta,
dlco
by
the side of the Goth,
teiha,fldo by
the side of inidw.
The latter
pair
is
jji'obably
the
only one in which Greek and Latin have
received the
same
additional sound in the
present
tense. Greek
agrees
222
with Sanskrit in
uv(,) = oshd-mi, "7r"vdofxai=b6dkd-mi,
with Sanskrit and
Gothic in yfvio^=(j6shd-mi Goth,
kmsa,
with the Teutonic
language only
in
(Tr"(;(w=Goth.stevja,
in
^""iiyw
=
Goth.
Imiga,
and also in Xeiiru) if
Tick is
riglit
in
comparing
with it the Goth,
leihva,
I
lend, give
up.
It
is remarkable that in Teutonic
languages
the vowel i is intensified
justas
in Greek to ei,not ai,
while
u becomes
iu,
which
anyhow comes
very
near to the Greek
av.
The iu of the Goth,
hiuga
beai'S
evidentlyjust
the
same
relation to the
ev
of
(pevyu)
that the i of the Goth, ita bears to
the
e
of tcw=Lat. edo. From the latter asfreement we
draw the conclu-
sion that before the
separation
of the Indo-Germanic
languages
the old
short a-sound
began
to he
pronounced more clearly,
that
is,more
like
e.
So
we have
an equal riglit
to conclude that in such
present-formations
of
the
same period
of the
language'shistoiy
the old
au became
eu,
or some
sound not far oflf
e^(,,
and this is
certainly
another remarkable instance of
unanimity
between the
European languages. May
not
possibly
the
long
e-sound of the Ch.-Sl.
begg,
Lith.
be(j-ih=(pevyw,
have
oiiginated
in the
same
piimitiveeu 1 However that
may
be,
it is certain that the e-sound
of these verbs has
something
to do with the Gk.
ev.
Now that
we
have in this
way
learnt to see the
common
foundation
that underlies the
phenomenon now
vmder
considei-ation,we
will tui'n to
the Gi'eek forms in
j)articular,
and
try
to
bring
to
light
then.' number
and their
variety.
It would be
possible,
in
attempting a
review of all
the foi-ms
now
under
consideration, to set to work
on
a,
so to
speak,
historical
principle,making
it of
prime
consideration in the classification
whether there is
a
real and
living
addition of
sound,
made inside the
verb,
and
funning an
element in the A^erbal
structm-e,
as,
foi-
instance,
in
Xei-n-io
tXino)',
(pevyw (.(pvyoi' ;
or
whether the intensification has become
petrified
and
lifeless,
and therefore so far useless for
piu-poses
of verbal
formation. But
a
closer examination reveals
many
intei-modiate
cases "
intensified
j^resent
forms
which, though they
have
no
unintensified verbal
forms in
common
use,
have still isolated
or rare vei-bal
or
nominal
forms,
either without
any
intensification
or
intensified in
a
diflerent
way.
223 Moreover,
it is
no doubt often
only an
accident of tradition that in
one
case we know of
a
form that
comes nearei- to the root than the
present,
and in another
we do not. It
is,therefore,more prudent
to
proceed on
the statistical
principle,
and to
put
first
cases of
diphthongal,
and next
cases of
monophthongal intensification,
and within each of these main
divisions
to divide the verbs
accoi'ding
to tlieii'fundamental vowels. In
order,however,
that due attention
may
be had to the histoiical
pi'inciple,
every present
that has
no
forms
containing
the
pure
root in
livinguse
is
marked with
at.
cii. VII.
DIPHTHONGAL INTENSIFICATION. 153
I. DIPHTHONGAL
INTENSIFICATION.
A)
Roots with an i.
1) (f)nellix),
cp.
Princ. i. 307. No form shows the root-vowel
i,
but
in aoicoc aoih)we
get
the
parallel
and somewhat heavier
diphthong.
uijcwr
on
the other hand
points
to a
rt.
fel,
to be
compared
with the Skt.
vad
speak,
vand
pi-aise.
In the Alexandrine vcw we
have the weakest
form in which the root occiu-s.
Joh. Schmidt
(Indogerm.
Vocalismus i.
126)
here
as
elsewhere attributes the
change
of an originala,
Gk.
e,
to
sounds of the i-series to the influence of a
nasal in the
group
of conson- ants
which follows
it,making aEtcio
stand for ^a-J-ivlb). In that
case
there woukl be no
intensification at all here. Still there is no
instance
in which
we can be
sm-e
that
eir arose out of ""'?.
Consequently
I
hold
by
the
hypothesis
of a stem ahc
by
the side of
uPed,
like
a-iac
and
2) (f)
o'(0w. The
unstrengthened
root can
be made out from
IQaivetrdat
*
depfjauefrdai(Hesych.)
and
a
few other Greek forms
given
at
Princ. i.
310, as
well
as from the Skt. indk
biu-n,
iddhds kindled. A
similar intensification occurs in Skt. edhas
fh-e-wood,
Lat.
aedes,
O. Ir.
aed fii-e.
3) a-Xit(p-(i}.
The radical
i
appears
in
cWijXkPu(Demosth.), aXi'jXifxiJiui
(Thuc), conj.
aor.
pass. i^aXifrj,
well attested at Plato Phaedr. 258
b,
also in the Homeric Xlvr'
iXulu),Xlvroc, Xnrapoc(Princ.
i.
330).
A difierent
intensification in
aXoKpij.
4) (t)"/i"('/3w
is
very
similar to cieIIo)in its formation. As has been
pointed
out at Princ. i.
402, we are
brought
to a root miv
(Skt.
mlv 224
shove),
while
ufj.evuj
and
mov-eo
start from
tnav.
A different inten- sification
in
afiotf3)].
5) f"(Coyucu
with the
meaning
appear,
i-esemble,
used from Homer on- wards
by poets
and
by
Herodotus
: to
Ei
tol
Kyp
eiBerai elvai A
228,
fiai'-ti ticofxtvoQ
N
69, %'vv h)
e'iCeTciL
i)jxap
N
98, irpocel^eTai (resembles).
Aesch.
Choeph.
178.
(putri.iadlof.iuor'Api(TTU)ri
Hdt. vi. 69. That
Ijesides this there was a
middle
tico^ui-=opiLncu
with the
meaning
see
(Klihner,
i.
807)
is
scarcelycredible,
and still less credible that in the
npoeic(')i.iei()c occasionally given by single
M.SS.
(Thuc.
iv.
64,
Aesch. i.
165)
there exists an
aorist
participle
'
with
an augment'
as we are often
told. Without
a
doubt the true
reading
is
Trpdicu^tvoL.
For no one
will
prefer
to admit
a completely
isolated deviation from the
primeval
coiu'se
of Indo-Germanic verbal formation instead of
assuming
what is
a
very
ordinarycopyist's
mistake. " The distinction between the two forms
of vowel sound is
preserved
in^VcEo-Qca and J
CtVyat,
while in olla
{fu~idu)-=.
Skt. veda Goth, vait
we have
a difierent kind of intensification. San- skrit
makes the
present
ved-mi with
no
thematic vowel.
6) (I)eiKiv yield.
There is
no trace in Greek of verbal forms with a
short vowel
or a diSerent intensification. It is
probablethough
that we
have the shoi-t vowel in
'ix-yng
track and the Lat.
vic-es,
vic-issi-m
(Princ.
i.
166).
7)
Whether there is a
present
ekio
corx-esponding
to
ioiku,
eiKeXoc,
tcfXoc
depends on
the
intei*pretation
of a
singlepassage
2 520
:
01
fi'
ore 8rj
p
'iKavovo6i
crcj)lcri tiKf Xo)(ri(Tai,
154 STEMS WHICH LENGTHEN THE VOWEL IN THE PRESENT, ch. vii.
where eke is
usually
translated
'
it seemed
good,'
but I. Bekker Homer.
Bl. i. 137 has maintained on good grounds
that eIke
belongs
to
etKELi' yield
and is used like
Trapekeir,
vntiKui' in the
sense
'
it
suited,came
iii their
way.'
The fact that
toiKe
ixoi
with the inf. in the
sense requii-ed
hei'e is
not Homeric makes
decidedly
for Bekker's view.
8)
t'lKiois the Doric for 'rvw or
i)ku) (Ahr.344),
attested
by
two
pas- sages
in
Epicharmus (Alu*.pp.
439 and
440) "7r"t
li
x
f-'^*^^ ohacig
and
avvEiKti {ohyap
fii)
trvvelKrinon
conveniat)
C. I. 2140. Since the short
225
vowel occurs
in
idadai,
kdi'Eii'
etc.,
the intensification here is in full
force. The
gloss
'kai'n'
ijKovaL
in
Hesychius
is
enough
to make it doubt- ful
whether e'Iku)and
ijku)
are not both
reallyperfect-forms.
9) (1)ETT-E/ywwithpetrified
ti,
with
perhaps a
cognate cUphthong
in
the ai
of
alyiQ (Princ.
i.
221). *e'(yw
is
exactly
like the Skt.
e^d-mi
which also has a
permanent
e.
The short vowel has survived in the rt.
imj.
10)
EpeiKii)
by
the side of the
aor.
i'lpiKe
P 295 and the later
epi]piy[.iai.
If Fick^ i, 742 is
right
in
compai-ing
the Skt. rikk
scratch,
an
older
form for
likh,
rekhdmi
exactlycorresponds
in its formation to the Gk.
present.
11) tpdizw by
the side of the aor.
ijpnve.
E
68, ipnTip-i
Find. 01.
2,
43, pf.
Kurepijpnra
^
55, clearly
related to
piTrTw.
12) (f)
\elftw.Hesychius
has the
suspiciousby-form \//3et
" (TTTEi'^Et,
Elsewhere the X
appears only
in
noxins : \if3ag,Xij3oc, Xtiopoc,
with an ot
in
XoifjT/.
13) XeiTTOj, probably
the verb which
among
all of this class has main- tained
in full force for the
longestperiod
the vowel-intensification in
contrast to the other shorter
forms,
for
eXittoi', XltteIp,Xitzwv,
XiTvierdai to
which is to be added
Xnriirai(doubtful
in Homer and not
clearly
attested
till
later), are, along
with XiXonra to be found from Homer
on
to the
very
latest times. The
same
formation of the
present-stem
is to be
seen
in the Lith. leku inf. llkti
remain,
and in the Goth, leihvan mod. Germ.
leihen
lend,if,as
I am inclined to
think,
Fick^ i. 753 is
right
in
con- necting
it with Xei'wo). The
present Xifxiraiw,
which
occurs
here and
there from
Thucydides onwaixl,
is
closely
related to the Skt. rmdJcmi
and the Lat.
linqiio.
14) (I)Xe/^w.
From the shorter stem are formed
XixfJ-u'Cw, Xt^/^aw,
Xi)(aj/o-c,
and a difiei'ent intensification
occurs
in
compounds
like
aiixaToX()i\i)Q (Aescli.).
Lat.
lingo:
XeI^ii) '.\ linqtto
'.
Xeittw.
15) (f)
j'Et0"t,
which is the
spellingprescribedby
Herodian
(ed.
Lentz ii.
554),
and established
by good
M.SS. at Thuc. iii. 23 and iv.
103. Our editions
mostly
have
I,
but I. Bekker at ~Sl 280 writes
vEKpijiEv.
The short vowel in
vi(pa(ace),
vifuQ, rKperog, ntpoEiq.
Cp.
Joli. Schmidt Zur Gesch. d. Vocal, i.
134,
Gust,
Meyer
in
Bezzenberger's
Beit
rage
i. 82.
16)
TTEtdio
by
the side of the Homeric
ttettSov,poeticalEmQor,
Tridicrdai and
TTETriOErrBai, "KEiroiBa,plupf.
1st
plur. ettetviBixev.^ ttkttoc,
226 7rj(T7(-e,
so
that the contrast between the vowels is in full
force,as it is to
some extent also in the i-elated Latin
/i(?o(old
iL"t.
feido),fldu-s by
the
side of
fid-e-s, fide-li-s, foedtts.
Whether
or
not there is
anphing
like
this
parallelism
between Greek and Latin in the related
languages,
de- pends
on the
question
whether
tteiBu), as
Fick i.^699 and
Bugge
Stud.
iv. 380
maintain,
corresponds
to the Goth, heidan
or
not.
Cp.
Princ. i.
325 and Joh. Schmidt Vocal, i. 126.
CH. VII.
DIPHTHONGAL INTENSIFICATION. 155
17) (f)
(TTEfj^oj.
The short A^owel is
preservedonly
in
ariftoQ
and
oTlljioj.crToij3)'] stuffingbelongs
in
meaning
to a
different set of words.
Since the rt.
oTt/3
shows
many
points
of connexion with the li:.
arf/^^
in the
meaning stamp,
ti'ead,some
probability
attaches to Joh. Schmidt's
conjecture(Vocal,
i.
129)
that in
rrre'iftw
there is
properlyspeaking
no
intensification but a
compensatory lengtheningfollowing
uj^on
the loss
of
a
nasal
(arfju/a
for
oreju^,tti^Ij, orijo), especially
as in
Xenophon
(Kilhner
i.
909) good
M.SS.
occasionally give(rriftw
for
arellSu).
18) GTtix"^hy
the side of the
aor.
eort^oi'
11
258, though Hesych.
knows also of
a
present arixovfri,
which has been
adopted by
recent
editors at
Soph. Antig.
1128
(chorus).
The Gothic
steiy-acorresponds
in the
same
way
to the Gk.
aTei-)(^io
that the Goth, subst.
stavja
does
to
fTToi^o-Q,
while
(TTixo-Q
finds
a
counterpart
in the Ch.-Sl. stiza.
Princ. i. 240.
19) (p"icoi.iai by
the side of the Homeric
ne(puEfT6ai, "Ktipici^rjojicu.
Its
etymology
is not clear.
B)
Roots
avith the
Yowel
v.
1)(f)ai/w,
kindle
(cp.eravw).
There are no
by-forms
with the short
vowel,
which however
may
be deduced fi'om the Skt. rt. ^ish bui-n and
perhaps
the Lat. us-tu-s. The
presents
uvio (for^avcnu),
Skt. oshdmi
and ilro for *ous-o coincide
exactly
in their vowel.
2) (f)oi!w,
make
dry,
also written
uvm.
The
rough breathing
is
however established
by cKpavu)(Aristoph.Equ. 394),
to which
perhaps
we
may
add
Kudavaivw,
said to be Attic. The it. is the Indo-Germ.
sus
make
dry,
Skt. cAtsh
(forsus/t),
Zd.
Ims//,
cp.
the Ch.-Sl. szcc/m
dry
(adj.),
Ficki.3 230.'
3) (f)
yevM,
with
no
by-forms
with the short
vowel,
which
appears
in the Skt.
gush,"^ttshe hy
the side of
(/osha-s,
the Lat.
^ms-^w-s,
the Goth.
227
kus-tu-s. The
rare
j)resent-formation
in the Skt.
^tishgoshdini
and
that of the Gk.
yeiuj
for
*-/"v(t"jj
and the Goth, kiusa coincide
exactly.
4) (f)^tvi:u), (bpoi'Tii^u) only
in
Hesychius,
and
clearlyconnected,as
Lobeck Rhem. 59
says,
with the Homeric
ErcvKewg.
It would
probably
be too bold to
assume
connexion with the root ^vk discovered
by
Roscher
(Stud.
iv.
199).
5) Ipevyoficu
as
early
as "
438. In
spite
of the difference of
meaning
the
aor. i'jpvye
bellowed Y 403 can
hardly
be
separated
from this word.
The Attic
present
is
ipvyyavw.
With
epEvyojxaL
the Old-Lat.
e-rtlgit
(Princ.
i.
222)completelycoincides,
with it = ev.
6) (f) tpEvQu).
The stem
EpvB
surAdves in
kpvdpo-c= Skt.
rudliird-s,
Lat.
ruber,
and
Epvdairu).
The subst.
'ipevdoc,
like the Skt. derived
adj.
lohita-s, and unlike
rubor,shows an
intensified vowel.
7) (f)Evoj
singe,
which must be identical with
avw no. 2.
8)
KEvdio
poetical
from Homer onwards with the
by-form kevQuvm,
aor. KvdE
y
16, KEKvdijjiTi
4 303, pf.
Ki-"evdE. In Sanskrit
we
find the
very
singularguhd-mi,
for
^kudh-d-mi,
for which
we should have
expected
*g6hd-mi.
Here
then, as in the verbs
given
on
p.
158, monophthongal
intensification has taken the
place
of
diphthongal.
On the initial
see
Pi-inc.i. 322.
9) (I)vEvw,
to be
compared
with the Lat.
nuo
and
i/uora^w, rvtrraXog,
perhaps
with the Yedic
mi
{aava-te)
turn oneself
(Fick^
i.
652).
156 STEMS WHICH LENGTHEN THE VOWEL IN THE PRESENT,
cii. VII.
10) (f))"w
for *"Trf/w
swim, i-rreo-y,
i-vEv-aa. The root
appears
in
Skt.
as smt flow,
swim. Princ. i. 396.
11) TTLvOojiai by
the side of
nvi'd-dro-iiui,
both in
Homer,
Trvdetrdai,
aTTvaroQ. Except
in voice
Trevdofxai,
the Skt. hodhd-rai and the Gothic
ana-hiuda
exactly
coincide.
12) (t)
TrAf'wand
13)
TTl'ih)
for
TtXffju), ^TTtffju)
will be discussed in
Chapter
XI.
along
with Bew
(run).
14) ()iu)
for
^rpffu)by
the side of
tppvij-r, eppv-q-Ku, pv-oq
(Eurip.
Hippol.
1
22) correspondingexactly
to the Skt. srdvd-mi.
Cp. Princ.
i. 439.
15)
fjtvu) by
the side of the
aor.
av-To
discussed
on
p.
130, pf.
errrrv-fxat.
This
verb,
which is
apparently
confined to
poetry,
i-eminds
us
by
its
228
present
of the Aeolic
irieruj. Anyhow
the diiference between it and
ttAe'ojand Tryiw is remarkable,
16) (I)airevcw.
A
variety
in the intensification is to be
seen
in
(TTrovh).
To
get
at the
primary
vowel of the root we must
go
to the Lat.
stud-eo,
stiid-iu-m
(Princ.
ii.
360).
17)
TEv-^io
by
the side of
re-vKe'ii',
rervKoi'-o, tetvkto,
rvK-o^
and
ryyX""'w.
There is
nothing quite analogous
in the related
languages
(Princ.
i.
271).
18) (pevyu)by
the side of
E-0vy-f;-)', "nEcpvyj.ievoQ^ (pvy}), (pvyuQ.
Sanskrit
has the
imstrengthened hliuyd-ml,
but the Goth,
biiuja
stands
on
the
same
level
as
(pevyw.
There is
a
by-form
0uy ya
r w
from
Aeschylus
onwards.
19) x^^
stands for
x^-^'i'^
'^i^dis discussed in
Chap.
XI.
20) (f) xpevlu).
In this verb the
diphthong
is
quitepetrified,
but
"ipvdoq
= -ipevloc, t-^vOtv
edjEvaaro
(Hesych.)
retain the
primary
form of
the vowel
(Princ.
ii.
142).
II. MONOPHTHONGAL INTENSIFICATION.
A)
Roots
with hard Vowels.
1) (f) fipliyu),
with
no
form from the shorter
stem,
which however is
to
some
extent
replacedby
the related and
expanded
dXe^u)
(Princ.
ii.
147).
A
variety
of vowel is shown
by
apwyoc, uptoyli, by
the side of
apjjywj'.*
2) (f)
oi6)Kio
may
be
put
here
on the
ground
of the
possible
connexion
with
ciuKO)
uQ
discussed at Princ. ii. 309.
"
3) ijdofiai (Dor.yahcrdai
Hesych.)by
the side of
arcarw from the
rt. of Lie. ijiETaicorrespondsexactly
to the Skt. svddate
(Princ.
i.
282).
The forms
eiiloi',
aSe'iv in
spite
of then-
meaning being
not
quite
the
same
and
approximating
i:atherto that of
arcdyw, justifyus in
saying
that the
intensification is in full force here. The active
ij^uyrejoice
is
given by
Pollux iii. 98 from
Anacreon,
and this is not the
only place
where it
occurs.
The
same intensification is to be
seen in
iicvc
Dor.
aSvg.
4) (t)Oiiytj
Dor.
Ociyio
shows in the Doric forms
rtdwyfiiyai,by
the
229 side of
-"9ay/;"'rot, Wwx^f/c by
the side of ddi^ai
(Ahr.
Dor.
182)
all in
the
meaning ^idvaai^fxeOvfjOfjiuL a certain fluctuation in the vowel. Its
origin
is obsciu-e.
'
I do not venture to
give as a
present
in acti;al use Stiku Sdev eSanov
given l.y
Herodian i. 436.
CH. Yii.
MONOPHTHONGAL INTENSIFICATION. 157
5)
k-)]d(i)
Dor. K(itM
by
the side of the Homeric
KSKiicojy,KEkdh'jTOfiai
cp.
Kijcoc.^
6) (f)/\)/yw.
We
are
inclined to
see a trace of
a short root-vowel in
Xayoo-ira;
"
a(^"7)ai(Priuc.
i.
224),
Tlie
?/
anyhow
does not favour
Bugge's
connexion of the Avord with the rt.
Xtx (Stud
iv.
335).
7)
/\//flw
Dor. XdOiv
frequent
from Homer onwards
by
the side of
Xardario in both active and middle. There is also the isolated
""."
di
/u"
TTorrw)' \i]Oarei o(t(t
e~adoy
i] 221,
in a causative
sense,
thus
furnishing
a
present
to the Homeric
XeXador,
which like the
ordinary
Greek
tXadoi',XaOe'ir,XaSifrdfii,
Hom. XeXadetrOai
presei'ves
the short root-
vowel. With
X)'/9w
agree
the nouns Xydrj, ETrtXj/ffyuwr,
with XaOelv
Xadpa.
8) (f) i.n']Cof.ini poetical
from Homer
onwards, even
in Pindar with
an
T)
and not
*fia^onaias we
might
have
expected.
The
r)
is
only
coun- tenanced
by
the subst.
-o
j^irjcoc
(cp. M/'/ceio)
and
/LujaTiop.
It is
undeniably
related to
fiica/jai, though t]
Ijy
the side of
a
radical
"
is
as
isolated in this relation as is that in the
perf./ue^tjXe by
the side of
j^iiXEi.
9) o-//7rw by
the side of
aairijrj
T
27, errd-yjr
Hdt. and Attic
writers,
with the Attic
acnrijaroidui ; cp. aaivpoc
by
the side of
arjirecujy.
10) 7-//KW,
Dor. rdtcLo. The short vowel
occurs
in the Attic
"-d\";"'
and the later
-dK-ljaofxai,
as
also in
-ctK-epoQ
by
the side of
rijyavoi',
11) -jji'iyu). a-n-n-fx{]yovat
11
390,
the short A'^owelin
hii-fiayov r]
276,
Tjiayiv
(3rdpi.
aor.
pass.)
IT 374.
12)
Tpwyw
as
early
as
Homer
by
the side of the Attic
'irpayov
and
rpayoQ.
13) (f)
0wyw by-form
of the
pres. (pwf^w,^wyru^n.
'No trace of the
short vowel unless
possibfy
in
(pvt,6Q
and
(polix^iXoc
disciissed at Princ. i.
232.
Cp.
the O.H.G. hcMm.
B)
EooTS
WITH
Soft Yowels. 230
a)
1) BXipu).
The I in the
present
is established
by Aristoph.
Ban.
5,
fragm.
12 Mein.
{QXipajjai),
for the I in the aor.
pass.
tdXipi^vwe have
no
proof.
Theocritus
15,
76 has
(fXifloiiai,
which is
only
a
dialectic form
of the
verb,
with
a
long i.
2
KXciOco,
if it is
rightly
connected
(Gust. Meyer n. Pr.
IS)
with the
synouj'mous
Vedic JtaH
(with aspiration
of the t
?),
also
belongs
to this class
(cp.
Lat. C7'ates
and Joh. Schmidt Voc. i.
422).
^
Giistav
Meyer
in
Bezzenberger's Beitrage
i. 81 discusses most of the forms
given
under this
head,
and in
so doing
maintains that l has in
many
cases
taken
the
place
of an
older
ei.
I have
rejaeatedly
called attention to the
same fact.
^^^len he
goes
on to
say
at
p.
83 that
'
the
assumption
of the
lengtliening
of
vowels for the
purpose
of
present
-formation is devoid
of sxjypoyt,''
there is
stu-ely
a mistmderstanding
here. That the Greeks turned X into l with this
object
I have
never maintained, only
that l
(as
the
successor of
ei)
exercised this function
by a
traditional
right
of
long standing. The ei
is itself the
successor
of
an ai,and both
I and fi alike exercise the function of
characterising
the
present-stem.
More- over
I have admitted into the list in the test forms in which the I of the
present
is
possibly
of older
standing
than the
corresponding
i in other forms. The same
remarks
apply to the stems with a v.
158 STEMS WHICH LENGTHEN THE VOWEL IN THE PEESENT.
ch. vii.
2) 'kco,poetical
from Homer onwards
by
the side of
'iKtirOai,
is of
sppciiil importance
as an
instance of
monophtliongal
intensification
taking
the
place
of the
diphthongal,
since in this
case
the
diphthongal
form has
siirvived.
Cp.
no. 8 on
p.
154.
3) (f)ri(l"ei, apparently
a corrupt
form of
j'Et^et given
at no. 1.5 on
p.
154.
4)
TTviyoj.
The
long i
in the
present-foi-ms
is
as clearly
established
by passages
in the Attic comedians as
is the short
t
in
inreTri'iyip'.
5) (f) Tito
(Homeric
riw
and
riu),
Attic
rico)
falls into this class. The
long I (uTiroc
N
414,
in another
sense I'itItocS
484)
occurs
in Homer
not
only
in arsis
:
e.g.
E 467
oy
Iffov
hlo/j.tp"EKTopi cia",
but also in thesis
:
^
84 uWh
ciKip' TtovfTi by
the side of A 2.57
Trspljiiv
rrt
tIm. That the
length
of this I is not
due, as
might
be
supposed,
to the
running together
of the
t
with
a
followingj
as
is the
case
with the
v
of Xvw
(seep.
148),
is made
probable by
the
following
well-attested forms
on
Doric
inscrip- tions
: uTvorelfTEi, cnroTEKTciTw, Teim'ircjp (Aln-ens,184),
and the Locrian
anoTtim) (Allen,
Stud. iii.
231),
to which
may
be added numerous
Attic
231
examples
from classical times like
Ttto-o/ufroc,
Tetc/ac
(Cauer,
Stud. viii.
253). Cp. Sauppe
de titulis
Tegeaticis,
Proemium to the
Lektionskatalog
of
GiJttingen
1876-77. The
diphthong
in these forms must have the
same origin
as
that in
\ei\poj, 'iiieimi, TldaavlpoQ,
and
points
therefore to
a
pi-esentrt/w,
which
agi'ees
exactly
Avith the Skt. middle
Kdj-e
fi'om the
coi-responding
i-oot
Hi
(Princ.
ii.
93).
This foi-m of the
present
occurs
in
the Arcadian
imperative
uTrvndTU)
(Clelbke,
Stud. ii.
27,
Joh.
Schmidt,
Vocal, i.
142),
which is
enough
to remove
all doubt on the
subject.
Still,
the
testimony
of the Homeric verse is
enough
to
prove
that
among
the lonians the
diphthong
gave
place
liefore vowels to the
long i
at a
very early
time. If not it would be inconceivable that the
shortening
of the
vowel,
which
was
the rule in Attic
Gi-eek,
should have
begun
in Homer's time.
Cp.
Tti'v/jciip.
113.
6) Tpiftu).
The short
i
is well established in
hpiftyp',
e.g.
Aristoph.
Eccles.
1068,
also in
Tplfti'irro^at,
e.g.
Soph.
O. P. 428 kc'ikwi'
octiq itc-pi-
fti'ltreTai ttote. Cp. (ppvyw
below.
b)
V.
1) (t)fTTiKpM.
The
V
in
trarvfu)
is established
by passages
from
Nicander. The short vowel is
representedby arvf'Kcc, arvcpeXog by
the
side of
oTixpoc.
2) Tv^w by
the side of
hifip',Tv"f){iaonai. Cp. Soph.
Ant. 1009
KUTV(j)(.
KuieTrrve
and
Aristoph.Lys.
221 oVwe cw
ai'ijp
i-n-iTVipf] jiiaXfcrra
fjov.
The
nouns
rD^o-c,Tvfecdiy, -vtjjecayoQ, rvcpioy
have
a long u, rvfXoc
alone,
if it
belongshere,
is
a
witness to the
v.
The
corresponding
Skt.
rt.
(Utilp
has the vowel
always long (Princ.
i.
281).
3)
(ppvyu).
Aristoph.
Pan. 511
t(f)pvyE
Ktbroy
uytKEpavyv
yXvKVTaroy.
V
in the
passive
aoiist
:
Antliol. Palat. A'ii.
293,
4 ttXo'w
irehjOelQ
((ppvyi]
ci-^evQ
i/TTo.
(ppvyuyoy
follows the
(juantity
of the
present.
It
certainly
looks,
from what Delbriick
says
at Stud. i.
2, 136,
as
if the
long
vowel
here,as
in
rpiftu), preceded
the short
one.
4) vl-dxw.
The
V
in the
jiresent-forms
is established
by
A 621
llpw
a7r";//v)(,)iTo
\LTwywy,
the
v
in the
passive
aorist
by Aristoph.
Nub.
151,
where Dindorf after
Moeris,
p.
214 Bekk.
(v//vx"/'ot 'Arruo/,\l/vyrivaL
CH. VII.
MONOPHTHONGAL INTENSIFICATION. 159
"EWj/j'f c)
writes
-d^vxEimj.
The
x
I
regard here, as
in other verbs (rpt^xw,
/3|0vxw,
(T/.IIIXOJ, (Tfxu)yjj},
see
Princ. ii. 365
ff.), as a
mutilated inchoative
(TK.
The
change
therefore between ii
and
v
must be
i-egarded
in this
2.32
word, somewhat
as
in the
case
of
no. 3, as a secondary phenomenon.
Perhaps
the
same reason
may
account for the
length
of the root-A'owel in
In all, then,
the number of the verbs which follow this class,
when
we
have subtracted 2
(f'/\w
"
'i'k-w,vd(pw " " fcfiw),
which
are given twice,
and
the
more
than doubtful
"iKio=eoiKa
(no. 7),
is 58. In 30 of them the
distinction between the fuller and the shorter form is in full force
as an
element in the verbal formation. AV^hen
compared
with the first class
this number must
seem remarkably
small.
160 THE T-CLASS.
ch. viii.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE T" CLASS.
This class of
present-stemsbi-iiigs
us into a sphere
in which there is
no
longer
the amount of
agreement
noticeable in the
previous
classes between
the formations of Greek and those of the related
languages.
We shall
therefore be
prepared
to find that
during
the
periods
of which
we
have
linguistic
i-ecords the
prominence
of such
present-stems
becomes
greatei'
as
time
goes
on.
In this
respect
there is a
decided contrast between this
class and the
preceding.
Almost all the
reallyliving
foi-ms
belonging
to
the
lengthening-class
may
be
regarded
as an
inheiitanceof
greatantiquity,
while the same can
by
no means
be said of the class now
under considera- tion.
This contrast will be visil3le in
a
still wider
area
of
phenomena
as we proceed
with
our investigations.
It will further
appear
that the
formations of later
periodsare always
the I'esult of the
aflSjcing
or
the
transformation of
consonants,
Avhile the
power
of the vowels to
change
their character is
evidently
on
the deci-ease.
i"3.3
Various
explanations
have been offered of the
way
in which
tvtt-u),
ftuTTTO}, /3/\o7r-w arose
from the roots
tvtt, ftacp, /3\ct/3.
In
my
'
Tempora
xind
Modi,'
p.
83
ff.,
I
regai-ded
the
process
as a pm-ely phonetic
strengthening.
This view
was specially
based on a
few
cases,
in
which,
as
in TTToXic beside
7ro\(c,
Trr/craw beside
2)inso
and the Skt.
^:)/s/",
the
ttt
was,
at the
stage
at which the science had then
arrived,pretty generally
taken to be a purelyphoneticstrengthening
of the
simple
labial
explosiA^e.
The careful
investigation
of the
parasitic
nature of the
j,
and the
con- sonants
wliich
develo]-)
themselves before
a,/,
has led us on beyond
such
views as
this. And
then, as
Grassmann
(Ztschr.
xi.
40) aptlyremarks,
even though
" as I cannot admit "
a
'
supporting'dental,as others have
called
it,
coiild in
a manner
sprout
forth out of
a guttural
or a labial,
still after a
radical
/3we
should
expect
S not
r,
and after
"p,
6. Con- sequently
forms like
/3\a7r-w,/3a7rrwwould, even on the above
veiy
doubtful
theory,
remain
incomprehensible.
Driven then from the
piirelyphonetic explanation,we
shall look
equallyvainly
to that offered
by Bopp
at
Vgl.
Gr.
"
498 for Satisfaction.
Bopp
thinks it
possible
that we
ought
to
regard
the
r
of
rinrrio as a
transformation of the i' seen
in
m^rio.
But the
change
of
t"
to
r
is as
unexampled
as
it is
intrinsically improbable,
and this
h}-]5othesis,
with
which
Bopp
himself
was so
little satisfied that he
proposed
another
as an
alternative,
will find
no intelligent advocacy nowadays,
when we are
apt
to be
more
careful in
deaUng
with sounds.
Another
attempt,however,
to
represent
this
enigmaticr as the double
of
a consonant
employed
elsewhere in the
expansion
of the
present stem,
has found
a good
deal of
acceptance;
I
mean
that wliich would make
the
7 identical with the
j
which "
as
is
now
clear to all" is at the bottom
i
en. Tin. ORIGIN OF THE T.
iGl
of the most various obscurations and transformations of Greek
present-
formations. Since I have reviewed this
theory
at some
length
in
my
Princ. ii. 329
ff.,
and
since,as
far
as
I
know, no new
arguments
on the
subject
have been advanc-d in the
meanwhile,
it will be
enough
here
shortly
to summarise the
reasons
which
compel
me to
rejectan
explanar234
tion which has the
approval
of such eminent scholars
as Ahrens
(Formenl.185),
Grassmann
(Ztschr.
xi. 40
fi'.),
and Ebel
(Ztschr.
xiv.
34).
As
an
argument
for the derivation of
tvtttlo
and the like from
tvttJu}
etc. Grassmann
laysspecial
sti-ess on
the ftict that in this
way
a
gap
would be filled in the
far-spreading multiplicity
of
present-formations
of
this kind. While dentals and
gutturalsalong
with this
j produce o-"t
(tt)or f,
and with
\, y
and
p
it
gives
rise to other
transformations,
the
labials
are
left out
altogethei-,
and it is at fii\st
sight
a
very plausible
idea,
that in these vei'bs in
-r we have the
missing product
of
j
and the labials.
'
Unless,'
says
Grassmann
(xi.40),
'
it is assumed that
Greek,
unlike
Sanskrit, was averse
to the connexion of final labials witli
the characteristic of the fourth
class,we must
conjecture
that these
formations lie hid in Greek
...
in the
shape
of other stem-formations.'
There are however similar
gaps
elsewhere. For
instance,as we saw on
p.
109,
there are
among
the
presents
in
-iv-jjt
none from
a
labial
root,
although
Sanskrit roots of this kind
by no means
reject
such
a
mode of
pi'esent-formation.
The absence therefore of
present-forms
in
irjio, 0Jw,
/d/w
would be not a bit more
remarkable than is this
clearly
established
phenomenon
in connexion with
presents
in
-)i;-/.n.
Language
does not
set itself to
carry
out in its forms
systems
which
we
have
devised,
but
follows
analogies
which
we cannot
always expect
to fathom.
A second
ai-gument
for the
theory
in
question
is drawn from the fact
that in
one
clear
case at least
a
Greek,
ttt- corresponds
to a
Sanskrit
present-formation containing a j. a-KeTr-o-iicn corresponds
to the Skt.
pd(^-jd-mi (rt.
spar
for
spak),
and the foi-mation finds
a
support
in the
Lat.
spec-io(Ebel
Ztschr. xiv.
35).
A second verb in which this
theory
would establish
an
agreement
between Greek and Latin is
pciTr-w,
if
Bugge (Ztschr.
xx. 32)
should
prove
right
in
connecting
this verb with
sarcio,as to which
point
however I
am
still
a
little doubtful. It is
possible,
too,
that
(papK-eaBin,
which weshall meet
below,
may
be added to these two.
But these
parallels
do not mean
much after
all,
for cases are
extremely
235
numerous in which the
same roots form their
presents
in diflerent
ways
in the different related
languages.
A third
argviment
in defence of the
j theory
is that the
oi'igin
of
TT-rw from
-rr-jio
is
phoneticallya possible
one.
For as in the
primary
form
*fjhjas, yesterday(Skt.hjas),a parasitic
dental arose
before the
j,
and
by
assimilation to the
^
which
came out of the
yh
became
6,
and
ultimatelyexpelled
the
j
which
was
the
source
of the whole series of
changes,so
-rrj might
have become
-n-cj, tttj, ttt,
and it looks
as
if
tvtvw actu- ally
did arise from
*wjvu (Princ.
i.
355).
All the
same,
there is
no
manner of
necessity
that what is
possilale
in
language
should have
actually
occurred.
Lastly,
Ebel has made
specialcapital
in his
argument
of the verb
XoXETrrai.This,
he
says,
is
a denominative,
and must have
come
from
*\u\f.Trjw,
like
f.ia\a(Taui)
from
fxaXciKoc,
ttoikiXXlj from TTOtk/Xor, But
there is
very
little of the denominative in the
use
of
x"X"'7r-w. ij.u\d(xatiy
M
162 THE T-CLASS. ch. vin.
is to
make soft. noii^lXXeir to
make
gay
or
many-colomed,
but
x'^iXeTrTtiy
is
by
no means to make
heavy,
but either to
press
hard
ui)on,
as at
c 423,
dtCJi'
oa-ic
ere
x'"A"7rr"(,
or to
enrage,
the latter
especially
in the
passive")(a\t(j)Hii":
enraged. Starting
then from
a root
xciXett,
which
miglit
have come
from
x"'^^"
"^^ might
arrive
on the
one
side at
-^^aXi-KTU),
on
the otlier at
\a\e7r()c.
While, then,
the reasons to be advanced
for
this view are
by
no
means convincing,
there
are,
it
seems to
me,
a
number of reasons against
it which it is not
easy
to
meet, and, \\\ particidai',
in the first
place,
the
difficulty
of
getting
from
(pj
to
vr,
and the
impossibility
of
getting
from
/y
to 7rr.
Where there is
a (b
in the stem we should
certainly, on
the
analogy
of
x^"c
mentioned
aboA^e,
expect (pd
instead of
ttt.
It is true
Ebel at
p.
43
says
it is
possible
that the sounds
0
and
j
'
met each other
half
way,'
and it dues look
as
if this transition
might
be
possible.
We do
see
from the forms
eXot-t-wi-,
i^opvTTio,
which have come immediately
fi'om
*i\(iKJ("ji', *kii()vtJu),
that the
aspiratedisappeai'ed previous
to the trans- formations
produced by
the
j.
It could be
maintained, therefore,
that
this
happened
in this case as well,
and that between
*ija"p-jw
and
ftairro)
there
laya *t3an--j(jj,
and that from this there
arose */5a7r-^(w, *i3un-TJu",
236 l^anTu).
But it is
absolutelyimpossible
to devise
a means of
getting
from
*i'il3-jii)
to I /tt-w. To
suppose
that the
j,
which in all other cases
exercises
a softeninginfluence,
should here have been the means
of
hardening
the
/3by
the
reverse of the
process
which
produced ypct/3?"p',
Kpv(3la,
and other like
forms,
is
inadmissible,
and the
only
resource
for
the defenders of the iotacism of the r-class would be the
assumption
that
these
verbs,which,
it is
true, are
only
three in
numbei-,
followed the
analogy
of the 7r-formation.
A second
objection
to the
theory
lies in the existence of
one or two
r-formations from roots which do not end in
a
labial. Even if
objection
should be taken to tik-tm on
the
ground
of its
t,
in which it does not
exactlycorrespond
to
ttektm,
KXin-no,
aKt-rrro^di,
and
TiKvor, though
I
doubt if such an
objection
would
hold,
there is still nikrw left. I admit
that this form does not occur
in
a sentence in
any
author. But it is
given by
Pollux vii.
165,
and also
by Hesychius.
For the M.S. has
TreKTet,
with the
explanationKTul^ei, riXXei,Ktlpei,Suirei,
and there is the
less reason
for
altei-ing
it to
ttekteI,
because Herodian
(ed.
Lentz i. 435.
436) expresslyrecognises
the three
px-esent
forms
tteVw,Trtk-w,
ttUtu).
The fixctthat
Aristophanes(Lys.685) gives
the form
ireKrovi.tEvog
does
not exclude the
possibility
of the existence of
ttei^tw
any
more
than does
fnirre'ire (Ar.
Eccl.
507)
that of
plir-u).
The fuller forms
might
be
expansions
of the
shorter,
like
alce")/.iai
of
aicofiai, ttiew
of *7rt'w
(Roscher
Stud. iv.
195).
With
TvtK-TEM we might compare
vXaK
teu)
if it were not
that
a comparison
of the Homeric vXiiel shows the
k
itself to be an
expansion.
The shorter foi-m finds
a
clear
support
in the Lat.
pecto,
and
the fact that the t here makes its
way teyond
the verb into the
noun-formation as
well
(^Ject-e^i)
no more condemns the
comparison
than
would ucuaKaXoQ
condemn
our view of the
o-k,
or conjunx
that of the
nasal
as an
element in the
present-formation.Anyone
who refers
ttekt^ii
to
TTEK-jix)
must
rcgai'd
as a
pure
chance that both
languages
accord so
completely
here. For there
are no analogies
to be found in Latin for the
change
of
a
kj
to kt. On the
conti-ary,
forms like
jacio,/acio, rapio,
cfipio,
prove
that in Latin the old
kJ,pj
survived intact as ci,
jn.
"
C"H VIII.
ORIGIN OF THE T. 163
Moreover,
in
Latin,by
the side of
pecto
are pUcto
and
necto,
and
though
2)lecto
is
distinguished by
its t from
ttXek-w,
it is
supportedby
the O. H. G.
JiiJdu,
and the
certainly
related Goth,
faltlm
with the
gutturalsup- 23^
pressed,
=Cli. -SI.
plcta.
Here then
we
have the
testimony
of three
families of
speech
to
the
expansion
of the rt.
p^a^
to
flact.
The forma- tion
oinecto is not so
ti'ansparent.If,however, as
Fick^ i. 124
assumes,
the
synonymous
Skt. nah
reallycomes
from
a
primary nmjh, we
have
here another instance of
expansion by
t. Tliis Latin t is
cei'tainly
never
employed
as an
expansion
for
forming a
present-stem,
but Lith- uanian,
and in
a single
instance
Church-Slavonic,
do thus
employ
it.
The Lithuanian verbs in which the
pi-esent-stem
is
distinguished
from
the verb-stem
by
the addition of the
syllable
-tu are
given by Schleicher,
Lit. Gr.
"
117. Their number is
extraordinarily large.
It is
only
the
Low-Lithuanian
ei-tu,
go,
which
joins
the t
immediately
to the stem. All
the
rest, unless,as
in
dr\s-tuam bold,
luz-tu
break,
the root itself ends
in a sibilant,
insert
a s
before the t :
dlk-s-tu
am
hungi-y,bug-s-tufear,
sirp-s-tii ripen,
mlr-sz-tu die. This
fact,
in connexion with the inchoa- tive
meaning
which is to be seen in a
gi-eatmany
of the
verbs,
has
decided
Grassmann,
Ztschr. xi.
41, to
identify
the whole of this
present-
formation with the Graeco-Latin in -sko. In the
way
of this
assumption,
however,
there is fii'stthe verb
ei-Hi,
which cannot be so
explained,
and
also tlielaw of Lithuanian
phonetics, according
to which it is
only
before
a^
that k
can change
to t. The insertion or
rather the evolution of
a s
as an auxiliary
consonant before various other consonants is
an
extremely
common
phenomenon
in this
language (Schleicher,
Lit. Gr.
j).72),
and
ought
not to be denied because at first
sight
it is
surprising.Moreover,
the Lithuanian formation has the
support
of at least one Church-Slavonic
present
with
a
movable
t,
as
has been
pointed
out to me
by
Leskien.
The Ch.-Sl. ras-te-ti he
grows,
is related to the inf. ras-ti to
grow,
and
to the I't.r"^?=Skt. ardh
{rdh)grow,
exactlyas
is the liith.
gds-ta
he is
frightened,
to the inf.
gds-ti
and to the rt.
gand, or as is the Gk.
aTTTti to the st.
a\//t,
which has come
from
utt-ti.
It
being
thus established that in several
European languages
the
expansion
of
a root
by
the addition of
a ^ has taken
place,
the t
being
sometimes
a
permanent
addition to the
stem,
and sometimes confined to
the
present-stemalone,
and that it is added to roots
ending
in the most 238
various
sounds, we shall be inclined to assume
that this has
happened
also in the two Greek verbs hvvtu)
and
Itpiiru), that,
i.e.the forms with- out
the
r are the
older,
and that those with it are
expanded.
That it is
impossible
to
suppose
the i-everse of
this,
i.e. that
arvuj
and
aiww
came
from older forms with the
r,
we saw
above
(p.122)
in connexion with
the form
j'/mro
and other related formations. When we come to deal with
the thematic aorist
(Ch.XIII.) we
shall meet with some forms, especially
i]fiaft-T(.-y
and
'i-jxop-TE-r (Hesych.),
in which the
r
is of
a
precisely
similar
kind.
They
are
preterites
to the obsolete
presents*a^uip.Tbj, ^i.i(':p-r(o.
The
pure
root is to be seen in
afxnp-e~a' (Hesych.)
and the Lat. inor-i. Hence
we can clearlysee
the
following
to have been the course
by
which the
Greek forms
belonging
here took
shape.
1)
In a
pre-Greekperiod
there
were already
verbal-stems without
a
final t which
were confronted
by
others with the t of
pretty
much the
same meaning.
The t then
belongs
to the class of what I have discussed
at Princ. i. 75
ff.,
under the
name of root-determinatives.
M 2
164 THE T-CLASS.
CH. vin.
2)
The existence of these
pairs
of forms
was
turned to account
by
several
European languages,
and the t was used
as a means of distin- guishing
the
present
stem from the rest of the verb. The same use was
made of other elements of the same kind, though
not to the same extent,
e.g.
6\i-K-u".
3)
The Greek
language
confined the kind of
present
formation which
was
thus
established,
with the
exception
of the few instructive relics of
its wider
application,
to labial
roots,
and in this
way
provided
this class
of roots with a
i-egular means
of
forming present-stems
as
distinct from
the stems of the verbs,
Tlie
only question
left
is,
what is the
origin
of this element which
we
now
regard
as a
root-determinative usefl
as a
present-expansion
i The
answer
depends
on the
judgment we
pass
on these determinatives in
general.
Tick has in the
'
Nachwort
'
to his
Comparative Dictionary
subjected
these difficult
questions
to
a
fresh
inquii-y.
With
respect
to
the determinative t
becomes, at iv.^
p. 61),
to a conclusion similar to that
239
previously
arrived at
by Hugo
Weber
(Ztschr.
fUr
Gymnasialw. 1864,
p. 127),
with the latter
regarding
the t as a constructive
{vmrthildendes)
suffix,though
he does not confine himself to the
comparison
of the suffix
-ta of the
passiveparticiples.
He seems rather to hold this t sometimes
identical with the nt of the
active,
sometimes with the ta of the
passive
participles,
and sometimes with the nominal suffix -ti
(pa-ti).
I cannot
quite
see
my way
to either
view,
and it
seems to me that the whole
ques
tion is not
yet ripe
for discussion. Of
so much
only
can
we,
I
think,
be
sure,
that
tvttto {rviTTt) was from the first
just as
much of
a noun-stem
as
ceiKiv,
or
ayo
{''lye).
In
case a stem like
rvn-ro was of like formation
with the lora contained in
ctWri-Qwe
should
get
for it the
meaning
of
a
nomen agentis,
such
as we conjectured
for the
present-stems
in
I'u,
va
and
o.
At this
place,
where
we cannot do
more than touch
upon
these
final and subtle
questions
of Indo-Germanic
formation,a minute
inquiry
into this will not be
necessary,'
but
we shall turn instead to a
review
of the Gi-eek verbs
belonging
to the r-class.
I. LABIAL STEMS.
A)
Stems in
tt.
1)
ufTTimTTTio
in
iise from Homer
(I 237) onwards,
with the
aor.
uffTfxtxl/aL (aarrpaxpac
P
595).
The
tt
appears
in
.thenoun
u(7rpairfi (Horn.
affrfpoTrf/).
2) i^pETTTio, a
poeticalby-form
of the
iinivei-sally
ciu-rent dpiww, first
occurring
in
poets
of the Alexandrine
age.
3) iriTTTw,scold,
S2
768,
r
438,
Aesch.
Ag.
590,
Nicand. Ther. 347.
The
TT occurs
in the Hom.
aor, hty'nToy,
ipiTvawor.
From
an
older stem
kv-iK
compounded
with kv
comes
the
present
lyiaai,}which is also Homeric
(X 497,
O
198). Cp.
Princ. ii. 59.
2^Q
4) ii'inTw, speak to,address,only
established
by
Pind.
Pyth.
4, 201
a^E'.azkyiTTTioy
tXiricug (cp.
Buttm. Lexil. i.
285),corresponding
to the
'
T would refer the reader to
Brus:man".s
paper
'
Zur Geschichte der Prasens-
puffise' iu the
SprachivissenschaftlicheAhhandlungen aiis
G. C.'s Granimat.
Gesillschaft,
p.
L')3
ff.,where he
gives also
one or two
analogies
from Sanskrit.
CH. viii.
LABIAL STEMS. 165
Homeric future h
i-iptj (for*e)'-e\pw),
and
consequentlya
fresh
present-
formation for
h'vexi,
which establishesthe
w.
On the rt. (reir
cp.
Princ.
ii. 67.
Cp.
above
p.
132.
5) 6mt!tu),a
poeticalby-form
of the usual
Blottevu),
Aesch. Prom. 937
:
QwwTE
Tuv
Kfjurovvr
uti. Fut.
dwipu) Hesych. tiwi/'^'C
'
OuJTrevffeic,
AlaxvXoc.
6)
IWmwtw
(alsotWioTTfw,
cp.
iXXaiiio
iWujttH^u)), a peculiar
com- pound
from
ik\v-Q crooked and uixb.
Hesych.
IWw-n-Tfif
(Trpa[^ii^ei.t\
iyi^aTiXXw\pat:
Aesch. Eumen. 113. The
present
KUTiXXcjnTttv occurs
in
Philemon
(Comici
iv.
45),
and like forms in other Comic
poets
and in
late authors
(ISTauck Melanges
iv.
30).
7)"iirTu^ai.
The
present
is
only given by grammarians
as belonging
to the Homeric future and aorist forms
'(;//"-"( (B 193) ti|/ao(A 454).
The
TT
is
pretty
well established
by
'inoi;
trap-lid,
fuller's
press.
Cp.
Princ. ii. 59.
8)
Kaf-nrTo).
Homer has
i:f'ifi\p"ty, EKnn-ipev
but not the
present,
which
however is
common
in all Greek from the Attic
period
onwards. The
tt
is established
by Kdj^nrvXij-g.
9)
KaTTTU), only
retained in
Hesychius'sglosseyfcaTrrer
et^n-i'd.
(Lobeck
Rhemat. 4G.
note).
The final letter of the root fluctuates between a pri- mitive
TT
((vCtTri/w)
and (h
(i^ei^aftiioc).
Princ. ii. 120.
10) kXetttw,
in
common use
from Homer onward.s. The
tt
in the Attic
aor. "i:Xc'nrT}i', jcAott// etc.
11)
KOTTTOj,
the
same, keuottuji;
N
60, itcoivrjy Aristoph.,kokoc^
kotvI].
12) fu'ip-rrru), i^u'tpTrrtjai
9
405, fiup\pai, i.u'tp\pac
etc.
poetical
from
Homer
onwards,
fif^apTzujQ
Hes.
'
Epy.
204.
13) neTTTio,
a
late
by-foi-m
of
Triatruj, ttettio
not
occuiring
earlier than
Aristotle,
tt,
from an
older
k,
in
TroTTftior.
14) plirrw
common from Herodotus onwards
by
the side of
pinriuj
which is Homeric
(cp.iztKTU)
and
wtKrico)
and
plwrafTKoy
() 23. After
Homer
pixpu)
and
tppi\pa
are
very
common.
The
tt
is established
by
piTT)'],
piTTu,
pnrii^o).
The
passive
aor.
ipplfrjr
shows
a
0
as
well.
15)
piinru). pvivrojuai
Aristoph.
Ach. 17 and later. The
tt
appears
in the related
pinroQ,
pvwoM.
16)
(TKUTTTw,
first in
Hymn,
in Merc.
90,
later in common use.
The
TT
is established
by
rrKcmavij,
ffKuneroq
Princ. i. 204. But there is also
a
"f
in
i(Ti;a(j"r]i' (Eurip.etc.).
17) aKin-TOfiai,
from Homer onwards
(P 652),(ticottoc,
fjKOTrt'i, cr^oTrto.
241
18) (T/c//7rrw,
the
same.
akj/rrT-fi^jf )"c
p
338, ntcijirwi', (Tk/^n-ai'ior.
I'rom
the related stem
erKipn-
(rrKif^txpui, aKi^KpUiiiai)
there
appear
to be
present-
forms
only
in
Hesychius :
(TdfXKTFi, ndjiTZTtTai.
19)
(T(":r/;n-w
only
in
Hesych. : oKviivTeiV
ruarrei)',
KUiyoroj^ith'.
(iKViiroQ
niggardly,(TKitTroVz/c (by
the side of
aKi'i"l"uc, "7Ki'ifurr]c)
are
considered to
be related.
20) GKioTTTio
in
common use from
Aristophanes
onwards. As witnet-s
to the
It
of the stem we
may
refer to the word rTKunraXioQ
given by
Herodian,
and the
more, than
probable
connexion with
"tku)^(o^n.
"TKWTTUt:J.
21)
TVTTTd),
A
561,
in
use in all dialects and at all times.
Ervwijr
il
421,
TVTTdg,
Tuinrai'oi' etc.
22) )(aA"7rrw,
used
by Theognis
and late
poets
as
well as
by Homer,
has been
ah-eady
discussed at
p.
161 f. in its relation to
^uXnrui:.
166 THE T-CLASS.
ch. tut.
B)
Stkms in
""/).
1)
uTTTio'
TrpoTiuvrTio
Q,
110, i'ii']TrTe X
397, dwreai
k 379,
KuBi'nrTtTi) O
127, iJTrrero
Y 468. From Homer onwards the word is in
general
nse,
more often in the middle voice. The
f
is shown
by lapi),
acpuw, ui^iqiufuio
(Horn.),
(tfaffcrw
(Hdt.).
The related Latin
ap-io as
well
as the forms
airT]rpia,
iiTrrjriiQ put
it
beyond
a doubt that the
fp
came from
an older
tt.
2) /3a7rr(.),
in
use
from Homer onwards
("392),ej3a(pi)i'
from Plato
onwards. The
f
is also
seen in
l^afi], ftaftvc, jocifeloi'.
That the
aspir- ate
is
primitive
is made
probableby
the
relationship
of tlie Skt.
gdh dip
oneself
(Princ.
ii.
75).
3) yKuTTTM, only
in Schol. B on B
88,
and BE on c 438,
elsewhere
y\c'i(j)ii".
4)
cpvTTTw,
first
occurring
atHes. Scut. 243
t-ara
h'
fcpurrmrTo
TrupEa'tc,
then in
Eurip.Xenoph.
etc. In Homer there is
only
(nrocpvcjwi (cp.p.
144)
which counts for
an
opt.present,
but
may
be
an aorist,
and
cpvxla,
aTrecpv"pOEV, cpvxpaiueroc. tmolpixpoi
and the
nouns
^pvffi, ^pvcpvc, cpv(j"u?ic
given by Hesych.
establish the
(p
of the stem.
242
5)ipe-TU), a
by
-form of
fpi(f)w,
found from Pindar
(Pyth.4,240)
" who
also has
fpefu)(tpefoira
Isthm.
3, 72)
" onwards. Homer knows
only
ipi^^ai.
The
same alternation between the two forms is seen in the
Attic comic
poets
:
Cratinus fr.
9G,
1
ipEnrofiai,
but
Aristoph.
fr. 54 D.
ijpefE.
The
(fj
occurs
also in the Homeric
vxli-eiJtcp-liCj {/i^-opo^o-c,
opo(j"()c,
opofri. According
to Fick^ ii. 214 the
f
arose
from
a
jx
6) 0((7rrw, common from Homer onwards.
i7-"^";r,
first in
Herodotus,
Tn(pliffoi.iai, Tid(i(l"u-at
Hdt. vi.
103,
TU(po^, Tu"p)'i,
and
rafpog prove
that
the root ended in
"p.
7) OpvTTTOj.
The
present
from
Aeschylus
onwards
: liaOpvivTopiirwv
Prom.
891,
r 363
ciarpvfif, rpixpoQ,rpvcp))
etc.
Though
it is thus shown
that the root ended in
a ^,we must
probably regard
the
(j)
as the suc- cessor
of
a|).
Princ. i. 276.
8)
KoXuTTTu). The
pi-esent
does not
occur before
Aristotle, thou^rh
t:iKo\u/.ii.iirog
and the like
are
older. The undeniable connexion with
K-o\"0ot- quoted
from
Epicharmus {KoXacpi^tir NT.)
entitles
us to set down
9
as the final
consonant of the root.
9)
KpvTTTu)
common from Homer onwards
(?/205).
The
^
of the
stem is shown in the
post-
Homeric
v/)v^jj/, Kpvijja, Kpvcpuloc, Kpocpoc,icpvpioc
and in the form
Kpv(pn'";
which is established
by
La. at
Soph. Aj.
1145. Later Greek shows
numerous
by-forms
with a /3: Kpiifta,
Kpv
fyio"
,
(Kpvj]ip',
kpvioiifTof^tdt. Cp.
Lobeck
on Aj. 1145,
Princ. ii. 141. The
case
of KaXvTTTU} is similar.
Probably tt was
the
primitive
final letter of
the root.
10)
KVTTTio,
from
Aristophanes
onwards. The
(p
has the
suppoi't
of
the Homeric
Kvcpog
(fi16),kv"1)("c,
and the Lat.
cumhere,
cuhare. Still
here too
perhaps(Princ.
ii.
142)
the root
originally
ended in a
jj.
11)
Xi'-nrw
longfor,
first
occurring
in Alcxanch-ine
poets
as a
pre.sent
to the isolated
\E\t^fitvnc
of Aesch.
Sept.
380. The
only
traces of a
(jj
are to be
seen
in the remarkable
Xtfepiovvrec
discussed at Stud. iii.
199 and in the
analogous
Skt. rt. InM,
Lat. Inhet etc. Princ. i. 459.
12)
puTTTut
in all kinds of Greek from Homer onwards
(tt422),
fppafrji'
from
Euripides
s time.
Cp. pa^//,pucpevc,pn(pic. Bugge'scon- jecture,
mentioned bove on
j).
161,
that
pc'irrrw exactlycorresponds
to
CH. vin. LABIAL STEMS. 16*
the Lat.
sarc-io,
and thus stands for
*(7f)a--j(i",
wit-h
-k "=
c,
lacks
cori-o-
boration.
C)
Stems in /3.
243
1) /3\aVrw (cp.ftXaftfTui
p.
144)
"/.
294, a 195, r 22,
I
507,
T
94,
O
724,
later in
general use.
The
fl
appears
in
"/3Ao/3)?;^ (as early
as
^
4G1), ft\(ijM}fTOj.iuL (Attic),
in the noun-forms
[3\afii], /3/\a/)fpJc, /3/\ctpoe
and in the derivative
fiXuphrraeiv ftXan-endai(Hesych.).
Still the
/3
is
appai-ently
not
primitive. Cp.
Princ. ii. 153 and
Sophus Bugge
Stud. iv. 326.
2)
KdXvTTTM in
use
from Homer onwards
(P 243, -^ 114).
The
/i
perhaps only
in
khXii/d?; (Hdt.,Thuc.)
and its later derivatives i:a\vj3i(iy
icaXvfliTrjc.
It is
probable
that the final letter of the root was originally
p.
Cp.
Princ. ii.154. A fewfoi'ms show
a
(^
as
well
:
TrepiKuXvipt'i (Plato),
ciKciXvcfioc (Diog.Laert.). Cp.
i^pv-n-Tw.
3)
?'"7r-w,
a by-form
of
vi^w.
It is doubtful if it is
Homeric, as
in
the
oidy place
where it stands in our texts, a 179, aT7(ift\li(if76ai
is
proved
by ApoUonius
Lexicon
23,
15 to be the old
reading,
and not uTroj'iw-ea-Oui
which most of the M.SS. have
(Nauck Melanges
iv.
31). r/Trro/iud
Hippocr.
Strabo.
\Ep)iTrTovAristoph.
Pax 961
(Homeric y^fpviylarTo).
That the stem had
a /")is shown
by xipn-li(ace.x^P'"'/^");
^^^^ ^'^^^ ^^^^
/5came from
a
(/ by
the Skt.
niy (Princ.
i.
395).
In the
Septuagmt
we
find
rKpljao^iui.
D)
Stems
with an
Undeterminable Labial.
1)
yi'(ij.nr-M
poetical
from Homer onwards.
Cp.
kuj^itttu).
2)
cliTTu) the
same, probably
an
expansion
of the rt.
ca {calu))by
means
of
v. Cp. cairavr].
3) lap^a-JiT(x) the
same,
from
*t(ip-capTT-TU) (cp.Ipeirw)
with Ijroken
reduplication, as
has been shown
by
Fritzsche Stud, vi 297.
4) cuTTTio,
a
late
by-form
of
^vio,probably expanded by tt,
the
oldest
authority
for which seems to be Antimachus
(Schol.Apollon.
Ilhod. i.
1008).
5) kpiTrTUj.ini, esse,
B
776,
E 196, t
97
only IpeTvrpf^Kiot, fpeTr-Ofiirovc,
cp. Aristoph.Equ.
1295. The active
v-epEirrE
occurs at ^ 271, Kovi-qv
c
vTr-'ptTTre
Tror^oTtr.
Perhaps epeTTTO}
is related to
7'ap-io, upTraE,apwa^w.
6) ift-rrw.
From the
present
stem Homer
only
has
Kara
xpo"
KctXby
toTTT-jjc
I 749
(cp.
/3376).
Aesch.
Sept.
544
IcnvTEaQcu, Soph. Aj. 244
501
Xoyoic 'taTrrwv,
and in late
poets,
la-n is
apparentlyexpanded
from
la =: Skt.
jd
go,
in
a
causative
sense
by
the determinative
/"
just
as
the
Lat.
Ja-c
is
by
k.
7)
KopvTVTM
in late
poets.
Theocritus,
besides the
aor.
(^";tv
Kopvlij
3, 5),
has the
noun
KopvirTiXo^,
and
Hesych.
has
uopvirroXric
"
K"pari(7rii"
,
and ivota^fc"
C?)
a"y"c,
at
jj.))
Kopvnrovaiv.
Connexion with
K'^pvtjjt]
i.s
probable,especially as f^opvirndv means to
carry
the head
high.
8)
\a7r-w. The
present-stem
is not found before Aristotle. The
perf.XtXa"iia
in
Aristophanes. XiKpvfmw
is
evidentlyrelated,though
possibly
the root is
lap,
which has softened its
p)
in the Latin lamho.
Princ. i. 453.
9)
ffKi)ptiTTOi.iai.
e'iTTodl
toi
poiraXnv Teri^fquirov eari Ti;i]pi~Tead* o 196,
aKTfpLTTTnfifi'GQ
X 595. Ths actlve in
Apoll.Rhod., origin
obscure.
168 THE T-CLASS.
CH. Till.
10)x^f/'"''"''/'"')
clear the
throat,
from
Euri^).
onwards.
Clearly
an
expansion
of
XP'/'
{XP^M^^'^" XP^I'-^'''^^^
Princ. i.
250),
so that the root
jn'obably
had a it.
11) ^pif^nvTw. tyxfiiftwTorrn
P 413. Tlien in the
tragedians
and late
poets. ini-)(^(ni.nrTti Bacchyl.
3G Be.^ The rt.
y^pi^-v
:
^pur (^(pa/j'w)
\
'.
II. GUTTURAL STEMS.
1) TTf'kTw, a rare
present-form
of thei^t.
-n-eic,
has
already
been discussed
on
i".
1G2. From the
same root are formed
nexM
(only
in the
gram- marians,
e.g.
Herodian i.
435,21),
wekw
{ff316,
Hesiod
0pp. 775),
and
TTEKrioj
(Aristoph. ). Cp.ttoko-c, tvokuc,
ttokH^h).
2) r/vrw
(r86,r
113),
common to all Greek. Rt.
tek,
whence
treicor,
TEKoiinai, TiTOKa, TEKoc, TfKi'or, ToKtvc, TOKOQ,
The
explanation given,
of
-iKTM by
Ahrens and others
(Kiihner
Ausf Gr. i.
629),
i.e.that it is an
originally reduplicated
form and stands for an earlier *ri
r(f)/."..
has no
analog}"
to
support
it. Moreover the number of thematic
present-
stems
that are
reduplicated
is too small to make this
coujectiire probable.
On
the
weakening
of e to i see Princ. ii.378 ff.
3) (jjupt^Tfadai explained])y
Photius
by (pfjarTEndni,
also
(jiapK-ov'
(j)(iXai:))v
(rk:eva^E
Hesych
,
so that it must be a
by-form
of
(ppaaau,
(iKipyivfii,
and
corres]Dond
to the Ij"tin
/arcio.
215
III. VOWEL STEMS.
1)
cuvTio an Attic
prasent-form,
first in Aesch.
Ag.
1123
Ivrarvrti,
for the Homeric and Herodotean aviiu).
Cp. i'lWTo
p.
122,
where the
form with the
rouijhbreathinajwas
also noticed.
2) upv-u),
an Attic
though
not
frequently
attested
by
-form of
aiwu),
Plat. Phaedr. 253
apvTuxnv,
Pherecr. fr. 124
(ipvTtadai. uiwrjiroyrai Tldt.
vi. 119 as a
present
stands
alone,
and L. Dindorf
conjectures cKpvaaoyrai
instead. It
origin
is obscui-e. It would be
possible
to start from the I't.
"?" obtain,win,
which
appears
in
up-rv-Tcii.
If in conclusion
we review the whole extent of this
present-formation,
we shall find that the class contains 48
labial, only
3
guttural,
and 2 vowel-
stems,
in
all,
that
is,
53. In
very many cases, especially
in that of
tpETrrw,
EviTTTiii
(no.4),ttetttw, ipETrru), jyXaTTTU), i Itttio, ttektu),
Ilvvtm,cipiirw
this
present-formation
confronts an older one of another kind. In not a
few
cases
the foi-ms of this class could
only
be found in late Greek. The
number of verbs of this class
therefore,
which were
actually
in
general
use,
is not
exceedingly large.
CH. IX.
THE NASAL CLA,SS.
169
CHAPTER IX.
.THE KASAL CLASS.
Kext to the
present-stems
whicli have been
strengthened by
a r
it will
be best to
place
the
widelyramifying
foi-mations in which the element of
expansion
is
a nasal,
and for this
reason,
that the
syllables
which contain
the nasal are apparently
of
precisely
similar
origin
with the
syllable
in
the
present-stem
containinga -.
Here too we have to deal with
a stem-
formation not unlike the formation of nominal
stems,
or more
correctly
--*"
speaking,
of
exactly
the same character,
and in the first instance
pro- ceeding
likewise
by means
of a simple
suffix. We have
already
met
"svith
expansionby means
of
a
nasal
syllable
at
p.
109 fF.in
dealing
with
the
present-stems
of the non-thematic
verbs,
and it is clear that there is
the closest
relationsliip
between the formation to be discussed here and
those discussed above. To this
point
I hav^ called attention on various
occasions,
and
especially
on
p.
116.
All nasalised
present-stems
which 'have
a
thematic vowel
can
be
distinctly proved
to have arisen from
correspondingpresent-stems
which
had
none, by
the action of the
tendency
to
uniformityspoken
of
on
p.
148,
which
permeated
the
European languages
in
particular,
and
which led
on
all sides to a gradual
retrenchment of the
older, non-
thematic
conjugation.
This
gradually
effected
change proceeded
in
one
of two
ways.
Either the thematic vowel took the
place
of the final
vowel of the stem in
m, rw,
or
it was
afiixed to this stem as
it
was.
For
instance in the 1st
plur.
"
-va-fiev
might
become either
-vo-fj.ev
or
-va-o-fxev,
-vij-jxev might
become either
-vo-fiev
or
-vv-o-fiiv.
The former of these two
changes
is somewhat
surprising
in the case of
pi-esent-stems
in
tv,
because the
phoneticchange
of
v to o
and still more to
e as would have to be the
case
e.g.
in the 2nd
plur.
-ve-te by
the side
of
-vv-TE,
is not natural to Greek. We shall have to
enquire
therefore
whether the facts of the
case
may
not admit of
a
diflerent
explanation.
In the
case of the stems in
a
however both
explanations
are
equally
feasible.
The oriental branches of the Indo-Germanic stock as a
rule know
nothing
of formations of this class. There are
however
single
instances
of
a tendency
in this du*ection to be seen in connexion with the forms
given
above on
p.
116. For instance the
impf.a-grh-na-ni
which accord- ing
to Delbrlick first
occurs in
Epic Sanskrit,
bears
exactly
the same
relation
to the old
prevailing
formation shown
by a-grh-yid-m,
that the
Gk.
E'Ku^-yo-i'
does to such a
form
as i-aKic-vr]-)'. Spiegel
in his
grammar
170 THE NASAL CLASS.
ch. tx.
247
of the Old Bactrian
languagep.
243 notices similar
processes
in tliis
quarter.
Tlie Zd.
imperativepe?v?7^"
(fill)
e.g.
bears to the Skt.
jjr-rtl
dhl
a
relation
quite
similar to that of
refji-re
to niX-ya-Si. In Sanskrit itself
this verb has
developed
forms like
prnd-ti,
prna-te,
and mrna-ti he
maims,
for which in that case a root mrn is
given, as
compared
with
mr-na-ti is
quiteanalogous.
The 3rd
pi.prna-nti,
which
might belong
to either of the two
formations,corresjjouds
to the Old-Latin
{ex)-2iletiu-nt
"=exphnt,
and is
onlydistinguished
from the Doric
TTiji-TvXai'o-yTL,
which
the Homeric
Tn/.nrXai'Ercu
warrants lis
in
supposing,by
the absence of the
reduplication.
Another link between the classes of verbs in
use
in
Sanski-it and those in
question
here is the connexion that exists between
the 5th or 9th class and the
nasalising
verbs of the
6th, as seen
e.g.
in
tr-m-2""i-inl (Rv.) by
the side of
^/'p-wo-mi {ripiru}),
ma-n-th-d-mi
(shake)
by
the hide of
math-nd-mi, ^r-n-th-a-ti by
the side of
prith-nd-rni (plait).
The last-named forms
come nearest to Latin forms like
ru-7n-j)-o,
Jl-n-d-o,
2n-n-g-o.
" Much
light
is thrown
on
the
subject
of the mutual
interchange
of the various nasal
present-formations by
the Old-Persian a-di-na-m I
took
away (Spiegel, Altpers.203),by
the side of the Zd. zi-nd-t
(conj.)
and the Skt. hi-no-mi I
throw,
with which the Ii'anian words have
no
doubt
rightly
been connected.
We thus
see that there is
by
no means an absence of
precedents
for
the
present-
formation Avhich is now under
discussion,and which extends
more or
less to all the
European languages.
We will in the first instance
adduce
only
such Greek
presents
of the kind
as have connexions of a
similar stem-formation in another
languasje;
8dK-v(i" Skt.
dq(^d-mi(no authority
given,
hut there are other
ibrms with
a
nasal in the Pet.
Pict.).
Ti-vo)
"
Ki-no-mi
(Princ.
ii.
03).
(f)di-vm
"
Jishi-nd-7ni
(Princ.
ii.
370).
k\l-i/co
"
qn-nd-mi,
Zd.
7i{-qiri-nao-mi (Joh.
Schmidt Voe.
ii.
251).
Kpi-vco cp.
Lat.
eer-no.
iWivco
(cWficjio) Ilesych.)
"
U-no (Lob. Rhemat.
123,238).
la-Tc'i-vo}
(Polyb.)
Oh. -SI.
sta-nq.
{(TTa-fvco
0. I.
2556).
Xaivo)
(rt.
xn,
x^'^)
Oh.-Sl.
zi-nq(cp.
0. II. G.
(/i-n-c-ni).
248
A I'emarkable
agreement
between Italian and Teutonic is to be
seen
in the Umbrian
imperat. pe7's-7ii-mu
pray
(rt.
pers
for
prek,
cp.
Lat.
2)rec-dri), as compared
with the (jothic
fraith-na,
0. ~^.
jYeg-na,
A. S.
frigns
oxidi
fringe (Schade
Wtb.
143),
in which the metathesis
strongly
suggests
scindo
as
compared
with the Cxk.
tTKicrr]-}ii.
The Gothic
presents
in
-na are distinguished by a special
intransitive and
passivemeaning,
in
the former of which
they agree
-svith the similai-
pi-esents
in Church-
Slavonic and
Lithuanian,though
in Lithuanian
(Schleicher, Comp.^ 784)
the nasal holds
a
diftbrent
position.
In Greek and Latin
no such limita- tion
of the
meaning
is
appai-ent.
Now that
we
have taken
a
summary
view of nasalised thematic
presents
in
general,
it becomes our
duty
to
classify
the Greek verbs
belongiug
to this
class,
and to
enquire
into the
origin
of each kind. We
must divide them into five main
classes,
each with various sub-classes.
We shall here discuss each class as a whole,
prepai-atory
to the
subsequent
CH. IX.
CLASSIFICATION OF NASAL STEMS.
171
arrangement
and verification of the
separate
verbs of which each class is
composed.
L PRESENTS IN
-vco, -vo-/jiat.
This class
comprisesonly
verbs in wliich the root has received no
further addition tliau
this,
e.g.
Tvl-rw,
?fk--j'w.
They
are to be
compared
to Latin verbs like
ll-no,si-no,
O. Lat. da-mcnt,
and
imp.
da-ne
(?)
(Neiie,
Formenl. ii.^ 412
f.),
-i-nunt in
oh-i-nunt,red-inu-nt,
which
exactly
agrees
with the Lith. einu I
go,
and, as
Gust.
Meyer (Stud.
v.
337)conjectures,
with the Skt.
inva-mi,
I
press
in,
make
myself
master
of. These forms fall into two tli
visions,according
to their
origin.
_
Some
come,
we
may
conjecture,
from an
older
-ru-fn
-)d-/.ta/.
This
origin
is
clearest in the case
of
ca/;"-)"f
In^n'ti^ii, eraj^ioy- tca/ta^oj' (Hesych.),
and
in that of
eTTiTvor
Hes. Scut. 291 =
*tV(rj'0)' or
kniTvacray. If the 1st
pi.*Sufx-i'o-^i"v
had survived it would have borne
exactly
the
same
rela- tion
to ^a^i-ya-fjey as
that of the Lat. ster-ni-mus to the
pre
supposable
*star-na-mas
(Skt.str-ni-mas).
Fick
^
i. 57 connects
/^ayuro
with the
Skt. cijrdE
Xtyofieyoy
cnvi-nd-ini,
and Delbriick
(Verb. 216) justifies
the
comparison.
" A second kind are clearly
related to verbs in
-yv-jm,
which,
as we
have seen on
p.
109,
have numerous by
-forms in
-yv-uj.
In this
way
Ave
have side
by
side
ri-vv-Tai
(p.113)
and
tlvco.
(pdi-vv-dco (cp.
Skt.
kshi-nu-mi)
"
(pdivco.
TTTap-vv-nai
(p.112)
"
TTTupvoiade (Aristot.
Probl.
x. 18).
^
249
i-a^ivvv-fv
"
e^ivev(Hesych.cp.
ano^lvvvTai.
'
anocr^ivvvTm) .
Skt. dhu-nd-mi
"
Bvvw
(Piioc.
i.
321).
The clearest trace of the old
w
is that contained
by iXavyw,
i.e. eXa-vv-to
(cp.
the Sanskrit forms in -nv-a
for
nu given
on
p. 109),
where it is clear
that the
v
of the
av was
anticipatory
of the
v
in the next
syllable,
from
which it afterwards
quite disappeared(Princ.
ii.
338).
Our attention
must further be
directed,as
it has often been
already (cp.especially
p.
121),
to uyvhi (arud))
on
account of the forms 'dyerai and
'aio/ro,
which
are as
early
as Homer. In this case we
have the
series,
which
we
only
suppose
in the
case
of other
stems, complete
:
avv-jxaL
avv-a" avco ava.
As to the
etymology
of the
verb, we
may
leave it
an
open
question
whether
or
not the
v was
pai-t
of the
root,
in which case we
should have
to deal not with
a lu
used
as a
present-expansion,
but with
v
used to
expand
the
stem, a
possibility
which
gained a
certain amount of
proba- bility
from the
comparison
of the Skt. rt. san
{san-d-mi)
of the 5th class."
As an
instance of the
phoneticprocess
assumed
by us
it holds
good
either
way,
and entitles
us,
even when the series is not as complete as that
given
for
arv^fu,
to fill
up
the
gaps
in it on
the
analogy
of that
series,
and in
particular(cp.p. 113)
in these two cases
"
Tt-i/u-irat rX-vv-pevai(Eurip.)
*Ti-vv-(ii^ *tl-vco rXvco
'
I write these forms with the
asterisk,although
I am quite aware
that in
Plutarch and Diod jrus forms like
nuvovTfs or riufvofTes are of isolated
occur- rence.
But from what L. D. in
Stej^li.
Thes.
s. v. tlvvvoi
sa}s,
I doubt if the
172
THE
NASAL CLASS, ch. ix.
Importance
here attaches to this fact in the
history
of the forms
:
that
the
(
before the
-w was
sometimes
short,
wliile before
-jw
Homer has it
always long,
and it does not
be;i,T.n
to be short till Pindar's time. We
may
conjecture
that from the time at which the
digamma
was
in use
in
all Greek dialects there arose
beside *TLt'vw
a
form
*r")/ui,
from which
by
assimilation
there next came *rij'ru",
and
then, by compensatory
lengthening,nvw,
until at last all trace of the
spii-ant
was
swept away
250
with the
shortening
of the vowel.
Precisely
the
same phonetic
series
may
be actually
seen
in the Dor. Ei'fo"j
(Cort-yr. ii.scr.),
Aeol.
^trroc,
Ion.
tf'iyoc,
Att. Uioc. The assumed stem
^^Oifv gets
specialsupport
from
the Homeric
(pdlw-di.;cpHi-iv-Oo-v.
No Aeolic
present-forms
for the
stems
(i)6i
and
-t
have been
preserved,
but
opiviv
and ahioiriu are
well
attested
(Ahrens
Aeol.
53),
and these have
clearlycome
from
^opafu),
*anf())Tui. This
assumption
is confirmed
by
the relation of
opivu)
to
ufirvj.u.
It will be
enough
to
point
out how natural such a
series
as
the
following
would be
:
" -
op-vv-pi
*6p-vv(i) *op-L-vva" *()pivfai oplvva opii/w.'^
The last form but one
would stand on
the
same
level
phonetically
with
the Gothic
rinna, though
the
meaning
of the latter is intransitive. On
the other
hand, we must abide
by
the old view of
Kpino,
kXivio
(Aeol.
Kphnu), kX/itw),
i.e.that
they
have arisen from
Kpujui,icXtrjit),
because
it is
only
in this
way
that we can explain
the futures
KpMf'w,
KXliito,
which
point
as clearly
to a
verbal stem
Kp7y,
k-Xir
(besideKpi
kXi)as (pmoj
does to
0a)'.
If,then, we
attribute the
graduallydisappearinglength
of
the vowel before
i
in
r/rw, (pdnw,
to the after-effects of the old
syllal"le
iv^,
it seems a most natural
thing
to
conjecture
that
(pBa-yuj.
whose
quantity
underwent a
similar
change,
arose
in the same
way.
Finally,
it is
possible
that we
have
a
still less obvious trace of the
present-forma- tion
here in
questionpreserved
in two
presents
which are just
like each
other,l3iiv\oi.iai
and the Homeric
oi/Xo^ieroc.
For
i3ov\ofxai
we
should
be entitled
by
the Aeol.
/3oAA'r=/3oi/\// (Ahrens,59),
the C^ret.
/iwXo/iiat
(Hey
de dial. Cret.
p.
25),
and the Homeric
fj^oXorroa,
234, tJoXt-ui
A
251
319,
to assume an
Aeolic
jyoXXofiai.
This form however is
actually
to
be found in Theocr.
28,
15
{f,3oXX6pa,'). l36XXofiat,
it is
extremely
probable,
arose
by progressive
assimilation from
^jjoX-ro-i^iai,
as
did
iX\v-iJi
from
^oX-rv-f-ii.
Now the
lo
of
*/3o,\-ro-^au
would bear to the
no
of the Skt. vr-no-mi for *var-iid-mi
(Ichoose)exactly
the relation of
that
oiri-ro-yun to the
no
of the Skt.
ki-no-mi
(cp.Brugman,
Stud. iv.
reading
in these cases
is correct. It is
possible
too
anyway
that it was
coined
afreshlnlate times,
and that it
was only a chance that it resembled the old
form.
- Of the
anaptyxis
of
an * after
a liquidwe
should have an
excellent example
in i\-i-vv-a),
if
we
could be
more
clear about the
etymon
of the verb,
whose
mean- ing
'
rest, loiter,'
does not
come so
verj^
near
to that of the root feA.turn,
revolve.
It is
possibleon the other hand that the
l
is of the same kind as
the i in the Lat.
07'ior
(Gk. opeovro),
i.e. a present -expansion.
*
Gust.
Meyer n.
Pr. 45
regards
the
long
vowel as an
intensification of the
same kind as
that
seen
in relw riw
(cp.
above,
p.
113).
But the contrast between
(pBXvvdetv
and
(ftetueiu
in Homer and the existence of "avw
by
the side of
avvai seem
to
speak
for
my
view. The
same
scholar does not like tlic derivation of
-va"
from
-vvu,
and will
only recognise
-nu-mi as a forerunner of -vw.
But there is often
not a trace to be seen of such a
formation.
CH. IX.
CLASSIFICATION OF NASAL STEMS. 173
121).
With
fjovXo^ni, however,
I have at Stud.
v.
218
compared
the
Homei"ic
participleoi;/\o/i'f"r,
which
as clearlyhelongs
to the rt. o\
(oWvfii)as
it is
chstingiiished by
its active
meaning
from middle aorist-
forms like wXero and oXifrdm. I
conjecture, then,
that
by
the side of
.*u\-}'v-f-ii
there existed
a
middle
*o/\-rvo-^a/,
which
early
became *o\-
ro-p.ai,
*o/\-Xo./ia(,
and was finally
made into
*ovXoi.iaiby compensatory
lengthening,and, no longer thought
of in connexion with
oXXvf.ii,only
survived in the restricted
ovXaj^iFi oc.
In
an
aorist
participle
the
ov
would
be
mexpUcable, while,on
the other
hand,
the shortened
oXd/^ievoQ (Em-ip.)
is
completelyexplainedby
the
analogy
of the Homeric
j36Xoi'to.
To
these
may
be added
e'iXXio,
which
we
shall have to discuss
on
]".
176.
For the
remaining present-stems
of this di^dsion there
are no
criteiia to
show whether the
syllablei-o (re)
came from
na or by
way
of
an
inter- mediate
rvo {fve)
from
rr, or,
in other
words,
whether
they
stand in
direct relation to the 9th
or
to the 5th class of Sanskrit verbs.
IL PRESENTS IN
-a-vo), a-vo-fMai.
The traces in Sanski-it of
a
similar formation to that of the
very
ntimerous
Greek verbs in
-avw
have been
already
noticed
on
p.
116.
The Vedic ish-ana-t there mentioned is in formation not at all distin- guished
from Greek forms such as
e.g.
the Dor.
r)vl-avi,nor
the middle
impf.
ish-ana-nta from such foi'ms as i}\d'ayo-%To,
while the
more
frequent
forms of the 2nd
sing,imperat.
act. in
-ana, e.g.
grh-dna
catch
hold
of,
ac^-ana
eat,
are to be
compared
with Greek forms like 'U-cv
e.
Of
a precisely
similar character are
the Armenian
presents
in
-anem
given
by
Hiibschmann Ztschr. xxiii.
406, e
g.
Ikh-dnem =
Xijnr-avo).
" Latin
presents
a
number of
parallels
which are
adduced
by
Keue Formenlehi-e
ii.^ 412 f. and Corssen i.^ 420
:
sol-ino consulo
(Fest.
j^.
351),
wliile sol-
inunt,according
to Fest. 162, occurred for
solent,
and at Fest.
p.
352 in-
ser-ln-unttir is
given
from
Livius,
Odyssia
Latina. It is at fu-st
sight
252
somewhat
surprising
that the i in the last form should be
long (Ritschl
Monum.
epigi-. tria,p.
18).
But it is not
impossible
that the
long
vowel
ought
to be
explainedas originating
in *ser-io a possibleby-fonn
of
ser-o
formed like
fer-io{ferinunt
Fest.
p.
162).
Such
a
present
would
exactly
correspond
in formation to the Gk.
(."i(jm
for
*cr"p-jio. Thereupon
the
vowel of the t'-classwould have rmited with the initial letter of the nasal
suffix
-rno (for-dno)
to form the
long i,
somewhat as
in
i^nvui.(pv^urdj
which
are
for
*ec-j-avco *(pvy-j-arM,
and
preciselyas
the
^T
of the
rare
^v'Carh)
contains the
only
trace of a
Greek
present-formation
in i fi-om
^i^y, so would the
long
i in inserinuntur have
pi-eserved
the
only
relic
of
a Latin
present
formed after the ?'-class from the rt. se?:
In the
formation of the word then there is
no com]:)elling
cause to follow Ritschl
.
in
altering
Festus's inserinuntur to inter sertnuntur.
If solirio had
a
short
i" as to which
we
have
no guide
" sol-ino is to -solo
(consulo)
as
ahl-nvM to
ai;"(ij,
and the short i in the verb to the d of the Greek
as
that in
2i(itvaa
to the d in
Trararr].
" In Lithuanian there are numerous
verbs in -in-ti
in the inf. with
a
causative
meaning,
such as aiig-in-ti
make to
grow
(dug-ti^row),
mar-in-ti kill
(mir-tidie). Cp.
Schleicher Lith. Gr. 164 f.
The connexion of these with the Greek forms here under discussion
can
hardly
be denied.
To accoiint for the
origin
of such formations is harder than to collect
174 THE NASAL CLASS. ch. ix.
parallel
forms
from other
languages.
What is the relation of -ana to the
shorter -na'i Benfey (Kvu'ze
Bktgr.
p.
94)
says
that the
-na
is
'splitup
'
by
the addition of
an a.
I doubt if this
can
be
justified by analogies,
esi)ecially
in Sanskrit,
and
we
shoiild have
just
as
much
right
to main- tain
on
the other hand that -ana was the fuller form from which the
shorter -na arose.
The
only thing we can be sure of is that both -ana
and -na are to be
regarded
as
originally
constructive
{v)orthil(lende)
suf- fixes.
The same
view is
expressedby
Gust.
Meyer
n.
Pr. 57 ff.
The Greek
presents
in
-orw,
of which Lobeck
on
Buttman Ausf. Gr. ii.
64 ft",
gives
the most
completelist,
fall into two subdivisions. We must
clearlydistinguish
those in which the
stem-syllable
is itself nasalised as
253
in li-y-c-drh)from those in which
-m w
is added to an
unchanged stem, as
in
f(/(n/5r-((i
w.
To the first subdivision
belong a
lot of
very
old and
much-used
verbs,
in the case of which
our
first business will be to
explain
the nasal in the
I'oot-syllable.
The related
languages
show
no
completeanalogy
to
this,though_^for
a
number of the verbs which
belong
here
they
have forms with a
nasal element inserted
only
and not affixed
as well,
and
present-formations
which
are
similar in other
respects.
Thus we
may compare
6iyyav(j}
with the
Ijat.Jinf/o
Piinc. i. 22;3.
vSkt. a-lntiibha-7ifn Priuc. ii.145.
Lat.
linquo
and the Skt. vinaK-mi
plur.
rihli-mns Princ.
ii.GO
,,
{pre)-hendo
Princ. i.242.
Litli.hmidu
(wake)
Princ. i 325.
Ch.-Sl.
otu-bug-nq-ti (aufugere)
Princ. i.232.
Litli. tinhi-s it
happens
Princ. i.271.
The consideration of all these
])henomena
as a
whole
must,
I
think,
lead to the conclusion that the nasal
syllable
at the end
was antecedent
in time to the nasal which
was
inserted. I thei'efore
conjecturedeven in
my Tempora
und Modi
p.
65 f. that
'
the nasal of the
stem-syllable was
a reflexion of the nasal
termination,'
and more
distinctly
in
my
'
Erlau-
tertingen'
'123
(Eng.
trans,
p.
143)
'
this nasal is
apparently
due to the
anticipation (^Vorklimjen)
of the nasal contained in the
followingsyllable.'
The
same
view is
expressedby Benfey
Kurze
Sktgr.
p.
83. He calls
the
phoneticpi'ocess
'
assimilation.' He is followed
by
Leo
Meyer
Goth.
Sprache
p.
208,
and also "
though
from fresh
points
of view and with
some
points
of difference "
by
Joh. Schmidt Vocal, i.
p.
32. It
be'ng
then
extremely probable
that the inserted nasal is due to the
anticipation
of
the aftixed
nasal,
the
only
room for doubt is
-whether,as
Benfey
and Leo
Meyer think,
the series of forms was
*Xa^-va) *Xa-ii-^-j/a) \a-fx-l3d-i"co,
or as
Joh. Schmidt
prefers
*\a^-va)
*\aj3-avci)
Xa-jx-ji-iva.
On the side
of the former view is the fact that in this
way
the
same
])rinciple
will
explain
those forms which have an
inserted nasal
oul}-,
such
as
the Skt.
pra-Ia-in-hh-a-nte, passive
aorist a-lanihJt-i
by
the side
254 of
a7(76/(-i,
causative lamhh-a-ja.-mi,aor. a-la-lamhham,
the hat.
Jingo,
linquo
and the
completely
isolated Greek
(r^lyyu)
in which the nasal has
become
fii-mly
attached to the verb-stem. The
onlypoint,
that
is,
in which
I
CH. IX.
CLASSIFICATION OF NASAL STEMS. 175
they ai-e distinguished
from the assumed
primary
forms is that
they
have
lost the nasal which
came before tlie thematic vowel
:
la-m-hh-{n)a-nte.
It
seems
to me more
probable
then that the inserted nasal
arose
in
this
way
ihan that it is due to metathesis. On the other hand there
are no distinct indications that the a-sound which
precedes
the nasal
tei-mination never
appeared
until
after
the insei-tion of the nasal. I
think therefore that it is
veiy
possible
that in
a
jjre-Greekperiod
form like *la-in-hh-nd-mi and ^la-m-bh-and-mi existed side
by
side.
We are
hardly
warranted in
assuming,
at all events for
Greek,
such
a
form as
*Xaju/3-i'w.
Joh. Schmidt
aptly
compares
the
ordinary
Greek
Tv-jj-TT-ai'o-y
by
the side of
-vw-avo-i' (hymn.
horn. xiv. 3
KporaXioy
TVTrrtyu)}' T "laxn)-,
while the other
j^roofs
he advances for the antici- patory
epenthesis
of the nasal " such
as
(nvXa-y-^-vo-}'
" with which
Sophus Bugge (Stud.
iv.
430) aptly
compares
the Goth,
lunga (stem
lungan)
"
by
the side of
o-TrX/yr
and the Lith.
bluz-ni-s,
and the
parallels
from other
languages,
are more in
hai-mony
with the view which he
opposes."*
All the roots which have
a
short vowel are
subject
to this affec- tion
with the
singleexception
of kdiu) for which
we should
expect
*iy-Knru).
This verb is however so
far
peculiar
that its d is
long
throughout.
It is
just possible
that this
points
to
an
origin
from
luar-fuj. The
long syllable
-svoukl thus be due to the
same cause as in
rirut,(pOlvw,fddvu)according
to the view
expressed
above
on
p.
172.
That the nature of the first
syllable
is in
some
way
connected with
the
quantity
of the second is shown
by
the variation between the
Homeric
K-(';(a)
w
and the Attic and
poetic Kiy-^diioas written
by
Dindorf
on
the
ground
of M.SS. indications at Aesch.
Choeph. 620,
and
subsequently
in some
places
in
Sophocles(O.C.14.50)
and
Euripides(Hel.
597).
If Fick^ i. 55 is
right
in his
comparison
of this verb with the
255
Lith. kanku inf. kdk-ti obtain and the Skt.
gak-no-mi
to be
able,closely
connected with which is rak
imperat.(^ag-dhi
to which
among
other
meajiings
the Pet. Diet,
assigns
that of
'
make to share
in,'
this would
be another instance in which the nasal
expansion was not confined
to Greek.
The second subdivision of the verbs in
-aiw
consists of those which
content themselves with the
simple
addition of this
syllable.
In all of
them the stem
syllable
is long
either
by
natm^e or
position: KEvii-dvw,
XyB-dito,
ai*s-"''w, dX(p-dyw.
These verbs are not
nearlyso numerous or
primitiveas
the last. INIost of them have
by-forms
of
equal
or
greater
currency: Kfvduj,Xltdu)XarSdiu),
au^w. It is not uncommon to find the
present-expansion -arw
added to
present
stems which have been
expanded
once
already
"
e.g.
to
present
stems of the
leng-thening
class
in
dijydvu),cfi/fJarw,XrjHdrcj,of the i-class in
l^-dto),di^-drcj, (pv^-avw,
of the inchoative class in
dXvaK-drw, otpXiaK-dtu), elpiyiaK-drw,
to for- mations
with
a
0 in
Srp-d-drio,
Ix-^'d'o-idcu, ru-f7-d-di'0-/.icu, 6Xi(T-B-dyo),
to
reduplicated
stems in the late icrrd-yw
[here-iw
not
-cnw
is
added],
ifT)(^dyw,
to formations with
a r
in
a^japr-a'i w,
ftXaar-dyio,
and to a stem
alreadyexpanded by
a o-
in avl-dyu). It is remarkable that
anilogies
to
what
we
may
call
tertiaiy
formations like these are to be foiind in the
*
Gustav
Meyer's %aew (p. 90),
tliat in
QiyyoLvaia second nasal
syllablewas
grafted
upon
the first:
*
Qiy-vu *Oiyyo}
=
(Jingo), diyy-dyu,
I cannot
helpthinking
too
elaborate.
176 THE NASAL CLASS.
ch. ix.
related
languages.
The
conjunction
of the nasal class with the incho- ative
is to be
seen, only
in the reverse order to that of the
Greek,
in the
Lat. fru-n-isco-r(Lucilins
ed. Luc. Miiller xviii.
2)
and in nanciscor
whicii
api^arcntly
arose by
metathesis from *nac-ni-sco-r
(Joh.
Schmidt
Ztschr. xxiii.
270).
Greek formations like
?np-0-arwexactlycorrespond
to the Lithuanian in
-d-inu,
of which Schleicher
gives
a list in liis Lit,
Gr.
p.
1G5,
e.g.
hj-din-ti
to make it
rain, p{-din-ti
to
get plaited.
The
causative
meaning
which attaches itself to these forms, as
well
as to
those in -inti is no
hindrance to our
com])aiison.
The nature of these
verbs rendeis it
probable
that the second subdivision of verbs in
-(iru)
Is of
compai'atively
later
origin
than the
first,
and this conclu- sion
will be confirmed
by
the
more
minute
investigation
of the several
forms
given
below.
256 ni. PRESENTS IN
-vao), -vao^at,
AND
-avao), -avaojxai.
The verbs in
-yrj-fii
treated of
on
p.
116 fi".have in
many
cases
by-
forms in
-la-u) :
e.g. caji-ya-w, Kip-ra-io,
TriT-va-w. A2:)parently
the rela- tion
of -)'f(-w
to
-ij]-fii
is the same as
that of
-ru-w
to
-rv-i.ii.
Schleicher
Comp.^
p.
765 assumes
that
a j
has fallen out between the
o
and the
thematic
vowel,just
as
in the
ordinaiy
verbs in
-nw
e.g.
^a/^ia-w.
In
sup- port
of this
we can certainly
mention
luKru'Cnfiai (Aesch.
Pers.
571),
which is
unmistakably
a
derivative from ofkrw made
by
means of
-ai^w^
njdm'i.
And it looks as
if the Sanskrit forms in
-nd-jd-mi
discussed
by
Benfey
Or.
u.
Occ. i.
427,
iii.
217,
like
^5a;if7/oni/=7rep)aw were also in
its favour. But since we not
only
have
no
ground
for
assuming
in the
verbs in
-i'vm just
mentioned the loss of
a /,or in other words for
assum- ing
that the mark of the ?'-class
was
added to that of the
nasal-class,
since moreover we
have in other instances
repeatedly
seen the
simple
thematic vowel added to the stem of verbs in
-^(,
e.g.
in forms like
'i-ii-ifii, ewi',
irrra (Hdt.),Tri^inXiu)(Hes. Theog. 880),
I do not know
whether we
ought
not to
prefer
the
simple
to the
more elaboi-ate
explanations.
The
case, however,
is somewhat otherwise with the verbs in
-avaiir,
-avoo/iot.
These verbs have
no
such
prototype
as
is
pro\dded
for verbs
in
-vau) by
those in
-mi^i.
What are we to
say
then to the Homeric
ceiKcii'ouji'To, trr-^ayoioira
(cp.(V^^artr?;))
? For
ctiKciiuu) we have in ?f/-
k-i'v/zi
at least
something
like a
related
form,
and can
conjecture
that there
is between the former and the latter
a
relation similar to that between
opiyiaofini
(p.Ill)
and
opiyrvfjit.
A transition to the
analogy
of the
a-
conjugation
is here unmistakable. It
might perhaps
be
conjectured
that
these verbs are properly denominatives,
and for
Kvptcaruut
a noun
KvpKOLvri
is
actuallygiven.
But the
linguistic sense certainlyregarded
them
as
little different from verbs in
-(ivm,
and besides
theyonly occur
in
the
present-stem.
In Zend
(Schleicher Comp.^ 761)
the verbs in -nao-mi
{=;Skt.nomi)
have'
by-forms
in
-navd-mi,
e.g.
2nd
sing,impei-at.
kere-
7iava (make). Might
we venture to
compare
the
enigmatical
Greek
^57
formations with these?
opiyvaofiai
would then stand for
*6piyvufi"-p"ii
with the old
intensifying o
retained. The sounds in the two cases
agree,
but the
comparison
is doubtful all the
same, especially
as a
is
extremely
rare in such
a position.
It is with
greater
confidence that I
compare
the Latin verbs in
CH. IX.
CLASSIFICATION OF NASAL STEMS. 177
-inare : car-tna-re (Enn.),
which is
explainedby jurgare,
ohtrectare and
referred to a I'oot which is
perhaps
connected with
v^/pw,coquinare
(Plant.),
a by-form of
coquere.
de-stl-nd-re
occupies
a positionby itself,
inasmuch as
the i has
evidently
been weakened from
a
radical
a.
It
bears, then, a
similar relation to
coqu-iiia-re
that
Traju-cpa-i'aw,
assuming
that this form has come from the i-t."a not
^a-r,
does to hiK-araix),
and
has its
counterpart
in the Cretan
crra-iv-w as
also in the form
i-a-ai to
first found in
Polybius.
IV. PRESENTS IN
-vsof, -vsofiai.
These not
very
numerous
formations are
evidentlyclosely
connected
with those
just
discussed. As to the
origin
of the vowel
e we
shall
hardly
avoid the uncertainty which arose in the last di^dsion about the
n.
The
syllablere along
with the thematic vowel often attaches itself
to the
same
roots which also take other nasal
sti-engthenings,
so
iK-vio-^ai by
the side of
iKava"
Su-j/eci)
(Hdt. ?)
" "
bvvu)
6v-veu"
(Hes. Scut.)
" "
6vva
In Kiviu) the
syllable
re
has
passed
into the whole
verb-stem,
but the
re- lation
to
Ktrv-f^Kii
is unmistakable.
The verb
ayuEw,
which occiu's
in Homer
by
the side of
ay irijierat,
ayiretTKnr,
stands
by
itself. The
i
is
evidently
the
same as
that in
opiioj,
and here too we
get
a
form without this vowel. Similar
to the relation
of
vp-rv/jL
to
opiru)
is that of the Cretan
ayriw (Hesych.)
to
aylieu".
V. PRESENTS IN
-aivo), -aivofxai.
These
presents
are
due to a
union of the marks of the nasal class and
the
J-class.
We can hardly
be
sin-prised
at such
an accumulation of
258
expansives
after
having already
encountered several instances of the
union of the marks of the nasal and inchoative classes. The verbs in
airw,
if
we
omit those which,
like
aypau'iw,avairw, KEpCaivd),
vyiauo),
come from Greek noim-stems in
common
use,
fall into two divisions
ac- cording
as -v-iio or -ar-iu)
is
joined
to the root. This variation is evi- dently
due to the same reason as that between
-I'w
and
-arw.
We
may
conjecture, therefore,
that the first division is
closely
connected with the
verbs in
-rw,
the second with those in
-arw. ftnirwis the
only
instance
of the fii'st
di\nsion,
while the second is
represented by
v(p-airu",
aXir-ahui.
In
KciyKctiref duXnei, i-qpairei(Hesych.)
i.e.
":o7-*:a(f)-i'i-f(,
we find the
same
inserted nasal as
in the likewise
reduplicated TriinrXa-no.
A
shorter
by-form
occurs
in
KayKone\r]c
{i.r]puc -w (txjfjo) Hesych.). re-
Tpe/d-aii'M
is likewise
reduplicated,
and it is noticeable about the second
part
of the word that
ai-jw
has been added. This formation too has its
Indian
prototypes.
In the Yedas there
occurs as a causative
present
of
the rt. dam
among
others the
dam-an-jd-fialready
mentioned
on
p.
117.
a
form which would
exactlycorrespond
to a
qmte possibleGreek
*daiJ.airM.
and which
Delbriick,
who
gives a
collection of such
presents
from the Yedas at
p.
207, regardsas a
denominative formation from da-
mana-rii
taming. (Cp.
G.
Meyer n. Pr.
99.)
Most of these
presents
N
178 THE NASAL CLASS.
ch. ix.
actually
have nominal stems of that kind
by
tlieii*side. Still there
are
some
that have no
such
stems,
e.g.
rishan-jd-ti
he is in
fault,
which
stands
by
the side of the
synonymous
resha-ti
just as, say,
the Greek
Kpouiiu)by
the side of
Kpovio.
The verbs in -arw
and
-nirw
have this
peculiarity
in
common,
that in
many
instances
they have,
besides the shoi-test and the
longeststem,
a
third,
which is used for the formation of the
compound
tenses and
even
of the
peifect
:
fiaO fiai'davo fiade {^adrjaofiai)
alard alcrdavo alaOe
{aladrjaofiai)
aXiT aXiraivo aXire
{dKiTrjfjLfvos)
259 and
by-forms
of the last kind
are
not unknown
even
in the formation of
the
present
:
e.g.
the Homeric
ixixmtn
by
the side of
v(paireir.
The verbs which
belong
to this
widelyramifying
class
are
the follow- ing.
They are aiTanged
in the subdivisions
given
above.
I. PRESENTS IN
-vo), -vo-fMUC
1)
*a\ifu)
only given by grammarians
and
explainedby aXeifo).
We
follow Lobeck Rhem. 123 in
connecting
it with the Lat. U-7io
(le-vi,
li-tu-s).
Connected
are Hesychius'sglosses
liKelvai
"
to inaXelypai
roix^,
aXlvai'
ETraXe'ixpai,
aXiteit'
(cod.aXii't'ir)' aXEifei}'.
aXii'ovtnv
given by
Bekk. Anecd. 383
as Sophoclean hardly belongshere,
since it is
ex- plained
by XeiTTvi'ouarn',
but rather to aXioj
grind,
and is
probably
to be
regardedas a
formation similar to
oplvu).
It must be admitted therefore
that this uXivit)=lino is not
beyond suspicionas a present-form.
The
aorist aXlvai shows that the
y
extended here
beyond
the
present-stem
as
in
Koli'cii,
KX7rai etc.
2) ai'to
has been discussed
on
pp.
121 f. and
171,
where the Homeric
forms will be found,
uvok;
Aesch. fr. 156 Dind. with
d. aveiy
Plato
Crat. 415 a,
3) ftfpru}/jeda' KXr]p(o(ju)fitdci Hesych. was given on
p.
118. It is
jjossible
that it
belongs
here
as well.
4) ftvvio a rare by-form
of the usual
ftui'iu)
in Hdt.
hajjut'erai
ii. 96.
5) ct'iKiu),
the forms of the
present-stem,
which
are afterwards in
generaluse,
are wanting
in Homer.
Cp. cayKaiw,
In Skt. there exist
side
by
side the rts.
c/af
and
c/af. Cp.
p.
170.
6) 2o/i"'w (?)only
in
Hesych. : ^o/i"'"i (cod.?ajj.re'i) Cdfiai^ei,
cp. p.
171.
7) ^ii'(ti,
Aeol.
^ij'i'w,
elsewhere
^ii4w,
Hes.
0pp.
598
Aij^iriripog hpov
o(vT")i/ livii.tti"^
nTToolvioi'Ti tab. Heracl. i.
102,
Meister Stud. iv. 433.
8)
^vi'w fi-om Homer onwards
(dvi'oyreQ
X
579,
^vi'e E
845,
cnre^vfE
^
364, ciit'or A
268),
but seldom in Attic
prose.
260
9)
eXuvi'u)
orxlinary
Greek from Homer onwards
(M 62),a
shorter
present-form
eXun'
(!)
ii
696, elceXcuv k
83 and elsewh?re in
poets,
rare in
prose,
tab. Heracl. i. 127 tTreXcio-flw.
Cp,
p.
148.
10) 'i-'Civ(.-v ifT/jEJ'i'uEi' Hesych. Cp. ^"/j'v/i""' (cod..^"/('o/i"i')
'
(T,ny'-
rv^Ev.
11)
Bvvu). dvi'E
"(impf.),
E
87, by
the side of
oXouiui fpeffl
Ouel
342
;
also in Pindar and later
poets.
Bviiu) Hes. Scut. 210.
CH. IX.
PRESENTS IN -v(0. 179
12) laraio),
a
by-form
of
"trrrTjfn,
known to
occur
from
Polybius
onwards.
13)
Ka^vu),
from Homer onwards
(^ 280,
T
170,
Kujjire
E
797)
in
general
use. Cp. p.
171.
14) ^Kipxru)
is
only quoted
from
Hippocr.,
Kepy^vu
(cod.KEp-^ru)-
-payyvei
Hesych. By-forms
Ksp^io, Kep^iow.
15)
k-txn-)'w.
In Homer with short
t
and
long a :
Kixarei
T
165,
Kixarere
^ 407,
kxter the
quantities
are reversed;
kty-^a-i'ei (abovep.
175). Cp. Kt'x'?/*' (p.121).
16) Trifx-7r\a-ve-rni only
I
679;
discussed
on
p.
170.
17)
nivit),
Aeol.
TTwi'w, ordinaryGreek, by
the side of the fut.
irioixai,
aor. ivio-v,
ttIOl. The related
languages
all know the rts.
tto, iri, origi- nally
pa,
but know of no
nasal
present-formation
from this rt.
18) *TVTaprof.iai.
The Aristotelian
nTctpromde (Probl.
x.
18)
was
mentioned above
on
p.
171,
nrapivijai
on
p.
112.
19)
*(TTai'"i'
(Treh'erai,av/^iiSiloviTTat, Hesych. fyiyhow
related to
rrreroc,
though
the
meaning
makes it doabtful whether it is also related
to the Cretan
trrarvu) {statuo).
20)
Tt^i'o)
(Dor.
Ion,
Tc'i^rw), ordinaryGreek,
tci/jlij]
T
105, 'ira^rov
A
155,
TUfxyoirn
2 528, iKTci^i'Eiv
A
515, only
at
y
175
ri^reiv,
Hdt. ii.
65
Taixrov"Ta,
Heracl. tables
ciaTdjj.vtLi' (i.12,
ii.
65);
Homeric
by-form
r"""(,
N 707.
21) Tivo).
With I
in Homer:
(^lodypia
rirEiv 2 407, tiveiv ovk
ldi\u)(XL r
289, Tirwv B 193. Later the short vowel
gi-adually gains
gi-ound:
Solon fr.
13, 31,
" "
tpya Tii'ovaiy,
Pind.
Pyth. 2,
24
TireffSat,' Theogn.
204
TUoyrcu,
but at 740
diTtrtVen-, Soph.
O. C. 635 oh
(TfiiKpov
Tirei
etc. On the relation of the word to rivvTai see
p.
171 f. If
at Princ. ii. 93 the Skt. Klno-mi is
rightlycompared,
we have therein
not
only
the
same root,
but also
a
similar
present-formation.By-form
TIW.
22) cpedrw.(pBcivti
ci
rt izanar
W
uiav
I
506,
cp.
"^ 262. But
ov 261
"l"duvoi drr}(TKh)i'
TiQ
dv
Eui'ip.
Or. 941
Dind., ovk
du
(f"ddyoiQ Aristoph.
Eccl. 118. Common to all Greek
by
the side of
efdrji', t(pda"7a, (ftddau).
Bugge
Ztschr.
xx.
39
compai-es
the Zd.
fsdnajaiti
he sets
going,
and
infers the existence of an
Indo-Germ.
spd-na-jd-mi-=-*(j)da-vd(,}.
23) (pOit'u).(pdivovmv j'UKTtg
re Kai i]^aTa
\ 183.
(pdirero) e 161, fpdt-
roiToc r
307. " But Pind.
Pyth. 1,
94 oh
(pBivn,
Isthm.
7,
46
Karifdlye,
Soph.Aj. 1005,
at the end of a trimeter,(pBlveic.Cp.
p.
171 f.
24) (phvMonly
in the list of verba
barytona
in
-"w. (Herodian
ed.
Lentz i.
450.)
Two of these
forms,
12 and
16,
have come
from
reduplicatedpresent-
stems.
Besides these
forms,
which have all retained the characteristic
nasal,
there
ai-e thi-ee which
apparently
had it
originally,
but have lost it
by
a
process
of
progressiveassimilation,
i.e.
25) EiXu),
press
hard
(elXof-iinoy
Q
215),
Aeol. eXXw
(d-eWeLV dxelp-
yeii' Hesych.),
Dor.
///Xw (yiiXeadaL'KarixtfrdaiHesych.). Brugman
Stud. iv. 122
conclusively
infers from these forms
a primary /t'AXw,
and
shows
by a reference to the
by-form
t'tXXw
(forftXKjw)
that it is
probable
that /e'XXw came
fi-om feXru).
On
26) ftuvXoficu
and
27)ohXofjeroQ
cp. p.
172 f.
n2
1 80 THE NASAL CLASS.
ch. ix.
II. PRESENTS IN
-avoj, -avo-fiat.
A)
Those with
Nasalised Eoot-syllables.
1)
I'lv^diw,poetical
from Homer onwards
(at'^dvei ft 114, rjicave
O
674).
Rt.
trfat,by-form ijdoi.iai.
2) ypvuTrdiu).
A rare word,
translated
by eTriicdfnrrtii', ypvTroixrQai
(Hesych.,
Bekk. Anecd.
p. 228). By-forms
y|0U7ra"j'w,
ypviravi^w,
ypvirrw,
clearly
related to
ypuiror.
curved,
bent.
262
3) 2ay/ca')'w, a by-form
of
Sa'vi'w, only given by grammarians,
who
mention
a
form
crjicw
as
well
(cp.
p, 156).
4)
epvyy
drill,used
by
Attic
poets
instead of
Epevyii/jai,
of which there
is older
evidence,
Eur.
Cycl.523,
also in
Hippocr.
and later writers.
5) diyydyu),
in Attic
poets (Aesch. Sept.44, Soph.
0. C.
328),
and
here and there in later
prose (Aristot.).
A similar
present-formation
is
to be seen
in the related Lat.
fingo(Princ.
i.
223).
5b)
Kvrddier
KpvTTTii,
Hesych. (G. Meyer 92).
6) K'Xayyai'w,Soph.
fr. 782 D.
OTTOv
TiQ
vptiQ
ovy^iKKayyavti (cp.
Aesch. Eumen.
131),
elsewhere
onlytwice,compounded
with kn-uva. A
by-form Kkuyyiw
in
Theocritus,and,
in
a
somewhat cUftereut
meaning,
K\n(^w. Cp. KtKKayya (by
the side of
KeKXrjya), i:\ayyi]
and the Lat.
clayigor.
7) Xayxciiu).
In extensive use from Homer onwards
(t
160
ec
Ie
EKuaTiji'
ivreu
Xuyxaroy niyfc).
The nasal
passes
also into the
perfect
XiXoy^a.
If Fick^ i. 748 is
right
in
comparing
the Ch.-Sl.
fo-l/^c-q. (Xay-
X""'w)
and the Lith.
jKr-hnh-i-s, a
man's
due, we have in these words
additional
testimony
to the
early
presence
of this nasal.
8) Xa/i/3arw.
Present-forms
occur
from Pindar onwards
(01.1, 83).
Importance
attaches to the Herodotean forms
Xa/.r^'o/xat, ko-f(Xa/n7rr"'oc,
iXdfjipdrjy,
but not to the late
KaraXii^i\pofiai, uvtXiifxipdr],
and the like.
Cp.
Aaifujuai, Xai^of^tcii.
Job.
Schmidt,
Vocal, i.
118, gives
a most minute
discussion of the traces of similar nasal formations in Sanskrit.
Cp.
above
p.
174.
9)
Xavdayu). Common to all Greek from Homer onwards
(eXdidaroi'
N
721,
Xavdayofiriy ju 227),by
the side of
X//0w (Dor.Xcidu)), Xr}6ay(o.
10) Xti^nrdyu).
Once in Thuc.
(viii. 17, KciTaXi/jiTrdyovat),
and then in
later wi-iters. XeIttu) is
immeasurably
more
frequent. Cp.
the Lat.
linquo,
Skt.
ri-nd-K-mi,
and the Goth,
af-lifna-n.
Princ. ii. 60.
11^Xvyydyofiai,
sob
(Hesych.). Cp. Xvy".
12) fxaiOdyw.
Common to all Gi*eek from
Sophocles
onwards.
Cp.
fiEvH-rjpr)' (ppnyricHesych.
Princ. i. 387.
13) TTciyddyw,
late and
rare:
Schol.
Eurip.
Hec.
1130,
nyA
Tiine
ravra Traiddieig
; Apollonius
and Herodian
gave
the form
(ed.
Lentz
263 ii.
545).
Trayddrw
: TTtrdoQ \\ f^iai'ddyio : f^urQiipr}.
Reasons in favour of
the connexion with
wEyoiuai,
-rroyoc
may
be found at Princ. ii. 365.
14) TTviOdrofini.Homei'ic,along
with
itEvBofxai (Trvyddyoi.iai
ft315,
TTvrdarofirjyy 256),
new-Ionic and Attic. The nasal is
probablyonly
to be found in the related Lith.
hundu,
I
am awake,
and
hudinu,
I wake
(trans.).
Princ. i. 325.
15) rvyyo'i'w.
Common to all Greek fi'om Homer onwards
(Topfruy-
X"''"
A
74, k 231
Tvy\nyt)
with
rtv^io
in
a
different
meaning. Cp.
the
Lith.
tenku,
I fall to the share
of,
Ch.-Sl.
tuk-na-ti, ligere.
CH.
PRESENTS IN -avw.
" 181
16) (pvyyctt'u).
From
Aeschylus
onwards of
prettyfrequent
occurrence
as a by
-form of
fevyio,
especially
in
compovinds.
17) (pXvvMiui.eK"pXvyMrti}'=eK(j"Xvi^"iy, EKCpXveii;
bi'eak
out,
of
sores
(Hippocr.).
18) xa"'2"'"''"'.
From Homer onwards
(^
742
x"''^"''0-
^he nasal
recurs
in
icEx^t'^a
and the Lat.
pre-hendo(Princ.
i.
242),
and
perhaps
in
the Ch.-SL
zfdati,
to want
{Joh.
Schmidt Vocal, i.
73).
B)
Presents in which the
Root Syllable has not been
Nasalised.
With the
singleexception
of k-dvw all the root- vowels are
long
either
by
nature or by position.
For the rest the stems are
of the most various
character,
and this
variety
will necessitate a
further subdivision of these
presents.
a)
apco
added to stems which show
no
present
expansion
before it/
1) aXfdyu).
In Attic
poets,
Homer knows
only 7]X"poy, uXcpot,
aX(poir.
2)
avE.ayb).
In use with
Herodotus,
Attic writers and others
by
the
side of
cii'tw (Homeric ae'^w),
which holds its own all
through(cp.Veitch,
p.
101).
Another but a
late and
rare
by-form
is avEiio
(cp.av^)jiTonui
etc.).
The latter reminds
us
by
its formation of the Lat.
aug-eo
just
as
avlaiu) does of the Lith.
augin-ti
and the Goth, hi-auk-'rian increase.
av^w
itself has
a stem
alreadyexpanded by
a.^
3) epvudyw. Imp.
epvKaye
k 429,
2nd
imperat.KaT"p{ji^(tye
ii 218.
-"4
tpvKw
has been
developed
from
ipv(epv/jiai) by k.
4)
el^ayEi a doubtful
reading
in
Lycophron
1354.
5) 'iKutu),poetical
from Homer onwards
(kaveteijfiErepoi'
lui S
385,
)(p"(w yap
iKnyirai
K
118). Cp. 'ticoj, 'iKviop.ai.
6)
Kvlayw.
Only
in Homer
:
KvhdvEi S 73,
Kvlayoy Y 42
by
the side
of
Kvcaiyu),
Kv^ioujy,
7) o/c"j'w.
o'lldyei I
554,
otcdyerai I
646,
olcdroyT
Aristoph.
Pax.
1166,
elsewhere olSiw
(even
as early
as e
445
:
a"^eoy
cp.
oloiirruj, h"c7]ira),
later
olcdw,
oldaiyio.
8) 6(pXdi'W.ofXdyew' dcfyXifrKuyeii', 6"peiXfiy Hesych. Cp.
Phot. Lex.
By-forms ofXio(late), dftiXu), ocpXia-Kw (Suid.), ofXiat^dyw.
b)
avft)
added
to
forms of the
lengthening
class.
9)
"/)(^cn'(rf,
to be inferred from
Hesychius'si'jxayEy'
El-n-Eyfrom the rt.
HX
=
Skt. ah Lat.
ag (djo).
Elsewhere thei-e is
only j//,u', pret.I'l-v(p.
103,
cp.
Stud. ix. 463
ff.).
10) 8)iydyw. di]ydyii-ut,vrEi Hesych.,
and
accepted
on
this
authority
by
Herm. and Dind. at Aesch.
Ag.
1535. Elsewhere
0//yw.
11)
KEvOdyu). EKEvdayoy F
453,
elsewhere kevOui
(Kviddiu),
p.
180).
^
On the Homeric fjK^avesee Chap. XIII.
"
3.
*
fipaTOLVii
"
l"ai(fi
airh
ttjs voctov Hesych.
is connected
by
G.
Meyer
with the root
vart
(vertere),
so
that it would
mean
'he takes
a turn,'
i.e.for the better.
182 THE NASAL CLASS.
"
or ix.
12) \T)ddvio.XrjOfirei rj 221, cavis"atively,
'he makes to
forget,'
cp.
X";flw, X(t)'Ud)u),
l)oth in Homer.
c)
aj'w
united with
reduplication,
cp.
IcrTavet, TnixTrXdveTat,
p.
179.
13) itrxdiu). By-form 'ifr-^^to
for
(Tt-(7)((i;.
Homeric:
laxurei
S,
387,
if7^(ii'"7T]i'
P 747.
Cp. Iff^ai
I'jioyTo.
"
d)
arw
added to stems
expandedby
r.
14) ctfiaprdi'to (cp.
p.
163).
Common to all Greek from Homer
onwards
(tiiiuprat'e
K
372,
\
511).
15) /3/\a(Troi'w.
From
Aeschylus
onwards
(Sept.594).
16)
liXv/TTaiwa
by-form
o{
ftXv^u)
used
by
ecclesiastical writers.
Cp.
avu(i\v"TTdvii) (Hesych.),
with the
apparentlyapocryphalby
-form
ai'tt-
ftXvnQdi'U).
16
b) oTTTarnjiaL
in late
prose
in the
sense
of
o/xZy^/ca.
265
e) a^'cu
attached to
forms of the t-class.
17)
a'Cdrio,only a'Cdvtruihymn,
in Yen.
270, elsewhere,including
Homer, "^w, at^aivio.
18)
'I'CdvM
prettyfrequent
from Homer onwards
(K
92
/^r/rf
(,
KaBi'Carov
I 3,
trans.
't'Caicv t'vpvrdytora
^
258).
Also
(4(i",
e:^tTO.
18
b) (pv^dro) (1)Hesych. ^v^arcu* (j)vye~ii',
^tiXiocrcK.
f) avw
added to the inchoative
ctk.
19) dXvtTKat'w, only
dXiffkuie
x
330,
cp.
dXvaiao,dXviTKdi^ijj.
20) dpftXirTKdi'u) (Pollux
iii.
49)
a
by-form
of
d^l|")Xi(7Kw.
21) 6(j)Xiai^di'w,
Attic
by
the side of
"j(piiXto.Cp. 6(p\dyw
no. 8.
22) fypiyKJKaj'u). irpiyiaKdrtir'
ti'jOiyouj'
Hesych.
g)
avoi
after
an
expanding
6
(cp.
p. 175).
23) ui(Tddrni.iai,
in
general
use
fi^om
Sophocles
onwards.
(liaOof^icu
is
a
questionableby-form. Clearly
the word is connected with
diu),
which
in in aim shows similar
meanings.
24) tcipddi'u). Compoimded
with
prepositions
in Attic
prose
: Karadap-
Qdvtiv,tTTiKaTa^apfidi'tir
(Plato),lap-d
is
certainly
to be referi'ed to a
shorter
lap,Ipu (Princ.
i.
288).
25) ((Trex^f'tt'o/fot,
an
Attic
word,
may
find
a
place
here
although
the
origin
of the word and all its kin
(ex^^oc, exOpdt)
is obscure.
uTrexOdrEai
/3
202.
25
b)
dXiffBdvio
a thoroughly
Attic
present,
later uXi/rOanu). In
Homer there is
only
bXiuOf.
Contrary
to all
analogy
are the
apparently
denominative forms
:
26) /(fXti'i'fi,
H 64
f^itXdi'ei
ci
re
Trorrof vn a'vri)c. Kvvdtio,
which
Lobeck
(Rhem. 235)
compares
with
it,
differs from it in not
having
a
distinct noun-form with the
same
stem. Is it
possible
that
jdeXdyu)
is a
CH. Tx.
PRESENTS Ix\
-vdo)
AND -avao).
183'
verb formed
straight
from tlie root in tlie sense
of
*
to
gi-ow
turbid
'
]
/u6\(ic, jioXiirw are certainly
related
(Princ.
i.
46i). Cp.
G.
Meyer
86.
27) (parrydvtTai-^ifeiayuipe'iTai.
This
strange
word Mor. Grain
(Philol.X. 582) conjectures
to have stood for
*o-0ay-(T/.-fi)'f-rot,
and the
subst.
ipiiffyaro-i'
for
*rr(puy-nK-ai'o-r.
If he is
right
" and
a
defence
might easily
be found for the
aphaeresis
of the initial
a
" we
should have
2GG
a formation like
ofX-i-tTK-dyu).
But the
conjecture
is a
doubtful
one.
There
are two isolated verbs in
-itw
which
may
find
a place
in
an
appendix
to the verbs in
-arw. (Cp.pp.
172 and
177.)
1) dyiru)preserved
in
dyirifieiaiv 213, dyirtffKoi'
p
294,
elsewhere
ayw,
dyii'tu). (Princ.
i.
208.)
2) Spivw,poetical
from Homer onwards,
opivei
A
298,
optj'ovTdi
A 525. Lesb.
opiinw.
III. PRESENTS IN -vd(0 AND -avd(0.
A)
-In
-raw,
AND
CON'SEQUENTLY
BY-FORMS TO THOSE IN
-rr]-i.lt.
1) Ca/jLidu) cp. p.
116 f.
2) Kipidijj
EKipia
K 356,
Kipt q.
Hdt. iv. 66.
3) Kprifxi'dio.
KaTiKpi]iiyu)rTo
hymn.
Homer.
7, 39,
other forms not
till late
prose.
4)
TTiXidii). 3rd
sing.
act.
ttiXj'^
Hes.
0pp. 510,
2
sing,
mid.
TriXr^
hymn,
in Cerer. 115.
.5)
TTiTic'iu)
cp. p.
117.
B)
In
-oi"w.
1) ppa'vKciidffddi'
kiv\ Tojv /vXatdrrwr 7ro(?(WJ'
Xiyerni, mc
j.iif^ir]ua
(pioyfjt; Hesych.
cp. l3pvt:ari]crofj.ar fioiiaofiai,
Nicand.
Alexipharm.
221
with the scholia.
2)
heiKci}
dofxai,
cei/ccti
owjto ciTrnrraiy
O
86,
^iiicnyoojyTO
iTreirtriv w
410
(c}). a 111)
in the
sense
of
greet,
while
on the other hand the act. deiK-
ai aarT(."^-Theocr.
24,
56
'showed,'
for which i-eason Buttmann, probably
rightly,
connects the forms with
cekyv/ui(cp.
I 196
hiKyiij-uyoQ Trpocicpr])
and StlBtKTo.
Hesych.
has Sei^avdrai'
dtnrdi:^trcn, perhaps
formed from
the
rt. ciK
(cp.^i')(^yvfjiai
p. 110),just
in the
same
way
as
the other from
CtlK.
3) IpvKavdu), only a
199 u'l
nov kuvov ipvKavuuxr'
diKovra and in
Q.
Sm}Tn. Cp. kpvKayb).
4) \a-^uyuw'
l(T^a\dn(TKov
O
723,
(VyarowiTo
M 38.
Cp. (Vxoi'w.
5) Kpavyuydn^ai. Only
Hdt. i. Ill ivauioy
icpavycuio^uyoy.
6)
KVKiudw
Aristoph.
Thesm.
852,
ib.
v.
429
KvpKaydv ;
both related 267
in
some hitheiio
unexplained
way
to
/cu^fiw, KVKtwy.
7)
opiyyao^iai cp. p.
111.
8) 7ra
fifayaw, epic
from Homer
onwards, an intensive from
(pauM
like the related
-n-a^tpaiiw.Only
in the
participleu'lyXr]-rru^fayouxra
B
458,
Ttv'^Ea 7raf.i(j)ay6"i)}'Ta
2 144.
9) vfardb). Only
in
]\laneth.
6,
433
^dpsd
6'
v(pay6ujyTa".
A
by-
form therefore of
vfaiyu.
1 84 THE NASAL CLASS. ch. ix.
TV, PRESENTS IN
-veco.
1) ayito). ayreJi'' ayfir Kpj/reeHesych.
The form is
a
connecting
link between
iiyu)
and
oytrew.
2) /3iiifwItaftvriorTiu
Hdt. iv.
71, tftvrovv
Ar. Pax
645,
cp.
above
p.
178
liaftvvETai.
Its
origin
is
altogether
obscure,
fivao), i/ivaa
show
that i'"
is
only
a
present
tense
expansion.
In Aristotle there
ls
the
shorter
pi-esent-form fivit),
and still later
ftvC^.
3) OvtEio. A rai'e by-foi"m
of
cvi'm
(cp.p. 178),
hdvreovcri Hdt.
iii.98.
4)
OvftM. idvvEor
only
Hes. Scut. Here.
210,
286
cp.
Qvvu).
5)
'iK"
iofxui.Only
twice in Homer
i
128
iKyevfierai,
oj
339
iKi'tv^eQa.
In
common use
with Herodotus and Attic
poets.
6) -iTx-vio-^ai.
uj^nrifT-^rovr-Hi.
is an
ill-attested
reading
in
Ainstoph.
Av.
1090,
M^hich has been
altered to
aiJi.Tri(7\nv)'TaL0v
hiJTTi(TxorTai{T)\iid.).
Perhaps though
the form is
a
true one
after
all,as
it stands in
complete
analogy
to
i/Tr-to-j^-jfo-juai,
which is in use from Herodotus onwards.
The
syllable
has here been added to the
reduplicated
stem
\(t^
for
fn-tre^.
Cp. ira^(f)cu'(toj 7rtyn7r\c'u'w.
We have met with the
same reduplicated
stem in
i(7\avM
and
(Vxa)ow.
7)
*/vti'f
w onlypartlybelongshei-e,
inasmuch
as
the
present-expansion
has taken
a
permanent
hold in the verb
(/vuj/o-w etc.).
But"
ai'tw
is
unmistakably
founded
on
vfru^jai.
7b)
^Korriit). Aesch.
Suppl.
9
Koirelc,
164
/coi'iw
fov Kof-iew. A
present
to the
aor.
l-Kof^uQa- i^rrOo^teOa,
rt. kcJ^
(Princ.
i.
186).
8) Kviiuj,
Homer
[Kvveav
"p
223),
Attic
poets
and late writers. Homer
2G8
^ises
KV(T(T(i, EKurra,
but it is
visually
the case
in the
simple
verb and
always
in the
compound npoixvye'iy
that the
re pervades
all tense-
stems.
9) ol\v"U).
Poetical
by
-form of o't
)(Ojun
( :
y
322
ol)(^yev(n,
i
120 elc-
oi^vEvm,
also
o'i)(i'iffh:oi',
once
in Pindar
(Pyth.5,
86
o/^rEoiTec)
and
occasionally
in the
tragedians.
10) TTirrew.
This form which since
Elmsley
ad
Emip.
Hei'acl.
77,
Med. 53 has been
exiDelled
from the texts of the
tragedians,
Ls well
attested
by
Herodian ad II. O
827,
where the connexion
absolutely
requires
the
reading mrrwr,
which is defended
by Lobeck, Lehrs,
and
Lentz,
all the
more that we know from other
soui-ces
that HerocUan
approved
of this form
(Herodian,
ed. Lentz ii.
1, 290).
Since however
there
appear
to be in one or
two
passages
forms with short vowels in
a
present sense, especially Soph.
O. C. 1754
irpoQTnrrofj.ev
(the
M.SS. have
the unmetrical
TrptigTriTrTOf.it}),
Buttmann is
certainlyright
in his
assump- tion
that both
forms,
irlrrw and
TrirvEto
(cp.
above
p.
177),
existed side
by side,
and this does not exclude the
possibility
of an
aorist
ETririwj'
which is demanded at
Soph.
O. C.
1733,
with
a
part.Trtriwi'.
Besides
the
tragedians
Pindar
appears
to be the
only
wi'iter who knows of tliese
forms.
Following
tlie verbs in
-rtw
comes a single
verb in
-ofw,
Just
in the
same
way
as a
few verbs in
-n w came after those in
-iw
and
-arw.
11) dyli'f'w(cp.
p.
183 and
fiyifw
p.
184) pretty
often in Homer
{cr/iyEl 4 105,
uyinov
ii
784)
and
Herodotus,
elsewheie
only
here and
CH. IX.
NASAL PRESENTS WITH TRACES OF A
^.
185
there. In the Homeric
hymns
there is also the fut.
aywi'iffu)
in which
the
present-expansion
has
gone
further than the
pi-esent.
V. PRESENTS IN
-vco
WHICH POINT TO AN OLDER -VLCO.
Here
again
we must
recognise
two subdivisions :
such verbs as
add
-I'-tw,
i.e. a conjunction
of the nasal
present-expansion
of the first main
class,
and the mark of the
^-class,
to a stem
ending
in a vowel,
and su(;h
as
take an o as
well before the
-t-uo. aXBaivw,
i.e. uX-O-ni-iw bears to
jja-y-iu)
exactly
the same
relation
as
that of
a\(p-ur-w
to
(pda-yw.
A)
-r-iuj ADDED TO
VoWEL RoOTS.
269
The
only
verb we can
put
here with
certainty
is"
(iairw,
in common use
from Homer onwards
Qoairei
A
443, Iftnivov
0 145).
The
r
of the
primary
/3o-)tw
appears
in Greek
onlyas a portion
of the
present-expansion,
wiiile the
n
of the
corresponding
ven-io
(for
gven-io)
goes
all
through
the verb.
Cp.
Princ. ii.73.
The other verbs of kindred
origin(cp.
below
p.
215
f.)
retain their
v
in
some at least of their tenses : Kpino
from
Kpi-r-ju)
fut.
KpXvGi,
aor,
eicplva,
though
the
perf.
is
Ke-kpt-Ka,
vt'-Kpi-^cH,
so
that
strictly speaking
the
""
is not in them to be
regarded
as an
element of
present-expansion,
but rather as a root-determinative,
the
j alone,
hi
conjunction
with the
thematic
vowel, being
the
present-expansion.
For this reason we
place
these verbs in the
j-class.
From the
jwint
of view of the historical
development
we must iiot be blind to the fact " seen
in the relation of
/3at)'w
to vcQiio" that the
processes
of root-determination and
present-
expansion
are
often almost
indistinguishable,
as we have
already
had
occasion to remark with reference to the :Z'- class.
B)
-at-lM ADDED TO
CONSONANTAL RoOTS.
1) *a/\ou'w,wander, Eurip.
and later authors. It
may
be doubted
whether the
verb,
like
dXcio/iai,
is
a
denominative from
"\?j,
or has come
straight
from the
root, especially
as
there are no
tenses but those of the
present-stem.
2) uXdaii'U),Hippocr.
and late
poets,
while in Homer
dXdof^iai (fut.
t-rraXd
nfTofjiai)
is in use. By-form
uXdliaKu)
with the variant aXdinri.w in
Hippocr.
The
corresponding
Skt. rt. ardh also forms the
present
occa- sionally
by
nasal additions
: rdli-no-mi,
rndcUirni.
3)
aXiTairw.
Only
d\"ranerat Hes.
0pp.
330. Also
ijXiroi',
aXi-
Ti(Tdai, dXiT")fiei-nc,
all Homeric.
4) ipi^ah'U)
B 342
uvTbDc yap
iTrieaa
ipihilyo/jev by
the side of ^ 792
TTotTfrh'
iplh'irracrdai (old
variant
epii^ijaaaOui,
as
I. Bekker writes
it).
Owing
to this fluctuation between the stem with
r
and the stem
without,
this
verb,althougha denominative,
is
given
in this
list,
while
e.g.
in the
270
case o(
ipiCif.iaiyu) (irritate,
cp. epedii^w)
or ipvdahio (jz/ji/O/; ra Apoll.Rhod.)
there was no reason for so
doing.
5) nayKciiiu). Only KayKuini' daXTrei,IrjpalvsiHesych., cp. Kayico-
/je'i'VC" IrjpuQrw (j)i'jj5u). Brugman
Stud. vii. 205.
6) f:y]caiyei' /jepifiva Hesych.
M. Schmidt is
pei'hapsright
in
holding
to be
a
mistake for
Krjpaivei
which is rendered
by
the
sajne
verb.
18fJ
THE NASAL CLASS. "
CIT. IX.
7) Kpnitit'w, only Kfxniiriov
Z 507, O 264 and
again
in late
writers,
clearly
connected with
Kpovu).
8)
KvaivM only
in
Hesych.,
who renders Kvairujy
by
tyKvoq wv.
9) XtTairu), only Eurip.
El.
1215,
cp.
Xtrartvw,
kiTaveia,
10) y-qfalrio a by-form
of
d'/^w
in Eustathius.
11) d(T"ppau'Ojjiai,
from
Euripides
and
Aristophanes onwards, fut.
vrT(f"pijToijnt,
aor. ioa^povTo, Aristoph.
Ach. 179 and
elsewhere, clearly
a
compound,
whose shorter forms
are evidently
of later
origin
than itself.
One of the most remarkable of these is
wfrfpavro
(Hdt.
i. 80).
12) TtTpsfxairu), only
in Attic
comedy, Aristoph.
Nub. 294
TtTpifiaiytj
In the
case
of several of these verbs it is
impossible to determine
whether the nasal
syllable
is to be
regarded as an expansion
of the
present
tense
or
of the verb-stem.
i
The
sum
total of the verbs of the nasal-class is thus
seen
to be
a
very
considerable
one.
The first division
(fw)
contains
27, the second
(o)'w, ti'w) 50,
the third
(row, avaoj) 14,
the fourth
{vv"t) 12,
the fifth
{rji")) 12,
in all 115. Of these 7 verbs it is true
occur
in 2 of these
divisions and 1 in 3.
Anyhow
there
are more
than 100
verbs, and if
we
add to these the 50 verbs in
ri"-/u
and the 8 in
-vrjjj.t,
some
of which
however
occur over again
in the thematic nasal
class, we
find that about
150 verbs make
use
of nasal elements in the formation of the
present.
Corresponding
formations
are
to be found in
great
numbers in
Sanskrit,
and
more particularly in the Vedas. In modern Greek
presents
in
-rio
have become far
more numerous
still
(G. Meyer 48).
CH. X.
THE INCHOATIVE CLASS. 187
CHAPTER X.
THE INCHOATIVE CLASS.
While the verbs we have to deal with in this
chapterare by no means 271
without
parallels
in the wider domain of the i-elated
languages,
still this
kind of
present-formation
is more
than otliers confined to the Graeco-
Italic circle. It is
only
here that
they
have
developed
to
any gi-eat
extent
and with
any
regularity,
so that in the common possession
of
an
in- choative
class is found to be one
of the
strongest arguments
for the
specially
close connexion of Greek with the Italian
languages.
From
another
point
of view the
present-expansion
under discussion is distin- guished
from all others
by
the fact that there is attached to
it,though
here
again
almost
exclusively
within its own narrower circle,
and even
there not
universally,
a
clear and definite
meaning.
In one set of in- stances
this
meaning
is as
unmistakable in Greek as it is in
Latin,
and
this fact is
one
which
may
throw
light
on
the
process
of
present-expansion
generally.
For if the
present-expansion
has in this
particular
instance
to
express
a
specialmeaning,
it is natural to
suppose
that the
variety
shown
by
other forms of such
expansion
was no mere idle and fortuitous
complexity,
but was
bound
up
with the effort to
distinguish
the
con- tinuous
action not only cjuantitatively,
so to
speak,
but also
qualitatively
from the
momentary.
In the verbs of the class now
before
us
it is the
action that is
graduallycoming
into
being
which is
distmguished
from
that which has attained its full idealisation. We therefore call this
class,
notwithstanding
the fact that the
meaning
as
above described does not
in all
cases
stand out with
equaldistinctness,
the inchoative class.
The mark of this class fi-om the
beginning
was
the
syllable
-sha.
Traces of this
syllable
in the same or a
like
application
are to be found
in most of the related languages.
No one
it is true will now venture to
adopt Bopp's assumption (Vergl.
Gr. iii.^
104)
that the numerous 272
Sanskrit desideratives are to be identified with the
present-
formation
now
under consideration. Desideratives have two
things
in common
with
the
inchoatives,
the sibilant and the
tendency
to
reduplication.
It is
conceivable therefore that some one
should hit
upon
the idea of connect- ing
the Skt
^i-"jud'S-d-mi
and
yi-yrw-rr-K-w.
But a nearer
examination
shows that the
tendency
to
reduplication
is
only occasionally
manifest in
the Greek inchoatives and
quite
unknown in the
Latin,
and
consequently
is not an
essential characteristic of this class. The s
then is all
that is left.
Granting
that this
comes
in both formations from the
same
source,
there would still be the k
wanting
in the Sanskiit forms.
It will not be
readil}'
admitted that the
gutturalis,as
Bopp assumed,
'
only
a
euphonicaccompaniment
of the sibilant.'
Relinquishing
then
as
we do the
attempt
to find in the desideratives the Indian
representatives
of the
inchoatives,we aie
all the
more
convinced of the connexion of the
188 THE INCHOATIVE CLASS.
ch. x.
latter with a
small number of Indian
forms,
in which the sound
Kh,
which elsewhere too takes the
place
of
an
Indo-Germanic sk
(Gk.
ok,
Lat
sc),
is the means
of
distinguishing
the
present-stem
from the root.
There are 6
presents
of this formation
:
iWid-mi I
seek,
wish rt. ish.
uMlnUni I
shine,
grow
bright
rt. vas.
gdUUhd-mi
1
go
rt.
gam.
jdWid-mi
I
hold,
lift rt.
jam.
rUUhd-mi I
go,
reach rt.
ar.
'juMhiUni I
yield
rt.
ju.
In the first.4 instances
a consonant has
manifestly
been
suppressed
before the
present-expansion.
Besides these 6 instances there is also
:
vdhMhd-mi I wish rt. van.
The root
forms,
it is
true, a
present
of its
own as well
: vano-mi,
but
vduKUha-mi is also set down in the Petersb.
Dictionary
as
an^
expansion
of
van,
and is
actually
found
only
in the
present-stem,
miirlcha-mi, I
grow
firm,curdle, congeal,
stands
over
against
the
participle
mur-td-s
cm-died and the
noun mur
ti-s
shape,
and thus still shows traces of
a
movable Jch"sk. On the other
hand,
the
same element in the rt.
praM
27
o {prJcJchd-mi) ask, seek,
is not confined within these
Umits, though
in
view of the
many
similar
processes
in the
case of other elements of the
same kind,
this cannot
prevent
us
from
ascribingto it the same
origin.
Ascoli
(Glottologia 228)
thinks he
can
discern in other formations
_
as
Avell,
e.g.
in
vra(;Ktear,
and in various roots in
sh,
e.g.
hhdsh
speak,
which
he
compares
with
farxKU),
traces of the same sk. These formations
are
discussed at
lengthby Pott,
Et. Forsch. ii.^ 622.
In Zend the same
element is
representedby
f, e.g.
ga-r^a-i-ti=^kt.
(jd-Mha-ti. A
very
instructive form is the 3rd
sing.opt. ish-a^6-i-t
he
may
wish
(rt.ish),
which
we are
inclined to follow Schleicher
Comp.^
762 in
referring
to the
primary
form
*is-askd-i-t,
while Justi
conjectures
that it is
a
desiderative formation. If Schleicher is
right,
we have in
the
syllable
a^a
from aska the
type
of the Gk.
enKij
in
ap-iat^w
and the
Lat.
isco,
e.g.
in
in-gem-i-sco.
In Armenian
according
to Hubschmann
(Ztschr.
xxiii.
29)
can-ach-em
corresponds
sound for sound to the Lat.
gn-osc-o.
We shall have further to consider in detail the
analogous
Latin verbs
of which Corssen ii.- 282 fi".
gives a complete
list as
they
are
of the
greatestimportance
for the elucidation of the Greek forms. There
are,
however,
Oscan and Umbrian
parallelsas well,
e.g.
Osc.
com-jxira-sc-us-
ter
(tab.
Bant.
4),
which is
probably rightly
rendered
by
'^conquisita
fuerit.' The stem
parsk,
which
we met with in the Skt.
praJch,
appears
with
a
fresh
expansion
as
pers
in the Umbrian
pers-nl-mu
^
let him
pray
(cp.
the Zd.
pere"^-anyei-fi
he asks and
oiiiX-inK-arn)).
The most remark- able
Old-Italian form of the kind is the Umbrian ei-sc-urent 3rd
pi.
of
a
fut.
perf.
For this form Aufr. and Kirchh. ii. 358
(cp.
Breal Tables
Eugubines
p.
255) conjecture
the
meaning poposcerint.
We have here
before
us a
verb-stem which is found in all the branches of the Indo-
'
Breal, Tables
Euguhiiies,p.
1)2,prefers
to consider the form
a
denominati%'e,
so
that the
syllablem
would
belong
to a noun-stem
jjcrs-ni (cp.
the Lat.
fail-tu-n).
This is
possible.
CH. X.
ORIGIN AND CLASSIFICATION OF THE INCHOATIVES. 189
Germanic
langiiagesexcept
Greek and
Keltic,
sometimes with unin-
teusified,
sometimes with intensified
i,
i.e. in the Skt. i-Mhd-mi,
the
Zd.
i-^ai-te,
the Umbr.
*ei-scu,
the O. H. G. ei-sc-o-n
(Eng. ask,
Germ.
heischen),
the Ch.-Sl. is-ka-ti
quaerere,
the Lith.
jes-ko-ti
seek. Since
by
274
the side of these
formations,
in the
comparison
of which I have followed
Fick^ i.
29,
there is the rt. is
(Skt.ish)
with the same meaning (Princ.
i.
500),
it
might
be maintained that the
expanded
form is due to the addi- tion
of
k{a)only,
not of sk-a. But it is more
probable
that is-skd-mi
was
the
primary form,
and that in it we
have the most
widely
extended
instance of the inchoative class of
presents.
In the Letto- Slavic
languages
I know of no analogybeyond
this one
verb. From the Teutonic it is
highlyprobable that,
as Pott
assumes,
the Goth, thri-skan,
0. H. G. dre-ska-n
(thresh),
and further the 0. H. G.
le-ska-n
(extinguish), /or^c-^--^, (seek),
and the O. N. ra-ska loco movere
belong here,
with which last also theO. H. G. adverb 7-a-sko Germ, rasch
(quickly)
is connected. Forsc-6n is to be referred to the rt.
parsk (Skt.
prafcJcIi,
Lat
pose
for
porsc),
but has
a
derivative termination of
a
similar
kind to that which we meet with in the Lat. misc-eo=^0. H. G. raise-iu
by
the side of
niayio,
in the 0. H. G. wunsc-iu
by
the side of the Skt.
vdnMha-mi,
in
r)\a(TK-a(^w by
the side of
fjXuffKw.
In formation the Gk.
Ttpv-ffKb)
{TEpv-cTKE-To- iTEipf-To
Hesych.)
is almost
completely
identical with
dre-skan.
Cp.
Princ. i. 275. In all
cases,
however, except
in the above-
mentioned
oriental forms and in
Latin,
the
primitiveduality
between
present
stems and verb stems without the sk has
disappeared.
As to the
origin
of this
present-expansion
no
certain
judgment
can
be
passed.
We shall
hardly
be able to
regardanything
else
as
established
than that in the
syllable
ska the same
root-determinatives which we
elsewhere find used
separately
as s
and k
are here in
conjunction.
We
meet with sk
moreover,
as
Schleicher
pointsout,
in noun-formation as
well. The diminutives in
-ktko,
-t"r/va
show a most evident
relationship
in their
application.
The same
suffix which in adoleseens characterises
the
verb-stem,
is in the
sjTionymous
vEavirrKo-Q the mark of
a noun-
stem,
and it is
easy
to see the bond which
closely
unites the small as
what is
coming
into
being
with the action which is
coming
into
being
or
being gi-adually
realised. In
accordance,then,
with the
conjecture
we
have
already repeatedly
made as to the
origin
of
expanded present-stems,
we
shall also
regai'd
the stems in -ska
as
noun-stems
which,
when
joined275
predicatively
with the
personal
terminations as
subjects,
do
duty as
present-stems.
Of the relation of the iteratives in
-nKov
to the verbs of
the inchoative class we
shall have occasion to
speak
later.
It is now
incumbent on us to
present
the reader with
a general
view
of the various
ways
in which the mass
of verbs of this class are formed.
It will be most convenient to divide them into 6
groups.
1)
The first
group
consists of verbs in which the characteristic
aK
is
added
immediately
to the root. This is
clearly
the oldest
formation,
e.g.
fta-ffKio, ft6-(TK(jj,
"()a-(rKO), answering
to the Latin
pa-sco,
sci-sco. Some of
these forms
are
characterised
by reduplication
as well,
which
appears
in
precisely
the same
shape
as in the
reduplicatingpresent-stems
in
^(
:
yi-yi'u)-aKit)
(by
the side of the
Epirotyi'wo-kai=Lat. gno-seo), 3t-2pa-(rt.w,
7r(-7rpa-(TkOj,jjn-^j'Tj-fficio,
iri-ivi-aKij).
2)
The second
gi-oup
is
only distinguished
from the first
by
the fact
that the root as compared
with other forms has suffered metathesis
:
1 90 THE INCHOATIVE CLASS.
"
ch. x.
dt'fj-iTKu) (by
the side of
t-Sar-o-i),
(3\w-(tk(o
(besidee-^ioX-o-j),
in the
coui-se of which the vowel
always gets lengthened. Here, too, redupli- cation
appears
in one instance
: ki-kXii-/tkw. On the
boundary
between
this
gi'oup
and the
preceding
there is here and there
some debatable
ground.
If we
take
our
stand in the Indo-Germanic
period
yfu)
and
yur(t
have
already
suffered metathesis
as
compared
with the elsewhere
discernible
gan (ourcan)
and
man (Lat.me~inin-i).
But in Greek the
metathesised is the characteristic and
only
form of these
roots,
while
others
only put
the vowel after the second consonant to fonn the in- choative.
So, too, cre-sco by
the side of
Ceru-s, Ceres. Joh. Schmidt
(Ztschr.
xxiii.
278)
makes it
appear probable
that all
primitivepresents
with
a
long
vowel before the
-o-kw
have suffered metathesis.
Cp. below,
group
3.
3)
The third
group
contains verbs of
a decidedly
derivative character.
Here the vowels of the derivative
conjugation
appear
before the
(tk : a
e.g. yr)pu-ffK(i},
ijfta-(TK(i),
rj e.g.
uXh'j-ffKU), aXOij-aKio,u)
e.g. u}a-jyi(jj-(TKO-/dai,
V
e.g. fiidu-fTkoj.
In
many
of the instances noun-stems
unmistakably
form the
starting-point
for these verbs
(///3a, /3to,/^tOu).
This
group
corresponds
to the
numerous
Latin denominative inchoatives like
ira-scor,
276
invet
era-SCO,
clare-sco,inature-sco,
ohdormi-sco. The vowels
were
pro- bably
long
from the
beginning.
The formations of this
gi'oup
bear to those of the first
exactly
the
same
relation
as is borne
by
the Aeolic contracted verbs in
//i
to the
primitive
formations of the
kind, so
that
tij^atTKu) : l^arrkw: :
Aeol,
yiKaifii: 0a^i.
That
is,
in the
one
the vowel is
radical,
in the other it
is the result of contraction. The kind of conti'action is made
plainer
to
us
by
the iteratives.
ifpanKo)
clearly
stands
on
the
same
footingas
far
as formation
goes,
as
e'larrKEA
125,
T-pwTrctiricero
(A 568). By
the side of
the.se contracted
forms, however,
stand those which
are as
yefc
uncon-
tracted,
such
as
rauraaaKE, yoaaaKs,
IxdvaaaKoy.
No one will doubt
that the second
a
has hei-e been
developed
out of the thematic
e
under
the influence of the
first,
and that the inchoatives took the
same course.
Consequentlywe
may
fiom
ijftufTKU)
infer
a previous *('//3ae-o-A:u),
and this
will .show
us
that the
a-k-,
which is the characteristic of the
class,was
affixed
to the full stem of the derivative verbs
containing
the vowel of the
derivative
conjugation
and the thematic vowel as well. In the case of
the
e-conjugation
the
parallel
is not so striking: aX^li-rrkw
by
the side of
"d(-TKe. The iteratives either allow the two e's side
by
side
:
fiXee-atcE,
Tvo'Mt-aKE, or they expelone
of them
: KaXi-iri:tro, o'ix"'t-iTice.
The
"j
of
"
aXhiifTKu)stands on the
same footingas
that in
(frnpi'i-^iEvai
and the Aeol.
acik)]-ei.
It
is,as
has been shown more at
length
in Stud. iii.379
ff.,
to
be set down to the after effects of the
j
which
originally
existed after
this vowel. Of
precisely
the
same
kind is the
w
in the 'Homeric
I'TTi'w-oj'rac
and
consequently
that in
avtiftiio-nKo^ai
where it has swal- lowed
up
the thematic vowel. We
may
conjecture
the
same
process
in
the
case of
/.lEBu-nkO) on
the
ground
of the Aeolic
/.uOv-lio.
This is the
pi-oper
lAnce
at which to deal with
a
remarkable tradition
of the old
grammarians,
to which Usener has called attention in
Fleckeisen's Jahrb.
1865,
p.
245 ff.
Oij-Cor two of these inchoatives
were in
antiquity
written with
an i
after the stem-vowel. Distinct
testimonygives
tiyai-ffKU) and
fiifii'al-aku)
as
Aeolic
(Ahrens,
Aeol.
96),
testimony
which is derived
ultimately
from Herodian
(on
A
799).
But
CH. X.
CLASSIFICATION OF THE INCHOATIVES. 191
Usener
finds the
i
also in the
corresponding
Ionic and Attic forms
Oy/j-fTKio, ^ufX)'^-(Tic(i),
and
moreover in
Opu-aKiv,
and that in
part
from the 277
same source (Herod,
ed. Lentz ii.
521),
in
part
from the
readings
of M.SS.
of
unusually
ancient character. The latter have also
a quite
isolated
Kii:\}'](Tk:w,
while for
yiyrwcr/cw, fjif^pwai^io, rtrpwCT/vw,
ftXuxTKu},
and other
forms which to all
appearance
are
of
exactly
the
same
kind
no t
is found.
Now,
has this
^
difference
any
foundation in the forms themselves?
Ahreus
(utsupra) compares
the
diphthong
of drula-Kio with that of the
Aeolic
jj-axal-Tct-r.
In the latter
word, as
has be
n
shown at
length
at
Stud. iii.
192,
I
regardai as
the remains of the
rrja(Skt.ajd-mi)
which
originally belonged
to words of this kind. A
portion
too of
our inchoa- tives
are
to be referred to such derived stems. Such
a
form
as *yr)pai-
(TKio
would hence be
hardly
more to
.
be wondered at than the
actually
occurring
waXulw. But it
happens
that these
very
three verbs which
are
given
with the
i, 6y"j-aKoj,
^ifirij-aKM, Spw-crKU), are not denominative,
but,
for all
we can
see,
have come
straight
from the roots. Still
we
shall
hardly
find
any
other
way
of
exjilaining
these
extraordinary
forms than
that of
presupposing
as a
preliminarystep *Bva-i-(x), *fXL-pru-i-uj, *Bpaj-w,
from which the
i
has
passed
into the inchoatives. For to
maintain, on
the
gi'ound
of these few
verbs,
that all inchoatives
once ended in
-lfT^:w,
and that it is
merely owing
to a
corrupt
tradition that the
t
has in other
cases
disappeared,
is
hardlya
justifiable course, especially
as the
analogies
adduced from Sanski-it and Zend
place
it
beyond a
doubt that the
i
did
not
belong
to the
original
characteristics of thLs class. Otherwise Joh.
Schmidt Yoc. ii. 319.
4)
In
a
fourth
gi-ouji
we
perceive
the existence of
an e or i
which
has attached itself to the
root,
the final letter of which is
a consonant
;
e
only
in
a singlepresent, ap-i-aKw,
with which
we
may compare
the Lat.
trem-e-sco occurring
in Lucretius and
Yei'gil(Coi-ssen
ii.^
283),though
it
is
frequent
on the other hand in the iteratives which
by
their formation
altogetherbelong
here:
neX-i-oKero,'il-e-aicEi',
noppvpe-aKe.
In the
place
of this
e we elsewhere find
an t :
a.\-i-(TKOfiai, cnracp-i-aKu), apap-i-(TK:(i), evD-
i-(7Ko),
and the
same
in Latin
: ap-i-sco-r, pac-i-sco-r, in-gem-i~sco.
The
first of these vowels is
regarded by
Schleicher
Comp.^
768
as identical
with the thematic
vowel,
the second he sets down
as an
auxiliary
vowel.
It is
however, as
Corssen has
seen, hardlypossible
to
separate
the two.
We shall not be far
wrong
if we
regard
the
", just
as
in
a/^if-l-aKO)
and in 278
'iiT~difrom the rt.
h, as a
weakened
e
and
identify
it with the
e
which
we meet with
e.g.
in
ape-ri], i'lpe-aa,
and in
numerous other verbal and
nominal forms
e.g.
ijE-e-ia-ro,
ri^ie-ui-c, fiei-e-Toc.
The
t
which introduces
itself in a
large
number of Sanskrit
forms,especially
of the aorist and
future, is
very
much the
same
thing.
If
we were quitesure of the
above-mentioned Zend
ishago-it
we
should have 'in it
a remarkable
testimony
to the descent of this vowel from
an
originala.
5)
A fifth
gi'oup
is formed
by
the
stems, ending
for the most
part
in
a
consonant,
which endeavour to
join
themselves
immediately
to the
class -characteristic. This
process
is not unattended
by
loss of sound.
A
guttural
has
disappeared
in
dei-ci-a-Ko-fiai (rt.fi/v)cp. Si-ai^o-c,
which is
probably
for diK-aKo-i; from dticely
throw,
i.-i-aKU)
(rt.Ik),
"i-ctku)
speak (rt.
fiK,feir),
Xa-(TKii)
(rt.Xac),
Ti-rv-rrm-piai (rt.rvK, r^x),apparently
too in
i-d-(TKeiy
dyeiy
(Hesych.),
to which
Xe-rr^rj
is
a
cori-espondmg
form if it
really
stands for
Xex-(TKi] (Mor.
Grain Philol. x.
581),a 6 has
disappeared
1 92 THE INCHOATIVE CLASS. ch. x.
in ^:\^o-f7l;Mv^
fTriK\to(hoi',
a r
in
x""'^'^''^
^t.
)("'S
unless
we
prefer
to
go
straiglit
back to the rt.
x"'
The related Lat. hi-sco
(by
the side of hie-
ta-re, hiu-l-cu-s)
does not
give
ns the means
of
deciding
the
point. Quite
by
itself stands the denominative -mfv-irKM
which is
clearly
derived from
TTiyvri'i-c. So too the Lat. disco
by
the side of
didic-i,
po-sco
for
por-sco.
6) Lastly
we
include in a sixth
group
those verbs in which the
originalrrK
appears
in a
mutilated form. This mutilation is of three
kinds. The
"tk
appears
as
iry
in
fj
I
(ry
lo by
the side of the Lat.
onisc-eo,
the
y
in which we
shall discuss
minutely hereafter,
and further in
liiayix)
"
aTTocvuj Hesych. by
the side of
eycucv-fncu)
N. T.
o-j^
for
(tk
is shown in
7ra-r7)(w,
which verb has been discussed at Princ. ii, 365. The 0 of
'iiradoi',
Tvi-KinSa as
the Lat.
pa-ti-o-r
also
shows,
does not
belong
to
the
root,
for which
we are
left with
ira (whence 7r";-fxo) or iray (cp.
iriv-o-
//of,
"Kovdi).Consequently
the ^ has most
likelynothing
to do with the
X
of the
present-formation.
The
aspiration
of
a
tenuis is however not
unexampled. Lastly,
in a
number of forms after
aspiration
had taken
place
the
n
which
was
the source of the
aspiration
fell
away,
as
in
'ip-
\o-fxai
for
*ip-aK()-^ui by
the side of the Skt.
rJcJchd-mi,
in
Tpv-xj^
by
279
the side of the
repv-ffKw
mentioned
on
p.
189,
and in several verbs
in which the
x
overstepped
the
oiiginal
limits which confined it to
the
present-stem,
as
in
ev-x""-^i(ttby
the side of the Skt. vdnJcIchd-mi men- tioned
on
p.
188,
and theO. H. G. tvun-sc-ian.
Among
the forms with
a
simple
X
for
""(v'special
interest attaches to
(TTti-dx^^ if,as
is
probable,
it
belongs
here,
inasmuch
as
the
a
here takes the
place
of the
i or e
which
is
usually
found elsewhere. This
a
finds its
only analogy
in the often-
mentioned Zd.
ish-a^8it.
If we
conclude
by taking
a
survey
of the instances in which this
method of
present-formation
in
any
of its modifications is to be found
applied
to the same root in two or more
of the Indo-Germanic
languages,
whether the foi-ms are
expanded by
other
stem-forming
elements or
not,
we
shall find the
following
10
:
-^o
Skt.
(/a
Jffc^"'t-mi Z\. 3id
sing,jagai-ti ISda-Ka.
"
rliUha-ini
epxa/xai.
"
vdhUUhd-mi
evxnixai
O. H. G. wunsc-iu.
"
prliUIid-mi
Zd.
pereqd
Lat.
po()-)-too
O. H. G. inf. forsc-o-n.
"
iWikdmi Zd. 3rd
sing,ii^aite
Umbr. ei-scu O. H. G. inf.
et-se-o-n
Oh. -SI. inf.i-ska-fi Liith..
jei-ko-ti
p.iayco
Lat. tnisc-eo 0. H. G.
misc-iu.
Armen. ean-nrJipm
yi-yva-a-Kut
Lat.
gno-sco.
(cp.
above
p.
188)
p.i-p.vf]-a-Ko) "
-min-i-sco-r.
xd-(TK(o
,,
hi-sco.
fepv-aKO)
O. H. G. inf. dreshnn.
We have
now to
give
a
list of all the Greek vei'bs with inchoative
presents.
I.
-crKto, -(TKO-pai
ADDED DIRECTLY TO
YoWEL RoOTS.'
1) l3drTKio. l3drTK
'idi B
8, TrapiftarrKe A 104
(not
an iterative),
of
isolated
occurrence
in
Aeschylus
and
Aristophanes.
In
a
causative
sense:
B 234
KaKwv iizi^arKifjier
v'lac
'A^'^"''''''
'
Tliose which
are reduplicatedare
marked with a *.
CH X.
PEESENTS IN
-(XKO).
'
193
2) (iooKU)
used from Homer onwards
(\
365 ola
-e ttoWovq j36(tku
ycua fxsKaiia noXvcTirepiaQavOpwTrovg^by poets
and
occasionallyby
prose-
writei's.
3)*-yi-yt'w-(rKU)
in
general
use
from Homer onwards
{-/lyyujfTKM
ai
280
Qea E
815),only
its
place
is often taken
by
the
by
-form
yli'wcr^w,
which
has been
adopted by Bei-gk
and Mommsen in
Pindar,
e,g.
01.
6, 97,
though
with Attic writers it is accounted a
late form. In Homer editors
are
probably right
in
retainingyiyrio"TKiji,although according
to La
Hoche Textki-. 220 the Ven. A
oiily
once
(^ 240)
has
yiyvojaKw.
The
correct
explanation
of the form
yliioiTKU)(thelength
of the
t
is attested
by
Herodian ii.
179),
as the result of
compensatory lengthening,
is
given
by Brugman
Stud. iv. 103. The
Epii-otyiw-ff/cw
is remai-kable as
being
identical with the Latin
gnosco (Etym.
Oiion.
p.
42, 17).
4) *^t-ci-(TKo-jj.ai, frighten,
with the remarkable substitution of
e for
I
in the
i-edupLication,
is
only
found at
Aristoph.Lys.
564 ieeSlai^eTo
-})v
t(Txa3o7rw\ij',
and has been
adopted
as an emendation at
hjonn.
in
Merc. 163
: -/
fxt
ravra ceciirtceai,
for the senseless
-irvaKeai
of the M.SS.
deiciatTOfiui,
of the same
meaning,
is more common.
5) ^Bi-Spd-iTKu),
in use from Herodotus onwards
(cnro-^idpri-aKw)
in
compounds, particularly
with
ano.
6)
*ey-ii-cv-c;KU} N. T. in a transitive
sense
'to
put on,'
middle 'to
wear.'
7)
6pd-(nc"iy
dicifxinriiaKea' Hesjch. Cp.
Lobeck Rhem.
65,
Princ. i.
319. The rt. dhar, hold,
underlies the word.
OpfjaKoc,dprjaKeveLy,
and
Op)i(TK(x}
are
of
a
similar formation.
76)
*/":arE-Ki-cXa-ffive' Kart'/vAa Photii Lexicon.
8) *yut-/xr//-(7/cw
from Homer onwards
(s
168
nr]difxe
rovrtor jjii-
jjyrjtTK'),
middle used
along
with
jucaojucu.'
On
nt'cdaKw(E.
M.
452,35)
and
in-fxvai-aico) cp. p.
190 f. The
same
present
formation is to be seen
in
re-mini-scor,
cornniini-scor.
.
"
9) *7ri-T:i-(TK(t), give
to
drink,
is
only
found in
Hippocr.
and Lucian.
10) ^-i-irpd-f7K(i) rare,
Homer has
nip-viq-jiL
instead
(cp.
above
p.
117),nnrpd(TK"Tai Lys. 18, 20, irLTrpaaic6jj.eva
Plat. Phaedo 69.
11)*Vt-^au-o-/vw, poetical
from Homer
onwards,
where the
i
is
some- times
short
(A.442),
sometimes
long (K. 478,
cp. hymn,
in Merc.
540).
At Hes.
Theog.
655 there is the vai'iant
TrKpaaKeai
for
-ifavaKeai.
The
non-reduplicatedcompounds cta0w"7/cei)', iiTKpavcTKzir, vTiofavfjKtiv(Hdt.
iii.86
ufi i/fj-eptj dicKpuuo-Kovai])
are now
written in Herodotus with
an
w,
and in Aristotle with
an
av,
and are intransitive.
12) fd(TK(i).
In Homer
'i"pa(TKov, (pduKe,
in Attic writers
0a(7Kw as a 281
conj.,(pdtTKOLjxi^ (^daKEiv, (pdaKior,
not so often in the indicative.
II.
-a-Kco, -(TKO-ixai
ADDED TO OoNSOXA"fTAl RoOTS
WHICH HAVE BECOJIE
VOCALIC BX Metathesis.
1) pX(o-a-K(i).KctTal3\u)fff:oy-a tv 466, 7rpoj3\(t)(TK"iJ."y
r 25, "7rpuj3\u)iTK"LV
4" 239, 385, elsewhere
only
in Alexandrine
poets,
wliile the aor.
i^oXov
is used
by poets
of all times.
^) *pi--pptt)-(TKb) a
very
rare
present,
cited
by
Veitch
only
from
Hippocrates,
Plutarch
(Mor.
1059 F.
7r"pt/3t/3pwa-/cor7-a)
and Babrius
(108,
9
pippujffKuiy),
while other
tenses,
and
especially
the
perfect,
are
o
194
THE INCHOATIVE CLASS.
'
ch. x.
far
more common.
"
Hesych.
lias the
Hon-reduplicated by-form avaftpojaKwv
KareaBiwr.
Cp. yvMfTKM
I 3.
3)
Dor. Ot'd-ffK(o
(Pind.
01. ii.
21),
Ionic and Attic
6))'jj(7a.w,
in
common
use from Homer
onwards. The Aeolic QvaitrKw has been discussed
already
on
p.
190 f.
4) Bpoi-tTKU),
in
})oets
from Homer onwards
{dpwrrKovm
E
772),
and
in Herodotus.
The
by-form 66pt'vi.uti was mentioned
on
p.
110.
5)
*Ki-K\ri-(Ti;io tolerablycommon
in both active and middle from
Homer onwards
(x
397, I
569, o 403,
Pindar
fragm.
64 Be.
KiKXi'ifTKoifri).
6) f))i-/TKo-fiai
only
in
Hesych. pijaKonirwi'' Xeyoiiirdyv,
and therefore
from the rt.
fep,cp. prijxae'lprjKci
etc.
There would be some justification
for
putting
yiyvwrrKw, BpnnKw,
fiil-iyi)(TKw
and
TrnrpatTKh)
in this list instead of in I. I have not done
so,
however,
because the consonantal roots
gan,
dhar,
man,
and
j^^a?'
either
do not survive in Greek at
all,or show
no
regular
altei'nation with
the
corresponding
vocalic stems.
HI,
-o-KO), -a-KO-jxat
ADDED TO VoCALIC StEMS
OF TWO OR MOEE SYLLABLES.
1)
aa-(TKEi
"
pAaiTTEi,(pSeipei Hesych.,a
jii'esent
to Homer's aor. daae,
mid.
uaffuTO (cp.avnra
Pind. =
arj;).
2)
lii-aKO-vTO (alsoaUmcnvTo)'
areiravovro, ihoi/junTO Hesych.
(aeVKw
Ls cited
by
Herodian i.
436),a
present
to the Homeric
aor. aecra.
282
3)
ci\Bi}-(ri^M
intrans.
heal, only
in
Hippocrates,
with the variant
oXdifTicu)
(like
Class
IV.).
Other
present-formsare
aX6o-f.iai
and-aXdalrcj
(trans,
cp. p.
185). aXde^ic Hippocr.
4)
aXv-(TKw.
uXv(TKM)'
X
363, 382,
elsewhere
only
in
Apoll.
Rhod.
The forms aXv^w, yXvEn
in Homer and the
tragedians
suggest
that
ctXurrkw has come
from *aXvK-m:o). But
kukoi'
/jLopov
i^aXvovreQ
hymn,
in Bacch.
v. 51,
and the common forms
aXevu),aXio/jiai point
to
a vocalic
stem
a\v,
which must have been
developed
from a\
(cp.0X77,aXc'w/xai)
in
a
similar
way
to that in which
/tpv watch, discussed
on
p.
122, was
developed
from fep,
the Skt.
var,
and IXv from PeX. The
guttural
stem
therefore must
have been made either
independently
of the inchoative
present-form
or
else out of
it,by
the
repression
of the
sigma.
5) ftiw-aKo-j-iai,
only
Aristot. Meteorol. i. 14
ETtpoi
tottol
(iiwaKoi'Tcu,
avaftibjerKETai
Plato
Symp.
203
e,
besides which there is in late
prose
the
active
a j'a/3iw(7"vw.
The
corresponding
aorist-forms
are of
more
frequent
occui'rence.
6) yai'v-(TKo-fjiai
first cited from Themistius.
Cp. ydrv-fxat
above
p.
112.
7)
yei'"iu-(TKw
Plato
Symp.
181
d, Xenoph.
to
get a beard.
By-form
yeveiai^b), yejeiaw.
8) yi)pa-(TKU)
common
to all Greek from Homer onwai'ds
(yZ/pao-vc
P
325,
yrjpnaicei 1]
120),by
the side of
yiipdi'
in the
game sense (Xen. Cyi\
iv.
1, 75). Cp. eyj']pcii' p.
134 and Lobeck
on
Buttm. Ausf Gr. ii. 393.
9) iifjri-ffKu)
from
Euripidesonwards,
in
pretty
much the
same sense
as ";/3a"i", although
Moeris
p.
198 Be.
says
: yjjluaKfir
IttI
rwr
Tj-alhov
rujy
npX"A'^''""'
'//^*""' '^C *""'
'"^ TrXeltTTOv
'
Arfitcoi.
Eurip.
Ale. 1085
rvv
c' t(V
iipacricei KUKor,
Xenoph.
Anab. iv.
6,
1
nXtji'tov viov tqv
apri
CH. X.
PRESENTS IN -i-"TK(0
AND
-s-aKw.
195
10) y\af7Kio.
B 470 Of re vara orofl/xfV Troifxpfiiov yXcKri^ovmi',
cp.
N
104, by-form j'/\off(ca4w
also
epic.
11) t\a-iTKo-fini
I
propitiate
Z
380,
A 472 and
later,always
tran-
sitiA^e. In the
same sense '/AojL"at hymn.
Hom.
21, 5,
Homeric
^'Aao^iot
(cp.
p.
119),
Aesch.
Suppl. 117,
127
iXiofim.
iXi'iKrjai on
the other hand
stands at
0
36.5 in an
intransitive sense.
The
/c
in this form is of the
same
nature as
the
guttural
which
appears
in aXv^w.
12) i^ttdij-akd},
intoxicate,more commonly jitdv-crKo-^ui
in Herodotus
283
and Attic
prose.
13) 17 lOTua Keren {\) only
Orac. Chald. xxviii.
p,
23
according
to
Lobeck Ehem,
249, though according
to
Steph.
Thes.
s.v.
the M.SS. have
"KwraaKETo,
which
may
be an
iterative.
14)
fTtXa-nKMv
\ajXTr(x)v Theognosti Canones,
Cramer Anecd. Oxon.
iv.
pp.
11,
19.
15)
TfpvaKETai
'
voaei,^BivelHesych.
to be
compared
with
-epva-Kero'
ereipero
and
repv
(betterrepv)'afrdei'tc,
Xetttov.
16) 7|Ofa"7ro"r(C"CT0w j^ierajjaWiffdu), ewinTpecpeadd).
1\.
-a-Kco, -a-KO-jJiai
AFFIXED AFTER THE ADDITION OF A ShORT VoweI,.
1)
aXd-i-fTKio a
variant to the
uX6ii-(tim
in
Hippocrates,
mentioned
at III 3.
2) aX-i-aKo-fiai
from Pindar onwards in
poetry
and
prose.
Homer
has
onlyijXwy,aXw^erai
etc. The root
(Princ.
ii,
169)
must be
/uA,
/gX
(oXii-(Ti-e, f'/XXw).
3) cifAfiXaK-i-fTKU),
a
Doric
present
to the
aor.
ijj^ijjXciKo-y (Archil,
fr.
73
Be.^),
which in Pindar and the
tragedians
is
ij/^nrXaKor.d/LiftXriia'fTKoj
is
only
attested
by
two
passages
of the
Pythagorean Theages
in Stobaeus
Floril. i. 67, 68 and one
of the
.Pythagorean
authoress
Phintys
Stob.
Floril. Ixxiv. 61,
and
dj^nrXaicicTKU)
not at all.
4) df-tl3X-i-(TKM
fi'om Plato
onwards, especially
in
compounds.
The
forms from the st.
a7'/3Xw
are more frequent. Eurip.(Androm. 356)
has
also
ilaf.iftXovj.ie:v
in
a
causative sense. Hesychius gives
the
by-form
d^il3Xv'(rKEL' EL.af.tl3Xol. KvpiMQ
Se f.wI
dfJireXov.
Kal
EKTirpwaKEi.
'^odwi.Xrit;
'ArcpoiJ.Ecr]. diiftXwcFKU),
attested
by Suidas,
is cited in
Steph.
Thes. from
Galen and other late
prose
writers.
Perhaps d/jf^Xv-Q or a by-form
*d/^ftXo (Princ.
i.
406,
ii.
396)
is the word which furnished the stem for
the verb.
5)
drciX-i-cTKu)from Pindar onwards in
poetry
and
prose by
the side
of orciXow
(e.g.
araXovv C. I. A. I.
55, 3).
6) *airci(j)-i-(TK(t) only
X
217,
lE.mrcKpiaKuJi'
Hes. Th. 537
(v.
1. eSaira-
rioKiov).
The aorist-forms
occur pretty
often in
poets.
7) *upap-i-(TKio only " 23
civtoq
^'
aju'/)t
Tro^Emri loTg
apapiaiCE
iriciXa,
and in imitation of this
passage
Theocr.
25,
103.
8) dp-E-(7Kio,
from Herodotus onwards in
poetry
and
prose ;
Homer 284
has
only
the aorist-forms in
a
somewhat different
meaning.
9)
(ETT^-aVp-l-fTKiO. TOV
^E
TE
TToXXol
E7raVpi(7KOVT (h'dpMTTOl
N 733. Thc
active
occurs in
Theogn.
Ill in
a
causative sense
ol F
dyadol to
i^iiyinrov
ETravpiatcavai iradot'TEc-,
and thus
Bergk'sscruples
about this
passage
fall
to the
ground. By-form liravpiu)
Hes.
0pp.
419.
o 2
19G THE
INCHOATIVE CLASS.
ch. x.
10)
{ek:)-yafx-i-(TKU}
IST.
T.,a by-form
of
e/.y"/;u'^w.
11) ytyu)r-i-(TKw
iu the
tragedians
and
Thucydides,so
that it is
a
posthumous present
to the Homeric
perf.
ytywi'E,
phipf.iytywvti. By-
form yiyu)viw.^
12) evp-i-(TK(o.
Of the
present-forms,
wliich
occur everywhere
from
Pindar onwards, evpim^uj only occurs
in
Homer,
and that but
once
(r158),
while
evpe
is of
frequentoccurrence.
13) Kop-i-anii),
a
late
present
to
iKopeaa,
iKopiafraro
etc.,
attested
by
passages
from Nicander
e.g.
Alexiph.
41.5.
Cp. Kopivw^i,
Kope(TK(oy
seems
also to have been used in the
sense
of
iE,vftpi'Cu)v (Hesych. s. v.
Kopiiov).
In
HippocratesTrepl.aSivjoi'
p.
271,
31 of the Geneva edition
there is
KopiaKoyruiTroWrjc
vyparruiq
in the sense of ahundant.
14) Kv-i-dKio, a
by
-form of
/.uw,
Kviu) attested from
Hippocrates.
The
middle
occurs
in Herodotus
{ii.93)
and Plato.*
15) 6(t"\-l-(TK(i), only
mentioned
by
Suidas
as an alternative for the
Attic
6(pXi(Ti"ai'(ij.
16) pv-'i-(jKo-jxai, only
found in Heliodorus and Eustathius in the
sense
of
pew.
IpviaKETO'
eppeev, tx^'^'o
Hesych.
17) (rrep-i-cTKio,
Soph.
0. C. 376
uTvofTrepiaKEi,
Tliuc. ii.
43,
the middle
i-ather more common
with the older Attic
wiiters,by
the side of
aripo-
18)
TeXicrKoj
complete, only
Nicander fr.
74, 10
reXidKwv,
cp.
0.
Sclmeider Nicandrea
p.
96,
while others write Te\i(TKu)v. The form with
285 an t
is
given by Hesych. reXitTKOfXEvoc' irXrjpoviJ.eroQ, TeXeinv^evog.
It
does not occur before the Christian
period,though
Herodian i. 436
gives
the active.
18
b) rif.(TKOjxivoL
C. I.
3538,
in
a metrical oracle 12
(cp.
Nauck
Melanges
iv.
36).
19) yXotc-E-rjKU), only
in
Hesych.
in the
glossx^oicerrKovnai
"
yarjrpi-
CovfTcu
i.e.
filling
the
belly,fattening,
so that it is
a by-form
to
x^oiccti'*
ZuXKeadai
kul rpvcpdv,
the
perfect
to which is
Ke-)^Xoide
'
cuXk-ito.
20) xP'?"''-''''"-""-/^"'j only
Hdt. iii.17:
xP'?"""''^'''0''''ai
(M.SS. xpri'iaKovTo)
rjJvcctTi, by-form
to
'x^paojxui
in
an iterative sense.
V.
-crna, -a-KO-pai
ADDED IMMEDIATELY TO
OONSONANTAL RoOTS.
1) *^t-^n-(rvw,
which
only belongs
here
on
the
assumption
that the rt.
dax (probably
from
Suk,
and so=Zd. dakh-sh
teach,
Lat. die in
disco,
di-dic-i,
doc in
doc-eo)
is at the bottom of the whole
verb,
and conse- quently
that the
present-form
which
was common
to all Greek from
Homer onwards
came
from
*ci-ca-)^-(jKio
or *ot-^o/v-o-/vw and not
directly
from the rt. la
{U-ca-er,k-lai)-}'). Cp.
Princ. i.
284,
Pick i.^611. We
met with
a
corresponding
fluctuation between
a vocalic root and
one
which had been
expanded by a
guttural
in the
case,
of uXvctkco
(iii. 4)
and
iXdffKOfiai (iii. 11).
The fact that forms like
eBiba^e, BeSilayfiai
are as
old
'
Nauck discusses this verb in
detail,Meldhr/es
iv. 41 ff. He denies the ex-
isterce of
a perfect
ytyoiva,
and
prefers to call
-yeycoj/e
an aorist. But the
"
does
not s N^t this view
(cp.
Ch. XIII.
ii.).
*
h ^Xf'^'^w is
only mentioned
by
Herodian i. 436. The
alijhabcticalarrange- ment
a the
place
is
faulty,
and
so
it is
quite possible
that this form has usurped
the
place of another.
CH. X. PKESENTS IN WHICH THE -(TK IS TEANSFORMED. 197
as
Homer
goes
to
prove
that
lila^
was
in
quiteearly
times
recognised
as
the stem.
2) *hEi-Zi-(JKO-i.Uii OV C(.-li-(JKO-i.iai
y
41
lEilirTKofxtvoc (o
150 ceSktko-
/.leroc)
2e
izpoci^vht, a
121 lindi
xpvariu)
^eL^icTKero
(cp.
v 197).
The
pre- cisely
identical iise of hn^ai'otjt'rn and
ceiKrvfierog
(cp.above,
p. 183)
undoubtedly
entitles us to refer the word to the rt. cik
(deiKivfii).
3) *e.-'t:-(fKio,
"i-(TKio
{'iffKwi', 'i(Ti.-ov(Ta) a
causative
present
to
tot^-o,
'ikeXoc,
almost confined to Homer
(impf.
I'iktkoj', uai^or),
so
that the rt. is
clearly
l^:
"
On the
impf.
'irrKEhe said
(r203,
x
31)
from the rt.
aEK {atTr)
the
reader
may
be referred to Princ. ii. 68.
4)
*i-d-(TK-EH''
ayiiv
Hesych.
which Lobeck Ehem. 249 and M.
Schmidt found
obscure,
but which
may
probably
be
very
simplyexplained
as an
inchoative
present
from the rt.
ay.
It stands then for
l-ay-rrKw. 286
We met with I as a reduplication
of
a
in l-av-io.
Cp.
Princ. i. 484.
5)
K\w-(TKb).
Only
KXwaKwv etvikXioOmv
Hesych., so
that it is for
K\u)d-(TKw. On its
origincp. p.
157.
6) TTU'ir-o-fcw,
a denominative,apparently,
from
-kivvto-q,
since it
means
just
'
to make
wise,prudent.'
So Aesch. Pers. 830
irpoQ
tuvt EKtlvoy
Evfpoveiv
KEj^pj^fXEvov
iTLvv(TKET EvXoyoKTi vovQETr}p.n(TLv,
and the
aor. occurs,
at !Si 249
i]^ri
yap jue
/cot
aXXo
te))
ETrirvaaEv
^(pETfxr]. Cp.
Simon. C. fr.
12 Be.3
,,",.,
7)
Ti-Tv-aKO-fxai.
r 80 lu'iah' te
tltvitkoixei'oi
XuEaffi
t EJjaXXoi',
titv-
I7KET0
e
41,
N
23,
also used in the sense
of
TEvx^it'.
The active is used
by
late
poets
in the latter
sense.
Other inchoative forms from
an
equivalent
of this stem are aKodvaKEiv
(M.S.uirobvKEii')' uiroTvy\avEiy,
EvQvaKEi-
EVTvyxavEi,
with a
remarkable
shifting
of the
aspiration,
which
was lost before the
rr^-,
to the
initial,
TErvaiMr-
in"pavii^wr,
tetvctketo'
KaTE(TKEvut,ETo,
all iu
Hesych.
8)
xn-o-^'w
found from Solon onwards
(fr.13,
36
Be.^),apjmrently
for
Xaj-(7Kw, cp. x"n'w,
aor.
'i-xav-o-f, pf.KExw-'^h
while the Lat. hi-sco shows
.
no nasal.
diu(pl(7K0}'rEc
"
ii'Cvi"i.iEvoL
(cp.ETraiJL(pi(TKw),
which
might
at first
sight
be
taken for
an
inchoative of the rt.
he,
so strongly
resembles the form
df.nritT\it" (more commonly dj^nrifTxi'^onaL)
that we
may
certainly
follow
Steph.
Thes. in
regarding
it as merely
a by-form
of the latter.
dn(]"itTKu):
*di.i(piaxM : '.(T6jdi]Ti : ^'(7u)0t]6i.
We have thus in this form
a
second
instance of the
progressive
dissimilation in the case
of
neighbouring
aspii'ated syllables.
VI. A TRANSFOEMED -(TKCO.
1) ^v-iryii)-
uTTolvu)
Hesych.
The
y,
as
in
fxiayu),
has arisen from
/;. "
Cp.
3iSvo-/cw
above,
p.
193,
and
niayd).
2)
Ep-x"-fiai
common to all Greek from Homer onwards
(N 256). Cp.
Princ. ii. 366.
3)
fxi-irytj
used
extensively
from Homer onwards both in the active
and the middle. The Lat. mis-c-eo shows most
clearly
that the
y
has
been weakened from
k.
This is confirmed
by
the Skt. mik-sh,
mi-mik-sh
(Princ.
i.
417),
from which it
might
almost be inferred that the course
of the
expansion
was as
follows
:
mik
(Skt.mig-rd-smixed),
mik-s
(Skt.
287
mik-sh),
mik-sk
(Lat.misc-eo).
A
glance
at
cvayw
is
enough
to teach
us
that we ought
not to
explain
the
y
of
jti/uyw
in the
way
taken
by Ahrens,
198 THE INCHOATIVE
CLASS. cii. x.
who at Formenl.
p.
123
says
tbat
'
the remarkable
y
has been
brought
about
by
the transformation of the k.' It would
hardly
be
possible
to find
an
aiialogy for such a softening
influence. It
may
even
be asked whether the
original
ksk had not
already
been softened to sk before the
softening
of the
K
between vowels in forms like
kf-iiy^r, jtuyac
etc.,
so
that from the
primary
*mik-skd-)iii
would have come even
in (Ireek
a *i.ii/rKio.
It wovdd
not
in itself be
improbable
that the
softening
of the
simple
Z;to
y
in forms
like
kj-uyriv
should
by
the force of
analogy
have had
something
to do with
the
softening
of the sk. Joh. Schmidt however
(Vocal,
i.
123)
makes the
very
plausibleconjecture
that the well-attested natural
length
of the
vowel in
fxirryu), filial, fi'iKTo
is due to the after-efiects of a nasal,so
that
we
should have to assume a primaiy
form
/.tiyy-rr;cw,
in which the first
y
would have arisen from the
syllablew
in
/.ilyvviii.
For the softened
Svayu)
too there occurs a
nasal formation in ovrw
(cp.
above,
p.
178).
So
it
may
be that its
j^rimary
form was *2v)-o-/cw,
and that the nasal was in
both cases
the real source of the
softening.
4)
7ra-(7X'^
common to all Greek
[aXyeaTvaa^ei
Y
297). Cp.
Princ.
ii. 365
f.,
where
objection
is taken to the
wide-spreadassumption
that the loss of
a ti is,the
cause
of the
aspiration.
The
comparison
of
the Lat.
j9"-^i-o-r
and of
Tviv-o-fiai, ttojo-c pointsconclusively
to the
assumption
that the
root-syllable
was 7ra
(ajiparently
for
mrrt, cp.
aKa-vi-Q
and Princ. ii.
356). t-ira-8u-r,
and iri-Tror-du are expanded by
a
d. The
Sicilian
perfectiriwoaxd(Ahrens,
Dor.
351)
has been formed in
striking
analogy
to the
present.
The different view of this verb taken
by
Joh,
Schmidt
(Voc.
i.
93)
fails to comance me. Synonymic
differences such
as have arisen not
only
between
Triytrrdat, ttovoq
on one
side and
7rncr)("U',
TraBe.~iy
on
the
other,
but also between TtudoQ
and the
undoubtedly
related
TTEi'doQ(mourning)ought
not to induce us to
separate
the stems ttet
and
TTud. In
TTEt'-i-x-po-Q
(y 348),
irer-r^-c,
TTEv-it] (i,157)
we
have a
modifica- tion
of
meaning
in the case of
ney precisely
similar to that which has
prevailed
in Tradeh' and
Tracrxeii'.
Still less am
I inclined to
separate
the Lat.
j^:)ft-"i-o-r)
which in the wide ramifications of its
meaning
is
completelyequivalent
to
Trudtir,
and
-i)-fia(TD/ytta-u 7rc((T)(ctr)
from the
form of the stem which ends in B.
j^'^'^-i'^-o-'*' comes
from the rt.
pa,
as
2)o-ti-or
from
jyo (cp.fa-te-o-r).
Besides these I have at Princ. ii. 365 f. tried to make
good
the
assertion that the
following
8
verbs,
whose stem ends in
x
even
outside
the
presenttense,
owe
this consonant to a softening
from (tk.
yXiXOj-ini
in
Herodotus, Aristophanes,
and Demosthenes.
Forms
belonging
to other stems than the
present
ai'e
of
quite
isolated occm--
rence, e.g.
iyXi'ia/irii'
Plato Com. ii. 695 Mein.
yXl/rxpo-g(Princ.
i.
458)
pex'haps
contains the sibilant which we assume to have existed before
x,
while
yXt-c",y\oi-6-g
seem to
give
the root.
tiixonai,
common
to all Greek from Homer
onwards, accompanied by
a
plentiful
noun-foi'mation
:
evx'),ei'X'^^*'' ti'X*"""'''^^"'
'^^^ forms like
"vEoi.i(n (Soph.),evKTo (above,p.
131),riviaro(Pind.Aesch.).
The Skt.
vdiiJc/ta-ti he
wishes,
desires
(forvan-ska-ti) thoroughlycorresponds
to
the
meaning wish, as
does vdnKhd wish to
ti/x"'/
and the O.H.G. tomisc.
Both words
ai'S
derived in the Pet. Diet, from
va7i
wish for.^ "v=va
*
Roth
(ZtseJir.
xix.
220)
however connects the stem
eux
with the
Skt.]vugk-df,
the
offering,
presentingone, making t-affh
the rt. So too Fick' i. 765.
CH. X.
PEESENTS IN WHICH THE -c/c IS TEA^^SFOK:\IED. 199
may
be
plainly
seen in
tvfiv-g
from *varn,-s
(Skt.
uru-s Princ. i.
431),
and ia
"vj't-c
bereft:=Skt.
vdnjd,
iind
(Bugge
Stud, iv.
328).
}'"IX^'"
Homeric
(^yr]-)(ifif.iaL
e 375),
also
viiioj-iui
s
364.
Tl.u'lX"^ 4
226
t(Tni])(oy by
the side of
cr^au)
in Hdt. and
Aristoph.,
r(.6-(T^riK-ro-Q
N
342, ciaafxrixPtiQ Ai'istoph.
GTEv-u-yjio
n 391 and elsewhere
by
the side of (rrive K 16. Here
there
are no
forms with
a
'i. The iterative
a-eraxECTKE
T 132 is no
objection
to the view that
x
stands for
an
earlier
(tk,
as
is shown
by
Tpvx("J- Tpv^ofif-roQ
a 288,
cp, Tipv-trKto
above,
p.
195. Still as
early
as
p
387 there is
-pvt,u).
"
"'l^iiX^o by
the side of
\//aw,post-Homeric, ^j)Soph.
Tr. 678
by
the
side of
'i\p7]KTai
ib. 698.
\lvX't" ui'Eipvxot'
N
84, \l/vu.aua
Y
440; ^vxi'i, '^^^XP^^^ '4^^X'"s
^1^*^ show
the
x"
and it is
only fv-adoj
and the other forms
put
with it at Princ. ii.
117 which
are to be refeiTcd to a
vocalic stem.
If this
conjecture
is correct there is no
other
explanation
left for the
ogQ
t,except
that
either,as "we
assumed in the case
of
oAii^w,t\"]Kri(Ti, cica^w,
they
are to be referred to stems which have been
expanded by
k; or,
and
this
seems to me the
simplerview,
that the
E
made its
way
into the
futiu-e and aorist on the
analogy
of e-Xe^a-o
by
the side of
Xe'xoc,kXiyt,u}
by
the side of
iXiyxii^,
i^i^aro
by
the side of
cixn^ui
etc.
.
The
sum total then of the inchoative verbs in Greek is made
up
as
foUows
:
in the first division there are 13,
in the second
6,
in the third
16,
ia the fourth
21,
in the fifth
8,
iu the sixth
12,
that would be ia all
76. Since however
repvaKtj
in iii.
was originally
identical with
-pvx"^
in
vi,
and
aXdijaKU)(iii. 3)
with aXOiaKU)
(iv.1)
we must subtract two
from this
number,
and this
gives
us a total of 74, not
qixite
half the
number,
that
is,
of the verbs of the nasal class. It must be remarked
moreover that
very many
of these
presents
do not occur
till
late,
and
that not a few, though given
in
oiir
grammars
as
the
regularforms, are
of
quite
isolated
occiUTence. This is
especially
the case with
CEoiff/co/xat
(i.4),CicvfjKio
(i.6),
6pa(7K"i) (i.7),
tcaT-e-KitcXaarKe
(i.7b),
"nrirrKw
(i.9),
"uLTvpcKTKU) (i.10),j3XioaK(o (11. 1),/5t/3pw(T(vW (11. 2),pijcrKOfiaL (ii.8),
darjKta
(iii. 1),
difTKovTO
(iii.2),ciXdtjaKu)
(iii, 3),
dXvcrKoj
(iii, 4),
yaivcjKOfxai
(iii. 6),i]Xd(7K(i) (iii. 10),itu)tu(tk"tui (iii. 13),
rraXcKrKU)
(iii. 14),repvcTKU)
(iii. 15),rpuj-daKuj (iii, 16),-lEtrKOfxtvoi (iii. 18b),a.jj.liXuKiiTKw (iv,3),
UTra(}ti(TKU)
(iv,6),clpapiffKw (iv.7),kKya^iatcii) (iv.10),KopidKw (iv.13),
pviaKofiai (iv.16),
reXiaKU)
(iv.18),x^oiciaKU)(iv.19),xp'?''''''"^""'
(iv.20),
id(TK(i)
(v.4),
/vXwfffcw
(v,5), cvfxyio (vi,1).
After the subtraction of
these 32 rare forms there remain about 40 verbs in which this
present-
formation
was
actually
in constant
use.
Finally,
as
regards
the
meaning
of this
present-expansion,
if it had
not been for the
abundantly
attested inchoative
meaning
in Latin verbs
like
adolescere,reviviscere, j^uhescere,
senescere,
clarescere
etc,
it would
perhapshardly
have occiu-red to
anyone
to ascribe even partially
the
ex- pression
of the
same notion to the Greek verbs of like formation. As
a
fact out of the 74
present-forms of this class
only 5,
i.e. the Hero-
dotean
diafwntcEii' {illucescere), u.vafiio)(TKOf.uu (revivisco), yEVEidaKcj,
yi]pd(TKoj (senesco), }]pd(TK(s)
(puhesco)
have an unmistakably
inchoative
290
meaning.
When
once awake to this fact we
shall
perhaps
go
on to
admit that the action also in
yiyrwo-^-w (gnosco),
/xi/ji'ija^Kw{reminiscor)^
200 THE INCHOATIVE CLASS.
ch. x.
cicaaKui, TiTvtjKOfxat,
and
possibly
iu
ftaaKU),
Kv'iffKO) and
KiicK^itTKw
is
repre- sented
as
gi-adually arriving
at
completion.
A number of these verbs
have in the
pi-esent
stem,
and that
partly
in contrast to the rest of the
verb,
a
decidedly
causative
meaning.
This is
specially
the
case with
tTTiftatTKU), Be^ifTKOfxai
make
frightened, TrnrirrKOJ, fxeHvcrKO), ek-yftfilrrKw, h'rrKuj,
irivimKu).
ui'dj^jiCjirKOfxai
is used sometimes in
a
simplyinchoative,
some- times
in a causative sense. That the inchoative meaning veered straight
round to the causative we are
hardly
entitled to assume. Jt was rather
that the
operation expressedby
some of these verbs Avas from the first
a
gi-adual operation.
Gradual
upspringing
and
gradualopei-ation
met in
the same
form,
and this is
by
no means the
only
case where one and
the same form is made the vehicle for an intransitive and a causative
meaning.
Later on
usage,
as it often did also in the case of intran- sitive
inchoative
forms,
allowed the notion of
gi-adualness to fall
away,
and
so
nothing
liut the causative
meaning
was left. For
ftficKfiv
e.g.
we
supjjose
the
pi-imarymeaning
to have been
'
to
get gradually
into
motion/
and td this
was added the causative
'
to set
gradually
in
motion,'
and hence for the
compound
with Itci
'
to
bring gradually
neai-er to
something.'
The distinction between that which comes about
and that which is
brought
about
formed,
to
beginwith,
no moie of a
special expression
here
than,
say,
in
ari'i-uio, e-ffTrj-aa, 'ij^i]-cru,
as con- trasted
with
e-a-ri-y, 'i-jorf-r,
or in verbs like tKavvuv,
uyeiv.
After
this contrast between
f-KiftarrKw
and
knif^al I'w, "7rt/5"7"'""
etc. had been once
developed,
the
specialexpression
of
gi-adualness
which had
really
been
the
]"i-imary meaning
of the
form,
fell
quite
into
abeyance,
and
eTriftarxKU)
in this
way
came to be a
pm-ely
causative verb. Thus viewed these
very
caiisativesare also witnesses to a
period
in which the
o-k was a
present-expansion
with
a definite
meaning.
The
vulgar
dialect of
Rome,
as Lowe
(Prodromus
corp.
glossar.362) pointsout,
shows the same
change
of
meaning
in
e.g. ferascit
ferum
facit,
pravescere depravare.
In the
case
of the
greatmajority
of the verbs of this class it must be
admitted,
it is
true,
that all recollection of this
early
state of
tilings
had
as
entu'ely disapjieared
as in the case of the Latin yevha
nancisci, j)acisci,
2" I
ulcisci, 2'"'"'oficisci,
2}ciscere. Among
the Sanskrit forms which we re- cognised
above as
belonging
hei-e in
form,
at least two haA'^e an
unmistakably
inchoative
meaning,
i.e.uMItd-ti illucescitand mnrliha-ti
it
curdles,
grows
firm,
stifi: We
may
see in this
a remarkable trace of
an inchoative
meaning
in the
syllable
ska
[Uha),
a
meaning originally
existing, we
may assume,
in the Indian
languages
as well.
CH. XI. THE I-CLASS.
201
CHAPTER XL
TRE I. CLASS.
There is
probably no discovery
made
by Comparative Pliilologjr
which has contributed so mucli towards
a
clear
understanding
of
the structure of the Greek verb as the
discovery
of the i-class.
Biittmann, who
so
often showed
a deeper insight
than his contem- poraries,
got
no
further than the
pei-ception, expressed
imder the head of
'double themes
'
(Ausf.
Gr. i.^
367)
Math reference to
presents
like
(pah'w,jSaWcj,
Tcitrffo),
(fpa^io,
that
'
in
a
large
number of verbs the stem
of the word
'
appears
'in the
present
in
a longer,
fuller
form,
produced
sometimes
by a long
vowel or
dij^lithong,
sometimes
by
the addition
or
the variation of consonants.' Least of all
was
this
a satisfactory account
of the
presents
in
-/row
and
-^w, as in fact the
'
variation of the
con- sonants
'
was left
quiteiucompi-ehensible.
It
was not for a moment
suspected
that it
might
be
j^ossible
to
explain
the four verbs selected
above
as
examples,
and those like
them, on a singleprinciple,
not'uith-
standing
that it would have been
possible
to ai-rive at the ti'uth
merely
from
a
close examination of Latin verbs in
-to
in connexion with the
alterations manifest in the
comparatives
in
-uor,
without
any
aid from
Sanskrit.
Bopp Vgl.
Gr. i.- 211
acknowledges
that it
was the
analysis
of the Greek
comparatives
which first led him to discern the connexion
between Greek verbs in
-o-aw
and -XAw and the Sanskrit verbs of the 292
foiTrth class
(1stsing,-jd-mi),
and this is
why,
in
my
'
Tempora
und
Modi,'
I devoted such
a
considerable
space,
" and the condition of the
science at the time made this
quite
necessary
" to the
parallelism
between
the foi-mation of the
comparative
and that of the
present.
Since that time the
analogies
from Greek have
by Bopp himself,
by
Schleicher and others, been
placed
in
so
clear a
light
that
no
doubt
on
the main
points
is
any
longer possible.
Controversies exist
only on a
few side
questions
and
single])oints,
and
on
the
origin
of the v.hole class.
In
respect
to these
questions
I will deal
only
with such
ground as has
not been
already
covered
by me in
my
'
Principles
of Greek
Etymology.'
Our main task here is to demonstrate the
originalunity
of the whole
mass of the
present-formations,
apparently
so diverse,
which
belong to
this class. Such
a result
can be Avelcomed even
by
one
who stillfeels
some doubts
as to the
origin
of the whole
phenomenon.
It is
a settled fact that the
primitive
Indo-Germanic
language
distin- guished
a large
number of
present-stems
from the verb-stem
by atlixing
the
syllable ja.
As
/
and i
are
constantlyinterchanged
before
vowels,
we
may expect
at
starting
to find ia
as
well as ja
in the various indi- vidual
languages,
and to find both forms of this one
element
represented
by
such
substitutes
as
the
phonetic
laws of the
singielanguages
woidd
lead
us to
expect, ja
can
be
clearlyseen in 4
families,
in
Sanskrit,
where
202 THE I-CLASS.
CH. XI.
the class of verbs characterLsed
by ja
is
given as
the
4th,
in
Zend,
in
Slavonic,
and in Gothic
:
Skt.
kuji pres.
kup-jd-tni
I become
agitated.
Zd.
ve7-ez
"
verezryd-mi
I do.
Oli.-Sl.
zna
"
zna-jq
I laiow.
Goth,
haf
"
haf-ju
I heave.
ia
appears
in the Latin verbs of the so-called third
conjugation
in -io
:
fun fug-io.
In Lithuanian we
have the
same
interchange
between
^a
and
^"
which
we
shall
presently
see to have taken
place
in Greek. The ia
occurs
in
293
rt. ar
pres.
ar-ih I
plough,
the
ja
both in derivative vei-bs
e.g.
laido-ju
I
bury,
and in
primary
verbs with the
phoneticchange
of
j
to
z,
which is
pronounced
like the
French
J
:
rt. sed
pres,
si'd-"u I sit.
We
are accordingly
entitled to
expect
to find the forms in
-jd-tni
represented
in Greek sometimes
by a
vocalic
-no,
or perhaps (but
of that
later)
-fw,
sometimes
by
the old
-jio
and all the transformations to which
such
a syllable
would
by
Greek
phonetic
laws have been liable. We
derive the most material assistance here from the
analogy
of the
com- parative,
the suffix of which is to be refei'i'ed to the
primary
form
-jans.
Compare :
It is
only
for the
change
from
cj
to
;
which
we have to
assume
for
ei^oi.iai,
'ii^b)
that we
have
no analogy
among
the
comparatives,though
this lack is
fullycompensated
for
by parallels
in other directions
e.g.
apyvpo-irti^u, compared
with the feminine of the Lat.
aac-j^ediu-s (Princ.
i.
161),
Lesb.
^a=ordinary
Greek bid.
The Sanskrit 4th class of verbs is
one
of
great
extent.
According
to
Bopp
it contains 130
verbs,
to which have to be added
a
few
roots in
d,
which are
classed
by
the Indian
grammarians as
roots in
e
and
o.
Boehtlingk
in
a
note to his Sanskritchi'estomathie
p.
279
was
the fii-stto
bring
this last fact to
light. Consequentlye.g.
the rt. d/id
suckle,
^Jres.
dha-jd-iui,
rt.
fa
sharpen,pres.
^-jd-mibelong
to
this class. This makes
the total
a
still
largerone.
The Skt.
med-jd-mi,
from the rt. viid
get
fat,
is the
one solitary
instance in that
language
of intensification of the
'
On the
newly found Attic form oKelCuv
(C.
I. A. 1
B,
33
etc.)
of. Caiier SttxL
viii. 254.
en. XI.
EXTENT AND ANTIQUITY OF THE CLASS. 203
root- vower combined with the achUtion of the
syllable J",as
in the Latin
294
mejo
for
meig-io
from the rt. ini(i,
and in the Gk.
TrXiirjrju)
rt,
TrXay.
In Zend there
are, according
to
Justi,
not so
very many
of these verbs
to be fomid. From Old-Persian
Spiegel(Mtpers.
Keiliuschr.
p. 166)
knows of
only a single
instance. In Latin there are
the
following
15
verbs which
belong directly
here
:
cccp-io, ciqj-io, fac-io,fod-lo,fug-io,
yrad-io-r, jac-io,lac-io,moi'-io-r,quat-io,j^ar-io, jJO'i-io-r, rap-io,sa2}-io,
spec-io.
But thei-e
are some more to be added
;
for,as
Struve
(lib.
d. lat.
Declination und
Conjugation
p.
199)
has well
shown,
the
boundary
line
between these verbs of the so-called 3rd
conjugation
and those of the
4th
which,
like
Jar c-io,Julc-io, or-io-r,sal-io,are saddled with
an
i
only
in the
present-stem,
is not
very
clearly
drawn. In the
very
earliest
Latin there
appear
forms like
parire^parere,
moriri=7nori, cuplre,
desipire
and the like. It was only
in the coiu-se
of time that the fasliion
became established of
regularlyexpelling
the i of the stem in certaia
verbs before
a
short
er,
and
keeping
it
everywhere
in the form of a con-
ti'action in others. The difference between the two sets of verbs is not
enough
to constitute
a
difference of
conjugation;
we
ought
rather to
place
all verbs whose i is movable
(as
contrasted with that of
audio,
audtvl
etc.)
in this class. And even in
cases
where the i
goes
right
through
all
foi-ms,
e.g.
in
mug-io,
we are no more
excluded from the
sup- position
that it
may
in the
beginning
have been a present-expansion,
than
we are in the case of the nasal of
jungo
and other formations of
that class. The class-characteristic is not so
evident at fii'st
sight
in
djo,
mejo,
wliich
no one
who looks at
rad-jor=mag-iorcan
doubt to have
originated
in
ag-io,meig-io.
Gothic has
only
8 verbs in wliicli the
syEableja
characterises the
present-stem as such
: hld-janheg,/rath-janunderstand, haf-janheave,
lilah-jan laugh,rath-jancoimt, skath-jan injure,skap-jan shape,make,
iind
vahs-janwax, grow
(Leo Meyer
Goth.
Sprache
p.
350).
Here as in
so
many
other
cases Greek
sui-passes
most of the other
languages
in the
abundance of the forms
preserved,though
all kinds of transformations
have
so
modified the
original
formation that it is almost
unchstinguish-
able.
The
cases
in which the formative
syllableja can be shown to have
been affixed to the
same stem in more
than one
Indo-Germauic
family
of
languagesare
the
follo'wdng
20
:
sal-io. 295
sjnr-iii (inf.spir-ti
Princ. i.
358).
d-jd-mi(cut).
dir-iu
(flay).
sM-zu.
sub-fio.
svid-jd-mi.
haf-ja.
cup-io.
"
qloc-io.
Uuk-iu
(Princ.
i.
196).
main-ye-te
(he
thinks)
(cp.
the Gk.
fialverai.
Princ. i.
387).
mel-jq(Itrrind).
ud-zu
(smell).
296
CH. XI.
Besides these there are a
few
more instances,some of wliich
ai-e
doubtful,
while others
are of an
exceptional
character. The Gk.
trfuWw,
for
instance,
and the Lat.
folio can only
be
compared
on
the
assump- tion
that
Ij
sometimes turns to II in Latin also.
nv'Ccivgi^oan
can be
compared
Avith
mug-i-re
if the
g
of the latter is not a weakened k
as
might
be inferred from
ixvKao-f.Lai.
Undoubtedly
the Lat. mor-io-r is
to be
compared
with the Skt.
mri-jd-te
he dies:=Zd.
{fra)-mair-yei-te
and the Old-Pers,
a-mar-iya-td
he died
(Joh.
Schmidt Voc.
244).
But
the
syllable ja
has in the Sanskrit word the force of the mark of the
passive
voice,
/3aiVw,as we
remarked
on
p.
185,
is of the
same
forma- tion
as
the Lat.
ven-io,
but in
Latin, as
in Oscan and TJmbrian
(.3rd
sing.
flit.
ex. hen-ust)
the nasal sticks fast to the verb-stem all
tlu'ough,
while in the Greek verb it
appears
only
in the
present.
From
a
Greek
point
of view then
ftuirio
is
one
of the verbs in which the nasal class and
the i-class
are imited,
but ven-io
belongs exclusively
to the i-class. In
the cases of
rpelu)by
the side of
rpew,
and
7!-auo=2Xiv-io conjectural
com- parisons
will be
given
below.
Having
thus set the
antiquity
of this class of verbs in the
rightlight
we have now to consider what
was
the
origin
of the
syllable JV^
On
this
point
there
are
px'actically only
two views to choose from. Either
the
syllable-ja
is
just as
much
a
noun-sufEx
as, according
to the view
argued
out on
pp.
108 f.and
164, are the
syllables -na, -nu,
and
-ta,
which
constitute the marks of the nasal class and the
^class,or else we
have to
deal with
quite
another sort of
formation,
i.e.
a compound ;
in other
words,
that
is,
the
syllable ja
is of verbal
origin
and identical with the
verbal
rootJ",
Skt.
^VT.
Each of these two views has redoubtable
names
on
its side. Schleicher avows
the former
(Comp,^753),
and the latter
was
first stated
by Bo}"p(Ygl.
Gr. ii.-
357),
and
adopted,among
others,
by Benfey
and Max Miiller. I have
myselfrepeatedly(especial!}^
in
my
Erlauterungen^103,
in
my
'
Zur
Chronologie
'
^
57,
and in the Intro- duction
to this book
p.
12)
declared for the second of these \aews.2
On the side of the former -view
may
be
urged
the
analogy
of the
above-mentioned suffixes. The suffix
-ja
moreover
is of
very
frequent
occiu-rence
in verbal
adjectives,
it is used in Sanskrit in the formation of
gcrundi"valadjectives
like
jag-ja-s(rt,jaij)
venerandus=Gk,
ciy-to-c,
though no
definitely
established
meaning
was uniformly
attached to it.
For instance
/"r"^-;"-s
from the rt.
pale
cook means ripening,
and the
cor- responding
Zend form likeAvise.
Emphasis might
even be laid on
the
fact that iai Sanskrit the suffixes
an
and
Jrt
are foimd imited in the later
fuller
gerundive
termination
-an-ja, -an-lja,
and that in the verb likewise
^
Since the above was written an attempt
has been made in
Bezzenberger's
lieiirage
i. 120 if.
by
Fick and Fiihrer, to show that the
'
so-called
ja-suffix
'
was
from the first
an element inherent in the verb. I confess I
see no reason
for this
view, and it
seems to me that no
proper regard
has been
paid,
in
making
the
lists
there
given,
to the
period
at which the several words occur.
I fail to see
that,
e.g.
the
altogether
late
finX'^a, hoarseness, can
be of
any
i;se at all in ex- plaining
/S^o-fftu or rice
vei'sa.
CH. XI.
OKIGIN OF THE
ja.
205
both elements occiu* not seldom in
conjimction,
whence
comes
e.g.
the
Skt.
bhur-an-jd-mi
I
start,
and the Gk.
vf-airu)
i.e.
vf-av-juj
from the rt.
vij"=:the
Skt.
va]) (cp.
above
pp.
177, 185). Single
instances in wliich to
297
actuallyoccurringadjectives
in
-ja
we can find actual
present-stemscor- responding
in sound and
meaning
seem not to be
altogetherwanting.
For instance in Justi's Zendworterbuch the
adj.
verez-ya
(rt.
varez=Gk.
fspy)meaning effectual,
and the
pres.
verez-yd-mi
I
do,
i.e.I
am effectual,
occur
side
by
side.
Elsewhere,
it is
ti'ue,
the
meaning
of the verb does
not
square
so
well with that of the
adjective.
For
instance,a^ofxaL=
ay-jo-f.iai
I dread does not fit in with either
u-y-w-g
or jny-ja-s, nor
the
passive
or
intransitive
meaning
of the Skt.
mri-jd-te
he dies and the Lat.
onor-i-tur with the Zend
mair-ya destructive,deadly,
and there is
no
very
close connexion in
meaning
between
TrAay-to-c
knocked out of
shape,
and hence
crooked,
and
TrXi'irratir
i.e.
TrXrjK-jeir.
It must be
admitted that in the
case even
of those
present-stem
formations which
we
have seen
good
reason to
regard
as of nominal
origin,
the
develop- ment
of
meaning
in the forms which at a later time
were used
only
nominally,
took
quite
a
difierent
coiu'se
from that in the
present-stems,
and indeed all such introductions of nominal-stems with their various
suffixes into the structure of the verbal
system
must have
belonged
to
such
a
very
earlypei'iod
that all consciousness of
any
connexion between
the nominal and verbal form must
very
soon
have
disappeared.
All the same
the
preponderance
of
probability
is
on
the side of
Bopp's
view. The element
ja evidentlyplays a more important part
in the
verbal structure than all those other
syllables ua, -nu,
-ta, or
-ska " of
which, as
component parts
of the
present-stem,
we
thought
the
origin
was to be traced to nominal suffixes. The
syllable-ja,
with the accent
on it,
and
as a
rule in connexion with middle
termmations,
does
duty
in
Sanskrit
as
the mark of the
passive,
as does the
syllable
-ya
in Zend and
Old-Persian,
where it is not
uncommonly joined
with active
personal
ter- minations
as well
(SpiegelAltpersisch
p. 169). Accordingly
the
majority
of the Sanskrit verbs of the 4th class with which
we are
here concerned have also
an
intransitive
meaning.
Max Muller
(Skt.
Gr.
p.
188)
is of the
opinion
that there are traces which show that the
verbs of the 4th class
were originally
accented in the
same
way
as
passive
verbs. Further the
syllableja apj^ears
as an
essential
part
of
the suffix
-aja by means
of which
derivative,and, more
particularly,
decidedly
denominative, verbs
are
formed in Sanskrit and
Iranian, 298
and which has become the
source
of the manifold denominative foi-ma-
tions of all the related
languages.
We shall come
back later
on to
what I hold to be the unmistakable fact that this
-aja
is
nothing
else than
an a
which is the final letter of a noun-stem,
and this
very
ja
which is
used to form the
present.
The
syllable ^'"
" m
the form now
of
^a
and
now of i
"
is also the modal characteristic of the
optative,
and is to be seen
again
in the future
as the second element of the sviffix
-sja(Skt.
dd-s-jd-mi^=T)or. Sw-cr-iw).
It
might
be
urged against
this that
we
have "
here to deal with elemeni3s
which, though
alike in
sound, are
of
totally
different
origin.
But there is
a
probability
from the
meaning
too
that the
ja
in the
optative
Ls the
same as that in the futm-e. And since
in the futui-e all
rightly
agree
in
referring
the first element in the suffix
to a verbal
root,
i.e.
as,
there is
a specialprobability
here that the
second is not a mere
nominal suffix but
a
verbal stem. It is not to be
206 THE I-CLASS. CH. XI.
denied of
course
that suffixes wLicli occur elsewhere as
nominal
suffixes
occasionally perform
other functions. For instance the suffix
-na
gets
that of
expressing
the
passive
in Gothic. But where is
a
nominal suffix
to be found with such manifold ramifications of
meaning
as this
-J"?
Ai'c we to imagine
that in the structure of the verb such essential
cate- gories
as passi\T.ty, modality,
and the
designation
of the
futiu-e, as good
as came
out of
nothing
at
all,
or,
in other words
arose
from the
chiince
difference in the
a])plication
of
a
nominal suffix which has in itself
no meaning, or
at least none to
distinguish
it
essentially
from other
nominal siiffixes? This seems to me an impossibility,
and I believe that
Schleicher himself would
hardly
have maintained the
pronominal origin
of the
syllable
J
a
if he had
not,
with the
rigid
exchisiveness of attention
which
was peculiar
to him
]iurposely
refused consideration to
many
of
the abstruser
questions
about
'
function.' And
yet
it is
only by
the
conscientious and comlnned consideration of both sound and
meaninar
that
a satisfactoiy
solution
can
be reached of the
problems
set us
by
the
Science of
Language.
If
we
proceed
to ask what is the
way
which modern
languages
have
taken,
in
periods
that
are more
open
to om observation, to
express
categories
like
passivity,modality
and
futurity
there is
no
doubt
about the answer.
It is
by
the
application
of
auxiliary
verbs
which, in
299 \'ii-tue of the
meanings
which had been
already
determined in their
independent use,
carried in themselves the
gei-m
of the
expression
of
these relations. It
was
these clear
analogies
which
Bopp
had in view
when at the
very
outset of his vast labours "he
conjectured
that
auxiliary
verbs had been made
use of in earlier
periods
of
linguistic history.
And
seeing
that
Bopp's explanation
of the sibilant in the verbal structure
as
being
the rt. as is as
good
as
universallyaccepted,
and that of the dli
(Gr.9)as being
the rt. dlia
jilace, do,
is
pretty generallyadopted,we
shall be
justified
in
inclining
to his derivation of the
syllable-ja
from
the rt.
ja (Skt.jO^j
go.
The idea of
going
contains in
itself, as
is shown
by
W.
von
Humboldt
(Ueber
die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen
Sprachbaues,
p.
257
ff.),
and
as we
have
alreadypointed
out on
p
12,
the
germs
of the most various
meanings.
To
begin with, going
is
a
continuous
action,
and
as
such is
adapted
to be used in the stem of the
dui-ative
present-tense.
Take for instances such
phrases as
the Germ.
schwanger (jeJien
'
to
go
with
young,'
'
to
go
walking,'
'
to
go begging,'
('
to
go
shai-es
')or
the Latin
exsequias
ire. Then
going
is intransitive
and,
where it means not the
striving
after
an
object
but the
getting
into
a state,
it
can
give
rise to a passivemeaning, as
for instance in the
German verloren
gehen
'
to
get
lost,'and/eilgehen
*
to
go
for
sale,'
and
in the Lat. venum
ire.
Bopp (Vgl.
Gr. iii,
" 739)
mentions that in
Bengalee
Jcord
yd'i,jDroperly
'
I
go making,' means
'
I
get
made.' The
same verb
again
can take us
further to the notion of
striA^ng.
How far
it is
possible
that we
may
derive hence the
explanation
of the modal
itse
of the
syllable _/"
in the
optative
will be discussed when wc come to
deal witli this mood. The force of
a
future is
cleai-ly possessedby
the
verb ire in
dejectum ire,amatum iri,
with
which,
besides the
analogies
from Fi-ench mentioned
on
p.
12, we
may compare
the German ha"len
gphfu
'
to
go
to batlie'
(and
the
English
'I
am going
to do
it').
It is
easilyconceivable,
if this view be
taken,
that the force of this affixed
verbal root should in
many
cases
become
considerablyweakened,
and
CH..XI.
PEESENTS IN -too. 207
should
even
be
entirely
lost
sight of,
and that
consequently,
after all
suspicion
of the
origin
of the
syllable
in
question
had vanished from the
consciousness of the
speaker,
it
might degenerate
into
a
purely
formal
constructive element and be used in transitive
or even causative verbs.
We
may
even
find it
possible
on a more
detailed
investigation
to
imagine
many ways
in which the tiunsference of use
might
have taken
place.
The
apparent
absence of
meaning
in the
syllable
which
we are
obliged
300
to
acknowledge
in
many
cases
is not
enough
to
outweigh
its
significance
in
many
others. This absence of
meaning
is in accordance with the
general tendency
of
language
"
just
as in the
case
of the inchoatives
we
saw a
meaning
which at fii'sthad been
a
specific
one preserved
in but
a
small circle of verbs " while the
significance
which it
possesses
in the
future and the
optative
could hardly
be
explained
without the
help
of
Bopp's assumption.
Max Miiller is
so thoroughly
convinced of the
origin
of
our syllable ja
from
the root of the verb to
go
that in his
essay
*
On the Stratification of
Language 'p.
31 he
actually
refers the
primary
nominal suffix
-ja,
fem.
-jd,
to this root. In this
way
then the second
of the two
possibleexplanations
woiild coincide to a certain extent with
the first.
However,
I admit that I still feel considerable doubts
as to
the soundness of the latter
explanation(cp.
the note
on
p.
204
above).
With
respect
to the Greek
representatives
of the
i-class,
which
we
have
now to review in their several
ramifications,
it is certain that there
cannot be said to be
any
special
modification of
meaning
in the
present-
stem as
opposed
to the verb-stem, even
to the limited extent in which
this could be maintained with
respect
to the inchoative class.
The Greek i-class falls into two main
divisions,accordingas the
vowel
I or
the consonant
j
is the basis of the sufiix. The first of these
divisions is but
poorlyrepresented,
the second branches out in the most
various
directions,
and has therefore to be divided into several sub- classes.
I. PRESENTS IN
-ceo.
Greek forms constructed like such Latin
presents as
cap-io,fod-io
ai-e rare.
Siich
as
there
are
fall into two subdivisions
:
A)
where
-"w
has been
preservedpui'e,
B)
where
-iw Jias coalesced with other vowels to form
diphthongs,
A)
t(T-d-lio,
which occurs
from Homer
onwards,
with the
(alsoHomeric)
by-form
'icf-Qw and the
unexpanded 'icto,
is the
only present
with
a 301
movable
t. Since, however,
the
t
is here
preceded by
another stem-
expansion,
i.e.
Q, we
have
evidently
here what
we
have encountered
so
often
before,
e.g.
informs like
6(^"\.L-aK-av(t), ala-B-uro-fxai,
the
conjunction
of two elements of
stem-expansion.
The stem without the
t
is
just as
much
a
present-stem
as
that with the
i,
so
that
properlyspeaking we
cannot call this
a
present-forming tw.
Delbriick
(Verb. 202)
discovers
an
isolated
parallel
to ia-diio in the YecHc
p-to-cUiljd-ti
he
obeys (rt.
p-u
hear).
All the other verbs in
-iw keep
the
i
in the other tenses as
well
as
in
the
present:
a\iw
jjXio-a,
kvXIm
eKvXiara,oioj
Hom. o'iaarc. In the
case of
denominative verbs like
/.irji'iw, STjpiofiai,
kovLu) this is
hardly
to be wondered
208
THE I-CLASS.
CH, xi.
at. All these verbs are
like the Latin verbs with a
permanent
i like
audire,
lenire,
and not like such as
cupere,
fodere.
It is
possible
that this
per- manency
of the t was
not a primitive
feature and that the extension of
the domain of the
t was,
like that of the nasal
affixes, only gradual.
But
where we
find forms with a permanent i occurring
in the
very
earliest
times we are hardly
entitled to make such
an
assumption.
In the
case
of a'iEiv hear we must not overlook the
post-Homeric ifiaa
and the
a of
the Herodotean verbal
adjectiveE-n-airrmc,
" all the less as in the
evidently
related
ai-a-O-avo-fiai
we see
the other
stem-expansionsfollowing
the
same
consonairt. Hesychius'saere
*
ukovete
does not make
against
this.
Although
then the facts here adduced
by
no means
exclude the
possibility
of the connexion of
atw
with the rt. av conjectured
at Pi-inc. i.
482,
it
cannot be said,strictly speaking,
that the
t
of this verb is instrumental
in
foi-ming
the
present-stem.
We have more right
to maintain this in the case
of Ic-ioj
(Princ,
i.
300).
For here
to, originallyaho,
is
unmistakably
the
root,
which
appears
unexpanded
in
iS-oc
IS-po-c, t^-|0-w(r)-c,
and the
corresponding
Sanskrit root svid forms its
present
after the fourth class
: svid-jd-rai.
.But
we
look in vain for a futui-e *'f-(Tw
or an
aorist ^l-rra. All that is
preserved
is
et,-ioi-(7a
in
Aristophanes
Av. 791 and forms of the
same
kind in Aristotle. The
length
of the
i moreover iu Attic
(irplyav IciriQ
Aristoph.
Pax
85),
as
contrasted with the Homeric 'idioy
v 204,
is
remarkable.
302
B)
If,then,we
count tad-iw and ll-iw
as
two instances we
may
begin
this
division with no. 3. Presents with
diphthongs
before the thematic
w
have in
some cases no
corresponding
forms of a
shorter
stem, as
ttcu'w
tTraifxa ETraifrdt]}', Tzraiu)
tTrraiaa,
(teiu) caEirra (Tei(rfi6g_.
In these
presents
then there is
no
element to be seen of the kind we
seek. Where there
are
forms of the two
kinds, we must
distinguish
between two
classes. On the
one hand, a
vowel-stem
may
have
directly
coalesced
with
-iw
;
on
the
other,a consonantal stem
ending
in / oi- a
may
have
become
exposed
to the
same
transformation after the loss of its final
letter. The
cases
of the first kind
are
arranged
under
1),
those of the
second under
2).
1)
3) aya-/'o-/icu by
the side of
ciya-ficn, aya-o-^oi, aya-4w,
has been
already
mentioned at
p.
118.
4) Sa-lo-jjLaL divide,
which
we
gave
at
p.
203 as one
of the verbs
which showed the same
method of formation in Gri'eek and Sanski-it.
Along
with
ca-w-jjiEi'-ugp
332, cu-ie-to o
140
we
get
forms like Id-aov-aL
X
354,
Sd-aarrdaL ^ 511. The forms without
an i might certainly
b3
referred to the stem cut
which underlies
caTEoi.iui.
Cp. Leskien,
Stud,
ii. 122. The double
ct
oi
dnocdaaonai
P
231,
cdrrerapro A 368,
in EeSuit-
rai A 125 dydSairroQ
(Plato)might
be
appealed
to in
support
of this.
It is
anyhow
remarkable how the
i
has made its
way
into other verbal
forms and noun-stems Ci-^ai-anti
(onlya
23),Eai-rv-jji (fat.caiaco),
cuL-
('")-c,
oru-rpo-e, caL-Tv-c, oot-rw-yitwr,
which, however,
finds
a
complete
analogy
in the Skt.
daj {ddj-a-te) divide,confer,
allot. The
meanings
of
this verb with the
j preservedactually
come nearer
to those of the
CH. XI.
PRESENTS IN -ico.
209
Greek verb than those of
d-jd-mi, though
the
latter,according
to the
Pet.
Diet.,
in
composition
with various
prepositions
means also
allot,
divide,
and thus
comes so near
to the Greek verb in
meaning
that it
can
hardly
be doubted that it has the same root. We have here a
very
clear
instance of the vacillation
early
manifested
by language
between a
merely
partialstem-expansion
" one
limited to the
present-stem,
that is" and
one that
goes
all
through
tho verb. 303
5) KEpa-i(i), by
the side of
kifja-fAai, Ktpao-fxai,
of.
p.
120.
6)
dvlii),
7)
Aeol.
(pvlu), which, along
with other related formations in which
the
I
is sometimes found and sometimes
deducible,
have been discussed
on
p.
147.
2)
8)
ya-i(i",
only preserved
in the Homeric
part. yaiu)v
A 405.
Still,
yav-pi)-Q
and the Lat
gau-d-eo (Princ.
i.
211)
make it
probable
that it
comes
from
yap-M.
There are no
other tenses.
9)
ha-iu)
kindle, poetical
from Homer onwards in the active and
middle. Its
origin
from ShJ'-ko is established
by Se-^av-jji-i'o-c (Princ.
i.
285).
CdJ-
corresponds
to the intensified Sanskrit root du
{du-no-mi)
burn,
whence
comes dav-a-s,a
burning.
The
perfect
is
ci-h)-e,
and there
is an aor. Ed-rj-Tcii.
10) f:a-i(o with the Attic
by-form
kuu),
common to all Greek from
Homer onwards. The Attic
Kuv-ffw, e-Kav-aa, Ki-xav-fiai, Kav-fia
etc.
establish KaF
as
the stem of the verb.
11)
cKa-iiD in
Homei",
Attic
by-form
c\aw. Homer has
cXctiz-fTo/ua/,
c\av-(Te,a-k-Xau-ro-c,
the
tragedians/.""-)C/\f(u-/ie"'o-t',
so that the stem of the
verb must be
k-\a/,
which has
perhaps
been
developed
from the rt. k-Xu
wash
(k-Xy^w
cp.
2)lo-ra-7'e
and the rt.
plu),
in the
same
way
as ^o/
(no.
9)
from du.
12) Xt-Xa-to-/iai an
isolated
epicpresent,
which
we
should be able to
derive
straight
from the rt. Xa
(X"/-/^(a),
if it
were not that there is
no
definite evidence of the existence of such
a root
(Princ.
i.
450).
The
rt.
las,on the other
hand,
is well
established,
and in Sanskrit it forms
a
present Idsh-jd-mi (as
well
as Ids-d-mi)
of the
same
meaning
as
the
Greek word. It is
only
the
reduplication,
for which
we
shall find
numei'ous
analogies,especially
where the
meaning
is
intensified,
that
distinguishesXt-Xa/o-^cu
from
Idsh-jd-vii.
The Homeric
Xe-Xirj-ixi to-g
ought perhaps
to be referred to
Xe-X"X"7-^(f ro-c.
13) ^a-la-j.icu.
Leskien
(Stud.
ii.
88)
has made it
exceedinglyprobable
that the rt.
juac
is at the bottom of this
present,
which occurs
in
poetry
from Homer onwards
(E
748
"llpr]Ce ^idanyi doojg
tTveiiaieT ap
'iTrirovg).
The forms
fxdafreTcii
I 394
(Aristarchus), kTZii.iuq(Tajiirri r 468, iivinacTToc
v 304
377, paarTi'ii), fxdsfxa
all make for this. This
^tac
we
may
regard
as a
sigmaticexpansion
of the rt.
ma
which is to be found in ma-nu-s
and
jjiu-pi]
hand
(eu-yucip//c)
with the fundamental notion
touch, feel.
The
fundamental
meaning
is
readilydistinguishable
in some of the Greek
forms, while in others the derived
meaning
'
feel after
something,long
for,'
is
prominent
(Princ.
i.
388).
As it is
probable
that the rt.
ma
measure (Gk. yue)
is also to be referred to the same
fundamental notion
we should not be excluded from
identifjing
the Skt. mas measure
with
the Gk. rt.
jiitc,
only
this Skt. root is
only
to be found in lists of roots
210
THE I-CLASS.
CH. xi.
(Pet. Diet.), though
the
present
form
mds-jd-mi,
which is
completely
identical with
*^afj-jn-nui,
is also
given. .
-
14)
rn-iio used
by poets
from Homer onwards. The existence of
a
tT
is made
probableby
such forms
as
rd(T(Ta
c 174,
dTrerdtTfTaTo B
629,
rdrrdrj
S 119. On the related rt.
viq {vi(T(TOf.iai, vonroQ),
which derives
support
from the Skt. nas
to
join
oneself
to,
cp.
Princ. i.
391,Leipz.
Stud.
i. 141. The
i,
as
in no. 4,
appears
beyond
the
present-stem
in
ra-t-trow
(cp.
vairui,laerifpeg'oiK)iroijec Hesych.).
15) rpe-iw
instead of the usual
rpew
is
quoted by
Veitch from Timon
Phliasius fr. ix.
(Wachsmuth) ;
f)i'
TrXf'irrroi
viroTpilovmfrcxfufTTai(cp.
Oppian C}Tieg.
i.
417,
iv.
117).
If
we
ought
to discern in this wox-d
the effects left
by
an earlylinguistic process, rpdo)
would
coiTespond
to
the Skt.
trds-ja-mi.
But
as
it occurs in these late
poets,
it is
possible
that it is
only
due to an
imitation of the
epic
forms we are
just
about to discuss.
In
conclusion, neglecting
the
alphabeticalarrangement,
we
may
group
together
the
following
similar
epicpresents
in
etw :
16)
deioj.
17)
vXdu).
18) TTi'Etu).
19)
X^'*^
(x^*^)"
After all that has been said
by
othei's and
by myself (Princ.
ii.
201
f.),
it seems to me most
probable,
as
may
be
gathered
from what
has been said on
p.
156,
that the first three
ought,just
like
^alw,
kcum,
icXaiu),
to be referred to
primary
forms with an
i,
i.e.to
def-tio, irXff-no,
TTVff-Kt}. irXfJ-'iiv "
by
the side of
ttXvvw,ttXvtoc,vXifxct
and
ttXooc,
i.e.
ttXo/oc "
gains support
from the Ch.-Sl.
plov-jq,,
the Lith.
plau-jii
and'
the 0. H. G.
Jleiv-iu(Princ.
i.
347).
" To ttie/w
(Aeol.Trrtvb)) belong
305 the aorists
ufxnvvE (X 222)
and
dfj-Tn-vrn
and the
noun
irrot] (for
Tzro^r])
and
TTvou] (forTrvohr)).
" Of forms
belonging
to no. 16 Homer has
dihj
Z 507 beside
Qirim
S
601,
QeitLv K
437,
n 186 etc. beside BUiv B
183,
A 617
etc.,
of those
belonging
to
no. 17 -kXeieiv I
418, o 34,
nXeiot-
TEQ TT
368 beside TrXiwr H
88,
of those
belonging
to no. 18
irvtui
P 447
beside Tvyiet
e 469, kiiiTDiirftn C 357,
dKoirieiwv N
654,
dTTOTTveiovaai
c
406
and the like,
x^'*^
(^o-1^)
^^
represented
in Homer
only by
eyx^'f?
* 10,
and Hes.
Theog.
83 has
yeiovai. By
the side of this
come
x^'"'-i X'^^^i
and the shortest forms
'i'^vro,
yyt^xvoQ,
KiyvTai
etc.
Hesiod is our
onlyavithority
for
"
20) pei(j)
: fragm.
237 Gottl.
Trora^w
pelovTieoikmc.
We
may
here add the word discussed
by
Usener in Fleckeisen's
Jahrb. 1872,
p.
741 ff.
21)
h'lv. Sely
as a neuter
participle=ceo "'
is there
quoted,
in
con- formity
with the
testimony
of old
grammarians
from several
passages
in
Attic
prose
wi-iters,especiallyLysias 14, 7, Xenoph.
Hell. vii.
4,
39.
Since ce~iy bears to ceor
the same relation
as
that of ttXeIi'
more
to
nXenr,
Usener
justly
concludes that there was a
present
form
*Etiu),
of which
the
participle
ct'tov is the
primaiy
form of
fetr, just as TrXeTor is that
of 7r/\"")'. *lEito he
rightly
refers to
cif-ju), just
as at Princ. i. 289 the
stem lei-is
given
for
cew.
There is
ground
for
suspecting
other
presents
with
t-diphthongs
of
having
lost consonants in
a similar
way.
But the
t
appears
to have
established itself
firmlythrough
all the
tenses,as
is the
case
in
Kva-iw,
Ki'aiau),
'iici'aiaa
by
the side of
i;"'d-u), Kitj-du),
which Pick i.^ 49 refers to a
rt.
Icva.i,
in
tto/w,
Trn/o-w or
Traiyjrru), ETrnifrn,
EwniffQip
which at Pnnc. i.
333 I have
compai-ed
with the Lat.
pav-io.
The
i
of the latter verb is
CH. XI.
PRESE-NTS IN -\\").
"
211
treated as
ifit
were
that of the
^-conjugation (cp.
also
pavimentum),
but
Paul.
Ep.
p.
70
quotes
from Lucilius the
perfectde-puv-i-t
from
de-piiv-io,
so
that the i of the verb
appears
to have been a
movable
one.
" irraioj
TTTdtauj,
ETrrotcra
is of too uncertain
etymology
to
yieldus
any
result for
our presentpurpose.
II. PRESEXTS SHOWING THE EFFECTS LEFT BY AN
ElRLIER
-jo3.306
A)
Yerbs
in
-\/\w
-X/w.
1) ci/Wo-^fu, ordinaryGreek, by
the side of the Homeric
aXro, conj.
'
aXe-Tai
(cp.above,
p. 130),
the Att.
aXov^cu
etc. Lat, sal-io
(Princ.ii.l67).
2) /3a/\/\w, ordinaryGreek,
with the Arcadian
by-form i^iWio,
of'Ww
(Princ.
ii.
76),by
the side of
IpaXor (Arcad.l^zXoy),ii3aX6/.ir)y, iSaXw,
fieXoc, [3oX}].
If we are not mistaken in the
comparisonsgiven
at Princ,
ii.
76,
and the
assumption
that the
primary meaning was flow,glide,
the O. H. G.
quillu
scaturio
(pret.qnal)
is due to the same method of
present-formation.
" ciaCeXXeiy ciuairdv
Hesych. can be
nothing
but
^ta/3c4XX"n'.
3) fjcaXXo).
Plato Theaet. 174 d is the earliest
passage
in which the
verb is found. Of forms of other tenses there
occurs
only "i3ctiXa-o.
4) /3cf'\Xw;'*
Tpfjjuov
?)/3^fw)'"Hesych.
as also
fllvXXeLv'ItCiirai,
Tp"j.t"ii'7/
ft^e'tv
belonging
to
fiSeX-vpo-g
which is
an
expansion
of the root
of
fjliu)
which
was originally /3^f c (Princ.
i.
284).
5)
laXXef
/cacoupyti
Hesych.,
if
genuine,belongs
to
2"(Xj]"
KciKovp-yr],
^aXyifTUTdai'
Xvix))i'aaOai,
(\iiKr]iTai
and
CrjXEonai.
To the latter cuXXio
bears
exactly
the
same
relation a%s drjXeu)
to fJoXXw.
6) OciXXit),
the
present-stem
not till after Homer
(who
has
OtjXsoi'
" 73, hra6)iX))ff"i A
236),
later it is found in
ordinaryGreek, by
the side
of the Homeric
re-daX-vla,reOjjXwc,
daXoc.
7)
'(XXm cannot be
put
here with
completecertainty,
inasmuch as
it
seldom
occurs
without the variant eiXw or e'iXXw,
while at
p.
179
we
refeiTed eiXeiv
press
hard to an
earlier J-eX-rw. Still it is not
impossible
that from the rt. feX
twist,
tui-n there should besides "t\w have been
formed
an tXXw
standing
for
J^eX-joj. Cp.
Buttmann Lexil. ii. 150 f.
8)
keXXu) does not occui-
in the
pi'esent,
but o-keXXu) is
frequent
in
Attic
prose (Princ.
ii.
397).
9) neXXui,ordinaryGreek,
with XX all
through
the verb
(Att./jeX-
307
Xj/fTw, efiiXXr]aa),
but it is
certainly
from the same root as
juiXsi (Princ.
i.
412).
10) juuXXw only
Theocr.
4, 58,
mentioned in the scholia on the
passage
and elsewhere
by gi-ammarians,generally
sensu
obscoeno
(fivXXcL'
"7rXi]"Ttai^"i
Hesych.),undoubtedly
however related to the Lat. molere
(cp.
permolere)
and
ixvXo-q.
The
same present-formation occurs
in the Ch.-
Sl.
mel-ja.
11) TraXXw,
in
use from Homer
onwards, especially
with
poets,by
the
side of
o;i-7^"-7ro\-w^"
T
355,
TTuX-TO
(cp.above,.
p.
131),
naXo-c.
12) aKuXXto
scrape up
earth, dig,by
the side of
aKciX-tvoj, aKuX-t^w,
from Hei'odotus onwards
(ii.14).
13)
aKiXXu)
dry (trans.)
KctremctXXovTo Aesch. Prom. 481, by
the side
of
(TKeXeu),(TKeXf-T(')-g etc.,perf.em^Xrj-Ka,rTh:Xr]-p6-c.
The aorist
k-aicrjXa
{"rK))Xeie
^
191)
should
by rights
have a
present
crKaXXdj. There w;i3
p 2
212 " THE I-CLASS.
CH. XI.
clearlya
similar variation between a
and
e
before \ here
as
in the rt.
IjleX (^e\tl)
with the
perfect^cjur/Xt
(Dor. fiifudXe).
14) aKvWoj,
from
Aeschylus onwards,
later there is an aor.
(.a-KvXa
etc.
15) (rriWo), as
early
as
Homer
(M 325), by
the side of the fut.
oreX-f'w
(/3287),
aor.
are'iXa
{'6, 248),
later
e-ffTaXtj-r, 'i-rrTuX-fxai,
e-a-raX-Ka.
16) cr"})aXX(,),
from
Aeschylus
onwards
by
the side of
o-^aXw
(also
middle),iacjmXijv, i(T(j"aXfxni.
Homer has
only
the
aor.
afiiXai^719,
p
464.
17) reXXu),common
from Homer onwards
by
the side of
'ireiXa,
TtraXi-ini.
18) TtXXw,
as
early
as Homer
(X 406),
and from Attic writers
nXw,
'i-lXa,hlXBr^v
and other forms.
19) xpaXXw,
from
Aeschylus onwards, 'itpijXa.
We
may
conclude from
Hesychius'saijXuTo' taeiaE
that there
was a
verb *adXXio
belonging
to
(raXo-g.
Tlie
disyllabic
stems are
partly,
like ttoikIXXu)
(asearly
as
Homer),
unmistakably
denominative. Of these we
shall ti'eat later in connexion
with the
remaining
denominatives of this class. There is however
a
group
of
disyllabic
stems which we will here
give apai't
from the
rest.
Eeduplicated Present-stems.
Some of these remind
us
of the Sanskrit intensives in which the
redui^lication syllable
has been
strengthened,
as
Schleicher
(Comp.^758,
308
cp. Bopp Vgl.
Gr.
" 756)
has
already
remarked.
Anyhow
the
con- junction
of
reduplication
with the mark of
the^'-class
is
common to both
these formations. The other cHvisions of the class will furnish
us
with
abundance of
analogies
to this. Gerland
(Intensiva
und
Iterativa,
Leipzig1869)
discusses this kind of Gi'eek intensives at
p.
.32.
20)
aioXXo)
V 27,
in Hesiod and
Pindar,
later aloXiw. The
o
has led
to the
assumption
that the verb is derived from
aloXog.
No other tenses
occur.
21)
Bai^aXXw in Homer and Pindar. The latter also forms ^tBo
t-
SaXfjii'OQ,
daiCaXdeic and
(from
an
evidently
denominative
by-stem)
Saida-
Xwcrt^iEv (01.1,109).
It
by no means follows,however,
that Zai-luXo-g
was
earlier than caicaXXw.
Cp.
Princ. i. 286.
22)
dEy-SiXXu) I
180, Apoll.Rhod.,
with no
other tenses. The San- skrit
d-dar trouble
oneself,
take
thought for, compared by
Fick^ i.
106,
which is
only
used in
composition
with the
prepositiond,
shows
a
kindred
present-foi'mation
in
d-dri-jd-te.Cp.
also the O. H. G.
zil-jan.
The
reduplication
is like that in
hiv-lpi{f)i,-r
beside
Ipv-Q.
23) "-oX\w,
from Homer
onwards, by
the side of the aor. ("?Xo,
in
poets. Cp.
Princ. ii. 171. The root must be aX = Skt.
ar
go,
from
which likewise there is formed the
reduplicatedpresent ij-ar-mi,
which
besides the intransitive
meaning
has the transitive
meaning
'
move,
bring.'
24) Koi-KvXXu),only
in the
present-stem
in
Aristoph.
and in
gram- marians.
The
etymology
is obscure.
25) i.ioi-[ivXXo),
related to
fiven-,
is
explainedby
Pollux ii. 99
by
o-vMiyttr
7-c"
x^''^'/"
'-*^t
Hesych.
renders it
y^/Xu^Eir,
kadiuv and it
stands,
CH. XI.
STEMS ENDING IN
p.
-
213
thanks to Meineke's
strikingconjecture,
in the latter sense at
Hipponax
fragm.
80 Be.^
26)
TraiTTfiXXw
only given by lexicographers;
TrotTraWtiv
"
(tiieip
Hesych.
The
word,
if
genuine,
is a
kind of
frequentative
to ttuWuv.
It is
possible
that it arose from a
nominal stem which underlies the
Homeric
waiivaXotiQ.
We
may
also mention here the
etymologically
obscure "r-ir-oX-Xw
with its
trisyllabic stem,
"
possiblya
denominative related to
drctXoc,
aruXXw.
B)
Epenthesis of the ". 309
1)
Stems in
p.
The Lesbian Aeolic dialect took
just
the same course
in the
case
of
stems in
p
as
in that of stems
in
X,
i.e.that of
progressive
assimilation
:
(pOeppu)
:
*(j)Oif)jio
; ; /3((X\w: */3aXjw.Cp.
Ahrens Aeol. 53. The other
dialects took
a
different
course.
It is true that it is almost
exclusively
from the Ionic dialect that we
get
instances of the real
anticipatory
epenthesis
of the
i.
Still the assertion of the
grammarians,
which
Ahrens
wrongly
calls in
question,
that the Dorians said
fOaipw
for
(pdelpw,
leaves little doubt that the Dorians
agreed
in this formation with the
loniaus. We have
a
distinct
testimony
to tliis
agreement
in the
Cretan STTEIPEN adduced
by Brugman
Stud, iv, 99 from C. I.
no.
2556,
i.
18,
afoi'm which is
important
for the
explanation
of this
present-
formation. For since in the Cretan dialect
ei can never come
from
e by
compensatoiy lengthening,
it
proves
incontestably
that the
t was
here
really
introduced
by anticipation
from the
followingsyllable.
The case is different with stems in
vp.
These show the effect of the
j
in the
followingsyllableonly
in the
lengthening
of the
v :
xvpw, (pvpw.
To assume
the same
process
here would be too artificial
an hypothesis,
and
Brugman (Stud.
iv.
100, 117)
has shown
conclusively
that in this
instance the
length
of the
syllable
is due to
compensation,
and that
Kvpio
came immediately
from
a *i"vpp(t)
which
we
may
assume on
the
analogy
of the
actuallyoccurring
Lesbian
oXocpvppw.
It must be
admitted,
how- ever,
that such
presents
as
have no
attested Aeolic
counterparts
in
pp,
ought possibly
to be
put
into the
lengthening
class "
may perhaps
have
been formed,
i.e.like
tvcpcj,(ppvyM (p.158).
1) ceipw, by
the side of
ctpw,
in Hdt.
(ii.39,
iv.
64)
and Attic
writers,
Lesb.
lippio. ^aipw
which
occurs
in
some
M.SS. at
Aristoph.
Nub.
442,
Av. 3G5 Dindorf is
no
doubt
right
in
altering
to
Cilpu).
For
the
oi'thographical
rules of the
grammarians
"
e.g.
Hex'odian ii. 490 "
know of
nothing
but
ceipu),
which
analogydemands,
and the Aeol.
cippw
(Ahr.
Aeol.
53). ^eipw
i.e.
*hp-jio
has been above
(p.203) compared
with the Lith. dir-iu. A Sanskrit
cUr-jd-nii
of the same
formation is
310
also mentioned in the Pet. Diet,
as
given by gi-ammaiians.
2)
i.'ip("} say,
from
hipw /3
162 riilt
t'lpw(X 137, v 7),by
the side of
the fut.
Ipiw,kpu)
from Homer
onwards;
there is also the
present flpiw,
Hes.
Theog.
38
elpevaaisaj-ing.
3) e'ipi)i.tai ask,
seek
a'lpeai
y
80, e'lpeTO
A
513,
but like no. 2)
with
by-forms
from a
stem in
e : epiwv
H
128, conj.iptio^xfv
A
62,
epewn(u
p
509, epiui'To
A 332. The stem
Ip
appears
without
any expansion
in
the middle aorist-forms in
use
from Homer onwards
'ipw^m,Ipoij-ii])',
214
.
THE I-CLASS. CH. xi.
ii"irrl)ai (7 243),
to wliicli was
later added the indicative
rip6nr]r.
On the
dilliculty
of
connecting
these forms with
eifxo
say op.
Princ. i. 429.
4) e'ipw
set
in
a
row,
fasten. Tlie
present
from Pindar onwaids.
The llonieric form
ijeipe
discussed on
p.
81
belongs
either to the
impei-fect
or to the
aoiist,
while the
unexpanded
stem is
certainly
to he
seen
in the
Homeric
kepfxevoQ,eepro.
ci-ip-irui
is
quoted
from
Hii^pocrates. Cp.
Princ. i. 441. The Lat. sero
is
an unexi^anded
form from the corre- sponding
Latin stem.
5) i^-tlpio
from Homer onwards
(A 560,
\
578)by
the side of the fut.
Ksp-iw,
Kepw
aor. 'i-Ktp-au
N
546,
Princ. i. 181. The Lesbian
Kippu)
is
often
given.
6) Kipu).
Kvpnv
"*
821,
t-Kvpo-r
Soph.
0. C.
1159, Kiptrai
n 530. A
by-form
of the
present-stem
occurs
in
Kvp-iu)
Aesch. Prom.
330, Uvpovy
Hoph.
El.
1331,
whence we
find later on Kupijaw
etc. The
pure
stem
Kiip
occurs m
t-Kvp-aa, Kup-au).
7)
fj-Eipoi-tai.
fxeipeo
in the
suspicious
verse I
616,
and
aTvopeiptTai
is
not
quitebeyond suspicion
at Hes.
Theog. 801, 0pp.
578
(cp.Kochly);
the
only
other
passage
adduced for it is Aratus 657
(/'(eipo/.itj'jj).
The
foi-ms from the
unexpanded
stem however are
of
frequent
occurrence :
the Homeric
efx/xope,
e'lfxaprai,
jjiepoQ.
At Princ. i. 412 I have connected
with it the Lat. mer-eo.
8)
fj-vpo/uni.
Homer has
/jLvpovTcn
T 213,
fxvp6/.iti'oe t 119,
also later
lX)ets,
and Hes. Scut. 132 has the active
impf.nvpor.
9) lupofjat, a
by
-form of
supt'w,not before Plutarch.
10) Treipw,poetical
from Homer onwards
{)"91,
y 33).
The shorter
311
stem occurs as early
in
w e-
Trap- /ae
toe.
At Princ. i. 338 I have
compared
with it the Ch.-Sl.
pra-tiscindere,
of which the 1st
sing,jyor-jq,
"
though
not
supported by quotations
in Miklo-ich's Lexicon " is formed in
pre- cisely
the same
way
as ireipw.
11)
-TvpiijiUK,
only
found in
Hippocrates,
while the
aor. iirrvpijv
occurs in Plutarch.
12)
auipoj
Eurip.
Ion 115 and
elsewhere,
the shorter stem in
aia-qpa
(comicpoets),
Aoi*.
Earjpa (Soph.).
13) (TKuipit) only
in the
present-stem. rrKdipniTec
E
572, aKuipuxnv
K
412. The
pure
stem is shown in
crKupll^w
and with
a
thinner vowel in
eTKipratj.
14)
cnratpw
(cp.
below
acnralpu)), only
in Alexandrine
poets,
in
Ari.-totle and in late
prose.
There are no
forms found
except
those
from the
pi-esent-stem.
15) (TTrsipu),
in
common use
from Hesiod onwards
(0pp.463),by
the
side of the fut.
airipw,
pf. 'iffTvaprui,
aor. iairdoiji', OTropd
etc. Lesb.
cmipoii).
16)
(Tvpu).
Present forms first in Hdt.
(ii.60)
and
Aristophanes
(jupaavpwvEqu. 527),irrvprfr
not till late
prose.
17)
TEtpo}
(Lesb.rippu))poetical
from Homer onwards
(A 315),
but
only
in the
present-stem.
The
pure
stem must be
sought
in
TEp-E-rpo-r,
Tip-i]y
and the Lat. ter-o.
The latter is related to
rtt'pwexactlyas sero
is
to
t'ipw(no.4).
18) fdEtpu),
Lesb.
(pdippw,
from Homer onwards with the fut.
(pdEpau),
later
(^iiepw, f-tpOup-Tfi', i-cpOop-a
etc.
19)
(pvpu),
in
generaluse. il 162
CnKpvai E'lf-iar Efvpnr,
We cannot
put
this verb here without
reserve,
for the bhort stem
fvp
which we
thus
\
CH. XI.
STEMS ENDING IN
p.
215
are obliged
to
assume,
is nowhere to be found. Even the derivative
6vpaw
has
V (Aesch. Sept.48).
The
present-stem
seems
therefore to
have become
completelypetiified,
unless indeed
we ought
to
explain
the
long
vowel in
quite
another
way.
20) ^((('pw,
in
genei'al use,
beside
(.--^ap-m'
" Homeric
Kt\^cipi']aw, i^ix"P'
r\()TL,Kex"'(pi}"'To.
If at Princ. i. 244 we were right
in
comparing
the Skt. "
hdr-jd-miamo, desidero,
there is
a
correspondence
even
in the formation
of the
presents,
as
also in the Umbr. herie-st
volet,
and the Osc.
heriiad
capiat.
There
is,however, a difficulty
in the difference of the
meanings.
21) ipatpw,a rare verb,denoting vibratingmotion,
used
only
in the
present-stem.
Aesch. Prom. 394.
Besides these
monosyllabic
stems there
are
also
a
few
disyllabic ;
viz.
312
a) Reduplicatedstems,
correspondingexactly
to those mentioned
on
p.
212
f.,
i.e.
22) yapyaipeiv
swai'm with,
in Cratinus
(Meineke
ii.
221): avlpihv
apitTTiofiraaa
yapyaipei
ttoXic. It is natural to
conjecture
a relationship
to
ayaipu),uyapa, Traiiiyupi-Q {no.27),
to which
yapyttlpu)
seems
to be an
intransitive intensive.
23) Kupi^aipeit' ringor quake : Kc'tpicuipe cs
ycua
TroZefrcnvY 157.
24) fiapnaipsivshimmer, poetical
from Homer onwards
(N 22).
The
unexpanded
stem
appears
in
ijap^apioc, ^apf.uipvy'}].
25)
/.lop^vpeir
boil,bubble,
the
same.
26)
Trop(pvpiiv
move in
waves
(used
of the
play
of
colours),
the same.
A short
V
appears
in the related
iropcpiipiw (late), Tropfiipog.
b)
Stems with
prothetic
vowels.
27)
a-ytipio, ordinary
Greek
by
the side of the Homeric aor.
ayeporro,
aypofieroi,
})yepOi]f,
ayupa, narijyvpiQ.
Lesb.
ayippu).
The derivation
from
a copulative
and the rt.
gar (yiynno)
does not suit the use of the
words well.
ayEtpeadai,uyepecrdat
in Homer denotes the
carrying
out
of the command
proclaimedby
the herald
:
B
52,
444
rot
h'
yyelpovTo
fiaXiliKu,
and
ayvpri](; beggar(i.e. collector),
ayvpijog
have
nothing
what- ever
to do with
calling.
It is better with Fick^ i. 73 to
compare
the
Skt.
grd-ma-s
troop,mass,
with
which, however, we must also connect
the Lat.
grex
and
yapyaipii) given
at
no. 22.
28) n-eifno (Lesb. nippw)
from Homer onwards
{""
366
a."ipoi.iivr],
T 386
impf (ieipe,
Hdt.
ijeipt)
with the
plupf.
awpro,
aor. aepder.
The con- traction
begins
in Homer
(nVpoiroc
P
724, apOtlg
N
63),
in the
tragedians
we find
'dpw (e.g.
Aesch. Pers.
795, Iph.
T,
117),apai, i]pfxaL
and
aipw,
and when
we come to Attic
prose only
the contracted forms
are
found.
29) u-o-TTo/pw, by
the side of
awalpu)
no. 14,
from Homer onwards
(M 203).
For its derivation
see Princ. i. 358. Since this
stem,
like
no.
28, begins
with two
consonants,
it is
possible
that the
a
is here the
remnant of
a
reduplication,
in which
case
u-o-Tra/pw : yap-yaipw ;
'.
t-airap- .
rat : yi-ypairraL.
30) t-yelpu) (Lesb.syf'ppw)
from Homer
onwards, by
the side of the
313
Homeric
e-ypsro,
i-ypy'i-yop-a,
ijyep-tirjr
etc.
Cp.
Princ. i. 221. Fick^ i.
72
compai-es
i-yelpw
with the Skt. causative
(ja-garaja-mi
I awaken. In
this case
iyeipw
would be a derivative A^erb.
31) 6-Hpofxai,
the
prevailing
form from Homer onAvard.*?
(X 424),by
216 THE I-CLASS.
CH. xi.
the side of
^vfw^Ku(Aesch.
Prom.
271, Euiip,
Hec.
740)
and
ndi^upTog
(AescL.Soph. Eurip.).
2)
Stems in
v.
Since the
r
in
many
of the stems which fall under this head is
just
as
movable as
the
epenthesised
i, many
of the
following
verbs have been
already
noticed
among
those of the nasal
class,especially jjait'u) on
p.
185.
In cases
where we
have no
short- vowel forms of other stems than the
present
it is often
impossible
to decide whether
a
present
h".s been foi-med
according
to the nasal-class or
the i-class. For instance it is
by no means
impossible
that the verbs
cu'w,
^urw, Ovrio,iriiw,(pvio)given
on
p.
178 f.
arose from
*Si}'jio, *^vvjwetc.;
and when
on
the other hand
we
assign
(t/i
o/^uu
to the
i-class,
and
so
refer it to
*(nrjnfini,
the
only reason we
have for this is that no root *ai is
anywhere
to be found. It is
possible
all the
same
that there
was
such
a root,
and that
aivo-iiai
came
from
*(n-)\Fo-fiai. Only where, as
in
Qdrw,
Kaino an i-diphthong,or where,
as
in
Kpiru)
with its fut.
KpXvw,
forms with
a
short vowel and a r
occur,
have we
clear and certain
pi-oof
of the
original
existence of a
J
in the
present-stem.
It should be said that out of the
followinglist,
besides
crivo^ai
above
mentioned, deiyw,
kuIiu) and aaivw
are
the
only
verbs whose
stems show
a y
vmder all circumstances.
1) ydvo^ai, poetical,ytirofxirw
Y
128,
B
208,
Hes.
Theog. 82,
the
usual
present being yiyyoinai,
so
the Skt.
yci-je, one
of the
presents
of
the rt.
"^an,though
this has no n.
2) dpau'w, belonging
to
Cfmw
do, only
at K 96
;
we
get
the stem
without the
I
in
oXiyocpariwx',
Princ. i. 294.
3)
dEiru)
poetical
from Homer onwards
(n 339);
Attic dramatists
have forms with
e,
which are now
lightlyregarded as aorists,
and are
hence accented
Qtrtir,
derwy. The rt. 6"j' =
the Lat.
/en
in
fen-do
(Princ.
i.
316).
314
4)
Kciiioj from
Aeschylus
onwards
by
the side of
Karu", tVaror,KtKOfn;
it-can hardly
be from
a
different root from that of the fuller and older
form
KTiii'b)
and the Skt. kshan
(Princ.
i.
192).
5)
kXxiw
(Lesb.k-Xti'j'w) ordinaryGreek,
with the fut. cXnw
(Ari-
stoph.
Plut.
621),EKXivrjy(Aristoph.Lys. 906),
tVAtra. The rest of the
tenses come from the shortest stem kXi. k-Ali
?/
from the
present-stem.
6) i^pairw.
In Homer the
apparently
denominative
K-paiairco
is the
prevailing
form.
Kpahovai
t
567.
Kpaaio
from Pindar onwards in
poets.
Homeric fut.
KparitfrQai,
aor.
EKpr)ia
etc.
7) Kpiiw,ordinary
Greek with the fut.
Kptno (c'laKpiflti
B
387),
iKplvu,fKpirdr]i',
later
li^pi6r]y
from the shortest
stem,
like
KEKpii^a, Kihpi-
^(u.
The Lesb.
present-formKpirrw
has the
testimony
of
an
inscription
C. I.
2166, 23,
iniKiiivrtTo.
8)
KTuvu) (Lesb.KTtrrw), cp.
no. 4,
than which this is
an
older and
commoner foim,
from Homer onwards with
ktevG),EKTaror.
The shorter
stem contained in
KTa-jxevm
etc. was
discussed
on
p.
130.
9) jm'tvo^cu(rare
active
f/c/ja/rw Em-ip.),
in
us?
from Homer
onwards,
with
/.uij'ov^ai,
if.uiyjp., ^/e'/KTjrct.
The
coiTCsponding
Indian and Pei'sian
formations,which, however,
have
a different
meaning, are mentioned
on
p.
203.
10)
^aiiw
X
423,
later in common
use, ^drw, (^arQi]v.
Cp. ^tw,
CH. XI.
STEMS ENDING m v. 217
11) I'mliio,
from Homer onwards
(pairovro
A
282).
The forms
l-ppaC-uTdi
V 354,
eppadaro
M
431,
puiraaTs
v
150
point
to
a
root
fxic
which
again
is identical with
aph{apdw).
p"uru)
therefore
perhaps
stands
for
pal-ijio (Princ.
i.
283),
and here also
we
have
a
threefold formation
:
pui
jOn(t)r pf((f')rf.
Fut.
pcii'U),
12) ffairoj,
from Homer onwards
(k 219).
There
appear
to be
no
forms with
a short vowel.
13) uii"mai (Lesb.a/iTo/jca),
from Homer onwards
(^139).
No
forms but those of the
present
and weak aorist stems.
14)
Teii'(x). This
present-stem
is not
clearly
established in
Homer, as
Teh'7]
n 305
may
be an aorist,
but from-
Ae.-chylus
onwards it is in
common
use, by
the side of
rerw,
ereira
and the forms from the rt.
ret
TtTaTdi,
iraO))}', rnroc.
"
Cp.
Tiraiuio.
15) (pairit)
bears to
(putiyw
a
relation similar to that of
Kpairw
to
Kpaiaivw.
The
present-stem
is in universal
use
by
the side of
(paiw,
(jiarovf-iaiyefaiip.,
Trifrirn.
The shortest stem
(f"amay
be
seen,
most 315
clearly
in
7rf(^j"/fTo^at (P 155).
16) -x^cihu)
a
late
present,
fii-stfound in the
poets
of the
Anthology,
to the st.
)(0)'
(;^ai wi'
n
350,
K"\i]tivg
0
409,
Ey)^ai
ov)'rai Aristoph.Lys.
271),
for which the
present
in
use
is
^^arr/coj
(cp.p. 197).
There is also
")^ai'evin''foudi'Hesych. (Gust. Meyer n.
P.
50).
17)
xP""'^)
from
Aeschylus onwards;
forms without the
t are rare :
"Xpui'u)
Pseudo-Eurip.Iph.
Aul.
971,
late
i)(^pai'6T]i\
Eeduplicated Forms.
18) arairoj-icu
formed
appai'ently
from the
negativedr,
in
use from
Homer
onwards,
the
only
form from another stem
being aitjiarrdai.
19) j-juj.ij-)uiy(i)
K 375
o C dp
eiTTr] rapfyijair re, /jo/x/Jct/rwi',
later also
of
trembling
and hence
stammering
of the
tongue. Only
in the
present-
stem.
20) Tra^faivM epic(A 30,
T
398)
with the
part. Traix(par6ii)r. Op.
fair
IV.
The intensive force
comes out
clearly.
21)
TTUTrraii'd)
poetical,
P 674 ircivrocre
TrtnrTatrujv
; Soph. Aj.
11.
Aor.
7rd7rr/;ro as
early
as Homer. A
by-form
in
Lycophron
is
7r"7r-a-
Xaof-iai.
22)
rerpaivto.
The
aor. rirpijre,
which shows that the
reduplication
stuck to the
stem,
is
as
early
as
Homer,
the
present
not till Herodotus
and
Aeschylus. Cp.
Tirpau).
. 23) Tiraivu) only
in Homer
(B 390,
^
403)
and other
epic
writers.
Also
TiTi'ivaQ (N 534).
^."ay^."o/l w
and
Terptyniru),
the latter of which is characterised
by an
inserted
av as well,
have been
already
mentioned in the nasal-class
(p.
185
f.).
"
Hesychius'sglosses
yayycta'tt
J/
"
to
fiera
ysXioroc Trpocnotiiin;
cacaheiv,
carhiiieiy
drEiii^eiy,
fnpinrav
are of too imcertain
a nature
(cp.
Mor.
Schmidt)
to be included in the list.
3)
An isolated stem in
k.
TTtiKb) only a 316, e'ipia
irtiKiTt
X^P"^^^',
Hes.
0pp.
775
oic ireiKeiy.
Cp.
above,
pp.
162,
168. Isolated
though
this verb is in its
present-forma- tion
no doxibt is
possibleon
the
subject.
Moreover-
analogies
in
other
218 THE I-CLASS.
. .
cH. xi.
classes of formations foi- the
auticipatoryepeutliesis
of the
i before a k
have been collected at Princ. ii.
p.
335
f.,
and it is
possible
that the
316
eftbrt to
distinguish
between Trekio and Ttiaaijjhad
something
to do with
the
special
treatment of the
tcj
in this case.
C)
Presents in "t"j (tt).
T have discussed the
origin
of this
aa
in its
proper
place
at Princ. ii.
p.
323 ff. It is an
undoubted fact that
aa
(Att.
and Boeot.
tt)
bears
to
4
the relation of tenuis to media,
and
consequently
for
jDresents
in
a"ru) (tto))
we are
to
expect
to find roots
ending
in
k, x
or
r,
0,
and for
presents
in
i^u)(Boeot.
and
Megar. ccw)
roots
ending
in
y
or
h. The few
exceptions
to
this," to be marked with
a *,
" are
mainly
referable to
older and sometimes
actually occurring by-forms
with
a
harder final
letter to the
root,
which hard letter afterwards became softened. But
few verbs
point
to a
radical
sigma,
and
many
occur only
in the
present-
stem
or
else show
a
fluctuation between difierent stems.
1)
Verbs from
guttural
roots.
1)
*a.-'crw an
unauthenticated
by-form
of
ayivfxi
only quoted
in
Steph.
Thes. from the E. M.
KUTuatrw
in
Appian
and Artemidorus.
2) /3//ffrrw quoted
from
Hippocrates,
comic
poets,
and
Xenophon, /3/y"w,
efir}^n.Cp.
the noun-stem
jjrjx
nom. /3//^.
3) fipvTTU), only given by lexicographers : Hesych. /ijoirretj'*
IffdUir.
E. M.
p.
216,
25 however
givesjipvTTovTEQ
as
Athenian for
TrvpeTToiTec,
7rf(/K(
7-01'
jjiJvx^Tijr,
so
that the use
of the word arose from the
chattering
of the teeth in a
fever,
/jpirrw
is
only
another
present
for
jipvKU).
It
seems
though
that
we
ought
to assume two stems of the form
jifivK,
one
with the
meaning avieptidtn'tovq
o^oiTau
fiera
xpixfjuv (lUesych..),
to which
belong
the
aspiratedftpvxh,/3f"v\w,
the other with
a
force
difiering
little
from that of tlie
apparently
related
ljij]pio(TKtii\^
3
b) y\uv(jaio,SieiyXavrra-uvtn Apollon.
Rhod.
1280,
cp.
yXavKO-c.
4) cpatTaujxai.
Homer has
only cecpay^ivoc,
the
tragediansonly
oi
-
perfect-forms.
The
present
occurs
first in Herodotus
{^paaaajxivoi;
iii.
13); Aristoph. (Ran. 545)
has
kcpaTTOfiriy,
and Plato
(Lys. 209)
cpalujieroi ;
the active first occurs m
Pollux. From
cpak,
gen. cpa/vo'f,
hand,
I have inferred
(Pi-inc.
ii.
98)
that the root is
cpuK,
while Fick^ i.
107 starts from
cpax
and
compares
this with the Zd.
drazh,
the Ch.-Sl.
druzati hold fast.
5) tipnarru)
the shorter form of
Tapaaeno
in
Pindar,
the
tragedians
etc.
Aor.
t6puL,a.
Perf.
rirp^yu.
6) it-iarrw, by-form
of
eitTrrw,
X 497,
cp.
above,
p.
164.
7) Trpo-irTcroiiUi
Archil, fr. 130 B.^
along
with
Trpo-iK-rrj-c
beggar
{"352)
and
npoi^ gift,present,apparentlybelongs
to the stem isk ask
for mentioned
on
p.
189.
8) Kkwaaoj, a rare by-foi'm
of
icXwi^u), only preserved
in Suidas s. v.
0wXar,
cp.
the Lat.
glocio.
9) XevatTio, poetical
from Homer onwards
(T 110),
no other tenses.
Not till
poets
of the
Anthology,
Manetho etc. do forms like
Xtiiaio,
*
Sa-^v(T(Teff6at,
Sai-Sva-ffeffdaf
(\Keadai,
known
only
from Hes3'chius,
is well
compared by
liosclier Stud. iv. lO'J with the Lat. duco,
Goth, tiuha.
CH. XI.
PEESENTS IN -aaco. 219
Xtvrrai;
occiu",
aud tliese
are
sometimes douLiful. The
k
is established for
the root
by
the Skt.
^o^^(Princ.
i.
196).
10) *yuct(7(Tw,
common
in Attic. In Homer
only arafui'^eiQ
r
92.
The aorist
tfiaytir, fxayevc, /L(a-,'(i,
^uyctpov,
point
to a rt.
fxay,
which
however
(Princ.
i.
405)
has
apparently
been softened from
^hk.
11)
fivaaio. atrofxvTTU)
first found in Attic
writers, airo
[.iv^afxtiog
Aristoph.
The Skt. 7nu?c aud the Lat. tnilmts
prove
the root to have
ended in
k,
which in
nmmjo
has been softened to
g (Princ.
i.
198).
12)
*j'U(To-wfrom Homer onwards
(yvfrrroiTeg
N
147, rvU
H
346).
y
shows itselfto be the real final letter of the root in
kvvyip',
which
however does not occm' before Plutarch. On its
origin
cp.
Prmc. ii. 165.
13) oaaofiai, Epic (il224)
from the rt.
ok
which is
preserved
in
oc-ulu-s,
is transformed in
just
the
same
way
in
onae (from ukl-e),
and
elsewhere
appears
labialised
as 6tt
(oxbofiai,
Princ. ii.
62).
14) Triaaw, m
generaluse
from Homer onwards
(A 513).
The late
by
-form TrtVrw has been mentioned on
p.
165. The
k of the root
appears
labialised in the other
tenses;
Skt.
^j"X',
Lat.
coquo (Princ.
ii.
65).
15) *7r//fTcrw a
late
by-form
of
"m'lywi.u
first found in Strabo and Dion.
Halic,
about which it is doubtful whether it is to be referred to the
original
stem
7ra/v- (Princ.
i.
332),or owes
its existence
only
to
analogy.
16) *7r\{iiTfTw, as
early
as a 231,
afterwards in
generaluse in com- 318
position.
Forms like
tirXijyrii' (T 31),irXtjyii
seem to
point
to a radical
y.
But the Lith.
j)lak-u=TrX)j"T(T"jj
and the nature of the
aa
allow
us to
conjectiu-e
that there
once was a
^ in its
place.
17) TrXitraofiui stride,4^
318
ev Ce TrXifraovTO
"Kocerraiv,
related to
trXit,
TrXiyjja,irXi^uc,a^ifinXiE,
and
therebyproved
to be of
guttural
stem.
Cp.
Princ. i. 203.
18) *7rpa(Taw
from Homer onwards
(i'
83
wpiiafrovai) by
the side of
TT/jH^w,
eTrpUL,a,
Tfinpaya.
The
y
is shown
by
the
Tr/jckoe
of an inscription
to have been weakened from
k (Princ.
ii.
327).
19) TTT-Z/ffrrw, a post-Homericpresent. Beyond
the
present
the stem
appears
with the
same
meaning
in
a
twofold form
: irra KUTa-irrij-riji'
(cp.
p.
127),TTE-TTTrf-bjc
i
354, 7rra-/c (.ara-Trrakwi' Aesch. Eumen.
252,
also
(/vO-u)-7rTJ/iai'
y 190.
20) nTvrraw,
from Homer onwards
{jrrvarTorTo
N
134) by
the side of
nTv^o/jat,TTTv^ai,tttvktoq
etc
tvtv^-eq tttv^-i)
show
a radical
)(,
which
perhapsoriginated
in
a k (Prmc.
ii.
105, 116).
21) TT-wffnrw, especially
in
poets
from Homer onwards
(A 371, (T
363),
but
only
in the
present-stem,evidently
of the
same root as
"Krijcraw.
A
remarkable
by-form
is
wTwiri^ai^iiiey
A 372. The
x
which
appears
in
Trrw^oc
has
apparentlycome from
a k.
22) pdaeru),
a
late
j)resent
" first found in Dion. Halic. viii. 18
[ivppa.T-
TovtTi)
" to the much older forms
tnippu^aaa(Soph.
0. C.
1503),
kiarep-
pa'x^j/r(Thuc). Cp. apiiaauj.
The final letter of the stem cannot be
determined with
certainty.
23) *pl](Trju), a
late
by
-form of
pyyi'v/ji
(cp.above,
p. 112),
an
altogether
difierent word from the Homeric
pi'tafftiv (no.44) stamp.
24) auTTw (Hippocr.
adtrnwt)post-Homeric. fftauy^iiioc(Aesch.
Ag. 644).
A
guttural
root is shown
by
the aorist adt,ai
(Hdt.Xenoph.)
and
auKoc, aiiyr],
wliile
Hippocrates
has
eaane
and other like forms.
25) *(T(pdTTw,
the
present-form in late Attic from Plato
onwards,
while
Homer, Herodotus,
the
tragedians
and
Thucydides
have
onlyai^d^u).
220 THE I-CLASS.
CH. xi.
The root is shown
by (T"/-a^at
and
i(j(piyr]v
to have been
cr^ay. Cp.
Princ. ii. 327,
26)
*TUfTfTio, post-Homei-ic
with
ru^io,eVa^a,
erayr))'
(post- Attic),
'319
royoc,
so
that the root
appears
to V"e
ray,
with which however no com- parisons
can be made from the related
languages,
roy
might easily
stand for *tuk:
27) TvatTu).
We
only
know rvaaef tKErevei Hesych.,
which it is
natural to
conjecture
to be I'elatedto the rt.
-vx Tvyxareiy.
28) *(/Y"((ff(Tw
a
present
to the Homeric
t(pput,a,
Ifftpaxf^i^v
first found
in
Hippocrates.
Forms with
a
y
like
icjipayriv, Tritppuya
do not
appear
before Plutarch. In the Attic
by-forms
(ppayrv/xi
or
fct^yru^/t
(p.112)
the
y
is due to the influence of the
r,
as in
"wXiyrvf.u.
Lobeck
saw that
(ppdrrtTio
Siiid
farciowere identical
(Rhem. 103). Cp.
Princ. i. 376.
29) (pplnau)
ordinary
Greek,
fpiatrei
N
473,
with
'ifpiEo, irecppkaai
A
383, fpit., (ppit^r],
so tliat there is
no doubt about
(/)pl^"
lx;ing
the root.
^^
30) *(f"pirTmo
a rpiite
late
by-form
of
tppvyio.
At Theocr. vi.
16,
xii.
9 the
reading
(ppvyeiy
has
decidedly
better
authority
than
(pplrreii'.
2)
Verbs from dental stems.
31)
aT-oiJai
= haCoi-iah
I
weave, only
known from Bekker Anecd.
452 and 461
(Lobeck
Rhem.
78).
The authorities
given
for it are in
the former
passage
Sophron,
in the latter
Hermippus
the
poet
of the old
comedy (Merneke
Com. ii.
382).
The form
ua^a
(Sophron)
establishes
the dental. It seems
then that ii-u^Eadui is related to uTreaOut in the
same manner as /3pa;w
to
fjpdfraio.
The
lexicographer
above-mentioned
holds the two verbs to be
one
and the
same
'
/i"ra/3o/\j/
tuii' cvo an
32) ftpcKTtTw, only
the
present-stem,
with the late
by-form ftpd^u),
is
found in the Attic
period (Plato,Aristoph.),ftpdau), 'ippa(n,
ijpa-a-^og
not till later. For a conjectureas to its
etymology
cp.
Princ. ii. 215.
33)
diaatadcW
lureir, iKenueii' Hesych. by
the side of iiK-o-defT-ra-c
and the aor. Biaaaadui,apparently
to be referred to the rt. diq
(Princ.
ii.
130).
34) d\d"Tnu), a by-form
for dXato
only
found in Galen and other late
or) A
medical writers. Even the latter is not attested
by any
old
writer,
while
i-d\u-(Ttv occurs as early
as o- 97,
and dXurr"jE at E 307.
Accordingly
it
has been
conjectured
tliat the root is d\ac.
35)\trT(r"juai
from Homer onwards
(A 174)
with the
aor. Xiriffdai
(n 47)
and
eWktu/u?;)' (A 35),woXvWkttoc, Xirii,
XiTurevw.
36) rirT"T(ii.iai
a ])oetical present [virrrjovTo
M
119, iiacunidak 42),
which not
unfrecpiently gets
a
future
meaning, constantlyreplaced
in
M.SS.
by rtinaonai,riitruijai, yiffo^m,
which are
rightlyrejectedby
most
modern editors. Buttmann Ausf. Gr. i. 375
n.
has
given
the best dis- cussion
of the word. A future
liimijai, as
I. Bekker
among
others writes
at 4'
76,
is
against
all
analogy.
For there
can be no doubt that
ret =
the
Skt.
nas,
the root which
appears
most
plainly
in
vv(t-to-c,
and that
ri{(T)-(o
has been formed from it without
any
strengthening,
while
viaaoj^uti
has the
expansionpeculiar
to this class
(and consequently="'"CT-(o-^uu,
Princ. i.
391). Cp. vam,
above,
p.
210.
37) TruoTTw,
from Homer onwards
(E 900),
also
ndaut,'tTrarra^Ud/rOtjv
in Attic writers. Fick^ i.135
compares
the Zend \Qvh
path-ydi-ti
of which
CH. XI.
PRESENTS IN -(t"tw.
'
221
the
present-form corresponds
to
ttcVitw, though
its
meanmg
'
fill
up
'
is a
long
way
from that of
Tranaiiv
'
strew.'
38) ndaffojdai'
ktrQiu)
Hesych., clearly
a
by-form
of
Trart'o^at,
which
points
to a rt.
Tror.
38
b) TrXao-rrw,
from Herodotus onwards
{ttXcitto)
in Plato
etc.).
Aor.
TrXafrae,TrXaoroe as
early
as Hesiod,
TTfTrXaoroi
iirXaaQr]
Attic.
39)
TT-iaabj Pherecr. Meineke Com. ii.
345, by
the side of
TTTirrai,
Ew-iadai in Herodotus and the Attic comedians. The word is unmis- takably
related to the
synonymous
Skt.
pish {pindsh-ini),
Lat.
pinso,
Ch.-Sl.
jnsq (Princ.
ii.
104),
The root shows in Greek
a r developed
after the
tt. Consequently
we
may compare
the Lat.
phis-io(Ennius
trag.
V.
396 Ribbeck
pinsibant)
with
wTicraw
for its
present-formation
as
well
as
its root.
3)
Verbs with stems of which the final letter is uncertain.
40)
vTTo-cpiiaffw
in late
poets (ApoUon.
Rhod.
etc.)
formed
on
the
analogy
of the Homeric
virol^piiffTi^p, only
in the
present-stem.
41) KvmcTtJh) poetical(o 809) only
in the
present-stem.
42)
Xvirfferai
'
ixniieraLHesych., a totally
isolated and therefore
suspectedgloss. Cp.
Xvrraa.
43)
racrau),
a
present-form
not found till late
prose (Athen.
iv.
p.
321
130),")'Oh"
0
122,
Karara^ai'TtQ Hdt. vii.
36, j'a;.Toc Hesych.,
but at
Aristoph.
Eccles. 840
nyarr^iiai
is the
reading
of the- M.SS.
(Dind.
I'cj^ay/ie'i'at)
and Theocr. ix. 9 vivaarai. It is
hardlyprobable
that it is
connected with
rai^oc, ruKi]
hide,fleece,
and I know of
no
other word to
connect it with.
44) f"'ifT(Ttj stamp
2 571 and in late
epicwritei^s, quite
distinct from
pj'iyi'V^ii,
more likely
to be identical with
paarrw (no.22)
and
ctpcto-crw
(no.51),
which have
a
guttural
stem.
45) (pXvaiTEi' spvyyaru
Hesych.,
a
by-form
oi
"pXv(i), (j"Xv^(o, (pXvrSai'oj,
with which
fXvcTau'a
is also connected. Nearer still is
fXvaei' niro-
ftaXtl, tpimi,
'Ciatiand
tKcfXvlai Apoll.
Rh. i. 275
(Lob.
Rhem.
101).
46) \pv--"i
'
TTTvei Hesych.
^
4) Eediiplicating
verbs.
(These
we will
give
without distinction of
stem.)
47) CEi-^iai7oiJ.ai transitive,frighten
N
810,
A
184, intransitive,
be
afraid B
190, dt^iTTOfXEtoc
Plato Phaedr.
p.
245
b,
in the former
meaning
there
are hi^iEEadai Y
201, hidi^airtim2 164.
48) iraKpafTorw
B 450
(Tvi' rrjiruKpacrrjovaa
CiEcravTO XaoK 'A
vaiwi',
then
not
agam
till
Apollon. Rhod., Oppian
etc.
Although
the
primary
meaning seems to be that of violent
rushing
about
(er^ourrtw^wc ^EpEadai
Schol.
Apoll.
Rh. iv.
1442)we can
hardlydeny
that it is connected with
the rt.
(pa (paii'ti) (cp.
IjSit.
fax, fac-ie-s, /ac-etti-s) .
49)
TToifvaao) snort,
first in
"JSTicander, though Tro/i^uy^rt
is
as
earlyas
Aeschylus,
which
proves,
in
spite
of
(ttvaan),
tliat the stem ended in
a
guttural(Princ.
ii.
117).
5)
Verbs with vowels of
a
late
development.
Under this head fall not
only
those with
a
protheticvowel,
such
as
222
THE I-CLASS. en. xi.
have met us
in other divisions
of tlie
i-class,
but also
one stem
which
has become disyllabic by
an
internal
development
of the vowels.
50)
a-'i(r(Tb) from Homer onwards
(P
662 arr/or a'irrnovni, Z 510
wfitnq
nvVrrorrnO by
the side of
i/;rcui"t
4)
126,
i'iiUy*
247,
'uiiaaiiut X 195.
From Pindar onwards there occur
also the contracted forms
^t^tw
(Att.
ooo
comic writers ^ttlj), Itrrror, "ft,oi, JiEa.
The final letter of the root
appears
in \'ii^:!| ro"wi' "(\a.
() 709. uirraEiv can only
be
brought
into connexion
with the Skt. rt. vij dart,fly
off,
whose
meaning
is
very
similar
(cp.
Pet.
Diet, imder vi"j), on
the
assumption
that the Indian
y
had been weakened
from k. Still I am not aware
of
any
certain instance of such
a
weaken- ing
in Sanski-it.
51) ufjivfrtTii),
from Homer onwards
{ufLVTrf.y
T
284)
with
uf.ivttiQ
(A 243),
KUT-u^LviuTo (E 425)
and the like. The
y
of the late
a/^ux''
^^
doubt came
from a
i;,
hence
afivK-aXur
a/:t?"c
Hesych. Cp.
the Lat.
muc-ro
Princ. ii. 165.
52) npnrrmo
ordinary
Greek, dparrire(e 248)
with
ufmEu)(^ 673),
nndxf^T](f 426).
It is
probably
connected with
pijrTau)
(no.44). Cp.
Princ. ii. 132."
53) 6(ivT(Tu) ordinary
Greek
(k 305),opii^w,urpv'Ea, KaTopvxnno^itrQa
Aristoph.
Av,
394, dpvxh,
not so good
Attic
oovyiy. Cp.
Princ. ii. 141.
The stem
opvx
apparentlyowes
its
x
(cp.
no.
50)
to the
aspiration
of an
orif^inalk. Fick^ i. 744
aptlycompares
the Lat, runcare to
hoe, runco
a hoe,
and is
perhapsright
too in
connecting
the
mining
term
cor-rugu-s
and ar-riiri-ia gallery
in a
mine.
54) Tctpdrrrru),
the
present-foi'm,
found in
common use
from Pindar
onwards,
of the stem
formed
by anaptyxis
of
an a
after the
p
of the stem
rapx
(Oimffffo)
no. 5).
The form
rapxr)-
-rip""tcHesych.
is instructive
(Princ.
ii.
319, 402). irdpalE
occurs as early
as
c
291 with
rtrplixf^i
" B
95,
cp. Tcipaxn.
Joh. Schmidt Vocal, ii. 314.
D)
Presents
in 4"-
1)
From dental sterns.^
1) /SXv^w. aiiojiXv^iuiv
I
491, also-/3\6w,
likewise with
a long v.
Forms of the future and aorist are hardly
to* be met with before
Aristotle
[avafyXvaai, Apoll.
Rhod. iv. 1446
'iflXvfTsr).
2) fipaCu).
The
only
authorities for this
by-form
of the
/3joo"7-(tw
dis-
323 cussed under no.
32 are
late
prose
writers.
3) /3u.^w, a
late and rare
by-form
of
j3vyeM(cp.
p. 184),
ftvo) (Aristot.)
in
an
intransitive sense 'crowd,
cluster'
(Aretaeus
'
i) nrvaig fivi^u'
Steph.Thes.).
ftEilvtrniroq
as early
as c
134.
4) iCo^iui
and
'/4w,'ii^ofjni, inseparably
connected with each
other,
notwithstanding
that the forms with
an
e,
as
Buttmann
(
Ausf. Gr. ii.^
202),
has
shown,
have the
inceptivemeaning
seat oneself,
and those with
an I
the durative
meaning
sit. Buttmann's
conjecture
that i'-^f-ro
is a
redu])licated
aorist like
i-criTe-To
is untenable because the
'origin
of
^
from
(Tc
which he maintains can
nowhere be established. It would be more
conceivable that
t^w, as
Kiihner Ausf. Gr. i. 837
assumes,
has arisen
*
*o^i"a"ro)xai (Princ.
i.
303)
does not occur
in the
present-stem
at all.
*
"\a.^(iv fiwpaivfiv(Hcsych.) probably belongs
here in viriue of /SAaS-apd-y,
/3\o5-^ljand other words with a 8,
en. XI.
PRESENTS IN ^.
.
223
fi'om a reduplicatedai-arei-jio, though
that cannot be
proved
either. It
is
prohablethough
that the
t,
as
in
ic-pv-io,
is
only
a
weakened
f.
" lu
Homer the ind.
]jres.
ei^("f.iai, a
foinn which Buttmann
suspected,only
occurs at
k
378
(f4f oi),
biit it is attested in
good
Attic
by Soph.
O. R. 32
and
Aristoph.
fr. 408 Dind.
(K(iOlC"fifti).
The
preteritefi^troetc.,
later
usually
in
composition
with
Kara,
is
"rdinary
Greek. "
I'^w,'It^o^ai
from
Homer onwards. " The rt. kt
(from
^f? = Lat. si'd in
sfid-eo,
Skt. sad etc.
Princ. i.
297)comes
out
cleai-ly
in the Attic future
i:aB-EC-ovf.i(ii (Aristoph.,
Plato),as too in
U-oc, eS-pa.^
5) kXuCw
from Homer onwards
[KKv^eoKov
^
61, eKXvaQr]
S
392).
Cp.
KXv^ioy,
Princ. i.
185,
ii. 300.
6) Kyli^w
from
Sophocles
onwards in the
present-stern,
found in the
aorist
tkTJ'iffa as early as Pindar, Kvinio,iKt'ifrOrjt'. Cp.
Fick^ i. 538.
7) Kpl^u),
deducible from the Boeotian
/"p"^?fjuf r yeXar,
cp.
Ahrens
Aeol. 175,
Piinc. ii.
258,
Lat. ridere. It is
probably
not the same Avord
as KpUeiif
shriek.
Sy KTiUo
the
present-stem
occurs
first in
Herodotus,
fV-rtrroin Homer 324
(\ 263). Cp. -KTi'fiErn-c p.
129 and Princ. ii. 300.
9)
o^io
from
Aeschylus
onwards, o^w^eu'
t
210. The
pure
2
comes
out in
o?-^)'/ as well, as
also in o"I-or and in the Lith. ^id-zu of the
same
present-foi-mation.
Princ. i. 302.
10) e^-TTu^o-fuai, only
in the
present-stem
in Homer
(II50, /? 201)
and late
poets,
but the dental of the stem is established
by Hesychius's
glosstfiTTdCTTripac i-ivdwy TriiTTwrac, /.tapTvpciQ (Lobeck
Bhem.
8).
eju-
"nuiu-c acquaintedwith, seems to be related.
11) Trpi'Cu) a
later
by-form
of
Trpt'w
Plato
(?)Theages 124,
Pollux vii.
114,
Herodiarti. 443.
13, ivpiaToc
though occurs as
earlyas o-
196.
12) (TKvO'^cii
A 23. The dental stem is established
by ETnaKvaaturo
7}
306 and the
synonymous
(TKv^fiairu) (O 592).
13) (TX'''4'w Xenoph.
Hellen. v. 4, 58, by
the side of
irxatj
(eaxoiv
Aristoph.
Nub.
409). tT\dtTb)
and
Efy\a(ja
occur earlier and
more oft^n.
*
14) "Txii^(i}.
The
present-stem
is in
general
use from Pindar
onwards,
'iffxKTf, ttrxirrO-q
are as earlyas
Homer
(3507,
II
316).
The rt.
o-^t^comes
out
clearly
in nominal forms like
r^x'^V, ""X^^"^-
Princ. i. 306.
15) fXd^io
a
present
assumed for the aor.
'ifXacov (they
burst
asunder)
in Aesch.
16) (/^XuiTw by
the side of
'7)Xi/w (tcpXve
$
361).(pXv^ei' am^el, cpXitrsi'
i^ecTsi Hesych. Cp. (pXvnau)p.
221, no. 45.
17) (ppd^u),
in
general
use
from Homer onwards
(fpd^so
S
3)
with
(fipdrru), ifpaffa, (.(ppdrrdrji',
Homeric
i.Tri(ppaBoi' (K 127).
On the Boeotian
(ppdrTfTO) see
Princ. ii. 226.
18) xa'^"^ dy-xai^eSoph.fr.
800
Dind., xd^ofiai(E 440),
fut.
x"'"''^''-
fiai,
aor.
"xa"""^"''".
The
pure
stem of the
original
root skad
occurs in
KEKaccji'
(A
334),
KEicdcovrn
(A 497),
Princ. ii. 110.
19) x^^^ Aristoph. Equ.
70. The dental stem is established
by
Xe"^ovfxni, ext(Ta, (C"xo"!a,cp.
the Skt. had. Princ. i. 245.
^
K\d(a}SiaffxiCoo Hesych., a by-form
of
Khdw,
which the well-attested
^nXaffa,
KXao-Tos,
kAo'Soj would
just
suit. Still the
testimony
to the
present-form
is not
clear enoueh to
gain
it
a place along
with the others.
'
Ao^o)vfipi^w only
known from the Schol. on Eurip.
Hec. 64 and
Hesych,
Ka^iiv e^vppi(eiv,
appears,
in virtue of XaaaffSw
x^fya^eVoHesych. to
belong
here. Lobeck Rhem.
76,
Princ. i. 450.
224 THE I-CLASS.
CH. xi.
2)
Presents in
L,
from
a
guttural
stem.
325 20) "(^(.iSo])h.
0. C. 134
{ovceyu'Covt), aCoi.iaL
A 21 and elsewhere
in
poetry.
The final letter of the root is shown to have been
y
by
ay-uc,
ay-jo'-e, ay-w-Q
and the Skt.
ja^ (Princ.
i.
208).
21) ftd'Co) poetical,
I
58, piftcKrai
B
408, tKftu^ei
Aesch.
Ag.
498.
22^
ftpii^io
A 223, unol^piEarrec"
151.
23) /3i'4w shriek,especially
used of the
cry
of the owl
{lyvagbubo),
t/ji'it
in late
prose ;
probably
of the
same som-ce as
the
ftvK-cu
ai'efxoi
(^jSvt^rciLjy arifjiujt'
Karehrjcre
h:ekfvBa
k 20).
24) ypv'Cw,
to
say
ypD,
utter
a sound,
from
Aristophanes onwards,
with
ypvEi'i^nt, eypvt,a (Clemm
Stu.d. iii.
293).
The form
ypvcrei
in
Aiistot. Probl.
4,
2 seems
from its
meaning
alone to be
no con- nexion.
25) Kka'Cio,
from Homer onwards
(U 429),
the
y
is established
by
(C"^\r;ywc {B 222),
iK\uyl,a(A 46)
etc.
26) k\oj'C^i.v to cluck,glocire,
cp.
cXwiro-w
above,
p.
218, no.
8.
27) Kpa'Cii) Aristoph. Equ.
287. The aorist
av-iKpayoi'
occurs
in
Homer
(i467),
KSKpaya,
KeKpaEopaioccur
in the dramatists. The
noun
Kpavyii,
whence
Kpavyai^ii).
KpavyarroQ
and the
KpavyfuaoiLUU
mentioned
on
p.
183
point
to a rt.
Kpvy
which
was
intensified to
Kpavy,
possibly
even
to a rt.
KpvK
(Princ.
ii.
148).
28) Kpi'(u)
Menander Mein. Com. iv.
295,
KCk-piyo-eQ
Aristoph.
Av.
1521,
but in Homer
we
find the fuller root
KpiK
Kpitce
IT 470.
29) tcpw^oj croak,
crocitare
Aristoph.
Aves
24, k'/cpw^ac
Arist.
Lysistr.
506
Kpwynoq.
30) X/^w a
late
present
to the Homeric
aor. \iylf.ftiiiQ
(A 125)
used
by
Nicander
(iTriXii^oyrue oitrrovg
Herodian ii.
802). Cp.
Lobeck Rhem.
79.
^
31) Xv^w. Apparently
the
pi'esent-stem
is all that
occiu'S
(Aristoph.
Ach.
690),
but the subst.
XvyE (stem Xi^yy)
and the
present-form
XvyyaynpiaL
mentioned
on
p.
180
put
it
beyond a
doubt that there is a
guttural
at the bottom of the
C-
Pollux iv, 185 knows of XvTTttv as
well.
32) ril,M,
from Homer onwards
(A 830, ^ 224) by
the side of
it'i^w
326
(r376),vi^paro(H 230),rt.'tTrroc (Z 266)
and the
present
vitttu)
discussed
on
p.
167. It is shown at Princ. i. 365 that what is
apparently
the rt.
rift
has arisen
by
labialism from
nig (Skt.niy).^
33) ttXuI^w smite,
strike out of the
way,
mislead,
from Homer on- wards
(B 132, t 389).
The
originalmeaning, by
which
7rX";'w (possibly
from
*TT\ayy-ju))
shows itself to be
a by-form
of
7rX//ao-w,
is most
clearly
to be
seen
in
Kvpia
irpogirXai^ov
M 285
(cp.
X
583).
In theaorists
"7rXay"n,
ETrXayx^Bvi'
and in
TrXayKrvc, as
in the Latin
plango,
the nasal is
cleai'ly
seen, cp.
also
7rX//y
rv^i
above,
p.
112,
and Princ. i. 345.
34) piliu)
do
(by-form'ip^w),
Boeot.
pil^M,
almost
exchisivelypoetical
(B 400),
fut.
piEio(X 31),
Aor.
eppe^a,
tpeta (I 453), pexBfP (I 250),
apeKTOQ.
At
p.
204
we
connected the rt.
Fepy,
with the
by-form J-pey
explainedby Siegismund
Stud.
v. 123,
with the Zd.
vctrez,
and the
\n-es.
'
A trace of a ird^wis to be
seen
in afi-Trd^ovrai
"
avairavovrai, d^Ta^ai
" ttoDo-oi
Hesych.,
forms wliich
can hardly
have
anytliin^-
to do with
e^Trasfo^ai.
It is
more
.likely that
tto^wis related to iravca as "Ct",dry,
is to avu.
CH. XI.
PRESENTS IN f. 225
p(.'Cii)
with the Zd.
verez-yd-mi.
On the relation of
'ip^cj (alsof'pcw)
to
pE":wcp.
Princ. i.
222,
ii.258.9
35) pvi^whark, growl,
which we
compared
ahove with the Lat.
rug-io,
is
only
known to us
from the
lexicographers (Pollux,Hesych.).
36) (Tt'Cu) hiss,
from Homer onwards
(i394).
tenia
is first found in
Paulus
Silent.,
but
(riyfxuc,
ait,ic are as early
as Aristotle.
37) (Twi^o)
cheep,
used
by Theophrastus
and Aratus of the note
of
a bird called sometimes mriruQ
and sometimes
ffiriyyoQ(cp.(rni'Ca
finch).
38) rTTcii^u),
The oldest witness to the
present
is
Hipponax
fr.57
Be.^,
0Ta'"f, ivifjTaKTai occur
in Homer
(T 39, /j 271). Cp.
oroywr.
39) art'Cu),
from Simonides C. onwards
(fr.
78
Be.^)or/^w, 'innla,
ariKTOQ.
The
y
comes out
plainly
in
ariyevc, ortywi', aTiy/ui],
as
also in
the Lat.
-stinguo(Princ.
i.
265).
40) acpd^w,
the older form for the Attic
(fipctTTu) (above,
p.
219),
g 320.
41) (Tfvi^d)
Plato Phaedr.
251,
later
acpvEai,
rrcpvyjioQ.
42) Tpi'Cw,
from Homer onwards
(w 5)
with
TETpiyCJTaQ
B
314, rerpi-327
y"i
* 714.
43) rpvi^w,
the
same,
i.
311,
later
eVjOv^a.
44) 0u'ifw, only
mentioned
by grammarians (Herodian
ii.
265) as a
present
to the Homeric
ntipvi^orec.
As the Lat.
fiiy-io
would be the
exact
counterpart
of a Gk.
^u^w,
this form is
probably
not an invention
but the real source
of the above-mentioned isolated
perfect,
as of 'bv/'a.
fv^ariKOQ, (pv^aXioc.
45) 0w^w,
a rare
by-form
of
0wyw, fwyvvfii
roast,only
found in
Hippocr.
and the comic
poet
Strattis
(Meineke
ii.
789,
where it is written
(pw'CEir).
Of these verbs from stems which show the
guttiu-al a
large
number
are imitations of natm'al sounds "
including26, as
many
as
15,
i.e.
nos.
21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36, 37, 42,
43. Even such
imitativ^e verbs
as are evidently
based on an
inteijection or a noun-stem
show, as we shall see later
on,
the same coui'se of
procedure.
There is
consequently
the
gi-eatestprobability
that the
following
onomatopoetic
words,
for which
we
do not find
any
forms with
y
't, or
)(,
also
come
from
a
guttural
stem.^
46) /3p""^w, vised,according
to a
passage
in Pollux
v. 88 which is
wanting
in the best
M.SS.,
of the
growling
of a bear, according
to
Hesych.,
in the
meaning
whine
(iiavxnocvpeaOai).
47) yXaitw.
In
Hesych.
Mor.
Schmidt, on the
ground
of the
alpha- betical
arrangement
reads
yXayya;^*.
But the Scholia
on Theocr. i. 1
(p.33,
17 ed.
Ahrens) quote
from Pindar
: anvrw
^eXoc yXu^tLc.
48) p"4'w,according
to Photius like
pv'Cii), bark,according
to
Hesych.
paCf-iy
r|Dwy"t)', K-up/wgETTt rwi' k-urw)' (pei'haps'scrunch'),
fufx^riKCoQ
iivX
-oil i']\ov.
The verses of Ci'atinus
(Meineke
ii.
33)
are rather obscure
(cp.
the Skt.
rd-ja-ti
he
barks).
"
No instance has been adduced of the
present pe'Cco
in the
meaning fli/e, but
only of the aor. ("e^ai,
which is rendered
by )3a4"""
and from wliicli
come
piyos,
^ayevs
and
perhaps pfjyos
Herodian ed. Lentz. ii. 577.
'
Such conclusions
as these are deceitful at the
best, for
ypi(e(T6ai
^veep (\pi(o-
jueVrj* K\alov(xa)
shows
by iipiSef
iKKavcrev and
xpivSeaOai.'
K^aieiv that its stem ends
in a dental, " This notice of this rare
verb
may
suffice.
Q
228
"
THE I-CLASS.
CH. XI.
49) fTKv'Cit) as an onomatopoetic
verb is distinct from
no. 12,
and is
used
accordingto,Hesycli.
of the
snarling
of a dog (aKui^ovaiy
"
iiffv^i]
vTTofdtyyorraiwaTTtp
Kvfei;).Cj).(tkv^uv
Pollux
v. 86.
328 3)
Presents witli undeterminable stems.
50) a^w, dry (trans). a'CojiEri]
A
487,
then in Hesiod and Alcaeus.
Cp.
a^oXfor.
Clearly
related to
avw.
51) fipv^u), drink, only
Archil, fr. 32 Be.^
62) ?ii^w, apparentlybelonging here,
has been
already
discussed
on
p.
105 f.
53) Xa^nnui
as earlyas B 418
\aO"taro,
E 371
eXai^em,only
found
in
poets
and in
Hippocates,
with the
by-form Xa^vfiai
mentioned on
p.
122, apparently
related to the rt.
Xo/3.
54) Xii^w,explained by Hesych.
among
other
meanings by
Trai'Cu).
Lobeck Rhem. 79 connects the verb with the
XrU'w
mentioned
on
p.
223.
55) /iii^w, suck,
with the tense-formation of
a
derivative verb
fxvi^t'ia-w,
f/xvi^r]fTa, by-forms /uv^'ow,jxv'Cfw,
from
Xenophon
onwards.
56) fivii^w,
gi-oan, murmur,
9 457
k-nifivldr,
which reminds
us of the
Lat.
mugio
;
the
present
occurs in
Aristophanes,
and
'i^vfftv
is
quoted
from
Hippocrates,so that the stem is undeterminable.
57) p'^i'w, only
known from
Hesychius's
obscure
gloss()i'(uv
rpwyuv,
Kaiiiv,fjvcrriXuiTdcn, HrjXa^eiv.
58) rrmi^u), only
in the
present-stem
in Homer
(A 811)
and late
prose-writers.
From
prose
of
a
very
late date
nKUfrf-inQ
is
quoted,
but
this
solitary
indication of
a
form that does not
belong
to the
present-stem
is
by no means enough to establish oKal
as
the verb-stem. The Skt,
khang points
rather
(Princ.
i.
475)
to a rt.
avoy.
4) Reduplicating
verbs
(cp.
Fi'itzsche de
reduplicatione Gr.,
Stud.
vii.).
59) appd'Cw(also
written
npo'Zfw)
and
ap/illoj
denote
a
cry
uttered
by a
dog,
which is not a bark,
Pollux
v. 86, on
op/j/;wcp.
Bekk. Anecd. iii.
1452.
Cp. no.
48.
60) j3aftai^w.ftaftdi^ftv
'
to (^*")) cir]pQptof.iei'n Xtyeir.
tvtni ce ftndr.
The
fit)
is due to a
conjecture.
To this
belongsliijiuKT^c, which,
among
other
meanings,
has that of
KpavyaooQ.
Cp.
no. 21. Another
ijaftdi^io,
perhaps
related to
ftuivw,
may
be discerned in the
glossfiafidlai-
op^v-
ffatrOai, /3o/x"Krr;c
'op^^ijirrj/c.
o29
61) ftifiai^u)
is likewise of twofold
origin,
if
Hipponax
fr. 53 Be.^
really
wrote
tj.ifiiftuiuvTeQ-=kf.ii^oiiaarTBc, as
is stated in the E. M.
(Schneider
IfiftaftdtayTec).
" The
ftiftdc^io
which
belongs
to the rt. flu
is used in a
causative sense
(otherwise/3(/3at-, /3t/3aw
cp, p.
105)
from Herodotus
onwards with the fut.
jJiiVinw, i^iftui, aor. "/3"73a"ra
etc,
62) ftotftvCeiv o-aXTTj^cu'Hesych.
63) yoy-yii^w
and
yoyyvfffioc,
found in the N.
T.,are given by
PhryniehuB
p.
358 as lonisms. The rt.
ywy
(Princ.
i,
220)
may
be
deduced from the Skt,
guv(f (Brugman
Stud. vii.
211).
The
sama
change
of a guttural
to a dental stem as in
(rca^w.
64) i-Xe-Xi^eif
shake, upheave (trans.):
fityay
^' IXiXi^ty
"OXvfnroy
I
CH. XI.
KEDUPLICATED PRESENTS. 227
A
.530,II
c'
iXeXi-^^Oi]
-rraaa (^ravc)
fx
416, TiTpciopkiQ IXtXtx^doroQ
Pind.
Pyth.
2,
4 is
aptlycompared by
Pick Ztschr. xfx. 252 witli the Skt.
re(f{regd-
mi)
which in the active is
exactly
synonymous,
and is used in
just
the same
way
to denote the
shaking
of the
earth,
and with the Goth, laikan
spring,
hop,
wliich coincides with the use of the middle of the Sanskrit word.
From the root
Xiy
then there came by
the
piefixing
of
an e
and
redupli- cation
the. intensive form
i-XE-Xiy-jio.
But this
meaning
does not suit
those Homeiic
passages
in which eX^XlEai means turn
round,
and tXtXi-
Eaadai writhe,
twist about. These
belong
to kkirrfTM. There is
a
third
iXiXi^u)
which
as an
onomatopoetic
verb ranks with
aXaXa'Cu)
and oAo-
Xv^w.
In these last three verbs the
'C
is derivative.
6.5)KdyKui^w
or
Kh\aCio laugh (in Hesych.
also
KaKyJic^u)).
The
second of the three forms occurs at
Soph. Aj.
198
Dind.,
Ar. Eccl.
849,
a.viKuy')(aai
at Plato
Rep. 337,
fut.
khx"'1^
Theocr.
5, 142, by
the side of
Kay\(t(T^i6c^ co^a(T|((Jc, cp- icay)(ciX(')u)(n (Hom.er).
66) KaKKa'Ciir,
cackle
(Hesych.), cp.
Pollux
v. 90.
67) Ka)(Xa(^eiy,
of the sound made
by a liquid,dash,
gurgle
Pind.
Aesch.,according
to
Hesych.
also used of
laughter.
Q^) KixXiO''laugh (Aristoph.).
69) XaXci^M,
XaXate'
f3an Hesych.
Anacr. fr. 90
Be.^, XoXcUairu*
(ioijaavTEc^
cp.
\aXf(",XuXayi],
70) -KucpXaCoi
N
798, roar,
heave
(ofwater),more common
in Aristo- phanes,
later also used of
stuttering, TriK^iXarjjjLn.
71) Trnnrii^u) cheep,
also
7r"7r/;w,Aristoph.
72) TTOTnrvi^io Aristoph.Vesp.
626
iroTnrvnjioc.
73) t'it'i^w,
Zenodotiis's
reading
"
rejectedby
Aristai'chus " at B 314
330
(rIr/4'o)?-ac)
for
rerotywrae.
Aristarchus knew the verb
however, and,
according
to the scholion of
Ai-istonicus,
held it to be suited
only
to the
ordinarytwittering,
not to the
frightenedcry
of
sparrows.
74) Toi'dpv'Cd) mutter, only
in late
poets(Oppian)
and
lexicographers,
the commoner form is
TovBopv'CM(Aristoph.).^
On the numei-ous
words in this listwhich denote the cries of animals
copious
information
may
be found in
Wackernagel's
Voces variae ani-
mantium Basel
1867, though
the author has not referred to the valuable
Cullection of words in Pollux
v.
86.
Finally
we
may
place
here
a
word whose
etymology
is still
obscure,
i.e.
75) aaTrai^oftnt.
The initial
a seems to be
prothetic,
like that of
a'iaaw,
cipcKTffut,
though
it
certainlymight
be the remnant of
reduplica- tion,
as
in
appa'Cw.
Diintzer Ztschr. xiii. 10 connects it with
aTraw.
In
Homer there
occurs
only ijmTa'CovTo(K 542) by
the side of
amranTik:,
affiracrlwc. The dental stem is established
by
these forms and the Attic
aaTraffuadai
(Eurip.Xen.).
Taken
together,
the verbs which form the
present
in this
fashion,
and which are to all
appearance
primitiveverbs,are shown
by
this review
to be
very
numerous. There
are in all
233,
very many
of
them,
it is
true,
but little
used,
and
some few half obsolete. Out of these thei'e
are
21
presents
which have
kept
an i
and 212 which show the effects left
by thej.
Under the latter head there are 26
presents
in
X\w,
31 in
pM,
*
TwOdCetv
jeer at,
also duToi^etu,can hardly
be
a reduplicated
word.
Cp,
Lobeck
Paralip.
47.
q2
228 THE I-CLASS.
CH. xi.
23 in
I'M,
ono
stem in
k-w,
56 in
aa^,
and 75 in '(u). Of
reduplicating
verl)s
sliowing
often
an
intensiv^e
or
iterative
meaning
this class contains
37
:
7 in
X\w,
5 in
pw,
6 in
via,
3 in
aau),
and 16 in
4'w,
But this
by
no means
completes
the circle of
presents
of this formation. We referred
on
p.
147 to the probability
that verbs like
Hvm, Xvw, (piio)
have lost
a _;'.
Still this is not all
;
the vast tribe of derivative verbs all
belong here,
and for this
reason we
shall
proceed to treat of them in
an 'appendix'
to the
present
chapter.
229
APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
331
ON DENOMINATIVE VERBAL FORMATION.
The
same
syllable ja,
which is the basis of the
widely-ramifying- present-
formation of the verbs
justdiscussed,
has to a
very large
extent served the
purpose
of
making
derivative verbs. In Sansla-it derivative verbs
mostly
follow the
so-called tenth
class,
of which the
present
in the 1st
sing,
ends in
-ajd-mi.
It
was clearlyrecognisedby Bopp
" and stated
among
other
places
in his
Vgl.
Gr.
\.~225 ft'. " that to these verbs
correspond
the Greek verbs in
aw, fw, om,
the
Latin in
are, ere,
all the weak verbs of the Teutonic
languages,among
Avhich
the Gothic which have
kept
the
j
are
the most
instructive,
and
a
largeportion
of Slavonic a,nd Lithuanian
verbs,
among
which the
j
is
more or
less
widely
spread.
This view is advocated
by
Schleicher
(Oomp.^ 340),
Leo
Meyer (Vergl.
Gr. ii.
3),
and Scherer
(Zur Geschichte der deutschen
Sprache
p. 183),
so
that
we
shall not be far
wrong
in
saying
that the above-mentioned derivation of the
most extensive class of derived verbs from the
singleprimaryform,
which has
survived in
Sanskrit,
is the view
generallyadoptedby ComparativePhilology.
This view has nevertheless not been without its
o^spouents.
Pott,
in his
Et. Forsch. ii.^
977,brings
forward at
great length
the difficulties which stand
in the
way
of
'
making
the various weak verbs of the Indo-Germanic
languages
all
spring
from
one
stalk
" the Sanskrit 10th class.' All he
really
does how- ever
is to
giveexpression
to doubts and
objections turningmainlyon
the various
meanings
associated with the various derivative formations in the several lan- guages,
and
rightly
calls attention to the fact that
many
such formations were
'
afterbirths,'
which did not take
shape
until
they
had reached the soil of
the several
languages.
That
on
the other hand the
type
and
starting-point
for all the forms under discussion must be
sought
in these same Sanskrit 332
verbs,seems to me as
clearly
established after Pott's exhaustive
investiga- tion
as before. And this
surely
is all that
was
held
by
anyone.
For the
assertion that the Greeks formed
no verb in
ew or
ow,
the Romans none
in
are,
ere,
that had not its exact
prototype
from that identical stem in
primitive
Indo-
Germanic,
is too
preposterous to have been made
by any
reasonable scholar.
It
was
necessary,
no
doubt,
to establish and elucidate
more clearly
the
ramiti-
cation maintained
by Bopp,
and in
so
doing
to bestow
fitting
attention
upon
the
meaning
of these formations. We
may say
at once
that this latter
point
throws but
slightdifficulty
in the
way
of
Bopp'stheory,
for the reason
that
the Sanskrit verbs in
-ajdmi,though set down for the most
part
as
'
causatives'
jn oiu-
grammars
and
lexicons,
in
reality
often show
quite a
different
meaning,
and that of
just as
various kinds
as are
shown
by
the derivative verbs in
European languages.
For
instance,
the Skt.
dharshdjd-mi
venture on something,
is in
DO
way
different from
dapa-ew,
and
rghdjd-mishake,
rage may
even in
230 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
luoaiiing
be
compared
without
difficulty
with
opxeofiai,
wliile the
really
causative
smarujd-ini
make to think,
call to
mind, agrees
with the Goth,
mi'rjan
and the
Latin
reduplicated
mcmordre.
The best review ot" the manifold Indian forma-
tiona is to be found in Delbriick
p.
200 ff.
Tlie
prevailing
view of the
origin
of the derivatives has of late been
attacked,
in
particular by Oorssen, on a point
of
importance.
In his
Aassprache
ii.'^733.
wliile
admitting
the connexion with the Sanskrit verbs in
-ajci-mi
in the
case oi
the Latin verbs of the
e-
and
i-coujugation,
he
emphatically
denies it in that ol
the
fl-conjugatiou.
On
p.
73G he leaves it
an
open question
whether the Greek
verbs in
-am are
aJso to be excluded from this connexion. The formal and
distinct contradiction of
one
of the main
points
of the
theoryon
the
part
of
so
distinguisheda scholar
compels me to
examine,
however
briefly,
both the
grounds
lie
allegesagainstBopp's view,
and the
theory
which he himself
propounds.
Oorssen's main
objection
to what till then
was
the
prevailing
doctrine is
this,
" that it is
improbable
that the
same
formation should have
been transformed in
so
many
different
ways
" that the old
ajd-mi
should
appear
333 now as
-ao,
now as
-eo,
now as
-io. This
objection,
if
valid,
would serve
equally
to
disprove
the
oi'iginal identity
of the Greek verbs in
-aw, -ow,
and
-fw
which
so
often take each other's
places,
as
also the
originalidentity
of the three
Gothic weak
conjugations,
and the
same principle might
even excite doubts
as
to that of the Latin verbs in
-eo
and -io.
Still,
if the
same
suffix -tar has
survived in Greek as
-rtp
{Trarep)
and
-rop
(prjrop),
-far as
-rcop
(prja-Tcop,
Lat.
dator)
and
-rr^p
(Borrjp),
if the suffix
-os
appears
sometimes
as -os (-ms)
e.g.
in
decus,decerns,
sometimes as -es (-os)e.-g.
in
genus, genei--is,
if Corssen himself
regards
uot
only
these
suffices,
but also
-oii
and
-en {-in),
-ont and
-ent, -aio,
and -eio
as
in each
case essentially
the
same,
this
is,
I
think,a sufficient dis- proof
of the
applicability
of this
principle
in
general,
and it
even
proves
unmis- takably
on
the other hand that what
were originallypurely phonetic
trans- formations
have not
unfrequently
led to the
growth
from
one and the
same
primary form,
of different
secondaryforms,
which have
then,
in the
course
of
time,won
themselves
a separate
existence.
Objection
is taken in the second
place
to the
disappearance
of the
j
between
the two rt-sounds.
'
Neither in
Latin,'says
Oorssen,
'
nor
in Oscau does i
or
/
ever
fallout between two "'s without
leavinga trace,
and
allowing
the
a-a
after- wards
to
run together
into a.' This
may
as a
matter of fact be
quite
true
;
still
I do not think there is much to be
gainedby phonetic
rules which
are of
purely
theoretical construction,
and not deduced from
a
series of
given cases. How
often,
I should like to
know, was an opportunitygiven
in the Italian
language
for a
j
to fall out between two a's ?
Besides,
the
assumption
that those who
identify
the Latin doma-t with the Skt.
damdja-ti
hold that
an
i fell out
betw^een two
a's,
is
a
mistaken
one.
For it is certain that the
a
of the thematic
vowel
(op.p. 145)
had
split
up
into
e
and
o long
before the
j
fellout. The
un-
contracted Greek forms make this
as clear as can be. We here have
actually
occurring
forms like
Sa/xtiei,
and can consequently
have no
hesitation in
assum- ing
a
middle form
*damajet
between
dantajn-fi
and dotndt.
The/, then,
has
fallen out between a
and e.
Now of this
disappearance
aes - Skt.
djas
furnishes
334 ns
with
an
undoubted
instance,
for in this
case
the middle form
aes
has
actually
survived in
aeueiis
== aes-neu-s (ITmbr.
ahcsnes Corssen i.
103).
The 1st
sing.
domo has
evidently
been contracted from do)na-6.
Why
the
spirant,
which
(cp.
Corssen i.
308) so readily
fallsout between vowels "
e.g.
in
Pompeus by
the side
DENOMINATIVE VERBS.
231
of
PompcJHS,
ill
mireu-s by
the side of
xp^a-fios
and the Skt.
-eja-s,
in
quadri-gn
for
quadri-ju(ja"s\io\M
have been
inviolably protected
from
falling
away
by
the
very
fact that a long a
went before
it,
I cannot conceive.
In the
case
also of
the
genitives
in as
in Old
Latin, Umbrian,
and Oscan
{escds,
Osc.
moltds)
I
still think it
probable,
in
spite
of what Corssen
(i.*^ 770) urges
in behalf of
a
different
view,
that between the
a
at the end of the stem and that of the
genitive
termination,
there has been lost
the,;
which survives in the Skt.
-d-j-fis.
Where
else
can
the
a
be said to manifest its
power
of
defending
the
j
from e,xtinctiou
?
With
Mdja, mdjor, djo
the case
is
quite a
different, one
;
here the
j
has
come
from
gj
and was
probablypronounced differently,
as
in
pcjor
and other
forms.
A further
objection
is
expressedby
Oorssen as
follows :
'
Among
the
super- abundance
of Latin verbs of this
conjugation,
there are hardlyany
which would
correspond
in root with
a
Greek verb in
-aw or a
Sanskrit verb in
-ajdmi.'
In
his
note he mentions the verbs bovare
{rebuare),comare,
cacare compared by
Leo
Meyer
with
/Soof,Ko^av, kokkciv,
as
the
only
three instances of such
a cor- respondence,
and tries to
get
rid of the Latin verbs
by showing
them to be
borrowed from the Greek. Whether he was right
in so regarding
them I will
here leave
an
open
question.
But beside these verbs there
are a large
number
of
undoubtedlygenuine
Latin verbs which
can
without
any
etymological
diffi- cult}'
be
compared
with Sanskrit verbs in
ajd-mi,
Greek verbs in
-aw,
and
Teutonic weak verbs. It
may
suffice here to enumerate the
following
11
(cp.
below
p.
23G) :
335
If we include the Greek verbs in
ow
and
afw, which,
as we
shall
see directly,
are
of the
same
origin,
we
get
a
far
greater
number of
corresponding
formations.
This,
it
seems
to
me,
is
a sufficient confutation of this
objection,
as of all that
Oorssen has advanced
againstBopp'stheory.
232 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
Corssen's o-wn view is that the a
of the
a-conjugationcorresponds
to the
final letter of
noun-stems,
and
never
had
"
j
after it. In
deriving
multd-re from
multd he
supposes
that the thematic vowel
was
added
immediately
to the
noun-
stem,
that,
e.g.,
multd-t stands for
an original
multd-at
or vmltd-e-t. But the
addition of the thematic vowel to
the
already
established vowel at the end of
the
stem,
is
phoneticallyimprobable,
and is without actual
precedent.
For the
number of forms in which two a-sounds have stood side
by
side from the be- ginning
is^almost
a vanishingquantity,
and the
etymologicalrule,
that where-
ever
two vo
wels of the kind come into immediate
proximity
the chances
are
that
a consonant has fallen out between them has always been found to hold
good.
Corssen's Sanskrit instances
prove
nothing.
A form indld-tA he
crowns
from mala
garland
is nowhere to be found in the Pet.
Diet.,
for the
reason,
as
Delbriick tells
me,
that it is
exclusively
confined to the
tolerably
late
subsidiary
grammatical
work
Siddhanta-Kaumudi, a
book which contains
many gram- marians'
fancies. That this
very
singular
form
was actually
used
we cannot
imagine
for
a
moment,
the real causative from 7ndld
being tndld-ja-ti (Pet.
336
Diet.).
And
even
if we are
to believe that forms of the kind
were tried in
Sanskrit,
it would be hard to
prove
that the d before the
personal
termination in
this
language
was the
product
of
an a
and
an added thematic vowel.
Anyhow
then it is
a great
mistake to draw
any
conclusions from such
a
form
as to the
state of
things
in
primitive
Indo-Germauic times. There
are denominatives in
Sanskrit,
with the verb-stem the
same as
the
noun-stem,
but the last letter of
the stem is
always short,
e.g.
IbhitCi-tihe is
red,
from lohita. But
even
such
forms
are not
by
any
means
of
earlygrowth,
and there is
very
little of the kind
in the Vedas
(Delbriick
p.
217).
The utmost to be
gained
from the
analogy
of
these forms would be the vindication of
a
Latin *novere from
novo, *pie"-e
from.
pio,
a
kind of formation which is of
strictly
isolated
occurrence
in
Greek,
e.g.
Ofpfxero
6
437,
^fiXero Aristarchus at
tj
289. In these
very
rare
formations the
short final vowel of the
noun-stem is taken
as
it stands
to
make the thematic
vowel. Whether such forms
are imitations of the
same
types
as we met with
inider the ^-class and the nasal class
(pp.
164 and 173
f.),or are
of
quitea new
stamp, may
be left
an
open question.
In
no case
have
they anything
whatever
to do with the
questionable
verbs characterised
by long
vowels. The Greek
rt/iao) clearlyshows,
besides the
loriff
final vowel of the
stem,
the vowel which
we
call thematic
as
well. For such
a
union
as
this
we
shall look in vain
elsewhere. For
even
in the Greek verbs in
va, evw,
and the Latin in
no
like
acu-o,
statu-o where such
a
union has
apparently
taken
place,
we
shall find
(cp.p.
240 f.
below) good reason
to
assume
the loss of
a/.^
A
more thorough-going
attack has of late been made
upon
Bopp's
view
by
337
Savelsberg,
who in theZtschr. xxi. in his
*
Umbrische Studien
'
not
only
denies that
there is
any
connexion between Italian derivative verbs and the Sanskrit verbs
in
-ajdmi,holdinginstead,on
the
ground
of
a few Old-Italian verbs of
equivocal
'
Corssen has in his last work
(p.
493
ff.)
made another effort to vindicate his
theory.
He
alleges,as
far
as I
can
see,
no new arguments,
and
seems
to
ignore
tlie most undeniable facts in the
liistory
of
language.
He
ignores
the loss of the
J in the
ordinary'
Greek /ueei^ai which is
clearly
established
by
the
Aeolic/usOuia',
and
the other traces 1 have
pointed
out of
an " in Greek derivative verbs, as
also the
fact that the contraction of a Latin a'titow,
which he
denies, occwcsm Saturtmshy
the side of
an older Sa'i'turnm
(on
wliich head an untenable
conjecture
is
advanced at i.
ilT),
in nu'i lis= ma-rel'/ii,and in amdrunt for amdv-crunt.
(Cp.
Corssen himself
'
Aussprache,'
i.^
317.)
I
I
DENOMINATIVE
VERBs! 233
meaning
and obscure
form,
such
e.g.
as
the Osc.
tribrn-aka-v-um,
that these have
lost
a
V,
but
even givesexpressionon
p.
197 to the like denial for
one
and all of
the Greek verbs of the
same description.
I do not
imagine
that this view is
shared in
by
many
and I therefore content
myself
here with
noticing
it in
pas- sing,
the
more
so,
that I believe that the whole of the
followingexposition
will
place
in the clearest
light
the close connexion of the Graeco-Italic derivative
verbs with the Sanskrit verbs of the 10th class and all kindred formations in the
related
lansfuaires.
We will
proceedthen,
in
spite
of these
objections,
to derive the Greek
con- tracted
verbs from the verbs in
-ojd-mi.
The next
question
that arises
is,
what
are we to
say
about the
origin
of these verbs in
-njd-mi
? Two
explanations
of
them have been advanced.
According
to
one,
which follows in the
steps
of the
Indian
grammarians,
the element which is the characteristic of the verbs of the
10th class is
properlyspeakingi,
and
consequently, e.g.
in the
case of the Skt.
ved(i-jd-nii
I malve to know,
the stem to be
given
is
ved-i,
and the
aja
is
an
after- growth
from
this,
due to
an
addition of sound
(Guna)
and the affixed thematic
vowel. This view has been
developed
most
consistently by
Grassmann Ztschr. xi.
81 if. It
compels
Grassmann
altogether
to
separate
verbs
which,
like
namas-jd-
mi I
honour,
from ndtnas
reverence, clearly
show
an
added
-jri,
from those in
-ajd-mi,as
also to
deny
that
any
connexion exists between the first
a
in
-ajd-mi
and the final
a
of noun-stems. In Sanskiit this division into two classes is
ap- parently
favoured
by
the difference of the accent. The verbs of the tenth
class,
the so-called
causatives,
accent the
a
before the
syllable-ja
;
vedd-ja-ti,
while the
others
accent the
-ja
itself:
deva-jd-ti
he
serves
the
gods.
But Delbriick
(p.209)
shows that
'
the
partition
between the two classes is not free from
gaps.'
The
following
verbs
e.g.
are unquestionably
denominative
: arthd-je
'
strive,desire,
from drtha-s
aim,advantage,mantrd-jedeliberate,
from mantras
counsel,7nrgd-je hunt,
which in
meaning
is to be referred in
just
the
same
way
338
to
)nrgd-sgazelle, as 6rip-da
is to
6x]p.
Such
comparisonsas these
give
the
greater probabilityto the second
view,
which is
especiallyrepresentedby
Schleicher
Comp.^
341 and Leo
Meyer
ii.
19, according
to which the first
a
is
identical with the final
a
of
a large
number of
noun-stems.
We
cannot,
it is
true,
find
a noun-stem in
a
for
every
verb in
ajd-mi.
But there
is,on
the
one
side,nothing
to hinder
us
from
assuming
that there
were large
numbers of stems
of this character at an earlyperiod,
while
on
the
other,
it
was precisely
in the
formation of derivatives that the force of
analogy prociu-ed
for
a form,
when
once made, a
wide
extension
of its
original
domain. The
syllable-ja
however
is in that
case
clearly
the
same which
we
have found
dischargingon so largea
scale the function of
a
present expansion.
It
might
be
objected
that there is
an importantdifference
here,that,
whereas in the fourth class of Sanskrit verbs
the
syllable -ja
is confined
to the
presentstem,
in the tenth it
extends, along
with the
preceding
a, through
all tenses. Greek itself however can
show
us
that this dift'erencehas
nothing
to do with the
special
nature of the denominative
verbs. Numerous denominative verbs such
as
e.g.
ttoikiXXw from ttoikiXo
(for
noiKi\-]oi), 6avfj.aivco
from
Oavfiav(for 6avpav-j(o), c})v\daa-oo
from
(pvXaK(for
(pv\aK-ja))
have this addition
only
in the
present-stem,
and form the
remaining
tenses
straight
from the
unexpanded stem. We have
repeatedlyseen
that the
general
relation between
present-stem
and verb-stem is not
rigidly
determined
by an impassablebarrier,
and
we
may
therefore well
assume that the habit of
regarding
the
syllables aja,
like their late
phoneticrepresentatives
in Greek
234 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
d,
T}, a,
as a fixed element in tlie stem was only
introduced
graduallyas
time
went
on.
In tlie Vedas forms like the late future
1wraj-is]ijd-7ni
and the like
(Delbriick p.
184) are rare.
Nor is it unheard of in
Greek,
and still less in
Latin,
that derived contracted verbs should have
part
of their stem movable
:
e.g. yoaw,
aor.
e-yo-o-i',
Lat. domd-re
pf. ilom-ui,fricd-re ^art.fric-tu-s.
This
diHereuce then can hardly
shake
us
in the conviction that this
syllable -jawas
the main element in all derivative formation for all the
languages
of
our
stock,
339
If
now
in the verbs in
ajd-mi
i\iQvowel which
pi-ecedes
this
syllablewas
from
the first the final vowel of the noun-stem which is the basis of tlie
verb,
it is
easy
to see
how the bond between the final letters of the stem and the
special
form assumed
by
the derived verbs should
never have been broken. What is
more, we
shall
see
in this
very
relation, as oiu* more
detailed examination will
show
us
later
on,
the main
explanation
of Avhat is at first
sightso surprisinga
multiplicity
in the forms assumed
by
this
widely-ramifying
class.
The Greek derived verbs fallinto ;(Areeclasses.
T\iejirst
consists of those which,
come
from vowel-stems and
keep
the
vowel,e.g. Ti^ia-m,
hrfKo-w, fxr^vl-w, 8aKpv-co,
api(niv-u".
The second
comprises
the verbs which
come
from consonantal
stems,
e.g. fiiKalvo),
i.e.
p.(\av-ja",
reKpaiponai,
i.e.
TeKpap-Jo-fxai, Krjpvaa-co
i.e.
KrjpvK-joo.
The third
comprises
those whose final vowel has been knocked off before the de-
rivJitive
termination, syncopated
vowel-stems as they might
be
called,e.g.,
Kada'ipu)
for
Kadap-j"a
from
Ka6apn,ayyeXXco
for
ayyik-jun
from
ayytXo, (fxippdacru)
lor
(j)appaK-ja"
from
(f)appaKo.
The third class is
obviouslyvery neai'lycon- nected
with the
second,
and
as the
phonetic
processes
are
the
same
in
both,
it is
not
always
easy
to determine whether the noun-stem which forms the base of
the verb had
a vowel
once,
or always
ended in
a
consonant. For these
reasons
we shall
join
the second and third classes
together
and
arrange
the verbs in tivo
main
divisions, thejitst
in which tli" sound before the derivative suffix
-ja
is
a
vowel,
the second in which it is
a consonant.
Briefly
the first main division
may
be called the vocalic and the second the consonantal. No doubt each of
these classes has been
developedbeyond
its
original domain,
and hence the
grow- ing
force of
analogy
is
an
element of
importance
which must be taken into ac- count
throughout
the whole of this
investigation.
I. VOCALIC DIVISION.
1. Verbs in
-aw, -aioo, -a^co.
It is an importantfact,
which meets us
when
dealing
with the
question
of
the connexion of the contracted verbs with the Sanskrit verbs in
ojd-mi,
that
340
"^"^ ^'"^^
^till
point
to some traces of
they
at this
place
in Greek. I have called
attention at Stud. iii.191 to the remains of derived verbs which
kept
the
i.
The
I has survived after an o
in "n-aXatoi
(Boeot.770X170))
which it
can hardly
be doubted
is
a denominative formed from the stem naXa
(r)ndXr]wrestling), especially as we
find
an
aorist
eTrdXrjaa
in Ildt. viii.21
(naXtjaeie), though
with
a special
modi- fication
of
meaning.
Other
present forms,already
discussed
by
Lobeck
on
Buttm. Ausf. Gr. ii.'^
59, showing an at
in derivative verbs
are (iiaiw (Ilesycli.
-^id^co),8i)(aico (TIesych. =Si;^a'fco), ;^aXn/a) by
the side of
x^^"^'
o'TCi^"^^"^
^J
the side ol'a-TuXciM and
a-TaXd(co,
uralco
(Aratus
-
tVa'^w),
the last of which is
confirmed
by Ilesychius's
Boeotian
la-rj'i la-d^d,
for
a Boeotian
rj
is without
e.xcep-
tion the
representative
of
an ordinary
Greek
ai (cp.
above
p.
00
f.).
The Homeric
napa(f)dciiri(Ti
discussed
on
p.
30
f.,
would find a
place
in this list if
we were to
VERBS IN
-aw, -acw,
-a^w.
235
follow Johannes Schmidt in
taking-
it
as a conjunctive, as also
nraLO),
wJiich in
a
causative
meaning,
I make to
stumble,
is
aptlycompared by
Fick i.^ 658 with
the Skt.
j)dtd-jd-vii
the causative from
2Mt
fall. A further case
in
point
is that
of the Lesbian Aeolic
fiaxai-ra-s
=
[iaxi]Trjs
(Alcaeus
fr. 33
Be.-''),
in
as far as
it
points
to a */ia;("ta).
Other
words, some of which have been mentioned above
{dyaiofxai p
118,
Kepatf p.
120,
fiiixvaicTKoy p.
100), we will
pass
over
here. In all
these
cases
then the
t represents
the
original Rafteran a
in
exactly
the
same
way
as
in the derivative
adjectives
in
-aio-s
e.g. apxa-lo-s,KopiKpa-lo-s
as compared
with the Skt.
eja-'i
i.e.
a-ja-se.g. pihinislu'ja-s coming
from
man {purusha).
These forms
come nearest to the Gothic weak verb-stems in -ai.
If,e.g.
we are
entitled to
conjecture
that in the first
part
of
poeticalcompounds
like raXal-
(f)p(ov, Tokai-poxdo-s
there is likewise the remnant of
an
old verb *TaXai(o
as
present
to
e-rXrj-v, e-rnXita-tra,rtrXcivai,
this verb would
correspondexactly
to
the Goth, thulai-th he endures
(inf.thulan). Perhaps
too Leo
Meyer (Goth.
Sprache
p.
683)
is
right
in
comparing
the Skt.
tulujd-miweigh, lift,
and the
Latin tollo is
perhaps
another
parallel,
which
may
be
explained
to come
from
*tol-jo
for
*tola-jo.Savelsberg(Ztschr.
xxi.
200),
who
appeals
to Thiersch,
recommends that
we
should
regard
the
-ai
in the above-mentioned Greek words
as a
way
of
lengtheningan a
;
but this amounts to
abandoning
all
attempt
at a
341
real
explanation.
The
original/
is
preserved
in another form in the verbs in
-fco.
That the
^
is to be.
regarded
here
as
the
representative
of the
/
was the view held
by Bopp,
who sets the verbs in
-o^w along
with those in
-aco, -om,
and
-eco
in the same
class
as the Sanskrit verbs in
-njdmi.
The
representation
of
an
old
j by (
has
been discussed
by me at
length
in
my Principles
ii.263
ft'.,
and I there call
special
attention to the fact that
many
verbs have
presents
in both
-aw and-a^w as a
strong
argument
that the two forms had
a common
origin.
I will content
myself
here
with
enumerating
the verbs in
-aw
which have
presents
in
-a^coas well,or
which
have foi-ms from other tense-stems which would
naturally
accompany
such
presents.
There
are
the
following18,
of which as
many
as
10 show the twofold
present
in
Homer
:
ayaTvda"(Horn.) ayaTra^w(Hom.)
dyopaopai(II.)
'
liyopa^o) (Hdt.)
dvicia
(Horn.) duici^w(Hom.)
aiTido),
dvridav
(Hom.) dvridau),
dvTidcravra
(Hom.)
dpTTcofjLai (Ilesych.) apTrd^oi
dTipdco(Hom.)* dTipdio)(Hom.)
^taw, (3fj3lr]K" (Horn.) ^td^o)(Hom.)
yeXda
Aor.
f'yeXa^e (Theocr.)
fTTt-StKard-s
(Stud.
iii.
189) SiKofco
7rpos-8oKd(i" So/cd^o) (Sophron)
elXv(p6(oi/ (Hom.) tlXv(f)d^ei (Hom.)
evvrja-a, fvvr]6rivai (Hom.) ivvd^efrdai(Hom.)
*
Nauck
Melanges
iv. 38 fJ.will not admit
arifxav
in Homer and calls it
an
*
erroneous form.'
Cp. Euripid. Stud. ii. 179. It is
questionable though
whether
arifxav
stands
on
the
same footing as the und aibtedly
anomalous
compounds
like
Svs-evri(rK"iv which
are there discussed. As the negative
of
rif^av annav
would no
doubt be
'
erroneous,'
but not as a denominative from
arip-os.
Gf.
aaxa.\6.au
from
*a.-(TxaXo-s,
KaKoSai/xovav(Aristoph.) from KaKo8aifj.uv,
beside
Saifiovav(Aeschylus),
and
avofj.oi.ovv(Plato)
beside
ofiotovv.
236 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
(VnV/cfTo
(flG07) tVa^co(Horn.)
Pfcicii
(I'fcio)) Vfa^co
ovTUf, ovrrjcra
(Hom.) ovra^co,ovracTTai (Hom.)
ndpdo),TTdprjdrjvai (ITom.) ntipd^u) (Horn.)
(Txti"(Aristoph.) a-xd^oi
;^"/.iai'
"
piyovv
(Hesych.) ;^(/ia^eii'
"
tov
xfip.(ova
buiyetv(Ilesycll.)
o42
"VVe have beside these to consider the whole class of
frequenlatives
in -ra'co
which liave
by-forins
in
-ra^ui.
These verbs
are
clearly
identical in formation
with the Latin
frequentatives
in -tare
(Leo Meyer Vgl.
Gr. ii,
10).
vaurda
may
be
compared
for its
meaning
with the Lat.
habitdre,as also
pekirdca
with
the Lat.
mcditari,aKiprdv
bears to
a-KcilpeLv
the
same
relation
as
that of saltare
to
salire, 'KapTTfrdv (Horn. Xa/i.Trerocoi'rt)
to
XdpTTfiu
that of cantare to canere.
We
may compare
also
6i';^eTdacr^at (Horn.),f'pojTai', deprav (dprdv)
j)ensare by
the side of
culpdvpendere. Irrj-reou
is to be derived from
an *(rda),identical
with the Lat.
ifd-re,
and
now supportedby
the Elic
(Tr-av-ird-Kup
i.e.
*f7raviTrjKws
(the
Damocrates
inscription,
Archaeol.
Zeitimg1876,cp. e$-LTr]-'Ko-s).
From the
point
of view of
Greek,
the natural
thing
is to derive the
majority
of these
A'erbs from masculine stems in
-ra
" vauTd-a from the
stem vaiera- etc. But
the Latin verbs have
no
such
correspondingnouns,
and if
vi;e
want to maintain
them to be of a
similar
originwe must assume
that
noims
of this kind survived
in these derivatives and nowhere else.
Both Greek and Latin would admit of the derivation from
verbal-adjectives
in
-TO,
and most of the Latin verbs are
found
along
with such
adjectives.
In
any
case the Graeco-Italic verb-stems in -ta
provideus with
a
fresh
argument
for the
identity
which I believe to exist between the Greek and Latin
"-conju-
gation.
Now several of the Greek verbs in
-raco
have
by-forms
in
-rafco,
some of which are of
great antiquity:
e.g. eXKvard^u),
which is related to
IKkvco,cXki'^was
tractare to trahcre,pva-Td^aby
the side of
ipvca, dXvKTd^o)(Hdt.)
by
the side of the Homeric
dXaXvKrrjpai,dyvprd^cobeg (Od.) by
the side of
dyeipw,pnrrd^o)(II.)
which bears to
piTrrco
exactly
tlie
same
relation
as that of
jactare
to
jacere,
with the iterative
prnTaa-Kov
O
23,
which
points
to a *pt7rrda),
oz^ordfa) by
the side of
ovopat,
olvoiroTd^tiv by
the side of
ttottj-tv-s (Hesych.)
and the Lat.
potai-e.Hesychius
has also
SpoKTu^ets
'
Trept/SXeVfi?,
which bears to
depKopcu
the
same
relation
as
that of
spectare
to
*spccere, tvKrd^ov
"
evxov
which is
clearlynothing
but.a by-form
of
evxerdaa-dai, iKvirra^ov
"
iKviTTov
like cuhitare
by
the side of
cuha7-e, (peprd^ei
"
(f)epei
like
gestare by
the side of
(lerere, vtvara^u)
343 (Horn.)
and
vva-Td(u" (Plato)by
the side of
vevoi
like the Lat.
nidarehy
the side
oi
nuere, (f^avTu^aby
the side of
(f)aiva)
like ostentare hemAe ostendere. In
one or
two
cases
the Greek
-raw seems to have become weakened
to
-rew,
as in
pinrea).
Verbs in
-rt^wtoo,
like
neiprjTl^a),
vdW be found to be related.
These formations
prove,
as clearlyas anythingcan be
proved,
that the ter- minations
-ao)
and
-afo)are
identical. What else could have
produced
this
two- fold
formation if it
was
not such
identity?
It is obvious that this
identity
further entitles
us,
when we
find verbs in
-a^oo,
which
are not
frequentatives,
of
the
same root as Latin verbs in
-are,
to treat them
as identically
the
same verbs,
and thus to
identifye.g. rvp^d^eiv
with the
synonymous
ttirbare,x^^H-d^eip,
which
among
other
meanings
has that of to
pass
the
winter,
with hiemare Avhich
means this
only,SiTrXd^eti/
with
duplare,
and
even biKd^fiv(Lacon. fVtSiKaT-dj)
with
dkare,
for both
come
from the
same noun-stem dika
way, manneVj
Avhicli
VERBS IN
-aoi, -atoy,
-a^o). 237
in Greek has settled down to the
specialuieauino;
of the
right
way,
law, right.
How
impossible
it is to derive the
f
of the forms above mentioned from stems
in -S
(-aS)or
from the
analogy
of such
stems, as some have tried to
do,
is made
sufficiently
clear
by
the
comparisons
made
above,
but it is
put beyond a doubt
by
the
numerous
verbs in
-fw denoting
sounds which
are derived from
interjec- tions
(Lobeck
Rhem.
216)
like
aXoXd^m (dXaXa,dXaXrj),ald(co(alaC),^av^toor
0av^(o(/3aC), ypvCco,evd("o(eua),Iv^co, oi^co, otfj.a"^a" {otixoi), (pev^a)(Aesch. Ag.
1307 KA.
(f)ev (f)fv.
XO- titovt ((pev^as ;),a^co-
There is
not an
atom of
proba- bility
that such verbs have been formed
on
the
analogy
of noim-stems in S
or
y.
We
may
also learn from them that the
guttural
which
appears
outside the
pre- sent
tense need not
belong
to the
root,
but is
often,
like the
f
of the
present,
to
be
regardedas
the
representative
of the
old/.
The
phonetic
side of this
question
I
pass
over here
on
purpose, as,
besides
the above-mentioned
passage
in the
Principles,
I have
given
it
a
special
dis- cussion
at Studieu ii.
p.
185 fF. The
splitting up
of
a singleoriginal
sound into
several
is,as we saw
above on
p.
230, a common phenomenon
in
language.
It
was
in this
way
quitepossiblethat,
in
early
times a distinction should arise be- tween
ay
which inclined to a vowel,
and hence
was easily
volatilized between two
vowels,
and
a
thicker
y
which was
almost
pronounced
like
j),
which
afterwards,344
like the initial of the Skt.
ju(/d-m,
Lat.
jugu-m,
Gk.
(vyo-vproduced a
d before
itself,
and from this
dj
a (.
It
might
be
imagined
that the choice between the
two
pathsdepended on
the
quantity
of the
precedingo-sound,
in the
same
way
as
in Sanskrit we
find two forms of verbs in
ajd-mie.g. aghdjdmi
threaten from
aghd-sbad,
and
virdjate
behave oneself like
a man fi-om vird-s
man. But
on
the
one
hand this
parallel
would
give us no help
in the case of the verbs in
-i(w by
the side of
-ew
formed from
o-stems,
because
we can hardly imagine
these to
have had
a
vowel which
was alwaj'slong,
while
on the other hand it is
more
probable
that the twofold Indian formation in
point
finds its
counterpart
jather
in the
interchange
between a as
the
representative
of the
longa and
an e-sound
which became later an i-sound,as
the
representative
of the short
a.
It would
be
as
hard to find
a
definite and consistent
explanation
of the
twofold
forms,as
for the
greater multiplicity
of vowel sounds in late
linguistic periodsas. con- trasted
with the
gTeatersimplicity
of earlier
times,or
for the threefold forms
in the Teutonic and
particularly
Gothic weak
conjugation.
As
regards
the relation of the verbs in
-am
and
-afw to the stems from which
.theycome,
it
appears
(cp.
Leo
Meyer Yergl.
Gr. ii.
6)
that the number of the
verbs in
-aw
which
come
from stems in
-a,
like
alndofiai,dperdco,ai^do},
^povrdco, StA//'aw, rjjBda},
viKao),
6p/xda),(rtyaa), "TKida", ToXfido}
is
very
considerable. Far
less numerous are those from stems
in
o,
like
di^idco,
'dpia-rdco,
lepdofiai, veda,
and still
rarer the derivatives from other
stems,
like
Ix"vdai,i^epfacrdco, (pvaido),
in the
case
of
some
of which last it is not
impossible
that feminine
substantives
like
*ixdva(cp. dijpa)*P"peaia (cp.dvcria)were
the immediate
antecedents of
the verbs. In the case
of the verbs in
-a^m
the relation is somewhat
difi'erent.
A considerable
proportion,
such
as alxfJ-dCco (cp. alxp-T]rT]-s),
avyd^ofiai, 5t/cdfca,
tiXanivd^co, (TKOTnd^co (Horn.,
late
poets
have
a-Koni-rfTris), point
to
"-stems,
but
there are
almost
as
many
from
o-stems,
such
as
erot/xd^w,Xidd^w,
a-qKd^a,
(saejn're), perpid^a), SoKt/xd^co, To^d^oiJ.ai. Along
with the
latter
may probably
be classed the verbs in
-a-Ka^coalready
mentioned
among
the
inchoatives
on
p. 189,
such
as dXua-Kafco, rjXaa-Kd^co, Trrcocr/cd^a),
in
so
far
as they are based
on
noun-stems in
-o-ko.
Besides these we have derivatives from
stems in
fia{T)
345
238 APPENDIX
TO THE I-CLASS.
like
ovofidCco, 6aviJ.n(a", xftM^Ct^'
i" which the
a
must likewise have had its
origin
in the stems from
which
they
were
derived.
Beyond
these there
are not
many
verbs in
-n^a-,
and these are mostly
to be
explained
on simpleanalopries.
On tlie whole then it
appears
that in this
particular
class of verbs it is im- "
possible
not to see
tliat the "-sound
corresponds
to the final letter of the stems
from which they are
derived. The substitution of
a
for
o
is of
course to be at- tributed
to oriunnal identity
of the two vowels.
Consequently
the
"
of
avriaoi
and
jjLfTpin^ui
stands
on
the
same footingas
that of
Takdvfiia-hri-i,
and
YlfKonovvi](TUi-Ko-s.
2. Verbs in
-oco, -oiu), -o^co.
It is
possible
that this
very
sense
of the connexion between the vowel that
distinguishes
the
conjugation
and the final letter of the steiri from which the
verb is derived,
which has been noticeable
hitherto,was
what led to the forma- tion
of an o-oonjugation by
the side of
an
o-conjugation.
In
my essay
'
Ueber
die
Spaltung
des A-Lauts'
(Ber,
der K. sachs. Ges. d. Wissensch.
18G4)
I be- lieve
I have shown that the o-sound took its
place
beside the "-sound later than
the e-sound. There was therefore
probably a
time in which the Greeks had
verbs in
-ao"
and verbs in
-eu" as two distinct
classes,
but none
in
-oco as
distin- guished
from
-aco.
The Gothic
o-conjugation corresponds
to both classes at
once,
inasmuch as
6 is the
representative
of
a,
and is
presumably
to be
compared
with
"
tlie Slavo-
Lettic
o-conjugation (e.g.
Oh.-Sl.
cUla-jqwork)
and the Irish verbs of the second
series in Zeuss- 4'M
(e.g.
carai-m I love). Though Latin, as
I have
pointed
out
in the
Symbola philologorum
Bonnensium i.
p.
274,
is not altopether
destitute
of traces of
a
lilie
formation,
among
which the most immistakable is
aegrdtiis,
which is formed in
exactly
the
same
way
as 1(tu)t6s, SrjXcoros, spealdnggenerally
we
may say
that the far more numerous Latin
f?-conjugation
includes the verbs
which in Greek end in
-o"",
so that
e.g. nw/xow
in the
sense
of inflate coincides
entirely
with
animdre, ^vyoa
with
/(?_r/a?'e,
Xetow with
levdre,\o^6"o
with hi.idre,
ofj-nXou)
with
simuldre,
and to the Lat. novdre
corresponds,
not
only
reilct)and
346
i/f afa"
which have been
compared
with it above, but
veoco as
well. Herein we
may
discern a fresh bond of union between Latin and Greek derivative forma- tion.
It is
possible
that it
was
in the
livelysense of the connexion of the derived
verbs with the final letters of noun-stems that
brought
about the desire for verbs-
in
-oco
beside those in
-aa",
and that in
a relatively
late
linguisticperiod.
It accords
with this view that the verbs in
-oco come to a
very
large
extent from
stems
in
-0,
as
e.g.
/3i()a),
yvfjivoco,
eeSi/cJco, KaKoat, xo^ovfiai,fiovoa),
opdoco.
There
are also,
it is
true,
some which, like
Knpv(f"6u", (r^p.i6co, pi^oo), yfcfnipoco,
stand
by
the side of
stems in
-a,
and
a
stillsmaller number from
more -out-of-the-way stems,
such
as
piyoco, ynvvovp.ai, aropow,
rrcpoco,
some
of which
may
probably
be
explainedby
the fact that the noun
had two different stems. It is worth
noticing,however,
that,as
Leo
Meyer Vevgl.
Gr. ii.
p.
"'^4has
shown,
the
exceptions
to the rule
are
vertf
rare
in ITomer.
Though
there
are more
than
forty
verbs from o-stems
there
are only
seven
from others.
There" was once a /
here
too,
and the verbs in
-oco
show
some traces, though
only
faint
ones,
of this letter. The
/
has survived
(Stud.
iii.
19.3)as t
in
Appin-p.aTa
"
iiprvfiara
in
Ilesychius
and in the Homeric
Kv8oi-p6-s,
which can
hardly
be
explained
othern'ise than
as coming
from an obsolete
*"cv5otco,
and
VERBS IN
-Oft), -otft),
-0^(0.
239
perhaps
also in
froi-fio-s.
There
are only
two verbs in
-ofw, a^/xofa) (from
Homer
onwards)
and
dfano^m.
The former
can hardly
he
anything
hut
a
de- nominative,
either from the stem
dp-fio{apfxo-s),
which does not occur
before
Sophocles,though
its adverbialised locative
"p^oi
just,justnow (Aeseh.),
looks
as
if the stem were an
old
one,
or
else from the stem
apfiov,
which survives
only
in the derivatives
'Ap(jLov-i8j]-s (E 60), apfiov-ia, apfiov-iKo-s,
and in the com- pound
^T]T-dpp.cov (e 250)
" in the last word with the
original spiritus
lenis " and
comes
very
near to the stem of the Homeric
ap^a
team. There is in
any
case
no reason why we
should not assume
the
same
relation between the
^
of
upixo^o)
and the
t
of the above-mentioned
app.oip.aTa
as between the
^
of the verbs in
-a^w
and the
i
of the verbs in
-aia.
It should be noticed
moreover
that outside
the
present
Homer knows
only fjppoa-e
and that the older Attics show
a
pre- ference
for the dental inflexion
{fjppoa-Tai, appoa-reos). appo^ai
and the like are
Doric
(Alcman, Pindar)
and
are by no means(cp.p.
230) an
indication of
a guttu- ral
stem. In view of the Homeric
i^ppoae
on
the other hand
we
may safely347
assert that the
^
is the result of tlie derivative
_/.
It
was probably
the
analogy
of this
guttural
form which
produced
the late Attic
appoTrui.
The
y
of
appoyrj
" which
occurs
first in
Eupolis
" is either the remains of the old
/,or
else is due to
theanalogyofra-yj^by
the side of
rao-o-(B,aXXay)7 bythesideof
aXXacra-o). The second
verb in
-o^co
is
8ea-n-6^(o.
It has often been maintained that
Sfo-Trufco was derived
fromSecrTrdr?;-?,
" from the stem bfa-Tj-ora that
is,
" but this is both
phonetically
and
historically improbable.
There is not a singleone
of the innumerable stems with
r-suffixes which has
a
derived verb in
-^a"corresponding
to it. It is
no use to
cite verbs like
ovopA^coby
the side of
ovopar-os,
for,as is shown
by ovopalva
and the Goth,
namn-jan,
there
was a preliminary
ovopav
from which
ouopd^a
can be derived. But where are we
to find
a *Tro\i((o
formed from
ttoXittj-s, a
*
86^(0by
the side of 8ot6s or anythingresembling
them ? And
yet,
there
was
justas
much
reason why
such verbs should be
formed,
if
phonetically possible.
We need not attach overmuch
weight
in this discussion
to the fact that
BfanoTTj-s
is
as a matter
of fact first found somewhat later than
Seo-TTo^to or
rather than the future
deaTroaa-cis,
the former
occurring
first in
Tyrtaeusfragm.
7, 1,
the latter in the
hymn
to Ceres
v.
365. Homer knows
only hea-iroiva,
while
Tyrtaeus
and the
hymn
to Ceres have bemroarvvos as
well. Inasmuch
as
I consider that
even
the
identity
of
-^oiva
with the Homeric
iroTvia,
tvorva
and
the Skt.
pdtni
is
by no means so
certain
as seems to be
supposed,
and that it
would be
as hard to
get
beanoa-vvo-g from the stem becrnoTa
as Seo-n-o^co,
it
seems
to
me
far
more likely
that
we ought
to start from
a
compound
shorter stem
*Sf
(T-TTo.
The
syllableno
would here
correspond
to the
-pa
of Sanskrit
com- pounds
like
nr-pa
lord of
men, g6-i)a
lord of
cows,
and ruler in
general,
and
other words. In that
case Seo--7ro-^(o
would have come
from *Sfo--7roin
justthe
same
way
as
the Skt. verb
yo-pa-jd-ini
from
go-pd.
dea-noiva and beo-Tro-a-wo'-s
(cp.(v(j)p6a-vvos,
yeiToavvos) seem to
point
to a
stem
*8"(r-Tro-i', the second
part
of which reminds
us
of
Udv,
and the Lith.
pd-na-s,
Ch.-Sl.
pa-nu.
3. Verbs
in
-ew, -eim,
-efw AND
-tfco.
348
A
portion
of the verbs in
-ajd-miseem
very early
to have weakened the
first a into
e.
The
followingare
the Greek verbs which can be
compared
with
verbs of the like formation in the related
languages:
dpKeo),
Lat.
arceo.
dpT"op,ai,
Skt.
rtd-je,
set in order.
240 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
yr]6i(x",
Lat.
gaiulco.
6apcrea",
Skt.
dharshd-ja-mi (ventureon),cp.
above
p.
229.
KOfcd,
Lat.
cav-eo,
Goth,
us-skav-jan,
Oh.-Sl.
duvajq{servo),
0. 11. G.
scaio-6n,
Lith.
kavo-ju
(watch, protect).
opxeoixcu,
Skt.
ryh(i-jd-mi (quake,rage),
cp.
above
p.
229.
oxea",
Skt.
vdhd-jd-mi (drive,carry),
Goth,
vag-jan(move).
po(^ea),
Lat. sorheo,
rpoTreco
"1
j^^
forqueo,
0. 11. G.
drdh-jan(tm-n).
(j)ope(o,
Skt.
bhdrd-jd-mi(let
out on hire),
Ch.-Sl.
su-bira-jq {colligere),
Zd.
uz-bdra-jfi-t (he
carried out or forward).
o3V"opai,
Skt. vasnajd-mi (bargain).
(Sophrou avaa-fiTai).
To these
we
may
add
a
few others
which, though
not
preserved
in
Greek,
throw
lighton
the related Latin
f-conjugation :
Lat.
cens-eo,
Skt.
^qsd-jd-mi(givenotice,announce).
Lat.
lub-et,
Goth, lubai-th
(he liopes).
Lat.
sil-co,
Goth, ana-sil-an.
Lat.
tac-eo,
Goth, thah-an
(0.
Sax.
thag-jan,
0. H. G.
daghi).
Lat.
terreo,
Skt.
trdsdjd-mi(terrify),
Goth,
thlas-jam(?)(terrify).
And the
following,
which are instances of the variation of vowel in the
derivative
syllable :
l3np"co,
Lat.
gravdre,gravdri,
Goth,
kaui-jan(burden).
8enrv(a,
Lat.
dapindri.
Tjyeopcu,
Lat.
ind-dgd-re(properly
to drive into the
net).
KuXea,
Lat. cald-1-e
by
the side of
Cale-ndae,
O. Sax. halon
(call).
349
KaXrjTap,
J^"t-:
caldtor,
0. H. G. holen
(fetch).
Xoeco,
Lat. lavd-re.
(TKOTT-eco,
Lat.
{au)-spicdri,
O. H. G.
spe/ion(spy).
The converse
of this relation holds between
dpydco
and
tirgeo,
wbicli meet
in the Skt.
urtfdjd-mi(part,iirf^ivjant powerful).
The verbs in
f co are by no means so closely
related to
any particular
class of
noun-formations as
those in
-aw
and
-ow.
Some
come
from
o-stems,
as alveco,
biveo},
Koipavfo),
Koa-peco, ot/cew,
some
from
rt-stems,as aTrejXeo), diirfco, (fxopfco (Pind.
(jioivaa-e), "^"V(tt"o},
as
many
from .s-stems
(cp.
Skt.
dcfdjd-mi
from
o"/r/s strength)
,
as dpeXeco,
dvdfod,
(vrvxfco,
Bap^ea, Kparico,
some from stems
ending
in other
consonants,
as dcppov-eo), laTop-eu", enixfip-eo).
This indifference
as to noun-
stems
shown
by
the verbs in
-em explains
the fact that there is
often,as
in the
case
of
daKiO),avxfc^,
8r]Xeopai, ivoUco,vXaKTf'o),either
no noun-stem at all
or one
which
occurs only
in
compoimds, e.g.
in
(fxov-aaKo-s, Xoyo-7roi6-s, as also,on
the
other hand,
the fact that the forms of the verbs in
-ew
and
-w,
as we
shall
see
later
on,
so
often
interpenetrate
each other.
Of
presents
in
-tico
there
are seven
in Homer
(Stud.
iii.
p. 192): aKelopai
(also
in Pind.
Pyth.
ix.
104),paxelopm,
veiKfla
(also
in Hesiod and
Theocritus),
nlvo!3apei(ji,
oKvelco,TTfvdela,
reXeto). With
regard
to five of these Leskien has
shown at Stud. ii.
95,
that
they are founded
on sigmaticnoun-stems,
those i.e.
of the words
okos, vukos,
olvo^apTjs, nivdos,
t(\os. He
conjectures
not im-
VERBS IN
-"W, -"LW,
-e^ft)
AND
-i^w.
241
probably
tbat tbe
same
is the
case
with
oKveico,
for it is
justas
conceivable that
there should be a to *okvos,
formed like
edvus,ervos as
well
as a
6
okuo-s,
as
that
there should
be,as
there
is,a r6
aKoros
as
well
as a 6 o-koto-s.
Still this is
mere conjecture,
and
as regards^axelonai
there is absolute lack of
grounds
for
saying
that in this instance also the
et owes
its existence to a o-
which once
existed between the
e
and the
i.
There is
on
the other hand
good ground,
in
view of the Lesbian
fiaxai-ra-s
mentioned on
p. 235,
for
thinking
that
fiaxf^-
ofiai (p
471
fiaxftojievos)
existed
along
with
fiaxaiui
and
was
formed from the stem
fxaxa
{finxf])-
To this
may
be added
ifiveiova-ai
in the
proem
to Ilesiod's
0pp.
2,
which is
certainly
to be referred to
vfivo-s,
and oiKficov
(Theog. 330) by
the
side of
oiKo-s.
It is
possible
that
we ought
not to attach much
weight
to the
35Q
forms used
by
late
poets,
of which Lobeck Rhemat. 92
gives
a list,
for these
are
probably
all blind imitations of Homeric
prototypes
which owe
their existence
to the
delusion,
not even yet
rooted
out,
that the Homeric dialect admits of the
lengthening
of
any
e
whatever into
ei.
It is to be noticed
moreover,
that
Herodian
(in
the E. M.
p.
620, 44,
ed. Lentz ii.
267) regarded
oKvelco
by
the
side of oKfe'conot
as mere Tr^fovacrfios,
but as
Trapayaiyr], aaTrep napa
to
dakTza)
yiveTaidaknelu),
piyo)
piye'ioi, ovtcos okvo)
oKveico. So too at ii.
462,
where he adds
the desideratives lUie
TroXepijaeio.
Such
a
view
was perhaps
based
on
the fact
that in
some cases
there
were only
so-called
barytone
verbs in
use by
the side
of those in
dco,
as
in this
very
instance of daXnfla) and
daXnco,
and that of
6epei-
ofievos
(Nicand.
Ther.
124,
Al.
567)
and
Bepopai.
A bare mention
may
here
suffice for the
following
forms: aTreiKeio)
(Nounus,Musaeus),
Kairvelmv
(Nicand.
Ther.
36),
KeXevBeioPTfs {SbevovresHesych.,
the M.S. has
KeXevdiovres), Idfiopev
(Oallim.
in Jo
v. 76).
It is
only
OakTreiw and
Oepeiw
which could have
anything
to do with stems in
o-. Considering
all this I think it must be admitted that
-610) was an
old
by-form
of
-eco,
related to it in much the
same
way
as -aim to
-aco.
The Boeotians said
tw
for
ecu : avXiovTo,
8oKLei
(
=
doKerj)
etc. (Ahrens
Aeol.
179).
Since
t,
in this
dialect,
when
long,
is the
regularrepresentative
of the
diphthong
ei,
and when
short,can
stand for
e too,
and since the forms
given
above
are only
known to us from
inscriptions,
it is
impossible
to
say
whether
the
step
before the
ico was ei"o or ew.
There
is,according
to Herodian
(i.443,
ii.
949),onlyone
present
in
-ffw
of
more
than two
syllables : Tne^a,
which is found from Homer onwards
(n 510,
8
419),
with the Doric
by-formTrtfifo) (Alcman fragm.
44 Be.^
firia^ev)
and the
doubtful Ionic
Trte^fM
which Herodian
(ii. 140)
attributed to
Apion,
while
reject- ing
it himself. The Doric
ma^m was,
as
Herodian
saw, avakoymTepov. Pick,
(i.2146)
is
probablyright
in
taking
the rt. of the verb to be
pis,
Skt.
pish,which,
though
its
primarymeaning,
retained in
nTiacTO),
is
'
pound,'comes
very
near to
TrteX^^
in
many
of its
compounds, e.g.
in
d-pishpress
hard,t"^-/"is/i crush,
^^ra;!?- 35 1
pish
rub
againstanything.
I cannot
agree
with Tick however in
regarding
the
i
of
TTuCa"as
related to the d of the
secondary
root
pid
for
*2)is-d (to
be hard
pressed).
The *7rto-6-S
or even
*7n"T-a-8
which,
he
assumes,
and
supposes
to
have arisen from
*2ns-dby
the introduction of
an auxiliaryvowel,
has
no
analogy
to
support
it. This
explanation, too,
will find obstacles in the forms
with
^,
y
and
Xi
^^^
especially
in the Dor.
md^as (Theocr.),
in
inU^a,
7reni"y-
p-ai,inUxd'qv(Hippocr.),
which exist
on
good authority
beside inieaa and TmrU-
a-fjiai.
For with
very
rare exceptions?,
among
which
e.g.
is
KaBi^rj
in
Theocr.
(1,51)
from the rt. eS,
such
guttural
forms
are
found in
conjunctionwith
a
present
in
f only
when this
f
is the
product
of
y
+
;'
or a simpley,
and
not when
B
242 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
it has come
from 8
+j.
It results from this tliat the
f
of
Tria^o), ttuXw
is
a
derivative
(
of the same
kind
as
that in
dXaTrafw,TrroXe/Mifw.
The
primary
form
we
may
take to liave been
*p{sajd-mi.
From the rt.
pin
a noun-stem
*jns-a,
Gk.
ni-cTo, TTt-o,
must have been
formed,
and from this the derivative verb
Trtafo),
nifCoi,
of which the latter must bear to the former much the same
relation as
that of the New-Ionic
o/j/w
to
opaw.
The further
weakening
off to
i,
which
took
place
as a
rule in the
analogous
verbs, was
prevented
in the
case
of
nifCa
by
the
precedingt. Op. Mangold
Stud.
at.
155. " Further traces of
an e
in this
position
are
the Homeric forms
dxrjxf^ar(P 637)
and
eXr^XtSar' (r]86),
on which
I
may
refer to Prine. ii.293. As
a
companion
to the former
we
find at M 179
the
specially
noticeable
dKaxeiuro,
of which the
ei,
which has been
transported
into the
perfectstem, can hardly
be
a mistake for
ij.
aKrixf^ar
derives addi- tional
support
from the substantive
aKtjxf^oves'
\v7rac
(Hesych.).
The 8 is here
of
just
the
same
kind
as
in the Herodotean
KfX'^p^^arai, only
before it the older
t,
wbich in
aKa;^ifco
has sunk before the double consonant to
t,
has survived
intact. In the
case of the
reduplicated
stem
iXrjKfS we
may
assume
the
same
relation
to *i\rj\a8as
that between
Tne(o)
and the Doric
Trtafw.
As a present
to
it
we
should have
expected *fXeC"i),
and with the fuller vowel
*f'Xd^a),
to the
latter of which moreover
point
such forms
as rfkaa-a, eXaaros,rjXaadrjv, Perhaps
too there is to be
seen
in Homer's
epithet
for
Notos,dpyea-TTjs (dpyea-rao
T^ioroio
352
A
306)
the trace of
a
verb
*dpyf^fiv
to make
clear,
from the
adjectivedpyo-s,
in
its
meaning
of XevKoy which is
preserved
in
Ilesychius. "
The Tarentine
ciueyfia'
aXviypaHesych. points
to *alp(^a"as an
older form for
alvl^o}.
We have in this
way
traced the
steps
which connect the verbs in
-ea
with
those in
-i^a".
Of the latter it is
only
a
portion
which
belong
to the division
now
under
discussion,
while
others,
in
which,
e.g.
in
oniCoi
from the stem
6ni,
(XttiCcl)
from the stem
e'Xjrt, we
have
no reason to
deny
the
antiquity
of the
t,
will take rank
along
with the verbs in
-km.
Those verbs in
-tfo),on
the other
hand,
which in formation and
meaning approach nearly
to those in
-ew,
belong
to our present
class. The fact
itself,
that
i^a
takes rank beside
fco,
as a^co
beside
aa,
was
first
recognised by Grassmann,
and
by
him demonstrated at
length
at Ztschr. xi. 97 ff". The
simple explanation
thereof is to be found in
the double
consonant,
before which in
plCa (cp.7-ad-iv), t^w {=
e8-jai), x^i-C"^
beside
x^"
a
hard vowel has
passed
into the
corresponding
soft
one.
Further
parallels
to this
weakening
are
to be
seen
in iir-6i
by
the side of
eV-rj,
tV-rtu
by
the side of eVrm and other
phenomena
discussed at Princ. ii.379. Lobeck
saw
that the verbs in
-tfwwere closely
related to those in
-eco,
and he
even
declares
at Rhemat. 227
:
'
Forum
quae apud
Ilomerum
legunturpleraque
metri
causa
diverse declinata sunt:
Kopenv
Kopi^eiu,x^'''^^^^'- X"''''tf' etc.';though
he has
sufficient
insight
to make him shrink from
finding
the exclusive
gromid
for the
twofold form in the licence of
poetry,
and
prefers
instead to
conjecture
'
hunc
paraschematismum
cum sermone ipso
uatum esse.' Homeric Greek
presents
us
with 9 cases
of this twofold form
:
alvrjCTOV(Ti
(tt
380) alvi^op' {6487)*
alrfja-uiv (p 365) alrl^^cov (p 222)
6
dKaxw^ i"^223) aKdxlCfts(tt432)
*
To this verb
belongs aiviyp-a,
in which the
y
is of
just
the same kind
as that
of
apixoy(\, and
justas
this latter had
a.ptx6aoo"
formed at a late
period,so the former
had alviaaotxaiformed in Attic Greek.
*
aKaxliiiis,like 70^70^(^01
and a
few other
reduplicatedverbs, an intensive
VERBS IN
-"Q", -SLCO,
-s^coAND -i^o).
243
Kai'dx'T^f (''" 460) icavaxi-C^ (M 36)
KOfiifiv
(C207) KOfxiCofxfuos {6 4:51) 353
Kova^riae(O 648) Kova^i^e (N 498)
^ox6i]"Tfiv (K 106) fioxdi^ovTa (B 723)
o;(Xei't'Tai ("I" 261) o;!(XtVtrftai' (M 448)
(I.
Bekker
6x^'f}"T(iav)
TrpoKoXeaa-aro (H 218) irpoKuKi^cTo
(T
19)
To these
may
be added
dpdiSrjaf
and
dpd^i^f
in
Hesiod,
the Homeric
a-papa-
yrjo-ai
and Hesiod's
eapapdyi^t,
and
a large
number from late
poets
and
prose-
writers,
such
as
T(i)((oo
and
tux^Co^^ drpfpeo)
and
drpe/m'fco,
vorfpeo)
and
varepi^co,
Tjpepf'a
and
rjpfpi^o), dcrpevfoi
and
dapevi^o),ae\ayea"
and
crfXayi^o).
^^ ith
re- spect
to the differences which are to be
seen
in
some
of these
cases
in the
meaning, e.g.
in 8(lttv"7i'
(takea meal)
and
Beinvi^eiv (entertaina
guest),
both
in
Homer,
and in others in the matter of dialect
or style,we
may
refer to
Lobeck. The
onlypoint
I wish to
emphasise
here is that several aorists and
fiitures with
a
short vowel
are
thus
satisfactorily explained.aKijSeo-a (S 427),
dpicfo-a, KoKfo-craTo,
alveao) it is
quitesimple
to
regard
as belonging
to
*dKT]8eC(o
etc. *Ka\fXa),*alvfC('^ were
the forerunners of the
actuallyexistingKoki^io
and
alvi^(o.
In fact KoKeaa-ai
bears to
AcaX/^co exactly
the same relation that
ea-crai
does to t^co.
The close
relationship
of the two formations entitles us to
compare
the verbs
in
-ifo)as well as
those in
-eo
with Latin verbs of the
e-conjligation.
Thus
pabi^a
the
by-form
of
pa8du)
comes
perhaps nearer to the Latin madere than
the "-form
does,
and
TrpoKoXi^aas near to the Latin Calendae
as KaXeai does.
(fiarl^fiv seems to have
sprung
from two sources : on
the
one
hand,
in the
mean- ing
speak,spread
a
report,
it
comes
very
near to
(fydn-s,
whUe in that of
promise,
appoint(e.g.Elirip. Iph.
A. 135 ts rw
ttjs
^eay
ar]v
nal8'
cikoxop(f)aTi(ras rjyes)
it
stronglysuggestsfateri,'pmjiten.
The
interchange
between
e
and
a
is
so
common
that
we are
entitled also to assume
the relation between
opaXi^w(alsoopaXoa)
and simnlare
Tropica)
and
jiarare
yvmpi^co
and
i-gnm'are'' 354
to be none other than that with which we met above in the
case of
/3ape"
and
gravdre.
If
we inquire
into the
sources
from which the verbs in
-i^"are derived
within the Greek
language,
we
shall find that
many,
such
as
evapl^co, Xoy.'fo/xat,
oiKi^o), ottXi^o), vopi(w,TvpopaxiC(o, come
from
o-stems,
a
veYy
small
number,
such
as
/cai/a;^i'^a), Trfiprjrt'^co (cp.
above
p.
23G),ifKriKTi^opaL,
from
ff-stems,several,
such
as TfLxlC^, pepi^oo, Bept^o),
ovfibl^o), KTepet^co,
from
s-stems.
By
far the
largest
portion
of verbs in
i^codeveloped
as
the
language
went
on, gradually,
and tome
quite
late. Those of them which
point
to a
consonantal
stem,
such
as dycovi^opai,
dKovrl^o), paKapl^aetc.,
will be
placed
in the other
division,
in which the
i
is the
originalletter.
o
formation
(cp.
the Homeric
axfoiv),
and thus takes rank with the
intensives,with
which we became
acquainted
at
pp.
212, 215,
226
etc.,though
it is
distinguished
from them
by
the fact that -1(01, like
-et", points
to a preliminarj'noun-form. In
the case
of
/xepuripl^w
this form is
actually
found in
fiip^npa.
'
Both verbs have
evidently come from an adjective-stem
almoBt identical
with the Lat.
gndm-s, i-gndru-i.
R
2
244
APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
FlKST EXCTJRSTJB.
On the
Interchange
and the
Meaning of
the Verbs in
-aa", -o"o,
-e'o.
Having
thus reviewed the
origin
of the three commonest classes of denva-
tive
verbs, we
have two
things
left to do before we proceed
to the other
classes. We must first
say somethingmore on
the
grounds
for the division of
what was originally
a singleclass,more
particularly
in
respect
of the
meaning,
and then we
shall have to discuss the
phonetic
treatment which the so-called
contracted verbs received in the various Greek dialects.
The source
of the division of the derivative verbs
was,
as
has been above
stated,
the
splitting
up
of the old
a-sound,which resulted^as we conjectured,
first in the
development
of
an e
beside the
a,
and
so
of
an e-conjugation
beside
the
fl-conjugation,
and
subsequently
of
an o-conjugationas
well. It is
clear,
however,
that these fresh
growths
did not unfold themselves unaided
by
the
operation
of
analogies
not
only
of sound but of
meaning
as well. At first all
derivative verbs had
hardlyany
other function than that of
denotinga state or
355
action
standing
in
some
relation
or
other to the notion of the noun-stem from
which
they were derived,
and
even as to the relations in which we
find them in
the
period
of Greek of which we
have full
knowledge,
it
is,as
Lobeck
says (on
Buttm. Ausf. Gr. ii.'
384),
labour lost to
try
to
get a
definite formula for the
use
of the different kinds of deiivative verbs. It
is,however, possible,as
I
have
pointed
out in
my essay
'
Ueber die
Spuren
einer lateinischen
o-conjuga- tion
'
(Symbola
Philol. Bonnens. i.
p.
272),
at all events to find
some
pretty
thorough-going analogies.
On
reviewing
the lists
given by
Leo
Meyer
of
Homeric verbs in
-aa, -eco, -ow,
we perceiveimmediately
that those in
-ow
are formed,
in the
majority
of
cases,
from
adjectival
o-Biems" out of 40 there
are
21 such " and that these have
clearlya
causative
or
factitive
meaning,as
e.g.
in
aiaroco, aXa''"a", dXtoco,
yvfj-voo),
iVdo),
KaK''o), KvpTi'o), ixovoco,
oidco,o/xotiio), opdoco,
o-ao'co,
x^poco,
all of which we can translate to 7nake
something. Along
with
these
go
others which
come
from
substantives,
and have a
similar
meaning,
"
that of
'bring
about
something,provide
with
something'
"
e.g.
vTri'doj,
;^oXda),
6piyK6(o, 7rT(p6(o (cp.
the Skt.
pattrdjd-miprovide
with
feathers), "TTf(f}av6(o.
On the other hand the verbs in
-aw,
which come
from feminine noun-stems in
a,
get
their
meaning
from these
nouns,
and
generally
denote the exercise of
some
activityor
the existence of
some stffte,
e.g. dyandoy,dyopdopiai, alTi.dop.ai,
avBdco,^odo),dvdco,rj^doo,dfdop.ai, Qoivdopai, prj^avdopai, viKao), ntipda,
nXavd-
opai, TTOTdop.ai, aiydco, roX/xdcD.
This
analogy
makes itself felt also in the
com- paratively
late formations in
-laco,
which denote
a bodily
or a
mental
languishing
or desire
(cp.Chap. XXIII.),
such
as uavaidu),wxpido),
KXavaido),
aTpaTrjyida,
Tvpappida.
Most of these verbs
presuppose,
in idea at
least,
feminine nouns
in
-a.
With
regard
to the verbs in
-fco,
however,
I would ventm'e to
conjecture
that
theywere formed under the influence of a twofold
analogy.
On the
one
hand it looks as
if
an intransitive
meaning was developedvery early
in
a large
number of them. In view of Latin
pairs
of verbs, such as
aJhare and
alhire,
clarare and
clarere,
salvarc and
salrcre,as
also of the numerous
inchoatives in
-esco
(cp.
above
p. 190),
and the
prevailing
intransitive or
inchoative
meaning
of
356
^^6 Church-Slavonic verbs in
eje-ti (e.g.zlufg-je-tl
flavescere)one
is
tempted
to
conjecture
that in
a periodpreceding
the difl'erentiationof the Greek
language
aa
such,
this difierence had
developed
itself between the a-
and
e-conjugation3,
I
THE IVIEANING OF THE CONTRACTED VEEBS. 245
that the former " from which
sprung
later the
o-conj ugation
as a
separate
formation " took
more particularly
the transitive
meaning,
the latter the in- transitive.
This rule holds
good
at
any
rate in Greek in
a large
number of
compounds.
In this
language
-f(o,
" and
-i("otoo,
"
was
the formation
uniformly
employed
for the
numerous
and
mostly
intransitive verbs formed from nomina
agentis,
of which Leo Mever
(p.25)
finds 21 in
Homer,
such as deXuTto),dTrtorew,
fTTiKOvpeco,
VTrfpT}(f)avf(o.
A second
analogy
is to be found in the
extraordinarily large
number of
masculine substantives in
o
of abstract
meaning
which existed in Greek from the
first,
such
as a6f\os,nlvos,
yap.os, Koafios.
Out of 66 Homeric verbs in
-to) 44,
such
as ddXea, alvew,
yafxeco, KO(Tfie"a,
KTvnio), fjio\^6("o, sKveco,
ofiadeco, ofxiXfoo,
TToBfco,
TTOveofjiai, arova^fm
{a-revaxtC^^)
,
(f)doi'eo, come
from stems of this land.
In this
way
it
happened
that
a
much less definite contrast arose
between verbs
in
eo)
and those in
aw
than between verbs in
ew
and those in
ow,
which
we
assumed,as a rule,to be fonued from
adjective-stems.
It
was
the coincidence of the most various circumstances which ob- literated
the boundaries between the three
conjugations.
In the first
placea
conflict arose
in
many
instances between the
analogy
of
meaning
and that of
sound.
y"(f)vp6(o pi'obablyowes
its
existence,
in
spite
of
yecpvpa,
to the
prepon- derance
of the
former,as
does
Updop-ai
in
spite
of
lepo-s,
while
Xw/Sdo/xat
and
reXevTaco,
in
spite
of their somewhat causative
meaning,
to
the
phoneticanalogy,
i.e. to the
prevailingsense
of their connexion with a-stems. Of
course
there
were
other tendencies which
helped
to shift the verb from
one
class to another.
Possibly
it is sometimes
only
our
defective
knowledge
of the Greek
vocabulary
which makes
us
think this. There
are,
for
instance,
many
instances of
a
and
o
stems
existing
side
by
side
;
and it is sometimes
a mere
chance that one
has
been
preserved
and not the other. How
easily,
e.g.
might
the remarkable
Kopv(povfr6ai,
have
come
from
a
lost
*Kopv(po-sexistingby
the side of
Kopv(f)r]
?
On the other hand there
were no
doubt
cases
where
phoneticweakenings
took
place. Many an original
-am,
-a^a"
may
in this
way
have
degenerated
to
-eco,
-ifcu,
35 7
more
particularly
in
cases
in which the consciousness of the connexion with
an a stem had been
lost,as we conjectured
to have
happened
in the
case
of
pnrriM
by
the side of the Homeric
piTrraa-Kf,
pirrrd^oi.
In the Greek dialects the mutual
interchange
between all three
conjugations
ia
as common as
that within the
same
dialect at dift'erent
times,
and where two or
even three forms of the
same
word
were
in
vogue
at one time,
it
was
necessary
that the
tendency
towards ditferentiarion should
give
rise to small varieties of
use
which
are not in all
cases
quite
consistent with the
prevailing analogies.
In the
chapter
'
de confusione terminationum
conjugationis
circumflexae
'
in Lobeck's
Rhemarikon
p.
163 ff.and in his note on
Buttmann ii.^
53,
is
a copious
store of
material,although
all that is
piu-ely
dialectic is there excluded. It will be
enough
for
us to adduce
a
series of facts. The
numerous
Ionian
by-forms
in
-ew
for the
verbs in
-aco seem
clearly
to be the result of
a weakening.
In this
case we are
inclined to find the
specialground
iu the Ionic
preference
for
" as compared
with
other vowels. Hence
rjirreov, peuolveov, opoKXeovby
the side of forms with the
a
in
Homer,
fpea
for
epda,8L-^i(o
for
Bi-^dco
in
Archilochus,KVKevpevosior KVKa"fievos
in
Solon,e'xpeovTo, olde'ovro,
opecD
in
Hippocrates(Renner
Stud. i.
2,43),
and much
of the
same sort,
such
as
etpojTeov, (prjxaviovro, ooppeovro,
(poireovr-cov, ToXp(a"
in
Herodotus
(Bredow
dial. Herod.
382).
This
explanation, however,
does not hold
for all
cases,
for while it
may
be said that wvaaelTai
by
the side of
wveofiai
is
an
246 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
antiquated
Doric
form,on
the other hand
6pia"v, avXfcov,iTVLn^iemv,
fpfweovres
are
Doric
as
well
as
Ionic
(Ahrens 310, Sitzungsber,
der k. siichs. Gesellsch. d. W.
1864,
p. 221),
and
though
Plato
uses aloXem,
the Ionic
Hippocrates
has aioXarai.
^I'pe'o)
is the older and
^vpaco
the
post-Atticform,
and there
are
other instances
in which the Atticists
warn
their readers
against
the
ao"
of the
koivt)
as
opposed
to the
e")
of
good Attic,
and thus it
appears
likely
that it
was not
phonetic
grounds
but
conflicting analogies
which
were the
determiningcauses in
many-
instances.
We
may perhaps
be
right
in
regarding
Doric forms in
aw,
where the other
dialects use the form in
ow,
as of an
older
date,
e.g.
KOkvaa-avres (Pind.Pyth.
iv..
115),
TvapeKoivaTo
(ib.133),
to which
we
may
add the Asiatic-Aeolic
d^iao-et
=
d^icl}(Tfi (Ahrens
Aeol.
94, Philolog.xxv. 191).
We have
alreadycompared
358
ffuv
with the Lat. novdre.
This
form,as distinguished
from
veovv,
is
specially*
used,as Lobeck
remarks,
'
de innovatione
agrorum,'clearlyan
old
use
of the
word,
in which the old form has survived.
Kvicraav occurs
in earlier
Greek,
Kviacrovu
in later. On the other
hand,
in
a
Lesbian
inscription
edited
by
Conze
(Reise
auf Lesbos
p.
23) we
read
(at
1.
7)
ripoio-aa-a
instead of
Tipaaaa-a.
In- stead
of the usual
a-Keva^cowe
read in
an inscription
from
Megara (Revue
Archeol.
July 1875,
p.
20) enfcrKevcoa-av
and C. I. G.
2448,
viii. 25
KaraaKevrndri.
Comparatively
the least
inteixhange
takes
place
between
ew
and
ow,
such
as
is to be
seen
in the Ionic forms
avrifvueda,d^ifvfiei'os, picrOevvTai,
e8iKaieiiin-o
(Bredow 391).
We find KVKXea and
kvkXoq)^
piyea
and
piyoco
existing
side
by
side without essential difference of
meaning.
There
are even cases
where all
three forms
exist,as aKijvdco,
o-Krjvtto, (tktjvoco,
all three
good Attic,
and with
no
definite
variety
of
meaning.
The
unity
of all these forms
is,
I
think,con- firmed
afresh
by
the extent to which
they were
used for each other.
Second Excukstts.
On the
Inflexionof
the Ve7-ba Contracta.
I have treated the inflexion of the verba contracta
in full at
'
Studien
'
iii.
p.
379 ft'. I
may
therefore be allowed to
give
here a
very
brief
recapitulation
of the results of the
investigations
there detailed.
As
distinguished
from the other
dialects,
the Aeolic
dialect,
it is
generally
stated,
treated the contracted verbs like verbs in
-pi.
A closer
examination,
however,
reveals the
fact,
that the
use of different terminations
was quitean
in- significant
element in the difference between the dialects " for in
reality
it is
only
in the first
person
singular:
Aeol.
(plXrjpi by
the side of
(piKtco,
and in the
infinitive active
: (piXijpev
or
(^tXijmt by
the side of
(f"i\eiu,
that there is
a
dif- ference
in this
respect
" the main
pointbeing
that
they
differ in the mode of
treatment of the vowels and
diphthongs
which
appear
in the
body
of the verbal
forms
:
359
Aeol.
(f)iX7]pev
Aft.
cf)L\ovp(u
"
(piXfiai
"
cfitXovai
"
part.(f)i\eis
"
(j)iK(ov
,,
(f)iXi]pevos
"
(f"iXovp(vos
These vowels are in
many
forms
justas long
in Aeolic
as
in
Attic,so
that
(f"iXr]-p"i'
and
Tide-pev
'ap-dpfvos
and
iarni-pevos
THE INFLEXION OF THE CONTRACTED VERBS. 247
are distinguislied
from each other
equallyclearly
in both dialects. The
only
e.xceptions are
such forms
as
either
have, or once had, vr
after the
conjugational
vowel : 0tXety,
gen.
(})iXe-vT-os,
3rd
pi.(plXeiai
for
*(plXe-vTi,
and the vowels
preceding
the modal characteristic of the
optative: (f)iXe-ir]-v, yeXa-ir]-v.
We
have
alreadyseen (on
p. 135)
the
neighbouring
sounds
exercising
the
same
shortening
induence in the
primitiveaorists,
and
we
referred then to the forma- tions
now
under discussion. Now the
long
vowel sound which we
thus find to
be the rule must without doubt be
explained
to be the result of contraction.
The Aeolic \erhs
(piXt^iii, yiXaifxi, doKLixufxi are justas
much contracted verbs as
those in the other dialects and in
Latin,
to the latter of which the Aeolic forma
bear the closest
resemblance,
e.g.
SoKrj-^ev
= Lat. docc-mus
doKfL-a-L =
,,
doce-nt
8oKrjfifi/os
=
,,
doce-mim.
In the conflict between the two vowels Aeolic like Latin lets the first
vowel,
which
we
may
call the
conjugational vowel,prevailthroughout,
while
the main Ionic dialect was
far less consistent in its
procedure.
In order to
comprehend
the rule of the Aeolic contraction
we
must start
from
-ajd-mias
the
primary
form. This is
onlyfeasible, however,on
the three
followingassumptions:
1)
The second
a
may,
at the time when the Greek dialects stillformed a
singlewhole,
not
yet
have manifested that
regularchange
of
o
and
e sounds
which is the characteristic of the thematic vowel. There is
no
way
of
getting
from
(f)iXeo[xev
to the Aeol.
cpiXrjfiei^, or
from
(piXeofMevus
to
(pLXrjfXfvos.
On the
other hand all the vowels
can
be
completelyexplainedas soon as we assume
3QO
that the
-ajd-mi
first
appearedon Greek
ground
in the forms
-a-je-mi, -o-je-mi,
-e-je-mi.
At
p.
206
we recognised,as we thought,
in the
syllable -ja
the verb
to
go.
In the forms
U-vai,U-irj-v we
have formations which differ from the
-je-mi
of
our search,only
in
having
the vowel
i
in the
place
of the
spirantj.
Hesychius
has
moreover
preserved
the
glossdrj-yu.-
Tropevofj.ai.
If this
is,as
Lobeck
conjectured, a
mistake for
'Irj-fii, we have here the 1st
sing.
ind. to le-pai.
Perhaps
too ^i7/-/ir
ttoioo,
diij-aaf
TroiTJa-ai (Ilesych.)
with di for
de,
is to be
referred to
*dha-jd-?m, so
that it
comes quitenear to the Oh.-Sl.
d^-ja
I do. A
remarkable form
however,which,as I
believe,
confirms our conjecture
of the
originalpresence
of the e-sound in this
place,
is the hitherto
imexplained
and
extraordinary presentdxwzcrS^/xt quoted
in the E. M.
p. 181,
44 from Alcaeus.
The
authority
for it is Herodian
nepl
naduv
(ed.
Lentz ii.
290),
and this is
enough
to
give
credit to the form. Alcaeus wrote
axmo-S/z/xt kukcos meaning
'
I
am sorely
vexed.' Herodian is
no doubt
right
in
connecting
the form with
(ixos, or,
as we
should
say,
with the
rt.
d^, though
in
a
way
of his
own :
'
ea-riv
aXo}, napayayov
ax"C"^""X^f'^M'
*""''
rporrfjrov ^
els
a-
Kal 8
TrXeovaarp-cS tov v
axvd(ThT)p.i.^
Without
vouching
for the
perfectcompleteness
of this
account,
we
may anyhow
be
sure
of the form itself.
axvAa-br^pi was
the Aeolic form of
what in Attic
was a^vaCf^.
This form
we
may suppose
to have arisen in the
following
way.
There is
nothing
to
prevent our
presupposinga noun-stem
*ax-va,
formed from the
rt.
ax
in
a
similar
way
to that in which
Tfx-va
came
from the rt. tsk. The first formation from this stem is
axvdCf^,^
which
might
8
Hesychius's gloss axvii^ei
"
Hx^erai,
fxiau, xpdyei
has been omitted from both
of Mor. Schmidt's
editions,no
doubt
by an
oversight,as
the note to 92 shows
The older editions have it.
248 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
have come from it exactly
in the
same
way
as StKafw
from the stem Sua.
Inasmuch
now as we
have
recognised
the
f
of such formations to be the
repre- sentative
of an original j,
we are brought
to
a
form
*axva-joi.
In the
place
of
the
o),
however, d;^i'afrS7;/:it,
which has
incontestably come
from
nxva-jrj-yn,
shows
361 lis
the
very
e
sound which
we were
looking
for in verbs of this kind. It is
remarkable what conlirmation this form
gives
to both of
our
hypotheses,
first
that the
e
sound is the
predecessor
of the
o
sound,
and
again
that the verba
contracta were originally
identical with those in
^w.
From the
primarya-jd-mi
then there
was developed,as we
may
now assert more definitely,
first
a-je-mi.
This
againsplitup,
accordingto the
way
in which
the/
was
treated,
on
the
one
hand to
a-^rj-fxi, on
the other to
a-rj-fii,
and inasmuch
as the
a can
appear
in
either of three forms
u,
e,
or
o,
there results all the
variety
of
ending
which
we
have here to
try
to
comprehend.
2)
The second
assumption
which is
requisite
for the
comprehension
of the
Aeolic formation is that
thej,previously
to its
disappearance
from between the
two
vowels, was
in all
cases
productive
of
lengthening.
The most various
traces survive of the
originallength
of the vowels of the verba
contracta,as we
shall have occasion to notice
immediately.
We shall therefore have to
assume,
for
an
earlyperiod
of
Greek,
forms like
*yf\ar]-fjii, *(f)iKr]T]-ij.t.,
*
SovXaTj-fxi,
*yeXd(-fji.evos,*^iKrji-^ievos, *bov\(ji"i-ixevos,
from which
by
contraction came
^Lkrjp.i, BovXafii,yeXd/newy(cp.uaafj-evos),
8ovXd)fJ.evos.^
3)
Our third
assumption
is that
a
transition, even
among
the
Aeolians,was
gradually
made to the
conjugation
in
-co, though perhapsonly
to
a small extent.
The
only
actual instances
we
have from Aeolic Greek
are koX^w (Herodian
ii.
332), nodfjo), dSiKTjei. TrodrjM
bears the
same
relation to
nodrjui
that SeiKvvo) does
to
SftACfi^jui. Strictlyspeaking
what
happened was
that the "?-sound in
7ro^?;-7;-/nt,
plur.iro6rj-e-nev,
underwent the
change
to an o-sound which
regularlyhappens
in the verbs in
".
The first
person
wodrjco,
later nodeco finds its closest
analogy
in the Lat.
mone-o,
while
mone-mus, mone-nt,
as we
saw, correspond
to
*7r6dq-fiev,
*Tr66(i-(Ti. The
Cyprian koXij^o) (Princ.
ii.
266) preservedby
Herodian
(i.444,
362 ii.
332)
is
a
remarkable form. It
proves
on the
one hand that
^ representsJ
alone,
and
shows,on
the
other,
that the
lengthening
assumed above
belongs
to
a
periodprevious
to the
origin
of the forms with the
f.
Homeric
Greek, as
is well
known,
has retained
lengthened
forms of this
kind in
great
abundance: from the
"-conjugation
forms like
o-vXtjttjj/, nposavdl]-
TT]v, crvvavTr]Tr}v, (poirrjTijv, dprjfievai, yorjfifvai,
TTeimjpepat., ovrj^ievos,
which
are
onlydistinguished
from the Aeolic formations
by
the Ionic
";;
from the e-con-
jugation
forms like
dTretXTfr?;!',
oixapT-qrrjv,nak-qfievai, TTfvd^
fifvai, (piXripfvai,
which
may
be
compared
with the Boeotian
Kaprep^peu (probablymore
correctly
Kap-
Tfpelpev
Ahr. Dor.
523),akirripevos
which
corresponds
to the Arcad.
ddiKrjpevos,
the Lesb.
(f)opTJp(vos
and the Boeot.
Delph.
and Locr.
participles,
like ddiKfi-
ptvos, d"pap"ipevos, KaXdntvos;
from the
o-conjugation
the 3rd
sing,
a-dm
(II363,
*
238),
which could not
conceivably
have
come from
*((xdo(,
but which falls
*
The
specifically
Aeolic
epenthesis of the
/
in
yiXaifu,
and other
irregularities,
such as those enumerated
by
Ahrens Aeol. 139 " 3rd
sing. "("ih(i, x"'''"'0',
apparently
the result of
weakening"
need not be mentioned here.
VERBS IN -10)
AND -i^(0.
249
into its
placequitesimplyas
the 3rd
sing,
to the 2nd
sing,preserved
in Alcaeus
fr. 73
oT liacf)' dnoWvufvois craws,
as
also does the
imperativecraw i/ 230,
p
595
as analogous
to the so-called Aeolic
fivpco
(Ahrens 140), so
that
we
have to
recognise
in it
a
contracted form of *ada)f. To these must he added the forms
eaXwi/,dXoitjv, aXavai, dXovs, f(ii(oi', ^loir/v, ^iu"vai,^Loiis
which survived after
Homer's
time,
and
which, notwithstanding
their aoristic
meaning are,
as we
saw on
p.
133
f.,undouhtedly presents
in
origin,
and
provideus,
in their
long
vowels,
with the clearest evidence in
support
of
our
view. It is thus
placed
beyond a
doubt that
here,as
in other
cases,
the Aeolians
preserved
formations
of
a
kind
peculiar
to the earliest
period
of the Greek
language
in
general.
There is
a
like
plenty
of forms from various dialects like the Aeolic
rrodrjcOf
d8iK-l]eis, forms,
that
is,
in which the thematic vowel has made its
appearanci.,
while the
conjugational
vowel is still
long.
Such are
the Homeric
neLmco,
8i-\f/do),
pevoivTjTjcri (O 82),
the Hesiodic
dpddv (0pp. 392),
the Attic
Treivfjs,
St"|/-r;, fdi\lrr],
XP')''''^''
^tc,
which
can only
be conceived as coming
from
neivrjeis,
bi^rjeietc.,
the
Delphic avXrjovTfs,by
the side of
avXecov, a-vXeovres,
and
contracted forms like
avXriv,a-vXrjT"o,
the Homeric
v-rrvajovres,
Idpaovcra,just
like the forms from the
Delphic
dialect
: dTraXXoTpioyovcra, dnaXXoTpuooir], o-tc
(^avutiTU),
paaTiyoioov,
by
the side of the contracted
dovXwrj,
of which the last
may
be
compared
with well-attested Attic forms like the infin.
piyCav,conj.
3.
s.
353
ptyo), Opt.piydrju, part.
dat.
piyavTi
(Aristoph.
Ach.
1146)
and
Hippocrates's
i8p"0T]t", ISpQXTi, l8pa)VT"s.
The
view,
which in itself is
objectionable,
that forms
like these are
in Homer due to metrical
license,
is
completelyupsetby
these
facts.
What
place
is to be
found,
in this
history
of the verba
contracta,
for the so-
called
lengthened,
but
more properlyspeaking,
assimilated Homeric forms like
opdo),opdas,pvaopevoi
etc.,
is
a question
which I will not
again
enter on here,
as
I have
on
several occasions
expressedmy
views with
regard
to
it,
" most
recently
at Stud. iii.
400,
" and
as
I
can now
refer the reader to
Mangold's
paper
'
De Diectasi
Homerica,'
Stud. vi. 139 ft".
4. Verbs
in la and tfo).
Just
as the noun-stems in
i are
far less
numerous
than those which end in
a
or
o,
so too the verbs in
-la
and those verbs in
-i^w
in which the
t
may
be
regardedas
native to the stem fall in number far below the three classes hitherto
discussed. The
only
verbs in
-iw
from noun-stems in
i are b-qpicd (Homeric br^pt-
a-aaOai from
fi^pt-s), kXt^Iw(Horn. KXrfia-ai
from
"cX7//t-y
= Lat.
cldvi-s,
Hdt.
kXtjioj,
Att.
kXiJq),
later
KXeico),
kovIm
{kovi-s,
later
kovI^co),
/xao-rico
{pda-rieP 662
from the st.
pacm
ace. pda-Ti-v), pyjvio)(^^w-y,prjvXe, prjvtcras), prjTlopat {prjTi-Sf
prjTiaopai).
We
cannot be
so sure
that the Homeric
KrjKia}
{dveKTjKif, Soph.
KTjKiov) comes
from the
post-Homeric
KrjKi-s (gen.ktjkISos).
The first two of
these verbs have a
long i throughout,
and this must
undoubtedly
be held to be
older than the short
vowel,
and is
perhaps
the
product
of the final
i
of the stem
and the derivative
j {kovi-jw, kovico).
To these
correspond,
in
Sanskrit,
verbs
like
(f(mi-jd-ti
he wants a
wife
(^dni-s),ardti-jd-ti
he threatens mischief
{drdti-s
mischief),
in
Latin,
verbs like
Jinire,grandlre,lenire,poth-e, in~?-etire,
vestire
which
are evidently
founded on noun-stems in i. A\Tiere no
such
nouns can be
found for Greek verbs in
-loo,
as
is the
case
e.g.
with
dXia,
kvXiw
(by-form
KvXivdco, KvXivSew)
,
papUiv (o)(Xel(j6ai,
Trvperreiv
Hesych.) we ought perhaps
to
assume that such stems have been lost. For
fiapUiv,
which has been
wrongly
250 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLAS3.
suspected,
such a
stem
might
be deduced from
fiapi-X-q glowing coal,coal-dust,
and it is related
anyhow
to the
name
of
an inflammable stone which in Aristotle
364 according
to Boiiitz's Index ia
fj.apiev-s
{jxapUuv.
1.
papiOdp),
in
Hesych.
is
papi^eC-s.
The vtsrbs in
-tw
which
are,
at least
apparently,primitive,we
have
discussed on
p.
207 f.
Along
with these verbs in
-tw come a number of forms in
-ifcu,
which
point
to primitive
stems of the
same
kind.
They
bear to the verbs in
-la
the
same
relation as
that of the above-mentioned
papi^evs
to
pnpievs.
Such
are Ki6apl(o},
vfpta-iCopnt; vo(T(pi^(o (adv.i'6a(f)i), dprjyvpi^ofxai, uni^M, noXi^co,v(ipL^oi, x^^^C*^'
pai,
p^aTtfco,
all Homeric
verbs,
to which
may
be added
e.g.
from later Greek
paxiC"^(cp.
also
paxirrj-s), cf)r]pi^"o.
None of the noun-stems
belonging
to these
'" ,ibs show
a
S in their
inflexion, as
is the
case with
eA7ri-y, i'pi-s,
na-t-s
(jral-s),
piTTL-s, (ppovTL-s,
to Avhich the verbs
eXnlCo),fpl-C^,Trai^co, piTrtfco, (ppovTi^co
correspond.
Hence I cannot believe that the 8 of the
noun-iuiiexion,
the
sporadic
character and
origin
of which I have discussed at Princ. ii.
278,
has
any
special
connexion with the
f
of the
verbs,
and hold rather that the latter
is in all these
cases
the
representative
of a simple
j,
before which an involuntary
5
was developed.
It is not
quiteso
easy
to
answer
the
question
whether verbs like
paarriCco, (TuKrTL^(o,(poppL^o3,
which show
a
guttural
iu the tenses
beyond
the
present
stem,
have
sprung
from the noun-stems
paany, aaKniyy, cpoppiyy,
or
from
shorter
ones,
such
as actually
exists
as a by-form
for
paa-ny.
This is
a question
which
we can
here aflbrd to leave imsettled. That it is
possible
that in deno- minative
verbs of this
kind,
to which
we
shall return in
Chapter
XYII.
(p.
270
of the
marginalpaging),gutturals
may appear
which
are not to be found in the
noun-stem,
is
proved by Tra/^co, inn^ovpai(Laconiaus
in
Xenoph.),(nai^a,inalx-
6i]v,Tva'iyviov,
and
we saw likewise at
p.
237 that in the inflexion of the verbs in
-^o)
formed from
interjections
there
are gutturals
which have
come
from
a
simpley.
To this class of the verbs in
-i^iowe must also
add,
I
think,
those
which,
like
dyoivi^npai, uKovTi^oi,dvdpi^u), k"\i]t(.^co, paKapi^o), aaxppovl^a),
come from
noun-stems ending
in
a
consonant. In this
case it seems
to
me
most natural to
regard
the
i as a
vowel
producedinvoluntarily
before the
j,
so that
e.g.
epTrodi^co
and the identical
imjyedio
would have to be referred to
a
denominative
*2)ad-
jCi-mi, *pad-i-jd-"ni.
For several of these
verbs,however,
other
explanations
are possible.
365
5. Verbs in -vw and -u^w.
The
following
verbs in
-i;a) are clearly
denominatives
:
axXvoi,
yijpvco,
daKpvco,
eprjriio),
Wv"o,
p(dv(o,oi^vco,
to which we
may
add
(plrvd)
=
Li?itfutuo, though
the
corresponding
noun-stem does not occur
till
a
much later
period
than the
verb,
and also
ravoi or raij^co
which is to be deduced from
Hesychius'sravaas'
peya-
Xvvai
(cp.Tavs'
ptyas,
noXvs).
That in such verbs a /
has fallen out between
the
i;
and the thematic vowel is the natural and
perfectlyunobjectionablecon- clusion
suggestedby
the
exactly analogous
formation of Vedic verbs like
rtfu-jd-ti
he is
upright,
from
r(/u-supright,kratu-jd-ti
he
puts
forth
strength,
from krdtu-s
strength,
taken in connexion with all these
derivatives,
and the
same
assumptionmay
be made for the
corresponding
Latin verbs like
acuo,
inetuo,
statuo. An
importantparallel
is observable between the Greek
haKpvuv
and the
synonymous
Gothic
tayr-jun,
which, on
the
assumption
that the Gk. word
once
was baKpvjtLv,
coincide
exactly,
while the loss of the
;
after the u
in Latin ia
VEEBS IN -svco AND -ovo).
251
exemplifiedby
the Lat. struere as
compared
with the Goth,
straujan(cp.
the
Skt.
stdrdjd-mi).
We have however
a superfluity
of unmistakable intermediate
forms in Greek itself in the Aeolic
presents
in
-viod,
which have been noticed
above at
p.
1-47. One of these
presents
is
^ifdvio} (Ilerodian
i.
456), evidentlya
denominative,
while aXvia and
ottuico are as
yet
somewhat obsciu'e.
The other
representative
of the
/
which
we
should
expect
in this
place
is
^.
We have
no
instance
though
of an
undoubted denominative in
-v^o).
It is
possible
that
epnv^co
comes
from
a noun-stem
*fpnv,
known to
us
anyway
as
the
proper
name
of the Theban
""Epirv-s.
A direct branch of the stem is
perhaps
to be
seen
in
the name
of the
creepingplant epirvWov,epnvXkos,ip-rri/XKiov.
Forms like
e/jTTva-a),
elpTvvua,
fpTTvaris, fpTTvariKos
bear to
fpnco
exactly
the
same
relation as
that of
iXKiicrco,
elXKVcra,(iXKvaTai., eiXKvcr6r]v, eXKvais, iXKVcrTa^at
to eXko). Not- withstanding
the latter
are commonly
referred to a
present
iXKva which does not
occur
till the latest
Greek, though analogyspeaks
for
iXKv^w.
The
remaining
verbs in
-v^coare almost entirely
onomatopoetic
verbs with
a guttural
in the
stem,
and
are
widely
different from the formations here in
question.
Some of
these we have met
with above on
p.
237.
6. Verbs
in -evco and -ovco. 366
That these verbs also
once had a
j
before the thematic
vowel,though
not
proved by
the existence of
by-forms
vfith
a (
" for the awkward combination
-ev^oiprobably
does not occur
except
in the above-mentioned
onomatopoetic
(pev^co
" is
extremelyprobableon
various other
grounds.
In the first
place
the
already
well
developed
and well established rule for the denominative verbs in
generalspeaks
for it. At
p.
232
we saw that,though a noun-stem
may
as such
do
duty as a verb-stem,
e.g.
SeiKvv in
deiKwpi,
the conversion of
a noim-stem
into
a ver1"stem
by
the addition of the thematic vowel
was
unheard of. And
yet
such
a conversion must have taken
place
if it is to be assumed that
^aa-iXev-a
came from
iSaa-iXev
without the loss of
a ;'.
The
only imaginableexplanation
of such
a
form would be that
*/3ao-iXeu-/:it was
formed from
(iaaiXfu as was
8(iKvvp.i
from
8fiKvv,
and that
subsequently
the thematic vowel came in,as
in
beiKuvo}, on
the
analogy
of the verbs in
w.
But I know of
no
support
for such
a view. There
are moreover some
hints at all events that there
was once a j
here. If the
diphthongev
had stood from the first
du-ectly
before the thematic
vowels,
it would be
surprising
to find it
so
well
preserved.
If
*lfp"v-as
and
*lep"v-es
became
Uprjos
and
Upfjes, why
should not
we
get ieprjco, Uptjeis
and the
like ? Presents with
a ev
in them which have
come
direct from the root show
a
corresponding
loss of sound
e.g. 8fo-paiby
the side of
devo-pai(cp.
above
p.
210),TrXeo),
TTveco,
peco,
beside
Set'oj, nXeio},
nvflco of the /-class. In denominative
verbs in
evu no such loss
occurs.
Again,we
have
repeatedlyremarked,
and shall
discuss at
length
in
Chap. XXI.,
p.
369
(marginal),
the fact that the
a
which
appears
to have intruded in
some tenses
e.g.
in
ellXKv-a-Tai, fiXKv-a-drj-v, i-p.vi]-'
a-drj-v, KeKvXi-a-pai,
and in
a
correspondingway
in noun-formations
e.g. irp'i-a-p.a
(pres.TTpt'^co
beside
Tvpia)points
to the existence at
one period
of
aj
which has in
many
instances become
^.
And this
same o- occurs
also in
some
verbs in
evo,
367
especially
in
KeniXeva-pai, iKeXexxrd-qv, eXeixrdrjv,
the latter of which is from the
monosyllabicstem Xtv for
Xaj:a
(Xaas).
With this too
agree
the
primitive
verbal
forms
TTfTTXfva-Tai, fiweva-Oriv,
for
we found
by
the side of
nXica,tvv"(o
the forma
nXe/ju), TTvefjoi
30 that
we have here another
case where this
"t
confronts
a i iu
252
APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
the
present.
For these reasons
T make no doubt that Schleicher
Comp.'
855
and Leo
Meyer
ii.43 are right
in
referring
the
presents
in
-evo) to
-evjco.
As to the
origin
of the verbs in
-eva,
we must look for their
startingpoint
to
the noun-stems in
-ev.
It must be admitted however that but
a
very
few of
these verbs have noun-stems of this kind
corresponding
to them. Leo
Meyer
gives
44-IIomeric verbs which have
no noun-stems in
-ev
and
only
10
altogether
which
have,
and
even from these 10
we must deduct 2
or 3,
for it is not till the
latest Greek that
T)yefxovev-s
(forrjyenovevo)),
and
vSpev-s(forvBpfvoi)occur,
and
nopfv-s
is
only
found in
Hesych.,
and that with the
meaning nop6p.tvi,
so
that it is
but a
poor
foundation for
Tropeio). dpicrrevci though,
from the Homeric
dpicrTev's,
has been overlooked. There remain therefore but 8 Homeric verbs in
-evw
which show the normal relation to the
noun-stem, though
there
are some
verbs
of
very
common use
among
them
; they are
apta-revw,
iBaa-iXfvw,
rjVLoxfvo, rjnepo-
nevo, iepfva",
vofieva, Tro/nTrevtD,
;(aX({6r/").
To these
we
may,
it is
true,
add a
few
from
post-Homeric
Greek, such
as a^Kva,
^palSeva,
ypapp-arevco,
iTTnevco, aKvnva,
Topevoi, (fyovevco.
But for Homeric verbs like
d-yopevop-ai,
dedXtvco, dpxfvco,
^ovXevco,6r]pfvQi, Br^revoi,
p.avTevop.ai, iTvkfva", ro^evto,
and for
post-IIomeric
verbs
like
Trai8evci",
iriarevu},
xopevco
it is vain to look for noun-stems in
-ev.
The
related
languages
too
give us no help
whatever in
respect
of this whole forma- tion.
The solution of the riddle is however
probably
to be found in the fact
that in Homer the nominal-suffix
-ev,
as
I have
pointed
out at Ztschr;
iii.
78,
iv. 213 is
constantly
added to shorter formations to
strengthenthem,
and
espe- cially
to stems in
-o,
with the view of
givinggreater prominence
to
the
person
acting. Occasionally, as
e.g.
in
rjvioxrja,
fjinoxrifs by
the side of
fjvioxo-s, ovpr^av
K 84
by
the side of
ovpo-s,
Trofnrfjes, Tro/xTr^ay by
the side of
irofnros,
AWioTr^asby
the side of
AldioTres,
this addition is made in certain
cases only.
It is not sur-
368
prising
therefore that this suffix should have introduced itself in
just
the same
sporadic
fashion before derivative
terminations,
and
even
before the derivative
-la
of feminine
epithets,as
e.g.
on the
analogy
of
Bvsapia-TOToKda
{tok(v-s)
in
fV7rar(p-f{f)-ta,
and
fvpv68e(f)ia as
also in the verbs with which we
have here
to do. It
was
felt
prettj^
much that
every
nomen agentis
in
-o might
have a
by-atem
in
-ev as
well. On the
pattern
of such
a
noun,
i.e.
*olvoxoevs,
which is
just as conceivable
as
rjvioxev-s,
was formed
olmxofvo),
on
that of *lKeTevs,a
conceivable
by-form
of
iKtrrj-s,
Ik"T"V(o. A
very
large
number of the noun-
stems
in
-f V are designations
of
persons
which
are
derived from the name
of
a
thing
and denote the
man
who has
to do with that
thinge.g.
Innfv-s,olKfv-s,
(TKVTfv-s. Perhaps
there
were
once,
on
the
analogy
of these
words,
such nouns
as *dr]pe\j-s, *7rai8ev-s, *To$eii-s.
From
these,
whether
they actually
existed or
were only present
to the mind
as
types,
came verbs like
drjpevco, naidivco, ro^f
I'o).
Hence their
decidedlypreponderating
intransitive
meanings (Buttmann
iL
383).
The verbs in
-tva
have all from the firstthe
meaning
to conduct or
behave oneself
after the fashion of
some
person
or
other who
was denoted,
at least in
idea,by
the suffix
-ev.
The need of verbs to
discharge
this function
evidently
conduced
to swell the list of verbs in
-eva.
In
use,
these verbs come
nearest to the verbs
in
-e").
This
sufficiently explains
the
constant, though
not
always meaningless
intercliange
between the two
classes,
for which
see
Lobeck Ehem. 199 ff. No
one
will
try
to deduce
a phonetic
connexion between these two formations
from
the fact that
we
find side
by
side
^rjTfvw
and
C^reo),olvoxotvw
and
olmxoea",
tTn8r)p.fva)
and
enihripfbi.
There
are onlya few verbs in
-ouw.
These few
appear,
at least in some
VERBS IN -VQ) AND -aivo).
253
cases,
to be related to those in
-" vw.
Thus
Hesychius'sfioXuvfiv{iyKoirrdv ras
Trapa(f)vd8as)
,
as was recognisedby
Lobeck Rhem. 206,
is identical with the
Attic
fioXeveivquoted by
Pollux vii. 14G from
an
Attic
law,
and
explained
by ras avTo^oXiaskottthi'. nuXevo)
however stands in the same
relation to
{avTu)fioXo-s
that
dpxfva
does to
dpxos-
koXovco seems to me to be in the main
rightlyexplainedby
Fick^ i.
240,
when he refers it to *KoXof6-s,
the form to
be
expectedas
the basis of
koXo/3o'-?, so
that it
may
possibly
have
gone through
369
the intermediate
stage KoXof-jo), koXov-J(d,
and
may
bear to koXoISoco
the
same
relation
as
that of
oTpoyyvXXco
to
o-rpo-yyvXoo).
It is not
so
easy
to
explain
aKovco
and
opoxxo.
If this view of these verbs is
correct,they
have the closest
resemblance to
the Church-Slavonic verbs in
-u-j(ji
inf. -ova-ti
e.g. kupujq
inf.
kupovatibuy,
the
only
diflerence
being
that here an a-sound is added in the
infinitive.
II. CONSONANTAL DIVISION.
"V\'e have here to deal with derived verbs which
originally
had a conso- nant
before the
-joi
of the
present,
whether that consonant is to be
regarded,as
in
Bavp.av-ju},
the
primary
form of
Bavfxaivoi, as
the final
consonant
of the
stem, or,
as
in
KaBap-jui,
the
primary
form of
KaOaipa,as part
of the suffix
(/ca^-apd-y)
by means
of which the noim-stem has been formed.
1. Derived Verbs in -va.
These
have, beyond a doubt,
their
starting-point
in
stems in
v
and
vo.
There
are examples
of both kinds in Sanskrit of the most
transparent
forma- tion,
such as ukshan-jd-ti
he acts like
a
bidl
(ukshdn),kr/Kin-jd-tihe
acts miser- ably
(krpand),
the latter
standingby
the side of
krpd-ja-ti
and
krpa-jd-te, just
as
;)(et/Matt/cD,
and
ovojiaivo)
have
"x.^ip.d^oi
and
ovopid^^a)
without
v.
The Greek
verbs of this kind fall into three
divisions,two of which
are
very
rich and
one
poor.
Verbs in
aiva
and
wa are
numerous,
those in
eu-cu rare.
On
phonetic
grounds we
vdll
put
eivco next to aiva.
a)
Verbs in
-aivco.
From stems
in
u,
and with
a preference
for
an "-sound, even where there
is
none
in the
noun-stem,
there
are
formed verbs like
d^paiVoj{d"ppov),
/xf-
Xaivco
{fieXav),p.ekf8aiva" {fxeXedov), Triaivw (ttiov), Troi/xaiVw (Troifxev)
and
nu- merous
dei'ivativesfrom neuter stems in
pLav
like
dadp-aipco, 8eip.aiv(o, Kvpalvco,
nrjpaivo),^^ei/xatVo).
To these
may
be added
a
small number whose
correspond- ing
noim-stems seem to
point
to the sufiix
-7ia {yo):iSaa-Kaiva,
from
^daKavo-s,
370
Xiraiva
(by
the side of
Xira^to
and
Xiravevo))
from Xiravo-i
(Aeschylus).
From stems in
-o
and
-a
there
come a largenumber,
such
as dypiaivco,
SvcTKoXaivco, Xeiaivco, XevKaivco,^rjpaivco
"
Xvacraivco,6pp.aivco, opyaii'cci, "jriKpaivo),
Tfpa-aivco (cp.
the Goth.
thaurs-na-n) .
The relation of these to those
already
mentioned is
just
the
same as
that which subsists between
vop.eva {pop(v)
and
nia-Tevoy (ma-To).
It is
possible
that for
some
of the
noims from which
these verbs come
there
actuallywere by-stems
in
vo.
It is
as
conceivable that
there should have been
a
*XevK-avo-s, or *^r]p-apo-s, as
that there should be
6p"pav6-sby
the side of
6p(f)6-i
= orhu-s
(Princ.
i.
367), or ir-avo-v
"
dXridS"s,
a-cl)d8pa by
the side of
ereos,
eVo'?.
\Yhat is more surprising is,
that verbs in
-aivw come from not a few stema
254 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
in
-fs,
and
even
from
adjective-stems
in
-v,
as
6aiJ.^aiva", KvBalvo), Tradalva,
Bvaxfp(ii"'(o
"
yXvKaivw.
It is conceivable that further
investigation might re- veal
an independentoiigin
for several of these
nasals,
but
even
then
we
should
liave to assume
that the
analogy,
when
once formed,
gave
the
pattern
for fresh
formations. There
can
be
no doubt that the
simple
verbs in
-aivco
in which
the
V
is movable had
an
influence
upon
these formations
(cp.
above
p.
216
f).
There
are moreover
derivative verbs in the Teutonic
language*,
such
as the
Goth,
fi-duj-inon (dominari),
A. S.
ylis-n-jan (coruscare),
mod. Germ, ord-n-en
set in
order,
which have
an n
in the derivative
syllable, while, as Jac. Grimm
T). Gr. ii.174
says,
it is
only
'a
very
few of them which
presuppose
a
substan- tive
in -in.^
b)
Verbs in
-sivco.
There
are
onlyciXetivo), fpeelvoi
of unknown
origin,
and
(f)aeiu(o
which must
come
from the stem
(Pats,
and is
accordingly
of
just
the
same
kind of formation
as
Ba^i^aivu).
c)
Verbs in
-vvw.
We
hardlyget any help
here from
noim
formations. It is to be
noticed,
however,
that
some
few
adjective-istems
in
v
have
by-forms
in
-wo, e.g. Bapcrv-s
6dp(rv-vo-s (n 70),
Wv-s Wvv-rara
(2 508).
To
regard
these
by-formsas older
forms of the
stem, as
is
suggestedby
Leo
Meyer (ii. 75)
and
others,
is
ex- tremely
bold. It
seems more
likely
to me
that
Bdpa-wo-s
is derived from
ffapav-s
371 in the
same
way
as Xiyu-pd-y
from
Xiyv-s,
or 7raxv-\6-s
from
Traxv-s.
A like in- terchange
between
a
shorter and
a longer
stem
may
be traced in forms like
ihpvvdiiv
beside
l8pvM,
and
trjpivBrjv
beside
trjplco.
The twofold forms
are more
widely developed
in
dprvo) (rjprvov, dprvcr"o, TJpTVjiai, rjprvdrjv)
and
dprvvu)
{fjpTvvov, dprvvfd),
Tjprvvas,
dpTvv6r)v),
both from Homer onwards. It is therefore
easiest to understand the verbs in
-vva"
which
are formed from stems in
v,
such
as dp^Xvvo),liapvva),^pabvvco,haavva,
(vpvvai,
rj8vvo),o^vpw.
In this
case
primitive
verbs of the nasal
class,
like 8vvoi beside
8v"o,
nlvm beside shorter
forms without the
v,
have
no
doubt
helped
to establish the
use
of the
v as a
convenient means
for the formation of derivative
verbs,
the
tendencyto which
grew
so strong
in course
of
time,
that the modern Greeks have
come to
develop
numerous
verbs in
-mva
from
o-stems,
which have driven out of
use the less
convenient verbs in
-oco, e.g. TrXrjpava
=
nXrjpooy.^
More numerous than these are
the verbs in
-wco
derived from stems in
o,
such
as
dlSpvvco, d8pvva", BoXvi/ai,
KaKvvco,
Xap.irpvvo), Xenrvpco,
nfyaXvvai,
(rep.vvi/a".
a-KXrjpvvdj.
Here the
v
is
remarkable,
for to set down
by-stems
in
v
for
one and
all of the score or so
of verbs of this
kind,or to ascribe the formation
to the
influence of the not
very
numerous
verbs formed from stems in
v,
is
a question- able
course to take. I have therefore
on a previous
occasion ventured
to con- jecture
that the
v
ishere a
weakened
oi.
In this
way d^po-v-ja
from
the stem
a/3po
would receive the
same explanation
as
Xi;o-fro-i'-/cd
from Xvaa-a. The verbs in
*oiva would tluis bear to those in
aivco
the
same
relation
as
is borne
by
those in
00)
to tliosein
aa,
a^w.
We have
a v
that has
come from
oi
in the Ionic
^vvos,
$wT]iovby
the side of
koivos,
and
a
still
more notorious instance in the Boeotian
v
for the
ot
of the other dialects. I know of
no definite
analogy
in ordinarv
Greek
though
for
a v
in the
place
of
an oi.
'
On this
point, as on that of the denominative verbs in -yu in
general, rich
material
may
be found in Gust.
Meyer
Nas. Pr. 94 S.
VERBS IN
-po), -aip(0, -sipo), -vpw,
AND -\"). 255
There remain
a
few verbs whose
corresponding
noun-stems
end in
$",
such
as
alax^vay, Kparvvm, firjKvvco.
It is
possible
that these
may,
as
is
common in the
case
of
sigmaticstems,
have modelled themselves on the
analogy
of o-stems.
In one or two cases
however other
explanationsare possible, as
in that of koX-
Xtii/o),
which is
perhapsdirectly
connected with the Skt.
kaljdna-s, beautiful, a
derivative from
kal-ja-s
= Ka\6s,
and with
KaWovrj beauty.
We cannot
have
37-.
too
livelya
sense,
in
dealing
with these
questions,
of the
possibility
of such
by-
forms.
2. Derived Verbs in
-pa.
In Sanskrit we
find forms like the Vedic
adhvar-jd-nt sacrificing
from the st.
adhvard
sacrifice,
while for other verbs of the kind in this
language
noun-stems
with
a
derivative
r can only
be
supposed
to have
existed,as
is the
case
with
ratha-r-jd-fihe
rides in
a carriage(rdtha),sapa-r-jd-ti
he reverences (rt.sfl/?).
The Greek formations in
pw
are not
very
numerous.
a)
Verbs in
-aipco.
The
only
verb from
a
stem
ending
in
p
is
rfxpalpco, more commonly
in the
middle
reKpalpopai {TiKpap,T(Kpr]pLo-v).
From stems in
-po
there
are
yepaipa
(yepapo-s), ivaipa
(ra evapd),Kudaipco
and
peyalpa,
the last
being,as
Buttmann
(Lexil.
i.
259)
saw,
undoubtedly
derived from
*peyapo (cp. piyapo-v a room),
the older form for
peydko. ex^^'P" clearlybelongs
to
exdpo-s,
whether we
suppose
an *ix"upo-i
formed like
yepapd-s,
or set down the
a
to
anaptyxis,as
in the
case
of the
e
of the Lat.
ag-e-r
from
*ag-ro-s,
Goth, akr-s.
i\iaipa"
has
no noun-stem
with
an
p,
and
i\e(^aipopai
is an obscure word
altogether.
b)
Verbs in
-etpw.
Ipdpo)
from
"pepos,oiKTelpoi^ by
the side of
oiKvpo-s
like
e'x^aipm
beside
ix.^p6-s.
iBeipa
$ 347 is obscure,
c)
Verbs in
-up
ft).
There is
no
doubt about
paprvpopai
from the stem
pap-rvp
with the
by-form
paprvpo, Kivvpopai
(by-formKivvpi^ay)
from
Kivvpo-s, pivvpopai
(by-formpivvpi^w,
Lat.
minwrid)
from
piwpc-s,
while the
remaining
verbs
d6vp(o,oXocftvpopai,
TrXrjpvpo) (also
written
irkrjppvpo),
with the
by-form nXrjppvpea)are
of obscure
origin.
3 Derived Verbs in -Xw.
We
may say
just
the
same
about these verbs
as about those in
-pa.
A few
verbs in -Xco which
we might
be
tempted
to
expect
to find under this
head,
such
as atdXXo),
baiSdWai
we
have
givenon
p.
212 f.
as primitive
intensive formations.
From noun-stems
in -Xo come dyyeWa,
alKoWo)
(oIkoXosHesych.),dTaa-6dX.X(o,
KapTTvWo), KcoTiXXco, vavTiKXopat,ttoiklXXo}, a-TpoyyvWat(by
the side of
(rrpoyyvXdo)),
2
The form olKripason an old- Attic
inscription (Cauer Stvd. viii.
253)
has led
Kirchhoff
{Monats-Ber.
1872,
p. 237)
to take
oiKripeo to be the real
present,
and
this does
seem
to suit olKripnoov
and the Lesb.
olKrlppcj ;
but it would be the
only
instance of a
form of the kind. Since there
can
be
no
doubt
as to its derivation
from oiKTp6-swe should have to
siippose
that in this
one case an i and not
an e
developed
itself between r and
p : *oiKT-i-po-r,
*olKTip-joo,
and I know of no
analogy
tor this.
Ought we not rather to
regard
the i in tlie
same
way as
in
rfaas,rffiij,
for which we often
get
the
diphthong,
i.e.
as an early corrujDtion
of ei ?
256 APPENDIX TO THE I-CLASS.
(TTw/ii^XXci).
The remainder we
shall not be too bold in
referring
to similar forma- tions.
For
instance,we
have in Homer not
only da-xa^^"'"
but
do-xaXdco,
which
brinnfsus to
*d-a-xa-\o,
from the rt.
a-ex, o-^f
(cp.axo-^r)).
For
ii/SaXXo/xai we
mav conjecture
a *fivd-a.'ko,
formed in the
same
way
as aW-aXo-s,Tp""x-aX6-s.
6(f)f\\(o (o(j}e\oi)
comes most
likely
from the
same stem as
the Latin
opul-entu-s.
Of
just
tlie same
nature are
the Teutonic weak verbs
(discussedby
Jac. Grimm
D. Gr. it
115)
like the Goth,
vtikiljan{
=
ixeyaiptiv
magnificare),
and the mod.
Germ,
gdngeln
to have in
leadingstrings,
streicheln to
stroke,
tdndeln to
trifle,
dallj'.
The diminutive
meaning
which is here and there discernible in both
languages,
has its
origin
in the noun-stems
upon
which tlie.se formations
are
based. In
a
certain sense
then
we
may compare
Latin verbs like
moduldri,
ustvlare and the
*petulare
which
may
be deduced horn
pettdans (c^.petul-cu-s)
,
only
that
they correspondmore to
a-rpoyyvXoa
than to
arpoyyvW"o.
4. Derived Verbs
ix -a-a-a (-ttm).
These verbs fall into two
groups,
which
we
may describe,
to
keep
the
old
nomenclature, as
those with the
guttural
characteristic and those with
the dental. There
are,
however, a
number which show neither characteristic.
374
From
actuallyoccurringguttural
stems we
find " from stems in
k or ko:
dvdcr(T(t){favaK
and
favuKT
Stud. iii.
115), iyyXva-cro) (ykvKv-i\
ikiacro)
(eXi^),
OadfTcra)
(cp.^oco/co-y), Bcofj-qacra) (dajpr]^),
KrjpvcrcTai
(Krjpv^), paXdcrcrco(paXaKOs),
Trrcocrcrco (tttwI),
vXacrcrco
(beside vXaKTico, vXa^), (pappdaaco {(puppaKov),
(f)oivi(T(rQ) {(jio'ivi^), (f"vXda-(Toi ((pvXa^),^Yopaa-o-co (x"P"^))
" from stems
in
x
or
xo
^r)(T(TU) i^r]^),peiXia-a-o) (peiXixos).
From stems which show a dental
there
are
far fewer:
nyrwcrcrto
(ayi'curor, late),alpdaaco(alpar),^Xittq) (peXir),
Ipdcrao){Ipavr),
Kopvcraoo
(KnpvO),Trivvacrai {ttcvvto-s),
nvpecrcroi (^TrvpfTo-s).
The verb
di]6e(r(rnv
stands
quitealone,
inasmuch
as
it has
come
from
a sigmatic
stem,
and
accordinglybelongs
to the list of formations in
-as-jd-mi,
which
we
found on
p.
240 to be
represented
in Greek
by etw.
We have seen above that
a-a
cannot come
from
y.
For dXXdaa^a
therefore,
and
iraTda-a-a,
and
Trrfpixra-o}
we
assume,
instead of the
actuallyoccurringdXXayr], T]XXdyr]v, ndrayns,
and the
gen.
nrepvy-oi,
older forms with
a
k,
for dXXdaaui therefore dXXa/co,an expansion
of
dXXo formed in the
same
way
as
the Skt.
aiija-kd-s
from the
synoujmous anjd.
The O. Ir.
mliyim
muto
correspondsexactly
to dWdaa-a. In this
language,as
I learn from
Windisch,
there
are numerous
formations of this kind which all
come
from
adjective-stems
with
an original
-ha. This class is
represented
in the
Teutonic
languages by
the verbs with
a
g,
discussed
by
Jac. Grimm D. Gr. ii.
806,
some only
of
which,
like the A. S.
ga-hdlg-jan
= to hallow
(Germ, heiligen)
come
from
actuallyexistingadjectives,
while
others,
like the O. H. G. chriu-
zi(/6ngo
on a cru.^ade,biinunigm admonere,
either never had, or
had lost
correspondingadjectives
of this
kind, as
is
especially
the
case with modern
German verbs like
stcinigcn(stone),endigen(finish), pehu'gen(torment),
be-
schoiin/en(glossover).
These common
German formations
are
calculated to
throw much
lighton
the formation of derivative verbs in
general.
Latin has
verbs like claudicdre,alhicdre,
which
exactlycorrespond
to the Teutonic verbs
in
-igm
and what in Greek would bo verbs in -(c(ico.
Some of the Greek verbs in
(raw
show clear
signs
of a guttural
stem in other
tenses or
in
cognate
noun-forms,
without
enablingus to deduce
a
definite
primary
noun,
as
in the
case
of
^biXvcra-npni(/3SeXv;^po-$-), a-napdaa-co {anapd^ai)
and
others. Several of the less comprehensible
of these
wo might perhaps
suppose
CH. XI.
VERBS IN -cro-w.
257
to have
come
from
adjectives with
a k
analogous to the Latin
adjectives
in
-ax
and
-ox
like
ro)-ax,
velox. Greek itself is not altogether
without such
formations, 375
as
is shown
e.g.
by i/ea^,
used
by
comic
poets
with
a
comical force
as a
substitute
for
veavias
(cp. veox-fj^n-s),
find in the
same
way
v"^pa^
young
animal,
from
vf^po-s, \fia^
from Xfio? smooth
(Hesych.),-v//('Xn^
from
^i\6s
bald. In this
way
we might
suppose
an adj. *iypi]-^
for
iypr^aaa,
and
an adj. *d(f)a^
for
d(pd(r"T"x"
feel and the like. For
some
of the verbs in
-vaaco we
may
deduce forms in
-vko,
which,
as
Ernst Kuhn
(Ztschr. sx. 80}
has
shown, correspond to Sanskrit
adjec- tives
in
-ilka,
as
e.g.
by
the side of
pnppnXva-a-opiu we
find the subst.
pnppn\vK"inv,
and
by
that of the late
pappapva-aco,
from which
dpapva-aoi^ seems to be not
widely different, there is
pappapvyrj
with
a
y
softened from
k.
The verbs in
-waaco
(-ojttco) are especially numerous. They
denote
a
ten- dency,
generally
of
an imhealthy nature,
if not
an
actual defect.
Cp.
Lobeck
Rhem. 248.
Among
others
we
may
mention
dp^Xvaxra-co, iVrepcoo-o-w, Xipaxra-a,
vea)(T"T(i. (Hesych. xatj't^ft
he has the
reformation-sickness),
ovfipaxrarco,
TvcpXciXKro))
vm'dxra-a). The
meaning
is not equally prominent
in all
cases : e.g. vypcoaacov
(r"poyyos
Aesch.
Ag.
1329
means simply a
moist
sponge,
and
oi/etpwa-o-a)
dream.
These verbs show but
scanty
traces of
gutturals
in the other tenses and in
derived
words,
e.g.
dveipa^^is (Plato),
ovfipcoypos
(Aristot.), utvflpa^e (Butt-
mann
i."
375).
On this fact
was
based the
conjecture
I
expressed
in the
Symbola philolog.
Bonn. i.
281,
that these verbs
might possibly come
from
an
earlier
-a"T-ja",
and
so correspond to Latin verbs of
a
similar
use
like
balhu-tio,
caecu-tio. Guttural inflexion forms
no insuperable
obstacle to this, as
it
might
very
easily
have
crept
in later
on
the
analogy
of the
numerous presents
in
acr
(it)
which
come
from
guttural stems. Anyhow
the
w
is of the
same
character
as
that in
tv(^\u"-t6-s,
vttvco-ti-ko-s.
'
apapv"T"roii seems to bear to
pappapvcrcru
the
same
relation
as
that of
aydpu to
yapyaipw (p. 215).
258 THE E-CLASS AND THE RELATED FOEAIATIONS.
cu. xii.
^"^
CHAPTER XII.
THE E-CLASS AND TEE RELATED FORMATIONS.
It was indispensable
that we should review the i-classin all its ramifica- tions
and in its connexion with the derivative verbs before
attempting
to
explain
what looks
a
far
simplerphenomenon,
which is connected at all
events with the formations described in the last
chapter.
The alterna- tions,
within
a singleverb,
between
a
shorter stem and
one
expanded by
an e-sound,
is one of the commonest of
irregularities.
We met with
a case
of such
a
twofold formation as
that of
^adt (naBtj-oroiuai)
beside
fxad
and
/^aiflaro
on
p.
178. We
may
here
distinguish
between four modes in
which this
duality
manifests itself.
1)
The e-stem
appears
in the
present,
while
some or
all of the other
tenses come
from
a
shorter
stem,
e.g.
8oK((a
fdo^a.
We
place
this kind first because it bears the most resemblance to the
cases
of
present-expansionalready
discussed.
2)
The shorter stem is
peculiar
to the
present,
while the
expanded
or e-stem
appears
in other
tenses,e.g.
fieveo fjiffj.fvrj-Ka.
3)
Both formations occur
side
by
side in the
present itself,
e.g.
aidofxai albeo/iai.
4)
Where there is
a
present expanded
in
some
other
way,
and also
the
pure
shoi-t verb-stem in some
other
tense,
and
a stem with
no other
expansion
than an
added e-sound occurs in
a
third.
e-ytv-o-firfv
yi-yvo-fiai
yevrj-a-ofxai.
It is obvious that these four
processes,
wliich,
to
use
the old
gram
"
marians'
expression,
coincide in
showing
the
TrXeoyaaiuug
of
an
e,
ai-e
very
377
similar,
and we
must see
if we cannot
explain
them all
on a
singleprin- ciple.
The related
languages yield
us some though
not
many phenomena
which
may
be
compared
with these
processes.
Inasmuch
as we have
compared
the derivatives in
-eui
with the Sanski-it verbs in
-ajdmi,
we
can adduce
somethinganalogous,
for
processes
1
)
and
2)
at all
events,
from
this
language.
As a
rule the
-aja
which is the characteristic of derivative
verbs
pervades
all
tenses,
but the
reduplicated
aorist forms
an
exception,
being
made
sti'aight
from the i*oot. Hence the aoiist a-Uii-lcura-t he
stole bears to the
present Uordjd-mijust
the
same
relation
as that,
for
instance,
of the Homeric
'iarvyt
to the
present arvyiw.
In another case
cu. XTi.
THE E- CLASS IN THE RELATED LANGUAGES. 259
we
find
a form of the 10th class
standing
side
by
side with one of the
first, though
there is
no
great
difierence of
meaning
between the
two,
e.g.
dharshd-jd-mi
venture on a thing,
beside
dJidrshd-mi,
the former of
which
we
compared
on
p.
229 to the Gk.
dupaiu),
while the
latter,
in
Greek
letters,
would stand
as
'^dapauj.
Latin shows
a
still closer resemblance. This resemljlance
was re- marked
by Lobeck, who, on
Buttmann's Ausf. Gr. ii.52
expresses
himself
in words which
are
of
significance
in the
history
of
grammar,
when lie
says
:
'
The
interpolation
of
an f, so
natural in
itself,
favoured the
purposes
of
metre,
and the
pi'opensity
to
full-sounding
forms
;
both in the Latui vo- calic
words like
cieo,clueo,
ahnueo
(conniveo)
,
tueor,
and in the Greek
2acEw,
ku"w,
\oiix),daiufjai.^
Here is
a scholar,as a rule so strict, so
disinclined
to
rationalise, ready
at a
moment's notice with
an
explanation
which a
moment's reflection will
explode
! It was going
rather too
far,
to credit
Greek,
and not
only
Greek but
Latin,
with
having
saddled themselves
with
a pack
of idle vowels all for the sake of
greater
fulness of sound.
Lobeck shows in this
an utter want of the historical
perception
of
language
as a
growth
of
popular
use
and convenience. He
thought
of the
'
nominum
impositoi'es
'
pretty
much
as leai-ned
poets,
and
was
as ready
to
imagine
them
adding
a
sound or two on
occasion to their
foimations,as he
might
be to
imagine
a
painteradding
a
few touches to
his
picture.
For all tliis
we
need find
nothing
to
object
to the
par- ticular
piece
of
comparison
between the two
languages
which Lobeck here
378
indulged
in. The
comparison
is
a
just one,
and
may
even
be
widely
extended. With the
exception
of the few verbs in
-eo which,
like
neo,
Jieo,
de-l"o have
come
straight
from the
root,
all Latin verbs of the
e-conjugation,
as
is well
known,
lose their
e in the
perfect
and in the
l)assive participle,
so that hoKtb)'ilolafinds
an exact
counterpart
in
doceo,
doc-ui.
Sti'uve,
who in his treatise
'
liber die lateiaische Declination
und
Conjugation
'
(1823)was probably
the first to
recognisethis,states
the matter thus
on
p.
188
:
'
the
larger
number
'
(of
the verbs of the
2nd
conjugation)
'
borrowed the shorter terminations from the third
conjugation.'
He
was so far
right
at least in
this,
that it is
reallya case of
a return to more
primitive
stems. The
phenomena
of this kind in
Latin
may
now be found collected in Corssen ii.^ 293 and in Neue ii.^
422 ff. Well attested twofold
forms,
of
just
the
same
kind
as 'e\k(oeXkIoj
are cio
cieo,
chco
(cAuw)clueo,fervoferveo,fulyo (tpXeyd)) Julgeo,nuo
nueo,
olo
oleo,scato
scateo, tergo tcrgeo,
tuor tueor. There is no instance
in Latin of the
anomaly given
under
3),
i.e.the
appearance
of
an e-stem
among
the other tenses
(^fxEiw ^u^iii^-Ku).
The
appearance
of the i-stem
however,
in
peto petl-vipetlhi-s,quaero (quaeso)quaesl-viquaesUu-s,
is
analogous.
German
too,
with its
intei^change
of the so-called
'strong'
and
'
weak
'
forms,
presents
us with much which is
analogous,
the
only
difierence
being
that here the
'
weak
'
forms seem to be,
much
more
decidedly
than in
Greek,
the later
growth
which
gradually
forced the
older forms into the
backgi'ound.
The Slavo-Lithuanian
languages are
specially
characterised
by
the formation of
a so-called second verb-stem. In a
large
number
of verbs this second stem is in Lithuanian characterised
hj e,
and
e.g.
the Lith. future
gelbe-siu
bears to the
present gelhu (I help),
precisely
the
same relation
as
that borne
by
the Gk.
ilh'i-aoj to
a 2
260 THE E-CLASS AND THE KELATED FORMATIONS.
ch. xii.
ivcoj.
In Church-Slavonic ^ is
occasionally
used to form the second
stem, though
hoth
languages
differ in
so
far from Greek in the
matter,
that in them the
infinitive,
which in Greek stands in the closest connexion
with the remaining present-forms,
is the main
representative
of the second
stem. Since however this infinitive is of the
same
formation with the
Greek nouns in
-n-g, -cri-c,
the Ch.-Sl. Vf^deti know is
actually
related to
viste
ye
know in
exactly
the same
way
that
I'i^rj-tri-Q
is to 'ia-re.
379
The
similarity
of formation thus shown to exist between the related
languages,
however
noteworthy,hardly
entitles
us to conclude that the
Greeks received this
peculiarity,
like most of the characteristics of stem-
formation which
we
have discussed
hitherto,
from
an
older
pre-Hellenic
period.
To
begin with,
there is a
lack of the
necessary
cases
in which
the like twofold formation is to be found in different
languages
in the
same
stem. We shall not be far
wrong,
if,
instead of
this,we regard
the
e-class,
to
keep
this convenient name for all the formations which
belonghere,as of no
very gi-eatantiquity,
and
suppose
that it was not
till after Gi-eek became
a
separate language
that its somewhat extensive
development
took
place.
It
may
even be
questioned
whether all these
processes
which in their effects
are so
similar
are to be
explainedon
the
same principlethroughout.
For this reason I have
thought
it safer to
give
the e-class
by
itself under this
head,
and not to be in too
great
a
hurry
to
incor-porate
it with the
i-class, although
the two are obviously
related. At the
same time I
am,
on
the
same account,
reluctant to
separate
the various
phenomena
here in
question,
which
are
in
principle
at least of
a
similar kind.
We have first to deal with the first division of the
class,
i.e.with the
presents
characterised
by
the addition of
an f
.
With
respect
to forms like
^ow'w, "ya/.iito,
and (hOitj I
conjectured
in
my
Tempora
and Modi
pp.
92 and 95
ff.,
that their
e
has
come
from
a.j,
and that
consequently
this
formation is identical with the fourth
or ^-class.
The fact that the
originalpalatalspii-ant
has
occasionally
taken the form of an "
in Greek
is
beyond
a doubt,
and has been established at some length by
me at
Princ. ii. 239 ff.
Kereo-c (by
the side of
Keiro-c
and
k'"i'o-c)=Skt. ^unjd-s
primary
form
kvanja-s),
and Doric futures like
TrpnEelt; by
the side of the
1st
sing,irpa^iw
and the Skt.
dd-sja-miare
the clearest
proofs
of this
change
of sound. I therefore held to this
explanation
of the
presents
in
question
in the
'
Elucidations
'
(Eng.
Trans,
p.
146) as
beingphonetically
unassailable,though
I added there that the
principles
of word-formation
would not admit of its
application
to all the
forms,
and that
on
this
account the
question,
whether
an e of this kind in the
present
tense was
to be
explained
in this
or
another
way,
must often remain
an
open
one.
380 In other words the
question
comes to this
;
did the
-eto come from
an
older
-jd-mi
or
from
-ajd-mi
1 It
being
shown to be
phonetically possible
that
-eio
shoiild have come from
-jd-mi,we
shall hold this
origin
the
probable
one
in
cases
where the related
languages,or
Greek
itself, point
to forma with
a simplej,
and
presuppose
-ajd-mi on
the other hand,
where there
are
decided traces of
a
denominative formation. Unfor- tunately
there
are a
number of forms about which both
sources
of in- formation
yieldus nothing
at
all,
and
we can never get beyond a
pro- bability
one
way
or
the other.
The three active
presentsKvpiw(fromAeschylus onwards),Ivpew,
and
fiapTvpio)
stand beside
kvpoi, Kipn^ai, E,vpo^ai(not
till
Plutarch),
and
CH. XII. ORIGIN OF THE
s.
261
(.lupTvpo^iai.
It is natural to
conjecture,
that the
primary
forms
Kvpjoo,
Ivpjiij,
and
^ainvpjw
took two different
directions,one
resulting
in
an
jissimilation of the
j
{*i^vppu))
which
afterwards,
when
pp
became
p
and
the vowel
was lengthened
in
compensation,disappearedentii-ely
;
the
other in
a
change
of
J
to
e,
in which form it survived for
a longer
time.
It is true that forms like
Kvpfirrai(asearly
as
Hesiod)
and
Evpuo)
should
make us cautious,as
they suggest
the
possibility
that verbs in
soj
may
have existed at an
earlyperiodby
the side of the more
primitive
forma- tions.
"
opiofTo,
at B 398
(uaTurTeg
^'
opiorro
and ^ 212 toI h'
opiorro,
is
evidently
an
imperfect
from the rt.
op,
the aorist of which is
ujpm,
and is
consequently
a
by-form
of
op-w-jiai
of
a
different
present-foi-mation.
It
is
very
natural to
compare
it with
or-i-untur,
in which the i
(cp.
ortu-s)is
just
as
movable. On the other hand there is the
analogy
of the stem
CTropt
(eoTopeffa)
beside
ffrop
in
(j-op-rvfii.
" In the
case
of
o-/ji)(-"w
by
the
side of the
aor.
w/its"
we
might apj^eal
to the Lat.
me-jo=--')neig-jo
in
sup- port
of the view that the
-eio comes from
-jd-mi.
Beside
7rar-"'o-/iat
Hesychius
has
(cp.
above
p.
221) preserved
the form
TraaaErai,
which
points
to
nar-jt-rat(Princ.
i.
335),
while the
corresponding
Gothic
/dc?-
ja-n,
inasmuch
as
it is a weak
verb,points
to
Trar-tjo-jdai.
"
yrj-d-iw
beside
yi-yrjd-a
and
ij-d-iio
(sift)
beside
r]6-f^i6-c,
both from shorter roots ex- panded
by
a 6,might
be
compared
with l(j-diw in
support
of the view
that the
e
and the
i are
representatives
of
a
j.
But
by
the side of
yij-d-iw
stands the Lint.
g
a
tid-eo."
-ofpcw
(Princ.
ii.
180),
with the Cretan
by
-form
a'lXeo)must
undoubtedly
be referred to a i-t
Zap
with its
by-forms
/aX and
feX. The
diphthongpresents
some difficulties,
but these
are removed at
381
once by
the
supposition
that the
primary
form
was fap-jw,
in which
case
we should have to assume the usual
epenthesis
to have taken
place.
We
cannot be
quitesure of this
though,as
there
are no
distinct
parallels
to
the word in the related
languages.
In distinction to these there is another class of these forms which
we
shall with more or less
certainty
assume to have
come from
noun-stems,
and
consequently
to contain the
regular
derivative
tw.
This is above
all the
case
with
y^paiafiiw,
which
undoubtedly
presupposes
a stem
"XpuitTfio
for
)(pu-fn-fio
(cp.ypy'iaiim-o),
with niKriu)
(cp.
above
pp.
162 and
168),
pnrreu),
which has been discussed on
p.
162,
and
probably
for
"j)iX-eoj
in
spite
of the Homeric
s'piXaTo,
to which
a
present *^(\Xw
would
correspond,
and this could as well be
a denominative from
(plXo-e
as
Ti-oiKiXXu) from
TroiKiXo-". It
may
be doubted whether SoKeio
can find
a
sufficient
support
in the
Suko-qwhich is
only
used
by philosophers, or in
the
glossematicIoki],
although Iokc-jjo-q
presupposes
a noun-stem
justas
much
as
Tropi-fjo-c
or
-pofi-fio-c.
In the
case of
ya/uiwhowever, as of
iiivTreuj
and K-vwitt) it
can hardly
be doubted that
they
came from
ya/io-c,
covTTu-c, tc-vTTO-c,
US
also
piyf'wfrom p'lyoc.
Careof^m (cp.
Ch. XXI.
p.
369
marg.)
bears
precisely
the same relation to
aTrocarrtrfTai, laao^ai^lcKjrraaQai
that
TTciTioftai
does to
KarraeTai.
The
e of
koeu)
with the
aor.
t-Ko-^tv (Princ.
i.
186)
is
anyhow, as we saw at
p.
240,
of the
same nature as that of the
Lat.
cav-eo,
and that of Xotw beside Xovw
as that of the
a
in the Lat,
lava-re. We must take
care to
notice,on the other
hand,
that in
some
presents
in
tw by
the side of
w
the vowels
are by no means such
as suit
the
supposition
that the
precedingstage
was a noun,
yt^ih)
can have
nothing
to do with
yo^oc,
nor fXktw with
oXki].
Nor
can the like
assumption
be made with
any probability
for
fxsUojyby
the side of
262
THE E-CLASS AND THE EELATED
FORMATIONS.
ch. xii.
^iilu)v.
In
general
it
can hardly
be
denied, that within certain limits
a
kind of
analogy
arose for
by-forms
in
-no
by
the side of forms in
-m,
without the makers and users of such forms
being
conscious of definite
noun-stems to
correspond.
We will
now
proceed
to review the individual verbs of the first
division. It is to be noted that the
language
showed
an
extraordinaiy
vacillation between the shorter and the
longerstem,
and that the
num-
382
ber of twofold forms is
very great,
and that
they
sometimes both
occur
in the same
periods,
and
are even used
by
the
same authors.
1)
Presents
in -ew with Forms from a shorter Stem
in other
Tenses.
1)
n't
pi
i.) common to all G-reek from Homer onwards.
The stem
n'ipt
also
occurs with the
e
short in
(ipi-drj-y (since
Aeschylus), (t'lpe-Oi'i-
ffn/Adi,
alpe-ro-Q (Hdt.Plato),
with the
long
rj
in
atpi](ju) (11.), up-alprj-ica
(Hdt.),rjpr]-i.iai
(Aesch.),
while
a shorter stem underlies the aorist-forms
ti\o-)',
EK-t-rrdai and the late fut.
k\(wiJ.(ii.^
lb) aXiTiiijeiog, clearlyan
Aeolisingparticiple
like
"^(/\"/^"ej'oc, only
0 807 and Hes. Scut,
91, by
the side of the forms
ijXiror, aXlreffOai which
are commoner
in
poets.
2)
"yaj.iew
Homeric both in the active and the middle. In this
case
the e-stem with
a
short vowel is
only represented by yaiit-iov (by
the
side of
yai.u]T"ot')
unless
we count the futures
y"/(w, yn/zoi^tat ;
that with
the
long
vowel in earlier
times,
besides the above-mentioned
yai^irj-ioy,
only by
yeyaprj-Ka (Hdt, Aristoph.),
which is
joined
in later times
by
yai^uirjoj^icu
and the like." On the other hand
we have the
aor,
l-yd^ie
(Pind.), 'iyrj/^s, tylij^iaTo
from Homer onwai-ds from the stem
yajx.
3)
ysywi'tw
almost
exclusivelypoetical
from Homer onwards
(ye-
ytoj'eTv
M
337)
with the
by-form
yeywpiaKio,
mentioned
on
page
196,
which is
obviously
derived from the
perfectye'ywro
of
present meaning,
the
only
form from the shorter stem. The e-stem
occurs also in
yeywrZ/^w
(Eurip.), yeywyijaai (Aesch.),
'
4) yt]t)ei," poetical
from Homer onwards. The e-stem
occurs also in
yr]8ri(T(j, y))Orjae, by
the side of
yeyijDa (Pind. yeycWi)
from the shorter
stem in the
same
poets,
and in isolated instances in
prose.
In
quite
late authors
(Sext.Empir.,Anth., Qu. Smyrn.)
there is also
ynQofiai.
5)
coKiw in
general use from Homer
onwards,
with
akrjae
(v93).
Post-Homeric but
good
Attic
are
the forms
cv^uj,'ilnht,
cecoKvai, icuxQny
from the shorter
stem, alternating
in
poets
and Herodotus with such
forms
as cio/c/yrrw
(Aesch,
Pr.
386),tcoKtjat (Pind.),cecut^rjKs (Aesch.
Eumen.
309),coKijOdg (Eurip.
Bacch.
1390).
383
^) (y)^ou7rfw.
The
present-stem occurs
only
at
Eurip.
Ale. 104
and in late
poets.
The aorist
i{y)o(ivin].fTa
is
common in
Homer,
with
tfCovTTwe (hthovTTUTOQ Ol^iirodao ^
679)
from the shorter stem. At Anth.
vii. 637 there is Karf^ovTre.
7) r'ldiu) sift. The
present occurs
in
Plato,
and there is the
aor.
ricra
from the st.
t]d,
which is
quoted
in
Steph.
Thes. from
Hippocrates,
and
the
common substantive
I'ld-pv-e.
Still
"/^if,7""roc
and
ijBtirraro occur
from
Plato
onwards.
8) dt)X(o)a Homeric
present
for the
ordinary
Greek BaXXw mentioned
'
(TT-avpfw
has been mentioned on
p.
195,
CH. xn.
VERES WITH E-FOEMS OUTSIDE THE PRESENT ONLY. 263
on p. 211,
with the
perf.TidrjXa(Find.rsdiiXe), OriXt'icni (A 236),duXrjaa
(Pind.).
9) Kii'Tiu)
makes all its forms
(Kerrrjcru), EKiyrrjnra,
KEKei'TrjiJiai
etc.)
regularly
from the st.
Kerre.
The shorter stem is
only representedby
the dna^
Xeyoj^itvov Kev-acu
^ 337 and
by
noun-forms like
koit-o-c,
kIv-
riop (forKEl'T-TUlfj),
KU'-TfW-l'.
10)
KTviriw. KTvniei N 140 and also in Attic
writers,aor. ktvtze
P
595, EKTVTTEy Soph.
0. C. 1456
by
the side of
KTinrriffE
ib. 1606.
11) on'ix^u)
Hes.
0pp. 727,
with
iom^Ev Hipponax
fr. 55 B.'^ and
vi^uxi^ui.
Cp.
above
p.
261.
12) opEotTo
only
in the two
passages
in Homer mentioned
on
p.
261,
13)
7rar-Eo-/-int.
The
present
is first found in
Herodotus,
and the
aorist
eVairct^o/j'
occurs
in
Homer, Herodotus,
and Attic
poets
: Traaayro
A
464, EiracractiJEd' i 87,
Traffacrdai
Aristoph.
Pax 1281
by
the side of the
plupf.
ivETrarTj.n]v
H 642 and
('nraarnc
5 788.
Cp.
above
p.
261.
14)
The
imperat.ttiei,
common on
cups by
the side o"
e-ttio-i',
7r7-9",
ni-yw
cp.
Roscher Stud. iv. 194.
15) plyfw.
The
present
is
only
found in
Hipponax
and Pindar. In
Homer
(e.g.
IT
119)
and
Sophoclesoccur
pi-^yjaiv, Eppiyrjaa, piyrjfTEy,
while
the shorter stem is
representedby
the
perf.Eppiy'
H
114, conj.ippiyrjtn
r 353
; Eppiy
El ;//216,
may
be either
imperf.or pluperf.
16)
(TTvyEw.
arvyinvai
H
112,
also in Hdt. and Attic
poets,
while
from the stem
rrrvy
are
formed the aorists
Earvyov
k 113,
P 694 and
EffTv^a
{aTvlaifiL
X
502),
the
perf.
ti7Tvyi.iai
(Hesych.),
the
passive
future
(rrvyijirerai Soph.
O. R.
672,
and noun-forms like
arvyoc, (j-vy-ro-g.
Still,
after
Homer,
there
occur
also
aTTEu-vyriaa
(Soph.
O. C.
692)384
awEUTvyrjKct'n
(Hdt.
ii.
47),(rrvyrjdEv (Aesch.Sept.692)
and the like.
17) (piXiuj.
The
regular
forms of the
e-conjugation
are too common
to need confirmation. From the shorter stem are formed
only EcpiXaro
E
61, (piXaro
Y
304, Imperat. (plXai
E 117, ^JiXwirruhymn,
in Cerer.
117. Forms of the kind
occur
in imitators of the old
Epos.
The
ByzantineTre'^tXyLiat hardly
comes into consideration.
18) ^oio-juf'w.
As
we ought perhaps
to
regardxpai(THE~iv
in Homer
(e.g.
A
589)
as an aoiist,we must
go
to Nicander
(Ther.
914
xpfuff/id)
for the
present. Along
with the
regular
e-forms
xpn"''A"?'''fV'f'^ {^ 316),
Xp(ii(Tfir]"7Ey (n 837)
we
find the aorist
exp":ii(t/.i"
S
66,
xp"''^^*^
H
\^i,
Xpni'^My
O 32 from the shorter stem.
19) (l)dE(o,
from Homer onwards
(y 295)very
frequent
in both active
and middle. From the shorter stem come aTrwo-ft (A 97),
the Att.
wo-w,
ioao^ai,euxte (FI410),waE (E 19),w/rayro (IT592),
the Attic
EwtTU,
Iwan-
l^rjy,
'E(i)"yj.iai, EwffBrjy, u)adi](Joi.iai, woroc,
woTr'oc,
while Attic
poets
also
have
wOnffu) (fiw^j/crojuer Soph. Aj. 1248),
and in late
pi'ose
we
find
loOrjffa.
2)
Presents
without an e by the side of other
Forms
with
E OR
t].
Out of the considerable number of the verbs which
belong
to this
di\4sion,we
will
reserve
such
as show in the
present
an
expansion
of
another
kind,
which does not
appear
in the e-forms
as well,
e.g. pEU)
pvyjaojjiai, /jiayBayto /iofl/'/croyuat,
for the fourth division. The forms "yi'ith
which
we
have here to deal
are of the most various kinds. The
simplest
264 THE E-CLASS AND THE RELATED FORMATIONS.
cu. xii.
case
is that iix whicli the
present-fonns
have
a simple
stem and the other
tenses a stem
expanded by
the addition of
an t
e.g. yuAsintXijaei,
vtfiii)
vtvifxi]Ku,
itiiXu}
ideXt'irjw.
Here and there
comimrison can
be made ^vith
vei'bs in the related
languages.
With
fxtfiivrjKa yfQ
may compare
the
Lat. viane-o.
The forms
ec-iiSe-rcu
(Chap
XVI.
p.
384
marg.), tc-t'icu-ica,
yjCta-Oti-ybelonging
to ttw
may
be
compared
with the Skt.
ddd-jd-mi,
the causative of the vt.
ad,
with the
meaning 'give
food to.'
In othei-
cases
the
present
shows
a
less
piimitive
chai-acter. It is
possible
that
evScj,Kt'iow, o'l^ofxcu
are petrified presents
of the
lengthening
class
;
anyhow
their
diphthongs
extend into the tenses with
an e-stem
: tvciiaw,
Kricijao), otx"io-oijK.ii.
One of these
presents
can be connected with
an
385 analogous
formation in the related
languages:
from the intensified stem
J-fiCi.is formed the fut.
tlliirru),
and the stem hici also foi-ms the basis of
the moods of the
perf.
olca of
pi'esentmeaning (^tlciw, tiluriv)
and is
there restricted to the
meaning
know. The Skt.
veddjd-mi
is not
merely
causative,
but also
means know,
the Goth,
fair-veit-jan
preserves
the
physicalmeaning see,
and the Ch.-Sl. vkU-ti which has been referred to
on
p.
2")0,
agrees
in form and
meaning
with the Greek ilcivui.
tlci^ao)
is
therefore
propei'ly
the future of
an
*'ticiu) which
corresponds
to the
above-mentioned
veddjd-mi.
From
a
present
of the ^claiss
we
get
TVTrD'irru},
from what
w-e
coujectui-ed
to be
a
present
of the "-class
jS/wXij-
(T(j/.iai,
and from
a
present
of the inchoative class
ijuaKijaii).
The i-class
in its various ramifications furnishes
a
largercontingent:
kXuIuj
/cXcu"//7w,
fieXXu)ideXXiirru), o^t/Xw ocpeiXijtrio, yjniptij
^aipijoroj,
'H^ofxai i:adL^i}fTo/.iai,
It is obvious that all these e-forms have not come
from the verb-steiu
but from its
expanded form,
the
present-stem.
So far
they
bear the
stamp
of
a not
very
primitivecharacter,
and have in
many
cases clearly
become
extended
gradually
as
the
language developed by a convenient imita- tion
of older
t}^jes.
Two
cavises were
clearly
at work in the
multiplication
of these forms.
First,phoneticnecessityor convenience
(cp.
Lobeck
on
Buttmann ii.
44).
From stems like
uXi^,oi/",a^O, f'P,aXd there
was no
possibility
of
making a
form which should be
recognisable as a future
or
an aorist without the
help
of this convenient
e.
From forms like
alS,
ktjc,
Trer,
while it is conceivable that there should have been made forms like
*u'i(T("fxai, *'eKi](T(i, *7rEfjofxai,
it is clear that
they
would not have been
so
recognisable
as
alciffojiiai,
iicijBriaa,
Trtn)fTo/jai.
The other
cause was the
effort to
distinguishone
form from
some
other. It
was
only by
the
help
of the
"
add^il to the stem that
onfno^ai
[inofiai)
could be
distinguished
from
oicro^ni(^(pipuj), tppt'ifTb) (^tppw)
from
ipti) (etpw),ciijffu) (^ewlack)
from
h'jaio
[ciwbind),aj^Qiao^ai
from
aioiiai
and
a-^^Qiirrofxai, ifia^^tnauifi'
from
'f/.in^a^r]y (/^lacrcw),
7rai//(TW(tth/w)
from
Traiaw (TraH^oj).
Pott in his Et.
Forsch. ii.2 957 has collected instances of this kind. Of the variation in
the
quantity
of this e-sound it will be time to treat when
we come to
the tenses in
question.
All
we
need notice here is that the short
"
is
very
rare.
The
only
forms
among
those which
are to be
given
imme-
386
diately
which have the vowel short
throughoutare
rixytcw^ai,a)(fc)"ff(^"/"'at.
A vacillation between a
short and
long
vowel is to be seen in
uKi^xtpiroq
and
at:ay^i]p.ir()(;, nXQujj.(xt. aXBi^crofxni (iXOetrOiiiai, fj-iywfjurtror fxeuirijKa,
finy^oiKu
pLLiy^lifTUTo, i.ui')(_lrjaai)ai
and
a
few others. Where the vowel is
short it is
tempting
to
suppose
that it
was an
auxiliaryvowel,
and if
so,
to
compare
the Gk.
"
with the * which meets us
sporadically
to so
large
CH. XII.
VERES WITH E-FORMS OUTSIDE THE PRESENT ONLY. 2G5
an extent in the tense-foi-mation in Sanskrit
e.g.
a-ved-i-sha-vi,
the aoiist
of the it. vid,tar-i-shjd-mi
the future of the rt. tar. But this i itself
needs to be examined
more closely
and
ought scarcely
to be so
decidedly
pi'onounced
to be a
purelyphonetic
element
as
is
usually
done. In the
case
of the Greek
e-sound,prevailingly long
as it
is,
it seems to me now
f;ir
more
probable
that the whole
phenomenon
is due to a
confusion of
the derivative with the
primitive
formation,
and that the variation in
quantity
is connected Avith the variation between forms in
tw
and
t^w,
i((jj
discussed
on
p.
241 ff. We will now give
without further subdivision
the individual forms which fall under this head.
1)
aXiHw. In Homer
we
find active and middle forms like
aXf^t'^tv
(r 9),a\itil)nt(Tdn "A 348) by
the side of the fut.
aXeb'iTtig(I251),
the
aor. a\eEi]ff(u(y 346),
and Hdt. has
aXiEijao^iai. a\iiof.iuL as a
future
(Soph.
0. E.
171)
and aXiiaadat
(O 565) belong
to the stem oXk with
an
unconsciouslydeveloped" (cp.oX-oXko-v).
2) aXQonai.
IxXdtTO E
417, airaXdiidaGQai
Q 405.
Cp. uXdiiaKu,,
aXdioTKU)
p.
194.
3) avt,(i) (Hom.
(u'sw only
in the
present)by
the side of
uvL,aru),
fut.
(iviiffTii), avEij(7i)uat, aor. rivErimi, pf. 7]VL.r]i:a, r^vtv^ai, pass.
aor. r]VL,ij6i]v,
verbal
adj.avli]Ta-c,
all well attested in Herodotus and Attic writers.
In late
prose
(Plutarch,
Dio
Oassius)
there
occur
isolated and hence
questionable traces of
a
pi-esentavtiio,
and
avEovfjityog
is found in the
iambic
inscription
from
Megara
C. I. 1066. The e-forms
correspond
to
the Skt. causative
vakshn-jd-mi(letgrow). Cp.
p.
181.
4) ayBo^ui.
The
present-forms
are
the
only
ones in
use
in
Homer,
but in Attic times
we
find
{ovkaybiatiAristoph.
Nub.
1441)
the fut.
lixBiauj^Lai
and the
passive
forms
ii\HeaOi]t' (Thuc.)
and
a'y^derrfiijrToiMu
387
(Xen. Platoj.n^Qiifjui:- yo/ioOo-dc (Hesych.)
shows
a variation in
meaning
as well. Veitch notices isolated traces of
hydih)
in late authors.
5)
potTKU)
in Homei'
(O 548) by
the side of
f3orri,{j(Ttic;
p
559. Other
forms with
ry
are rare
and
mostly late,pi"(TKi]Tioy Aristoph.
Av. 1359.
6) /3ou\o/jot.
Homer has
only present-forms(among
which
are
("ioXeffdf, kpoXorro)
and the
pf. ivpoj^iftovXa.
These
are
graduallyjoined
by one or another e-form. flovXi](Tufiai (first
in the
hymn,
in
Apoll.
Pyth. 86),ipovXi'iOtjt' (from Sophocles onwa,rds), f^ejjovXjjfini, ftovXijro^,
all in
use
with Attic
writers,
later
lyuvXrjdi'iaofiai. Cp.
also
IjvvXTjmc,
jjovXjj/jia.
7) ypatpo)only belongs
here in virtue of the
perf.
yEypa(l"r]Ka
which
the Atticists
reject,
but which Lobeck
(ad Phryn.
p.
764)
defends.
Kiihner
(s.v.)points
out that the best M.SS. of
Xenophon
Anab. vii.
8,
1 have
"ytypaiptjKUToc.
8) Cfw.
On
p.
210 we met with the
present
form celu) for
*of//w.
We
presupposed
however the existence of
Civw
(HomericCEvajjai,
eSevaro
A
602)
and *cf/w
as
earlyby-forms
of another
present-formation.
Homer
has also the
aor. idtvticref t
540
by
the side of
'icr]aev(l/jieTo
3'
tctiatv apTjQ
a\KT)~ipayeriartlai
S
100).
In Attic
prose
^sj/tw,deiirrojjai, eciyjaa,
ctci-
riiiai,
kceiidrji' are common.
9) cicarjKO),
^toaffkj/ffat Hes.
0pp. 64, lidaffKijfTciijji hymn,
in Cer.
144,
cp.
Pind.
P}i;h.4,
217.
10)
e^w,to this
present-form,
which is identical with theLat. edo s.ud
is almost
exclusively
confined to
poetry (from
Homer
onwards,
Z
142),
the Attic writers made from
an e-stem the
perf.ic-}'ico-Ku, el-i'ih-a-jjKn
266 THE E-CLASS AND THE RELATED FORMATIONS.
ch. xti.
(Aristoph. Plato),
Homer
eS-ijce-rciL (x56),Hippocrates
the
aor. rici-T-Bt]v
(as
if from *tCf.Ctoa by-form
of
*e?ew). Cp.
p.
264,
11)
lOeXo). From Homer onwards
(e.g.
II
364)
with
LQtXijTU}(S 262),
lOeXijaty(i 396).
In Attic writers there is also
fideXrjicn
(Xen.).
We
need not notice here the
disappearance
of the initial
e. Cp.
also
OiXrjixd,
OeXTjtTiQ
and
tQeXovTi]Q.
12)
*ei?(o, not used in the
active,
mid.
f'icofun,
fut.
(.'Irojiai (titreui
388
*
2y2)
and
eloiifrw {ela'iaeig t] 327),
the latter in Hdt. etc. The same
stem occnrs
in the
perf.conj.elceb), Opt. acti-qr. Cp.
p.
264.
1
3)
tp()(").
The
present
is of
common occurrence from Homer onwards
{epfjiruj
Y
349,
eppETE
Q,
239).
Also
ipprjaio(eppt'iTeic, hymn,
in Merc.
259)
with
I'lppt^rra
in
Aristoph.(Ean. 1192)
and the adv.
ippEvri(Alcaeus
Ahr. Aeol.
142).
14) EvCu",
more
commonly
kciBevIw. The
present forms,
used
as early
as Homer, are
joined
from
Aeschylus
onward
(Ag.337)by
Evlijrru, kciOev-
cJjirai,KCiOevhjTEO}'.
15) E\p(ij
in Herodotus and Attic
writers,
with
kxpfjaio, ij\p)]fTa
and the
corresponding
middle
forms,
also
Exl^rjBrj (Hdt.),
later
i'lJf/rinai.
The verbal
adj.E(l"d(')(:
is found in
Euripides,Expijruc
in
Xenophon. Cp. txl/rjaic, E4/r]i.iri.
In Hdt. the M.SS.
give once or twice the form
txpEE
which however is
rejectedby
the later
editors,nor
do
Expito
and the like
appear
to be
firmly
established
anywhere. Cp.
Yeitch
p.
258,
Kiihner
p.
828.
16) 'li^M, KuOii^M.
The
present-forms,
which
are Homei-ic,
have the
fut.
Kndi(^i}rToi.uu (Plato
Phaedr.
p.
229),
and later
(Dio Cass.)i"uOii^)]rrac,
'i^riKa, Ka6ii^r)6E(c. Cp. li^ai'u)
above
p.
182.
17) keXo/^uil poetical
from Homer onwards
(O 138)
with the fut.
KEX}j(TETai (k-296),aor. /ceXj/o-oro
Pind. 01.
13, 80, Epicharmus
ap.
Athen.
vii.
p.
282.
18) /civ^w, Kl]h)i.iai
from Homer onwai-ds
(P 550,
A
56)
with the fut.
Kr]^l]fTntTEQ O
240, uTTOKJia'i'^ujTE ^ 413.
fk-//C"(Ta
has been discussed
on
p.
264. In
Aeschylus (Sept.136)
there is found the
imperat.
mid.
Kt'idEirai
with the short vowel.
19)
k\uIco
belongs
here
only
in vii-tue of the fut.
/"Xa(//"7aj
which
appears
in and after Demosthenes
by
the side of the
common kXava-of^iai (Dem. 21,
99, Hyperides c. Demosth.
p.
352
Sauppe,
p.
19
Blass),
for which the
vai-iantK-Xm'/(rw
has at Dem.
19,
310 been
generallyadoptedby
other editors.
20) i.ieXu", especially
in the 3rd
sing.,common to all Greek
{/jeXo) i 20,
/xeXetw
Q.
152),
mid.
fxEXoi^iai, Epic
3rd
sing.^e-;j/3Xe-rcu
T
343, Ep. perf.
f.iEi.ir)XE (B 25, Hes.),
Pind.
/.lefiiiXwc,
while from the stem
/he,
Xe are formed
the fut.
f.tEXy)(TEi
E
430,
fiEXijaErai
A
523,
and the Attic
Eft
EXrjrTE, /.lEfjiXrjKe,
fXEXrjdEtg (Soph.), lAEXrjrioy,
and in late
poets jjEpfXrjTai. Cp. "7r(jU"X"0^tat
and the
nouns ijeX-e-tt), jueX/y-^jo.
389
21) /xeXXoj,
common in the
present-stem
from Homer
onwards,
bxit
the forms from the
e-stem, /.uXXijaio, E/jEXXrjira, fjEXXijrioy
do not occur
before Attic
prose.
Only rifjiXXritra occurs as early
as Theognis
259.
22)
iJEiu).
To the
common
and Homeric
present,
futiu'e
(i.tEyEw nErw)
and aorist
(EfXEiya)
Attic
prose
writers add from the e-stem the
perf.
fiEfjiyriKa (^kjjjiEfiEvqKEy
Thuc. i.
5),
^eyETOc,
and later writers
f.iEyi]rEnv.
23) )EiiM,
common to all Greek. Here too the e-forms do not occur
before Attic
prose
:
rEyE^trjtca, vEyEfdTjTai, EyEfiiiOrjy, rE}xr]TEOv
(Plato,
Xenophon), post-Attic
yEjjijaopnu. iyEjAEdyp',
which Bekker has
adopted
at Dem.
36, 38,
would suit
yifiEaiQ,
but has
only scanty authority.
CH. xn.
VERBS WITH E-FORMS OUTSIDE THE PRESENT ONLY. 267
24) o4w. Cp.
above
p.
223.
c)4"/"rw, "'Cri"^a
fii'stin
Aristoph.(Vesp.
1059,
fr.
538).
The fut. oKiiJio is
given
in the Canones of
Theog-
nostus
(Herodian
ed. Lentz i.
444)
and
quoted along
with
w/^^fffa
from
Hippocrates.
25)
(noj.im.
Homer
along
with
oito,
wiero etc.
(/c248)
has the
aorists
oifram ("213)
and
wlrrdr)'' (tt475).
Of
merely
isolated occurrence
and for the first time in
Eurip.(Tph.
Aul.
98G)
and
Aristoph.(Equ.860),
though
more
frequent
in Attic
prose,
are
on]fTn^uii,
Mi'jdijr,
and later
(jirjdrjffOj^iai,
ohjrioi'. Cp. on^rriQ (Plato).
26)
oixojj.ai.
By
the side of the
present-form,
in use from Homer
onward, are found
Trapwxwfc-ev (Aristarch.)
at K
252,
the
uncompounded
MX'oKu
or o'l'xwK-a, evidently
from
an o-stem,
in the
tragedians(Aesch.
Pers.
13, Soph. Aj. 896),
and
Hdt.,
the latter of whom first has the
perf.
otx"/juai {ciolxnf^ai
iv.
136),ot)(^))"ropai
in the Comic
poets
and Attic
prose
writers.
27) 6(pei\u).
Older Greek knows
only
of forms of the
present,
the
formation of which has been discussed
by Brugman
Stud. iv.
120,
and of
the aorist
wfptXor.
To these
Thucydides
adds
d^"t/\";ffw, ihipelXrifTa, ofeiXr]-
OfIc.
Cp. u(p(i\r]fin (Thuc.Plato).6l"ei\tvfii)'r]Q
in the Ionic
prose
writer
Ensebius in Stobaeus Floril.
28,
3.
28) 7rep?o/ioi (Nauck Melanges
iv.
50),pf.TztTropCa,
aor. eTrapdor,
but
the fut
"-o-H|Oo'/^o/."nt (Aristoph.
Ran.
10)
from the e-stem.
29)
Trf-nf.t(ii.
To the forms in
use with
poets
from Homer onwards
of the
present (by
-form
niranai
above
p. 120)
and of the aorist
"7rro|j"/r,
-TTritrdai
(by-formTrrunHcu)
are
added the fut.
Trfr/'/o-o/^at (Trerijcrei Aristoph.
Pax
77, 1126).
Whether the more common
Tr-tjan^ai
came from
390
77 e-
tjrro1.1
n I by syncope,
or was formed from the stem
tttci,
cannot be
decided.
30)
TEvxo)
finds
a place
hei-e in virtue of the form
TErfvxv^^'^i- (by
the
side of
TSTvyijai)
which
only occurs at
)^
104.
31) TVTTTw,
in common use
from Homer onwards
(Jrv^pE
N
529, rvxjyai
Hdt. iii. 29,
rtTvp^iro)
N
782).
Of the forms from the e-."tem the first to
occur is the fut.
rvTrrZ/aw
in
Aristoph. (Nub. 1444)
and Plato
(Oorg.
527 a TVKTijfTiL),
while
ervTrnqira
is fir.stfound in Aristot.
(Pol.
ii. 12 ay
TVTTTijfftjai),
and much later
come
riTv-rrTr^Ka (Pollux
ix.
129),
rervTrTr)i.iai
(Luc). [Cp. Sandys,
Excur.^us A on Demosthenes,
Part II.
pp.
207-21
1.]
32) x^alpo).
Of thLs
verb,common to all Greeks of all
periods,
the
only
form which
belongs
here is the fut.
"xcupijmo,
which
occiu's once
in
Homer
{\nipijfTiiv
Y
363),
then in
Hdt., Aristoph.
and Attic
prose.
The
aor.
ex.'^tiprjira
not before Plutarch. The e-stem
x"P^
formed
straight
from the root will be discussed further
on. Cp.
p.
215 no.
20.
We
may
finish the list with
33)
The stem
co,
which is almost
entirely
confined to
poetry,
has
no
present,
and is used without
expansion
in
perfect
forms like hcawQ
p
519
and in the aor. ciSaoi'
(taught)
" later
'icanv,
sometimes
transitive,
sometimes intransitive " which
might
be
placed along
with lilarrKw.
On the other hand the
expanded
stem
oae serves to form both the
aor.
fCar}-v
and
har\-(TOfiai (caijoreai
y 187),^ECarj-KU(?"?a7/vorte /361,
Hdt.
ii.
165),^ECarifiivoQ hymn,
in Merc.
483,
Theocr.
It is
a
fact which the historian of the verbal forms should
notice,
that
it is
only
in 1 4 of these 33 verbs that the e-formation
occurs as early
268 TDE E-CLASS AND THE RELATED F0R3IATI0NS. ch. xii.
as Homer,
while in the
remaining
19 it does not
appear
till late. It is
clear from this that the formation took time to
spread.
3)
Both Fokmatioxs side ey side in the
Present.
It is beside
my purpose
to exhaust the
numerous cases
in which the
present
occurs
in two forms,
both with and without
an e.
Lobeck
(on
P"uttm. ii. 52
ft'.,
and on Soph. Aj. v.
23'J)
has collected
an
abundance
of material
on
the
subject.
I shall content
myself
here with
adducing
39 1
verbs whose tense-formation is made more
intelligible by
the
discoveiy
of
by-forms
" often rai'e or even
isolated " fi'om
an e-stem.
1) ciiOdfiai
and
ulcfvfiai,
both in Homer
(^a'ltfo
4"
74,
lucof-iuiov
E
531,
aihro 6
86)
"
alciofini
Z
442,
nl^t'iotl
503).
Later the e-formation is
the
pi-evailing one,
so that after Homer the other is
only
to be found in
lyricpassages
in the
tragedians
and in the Alexandrine
poets (aJco/ufroc
Aesch. Eumeu.
549).
Fut. tucitrerai X
124, alceaffcifjiui
l 388, aor.
rici"raT
"}"
28,
a'ictrrcrcuI 640. The forms with
a
simplea
also occur
in
Attic writers. To these are
added
ijcerrf^iat,ijciadtp',
the latter as early
as
Homer
[u'lrtadtp
II
93).
It is natural to assume a
stem at^tc
(cp.
al^uQ nom. uI^wq)
for the forms with
e. Cp. a'lSecrir, o(0//xa"r-
2) -yif-iu)
and
yefuco.
The latter form is
given by
Herodian ii. 230
:
3)
e'lXu) and
eiXiut,
if
our explanation
on
p.
179 was
the
rightone,
do not
properlybelong here,
but to the twofold forms like cviu)
Ivvib)
given
on
p.
177.
"(\o/u"rw"'
occui-s at 9
215,
but the
prevalent
forms
are
a'lXeoi' and the
like,
which
are joined
later
by ti\t]/i(u,
ti\i'iHr}i'
(Hdt.).
4)
The Ionic
i'lpopiai ask,
of the i-class
(cp.
p.
213)
A 553, Hdt., by
the side oi
iptw((fiiotfit
\
229, t'/jfov^ui
p
509),
aor. i'lptro (^ipw^eda
d
133,
epiardai etc.)
in
genei-al
use
from Homer onwards,
fut.
tlfiri'iopai {tlpr]-
ffo/nO' 0 61),
and also in Hdt.
[eTreiprjaoijiiovt;
I
67).
Attic has
iprj-
aofiai.
5) Eipu) say
by
the side of
elpiu)(cp.p.
213).
6)
t'Akw and
e\keiu,
l)oth in Homer
: IkKe^JO'di
K 353,
tX^ercn P 136 "
'iXi^eot'P 395. With eXKiio
go
the fut. tXi:ria(jv"T'
X
336, ij\Ki]fTt
X
580,
{.XKljOticTUQ X 62.
Cp. "/\k7;9/L"OC.
7) la^w
Homer and
Euripides,tu\iijj
with
lu^ticru), lax'i'^d
in the
tragedians.
8)
KtX(tco)i'
only
in the
pai-tic.
in Homer
(t^eXariov
"l"
16),
in a
choric
song
in
Aristoph.(Nub.
284)
and in late
poets,
while kiXaSiio occurs
from Pindar onwards
(KeXuttovnPyth.
2, 15)
in
poets,
with
"\"ffjaoyiia(,
KeXa'ijffa,
the latter
as
ejxrly
as 0 542
(Nauck INIelanges
iv. 50
ft'.).
9) i^vpu)
and
k:vpew.
Homer has
only
the shorter form with the aor.
392
tKvpaa.
From Hesiod onwards
(0pp. 755)
we
find Kvpiu)
in
poets by
the side of
^d/jw
with
Kvpi^rjM
and
tt^vDijad. Cp. p.
214 no.
6.
10) Kvio
and Kviu). The shorter
present
is the rarer. t:vti
is written
at
Theogn. 1081,
and in an
oracle in Hdt.
v. 92. As the difterence is
only
discernible in the accent the tradition
constantly
vacillates. Aes- chylus
has tKvrre (Dan.
fr. 41
Dind.),
and
vTT("KvfTnj.iiri)
occurs at Z 26,
X 254. "
KviM,
which is
equivalent
to the Sk.
evdjd-mi(Princ.
i.
195)
is
the
prevailing
form from Homer onwards
(uuh
T
117),
with
kj/"/tw,
fo'"f/"7(i fn)m
Hippocrates
onwards
(e.g.Aristoph.Thesmoph. 041),
and
afterwards
kikvuku,
ikvi'iOiii'. Cp.
KvirrKw and the nouns
Kvijfiu,
Kvijaiq.
CH. xn. VERBS WITH TRESENTS OF EOTH KINDS. 269
11) XovtM),\vw, Xoveut,
Xofw. All four forma
occiii*
in
Epic
Greek:
\t)V"fTB(ti Z
508,
Xo
K 3G1, e\ov"(ii' hymn,
in Cerer.
289,
Xoeoy B 252.
To the shorter formation
belong
the forms
Xovfrw, tXnvaa, Xi\ov/.iai,
XnvaSni,
all from Homer
onwards, to the
longer
AoeVanc "^
282,
XotrrfTaro
4
227.
Cp. Xovrpo-r
and
Xoerpo-f,
Lat. Idvere and
lavdre,
Nauck
Melanges
iv. 53.
12)
fdaprvp'^fini
and
fjaprvpiw. j.inpTvpETai
Alcman
pap.
ii.
8,
Ae.scli.
Eum.
643,
with the
aor. kjJiapTvpdfirtv (Plato),
in the active
only fiapTvpiu),
jdnpTvptiiTii), Efinf"Tup)]mi, j.iE^iapTvpr]Ka,
with
ifuipTvpiidrj}',
all from Pindar
and Herodotus
onwaids,
and
good
Attic
as
well.
13)
na^ojjLai,
the
ordinary
Greek form from Homer onwards
{i-iay^o-
f^ieaOa
l\
352),
also
j^in^ioiTo
A 272,
/dcixnoi-iei'oc
(above
p. 240),
finxfoi-
Tni B 366. The "-stem imderlies the fut.
fin\i}r70f.iai, (S 265)
and
n""xf.'
(Ti.juaf
(Hdt.),
the
aor.
/ia^fj^a/^froc
(F 393) by
the side of
fiaxinuahni.
(r 20),
the
perf.
fjei.iaxrii.ini
(Thuc),
and the verbal
adj.
fxaxTjroi' (/.i 119)
by
the side of
ufiaxsToc
(Aeschl Sept.85).
1
4) ^""^ai
and
fiectio.
Both forms
are
represented
in Homer in the
active
only by
the
participle:/(t'cwra 72, /jedotTec
often
(e.g.
11
164),
but
Aw^wirjg f.iE?tu)i'
n
234, Ki'XXj/i'tjc
/.leceniTa,
hymn,
in Merc. 2
(cp.
KuXXainc ("
^eCfiQ
Alcaens fr. 5
ace. to
AjiolloniusDyscolus),
with similar
forms in the
tragedians, fit^ac as
2nd
sing, Soph.
Ant. 1118. Mid.
jjE^ajfiEda
E 718, fifSni'TO
tl
2,
fut.
{.lE^'iao/uai
i. 650.
15) /.uvvBu)
in
Homer,
Hesiod and the
tragedians.
In its
placeHip- pocrates
has
jiuvQeu)
with
yutcuW/yo-w, Efiivvdrjfra, fiEfjiivOrjKa.
16) ^iii^oj
suck
(Xenophon). Hippocrates
has
fiv^itv,
later
(Aelian)
fiv^ao). EKfivl^rjaaQ as
early
as A 218.
17) ",vpw,IvpEU),ivpau).
On the late
^vpofiai
cp. p.
214
no.
9.
Et,vpa
393
is found in
Hippocrates,Evpfio, Ei,vpr]aa, E^vpi^pai
from
Sophocles
(Aj.786),
Herodotus and Plato.
Ivpnopai belongs to
post-
Attic
prose.
18) TTEKTEu) by
the side of
ttektw, cp. p.
168.
19) piTrriwby
the side of
piirru), pp.
165 and 245. Lobeck ad
Aj. v.
239.
Cp. ETVTTTTJfra,
20) ffTEpEu) (Attic),
with
a by-form
(rrepof^tai
in the
middle,
from
the former
come
tTTEpiinu),
karEpriiTa (orfptVoiv
262),
OTEpijaig.
Aor.
pass. Effreprjr.
21)
TopEb),
only hymn,
in Merc. 283
avTimpovvTa, by
the side of the
aor,
t-ropo-y
A 236.
ut'TEToprjrrEv
E 337.
Reduplicated
presents TETpnhw,
TlTpUtO.
22)
TpawEU) (cp.TpoTTEio),
the
simple
verb
only
in the
sense of
*
tread
grapes'{q 125,
Hes. Scut.
301),
but
Eirirpa-n-EU)
(Tpwo-ii'
yap
liviTpavEovffi
(pvXdfffTEiv
K
421)="'7rtrp"7rw.Tpawiw corresponds exactly
to the Lat.
torqupo (cp.
torcu-lar
a
wine- or
oil-press)
and the 0. H. G.
drdhjan,
mod. G.
drehen,
twist.
23) (pdni'Ewby
the side of the usual
fdcuto(p,179)
is said to have
been Zenodotus's
reading
at I 506
(00a"'""().
24) (pdir EU) by
the side of
({"6h'u}
is
given as a variant in
Hippocrates.
In this and later
prose-writersoccm-
EcpOiir/tra, E(p6lri]Ka.Cp. no. 3
above.
We have treated of 8aXTrEiu"
by
the side of daX-n-w and
depEiofiai by
tbe
side of
dipofiai
on
p.
241.
270 THE E-CLASS AND THE EELATED FORMATIONS.
ch. xii.
4)
^'-FOUMATIONS IN OTHER
TeNSES THAN THE PRESENT, WHERE THE
Present-stem is expanded in some other way.
Since
many
formations which
belong
here have
incidentally
been
men- tioned
elsewhei-e,
it will be
enough
to
give
here
a
summary
enumeration
of the
vei'bs,arranging
them
according
to the
way
in which the
pi-esent
is
made,
and
taking
those in each class in the order in which
they
have
been there
given.
A) Lengthening
class.
While
ttct'iffu) came
up
for consideration under division
3,
the
excep- tional
fut.
(Ojyrrw
Theocr. iii.
37,
formed
just
like the l.at. vide-bo and the
Ch.-Sl. vidMi
(see).
TriOi'iaio {"mB,,neiQ (f"
369), 7rtfl"/aac A
398,
Pind.
Pyth. 4, 109,
Aesch.
Choeph. G18,
both
intransitive,
and the transitive
TrtTridi'iau)
X 223.
Cp.
iriTTiOof.
394
Effrilhrcu only Soph. Aj.
874.
TrefiCijrTt-ai
("
21.^",
O 158,
in Nonnus
7r"0(3/;/if'roc as well.
eppvrjKu, Tvuptppvi^KE
Soph.
Phil.
653,
then in
Aristoph.
and Attic
prose,
Eicpviiaeadai
Isocr.
8,
140.
Cp. kppv)]r.
KtKah'iaofiat {KeKaCT](T6f^itd^
Q
353)
bears to
Krjhrjaag the
same
relation
as that of
Idtjau)
to elci'ierw.
B)
r-class.
ic"f:a(pT}ijJC
(^K"Ka"pj}(')Ta
E
698).
Tvin'iaei'TrXtj^ei Hesych.,
who also mentions
a
pres.
-viteI.-
irXiiffaei,
as
also TVTraiiEiy'kuttteh'.
C)
Nasal class.
Attention has
already
been called
on
p.
178 to the fact that
many
verbs of this class have
by-stems
in
e.
In the case
of
Kixurw
there is
a long
list of
by-forms
from the stem
ki^f,
most of which have been
given
on
p.
121,
and there
are
besides the
fut.
Ki\i]eTo^ui
from Homer onwards
(^Ki^iiaEfrdai
"t"
605),
the
aor.
Ki\i]-
aaro
K 494,
and
a*:('x"jrof
P 75.
adiifTij
Hdt.
v. 39, fefacrj-KOTa
Locr. inscr. Stud. ii.
p.
445 1.
38,
ahriKE
Hipponax
fr. 100 Be.^
Cp. a^j/yua
"
\p}iftff^(i,
coyfia
Hesych.,
Skt.
causat.
svaddjd-nii.
\E\al3nKa
Hdt.
(iv.
79,
iii.
42),Eupolis.
Hadt'iTiifiai,
^f/if'iW"/ca, /ua6"jro-c
in
general
use
from
Theognis
onwards
(fiadijaEai v. 35)
in both
prose
and
poetry.
The stem
finth corresponds
to the mede of the Lat. mederi and the
corresponding
Zd.
maidhaya-,
whence
comes maidhayanha (teach).
On the
identity
of the stems
cp.
Princ. i. 387 fF.
Cp. fiadiiaig, i^tnOrjrt'ic, fiaOr)^n.
ri/Y"jff"
$ 334,
TETv\riKE
K 88,
Tliuc. i. 32.
Cp. TETEV)(Ji(Tdai
abovB
p.
267.
avi{]aii).
Cp.
above
p.
265 under hv"w.
olci/Tio, w^7)(xu, M^7]i:"i (Hippocr.Plato)
may
just as
well be
assigned
to
u'lclto
(Hippocr. Hdt.)
as to
oltarcj. vlMu) does not
occur
before Plu- tarch.
CH. XII. E-FOEMS WITH PRESENTS OTHERWISE EXRANDED. 271
anapriifTo/uaL
from Homer onwards
(^hj.iapTifjeaQai
i 512),}if.tc'ipTr]Ka,
ilfiaprrjfxai, ijnaprlidiji'
in Hdt. and Attic
writers,lifuipTjjcTa
is not Attic.
Cp.
afiapTi]fia
etc.
l3Xa(TT})(Tw, iftXuarqaa, El^Xaffrrji^a
(Eurip.)by
the side of the
pres.
ftXaffraioj
and
(iXuffTtM.
Cp. ftXaaTrj/ia, j3XutTrt]fTig.
i'Cn"0[xui
see above
p.
266 under
i'^w. 395
6"j"Xr](T(i) Attic,w(pXr)(Ta
rare.
Cp. oipXrjfja.
alffOfiffajjai, ij(rBi]j.iai, altrSrjTog,
Attic from
Sophocles
onward
(Philoct.
75). Cp. a'iady^du
etc.
tcarabclapQi^Koq
Plato Conviv. 219.
c'nrt^di](TOiuiat Euiip.
Alc.
71,
Hdt. etc.
; ('nrrfxdrjfiivog
Thuc. i. 75,
tplcijfTafrdai
has been mentioned on
p.
185.
oafpijo-ojuai
Aristoph.
Pax 152.
Cp. o(T"ppi](nc.
D)
Inchoative class.
n'lfinXaKiiTai
Aesch.
Svippl. 916, a.i.nrXaKT]r(jg, ufnrXaKrjixa (tragedians).
klaTTa(pi]iTt hymn,
in
Apoll.Pyth.
198.
apvpei-ieyoQ onlyApollon.
Rliod. iii.833.
iTravp7](T"ardai
Z 353,
cp.
the isolated
iwavpeoj.
ytyiovijau).
See above
p.
262 under
yeywrfw.
"vp7](Tii),
fii'stat
hymn,
in Merc.
302,
and thenceforward in
general
use
along
with
ivprjKa, evpij^m,
evpedr}r, tvpidtjao/jai,
evpervg^
and in late
Greek
tvprjau.
The variation in the
quantity
of the
"
appears
in noun-
formation as well
:
evpyj/du, evpEtnc
XaKi'ifTOfiai (Aristoph.
Pax
381),eXuKriffa, belonging
to Xo"r/cw
(which
was omitted
by
an
oversight
on
p. 197)
Aesch.
Ag. 865,Aristoph.
Ach.
1046,
with the Homeric
by-formXrikiw(eTreXj/zceov
d
379),
with which
we
may put
^laXdu'jffaffa
Aristoph.
Nub. 410.
Cp.
AAc'aa in Attic
poets.
E)
/-class.
ijePoXy'iaro
I 3
(beside /3e/3X//aro
S
28),
(ief^oXriixEvoQ
I
9,k
247
(beside
3X7]/.i"t'oc
A 475
etc.),
with
fteftoXrjTui
which first
occurs at
Apollon.
Rhod. iii.893. The more
widely
used stem
fiXr]
I am inclined to
regard
as,
like
-Xr),"ti:Xt],
K/uri,vfir],
drri,
and
others,
the result of metathesis.
Cp. Siegismund
Stud.
v.
199 and above
p.
132.
fiEiioprfKe,fi"fxopT}/uiyoQ (Nic.
Alex.
213, 229),fxefi6pr]Tai (Apoll.
Kh. i.
646),
a late
by-form
to
fieipo^ui, fn^ope, jxt^npfxiyoQ.
The stem
uopt
bears to
fitp
the same relation as that oi
ftoXe
to
/3aA,l3eX(/3e'Xoc).
ice-x^apriwg
{Kexapi]"^'^
H
312),KexaprjKU
(Hdt.
iii.
27,
Aristoph.),
396
KExapr]iiivog (hymn.
hom. vii.
10, Eurip. Iph.
Aul.
200),
tcex,apr]t'TO
(hymn,
in Cer.
458),KEyapricrinEv
O 98.
F) Reduplicating
verbs.
The few verbs of the thematic
conjugation,
which after the fashion
of the verbs in
-/ii
characterise their
present-stemby reduplication
will be
given
at the end of the book in
Chap.
XXIV. Two of these
must be mentioned
here,
inasmuch
as they
have
non-reduplicated by-
stems in
" :
\
/3./
272 THK E-CLA8S AND THE EELATED FORMATIONS.
ch. xn.
yf.riirj()j.i"ii, yf-yevrjiiai,
both from
Aeschylus onwards
(Eum. 66,
Choeph. 379)
with the remarkable by-form yeyeyaf^Uyoc
Pind. 01.
6, 53;
the form f.ytvi]6ip'
counts
as
Doric and
not good Attic
(Phryn.
p.
108),
yivTjHiitronu.
Plato Parmen. 141,
ytij^roc
(Plato). Cp. yiiecri-t, yei'irric,
yerFTij,
Lat. gene-trix, geni-tor, gene-tlvu-s,
Skt.
^ana-has, gdna-na-s,
^ani-td (st. fjani-tar), (fdni-trt.
The oldest Sanskrit
present-form is
(jdnd-mi (answering to
a possible Gk.
*yei'd-/.u),
and this has
a
3rd
sing.
mid. a(jana-ta-=kyivt-To. Apparently the root
\"ga
(cp. yeyn-fiev),
Skt.
(fa,
and
na
is
a syllable peculiar to the
present, so
that the Dor.
yeyerd-
^ei'og
is formed
as
it
were
fi-om
a
pres.
*yepaw, which bears to the *yEiu-
/u
deduced above the
same
relation
as
that of
Trinow
to
irirvqui.
lieo-H,
aorist to l-avio (r 342, 'diaa^iv
y
151, 'diaai
o 40), contracted
'cifTafiet'
IT
367.
G)
Verbs in
fit.
Here
belong
forms like the
following :
Put. oXEcrtTw (M 250), "\f.(Ta
(X 107),
SXwXcKa used from Herodotus
onwards
by
the side of
oWv/dt,
oXwXa.
Cp. uXeOpo-c.
ttTTopEtra
(y 158) by
the side of
nT()f"vvf.u
(cp.
above
p.
112).
Occasionally it is in noun-formation alone that
any
trace of the
ex- panded
stem is to be found.
XaxE-i^i-c
bears
exactly
the
same
i-elation to
the rt.
Aox
that
vij.ie-ai-c
does to the rt.
vt^,
but while the stem
vtptf.
has
survived in
some
verbal forms, this is not the
case
with
Xox".
Of
an
c-stem belonging to
dXfah'w
the
only trace left is to be found in
uXorja-rrj-c,
(iXcftEail^oiai. It lies l^eyond our province to
pursue
this
phase of the
e-formation
any
further.
397
If
we
reckon
up
all the verbs whose
irregularity
Ls due to the
pre- sence
of this movable
e we
find the number to be 115. Some of these
have, it is
true,
been counted
twice, because, as
in the
case
of
x^'f"^*
Xuip'iTio
and
icejf^nprjKa,
they
show two different
e-stems, or
because
they
form two different
presents,
and others
are rare
and late. On the whole
though
there
are fully
100 verbs which
belong
to this class,
273
APPENDIX TO THE E-CLASS.
It is far less often that we
find other movable
vowels,
but to a limited
"
extent there occur stems
in
a
which
alternate,just
as
the e-stems
do,
with
shorter stems. These
are precisely analogous
to the far
more numerous Latin
verbs of the
o-conjugation
whose
a,
as
in
domd-re,
dom-ui, domi-tu-m,
does not
extend
beyond
the
present.
The
followingare probably
the
only
Greek verbs
of the kind.
"yoao),
common from Homer
onwards,
with the isolated aorist
'iyoov
from the
rt.
yo(/)
Z 500.
firjKdoiiai,
the
present only
occm*s
in
grammarians : Bekk. Anecd.
p.
33,
8.
Byform nTjKa^a"
Nic. Alex.
214,
which the scholiast
interprets
ixrjKarai cos TrpojSa-
Tov,
Pf.
^f^TjKws
K
362, fi"fiaKv7ai
A 435, plpf.
fiffxriKov
i 439, aor.
fxaKcav
J I
469.
fiVKaofxai, fxvKOifievai
k 413,
with
dfi(f)ifiefiVK" k 227,
^lefivKe
Hes.
0pp. 508,
aor.
}j.vKe
Y 260. In Attic writers there are foimd
onlypresent-forms,
which
are
joined
in late
poets by
nvKi]aco
and
fivKrjaas.
As
a parallel
to the
numerous verbs with both
eco
and
w
in the
present
we
may
notice
juv^dco(suck)by
the side of
/xv'fw, especially as fiv^eaoccurs in
Hip- pocrates.
Yeitch,
it it
true, givesno earlier
authority
than Aelian H. A. iii.39
for the a-formation. It is
impossible
to
say
whether Homer's
ixv(r]cras (cp.
above
p.
269) comes
from the
e- or
the
w-stem.
We
may
further notice here
a few verbs which take an a
in the other tenses
when their
present
is
expanded
in
a
different
way.
"We
may say
that
intpaaa ;
TTepvq-^ii
: :
{(TTopfo-a
:
(rropw/it,
while there is
no more a *7repdco or
*TTepd^(o as a
present
in this
meaning
than there is
a *(TTope(o,
It is
probable
that
irepdav
398
* 454 is the fut. to the
aor.
nepaa-av
(o428),iirepaacrev
$ 40. The
perf.pass,
partic.
newfprjpivos
$ 58 bears to it the
same relation as
that of
/3f^i'^/"e to
ejiiaa-dprjv
and other
examples
mentioned on
p.
235 of this alternate
adoption
of
the
analogy
of verbs in
aw
and of those in
a^a.
The traces of
a movable
o are rarer still,
but not altogetherwanting.
On
p.
267 we met with the Homeric
perf.
cpxa-Ka
to
o'lxopai,
in which the
co
holds
just
the
same positionas
that of the
r]
in
o'ix^-fiai (Hdt.).
" There are besides
a
few Doric
forms,
the
perfects
W-ca-Ka or
e-vedco-Ku
(Ahrens
Dor.
340)
from the
stem
(Tj^fd
(cp.idi^co),
which occiu's in the
ordinary
e'loodawithout the added
vowel. WoiKa is
only distinguished
from it
by
the loss of the
reduplication.*
The stems
d\co,dvaXto,
and
dp^Xa,
which
appear
in
edXcov,aXaa-opai,edXaKa,
dvaXwcrai, fjp^Xcoa-e (cp.pp.
133 and
195),
bear the
same relation to the shorter
stems of the
presents oXlaKto,dp^Xia-Kio
that the stem
evpe
(p.271)
does to
-
acpfoiKa,a(pewvTai,
avkSxrOai
(tabb. Heracl.) are similar in
appearance only,
for in them the
w is,as
Herodian
(ii.236) saw,
the
representative
of the
t]
which
appears
in
'l--n-iJ.i. The same
may
be said of
irfirrwKa,
iSrjSoKa.
274 APPENDIX TO THE E-CLASS.
(IpicTKco,
and the
occuiTence
of tlie
presents
di/aXoco and
ufifi\6a" as
well is to be
regarded
in the
same
way
as
that of
yeyajvew
by the side of
yeyaviaKw.
Lastly
the
o
in
wfioaaafitv
Y 313,
ofioaev
T 113,
which
was
found in all
periods
in this
aorist, as
also in the perfect
ofioofioKa, ofio^noTai
and
oixdnioa-rai,
op-cifioa-fifvos,
the
aor.
pass.
(Lfiodrj or w^ocrGr],
and
avfOjxoTos,
can hardly
be of
a
different character. For
cofxoa-a
: oji-w-fiiwi-frTopi-a-a:
a-Top-w-fjLi'.'.fnepa-a-a
:
"n-f'p-i'rj-fj.L.
The short vowel is here due to the
same analogy
which'we discussed
above with reference to
the
a.
wfioa-a
is in
a
way
the aorist to
a
lost
*6iJ.6^o}
(cp.
p.
239
apfio^o), fieano^co).
AU these facts
go,
I think, to
prove
that the
duality
of
stem,
which
we
have
been
discussing,
is due substantially to
the mutual
interchange
between
more
]n-imitive and derivative
verbs,
and this fact
justifies us
in investigating
the
phenomena
last discussed in
an appendix to the e-class.
CH. xiii.
THEMATIC AORISTS. 275
CHAPTER XIII.
THEMATIC AORISTS.
AVe have
previously
had occasion to notice that there
are
aorist forms Vol.
not
distinguished
as
such
by any
definite formative elements. In their II.
originthey
are exactly
like
corresponding
formations from the
present p.
1
stem,
and
they are
only distinguishedby
not
having any unexpanded
indicative
present
formed from the same stem. We saw for instance
(p.125)
that in formation the aorist
'i-(ir]-v
and the Homeric
jja-np'
do
not at all differ from
e-(p7]-y
and
0rt--jji'.
Thex'e is
exactly
the
same
rela- tion
between thematic forms like
e-rpacpo-y
and
e-ypa(po-y,(.-re/ne
and
i-vejJLe,
TEKOL
and
ttXekoi,yeyi-adai
and iriye-aQai. The forms
eypacpoy,
ivefie, irXiKoi,
TriyEtrBai
are
presents
or
imperfectssolely
because
they
are
accompanied by
the
presents
indicative
ypafu), yefno,
ttXeku),iriyoj-iui.
The others are aorists,
because this is not the case.
It follows from this
fact,
which is of the
highestimportance
in rela- tion
to the structui'e of the
verb,
and which has found the fullest
confirmation in Delbrlick's Researches
on the Verb in the Veda
(p.16),
that the distmction between aorist and
present
or
imperfect
forms is
by
no
means invariablysharp
and unmistakeable. We have the
following
cases :
1)
The
present
indicative,
which
by
its
occurrence
makes the
cor- responding
past
tense into an
imperfect,
is
wanting
iii certain dialects
and at certain
periods
of the Greek
language,
but
actually
occui-s else- where.
Thus in
4'
90'
e'Tpa"pe
r' evSvKfcos Kcii crov depuTTOVT^ ovop.rjvev. 2
ETpcKpe
is
certainlyan aorist;
for in X 421
we
have the unmistakeable
imperfecte-pe(pe.
But in the Doric dialect the
present
is
rpcKptj(cj?.
Pind. Isthm. \Tii. 40 'IwXkov
rpafeir irediov),
and hence in Theocr. iii.16
bpvfiaTf viv
eTpa(f)e
fiaTrjp
the
very
form,
which in Homer
passes
for
an aorist,
is taken as an
imperfect.
In Herodotus the ind.
pres. rpu-n-u)
is common :
(e.g.
i. 63
rpoTTouo-t);
hence
tTpa-n-ovTo
(e.g.
i.
80) can
hardly
be
anythiog
but
an
imperfect,
while the same foim in Attic
writers,occurringby
the side of
hpeTToyro,
is
undoubtedly
to be considered
as an
aorist. The
same form
can therefore at different
pei-iods
and in different dialects have
a
different
force. And it is not
always
easy
to determine what this is. For
instance,
does the
exclusively
Homeric
/3\a/3frot justify
us in
regarding
the form
eiSXajyE
in
Quintus Smp-naeus (v.309) as an
imjjerfect
1 The
context
seems
to be rather in favour of the aorist. Can
we
regard
the
Homeric
ijX^aye,to which
we
shall
i-eturn,as an
aorist, on
the
ground
that in
Aeschylus
we find.a
pi-esent
aXcahio 1
T
2
276 THEMATIC AORISTS.
ch. xiii.
2)
We
have, as a rule, a serviceable criterion in the different
ac- centuation
of the infinitive and the
participle.
But
freqvxently
the
tradition is
untrustworthy
in this
respect.
Thus the accentuation
uytpEfjOni,iypEtrdai (e.g.
v 124)
is
supported by good
authorities.
Herodian
(i.452, 26) assumes a
present 'iypw
; cp.
ii.
254,
783. On the
other hand
kimi' Kie'tr is the
common accentuation,although
in
Aeschylus
(Choe2)h.680)
we find the unmistakeable
present
form
kIeic
(cp.
p.
146). ixOeaOai
is
generally regarded as a
present,aniixBeroas an
aorist to
nirixQcuonai,
For the accentuation
ciiadscdai,
e.g.
Thuc.
v.
26,.
it
may
be
ui-ged
that the
present
form aiffdovrai has
strong support
in Isocr.
3, 5,
and is
recognisedby
Herodian i.
441,
2. Yet
no one
would
deny
that
riaderoby
the side of
yadareTu
is
an
aorist. We must
therefoi-e admit that the old
grammarians are not
consistent,
and often
follow for the accentuation of forms which
wei-e not
living
to
them,.
3
purely
external
analogies,
borrowed from the
spelling.
In fact it almost
seems as
if the
usage
of
language was itselfnot free from confusion. A
man would be much deceived if he fancied that the
meaning was
in
every
case sufficient to decide the
question.
For the difference between
present
and aorist-stem is often
so slight
that in
many places
both
are
possible.
Under these circumstances
we cannot be at all
surj^rised
that
late writers not seldom constructed
present
foi'ms after old forms which
we have
good i-eason
to treat as
aoiists
:
e.g.
Apollonius
Rhodius iii.
895
ayipoi'TciL
after the Homeric
aor. ayipovro,by
the side of the
impf.
ayeipovTo,
Dio
Ghrysostom (j(p\w
"
recognised
also
by
Herodian i. 448 "
after the Attic aorist
wcpXor,Ai^ollonius
Rhodius KetcXtTcii
(cp.
Herodian
u.
s.)
after the Homeric
EKtKXeTo,
and others of the
kind,
which
we
shall
severallypoint
out. It would be
an
anachronism to
argue
fi'om such
stragglers
to the
present
character of much older forms.
3)
Greek aoiists sometimes
correspond
letter for letter to Sanskrit
im]^"eifects,
e.g.
e-dpa/xe
= Skt. a-drama-t
e-0vye
=
"
a-Wm/ja-t
e-yevo-vTo
=
"
a-yana-ntot
The Sanskrit forms are
imperfects,
because
they are
connected with the
presents
drama-ti
'
he
runs,'hhuija-ti
'
he
bends,'^ana-te
'
he
becomes,*
while there is
no trace of
a
Greek
*Bpafji"), *(pvyw,*yet'opcn.
4) Participles
which have become substantives
may
come
justas well
from the stems of thematic
aorists,or
from stems like
them, as from
present
stems
: rirwr, cpckwr,Evcpaf.tM)',
in Avhich it is not
easy
to detect
any
other relation of time than in
/ut'cwj', M"\7ro)U")'"7, Uapfjiiiov,
while
JLvtXOwv
can be taken
as Benvenuto.
Buttmann first
clearly
determined the essential characteristics of this
aorist formation. From the discussions in the Ausf. Gr. i.'^399
ff.,
which
are still well worth
reading,we can see
how the
thoughtlessness
of
Buttmann's
predecessors
had
gone
so far as actually
to assume an
aoiist
*f.(l)i\oy
from derivative verbs like
^tXt'w,
and
generally
to
give
this
formation
as one to be
expected
in
every
verb. In the face of such
4
absui-dities,
Buttmann
was
qiiite right
in
laying
down the rule that
only
*
primitiva'or verbs which are to be
regarded
as equivalent
to
'
prinii-
tiva,'admit of
a 2
aor. act. But the addition
'
which are to be
regarded
as equivalentto
primitiva'
is
quite
sufficientto show that the line cannot
CH. XIII.
THE OKIGIN AND CHARACTER OF THEMATIC AORISTS. 277
be
very
sharply
drawn. Verbs like
ayyE'Ww, evalpco,ofeiXto
with their
disyllabic
stems must
certainly
be
regarded
as
denominatives
;
and
yet
we cannot
deny
to them aorists of this form. Even the invented
*"0t\o"/
is not invented
against
all
analogy,
inasmuch
as
it
might
he
supported
by
the
actuallyocciu'ring
f.-xpai(7fio-i',
which
certainly
goes
back to the
adjective
stem
^xpaKTifxa
for
*j(po(T(juo.
But it is the most
important
task of the
grammarian
to determine the
prevailing
character of
a
forma- tion,
and to
distinguishrigorously
what is isolated from what
properly
forms the rule. And
so
far Buttmann was
quite right
in his
remark,
which
was protected
from
misconceptionby
the addition of
'
or.' He
was
also before his time in
comparing (p.404)
the twofold character of
the Greek aorist with the double formation of the German
preterite,
comparing e.g. rpeTrw tTpairov
with
gebegab,
and
/jXeVw ej3\e\pa
with lebe
lehte,
and in
calling
attention to the
changing
nature of the vocalism.
No
one
will
certainlyreproach
him with not
having alreadyrecognised
the German
preteriteas an
oiiginalperfect,
and the Ablaut as distinct
from the Umlaut.
Only,
with all his
acuteness,
he
was
misled
by
Hebrew
analogies,
and went
wrong
in
regarcHng(at
p.
368)
the 3
sing,
of the
aorist,
without its
augment,
and with the elision of the thematic
vowel,
e.g.
Xc(/3', /3aX',as
'
the
simplest
form of the
verb,'
and
adding
the assertion
that the Greek
language
'started with the aorist :' he went still further
astray
in
assuming
for forms without the
augment
an originalpreterite
force. But it is
only by degrees
that even
comparativephilology,
with
the richer means at her
command,
has overcome
many
similar
perverse
views,
and above all has learnt to
distinguish
between forms that
are
reallyprimitive,
and such
as have
merely
the
appearance
of
primitive
forms, owing
to
phonetic
losses.
Thematic
aorists,or more
strictlyspeaking
shorter
preteritespro- vided
with
a
thematic
vowel,
and
distinguished
from
longerpreterites,
5
called
imperfects, by
the absence of those
additions,
which we
have called
present expansions,occiu- not
only
in
Greek,
but also in
Sanskrit,Zend,
and Slavonic. But the traces of shorter
moods,
infinitives and
participles
are
extremely scanty except
in Greek. As
a
system
of connected forms
the thematic aorist is
properly
found in Greek
alone,
and it is doubtless
a result of this fact that it is
only
in Greek that
we can
prove
a
clear'
distinction of
meaning
between the shorter
forms,
and the
longer
ones
which
correspond
to them. For to mark
or to
preserve any
distinction,
language
needs
a
somewhat
lai'ge
number of
cases,
in which it can be
"brought
into exercise. The instinct of the Greek
language
in the historic
time had
a
safe criterion between forms of the aorist and forms of the
present
stem in the accent of the infinitive and
participle
active and of
the infinitive
middle, by
which
r^Ktiv, Kpaywi',
yevitrdcu
were sharply
separated
from
KpiKew,
rtywr,
irii'Errdai. But
probably
this distinction
had itseK been
imprinted
at an
earlier
periodonly
mider the influence of
the intellectual
tendency
towards differentiation. We shall
come
back
afterwards to this
question.
Under this head we have in Sanskrit that formation of the
aorist,
which
Bopp gives
as
the
6th, Benfey
as the
2nd,
Max Miiller
as
the 1st
form of the 2 aorist
;
but also the 7th of the 2 aorist
according
to
Bopp,
the 3rd
according
to
Benfey,
the 2nd
according
to Max
Miiller,
that
which includes
reduplicated
forms. But in Sanskrit
gi-ammar
the redu- plicated
forms
are by no means
sharplydistinguished
from those which
278 THEMATIC AOEISTS.
ch. xtii.
are
not
reduplicated.Excluding
for tlie
present
all
reduplicating
forma- tions,
we
will content ourselves
with
quoting
here such foims
as come
from the same stems in Sanski'it and Greek.
They are
the
following:
(i-(lar"^(Mii
""
e-bjmKo-vImpf. u-drgn-7n
=
e-hfpKo-v
a-hiidha-Hta " f-nvdo-vro
,,
a-hodha-nta = e-irevdo-vTo
a-rifca-t = i-'hine
(according
to
Benfey
Ausf. Qr,
p.
394)
a-vida-t = e-fiSe(with
pres.
vindd-mi)
a-(;ama-t
=
e-Kafxe
(with
pres. (^dni-nd-mi
, cp. p.
171)
In Zend the
only
trace of this formation seems to be the 3
sing,
hva-t
(Schleicher Comp. 743,
Justi Handbuch
p.
400).
hva-t is related to the
6 3
])lur.hu-n, just as an
aoristic
*i.(j)ve, quite
conceivable
by
the side of
the
originalpresent fvlw
on
the
analogy
of the Homeric 3
sing.cifi-wivE,
is to the
actuallyexistingt'-^vi'
or
(j)vi'.
The Chuich-Slavonic aorists of this formation have been discussed
by
Schleicher
Comp.
745 Ksl. 358 ff. With the
exception
of nesii
(from
*naJca-m),
I
boi'e,
which
agrees
at
any
rate in root with
i'p'ayKo-v,
I do not find
any
Slavonic
aoiist,
which
may
be
placed by
the side
of
a
Greek aorist of like formation. Traces of
a
Latin aorist of this
kind I have
attempted
to establish in
my paper
'
de aoristi latini
reliquiis' (reprinted
in Stud.
v.
431).
Of the forms which
appear
to me to fall undei- this
category,
there ai-e
only
two which
agree
in root
with
any
Greek
aoi'ist,
i.e.
twja-m [attiya-m) by
the side of the
present
tcmya-m,
with the Homeric
reduplicated
TtTuyu-r
and
yenituryeni
with
ytriadui.
A
third,
the
petrified participle ^j"rew"es corresponds
in form
to the Greek
Trofwrrec.
But the
meaning
has become modified in
a special
way
in both
languages,
and we cannot
placeby
the side of
Tropoirec any
present
formation
comparable
with
2)arientes.
As the number of Greek
aorists of this
foi-mation,excluding
those which are
reduplicated,
is miich
tibove
a
hundred
(as
we
shall
see immediately),
vre must admit that the
points
of comiexion with other
languages
are but
scanty :
still
they
are
quite
sufiicient to
prove
the existence of this
manner
of foi-matiou in the
original
stock of the Indo-Germanic verb.
We
go
on now to the
special
chai-acteristics of the*Greek thematic
aorist. All the
forms,
which
belong here,naturally
divide themselves
into two classes
:
i.e.
I. Aorists without
redu2:)lication,
and
II. Aorists with
reduplication.
The first class is
by
far the more numerous
;
the second class is found
largelyonly
in the Homeric
dialect,
and ia later limes it Ls
extremely
limited.
I. Aorists without
Reduplicatiox.
The first
thing
which
we
have to consider here is the relations of the
7 vowels. In the
present
formations,
which
are
only
characterised
by
the
thematic
vowel,
it
appeared(p.145)
that
by
far the most
common
vowel
is
f,
while
"
is
especially
rare.
Here
on
the other hand
a
is the most
usual of all stem- vowels. On
p.
150 we saw
that
presents
with
a
short
i
and
i; .ire rare.
Aorists with these vowels
are on
the
contrary tolerably
numerous. The
one observation
evidentlygives
a
welcome confirmation
of tlie
other,
inasmuch
as
the distinction of the two formations was
evidently
intended
by language.
Difterentiation
by means
of vowels is
CH. XIII.
THE STEM-VOWELS. 279
one
of the favourite
phenomena
in the structtire of the veib. In forma- tions
so
simple as
these the difterentiation can only
affect the vowel of
the stem.
Of 116 aorists of this class 54 have an a
in the
stem-syllable, e.g.
ahelv,
afinprtly,
apiaOai,fiaXeJy,^UKtlr', ^prc/ueTr, Oaie'i}', Xa/jelr,jj-ciOe'ii',
Xoff
("'.
It is
only by
means
of this difference of vowel that the verb
-piiTio gets
a
simple
aorist :
rpuTrtiv.
e
appears
only
in 17
instances,
e.g.
yEiiaOai,IXeTj', tpeadai,ocpeXelv, Treaelt',
reict'ii'. We notice a
dialectic
variation between
a
and
t
in
Tcijuel}' by
the side of the later
ts/jlui',
in
/jaXtTr
" Ai'cadian
t^'tXej'
with
present
('e'/Wwor ciWu)
(tcceWojrfc
In- scription
of
Tegea
1. 51
[Cauer
Delectus Inscr. Gr.
p.
138],
Michaelis
[andCurtius]
in Fleckeisen's Jahrb.
1861,
p. 587)
" and in the Locrian
apiarai(Inscription
of
ISTaupactus
1.
32)supposing
this to be for eXiffdut.
By
the side of the Attic
j/'/iuproj'
we
have the Homeric
i'jjxjlpoTot'
with
o.
Evidently
the oldest of the three hard vowels has
an
'
elective
affinity
'
A\ith this old aorist
formation,just
as
the later
e
has with tlie
present.
We find
o only
in 8
cases : dopelr,/uoXdi',oXiadai, iropziyetc.,i on the
other liand in
19,
e.g.
aXirtiv, liictir, QijeIv,
lltir,Xnrely,v
in
13,
e.g.
Kpvjjslr,Trvdirrdai, rvx^lv,f)vy"h'.
Five aorists with
dij^hthongal
stems are
quite
isolated
instances,
i.e.
alcrdetrdai, ETravpelv, evpely,Eovwaii', 'xpaia/.iely.
In 9 forms the vocalism is
irregular.
In tlu-ee of them there
can
hardly
be
a
doubt that
spicope
has taken
place,
i.e. the
participle
aypu-
jiEvoi
(e.g.
1"
166) by
the side of
ayipovTo (e.g.
2
245)
and
ayEpiadai
(/)385),
and
typero,
with the
imper.e'ypeo,
the infin.
kypiaQai
and the
part.
eypofjiEvoQ (k 50);
and also
HxpXor,
which differs indeed in
usage
from
uifeXoi',
but which is
certainly
identical with it in
origin.
The
same phonetic
process may
be noticed in the Skt.
a-ksha-n,
which
occurs 8
by
the side of
a-ghasa-n as a 3
plur.
from rt.
ghas eat,
devoiu-.
'i-yEv-ro,
which has been
wrongly put
here,
found its
proper place
on
p.
130
by
the side of the active
h/ar.
Metathesis meets us
very
plainly
in
'i-lpuKo-v by
the side of
cipKOjjiUL
(as
1
sing,k
\%1
,avE6pai:Er
S
436),^pa"."ir
Aesch.
Ag. 602, cpo/coo'Eurip.
Here. F.
951,
with the Skt.
a-darr^a-m
and in the
quiteanalogous'i-Trpado-v
beside
7ripd-(o (3pi.ETrpdOov
2
454, cunrpadiny
II
32). 'idpuKoy
has
only
become
an aorist
by means
of this metathesis an'd the retention of the
o
as
compared
with the
e
of the
present stem,
while in Sanskiit the fuller
ddarc^a^in
is
regarded
as an
aorist in contrast with the weakened
ddrr^a-m.
We find metathesis
appearing
as a
phonetic
affection of
no
importance
for the
tense-system
in
'i-capdo-v (post-Homeric) by
the side of
'i-cpado-r,
^padiuy{v143,
3
163).
In the case of 4 forms it
may
be doubted at
flx'st sight
whether
they
are to be
explained by s}Ticope
or metathesis,
i.e.
E-trxo-y, EyL-a-jro-y,
E-uTTu-y
and
E-TrT(')-p.riy.
We
might
be inclined from
a
fundamental form.
i-(TE)(o-y
(-=8^. a-saha-m)
to dei'ive on the
one hand
by
the loss of the
a-
t-EX"'^ s'X"'''
^^^^^
^^'
^^^
imperfect;
and
on the other
by
the
rejection
of
the
"
E-ff^o-y,
the
aorist,so that the distinction of
meaning here,as m
the
cases of
metathesis,
would
only
have been
brought
about
by
what
may
be called casual
phonetic
affections. But this is
opposedby
the
imper.
ffXt'-c,
which shows
by
its
formation,
corresponding
as tliis does to that of
the
conjugation
in
-fxi,
that the
e was
regardedas a stem-vowel,
and that
hence
tr\t
was regarded
as the root. In this
sense we
discussed the form
on
p.
132 and
shortly
before the
completelyanalogous
iyi-a-KE-c. We
280 THEMATIC AOKISTS. ch. xiir.
decide therefore for
metathesis,
which is also confirmed
by e-ax^'^o-r,
ffxv-
aw, E-(T)^i]-t:a,
(t-)(.^-t6-c, fyxi-ryi-c, rrxtj-f^Ktf'^TL^d
a-fnre-To-Q,
de-(nrt-cno-Q.Hence
tTxoi'
and h-imrou are properlyprimitiveaorists,
in which
we should
natm-ally
have
expectedas
1
sing.
ind.
^t-rrxn-^'i *i.-"Trrr]-p.
But the final
vowel
was in most verbal forms afiected
by
the
interchange
between
0
and
e,
so
that
finally
even
in the
imperativeirtaire,
Trapaaxe
and other
forms of the kind found
a place.
The
optative
(T)^o"/ir/i'
is to be looked
u])on
just as
doifiip', only
that in the
case
of the latter the
earlier
foim
Hdfi-qv
was
also
preserved.
We meet with
a
similar
change
of
9 the radical into the thematic vowel in Sanskrit
aorLsts,only
that
here,
with the firm nature of the
a,
the
change
appears
not as
qualitative,
but
purely as quantitative,
e.g.
in
a-khja-m
'I told 'from the
root
khjd.
After these two certain instances it is
very probable
that
we have to
come to the
same conclusion with
regard
to
e-o-tto-j' {kir-ianoi'
3
plur.
T
294),iTri-irnrjc, kiri-mroi, InL-airEiv,
jieTa-triziov.
We shall have occasion
to return to the middle forms anicrdca etc. when
dealing
with the redu- plicated
aorists. It is
more difficult to form
a
judgment as
to the
aorist
e-TTTu-fxi]}',
Trri-trdai. Here
we
find
a
by
the side of the thematic
vowel
:
(.-TTTci-TO, aTro-TTTa-fietog
as
well
as inr-i-TTTrj-r,
the I'elation of
which to
TTfTcifxai
was discussed on
p.
120. It is true that
eTri-rrTi-adat
and the like
occur even in Homer
(e.g.
A
126),
but
we
have
some reasons
for
regarding
the forms with
a as the older. Now
as we find side
by
side in the
present-stem irera
and
tteto (Trerofiai)
and in
the aorist
irra
and
TTTo,
the balance inclines in favour of
syncope.
With these forms
1
compared (1.c.)
tteXo
(tteXo/.uu)
and ttXo
(e-ttXe-to).
This is
not however
to be understood
as implying
that e-ttXe-to
(also
in the active ettXe
Mil)
is an aorist. The aoristic force does not suit various
forms,
e.g.
iirinXo-
fip'ov
ETOQ r;
261
:
ettXeto is therefore
just as much
an
imperfectas
etteXeto. The
phonetic
difference
was not in this
case
used to
distinguish
an aorist.
As to the
origin
of the stems
appearing
in these
aorists,
the
majority
correspond
to the
expectation
that
we should find in them
nothing
but
an
unexpanded
root
together
with the thematic vowel
:
e.g.
uce'iv,
aXiffdai,IjuXeIi', Scike'ij',
6arE~n',JSelr,iKEfrdai,oXinBai,
o/i-tti've, iropEli',
TTvdEffdai,
tekeIv. But it is
unmistakeably
otherwise with
a not
insigni- ficant
number of
by no means
late and in
part very
common forms :
e.g.
j-}Xu(jTE~iv, cuirQiaOai,a/xTrXcKCfTr, EvpE'if.
These have
evidently
arisen
from stems of
various,and,
in
part,certainly
nominal
origin.
We
might
call them
secondaryaorists,
and
may
di\dde them into the
following
five
groups
:
1)
Aorists with
an
9,ccessory
d. These fall into two
subdivisions,
accordingas
the 8 is attached to the whole verbal
stem, or only occurs
sporacUcally :
10
a)
Aorists with
a 0 attached
throughout : cuaBiaBai,capflfir, huBe'iv,
TraOftr,
oXktOeHi'.
h)
Aorists with
a
sporadic
0
: I'lXv-do-vand
7iXdo-}', E-trx^-Qo-v(by
the side of
E-axo-i').
We
must return in
a
later section to a
general
consideration of the
forms with 9. It is sufficient to i-cferhere to what
we
have
put together
in the
Princiides,
vol. i.
}).
81 f If the B
appearing
in such forms
comes,
as
is
generallythoughtprobable,
from the rt.
(h,
Skt. dha
'
to
place,do,'we
must
recognise
in such aorists
compound forms,
to be
compared
with the
"CH. XIII.
SECONDARY FORMATIONS.
281
Oerrnan
weak
perfects.
The case
of the thematic vowel is then here
jvist
as
it was
with
e-cxo-j'
:
it must have come
from the stem- vowel of the verb.
2)
Aorists with
an
accessory
r.
There are scarcely
more
than the
followingfive,
which
belong
here :
";\(7-o-i' (gen.
mid.),which, as
has been shown in
Principles,
vol. ii.
p.
179,
is connected
with the rt. "\
{aX"i, "A-fif^^oi)
and
especially
with
7)\t-(ho-Q,
"i'ljxapTo-r,
which has been
already
mentioned
on
p.
163 under the
present
formations
with
-.
The
Epic
forms
i^jH^po-ov, aftpnTaL,tiv
show that the
rough
breathing
is of later
origin. Certainlyi]njipoTo-v or
yfiapra-i'
is
nothing
but a
verbal form
du-ectly
deiived from the
adjective*a-fxap-To
'not sharing'{cp.yitfVoc, /^oTpa,juopo-c),
as
has been
already
shown in
Principles,
vol. ii.
p.
350. Further confirmation
may
now
be
supplied.
Hesychius
has the
gloss ujidpi'ir
with the
explanations
uKoXovOe'iy,
TreideaBai,
u^tapraret
j'.
The first two
meanings evidently
suit
only
^
a
u^ape'ti'
equivalent
in
meaning
to
o-jjiaprelv,
the third
justifies
us in
assimiing
a
shorter
ujxapiu)
formed from
u-^apo,
and related to
*a-/jnpr"7j/
as
ctTrpaycT)'
is to
c'nrpuKTeh'.
In the same
storehouse of facts we
find the
gloss ETrii.wpTOL
"
(TTTupiiJOQ
jT],
in the
explanation
of which the word
fioprt]
is
quoted
and
explamed by juepoe. enifxaprog
is
evidently
the
opposite
of the
a-fxopro-Q
which is at the bottom of
ajxftporEii'.
Other traces
of this
negativeadjective
are pointed
out
by
Lobeck El. i. 37. " It is
just
the
same
with
i-lj\aaTo-r.
Here the
noun ftXaaro-gactuallyoccurs:
its
deri^^ation from the rt. vardh Gr. hiXO and
by
metathesis
J^Xad,l3XaO
is
discussed in
Principles,
vol. ii.
p.
168. These formations
evidently
became aorists
only by
the existence of
ojuaprcu'w,
ftXafr-ayw,
which are
11
expandedby present-strengthening.
" "We have further
E-fiopre-v,
known
to us only
from
Hesychius.
Lobeck 1. c. i-egards
it as a
mistake for
i']fxopT"i',
so
that it would be
equivalent
to
i'l^iapTEv.
But I doubt whether
the
explanation
of
Hesychius
InridavEv suits this view. It is true that
the
glossiff(iiJLopT"i'
"
('nridcwei' remains obscure. I
conjecture
that the
syllable
la- is here as
in
'i(T-(p(i)p-tQ=(pu)pEQ
a
dialectic form of
eu,
but the
1]
is
strange
; probably
it is
a
mistake for
f. l./xoprt-i',
if
correctly
recorded,
is to
fjop-ro-c,
explained
in
Hesychius by fli'rjroe, just
as
e^jXaffrey
is to
ftXaarog.
" From
a
much later time
we
have the last of
these forms
lifiap-oi',
i.e. in
Orph. Argon.
511
:
Kai
pa
navr]p,(p'nj(Tiv
iv
elXmrivrjatv
op-aprev.
We
may
conjectui'e
that we
may
see
in this word
only
an
imitation
of
ajxaproi'.
There is one more doubtful form in
Hesychius,
to which
my
attention has been called
by Brugman, Sprachwissenschaftliche
Abhandlungen p.
160. The
gloss
acpauToi'
'
'idioy is written
by
Mor.
Schmidt
acpuKToi'
'
elcov,a
very happy thought.
The
frequentative
dpoKTcii^EiQ
-"
Trtpt/iXfTTEif
suits thls
very
well,
a as an augment
was
dis- cussed
on
p.
77.
We
may
find in the kindred
languagesan analogy
even
for these
isolated forms. In Sanskrit from the rt. as
'
thi-ow
'
there is formed the
very
remarkable aorist ds-thcc-m. None of the
attempts
to
explain
this
hitherto,so
far as they
are known to
me,
seems
at all
satisfactory.
Perhaps
the form
belongs
to the
presentgroup.
The
aspiration
of the t
after
s
is not without
analogies.
*ds-ta-7n would be formed in
exactly
the same
way
as '(-(jXaff-ro-y.
Besides
this.
Old Erse has
a
widely-
extended
preterite
in
t,
e.g.
3
sing.
bii--t tulit
(Zeuss-Ebel p.
454),
trans-
282 THEMATIC AORISTS.
ch. xiii.
lated into Greek letters
*e-(j)Ep-Te
=
t'(jiep-e.Perhaps
the remarkable
Oscan
preterites (3sing.)
in
-ted,
which have
long
been
compared
with the
Keltic
forms,
e.g.
^;ra?/a^^ecZ=probavit, belong
to this
group
: Schleicher
Comp.^
823 treats them
as
perfects.
As these
languages
have lost the
augment,
the distinctive criterion of the
preterite,
the
question
is haixl
to decide.
12 3)
Aorists with
accessory
nasals.
Here we
may
first mention
liXlcire
(rr70, w 368),
with the
present
aXSaii'u),
in face of which the form is
I'egardedas an aorist. But
as
aXtah
oj occurs first in
Aeschylus,
while
ijXcare is
only Homeric,
and as
the
sense in the two
passages hardlydecidedlyrequires
the
aorist,
the
possibility
that
i'lXcayt
is the
imperfect
to
a
subsequently
obsolete *uXcariv
is
by no means excluded. On 'l-wirvo-i'and virriu) I have stated
my
views
on
p.
184. The
occm-rence of the
longer
form iriTriu)
by
the side
of
TTiTyit) was sufiicient to mark
tmrroy as an aorist. But it is worih
noticing
that the
use
of this vei'b is limited to the
poets.
But
pei'haps
there
are
still
some other forms to be
placed
here. If
in the
case of
yiyru-fxui
we start,
not from the fundamental form
ytv
which
appears
in
yei'iaOai,
yeyoya,
yiroc,ahiyevirrj-c,
but from the root
ya
which
occurs
in
ye-ya-ioc,
ye-ya-uai,
then in the stem
ye-ro,
justas
in the 8kt.
})i'esent (ja-nd-mi,
the second
syllable
must be
i-egarded
as an
expansion (p.272).
This is the
explanation
of the fact
that, as we saw
on
p.
276, a-ijana-'iita
is
I'egarded
as an
imperfect,i-yiro-vTo as an
aorist. Of the
same- nature is
"-x")'o-j',
undoubtedlyan aorist,by
the
side of
x"'T'-'f.
But if Gustav
Meyer (Die
mit Nasalen
gebildeten
Prasensstjimme,
p. 50)
is
right
in
starting
with the root
X"
for both
presents,
x"-''''
is
an
extended form
just as
much
as
yjn-OKo
(cp.
above
p.
197, Principles,
i.
p. 241).
It is much the
same Avith Kavtlv and
KTdi'tly. Here too we ai-e
brought
to a root in
o,
with which however
the nasal
coming
from the
extending syllable-na soon became incor- porated.
Cp.
pp.
130, 216,
Gustav
Meyer
op.
cit.
p.
33. We
ought
not
perhaps
to attach much
importance
to the
gloss
of
Hesych. K-uyeiy
"
KTEiytiy,
for this
may
well be an error for Kravtly.
4)
Other aorists of
secondaiy
foi-mation.
Thei-e
are still
a number of isolated forms
remainLng.
A suffix
-ko
is
clearly
shown in 'i-KTu-Ko-y
(i^arawrdKMy
Aesch. Eum.
532),by
the
side of the Homeric
Karo-7n-//-7?/r.
The
expanded
stem also underlies
the
present
TrrZ/ao-w.
With these formations
we
may
connect
k-fl/j/cn,
13 'f.-i]K(t,
i-lwKci with their
a
which reminds
us of the
sigmatic
aorist: to
these
we shall return below. " The
y
iii
t-Tjxayo-y may probably
be
regarded as a weakened
k (cp.Principles,
i.
273). i']f.i-XaKoy
too
does not look
very primitive,
but the
etymology jJi'esents
difficulties.
The relation of the Homeric
'i-')(j}ai(TfXE
etc. with the much later
j^pmcrfxiut
was discussed on
p.
259.
xpai(Tf.i()
is
an
adjective
stem from
XP"-"''/'"
(later-^Qyii-ai ^o-t)
formed like
^n'/ie^to-r,
hence the verbal form
t-^pairr^t
is
just as
closely
related to the nomi-stem
XP"'""/'"
as
the Homeric
(h'f"fit-r") to the stem of
iiep^ia-c.
In tiie
cose
of
i^fiaia^u
the absence of
a
similarly
formed indicative
present gives
occasion for its aoristic force.
" A suffix
-po
is
possibly
to be found in the aorist
i'lyapo-y, though
thifi
does
not occur before Pindar
:
the origin of the word is obscure. But the
derivation from
tyapa
'arms' is
rightlyrejected:
Pindar's
phrase(Nem.
X.
15)
iy
okXoiq hape
goes especiallyagainst
it.
Perhaps
the word
CH. xui.
XOX-REDUPLICATED THEMATIC AOEISTS. 283
comes
from the rt. son (Skt.
pres.
sanoml)
'
to -svin,'
'
to
acquire,'
which
on
p.
122 "we thought we
discovered in
arvw,
and to which
probably
-h'-Ti]-c
in
avTci-it'Tij-c, av6iiT7]-cbelongs.
From the rt. sen comes
the
Skt.
san-ara gain,booty,
from which
we easily
arrive on the one
hand
at -o
ticipa
(spolia),
on
the other at
ivuipio
i.e.
ii'cip-jw,
'to make
booty
of,'
'
to
acquii-e.'
An ^suffix
possiblyoccurs
in
uxfj-eXo-r
and
w0\o-)',
but I do not know
any
satisfactory etymology.
The aorists e-^outto-j'
(fu'st
in the
Anthology),iTT-avp-tl)',
and
tvp-eli'
show
by
their
diphthongs
that
they can hardly
be
radical,
but their
etymology
is
unexplained.
As
"(o-^w
is
probablyrightlyregarded
as a leduplicatedpresent,
we
have in
ijj.iTZKjyo-p.riv
(Aristoph.)
an
aorist with
present
reduplication,
which
only
derives this force from contrast with
anTrinyj-vin-'fxai.
Finally
the aorist
w
(7^,00-^/ "/r,
found fii'stin
Aristoph.
and for which
Herodotus has
u)ff(j)pcii.tr]t',
has come
from
a compound
stem. For as we
cannot fail to see
here the rt.
oc
{o^^uj),
the second element of the word
must contain
a
second root.
6(7-ippo
for
6S-(l)po
appears
to be a compound
of the nature of
Kap-!vo-"p6p(i-c, (f)U)"-(p6po-c,
but to be
compared
because of
the
rejection
of the vowel with
ci-(ppo-Q.
We have
actuallyauthoi'ity
in
14-
later time for the substantive
6a(ppaz=6(iuli.
oa-cijpo
has its
counterpart
in
ol-facio : oacppaij'o/JUL
is
a
later
expansion.
So various are the foi'ms which
may
be united under
one common
category.
I
now
give
a
list of the thematic
aorists,
which
are not
reduplicated,
arrangedaccording
to the initial letter of the stems :
and hence I
gene-
I'ally quote
the
infinitive,
in which the initial comes clearly
into
promi- nence.
The
only exception
is in the
case of isolated
forms,
not
existing
in the infinitive.
1) uyyeXtli'. Certainly
established in Anthol. vii.
614,
9
ca/.iu"
c'ayyfXer/jj',
elsewhere
usually
with various
readings:
e.g.
Herod, iv. 153
cnr}']yye\or (v.
1.
XX),Lyciirg."
85. Mid. still less authenticated,
2) ayEpiatiai/3385,
also accented
uyipeoOai (Lobeck
Rhemat.
132),
ayipcrro
B
94, part.
aypvfxeyoQ cp. p.
279.
3)
uhlv. Established from
Homer, Pindar, Herodotus,
and
Sopho- cles
(Antig.89).
For
eacor,
evucoy
p.
79. Mid. isolated and late.
4)
cuffdiaOui common
from
Aeschylus (Prom.
Y.
957)
onwards.
5) T/Xcu*'*diticussedon
p.
282.
6)
aXeadcu.
aXijTui
^
536, aXo/./fj'a
Acsch. Eum. Sue
ch,,clQaXoifirjy
Soph.
Fr. 695 Dind.
iii'iXov
M.SS. Aesch. Pers.
516,
altered
by
some
editors into
irj/Wou,
because this aorist is not
regarded
as good
Attic
;
'
forma barbara
'
Cobet. IST.L. 454. For uX-o
see
p.
90.
7)
aXire'tv.
ijXi-ey
p.
262, aAirwi' Aescll. Eum. 316.
'Adi]i'ai7]y
aXiTOVTO
" 108,
aXiriaOai.
C
378.
8) 7]X(f)or
"i"
79, iiXipoi
o
453
;
these Homeric forms
are regarded as
aoiistic
only
because the
present uXcpurujoccurs
(according
to
Veitch)
three times in Eur. and
Aristoph.
9) afiapTtlv
fi'om Homer onwards
:
ajiupT
A 491
(withimpf.{ifiuprave
K
372),
ufiaprwv
"^ 857. Also
i'jm^paroy
(j"
425 etc.
10) ct/Li7r/\a"v"7)' poetic
aorist with the
bye-form i/ju/BXa/vO-r,
established
from Archil. Fr. 73 B^.
Cp.
p.
195.
284
THEMATIC AORISTS. ck. xiii.
11) apt!)',
only (ipoi
from
qmte
late
prose;
but
very
commonly
i'tpetrOui
in
poets
from Homer onwards
: ti)v
aper
t/c
TuiCoio A
625,
15
/iktHui' apyjrai
M
435,
kXIoq
eaBXoy
apolfirjv
S
121, kvcoq iipiadcu
U
88,
TTtiSotr KXoTrav
apidhu Soph. Aj. 248, never
with
any
other
meaning
than that of
acquiring,gaining,
and hence
belonging
to the
present
apvvfiai
(p.110).
As
a'ipio
is contracted from
ae'ipu) (poet.
: to this
belong (iepBev, iieptdoyrai)
the aorist forms with
a
short
a cannot
possibly
have
anything
in
common
with
aetpa)
or uipw. Cp. Principles,
1.
425,
442.
Buttmann,
ii^. 100 was
led
astray by
the
parallelism
of
cif/pwa'ipw
with
(jxieh'u) fulvu).
But while
aelpd)(p.215)
is the form
invariably
used in
Homer,
it is the
opposite
with
^aivw.cpaeivw
occurs only
in a
very
limited
application,
so
that the shorter form has
cei"tainly
not come
from the
longer,
derived from
(jkioc.
12) (ipetT6ai 'take,'
in the Locrian
inscription
from
Naupactus [Cauer
I).
Ill,
B.
18]
1. 32
Tuv (iKui' Tvpo^iQov
apearai
tvotvvq LiKarrrfipuc,apetrrai
Kcil
cufiet',
(cp.
Stud. ii.
448),
either from the rt.
up,
which underlies
the
present a'lpeu),
or
with
a
change
of
breathing (cp.ay""'=ay"n')
for
apiaOai,
and hence akin to the
preceding
word. The former is the
more
probable
because of the common
formula
ckrjyXaiJelv.
13) inavptiv,
almost
exclusivelypoetical:
^"/
tic xf^^"X"^'"'?-' ^'"''^vprj
N
649, tiravpifXEv
S
302,
middle eiravoiaOai A 4lO
[iTravpojyrai), iTzavpoiru
Herod, vii. 180.
14) ftaXiiv,[jdXiaduicommon
in all Greek from Homer
(II
618,
B 45
etc.)
downwards. Arcad.
'ii^eXev tlmXey Hesych.
15) i-[iXufif.-v only
in
Quint. Smyrn.
v. 509, rb] rv toi (.i3Xaj3Ev
ifTop; cp. p.
275.
16) ftXa(TTtiy
in Pindar
(01.
vii.
69),
Herod,
(vii.156),
and the
.ilramatic
poets (Soph.
El.
238).
17) j^payelvpoetical
from Homer
(E.863)
downwards.
18)
jopvxtiv
'bite,'only
in Anth. ix. 252
(i'/jpuxf)-
19)
yiyiaQai common
in all writers from Homer downwards.
20) yooy
3
pi.probablyonly
in Z 500
at p-lveti i^wuy"yuoy"Ei:Topa.
21)
e-^ae-y
only
in
Apollon.
Rhod. iv. 989 etc. with the
meaning
-'taught'
(hence=
?"?""-
1').
22) Cu)]rai only
in Y
316,
$ 375
ottot ay
TpoltjfiaXep^ rrvpi
Trdtra
^arjTui.
Rt.
^av,dap,
hence for
*laFT]rai.
23) cciKely,common especially
in the
poets
from Homer
(E 493)
downwards.
16
24) capdeh',
common
in
poetry
and
prose
in
composition
with
raro,
KariipcBoy xp18, Ku^C'padirrjy o 494, KcireBapdoy
Thuc. vi. 61.
25) ru-"ti' an
isolated
post-Homeric poetic
aorist
:
Pind. 01.
x. 72,
i^iKE
TTtrpu),
Aesch.
Choeph.
99
ciKovrm.
26) i-covwe,
Kar-i-Sovire
only
in Anth. vii. 637.
27) cpciKely
in
poetry
from Homer onwai'ds
(e^patcoy
k 197),l-dpai:6-fit]v
Anth. vii. 224.
28) dpcifisTy
common
from Homer
(S 30)
downwards.
29)
cpuTTujy
only
in Pind.
Pyth.
iv. 130.
30) EyplaOdi.
typETu
o It, viryov
B
41, Kuy
typ)] f^efftjidjopiyog
Ar.
Vesp. 774,
EypEo
K
159, lypEtrdcu1' 124, Et,Eyi)i(TBai, iiEypo^Eyoq
Plat.
Symp.
p.
223 C.
31) IXeTi',
kXiaQai
common
from Homer downwards.
32) ffXvdo-y,
IXdEly. The
trisyllabic
form is limited to the indicative,
CH. XIII.
NOX-REDUPLICATED THEMATIC AOELSTS. 285
and occiu's only
in
Hoiner, Pindar, and, especially
in melic
passages,
in
the
tragedians: K
28, Soph. Aj.
234
:
the
disyllabic
from Homer down- wards
{7iX0orc
82)
as
the \isnal form in the
indicative,
and the exclusive
form in the
conjunctive,optative
etc.: i\6oi E 301 occurs at all dates
.
and in all dialects. Hence Dor. 7]i6oy
(Epicharmus,Theocritus),
Lacou.
7i\aoy,
i\(Twr
(Aristoph. Lys. 105).
33) eiape'ii',
llEvapi'iv
Hes. Sc.
329, hupor
from Pindar
(Nem. x. 15)
downwards.
Cp. p.
282.
34) ipiadai
from Homer onwards
commonly
used in all
moods,
the
infin. and the
participle.
35) epiKE~iv, ypiKE
c' nnrolaaeia
Kopvg
Trepl
covpuc
uKioKrj
P
29.5,Soph,
Fr. 164 Dind.
36) tpi-iir,i']pnre
c'
e^
ox^'wi/
E
47,
epnrojv
9
329,
isolated in other
poets
and in
Hippocrates, ijpnro^uv
Agathias
Anth. P. ix. 152.
37) epvyCiv
in
Homer, perhaps
also in Callimachus Fr. 246
(ed.
O. Schneider ii.
p. 485)
with the
meaning
'
roar
'
(iipvye
Y
403),
later
(also
in
Aristot.)
'
vomere
'
Ar.
Yesp.
913
iri^pvyw,
cp. p.
155.
38) tvptlv,EvpiffBai
from Homer downwards in
ordinary
Greek.
39)
air-Eyhi.-(jdai,
from Homer
onwards;
in $ 83 I. Bekker writes
.
airix^eaeai,
but
cp.
Eur. Med. 290
Elmsley,
Dind.
Kpficrcrov
8e
fj.oi
vvv
npos
a'
cnvex"i(T6ai,
yvvai,
\'J
rj
p.aX6aKta6ev6
varepou peya
crreveiv
where the aorist force is miich the
more suitable.
40) OaXe, a
very
doubtful
reading
in
Hymn.
Homer, xix.
33,
for
which Euhnken
conjectvires
Xude
: cti
oQaXfTj- often
occurs
in the New
Test, and LXX.
41)
dcu't'ii'from Homer onwards
very common, especially
in
com- position
with
OTTO
and
Kara.
42) deie'tr,
established from Pindar
(01.7,
28
Oerwr),Eurip.(HeracL
271)
and
Aristoph.(Lys.821).
43) Oiyt'ir
occurs
in Pindar
(diyor
Isthm. i.
18),
in the
tragedians,
Hippocrates,Xenophon,
and in later
poetry
and
prose (Aristot.). aiyiiy
is Laconian "
Aristoph.Lys.
1004.
diyearBai
Themistius.
44) dopeli'
from Homer onwards
(dope
'^
509)especially
in the
poets:
vTrepdopeli'
Herod, vi. 134.
45) Icelr,
iceadat in all Greek.
46)
kiffOai common
from Homer
onwards,
in
prose
for the most
part
only
in
composition
with
utto,
iwl.
47)
a/u--t(7X"n ,
afiTr-iff)(^e(TduL,
both established from
Aristoph.
(Eccl.
540),
the former from
Eurip.(Ion
1159
i]niTi(T\(.r)
and Plato
Protag.320.
Cp. p.
283.
48) Kct^fli'
from Homer onwards,
in
poetry
and
prose, Kafiiadai
2
341,
iKfif-iorro
I
130.
49)
Kave'iy in the
tragedians(Aesch.Sept.630)
and Theocritus.
50)
Kidi'
cp. p.
276.
51)
/v-t)("(j'cp. p.
121
j
in
poetry
from Homer onwards;
y
169 Ir
52) e-i;Xay"i-v
a rare
poetical
aorist of /cXcU'w
Hymn.
Horn. xix. 14.
ai'iKXayoi'
Eur.
Iph.
A. 1062.
53) (cpctyfTc
from Homer onwards
(^467)frequentlyin poetry
and
prose.
54)
KpiKE
only
in U 470
Kpke
le
^vyor.
286 THEMATIC AOEISTS.
ch. xiii.
55) cpvfteli'
first iu
Apollodorus,
in New
Test.,
and in Plutarch.
5G)
KTaveli' poetical
from Homer onwards
(B 701)
and in late
prose.
57)
'i-KTvne
poetical,^tcyaXa KTvwe Q
75, (.Krvwei' aldijpSoph.
0. C.
U56.
58)
Kvde
perhapsonly
in
y
16
oiriw
Kvde
yam.
59)
Xafttlv,XaljirrBai
in all Greek.
18
60)
Xadeh;
XaOetrOai in all Greek.
61)
Xatci'iy
poetical(X/iKe
S
25,
XaKtiv
Soph.
Ant.
1094),
62) Xa')(jui'
in all Greek.
63^Xineiv,
XiTTErrdai
univei'sally
used.
64)
Xiriffdai n
47, XiTol^T]}'
E,406.
65) /.ladeh'
common
from Homer onwards
[fiaOov
Z
444).
6G)
fiuKU),',
n
469, K 163, a- 98, r
454.
67) i^iaTrhu'
Hes. Scut.
231,
304.
68) /j-oXe'ii' poetical
from Homer onwards
[/j-oXr]
Q.
781,
^oXovaci
Z
286),
also in
Xenojihon
and in late
prose.
69) '(.fiixopo-r
first in Alexandrine
poets
: Apollon.
Rliod. iii.4
'i^^optc,
iv.
62, probably
fi'om a
misunderstanding
of the Homeric
'if^ij-iopi
A
278,
which will have to be discussed under the head of the
perfect[l^elow
p.
131
marg.].
70)
nvKo-y
only
in E 749 wvXaL
fivtcov
and
y
260
rxnicoc
i^tvKe.
71)
oXecrOai
frequent
from Homer
onwards, especially
in
composition
with c'lTTO.
71b)
uXiffdely aXiffOe Y
470,
$ 774,wXtade Attic
poets
and later writers.
72)
ofiapre-i'
a late-formed aorist from
oixapriu) only
in
Oii^h.Arg.
511,
cp. p.
281.
73) uipe-To
M
279,
X
102,
opoiro
^ 522, oinroT
epig
"
upijrai
Hes.
Theog. 782, 6p6fiEi'o-c
in the
tragedians(Aesch. Sept.115). Cp. tLpro
p.
131. On the other hand
opovTo y
471 is the
impf.
from rt.
fop 'see,
watch.'
Cp. p.
144.
74) 6(r(ppi-(Tdai
established from the comedians
(Ar.
Ach.
179)
and
late
prose.
75) ""p"Xo-i'
from Homer
(wgwcpsXec
avrod^ oXiadcu T
428)
onwards
commonly-
used iu all Greek for
wishes, resembling
the
usage
of
o(p"iXw.
"
u)(j)Xo-i' differing
fi-omthis
only by
the
syncope,
in
a specialmeaning,
'
I
was indebted,'
hence more
agreeing
in
use with
ocpXiaKuvw,
in Herodotus
i(t"t\///r aif/)X"
viii.
26)
and Attic writers. The
present o^Aw quoted
from
JDio
Chrj'sostom
and
Appiau
seems to be
a
later foi-mation.
76)
TTuOt'ii'in all Greek.
77) Tzapleiv abundantly
established from the
comedians,
in
composi- tion
with
OTTO,
Kara
etc.
(Aristoph.
Pax.
547).
78)
irere'iy Aeolo-Doric,
established from Alcaeus
(eTreTcy
Fr. 60
B')
and Pindar
(efXTrtreQ Pyth.
viii,
81).
The other form
commonly
in
use
from Homer
[wiatv
S
460)
downwards will have to be discussed in
Chapter
XVII.
[p.
284
marg.].
19
79)
TtiEiy in all Greek.
Cp.
7r7-0ietc.
p,
129.
80)
irSiiy from Pindar onwards
{-KiBuyPj-th.
iii.
28)
here and there
in
poets.
TridffrOaiin
poetry
from Homer onwards
[lirlBoyTo
F
260,
cp.
C. I. A. ii.
38, 4).
81)
TTLTytiy in Pindar and the
tragedians;
cp. pp.
184 and 282,
82)
n^t-TTiKe.
((Wo
av
f-itv
yvy arPjBi
kciI
afiTryve
X
222,
3
sing,
in
Quiut.
Sm}i"n. Cp.
ufiTvyv-o p.
129,
CH. XIII.
NON-EEDUPLICATED
THEMATIC AORISTS.
287
83) Tzopeiv
in
poets
from Homer onwards
(imper.irope
I
513,
iropwy
n
178).
84)
TTfyaOtir
in Homer
{cicnrpaOUiv
race
iiffrv H
32)
and Pindar
{ETTpadE Pytll.
ix.
81).
85)
Kn7-a-7rra".w"' only
in Aesch. Eiim. 252.
86)
TT-opEtr
common
from Homer onwards
(p
541
Tj^Xe'^axoc
^"
y^f'y'
"TrTapE)'):
from
Hippocrates
a conjunctive
middle
Trraprjrai
is also
quoted.
87)
TT-i-ffdai
cp.
above
p.
280', Veitch
p.
468.
88)
Trvdi-rjBaL in all Greek.
89) (TVf-eppaf"-i'
only
in Nonnus Dion. vii. 152
jujjpw
2e
avrippacpEv.
90) EppK^E-y
only
in
Oppian Cyneget.
iv. 350.
91) aTrapi-rrBai
a
doubtful
reading
in
Polyaen.
viii. 26. Others
{nrEtperrBai. Cp. Veitch,
p.
529.
I)
and Herodotus
{TVfpiE(nrE
vi.
44).
" airE-nBai
(with
the
redupli
l-aTTtaBai)
in
Homer, Herodotus,
and Attic writers
{Tpwmv
afia
mrEfrBai
E 423
(v.
1.
kaizEadai),
(ttteIo K
285,
kiriaTri] Soph.
El,
967,
ETtCTTro/itroi
Thuc.
V. 11).
93)
aiTEly
'say,'Evi-airo-y,
from Homer ^onwards
(B 80,
lyi-mroi
S
107).
The
imperativee-cjite-te pei^haps
for h-mvE-vE.
Cp.
above
p.
280.
94) E-ariftE-y
ETTuXvyEv
Hesych.
95) (TTixfiy
n 258
effrtx^r,
then in Alexandrine
poets
:
for the traces
.
of a
present (rri^io cp. p.
155.
96) (TTvyEly
rare in Homer and later
poets (kutU
3'
eorvyor
avn'iy
K 113, Apollon
Rhod. ii.
1196).
97)
(Tx^'ii', (Tx^-'rBai
in all Greek. For
^xe'-ccp. pp.
132,
279.
98) TuidEly,Taj^iE-aBdi
are
the forms usual in
Homer,
Herodotus and 20
Pindar,
instead of which we have in Attic
te^ieIv, refiiaBai(jEHEyoQ
rcifioi'
Y
184, TcijiiaBai
Herod, v, 82. "
rEfiovaa
Soph.
El.
449, 'izEfjioy
Isoci-.
8, 100).
99) TutiivwfXEBa only
in the
phrase TupirwiiEBaKoifxrjBeyrEt:
il
636,
a
295, xp
255.
100) Ta(f)E7y
here and there in
poets
from Homer onwards
(ra^wj'
h'
dyopovcTEy
'
AxiXXevg
'*P
101).
101)
-EKEJy in all Greek.
102) Si-E-Tfiayo-y only
in
tj
276 ro^e
XcuTfiadiirnayoy.
103)E-TopE
only
in A 236 oi/o'
ETopE
^worj/pn.
104) TpayElv
established from Attic comedians
(Ai-istoph.
Ach.
809),
Hippocrates
and late
prose.
105) Tpa-n-Ely, Tpawi-aBai common
from Homer
(Y 439,
II
594)
onwards
;
the middle not unknown even to Attic
prose.
106) Tpa(j)E~ir,
transitive
ErpcifE
t EyCvKEwq (v.
1.
ErpE(pE)
^
90, rpa^e
Pind. Nem. iii.
53,
intransitive
'grow up'
E 555 and elsewhere:
so
in
'
later
poets.
107) Tvire'iy,
the
only
evidence in
early
times is Eur. Ion 767
(kVuTTEj'),
then first in Achilles Tatius.
108)
TvyEiy
in all Greek.
109)(payE~iy
the same.
110) fayEtrOai
a
doubtful
reading
in Xen.
Cyi\
iii.
1,
34
{(pavoifj.i]r),
imper.(jx'ivEv'in
a
Laconian
saying
in Stobaeus Floril.
108,
83.
111) E-(pXaco-y.
Xact'SfC
E(j)XaC()y
utt'
aXyemy
Aesch.
Choeph.
28.
288 THEMATIC AOEISTS.
.
ch. xiiu
112) "l"pcicey
tXtyti'Hesych., i(}"fmhEv' tcijXioaevih.
113) (pvyElv
in all Greek.
114)
x"C"u
established from Homer
(A 24),
the
Anthology
and
Hippocrates.
115) xa'f'''
from Homer
(ro-e
fxoi xorot Evptiax^wj/
G
150)onwards^
established
mainly
from
poets,
but also from Herodotus and
Hip- pocrates.
116) x"po-j'7-o
only quoted
from
Quintus Smyi-n.
vi. 315
Tpwec
2''
"7rt
iiciKpa "^(CipOVTO.
117)
e-xpaifTfiv-i', Ttl^oQ
c'
ovK
'ixpaifTfie jtTvyfiivov
S 66, X(mit7f.ir}
() 32
etc.,
then in
Apollon.
Rhod.
(ii,
218
X|0"''^i""''ei^oi).
21
II. AORISTS AVITH REDUPLICATION.
The aorists to be discussed here
come from the
reduplicated
stem in
just
the same
way
as
those hitherto discussed from the
non-reduplicated
stem. The
reduplication
therefore
serves
to
strengthen
and
bring
into
prominence
the verbal stem. After
my
elaborate attack in
Tempora
7md Modi
pp.
150 ff.
on
the view till then
generallyaccepted,
that
re- duplication
served to mark the
tense,
and was akin to the
augment,
it
is
hardlynecessary
at
the'
present
time to return to this
question.
For
the
position
which I then established is
now
universally
admitted for
Greek,
e.g. by
Kiihner Ausf Gr. ii.
513,
and has been laid down
by
Schleicher
Comp.^.p.
739 for the
corresponding
forms in Sanskrit and
Zend..
Reduplication,
that is to
say
the
repetition
" actual
or
suggested
of the
stem, can
have had no other
purpose
than to
bring
the stem into
prominence.
We have
already(p.8)
had occasion to notice this
primitive
linguisticresource employed
in this
way,
and we discussed on
p.
105
its
occurrence
in the
present,
aorist and
perfect-
stem
indifferently.
Hence it admits of
no
doubt that
reduplication,
like the thematic
vowel,
was
in
no
way
intended
originally
to denote the nature of the tense.
For it is excluded from no one
of the three kinds of tenses. We
can
look
back to
a
time when
language
formed both
a
present
and
a
past
on
the
one
hand from the
pure,
on
the other from the
reduplicated
root :
thus from
da dd-mi dadd-vii
a-dCi-m a-dadd-m
tarp tarpa-mi tatarpa-mi
a-tarpa-m a-tatarpa-m,
The
only
reason why
in the first instance the form without redu- plication
became
an aoiist,was
that the
present
indicative without
re- duplication
fell out of
use.
On the other hand the
reduplicated
a-tatarpa-m (cp.TSTupTren,) gained
an aorist
force,
because the non-
reduplicated
form here
serves as
the
present
indicative. Hence so
far
we
recognise
the closest
analogy
with the relations
already
discussed.
22 But
a new influence
steps
in from the foct that we
have
a
thii'd
com- peting
tense,
the
perfect,
which
we
shall learn to
regard
as a
si)ecial
ramification from the
reduplicatedpresent,
and this
competition
is of the
greatest importance
for the Greek
reduplicated
aorists. For the
aorist,
like the
perfect,
is
distinguished
from the
present-stem
in Greek
by
that
delicate
iihonetic law,
which we touched
upon
on
pp.
135 and 189. The
vowel
t
is used without
exception
for the
reduplication
of the
present-stem;
but
never for the aorist and the
perfect
:
here
we
find lor the most
part
CH. xni.
KEBUPLICATION IN THE AORIST. 289
the vowel
e.
This remarkable differentiation Delbriick thinks he can
show as beginning
even
in the Inclo-Clermanic
time,
inasmuch as in
Sanskrit the i
similarlyappears,
though onlysporathcally,
in the
present-
stem,
while it is
absolutely
unknown to the
perfect.
Hence
ti-shfhd-mi is to the Doric
i-ara-fjn
and Lat. sisto
precisely
as ta-shtlidu is to Gr.
"-oTu-/.t")'
and Lat. ste-ti.
But Sanskrit treats the aoiist in two
ways.
The a
is
predominant,
and to this
again
a
Gi-eek
e corresponds, e
g.
a-pa-pta-m (Iflew)
like
e-re-r^o-v,
but in
many cases, especially
ia the forms with
a
causative
meaning,i
appears,
though
the
length
is not
always preserved,
and it is therefore
regardedby
Delbriick
(p.
109
ff.)
as later than the short
vowel;
e.g.
a-pi-pata-t (he
made to
fall)differing
from
e-we-tpve
and of like formation with. the
impf."-7rI-7r-f,
which in
meaning
attaches
itselfto the intransitive
7ri~-w.
By
means
of this difference in the vowel Greek avoids
any
confusion
of
reduplicated
aorists with
present-stems.
But the aorists come
thereby .
all the nearer to the
perfects.
As in Sanskrit there are
past tenses,
with
i-egard
to which there
may
be a
doubt whether
they
have
come
from the
perfect-stemby prefixing
the
augment,
and hence whether
according
to the usual
terminology,they
are
pluperfects
or
reduplicated
aorists,
so
also in Greek, For Sanskrit Delbriick has
thoroughly
dis- cussed
these
questions,
and has
assigned
to some verbs, partly
on
the
groimd
of their
form,
and
partly
from
regard
to their
specialforce,a
place
in close connexion with the
perfect,
while he has made
a
gi-eater23
separation
in the case of
others,though
on the whole he has
recognised
the common origin
of all
reduplicated
forms. I
entirely
agree
with
bim in
this,
and believe that we must deal in
precisely
the same
way
with Greek.
Everj'thing
leads us to the conclusion that the
reduplicated
form was at first
only distinguished
from the
non-reduplicated by
the
fact that the former
represented
the action
as more intensive. From this
common
stem on
the one
hand the
perfect
was
developed,originally
mei'ely
an
intensive
present,though graduallyby special
modifications
of the
endings
it
gi'ew
into
a special
form of
language.
We shall have
to discuss this
fully
in
Chap.
XYI. But
on
the other side from the same
stem the
reduplicated
aorist
grew,
and this
againseparated
itself from the
forms of the
perfect-stem, mainly by
the
identity
of its
endings
with those
of the
non-reduplicated
aorist. In the
past tense,
that
is,according
to
the usual
termmology,
in the aorist
indicative,a
confusion with the
pluperfect
was generally
the less
possible,
that for this tense a compoimd
formation
(1 sing,
-ea, -r], -eir)
became almost universal in the
active,
while the forms of the
perfect-stem
in the middle were sufficiently
dis-
tmguished
from the middle
reduplicated
aorists
by
the entii'e lack of the
thematic
vowel. The
perfect-stem
besides has in Greek
a preference
for
the
long stem-syllable,
the
aorist,including
the
reduplicated,
for the
shorf,
and in fact for
syncope
: so
that
care
is thus taken that even the
unaugmented
form of the 3
sing,
aor,
tteViQe is
distinguished
from the
perfect
Triiroid^.
In
spite
of this delicate means of
discrimination,
there
are some cases
u
290 THEMATIC AORISTS.
ch. xiii.
in which
a
decision is not
immediately possible,
i-efvi^o)' (Hes.Theog,
152)
is shown
by
its i.-
and
by
its
meaning
to be a
pluperfect.
But both
these
proofs
are wanting
in
f.-nifii]Ko-i',
for the
only
passage
in which the
3
pliir.
occurs (i439),
OffKfiai
8'
"fiffir]KOV
dvrjfxeXKTOL ireplcnjKovi,
gives
no
safe criteria. But we
have
a word of
exactly
the
same
forma- tion
in
eiriTrXrjyov,
which occurs rdore
frequently,
and which is
accom- panied
also
by
middle forms : E 504
Of
pa
(i.e. KovLaaXov)
""^
ovpavov
(s TroXv)(^aXKOv firiTrK'qyov
TrdSes Ittttcov
:
cp.
"*!'363
iriTrXriyov
c'
i^affiv,
and fui'ther 11 728
TrsTrXrjyei^ifr,
which
recui'S
"^
660,
and 6 264
TTETrXrjyoi'
Se
"^ophi'
6e2ot' jroalr. As this form is
accompanied by
the
equivalentpresentperfectireTrXijyu (part.7r"7r\/;ywc),
and
as we
find here the
length
usual in the
perfect,
we
shall be inclined
to take
"fff7r\?;yoi'
as a
pluperfect,
and to form the
same
judgment
as
to
eidif-ajKoy,
which is
accompanied by
the
-synonymous fjeidtjKWQ
fem.
f.ieiiaKvla.
The
objection
may
be
made,
that the infin.
neTrXijyifxeu
and the middle forms
TreTrXi'iyeTO (M 162, r 198) ireTrXijyovTO (S 51)
prove
by
their thematic vowel that
they
have
nothing
in common
with
forms like
-HETrXriyMQ
and the
post-Homeric TtinXip/fxuL.
But this
objec- tion
does not hold
good,
for in the fii-st
place
late
poets
have the
by-form
of the
participle TTETrXZ/yoiTf c
in
a
present
sense
(Callim.
H. in Jov.
53,
Nonnus),
and
secondly
other instances are not
wanting
in which this
vowel makes its
way
into
immistakeablyperfect
forms after the
analogy
of the
present.
The Homeric
ictKXi^yoi'Tec,
well established in M 125
(cp.
La Roche Textkritik
p.
296,
0. Schneider ad Callim. i.
151) by
the
side of the
singularKeKXr]yo}Q
B
222,
is sutHcient to show that no absolute
distinction is
possible.
" We
might
add to these forms
eKf^payot',
if its
case was more
certain. In Anth. Pal.
v. 87,
2 we
find
K-fk-pdyer,
but the context
requires
rather the
present,
and
we are
tempted
for
KEKpuytv
u)c
to read
KiKpay wq.
There is
only
one
testimony
for
tKEKpayor
left,
and that from the LXX. "
XeXuKorTn, only
in
Hymn,
in Merc.
145, though
it has
a
short
a,
shows
by
its
mean- ing
'
they
bellowed
'
the closest connexion with the fem.
part.
XtXa-
Kvla
/x
85,
which also has
a
short
a,
so
that we
may
regard
it as a
pluperfect just as
well
as
kj.iepr)Kor.
" The same
holds
good
of some im- peratives
foi'med without
a
thematic
vowel,
which
properly
do not be- long
to this
gi'oup,
but which
may
be discussed here because of their
isolated
position.
The Homeric Kt-KXv-Qi
(plur./.f'-vXu-rt, occurring
also
25 once in Find,
Pyth.
iv.
13)
is to the rt. kXv
precisely
as
ri-rXa-Oi is to
rt. tXci. It is of
no
consequence
that the latter comes
by
metathesis
from raX. Of the
same nature is
t:e-Kpax-Oi.
The
reason why
ri-XaOi
and
ktKpnxf^i
are
regarded
as
perfects
is that
they
are accompanied by
unmistakeable
perfect
forms like
rfVAa/tei' (u311),re-Xyjvla,-"-\?joror,
(vfVpdya,
while these are
entirelywanting
to tctKXvdi. But we can nt) more
talk of
any
specifically perfect
force in
Ki'^pnx^^i
than in KeKXvf)i. The
posi- tion
of the
reduplicated
forms in the verbal
system
is therefore
just
as
clearly
defined
as that of the
non-reduplic;\ted.
In the case
of the latter
the
occurreiico
of
a
i)resent
indicative Ls decisive
;
in the case
of the
former the
occurrence
of
a perfect
incUcative of similar formntion. Iso- lated
forms
are to be
regarded
as
aorists." TreTreiadi
(oririiria-di)
Aesch.
"CH. xm.
VOWELS OF THE REDUPLICATION AND THE STEM. 291
Eum. 599 must be
regarded
as a
perfectimperative
because of its
mean- ing,
whicli
belongsentii-ely
to TrinoSit.
Besides Sanskrit and
Greek,
it is
probably only
in Zend that
we
have traces of
a
reduplicated
aorist
:
these are
pointed
out
by
Schleicher
Comp.'
742. The
only
thematic formation mentioned
by
him is to-
"as/m-_^,
he
wrought,
fromrt. ^ff6Vi=Skt. faksh. The 3
sing.perf.
of the
same
yt.
is in Zend ta-tasha
(cp.
Justi
Handbuch,
p. 133).
Thus here
too the two tenses
sti'ongly
resemble each other.
The
reduplication- syllable
in Greek has
always ".
The
exceptions
are
very
few. In the fii-st
place
there is
a quite
isolated
foi'm,
from
a
stem
beginning
with
a consonant,
in the
participlequoted by Hesych.
"Ka-^w-v KTEivaq (cp.Lobeck,
Rhemat.
9)
which
evidentlybelongs
to the
perf.
7ri-(pa-i-Tai, Tre-ipa-ffdai (cp.fo-vn-c).
We should have
expected tte-
(pojy(cp."-7r"-^i'o-)'), jvistas
the rt.
(pa
'shine'
givesvis
the non-thematic
aorist
"jri-ft]' tcparrj
Hes. We have to mention besides
a
number of
stems
beginning
with
a vowel,
in which we find the so-called Attic
re- duplication,
familiar from the
perfect
formation. This
occiu's in six
aorists,
five of
which,
i.e.
ay-aytli',aK-a-^^elv, aX-aXKslt', a7i--a(jj"7v, ap-antlv
have
a, one,
i.e.
op-opetj'
"
has
o as
the stem- vowel.
Delbriick,
p.
Ill,
points
out some Vedic forms
completelycori-esponding : am-ama-t from
rt.
am
'
damage,'
and with
a
weakened stem- vowel dn-ina-t from rt.
cmi
'
breathe,'
drd-ida-t and
drp-ipa-t
with
a
loss of the
r also,
from the rts.
ard
'
press
'
and
ar-]),
an
expansion
of
ar
'
to fasten in.' This
agi'eement26
is all the
more
remarkable that this kind of
reduplication
is unknown to
Sanskrit in the
perfect.
We shall return to it under the head of the
perfect.
" There is
a case of Attic
reduplication
with
e
in the stem and
reduplication syllables
in
iji'-syicn-r (Principles
i.
p.
384)
from a rt.
tyv,
which is
regularlyinterchanged
with nank
(Lat. nanc-i-sco-r).
In the
Homeric
kreiKeiiEv
T 194 the nasal has
disappeared
with
compensatory
lengthening(Job.Schmidt,
Tocalismus i.
122).
In the
stem-syllable, which, as we saw above, i-ejects a
long vowel,
we have
just
the sa,me
phenomena
as
in- the
non-reduplicated forms,
i.e.
the
preference
for the vowel
o,
wloich
appears
in at least 20 cases out of
41,
and the metathesis and loss of vowels
:
with
regard
to the choice
between the former and the latter of these the same
doubt
presents
itself
as
in the
non-reduplicated
forms. k-Ke-KKE-ro
(rt.keX),'i-ff-n-e-To, e-re-
T^o-v, E--e-(pro-v
are to be
judged just
in the
same
way
as
t-crxo-j',
and
the other words discussed on
p.
279. The
rejection
of
a
p appears
in
/i("-/(07ro-(")'
Hes. Sc. 252
[nairitiv 231, 304),a
process
which finds its
analogy
in the Sanskrit forms
drd-ida-m, drp-lpa-m
mentioned above. "
Contraction after the loss of
a
/
appears
in
'i-fenvo-r,
which Sonne
first in his
Epilegomena
to
Benfey's
Wurzellexikon
(1847)p.
39,
and
then
independently
Ebel Ztschi*. ii. 46
(1853)compared
with the Skt.
a-voJca-in for
*
a-va-valia-m. There
is, however,
one objection
to this
attractive
compai-ison.
The
.diphthong ei
in el-rreTv
occurs even
in
dialects which contract ee
into
rj
:
thus in Alcaeus Fr. 55 Oe'Aw
ti fenrfjy,
though
here the
reading
is not
quite
certain. We should have
expected
/;/7rj/)',
after the
analogy
of
"]^"(; = fl^eg(Sappho29).
And Priscian i.
"
54 does
actuallyquote
an Aeolic
TiTrny.
But in Old Attic also the
common
eTttei'is
always
written with
a
diphthong (Cauer
Stud. viii.
257). Perhaps we must
presuppose
^fe-J-i-o-y formed after the
analogy
of
.
V
2
292 THEMATIC AORISTS. cu. xi
Sanski'it forms like dn-ina-t. The
i
of
6v-ivi]-jxL
and
oir-nr-evdi
arises
from a
similar
weakening.
" kviv'nro-v with the
by-form iiiina-nov,
and
Epvk-aKu-r
are quiteii'regular,
h'-ir-lwe-y,
for which ij'-ii'nrre-yis a
bad
variant,
may
be
simply explained
from
a
mistake
as to the
preposition,
27 just
as
"/)'f7re, Trpoci'iyewe
are
forms
occurring
in the
M.SS.,
which
Bergk
has
adopted
in Find, Nem.
x. 79,Pyth.
iv. 97.
Cp.
Rich. Fritzsche
Stud. vi. 3^32.
ifvina-nov
and
IpvKUKoi'
are so
far
parallel
forms that both
have
apparently
suffered internal
i-eduplication,
and in
spite
of tlie
difference in the vowels of the second
syllable
have
a
in the third. For
yi'iTTUTTot'
Ebel Ztschr. ii.48
following
Pott has
suggested
the
exjilana-
tion from the rt.
'Itt, interchanging
with
hnr,
and in
Principles
ii.
p.
59.
I have
expressed my
concurrence.
Here the
preposition
has received
the
temporal augment.
We must
regardkr-iirjaTre as
the
original
foi-m.
The
syllable ja-K
is
reduplicatedby
'Itt.-The latter form also is
preserved
in the verb 'iTrreaOcii
'
to
damage.'
To luiderstand
tpvK-uKo-v
we must
start from the rt.
hp,
with the
meaning
'
to
watch, guard,'
which I have
discussed in its relation to the Homeric
epvadui,eipvaOdi
in Stud. vi. 272
ff.
Expanded by a
u,
and extended
by a k (cp.oXe-kcj,e-Trra-Ko-y)
we
find
tpvKU)
with the
exclusivelynegative meaning (so
to
say)
'
to ward off' :
this is related to the
meaning
of
etpvadai,
as eipyeiv
*to shut out' is to
e'tpyeiy
'to shut in.'
ep-K-oq
contains the
expansion
without tlie
v.
We
must
therefore,
if
IpvKUKo-y
has
really
been formed
by I'eduplication,
assume
that there were
oiiginally
two
expanded
forms vark and
varuk,
and that the two are here united. I
regard
*varuk-varTia-m as the
original
form. From this
G?ca\e, *varuli-v(ika-m,through
the same loss of
the
r as
that which
we saw in the
case
of rt.
^np-Tr,
and in the Yedic
forms
drd-ida-ni,drjJ-ipa-m,
and then with
a rejection
of the / ^vaj-vJc-
aku-m,
in Greek letters
tpvKaKo-y.
We
may compare
to some extent the
perfectvcp-i^ipua^ai, though
this
only
rests on
the evidence of
grammarians
(cp.Principles
i.
369).
It is
noteworthy
that all
reduplicatedaorists,
Avith the
excej^tion
of
ctyciyei)',
and also of EfVetr and
Ei'ty/cEt)'
which have become
unrecognis- able
as such, owing
to
phoneticaffections, are
limited to the
language
of
poetry,
and for the most
part
find their
place among
the archaisms of
Homer. We will
now give a
list of all such forms.
1) ay-ayeiv
from Homer
(j'/y
ay
" Z
291,
ciyayiy
A
112, j/yciycS'
"E/c7-WjO
X
471)onwards, common
in the active and middle.
2) aK-ay(Eiy,aKax^f^iiai, quoted
from
Homer, Hesiod,
and Alexan- drine
130ets
: fxiya
2'
?/k-ax^"
Xaoy
'A-^aiwy
TI
822, flu/itw
uKaj^wj'
Hes.
28
Theog. 868, iiyrjaTiipiq
c
uKaxoyro
TT
342. The
reduplicated
stem ex- tends
through
all
tenses,awtj^/^'w,
uKaxfirra.
Cp. lixog.
3)
uX-uXKe'ty from Homer onwards in
non-
Attic
poets
: ottwq
ri
f^wi
dXyoc
ftXtiXcotc
V 319, TvoXeixov
Trep
aXa\/ca"j' I
605,
aXciXKe
ce
Xeipwr
Find. Kem. iv. 60. We find also
ciXciXkIj/tu)
in
Apollon.
Phod.
4) (nr-a(pely.
The active
occurs frequently
in
poets
: iTap)]Tru(^"t^ 360,
"^a7r"f/)w"'
Eur. Ion. 704 ch.
;
the middle
only
I
376, ;//
216
(ciTro^ot-o).
Reduplicationoccurs
also in the
present uTracpiiTKb).
5) np-aptly poetic,
roitqre kXvtuc i'lpapereKTwy
^
~12,
ctW
"/"" y
a (jToyiitan i'lpapty (fipu'uc
Soph.
El.
147,
apapoiaro
in
Apoll.
Rhod.
6)
^"-^a"
'taught'only
in the
Odyssey :
0
448, \p
160.
7)
^i-laKi
only
in Anth. xii. 15.
8) iinuy
in all Greek
: Homer, tuivoy
cp, p.
79.
CH. XIII.
EEDUPLICATED AOEISTS. 293
9)
tviviKs
only
in Homer and
QuintiisSmyrn.
'iKeTaoyiSrjy
kvii'tTrev
O
546,
^ 473.
10) ifyiTza-!TE, exclusively
Homeric V 427, u
17.
11) TE-Qiytv ij\paTo, probable reading
in
Hesychius
for
Tedeiyiy.
Lobeck El. i. 155.
Cp. OtyeTr,
p.
285.
12) re-Oop-tlr-
hinnjh'jaaiHesych.,thougli
out of tbe
alphabetical
order.
Cp. doptiy.
13)
Ke-f:ahly,KsicaleaOai,exclusivelyHomeric, dv/j-ov
kuI
i/^i'X'7c
KimCioy A
334, vTTo
de
Tpwec
i^sKacoyTo
A
497,
O 574 :
from the same stem
Kei^acrjacu-/3\a\//ca Hesych.
For the root
cp.
Principles
i. 300.
^
14).
i-ic"-K\t-To
poetic
Z
66,
kekXet' 11 421 etc. kekXev Find. Isthm,
vi.
53,
KtKXol
i-iay
Aesch.
Suppl.
591
ch.,KeKXa/uieyoc Soph.
0. T. 159
ch.,
kekXeo
'
KaXeffoy
Hesych.
Later
poets
form besides
a
present KeKXo/jiai
Apollon.
Rhod. i. 716
((v-e'cAe-af).
In
Hesych. we actually
find the active
kekXeI,or,
as
emended
by
Lobeck Rhem.
112,
icii^Xei. This is the
same
phenomenon
which
we met several times in the
case
of the
non-redupli-
aited aorist.
15)
KE-Kvdco-ai
only
in
4
303 oTror' liy
(TE Euj^iol
KEKvdtoai
kcu avXi).
29
Cp. E-KvOo-ylx
28.5.
16) Xe-Aa/jf-ffOcti only
in 3 388 -dy
-/
e'i
ttmq
irv Cvyato
\o)(rj(Ta^("roe
XEXajjeuOni,
with
XajiEcrBaL
p.
285.
17) XE-XaOn-y,
EKXiXadoy
KiOciptfrriiy (3 pi.)
B
600, \e\o0j7
c' ocvvc'iajv
O
60, on the other hand
XEXaBoiiiL
in the sense
of
Xu.doii.u Apoll.
Rhod.
iii. 779. "
XEXaOoyro,
ovhE aidEy deoi XeXaQorro A
127, /i")r/c
fJiOi
otVet-
Xawy XEXadETdw 11
200,
XEXaHoyro
ce
fxaXocpoTrijEc,
ov i^ihy
fk-XeXaOorr'
Sappho
Fr. 93 B^. The middle
always
means 'to
forget';only
in Hes.
Theog.
471
'
to conceal.'"
There is
a
present
"\-XeXd9w"',
if this is the
rightreading
in Theocr. i. 63 as an
epithet
of Hades.
18)
Xe-Xfk-o-i-o
only Hymn,
in Merc.
145,
cp.
above
p.
290,
for
E-XaKO-v
p.
286.
19) X"-Xa)(o-)', o(ppa TTvpoc /ae
TpCuEC
k"ca
Tpwwv aXo\oi XeXc'i^ukti
daroy-a 11 80
(cp.
O
350,
X
343)."X"Xax"f=^"XO'
Anth. Pal. vii. 341.
20)
/.tE-ficnrn-u-r
Hes. Scut. 252
;
the
reading yf/poc
te jiifxapivoy
ib.
245 is
by
no means
certain.
21) wp-npE
transitive 'aroused'
ra
f-iiy
t
ILvpugte Norog te Copop
ETTai^aq
B 146
(cp.
N
78,
S
712),
intransitive 'rose'
"p!ipE
Qe~ioqIioiIoq
d 539.
22) TTf-TToyo-///-)'
is
quoted
from
Eupolis by
the Scholiasts on S 241
among
aorist forms. There
seems
to me to be no
good ground
for doubt- ing
such
a form, as
is done
by
Buttmann A. Gr. 11^ 273 and Ahrens
Dor. 330.
23)
7r"-7raXwj',
aiXTTEwnXwy
TrpoiEi
coXi)(^6tTKioy eyx^C
F 355.
24) 7rE--apE'iy,
a
reading
well
supported
and
acceptedby Boeckh,
Bergk,
and T. Mommsen in Pind.
Pyth.
ii. 57
kXEvQipa(ppEylTVEirapElv,
with the
meaning
of
ciTrocetifa :
cp.
Hesych. TTE-rrapE'iy
"
EyOEliai,ai^nijyai,
TTETT-apEvtrijioy,Ev(ppa(TTov.
Boeckh in his notae
crificde
rightlyrecognised
in this word
a stem akin to the Lat.
apparere,
but
having nothing
to do
with
TTopE'iy.
25)
7ra0wj',
occurringonly
in
Hesych.,
and discussed
on
p.
291.
26)
TTE-TriSEly.
7rE--ide-(T6in, quoted
from
Homer,
Pindar and later
'
Ke-Kdyiio) a reading, rejectedby
Aristarchus and
Herodian,
for i-rrei
Ke /co^uco
A
168.
Cp.
H 5 iirei
Ke Kafiaxriv,
P 658, and La Eoche
Textkritik,
p.
295.
294 THEMATIC AORISTS. ch. xiii.
poets:
iriTTidEv
(ppivaQHymn,
in
Apoll. Pytb. 97, TreTridwfiev
I
112,
30
TTfTTidfly ib.
184,
TTtTriOwr Pind. Istbm, iv. 90 TTEiriOovaa dviWag
O 26.
" ovt: ftj' ci'i 7-(c
avrip
Tveiridoid'eu avrov dv^if
K 204.
27) i.-TTf.-n\r]yo-v
noltQ 'ItztvmvE 504 and elsewbere in Homer. Otbei-
forms, some middle,
bave been mentioned
above,
p.
290.
28) TTt-TToptli''
covi'ai Hesycb. cp. Trope'n' p.
286.
29) ne-TTvOt-adai,ft Key
f/x"
i^woi"
TrenvdoiT iiri
rijvah'A)(Ot(u"'
Z
50,
K 381
(cp.
A
135).
TVEirvdojirai-
a /.ouo-wfftv 'Arrtcwc
(?)Hesycb.
Ari-
starcb^^s
recognises
tbe
reduplicated
form in Z 50.
30)
e-ani-fflku bas SO completely
coalesced- witb tbe
non-reduplicated
a-KE-adat,
tbat it can only
be
clearlyrecognised
in forms wbicb do not
admit tbe
augment,
like
afx E(nroi^ir)i'
r 579, ct/^i'
Effnirrdui E 423
(accord- ing
to tbe cod. Ambros.
;
otber M.SS.
o/ua
(nriadai),
and stillmove
indu- bitably
in Pind. 01. viii. 11
uriii avv yipuQE(nrr]T ayXaov.
3-1)TE-rayu)}',
ttocoq
TfTaywf
A 591
(cp.
O
23),
witb Lat.
tangOy
old Lat.
conj.tagam [Stud.
v. 431].
32)
TE-TCipTTETO, (IVTClp
ETTEl (ppEalv
yfTl TETUpTTETO
CaiCoXu XsviTaLOy T
19,
TETapTTwfiEfrQa yooio
"^
10,
TETCipTrofjiEyoc
a
310.
33)
E-TE-Tfio-v
in
Homer,
Hesiod and later
poets always
in tbe
meaning
'come
upon,'
etet/ie
A
293, ci(pp' etl
o'ikoi
up.vjif)ya
fajripa
-ETfiijq
I) 15,
TETnoiixEy
Tbeocr. xxv.
61. "
e-tet/jieto
umrETog o\/u?7Orpb. Al'g.
366,
wbere on
tbe
ground
of tbe difference of
meaning
Rubnken and
G. Hermann read
ETE^iyE-o.
34) TE-TOpE-V' ETpWITEy,
iTETOpEV'ETpVirr^TEV, TETOpHJ' TpwrTTf
HeSycb.
Cp.
E-TOpe.
35)
TE-TVKi'ty
only
in
o 77,
94 in tbe
pbrase
CE'nryoy
iyl
/ueyapoic
TETVKEly :
tbe middle is common
in Homer
: rErvKoyro ce
^cii-a A 467 etc.
C\).
Callim. Dian.
50, TErvKolfieda copiroy fx
283,
TETVKiadai 4"428.
36) TE-TVTTorTEQ oulj
Callim. Dian. QO
paidTiipec
")xf^f^i^^''
"
'/" aiajpoy
a/jftoXu^iQ TETVTv6y-EQ.
O. Scbuelder
(ad
Callim. i.
p.
150)
accents
TETVTTuyTEc,
and takes tbe form as a present-Kkeperfect
like
KEKXiiyoi-ec,
but a
perfect
rirvTva is
quite
unknown.
37)
-ETvxriTi, TETvxoiEv
quoted only
from
very
late
poets (INIaximus,
Manetbo).
Biit
tetv^v^i-
was recognisedeven by
Aristarcbus and bis
commentator Aristonicus
on
A 116
as a
variant for
(e'ittep)
te
-vy^ai.
38) 7rE-(pihE-ffdai,
Homeric :
"7rE(piloinriy
i 277,
TrEficoiTO
Y
464,
TTEfi-
?"a0ca * 101.
31
39) E-TVE-cpvO-Vpoetical
: VV
ETTEtpyOflEy "//U"7c
K
478, ~((pyEy [.lUTEpa
Pind.
Pytb.
xi.
37, Soph.
O. T. 1497. Otber forms
only
Homeric
:
y/y
Toa
TTc'^fj;
Y
172,
TTEcpyEfiEy
Z
180,
Kcira-n-Ecpyoiy
P
539, -"(py6yra
IT 827
:
Ai'istarcbus and Herodian accentuated
tte'^iwi'
:
cp.
Herodian on 11
827,
Herodian ed. Lentz i. 470. In
Oppian
Hal. ii.
133, v. 390, Trifyovaias
3
pi.
pres.
40)
E-7rE-(f)pacn-v
only
in Homer and Hesiod :
E7rE"ppah
U
51,
Trt(ppaciT7]y
Hes.
Theog.
475, Tri^paloi
S
335,
Ti-E"ppaCEfxEy ?/
49.
Cp.
^paZey.
41)
KE-x^pn-yTO
n
600, KExapoiciTO
A 256, /cf
x"po/yu"(^o
Pbilox. Fr.
2,
24
Be.^,
cp. x^cipoyro
and
KExapiimo.
At tbe close of this
survey
we
may point
out how
large
a number of
these
reduplicated
aorists bave
by-forms
without
reduplication,
not less
than 19 out of
41,
i.e. ceIuke
(7)
and
IhkeIv, -fdiyt (11)
and
(hyEly,
refiope(12)
and
dopE~iy,
kekvOwiti
(15)
and
Kvdely, XEXuj3Eadcu(16)
and
CH. XIII.
REDUPLICATED AORISTS.
295
Xapeadat,
\i\adoy
(17)
X"/\a^:o)'
(18), XeXa-x^ni' (19),
and
Xdde'w, XuKeli',
Xci-^eJ}',
HEj-UiTTOiii'
(20)
and
yLtrtTTtEU', u"pope
(21)
and
wpeTO,
TrsTrvd tcrOai
(29)
and
irvdiffdai, kcrnea-Bai
(30)
and
a-ireadui,
TerapTrero
(32)
and
rap-
TTwjitda,
tTETi-ior
(33)
and
ere/^iof,
riropei' (3i)
and
erope,
i-iippuce (-40)
and
(ppacey, KExaporro
(41)
and
x"''P'^''''"
"
^^^ ^^ these
we
may
add
KeKXvOi,
KiicXvTe formed
dii'ectly
from the
root, as
mentioned
on
p.
290, by
the
side of kXvOi and KXvre.
We have often
pointed out under the several heads the
prominent
peculiarities
of
usage.
We
expect
to find
always
in the
stronger
form
a
more
forcible
meaning.
An intensive force
may
be detected most clearly
in the Homeric
use
of eKeKXem
by
the side of
KeXero,
in KeKXvdi
as
compared
with
^XvOt,
and in the two 'aorists of rebuke' iiiji-e and
rivitvaiTe.
The isolated aorist
-erayior
too has
certainly
derived its
forcible
meaning
of
'
seizing
'
as compared
with Lat.
tangere
by
the
help
of
rediiplication.
We
might conjecture
the
same
for
n/.t7r"7raXwj'.
In
the
case
of
XeXiikovto, as we
have
already intimated,
the
meaning
'
howl
'
as compared
with XukeIv
'
to sound
'
depends
upon
the
same.
The foi'ce of
tkoxf''', apaptli', cecaely,
Kek-adfli' is
decidedly causative,
and
the
same
is
especially
clear in
vpopelv,
in
XiXuy^^ov
and XiXudov. In the 33
case
of
XfXaxwo-t
Aiistarchus remarked
on
II 80
'
ai-t rov Xa^iii' -noii]-
awni! The isolated
-KtirapfAv
is to
ap'parere
as XiXayfiv
is to
Xayflr.
Thei'e
were
often
departiu-es
from this
usage
in
particular
instances.
But if
we
compare
the causative force of this device of
language
in the
Sanskrit
aoiists,
and in
presents
like
'it7TT]-/.n=sisto
its
use can hardly
be
a matter of chance.
"
In
etetiiov
the
usage
has been otherwise difieren-
tiated, for the
reduplicated
form is limited to the
meaning
'
hit
upon.'
An
anomaly
of
tolerably
wide
extent,
which the
reduplicated
aorist
shares witli the thematic, is found in the
occurrence
of
an a
instead of
the
usually alternating
vowels
u
and
e.
This
appears
partly only
in the
post-classical language,
but
partly
also in the
language
of earKer
times,
and
even
in that of Homer. I
mean
forms like
tlnu^ })yiyKafiei'
for
eJ-oy,
iiyiyKnp.ey,
and others which made their
appearance
in Alexandrine
or
even
later times
(e.g. 'iXaj^ay).
The
right
view of
t-cajra,
'i-di^Ku,
rixa
is
also connected with this
question.
But
as
this whole
process
rests
upon
a
confusion of the
analogies
of the thematic and the
sigmatic aorists,
it
cannot be
more fully discussed,
except
in connexion with the
sigmatic
formation
(Chap.
XVII.
).
296 MOODS OF THE PEESENT AND SIMPLE AOEIST STEM. ch. xiv.
CHAPTER XIY.
THE MOODS OF THE PRESENT ANT) SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
After our
survey
of the formation of the
present
stem and the
simple
aorist
stem,
each in its twofold
form,
with
or without the thematic
vowel,
it
remains for
us to discuss the
signs
of the moods and of the verbal
nouns.
In this
chapter
we
have to do with the moods
;
and I
place
first the
Imperative,
as
being
that mood which shows the least difference from
Avhat is
conjecturally
the most
primitive
form of the indicative.
33
I. IMPERATIVE.
According
to the usual
logical scheme,
the
imperative
is here
placed
on
the
same
line with the
conjunctive
and
optative.
"But in formation the
imperative
is
completely
different from the two other moods. In the
latter the modal element
comes
in between the stem and the
ending,
and hence in the same
place
in which
we
found the
numerous expansions
of the stem in the
case
of the formation of the
present
:
indie.
'i-\i.iv conj.'i-o-fiev
,,
(pfpo-p."v opt. (pepo-i-fiev.
We
see at once
that there is
an
analogy
between the
expansion
of the
verbal stem to the
present stem,
and the formation of
conjunctive
and
optative
_
forms. On the other hand tlie
imperative
is either not at all
distinguished
from the
indicative,
e.g.
in
(pspe-re,(pips-ade,
or
it is dis-
tinguLshedonly by
the different form of tlie
personal endings.
The
place
of the
imperative
formation is to be
soughthere,
i.e.
solely
in the last
syllable
of the verbal forms
:
ind.
l-a-rrj-s imper.
'i-crTa-6i
"
"cj)epe-(Tl
"
(j)ep"
,,
*"pepe-crcu
"
*(j)ipe-cro
to
use here the most common
and indubitable
origuial
forms
by
the side
of those
actually
in
use.
The second
persons
of the
plural
and dual in the active and middle :
"l"epeTs, (piptrof
"
(pepeaOs, (j^ipeadov are
not at all to be
distinguished
from
those of the indicative. In the
case
of the 2
plur,
we
might
indeed
conjecture,
after tlie
analogy
of the distinction in
"
Latin between
fer-tis
aw^fer-te,
tliatthe Greeks too
were not
unacquainted
in earlier times
with this distinction between the indicative and
imperative.
We
may
refer for
a
conjectmval ^fipe-reQ
to
p.
45. But there is little
probability
in this
conj'ccture,
for it is
only
from Latin that
we can
argue
to sucli a
distinction
; nnd/er-tis, legi-tis
show
high antiquity.
The loss of
a
final
s,
m Latin limited to the
imperative,
extended
'in
Greek also to the
indicative. Sanskrit has in the 2
pi.
of the indicative -tha,
in the
same
Ch. XIV. SECOND SING. IMPERATIVE IN -di. "
297
form of the
imperative
and of the historical tenses -ta
;
so
that here
a 34
distinction arises between b/iara-t/ta 'fertis' and hhara-t
a
'
{erie'
;
hut
this distinction is not one which
anyone
would be inclined to maintain
had been created for the
specialmeanmg
of these two forms. The
same
is the
case
with the middle. Greek knows no
distinction between
(pipe-ade
as an
indicative and
as an imperative,just
as
little as
in this
case
Latin knows with iia
/erimini.
In Sanskrit the
imperative
has the
secondaryending -dhvam, so
that here too the indicative hhara-dlive is
distinguished
from the
imperative
hhara-dhvam. The weaker form in
Greek made its
way
into the
indicative,as it did also in the active. The
second
persons
of the dual
e.g. (pepe-ror,
(pepE-(Tdor
also have to serve for
indicative and
imperativealike,
while
Sanski-it, just
as in the
plural,
assigns
weaker
endings
to the latter
mood,
and
so
aiaives at a
separation
between indicative and
impei'ative.
Now as the
separation
of
impei'ative
from indicative foi'ms extends much farther in the 2
sing.,
it
seems to
me
probable
that the
stamp given
to the mood
began here,
and that
starting
with this it
was by degi-eesattempted
I'ather than carried out
in the
case
of other
impei'ative
forms. Even in the 2
sing,
the Vedic
dialect often uses
the indicative in
place
of the
imperative form,
e.g.
md-si as
well
as
md-lii and the
like,as
Delbriick
points
out
p.
34.
Hence
oui- investigation
of the
impei-ative
forms limits itself essen- tially
to three
points,
the formation of 2
sing,
in the
active,
that of the
same
person
in the
middle,
and the forms in
-tw, -roj-y,
-crdM,
-nBiov
(which
cannot be
separated
one
from the
other),together
with
anything
which
may
be connected with them.
A)
Formation
of the
2 Sing. Act.
1)
Termination -9i.
This
ending
is
entirely
limited to the
primitiveconjugation,
and
hence
never
appeai-s
after a thematic vowel. The same is true of the
corresponding
Sanskrit termination -did and its weaker
by-form
-hi.
The
agreement
here is therefore
complete,
and
we
may put
a number of
Greek
imperatives
in -fitside
by
side with Sanskiit
ones,
without
finding
any
other diflerences than those which
proceed
from the
phonetic
laws 35
and tendencies of the two
languages:
e.g.
i-hi = 'i-Oi
pi-pr-hi
= {iix)'Tv'i-iiKT]-6i
qru-dJii
= kXv-6i
pd-Iii
= Aeol. TTco-di'drink.'
If there
were
active forms
corresponding
to
ra-iv-Tai (p.113),
the im- perative
would
necessarily
be *rc(-)w-fli
(cp.
!ji.irv-6i),
which would
correspondexactly
to the Vedic tanu-hi. e-dhi
'
he,'coming
with
an
unusual
change
of sound from
as-dhi,corresponds
to the Gr.
"io-di,
for
which Hecataeus used the
regular
form 'ia-Bi
(Herodian
ii.
356). Quite
.
in the same
way
Zend,
in which the
aspirate
dh is
regularlyrepresented
by f/,
forms fi'om rt. i the
imper. i-di='i-di,
from
gd gai-di (with an
epenthesis
oi
i)=j3f]-di,
fvoxxi zd 'know'
(by
the side of zan=Gv.
yrw)
z-di':=yt'(L-6i.
It is
seen
at once from these
comparisons
that the treatment of the
298 MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AOPJST STEM. ch. xiv.
root-vowel is not
always
the same.
Sometimes it
appears long,
some- times
short. There is the same
variation
as was
discussed
on
p.
96 and
in the case
of the aorists on
p.
135. In the
aorists,
where the form is
retained
complete,
the vowel is as a
rule
long : ftij-6i :
0 492
(Lacon.
K(i-j3a-fTi Hesych.),yj'w-Hicommon,
cv-6i 11
64,
kXv-Bi
Homeric,
also in the
tragedians,
ttI-Ol
(Arist.Vesp. 1489), ct7ro-7rrj/-6t
'
fly
off'
(Philostr.
Epist.11),arij-Oi
"ir 97
(Lacon.
lirram
"
uvuarrfii Hesych.),tXtj-^i(Soph.
Pliiloct.
475).
Presents with a long vowel,
and hence after the
analogy
of the indicative,are
furnished in the
singularby
cilb)-Qi and
'1\i]-0l
y
380
aWu
ava(T(j iXtjdi,
StSco^t be
fxoi
KXeoi
ecr6X6i',
op.
'//\"?0' TT
184. For the latter later
poets,e.g.
Theocr. xv. 143,
Calli-
machus
Hymn.
vi. 139 have 'iXuBi. We
may
add
f^7r(7r/\?j9i
\p311,
and
^ijOi, quoted
from the
yrw/xcu
of Menander v. 191,a
Hne which
can hardly
have come
down to us
correctly.
A short vowel
appears
in the
ordinary
'iOt,
in the Attic
(jm-dl,
which is used from
Aristophanes downwards,
in
tXXaOi discussed on
p.
119,
in
o/i)'u9t (^ 585)
and in
opvrtii (Z 363).
2) 9
for 0L.
Six aorist
imperatives
in
e,
i-e.
S(k,f^t'c, h, cx^'C) ^t'P^^ ("0|O"C Aristoph.
36
Vesp. 162)
and the Homeric Iri-a-KEQ
(A
186 and
elsewhere)are generally
"
explaitiedas arising
from the
primitive
forms *?
o-6",- *(Tyi-di
etc.
by
the
loss of
(
and the
change
of the
i),
which cannot stand
as a
final
letter,
into
c-
But in
no language
ai'e
there
primitive
forms of the kind
assumed,
and it deserves to be
carefully
noticed that
by
the side of the
present
(Ita-Oi,
which
may
be to a certain extent
compared,
there is
no
trace of
any
form
*"pu-c.
And the
only
certain instances of the
change
of a
final
r
into
e
nre
Trporivpoc,
*fltftriK6T /3f/3?/kdc.
The
origin
of the
local adverbs
ei'Coq
and
'tt,nc, quoted by grammarians
sometimes
generally
as Dorian,
sometimes
specifically
as Syracusan,
from 'ivcodi and
^'ibSi,
is
as Ahrens Dor. 366
justlynotices,by no means clear. Hence I do
not
regard
the
oi-dinaryexplanation
of these
impei'atives as
absohitely
certain. Since in the tUalect of the Vedas the termination -si in the
case
of
primitive
verbs is not
quite
unknown to the
imperative:
e.g.
ije-shi
'conquer,'
rnd-si
'
measure,'jV7-si'go,'
it would not be
impossible
that
c6c
should be shortened from
*f(i-a(,like
a'coi-r from *c('cai-(Tt
"
Skt. da-dd-si.
This view
might
also be
su])portedby a
Latin
analogy
in the 2
sing.
imper. es
from the root
ed,
which as
Neue Formenl. ii.^ 603
shows,
is
certaioly
established
by one
instance in an
inscription
and several in
Plautus.
Mei"guet
in
'
Die
Entwicklung
der lat.
Formenbildung
'
p.
244
suggests doubtfully
that this form
'
descends from
a time when this
imperative
still ended with a dental,
before which d then
passed
into
s\
that
is,
that es originated
in
*ed-di,
*('s-(//^Skt. ad-dhi. But
as
there
is
no trace of
any
termination -di on Italian
soil,
and
as
there is little
probability
in the
gi-oup
sd,
it is
perhapssimpler
to think of
an
indicative
*essi
cs
which was
used at the .same time as an imperative,
and to
assume
the like in the case
of
cs
also. Still
we cannot consider the older
view of the Greek
imperative
forms in
-e
as one to be at
once rejected.
CH. XIV.
SECOND sma. imperat. without any termination.
299
3) Imperatives
without
any
termination from verbs,
wdtliout
a
thematic vowel.
Some of these
imperatives
have shorter
by-forms
without
any
personal
ending,
as
h'l-tnre
(?642)by
the side of
")7'-(T7r"c,
which was
mentioned above
p.
132,
KuO-E
"
with the
sti-ange explanation
inicoc
Hesych.,ax^
established
37
by
the metre in the oracle
quotedby
Schol. on
Eui-ip.
Phoeniss. v.
638
(ed.
Dindorf iii.178 1.
1)riit'Se av
iiys/j.ura
(ryi
TzipiTpiTTTOLO
keXevOov,l-Ki-n-^f,
the
reading
of the M.SS. Hes, Scut,
446,
where there is no
occasion with
Goettling
to read the
present tV-fffj^f,
inasmuch as
the aorist is better
suited to the
passage ('Apff,iivinyj. ^iroQ KpaTeptjy kcu
^e'lpaQaawTOVc),
K-aro-axe
the
reading
of the M.SS. in
Eurip.
Here. Fur.
1210,
for which
Elmsley
and after him
I)indorf
and Kii'chhoff read
(."ara-o-x"0",7ropa-ff)("
the
traditional
reading
in
Eurip.
Hec. 842
(mOov,Traparrye x^'P" ri]
"rrpeaftvTidi)
for which
irupaa-^tQ
is now
read. Porson
justly
defends
Traparrx^E,
though
he
judges
othei'wise
on Orest. 1330.
Finally
the Bodleian with other M.SS.
has the same form in Plato's
Protagoras
p.
348 a. Goettling(Allg.
Lehre
vom Accent
p.
45) recognised
that in these forms the accent
properly
falls
on the
penultimate.
Recent editors have been reluctant to
accept any
of
them,and in Attic
prose
there
are
difficulties in
admittinganjiihing
so iso- lated,
contrary
to the
prevalentusage,
so long as
it is not
abundantly
esta- blished.
But the case is different with the
language
of
poetry.
The
question
is whether in such forms the termination is to be
supposed
to have
dropped off,
in which case
they
would serve to confii-m the
assumption
of the
origin
of the
c
in Ot
: (r^i
would then be to
ox^''-
'^^'^^
the
original*(7X"-0i
as ovrio
to ovtwc
and the
hypothetical
*o{Jrwr. But if
we take into consideration forms like
ir a pi
rTX'"-'"'", Trapaaxw, TrapucxoijJ^i;
to which
Tvapaux^
bears
just
the
same
relation
as
"n-urrx'^
to
'i-rvaaxoy etc.,
and reflect how
strong
the
tendency
is
universally
to confuse the
primi- tive
formation with the
thematic,
it
seems
to me incomparably
more
probable
that
we
have to admit this
explanation
also in the
present
instance,
that
is,
to
regard
izapaaxe
etc.
just
like
Trapauxovrwv
etc. as
thematic formations.
We
may
mention here two other
imperatives
without
terminations,
which
present
themselves,apparentlyvery
anomalously,by
the side of
the
regular/jfj-^i, a-Tfj-di,
" the well-established forms
*/3a
and
*fTTa,
occurring
however
actuallyonly
in
composition: "V/3dEurip.
Phoen.
193,
"7t/3a
Eur. El.
113,
iTTiiDci
Theogn. 847,
/.-a-a/joYesp.
979, 7r/jo/3a
Ach.
262 " ui'fTTd Theocr. xxiv.
36,
Trapaora
Meuander
(Comici
iv. 105 no.
II.).38
As in Attic writers
a
in
place
of
t]
would be
unprecedented,
we cannot
suppose
them to have
originated
from
fta-Bi,
frrd-di
by a
loss of
-^j,
and
must rather
assume here too
a
transition to the thematic
conjugation.
The forms
quoted
are not, so far as
their formation
goes,
primitive
aorist
imperatives,
but thematic
present impeiutives
from
ftdw (discussed
on
p.
148)
from which
7rpo/3wj'r"c
i7iter alia is
quoted
from Cratinus
(Com.
ii.
p.
88). Certainly
we
have
no
authority
for
^oraw,
but it
corresponds
exactly
to the Latin
sto, so
that the
imper.
std is
completely
identical
with Gk.
ffrci.
This
explanation,suggestedah-eadyby
Lobeck on Biitt-
mann
ii.^
125,
of
course does not exclude the
assumption
that these
forms
were syntactically
accounted
as aorists,
because the
corresponding
indicative
presents
were
obsolete. This view is confirmed
by
the form
300 MOODS OF THE PEESENT AND SIMPLE AOEIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
tfiftrj
wliich
appears
in Ar.
Lys. 1303, though
not without the variant
infia. tf-iftrj occui's
in the Laconian final
song;
it can
only
be
explained
as a
Doric foi-m
Ijysupposing
it is contracted from
*t^ftaE.
Whether
the form
ttw by
the side of
ttwQl,quoted
in Et.
Magn.
p.
698,
52 from
an Aeolic
poet (x"'P" '""""* '^"J^) originated
in the
same
way, depends
upon
the
judgment
we form
upon present
forms with
a like
ending.
We now turn therefore to those
present imperatives
of the
conjuga- tion
in
Y"j
which have
altogether
lost the
syllable
di. Such forms
are
certainly
not less
numerous than those which retain
6i,esjiecially
if
we
include the Aeolic and Doric dialects. After what
we have
just
said with
regard
to the transition to the thematic
conjugation,
it is natui-al to
suppose
that all these shorter
imperatives
could be
exi)lained
from the
analogy
of
this
conjugation.
But
we
shall not find this sufficient. A form like
e.g.
'(.aTY}
in
Homer, Kpi'ifn'r)
in
Euripides
cannot
possibly
be
explained,
in
accordance with the laws of Ionic
contraction,as
from *'iaTae
^"Kpijf.irae,
any
more than the Doric
iyKiKpu
from
^tyKiKpae,
for here
ae
is contracted
to
rj.
Hence
we
divide all the forms wliich
belong
here into two classes
;
i.e.into
apocopated
and thematic forms.
a) Apocopated
forms.
The loss of the
syllable
di finds its
analogies
in various
phenomena
of
39 the 1 and 3
sing.
ind. and
conj.,
which
were mentioned on
pp.
28 and
41. The Aeolians of Lesbos formed the 3
sing,by rejecting
the
per- sonal
ending : yAcK,
and the 2
sing,imper.
in the
same
way
:
ksi'tt].
The
Aeolic forms of this kind
are discussed
by
Ahrens Dial. Aeol. 140. The
gi-ammarians quote
as
Aeolic Ifrra and
'larr), ei^iTriTtXr], Kivrt],
[jivpuj,
^Ico).
Ahrens's wish to
reject'iari],
which is described as Aeolic in Et. Gud.
283,
40 and in Et. M.
348, 9,
arises from
a
mistake. He is correct
only
so far,
that
'iaTri
cannot be
explained
like 'lard from
a mere
i-ejection
of the
ending. By
its
i]
'i"Tr]
in the
case of the Dorians and Aeolians " for it is
called Dorian too
by
Herodian ii. 209 " is shown to be contracted.
According
to the Dorian and Aeolian contraction it
might
come from
I'oTof, Hence the identical forms in the chflerent dialects
are, remarkably
enough,
to be
explained ditferently :
the Dor. and Aeol.
'Iffra,
and the
Ion.
'iffTTi are
apocopated,
the Dor. and Aeol.
'ifrrri
and Ion. 'lard are
contracted.
"
From
Aeolising poets
we
may quote da/xia Sappho
i.
3,
Kur, Sappho Frag.
114
B^, hfidprr]
Theocr.
28, 3, cptXi]
29,
20." A
Homeric form of this kind is
presented by
'/(xr/j ""
313,
which
reappears
inEur.
Suppl.
1230 and Ar. Eccl. 743
{k-adt(7Tr)).
We
may addK-jo///i)'7jEimp.
(orrather,as
Nauck
conjectures, Eupolis)Frag.
918
[tcpiji-iri] aeav-))i'Et:
^iarig
cii'TrjpicoL), Trif.nrpri
Eur. Ion.
974,
and
"y'^"''"^'P"
Sophron
Fr. 2
(Ahrens
Dor.
464).
The isolated Attic
imperativeit,ei
(Ar.
Nub.
633),
omitted in oui-
grammars,
with which the Scholiast on
this
passage compares
ci'ttand
/.liret,
is
perhaps
to be taken in the
same
way.
For it
seems to me better to
assume an
*"tfc)iformed after the
analogy
of llciodias
the
original
form
rather than
an eiw,
unknown at
any
rate on Attic
soil,
and with which
we could
only
compare
the
conjinictiA^e
eUo in
Sophron (Frag.
2
Ahrens).
If
el as an
imperativereallyoriginated
from the thematic
form,
it would
necessarily
have been contracted from
*""",
like da~i
=
ia~ie in
Hesychius,
and would
completelycorrespond
to the Lat. i
(for
ei
:
cp.
Imus).
CH. xiT.
EEGULAR THEMATIC IIMPERATIVES.
301
b)
Thematic Forms.
Considering
the
generaltendency
of the
piimitive
forms to
pass
into
thematic
forms, imperatives
like ceiKwe
(Hes. 0pp. 502, Plato),
oXXve
Archiloch. 27
{mi (Tcpeag
uWv
uJaTrepoWvtic,)
u/xvve (Theocr.
27, 34)
40
present nothing surprising.
It is otherwise with
Ihv-u,
which we find in
Theognis
1240 at the end of a
pentameter.
If
we are not to correct this
into
t,vj't"i,
as Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. i.^
523)suggested,
we must
recognise
here,
not indeed the addition of a
thematic
vowel,
but
probably
the
transition of
a
radical
e
into such
a
vowel.
We have clear cases of conti-action from forms with an
added vowel
in
Tidet,
which is in
general
use
from Homer
(ridei
h-parog
A
509)onwards,
i"i (""338, Eurip.
El.
592, occurring
also in
compounds
in Attic
prose),
EiSov,
which is found from Herodotus iii. 140 onwards. We must add
also those forms in which, the
simple
vowel is
only
thus
intelligible,
as
Kadiffza
(i.202),TrijjiirXa (7r//j7r\cl av
/jej'
li-ioi
Xenarch. Meineke Com.
iii.
616),
Dor.
tt/juttAj/,
Herodian i.
464,
lairv i.
70,
vnvv
(Soph.
Trach.
1185, Eiu'ip.),
(TTopvv
(Aiistoph.
Pax
844), arpijwv (Com.
anonjon.
Meineke iv.
605).
The most difficult form of all is the Pindaric cicoi
(Pind.
01. i.
85;
vi.
104;
vii.
89;
Nem.
v. 50).
It
can only
be
understood in connexion with the Aeolic
cHoiq
and the Homeric
^ilo~iada,
and
pointsby
its
diphthong
to a
^ItZoiw
as an
older
by-form
of
*cic6o)
(cp.p.
238),
which has arisen from a
transference into the deriva- tive
conjugation.
We
might assume as
the
primitive
foi'm a *(Ia-da-
jd-mi,though
this
hardly
has a jiarallel.Bopp's
notion that didoi
might
have arisen
by
the loss of 6 from clco-di
(Vgl.
Gr. ii.^
290)
breaks down
vipon
the
improbability
of such
a loss,
for which the Greek
language
offers no
analogy.
Still less
can we
follow
Bopp
in
explaining
the
origin
of deiicrv in this
way,
and in
actuallytracing
back
v
to
vi.
Nor can we
say,
as I
supposed
in
Tempora
und Modi
p.
21
(cp.
Kiihner Ausf. Gr. i.^
p.
524)
that
'
in the
lengthening
of the vowel of
'/ott/, cldov,
Calvv we
must
recognise
a trace of the
originalending
diJ We do not now
look
upon
'
compensatory lengthening
'
ia this
superficial
way,
and cannot
allow that a lost
syllable
ever
had the
power
of
lengthening
the
pre- ceding
syllable.
This brief mention of
differing
views will suflSce." With
regard
to the
occurrence
of
many
foi-ms here noticed as contracted,we
41
may
refer also to Cobet Mnemos. ix.
p.
373 and von
Bamberg
in the
Zeitschi'.f.
Gymnasialwesen
xxviii.
p.
27.
4) Eegular
forms of the thematic
conjugation.
The
ordinary
second
person
of the
imperative
of the thematic
conju- gation
has no
personalending.
All
languages,
which have an
imperative
at
all,
agree
in this.
Compare
Skt. bhara Zd. bara Gr.
0epe
Lat.
fer
.
"
galiha
,,
jBda-Ke
In
spite
of this
Bopp (Vgl.
Gr. ii.^
291)
and Schleicher
(Compend.^
654)
assumed that here too there was
originally
the
ending
-d/ii
(Gr.6i),
and that it was
afterwards
dropped,
as
in
a
part
of the verbs in
-fii.
Delbriick
pronounces
against
this view
(Verbum p.
33) as
follows
:
'
we
never
find
a *bharadhi,
but
only
bhara. We
cannot,
I
think,
doubt
302 MOODS OF THE PEESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
that in tliesewords the
simplepresent
stem
was
used from the fii-st with
an
imperative
force.' And we can
well
imagine this,
for
just as an
exclamation
(Atisruf)
even
without
any specialsign
in the vocative of
the
noun
may
become a
call
(Anruf),
so
the bare stem used
as an address
{Zurvf)may
in the verb become a command. Inasmuch
as the stem of
thematic
verbs,as we
saw,
does not at all differ
origmally
from
a
noun-stem,
sometimes,
so
far as
the somids are concerned,an imperative
and
a vocative
do
completely
coincide
:
e.g.
oy"=Skt.
ay
a
is
only tlistinguished
from
the vocative
ayt by
the
accent, a
distinction which vanishes in
Sanskrit,
whei-e the vocative
rejectsan accent on the final
syllable.
As the
present
stems in 9tw=Gr.
vv ai-e also in
originnOun-stems, we might
regard
in the same
way
forms like the Skt.
"^r-nu
hear
(by
the side of
c^r-nu-li%).
However,
for Gi'eek and Latin
we are not
wholly
without
traces of a termination,
afterwai'ds
lost,
for the thematic
forms here
vmder consideration. We
have,
it is
ti'ue,only a
single
instance of the
kind well established for each of the two
languages,
for Greek
ayic
"
uyf,
(jjipe
in
Hesych.,
for Latin
2"fospices, prospice
in Fest.
p.
205. There
42 are
also one or two doubtful instances. For the senseless
i^aric
'
i^i]rEl
in
Hesych. Guyet,
followed
by
Koen
on
Gregorius
Corinth,
p.
620 read
^utec
"
i^yrei
;
there is also
4 dec
*
4*7
for which
perhaps we should write
^oeq
"
'Cii.
From Latin we must also mention
perfines, perfrhujas,quoted by
Festus
on
the same
page.
Bergk
in the Index Lectionum
Marbm-g
1847-48
most
decidedlyregards
the Latin
glosses,
Avhich he looks
upon
as
taken
from the Carmen
Saliare,as imperatives
with
personalendings. Corssen,
who
was formerly(i.^286)
of the
same
opinion,
afterwards
(ii.^ 474)
explainsprospices
and
perjlnesas
optative
forms. But
we cannot
see
from what sort of stems theyare to come. For
as forms of
prospicere
"and
^je?'^?iere,
which is
probably only
another form of
perfimhre,they
"can only
be futures.
Besides,
with this
explanationwe should have
again
to assume
for
prosjnces
a by-form
of the
present *prospicoas
well
:as prosjncio,
and
Ave camiot see Avliy
the
word,
if that
was
its
force,
"should not have been
explainedby prospicias.
It
seems
to
me
that the
Latm
2^^'GS2)ices
and the Greek
c'tyfc
lend each othei- mutual
support.
The Greek foi-m is dei-ived
by
Koen 1.
c. from
*ayj/^t(cp.//yfoyjcu),
and
lie
supports by
this his view of the
gloss^citeq,
to which
^oeg must be
added,
if it is
really
to be taken
as an
imperative.
However, we
cannot
:see
what is to be
gainedby
the
analogy
of the
conjugation
in
-/xt.
For
^n Aeolic
present imperative
to
*ay?/^a
would be
*(iy-i]
not
aytc ;
an
imperativepresent
in
c
is
just
as
unheard-of from verbs in
-/ii
as from
verbs in
-w.
It
seems
hence much more
probable
to me that Ave haA-e in
both
languages
isolated relics of a
formation
'
of thematic
A'erbs,
Avliich
early
became extinct. From a purely
Greek
standpointAve
might
be
tempted
to refer
liyec
to
*uy"-6t,
and to find herein
a
confirmation for
the deriA'ation of rd-c from
ca-Oi,
and for the
assumption
that thematic
imperatives
also were not
originally
Avithout the termination. But
ciye-ecan hardly
be
separated
from
prospices,
and
as
in Latin the
s
cannot have come from an original
(I/i
(zz^Gr.d),
and hence the Latin
s
can
only
be
regarded
as
representing
the termination
-si,we shall
ap})ly
the
same explanation
to
aye-c.
The form
belongs
to the
same
category
as the Vedic forms like md-si
measure,
and others mentioned
on
p.
298,
43
only
that the i has here been
dropped
Avithout
leaA'ing
any
traces,just as
iu
(jn'ic, 'i(TTr]s etc. and in the Doric
XiyEc=\iy"ic.
For we can hardly
CH. XIV.
IMPERATIVES IN -ro)9.
303
be satisfied with the so-called
*
false
conjunctives,'
as
Delbriick calls the
imaugmented preterites
of the Vedic
dialect,
used with a
modal
force,
in
the entii'e absence of similar formations
on European
soil.
Carte, (^oe'c, if
correctlyreported,
are
Doiic
forms,
which are
I'elated to the
imperative
aytQ
precisely
as
the Doric indicative iroiicis to
Xiyec (Ahrens
Dor.
176).
Perhaps oyft'
was
also limited to the same dialect,
and
was
thus
an
indicative vised as an imperative.
Grammarians
(especially
E. M.
302, 36)
mention as
Sp^acusan
the
forms
Qiyov, Xaftor,
areXoi' for
diye
etc.
cp.
Ahrens Dor. 304. The
i'
is
probablyhere,as
in the
impei'ative
of the
sigmatic
aorist
only a mean- ingless
nasal after-sound which had the duller vowel as its effect. "We
took
a
similar view on
p.
67 of the
personalendings-jjeBtv
and
-fxiQar
by
the side of
-i.uOa.
We are
excluded from
supposing
a
confusion of
the thematic with the
sigmatic
aorist
by
the fact that this
confusion,
of
which we
shall have to treat
below,
is not
regarded
as
Syi-acusan
at all.
Finally
we
may
mention here a
few
more forms in which the thematic
vowel suffers conti'action with
a
preceding long
vowel or
diphthong.
Here
belongs
Xov
"
Xovaai 'AttikoI
Hesych.,
where Mor. Schmidt alters
XovfTciLinto Xove,
for outside the
imperative
contracted forms like
eXov,
Xovrai,
Xovrrdai are common.
We find also
Cul,cale,
for which
see Mor.
Schmidt
on Hesych.
i. 453. He also
conjectures
that for
^P*
*
XP^^'-
"^^
should i-ead
xp'i-
'
X"'~^^-
-^" Photius
Lexicon,
p.
348,
1
(ed.Porsoii)we
read
:
TTuv
'
TO TraiKTciL /."orocruA/\a/3we,
from which W. Dindorf, Meineke,
and
Bergk
in
Aristoph.Equ. 821,
for nav obroTi of the M.SS. read with
Elmsley irav ttuv
ovtoq.
Mor. Schmidt
on Hesych.
iv. 297 mentions also
the form 7ra7 for
tvcCu,
but I cannot find
any
authority
for this. These
forms,
in which the thematic vowel coalesces with the
preceding
one are
really
not much more
surprising
than
ri^xa
or 4"/ (for^'Cn-^)-
To these
belongs
also the isolated Homeric
imperativetT]take,
there !
(S 219,
"^
618,
K 287),
the
plural
of which
-Tjre
is
given by Sophron (fr.
100
Ahrens).
W. Dindorf Annot. ad Aeschylum
(Oxon. 1841)
p.
318 is bold
enough 44
on
the
strength
of these isolated instances
actually
to
regard
?/an for cUnye
as
possible
in
Aeschylus, although
this
process
is not an
apocope
so
much as a rare
kind of
contraction,as we
may
see from the forms of
Xovw. The same scholar is still less
justified
in
addmg
the dictum
*
sponte intelligitm- apocopen
banc ibi tantum locum
habere,
ubi idem
verbum
repetatur.'
No
authoritysays
a
word of thLs. Is the Latin
apocope
in
die,due, fac
limited to
repetitions
% From the established
forms of this kind
light
is thrown back
upon
the contraction in "kj-u.
bXXv
etc..
5) Imperatives
in
rw?.
Latin
possesses
two forms for the 2
sing,imper.;
by
the side of the
usual form without
any
ending,
it has that in
-to,
which is
distinguished
by a slight
shade of
meaning
from the foi-mer. This -to is identical in
form with the
only ending
of the 3
sing,imper.
in Latin and
Greek,
and
the same
holds
good
of the Vedic
ending
-tctt. We have
every
reason to
regard
this tat as
the
primary form,
and its final t is still
preserved
in
the thii'd
person
in foi'ms like the Oscan likitud and 0. Lat. estod
(Fest.
p. 230).
We
may
look
upon
the fact that the same ending
appears
in
both
persons
as analogous
to the case
of the dual
-tov
(cp.p.
51
f.).
Probably
td-t for the second
person may
be referred to
an emphatically
304 MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AOEIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
reduplicated
-tva. Forms of this kind
'
are
aljundantly
established
by
Dclbriick
(Verbum ^?),especially
for the second
person, e.g.
voJcatdt
call,
vaJiatat
carry,
hliavatdt be. In Zeitschr. viii. 297 I called attention to
the fiict that the Greeks wei-e not without
a
correspondingform,
and
Bergk
de titulo Arcadico
p.
ix. tells
us that the
same
idea had also
occurred to him. The
gloss
of
Hesychius (.Xde-Mg
"
a it)
tov
IXBe SnAo-
yuo'o/(read I,u\cifxh'ioi)
is at once
explained,
if we
suppose
that the final
t
here, just
as
in the ablative
sing.,changed
into
r.
I think I have
since discovered
a
second instance of this
foi'mation,
which had
disap- peared
from
literaryusage,
in the
gloss (pa-Mffar
"
yrwdi,
proposmg
in
Studien iii.188 to read without the alteration of
a
letter
(pfiriJc
'
nyayi
wdi,
45 and
supposing
that
(Jxitmc,
in somewhat the
same
way
as
Xeye, was
especially applied
to the utterance of what
was
read.
Possibly
in the
dialects whach
possessed
these forms
a
(hstinction
was made
possible
between the second and the third
person, by
the i-etention of the old
dental in the form of
g
in the former and its loss in the
latter,a distinc- tion
maintained neither in Sanskrit
nor
in Latin. The somewhat
sur- prising
accent,
if
we
may
regard
it
as
recorded,
accurately,
may
be com- pared
with the
tendency
of
singleimperatives
like
iXBi,el-rri^ Xafte,
Ice to
become
oxytone.
B)
The Second Person of the
Middle.
The termination of the second
person
of the middle and its
conjectiu-al
oi'iginwere
discussed on
p.
59. The earliest demonstrable Greek
ending
is
-o-o,
which here
coiTesi)ondsentirely
to the Skt.
-sva,
whilst
this
ending
is
foreign
to Sanskrit in the
pi'eterite
and
optative.
Hence
hhara-sva and
(^epe-o, (pepov
saKa-svn
,, erre-o,
errov
saha-sva
"
i'x^-o, e'xov
correspondexactly
ra
form and
meaning.
We also discussed above
(1.c.)
the conditions under which
-cro
has been
preserved
unaltered. Instances
of ffo
retained in the
case
of verbs in
/.ti
are
apw-rro (frag. trag.adesp.
3 ed.
Nauck),
kiriaTa-cro Aesch.
Soph. Herod.,
'lara-ao from Hesiod
onwards,
and in
compoiuids
not unknown to
pi'ose,
'iera-o
'
be
'
a 302,
y
200,
and
(quitelate)
'iao thence derived
(cp.TrapErro
"
Trnpdyevov Hesych.),yao
r
406,
/v-eIo-o"i"
122,
avrirro
t G8, t/n-7r/\";rTo Aristoph.Vesp. 603, irpiacro
Ach.
870,
TiOeao Pax 1039. " rrovao
"
epx"*^) Tropevov
Hesych. (cp.
Ahrens
Dor.
352)
Forms,
with the
a omitted,
but withoxit
contraction,are common
in
Homer, as ceiciaaeo
A
184, eipeo
a 284,
tXTrto Y
201,
tpx^o
^^
54,
Oio
K 333, XirraEo,(ftelceo, x^fO; naprao
O
475,
(puo
ct
171. Similar instances
from
elegiac
and iambic
poets
are pointed
out
by
Renner Stud. i.
2,
30.
Pindar has iridui
Pyth.
i.
59, ai-n/vuXeo
Nem. vii. 77. There is abundant
evidence in Herodotus for forms like
TrpodOtVfo
iii.
62, avaitavto v. 19.
46 The contraction
of
m
into
tv
often
occurs
in Homer
as
in other
Ionisingpoets
and in
Herodotus, by
the side of the uncontracted forms
:
ftaXXtv
/u
218,
vTro^fi;
o 310,
eVeu N
381, 'ipxev.
Z
280,
evxEv
fl
290,
VCeu r
162,
ttuQev S 235" aXf'^Eu
Archil.
66, 2, evTpi-ev Theogn. 400,
IjuXev Theogn.
1050 "
cfKtv
Pind. 01. iv. 8 "
-epTrev
Herod, ii. 78,
ai-ixev
i. 206. " As the contraction of
to
into
tv
is not unknown to some
branches
of
Dorism,
there is
nothingsurprising
in tcaStv in Callimachus h. V. 140.
CH. xiY.
IMPERATIVE." THIRD PERSON SINGULAR. 305
We need
give no instances of the Attic custom of
contractingeo
into
uv
in thematic vei-bs. As for the verbs without
a
thematic
vowel,
conti'ac-
tion made its
way
completelythrough
the short aorist
forms,
e.g. wlxw
Soph.
0. R.
1521,
0oD
Soph.
0. C.
466,
a.'aax"u
Eurip.
Ion
947,
hut it
also
very
soon
attacked the
presents
: ridov Aesch. Eum.
226, though
without
consistency,
so
that in the comic
poets
even
in the
place
of
Kudrjffo
"
apparentlythi-ough
an intex'mediate form ^KaOerro " kuOuv in- truded
itself
(V^eitch, p.
307),
and
similarlyaov 'hurry'
from the indie.
aovf^Kii
(Aristoph. Yesp. 209).
" In non-thematic stems in
a contraction
also came to be usual
: torw Soph.
Philoct. 893.
Another rare contraction within the word
brings
about
n
from
the union of
an e belonging
to the stem with the thematio
e.
Thus
alhTo from cucieu Q.
503, i 269,
both times almost in the
same for- mula
(cp./.ivOtlat, re'iai),
and
rilo, quoted by Veitch,
p.
409,
from
Leonidas of Tarentum 70. In the
same
way
from the
primaiy
form
ciXuto
by
interior contraction
came first
*",\c7o,
then aX6w
(e377),
for
as
the contraction of
eo to
o(/
is
un-Homeric,
aXtwv
as the intermediate form
is out of the
question.
A
lightening
of the word
was more
commonly
effected
by
the
rejection
of
an
f,
that
is,by
means of
hyjihaeresis,
for which I
may
now I'efer to
the
thorough investigation
of Fritsch Stud. vi.
p.
128. Forms like
ciKoalpeo
A 275,
fxifiio
Simon. C.
frag.
29
B^,
vfjjayeo
Theocr. ii.
101,
ciKEo
Herod, iii.
40, ipoftio
vii.
50,
will suffice
as
examples.
Fuially
there remain two Homeric forms in
which, according
to the
prevailingview, -eu
is
'
leng-thened'
to
-no.
It is needless to
point
out
how
utterly
incredible it is that
among
a number of instances of the
second
person
of the
imperative
formed in the
same
way, only
two should
suffer such an
affection. Besides the
more recent science of
language
shoAvs 47
a
lengthening
of this kind to be
extremely
dubious. Nor is there
any
probability
whatever that in these two isolated forms
some
very
archaic
character has been
preserved,
as Christ has
conjectured(Griech.
Lautlehre
p. 195).
He believes that the
ti
of
Ipiio(only
in xV
611)
and
o-Treto
(only
in K 285)
may
be
explainedby compensatory lengthening
from the
primitive
form in
a-sva
Gr. e-nW). Foi' the
phonetic
process
we
might
quote
the
analogy
of
e'lwdci,
which is for t-afwBu.
Only
in this
case the
course probably
was
that from e-aFmOa
came
in the fii'st
placei-fFuuOo,
and then
tiu)da,
while the
personalending sva in Greek
at once-
passed
into
-aij,
from which form
we cannot ariive at
an
explanation
of the
ei.
But
kpew,
if we accent it
epe'io,
can be
very
well
explained
upon
the
analogy
of alct'w. For taken
as an
imper.present,
it is
easily
comiected
with
epiufmi
p
509, IpieaQaL4 298, epioi'To
Q 445. The second instance
(jTve'toin K 285
o-TTfio
poi
(uf ore
Trarpi cifiecnrfo
Tvbe'i 8ia"
resists all further
explanation.
But I leave it iindecided whether
we
are to assume a
corruption
of the
readmg (say
from
Eaire
ci^') or that
the
poet
of the Doloneia
here,followinga
false
analogy,
coined this form.
C)
Third Person
Singular,
Active
and Middle.
t is
justlyregarded
as
generally
admitted that the
ending
-w,
common from Homer
onwai'ds,
ha:-
come from
rw-r
and
correspondsrto
X
306 MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xtv.
the Yedic
ending
id-t. For the
lattei",
which has also the evidence of
Panini,
Del br lick
(Verbum,p.
59)points
out at least one certain
instance,
(jalcKha-tdt
let him
go,
which would
correspond
to a
Greek
^ftaaKt-Tu).
From tlio Italian
languages
we h.?i\Q
faci-tud
C. I. L.
no.
813
(
=
Osc.
fac-tud
Tab. Bant.
9)
with esto-d in Festus
p.
230,
13
(=0.sc.es-tud)
and also the Oscan forms Uki-tud-='L?it liceto
(cippus
Abellanus
36),
deivatud iurato
(Tab.
Bant
5),ac-tud=:-Sbgito (ib.15). Umbrian,
like
the later Latin
agrees
so
far with the
Greek,
that it has also
dropped
the final consonant: suh-ah-tu
(=sub-i(/i-to),
e-tu
{=i-to)ffer-tu {=fer-t6).
48
Cp.
Aufrecht and KirchhofF Umbr.
Sprachd.
i. 142. With
regard
to
the
origin
of this
termination,
the
simplestcourse is to
assume an em- phatic
repetition
of the
pronominal
stem
ta,
which in the first instance
was
pronounced long :
hence the
priinary
form was td-ta.
In the
same
way
the middle
ending
-rrhio doubtless
arose from
-adw-T,so
that adu-r and
tw-t
correspond,just
as
in the 2
plur.
rrBe and
re,
as
in the
dual adoi' and
ror,
rrTioi'
and
nor.
The
sign
of the middle voice is con- cealed
in the
ad,
for which
we
may
refer to
p.
68 f. I have discussed
there the few dialectic diiferences with
regard
to the combination aQ
(Locrian
^}]aTU),
Cretan
cnrnfenrc'iOdb)).
D)
Third Persox
Plural,
Active anb
Middle.
Wliilst for the
singular
of the third
person
all Greek dialects essen- tially
agree,
the
variety
of formation for the
plural
is
tolerablygreat.
For the "active we can
distinguishfour,
for the middle three different
formations. There
was
in fact
no
little
difficulty
in
denoting
number
and
mood,
and in the middle
a retiex relation to the
subjectbesides,
and
all tliisin the
way
of the
imperative,
in the termination alone. We
may
projDerly j^lace
fii'st
1)
The forms in
-vtcj.
These are
abundantly
established from Doric dialects
(Ahrens296)
of different
regions
and times
:
Lacon.
loyrw,
Heracl.
dyypai/zajTw
(Meister
Stud. iv.
423), Delphic
Trope^oj-rai, eoyru),
a-rrohn'TU),
irapa-
fjLeirdi'TU)
etc.
(Berichte
der k. sachs. Ges. der Wissensch. 1864
p.
227),
and also from the
inscription
from
Tegea (which
Kii-chhoff". IMonatsb.
Jan.
1870,
has shown to be
probablyLaconian)
ciayvvrroj,
and from the
Arcadian
inscription
of
Tegea
: Trot
rrw, i^a/.ii6v-u),
ayKupvcrauvrut,
lyayorrio,
Biayyoi'Tw(Gelbke,
Stud. ii.
389).
Then follow
2)
T]ie forms in
-vtmu.
These ai'e
the most
widely
extended. For
they are
a)
The
only
forms in use in Homer
:
ayyeXXoi'TOJu
Q
517,
uyeiporrujy
B
438, (btvyoyrioi'
I 47, vrtroiTW*' a 340, ai'Tiowi'Tiou
^ 643 etc.
b)
New Ionic
:
Xeyoyrtjy,
t-^oiTioi', Trao-^oiTwr
quoted by
Kiihner
i. 528 from Herodotus
(i.
89
etc.).
49
c) Attic,
much more commonly
than those in
-ETcorrnr :
Kvpovmoi'
Aesch.
Choeph. 714, yfXwiTair
Ka-!Ti\aip6yTU)y Soph. Aj. 961,
TrsfnroyTwy
O. C.
455,/iowirwi' Aristopli.
Ach.
186,TrnpnBeyrioy'Nnh. 4513,c'nroEoyrwy,
ofiyvyrojf
Thuc.
V. 18,
/^(frf^orrwr
Plato
Protag.
322
d,
coKniaL,()VTij)v
.Xen. Mem. i.
4, 1,
eyypa^orrwr, 6(j)eiX6ynoy,
law in Demosth.
43,
71.
CH. XIV. IIVIPERATIVE. " THIRD PERSON PLURAL.
.
307
d)
Doric
by
the side of
-vtm : di^oyrio}', ixoi'Ttoy,
ettioitwi', Oirnoy,
established from
inscriptions by
Alirens Dor. 296.
It will be. seen
that there is not the
slightest reason
for
calling
these
forms A
ttic,as
is often done.
They are
called
so by
the
grammai-ians
simply
because the Atticists recommended them for
practicalpurposes,
as
distinguished
from the forms in
--wo-ar,
which were afterwards
more
common
(Gregorius
Corinth.
" xcvii.).
3)
Forins in
-vrov
occur
only
on
the Lesbian
inscription
C. I.
2166,
where Boeckh
reads
(pepoiTU)}',
"pv\a(T(76i'TMi', KaraypirTtov (cp.iTri^ieXerrdiov).
The
copies
of
the stone do not
always
agree,
but in some instances all
give -irov
{(jivXaaaoi'Tor),
which is defended
by
Ahrens Aeol.
p.
130. In Conze's
Tit.
8,
2 1.
6,
8
(Reise
auf
Lesbos)
also
-telxovtov
and
-jtoj' are to be
regarded
as traces of this
formation, as
Wald
rightly
maintains
(Addi-
tamenta ad dialectum Lesbiorum et Thessalorum
cognoscendam. Berol,
1871).
4)
Forms iii
-vTcoorav
occur
only
in the isolated lovTwaai'
(Anecd.Delph.
ed. E. Curtius
xiii,
15,
xxix.
17,
xxxix.
20).
5)
Forms in
-tmv.
Of these I know
only
two instances
:
'iarioi' and 'irun'. 'itTTujyin
Homer
only a
273 Oeol c' ettI
/japrvpoi earoj)',
for in A 338
rw
o'
civtm
jxapTvpoL
'iartav it
may
be 3 dual
;
but it is
completely
established in Plato
Legg.
759
ovToi
2e i(TTh)v
EL,r]'yr]Tai
Sia
fiiov, Rep. 502, Xenoph. Cyr.
iv.
6,
10, m no. 32,
9 of the
Delpliicinscriptions published by
Wescher and
Foucart,
and in the
inscription
from Chios in Cauer's Delect.
Inscript.
No. 133 1.
20;
so that the
eotwj'
recorded
once or twice in
Archimedes,
though regarded
with
suspicionby
Ahrens Dor. 321
f.,
is
certainly
not
to be
tampered
with.
"
'irwi'occiu's
only
in Aesch. Eum. 32 '(Vwi'ttoXw
Xax^^'TEQ,wc rojui^erai.
In both forms the
"' alone has
evidently
the
function of
denoting
the
plural
as
distinguished
from the
singular.
We
50
have
an
analogy
in the Oscan form
eituns,
which
occurs several
times,
if
we take
this,not,
as was formerly
the
case,
as 3
pliu-. indie,
but with
Sophus Bugge
Ztschr. xxii. 390
as
3
plur.imperative.
6)
Forms in
-rojaav.
From
Thucydides
^
onwards these forms
are used in Attic
by
the side of
those in
-vrwr,
and
by degreestheysupplanted
the latter
: /ladirwaay
Thuc.
i.
34,
(pEpETLJCfai'
Plato
Legg. 759,
TrapaXa^joavETuxrav Xenoph. Cyr.
vii.
2, 14, (in
a law)
/.uyETMo-av
Demosth.
21, 94,
'irwaay
Eurip. Ijjh.Taur.
1480, t(TTbi(Tuy
Ion 1131
(Dind.karia).Cp. T!-"pifiat,uT(jj(Tay
Slenander
fr. 109. " Besides these
aijOeVwo-a^, eoTtuaav, TrapafieiyciTujaay, TroiijTarujffay,
XafDET-MTci)',
TrapEx^Erwccu'
are
established
by
Dorian
inscriptions
(Ahrens
Dor.
296,
Ber. d. k. siichs. G-es. d. Wissensch. 1864
p.
228).
If
we turn from this statement of the facts to their
explanation,
all
the forms
evidently
fall into two
groups.
In the first
case the 3
plui-.
'
Cobet Nov. Lect., p. 327, corrects
awaj'
lorms in -tcoctoj/ from
pre-Macedoniau
prose-writers.
But there are a large
number of tliem.
X 2
308 MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
is characterised
by
the
rr common to this
person
in the indicative also
:
Xvuiru),
Xvoj
nof,
XuofTor
(1),
Xvovrwrrur. The second
grovip
is formed
from the 3
sing.: trwj'
'i-iocav. The
comparison
of Latin forms like
nmfo, h(innto
is of itself
enough
to leave
no
douht that the former
way
is tlie older. As in the 3
sing,
we
traced the
ending
-7w=Lat. -to back
to -w-r=Lat.
to-(l,
it is
probable
that
-vtm
also lost
a
final
dental,so
that we
may
give
-ntat as
the
conjectural primary
form of the termina- tion.
Benfey
'On Plural
Endings'
p.
33 thinks he
can
quote
one ex- ample
of this termination in Sanskrit:
hajantdt Naighantuka
ii. 14.
In this termination the
plural
is
evidently
denoted
just
as
it is in
the indicative,
while the
imperative
is denoted
as
in the
singularby
the
long
d and the
repeated
t.^ Hence there is
no difference of
principle
between the two numbers in their mode of formation. As to the forms
51 with an
added
r
and
crur,
it is
certainly
the most natural
thing
to ex- plain
both elements from the
analogy
of other
pluralforms, supposing
that the custom of
pronouncinga
final
r
in
a 3
plur.
like
tXtynr,ijSoujy,
t-oiovi
,
and
a rrar
in such
as icorrar, "7ro/?;frf(r produceda
similar
ending
here also. This was
doubtless most
naturallysuggested
to those who
spoke
Attic
;
for the consciousness that
vt belonged
to the
plural
could
hardly
have been
clearly
retained
among
them. Even the
genitive^
of
participles
like
XtyoiTuyy,Troiovt'rwr.
from which the
grammarians
dei'iA'e
the
imperatives,may
have contributed to
produce
this result. This
explanation
is
strongly
confirmed
by
the
evidently
later second
gi'oup,
for in this the mark of the
plural
lies
exclusively
in the
appended ;" or rrar.
The middle forms
are
limited to four
: *r(TOw,aOw, frdojr,
adiuaur.
The most remarkable,
in which
we can still
recognise
the effects of
an
interior
pluralr,
has come to
light
within the last few
years,
in
a
single
in- stance,
which is however foui- times
rej^eated :
it has been
pointed
out
already
in Stud, ii.
p.
450 and above
p.
69. The
mscription
on bronze,
discovered at
Tegea,
and
publishedby
Eustratiades in the
'Ap^j/carAoyicj;
icjyrjldepic, UepioctigB,
rev-x^og
IT
(1869)p.
344
[cp,
also
Cauer,
Delectus
Inscriptionump.
4]
has been ascribed
on
good gi'ounds
bv Kirchhoff
(Monatsb.
der Berl. Akad.
1870,
p. 63)
to the fii-sthalf of the fifth cen- tury
B.C.,
and
assigned
to the Laconian dialect. There
we
read
on
the
second side "
"t
fxtu
KU ^6j]avTos
aveXfado)
i.e. if
he,
the
depositor
of the sum of
money
here in
question(Xuthias),
be
alive,
he is himself to recover
the
sum
;
then follow the conditions in
case
of his death :
al Be
Ka
[xtj
^6t]
toI viol dve\o(r6"oto\
yvqaioi
and
again
thi'ee times aveXimdu) after the
plm-alsubjectsrai
Ovyaripec,
vol
loBoi,
rot
(ifratfTTa 7r('Sii:er
(?).
Hence areXondio is the
plural
to
iDeXirrOb). Now if we
remember that the thematic vowel
appears
as o
only
before
nasals,
and elsewhere
as
f,
we see that ayeXofrOu} is
evidently
for
*fa'eX6vt7d(o,
and hence it is to nreXEfrdu)
precisely
as Xeyomo
to
XfytVw
or as
XiyniTcti
to
Xiytrai.
It is the
very
termination of this
form,
which
Ahrens Dor. 297
justly
held that
we
ought
to
expect:
'
in
subjective
'
*
The
repetition
of the suffix comes out with
esioecial
clearness in the Um-
brian forms
etitto,hahitutu
(JiaMtuto),stahituto, tusetutu (tursitiito),
which in
form
approach
the Latin
itofe,hahetotc,statofc, toTirtofe,
but
are fJiird
persons
plural (Aufr.
and Kirchh. i.
143).
CH. XIV. IMPEEATIVE. " THIRD PERSON PLURAL. 309
" so
Ahrens calls the middle " 'e ciSuadw et
KpniaQw plurales
fonnae
52
cttoio-tiw et
/vpu'oj'"r0w
fieri debebant.' A remai'kable confii-inatioii
by
a
later
discovery
of
a form which had been
merely
inferred. After what
has been said of the
previously
discussed forms in
-to,
we shall have
no
hesitation in
principle
to assume hei'e too the loss of
a
r,
and hence to
assume a *eX(j-i'aBwr,
which is
evidently
for *e\6-i'r--o)T. In this form
the internal
y
denotes the 3
plur.preciselyas
in
Xtyuirco.
The middle
element is
expressed
in the
ad,
the
imperative
in the last two letters.
On
p.
64
we
traced the
ending
-irui,
e
g.
in
Xiyo-iTcu
back to the three
pronominal
elements n-ta-ti
;
the termination -raOwr
points
to four
:
n-t-ta-t{a).
Hence the 3
plur.
of the
imperativepossesses
one such
element more than the 3
plm-.ind.,just
as
the 3
sing,imper.Xeyi-adoj-
possesses
one more than the 3
sing,
indie.
Xiye-rai
for
*Xeye-ta-ri.
If
however it seems to
any
one more
probable
that such
a curious form
should not be based
upon
a
very
ancient tradition from the freshest
formative force of the Indo-Germanic
language,
but that it
origmated
much later in the endeavour to mark the
plural
in the
imperative
middle
also in
a manner
analogous
to
XtyovTui as
compared
with
Xiytrut
and
kXiyuiTO as
compared
with
tXiyiro,
I
can make no
objection
to this view.
In
any
case we must
go
back to an
-nraOuj,
for without the
v
the
analogy
is
a
very
weak
one.
On the other hand the final
r
in this view
may
have
been
foreign
to this form.
This unmistakeable Laconian form
supplies
us
with
a most welcome
confirmation of
a
Heraclean form. On the first Heraclean table 1. 127
we read
:
si
-wee ku
/."") TTEi^vrevKuyiTL
Karray (TvyBijKciy,
uyypaxpdyTCJ
kuI
ETv
EXarrd
10 ra
ETTi^ufxiu ra yeypajx^iya.
As the neuter
plural
is
joined
to
a
plural
verli
on
these
tables,
ItteKuctQm
can only
be
plm-al.
Now it
might
be
supposed
that tTrtXacryw was contracted from
ETveXaEtrdw,
and
belonged
to the second class of
pluralimjieratives, wliich,
like
Kpiyeirdh)
and others to be discussed
immediately^
do not differ from the
singular
imperatives,
but Aln-ens Dor. 195
rightly
saw that this would contradict
the Dorian laws of contraction. For
as
the
imperative
of
(ipacj
in
Epi-
charmus is
opt],
and
as
the Heracleans contract
iiriftui]
into
en-i/j^
(Meister
Stud. iv.
394),
we
should
certainly
have
expected*eTTeXiiff6io. 53
On the other hand tVeAao-yw is
explainedquitesimply
from
*iTrEXa6-(yQu),
just
like
iiQ
from
uoc, fivria
from
(pivriao.
Meister is
right
in
following
this acute
explanation,
which Ahi-ens chscovered without the
help
of the
Laconian foi'm."
Finallywe
have to take account of two Attic forms of
the
same kind,
first established
by
Kii-chhofFs excellent
Inscriptiones
Atticae Euclidis
anno vetustiores. I owe the notice of them to Paul
Cauer's kind commiuiicatiou. In no. 32 A 16 we have i^al
avyayoi-ujy
kUL (7V1 i:Xi]6yrii)y rat,' Ovpac rov OTrLudocoiuov
kciI
(Tucr"7/;^fUJO(T0wi' [Kirchhofi"
appends
a
? to the
o]
rolg tCjv
ttjq \\drjycic
TcifxiaiQ ;
and in
78, 5
[ol
(TT^pdTijyoi xpw"79(i;[j'.
We find also
67r(/("\o(Tfi[wi'
in C. I. A. ii.92 1.5.
Evidently
theseforms
mutuallysuppoi't
one
another.
The second form of the 3
plui\imper.
middle is not
distinguished
from the 3
sing.
It
occurs
only
in four instances fi-om
a single
not
very
ancient
Corcja-aean inscripti(m
C. I. Gr. no.
1845
: cicoaOw, iKXayi^errOcj,
KpiretrOoj (\.
125
KpiviaQw
EKacrroi) Ircai'tii^eo-Ow (Ahrens
Dor.
297).
Pro- bably
this formation rests
upon
a confusion with the 3
sing.,
from which
it
was no
longerpossible
to
distinguish
the
pluralby
a
difierent vowel.
The third form in -rrOwy is from Homer onwards
by
far the most
common :
eTTEfrOojyI
170,
TnOeaOioi' I
167,
crfpiaaadwv
$ 467. Kiihner
i.
310
MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIJVIPLE AOEIST STEM. ch. xiy.
537
quotes
instances from
Herodotus, Sophocles,Aristophanes,Tbucy-
dides,
Plato and
Xenophon ;
and Ahrens Dor. 297 others from Dorian
iuscriptions
of different countries
(Ther.TropeviaOu))',
Cret.
ijaBo)}',
aTarvi-
oihov,
Rliod.
fWcitoo-flwj').
In
Delphian inscriptions
we
find
iftkia^iwr^
c'uOfXiaHwi'
(Borichte
etc.
1864,
p. 228).
The foiu'th form in -erdiorrav is related to that in -rrOtjy
precisely as
the active
-Tuaay
is to
-nor.
The form is
un- Homeric,
and unknown
also to Herodotus
(Bredow
de dial. Hei-od.
337)
and
apparently
to the
tragedians,
but in Attic
prose
it is used
by Thucydides {lofeXeicrdwaai'
iii.
67),
and it is not unknown to the Doric dialect
:
Cret
(Dreros)
IdrrnfKrdMfTay, Corcyr.cnrnXoy
Haa^iioaai'
,
Ther,
Troptvtrdujffav,
and often in
Archimedes.
Cp.
Ahrens. 297.
The thii-d and foui-th forms have
evidently
come fi-om the
singular
by
the addition of
v
and
irar asplvu'al signs,precisely
in the
same manner
as was the
case
partly
in the active,
^*
E)
Dual Forms.
The second
person
of the dual of the
imjierative
active and middle is
tolerably
common
in Homer
:
e(pojj.apT"~iTor
kcu mrEvceroi'
Q
191, airoTive-
Tt)}'
Q
186, e/jjhj-oi' KCLi
acfywi,
TirnlrsTOy ^ 403 "
tp-^trrQni'
A
.322,
rrlrov 0'
aTTEfrdov Kcil
")((iipeTov
C
60,j.ia-)(E(Tdov
H 279,
(ppai^enOni'
Y 11.5
;
and
quoted
also from Attic writers
:
xfp"''^''
Soph.
O. C.
1437,
e'nraTov
Aristoph.
Av.
107,
Plato
Euthyd. 294,
liKohiTov
Aristoph.
Plut. 76.
On the other hand Kontos in
Aoyioc 'Epi^iijc
i.66 maintains that there
is
no
other instance of
an early
date of the 3 dual
imjoer.
act. than
Ko/jel-
Tiov
9 109
{tovtm
fiEv
Ofpc'iTj-oi'Te KofjielTW}'),
where this is established
as
the
reading
of
Aristarchus,
and has
good
M.S
authority.
In the
'0/.n/pov
f7ri/x"pj(Tyuoe
(Cramer
Anecd. Oxon. i.
397)
we
read
^
gtijxuovvtui wq
irpocr-
TUKTiKur
inrap^dv
rb
KopHTwy^
a\X^ ovSiTfOTe ?vVkw
TrpofTTnicTiKu} rpirov irpoa-
wTTov e-^plimtTO
'
OjjiTjpnc.'
For in A 338
: rw o avTw
^laprvpoi
'ecttwv need
not be
regarded
as a
dual. Besides this Kontos can
onlyquote
a
3 dual
^icKpepETtor
from Maximus
Tyrius20,
1.
Cei^tainly
this
passage,
as well
as that from the
Epimerismi,
shows that the Greeks of a
later date in- corporated
the forms in
--wv
in their
paradigms.
There is
a
notewoi-thy
passage
of Suidas
quoted by
the
same
scholar
: 'i-^ETov
dvTi
mv k^ETOjaav,
cv'iKwQ'Xtyfroj'TOVTO Tij^mloQkcu AvTiaBfirjg, ky^ETOVce Kai
KXf/Vop^^o)'
uvtoIq roovj'Ta eIq
/uici)'
^.tu
Tijy
avTijyJ
It seems to me
by no means
proved
that
here, as
has been more
than
once conjectured,
we
should
write
exETwr
and Xf
yfVwr
;
we
may
rather
appeal
in
support
of this isolated
-ray
in the 3 dual
imper.
to the
uncertainty
in the use
of the dual
(cp.
pp.
52 and
307)
which is
adequatelyexplainedby
the
rarity
of the
usage ;
indeed in the
above-quoted
verse
of the Iliad some
cop}dstsactually
wrote
KofXEiTip'
by an error.
Besides the doctrine of the
gi-ammnrians
is
here too
supportedby
the
analogy
of
Sanskrit,
which has for the 3
dvial
as distinguished
from the second
person
the well-established ter- mination
-tdm,
e.g.
i-fdin=*'i-ru)y,
pa-tdni,
sida-tdm.
Cp.
Delbriick
Verb.
p.
61. But whilst with the Indians the termiuation of the im- perative
coincided with that of the
preterite
and the
optative,
a
distinc- tion
of vowel
was
pi'oduced
in Greok between
-rrir
and
-rwr.
65 The 3 dual middle cannot l3e
recognised,
as it is identical with one
form
of the third
person plural: \viaOu)y. For
everywhere
a
plural
foi-m
can
replace
the dual form.
CH. XIV.
CONJUNCTIVE.
311
IL CONJUNCTIVE.
As
we always
start from the
simplest
and most
transparent
forma- tions,
it will be
our
first
duty
in the
case
of the
conjunctive
to examine
those forms in which the
principle
of formation of this mood comes out
quite
clear and unconfused. These are
those in which tlie
piu-e
root is
lengthened by a
short "-sound
(e or o), provided
with the
primary
personal endings,^
and
employed conjunctivally.
We have
ah-eady
repeatedlyquoted
l-o-fxev by
the side of
'l-fMev
as an instance of this method of formation. In VecUc Sanskrit " for
such forms
are
quite
unknown to the
post-Vediclanguage
" there are
accordmgto
Delbriick
p.
193
only
a few instances
of the kind
:
e.g.
from
han 'kill.'
conj.
han-a-ti
(=
Zdi.
jan-a-i-ti)
with ind. han-ti
(
=
Zd.
jaih-ti)
:
from
as
'
be
'
conj.
as-a-fi
(=
Old Pers.
ah-ci-tiy,
Zd.
ahh-a-t)
be he
ind. as-ti he is
(
= O. Pers.
aq-tiy,
Zd.
aq-ti).
Still the
principle
of formation is
completely
established
by perfect
and
aorist forms which will
occupy
us
further
on,
and also
by
the
analogy
of
the Persian
languages.
Hence the most
primitiveconjunctive
is
distinguished
from the cor- responding
indicative in
no
other
way
than the thematic indicative from
the
primitive
indicative. We
may
state this thus
:
conj.
han-a-ti
:
ind. han-ti
\\
ind. hhar-a-ti: ind.
hhar-ti,
or, putting
it
otherwise,
bhara-ti
may
be at the
same time
conjunctive
and
an
indicative
by-form
of hhar-ti. On this fact is based the
explana-56
tion,
which in
'
Zur
Chronologie
'
^
(pp.
49
fF)
I endeavom-ed to
give
of
the
origin
of the
conjunctive.
It is
highly probable
that
formations,
which
are
completely
alike in
appearance,
were
also in substance and
originally alike,or
in other
words,
that the
a (t,o)
of the thematic in- dicative,
and the
a
of the
primitiveconjunctive
at first served the
same
end. On
p.
9
(cp.p.
138) we took the thematic vowel to be
a stem-
forming element, by
which the nominal character of the stem was more
sharjily
denoted. Hence if hhara-ti meant
originally
'
bearer
he,'
from
this
on
the one
hand the
meaning
'
he is a
bearer
'
with the force
'
he is
engaged
in
bearing
'
and so
the durative force of the indicative
might
be
developed,
and
on
the other hand the
meaning
*
he is destined
to
bear,'
'
he is to
bear,'
i.e. the
conjunctiveapplication.
The Greek
language
has
preserved a
not
wholly insignificant
number of such
primitiveforms, though only
in its oldest
phase,
the Homeric dia- lect.
All these forms were
entu-ely
misunderstood
by
the older
gi-am-
marians,
and
were wrongly
taken
as conjunctives
'
with a
shortened
mood-vowel.'
Though
this assumed
shortening
in the
conjunctive
of all moods which is elsewhere
always
inclined to
lengthening,
must have
appeared
to
every
thoughtful
scholar
an extremely
dubious
process,
even
^
Delljriick has
proved
with
certainty
that
even bej"ond
the
sjjhere
of Greek
the
conjimctive
had at first
only
the
primary personal endings,
and that hence we
cannot talk of
a
'
conjunctivus imperfecti,' as
the Sanskrit "
grammarians have
hitherto called the shorter forms.
Cp.
'
The Old-Indian
Verb,'
p.
192.
312 MOODS OF THE PEBSENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM. cii. xiv.
comparative philologyonly
arrived
by degrees
at the correct
view,
hccause it
was only by degrees
that the forms of the Vedic dialect which
bore on
the
question
came to
light.
In
Bopp (Vergl.
Gr.
" 716)
Greek
foi-ms of the kind mentioned
are not
yet put
in their
rightplace.
So
dependent
are we
all
upon
the
discoveiy
of facts. A more correct view
was
given
in
my
'
Tempora
und
Modi,'
and afterwards
by
Schleicher
Comi^end."
289. Since then
Westphal especially
has done
good
service
for the Greek
conjunctive,
and also Joh. Paecli in his doctoral disserta- tion
'
de vetere
conjunctivi
Graeci formatione
'
(Breslau1861),
which is
evidently
due to
Westphal'ssuggestions.^
Besides Herm. Stier in
my
^'
Studien ii.
p.
125 ff. has
thoi-oughly
discussed various sides of the
Homeric
conjmictive
formation. All Greek
conjunctives
may
be best
divided into three classes
:
1)
Those in which the mood-element remains
as a
short a-sound
;
2)
Those in which the
sign
of mood consists in the
lengthening
of an
alreadyexisting
a-sound
:
3) Apparent exceptions
to the firsttwo methods of formation.
1) Conjunctives
with
a
short a-sound inserted.
With
regard
to these forms
comparativegrammar
finds itself in the
most decided
antagonism
to the doctrine of the old
grammarians,
which
has maintained itself with
slight
modifications
up
to ovu- own time. The
old
grammarians,
in tlieii-
absolutely
un-historic
way
of
regarding
the
question,starting
from the Attic
dialect,were
obliged
to set down in the
first
place
the firstof the three recorded forms of the 1
plur.conj.
aor. dC^nev,
Oew^ttr,(hioner,
and to
regard
the other two as
afiections of this
primi- tive
form. In this
respect
the
fragment
of Herodian
(ii.
267 ed.
Lentz)
is instructive. We
see from
this,
that
no
fewer than three
phonetic
aflfections and
one
hypothetical
intermediate form
{BuMf^ur)
were
necessary
for this
grammarian
in order to
get
from his
starting-point,
the Attic
diofjieu
to the Homeric
Qeiojxei'
;
viz. fii-st
ciaipeaig
:
Qil)}XEv diio^er,
second
Tr\eoi'a!Tiiu(, : OEwfitr^BtiwjjLey (the
latter form
being
merely an assumed
one),
third
rrvcrroXii : deiuj/derdEioj.iE)\
The ciu'rent modern
grammar
substitutes for the
very
dubiou.s
expression-XtoraiT^/oc
extension or
lengthening,
and
can
get
no
farther
(cp.
Buttmann
1.^516,
La Roche
homer.
Untersuchungen
p.
152
fi".).
For
comjmrative
gTammar,
on
the
contraiy,
the third form is not
only
the earliest
recorded,
but also the
most
original, setting
aside
a
slightmodification,
and the others are to
58
ba
explained
from it. It needs
no
argument
to show that the latter
view,
which stai-ts from the oldest form recorded in Greek
literature,
and fi'om the
primitive
form
i-esulting
from
a
comparison
of this with
the foims
preserved
in Sanskrit and
Persian,
is the
only historical,
and
consequently
the
only
scientific view. The old view
was only possible
by reason
of the often-mentioned
error that the
poets
'
metri causa'
allowed themselves all conceivable Procrustean
operations.
*
The
view.expressedby
Paech and
repeated by Westphal,
that I
gave
the true
explanation onl}-
for the
one form
toixiva.s compared
with
tjiev,
has
no justifica- tion.
For
on
p.
2A"\ of that work of mine
-n-apaTijeTov,
Swofifv,deiofiev, Sa/xelere,
and
on
p.
247
"flofjL"v, areinfifvare
also mentioned. But I
gladly
admit that these
scholars have
essentiallypromoted our insight
into the structure of the
conjunc- tive,
especiallyby a more correct
explanation
of the
sigmatic
aorist forms with a
short
vowel.
CH. XIV.
CONJUNCTIVE. 313
The Homeric
poems
offer tlie
following
eleven
conjunctives
with
a
short vowel from
present
and
primitive
aorist stems.
Postponing
for the
present
the difficult
question
as to the
way
of
writing
the vowel which
precedes
the
mood-vowel, we
will
quote
the forms in
alphabetical
order
:
1)
"/\-"--cu
conjunctive
to aX-ru he
leajjcd(cp.pp.
90, 130).
The
breathing
is
givendifferently
in.the two
passages
(A 192, 207)
in which
the form occurs.
Herodian wrote
ciX-t-rdt,as
he wrote uX-o and
aXf.ui'(iQ ;
good
31. SS. have dXercu
(cp.
La
Roche),
which "La Eoche and
Bekker
rightly
follow.
2) E7ri-i3))-o-fxev
'C
262, K.- 334, Ka-a-pj^i-o-p.iy
K
97,
with the variant
jTtt-o-f^uy
to be discussed hereafter.
3)
l3X{]-e-Tai
p
472, conjunctive
to
jjXijTo(cp.p.
132),
with the variant
pX}](7tTai,
which I mention
only
because the imfamiliar character of these
old forms elsewhere too led the
copyists
into similar mistakes.
4)
yrw-0-p.ti'
TT
304.
5)
cw-o-^ur
H
299, 351, TT
184.
6) epd-o-jj-ev
A 62
; cp. p.
213. The
corresponding
indicative must
have been
*i:'pjj-/j(.
7) del-o-fiei'
A
143,
"*"
244,486, y
364
/.-am-OeZ-o-^/EV
"p
264,
cnvo-Ou-o-
fxui
2
409, Kara-deL-o-iiaL
X
111, r
17.
8) 'i-o-/.i"i-
with
a
short
i
(e.g.
aW
'io/jiei'
Z
526)
21
times,
with
a
long L (e.g.
B
440,
I 625 at the
beginning
of
a
verse)
8 times
according
to Stier Stud. ii. 129.
9) f.-tx"''-o-/L'""'
^ 128,
10) (7t{]-o-jj."1' (v.
1.
(TTtl-o-i-iei)
O
297,
TTap-eTTij-e-Toi'
(7
183
(v.
1.
CTrJyiTsro)').
11) (pdi-E-Tcu
\
173, (pdi'C-fjiefTda
S 87.
To these must be added also
1)
Two
passive
aorist forms :
ca/^//-"--" (M.SS. ccifiel-E-re)
H
72, 59
TpaTrei-o-fxev
r441, a314,
0
292,
and
perhaps re/jLeaarjOsl-o-fiet',
which
I. Bekker has
adopted
in 12 53
[refjEircrriOeioixei' ij/jeIq
for the traditional
2)
Two
perfectforms,
the common
s'lc-o-ney by
the side of the indi- cative
'tC'i-iiv
and
ne~(ild-o-i.i"y
(c
335
by eTreTridfjiey,
to which
we
shall
return when
treating
of the
perfect.
3)
The numerous
conjunctives
of
sigmaticaorists,
like
Ipvar/r-o-fiei',
cLfxEL^i-E-Tai,
which will
requirethorough
discussion hei-eafter.
The whole
gi-oup
consists of forms in which the mood-vowel is not
lengthened
either
by position
or
otherwise. For the 1
suig.
we could
not
imagine
a
form
*cw-o-/La or
anything
of that
kind,
because the vowel
in this
personal
form is
always long,
but for the second and third
we
might certainlyexpect
*Iu)-ei(;
^lu-si
coming
from ^luj-E-m
*cu)-"--i,
and
for the 3
plur.
*cu)-ov-(tl
proceeding
from ^cuj-o-yn
;
but
nothing
of the
sort occurs: instead of these we have forms like
yi w-w,
-yiw-tjc, -/yw-ij,
yiw-wfft. Perhaps
the fault lies with the record. For as
all such
fdl-ms,
if
they
wei'e
li"ig
at
all,
must have been
alreadyantiqiiated
at the
time of
transcription
into the new
alphabet,
we
have
no
better
authority
for the correct
reproduction
of the sound of TNOEIZ TNOEI
rNOOSI,
GEEI2 AAMEEI2 than for that of HE02. On the other hand the
transition into the
all-absorbing o-conjugationby
the addition of
a
the- matic
vowel to the root-vowel is estabhshed
by
numerous
facts. I need
only
mention
jyacj,
iXaw and other formations discussed
on
p.
148. Hence
it is difficult to decide.
314 JMOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AOEIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
There
are only
two
points
still to be discussed
:
the
quantity
and the
quality
of the stem-vowel. The
quantity
offers
no
difficulty
after what
we
have seen on
p.
135. For
if,as seemed
probable
to us thei-e,
the
vowel of such aorists was originally long
and
only
sometimes
shortened,
all forms are
thus most
simply explained.
In
cw-o-jjer, n-Ty'i-e-Tor,
Oii-yQ
we see
the
originallength reta,ined,so
that
we cannot talk of
any
lengthening
at all,
any
more
than in
yrw-j/c, yrw-wcri,
or
in
fl\ij-E-rat.
60 Some
slightdifficulty
is
presentedby 'i-o-fxey,
for no reason for the
length
is
discoverable : we
should therefoi'e have to find this in the
analogy
of
yvw-o-ntv,Bei-o-f.ur.
But in this
case,
as we
saw,
the
long
vowel is the
exce})tion,
the short
one predominates.
Besides it is
an
indisputable
fact
that, compai-ed
with the more
fixed
quantity
of the hard
vowels,
I
is
everywhere subject
to much
gi-eater
variations in
respect
of
length
and shortness.
The
question
as to the
quality
is much less
easily
settled. As the
o-
sound
always appears
as
w,
the t-sound
as
/,
only a ("/)
and
e
remain to
be discussed. But in these the tradition vaiies most
perplexingly
between
?/
and the
diphthong ei.
Untold
quantities
of dust have been
stin-ed
up
around the forms
belonginghere,
and the
unlucky theory
of
lengthening
combined with
an over-hastyattempt
to arrive at a
general
rule has cast more
darkness than
light
upon
this
subject. Westphal,
Method. Gr. i,
2, 286, was
the fii-stto view the
case more
correctly,
without, however, making
it
quite
clear. We must in this
question
deal at the
same
time with the forms with the short
mood-vowel,
and
with those
which, according
to the
analogy
of the thematic
conjuga- tion,
show
a
long
vowel
instead;
and hence we must
put Beiujiey
and
BiiM side
by
side with
(TTr]ojjEi'
and
(rrijuim.
There
is,however, by
no
means a
large
numbei- of forms in
question,
but
only
9 aorist and
present
stems and 5
passive
stems
altogether:
\dz.
1)
The stems
/3Xj/, Bar],
r/, ip?;,
drj,
Kixn
with
an e
in the stem.
2)
The
passive
stems
Ea/ir],
/Jiyi], crani], rpa-j], "l"ai'T],
of which the
same
holds
good.
3)
The stems /3"7,
or?;,
(pdr],
with an a
in the root.
Here
are altogether
14 stems.
The M.SS.
give
us no sure
basis in this
question,
as even the best of
them show the
greatest
fluctuations,
but with
a
decided
preference
for
the sound
ei,
and
besides,as can
be
seen
from the
proofs
in La Roche
(Textkiitik,
405
fi".,
Homer. Unters. 152
f.)
fall into
frequent
confusions
of
conjunctive
and
optative
forms
(/Luy//j;c,
f^iy^'yc,
/t^'y^'/c).
On the
61 other hand
we
have at least for a
certain
group
of forms
positive
infor- mation
as to the doctrine of
Aristarchus,
i.e.
we
know
1)
That Aristarchus wrote
0or"/"j(X 73),amriiri(T 27),Oyrjc(Z 432),
as
DidymiLS
testifies at all three
places(ovrcog
'A.
cia rwc cvn ?;);
2)
That in ^ 244 he read
dtlof-tfy accoi-ding
to Aristonicus
'
"/
cnrXri
vTi (fuiierraXKEV rh
Qtliofiti' (?p.
E. M.
p.
727, 30)
;
3)
That in P 95 he read
TrepKr-iiwa-' according
to
Didymus
'
^Apiarap-
XOe
^(O
TOV T).'
Of these three decisions of Aristarchus modern
scholarsliip has,strange
to
say, accepted
the first
two,
but
rejected
the
third,on
the
strength
of
a
phonetic
theory,which, as we
shall
see,
is
entirelyarbitrary.
This
theory
is stated in the
following
words
by
I.
Bekker,
Hom. Bl. i.
p.
227,
*
this
same
e,
if the
verse requii-es
that it should be
long,passes
before
o
CH.
XIT,
CONJUNCTIVE.
315
and
M
into
et,
before
?/
into
";.'
La
Eoche,
Horn. Unters.
p.
152, blindly
follows,adding
much that has
no bearing
on
the
point.
As the funda- mental
assumption
of
a lengthening
of the stem-vowel is
false,
this is
enough
to make the whole
theory collapse.
But even
without this in- sight
into the
genesis
of the forms it is not hard to i-efute it. La Roche
himself
givesnumerous exceptions
to this asserted rule
:
e.g.
'O^vrrfjog,
'Axi^yjor, "Ap)]nc, TrdXrjor.
How can we
speak
of
a
disinclination to the
combinations
rjo, i]ov, r]w
in
a
dialect which
gives
us forms like
njoc,
rrjor, vrfiot', rjovc,
?/o7,j'/u;, cl]Ofj.ev,
o(f"?wi',Trniijnra
in abundance? Even
I. Bekker did not venture to meddle with forms like
these,nor
with
participial
forms like
KeKcuprjoTci,KeKfiriwg,
t"tii](')ti,
and fell into self-
contradiction,
when in
spite
of
this,supportedby Zenodotus,
he advocated
the
reading
redvsiwt: instead of the
reOrrjujc
of Aiistarchus.
Evidently
Aristarchus knew
nothing
whatever of
any
su,ch doctrine
;
in the other
grammai-ians
no trace of it is to be found
;
and scholars who
layespecial
stress
upon
the
weight
of
tradition,ought
least of all
men
to favour
a
X"rio7-i
such an
invention. Hermann
Stier,
in the
paper
mentioned
above,
has
justlyexpressed
himself
against
this
theory,
but he
might
well
have
rejected
it more
decidedly.
As in
our view the
length
of the stem-vowel is
original,
we shall,
to
begin with, gladlyaccept
a
good tradition,
where such is to be
62
foiuid. Hence we write with Aristarchus in P 95
nepiariicjfr^
which is
formed
precisely
as
yrwwo't,
dwujut,
the latter also in Hesiod
Theog.
222.
In the same
way
we
read also in O 297
ff-ii-o-fiey
like
yroj-o-fAev,
?w-o-^")'.
As no one
disputes(rrij-yjQ
P
30, or//?;
E
598,
and
Tritpirrii-E-ro)'
"t 183, we
here
get
the
simple
series
:
yj/CO-O)
arrj-rjS yvca-rjs
(rrrj-r] yvw-rj
(TTrj-e-TOV
(TTrj-o-yifv yvai-o-fiev
(TTTj-co-ai yvai-ui-cn
Hence it at
once
becomes
probable
that
'i-ftrj-r,
which is
quiteparallel
to
t-a-j]-y,
formed its
conjiinctive
in the
same
way,
i.e.
j3ii-u),
not
ftel-w,
though
all M.SS have the latter in Z
113,
the
only passage
in which the
form is
found, uTrfp/j//?;
and
ii^fjiirj,
as
is
commonly
read in I
501,
11
94,
Kara-ftii-o-^Ev
in K 97 with the best of all M.SS. the Venetus
A, Eiri-jSti-
o-f-iev
1^
262 with the codex
H(arleianus), supportedby
the
reading
of the
im2:)ortant
codex
M(arcianus)kirifiijiroi.ur,
as
La Roche
gives
it at this
place,
or
"7r(/3j'/o/,t"j'
with
superscribedno,
as
he
quotes
it in Horn. Unters.
\).
151
;
and of course also
(/)"^";
A
128, ^ 275,
and
"pe!]-ij
U 861.
The
case is somewhat difierent with the "-stems. Still I do not see
why
we should not
accept
"
against
the
opinion
of Stier " Ai'istarchus's
av-i^-^
B
34,
almost the
only
form which has
authority,
a-^?/??
P
631,
for which
the M.SS.
give a
specimen
collection of senseless
readings(afijei, afelr]
etc.), i.ud{pj
"
471 in
spite
of the
ei
of the
M.SS.,
Oz/jjc
Z
432,
n
96, 0//j}
k
301, o 51,
for each of which there is some
slightsupport,
and in the
same
way
ca/.n'ir]c
T
436,
jjiyvyc
e 378, o-aTrZ/jj
T
27,
0f(iI'pj
X 73.
Copyists
have
every
whei-e
a
tendency
to
ei,
but the more i-ecent editors
rightly
follow Aristarchus. There is
no
dispute
either about
j3Xi]-e-tiii
p
472.
Hesiod
givesonly
the
one
form
OEirj0pp. 556,
where
ei
is
generally
written. There remain stillthe 1
sing,
and 1
plur.:
for these the tradi-
316 MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AOEIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
63
tion
only
knows
ei,
hence caeiw K
425, E^e/w
A 567, fieOeiw
T
414,
fci\ti(i)
A
26, Ipewfitr, Oei'ofity, Kixfio^er^T^aweioiiev.
The
diphthong
COuld
only
be
explainedas
the
weakening
of
an
??,
for the older form doubtless had tliis
vowel. But
as we
have
seen
how often this
ti
creeps
in
erroneously
for
an
j;
which has other evidence in its
favoui",
it is not too bold to assume
that the
diphthong
in these
eight
forms
only originated
in the incorrect
notion of the
copyist,
that
(.rj,
i^o
etc. were
the normal
forms,
and that
"1 was to be
regardedas
the usual Ionic
lengthening
for
t.
We made
a
similar
conjecture on
p.
103 for
tiarai,more correctlyi'larai.
As soon
as we write all forms with
t],
we
.
have the strictest
analogy
between the
stems in
o, a,
and
e.
It follows from what we
have said that there are
very
few
cases
of
a
real
lengthening
left. Two of these have been
alreadymentioned, 'i-o-^ev
(p.314)
and
^//-j/c.
We are
probably
not
wrong
in
seeing
in the
r]
of
the indicative
0??-/u
the
source
of the
length
in the
conjunctive.
The
third form of this kind is the
entirely
isolated
/.ut-eIw,ixppa
i^ojo'im
fXETuw
^ 47
(cp.
X 388
4wo7(Tii'ixeriw).
Here too it is natural to
employ
the
same
principle
of
explanationas
in
^//-r;.
Gottfr. Hermann
thought
he had discovered
a
3
sing,e'iri or
i'jrj
to this 1
sing,
e'ioj
(Opusc.
ii.
32).
Hence in I 245 he wrote
ravr' atvS}":^fi8oiKa
Kara (ppeva, fjif]
ol OTreiXaj
"KTeXe(TU"cri.
6eoi,rjfxiv
6e
8r]
cucrifJ-ovflj],
(cp.
p 586).
The M.SS. however have the
optativeair],
and this
can be
easilyexplained.
I. Bekker wavered between the two
readings.
In
1843 he wrote at both
placesiuj,
in 1858
eirj,
in 1861
(Hom.
Blatter i.
228)
he
preferred///;.
The more
recent editors are
doubtless
right
in
retainkig
the
optative.
" A
conjunctive,
in which
lengthening
after the
fasMon of the
singiilar
indicative is unmistakeable, is fm-nished
by
"tw='(w
m Sophron. (fr.
2
Ahrens),quoted on
p.
300 in
comparison
with the
imper.
t'l. An
altogether
abnormal mood-form
tT-n-l-ri
(aia-
(TTuhj,
M.SS.
avatTTatj])
has been
adopted
in Find.
Pyth.
iv. 155
(cp.
Ahrens Dor.
133).
Here it has been
supposed
that
a was
lengthened
to
ai,
and the
analogy
of the
similarly
isolated Homeric
Trnpafdaiijcn,
ex- plained
in another
way
on
p.
40,
has been
pressed
into the ser\dce. But
the
assumption
is
completely
incredible. Could
dra-oru-jj (cp.
Homer
ffr"/jj)
be the connect form ]
64
2) Conjunctives
in whidi
a
previously existing
a-sound
is
lengthened.
The rule that the short thematic vowel of the indicative is
lengthened
in the
coiijunctive,
is
so
well established from Homer
onwards,
that
we
need
hardlygiveany
instances.
Conjunctive
fonns like
ri/xwA", aivoujje,
api'iyi],
(j)"v-yMfAev, Tvaiiai(ryvyr]Tt,
tXtcwai,
ij"Epi}roi'
"
(iyw/iai,rt)jat, ^^fpf/rni,
TTtiiiLjjLtda,
'intitiOe,
TriXtDrrai "
uuj, tXOtji.,
Xit/3/j, 7ra0wyu")', ra/JJ/rf, (payiofTi
"
/\a(iw/Lta(, X/7r"/-ai, yeruiiitOa,
7r(9"/(T0e,'
rpaTrwi'rai
are
found
by
hundi'eds
even
in the Homeric
poems.
These forms follow
exactly
the
same prin- ciple
of formation
as
the
correspondhig
forms in the Vedic dialect,so
that
e.g.
the
following
Homeric
conjunctive
forms
agi-ee
letter for letter
with then- Indian
equivalentspointed
out
by
Delbriick
:
CH. XIV,
CONJUNCTIVE. 317
a-(fd-ti =
ciyjj-a-i C 37,
ayrj
H 335
vidd-si =
'idrj-s (forfi8r]-m)
vidd-ti = I'S//(forfidrj-n)
hhard-ti =
"^ep?; (for(fyeprj-ri)
voJcd-ti =
(iTTT]
(forfenr-q-TL
(from va-Vfif^n-ti)
from
j:e-j:enr]-Ti).
In Zend the same
rule holds
good,
so
that
e.g.
hard-t
(witha secon- dary
ending)
is
parallel
to the
quoted
form
bhard-ti^=(pepr].
A
more
completeagi-eement
cannot be
imagined,
and hence the
occiuTence
of this
conjunctive
formation for the earliest
period
in the life of
language
is
put
entirely
out of doubt. I
lay
stress
upon
this
fact,
because
we can see
from
it how
extremelyimprobable
it would be
that,
instead of the
long
vowel
which characterises this
mood,
that which is
especially opposed
to the
usage
of the
conjunctive,
the short thematic
vowel,
should
capriciously
make its
appearance.
It
was only
the
incompleteness
of the mateiial
then
accessible, especially
in the
case
of
Sanski-it,
that could have led
me
to the view
expx-essed
in
'
Tempora
und
Modi,'
that the
conjunctive
was
to a
certain
degi-eeonly
an experimentalmood,
and that the
long
vowel
might occasionally
be shortened
again.
The Italian
languages
show the same fonnation of the
conjunctive.
The
long
a
of the Latin.
ye7'"s.
Old Jj^t.
/erdf,/erdmus,/e7-dtis, audidmus,
docedmus,
and
similarly
in the
passive,
are
now,
in
opposition
to earlier
opinions
to a
diflerent
effect,generallyrecognised as identical with the
same
sound in Sanskiit and Zend. Of the
same formation
are Oscan
55
forms like deicans=~Liit. dicant and Umbrian like
far^ia-=faciat.
The
interchange
between 0
and
e,
in a manner
corresponding
to the
indicative,
is characteristic of Greek
: by
means of this with true Greek
delicacy
the
originally existingparallelism
between indicative and
conjiuictive
is
restored,
whOe the contrast
heivfeenferhrnts
and
feramiis
does not allow
us to
recognise
the
originalprinciple
of formation
so
completely.
If we now
ask what was
the relation between this formation of the
conjunctive
and the
primitive
formation
previouslydiscussed,we can
hardly
content om^selves with the bare fact that the
conjunctive
wa;S
distinguished
from the indicative in both instances
by
the addition of
a
short a.
For it would be hard to conceive of the modal force of such
an
addition. For the
primitive
foiTuation
represented by 'i-n-f^ur we
thought (p.311)
we
could discover a probableexplanation
in the
assump- tion
of a
nominal stem. For thematic verbs such
an explanation is
impossible,
for we can hardlysuppose
nominal stems with
a
long a. It
rather seems
that we
have here
merely
a
formation
upon analogy,
the
linguistic
instinct
findingonly
a quantitative
difference in the
primitive
forms after their
origin
had become
obscure,
and hence in the need of
setting
a conjimctiveby
the side of *bharati
(=(pep"-Ti)
which had be- come
fixed
as an indicative,creating
a *hhard-ti which differed
only
in
quantity.
For hhard-ti
:
hhard-ti
', '.
as-a-ti
:
as-ti. I will confess how- ever
that I am myself
not
quite
contented with this
explanation,
and that
a more satisfactoryjustification
of this
long
vowel would be
very
wel- come,
if it could be discovered.
3) Exceptions
and Variations.
"Verbs without a
thematic vowel
show,
with the
exception
of the
previouslyquoted
relics of a more
primitiveformation,
the
greatest
ten-
318 MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AOEIST STEM,
ch, xiv.
dency
to form tlicii-
conjunctive-
after a thematic fashion. It is the
same
feature of the
history
of
language
as that of which we have learnt to
recognise
so
many
instances in the indicative. Just as on
p.
169
we saw
that from the suffix
-ra comes on the
one
hand
-j^o {ca^-ra-^er
but
KUfi-vo-
l-iEv),
but on
the other
-va-o (*Ofi/Lt"'a-o-/x""'),
so
here too this twofold
possibility presents
itself,
a)
treatment of the final vowel after the fashion of the thematic
vowel
: Ivva-^iu conj.
cvfwyLai ;
and
66 b)
addition of a
thematic
vowel,
which in the
conjunctive
is
naturally
long: 0f(-f("r,conj.*(pa-w-iiE)'
contr.
0w-^"J'.
The method of formation denoted
a)
is limited to
disyllabicstems,
the final vowel of which could
evidently
the most
easily
pass
into the
analogy
of the thematic
conjugation.
Two forms of this kind
are found
in Homer : Evrrjai
Z 229
according
to Herodian,
while
Tyrannion
wrote
dvyijai,
and
Kifyujvrai
A 260. A third instance
l-Kiar^TaL
IT 243 is
very
doubtful. Aristarchus
according
to Aristonicus
and
Apollonius
in the
Lexicon took the form as an indicative with
irregularlengthening.
Zenodotus
absvirdly
read
ETrtcrrtarat.
The
conjunctive
can
hardly
be
defended
here,
but
certainly
the
rj
in the indicative is also
extremely
singular,
ciiorrru with the indie. cUi'tcil would be taken in the same
way,
if the
optative
dloiro
p
317 did not show that the verbal stem else- where
too
passed
into the thematic
conjugation.
Hesiod Scut. 110
has the form
/.tapi
wyLtEo-y',
the
parallel
to
the
optativenaprolfxeda
X 513.
In Attic writers forms like
"wifTTi]Tai,
cvvriade,cvruyrTcu are
universally
recognised
as conjunctives;
so too
Trpiw/Jiai.
Here the
conjunctive
force
attaches itself
everywhere
to the letters
rj
and
w
introduced from the
thematic
conjugation.
But there is one more rare
method of formation of this
mood,
accord- ing
to which other vowels also
appear
in the
lengthened mood-syllable.
Bergk
de tit. Arcadico
(Hal.1861)p.
xv
deserves the credit of
having
first collected such formations.
They are
the
following
:
1) ouiToi
Arcad.
conj.,
inscr. from
Tegea (Fleckeisen's
Jahrb.
1861,
p. 587)
line 19
:
oaq.
ap
^iaroi
trfeiQ
i^cifjiq.
2)
cvi'af.iai
inscr. from Drerus
(Gott.
Nachr. 1855
p.
104)
1.41
: aiteviriu)
on A.a
cvrajjiui
kcikov.
3) ipdrai
Find.
Pyth.
iv. 92
:
o(j)patiq . . tparai
(v.
1.
epdrai).
4)
'i/rdi'Ti C. I.
no. 3053,
1. 11 inscr, from Cnossus : oV^
u"p
'irram
(v.
1.
IffHt'Ti)
i.e.
oTTwc
oiii'
dcwiTi; cp.
Stud. i.
1,
246.
5)
KadidTurai C. I.
no,
2671 from
Calymnia
1. 42
:
ottwq /ij)
dia
\pa(j)uv
tCjv
TTpoy/iftrwi'
Kpivofxii'u)v eiq
xXttw
rapaj^ctv
6
cd/xog
KaditTTcirai.
"irL(TVfi(TTaroi
inscr. from
Tegea
1. 19.
67 irapiffraraL
inscr. from Andania 1. 72
(Sauppe Tzapia-Tdrai) ;
ta'
Be
fxij
Trapiararai
eirl
doKifiaaiay.
6) "n-poTiBtjiTi
inscr. fi'om Andania ed.
Sauppe
Gott. 1860 1.89
o/ra ku
ol
OvoPTte T^'JTi ri^L
Kparq. TrporldtjiTi (Sauppe7rpoTiO)~]yTi). Cp.
1. 93
cu'aTiBtjTai.
7) KaTU(TK"vdadt\vTi
ib. 1. 93
onwQ
KaracrtcevdaQ^vri (Sauppe -Qi]yTi)
Oijaavpoi.
8) "!rpoyp('i(j)r]i'Ti
ib. 1. 162
o nr
7rpoypn(pt]rTL
(Sauppe -"p}]\'Ti).
The
strangest
of all the forms is
i]yTui="(Ti
in the
inscription
from
Andania 1. 85 oVot
ku j^rrai
Ik
rdq ajitripaQttoXeoc,
for which
Sauppe
writes
j/i-rai.But the sense
appears
to
require
the former,
and the form
is
equallystrange
in either
case.
It looks as
if to utI,
which is several
CH. XIV. CONJUNCTIVE. 319
times
quoted
as Doric
(Ahrens
p. 321)
a
middle ^errai was formed. To
this h'Tcu
iji'TUL
as a
conjunctive
is related
preciselyas Trporid-qvri
is to
irporidevTi.
In several of these forms it is not
imjiossible
to
assume a contraction,
especially
for
cwdixai,'iauvn,
in which d
may
be the Doi'ic contraction
from
"o or
ow, just
as
(jkwti,
e-n-iaTcii'Ti
(Ahrens 312)
are
generally
re- garded
as contracted. It is true that
oe
and
at]
are regularly
contracted
to
7]
with the Dorians
(Heracl."7r(/3/;=e7rt/3(("/),
but as
there
are
excep- tions,
to which
belong
e.g.
Pindaric infinitives like
vikciv, opdv, mydi'
and the dative of the
adjectivedpydeic cVpydirt,
the
possibility
of
ex- plaining
-ffTaroi
from
*oTdrjrai,
?)"a.roifrom
*cea-r]Toi
is not
entii'ely
ex- cluded.
But it is more difficult to assume that forms in
-rjiTi
have
originated
from contraction. There
are
absolutely
no analogies
for the
contraction of
";w
or even ew
to
rj.
At the utmost it would be
possible,
if
we were to start from forms in
-rj-u-m (cp.(^n-o-fier),
as is demanded
by consistency
with
our
discussions
on
p.
313,
to
get
from
*ridt]-o-i'Tt
to
ridi]-vTt as
from ttXeTui' to
irXelv,
leiov to helv
(p.210).
The
length
of the
vowel would be of the
same
nature as in
0"'/?;c.
We must add further
some
conjunctives
of
present-stems
in
w,
viz.
ore KEV " (wt'i'viTciire reoi
Kcil ivret'Tinorrai cudXct
to 89,
rroWui he
re TrevKai
aijEipoire
"
prfyrvvraL
vtt'
avTwv
Hes. Scut. 377 after
wc ote
and
a
pre- ceding
TriawtTi, wc
fiijfioi
x"7'e''A.a
prjyi'vrai
Hipponax
fr.
19,
4 Be.^ The
68
strange
forms ciaa-i^eSdi'vvTai and
ctcKTKEhdywai,which stand
as
conjunc- tives
in Plato Phaed.
p.
77 do not seem to be believed in
now.
If we take
a
general
view of the whole
case,
it
seems to me
that the
assvimption
of
a contraction in these forms is not
very probable.
b)
For the
great majority
of the
conjunctives
of vmthematic verbs
the mood-vowel is added
on to the stem
quite
after the fashion of the
thematic
verbs, so that for the most
part
the former fall under the
same
rule
as the latter. For the thi-ee
persons
of the
singular
in the
active and the 3
plur.
act. and mid.
no other method of formation
was
at all
possible
but that
representedby 't-w,
"";"",ijj,
t-wo-t.
For the 2
plur.
act. too there is
no trace of
a
conceivable and
pronounceable *t-"-rf,
but
only 'i-r)-Te.
It is
easilyintelligible
that
by degrees
other
forms,possible
in
themselves,
become assimilated to those with the
long vowel, so that
e.g.
the
"i-o-^Ev
discussed
on
p.
311
only
continues to exist
as an
archaism
in
Homer,
and
was everywhere
else
supplantedby 'iujfxev.
We can
follow
tolerablyexactly
the
stages
of the
jorocess
by
which
the later rule
by degreescompletely
thrust itself into the
place
of the
earlier. In
many
instances the two vowels still stand side
by
side. A
sufficient number of
examples
of forms with
long
vowels like
y)w";c, cmjuja-i
have been
alreadygiven
above.
By
the side of these we
find also those
with the short stem-vowel^ like
u"J)-e-)]
IT
590,
k-rfw/ifr x
216,
(ttBiwixEv
-n-
383, (f"6E(t)a-i 10 437,
and
numerous instances from the root
ee
like
ew A
119,
Erjm
B 366. From Herodotus
we
may quote
dirii-it)m vii.
226,
^Ew(7L iv.
71,
e-miJEMi^iEi'
vii.
50,
while
by
the side of these contracted
forms are in abundant
use. The Dorians too are not disinclined to the
open
forms
e.g. dvrt-7rpid-r]-Tai Delph. 52,
10 edd. Wescher and
Foucart,
fy-J')]\T]6i(i)i'ri
tab. Heracl. i. 152 and Bem is
quoted more than once from
the
fragments
of
Sappho,
thus
oTTirat;
yap
ev Oeu) Herodian ii. 267.
*
Cp.
La Roche, Grammatische
Untersuchungen.
Ztschr. f. d. osterr.
Gymn.
Sept. 1874,
p.
408.
320 MOODS OF THE PEESENT AND SIMPLE AOKIST STEM. ch. xiv.
In the case
of
some
forms it is natural to derive them
by
'
trans- ference
of
quantity'
from the most
primitive
forms discvissed
on
p.
312,
69
e.g.
in
fittvim',
which
may
be related to the Homeric
/3;;r,-//")', as twQ
is to
the older form
yor,
ftarnXiwQ
to
fta(n\7]("i:.
This
explanation
is most
probable
for the Homeric
'iuyjitv
T
402, if,
with Buttmann Lexil. ii.
131,
we refer it to the root
a satisfy(=Lat. sa
in
sa-tici\sa-tis).*a-o-/.(f
r,
*ii-(i-fiEi'
would be
a
1
plur. (from a
lost
*a-^i, *"/-A")
of
precisely
the
same formation as
fttj-o-^ev,
and
by
the
same phonetic process
we arrive
at
e(i)-f.iiv.
But
as
there
are certainly
also forms in which the
long
mood-
vowel is attached to the
root,
it is
hardlypossible
to decide in
any par- ticular
case,
which
was
the
course
taken
by language.
By
f;\rthe most usual forms at all times
wei^e
the contracted. For
contraction
we
may
even
quote analogies
of the Yedic
language
e.g.
dd-tl=cu)-m,
dhd-ti^Ofj,
so that the Homeric
cwijai sm'passes
such
Sanskrit forms in
antiquity.
Here too different
possibilities againpresent
themselves in
particular
cases.
For
instance,
yrwfxtv may
come
from the
primitive
y^w-o-fiey
just
as well
as
from the later
yrw-M-fiEj',
4'vyi"/3/\//-"i 77
204 from
'",\fiJ.ft\rieTai
and
t,vidi3\j]r}-ai, drjaiT
403 from
diktat
and
Brii^ai,/Li"9w/.t")'
K 449 from
/.uOjjn/jsi'
and
fitOe(""fict'.
The contracted forms are
very
numerous
in
Homer and
Herodotus,
and
by degi-ees supplant
the
open
forms almost en- tirely
in all dialects.
Compare ^ai
O
359, fieBiiim
N
234, K-txjJ"'' (Bekker,
La B.
ul-^rifTi
as if from
k7"(w)
/u
122, jjaJm s 86, t7ri/3"/ro"'
xL
52, trwijueBa
N
381, Tf'ifnvXijm
(M.SS. TiinrXrini)
Hes.
0pp. 301, Bi]~ai
Herod, i.
29,
rirnffrf]
vii.
53, avalorj
ii.
13,
eTTiSiOw ii.
13,
rpa.vTL=^(vm
tab. Heracl. i.
116, Trciparidij Epich.
fr.
112,
ciayrwrTi
tab. Heracl. i. 153.
The
case
of the
conjunctive
of
Kel/dai
is
quite peculiar.
In foui'
lines of Homer
icelrai stands
as a conju.nctive,
viz. T 32
ijvTrtp
yap
KelTai
ye Te\E(T(p('"poj' elc
eriavroy,
i2 554
o'ppa
kev "Ecraip
keItcIi
eiI
KXitrt^mv
uk-rjh)c, ft 102,
- 147 in the formula ai
kev a-lp mrElpov
keTtch. The
editors since Wolf have
generally
written
ki}Tui,
but the better M.SS.
have almost
alwaysice'i-cu,
with the
exception
of
Pap,
H 554.
Buttmann,
Aus. Gr. i.2
545, seems to me to have seen
the truth in
rejecting
the
alteration and
taking
u-eItui as a conjunctivecoinciduag
in foim with the
indicative. As
a
conjunctive
KE'i-rai has
evidently
arisen
by
contraction
70
from
KEi-E-Tui,
like
si/yu/3/\"/rat
from
si;/i/3\//-"--a(,
or as it\e~iv from
ttXeTo)',
i^EiciopoQ
from
(EioCMpoc,
Xov-Tcii from Xovetch. It is
noteworthy
that in
this
conjunctive
the
diphthong
before the
lengthened
thematic vowel
was not
wholly
extinct even in Attic times. In C. I. Gr.
no.
102 1. 10
we read
wap'
ib tw
keiui'tcu,
and Veitch
quotes keijtcil,
liciKE-qcrde
from the
best Attic
prose
writers,
and
TvpoaKiioiTai
from
Hippocrates,
while
i-j/ra*,
which has been so confidently
introduced into the Homeric
text,
is
nowhere established
beyond
a doubt,
and as a form
surpassing
the Attic
dialect in its
disfigui'ement
it
appears
altogether
unsuitable to that
early
time.''
We
come now to a question
much discussed,
and answered in
very
.
different
ways,
that of the accentuation of a
number of
conjunctives
of
the
conjugation
in
-j-u.
Ought
we to write
riOijTcti or nOrjrai
1 From
.
"
La Roche Ztschr. f. ost.
G}-mn. Sept. ISli,
p.
412,
defends
Kvrat,
which is
found at T
32,
fl 5.54 in A and. he
says,
at t
147 in
N, referring
to Keomai
X 510. "
Hartcl
'Homerische Studieu
'
iii.
10, argues
for (ceUrat with
ei
for the most
pai't
short.
CH. XIV. CONJUNCTIVE. 321
the
grammaticalpoint
of view the
questionshapes
itselfthus
:
is
rtdrjrai
formed
according
to
a),
i.e.
upon
the
analogy
of
Ivrr^Tut, or according
to
b)
i.e.
upon
the
analogy
of
i.vfj.i3\rj-ai
1 As with
regard
to accentuation
we
have no more
trustworthy
soui-ce
than the old
gi'ammarians,
we have
to deal in the first
place
with their doctrine.
Unfoi'tunately they are
by
no means
at one on
the
question.
We have
tolerablygood
informa- tion
for the
present-forms.
We know from the scholion
on
Z 229 that
'Af)iffrapy^oc mi
o't
ciWhi,
in
opposition
to
Tyrannion,
who
actually
wrote
dviijat,
took such forms as
proparoxytona,
and from Herodiani. 462 that
as distinguished
from
cvvwfiat,
tTr/orw/ncu,
f
i^wyitat, Iir-wyuai
were
regarded
as
regularly
con-ect.
Only
those middle
conjunctives,
which had
no active
form, were
accented as
propai-oxytona,
the rest as
properispomena.
We
cannot indeed discover
any
internal reason
for this
distinction,
but
per- .
haps
the rule was nevertheless based
upon
the actual
usage,
and it
gains
a
firm
support
from the fact that the same
holds
good
for the
optative.
On the other hand the Anecdota Oxoniensia ii.
344,
28 and i.
469,
7
give
us a canon
for the aorists which Lentz
similarly
asciibes to his
Herodian
(i.469, 7): Trdf
v-rroraKTiKor
fig
/uai
Xrjyoy etti
cevrepov fiecrov
71
aopiarov
kv
r^
aviOirrei
Trpoirapu^vi'e-UL
o'luv
Bwfxaia.ir6Qw(iai kcu ^ladwuai,
(Tyw^ai
a7r6(T-)(^(i)fiat.
Hence
e.g.
in A 799 we must accentuate ctTroVva'i'rai.
We can
again
discover
no
reasonable
ground
for the different treatment
of the two tenses.
Any
one
who
regards
the docti'ine of the ancients
as
the
unerring
standard of
our accentuation,
must therefore
adopt
this
contradictory
fashion. But the editors have
rarely
done this
; they
have
generallypreferred
the contracted
foi-ms,so that
e.g. TrpocrOrj
is
commonly
wiitten in Herod, vi.
109,
on
the
strength
of all the
M.SS.,
TTpof/rcti
in Demosth.
19, 118, vporiade
in Thuc. i.
71,
4
by
Bekker and
Classen
(Poppo -purirrBt)
etc. Even the latest
thorough
discussions of
these
questions by
Bellermann in the Ztschr. f.
Gymnasialwesen
xxiv.
p.
331,though containing
welcome and
very
abundant infoi-mation as to
the evidence of the M.SS.,
and
by
v.
Bamberg
ib. xxviii 28
ff.,
have not
led to
any
important
results. There remains
finallyonly
the fact in the
history
of
language
that from an
ancient date there has been
a
wavering
between the fuller contracted and the
(so
to
speak)slighterforms,
for
which it is
no longerpossible
to determine
definitely
the
extent and the
canon.
The same
question
returns in the
optative.
But in this mood
we have,
at
least,a
certain fixed
point
in the
supplanting
of the earlier
El by
the
diphthongoi.
For it is clear that
by
the
change
of vowel the
passage
into the
o-conjugation
was completed,
so that
we have stillless
reason
to wonder at
Trpooiro,
ett/Qooto,
than at
7r/jo'wj-rcu, tTrtdwiTcn. For
this
reason
TzpoayoivTo,
with which we
may
also
compare "n-p6ff-)(oi^t,
is
the
only
accentuation for which there is
authority.
Now between
the
optative
and the
conjunctiveundoubtedly
there is
an
analogy,
and
this is the
reason why ETr/uxwiTOf,Trporryw
and the like
are
genei-ally
written,
and we understand the view of the
grammaiian
who in his nde
gave
the
preference
to this
analogy.
Finally
we must touch
upon
one more
peculiaiity
of the
thematic
,
fonnation. We have
repeatedlyexpressed
om'selves in
opposition
to the
assumption
that the
long
thematic
vowel,
in which lies the
distinctive
mark of the
conjunctive,
can
be
occasionally
shoi-tened
again.
Such
an
assumption
had a
kind of
probabilityonly
so
long
as the short vowel in
forms like
"i-o-ntv, e'id-o-fitv
was not understood to be
original,
and that 72
Y
322 MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
in the
sigmaticaorists,
to which
we
shall
return,
could not be
explained.
After the
disappearance
of these
apparent analogies,
we shall
hardly
make
up
our
minds to
regard
a
shoi-t vowel in the
place
of
a long one
in
the
present
forms of thematic verbs as
possible.
In
fact,
in face of the
enormous
number of
i-egular
thematic
conjunctives,
there
are
only
9
forms which are suspected
of
having
been
abnormally
shorteiied. Herm,
Slier Stud. ii. 138
points
out
8,
to which
we must add
KeXevo/jLei'
in ^
6.59=802, a verse
which Stier has
jn'obablyintentionally passed over.
Of these 9
forms,
in the fii'st
placeone,
viz.
tpdofiei'
A
62,
has been
quoted
above
(p.313)
as a regular
formation
on
the
analogy
of verbs in
-jxi.
The two
conjunctives,
which
we
find in immediate succession B 232 f.
"iva
iiiayeuL
iv
(piXoTrjTi
rjv
r'
avTos aTTOvocrCJJi Karla'xeai,
may,
as Stier
saw,
be made
regularby writing
an
";, fxlayrjai, Karia-\7]ai.
"We find
a shortened
r]
in
lieiSXyjca
A 380. How
easilymight
the
copyists,
misled
by
the false notion that the
conjunctive
admitted either
quantity,
make
an error
bx
transcribing
the E ! One
apparent present-conjunc- tive
may
be taken
as an aorist,
viz. c 672
cos av inKT^ivyepSiS
vavTihXerai e'ivfKa
narpos,
whether
we
write rourf/Verai with
Paech, or
with Stier
assume an Aeolic
form like
dfiXXsLei'
11 651. The latter
course
is the
simpler.
It is
diiferent with the form
ftovXerai
A 67
at Kfv TTCoy
apvuiv
Kvlarji
aiycov
re
TfXeidiV
fiovXerai
avridcras
rjp-'i-v
anb
Xotyouafivvai.
Westphal
land
Paech
regard
this as
analogous
to
aX-e-rot,
presupposing
an
indicative
*i3ovX-Tai corresponding
to the Latin vol-t. But
as the
ov
of this
verb, as we saw on
p.
172, came
from
compensatory
lengthening,
and
presupposes
a primitive
form
*/9oX-ro-/ifu (cp.
also Gust.
Meyer
*
Die mit Nasalen
gebildeten
Prasensstaamme
'
p. 46),
the assumed
j3ovX-
f^al
vanishes. A
present
formed without the thematic vowel could
at the
utmost
only appear
as */3o\-/"cu.
But there is not a trace of this to be
73 found
anywhei-e
in Greek. Hence I
regard
it as
probable,
that the
true
reading
is
ftovX-qr
cwTiaaaQ,
as
Stier also
suggests.
The custom of
"v
TrXiipovc
ypafELv
might easilygive
rise to the
error. " Thus four forms
are
still left.
Among
them is S 484
^o
TO) (cat Ke Tis
evxerat.
avfjp
yvcoTov
fvl
jjieydpoicnv dprjiaX/cr^paXiTreadai,
where Gottfr. Hermann
Opusc.
iv. 41
regarded
the
conjunctivewith
K" as intolerable,
and
by an
easy emendation,
confirmed
by one
M.S.,
wrote Kcd
re ric. Cp.
La Boche ad loc.
fi/xfat
is here
decidedly
in- dicative.
There is still less
diflficulty
about ^659=802.
I'ivbpe
8va"
nep\
rwvde
KfXfvop.(v,
antp npiara
TTV^/LiaX' dvaaxofievco 7T(TrXriyfp.fv.
Here the
paraphrasepublishedby
Bekker takes the form
as indicative
{TTpo(jTu(jrjonty)
and there is
nothing
to
prevent
us
from
following
it. In
K 361
wr
S'
oT( Kap-)(ap6bovT"
hvai
Kvvt,
dbore
dTjprjs
ij
Kfiuid^
T}( Xayoiop(ivfiytrov (fififvis
alti
CH. XIV.
.
CONJUNCTIVE. 323
the
only difficulty
about the indicative arises from the fact that
v
Si
re
TTpodirjm fifji^Kwc
follows. But Paech
very
properly
remmds
us
of the
reading
recorded
as that of Aristarchus.
X"i"povav vXtjevra,
6 Se
irpodiijai
fi.
If
by a slight
emendation
we
write
o re
TrpoOiycn,
we get
a relative clause
with the
conjunctive,
introduced into
a simile which has the indica- tive,
a construction for which Paech
justly
compares
N
62,
p
518;
the alternative which he
oiFers,to take
tTTeiyerovas
the
conjunctive
from
a form
*in"iy-fji,
which is without
any analogy,
has
nothing
to
recom- mend
it."
Finally,we
have still to discuss M 42
CO?
8 or'
uv
i'v
Te Kvveaai Koi
avhpaiTi 6rjprjTrjpcnv
KUTTpios rje
Xe'cov
(TTpe(f)eTai
crdevei
^Ae/ueaiVcoi'.
Stier
justly
refuses to defend
an indicative after
or of by /." 410-12,
where
we
ought
rather to read with Bekker
ai^aipwcn.
But here too
Paech has made
a
happy suggestion,writing
for-
wc
o' or' cii'
by
a
slight
change wg
c' biror
(cp.
X
492).
Thus all instances
are
easily
set
aside,
and it is to be
hoped
that the
*
shortened mood-vowel
'
has
played
out its
part.
There remains however
one
ii-regularity
to which the friends of 74
ii-regular shorteningsmight appeal.
On Dorian
inscriptions, especially
on
the Hei-aclean Tables and
on insci-iptions
from
Thera,
but also
on the
Arcadian
inscriptions
from
Tegea, a remarkable fluctuation
appears
in
the 3
sing,conj.,
and
we
find sometimes the
regular
r?,
sometimes
ei,
sometimes
"?, e.g.
Ko-KTn
side
by
side with
vifiEi, (pipei
and
cih^kjQwQT].
The
inscription
from Andania
pubHshed by Sauppe
has
no other active
conjmictives
but those with
ti : OeXei,
txei,
Tricreietc. and
gives
the
peculiar
middle
conjunctive
form (TvyTeXelrai 1. 39
as
well
as
yir-qrcu
1. 2. It
will be sufficient with
regard
to this to refer to the
thorough
discussion
by
Ahi-ens Dor.
294,
and to Meister Stud. iv. 390. I
agree
-ftith the
latter in
taking ei to be
a phoneticweakening
from
t],
for which he well
compares
the later Attic
ftovXei
for the earlier
fiovXij.
That there is
no
question
here of
a
confusion between the indicative and the
conjunctive
is shown most
plainlyby
forms like tl
= 7]and
Xujdel
which have
no cor- responding
inchcatives. For the form without
i
I would
assume,
not as
Westphal
does
(Method.
Gr. i.
2, 62)
a
special
form
*(pEp7]-r
with
an
originallysecondary personal encUng,
but
a
purely phonetic
process,
which, as
Meister well
explains,
is confirmed
by more
than
one
example.
Long
before the
irruption
of itacism
we notice in dialects which
were
not
regulatedby a
local written
language,as a
kind of
prelude
to the
later and more
thorough changes
of
vowel,
various dislocations
among
the
long e-sounds,
with which
we
may
to
a certain extent reckon
ei.
Apart
from these 3
pers. sing.,
there is not the
slightest
trace of
any
im-
certainty
in the
use of the
conjunctive
vowels
among
the
Dorians,as is
proved e.g. by
Heraclean forms like
ivefvTevKwvTi,u"pojxotw(TMVTi, SiKwyrat,
and Messenian in the
inscription
from Andania like
oyuoo-wj'n, Xa^Mt'Ti.
Cretan
expressions,
which
might
be
quoted againstthis,
like
vg
ci
k-o ^")
(pvrevirei, on ce kci /lu)7rpat,(irTi
I take with Kleemann
(reliqu.
dial.
Creticae Hal, 1872
p.
9)as future,
like the Homeric
:
o'i
ke
fte n/xZ/coi/o-j.
T
2
324 MOODS OF THE PKESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM. ch. xit.
75
III. OPTATIVE.
If we
compare
an optative
form like
Xiyo-i-fitv
with the
correspond- ing
indicative form
Xiyo-fiey,
we are
presented
at once with the vowel
(,
as
the
sign
of the
optative, just
as the short a-vowel
previouslyappeared
as
the
sign
of the
conjunctive.
But
a
further examination shows that
language
did not content itself with this vowel alone. If
we
compare
Xiyo-i-ixer
with
\iyo-it-v
and
lo-iri-v, evidentlya triple
form of the mood-
sign
results
: I te
ij].
In Sanskrit two of these three
can be established
with
certainty.
The verbs with
a thematic vowel
have,
with the
excep- tion
of the 1
sing.,
i
as
the
sign,e.g.
hhare-ma i.e.bhara-i-mn =
(f)fpo-i-fj.fv,
on
the other hand in the other main
conjugation^cs
appears ; e.g.
Ved.
jd-jd-m
from the rt.
jd go
3
sing,s-jd-t
for
as-jd-t
= Gr.
i-ir^
for
*e(T-i7].
Schleicher
thought
he could
recognize
the intermediate
ja
in the 1
sing.
of the thematic
verbs,
e.g.
hhare-ja-m.
But Delbriick
regards
this
form
as a purelyphonetic
and
specifically
Indian modification of
^hhare-m,
and hence assumes
that from the
%
of the
diphthong
ai
(Ind.e)
before
m
an
a-sound was naturallydeveloped.
I must
reserve
my
assent to this
assumption,
until there is
some
other confirmation of such
a remarkable
phonetic
process.
Another trace of this
^a
seems to be offered
by
the
3
plural.
The Indian form
hhare-jus
is
generally
referred to
*hhare-jant,
which
exactly corresponds
to the Gk.
(j)epo-iei'-=Zd. bam-jen.
But it
remains doubtful whether the
a
is
a
constituent of the
personal
termina- tion,
as
in
ds"m{t)=:7}f7ar, or
of the mood-element
(cp.
p.
49).
Schleicher
is
inconsistent,on
p.
699
dividings-j-us
for
*sjant,
but
on
p.
703
assuming *kfr-jt-v as
the earlier form of ilev. The
remaining cognate
languages give us,
in their less known
or
less
finelydistingxiished
quan- tity,
not more
than two
forms, or
in
part,only one,
thus
O. Lat. s-ie-m for *es-ie-m =
f-'ir]-v
by
the side
oifei-e-mus
tor
fera-i-mus
=
(pepo-i-nfv
and
similarly ste-t,
ste-mus i.e.
sta-i-t,
sta-i-mus
76
unlike the Gk.
ara-h).
Gothic has in the 1
sing.
pres. e.g.
h-mra-u, if
this is
rightly
traced back to *baira-jtc,
and in the
preteritee.g. her-ja-u,
ber-ei-setc. a trace
oija,
while in the
present
elsewhere
only
i
appears,
e.g.
baira-i-ma=:(pepo-i-fiEy.
In Slavonic and Lithuanian
only
i
or even i
is
recognisable
as a
relic of the
mood-syllable.
With this
mood-sign
are
united the
secondarypersonalendings as
a
rule
:
and
by
the
employment
of these
an analogy
is formed between
the
optative
and the
preterite,
which is
especially imjiortant
for the
usage
of the Greek moods. But it is
very
remarkaljle that it is in
Greek,
which retains the
primary endings
for the
conjunctivemore consistently
than
any
other
language,
and which has worked out most
delicately
the
distinction of
meaning
between the
conjunctive
and the
optative,
that
we
find a surinisingexception,
the 1
sing,
of thematic verbs in
o-i-fxi,e.g.
({tipo-i-i^ii.
We discussed this
case on
p.
28,
and there
regarded
the
primary
ending p-s an
instance of
high antiquity,as a
relic of that earlier
period
iu
whiich
the division of
primary
and
secondary
terminations had not
yet
CH, XIV.
OPTATIVE.
325
been
fully
established. On
p.
31 we
discussed the traces of the
regular
V
in
Tpifoiy,
(ifiuproiy.
The
completely
isolated Homeric 3
sing,
with
a
primary ending TrapafBahjai
K 346 we thought
on
p.
40 we must
regard
as an
aben-ation of the
linguistic sense on
the
part
of
a
later imitative
poet.
As to the
origin
of the
optativeformation, comparative grammar
has from the fii'st been inclined to
recognise
a significant
element
in the
syllable ja,
which acts as forming
the
optativeby
the side of i and
jd.
Tlie various
attempts
at a
further
explanation
tiu-n
essentially
upon
two
points
in
dispute,
viz. first
upon
the
origin
of this
syllable,
and
secondlyupon
the i-elation of the shorter form i to the
longer.
As to
the
origin,
the i-elation of the
optative
to the future is of much
impor- tance
for this. The future in
-sjd-ml,e.g. dd-sjd-mi(3 sing.dd-sj-a-ti)^=
Dor. lia-cr'iio
contains,as
is
generally
admitted
on
the
ground
of the close
connexion of
meaning
between the
optative
and the
futiire,
the same
ja
as that here
discussed,only
in
composition
with the rt. as.
In other
words
dd-s-jd-micomes
from the rt. da and
*as-jd-mi,
and this
*as-jd-mi
takes its stand with its full
personalending by
the side of
*as-jd-m
the
77
primitive
form of the
optative
of the rt. as be,
which makes
use
of the
secondaryending.
This combination led me
in
my essay
'
Zur Chrono-
logie
2 '
p.
59
ff.,following
the
previous investigations
of
others,
to the
hyjiothesis
that the
optativesyllable
is
essentially
identical with the
present expansion ja.
Hence
as we
believed we
could
explain
the
conjunctive
from
a particular
kind of the
present
indicative,so we see
in another
expanded
indicative formation the source
of the
optative.
Hence, according
to this
view,
the modal
application
of certain verbal
forms
arose
throughout
from the
temporal,especially
from the denotation
of what
we call
*
kind of time.'
Benfey (Gottingen 1871)
has
subjected
the
origin
of the
optative
to a
thorough investigation.
I can
agree
with him in several
negative
contentions. Thus with
Benfey
I
regard
the
hypothesis
of
Schleicher,
that the
ja
of the
optative
is connected with the
pronominal-stem
ju, as unsatisfactory.
For
though
Schleicher
certainly
had not in
view the
relative,
and
evidently
later
application
of the stem
ja,
but
probably only thought
of a nominal stem-formation after the fashion
of the
present
stems in
a, na, nu, yet
it is
impossible
to assent to such
a view, so
long
as
the
meaning
remains
completely unexplained.
On another
point
too I
agree
with
Benfey
: we cannot be
satisfied,
as Schleicher
is,
with the
simple assumption
of 'intensification'
for the relation between
jd
and
jd.
For
although
sometimes else- where,
e.g.
for indicative forms like
0r/-/Lt"
by
the side of
(l"a-fiiy,
we
cannot arrive at the ultimate reason
for the difference of
quantity,as
we saw on
p.
98,
yet
the case is difierent with this
mood-syllable,
inasmuch
as it
appears
in its twofold
quantity
under much moi'e
mani- fold
relations. On the other hand I cannot continue to follow
Benfey
's
acute
discussion,
where he
regards
as
the
proper
source
of the
optative
formation the
2)retei'ite
of
an inteiisive foi-m of the rt. i,
known
only
to
Sanskrit,
and defends this
by layingspecial
stress on the
length
of the i
only recognisable
in Sanskrit. We have seen repeatedly
that the
assumption
of a
preterite,oiiginally
not
augmented,
is
quite
arbi- trary.
Besides
Benfey
himself cannot
deny
that there are optative
78
forms with full
personalendings,
and is at one
with
me
in
holding
that
the
primary
-mi
especially
attached itself to the 1
sing,
from the earliest
326 MOODS
of"
the present and simple AOEIST stem.
ch. xiT.
times. But how can we
talk of
pi-eterite
forms in the
optative,
if
we do
not find that even
the
secondaryendings,
which besides the
augment
are
the
only si,giis
of the
preterite, always
cleave to the
optative
1 The
pre- terite
ouglit
therefore to be left
w-holly
out of the
question,
and
we
ought
to
Slieakonly
of forms with full and with abbreviated
personalendings^
as we actually
find
duplicate
forms of the kind side
by
side
among
the
Indians. Just as
little
can
I believe in an intensive formation
as a
component
of the
compound.
Intensive foi-mations
are not
very
commonly
used in
any
of the
cognate languages.
It is therefore a
very
bold
presumption
that
an
intensive of the rt. i
was so familiar in the
period
before the
separation
of
languages
that it could become
incorpo- rated
with a
preceding
verbal stem into the
unity
of
a new form.
Besides this formation would be manifested
as such in
many
forms
only
by
the
length
of the
*
(prim,
i
+ i),
a
length
of which
no traces
occur
except
in Sanskrit. The whole
hypothesis
is hence
quite
devoid of
any
firm basis.
Again
it is
evidently
in
no
way
easier to arrive at the
meaning
of the
optative
from the intensive of i than from the root i
or
ja
itself. An intensive of i must have meant
'
to
go eagerly
after
some- thing,'
*
to desire
eagerly.'
But such a
meaning only
suits the 1
sing,
of
the
opt.,
where of course
e.g.
a
hy[)othetic dd-jd-m=lo-lr)-r (ordd-jd-mi)
may
be
explained
veiy
well from the
meaning
'
I desire
eagerly
or strive to
give.'
On the other hand for the second and thii-d
persons
we could not
get
from
'
thou strivest to
give,'
'
he strives to
give
'
either the
optative
meaning
in the narrower sense
'
mayest
thou
give,'
'
may
he
give,'or the
potential
*
you
will doubtless
give,'
'
he will doubtless
give.'
Hence if
we
do not wish to assume that the
meaning
of the mood first
stamped
itself
upon
the first
person,
and thence extended
itself,
to a certain extent
abusively,
to the
others,we must
give
up
the notion of
looking
for
intensive forms in the elements of the
optative.
It woiild be easier to
get
from the
unstrengthened
root of
goin^
to the
79 main functions of the
optativethrough
the intermediate
conception
of
a
tendency
towards
something.
In this
way
the force of
wishing
would be
given originally
for the first
person exclusively
:
'
I
am
going
to
give
'
in
the sense of
'
I am inclined to
give;
'
for the second and third the force of
the
potential,
which borders on
the future
:
'
thou art
going
to
give
'
(cp.
French tu vas
donner)
i.e.
'
thou wilt doubtless
give,'
'he is
going
to
give/
i.e.
'
he will doubtless
give.'
We
can
also well understand how in a later
period
of the
language,
after the
oiigin
of the
form,
which had
by
this time
become an actual modal
form,
had
disappeared
from
consciousness,the
distinction of the
persons,
which
we have
presupposed,
also
completely
A'anished,
and the fii'st
person
might
be used with
a
potential
force
as
much
as the second and third with
an
optative
force.
However, even
the Greeks of the historic time had the dualism of the modal function
liovering
before
them,
when
they,partly
under
our
very eyes,
created a
specialexponent by means
of the
particlecu'
for the
one
main
appli- cation,
viz. the
potential
usage,
and thus
acquired
the evident advan- tage
of
being
able to
distinguishrigorously
in
independent
seirtences
between the
potential
and the
strictly optative
functions.
But there is another
point
to which due
importance
has not been
given
in earlier
attempts
to
explain
the
optative.
In
giving
in Chronol.*
T)!)the
comparison
{d)s-ja-n{t) : as-a-nt{i)
=
svid-ja-nti :
hhara-nti
CH. XIV.
OPTATIVE. 327
I did not
altogether
overlook the difference of
qnantity
in tlie
a found
in
many
forms,
but I did not
lay
proper
stress
upon
it. The
present
formation
-as-jd-mi(Lat.ero
for
*esio)
which underlies
the futiu-e
ending
sjd-mi(Gr.-o-tw) agi-ees
indeed in the 1
sing,
with the
optative{a)s-jdin
(=Lat.
sie/M for
*es-ie-m),
but this is to a
certain
extent,
so far
as
the
quantity
is
concerned, merely
accidental. The 3
sing,
is in the fiiture
ending *(a)s-ja-ti,
but in the
optative{a)s-jd-t.
The
same
distinction
appears
in most of the
remaining personal
forms, I have
already
mentioned that
Benfey justlybrmgs
this distinction into
greaterpromi- nence
than his immediate
predecessors.Benfey, following
a
casual
suggestion
of
Bopp's ("715),conjectures
that the
long a
in
{a)s-jd-t
is
related to the short
a
in
{a)s-j
a-ti
^w^i
as
hhard-ti is to
bhara-ti',
in
80
other words that it
betrays
a
conjunctive
formation. If this combina- tion
is
coirect,
there are
propei'ly
in the
optative
two forms
differing
in
principle,
in the fii'st
place
indicatives of the
present
formation in
ja
for
the whole thematic
conjugation, e.g.
*hhara-ja-ini (Skt.hhare-ja-m),
and
secondlyconjunctives
of the
same
formation for the
conjugation
without
the thematic
vowel,
e.g.
*da-jd-vii (Skt.de-jdm,
Gr.
?o-/r?-r).
As it is
indisputable
that the
meanings
of the moods
only graduallygot
marked
off and not in the least in
opposition
to each
other,we cannot be much
sm'prised
if formations of such
a
different
origin
came to coincide in force.
For
according
to what seemed to us
probable,
under the head of the
conjunctive, as to its
origin,
there
was
originally
no
greater
difference
between
hhar-ti,
he
bears,
and
bhara-ti,
(if)-
he
bear,
than between 'he
bears' and 'he is
a
beai-er.' Hence it
seems
to
me
not unreasonable to
suppose
that at the time when the
optativebegan
to form
itself,
the
usage
of
language
stillwavered in its decision
as to whether it should
develope
the
new form from
an indicative,or from the
conjunctive
which was not
by
any
means .sharply opposed
to
this,
but which
was
already a
distinct form. Thus we can explain
the fact that relics
of both methods of formation
are
preserved
to us.
Optative
forms
of the so-called second main
conjugation
in Sanskiit in fact cannot be
distinguished phonetically
from
conjunctives
of the so-called fourth class.
E.g. a^-jd-mmight just
as
well be
a conjunctive
with
a secondary
ending
from
an
indicative
a"^-jd-mi,
as an
optative
of the rt.
"f
without
present expansion(which
it
reallyis)
: though
in the forms fi'om o-stems
or
the so-called first main
conjugationphonetic
modification
prevents
confusion with indicatives of the foiu'th class. Even in the
period
of
the united
life,
in those
roots,
which
employed
no
thematic
vowel,
the
heavy
form with the
originally conjunctive
d estabhshed itself
{-jd-m,
jd-s,jd-tetc.) ;
but in thematic
formations,
the stem of which
was
already
weighty enough
of
itself,
the
lighter{-ja-m, *ja-s(is),*ja-t(i-t) etc.).
If this view is correct "
though
no one can
fail to see
how hard
it is for us in alF these
questions
to arrive at the ultimate facts
" ^we
get
a
glance
into the
gradual growth
of the
forms,
and obtain
this series
:
present expansion (kind
of
time)
"
conjimctive
"
optative,
81
the former
developed
fx'om
an earher,
the latter from another and later
method of
expansion,partlyby
the
help
of the earlier
conjunctive.
It
is true that our view rests
upon
the
assumption
that for certain forms
the
mood-syllable
was
originally
not i but
ja,
and that the thii-d form c:f
the mood
element,
the
simplei,
is weakened from
ja.
But the latter
presumption
has
so
many analogies
in its favour that it will
hardly
328 MOODS OF THE PEESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
meet with
any
serious
opposition,
and if
we can
explain
the
syllableJ"
ill
optative foi-ms,
without
having recourse
to the
assumption
of
a
purely phonetic expansion
of the
a,
which is
certainly
not free fi^om
objections,
such
an explanationwill,
I
think,
deserve the
preference.
"We shall
come
back to the
question
of the relation of
ja (tf)
to i in
the consideration of
some parti
culai- forms. Here I
only
wish to
bring
forward
one more
point,
which
seems
to me not
wholly unimportant.
Delbriick in his
'
Altindisches
Verbum,'
p.
195, points
out that
optative
forms
can
be
*
in
part very
rarely
'
quoted
from the Veda.
Evidently
the
conjunctive
in this ancient record of Arian
language
is
a much
moi'e
common
mood than the
optative.
Now if
we wei'e right
in
assuming
that the latter
only by degrees,so to
say, separated
itself from the
indicative of the i-
or _/a-class,
it is
probable
that this
sepai'ationonly
brought
about as its latest effect the formation of
optatives
with the
mood-sign^^fl. (i)
from those
stems,
which had this
syllablealreadyas a
present-expansion
or a
so-called
class-sign.
And hence it is
noteworthy
that forms of this
kind,
e.g.
2)a"^-je-s
i.e.
*pa"^-ja-i-s
from a
still earlier
*2)ak-ja-ja-s (videas), according
to
Delbiiick,thoughthey
do
occur,
are
very
rare.
Perhaps
we
may
explain
this fact
by saying
that in the time
of the Vedas the last
step
in the
path
of
separation
had not
yet
been
Very long effected,
and that
therefore,
in other
words,
the mood as such
still showed
signs
of its
origin
from the tense. For
a
mood
can
only
be
regardedas completely
established for the
linguisticsense,
when it
can
be formed from
every
tense-stem. The Indians
seem as a
rule never to
have attained with full clearness to the consciousness of the difference
82
in
principle
between tense-forms and
mood-forms,
for
they
possess
in
their
terminologyno expression
for mood whatever.
We now tui-n from these
attempts
to
get
an insight
into the first
establishment of the
mood-forms,
to the
actually
extant Greek
optatives.
The forms
arrange
themselves
simply
in three
groups,
the first .contain- ing
those of the so-called verbs in
-fxi,
the second those of the thematic
verbs,
and the thiixl the deviations and the vai-iations Ijetween the fu'St
and the second.
1)
Optatives of the Verbs without a Thematic Vowel.
The
mood-syllable
has in the three
persons
of the
singular
the form
-aj=Skt. ^'d,
Zd.
yd,
Lat.
ie,
while the
e
in the 3
plur.,
with the
excep- tion
of the later formation in -crni' to be mentioned
afterwards,
is
always
short.
E%T.dentlyfjnlei' as
3
plur.
is related to
puh]r
as 1
sing,
preciselyas trldev to hiBi^r,
Dor.
'icpar
to
t^dr ;
and
as we
explained
the
short vowel in the
preterite
of the indicative
by
the influence of a double
consonant once
present,
and
forming position,
we naturally
do the same
here. Zend offers the similar
ending je-n;
Sanskrit has altered the
a
(here
too
shortened)
into
u
and
nt to ."?
{-jus).
The
agi-eement
of Greek
with Latin in the
e-sound, as
compared
with the Indian
a,
deserves
notice. The
only
foi-m with
a belonging
here hitherto discovered in
Greek is the 3
sing.
ia
= t"ir\
with the 3
pi.
rrvviav
(cp.aTvoTiroiar)
on
the old Elean
fparpn
C. I. G. 11
[Cauer
Del. Inscr.
\).
135]
with the
Boeotian
irapilai'(KeilSyllogep.
14,3,4).
But we must not fail to take
into account also the so-called Aeolic forms of the
sigmaticaorist,
like
riaeia,r/attac,Tianai',
to which
we shall return in
a
subsequentchapter.
83
CH. XIV.
OPTATIVE OF NON-THEMATIC VERBS. 329
Vedic
forms,
which
entirely
agree
with Homeric
forms, are
de-jd-m
= ho-ir]-v o
449
dhe-jd-m
= 6f-ir}-v
"E
2\b
^ne-jd-s
=
yvo-irj-s
T 53
dhe-ju-s
= df-le-v
A
363.
The e
of the
root-syllable
for an
oiiginal
d rests
upon
a
specially
Indian
phonetic
affection.
Compare
fm-ther
{(i)s-jd-t
= (-it)
0. Lat.
{e)s-ie-t
la)s-ju-s = elfv
(Zd.qh-je-n)
O. Lat.
{e)s-ie-nt.
For the contraction of the radical
v
with the mood-element
i,
shown
in the Homeric
cwahv)] i 377, Svr}v
286
"t 348,
the Vedic
bhil-jd-
ma
equivalent
in formation to a
Greek
*"jt"u-/rj-/i")'
is instructive. The
Homeric form
\i'n]
T
209,
at first
sighta
surprising
one,
of which
we
have
the
pliu-al irepi-itiev
in C. I. G. 1688 1.
18,according
to Boeckh's
reading,
has its
counterpart
La the Vedic 1
sing,jd-jd-m. h-irj-v
is
regularly
formed from the stem U,
which is to Skt.
jd as Be to dhd.
h=jd
is
expanded
from ('.
Cp. p.
121. On the other hand the
unmistakeably
synonymous
form
e'ii]v t, 496,
i2 139 is
quiteunparalleled.^
Buttmann
A. Gr. i.2 541
conjectured
that the
diphthong
here rested
upon
a con- fusion
between
ei
and I. For
*'f";-i'=
(-"?/-"' (cp.
Skt. 1
plur.i-jd-ma)
would be
really
the
complete analogue
of
cvriv.
The mistake
might
have been occasioned
by
the
el
of the indicative. But it is also
conceivable that
tn/r
was only
a
variant for
\eir]v, so
that both would
correspond
to the above-mentioned Vedic
jd-jd-m,
the former with the
loss,
the latter with the vocalisation of the
j.
Other Homeric forms of similar
formation,
in
some cases retained
also in later
times, are fta-ir}-i'
Qj
246, im-fta-u-v
0
512, uTn-lr]a 256,
T\a--u-v P
490,
cpa-iri-c
T
220, cpda-ltj
N
815, a"p-e-h]
F
317, i:Lxe-iv
B
188,
aXo-lrj-por a\uT]i'
X 253
(cp.o 300,
whei'c La Roche
regards?'/ *:"i'
dcwaTov
"j)vyoi
i]K"i' aXwj;
as
possible[cp.Merry on S,
183]).
For the fii'sttwo
persons
of the
plural
the Homeric
language
has
only
forms without the
e,
like
0a-T-^i"j'
B
81, ^o-7-^e)/
N
378,
Sido-7-T"
\
357,
awo-lo-l-Te -^
61, de-l'iueu ^
347,
kiTi-dt-'i-Tf. i2
264, 6-t-re
0
195,
"K^vfi"r
n
99,
and
so
in the
passive
aorists
following
the
same rule
Kotr-
/xTjOelfiev
B
126, "n-eipvBdjj.ev w 305, ^uiKpudelire
F
102, w
532. Duals of
such
optatives
do not occur
in Homer. There is
a remarkable coin- cidence
in the fact that in Old Latin also the fuller formation of the
only verb,
which has at all retained
it,
the verb
substantive,
is limited
to the
singular
and the third
person plural,
while in the firsttwo
persona
of this number we
find
only I in the
place
of ie
:
thus
(-'ir]-v (foria-iTj-p) =
s-ie-m
(fores-ie-ni)
f-'lrj-s (
,,
ecr-irj-s)
= s-ie-s
(
,,
es-te-s)
'irj(
,,
ea-irj-r)
= s-ie-t
(
"
es-ie-t)
84
but
e-U-v
(
"
i(T-Li-VT)
= s-ie-nt
(
,,
es-ie-7it)
f-l-lj.fv= {e)s-i-7nus
f-i-Te =
{e)s-l-tis.
Cp.
Neue Lat. Formenlehre ii.^592 f.
'
Haupt Opusc.
iii.
341,
defends
th^
derivation from elvai be.
330 MOODS OF THE I'EESENT AND SIMPLE AOKIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
Differing
in this from the
usage
of Homer and the Old
Latin,
the
language
of Herodotus and the Attic writers
(cp.
Kiihner Ausf. Gr. i.^
543
f.)frequentlygives
fuller
forms;
but the shorter
ones continued to
be
largely
used side
by
side with
them,
and
are
regarded by
the
gram- marians
as better Attic. Thomas
Magister (ed.Ritschl,
p. 54)says
ol
yap
'Amidol tv naai TrXrjdvi'riKolg rwy evKTiKiiJr "
7ropoX"jyo^f I'Oic rjJrj
"
awoftaXkovaivavro,
o'loi'
Tv"pdE'ifxe)'f Troio'ifxev, ftu'i/jLet'.
The' addition
nXijv
(j)vXuTT"a6ai
Set
to KciKofwroy,
kvOa
ay
Tv-)(^r],
wq
eVi
tov ftalrek"ai
ffTalre
Kui Twp o^oiwv
deserves
no
serious consideration.
Compare
^Vfxl3air]^ev
Thuc. iv. 61
^vji^aifiev Eurip.
Phoen. 590
ffjLJSalrjfxev
Xen. Anab.
v. 6,
12
boir)ix(v
Xeu.
CjT. V. 3,
2
boififv
Plat.
Rep. x. 607 d
boirjTe
" "
iv.
5,
47
Herod, vii. 135
dcpei-qre
Demosth. xix. 71
ac^elre
Thuc. i. 139
yvoLr]fxeu
Plat.
Legg.
xi.
p.
918
^vyyi/o^iiev Soph. Antig.
926
6firj^fv
Plat.
Protag.p.
343
e nposdf'itJ.ev
Plat. Men. 84
(vdeirjTf
Dem. xviii. 324 Karadelrt Dein. xiv. 27
Tidfifxev
Plat.
Rep. x.
605
(^air)p(v
Eur. Ion 943
(Dind.
^Vfxcfyalfxfp) (f)alpep
Plat. Phil. 63
(f)6aiT]Te
Herod, vi. 108
((poire
and the like
are not found).
It is
only
from
dfii
that the forms without
"/
are considered the
rarer;
still
eljAey
Eui\
Hipp. 349,
Plat. Theaet.
147, eirtji'
the
only
dual
form of this kind which I have been able to hunt
up.
Plat. Tim, 31
(e'iijToi'
Plat.
Euthyd. 273e),
dra
Soph. Antig.
215
(M.SS. 7it"), are
the
commonly
received
readings.
The fuller
post-Homeric
forms
agree
with
the Indo-Persian method of
formation,
thus
e.g. in]Ti]v
with Ved.
{a)s-jd-
tdm, siTfre
with
{a)s-jd-ta,
Zd.
qh-jd-ta.
However it
seems to
me
very
doubtful whether the fuller
forms,
recorded from
a
later
time,
rest
upon
'
85 a primitive
tradition :
I incline rather to the
conjecture
that
they owe
then* revival to the
analogy
with the
singular
forms.^ The love of
securinguniformity
is
always a
main feature in later times.
Our view is further confirmed
by
the relation of the two forms of the
third
plural.
The Homeric
language
has
only
one
instance of the forma- tion
in
-ir]-aar,
which most resembles the
singular: oTa-i-q-Gav
P 733
(naparTTalev
d
218,
TTzpLOTultv v 50),
while there
are ten instances of the
shorter form. In this
case
there
can be no doubt
as to the
more
recent
character of the
form, for,as we saw on
p.
50,
the termination
-rrai'
is
everywhere
of later
origin.
It is
only
from Herodotus onwards that
forms like
eirjtray
Herod, i.
2,
ii.
6,
fairjirai'
Thuc. viii.
53, yyoirjuav
Demosth. xxxiii. 15 became
by degrees
somewhat
more
usual. Whether
the
pai^ticle
^t"j',
so common in
Attic,
has
reallycome from the 3
plur.
opt.
of
eifjt,
as
is
frequentlyassumed,
I do not undertake to determine.
As the Attic writers
especially
connect the neutei-
plural
with
a
singular
verb,
the
plural,
for the
subject
of which
we
could
only supplyravra or
avra,
is
surpiising.
We
might
also
suggest
a
shortened
eh),
afterwards
supplied
with
an
appended
nasal. But the
question
deserves further
*
Tliis is
supported by
the
result,at which La Roche Ztscbr. f. Oest.
Gymn.
Sept.
187-4
p.
426 ff.arrives, that it
was mainly
the
prose
writers who
brought
the
longer
forms into more general use.
CH. XIV.
OPTATIVE OF THEMATIC VERBS. 331
inyestigation,
in -which it "would be
necessary
to take into consideration
also the
particle
el
a.
Finally
in the middle the
Gr^ek language
knows no duplicate
forms.
Everywhere i
alone
assumes the function of
denoting
the
optative:
?o-f'-jU7j)',
"pa-l-o, Be-T-TO,yyo-l-ro.
In the Homeric
ccui'vro
^l 665 and the
corresponding
3
pi.
Sairvur
a
248 the
i (cp.
ctr}
p. 329)
has left the
only
ti-ace of its existence in the
length
of the
preceding v.
And here Greek
again
coincides with Sanski'it and
Zend,
where
i
is the
only sign
of the
optative
in the
middle, so
that the Gx'eek rStiro has the
advantage over
the
coiTesponding
Vedic dadlilta at least in the retention of the radical
vowel.
After
we
have taken this
rapid
survey
of the facts of the
case,
we are
led
on to the
question
of the historical relation of the shorter forms to the
86
longer ones.
With
regard
to Greek,
it is
very
rarely
that
any
doubt is
expressed
upon
the
point.
The old
grammarians talk, as we
saw,
of
an
a.noj3o\l]
of the
?;,
for which Choeroboscus
(Herodian
ed. Lentz. ii.
824,
31) uses
the
expression (rvyKo-m'].
The accent also
points
to the
priority
of the
longer form,
for it is
only
thus that
we can
understand the dif- ference
between
dicolre,
ciEolro and
Ao/3ot-f, yipoiro.
We must not in- deed
deny
that
hco'uv,
Avhich cannot in
any
case come
from
hcol-qrray,
is
also
properispomenon.
But
here, as elsewhere,
there is
no
difficulty
in
the
assumption
that
analogy was an
essential
soui'ce
of the
accent.
Among
modern
gi-ammarians
the \-iew that the shorter forms
are con- tracted
has been the
prevalent one.
Ahrens 'Ueber die
Conjugation
auf MI
'
p.
15
was
the fii-stto set
against
it
another, starting
from the
shorter
forms,
and
regarding
the
";
of the
longer
"as
'
strengthening.'
But
such an assumption
is
so
entirelyopposed
to the
conception
which
runs
through
the whole of the modern science of
language,
that it will
hardly
find
any
adherents,
Benfey
has
disputed
the contraction from another side.
He
laysgTeat weight
upon
the fact that the
sign
of the
optative
in three
languages,
viz. in
Sanskiit,
Zend and
Greek,
consists for the middle in the
simple
^,
while for the
active,
at least
over a
wide
range,
it consists in
jd,
and that there is not
a single
trace of the full
syllablejd
in the middle
in
any
one
of these
languages.
The last-mentioned fact loses somewhat of
its
importance
from the circumstance that in Zend
we
find at least
one
isolated
form, quoted by Benfey himself, dai-d-ya-taanswering
to
a Greek
*a-^o-te--o,
from which it is
plain
that at
any
rate the
syllable
ja,
accord- ing
to
our
view the earliest form of the
mood-suffix, was not
wholly
foreign
to the Arian middle. Now the middle terminations
are
tlirough-
out heavier than those of the active
;
and thus there
was more
induce- ment
to contraction. Hence
we can hardly
be
surprised
to find that
this
process
went on independently
in the three families of
speech.
For
we
might
ventiu'e to
assu.me
the shorter form
even
for the
period
of their
common
life. From the
standpoint
of the classical
languages
it would
be
a
strange
notion to derive
colfiev, (r-alre,ciuKpnde'iijev
and Lat.
slmtts, 87
siHs,
velimus from forms Hke
^olrjuer,
siemus
etc.,
but to
deny
the like
oi'igin
for
dicol-n,BelfrdE. The
optative
forms like
ayairo,
iirltrTaiaQe,
which
are
other^\"ise
accented,
will he discussed under
3).
332 MOODS OF THE PKESENT AND SIJVIPLE AORIST STEM. ch. xiv.
2)
Optatives of the
Verbs
with a Thematic Yowel.
The thematic vowel invaiiably
combines with the modal
t to form
the
diphthong
oi,
which
answers
to the Sanskrit and Latin
e
(=ai)
(pfpo-i-fxeu,
Skt.
bhare-ma, Lat.
fere-mus,
for it is
an established fact that the Latin futures characterised
by
the
long e are
in
oiiginoptatives.
Vedic
forms, completelycorresponding
to Greek
or
Latin
forms, are
2
sing.
Skt.
pa^-je-s
= Lat.
spec-ie-s
3
sing,
vidc-t = Gr. piboi
2 dual voTietam = Gr.
feinotrov
Zend
supplies
2
sing,apa-baroi-x=" dnotpepois
Lat.
au-feres
8
plur.bara-yen " (pepo-itp
We discussed
on
p.
328 the character of the vowel in the 3
plur.
It is
noteworthy
that in Homer the
regular
form of the 3
pliu".
mid. is that
in
-oiaro : ytJ'o/ciro,
(nrep-)(ijiaro,
ftiuaro
A
467, TreidolaTO, Toi,aCoiaro,
with
the one exception
of A
344,
where the harsh hiatus
omrcos oi
jrapa
vijval(root
paxeoiVTo
'Axaioi
points
to a corruption.
Thiersch
proposed^ax^orrai.
We should
pro- bably
write with Struve and Ahrens
^ax^olar'.
The new
Ionic follows
the Homeric
language:
Herodotus has
ftovXoiaro, dyomro, uiriKolaTo,
avLuiaro (iv.130),
iir}ycivuiaTo
(vi.46).
It
appears
at first
sight
pro- bable
that this
a
is the
same as
that which
occurs, though
with less
con- sistency,
and not after thematic
vowels,
in the indicative of the
same
dialects: Homer,
fiefiXi'jciTai, Kiarai,
Herod.
";rt
oTt'orcu
,
tK^thkiTai.
In the active
we find,
fi'om the
group
of forms here under considera- tion,
only
the three isolated dialectic forms
quoted
on
p.
328
answering
88 to the
a
of the
middle, along
with the
widely
extended
sigmatic
or
so-called Aeolic aorist-forms in
-eia, -eiac,
-tiav {ricreiuyA
42)
also
mentioned
there,so
that
we can
hardly
refuse to
recognisela as one phase
of the
optativesyllable
ja,
though a rare one.
Thus the e of the Zend
hara-ye-nalso,
and that of the common
Greek
(f)ipo-uv^
can
hardly
be
difierent. But
by
the side of
-ouiv
and
-our we
find also
a
third
termination :
oi-v,
in which the vowel has
entirelydisappeared.
There
are frequent
instances of
a
third
person
plural,
in which the
optative
sign
consists
merely
in
",
in the
Delphic inscriptions :
thus
irapc'j^ou'
(Anecd.Delphica
ed. Ern. Ciu'tius
no. 12, 13, 31,
Wescher-Foucart no.
32, 9; 33, 9; 38,
11
etc.)
iroUoiv W.-F.
24, 7,
diXoiv
43,
20. These
same
inscriptionsgive
also
irapixpui'
and
Trapexoio-ar.
In
Traptj^ou-
we
have
certainly
not to
recognisean originally
distinct metliod of forma- tion,
like
TToiijacu by
the side of
Tronjattt,
but
a
contracted
form,
which
thi-ows
lightagain upon
elpevas compared
Avith
E'irjiJTji'
and the like.
Without
noticing
the
Delphic
forms I. Bekker Homer. Bl. 112 and 219
conjectured
the termination
-w
for the 3
plur.
in
some
passages
of Homer
and of Attic
poets,especially v
382
Toiis
^(ivovs(V
VT}i
tto\vic\t]i8i ^aXovres
(s
^iKeXoi's
TTf'p^aptv,
o6fv
k( toi t'l^iov (iX"poiv
cit. XIV. VARIATIONS OF THE ORDINARY OPTATIVE. 333
where the M.SS. have the
singular.
Most recent editors have followed
Bekker,
for the
singular
in this connexion
gives
no sense. Bergk
Poetae
In'ici^
p.
487,
who calls
liXfoiv(incorrectly
as we
have
seen)
a
'forma
inauclita
quam
finxit I.
B.,'
attempts
to
get
rid of the
difficulty by
striking
out the
preceding
line
as an
*
imperitaihapsodi
alicuius inter-
polatio.'
The other
passages
are
all not
convincing,
so that
Bergk
is
I'ight
in
saying
that this form has but weak
support
in literature.
3)
Fluctuations and Variations.
We have here to do in
part
with the
same phenomena,
which
we
learnt to
recognise
above
p.
320 ff. in the
conjunctive.
But in the
optativesome pointspresent
themselves in
a
greater diversity
of
shapes,
inasmuch as
in the active there is
a
greatervariety
of
endings.
The
fluctuations in the
case
of the
optative
are of two kinds. We find
on
89
the one
hand in verbs in
-^l
by-formsfollowing
the thematic
rule,on
the
other
hand,
what is
more surprising,
in thematic verbs
by-forms
with
the
peculiarities
of the verbs without thematic vowels
:
thus
we have
ioi^i
as
well
as t"n]v,
and
on
the other hand
Trowhjyas
well
as
-rroio't^i.
The
manner
in which the thematic method of formation
gradually
overgrew
the other shows itself in two
ways
in the
optative, just
as it
did in the
conjunctive.
Either the thematic
o
takes the
place
of the
radical
vowel, or
it is suffixed to this vowel.
Compare
kTri-doivro and
diivTo with 'i-o-Land
"n;.
The accentuation of the
optatives
of the first
kind
was
discussed on
p.
321, so that I need not return to it here.
Among
the
optatives
of this kind
we
find two of
a
peculiar
character
:
ioir}v
and
ay(ohp'.
If
we
remember the Homeric form
leinv,
mentioned
on
p.
329,
which
approximates
to the infinitive
\ivai,
it is
very
natural
to
bring loi-qv
into
a
special
relation with
this,givmg
the
equation
and thus to
regard
the
o not as suffixed,
but
as
oi-iginating
from the
s.
I
am not shaken in this view
by
the fact that
^it^wlijy
and the like cannot be
quoted
from
any
author earlier than
Xenophon
and Isocrates
(v.
98
;
vi.
42).
The form
might
have been
long
in
use,
and it
might
be
by
pure
chance that it does not
occur
earlier in the extant texts. For
on
what
analogy
could
"i-o-i-^i (if
we are
to derive it from
a stem
expanded
by
an o)
become
lol^v'i
We shall
see immediately
that this fuller form
only
makes its
way
into the thematic
conjugation
in
a
strictly
limited
circle of
forms,
in the case
of which it admits of
complete explanation.
We have further the
entirely
isolated Homeric
inKT-^oiriQ
S 241
'
T"o Kev irrtaxoirjs Xmapovs
noBas
etKuTrivd^(oi",
The Ven. A. has the
reading iiricrxoue,
the
Palimps. Syr.ETriaxolac.
From the scholium we see
that Herodian read
kTvUxnitc, an
unexampled
form,
which he
supposed
he could
explain
either
by
the
'
pleonasm
'
of
the
" or
from
a shortening
of the
?/.
tivia-)(piuQ
is
quite
as
unprecedented:
it
might perhaps
be
compared
with
fieivtiaQ
and other so-called Aeolic
forms of the
sigmaticaorist,
which we touched
upon
on
p.
332.
i-maxon^c^
90
the
reading
of Alexander of
Cotyaea,
finds
support
in the Attic
(r^oajv
(Isocr.
i.
45),(txoIt] (Plat.Apol.
34
a), axohinar (Hyperides
pro
Euxen.
col. xlii.
19).
Now if
we
remember that the aorist-stem
trx^
with its
originally
radical
"
presupposes
an
early
inflexion after the
analogy
of
de,
334 MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xiv.
",
and has
actually
retained
ax^Q
in the
imperative,we
may compare
with the
equation
loLT]V '. uirjv
=
6o'mt6a
'.
Bdfiida
t'le second
axoirjv:
*
(TXfi^v^toirjv
'.
1(lt]V,
We
may
therefore
say
that
o
in
axoiiv comes
from
"
in
*(tx"'J?'' justas
i-axo-n^v
presupposes
"^'i-trxi-jiEv,
and
as
irupa. o-^e
with
a thematic
c
presupposes irapa-axf^-Q
with
a
radical
e.
Whilst in the
ending -irf-v
a
relic of the old method of formation is still
^^reserved,
in
vTrip-uxm
I 184,
iri-tTTTOL S
107,
iiri-aTvoi
ft250,
in all middle forms
developed
from such
stems,
like
liraaxolfJiriv
\
375,
(rxoiaro
B
98,
and in SIolto
p
317
by
the
side of the indicative Bu-vrai
(cp.
above
p. 120)
it has
altogether
dis-
aj^peared.
The
corresponding
forms from the roots k and de cannot be
quoted
from authors earlier than the Attic
writers,^
and
even here there
are
considerable variations in the M.SS. between
ei
and
oi,
as also in
accentuation,
thus Plat.
Gorg.
520
Trpool-o,
Dem. xviii. 254
irpoouTo
(Westermann Tzpoth'To), cKploire
Plat.
Apol. 20,
KciTadoire vith the
v.
1.
Ku-adelrE Dem. xiv.
27, TrpoadoiTo
Dem. vi. 12
according
to
Voemel,
iTTiQoijjLEQa
with the
v.
1.
ETrideifieda
Thuc. vi, 34.^ Heie
belongs
also
KaBrjuai,
the vowel of
which,
after the remembrance of an
originally
existingc
had become
obscured,was
treated like
a
final vowel. Forms
like
Kadrijirir, Ka9"]ro,Kad^jdeda,
which
we
ought perhaps
to admit in
Arist.
Lys. 149,
Ean.
919,
Xen.
Cyrop.
v. 1,8, according
to the traces
in the
M.SS., change
into
Kudoijjirjr (Plat.Theag. 130),
KaOolro
(also
KadoiTo), though
Cobet Nov. Lect. 225 in his
rigour
\\dll not allow these
in Attic.
91
It is much less
common
for the
primitive
verbs to become thematic
by
the addition of
a
vowel. Here
belong
the Homeric forms 'i-o-i-QI
284,
i-o-L I
142,
\ 838 and the
quite
isolated Irioi Herod, vii. 6. The
introduction of the vowel
may
have been facilitated
by conjunctives
like
iu)and the
participle twr,
the
only
form in
use.
The forms 'ioiQand
tot
find
a
support
in the Latin
-ses,
-set of
pos-sem,
es-set
(fored-set).
Besides
these I
can
only compare
Ot'otrowhich
appears occasionally
in Herodotus
(TrpogdioiTo
i.
53,
vTroOeoiro
Yu. 237
;
on
the other hand
Trpode'iTo
iii.
148).
For
toi (^
21
),according
to what has been said
above,
is rather to be taken
as moulded
on lolrjv
for
le/j/i-,
and is related to
toiijvas
Wepirxoi(dis- cussed
above)
is to
ETntrxniTji',
though certainly
the
participle /wr
sug- gests
the
parallel
with
eoi,
iwv. These
scanty
traces of
an
added vowel
make it
extremelyimprobablethat,as has often been
assumed,
in all the
optatives
of the verbs in
fii
with the sound
oi
the
analogy
of the
con- tracted
verbs
was
followed. The
course
of formation
was not
irpaQdelro
TrpocdEoiTO TT pogdolTO,
hut
irpOQdEl-c (andTrpocbEiro), irpocHoiTo (andirpocdoiro).
This view solves for us a riddle,
otherwise
hardlyintelligible,
in the
fact
(one
which contravenes the whole
course
of the vei'bal
structure),
that the contracted
vei'bs,as
well
as the contracted futures which
are
analogous
to
them, though undoubtedly
thematic in their
formation,yet
deviate into the
analogy
of the non-thematic verbs. The older
grammar
legarded
the so-called Attic forms like
"Kowiip',
rif-twriQ
as
by
no means
'
vworieoiTo Herod, iii.41 lias weak
authority:
Stein writes vneriBfro.
'
Tlie Cretan form awfQovro C. I.
2554, 2,
wliich Ahrens
regards as an
err,
points to a still wider extension of the thematic
o.
CH. XIV,
VARIATIONS OF THE ORDINARY OPTATIVE. 335
surprisingby-forms
of the shorter like
iroioim,tijxwixi.
But a little
i-e-
flexLion
upon
the
course
of the
developement
of the Greek verbal structure -
shows
us at once
that such forms are
reallyquiteas astonishing
as an
occasional
^Ktyircu by
the side of
Xiyew
or
aycofii
by
the side of
ayw
w^ould be. But it has been
fullyproved
above
p.
246
ff.,
that the
con- tracted
verbs,
for which the Aeolians retained
very extensively
the
analogy
of the verbs in
^i,
show even
outside this dialect unmistakeable
ti-aces of such
inflexion,
and that various
phoneticphenomena point
with
certainty
to a general
extension of the Aeolic inflexion in earlier times.
It is therefore
a priori probable
that this
phenomenon
also
may
be
ranged
with the others.
Before we
discuss this
any
further,
it will be
necessary
to
point92
out the actvial facts
as to the
occurrence
of these
forms,
for which col- lections
have been made
by
Fischer ad Vellerum ii.
345, Matthiae i.
"
198, 2,
Kiihner i.
p.
544,
Wecklein Curae
epigraphicae31,
La
Roche,
Ztsch. f.
0. Gymn. Sept.1874,
p.
424 ff. In Homer there
are
only
two
instances : (piXoh]
h
692,
and
(popoi-q
i 320,
while
optatives
like
(pdoj'Eoifxi
\
381,KciXioi, (.^[(pdorioic, bfjLO(l)poi'"oig, veikeioi, ew/xi
tt 85,
t'w
u 12,Ipuroiut
o 317,{jftMoijui
H 157
are
far
more common.
On the various forms of
the verbs in
ow
in Homer
Mangold
Stud. vi. 208 ff.
gives
full informa- tion.
The so-called Attic forms
appear
also here and there
on Ionic
inscriptions
:
thus C. I. 3044
aTTEiOohj, avioQeoir] (1.51) by
the side of
iroiol
(1.43);
and in
Herodotus,
but here too still
as rare exceptions
;
thus
iroiolr]
vi. 35
(v.
1.
TTOto?,TToiirj),
kvopwri
i. 89
by
the side of
ttouoi/ji
v. 106,
KaXeoi i. 11. From
Hippocrates
too a
few instances
are quoted.
They occur,
as isolated
forms,
among
the
Dorians,
e.g.
C. I.
2556,
47
a^ii:oir], Epicharm. fragm.
33
TLs
8e
KU XcoT}yevecrdai
fxr)
(f)6ovovfji.evos (pi^.os
;
where, according
to the
principle
established
by Hugo
Weber in his
paper
on
the
pai-ticle m,
we must write
kcw.
In the
Argive treaty
of
alliance
(Thuc. v 79)
we
find
hKoir).
On the other hand
we
have in
Alcman
p.
89 B.^
iui^m,
in the Locrian
inscription
of Chaleion or Oean-
theia 1. 2
avXw,
1. 4
uCikoctvX^,
1. 6
fxerafoiKeoi,
1. 8
Trpo^Eveoi,
and
on
the
Delphic inscription
C. I. 1688
eftopi^eoifii (cp.lipiopKioifiey
in the Cretan
inscription publishedby Bergmann
1.
71),
We
see
from this that the
name
'
Attic
'
for the fuller forms is
only
'
so far
correct,
that
they
be- come
more common
and almost the rule in Attic. For from the time of
the
tragedians
the
longer
forms
occur,
and in
prose
they
become in time
much
more common
than the shorter ones.
The
following
statement
may
make this
plain:
Aesch.
Suppl.
1064
anoa-Tepoir)
Pi'om. 978
voao'ip.' av
"
Ag.
1049
dnei6oLr]s Sopb.
O. R. 1470
8oKo'ifu
Soph. Antig.
70
dparjs
"
Phil. 895
8pafxi
"
Trach. 902
dvTcarj
Eur. Hal. 1019
dbLKoit^fiev
Aescb.
Suppl.
1014
firvxaip-fv 93
(v.
1.
d8iKoir]V vivj
"
Cyc.
1.32
8pa7jp.ev Sopb.
Pbil. 1.393
SpSfxeu
(Dind.^vv8paip."v)
Arist.
Vesp.
279 dvTil3oXo\r] Sopb.
Tracb. 1235 voa-ot
"
Nub. 1255
Cfonv
Thuc. ii.5
Trpoxciipoirj, BoKoitj
Tbuc. ii.100 So^oT
"
viii.66
aiyfT]
Plat.
Rep.
vii.51Ga
Ka6op"f
336 MOODS OF THE PRESENT
AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xrr.
Plato Orat. 391
ayanwrjv
Plato
Rep.
viii.557
dnopol
"
Menex.
247
viKa)r]Te "
Legg.
ii.064
nrjBm
"
Gorg.
486 tXtyylwr?? Theogn.
107
d/xws
Isocr. vii. 50
enLTino)T]v
Dem. iv. 51
vtKwr]
Aesch. ii.157 fina-Tiyoirjv
Arist. Pax 1076
v/iemtoi
(v.
1.
ixaa-riyo^fMi)
" "
102 doKoit](Tav regularly-aev,
-o'ltv."^
To understand the
longer
forms we
must start from the
primitive
forms of the contracted verbs,
which recommended themselves to
ns on
p.
248 as
the most
probable,
viz.
^^tXj/'jj-^f,
*2ouXw"?-/x(, *viKari-}jii.
The
originaloptatives
were
thus
*(pi\i}e-trir,
*Sov\"i)E-tT]i', *yt.t:aE-ir]-y.
These
forms were variously
modified.
By
contraction there came about the
Aeolic forms
"pi\dr]i',
for which there is
good authority,
as well
as
for
okelriy (cp.
Ahrens Aeol.
140),dovXotrjr,I'lKui'rjy,
the last two not
being
established
by quotations,
but
presumable
.on analogy.
On the
other
hand
here,as
in so
many
other
forms,
the
very
common o made
its
way
into the
place
of the e : ^fiXrjo-irir,
*lov\u)o-i.r)-r, *yiKao-ir)-y,
shortened
into
(piXeolrjv,
dov\noh]y,rtKciolrjy,
and contracted into
(piXoirjy,
hwXoirjy, yiKu"r}y.
It is
noteworthy
how rare the
examples
of this
formation
without contraction
are,
like the above-mentioned Tean
uyujdeoir].
This
might suggest
that
(piXohjy
arose in the same
way
from the Aeolic
fiXtirjy
as
ax""ir]*'
from
*"T-)(th]y,
and for the Homeric
94
(f,i,poir)y
tliisview would find
special
confirmation in the Aeolic infinitive
(popijyai.
But the
optatives
of the verbs in
-aw
with their
-t^rjy point
without
any
qualification
to
-aoiyy,
and it is
probable
that the two other
classes
of contracted verbs went the same course.
The contracted verbs in
-ew were
followed
by
the contracted
futures,
which indeed in
every
respect
are guided by
their
analogy.
Thus
epolrjy,
dtayolriy
and the like need no
further
explanation.
The
case
is diffei-ent
with the
optatives
of the
perfect
like
TrtTroiOoh].
We shall
come back to
these forms in
dealing
with the
perfect.
We
may
simply
mention here
that the vowel of the
i^ei-fect-stem
in
"(?f/rji', dEciiehjy
is treated
exactly
like a stem-vowel, so
that here too no diflSculty
is
presentedby
the method
of
explanation just
set forth.
There is thus
only one
group
of forms
left,
which is
surprising,
the
Lesbian Aeolic
optatives
in
-oiriy
or
-orjy
from thematic aoiists
(Ahren3
Aeol.
132).
For these we
have
really
two
witnesses,
the scholium on
S
241,
mentioned above,
in which there are
quoted
as
analogies
to the
Homeric
":riT^o/?jc
from the work of Alexander of
Cotyaea
irepi
ttcuto-
?jaTriI)V, 'loi'rjy
Kal
ayay
ohjy
Tvupa
Sa7r(^o7' and
'
7mrayoiT]v Trap
EvTToXici,'
and
Etym. Magn. p.
558,
28 "Eori
Xaxoif^t,Xaxoi?,Xaxoi'
Tovro yh'srai
Kara
TrXtoyarrfioy rov
r]
Arrt/cwr
Xai^o/r)' Eira "Kpot^dzaii tov
C Xaj^otTjt"
^ft'
TpoTTT]
rov c "'f ''" yuerai
ru
irpiLrov'
Koi
('nrufioX^
AioXiKt] rov I Xaxorjy (cp.
Anecd. Oxon. ii.
204,
Choeroboscus ii.
772).
Hence the
fragment
of
Sappho preservedby ApoUon.
de
syntaxi
247
(fr.
9
B.^)
is
undoubtedly
read
correctly
tluis
:
aW
f'yo), \pv"jO(TTi(^av' 'A(Pp68iTa,
Tovdf
TOV mikov
Xa)(6rjv.
" Cobet Nov. Lcct.
p.
364 limits still further the use
of the shorter
forms,
saying
'
Tragicis
licet vocrolfxi et
SokoI/xi
et similia dicere,
populo
et comicis et
oratoribus non licet,
sed SoKoirjv, votroirjv et similia sola in
usu
sunt.'
CH. XIV.
MOODS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AOEIST STEM. 337
Of the two other forms the
one
has been
already set aside
by
Ahrens
Dor. 330. For it is
very
improbable
that the Attic comedian
Eupolis
should liaA'e formed
an
otherwise unheard-of aorist TrtVdyo)', and much
more probable
that
rrtTrdyoit]}'
is to be taken
as
the
optative
of the
per- fect
TTETTt/yo
in
a
comic imitation of
a
Doric dialect. Meineke in the
Addenda to tlie
larger
edition of the Comedians
v.
p.
10 to
a
certain
extent admits this. Hence
nf!rayoii]v
goes
along
with the above-men- tioned
-n-e-oidotrji'
and the like. Is it
possible
that
clyuyoh])',
which is
also
quoted
from
Sappho,
is
merely a copyist's error
for
Xu-^^oir^rl
In
95
any
case
these aorists
are quite isolated, and
although
in the
case
of the
Aeolians, who formed
optatives
in
-irjv
from all derived
verbs,
it would
not be
quite impossible to imagine an
extension of this
analogy, we
may
still venture the
conjecture
that
\a\()r]r
is
perhaps by no means
identical
with
Xay^oii.u,
but is formed from
a
derived
*Xa^ow,
Aeol.
*Ad)(W|Ut,
and
is thus
completely regular.
For
a
derived
*Xa)^o(i" by
the side of
A."^oc
would be
quite as
conceivable
as Snow,
vEtpoio
by
the side of
Oiioe,
" E"poQ.
The loss of
I
has its
analogies, as
Ahrens has shown in
" 16,
in
a widely
extended
uncertainty
of the
i
between vowels
among
the
Aeolians,
which
jioints to a
semi- vocalic
pronunciation,
and of which
we
found
a trace in the Elean
ea^e'tr) on
p.
328. For
barytone
verbs Ahrens
Aeol. 133
quotes regular
forms like
Eavoic, j^aipoiada as
at the
same
time
Lesbian.
338 VERBAL NOUNS OF PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
CH.xv.
CHAPTER XV.
VERBAL XOUXS OF THE PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
Of the forms of tlie two stems hitherto discussed there remain
now
only
the infinitives and the
participles,
i.e. the formations which
on
p.
2 Ave described
as
verbal
nouns.
Though
the
more uniform extension
of the
participles through
the various branches of the Indo-Germanic
languages
makes it
hardly
doubtful that the verbal
adjectivesor
par- ticiples
were
fixed at an
earlier date than the
petrified
case-forms of
abstract substantives, which we
call
infinitives, we will still
keep
to the
ti-aditional
order,
and
begin
with the latter.
I. INFINITIVES.
In the formation of the infinitives
we meet with
a variety,
which is
quitesurprising,
when
compared
with the
uniformity
in the form of the
96 moods. Not
merely
do the different branches of the
cognate languages
show
important
differences in the form of the
infinitive, as we
shall
have to
explain
further
on,
but
even
the Greek
dialects,
which elsewhere
show
hardlyany
but
phonetic
variations in the formation of the verbal
forms,
differ
considerably
in the formation of the active infinitive from the
stems here mentioned and also from the
perfect,
while for the middle
and,
to notice this at the same time,
for the
sigmaticaorist,they
offer
us
the usual
spectacle
of essential
identity.
We shall return further
on to
the
significance
of this remarkable difference, which hitherto has
re- ceived
but little attention
;
but
our
task for the
present
is to
represent
the
variety
as
accuratelyas possible.
The various infinitive forms of the Greek
language
can be best
arranged
in five
groups
:
1)
those in
-fiei'ai
and
-/Lzer
:
e.g. (^tuiierai, eXOefiev, redyafxerai.
2)
those in
-rot :
e.g. yj'w-rcu, c^a-rat,
yeyoyi-icu.
3)
those in
-ev, -T)y,
-eir :
e.g.
Cret.
(pepEv,
Aeol.
ElTrrjr,
Homer.
6el
"it',
(pvyieiv.
4)
those of the
sigmatic
aorist
: Se7^at,
u/j-vyai.
5)
those in -adai
throughout
the whole middle voice.
It is
only
the first three
groups
which need a more thorough
dis- cussion.
What
we are
struck with at
once
is
a
very
extraordinary
variation,
in the case of the
prunitiveverbs,
i.e. those which have no
thematic
vowel,
between the first and the second
group,
in the
case
of
the thematic formations between the first and the third
gi'oup.
In
the
language
of Homer this variation reaches its
height.
We
may
see
in this
one
of the
many proofs
of the unmistakeable fact that this
language
established itself in the mouth of
epic singers
under the
crossing
influences of different dialects. From the root k
there
are
five
forms
:
'ifjfitrai,
tfitrai, ""/i")', ""e"',
and
thai,
the last
already
the most
CH. XV.
INFINITIVES. 339
common.
In tlie case of the derived verbs it is not uncommon to find
three forms
ori^rinating
in tlie
crossing
of the Aeolic foimation with the
Ionic after the
analogy
of the
conjugation
in
-/ut
:
(jwpij-nErai, (puprj-yai,
(popi-tiv,
so
that here the fii'stthree
groups
are represented
in
one
and
the
same
verb.
"
1)
First Group: Infinitives in
-/.lei'cu
and
-^ev.
97
Between the
longer
and the shorter form there is this
chfierence,
that
"the former is
decidedly
more archaic,
i.e.
more
usual in the Homeric
dialect,
but cannot be elsewhere
proved
to have been in
use, except by
a
few traces in the Lesbian Aeolic
dialect,
and in the
elegiacjDoets
in-
flu.enced
by
the Homeric
language.
As instances of the various
present
and aorist forms of the two chief
conjugations,
which
belong here,we
may quote "^//i"j'f"i
A 117,
ciet,if^"iai
Z
393,
TrapKrrcifjerai r]
341, i^evyi'v-
[xerai
T
260, Kix^'ifierai
O 274 "
Karcifirii-ierat
M
65, aiorj/jut)cu
K
55,
c6-
fisicii
A 98, difitvciL
B
285,
yiwf.i(rai
B
349,
Karacviueycii
T
241,
oXw-
fjtiai
$ 49.5"
aeicif^iei ai
6
73, up^i/jei'cu
Y
154, Xyp/eperai
I 257, ttoito-
Tropevifiei'cii
e 277 "
elTrefjercu
H
375, iXdi^eiai
A 1.51"
6iOe/.iet
ai
i.e.
aiu-de-iJierai
and
'i^tj^urai
on
the
inscription
from
Cyme
C, I. 3524 1.
53,
51,
a-rrvcofierui
on
that from
Mitylene 2166,40; ipfxei'cu
appears
re- peatedly
on
the Lesbian
inscription
discovered
by Conze,
and in
Sappho
fr. 136. For forms like
"j)v\u(T(rip.evai
in the
Elegiacpoets cp.
Reimer
Stud. i.
2,
31. " The forms
etj-ierai
as
Megarian
in Arist. Ach.
775,
and
(iXete/uEt'ai
in the
Spartan treaty
Thuc.
v. 77 are
quite isolated,
and
Ahrens doubts both.
The infinitives in
-/lei'
are
formed
by
Homer less
commonly
from
verbs in
-jji
than those in
-ptruL
:
'ifijjiw
2
364,
fxediintr
A
351, 'tj-uv
'
A 170,
opj'v/JEr
I 353 "
C()f.iEV
A
379, /.lEdif-iei'
A
283,
EirnrpoE^Ei'
A
94,
ovraj^iEi'
E
132, (y)^ipEv
6 254. Those from thematic verbs
are more
common: ayi^Ei'
A
323,
ayopEvifiEi'
B
10, liyawaCEj-iEv
O
464, choke
i.iei',
Kaiif-LEV, VKpEjJEV, ir()\EjJnCtlAEl', aiTEVCE^EV, (flEpEflEy "t7r"/LXf
I' H
373,
iXdEfiEu
A
247,
(payE^Ev
k
386. On the other hand the Dorians have
made the form in
-jiev
the
regular
one for non-thematic verbs
(Ahr.
Dor.
315).
This form
may
be established
as
Cretan
{cudjiEv
C. I
3048),
Laconian
{ItTvocoiiEv 1334),
Heraclean
{^jfxEv
tab. Heracl. i. 75
etc.),
Delphian {e'iiuv
Wescher-Foucart i.
2, 7),
Lociian
{ktEl^iEv
Stud. ii.
453,
1.
3, 8),Corcyraean [ara6ii.iEP
C. I.
1841),
and
Syracusan (j^^pocilo^iEv
Epich.
fr.
71, Ahrens),
and is
abundantlyrepresented
in Pindar
by
the
side of the
rare
Tonic form
covrai
{ridE^Ei' Pyth.
i.
40,
ord^tfrPyth.
iv.
2):
cp.
G. A. Peter de dial. Pindari
jx
63. The few instances of the
kind in the Attic drama
are discussed
by
Gerth Stud. i.
2,
257. The
98
Aeolians are
much less consistent. We have indeed Boeot.
eJi.iEi'=ih'ai
C. I.
1562, 63,
KapTEpfjfxEv
Athen.
x.
p.
417
b,
and Thessalian
Iohev
(Ahrens
Dor.
p.
529,
1.
12),
but the Lesbian Aeolians
always
said
iiraivriv (and aiyr)^i), ai'rXrjy,I'iicav, bpivr (Conze): we also find in
Conze Xli. C. 1.
12,
TrapTji =7rop"7j'a( (from Trapir]^n
'. at
IeI
7rapj;i'
uvtoiq
TciQ ciKac),
which modifies the rule of Ahrens Aeol.
315,
that
mono- syllabic
stems
always
had the
ending
-fiEvai.
There
are
further the
Arcadian forms
r]iai,
anEidrivai,KariKpooyrirai (jVIichaelis
in Fleckeisen's
Jahrb.
1861,
p.
594),
wliich are
of
importance
in
foi-mingour judgment
on the Homeric dialect.
Evidently
the same
varietyprevailedamong
the AeoUans
as
with Homer. For there is
an
agi-eement
also in the fact
z 2
340 VEKBAL NOUNS OF PEESENT AND SIMPLE AOKIST STEM.
ch..xv.
that at
auy
rate with the Boeotians and Thessalians there
are infinitives
in
-/(")'
from thematic verbs, Boeot.
(payf^iey (Ahrens
Dor.
523),.
Kpil^efxeu
Strattis in a
Boeotian
passage (Ahrens
Aeol.
210),(pipi/Asv
(Rocueil
d'inscriptions
de Beotie
par
Decharme, no.
xxv),
Thessal.
vTrapx^A'E'')
"yy/J"0"V"'' (Ahrens
Dor.
p.
529,
1.
20, 27),
all forms which
have their
parallels only
in Homer.
There are
still
a
few
peculiarities
to be discussed. For Homer
Bekker
(Homer.
Bl. i.
69)
has discovered the law that 'the
language
of
Homer knows no
infinitive in
-/tf,
in which the
penultimate
has
a
double consonant or a
long
vowel
:
'
hence while
we
find
yruineyai,
there
is
no *-/}'Mue)', no
*rTT)ij.ier, *2ii^e)', *i/jop)7/ff r,
and
none from
passive
stems like
*rU(/^n7/i")', *codrji.iei', though
forms of this kind
are common
among
the Doiians. To the
Aeolians,however,
such forms
seem to be
quite
as
unknown as to Homer.
Length by position
appears
in
e/i/xej',.
which occurs five times in Homer
(^ 364, 4 334, tt 419, t 289,
x
210)
with the variants
'ifx/^iei'
and
elyai,
and also in
'('^^ej- (A 719).
" Three
Homeric infinitives have
a su.rprising long
vowel before the
endings
-jjii'cu
or
-j-tev,
TiB!)j.urai
^
83, 247,
t/i"i'at
Y
365,
and
'Cevyrvixev
11
145,
which violates the rule
justgiven.
Of these
TiOt'ijuevai
has been left
unassailed,
for it is
evidently
formed
upon
the
analogy
of
tcaXy'jjjiEvai
K
125,
kix'/f
f'ot
O 274. For
'Ijneiai, however,
G. Hermann
Opusc.
i.
242 has
proposed'ififxei^ai, supported by
an unintelligible
passage
in the
99 Et. M.
p.
467, 20,
for
'C^vyrx)i.iEi' l^fvyi'v/^ifxev
which has
no
support
what- ever.
I. Bekker
(Hom.
Bl. i.
69)
approves
of
both,
but has
only
ad- mitted
the former into his text. The model from which this
suggestion
is derived is
apoixfiEi
ai
Hes.
Op. 22,
wliere the
reading
is
by no means
certain,
so
that
we ought pei'haps
to write
simply
apu)jj,erai,
a
form with
an
Aeolic
colouring
after the
pattern
of the Homeric
(JiOfni/jeycu (cp.
aXw/i")'at).
For the two Homeric verbs we must
conjecturally assume a
transition to the
analogy
of the thematic verbs
;
i.e.
fjUErai
is contracted
from
*lei.ieraL (cp.iwr, 'ioif.n), i^"vyi'Vf.iEi'
from
*'(evyyveiJ.t}' (cp.(evyvvov
T
393).
If
anyone
finds this
assumption over-bold,
he
may
remember
that
i^Evyi'Vf.ii
and
opvvfii
are
the
only
two verbs in
-/xt
which form
an
infinitive in Homer. The view that
syllablesnaturally
short
can
become
long,by
what is
supposed
to he the easier road of the
doubling
of the
consonant,
rests
upon
a
false
application
of the
irregularities
occurring
with the
augment,
discussed
on
p.
78. " I. Bekker
(Hom.
Bl.
i.
147)
shows that the forms in
-))i.ieiai as
well as
those in
-"/'"''
were
favou.red
by
the
preference
for a dactylicending
at the close of the
fourth foot.
The most curious of all infinitives are those in
-f.iEiy,
quoted
from
inscriptions among
some
of the
Dorians, especially
among
the Rhodians
and their Sicilian colonists
;
these all come from roots without the
thematic vowel
:
Rhod.
npondE/^iEiy
C. I. 2525
b,
1.
99,
e'lueiy
2905 c. 7,
Gelan
ayadijjLEiy 5475,
1.
25, Agrig. e'i/^ieu', avaOEf.iEiy, ('nroh^ieiy 5491,
1.
18, 23,
24. In
Epicharmus, too,
Ahrens Dor. 315 thinks he finds
traces of an ending
-fJ.Eiy,
and in the
appendix
he adds
ayoiKoSon)]diii.iEiy
from
an inscription
from Telos
near
Rhodes
published l)y
Ross. This
termination is
evidently
confined within
very
narrow
limits. It deserves
notice that these same inscriptionsgive us
in
part
the
strange
form
TTtipttrrxvot, waptirry^i'tilhii (Ahr.341),
that
is,
another instance of
ft
in
the
place
of
a wide-spread".
CH. XV.
IXFINITIVES, 341
2)
Second Group
:
Infinitives
in -rai.
The forms like
fuvat,
cihhat, TiBiiai,^tit^vvvat, SO common in
Attic,
are as entirely
imknown to Homer
as
to tlie Doric and Aeolic dialects.
Even of tlie
perfect
infinitive in
-ivai,
like el^etai
(Homer. 'iCf^ievai),
yeyorerai,
as
Meister Stud. iv. 422 has
alreadynoticed,
there is not the
slightest
trace to be found in
Homer,
any
more
than with the Aeolians 100
and Dorians
(cp.
Ahrens Dor,
331).
A
deep
rift here
runs between the
Greek dialects. For the Homeric we
may,
in accordance with what has
been noticed above
(p.340),lay
down the
followingrule,
for the cUstri-
bution of the three terminations
-fxeiai, -fj-er,
-rai :
-{.lei'ai
is
used,
"evidently
as an archaism,
Avith the most different
stems,
-^er
only
with
stems with a short vowel,
- " oi only
with those with
a long
vowel. Hence
yvQifievai
and
yvcovai
(f)opT]fiepai
and
(poprivai
Qefievat defiev
and Oelvai
ocCur
hut not
*yv5"fxev
but
yvdvaL
not ovTiivaL but
ovTupevai
or
ovTafxev
not fl^ei'aibut
i8fj."vai or tS/ixej'
not Tedvdvat but
reOvayLevai or Tedvajxev.
There is
only
one exception
to this
rule,
\4z.
liyai,
but this
occurs
very
frequently, though
often with the various
readings"i}.ieraL
and
"ifiEv.
If
we
remembei- that here the form alone in use later
on
difiers from the
genuine
Homei'ic form
only by
a
singleconsonant,
it becomes not
impro- bable,
as
Leo
Meyer Vergl.
Gr. ii. 279 has
alreadyconjectured,
that this
exception
was
unknown to the
genuine language
of Homer. The col- lections
given already
on
p.
339 f. show that the Dorians and AeoHans do
not share this disinclination to iirfinitivesin
-j^ier
with
along penultimate.
The disinclination is
specifically Homeric,
and
quite
leaves the
impres- sion
of
a custom
fashioned in the cu-cle of the
epic shigers.
Infinitives
in
-rat
after
a precedinglong
vowel
are
tolerably
numerous
in
Homer,
quite
in accordance with the later
langiiage,
as
""/''"' y
183,
aXwrai ^I
172,
l3i}rai
M
459, iJiwiai
K 174,
y)wiai
/3159, ^layrwrcu
H
424, covrcii
A
319,
ciyai B
413,
ilfcu N
369,
Bt'ircn Z
92, (TT-J/mi
$
266, Trepicpdrai
w
236,
and more common
than all eJi
ai.
The
present
form h^ovvai occm'S
as a quite
isolated case in Q,
425,
and must be
placedamong
the numerous
linguistic peculiarities
of this book. All these forms
are
not established
as Lesbian Aeolic
;
how
slight
the traces of them in Doric are
is shown
by
Ahrens
p.
316. Even in
Pindar, according
to Peter
p.
63
ctiKt'vi'ciL 101
{h:
171
Boeckh)
is
quite
isolated. On the other hand
we
iind in the
Arcadian dialect
7]rcu = eh'ai
(Teg.10), invtidfivai,
Karvc^porTpuL(ib.49)
answering
to the Homeric tlrm and
fapfjyai
(cp.
above
p.
339).
3)
Third Group: Infintives
in -ev (-fir,-?;r).
In the formation of the infinitive from verbs with a
thematic vowel
the Greek dialects
agree very
much more than in that of verbs in
-fii.
The old forms in
fjerai
and
-/.itr grow
antiquated
much sooner
after
a
thematic A'owel, From the
very
earliest times we
meet with infinitives
in
-Ell' (Aeol.-rjr,
Dor.
-"j') everj'where
on
Greek sod. Even in Homer
this
ending
is for
more common in the
present
than the ??i-formation.
If I
may
trust
my
collections,
there
are
151 infinitives in
-nr (including
342
VERBAL NOUNS OF PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xv..
the contracted
verbs)against
84 wi-formations. In this statement all
compounds
are
reckoned
along
with the
sinijile
verb
as one. It is
espe- cially
noteworthy
that the contracted verbs
can only
form theii- infi- nitive
in two
ways,
either in the Aeolic fashion
:
KuXljiJ^erai, fopiji'ui,
or
with the
ending
-ei',
whether
uncontracted,
irepaar, oxseiv
or con-
tiucted
reii^el)',
ivtipur.
We
might
indeed conceive of forms in
-EEfxtr,
-ctEfiEv
or
-EijjLiv,-ajXEv,
but
nothing
of the kind is heard of.
Evidently
the formation of the infinitives in
-^Evai
and
-fxEv
established itself at
a time in which there
were not
yet any
contracted verbs in the
later
sense
of the word. When these
came
up
and formed their infini- tives
in
a manner
corresponding
to the other
flexion,
the foi'ms of the
third
group,
which
by
this time had been
qvdteusual,were selected
; by
the side of these it was
only
Aeolic forms like
0op
"'//(" rot
which held
their
ground
here and there in the
usage
of the minstrels.
The
present
mfinitives in
-elv are
Ionic in the wider
sense,
hence
they
are also Attic
;
but besides
they
are also current in the so-called
milder Doric
(Ahrens
Dor.
170),
and hence
they
have been
recently
quoted e.g.
from the Locrian dialect
(Oveiv, ayeir, (jx'ipEU',
Allen Stud. iii.
237).
The Lesbian Aeolians used
-rji'
instead
(Ahrens
Aeol.
89).
On
inscriptions
we find
avi.i(j)ipr]i' (C.
I. no. 2166, 29),
(ipKErjr,
'ix'V'j
f-iriypa-
"pT)i' (no..3524,17, 29, 37),(pEvyrji' (Sauppe
de duabus inscr. Lesbiacis
Gott.
1870,
p. 24),
in M."SS.
liyrji' (Sappho 1, 19),
KpEKrjy
(ib.90),
cppoi'.
102
Ticrdr]!' (4:1,2),on
the
strength
of which
-"]i'
is
universally
written in the
infinitive in
Sappho
and Alcaeas. The same termination is
frequently
denoted
as Doric
by grammarians ; but, as
Ahi'ens
(p.158) shows,
this
can at most be the
case
for
some
branches of
Doric, especially
for La-
conian. In Theociitus
-rjv
as an
infinitive termination is not certain.
Instead of this
we
find the shorter
ending -er
(Ahrens,p.
176)
abun- dantly
established from difierent sections of Doric. There is the evidence
of
inscriptions
for the Cretan forms
(jjipet'^ tiktev,
urayirdotricEy, mrEiiiEv
(Helbigp.
33),
the Heraclean
uyypa(bEi',
e'x^'')
v;rap)("i'
(Meister
Stud. iv.
421),
the Theraean
Eyypa"pti',
the
Delphic
ayfr, (pepEv,
dver.
Finally
the Arcadian
]^(paivtv,
ETrrjpEiu^Ev,
viTap)(Ei'
(Gelbke
Stud. ii.
26)
are to
be noticed. Even the
conjugation
vowel
e
of the derived verbs cannot
produce
a
long syllable.
In the Theraean dialect there
are Iloikev,
Xei~
Tovpyi)',
in the
Delphic evuike)',
in Cretan
roiy,
ttou)',
in the
Pytha- goreans
Kpurir,OEujpEv,
as
against
contracted forms of the
"-conjugation,
like the
Delphian ETriTif^irj)',
ffvXijy.
The reduction of
a
double
f to a single
one before final consonants is
one
of the
recognisedpeculiarities
of Doric.
We
come now to the aorist infinitives. For these we must refer in
the first
place
to the
thorough investigation by
Renner in Stud. i.
2,
32.
In Homer
we
find the
endmg -Etiy according
to Renner's calculations
102
times,
but
only
in 14
places
before
a vowel,
e.g. /.t
446,
Elcndieiv
ov
yap
/"""!'
vTrEK(f)vyot
atTrvi' o\edp(jt',
A 263
'irrri^)^
waTTEp
ij-iol, iriEti)',
ore
Ov/Aos
(i)wyi].
Thei'C are further three other
forms,
the
contracted,
e.g.
sXe'i}', ah'ir,ttieIi',
which in some verbs is the
only
form of the kind
admitted
by
the
metre,
e.g.
uXciXi^e'i)', hf.iitprElr, EiTrelr,irEiriOtlr,
while
other
stems on
the
contrary
exclude the
open
form,
e.g.
IpadiEiv, kpvtca-
KEEir, irpuOEEir; secondly,-in^v
:
uXaXi^ifiEt', 0oyfyU")',nyij-iEV, ttie/jei';
most
r.irely -i^iErai : a\ciXKiiJ.erai, eXBe^ieicu.According
to
my
calcvda-
tion there
are 19 different aorist
infinitives,
for the most
part
in
very
common
use,
in
-eelv,
21 in
-"?"',
10 in
-ifXEr,
4 in
-i/jEycu.
Hence here
CH. XV,
INFINITIVES.
343
too, as
in
so
many
other
cases,
the form which in later times is the
only-
one
in
use,
is even
in Homer the most usual.
Hesiod, according
to
Forstemann de dial. Herod,
p.
33,
in the
Opera,
and the
Theogony,
has
only
the contracted form
(a^u/x/jnAtl;', erto-TreTr,eXBt'iy,lleli',
daitTi'),
in the
Scutum,
which for the most
part
comes nearer
to the
Homeric
language,
5 aorist infinitives in
-Etw occur
in 6
passages
; 103
kXee'iy
337,
Kiirhiv 332,
/ictTrtfU'
231, 304, 7ri""tr 252, 7rpae""ii'
240
;
twice
before consonants
(^Xnreeii' kcu\ irpuQinr /.itiuawTsc),
four times befoi-e
vowels in the maiu caesura of the third foot. The traces of the ter- mination
-eeiy
in
elegiac
and iambic
poets
are extremelyfaint,
while the
Alexanch'ine
poets
in their imitation of Homer
by no means reject
them.
There is
absolutely
no
instance of an
infinitive in
-eeir on an inscription.
They
have
disappeared
from the text of Herodotus in
consequence
of the
investigations
of Bredow
(p.
324
S.)
and
Stein,
the M.SS. evidence for
them,
which in
Hippocrates
also is
weak,
not
recommending
them.
The Attic
Ihly, Xo/jtlr,fiaOeTi'
etc.
point by
their accent to contraction.
In the
same
way
in the Laconian
passage
in
Aristoph. Lys.
1004
cnyfiv
(=:9(y"7j)
is read
according
to the traces of the RaA'enna M.S.
;
and the
Dorian aorist infinitives in
-tr,
like the
present
iufinitives of the
con- tracted
verbs
are
accented as
oxytones
:
reKer,
kltXir,
e/ujoaXe)-, avi'aya-
yir,
while the Asiatic Aeolic law of accentuation
requiresus to wiite
J'eiin]!', uTvoOayr]!',
vTrorrxv
(Sauppe
de inscr. Lesb.
p.
24). Reserving
for the
present
the
pi'oof
of this
view,
the fact
may
be here
provisionally
mentioned,
that all these
endings
may
be
easilyexplained
from
a
primi- tive
form in
-etv.
One
exti-aordinaiy
formation still
remains,
viz. the few instances of
an
infinitive in
-y
instead of
-rat
from
primitive
aorists. There are
pro- bably
not more than two which
can
be
established,"Kupip'-=.TcupEhai,
mentioned above
p.
339,
and hvr=zlvyui
(Conze,
Reiseanf
Lesbos).Since,
as we
saw,
the Ai-cadians had forms like
aiitiQT^rai,against
which there
are
Lesbian forms in
-jjr,
it is natural here to
conjecturea
loss of the
syllableat,
which would also serve to
explain
the Aeolic
passive
infini- tives
like
idEdu'y6}]y=iu"dvadfiyai. ^vv
is
quite isolated,
and
extremely
doubtful in Parmenides
v.
65 ed.
Karsten,
where the M.SS.
give
the
unmetrical verse.
varepov rj
TrpoaBevrov fxrjbevos ap^ap.ei'ov (pvvai,
ir~ivis
justas
doubtful in Anthol. xi.
140,
where the M.S. has
ols oil
crKa)p.p.a
Xeyeiv,ov rrew (piXov
wliile Planudes
gives
Triv. We should
probal^ly
read Tvielj' with
synizesis.
Finally
covy twice occurs before
vowels,
viz.
Theogn.
104
rov hetuIovv104
ediXoL and Phoenix
Coloph. v.
20
voyLoc.
Kopijyi]Xf~ipa
^ovv
tTraL-ovor].
Perhaps
it is best to indicate
by
an apostrophe
in both cases
the elision
of the
ai.
As the fom'th
group
of the
infiiaitives,
the aorist infinitives in
-rrui,
show no
variations whatever within the
range
of
Greek,
and the fifth
gi'oup
containing
the middle infinitives in -(rbui
very
slightones,
there is
no reason
to
occupy
ourselves more in detail
with
pointing
out these
forms,
and we
may
at once turn to the
question
of the
origin
of the
different
forms, a question
which in
some points
is
one
of
difliculty.
344 VERBAL NOUNS OF PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xv.
The nature of the infinitive,
both formal and
syntactical,
has been
thoroughly
discussed of
late,especially
in the
writings
of Wilhelm de
infinitivi forma et
usu,
Eisenach
1872,
and
Jolly
Geschichte des Infini-
tivs im Indogermanischen,
Munich 1873.
By
way
of elucidation of the
Greek
infinitives the
followingimportant
facts are
brought
out
by
this
discussion :
1)
In
every
infinitive form we have to
expect,
besides the verbal
stem,
which in
many
cases
is still further characterised as a tense
stem,
a
nominal suffix and a case
suffix.
2)
The
same
multijilicity
of nominal
suffixes,
which has
already
met
us in
Greek, prevails
in the infinitive in several of the
cognate languages,
above all in the Vedic dialect
;
and this is sufficient to warn us
beforehand
to use
the
greatest
caution iiithe
attempt
to
prove
the
identity
of forma- tions
which
only distantly
resemble each
other,
without
adequate
reasons.
3)
In Gi-eek we can discover with
certaintyonly
such
case
suffixes
as
denote the locative
or possibly
the dative. The locative is
adapted
for the
infinitive,
inasmuch as
it denotes the
sphere
within which an
action
takes
place,
the
dative,
inasmuch as
it denotes the
object
with reference
to which an
action is done.
Now if
we
consider in the first
place
the first
group
of active in- finitives,
the
polysyllabic
forms in
-fxevai,
with which we were
concerned
on
p.
339 find their
complete
correlate in the Vedic forms in
-mmw,
of
10.")
which Delbriick Ind. Verbum
p.
226 however
quotes only
five instances.
But of these
five,
two
correspond
in stem also to Greek forms :
dd-inane
z=c6-fiEtai, vid-7)ume='ic-i.iEi'ai.
We have fiu-ther the Zend infinitives
in -maine
(Wdhelm p.
14)
like
^tao-mainepraise
from rt.
ffti=Skt.
stu.
There
can
be no doubt about the
oiigin
of these forms in Sanskrit
-7nan is here one of the most common
suffixes for the formation of
abstract
substantives,
and -man-e
the dative of this suffix. From the
stem vid-man there is
an insti'umental,
from the stem dd-man a genitive
as well
as
the dative used
as an
infinitive. The
case
is the same
with the
Zend
-maiiie,
the dative of the nominal suffix -?7i"?i. Hence if
co-yuf
"'ot
is
identical with
dd-mane,
which does not differ at all
phonetically,
it follows
that
cd-fieiui
also is a
dative. And such is the
opinion
of
BoppYergl.
Gr. iii.'-^
324,
Leo
Meyer Vergl.
Gr. ii.
281,
Delbriick Ztschr. xviii.
82,
Wilhelm
p.
14. I have hitherto in
agreement
with Schleicher
(Compend.^
p.
401) especially
in the
'
Elucidations
'
^
p.
197
(E.
T.
p.
221,
but
cp.
pp.
198-202 of the third German
edition)
held
a
diflerent
view,
influenced
chieflyby
three considerations. In the first
place
it seemed to me
im-
pi-obable
that the infinitive
ending
-fiemi
contained a
diflerent case
from
-eyni.
But the latter
e.g.
in eld-ii'ai seemed from its
similarity
to the
Skt. ved-ane the locative from a
stem
vedana,
to be established as a
locative. This
argument
is not
valid,because,as we
have
seen already,
-f "'a(
is
post-Homeric,and, as
will be
shown,
is
very
different from this
-ane. Secondly,
while Latin has
a
suffix
-men,
correspondiug
to the
Skt. neuter
-man,
Greek
givesonly
neuters in
-/im
(from nur).
Hence
we should rather have
expected
-/.lav-ai.
On the other hand it seemed
to be
easy
to connect
-/.terai
as a
locative of
a
feminine stem
-/.lera
-w-ith
the Greek
participles ;
and there was
little to
surprise
one
in the middle
force of the
latter,
inasmuch as
it was evidentlyonlyby degrees
that the
distinction of the
genera
verhi became established,
while in abstract
CH. XV.
THE ORIGIN OF THE INFINITIVE TERMINATIONS. 345
substantives like
irXtjir-iAoyri,
whicli
are vinmistakeablyakin,
there is
nothing
of
a
middle character
(cp.Jolly
Infinitiv
p.
85).
There is no
great weight
in this
consideration,
because the heavier vowel a
in these
innch-nsed
forms,
after their connexion with those in
f(o()')
had become
obscured "
cp. 7rot^//r, TroifjLwog
"
might easily
have been
'
thinned
'
into
". Thu-dly-ai
nowhere
occurs as -a
suffix of the dative. But
as -ai
is
106
the
regular representative
of
a
Skt.
e, e.g.
in the
personalendings -rai
=te, -yrai^nte,
the
assumption
that the old -ai in this
place
retained its
full
strength,
has at least some analogies
in its favour. The
impro- bability
that the Skt. dd-mane and
coiuevcu agree purely by accident,
and the
impossibility
of
explaining
the Sanskrit form otherwise than has
been
proposed,
i.e.
as a dative,
remain the
principal
f;icts. Hence I
agree
now in
regarcUng
the datival
origin
of the Greek forms in
-f^ieiai
as
"established.
Then comes the
question
how the shorter
-f.uy
is related to this
-^Et'cii.
The almost universal
opinion,
to which I have hitherto
un- reservedly
given my
assent,
is*to the effect that
-/lei'
simply
arose
from
the fuller
-^efai
by
the loss of the
-en.
A confirmation of this \dew
could
apparently
be derived from the accent. For the accentuation
ovTai^ier,
dni^tv,ay
ifxtr,
which violates the
ordmary
rule for the accent
of
verbs,pointsdecidedly
to some loss at the end. But it is still difficult
to assume that the
longdiphthongalending
has been
dropped.
The loss
of the
-ai
could at most be
supported by
the elision of the
-at
in verbal
endings
before
vowels,
and
by
the consideration that the consciousness of
the
meaning
of this element must have become
very
faint
even
in the
earliest times. A fvu-ther
support,
which this view seemed to find in
the
assumption
that the
ending -tv was
in the
same
way
a
shortened
form of
-f
j'cu,
quite
fails
us. For, as we
shall
see,
-tr never occui's
side
by
side with -ei
ca,
and is
a completely
distinct formation. And
it is
only
in the case
of the Lesbian Aeolic infinitives in
-r]v by
the
side of
-i)rai {i.ie6v(y0t]i')
mentioned
on
p.
343 that there is
any
more
pro- bability
in the loss of the
diphthong,although
even
here another view is
possible.
Under these circumstances it seems to me
very
doubtful
whether
we can
refer
-/(er
to
-p.tvaL,
and it
appears
more probable that,
as
others also have
conjectured,
-/xtr
has lost
a simple-i.
Thus
cojxiv-ai
would be
dative,d6f.iei'
for
cofiev-i
locative of the nomhaal stem
cofiev.
The loss of the
i
has its
completeanalogue
in the
preposition
ii'
by
the
side of
")'/,
and
a more distant
one
in the 2
sing,
in
-eic
for
*eiai,
*"(n
and in the
plural
datives and locatives in
-oic, -rue by
the side of the
107
earher
-oiai,
-aiffi. In this
way
we
might explain
also the Rhodian
forms in
-fiew
:
tiiijeu'would be to
Oe^ei'
from
*3iiJ.Er-i
as ilr to iv from
")"",
that is to
say,
we
should have here
an
example
of
epen
thesis. How- ever
I should not like to attach too much
weight
to this latter
conjec- ture.
Naturallywe cannot
suppose
that there was
any
more
difference of
meaning
between
-/.lEiai
and
-fxEv,
than in Sanskrit between the infini- tive
forms oriffinatinff in the dative and those from the locative. The
category
of the
infinitive,
which
Jolly
very justlyplacesulong
with the
adverbs,
rests rather
upon
the
petiifaction
of the case-suffix.
We come next to the second
group,
the infinitives in
-I'ai.
For the correct
explanation
of these forms the statistical data
given
on
p.
340
ff".,
which
have not as
yet
received due
attention,are
of the
very greatestimportance.
Pre-vdously, starting
from the Attic
elcEvai,
I
regarded
the
e as an essen-
346 VERBAL NOUNS OF PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
ch. xv.
tial element of these infinitives
;
and hence I
compared
e.g.
ftilircu with
the Skt. locative
vedane,
which is used in later Sanskrit
as an in- finitive.
But it is
an error
in
philology
to
compare
an
evidently
late
Greek form with
a
Sanskrit form which is likewise somewhat recent.
And in fact the traces of Vechc infinitives in
-ane,
as Delbrfick
p.
225
shows, are
extremelyscanty.
The two which rest on
certain
evidence,
dhnrv-ane ad
pugnandum
and turv-diie ad
vincendum, are
regardedby
Wilhelm
p.
15
as
datives from stems in
-an.
If
we
consider how in the
Yedas the most difierent stem-formations
are
in isolated instances used
in
particularcases in
a manner
resembling
the
infinitive, we shall admit
that tliis
agreement may very
easily
be
purely
accidental. On the other
hand two facts of the Greek
usage
can
hardly
rest
upon
chance,
viz.
firstly
that the Homeric
language,
with the
exception
of
Uvai,
mentioned
on
p.
341,
and
probably incorrectlyrecorded,
has
only
infinitives in
-rat
with
a
long penultimate;
and
secondly
that the
penultimate,contrary
to the
generalcourse
of verbal
accentuation,
in all Greek dialects has
always
the accent :
yrwi ca, ovravai,
rtOivai, The two facts combined
make it
probable
that this termination has suffered the loss of
a
108 syllable
before the
r.
The vowel before the
r,
which in Homer is
always long,
and which in all Greek without
exception
is
accented,
always belongs
to the
stem,
and not
merely
in
^tco-t'cit,
(pa-iai,
Tedra-raiy
(popyj-rcii,
where this is
self-evident,
but also in
eice-yai,
which is con- nected
with
elEi-oj, tlo"-h]-y.
Hence we cannot talk of
an ending -et'ui,
but
only
of
-rat.
Now
some
might
wish to make use
of these facts to
show that the
-roi,
to which
we are thus
brought,
is
a
shortening
of
-fiefai
through
the intermediate
stage
-/xrai.
We should thus have
series like
yva-fievai
*
yva-fivai yvavai
cpd-fifvai
*
(fia-fxvaL cfidvai.
The
syncope
of the
e
would find
support phonetically
in forms like
fj.Edi-/j.ro-c^ l^iipi-fxyci,
TEpa-fivo-Q
and in Latin words like
alu-mnu-s,
colu-mna. But it would be diflicult to adduce
a
single
Greek
analogue
for the reduction of
/.tj'
to
a mere v :
nr
is
an
extremely
favomite
com- bination
in Greek. The form
covvai
leads
us on
another track.
Benfey
Orient
u. Occident i. 606
(cp.
Wilhelm
p.
17) compared
this with the
Yedic
ddvdne,
which is indeed
according
to Delbrlick
p.
225
quite
isolated,
but Avhich
occurs frequently,
and
can
only
be
explained
as
the
dative of
a
nominal stem
dd-van,
derived from the rt. dd. This
com- parison
remained till
lately
a mere
conjecture,
but it has
recently
found
a
striking
confirmation in the
Cyprian ccfivm,
which
occurs twice
(cp.
Deecke u.
Siegismund
Stud. vii.
248).
Now are we to
suppose
that
Zovvai was formed in
a
quite
different manner
from
lilovrai, or
that the
isolated Homeric iiluvi'uiis
an
absolutely
distinct formation from
cilvrai,
and both
again
from
yvCJrui, dtliai, (pdvui
? In this
way
we arrive at a
certain
degree
of
probability
that all infinitives in
-rai
have
originated
in
J'ercu. As
covv(ti came from
cofejcn,so Ouvai would have
come
from
OeJ'ei'ai^
yruj-yai
from
yvio-ferai.
The
post-Homeric
forms
cilorai,(pdrai,
elle-
vai
would be later
formations,arising
at a
time in which the mccUal p
was
completely
extinct. But at least in the accentuation of the
penul- timate
there still remained a reminiscence that it was once an ante- penultimate.
Cp.
E-Ko-nEy
for
i-Kcf-nEv
from the rt. Kof
(Princ.
i.
186)^
CH. XV.
THE OKIGIX OF THE INFINITIVE TERMINATIONS. 347
kX6ii-q
for /.XoZ-ct-e
(ib.
i.
184).
I do not venture to
give
this
explanation
as a
certain one.
Bnt it will be admitted that it
agrees
with the 109
recorded facts and with
phonetic
hiws. It would not be
absolutely
impossible
that
(pa-vai,
Tidi-rai and the like should be locatives formed
by
means
of the sutEx
-i-a
;
but then the accent would remain
entirely
unexplained.
All the earlier discussions of the forms of the third
group
start from
the
ai'bitraryassumption
that the
r
of the
ending
-ei' was a
mutilated
-I'ai,
hence that
Xeyeiv originated
in
^Xeyf.nai.
Now under the head of
the
^t-formation
it seemed to us
that there were
serious
objections
to the
admission of such a
loss of the end of the word
:
and hence all
pi'oba-
bility
for such an
assumption
in the case
of the third
group
is
wanting.
For in no single
instance within the limits of the
present
and aorist
formation is there even
the
slightest
trace of
a longer
form
by
the side
of the shorter known to us.
Forms like
^Xeytipaior *X"y"j'aior *ij)v-
yeiiai,
^(pvyeevai
or anything
of the kind that has been
imagined,
no- where
exist. For the immense mass
of verbs with
a
thematic vowel
the infinitive in
-eiy
(Dor.-er,
Aeol.
-?/))
is established
beyond
doubt
from the earliest times. To derive
very
ancient forms
common
to all
Greek,
like Xveiy
(Xvev,Xvr]i)
from forms like
yeycyirat, emiai,
in
which we
take the
e to be an
element of the
tense-stem,
and which make
their
appearance
only
at a comparatively
late
date,
is
moreover
forbidden
by
the accentuation. Besides we
could not thus
explain
either the doubled
vowel in
(pvyieiv (or(fwyitv),
or
the
length
of the final
syllable
in
Xveir,
XvTjv.
For the assertion that the vowel of the
precedingsyllable
was
lengthened
in
compensation
for the
dropped at,
happilybelongs
to a point
of view which has
long
been
passed by philologists.
Leo
Meyer Yergl.
Gr. ii. 281 traces back forms like
Xveiv, ([ivye'iv
to
Xvi-fxir, (pvyi-fxer.
Certainly
in this
way
the
diphthong
of the
ordinary
form and the
doubled
e
of the Homeric would both be
explained.
But it is
quite
im- possible
to adduce
any
analogy
for the loss of
a
consonant so
much liked
and
so common as
/i
from the middle of
a
word between two vowels.
No one
will
appeal
to the loss of
m
in the Skt. e=:*me of the 1
sing,
middle,
for we
have here to do with a
fact which falls within the life of
the Greek
language;
and stUl less to the
exi)lanation
of the Greek 1
sing.
mid. in
-/.un
from
ma-mi,
defended on
p.
55,
for here
too, even
in the 110
earliest times of the Greek
langaiage
as we know it,no ??i
remained be- fore
the i. The loss
was
occasioned
by
the aversion to too much
repe- tition
of the same
sound in foi-mative
syllables.
Forms like
Oii^ui,
oro/xo,
evprjidci
are
among
the commonest in
Greek;
and as
the infinitives in
-HEvai
and
-/.ter
are
evidently
akin to the substantives in
-/(",
we cannot
see
what can
have induced the
language
to
get
rid of this
/(
only
in the
infinitives,
while
every^vhere
else it had
no objection
to it. For this
very
reason
this
theoiy was
very
earlyopposed by another,
which
re- garded
the sufiix
-"!' as
completelyindependent
of
-jiev.
As
early
as
my
essay
'
De nominum Graecorum
formatione,'
p.
56,
I
expressedmyself
in
favour of
this,though
I there
expressed
several
erroneous opinions
on the
subject
in
question.
Schleicher
agi-eed
with me in
principle, tracing(pipEiv
back to
a primitive
form
*0EpeI'ra, totally
distinct from
(;""|0"-/u"j'ot (Comp.^
p.
411).
But in the first
place^fepEiaiis,as we
have
seen,
a
pure
fig- ment
of the
imagination,
destitude of
any analogy;
and in the second
placeeven
with the
help
of this
hypothetical
form Schleicher can only
348 VEREAL NOUNS OF PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM. ch. xv.
explain
the
diphthong
of
(pepen' by assuming *"peperias an intermediate
step
between
*(pepei'ai
and
(pipeiv.
But in what other instance have
we
a final
nt
shortened to
1
1 An advance is marked
by Scherer,
Zur Gesch,
d. d.
Spr.,p.
474, who, though
he also refers
(jyepnv
to
*tptptyi,
does not
take this
hypothetical
form
as
the
shortening
of
an
equallyhypothetical
*"pepet'ai,
but as the locative of
a neuter stem
(pep-ty.
But this view
also is untenable
;
for,
to
say nothing
of the fact that such stems in
-sr
(cp.
Lat.
muju-en) are unknown in
Cli-eek,
it would be
absolutely
im- possible
to
explain
from
a
primitive
form
*(pepFi'i
the Doric
(f)ipev
and
Aeolic
(j)tpy]r,
or
from
an
analogous*fvyerL
the Homeric
(pvyeen'
and
Attic
(pvyE'iv.
The forms of the Greek
dialects,
like
Aeol.
(jifprjv
Dor.
(fyepev
Ion.
(pipeiv
point
with
certainty
to a
primitive
form
*(f)epeer,
where
we must take
(j)Epe
as
the
stem, ev as the
ending,as also in the Homeric
aorist,
the
termination of which will
require a more
thorough
discussion imme- diately,
we
find both e'sside
by
side.
This is the
place
to return to those remarkable
forms,
which have not
hitherto received due consideration in the discussion of the infinitive
111 formation,as we
promised
to do
on
p.
343. We saw that the
et
of the
present
infinitive in
-sir
points
to contraction. But
cfiipeiy
cannot have
come
from
*0ep"-"u', as we
might
at first
conjecture,
for then the form
would have to be
perispomenon;
and
even supposing
that the Tonic
diphthong ei
had ai'isen otherwise than
by
contraction from
te,
the Doric
and ApoHc forms
(j)ip"y (pipyjy
would be
inexplicable.
But if
cpepeiygoes
back to
(ptpe-Ev,
for
cjjvyely
we have
evidently
to
expect
not
fvyeen'
but
*(jwyUyas
the earlier form. For between the
present
and the thematic
aorist stem there is not the
slightest
difierence of declension in
respect
of
pei-sonal endings,
moods and verbal
nouns^
with the
one
exception
that
the aorists in the infinitive and
jiarticiple
are
inclined to accentuate the
element which does not
belong
to the stem. This
tendency
to w^hich
we
shall I'eturn under the head of the
participle, givesus
the inestimable
advantage
of
being
able to
recognise
(pvye'ir
at
once, by
the
accent,
as a conti-acted foi-m. That these active aoi-ist infinitives
are
peris-
pomena,
and the
corresponding
middle forms
are
paroxytones
is the well-
established doctrine of the old
giummarians.
We
may
here
simply
refer
to Arcad.
173, 20,
Herodian ii.
18-5,
2.5.
Certainly
this doctrme
was
based
vipon
the observation of the
livinglanguage.
There
were only a
few
Homeric,
i.e.
no
longer livingforms, on which there
were
doubts
and controversies
(cp.Gottling Accentlehre,
p.
56,
which
we
had
occasion to mention
on
p.
276.
In the old
copies
of the Homeric
poems
the infinitives under dis- cussion
must have been written (tYFEEN lAEEN etc. For the
^Era^a-
pok-D/p/^oiTfc
of the Attic
time,
who themselves said-
^uyfTr,
Icth',
and
who, as
may
be concluded from numerous facts,were
of
opinion
that the
poets
not
uncommonly
allowed themselves the
'
pleonasm
'
of
a vowel
before another of the
.same sound,
it
was
extremely
natural to
reproduce
these forms
by (j"vyi"iy, l^eeii;
and
so not
merely
to
satisfy
the
require- ments
of the
metre,
l)ut also to
approximate
to the Attic
practice.
The
forms in
-ftr,
requiredby grammaticalanalysis,adapt
themselves to the
verse,
as we have intimated above
(p.342)
in the
great majority
of
112 instances
without
dilficulty.
Where
a consonant
immediately
follows
CH. XV.
THE ORIGIN OF THE INFINITIVE TEEMINATIONS. 349
such
forms,
this is self-evident. Of the 14
passages
in
Homer,
which
contain such infinitives before
vowels,
there are
7 in which the
length
of
the termination
-e y
may
be
completelyexplainedby
the main caesura
of
the third
foot,verses
like
2
511
r/e
8iaTrpa6eeiv
r]
avSixanavra
Sdaaadai
besides T
15,
^ 467,
fl 608, a 59, i 137,
\ 232. There is
nothing more
surprising
in the
quantity
of the
syllable-ev
here than in
B 228
Trpci"TL(TT(0
St'So/xei', evr au nToXUdpuv eXcofiei'.
Again
in the 5
passages
in which such
an
infinitive stands in the
caesura
of the fourth
foot,
there is not much to astonish us
in the
lengthening
of
-er, e.g.
e
349
a\|/' dTroKvcrdfjLevos
iBuXeeii' els o'Lvona
ttovtou
Cp.
A
263,
K
368,
X 426.
Compare
H 418
(cp.420).
dp.(f)6Tipov, viKvas T dyepev,
erepoi
Se
ped'vXrjv.
In 9 508
(.pvaai'Teg
with, its / would be
quite enough
to
lengthen
the
final
syllable
of
*f3aXeei'(cp.
Stud. vi.
266).
Two
verses remain in
which the
polysyllabic
character of the word makes such a
phenomenon
explicable
even
in the second foot :
p
446 flcriSifii', ov
yap
Kfv VTreK(pvyoi
alirvv
oXedpov
T
477
n"(ppa8e(LV
ede'Xovaa
(pCXovttoctiv
evSov iovra.
The
lengthening
of
a
final
syllable
short in itself would here
come
under the
same
head as
the
cases, quoted by
Hartel Horn. Studien i.^
116,
e.g. Elcof^ieroQ 'AKafxavTi
E 462. The
examples
from Hesiod
are all
in the
caesura
of the thu'd foot. It will be
seen
how
easily
the forms in
-eev
can be introduced into the text of Homer and Hesiod.
Biit we
have not
quite
fimished even
yet
with these forms. The
stem-forming
suffix and the
case-ending
have
yet
to be determined.
Scholars
used to be
disposed
to
put
this infinitive
ending
side
by
side
either with noun-for-mations in
-ev, -ov,
or with those in
-era,
-ora.
But
-")'
occurs
in Greek
only
in a
few obscure substantives like
ai/x-f,-oi'
somewhat more commonly, e.g.
in
eiK-or,
but without
anywhere sharing
anythmg
in
common
with infinitives. Feminine substantives like
ijC-orij
come nearer
in
meaning.
But who can
believe that
a
suflSx with one initial
vowel, having
for its
primitive
form -an or
ana,
was
from the first added 113
immediately
to verbal stems ending
in
a
vowel. It is
by
no means usual
in the
primitive
formation of words to occasion accumulations of vowels
and contractions. It looks much more as
if the concurrence of vowels
in
(pevyt-ei-, 'pvye-tv,
as in countless other
cases, e.g.
in
yere'l,'keo,
evxeat,
(pcua,
yekee,
had
originated
in the loss of a consonant. The
question
then
arises,
what consonant 1
According
to Greek
phoneticlaws, as we
have
seen,
we cannot
suppose
the loss of
a
p,
which has often been
con-
jectvired :
but we
must take our
choice
among
the three
spirants_;',
v,
and
6f.
I do not see anything
in favour of the fii-sttwo
;
for we should
have to imagine a
locative from the suffix
-vaji,
-vani,corresponding
to
the dative -vane
(dd-vane),
but there is
no
hint of
anything
of the kind.
On the other hand the thu-d would find some
sujDport
in the Vedic
ending
-sani. Delbriick
p.
227
quotes
8 forms of the kind from different
stems,
e.g.
pra-hhu-shdni
from the rt. 6/iiZ=Gr.
^u.
There
is,
it must
350 VERBAL NOUNS OF PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORLST STEM. ch. xv.
be
admitted, no snch infinitive fi'om a stem in
a
thematic
vowel, as we
might expect
as an
immediate
parallel
for the Greek
forms, no
^hhara-
sani
as an analogue
to
(p"pe-{'7-)e)'.
If this
comparison
is
correct,we
must assume a
loss of the final locative
i,
i.e. the
same
process
which
we
regarded
as probable
for the
ending
-/xei/
on
the
analogy
of
ev as
compared
with the Homeric evi. In tliis
way
Ave might even fiad
some
support
for
the
diphthong
ei
by
the side of the thematic
e,
in
opposition
to
our
pre- viously
expressed
view
: (pvyi-eir might
have
come, by
means
of
epenthesis,
from
hhuga-sani,
like eh' from kvL and
possibly
the Rhodian
-ixew
from
ma7ii.
However,
there
are
weighty reasons
against
such
a combination.
For
as
the Doric
(pvyiv,Hiyiji'
cannot
possibly
be traced back to
(pvyieiv,
diyieiVj'we
should have to
regard
the
ending
-tn,
-sir
with
a transj)osed t
as a
peculiarity
of the Ionian main dialect. But
even
within this
dialect the
ei
of the
ending eiv
is
evidently
not
genuine.
The contracted
verbs show
no trace of the
i
in forms like
Tip.av,
uLa-dovv,
and the
accentuation of
(Jiipeiy
makes
a contraction from
*(pfpeea'
inconceivable.
"We must therefore
reject
the
hypotheses
of
an ejoenthesis
of the
(.
114
According
to the earlier
hypotheses
as to the infinitive suflixes the
most usual Greek infinitive formation seemed to find its most
complete
analogies
in the Teutonic
languages,
the Gei-man
ending -an being com- pared
with the Greek
-iv, though
this created fresh diificulties. If
oiu'
parallel
between
-"i'
and -sani is correct " and I do not see am-thing
which could
proliibit
such a comparison
" Greek here
approximates
to
the oldest Indian. It is not without
significance
from this
pomt
of
view,
that this infinitive
ending
is in the Vedas
one of those
'
which,'as
Jolly,
p.
132, puts it,
'deserve the name of infinitive in
every respect,'
i.e
occur also as
imperative.
This discloses also
a
kinship
with other Indian
and Latin forms. It is natural to
conjecture
that the
ending
sa-n-i is
connected in its fii\stelement with the suffix
-se,
which is added
lurely,
e.g.
in
(/i-she
from the rt.
(^i,
conquer, du-ectly
to
roots,
and
more
often
to stems in
a,
and then
(cp.Delbrlick,
p. 223)
is taken
as
-ase, e.g.
^Ivd-se,
Hve
(pres. 0vd-vii).
This formation has
long
been
recognisedas
the
analogue
of the Latin
infinitive,
e.g.
da-re for
da-sf, vive-re
for
vive-se.
Thus
*\Eya-(T"y,conjecturedas
the earliest Greek
form,
and
lege-se
the earliest Latin form
come tolerablynear to each other. The
Latin, as
has
long
been
recognised,agrees
more
exactly
with the
ending
of the Greek infinitive of the
sigmaticaorist,
which
we set down
as
the
foiirth
group
of Greek infinitive forms. AVe shall enter
upon
this
more
fully
under the head of the
sigmatic
aorist.
Finallywe
have still to discuss
iheffth
group,
the middle infinitives
in
-fjBai,
which
are common to all Greek from the oldest times. The
few deviations like the Locr.
E\e(TraL=k\e(T6ni,
Cret.
armXlBai,
and the
doubtful IrOai' Kudtaai
Hesych.
have been
already
mentioned
on
p.
69 f.
The Vcdic dialect
frequently
makes
use of the termination
-dhjcd,
which
is
undoubtedly
to be
compared
with
-adat,though
no middle force is
perceptible
in it. The latter is
something peculiar
to Gi-eek
;
and
Jolly'sinvestigations
show that there
are
few
languages
in which the
infinitive
undergoes
that
more
delicate
development,
which renders it
capable
of
expressing
hiaOttrig. The Latins have formed for themselves
115 for the
passive a
form in
-?"?", subsequentlyI,
which in
spite
of all the
pains spent upon
it has not
yet
been
completelydeciphered.
The Gi'ceks
Belected
one out of the
numei'ous
adverbiaUsed infinitive-like formations
CH, XY,
PARTICIPLES. 351
and
by degi*ees
confined its
usage
to an exclusively
middle
sense. The
similarity
of these
forms,
after
they
had been modified
by phonetic
changes,
to Greek middle forms like
^epeaBor,(pepeadf, (pepEaBu), ^jfpe'aSwi'
xindoubtedly
favoured this limitation of
usage.
We have Indian
parallels
to Greek infinitives in
(Delbriick p.
226):
hhdradhjdi
=
(pepea-dai
sdhadhjfii
=
ex^crdai
salxddhjai
= eneadait
It is worth
noticing
that such forms
are
also
developed
from
expanded
and derived
stems,
e.g.
^n6a-cZ/yd('
like
yiyre-trBai, 2)rnd-d/ijai
like
re/j.-
t'E-uBai, ynandaja-dhjdi
like
ri^daBai.
The
same termination
appears
in
Zend
as -djd'i or -dhjdi,agi'eeing
in
usage
with the Indian form
;
verez-
jeidjdi,
as Jolly
Inf.
p.
87
writes,or verezidjdAas Spiegel
and Justi
read,
the infinitive of the rt. varez (verez)
which
corresponds
to the Greek
J'epy
or
J^peydo,
agrees
letter for letter with the Greek
J-pii^efTBui.
The
same
language supplies
the isolated form
buzdjdi,or as Justi \\T.'itesit
hu-zhdyai^=.(pve(jBai.
In the sibilant which is found here before the
termination
Jolly
I.e.'
recognises
a
coi'relate of the
ct,
which
regularly
appears
in this
place
in Greek. He
conjectures
that the sibilant is a
relic of the rt
as,
to
be,
'
be.' It seems to me more
natiu'al to think of
the suffix -as or s{ci), which, we have
alreadyseen,
was contained in the
Indian and the
Latin,
and
jjrobably
also in the Greek forms. On the
analogy
of
simple
formations like
(jjepeaBcu,
such
a
suflix
might
also have
been connected with
more complicated tense-stems, e.g.
in
XilerjBai,
XeiarrBai. However, on
p.
71
we
found
a means
of
explaining
the Greek
-aBui, according
to which the a might
be of
purely phonetic origin.
Whether the
entii^ely
isolated Zend form necessitates
a
different
analysis,
116
I wOl not now discuss,
any
more
than the further
question
what relation
it has vnth the 0=Skt.
dh,
Zd. d or
d/i. It
may
be
regarded as estab- lished
that this consonant here
essentially
forms
a stem,
and therefore
lias the
same
force as in the substantives
ixirr-Bo-e, a-yj-B-oc,nXii-B-og,
iix-d-oc,
and also that
-dhjdi
is the dative of
a stem in -dhi. But whether
there is
any
connexion between this dh and the rt. dha
place,do, as
has
often been
conjectured,
is
a question
which cannot be settled without
more profound investigations
of the Indo-Germanic stem formation.
Cp.
moreover Wilhelm de
infinitive,
p.
23.
n. PARTICIPLES.
As
compared
with the
variety
and
obscimty
of the
infinitives,
the
participles
of the first two tense-stems
present
a
very
simple
appearance.
No one can fail to see
that
a
definite and somewhat
strictly
limited
por- tion
of
adjectivalformations, even
in the time of the Indo-Germanic
unity,approximated
to the verb in
respect
of
government
and varia- bility,
and continued to exist in the
sepai-atelanguages
with forms
clearly
marked and but
slightlyaltered,
while in the
case of the infini- tive
very
different
attempts
were made,
of which
only a
small
portion
found
more
extended
acceptation.
'
In the like manner
Justi Handbuch des
Zend,
p,
372,
says
'
the inserted zh
belongs originally
to the termination.'
352 VERBAL NOUNS OF PRESENT AND SIMPLE AORIST STEM.
CH. XV.
A)
The Active Participle
of the Present
and Thematic Aorist,
The
stem-forming
suffix
was
originally
after consonants
-ant,
after
vowels -nt. As the latter suffix is
unpronounceable, we shall have to
start with
-ant,
and to
explain
the shorter suffix
by supposing
that the
a
disappears
after a
preceding
vowel in the stem. The
phonetic
relations
ai'e
precisely
the
same as
in the formation of the 3
pi.
in
-anti,-ant and
-nti,-nt
(p.46).
The
following
may
serve as instances of the
con-esponding
usage
of
this sufficefor the
same
purpose.
Skt.
atfant,
Gr.
dynvr,
Lat.
ac/ent
"
arhant,
Gr.
ap^ovr
"
hhcirant,
Zd.
baraht,
Gr.
(pfpnvr,
Lat.
fevent,
Ch.-Sl.
hery (nom. sing.)
"
j(int,
Gr.
lovr,
Lat. eunt
"
sant
(forasant),
Zd.
hent,
Gr.
fovr,
Lat. -sent
{prae-sent).
117
The diffi3rent colour
given
to the vowels in Greek and Latin deserves
notice. Greek
prefers
the dull
o with the
consistency
which distin- guishes
this
language.
Latin is less
regular;
and here and
there,
e.g.
in
etmtis,
voluntas
(forvolunt-tas),
voluntarius and in
sont,
which
ac- cording
to Clemm's acute
explanation(Stud.
iii. 328 ff.
[cp.
iv.
205,
viii.
344]),
is identical with
sent,
the duller vowel
appears by
the
side of the
prevalent e.
The initial vowel of the
pai-ticiple was
after- wards
completely
lost in the Greek verhum suhstantivum. The Attic
wi'
is to the Homeric and Herodotean
zwv,
just as Ion.
cprii
is to Att.
koprr]
or as Att.
6q to Hom. kog. It is an instance of the
phenomenon
of
hyphaeresLS, thoroughly
discussed
by
Fritsch Stud. vol.
vi.,
esp. j^p.
111-113.
Westphal'sattempt (Griech.
Gr. ii.
106)
to trace back
ojt to
sant breaks down from the fact that an
initial
sigma
does not thus
simply
disappear.
The Doric form
trr (dat.pi.
h'Turrmy tab. Heracl. i.
104)
is formed
u])on
the
analo.gy
of
Oei't,riOevT,
with the loss of the final
g
of
the root. The Homeric forms
'ifiEvai, ijitv
as infinitives
ai-e
similar.
The accentuation of the suffixed
syllable,
which has become the rule
in the aorists
:
icwr,
Xafiwy,
may
be
placed
among
the accentual ten- dencies
mentioned
on
p.
348. But forms like
Imv,iujv,
Iklji'and Indian
present participles belonging
to the so-called sixth
class,
like rdhdnt
(rdh,
ardh
grow),
dvish-dnt
(dvishhate) I'lotjdnt {rug break),
show that
the occasion for this was not
an
internal
one,
connected with the
essen- tial
character of the
aorist,
but an
external
one,
connected with the
slightphonetic
substance of the stem-
syllable.
It is worth
noticing
how far back this twofold accentuation
goes
in
point
of time. Another
variation,
which
ajipears
in the Asiatic membei's of
our
group
of lan- guages,
on the other
hand,
has left
no traces in
Greek, so
far
as
participles
proper
are concerned,
the variation of the nasal in the
participial
suffix.
In Sanskrit
only
a
small
poi'tion
of the
cases
retain the
n,
the
majority
reject
it: nom.
plur.
hhdrant-as = ^ipovTsc,
but
ace. plur.bhdrat-as=^(pf-
poj'rac;
in
some, especially
the
reduplicatingstems,
the
n
is
altogether
wanting:
dddat
"
Cilorr. Even in Greek such formations with
a
sup- pressed
nasal are not
altogetherwanting, as is shown most
plainlyby
a-kfiT]-T
as
compared
with
u-fca/io-iT
:
in Latin forms like
super-ste-t
as
118
compared
with sfant
belong
here
(LeoMeyer Ygl.
Gr. ii.
99).
But
only
in such
participles
which have so to
say
run wild,
i.e. have become
sepai-ated
from their
verbs,
does the nasal
disappear
: both Greeks and
CH. XT.
PARTICIPLES. 353
Romans
always
excluded these variations from verbal flexion itself.
The same
is true of the other
European languages.
The
complete
dis- appearance
of the
n before t
in Old Ij."ishis based
iipon
a
far-reaching
phoneticpeculiarity.
For the I'elations between the vowels as to their
length or shortness,
e.g. yro-vT
by
the side of
'i-yvw-v,
Aeol.
ftXe-prby (piXij/ui
it is sufficient
to refer to
pp.
135 and 247 and to Stud. iii.379
ff.,
vi. 431.
B)
The Middle Participle.
The suffix
-yuei'o
has
long
been
I'ecognized
as
connected with Skt.
-indna,
Zd.
mana or
tnna,
Lat. mino
or mno.
As the Indian form is
alone in
having a
long
vowel in the
penultimate,we
shall with Schleicher
(Comp.^398) regard
this
long
vowel as
by
no means original.
Compare
Skt. dada-mdna and
8i8o-fx{vo
"
tishtha-mdna
7i\
J
hi-ste-mano
"
l-crTa-fjievo
\hi-sfe-7nno
"
bare-miia
"
(^epo-fxevo,
Lat.
feri-mini
Skt.
rghdja-mdna
" opxeo-fifvo.
The
tendency
to
supj^ress
the middle vowel is
present
in Greek and
Latin 'as well as in Zend
;
but in both
languages
it is excluded from the
rule for verbal forms
proper,
and,
like the omission of
7i from the active
participle,
is reserved for those
adjectival
and substantival forms which
have
no
longer
any
connexion with the verb. In these wild offshoots
there is also in several
cases a more
specialagreement
as to the vowel
between Greek and Latin.
Cp. aht-mmt-s, vertu-mnu-s,
colu-mna on
the
one
hand with the Greek forms in
o-fxevo-Qj
on
the other with ali-
inini
:
crTa-fxi'o-Q
stand,
cask
on
the
one
hand with
l-aTu-fxevo-Q, on the
other with Lat. da-mmi-m.
(oiXe-^vo-v, ripE-fxro-cby
their clearer
vowel as
compared
with
/3a\o-/i"fo-c
remind
us
of the i of the Latin foi-ms
in -i-mini. Whether this is the
case in
a
yet higherdegree
with
nipi-f.ii(i,
fxili-iivo-Q
need not be decided. We
see
that
everywhere
there is
no
lack of
phoneticvariations,
and that the rule has
only
become established
i ,
q
in the
case of the verb in
consequence
of the
enormous
number of analo- gies
which obtrude themselves. A
more
exact examination^ of thn
participial
forms
lying
hid in
adjectives, appellative
substantives and
proper
names would
promise large
results for the more obscui'e side of
verbal
structure. Thus from the Homeric
iv-KTi-fiei'o-g
and the
proper
name
KrifiEvog
we
may
deduce a rt.
kti,
which
occru's
elsewhere
only
in
the
by
no means primitivekti-'Cw: oi/Xd-^tf ro-c
with its active
meaning
points
to a
present*oi/Xo-/."o(,
foitned like
[jovXo-jLiai,
both
pi'obably belong- ing
to the nasal class
(cp.
Stud. v.
218).
In forms of this kind the
interchange
between the active and the middle or even
passivemeanings
is
very
free. Consider
e.g. aKcifiac,
a?a^ac
as
compared
with
Aao^dfictg,
K-('/u" roc,
which
probablymeans
'founder' and
eO-K-ifteyoi;, i:py]-defxr'o-v
and
(it\envo-y,fe-mina=dr]-niri]
'
the
suckling
'
;
in fact as a rule it is
only
in
living
verbal forms that such
categories
of
meaning are
found
to be at all
rigoroiisly
carried out.
_*
Cp. L. G. Franz
'
De nominibus
appellativis
et
propriis
Graecis
quae
a
partici-
piis
orta
sunt,'a Leipzig
doctoral dissertation of 1875.
A A
354 PEEFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvr.
CHAPTER XVI.
THE PERFECT STEM AND THE FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
We have hitherto been
dealing
with two
groups
of Greek verbal
forms,
which in their wide ramification embrace
an
extraordinary
nvunber of
vaiied structures. The twofold character of the
groups
was
given clearly
in
a
whole series of forms. But
as was
shown in
Chapter
XIII. there is
no
lack of intermediate
members,
forms which hover
indifferently
be- tween
the
two,
which
may
serve as evidence that this twofold
character,
i.e.
present
and aorist
stems, proceeded
fi'om one common source.
The close connexion of the two
groups,
one.
with the
other,
may
be re- cognized
from the fact that in
respect
of the formation of the moods and
of verbal
nouns,
there
are
only
very
slight
differences between them
;
and this is the reason
why
we were able to deal with them in common.
120 A
very
different
appearance
is
presentedby
a
third
group
of forms
to which we now proceed,
the
group
of the
perfect;
and the difference is
especially
marked in the form with which
we are
familiar from Greek.
The
personalendings are
not indeed in themselves
very
different
:
and
we recognize
at once
the twofold nature of the addition of the termina- tions,
which is known to us
from the
present
and aorist stems. It is
evident that
'id-fxey
is to o'iS
a-
fie
y just
as
leiKi'v-fitv
to
CeiKi'vo-fiEV.
But
instead of the thematic vowel with its
regular
variation between
o
and
e,
the vowel of the
perfect
active is
o,
which is weakened into
e only
in
the third
person.
In the
perfectmiddle, on
the other
hand,
there is
no
such vowel. These differences between the inflexion of the first two stems
and of the third stem do indeed in
part disappear
as soon as we turn
from Greek to Sanskrit,
where the vocalism
presents
a
different and in
some respects
a more ancient
appearance.
But even here,as
in the other
two families of
languages
which have
a perfect,
the Italian and the
Teutonic,
similar means
of distinction
are not
lacking.
The certain
sign
of the
perfect,
and of all that
comes
from the
perfect
stem is
reduplication.
We have learnt to discover
reduplication
also in
the fii'sttwo tense-stems. But there it
appeared
more
occasionally.
Here it is essential. Greek
especitilly
has also
provided
for the chs-
tinction
by
a
delicate shade of vocalism. The
perfectfteiodtri
cannot
be confused with the
pi'esentftiftdai, nor
rirevx^
with the aorLst
tetvx^-
We have
alreadyrepeatedly, especially on
p.
288,
referred to these
re- lations.
But in
spite
of
this,
and
although
the
germs
of such distinc- tions
go
back in
part
to
earlyperiods
in the Hfe of
language
we have
seen
(1.c.)
that all
reduplicating
formations were
originally
one
and the
same.
It
seems to me
hardly
to admit of
a
doubt that the
perfect
in- dicative
was originally nothing
but
a particular
kind of
present
forma- tion.
As
a reduplicatedpresent
with
an
intensive
meaning
this form
sepai'ated
itself from the
pi-esent-stem,
and became
by degrees
an in-
CH. XVI.
THE PERFECT. 355
dependent
member in the
system
of verbal
forms,
with a distinctive
stamp
of its
own.
The
history
of this
process
of
separation
lies
clearly1 21
enough
before
our
eyes.
The
numerous pei-fects
with the force of
a
present,
and the creation of
a
preterite
from the
perfect
stem in the
"different branches of
our stock give
the clearest
proofs
of this. We shall
return
veiy
soon to these
important
relations of
meaning.
While
we
may
in this
way,
as
it
seems,
follow
up
the
perfect
to its
first
origin,so
too
extremely
abundant materials lie before us here
from the later
periods
of the
history
of
language,especially
from the
history
of
Greek,
for which
we
have the evidence of literature. The
store of
pei-fects
in the
language
of
Homer,
"
especially
in the active " is
l)ut
meagi-e,
as
compared
with the wealth of Attic and later
prose
in
such forms. The treatment of
reduplication,
where there is an initial
vowel,
differs
consideiubly
from the method which afterwards be- came
the rule. The
important species
of
perfects
in
ku,
which we
afterwards find in hundi-eds of
instances,
is
only just beginning
in
Homer
:
the
aspiratedperfect
is
altogetherlacking,
while in
Homer, as
in the older
I'epresentatives
of the Ionic dialect
generally,
we
discover
remarkable tendencies to
aspiration
of
a different
kind,
which are aftei-
wards lost. With the
Dorians,
the
perfect,
so
far
as concerns
the ter- minations,
follows much
more
than elsewhere the
analogy
of the
present.
Here and in
part
with the Aeolians the vocalism
presents phenomena,
which remind
us
in
many ways
of the Italian
perfects.
For the
plu- perfect
active it is
only
in the Attic
period
that the method of formation
is established with
complete regularity.
In short we
may say
that
the
perfect
is in
every respect
a
developed
verbal
form,
and not
one
which
was
complete
to
begin
with and
everywhere
uniform.
Although
the
antitypes
of the Greek
perfect
may
be
recognized
in
some of the
cognate languages,
the
stamp given
to this form is
in
every
family
of
speech
an
individual
one.
The
perfect
can
hence
give
us the fullest indications of the course
which the
genius
of the
language
takes in
proportionately
late
periods.
But
everything
is
intelligible only against
the
background
of the old
forms;
and hence
comparative
philology
has
yieldedespecially
valuable results in the
case
of the
perfect.
We
begin our account with the element which is the most charac- teristic
of the
perfectstem, reduplication.
In its wealth of
redupKcated
122
perfects
the Greek
language
is
superior
to all others.
Reduplication
appears only
within
a limited
range
in
Latin,
Gothic and Erse. In
Sanski-it it is far
more
common,
but it
occurs only
in
primitive,
not at
all in derived verbal stems. The latter have to resort to a periphrastic
formation for the
perfect.
The Greeks alone have
given
a
further
extension to
reduplication
from such andent
examples,
and
applied
it to
all verbal stems without
exception. Natm-ally
the rule became all the
more firmly
established with the abundance of
instances,
and the tense-
stem of the
perfectwas
universallymore
richly
and
regularly
framed.
A A 2
356 PERFECT STEM AND FOEMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch, xn.
I.
REDUPLICATION IN THE PERFECT.
A)
With an Initial Consonant.
Reduplication
means repetition
of the verbal stem. But from the
earliest
times
language
was in
many
cases
content with a mere
indication
of this repetition.
In
compaiison
with the
repetitions
in
word-formation,
which were
carried out with
more vigour,though
here and there also
peculiarly
broken
and
mutilated,
" for which I
may
refer
especially
to the
most recent investigationsby
Fritzsche and
Brugman
in the
Studien,
vols.
vi. and vii., " this means of
emphasis
had to he carried out
for the
purpose
of verbal flexion in
a
light
but
recognizablemanner
in the
perfect
with
a
cei-tain
regularity.
For it is desirable for in- flexion
that the moveable as well as the immoveable element should not
be too
completely
obscured,
and the earHer the
period
of
language,
the
more clearly
do the two come out.
Regularity
is shown in the
case
of
the Greek
perfectreduplication
first in the
vocalism,
and that
quite
without exception.
The
reduplication-syllable
" so we
call that
prefixed
to the stem " has without
exception,
where it
appears
as such,
the vowel
e.
This is not the case
with the
cognate languages.
In Sanskrit the vowel
of the
reduplication-syllable
is
as a
rule like the vowel of the I'oot.
Thus from rt.
yan
is formed
ga-^mia=^yi-yova,
bvit from rt.
riU-=Xnr
ri-reUa,
which
would
correspond
to
a
Greek *\i-\onra
;
and in the
same
way
^u-^osha
from rt. (Jii.sh
enjoy,resembling
a Greek
*yv-yeva-}iai
for
123 yiyEvajjiai.
The
same
rule holds for
Zend,
e.g. ^u-^ru-ma,
we heard,
answering
to a
Greek
*t:v-KXv-fjie}' (cp.aor. i^ii^XvTe).
But even
in San- skrit
there are some
few remarkable instances of a
process
more analo- gous
to the Greek, especiallyba-hhuva,
which
answers quite
to the
Homeric 3
pi.Trefvacri,
and
sa-suva
from the rt.
su, beget.
Now, as we
find also in the Latin
perfect
the fluctuation between
j^eposci
and
2^oposci,
tetudi and
tutudi:=^kt.
tutoda, we
may
doubtless
conjecture
that
during
the time of the united life there
was as yet
no
fixed rule. In
Sanskrit the more physical
method of
repetition(so
to
speak)whereby
the sound of the
stem-syllable
fell
more clearly
twice
upon
the
ear,
prevailed,
in Greek the
more intellectual, whereby reduplication
became
(so
to
say)
a servant of the idea of the
perfect,
clothed in a
uniform
livery.
The numerical
superiority
of the roots -with
an a
may
have
given
rise to this
uniformity,
as
earlyas
the time when this vowel had
not
yet split.
For Latin it is well wor.th
noticing
that the earlier
custom
of
saying
memordi, pepugi,
and the like
(Gellius
vii.
9,
Neue
Lat. Formenlehre
^
ii.
464)
coincides with the Greek. The later lan- guage
retained,
it would
seem,
too few instances of
reduplicated perfects
itohold to the old rule,so
that
completeitlentity
of
sound,
to which the
nature of reduplication
must have
invited,again prevailed.Cp.
Ber.
d. k. S'cichs.
Ges d. Wissen. Juli
1870,
p.
14.
Similarity
of vowel is
the rule also
in
Gothic,fai-fah,skai-skaid,
ai-cmk. The ai is taken to
be
short,
and thus the
representative
of
e by
Scherer Gesch. d. d.
Spr.
p.
11,
and recently by Bezzenberger
'Ueber die
A-Reihe,'
p.
37. In
Old Erse
too,e,
though
not
always
used
as
the vowel of the
reduplication-
syllable,
is
employed
by preference.
In
my way
of
regarding
these facts
I
agree
almost
entirely
with what Delbriick Altmd. Yerb.
p.
127,
followingLassen,
has indicated
as
his
own.
CH"
XVI. KEDUPLICATION WITH AN INITIAL CONSONANT. 357
The
difficulty presentedby
the consonants
was
gi-eater
than that of
the vowels. Here too we notice
an
attempt
at
simplification.
It shows
itself first in the universal
law,
that where there is an initial consonant
the first vowel of the
root-syllable
foi-ms the end of all that
comes
into
consideration in
reduplication.
On the
analogy
of nominal forms like
har-kara-s,mar-mar
as, fiip-fiepo-g, (iap-(oapo-Q,
Lat.
mar-mor, turtur,
an 12-1
Indo-Germanic
*dar-darka,an Indian
*dar-darc^a,
a Greek
*Bep-copKa,
"
a
Latin mer-mordi would be
by
no means inconceivable,
but
nothing
of
the kind is
actually
found. The
reduplication
of the
perfectwas
weak- ened
by frequent
usage
even
in the earliest times
;
it
was
according
to
Fritzsche's
happily
invented
expi'ession
a
reduplicatiopraefixa;
it
was
justly
felt to be
a
merely
formal
subsidiarysyllable
of the
word,
and for
that
very
reason
could not be allowed too much extension. For the
perfect
da-darha is the earliest deducible
form, preserved m
the Skt.
da-dar"^a
and the Gr.
^i-lopKu.
There is
probably
no
exception
to this fundamental
rule. In the
case
of
a
single
initial
consonant,
this
one consonant of
course
appears
in the
prefixedsyllable;
stillthere
are some few
exceptions.
It is true that in Greek thei-e is
none of that
tendency
to
dissimulation,
owing
to which
among
the Indians the
palatal
consonants are
used to
replace
the
gutturals(Jca-Mra,
ga-gama).
We could at most
appeal
to
the
gloss
of
Hesychius ^iftwai
"
aretraKTai, which, considering
the
prefer- ence
of the Arcadians for
4
as the
representative
of
ft
(i^ipedpor, ^AXw,
ETn'Capiu),
Princ. ii.
96),
we
may perhaps
ascribe to thLs tribe.
Cp.
Stud,
vii.
p.
390. On the other hand the
aspii-ates
are
already
treated like
double
letters,
the first
explosive
element alone
being repeated,
and the
aspirationbeing dropped
in the
syllable
of
reduplication.
As Indians
and Greeks
agree
in this
point
in
spite
of the different character of their
aspirates, we
may probably
assume that this law had been established
even in the time of the
unity
of
language. Cp.
the Indian
perfect
stem
dadha,
1
sing,
dadhdu with the
corresponding
Greek
teQe,
1
sing.TidsiKu,
ha-hhuva with
Tre-cjnia-tri quoted
above.
Where two full
consonants
appear
at tli^e
beginning
the
process
varies. The
repetition
of both consonants is not
only
unknown in
Greek,
but also in Sanskrit and Latin. It is
only
Gothic which feels
no
objection
to such harsh forms
as shai-shaid,stai-stald, stai-stagg. Perhaps
we
may
therefore ascribe
greater
harshness in this
respect
to earlier
periods
of
language.
For Vedic Sanskrit the law- of dissimilation which
was framed to avoid
an excess
of similar sounds is
given by Delbrlick,
125
p.
102, as follows
:
'
If
a root
begins
with
more
than
one consonant the
stronger
is
repeated,
e.g.
from
sk,
sp,
sth,
the k
p
t,
of
sv, sm,
the s.' On
the other hand the Greek law for verbal formation is
:
' '
the first at most
is
repeated.'
The
tendency
to avoid too much
repetition
of the
same
sound in
syllables
immediatelyfollowing
each other
may
be
noticed,as
I
have shown in the
Principles,
ii.
p.
373,
under other circumstances
also. In those
most familiar combinations of
letters,
which consist of
an
explosive
followed
by
p,
X,
r, ju,
the Indian and Greek laws lead to the
same
result.
Compare :
Skt. ta-tre .3
siug.
mid. from rt. trd
protect
and
ri-rplya
"
da-drus 3
pi.
act. from drd
run
and
ano-he-hpaKa
"
pa-2rrd
3
sing.act. from
jird
filland
Tre^rrXrja-ixai.
'
The Indian
practice
has
analogies
in Greek and Latin outside the
sphere
of
verbal inflexion
: Ka-"rKa\lCw,
Ko-aKvXfiwria,qui-squiliae.
358 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
In these combinations Gothic also
agi-ees
with both
languages.
Compare :
.
Gotb.
(jai-grot {grctaweep)
and
yi-ypa^a
"
fai-Jl6k {Jlekalament)
and
Trt-Tt^-qya
"
fai-frais{fraisatry)
and
Tri-^paa^ai.
On the other hand there is
no trace in Latin of
any
form like *te-
trildi,or ^fe-frigi, or
*pe-2)ligi. Erse,
which is not
very
rich in
re- duplicated
perfects,
almost
entirelyagrees
with Greek in the
phonetic
treatment of
groups
of
consonants, as Windisch tells
me,
e.g.
ce-chlada-tar suftbderunt
(rt.clad)
ge-granna-tarpersecuti
sunt
(rt.grand).
But this
language
also allows
reduplication
in the
case
of
sc,
e.g.
se-
scaing(rt.scag),
se-scaind
(rt.scand).
But the Greeks did not
always
admit
even
this modest amoimt of
re- duplication.
As is well
known,
the fii'stof the initial consonants is
only
allowed, as a rule,
in the
reduplication -syllable
when the stem-
syllable
contains the
groups
of consonants mentioned above
as
the
126
lightest
of all. Thus
ftift\r]Ka, ftifipida,
yeypawrai, lihpofia, KEKXi^fxai,
KEKpaya,
rerXcifAey, rirf^irjKa, Ttrprxjia,
riQvi)Ka,TrtTrXevrat, TriTrpaya,
ttItt-
I'viTui,
are admitted. But
even
here thei-e
are exceptions. By
the side
of
fte.(3\a(pa
established from Demosthenes and
Aristotle,
and the
Homeric and Attic
joifiXa/xfiai
we
find in C. I. i.
no.
1570
a,
1, 51
K-are/3\a0o-"c.
Thuc. iii. 26 has the foi-m
iftefiXaaTiiKei, Em'ip. Iph,
Aul. 595
t(?j\arTTiiKa(i' ;
in Plato Conv. 216 d.
yey\vfxfj.ivoQ
is the well-
estabKshed
reading,
but in
Rep.
x.
616 d.
k^eyXv^inirw.
In Ar. Thesm.
131
KaTiyXwTTidfxirov
follows the latter method.
TtQXaajxii'oq
is
quoted
from the Middle
Comedy (Alexis,
Meineke's
Comici,
iii.
510)
and from
Theocritus
(xxii.45),iBXaafxivoQ
from Athenaeus
xv.
p.
699 e. Over
against
the
prevalentyiypajjifxcu
we
have in the ancient Elean
treaty
of
alliance C. I.
no.
11
typo/x^te'rw. Apollonius Bhodius,
who has in iv.
618 the
regularKeKXi]"i"Tfiai,
ends the
verse
in iv. 990 with roQtv
iicXifiaTai.
The weaker formation is
quitefirmly
established in the
case of the rt.
yj'w
: t'yj'wco,
eyvLja/uai,
kyru)pi(7fxui
as
distinguished
from the
redupK-
cation of the
present
in
ytyvwercw
and
yiyi'o/xai.
In harder
gi^oups
of
consonants the fuller form is
rare :
hence
KeK-rrjiixai,
TriirTijKa
and
TTETTTrjdjQ,
TTfnrwKu
and
TriirTafxai
on
the
one
hand and
^efxrr]j.iaL
on the other
are
quoted as exceptions. Here, too, bye-formsare
not
Avanting
: itcriiadai
is found in I
402,
and
occurs
in
Herodotus, Aeschykxs, Plato, and
Thucydides,though
not without different
readings;
ut'eKrijuai'aieiXijcpa
2od)ovX/7s
is found ia
Hesychius, iciKTijuui appeal's
first in Hesiod
0pp.
437,
and afterwards
frequently
in Attic writers. Over
against
the
Homeric
participle7rf7rr?jwe
is the Attic
'iirTyj^a (cp.
tirraKivai
'
KEKpv-
(j"iyai), against
the usual
TrtVra/^o*,
Avhich
compared
with
TZETavvvfn^
iiriTaaa is marked
by
syncope,
there is
urtTTTafiU}]'
arEoyyuirr)
in
Hesy- chius.
We
may
add
TrEirrepvyijOfxai
Sappho
p.
38
B^, irETTTvicrai
Aristot.
It is
only
in
Byzantine
\ATiters that
we
find
viipQuKa.
On the other
hand instead of the monsti-ous form
*n-E;//vKwe quoted
in Yeitch and
Kuhner
(p.936),
and said to be from
\pvx(t",
we really
find in Anthol.
Pal. vii.
115,
where we are
told to look for
it,-ke^vkCiq.
In the combi- nations
containing
o-,
^, \\j,
and
convei'sely ok, (jy^,air, trcp, ar, ad,as
in
the
case
of
^
the
reduplication
of the
perfect
is limited
exclusively
to the
CH. XVI.
KEDUPLICATION WITH AN INITIAL CONSONANT. 359
simplevowel,
of which we have evidence in abundance
from Homer
onwards:
kCi^yf-Liiai
S
276,
"(T7-"^o
rwrat
E
739, kaipiiKwvTO
V
t"2,
e^""'w-127
UEi'OQ Soph.
Tr.
6.5,'i^tvaj.uu
from
Herodotus, fi/^Z/^KTrcti
fi'om
Emipides
onwards, EaKsdaafxivog
Her. iv.
14, eo-Ktvafarat
ib. iv.
58, 'tairaprui
Eur.
Here. Fur. 1098 etc. Here
we
may
notice the
quiteunparalleled
uTre-
l^ir"'llj.vK"
X 491. Earlier
gi-ammariansgenerallyregarded
this
process
as
an
appearance
of 'the
augment'
in the
place
of
reduplication.
Butt-
mann
Ausf Gr. i.^ 314
exj^resses
himself
more prudently:
'the re- duplication
is
representedby
the
simple
".' But
even
he does not
rigorously
hold fast to this
more correct
view,
and in the
course
of his
statement he mixes
up augment
and
reduplication.
That the instinct of
the
language
succeeded in
distinguishing
the i of
eaTraprai
from that of
the
preterite
ainrupe
is
seen
from the feet that the
e
of the
perfect
is
i-etaiued without
exception
ia the infinitive and
participle
as
well as
in
the
rare
forms of the
moods,
Avhile the
e
of the
past
tenses is limited to
the indicative. The view that the
e
in all
perfect
forms is to be
regarded
as a
relic of a
fuller
reduplication syllable
is
especially
confirmed
by
a-a-i]h:a.
For here in the
spiritusasper
we
have still the relic of the
a
which
on
the
analogy
of
'[-(ttti-^ii
and Lat. sisto
as
well as the Erse forms
quoted
on
p.
358 must
undoubtedly
have been once
present.
In the
case
of all stems
beginning
with
o-
in combination with another
conso- nant,
the number of which is not
small,
and the
example
of which is cer- tainly
not to be esteemed
as
of
slightimportance
for the other
cases,
it is
natural to
svippose
that the
history
of their
origin
was as
follows
:
that
e.g.
*(re-cnrap-Tai
*
i-aTrap-rat e-anapTai.
were
the three
stagesthrough
which the
corruptionpassed.
I have
put
together
some
other
analogies,
of which the most
important
are
tX'^"^J
the side of
Kt'xA-w
in
Hesychius
and
"\pio, oxpoy
from the rt. ttett are
the
most
important,
in Princ. ii.
p.
375 S.
Brugman
in Stud. vii.
gives
much
other material for
comparison.
Of course this distinction in
principle
between
reduplication
and
augment
does not exclude the
possibility
that
augmented
forms like
t^ei/^ctt, toTf^cu'waai,
'iaivEipE
and other
common
words of the kind
helped
towards the reduction of the
reduplication
to a
simple".
Convenience of iitterance
readily
avails itself of such
supports
to
replace
foi-ms diificult
to.
pronounce
by
easier
ones.
Even the treat- ment
of the stems
beginning
with
p,
in which for other reasons augment
and
reduplication
came to coincide in
form,
may
not have been without 128
its influence.
The
specialmanner,
in which stems
beginning
with
a
p
were
treated
as
regards
the
augment, occupied
us on
p.
77 f. I called attention tliere
to the fact that
'
many
verbs
beginning
with
a
p
can
be shown to have
lost a / or o-.' The
phenomena
of
reduplication
are to be
explained
in
the same
way.
Before the combination
/p reduplication
was
pi'obably
limited at an
earlyperiod
to a
simplef,
so
that hence from rt.
fpay
(Principles
ii.
159) *E-fpb)y-a
and the middle
*E-PpT)y-ixai
were
formed.
By
assimilation these became
E-ppioya, 'i-ppriyfiai.
I cannot mention
any
ti'ace of
a
J-E-J-puya, J-E-fprjyfiai,
which in themselves we
might
have
imagined existing
in the earliest times. Homeric verses
Kke 0 137
oWct Kam'tiTL
avvEppi]KTai
iroXtEaaLv do not allow us to
suppose
a/. Of
the not
very
numerous
verbs which form then-
perfectthus,we
may
deduce an initial
/p
with
certainty
for
ippi^o)Tai r]
122,
and with
great
360 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
probability
for
piVrw (tppicpa, tppi^nai)
:
cp.
Princ. i. 437. The
peifect
tip^Ka^
mid.
tiprifxai
stands
quite by
itself. As tlie rt.
hp
shows the
clearest traces of a/ in the
present
tipw
(/3
162 Talt
e'ipu)),
in the Lesb.
/3,j//rwp,
and in the Elean
fparpa (Princ.
i.
428),
there
can
be
no
doubt
that this sound was once present
also in
eiprjKci. Only
two
points
remain
doubtfid : first,
whether
we
must
assume as
the
immediately
precedingstageh-fp-q-Ka
or
i-J^pij-Ka,
the former
on
the
analogy
of /e'-Zao
a,
of which more hereafter,
the latter
on that of
e-yvw-Ka
:
and
as there are
no
certain ti'aces of
an initial / in this
perfect(Knos
de
digammo,
p. 91)
the second
hy[5othesis
is the
more prudent,as we
have
just
decided in
the case of
eppojya
: secondlywhy
this
k-fpr]-Ka
did not become
*eppr]Ka as
much
as
'ij'pwya
became
eppwya.
Hardly
any
other
answer can
be
given
to this than that
language
elsewhere too
wavers
between
doubling
of the
consonant and
compensatory lengthening,
eppioya
is to
t'lpi^Ka as
ivroai-
yaio"
to
elpoaiipvXXoc
and as epveu
to
Eii'arog.
After the
augment
of the
passive
aorist
we
find the same fluctuation
:
Att.
eppridrjv,
Ion.
elpid-qv
(Her.
iv.
77).
For this
reason
it
seems
to
me
not advisable to
assume
for the
explanation
of
e'iprjKa
a
form
'^fe-hpr]-Ka,
conceivable as
this is in
itself,especially
as
elpijurj
has
probably
come
from
i-fpi]-rr]
with
a
129
prothetice.
A.
Bailly
in the Memoires de la societe de
linguistique,
i.
345 ff.has
thoroughly
discussed
elprjKci
and similar forms which will be
treated of
immediately.
.For
eppvrjKu
we
may
with
certainty,
for
eppiofxai
with a
cei-tain
probability,
for
tppcnrTaL
with
perhaps
still
more
proba- bility
assume an
initial
sr.
(Princ.
i.
440,
ii.
333).
The root of
'ipplya
(P 175,
r
353)
is still
doubtful,
but the loss of
a consonant Ijefore
p
is
made
probableby
the Lat.
frlgeo(Princ.
i.
438).
It is
only
in the root
piiC,
which underlies the
present paino
and meets
us
in
eppcdaraiv 354,
that we can
find
no trace of
anything
of the kind
: pad seems
i-ather to
have come
by
metathesis from
apo.
In this
case
it must be assumed
that this isolated form has been carried
along
with the
others; analogies
to this will be found in the
case
of other initial letters. Full
redupli- cation
before
an
initial
p
is
extremelyrare.
In
^ 59 we read
.to.
fj.oi
pepvTTw^ii'a
KElrai with the. scholium
;
fioroc,
e(tt\v
ovtoq TrapctKEl/xEj'og
irapu
rw ivoajTrj uwo tov
p
^ECnrXufTfiirov
'
tffTi
Se
kcu irap''Ara^-peorrt to
'
pEpanicffXEru)
t'wro).' The root of
pvirou)
is obscure
:
for
pan-Z^w,
paTTiQ,
pa0doQwe
may probably give fpmr (Princ.
i.
437).
Here then
every
trace of the
spu-ant
had
disappeared, just
as in
pEplcpdai quoted by
gram- marians
from Pindar
(Lp'ici
ed.
Bergk^
fr.
314).
Similar anomalies from
late
writers,
e.g.
pipevKu
from
Origen, are pointed
out
l\y
Lobeck
Paralip.
13.
Irregularities
of
a like kind show themselves
sporadically
in the
case
of
an
initial
A,
fx
and
cr.
Here the full
reduplication
which was to be
expected
is found from Homer onwards in
a
nixmber of
forms,some
very
common,
as XEXyjKiog(X 141),
XiXonre
(A 235),/\"\oyxao-t(X 304),i-tifiijXE
(B 25),
fiEjjLora
(E 482),
and
fisjiucKTi, ^Efiawc^ ixeiivkev
(fl
420),
ge(ti]-e
(B 135),
ff"(7Ei(TTai
(Pind.), (T"(T"'//iai'rat (Herod.),(TEiriyrirai (Eurip.).
But
alongside
of these we
find
a smaller number of abnormal
perfect
forms
of two
kinds,
viz.
on
the
one hand,
such as are evidentlyparallel
to
tppujya
:
EiJ./j.op", Eacrvficu,
on the other hand forms which
may
be
com- pared
with
tipriKa : EiXrjxa,f"(X"/0n, f'/Xo^n,t't/xapTai.
The
principle
of
explanation
is
supplied
at
once
by
this
grouping.
We see immediately
.
that the
syllableei here too results from
compensatory lengthening,
and
CH. XVI.
EEDUPLICATION WITH AN INITIAL CONSONANT. 361
that the forms with the doubled consonants are
the older. But the
attempt
to
explain
the latter from assimilation
after the
example
of the
roots
beginning
with
p
is
by no means so
easy
and successful
as
many
130
have
thought.
To
beginwith,
the actual facts
as regards
these forms
warn iis to
be careful in the
assumption
of consonants which
might
have
been
dropped
before
or
after the letters
fi,
X,
ff.
"We have to deal with
five verbal stems. We shall best
get
a generalsurvey
of the formations
actuallyoccui-ring
if
we
range
the similar forms under
one another,
putting
the
regular
in the first
column,
those which double the consonant
in the
second,
and those with
ei
in the third :
KaTa-\e\d^r]iie (Herod,
iii,
f'lXrjcpa (Attic
from
Sophocles
42) onwards)
XeXd^tjKa (Eupolis,
Archi-
e'lXrjfxfiai
ditto
modes)
drro-XfXaauevoL
(Herod,
ix.
et'Xa^a(lateinscription
from
51)
Phocis. Ahr. Dor.
347, 11)
XfX7]fifietn] (Aesch.Ag. 876)
XeXafifiai (Archimed.)
XeXa'xao-t (Hesycb.) f'CXrjxa (Attic
from
Aeschylus
onwards)
XeXdyxoo^*(^304,
also Pind.
Frag.Herod.)
" ,. ^
"
/TT T. \
Kar-eiXove
'
KareXe^eHesych.
XeX,ya,XiXoya (Hesych.)
avu-e[Xoxa(Demosth.)
Trpo-XeXeyfjLfvoi (N 689,
Ar. ^w-dXeKrai
(Arist.
Av.
294,
Vesp.886)
also Thuc. Plat,
etc.)
diro-XeXeyixevoi (Herod,
vii.
"
di-eiXfypai (Plat.Lys.)
40)
XeXeKTai
(
=
f'ipr)Tai
univer- sally)
fifpoppemv
(Apoll.
Rhod.
f"/iope
0
189,
X
338, elpapro ($ 281,
Hes. Th.
iii.
1130)
Hes.
894)
li"iJ.6pr)Tai (ib.
i.
646) ifxpopavri Hesych. eipaprat(Attic
from
Aeschy-
i'a-avpai
N 79 lus
onwards).
facrvpevos ]
Homer and
ea-a-vTo
" other
poets
Cp. eaa-orjpevov
'
redopv^rjpepov, mpprjpevov
Hesych.
There is
absolutelyno
support
for a
lost consonant in the case
of the
131
roots
Xo/3,Xox, Xey,
as
has been shown in Princ. ii.
144, 111,
i. 454.
tfifiopE
and
ujxapTai
have been
compared
with the Skt. rt.
smar,
think,
and
an
indication of their connexion has been found in the
rough
breathing
of
t'lpaprai,
which would thus be from
^ae-a-fxap-Tat.
But the
difficulty
in the
way
of this combination has been
alreadypointed
out in
Princ. i. 413. This verb is connected rather with
a
rt.
/usp
divide
{/^epoc,
merere)
the
meaning
of which is far removed from that of
thinking.
The dialectic forms
t^l^paraL
'
t'lfxapTcu Hesych.,e/j-fopajdiru
"
tlfuapfxevr]
Hesych,
and E. M.
p.
334, 40,^wftparo-e'lfiapro Hesych.,
are
also to be
taken into accomit.
Besides,we cannot
deny
the
appearance
in other
instances also of a rough breathing
of later
origin.
For
(revw (Princ.
i.
475)
the loss of
a spii-ant
after the
a
cannot be
proved
with
certainty,
in
spite
of
earffeva.
The
key
to all these
perfects
is hence doubtless to be
sought
in
metathesis,a
notion which has been established
by Brugman
-
ipPpapeva, Tlapa^aKppovir] elp,app4yr}.
Ko2 AdKoives oD'tco
Xiyovaiv.
362 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
Stud. iv.
102, 124,
and
Siegismund
v. 211, following
Pott Et. Forsch.
ii.'-^ 389.
Bailly
is of the
same opinion
foi- a
pait
of the veibs. From
*X"-/\r;0a,*\e-\i]xu,*Xi-Xeyixat, *fxe-fxope, *ffi-fTv-fiai came
*"A"'-X";^a
etc.
by
the
prefixing
of
an
ix'rational initial
e,
then
by
the
suppi-ession
of
the second vowel
*eXXr](pa,
efifiope,
'icrav/jim,
and
finally
in the
case
of
some
verbs at a
later
date,when the first X
gave up
a part
of its
'
voiced
sound
'
to the
px'eceding vowel, e'iXrjfpa, eiXr]-)(^n, e'iXoxa, t'lfiuprai.
Hence
tfxfwpe
is to
e'l/jiapTai
miich as the Lesb. aor.
tVe/i^ua
is to the Attic
e^eifju.
Following
this
view, one might
be inclined to hold even that
eXXafje
(explained
otherwise
on
p.
78)was a metathesised
*XeXal3e(cp.XeXafSiadm)
and that
'ifxfiafit came from
*fxiiJLuBe.
In the
followingperfects
e
appears
as
the
syllable
of
reduplication
before vowels. It has
long
been
recognised
that this
anomaly,
like the
syllabicaugment
before
vowels,
is to be
explained
from the
dropping
of
a spirant,
to which in the
case of
reduplicationwas
added later
on
the loss of the
same letter at the
beginning.
As in the
case
of most of
the stems which
belong here,
the
original
initial letter
was
pointed
out
on
p.
79
f.,we
may
content ovirselves here with
a
brief statement. We
have to do with the
following
forms
:
132
1) eayt
Hes.
0pp.
534 kirl
I'wra 'iaye;
then in Attic
poets
and Plato:
KartayuTEQ
C. I. A. ii,
61, 42,
Kareayura
Herod. vii. 224. The irntial
digamma
may
still be detected in
Sappho 2,
9
yXuxraa 'iaye,
where
Bergk
on the
analogy
of Lesbian instances to be mentioned
immediately
conjectiu-es yXwaa
tuayf.
2)
fd^a I 173 Tolai C" Trocti'
Ictcora
fjivOoveenrei'
;
then in Alexan- drine
writers. The stem
expanded by
"
has retained its /
among
the
Locrians
/ffa2?;9"'"" inscript.
of
Naupactus (Stvid.
ii.
445)
1. 38.
3)
kaXtJua. "vuXwh:a
was
quoted
on
p.
79 as a certain
proof
of the
digamma ;
kuXwKa is Attic from
Aeschylus onwards,
while Pind.
Pyth. 3,
57 uses aXwKa,
and
ijXioKaoccasionally
makes its
appearance
in Herodotus
and Attic
writers,generally
with the variant eaXojKu.
4) eeXixai.
fi 662
/caret atrrv leXfieduy
N 524
Aide l^ovXfjcriv
eeXfiivoc.
There is the
plupf.ijiXfieda' rrvytifxfxeOa Hesych.
and f'dXtiPind.
Pyth.
iv. 233
(Boeckh),
and with
a stem
expanded by
" eoXrjroApoll.
Ehod.
iii.
471,
to which
belongs e6Xr}Tui'
rerapaKrai,
and
ivXrfTo'kiricpvpTo,
tTiruKTo
Hesych.
5)
Etpyfjieyoi
E 89
yi(j"vpai eepyfiirai(V^aj'daxTU'.
This verb
was
passed
over in
treating
of the
augment,
because
even
in forms without
the
augment
or
the
reduplication
there
are traces of
a
double
e :
Apoll.
Rhod. iv. 309
iepyerai,
SO
that the
e
may possibly
be of the
same
kind
as in
eetya.
But the / is well established.
Cp.
Princ. i. 222.
6) iepnirog.
a 296
riXekrpoKTireepfxiroi' ;
and also
'iepro
'
EKpi]fxva
Hesych, Cp.
";fip" p.
81.
7) ""(770 (M 464) may
find
a
place
in
our
list
here, though
it is
possibly
not for
fe-ftrr-To,
but for
t-hff-To,being
thus
a
past
tense from
the
iim'eduplicated fia-^iu,ta-f-uu (3sing.liritaTai,
oracle in Herod, i.
47).
8) ioLKci,common
from Homer onwards
:
he has also 'iiKTovc 27,
iinTTivA 104 and the middle forms
i'iikto v 31,
'iiKTo^ 107. The / is
probable,
but not
certainly
established.
Cp.
Princ. i. 309.
9)
ioXiTu in
Homer,
Hesiod and Alexandi-ine
poets:
X 216
rvv h)
vail
y' EoXTra,
1 186
x"^^'"'^C
^" i^' ioXTra
ro piEeit', plupf.
fwX7r"t
(f"
96.
Here
as in
no. 5 the double vowel extends itself also to forms like iiXTreToi
CH. XTi.
KEDUPLICATION WITH AN INITIAL CONSONANT.
363
IN
813, ie\TroiTrj]t'
6
196,
in which the first
e can only
be a
prothetic133
vowel. For the
origin
of the verb see
Princ. i. 328.
10)
eopya.
F 27
oaaa 'iopyac.
The
plupf.
ewpyei
k 289 was
dis- cussed
on
p.
81.
Cp. p.
86. Herodotus also has the form
iopyie
i.127.^
11) iovpi]Ka (Hippocr.ovprjtca)
has been
ah-eady
discussed
p.
80,
and
quoted
from
Aristophanes.
12) iwytji-iai
in
Aristoph.,Plato, Lysias,
Demosthenes
with the
plupf.
iwi'i]Tu, Aristoph.
Pax 1182
rw
ci airC
ovk ewrrjr'. Cp. p.
80.
An active
fwj'/j".wc
is
quoted
from
Lysias
in Bekkei-'s Anecd.
p.
95,
25.
13) ew(Tf.iai
(Herod, wa/zot).
Thuc. ii.39 aTrEwff^aiand similar forms
elsewhere in Attic
prose.
Plutarch has also
ewKct.
Two
perfects
have distinctive
pecviliarities
of the
same
kind
as
those
mentioned on
p.
81,
viz.
14) di'-f'wyo, quoted
from
Hippocrates
and
post-
Attic
writers,art'wxa
from Demosthenes and
Menander,
niewy/zcu, areuyfxrip
common
from
Euripides(Hippol.
56
ov
yap
oW
areuyfiiiag-irvXag)
onwards,
with the
un-Attic
bye-formsj/roticroi, ";)'0(kto.
15) twpaka
with
pluperfect
forms
(IwpaKeaay
Thuc. ii.
21)
common
in Attic
prose,
with
iwpajiai
since Isocrates. With
a
short second
syllable
in
Aristoph.
Thesm. 33
ohx kopuKagTTM-n-ore.
The root is
/op,
Princ. i.432.
In both verbs the interior
strengthening
is the result of a trans- ference
of
quantity.
It is different with
16) e'iwda,
from Homer onwards
(E
766
?/'
/ue
kuicktt
e'icude
i^ciKrjc
odvvniTitteXc'i^eii') though
he has also the form
emBu,
which is usual in
Herodotus : 0 408 alel
yap fxoi
ecoSsv cvt/cXai'
orri /cev
e'liru). After
Homer's time there is also the
plupf.eiwOew,
in Herodotus iwdea. The
first letter of the root was
discussed on
p.
85
:
eicjOa is from
an original
e-(Tfoda. The
diphthong
is due to
compensatory leng-thening
for the
ct 134
which has been lost before
/,
so
that i-afoi)a became in the first instance
EL-foda,
while the
w
is due to the influence of the /.
Cp. Brugman
Stud. iv. 170. With
regard
to the -^olic ihiBwKu i.e.
e-fidio-Ka,
where
the loss of the
(t
has left
no trace behind, we
may
refer to
p.
85.
Finally
in the
followingperfects
the
reduplicationsyllable
can
only
be
recognised
from the contraction. The
case
is
quite
like that discussed
on
p.
83,
where the
syllabicaugment lay
hidden in the
syllable
a, only
with the
difference,
that the
perfects
have lost
a spirant
not
merelyafter,
but also before the
e.
elXiaaero
goes
back to an earlier
i-hXiaaEro,
t
iX
iKTa t
to J'E-HX iKrai.
1) I'laKa,
Eiafxai,
quoted
from Demosthenes
(8,
37
;
45, 22).
In
opposition
to what, was conjectured
on
p.
84 as to the
origin
of tliis
verb,
attempts
have been made from two different
sides,
and in
a
somewhat
inconsistent manner to
prove
that
iaw,
in which verb the loss of a / after
E
is
quitecei'tain, comes from *"rf/aw. S.
Bugge
in Fleckeisen's Jahrb.
vol. 105
p.
95
compares
t'/ow with the Lat. de-sivare
desinere,
recorded
3
eopTo(j)
"
e5o|e,Kpenvarat (betterKprifiuarai) Hesjcli.
looks like a perfect.
Lobeck
Rhem. 124
suggests "pape and the
like, but from the root
ap
we
cannot
get
to
syl- labic
reduplication.
Can we
suppose
that in this form there is concealed the rt.
va7- choose,
to which alpeu belongs (Princ.
ii.
180)
? The Homeric eVi ^po "p4peiv
would well suit this view, and also the following gloss
in
Hesych. copras -apiaKov-
(ras, KaXds, where e would in that case
be
prothetic.
As for
Kprip.va.-Tai
this
expla- nation
has
long
since been referred to
[an^oprai,
confused with
eoprai,
to which
the Homeric dapro is the
pliipf .
364 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
in Paulus
Epitome p.
72, deducing
from this
a simple
verb sivare
identical with *atFau). Leo
Meyer
Ztschr. xxi.
p.
472 f.
adopts
this
com- bination,
so
far
as
it is
given here,
and finds in it
a confirmation of the
view that he had
previouslyexpressed,
that *atj'au)
goes
back to a primi- tive
form
*savajdmi,
which
proceeds
from the rt. su
'
excite,send,'
pre- served
in Sanskrit. The
meanings
of this root
as they are now
given
in
the Pet. Diet,
certainly
do show
some points
of connexion with the
usage
of
"ow,
the
meanings given
for
jyra-su e.g. being
'
call,occasion,
allow,give up.'
But after all the link is but a
weak
one,
so
far
as
meaning goes.
Hence
even
if
we
may
describe this
comparisonas phoneti- cally
legitimate,
and make the fui'ther admission that forms like
eiwai
and the
like,
the existence of which in
our
texts Leo
Meyer
holds it
superfluouseven
to
mention,
may possibly
be mistakes for tdwo-i and the
like,
still
we cannot
anyhow
talk of certain
proof.
But in no case can
the Latin word be connected at the
same
time with sinere and with the
135 rt.
SIC,
and it
seems hardly
conceivable that desivare is
wholly
without
any
etymological
connexion with the
completely equivalent
desinere.
Hence
although
the si of the
past
as well as the
perfect
would thus find
a
satisfactory explanation,
I
keep
for the
present
to
my
'
non liquet.'
2) e'idiKa,
established from
Xenophon
and
Plato,
e'lditTrai and the
pluperfect
ilQl(Jto from
Thuc, Aristoph.,
Eur.
etc.,justifies
its
ti by
what
was said under e"n,)da.
3) f~LKa,
tijiai,
used
especially
in
compoiinds
from
Aeschylus onwards,
by
Attic writers both in
pi'ose
and
verse,
and also
by Herodotus, along
with the
plupf.e'l/J-riv,
is
explained
from the
origin
of the rt.
"-=ja
dis- cussed
on
p.
80. This derivation has since been contested
by
Leo
Meyer
Ztschr.
xx.
353 ff.with the
fiery
zeal which is all his o-svn
;
but
though
this scholar maintains that
'
hjfiL
and all that
belongs
to it show
very plainly
that
they begin
with a
vowel in the
language
of
Homer,'
I
should adduce the
syllabicaugment
of
{r]Ka
and the
"i
of
Trapddi]
"^ 868
as a
proof
of the
contrary.
The
post-Homeric
forms with
el
(e'ldrji', eiKa,
eT/xcu)
lead to the
same
results. Hence I do not see
with what
justice
it
can be denied that this root
originally began
with
a consonant.
4) EiXiyjjLEroQ
Hes.
Theog. 791,
then in Attic from
Eui-ipides
onwards
t'/Xt/vTCK,
etXtkTo etc. But as
the
diphthong
is not unknown to
the
present either,as we saw on
p.
85,
it cannot be decided whether the
EL
of the
perfect
has
come
from /e-Ze
or
from a prothetice
followed
by
J'e,
The Homeric
EiXvfiEi'og
E 186 with fut. EiXvirit)and iXvadEig i
433 would
in the latter-
case
oflTerthe nearest
parallels.
5)
Ei^ai
from the rt. /ec clothe r
72
Kara
Ik
xpo^ "fV^uiro
Et/xat,
\ 191
Eirai,
S 596
E'laro,
\ 381
Et/j.Ei'UQ
(caro- eVi-)
with the
unreduplicated
Efraai (w 250),tV/'eorat, plupf.eVero, e"tto (f'cff-o), E(Tdr)v.Cp.
above
p.
362,
no.
7.
eI/jcu might
be for
fea-fjiai
like
Elfii
for
eV-yu/,
but this
explanation
of the
diphthong
docs not suit the 3
sing,
tlroi.
6) E'ipyacrfiai,
Attic from
Aeschylus (Ag.
354
x"P'f 7"P
""''
"'"'A'"c
Eipyaarai novcji') onwards,
in Herod,
tpyatrrai,
plupf.
EtpyaafX7]v
Thuc,
in Herod.
Epyadfirjy.
Op, p.
86.
7) elpKu
from
E'ipEivserere Xenoph. Cyrop.
viii.
3,
10
irEipfiEvoq
Herod, iv. 190
Stein,
with the variant
irEpjiivoq ; cp.
the Homeric
EEpfiEvoQ p.
362,-no. 6.
136
8) elpvuTai
from
Epv
i.e.
fspvQ
draw
(Stud.
vi. 265
ff.)
S 75
yrJEg vtul
Trpwrcu Etpvarai uyxi^
daXufforrjc,
N 682 O'ly''
icp'
(i\oc iroXiiJQEipvfxii'ai,
CH. XVI.
EEDUPLICATION WITH AN INITIAL VOWEL. 365
d 151
yijvc
re KarelpvaTcit,
with the for'ias of the
plupf.
S 69
e'ipvrro,
!S 30
eipvuTO.
9) itariaKaftiffriafmi good Attic,
cp. p.
86.
B)
Reduplication where the Stem begins with a Vowel.
With an
initial vowel there are two
possibilities
for
reduplication.
Either the initial vowel alone
was repeated,
which then however
always
remained the
same as the vowel of the
stem-syllable,
and did
not, as
with an
initial
consonant,
sink to
e.
There is evidence of the
possibility
that both vowels existed
independently
for
a
time side
by
side in Gothic
perfects
like
ai-alth, ai-ccik, ai-auk,
which
may
be
compared
in
respect
of their form with
t-aXXw,
'i-avQ-o-i'
(Fritzsche
Stud. vi.
325).
Hence
for the root ad eat we
may probably
presume
a form a-dd-a. In Sanskrit
we
find
only
forms like dda
(cp.
Lat.
edl);
and
as
in Greek the vowel
of such
perfects
is
only distinguished
from the initial vowel of the stem
by
its
length:
Dor.
\i\Xaxa,
Horn.
{e(p-)7]7rTai,
we
shall have to
assume,
as
in the
case
of the
temporal augment (p.87)
that the rule for this
re- duplication
was
framed before the
splitting
of the vowel. For such
forms cannot be
explained
from the contraction of
a
syllable
1-. The
Indian
pei"fect
knows
only
this kind of
reduplication
: rt. ar raise,
has
in the
perfect
dra. There
are no
Italian
peifects
either of
any
other
foi'mation from the roots here in
question.
On the other hand Greek
possesses
a
second fuller formation of the
reduplication-syllable,
which is
known
by
the
name
of Attic
reduplication.
It consists in the
repetition
of the initial vowel
along
xvith the consonant which follows it. We
actually
find as
against
the Vedic "?'"
(i.e.
as it
were *wpa)
a
Gi-eek
op-wpa.
This
reduplication
is called Attic doubtless
only,as
Buttmann Ausf.
Gr. i.^ 327
saw,
because it here and there
(e.g.r/Xtcr/uat
for the old
aXi'tXea/jLai, i'jpei(rid(u
for
epijpeKTfiai)
had
disappeared
from the
usage
of
the later
Greeks,
and hence
was to be recommended
as a good
and
genuine
Attic formation. !N"oun-formations,
which are
based
upon
the
same
principle, are
collected
by
Fritzsche 1.
c.
p.
287.
Many,
like
oyayupr"/c,
aXaXay^, nhodvffrai, are connected with kindred verbal
forms,
but others
137
like
eTr-o\p=iup-7ipa, 6X-oX-vi^wby
the side of ululare have arisen inde-
pendentlj'.
Viewed
precisely
the
primitive
form of the first method of
reduplication, e.g.
a-ara or
a-dra,
is related to the second
e.g.
ar-dra
exactly
as
the less
complete
in the Lat. me-mor
to the
more complete
in
fjiip-fiepa {(ppovTi^oc
ci^ia
Hesych.).
If
we count in the initial smOoth
breathing,
the
redupKcation-syllable
in each of the two cases
of the
second series contauis three
elements,
in each
case
of the first it contains
two. We have met with the
same
process
already
in the
reduplicating
aorists,
where fonns like
ay-ayeli',^jkcix^, vp"poi', wpope
occur.
In this
instance it is not unknown to Sanskrit. Delbriick
p.
1 1 1
quotes
from
the Vedas
dm-ama-t from
am
damage,
and with
a weakening
of the
second a to i dn-ina-f from rt. "7i breathe,
drd-ida-t from rt. ard
(caiTsative
^shatter),
which
are
only
recorded
by
the
grammarians (cp.
above
p. 290).
From Zend
Bopp Vergl.
Gr. ii.^529
quotes
the 3
pi. perf.
ir-irith-are
from the stem irith
dissolve,as an
isolated kindred formation.
The Greek
perfect
foi'mation is
separated
from that of other
redupli- cating
tenses
by
delicate distinctions. Here the distinction lies in the
rhythm.
The aorists leave the
stem-syllable
short
:
wpopt ;
the
perfects
366 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. cS, xvi.
bring
it out
vigorouslyby
its
length:
op-cjps.
The rule for the
perfect
has
an unmistakeable
analogy
with the manifold
lengthenings,by
which in
compound
words the
beginning
of the second constituent is
brought
into
prominence:
TroSZ/i't/Ltot;,
vKojpeia, m'u)vvfxoQ,
Even
Bopp, Vergl.
Gr. ii.^
529,
refused to
regard
the
long
vowel after the earlier fashion
as
'aug- ment
'
;
and it cannot be taken
as a
temporalreduplication
in addition to
the
syllabic, especially as
it
reappears,
as
Bopp
also
pointed out, just as
much in nominal forms like
ayojyr'],
aKWK}],
ehu)h'].
The
long
vowel
agrees
besides with the extensive
tendency
of the Greek
pei-fect
to
prefera
long
stem-syllable,
which
we
shall have to treat at
greaterlength
further
on.
In the feminine of the
participle
the short vowel is
preferred,so
that
apapvla
is not
distinguished
in
rhythm
from
apapwv.
The
carrying
out
of this
rhythm
of the
perfectis,
it
appears, specifically Greek,
while
138 evidently
the kind of
reduplication
here under discussion
belongs
in its
origin
to
an
earlier
period
of
language.
There is
not, however,
perfect
consistency
with
respect
to
quantity,as
is shown
hy
aKci^riiiaL
and
aKrwehciTo, aXaXrjj^ai, a\a\vi;Tr)fini, IpipiirTO.
The need of
bringing
into
definite
prominence
the essential
differentia
of the
perfect
gave
the
impulse
to this
specifically
Greek
expansion
of old
germs.
We
saw on
p.
366 how in another direction also the Greeks extended this
differentia
further than the limits which
can
be demonstrated from other
languages.
As
we now turn to the task of
giving a
list of the
perfects
with
Attic
reduplication, we are met
by
-two facts in the
chronology
of the
language,
which have hitherto received but little notice. The firstcon- cerns
the relation of these
perfects
to those in Homer which
are
characterised
merely by
a
long vowel,
the second the nature of the stems
in which this kind of
reduplication
is
effected,
and the
closely
connected
question
as
to the
antiquity
of this method of
formation,regarded
from
the
point
of view of the
more general history
of the Indo-Germanic
languages.
If I
may
trust
my
collections,
there
are
iii the Homeric
poems
only
25
perfects
from stems
beginning
with
a vowel. Of these 19
show the
Attic,
6 at most the
ordinaryreduplication.
The former will
be
given
later
on along
with the later formations of the
same
kind
:
the
6 with the
ordinaryreduplicationare ;
KarriKLa-aL
tt 290, t 9, iip-iiivTat
B
15 and
frequentlyelsewhere,
with
(.(pijTrro
Z 241 and
av-ij(l)9io
jj.
51, 162,
fjfftCTfrai
K
438,
with
ETr}](7Kr]Tai p
266,
yrrxyfifi^t'oc
2
180,
a.(p-~iyQai
I,297,
perhaps
"IxsaatI
36,
for the
long t can
hardly
be imderstood
otherwise,
k-K(oya.T()
M 340 with
-Kapt^^Ktvor ivapLiyjaKtv
K 252 with the variant
TTupoixMKf.t',
which has
good support
from the Alexandrine
time,
and
probably
deserves the
preference.
The
cases
in which
leduphcation
is
entirely
omitted with
an
initial
vowel,
like
ovraa-ai,
uEijKorec
will have
to be discvissed later
on, along
with the
same phenomenon
in the
case
of
stems
beginning
with
a consonant. From the
point
of view of the Greek
languagewe might
thus be led to the
opinion
that the method of for- mation
which
was
afterwards
widelyemployed,was
in Homei's time
] 39
something
novel. But
a
glance
at the universal rule in Sanski-it is
enough
to show
us
that in this
case
the
language
of Homer does not in
the
remotest
degreereproduce
the
original.
The
perfect
is in
epicpoetry
generally
not a
very
common tense. This is the main reason
why
the
instances
are so
few. It is
only
in
Attic,as
will be
seen
repeatedly,
that
the
peifectswere
freelyformed,
and that too
especially
in later times.
Besides,most of the forms with
an initialvowel have
come
from deiived
CH. XVI.
REDUPLICATION WITH AN INITIAL VOWEL. 367
stems,
in
part
vinknown to tlie Homei'ic
poems,
like
i'lyyeXrat, I'iBiKiiKa,
wjxoXoyriKa, })pu}rr]Ka, ?'/stwKa, e^yjia/rrai, vfipiKct
etc. In view of the in- creased
needs of later
times,long
after Homer
a
rich abundance of such
forms was
produced
in imitation of
a not
very
numerous stock of
primitive
creations. But it is worth
noticing
that what is the rule later
on,
in Homer
appears
as
the
exception.
If
we
ask
now
in the second
place
in what sort of stems the Attic
reduplication
appears,
there is no
lack of
very
ancient
ones
among
their
number,
and it is
quite
what we
should
expect
to find these in Homer.
Among
such
perfectsproceeding
from roots are
acax/tgroc, ap?7p",
"'2?;^a,
'vCwCa, oXioXa,
oTrujira, opwpa.
But the
gi'catmajority
of the
perfects
with Attic
reduplicationcame
from
disyllabicstems,
and
betraythereby
their
relatively
late
origin.
The
disyllabic
stem has
originated
either
by prothesis
as in
ayep
(ayriyipar
Y
13)aXi(j) {aX7]Xi(t"a),
opsy (opwpt)(o-
Tui
n
834),
and
probably
also in
eveyK, epnr,
or by
evident
exj)ansion
of
the
stem, as in iX-v-B
(eXi'jXvda,
Hom.
ei\{]Xov6a), ap-e (apiffKW, apZ/ptko),
alpe(apaipr)t:u)Q
and
even di'aipatpe/^t'joc) or
by
unmistakeable
secondary
formation
as
in
oXaXTj^ai,
aXaXvaOai,
aXuXvKTTjjjiai,
aw-api^paKTai
{lipautTw), aprjpofxii'ij (^upoio), eXyXiy/xai{kXitrau)).
In the
case of two
verbs
we can
prove
that there was once a digamm^a :
e^ijfiEKa (cp.
Skt.
vam,
Lat.
vomo),
and
eXy^Xiyfiai(rt.feX) already
mentioned. Some
stems
e.g.
that of
ofxyv/xi,
d^wjuo/ca,
that of
opytrao}, 6pwpv)(a,
of
IXiyvio
IXtfXeyKTai
and of
tpeicu)iprjpiSarai
remain
obscure,
but these too do
not at all look
as if
they
were
particvilarly
old. The curious and
perhapsjustlysuspected
forms
given by
the Et. M.
p.
372, 42,
epqpo.rj.a
{from epwrau))
and
kr-qTo/jLaKa (from eroi/jLai^u)) give
US the
extreme
'
in-
1 40
stances. In
short,
the result at which we arrive is that the
ffreat ma-
jority
of these
forms,
and
among
them not a
few which
are found in
Homer,
have been created in imitation of
a
few old forms
by
the
luxuriant
productive
force of the Greek
language. What Windisch
Ztschr. xxi. 410 has
already
remarked
as to this method of formation is
thus
completely
confirmed. The Attic
reduplication
has
therefore
a
special
interest
as bearing
on the
history
of
language.
It shows
us what
the Greeks were
capable
of at a
compai*ativeIy
recent
time,
and
may
serve as a warning
not to
go
too far in
explaining
Greek forms from
pre-
Greek models. The Homeric
language,
in which
many
at
every step
conjecture
reminiscences from the
grayest antiquity,evidently
is in the
middle of this
period
of recent imitation. We
may
here
as
in other
cases
cast oiu*
eyes
back from Homer to a
still earlier
poetry,
which
was
actually
creative in
moulding
characteristic forms of
language.
The established instances of Attic
reduplicationare as follows,
Homeric
examples being
marked with an
asterisk
:
1) *ay";y"par' (plupf.)
A
211,
Y
13;
other
forms,
like
ayrjyepnEvoQ,
(lyijyepKag
are not
quoted
from
any
author earlier than
Appian. Cp.
on
no.
17
kyelpu).
2)
ayi]o^ci,
first in Aristotle
{avvayrj6xaiJi"v
Oecon. B
p.
1346,
a, 28)
and in the
spurious
documents in the
speech
De Corona
(39,73),
nyz/oyet
in
Polybius,
o-yijjyTjo^fi
"
IkoukteHesych.,
crvj'ayayo-^^^n,inscription
from
Thera,
C. I.
2448,
ii.
10, avyayayoxe'in,
i. 28.
3) *rk-ax^r/^ai
0
314, aKrjx^car
P
637, (i^aj^f/aro or
UKcixvaTO
M
179,
fiKyjxifJtsvY)
E 364. The
reduplication
in this
case extends
very
far for
uKaxpuro,
a.Kaxi(^""i, uKi]-)(}l6i'"t;
'
XvTrai
(Hesych.)ai'e
quoted.
368 PEEFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvr.
4)
*aKaxfJi"yoi
common
in
Homer,
e.g.
O 482.
5) aKi]Koa
common
from
Aeschylus (Pr.740)
and Herodotus onAvards.
6) *u\a\)]/.uii
^
74, aXaXrjffo
y
313, aXa\r)i'TO
also Eur. Andr. 306
(chor.).
7)
*a\a\vi^TJ]^ai
K 94.
141
8)
uXaXvKTo from the Horn. aXvarru)
Quint. Smyrn. 13, 499; 14,
24.
9)
aXaXvadcu
'
(poftelaOai,
aXvetr
Hesych.
10) aXtjXeaiJiaL
Herodot. vii.
23, Thuc, aXj^Xe/cevai
Nicarchus AnthoL
xi. 251.
11)a.Xr)XL(j)a
Demosth.
d\*/\t^^""'oc
Thuc. iv. 68.
12)
apaiprjf^wQ, apaipijKEe,
apalprjTcii, apaipr]TOHerod,,
ayaipeprj^evoQ
by*
itacism for
av-cup-aipr^-fxivoQ inscription
from
Thasos,
discussed
by Berg-
mann
Hermes iii.238. On the other hand there is
rjpr]Ka, ^prifxai
from
Aesch. and Thuc. onwards.
13) *apa.pa
Find.,conj.apijpri " 361,
ap-qpoQ
A
31,
apapvla
O 737 and
often. In Aesch.
(Prom. 60)
and
Eurip.
there
are
isolated forms of the
kind,
apyjpeixii'ot Apoll.
Rhod. iii.833
(for
which
Quint. Smyrn.
has
apripufjiivoq). xpoffcipi'ipeTai (couj.)
Hes.
0pp. 431, i)pi]pnvTO Apoll.
Rhod.
iii.1398.
14) arvv-api'ipuKrai
'
avyKiKOTrraiHesych.
15)
apnpeKtv
quoted
from Sext.
Emp.
ed. Bekker
p.
652,
29.
16)*apr}pofiEyr]
S 548, Herod.,
upyjporo
Apoll.
Rh. iii.1343.
17) *eypi]y6p6a"TL
K
419,
2
pi. imp. eypi'iyopOe [H
371
etc.],
inf.
middle, eypijyopBai
K 67,
from Aesch. onwards
eypijyopu (eyprjyopwc
Eumen.
685),iyprjydpeiy
common
in Attic
prose. [Cp.
Lobeck
on
Phryn.
p.
119.]
The
way
in which we
regard
the
reduplication
in this verb
depends
upon
the
question
how we
explain
the I in
kydpu),
whether
as
.
the remains of the
doubling preserved more completely
in the Skt.
(/d-gar-ti
he wakes
(Princ.
i.sub
voc.)or as a
prothetic
vowel
(Fritzsche
Stud. vi.
322).
In the former case
e-ypij-yop-a
would be twice
redupli- cated,
like
ce-ci-()ax-a, only
that the
perfectreduplication
made itself
visible in the second
syllable,
in the latter I- in the
perfect
would also
be
prothetic ;
in both
cases we
should have to
explainypl]~ynp-aas by
metathesis from
ytp-yop-a
(Siegismund
Stud.
v.
169).
The
adoption
of
the
p
into the
reduplication-syllable
is in
any
case
very singular,
for
we
should have
expected*e-ye-yopa or ^l-yy-yop-a.
Hence the forms
quoted
have, strictly speaking,only
the
appearance
of Attic
reduplication : a
remark which also holds
good
for
no. 1. We cannot however doubt
that to the instinct of the
language
all these words seemed formed alike.
142 The
long
vowel of the second
syllableproves
this. I have discussed in
Stud. vii. 393 the trace of a
Laconian
regularlyreduplicatedli^yopilv
"
typ-qyopivai.
" The form
ky-iiyip-fxai
recorded from Thuc.
(vii.51) on- wards
(with ty-i]yEp-Ka
in the
post-Atticperiod)
is
more
regular
than
the active form.
18) *eCr)Sa,Kara ravpoy
IhjcwQ
P
542, ecrjdvlai Hymn,
in Mere. 560.
iBrjc^orcu
x
56, th'jcoKci
Attic
prose,
with the mid.
eSj/oeo-juat.
19)
*"\//\arai
H
518, j)Xi)XaToE
400, iTrEXijXaro
N 804, eXijXacar
rj 86,
with the active iXi'jXuKa
and the
correspondingphipf.
from Herodotus
onwards.
20) iXi'jXeyfjiai
occurring
from
Antiphon ouAvards,
with its
plupf.
21) iXT]XiyiJiiyoQ
Pausan. x. 17, 6,
but
every^vhere
else from Hesiod
onwards
f'/Xtyyuat.
CH. XVI. REDUPLICATION WITH AN INITIAL VOWEL. 369
22)
*eX{i\vOa. a.7re\i']Xvdu
"1
766,sTTEXijXvdac 268,
then in Herodotus
and Attic writers. The
expanded
Homeric form
eiXiiXovBa
E
204,
A 202 etc.
(with eXr]Xov6(l)s O
81)
is
altogether
abnormal. I do not
"
know that
any attempt
has
ever been made to
explain
the
diphthonget.
23) eiui'if^uKn,
Eiiiij.it(TTaL
from Lucian and
Aelian,
the
phipf.
eiAijfAfKte
quoted
fi'om
Hipi)0crates.
24) kriivoya
common in Attic
prose,
with the mid.
"i'//j'"y/^".oi,
Herod,
viii.
37, i^ivr]rf.Lyfxiya.
"
Hesychius gives
the
regular
form
KariivoKci
'
25) *ii"i]peca-ai
'^
284, "p"?pEOar(o) r]
95,ijpi'ipEi/rro
F
358, Ifn^peLafxlroQ
Herod, iv. 152. The active
ipyptiKa
is
post-Attic:
"
i'lpeiKci, i'lpeiffpm
occvir from
Polybins
onwards.
26) epijpiyjjiiyoQ
Aristot.
27) *tpipnrTO
S 15
; post-AtticepiipnrTat,
epiipnrro.
28) *lpr]pi(TTui
from
kpH^w
Hes. fr. 219
rw
o'
vvtlq ip^piarai kparog
ciXXoc.
29)
*6cMhi
" 60, I 210,
and afterwards similar forms in
post-Attic
writers,
wCwde '
aiffrjTrei'
(probably
wcwEei
"
(7"ffjj7rft), ui^eaEi'.
30)
*6cMCvrjTai
s 423,
lolvarai
'
rjyQiaBi] Hesych.
31) *(Tvr-oK(i)')(6TE
"
In
Kjv
1-117 twTWKOTEQ Hcsych.
In oiir M.SS. atB 218
there is
avv-oyuyKOTs
which Buttmann i.^ 331 derives from the former
by
a
transfei-ence of the
breathing
fi'om assimilation to
e'^^w.
The chief
support
for this view is to be found in the substantives
dvw^fj,avroKM\i].
while
we
may
also
very easilyget
from
oyiu)
to a
by-form
o^ow,
and 143
thence to a regular*u)-)(^Ka
and without
reduplication
o'^^wku. Cp.
iTToxvi^i^t'oc
Nonn. viii. 229.
32)
*o/\wXo n 521 and often elsewhere in Homer and afterwards
common, plupf.
oXtjXei K 187
etc.,
oXwXcKa from Herodotus onwards.
33) fJ^iwjKo/cn,
of-iw^ioTaL
or
vf^i"l)fi(iffTcn
from
Eurip.
onwards.
34)
*oTvu)-!raZ 124 etc.
oTTw-Kti
(f)
123,
both thenceforward in
poets
and Herodotus.
35) *opu)pe
H
388,
opwpei
Q
59, plupf.
also in the
tragedians, f3jOwp/?r"t
conj.
N. 271.
36) *6pu"p"i only
in ^
112, plupf.
fi-om
a
presumable
opwpa
from the
rt.
fop,pres. opofiai
:
cp.
Lobeck
on
Buttmann ii.^
260,
Princ. i. 430.
37) *vp(opi)(^nTai
IT
834, opupi^ctTO
A 26.
38) 6p('.)pvx,a
Pherecr.
(Com.
ii.
p.
327
v. 19),
opwpvKTcu
Herod,
iii,
60,
with
wpvKTcu
ii. 158
(?),
opwpvKTo
from Herodotus onwards.
39) vcbyjcparjTcii, quotedby
Herodian ed. Lentz ii.950
: ovhtc 'Attik-oc
TvnpaKiif-iEroc
airo rov v
apy^Erai,
aXXa
ixovoq
6
vcpyjcpatTTai (cp.
Suidas
S. v.
l"fiij(parTai
Bekk. Anecd.
20).
On the other hand
ErvfarrfiEj'OQ
Herod,
iii.
47,
and the like in
Xenophon
and
Antiphanes,
Com. iii.
p.
52. The
Et. M.
gives
vipvipaarai,
which
certainly
diminishes the
authoiity
of the
former
form, already
attacked
by
Lobeck ad
Phryn.
p.
33. I have
attempted
in Princ. i. 369 an explanation,by referringv(j)-r](p
to the rt.
vabh O. H. G. u-eban
; v(p
would then be
an earlyweakening
of
fa0,
in
the second
syllable
the fuller form would be
preserved,
but with the loss
of the f. We met with
something
similar above
p.
292 in the
redupli- cated
aorist. In Sanskrit the
syllableva
is
reduplicatedby ?/.,
e.o-. in
ii-vdJca. Under
any
circumstances the form is
singular.
B B
370 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
C)
Loss OF
Reduplication.
It is
hardlyprobable
a priori
that such
an essential characteristic as
reduplication
could be
simply
lost. A
prominent
feature of Greek
formations
throughout
is the retention of all
significant
elements. Even
in recent formations we
have
just
seen
that the
tendency
to
reduplication
continues to be
living.
But as in the
case of the
augment so in
redupli- cation
there is
an
essential distinction between forms
beginning
with
a
144 consonant and those
beginning
with
a
vowel. It is
only
in the
latter,
which indeed for the most
pai't
exclude
any prominence
of the
sign
of
the
perfect, as
well
as
of the
preterite,
as a
distinct
syllable,
that the loss
of the
x'eduplication
is at all
common. In
cases
of
an
initial consonant
there
are
only very
few instances of this
phenomenon,
and these
belong
either to the
rusty antiquities
of the
languageor to the isolated ventures
of
particular
writers. The retention of the
rerluplication
is in Sanskrit
also the almost invariable rule. Delbriick Altind. Verb.
p.
121 men- tions
and discusses the
altogether
isolated
exceptions,
and
opposes
the
earlier and looser
assumption,adoptedby
Corssen in order to make out
reduplication
to be
something quite tmimportant
for the Latin
perfect.
It is
es])ecially noteworthy
that
reduplication
is
among
the Indians
occa- sionally
suppressed,onl^/
in the more
polysvllabic
dual and
pluralforms,
which also furnish the much-discussed
by-forms
with
e [tenus
from
tatdna).
The
preference
of Latin for
compact forms, cooperating
with
the altered laws of accentuation,
produces
in Latin
a further extension
of this
phoneticdecay.
The same
thing happened
in
Teutonic,
and as
Windisch informs
me,
also in Keltic. The Grreeks and
Indians,
with
their delicate feeling
for
articulation,have, as
is
so often
the
case,
retained the most
faithfully
the earliest forms,
a)
Loss of
Eeduplication
with
an
initial
consonant. "
1) yFVf^iada only
in Theocr. xiv. 51 in the
proverb
fxvc
ysu^tSa iriffaac
(cp.Diogenian.
Cent. ii. 64
opre
five
Trlrrarjg "ytvfTcn).
It is most natural
with Meineke to take
ytv^tQa as a
perfect.
Still
we can
hardlyreject
as impossible
the
explanation
of the word as a
present
for
yevo/ieBn (cp.
Xnvrni, Xovi'Tcii), especially
since
SeviJEi'or=?tv6i.iei'oi', heofifror
has been
proved
to be
probablyright
in the last
verse of Theocr.
xxx.
2) ^e'xarat, Tron^ty/xEroc
Buttmann ii.^ 149 takes
as
perfect
forms
with the
reduplication
lost,
because the
meaning
'
await
'
which is con- nected
with these forms
(M
147 (rvetrmy
eoiKore,
rwr iv
opftrrnv
ai'^fiuif
j)^6Kvrwi' ?f')(OTOt KoXotrvpTovloiTd,
I 191
^eyiuevngAluKidr^yottote Xij^eiev
afi()o)r,
and often
Troriciyfieroc)
is elsewhere limited to the
perfect
forms
with
reduplication
:
K 62 hhyfieioc e/'co kev
fXOrjr^
E 228
"/"
rrv
roih
Of'^fto.
(Jp.
above
pp.
104,
131. Kiihner
points to the
post-Homeric
145
use
of the
present Hxf"^ni,e.g.
Eur. Or. 1217
i)6fiu)r
Trapoc
fiivnvan
nap-
dirou
?f)(ou
TTocu.
And it cannot be denied that in the
non
-reduplicated
forms
irpoffcoudv
{ind
irpon^exen-Bai
the
meaning
'await' has been attained
without the
help
of
reduplication.
Now
as we
have also forms from the
rt.
^ey
without a
thematic vowel in
^fVro,?i^n,^eyBcu(pp.104, 131),
the difference in
meaning can
hardly
induce
us to follow Buttmann in
separatingof'x^o',
receive,
from
^exBai(for^ec^e-xdai)
await.
3) Ovf.i[jL"ioc,
burnt, damaged, only
in Et*. M.
458,
40
:
dv/jfiei'or
:
CH. xvc.
LOSS OF REDUPLICATION. 371
BrjXotTO vno
nvpoc
fttflXii^it'OV i\ KeKaKU)fJiivov. kot
Trapa
yewpyo'ic,
o'l
vizo-
KeKuv}.iiroi
viro
Tra\r]Q
a^iz(Xu)VEQivredvufxevoi
KoXovvTai. The
present
is
Tu(pii".
To
assume an
aoiist
*H)vjj^ii^v
like
iliynr)r,
which would
require
to have
a passive
meaning
\\ke
ftXfirrdai,
is not a
desirable
course:
it
would be better to
suppose
that the
word, belonging
as it does to the
language
of
peasants,
lost its
reduplication,
and
subsequently
also the
accent of
a perfect.
4)
tXftTrro
ApoU.
Rhod. i.
45,
824
according
to Buttmann i.^318 and
Lobeck
on
Buttmann ii.^ 17
a plupf.
for eXeXenr-o. We discussed this
form in another connexion on
p.
lol.
5) t7raXi\\6y)iro
Herod. i.
118,
of which Buttmann
says
'perhaps
the somewhat
clumsy compound
furnished the
reason
for the
simple
augment.'
It would not be
very
venturesome to alter
a
form
so isolated
into
7rf7.-"/\(/\Xoyjjro.
There are
also three forms
only
recorded
by Hesychius: airuT
j-irjTai-
airoKeKOT^TUi,
liaKopicTT
ni' ^lanapdiveverat,
kirtTtvKTaf iy
tTriTv^iif
IfTTt
(M.S. tirroj),
all three
guaranteed by
the
alphabeticalorder,
but
without
any
information as to their source.
(fXan^eioq'TervipiojiiroQ
\fi
declared
by
Meineke on
Theocr. xiv. 51 to be a copyist's error for
irefXa-
(rpivoc, though
it is not more surprising
than the other three
examples.
We will discuss oJca under
b).
b)
Loss of
Eeduplication
with
an
initialvowel.
There are precisely
the same
difficulties in the
case
of
reduplication
with
an
initial vowel as
those discussed on
p.
91 ff.in the
case of the
augment.
It is therefore not
necessary
either to enumerate all
cases
sepaiately,
or even
to discuss in detail the combinations of letters before
which this license is found. The Herodotean e'lKatrrai
by
the side of
ijkaiTTcu
in the
tragedians
is not
really
different from
e'lKai^oi' by
the sidt 146
of
ijicci^oy, though
in small matters like these there
are
here and
there small
peculiarities.
In the
preterite
there is
rjvpoy
as well
as
evpoi,
but in the
perfect
there is
probably only
evprjt^a, tvpr^jjai.
We
may
di%dde the forms that
belong
here into three
groups
:
(1)
those with
an
initial
diphthong
or
vowel
long by nature, (2)
those with
a short vowel
lengthened by position, (3)
those with a
vowel which remains short.
The first and second
groups
are
very
widely
extended
over Greek of all
times and
dialects;
the third alone is somewhat
surprising,
and is
coiTespondingly
rare.
To the fii-st
group
belong
the
numerous com-
poinids
with
tv
like
EvcoKi'/Ji^Ka,
eltpyerriKu,
Evr^x'/'-a, evcjxvP"',
^ which
at the most an
internal
reduplication
is sometimes
attempted,
but
also,
what we
should not have
expected,
a
number of
perfects,
for which
an
initial / is established.
Among
them oica
takes a place
of its
own,
inasmuch
as
the
corresponding
Skt. veda and Goth, vait also show
no
trace of the
perfectredupHcation.
It is
probable
that
here,
not unin- fluenced
by
the
completelypresent
meaning,
the
sign
of the
perfectwas
lost even
in the time of the common
language.
Had
we not the
parallels
of the
cognate languages,
from the
point
of view of Greek it
would be
very
natural to
explain
the loss of the
reduplicatedt
ia oUa
by
Herodotus's
(uku (e.g.
iv.
82) by
the side of the
ordinary
Greek
eoiKa,
and to
place
the loss of the
"
in a
time when the / had
already
dis- appeared.
Strictlyspeaking,
olca
belongs
therefore to the
cases
of
B B 2
372 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvl
dropped reduplication
discussed under
a).
But
we place
it here because
of its resemblance to some other forms.
Hesychius
has
preserved
for us
also the
con-esponding
middle form
'idfiai
with the
explanationytrd^o-zcw,
(u()(i. Since
Vc/.tfu
is to oJria
as
//Vy^(""
is to
toiKo,
there is no reason
with
Mor. Schmidt to
regard
this form
as
corrupt.
A form
corresponding
to
the Herodotean
(uKa occurs
also in
Alcman, where, however,
the
readin"^
oIkuc
(l)pai(i)
Xh'bj
(fr.
80
Be.'^)
is not
quitecertain,
because of the variant
fAKUQ (cp.t(Kwc).
On the
pi'obability
of
a / in this vei-b
see
Frinc. ii. 309.
The
analogy
of these two
present perfects
will meet us again
in
a
different connexion. As
phoneticchanges
show themselves
very
rarely
in
147
the
case of
an
initial
ei, aTVf^CKrfjiivoQ (Herod,
ii.
141),t'lpy/uat (Aristoph.
Xen.
Aesch.)are less
surprising, though
hei-e too there
was originally
f
(Princ.
ii.
l70,
i.
222).
In the familiar Homeric
ourarTTai (A 661)
we
could not
expect
the
diphthong lov,
which is unknown to this dialect.
There is more to
surpriseus
in the Herodotean
oiKoiofjrjTai (i.
181),
(HiciTTnt,
o'lKYfTo, oli'iOfiEioc, by
the sldo of the Attic
wKnl^of^irjrni (Thuc.
vii.
29)
(DKifTTui, (OKYfKa (Sopli.),
but the
diphthong
is
quite
in
harmony
with
the Ionic
usage
elsewhere.
ohohopiiTai is,however,
also found
on
the
Heraclean Tables
(i.137),
and Meister Stud. iv. 423
rjuotes
otK)ii.irii
from
Archimedes. Of
perfects
with
an
initial
long
vowel it is worth while
noticing 'dofj/u'i'oc (2i435),
the
origin
of which is obscure
[cp.Merry on
( 2].
The
long n
of the
reduplicationsyllable
reminds
us
of that in the
augmented syllable
of aXro. There is also
acrjk-orec
in the formula
ku-
/(rtrw
"ict]k-(')rei:
rjce
i^ai vwyu) (K 98, 399)
with the variants
ahjicnrec,
acc")-
KOTic.
La
Roche,
Textkrit.
179,
recommends the
reading
of Herodian
with the
rough breathing(i"t.
oS
cp.
a^-po-c, ac'-iro-c
from
a^sa,
in Lat.
satur)
and one
I. It is
doubtful,however,
whether the form with
cc,
which has
quite as
much
authority,
is not more
correct,
as
in the
cognate accr^y
E 203
; cp.
Princ. ii. 290.
In the second
group
we
may
mention as Homeric forms
spx"''"'
and
tp^aro
k 283, I,73,
the latter
by
the side of
e(p-)(^nT")
k 241,
which
agree
well with
airuipyti
9
325, 'ipyadov
and the aor.
tpsar,
and
quite
correspond
to Herodotean forms like
kartp^di,
cnrepyfjitroc,
and
erTfrai
from the rt.
J-tg(evyvfii) w 250,
from which
an
oracle in Herod, i. 47
gives
the 3
sing.
eViEorat with the
plupf.earro
F
57, tt 199, fffro
p
203
and
fi-equently.
The course
of the
language
must have been this " that
first there
was
real
reduplicationJ-t-Fepxarcti, H-firr-trai,
then with the
disappearance
of the internal /
(cp.'lula) ff-ip\a-ui,
H-irr-rrai,then with
aphaeresis
of the
" J-lpxfJ-rui, Hncrai,
and
finally
when the initial / also
was
sacrificed to the dislike felt
by
the Greeks for soft
spirants,
tpyarai^
iarrni. Forms of the kind mentioned last but one have left traces
enough
in Homer. While then in these cases a vowel did not
originally
stand
at the
beginning,
Herodotus furnishes
a
number of
perfects
of the kind
without
reduplication
from
stems,
for which
we cannot
imagine a conso- nant
to have been lost
: ajif.iiir)i:
i.
86, a-iraWay^iroc
ii.
167,
apy^Evnc
148
i-
174, Itpi^iorr^iroQ
ii.
12i,
/cnrappwc^/vne
iii.
145,
npTsarni
i.
125, ipyarrrai
iii.155
[but
cp.
Princ. i.
221]ipfifa-o
i.
83,
tnawrai vii.
10,4 [foaw^/t roc
viii.
130],(iTTtilrjptfoc
i. 188. Here the disinclination to
long
vowels before
more
than one consonant has
evidently
hindered the
application
of re-
duplittition.
A dinibtful instance of the kind is
("xppviofievnc
in Timon
rhlias.
p.
28 Wachsmuth
(Diog.
Laert. ii.
126).
For
Hxppvw^iyoQ
which
CH. XVI.
POSITION OF THE REDUPLICATION. 373
is not without M.S.
authority,might
also be
brought
into the
verse by
syuizesis
on
the
analogy
oi'liXtKrpvwrog
(Hesiod.
Scut.
3).
The most
surprisinggi'oup
is the third. For we can see no reason
for
omitting
the
reduplication
where the initial vowel is short. Hence
the cases
of this kind are not
numerous,
and are almost
exclusively
Ho- meric
archaisms. There is an exception
in the
very
surprising
Hero-
dotean
aXta-i^irug (iv.
118 and
elsewhere):
cp.
Bredow de dial. Herod,
p.
292;
like
olda,
and
earrai
with
an
old
digamma.
Homer
gives oXtr//-
ixet'og
2
807,
with little trace of the
perfect
in accent or meaning,
and
justified
also
by
the
impossibility
of
bringing i)\iTr}fxiioQ
into the hexa- meter,
and
nrwya
(e.g.
S
105),
which
was
retained in the
language
of
the Attic
poets
and Herodotus
(iii. 81).
The
origin
of the word is
obscvu-e,
but it is not
improbably
connected with
uvayKr].
Hence
per- haps
")-wyo
is based
upon
Attic
reduplication,
like
Iik-ioki],
the nasal in
the
stem-syllable disappearing
after it had
produced
a softening
of the
consonant. The Oscan
angit (tab.
Bant.
2)
Avith
mujctuzet (ib.20)
which has been identified
on
insufiicient
grounds
with the Lat.
agere,
having
the
meaning enjoin,order,might
be
cognate, afxift-iax^'tu
B 316.
The word could not be otherwise
brought
into the
verse :
besides the
whole verbal stem is
already reduplicated,
for
l-ax
for
fi-fa^evidently
goes
back to the stem
preserved
in
-iixoQ,
nx^^^
(^P-
Fick Wortei'b.^
204).
"
iiptvToonly
in i2
125,justified by
the metre.^ " From later
poets
we have
further
a-!ra/.ienrru
Anthol. Pal. xiv.
4,
a/dtinro
Nonnus
Dionys.
xliv.
241,
l)ut there is
no trace of
a
pluperfectmeaning
in either
place,
and it is
doubtless better to
regard
the word
as an
aorist of late formation like
tXei-n-rd
(p.131)
:
" On the other hand
tTroxvA'f'^c npfjan
i^vkjuh'
Nonnus
Dion. viii. 229 is
a
certain instance of the mutilated
perfect.
D)
Position
of the Reduplication. 149
The
numerous
irregularities
which
are to be found in
compound
words in
respect
of the
position
of the
reduplication
do not come within
the
scope
of out"
invcbtigation,
any
more than the similar
phenomena
in
the
case
of the
aorists,
which
were
briefly
mentioned
on
p.
94. It will
be sufficient to notice
some
of the
i-arer instances.
Here, as in the
augment,
the careful endeavour not to omit the
expansion
which is
significant
of the tense is
prominent.
This endeavour is here
even
greater
than in the
case of the
augment,
so that,
with the
exception
of
the few instances
alreadynoticed,
the
reduplication
is
never
wanting
even
in
compounds, though sometimes, as a
result of this
strong
tendency
to mark the form
distinctly,
it is doubled. The fundamental
law, according
to which
every
verb not
compounded
with
a
preposition
is treated
as a
whole and altered at the
beginning,produces
such
clumsy
foi-ms as
hhvffTvxt]"^a (Plato,Lysias),TrtTroXwpKr)f.tiioQ (Thuc.)
r/iaiTtwjuat
(Thuc.Dem.)
But the
preposition
here too is marked off
as an unes- sential
member of the
verb,
not
only
when the vei-b is used also without
a preposition,
as in
utt-oXwXci,ara-Si^p()f.i", tTri-Tirpanrai (Homer),
but
also when it either
occurs only
with
a
different
meaning,
e.g.
in
^t-wk"/Ka
(Plat.), Karn-TveippoiTiKa (Orators), or
does not occur at
all,
e.g.
in
otto-
XtX6yr)Tai(Orators),
Trapa-reruiJ-i^Ka (ib.), iy-yeyvjjuai (Plat.Dem.),
t/ii-
TTinuCKTijiiog (Aesch.
Prom.
550), iwi-ujpKiji^E (Xen.),
er-ht^iwKora
(tab.
Hei-acl. i.
120),ey-Ttdvjjrifiai (Thuc).
The theoretical distinction of
374 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xyi.
decomposita
and
composita
had
evidentlynever
veiy
much life in it in
the
genius
of the Greek
language.
It is
comjiaratively
rare to find other
first elements treated like the
prepositions
in
compound verbs,
and this
is
apparently
the
case only
where the whole word
begins
with
a
vowel.
To this class
belong ai'Tevn-e-n-tJujKey
Dem.
xx. 64,
tTnroTETpofriica Lycurg.
139,
(tConrerr"ipi]Kafxey
Philippides
Com. iv. 471
(Herod,
viii. 129 has on
the other hand
^loconropiji^eam').
Here
again
we
may
recognisea luxu-
liant creative
impulse.
Because the
reduplication
could not
get
its full
rights
with
an
initial
vowel,
it
was carried out
syllabically
within the
word. This view is confix'med
by
the fact that sometimes under similar
conditions
we
find double
reduplication,
either in such
a
way
that there
150
is
a
vowel at the
beginning
of the first
element,
and the internal redu- plication
is
syllabic: bjcoweTroirjfiiyr]
Xen. Anab. v. 3,
1
(Kriiger
ihhu-
TToi
r}/.ie
IT])or convevsely; he^i^Trjfiai
Thuc. vii. 77, neirapifirjKa (Aeschin.
ii.
154)
or
thirdly,
with
a
repeated
vocalic
reduplication : ^^^^(XjjKe
(Dem.
xxi.
4),kirrirwpi^io^ai (Dem.
xviii.
311).
In the last two
examples
the treatment of the
prepositions
if and
uru
shows that
they were no
longer
felt to be such. This
exception
to the fundamental law is illus- trated
by
numerous instances
elsewhei'e,
and thei^e is
reallyvery
little to
sui-prise us
in
it,
for the coalescence of elements
oiiginally independent
is
one
of the most
frequent phenomena
in the
history
of
language.
Cases of the kind
are furnished
by
treirpujyyvrjKa
tab. Heracl.
(Meister
Stud. iv.
424)j
which
we
may
call the
counterpart
to the
previously
mentioned
kyytyvi^jxai,'^ f.iei.ieTii.iii'oi_ (Herod,
vi.
1),
where the stem-vowel
too is
very
remarkable, "tjjjL^Uufuu (Hipponax 3, Aristoph.,Plat.),
i']i'Oi"TTai
'
Trpocrji'i^Qr], npoc^ei'rji'eKrat Hesych.
E)
Significance
of the
Reduplication
in the
Perfect.
The
significance
of the
reduplication
in the
perfectmay
be
very
clearlyrecognised
from the Greek
use
of this tense. But it has been
frequently
overlooked
by
our gi-ammarians,
because
they
could not shake
themselves free from the notion that the
perfect
must have been
origin- ally
a
past tense, though
in Greek above all
languages
the
employment
of the
primary personal
terminations and the absence of the
augment
in
the
pei'fect indicative,
and also the
numerous
perfects
whose
meaning
is
unmistakeably
present, might
have
guided
them
aright.
Yet
even
Buttmann
was
misled
by
his notion that
reduplication
was
the source
of
the
augment (i.^313)
into
confusing
the
perfect
with the
past tenses,
and thus had much trouble with cases
'
where the
perfect
has the force
of
a present.'
He admits
(ii.^ 89)
that in
perfects
like
f^iffirjXe
'the
piesent proper
and this derived
present
force
aj^proximate
so nearly
that
the
usage
of the
language
confused them.' For several mimetic
perfects,
151
like
KtKpayn,
he
gives up
the
attempt
to derive them from an
eai-lier
peifect
force.
Bopp
was the first to discover the true
point
of
view,
which deserves the
more
cordial
recognition
in that the
usage
of the
Indian
perfect
did not
give
at the time when
Bopp
wrote his
Compara- tive
Grammar,
the
slightest
trace of
a
present force,
with the
exception
perhaps
of the anomalous
veda=J'o'^a,
Goth. vait. At that time the
Ohl Indian
perfect
seemed to be
a
purelypast tense,
and hence its
usage
*
Perliaps rjyypa/x^tvat', as
Naber
Mnemosyne
i.
p.
105 is inclined to write for
the recorded
ijypa/x/xfvav
in tlie second Cretan
inscriptionpublishedby him,
line 4,
in the
sense
of
iyyc/po^jxivav,belongs
here.
CH. XVI.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE REDUPLICATION. 375
tended rather to increase than to diminish the okl confusion. Hence it
was not
by
means of
Sanskrit,
which in
so
many
other instances served
to clear
up
mattei-s at
once,
but
by
a
genei-al
estimation of the Indo-
Germanic
formations,
in which the Greek
usage,
the isolated Latin
perfects
odi and
memini,
and the numerous
Teutonic so-called
'preterite
pi-esents
'
cai-ry great weight,
that the founder of
comparative philology
was
led to the correct
view,
which he
expresses
in
"
515 in the
following
words,
'
The
reduplication-syllable merely
serves to
intensify
the
concep- tion,
and to lend to the root an
emphasis,
which is
regarded by
the
genius
of
language as a
type
of what has
already
becofne and is
com- plete,
opposed
to that which is viewed
only
in the course
of
becoming,
and has not
yet
reached the
goal.
Both in sound and
meaning
the
perfect
is akin to the Skt.
inteiisivum,
which is also
reduplicated,
and in which the
vowel of the
reduplication
is intensified for the sake of
emphasis.'
It
was
only
later
on
that
Bopp
found some
support
for his view in the Vedic use
of the
perfect, quoted
in ii.^
p.
466 note
;
i.e.
cases in which
'
the
perfect
denotes the
completion
of
an action
'
;
^
and discovered
(p.531)
some ana- logies
for this in the use of the
corresponding
Zend forms,
Spiegel
too
(Grammatik
der altbaktrischen
Sprache
p.
318)
takes the
reduplicated
perfect
of Zend
as
the tense of
completedaction,
and
cpiotes
instances in
which this form has
quite
the force of a
present. My
statement in
Tempora
und Modi
p.
172 f. was in accordance with
Bopjj's
first ecUtion.
Kiihner Ausf. Gr. ii.'-^ 126 fF.has made no use of these
explanations.
More
152
recent
investigations
of the Greek
perfect, especially
the dissertation of
Warschauer
'
De
perfectiapud
Homerum usu' Breslau 1866 and the
paper by
Eichard Fritzsche
'
iibei-
griechische
Peifecta mit Prasensbe-
deutimg' (Sprachw.
Abhand.
aus G.
C.'s,
gramm.
Gespllsch.
p.
43
S.)
have carried the
question
fui'ther and treated it in detail. Hence 1 content
myself
with
puttingtogether
in
a narrow
compass
the most
impoi'tant
points,
and
am
often
only
able to
repeat
what I then stated.
A
very
considerable number of
perfects
have
quite
the force of
a
present,
and
among
them
very many
Homeric
ones.
In
some
instances
it is
easy
to deiive the
present meaning
from the
temporal
force of the
perfect
which afterwards became the
rule,
that of
a
present
of
completed
action
:
e.g. Kt^r/j/xfa
(cp.
Goth,
aic/)
'I
possess'
from the notion 'I have
acquired,' tyt'WKa^novi
'I have
recognised.'
But in the case
of
a
very
lai'ge
number of
verbs,especially verbs,as Fritzsche
p.
48 well
remarks,
which denote
an action
as distinguished
from
a state,we cannot
get
out of the
difiiculty
thus. For
a
completed
action
ceases,
while
a con- dition
brought
to a state of
completenessmay
endure. Viewed tem- porally
TTfVAjjya
can only mean
'
I have
struck,'
which carries with it
the
meaning
of
'
I
am
strikhig
no more,'
and
any
one who wishes to
derive the whole
usage
of this form fiom such
a fundamental
meaning
must take X 497
Xepaiv TTtTTkrjyois Kai
ovtihelounv
evicraav
as denoting
that the action of the first
participle
is
completed,
while that
of the second
endui-es,an explanation
which
a
little reflexion
upon
the
connexion of the
passage
wiD at once show to be
quiteimpossible.
One
cannot see
bow
tcexpaya
'
I
cry
'is to be
explamed as
'
I have cried.'
*
The
investigations
of the
use
of the tenses in the
Veda,
in which Delbriick
is
engaged,
will not fail to show how far such isolated observations
are confirmed.
37 G PEEFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
The
imperativeKii:paxf^i
if from a perfect
of
completed
action could
only
mean
'
have cried' i.e.
'
have done with
your
crying';
but it
means
just
the
opposite;e.g.
Aristoph.Vesp.
198
(vbop
KiKpax"t
TTfs
dvpasKeKKdtr^fvrjs.
Wlicn it is said of Thersites B 222
1.53
the
meaning
is
certainly
not that Thersites first cries oiit and then utters
abuse. In P 264 the
perfectftefypvxr) fieyu Kvfia
after
we
iirtis
certainly
not connected with the
present fiuowm to
convey
the
meaning
that the
roaring
of the
waves
is
past
when the beach
resounds,
but that both
continue side
by side,just
like the
battle-cry
of the
Trojans,
which is
more
vividlypresentedby
this
comparison.
In short the
explanation
of
the
present perfects
from
perfects
of the usual kind is in
many
cases
impossible,
in others
only
to be cari'ied out
by
unnatural de\aces
wholly
at variance with the
simplicity
of the eai-liest
language.
Scholars have
been led to these
attempts
at
explanationonly by
the erroneous
notion
that there
were no
other means of
accounting
for
them,
and that the
perfect
form must
necessarily
have fiom the first the assumed
temporal
meaning.
But this is not at all the
case. On the
contrary
we
have
seen
repeatedly
that the
original
force of the
reduplication
was
intensive
and that the
perfect
wa;s a
piesent
to sta.rt with.
By means
of
i-edupli-
cation intensive
presents
were
formed at
earlyperiods
in the
language.
Some of these
presents
followed the rule of the
present
formation.
To these
belong
the
reduplicatedpresents
of the
primitive
formation
like
^iciofii
and the not
very
numerous forms with
a
thematic vowel
and a similar
expansion,among
them
especially
verbs of the
I-class,
like
yapya/pw, Tirulioj,
and also the Sanskrit
intensives,
which are
charac- terised
by
a
heavier
reduplicatior,
e.g.
dar-dhar-ti he holds
zealously(rt.
dhar),a-jn-pet
he swelled
(rt.pi),
nd-nad-ati
they
sound
loudly,
and
some
similar Gi'eek forms like
iij-iiojby
the side of
liio,^ei-?^ifTa()fjai,
KMi^vct),
{.lui-fxitb)
(Fritzsche
Stud. vi. 300
f.).Others,
which did not
establish themselves
as
present
forms, presented
themselves above on
p.
288 ff.
as reduplicated
aorists. Now for
some
of such forms a
distinc- tive
method of treatment came in,
that
is,
there were certain
peculiarities
of the
reduplication vowel,
the
personalendings
and the thematic
vowel,
through
which
graduallya
specialcategoiy
arose.
This new
category
of individualised
pi'esents
we
call
perfect.
In it the deiived and
transferred
meaning,
that of
completedaction,comes to be
predominant.
154
But it cannot
surprise
us
that at a
time when all this was in
a
state of
iiux,a seiies of
reduplicated
foi-ms took the same
outward
form,
while
they
remained true in their
meaning
to the
original
destination of this
device of
language.
I
expressed
this in the
Tempora
tind Modi thus
(p.176)
'the
word-foraiingreduplication
creates in
Kekpaya
and
fiifxvKo.
the
same terminations
as
the
reduplication
of inflexion does in
XiXonra,
/)f73po"(.".'
All these views have been abundantly
confirmed and I'en-
dei-ed much clearer
by
the more exact
investigation
of the Vedic forms.
In the Vedic dialect the limit between intensive
present
and
perfect
forms, as Delbriick shows
fullyon
p.
135, wavers in
many ways.
In
short it
comes out from all this
as cle{\rly as possible,
that the Indo-
Germanic
perfectordy by degrees2)artedofffrom a redvj)licated present,
CU. XVI.
INTENSIVE PERFECT-PRESENTS.
377
aud from this it follows that where
we
find in the
perfect
a
present
meanuig,
which
agi-ees
with the force of
reduplication
elsewhere,^
there
is not the
slightest
reason to
regard
this
as anything secondary,
but
rather on
the
contrary
to
recognise
in it
something extremely
ancient
aud
primitive.
The
very
considerable stock of these
noteworthypresenti"erfects may
be classed as
follows.
1)
Mimetic verbs.
Perfects of this kind follow the
analogy
of
presents
like
^lop^vfxo,
^:ll.X}|ffK^o.
Fritzsche
p.
48
quotes eight
mimetic
perfects
in Homer with
the most
decidedlypresent meaning: ftiiipvya (P 264),yiyiorf.[e400),
laxvTa
mentioned above
p.
373, KeKXnya (P 88)
with the later
by-form
K'kXnyya (Arist.Vesp. 929),Xt\i]Kil)Q
X 141
{\e\aica
in the
tragedians),
/i"/^rj/.wc-
K
362,
afji"pi^efivKei-
k 227, rtrpiyv'ia
^ 101. There are
further
the later
KeKpaya,
which is so common in Attic
prose
that the redu-
l-5i"
pliaxted
verbal stem is
employed
not
merely
in the future
KEKpulo^m,
l)ut also in nominal formations like
KeKpayfjoc, KeKpuK-rjg
and the comic
compound K"t:pa",icafjae (Aristoph.Vesp. 596), tcei:piy6-eQ
Aiist. Av.
1521,
and
kexXrj^iyni' xpocprir Hesych. (Fritzsche p. 51).
2)
Verbs of
sight
and
smell,
wherein we include those which denote the excitement of these sensa- tions,
and those which denote the
receptiveactivity,
as
under the
first head.
Language
indeed often denotes both
by
the same stems
(Princ.
i.
140). Reduplicated presents
of this kind are
furnished
by
^lapf^ulpw, TraKJx'tacTu), OEvciWu},
Trcnrraini). Here
belongs deSopKc,
which
means
only
look, glance,
beam
:
Trvp
6(pQaX^(n"Ti lt})opKwc, r 446, to kXeoq
T7]Xudev cCopKt
Pind. 01. i.
94,
TrporrtjTrov
/JiJTsCtcopicog ju/;reavtnovv
Aristot.
Physiogn.p.
808,a,
4
(a
face neither
expressivenor intelligent).
There are also
XiXafXTve
which in Eur. Androm. 1026 can hardly
be
taken otherwise than
as a
present,
and must
certainly
be taken so also in
Troad.
1295,
and
ocutca,
the
plupf.
of which is Homeric
: t
210
o^/^i//
o'
ij^e'ia cnro k:pT]TFipng
dSw^ti.
oirwwci on the other hand
appears
from Homer
(e.g.
Z
124)
onwards
so
often
as
the
present
of the
completed
action
that even
in
Soph.Antig.
1129
ere
o'
vwep
^iX6(povirirpac,rT-epu\p orrujive
Xiyivc we
shall not
explainoTrwTre by dpn
as
the scholiast
does,
but
re- gard
it as a genuine perfect
'
has
seen
thee.' "We
may
however
place
here
EoiKa,
which has
always
a
present
force,only
that the fundamental
meaning
of the root was
perhaps
a
very
different
one
(Princ.
ii.
309).
3)
Verbs of
bodily
actions.
We have
reduplicated
presents
of this kind in
/5a^//3a/r"U'
chatter,
iruiwivEiy pant.
The
followingperfectsbelong
here
: iEhpayfxEyoc:
gi-asp-
^
We
may quote
here the words of Lobeck ad
Sophoclis
Aiacem v. .380 on the
nature and force of
reduplication:
'
In iranriWoi clare
apparet
vis
reduplicationis
intensira. Nam ut
irpoirpo, -raixncLv, aihavros,ipsipptis,quisquis,
nndeunde nuda
soui eiusdem iteratione
plus significant
quam simplicia,
ita verba
quae
motum
crebrum et
quasi
coruscantem
demonstrant, reduplicationem tanquam propriam
notarn continuatae actionis
recipiunt.' Reduplicated presents
Lave been dis- cussed
on
pp.
105, 179, 209, 212, 215, 217, 221,
226.
378 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xti.
ing {Korirfc
^.
aijjiuTol(T(Tr]Q
N
393),liihiyiiTcu
-q
72 with the
past
Zti-
Zi\(iTO(A
4
TOi
he
"^fwtrioiQ
cenaifrmv htice^aruXXt'iXovc)
in the
same
meauiug
of
greeting,
which attaches to the
reduplicated
inchoative
form
CttcltTKOfjiai
or SehlaKOfiai (cp.
above
p. 197),KCikiog KeKUtprffWa Ovfioi'
E
698, fc")(^)]r(')ra
IT
409,
and in the other forms also in Attic writers of
the
wide-opened mouth,
XeXeix^oTeg licking
Hes.
Theog. 826,
which
156
Fritzsche well
compares
with the
equivalent
Skt. intensive
le-lih, ntTro-
rliarcu
of the
fluttering
of birds B 90 a'l
fxivr
h'Bu
uXig
TrtTroTijuTai,
tu
he
re erda,
Tre"l)f"iKv~i"u
chilled
11
62,
cp.
Find. Isthm.
6,40,
but also in
an
im- material
sense A 383 o'l
re ae
TreijpiKuai, nefp/jiKwi;shuddering
Demosth xviii.
323, (Ttmyyivai
grin
Hes. Scut.
268, Aristoph.
Pax 620. " We
may
also
without violence
place
here the almost
synonymous
Homeric
pluperfect,
iXiXiKTo
(fromkXiaow)
A.
39,
and
Ojowpe'j^oro
A
26,
for
'
to stretch one's
self' is
a
bodily
action
;
but in IT 834
o/jwpej^aroi noXe/j.iiieii'
is to lie
regardedas a
feeling
of the mind.
Perhaps
also
redrj-na
is of the
same
kind,
if it denoted
originally
the
staring
gaze
of astonishment,
4)
Verbs of mental states.
These have
certainly
to
a
lai-gedegree
been
developed
out of the
preceding
group,
for the action of the
body
was the
sign
of a certain
excitement of the
spirit.
But the transference of
meaning
cannot
ahvays
be
pointed
out so
clearly
as in the
case
of
Tre(ppiKa
and
opijjpix^aTat.
Here
belong
a/.nx??/^"a(
T
335, uXuXuKri^i^iai,
K
94, yeyrida
Q
559,
hidia and
heihuiua,
to be
compared
with
heiditrfToi.iai,
toXwa X
216,
tppiya
P
175,
KEtcrjdaTyrt.12,
28 Be.^
KeKun-nWiflujLiw
"I"
456, KE\apr]"')Ta
II
312, XeXii]-
^t(u
M
106, XtXi/j.i.ii""ii (I't- Xi(p)
Aesch.
Sept.380, f.iej.La(,)Q
and
^ijjora
(cp. i.iai/j.aw), idtfxrjXojg
E
708,
from the middle form of which the
i-eduplicated present /jei^iftXerai
T 343 ha,s been
formed, jKc'/^rry/iat
in
ordinary Greek,
fie^ipa
Aesch, Prom.
977,
reTriKci
F
176, -eTi-qtWtc
I
30, TeTa]fiiroQ
6
437,
rerXadi E
382, Trf^uCorfg
"" 6. Some of these
perfect
stems also
pass
into
noun-formation, as
is shown
by ai;i]x^^"J*'^'''
XvTvai. " In Latin memini and odi
belonghere,
the former of which
by
its
imperativememento, a
form
unique
in all Italian
languages,
is
proved
to be
a genuine
present.
Several
]}resentperfects
in Teutonic
languages
also denote emotions of the
mind, as Goth.
man-=ixiiJiOva,
Lat. memini,
6'j
I
dreaded=ck";^"/jLtat,
5)
Intensive
perfect-presents
from other verbs.
The
remaining
forms
may
be
arranged
in two subdivisions
:
a) Intransitive,
"[57
which
naturally
denote a condition which is
one degree stronger
and
fuller than that
expressedby
the
con-espondingpresent
form
(cp.
Butt-
mann
ii.^
89).
Hei-e
belongsaXaXiiai^aiby
the side of nXdadai
(y 313),
differing
from it much
as
'
roam
about
'
does from
'
wander.' The mean- ing
oi
fifjlpiiia comes out
clearly,
if we
compare
r
112
flpiQrjTi
ce ciihpea
KftpTTw
with n 384
wc
3'
i/TTo
XaiXawi ndira tceXdU))ftiftpSe x^'^'?
though
the intensive foice of the
redupliciition
is less evident elsewhere, e.g.
o
334
Tpa-KtCaiaiTOv Kni
KptiCJv
j)2'
o'irov
ftel^piOaaif,
SO the difference
CH. XVI.
INTENSIVE PERFECT-PRESENTS.
379
between //
ayopa
Tri-n-XyjOe (Pherecrates
Com. ii. 265
Trpiv ayopar
"mirXri-
eiiai)
and
wXi'idet{ttXtjH uvatiQ
oyopac)
is at most
very
slight,
and so
with
Te6j]X"
and daXXei. We see more of the intensive form in H 345
ayopi)
yirtT
'IXiov kr noXei
ctKpy
ctii})
TtJpnxv'ia,
and in the familiar use
of
TTETrniOa
by
the side of
TniOofiai.Kixpiit^'^'ce P
347,
and
Kf)(p??ro
tt
398
are
stronger
than
xpioj^uroc
and
eypiiTo.
Warschauer in the
essay
above-
mentioned
p.
19 wishes to take the Homeric
ftifii]Ka
often as an
intensive
flair
u),
and to
explain
thus the remarkable use
of the
pluperfect
'de
deorum
gradibus
aeterni roboris
plenorum,'e.g.
A 221
?/
^'
OuAv/i^oi
cc
flefi)iKu. Certainly
the same form occm-s
often
enough
of men
in the
same
sense,
where an especiallyvigorous
movement does not suit the
context,
e.g.
Z 495. But it is certain that
Ifltflt'iKet,
when thus
applied,
approximatesvery
closely
to the
imperfect,
and that
an entirely
false
sense
is introduced into the
passages
by
those who
try
to find in it
a
real
pluperfect
of
previouslycompleted
action. In the same
way
we have a
perfect
with the force of a
present
iiiA 11
rw
o'
avre
^(Xo^yiie/crjc 'A(l"poliri]
ule\
7rap//f/.t/:)/\w^T.
b)
Transitive.
In A 1 1 3
trpoftiftovXa
has
decidedly
an
intensive
tinge,
which has
entirelydisappeared
in the German
perfect-present
'
ich
will,'
and so
in
joeflpiijdoiQ
A
35,
which
approximates
as nearly
to the verbs of
bodily
action as ftiflovXa
does to those of mental condition
:
there are
also
KeKonwQ (T 335, TTETrXriyvla
E 763. A
very
clear
instance,
out of which a
temporal perfect
cannot be extracted
by any
kind of
dodges
or devices,
is
given
in
(cArjpwrvv
ireTaXuatje II 171.
Reduplication
has here much
the same
efiect as in TraiTrc't/Wttr. The intensive force has
disappeared
in
oiwyo
and
yiypLipug
'
o tuIq x^pfflr
oXtet/wj'
(Hesych.).
It is worth
noticing
that verbs
denoting
a state
appear
far more
often in these forms
158
than others do. An action often
seems
all the more energetic,
the more
it is
complete
within itself This is the
sense
in which
Rumpel
'
Die
Casuslehre
'p.
118 f.
speaks
of the
'
intensive
pregnancy
'
of the intran- sitive.
The circumstance that so
many perfects
of the earlier
stamp
are
used
intrausitively,
is
closely
connected with this. To this
list belongs
probably
the Indo-Germanic
vaida, perfect
from the root vld
see,
with
the
heightenedmeaning
of inner
sight
or knowledge (Skt.veda,
Zd.
vaedd,
2
sing.v6i(^td,
Gr.
fo'iou,
Goth,
vait),
which lost its
reduplication,
it is
true,
in the
very
earliest
times,
but was certainly
characterised
originallyby
this device of
lang\iage, just
as
much as
the Homeric
ce^Kwc,
in order to
distinguish
the clearer inner
sight
fi-om the external.
For the current
explanation
'
I have seen
'
and hence
'
I know
'
has
much too sensualistic and
empiricala
flavour to suit
very
ancient
times.
In this examination we have omitted all forms in which it is
pro- bable
or
easOy possible
that the
present
meaning originated
from a fully
developedtemporal perfect.
We
might
in this sense distinguish
between
primary
and
secondaryperfect-presents.
Those are
secondary
in which
the
meaning attaching
to the
present,
and indeed also to the aorist
forms,
of the
gradual
or the sudden
origination
or
of the
coming
into
being
of the action is excluded in the
perfect:
this is the case
certainly
in
'i-ffrq-Ka
which
presumes
the
'
petrifaction
'
of the movement which is
presented
in
I'crrao-Qat, arrjiai,
and in
(ii-fij]Ka
in the
meaning
I have
380 PERFECT STEM AND EORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
stept out,
I stand
firin,
whence the
adjectiveftfftci-io-c
is derived from
the
perfect
stem fttj^u.
To this class
belongs
also the familiar Homeric
u/i^n/Jt'/^/^ica
A 37
OQ Xpvarjy ap"piftil^i]KaQ,
which I
formerlyexplained
erroneously
as
'
wander round.'
Passages
like P 359 and the substan-
tiv^e
ai^(pi/yuiTic
E 623
prove
that the
present perfect
denotes
a firm
and,
properlyspeaking,stridingposition
to
pi'otect
an object.
This was the
explanationgivenby Aristarchus,as Aristonicus testifies: crcra
/^erafjwpay
tt: TfTpa-rro^ujv vn"pf.ia^Elf.
This view is now with
justicegenei'ally
adopted by
most commentators. Hence this is a
secondaryperfect-
present.
We must come to the same conclusion about the Lat.
co-epi
(Lucret. [once
:
and four times in Plautus
:
cp.
Munro
on
Lucr. iv.
619]),
159
contracted
coej)i,
like
ince2)i.
Of the Greek
perfects
with a
present
force I
am inclined to
interpret
in the same
way eypi^yopa,
redapcrTjKa,
TidvTjKa,
vevufiiKa^ TrcTroij/^at, irK^ujii^^ai, kmvovhuKu,
netpvKa.
It is some- times
diflicult to
decide,as so often in
questions
of
syntax,
because
we
have no criteria for the time in which a definite
tisage
established
itself. It is not
uncommonly just
as
possible
that
very
ancient tenden- cies
continued to show themselves in a
usage,
as that later ones were at
work.
So much is certain. Even the
language
of Homer is
acquainted
with the
employment
of the
perfect
form to denote
completed
action.
In
clearlyrecognisable
distinction from the
extremely
numerous in- stances
of
a
purelypresent usage, justdiscussed,Ave meet with
perfects
like T 122
i]Cr\
aryp
yiyov icrdXo^"
Yjvpvtrdevc,
P 542
ujc tiq
re
Xfwv
Kara
ravpoy
ihr]hwQ,
E 204 kq''WioyeiXrjXovda,
F 57 KciKiiiv
fVf^'
orraa
iopyag,
A 12.5 aWa
rci
fity
iroXlwy
tL,nrpad()f.ie}', ra ^e?a(TTai,F 134
TvoXejjLOQ
li
TV iivavTai,
/u
453
tlpr)jxiya /.tvdoXoyeviiy.
Those are note- worthy
instances in which
one
and the same
perfect
is used in two
ways,
e.g. p
190
2/)yiip/jefiftXwKe ^laXitrra ")/^"pby
the side of the
purelypresent
"KapjiipftXijjKE quoted
above.
Probably
this latter
usage
is much older.
Peihaps
we should
represent
to ourselves the
way
in which the
present
of
completed
action was
developed
out of the intensive
present
somewhat
as follows.
By
the side of the intensive
present
there was in
many
cases
from the firsta non-intensive
present
formed from the same stem. The dis- tinction
between the two
necessarily
became more precise,
as time went on.
The non-intensive
or ordinarypresent,e.g.
oXXvjjhi,'ipxof^iai, yiyiuxTKw,
inasmuch
as it
expressed
a less
vigorous
action to start
with, by degrees,
as
compared
with the
perfectpresent,
shifted into the form for the
(so
to
speak) incipient
or
growing, attempted,intended,px'eparatory
action
;
while on the other hand the
perfectpresente.g.
oXwXu, tXi'/XvOa, 'iyiwKa
denoted the
opposite
to all
this,
the
completed,full,
finished action.
Owing
to the fact that a
past tense,
the
pluperfect,
was
very
often
formed from the
perfectstem,
and not
uncommonly
a future
also,
this
contrasting usage got
more and more established
;
and as the instinct of
language
is
directed,as time
goes on,
much less to the
ancient,
delicate
and, so to
speak,qualitative
and more
physical
distinctions between
syno-
160
nymous
forms,
than to
easily
conceived distinctions useful for the con- nexion
of
speech,
the
perfect
was used more and more to
express
a
stage
of
time distinct from the
present.
The last
step
in this
development,
viz. the
change
of the
present
of
completed
action into a
past
tense of
action
generally,
is
prepaied
for
perhaps
in later Gi-eek
prose
" a question
which stillcalls for
thoroughinvestigation
" but is
never
carried out in
!
CH. xYi.
PERSONAL TERMINATIONS OF THE PERFECT-ACTIVF. 381
Greek
: [cp.
Winer's Grammar
p.
340,
with Moulton's note
(E.
T. ed.
2)].
The existence of the
aorist,
which in Greek is so
fullydeveloped,pre- served
it from this. On the other hand the so-called
perfecium
his-
toricum of the Romans,
the
prevalentcorrespondingusage
of the
perfect
in
Sanskrit,
and the narrative use
of the Teutonic
perfect,
to which has
been
given
indeed the name of
preterite,
or even
of
imperfect,represent
the final
point
in the
long series,
in which the different
stages
can
be
clearlydistinguished.
How the
present
of
completed
action can
change
into a
past
is shown most
strikinglyby
the
exclusivelypopular use^
especially
in St)uth
Germany,
of the
periphrastic perfect
'
he has
done,
said
'
etc. in narrative. Doubtless the
comparison
of
languages
which
are not
cognate
would also be able here to
explain
and confirm much.
Thus W.
V.
Humboldt in his work
'
Ueber die Verschiedenheit des
menschl.
Sprachbaues
'
p.
267 mentions that in the Huasteca
language
the same syllable
serves to denote the violence of
an action,
and to
express
the
past.
We have here the
same starting-point
and the
same
final
point
as
in the Indo-Germanic
languages,
and we
may
probably
conjecture
that there were
also similar intermediate
stages
between the
two.
II. THE PERFECT ACTIVE.
In no tense is there such an essential difference between the form of
the active and that of the middle as
in the
perfect.
Almost without
ex- ception
the
perfect
middle follows the
primitive
method of formation of
the verbs in
-^t,
while the
active,though
it has also
preserved
some
relics of this method of
formation,
in the
vastly predominating
number
of verbs
goes
back to a disyllabic
stem
ending
in a
vowel. The
only 161
distinctive mark common to all
perfect
forms is
redviplication.
Now
that we have treated of this
generally,
we must divide our
subject-matter,
and discuss the
perfect
active
by
itself. In
doing
so we start with the
terminations,
and then turn to the formation of the stem. It is
only
later on
that we come to the
peifect
middle with its
essentially
different
characteristics
;
and
this,
like the
active,we
shall deal with first in the
indicative. The forms
proceeding
from the different
perfectstems,
viz.
the
pluperfect,
the moods and verbal nouns of the
perfect,
and the future
of the
perfect
stem form the close of the whole
widely ramifying
dis- cussion.
A)
Personal Terminations of the
Indicative.
The indicative of the
perfect
has
long
since taken its
place
in the
system
of the Greek verbal forms
among
the main
tenses,
i.e.
by
the side of the
present
and the future. The
primary personalendings,
which have not
suffered the
slightest
alteration in the
middle,
and in the active
only
differ
very
slightly
from those of the tenses
mentioned, cleailypoint
to
this common
character. In Greek it is
only
the infinitive and the
par- ticiple
of the
perfect
which have terminations
entirelydiffering
from those
of the
present.
In the
cognate languages,
on the
contrary,
the
case is
quite
otherwise. The Sanskrit and Zend
perfectpoints,
it is
true, by
the
diphthong
e
in the
middle,
which is characteristic of
primary forms, to
the fact that the
perfect
is one of the
present
formations,
and the
ending
382 TERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
"
of the 2
sing.
mid. -se
agrees completely
with the Greek
-aoi.
But in the
active
we can
notice no
remarkable likeness of the
personal
terminations
to those of the
present.
The 1
sing,
and 3
sing.perf.
are without
any
terminations
;
the 1
plur.
has not
-mas,
but the
secondary -ma,
the
3
pi.-MS,
which
occurs
also in various
past
tenses. The Latin
perfect
too does not
correspond
at all
completely
in its terminations to the
pre- sent
; though
this is less
surprisinghere,
seeing
that in Latin the dis- tinction
between the two kinds of
personal
terminations is almost
entirely
obliterated
everywhere.
It is however
noteworthy
that the
only
ter- minations
which are
quitepeculiar
to the
perfectdistinguish
tliistense
quite as
definitely
from the
present,
as
from all other tenses. In the
2 sina:.
-"""
Slit,
-tha,
Zend
-thn,
Gr.
-ada,
Lat, -sti
162
correspond.
"We discussed this termination
on
p.
34 fF.
;
it
may
be
placed indifferently
under the head of the
primary oi-
the
secondary.
Is^oYQOver,
m(TBa=vettha is the
only
instance
showing
the two termina- tions
with the
same
root. But for the Latin
perfect,
forms like
vvH-sti,
legi-sti as
contrasted with
vides,legisare of much
importance
in deter- mining
the connexion of this tense. For the
Gi-eek,
the
question
is
whether the
greater agreement
of the Greek
perfect
with the
present
in its
terminations is
a
very
ancient feature which has been here
preserved,or a
later
formation,
which
only arose on
Greek soil. I have
no
doubt about
the
answer to this
question.
"We have had
reason to think that the
perfect
was originallynothing
but
an intensive
present.
How then
could the almost
complete identity
of the terminations in
Greek,
and
the extensive resemblance in the
case of the middle in Sanskrit
rest
upon
chance ? It is therefore
extremely probable
that the
deviating
forms of
the
perfect
active in the two Asiatic
languages are based
upon
later
mutilations. "We found
a complete
loss of the
ending
in the 1
sing,
present
also. Now
evidentlyreduplicated
forms
might more
easily
than
others suffer such a loss,
because of their
length
and heaviness. But in
the
case of Sanskrit this abbreviation in the active is
a
very
ancient
one. Delbriick
(p.46)
also
gives
instances of the 2
plur.entirely
with- out
an
ending
from authorities
as earlyas the
Vedas,
e.g.
daild like
a
possible
*C)iloTe. "Who would venture to
regard
such forms
as com- plete
?
They
have
evidently
lost their termination. Now
why
should
not the mi of the first
person,
and the ti of the third
person
in the sin- gular
have
disappearedjust as
well ? Other
attempts
to
explain
/orms
like
yijovd,
yeyo)t=:Skt. ^a-(jana we saw on
p.
25 to be untenable.
It is still easier to understand the abbrevintion of
an oi'iginal -anti,re- tained
in Greek, into us
in the 3
pi.
We shall find
presently
some
analogies
for this from later Greek. The
preservation
of the terminations
in Greek was evidently
assisted
by
the
meaning
of the
perfect,
which until
comparatively
late times
remained, as we
saw,
distinct from that of the
past.
The
perfect
middle
experienced
this influence most
fully.
It shows
in its whole foi-mation
a high antiquity,
and other traces lead
us to the
opinion
that the middle voice of the
perfect
in
early periods
of the life
1G3
of the Greek
language was more commonly
formed and
employed
than
the active
;
for
many
of the active forms
are based
upon
latei"
formations^
which
are still to a great
extent unknown to the
language
of
Homer,
while in the middle little of the kind is to be
recognised.
Hence we
CH. XVI.
PERSONAL TERIVIINATIONS OF THE PERFECT-ACTIVE. 383
have a right
to assume
that the full termiuations of the
pei'fect
middle
uai, (xai, Tcii,
vrcti
contributed to
keep
up
the consciousness of the con- nexion
of the
perfect
with the
present.
We now proceed
to the several terminations. Two instances of
a
1
sing.perf.
act. in
-^t
are
preserved
to
us,
both from the
same root :
yo/^"7Ut i.6'i'"'^'?~jW'
'
"7r/"Tra/^Ku^ Hesych.
and
ifff't'/ii
"
eTrtVra/iat^vpakovmoi.
The
significance
of the two forms for the doctrine of the
perfect
I have
pointed
out
ixlready
in Stud. i.
1,
p.
239 ff. As
'irraidi by
its
a
shows
that it is a
form of a
peculiarkind, we
have to consider
especially /o/o?7jlx(,
which we brought
into notice
on
p.
26,
when
discussing
the
personal
endings.
The vowel before the termination will
occupy
us
again
here- after.
Here we have to do with the termination itself,
oicrji^u
is men- tioned
as
Aeolic also
by Choeroboscas,
p.
867,
and in the
'ETrij.iepiiTjjio\
'Ofitjoov (Anecd.
Oxon. i.
p.
332, 2):
ol M.AloXelg to olda
o'ldrjf^a Xeyovm;
cp.
E. M.
p.
618,
55. It is
easy
to
say
that here the
alreadypresent
perfect
has
passedwholly
into the
present
inflexion of the verbs in
-fii.
But even though
the
analogy
with the
conj.
e(^"w and fut.
elll^aio
is
un-
mistakeable,
and did not
escape
even
the
ancients,
still it wovild be
an
entire mistake to
regard
the form as one
purelypresent
in its
character,
and
wholly foreign
to the
perfect
olca. For the
oi
pointsdistinctly
to
a
perfect
form,
and I do not see
why
a
very
ancient form should not haA'e
'
Ijeen
preserved
here. Delbrilck too
(Altind.
Verb.
p. 24)
agrees
with
me
in
holding
that the termination -mi
once
held its
place
after the
a
of
the 1
sing.
The loss of the termination
may
have
begun
as in the
pre- sent
(p. 30)
with the
apocope
of the
i,
and
only
afterwards have
ex- tended
itself to the nasal. The nasal isolated at the end of the word
disappearedentirely,
as so
often after an a (e.g.
7ro^a
= Skt.
padam, ehi^n
164
zzzculiksham).
I do not venture to decide whether the course in Sanskrit
was
the same.
But the loss of the
ending
is
firmly
established for
similar forms of the
present
in Zend
(cp.
p.
26)
and for the so-called
imperative
or more properlyconjimctive
forms in -dni
(Delbrlick
p.
26)
in the Veda dialect.
For the 2
sing,
the termination -9a or -ffda is
characteristic, though
G-reek has retained it
only
in
olcrdn,
which we have
already on
p.
34
compared
with the Skt.
vet-tha,
Zend
voir^td,
Goth, vaist. The Latin
perfect
termination -stl,on
the
contrary
shows
a remai-kable
similarity
to the -tha of Sanskrit and
Zend, so that on
p.
36 we compared
dedi-sti
with Skt. dadi-tha and Zd.
{fra)daddt]ia.
hibi-sti
answers to Skt.
j)apd-tlia, fuisti
to Skt. hahhuvi-tha. There is
nothing surprising
in
the fact that the full
ending
-adu afterwards became softened into the
-q,
"
which runs through
all tenses and
moods, especially
as even
present
forms like
i'ot/jc, tLQijq,
Dor.
afieXyiQ(p.139)
have retained
no other
sign
of the
person
than this
simpleq.
The Doric
"laaiQ
Theocr. xiv. 34
quite
follows the rule of the
pi-esent.
The 3
sing,
has
as a
rule
no
sign
of the
person
either in Sanskrit
or
in
Zend, so
that
e.g.
^a-^dna
and the
equivalentyi-yove,dnd(;a
and
ii'-ntoxi
are quiteparallel.
Some stems in
a
indeed form
a 3
sing,
in
du,
e.g.
daddu
cicutKe,
tasthdu
eTTtji^e ;
but this
diphthong certainly
does
not contain a
proper
personalsuffix,
for
apparently
it
appears
in the 1
sing.
also,though
not till
post-Vedic
Sanskrit. Hence Latin here with its
'
With
regard
to the
y
as representing/ it is sufficient here to refer to Princ.
ii.
p.
228 fE.
384 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
(ledi-t, steti-t,
cpcidi-t
surpasses
the
languages
mentioned. But the well-
authenticated Doric "laari
(0.
I.
no. 5773,
Theocr.
xv.
146)
is still
more
complete,
for it has
preserved
even the final vowel. The usual Greek
form, on
tlie other hand,
is more weakened than the
ordinarypresent
form
;
stillon
p.41
we came across
Aeolic
presents
like 3
sing.yeXai, cicoi,
which have retained
no more
of the
personal
termination than
yiyoye,
and it is no
better even with
Xiyn
and the like.
In the 1
plur.
Sanskrit has
only
the
ending
-ma. Neither
-mas,
nor
the
specifically
Vedic -masi is established for
perfects.
The Doi-ians on
165 the
contrary
did not
give
up
the fuller termination
-p.ee
even in the
perfect:airoKfKV(pai.i"c (Reiske,
Dind.
t-mKEKixljafitc), Aristoph.Lys. 1003,
uTrerTTaXKUfjLiv,
U. I. no. 2670, 2,
any
more than the Romans their
-nius.
The 2
plur.
is not
distinguished
from the
present.
There
are
only
a
few
peculiar
forms in -Qe instead of the usual
-rt.
Of these
only one
properlybelongshere,
because it is the
only
one found in the
indicative,
TTETrotrdtthrice in Homer in the
phrase
tTrel
khku
iroWa "Keitoadi. T
99,
K 465, i//
53. So Herodian and
our
M.SS. Aristarchus read
Trt-raaQf,
not
as
though
he derived the form from the un-Homeric imrdnBai
possess,
as Eustathius
thinks,but, as
Lobeck
saw on Buttmann ii.^
25, as a
kindred form to the
participleTmraBvla,
the a of which seemed to him
to suit this form better than the
o
Avhich
only
appears
before the
"'
of
Triiroidu." There are also two
imperative
forms of the like
formation,
which
we
take into consideration
here,
because
they
are
indispensable
for our decision as to the termination
:
uvwyQe
"y^
437
[Eur.]
Rhes. 987
and
Eypt]yopde
11
371,
S 299
typijyopde(Kaerroc.
" A third
imperative
foi-m in the
Hymn,
in
Apoll. Pyth.
360
ir]ov
ce
Trpoc^vAo^^Of
is
without
reduplication.
The form is too extra
ordinaiy
to be
credible,
and the whole line is
wanting
in the best M.SS. It seems to me that
Lobeck
on
Buttmann ii.^25 saw
the
truth,
in
holding
that the
composer
of the line meant to write
rrjov
?e
Trpo(pvXa-)(de,
and that with
a license
not
unexampled
in late
Greek,
he formed
a
jterfect
middle without redu- plication.
" There is still less
authority
for the form oladt in the
place
of
the usual
'iirre,
which in Bachmann's Anecd. ii.
p.
358 is
quoted
from
Sophocles,evidently
with reference to 0. R. 926
fidXiara
8'
avTov
(nrar' el KciroiaB'
ottov.
This is the
reading
of La. But the editors
justly
assume a
corrup- tion
as a
result of
itacism,
and
print
KarifrB'." On the
strength
of these
five forms "
though
he omits to mention the last
two, "
Westphal
INIethod.
Gr. i.
2,
52 starts the
theory
that the 2
pi.
act. had
originally
the
ending
6e as
well as -e.
He will not find
any
one to
agree
with him. Such
unexampled
foi'ms
point
to
special
aben-ations of the
language.
Butt- mann
ii.2 24 was certainlyright
in
saying
'
from the
similarity
of sound
to that of the
passive
terminations
{ririKpdt, i(^BctpQe etc.)
the
r some-
166
times
passes
into 6.' The want of
a
vowel
belonging
to the stem misled
the instinct of the
language,
which was used to such
groups
of letters
only
in the middle,
into
confusing
them with the middle terminations. In
the
case of
urw^^i
this view is confirmed
by
the 3
sing, ar^x^w
A 189.
Or
are we
really
to conjecture
for the 3
sing,imper.
also
an
old
by-form
in -0w? No
one
will
readily
believe this. For
typ^yopdt we
have also to
take into account tlie middle infinitive
kyp-qyopBai k
67.
The 3
plur.
with its
decidedlyprimary ending
does
more
than
any
CH. XVI. THE PERSONAL TERMINATIONS IN THE INDICATIVE. 385
other
peison
to secure to the
perfect
its character as one
of tlie
principal
tenses.
Examples
of the Doric forms in
-air"
have been
quoted already
on
p.
4G f. We
may
add from an inscription
edited
by
Ross no. 81
araTtOiKuiri,
{rom
Sophron. (.")("'
"''^^
fr. 51
Ahr.,
e^:7rf9ai
am
fr.
75,
/VctiTt"
"//ooua"
Hesych. (1)(cp.
'iKeiy
iXjjXvdeicu), kjinopaiTi' Ttrevy^nai
ib. That the Aeolians remained
equally
faithful to the
piimary ending
is shown
by
Boeot.
aTrocfCoai
0t C. I. 1569
a
iii.1.
35,
Lesb.
"n-eiraymmv
(Ale.
fr.
34,
2
Be.^),i^eKpkuian- (Sappho
1 fr. 137
Be.^),as
Ahrens is
pro- bably
right
in
writing
on
the
analogy
of
Xiyoinn' etc.;
the M.SS.
give
forms in
-uai.
For the Ionic dialect the curious
shortening
of the
a
must also be mentioned
:
this is well authenticated
by
two
passages
in
Homer
[n-edivkuai Ti]\iOuii)i'Ta
j;
114, Xt\i)y\d(Tiv
ItraStoTm X
304)
and
by
Herodian ii. 16
L.,
where two
passages
from
Xenophanes
"
{^tnaQr]Kain,
ire(p)']i'(iiTi)
and
one
from Antimachus
(t'EiEVKctrriv) are
quoted.
Herodian
knows of
iTepa
TrXt'iiTTa,
Nicand. Ther. 789 has
(.mcMjkCifri
x"A"'-
Em-
pedocles
has
v.
314
XeXoyxcim,
v. 336
TrtTn'iyanrn'. Cp.
Merzdorf Comment.
])hilol.
sem.
Lips.
p.
55. We
may
to a
certain extent
compare
with this
Ionic
shortening
the Doric
shortening
of
-ui'ti
to
-a-t,
of w^hich however
only
one
example probably
is
preserved
to
us,
idoj^an- elwdftai
Hesych.,
so
that the
case
is not
very
firmly
established. Greek is elsewhere also
inclined to
reject
a v
after
o (cp.
k-Kitro-i'and the 3
pi.
mid. in
-arat,
-aro).
The desii-e to
distinguish
the 3
pi.
fi-om the 3
sing,
huidered else- where
this
tendency
to consult convenience. No wonder that in the
perfect,
where the 3
pi.
was
otherwise
sharply distinguished
from the 3
sing,
here and there convenience carried the
day.
While in such
cases a ten- dency
to internal
shorteuingappears,
which is
quite
unknown in the
present,
elsewhere an external
shortening
must be
noted, whereby
167
the Greek
language
tm-ns into the
path consistentlypursued by
Sanskrit. Third
persons
plur.
in
-av,
i.e.with
a secondary ending,
are
recorded in several instances. Ahrens
quotes
a-KiaraXKav C. I.
no. 3058
1.
5,
3048 1.
4,
3052 1.
4,
and we
may
add
KeKi^LKuv
from the
Delphic
in- scription
of the
Amphictyons (1.58)published by
Wescher in 1868. All
the other known instances date from the Alexandrine
times,as
TrapeiXrjipai'
C. I. 31 37 1.
38,
TEcpiJiKay
Lycophr.252,
topyav
Batrachomyom.
178. Sextus
Empu-icus
adv.
gramm.
"
213
explains
such forms
as Alexandrine,
and
quotes
as an example
tXiiXvOav
;
others of the
same
kind like
ewpuKcw,
TTu.ffffrijKnr,
Tziiroidar are quoted by
Sturz de dial. Alex.
p.
58 from the
LXX.
:
for the
occurrence
of such forms in the New Test.
cp.
A. Butt-
mann
New Test. Grammar
p.
43
(E.T.)[Moulton's
Winer
p. 90].
Un- doubtedly
the
analogy
of the aorists and of the other 3
persons plur.
in
-rruv
which w-ere constantlygi'owingmore numerous
in the Alexandrine
time,
favoured the rise of such forms
;
and all the
more so that the
syntactical
distinction between the
perfect
and the
past
tense
was
less
sharply
main- tained
at that time. We thus
see that at a
very
late date the Greek
language
had arrived at
pretty
much the
same
point
as
that at which
we
find Sanskrit in the earliest times. For
as
in the
perfect
active the 3
pi.
'
alone had the definite
recognizabletype
of the
primary form,
this
change
in late Greek of the old
-a(n
into
-a. really
did
away
'with
every
definite
mark of the
perfect
active
as a
principal
tense. But the middle
always
remained faithful to the old
type.
And thus
even
in the
very
latest
period provision
was
made for
separating
the
perfect
from the
past
tenses,
c G
386 PERFECT STEM AND FOEMS CONSTRUCTED FROM
It!
ch. xvi.
B)
Formation
of the
Stem.
a)
Eelics of the
primary
formation.
The old view that
perfect
forms like
ftij^a-^ur, eaTd-rs are
syncopated
or
shortened from the
longer
forms
ftfft))Kai.iei
,
ecrrrji^ure
is
even in Butt-
mann
carried out with
a positiveness,
which astounds
iis
in the
case of
an enquirer
of such
insight
and
independence.
And
yet
this view leads
to the
assumption,
advanced at i.^
416,
that forms like
cecaam cthacjc,
1 68
^cpacKTi fXEfjinwc,
yeyna"i yeyawc
are to be
regarded
in the
same
way
'
even
though
the
perfect
in
rj^a,
from which
they
may
be
presumed
to have been
abbreviated,
does not exist.' In this
phrase
"'
maybe presumed
to have been
'
[German tcdrcn,
the
'conjunctive
of
non-reality']
Buttmann's scientific
conscience
betrays itself,
which could not after all
quite
free itself of
doubts as to this
theory.
Elsewhere this
thinker, usuallyso
rigorous,
escapes
more
easily
from the difficulties which resulted from
adhering
to
the doctrine of
syncope,
as in ii.''
23,
where he is
treating
of
KEKfmx^'.
As of
course a *KEKpay(-di. or anything
of that
kind,
which would have
to be assumed in Obedience to this
theory,
would contradict all
analogy,
he
gets
o\it of it in the
following
way
:
'
as some perfects
of this kind
acquire a
pi'esentforce,
these
acquire
also
a
2
sing,imper.
with the
termination
-61,'
where he
seems to
forget
that this termination
belongs
only
to verbs of the so-called
conjugation
in
-/it.
How
easilymight
this
-81 have
guided
him to a truer
course,
had he not
resolutely
made
up
hi-
mind
on
this
point
to stick to the old method ! I do not know whether
at
the
presentday,
when
Ahreiis,Boppand
Kiihnerhave
long
ago recognized
the
truth,
any
one
holds from conviction to the doctrine that
e.g. pt-
flifKam,by
a quite unexampled
loss of the
k
and
shortening
of the
stem-
vowel,
became
fSeftaatri,
and that
hldi^iev came
in
a
similar
way
from
htColKcij.i(t'.
But there is still
no
lack of
men,
who either
thoughtlessly
sing
the old
song
of
'
syncxDpatedperfects,' or
try
to
prove
their claim
to
be
'
scholars
'
of the
purest
water
by showing
themselves unmoved
by
the doctrines of
'
comparative philologists
'
on
such
points.
And
yet
even
Lobeck El. Path. i. 380
says
in
plain
blunt words
'
perfectaquibus
syncope
praetenditur'
*
sequuntur exemplum praesentis'iara/jLer, ciconey
etc. sine ulla
syncopae
contagione.'
The
personalendings
of the dual and
plural
indicative
were attached
directly
to the
perfect
stem
in
a
limited number of archaic verbs. These
foi-ms
naturally
are
related to those with the vowel
n,
which became the
rule,precisely as
the
present
foi-ms of the
same
kind
are to those with
the thematic vowel. If
any
one
regardsrirXaf^iet'
as
syncopated,
he
"
would have to maintain the
same view of
TiOe/^er, 'inraiiiv,
and even of
'"9
tfiai.tei',
ecofitf.
Indeed strict
consistency
would demand that he should
also
explain
forms like
earafiai, cecofiai
and
ultimately
the whole
perfect
middle
as syncopated.
The
question
here
naturally
deals
altogether
with
primitive
forms of the most ancient formation. In the
singular
no
forms
of the kind occur.^ But
as
in the
plural
the full
endings give a
hold
to
the short
stems,
for which
they supply
as
it
were
the
framewoi-k, so
the
same
holds
good
of the termination -di in the 2
sing,imper.,
of the suffix
'
Lobeck on Buttm. ii.* 27 shows that
singulars
like *T"'T\oa and the
likej
which used I0 be
senselesslypresupposed, do not exist.
CH. XVI.
PIIIMARY FOEMATION OF THE STEM. 387
-rat or
-jj-fv
in the
infinitive,
and of the suffix
-07- (for/or)
of the
par- ticiple.
But there
are
other forms which must not be omitted }iere.
Though
we
are, strictly speaking,onlydealing
in this section with the
perfectindicative,
still in
our
survey
of the
existing
stock of
primitive
flexions
we
must of course
take into account nob
mez-ely
the
impera- tives
and
participles,
but also the
pluperfects.
The demonstrable forms
of this kind
are, alphabetically arranged,
the
following:
1) cirwy/ufFliymn. Apoll.Pyth. .'550, cnwxOi
^
.158,
Aesch.
Choeph.
772,
Eur. Ale. 1044-. rii
w)(Of,arwx^w
have been tieated above
p.
384.
2) fttf3a-a(7i
B 134. For the double
o
compare p.
48. Ths con- tracted
ftepdcTi
is
quoted
from the
tragedians.
As
l3ej3dm
is to
/je/jaair/,
so
is
fDtfjws
to l3tj-)au)Q.
The latter is confined
to
Homer
(S 477),
the
former to Attic
poetry.
In the feminine
loefjwaa
makes its
appearance
as
early
as v 14,by
the side of
inftfjjav'ia
li 81. These forms will have
to be discussed later on. The Homei-ic infin. is
i^tftanev (P 359),
in
Eiu'ip.
and Herod.
jhl3uiai.
3
plur.plupf.jjei3a(Tay
P 286.
3) ftt(3pwT(.Q only
in
Soph. Antig.
1022.
4) ytyu(,t(n
A
325,
also in Hes. and
Aj)oll.Rhod.,
inf.
iK-yiyafiiv
E
24S, ytyaOtra
I
456, tK-yeyavia
T 199.
yfywf
fem.
ytyCjrja
in the
tragedians, plupf.
tKytyan^v
k
138.
6)
ciZawQ
p
519,
hcaam Callim.
Ap.
46.
6) ceihtnet'
I
230,
Att.
recifjiEv
Thuc. iii.
56,
lf.ciam "L 663 and
Attic,
imper.
ceicidt S
342,
Att. liciOi
(Aristoph.),
inf.
^ft^/jusr k 381, part.
Beilwres A
431,
Att.
heCiwc,
iceuLirai' E 790. The Homeric
reduplica- tion
is
quite
after the fashion of the intensive verbs.
7) eyp7]yop6tcp. p.
384.
170
8)
iiicTov I
27, iiKTriy
A
104,
toty/^jtr
Soph. Aj. 1239,
Eur. Heracl.
681, Cyclops
99.
9) EiXiiXiwd^er
I
49,
y
81, eXi'jXv^ey
Cratin. Com. ii. 153 with the
variant
eXijXvdnei'
Achaeus fr.
22, Nauck, eXy'jXvTe
ib. fr. 41.
10)
TtdidfTi X
52,
redicifjer,
TeOruTE in Attic
prose-writers,
ridi'adi
X
365,
TediaTU) O 496 and
Attic,
inf.
TEQvdjiei'ai
il
225,
Ttdiavai
Attic,
Tedyr]b)C
P
161,
cnroridradai'
fx
393,
iridraffav Attic.
11) 'id/iev
in Homer and
Herodotus,
Att.
'irr/jLEv,
in all Greek
taroi',
/(TT-f,
plupf.ji'Tf.ier,
IjfTTein the
tragedians,
dual
i'lTrr]!'
Aristoph.
12) Kiicpu)(_di Aristoph.Yesp. 198,
Ach.
335,
but
plur. Kenpdytre
Yesp.
415.
13) i.tij.uifif.v
I
641, ^ifjxaB^
n
160,
iiEfiaam
K 208, ^iif.iaror
K
433,
imper.
yut/iarw
Y
355,
i^ie^uwq
often in
Homer,
also in Pindar
; plupf,
lufjuaffut'
N 337.
14) ixenioXwi'Tioy-
Tvxoyrwy
Hesych.,a
form like
/3"/3pwT"c, only
pass- ing
over into the
analogy
of the
present,
whereof more later on. A
similar method of formation is
presentedby
the aor. ii3Xw
ifiui]
Hesych.,
both from the
present
/3A.wt("w.
15)
TrsTrtirrdiOr rremaOt Aesch. Eum.
599, ETreiriBi^iey
B
341,
S 55.
16)
TTiTTucrde with the variant iriTraade
(Aristarchus),
discussed
on
p.
384.
17)
TTtTrrrjijJC
I 354,
TreTrrrjwTec,
Tre-rrrrjvla.
18)
EfTTUfier
X
466, d"pE(7TarE
A
340, tffrrjTE
with
a
very singularlong
vowel A
243, 246,
Eardai A
245, Eararov
^
284, imper.
Earadi
X
489,
inf.
EffrafiEyai
A 410, lardfiEy
M
316, partic.eutewq Herod., EnraoToc
T
79 etc. The Attic forms
e.g.
irrTayai partic.
Idrwc etc.
even
where
they
c c 2
388
PERFRCT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED
FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
differ ft-om tlie Homeric do not need to Le
established
by
references.
3
pi.plupf.efrrufrai'
E 781.
19) rirXuf^itv
V
311, iinper.
rtrXu^i A
586, TtrXciTU)
tt 275, inf. TtrXa-
fJFvai
r 307, TfrXanti'y
209, partic.TerXTjoreg
E
873, TerXrivlav 23.
We
may
call attention
once more here,out of the
alphabetical
arrange-
"^'1
ment. to
tlieBoeotian inro-CECi'iafOi,
mentioned
alreadyon
p. 384,
in the
inscription
from
Orchomenus,
which differs from
an Ionian
*c"c6a(n
only by
its r6.
To these archaic forms from verbal stems and roots of the
most
primitive stamp
we must add from a much later time two isolated
formations from stems
evidently derivati^'e,
which
are
clearlycon- nected
with each other, but are
otherwise
quite isolated,viz.
20) heTiiwvd^iev
Eubulus Com. iii.248 several
times,Alexis ib.
429,
ve^tiTTvarai Plato ib. ii. 663.
21) "tfn'inraf.iEv, quoted by
Athen.
x.
423
a
from
Aristophanes
and
Hermippus (Com.
ii.
407).
The
passage
of the latter
poet
"
rjpKTTavai
Ka\
Trapicrravai
tovtI
evidently
contains
an assonance.
Pei-haps
both forms
owe their
ex- istence
to
parody,
or some
such
play
upon
words,
somewhat
as in the
German
'
umgebrungen,''gespiesen.'^
Lobeck
on Buttm, ii.* 28 derives
Ot^ftTTj'aj'ai from
?/|fj((rra)ai
by 'synecdrome.'
b)
Formation of the stem
by
the addition of
a
vowel.
While the
perfects
of
a primitive
character
just
discussed
were
quite
in a minority,
the formation of the stem
by means of
a vowel became
the rule
throughout.
This
vowel, by
the addition of which
perfectsof
root-verbs
acquireda disyllabic, or
in the
case of
syllabicreduplication a
trisyllabic stem,
appears
regularly
as a
and is weakened into
" only
in
the 3
sing.
The stem
yfyora
of
y"yo)'"-/L"f
r
is to the shorter
yeya
of
yf'yo-yi/f I',
the stem TTinoidu of
"KEirviBa-fitr
is to the ttettiQ
occurring
in-
l-TZEniO-fifv as
the
present
stem ia i.e. kaa
(p.119)
is to
tc.
The
impei""
feet form 'iuTt is to
i^rrrtpreciselyas
o'i^ute to VoTf. The
a
of such
disyllabicpresent
stems
e.g.
even
that of
oya-/m",
Trira-^jai
seemed to
us on
p.
123 an expansion
of the stem
analogous
to the thematic vowel.
And I see absolutelyno reason to
deny
the
same character to the final
vowel of the
perfect
stem. It is
only
the fact that this vowel does not
appear
in Sanskrit with
anything
like the same
regulaiityas in
Greek,
and that in tliis
language
the
a
is limited to the 1 and 3
sing,
while in
the other forms there is sometimes no vowel
found,
sometimes i before
1 '^2
the
personalendings,
which has led scholars to
regard
the vowel of the
perfectas a phenomenon
of
an altogether peculiar
kind.
Bopp Vergl.
Gr. ii.'^497 calls the i of Sanskrit forms like
httup-i-ma a
'
couuecting
vowel,' but
yet
conjectures
that this i
'
may
at an earlier time have been
a.' Hence he
evidentlyregards
this vowel as the
same as that
appearing
in
ycyo'io-^fr.
Schleicher could not
iijion
his
principles
admit 'con- necting
vowels,' but he moves
in the same circle of
ideas,when,
supported
by
the
comparativerarity
of this vowel in the
Vedas,
he calls
(Comp.3
"
[Hurlesqueformations, arising:from a misapplication
of
grammatical
analo- gies
for
'
umgebracht,' 'gespeiset,' analogous
to our own burlesque
lines
:
Ami mnny
a leery
smile he
sniole,
And
many a
wink he
wunk.]
CH. xTi.
FORMATION OF THE STEM BY AN ADDED VOWEL. 389
724)
the Sanskrit i in
question
'a
sul)sidiary
vowel of later
development,
between the
perfect
stem and the
personalending.'
Even Delbrlick
treats the i as a
'
connecting
'
vowel. It seems to me
that a
careful
examination of all the
perfect
forms from all the
languages
which
possess
such
a
tense,entirely
confii-ms the
stem-formia"j
character of this vowel.
In Sanskrit itself it-can hardly
be said that there is
any
adequate
reason for
regarding
the vowel
a
of tutoda in the 1 and 3
sing,
and that
of tutudd in the 2
pi.
as anything specifically
distinct from the i in
tutxidima,
tutuditha. For as
the
weakening
of an a
to *
in unaccented
syllables
is
among
the most common phonetic. phenomena
of
Sanskrit,
and as we
find in forms from stems
ending
in
a. e.g.'
dadld-md
answering
to a
*Te-dE-fiEy, ta-sthi-md='i-(TTa-i^i"y,
an
i instead of this
a,
one cannot
see
why
a
form like
dadar^i-ma
should not be related to
Ctlopxa-iiir
as
pita
is to Gr.
Trarijp.
Gothic and Old Erse also
point
to
perfect
stems
with
a
final
stem-forming
a.
In Gothic the u
of
plural
forms like
vitum, vitidh,faifa1nim,faifahuth
is
explainedby
Schleicher as a
sub- sidiary
vowel
just
like the i of the
Sanskrit,although
it is found even
after
vowels,
e.g.
in saisoum.
Nothing
however
prevents
us from re- garding
the
?*,
as
well as
the i
.
appearing
in the same place
in
Sanskrit,
as a
weakened
a.
In Old Er^ie we
find the
a
in this
place,just
as in
Greek,
most
plainly,
as I learn fr"m
Windisch,
in
deponent
forms like
cechna-tar
(rt.can)
vaticinati
sunt,
rodania-tar
passi
sunt. The forms
with active
endings
however are
the most
instructive,e.g.
1
sing.
ce-c/ian=cecini,
which
points
to *ce-cana,
2
sing.
ce-chan=cecinisti,
but
17;;*,
corre.sponding
in formation to a
Greek
KeKOTruc ;
but on
the other hand
3
sing,ce-chuin,
which
points
to
ce-canit,
that
is,
to the same sinking
of
a
to
a clearer
vowel,as
has become the rule in Greek in the
same place.
We
have
finallyLatin,
where at
any
rate in the 1
plur.e.g.
in tutull-mus the
short i
precisely con-esponds
to that of
Sanskrit,
and
may
b^ weakened
from
"x
just
as well,
somewhat
as
in Lat. 'mdchina^=lJov.
f^ia^aia.
On the other hand all kinds of controversies have been raised
by
the
long i,
which the careful
investigations
of recent Latin
grammar
have
shown to he the vowel which at a
very
early
date terminated the Latin
perfect
stem. But
by
the side of the
long
i of
full,
ceplt
even in
early
times
e
shows itself
: fiiet,
dedet
;
so
Falisc.
dtdet,
Osc. deded
(Corssen
Aus.spr.
i^.
725)
and later on ei,wjiich
in this
place,
as
in
many
others,
was not a genuine diphthong,
but
only
an
intermediate sound between
e and i
: fuueit,
dedtit. The
long
vowel was
always
x-etained in the 1
sing.
and 3
plur.{dederunt), though
in the latter
alternating
with the short
vowel
{dederunt),
and besides the common
3
sing.,
is established.in ihe
second
by
interieisti.
'
On the other hand there is not the
.slightest
trace
in the 1
plur.
that the i was ever
long.
The
length
of the vowel in the
forms
quoted,
to which sufficient attention had not been
previously
given,
furnished Corssen with his
reason
for
separating
the Latin
perfect
comjjletely
from the
Greek,
and
cannecting
it with a
foi-mation of the
aorist in
Sanskrit,
characterised
by
the
long
i. This
" cannot
possibly
be
approved.
The Latin
pei-fect
is
proved by
the
reduplication,
which
attaches to it from the
first,
to be akin to the Greek and Sanskrit
per- fect,
while the Indian aorists like a-kram-l-m
quoted by
Corssen follow- ing
Aufrecht are
entii-ely
without
reduplication.
The Latin
perfect
'
This isolated
example
is
regarded as
corrupt by
Jch. Schmidt Vocal, ii.345.
But
cp.
oi^-naea
p.
39U.
390
PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
resemhles the Greek in that
a
pasttense,
the
pluperfect,
and
a
future ai-e
formed from its
stem,
and indeed both in
a manner analogous
to the
1
' *
Grreek,
while the formation of
a
past
tense from
an aorist would be
quite
unheard of But there are other considerations of the most
impoi-tant
kind. TJie Latin
perfect
is
proved
to be a
pi^incipal
tense
corresponding
to
the
present
in the first
placeby
its
employment
as a so
called
perfpctum
logicum,secondlyby
the fact that
a
periphrasis
with the
jncontestably
)"resent
form
sum is iised for it in the
passive,
and
thirdlyby
the fjict
tliat in Latin too there
are at least
some
perfect-presents odi,coepi,me-
mini. The
case
therefore stands thus. No one will
readily
succeed in
pointing
out in
any
one
peculiarity
of the Latin
perfecta hindrance in
the
way
of
connecting
this tense witli the Greek
i:"erfect,
with the one
exception
of the
long
i. But even this
hindrance,
which has
strangely
enough
.seemed to some scholai-s
quiteinsurmountable,
may
be
^et
aside.
Even
supposing
" what I do not admit " that
we
chose to look
npon
this
long
{
as
very
ancient,
and to
compare
it
only
with such Sanskrit
forms,
as
show the same sound,
from the rich stores of Indian
forms, now
garnered by Delbriick,some
might
be di-awn which have
a
much better
claim to be
compared
with the Latin
perfects
than the aorists
quoted
above. Delbriick in
"
187 collects forms which have a
long
I between
stem and
suffix.Among
these
are not
only present forms, some of
which
are
very common,
like hram-vn I
speak,
but also
present
forms
from
intensives,
like dardari-mi from rt. dar
split,
nonavl-ti fi'om rt.
nu
cry,
hdhhnvl-ti from rt. hJm be. In
""
154 ff.this method of forma- tion
is discussed
more in detail.
Since,as we have
seen,
the
perfect
is
originally an
intensive,
present,nothingprevents
us from
comparing
the
I of the Latin
perfect
with this
^,
as has been done
by Westphal
Lat.
Verbalflexion
p.
1G2, so
that
e.g.
bdhhavl-ti
fmAfvlt (for
this is the oldest
recorded
form)
Avould be
essentially
identical. For
we
may certainly
trace
filit
back to an
o\^bt
fe-fovJ-t
,
and this form would differ from the
Indian intensive form
onlyby
the weaker vocalism of the
reduplication
^
'""'
syllable.
I am however
by
no means inclined to
lay
any esppcial weight
upon
the
agreement
of the two
languages
in the 1.in the case of
reduplicated
forms. But in
any
case the
occurrence of
a
long
i elsewhei-e than in the
aorist
proves
that this vowelis
by no means
specially
characteristic of
this
particular tense,
and hence that the I of the Latin
]"erfect
cannot
give
the
slightest reason
for
explaining
this
as an aorist. But a further
perspective
is
opened by
the fact that
even Greek is not
wholly
without
forms in which instead of the usual short
o we
have at the end of
the
peifect
stem another vowel, and that
a long one : not indeed
7,
but
r?.
I have
alreadypointed
this out in Stud. i. 1
,
246. Here
we
mu.'^t enter on the
questionmore fully.
Fii-st then the evidence.
We have the
authority
of the Heraclean Tables for the two infinitives
TTnrpu)yyvivKrii.tir
i.e. translated into Attic
ironqyyvtvKirai(i.155)
and
TTffjwTfvk-iJiJfy (i.142),
for which I
may
refer to Meister Stud. iv. 422 f. As
with the infinitive
terminating
in
-;"f
i-
any
notion that the
long
vowel ori- ginated
in
compensatory lengthening
is.
excluded,we must here assume
organiclongtli:
thus
we arrive at a
Doric
perfect
stem in
tj,
correspcmding
to the
ordinary
stem in
n.
Tliat this method of formation
was not limited
to the Dorians is
plain
from the Aeolic form
J^oicij-fu, quoted
on
p.
383
for its termination.
Hesychius gives only
the 1
sing,
yoi?n^|^,
hut in
Anecd. Oxon. i.
p.
332 1.
3,
the 2
sing.o'lCrjQ
is also
mentioned,
and in
the Et. M.
p.
618, 55
o'lCrjnrOa, developed
*
kut iiriKracrtr,' though
the
CH XVI,
FORMATION OF THE STEM BY AN ADDED VOWEL.
391
latter is
quoted only
to
get
from it to oJada,
for which another
gi-am-
marian of the Et. M
suggests
a
further
possibility.
dicijtTda
is also
ac- cepted
by
Lentz Herodiau i.
-ifiO,
1. The most
strikingparallel
with
this
perfect
stem
fuih]
is furnished
by
the isolated Ch.-Sl. 1
sing.
vedS
(1 know) (infin.vMeti),
to which Leskien has called
my
attention.
Similar
perfect
forms also meet us
in several
passages
in different M.SS.
of Theocritus
:
oTrwTr// (3 sing.)
iv.
7, XtXvyxi
iv.
40,
iri(pvnr}
v. 33, 93;
xi,
1,Tre7roiOi]c V. 28, -nnroidtjcX. 1, though always
wnth various i-ead-
ings
: d7rw7r"(,7r"7rot'yEtcetc.
The latter forms have been
adopted
in modern
texts, on
the
assumption
of a transition of the
perfect
into the the- matic
present
foi-mation
;
and
certainly
evidence for this is not
lacking.
Morsbach too in his careful dissertation
'
de dialecto Theocritea
'
Pars 1. 176
Bonn 1874
p.
70 decides in favour of the
ti on
the
preponderating
evidence of the best M.SS.
Anyhow
the
frequency
of the
//
remains note- worthy.
In
Epicharmus
also
(p.75)
where Ahrens writes
yeyuOei,
there is
authority
for
ytyc'idi} as
well
as
for
yEyadel.
We must admit that the
authority
for these third
persons
perfect
in
"/
is not
quitetrustworthy.
The Lesbian Aeolic infinitives however in
-j]i',
TtdiuKr])'Sappho 2,
15
iTTLTtOtLjpiiKi]!'
C. I.
3524,
19 are
undoubted and unassailable. But
these too are
considered to have been formed in imitation of the
present
infinitives in
-??)',
like
fepy])'.
This view
may
be
supportedby
the fact
that the
participle
in this dialect
regularly
has the
ending
of the
present
participle
in
lov.
Another view however is also
possible.
The infinitive
termination
-e";
discussed
on
pp.
341 ff.
may
have been
independently
attached to the stem ending
in
r/.
Cp.
also
p.
339. The Doric
perfect
infinitive in
-"/'""'
(Ahrens
Dor.
331)
is also
very
remarkable:
ayTiire-
7vaii)ii.iey
Archimedes de
plan.aequ. p.
8. The
similarly
formed
vpoti-
ii^er
in
a fragment
of
Archytas (StobaeiFlorilegium,recogn.
Meineke
iv.
p.
206,
1.
21) can hardly
be reconciled with the
context,
and hence
cannot be
regarded
as certainly
established
(N"auck
Bulletin de I'Acad.
de St. Betersb. 1877
p.
383).
This form cannot have been formed
on
the
analogy
of the
present,
for,as we
have
seen
above
p.
339,
the termination
-/i""'
is
quite
unknown to the Doric thematic
present.
It is
only
informs
of a
primitive
formation like
0"/n"r, luf^tev, uaKr]^))yiEy
that this infinitive
ending
finds
a place.
It follows that
atTi-n-eTroiti-t-fjiev
is formed from
a
stem in
f,
i.e. frora
a stem of the
same
kind as that which underlies the
common
Greek forms
conj.elciot), opt.eicetrii',
inf.
eiderui,
fut.
"/6";(tw.
The
infinitive in -i-iai" for it is
wrong,
as we saw on
p.
344, to take -iraL
as
the
termination,
is
evidently
related to that in
-i-fitr just
as
nOi-rai is
to
TiQi-jjier.
Hence we see
that
perfect
stems in
e are not
wanting even
to the Attic-Ionic
dialect,though
it is
only
"(7" which Ls carried out
throughout.
But the
widely
extended
perfect
infinitives in
e-rai,
the
only
forms used in
Attic,
carry
gi-eatweight
in the discussion of this
whole
question.
No one
will
readilydeny
that forms like
ytyovi-vai^
"jrewoidE-i'cn
are
of the same
origin
as
t\"i-rai. Hence in these too the
"
is
an element of the
stem,
not of the
ending.
We have to add
finally
177
the remarkable Doric feminines of the
participles
in
-ela,
which
occur in
four forms established
by inscriptions : tpprjyeTa
Tab. Heracl. i.
18, 23,
28, 34, 36, 39, 42, f-jr it eTeXene'ia, effrakfio,^ trvvayayox^^'ia
C. I.
no. 2448,
26, 27,
28. Ahrens further
conjectures
that in the letter of the
Pytha-
*
The active or
transitive force of this form is worth notice.
392 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
gorpan INIyia(Orellino.
13),
the
unintelligible ttote ohela^ of tlie M.SS.
should be
corrected,
not to noTunKviuQ with Koene ad
Greg.
Cor.
p.
191,
followed
by
Hercher
Epistolographi
Grraeci
p.
608,
but to
woTeoiKtiaQ
i.e.
Trpof-iotKvlnr,
which is
veiy
probable;
The
explanation
of this fonn
has been hitherto
extremely
diiSicult.
Meister,
who
attempted
it in
Stud. iv.
387,
in order to
explaineppriy-t'ia goes
back to
kppriy-fua-ia.
Exit
as
the vowel of the
participial
suffix
-vat or -vas
appears
without ex- ception
as 0 in all Grreek
dialects,
and in the case of the masculine and
neuter in the Heraclean dialect itself
(ireipvrevKOTa etc.),
it is
extremely
impi'obable
that it
passed sporadically
into
e
in the
feminine,
and that
too before the
rejection
of the
a,
that is at a
very earlyperiod.
Dia- lectical
phenomena are as a
rule to be
explained
from
phonetic
changes
of a
comparatively
recent time. Hence
evidently
any
explanation
recom- mends
itself to us more
which
spares
us
the
long
and circuitous route to
the Indo-Germanic
primitive
forms
;
and such an
explanationpresents
itself
unsought,
if
we i-emember that this
same Heraclean dialect formed
the infinitive in
-ij-nev.
The
e
in
*ippr]y7]-n"r
which
we
may
deduce,
and that in
fppr)ye-la
were
certainly
of
one
and the
same
origin.
I
conjecture
the
followingpreliminarystages,
all
belonging
to the
specifi- cally
Greek
period
of the
language^ippriye-vta (cp.
Horn.
TreTrri^vla, iyyt-
ya-vlft,/"f/3o-i;7"), *eppr]yc-J'ia, *ipiir]ye-~t(t.
Now that
we
have thus demonstrated in the Greek
perfect
various
traces of a
stem-forming e,
sometimes
long,
sometimes
short,we
may
return to the Latin
perfect,
and find in the relics of
an e
in the Greek
perfect
a
very
impoi-tant
additional
reason for
connecting
this tense with
that which bore the same name in Latin. For there
are not
wanting
178
cases,
in which
a
Latin vowel
fluctuating
between i
e
and ei
answers to
a
Greek f. which has
come from an
originala,
as
e.g.
in the
negative
pai-ticle ne
(nei,ni)by
the side of the Gr.
r-q
in
iijToiroc, films (IJmbr.
ace.
-^l.feliuf) by
the side of
Or,Xaf^iwr,
semi and
sin-ciputby
the side of
Gr.
r]fii.
Thus the
parallel
between Aeol.
fnicr)-m,J-oidij-rrda
and Lat.
mlt,
vldisti is
completelyjustified.
In the 3
pi.
indeed the
ordinary
form vidermit has the
long
e.^ Had the Lesbian Aeolians formed
a 3
pi.
from the
disyllaV)ic
stem
fmcr] on
the
analogy
of
i-rrai'n,
it must have
appeared as fnici]-a"ii/n.
In other formations from the Latin
perfect
stem,
as
in the 1
plur.,
the short vowel comes out
distinctly.
There is
reallyhardly
any
more reason
for
holding
that vl'limus is shortened
from vldliiiffsthan for
holding
that in
yeyora-^ify
or
Skt.
{ja^dni-mnor
Goth, vitum the short vowel took the
place
of
an
earlier
long one.
Con- junctives
like
vule-rim,
futures like
vide-ro,plupei-fects
like vide-ram
show the short
e,
and thus resemble Greek forms like
TrfTrordE-f^iEr, ye-
yari-Tu). Finally
the fluctuation of the
quantity
in the 3
pi.
now
first
becomes
properlyintelligible.
While in the other forms the
usage
became
firmlyfixed,
here we
may
recognize
both
analogies
side
by side,
the formation from
a stem in
e,
which became the
prevailing
one :
vlde^
runt, steterunt,
and that from one in
e : steterunt. Steterunt is to stete-
runt
as
TreTroi'di-fiiy
is to
TrtfvrtvKrj-fiey.
In this
as
in other cases
I
*
Joh. Schmidt's
conjectiire(Vocal,
ii.
p.
345)
that the
length
of the vowel "f*
due to the influence of the
followins: ;" must remain
imiirobable,
imtil
some rea- son
is discovered
why
in numberless other
instances, e.g.
in the infinitives in
H-f,
in the
con;, impf.
in
frcm,
in
widely
extended formations like
generis,riscira,
and
in the whole
past
tense i-ram the r had no lengthening
force.
CH. XVI.
PEEFECTS WITH A PRESENT INFLEXION. 393
incline more
and
move to the view that the
quantity
of the formative
syllable
was not
always
from the first
quite
fixed. Quantitative
inde-
finiteness
or
the existence side
by
side of a
long
vowel and
a short
one,
seems to
me, especially
for
early times,
not at all an
inconceivable
thing. By
these considerations however we are brought
back to another
analogy
for the
e
in the
perfect.
We learnt
previously
the existence of Old Indian intensive forms
from stems in
I,
but declined to
regard
the
agreement
in this vowel as 179
the
sign
of
any
particularidentity
of formation.
Now,
after we
have
seen
how
many
different traces of the
long
stem -vowel can
be
pointed
out
by
the side of the short
one,
the
question
is whether this Old Indian
long
I was originally
the same as
the Greek
r\,
i.e. whether
they
do not
both
go
back to a
long
a.
The
question
is connected with the nature of
the I in Sanskrit
generally,
which takes the
place
of a even
e.g.
in the
present
formation of the so-called 9th
class,jund-mi
1
pi.junl-mas.
Delbriick
p.
1.51.
says
'
originally
the
a
extended to all the
persons
:
the
separation
of nd and n'l is of later date.' In these forms
too, as
in the
perfect,
there
are by-forms
with
a
short a.
It is therefore
very
natural
to
conjecture
that
we
have to do here with the saine
phoneticprocesses,
and that the I of the
reduplicated
Sanskrit intensives as
the
representa- tive
of
an
earlier d
may
really
be
compared
both with the Doric
";
and
with the Latin
i (ei,e).
Finally
we
have still to discuss
a
treatment of the
perfectstem,
which has hitherto
only
been mentioned in
passing,
viz. the
complete
transition into the
analogy
of the thematic
present.
The
present-like
nature of the
perfect
made this
danger evidently
a
very
near one.
The
active
perfecthad, so to
speak,
to steer between
Scylla
and
Charybdis.
The one rock, on
which it
might split,
was
the
analogy
of the
past
tenses,
the other
danger
the transition into the forms of the
present
of the
incomplete
action. Both
are as a
rule
happily
avoided. Still the
attractive force of the
present
seems to have been not
small, especially
in the eai-liesttimes. Hence the forms of the kind in the
epos.
Later
on
the
langi^age
of literature almost
entirely
resisted this
tendency,
but in Doric and Aeolic dialects the false
tendency was developed.
The
evidence of the latter fact
preserved
to us
is
comparativelyextensive,so
that its
range
was
probablytolerably
wide.
The Homeric
perfects
with a
present
inflexion
are
the
following.
aiujyti
Z 439 and
elsewhere,
also in Herodotus
(vii.101),
with the
past
ipioyov
I 578. The
imper.diwycVw
/3 195
may
just as
well
belong
to
the true
perfect;
the infin. d"
wyt'/ifi- (N 56),
to be
explained
in Homer as 180
an
instance of the
present
inflexion,comes to coincide with the Doric
iTETrordefitr
discussed above
p.
391. We saw on
p.
373 that
orwya
is
in
origina peifect.
How else would its
perfect
inflexion be
possible
1
There
are
many perfects
that have become
presents;
but
presents
can
hardly
have become
perfects.
"
hiao,
e.g.
S
44,
is shown to be a
perfect
by
its
reduplication,
which in this case
is
strengthened
after the fashion
of the intensives
(cp. deillirrjoijcn). Evidently
hl^io is for
*hei?iu",
which would be to the extant ^iicia
(N 49),
deihac
(a 80)
as drwyw
to
oj'wya.
"
K"tc\i)ynrTfc,
the
reading
of the best M.SS. in M 125 and
elsewhere,
and
proved by Didymus
on
IT 430 to have been
one
of the
two
readings
of
Aristarchus,
while
K"(.X/?y(Z)-fc (cp.rcrpiywrfc
etc.)was
the
other,
is
rejectedby
I. Bekker Horn. Bl. i.
94,
but there is
strictly
394
PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
si)eakingnothing surprising
in
it,except
that it stands alone
among
Homeric
participles.
For in view of the
variety
of the Homeric forms who
could find
anything surprising
in the difference from the
singularKekXjjyMg
1
K"(.A//yoi'r"t occurs with the same variant in Hes. Scut.
379,
412. " We
have also in Hes. Scut. 228 the uncontested
tppiyoin
loiKwr. -It is worth
noticing
that all these four
epicperfectsare
always
used as
presents,
and
hence it was all the easier for them' to take the form of the
present.
The
perfects
in
w are most
commonly
denoted
as Sicilian and
speci- fically
Syracusan
;
for which
cp.
Ahrens Dor. 3'29. Herodian
(ii.830)
eiwdaait' oi
irapuKtifuroiTpiweir to a
elc
w fjat ttou'Ii'eiefrriLrd.
iroXv
ce
roioiiTO)' tOoQ
TTctfia ^viniKufrioiQ'
oXtoXn
oXwAw, dtCoiKa
CecotKU),
Kai
to
KeKXvKe
(imperat.)
^t
7ra|o' 'E7rtx"p/^w wtto Oi^utoc tov
kekXvku}. " htloiKui
occurs in Theoer.
xv. 58. These too are
purelypresent
in
meaning.
The
second and third
persons
in
-eu;
and
-n, belonging
to them with the
variants
-?je
and
-";,
have been
already
mentioned
on
p.
390.
Among
these
there
are some
perfects
of
present meaning
e.g.
ytycSEL-=.yiyridi Ejjich.
75,
but also unmistakeable
perfects
of
completed
action
e.g. aXi(pdipwiui
Sophron.
fr.
63,
wt"piiK"i
Theoer.
v. 33. To this
gi-oup
of forms
belong
also the Doric infinitives in
-eir,
also mentioned
above,
of which
yeyoren'
181
(by
the side of
etpi^k-ora)
and
[f(^u/nr-]/3((r//(v"tj' are recorded
on a
Rhodian
inscription (C.
I. 2905
B,
1. 6 and
7). yeymeir
occurs
in Pindar 01.
vi.
49, KE'^XaSfii'
fr. 57
Be.,iretpviceii'
in
Epicharmus
fr.
97,
hcvi:nr in
Theoer. i. 102.
Hesychius gives
also
irjyopely,probably an error
for
I'lyupdv,
with the
explanationkypr)ynpirai Arkwifc, a
word discussed in
Stud. vii.
393,
and
KarareOiiTTtn'dav^iai^eiv.Participles
of the like
kind
are
quoted by
Ahrens from Archimedes
:
jxtfitiaKovija,
avearaKovaa.
We
may
add from the
Delphic inscriptionspublishedby
Wescher and
Foucart
(no.190, 15) TtrEXevTaKova-ac. Pindar follows the
same
fashion
in the two
present-perfects irK^piKovTaQPyth.
iv.
183,
and
KtxXacovTaq
ib. 179 with
Ke)(KalojQ
01. ix. 2. Outside
Sicily
therefore these forms
are
only
in
use here and there
among
the Dorians. On the other hand the
Lesbian Aeolic
usage
in the
participle seems to have been more
regvilar
(cp.
Ahrens Aeol.
148).
The ScholionV.
on 11 430 describes
KEicXiiyovrtQ
as Aeolic,
with which
cp.
Herodian ii.
306, 35.
7r"0i"yywi'=7r"^"vywc
is
quoted
there and in several other
places
from
Alcaeus,
and also
""to//-
K(ov,
eipi'iKiov.
TreTrXrjpuKoira
is found
on
the Lesbian
inscription
C I.
no. 2189 1.
9,
fVtrerfAfVorT-o in Conze
(Reise
auf
Lesbos)
No. XVII.
1,
evEpytT^Koifrai'
X. 1, KarEXi^XvdnrTDQ
VIII.
2,
9
;
hence Kaibel
justly
supplements 7r"7ro";i.[wi']
in the Lesbian
inscription
discussed
by
him
(Epliem.epigr.
II.
xx.).
In all Greek dialects the
perfect-present i'lKU)
is
common
;
it has
never
(juite
lost its
meaning
of
completed action,
and hence it
was rightly
explained,
even
by
the
ancients,as a perfect.
Thus in Anecd. Oxon. i.
212
we
read
ek tov
'l"]f^n t'lrrio i'iku
Ka)
"/\w' eS oii Kni ^iktvietch'
airu
ti
tov
TTdpdKEifiEyov
TOV
"/krt y(y)ET"ii
t^iiTH
2.vp(tKi'Vfnovc
pi}f.ut
iJKh),wc 7r"7ro(')(""t
irEiroiijKU).
This view is
confirmed,as
Ahrens Dor. 345 has
noticed,by
the
gloss
of
Hesychius
"iKam-
i'jKovm.
For
we have more than one
testimony
to this
" as Doric, even in
an inscription
C. I. 2140
b,according
to Ahrens's
probableexplanation
of the
conjunctive, ov
yap fjrj
(TviEikii,
by
rrvii^Ki^
in the
sen.se of
-irponijkti;
and "}V-w=
?/("w
occurs in
Epi- charmus
fr. 19, 13,
flK"
=
"/v"
in fr. 24, 2. Hence
*i/ko
" for
we musst
182
assume this to have been the earliest form of the word " was probably
CH. XVI.
CHANGES IN THE VOWEL OF THE STEM-SYLLABLE, 395
tlie
perfect
of the it. a-
(keadai).
We
may
doubtless
place
here also the
femiiiines of
participles
of the shorter
perfectformation,
like the
poetic
fiEjiuxTci,
first found in
v 14,
then in
Soph.
0. C.
312,
yeywcro
Eur. Med.
405,
and the
common Attic
errruiau
(in
Herodotus,
e.g.
v. 9'^
tGTtCja")
and Ttdiedxra
(e.g.Lys. 31, 22).
It would be
certainlya
mistake to
explain
this
ending -w^a by
going
back to
-vena,
the earlier form of the
termination
-via.
We have here to do with later formations.
They
are
all
evidently
conti'actions from
-uovtra.
As
kfTTJjv'ut
and the like
sounded too archaic
by
the side of
tirrwr,
while
a contraction of
rjvi
was
hardlypossible, earwna was
formed
on
the
analogy
of
Ti^waa
and similar
forms
universally
familiar.
Posidi]ipus
went even
further in
giving
after the
Syracusan
fashion
ear"/Kw
for the 1
sing.fVr"//va(x^then.
x.
412).
c) Changes
in the Vowel of the
steni-syHable.
It is
entirely
in
harmony
with the
origin
of the
perfect
from
an
intensive
present,
that
language
is in
many
cases not content with re- duplication
in this
tense,
but that as a
rule the
stem-syllable,
if not
already
long by
nature or
position, undergoes
a
strengthening
of the vowel.
This
strengthening
of the vowel of the stem is the
counterj^art
to the
raising
of the vowel of the
reduplication syllable,
which is found
espe
cially
in intensives. It is
a
very
ancient
phenomenon.
In the
preference
for
a
fuller vocalism of the
stem-syllable
Greek
agrees
with
Sanskrit,
Gothic and old Erse. The
following
forms
may
pi-ovisionally
serve as
examples
of this
:
Ved. rt. fan 3
s. perf.
tafnna
riU
(free)
1
s. perf.
rirelia
ru(J(break)
1
s. perf.i-uroga.
A
special agreement
of Greek and Sanskrit is found in the fact that the
intensification of the vowel in both is attached to the
polysyllabic
stem-
formation. Delbriick
p.
119
lays
down the rule for the Vedic
dialect,
'
If the
stem-syllable
is
short,
the termination is
immediately
added
:
if
the
stem-syllable
is
long,
an
intermediate i
comes
in between this
syllable
and the termination.' Without
agi'eeing
with the
assum]ition
of an 183
inserted
letter,we
may i-egard
the facts observed in the
followingway.
In
the Vedic dialect intensification of the vowel occurs
only
when the
syllable
of the root receives
a
kind of
protection
in the vowel which is
added,
and
which, according
to the view we
have
previouslydeveloped,
foi-ms the
stem. And
pi^ecisely
the
same
holds
good
of Greek
: veda=fu~ioa,
vid-md
=fil-f^if.v.
Differences
appear
indeed in individual
instances,
for the
a
is treated in
particular
Sanskrit forms
differently
from the i. On the
other hand there is
one
exception,
which is found in both
languages
in
common : inrrQa has the fuller
sound, just
like the Vedic
vettha,
in
spite
of the immediate addition of the terminations. The instances of the
agreement
of Greek with Gothic and Erse are seen
mainly
in the dif- ferentiation
of the
a,
to which we
shall return.
Latin, on
the other
hand, in direct
opposition
to
Greek,
shows a
preference
for
a
shoi't vowel
in the
root-syllable, as
is seen from
p^pigi as
compared
with
TrfVrjya.
As
we have
preserved
to us fiom Old Latin the form tu-tudi
(cp.
Skt.
tu-toda),
which
was
afterwards
replacedby tu-tudi,we
may
conjecture
that the Graeco-Indian rule
was originally
not unknown to Latin,
but
396 TEEFKCT STEM AND FOEMS CONSTRUCTED FKOM IT.
ch. xvi.
that
afterwards,
not witlioiit the influence of the
accentuation,
it
changed
to tlie direct
opposite
in the case
of the not
extremely
numerous perfects,
which I'etained the
reduplication.
Yowel -intensification in the
perfect
is
evidently
an
archaic
procedure,
and
hence, as
Uhle
(Spi-achw.
Abhandl.
p.
63)
well
puts
it,
'
the
capacity
for intensification is so to
speak
innate
in the root.' It cannot be
subsequently
transferred to later
forms,
and
is confined within
very
definite limits.
The Greek
perfects
may
be
divided,
in
respect
of
vocalism,
into three
groups
:
those with
complete
intensification
(At'A/jfia, ioiku),
those with
half intensiflcation
[yeyora,tppM-yu),
and those without intensification
(Ke\(if^nr(t, yiyimcfxi).
The last
group
is the most
varied,
because the
strengthening
of the vowel is omitted from
very
different
reasons.
The
Jii'st
group
embraces not
only
the forms in which the short vowel
of the root
passes
into the
correspondinglongvowel,
which
happens only
in the
case
of
a
primitivea,
but a^so those in which a
diphthongiippears,
184
which is
only
the case
where there is
t or w
in the roo".
From the
Greek
point
of view these two
processes,
which Sanskrit
grammar
sharplydistinguishes,
coincide
here,justas
in the
present (cp.
p.
150
fF.).
The
a
of the Doiic
AsAnf^o,
the
oi
of -ni-TToiBuand the
ev
of KiKivda are
completelyparallel.
The distinction between the so-called
guna
and
vrddhi is
significant only
for Sanskrit, not for
comparativegi-ammar,
and
the
impossibility
of
separating
these two
stages
of
intensitication,
which is
cleailyperceived
in
every
encjuiry
which extends
beyond
the limits of
Sanskrit,
is
a
main obstacle to all
attempts
to
explainphonetic
intensifi- cation
from accentuation. From the Gothic
we
may compare
with these
gi-oups
for the most
part
such words
as
ala
preter.
61
(sprangup),
hi-leiha
(cp.AftVw)preter.bi-laib,hiuga (cp.^evyw) preter.
hatig(cp.-n-iftvya).
The
a
of the root becomes d or in Ionic
7]
in the
followingperfects:
fE?"jrt
P 253 for
*Ei-^riJ--a,
cp.
conj.
aor.
cutjTai
for
^caf-rjrat.
^(S)]-)(^a by
the side of
b/ikiw,
Babr. 77.
taye
i.e.
fc-faye,
Herodot.
'ir^ye
cp.
ab.OA^e
p.
362,
with
aor.
pass.
tiiyri(N 162).
iaha
cp. p,
362,
beside
t'milnr,
ale
(p.79).
f'i\i](f)n,
Dor.
(tXa(l"a (p.361)by
the side of
An/jtTr.
"'(A?;)^n (ib.)by
the side of
Aa^^ttr.XeXd^^ani'
TiTtvyctfTL
Hesych. Cp.
]\Ierzdorf, Commentationes
philologae
semin
phil.Lips.p.
54.
tTTTi]-^a
in the Attic
orators,
beside
irri'iiToio
tVrdcor.
KfKr]^"
Tyrt. 12,
28 Be.-^ beside /"-f\d?o)'.
KiKT]"j"e' Ttdi'tji^e Hesych.
beside the Homer.
Kfk-acprfOTi dvfj^.
KeK\T}yu)g
B 222
(cp.w/vAoyya Xenoph.)
beside
iKXayoi'(cp.above,
p.
285).
K-f'xdi-a
Dor.
(")^(frai rt Sophron.
51
Ahr.),
k"x"7"
ora
11
409,
other foiTns in Attic
wi-iters,
beside
i.-\a.toi'
(above
p.
288).
KtKpdyn
beside
tKpayof,
For the
quantity
of the
o
in the
pi'esentcp.
Uhle Abhandl.
p.
68.
tvi-\tX(W(t Doric
(Find.
01.
11, 3),XtXijOa
in
Herodot.,
beside Xadelv.
//e/irjkwt
K 362 beside
f^upnkv'in
and
/ici^wr.
185
//f/jj/io
in Attic
poets
beside
l^idi'rjr.
irfrrdyaiat Ale. fr.
34, 2,TrtVijyf
from Homer
(F 135)
onwards,
beside
liTdyrjy.
CH. XTi.
CHANGES IN THE VOWEL OF THE STEM-SYLLABLE. 397
TTEirrjXoTi a
doubtful
reading
in Nonnus Dion. xiv. 152 beside
'twaXro^
"naXoc.
TTETrArjywf
X 497,
7r"7r\?jyi/7a
E
763,
other forms
very
isolated in
Attic writers beside
et^-n-Xdyfii'dt, (.KTrXuyiiaofnn.
kKTrt(pui'arTi Sophron.
75
Alir., Tzi(pi)va
in the
tragedians, more rare
in Herodotus and in Attic
prose,
beside
(purriyai.
airrriire
from Homer
(B 135) onwards,
beside
rjcnvf'irai.
a((Tiii)U}c
Aristoph.
Pax
620;
other forms also later in isolated
usage;
Theocr. vii, 19-
(rtcapwc,
fem.
aecrapvui
Hes. Sc. 268.
Tidi]na I,168,
Herod, ii.
156,
beside
rcupMi'.
TiTTji^a
r 176, rerdi^oTCK,
Eur.
Suppl.1141
chor. beside
-di."/ra;.
Ti.Tpi))(yia
II 346 beside
Tupu^^i].
The
"
of the root becomes
"/ only
in
\ieiJir}Xt
B 25 with
jjffjrjXMi;
E 708 and
plupf.f^it^iijXti
B
614,
and also
in Hesiod
0pp.
238. The
readingnz^iaXorac
in Pindar 01.
1,
89 is
very
doubtful
(cp.Tycho
Mommsen ad
loc).
But
^ij.ir]\(
is
intelligible only
under the
hypothesis
that the older form of the root
juttX
continued to
survive
by
the side of
yutX,
like ImXe'iy
by
the side of
/3"
A
oc,
(caXtlr and
KeXiadat, rrruXijiai
and ffreXXtii'
etc.,
and that from this
came
*ji/f7'"Af,
Ionized into
/.(f/''/^^-
Choeroboscus in a
passage
cited
by
Lentz in his
Herodian
(ii.795)
mentions
a TEOr]Xa as a
perfect
of
diXu),
but
nothing
is heard of this
elsewhere,
any
more than of his
Tervwa
and other
forms,
which
seem to bear the mark of
a grammarian's
manufacture.
Of
an "
in the
root,
raised to
ol,
we
have the
following
instances
:
cei-^oiKciA 555 and elsewhere in
Homer, common in the weaker form
5tco(ko from
Theognis (v.39) onwards,
must be
regarded as the
perfect
of the stem
cm.-,
which is
expanded
from
li,
and underlies the intensive
present CEiCincTOfxui (^cei^iEurrBai
2
164)
and
^i^tiKtXoc c'lel
(poftttv^ttoq
Hesych. (cp.Princi})les
ii.
308).
For if
we take
^.a as
the formative
syllable
of the weak
perfect,
the
diphthong
is
hardly intelligible.
We 186
shall come
back fuither on to this form as one of
great importance
for
the
explanation
of the
k.
uHKa common
from Homer onwards,
in Herodotus oka
(iv.82).
Forms like
ehvla,
eiKoc,
ei^am
will be discussed later
on.
XiXonra in universal use
from Homei- onwards.
ol^a the
same,
in
completeagreement
with Skt. veda and Goth. vait.
The weaker
diphthong ei
is in the moods etc. still
more
firmly
established
in this
case
than in
tuiica.
neTTotda from Homer onwards
(A 325).
TrefXoiceiai'(ftXvKran'ovodai
Henych.,SimriipXoidst'
'
haKe^vrai
beside
E-cpXice-f ^uppeey,ipXiCui'Ei' caipfiE'i. Cp.
Princ. i. 375.
Ki-xXoi^Ey
hiiXtcEro
Hesych. Cp.
ib. ii.
p.
302.
Cp. x^^^'l-
?"""-
xXotSwc"Siappiuji' vKo rpv(l)fic.
In Plutarch
(Ale.1)
we
find
iiukexXicwq
in the same sense.
A V
in the root becomes ev
hi
ii^Evxn,
the earliest instance of which is in Philostr. Vita
Apoll.2,
xiv. 64
(eTTCi^EUXorac).
KEkEvOa X 1 1 8 and also in Attic
poets.
TE-Evxa,
in Homer
only TEnvx'^i:
/'
423,
and
so
in Demosth. xxi.
150,
in Herodot. iii. 14
ireTEvx^f'
398 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FEOM IT. CH. xvi.
"Ki(\"tvy"i
from Homer
(" 12)
onwards in
poetry
and
prose.
We have
entirely
isolated instances in
fiijjivtcd,
Homeric
(2 580),
with the
aor.
^ivKt.
Y
2G0,
pres. fivicaoiiai,
and hence with
an
intensification of
v
to i)
(cp.
p.
157).
f.i\)'l\fw6a by
the side of
fXi'iXvda,
the former
only
in. Homer and
once
in Theocritus xxv.
35':
cp.
above
p.
368.
Evidently uXijXovOa is
to the future
tXtv^ofxai
as Triizoiiiais to -Ktinu) or to the
present
iriiHu".
It is the
solitaryattempt
in the
perfect
to introduce
an intensification
of
V
different from that of the
present,just
as anovlr]by
the side of
/nrevcio
is an
isolated
example
of the like
phoneticchange
in the formation of
nouns.
For
mrovc^ij
is to aivtvcuj as Xnijir)to
Xiiftu),
while the
case
is
different
e.g.
with aKoXavdoc
by
the side of KtXtvQoc.
187
.
The total of these
perfects
is 39.'* It is
only
the
monophthongal
intensification of the
a
which is at all
a common
phenomenon :
of this
there are 25 instances.
We come now to the spcorul
group,
characterised,as we
saw, by
half
intensification,
that
is,])y
the
change
of the
e
which
prevails
in the
present
stem into o.
AVithin this
gi'oup
we can
again
make three divisions.
By
far the most numerous has
o
in the
perfect,by
the side of
e
in
the
present
:
in a
few instances
w
appears
instead of
n by a
phonetic
affection
:
in a
single
instance
r; passes
into
w.
The whole
})honetic
change,
which chai-acterises this
gi'oup, evidentlybelongs
to a later
period
than the
complete
intensification. It
piesnpposes
the
splitting
of the
a.
and therefore
has, so to
speak,a European
character. The
diversity
of
the
vowels,
which
proceeded
from an
old
a,
is in fact
used,
not in
Greek
alone,
to
serve,
as
it
were,
in the second line for the
distinguish- ing
of tenses. We learnt in the case of the thematic aorist to
recognise
the
preference
of this tense for
",
and in the Gise of the
present,
the
preference
for
t.
In the same
way
the
perfect
is fond of the
o.
But
we cannot talk of
a
law. The
usage may
rather be formulated somewhat
as
follows. The
language
is not
governed by
this
one
tendency
alone
:
it makes use
willingly
of this
very
manageable pigment,
if so we
may
call
it
:
but it can get
on
without
anything
of the kind. Scholars haA-e
long
since
compared
with these Greek
processes many phenomena
of the Teutonic
Ablaut
;
and this is not the fii'st
case in which the Teutonic vocaUsm has
offered us some noticeable
points
of
comparison. Only
the latter is far
more
richlydeveloped,
and in the case of the
perfect
is all tlie
more varied,
in
th.'it
a
distinction is made between the
singular
and the
plural.
But there
is
agreement
thus
far,that,as was
shown on
page
145 the
present
stem
has
a preference
for the
p,
which
may
become
i,
while the
perfect
stem
on the other hand
prefers
in
many
cases a heavier
vowel,
which
appears
on
Teutonic soil
'
as
a,
and in Greek has
assumed, though
perhaps only
at a
later
date,
the dirller
colouring
of the
o. Possibly
we have a
relic of
a relatively
older time in the form
TfTpa(f)a
from
T^tVoj
which
crops up
in the Attic orators
by
the side of
rt-pocpu,
and
the
a
which
appears
in the
perfect
middle
(-tTpai.ifiat, Terpafnrai)
and
188
which will hereafter be
discussed,
is
perhaps
not
wholly
unconnected
with this
a
of the active. Hence
we
may
so
far
compare
the Gothic
giba gab
with
rpiiriorirpcKpa
or rirpo^a,
stila stal with K-XeVrw
KSKXfxpa.-
According
to Windisch theie are
many
instances of
a
similar relation.
"
aufifiya,
the oi of which
depends
upon
the influence of the
digamma, \va^
discussed
above,
p.
3G3.
I
CH. XVI.
CHANGES IN THE VOWEL OF THE STExM-SYLLABLE. 399
'
in Erse also
:
e.g.
the
present
con-dercar beside the
peifect
ad-chon-darc
(A'idi) agrees exactly
with
cipKonai hicopKiu
The stem-vowel of the
peifectwas
unmistakeably
felt
by
the three
languages
to be a
heavier
one,
so
that this
phonetic change
is in
some degree
connected with
that discussed under the first
group,
indeed has
perhaps
been formed
in
analogy
with
it,
when the
sjjlitting
of the
a at a
considerably
later
stage
in
language
ci-eated
new possibilities.
Phonetic variation is
as a
rule
more
sought
after in an intermediate
stage
of
language
than in the
earliest. Latin is but little influenced
by
this
tendency,
and shows in
its
perfecthardly anywhere anything
that
can be
compared
with the
facts mentioned. If
any
one
should be inclined to think of isolated
instances like
pello pepuli,
which
might possibly
be for
an
earlier
*
pe-poli,
like te-trdi for
te-tol-i, a
glance
at
pulsus
and the 0. Lat. at-tula-t
would
upset
such a
compai'ison.
The Latin vocalism shows the archaic
stiftaess united with
great weakenings.
We miss in it almost the whole
of the varied life of what I believe to have been the intermediate time.
We
now turn to the various
perfects
marked
by an
o, adding
at the
end the few instances in which
o
is found
over
againstan a
in the
present.^
Dialectic variations
present
themselves here
more frequently
than in other
perfect
formations.
yeyova
common
fi'om Homer onwards.
ci}opKa
in
po3ts
from Homer
(X 95)
onwards.
lecpo/da, ai'acedpoiJ."
" 412, lizicthpopEi' v 357, rare
later.
iyplp/opasee above
p.
368.
t'lXo^a(XeXiye,XiXoyu Hesycll.)
p.
361.
tKToi'ci
from Aesch.
((curEkTorae
Eumen.
587)
onwards in Attic
189
writers;
u.irsi^T"h'"eHerod,
v.
67.
i/jpopi p.
361.
evijyoxe
with
jji'ovoHesych.
p.
369.
t'oXTTo
p.
362.
topyo
ib.
^i-i.(p6opac
O 128. and
again
in late
prose.
ay-r]yoder
p
270, iir-fv-ip'oQev
6
365,
both also
as
preterites.
The
preseht
*
aviOw
(cp.ui'Ooc),
which must be
assumed,
does not
occur,
Ktf.Xoipac Aristoph.
Plut.
372,
also in
prose.
Kix"^"^i ty^X^ta Aristoph.
Ran. 479.
fuepoi'a
in Homer
(Q 435),
other
poets (ip/jtipuvev Soph.
Trach.
982)
and Herodotus
{^tuorirai
vi.
84).
The
present
stem with
c
does not
"
occur with the same
meaning,
but
we
may compare
fiiioc,Miirwp.
^ipova ;
pefjiaain
\ \ yiyoi'a: ytyadirt.
There is
no
need to assume a
distinct
fxij-ioya,
which follows the
meaning
of
piriw remain, on the
strength
of Eur.
Iph.
A. 1495 Via
te loparu
f^tepove
2oVa.
Kara-fii'oxi
'
avi'ovrriaiceu
Hesych.
is of obscui'e
origin.
leiofe' reiicpMTui
Hesych. according
to M.
Schmidt, ui/D'ero^vTa)'
"
fTKvdponn'iv ib.,perfect
to
jf'^w,
which is
adopted
at
any
rate in the
compound ^vvri(pti
at the
suggestion
of Cobet
Aristoph.
Aves 1502
:
cp.
Dindorf
on Aristoph.fragm. 142,
349.
TriTTonfa quoted
from Herodotus and Attic
prose.
'
The 'forms ^eQpoxa, ea-ro\a. effrocpa quoted by
Choeroboscus
(Herodian
ed.
Lentz ii.
356, 794, 837)
and in
part
noted as Attic,
I do not venture to
place
in
this
list,
any
more
than
ireirXoxa quoted by
Veitch
p.
482 from
one
passage
in
Hippocrates,
while everywhere
else this writer has
WirXex'*.
400 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
Trirroifia,
from Homer
("'6) onwards,
with the isolated
participle
TrtTrd:)v'iu
(f)555).
For the
present
form with
t we
have WrOot,-.
Triiro^tTa
in
Aristophanes.
TTtfopfta,
only
Utip/jpl^ei Hymn.
Merc. 105.
TtTOKa^ TtTOKvuiQ
Hcs.
0pp. 591,
then iu Herodotus and Attic
writers.
rirpotpci
from
Tpi-n-ii) Aristoph.
Nul:).
858,
nynTtriMxjxic
Soph.
Trach.
1009. In Attic orators
rirpucpacrops up,
for the most
part
as a
"
vai'iant for
reTpofa.
The latter is
preferredby
I. Bekker and
Sauppe.
Weidner reads
ararerpuforaQ
in Aeschin. i. 190.
TErpofa
from
rpf'^w,
in Homer
(intrans. \p237),Sophocles(O.
C.
186)
and later writers. Here
too, though
first in
Polybius,
the variant
Ttrpcvka
is found.
190 The
change
of "
into
o
is
neglectedprobablyonly
in the
following
isolated forms.
fliftke'pa Antipater "/"." -ov -Kfpljviuikuq
avufiiojaewQ
in Stobaeus
Floril.
70,
13
: awopjiftXefporec.
a)'-riv"-)^vlai'- aia/jipoucrai'
Hesvch.
C]).ti'"]rnxa
and
kut-}]!
ot^cf kare-
rijioxaih.
"
vnfnfx^'''
I'l'f'/^aXf, vTrelx^e
ib. is also
probably
of the
same
formation.
/c"kXE/3W(,=
(v"/vXo0wcinscription
of Andania.
XiXeyif
ttpj/ka
Hesych.
beside
Xekoyug
'
eiptjicag
and
on
the other hand
(Tvi'eiX"\wg
"
(Tvi
uyayu)!'
Hesych.,i^elXe-)(^u
Aristid.
49,
381.
6pwpt')(^ur"t;' opfynireg
Suid.
TTtVAtx"^y
^^^ ^^^^^ ^^
newXoy^aHippocr.
"!renvp"x"')Tec
Aristot. Probl. xi.
22, Tmrvpexirm
Galen.
Here are altogetheronly
8
instances,
all of
a
later
stamp
and
some
of them
quoted
as
rarities. We
may say
thei-efore that the
change
of
e
into
0
became the rule.
Besides the 24 instances with
o by
the side of
e,
there
are 3 more
forms in which the
o answers to an a
in the I'oot
:
viz.
KfVoj'ct
quoted
in the Et.
Magn.
from
Sophocles(fr.
896
Dind.),rare
elsewhei'e,
with the
present
van w.
XfXayxa
in Homer
(\ 304)
and other
poets,
and in Herod, vii. 53.
TziivoaxdSyracusan,Epicharm.
fr. 7 Ahr. Here the
present expan- sion
has made its
way
into the
perfect,
as in the Skt.
pa-pralcUha(stem
.
prask,perhaps
for
prak-sk)
and Erse ne-naisc nexuit.
Cp.
p.
198.
Finally there is one form in which under the influence of
a
cUgamma
once
present
the o
api)ears
as long,
viz.
iiwQa,
from Homer onwards :
cp.
Brugman
Stud iv. 176 and above
p.
363.
On the other hand the
long o answering
to the
long e
is
only
to be
found in
one quite
isolated form
:
tppiijyn,
occurring
from Aeschylus
onwards in Attic
poets
and
prose-
writers,
while the Heraclean tables
give
the form
ippijye'ut
mentioned
above
p.
391.
Cp. Hesych. KaTtpptjyoTag-
citppr^yfiivuvc.
There remains the third
group,
i.e.
perfects
which from
very
different
191
reasons do not
distinguish
this tense-"tein by any
change
of the vowel.
We
may
here
again
make two subdivisions,
viz.
perfects
whose stem-
syllable
is
already long,
and
perfects
whose
stem-syllable
remains short.
There is no
small mmiber of
perfects
based
upon
stems which
are
always long,
and ^\"hich therefore remain unaltered.
CH. xTi.
VOWEL OF THE STEM UNCHANGED. 401
1)
With
a
stem-
syllable naturallylong.
TTpo-j3if3ov\a
A 113. If the
explanation
of the
diphthong given
on
p.
172 was correct,
the
present
formation has here found its
way
into
"the
pei-fect, just
as in
TriTroa-^a
mentioned ahove and in Lat. iunxi.
Ijeiipldu
in Homer
(n 384)
and other
poets,
beside the
presentlopidw.
/3f73pi"x"
illHomer
(P 264),Sophocles
and later
prose
writers,by
the
side of
ppvx('t("fj(ti.
yeyrida
from Homer onwards
(0 559),
Dor,
yeytt^" (Find.Epich.),
beside
yijOeM.
yeywve
also in
poets.
?"?('wx" oii^y
ill
HyperidesLye.
p.
29,
6 ed.
Schneidewin,
beside ?twK-w.
cfSouTToVof^ 679 beside loviriu).
epplya
beside
plyeuj
:
cp.
above
p.
360.
Eo-^v^ci
first
quoted
from
Hermippus
in
Diog.
Laert. i. 117
{kiztaKr}-
tpiiai),
beside
aKi'iTrru).
KsKplyt'iTEc
Ai-. Av. 1521 beside
cp/^'w.
For
Kpii^e
IT 470 cannot be at
once
assumed to
belong
to the
same verb.
K(Kv(pa, ai(it:ek:vij)cipai'
Em*.
Cycl.212,
connected with
Kv(p6c, Kvcptov,
Kex^n^ojQ
Find. 01.
9,
2 and
elsewhere,a
completely
isolated form. "
A second
perfect
of the kind
Ke-xXrjcti'cu
"
\po"pe~iy Hesych.
is discussed
by
Fritzsche Abhandl.
p.
51.
TTETrXi^da
Fherecr. Com. ii.
265,
and later
writers,
beside
ttXiiOw.
TTETrpttyn
from Findar onwards.
TriTTvda, only
recorded in kara-Tri-n-vBa
'
Kartppv-qKci
in
Hesych.
;
hence
there is
no e\'iclence of the
quantity
of the v.
But it is
certainlylong
as
in TTvOw.
iriipplKa
cp.
above
p.
378. Editors wiite
ippluaov
in Hes. Scut.
171,
and the
i
is
long
also in
(ppli^r], ((ipiKw^rjc
etc.
vpxd- WX"''''^
ill ^
psephisma
in the Vitae decem
oratorum,
Fkit. 192
Moralia ed.
Wyttenbach
iv.
p.
414 F.
2)
Stems with
a longby position.
KtKXayya quoted
from
Aristoph.(Yesp.929)
and
Xenophon, evidently
formed in imitation of the
present KXnyyaiw,
and of
KXay^u, eKXayt,ahy
the side of
t^Xnyor.
The Homeric form
KSKXriyojg
was quoted
above
on
p.
396.
Kexayca
"^
268, plupf.Ksxf'trhi
H
192,
bears
exactly
the
same
relation
to
xarcoi'w.
The short
a
of the root
appears
only
in the
aor. f'xo^oi'.
XsXaf.nre
twice in choric
songs
of
Em-ipides,
Andr.
1025,
Troad. 1295
;
cp.
above
p.
377.
fXE^apirwc
Hes.
0pp. 207,
in
Quint. Smyrn. cifupifxifxapcpe.
Trecpvyywi'quoted
from Alcaeus
(Ahi-.
Aeol.
148);
cp. (pvyyaroj.
The
stem-syllable
of the
perfect
remains short with
any
degree
of
regularityonly
in the
following
cases :
1)
In the forms
quoted
above without
a thematic vowel:
ceicifiEv
and
Ciihlfiai', CiiciOt,I'iKTrjr, ridi'ctfiey, TidvujjEi ai, TeBiadi,'icf.ity, 'iarfy
'iffTor,
fiifiafiev, ^ifdaroi;
tardfier,
eaTuOi,TirXaOi,TeTXa/jerai.
The
only
words which show intensification without the
support
of
an
added vowel
are
'ioiyi.iEi'
and
tlXy'jXovOfxer.
From this consideration
we derive
a confirma- tion
of
our view that the
e
of
koiKtrai,
irEirotOeiai is
stem-forming,
and not
an element of the termination. It cannot be
a matter of
chance,for the
perfectmiddle,
which
always
adds the tenninations
directly,
is
as a rule
disinclined to the
long
vowel
:
irEfvyfjEioc,
j'fiKTo.A small number of
D D
402 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. cu. xvi.
intermediate forms with the
diphthong ei
from stems in
i
deserve
notice,
viz.
eiciio,eicelTjr,
slcirai,eiEwg
" uKtrai
(Eurip.Aristoph.),
eIkwq
(from
Homer onwards,
*
254),
e'i'^aai (Attic),
" TreTreirrdi Aesch.
Eumen.^
599,
if
we are
not there to read with Gilbert TreVtorflt
.
Tlais ft
takes a
similar
position
as a raiityby
the side of
oi
to that which
a
holds from roots
with
f by
the side of
o,
the more so
that both
sounds, el as
well
as
o,
are
common
in the middle : XiXEi/xfuu,ErjTptnrTat.
Deviations from
a
I'lile
are
often
signs
of
antiquity.
Is it
possible
that
ei origriially prevailed
193 also in the
perfect
as an
intensification of
i,
and
only
later became
weakened into
oi,
not without the
cooperation
of the desire to
distinguish
the
perfect
from the
present
1
2)
The stem-vowel further remains short often before the termina- tion
-via
in the feminine of the
participle :
uprfpioc
"
apdpvla (O 737),
but
apr^pvTa
Hes.
Theog. 608, \e\j;/cwc
" XeXukvIu
{/j. S5),
/^(E/ia/cwe
"
i^itfiaKvldi
(A 435),
jU"/iowc
and
/Lt"/,tao-"c
(B
818
hejxwWe
N
197)
"
luEjuavlu,
TeOrjXwc
"
TEdaXvla I
208,
with which
veTraOvla,-KEfuvia
also
agree,
but there is
no
consistency,as
is shown
by TroTi-TTE-n-Ti^v'iat v 98,
rerpi^^vui
H
346,
rtrpi-
yvla
^?
101, TTETrXrjyvTa
E 763. The feminine to (idu)cis now
written in
our
editions sometimes eIcvIu
(ovttiuu
tlcvlu tokoio
P
5),
sometimes uv'ui
(Ivl
(ppetTi
"Kcwra
Idv'ia
v 417).;
the feminine of
f(\wc,
besides the
soHtary
EioiKvlai 2 418 is
only
f/\i'7a.
Perhaps
the
pronunciationwas hfilv'ta
and
hcvla,
fcfiKvia and hicvui. This variation in
quantity
is limited to
the
Epic
dialect
(cp.
Uhle Abhandl.
p.
68),
3)
The
rhythm
of the
perfects
with the Attic
redupHcation,which,
when the second
syllable
is
long,prefer
the third to be
short,was men- tioned
above
on
p.
365. Hence we
have
aX)'iXi-pa,
iXliXvOa,Epi'ipina,
opdjpExcc
and others of the kind.
4)
The
stem-syllable
of
many
perfects
with an
aspirate
remains
short,
even
without this kind of
reduplication,
as
in
i'lXXci-x^a, ijipXafa,joeidXe^u,
yEypafu,
hoicaxtt,XiXacpa,tte^vXcixu,
EdKUfa.
In
many
instances we
know
nothing
as to the
quantity,e.g.
in
cmniTrXixe'liaftifti]Kt, cimrt-
"kXix^q'ciEirrdg, K"xyp'"^Q Hesych.
It has often been assumed without
any
sufficient reason
that in such
cases
the vowel is short. We can
hardly say
more
than that the short vowel before the
aspirate
is the
more common.
The
reason
for this
i^eculiarity
is
undoubtedly
to be
sought
in the nature of the
aspirates.
Uhle
op.
c.
p.
70 asks
A-ery
justly:
*
Is it mere
chance that the double consonant
preserves
from
aspiration,
as
it does from intensification ? Or
may
we
suppose
that the
aspiratewas
felt to be a
kind of doul)le sound 1
'
I think
we can unhesitatingly answer
this
question
in the affirmative. In fact
according
to the view established
in
Principles
ii. 9 ff".the
aspiratesactually
consisted in
early
times of an
explosive
sound immediately
followed
by a breathing,
and hence were
heavier than all other consonants.
It is
very
noteworthy
besides that the
194 dental
aspirate6,
the one
which is
never
denoted
graphicallyby TH,
in
regard
to this
perfect
formation does not hold
quite
the
same place
as
x
"^"f^
"p
:
and for our
view of the whole
phenomenon
it is of much
imi)ortauce
to remember that it is
quite
unknown to the older
language.
The old
perfectseVXj/i/jo,
e'iXijxa, rirpiixfi, tetevxc,
as
well as kikEvBa and
XiXyjdn
have the intensification
of the vowel before the
aspirate
and
prove
that we
cannot
speak
of
a
definite
law,
but
only
of a
phonetictendencyprevalent
especially
in Attic,
5) Finally
there are
still two isolated forms with short vowels to 1)6
CH. XVI.
COMSONANTAL CHANGES IN THE STEM-SYLLABLE. 403
mentioned
: (U/'/k-oo,
which is
commonly
used from
Aeschyhis
and Hex'O-
dotus
onwards,
and which is
evidently
for
(k-///vo/",
and
may
thus be
placed
with the
perfects
with Attic
reduplication;
and
eSliccJ^e
and
"?"/?o/"c,
which
exactly
agree
with this in
rhythm,
in the metrical in- scription,
which is
unintelligible
in its connexion and in
eveiy respect
extraordinaiy,
'ex schedis Fourmonti' C. I. No. 15. We
can
hardly
mate
up
our minds to introduce ad hoc a derivative
*e()uvu),
constructed
like uk-ovu).^
Taking
into account the Homeric
eci'ito-rai
and other
forms to be mentioned
subsequently,
in which
as in
kZ-lilen-fim a stem
expanded by
a vowel
occurs,
it still
seems to me
(cp.Principles
ii.
113)
most
probable,
that the/ in
tlljhtpawas intended
by
the
mason to denote
the
spu-ant
which is
naturallydeveloped
l)etween
o
and
",
and which
does not differ
widely
from the
EngKsh w.
In
any
case
the form remains
quiteisolated,
for there is
no
example
of
a
perfect
with
one original
vowel
before the other.
d)
Consonantal
changes
in the
stem-syllable.
The
only
consonantal
change
at all
common
and therefore of
any
greatimportance
for the formation of the
perfect
is
aspiration.
The
older
grammarians, as
every
one knows,
took the
aspiratedperfect
as
well
as that characterized
by k as the
iwA-fectumprhniim,
which
they
distinguished
from the
perfectumsecundum,
which
was characterized
by
the absence both of the
aspiration
and of the
v.
The
grammarians
of 195
antiquityproceededmore
prudently,
for
they
called the second and
simpler
formation
piaoQ napuKtij.L"roc,
a
phrase
which
was
intended to denote
not that it
properlybelonged
to the
middle,
but
that,
like the
middle,
it
had
an
undefined
meaning,
sometimes
more active,
sometimes iiitransitive.
Forms like
KeKsuOu,
-trev^^a,
wETroiBa,TrfTrpdyo,TTEfip'u, fctya,
SiECpOopa,
6K(i)\a furnished the occasion for this. For where double forms occurred
side
by side,as in the
case of
vlTrpaya
and
Triirpn^ci, Sie(l"dupa
and
c/e-
^(^ap/ca,
uXioXa and 6\w\ei;a the distinction was not
superfluous.
But it
was a mistake to
identify
this distinction with that of the other so-
called
tempora prima
and
secunda, as was
done
by
Buttmann. He
says
(i^408)
'
The
perfectum
activi is
distinguished
in
respect
of
cliaracter,
for the
perfectum
1 has its
own character,
while the
perfectum
2 has
always
the
unchanged
character of the
verb,'
and further in Note 1
'
In order to introduce
unity
into all these
cases we must
regarda as
the
proper
suffix of this
perfect.
This
aspiration
united with the mute of the
labial
or
palatal
organ
to form
an
aspirate,
but between two vowels and
after
a
liquid
it
changed,
in order to be still
audible,
into a
k,
since in all
languages
the
palatalsare most
neai-ly
akin to the
gutturals.'
Buttmann
endeavoui-ed to
explain
the
circumstance,
" i-emarkable
enough
from this
point
of
view," that the dental
consonants,
and
especially
the
common
0 (pres.'C)
did not also
pass
into
Q,
and that
e.g.
we never
find a
perfect
like
*lj"i(ia from
at/cw or
*/".-e/":o/xt0a
fi'om
KOjxi'Cw, by saying
that these
verbs in the
common
forms,
future and fii'st
aorist,
'
by
the loss of these
letters
became
quite
like the verba
jiura!
It is
pei'haps
not
superfluous
to call to mind
occasionally
such
attempts
at
explanation.
We know
now that the Greek
rough breathing
is no
originalsound,
but
only
the
"^Earlier
attempts,
like that made
by
Kuhn de
coiij.
in MI
p.
64,
to
compare
this isolated
fo
with the Latin
perfect
in
-vi,could find but little assent
nowadxj^s.
D D 2
404 PI":RFECT stem and forms constructed from it. cu. XVI.
resklunm of older and fuller
spirants.
In the middle of a word the
rongli
breathing
could at most between vowels be taken into
considera- tion
as the relic of a
sigma.
After consonants it is
quiteunknown,
and
it is
utterlyimpossible
to
suppose
the
change
of a
roughbreathing
into
the
strong explosive
k-.
Still the notion that the so-called
perfectumprimum was
something
essentially
different from the so-called
perfectumsecundum,
and the
aspiration
of the consonant of the root
something
somehow akin to the
k
of
196
the termination
-kg,
was so
firmlyrooted,
that even
Bopp
retui-ned to it.
But while Buttmann
sought
to
get
from
o
to
ku, Bopp
conceived the idea
of
trying
the
opposite
course.
What is said in this sense in
Vei'gl,
Gr. ii^'
446 S. needs no
refutation
nowadays. Bopp conjectured
in the
j^erfect
in
(CO a,
composition
with the substantive verb of the same
nature,as that
which he had
recognized
in the
signiatic
aorists. The mei-e existence of
the three aorists in
-ku,
where he
regarded
the
origination
of the
k
from
"t as
established, was
sufficient in his
eyes
to
explain
such a
surpinsing
transi-
"tion as that of the dental sibilant into the
gutturalexplosive
as
'
very
natural
'
for the
perfect
too. Even the
slightsupport
of which
Bopp
availed himself in the Church-Slavonic transition of
s into the
spirant
ch
and the Lithuanian k in certain
imperatives
has broken down. For there
is a
very great
diflference between a
spirant
and an
explosive,
and the k
of Lithuanian
imperatives
like duMte
give,
has received a much more
satisfactory explanation
from Schleicher
(Lit.
Gr.
p. 231),so that
no
one
will be
likely
to find in it hereafter a
transfigured
s. It
was a still
more
odd notion that the
aspiration
of the consonants
e.g.
in
TrfVXE^^a
had come
from
k;
hence that
TrfVXex"
had
originated
in
^iriTvXtK.Ka,
where one could not
helpaskingwhy
the
a,
which was the
source of the
K,
did not make its
appearance
here
too,
for *TriTr\ilawould have been
just
as
easy
to
pronounce
as the aorist
tTrXtE,a,
and forms like
t'ttaai,
'iacifTi show in what
way
the cr was
employed
in the
perfect,
even
though
only
in isolated instances. For such reasons
I have from the first
contested
Bopp's
doctrine on this
point,especially
in
Tempora
imd Modi
p.
191 AT. and in the Elucidations
p.
123. Most
philologists
probably
agi-ee
with me now in
accepting
the view
expressed
first
by
Pott E. F. i.'
42
ff.,
which
maybe
thus formulated
: The
asjnratedj^erfect
is not a
format
tion
essentially dijfering from
the
non-aspirated ;
the
aspiration
is to he
regardedonly
as a
phoneticaffection of
the consonant
of
the
root.
(Cp.
Schleicher
Compend.^724.)
Thi-ee facts tend
very strongly
to confii^m this view.
Fii'st,
the
197
aspiratedperfect
is
quite
unhiotvn to the
langiiageof
Homer. We
may
add on the
strength
of the more con-ect
data,
which are now at our
command,
that it is
hardlypossible
to find an
instance of this formation
earlier than
Herodotus,
and even in this
writer,
if
my
collectionsdo not
mislead
me,
thei-e is
only
the
solitary tTreTrviLKpee {i.
85
"),
which reminds
us of
TToiiipaywytl
in
Hesych.
The
aspirated perfect
is unknown to the
tragedians,
with the
exception
of
rt-pocpct,
quoted
from
Sophocles
on
p.
400. In
Thucydidesagain
we find
only
Herodotus's
TrfVo^i^o.
Such
forms do not occur
in
any quantity
before
Aristophanes, Plato,
Xen-
ophon,
the orators and later
comedians,
many only
much later. The
few Doric formations of this kind will be noticed below. Now if we
'
For
Tre7ro7jx*Vai (V 106) Stein on the
strength
of
good
M.SS. reads
TreTrotrjKfvai.
.CH. XVI.
CONSONA-NTAL CHANGES IN THE STEM-SYLLABLE. 405
remember that tlie Attic writers were
especiallycaavi'riKoi,
that the
-aspiration
of a tenvxis,
and
especially
of
a v
and
n,
is one
of the most
widely
extended
phenomena
of the Greek
language (Principles
ii.
107
ff.),
and that this affection
was
always spreading
more
and
more in
the
popularlanguage,as
distinguished
from that I'uled
by literature,as
has been
proved by
W. H. Roscher in
my
Studieu i.
2,
63 ff.
we
may
doubtless
say
with
confidence,
that the
aspiratedperfect
is
a
variety
of
the
non-aspirated,
wliich
passed by degrees
from the
popular usage
into
that of literature
only
in the most
flourishing
time of Attic
prose,
in
view of the
increasing
demand for active
perfects.
As soon as a
number
of common
aspirated
forms like
TrtVojufpo, kf^-o^n,KEKXufa, TrecpvXii-^^a,
iii]royji
from roots
ending
in
a tenuis had established
themselves,
the
genius
of the
language came to feel that the
aspiration
was
something
appertaining
to the
perfect,
so
that roots
ending
in
a
medial were also
treated in the
same
way
: ijiljXafa,fxi/^iaxa, TrtVpdx^o.
Both kinds of
aspiration
wei-e favoiu'ed
by
the circumstance that
even
in earlier times
there
were not a
few
perfects
whose
aspii-ate
was
either as in
eiXrj^a,
tiXr](pu, KEKVipa,
yiypuipa,
earpodta original,
or at
any
rate not in the fii'st
instance and not
solely
proper
to the
perfect,
like
aXiiXtfaby
the side of
aXeifto(rt.Xi~),cecldaxd by
the side of
cicax^'i(cp."Joc-eo)^ XiXacfia
{XiXcKpaq Aristoph.fragm. 492) by
the side of
X(i"i)V(T(rM (Princ.
i.
453),
EtTKCKfta (rt.(TKn-
Princ. i.
204)by
the side of
(TKCKpoc, aKCKpi],
A second
argument
of
great importance
for this
question
is found in 198
tJa6fact that the
same
kind of
aspii'ation
occurs
from Homer onwards
in the 3
pi.
of the
perfect
middle. Homeric forms of the
kind,
the
authorities for which will have to be
quoted more precisely
later
on,
are
ciici-^arai (I't. ceik),
Terpafa-ai
(I't. -pEir),
epxarut
(rt.fapy),
opupe-
Xarot (rt.opey),TtTpltparcu(rt.rpij^),
to which are
subsequently
added
kTE-a^ciTo, ""\")(aro, kaetrayciTo.
It is
very noteworthy
that here too the
medial of the stem is treated
just
like the tenuis.
Evidently
these
forms,
the
aspiration
of wliich
can never be
satisfactorily explained
from added
sounds, were the
precui-sors
of the Attic active
perfects.
What in the
middle remained
an isolated
affection,
and aftei'wards
completely
dis- appeared,
became in the active
a common
process,
favouring
the
coinage
of new forms,
wherein
we
may
admire the still
youthful
formative
tendency
of the Greek
language,
which is reluctant to leave unused
what
was once at its command.
A third
fact,
which
we
press
into
our service,
is that the vocalism
also makes
any
essential difference between the
non-aspirated
and the
aspiratedperfectimpossible.
If the interior vowel
change
were some- thing
reserved foi-the
non-aspii'ated perfect,
we cannot understand
why,
in
spite
of the
aspiration, we discover vowel -intensification in
cih])(a.
{laKiw),
(.TTTTjxu
(besideETr-dKoi), ei^evxa(^i^evyrvfjii),
and on
the other hand
the
change
of
e
into
c
in
etAo^o, kv^jro^a,, KiKXo"pu, Trljroiji"pa, Tirpoipa (i't.
TptTr).
In other words
a change
of vowel and
aspii-ation
are by no means
mutuallyexclusive,
and
we are quite
without
any
criterion for
completely
different methods of formation of this
tense,
with the sole
exception
of
the
K.
We can
only distinguish
two kinds of the active
peifect,
that
without
/v"
and that with
k.
The
aspiratedperfect
has been
subjected
to a thorough
discussion
by
Uhle in the
'
Sprachwissenschaftliche Abhandlungen
'
p.
59
ff.,
which
amounts in
part
to
a re-establishment of the old distinction.
Though
406 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvu
the
diligentcollections,
which ai'e
offered
there,
call
foracknowledgment,.
and
though many
of the
points
of view
suggestedby
Uhle deserve all
consideration,
I cannot
agree
with his
general
result. I
gladly
admit that
vowel-intensification,
with the
exception
of the
change
from
"
into
o,
did
199 not
pi-esent
itself to the
genius
of the
language
as
anything
essential to-
the
perfect
and
peculiar
to
it,
and it is
noteworthy
that the
long
vowel
or diphthong
"
just
as in the future and the
sigmatic
aorist " is
very
often common
to the
perfect
stem with the
present
stem :
rtTtjka, Keicrjcu,
"n-ifltsvya,
eppTjyn.
But
on
tlie other hand we have learnt to
recognise
instances
cnoitgh
in which
a
perfect
with
an
intensified root-vowel
corresponded
to a
present
without
this,
like
Trefijid
and
f/xi/rw, uXijfa
and
Xoyit/Kirw.
Cases of the kind
are
given by
Uhle himself
on
p.
66.
These in connexion with the
change
of
e
into
o,
which
even
according
to
his view is characteristic of the
perfect,
sliow that the
genius
of the
langiiage
had the bestowal of
a peculiar
vowel-character
upon
the
perfect,
so
to
speak,hovering
before its
eyes
as
its
goal.
Uhle
lays
stress
upon
the
oliservation that
an unexpanded present,(according
to our classification,
a present
of the first
class)
never answei-s to a
perfect
with
an
intensified
vowel,
and hence
e.g.
a parallel
to the Skt. tuda-mi
perf.ttitdda,
that is
an imaginable*(pvyw
w"(j)ivyci
is never
found. But the
reason
of this
lies not in the
perfect
but in the
present
formation. For on
p.
14.5 fi",
it was
shown that the Greeks allowed
presents
of this short kind almost
exclusively
where there is
e
in the
root-syllable,
or with
a
double
con- sonant,
and
on
p.
1^78 we saw
how such
present
stems
passed
into aorists.
There are
only
three
presents
with
a
shoit;
a
actually
in use
in Attic
("lyw,yit(\(j)w,
fia-)(^i)f.iui,
and
scarcely
a
single
one with
any
other short
vowel but
e.
But in the case
of the numerous stems with
"
in the
present
the
o
has
quite regularly
established itself
hj
its side as the
vowel of the
perfect.
The
surprisingpart
of the fact
quoted by
Uhle
therefoi'c
properly
confines itself to
this,
that
ypu"pti)
and
na\onni
have
no perfects
with
?/
in the
stem-syllaljle,
and
as we saw on
p.
402 the
"j
is
not at all to be
exjiected
before
an
aspirate.
The relations of the vowels in the
aspiratedperfect,
on
Avhich Uhle
lays
much
stress,
we
had occasion to discuss on
p.
402. Uhle's
rule,
according
to which
'
a
double consonant or
natiu-al
lengthprotects
alike
fr-oniintensification and from
aspii-ation,'
has
accorduig
to his
own
admis- sion
11
exceptions,
to which however we
must add also the 4 instances in
which
an aspirated
form is on record as
well
as a non-aspirated
one :
aviioya
and
f'u'"wx", Triwpaya
and
"Ktirpaxa
etc. The true number of the
200
exceptions
therefore amounts to
15, certainlya
very
considerable one.
A still more thorough
examination of the indiWdual instances would
give
occasion for a good
many
remarks even
upon
the 49
'.regular'
formations,
which Uhle assumes. I think however I have
already
dwelt
longenough upon
this
point.
No one can
fail to see that
aspira- tion
in tlie
perfect
so far i-emaiued f;aithful to its
origin
as a phonetic
affection,
that while it made other distinctive marks
superfluous(cp.
j/Waxa, 7r"'7r\"x")
it
never completely
excluded them
(cp. "(\";^a,.
7r"7royu0a).
I
now
add
a list of the
aspiratedperfects,
in
alphabetical
order
:
"y"/"X"
with the Tlieraean
ayayox"
will have to Ije discussed later
on. " The
regulai"
?/x"
^^
"^ "^f*
from
Xenophon
onwards
{rrvriixw:
Mem
or. iv.
2, 8, irpviiyjuai
Demosth. xix.
18).
CH. XVI.
ASPIEATED STEAMS. 407
/j"/?Xn^""'ot
Demosth. xix.
180, KaTsfiXncjxireQ cp.
above
p.
358.
"7ro-/3"/3/\"0(ir"e quoted
above
p.
400.^
^"^op?f((/)"
"
KaTulyejjpuji^e Hesych.
llceixfi''tctit,a
Hesych., ?.ehi)(^ev
Alexis Com. ed. Meineke iii.
p.
oil.
S"C7]x"^Q quoted already
from Babrius
p.
396.
Secho)^a
from
Hyperides
p.
401.
f^fSoxfO""!'
from ('oKt'wDio Cass. xliv. 26 ed. Bekk.
s^evxnquoted
from Philostr.
p.
397.
""'//)'ox"
cp. p.
369,
illAttic
prose.
ETT-j/xft
iu Attic orators
(Isocr. Lye. Dem.).
tpprjxa
first in the LXX.
eppicpivcu Lys. X. 9,
21.
kfTKrupivuL
cp.
above
p.
401.
oi'-Ew^o, ar"wii^ora
rh
rri^fitiu
TtLr
oti:rjf.iaTU)i'
Dem. xlii.
30,
Meiiaiider
Com. iv.
p.
133.'
'
tnr-i]Wax(i
Xen. Memor. iii.
13, 6, ?(//X\nxei' Dionys.
Com. iii.
p.
547 V. 10, /.liraWaxoroginscription
from Thera C. I. Gr.
no. 2448,
1. 12.
KtK(i\v(t)a Origeiies
in Veitch
p.
312.
E7ri-K"i;)]pvxii'(n
Demosth. xix. 35. 201
A.-"'/c\o0o ab-eadyquoted
p.
399,
from
Aristopli.,
also in Plato and
Demosth.
K(.i:ocj)u
in
Lysias,
Plato and Demosth.
as
distinguished
from Honiei*.
KEKOTrwC
"-K"h:paTr]p(\)}fiec 8ophron.
p.
71 Ahr.
/\f'/\"X" quoted
from
Galen, s'iXnxa(cp.
p.
361) (jvi'slXoxn
Dem. xxi.
23.
/xEfiaxorec,
f.iu.i^a}'
{.iej^iuxoteq
Ai'istoph. Equ.
55.
avi.i-j.iif.iixa Polyb.
Dio Cass. Galen.
opcopexoTtg only quoted
from Suidas.
ireTraixii'
Plut. Dem. 9.
7r"VX"X"
fliicl
TrETrXo^nHijipOCr.Cp. p.
400.
veTTopcija
in Herodotus and Attic
prose.
Cp.
404.
"/i-7r"7r//X"cror
Dio Cass. xl. 40.
Eia-TreirXrjx"^
doubtful
reading
in
Hippocr. Cp.
Yeitch
p.
486.
irinpaxaquoted
from
Xeiiophon,Dinarchus,
Demosth.
(xix.17)
and
Menander
(Com.
iv.
254).
irEnvpzxorti; p.
400,
from Alistotle.
7rf0vAa)("
in
Plato,Xen.,
Din.
Ttrnxa
Xen.,
(TViTemxe
Plato
Leges
625.
WOXi^o Polyb.
xviii. 7 r"^Xi"/jo-wr. :
TSTpifa, "7rt-frpt^;")'
Ai'istoph.Lys. 952, (Tvirirpicpev
Eubulus Com,
iii.235.
TtTpotpa
and
rirpa^a
from
rpeTru).
Cp.
above
p.
400.
This makes
altogether
37. The
quantity
of the stem- vowel is
every- where
marked,
where
necessary,
as
far
as possible.Among
these the
stems with
a
tenuis and
a
medial
are
almost
equallyrepresented.
The
*
According
to Yeitch
p.
127
Pel3pvxa"5Quint. Smyrn.
iii. 146 would
belong
here,
for he derives it from
PpvKeiu
to
gnash
the teeth, bnt
nothing prevents us
from
allowing
the
lion, which is described there, to
roar,
and hence from
adopt- ing
the
fipxix""
mentioned on
p.
401 as belonging
to
Ppvxaofj.at,
408 TERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FR03I IT.
ch. xvi.
two forms
(".e/.par//fn)^a {tt:eKpaTi]i)l)^ri^"g
cp,
Alireus Dor.
332)
and
TreTraixo.
deserve
especial
notice
;
for in them the
guttural
which
comes out in forms like
^ykittj^i^w,
Trctd^'oD^at, Tra/yrtor
shows itself also
in the
peifect.
The former
example
further
jn-oves
that
aspu-ation
in
this
place
was
not unknown to the Dorians
also,a
fact for which
we are
the
moi'e
glad
to find
evidence,
because it
happens
that almost all the
202
other forms are
pure
Attic. But the fact that there is evidence for the
aspii-ated
form from two different Doric
districts,
Theiu and
SjTacuse,
hai'dly
leaves
a
doubt that this method of formation extended to that
dialect also.
So much for
aspii-ation
in the
perfect.
A
countei-part
to this is
suppliedby
the
sinking
of
a tt or
(p
into
/3,
which is established in three
forms:
eypuftwc'eyypa\//atHesych.,ke/cAt/jwc inscription
from Andania
(publishedby Sauppe
Gott.
1860)
line
78, TraprtTvf.ii3ef napaqipnrel,
{lIuuprtjK-ei' Hesych.
The first of these forms admits of
some doubt.
Probably a
y
has
dropped
out after the
v
and the accent is
wrongly
given;
hence
we
should read
h-ypaftujc.
The
reduplication
has been
neglected,
as in
iyyvi^^ai.
For
KtKXeJDojgSauppe assumes a
present
*Kkef3u) by
the side of (cXeVrw on
the
analogy
of the late
Kpvftwby
KpvTrru).
But the consonant of the root in
k-pu-n-Tw
is
f,
in KXi-n-rw
it.
As there is
no trace of
any
word
**v\f/3w,
it seems to me more
probable
that the
softening
of
-k
to
/3was limited to the
perfect.
Trap-ervfijyeL
shows
by
its
reduplication
that it is a
perfect,
and
by
the
apocope
of the
pi'eposition
and the
present ending
that it is
a
Doric form.
Taking
into considera- tion
TVjUlJoyipcoi''
t(jyciT")yi]p(i)Q
Kcii
vapi]\Xayi.ie
i oc rij
reoro/ct
[Anecd.
Bekk.
65, Phot.],
which
can hardly
have
anything
to do with
rv/xpog
grave,
I
conjecture
a
perfectTETVf^ii^a
Avith the intransitive
meaning so
common
with the older method of
formation,
dii-ect from the rt.
Tv(p,
which has elsewhere
only
in
rvcpdu), reriKpunai,
derived from
Tvcpog,
the
meaning
'
to be surrounded with
mist,
darkened.'
Two
ejiic
forms
resembling
each
other,
but
deviatingwidely
from
the formation of these
perfects,
are wecpv^uTtQ
and
^.e^xvCore,-n-tipv'CoTic,
we
find thrice in Book h
of the Iliad
(6,528, 532),
once in Book X
(1
= (I)
6).
In Princ. ii. 96 I think I have
disproved
the view that the
4
here
arose from
a
combination of the final consonant of the root with
the / of the
participial
sufiix for. The
4
is there
explainedby
the
analogy
for
(pv'Ca.
Granted that there was a
masculine
fv'Cu,a
peifect
stem
Treifw^a might
have been
formed, just
like the
present
and aorist
stems
Oepi^o-,
"\^pat(Tjio-.
We
might
also conceive a
present *^v4(tj
=
Lat.
fxuj'io :
the
expansion
would then have made its
way
into the
perfect,just as in the
Syracusan
-Kt-Koayji,
quoted
above
p.
400, or
like
203
the nasal of
AAoy^a, Trecj/vyycoy, /vt^arfa.^"/ii/i,or"
we know
only
from
a
quotation
of Antimachus in Eustathius
(on
Od.
r
401) going
back to
Herodian
(i.444).
The old
grammarians regarded
these
forms,
like
Hesiod's
AfAttx/xorec
or XeXixf-ioTtc (Theog.826), as
syncopated
from
TTf^uifj/Korfc etc.,
but
no one
will
now believe this. Por the third of
these forms
hardly
any
other
explanation
than that from
a noun-stem is
possible.
e)
The Perfect with
k.
This form
too,
which is
very
widely
extended in Attic
Greek, we
can see
becoming more common
by degrees
in the
period
of the
language
CH. XVI. THE PEBFECT WITH
k.
409
for which
we
have historic
testimony.
As will be shown in detail
further
on,
there ai'e
only
about 20 forms of the kind in
Homer,
while
the total number of the
perfects
in
k quoted by
Veitch
reaches,as
I
count
tliem,
to 268. If
we
remember tliat the meritorious work of this
industrious collector excludes all
quiteregularforms,
and therefore
very
many
derived
verbs,we
may
venture to assert that the total number of
these forms
may
be
fiii-ly put
at least at 300
;
and it is
very
remarkable
that
hai-dly
a
fifteenth
part
of these is Homeric,
.
But the different law of
formation is of still more impoi'tance
than the numerical relation. The
language
of Homer has
perfects
with
/; only
from stems
ending
in
a
vowel. Hence forms like the Attic
irtKiiica,
taruXKd, i)pKa
are
quite
vmknown to it. Even the
existingperfects
from vowel-stems like
^eiSoiKa,l3i[3t]i:a, nifjwKci
have
by-forms
without the
/"-,
like
hlcL/Jsy,
/5e/5(ia"T(, e/Li-n-iipvv'ia
There is
an especially large
number of
participles
of
the
kind,
like
(.f/x/Lu/w-oc
by
ueKjuiji^a,
rerXtivla by TErXrji^ti.
The formation
with
^.-
does therefore
exist,
in the time of
Homer,
but rather as
experimental
than
as
normal. And even the Attic writers have
retained in the forms
quoted
above
p.
387,
like
cVT-fi/^er, ridyuTE, ceciwq
traces of the twofold formation. Thus the case
is different with this
whole class of
perfects
from what it was
in the class
previously
discussed.
We
see them
gi'aduallymaking
their
appearance
side
by
side with the
primitiveperfects,
and
supplementing
them in a particular
direction.
For in the case
of vowel-stems we can as a
rule
only get
a
singular
of
the
perfectby
means of
^: ;
we never
find
a */"f'/?of( or *ftifir]a, as w^as
noticed
on
p.
386. This also
serves
to
explain
how it has been
possible
204
for scholars to conceive the notion that this
ic,
which
comes
in so con- veniently
to
distinguish
the
perfectforms, was developedpui-elyphoneti- cally
between the
long
vowels
suppliedby
the intention of the
language
and the
a.
I
myself
in the
Tempora
und Modi
p.
199
gave my
assent
to this
view, propoimded
fii'st
by
Thiersch and afterwards
brought
orward with
greaterweight by
Ahrens 'Ueber die
Conjugation
anf MI
im Homerischen Dialekt
'"7,2, accoixling
to which the
k arose
'"
for the
avoidance of the hiatus
'
or
'
from the
gaping
of the mouth.' The more
exact observation of
phoneticprocesses,
which
has come
up
only
since
the
appearance
of that
early
work of
mine,
has since
taught
us
that the
'
explosive
sound of the vocal cleft
'
commonly
called
sjni-itus lenis,
which
is heard between two vowels,
when one immediately
follows the
other,
cannot
possiblygi-ow
into a
gutturalexplosive.
We shall
hardly
find
any
one nowadays adducing
the forms
ov-K-in,/[n/-/.--"Vt
in
support
of siich
a view. The
(c
here
certainly
rests on a pronominalparticle
added to
the
negation,
which occurs more fully
in ovkI and A\'ith
aspiration
in
ovx', raixl(cp.Roscher,
Studien iii.
144).
Out of tliousands of instances
where vowels
come
into
contact,
this would be the
only
one in which
the contact was
avoided
by
such
an
insertion. If the science of
language
in its
present position
scorns
the
'
connecting
vowel,'
it is still
less tender to what
Westphal
calls the
'
separating
consonant.' I have
therefore
long ago
retracted
my
earlier view in difierent
places,espe- cially
in the 'Elucidations'
p.
128. Another
view,
viz. that the
c
originated
in / or even
from
rr,
has been
rejected
in Princ. i. 79
as
not
made out. The labial
spirant
is
just
as far removed as the dental from
the hard
gutturalexplosive.
Phonetic violences of 'this kind
are now
probablyregarded
as possibleonly by
one or two here and there.
410 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
cu. xvi.
The
only
correct
way
of
explaining
this is to take the
i^,
which
we
never
find
coming
from
any
other
sound, by itself, or
in other words to
establish
analogies
for it
as a
formative element added in tKis
place,
and
extending by degrees
as
time went on.
In the
Principles
1.
c. I have
205
connected the k
with the root-determinative k which
we
have often found
added, especially
to roots
ending
with
a
vowel.
Holding firmly
to this
further
connexion,
I
now
maintain with
positiveuess
that the
/c
of the
perfect
is
a stem-forming elemeiit,
and
as we certainly
cannot
separate
the vowel
following
the
k
from the
consonant,
the
syllableku
is stem-
forming.
It is true that the stem needs such a suffix
only as a noun-
stem. But after
learning
to
recognise,
under the head of the formation
of the
pi'esent,
a large
number of
suflixes,
which
though originally
in- tended
to denote i-adical
noun-stems,
still made their
way
into the
verb,
and after
findingeven in the thematic aorist traces of such
suffixes, quite
apai't
from the
vowel, we cannot be
surprised
to meet
again
in the
per- fect
such
a
stem-forming
consonant.^ No
objection
can
be
brought
against
this view on the
ground
that the
perfect-stem
is
already
marked
by reduplication.Reduplication
and noun-suffixes are
quitecompatible,
as is shown
e.g.
by
a-y-ayvfj-Tyg
(Hesych.),/3"-/3a-io-c, Ke-Kpc'iK-Ttj-c,
ke-
h:pij(j)-aXi)-c.
I therefore
now
regard
the
ku
of he-Ebj-Ku
as dii-ectly
analo- "
gous
to the
present expansionsr",
i
v, ro, ayo, to,
gko
and to the
to
and
Ko
which
are
demonstrated in
some
few
examples,
as we saw
above
p.
281, even
for the thematic aorist.
Supposing
there was a
noun-stem
ftii-Ka
Ion.
lirj-Kci, by
the side of this
a reduplicatedftt-fta-Ku, jjE-pij-Ku
might
have been
foi-med,
and such
reduplicatedstems,
at a
time when
the verbal forms were still
fluid,might
have made their
way
into the
per- fect,
side
by
side with the shorter
forms, just
as the noiin-stems
c""".i
u,
Xa/j-ftayo
appear
hj
the side of shoi-ter
present
formations,
and foi-ms
like
uXiTd,
a/uapTo
by
the side of shorter aorist formations. Such forms
characterised
by
definite distinctive sounds
agree
with the taste of
cer- tain
comparatively
recent
peiiods
of
language
better than the most
archaic
kernel-forms,
which in
any
case must receive
a moi-e
individual
206 shape,
much
as a richlydeveloped
national life demands definite customs
and
dress,
and
as similarity
and indeed
uniformity as a rule extend more
and
more
widely
in the
course
of the life of
a language
and
a
nation
alike. Hence
we cannot be
siu-priscd
that this
k,
which at first
only
appears
here and
there, by degrees gets
the
upper
hand,
and in time
conquers
for itself
a
wide
region
ovei'
which it
prevails,
and that the
peculiarly
mai'ked
perfects
of the older
stamp
more
and more become
varieties
by
the side of it. Fi-om such
points
of view there is still
some
reason
for
calling,
with Jacob
Grimm,
the earlier forms which
give
evidence of
youthful
creative
force,
sti'ong,
those which have been re- duced
to
uniformity
weak.
For the
syllableku
in the
perfect
we
may,
with
our
present way
of
regardingit,
adduce three sets of
analogies;
viz.
1) Verbal,
from Greek
itself,
i.e.other verbal forms in which
we
may
recognisea suffix with
k.
To these
belong
")
In the first
place
the tlu-ee isolated
aorists,
which
are always
"
I find
myself
here in
agreement
witli Bruuman
'
ZurGeschiclitc der
priisens-
bildcnden iSuftixe' i" the
'
Sprachw. Abluindlungen
'
p.
155, without however
being
able to
accept
his further conclusions as to the extension of such stem-
formations.
CH. XVI.
THE PERFECT AVITJ{ K.
411
classed witli
it,
tcioKu,
tdi]Ku,ijku.
We must come
back afterwards to
these
forms,
which
evidently
follow the
sigmatic
aoiists as regards
their
inflexion,
because
they
can
only
be understood in connexion with other
unsigmatic formations,
in which
o,
so to
speak,plays
the
part
of the
thematic vowel.
/3)
A small number of
present
forms,
where the k
is
e\ddently
of the
nature of
a
suffix. This is most
plainly
seen
in dXt'kw. The inflexion
of this verb is based
upon
the two-fold verbal stem d\ and oXe and the
two-fold
present
stem 6\\v
(from vXrv)
and
6\eK"/i.
The stem-form
Avith
ic
is in Homer limited to the
present
stem
:
oXiKoveru' 2 172, Trt^ot
/i"j'
TTs^ovQ
oXeKoy A
1.50,
6XiKov-ni 11
17,
o\ii:ovro A
10;
it also occurs
a
few times in the
tragedians[oXei^eic Antig. 128.5,ihXet:6^af
Trach.
1012) always
in melic
passages.
In Herodotus fii'st
(i.45)
we come
across
the
perfectairoXwXti^a,
which thenceforward takes over
the transi- tive
function
as compared
with cnroXujXa.
Evidently
the
longerperfect
is
I'elated to the
correspondingpresent
much as TriTrXrjda
is to irXiidoj.
On
the
Cj-^man inscription
of Idalium there is
(1.16)
the form
fo-Jco-i-je,
which Deecke and
Siegismund(Stud.vii. 243)reproduceby cwkou] (Ahrens,
probably
more
correctly, by cwkvie
Philol.
xxxv. 68),
and refer to a
present
20T
*cwKU),
which is to Becwkci
as oXii^u)is to oXwXei^u. Even if the
Cyprians
hajd
by
the side of this
optativeonly
the indicative of a
past
tense '*'i.cwkov
or even
the common
tcioKu,
the form would be of
importance
for the
formation here under discussion. For mood-forms
hardly
ever came
from aorists with k.^
By
the side of
'iX)]6i
and
tXaaKOj-iai
we
find
f
365
the
conjunctive/'A/'/k-tj^ti :
el
ksv
'AttoAAwi'
///^Tj- iXi'iKrjci
icctt
adayuTOL Beoi
c'lXXoi. The
meaning
is as
little that of a
perfect,
as
that of the
optative
in the Homeric
hymn,
to
Apoll.
Del. 165
(AZ/kOf
/xey
'A-n-oXXioy
\\prefiidi
ivy. We are
therefore
justified
in
assuming a present iXi'itao,
the
c
of
which does not extend
beyond
the stem of this tense.
The
case is difi'erent with
kpvKU),
which was thoroughly
discussed
on
p.
292. Here the aorist
ipvKaKov
shows the same
guttural,
and this
appears
also in
epvtw, tf)vi,a.
The
k-
has therefore more of the character
of
an
expansion
of the root. For
no one
wUl doubt that
ipvKuj
is an ex- tension
of the stem
epv protect.
" The same
judgment
is to be
passedupon
jjpiiKw
in its relation to the rt.
ftop(pijjpujfTKw cp.
Princ. i.
78,
ii.
80)
and
upon
SiojKU)
as
related to
cio-fim,cie-iuai(ib.
ii.
309).
" Another
gi-oup
is
formed
by
the
presentscei-ciaaofiai (cp.
above
p.
221)
and
77--//cro-w,
which
are
evidently
based
on
the stems cik
and
-tcik.
Both occur
also in
forms
belonging
to other tenses
: lEuilendai,
'iTzraKor. To these stems
-Jw,
the
sign
of the
I-class,
is added as a
presentexpansion.
These
presents
are
therefoi-e
quiteparallel
to Latin
presents
like
/"-c-io,
and ia-c-io. Those
who
agree
with
me
in
referring/h-c-io
to the
rt.ya
= Gr.
de,
can
regard
this form
as
simply
the
present
to
e-driKu,
which we might
transfer into
hypothetical
Greek in the form
*6r](TrTw.
On the other hand we can
hardly
say
now
whether cti-cuiKci is
a
strong perfect
from the rt. tt/c or a 208
weak
one
of the vt. ci.
We
can
here
see clearly
how all these cases
hang
^
The relation of
eScoxa,
Se'SojKo to the Skt. di7c
worship,
offer
{adCicat,(liidiiqa)
need not be decided here. " I
may
mention also that
Bergk
Jen. Litteraturz.
1875 Xo. 26
explains
the
sign,
which Deecke and
Siegismund
take for
je,quite
differently,
viz. as j)si,
and hence instead of SwKoie reads the words
as
Soko7
^i
( =
(r(^iV).
With such difficult texts it is
impossible
to arrive at complete certainty
except by repeated
examinations.
412 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi,
closelytogether. Possibly
the Homeric
kypijaau)
also
comes from
a stem
lyinjK
or
typ-qKo,
whicli is not fiir removed from the
perfecttyijyepKu,
though certainlytypi^yoiSacnmight suggest
another
explanation;
and
the
pei-fect
with /."
is not
quoted
fi'om
any
author earlier than
Josephiis.
" In
Apollon.
Ehod. we find
vnucpiicrowy(cp.
Homer.
vTraOprffTri'ii) o 330).
*cpr]-K-ju)
would be related to
ci^paKa
much
us
fac-i-o
to the Osc.
conj.
Jefaci-d.
y)
As thematic aorists with the suffix
ko,
we
recognised
p.
282
jjfXTrXnKot',
on
which I did not venture to
say
anything positive,
because
of its
etymologicaldifficulties,
and
e-n-a-Ko- r.
The latter is related to the
primitiveKaTu-iTTi]-ri]v
{6 136)
and
Tre-ivT-q-u'Q (^3.54)precisely
as
KiKfirjKu
to
KEi^ntjiljc
or as /3f'/3A?/(va
to
i,viift\iiTi]i' (above
p. 132).
The
y
of ci-i-
T^ayt-r
appeared
to us also of the
same nature
as
this
k,
so that we have
again
the
parallel
:
ri-rfxr^-KE
:
r/dii-m-i: ; *,
'i-TrruKO-p
: ivrii-r-qr.
(")
There
are also
some
isolated
forms,
in which the
k is
evidently
a
later
accretion,
but not
preserved
in. its
purity,
viz. aXvtM
by
the side of
aXvffku) and aXvio
(cp.p.
194).
A
very
conceivable aorist
*!j\.vKf"i' or a
present
*a\vkw is alike unknown
:
it is
only
in
sigmatic
forms that the
gutturalcomes
out. It is difficult to determine whether the
k
of the
iteratives and of the inchoatives
undoubtedly
akin to them
(cp.
j).187)
which is
always precededby a,
is connected with the
k
here discussed.
2)
Nominal formations.
In all kindred
languagesnouns,
which
are derived
immediately
from
roots or verbal stems
by means of the suffix
ka, are rare. Greek foi-ms
of the kind
are
found in
(jw-ko-c, y\"i;-/.o-c, 0//-k-?j (cp.
Skt. dhd-ka-s
re- ceptacle)
:
Latin
ones like
lyvae-ji-ca (mourning
woman,
from
Yt.fa,fari),
medi-cu-s are discussed
by
Corssen
Aussprache
ii.^ 306 fi".
: a few othei-s
are
quoted by
Schleicher
Comp.^ 461,
with the Ch.-Sl.
^j^m-^-??
nation
from the
same root as,
po-jnd-r/.-s
and
ttoK-v-c,Tr\rj-6-oc.
3) Cognate
vei-bal forms in other
languages.
Yei'bal forms of the nature of this
perfectevidentlybelong
to the
209
youth
of the various
languages.
It is
possibleindeed, as
has been
attemptedhere,
to
point
the
patterns
of these
foi-ms,
inherited from a
stillearlier
period,
which are as it were their
starting-points,
but we can
hardly
trace
any adequate
reason for the fact that out of
many
stem-
formations this
particular
one became the
more common in this
place
and for this
especial
purpose
: we can at most detect certain
points
of
connexion in the
usage
of
a
suffix. In the
case
of the thematic aorists
we discovered the
tendency
to
a
stem-formation with
r,
wliich
developed
in the Keltic
languages,
and
perhaps
also in Oscan into
a definitely
marked
preterite.
We cannot be
surprised
then if within the circle of
the
more familiar and more
thoroughly investigated
Indo-Germanic
languageswe
find
no
peifect
with
a
k. There is however a trace of this
in
Oscan, though unfortunately only
in the one word \io/coK"ir=Lat.
{col)locavit, on
the
inscription
from Anzi
(no.xxxv.
in
Enderis). Cp.
Corssen Ztschr. xviii. 210.
Corssen, on the
ground
of the
complete
isolation of such
perfects
on Italian
soil,formerly
would not admit that
the
K
of this form had
anything
whatever in common with that of the
Greek
perfect.
But after
discovering,as
he
thought,
a
considerable
number of Etruscan
perfects(3 sing.)
in
-ce
e.g.
tur-ce said to be=r"-
TopfVKe, hij)u-ce,
which
according
to him would
coiresjiond
to a yiyXvfe
(in
form
pretty nearly*y"yXv"pivKi),
ie-ce
answering
in the
same
way
to
CH. XVI.
THE PERFECT WITH K.
415
T"'-0fi-A.",
he altered his view
(DieSprache
der Etrusker i.
754),separating
the Greek
perfect
from the Itahari " without sufficient
reason,
as we saw
on
p.
392 " because of the
vocalism,
but
explaining
the k as
something
common
to both. As the Italian character of Etruscan does not seem
to me to be made
out,
in
spite
of Corssen's admirable carefulness in
working
at the remains of the
language,
and
as
the
interpietation
of in- dividual
points
is still far from
certain,^
I mention these Etruscan forms
only
with
reserve.
An enumeration of all the
perfects
in
kh
would have
hardly
any
mean-
ing
in face of the later wide extensioTi of this form. I content
myself
-'^^
therefore with
quoting
the Homeiic forms and
making
a
few brief
remarks
upon
the occurrence
of this formation elsewhei-e. In the Iliad
and the
Odyssey
we find the
followmg
20
jierfects
with
k :
.
u.Ct]k6t"c K 98, ah]K(')Tac
^
281.
fDej37]Kag
O
90, uf^KpiloeflrjKii'
Z
355, plupf./5t-^5//*.-"t
A 221 etc.
f3ti3lvKe
K 145,
n 22.
l3"f3\{,KOL
e
270, plupf.f3ei3XiiKei
A 108 etc.
(3"f3p(ji)k:wc
X 94.
^"?a/;/v" 0
134, CecaijKoreQ /j
61.
"
^t^etTTviiKei
p
359.
delvKe E 811 etc.
^etcoLtca A 555 etc.
v-!r-tfii'i]fxvKE
X 491.
eartjKdc
E
485,
earrjice
F 231
etc.,knTi'iKit
A 329 etc.
KEKfiyjKag
Z 262.
/x"/i/3/\wk"
p
190, irapfiE^i3\u)Kt
All,
fxi^vKEi' (from ^i/w)
^ 420.
"n-ecpiiKT]
A
483, TZEi^vKam cp.
above
p.
385
TTEf
vKEi
A 109 etc?.
TEdauaiiKaiTi
I
420,
687.
ridi-qKE2 12 etc.
rirXi^KacA
228, tet\-i]ker
347.
TETV\1)KMC
P 748.
7ra|0-w)(W(;"
(Aristarch.,
M.SS.
Trapw^'?'^"^ "^P-
^^
Roche)
K 252. The
dubious
(Tvr-o)(_wK6TE
B 218 was
discussed above
p.
369.
Vowel stems of
every
kind have
pi-oducedperfects
in
tc
in such
abundance in the
post
Homeric time that it is
completelysuperfluous
to
quote particular
instances.
Very many
might
be adduced
even
from
Herodotus,
the earlier
tragedians
and
ThucycUdes.
We
may say
indeed
that the Attic TSTiters could form a
perfect
in
i.a
from
any
vowel stem.
From consonantal stems on
the other hand the most numerous
perfects
in the Attic writers
belong
to
present
forms in
-4w,
like
yeyu/urfiica,
i'lpwaKa,
ijTi'udKci,
("yKEi^iijf.uaKa,
it,i]TUKa, TEdavf-iaKu, KEkwiuukci, wiojuciko, EinrovcaKa,
iTfippaKu(from fpai^u) Isocr.),
"
eWiku,TEBin-iKa,E\p}]"piKct, j)pEdit:a,
KEKOfiiKa,
211
VEVOjJilKn,
(bl'EtClKd, TTETTOpiKCl, VE^porTlKU, vfiplKd,
TrfVnt
/v"0,
all
gOOd
Attic.
yEyv^raKCKTiv^
TTpovTEdEa-JiKEi occur as
early
as
Aeschylus (Prom. 586,
211),i^EKOfUKcjc
in Hei-odotus
(ix.115).
Most of the
examples
are furnished
by Plato,Xenophon,
and
especially
the Orators. Rott in the Ztschr. f.
Alterth. 1853
p.
183 has
justly
observed that the
suppression
of the
consonant of the stem in the future and
sigmatic
aorist favoiu-ed the
'
Cuno in his Etrascan Studies
(Fleckeisen's
Jahrb. 1874
p. 313)
translates
tu7'ce
by
dedicat. Elia Lattes
(Memorie
dell' Instituto Lombardo Vol.
xi.)
takes
tnrce as a
proper
name
Turcius.
414 PKRFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
formation of such
perfects.
For if in earlier times forms like
ceceiTrrrjicu
by ctnryiiau)
and
icEiTn'ijrra,
XeXvku
by Xijnrw,
tXvrra
were
in
use,
it
was
natural to form a
i'lpiraKa
for
upTrdtroj, ijpTraau.
It
was
just as
easy
for
"KtTTttKd (Orators)
to be added to
tte/o-w,
cVtio-a. The instances formed
from oilier stems in the Attic
period are not
very
numeroiis.
KE-KpX-Ka
and
Tt-Tii-ica are hardly
to be
regarded as consonantal,seeing
that the
stem without
j- Avas
in
use
also in
KpJ-Ti'j-g, k-pi-m-c,
ra-To-c,
Tu-ai-c.
TricpciyKd
is
(|uoted
several times from Dinarchus. It is
only
from
Aristotle onwards and in later comic writers that these forms with
a care- fully
preserved
nasal like
cnrii^TayKa
became
more common. From stems
in
p I'lpKci, etpKci
(ciEtpt^oTEc Xen.),rriuvpKa, 'icbBapica are the
onlyones
which
are good Attic,
of those in X : I'r/yEXKu,
laraXKa. We
can plainly
per- ceive
here the
gi'adual
extension of the foi-mation.
Our statement of the
case
hitherto has made the
perfect
with
k
appear
as a
pre-eminently
Attic form. But it would be
an incorrect notion
not
to consider this formation
as existing
in the other dialects Intimations
to this effect have
already
been
given as
regards
Ionic. We
may
further
qviote
as
Doric
EvpuKoi^Ev
with
a
noteworthy a
in the Ci'etan
inscription
edited
by Bergman
Berl. 1860 1.
71,
KEKpiKuy
from the.
inscription
of the
Amphictyones
1.
58,
and the Cretan cnriaraXi^Hi'
(C.
I.
no. 3058 1.
4),
both
already
mentioned for their termination
on
p.
.385,
and also the
Heraclean infinitives
(cp.
p.
390)
irEipv-EvKiifiEi',
TrpuyyvEVKitnEy.
Common
forms like
jiiftaKu,
ci^.ioKaetc. need
no quotations.
Wescher
publishes
in the Bulletin de I'ecoled'Athenes
no. 6
an
inscription
from Mantinea
with the
strange
form arak-"()C"rrt()'07-"'W"i/"f
(1.26).
c'tk-oi-m is recorded
Anecd. Oxon. iv.
188,
14
as Dorian,
and also
afuoKa perf
of
(^hji^u (Suid.
s.
v.,
Herodian ii.
236, 2).
As here the
stem I, not unlike the Attic
212
TTETrrioKu,
Trtwaic, TrrCofia
and the forms
taXwr, "a/\w/;a,
has
passed
into the
derived
o-conjugation, so has the stem W in eQwkutl' EiwBdai
Hesych.
where the termination shows that the word is Doric. The Lesbian form
for this is eve^wkev
e'iwOe}-, along
with
EvaXwKEv=EaXii)KEi'
(Herodian
ii.
640, 10)
with the Lesbian
v
for / and the
disappearance
of this
spirant
at the
beginning.
An odd formation
presents
itself in the Pindai-ic
infinitive
yEydi:Eiv=y"yot'Erai
01. vi.
49,
which is related to
yeyafXEi'
01. ix. 110 much
as
ceEoikevcil
to the Homeric
cEicl^ey.
The
strange
i^EKOKEi'' {.'yrw/vfr
I have
attempted
to
explain
in Stud. vii. 392
as
the
perfect
to the
aor.
ekoiiev e"iC()j.iev
This too does not look
quite
Attic.
Among
the Attic forms
two,
viz. eIku and
teBelkci,
show
a
surprising
diphthong.
Vowel stems have elsewhere
i-egularly
the
long
vowel before
K
;
some
instead of this a short vowel like XeXvku
;
some fluctuate,
like
li-CE-Kciand
ce-cij-kh.
We must ti-eat these
I'elations of the vowels
collectively
in a
subsequent chapter,
for the
same
phenomenon
reappears
in various other tense-stems. The
diphthong
is in
any
case
unusual.
As
regardstlicft,
which
occurs
frequently
from
Sophocles
onwards
along
with the middle
eI^ui,
the
ei
is here
justified by rt-duplication.
We saw
above
p.
364 that eIku
probably came from
je-je-ku.
It is therefore
formed like li-^E-Ka
;
and
even
if
we
should be
wrong
in the
etymology
of the
word,
in
any
case a
spirant
has
dropped
out between the two e's,
and these afterwards coalesced into
ei.
The
diphthong
is therefore here
completelyintelligible.
It Ls otherwise Avith rideiica.^ It is
noteworthy
'
According to Herodian ii. 837 tlie form
arose rpov^ Boiutik^ Sxrirep5}p"!"s
f'lpWfS.
CH. XVI.
THE PERFECT WITH K. 415
that we have
preserved
to us at least one trace of the
more regular
-eOe-Ka: avaTediKuiTi Ross. Inscr. I. no. 81,
1.
10;
but Tt^eiKa and the
middle rf^flT^at are current in the Attic writers from
Euripides
onwards.
It cannot be denied that the eai-lier
"/
has in
many
cases
given place
to "t
in later Attic
: jjafTiXelc
for
/xt^tXj/c,
f/otu-
for
rj^rj,
Xvel as 2
sing.
mid. for
\6"j.
But it
required
some other
attraction,
I
think,
to
\
cause
this
one perfect
to
separate
itself from the
many
hundreds of
perfects
in
-7]t:a.
For in fact
analogies
which break
through
the
ordinary213
rule are
like heavenly
bodies which
by
their
proximity
divert the
course
of others. Are we to
suppose
that eIku
was
here the
distui-bing
force 1
If
we
remember that the
extremely
common verbs
'irifn
and
Tidt^fiL
con- stitute
a pair
of
twins,
which resemble each other
on
almost
every point
"
just
consider forms like 'iet
tTiQet, o'lj-u^v doij.up', yKci
iBrji^a, ijaujdi'ifrw,
"0j/)'fa TEOiji'ui
" this
explanation
does not seem to me
improbable.
And
I cannot
suggest any
other. The fact that
"?
and
ei never
differed
very
much in the
pi'onunciation
of the Attic dialect has of
course
also to be
taken into account.
Finally
some
forms have stillto be discussed in which
peculiarities
of
the
strong perfect.
pass
over
into the formation of the form with
k.
We
noticed above
p.
397 that the conditions of the vowel in the older
perfect
e.g.
in cevoiKa are not
absolutely
unknown to the
perfect
with
k.
In
view of the
preference
of this tense for the
o,
the above-mentioned
w
of
TTEtrrwKa,
and similar
perfectsby
the side of
;re7rr??wc might even
find its
reason in the
analogy
of the
sti-ong
forms. It is thei'efore natui-al to
explain
thus the
o
of the
surprising
form eci'iSo-Kci.
This is
quoted
from
Aristophanes,Xenophon
and Aeschines. It has a
precursor
in Homer.
In
x
.56 we
have in our M.SS ocraa roi
tV-TrfVorcu
kcu eci'ihomiei' /Ksyd-
pniaif,
which has
generally
been
adopted.
But from Et. M.
p.
316,
3.5
it
appears
that Aristai'chus read
Eciihirai,
Herodian
ici'i^Erai. The
plural
would be
sti'angeby
the side of
EKnETroTai.
On the other hand
e^Ijcetcu
is
a
quiteregular
formation from the
expanded
stem
Ice,
which is related
to the Attic ih'idE-a-raLas
ofxwjio-ni
is to
o/iw/.(oa-at,
and it is
highly
probable
that
kcljlETm
stood
originally
in the
text,
because the
change
from
" to o
is unknown to the
perfect
middle. The active to iciihrai
might
have been ^ECt'i^Ku(cf.Ej-n'ii-iEKa).
But here the
very
same o
made
its
way
in,
which we meet also in the form without
/".-
discussed
on
p.
403, eh'/cofa
(C.
I. Gr. no. 15).
The
*"Oi]ha
which
we must assvxme
is related to Ecijcoi^a as nxi'iKoa
is to the Doric
uKovKa (Ahrens
Dor.
337).
" We have fui'ther the
strangest
of all
perfect
forms
uyyio^u,
a
tolerably
late
formation,
which occurs
firstin the
spurious
letter of
Philip
Demosth. 214
xviii.
39,
then in Ai'istot. Oec.
2, 2,
and more
frequently
in
Polybius
and later
prose-writers,
in the
place
of the
regidarj/j^a (cp.
p. 406)
for
which there is
plenty
of evidence from the best Attic
period.Important
assistance is
given
for the
explanation
of it
by
the Dorian
avi'-ayd-yoxa
in the
inscription
from Thera C. I. Gr. no. 2448,
i.
28,
ii.
10,
iii. 13
[Cauer
Delect,
p.
77
ff.] along
with the
ayZ/yoj^e
of an
inscription
from
Sigeum (Buttmann
Lexil. i.
297).
The Doric
ay-ay-o-j^a
shows
un-
mistakeably
three
elements,
the Attic
reduplication,
the vowel
o,
the
termination
x"-
The
reduplicationjiresents
no difficulty ;
the vowel
o
is
evidently
of the same nature as
in
ioZ/cova,
and hence the
x
cannot be
based
upon
the
aspiration
of the rt.
ay,
for in that
case it would
be,so to
speak, retriplicated
instead of
reduplicated(ay-ay-o;^
for
ay-ay-ox).
416 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
Evidently
the
x
is
only
a phonetic
transformation of the
k.
Or in other
words
:
ay-ayo-x"
belongs
to the
perfect
in
kh
;
it is for
*a'Y-a-/o.Kci,
which would he formed
exactly
like
ec-(]?,o-i:a. But the
k:
has become
x
by
a phonetic
affection. This view is confirmed
by
the form
\epiTev\E
in the
inscription
from Mantinea
published by
Wescher Bulletin de
I'ecole d'Ath^nes no. 6,
1.
6,
to which
we
may
also add
/5f/3\/jxw'" (C.
I.
Gr. 2360 1.
7;
cp.
Stud. vii.
393) though
this rests on somewhat doubtful
authority.
As the two latter forms admit of
no
other
explanation
what- ever,
this remains
probable
also for
ayi^yo^a.
In the later
c'ty/yoxa
(Boeot.uyflo^a according
to Et. M.
9,34)
there is
one more
irregularity,
the
suppression
of the
y,
of which this is
probably
the
only
instance in
the Attic dialect. The Boeotians offer the
parallel
Iwv
or
iwi'=t-yw,
the
Tarentines
6XioQ=6\iyoQ (cp.
Princ. ii.
2-i7).
I have
given
further
reasons
for
believing
that
reduplicated
forms hold
a
place
of their
own
in
regard
to
phonetic
laws in
my essay
'
Ueber die
Tiagweite
der Laut-
gesetze'
Berichte der Sachs. Ges. d. Wiss. 1870
p.
16 ff". Here two
guttui'als were
felt to be
enough.
ni. THE MIDDLE PERFECT.
Compared
with the active
pei-fect,
the
perfect
of the middle is
a
simple
verbal form. A
singlevery
archaic method of formation has
215 been carried out here
quite independently,
and
as we saw on
p.
354,
in
contrast to the active. We could
only quote
a
few instances in the
active where the
perfect
stem is
immediately
united to the
personal
endings;
in the middle tliis formation has become an inviolable rule.
Forms like
cico-rai,XtXv-trat, TreTrvcT-rai joijiaK-Tai rerviai t iyinraL
are
the most
primitive
which could be
expected
from such stems.
They are
quite parallel
to Vedic forms like
da-dhi-(Ihve=T"-6e-(T6e, ri-rik-she-=-
Xf-Xtiw-aai, hu-hhu^-mahe (from hhug enjoy,
cp.
Homer.
Tretpvy/dh'oc).
Perhaps
the
reason why
the Gi'eek
language
retained to all time in the
middle
perfect
the
primitive
method of
formation,
which in the
present
and aorist occurs only
to a
very
limited
extent,
and often
only
as an
archaic
rni-ity (e.g. rjarm, cekto, u\to),
is to be
sought
in the fact that the
stem
strengthenedby
the
syllable
of
reduplication gave
as
it
were more
hold,
and had volume
enough
to remain
recognisable
in
si)ite
of
many
mutilations of the final
letter,
unavoidable where consonants were brought
into contact. For this
very
reason
the middle
perfect
is
quitespecially
the
place
for consonantal
changes
which are
liased
upon
assimilation.
The faithful
preservation
of the
personalendings
gave
to the stem of the
middle
perfect
a mobility
which is elsewhere unknown in the Greek
verb,
without
any
loss of clearness. While the active
perfect,
as we
have
seen,
developed
in different directions
only during
the
coiu-se
of
the
history
of the Greek
language,
the middle is
already
in full
use
in
the time of
Homer,
and remains
essentially unchanged
for all
times,
with the
exception
of the thii'd
pei'son
plural,
which
by degrees
dies out
in the
case
of consonantal stems.
The traces of a
thematic treatment of the
perfect
stem are extremely
scanty
in the middle,
a as foi-minga stem
occui-s,
with the
exception
of
('il"ripa^"r()c,
to be mentioned
immediately,probably only
in the
quite
isolated forms
tKyfyaudOe Epig.
Horn.
16, 3,
ti^ytyaar-o
(ot
nap
Oeoo
CH. XVI.
THE mDDLE PERFECT. 417
eVyfyactiTo)
Anth. P.
XV. 40, 20,"*
and in the
strange
a-eiTvayrai'
wpjxi]
Ku (Ti
in
Hesy chins,
which
evidentlybelongs
to
fffu
w, tfrrrvfia
i
.
We must here
216
include the
a
in the
stem,
and treat
vro,
rrui as the
personalendings.
For
-avrai as a
personal
tei'mination
by
the side of
-arai
is
quite
unknown. "
One
might
detect a trace of
e
in the forms
ck--?/x"-/xf )'/?
E
3G4,
aK-r]-^e-/j.")'ai
2
29;
but
aKrjxiSa-at,
to be discussed
hereafter,
and the
cognate
forms
a^axw^^'^^f
cn"uX^]fTOai
show that the vowel is in
a
diiferent
position.
With
more justiceuptjpc-^iiog
may
be
quoted here,
but it
occurs only
in
Apollon.
Rhocl. iii. 833 and
Quint. Smp-n.
ii.
265,
iii.
632,
has in its
place apripuj.iiroc,
both
evidently
isolated ventures of learned
poets.
Another
completely
isolated form is leiaarTdai which
occiirs once tt
316
as
the middle infinitive to the active cilaa. Nor
can we
deny
a vocalic
expansion
of the stem in
ih'icorai
discussed
on
p.
415,
while the Hero-
dotean
cu-ew-itoi (ii.165=di'"7"'ro()
with the Hera'^lean
iu'euxtOui,
and
the
(npiiOjjaL quoted by
Herodiau
(Meister
Stud. iv.
433) maybe grouped
with the vocalic
expansions
mentioned
there,
which
are
perhaps
limited
to the
perfectonly by
chance
[cp.p.
273
note,
and for the N, T.
oK^EWJTca
Moult on's Wiaer^
p.
9G
f.].
" Some few forms show traces of
the thematic vowel
:
thus
fiif^tftXe-rca
T
363,
with its
past jiE^ftXe-ro
$ 516. We shall
probably
laest take these forms
as
originatingby
metathesis in
iiu-/ii\-Tai, /ie-^eX-ro.
Buttmann Ausf. Gr. ii.^ 243
regards
the
"
here as
the short vowel of
/de^dX-qra quoted
fi-om
Theocritus,
and
certainly
the
e was
originally
attached to the
root,
but Lobeck adduces
from
Oppian
Halievit. iv. 77 the form
fienJ^Xoi'Tui,
so that here the
thematic nature of the vowel is unmi-^takeable. " The
"
of the Homeric
opojperai,
only occurring
twice
(r377,
524),
is
undeniably
thematic
:
it is
indirectly
confirmed
by
the
conjunctive
opwprjrai
N 271.
(Cp.
Buttmann
Ausf. Gr. ii.2
56.)
" We
may
further
recognisean indubitable transition
into the thematic
conjugation
in
avaytypcKpov-ui
in Ai'chimedes
(Ahr.
Dor.
333),' supposing
the
form, by
the sideof which the isolated
araye-
ypu(pa-ai
is also
recorded,
deserves our confidence. " The
same
process
may
be
seen,
carried out
extensively,
in
o"i)(op.cu,
if this verb with its
perfectsignification
is to be
justlyregardedas a
petrified perfect
of
uku)
(rt./t/v.),
Princ. ii.115.
With
regard
to tlie
personal
terminations we must notice the careful
preservation
of the suffix for the 1 and 3
pers. sing,as
compared
with
217
the mutilated
e
of the
Sanskrit,
which is used for both. The endino's
.
-truL
and
-no too of the 2
sing,
are carefully presei'ved
iu the
perfectstem,
as
everywhere
ia forms of
primitivestamp,
a fact established
ah-eadyon
p.
59 f
. ;
hence
uXaXritrcuo 10, hcc'iK-pvaai
Yl
7,
imper. aXaXrjfro
y
313,
phipf."jzEirrvtro
'd/
210, k-e)(o\wfro
II 585. There
are
exceptions
in
fAijutTjai
*
442, by
the side of
/K""r/7"Tcu
*
648, ijipXtjai
E
284, A
380,
N 251 and
""T(7uo
n
585, I 447,
the latter form
(cp.
p. 130)perhaps
to be taken as
an
aorist. As the
only
traces of
a contraction show themselves in Homer
in
)uf^i'j/
O
18,
Y
188,$ 396, w
115 and in' Herodotus ia the
imper.
fitfivto (diairoTa, fiiiivio
ribr
'Adrji'aiwt' V.
105),
Lobeck's view
(on Butt- mann
ii.-
244)
is
very
probable,
that here we must
assume
with Herodian
a
present
form
fis^yofxat,
which is
parallel
with
fxi^pXe-ai
and
comiected
*
The thematic
perfecttKyiydovrai
used
as a
future
(Hymn,
in Yen.
197)
is
too
strange
not to be doubted. There seems to me much
probability
in Baumei-
ster's
conjecture
E E
418 PERFECT STEM AND lORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
with the
proper
names
Mtfxrwr,'Ayo^E/xj'wr.
" The loss of the
a
in the
press-of
consonants in the case
of forms like
Tre^vXay^Oe, \iX(.i"p6i, ari'jfdu)
hardly
needs further mention.
The
endings
-arai
and
-aro
for the 3
plur.
have
ah'eady
been
thoroughly
discussed on
p.
G4
f.,so we
need not retiu-n to them here. There
are
only
two kinds of formations which deserve to be
mentioned,
those with
c
before the
a,
and those which
are
aspirated.
The 2
jiresents
no
dif- ficulty
in
tpripeoaraL
('^284, 329)
and is
pi'obably
the consonant of the
root also in
ipp/ihiT'
M 431
(Princ.
ii.
293);
on the other hand in the
Herodotean
ayojticarai
ix.
26,
Ifri^EvciSarui iv.
58,
laKevalaro vii.
62,
"KapeffKtvahn-o V.
65 etc.
KC)(^bjpt^ciTai
i.
140, 151,
ii. 91 it must un- doubtedly
be the
same dental element,
which is
presente.g.
in
Ko/diC)!
and
occurs
in the
present
in
-"fw as a
component jjait
of the double
con- sonant
C
On this I based the combination discussed
on
p.
242,
accord- ing
to Avhich the h in the Homeric
nKi]xicaT' (P 637),
eXrjXtSar'
(r]86)
is
to be taken in the
same
way,
and therefore bears witness to a
formation
which would end in
-i^w
in the
present,
while
aKrjxei^ii'og goes
back to
the
same
derived
stem, though
in this
case
it does not show this
c. We
should have to notice also cnrfarra^ai'TO'
uTrearrjaav Hesych.
if the
gloss
had to be read aTretnra^aro, But the
alphabetical
order does not
agi'ee
with
this,so
that the tradition must be
regarded
as
quite
uncertaua. "
218
Attention
was
called
on
p.
405,
where
Ave were treating
of the active
aspiratedperfect,
to the
aspiration
which
appears
in a number of such
perfect
forms before the
a.
The foi'ms of the
perfect
and
pluperfect
which
belong
here
are as
follows
:
Leicexnrai j;
72, ^eiSt'x"'!'')
-^ ^
{"^P-
I
671,
X
435);
plur.
to hi-
3"/vt(o).I
224 with the
presentSeLclirKOfxai (rt.Bik,Beik).
iiXiyjiiTo
Herod, vii. 90 from tKiarfu).
'ipyarai k 283, Itpx^iTO
k 241, ipxtiro
i 73 fx'om
t'lpyu).
EffeerdxaTO
Herod, vii. 62 from
au-rio.
ava^E^ixuTui
Herod, i. 146.
ojowp")(ara(
II
834,
opwpexnro
A 26.
rsraxarra
Thuc. iii.13, Xen. Anab. iv.
8,
5
(aiTt-f-aj^arcu),
treTcixfiro
Herod, vi.
113,
Thuc. v. 6,
vii. 4. The evidence of
the.inscription
from
Methone
was
mentioned above
p.
66.
TETpafarai
(eiri)
B
25, Theogn. 42,
Plat.
Eep.
vii.
533, rtrpafaS'
(plupf.)
K 189.
reTpi(j"arai
Herod, ii.93.
If
we
i"nt
these nine
examples along
with the other instances of the
employment
of the
endings-arai, -aro,
it results that
only
the
following
sounds
appear
before them
;
1)
a
vowel
: /3f/3A//aro(,
2)
a
liquid:hyijyipui)' (plupf.),
tirrdXaro Hes. Sc.
288, E(j)duparai.
3)
S
:
ECTKEva^aTO etc.
4)
the
aspirates
^
and
"j",
which in
yEypafarai, tcEtcpiifarai
Hes.
0pp.
386,
TETEvxnrcti
N
22,
"7rw)(aro
(only
M
340),
which
following
Buttmann
Ausf. Gr. ii.^189 we
derive from
"7rix"^"
belong
to the
root,
in all other cases
have arisen from the
coiresponding
hard
or soft
non-aspirated explosive.
The
only exceptionprobably
is a-rriKaTo Herod, viii.
6,
for which we
should liave
expected*uTrix(iTo,
We
may
mention as a
remarkable in-
.stance of
a form in
-itui faithfully ])rcserved(cj). TrtVauj'rat)
the Doric
uttokikX^vtcu,
as
Ahrens
(Dor. 346)justly
I'estores the words in
Epi-
charmus,
from
^"Xyw=Att.kXj/w,
kXeioj.
"CH. XVI.
. THE MIDDLE PERFECT. 419
As to the vocalism of the
stem-syllable,
the middle
perfect
here
219
deviates not
inconsiderably
from the active. The intensification of
a to
j/
is here
by
no means
fii-mly
established.
By
the side of the Attic foi-ms
cedriy/xeivc, 7rf7rX?;y/t(f(i, eiXyji^ijiiai,
XtXiinOai (Soph.
El.
342)
we find the
Herodotean
cta/XtXa/z^u'ioc (iii.117),
the Homeric XAatrrat
(E 834).
Over
against
the active
iri^riva
are
Ti-ifaa/iai, "ni"pavTai.
How little the
middle
perfect
is disinclined to the d of the root is shown
by ftij3uj.ijjLai,
.l3"j3Xcnrrai,
yiypafi^di, KiiccKraai (r82),
f^iff^iuKrai,
TrtVaXT-at, EaraKTut
etc. "
The intensification of
i
to
oi, though
characteristic of the active
perfect,
is
unknown in the middle. Instead of this we
liaA^e sometimes the
"t
which
is
common
in the
jn'esent
stem :
f'e'ceiy/./cu (from Sophoclesonwards),
for
which Herodotns has
dicey
/uai
(cnrtciceK-u
iii.
88),
JiptipeiffTO
(A 136),
iprjpeiafxii'OQ (Herod.
iv.
152)
beside
ijpLafiii'og (Hesych.),
XiXuirraL from
Homer onwards
(N 25G),
"n-eTreicr/.iai
from
Aeschylus onwards,
while to
the active
eoiKci
corresponds
the middle
irpocifilai (Eurip.
Ale.
1063),ijikto
I 796 and 'iiKTo"^
107, to the active oico the middle
'ilfxai'
yirw(TKw,
oihi
Hesych.
In
Ti-evxarai (N 22)
v
becomes
ev,
but it remains
i;n-
rai-^ed in te-vUii
(11622),
TtrvKTai, TervKro, TeTv\Bai,TETvyfiivoc.
From
Cevyvv^iL
in
spite
of
Cvyor, e^vyijvwe find
only ti^evyidii'oc,
and form
]ike
E^evKTui,e^evxQcit,
t^^ti/K-o
in Herodotus and Attic
wi'iters;on the
other hand in
spite
of
TrevOofiai
and
Trevaofiai
there
are
only
vETrvanaL
from Homer onwards
(\ 505),TVETrvuTo
N
521,
and in the
same
way
in
spite
of
(pEvyu),TTEfEvya
there is
TtE^vyfiivotj (Z 488).
" We find
no trace
of the
change
of
e
into
o,
of which there are such
numerous instances in
the
active,
with the
exception
of
ecijcotcu
mentioned
on
p.
415,
but
pro- bably
-wTonglyrecorded;^
there is
one
cei-tain instance of
w
answering
to
an E
in
awpro
(F 272).
The
regulari^Epfxitoi:
is
quoted
first from
Apollon.
Ehod. ii. 17l. But here
undoiibtedly
the
o
is coimected w*ith the/
which was once
found before the e
(Princ.
i.
442,
cp.
Fick^
216).
We
mentioned the
entirelyunique reading
in M 340 Trdo-at
{-rrvXai) yap
tirio^aro
on
p.
418. Buttmann to
support
his derivation
compares
On the other hand
we find in the middle
perfect
a
preference
for
the vowel
a
answering
to "
in the
present,
to which
Ave detected
only
slight
tendencies in the active. This
preference
is however limited to
220
the vowel
precedinga
liquidor a
nasal. 'WTiile in forms like
fti/DXETrrai,
KEKXeTrrai, TreTTf^/ut'j'oc, nETrXeKrai,
ECKE^fXEvoQ
the
e
of the
pre.sent
stem
appears
also in the
perfect,
it becomes
a
in
hdapfXEroc
Herod, vii.
70,
Aristoph.,CEcapOai(Solon
fr.
33,
7
Be.^),E^iapTui
from Homer onwards
{E'ifiapTo
^
281), 'irmapTcu
in Herodotus and Attic
"\\Titers, toraXaro
(Hesiod
Sc.
288),eittuX}jiui
from Herodotus
onwards,
torpo^^cu
first in
Hjnnn.
in Merc.
411,
then in Herodotus and Attic
writers,efdapfiat
from
Aeschylus onwards, E(p6apa-oquoted
above from
Herodotus, vre-
TTup^iEvoQ
first in A
633,
etI-uXto B
643,
ETriTEraXrai and the like from
Sophoclesonwards, -E-aTtu
with loss of the
"' preserved
in
Trf^JojToi,
from Homer onwards
(X 19),TEdpai^ifKu
from
Em-ipides onwards, -e-
-panf.iaL
from Homer onwards
{rETpafifjirog
P
227).
The
a
in
many
of
these verbs extends to the vei'bal
adjectives
and
passiveaorists,
in
some
also to the active
aorist,
the
preference
of which for
a was mentioned on
p.
278,
in several to the
perfect
with
k : 'icpOupKct,
rirana.
*
Cobet Mnemos. Xova series ii.368 also holds that iSriSiTaiis the
rightreading.
E E 2
420 PEKFECT hTEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM
IT, ch. xvi.
Finallywe
have still to discuss the
changes
which
are
brought
aljout
by
the contact of the consonants with each other. The
changes,
based
upon
geneialphoneticlaws,
befoi-e the terminations
beginning
with
r and
0
(^rd),
Sltch as occur
in
XtXeKrai,
ireTrvaTcii, yiyfxnTTai,Ttrpafdu)(M 273),
aflx^di
need
no
discussion.^ With
regard
to the 2
sing,we
may
men- tion
that the oldest form
arising
from assimilation is
represented
in
Homer
by Kticacrffcu r
82 and -Ki-KVGrrai \ 494. For the latter Plato
Protag.
310 has
irenvcrai as a
result of the
frequent
reduction of
a
double
o- to a
singleone. Somewhat
more difficulty
is
presentedby
the terminations
begiiming
with
/u.
Complete consistencyprevailsonly so far, that
every
labial is assimilated to the
/.i,
thus
even in Homer in
KEKuXv/jfjiii'o^
n 3G0
etc.,
XeXit
ft
/.li I (K I 448, titpu^^Ivoq
P 227 etc. On the other hand
a
dental
explosive
remains in
KiKopvQ^ii'OQ
F 18 etc. and in Pindar's
KtKal^iroQ(01.
i.
27) by
the side of the Homeric
i^sKucrideyoc
A
339,
221
KEKcifTfieda w 509, KiKua^iioQ
c 725. The
KeKopvdfiEvoQ
is contrasted
especiallyshar2)ly
with the
equally
Homeric
XeXuafitda
A 313 and
tte-
"Kvafxai
X
505,
to which
are subsequently
added
"Kiireirrfxcu, iua^iai.
We
cannot talk of
a ])honetic
law
requiting
the
change
into
a
in the face of
Homeric forms like
oc/ji),olcfia,icjjeTui], aradfxri,(T-uHfiUQ,upi6/.u)c,
"yj'aOfioc.
The
process
is rather to be
explained
thus
:
the
sibilant,
which
is
moi-e
convenient before the
/k,
and which made its
way
also in the Att.
otTf-u'i
and in the New Ion.
pv(jfx6r-=pvd^6c, by degi'ees
became the rule
with dental stems in the
common
verbal
forms,
which
aie
especially
im- patient
of
any
harshness,
while
on
the other hand the
unique KSKopvdijevoQ
maintained its
ground only as an
archaism under the
protection
of
Epic
"
formulae. " The treatment of the
gutturals
is to be
regarded
in the
same
way.
There are
many
instances from noun-formation of the older
method of treatment
according
to which the hard
explosivek or
x
is re- tained
before
/l/,
as
uKfi)), aix/J^'i, ^o^^/n//, TrAoy/uof,
avxfiOQ, j"0)(^toc. Among
verbal forms
Ave
find
only aKcix^iiroQ
from the rt.
uk
M
444,
K.
135,
which
as a
'
petrified
'
participle
takes
a position
of its
own. Elsewhere without
exceptionevery
guttural
is
representedby y,
whether the stem has
y,
as
hxtCevyiiivoQ S-276, 01' /c as
in
BeCr^yjjit'oc, ^i^eiypcii, Ksio'ipvyi^tai, 7rE(j)vXay-
jiivoQ(^ 343),or
X
^S
in
Tipy^ai, cKplyfiai, CfOfy/i"Voe"(A 107),
Terapuynui,
CiCpayfiiyo(^
N
393, Teruyfxiroc(H 225).
Hence
idefj.opvx/JtE"'ci
can
hardly
be the correct
reading
in
y
435
;
we
ought
rather to write
fxei.iopvyfiiru
with
Apdllonius
in his Lexicon. The
'
sonant
'
sound of the
y,
as our
physiologists
call
it,was more
akin to the
nasal,
and hence became the
general representative
of the
gutturals, as a
did of the dentals. The ten- dency
of
language
is here
always
towards
a
simple
rule for verbal forma- tion.
The
only point
left
open
to vaiiation
was
the treatment of a v
before
^
and before
a.
A number of stems from Homer onwards with- out
any
vaiiation fonn their middle
perfect
from
a
stem without
y :
t:EKpt[j.cH,
kekXitui,TE-aniroc.
In the
case
of others assimilation
appeal's
even
in
Homer;
thus in
yjrrxvfii-t^yoc
2
180,
and in the
same
way
we
find
in Attic orators
TvupM^viif^Ku (Aesch. c.
Timarch.
" 43,
but
by
no means
on good authority),
but from Solon onwards
(fr.13, 71)
in
Sophocles
"""2
(0.
C. 1 1
22)
and Plato we read
tte
^ao-^u'rof ;
from
Thucydides
onwards there
is evidence for
yufyu/aajuai,
in Herodotus
(ii. 39) we have
aErD-niaa^iivaQ,
in
Plat.
(Rep.
X. 607,
Parmen.
14i\)
iicvuf^uoc, nEirEpaafuyor,
(Leg.
vii.
807)
*
KfK(VTaf
lifKpvwrai Hcsych,,
if
corrtctl}-recorded,
is
quiteunique.
CH. XVI.
THE MIDDLE PERFECT,
421
"n-ETriaufieyoQ.
It would be liard to
quote any
other
example
of the
change
of
y
into
IT. Perhaps
the
analogy
of the numerous
forms in
-d/jot,
especially
from verbs with
-4w
in the
present,
contributed to
produce
it. There
were
only
four classes of
perfects
in
common use
for these forms with
ju,
those
with vowels or
diphthongs;rtrZ/tT/pa, TreTr/ortvjuca ;
tliose with
y:
ke-
Kijpvyfiai ;
those with
ju
:
/ctKpu/j/ucioc ;
and those with
"t ;
KiKoiiiaixai^
TTapeaKtucKTfiiroq.
The last formation attracted to itself, as
it
appears,
fie^iaai^tai
and
others,
while in the
post-
Attic
period
the
analogy
of the
vowel-endingprevailed
here and there
:
T"rpa\vi.ieyog
(Galen),
but
fxfi
also
reappears:
fxE^ia/ji^ai (Cramer
Anecd. Oxon. iv.
197).
Hence a
definite rule never prevailed:
for the variations of the
post-
Attic writers
it will be sufficient here to refer to Lobeck on
Phryn. p.
34
sq.
" Ex- amples
of the 2
sing,
of such verbs ai*e extremelyrare,
if
they
exist at
all. I have not been able to discover
Tre(paraui
and the
like,
which our
gi-ammars
give.
Even Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. i.^
442)
says
'
but it
was
generally
avoided
by periphrasis,'
" "VVe have an
entirelyunique
form in
the Homeric
el/jiai
from
(.rvvfAi (r72,\p11.5)
with the
participle e}fihoQ
(ti/jtyni
A
432, e'lfiiyoQ
O
308,
tTrttij.uyoi
II
164, KaTaeip.iyov
y 3-51)
to
which
we
actually
have the 3
sing.
elrorX 191
(v.
1.
yarai,
t'ltTTai),
the
latter a
very
sui-prising
form
by
the side of the
plupf.earo
"*"
67, eearo
M 464. As a is elsewhere
a
very
favourite sound before the termina- tions
of the
perfect,
we
have to look for some
special
reason for the loss
of it.
Probably
this is to be found in the
precedingdiphthong,
which is
to be
explainedby reduplication,
so
that from
*'/e-/e(r/xat
fii'stthere
came
*/"i(T^a(, as
from *fefETroy
h'nroy,
and then the
a di'oppedout,
as
in
?;/xat,
ijneda.
Even the
"T/.to
which came
from
lia^a,finjiumay
have
helped.
The 3
plur.i.'iaT{o)
S 596 is
easilyexplained
from *e'i(T-aTo.
But the
analogy
of
tJit-cu, rjaro
requu'es
for the 3
sing,
ttorut,
the traces
of which have
also,as we
saw,
been
preserved.
As
we
shall discuss the
quantity
of the stems
ending
in
a vowel,
and the
apparent
insertion of a
a,
later on in a
wider
connexion,we
have
now only
to add a
word
on a
few
passages
where it looks
as though
the
3
pi.
from consonantal
stems,
which could
only
be formed with some 223
difficulty,
were
replacedby
the 3
sing.
In Pindar
Pyth.
is. 32
we
read
:
^o/3w
F oh
KEXEijiayTcu (ppiyeg (Schol. kxf-if-La"Qi-jfray).
It is
very easy
here
with
Tycho
Mommsen to read
ovk EXElp.ayQEv, though
others find here the
so-called schema Pindaricum. Gottfr. Hermann on
Aesch. Pers. 569
[574
Dind.]
is inclined to
regard
the
employment
of a
form in
-y-ai
from
stems in
v
with the force of
a plural
as
legitimate,
on
the
ground
that
VTUL
could
easily
have
come
from
-y-y-ai, e.g. KiKpavTai
from
KEKpay-vrai.
But in
reality
we could
onlyexpect
-area
in the case
of consonantal
stems. In Eur.
Hipp.
1255 the
more
recent editors write with
Elmsley
in the
place
of the
avf.i(j)opai
of the M.SS.
alal,
KfKpavrai
avp"popa
veav khku)v.
On the other hand
no one tampers
with Bacch. 1350
alai,Se'Sowat,rrpfa^v,TKrjpovfs(pvyai,
thoxigh
it has
probably
never
occurred to
any
one
to
regai'dcecoktui as a
form which has arisen
by phoneticchange
from *tf3oc-i'rca. There is
here
a
figure
of
syntax.
Hence we can hardly
agree
w^ith Ahrens
(Dor.
p. 333)
in
taking
oroyeypctTrrai
as a
plural
in
a
passage
of Archimedes
(p.244).
422 TERFECT STEM.ANJJ FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
IV. MOODS OF THE PERFECT.
*
The
conjunctive
and
optative
of the
perfect
occur altogether
but
seldom,
the
imperative
of the
perf.
act.
hardly occurs
at all
'
said
Buttmanu Ausf. Gr. i.^ 417. For the
frequency
of tlieir occiirrence
and
the
replacement
of the forms
hy periphrasis
in Attic
prose
La Roche
furnishes welcome collections in the Zeitschrift f. d. osterr.
Gymnasien
Sept.
1874
p.
411
ft",
1876
p.
593 ff
(cp.
v.
Bamberg
Ztschr. f
Gymn.
1877 Ber.
p. 10).
The
primitively
formed
imperatives
of tlie active like
'icrdi, at'wxOi,
reOyaru) have been
quoted
above
p.
384. There is
a
remarkable loss of the
ending
in rerXa'
vTrofieii'ui'
Hesych. by
the side of the Homeric rirXadi.
But this
really
almost exhausts the stock of such forms. An
imperative
224 of the active
perfect
in the second
person
is
as a
rule
possibleonly
where
the force is that of
a
present,
as
in
yeywye
{Aesch.
Prom.
193, Soph.
Phil.
238,
Eur. Or.
1220),
^vpoysrc
Aristoph.Vesp.
415, Kex^'irere
Ar.
Ach. 133. In the last two forms we should notice thee which has
come
in
upon
the
analogy
of the
jwesent,
and which
reappears
also in the few
instances of the 3
sing.:
fiEfxaOriKirio quoted by Krliger
from Stobaeus
('4 p.
318
Leipzig'?),
and lirarartTaXKiTw Arist. Meteor, iii.5
p.
376
b 29. Ahrens
(Dor. 330) quotes
as
Doric
: KSKXvKe
Epicharm.
Anecd.
Oxon. iv.
339,
where
evpiji^e
is also
mentioned,
ye-ynyerio, cu'earaKeru),
7ro/3f"7r"7rrwK"Vo"
from Archimedes.
[Jelf"
195 Obs. 1
gives
jjejytjKirit),
koiKiTU) from
Lucian.]
Of
conjunctives
it is
only
that from the
present-like
o'ua which is at
all
common.
The
onlygenuine conjunctive
forms of
primitive
formation
with
a short mood-vowel are
e'lcu/jiEy
A
363,
11
19,
y
18,
eihre Q
18,
S
53, I
17 and
TTewoiBofXEv
k
335. The usual
conjunctives
for o'lca
are
formed from the e-stem
by adding
the thematic vowel
lengthened
as
for
a conjunctive:
flciw S 235
(I.
Bekker
can hardly
be
right
in
giving
icioj)
elcui
(A
515
etc.).
The
corresponding
contracted
forms,
also
occmTing
in Homer
(elhjr
Q
420,
uc^
O
207,
eIcwoi
ft112) are
in later
times the
only
forms in
use. In all other vei'bs the usual final vowel of
the
perfect
stem is
lengthened
in the
conjunctive,
like the thematic
vowel, as in the Homeric forms
afn'ipr)
e 361, -irpoftefti'iKri
IT
54, fteftpuxri
P
264,
ippiyijtn
.r
353,
"ff-)jK7] X
469, yu"/n;A/;
A
353, d\w/\";
A
164,
opdjpj}
I
610,
TTETTo'iQb)
oi 329, TTewoidtjcI' 344, -e(l)vi:ri
A 483
(but
e/utte^u/j.
Theogn.396)
and in
post-Homeric
forms like
yeyoytj
Theogn. 300,
ctai]
Xen.,
dkijijuiXTi
Plat. Polit.
269, (.oikuj Xen., oVo;
Herod, iv.
180, karCJi^itv
Plat.,
karuxTi
Eurip. Demosth., IrrTijKij
V
435, Herod., Attic, kt/cXayyw
Ar.
Vesp. 929, KiK-XufwcnEqu.
1149',
XeXj/Wj/
Theogn. 121, irtizXiiyij
Ar.
.Av.
1350, Ti6y)ik(,)ai
Thuc. viii.
74,
w(f"Xi)K7]
Ar. Av.
1457,
Tre^ureucw^rt
Tab. Heracl. i.
li'2,
125 etc.
In the
optativeswe
may
notice
a
threefold distinction. A small num- ber
of
them,
following
the inflexion of the
perfect
stem elsewhere,
have
throughout
primitive
forms
: eara-iij-y
Homeric
(nfecrrcdt]
ii-
101, 169),
reOyaajy-I, 98,
also in
Theoguis
343 and in
Xenophon, -erXalri
I 373.
With these we
may
jilace
the
common eueiijy,
inasmuch
as
the stem
sih
225 is
treated
quite
after the rule for verbs in
MI,
and
cecuh]
Plato Phaech-.
251. The second method of formation was
probablydeveloped
from
the
last-named,
tlie
stem-forming e passing
into the thematic
o,
as
in
"o/"/r
(discussedon
p. 333)by
the side of
leofy.
So we
may
explain
cii. XVI.
MOODS OF THE PERFECT.
423
istTroiQoii]
Arist.
Acb.
9-40,icrjCoKou] or,
as
Meineke Com. ii. 179 con- jectures,
Eh](:uK6)i (cp.TToew)
in
Cratinns,tKireipEvyoiip' Soph.
0. R.
840,
TrpoeXi]Xvdoh]Q
Xen.
Cyr.
ii.
4, 17,
and
TreTray ou)r
in
Eupolis
mentioned
above
p.
336. " The third method of
formation,according
to which the
stem- vowel of the
perfect
is treated
just
like the thematic vowel of the
present,
is the most
common,
and
prol)al)ly
occurs even
in Homer
lytftXi'jKot
I. Bekker
and La Eoche after Aristarchus 0 270
(v.
1.
/5f/5X"';iv-"t), iretpevyoi
a
doubtful
reading
in "I"609
(I.
Bekkor
Treipevyei).
In
A 35
jiefipwOoiQ
is well established. Post-Homeric
examples
are
furnished
by fc/3"/"A./"ot"j'
Thuc. ii.
48, ftEfj(Ju"KOL
Herod, i.
119, TrepieXrjXvOoi
Herod,
iii.
140,
ioiKoi Plat.,
evpijKoi
Herod, i.
44,
evpaKoi/uev
on the Cretan
inscriptionpublishedby Bergmann
1.
71, lyKexvp"li^oi
i.e.
eyKEx^ip'i'^o'-
inscription
of
Tegea
V.
12
(Gelbke
Stud, ii
39),
KctdeaTijKui
Plat.
Legg.
759, jiXmkoi
Herod, i.
83,
6(j)Xi)kol Lys.
xxiii.
3, ivtirou'iKoi
Thuc. viii.
108,
TTETTuyBoL Plat, Parm. 140.
The mood-formation of the middle is stillless
commonly employed.
For the 2
sing,
of the
imperative
I find
only aXuXijao
y
313, cei"et,o
E
228,
Y 377, X 340,
fx^iyijao
common
in comic writers
(Meineke
Com. v.
p.
635),Tviirp^ao
Pherecr. Mein. Com. ii.
287, Tre(j)vXcd("
Hesiod
0pp.
797,
oracle in Herod, vii. 148. " The 3
sing,
is more common,
because in this
the true
perfect
force can
be
brought
out. As
examples
we
may
take
the
only
three which are Homeric, urlifOcj /t
51, 162, TervxOio
/3356,
(p
231, TETpa(("d(jj
M
273,
and also
Treireipaadu)
Ar.
Yesp. 1129, rersf-uiaOw,
l.ud"l(reco
both in Plat.
Soph.
267, areaaxQoj Antiph.
Meineke's Com. iii.
130, yeypacpdu), ceciadw,
hiCoadw, cecuxBm quoted
ivoni
Vleito,etc iCuxf^u)
from
Xenophon.
"
Among
the
conjunctive
forms the most remarkable is
"upocapiiptTcu
Hesiod
0pp. 431, as being
the
only
instance of the insertion
of
tiie
short mood-vowel in the
middle-perfect.
The
reading
however is not
quite
certain. We
may compare
also the forms of the
same
verb
quoted
on
p.
417. We also mentioned there
opwpjjrcu
N 271,
which is related
226
to an
indie.
*dpwperotprecisely
as TrenXi'jyri
is to
TrfVA/p/e.
Other forms
of the kind seem to occur only
from a
few vowel-stems where the
meaning
is that of
a
present. yu"/^t)'"w^e0o (Stein
writes
iie^rijfxtda)
Herod, vii. 47
(besideixejxrujutQa
t, 168)
and the accent of forms like
^EjxiniTcu
Isocr. xviii.
40, KSK-iirai
Plat. Theaet. 200
c,
KeKrijaOe
Isocr. iii.
49, point
to contraction,
either of the
long
stem- vowel with the short
mood- vowel which
might
be
expected;*/tt"-jur7j-o-^t"9o, or
with the same
vowel
lengthened
as
in the thematic
present
: ^'fxe^ivi)-w-iMdu.
The two
Doric forms of the
kind, quoted by
Ahrens Dor.
333,
deserve notice
:
Tab. Heracl. i. 137
oaaa Ka tv ama. ra
ya
oiKodojji'jTCti,
and in the
Theraean
inscription
C. I. Gr. 2448 vii. 12
according
to the
very
probablereading
of Ahrens : oaa /ca
/,u/
wv
TreirpuTcu,
Perhaps we
may
argue
from these two
forms,
to
replace
which an
Attic writer had to
resort to
periphrasis,
to
a
wider extension of the mood-formation of the
pei-fect among
the Dorians. "
Optatives
are only possible
from vowel-
stems.
^efxri]jdr}v
J[i 745 and XtXvTo a
238 with the variant XeXvvro
(Sf .
yvla EKaarcv),ctnjrrde'
c"C";i"i'oi
e'hjTE Hesych.
are
formed
by
the imme
diate adcUtion of the mood-element. There is
good
evidence for the
following
Attic forms of this kind
:
^Ejui'jjro Aristoph.
Plut.
991,
Plat.
E.ep.
vii.
518,
"/crjj-o
Plat.
Legg. v. 731, KeKXrjoSoph.
Phil. 119
Dind.,
hajhi^XijadE
Andoc. ii. 24
(Bekker).
Here and there forms
crop up
like
fXEfjiiwo
(Xen,
Anab. i.
7, 5, v.
1.
yiifjurj/o),
j-uixveioto
^ 361
(Bekk.
424 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
f^u/jLi'Tiro),
lUfivMTo
Xen.
Cyrop.
i.
G,
3. Cobet Novae Lect.
p.
223 ff.
recogni.ses only
formations of the former kind. As Lobeck Path. i. 426
rightlyperceived,
/ue^iwo
could
only
be
explained by
a transition into
the
analogy
of the
present
form
*/u"ixrr]-o-w.
But the
rarity
of such foi-ms
makes them
suspicious.
V, VERBAL NOUNS OF THE PERFECT.
The infinitive of the active
perfect
has
already
been treated
by us on
vaiious
occasions,especially
on
pp.
341, 345,
390 ff. Hence it is suffi- cient
here to illustrate
by examples
the chief kinds of formation
:
^^'^
1)
Perfect infinitivesin
-fxevai.
la-ofiDcu
K
4S0,T"-\afxei'cii
v 307,
-edrautraL il
225, 'icfievai
fi
154.
2)
in
-fxev.
a) piimitive.
ftefia/xei'
P
359,
k-yeyafiet'
E
248, c"u~('/j")' i 274, 'idfxev
A 719.
1))
with
a
precedingstem-forminge.
Heracl.
Trtij.vTtvKiji.iei' (p. 390),uvrL-Ktitovfiifxiv
in
Archimedes,
ye-
ywj'iiiti'
Q
223, ai'ioyifiii'
N 5G.
o)
in
-vau
(post-Homeric).
a)primitive.
ftej3ayaiEurip.
Heracl.
610, cnrofteftarai
Herod,
v. 86, kararai,
Tedfcit'ctifrom Herodotus onwards
(i.17,31)
in
common use.
b)
with
a
i^receding stem-formmg
e.
2e?t"-i'oifrom
Thucydides onwards,
dedoiici-vai-
Eurip. Suppl.548,
(icfiui from Herodotus and
Aeschylus onwards, eoiKtiai
and ehirai
Attic,ijXioi^it'ui
Herod, i. 70.
4)
in
-eLV
[rjv).
by
the addition of the
ending
iisual in the thematic
present; yt-
yciKtiv
Find. 01. vi.
49, ctivKeir
Theocr. i.
102, KexKuCtiv
Find. fr. 57
Be.3
cp.
above
p.
391, iTrirdhivpi'iKrir
inscr. of
C}Tne
C. I.
no.
36401. 19.
Cp.
p.
391.
The middle infinitive with its invariable
ending
-adai after vowels
(Homer. nXaXTJ/rOai,^f/^Xj/ffflat, t^ureipvadat, "TTeTri'imOai, ic"-)(^oXwffOai),
find
-dai after consonants
(Homer. cifl^Bcu,ctcda\6at,TTETcvadai, XtXeltpdai)
presents
no
peculiarities.
On the other hand the active
]iarticiple requh'es a
short discussion.
While the
particii)ial ending,
in the
case
of all tense-stems with active
inflexions,
is elsewhere
representedby a
suffix -ant or -ni,
the
perfect
stem alone has its
special
suffix
-or
feni.
-via.
The connexion of these
two forms
can
hardly
be iinderstood from Greek alone. But here the
CH. XVI.
VEEBAL NOUNS OF THE PERFECT. 425
Sanskrit -vat
with the
by-forins-vans,
us
and the feminine -ushl at
once
supplied
the
explanation.
As this suflix also is limited to the
perfect,
and
as
in Zend too as
well
as
in Church-Slavonic it
reappears
m
the
same application,
we can
determine with
certainty
the
special
formation
of the
perfectparticiple
in the Indo-Germanic
period,
and thus
may
re- gard
its consistent
cariying
out in Gtreek as a special
archaism. In
228
Sanskrit the nom. sing,
of the mascuHne ends in
-van,
that of the neuter
in
vat. Thus
da-dr^-vancorresponds
to the Greek
Be-bopK-as
ta-sfhi-vdn
" " ,,
f-ara-as
'
ba-hhil-cdn
"
"
,, "
Trf-^u-cij
vid-van
,, " ,,
flS-ais
and stillmore
exactly
iu the vowel of the stem the Sanskrit and Zend
fern, vid-us/il answers to the Greek iB-v'ia.
Even in the accentuation of the suiiix Sanskrit and Greek are ab'ke.
In Chm-ch-Slavonic also the suiHx -vii is
presei-ved
with the
same
func- tion,
e.g.
da-vu^=ceSwKwc
;
for the variations here
produced by
the addi- tion
of
an expanding
suffix we
may
refer to Schleicher's
Compendium^
390 f Latin has
perhapspreserved
two relics of this
form, though
the
words are used as
substantives
:
pajm-ver
and cadd-ver. The former
seems to
go
back to a rt.
j^ap,
shoot,
grow up,
swell,
which
occurs
in
2xip-ula
blister and
^XMn^x'/m-s(cp.
Fick^
137):
'swollen'
is,
I
think,
a
suitable
name
for the
luxuriantlygi-owingpoppy.
^
Cp. Brugman
Stud. vii. 322. Cadd-ver would be formed from i-t.cad
by
a
stem-form- ing
d,
like
KEKftfrjujc
from the stem
Kacps.
The
'
fallen
'
would
certainly
well suit the
meaning.
The
perfectparticiple
is
extremely
common even
in
Homer,
far
more common
than all the other forms of the active
perfect.
There is
nothingsurprisingm
the loss of the / in the Greek masculine and neuter
after
consonants,
e.g.
in
iopywv,
fifurjKujc,
elcwc. In the numerous
Homeric forms in Avhich the stem-vowel remains
unimpau-ed
before the
siiffix,
the remembrance of
a spii-ant
once
piesent
has been retained
:
j3ei3awc,
cecaojc, fit^aiDc,
redmjwc, Ter\r}6roQ,
TTETzrrfWQ, Terirjivc,
(oeloaprjori,
K"KOTr](oc,
KEycipr)6Ti.
The later contracted
forms,
of which lorwe alone
reinained in common
use,
while the others like
fitftwQ,
yeywc, Tre-rrTwg,
were confined to the
language
of
poetry,coi-respond
to the natm^al
change
of form. For ka-rwc the intermediate forme
ore we
occurs in Herod, ii.151.
229
On the other hand the / survives to a
certain extent in the feminine. For
it is
only by
the
help
of the
primitive
form vas-ia that ^va-ia and with
the
regular
loss of the
a v-ta are intelligible.
Sanskrit in its ush-l shows
the
same reduction of ra to ?(.
The
preference
of the feminine for the
short stem-vowel
(apdpvla, /.("/ia/.u"a)
was
treated
on
p.
365
;
the Doric
-Eittj
i.e.-"-/ta on
p.
392. The Doric form
presupposes
according
to our
xiew the existence of
an ending already
shortened to
-via,
a
presupposi- tion
quitejustified by
the fact that from Homer onwards no
fuller form
than this
occurs. The form
-ma
is not
altogether
unknown even to the
Dorians;
cp,
KuBeffraKvlni' Cretan
inscription,published by
Naber
Mnemos. i.
p.
79,
1.
14,
68. The stock of the extant
participles
in
-via
is
supplemented by
forms without
reduplication
which have become sub-
'
This -view now seems to me more probable,
than that which I
gave
in Princ.
i. 358
[omitted
in Grandz.^
p.
287,
but
cp. p.
511],though
it differs but
little,so
far
as the
meaning
goes.
426 PERFECT STEM AND FOEMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
stantivcs,
like
(I'iOviu,
uyvia,
af)yvi(i,"Apirvin,
TJXetdvia
(by-form
'EXijfteici),
'Q.I)ti6vLa
:
these are discussed
by
AVuruer in the
'
Sprachw.Abhandlungen,'
p.
Ill ff.
The form of the
nom. sing.masc.
of these
participles
is not
wholly
free from difiicultics. From the stem feuor we
cannot
get
to Peicwc.
For
compensatory lengthening
never results from the
rejection
of
an
explosive
sound. Hence I have
already
Stud, ii. 171 endeavoui-ed to
estabKsh the
probability
that
feuwc
goes
back to the stem feuog
(8kt.
vidvas),
so
that in Greek there are at least
some traces of the
vaiicty
of
stems in these
participles,
which in Sanskrit is much
gi-eater.
The
feminine at
any
rate can only
be reached from the s-stem.
A fui'ther
irregulaiity
is found in the variation of
quantity
in the
Homeric
participles.
Instead of the
prevalent
suffix
-or we
find in the
following
9 instances the
lengthened
form
-wr : fttftaibTa e 130,
yfyawra
I
456,
B 144
(plur.
B
866),
i:iKfir]wTL
Z
261, KS^Xr^ywrEc
U 4.30
('
iy
ry
kriparwy 'Api(7Tup-^ov,^
V.
1.
K"K\)iyoi'rec),
P
756,
f-UfiawTE
E
569,
fXEfxawroq
0
118,
/XE/jiauirEQ
B 473, vTroTrenrriiLTEe
B
312, TEdvijairaZ
464,
II
858,
teBi'tjuiti k 494, TEdi'yjMrwv
IT
16, TETpiyiLTUQ
B
314,
TTEcpvwTUQ
t
477. Two
of these stems show short
by-forms
/xf^ctwc
{^^iEfxaore
N
197,
/Lttyudorec
B
230
818)
and
teQvt^ioq{rEdi'rjoroc
P
435, ace. s.
P
402, plur.i// 84).
After
what
Brugman
Stud. iv. 173 f. has said
upon
this
case
and others like
it,
it seems to me most
probable
that
we
mu^t
regard
the
digamma as
the
soui'ce
of the
varying quantity.
We
recognized
similar
phenomena
in
the
case
of the
augment
on
p.
81.
The
analogy
of the
present,
which
we
have often met in the
perfect,
did not
spare
the
participles
eithei'.
Doiic,
Aeolic and isolated Homeric
cases
of the kind
were
put together
aboA^e
p.
393 fi". Formations like
ftEJiwrra,
karuirru
were
also discussed there.
The three
quite
anomalous forms
Trf^u^orec, ^tjj.v'C6Tt, \e\ei-)(^i.i6teq
were treated of
on
p.
408.
The middle
participle,
of all
perfect
forms in
Homer,
and
perhaps
thi'oughout
all Greek
literature,
the most
common,
is formed with the
gi-eatestregulaiity.
As in the infinitive the main accent
invaiiably
falls on
the
jienultimate.
Accentuation of the termination
as oi)posed
to the stem
prevails
indeed also in the
participle
and in the infinitive of
the
active,
in the former
case
in
agi-eement
with Sanski-it. The middle
per'fect participles
have
among
the Indians " thus
diftering
from Greek " "
the termination
-dnd, so
that in the
case of the middle
participle
there is
no longercompleteagi-eement
between the two
languages.
A few Greek
foi-ms,
in the
opinion
of some gi-ammarians,
made
an exception
with
re- gard
to the
accent, being
accentuated
on
the
antepenultimate,
in this
case ranking
as Aeolic. These
are aXaXt'ifiEroc, cao;)(///.("ror
and
nKij^^i-
^EVOQ
{'L29),apiipifiEroQ Apollon.
Rhod. iii.
833, EXi]\af.iEt()C, Eaaii^Eroc.
Herodian
appears
to have wavered in his
judgment
of these
forms,
for
in i. 471 he
approves aKO)('//"f ''^'C,
in ii. 142
(kox''//"""'".
Lobeck
on
Buttm. Ausf. Gr. ii.^ 43 discusses all the
instances,layingespecial
stress
on the
meaning,
and
on
the
gi'ound
of this
justlydefending
the usual
accentuation,especially
for
"\7;Xf"/ufroe. Certainly{lE^rm^iiyoc, h^EyfiE-
roc, K"xpi]l^^'''"i
aiid other
paiticiples
have no more
of the force of a
perfect
than those
forms,
and
yet tliey
follow the
general
rule.
Comi^lete
regulaiity
then does not
prevail
here. A
place
of their own must
be
assigned
to forms like
aXiriiitEmg
?
807, 6ri]f.ityuc
/9
33. These
are
CH. XVI.
VERBAL NOUNS OF THE PERFECT. 427
uaturally
forms with the force of
a
present,
of the Aeolic
type.
Start- ing
froui these some grammarians
hekl that the accentuation of the
present
was justified even
in the
case
of several
genuineperfect
forms.
YI. TENDENCIES TOWARDS SIGMATIC PERFECT-FORMS. 231
It is
only
now
that we have traced the forms of the
perfectthrough
the active and the
middle,
that we can
toiich
upon
a
number of forma- tions
which are
characterized
by
the sibilant o- in a manner completely
different from the rule for
perfect
formation. The
question
concerns
the
following
foi-ms
:
1)
The two third
persons
plural
of the active : 'i/rdTt,
which is in
use
from Homer
(Z 151) onwards,
and
eiEni^t,
which is
quoted
several times
from
Euripides (Hel. 497,
I. A.
848),Aristophanes (Nub.
341, 343,
Av.
383)
and other
comedians,
and besides
only
two or
three times from
Plato
(Soph.230).
2) y"ypa\l"aTat,
the
corresponding
middle
form,
onlv in Tab. Heracl..
i. 121 6(7(7(1
")' ra avrdijKCL"yeypaxparai.
3) ix"fxi(j6u)(7ioiruL
ib. 106 : rav
yai',
i'lv
Ka uvroi Lisf.iicrB(!j(T(l)yTai,
i)
uprvaivt'Ti 7/
aTTOCwi'Tni rav tiriKapirinv.
4)
The inflexion of
'('o-o/i(,
carried out
throughoutamong
the
Dorians,
wliich I have treated more fully
Stud. i.
1,
240 ff. The recorded forms
"ia5iixL Epich.
fr. 98 Ahr. Find.
Pyth.
iv.
247,
Theocr.
v.
119.
"i(7aiQ or 'laaq Theocr. xiv. 34.
"i(7ariC. I.
no. 5773,
Theocr.
xv.
146.
'((TUfxey
Pind. Nem. vii. 14.
(ffctrt
Pei'iander
ap.
Diog.
Laert. i. 99.
'i(7ar-L
Epich.
fr.
26,
Theocr. xv.
64.
There is also 3
pi. conj.
[(jav-i or "Kiav-L C. I. Gr. 5013
(ci'tto utv
i(7dvTi=h'a
elSM(7i,
Cliishull
lawrri).
" Inf.
i(7ui^eyai
according
to
Hesych.
yirransyai'
elcfyai,pai'tic.
'ifxag
Apollon.
de adv.
587, 8,
dat. '(ortiTt Pind.
Pyth.
iii.29.
The
"7,
rniited
generally
with the vowel
a,
reminds
us
at
once
of two
kinds of
formations,on
the one
hand of the 3
pers.
pi.
in
-aay,
like
E-^o-o-aj',
t-(pa-/7uy
(cp.
pp.
48, 50).
This
analogycomes
out still more
plainly
in
the Homeric
plupf.
torti',
the
past
of 'icraai. But on
the other hand the
syllable-o-a suggests
the
sigmatic
aorist. After the views
expressed
on
pp.
11,
12 as to
compounded tense-formation,
I have no
doubt that
we
have an
instance of this here. These forms have the
especial
interest,
that
they
reveal the connexion of the Latin with the Greek
perfect.
232
The Latin
perfect
makes
use
of
composition
in three
ways,
\dz.
first,
in
all
perfects
to foim the 3
plur.; secondly,
to form the
conjunctive;
thirdly
to foi-m the whole
perfect-stem.
'i(Ta(n
4e.
J-ic-aavTi and eit,aaiare
the
analogies
for the first
application,
hl-nu
yri
differs from vule-runt i.e.
vide-sunt
only
inasmuch
as the Greek stem
preserves
its
primitiveform,
while the Latin has become
disyllal^ic.
The relation is
just
the same
between viderint and the Heraclean
f.iti-u(7Bb)-rju)i'TaL,
while the Latin
perfect
in
-si,e.g.
Iv.-siand the
correspondmg
Old
Irish,
e.g.
gahsicepit,
gen-sa-m
fecinaus resemble the
completelysigmatic '((rdjuj,
"VVe shall
return to
"lau^i
under the
sigmatic
aorist
;
in this
word, as
the force is
completely
that of a
present,
it
may
be doubted whether it
was ever
428 PERFECT STI::M AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
characterised
1)y
initial retluplication.
In
any
case we
have in
dealing
Avith these words to take into account the forms which iJelbriick de- scribes
(Altuid.
Yerb,
js.
181)
as' double stems.'
.
'
YII. THE PLUPERFECT.
The
pluperfect,
as the
past
tense of the
perfect, seemed,
until
recently,
to be a
tense limited to Greek and
Latin,
in the
possession
of which
these two
languages
had the
advantage
even over
Sanskrit with all its
wealth of forms. "W.
von
Humboldt had
indeed,as
I
pointed
out in
my
*
Tempora
und Modi
'
ji.
xiii and
230, recognised
that Sanskrit
was not
entirely
destitute of forms of
a
similar
stamp,
which
lay
concealed
among
the
reduplicated
aorists. But it was
in Grassmann's Lexicon to the
Rigveda
and in Delbriick's Old-Indian Verb
p.
122 that
an
Indian
plu- perfect
was
for the first time
definitelyrecognised.
Still it is
only
among
the Greeks and Romans that this tense has a wider
extension,
and
thereby
i-eceives its definite
place
in the
system
of the verb. The
past
tense from the
perfect
stem has three kinds of
general
distinctive
marks
:
the
augment
as a sign
of the
past tense,
the
reduplication
as a
sign
of the
perfectstem,
and
finally
the
secondary personalendings,
which are
the
only ones possible
for
any
augmented
tense. Of these
-233
thi-ee distinctive mai-ks the
augment
is in the
pluperfect
the most
moveable.
We cannot be
surprised
to find that
so light
an
initial
syl- lable
did not
clingvery
fii-mly
to forms which had
already
so much to
cairy,
and in which the
past-force
remained for the most
parf
re- cognisable
even
without this
syllable.
Hence from Homer onwards
we
find in the most different kinds of literature
pluperfect
forms without
any
augment,
like
aTroTeOvairai', as
La Roche writes
/u
393 with most
M.SS., a/jtpijjelh'iKei
Q
68,
TiTvt,o0
163, TrtTrrouoto-a)'
Thuc. i.
89, TiETrov-
0""^""j'
Plato Phaedr.
89,
inroTrefevyr]
Plato
Apol.
36
a,
^ta/3"/3"'//v"t
Xen.
Anab. vii.
3, 20,
TrtTrorOEcrai'Dem. xviii.
213, oTrwrreo-aj'
Herod, vii. 12.5.
It will sufiicehere to refer to the most recent
investigation
of this
ques- tion
by
La Roche in the Ztschr. f. d. osteiT.
Gymn. 1874,
p.
408 6". We
may just
mention e'larni^eii'
(cp.
above
p.
86)
which occurs
first in Hesiod
(Scut.269),
and then often in Attic
poets (Ar.
Av.
513)
and
prose
writers
(Thuc.
i.
89),
without the short forms
'iaruTOv, tarn-?;!',
errraffav
ever having
the
augment,
and
everywhere constantlyinterchanged
with
the
unaugmented
forms. Three methods of formation are
in use :
vi?..
first,
the
primitive,
in which
we
have
only
the distinctive max'ks
men- tioned
above
;
secondly,
the
thematic,
in which the
perfect
stem is ex- panded
by
an
added vowel
; thirdly
the
compound,
in which we
may
clearlyi-ecognize
the
appended
stem of the verb substantive. In the
middle the fii-stformation alone
prevails:
in the active the first and
second are representedonly
within a
very
narrow
compass,
while the
third has become the rule.
A)
Active Pluperfect.
1)
Primitive Formation.
All the forms
belonginghere,
like
iiriitiQ^Ey, i'CKTrjv, Jjfffiev, 'iirar,
have
already
been
quoted
on
p.
38.5 fF.
along
with those of the
primitive,
perfect, so
that
we
have
no
need to
say
anything more
about them.
CH. XVI. .
THE PLUPERFECT. 429
2)
Tliematic Formation.
Here
belong,
as the clearest
representatives
of the
kind,
the two
Epic
past
tenses
(3 pliir.)ifj.i^i]Kov i
439 with the
i):irticiple
^fyu"?)"wc
and
iTtiipvKov
Hes.
Theog. 152, 0pp. 149,
Scut. 76. The
case
is the
same
with
ai'wyov
i 331, uiioye
e 276,
inasmuch
as we
have
repeatedly
learnt
234
to
recogniseaiwyn
as a
perfect.
But here the
peifect
too is sometimes
inflected like
a
present (arwyei).
The
analogy
of the
imperfect
is in
these
pluperfectsjust
as
unmistakeable
as
that of the
present
in
many
pei-fect
forms
quoted
above. Such
pluperfectscoiresiX)ndexactly
to
Sanskrit formations like
e.g.
a-Tcalcalcsha-m with the
perfect
Kalcaksha
(rt.
l^al:sh
see).
As in Sanskrit the boi'der line between these formations
and
reduplicated
aorists is
doubtful, so with the Greek
TrtTrXip/oi'
we
cannot determine whether it is the
pluperfect
to
ninXriya or an
aorist.
The form was
discussed
more thoroughly
on
p.
290,
But there
are
also some
past
tenses of the like kind which
occiu"
only
in the third
person
singular.
As with these there is no
difference
between the
ordinary perfect
and the
past pei-fect, we cannot talk here
of
a transition into the
analogy
of the
present.
The distinction between
perfect
and
pluj)erfect
consists here
exclusively
in the
augment.
But as
the latter
may
always
be omitted in
Epic poetry,
to Avhich all these forms
.
belong,
the two coincide in
form,
and it is
only
the connexion which
decides,
.
Hei'e
belong
av-i)vo6e-v
A 26G
o(^pa
o'l
aifj,' en Ofpfiovav. (^ ojTfiXTJs
"TT-ev-T]uode
B 219
"v^/'eSi'))
S'
iirfvrjvode \a-xyii
8eldi" 2 34 dfidie
yap p.rj
Xaifiop
airafirjafie cridripcp
fyeycove
S
4G9
yey(i)ve
Q, /03
KaKvaev r ap'
eneiTn, yeycovt
re nav kutu aarv
with the
present-like
liaaoi'
re yiyioveftoijaag
e.g.
4
294.
Cp,
Buttmann
Ausf. Gr, ii.2 35 f. It is
plain
that
we have to deal here
only
with
pei-fects
which have the force of
a
present.
One
feels,
with formations of
this
kind,
how
slight
are
the
means
which
language employs
for the most
importantdistinctions,
and
can
realize the
dangei-s
to which the
system
of
verbal forms must have been
exposed
in
languages
which do not
possess
eitjier
the
augment
or
the distinction between
primary
and
secondary
terminations.
Perhaps
the lack of
perspicuity
in the forms
just
dis- cussed
contributed to favour the extension of the tlurd
pluperfect
formation.
3) Compound
Formation, 235
The Ionic dialect from Homer onwards has
preserved
for us a
plu- perfect
which is characterised
by
the addition of two vowels, pronounced
separately,
to the
perfect
stem. Fanatical friends of the
theory
of the
'
connecting
vowel
'
necessarily
found this
inconvenient,
inasmuch as it
looked
as
if
language here,
in its excessive
luxmiance, employed
two
I
connectingvowels,'though
one of these could not
helpbeing
so
completely
in the
way
of the
other,
that it
really
turned into
a
'
hindermg
vowel.'
AVe have here to do with forms like the
following:
1
sing,ijcta
S 71,
fiveeii
(ppetji
6
366, i]ciaTheogu. 853,
Herod. ii.
150,
Callimach, fr. 297 ed, 0. Schneider.
'
430 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch.
xvi.
jyrwyta
i 44, tc 263,
p
55.
TTETToldea c 434,
6 181.
t-fOiiTrta4
166.
twdeu Herod, iv. 127
(theonly example
in
Herodotus).
2
sing.IreOliTreac, an old variant of
i)r]i]rruo lo 90,
while
Hesychius
quotes j)'c"Ec" ji^tie,
with wliich
compare
Et. M.
s. v. kire-n-oujicf^iv,
Ittzttol-
VKea (p.
386,
15
sqq.).
The double
" savours strongly
of
grammatical
theory.
3
sing.
j;t""
B
409, 832,
A
330,
P
402,
in all which
passages
I.
Bekker to suit his metrical
theory
writes
j/o?.
From Herodotus Bredow
p.
320,
26
quotes
similar
forms,
e.g. apaipi'iKee
iii,
39,
eyE-yofee
i. 1 1 and
often
elsewhere,ottwttee
i. 68.
2
plur.ffvt'yceare
Herod, ix.
58,
the
only example
of the kind for
this
person.
It is a prioriprobable
that the two vowels did not
originally
stand
side
by
side
;
and it
was
very
natural to
conjectiu'e
the loss of
a
"t,
as I
did in
Tempora
und Modi
p.
333
followingPott,
after
Bopp Vergl.
Gi-.
"
645 had
proposed an explanation
similar in
principle,
but somewhat
more complicated
in the
can-ying
out. And as in the
same Ionic dialect
we meet in the
imperfect
of the rt. fV the forms
7]uor ia,
tag (Herod ),j)",
"ar" (Herod.),
it was not
possible
to avoid
identifying
the terminations of
these
plupei'fects
with the
impeifect
forms of the vei'b
substantive,
especially
as
Lat. lidera-m and
*"-fei8ea, j]8ea
236
vklera-s and
*(-j:ei8eas
v'ldera-t and
*e-_^"t'See, //See
videra-tis and
*e-j:fihiaTe, {jbiare
agree
exactly,except
in
quantity,
and in Latin the connexion of the
termination -cram
with
eram was
still
more evident. In
spite
of
this there is still one difficulty remaming.
It is
a
question
whether
the
"
is a
pail
of the
appended auxiliaryverb, or of the
perfect
stem
ending
in
a
vowel. Schleicher
Comp.^
812
prefers
the former view. It
seems
to me that the second deserves the
preference,
if
only on the
ground
of the 3
plm*.
For
here, on
the
analogy
of
"t-aar,
'i-c^a-aav,
t-co-erai',
'('-orcu'
they knew=/tc-(Ta)',Ave must
certainly
divide
jjc"-(Taj' so.
Again
we came across a perfect
Stem in
e
in the infinitive
Eili-fat,
in the
conjunctive
and
optativeeIceii), EiCE-hj-y.
Indeed
we learned above
on
p.
390 ff".to
recognise
the
perfect
formation with
an e sometimes
short,
sometimes
long,
as a
Graeco-Latin form. The vocalism of TreTraiOea too
suits
only
that of TrsVoiSa or TreiToSivai,not that of
7rt77irTi.tEi'.
Com- position
of
a
stem with forms of the rt.
eg
met us above
p.
427 in
the case
of
'iiruf^u ;
and
we shall have occasion i;nder the head of the
sigmatic
aorist to discuss this
piinciple
of formation in its various
connexions.
Evidentlyyci-ciTE
i.e. *"-r"Uf-(Ta-rE is to 'lauTE i.e. ^J-ic-tTa-Ts
precisely
as a
form
*eue-ixei' (which
is
very
conceivable,on
the
analogy
of the Doric
7rE7royd"-f.iEp)
would be to the Horn. inf.
ic-fj-ev.
The
same
element is in the
one case
added to an
e-stem,
in the other to the
\niexpanded
root. The
position
of the 3
plur.
is
evidentlyquitespecial.
The
-ffai'
of
ijct-tTdi;
t-TvtTvoydt-fTuv never loses its
a. Obviously on the
ground
of
i)a"''" t(J"-"-r -ffci'
established itself in time
as a termination of
the third
i)lural,
and
constantly
extended itself
more widely.
Thus this
-
CH. XVI.
THE PLUPERFECT. 431
personal
form took
an
isolated
position,
and whilst in
earlytimes,
when
for the 3
pi. only 'icov,
tcpai'
and the like were
in
use, e-feuE-cra,
"-fei^"-(Ta-e,
i-fei^e-(Teetc. down to the 3
plur.
l-feice-aa-vwere quite
on
the same footing,
afterwards the
"r
in all the other forms fell before the
universal
tendency
to transfoi-m it into
a
breathing,
but in the one
instance was protectedby
the
analogy
of the
numerous
forms
belonging
to
other
tense-forms,
which had meanwhile become
commonly
current. We
have
repeatedly
seen above,
in the
case
of the 2
sing,
of the
middle,
that
237
the a
between two vowels was not
always
treated in the
same
way.
It
is worth
noticing
that the
language
of
Homer, though
it has
quite
a
number of
primary
forms of the 3
plur.
like
ftiftarray, celcicrar, fiiiiaaay,
'lauv,
has
only
one single
foi'm from an e-stem loiKe-aai' N 102.
Now that we
have learnt to know the methods of
foi-ming
the
pluperfect
in their
clearly
marked
types,
the
question
is to which of
these
categories
that form
belongs,
which
occurs even
in Homer in
considerable
numbers,
and afterwards
came
to be the
only one
in
iise.
The forms here under
consideration,
which Cobet Novae Lectiones
p.
212 ff. has submitted to an acute
and
comprehensive
criticism
are
the
following :
-'o
a)
Forms in
rj.
1
sing.
" in the Old Attic dialect the 1
sing,according
to the evidence
of the
grammarians
and the best M.SS. ended in
?;.
One main
authority
for this is that of Choeroboscus in Lentz's Herodian ii. 326
:
ol
ce
'Adrji'cuoL^ TO
ctaXvdEV
vtto -wj'
'Iioiwv
avraipovai
Ka\
TroLovaiv elf;
rj
tTTzir
oi^KT]
Xiyoi'Teg
oQei'
kiu to
'
tt:")(^"ivi]
iyoj' Trap'^ApiaTo^avei
kv
^A-x^aprevmi' (v.10)
ore 8rj^K^xh^VirpocrboKOiv rov Attr^'^Xoi'.
The unhistoric
conception
of the old
grammarians
here meets us in all
its
strength,
or
rather in all its weakness.
According
to them
-ui
is
an
Ionic resolution of the usual
-uv,
but then
-la
itself is
again
contracted
into
-J/.
But we
perceive
a correct
insight
in the fact that this 1 sine, of
the
pluperfect
is
compared
with the 1
sing
"]="))'.We have the follow- ing
instances in which first
persons
in
?/
rest on
good authorityor are
treated
by
Stallbaum on
Sympos. p.
198
c, frequently r/'c//, Apol.
p. 31,
aTTwXwXy
and
w^eX";k?7, p.
36
cnzoizEipEvyr]
Theaet. 208
afeari'iici], Sympos.
1.
c. eTTETropdr],
p.
217
eyiCExeipni^r],
Republ.
472
ECecokr].
Afterwards
eiv
alone is used.
Dind.
Aristoph.
Nub. 330
;
eXeXi'iOijc
is
given by
Dindorf after Brunck
at
Aristoph.Equ. 822,
1044.
3
sing.rjEici]
I 206, ^c/j
A
70,
B 38 etc. La
Roche,
in
spite
of the
authority
of Aristarchus in favour of the
?/ (Schol.on E
64)
is inclined to
write
"1 everywhere,
and so too Cobet and Kontos in the
Aoyioe '^punQ
"
Cp.
Moeris
p.
197 ed. Bekker
f,^'Attikus,^Shv 'EWrjviKus.
432 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvi.
p.
61.
Certainly
the variation between "t
and
rj,
even
in the
same verse
N 355
vfxWepoQ ytyorti
Kui irXiiova
jj??/,
is
surpi'ising.
The
only
form
which is estal)Iished with ahsolute
certainty
is the Doric
uwoXojXi]
tab.
Horacl. i. 39. In Theocritus there is the
gi-eatest
fluctuation in th"
M.SS. between ei
and
rj ; cp.
Ziegleron x. 38,
xiii. 40. In Attic writers
there is no^^"here
any support
for
t]
in the 3
sing.(cp.
Gerth Stud. i.
2,
222).
1
plur. ijicrjuei' (probably
to be written
i)iicr]fiev)' ^iTriirrafjedaf,
riceifief
Hesych. ii:eKpufripixf]H-^C Sophron
fr. 71.
b)
Forms with
e.
In three
passages
of the scenic
poets
editors now
follow
Elmsley (on
Eurip.
Bacch.
1345)
in
writing
first
or
second
persons
of the
pluperfect
with a
short vowel
:
viz.
Aristoph.Lysistr.
1098
ceiya tea 'rreTrorBefxec
Soph.
O. R. 1232 Xelvrti
fiev
ovc'
a vpoadei'
rycf/xer
ru fi))
oh
Eur. Bacch. 1345
ov//' e/uuBeO' tii^Cic,
ore
c'
^XP*!''
^^'^
i)Cet".
In the first
passage
it is
a Lacedaemonian Avho is
speakilig ;
and this is
the
only reading
which makes
sense
(iNI.SS. -t-ayBaj^iec).
In the second
there is
no reason
for
altering
the
jjcEif.ui'
of the
.M.SS. :
in the thii'd
though
the recorded e'ictreis also
intelligible,
the
meaning
is better with
ijcETE. " For the 3
plur.
the forms in
t-aav
are,
as
has been said
above,
the
only ones
which
are
well
supported.
From Herodotus onwards
forms like
t^EXrjXuicEuay
Herod,
v. 20,
EwdEaai'
(Herod.),ktopatcEacw
(Thuc),ani]pKE"Tuv (Demosth.)
are universally
in
use.
Bvit from this
ending -Eo-ar,
as
Ellendt. Lex.
Soi)h.(ed.2"^^)
p.
515
justlynotices,
scholars
have too
quickly
arrived at an e
in other
persons, though
the state of
the
case
is
quite
different there. For
Soph.
0. R. 1232
cp.
Wecklein
Ars
Soph,
emend. 24.
239
c)
Forms with
ei.
1
sing.
The termination
-ftr,
which
was universally
used later
on,,
is
now
banished from the text of the
tragedians.
In later comic writers
and in
prose
from
Xenophon
onwards there is abundant e\adence for
-ft J'.
A list of such
passages
is
given by
Kontos in the
Aoytoc 'Ep/urjQ
p.
44 fi".
2
sing.
Here so
far
as
the ti'adition
'goeswe are entii'ely dependent
on
the
copyists,
to whom
-rjg
and
-eig
sounded
just
alike,
-etc
is
common
in Attic orators from
Antiphon
onwards
: Antiphon
5
" 15,
Isaeus
3
"
41 etc. "
I'lpijpEiaOa
Archil, fr. 94 Be.^ is
quiteunique.
3
sing.
The form in
-tt
is recorded
more than 30 times in
Homer,
e.g. vpiipEi
M
56, ijyejh'iKEi
A
296, (ih'iEi,
B 93. It continues to be the
"
prevailing
form. But we often have evidence that the
reading
of
Aristarchus
was
that in
-elv
e.g.
Z 170 hlEaic'
j/iwyftr
w TrfrSt^/w, though
here the
presence
of the J- makes it
impossible
to
speak
of the
r as
necessary
: j'/rtt^yetr, ovrwg
ffw -o) V
ApinTap^oQ' J/iwyfti' yap
(Did.).
Zonodotus and
Aristophanesalso,according
to the
same authority,
read
in S 412
rrrJ/WocihpXi]KEiy
v~ip utTvyor.
Hence there is not the
slightest
reason to attack this
form, as
La Roche Textki'it. 195
does,
where
we
Lave
authority
for
it,thougl\we
may
well doubt whether Bekker
was.
CH. XTI. THE PLUPERFECT. 433
light
in
introducing
the
j' at the end of the
verse.
The form in
tti^
is
expressly
asserted to he Attic in Bekker's Anecd.
p.
422
inreppojyEi
kuI
(Tvv rw V (nreppdjyeiv to rpiroj'irpoaivTro)',
and Cobet 1.
C.
and Kontos in
the
Aoytof 'Ep/.n7c justly
express
themselves in favour of the
adoption
of
this form in the Attic
writers,
in order to avoid the hiatus
: thus,as
earlier editors
gave
the
line,
in Ar. Nul). 1347
cby
ovTos,
el
fJ.'f] to) 'nfTToiOeiv, ovk av
rjv
ovTas
daoXaaTos
7']KEir=i(0Kn
Av.
1298,
yceii'
Eurip.
Ion 1187.
The
plural
and dual forms do not occur in
great ahimdance,
but
present
no
controverted
points
:
ycujitv
occui'S in Aeschin. iii.
82, tjIeite
Demosth. Iv. 9. In the 3
plui\-iKrav was regardedas un-
Attic. The
form in
-ew
for the 3
plur.,
three times used
by Apollonius
Rhod. ii.
6.'5,
iv. 1700
(jj^Etv),
947
rjpt'ipen'
is
very pecuHar.
The learned Alexandrine
gets
into fine trouble for it with the Dutch critic
(Novae
Lectiones
p.
467)
:
'
Apolloiiiusipse turpiterimpegit. Quid eo
homine facias
qui
ijceiv dixit
pro
sciebant' !
CertainlyApollonius
sometimes
indulged
in
strange freaks,
and
perhaps
tliis 3
plvir.
in
eiv was
only
an erroneous
240
imitation of Homeric forms like
joc'ii', e(pat',fxiy^r,
which
even at the
present day many
regard
as
abbreviated fi'om those in
-nui\
We
come now to the
question
how the forms in
r/,
"
and
et are
I'elatedto those
quoted
above in
ta
and
fe.
That the
"/
of the 1
sing,
in
the Attic writers is contracted fi'om the Ionic
ta,
and that the
et
of the
3
sing,
is contracted from
et,
was
the
prevalentopinion
among
the
ancients,
and is
generally
retained in modern times. This view meets
with no difficultiesin
1
sing.
Ion.
-ea
Att.
-77
2
sing.
Ion.
-fay (?)
"
-r^s,
-rjaSa
3
sing.
Ion.
-e"{u),-ei{v)
"
-"("'),
Dor.
-;;
1
phir.
Ion.
-eafj.ev
(?)
"
-rjfxev.
On the other hand this
theory
does not at once fit the 2
sing,
in
-sic,
though
on
p.
430 we learat to
recognise
the trace of an Ion.
eeq,
and
the 1
sing,
in
-eiv,
or
the
plural
and dual forms in
-ei/uev, -eite, -eltov,
-ELTi]r.
But as
the
-el
in several instances cannot be shown to exist till
late
Attic,
it is a
very
probablehypothesis
that this
diphthong
made its
way only by degrees
from the 3
sing.,
where it had
a
just
claim to its
place,
and that thus we have an
instance here of an
analogyextending.
The
v
of the 1
sing,may
be
explained
from the
analogy
of the
imperfects
and aorists. In the case of the
el
this view
gains
in
probability
from
the fact that in
one form,
viz. in the 3
plur.,
the extension of this
diphthong,though a
much later
phenomenon, goes
on as it were under
oiir
eyes ;
for here it is
only
in the
post-Atticperiod
that
ei
takes
the
place
of
e.
This
theory
is also favoured
by
the
history
of Greek
vocalism. The less the distinction between the sound of
77
and
el
demonstrably
became in the course of
time,
the more
easily
could the
latter intrude itself into the
place
of the former. In the declension of
the stems in
-ev we
have the
same
process.
The Old Attic
(VTr^e
is to
the later 'nrivE'ic
precisely
as
7/o;c
to
tjceiq ;
and the
change
of the
termination
-jj
in the 2
sing.
mid. into
-el
is also similar. Of verbal
forms
we
may
also
compai-e
the
imperfect
of
(Ifxi, fJEiv by
the side of
i'jia,
ya,
discussed
on
p.
121, especially
in the clearest
instance,
the form of
F F
434 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT. ch. xvi.
241
the 3
sing,jjufby
the side of
yet.
This
ephelkystic
v
forms aii
important
link in the chain of the facts here
coming
into considei-ation.
For as
its
place
is
only
after short
vowels,
in forms of the 3
sing,
like
jj^"t(i')
there is still a reminiscence
of the earlier form
/;""()).
There are
however two
kinds of forms which do not
agi-ee
with the
theorysuggested.
There is firstthe 3
sing,
in
-i]
elsewhere than in the Doric
dialect. For a
3
sing.
T/eiSr]
could
only
be
explained
in Homer as a con- traction
from yelha.
But no 3
sing,
in
-ea
is either recorded or
credible.
For
evei'j'^vhere
a
3
sing,
in
e answers
to the 1
sing,
in -a : yiyoj'u
"
yiyore,
fia
"
j]J", iypa\pa
"
Eypa\p".
But
we saw
how
fluctuating
are
the authori- ties
for this
T],
which Cobet
altogetherrejects.
We have therefore
an
instance here in which the textual ciiticism which is directed
only
to- wards
securing
an
uniform
jjolish,
and is
averse
from
questions
of
origin,
agrees very
well with the efforts which
we are pursuing.
" The other
formation is that with the short
e
for the first two
persons
plm^al,
men- tioned
on
p.
432.
Tren a
yd
sfieg
camiot have
come
from
^neTrovdiantQ
nor
riltTt
from
jj^earr.
But the
support
for these too was
not
very strong.
If there had been more
certain evidence for these two
forms, we
could
hardly
have
helped regarding
them
as
not
compounded.
As a matter
of fact from the e-stem of the
perfect
we might
arrive on
the
one
side at
a pluperfect
with
a long
vowel
?/,
on
the other at one
with the short
vowel
e. "KeirovQi^tQ
would then connect itself with the Doric infinitive
TTETroi'difxei'
and the
ordinary TrtTrorOi-rai, i)dcri
and
ycrj-aOa
with the
Aeolic
foilr\-}ii, fotlrj-rrda
and the Heraclean
TrecpvTevKijfxev.
If we re- member
that the 3
sing, plupf.(nroXwXrj actually
occurs
in the same
Heraclean
dialect,
which
presumably
used
*6\w\i']^ey
for
oXioXevai,
and
that
kKtKpaTr]f"ixnj.uc, quoted
more
than once above,belongs
to the
equally
Doric dialect of
Epicharmus,
it would not be
exceeding
the bounds of
probability
to assume a
half-oljsolete
simple pluperfect
with an
e,
the
stem of which differed
as
little from the
perfectstem,
as
the
primitive
and that
supplied
with the vowel of the
present.
The 3
sing,
in
rj,
which Aiistai'chus
decidedlyupheld
in
Homer,
would then be a
relic of
242
this formation
beyond
the
sphere
of Dorism.
Still,considering
the
rarity
of the forms
mentioned,
and the
uncertainty
of the
authority
foi-
several of
them,
I do not attach
any
weight
to this
hypothesis,
but
pi'e-
fer
myself
to hold to the view that all active
pluperfects,
with the
excep- tion
of those mentioned under
1)
and
2)
are compounded,
and have
originated
from the Ionic forms
by
contraction
;
and that hence,
not
taking
into account these
exceptions,
the whole active
pluperfect
of the
Greeks,
which was
actually
in
use,
is formed in the
same
way
as
the
pluperfect
indicative in Latin.
B)
Middle Pluperfect.
As the whole
perfect
stem in the middle is treated
quite differently
from the
active,so is it also in the
pluperfect.
The method of formation
is
throughout
the
primitive;
and
therefore,as
all that has to be noticed
in the terminations has been stated
before,
there is no
need for us to
occupy
ourselves
more in detail with this tense. We
may
just
mention that
even
in Homer the middle
pluperfect
is
very common,
and is formed from
the most various stems. The
following
will serve as examples :
TE-vynnv
4
234,KE-)^(')Xu}rTo
n
585, kipTjnro
Z
241,
cilzTO E 387, iipi'iptiffTO
F
358,
CH. XVI. THE FUTUEE PERFECT. 435
iXiXeiTCTO B
700,
ineTrvaro N
674,fitl^Xt'iaru ^
28, iafliKutrro
P
52, ri-
TaaOrji'
A 536.
Vm. THE FUTURE FROM THE PERFECT STEM.
Whilst in
respect
of the formation of
a
pluperfect
Sanski'it
may
!""
"compared
with Greek at least in virtue of certain tendencies towards
such
a formation,
the notion of
forming
a fiiiure from the
perfect
stem
" as even
the most resolute enemies of all
'
Graeco-Italic
'
must allow "
is limited to Greek and Latin. Still
even
this formation is not carried
out
completely.
The two
languages
here
mutually supplement
each
other,
Greek
making
but few
attempts
at an active future of
completed
action,
but in the middle
foiming
this tense
tolerablyextensively
with
a
prevalentlypassivesignification,
while Latin
on the other hand
only
carried out the active to
completion,
so that in the former the
active,
in
the latter the
passive
can
only
be
expressedby periphi-asis.
\e\vKO)s
ecrofiai
= solvero
XeXvaeTOL = solutum erit,
243
The future of the
perfect
stem
presupposes
absolutely
the earlier
formation of
a
futme from the verbal stem. A
TviTravao^ai
or
KSKo^ajxai
is inconceivable without
Travffo/jai,
Koxpofxai.
The terminations
-irofxat,
-crij,
-ffercu
had
long stamped
themselves
on
the consciousness of the
Greeks as
belonging
to the
future,
when the ci-eative
impulse
of the
language employed
them also with the
perfect
stem. The
futuruni
exactum is a
strictly
new formation,
but the
agreement
of Greek and
Latin makes it
probable
that the
tendency
to such a new formation
belongs
to the time in which Greeks and Italians were
stillunited. But
by
the side of the
agreement
of the two
languages
in this formation
there is also a significant
difference. The Greek future
perfect
adds the
future termination to the
perfect
stem in its
primitiveform,
the Latin
to the e-stem : lique-'vo
for
*llque-so,
but
XeXtin-ao-fxaL, tetige-ro,
but
TeruK-cru-fJui.
The difference cannot
sui-prise us,
for under the
pei'fect
stem
we saw
different stem-forms
interchange
elsewhere. The Latin futvu-e
formations are more
nearlyrepresentedby
forms like the Homer.
Kei^act'i-
(Tonai (0353)
which
agrees
in its method of formation with
cecide-ro, Trs"pLSt]-
"Terai (()215),
which would
correspond
to a Lia.tin
fe-/ide-7'it,
the
conjectural
basis of
fid
erit. But the Greek forms
quoted
do not attach themselves
to
jDerfects actually
in
use,
and hence cannot be
regarded
as
proper
futm-e
perfects,
but
only
as
futiu'es from stems
reduplicated
like the aorist."
The
circumstance, at first
sightsurprising,
that this future in Greek is
only
united with middle
terminations,
is connected with the fact to
which
our
investigation
has
moie
than
once
conducted
us,
that the
middle
pei-fect forms, especially
in the Homeric
period,
were
far
more
widely
cuirent than the active. But
a
still more
forcible
reason
is to
be foviud in the fact that the future of the rt. as be,
from which this
compounded
tense
came,
in Greek has
middle,
in Latin active
personal
endings.
When the active
perfect
later on spread
and
multiplied,
the
languagewas
douljtless
lacking
in the fresh creative
impulse
needed to
develope
futures from these
new formations. Thus the
perfect
with
k
244
remained confined to some
few future
forms,
which
we
shall notice
immediately.
We
begin
with these relics of
a
Greek active futurum exactum. The
I F 2
436 PERFECT STEM AND FORMS CONSTRUCTED FROM IT.
ch. xvr.
most remarkable instance of the kind is the Homeric
(vex^P'/cw,
of which
we
find the infinitive at O 98
:
TTaariv o/LiaJT 6vfi6i"
KexapfJcrffMfV
thus in
a definitively
active
meaning as
compared
with the
passive
v//
266
oil ne'vrot dvnos
KfxaprjcreTai.
This is the
only
instance of
a
futm^e
perfect
of a
sharply
difierentiated
active form side
by
side with the
passive.
The fact that the
perfect
stem
here has an intensive
present
force cannot hinder
ns from
taking
the two
forms
so, any
more
than
^/e/i
rZ/cro^ai by
the side of meminero. " We have de-
Im(tm recorded
on
very
dubious
authority,
viz.
by
Maci'obius in the
Excerpta
Parisina
(Grammatici
Latini ed. Keil v.
p.
610),
where Homer's
verse
V
3.58
u-hp Kcu dwpa cido}(Toij."i'
is
quoted
witli the
reading ced(^(7o/j.ev.
The words
are : inveniuntur huius modi
tempera fignrata
et ex verbis in
w exeuntibus,
ut est
cedoiKyrrtt), quod proprium Syracusanorum est,
et
hctirru), ut
apud
Draqontem
. . .
Buttmann Ausf Gr. i.^432
explains
this
as
being
the
reading
of the
grammarian
Draco of Sti'atonicea. In
the
passage
quoted a
future
perfect
is
quite
unsuitable. But
perhapswe
may
still
conjectvire
in this notice
a trace of the real existence of such
a
form, cecdiaio would
agree
with dedero
except
as to
quantity.
On the
other hand
lorZ/^wand
TtQvijio)are
actually
in use by
the side of the
later and in Cobet's
judgment {Nov.
Lect.
264) quite
tin- Attic middle
forms
IfTTtj^ofiat, TedriiE,oijai.
Thus editors Avrite in Eur. I. A. 675
eicret (rv, x^pvi^cop yap
ecrrrj^fis weXas
in
place
of the
IffrijEri
of the
M.SS., as
in Ar.
Lys.
634 we have wh b*
tfTTijEu),
Thuc. iii.37
KaQtaTi]t,ti,
Ar. Acharn. 325
we T"6io']t,wv
'ifrSi
wvl.
Plat.
Gorg.
469
Te6ini",ei
ovrog,
Aesch.
Ag.
1279
rtdini^oiJiei'.
As
a variant
to Te6y))Eeiwe find twice in
Aristoph.redrijcrei
in the Ravenna
cod.,a
form which
we
cannot
regard
as
correctly
recorded because of its
strange-
245
ness : though
when Cobet finds in it
an
'immanis
barbarismus,'
it must
be remarked that from the shorter stems in use
in
earafjie)', -idvaniv
such
a
form
might
very
well be foi-med
upon analogy.
In the usual middle forms all is
regular
with the
one exception
of
slight
variations in
quantity. By
the side of
ctSefiai, Xe'Xii^ai
we should
expect cebiaofini,
which has but
slightauthority,
and
XeXvcrofxai,
but
Zeciiaofxai
and
\E\vrrnfxcuare in
use, evidently
under tlie influence of
futures from the verbal
stem,
like
Ii]"tw, Xiao^ai.
There
are numerous
forms Avith
an initial
consonant, as hdeEo/uai
E
238, KSKXiiirri
F 138.
fiEnriiaojiaL
X
390, Trt(f)ij/7Eui
x
2\7
,
reTEvHeTai M
345, i:"-)(oXtoffETai
A
139,
XEXeixpETai
Q,
742, fiE/jtUTcti
Hes.
0pp. 179, yEypa^pEraiSoph. Aristoph.,
"7rf-Xi)l("pai Herod., kaKE^ljonai Plat.,
EfTripT]fTo/.iai
Eurip.
I. A. 1203.
With
regard
to stems with initial vowels
(cp.
Homer.
e1pi](tetcii
^
795)
Cobet Nov. Lect.
241, following
I. Bekker's
precedent,
has restored
many
forms of the kind for
corrupt readings
in Attic
writers,as
a7r";X-
Xa^Eodt
Aristoph.
Ach.
757,
yrifiuj/Terai
Dem., rjp7](7ETai
Plato Prot.
338,
"niu)UTut Xen. Hellen.
v. 1,
14. This future is
as a
rule but
rarely
formed from derived stems. Still
we have KeKivSvyEvfTETcii
Antijih.v. 75,
"'n^OKEKiicvyEV(TErai Thuc. iii.
39, lia-n-EiT(tXE^ii](T6f.tEVor
Thuc. vii. 25. The
moods and verbal
nouns of the future
are
very
rare
;
in Homer there is
only
^"/i)'ijCT""r9"t : t 581,
"p
79.
CH. xTii.
THE SIGMATIC AORIST, 437
CHAPTER XVII.
THE SIOMATIC AOIilST.
The verbal forms hitherto discussed are quite sufficient,
in the
case
of
a
verh
proceedingdirectly
from the root and
characterising
the
present
stem
by expansions
of the various
classes,
to
express
all elements of
meaning-
developed
at all in the Greek
verb,
Avith the one exception
of the future
: 246
and
even
in the
case
of this
tense,
as we
shall
see
in the
followingchapter,
there is
no
lack of
attempts
to
express
it with the aid of the means
already
mentioned. It
might
be
objected
that
passivity
in an action
viewed as
aoristic is
only
to be denoted
by
means of the more recent
formations,
with which we
shall have to deal in
Chap,
XIX. But
even
here the older
language
is
by no means
destitute of
a simple
means.
Homeric aorists like
/3X7}/x"j^oe, "Aprji.
ktcl^evoq
show that it was
only
by degrees
that the middle aorist lost the
capacity
of
expressing
passive
action. Hence it follows that all the verbal forms which
we
have still to discuss
are
strictlyspeaking superfluous,
that
is,are not
called for
by any
one
definite need for
expression.
A form like
tVpt^'tt
beside
tTpcmov
is,so
to
speak,
an
alter
ego,
and in the same
way
rpispai
is needless
by
the side of
-paKelv.
Such
luxury
of form-creation has
hardlycome
before us
hitherto. For the
variety
of the forms of the
pi-esentstem, though resembling it,
is not of the same kind. In
the
case
of the
present,
we
thought
we
could detect
slight
diSerences
of
meaning
once
existing
for the
plurality
of forms. In the
region
with
which
we are now
concerned there can hardly
be
any
thought
of that.
At most we
may compare
the t-class of the
present-stems
vnih the
sig-
matic
aorists,
if we were right
in
explaining
this from
composition.
In
the introduction
(p.11)
we put
all the forms in
question
here
together
as
the
auxiliary
stratum. There too the
guichngthought
was
expressed
that all the forms still to be tUscussed are
related to those
already
dis- cussed
as a sentence with the
copula
is to one
without it.
In order to establish
our
\dew more fii-mly
it is
necessary
in the first
place
to take
a
sui'vey
of the forms
disthiguishedby
the letter
a:
In
Greek alone these
forms,
here limited as a
rule to the aorist and
futui-e,
form
a
very
considerable
group
of verbal
forms,
which
evidently
had
a
mutual influence
upon
each
other,
and
thereby
in the
com^se
of time
developed constantly
more
definite rules for theii" formation, a
thus
became
one
of the most
important
formative sounds for the Greek
vei"b,
of all consonants it is heard the most
frequently,
and there are a
number
247
of
verbs,
which besides the
present
stem have
only developed
the
sig-
matic stem. These forms
appear
in
a
somewhat difierent
light,
when
we
compare
the
cognatelanguages,
and
especially
Sanskrit. The sibilant
is here also
richlyrepresented,
and we cannot doubt for a moment that
it had its
place
even
at the time of the Indo-Germanic
unity
in definite
438
"
THE SIGMATIC AORIST.
CH, XVII.
positions.
But the
employment
of it is less
simple
and
regular
than in
Greek. The other
languages
fall
quite
into the
background,
but
present
some
strikinganalogies.
The dental sibilant shows itself in
very
different
applications,
viz.
1)
In isolated
pei-sonal endings,as
in the Greek
-crai' (e-do-trav by
the side of
e-do-y)
and in the
perfect
eiEa^rii.e.
ek-ffa-irt,
for which it will
be
enough
to refer to
p.
48 and
p.
427. Forms of this kind
are
probably
confined to Old
Persian,Greek,
and Latin.
2)
To the formation of
Tense-stems,
i.e.
a)
To the formation of
a
past tense,
with
correspondingmood-forms^
particii^les,
and infinitives from the
pui-e
verbal stem. These are
the
proper
aorist
forms,
to be
analysed moi-e precisely
hereafter. In these
Ave
may
notice
again
the
followingdifferences,
with
regard
to
which, so
far
as the Vedic dialect is
concerned,
I follow Delbriick Altind. Verb,
p.
177 ff.
a)
A
simples is
added,
which is
directly
united with the
personal
endings,e.g.
Skt. a-bhai-sh-ma we feared
(rt.hJd),
hd-s-mahi we
sepa- rated
ourselves
(rt.
A"=Gr.
x""
xcKTicui).
The
greatest
resemblance
exists between the
conjunctives.
The mood-vowel here is
",
so
that
e.g.
ha-s-a-te is formed like
cv-tr-t-rai as a conjunctive.
If Latin forms like
au-s-i-m,faxH are aorists,they belonghere,
i
being
added
as an
optative
element to the stem
expanded by
s
just
as
in ed-i-m.
/3)
ish is
added,
in which the
origin
of the i is not
definitely
estab- lished,
e.g.
a-^an-ish-ta
he was born.
Perhaps
tins i is of the
same natiu-e
as the
f,
which
a])pears
in
t-Trop-e-aa
and similar
foims,
which are
dis- tinguished
however
by
the
use
of the vowel
a.
248
y)
"ish is
added,
which
ought probably
to be
regarded
as a
redupli- cated
s
(si-s).
S)sa
is
added,e.g.
a-dhuh-shat he milked
(rt.duh),
Zend ven-ha-t he
struck
(rt.van).
This formation
corresponds
to Greek aorists like
E-leiK-ire,
e-^v-ffn
etc. In the 1
sing,
and 3
plur.
this
appears
also in
Sanskrit in the
place
of
a, e.g.
a-jan-sa-m
I
held,
3
plur.a-jan-san{vt.
jam).
In
precisely
the
same
way
Church-Slavonic forms aorists like
1
fiing. ja-sii
I ate
{=.^ad-sa-m)]n^t
as
if in Greek
we
had *il-ffa
(cp.
'f.fT-rTa = il-cfaI
seated),
bi-chu I struck
(=*bi-sa-m).
b)
For the formation of forms from the
jyresent
stem. Delbriick
p.
181 with Grassmann calls such formations 'double stems.'
They seem
to occur in Sanskint
only
with middle
endings,e.g.
arJca-se I
praise(rt.
arJc).
We
might
compare
the Greek k-Tavv-crtre
by
the side of
Ta-w-Tcu.
But there is
a stillmore exact
correspondence,
as
I have shown in Stud.
viii.
p.
460
ff.,
with the Latin
imperfectconjunctivee.g.
lege-re-m
for
lege-se-m.
The
e,
which
goes
back to a +
i and
answers
to the
ai
of the
Greek aorist
optative,
is related to the i of the
aboA'-e-mentioned/rtc-s-i-?y?.
precisely
as vehe-t is to ed-i-t
(as conjunctive),
ster-ne-re-m is formed in
just
the
same manner as
the Skt. (jr-iu-sheI
praise(rt.gir).^
c)
For the formation of
a perfect
stem. Tliis
occurs,
with
any
fre- quency,
as was
sliown above
p.
427,
only
in Latin and Keltic. In
Greek
we can
only compaie
'ma^n.
'
These ^-formations from the
present
stem arc related to those from the verbal
stem much as the
original forms in
-a-ja-mi,postulated
above
p.
327 for the
optative of the thematic verbs
(e.g.*hdd1uz-ju-mi
for
Iddlu'jam),
to those of the
primitive verbs
(e.g.*as-jri-mi
for (a).9-ja-w).
CH. xvii. SIGMATIC FOKMATIONS IN GENERAL. 439
d)
For the formation of the
i:)luperfect
from the
perfectstem, as
mentioned
on
p.
430. This is found
only
in Greek and Latin
(^0"-((t)",
vide-ram).
e)
For the formation of ih^
futuru')nexactum,
from the
perfectstem,
also
only Graeco-Italian,
cp. p.
435
(XfXu-cro/.tai, solve-ro).
f)
For the formation of a
simple/M^wreby
the addition of
s +ja
to the
verbal stem. This is treated in the next
chapter,
3)
For Mood-formation"
249
a)
in the Latin
imperfectconjunctive,which, as we saw above,
is
fonned from the
present
stem
(lege-rem),
b)
in the
perfectconjunctive
of the
same language (lege-rim)
for
which
we
found
a
parallelon
p.
427 in the Heraclean
fxejUKjdw-crwi'Tai ;
c)
in the Latin
pluperfectconjunctive(legi-ssevi).
4)
For the formation of desiderative verbs in
Sanskrit,
for the most
part accompanied by
a
reduplication
of the stem : j^h^^sha-ti
he wishes
to drink, rarely
without this
:
ap-sa-nta they
wished to attain
(rt."p).
Latin verbs like vlsere are akin,
and also the Greek desideratives in -o-e/w
(ytXa-o-f/w)
which are not
yet fullyexplained.
So far we
have been
proceedingpurelystatistically, merely pointing-
out and
grouping
the
facts,so
that
no objection
can
be raised
against
our
statement
even by one who holds
a
different view from
my
own as
to the
origin
of the sibilant. It
seems to
me,
in view of the difference
of
opinion
which exists
upon
various fundamental
questions
of
com-
pai-ative grammar,
of the
greatest imjDortance
to start from the neutral
territory
of the facts of the
case.
But now
the
question
forces itself
upon us.
What is this sibilant ? Whence
comes
this sound which intrudes
everywhere
1 We can now see so far,
I
believe,
into the structvire of the
Indo-Germanic
verb,
that
we
may say
there are only a
few
possibilities
open
to
lis.
No
one
will
readily
think
seriously
of
a purelyphonetic
origin
out of
nothing. Any suggestion
of the kind that has been
made,
does not
appear
to be maintained even
by
those who had
put
it forwaid
.
tentatively.
For
instance,Westphal
does not venture to defend the
s " after the
example
of other sounds
so explainedby
him " as a
'
sepa-
i-ating
consonant.' There
are doubtless,just
as
in the case
of the
ja
discussed
on
p.
204, only
two
possibilities.
The
one
is to
place
the
s
in
the
same
class with the stem
-formingelements,'
which we learnt to
recognize
in such rich abundance in the
present stem,
and of which
a
fresh instance met
us
in the
perfect
and
some
aorist forms with
k.
We
should in that case
have to start with
a syllablesa,
and
put
this
along
with that
Ka
and also with the
a, na, nu, ta,
ska of the
present
stems.
As such
syllables appeared
to us to be
stem-forming
nominal
suffixes,
in 250
this
case
the
s
like the other suffixes would be of
pronominalorigin.
Ascoli in his
Studj
Ario-Semitici
p.
26 has
actuallyput
forward the
conjecture
that the
s
had such
an origin,
and
Westphal
comes to a
similar
conclusion,except
that he
conjectures
that the
s arose
from the t
so common in the formation of nominal stems. But such a
phonetic
transition is
quiteimprobable
for
so early
a period
in
language
as
that here
in
question.
The sibilant itself however
appears
as a stem-forming
suffix almost
solely
with a
preceding
vowel, especially
in the suffix
-as.
We cordd at most
appeal
for
support
to the infinitive suffix
-sa7ii,
dis- cussed
by us on a
former
occasion,
and the few forms that are
possibly
akin
to it. Another reason against
the suffix
hypothesis
lies in the Indian
440 THE SIGMATIC AOEIST. CH. XVII.
aorists which end in the 1
sing,
in
si-sha-m,
e.g.
a-jd-sisha-m
I went
(rt.
jd),a-gd-sish-us they sang (rt.gd).
These forms
we cannot
helpre- garding
as
reduplicated.
But
reduplication, though
often
occurring
in
the
verb,
is unknown to
word-forming
suffixes.
Further,
where in the
whole realm of verbal forms did
a
stem-forming
suffix show itself in such
an
extraordinary
manifold
application
?
Stem-forming
suffixes have as
their
purpose
to individualize
: they serve
in their varied
multiplicity
for the
synonymic
distinction of nominal stems. From this
they
do
certainly
make their
way
into the verb. But it
was precisely
for the
present
stem that this varied nominal
stamp
of the stem was
charac- teristic
;
and
even
in the
case of the
present
stem we
preferred(p.204),
for
reasons
there
adduced,
to
regard
the
syllable J" as an
auxiliary
verb.
It is
especially
difficultto conceive of the
use
of a
stem-forming
suffix
for
particularpersonalendings
e.g.
in 'i-lo-iruv. For the suffix is
a
firmly
attached element of the
stem,
not a moveable accretion on one
particularpersonal ending. Besides, a
stem-forming
suffix
always
con- sists
of a
syllable,
not a
single
consonant. If therefore
anyone
should
so
explain
the
s in forms like Skt.
hd-s-mahi,
Lat.
au-s-i-m,
he would have
to maintain that both here and also in the future
ending-s-jd-mia
vowel
had been
lost,
which would be hard to
prove.
For in the verb the
2.51 primitive
method of
formation,
Avhich does not dread the collision of
consonants,
is
rightly
held to be the earher. " Now
over
against
these
reasons against
the suffix
hyiDothesis
there are justas
many
which
speak
/or
the
explanation
of the s from an
auxiliary
verb. In the fii-st
place
the fact that at a
later
period
inflected and hence
quite
unmistakeable
forms of the verb substantive are used for
periphrasisquite
in the
way
which
we here
assiune. Compare
"
e-8o-(Tav \
Lat. vidc-runt
j-with rerpafjifiei/oi
eiVt
"iK-(Ta-(rt
lu-si
^8e-{(T)a
vicle-ra-m
fi-aofji.ni
vide-ro
visus su7n
visHs eram
visits
ero
It
may
be
regarded
as an
established metliod of
linguistic enquiry
to
proceed
from undoubted facts in later
stages
of
language
to earlier
stages.
The
employment
of the
independent pronominal
forms in the
verb
'je
dorme'
'
I
give'
has led to a
i-ight understanding
of the
personal
endings,just
as
the
use
of the article has to that of the
word-forming
suffixes. Such facts from later
peiiods
show at
any
rate what
was
\mgmstical\ypossible,
even at an earlier time. To
change
the
possibility
into
probability,
of course we always
need a
preciseweighing
of the
particularpoints
in
question.
Now the terminations of the
sigmatic
verbal forms in
many
instances
exactly
resemble the forms of the rt. as
which
are
still in actual use.
The twofold method of formation
previouslydiscussed,
viz. either
by
the immediate addition of the
present endings
to the
root,
or by the
addition of the
same to the stem
expanded l)yo (Greek eg
and
ea :
cp.
pp.
101, 119)
may
be detected here too.
Compare
CH. XVII. THE ORIGIN OF THE cr. 441
1
sing,dsa-m = Gr,
rja
Lat.
era-m,
and the
endingsa-m
Gr.
era
(plupf.e-a = Lat.
e-ra-m)
3
plur.
ds-an = Tja-av
and tlie
ending-a-av
3 du.
ds-tdm =
fjcr-Trjv
and the
ending
s-td-jn
(Skt.
a-svdr-sh-tdm rt.
st'"/-)
3
sing.conj.
as-a-ti and the
ending
s-a-ti
-^-^
(Skt.
ne-sh-a-ti rt. ni
lead)]
3
sing,opt,{a)s-jd-t
= Lat.
s-"e-",
sit and the
ending
-si'i
{au-s-it)
1
sing,
fut.
eaofiai
and the
ending-a-o-fxai. (\v-cro-fiai)
Lat.
e?-o and the
ending-r-o (vide-ro).
It is
especially noteworthy
that two main formations of the
sigmatic
aorist in
Sanskrit, to which
we
shall also find the Greek
parallels,
exactlyanswer to this twofold formation of the rt. as
with and without
the added
stem-forming
a.
There is further the fact that two other
auxiliaryverbs, especially adapted by
theii' colourless
meaning
for
any
verbal
form, \rL. rt. 6/tM=Lat.
fu
and rt. cZ/ia=Gr. Qe
do, are employed
in
exactly
the
same
way
to
complete
the
tense-system.
Are we to
regard
it
as mere chance
that, just
as in Latin the roots es
and
fu,
mutually supplement
each other when used
independently,
so also in the
imperfectwe have
era-m and -ba-m which has come from
-fu-am,though
the latter
only
in
composition,
that in the
perfect
-si and
-ui,
vi i.e.
fui
(Osc.aamana-ffe-d),
in the futiu-e
-so
(Osc.ce^is-a-ze-t)
and -bo
(from
fuo)reappear?
The
employment
of the rt. dha=Gk. de will be discussed
later
on in its
proper place.
Here the Gothic soM-dedum
we souyh-t
with its
reduplicatedending proves
the addition of an
auxiliary
verbal
form
quite
as
clearlyas the
previously
mentioned Skt. si-sha-m. It is
true that
a different
theory
has been advanced with
regard
to this Gothic
formation. But the
attempt
to
deny
the
origin
of the
syllable
de from
the rt. dha ends with the
publicacknowledgement
of its
champion
that
he is
quite
unable to
explain
this formation. Since
Westphal
first
expressed
his doubts
as to the
explanation
of
many
verbal forms from
auxiliary
verbs established
by Bopp, though
these
only
extend to
a
portion
of the
forms,
similar attacks
upon
this
theory
have been
more
than
once
repeated.
But
no one
has
brought any
decisive reason
against
the
admissibility
of such
a composition.
As soon as we
presuppose,
as
we must,
that the first
beginnings
of
a compound
formation
belong
to a
time in which nominal stems were not
yet
characterised
l)ycase-endings
"
and this
assumption
is
just
as
absolutely
necessary
for the
explanation
of
2.").3
the
s
from
a stem-formation " we Ciin
completely
imderstand how a com-
poimded stem could be formed from the
coalescing
of
a
verbal
stem,
to
be
regardedas a nomen
agentis,
with the
s as
the remains of the rt. as be,
which
compound might
afterwards
supjjly
the
t}^3e
of similar
complicated
structm*es. "We have
already
stated
our opinion
upon
these
questions
and various
differing
views
on
p.
19 ff. The
objection
has
recently
been
raised
again
that there is
no proof
of our \T.ews : but this rests
upon
a
misapprehension
of our means of
knowledge
in these difficult
questions.
Proofs
are
only possible
in historical
investigationsby
the aid of
witnesses
: and of these there is
a complete
lack for the earliest
history
of
language.
All
positive
'
glossogonic
'
statements
are
always, strictly
.speaking, hypotheses,
but in some cases
hypotheses
of the same
degree
of
probability as those on
which the current
conceptions
in natural science
are
based,
e.g.
the
explanation
of the solar
system
and the like. It
can-
442
THE SIGMATIC AORIST.
"CH. XVII.
not be denied that the
same degree
of
probability
has
not.
been reached
in the case
of others. But
anyhow
the
one which is here in
question
belongs
to the class of the most
probablehypotheses,
those which at
one
stroke
explaina
large
number of facts.
We return
now from these
more
general
considerations to
our
sigmatic
aorist. If the
s
of this tense is that of the verb
substantive,a
further
question
cannot be
passedover,
viz. whether we have to
recognise
in this a
composition
of the verbal stem with
a
pai-ticidar
form of the
verb
as,
or a firmer union of both stems into
one
compounded
stem.
Bopp, who, as
is well
known,
laid
especial
stress
upon
the demon- stration
of
compounded
verbal
forms, always
held the view that in the
case of a
form like Skt.
a-dik-sha-m-='i-CEila there
was the union of a
predicative
root with the
preterite
of the rt.
as. Thus
e.g.
in his
Vergl.
Gr. ii.2
p.
423. Schleicher too
Comp.^
p.
796
expresses
himself
as follows
:
'An aorist of the rt.
as,
which here too loses its initial
letter,
is added
to the verbal root
: the
augment
is
prefixed,'
I followed this
view,
though
less
positively,
in the Elucidations
p.
1 20 and
'
Chronologie
'
p.
59. Misled
by Sanskrit, which ofiered
only
indicative
aorists,some
254
scholars have not had sufficient
regard
from the fii-stto the fact that the
question
involves not
merely
indicatives,but also
conjunctives, optatives
and the
corresponding
infinitives and
participles,
both
throughout
the
active and the
middle, in short
a
whole
system
of forms. In Vedic
Sanskrit this
system
is not
so
richlydeveloped
as in
Greek,
but it is
by
no means
devoid of
a
conjunctive
and not
wholly
without
an
optative.
This
deficiency
Delbrlick has himself
recognised
in
an addenchtm
(p.239)
to his statement
givenon
p.
19. Clemm deserves the credit of
having
first
more
thoroughly
discussed the
question(Stud.
vii.
p.
56
ff.),
and
brought
it
back, as
I
believe,
to the true
point
of view. Our whole
representation
of the structure of the verb is based
upon
the view that neither
a con- junctive
and
optative,nor a verbal noun can come from a
past
tense.
iyivETO
is no more the
79m
f5
of
"yivwi.iot, yirniTO,
than
lyiyrtTO
of
y/yrw-
fxai, yiyvoiTo,
or riitir
of
eiceir]!'.
On the
same fundamental notion
Ahrens bases his doctrine of the Gi-eek
inflexions,
in which with
especial
clearness and
consistency
for
every oblique
mood " if
we
may
so call the
conjunctive
and
optative
" and for
every past
tense a
j)'"'imarium
is laid
down, though
this is
wanting
in the
case of the aorists
:
e.g.
piimarium [Xa/Sw], conj.XajSwopt,Xa^oifxi
etc.
past e-Xa^o-v.
In
Chap.
XIII.
we saw that the thematic aorist is
nothing
but
a
system
of foi-ms from shorter
stems,
the
present indicative,or as we
may
also
say
the
primarium,
of which has fallen out of
use.
Hence it follows
that
we are
justified
in
assuming
for the foi-mal
completion
of such
a
system,
the actual existence of a
primarium, even though
in
any pai--
ticular
case
such
an indicative
presentmay
never have
actuallyexisted,
but
we must look rather to extensive imitation of
increasinganalogy
after the
type
once
discovered. It is not at all an
objection
to tliisvieu-
that the
strictly
aoristic foice
developed
itself
only
at
a
time when the
primarium had been lost.
Consistencye\T[dently
leads us to
presuppose
also
sigmaticprimaria,or
pi-esentsindicative,
thus
e.g.
for the
conjectui-al
255
Indo-Germ. aorist *a-dik-sa-m
a *dik-sa-mi.
Following
out this idea
we
may giveas a stem for the whole
system
of forms which
go together
dih-sa
(as
well
as
the shorter
dik-s),
without however on
that account
CH. XVII.
THE ORIGIN OF THE
a. 443
maintaining,
that such a stem
actually
existed or that the union of the
it. dik wdth
s-a,
which
came
from
as-o,
was
brought
about at a
time
preceding
the construction of verbal inflexion.^ There is little
probabilit.y
in the latter notion. But if
we assume
that at a
time when tlie nominal
stems
were" not
yet provided
with
case-endings,
a twofold
present
dik-s-mi
and dik-sa-mi
arose by
the
incorporation
of
a nominal dik
'
point'
(cp.
Lat.
jil-dio
'
rightpointing')
both with as-mi and also with
os-a-mi,
which
was
probably
in
use
side
by
side with it
(cp.
the
opt.
i{(T)-o-if.u),
we can
thus
explain,
I
believe,
all the
phenomena
here under
consideration. From the
same time,
in which the formation
by
the
addition of forms of the verb substantive
was
still
in
full
swing,
the
other
sigmatictense, mood,
and
personal
forms
may
also date
; they
are
as
it were isolated
offshoots,
of which
some
remained
isolated,
others
sprang up abundantly,though
in
part
at a
much later time.
This view
presents
the
follo^Wngadvantages over the older view
which starts with the
past
tense. In the first
place,
an easier
ex- planation
of the
past
tense. To
get
from dik-asat he
was
pointing,,
to a-dik-sa-t,
it
was
necessary
to
assume a
transposition
of the
aug- ment
from the middle to the
beginning
of the
word,
which is not
wholly
without
difiiculty, especially
as we
may conjecture
that the
augment-syllable
a cannot have
long preserved
itself
separate
from the
initial
a
of the rt. as.
On the other hand a-dik-sa-t is
very simply
explained
as a
past
tense
subsequentlydeveloped
from *dik-sa-ti. The
augment
was
in that
case
prefixed
to the verbal form
precisely
as
in all
other
past
tenses. A second
advantage
of this view affects the relations
of the
meaning.
'
At fii-st
sight,'
I
say
in Chron.^
p.
58,
'
it is
surprising
to find
a
root of this
seemingly
durative
meaning undei-taking
such
a
formation
(that
of
signifyingmomentary action).
For
being
is
certainly,
25 S
it would
seem, very
strictly
a
remaining,
an
enduring
in
something.
We should therefore
expect
the rt. as
rather in
present
forms,
like Lat.
2)0s-surii {=2)otis-sum),
than in aorists.' Now Clemm's
theory
doe.s
giveus
such
presents.
The
employment
of the
sigmatic
forms to act
as
aorists would therefore be
explained
somewhat as follows.
By
the side
of the
many
other
ways
of
forming
the
present stem,
there
were, during
that
linguistic period
in which the
compound
method of formation
came
up,
probably
the
same
periodas
that to wliich
we owe
the
present
stems
in
-ja,presents
in -s-mi and sa-mi with their
moods,
and
belonging
to
these
past
tenses in
-sa-m. Perhaps
even at a
time when the consciousness
of the
origin
of these forms was not
wholly
extinct a contrast arose between
the forms in
-ja-mi
and those in
-sa-mi,
the former
denoting
rather the
strictly
durative foi'ce of
going
about
a thing,striving
after
a thing,
the
latter rather
beingas
opposed
to
becoming,
that
is,so to
speak,
the
point
of
congelation
of the action. At
a
yet
earKer time the distinction of
continuous from
momentary
action had
presented
itself to
language,
and
had been denoted
by
the distinction of the
expanded
forms from the
lighterones.
We
can
understand how these
sigmatic
forms attached
themselves to the
latter,
the
aorists,
and how
thus,perhaps
first in the
past tense,a
form which
properly
meant
'
I
was pointing
'
came
to be
^
C. Pauli (Kuhn"s
Zeitschr. xx.
p.
321
ff.)
in his
reply
to
Merguet on Latin
verbal
formation,
in which there is much
ui^on
this
question
well worth notice,
defends the view of such a composition
of the stem. But
auxiliary
verbs
can
hardly
have
developed
at all without inflexion.
444 THE SIGJIATIC AOKIST.
ch. xvii.
used in the narration of mere facts,
while afterwards the
oblique
moods
also
acqmred a momentary
force. The
more
the need for such
a distinc- tion
of the kind of time
grew,
the
more
necessary
was it to
supplement
the old
partlyprimitivepartly
thematic
forms,
which
on account of
various
phonetic
difficultieshad not maintained themselves in the
case
of all
stems,
e.g.
but
rarely
with those
ending
in
a vowel. The
sigmatic
forms tilled
up
this
gap.
We can now
understand further how in
con- sequence
of this the
sigmaticprimaria
died
off,as
being superfluous
for
the
presentjustas
the
primaria'^f^rjfXL, *\d/9w,
*ru7rw have died
oif,
and
how
finally
in this
way
the main
requisite
for aoristic
use,
that
they were
accompaniedby
no correspondingpresent,was
attained for these
sig- matic
formations.
257
The
numerous
derived verbs of the Greeks
acquired
their aorists
only
in this
way.
I now believe that
attachingequalimportance
to the
form and to the
meaning
I
can so explain
the
origin
of the
sigmatic
aorist, I do not at all fail to
perceive
that such
speculations
as to the
genesis
of the forms of
language
do not
guideus to the
certainty
which
is
attainable in other
questions.
But to
give
them
up,
and to content
ourselves with the
mere
summary phrases
of stem-formation
or
analogous
formation would be
ultimately
to
giveup
the
proper
understanding
of the
structm-e of the
verb,
and to sink down from the idealistic
flight
which
distinguishes comparativephilology,
to the
purelyempiric
record of facts.
Now that it has been made
probable
that an
indicative in -sa-mi
with the character of
a
present
once existed,
the
question
arises whether
we
cannot
point
out some traces of it, Clemm 1.
c,
is
probably right
in
suggesting
the Sanskrit
desideratives,
in which the
syllable-sa is added
a,s a
rule to the stem
strengthenedby reduplication, e.g.
pijx'c-sa-ti
he
wishes to drink
(rt.jt?;7),
di-drk-sha-nte
(rt.dar(^) they
wish to
see,
like
a
conceivable Greek Hi-^eptc-'tro-vTai. Sometimes the
reduplication
is
wanting :
ap-sa-nta they
wished to attain
(rt.dp).
The desiderative
force is doubtless here the result of the
reduplication.
From the mean- ing
'he is
a
strong
drinker' " the
'
strong'
lies in the intensive force of
the
reduplication
" we
very
easily
arrive at the desiderative force. After
such
an application
had
once
established itself in forms of this
type,they
might originateeven
without
I'eduplication, just as
there
are some
perfects
without
reduplication,
and
many past
tenses
without
augment.
We have
an exactly
similar instance in the Lat. vlsere :
visit
corresponds
to the Skt, vivid-i-sha-ti which difters but
slightly
in its manner
of
formation. From Greek Clemm
quotes fiaa-ni
as similarly
formed. As
far
as
form
goes
there is no objection
to be made to this
:
and
no one can
deny
that the
meaning
is
purely
that of
a
present,
while the
common
Homeric 3
pi.
fi-aav suits
very
well
as a
past
to the
present-hke
H-acw-i.
But what makes
me
still hesitate is the fact that the 3
pi."iffum,
which
cannot be
separated
from the Doric
Wct^i,belongsentirely
to the
system
258
of the
indubitablyperfect
/otca=Skt. veda. For this reason
"('(ra/xi
was
quotedas one
of the traces of
a sigmaticperfect,
for which
naturally
we
must assume
the loss of the
reduplication.
With
greaterjusticewe
may
find relics of the
2Jrimaria
of which we
ai-e in
quest
in certain formations which have allowed the
a
to
pass
into
the
ordinary
form of the thematic vowel. " For
instance,a\et,a(Tdai
N 47.1
tiiiyei
(WtEaffdai
/"e/uowf icvruQ tjci(cat civcpac;
is
incontestably an
aorist.
But how is this form related to
iiXetifiercu
A 590
a\ec,ifierai
^"/^awra
and
CH. xvii. PRIMITIVE FORJIATIONS WITH A SINGLE
cr. 445
to
cWt^ufjieroc
Herod. i.21 1 ?
aXilaadai,as
well
as
the future
uXiEeiv,
which
has been here and there attacked
(e.g.
Xen. Anab. vii.
7,
3),
but which is
supportedby grammarians (Bekker
Anecd.
p. 415),
is
eAddently
from
the stem
oXek,
which has
come by anaptjTcis
from uXk
(uXkij,
aXi:ade~it),
not from the stem aXeE.
But
aXihffQni differs from
aXi^aadai
only as
nijorecrdai
differs from
iJijarcKrOai,
that is to
say,
the
rare vowel
a has
made
way
for the more common e.
I.
Bekker,
Homer. Bl. i.
319,
condemns the form with
o
in Homer
as 'an
unnecessary
and mis-
formed
aorist,'
but has not however ventured to banish it from the text.
I therefore take
aXi'So^aias as
accidentallypreserved
present,
whicl)
stands for
*aX"i'fi^"f((.
But the s-formation here
comes down from
a
]n'e-Hellenic time,
for aXiEw
corresponds
to the Skt. raJcsha-mi I deliver
(Princ.
i.
47-5).
" The relation is
just
the
same between Scu^aadai and the
present
oh'i^etrdai, only
that both
forms,
which
undoubtedly
go
back to
the it.
htK,are more rare. The former is
quoted only
from Anth. ix.
86 and Nicander Ther.
306,
the latter from
Hippocrates,
while
Xenophon
Conv,
4,
28
gives
the active
imperfect
w^aEor. " Without the
occurrence
of forms with
o,
Ave can
plainly
find
analogous
formations in otXw i.e.
afi'uo
by
the side of
avE,io,
both to be
compared
with Lat.
awj-eo,
Lith.
inig-ti,
Goth, ovlcon
(Princ.
i.
479).
Here too the sibilant extends back
to the
pre-Hellenic
time
(cp.
Goth,
vahs-ja
and Lith.
auk-sz-ta-s).
"
Finally?i\Peiy
knead
by
the side of
^efeii' (comic
wiiters)
and e^^en'cook
by
the side of TTinrrtir aor. -rri-djui
are
of the
same kind.
Perhaps
it is
better here
generally
to
explain
the
a thus,
instead of
regarding
it
as a
root-determinatiA'e
(Princ.
i.
83).
After these
investigations as
to the
origin
of the
sigmatic aorist,we
tm^n to details. The aorist forms of Greek which
belong
here fall into
two main
gi-oups, according
as the distinctive mark of this tense consists
of
a
singletr or the
syllableaa (rarely(to, o-e).
The second
group
is the 259
prevailingone.
Of the firstwe
find
only some
relics in the
language
of
poetry,especially epic.
We
begin
with these inasmuch
as they
bear the
most
antiquestamp.
A)
Eelics
of a Primitive For.matiox,
1) Conjunctive
forms.
We
oAve
it to
Westphal,
who fii-stin his Metrik
(p.
280 of the fii-st
edition
^)pointed
this
out,
and in his Method, Gr. i. 2
p.
266 ff".carried
it out more
completely,
and to Paech in his doctoral dissei-tation
'
De
vetere
conjunctivi
Graeci formatione' Breslau
1861,
that the traces of
a
sigmatic
aorist without
a stem-vowel have been
discovered,
and that there- by,
as has been
recognized
above
p.
312
f.,essentially
new
light
has been
thrown
on
the formation of the Greek
conjunctive.
We have shown in
Chap.
XIY. that the
sign
of the
conjunctive
in the
primitive
formation
is
a
short
o,
which is added
to the
stem,
but in the thematic the
lengthening
of the
alreadyexisting
short
vowel,
and have
rejected
the
notion
that, as was
formerly supposed,
the
long
vowels of the thematic
conjugation
could be shortened
again
at
pleasm-e.
This notion could not
be
destroyed
I'oot and branch
as
long
as there
was a considerable number
*
Cp.
p.
GO f. of the second edition.
446 THE SIGMATIC AORIST. ch. xvii.
of
sigmatic
aorist forms
e.g. "j)v\aio/j.e"',
eTrnneixpoiJui,
Tri/jLirafrtreTai,
iXaac-
f^ufrBa,
for which
no
other
explanation
had been discovered bnt such
a
shortening,justified by
many
with the
empty phrase
of
'
metrical license.'
Hence it was a
veiy
happy thought
of the scholai's mentioned above to
take forms of this kind
as conjunctives
not from aorist stems in
-ira
with
shortening,
but from aorist stems in
-a-
with the short mood-vowel
o or e.
These
conjunctivesbelong therefore,as was
intimated
already
on
J).
438 to the
category
of the forms
quoted
there under
2, a, a.
An
indicative,
not indeed
existing
but deducible
according
to
analogy
*i^u\a"-/it"j',
*"/3"?(r-/x")'
would have been foi-med like Skt. a-bhdish-ma
260 (j^t-
bhl
fear).
Such indicatives have fallen out of
use probably
because
of the
great
harshness of the
gi'oups
of consonants. But
conjunctives
with the mood- vowel
o or "
and thus related to the indicative
just
as
"i-o-^tv
to
'i-iJiei',(pBi-"-Tai
to
e-fdi-ro
did maintain
themselves,as
there was
no
harshness here
present,
in the
usage
of the
Epic bards,
to whom we
owe
the faithfvxl
preservation
of
so
many
other
gems.
Greek and
Sanskrit here
agree
to a
remarkable extent.
According
to Delbriick's
investigations (Altind.
Verb.
p. 195) conjunctives
of the like formation
from
sigmatic
stems are extremely
common
in the Vedic dialect. Thus
Tia-ere ("I" 134) :
*"-Tl(T-Te '.:
Skt. neshafha
'.
naishta
(rt.n'l
lead).
XU)criTai
(A 80) :
ex^^crTo
:: Skt. rdsate :
*ardsta
(rt.
?77
bestow).
The enumeration of the individual forms which
belong
here cannot
easily
be made with
completeness,
because the limit between the future and tlie
conjunctiveaorist,especially
in the
language
of
Homer,
is often
a waver- ing
one.
Abundant instances are suppliedby
Paech in his dissertation
;
and Stier Stud. ii. 138
gives
a
calculation of the
frequency
of the Greek
aorist
conjunctives
with
a
short vowel. The difference between the
figures
of the two scholars is not
veiy
great,
but there is some difference,
which for the
reason
above-mentioned is not to be wondered at. It will
lie sufficient here to
give
a
nvimber of indubitable instances of each
personal
form. With
regard
to the
Elegiac
and Iambic
poets
I
may
refer to Renner's fuller references
(Stud.
i.
2, 37).
1
plur.
act.
K Go
^T]
TTco? dl3pord^o
nev
nXXr/Aoiti'
A 141 H".
vvv
S"
aye pijn
fieXaivave
pv crcrop-ev
els aXa Siaf
fs
8'
eperas
eVtrT/Ses dyelpop-ev . . .
. . .
ai'
S'
avTijv XpvarjiSaKoWnrdptjov
^rjcrojxev
Theogn. v.
lOoo "iXXa
Xoyovpiv tovtov fdaopev,
avrap
ipo\av
avXfc Kal MovirSiv
pvrjcroped^ dpcfiOTepoi.
Pind. 01. vi. 24
ocppa
Kf\ivda"
t
iv
Kudapa
(ida-opev
oKxov,
'Umpai
Se
. . .
261
2
plur.
act.
pi.
27 ii'o pf]Ti
. . .
ry
fiXoy
i;
fVi
y^f aXyiytrerf TTijpa
TraOovres
O 134 fij OKe
ndvres
rirreTe
IlaTpoKKoio(f)6vov
2 du. act,
P 462
6(f)
pa
Koi
AiiTopiboiTacraaxr eTa.v tK noXepoio
CH. XVII.
PRIMITIVE FORMATIONS WITH A SINGLE o".
447
3 du. act.
E 233
fj.T]
TU)
fxep
Sficrai/re
jj-aTT] crerov,
ov8'
edeXrjTOV
1
slug,
mid.
3 237
avTiK
i-TTfi
K(v f'ya) napaXe ^ojJLai
iv
(^iXoTrfTi
B 488
TrXrjdvv
8
ovk av
tyai
fivdr^cro
p-cii
ouS'
dvop.riva"
2
sing.
mid.
y
45
avrap
fTsmv
cnreia-rjs
re koi ev^fai, fjdepis
eariu
Solon fr.
20,
1 dXX' e'i
fioi
mv vvv en
neiaeai
e^eXetovto
3
sing.
mid.
6 444
p.rj
TTU)R roi
KaO' 686p
8ijXi](TfTai
I 409 enel
clpKev apei'^ erai,
epKos
odovTcov
Mimu.
2,
9
kirapenrju
8i]tovto
TeXos
wapap.ei'^eTai"pi]s
1
piur.
mid.
A 444
o"pp'
iXcia
o
pe
(r
da
avuKTa.
The total number of the formations of the kind which
belong
to
eight
diiierent
personal
forms is not small. Stier Stud. ii. 138 counts
up
about 120 Homeric
instances,Westphal
Method. Gr. ii.
1,
267 f. 117.
On the other hand it has not been noticed
hitherto,
but it is
very
note- worthy,
that in Homer the aorists
conjunctive
with
a long
vowel like
iiparwfiev
II
38, Trepxpwfiei' v 383, otiat]TeLI t79,
arriaTijToi'
M
3-56,ti";\/;-
(TriTciL
r 107, {xvr}(ru"jxEiia
O 477 are quite
in the
minority.
I do not find
more
than 18 in
my
collections,
and of those it is
only ^I'l/o-w/ifOa
which
often occurs.
The 1
sing.conj.
in
-awpai
is
altogetherwanting
in
Homer. Hence for the aorist the formation with the slioi'tvowel is
decidedly
the
rule,
the later rule is the
exception
in the Homeric dialect.
The distinction from the
conjunctive
of the
present
and the thematic
aorist
(abovep.
316)
and the
utterly
untenable character of the old
theory
of occasional
shortening
comes out
thereby
all the
more plainly.
All the aorist
conjunctives
with
a
short vowel besides these forms and
c)^..^
those
corresponding
to them from other stems are
of a doubtful nature.
This is the
case
with
w
89
ore Kev
ttot'
ano^dipivovfia(nXrjos
^avvvvTULTe veoiKol inevTvvovTai ciedXa.
We discussed ^ojyrvjTciL
above
p.
319. iTverTvvovTai
can only
have
a
short vowel
as an
aorist
conjunctive(cp.
kvTvvtai
'C,
33),
and
so
Paech
p.
20 takes it. But this would be the
only
instance of
a conjunctive
form with
a
short vowel before two consonants. If we really
had to
take this
as a relic of
an
archaic
formation,
and had not to write ivTvvMv-
rni,
it would be natural to
conjecture
that also in other
corresponding
forms
e.g. aya(7i](Tde
S
111, KaTaKOfTpt'iarjirde
^
440,
iaatoi'rai
p
80 the
long
vowel
was
due to the
.copyists,
not to the
poet.
But the
undeniablyexisting
forms with
a long
vowel
warn us to be cautious. "
Cretan forms like those in the
inscription
of Dreros 1. 161
uc
Si
Ka /jt)
(j)vrev(Tei,
1. 118 ufrtra i^a p))
7rpat,oiTi(more correctlyTrpasoiTt) might
similarly
be taken as analogues
of
(3i]a-opei' etc.,
but we
decided
on
p.
323 to
regard
them as
futures. " For the three
persons singular
and the
448 THE SIGMATIC AORIST.
ch. xvir.
3
plur.
of the
active,
and for the 2 and 3
plvir.
of the middle mentioned
ah'oady,
the form with the lona:vowel is the
only
one
known in Homer
:
UKOVcru), (nre-)(d}]i"0}, Trnpt^eAcWrjrrfia {^ 344),yfttjfTrj, i^tv^y.
2)
Infinitive Active.
With
regard
to the infinitive of the active aorist
comparatiA^e
philology
has not
yet
arrived at
any
result which is
on
all sides
satisfactoiy.
It is true that
a
similar formation is not
lacking
in Sanskrit. Even
Bopp Vergl.
Gr. iii.^270
compared
Greek infinitives like
Xv-rrai,
Se'iK-aui
Avith the isolated Vedic infinitives in
-se, e.g. yi-slte(rt."^i)
to
sing.
Schleicher
Comp.^
p.
364 and Wilhelm
'
de infinitive'
p.
10 have fol- lowed
him in this. But these Vedic
forms,
of which
by
the
way
Delbrlick Altind. Yerb.
p.
223
recognizesonly
one
other
example
p7'ak-she
^
(rt.^;o?"^' fill)
besides
yi-she,are on
the other side
compared
2r33 with the Latin infinitives in
-se {esse
for
ed-se)
and
-re
(da-re,i-re),
ami
the latter
comparison
is the less to be
rejected
that the much
more
common
Vedic infinitives in
-a-se
find their
parallel
in the Latin infini-
.
tives in
-e-re.
We
may
state the relation thus
:
(ji-shi
:
Lat. M-re \
'.
ffrva-se (tolive):
Lat. virere.
Undoubtedly
the fii'st formation is
primitive,
the second thematic.
Neither has
any tiling
in
common
with the aoi-ist. We shall rather be
much inclined to
bring
the infinitive suffix -se=Lat.
-se,
-re
into
con- nexion
with the Vedic infinitive suflfix sa-n-i discussed above
p.
349.
Scholai's in their
eagerness
to find
proof
of case-forms in the infi^rntives
have for some time
past paid
much too little attention to the connexion
of the infinitives with definite tense-stems. It is not
possible
for a form
like
(jiv-aai
" divided into
^v
and
crat " at the same
time to be the
infinitive of
e-fv-aa,
and in its termination to
correspond
to the
-se
of
^i-she,
the -re of da-re. If
so analysed
fv-aui
would
belong
to the indie.
"-(j)v-y,
not to
e-fv-fra.
But
nothing
is clearer than the connexion of the
infinitive in
-(Tea
with the
remaining sigmatic
aorist formations. From
Homer onwards this is
plain
in hundreds of undoubted instances
;
and
in
meaning
too
fvfrai,
ffrfjcrai, ftfjmii
have
nothing
whatever in
common
with
'i(pvy,
eftrjr,
etrrr)}',
but
everything
with
t(l)v"7a,tl3r](Ta, t(TTi]au.
Hence
the earlier
hypothesis
is to be
given up,
in the
sense
in which it
was
suggested.
There
remain, as fixras
I
can
see,
three
possibilities,
viz.
a)
we might regard
all
agreement
between the
endings-se
and -mn
as deceptive,
and so
might i-ecognize
in
yi-she
the
ending -se,
but in
"pv-i7a-i
either the locative
ending
-i,
added to the
sigmatic
stem
expanded
by
a,
or
the dative
ending -at (Skt.e)
added to the stem
fva.
This two- fold
possibility
has but little
probability,
because in that case
the Greek
formation would be destitute of all
analogy.
Or
b) -se as
well
as -aai miglit
be
an
added infinitive of
an auxiliary
character from the rt.
os
be. This
theory
would indeed derive the end- ing
-aai
from the
same source as
the
-aa ofttpuaa;
but we
should have
to assume
that the
syllableo-a was
united -with the i-t.
^v by
two totally
2G4 different creative
acts,or
in other
words,
that forms like
(bvaai,
de'i'Smwere
formed
quite independently
and
only later,
and as
it were accidentally
^
Grassmann Worterb. zum Rig-
Veda
p.
849 derives
prakshii
from the
equi"
valcnt
expanded root
praJtsh.
cH. XVII.
THE FORMATION IN aa. 449
taken
OA'er
into the
system
of
itpvaa,
thi^a,
while the Sanskrit forms
remained
quite foi-eign
to this
system.
There is little that is attrac- tive
in this
possibility
either.
c)
Hence I incline most to a
third
explanation.
If there
were at an
early
date various infinitives with the
ending
-sai
(Skt.se), then,as
they
were
sometimes attached
directly
to the root
{(ji-she, ild-re),
sometimes
to the
present
stem
(yiva-se, bhoga-se,
Lat.
vive-re,duce-re), they might
also
very easily
be united to the shorter
sigmatic
stem ^e(^-(7a^,
(fivcT-acu.
The double
a
would then
naturally
have to be
simply
reduced to a
single
one
after consonants. After vowels of
course two alternatives
were
possible,
and it
may
be that forms like
KuXicraai,reXeaaai,rai'vffffai
have
preserved
the double consonant from this time. I do not wish however
to
layany
stress
upon
this last
point,
because the
"t(t
is found also out- side
the infinitive. In
any
case
KuXiaai and the like do not ofier the
slightest diSiculty
in the
way
of this
explanation.
For the
simplification
of an
earlier double ff is one of the most common
phonetic
processes
:
cp.
op"(T(n
"
opeai,
"Ki-Kvacai "
Triirvaai, fxiaao-g
"
jbiitTO-Q.
If this
explanation
is correct we have in these infinitives also
a relic
of the shoi'ter method of
forming
this aorist
by
the
simple
addition of
o- :
and that is
why
I have
placed
them here.
Probably
we must also re- gard
Latin infinitives like
dixe, exstinxe,
and
conjunctives
of the
plu- perfect
like
dixem,
extinxem not as
syncopated
from
dixisse,dixissem,
but as
coming directly
from
dix-se,
dix-sem. Wliether Itilai is
quite
identical with dixe I will not here
determine,
for this
depends
upon
the
further difiicult
question
whether in the Latin
perfect
stem we must
assume by
the side of the
primary
stock of
genuine perfect
forms
an
intermixture of aoristic forms as
well.
B)
The obdinary
Formation with a
Stem
ending in a.
1)
The final letter of the stem.
The formation of the several
personal
forms
presents
Kttle that is
exceptional
in the huHcative. The
sigmatic
aoiists in
-aa are common
to all Greek dialects. After the forms of the
present
stem there is 2G5
hardlyany
other tense-formation so common as
this. The
presei'\'ation
of the
heavy a
in all but
a
small circle of
exceptions
became
absolutelya
distinctive
sign
of the
tense, justas
in the
perfect;
but in the
case of the
aorist this vowel
was
carried out
consistently even
in the formation of
moods and verbal
noims.
We referred to the
agreement
of this
a
with
that of the Ionic
7]aor ta on
p.
440.
It is
only
in the 3
sing.
act. that the
a
has
vmiversally passed
into
the weaker
e.
The
reason
is
evidently
the same as
in the case of the
perfect.
In these much-used forms the vowel was protectedby
no con- sonant
from the
thinning
into
e,
while in the 1
sing,
the
originalsign
of
the
person,
the
nasal,was evidently
retained
longer,
and
then,disappear- ing
by degi'ees, just
as in
Eirra by
the side of Skt.
saptan
Lat.
septem,
^"\a:=Skt.
da"^an
Lat.
decern,
still exercised sufficient influence to
pre- serve
the
quality
of the vowel.
In the 2
sing.
mid.
-an
remains as a
rule uncontracted in Homer. Of
the 11
examples
of this form 9 end in
-ao;
'i\paoA 454,
wHmao
a 62,
iytiraoE
880, only
2 in
-w : ecrZ/o-ww 193, "7r"dpoo-w
$ 410. In Hesiod
G G
450 THE SIGMATIC AORIST.
CH. xvn.
accoi'ding
to Forstemann de dial. Hesiod.
p.
32 there is
only
SuScio-^rfo
Theog.
544. Of the forms in
-aa,
which the
grammarians
tell
us are
Syraciisan(Ahrens
Dor.
198)
we
find two in Theocritus i-rra^aiv. 28
(but immediately
before in 1.^27
iipafjfjuo)
and iK-acra
v. 6.
The
imperativepresents
more difficult forms in the 2
sing,
of the
active,
and middle. In the active we should
expect
the termination - a
or at
any
rate
-e.
The latter
actually
occurs in oicre
(x 106),
the dis- cussion
of which however we
prefer
to take in connexion with tlie
analogous phenomena.
This form
quite agrees
Avith the isolated
ex- amples
of this foi-mation in the Vedic
dialect,
e.g.
ne-sha lead
(rt.nl),
but
according
to Delbriick
p.
198 this
explanation
of the foi'ms is not
quite
certain. Instead of this -fft -uov
has become the
prevalent
termina- tion
from Homer onwards
[uKovaoi"
Z
334,
tarrov fl
4.51,
ofiOfrrTor
A 76
etc.).
The
question
is how the
""
is to be
explained
here. Pott Et. Forsclu
ii.2
1,
660
sees
in it an
appended particlet"v.
In that
case
this Greek
form would have
originated
in the
same
way
as
the Lithuanian im-
266
perative
in -k
e.g.
bii-k
be,
for which
see
Schleicher
Comp.^
827. But
we
have
no certain instance of such affixes in the structure of the Greek
verb. Still less can we
agree
with
Bopp,
who finds in the
r
the remains
of the termination
-Bi,which,
he
thinks,
first
passed
into
-c {*rv\pa-6i,
*rii\lnc)
and
finally
into
-)".
For all these intermediate forms are
purely
hypothetical
and the assumed
phoneticchanges
undemonstrable. And
as we have
repeatedly
seen that nasals
are
developed
after short final
vowels,
and become
more or less
firmly
established "
especially
in the -""
plur.
of the
imperative (cp.
p.
308)
" the
simplestexplanation
is that
suggested by
Giese
(Aeol.
Dial.
p.
110),according
to which the
v
oi'
uKovaor,
Ifi'iovetc. is a
nasal
after-sound,
which became
firmlyattached,
and which then had
as
its result the
dulling
of
a
into
o.
The
Cyprian
dialect has
recentlysupplied
us
with
an
instance of such nasal after-
sonnds in the
genitives
in
wv
e.g.
'0)'a(T/\wr=Dor.
'Oroff/Xw,
for which
an
etymologicaljustification
has been
sought
in vain. The
Syracusan
imperativesBlyoi',Xuflov
adduced
by
Giese
as analogous
were mentioned
on
p.
303.
It is far
more
difficult to
explain
the 2
sing.
mid. in
-crai.
Here too
there is
no trace of
any
dialectic variation. In Homer we
find forms
like Ut,ai
(R 227),
Ko^mai
(E 359),
Xiaai
(A 394),
\o"r7"7cu
(r 320),
"KEipi](Tui
(A 302),
fpanai (w 260),
vTrckpu'cii
(7535).
The
attempt
of
Bopp (Vergl.
Gr.
" 727)
to
argue
from a
conceivable active
*Tv-^adito
the
purelyh\'pothetical
middle intermediate form *-v\p(ii70i,
and to
get
from this
by
the
rejection
of the nO to rvxpni
cannot at all
satisfyus.
Benfey (Kurze
Sanskrit-Gr.
p.
90)
intimates that he
regards
-(rat as a
conjunctiveending,
for which he
quotes
the
analogy
of
a
pvirely
imaginary
Sanskrit -*sv(li. But rvihai is
entirely
without
any
trace of
a
mood-sign. Following Benfey
Misteli Ztsch.
xv. 332
conjectures
that
-auL
is to be taken
as a
*
fuller
'
imperativeending
and that
Tv^at
is for
Tv\pa-(rui.
But we should
certainlyexpect
TVipn-ao,
for the
imperative
is
by no means fond of fuller
endings
for the second
person.
Finally
Schleicher declares the riddle to be unsolved. There
might possibly
lie
some truth in the notion that
we are to take not the
simplei
added to
the
tense-stem,
for which
hardly anyone
will claim tlie force of
a
middle
267
personal ending,
but
-irai as
such here.
Only
the form would then be
proved
to be an indicative.
?"s"'"Tv\pai might
be indicatives used as
-CH. XVII.
THE FINAL LETTER OF THE STEM. 451
imperatives, just
as on an earlier occasion
we
found the Sanskrit second
person
in -si used in
a
like
function,
and
even conjectured
traces of
the
same
formation for certain Greek forms
(p.298).
The
question
is
what sort of indicatives
they are. cet,ai might
be the second
person
of
an unthematically
formed
*ci'yfj.ai,
the
present
to the
past csKio,
but
certainly
no one
will
readilyassume
the existence of
a
*Tvn-^ai
or
*rv/.i-
/ito(,
*i7tipi]-i.uu.
Hence it would be better to think of a *^es-^'rtt as a
primary
to the
conjunctivelit.-o-fxni, *Tv4/-fxai
and the Hke
; just
as on
p.
444 we came to the conclusion that forms of the kind must once have
"existed. But it does not seem
impossible
that
a
singleperson
of
a shorter
indicative formation
belongmg
to tlie same
group
of tenses but afterwards
obsolete,
should have established itself
as an
imperative.
Of the
conju7ictive nothing remams to be said after the attention
which we have
given
above to the forms with a short vowel.
But in the
optative
of the active we have to cUscuss the twofold
chai'acter of the forms.
By
the side of the
optative
forms which add
the
mood-sign i on to the
sigmaticstem, just
like those of the
present
and thematic aorist stems
{dEiUi-i-fii, cei^a-i-c,ceiE,a-i3
pliu-. 3f/"a-t")')
we find from Homer onwards
a
second method of
formation,
of which
only
three
personal
forms are
in
use :
2
sing, -e-ia-g,
3
sing, -e-it,
3
plur.-e-iar.
Hence here in the first and third of the forms
quoted
the
oi'iginal
a
of the mood-element
ja
has been
preserved,
but in all three
the
a
at the end of the stem has been weakened into
e.
The former
phenomenon
finds its
completeanalogy
in the Elean aTTo-rito-ui-i'
quoted
"on
p.
328. The
second,
the
weakening
of the
diphthong cu
before
a
vowel into
ei,
is based
upon
the influence which the
i
exerted
upon
the
preceding
vowel. In
precisely
the same
way
we
have Movcre-lo-v for
"*Moi'(To-To-)', Tlv6ay6p"-iG-c
for
*Ylvday('jpa-io-g
with various fluctuations
discussed
by
Lobeck ad
Phryn.
p.
371,
/jeffo-yeiae.g.
Thuc. i. 120
by
the side of
/.leaoyaiu.
In the last
instance, however, as
well
as
in
yelrw)'
(cp.y7]i-i]-c)
the
long a
has
perhaps
become
" through
the intermediate
stage 1].
With
i-egard
to the
frequency
of the two methods of
forming
the aorist in the
optative
La Roche intheZtschr. f.d. osterr.
Gymn.
1874
p.
418 ff. has made carefvil collections. The
following
facts will suffice
268
here. In the 2 and 3
sing,
the form with
ei
is
preferred,
in the 3
plur.
much
preferred
to that with
ai.
In Homer
accorduig
to
my
collections
the 2
suig.
occm-s 16
times,
13 times in the form
-eiuc {nin-d/eiuQ i 3-50,
reXicTtLcica 195, fieiyeiag
F
52)
and 3 times in
-chq {eizaKovrraic,
Y
250,
arnjjoXiiffnig
d
547, Spivatg
A
792) :
of the 3
sing,
there are about 90
instances,
and of these
only
8 in
-cu {aratleiE
V
216,
kKuffeu X
290,
oXeaete 9
358, iravTeitv
A 192 "
ytjdiiffai
A
255, uKOvaai
H
129).
The
3
plur.
has
always,
i.e. 26
times,-tuiv
UiKovatiav B
98, dp^eiav
A
335,
ri"Tsiay A
42)
with the
one
exception
of i2
38,
where two
optative
forms
occur side
by
side.
iv
Tvvp\KTjaiev
Kcii eVi
KTepta
kt(
p
laaie v.
In the
post-Homeiic
literatiu-e the forms with
"i can
})e shown to be
the
I'arer. Herodotus, according
to Bredow de dial. Herod,
p.
336,
has
only
the forms with
ei,
with the
exception
of three instances of the third
person plural
in
-nter (thus cicK/ju/Vri^attv
vi.
101)
which form Stein too
leaves
uuimpeached.
We
may
further
quote ctkauate
Arist.
Yesp. 726, tK-
TTvtvaai
Thuc. ii.
84,
and the like
commonly
in later writers.
KTirranv
o a 2
452 THE SIGMATIC AORIST. ch. xvn.
Pind. 01. vii. 42." The forms with
ei are held
by
the ancient
gram- marians
to be Aeolic
(cp.
Ahrens Aeol.
148).
The main
passage
on
the
subject
is in Choeroboscus
p.
778 s. ed. Gaisford
(cp.
Herodian ed. Lentz
ii.
823):
ce~t ^t
yu'waKeiy
(in
ra ivktiku ruv a aopiarov ei'tpyijTiKov
oi
AloXtiQ
Zi'aroil iiu TTfiofipoi'-ai,
cnor rv'^ai^iTV\peLn,VTrorrrpexpaifii, vtto-
rrritfApiui.
Koi
rw a
irpoaunvo)
oi AIoXeIq
fxovoi Ke-^pip'Tcii,
rw
Be
ctvTtpM
cai
rpiTo)
Kfit
ol
'ABrjruloi,
u'lo)'
rv\peiaCy
rvthtu kciI
TvxpEiai'ro
y
rwr tvXi]-
dvvrtKU)!'. We cannot adduce
any
of these forms from the
fragments
of the Aeolic
poets.
On the
contrary
there is in Alcaeus
p.
82 Be.*
(iKovrraig,
though
there is not much
support
for
this,owing
to the incom- pleteness
of the
verse. " The Aeolic 3
plur.
inrainnv quoted by
Phavo-
rinus is
regarded by
Ahrens Aeol. 210 as Boeotian,
for the Boeotians
in othei- cases were
fond of the forms in
-rrav {knaOouav
and the
like).
The
similarly
formed
Delphic "7rapiyj:)itTuv
was
mentioned above
p.
332.
"With
regard
to these foi"ms we have stillto mention two
iin-egulari-
ties. In Choeroboscus
p.
565
we
read ovck
yap
Xiyovm [oi AtoAtlc)
269
Tvxpslafiei'
oWa
rvxpeii^iev.
Ahrens Dor. 512
regards
this form as cor- rectly
recorded,assuming
the existence of
a
quite
unheard-of
*Tv\ltiafi"v
and
derivingrvi/tifxev
from it
by
contraction. Bvit the connexion of the
passage
requiresonly a trisyllabicform,
and as nothing
is heard of
an el
in these aorists elsewhere than before
vowels,
I
conjecture
that
we
should
read
ruvJ/at/itr.
For the
gi-ammarian
is
only
concerned with the fact
that the final
a
of the 1
sing,
does not extend to the 1
plui\
"
Savelsberg
Ztschr. xvi.
p.
413 ff. believes that he can
prove
the existence in dif- ferent
dialects of third
persons
singular
in
-et
instead of
-tie.
Such
a
contiaction
(cp.
above
p.
320 KEirai
for
KEitrai as conj.)
would not be
very
surprising
in itself. But the
authoiity
is
very
uncertain. Such
a
3
sing.opt.
in
-ati
is
actually
written
only
in the
Tegean inscription
1. 6 "" CE ttoXe/joq
^iaK(t)\vf7Ei
Ti rw)'
Epyo)}' "/
riot'
7)pyci(Tj.iiiwy
n
fBEpai^
Bergk
takes the form
as a future
: certainly
the
optative
suits better
on
the
ground
of
neatness :
but Michaelis and Gelbke
(Stud.
ii.
39)
write it
hnuwXvaEiE, supposinga slight
inadA^ei'tence. The
case
is
just
the same
with the Tean
inscription
C. I. G.
3044,
where is
A[FOK]TENEI,
which
Boeckh writes
awoKTEivEiE.
Savelsberg
reads a-n-okTEivEi as an optative.
In the Honiei'ic
passages
we
may
almost
always
either admit the future
(!'515)
or
get
out of the
diffici;lty by means
of the
apostrophe(\
585
mirciKi
yap
Kuxpet'
6
yipwv).
For the few
remaining
instances it is not
very
bold to write
at (thus
T
81),especially
as at least in
some
of these
jmssages
(x 98)
there
are
not
wanting
traces of this
I'eading
in the M.SS.
Only
forms in
ot are
I'ecorded as
Doric
:
ETziopki]aaijjLi,
"n-ouirrai
and
the like
(Ahrens335).
The midJ/e
ojytative
and the
participlepresent
no peculiarities,
noi-
does the middle
infinitive :
the active
was
discussed on
p.
448.
2)
The interior of the
stem.
By
the
meeting
of the consonant
ending
the verbal stem with the
appended rr
there arises a collision of consonants of various kinds,
the
settlement of which results
as a
rule from
phonetic
laws and hence needs
no discussion. We
may
here
justpoint
out that several
heav}- groups
270 of
consonants
were not at all avoided in this
place,
e.g.
etcXay^ar(A 46),
CH. XYii.
THE INTERIOR OF THE STEM. 453
My^e (A 125),iXey^riQ{I 522), entXcifi^Pe (P 650),tte^^e(2 240),ip^a
(rt.fepy"x 312),ap^a
and
tlpLa(Attic),
tOtUf. (()322).
Thei-e
are
only
two kinds of stems which form
an exception,
inasmuch
as
in these more extensive
changes
and
ii-regularities occiu',
viz. the stems
of the verbs which in the
present
end in
-^w,
and those in \
/j.
v
p.
We will deal first with the
former,
and in
doing so
will not
sepa- rate
the aorist from the
future,
which in tliis
respect quite
corre- sponds
to it. The
simple rule,
wliich
might
be
supposed
to be the
only
one adapted
to the structure of the
language,
that the dental
stem in the
sigmatic
tenses
gives(tct or a
simple tr,
the
gutturalE,
is not observed in the
case
of the verbs which in the
present
end in
-4w.
In
root-verbs,
it is
true,
we shall
as a rule,
and
especially
for
the Ionic cHalect in the widest
sense, regard
a rro- or o-
in these tenses
as
the criterion of
a
final dental in the
stem, a ^ as the criterion of a
guttural,
as
has been done in the
survey
of them
on
p.
222 ff.
; wy/'w
^Ed^^KTci),
arl^to
(^(TTi^u)),
and this criterion is almost
always
confirmed
by
"other evidence from the formation of
nouns
and verbs
(o-^'c*?" irriy/n'/).
But in the
case
of derived verbs in
-a^w
and
-i'Cmnothing
warrants us
in
regarding
those in which I
appears
in the aorist and future as in their
formation
essentially
different from those which show
o-.
It is the same
cijvcU'w
from which the Doric
CLKaL,ufiEroq
comes and the Attic ciKaaa-
jiEvoc ;
and
no one
will desire for the
language
of
Homer,
in
which,
in
the
case
of two
verbs,by
the side of the forms with i'
(apTra^wr
X .310.
i^pTva^E
M
,305,
k"l"HpTzdlai
N
189, lipTzaUtQ
T
iU"KTEptHu) ft222, KTEpdtm
n 291)
we
find
rarer forms Avith
cr {aviipwaaE
I
564, ijpwfKJE
N
528, KrEpiiL
2
334,
KTEpwvm
A
455, KTEpiaEie
y
285)
to assume two stems for the
same
word. We must
say
rather that from the time of Homer onwards
a
twofold method of formation has established itself. The relation of
the dialects is
broadly
this
:
Doric has
as a rule
",
Ionic as a
rule
a-
;
but the Homeric dialect fluctuates. As to the Aeolic
nothing positive
can
be said
owing
to the
deficiency
of infoi^mation.
The
questionnow is,can tlus
tolerably
extensive difference in the foi--
271
mation of much-used tenses be
explained,
or must
we
be satisfied with
accept- ing
it
as a fact 1 Two
attempts
at
explanation
have been made
as
yet.
The
one, adoptedby me
in Princ. ii.247 f. after H. L.
Ahrens,
endeavours to
explain
the
^
from the
incoi'jioration
of the
j originallybelonging
to the
present
stem.
ciKai^io
is for
Si/cac)'w,and this,as I think I have
shown,
is for
ciKiiju).
The
typeEtUKaEaaccording
to this view
arose
at a
time in which
the
palatalspirant
still remained
pure,
the
type
e^iKcirraa
(later e^iKCKja)
at
a
time when the
c"
had
already
made its
way
in. The foi-mer formation
would thus be the
earlier,
and hence there are still
numerous
traces of
it in
Homer,
the second the later. The other
explanation
is that fi"om
analogy.
This is
developed
and
supported
most
clearlyby
Cauer in the
Sprachw.
Abhandl.
p.
127 if.
According
to this view the historical
process
was somewhat as
follows. Thei'e were
from
veiy
early
times
radical
presents
in
^w
with the future in
^w
and others with the future
in
(T"i),
and also certain derived vei'bs in
-^w
(e.g. ap-u^w),
whose stem
originally
ended in a
guttiu'al{lipvay-i]).
In
determining
the form of
the derived
verbs,
which as a
rule
were later,
language
became
confused,
and did not
keep
the two
types rigidly
distinct. Hence
on
the
analogy
of
OTf'tCwEtTTulu,upirn^u) ijpwciEawas
formed also
a/3poro$o^f c (K 65),
on
the
analogy
of
or/sw or/^w
-KoXE^ilo^tv (^ 667).
In the
Principles [ii.
454 THE SIGIVIATIC AORIST.
ch. xvii.
248]
^
I uttered
a warning against
the
assum]"tion
of formation
on
iinaiogy,
and demanded from those scholars who inclined to it the
proof
of definite A^erbal forms from which the
analogywas drawn. This latter
demand is now partially
satisfied
by
Cauei-'s
investigation : whether
c|uitesatisfactorily
or
not remains to be
seen.
Fii-st
we mnst take
a
somewhat more exact
survey
of the facts
given.
In Homer there aie more
than 50
presents
in
-^w
with
a
dental
futm-e and aorist
formation,
and 28 with
t,.
The various needs and
con- veniences
of the vei'se are
satisfied in the
case
of the former
group
by
the
interchange
between the archaic
aa
and the later
o- :
e.g. iiiriaaofxtv
1]
190,
teli'irr' Z
217,
TreXuaaai ^
719,
TreXarruy A
434,
KOfiiaffu
A
738,
koiAKTEi'
S 4.56. The choice between i,
and
aa
has therefore
nothing
272
wliatever to do with the convenience of
foiining
the
verse,
in Avhich
many
scholars so
readily
find the occasion for
irregulaiities. Among
the
28 instances of the second
gi^oup
there
are
8 radical
verbs,
for whicJa
we
must
lay
down
a gutturalstem,
viz. the three mimetic verbs
kXu^w,
Xt;w {\tyEe
A
125),/iu"^w,
and also
iXeXii^o}
shake
(cp.p. 226) TrXdi^iOy
ptiiu), araCii)
and
nipd'Cw.
There
are
further 7 derived
verbs,
for which
Cauer's derivation from
a
stem-noun in
y
for an earlier
k
has
some
jM-obability :
"f"7rH4w [up-ayi]
:
cp.
Lat.
rajxix),/xoot/'4w(cp.fiua-Ttt,),
tXeXii^etrdaito tui'n
(cp. dXit.,fXiacnv), aaXTrii^ii)
(cp.auX'K-iyi,), anipii^cj
(cp.arrjpiyC), perhaps
also
aXuTrai^w,
if we
derive it with Fick i.^ 24 from
the stem of the Sanskrit
cdpaka-sweak, oXoXui'w
(cj). oXoXvy)))
which is
])Ossibly
connected with
imp^apvaau) fiup^upvyy]
and the 8anskiit forma- tions
in vl:a
mentioned
on
p.
257. In the case of
olixw^Eir
and
ivi^eirwe
miidit
certainlyexplain
the foi-ms with ",fi-om the
analogy
of
the
simple
mimetic verbs. There still remain then 11 instances
unex- plained.
titvapi'Cu), TToXe/jiiiw
come
from the stems
kvapo,
iroXe/xo
in the
same
way
as ottA/^w,^eu'/^w
from
vnXo, Hetvo,
and
yet
the former make
fiei'upiEei
1
339,
TroXenlLofiEi'
fi
667,
B
328,
the latter
f.(j)07rXi"T(ru)(n w 360,
LfivLa Z 211. The
remaining
woi-ds are
a/3poro4w, a7ro/3|0/4w (uTro/jpt-
iavTEc, I 151,
yu
7),Caii^w,Ci'oiraXii^u), eyyvaXi^w, KTepiii^U), /itp^/jp/^w,
-kAe/j/^w,fTTvitieXii^oj. inroj-jpii^eiv,
which Cauer
quotes
without
pi'Dof
as
a primitive stem-verb,
is
possibly
connected with
ppiBv-g
and
pupv-g
(Piinc.
ii.
77),
but in
any
case
the
guttural
stem is not
proved etymo-
logically.
These 11 instances must
according
to Cauer have followed
the
analogy
of the former 17.
Certainly
the resemblance of the 11 to
the 17 is not
particulailystriking.
It would be conceivable that
even
among
the 11 there were some
verbs in which the
guttm-al
had its
source
in
a word-forming
snffix
just
as
in
/uooTt4w
and
aaXTrii^to
and in
fiipjxi'Cu},
which in Homer
only
occm-s
in the
present
stem.
What
appears
in the
language
of Homer as an
exception,though a
tolerablywide-spreadone,
in Doric has become the rule. The Heraclean
tables
give us
the
following
instances
(Meister
8tud. iv. 427
f.):
uy)(u)pi-
iuJTff, eyBiKu^afiiroi,
CoKifxatom,
epya^uiTcii, efX"piS,ar, kTtpf.tUL,ar, Karttru-
ift//EC (as
well
as
KaT"r7u"(Tnf.n.c
i.
47, 51), IpllatTer,wfjit,at'.
It is
un-
neCL'ssary
to
reproduce
all the other
examples
collected
by
Ahrens Dor.89 f.
273
It is sufficient to
point
out that the most difierent Doric
districts, viz.
Laconia,Crete,
Southern
Italy,Corcyra,
Rhodes and Thera
agree
in this.
The E is least established from the
region
of the northern Doric. The
^
[Tliediscussion of this
question
in the
present
work is
now (Gnindziige
*
:
I871t)substituted for that in earlier editions of the
Principles.]
CH. xvn.
AORISTS IN
^a
FEOM NOX-GUTTUEAL
KOOTS. 455
Delphicinscriptions publishedby
"Wesclier and Foucart have in
no. 154
I v(T(piE,airTo,
bvit in no 3,
8
iiywriaayro.
We find
aytoviaauTO
on the
by
no means
pure
Doiic
inscription
I in Jahn-lMichaelis Bilderchroniken
p.
84. The Locrian
inscription
of
Naupactus gives
us reason by
the
form
t^IkPlUq
to
conjectui-e
that
e\pu(pt^aro
also
was
said in that district.
On the Messenian
inscription
of Andania
we
read 1.2
opKiEurw
and 1. 36
X^iopaEciTii)
from the otherwise unauthenticated
x^pct^en',
which
Sauppe
is
probablyright
in
translating
'
set
up,'
but 1.4
i'^opKlcren'.
The Cretan
forms of the kind are collected in
Helbig
de dial. Cret.
p.
20. We
may
quote "/i^aj'"to)'rwr, tivjDpiiijQ, neipa^oiiei', (Tvvayb)viia^iv(t)r, xapikioiieda.
" The Aeolic dialects differ
widely
from each other. The Boeotians
instead of the
air
which arises out of the combination of the dental with
the second
o-
said
tt.
That is to
say,
where the
a came
in contact with
the
explosive
soujid hardened to
r,
they
allowed the latter to
pi'evail.
!So Ahrens Aeol. 177
explained
the
KaracrKevarTr],
i.e.
Karacncevafrai of
an
inscription,
and the
reading
of the Eavenna M.S. in the Boeotian
passage
in
Aristoph.
Ach. 884
Kijiri^apLTTat rw
s")'w,
where the
cu
in the
place
of the true Boeotian
jy
is due to the Attic writers. Since then
we
have
recentlyacquu*ed
the form KaTalovKiTTuaQuL^ i.e. KaracovXhaadai
on an
inscription
from Orchomenus
published by
Decharme in the
Archive des missions
scientifiques
for
1868,
and
/.o/xi-rctjuei
oi
Athenaion
iii.482. " In Asiatic Aeolic we find instead of this
tt
the
aa
familiar
fi'om Homer in the
inscription
from
Erythrae publishedby
Kenner in
the
Sitzungsber.
der Wiener Akad. 1872
p.
335,
1. 55
x'^ipiaaurrai,
on
one of those
published by
Conze
(Reise
auf
Lesbos)hKd(T(7w,
but also
ciapTrd^aic.
The decree of Tenedos
(Philol,
xxv.
191)
has the forms
t\pu(j)iffaTo
and eckaffe. " On the other hand
we
read
on
the
inscription
from
Tegea
1. 5 and 28
Traperd^wrai
from
iraptTaCu)(Gelbke
Stvid. ii.
38),
and
the Arcadian dialect here
agrees
with the
Cyprian,
as
it often does. For
274
the
inscription
from Idalium twice
gives(Stud.
^^i.
252)
the
conjunctive
it,opvEr]~
i.e.
k'E,opi^i!j
or
in Attic
eEopiari,
where the
v
is
perhaps
to be
ex- plained
from the
primitive
form
opfi'Cio (ininscriptions opfoq
and
opftoc;).
This confirms
my
conjecture(Stud.
vi.
372)
that the
gloss
in
Hesychius
v'tov'
fjolidi^aoi'
is
Cyprian
and identical with the Laconian
ctoT^oj'
(cp.
Heracl.
awilui),
the
rough breathingtaking
the
place
of a.^
Now that
we
have thus ascertained the facts of the
case,
I must confess
that I cannot find
any
decisive
argument against
the
explanation
of this
surprising^
which I
previously
gave
after Ahrens.
Thej,
which
was
oiiginally pronounced
before the thematic vowel of the
present,might as
a
palatalspii-anteasily
harden into
an
explosive
sound before
o-,
and
this with the
a produced I, precisely
as
in modern Greek the verbs in
-"uw,
i.e. evo
form their futtu-e in
-evctio,
i.e.
e2)so.
For the fact
thatj
even between vowels
was not far removed from the
y
proofs
have been
brought
forward in the
Principles
1.
c.
; among
these the most remark- able
are
the Heraclean forms
"KOTLKKuiywaa=^TTpoaK\eiov(Ta
tab. ii.
69,
"ivQTiKXaiyov=TpoaK\t~wv
ii.
107, brought
into this connexion
by
Meister.
^
The editor did not understand the form. He accentuates it /caraSouXiTTa-
~
Ahrens however now gives a quite
different
explanation
of this word.
"
We
may place
here also the curious form
i^wKiy^e-
"iKiaQiv
Hesych.,
which
may possibly
be taken
as an
aorist to a
present
*oXi^(i}as a byform
of oKiaQavw.
Cp. 7reAi7|ai
"
iTnSpafxui/,(TwAiy^aL
"
(?) Spajxe'tu,
456 THE SIGMATIC AORIST.
CH. xvii.
Although
I have
no objection
on
principle
to admit the
operation
(jf
analogy
in such
cjises,
still the facts
are,
I
believe,more
easilyexplained
by assuming
ft-om the earliest times two
ways
of
treating
the
j.
This
naturally
does not exclude the notion that such Doric
forms,
in
part
only making
their
appearance
at a late
date,as are unmistakeably
based
upon
a
dental
stem,
e.g.
KaB'i'Cu)
(rt.
ec,
fut.
Kcidi^ii
in Bion ii.
16, tcaditac
Theocr. i.
12''),7ra"4w (rt.Tratc,
fut.
Trai!;ovy'rai
Laconian in
Xenophon
Conv.
9,
2 and often in later
writers,
cp. iraiyviov), really
owe
their
4
first to the
analogy
of the other forms which
were estabUshed earlier.
275
This has
already
been shown in Cauer
p.
143 f. The
converse change
is
also
explained
there. It cannot be denied that the
analogy
of the count- less
verbs with
c,
in the
present
and
a
in the
sigmatic
tenses
according
to
the
usage
of Attic
Ionic, suppressed
certain
fully
justified
formations
with
't,,
and
put
in their
place
the
more common forms with
a. A be- ginning
had been made here
by
the Homeric
^fjTraare
side
by
side with
upTTciiiai, already
mentioned. Homer
gives
from
/Ltu^'w eTrifiv^at' (A 20,
6
457)
for which we must assume a root
/j-vy.
The
same
may
be said of
ffKa^tO,(TuXTTli^Ui, (TTr}piC,ii), tTVIJl^O).
The
liquids
p
and \ do not
agree
well with
a following
a,
the nasals
still
worse. As a
I'ulethe sibilant has
disappeared
here in
consequence
of
progressive
assimilation. Still there
are some instances of the full
form,
all from stems
ending
in
p
or X. No stem which
preserves
a
final nasal
before
"r is known to me. For
Ktro-ui
^
3.37,
like
enEptTE
a
2
and"d/i"f)(7"
6
64,
has lost
a
dental
explosive
before the
cr,
and therefore remains
un- changed.
We
may
conjecture
that the sound of the
a
here
was
sharper.
From *"(T7r""'0-(7(j came first,we
may
be
sure, ^taTi-Ev-aa,
but
even
in
Homer
we
have the still more softened
EaTrEiira (y 55).
A
specialplace
is taken
by Tiprreiy dry, imper.
aor.
Tepaai
Nicand. Ther. 693 because
the
(T
of the root coalesces with the
n-
which forms the stem. The
case
is different with the
following
forms
:
(lipari Pauyusis
in Atheu. ii.
35, v. 14.
/Ltij
a-'
v,3pis
evl
(ppeaiOvfjiov at
par],
aptrai
from rt.
ap
fit
:
tTriipaEV
S
167, 339, lipaE
f
45,
apcjov
/3289,
353, dpaai'TEcA
136, aprrdnEVOQ
Hesiod. Scut. 320.
iXaav^ A
413,
inf. 'iXnai A
409,
$
225,
UXrrai ("
295, 'iXaaQ
rj
250,
Callinus fr.
1, 11, eXffaig (partic.)
Pind. 01.
x.
43.
inro-iptTE
Z
348, uno-ipffT]
4"
283,
aTTO-E^xTELE
4" 329
ci-iparjQ
from
e'ipeir string,
fasten
properly,
is used in
Hippocr.
OEptTOI^lEl'OQ T
507.
-i"6
iKEXaafiEvn
5,
i-rr-fKEXrrei'
r 114, KeXadirijiTi t
149. Hei'e the
or re- mained
even
in the
tragedians(Soph.
Fr.
804),
and in the futiu-e ceXaw
too,
while the
nearly
akin okeXXu) has uikeiX"i.
EKEpaEi'
N
546,
KEptTE
K
456,
Hes. Scut.
419,
KEpiTEu
Aesch.
Suppl.
665,
KEptTdjXEvoQ
Pers.
952, opt.
fut.
KEpmn
Mosch. ii. 32
(?).
Kvpnaq
F
23,
^
428,
also in Hesiod.
Theog.
198
{irpofriicvpaE),
He- rodotus
{irEKvp(TE
iii.
77)
and the
tragedians{KvpanoSoph.
O. C.
235).
opa(j/.iEy
A
16,
opatDfiEv
II
38,
opai^TE
^
210,
also in
Hesiod, Pindar,
and the
tragedians{opab)
Soph. Antig. 1060).
"
Also
KaBi^ov Kadiaov
Hesycli.
'
We
may
mention here also
IJAo-oto,
said to be for TiXdaaTo in
Ibycus
fr.
54,
and
i}\(7dfjitjv in fSimon.
Amorg. 17 in
a verse not yet fully ex^slained.
CH. XYii.
AOEISTS FROM LIQUID EOOTS. 457
EtTTtXaep
"
idTeiXey
Hesych.
e"p"p(T"v'tKVTiiTEj', q\ute analogous
to the Skt. a-hhCirsha-m from the
I'oot hhar,
which in the most dift'erent
languagesserves
to denote
bring- ing
forth and
pregnancy.
Cf. Princ. i. 373.
Bia-(pdfp(Tn
N
625, (pOeptravrec Lycophron
1003.
"])vpa(i)
(7 21,
(pvpfTafjLEvoQ
Kicand. Ther. 507.
There
are
altogetheronly
14
forms,
11 with
p,
3 with \ before the
0-.
From these we come next to those with the final letter of the root
doubled.
For these the form
i-ipparo
"
tlr^pdi Br]
is
instructive,
the "t
hei'e,
rn
spite
of its
power
of resistance noticed
above, having
fallen a
victim to the
process
of assimilation.
Among
the instances of the
retention
of the doubled consonant the
solitary
Homeric
6"pf\\titp
IT
651, /3
334 is of
especialimportance.
Asiatic Aeolic
gives
us more
of the same
kind
(Ahi'ens
Aeol.
50).
We have the evidence of
inscrip- tions
for
awifj-eXXav,
now found also in the
inscription
from
Erythrae,
(Kenner
u. s.
p. 335),eTrayyeXXaidiiu)}',
and
tKpivvt
in the Lesbian
inscriptions
edited
by
Conze. The
remaining
forms rest
upon
the state- ments
of the
grammarians. Cp.
Hei-odian ed. Lentz ii.
306,
33. So
iyivva-o,(nreXXafxeiafareiXc'ifierai Hesych.,hefificiTO, tcrivvai, imp.
aor.
ippov,
3
^^ing.
opparu),
according
to the
probable reading
of Ahrens
(Herodian
ed, Lentz ii.
503, 13).
How
smgle
consonants came
from
these double
ones,
with the
compensatory lengtheningdifterently regu- lated
in different
dialects,
needs
no
fui'ther
explanation.
Doric forms
like the Cretan
Tvapayyi)Xu)v-L (C.
I. G.
2556, 43),uTroorryXai'T-w)' (Naber
Mnemos. i. 114 ff. 1.
1),
Trtc-idXai'
fxeTuTr"fi\PaiT6ai Hesych.
have not
been
veiy
commonly preserved.
It is worth while
noticing
the form
"ptlipcu=(pOeipcu
on
the
inscription
from
Tegea (Gelbke
Stud. ii.
38),277
where the double
p
has
passed
into the
single
p
without
any compensatory
lengthening.
To the
great regularity,
with which the laws of
compensatory
lengthening
are observed in the Attic-Ionic dialect from Homer
onwards,
as is shown
by numerous
instances like
r/yttpa,
i'leipa, i^eipa,etcadijpa,
ijXaro, \)]Xa,etrreiXi,(jjlXai, eceifxa, eyijua,
'tvtijiu, anitCTeira,tyelrarOy
apTvtuQ,
'iijia, "K/\""'aro,
the occasional variations in the treatment of
a
before
"'
and
p
form a
remarkable
exception.
In Homer
perhaps
the
only
word
belonging
here is
ayEr]pai')j
"t"
347,
which
savoui'S
of
Atticism,
as distinguished
from
i^uipri
A 141. In Attic writers
we are
less
surprised
at the
preservation
of the
"
after
t
and
p
{-Tepciias, Inua'a),
since this takes its
place
in a more extensive series of
analogies,
than at
the
occurrence
of foi'ms in which the d
appears
after other consonants.
We have
good
evidence for
iax''"'
"'^'^'^sch. Eum. 267 "
cp.Ai'istoph.Ean.
941, EKiphaiaSoph.
fr. 499
Dind.,
Andoc. i.
134,
Dem. ix.
29,
tKoiXavav
Thuc. iv.
100,
opycti'Etac
Soph.
O. R.
335,
Trnrclrai
Aristoph.Yesp.
646
chor. Lobeck ad
Phryn. 25, Paralipp.
21
sqq.
has
ah-eadyexpressed
the
view that it is but useless trouble to
attempt
to find
any
definite reasons
for this
inconsistency.Only one thing
is
certain,
that the later writers
evidently
incHne
moi-e
to the d in
consequence
of the
popular language,
which here and there Dorised.
Perhaps
also
(Ti]p.dvai
in
Xenophon
"
though
this form is
disputed
" is to be set down to the
score
of the
many
"
"lifferentdeviations of this
noXvrpoTroi;
from
genuine
Attic. The reten- tion
of the d must have been favoured
by
the
analogy
of the
numerous
other forms in which there was
always a.
458 THE SIGMATIC AORIST. ch, xvii.
We
come now
to the treatment of the a
in stems
ending
in
a voweL
The
regulai-
forms with the
o- retained,are
here
really
the most difficult.
In view of tlie
tendency
of the Greeks to allow
a rr
between two vowels
to
pass
into an aspirate,
the retention of the sibilant in.the
same
position
in the
case
of the aorist is
surprising.
Foi- the
cases cannot be
numerous
in which a a
which is not weakened from
t {^r]ai) or (tu
(aptai)
remains
vuichanged
in such
a
position.
I have called attention to this
fact,
which
has hitherto been too little
noticed,
in
my essay
'
Ueber die
Tiagweite
278 der
Lautgesetze' (Ber.
d. k. Sachs. Ges. d. Wissensch.
1870)
p.
24 f. and
have there
quoted
the
parallel
between the
o- of the aorists and that of
the 3
pi.-aav
in t-^o-o-ai',
'i-cpa-aav.
The occasional
preservation
of the
rr
in second
persons
like
cvraaai,
i^n'iaTuno
is not
quitecomparable,
for the
originalending
here contained
a / as
well
as a.
So too in the 3
plur.
of those
piimitivepast tenses,as
in that of the
pluperfects
discussed on
p.
430
f.,
no reason presents
itself for
deducing an
original
double consonant. I
think I can
find the reason
for this
anomaly
in the
histoiy
of sounds in the
endeavoiu" after
perspicuity.
The
tendency
to more convenient intona- tion
was
not
operativehei-e,
because its satisfaction would have led to
harsh and obscure forms like
*i}ioav,*'iar,*eBovXt,ja,*tari]a.
But I
think that I have now discovered another
reason
in the
case of the
sigmaticaoi-ists,
viz. the action of the other
sigmatic
aorist forms and
the
sigmatic
future. Aorists like
e-n-paEa, typa\lia, ijXTriaa
from
con- sonantal
stems were common
enough
to
stamp
the sound of
a
for the
instinct of the
language
as one
distinctive of tliistense-formation.
Besides,
the
similarity
between the
sigmatic
aoi-ists and the futiu'es must have
become evident at an
early
date,so
that the two
tense-systems,
one of
them
revolving
about the stem
ypcu^a,
the other round
ypa^',
must have
been felt to be
parallel.
But in the future the
cr, arising
from
aj,was of
a more
fixed
character,
which secured its
pi'eservation
even between
vowels. I think
we
may
assert that the
parallelism
between the futm-e
and the aorist here exerted
a
pi-eservative
uifluence.
The
change
of the
o-
into an
aspirate
is
even
in the Laconian
dialect,
to which it
was quite especially peculiar,
a
phenomenon
of later
origm
in aorist forms. In the Et.
Magn. 391, 20,
forms like
ttou/cu'are
mentioned. We find
now
reiKtiap
i.e.
viKijerac
and
veiKaai'Tip^=iLtcli(TavTeQ
on
insci'iptions (Hermes
iii. 449
f.).
The chorus of the Laconians in
Aristopli.Lys.
1247
begins
with
op^anv
i.e
l')p^i)(Tov.
Also fi-om the
Cyprian glosses
of
Hesychiiis
Mor. Schmidt Ztsclu'. ix. 367 establishes
the
same change.
We
may
regard
as
certain: iravov
'irdit:
Kinrpwi,
cp.
itavffai'
l^eXtlr,i-ftirpa-oy
'
virui^ioaor
Ilcu^tot, If-nraTahv' 'if.if)\e\lioi'^
IvKaruTvaTuiv
'
iyKciTa/jXe'iLoi', 'ifxaoy
'
narutoi',
aim'
Tvrvaui
Hucjjioi.
In
279 the
newly decyjiheredC\^3rian
texts
no
ti'ace of this
process
has as
yet
appeared.
It is
more
difficult to
investigate
the aorists with
a characteristic
a,
which have
no o-.
These extend
over the most vaiious Greek dialects.
Five of them foi-m a distinct
gioup,
a v oi- /
having pi-eceded
the
cr
in all.
I
quote
first the forms
coming
into consideration.
aXtvaro T 360
etc, j/Xevoro
N 184
etc.,
uXtiie-ai
COnj.
^ 400, uXtrjTai
c 396,
aXeaiTO Y li7,'uXevai X
285, pi.
aXiatree
c 774,
aXevacrdai
fi
159,
269,
Hes.
0pp. 798,
aXeurjBai N 436
etc.,uXtvaiJ-erog
E 444 etc. From
the active
we find also the
regular
forms uXtvaov Aesch.
Sept. 141,
Suppl.528,
uXivaiiTE
Sept.
86.
.H. xvn.
AOEISTS WHICH SHOW NO a:
459
dariaffdcu
only
Hes.
0pp.
767
(1)
EKrja
A
40, Kciriicije Z
418, conj.o'/o^er
II
377,
opt.
Ki'iatEv
il
38, imp.
KTJar
(p
176,
inf.
K-ciKKijaiX
74, Ki'jaiTEg i 231,
kijchto
I
88, Kr]dfxet'rn
I 2-34.
There
are
also
keuq
Aescb.
Ag.
849, Soph.
El.
757,
c/CK-e'ac
Aiistoph.
Pax
1132
(chor.),
as well
as 'sKavtra Herod, viii,
33,
Ka-iKavaur Thuc. vii.
25,
Kuvani
PL
eaaeva
E
208, (reva Y
189, "(r(T"V"
Y
32.5,ETreaaeve a 256, (Teiaj' if
89,
iiraevayro A 549
;
'iffaevtrais
quotedonly
from Anth.vii.439
(eTTKrcrevaaBra).
")("vai'
r
270,
il 269,
x^i'"''
'S
436,
\evM(Ti
H
86,
xei^ft'w
Alcaeus fr.
36,
3
Be.^,
^(EvavTuv
c 214,
xfi'"'
iiif-'^ 75 " with
"X"")'
"L
347,
and the
same form in Attic comic
writers, conj.
x^p
Eiu\
Cycl. 329, (.yyiutfXL
Aristoph.
Ach.
1055,
"yxt"i'roc
Plato Conv. 214 inf.
o-vyxEfu
Isae. v.
18, ciaxiui
Herod, viii.
57, u^iipL^iaL
Hes.
0pp. 65, -xiaaBcuSoph.
O. C.
477. "
x^vauQ
Metrodoriis Antli. xiv.
124,
8.
Tolerablynumerous
traces
of these
sigmatic
forms from various M.SS. of Homer
(e.g.
a 291, /3354)
are
pointed
out
by
La Eoche Homer. Unters. 270.
They evidently
prove
nothing
Ijnt the
uncertainty
of the
copyists.
Thase five forms have been
frequentlyexplainedby
the
assumption
that
(T
has
dropt
out between the two vowels. But it is
by
no means
probable
that the
dialects,
which
e.g.
in
tKXavrra,
sTrXevaa and the
niunerous
derived verbs in
evu}
e.g.
in
IftcKriXevrra
left the
"t unchanged,
rejected
the
same sound under
precisely
the
same
conditions from these
28Q
few. It
might
have occurred to us
that the
rr disappeared,
not after
V,
but after the / wliich is
closely
connected with
it,
and that the
process
was :
e-Xe/-cra e-xf//" e'xf^fi f'x^"
so
that the / like the
liquids
and the nasals assimilated to itself the
following
(T,
and then in
some cases
continued to exist as
u,
in others
di'opt
out
altogethei'.
But then
we cannot undei-stand how the
/,
which
in similar forms is wont to
appear
only
before
vowels, got
into its
place
before
c.
To make this
exj^lanation intelligible
we should have to
start,
not from the roots
x^*? "^'v,
hut from
x?/,
cfJ" :" and
as a matter of
fact
we cannot
get
fui-ther back than kuJ-. But who could make
up
his
mind to
assume a I'oot
x^^
foi'the forms of
\iw,
while for
k-jxitcu
we are
guided
to
x^^
^
kI^vtcu
and the like would then have to be
regarded as
shortened,
without
oiu-
being
able to
see
any
reason
for the
shortening.
Hence the
purelyphoneticexplanatione^ddently
has its
special
difficulties.
I believe therefore that we cannot
get beyond
forms like
*"/vC(/-a,
^'tyjEf-a,
*"o-(Ttf-o etc. The
r;
in
"Kj;a may
well be taken
as
compensatory
lengthening.
Wliere in Homer
we
find
et
written
instead,Kiiav-tQ
and
the
Hke,
the
more recent editors have for the most
part rightly
restored
the
T] (cp.
La Boche Homer. Unters.
^.
159),
wlaich is the
only
form
justified as a
compensatory lengthening
of
t(.
A
noteworthy parallel
to
iKi]ais furnished
by
the Boeot. ada. The
gloss
of
Hesychius
atia
'
e^lcjta
Botwrot is
certainly
not to be
tampered with,
for a
Boeotian
ei
represents an Attic
?;.
Hence
we
have befoi-e us
the same formation
as
in
k-rja,
tKTja.
As the absence of the
augment points
to a
poet,perhaps
Corinna is the
source
of this
gloss.
On these considerations we must
therefore decide that these five^
aorists,
among
which caTtnaBcu has
-
Job. Schmidt Vocal, ii.331 thinks he can add a sixth
: i-irpid-ixrij^, which he
derives from
*i-irpi-(Ta-nriv
for
an earlier
*i-irfp-(Ta-a-tiv, regarding
it
as a sigmatic
460 THE SIGMATIC AORIST. ch. xvii.
281 absolutelyno by-foiin
with /or
v,
rest
upon
a
different
analogy.
We
shall come
back to them in
speaking
of
eIttci, Iji'syKa
and the Hke. We
may
just
mention here that the aorist without the ff
t'xeuae'x^"
^'^
accompanied
also
by a
future without the a
x^^
""
^^^ ^ ^^^
^^^^ there
is still less
probability
of the loss of
a u
and of
ffj.
The
preference
for the intensified vowel of the stem is characteristic of
the
sigmatic
aorist
as
well as
the future
;
and in this
respect
Sanski'it
(Delbrlick
Verbum 177
if.)
often
agrees
with Greek. Roots
ending
in a
T(?owel
I'egularly
raise their vowel
: eftrjaa,
to-Trjaa,
EiauTo (E538),KXrjlaai,
oiiraru
(t213),
vnoKvauc,
those
ending
in a
consonant
generally
follow
the
present: epi"i]U
T
348, tTrXtj^a,KurirrjEeT 206, tltd,a,jjXft^ro'
^
350,
idaaa I 645
(fromeidofxai), ijpEixpa (Herodot.Pind.),XelxpaL
from
Xeiftu)(li 481), Trelaai,t^artaTeixpuQ Soph.
0. C. 467 " i^Evlat,tTtv^Ev
S
338, i-KiKtvayQ 0
263, The
exceptions
from vocalic stems are discussed
Ijelow
:
theie are
hardly
any
to be found from consonantal stems. I
may
mention Xu^aadai'
KXijpdDaaffOai Hesych.,by
the side of which we have
the Herodotean future
Xaiiof^iai (vii.144),just
as
there is beside
XeXr]yfj.ui
a by-form XiXay/jiui, though
a
late
one,
and beside
Xij^icXat,i(:.
The remark of Uhle
'
Sprachw.
Abhandl.'
p.
63 holds
good
here: 'the
intensification attaches to the root.' Even
more
than in the case
of the
peifect
the influence of the
piesent
makes itself felt in the
sigmatic
tense-forms.
C)
Irregularities.
The
sigmatic
aorist shows a
few
phenomena
which deviate from the
prevalent
laws of formation
;
the fii'Sttwo of these
are
to a certain extent
opposed
to each
other,
but unite on
the
point
that the two aorists,
distinguishedby
the
grammarians by
means
of difterent
numbers,
in
spite
of their
great difierence,
sometimes coalesce. Buttmann i.^ 404 ".
says
to the same effect,
'
the terminations of the 2 aor. were
in
some
unformed dialects
interchanged
with those of the 1 aor.' and note 10
'
in the
same
way
the
converse
is sometimes found to be the case.'
Buttmaiui
explains
the fact
by saying
that
'
the aorist forms in
oj'
and
""
282 origmally
diiier
only
as
dialects.'
'
The ancient
language
formed the
aorist sometimes
with,
sometimes without
a,
and
as regards
the termina- tions,
sometimes in
op etc.,
sometimes in
a
etc. The
usage
of the
language
settled
vipon
the terminations au
and
uy except
in verbs in
X
fx
V
p,
but retained remains of the formations in
a
and
o-oi
.'
Apait
from the obscui'e
phrase
'
dialects
'
[Mundarten]
" for no
dialectical
difierence
can
be demonstrated " this view
seems
to me thoroughly
well
estabhshed. The
cjuestion
is one of a crossing
of the different
analogies.
It is lemarkable here that the
appearance
of the vowels o
and
e,
which
as a rule
aie so
much the
more
common,
in
place
of the
legulara belongs
to the earlier
period,
but the extension of the heavier
and rai'er
a,
in
place
of the
ordinaiy
thematic
vowel,
to the later. But the riddle
is solved
simply by
the fact that in the
post-
Attic
period
the so-called
first aorists with their
o were
almost the
only ones
in
ordinary
use
;
and that for this
reason they
drew the archaic forms of the so-called
second aorists
over to follow their
analogy.
aorist of
"iripvr)ixi.
But "to
say notliing
of other ditUculties " the imperative
of
iTrptafx-i)v is,as
every one knows, irpiaa-o : if Joh. Schmidt were right
it would
have to be
*Trplat.Hence I adhere to the view stated on
p.
120.
CH. xvn.
SIGMATIC AORISTS WITH o AND " FOR a. 461
We
begin
with the former and
more easilyintelligible case :
a) Sigmatic
aorists with tlievowels
e
and
o
for
a.
In view of the
extraordinary
number of forms which make
vise of
this
interchange
between the
e
and the
o,
the extension of this
phenomenon,
and its
penetration
into the
sphere
of the old
",
which is much less
common as
the vowel of
inflexion,cannot at all
surpriseus.
In the
case
of the
perfectwe
met with
processes quite correspondiugon
p.
393 fF.
If
we were right
in what
we said on
p.
442 ff. about the
origin
of the
sigmaticaorist,
and in
our
conjectui'e as to a
presumable
'
primarium,'
the
shifting
of the vowel becomes still
more intelligible.
A form like
\it,to
is to a
certain extent the natui-al
imperative
form from
a *XeEoidai,.
which we might
doubtless
expect
on
the
analogy
of
a\iE.ofiai.
Hence
the old
gi'ammarians
were
in
a
certain
sense
right
in
taking /BZ/crero,
Ivat-o
as imperfects
from
(jt'ia-ofiai, cvrro^ai (Schol.
A.
on A
496).
But
they were
wrong
in
identifying
these latter forms with the futures
spelt
in the
same
way,
and in
talking
of
a
ixtrayttv
tig ereffruj-a
(HerocHan
i.
p.
447).
The
following
instances,
limited for the most
pait
to the
Epic
283
language,belong
here. In most cases
there
are
also variants with
u :
1) imper.
adatu
Hymn.
Homer, xvii. 1.
Y^acTTopa
Ka\ liokvhevKe deia-eoMovaa
Xcye^a.
2) imper.
HEers T 10.5
(//htTrXij, on
avrl Toi ciyere)
i2 778, " 414,
uuBtjOe 0 50-5. Also
ai,inti'ai' ereyKeh',
aE,t(jQai'
liyiiyeadaiHesych.
3) imper.KUTafiijato
E
109, eiriljiifreo
E
221, ftijaeroF
262, eftijereTo
\p
1
(Trpoc-
B
48, ftTT- A 428, KciT-
Z
288,
Itt- 6
44).
From the scholium
on r 262 it
appears
that Aristarchus
preferred
these
forms,
where the
meaning
was intransitive,
without however
introducingany
changes on
that account
(ov/jfraWflz/rrt).
In
Hymn,
in
Apoll.
i. 141
Ejoi](7ao appears
as intransitive. Hes. Scut. 338
EiJiieraro
with the
v.
1,
eiViaero.
" In the
transitive
sense
rib
(ivajorjacifxeioi
is well established at o 475.
4)
IvatTO Z
136,
KUTehvaero A
86, vtt- ^ 127, civ-
A 496. Here too
Ave
have the evidence of
Didymus
on B 578 that
"/
kreparwi- 'Aptcrrop-
\tioiv
had
klvaero,
'
cal ean "^^apiearipa.'
The
participle
a
24
ot
fiev
bvcronevov 'Yrrepiovos,
ol 8
aviovros
and Hes.
0pp.
384
Zvtrofxtvaojv (flXr/tof'wi'), parallel
with
eVtrfWo^fj'ow)',
and therefore
quite
with the force of
a
present.
5)
Uei' B
667, lliQ
Hymn.
Hom. ii.
45,
Uov
(3 plur.)
E 773, K
470,
S 433.
6) impel",
\eleo I
617, r
598
;
at k
320 Aristarchus wrote Xiio
kraipivi'.
One M.S. has
XiHeo,
others Xi^ai. For Xitn
see
above
p.
131.
7) imper.
olfrs
x
106, 481, Aristoph.
Ean.
482,
ojVeVo* T
173,
6
255,
oifTETE
r 103,
O
718, V 154, oiaoi'Twy
Antimachus in Athen. xi.
p. 468,
and also
oifrifxevcu
T 120
{KiXEVEv)=.oiae^uv y
429,
while the same form
in S 191
may
be a
future. An other^vise identical aorist with
a occurs,
in aro'iaai Herod. i. 157
(M.SS. ar^nai).
462 THE SIGMATIC AOKIST.
ch. xvii.
8)
oprreo
V
250, ooaev
A 264.
'ipireo' Fueyeipov
(cp.tpero' wp/iii'/9";,
'ipTf)- ()pi.i"itTi]) Hesych.
diflers
only clialectically,
and must
pi-obably
be
regarded
Avith Mor. Sclimidt
as
Boeotian
(cp.'Epxofj-evfk)-
9) Impel".
neXaafTerov K 442.
fJXX'
f'/xe jjiiv vvv vi)V(t\ tt.
axviropoiaiv,
284 10) eTre/Toy
common
from Homer onwards in all its forms
among
Tonic and Attic wiiters in
poetry
and
prose,
while the Aeolians and
Dorians used the
regular
thematic aorist
enerot'
noticed
on
p.
286.
iiTECfovcannot well have arisen out of
tntrov by phoneticweakening,
for
it is
only
before
i {(p-nrri),
and
sporadically
before
v
(trv)
that
r
passes
into
"T. tTTEfTOP
is therefore for *e-n-er-o'o-fand is to 'iirtaai.e.*e-7reT-cra
just
as iftlint-o
is to kfilifraro.
Thus in this
case
the
formation,
which is else- where
accounted
anomalous,
has become the
rule,
while the normal
formation has become the
exception.
Hence we cannot
regard
eVfo-a,as
Biittmann Ausf. Gr. ii.^ 278
rightlysaw,
as
parallel
to
eXa/3a)'
and other Alexandrian forms. M.S traces of the forms
belong- ing
here are
found in Trifrut
Eurip.
Ale. 464 Dind.
(cp.Kii-chholf),
altered into
iriani,
Trpoceirefra
Eur. Troad.
292,
altered into
irpogETrtcroy
(cp.
Veitch
p.
478),etteo-oj^
Herod, i. 21
(only
the
Aldine),ivETriarafiei'
Aeschin. ii. 176.
Considering
the
very
fi-equent
occm-rence of the
other formation it would
certainly
be rash to
regai-d
these
as more
than
the blunders of
copyists.
Lobeck ad
Phryn.
724
quotes
forms of the
kind from later writers
(Sext.Empir.,
Achill.
Tatius,
N.
Test.).
11)
e-)(t"T")i',
quoted by
Herodian ii.
p.
801 from the
Ganymede
of the
comic
poet
Alcaeus
:
Kari')^erTov \Tfi(;l^ Nj/p/jtcoe.Cp.
Meineke Comici ii.
p.
826. Buttmann
supports
his view of
(.Trerroi'
mainly by
this
parallel,
and in fact:
(."Keaou (i.e. i-irtT-ao-v)
:
"KEaovj.iai
',',i^taov(i.e. 'i--^tc-(To-i-)
:
x^o'oi'fi"*'
Here there is abundant evidence for forms with
a
like
fXtmt,
"^ifTULjii^
X^"'"''
^^^
^^" ^^"
attacks their normal character.
b) Uiisigmatic
aorists with
a.
To these
belongonly
two forms of the classic
period:
tlwa and
{jveykay
and from Homer onwards
they
are constantlyinterchanged
with the
regular
formations
EtTror
and
//I'tyvo)'.
The occiUTeuce of the different
formations is treated of
thoroughly by
La Roche Ztschr. f. d.
tisterr.
Gymn.
1872
p.
125 ff. Here tlie
following
remarks will suitice
:
e'lTToy
(from"-/f-/f7ro-j',
cp.
above
p. 291)
has
prevalently
the
regular
vowels of the thematic aorist.
By
the side of these
a
establishes itself
first in the 2
sing.
ind. and 2
plur.imjjer. : eIttocA
106, 108,
eiTrare
y
427,
^
198.
Herodotus,
in whom middle forms like
awtiTraro
are
285
common,
and the forms eItto
(iv.44),ilirar,uttuc, e'nrat,
elsewhere
very
rare,
are
well
established,
is the writer most fond of the
a
in this stem
[cp.
Bredow Dial. Herod,
p.
324
sq.,
353
sq.].
In the Attic ^Titers the
forms
EtTraf,
E'iira-oy, e'Ittcite, EiiruTio
uiiiy
be
regardedas
the most common.
Of course
there is
hardly
any
instance in wliich the M.SS. do not
vary.
The
a
has
a much wider extension in
//rEyrai'.
Homer has the forms
aTTEi'tiKUc
S 25.5,
trEiKHj.iEy
m 43, i'lieii^iiy c 784, opt.
iitiicai ^
147,imper.
lyeiKiiTE 6
393,
inf. iyi'ihai ^
334, pai'tic.Ers/kac P
39,
mid. aytifii^nro
T
314,
riyEiKuvTo
I 127, The
a
is also shown to be Doric
by inscriptions
cH. XTH.
AOEISTS IN a WITHOUT THE "x. 463
j/i'f/ka,
e^eveyKai, htyKUfxErnc (Alii'ens p. 352).
In Attic writers the ctis
prevalent
in the indicative and
imperative(i
)""y^""(^w,
"
rey/co-e)
of the active
and in the whole middle. The
greatest
variation is shown in the
optative,
while in the infinitive and
participle
thematic forms
are
used. We find
however in C. I. A. ii.
1G2,
a,
4
iyeyicaawr.
Herodotus here fiu'nishe.s
nothing
remarkable with the
exception
of the
diphthong ei,
common to
him with Homer and
occurring
also in Pindar and Theocritus. Joh.
Schmidt is doubtless
right
in
explaining
this
ei
from the influence of the
disappearing
nasal
(Vocal,
i. 122
f.).
In these Uvo
widely
extended aorists we
evidently
cannot
suppose
the existence of
a a.
Not
only
would it be
quite unprecedented
phonetically
for forms Hke
*"(V-(tci,
*f
^"y^"-(Ta
to
change
into
eiTra,
Ire-yi^a,
but there would not be the
slightest
internal
probability
for such forms
in
themselves,
eIttoi' and
I'lvtyi^ui' beingreduplicatedaorists,
in which the
notion could not occur to
any
one
of
conjecturing
a
smuggled
o-.
It is
therefore
especially
clear here that the
o
is
acting
as
substitute,
so to
speak,
for
"
and
o.
There is
no altei-native but to
suppose
that,
at the time
when the vowels
were,
so to
speak,
still in
flux,
in
some
thematic aorists
the
a
resisted the
general tendency
to follow the
ordinarychange
of
vowels, as has
regularlyhappened
in the active
perfect,
and that eJttu
and
jVey-'"
are relics of Avhat
we
may conjecture
to have been a large
number of such archaic creations. The
preservation
of the o must have
been fovoured
by
the
very
large
number of
sigmaticaorists,
and
especially
of those of
'
suppletory
'
formation like
)/yy"(\o,h'Et/j.u,
while
conversely
the
phoneticchanges
of the stem which
came
about in eIttovand
ip'EyKuy
had made these aorists
very
much unlike their neai'est kin,
such
as
286
rjyayor,
"Aa/3o)-.
The confusion of the
analogy
of the two aorist forma- tions
is
a
remarkable
proof
that the instinct of the Greeks
regarded
the
aorist
as a spitacticunity.
Under these considerations it will be best
to view in the
same
way
the aorists with
a v or / in the root discussed
on
p.
459. Beside a
present
stem
Kctfjoa
second theme KC(fo
might
establish
itself,
and this
then, losing
the character it had in
common Avith
a
present
indicative,
became an
aorist
theme,
and as such, on
the
analogy
of the
sigmatic
aorist,
became Kufa. The difference from foi'ms like
eWci,
}]VEyKu
is
only this,
that in the
case
of the latter
we
find
by-forms
with the
ordinaryvocalism,
in the
case
of the former we do not.
All other words
belonging
here rest either
on doubtful or on
late
authority;
thus
ctyctyac*
uvrl
tov c'tyaywi',
and
ayayoV
arrl
rov dyays, oh'j/rjaoVf
(pr.pE Hesych.
EiravpufrBai, fTrj/vparo
Aristot. Eth, Nic. v.
p.
1163" 20
;
similar forms
in
Hippocrates.
""c-"C|C"o(vO
Orph. Argonaut,
v.
133.
Etca, wpuira
ce
eIIu
ftir]r 'HpakXijoc
^ewio ib.
v. 119, lila^EV
N. T.
[and
LXX
;
cf. Moulton's Winer
p. 86].
af-iXcu
C. I.
2557, 26,
on a
Cretan
inscriptionby
no means
very
archaic,
where Boeckh
perhaps lightly
writes
i'kJjeXei'.
On the other
hand
Hesych. gives
e'IKuto
(also
N. T.
[2
Thess. ii. 1
3]),
UEiXa-o
[Acts
vii.
10,
xii.
11],acpEiXcii'To,
forms which
Phrynichus p.
183
\cp.
Lobeck's
note]rejectsas un-
Attic. In the late
poem,
which is full of
strange
and
erroneous forms, Append.
Anthol. 257=C. I. 3272
we
actually
find
beside E'lXaro v. 5
EiXafiEvogv. 9,
which could
only
be
a
regular
forma-
2"7
464
THE SIGMATIC AORIST. ch. xvii.
tion under the
hy|)otliesis just stated,
and must otherwise be
a mis-
formation.
eyKartXinciTe, tyKCiTeXnrar.
evpar.
evpaadai
is
rejectedby Phrynichus p.
139.
t(j"ci)'ai'.
f.(pvyav.
ijXBnfxtv, eXHutco,
tXdare
(and
also
(TryXvBa
Anthol. P. xiv.
44) occur
ahnost
exclusively
in the LXX and IST.
T.,
but with
many
variants.
References are
givenby
Sturz de dial. Alex.
p.
60
sq.
and Alex.
Buttmann,^
Grammar of New Testament Greek
p.
39 f.
Three of these forms
might possibly,
on account of the
liquid
in the
stem,
be
regular
aorists of the
'suppletory
'
formation,
viz.
ETravparrfiai,
afeiXuTO,Evpcindai
The
case of
^acfipai'To (Herod.
i.
80, v.
1.
otr^parrd)
beside
uiacpporro(Aristoph.
Ach.
179)
is
a specialone,
because the whole
verb is
qixiteunique (cp.
above
p. 286).
Here the form with
a
has^
earlier
authority
for it than the other.
c)
Aorists in
-Ka.
These aorists in
spite
of their small number foi-m
an
important
link
in the chain of the verbal forms.
Evidently
the vowel of these forma- tions
is
brought
into
quitea
dijfferent
light,now that
we have met it
elsewhere also
;
and thiis forms like
"-cw/"a,
t-dr^Ku
approach on the
one
hand
nearer
to the
perfects
with which
we compared
them
on
p.
410 f
,
and
on
the other to the
unique
aor. t-nra-Ko-v
from the rt.
tttci preserved 'val-Trrij-
TTjv.
These aorists
are based
upon
a
verbal stem chai'acterised
by
the suffix
'ka,
with the retention of the ancient
a. Setting
aside the
quantity
of
the middle
syllablewe can state the
followingequation
of relations
f-Ba-Ka
: i-rrra-Ko-v '.: etVa :
(Itto-v
'. '.
8e8oiKa
: Syracus.SeSoiKco.
We know of five aorists in
-kci,
of which the three adtoKa
(quite
late
toioKHi-u]!'), yKci (in
Homer also
ft]Ka
:
cp.
above
p.
80; (Trpoc)//^!/^?;''
first
in Eur. El.
622),ef^r/m(OijKaro K
31,
other middle forms in Herod.
Pind.)
are common
in all
Greek,
but
chiefly
in the
singular
and the 3
pliir.
of
the
indicative,though iri]Knptvoccurs as
earlyas
f.i
401. The forms
with
K
therefore are
interchanged
^\dth the
primitivee^o/AEv, tSsre,
fnjr
etc.
preciselyas
in the
perfect.
There is further
trrctKcw fVrj/ffor
Hesych.,
which is
certainlyrightlyregardedas a Boeotian
or Laconian
modification of
E-ora-K-a-j' (Ahrens
Dor.
103).
A Boeotian
analogy
for
rr=oT
is
supplied by
iVr"="cr" until
(Ahrens
Aeol.
177),a Laconian
hy fl"Tr6i'=effr6v.
There is no reason for
alteringtTruKar
into
Edrarrnr,
as
Ahrens
proposes
to
do,
except
the
unique
character of the form. "
288 There is also
t"ppr}Ka, preserved
in
Eurip.
El. 1033
E-n-eicecppijicf,
eic-
E"ppr]Kil"(M.S. E\(:i(ppLKEX')' ElCETTEhjaE}-,
EiacioiJKEi',Elilppi^KEV'
a(f"iiKEv
Hesych.,a form in which Nauck finds the chief
support
for the view
that the verbal stem
(/jpe
is based
u])on
a
coalescence of
-r-pn
and
e.
For
the incon-ectness of this view
cp.
Stud. \Hii.
p.
327 ff."
Savelsberg
Ztschr.
xvi. 420 thinks he has discovered another instance in the Cretan cnri-
oTuXKay. But
on
p.
385
we took this form
as a perfect.
And
certainly
CH. XVII.
AORLSTS IN /ca.
465
the mere
fact that in
a similar
passage
in another Cretan
inscription we
find aTzifTTtiXny cannot suffice to
-prove
that the other form is
an
aorist.
It would be better to
suj)port.this
view
by
the
participle
a-n-enTu\KuyTt":
C. I. Ct.
3047,
2. But this form would be
by reason of its
e
such
a
marvellous
hybrid
between aorist and
perfect
that
we hold,especially
as
a p.'irticiple
does not at all suit the context and
as
the
copy
is but
poorly
vouched
for,
that Boeckh
was quiteright
in
regarding
it
as a
blunder
for awtaruKKar.
Savelsberg,following
a conjecture
of
Bopp's,
at the
place
referred
to,
in Ztschr. xvi. 54 ff.and 401 ff and before that in the
Synibola phi-
lologorum
Bonnensium ii.503
ff,
tried with much
leai'ning
to
give a
demonstration that the
k
of these aorists has
come
from
er,
I do not
think that he has made
many
converts to his
viev,
for
a
ti-ansition
from the dental
spirantn
into the
gutturalexplosive,
which is in its
natiu-e so
absolutely
vmlike
it,
is
as
improbable
in
itself,
in
spite
of the at- tempt
to find intermediate
foi'ms,as it is
unexampled ;
and
besides,one
can hardly
conceive
why
the sibilant should have been
preserved
in
many
hundieds of common
aorist
forms,
but in a few have been
metamorphosed
into
K.
But this zealous
attempt
has not been
wholly
without
fruit,
inasmuch
as a
number of little-noticed
sigmatic
aorist forms from the
roots
do, ",
fl" have been
brought
to
light.
It is true that much which
Savelsbergbrings
in here is doubtful. For Homer
especially
I
regaid
sigmatic
aorists of these stems as not established. But in the Attic in- scription
publishedby Rangabe Antiqu.
Hell.
no. 869,
17 we have uttu-
Cfjarii
Twr,
ib.
875,
5 aiudiantrtc.
Again
the
vmique
form aTrvBoacin
the Arcadian
inscription
of
Tegea
1. 13
can
hai-dly
be
explainedexcept
as
from.
uirv-conuQ
;
and
we
shoultl have to assume an
*'i.C()u
on
the
analogy
of
eV/^fc, 'i)^ev(i.
From Alexandrian and
Byzantine
Greek
ogg
lobeck ad
Phryn.
p.
721
quotes
forms like
Otjaijc, cujarjc,
which
occur
also
especially
in scholiasts
(-n-poffOiifDjc, iiriBiiari)
and
accordingly
we read
in Coluthus v. 25
(Lennep)
ttweci
KaXa
/.leBlifrac.
From the rt.
"ppe
be- sides
the
previously
mentioned
(.TrtiQvjnnp^n
the form with
it occurs even
in Attic
draniatii-ts,
e.g.
Eur. Here. Fur. \'2Q)1
Intuifpi^m, though
Kauck
will not allow it to stand theie.
HesychiusgivesKayeiji'i^trov* \a\(xaa(:,
tiifTciL'
Otjiravpiaai.
d)
Isolated forms.
"
('iiTd
(KciBeffaay Find.),t'iad/.iqf (lipifffraro i 529),
mentioned because
of the
augment
on
p.
85,
is
unique only
because the
rt. e^ from which
it
proceeded,
does not occur
elsewhere in the active.
Really
tlaa is not
farther removed from 'iCniKu than
toTTjao
fiom
'larufjai.
Even Butfc-
mann recognized
this i.^
524,
but he
wrongly
connected
/y^ucu
with these
forms,
for which see
p.
103.
Toaffaiq
Aeolic
partici[)le
Find.
Pyth. 3, 27, kwirorTfraiQ
ib.
10, 33,
eirerofTfTe
ib.
4, 25. As the
meaning quiteagrees
with
rvxelr,
it is
pro- bable
that the i-oot of the two verbs is
identical,
and also that of the
kindred forms
tuIoi',
-eKf^iap
(Princ.
i.
271).
But the aorist form re- mains
obscure.
Finally
in cei'tain
sigmatic
aorists
reduplication
makes its
appearance.
There
can hardly
be more than two of
them,
and we
may certainly
assume
that this
strengthening
of the
stem,
as comes out
clearly
in the
H H
466
THE SIGMATIC AOIIIST.
'
ch. xvii.
second
exiitnple, passed to these aorists from other forms of the verbs in
(]
nest ion,
and
was
not
created for them
:
TiOiirraro- iOt]\i\auro Hosych.
Also in
ri-Oij-fi], ri-rdii (Priuc.
i.
312)
we
find
reduplication.
riTpTjru X 396, ;// li)8,
afterwards
rtrpcu-a
from the
present Terpuirut
(Herod. Aesch.).
The
reduplication
attaches to the whole verb.
CH XVIII. THE FUTURE. 467
CHAPTER XVIIT.
-'90
THE FUTURE.
The
perfect
has been discovered to be
a
kiiid of
a
present,
individualised
onlyby degi-ees, though long
bBfoi'C the Greek
language acquired
its
distinctive form. With still
greaterpositiveness
we
may
maintain that
the future also is
nothing
but
a
pi'esent
form. In the latter tense this
view is
prettygenerallyrecognized,
and it finds the most unmistakeable
support
in facts not
merely
of the
cognate languages,
but also of Greek
itself. It is well known that in Gothic and Old
High
German the in- dicative
present
is often used without
any
distirc'ion with
a
future force.
In the Slavonic
languages
'
the
present
of the verba
perfectiva
denotes
the futui'e. The
present
force is thrust into the
background,
and
ap-
jiears
in certain
cases
almost
as an
exception
'
(Miklosich Vergl.
Gr. der
Slav.
Sprachen
iv.
772).'
In the
same
way
the Gh.-SI. ha(]a and the
Anglo-Saxon heo,
I shall
be,
take no distinctive
sign
to
exjDress
the
future. In Greek the
employment
of certain
jjresentforms,
characterised
by no distinctive
mark,
with the force of
a future,
is
an uncontested
fact,
d^u
has
acquired
its future
meaning onlythrough
usage
and
by
de- grees.
Even the indicative retains in Homer
occasionally
e.g.
B 87
{i\vTe
iB)ta
tlni),
II 160
[ayt\i)Coi' 'lanii), more rarely
in Attic writers
e.g.
Thuc. iv. 61
(iTrinati)
the
originalpresent meaning.
In the other
moods and in the verbal
nouns,
as
every
one knows,
this
never
qiute
disappeared.
We
see
therefore that the
case is
precisely
the
same with
these Greek
present-futures as
with the Slavonic
pi'esents
of
ilie^^cr-
fectiva
;
the
presentmeaning
is
only
to a
certain extent
'
thrust into the
backgj'ound.'
While
tew occiu'S
often
enough
in
poets
as a
present,
the
similarly
formed middle
jco^ai
has from Homer onwards
(e.g.
I,
271,
I
369 Oi/Tiy
kyco
TT-11/.ia-o}'
Lca^iai) exclusively
the force of
a
future,
luajuiL
is found in Find. 01. vi. 86
(rac ipartivoi'vCMfj -irtoj^uu) as
decidedlya
present. Hesychius gives
the active of it KaruTrhi- KUTu-ii'ti.'^ Else- 291
where
Trlofiai
is future from Homer onwards
:
N 493
"hg e'i
re
jjera
ktiXo}-
fffTTfTo
liifjXu
"n-iuuEf' Ik
fDoTiii'tic.
A fourth
precisely
similar
example
of
the kind
(payofiai
occurs first in the Hellenistic
period.
References to
the LXX and N. T. are
giveriby
Veitch
"p.
246. With these
we
may place
the two Homeric
present-futiues o'/w
and k-f/oj
(by
-form
kew)e.g.
I 685
"~ft
ovKtTL Ci'iere
rtKf^ni)f"
'I\/ok
aiTriivijr,
A 606 o'l
jxiv
KauKtiovTtQ 'ificiv,
V
342
opao
i.f'wr(3 iflvf. Buttmann wished to
explain
these forms
as
contracted from the
regularfutures,
liu.ifrom *cniu
(cp.(di^u,
cicuoi
)
Ktiw from
*iceiM
(
Ausf. Gr. i.^
397).
But this
attempt
cannot be
sanctioned,
'
[So
in Hebrew the same tense (that opposed
to the
past)
is called
by some
gra.nmarians
present, by
others future :
it
may
be used with either
force.]
- Mor. t^cLmidC
regards
the
glossas a niislaken
rej
etition cf
Ka-a^^iii
"
icara-
TTiVet. I do not see
any
sufficient reason
for such an assumption.
H H 2
AC)S
TUK future. ch. xviii.
if
only
for the
reason
that in the Homeric dialect
ae
does not
produce r/
Imt
d,
and the assumed intermediate forms are wholly without
analogy.
Both
are
thematic
present
forms with
an
intensified
stem-syllable.Cp.
Princ. i.
178,
285.
"
For the
quite
similar Homeric
(itlojiai
with the
by-
forms
ftfofun
and
fi'uiiJML even
Buttmann
attempted
no
explanation
of the
kind. The future force is unmistakeable in
passages
like
X 481 ri
w j3fi("[j.(ti
alua nadovcra
O 194
rw
pa
Ka\
ov ri Ato? /3/o/xai (ppecriv
Hymn,
in
Apoll.Pyth.
350
ttws
ku\
vvv fiiofxea-da ;
i'lnally
there is still the
quite unique ayacpdf.uTui
in the
epigi'am
of
Philippus
Anthol. Pal. ix. 575
Kai veKVS "LS ^auii'-
x^oopov
ucaSpa/xerat.
We should have
a
future
perfect
of
a
similar
stamp
in
t/cytyaorrai Hj'mn.
in Ven.
197,
if it is not
incorrectly recorded,as appeared
to us probable
on
p.
417. Whether other
formations, especially
some
Homeric
ones, .
are to be
placed
with
these, or whether we are
rather to assume for
them the loss of the
sigma,
will have to be considered hereafter. But
.
in
passing
we
may
call to mind another
way
of
denoting
the future
Avithout
any
distinctive
mark,
that
by means
of the
conjunctive.
In
Homer the use of the
conjunctive,
e.g.
in
ovkio 'icoi', ovce
""rw/"at closely
approaches
that of the future. In Old
Persian, and, as
Dr. HUbschmann
informs
me,
in 'Armenian the
conjunctive
has
quite
ousted the
future,
and in Zend it has done
so to a
great
extent.
.
It is
hardly
needful to
-"'-
mention the Latin modal futui'e
e.g.
veJiam
(conj.)
vehes
optatiA^e.
We
pass
on now from these more incomplete
intimations of
futurity
to
the foiination which is characterised
by a
distinctive
mark,
and that
too from
an earlypeiiod.
The Doric dialect has the
advantage
of
having
preserved
most
faithfully
and
plentifully
the archaic formation which
answers
to the most usual future of Sanskiit and
some
other
languages.
I. THE SIGMATIC FUTURE.
To
bring
the future formation
clearly
into view we
shall do well to
keep
distinct at first the two
principalkinds,
which are LLSually
denoted
by
the
exjwessions/ttfurum primum
and
secundum,
and to
begin
with
the
foinier,
that is the
regularsigmatic
futuie. This
form, as
is well
known,
shows in the Doric dialect
as com]iared
with the
others,something
additional,
either in the form of
i : honiio, or of
i,
which is
rarely
rctaiuod,
but
may
often be
recognised
from contraction
: cwrrw.
The fol-
lowin'f forms are on record
:
'O
A)"
Active.
1
sing.j3()i(0i]fTUtj
C. I.
no. 2554, 191, il-irfxul^iio
inscr. of
Lyttus
l.'"
(ILn-mes
iv.
2G7), K"/vorf];(i'f;(7/w
ib.
12,
antvitiui inscr. of Drerus
42,
all
(Jretan
: we
may
add
tjri"///w
kyTitalio
Hesych.
" Of the uncoutracted
forms in -alio we have
onlya
few
Deli)hicexamples: iicnpaiiu)
0. I.
1G88,
5, ipKiiiio
ib. 13. Contracted forms like
cwtw, lo/jaw
ai-e
mentioned
by
the old
grammarians
as
regidar
in Doric :
o'l
Aw^xtTc rnvq (ipifTTii:"
uf fi(\-
Aoirac
irfpianGxn
Anecd. Oxon. iv.
198,
hence Ahrens is
certainlyright
ni
circumilcxing
the
numerous
futures
on
the
(comparatively
recent ?)
CH. XVIII. THE SIGMATIC FUTURE, 409
Cretan
inscriptionno. 255.^
: t^J),fTrirpcfiliTi etc.,
and
so in
Aristoph.
Ach. 739
(panu),
747 KatwiCo. Theocr.
v.
142
(Cft^^^afw.
2
sing.
For this
person only
forms like
t^tlc,Ciixreic are known,
and
similarly
for the
3
sing.,only
those in
tl,
of whicli 11 are
found
on
the Heracleau
21)3
tables alone
(Meister,
Stud. iv.
430)
anoTufft'i i. 109
(also
Drer.
161),
fvrevffel
114,
f.iel 130 etc.
1
plmv
Cretan
fKiKudt^lopfi' (Helbig
de dial. Crct.
26),vfxi'Suifiei:
C. I.
3048, 15, avrctcujwXdiiofny
ib.
31, 305S,
11."
oto-t"jUfc
Theocr.
xv.
133.
'2
phir.
For the
severe
Doric dialects- forms in
-rrrire
would be ex- pected,
but the onlv ones recorded
are
mild Doric like
to^flrf, iiffilre
Ar.
Ach.
741,
747.
"'
-
3
plur.
Cretan
f3o(i'\3i]rrli)iTi lynnHr^alnm (inser.
edited
by Bergmann
1.
15),
Heracl.
una'liovrii.
102, awoKaTatTracTtn'Ti \. 149,
kioi'Ti
\.
120 etc.
{Meister,
Stud. iv.
430),
mild Doric
ciaKvaivi-i, vwapEtvrri
C. I. 2671,
L
34, 49,
and Ther.
it-apfEcviTi
ib.
2448,
iv. 1.
32, rrjaovt'Ti Sophi-on
19,
.
evpiinovvTi
Epicharm.
92
Ahr., uhXrirrevrTi
Theocr. vii. 71.
The active infinitives
occur
in the Cretaii
iTriroaxl/rjr, icddelijf(Berg-
mann's inscr.
12, 14, 70, 85), Delphic (C.
I.
1688) hiroypa-il/Ev.
" As
})arl;icipial
forms we may
quote
the
Megarian
ayapaauuiTic
Ar. Ach.
750,
and the Cretan
npefTptvuurTuc
C. I. 2557 B. 4.
B)
Middle.
For the. 1
sing,
we
do not find the
severe Doric
-m'("i.iat
which would
be
expected.
We have forms like
arreiifiui
Theocr. iii.
38, jlaatv^iai
ib.
ii,
8,
TrEipa/Tovjitai
(Ahr. 217),
2
sing. ftavKoKiaEri
Theocr. v. 44, Xrolij
i. 4 etc.
3
sing.
Heracl.
Epyati'irai
i.
168, kyliKuiijTc.L
i.
130, i:np~eviT)'irai
i.
159,
Meister Stud. iv. 430. " Mild Doric uyvatreirai
Sophron 89,
iffaei-ui
Archimedes
(Ahrens
Dor.
p.
203),
Theocr. vii. 67.
1
plur.
Cretan
")(((piEi6i.i"da
C I.
3048,
i. 16. Le Bus
Inscriptions
Grecques
et Latines Tome iii.Pai'tie
v. no. 74,
1. 16. " 6
r]
(re Out
ad' Theocr.
viii. 13. "
OujrTovf^ieO' Epich.
167.
2
plur. Megarian TveipaatlaSi
Ar. Ach.
743, Xu/jjaiTElade
Theocr.
v.
109.
3
plur. 'e\1,u)it(u' ai:()\ov())jTov/Tiv Hesyeh.
" HeracL
EpyaEoyrai,
la-
(T(')VT(i.i i.
112, E7nftE\rin6fTai 119, vTroypaxpoi rai
149. "
jiatTEuirai
Theocr.
iv. 26. " (^EEoiirTaiTheraean
inscriptionno. 2448, v. 12,
kaaovyraL
Argive
294
and Laconian
treaty
in Thuc.
v. 79.
There are also infinitives like ffrfffltrdai
Sophr.
23. " In the accentua- tion
of the forms I have
substantially
followed Ahrens
: on
this
some
stress mnst be
laid,especiall}^
as regards
the Heraclean third
persons
plural
in
-fToyri,
-(tovtui.
For these forms are
only
recorded on
imscrip-
tions
;
hence the accentuation of the
penultimate
is baSfed
exclusivelyon
the
hypothesis" npt an improba.ble
one" that the Dorians here still
retained at
any
rate in the accentuation some rememljrance of the vowel
once
present
after the
rr,
which elsewhere
they
so
carefullypreserA^ed.
Even in
syllables
not
long by position
the short vowel sometimes
appears:
Cret.
/^'^o9,7T()jufr, ^apil6j.iEda {TvpninfxzyHelbig
p.
27).
We
.
slxould in these cases assume withotit hesitation
a transition into the
470 THE FUTUKE.
en. xviii.
Attic method of formation,
did not
Ti\(jijai
=
7tXovpai(Drer.63^
show
us
that in this dialect o might
be the remains of
eo.
Outside the Doric dialect the futures of this
stamp
appear
as
the
so-called Futura Dorica, exclusively
with middle
endings,
and in
only
small numbers. Tlie two Homeric instances
are
marked with *.
1)
*
iaaElrai
only
B
393,
N
317,
with awfcrrrt'irai r 302,
while else- where
in Homer
trjaerni,
iaerni,
tarai, IrTTOf^tiroirrL
etc. are common.
There is also in Hesiod
0pp.
503
owa.- o/"( OfpoQ
irrnelrai.
2) i^Xdvaovf^ifOa only Aristoph.
Pax
1081,
while
KXavirofxai
etc.
ai"e
common
from Homer onwards
(X 87)
and established
by
the
metre,
e.g.
Ar. Nub. 58.
3) I'evrrovjiernL
only
Xen. Anab. iv.
3, 12,
where the
more recent
editors have
adopted
vevnofiEvoi.
In the
gloss
o"
HesyChius I'evaofuda
"
)i]E.(')^eda
there is
certainlyno reason
for this alteration.
4)
*Trcae""rTni A 824,
Trenitrai Herod, vii.
168,
Trerrovfiai
the
only
future form of Triwrco in
ordinary
use
from
Aeschylus
onwards. From
what
was
said
as to tirtrrof on
p.
462. it results that the word must be
divided
nti^ryaio-inu, not, as some
might think, irta-io-jiai.
5) irevTflffdai,
the
reading
of the Med. and other M.SS. in Aesch.
Prom.
988,
retained
by
G.
Hermann,
but
changed by
Dindorf and Weil
into TrtvrrerrOdi,
which is common from Homer onwards
(i// 262).
irtv-
(Ttrni
Aesch.
Choeph.
765.
6) TrXevnoiiJtHa
Thuc. i.
143,
-^Xfvcrt'LnBai A'iii.
1,
and similar forms
295
also in the orators
(Lys.
xiii.
25,
Demosth. Ivi.
6),
while
by
the side of
it
-XfvrrofHneverywhere
occurs
(even
in
/i
25).
7)
"wvtvrrf'irai found in the M.SS. in
Aristoph.
Ranae
1221,
altered
by
Dindorf into
tti
eurre-cti,
both
being metrically possible.
The con- tracted
form in Aristotle Meteor, ii. 8
(p. 367,
a, 13)
Tnivaelrriiai.
tfiirteufToiiai
Eurip.
Andr. 555.
8) lUvrrel-ai
Aristot. Meteor, ii. 4
(p.361,
a, 33),
ptvfTovr-ai
ib. 2
(p.356,
a,
16).
On the other YvAwd
pivnernL
Theogn. 448,
pivnorrtu
Eurip.
fr. 388 Diud.
9) (pev'^avi.ieOr(
established
by
the verse in Eur. Hel.
500, 1041,
Aristoph.
Plut.
447, (jjevEou^teyoy
Ach.
1129,
while Dindoif Eur. Bacch.
798 writes
(^itvUrrde
for the
(jxv^tlrrde
of the M.S"S. In
prose
writers too
htpevinirHai
and the
like,
e.g.
Plato
Rep.
iv. 432
d.,
have l3een retained in
our texts.
By
the side of it
(fjevEnfiai
is in well-established use
in
PJoraer and Attic M-riters
(S 307,
Aesch.
Suppl.456).
10) ytauv^KiL
the
only
future form in use
from
x*'^*^' ^o-
^^'-
^^^^P-
941.
These ten remarkable
exceptions
^
to a
rule
firmly
based
upon
thousands of instances
give
us
the
impression
of
having
maintained
themselves in
popular usage
from
an
ancient
date,
all the more so that
the verbs to which
they belong are
very
common.
We
certainly
cannot
sui)pose
that there
was
any
boi-rowinr;
from the Dorians. These forms
show
us
rather that in the non-Dorian dialects it
was only by degi-ees
'
.\ii clcvcntli form of the kind, generally placed
in the list with these,
irai^ovvrai
Xen. Couv.
i),2,
is
justly
noted
by
Cobet Novae Lecliones
p.
634 as
un-Attic,
the words
being .';i)oken by a Syi"acu.san.
" A twelfth n^eUoQeAvaX.
PLaen.
rJ4 is
very
extraordinary,
and for tliatreason
.suspected by
Butlmann
(An."f.
Gr. i.'-'
;{".I0) : if it is
correctly
recorded, we can only
undersliuid it as an imitative
k-ngthening
of
^n^iiaOt, rti^iiadi.
CH. XVIII.
THE DOKIC FUTURE.
"
471
that the shorter formation took its
place by
the side of tlie fuller.
These
exceptionssupport
the view established
by comparativegrammar,
according
to which the Doi-ic future
preserved
most
completely
the
original
elements of this tense.
This view
(Bopp Vergl.
Gr. ii.
"
648
ff.,
Schleicher
Comp.''807,
Joh.
Schmidt
'
La formation des
futurs,'
Revue de
Linguistique1870)
is based
upon
the
comparison
of
Sanskrit,Zend,
Lithuanian and Slavonic. The
Sanskrit future in
-sjd-mi
e.g.
dd-sjd-mi=Dor.
cu-aiu)
agrees
exactly296
with the Doric form. The vocalisation of the
/
in other cases produced
f, justas
in the Homeric
ksvio-q
from the
primitive
form
Kpef-jo-c,
which
comes
very
near to the Skt.
^ilnja-s
for
^van-ja-s.
For these
phonetic
processes
it is sufficient to refer to Princ. ii. 239 f. The future of Zend
comes still nearer to the Greek. The termination -mi is here
wanting
in the 1
sing, vakh-shyd (
=
Skt.
vakshjdmi)
from the rt. vac speak,
would
quitecorrespond
to a
Doric *J-tTr-f7uo
(from Jn-oi),
the
ace. sing,
of
the
pai'ticiple hit-shyant'eyn
to a *(l"v-iTior--a.
In Zend there is even an
example
of the fut. middle
participle,
the
gen.
plur.ziihyamiwm (ca),
"
where
/ly
appears
as
the
repi-esentative
of
shy.
If we imagine a
form
*yi.rrT("i.un
formed
an
the
analogy
of
(pvpaw
as
the future of the root
yfi,
the
genitivepluralmight
be translated into the
'
rough
Greek
'
[Princ.
i.
19] by *ytt'"rofxiru)r.
Schleicher
Comp.^
806
speaks
also of Zend
futures
'
with
a dropped_/,'
which would
answer
in
a
still
higherdegree
to
the Attic futures. But these
forms,
e.g.
ddoh/td=^d)rTM, are better taken as
conjunctives
with the force of ii future
(cp.Jolly,
Ein
Capitelvergl.
Syntax
p.
38).
The
ordinary
Lithuanian future in
-siu,
e.g.
bu-siu
(from
hundii
watch)
has
preserved
the
spirant
before the ti
of the 1
sing,
throughout
in the foi-m of the vowel
i,
while in other
personal
forms the
syllablesja
is shortened to
si,by
which
e.g.
hu-si-te becomes much like
an Attic
(pv-ae-re.
Entirely
isolated traces of
a
similar formation have
been adduced from Church-Slavonic
by
Schleicher and Joh. Schmidt
U.S.
If
we keep
all these facts before
our
eyes,
it becomes
extremely
probable,
that the future in
-"tw
is not a
formation
differing
in
principle
from the
Doric,
but
one
proceeding
from the same
primitive
form
by
the
way
of
phoneticweakening;
We shall be able to
represent
to ourselves
the
course
of the
phoneticchange
with most
probability
in the foUow-
"
way
:
From tlie Indo-Germanic
primitive
form
e.g.
dd-sjd-mi
came as
the
Greek
primitive
form
*cu)-ajuj.
The
rr
in this form had the
sharper
pronunciation,
which it
possessedalways
before consonants. At the
time when the
spirantj began
to be
disappearing,
it underwent a two- fold
change,
on the one hand
beingvocalised,
the
j becoming
sometimes
(,
sometimes
e,
which
finally
survived
only
in
contraction,
and on
the
297
other
beins: altogether
lost. The former method of treatment was
the
prevalent
one
among
the
Dorians, though
it was not
wholly
unknown
to the other
stocks,
the latter in the
remaining
dialects. But
thi-oughout,
even before
vowels,
the sibilant
preserved
the
sharper pronunciation,
which
protected
it to a
large
extent from
passing
into an aspirate.
The statement of the case
"here
given
diflfers somewhat from that
which is to be found in
my Tempera
u.
Modi
p.
312. Theie with
regard
to a
part
of the forms here under consideration,
I laid stress
upon
the
double
IT,
which the Homeric dialect
gives
in forms like
aycKraeaOai
472
THE FUTURE.
CH. Win.
^
181, (ule(Tnoi.iai ^
388,
eXatrffcj ^
427,
oXtertruj M
250, oiofftrerai
I 55.
I
accepted
the
explanation
of
Bopp,
who
explains
the double
a on
numeious
incontestable
analogies,
from assimilation. tXu-rrmo would
thus
come
from
iXa-ajw,just as
the Prakrit kar-i-ssadi=fikt. kar-i-
shjati(he
will
make)
has come
from
*kar-i-sja-ti.
In
following
iip
this
theory,
which cannot be attacked from the
point
of view of the
history
of sounds
alone,
it
was
very
natural to derive the
simplea
of the future
throughout
from
sjthrough
the intermediate
stage
of
rjrj.
We
might
even
attempt
to account in this
way
for the stubbornness with which
the sibilant maintains itself
even
between vowels. But
against
this
an
iusviperable objection
is raised from the side of the Doric
future,
for the
(7
of the Doric
cw-cr/w,
which
certainl)'^
did not come
from
(J(t,
has
just
as
much vital force
as
that of
f
wtw,
which
conceivablymight
have
originated
in
o-"7-.
Hence the
reason
for the vital force of the sibilant cannot be found in
the
swallowing
up
of the
j.
But there are
also other
objections
to this
view,
raised
by
Leskien Stud. ii. 81 flf. The double
rr
is even more
common
in aorists like
ayuafraaOai,
(jXirrrrni
etc.,
where
we
"cannot
suppose
the existence of
sj,
than in futures. It is
evidently
most
closely
connected with the
it,
which
appears
in the
perfectmiddle,
in the
passive
aorist in
0"/,
in the verbal
adjectives,
and in
many
nominal
forms,
and
which will
occupy
us
in a
subsequent chapter.
The
j
seems to have
been lost not
by assimilation,
but
through
the intermediate
stage
of
an
irrational
vowel, lying halfway
between
e
and i.
Bopp "
656 well
298
compares
the O. H. G.
krefti-o,
gen.
plur.
of the stem
krefti{Kraft,
strength)
with its
by-forms krefteo
and
krcfto.
We
may
also
compare
Greek forms like the Homeric
Ktvuq by
the side of
Kereoi, oq
beside
h'w.
Ion.
cpri]
beside
kopTi}
and other
phenomena
of the
hyphaeresis
discu.ssed
by
Frit.ich Stud. vi. 87. From this
manner
of
considering
the
question
it is
perhaps
still easier to understand how it
comes about,
that the
"
is
retained at least
sporadically
outside of the Doric dialect.
Now that
we have,
while
reserving
for the
present
the so-called
fiiturum
secundum, established,as
I
believe,
the
unity
of the whole
Greek future
formation,we must enter
upon
the
origin
of the form.
The almost
universallyadopted
doctrine of
comparativegrammar
is that
in the
syllablesja,
which characterises the
future,
the
s belongs
to the
verb
substantive,
and hence is identical with the
s
of the
sigmaticaorist,
while the
ja
which remains is the
exponent
of the future
meaning.
Thus the future is held to be a
doubly compounded tense,as compared
with the
simply compounded sigmatic
aorist. With
respect
to the
manner
of
regarding
these
elements,
and their
originalfunction,
there
are two different shades of the
same
fundamental view.
Bopp
in the
future termination
-sjd-mibrought
out
mainly
its
relationship
with the
potential
of the rt.
as, sjd-?n
extant in 'Sanskrit
(Yergl.
Gr. ii.
" 64-8).
Following
him I went so
far in the
Tempora
u. ^^lodi
p.
317 as actually
to derive
thetermma.t\on-sjd-mi/rom
the
optativepotentiiil (a)*-/a-??t,and
to
regard
the
primary endings
proper
to the future
as a
later moditication
of the
secondary
endingsbelonging
to the
ojitative.
The latter view is
erroneous
and cannot be
sui)portedby
any
analogy.
Hence I have
withdrawn it
already
in
my
'
Chronologic
' *
p.
60, 63,
and
adopted
the
slightlydilferinganalysis
of the
future,
which has Ijeen
put
foiih
by
Benfey(
Kur/e
Sktgr." 304)
and Schleicher
(Compend.^803)
and carried
out
by
Joh. Schmidt 1.c.
According
to this the future is
a compound
en. XVIII,
ORIGIN OF THE SIGMATIC FOEM. 473
present
form* the first element of wbich is
a ver])al
root,
while the second
element is the
present
form
{a)s-jd-mi,
that is to
say
a
present
from 'the
rt. as be,
formed after the fourth
or
i-class. This
explanation
seems to
be indubitable. But still with
r-espoet
to the
way
of
regarding
the
different elements here
united,
and their
function,
there
are
still
some 299
diflerences between
particular
scholars. Schleicher holds the future
force of the
present
form
as-jdmi,
which is added to the
root,
to be some- thing,
so to
speak,casual,though
he identifies
it, as had
long
been
recognized,
with the Lat.
ero. He calls
as-jd-ini
'a
present
form,
which
like
so
many present
stems in Indo-Germanic has
a future force.' Job.
Schmidt
expresses
himself still
more
positively
to the
same
effect. Both
consider
futurity
to be
as
little denoted
indd-sjd-mi"sm.
eCofnu
or
wioidni
mentioned
on
p.
467.
Benfey on the other hand takes
as-jd-mi
itself
as
a
compound
of the rt. as
with the rt.
jd
go,
so
that he translates it
by
*
Ich
gehe sein,'
comparing
the French
use of
je
vais and the
English
of
/
am going
to. The second view has decided
advantages
over the first.
Fii-st of
all,
it
replacesmere chance
by a
link of causation.
According
to Schleicher and Joh. Schmidt
any
other
present
formation
might
have
heen
employed just as well as this to mark the
future; according
to
Benfey,
whose view
approaches
that -of
Bopp,
the
reason
for the choice
of this
present
formation lies in tlie fact that its
meaning was especially
adapted
to such
an application.
Hence it is
no longermere
chance that
two
presents compounded
with
_;'", ero=*esjo,
and
(though
this is
pre- served
only
in
composition)
-bo for *bio had
a
future force
among
the
Romans. The view of Schleicher and Schmidt is
reallysuppoi'tedonly
bv the faet that there
are futures in which there is nothing to deaiote
luturitv. But from this fact nothintf follows but that under
some cir-
cumstances
futuritycan remain
undenoted, not that it
always
must so
remain. The notion of the
past
is often undenoted in the- historical'
present.
Does it follow from this that the
augment,
the
exponent
of
the notion of the
past, acq_uii-es
this function
merely accidentally
1 But
besides much
weight
must be attached to the fact that the termination
of the future coincides with that of the
optative.
We
thought
above
p.
325,
that
we
could trace the
optativesyllableja
also back to the rt.
ja
go,
and concluded from the extant traces of
primary endings
in this
mood,
that the
optatives
had
once ended in
-jd-mi
in the 1
sing.,
and
that
consequently
that from the rt. as ^^'as once as-jd-mi.
Now the
consistent
carrjdng
out of the view of Schleicher and Schmidt would
300
lead to
this,^thatwe
should have to
explain
tlie
optative
force of this
'
present
form
'
as
also
something purely
accidental. But we can
hardly
explain
the
multiplicity
of the
present
formations otherwise than from
the
pressing
need of
denoting
different sides of continuous action. The
form in
-jd-mi
must therefore have also had
originally
some
such
special
force,though
this afterwards
disappeared,
and if
we
have before us in the
rt.ja
a vei-bal
root,
which
was perfectly adapted
to denote intended
action,
it is
highlyprobable
that
we must
recognize
in
composition
^\ith this
root the
startingpoint
of the functions alike of the future and of the
optative.
Of
course the future must then have arisen at a
period
in the life
of
language
in which
ja
had not faded
away
into
a mere
present
element to
the
extent to which it did afterwards. The distinction between this
later-born tense and the -mood which
was
probably
.
earlier
developed,
was well
provided
for
by employing
for the future not the
simple
rt.
ja,
47'!: THE FUTURE.
ClI.
XVITj.
but
only
the rt.
compounded
with
as.
Nothing
hinders
ns from
assuming,
that at that
period ai^-jd-mi
was
surviving
also
as used
indepoiidently
with the
meaning
'
I
am
going
to
be/
'
I fim
becoming';
and thnt the Lat. ero
with its
firmly
established future force is
an,
inheritance from this ancient time.
Sonne Ztschr. xii. 343 is the
only scholar,so
far
as
I
know, who,
within the
sphere
of
comparativegi'ammar,
has
attempted
to
giv.ean
explanation
of the future
diifering
in
principle
from the
analysisjust
stated
:
and
this,
after the foshion
peculiar
to this acute but somewhat
audacious
investigator,
is
supported
with
only a few words. Sonne finds
it
surprising
that
'
the future characteristic
ja
should have occurred
originally only
after the rt. as.' This
objection
is
met,
if
we
regard
all
presents
in
-jd-mias parallel
to
as-jdmi,
and take the
syllable Jrt,by
no'
means as
marked from the first with the character of the
future,
but
only
as a
present expansive especially adapted
to be
employed
for this
purpose.
He himself
sees
with
Benfey,
and in
agreement
with the view
stated
above,
in the
syllable-ja
the I't.
ja,
go,
but is of the
opinion
that
301 this is
compounded
not with the rt.
as be,
but with nominal stems in
-as,
which he calls infinitives. He divides
e.g.
the Sanskrit foi-m
h/iavis/i-jd.-mi,
I shall
be, tiacing.
it back to
Uiarxis-jO-mi,
into the
'
infinitive
'
hhavas
being,
and
jd-mi
I
go.
According
to this view all
Gi'eek and Lith uanian
futuies,
and
a
very largeportion
of the Sanskrit
futures
also,
e.g.
dd-sjd-mi,diksh-jd-ini,
must have suflfered
syncojoe,
and
all the rest a weakening
from
a to
i,
and all
many
other
phonetic
changes
besides. This is
quiteenough
to
upset
this
explanation,
all the
more so
that
we
do not discover
anywhere
else in the neuters in
as
Gk.
ec (nom. or),
Lat.
es,
os (nom. vs)
any tendency
whatever to
drop
the
vowel befoi'e the
s. Besides,apart
from the Latin infinitives in
i-e,
whei-e
however there
are
difiiculties still
remaining,
there is no instance in
which
noinis
of this kind in
as were used
as
infinitives. Sonne's view
has therefore
justly
met with no assent.
After
determining
the
origin
of the
sigmaticfutiu-e,
it would be
proper
for
us,
as
liitheito
only
the Doric forms have been
separately
quoted,
to discuss more
in detail the
ordinary
formations. But
as
the
future is one of the tense-foi-ms
univei'sally
in
use,
to be
expected
from
every
verb,
and is formed with the
greatestregularity
from the most
different
stems,
there would be no souse in
quoting.
here
a
multitude of
examples.
We
may
rather,as
in the case of the
sigmaticaorist,i-enounce
altogether
any
such enumeration. What is otherwise
note\Yorthy
in the
form which the stem takes
as regards
both consonants and
vowels,
the
future shares almost
altogether
with this aorist. I
may
therefoie refer
on all these
points
to the
precedingchapter.
The relations of the con- sonants
are there discussed
p.
4.52 AT.where foims like
/3(("w, e-yyvnXiln,
(l"uf)aM
etc. find their
explanation:
those of the A'owels
p.
4.37 f. In the
preference
shown for intensifieil vowels of the stem the Greek and the
Indian future coincide
e.g. hhot-sjd
mi
(rt.hudh-AMnike) compared
with Gk.
Trfv/TOfiai (rt.TTvO), ye-shjd-mi(rt.
ijl
conquei'), compared
with
t'i-(7()-/.iru
(S 8, rt. /'
go).
Hence there remain
only n couple
of
quite unique
futures to be mentioned. There is the isolated Homeric hcoiffw
: h"ipa
.
cirwrrofift'
r 3.58,
which much
disquiete'd Aristojjhanes
of
Byzantium
302
(Schol.
H.
Q. on
this
passage:
hvi\tf)(ih"oy o.'Afjia-ocpcit'jje rw
ciCMirnfitv
yiHtcfxinapiiinfjEr),
and also cilujcr.tiy (it
314. ?wcrw is common
enough
CH. xviii.
ORIGIN OF THE SIGMATIC FUTURE. 475
even
in Homer. The Cretan
inscription
no. 2554,
where in L 201 we
tind
AlAililAI,
which Boeckh is
certainlyright
in
reading r?a%.*ff/w, on
the
sti-engtli
of the
context,
may
warn ns againstany attempt
at correction.
The
redujihcated
form has lieen formed from the
present
stem instead of
"
"
the verbal stem
;
and we
have
already
found the influence of the
present
stem
upon
the
sigmatic
tenses in the case of the aorist. The Herodotean
Xa/jxpoiiUd (e.g.
i.
199)
is also based
upon
tlie extcmsion of the
present
stem. And on
p.
465 f. we
learnt to
recognize
three
sigmatic
aorists with
.
a
similar
unexpected reduplication.
" We
may
further
quote
as
excep- tional
the future nviBvEio' (rvrairi'iao)
from
Hesychiu-s,
which attadies
itselfto the
present
forms nTrodvnrKtir and evOvgkeiv mentioned on
p.
197.
The
transposition
of the
aspiration
to the initial letter is
surprisingonly
because it is not found in the usual forms
t^vIm,TivEo/jKn,
both
occurring
in Home]-.
Eeally
Ov^w
is
quite
of the same nature as
the
ordinary
forms
dpe-ipw, di"i^ai.
II. THE FUTURE WITHOUT a:
A)
From Stems in A.
/i
v
p.
Passing
on now to the fixture forms which show no
tr,
we
begin
with the so-called futurum secundum of the
liquid
verbs. The difference
in
respect
of the future formation
"
between the stems
ending
in vowels
or explosive
consenants on
the one hand,
and those
ending
in the
con- tinuous
sounds A
/.typ
on
the
other,
extends
through
all the Gi'cek dialects.
The few
sigmatic
futures from such stems have been
quoted
above
p.
456 f. under the aorist. In the
great majority
of these
verbs,
which
the
very
common categories
of derived verbs
(pres.-anco, -vrw, -atpu",
-\Xu))
make
unusuallynumerous,
instead of the termination
-(tm
in the
1
sing.
" to describe the matter
by
its external results " we have
-fw,
lepresented
in some
branches of Doric
by
-im,
and elsewhere
becoming by
contraction
-w.
The
following
forms
may
suffice
as
instances
:
1)
Dor.
^ij^iEi'iu),
Cret.
inscript.
C. I. '2554 1, 189 f. and
200,
e"ar-
303
"yeXin)
Cret. inscr. of Dreros B
30, uj orytX/orrt
Heracl. Tabb. i.
118,
iirKoBapiiiiTi
ib.
132,
LTTiKaraftaXiovTi L34
according
to the
probable
correction of Ahrens
(Dor. 209)
for the senseless EIIIKATABANONTI.
(')f(iil)fitO"i Aristoph.Lys.
183. " But
E/dl3(tXe7
ib.
115,
KpirsvjTt
C. I.
2671,
35, efijjaXoiuteQ 2448,
viii.
26,
Kpivtl
Theocr. viii.
25, aXevpnt
Theocr,
2)
Homer.
IjuXew
9 403,
/.itrEtj
A
317, tvippaiiw
H 297 " Krei'tnc^ X
1.3"
ipiti
A
176,
orpvieei
/3
253 "
ayyEXiovm
I
617, aprvi'iovmya
277 "
jjnXien'
Q
417, ipfin'
F
83,
TDjfiuvEeii'
O 781 "
nyyeXeiov
d
24, ipiovaa
""// 2,davf^i(iiE0}'TtQ
0 108 " 6\i"rT6e O 133, vrrspBopfOi'Tui
Q 1 id"OareEaOdL
A 12. Contracted
forms,
often the
only
ones metricallypossible,are
much less
common : KTSiil O 65,
et:(l)nyel
T
104, ap(l)if3aXevf.icii^
-^
103,
kUj^itlrctL
B
389,
(ipt'tTui
Y
140, uyXuiEladai
K
331, fayEivOatfi
230.
"'
The future forms with a
e.g.
KaTaicTaveuvai Z 40D, KToyfovra 2 300
are
regai-dedby
Cobet Mnemos. N, S. iii.270 as corrupt. Certainly they are quite
isolated.
^
A
difficulty, already
noticed
by
Matthiae i.
405,
is
presented by oyiovjxai
A
233, I
132,
* 373, v 229 beside onel-raiI 274. The latter form leads
us to
conjecTure
that,
oixovfiai goes
back to
ofxiofxai,
but it is well known that
eo never
gives oy in Homer. It would however be
very
bold
on
that account to write
*6iJ.eviiiai. It is better to
sui3i-)0se
that
oixov/xai
comes
fmm the stem
o/io,
i.e. from
*dixoofiai, (cp. i)^offa, 6jxor6s)
and that the isolated
d/j-elrat
is a later imitative form,
476 THE FUTUEE. ch. xviii.
In Herodotus
according
to Bredow de dial. Herod,
p.
375 f. where
a
large
collection of
examples may
be
found,
the uncontracted forms like
Ciu(j"Oef)(U), i^tftcui
ieir,
ai^Lvyfiif, (mrojJdXiei)', vTcof^uriovai, vKOKpii
iin^iut,
(jjui
idi'Tdi
are regaixled as
the more correct.
Compare
however Merzdorf
de dial. Herod. Stud. viii. 149 ff.
3)
There is evidence that these forms are
also Lesbian
Aeolic,
e.g.
tfifitiiditn
C. I.
2166,-24
and mroXiio
Sapjjlio
fr. .50 Be.-^,
where Ahreiis
.
with G. Hermann writes Kurr-oXiM
(a7ro\fw
= Att.
crfXiw).
4)
The
regular
contracted forms of
Attic,
in constant use
from the
earliest
times,
both fiom loot-vei-bs like
ftaXw,
yjero',
ctpCJ,Tfj.tC),
utt-h-
Kpuov^iai,
and from derived verbs like
(iya\u", Kadctpw,(Vj^^j-aiw,
rfhjt/fi^"-
304 oi'pai,
oiKrepM,
need
no examples.
Such futures
belonged
to the .stores
of the Attic writers in
daily
use
quite
as
much
as
the
sigmatic.
Heiebv
the so-called fntura secuuda
distinguish
themselves
essentially
from tlie
other
'
tempora
secunda.'
We
procee"lnow
fi-om the demonstration of the facts to their
explanation.
TJie futures in
-em at first
sight
differ
enough
fiom those
in
-au)
to
justify
the
attempt
to
separate
them
completely
one
from the
other. This
attempt
has been made
by Hugo
Weber in the
Philologus
Vol. xvi.
(1860)
p.
694 with the
supjtort
of Voretzsch de inscr. Cretensi
p.
29. Weber's
view,
with wliicli
Benfey
'
Entstehung
des
Optativs
'
p.62agi-ees,
proceeds
upon
the notion that the futures in the Dor.
-no,
Ion,
-fw,
without
having
lost
a signia,were
formed
by
the addition of tlie rt.
jd
go,
to a stem
expanded ])y
an (.
The termmation
-iw,
-fw
would thus
bg
identical with the
-jdmi
from which
came *as-jd~mi,
but also A\ath
the
-jd-mi
from which the
numerous
presents
of the I-class
proceeded.
But whilst
e.g.
(^((/rwcomes
from
0o)'-tw,
the future
"ftny-lio
or
(pai-iio
would
come frgm a ^(pait-iwor,
translated into ante-Hellenic
sounds,
*bhana-jd-mi.
I do not
deny
that this
hypothesis
is
a possibleone,
and in
harmony
with
many phenomena
of the Indo-Germanic verbal
formation. If the view of Weber
were riglit,
we
should have in such
futures the
analogies
to
as-jd-ini
of which Sonne so bitterly
feels the
want, as was
noticed above
p.
474.
.
But to become
probable,
it would
need definite and unmistakeable
analogies
from the
cognate languages,
of which it is
entirelydevoid,
apart
from the
solitary
Latin
-ho,
-his. We
hold it to be
an
essential
principle
of method that
comparativegrammar
has to reckon
as
far
as possible
with
given
and
reallyexistuig
forms.
As
long
asit is
possible,
without
violating
Greek
phonetic-
laws and while
keeping
in mind other
points
of view here
coming
into
consideration,
to
bring
a ^\"idely
extended future form into
hai-mony
with the
prevailmg
sigmatic
method of formation,
this course seems
to me to deserve the
preference.
It is almost
exclusively
verbal stems, of a
perfectly
definite
})honetic
character which fown their future without n :
almost all otheis
form theirs with
n.
It is hence
extremely
natural to look for the
x'eason_
of the diflerence not in the existence of two
types
originallyqiute
305 distinct,
but rather in the
phonetic
character of the
stems,
and to assume
essentially only one
future formation.
Tiiese reasons
determine me to hold
on
the whole to the view which
Buttmann stated with
an acuteness
remarkable for his
time,
and
like the Laconian h^iumBa quoted above, which luidoulitodlypoints
to an
ou(6-
fjiida.6fi"vfj.ai would thert be the future of the
expanded
stem 6fj.p,
oae7rai tlia; of
the rt.
ofi
whic'.i underlits the
present Cf""i'/i(.
CH.. xvm.
THE FUTURE WITHOUT O".
477
expressed
in the
followiug
words
(Avisf.
Gr. i.^
394) :
'
We set down
-mo
as
the
proper
and universMl termination of the future
everywhere:
this*
was appended
sometimes
with,
sometimes without the
connecting
vowel
".' The
only doubt,
I
think,
which
can
arise is whether the
expression
'connecting
vowel' is
correct,
and thifi will have to be discussed- imme- diately.
Bopp
too
Vergl;
Gr. ii.
"
G56 maintained the
unity
of the
Greek future formation. But he
was
wrong
in his
explanation
of the
vowel
appearing
in forms like
^anX-iu), (T-tX-iw,
which he
regarded
as
identical with the
_/
of the
ending -sjd-mi.According
to
Bopp'sexplana- tion
the futurum
secundum, to use
the traditional fashion of
denoting
it,
would be
a degenerate
form of the Doi"ic future. But from
*rrrfX-o-(w,
*j.ur-aLU)
we
could never
get
a-tX-iw.
/.lei-no,
as
I showtd in
Tempora
und
Modi
p.
315,
but
only
*(77-f
/\X-"w,*/.iivi-iio,
and further in Attic
^amXiu),
*rrTtiXuj, *f.iei)iu)', */^""tJ'fr), just
as in the aorist from *i'T-"/\(ra
came ecrreWf/,
EtrreiXa. As in Greek it is
only
between two vowels that the sibilant is
wont to
disappear
without
leaving
any
trace,we
should have to
expect
for *areX-iu" the
previousstages *rrTiXi-'Tnu,
*(rreXe-"no. And this
paves
the
way
for the
admission,on
which Schleicher
Comp.^
807 bases his
statement,
that the Greek future formation
goes
back to the two
primi- tive
forms
1) njio2) errjw;
and further it
can
hardly
be doubted that this
twofold form is uot without connexion with the twofold formation to be
recognized
in
Sanskrit,on
the one hand
-sjd-mie.g. vak-shja-mi
from rt. vaU
speak
on
the other
-ishjd-mi e.g. tan-ishjd-ini
from rt. tan stretch
(op.rev-iui).
The
only difficulty
lies in the
explanation
of the vowel
appearing
in
the second
form,
which in Sanskrit is
i,
in Gi'eek
e.
The different
possibilities
in
the
way
of
explaining
this vowel have
been
so
frequently
stated of
late,most recentlyby
Clemm Stud, vii;
65,
that I
can
deal with them
briefly.
There are three
possibleexplanations.
Either the
t belongs to the second
part
of the
compound: *-er-"ajio,
or 30G
it
belongs
to the first
: *T(.rt-nju),
or
thirdly
it is
a phoneticmediating
element
naturally produced
between the two : *fev-t-tTJw.
The first
explanation,supported by Benfey,
Kurze
Sanskritgr.
p.
182,
L. Hirzel
Ztschr. xiii. 218 ff.and Schleicher
Comp.^
806
proceeds
upon
the notion
that in this
e
the initial vowel of the root ec
has been
preserved.
The
chief
leason
against
it is that the
e
of the root is
always
lost in
composition
with this
root,
and that the i of the
coi-resppnding
Sanskrit forms cannot
possibly
be
so
explained
wherever it
apjieais
(Leskien
Stud. ii.
79).
The
second
view,
that of Leskien and Joh.
Schmidt,
finds its chief
support
in
the wide extension of e-stems as
by-stems
to shorter
primitive
forms, which
we discussed
on
pp
258
f.,
264. But
we cannot fail to
peiceive
a
difference
hei-e. Forms like
fi/o'/rro;
beside
ivcw,
u"ij-Bi]v
beside
outfini
bear
no
relation whatever to
particular
sounds. On the other hand the so-called
futurum
secundum,
with
a
few
exceptions
to be discussed
hereafter,is
only
formed from stems in X
/it
r
p,
while
we must confess that
no
rule has
been discovered
as
yet
to determine what Indian verbal stems have their
future
ending
in
-sjd-mi,
aad what in
ishjd-ini.Against
the third
explanation, adopted by Bopp
and
by myself
in the
Tempora
und
Modi,
according
to which the
e
has been
developed pirrelyphonetically,
the
478 THE FUTURE.
CH. XVIII.
objeotioTi
is made that we cannot see why
the aorist
e.g. t-ficy-ua
(then
ijitvva, ijjLtit'n) got
on
without the
e,
while the future
e.g. ^rei-i-njm
(then*-e)'fju"
TEi'iii)or Ttyiio)reguhirly
took this voweL But one cir- cumstance
has baen overlooked here. The
presupposedprimitive
form
*Tei'ffjuj;
from which
*rei'trrju)
must have been
developedby anaptyxis,
is
one degree
harsher than *"-rf
I'cru. The three consonants
" rrj
could
nioie
easilyproduce
a
natural vocalic
by-sound,
than the two rrr. Considering
everythiifg,however,
I incline to an
explanation,which,
if I
am not
mistaken,
pretty neai-ly
coincides with that of Leskien. There
were,
I
believe,
of old in
many
cases double stems
: nia^i
and
niana,
tar and
tara. At an earlypei-iod
in
language
the future was
formed sometimes
from the
shorter,
sometimes from the
longer
stems without
any
firm
307
distinction. This state of
things
continues in Sanskrit,
only
that here
the
a
has sunk into
i,
and that the
sigmatic
aorist als'o
by no meajis
rejects
the same vowel. In
Greek, as
in
many
other
cases,
so here
too,
a phonetic
rule has been
established,
to which there
are hardly
any
exceptions.
The
longer
forms
serve only
to
help
out a difficulty
Avherc-
the future form without
a
vowel would become
quite
too
harsh,
and
would hencL? lead to an ol^scuiing
of its
origin.
It still remains for
us to trace out more precisely
the
path by
whieli
the
presupposed-i-rjjw
became the Doric
-tw,
the
oi'dinary
Grek
-eio,
-w.
We
must,
it
seems,
assume that the sound after the
o- was
vocalized in
these forms
, very
early,certainly
before the
separation
of the Greek
dialects,
or,
to
express
ourselves with
moi-e caution," for it is hard to
determine the
priority
of
J
and i" established itself as vocalic,
in .short,
that there was a
time at which
men said
*
XeiTT-ajo)
but *T"V(-crl(o.
.
I do
not,
I
confess,
see
any
definite
reason
for this difference.
Possibly
the accumulated short vowels contributed to
give
a
fuller intonation to
the vowel at first ii'rational. From ^rtye-aiw then came *r"""-Vw,
whejice
Dor.
Tei'lu),
in the
remaining
dialects
rei-'w,-trw.
From the form
*rE"'t-'u"j
everythinggoes
on regularly.
For it is well established in the
case of the
presents
of contracted verbs
also,
that
they proceeded (c-p.
p.
241)
from
e-iu) on
the
one
hand to
iw,
on
the other to
e w. Cp.
Cret.
Koafiioi'-ec,
a^iKiMi'. It is worth
noticing
the
greaterpermanence
of the
I
in these forms shown
by
the Heraclean dialect:
ai arytXioiTi,
(tvKoBu-
pioiTi
as distinguished
from
"^ol^t,
/v-ov/zorn.
This
greaterpeisistency
is
occasioned
by
the fact that the
t
of the foi'mer forms has taken
u])
an t
"
into itself.
.
"
'
B)
Contracted Futures without a Sigma
from other
Stems.
A considerable number of stems with
a
short
vowel,
which
are
fol- lowed
by
a
few consonantal stems with short
accessory
vowels,
form
a
contracted future without
sigma,
which in its most extended
application
bears in
our
granimai'S
the
name J'atunim Atticum,
again
not at all in
the
sense
that this form was
unknown to the other
Greeks,
but
only
308 because the
grammarians
wished to recommend it
as a
good
Attic foi-m.
We will first
survey
the fixcts of the
Cixse,
nnd then
proceed
to
explain
them. The forms
belonging
here are of three
kinds,according as the
short
vowel,
after which the
a
is
rejected,
is
a,
t or ".
CH. xviii.
CONTRACTED FUTURES. 479
1)
From stems in
a.
The most common ^re the futures of stems whose
present
ends in
-a^w, though, as Buttmann i.^ 391 notices,
the Attic form here too is
always only
'
a by-form
'
of the
ordinary sigmatic formation,
and in the
case
of
many
verbs is either
altogetherrejected^, or
crops up
only
in the
Hellenistic
period,beyond
the limits of cori'ect
prose.
From
presents
in
o4w
we
find the
followiBg
futui'es
:
1)
U|L)7roj/iat
LXX,
cp.
Veitch
p.
90.
2) /3t/3w./3i/3w)' Soph.
O. C.
381, 7rpo(./3(/3a Aristoph.
A v. 425,
and
the like in
Phxto, Xenophon,
Demosth.,
with middle forms also
: aiafti-
jjMjjLui Amipsias (Com.
ii.
p.
713)
Aeschinesii.
146,ai'a/3t/jctrai
Demosth.
xix. 310.
3)
ct/cdr. oht:
e"J)ri
^imt'
tri
Herod, i.
97,
while at i. 90
we
read
diKU(Toix"ioi.
The Attic writers in this instance used
only
the
sigmatic
form. On the other hand
we
find
on
the Cretan
inscription
C. I. 2554
1. 66 the
strange
form onMiLaL
(ruXXa
ce S.
pi Kpirai),
which
surpx-ises
us
if
only by
the termination
-tn
besides numerous
instances of
-in,
and
as
the
solitary
witness to an
Attic future
among
Dorians has the less
support
that it does not suit iliKa^av
and other forms of the kind. "
The mid.
ciKw^iai
LXX.
.
"
4)
uTTa-ooia^ia
only
Herod, i. 199,
unless
we
have there
a
present
form for which there is
no
other evidence,
for the context neithei-
requires
the future
nor
excludes it.
5) iE,trwiif.r
Isocr. ix.
34,
elsewhere
always
t^frao-wetc.
6) Ipyotfiai
LXX.
7)
KoXa
Aristoph.Equ. 456, K-oXw/ifVove
ib.
Vesp.
244. Often with
the
T.
8)
tteXw Aesch. Prom.
282;
TreXiire
Soph.
Phil. 1150:
cp,
TreXarru)
Eur. El. 1332. "
9)
Kara-rTKevav
inscription
of Olbia C. I. 2058 B.
1.-29,
53.
.
309
10) KaTa-(TKiuim Soph.
O. C. 406.
There are further the
following
futures from stems of the
same kind,
though
the
present
does not
anywhere, or,
at
any
rate,
does not in the
same
writers end in
-o4w :
\\y
I'n'TKnu. Kti(T
Eijji
Koi avTiou)
ttoKejjloio
M
368, arrwu)!'
ruiipMi'
a 25 beside
arTiaaeiQ
^
28
(cp.urriarrag
and the
like). aiTic'i^u) Soph.
Eur. Pind. Herod.
12) lai-ia.. "( ^")
Ofioii
TToXe/iocre 2fi//a /c"i Xot^a;*; 'A)^n/fJtic
A
61, ?)
'lEofiat
"
"/ cafjobJTi
Z 368. The
present
was
Za^i'^^i
in
Homer,
but
Zaj.iaCM
in the
tragedia-ns
and elsewhere.^
13)
t\w. e\,jwm N
315, t]
319
8,
lx^:,al Herod, i.
207,
iXaar P
496,
" "*
We cannot find
any
principle-
for the clioice of
one or tlie other form in
Atlic writers. Veitch
p.
170 makes the
good remark,
'What induced tlie Attics
to.
spare
tr in SiKctfc, and
expel
it from others in the same
category, ;8t(3aCf etc.,
we leave for Uniformists to tell.'
'
Buttmann Ausf. Gr. i.- 392 conjectures,
with Dindorf's conditional
approval,
for
Aristoph.
Eccl. 161 eK/cArjo-ia-o-',
cp.
Tiicsmoph.
90 with Dindorf's note.
*
Cobet Wnemos. Nova series ii. 395
prefers
in N 31.5 the
reading quoted by
Didymus
from the vTTop.vhiJ.aT a of Aristarchus, foaiffi and in
e 290 idav, both
as
futures from the root a= sa (sa-tvr) occurring
in
afxevat, io/xiv {(oi^eu).
But while
we can
easily
understand the e in 'dcofxiv (cp. "niwtxiv),we cannot understand it
before
an a in *ka(Tu for which we
should have
expected "f/cra;.
480 TIIK FUTURE.
ch. xvii
Aesch. Eumen.
75, cX^ Soph. Aj.
504, eXa^
Aristoph.
Ran. 203 besides
Honi.
fXarrrjco,
irai)f\iirtmu:
^
427, ordinary
Greek
?)\na"
etc.
14) KiJifii'iu)
II ""'"3
{iiiiTM Kill Kpffu'io)),
Kpf^Gt^iv
Arist. Pint. 312.^" "
Kptijciau)
Alcaeus Com.
(Com.
ii.
827).
"
hptjjiuffci,
t^ps^tdrrruc;
etc. iu
ordinary
Greek.
1.^)
TTtpaar,
future to
nepirj^u
or
TmrpaTKuj
$ 454 beside
eTrepcirr/ra.
IG)
ayu-TTETU)
Menander
(Cora.
iv.
77),
iK-n-eracrnvaL
Eurip.(Ipb.
T.
1135. "
TTtTuucu
Homer.
Trfrc'infrai)
and the
like,widely
extended.
17) cict-rTKic^r
Herod, viii.
68, 2,
fitdTKEcftr ib. i. 79. " m^ii'a Aesch.
Prom.
925,
u-n-'onnH ut Soph.
0. R.
138,
nvrrKtHw
Aristoph.
Ran. 903. "
ntiiluntiQ
Theog. 883,
and the like in later
prose.
" taKicurru from Homer
onwards.
2)
From stems iu
e.
These futures
ai-e
few in number. We can here
again
draw various
310
distinctions, especially
that between stems which have
f throughout,
and
tho.se where the
"
is
accessory.
We
]dace
the formei- first.
Among
them the form
hij^iu"
(from aj.ic()i-l-m,i,
which is
preserved
in
" 167)
takes
a place
of its
own,
inasmuch
as
the
e
here
repi-esents
the root itself.
"n-nov-ciitftw
is found in
Aristoph. Equ.
891,
a-n-dficpitl
Menander in
Meineke's Comici iv.
p.
171. The
remaining
forms
are :
1
) yajjlio
I
388,
ya/ifT
Aesch. Prom. 764 etc. in
poetry
and
prose.
For this verb there is also the shorter stem
ya/i,
so that
yctfiiu) ag a
future is related to
tyr)jxa
as
rrdaXio to
sV^jjAa.^
2)
kdXiii). KitXiovff' 'le F 383, kciXiTi,
KaXoviiat in all Attic. But
beside this there are h/i^aXfrTfi
T)emosth. xix.
133,
iTntaXiaeTui
Lycurg.
17,
EKKiiXEfTEfTBdi Aesch. i. 174.
3) Kiipiti
6
379, KopinQ
N
831,
but
Kopimo
Herod, i. 212.
4)
reXit.i
^'20',EK C"
kaJ die reXtl ^
161,
beside rfXf'ao-w ^ 559. At
/3
256 the M.SS.
vary
between rfXfft and reXtrFfi. reXiu is
quoted
from
dramatic
poets
and
Plato,
reXiaw from Pindar
(Nem.
iv.
43),Xenophon
and Plato.
There come now
the few instances of
a
conti^acted future from stems
ending
in
a mute,
which
accoi'ding
to the view
foinierly
in favour were
regai-ded
as
futura secunda,
viz.
:
5) KciOecoiiiJai,
Attic future to Kndi^errddi icadfcel
Aristoph.
Ran.
200,
also in
prose.
The same
stem-expansion
is shown in the
post-
Attic
ict-6Xof.
6) iJL.adfv/.iiii,
a
veiy
doubtful
reading
in Theocr. xi. 60
(cp.Ziegler
ad
loc.)
;
Ahi'ens writes
^(laf v^mi.
The
f
could
only
find
a
weak
support
in
ft
Ef.Uid
I]Kci, finOi'iTOfiai,
as everywhere
else the
long
f'
appears.
311
"
'^)iu"x"0)'7-fii
(cp.
p.
269) decidedly
as a future B
366,
cp.
imxi'iTni
Y
26. The contracted forms are
counpon
in the Attic writers from
Aeschylus
onwards until the Orators. We
may compare
the aorist
ftaxETctfrdui
in use
from Homer
onwards,
and
/L/n^fWoj' quoted
from Plato.
Beside these
even
Homer has
f.uixh'Jtrni
2] 265, /.utxy'iTdadcu
E 483. In
'
The
case
is
quite
the
same
with the rt. o\
;
lie fut. oKf-aai (v 309)
has been
fornu'd from tlie si eta
expanded
V)y 6, as well
as "\tcra. ok"'c\(Ka,o\edi)os, oKtw in
Ilcrodotiis
(o-7ro\"6t
i.
;54),
oAefirPe *
i;{3; oAi,
oXov/xai
in the Attic writers are
related to tlie shorlcr
stem 6\ as )3aAa"
is to
/3aA.
We
can see
witli
especial
clearness here how the e in the future of verbs in \ ix-v
p
comes in contact
with
unmistakeably stem-forming
elements.
.
Cp.
ab^'ve
i^p.
476, i77.
CH. xviii.
NON-SIGMATIC FUTUKES FKOM STEMS IN " AND t. 481
Herodotus,
where
previously
/t^axfTo^mt
was preferred, even
by Bredow,
p.
339,
Stein
now
writes
^axiiiro/jai, e.g.
vii. 102. In this verb the added
e undoubtedlypromoted
the clearness of the tense-formation.
8)
T"K"'t(Tdai
only Hymn,
in Yen.
127,
while
re^tir,TiitaQai ai'e
quoted
from Homer onwards.
Cp. TOKi-ro-c.
Cobet in the
Mnemosjaie,
New Series ii.
392,
has discussed a
large
number of the futures adduced here and to be adduced hereafter. He
assumes
that
they
have lost
a
o-,
and beheves he has discovered
a
well-
established
rule,at
any
rate for the stems in
e,
with
regard
to this loss
in Homer and Attic writei'S
:
'
In
quibus
vei-bis
" non in
i] pro-
ducitm-,
si est
antepenultima longa, tr
in futuro
non eliditur,ut in
e"airsaofucit, aicfffo/uca, upKEuu),
reii^iau),
et
a;^0""7o/jo(,
quorum iiiC"aof.iai
et
vEiKiaw et
cipK"(T"i
Homcrlca sunt. Contra ubi hrevis est
antepenultima,
(T ubique summa constantia omittitur.' But the second
part
of this rule
cannot be reconciled with
our texts without violent emendations. We
have
given
refei'ences above for
E-yKuXiaei,
Kopetru),
6\imo,
reXiaw
; apeaeig
appears
Demosth. xxxtx.
33, apianvTai
Aesch.
Suppl.
655
; kjiifru}
is
quoted
from
Hippocrates,
whom Cobet
possiblymight regard as not
coming
within the
range
of his assertion. But as the number of all the
verbs of the kind is but
small,
and
as we can find
no
intrinsic
i*eason,
i.e.
no reason in the formation of the
forms,
for this
rule,
there is no
sense
in
adopting numei-ous
alterations to
satisfyit,especially
as
the
stems of the
same kind in
a
would
adapt
themselves still less to such a
rule
(cp.liKatTh), i^oXacru), ayopaau)).
At most it is somewhat
probable
that
we
may
assume
in the case
of the familiar verbs
ya/uid), icciXeu),
rtXtw
that in Attic waiters
they
formed their future
only
in this
way.
3)
From stems in
t.
The futures in
-tw, -Lov^ai
are
especially
often described
by
the
ancient
gi-ammarians
as
Attic
;
as
by ApolloniusDyscolus
de construct,
p.
274
(Bekker)
; rov airu -j/c
'ArS/Soe
(T-)(y]fiaTi(Tnhv Kara fiiXXovTci 0a(Tt
Xvpiw, by
Herodian
on
II. A 454
(Lentz
ii.
806)
Krepiovm.
ij
Toiavr-q 312
v(p"(ric
Tov fT 'ATrtK))
kari
Kai Trspicnr^ tovq fiiXXoiraQ.
But this foi'mation
too Ls not at all limited to
Attic,
but
may
be foimd also in Herodotus
and Homer. There
are
four Homeric instances : ayXa'ieladaiK 331
(e-ayXa'U'tffdai
S
133),
usikiuj
X
256,
kOfxiuj
o 546,
Krepiovm
A
454,
in
Herodotus,
if I am not
mistaken,
eleven
: avacfKoXo-K i(~iffdai iii.
132,
liTpefiieiv
viii. 68
(cp.a-pefnei(jdai Theogn. 47),irayujviEviiaL
iii.
83,
i^arlpairoluviTaL
vi.
9, tVjffirtfw/jfioi
ix,
50,
dEtnrieeiv viil.
135,
Karayie'iy
i.
86,
KOfiiti
ii.
121,
I'OfiievfXEy
(Steinvofxiovner)
ii.
17,
ow(j)piEvrTtc
iv.
172,
")(apLElrTQaL
i. 158. More than
twenty
such forms can be
quoted
from Attic
literature,
and it
seems superfluous
to cite them
separately ;
many, e.g.
eXttiw,
ctejjiw
only
occur
much
later,
but this
may
often be
due to the accidental nature of om"
authorities. The
following
may
serve as
examples
from the best Attic
period
of vei'bs
originating
in dif- ferent
ways
: ijacielAristoph.
Thesm.
617, ceittvle'iv Dipliilus
Com. iv.
405, eQlov(tlXen.
Cyr.
iii.
3,53, IrrxvpLE'iTai Lys.
\'i.
35,kov^u'ivSoph,
Ant.
43,
jiETa\EipiE~irai
Plato
Rep.
410,
roa(piE~iQ Eurip.
Ale.
43, kutolktieI
Aesch.
Suppl.
903, o\kiovvteq
Thuc. i.
100,
Trpo/paa-iovvrai
Aeschin. iii.
24, ihfXTtovr-ai
Aristoph.
Ach. 24. Futures in -/crw are not
common
in
the
good
Attic
period:
but we
have no trustworthy
collections
on this
I I
482 THE FUTURE, CH. XVIII.
point.
Two forms of a
special
kind have still to be mentioned here
:
KaOiui and kXiu). The former is
sufficiently
established from
Xenophon
and Demosthenes :
Xen. Anab. ii.1. 4 Kudiely
(the
better
M.SS.,
how- ever,
have
KcSi(rEiv),
Demosth. xxxix.
11, K(dht~i,
xxiv. 25 Kudulre,
KaBi'Cio,
in
spite
of its
origin
in the rt. kc,
has
evidently
been
regarded as
a
verb in -l'C(o,
like
kojii'C^,
f Xtt/^w,
and treated
accordingly.
The form
KaraKXiil is
more
difficult
: we
knoAv it
only
from
a
fragment quoted by
Choer-oboscus from
Eupolis XP^'^"^^'
y^^'OQ(Meineke
Com. ii. 544
:
op.
Herodian ed. Lentz ii.
809):
tl
ja))ng avrtjv
KaraKXiel. The word is
explainedby
the
grammarian
in Cramer's Anecdota Oxon. iv, 195
by
u(T(pa\ie~t,
and treated
by
all
grammai'iansas a rai'e
future form from
kXeiu),
of which the Old Attic
present
is
kXtJu) (cp.
p.
249).
Joh.
Schmidt Vocal, ii. 254 f. has
conjectured
that this KaTUKXu'i
l^elongs
rather to karaK:\t;'ai with the force
'
veil,cover up,'
attested here and
313 there for kekXi^Ivoq
and ei^iKXiro. But
though
with much acviteness and
learning
he establishes this
meaning
for the stems
kli,
Jcal from different
regions
of
speech,
and also for Homer
(E 356),yet
there is
no
trace
whatever in Attic Greek of
any
such
use
of
KaruKXivu),
and in the
passage
of
Eupolis,according
to all
appearances,
the
meaning required
is that of
'shuttingup.'
Hence
scarcely
any
course remains
excejjt
with
Meineke to
put
fcaraKXieJ side
by
side with CaviCj
or
^aveiw from
^ai't/^w,
against
which Photius in his Lexicon
p.
85,
21
wai^ns
us,
and to
conjecture
that the comedian
put
the form into the mouth of
a
barbarian. The
Doric forms
vX^i'tD (Theocr.), ctTroK-X^'^oc
have been formed
on
the
analogy
of the verbs in
4w. Perhaps
there
was really
a
present /cXjjifw by
the side
of
kXiju)(cp.
Veitch
p.
332),
and the
presumed
barbarian meant to
say
(v-ara^Ajjel,
which would have some
analogy
in its
favour,
but said
by
itacism /cara/cXteT.
Now that we
have taken
a
survey
of the stock of
forms, we
have to
explain
them. Two
possibilities
here
present
themselves. Either there
never was a a here,so that all these futures would
propex'ly
be
presents
used as futures,
or
the
sign
of the
future,
the
sibilant,
has been
dropped.
The first xHiew
might seem
admissible at
any
rate for the fii-sttwo
groups ;
then,
as
Herodian ii. 809
says,
ya/ze'w,
reXicj in their
use as
futures would be
reallyan InffrioQ avrl
rov fxiXXovroc
But such
a
view
is
impossible
for the third
group.
Presents like
*Koij.iiw, ^nyivriovfiai
are
iinknown and without
any
analogy.
Hence
no
other
course remains
in the
case
of the third
group
but to assume the loss of the
a.
And this
makes it
very
probable
that the same
phonetic
process
took
place
also in
the verbs of the first and second
groups.
While, therefore,
in
my opinion
all three
groups
agree
in
changing
the
"r
into
a
breathmg,
the first two
differ from tlie thii'd in
one
essential
point, jjiftw
has
come
from
/3t/3ao-w,
KdXiei as a
future fi-om
KciXiaei,
that
is,
both from the usual future
form,
but
Kofuiu)
cannot be
explained
from
KOj^iim,).
It rather
presupposes
*Knfii-(T"U).
Ivulmer Ausf. Gr. i^.570 is of a
different
opinion.
He thinks
that
KOjjL-iio
comes
rather from
*k-o/lu-"(tw.
But this assumed intermediate
314
form would find
a
weak
support only
in the
rare
future forms like
fxax^-
aofiai
cited on
p.
481
;
and it is still less admissible to
presuppose
for
an
intermediate form so
deduced the loss of
a
c,
as
Kiihner does : *KOfiir-
t(no, *KOfii
"(Tw,
for a
loss like this is
quite
unknown. On the other band
CH. xviii. OTHER NON-SIGMATIC FUTURES. 483
"ver}i;liiiig
is
quite right,as soon as we
start from
a primitive
form
*"v-oji"-(Tcw
formed
on the Doric
analogy.
We
saw on
p.
470 that in
Attic writers this formation
was not
altogetherrare,
at
any
rate with
middle terminations. From
KOfii-crib)
there
came Kofii-iu) as
from -eXi-aw
-eXi-io. This
extremelysimpleexplanation
is
confirmed,
I
think,b}
the
existing
Done forms like
apKiE.e(D (C.
I. i.
1688,
1.
13), x"P'-"'A'^^"
(p.469).
The Attic
^npinvj-iuL
comes therefore from the
same primitive
form
as
this
")(cipih,wniQa.
As to the loss of the
(t,
it
may siupiisesome
that we
have assumed
this here without further
discussion,
while in the
case of the aorist
a
similar
procedure appeared improbable.
But there
another, and,
I
think, an
easier
means of
explanation presented
itself. Besides the
aorist is to
a
much
greater
extent without
duplicate
forms with and
without
(T,
which
here,especially
if
we include the Doric
dialect, are
found in abundance. We camiot
deny
that there is elsewhere too some
fluctuation with
regard
to a
between
vowels,
e.g.
in the formation of the
2
sing.
mid.
{-crai, -ao).By assuming
the
same
phenomenon
in the future
we can at
once
understand how even in Homer reXiuj can act sometimes
as a
present,
as
the
product
of
an
earlier
reXe((T)-ju),
sometimes as a
future
coming
from
TeXe((T)-(7(i).
The loss of the
o-
in contracted forms
was
evidently
favoured
by
the
analogy
of the
common futiu-es of the
verbs with \
/j.
y
p.
C)
OTHER FUTURES WITHOUT
o"
.
We have learnt above
(p.
467
ff.)
to
recognise
a
series of future forms
which were chai-acterised
as such
by nothing,
but which did
not,
how- ever,
coincide with
present foi'ms,
because the
presents
of these verbs
were on their side
distinguishedby stem-expansions.
Our
investigation
now bringsus back to
foi'mations,
which
externally
are
extremely
like
those
forms,
but which
are
distinguished
from them
by
the fact that
the future is here often
completely
identical in form with
a
present
in
more or
less
frequentuse.
There are not
many
verbs which
come
under
315
this
head,
and it is
a
question
whether all can be
explained
in the
same
way.
In Homer there are
three
futui'es, resemblingpresents,
in
-vw,
viz.
:
fu'uw,
which
may
indeed in A 56
ovk ai'vio (pOoveova
be
very
well
taken
as a
genuinepresent,
but in the
compound iL,avvioA 365
i]dr'jvn
liavvw
y"
Koi
vfrrepoi'
airi/JoXZ/crag (=Y 452) pointsmore decidedly
to
the
future,though
this
might
have been denoted
as
in
tt
373
by
ai'vff-
rrerrdai from the
same stem.
tpvovcn
A 454
a
Set
A',ov
fiev
aoi
ye TTarrjp
Koi
TroTvia
jJ-rjrrjp
ocrcre KaBaiprjcrovcn
6av6vTi
Trep,
ciXX oiavoi
a)firj(rTa\ ipvovcri ...
Cp.
O 351 aWa
Kvi'EQ epvovcfi,
X 67.
The best ancient
grammarians
assumed here
present
forms with
a futui'e force
:
thus Aristonicus on X 67 :
"/
cnrXfj on
xpovoQ
ijXXaKrai,
aPTi Tov
ipv(Tov(ni'
Kciiiv
'Ocvtraeiif vtvpi]v
ivravveiv
(097, 127)
avrl
tov
"fVraj'uo-fu' and Herodian
on
A 454
kpvovrn. Trpoirapo^vye-ai
'
itn'jWciKrai
1 I 2
484 - THE FUTURE. ch. xviir.
yap
6 e'j'fffrwc
'Xfloi'og
(ivti /jeXXovtoc. ovtuq
kciI
Apiarap-^^oq'
6 ce AXe^iuiy
TTepitnrd.
ovi; ev.
ii'Tcnveu'
in the two
passages already
cited from
(p
and also
(p
17i.
Wliy
La Roche
f
97 and 127
(after tXTro^at) against
Aristarchns and
good
M.StS. writes
evTarvcreiv,
and Ln the third
passage
ravvovm
(aW
"(\Xo(
Tavvovm rayci)
I cannot understand.
There is also
vEOjxai
S 101
[=^ 150]
vvi' F iir"iov
riofiul yt (piXtiv
is
TrarpiZa
yalar,
2 136
ijijjdei'
yap vevf^iat,
c 633 (Wttute
T/jXf^a^ocI'tlrai,lE,
152
wc
I'fT-at 'Olvaevc.
[Cp.
La Roche on S
505.]
The Attic dialect has
a
similar instance in the future
use
of
yiw
and'
"xioficu (cp.Elmsley
Review of Hermann's
Snppliceson v. 772,Eurip.
Supplices Lips.18'^2,
p. 254).
Certain instances are found in
Eur.
Suppl.
773
(ikX
eifx,
enapS)X^'P aTraPTrjaas veKpo7s
"AiSoti 8e
p.oXTras eK;^ea" 8aKpvpp6ovs
Fragm.
388 Dind.
Kapa
re
yap
(rov avyxe'o) Kopais ofiov
pava
T6 TreSoCT
eyKe(f)aXov
31G
Aristoph.
Pax 169
KaTrKpvTfvaeis epnvXXovavco
Koi
pvpov
iTTiX^ls
Plato Com.
(Merneke
Com. ii.
637)kyio
Ik
Xirpov(?)
TTapa)(e(x"v
tpxopai,
Kaya
Se
napaKoprjcrcov
Isaeus vi. 51 tVl
ra fxti'ii-inra
\irai
-xevpEt'ov
Kai irnyivvvTa.
Whether
the
language
of Homer
possesses
a
future-present
x^i/w
corresijonding
to
this is
dovibtful,
for
\tv("^Er
II
336,
and of course also
xtvu)
/3222,
may
be the
conjunctive
of the aorist.
A
very
unique
Cretan form of the same kind is found in the 3
plur.
arayrworn
C. I. no. 2554,
1.
39,
el
ce
fit)etopKi[",^6)Ti
o'l Xarioi
Koafjioi?; [.I)) 7rapayy"X["']oj'ri
IttI
tch'
uvuyvioaw tuq (rvidijicac, j/ fii)
ui'ay-
rwom,
('mortLcraiToji'
. . .
and
again
in 1. 45. Boeckh took the form to
be a future with the cr lost,
Ahrens Dor. 339 to be an aorist
conjunctive,
but this does not fitin with the futures of the context. We must not
indeed
forget
that we have no
very satisfactory guarantee
for the exact
reproduction
of the whole
inscription.
There remains
finally
the Old Attic ffwto : C. 1. A. i. 2 B. 1. 7 i^a\
ra
Koiia ra 2w"/u/3w)'trw)'
XOO Kai cnroScjirio..On this
form,
which is un- doubtedly
used in a future
sense,
I can now refer to the well-considered
discussion
by
Cauer Stud. viii.416 ft".
Now what
opinion
are we to foi-m
upon
these cases
1 For the four
Homeric forms the
rejection
of a "7 is
jvTst
as
possible,
as for those
jn-e-
A'iously quoted,
but who can believe it
possible
that the same
loss ha.s
happened
to
arayi'wot'-i
and
o-ww. Even if on the
analogy
of
kEot'Ti,
K-o(^oiTt we should
adopt
the accentuation
ai'ayiwoi'rt,
there would still
1x5
no
analogy
for the
rejection
of the
cr
in the Doric form. Buttmann
Ausf. Gr. ii.''^ 296 does indeed maintain this for
(twoj,
but Lobeck on this
passage justly
describes this
as
'
very improbable.'
It would be easier
s
I,
"CH. XVIII. OTHER NON-SIGMATIC FUTURES. 485
to
approve
the
attempt (v.Bamberg
Ztschr. f,
Gymnasialwesen
1874
p. 619)
to take
craiw
with this accentuation as an
Attic
futm*e,as we
have
"cleartraces of the
spelling(roii^w,
if this
very i,
which was all that was ca- pable
of
bringing
in the
analogy
of the
i^resents
in
-t4w,
was not
absolutely
wanting
in the form
aujio.
But Cauer 1.
c.
has
now
shown that
aww
in 317
Homer several times
approximates
to the force of
a future,
for which
I 430
(Vfj)'
fTwoiTsc k-aipovQ
is
especially
to be noticed. Hence I
regard
it
as
proved
that
(tww belongs
to the
present
forms used
as
futures.
The
same
must
undoubtedly
be assumed in the case
of
x^o^-
It is
quiteastonishing
to find that
an investigator
hke Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr.
ii.2
325)
thinks it
possible
that
ytM may
have
originated
in
*yJ.(no.
The
ev
of
\"vu)
as a
conj.aor.
and the
v
of
Ke-^vjxca
etc.
ought
at least to have
made liim hesitate. The
parallel
with teXIu) is
quite
erroneous
and
cannot be at all
supportedl)y
late and
possibly
not even
weU-established
formations like
i\idi}y.
If -^iujhad lost
an
o-,
there would be no alter- native
but to assume
the
following
as the successive
stages
of the
corrup- tion
:
*)("u-Tw*)^"i;-w *)(^f]^-u), yiio,
and
a
fifth
stage
would be furnished
by
contracted forms like
ewixels.
Who
can
accept
this
as credible 1 I
may
I'eferrather to what
was
said
on
p.
461
on
the occasion
presentedby
the
aoi'ist
f'x""-
111 its foi-mation
^ew
for
*xfJ-u)
is
certainlya
present.
The
coincidence of the tv/o tenses
is,as
I
suppose,,
to be
explained,
much
as
in the
case of reXiu) and
(cctXew, by assuming
that the foi'm
)("w
destined
exclusively
to
express
the
pi-esentgoes
back to an
earlier
x^/w {ty)(thj
t 10),
the future
x^^
to
*xf/w.
This
^fw
is in
any
case parallel
to the
forms wXeiio and ttie/w mentioned on
p.
156. The less
expanded present
form
was retained for
use as a future.
If
we now
look back fi-om these cases to those which
remain, we
may
really
doubt whether in these there has been
anywhere
a
loss of the
a.
I believe that there is
no certain criterion in
arvdj,
kpvovai,h'TavvEiv,
liofxaL(cp.
I'Lrjrjojxai
i.e.
vta-jo-jxai)
to decide the
questiondefinitely
in
one
way
or
the other. Even for the futures with "-stems cited
on
p.
479 f.
it would be
possible
in
some
instances with similar
probability
to assert
a
purelypresent
formation. For
instance,
kXCj as a
future
might
be
related to
iXaviw, Kopin
to
Kopivrvm,
ayairerui
to
ai'cnreTdi'VviXL
much as
TTw/^ai
is to
TTU'w.
But
as
forms like
reyw
and
KOfxiw,
which
can
be
understood
only
as from
*rEriaw,^KOjiLaeoj
prove
the loss of the
a
within a
certain circle to be
a fact,we
preferred
on
p.
482 the same explanation318
for these too. In conclusion it is best to
lay
it down that there
are
three kinds of futiu-es with
a
formation
resembling
that of the
present
:
1)
Such
as, by
the side of
an actual
use as
presents,
take also the
foi'ce of futures
e.g. el^t,
awu),
2)
Such
as have ceased to Ije used
as
presents,
and
only
act
as
futures
: e^o/xai, irio^at,
3)
Such
as,
in
consequence
of the
rejection
of
spiiunts,
either like
kciXeoj coincide with the
present
form at
a relatively
not
very
ancient
date,or like
reyiw,/3t/3w
have
exclusively
the force of
a
futvu'e
by
the
side of
a
present
characterised in
a
quite
different manner.
m, MOODS AND VERBAL NOUNS OF THE FUTURE.
The
optative
of the
future,
which is
employed only
in
a
subordinate
clause
depending
on a
past tense, is,as we saw on
p.
6,quite
unknown
486
THE FUTURE.
CH. XVIII^
to the
language
of
Homer,
whei-e
scai-cely
any
opportunity
for its
use
presented
itself.
Perhaps
Pind.
Pyth.
ix. 116
cri'V8' ae$Xois fKeXevaeP
8iaKp1vai
(re'dtv
avTiva
(TXWoi
ris
Tjpoicov
is the earliest instance of the
use
of this
mood,
which
we
find afterwards
in the
tragedians,e.g.
Aesch. Pers. 3G9
((pevt,oiuT), Soph.
O. T. 1274 ff.
(vxpotiTo, 6\poia6\yi'waoiuTo),
Philoct. 612
{Ttipaoitr),
in Herodotus
e.g.
i. 127 iKeXive
uTTuyyiXXtii'on
-KpoTEpov
ij^oi
(v.
1.
ij^ti),
more
commonly
first in Attic
prose,
in
Thucydides
e.g.
vi. 30
(KHjcrott'To),
74
(fevi,oiTo)y
Isocrates
[eiQirXevaoifx-qv
xvii.
9),Plato, Xenophon,
and Demosthenes
(xxxi.2).
This mood-form
never
became
very
usual, owing
to its re-
sti'icted
aj^plication.
But the verbal
nouns are on
the
contrary very
common.
Like the
optativethey are evidently
formed
entirely
on the
analogy
of the
present.
It will be sufficient here to
quote
Homeric
forms,
which
occur in
great
abundance,
e.g.
aUntrta
^
50, a'ipy]aeiiei'
P
488,
xP'-^'-^I^^^H'-^^'
"^
316,
yj]0}](Teii'
N
416, Eixppavieiv
E
688,
EKreXieiv
k
27 "
aiTijawy p
365,
iraiKTOvtra A 207, ayytXioira
P
701,cnrotTTpixpoj'rac
K
355, tpiovrett
334
"
cKpatpijireffdai
A 161,
cetireodai O
299, Kparierrddi
I
626,
cnroXt~iffOui
319 9 246 "
XvrrojxEi'oc
A
13, oxpvfxerai
S 141. Future infinitives and
parti- ciples
belong
to the
indispensable
stores of the Greeks from the earliest
times to the latest.
Finally we
may say
two words
upon
the familiar
idiom,
that
so
many
active verbs form their future in the middle voice without
any
diffei-ence of
meaning.
Lists of such futiu-es
are given by
Buttmann
Ausf. Gr. ii.2
85,
Kiihner Ausf. Gr. i.^ 684.
"
The latter in ii.'-^ 91
attempts
an
explanation
of this
strange pi'oceeding. Verbs,
which denote
intellectual
or
physicalpercejition,
had
(hesays)
not
vincommonly by
the
side of the active
a
middle inflexion
also,
without
any
essential alteration
of the
meaning,
e.g.
ukuveto
A
331, ipuru
A 56. From this he thinks
we can explain
the
usage
referred
to, especially as
it is
a
question
almost
exclusively
of vei-bs
'
which denote the
expression
of
a physicalor intellec- tual
activity.'
Kiihner
goes
on to
say
'
the notion of
futurity
is
really
only something subjective, existingonly
in
imagination.'
But unfbi-tu-
nately
the
attempted
limitation of the
meaning
of the verbs which
are in
question
is much too
elastic,
and
by
the addition of
'
almost
'
it is made
still more indefinite. It would indeed be
very
difiicult to find
any
meaning
shared in
common
by
futures like
uTzavrijGajxai^ aitoXavaofim,
yEXuffoj-ini,
yi]f"(ia")^ui,
t^oj.i(ii, TEvhijAiii,
")(^i(Tovfjai.
The
question
is trans- ferred
into
an
entirely
difiei'ent
region,
when Kiihner thinks he
can
further find
something subjective
in the
category
of future action
gene- rally,
which has
some internal connexion with the middle action which is
ruled in
a
higherdegreeby
the
subject.
But the latter notion is
evidently
based
upon
a
confusion of
very
different
things.
The
speakei-
cannot of
course
sjieak
of the future with
objectivecertiiinty,
but
only
in the form
of
subjectiveconjecture;
and that is
why
the
potentialapproximates
to
'
Kriiger Sprachlehre " 39,
12
gives a
list of verbs whicli in the
usage
of tlie
Attic writers
more or less
positively
form their futures in the middle voice.
[Farrar,Brief Greek
Syntax 5}00, points out how several of these middle futures-
correspond
to reflexive verbs in
French.]
CH. xTiii.
MIDDLE FUTURES. 487
the future. But the middle is
just as
definite
a
foi^m of
expression
as
the active. Hence while it is
quite right to
compare aicovao^ai
with the
Homeric
use
of
hKovero,
e.g. ukoveto
\a6c
avTijg, we
cannot
speak
in
320
either
case
of
subjectivity or
'
mere imagination.'
The future
can
be
*
mere imagination
'
at most for the
speaker,
that is for
myself,
if I
say
uKovatTui,
while the middle form
expresses
a
fuller
participation
of the
thii'd
person
referred to
as
the
subject
of the action. Hence I doubt
whether
we can
find
any
suflicieut
reason
for the
'
elective
affinity
'
between the future and the middle
:
and I
am
afraid that
we
must
content ourselves with the fact that the active and the middle
are
separated by
veiy
slight boimdary
lines. In
consequence
of this
slight
distinction,
which often is
so
delicate that it
can only
be detected
by
instinctive
feeling, at
a
very
early period
active and middle divided
themselves
upon
cUflerent tenses in
a
number of
very
common
verbs
;
and the middle form
especially
settled
on
the future. A number of
others afterwards followed the
example
of these. It is
no more possible to
determine them
by
their
meaning,
than
e.g.
to
lay
down
any
distinction of
meaning
in modern
languages
for the
use
to
'
be
'
and
'
have
'
as auxiliary
verbs.
Naturally
there is here too no
lack of deviations from the
rule,
upon
which
we
cannot enter here.
Perhaps
the
one fact, that
il^ii
has only
the middle future
erroijcn,
to which
we
have referred
on
p.
435 under the
head of the future
perfect,
has had
gi'eater
influence
on
the other
verbs,
than
might
have been supposed.
488 THE PASSIVE STEMS.
ch. xix.
CHAPTER XIX.
THE PASSIVE STEMS.
As the two tense-stems discussed in
Chaps.
XVII. and XVIII. stand
unmistakeably
in
a
closer
aflS.nity one to the
other,so
the two
gi'oups
of
passive
stems
again
form a common
division in the
great
whole of the
Greek verb.
They
share in the first
place
the
negativecharacteristic,
that
they
have
nothing quitecorresponding
in
any
one
of the
cognate
321
languages,
and
are
therefoi'e
undoubtedly
to be
regarded
as essentially a
recent formation of the Greek
language. They
ai-e
further united
by
their identical
force,
that of the
passive,
which in all other instances attaches
only
to the middle
endings,
but here is in
jiart
united with active
per- sonal
endings.Finally
we must notice the inflected
e
which I'luis
thi-ough
both after the fashion of the unthematic
conjugation,
and
hy
which the
passive
aorists receive their
peculiarstamp.
Hence we
have to do
unmistakeably
with
a
pair
of
stems,
the
parallelism
of which could not
escape
even
the
Greeks,
and the
development
of which had
a
mutual
influence
on
both sides. It is in the
case
of this
pair
of
equivalent
creations that there is most sense
in the old
terminology
which denoted
tenses
by
means
of numbers. For it is not
very
uncommon
here to find both
in
u.se at the same time,
e.g.
ifiiyrju
and
f.j.ii^di)v ;
and it is not
altogether
preposterous
here to denote the
rarer
form
as
the
second,
the
more
common as
the
first, as the former cannot
by any
means
always lay
claim to
greaterantiquity.
Still it is better here too to
replace
numbers
which
signifynothing by
definite
names. Hence, reserving
the
ex- pressions
'
strong
'
and
'
weak
'
for the
grammar
of
schools,
I call the
one
passive
stem that in
-";,
the other that in
-drj.
But as
shorter terms are
sometimes
indispensable,
I
occasionally
describe the former
as
the
lighter,
the latter
as
the heavier,
AVe shall in the first
place
discuss the
peculiarities common
to both
passive-stems,
and then examine the forms of each stem
according
to their
occurrence
and
origin.
The
e at the end of both
passive
stems is treated
throughout just as
in the so-called Aeolic inflexion of the derived verbs in
-"/-/it
(=-"-w).
Compare
Hom.
^oi'tz-t-j/j'
with
of.tapTi]rr)i',
Sarjfierai
with
coXZ/^erat,
Cfiijdeig
with Aeol.
0/\etc.
In
discassing
the moods above
pp.
31-i,319,
329 etc.
we were
therefore able to examine at the same
time forms like
lafxi'iere,
Tpaireio^iEr, ^iyiii]Q
etc. It results from this that the
e,
originating
from contraction
(cp.p.
247)
is
essentiallylong,
and is
shortened
only
under the conditions examined on
p.
135. In this
respect
the iterative formation
(pute-aKt-r
A
64, belonging
to
e-i/xi "'";-"',
is
instructive. The two consonants here
gave
occasion for the
shortening.
322 Hence the
e of
(/jarfn/r,cf^ajBevTOQ
has no
greater
claim to 1)0 considered
original
than that of
"]nXtlr]"; (plXeyroc,
and we must regard,
not
(pare
"H. XIX.
PECULIAKITIES OF THE TWO STEMS. 489
(jhXeijux'^i,
but
(jxiii], ftXr],i-itx'^i]
as
the true stems.
Compared
with
primitive
forms like
Bic,i^'k,
the
long
vowel in the
passive
stems holds
its
place
more obstinately,
as
is shown
by (pnrrjdi, (parijTio, XvBTivai.
The
very
close resemblance of the
passive
stems to the derived t-stems
of the more
archaic inflexion makes it
probable
that both
belong,so far
as
the form
impressed
upon
them
goes,
to the
same period
of
language,
i.e. to that in which the thematic vowel in its
ordinary
form had not
as
yet
been united Avith the contracted theme in
77
which had l)een inherited
from an
eai'lier
period.
We
saw on
p.
246 f. that to understand
0(Xew
we must start from an
earlier
*^)iA//fjiH, t^iXri-j^n.
At
a
time when
(j)i\7)iuLi, i(j)iXr]v
3
plui". tilnXet' (or e^/XEr?)0tX"/jU"rcu, (piXtig
were not
yet
limited to the Aeolic
dialect,icpuvr])'
and
hidi^v
with theii' moods and
verbal nouns must have been formed. We shall
come
back to this
point
in the
course of the
pi-esentchapter
and
try
to determine its
importance
for the
history
of the
developement
of these forms.
For the indicative of the two
passive
stems we
have first to take into
consideration the
quantity
of the
e,
and the different formation of the
3
plur.
It
might
appear
at liist
sight
that
a trace of the
long e
before
the termination
-'"('")
of the 3
plur.
had been
preserved
in the
entirely
imique /.naiOj]}' a'ijiuTi iii]poi (A 146).
The scholiasts B L took
jdiarHiji'
to be
a
'
dviKOJ'
"("" (TvyKOTvfic,' a
dual form shortened from
/^uarf^Z/rr/r ;
b\it
no one
will be
willing
to
accept
this view. Buttmann Ausf. Gr. ii.^
244 saw in it
an
aoiistic dual form of the middle from
a stem
jjnav
formed
according
to the rules of the
primitive
inflexion. As Hk-to
comes
from the rt. Sev,so we might imagine a
form
*i.iiay-To
as a 3
sing.aor.
mid.,
and
fxiar-d)]v (for*fxiai'-adr)i',
cp.
Cex-Bai)
would be the
correspond- ing
second
pei'son
dual. But thei-e are
several
objections
to this
too,
and it is hard to make
up
our
minds to
i-egard
this form
as differing
in
principle
from
isiuyOijuai'
which occurs in
exactly
the
same sense
at
n 795. Hence I consider it best with Ahrens
(Conjug.
auf
/^i p.
36)
to
"write
julai'dey,^
but not
as though
the 'bucolic caesura'
produced
the 323
length
of the
sylla))le,
foi'what was so
regarded
is better
explainedas
originallength;
I
suppose
rather that
jxiavdev
retained the old
length
of
position
in the final
syllable
even
in thesis. This
principle
of
explana- tion
is
recognizedby
Hartel Horn. Stud, i.^
Ill,
at
any
rate in
cases
of
arsis,
with reference to
t'^a v
and certain other forms of the kind. For
we cannot
really
believe that the
oi-iginnl r]
retained its natural
length
unimpaired
in this isolated instance before
rr
and the later
jt,
v.
The
regular
forms of the 3
plur.
in -er are far more common in
Homer than the
longer
ones in
-rjcrar.
Against
46 foi-ms in
-ey, e.g.
f'lyfr, 2o^e"', ^ur^iayty, K6"T^r](le}', TriixBn', Tc'iyvaOey,
there are only
15 in
-r]"Tar, e.g. fjilyr]f7ay (besidej.iiyer),
Tupin^fsay, t^apjjcra)',
"/'('^(^)/(Tnr, OwpiiX'
Qr](Tay. On the other hand in the
language
of later
poets
the shorter
formation is
an archaism,
used here and there. From Pindar Peter de
dial. Pindari
p.
59 cites 16 forms of the
kind,
e.g.
ftXajjey
ISTem. vii.
18,
'(.(pdapev
Pyth.
iii.
36, ovojiafrdEv
01. ix.
46, efiixHey
Isthm. ii. 29, For
the dramatic
poets
I
may
refer to Gerth Stud. i.
2,
257. There
are
well-established instances in Eur.
Hippol.
1247
Ei;pv"pd"y,
Aiist. Pax
1283
EKcpeadey,Vesp.
662 KariyaaOey :
hence in
Soph. Antig.
973 for
[' fxiaveevis
actually
found in
one M.S.
Cp.
La Roche ad loc. who reminds
us
of the fact that the
early alphabet
had
only one sign
for E and
H.]
490 THE PASSIVE STEMS. ch. xix.
the
TvfXwOii'
of the M.SS. I have
conjectured tv^XwOev.
We
may quote
also
E(l)i\r)6"}' (or(."l"i\adei')
Theocr. vii. 60. For the shorter forms it is
of
importance
to notice that
they occur
also on
Doiic
insciiptions,
where
we
may
give
them the Doric accentuation
: cnXiyei'
C. I. G. 3050 1.
7,
3052 1.
10,
for which in
3048,
1.
8,certainly only
from
oversight, cieXiyriv
has been
written,
which Boeckh with Buttmann alters into
cieXiyey.
Kcire^iKaffdEi' Tab. Heracl. i.
122,143,otfXf'xQEi' treaty
between the Cretan
towns
Hierapytna
and
Lyttus (Naber
Mnemos. i. 105 1.
13).
From
Archimedes Ahrens Dor. 317
quotesKariyvuxTdtr, awtlicodEr^
'iredey. It
istherefore well established that the Dorians made use
of such forms even
in
prose.
" Forms Hke
ipiiTvdtv, Ko/rfxijOe)'
are quoted
as Boeotian,
and
occasionally
also as Aeolic,
i.e.Lesbian Aeolic
by gi-ammarians(Ahrens-
Aeol.
211).
That the
longer
forms
were
not unknown to the Asiatic
Aeolians is
proved by earnOtjaai'Sappho
fr. 53 Be.^ We have an
instance of
a
Doric form of the
same
kind from
inscriptions
in
luXiyriffav
C. I.
3047,
1.7.
Evidently
the two formations were both in use
before
324 the dialects
parted
off. In the Attic wiiters and in Herodotus it was
only
the
longerones
which became established.
Except
in the 3
plur.
the traces of
shortening
are
very
uncertain.
The ancient
grammarians,
as
Boeckh
conjectures
in the notae ci-iticaeon
Pind.
Pyth.
iv.
115, regarded
the Homeric forms
t-pa^e'rrji'
E 555,
rpacpifiey
II
199,
S
436,
y
28 as
shortened. But the intransitive
use
of
the active aorist
erpct^oj'
is
completely
established
(cp.
above
p. 287),
so
that we are even
tempted
to doubt witli Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. ii.^
307)
whether the form
hpuiprjy
later in use is not to be denied to the
language
of Homer. For the active forms
may always
be restored
by slight
altei'ations,
sometimes
supportedby
traces in our
authorities
(e.g.
^ 84
supportedby
Aeschines c. Tim.
" 149).
" Besides these
probably
the
only
word that can be
quoted
is
(rrepQifXEy ffrepriBriycu Hesych.
But the
authority
for this is too doubtful to
carry
mvich
weight.
Of the moods the
imperative
of the
lighter passive
stem is
represented
in Homer
onlyby (puri]di
S
198,(payt'iTM
v 101,
while of
imperatives
of the
other form thei-e are 7
examples,
as al^iadriTe ft65,KaTcii;oif.irid})Tu)
I
427,
a-aiodt'jTw
P 228. "
Conjunctives
like
caeiio (orocu'/w)
K
425, (payijri
T 375,
2aw/x")'
B
299,x""^^^[k
I
33,
taydjj x
^^9,weiprjOdJi^ity
X
381, 7!-"ipi]6tjroy
K
444,optatives
like
rvTreiqg
N
288, TretprjBeiTjg
A
386, StatcpiydEire
F
102,
and infinitives like
Cf(/;/x"rai
Z 150 and
co/nptti
N
98,apiBjji]di]-
fxeyai
B
124, nyr)adi}vai
h 118
hardly
need
any
further
discussion,
still
less do the
exti-emely
numerous particijnal
foims like
uXeiq
II
403,
TrXT]y
iyTE 6
455,i^ixBeIc
F
48,pExf^^t'Tog
I 250.
The
lighterpassive
future is
represented
in Homer
onlyby crD/o-eat^
y
187, r 325, i.uy"](TEffdai
K 365. Instances of the heavier
are entu-ely
wanting.
It is
noteworthy
that the Dorians do not exclude the active
pei'sonal endings
for these futui'es
(Ahrens
Dor.
289),e.g.
avyaxBrirrovyn
C. I.
2448,
i.
25, ujaT(oB)jino
"
uKovffofiai Hesych.[Phot,
and Suid. add
Aiopulo], (j)ayrjffE~u'
Archimed. beside
CEixBy'iTErai
and the like. This
325
peculiarity
is connected with the similar
phenomenon
in the
case
of the
futurum exactum discussed above on
p.
436.
Finally
we
may
mention a
pair
of remarkable deviations
in the
Dorian and Aeolian dialects. To these
belongs
the Heraclean
conjunctive
^
Tliis form
was not inclurlcd ou
p.
5 because the
meaning
is not at all
passive^
but in formation it
ilccidcilly belongs
to tliis
categorj'.
CH. XIX.
PECULIARITIES OF THE TWO STEMS. 491
i-y-fr]\7]0ttji'ri=eL,ei\r]du)ari (Tab.
Heracl. i.
152)
where
e as often
(cp.
Cret.
tw/u"c=
Homer,
iioiiev)
is
replacedby i.
But it
was
very
imex-
jiected
to find in the decree of the honours of
Damokrater, dug
up
at
01yini:)ia (Archaoh Ztg.
1S7G
p.
1
if.)
the three
passive
forms with d :
avciTtb^, CoQq.,aTTO(TTa\antv
1.
32, 35,
37
by
the side of
ypacpiv
1. 31.
There can
be no
doubt theieforethat the d as an
older
phase
of
?j
was
not
rejected
in this
place
either. This fact throws new
light
upon
isolated
forms with
a,
which
crop up
elsewhere,
e.g. tTvizuv,
which is foimd in
some
M.SS.
m
Theocr. iv.
53,
but is
generallyreplacedby irv-Kr^v,
and
a~efT(rova given
as Laconian
[Xen.
Hell. i.
1, 23]
= *d7r"(T(7U7;
(Ahrens
Dor.
U7).
I. THE PASSIVE STEM IN
-r].
It will be
necessary
to state somewhat
more
exactly
what the
language possessed
in the
way
of these stems. For this
purpose
we
make three
cHvisions,Homeric,
Attic and non-Attic forms.
Of Homeric
passive
stems of this kind there are 22 or 23. I
give
some
refei-ences for each of them
:
ciyr](ri)
F
367,
eayr)
A
559,
3
plur.ci-yei'
A 214
(ivCiredy?;
Arist.
Vesp.
1428).
ia\r)(o)
N
408,
3
pliu\
oXer X 12.
"'/3/\o/3")'
""
461, /3\n/3")'
^
545,
also Attic
(Aesch.
Thuc.
Aristoph.).
dj'a-/3pox""' only
X 586.
l-Sarjv
r
208,
cuw^Ev
B
299, Icup'aL
h
493,
also
m
Theogn.
Pind. and
the
tragedians.
la^y]
I
545, edafitfiAEi'
N
812, ^cifiey
Q 344 etc. also in Pindar and
Attic
poets.
Bepiu)only
p
23.
EKc'ir]
A 464,
B
427, /ca
"//,""
rai
^
210, KaraKui'iyai
also in Herodotus
ii. 107.
Xiirev n
507,ETTft
Xiirei'
op/jnr'draicrw)',
the
reading
of Ai'istarchus
'
araXoyoy rov e\"i(pdr](Tciy,'
while Zenodotus read
Xin-ov,
which
presents
326
dilficulties.
cnroXnrrjyai
does not make its
apppearance
before Dio
Cassius.
Iiiyi]
E
143,
Efiiyrfv
T
445, luiyiwffi
B
475, fxiyfjidsiai
Z 161 etc. also
in Herodotus and Attic writers.
TToyj)
A
185,
TTciyev
A
572, xaytV
Plat. Tim. 59.
,
kar-"7rXj;y??
F
31, irXriyetQ
Q
12,
also in Herodotus and Attic
writers.
vTv-eppayn
Q
558,
U
300, kppayr]
also in Herodotus and Attic
poets.
pvT] y
455,
also Attic.
ffuTripj
T
27,
(Tcin^]
Herod.,
other forms of the stem in Attic writers.
Taping jXEi'
iV
780, f.TapTTi]Triv ;//300,
TpaneiOfXEV
T
441,
rapTvyjfiEiai
a 3.
T"p(T)']iJErai C 98,
TEpaijiai
IT 519.
TfjciyEV
n
374, Zi-ETfiayEi'
A 531.
rpafri
A
222,
cp.
above
p.
488,
also
m Pindar, Herodotus,
and Attic
wa-iters.
lia-Tpv"^iv
r 363.
492 THE PASSIVE STEMS.
ch. xix.
f.-rv7r7]
i2
421,
TvireiriQ
N
288, Tvrreig
A
191,
also in Pindar and Attic
poets.
(pai'T]
A 477,
"pavr)niv
i 466, (payt'irrjv
H 7
etc., common
in later
times.
t-Xf^pr)
r 23,
exapr}(Tav
T
111,
x"P"''''""
K.
541,
also in
Pindar,
Herodotus, Euripides,Aristophanes,
Plato
Eep.
606.
There
are
further the
following
35 additional from the Attic
period,
many
of which make their
appearance
as
early
as Hei'odotus
:
i^-a\i(pr]
Plat. Phaedr. 258.
aXXoyjyi'ai
common Attic,e^a-n-aWay^
Thuc. iv.
28, aTraWayZ/rro^ai
Herod, ii.
120,
Thuc. This is the
only
Attic instance of
a
lighterpassive
formation from
a stem
decidedly
derived.
ftatpf]
Plato
Eep.
429.
(ipaxt'ifrn
Aristot. Probl.
12,
3.
ypa(pi)vuL
Hei'od. iv.
91,
Thuc. Plat. Dem.
Cp.
ayaypafyfiei'
Cret.
inscr. Naber Mnemos. i. 114 if.
EKdapu'ra
Herod, vii,
26,
aTrocapevra
Xen. Anab. iii,
5,
9.
327 t^vyrjyPindar, Tragedians,
Plato.
dXiftijpai
Aristot.
/cXaTTfj'recPlato
Rep. 413, tu ctuKXcnriy Thuc. vii.
85, "E,eK\cnrrjffav
Xen. Hell.
v. 4,
12.
KaTa-KXirV]i'ai Aristoph.Lys. 904, Plato,Xenophon.
kottCktuv Aesch.
Ag. 1278, k^tKuirr] Aristoph.
Nub.
24,
Herod,
Thucyd.,irvyKOTviitreTcu Lys.
iii.34
Kpv(f)fii; 8oph. Aj. 1145,
Kpv(J))jaoyTai (M.SS.kpvjyijrroi'rai)
Eur.
Suppl.
543
Elmsley.
eK-Xmriii'cit Aristoph.
fr. 211 Dind.
i,vv-E-Xiyim(.}' Aristoph.
Eccl.
116, kfi-oXfyi/i'otLys. xxx. 8,
also
Thuc. Plat. Isocr.
c-.aXeyTivuicorresponding
to
liuXiyerrdcu
first in
Aristot. Eth. M. i. 29.
kK-^ayrjvai
Plat. Thaeaet. 191.
e-fxdvrjTe Eurip.
Bacch. 1296 and
corresponding
forms elsewhei'e in
poetry
and
prose.
Kur-opvxw'i^itdaAristoph.
Av. 394.
irvfi-TrXaKtj
Demosth. ii.21,
(rvfxwXciKeic Soph.
fr. 548 etc.
uTro-iri'iye'iei'
Xen.
Cyr.
viii.
2, 21, a7ro-7r)'ty//(To/.(oi Aristoph.
Nub.
1504.
pu(pT]v(u
Demosth. liv. 41.
piffjrui
Plato,
Eteppifr]
Aeschines ii. 153.
E-airdpi^v Soph.
O. Pv. 1498.
k-a-Ep-qi' (Trepeig
Eur. Alc. 622, Hec.
623,
Avith
ffripi'iffof-iai Soph.
El.
1210,
Thuc. iii.2.
t(Trpa(pr]i"
Solon fr.
37, 6,
Hdt.
Soph.
Attic
prose.
fffuyei'c
Aesch. Eumen.
305, KctTtff^dyi]
Xen. Anab. iv.
1,
23 etc.
nfaXijyui
from
Aeschylus
onwards in
poetry
and
prose
: Soph. Aj.
1136, (T0aX?/(Tfcr9"
Thuc.
v.
113.
vTTo-TayeiQ Phr^Tiicluis
Com. ii.
603,
then in
post-Attici)rose
(Plutarch) ; cp.
Nauck Bulletin de I'acad. de St. Petersb.
xx.
p.
506.
TOK-jjiat
in
tragedians(Soph.
Tr.
463)
and Plato
(Phae"lr. 251).
-(Kpijiui
from Aesch. onwards
(Sept.1021).
i-Tpdniiv
ditto
(Aesch.
Pers.
1027).
CH. XIX.
THE PASSIVE STEM IN
?/.
493
iiri-rpiftiiyai Aristoph.
Nub.
1407,
cp.
Demosth. xviii. 194 etc.
iiri-Tvipi]
Aiistoph.Lys. 221, lKTV(pi]ffoi.iui
in other comic writers.
328
e-(l)ddpi]r
from Pindar
(Pj-tli.
iii.
36)
onwards in
tragedians,
Herodotus
and
Tliucydides.
(j)v^
Plato
Eep.
494.
\pvxvt'ai Aristoph.
Kub.
151,
Plat. Phaedr. 242.
Besides these there are 32 more
passive
stems of this
kind,
which
occur
either
only as quite unique
in older non-Attic
craters,
or like
aTToXiTrfjiai
in Dio
Cassius,only
in the
jiost-
Attic
literature, or are quoted
only by Hesychius.
Of these
we
may
notice the
following:
"yrjpeiTOQ Xenophanes (fr.
8
Be.^)according
to Herodian ii.
829,
and
E. M.
230,
50
av8p6s
yrjpevTos
noXkov
dcpavporepos.
yra^?7)'ai'
KXuffdijiai, K}aj.i(])6fjrai Hesych. Cp.
Homer.
"Tri-yra/d(l)dii-
vai.
IpaKir-eq
Pind. Kem. vii.
3,
cpuKtiaa
Pind.
Pyth.
ii. 20.
ipnrh'Ti
Pind. 01. ii.43.
Kaprj
Herod, iv. 127.
ava-irapEtc
ib. iv. 94
:
cp. endpri'
iicerTijdr]
Hesych.
And
as
instances of later imitative formations
ayyeXiii'cuPlut.,now
banished from Eur.
Iph.
Taur. 932.
Eirdriv Koi areTrdjjy
Iv
r^ ffvvr]Qd(} Choeroboscus,
Lentz Herodian ii.
800, aycnrciy'irroiTai N. T.
icpXeyi]!'
Dion.
Hal.,
Luc. etc.
The total number tlierefore amounts to 89. "VVe
can
plainly
see
the
gi'adualdevelopement
of this
formation,
which however
by
its
very
nature could
never
attain "to the wide extension of the second. A
glance
at our
lists of the thematic aoi'ist forms
(abovep.
283
ff.)
shows
con- siderable
chronological
cUfierences. It
may
be fui-ther noticed that the
future in the
post-Homeric
time is
tolerablyextensively
formed fi-om
the stock of these stems once in existence. As Attic futures of the kind
in addition to those
ah-eadyincidentally
mentioned
we find
:
ftXaftiiffo^nL
Plat., Isocr.,
fJE-ey ypcKpijo-e-cuAristoph. Equ. 1370, Karai;Xn'}]aofj.ui
Aristoph.
Plat.,
ffvXXeyyjcrnfAEvoQ
Aeschin. iii.
100,
Trayijcrercii
Ar.
Vesp.
437, eK7rXay)ifT0f.tai Herod.,
Thuc. the
Orators,
"/"pay)/o-oj'rcuAesch.
Prom.
367, elcpvi'iEadai
Isocr. viii.
140, i^a-affcnriiaETaL Plat.,
tnrofffayljfTon'ro 329
Xenoph.
Hell. iii.
1, 27, EK-pilVjffErai Soi:)h.
0. T.
428, ^jcu'/yco/iai,
huKpdcipijtTOiuai.
As to the
vocalism,
the
stem-syllable
of these
passive
stems shows a
preference
like that which
we noticed on
p.
278 above in the
case
of the
thematic
aorist,
for the vowel
o. 28 of the
lighterpassive
stems have
an a
belonging
to the
root,
e.g. ay??,
pafri,
YP'^'-'P^: l^a^'il,X^^P^h
14 have
a
by
the side of
an
e
in the
root,
e.g. aXrj,?iapi], kXcittt], irXaKr),^
rapTrr],
only
5 retain the
e :
ayyEXj],dEpi],Xty?/,TEpcrr], ^Aty?/,o
appears only
in
arajypoxEt', EKniTr}r,
i
is
I'cpresented by
12 instances
e.g. aXt(pr}, ipiirt],
KXivr],
/Jiyi],
V
by
16
e.g. yXv(pr], i^vyr],
pvtj,
\pvx"h
The
long
vowel in the
above-mentioned
yriptiQ
is
quite
abnormal
: so are the
diphthongs
of the
un-Attic forms
: //ro/yr/r,
Christ,
pat. 996, aroiyiiffojicu LXX,
and of
^
iirXeKrjvoccurs
veiy
often in the M.SS.
as a variant for iw?^dKr]u. In
Polyb.
iii. 73
av-'i-KKiK-t](To.v
has been
accepted by
Bekker and Hultsch.
Cp.
KaraTt\iKii(n'
fruv^eCficn,
n-epnrcirA.ey/xei'ois Hesych.
494 THE PASSIVE STE]\LS.
ch. xix.
IvvE^tpevdilrji' (juoted
from
Hippocrates,though
the
authority
for the
last is hut weak. The short vowel in the
stem-syllable
is
as a
rule
as
much liked in the
lighterpassive
stem
as
in the thematic aorists.
Roots
ending
in a
vowel do not form stems of the
kind, as is
easily
intelligible.
Four roots in
v are
exceptions:
^v
(cuKCviivaiHippocr.)
TTTv {TTTviivuL Hippocr.)
pv, "j}v,
and also the
poeticalca
(caj/rai)
where
perhajDS
as in
narjj'ai (stem Kav,
Kof^) a
spirant
has been lost. The
most various consonants are
found l^efore the
rj.
but, curiouslyenough,
never
^. The most
common
is
y, e.g.
in
ayj],
i^vyij, X"y"?,
puyr].
In
later Greek this inti-uded itself also into the
place
of
x
i^^
opvyyjyai,
aya7rrvyy}vai (Hippocr.), \lvyf]i'ai,
and
corresponding
to this
we
find at
this late date
Kpvftijrai
beside
Kpixpiivai.
Lobeck discusses these
cases on
Soph. Aj.
V.
1145
:
cp.
Principles
ii. 141.
We
come now to the difficult
question
of the
origin
of this
stem,
for
which, as ali'eadymentioned, we are
quite
-without the
help
of
a
clearly
corresponding
form in
any
other
language.
In
my
Tempora
und Modi
p.
330 I
explained
the
lighterpassive
stem as
from the rt.
ja (Skt.ja)
330
go,
the same as
that which I considered to be the
source
of the
present
formation in
-ja(p.
206
f.)
and the Sanskrit
passive
suffix
-ja.
The
close connexion of the Indian
passive
with the
jsreseutex]Dansion,
wliich
even in the
case
of active terminations is not
unfrequently
associated
with
an
intransitive
or even a
passiveforce,
has been confirmed
by
Delbriick's Altindisches Verbum
p.
166 ft'. In the same
way
the use
of
the Latin ire in
a passivesense
(e.g.
venum ire)
serves
to
sti'engthen
the
hyjiothesis
that
a
verb of
going
is at the bottom of this
passive
formation.
My explanation,though pvit
forward
even by myself
with some
reserve,
has found
acceptance
with several \\T.'iters. Voretzsch de
inscriptione
Cretensi
(Halls 1862)thought
he had found
a confirmation of it in the
gloss
of
Hesychius "\ox''n* icapijKpijrec.
He takes
i-\ax-la
as the
3
sing,
of
a passive
aorist fi'om the rt.
Xo^,
which he
regardsas
identical
Avith that of the common
Greek
puffffEiv
strike,smite,
and he thinks
that the assumed
j
of the rt.
ja
has been
preserved
here in the form of
the vowel
t.
Such
a
confirmation of
my previousview,
based
on
original
authorities,
would be
very
attractive to me
;
but
although
the d of this
form has now
found
support
in the Elean form
quoted
on
p.
491,
I
cannot make
any
use
of it. Even if the
explanation
of this
completely
isolated
iXaxIa
as a
passive
aorist should be admitted to be
correct,
it
would not be
by
any
means
certain that
i
here
i*epresented
a
j,
for in
the Cretan dialect this vowel before other vowels has not
uncommonly
originated
from
t, e.g.
in
'(w/j"c=Homer. 'ewfier,
in
-/p(oc=Att. dipsoQ
(Helbig
de dial. Cret.
p. 25).
Hence
eXa^'a might
very
well have
come
from
*e\axia-
As
a
matter of fact there
are
various
objections
to
my
previous
explanation,
which now
prevent
me from
regarding
it as correct. Tlie
j
of
the added root
ja
would have been treated in a
completely
different
way
in
the
passive
stem and in the
present
stems. For the latter
J gives
rise to
all those
changes
in the
preceding
consonants mentioned
on
p.
211 ft". I
cannot see
any
reason why e.g.
the
h5'pothetical "ppiK-ja-^i
should become
"l"pi(T(no,
but
cpaK-jacpciK-t],
why (fjcir-juj
should become
"^)aiyw
but
(pai'-ja
(j)ar7].
The
length
of the vowel in
"'-tpaV-7;-/.t"j' i-cpciKtj-TE
and in the
*
Compare iKSafiyj
"
(KKavOfj AaKuives in
Hesych, according
to the
convincing
justificationof the M.S. reading by
Ahrens Dor.
p.
49,
and
Sa^ij
"
KavBrj.
CH. xis.
ORIGIN OF THE PASSIVE STEM IN
7}.
495
infinitive
?po^""7-''""
would remain
unexplained.
While in Sanskrit the
passiveappears
quite as a
present
formation,
the Gi'eek
jDassive
stems
331
have
nothing corresponding
to the
present expansion
of the stem
by ja.
Pui'ther the
long e,
which in itself
might
indeed have
come
very
well
from the vowel of the rt.
ja (cp.
It-
vat),
must have established itself A\'ith
wonderful
tenacity
in this
particular
formation.-^ But the main
point
lies in the
following
consideration. We
were
compelled
to
regard
these
passive
stems as recent Greek foi-mations
;
and, as we are by no means
inclined,
from the advanced
point
of view of the
philology
of the
present
day, summarily
to refer the
phenomena
of individual
languages
to ludo-
Germanic
primitiveforms,
the
explanationput
forward
thirty
years ago
in
harmony
with the
procedure
of
comparative
gi-ammar
then alone in
vogue,
which had all the boldness of
youth,
but often stood in need of
a
siftingprocess,
loses
very
much of its
probability.Now-a-days
chrono- logical
considerations alone
prevent
us
from
seeking
the
explanation
of
a
relatively
recent and
distinctively
Greek form in
a
comjiletely
obsolete
form of the
primitive
Indo-Germanic
language
;
and
we can regardas
probableonly
such
an explanationas
agrees
well with other
phenomena
of Greek
itself,
and is confii-med
by precedents
in European foimations.
An
explanation
of this kind for
our
passive
stem has been
attempted
first,so far
as
I
know, by
Schleicher
Comp.-^
p.
812 in the
following
words
:
'
Possibly
however this
e or
";
is
nothing
but an
expansion
of the
stem after the fashion of the derived
verbs,
the stems of which
are not un- commonly
treated
as though
their final letter
were
the final letter of the
root
(cp.
Lesb. Aeol.
0//\"j^i
O. H. G. hahe-m
etc.).
As the form of derived
verbs
was
used in Lithuanian and Latin to
express
the function of
a
past
tense, so
it
may
have been
employed
here to
produce
that of the
passive.
It is not the
case that all recent formations
are
compounds.'
These
words
seem to me to contain the
germ
of the true solution of the riddle.
We have
pointed
out above the
comjjletephonetic
agreement
of the
332
Aeolic
imperfects
of the
e-conjugation
with
our passive
aoiist. In forms
like
ix^dptji', iixiyr]c, Idyr],
Tef)i7)]iJE}XLL
it is
quite impossible
to see at
once
whether
they are
Aeolic
imperfects
like
ecplX?]!', ei'oj;,
or
2:)assive
aorists of
ordinary
Greek. The Lesbian Aeolians
actually
foim the infinitive in
pre- cisely
the
same
way
from the stems of both kinds
: t^dXrjr, tVanr/i'on the
one hand, ii'Ta.(j"r]y (cp.ytrijdip', /.udvfff^r]!') on
the other. It would be
a
strange
accident if in
spite
of this the two formations had
absolutely nothing
to do with each other. The
lighterpassive
stem, has besides
many points
of contact with those
e-stems,
the
interchange
of which with shorter
.stems constitutes the
peculiarity
of the e-class
(p.
258
ff.). Compare
yeypcKprjKa (p.265)
and
iypac^rjv
hehc'mKa
(p.267)
"I
",
,
,^
,
^
,
5, 5, /
' ^"^ '
" ailQ
eoariv, oarjcrouai
oeoaijfjLai J
# / r
(TT"p"Q}, ((TTiprjcra (p.269)
hesidc
ecrreprju
Tpaneai,
in
a
difterent
application(p.269)
beside
iTpanr)v
fppvrjKa (p.270)
beside
eppvrjv, pvqaofuii
TVTrr/a-ei " " tTVTrqv,
rvnTJcrofiai
^
A somewhat
differingattempt
to
explain
these forms on the
same principle
may
be fottnd in
Westphal's
Formenlehre der Gr.
Sprache
ii.1,
290. He
explains
i-ixiyri-v to be for
i-jxiyea-y, regarding
the " as the
representative
of
thej.
Most
of the
arguments developed
in the text hold
good
also
as against
this
explana- tion.
496 THE PASSIVE STEMS,
ch. xix.
"
beside
exdp^v.
In
cases
wliere there is
no
difference of
meaning as
in the forms of
the roots
ca, fjv,x"P
it is the most
impossible
to
deny
the
common
character. For teodrj-tca
and
i-ddrj-j',
Kt^nf^^ora
and
t^apr^v
we must set
down the
same
stems lat],
xnpif,
and
we
have to decide between two
equally
dubious
hj'potheses,
viz. the
one,
that this
agi'eement
is based
ujion
chance,
and the
other,
that other tense forms beside the aorLst and
future can occasionally
be formed from
a
passive
stem. Others how- ever
of the forms cited
above,
like
(jTv-yiio, yeypdftjKa,
have
an active
meaning,
so
that there is not the
slightest
reason for
deriving
them from
a
passive
stem. Hence
we
should
only
have
pure
accident left. After
what has been said there
can,
I
imagine,
be no doubt about the true
state of the
case.
We
may say
with confidence
:
the
lighterpassive
stems are nothinfi
hut stems
expaiidedhy
the addition
of e,
and
inflected
333
in the Aeolian
fashion.
The e-stems have in fact
repeatedlypresented
themselves as impoi^tant
new
formations at different
points
in the
sphere
of
the
European languages,
and
they
often
appear,
as we have
seen
especially
on
p.
259,
and in the case
of the future
on
p.
477, actingas
'
second'
or
vicarious stems
by
the side of shorter
ones, especially,
outside of
Greek,
in the
Latin,
Lithuanian and Slavonic
present.
The
same
stem-expansion
we I'ecognized
in the
case
of the
perfect
as an
extremely imjDortant
contril^ution towards
understanding
the Greek
as well
as the Latin
perfects.
Here
our investigation brings us
back
once more to the
same
phenomenon.
If
any
one chose to
quote
the Elean forms in
a
cited
on
p.
491 as an objection
to our representation, we
could
answer that the
Eleans too furnish the
e
in the neuter
participle ypa(pir,
and that there- fore
the
a
in
?oOa, dTrouraXdfxtv
is based
upon
a
very
extensive
prefer- ence
of this dialect for
a, upon
which
we cannot form
a moi-e
definite
opinion,
until
more
materials are at our command.
But one circumstance,we must admit, seems to stand
seriously
in
the
way
of
our
view
:" the
meaning.
Whence
comes
the
passivemean- ing
for this
passive
stem, I cannot
get
over this
point
as
easilyas
Schleicher does with what he
says
about
'
function.' It is
one of
Schleicher's weak
points
that he withdraws into
a cold nescience before
all
questions
of
meaning,
with the
timidity
all his
own. But it is true
that transitive and
intransitive,
active and
passivemeaning are not
unfrequently interchanged
in
an extremely capricious
fashion. For
instance it would not be
easy
to find
any
reason
why
the aorist uXwrai
along
with
fiXwo-o/xta
reached its
sharply passive
force
;
and
some
might
wish to
employ
such
examples
in ordei- to thi-ow overboard
any
question
as
to internal reasons in the
case of
our
passive
stems. But the
case
is different hei'e. It has been
alreadypointed
out more than
once
that
by no means
all
passive
aorists of this foi-mation have
a i-igoi'ously
passive
force. Kiihner Ausf, Gr. i.^
p.
5G0
says
'
the so-called aor.
ii.
pass,
is
nothing
but an aor.
ii.act. constructed
according
to the formation
in
HL
with
an
intransitive force.' The
meaning
of
very many
of these
forms is
intransitive,
not
passive.
Thus the
category
of the
passiA'c
is
334
completelyinapplicable
to
hirirailearn,
yr]pdqgrown
old,depfjvai
warm
one's self
{e-mike
Trvpoc
Otpiu)
p
23),I'wrp'aiflow,/.ini'fjt'ai grow
mad,
ffOTriJrntrot,rciKJ/i'atmclt, Tfprrljpo'ni dry (^e'ifiara
c'
I'lEXioio
fjerov
TEptrlj-
CH. XIX.
ORIGIN OF THEIR FORCE. 497
jjisyai
avyrj
^ 98,
nvhi
j^ioiat/.ta repffiii'cti
dvpurai IT
519),
^aj'jjraiappear,
"yapriruirejoice;ileK\ain](Tav
in
Xenophon
Hell.
v. 4,
12 and elsewhere
means
not
'they were
stolen' but
'they
stole
away,' EvreXiyrj/dev
in
Arist. Eccl. 116 not
'
we were assembled' but 'we assembled ourselves.'
In short there
can hardly
be
a
doubt that here
as elsewhere the
passive
force is
only
a specialdevelopement
from the
eai'lier, partlyintransitive,
partly
reflexive,
force.
In this
way
we
obtain for
comparison a
tolerablylarge
number of
foi'mations
phoneticallysimilar,
and
as we shall
now with
more con- fidence
assert,comparable
with these
passive
stems in
meaning
and not
merely
in external form. We saw on
p.
244 f. that the intransitive force
attaches to the verbs in
-eio, though
not
exclusively, yet
to a
largeextent,
and much
more commonly
than to the kindred verbs in
aw,
ow.
We
there
compared
the
prevalent
intransitive
usage
of the Latin verbs in
ere,^
and the Church- Slavonic verbs in
Sjeti.
Our Greek
passive
stems
in
e
may
be
very
well connected with these. At least in the
case
of
some passive
aorists Latin and Greek
completely
agree.
We
may
compare
torrere
with
Tepffijiai.
If the
participle answeriaig
to the latter
occurred,
its stem
would
necessarily
be
^repaevr,
which would
exactly
coincide with the Latin torrent :
in the same
way
fulgereanswers
to
fXeyfjyai,
and there is more
justice
in the old
comparison
of cdrere with
Kctpiji-ai
than
one
might
think at first
sight,
the tAvo
meeting
in the
notion of to be
shorn,
bereft. The late licet is to
linquit
much as iXi-rrr]
to
Xij.nray"i
ov XetTrei
(Princ.
ii.
61). Fi'equens
presupposes
a verb
*J'reqtiere
to be
close,crowded,
which
agrees
with
(ppayeic,
for which
thex^e is but late
authority(Princ.
i.
376).
The diiference between the
proceeding
of the Greeks and that of the Romans lies
mainly
in
this,
that the former
brought together
transitive and intransitive forms into
the
unity
of
one
verbal
system,
as
indeed
happens frequentlyelsewhere,
335
and
even
in the
case
of the most
primitive
verbs.
Compare 'iaTi)jxi
"
iarriv,
(pvb)
"
e(pvy.
The Romans on
the other hand treat
pe7idere
and
peoidere, jacere
and
jacere
as
distinct
verbs,
and carried each out
through
all the
forms, though
these were
far less numerous.
Hereby
the e-stem
inflected in the Aeolic fashion becomes one
of the difierent valuable
members in the
body
of the
same vei"b,
and thus
acqidi-es a
very
difierent
ajDpeai'ance
from that of the Latin e-stem. In Greek the intransitive
usage may
have been favoured also
by
the resemblance of the termina- tions
-r}i',-vfxey, -j?rf, -rjffai',-r]Tr]i'
to the
past
tense of the rt.
"",-,
a resem- blance
indeed which in the
case
of several
personal
forms could
only
make itselffelt with time. For
we
have learnt to
recognize
traces of
i]ff^ev,ijffre,
vfr-rjv,
hence it would be
wrong
to
conjecture
that such
a
resemblance
was
the
proper
source
of the
passive
\Tsage.
If
we
survey
once more
the course
which in
our view the
language
struck out for itself in
giving
a
stamp
to these
forms,we
may
lay
down
the successive
steps
somewhat as
follows
:
1)
At
a time when the
European languages,
and still
more
probably
the two
South-European languages,
had not
separated
from each
other,
by
the side of
monosyllabic
verbal
stems,
there
came into
use also in
many
cases disyllabic
stems characterised
by
the addition of
an
e,
inter- changing
with the shoi'ter
ones.
"^
Friedr. Haase in his
'
Vorlesungen
ijber lat.
Sprachwissenschaf
t
'
i. 97
describes the characteristic of the verbs in ere as
"
quiet
rest in
a state.'
K K
498 THE PASSIVE STEMS.
ch.
xix.
2)
These stems were inflected
quite
after the
pattern
of the derived
stems
proceeding
from
a-ja,
and hence fell to the
e-conj ligation.
3)
In this
conjugation,
as distinguished
from others
proceeding
from
the same primitiveform,
the intransitive
meaning prevalently
formed
itself.
4)
At a
time when the
process
of
creating
these e-stems
was at its
height,
the Aeolic method of
inflexion,
characterised
by
the
long e, pre- vailed
in Greece.
5)
Thus
were
formed in imitation of the
imperfects
the
indicative,
in imitation of
present imperatives, conjunctives, optatives,
and verbal
nouns
the
corresponding
forms of the
lighterpassive
stems.
6) Developing
further the
tendency pointed
out under
3)
these
stems found their
employment only
with
an
intransitive and
passive
force.
336 7)
It was
only
later
on
that the
corresjionding
futures
were formed
from the same stems on
the
analogy
of the
numerous
futures in
-^nrofiat.
II. THE PASSIVE STEM IN
-Qr^,
Here it is
unnecessaiy
to enumerate the individual forms. From
Homer onwards the
passive
formation in 0 is
very
common. According
to
my
collections there are in that writer 130 aorists of this sort from stems
of the most various
kinds,a
remarkable
excess over the 22 of the
lighter
formation. In later Greek it is not worth while to do
more
than count
the forms
proceeding
from consonantal stems. Thei-e are
251 of these.
From vowel
stems,
and from all denominative stems this
passive
stem is
properly
to be
expected
in
every case,
and it is
a
matter of no
impor- tance
whether it
actually
occurs or not. Hence I content
myself
with
citing
Homeric
examples
of verbal stems of different kinds. Homeric
aorists of this kind are a\i]dj]i'" 120, yvi^wwdtj
x
1" XvOtj
E
296,
iKivr^Btv
n
2m"idi\xlim i^ 326, Px^r)
F
368, dpvXlxf^n
"^
S96"spei(Tdrj
U
14.5,ciB(7xi(Tdii
n
316,
TriXaadEV M
420, KpOcpdij
N
405, lfl\a(pQr)fTav
^
387,
EJ'LXpil^fOdc
H 272"
ap-vrOri
A
216, oph'Or)
E
29, (paat'dei'
A
200"
ay""0(/
A
152, ciepdey
6 7
i"aiceadrtre (3
65." Of
peculiar
forms
I
may
mention
cixOrjrfXviriidrinHesych.
as
Mor. Schmidt is
un- doubtedly
right
in
reading
in accordance with the
alphabeticalorder,
in
the
place
of the
dxv^i
of the MS. This aorist to the
present axwy-ai
is
especiallynotewoi'thy
because of the
pi^esent
form
dxQo^ai.
Also
((p-i-ufrBeV iyeXcKTcif, hiexvBrjfrai', quoted
before
on
p.
79 because of the
augment, /xtpOelcra
"
arepijOuaa,hfjiepQiirra placedalreadyby
Lobeck El.
i. 37
along
with
fxeiptrai
'
ariperai
and
a/jiepdu).
Another woi"d
fiopOijt'aL
'
'ireipndiiyat, yeriaQai
is less
clear;
still it must
certainlylaelong
to
e/ufxape, Eijiaprai.
Of
oCvudrjiai
'
ocvaaff"ai, )(oAw0"/''"' nothing
else is
known.
With
i-egard
to the vocalism of the
stem-syllable
we
have to notice
two
points,
first the
a,
which, as
in the middle
perfect
and in the
lighter
passive
stem
(cp.
p. 493),
so
here too sometimes
answers
to the e
of other
forms,
and
secondly
the intensified vowels. The
appearance
of the a we
337
touched
upon
on
p.
82 in
speaking
of the Homeric
LcKpOrj
which with
Aristarchus
we
derived fiom
ETro/.iai.
There is
good authority
for
Tpa"jM]rai
o 80, Tap(ltd"i'
'(
99, rc'ipipdrj r 213, 251,
"p
57, according
to
which I. Bekker
was certainlyright
in
writing
-ap^Qtir)
in
e 74,
while
OH. XIX.
THEJ PASSIVE STEM IN
-Orj. 499
KaTt(TTpu(pQr](7av
in Herodotus i. 130
(Stein,
v. 1.
KarEtrrpucp^fTav),
earpcKpOyj
in
Sophron
fr. 78
Ahrens, (TrpacpdevTec
in Theocr. vii. 132
make their
appearance
beside the Homeric
arpecpBii'Te, thongh.
for this in
E 575
crTpa(pBei'Te
is
given
as the variant of the cod. M.
BapdeiQwas
used
for the usual
cupeigby
the comic writer Nicocharis
(Mein.
Com. ii.
844),
iffirapdr]!', airapdifdOfxaL
haA'e
no
authoi'ityaccording
to Veitch
p,
529,
d7ro(T7-aX0"j'r"cis read
on the
inscription
of the Cnossians C. I. 3053
1.
4, ciJiomnXBTj
in the Schol. T on B 21. " "While in the
cases mentioned
a
liquid
was
usuallypresent,
the
a
is
pi'oducedby
a nasal in
(paarBrf
V
650
etc.,(paai'dev
A
200, iUfaarSei'
T
17,
with which
compare ^aav-
raroc (v 93).
The similar
IktuvBt)belongsonly
to late Greek
(LXX).
It is
only,
as
is shown
by ayipBt]
A
152, lapBiv
Q
74,
KepBivrec
Pind.
Pyth.
iv.
82, a
phonetictendencyappearing quite sporadically
wlaich is
here in
question.
We shall
come
by
and
bye
to the
a
of
iTaBrj
etc.
An intensified
stem-vowel, mostly
in imitation of the
present,
meets
us
in this
passive
stem under
exactly
similar conditions
as
in the
middle
perfect
and in the
sigmatic
aorist. We
may
take
as
examples:
aXeKpBrji'cii Lys. Plat.,
aTrr]i.i"i(j)Bri
Xen. An. ii.
5, 15, idet)(Br] (Herod.
i?"exBi]), hixBiio-onai
common Attic, eTrei-^Brji'di
Thuc. i.
80, i^evxBiii'ai
Pind.
Trag.,TevxBijraLHippocr.
beside Horn.
ervxBi](A 470),iireiffBqv
common Attic,
and so
i\ei(pB)]f (as early
as
Hymn,
in Merc.
195''),
EKTrXrjxBiii'ui
Eur. Tro.
183, aKi^(pBr]vai Plato,
crvi'-}]-)(,Bijvai
Eur.
Suppl.
1029.
The
r
before 8 is not fixed in
primitiveverbs, a circumstance which
again
reminds
us of the
perfect(cp.
above
p.
419
f.).
Instead of
e we
find in such
cases a :
KaT-i-Kra-dtt' E 558
(cp.ffcrar, ei^raTO, KTaaBai),
"T(iBi]i'
Homeric and Attic
(raBr]
^ 375
etc.).Perhaps fj^aBr}' eyerrijB)]
belongshere,supposing
we are to assume
that the
gloss
is Boeotian " in
which
case we must write
ajyaBei
" from the root fta=-ya,
yev
recorded
333
in the Boeot.
/3ai'o=yi;)//. "/3a0";
would then be connected with
ye-
yaa"Tt, yeyaug,
tKyeyaarrBf..
Still
ftaiveiy might
also be intended in the
sense
of
cover, beget.
In the
case
of KKlvb) and
k-p/iw
the want of
a
nasal
in the
passive
stems
kXiBy],KpiBi], may
doubtless better be
explained
from the
interchange
of the stems kXi and
kXh',
i^pi
and
Kpu'.
Hence the
fluctuation in Homer
: ekXivBi]
F
360, KXirB}]Tr}i'
K
350,
but
ekXIBi]t 470,
i^XiBrjiuL a 366, CLah:pLiBi]i^ui'ai
T
98, Kpn'Bei'rec
N
129,
but
EifKpiBey
B
815,
while
subsequently
the forms without
v are alone in
use.
The
fluctuation between stems with and without r met us
in another
way
in
^r]pii'Bi]Tr]i'
n 756 beside
lr]pioixaL (Pind.),idpvrBijtrav
F
78,
II 56 beside
Upvs B
191,
afterwai'ds almost
exclusively(SpvBrjj'ai : aprvi'Br]
has the
two
pi-esent
forms
aprvrw
and
aprvcj.
Forms like
(hptrBi]
IT
509,
enapai'Bj]
I
212, iErjpai'Br) (i"
348, jjnavBr]rfav
IT
795,
where the
I'
is
generallyan
in- tegral
and
indispensablepart
of the verbal
stem,
show how little there
was
any phonetictendency
to
suppress
the
v
before B.
Finally
it is
worth while
noticing
how the nasal makes its
way
in from the
pi-esent
stem in the Hei-odotean
iXufKpBrjr (vi.92,
ix.
119),
for which elsewhere
we have
iX^ifOrji' following
the
precedent
of
eiXi](pa,
in late Greek
eX^jif-
Bqy. Cp.
p.
174.
We have mentioned
incidentally
above that the two
passive
stems
are
in
use side
by
side
incomparably
more
commonly
than the
sigmatic
'
"\i(t"devCallim.
Hjonn.
in Cer. 94 is
certainlyproperly
corrected
by 0.
Schneider after Blomfield into
(\ei"peiv.
K K 2
500 THE PASSIVE STEMS. CH. xix.
aovist
by
the side of the
primitive
or
thematic. Even in Homer
we find
the
pairs:
l3\al3ty
and
li^Xi^Br^cjar (* 387).
lajXEv
and
IjjLrjQivra (A 99).
fxiyrjiai
and
fxi'^f^iii^ierui (A 438).
TapTrr]jj.fv
and
rapcpBt] (^ 57).
In Attic the
following
are in
use :
i^uXKJ)^
and
a\"iq)dev(both
in
Plato).
aTnjWayr],'
Aesch. Pr. 750 and
a/\X"x0'?Eurip.
I. A. 798
(ch.)
ftcKpritaL (Plato)
and
cnreijafOr] (Aristoph.
fr. 366
Dind.)
ei;iyy](jar
Plato
Rep.
508 and
i:"vxOelaa
Plat. Polit. 302.
eKXlirjy(cp.
above
p. 492)
and
ek-\td)]r (Plat.Xen.)
Kpv"i)iiQ Soph. Aj.
1145 and
k-pvipOivTa Soph.
El. 837.
piipivTa
Eur. fi\ 486 D and
pifdiyrec
Eur. Hec. 335.
herpii^i]
Thuc. i. 125 and
Tpi(j)Buffa
Thuc. ii. 77.
TUfcy
Eur. fr. 230 and
t,vyTi^x^eiQ
Eur.
Suppl.
1029.
339 For the
usage
of the
tragedians
Person
on
Eur. Phoen. 986
(=972
Dind.)thought
he had discovered the
rule,'asperas
et
antiquas
formas
adamarunt
Ti-agici, ideoque
aoristos
pinores praetulere.'
But
apart
from
the fact that
many
of the
lighter
aorists are
just
as
old
as
the heavier
ones,
the rule is not
observed,as
Yeitch has shown under uXXaaffw
p.
45
by a
number of
examples.
The unrestricted choice between two
equiva- lent
forms still seems to
many
a
scholar
somethingunworthy
of
a
formed
language, though our own
mother-tongue gives
a pi-ecisely
similar
instance in the
parallel
usage
of v-ob and
loehte,/rug
and
fragte. [Cp.
our own use of
my
and
mi7ie,
loves and
lovefh,
kill'dand killed
:
and
see
D. B. Monro
on
Homeric Grammar
" 57.]
In this case fortunately
the metre not
uncommonly presentsinsupei'able
obstacles to the
passion
for alteration.
If
we now
attempt
to arrive at the
origin
of the
passive
stems with
Q,
it is in the first
placequite
certain that these stems find their
place
in
a larger
gi'oup
of foi-ms
which, though very
diffei'ently used,are con- nected
togetherby
the addition of the
same
consonant. We must there-
foi'efirsttake a
survey
of these forms.
6 elsewhere than iu the
passive
stem.
The
present
forms iu -Bw and the
past
tenses in -Bo-i' have been
actively
discussed and
diligently
collected
by
modern
grammarians,
not
as
yet following
in the lines of
comparative philology.
The discussion
was set on foot
by
the
question
raised
by Elmsley
on
Eur. Med. 1 ^C:"and
Soph.
0. C.
1015,
whether the
past
tenses in -aBo-i'
provided
with this
termination
are,
as
the
Englisli
critic maintained, aorists,or imperfects.
Buttmann Ausf. Gr.
ii.^p.
61
K,
Lobeck in his note on
this
passage,
but
especially
Immanuel Herrmann in the Erfurt
programme
of 1832 'de
verbis Graecorum in
uBtir,
eBeii- exeuntibus' and still more thoroughly
Wentzel in the
Oppeln programme
of 1836
^qua
vi
posuit
Homerus
verba
quae
in Bu) cadunt 1
'
have discussed
actively
this
question
of
meaning
and accentuation
"
foi-the latter concerned the critics
especially.
G. Hermann has
incidentally (on Soph.
0. C.
1015,
and
on
Eur. Phoen.
1184) expressed
himself
as againstElmsley.
Valuable
investigations
in
310 a different direction
are
furnished
by
Lobeck Ehem. 92 ff. We
can
'CH. XIX,
ANALOGOUS FORxMATIONS ELSEWHERE. 501
therefore draw
upon
the collections of these
predecessors
in
exhibiting
here the stock of forms. We
givepast
and
present
tenses side
by
side as
our
present question
is
only
that of formation.
A)
Presents in -'iw
and
Past Tenses in -9o-j'.
1)
From
monosyllabic
vowel-stems.
n)
With
a
short stem- vowel.
i-ax^-do-y, poetical
from Homer onwards
{'i(T\edE
M
184, are(Tx^doi.i"y
'1 294, (Txediru)
6 537, (TxeOejjet'
Pind. 01. i.
71,
c-xeOtJy
Aesch. Prom.
16, k-araa-x^Qof'Tec Soph.
El.
754).
The other forms of the
same kind
e-fiaOo-y,
e-Trado-p and
e-dfjado-r (by
the side of
'i-htp6o-r)
have been
discussed above
p.
280 and 284 f.
They are distinguished
from
i-^xeOo-v
by
the fact that the d is not limited to this
one tense-stem.
b)
With
a long
stem-vowel.
(3pido)
from Homer onwards
(i3pidr)fn r 112, l3pWo/j.ii'T]
Q
307, jipiBeiQ
Soph. Aj. 130, ijpidei.
Plato Phaedr.'p.
247)
with the
perfectfiiiipiBe
(n 384).
The
accessory
nature of the 6 is shown
by ftpi-upo-c (Princ.
ii.
77).
The
comparison
with
i3per6voi.t(ii
and Lith.
br^sti
to fill
(intrans.),
suggested by
Joh. Schmidt Vocal, i.
124, according
to which the 0
would
belong
to the
root,
can hardly
be I'econciled with the
use
of
jlpideii',
yi^do-fiirwr Quint. Smyrn.
xiv.
92,
yi^Qofiii'ij
Anthol. Pal. \i.
261,
yijdovTUL
Sext.
Empir. p.
567,
11 ed. Bekker. There
are fiirther the
perfectyeytiOa
cited above
p.
401,
and the
present yiidiu)
to be discussed
hereafter. The rt.
ya/
underlies the shorter
yaiw (Princ.
i.
211).
Kin'jdb), Ki'ndo^iai,
a by-form
to
/craw,
which
can
be
quoted
from Aris- totle
onwards.
r)/0w
Plat. Polit.
289,
shorter
present
form j'"w=Lat.
neo.
"n-XijOu)
from Homer onwards
{irXi'iHai
"l"
218, TrXfjOev
9
214)
Dor.
7r\c((^w
(rrXudovai
Aesch.
Choeph.
589
chor.),
in
pi'ose
TrXrjdovarjgayopdg.
Thei'e is also
Tri-\r]da,
cp.
above
p.
401.
iriTrpTjBof only
I 589. A
present -pifiuj
is nowhere found.
TrvQo)
poetical
from Homer onwards
: Trvderui A
395,
and in later
prose.
7ri;-o-j'=Lat.
^;m5,
Trviu)show that the 9 is
an accretion
(Princ.
i.
341
356).
cnroaifdeii' only quoted by
Athenaeus xiii.591 from the
gx-ammarian
Herodicus,a
pupil
of Crates.
c)
With
preceding
consonants.
axQo-^ai. Cp.
p.
265,
and for the
origin
of the root
lix{(ix-^v-f-uu)
Princ. i. 234.
'iffdw
poetical
and late
prose present
from the rt.
ec,
beside the usual
iadlu)
:
(.trOorTec G
231,
ttIie kul ?/"70' tt 141,
eaSei Aesch,
Ag. 1597,
i(7dovTag
PhUippides
Com. Meineke iv.
p.
469.
502
THE PASSIVE STEMS.
ch. xix.
2)
From
disyllabic
stems.
a)
In
a.
aXKct-Ou) Kul uXKadeip'^
^o^oKXrjg
kui Aii7)(^v\oc, (Tr]jiaiyti
Is.
j3oi]0ely
Bekker Aneccl.
p.
383,
31.
a/xvyaOeTEAlistoph.
Nub.
1322, c'l^xvruBea' Sopli.
0. C,
1015,
Eur.
Iph.
A
910,
ufjivyaOov (imper.)
Aesch. Eumen. 438,
ciujKa-6u)
Aristoph.
Nub.
1482,
ciwKcWecy
Eurip.
fr.
364, 2.5,
Plato
Euthyphr.
p.
15, eSiUadeg
Ar.
Yesp.
1203.
v7r-"iKfi0oiiiu Soph.
El.
361, wapeiKaOi]
Plato
Sophist.254, eiKaOoyra
Soph.
Trach. 1177.
i-ipya-Oev
E
147,
cnroepyade
$
599, l,vveipyaBov
S
36, ('nreipyadr}
Soph.
0. C.
862,
KareipyuOov(imper.)
Aesch. Eumen. 566.
Kar-E-KiiaOi
"
KaT"KOLfj.i]0r] Hesych.
with which
compare
Kiaadai
'
Kei-
crdai cited
p.
120.
UtT-t-dade
IT
685, /.itr-e-Kiado-y
A
52,
S
581,
then in
AjDollon.
Phod.
and Callim.
Hymn,
in Dian. 46.
TreXadeie Aesch. fr.
131,
irEX/idei Rhes.
556, Aristoph.Thesmoph.
58.
b)
In
e.
yyepidovTai
to
ay
eipw F
231, -yro
M 82
etc.,yyepEdEirOui
K 127.
Cp. aypaOey (Doric?)*
avyayeir
Hesych. on
the
analogy
of
EspyaOoy.
iiepiOorrai
T
108,
0
12,
then in
Apollon.
Rhod.
342
'Apcdovaa,
dou.btless
belonging
to
upeoKO).
EfuiOio Tu
Ef-uo
Cramer Anecd. Oxon. i.
87,
7.
EpiOovaiT 517,
h
813, EpiQrim
A
519, eptOe
F 414, ijpESoy
Theocr. xxL
21, expanded EpEBil^w A 32.
BaXdOioy
v//191, daXEdoyTEC -T63,
I
467,
daXidov(Tiv Theocr.
xxv.
16.
vEj-uBoyTo
A
635, yefjEdojy
Nicand. Ther. 430.
E-tTTTEpiBoyTo
"
EdTTEipoy
Hesych.
teXeBei H
293,
TEXidovffi M
347, TEXldoyrEQ
p
486,
then in Pind.
(Pyth.
ii.
78),
and the
tragedians(Aesch.Suppl.1040,
Eur. Med.
1096)
teXeOel Tab. Heracl. i. 111.
^aiddiv
A
735, Soph.
Eur. "^aEdovfTa
fx
132.
(jiXEyidEi
P
738, (jiXeyidoyTi
*
358, (p^Ey
eBoIcito "*"
197,
Aesch.
Suppl.
87,
(pXEyiBi^y Soph.
Trach. 99.
XpeiuiBwtTi Oppian Cyneg.
i.
163, ETii^E}iEBu)v Apoll.
Rhod. iii.1260.
Thei'e is also with
a long e
uXi'iBw
quoted
from
Hippoci'ates
and
Thoophi-astus.
Babr.
131,
5
I'lXijBoy.
c)
In
V.
fiapvBsi
n
519,
Hes.
0pp. 215, fyapvBor-vQuint. Smyrn.
xiii. 6.
i'lXvBo-y
quoted
above
p.
284. It is best to refer it to a
rt. kX with
the
expanded by-form eXv,
which occurs
in
7rpoc-i]Xv--t]-c, Trpoc-i'jXv-ro-c
and
m eXiiXv-te
(above
p.
387,
Princ. ii.
179;
cp.
rt. /"\ beside
aXv-ai-c,
rt.
/ep
beside
/fpu
p. 122),esjjecially as
the aorist is thus
brought
into
*
Elmsley and after him Dindorf and others write aXKaOuv and
regard
aXKaOa
as an 'invention of tlie
grammarians,'
and so
in the rest of the verbs, though
I
do not in
every
case
mention
it,
in all
corresponding
instances.
CH. XIX.
ANALOGOUS FOKMATIONS.
503
connexion with the
present 'ipxofxai (p.197).
Tick's
attempt
to start
from a root \u0=Skt. rudh
(Ztschr.
xix.
250,
Worterb. i.^
200)
is not
at all borne out
by
the
meaning,
and would lead to the
separation
of
ipxofiai
and
ijXvdu-v.
The
syncope
of
a v
in
riXdov
would also be hard to
explain.
From tX
rtX-do-y
is formed
independently, just
as i]Xv-Qo-v
from
kXv. For the
perfect
form
cp. p.
398. But
perhaps
the Skt. mdh is
itself
only a
variant of
ardh,
and
comes
like this from
or.
Hirhdei
n
392, ^lyvduvat
P
738,
Hes.
0pp. 244,
Aesch. Eum. 374,
Soph.
0. C. 686.
^QirhOnvm
Z
327,
(^Qivvduv
R
346, (pOiyvdoy
P
364, aTrocpdiyvB(^(TL
343
Apoll
Rhod. i. 683.
d)
In consonants.
A
special
gi'oup
is formed
by
the
presence
of
o-
before 6
:
cutrdoj
"
Ovfiuy
u'iadwy II
468, dvjioy
alaOe Y 403. The connexion
with
ciijfii,
uiu)
(eVei"piXoy
uioi'
rjTop
O
252),cu'i^w
etc. from the rt, vd
breathe
(Princ.
i. 483
f.)
cannot be doubted, airrdu) is
probably
for
ahr-Qu) and is most
closely
connected with
ciETi^toy-TryEv^ui
Hesych.
ijipaaOojy,only
in this form N
809,
()
676,
n 534. The
"t
here
probablycomes from
a ^,so
that
flifiaadwy
is to be
explained
from the
expanded
rt. i3ac,occurring
in
/3nc-o-c
"
ftac-i'Cit).
wXirrOoy from Homer
(Y 470) onwards, oXiadayu) from
Sophocles
onwards, perhaps
from
a stem
y\tr (yXirr-xpa-c) :
Prhic. i.458.
epixOwy e 83, epexOoi-ieyTjy
""
317, Hymn. Apoll. Pyth.
180 is
probablyrightlygrouped by Spitzner(Exc.
34 ad
Iliadem)
and others
with the almost
equivalentkpt'iKw,
to which it is related
on
the
ground
of its second
"
much
as
kpripicuT
to
tpdch)(above
p.
418). Cp. 'EpEx^evQ
and
'EpixOovioe.
B)
Formations
further derived.
Besides 6 we
find other
expanding
elements in the
following
forms
:
yrjdew
beside
yr}86i.ieyoc
mentioned above
p.
501,
is not uncommon in
poets
from Homer
(S 140, ey)]dee
II
127) onwards, as
well
as yridijffu),
yiidT](7e.yrjOew
is
quiteparallel
to
gaudeo,
and is related to the shorter
formation
as ")9"w
to
o-Z/yw(Lobeck
Rhem. 93
f.).
vTT-EiKadiujy
only
in
Oppian
Halieut.
v. 500.
opixOeoy only
^ 30 woX\o\
fxer
j^oec
apyoi
0/"fx^"0)'
aj-ififficijpu)
:
Spitzner
and others are
certainlyright
in
taking
it in the
sense of
The view of
AYentzel,
that the Homeric forms
ayax^dieiy(e320)
and
ev
o-xf0""""' TTEpiripua
^^ 466 are not aorist infinitives but
present
forms
of the
same
formation
as
the thi-ee
justquoted,is perhaps
correct.
An
t forming
the
present
meets us
in irjOlio
(cp.p.
207).
The
followingagain
are expanded
in
a
different
way
:
344
Kivad-ii^u),
which
occurs only
in
Hesych.,^
while the substantive
Kiyadiafia
thence derived is found in Aesch. Prom. 124.
opodvyuj. opodvye
N
351,
O
595, " 292, opodvyov
$
312, wpodvyero
Aesch. Prom.
200, e'VT.dently belonging
to
Splyu), 6pyvi.it.
^
Of the different
meanings
of this verb iSLaCeiy,anoerja-avpiCeiv Kara fxiKphv
avWiyovra,
tvwi
/xivvpiCeiv
koX Kive^v it is
only
the last which conies into considera- tion
here.
504 THE PASSIVE STEMS. ch. xix.
It is worth while
noticing
how various the stems are from which
these formations are
produced. By
the side of stems little
differing
from
the
root,
such
as
those cited under
1),we
find stems which we are
justi- fied
in
regarding
as
present
stems. This
comes
out most
plainly
in the
case
of
fOirv-Ou)
and
^lyv-Ou),
from which
we can
restore the
present
stems in
-rv (p.
108
fF.).
As
(jiOi-rv-dio
is to
Ti-w-fxai,
so
is
ijiiv-va-do-v
(cp.
Fritzsche Stud. vii.
386)
to a hypothetical*a^v-ra-/ia",
and i-id-u-do-v
to the l-Ki-a-ro' kKLi'tiro
(cp.p.
120) actuallypreserved
in
Hesychius,
KaTEKtiaBt to the Kui-aOat
'
Keladai also
qviotedby
him. Hence
we shall
be inclined to
compare
also the
a
of
neXa-deiy,
a\Ka-deii' with that in
ciya-fxai,
epa-fxai
(p.
118
fi".).
C)
Meaning.
This is to be discussed in two dii-ections. In the
one case
it is
a
question
of the
interchange
between active or transitive and
passive
or
intransitive
usage,
" relations which have to be taken into considera- tion
especially
for the
understanding
and the correct
analysis
of the
kindred
passiveaorists, " and in the other of the
dispute,
wliich has been
carried on with
more
zeal than
insight,
whether the
past
tenses
belong- ing
here ai'e
past imperfects
or aorists.
With
regard
to the first
point,
we meet with an
extraordinaryvariety.
We
can distinguish
thi-ee cases :
1) Decidedly
transitive forms.
To these
belong
utadMr
(dvjuo)), aXijOeiy grind,
etrdu) and
ladio),
epidu)[v^e'iai fieXecibreg oCvpofxu'ijt'
epiBovaivr 517),ci wkciOei v (^lurr^povq
epwrag crjfiorwv
^Mmdeir Eur. fr.
364, 25,
Kcntpov
klMKudiQ ttot Aristoph.
Vesp. 1203),ere-rrpTjOo
I'
fiiya
cioTV
1589, m'jBeii' spin,a^jdiiv sift,
tcTTTtpiOot'TO
'
'(.(TTTEipov, UijXeiwia" c'nroepyade
Xauv "I"
599, i/XEBeiu
^f^elt'j
^ApyeiovQce
IJoaeicuMi'
upuOvps
N 351.
2) Decidedly
intransitive.
345
el
pad o
I',
EKiadoy, eltcadeir,ir eXddeu',
fxaKpa
/3i/3tto-0a) r
N
809,
fSplOeir,i)epiOovTai, i)yepeOovro, ve^iidovTo (theywere feeding
"
pascebantur), ftupvBei
ci
/.wi wj.ioq
vtt'
avrov
11
519,
Hes.
Ojip.215,
KaraKeind e I'
'
KaTEKOi^iiihi,r]'iBfoi
daXidtn'reQ (^Q2",ijiXiog(paihuj'A
735, t'v^
c'
ijc^r]
reXeOei H
293, xpef^iiBtir,irvdeffdai, cixBeadai,
opi'^deov.
3) Fluctuating
instances in Homer.
loiKWQ
E
87, TrX}iOini(T)]":
ayopur (Attic),
but in later
poets
TrXiiiiew
is ti'f
Sltive also : TrAj'yOti
c'
avre
KurreXXa
jjowr yXnyog i)ce Kni otwv Qui
i-an-
"
, , ""/-^ .,~~
~-
Quint.
Sm}Tn. vi. 345.
-CH. XIX. FORCE OF ANALOGOUS FORMATIONS. 505
From these
groupings
it becomes
plain
that
we cannot talk of
any-
definite
meaning
for this class of verbs. Still the intransitive force is
the
prevalent
one.
The other
question,
whether the forms in
-Ou)',-6onr]v
are
of
an
aoristic
or a
present kind, has, as we saw,
raised much dust. After all
that has been said in this book as to the nature of the
aoiist,
it
hardly
needs
any
further
explanation
that here
as everywhere
the aoristic force
does not inhere
originally
in
any
one form,
but
only gets
attached to it
by
the isolation from
an
indicative
present.
The fact that there
are
numerous presents
in -Ow should of itself be
enough
to warn us against
the mistake of
looking
for
anything particularly
aoristic in the d. As
we saw on
p.
275 that the
question
whether
erpairoy
is aorist or imper- fect
can only
be decided
upon
the basis of
another,
whether at the
same
time and in the
same dialect
Tpu-rrio
occurs as an
indie,
pres.,
so
here too.
But this criterion is in the
present
" instance
an extremely
unsafe one
for
us,
for the lack of
a
recorded
present
form
may very
easily
be tbe result
of
pure
accident.
Wentzel, though
he deserves the credit of
i-efuting
erroneous
views with
regard
to the aoristic
foi'ce,yet
himself starts
from false
assumptions.
He
says
on
p.
19 on
eaxtdov : Ego statuo, priore
346
parte hujus verbi,quia
est aoristus,
initium
actionis,
et altera
parte,quae
est facta termmatione f0w continuationem actionis
inceptae
vel statum
indicaii,
qui
est
effectus
actionis inchoatae. How
ai-e we to
suppose
that the
syllable
aj^f,
the
same as
that which underlies the nominal
forms
cF'x^E-ai-c,rjy^e-doi', itxoX"/, a^^rjua,
or even
the
phonetic
group cr^,
as
Wentzel
assumes,
had from the first an indwelling
aoristic force 1 The
only
unportant support
for the aoristic force of the form is the infinitive
GXiBiiw,
but Wentzel
justly
remarks that this
might come
under the
analogy
of
6peyQiu)\
The accentuation of the
pai'ticiple ayi^^ovas an
oxytone
in defiance of all
authoritywas regarded by
Buttmann
(ii.^ 63)
as over-bold.
(rxtOwr
has maintained its
groimd
in the recent editions
of Pindar
Pyth,
vi.
19,
and
no trace of aorLstic force can be detected
there. In the texts of the
tragedians (tx^Ocji'
is
now
adopted
for the
most
part
after
Elmsley [cp.
Jebb
on Soph.
El.
350]:
thus
Soph.
El.
754
KuTcicrxeOoi'Tet;. Similarly
in the
case
of other
forms,
e.g.
e'lKaOeiv
which in El. 1014 has
certainlynothing
aoristic about
it,
but is
yet
generally
accentuated ekudtli'. It is
only Bergk
who
preserves
the
traditional accent. The zeal of
Elmsley
and his followei-s
against
the
accentuation of such words
as
pi-esents
is doubtless to be
explained
from
the
endeavour,
laudable in
itself,
to
desti-oy
root and branch the not
duly supported
presents,
which often used to
pass
current,
while forms
baptized
with the
name
of aorists were
held to be admissible in vai'ied
multiplicity.
It is further certain that
a decidedly
aoristic force
never
established itself. Hence I conclude
that, as
Buttmann has
already
decided,we
have
no
light
to alter the
accentuation,
and that
we
have to
keep
ourselves fi'ce from subtle
splitting
of hairs with
regard
to
present
or aorist force in these cases. " How little the
appended
0
lielongsex- clusively
to
any
one tense-stem comes out
clearly
from our whole state- ment
of the
case,
and
especially
from its
sporadic occurrence
in the
perfect,
e.g. yeyijOa, neTTovda, eXyXvOa, as
well
as
from the extension of
the sound
over
diflerent
tense-stems,
discussed in Princ. i. 81 f.
506
THE PASSIVE STEMS. ch. xix.
Similar Formations
in other Languages.
Bopp Vergl.
Gr.
"
630 ff.
placed
the d of the various Greek verbal
forms side
by
side with a series of
phenomena
in the
cognate languages;.
347
and
others,especially Schleicher,
have made considerable additions to hia
list. As the material is nowhere
completely
collected
so as to admit of
a ready
survey,
the most
important
facts
may
be
briefly
adduced here.
1)
In Sanskrit
we
find the
compound
verbal stem
";rad-dhdtrust,
believe,
from
which, as earlyas
the
Yedas, came forms like
theimrticiple
pxtd-dddhdna-s
and
pmd-dhita-s,
and
subsequently
the
present "^rad-
dctdhdmi,
unmistakeably
a
compound
from the neuter substantive
p'at
or
r^rath trust,
and
da-dhd-mi^Ti-dr)-iJ.i ;
a
view which is confirmed
by
the f\xctthat this
primitivenoun
is also
separated
from its
verb,
and
compounded
in the
place
of dka with the
equivalent
ka7' make. The
identity
of this
^rad-da-dhd-mi
with the
completely equivalent
Lat.
cre-do
(forcred-do)
is
one
of the earliest discovered and at the
same
time
most
noteworthy
facts in
comparativephilology.
" This
same -dha
occurs
also in Skt.
sva-dhd,properly
'
own doing,'
then
custom,
use,
habit,
from
which
comes
the Greek stem
J-eBo,preserved
in the Aeol. e-vedw-i^a
{for
k-orfedw-Ka),
shorter /cQ
{fedoQ,e'iwOu),
Princ. i. 311.
2)
In the Zend the
coiresponding
da is in far
more extensive
use.
Bopp quotes yaoz-da puinfy
beside the adverb
yoz purely.
Hiibschmann
Zur Casuslehre
p.
309 note
givesa
full dozen of such
formations,
e.g.
qab-da
fall
asleep,
beside
qa2i
(
= Skt.
svaj),
Gr.
vir,
Lat.
so})) sleep.
This
d is not
uncommon
in nominal formations also.
3)
From
Latin,
besides credere
already mentioned, we
may
with
certainty place
here the
prepositionalcompounds con-de-re,ab-de-re,
sub-de-re,per-de-re.Only
in the case
of
a few,as the two Indo-Germanic-
root da
give
and dha
place
have
come to
coincide,
it is not
possible
to
decide whether the
one or
the other root is
present.
Whether the
d,
which ten-do has added to the rt. tan
(teneo,
Gr.
reii'io,
Skt.
tan)
arises
from the
same
source, may
be left undetermined.
The i-oot dha would have
undergone
in this
language an application
still
moi-e closelycorresponding
to Gi'eek formations in
6,
if we ventured
to
agree
with
Scherer,
who in his Gesch. der deutschen
Sprache
p.
202
348
explains
the
imperfects
in -hd-m to be from this root. The
objections
brought against
this view
by
Corssen seem to me to have been answered
by
Pauli Ztschr.
xx.
p.
325 f. It is
certainlysui'prising
that the root
dha in
essentially
the
same application
in the same
language
within
a
word should
appear
at
one time with the
dental,
at another with the
labial medial. In
any
case
the b of ba-m cannot be
sepai'ated
from the
h of the future in -bo and of the
participle
in
-huoidus,
and
as
this sound
might
have arisen
just
as
well from the rt. bliu
as
from the root
dha,
I
do
not find
any absolutely
decisive criterion within the Italian
languages
for the
one or the other view. We
might
adduce in
support
of the
derivation from the rt. dha the wider extension of the rt. dha as an
appended auxiliary.
If Scherer
were right,we might compare
i-ftov\{]-
Or}-i'
and
vole-ba-m,
both with an
expanding e,
icu-Bi]
and
dd-ba-t,
both
Avithout
it,lffTd-Ot]-i' and std-ba-m in
spite
of
a slight
difference of forma- tion.
As for tlie retenticni of the
a,
in
Latin, we might
find
a parallel
to this in the Eleau forms like coOCi
quoted
above
p.
491. I know of
CH. XIX.
SIMILAE FOEMATIONS IN OTHER LANGUAGES. 507
only
one argument
wliich is
against
such
a connexion.
To the Latin
future in -ho
answers an Old Irish future in
h,
which alternates with
f
(Schleicher
Comp.^ 824).
But in the Keltic
languages,
as Dr. Osthoff
reminds
me,
neither h
nor _/'can
represent
an original
dh. Hence we
must either
separate
the Lat. care-bo from the O. Erse caru-h
(amabo),
or
careho from
careham,
and both of these courses are
alike
dangerous,
or we must return at last to the old
explanation
of b from bh,
and that
will be best.^
4)
The Teutonic
languagespresent us
with the
compound past tense,
Goth,
nasi-da, plur. nasi-dedum, an explanation,
which in
spite
of
some
difficulties has maintained its
ground victoriously against
recent
attacks.
5)
In the Letto- Slavonic
languages
a series of
comparablephenomena
have been
pointedout, especially
a)
A
present-forming
dha
(cp.-rrXijdw)
in the Lith. ver-dti 1 cook
(cp,
349
Schleicher
Comp.^ 782)
and in the Church-Slavonic
i-dq,
I
go,
ja-da
I
travel,
ride
(vt.ja-=tE). Cp. Jagic
Das Leben der Wurzel de in den
Slavischen
Sprachen.
b)
Lithuanian
present
active
participles
in
-da-ma-s,
e.g. j6-da-ma-s
from
j6-ti
lide.
c)
Lithuanian causatives \i\
dyti
e.g. hai-dyti
scare by
the side of
hijotifear,
and -dinti
e.g.
ly-din-ti
to make to
rain,ves-din-ti, cause to
lead,
beside vesti lead. This union of the
exi^ansionby
means
of the rt.
d/m with a
nasal
syllable
reminds us
of
lua-d-avo-fiai, htp-O-diw
(p.182).
To enter
upon
the traces of dha in the formation of
nouns
would lead
us too far here. But it is
extremelyproljable
that the 6 in words like
TrXfj-d-oc, 7rXr]-6-v-c, arij-O-o^,ev-ffra-d-ijc, (ip-i-d-fx6c, pv-d-jjio-c, fxia-O-u-Q,
jxiyt-d-oc
is not at all different from that here under discussion. It
can
hardly
be doubted that the rt. dha do is at the bottom of this wide- spread
element.
Origin of the
Syllable
Bi) (Be)in the Passive Aokist and its
RELATION TO
Oo
(Oe).
Bopp "Vergl.
Gr. ii.^
"
630 found no
difficulty
in
setting
down the
syllabledrj
in the
passive
aorist as
quite
identical with the dha of the
active Sanskrit aorist
a-dhd-m, a-dhd-s,
a-dhd-t.
'
i-rv"p-dr]-i'
is distin- guished,'
he
says,
'from
ed}]i'only
in this
respect
" and that is
an
advantage
" that it allows to the more
weighty personalendings
of the
dual and
plural
no shortening
influence
on
the
root-vowel, as the
Sanskiit
a-dhd-m=e-0)]-t'
also refuses to do in its
simplecondition,
e.g.
setting
d-dhd-ma
over against
the Gr,
i-de-jXEv
for
e-Oij-fxer.'
He
goes
on
to
say
'
After the
syllableOijwas no longer recognized
as an auxiliary
verl),
the force of
a
passive
character attached itself to
it,just as our
instinct of
language
fails to
recognize
an auxiliary
in the -te of
such-te,or
justas in another
te,
that of heu-te we no
longer
feel the
presence
of
Tag
'
A
new adherent of Scherer's view has
recently appeared
in the
person
of
F. G. Fumi in his
essay
entitled
'
Sulla formazione latina del
i^reteritoe futuro
impeifetti
'
(Milano 1876).
This
study
written with delicate judgment,
and the
most
complete knowledge
of the
facts,
contains
many
excellent remarks, and,
many suggestive points
of view.
508 THE PASSIVE STEMS.
ch. xix.
and in heu
(0.
H. G.
hiu)
we no longerrecognizea demonstrative.' This
explanation
I
disputed
in
my
Tempora u.
Modi
p.
325, mainly on the
ground
of the
meaning,
and
proposed an
alternative
one,
in which I
350
started for
-?;-"'
and
-drj-i'
from
a common primitive
form
J/j-r,
e.g.
for
t-^iyi)-)'
and
e-nixBr]-v
from
i-fiiy-jri-r,
and identified this
syllablejr]
Avith the Skt. rt.
jd
go.
This
explanation
broke down
upon
the
impos- sibility
of
tracing
back the 0 after other stem-consonants than
explosives
to
j
;
and besides the forms in
-do-r,
-0(o etc. so
remained
quite
out of con- nexion
with those in
-Or]-}'.
For these
reasons
I
proposed
another
explanation
in Ztschr. i. 25 ff. The
strange phenomenon presentedby
the
passive
force of
an
active form of
a
verb of
doing
I tried to
get
rid
of
by referring
the
syllable-Oij
to the rt. dha,
but at the
same
time
explaining
the
length
of this
syllableby
means
of
a
union of the I't.d/ia
"wlthja,
thus
explaining-6)]-i'
ivom.
-dt-rj-v,
i.e.the formative
syllable
of
this
passive
aorist
as a
passive
aorist from tlie rt. Qe. The
meaning
did
indeed
get
its due
thus,
but it was a
bold
assumption
that this
-07/
contained
implicitly
a
second
stem,
which had been annihilated without
leavinga trace. And there
was no example
whatever of
a passive
aorist
after the fashion of the
presupposedi-6e-jr]-v.
With the
exception
of a
few
passive
formations from stems in
v,
roots
ending
in a
vowel
always
reject
the addition of the termination
-i]
to form the
passive
stem.
Further,
the
appeal
to the verb
Jio,probablycoming
from
dha-jd-mi
is
all the less
satisfactory
that
Hesychius quotes
a partiallycompai-able
Ohj/j-i
in the active
meaning
of
ttoiw.
Still
my theory
met with the
approval
of Schleicher
Comp.^
812
f.,
while other scholai's like Scherer
Gesch. der deutschen
Sprache
p.
202 and Tick Ztschr.
xx. 359 returned
to
Bopp's
view. The notion of
Bopp
that the
lighterpassive
stem
e.g.
tfxiyijr
is
a mere
'mutilation' of the heavier
e.g.
k^iydr)v
is the
only part
of his
theory
which we
may
regai'das definitely antiquated.
The
phonetic
difference between the terminations
-dij-j-ifr, -Bt]-re
etc.
and the
simple a
Bt-jxti',
i-Hi-re, on
which I
formerly
laid some stress,
after the conclusions to which
we came
above
p.
135 as to the vocalism
of the
pi'imitiveaorists,
has
no significance
for the
present question.
Hence if there was
once,
as
I consider
certain,an
old
primitive
*"-6)rj-/:/Er,
*t-"r]-Te,
it becomes still more impi'obable,
that
by
the side of this there
was a second
*(h/-/.t")', *0i/--", as I
formerlyassumed,
contracted from
*Be-j}]-f(ei', *de-jn-Tt,
which
was preserved
in the terminations c^ the
351
passive
aorist. There remains of course
the
difficulty
of the
meaning.
A verb of
doing,
which in
cognate languages
is used to form
causatives,
is
applied
in Greek to denote
suffering.
Scholars have
attempted
to
make this difterence of
meaning intelligible
from dilierent sides
by
means
of the
usage
of the
primitive
aorists. Pott
even
in the first edition of
his
Etym.
Forsch. i. 187
compared
the intransitive
-dfi-vai
with the
intransitive
a-jj-rcu,
both
as opposed
to
r/0"//"
and
'Irrri^ni.
The same
notion has
lately
been worked out
by
Fick Ztschr.
xx.
359 and
1)y
Inama in his well- written article
'
degli
Aoristi
greci
'
Rivista di Filo-
logia
1873
p.
279. Both scholars
lay
stress on
the reflexive meaning
as an intermediate between the active and the
passive.
It cannot
indeed be denied that the intransitive
meaning
attaches to several
primitive
aorists as distinguished
from other fonns from the same
root.
Of 26 such formations with
an
active termination this is the
case
with
/
,
viz. in
fit'iiai, aTijmt, uTrotTKXrjiut, ^v^pXriTip.,
(rjiiirai, Iviai,
(pvyai^
CH. XIX,
ORIGIN OF THE SYLLABLE -Oi].
509
while
e.g.
in
yrwroi,
ivldi, kXvBi,
axic,
rXfiraiwe cannot detect tlie
slightest
trace of
an intransitive
application.
Hence we
cannot
speak
of
any-
extensive
analogy
of
meaning.
Under
any
circumstances it would still
be
hardlyintelligible why,
if the
syllable 6i]
in earlier times
really
had
a
reflexive or intransitive
force,
this should have survived
only
in com- position,
and not where it
was used
independently.
Hence I hold the
conjecture
that this
was always
the
case
to be
completely
untenable. In
the
sharpest
contrast with the roots
/3rt,
nra, cv, fu,
which
occur as
intransitive in the most different verbal and nominal
forms,
it would be
hard to establish this
clearly
for
any
form whatever
belonging
to the
rt. de.
_
Hence I hold it to be idle to ascribe to the
syllableOr]
itself the
intransitive force which
comes
out so clearly
in the
passive
aorists.
Besides,
this would create a
separation
between the forms in
dr]-ron
the one side and those in
-tio-r,
-6w on
the other
along
with the weak
past
tense in the Teutonic
languages,
which
we ai'C
hardly
entitled to
assume.
The correct vievv^
seems rather to be the
following.
We must
give
up treating
the
appended syllable
as
the immediate
sign
of the force
which
appears
in the
usage
of these forms. Scholars were not
previously
352
sufliciently
aware of the interval which exists between the time at which
a
category
of forms
originated,
and the
time,
often
long subsequent,
at
which their
employment
became fixed. The
agreement
of so
many
languages
proves
that even
before their
separation
the
composition
of
more
significant
roots with the root dha
'
do
'
was
carried out
tolerably
extensively.
We cannot talk of
a special
force for formations of such a
kiiid,
for
every
verb in itself denotes
an activity,
and it is
tolerably
unimportant
whether the
exponent
of the
conception
of
activity
is
expressed or omitted. The
periphrastic
use
of the verb
'
do
'
in German
dialects,
e.g.
'er that kommen' and in
English
e.g.
'did
you
come?'
'
he did not
come,'presents us
with a
parallel
from a
later
period
of
language
to what
we assert for the earlier
period.
Such
compositions
with d/ia
were
then,
I
believe,
used at a much later
period,during
which
men were no
longer
conscious of their
origin,
in order to
complete
in
various
ways
the
system
of verbal forms which was graduallybecoming
more
widelyramified,
and to fill
up
deficiencies,
which had
originated
owing
to
phonetic
losses. In this
way
the Teutonic weak verbs
got
their
past tense, though
in the rt.
do,
wliich in the French actitel
expresses
rather the
present
time, certainlynotliing
is contained which
coidd
point
to the
past.
Thus the aorist stems in "-?? and
-dr],
which in
their form
were active,came
to be used
as
intransitive and
passive.
The
former formation has been
thoroughly
discussed above. We
wei-e
able
in that
case to discover
many
intermediate links and
stages
for the
developement
of
meaning.
A similar service is done for us
here
by
the
forms in which 0 is connected with the
ordinary
thematic vowels.
As to the
phonetic
relation between .these forms in -dco and -Bo-r and
those in
-dtj-y, we can
hardly
feel
any
doubt. In
discussing
the verbs
"which follow the older method of inflexion we
have seen repeatedly
that
all the
so-called verbs in
-fii
have
a
tendency
to follow the stream of the
verbs in
-ew,
which
m time
overspreadeverything,
and that in two
ways,
tlie thematic vowel on the one
hand
being
added to the final letter
of the
primitive
stem,
or
the final
primitive
vowel on
the other
changing
into the thematic vowel. In the first
way
from
-i"ni (r?;-//^)
came
353
510 THE PASSIVE STEMS. ch. xix.
-ra-b),
from
I'v-^i -i'u-u},
ft'Om
*/3a-/xi */3a-a;,
from
*rTra-ni
trraio
(Lat.sto),
from
*dr]-fiL
the *di(o
occurring
in the Homeric
izpo-Qiovai,
in the other
from
-ra-fiey vo-fiev,
from i-de-v-ro
l-do-vro,
from
le-ir)-v lo-irj-y.
In the
same
way
we have in the case
of the formations in 6 three
stages:
1)
those with the final letter of the root retained
-dT]-y, -drj-^ev, e.g.
t(T)(idr]v
:
2)
those with an added thematic vowel :
opixO^or, yr\BiM;
3)
those with a thematic vowel
taking
the
place
of the finalvowel of
the root :
ttXyj-Bw, e-(T)(^E-do-v.
The second class of forms is
quite
small in number
;
the third
was
limited to some tentative forms of the earlier
time,
which were after- wards
almost
entirely
lost. There
was no definite force
attached,as we
saw
above,
but the intransitive
usage
was
prevalent.
It was
only
the
firstclass with its archaic
inflexion,
which became an
importantpai"t
of
the verbal
system,
and wliich
adoptedthroughout
the intransitive and
passive
force. I do not consider it
impossible
that aoristsof the
lighter
formation hke
ix^aprjv, kfiiyiiv, klar^v,
eTpanrjp preceded
them in this
course,
and that the
completely
similar terminations of the two
groups
of forms contributed to
bring
them
near to each other in
meaningalso,
or,
to
put
it more
exactly,
that the forms with
-dri,originally
less
differentiated, by degrees
under tliisinfluence
practically dropped
alto- gether
the active
force,
and established themselves for the most
partonly
in an intransitive or
passive
sense. As
eveiy
one knows,
there was no
period
of the Greek
language
which was entirely
without
passive
aorists
in B which were used in connexion with a
middle
presentquite
as
active,
and in fact sometimes as
transitive, as in Homer
uXi'jBrjt- ^ 120,alMffBrjTE
ft65,
reiJ.e(T(n'iOrjT"
H
54:4:, Tretpj/QjJi/ai
E
220,
later
iftov\i]Br)v, wjBrjv,
lcvvi]Br]v,
ZiakexBrivai, TropEvBfjyai.
We
may recognize
in these ti'aces of
an indefiniteness
originally
much
more extensive.
511
CHAPTER XX.
354
THE VERBAL ADJECTIVES.
All
participles may
properly
be called verbal
adjectives
in the \vider
sense,
as we saw on
p.
2,
inasmuch
as
their nature is
essentially
that of
adjectives,
while
they
share the various characteristics of the verb.
But the name is restricted in
practice
to two Greek formations which
are distinguished
from
participles by
the fact that
they
share to a much
less
degree
than these do the
specifically
vei'bal varieties of
meaning.
The
participles,
in
spite
of their
adjectivalcharacter,are
capable
of
denoting
the
'
kind of
time,'
and in
part
also
(partic. fiituri)
the
'
grade
of time
'
;
and are distinguished
from each other
by
a definitely regulated
diHsion into
active,
middle and
passive. Hence,
in
respect
of their
form,
the difierence between the
imsti'engthened
verbal stem and the
expanded present stems,
and the whole
multiplicity
of the tense-forma- tion
are expressed
in the
participles.
In
consequence
of this
every
participle belongs
to some one definite tense-stem. On the other hand
from each verb there is
only
one
paii'
of verbal
adjectives,
which for this
very
reason are
derived from the verbal
stem,
and
only
here and there
adapt
themselves
exceptionally
in
particular
cases to the
present
stem.
The
only
power
shared
by
the verbal
adjective
with the verb is that
of
serving
for
predication
in
a
higherdegi'ee
than
any ordinaryadjective,
and of
being capable
of the distinction between active and
passive,
though
with
a
decided
preference
for the latter.
Considei-ing
the close
affinity
of
meaning
between the most usual verbal
adjective
and the
participle,
we can
easily
understand how in those
languages
in which the
variety
of the tense-stems falls
quite
into the
backgi'ound,
e.g.
in
Latin,
the verbal
adjective
is reckoned
among
the
j^articiples.
Of the two verbal
adjectives,
which
were at the command of the
Attic
language
in the case of
every
verbal
stem, one,
that in
-to,
which 355
is most
extensively
in
use
from Homer
onwards,
finds
a
^^arallel
in all
the other Indo-Germanic
languages.
We
can
hardly
doubt that
an
adjective
with the suffix
-ta,
used
essentially
with
a
passive force,
belonged
to the stock of nominal forms
closely
connected with the
verb,
Avhich
we
may
assume as
existing
at the time
preceding
the
separation
of the
languages. Referring
for details to
Bopp Vergl.
Gr. ii.
" 818,
and
Schleicher
Comp.^
p.
421
flf.,
I content
myself
here with
setting
forth
the entire
agreement
of the Greek formation with that of the
cognate
languages
in the case
of
a
number of
simple
and
evidently
very
ancient
forms.
/3a-7-o-c=Skt. ga-td-s
yrri-To-Q (cp.lio-yvqTo-o),
Lat.
gnd-tu-s
Goth, airtha-kun-th-s 'earth-
born.'
y)w-rd-e=Skt. (^iid-td-s
Lat.
gnd-tu-s
512 THE VERBAL ADJECTIVES.
ch. xx.
lo-Tu-i=Zd. (Idfv Lat. (ld-tu-9
^fi'/v:-ro-c==Skt.
juk-td-s
Ijiit.
jimc-tus
KXj;-7-o-t, =
Skt.
gru-td-s
Zd.
gru-to
Lat.
(in)-clu-tu-s
TTETr-To-Q
cp.
Skt.
/)"^'-a-"a-m (cooked)
Lat.
coc-Ht-s Lith.
Icep-ta-s
ra-ro-c=Skt. ta-td-s
^6p-7-o-c=Skt.
hhr-td-s.
The verbal
adjective
in
-tIo-q
is
quite
unknown to the
language
of
Homer as denotingnecessity,
" the force which it afterwards
usually
has
" as
has been noticed
by
Kiihner Ausf Gr. i. 716 and Leo
Meyer
Yergl.
Gr. ii. 383. But
we
may
find
a
precursor
of this formation in
the Homeric
ri]-yaTfn-r,
used indeed
only
of articles of
clothing(B 43,
3
185),
but still doubtless
rightly
referred to
*vei]-ya-To-Q as
the verbal
adjective
from the rt.
yet'
(cp.yi-ya-fitv).
But
*ya-r"o-c
is to the
pre- sumable
*yo-ro-c(cp.Ti]\v-y"Tn-c)
as ^o-TEO-gis to So-t6-c. In Hesiod
we
find the form
(parewc, only
in the thrice
i^ecurring
formula
ovn
(j)aTei6Q-=in/andus,
and in
usage
not
differing
much from the Homeric
tiflfcr^aroc.
The
passages
are
Theog. 310,
Scut.
144,
161. It is
only
in
Herodotus and onwards
(^twKTtoc, co-ioc)
that we find the forms in
-rio-c
with their well-known force
firmly
established. From
Aeschylus
I have
one
solitary
instance in
my
collections
;
Choeph.
298
Ipyaariov:
there
356 are far
more
in
Sophocles
and
Euripides.
But
Plato,Xenophon,
and
Aristophanes
are the earliest writers who
supply
them in
great
abun- dance.'
Evidently
this second verbal
adjective,as Kiihner i. 716
remarks, belongsquite especially
to the
colloquial
Attic. These facts
are
of
some importance
in the
enquiry
into the
origin
of the sufiix -rio-.
This is
commonly compai-ed
with the
equivalent
Skt.
-tavja.
"So
Bopp
Vergl.
Gr. iii.
" 902,
Schleicher
Comp.^
p.
382. The
phoneticpossibi- lity
of the
agreement
of
a
ddiavja-s
with the Gk. IotIo-q cannot be
denied. The sufiix
-tavjamight
in Greek become first
-rffjn,
then
-rfto,
and
finally
-rio. The second
stage,
to which
(parew-c quoted
above bears
witness,
would be
a
parallel
to
cW-fTo-c,
which has
certainlycome
from
aartf-io-c,though
it does not
undergo a
ftirther reduction from
ei
to
e.
An
analogy
for the latter
might perhaps
be
sought
in the Homeric
ftaderj^ftaOe'ia
for
[jadef-ia,
u)Kin=u)i;ela for wKef-ia. The
only question
is whether the
comparison
of the two sufiixes has
on
other
grounds so
much in its
favoiu",
that
we are
compelled by overpowei-ingreasons
of
probability
to
assume such
a
considerable mutilation. Now these
can
scarcely
be said to exist. As we have
seen, --to-t
in its
ordinary
force
is unknown to the Homeric
poems
: -tavja-saccording
to Delbriick
Altind. Verb.
p.
238 is unknown to the
Rigveda.
This fact of itself is
of some
weight
as
against
the identification. In the
cognate languages
no trace of this sufiix has been
anywhere pointed
out. For
though
some
scholars
were
formerly
inclined with
Bopp
u. s. to refer the Latin
suffix
-tlvo,
e.g.
datlvn-s,
caplivti-s,
to the same
source,
this
view,
attacked
alreadyby
Schleicher
Comp.^ 382,
must be
unconditionally
sur- rendered.
From
-tavja-s
we could at most
get
to
-tiviu-s, never to tvvu-s.
'
The industrious
'Quaestiones de
adjectivisgraecis
quae
verbalia dicuntur
'
by Moiszisstzig,
whicli
are
buried in
a
series of
programmes
of the
gymnasium
at
Konitz,
I have
only
been able to hunt
up
in
part. According
to the 'Particula'
whicli
appeared
in 1868 of verbals in -ts'osthere
are
'
non
ita multa
apud lyricos
vates et
Aeschylum,
perpauca
apud Herodotum, nee plura apud Thucydidem,
apud posteriores
innumerabilia fere.'
CH. XX. OEIGIN OF THE SUFFIX -tso-. 513
Besides,
the Skt. sivfRx
-tav-ja
has
evidently
arisen out of the snffix -tu-
by adjectival expansion.
Hence
-tav-ja
attaches itself to the infinitives 357
in -tave
(e.g. (jdtave,ddtave)
and -tavdi
(e.g. ddtavdi),
so common
in the
Veda,
and to the later accusatival infinitives in -tit-m. Now the sitfiix
-tu in the form of
-tv
is
by
no means unknown to Greek
(e.g.Irv-c,
tcrj-Tv-i)
but it is not used with
an
infinitive
force,nor does it
anywhere
show
a trace of the
by-form -tav, produced by intensification,
which must
be
presupposed
for the further formation
-tav-ja.
Again
the
support,
which
some
have
thought they
could find in the
similarity
of
meaning,
is not
so
strong
as
it
seems
to be. For modal
applications
of
adjectives
of this kind
are
demonstrably
not
very
ancient,
as we can see
by comparing
the Latin datu-s with the Greek
Ioto-q.
If
there had been
a
verbal
adjectiveprovided
with the definite function of
the
participium
necessitatis in the time before the
separation
of lan- guages,
we
may
be
sure
that this would not have been
lacking
in the
Rigveda. Besides,
this formation
was at no
time the
only
one
in
use
for such
a
purpose
in Sanskrit.
Taking
all
together,
I believe that the
con-espondence
of
-tavja-s
and
-rio-q
is
merely apparent,
and that we
must rather
regard
both formations as
products
of the
separate
life of
the two
languages.
The sufiix
-Tto
I
regardas an expansion
of
-to. co-rio-c
is related
then to
co-ro-Q as ^yadeo-c
to
ayado-c,
cciilciXeo-g to
caica\o-c,
Cafou'eo-g
(S 538)
to
cacpoii'o-g
(B 308),Kvai'eu-g (A 39)
to
Kvaro-c,
which
we
may
infer from
Kvavo-wpoypo-c, icvuvo-yjcuTr\-c,
though
it
occxu'S uncompounded
only
in late
poets,
Xati'to-c
(X 154)
to \uivo-Q (F 57)
and miich
as
the
Hesiodic
\oyjiu-c(Theog.178)
to the
equivalentAoxo-c.
Tlie sufiix
-to,
used to form
adjectives
from
adjectives
with little or sometimes abso- lutely
no
change
of
meaning,
can
hardly
be
veiy
difierent from the
sufiix
-w,
by
the addition of which
cnra-t'iXin-e (t,288)
difiers from
aTraT7]\6-"(A 526),sXevOfpto-g
from
eXevdipo-e,
and
by
which
cuiKiXw-g
is fuller than
eiKeXo-g.
The close connexion between
-so
and
-to
is
made
plainby pairs
Kke
yijpaXio-g(He.sych.)
and
yijpaXioc,vrjcpaXio-g
(Aesch.)
and the later
i'r](paXeo-c.
That
-eo
in the
cases
quoted comes
from
-eio
is made
pi'obableby flpo-eo-g (r545)
beside
iSporeio-g (Aesch.)
fSoEo-g(P 492)
beside
ftoeio-g (P 389),
-xpyrreo-g
beside
^pvatLo-g,
both
Homeric,
and other instances of the kind. Various useful collections to 358
the
same
eflect are contained in the doctoral chssertation of
Aly
'
de
nominibus
lo
sufiixi
ope
formatis'
(Leipzig1873).
I believe
we
may
form
a conception
of the
course
of
developement
in the
following
way.
From the earlier and shorter verbal
adjectives
in
-to by-forms
in
-rtio
{"paTei6-g)
were
produced
in accordance with numerous
precedents
in the
case
of other
adjectives
:
and this
-reio was
afterwards shortened into
-T"o. Originally
there
was only
an imperceptible
difterence in
meaning
between this sufiix and
-to.
But as
by degrees
a
definite
category
of
meaning arose
for this
formation,
it
became,
firstin
Attic,more and
more
common
and
gradually
a
distinct verbal
adjective
to be
expected
from
every
verbal stem. In a preciselycon'esponding
maimer
from the
shorter sufiix -aXo
(x^^'^'^l-'-'^^^'^'^^
aidaXo-g, o/.(a\o-c)
the much more usual
sirflix
-aXeo,
which
Aly op.
cit.
points
out in about 80
words,
branched
off
by degrees.
It was only during
the
developement
of such
a new
category
of
meaning
that the accent became
fixed,
and that not
only
in
the verbal
adjectives
but also in the
adjectives
in
-aXen,on
the
penulti-
L L
514 THE VERBAL ADJECTIVES.
ch. xx.
mate. How
easilysubsidiary
modal
meanings
find their
way
into the
usage
of
adjectives
may
be sliowia
l)y
the
example
of the
adjectives
in
-1^0 e.g. aywytjuof,
"i)vi,i.fioc, (e359),aXuxriixoc (Aesch.Ag. 10),
fVTrerj/iriyuoc
(fledged,
Ar. A v.
1355),
while the Romans derive from the formations
with I their
adjectives
in
-ili-s, -tili-s,
-hili-swith
cognate meanings.
In their formation the forms in
-to
and
-teo are most
closely
parallel,
and
were evidently
felt
by
the instinct of
language
to be
quite
of the
same
nature. The verbal
adjectives
in
-to
show
even
in Homer the
same charactei'istics, as
compared
with the verbal
stems, as later
on :
ayrjTo-c, yiwro-r, TprjTo-c, rpwTo-Q,
"
epctro-c, KplTo-g,")^vt6-q,
"
vfat'TO-c,
cKTTraaro-g, cnrpriKTo-c, paizTo-Q.
The
quantity
in the vowel-stems and the
accessory
a
will
occupy
us
in the next
chaptei-.
In the
case of
con- sonantal
stems, just
as
in the
perfectmiddle,
there is
a fluctuation
between the short root-vowel and the intensified vowel of the
present
:
on
the
one
hand
tvk-t6-q
{^tvkti]!' p
206, f.vTVKTor
F
336,
cp. -irvKTai),
on
the other hand
veotevktov
O 592
(cp.TErev-x^ciTai), on
the
one
hand
niffTo-c
from Homer onwards
(O 331,
cp. k-KtTni^iJLev),
on the other
xet-
359
aTtov,
from
Sophoclesonwards,
euTretaroe,
the latter foi^ms in
meaning
too
coming
nearer
to the
present stem,
prjKTo-g (Hom.), rrjcro-c (Soph.),
Xtjttto-q(Plato),
ciufxenrror
(Sappho),
tlciKEnrTeov
(Lysias),(pevicro-Q
(Soph.)
beside
uXckttoq (Homer), anvrjTOQ (Homer),
Trva-iov
(Plato).
There is a
very
strange
form
e'lfiapTo-c (Plut.
Alexand.
30),
which
may
serve
to show
us
how
strongly
was
felt the
ainalogy
of the verbal
adjec- tives
to the 3
sing.perf.
mid. On the other hand
aTopvvTta' KciTuaTpb)-
TEct preservedby Hesychius
is due to the intrusion of the
j^resent
stem.
The distinction between the dialectic
/3"\-oc,
also
j^reserved by him,
and
l3Xr)T()g
is
piirelyphonetic.
In Sanskrit and in Latin two
ways
of
attaching
the suffix to the
stem are
in use :
\'iz.either
immediately :
Skt.
juk-ta-s
Lat.
junc-tu-s,
or
by
means
of
an
i: Skt.
kup-i-ta-s,
Lat.
gen-i-tu-s.
In Greek this
two-fold charactei- is known
only
to a
small extent. Sometimes
e acts
as an
apparently
inserted vowel here
;
but
upon
closer consideration
we
can see
that it is
a stem-expansion,
as in
ya/xr-r//(Plato),
evpeto-q
(Xen.),
tvpETEo-Q
(Thuc), a/L/o)(f7-o-c
(Aesch.),
/.ta^^trto-i' (Plato)
beside
fia\r]T6Q{fi119),/.tEi'ETo-g (Thuc),
that is in verbs of the e-class
alone,
which in
yajdiu), EvpEaic, j.Lu\E(TOjiai, fjiEfXErr]Ka
show other traces of
an
appended
e.
There is
an
unique
instance in iXero'-cI 409 formed from
the aoi'ist-stem with the thematic vowel
;
to which
we
may
add
vTVEXdETEov
quotcd
froui Strabo xiii. 622. The
same e
appears
in
some
adjective
and substantive forms, which, though
not felt
any longer
to
be
proper
verbal
adjectives, yet
in their
origincan
hardly
have been
different,
like
api-CEticE-To-c
(Homer),
u-i^iaiiduKE-ra-c (Homer),"tkeXe-t6-c,
TzuyE-To-Q
(B 187),lat^E-To-v,
EpTTE-To-}'.
The masculinc
adjectives
in
-to-q
and the feminine in
-rtj
which have become substantives and denote
actions,
like
tf.iE-To-Q
(cp.V07ni-ftc-s), vKpe-To-c,
ve-t6-c,
KinrE-To-c, apE-Ti),
(cp.api-rTKh)),
yEi'E-T)] (cp.geni-tu-s),
teXe-t!)
and others
serve
to confirm
this view. In such substantives
we
sometimes find in Sanskrit an a
instead of the i,
e.g.
pal;a-td-s
fire
{paK cook),
mara-td-s
death,
which
makes it
very
probable
that there
w^as once an a in this
place,just
as in
the Gk.
ciKufia-To-c,
ti^af.ia-To-Q (cp.domi-fu-s), dafa-ro-c,
and that the
e
as
well as
the Indian and Latin i
are
only phases
of this
d,
in which
360
perhaps
we
ought
to see nothing
but the thematic vowel. As this
CH. XX.
THE MEANING OF THE VERBAL ADJECTIVES. 515
vowel elsewhere characterises the
present
or aorist
stem,
we
may
regard
the stems
appearing
before the suffix -ta to a
certain extent as
present
or
aoiist
themes, a
view which has forced itself
upon
us iri-e-
sistibly already
in the
case of iXderio)'. In the vocalism of the root-
syllable
also
we
found clear traces of the extension of the
present
stem
to this
place.
Finally
we have still to
say
a word as to the
meaning
of these forms.
A
large
number of the forms in
-ro, e.g.
/3/joroc, yrwrdc, dj'rjToc, KsaroQ,
kXvtoq, TTorriToc always
continued to be
piu-elyparticipial ;
and
here,
especially
in the
case
of
compounds,
we
may
notice the freest inter- change
between the more
usual
passive
and the rarer
active force. Thus
avuiadrjTOQ
means insensible,I'nrpaKToc
sometimes
ineffectual,
aviX-n-KyToc
not
merely unexpected,
but also
hopeless,TrcifjipdapTog
all-destructive.
But even
the
simple
fiefXTrrvg
in
Soph.
Trach. 446 means blaming. Cp.
Klihner Ausf. Gr. i.^715. A
glance
at the active
participles
of the
Latin
deponents
like
nactu-s, iisu-s,
locuhi-s,potihc-s
is sufficient to
make this
interchange
much less
surprising
than it
might seem
to be at
first
sight.
Even in the suffix
-reo we find
an iiiterchange
between the
jDersonal passiveapplication, //
ttoXic
wfeXrjria
and the neuter active ti)v
TToXw
wipeXrj-eov.
The modal force of
possibility probably
established
itself
quiteas impei'ceptibly
in the verbal
adjectives
in
-to, e.g.
in
aiaroc,
ciTTvnTOQ,
as
in the Latin
participles invictu-s,
accejJtu-s
and in the
adjec- tives
in
-ij.10-
mentioned above. Still
even
in Homer there are unmistakeable
cases of it
:
e.g.
B 361
ovtoi inrofiXrjTO)' 'iiroQeatjerai otti kev
eittw,
I 526
Z(t)pr]Toi T eTTeXni'To
Trapapprjroi
r'
eireeami',
A 573 ov5' tV
ctrgicra,
I 409
ai'CpijQ
Se
vL'vx''
t''"^"'
eXdifier ovre XtVor/)
ouO'
tXerj],
Z 434 erQu
/uoXtora
a^iftaroq
kari
ttoXiq.
Indeed in the lack of a
verbal
adjective
of
necessity
the Homeric
language
sometimes
applies
the verbal
adjectives
in -to
in
a manner
which
approximates closely
to the later
iisage
of those in
-reo, e.g.
T
260
{
= t 597, \p19) KctKoiXior,ovK
ovofia'JTiji',
d 307
epya
yiXaffTci,
Afterwards the modal
applicationevidentlyconstantly
grew
more
common. But in
time,
in the case of
a
large
number of the nume- 361
rous
adjectivescompounded
with
prepositions,
the delicate distinc- tion
pointed
out
by
Lobeck
Parahpomena
p.
477
sqq.
established
itself,
that the
barytones
e.g.
cioXuroc = soh.dus
were
used
purely partici-
pially,
the
ox}i:ones e.g.'
diaXvT6e=dissohcbilis with
a
modal force.
Evidently
the accent in the
case of the latter raises the
syllable,
on
which it is
placed,
to a more
decided foi"ce
(cp.
Kiihner Ausf. Gr. i.'
415).
L I. 2
5 1 6 IRREGULARITIES OF THE VOWEL
STEMS,
ETC. ch. xxr.
CHAPTER XXI.
IRREGULARITIES OF THE VOWEL STEMS IiY THE FORMATION
OF THE
PERFECTS, FUTURES,
PASSIVE AORISTS AND VERBAL
ADJECTIVES.
Now that we
have discussed all the essential
groups
of the Greek
verbal
system
which can be shown to be in
frequentuse,
we must enter
upon
an irregularity
which extends
tolerablydeep
into the structui-e of
the verb. We have
already repeatedly
touched
upon
the abnormal
phenomena,
which
may
be
detected,
in the case
of vowel
stems,
in the
formation of
tenses, consistingpartly
in the
varying quantity
of the
stem-vowel, partly
in the
apparently very capricioiis
insertion of
a a.
The
sphei-e
over
which this
irregularity extends,
includes the
perfect
stem, especially
the
perfectmiddle,
the future
stem,
the
sigmatic aorist,
the
passive
aorist with 9 and the vei'bal
adjectives.
This
was the
reason why we
reserved this
phenomeuon
for
a general
discussion at the
end; though
this cannot claim to be
exhaustive,
for that would
require
very
extensive material derived from nominal
formation,
which is
foreign
to oin-
present purpose.
My
aim at
present
is
chiefly
to
bring
the
processes
belonging
here into the correct
points
of
view,
of which
some,
I
hope,may
be
clearly
established.
In
sharp
contrast to the stems
ending
in
consonants,
the union of
3(52
which with the
appended tense-formingsyllableshai-dly
ever
shows
any
vaiiation,
the final vowel of
a stem in the
groups
mentioned is
some- times
long,(and
this is the
rule)e.g.
/3"/(tw, ivi^iya, leZaKpvani, Ofjdujdeic,
(ih'jplroc,
sometimes
short,
e.g. yeXacroiiai,
alcinaaQai,
Ksxvrai,
coOfji'ai,
(liOiroc,
and sometimes after
short,
sometimes after
long
vowels in the
perfect
middle,
in the
passiveaorist,
and in the verbal
adjectives
there
appears
what
seems an extremely strange,
and hithei'to
insufficiently ex2"laiued
sigma,
e.g. emvarrrui, tTrpindi], yrworoc.
Nominal formations like
lifj/dct,
opduxTic
beside
corrjc, ^vinc,
(pdiiric
and
(nrrKrf.i6c, Tvpln^a,apaytiocmjc
show the
same
variation in the stem. These different
phenomena are
unmistakeably
connected with each other to a
certain
extent,
but it is
by no
means
possible
to
explain
them
on
any
singleprinciple.
We must for the
jn-esent
be satisfied with
dividing
them into two
groups
clearly
distinct
one from the
other,
and
only touching
each other here and there
:
viz.
L FORMS WITH A SHORT VOWEL WITHOUT "T.
Roots which follow the
primitiveconjugationgenerally
leave theu^
vowel short in tense-formation as
in nominal
formation,
e.g.
celorai,
irilh]
" iiofTtc, fiEryjr,
Of
fin, (Imric.
Here the short vowel is
properly
in no
M-ay surprising.
Fur
why
should not the
root,
which shows itself to
have
a
short vowel also
e.g.
in
eiofiey, ede-e,'t"pa(Tay,
do the
same
in the
CH. XXI. SHORT VOWELS IN THE STEM. 517
cases
mentioned ? If side
by
side with these the
long
vowel
now and then
appears, e.g.
in
cwcru), ea-TTji^a (besideeffraiiiei')
in
cwrop,
Oi'iki], we
may
compai'e
this difference with the
interchange
which exists between
"paf.i(.y
and
0";/.(/, 'i/uer
and
eI/j-l (cp.
p.
96
ff.).
A
very
uncertain vocalism
was to be
seen
also in the
cognate primitive
aorists like
(ji]--t]v
and
Ijq.-ti]i', 'iBej-ur
beside 8kt.
a-dJtd-'ina, as was
pointed
out on
p.
135. The
proper
origin
of this
interchange
of
quantity
has not indeed been discovered
by
any
means as a rule,
but it extends
over a wide circle of similar
forms,
and
may
be
summai-ilyexpressed
in
the statement that in the case of vowel-roots where thei'e was immediate
affixing
the
language
had at its command not
only
the
original
short
vowel, as we take it to
be,
but also the
long one proceeding
from it.
363
Why
indeed in
cwo-w, toTf^o-a,
tdi]K-a,
cilioKa the
long
vowel
prevails,
in
Edodijv,
oTctrof,
cEcoTiiL
the short
one, might
be hard to determine.
Only
so much
may
be
noticed,
that the middle
perfect,
the
passive
aorist and
the verbal
adjective
inchne most to the short
syllable.
Now the
primi- tive
inflexion is not
separatedby an
abyss
from the thematic. On the
contrai-y,
from the earliest times there were
transitions from the
one
into the
other,so that the
primitive
verbs are
everywhere
interlaced
with thematic forms. On the other hand from the so-called verbs
in
ti)
there
are several
by-forms
of
primitivestamp, e.g. /jjji'ot,/3"/3"c,
fiiftunw
beside
ftcdrcj,
Xvto beside Xuw. Hence it is
certainly
allowable
to
bring
short vocalic forms in such
cases too into connexion with the
jDrimitive
method of
inflexion,
and
so to
put e.g.
ftijoa-fxai, k-j^ja-brj-v
beside
li^o-fiai, k-l6-di]-v,
in this
way
explaining
the difference of the
former from
TeriyL-q-fxaL, k-TifxSi-Bq-y.
In other
words, we
take this first
class of forms to be remains of the older method of
foimation,
which
often united with othei'S
followinga
later i-ule into
a unity
of vei'bal
usage.
In this
way
we
may
explain
the
following
15 cases :
1)
Rt.
/3a,
The extant
primitive
forms have been discussed
more
in
detail
on
pp.
126 f. and 387. Hence come Trapaftei^jaadat
Thuc. i.
123,
TTcipaftaOij
Thuc. iv.
23, afxftaTOQ(Homer),
and also
joikjiq,ftadpov,
l^adfinc,
but
ftljfTM, ej3r]aa, ftifti]Ka
"
/?"7/.io.
2)
lit.
CE
bind,
cicr}
p.
105. Hence come
ciotKa
Demosth., cicerro
K 92, hdsig
Soph. Aj. 108, avrcETiov Aristoph,
Eccl.
785,
and also
ci(7Lc,
but
ai'VTTohjToc, ^ia?,r]i-in.
3)
Rt.
CO needs
no
references,
cecotui,
t^oOq,dorog,doTEog are
in
use
in all
Greek, as well as io-)'ip,
cottiq,
home. On the other hand
cwao),
tcwko,
hicwKa and
Cwrop
kluov (Q
335),^wrtr,Zwrivi].
4)
Rt.
cv.
For 'icvy etc.
cp. p.
129. Hence
lrCElvi.iEvr]v
Menand.
Com. iv.
199,
awocvO^
Aristoph.
Ran.
715,
alvroc
Hymn,
in Merc.
247,
cvcfic. The
length
of the
v
in the
present
is
certainly
dvie to a ^cvno
after the
I-class,
formed
on
the
analogy
of
(^viwcpiotedas
Aeolic.
Cp.
p.
147. Also
Zvfju),
cvaoficti,cv(T"-o,
dicui^E
(I239),
not before the Antho- logy
(v.73)
EK^iEiKUg.
5)
Rt.
". 'Irjfii
etc. kdfiycu
(Plat.
Pol. 270
avEdf]), AyEdwopai Thuc,
364
ai'eroc Plat,,
also
'iffic, acpETrjc,
but on
the other hand
I'jKa,cKjjijTujp
(I404).
6)
Rt. Be.
tIOtji^i, ETEdr]!', TEdljaojxai, deroc,
also
difia,Oeitic,
uyujvo-
Bettjc, on the other hand
dlja-io, Edrjica
"
dt'fKri.
7)
Rt.
(',elfii, 'if^iEy
"
-rrpociTOc^
trioy,
also
'irrjc, Ircifxog
" on the other
hand
eiaoficu
S
8, E}au^r}y
E 538, "
otroc, olfioc, o'ifxr].
518 IRREGULARITIES OF THE VOWEL
STEMS,
ETC.
ch. xxu
8)
Rt. \i;. XvTo $
114,
cp. p.
129.
Xi\ii.iai
Aesch. Pers.
.592,XvOev
d
360,
XvBeyrwv
Eurip.
Hel.
860, Xvtoc.
In XiXvi:a it is
generally
assumed that tlie
v
is
short,
but the
only
passage
quoted
for it
by
Yeitch
(Aristoph."Vesp.
992
iS,riTraTr]Tai
KaTroXeXvKii'
ou^
itcwt)
decides
nothing.
But Choeroboscus,
cd. Gaisford ii.
p.
548,
26
(cp.
Buttmann Ausf. Gr.
i.^
388)
bears witness to its short vowel. Also
Xv(tiq,Xvnjp,Xvrpoy,
On
the other hand
Xvaio,
'iXvau and in the
present
Xvio from
*Xviu),
but alsO'
with
a
short
v
; cp. p.
148.
9)
Rt.
TTo. aiijnrwBi
and
ttw
Aeolic
imperatives:
cp.
Ahrens AeoL
140. eKTri-rrorai
x
56,
iKTroBerr Aesch.
Choeph. 66, KaTcnrodiio-opai
Ar.
Vesji.
1502,
TTVToc, TTOTtoQ,
and also
ttotoc, "n-orijpior,
but
-n-ofia
(Find.)
and
TTLOfxa
(Eiarip. Plat.),
TreVw^-a like Lat.
j^otus,pocuhim.
10)
Rt.
crra, 'larijpi
etc.
ciearafiiroc (Plat.), Etrradr]
p
463
(also
Attic),
ffTardc. Also
crraaig, arrari'jp,
iniaTUTi]c,
(TTaBpiog,
but
aryrru),
't(JTi]tja, Zuiarrifxa,
ariji-nor.
11)
Rt.
(TV.
(TVTo, (Tvfierai p.
130.
'(.(ravfiai
N
79,
'iaavro S 519,
(.rrrrvdn) Soph. Aj. 294, iirifTavTOQ
(Aesch.),
on the other hand
ecraeve,
ivaeva.
12)
Rt.
aex,
I'y
metathesis
a-^E,
(rx^Q
p.
132,
eax^Qov (p. 501),.
errx^^ny(post-Attic), (txet'oc,
also
crj^Ecric.
ax^TXiog,
but
"(T^r/(co, "(Tx?7/zat
(Attic),
and
o-x'^i""-
13)
Rt.
06(, t(j"6iijy]y p.
129.
sfif^uii
v 340,
efdXao
Aesch.
Sept.
970, e"pdiOEy^^331, "peXT(k
Aesch. Pers.
523, anuipdiauv Soph. Aj.
1027
:
also "t)Oimc. But
fOifTorrai
A 821.
14)
Rt.
fv. efvi'p.
130. Tlie
only
evidence for the short vowel is
fvToy
(e.g.
S
123)
which has become a substantive,
with its
numerous
derivatives
((pvrtvu) etc.)
and
(j)vt7ic.
The
long
vowel
prevails
in
(pvuu),
^(tjvaa, "7rf(pvKa.
15)
Rt,
x^- ^x^To p.
130.
ffvyKExvKE
Menander Com. iv.
294,.
"X*^"(")
^
^21, x'^^^''? '" ^9^'
X'^'"'/
^
^^^- ^Iso
x^"''?-
On the other
hand
x^w, t'x^""'
365
Besides these 15
instances,
for which
we have e\"idence of the
primi- tive
inflexion,
the short vowel without
o-
appears
in
a
number" of
stems.,
to which forms in
v correspond.
To these
belong
It is hai-d to decide whether here the shoi'ter stems are
treated
on
the
analogy
of those inflected
primitively, among
which the rt.
"pOt
most
resembles
them, or
whether
a
loss of the nasal
leaving
the vowel short
has taken
place.
The form KareKTadEr E 558 beside
uTreK-av
is in favom*
of the latter view. The
conjectiu-ally
Boeotian
Epi'tdi]
mentioned
on
p.
499 is
exactly
like it.
CH. XXI.
FORMS WITH 0-.
519
According
to the view
just pi'oposed
there is no place
for
a o-
in
these
verbs,
and
as a matter of fact forms like
*/3a(7roc, ^iardadri,*co(tt6q
and the like are
quite iinknoA\n,
and even
if
solitary
instances of the
kind Hke
ipatrd)]
do occur at a
very
late
date,
this is to be
regardedonly
as an aberration of the
failing
instinct of the
language.
But neverthe- less
some
few
sigmatised
nominal forms
belonging
to such stems occiu'
in the best
period. They are
the
following:
Utir^ioi (in
Homer
only
in
\p
296 beside
dej.ta,Oe'yuic, Oeaic),
which we
may suppose
to come
from
the
reduplicated
root
6E-d{e),
much as
the Skt.
participle
datfa for
da-da-ta from the rt.
da,
hence the Doiic
ra-O-fio-c,
e.g.
Pind. 01. vi. 69.
.
The earlier form for both the
dialectically differing
formations would
thus be
*0E-d-i^6-g.
The 0
might
become
ff,
as in the
perfect
forms XeXa- 366
ajxiyoc, 7r"7rii(r/LJcu quoted
on
p.
420,
which occur as early
as
Homer. On
the same principle
we
might
be
disposed
to refer the forma
ctcr^o'c,
cicfixara,
which are common even in
Homer,
to
le-l-fJo-Q.
But there is
a
lack of
positivesupport
for
this,
such as was
supplied
before in
teQjioc.
Hence I
conjecture
that the rt. ce was expanded
to c"-0, as
the root
/3a
was
in
/5"-y-/io-c,
and that then the d was changed
before
/^/
into
"r.
Herodotus's
lvaj.n]
beside
Ivdj-il] (Callimachus
fr. 539 ed.
Schneider)
is
especially
in favour of this
explanation. Perhaps we must take in the
same
way
the Homeric
KKia^ioq
beside
tcXij-ia.
The form
(jwcmt;
beside
^vffii:
would be
extremelystrange.
But the more recent editors are cer- tainly
right
in
banishing
it from the
only passage
in which it
was
formerly
read
(Aesch.
Pers.
926),
in fiivour of
Tapfvg -iq (forynp
cpvffTic),
the emendation of Franz.
11. FORMS WITH cr.
To this second division
belong
forms like
^iffw,picric,TtreXtffiiui,
ariXifTTOQ.
The
language
of Homer has here often retained in the
futiu'e and the
sigmatic
aorist
a
double
o-, e.g.
tVo-w
l^ii'ivj^n), ^iacra,
e-iXeffffa.
Evidently
the first of these two sibilants is of the same
origin
as
that which
was always
retained in forms like
e-tXEffBrjr,
daperrroc,
and which has often been
legardedas
'inserted.' The short- ness
of the
penultimate
in
i^tao,
triXtaa is due to the reduction of the
double
rr to a single
one,
which
beginseven
in
Homer,
and has become
the rule in the Attic
fpiffai
beside the Homeric
epicrcrai,
KOjjlffui
beside
KOf.itffffui,
but also in
vptffi
beside
opeffffi,
ocroc
beside oaaoc.
The
explana- tion
for the verbal forms mentioned is based
upon
the
proof
that the
stem
originally
ended in
a
dental
consonant,
which before
r,
d, n
often
maintained itself
as
cr,
but
was
assimilated to a followingff,
and in this
latter
case finally disappeared altogether.
The most comprehensive
investigation
for the
purpose
of
clearingup
the
phenomenon
on
this
principle
is that of Leskien Stud. ii.
"68 fi". Earlier grammarians
contented themselves with the
assumption
of a 'strengthening' sigma.
But how little the short vowels needed such
strengthening
is
proved
incontrovertibly
from the formations which we
have discussed above
under the first division.
Why icoOijv but wx'iffdi])', why
cehrai but 367
TeTiXtff-ail In the case
of
long
vowels and
diphthongs
the
assumption
of
a ff on
purelyphonetic
inducements would be
quite
inconceivable,
and
yet we
fuid
TrenXijaiuui,
ijKovadi],atiarijc.
The assertion that the
doubhng
took
place
'
metri
gratia,'
often
repeated
for certain
forms, might
have
520
lEREGULAEITIES OF THE VOWEL
"TEMS,
ETC.
cii. xxi.
been
easilydisproved,
if
only by
the well-established distinction Ijetween
^wffcj, fiitnio, ij-yiirra on the one hand,
and
OfjLOcrira,
E,ea(Ta, KXatrcrs on the
other. IToweve/' scholavs liave not succeeded hitherto in
giving
the
desired
])roof
in each
particular
case. We also must be content with
establishing
the
principleby
a number of indubitaljle instances. It
will ))e
i)i'oper
in
doing
so to treat the radical verbs and the derived
ones
separately.
A)
Radical Verbs.
;i)
Eoots
originally ending
witli
a
,^igma.
In the
case
of these the
rr
apparently
inserted is
really
retained
as
the final letter of the root. The
shifting
of the
original
relation does
not lie with the
futiire, aorist,peifect
or
passivestem,
but rather with
the
present,
whei-e however it is
easilyexplained
from the most familiar
phonetic
laws. Here
belong
14
verbs,
viz.
1)
St.
a/tc,
from /"c = Skt.
vas dwell,
to
stay,
live.
In Princ. i.
484, followingLobeck,
I referred the Homeric aorist
ckffa,plur.aia-aiiiEv e.g.
r 342,
y
151 to the rt. ciF breathe. But Leo
Meyer
Ztschr. xxii. 530 shows that tliis aorist
along
with the
lavw
which
belongs
to
it,
never denotes
sleeping
proper,
but
only spending
(rvKTci
yM"i' aiaaiutv),
and hence
justly
concludes that
afsc, expanded by
the
prothetic
d is identical with the
equivalent
Skt. rt. vas.
liFeaa is
therefore for *u-ftar-a-a.
[Cp.
Grundz.-5
p.
387.]
It is
only
in the short- ness
of the middle
syllable
that the
sigma
still shows itself.
uffajXEv
TT
367 is due to contraction.
2)
St.
avc,
eve. Cp.
Princ. i. 496. The root is
lis, pi^eserved
in Skt.
ush,
Lat.
us
[tiro)
bxirn. The
cr
is
pi'eservedonly
in the nominal forms
evorpa, tvaara, 'iravap-a.
3)
Rt.
/3^"c=Lat.
vis
(visio)
Princ. i. 284.
/S^itr-^o.
4)
St.
-yevc
intensified from
giis,
as
the root
appears
in Skt.
(^ush
368
and Lat.
gus-tu-s (Princ.
i.
216).
The
o-
is
preservedonly
in
yivrrroQ
(Aristot.) ayevoTOf (Soph.),yevtrTEor
(Plato). yeyev/xai, yev/^u
follow
the
present.
5)
St.
epuQ interchanging
with
tpn
in the inflexion of
tpajxai.
kpaq
with Pick i.3 187 I
compare
with the Skt. lash for *ras desire. Hence
t)pu(j-aa-TO
Y
223,
Archil, fr. 30
Be.^,ipaardiic,
Aesch. Pers.
826, ipacrd)]-
ge(t6e Aesch. Eumen. 852.
6)
St.
hpv(:
for
/fpc=Lat.
vers
in
verrere.
Cp.
Stud. \'i. 265 fi*.
Hence fut.
EpvaaErai
K
44, epvfTdefTdni "p 125, aor.
conj.
tpvaaoj-ur
A
141,
tipvadr^vHippocr.,Epv(rr6cSoph. Aj.
730. The reduction of
(t(t
to a
beginseven in Homer
e.g.
kpiaaiTo
O 21.
7)
Rt.
/ft'clothe=Skt.
vas,
Lat.
ves
(Princ.
i.
470).
For
h'rv/j.i cp.
p.
114. Fut.
Eaaw TV 79, aor.
fVffor U
670, tVane t 396,
2
sing,plupf.
mid.
fffao T
57, ter-diiQ
beside
afKjuenw
t 167,
ajupdauifxi
a
361. Ar.
Equ.
891
Trpo(TaiJ(l)tw.
8)
Rt.
C"C=Skt.
jas
seethe,boil,
0. H. G.
jesau (Princ.
i.
471).
'CiffffEv
"Z
349, lU'CfffEi'
Aesch.
Sept.709,
Herod, i. 59. tiTeorai
is
quoted
from
Hippocr.,li^fffdt]}',
i^Euroc from late
prose,
but i^itriQ as early
as
Plato.
i^eioi'TaCallim. Dian.
60,
if
based,as
is
probable,
on an
earlier
tradition
points
to
*^Etj-jio;
also l^ei("v(7iW
(KJipH^ovfrai' Hesych.
i^ii\o-c
is
to be
explainedby compensatoiy leng-thcning
for *^EfT-\o-c.
-CH. XXI.
FOEMS WITH
cr.
521
9)
St.
4we
= Zd.
yaonh, yah gird(Princ.
ii.
263,
Fick Worterb. i.3
183).
The
a
retains its effect in
L,ioi-rv-ni (w 89)
and is
preserved
in
"irei^(i}(Ti.iii'cii
Herod, ii.
8.5,
in
'(warfwr,(^wari'ip (Hom.)
and in the late
i^ioarck-
On the other hand it has
disappeared
from
(wfjia,
^mvt]
from
the earliest times.
10)
Rt. "ac=Skt. nas (Princ.
i.
391).
raircra c 174, rao-c-aro
Hesiod
0pp. 639, rao-^v S
119, ivuadrj Eiirip.Aristoph.
Also
jutra-
ruarriQ (Hom.),
raiu)
(Z 1.5)
for
raa-jo. Cp.
p.
210.
11)
St. o?ve=Skt. dvish hate
(Princ.
i.
303), o^vor(r(t/x"j'oc r 407,
o^cjcvfTTat
" 423, w^v(t6i}i' Hesych.
In
a
reduced form wdvcrao
a
62.
12)
Rt.
ff/jfc-
If the connexion
conjectvired
in Princ. ii. 197 with
Skt.
^vas,
which
according
to the more recent
lexicographers means only
breathe, snort,
is
uncertain, [cp.
Grundz.^
p.
573]yet afiiv-w-^u
beside
apDiaauL
H
621, efffiirrdnv
(Plat.), uaflttTTO^
(A 599),frloefTTiipioQ (Thuc),
KaTarri^iaEL
Aesch.
Ag.
958
point
to a
sigma
as
the last letter of the root
in
spite
of
'i-trl^rj-r (cp.
p.
128).
13)
Pvt.
7-pfc:
= Skt. tras
(Princ.
i.
277).Tpiaae
P
603,
arperrroc
Aesch. 369
Prom.
416,
tTpiauv
A
745, -pifjuQSoph. Antig.
1042. Beside these
(cp.
i^ijXoc, a-prjiai)
there
are
rpi]p6c, Tpi]pu)i'. Cp. p.
210.
14)
Et.
xP'f='^kt. gharsh
rub
(Siegismund
Stud.
v. 181,
Joh.
Schmidt Vocal, ii.
332),-^pirrQeiaa
Aesch. Prom.
675,
'xplo-toq
ib.
480,
XP~icr/.ia (Xenoph.).
The
length
of the I comes
out in
y^piffu)
Eur. Med.
789,
E^plcrej'
K
364. The
present XP^^*^
'^^
explained
most
simj)ly
from
^\(ii(T-W (^ETnXpioJTEQ (j)
179,
^(f'tO''
^
186).
b)
Eoots with
an
original
dental
explosive.
1)
Rt. laT
(besideca).
For
larfoncucp. pp.
208 and 261. It now
seems to me
probable
that
Sariofxai
and
vrareo/ica
(p.263)are
formed in
exactly
the same
way.
Hence
Imo^aaaonai
P
231,
caacranEi'oc y
66,
BiiaffTai O
189, avacaaroc
(Plato), hiufjoi: (A 166),
caaaaOui S 511.
2)
Rt.
TTUT.
The evidence is
given
on
p.
263;
cp. Traaao/iiai p.
221.
3)
Rt. EC.
Cp.
p.
465.
E(l)Ea(7ai
J' 274, l^EtjaunEvoQ7r
443 beside
E'laa
p.
86.
4)
Rt.
pa?. Cp.
p.
217. rt.
paZ (^Eppa^arni, EppaEaro),
hence
pdaaarE
V
150. The
passive
aorist
{paidEiQPind.)
was
formed
following
the
present palrw.
From the stem
expanded by
6
we
may
explain
5) EKviinQr]r{i^irjrrdEirjj'
Ar.
Equ. 771),CY".
above
p.
501,
and also
6) vEPijafiEt'oi
Ar. Nub. 1203
7) 7rE7rX7](TTai
Plat.
Rep. 518, EirXtjadiji'
y
156 etc.
8) TTETvpritrixiror
Herod, viii.
144, EVETrpijadijaav
Herod,
v.
102 etc.
9) (TEa-qfTiiiroc Hip^DOCr.
In the
case of a
number of i-adical verbs it mvist remain doubtful
whether
they are to be
explained
in the
way
justdiscussed,or
in that
which is to be discussed
immediately,
B)
Derived Yerb.s.
In the
case
of these it is much more
difficult to understand the
anomaly,
because we are
often without the
means
of
determining|the
stems which imderlie the
particular
forms.
" 522
IKREGULARITIES OF THE VOWEL
STEMS,
ETC.
ch. xxi.
For
a small number of these vei-bs
we can indeed,
after what Leakien
especially
has collected
upon
the
svibject,
consider
a verbal stem
ending
370 in
c
as established,
whether this stem,
was the
only one,
or
interchanged
with another. But this holds
good only
for
1) alciofiai,
which is derived from
alZtq,a
by-
form of the stem aiZog
preserved
in alcwc. Hence
alliaaonai", 388,
adEsQiv H
93, aihirdeiQ
P 95 Pind. Aesch.
Eurip.,cucerraai I
640, ijceffiAivo(:
Demosth. xxiii. 77.
oiOfc
is to alcoQ as
Lat.
terajyes
in
temjjes-tas
is to
temjyos
in
tempor-is.
Cp. p.
268.
2) aKiof.iai
with the Homeric and Pindaric
by-form aKslofxai (U 29^
Pind.
Pyth.
ix.
104)
which
points
to
ni;t(T-jo-jAai.
The verb is therefore
derived from the noun-stem
ukiq (nom. ukoq
I
250).
('"/""
c-ro-g (N 115)
is to this stem as venus-tu-s to Venus. From
a/cet,-
came also
aKsaaai
n
523, uKsa-a-aio
Eur. Hec.
1067, as well
as
the later forms with a single
ff : T^KEffar
E
901,
aKifratrOai Herod. iv. 90.
3)
viiKiit)with the
present
form reiKeieiv B
277, I'eLeaa-e H
161,
vEiKiait)K
115, EVEixEaaQ F 59. From the stem
veikeq (nom. velrac).
4) teXew,
reXeui
'(
234,
rtXiaab) ^
559,
E-iXeaae M 222 beside rcXe-
ani/jit
I 157 and the
like,
which afterwards form the
rule,
teteXecttul S
74,
ETEXiaQr]c 663,
Aesch.
Choeph. 1067, uteXkttoq
A
26,
kiriTEXEaTiov Isocr.
xii. 37. From the stem teXeq
(nom.teXoc).
The
same principle
may
be
applied
with
a
cei-tain
probabihty
in
explaining
apETKU) (j'/pecro, r/pEadrjr),
on the
ground
of the stem
optc,
which
comes out, even more
clearly
than in
to cipoe(gain),
in the com- parative
apELuyv
with
a similar
meaning,
and also for the Homeric
KOTEUfuai (^KOTEamiTo
^
383,
KOTffTrrafiEvoQ
E
177) on
the
ground
of the
forms
KOTijELQ
and
^.-orfiroc (Pind.)
which
on the
analogy
of
teX}]elq
and
^jaftj'oc
allow us to deduce
a stem
kotec.
The same
may
be said of
-koBew
{jToiiEtjai /3375,
I
748,
Herod, ix.
22, though
also
7roy"/^i)'oi
/x
110,
later
TroOfiaw
and the
like).
In all the other verbs of this kind
we can
at most
S2)eak
of a
possibility.
Whether stems in 0 have contributed towards the formation of such
forms is
very
doubtful. We
might on
the
analogy
of
(pdnvdu),fxirvOoj
presuppose
a *Tai'v6(i)in order to
explainby
the side of
rurvcj
forms Uke
ETHi'vaiTE n
662, Tai'ixraaq ^
25, TETiirvaTO
K
156, rat vrrdEig
IT
485, as.
we
have
previouslyexplained iTrXijadrjy
from
tvXIjQu).
In the
case
of
EfiicTGui we
might
remember
ifiidw,
mentioned
on
p.
502,
in the
case
371 of
aXiaaai,
aXiaai
grind,aXtidw.
But we can nowhere
get beyond
con- jecture
here,
and the
applicability
of another method of
explanation
to be
mentioned
immediately warns us to be cautious.
For the
great majority
of the forms
coming
under this head
we
cannot solve the
problem by
any
of the
means
hitherto
attempted:
and
we must look for its solution
only
in the
phenomenon
which I have
pointed
oiTt
alreadyon
pp.
234, 242, 251,
viz. in the extensiA^e inter- change
between the verbs which
by
the
rejection
of the
j oi'iginally
present
before the thematic vowel show
a vowel
stem,
and those in
which a c has
dcATjloped
before
thisj*',
which coalesces with it into f.
On
p.
235
we enumerated 18 instances of verbs in aw
and
04 w existing
concurrently,
ten of which
were
Homeric. But there
were
also
many
otlier indications of the fjict that the
analogies
on both sides intruded
into each other. On
p.
242 we
quoted as
many
verbs in
em
with
by-
forms in
i^w. Traces of
v!^iobeside
vu" were
mentioned on
p.
250. Wft
"
CH.xxi.
FORMS WITH
a.
523
have fiirtliershown that a
largepart
of the verbs in
t^w
go
back to an
eai'Her tei'mination
f "^w,so that the
following
sets are
estabHshed :
The
hypothesis
that at
an
earlier
peiiocl
the
language
fluctuated,even
more
frequently
than
we can
precisely
prove
to have been the
case,
between the loss of the
j
and its assibilation after it had been
preceded
by
an
inserted
c,
is
certainly
not an
unjustified one.
Now later
on
the
same
pi'inciple
of formation did not
always
hold
good
in the
present
stem as
in the
remainingtenses,
hence
""\ow
but
yeXcio-w(as
if from
*y{\.a'Cix)),
eXkvu) but
eXKvadrjrai (as
if from
*"/\/".u4w).
Pott
Etym.
Forsch. ii.^
970 If.has
already
chscussed a
large
number of the anomalous forms in
question
from the
same point
of
view,
and in the Elucidations
p.
133 I
have followed him.
Particular verbs
are especiallyadapted
to throw
lightupon
this
process.
Thus
we have
uyufxat,
while forms like
uyaffaaro
P
71,
ayacr-
(Tsa-dai S
181, ayaarirrde
S 111, uycKrdiirai
from Hesiod
onwards,
oyct-
oToc
common
from
Xenophon onwards,
follow
ay
d4w, ft yf^'o/uru,
which
'^'-^
occurs
in Pind. ISTem. xi. 6
[ayu(6j.ieroi)
and in
Aeschylus (Suppl.1062).
The difference of
meaning
was
discussed
on
p,
118. As in the
case
of
this stem
we
have
authority
also for
ayaiof.iai
with a
vocalised
j,
and
ayuacrde,we
have in this
case
the difierent
phases
of the
primitive
form
tmusually clearly
before our
eyes.
"
ca^aw
=Lat. domo has been
pre- served
in the older literature
only
with
a
future
force,
and hence it
was
discussed on
p.
479. Homer uses
for the
present cafn'ij/ji
and
Jo^iaw.
ca/.tu(Ta-e
E
106, Baf.iu(T(TaQ
Pind.
Pyth.
viii.
80,
cafxufroy
I
496, eca/jidadTjv
6
231, lajxaaQii'
Eur. Phoen. 563
belong
to the rarer
present Sa/uai^w,
which
crops up
fii-stin Hesiod
(Theog. 86-5),
then in Pindar
{cap.u'Co-
fiiyay Pyth.
xi.
24)
and
Aeschylus (caijui^ei Choeph. 323)."
To the
present
ahiw
belong properlyonly
forms like
ulvi](Tov(n(jr380),
alvri-
iTbj(Ti
"^
.5.52,
while
ipeaa (from Aeschylus onwards),
alredek (from
Herodotiis
onwards)
suit rather
a\vi^oi.iai (N 374)
or
the
presumable
earlier form
*atrE'Cofiai.
"
TrpoKaXiaTciTo(H 218)
is hence
only
a more
archaic aorist form to
irpoKaXii^ero (F 19)
than
^-rrpovi^aXiffaro
would
be,
not
an
irregularone.
And doubtless the shoit
vowel,
which
always
held its
groimd
in tKnXeaa is due to this.-" The variable
a
in the inflexion
of
ffioi^b)
finds its
ex|3lauation,
as
Buttmann Ausf. Gr. ii.'^295
con-ectly
taught,
in the confusion of a verb
awio (from o-aow)
with
coj^w.
In
Homer
we
have
no trace of the
a-,
and the
4
of the
present appears
only
in
"
490
(aw^wi),
where however
Didymus
read
aojiov :
and
by
the
side of this irrcno $
238,
a-aw(7"t, aawa-eiav,
aawd)]-(i)
etc.
; cp.
Mangold
Stud. vi. 199. In
Aeschylus
fii-st
(Sept.820)
we find
cricrwa-ai,
in
Euripides(Here.
F.
1385) o-woreor,
while
""Til)6i]r,
"7wr"/p
never take
a
(7.
The
anomaly
becomes more
confused
here,
because the form with
i
ad)'C,u), thoroughly
discussed
by
Usener in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 1865
p.
238
f.,
is established
by
the Heraclean Tables
{KartcTMiayitc,
Stud. iv.
428),by
Attic
inscriptions
in
part
of
a
very
early
date
(Wecklein
Cvirae
epigraphicae
p.
45,
Cauer Stucl. viii.
416)
and
by grammarians (Herodian
e
.
Lentz i.
444, 6).
Of
course (tw4w
can only
have come from
aojii^w.
Put the statement that
Didymus
wrote no i
(Herodian
ed, Lentz ii.
586)
524 IRREGULARITIES OF THE VOWEL
STEMS,
ETC.
CH. XXI.
and the fluctuation of the
grammarians'theory
between the
derivation
373
from
*(ra(i^u)
and that from
(rwiCu)are
very noteworthy.'
A form
so
isolated as naoi^w
perhaps
is not due to the invention of the
gi-ammarians.
It
might
well attach itselfto
otCTroi^w
and
apjxui^w according
to the view
stated on
p.
238.
aaoi^w as a derivative from
aaoQ
is related to
mioio
just as to^uU'w
is to
casino.
The existence of a
rrauc^w, (toj'Cu) formed
from
(TaoQ
would
naturallyby
no means
exclude the later formation of a
moil^M
from
jrwoc.
aaoi^w
would be to itmIl'C^
much as the
Cyprian /caA/y^w
(Herodian
ii.
332)
to
kXrjii^u).
In this
way
we arrive at a system
of
equivalentforms,
which is
certainly
somewhat
complicated,
viz.
"
1
)
cracici)1
j
"
i "" , , , , ^
''
^
("
derived Irom
o-aos,
whence ia-aOnv
"
a-atm i
^"^'^''^^
derived from
a-dos,
whence
o-ea-axTTai
3)
(TcoiCa)']
-I
"
T n " T
aoiCoi
derived trom
acoos,
whence
Karea-cp^aixes.
Some radical verbs too have
apparently
a moveable
";,
thus
jSXv^w (utto-
pjXv'Cwv
I
491)
with
'iftXixra
(Apollon.Rhod.)
which
belongs
to
it,
and
flXhw[arul-jXveir Hippocr.),
ktIClo
with
tKnaaa,
ttcriarai
etc. beside
TrepiK-
Tiovec, /.tZ/zeioc, "tx"4w
Xen. Hellen. v. 4, 58,
whence
uwoffxdaw(Crates
Com. ii.
249),
"7xaaoc
Eur. Phoen.
960,
and
Ecrx^y
Ar. Nub. 409.
On
p.
2.51 we saw that the
source,
from which so
often the
4
sprang,
the
spirantj
both after
a
simple v
and after the
diphthongsav, ev,
ou
had its
place
in the
present.
As a
heBvIw
is
actually
on
record,so we
deduced
pre\aously
a *Xviu). Now
as soon as a c developed
before the
;,
^fiedvi^m Avas produced,
which is not itself on record,
but we
may
venture
to assert that it siu-vives in
{.itdvaQ^ivat (Herod,
ii.
121).
In this
way
we
may perhaps explain dpavadiyTa (Soph. Antig. 476),
^f^-Atva-o
(Herod.), iKeXevadiji' (Soph.Thuc), Xevadrjinu(Soph.).
For the rts.
raw
^'^
and kX(iv we
find
a
present
formation in i
actuallyexisting
in
kuiuj,
kXciIio i.e.
Kufju), KXufjw,
and so
for the intensified stems
ttXev,irvev
from
ttAu,TTj'v
in the Homeric
ttXe/w,jneiu) (cp.pp.
156, 210).
These are
followed
by
Kav(T-6c
(Eurip.),kXavoroc (Soph.).
The use
of the ff is
especially
extensive after
diphthongs
in
j^articular.
The form
Svvdfrd?]
which
occurs as
early
as
Homer
(^ 465, e
319) points
to an
obso- lete
*lvyaCn^cu,
which in its formation would be related to
cuiaf.tai
much
as
laKva'Cofiai (Aesch,
Pers.
571)
to
cciKru). TZE(l"uaf.iivoQ perf.jmrt.
to
(l"r]i.u (S 127)
leads us to
conjecture
a
present *0a4w
as a
by-form
to
(ficib) (p.148)=Lat./"/-i.
The dental
presupposed
in the verbs
mentioned,
as a
predecessor
of
the
(T, actually
occurs
in a few
instances,as in
iXrjXiBar
-q
86,
discussed
on
p.
242,
from which it is not too venturesome to deduce
a stem iXal,
which
presupposes
a
present
^iXa'Cw
Iteside the
actually
extant tXciw
{^iXwvQ.696).
This would
justifyfiXaaaa
beside
ijXaaa,yjXdtranTo
beside
j/Xaa"/ir/r, iXdnrroiiui
etc. " kXeiu) Old Attic
iv-\f|w
has most
probably
come
from the nonnnal stem
/.Xrp/i (= Lat.
clavi)
with
the
by-form
^.-X "//"". The
two stems
interchange
in nominal as
well as
in verbal forms. In
'
Tlic words recorded
in Et.
Magn. p.
7tl, 2."),
which
according-
to Lent z are
flniwn from Herodian run tlius : "AA.'
tj irapdSofny$x^i
rh
t.
rh 5e
ffwCui,ore
fxeu
yiverat
".TTh
tov ffaios (Tui(^oiis \firos \enl(^w
Ka\
Kara ffvvaipf(rii' ffif^w,
exei
rh t,
TjulKa
5" airh
tov ffdos crao^cc
kuI
Kpdaticrwfai,
oiiK
ex.^L irposyfypau.fj.evof
rh
i.
CH. XXI. FOEMS WITH a. 525
Homer we have the nominal forms
i^Xyfica
E 146,
f^XifKrivu 294, K\ii'i-
liamv
fi
215,
and
corresponding
to these
KXifiiraei' Ce
dvpaq r 30, KXifier-cu
aaridsg ft
34:4:. lu Herodotus iii. 58 we
read
(nrtK\r}'iadt](rav, on the
other hand the Attic writei's
use the contracted
form,
and that
partly
in
the earlier form
KXrjcar {Aesch.
Eum. 827
etc.), k-Mjfrai(Aesch.
Pers.
723),eyKXtiaai(Soph.Antig. 501),
for which I
may
refer to Gerth Stud.
i.
2, 218, KciTtKXriaOrir
Thuc. i.
117,
/.Aj/oToe
Thuc. ii.
17,
partly
in the
later avyeKiKXeiaro Andoc. i. 48. In the
tragedians
and
Aristophanes
according
to
Xauck,
Dindorf and Wecklein
(Curae epigr.66)
we
should
write
J/
throughout.
Besides the
present
stem the
perfect
middle also
attaches itself to the form without
c,
in Herodotus ii. 121
K"i;X7]ii.iit'ov,
in Attic writers here and there
icEi^X)jf.iai, KeKXei/nat, Ket^XeLff/jcu.
The
Doric
K-Xa^w,
^."o^"^."Xa^o-o
(Theocr.
vi.
32,
xviii.
5)
also deserve
mention,
inasmuch as tliis i'too as
the correlate of the
present properly requires
In this whole
question
we must not leave out of
sight
the fact that the
usage
was
exti'emelyfluctuating,
and that
on this account the
authority
of
our
texts cannot be
regai-ded
as
very
certain,
and that
evidently
the 375
(T
became more
widespread
in course of time. Buttmann noticed this in
Ausf. Gr. i.2
424,
where he
says
'
So that we see
that this
a has made its
way
in
by degrees,
for which the formation of the words in
4
w,
Oo),cw
supplied
the
analogy.'
He
was
only wrong
" with Lobeck
('
assumto
sigma corro-
boravit'
Paralipp.
320
sqq.)
" in
assuming
the
operation
of
a
'euphonic
principle,'
for we cannot
possiblyspeak
of this. Forms with
a
short
vowel like
^fc'^o-m, hidip',
XiXvrai etc.
always
remained
unaffected,
while
on
the other hand
e/.iriiiTdt]v {iTrifirrjudeiQ c- 189,
ttoXv^ivijitti], i^uy]ar-}}pec;),
"7rX/;"r9/7, eppaiadi](II339)op)^"joTjV", 7ro/\atcrr?yc, 6pw(Tjj.6c
in
spite
of their
long
vowel show the
a even in Homer. For the variations of
our
authorities I content
myself
here with
referring
to the abundant material
collected
by
Lobeck ad
Ajacem v. 704, and
supplemented by
Wecklein
Ciu-ae
epigraphicae
p.
61.
Elmsley regarded
evyi'corog
as the
only
correct
Attic
form,
but even
in Homer
(/3175, r 191, 397) we find
ayrwaTog,
which is known also to Pindar.
Bigour
is here
by
no means
in
place.
We cannot form a more
definite
judgment
as to the
authority
for
many
forms in the Attic
writei's,
until the
inscriptions
of the best Attic
pei'iod
have been
carefully
examined with this in view.
We can see
that it would be in vain to seek
any special
inducement
for each
particularform,
from the fact that while the
cr makes its
way
into forms to which it did not
originally belong,
on the other hand the
same soiind elsewhei^e lost its
originalplace.
We
can
hardlyexplain
otherwise
epyd-rjg(as earlyas
Archilochus fr. 39 Be.^
f3ovQegth'
i]fxiv
kpynrriQ
ir
oIkit]),
with the derivatives
epyanc, epyariKog,
ipyarli'r]c,
which
in its formation reminds
us
of
hmrorijc, toIottjc,oiVe-jjc, (pvXertjc,
and
further
Bav/jLaraepya
Hymn,
in Merc.
80, 440,
Hes. Scut. 165
(cp.
Pind.
01. i.
28),
KeKEvraf KEKevffrai
Hesych
,
yiyevf.uii
in
spite
of the rt.
yuc.
Evidently
such forms
point
to an
earlyobscui-ing
of the instinct of the
language.
Hence we
must be
always
very
cautious hei*e with
regard
to
bold
etymological
combinations. The
possibility
of such
presents
itself
often
enough.
Thus we
might conjecture
that under the
aor. UXundi^
lies a root k\uc
expanded
from ;."A
(Lat.cellere)
;
but it is
ju.stas con- ceivable
that the
present
form
*
k:\aju) arising
from
metathesis
was
376
expanded by
a c
and
produced
a *A:\a4w,
which
though
afterwards
526 IRREGULARITIES OF THE VOWEL
STEMS, ETC.
ch. xxi.
obsolete, was
the
source
of the
sigmatic
forms. For
yj-woroe
we might
suppose
a
stem
yrwc
expanded
from
yi'w,
but also
a present *y)'(iyw,
which
might
be
compared
with 0. H. G. hidii. The
same
alternative
recurs m
the
case
of
fxpuo/uai, '^(pu.ofiai.
Thus elsewhere too different
paths present
themselves,
between which it is hard to decide. But
speaking generally,
the whole
phenomenon
here in
question
does not
belong to quite
the earliest
period
of the
language, so
that the
spread
of
an analogy,
not
very
shax-ply defined, on
the
strength
of
a
number of old
precedents can hardly
be denied. I doubt whether it will
ever
be
easy
to arrive at the
proof
of the
principal causes
for the whole
phenomenon,
which
we
have here endeavoui-ed to complete.
527
CHAPTER XXII.
THE ITERATIVES.
The essential verbal
forms,
which
are carried out to a
large
extent
in
the case
of all Greek
stems,
have now been discussed
by
us.
There
remain
only some
formations which
are,
so to
speak,more
tentative than
complete,
and which
are
limited to
particularportions
of the
language.
Among
these the iteratives deserve the first
place,
if
only
for their
abundant
developement
in the
period
of the
languageconcerningus,
and
the manifold foi'ms
they
take.
They
are
tolerably
numerous in the
langTiage
of Homer. I have noted about 130
altogether,
in round
numbers. But it is
very
noteworthy
that
only a
small number of these
forms occur frequently,
e.g. sipaaKe,(piXeeaKe,
e'i-etTKe
;
by
far the
majority
have the
stamp
of formations which
were ventured once or twice,
and
which therefoi'e the
poet certainly
had at his
command,
if he needed
them,
without their
having
attained the full francliise
by
the
usage
of
the
livingspeech.
The number of the a7ra"
etpi]j.ieya among
them is
377
very
large.
With
regard
to the
particularpersonal
forms too a
restric- tion
appears.
It is
only
the third
person singular
and
plui'al
which is
at all common.
On the other hand the fii-stand second
person
plural
are only represented
each
by a singleexample
in Homer
: riKdcKnfxei'
X
512, E(pa(7Kerex
35,
and
so
the 2
sing,
of the middle TreXia-Keo X 433.
After Homer indeed about 90 new
forms
are
essayed.
But there
are
but few which
we can
get
from the older
poets. Hesiod, according
to Forstemann de dial. Hesiodea
p.
34,
has
only
10 such
forms,
Pindar
according
to Peter de dial. Pindari
p.
58
only
three. On the other
hand the iterative is
quite common
in Herodotus. Bi-edow de dial.
Herod,
p.
285 fi'.
gives a
list of 24 forms of the kind from different
verbs. The
tragedians
have left
us only
4 such
(Gerth
Stud. i.
2, 259),
of which
one alieady
occurs in Homer. All
clearly
bear the mark of
the intentional imitation of earlier
poetiy.
In
Ai'istophanes
we
find
probablyonly jDirenKof-itji' Equ. 1242,
and in the imitation of
an oracle
eEdTra-aiTKor Pax 1070. On the otlier hand the later
Epic poets,espe- cially
Apollonius
Ehodius and
Quintus Smyrnaeus delight
in
employing
and
multiplying
Homeric
iteratives,
and also Theocritus and Mosclius
have
some new
instances. The whole form was
therefore
livingonly
among
the
lonians,
and hence it is not unknoAvn to
Hipponax,
who is
thoroughlypopular
in his
style:
fr. 37 Be.'"^ dvea-Ke. So far
as we can
judge,
it owes its wider extension
only
to the influence of the Homeric
Epos.
It is
very
significant
that Attic
prose
let this form
altogether
di'op.
The
preciseusage
of the diu'ative forms
as distinguished
fi'om
the aoristic made the iteratives in
point
of fact
unnecessary, especially as
auxiliary
verbs like
elwdiyai,cpiXely,
and above all the
use
of
av
with
the indicative of the
past
tenses with the force of
a frequentlyoccurring
528 THE ITERATIVES.
ch. xxii-
action
(Grammar "
507 note
3)
were at
command,
if it was needful to
express
the
specific
force of
rej^etition.
In
Hei'odotus,as a
kind of inter- mediate
stase, an ay
of this kind is sometimes added
even to iterative
forms.
The itei-ativesshare the
group
itk
with the inchoatives discussed in
Chap.
X.
;
and
we
cannot fail to
see
that the force of the two is
cognate.
378 The iterative action forms
a
kind of contrast to the
regularlycontinuous,
just
as
much
as
the inchoative.
Every repeated
action is
on the other
hand
just
as
distinct from that which is
entirelycompleteas that which
is
coming
to
completion,
which realises itselfin
incipientattempts
Still
it must 1)6 admitted that
staiting
from this
common basis the
usage
of
the
past
tenses cut loose from
an indicative
present diA'erged on a
line of
its
own,
and thus became
an excellent
means, especially
for narrative
statement,
to
distinguish
with the
greatestbrevityfrequentlyrepeated
action from the
single
act. The iterative
past tenses,
e.g.
c6(jkov ai^e
related to the
present
stems of the inchoative
class,
e.g.
(iouKU)
much
as
the isolated
past
tenses in
-6o-v,
which
occupied us on
p.
501 ff.
e.g.
iax^Oovare to
present
forms like
7r\//9w.
It is
occasionally
difficult to
decide whether
a preterite
form is to be
regardedas an impei-fect
of the
inchoative class
or as an
isolated iterative form. Thus
on
p.
192 we-
decided to take
TrupiftaaKe
A 104
as an imperfect,
because
/3ot(v" occurs
as an imperative.
On the other hand
we shall be
obliged
to allow
"0a(TVfG
T 297,
(("aax
^ 191
(Ne'crTwp ^c't^x' o
yepcju
ot'
ETri/.ii'i](Tai^ieOa
(Tern) as
iteratives. For
cpaa-i^u)
as a
present
occurs fii'stin Attic writers
(cp.
p.
193).
In this instance therefore in the
course of the
history
of
the
language
first the
past
tense established
itself,
and afterwards the
present,
though only
with
a greatly
faded
meaning. Again erri^ov
admits
of considerable doubt. An iterative force does not come out
clearly
in
any
of the Homeric
passages,
and is more than
once decidedlyexcluded,
e.g.
H 153
yEvij]ce recjraroQ errtcov
arrarTwi',
T 180
Baijpcivt
e/J-og
tfftce
Kvv"vTriSoQ.
Cp.
'Pind.Nem.
v. 31,
Aesch. Pers. 656. On the other hand
in sevei-alof the
passages
in Herodotus referred to
by
Bredow
p.
285,
we must
recognize
the iterative
force,
e.g.
vi.
133,
vii. 119. Hence
we
shall
perhaps
do best to
place
the form with the others formed
by
the
suffix
-co,
of wliich
we spoke
on
p.
411
ff".,
and to
regard
the iterative
usage
as a
later
developement
which
easily
resulted from
following
the
forms in
-aico-v.
The Old Latin escit
(Neue
Lat. Formenlehre ii.^
596)
acts as a
present
with
a
future force formed from the
same stem. The
description
of these forms
as
iteratives and the
right apprehension
of
their
usage
is a matter of
quite
recent date. The ancient
grammarians
379
seem to have taken all the forms of this kind
as
merely
Ionic
expansions
of the cviri'ent
past
tenses : ra
hia
-ov (tke
-n-apij-yftfia
'luKioQ, as
Herodian
says
(ed.
Lentz ii.
792).
Buttmann
(Ausf.
Gr. i.^ 382
note)
even
believed
that he was the first to notice the force of these
forms,
after his attention
had been called to it
by
Grotefend. He did not fail to see
however that
the
repetition
of the action did not
come
out with the
same sharpness
in
all the Homeric
passages.
This is still
more true of the later
poets,
who
use
the forms more as an
archaic
garnish.
That the
augment
was not used with the Ionic
past
tenses in
-o-k-oi'
was tiiught
even by
the ancient
grammarians. Cp.
Et. M.
p.
295,
14
:
ra
yop
-niavra ciTro/Ja/WovrTt r")i' ey apx''}cXftki/j'tfcraffii'.
Tllis is true of
the
great majority.
But the
augment
is often used in Homer with the
CH. XXII.
ITEKATIVES FROM PRESENT STEMS. 529
iterative of
0//^t
;
efarrKeg(a\/\"/li' eipaffKeg
T
297),kcpaiTKE (oct"j)affK"
0
565, J' 173, ovTioT
i.(pa"Tic" p
114). Any
one
who chose to
apply
the
ciitical knife
here,
to restore the
uniformity
of which
many
are so fond,
would find
many
a
passage
not
easy
to deal
with,
e.g. fx
275 at the end
of the verse
a/dfiii' 'itpunKor,
t.
321
ke'ivoq
yap
'itpcKTKEv.
Other
augmented
iterative forms are
ef^ua-yeauopro
v 7,
ai'tiuopinvpeaKe /.t
238
(La
Roche
with the first hand of M.
ctio^u.), TrupeKEo-icer
^ 521, i]yivtaKov
Aratus
111. In CalUmachus
Hymn,
in Dian. 123 0. Schneider writes with
the best M.SS. ttoWu reXerrKoi' not ttoW ETeXetTKoy. For Herodotus
Bredow denies
altogether
the
use
of the
augment
in these forms. Stein
too writes
e.g.
Herod, i.
100,
where some M.SS. have
elcETrefXTT-efTKoy,
EfnrE^TTErrKoy,
iv. 130
XafteffKoy,
not as
it is in earlier
editions,EKafttffKor.
And
certainly
the number of the
non-augmented
forms here
so greatly
preponderates
that this critical
proceeding
is
justified.
It is difiicult to find
any
reason
for the
suppression
of the
exponent
of the
past
character of the action in the iterative forms. Buttmann
Ausf. Gr. i.2 382
says
it is sufficient that the forms were Ionic,
since the
lonians
always
inclined to omit the
augment.
But that does not suffice.
For in
Herodotus, as we saw on
p.
92,
the
syllabicaugment
is not
rejected
in
any
other case.
Buttmann is
more correct in
pointing
to the
length
of
the
forms,
itself
already
considerable.
Something
of the same
kind
we
380
saw to be the
case
in the
pluperfect.
A certain dread of
burdening
the
beginning
and the end of
a
form too much with formative elements can
be detected elsewhere too. The
speech-forming
ai-t also of the Greeks
knows a
p.r}CEi'ayav.
In their
oi-igin
the iteratives are extremely
various. We
can
distin- guish
four
prijicipal
kinds
:
A)
Iteeatives
from present
Stems.
These are
by
far the most numerous.
It will suffice to
quote some
chai'acteristicinstances from each kind of
present
stems :
thus
1)
from those formed
primitively
on
the
one hand
^otrx'
^
191" KEffKer (for^KeidKETo) f
41,
pvffKEv
il
730,
belonging
to
Etpvarat p.
122, on
the other
'IffTciffx r 574,avLEffKE Hes.
Theog.157,
W0"ff(v" Hes. fr. 96
Gottl.,pt'iywatcE
II
141, l^iowvaKEToE
857,
cufxvaaKE
Hymn,
in Ven. 251.
2)
from thematic stems without
any
further
strengthening
eX"o-/."c
E
472,
UEffKE X
501, QiXyEffKEy
264, iiyESKov
Herod, i.
148,
TrifiTTEffKE
Herod, vii.
106,
TreXeWfo X
433;
3)
from verbs which
lengthen
the vowel
"l"EVyE(TKEV
P
461, Xj]Be(TKE
^ 13
;
4)
from verbs of the T-class
KXiTTTErTKE
uv Hcrod. 11.
174,
cKTrpinrretTKE
Moschus ii. 88
(Hermann,
Meiaeke);
M M
530 THE ITERATIVES. ch. xxii.
5)
from the nasal class
TrirEiKt n
226, ftXaaravefTKE Soph.
fr. 491
;
6)
from the inchoative class
flo(TKi(TK0VTO
jU
355, fXKTyitTKETO
tT
325
',
7)
from the I-class
KkaUfJKf. 0 364,
KTzivKTKt fl
393, 7rOt^o/l'"0-(v" t 188,
aTtOTt\vVl(7Kl ^ 95,
(TTTEipefTKoi'
Herod, iv.
42, uTrayyeXXeiTKE
P
409, ftaXXiaKero(Stein: /3a\"-
(TKSTo)
Herod, ix.
74, Trpi'jcrffetrKoi'
d
259,
XirraifruETO I
451, pvara^ ecrKey
11
755, ep[(e(Tt;oi'
6
22-5,pe^Efficov x
^09
;
8)
from formations with 6
ftapilOEITKE Apoll.
Rhod. i.
43, fXU'vdefTKOV
'i,17, (pdll'vdEITKE
A
491,
TeXiOefTKE
Hymn,
in Cerer. 241
;
9)
from
a
stem
expandedby k
the isolated oXekectkei' T 135
:
10)
from denominative verbs with vowel
stems.
381
Xo
diificulty
is
presentedby
forms like Siveve(tk ii
12,
apiarEVEnKE
Z
460,
TajjiEveeTKE
Soph. Antig.
950. Bnt from the stems of the
contracted
verbs the iteratives are
formed in three
ways,
either
a)
without
any
important
alteration
veiKEiECTKE
B
221, i3ovkoXee(tkeq
*
448,
kuXee(tk" Z
402,
airaipEEfTKov^
Herod,
i.
186, TTOLEEaKE
Herod. iv.
78, (jtiXieffKE
Z
15, virvMErncov Quint. SmjTn.
H 503
;
b)
with assimilation
yoaarTKE
Q
92,
wEpacKTtcE
e 480,
i(i)(ava.arTKOv
O
723, iretaaaKov
\p 353,
aiKpcKpacKTKE
Moschus ii.
97, fiEiduiaaicE
Quint, Smp'n,
9
117;
c)
with loss of one
of the vowels
^dEfTKE X 596,
k-aXeo-fcero O
338,
TrwXifTKeTo E
788, fivQiaKovro
S
289,
oixt'efTKE
E790, KpciTEiTKE
Piud, Ncm. iii.
52, j^wEtrKofiriv
Ax.
Equ.
1242. "
EintTKOV
E
802,
jivafTKET
V 290,
Tpb)TTarTKETO
A
568, EL,aTTaTa(7Kov
Ar, Pax
1070,
ffvXaaKE Hes. Scut. 480. The ancient
grammarians expressly
teach that the vowel before
(tk
is
always
short
(Herodian
ii.
p. 792).
This excludes
e.g.
in the
passage
cited above from Hesiod's
Theogonyl
(v.157)
the
reading
of the M.SS.
avirjaKE.
This third method was
followed also
by some
forms at first
sight]
surprising,
viz.
plTfrarrKor
O
23, pin-aatct
^
827,
H
374,
X
592, ciappinra-
tTKEi' T
575
tcpv-nratTKE
Q 272
(i^pvn-TEfTKE Hymn,
Cer,
239),
which Kiihnev
(i.550) disposes
of
by saying
that here
acrKoi'
took the
place
of
eo-zjoj'.
But
we can hardly
be contented
with that. If I
am not mistaken we
have
a
fresh instance here of the intermixture of verbs in
aw
and
a4 w
CH. xxn,
ITERATIVES FROM AORIST STEMS. 531
noticed more
than
once,
and to wliicli reference was
made
on
p.
235.
This is
seen
most
clearly
in laaaKtTo ii
607,
which is formed like
rpioira-
rxKETo.
The
only present
known is
Inu'Cd).
But the iterative has
come
fi'om *\acn,). I. Bekk.er
thought
this form
so
strange,
that
on
the
sti'ength
"ofthe
reading
of the
papyrus
'
tKracrKtro' he
adopted eladtrKsro,
but it is
"certainly
better to
say
of Niobe
ovveK
lipaAr^rol
ladaKSTo
KaXXiTraprja
and further elaatrKtro in the
sense
of
'
compared
herself would be
quite
unique.
Now as (VdiDcero is to
ifrd^oj, so is
pinTatrKov
to
jOiTrra'^w,
the 382
intensive of
piirTU).
At S 257 the
god
of
sleep
says
of the
angry
Zeus
pnTTcl^wt'
Kara
Cwfia
deovQ,Ifie
c'
e^oj^ct
Tra'j-wr
ii^'jrei,
and at U
23 the
.same
Zeus boasts
ov
8e
Xd^oifjii
piTTTaaKOV TfTayav
otto ^r]\ov.
For
KpvTtTaffKi.
the
correspondingKpvTrrd^iooccurs
fii'stin Diodorus and
ecclesiastical writers. Still it would not be too
bold, considering
the
complete analogy
of the two fox'ms
piitTaunov
and
KpvTr-amcov,
to con- jecture
the
same
origin
for the latter also. How well the iterative form
adapts
itself to
frequentatives may
be seen from
pyrrTaCtaKev(ii755)
the
I'egular
formation from
pvardiiii),
which
according
to our view stands in
the like relation to
piTTTarrtcov
as avXaa^e to
yodanKe.
It is true that two
I'are forms with
a
strange a
still
i-emain,poiiiatrx^
Hes.
Theog.835,
which
however recent editors
replaceby pni'Citry^
for which there is
good
authority,
and Trdvrod' draairEiaaKe
Hymn,
in
Apoll.Pyth. 225,
whei'e
it is
very easy
to
read,following
most M.SS.
di'airelrrcKTKe,
dratrcrticruaKE
(only
M.
dvaaatiaaKf) whereby
we
get
a
regular
iterative from the
sig-
matic aori.st.
B)
Iteratives from
Primitive and
Thematic Aorists.
The need to render
possible
the
expression
of
repetition
not
only
of
the continuous action denoted
by
the
present stem,
but also of the
momentary
action,evidently
led to the extension of this formation
more
widelybeyond
its
originalsphere.
Thus
arose
the various aorist itera- tives,
which we have now to
point
out.
There are
but few
primitive
formations of the kind: c6"tk"jvI
331,
(TrdaKiv r 217, cvaKE
6
271, ovrufTKE
O 745
belonging
to olra
(cp.
p.
134).
Thematic aorist iteratives
are :
TrpoftdXeaiCE e 331,
yErtcrwro
\
208,
e'I-eo-i^eB 271
etc.,
EXEfTKoy
I
220,
}xeQe\e(jke
6
376,
'idecn^ET 217,
IciCEaKe
\p94,
dnoXinKETo^ A
586,
(j)vytai.E
383
p
316, i^aTaXiTTEfTKE, A.a'/je(T/c"
Herod, iv.
78, i^EXdOeaKs Or.
Sibyll.
i. 44.
C)
Iteratives from
Sigmatic Aorists.
dyi'ojiratrtcE,
as is
now
read after
Apollonius
in the Lexicon
p.
8,
18
in
\p
25 instead of the
hardlyexplicabledyruifTaairi^E
or
dyrwerfTECTKE
of
'
The active a.ir-6\ecrKev,
which Bekker has
adopted
0
270,
is
only supiDortedby
the Haiieian
M.S.,
hence La Roche is doubtless
right
in
reading with the best
M.SS. UTT-dAeiraev.
M M 2
532 THE ITERATIVE8.
ch.
xxu;
the
M.SS.,
contracted from
ayroi](7arTK(.,
like
oylwKorra
B
568,
652 from
6y6oi]t:ovTa, KaT-uCiii'aTKE
\
587,
a'it,a(TKt ^
369,(ett-
P
462),avciirrarjKE
E
786,
iatrdfrKtTu I
333,crjadaKero
il
15,ei^amcae 332,
eXdfrcKTKEB
199,
tp))TV(Ta(TKE
B
189,t'itpvaUCTKE
K
490, dpitu(TKOV
S
599,
aTTOKlVr](TU(TKE
A
636,fxryjTc'iaKETO
A
566, o/^toKX/jiraff/ct
B
199,
uprracTKE
P
423, ovTi'ifTufTKe
X
375,
tTTTEifTUirKE0
89, aTpt\pU(7K0y
S 546
(aTTO-
X
197),WfTClfTKE
X 599.
I do not find
anything
of the kind cited from
post-
Homeric Kterature
with the
exception
of
dKa'iaarTKE Orph.
Lith. 364. It is
very
remarkable
that the New Ionic
prose,
which, as we
saw,
elsewhere made such
abundant use of the
iteratives, rejects
these somewhat awkward forma- tions.
D)
Iterative froji the Passive Stem.
Here
we
have
only
to mention the one form
(jjdrEfricE
: A
64,
\
587,
fi
241,242,
Hes. fv.
44,3,
Avhich has
evidently
come from the
passive
stem
(pa")]
with the
same
shortening
of the final
vowel, as occui-s in
E"j"avey, (pariiToq, (pavEii]!',
and which here finds its
completeexplanation
in the
general
rule that
only
short vowels are admitted before the
m^
of
the iteratives. We
may
also
compare
KEtTKETo
cited above. The notion
of
assuming
an
E(puvov
for
(pdrEatcE
is
altogether
to be
rejected.
How
little
authority
there is for such an aorist is shown
by
the collectionsof
Veitch
p.
588.
The whole
category
of the
itei'atives,
which so to
speak
unfolds itself
before our
eyes
out of a not
inconsiderably
different formation with
essentially
the
same
foi-mative
elements,
and afterwards
disappears again,
is an
extremelysignificant phenomenon
for the
processes
in the
histoiy
of
language,
insti-uctivewith
respect
to the fact which we have so often
assumed,
and which we denoted
by
the name
'
branching
off.' If it was
384
incontestibly possible
at a
tolerably
late date foran offshootof the inchoative
class to attain to individual
life,
and
extensively propagatedby
a
spread- ing
analogy
to become an
independent species,
this foct
gives
additional
support
to the
hypotheses
which we ventured to advance for an immea- surably
earlier
period
in
resjject
of other
formations,
more
deeply
i-ooted
in the lifeof the
language, e.g.
as to the
origin
of the
conjunctive
and
the
optative.
533
CHAPTER XXIII.
DESIDERATIVES,
INTENSIVES ANB
FREQUENT
ATI VES.
We have
only
a
.small
gleaning
of forms left. These are
those v/hich
are proportionally rarelyemployed,
but which still cannot be
passedover
as
parts
of the
great
whole,
because
they
also
belonged
to the
system
of
the Greek
language. Compared
with the main
pile
of the edifice
they
form,
if we
may say so,
small
side-buildings,
like the
pleasure-housesor
pavilions
of
a palace,
which have been created for
special
subordinate
needs,
and
might
well be
dispensed
with
altogether,
without
anj^thing
essential
being
felt to be
wanting,
but which hold their modest
place,
-and bear witness to the inventive
power
of the architect.
I. DESIDEEATIVES.
While the
iteratives,
as we
saw,
were treated bv the ancient
sfram-
marians without
any
regard
to tlierr
meanmg simply as
past
tenses with
an
Ionic
expansion,
the desideratives used in
good
Attic coiild
not be
passed
over
by
them without
violating
their
principle, even as a matter of
usage.
The technical name
for these forms seems to have been
itperiKct,
as
Lobeck ad
Soph. Aj.
v.
32-5
saw, writingiferiKa
in the words of the
scholiast KciXovr-cti te.
tipeKTiKa,
and in the
same
way
in Theodosius
Grammat.
p.
67,
18
Gottliug
writes
(
" o'lop ujyw
OiLelw,j3pwrru) fipwaeiw,
arira
Kul
icperiKu
Xeyoi'-ai).
Elsewhere
e.g.
in the scholium
on S 37
we are
told that
eTriOvi-iririKioQ e'x*"'
^^ ^^^^ force of these
forms, or an
385
adverb in
-tikwc
formed from the
same
stem is
em^Dloyed
to
reproduce
the
sense;
thus in the Lexicon of
ApoUonius p.
125,
32
6\\^ewvTtc, dirrik:wQ
ej^oyTEQ
'
o
he
tvttoq rijg
Xeteujc Arrtcoc
"
KXavaEior-eg
yap
Xiyovaiv
aVrt
Tov i:Xav(7TiKGict'xo'Tec.
The old technical writers assumed two
types
of
this most familiar and
common
kind of
desideratives,
viz. those in
tiw (aVo
"i'e(7TU)Twi')
and those in
atioj (^cItto fieXXdi'r u)i').
But
as for the fii'st
type
only
the Homeric kiIo) and some
few forms like
daXneiw, reXe/w,piyelw,
oKveiii) are
quoted,
the desiderative force of which is
open
to
great doubt,
and in
some
instances
decidedly
to be
rejected,
Lobeck
(on
Buttmann's
Ausf. Gr. ii.2
389)
has
rightly
banished
altogether
tliisfirst
type,pointing-
out at the same
time that even some of the ancient
gi-ammarians
e.g.
in
the Et. M.
7.50,
.50
recognizedonly
the second
type.
The desideratives
proper occur,
as
these writers
noticed,only
in the
present,
so that the
form
wi/zEoi' (foru)y\jiLov) quoted
from
Soplu-on
'
(Ts/rrjuelwrai^ ['isspecially
noted']
: on
the other hand an imperfectmay
be formed from the verbs
in
-ftw.
Of the desideratives in
ireiw
I have succeeded in
discovering the
following
20 instances.
uKovaEiu)v
Soph.
"i\ 820
according
to Bekker Anecd.
p.
369,
13.
534
DESIDEKATIVES, INTENSIVP:S,
AND FREQUENT ATI VES. ch. xxiiu
ayayiioffeiu)Steph.
Thes.
'
Gl.'
cnraWaiielorrEi:
Thuc. i. 95.
avuftaaEioiTa
Thuc. viii. 56
(probably
more
correctlyo-vfiijrirTeloi'ra).
lDj)w"Teioi'TeQ
Callim. fr. 345.
ya/xi^uEiu)
AlcijDhi'on
i.
13,
iii.37.
yeXaaeioyra
Plato Phaed.
p.
64.
ypuxpeiujSteph.
Thes.
'
Gl.'
Benn'r)(T"i(")
do.
cpu(Ttiii)v Soph. Aj. 326, IpacrtiETOv
Eur. Phoen.
1208, cpatrduQ
Ar^
Pax 62.
C(i)(teUiu
Hesych. (M.S. ^oaeleiy), TrapadcoaEioi'ra
Thuc. iv. 28.
eXckteioi'ti Liician Charon c. 9.
epyarTEtwr
Soph.
Trach.
1232,
Epya/TEiEie
Soph.
Phil. 1001.
KXavTEiotTEQ Apollou.
Lcx.
125,
23.
i'avf.ia-)(i]rTEiovTaQ
Thuc. viii. 79.
386 (^EiovTEQ
S 37.
Tro\Eni](7eiurTEe
Thuc. i. 33.
Tvpav%'r](TeiovTa Diog.
Laert. i.
2,
18.
(l)Ev^"iu)
Eur. Here. F. 628.
X"o-"('w
Ar. Nub.
296,
x^'^^'V
^1^^-
^88.
The
ancients,as we
saw,
derived these forms all from the
futui'e, a
derivation to which in this
case
the
meaning
lends
a
certain
j)robability,
inasmuch
as the wish is
always
directed to the future. And in Greek
in
particular
the future does not
reject
the final
usage,
which is
closely
connected with the desideiative force. Still I do not see
how we could
get,
in the fticeof the
origin
of the futui-e examined on
p.
466
fi".,
either
from the earlier form
-aiM,
or
from the abbreviated
-crw,
to
-cteiu).
The
desiderative shares the
sibilant,
which is essential for its
form,
not
only
with the Indo-Germanic
future,
but also with the Indian
desiderative,
which ends in -sd-mi. But we saw on
p.
444,
that most
probably
it is
not this
termination,
but leather the
reduplication,
which we can see
in
the stem of the verb
e.g.
in
2n-2M-sa-ti
which
properly
carries the desi- derative
foi'ce. Hence if the Greek desiderative is at all akin to the
Imlian,
it must have lost the
reduplication, just
as
has been the case in
a
number of Sanski-it formations of the kind. But
no one will
readily
maintain such
a
view in face of the entire absence of the
slightest
trace
of such an
expansion
of the stem. And after all that would still leave
the
"1 quiteunexplained. Bopp
has taken a
different
startingpoint
for
the
analysis
of the desiderative form, comparing
a
form like Sojo-e/wwith
a
*ddsj(l-je (middle)
which he deduces on
the
analogy
of other forma- tions,
and
wliich,supported by
the Skt.
vrhd-jc
I become
great,
which
he traces back to
*vr-hant-je,
he deiives from
^ddsjat-je,
that is from
the stem of the future
participle.According
to this cuxteIu) would l^e for
owrroi'T-ju).
But all
phonetic
laws
go
against
such
an
assumption,
which
Bopp
was doubtless misled into
making only by compaiing
tlie Latin
desideratives in
-turio,
e.g. nupturio,
esurio. But even
in the
case of
these the derivation from the
particiijle
in -turns is
by
no means
certain.
387
For the difference of
quantity{imjUiirio,
but
mq^tnra) [Roby " 976],
which
'
presents
no difficulty'
to
Bopp,
is
a grievous
hindrance. Now-a-
days Bop)"'s
\'iew will
hai'dly
be defended
by
any
one.
Savelsberg
Ztschi-.
xvi. 362 ft*,
brings
the Latin forms
arcessere (besideaccersere^), ccqyessere,
"
[Cp.
Journal of
Philology
vi.'
278
ff.]
CH. xxiii.
DESIDERATIVES.
535
lacessere into connexion with the Greek desideratives,
which
certainly
come neai-
in
meaning.
But even
if
we
chose to start with the stems in
I
(e.g. capessl-vi)
which occur
elsewhere than in the
present,
we
should
stillbe far from
getting
an
identity
of stems. Hence no
formation
reallycorresponding
to the desideratives has hitherto been discovered
outside of Greek. It thei'efore i-emains
probable
that we
have to do
with
specifically
Greek recent
foi'mations,
and we can
only
ask after
what
patternsthey may
have been
produced.
Derived verbs in
etw are
to be
found, as we saw on
p.
240,
almost
exclusively
in the
language
of
Homer
: veiKtiu),
reXtlw etc. The desideratives in
-aeiM might
therefore
have been formed
upon
these at an
early
time,
when such forms were in
still more
frequent
use.
Another circumstance is in favour of this.
The
diphthongei
is sometimes
exposed
to the same weakening
into
e as
in those
presents.
We have the isolated
u)\peoypreserved
to us
from
Sophron.
The
Syracusan oxpiio belonging
to
it,
which we
may assume,
is related to 6-ipetu) just
as
reXew is to t-eXe/w. The desideratives in
-treno
are therefore,as
far as
their termination
goes,
verbs in
-tu)
in their
eai'lier form. It is more
difficult to
explain
the
precedingo-.
We can
hardly
look for
anything
else in it but the remains of a stem-forming
suffix. Now
0-
is indeed,
apart
from the
widespread stem-forming
suffix
-as=Gr.
"c, oc,
which
can
hardly
come
into consideration
here,a rare
sound in nominal stem -formation. But there are a
small number of
stems with the suffix
-rro, among
which
adjectives
like
fpiEo-c,Koi-t\p6-c,
Ti6a-(7u-c,
TTvp-au-Q
are
found.
Perhaps
we
may
add also
proper
names like
Aci/ice-cro-c,
"EXci-fro-c,
"'
Epa-o-o-c,
SJJ-o-o-c.
Now
possibly
fXaat'ui) is to'EXaffoc
justas
/vOipctjfw
to
Kolparnc
or aci/cew
to ciCiKoc. The
desiderative force
might
have been
produced by
theii- likeness to the
futures,
which sound somewhat
similarly.
A second formation of
essentially
the same function,consisting
of the
388
verbs in
-aw
and
-law,
is seen at once to be of denominative
origin.
Per- haps
the two
forms,
which have been
very
thoroughly
discussed
by
Lobeck
onButtmann ii.^
389, are
better
keptapart.
The rarer
verbs in-ow with- out
a preceding l evidentlycome from abstract
substantives,
e.g.
from
feminine abstract substantives in
a, t-o^ki-w
(Soph.Aj.
582
npog Tof.iwvTi
TriijiaTi), fiaxii''
"''rt rod
^ct^JJC
^e~iadai
Hesych., (^orti)'((pniaroog ySr]
Soph.
Phil.
1209),
from masculines in
o,
datarui'
(Plato
Phaed.
p.
6-i),
TOKwcra (Cratin.
Comici ii.
p.
'20S)
=^
part
ur lens,
\o7rdi' to incline to
peel
(oftrees).
Lobeck is
certainlyright
in
explaining
the verbs of sickness
[e.g./3payxd)', Xiddr, Tvolaypdr,vcepdi'
:
cp,
Lobeck
on Phryn.
p.
80]
as
identical with those
cited,appealing
to the German tei'mination -sucht
in Gelbsudtt
[jaundice]
beside Hahsucht
[greediness]. \pu)pdi' (Plato
Gorg. 494)
is related to
\pu)pa
as
-o/jdr
to
T01.111.
" The forms in
-tow
have
certainly
come
originally
from nominal stems which contained the
i.
Here Homer
gives
us an example:
M 265
df.i(poTipijj
S' A'tnyre KtXtv-
Tioioi'T eiri
TTvpywv
Trdvroae
(jwld'it)]!',
where the
meaning
is rather
imitative than
desiderative,
'
playing
the leader.' But in such foi-mations
the
more
delicate shades of
meaning
between the endeavoui' after
a
thing,
the
tendency
or
the inclination to a
thing,
and action in imitation of
a
man
everywhere
cross
each other. Now as we
find
nouns in
-ut-c,
discussed
by
Lobeck
Proleg.
487
ffi,
often formed with this
sense, e.g.
Tetpecr-lu-c, XoE-ia-c,'^ard-Ut-c, Kvixar-Ui-c,
I
can
well believe that ceXev-
rtciw properly,or,
as
Pott is wont to
say,
'
in idea
'
presupposes
a
536
DESIDERATIVES, INTENSIVES,
AND FREQUENTATIVES.
ch. xxiii.
*icEXEUT-iu-g as a
paragogeoffcfXew-r/y-e, justas much
as
ovpr]Tu'iar]Q
in Ar.
Vesp.
807
presupposes
*C)V(jr}TiaQ
and
*nv("t]T)]c, aKovrJTuw (aKovariKwQ
"')(ft)' Hesycli.)
*"k-oi/OT/at
and
a"n/c-"'yr,
w)'?;7-"aj' (Suid.) *wj'"jr/ac, a")'"jr/;c.
On the
same principleyavpidr
presupposes
*yavpiar,
fiuXaKidv^^uXaduQ.
It is
certainly
hai-d to decide whether abstract feminines
may
not also
have
contributed,as
may
be
probable
in the
case of KKavmay
(Arist.
Plat.
1099),6-ipLU)' (Hesycb.).
It is certain that in the
com^se of the
history
of the Greek
language
the
i
became
constantlymore
firmly
established,
and
-law
became
a
favourite termination of verbs of the
kind, so
that
by
the side of
kTepdv
Xtddv etc.
'ncrepid)',
XiOidv etc,
established themselves. For these I
may
refer to Lobeck ad
Phi'yn.
p.
79 ff.
389
The
unmistakeably
denominative character of the second formation
evidently
favours
our
conjecture
that the
case was
the
same
with the
first. As a
rule these later offshoots of the verb do not seem to be
formed
directly
from the stems of the verbs in
question,
but to
pre- suppose
usually
the
pi-eliminary stage
of
a nominal
stem, as we shall
have to notice
again
in the
case of the
frequentatives.
11. INTENSIVES.
A
definitely
formed intensive
formation,characterised
by particular
terminations,
does not exist in
Greek,
and therefore there is
no
Greek
name for the intensives.
'
I find in the ancient
grammarians no mention
of
epitaticor
2:)aratatic verbs,'
says
Loljeck
on Buttmann ii.^392. But
there
are remains of a
primitive
Indo- Germanic intensive
form,
to which
attention has
repeatedly
been called. The
sign
of the
intensity
of the
action is
i-eduplication,
which in this
case
is
readily
united with vowel-
intensification in the
syllable
of
reduplication.
In
Sanski-it,as
may
be
seen
from Delbriick's Statement in his Old-Indian Verb
p.
130
".,
the
modes of treatment of the stem are
diverse. A
part
of these forms have
been mentioned
already
under the head of the
perfect,
e.g. p.
376 ft'.
One of the various methods of formation is that the
reduplicated
stem
unites with the suffix
-ja
to form the
present
stem.
According
to
Delbriick
]).
131 this method is still 'rare' in the
Veda,
and becomes
*
more common later on.' Its
type
is
representedby ve-vi{i-jd-te
to let
fly
from the rt.
vuj, re-rih-ja-te
from the rt. rih
{lilt)
lick. But still the
formation must be
veiy
ancient
:
otherwise Greek and Sanskrit could
not
agree
in it. Such
forms, so
far
as
they are preserved
in
Greek,
belong
to the I-class of the
j^resent
formation,
and have
accordingly
been
cited
above,
viz.
p.
212 f.
seven
presents
in
-XXw,
ai.oXXw etc.
p.
215 f.
five in
-pw, ynp-yatpit)
etc.
p.
217, eight
in
-vw,
dv-airop.uL
etc.
p.
221,
three in
-o-aw, heL-lianonaL etc.,
p.
226 f. sixteen in
-^w uppa^u)
etc. The
whole
subject
has
recently
been tx'eated
so
thoroughlyby
Fritzschein his
390
paper
'
de
reduplicatione
Graeca
'
Stud. vi.
esp. p.
282 ff".that I need
not follow it
up
further
here, especially
as I
frankly
confess that I
cannot offer
anything,
which
quite
satisfies
me,
as to two
phonetic
difficultieswhich
present
themselves in these
forms,
viz.
as to the
t,
which
appears e.g.
in
7ro(-7ra\\w,
and
as to the nasal which
appears
in
C"t'-hiXXu). The
very
varied treatment which the
palatalspirantJ
under- went
in Greek has led the instmct of the
language
to
part
off"these
verb-^,though
fundamentallyquite homogeneous.
Hence
we natiu'ally
could not talk of
a definite and certain
usage.
"!H, XXIII.
FREQUENTATIVES.
537
Intensives, which,
belong to
any
othei' class of
presents, are extremely
rai'e,
perhaps
do not exist at all, for
even /vw-k-u-w
beside Skt. kii, howl
(cp.
Fritzsche
p,
301)
and
rrj-vl-w
beside
re w
might easily
have lost
a J
before the thematic vowel.
III. FREQUENTATIVES.
I have
repeatedly, especially on
pp.
236 f. and
243,
called attention
to the verbs in -T-riw with the by-form -tAI^oj, and to those in -rioj with
the
by-form
-r"4w,
which have the plainest
connexions with the Latin
frequentatives in -fare or
-itdre.
Ev\eTaofxai,
oi'ora^w, pvarai^w,
cutujj,
aiTi^u), iharii^u)
may
serve as examples, pnrriu)
and
j"c"are
quite
coincide
in their
meaning, fateri
and
(paTti^en'
do not essentially
differ. The
denominative
oiigin
of formations of this kind has been discussed already.
Their force is doubtless most correctly
denoted
by
the
name
'
frequenta- tives.'
But
tliey often deviate into the
category
of the intensives.
What Buttmann and Lobeck
(Ausf.
Gr. ii.^
p.
392 f.)
have fvirther
collected under the head of
frequentatives
consists of
mere
details. For
instance, in
yt/jti^eir
beside
yej-ieir,
epTrvi^tiy
beside
'ipTreir,
aeftliio)
beside
"TEl3o/jai, it is
merely a question
of
a
further
expansion thi-ough
the
medium of
a
nominal stem.
We
may
also
pass
over
here what is collected, as an appendix
to this,
with
regard to diminutives. For the
category
of diminutives is developed "
only in nominal stems. If there
are apparently some
few diminutive 391
verbs,
e.g.
E^aTrarvWeiv (Arist.
Ach. 657), yjjvXXidv (Ban. 515),
these
are
rather ventures of the Comic
poets
than verbs
actually
in
use,
and
"ven
these have
evidently
arisen
on
tlie analogy of denominative verbs.
The
inchoatives, which exist
only
in the
present, were
discvissed in
Chap. X.
538 ANOMALIES. ch.
xxjy.
CHAPTER XXIV.
ANOMALIES.
We have but little information as to the
arguments by
which Crates of
Mallus endeavoured to maintain the
principle
of
anomaly,
which he
defended
against
Aristarchus. Still we cannot but
suppose
that the verb
must have
supplied
him with
especially
abundant materials. In modern
grammar
the verb has
always
remained the
special
domain of
anomaly.
Buttmann in his
Complete
Grammar
disposes
of the
regular
verb in the
first volume in 240
pages,
the
irregular
in the second in 332
pages.
When
we
read what he
says
at the commencement of the second volume
as to the
irregularities
of the
verb, we
become aware how in
spite
of the
extremely
valuable
investigations,
of which I have
eveiy
where
thankfully
availed
myself,
in the
'
Survey
of the
Anomaly
of the Verb'
(ii.1-89),
the
number of
irregularities
remains
quite overpowering.
When he has
reached the end of this
survey
he himself
prefixes
to the list of
verbs,
which seemed to him
indispensable
as a
last
refuge,
the remark
:
'
Hei-e,
with the
exception
of the verbs which are
derived from other words'
according
to a
definite
analogy,
like the
gxeat majority
of those in
ct^w,
t^w
etc.
[ati. p.
472 he adds those in
aw, eu, ow, an'w, woj, evoi],
we must
properlyplace
all the rest.' But
even
those
excepted
are not
wholly
lackingamong
the
irregulai- verbs,
for
e.g.
in the case
of
many
verbs in
"w
and
ew
fluctuations of
quantity,
facts as to the moveable cr
discussed
392
by
us
in
Chap. XXI.,
and
as to the
occurrence
of the
particulartenses,
even
of those called
by
K. W.
Krliger"
40
'
regular,'
haA^e to be noted.
Hence a
considerable
part
even
of the verbs which are supposed
to
undergo
the usual or
regularchange,
are discussed in
every
alphabetical
list of
verbs, especially
in the most
complete
of
all,
Veitch's
'
Greek
Verbs, Irregular
and Defective.' Hence it is
reallyvery
hard to find an
answer to the
question
what verbs are regular. Perhaps
from this
way
of
looking
at the
question
it is
hardlypossible
to
give
any
other than
this,
'
those verbs
only
are
regular,
which do not
appear
in the list of the
irregular
vei^bs.' And I do not doubt that
many
will content themselves
with this
answer,
and that there will
even
not be
wanting
some
who
may
regard
such subtle distinctions as
not
belonging
at all to the
sphere
of
'
scholarship.'
As we now
stand
upon
a
different
level,
it is
worth while at the close of
our
whole consideration of the structure of
the Greek
verb,
to enter
upon
the
conception
of
anomaly
and
upon
the
reasons
for the
extremely great variety
of the Greek verb which re- mains
in
spite
of all
our
endeavours to obtain
guiding
and
simplifying
points
of view.
If we take the notion
'
anomalous
'
simply
in its
i)liysical
sense as
'
uneven,'certainly
the Greek verbs are
in the
highestdegreeaiw/uaXa
as compared one
with another. There
are
not
many
verbs which have-
CH. XXIV.
THE DOCTEINE OE 'ANOMALY.' 539
theii-
presents
formed
identically,
and at the same
time form their remain- ing
tenses
in
exactly
the
same
way,
and
on
the other
hand, thei'e
are not
many
roots with
just
the
same
phoneticcharactei",
which have the
same
present
form. Each verb
is, so to
speak,
an individual, or
rather
a
group
of forms with
a shape
of its
own,
held
togetheronly by
their
common meaning.
As
Germany
and
Italy
were formerly
'
geographical
exjn-essions,'
so
every single
Greek verb
is,
if
we
may say so, only a
lexical
expression.
But
certainlyaccording
to the scientific
use of the
word the
aru"iua\aare
not
so much
opposed
to the
o^"Xa
as to the
avaXoya,
and
arufxaXla
is
opposed
to
ctroXoy/a. Anomaly
in this
sense
is
evidentlya
much
more limited
phenomenon.
Formations wliich
range
themselves under no
Xoyoc, no
series of
phenomena
united
by a common
bond, are
among
the
greatest
i-arities. It has
necessai-ily
been
always
393
our
endeavour to
point
out such series. But the
analogue
appears
not
so
much in the whole
as
in the
single
gi'oups.
It is
only
in these that
we can point
out the
special
formative
impulses,as
they
spiang np
and
established themselves,
for the most
part
in
earlyperiods
of the
language.
These too
again display
themselves in
great variety.
What
a
number of
formative
impulses,supplementing
and sometimes
even
opposing
each
other,
may
be detected
e.g.
in the Greek
peifect
! The
particular
groups,
when
they
took
shape,were by no means always
what
they
afterwards
appeared.
The distinctions between
a
present
and
an aorist
foi-m,
afterwards of such
importance,
often
present
themselves in earlier
periods
of
langviage,
which contain the
key
to the later
periods,as fliiid. It was
only
when the
groups
got by degreespressedtogether
into
a whole,
that
many
of them
acquired
the
application
which forms the rule in the best
period
of literature. For
instance,
whethei' in the verbal
system
which
became the normal
one,
the aorist shovild be formed
primitively,
e.g.
"(["vf,
or thematically,
e.g.
ejiciXoi', or
sigmatically, e.g. tTrpaia,depended
on
the
question
whether
an
archaic stem-form had continued to survive
into the
period,
when all this
was settled,or not. Hence the
unity
of
each verbal
system
is one which has come about
historically,
and
can
be
understood
only as a historical
event,
not
by
means of
deduction,or
from
phoneticanalogies
alone. The latter have
undoubtedly
contributed to
the
result,
but
they
are not
jjroperly
the chief
thing.
The
tendency
to
produce
unifo
unityaccording
to theoretical
symmetry
has
certainly proved
itself
powerful
in the Greek
verb,
but still to a
much less extent than
in the verbal formation of other
cognate languages.
It is
only
the
system
of the forms
common to all the
groups,
viz. the
personalendings,
the
augment,
the formation of the moods and of verbal
nouns, though
the last
evidentlyonly by degTees,
which took
a
definite
stamj)
in
early
times. Within this framework the
greatestvarietyprevails,
and
we
miist admire the Greeks for
having
been able to fathom this abundance
of
"S'arioiisly
connected
ci'eations,
and
crossinganalogies
with
an
unerring
instinct,
and to
employ
them with due
regard
to their
placeintbesystem.
The anomalies within the different
groups
have been considered in 394
the discussion of these in detail. A
far-reaching
deviation from the
rule,
which
was
noticeable in thi'ee
groups,
was the
subject
of
our
consideration in
Chap.
XXI. It remains for
us now
to
survey
the chief
causes
of the
extraoi-dinary variety
of the structure of the Gi-eek verb
as
a whole,
and then to examine the
very
few
instances,
in which
we must
recognize
real anomalies.
540
ANOMALIES.
CH, XXIV.
In
addition,then,
to what has been said
ah'eadyas to the
general
charactei" of the Greek verbal
system,
I think
we
may
note the
seven
following points,
as
those which contributed to
a
large
extent to its
chequered
appearance,
1)
The
crossing
of active and middle forms.
Here
lielong
not
mei-ely
the so-called
deponents,
in the
majority
of which
a
reflexive
force,though
with diffei-ent shades of
meaning,
will be found
to be
underlying,
but also
especially
the
preference
of the future for the
middle
form,
which has been referred to
repeatedly,
and
conversely
the
use
of the active
personalendings
to denote the
passive,
which elsewhere
is wont to make
use of the middle.
Evidently
the distinction of
mean- ing
in the Indo-Germanic verb between the active and the middle
was
originally a
very
delicate and elastic
one.
2)
The
crossing
of the
primitive
and the thematic forma- tions.
The
more
convenient inflexion
by
means
of definite vowels
appended
to the stem and moveable
according
to a
fixed
rule,
makes its
way
wholesale into the remains of the
primitiveverbs,so that
no one
of them
has remained
wholly
unaffected. This is of itself
enough
to make all
verbs in
fii
properlyspsaking irregular.
But
conversely
in forms like
iptjr,
(jwrai,rr-)^"c,
in
perfect
forms like reOi
aicn,
in
optatives
like
-oioirju
and
thi'oughout
in the two
passive
aorists the
primitive
inflexion makes
its
way
into the
organism
of the thematic.
3)
The
variety
of the
present
formation.
This is
really
the
germ
and the
central-point
of the whole of the
Indo-Germanic wealth in vei-bal forms. The
present
stem is formed in
395
many ways, every
other tense as a rule
only
in one
way.
This is the
fimdamental law of the Greek verb. It is
precisely
at this
point
that
we meet with
a
greatly
excessive wealth of forms above the
requirements
of the
meaning.
A
glance
at the fixcts
pointed
out on
p.
135 ff".is
enough
to show what diversified
present
forms
came from similar stems.
In the
variety
of the
present
stem
a
very
ancient delicate distinction
between the different kinds of continuous action
has,as
it
were,
become
petrified.
For in the extant
language
there are
few traces of these dis- tinctions.
Some isolated indications of the kind
were
pointed
out on
p.
187.
It cHd not however
escape
our notice how here and thei-e
phonetic
analogies
limit the
variety
at lea"t to a certain
degree.
Under the fii'st
class
we saw on
p.
145 f. that certain short thematic stems do not occur
as
present stems,
under the third
(p. 161)
that the T'-class is formed
almost
exclusively
from stems
ending
in
a
labial. Similar limitations
based
upon phoneticanalogies
wei'e noticeable
elsewhere,too,
e.g.
in the
"case
of the verbs in
-rv-^/
(cp.
p.
109).
4)
The extension of the
present-stem.
Again a
very productive
source
of
irregularities
not
merely
for
(Jreek,
but for all the
cognate languages.
As the
present
stem with its various
(H. xxiT. ANOMALIES OF FOEMATIOX. 541
expansions
came to bear
a
less
sharplydistinguished force,
it
was
very
natural that it should
occasionally
extend
beyond
its
originalprovince.
Sometimes the
present
stem makes its
way
altogether
into the
pro\-ince
of the other
groups, e.g.
in
rcu'vaaa, -eTuivtr-ai,
ravvader
(p.113),
and
in the
Syracusanperfect
-e-"mxn
(p.400),
with
slightphonetic
modifi- cation,
sometimes the
diphthong
of the
present
extends into other
groups,
e.g.
almost
regularly
in
future,sigmatic
aorist and
perfect
forms like
\axLw, 'tTevL,c(, Xi\"i/.ij.iui,
sometimes the nasal
oversteps
the limits
proper
to
it,
e.g.
in
Ka:\ayya. Cp.
pp.
401,
460.
Though
it is
as a
rule
an
advantage
of Greek to
carry
out so
purely
the
original
distinction of the
present
stem from the verbal
stem, yet
we cannot be astonished to find
that the convenience of
employing
elsewhere too the stem which had
become habitual in
a long
series of the most
indispensable forms, was
fi-equently
too much for the beautiful old
flexibility.
5)
The intermixture of shorter
stems
with those
expanded
396
by
a
vowel.
Here
belong
the
phenomena
of the
e-class,
discussed
on
p.
2.58 ff.
But
we were
brought
back to this
on
subsequent
occasions
also,especially
in
dealing
with the future
p.
477 and the verbal
adjectiA'-e
p.
514. It
has its
analogies
outside of
Greek,
but it is difficult to
give
the ultimate
reason
of it.
6)
The
occurrence
of
equivalentduplicate
forms.
I
mean those
pairs
of
gi-oups
of forms alike in
meaning, formerly
distinguished by
numbers : aor.
1 and aor.
2. etc. Here there is
a
similar
variety
to that in the case
of the
present stem, though by no means as
great.
Various
parts
of the stock of
language,
of different
growth
and
belonging
to different
periods
were employed
for the same service in the
verbal
system.
The decision of the
language
between the
one form and
the other defies all rules. Latin has
correspondingphenomena
in the
numerous
forms
adoptedby
the
perfect,
the
gi-eatest
and least
explicable
anomaly
in the Latin
verb,
Sanskrit in the
diver-sity
of the aorist
formation.
7)
The intermixture of
merely
tentative,
isolated formations.
To this kind
belong
the forms in
0,
examined above
p.
500 ff. This
consonant creates
special
anomalies in
present,pei-fect
and aorist forms.
But the
k-
in
some
aorist and in
numerous perfect
stems is also of the
same kind, though
the
origin
of the two formations is
altogether
different.
Cp. p.
410 ff.
All these
u-regularities might
be
comprehended
under the
name
of
anomaUes
offormation. They
all occur
in
a
somewhat
large
number of
instances,so
that even
here within
anomaly analogyagain displays
itself.
On the other hand other deviations have more
individual
causes.
The
departm^e
from the
ordinary
course
is here due to
phonetic
processes.
This
is,
if
we
may say so,
a slighter
case
of
sickness,
the
predisposition
to
which is
pi'esent
elsewhere too under similar circumstances.
Within this class
again
we
may
distinguish
eeven
groups
:
397
542 ANOMALIES.
cii. xxiv.
1) Anomaly through
a
change
of vowel.
This
hardly occni'S
in
any
other instance than in the inflexion of
Tvivw,
which instead of
revolving
abovit
a single
stem
as
its
centre,
wavers
between the stems
tto {TreiTUKa, kir6di)i',
ttotoq)
and
iri
(tt/tw, tt'iQi,
EKior,
irioixrn).
The Aeolians with their
ttwiw,
ttwOi
gave
the
stx'onger
stem, oi'iginally pa,
a wider area.
In Princ. i.
p.
349 I have
proved
that both the fuller and the weaker form
are found also in other
languages
beside Greek.
2) Anomaly through
a
change
of consonant.
Here
belongs
tpypnai
"
i]\vQnv" tXijXvOa.
The roots
ep
and eX unite
here in accordance with the well-known close
kinship
of the softer
liquid
with the harder. But anomalies of formation make the
case still
more
complicated. Cp.
Princ. i.
p.
81.
3) Anomaly through
a
change
of vowel and
consonant.
Of this kind is
a'tpiio,
elXnr.
Cp.
p.
261,
Princ. ii. 180. The Cretan
(KpcuXrjaecrBai
on
the
inscription
edited
by Bergmann (Berl.1860)
is
very
instructive. The
greatestdifficixlty
is occasioned
by
the
i
in the
j^resent
stem.
Perhaps
we must assume a
present
foi-m
apjoo,
which became
by
epen
thesis
*a/pjw,
and afterwards
by
the vocalisation of the
J alpiuj.
4)
Anomaly through
metathesis.
This
appears
in the
pairs
of stems
/e/3(eipco, e'pco)
and
j:pr]
(fpprjdrjv')
7T.T (Dor.eWro.)
"
{
^^''
i^J^^"^^\
^^X
(fX)
f^"j
f'X'^
"
o-^f
(fXf
f^ 'i(Txov)
aerr (fV)evvcTre
,,
erne {ei/i-crne'-s)
(TiTV (en)
enojiai "
ane {(meadai).
5) Anomaly through
transformation of
ctk.
Here
belongs
once more
Epx,oficu
because of its
x"
^^^ ^Iso
(cp.
pp.
192,
197
f.)
7ra(7xw
and
/ifVyw.
6)
Isolated
application
of
reduplication
to the formation of
the
present
stems of thematic verbs.
We must dwell for a littleon this
anomaly,
because
we
have
as
yet
said
nothing
of it. Six
presentsbelonghere,
viz.
398
yi-yro-p.m,
from Homer
(B
468
yiyrETni)onwards,
in
common
use,
with the
by-form
y/ro/xai,
Avhich
according
to La Poche Textki-itik
p.
220 is the
more iisual in the M.SS. of Homei-, but which is reaarded
with
probabilityas post-Homeric
because of its inferior
originality.
In
Herodotus editors write
yuo/xai
(e.g.
iii. 80
eyyiyerai),
and
so
Tycho
Mommsen in Pindar
(e.g.Pyth.
iii.
13),
and after
Aristotle,
in whom
Bekker
approves
of
ylyioi-iai, ylrojiai
is
commonly
used. For the
origin
CH. XXIV.
PHONETIC ANOMALIES. 543
of the I
cp. p.
193. The other
present
formation
ydvoiiai was
discussed
on
p.
216. "
The
parallelism
with the Latin
gi-gno
is
very noteworthy.
In Sanskrit too there
are reduplicated
forms
: (^a-jan-ti(3sing,
in
gi-am-
marians
according
to the Pet.
Diet.).
(-fti-w
Homeric
(e.g.
S 259
lavwv),
then
once
in
Soph. (Aj. 1204)
and
Eurip. (Phoen. 1538).
The
syllable
of
reduplication
extends
beyond
the
present
stem in lavarcu \ 261 and
launuq
in
Lycophron (101),
as
in
the Homeric hwMcrw
(cp.
above
p.
474),
while
aeo-a
for
a/to-o,
discussed
on
p.
520,
is formed from the
non-rednplicated
stem.
''i-(T)(u),
a
stronger present
form of the rt.
crex,
in extensive use
from
Homer
("812 "icrxf-*)
onwards.
fii-lii'd),
a poeticalby-form
of
yut'rw,
to which it stands
exactly
in the
relation of
"i(tx"^
to
'ix'^o, occurring
from Homer
(N 747)
onwards.
-Ki-TZTio common
from Homer
(A 69)
onwards. The
poeticalby-forms
Trlr-rw,
TriT-rito have been
quoted on
p.
184.
Ti-rpcuo
coming
fi-om
ri-Tp-q-fxi (quoted
on
p.
108) by a
tran?;ition into
the thematic
conjugation
:
neither verb
occurs
before
Appian
and Galen
(Lobeck on
Buttmann Ausf. Gr. ii.
304).
For
rerpaivM
or
rirpniru) cp.
p.
217.
Reduplication
hence
appears
as a
present strengthening
within the
thematic
conjugation only
under
quite
definite
conditions, especially
in
the inchoative and in the I-class. Of the six verbs
justquoted,
two follow
those forms of the I-class which have
an
intensive
character, l-uv-w and
TL-rpa-b)
seem
to be for
*l-av-jw,*ri-Tpa-JM,
and
are
therefore related to
the verbal stems
av
and
rpa
just as *yap-yap-j(i)(p.115), *-i-rav-jw,
*r".Tpay-jio (p. 217),*f3i-(3a-ju} (p.226)
to their roots.
To the
precisely
similar
presents yi-yt'Ofjai, 'itxw, /u/yuj'w,
tt/tt-w the
399
question
attaches
itself,
whether
they, as was long
assumed
universally,
have arisen
by
syncope
from
*yi-ytvo-nui, ^jjn-fievii},
*7rt-7rerw, or
not.
The
expulsion
of
a
vowel like
e
which is
particularly
common
in the
present stem, is,as no one can deny,
very
suqirising.
Now if
we leflect
that from all these stems there
are
also forms in which the first consonant
is in immediate contact with the final
consonant,
and the vowel follows
both,
like
-yj'r/-roc^Ijat.gnd-tu-s, yvij-a-io-c,irx^-f^i-C,
"'XiV-crw,
erxfi-fici,
fivdo-jxai, fji-fivi'i-aKU),
fxrij-furj
(cp.
Princ. i.
387),
Tre-rrryj-wc, 7rrw-^t",
TTrw-m-f,
it
seems to me more probable
that metathesis took
place here;
and that therefore
yl-ype-rai
differs from
a
Skt.
^a-gan-tionly by
this
l^henomenon,
and
by
its middle
form,
and
so
far is the
regular present
to
the
aor. 'i-ytv-To
discussed
on
p.
130. For
"ktx'^
the form
tx^-q
men- tioned
on
p.
132 and discussed more fidlyon
p.
279,
carries
great weight,
for it
can only
be
explained
in this
way.
We must notice also the foi-ms
l-(Txti-rw,
i-rrxu-vuu),
which
presuppose
an *(-o-x" (cp-pp-
182, 183).
On E-TzXe-To we
decided in favour of the same
view. Just as
in
'i-rrxo-v
beside
f^xi-c
the thematic vowel
suppressed
the vowel of the
root, so
the
same happened
here and made it
appear
as though
a
thematic fonn
were
present
here from the first. With this view the
reduplicationappears
as a
relic of the old unthematic method of
formation,
and thus still
better suits
Tt-6r)~fii, ^/-^w-^t,'i-arrjfii.
544 ANOMALIES.
en. XXIV,
7)
Eoots
fundamentally
different,
united to form
one verb.
This
highestdegree
of
anomaly
appears
only
in five
verbs,
which
we
may
therefore call in the strictest
sense
mixed verbs
:
i.e. 3 -with twa
stems,
and 2 with three stems.
a)
Rt. e? with its
thi'ee-fold, or
if
we include
'ic-iueiai
(cp.
p. 104),
four-fold
present
t'^w
(Homeric,e.g,
tcei
O
636,
'icoiN
322,
and here and
there in other
poets),tVflw,
and
eVfJ/w,
discussed
on
p.
501,
its
perfect
again
with various forms
(cp.pp.
368, 415),
and its future formed like
a
400
present, supplemented by
rt.
(buy,
with the fundamental
meaning
of
participation, enjoyment,recognizable
in the Skt.
bhag. (Princ.
i.
370.)
b)
Rt.
fep
and /ett united in the notion of
saying. J^ep
in the
present
hlpo)
a,nd
elpim (p..213),
in the
perfecteiprj^a(p. 360),
in the future
Ipiit),
epw,
in the aorist
eppi'iOrii',
with the Herodotean vaiiant
elpeOijt'
and
in the verbal
adjective
priroc,
Fstt
only
in
eenroy,
ei-n-ni'
discussed
on
p.
291, The
present,
which after-wards becomes
obsolete,
is
replacedby
(l)rjfii,
Xiyw,
ayopevu),
SO
that
really
the form of the verbs of
saying
is.
still
more
diversified.
c)
Rt.
Pop,
rt. fic and rt. on-, fop
has been
preserved
without further
expansiononly
in
upovrui, opovro
(cp.
p.
144). /opo must be considered
denominative. It is
superfluous
to
give
references for the
particular
forms,
for all
are
in constant use from Homer onwards. The
present
formation from the rt. he
according
to the
lengthening
class
fEt^o/jai
(cp.
p. 153)
is also extant. In the
perfect
all three stems are
represented:
swpaKct, twpufxai
(Attic),folZa,olca in
ordinary
Greek
only
in the
sense
of
a
present, ottw-ku (poetic).
In the futiu'e too
{tllijrrw
beside
oxpofiai)
two roots
compete.
I have discussed the
anomaly
of this verb
so fully
in Princ. i. 124 that I need not I'eturn to it.
d)
Rt.
rpex
and rf.
cpa^.
Both occur
since Homer
(^ 520,
2
30).
Still the division here too is not at all
smooth,
for beside the
ordinary
conjunction rpe'xw 'icpafxov ds^pofia(only
in
poetiy)
and
ce^pd/jjjKa
Epctfiovf^iai
a
poetical
aorist
tOpeta
also occurs
(eTriSpeEai'Tog
N
409,
TTtpiBpilai
Ax. Thesm.
657)
and in Ar. Nub, 1005
cnroOpi^oncu.
In this
as in the
preceding
gi'oup
we can see
very plainly
how at fii*st the
different stems
were
inflected
throughout independently,
and how it
was
only
later
that,owing
to the
prevalent
use of
particular
stems in
par- ticular
tenses,
certain branches of each stem died off". The definite union
of the
stems,
which had become
defective,
in order to
supplement
each
other,
is
only
the last
stage
in these
processes.
e)
Rt.
"pEp,
stem
ivtyK,
stem o\. Here the limitation of the fii'stroot
to the
present
stem is
common to Greeks and
Romans,
and is therefore
doubtless to be
regardedas
very
ancient. Just
as
certainly
is
erzyK
beside
40l
IreiK reserved to the aorist
(cp.pp.
291, 463)
and
perfect(cp.
p. 407)
and
01 to the future
o'law,o'it7oi.un.
The traces of
an aorist from the latter
stem
are weak, and,
with the
exception
of the Homeric
oktete
discussed
on
p.
461,
late. Here therefore the individual
stems,
which
are
united
into
a whole, are
the most defective.
The
conij"rehensiou
of this last and
highest degree
of
anomaly
evidently
leads
us
beyond
what
we can call the structure of the verb
mto the
province
of
etymology
and
synonymic.
545
EXCUESUS.
ON SOME RECENT EXPLANATIONS OF THE VOCALISM
IN THE THEMATIC AORIST.
(Vol.
112.
pp_
35_44.)
The
investigations
of the Indo-Germanic
vocalism,
staited
by Briigman
since the
completion
of the first edition
.
of this
work,
and
pursued
zealouslyby many
of
our
younger
scholars,
have been noticed
once or
twice
above,
e.g. pp.
49,
97 note. These have also led to the
attempt
to refer what
seems
the
very
capricious
vocalistition of the thematic aorist
to more
definite
principles.
As
a certain
agreement
seem.s to have
been reached on
this
pointamong
a, number of
scholars,
in
spite
of
by no
means
inconsiderable difierences of
opinion
on
various
wide-reaching
cjuestions,
it seems to me
proper
to
say
a few words about it. In
doing
so,
I have set aside
altogether
the
question as to the vocalism of the
primitive
Indo-Gex-manic
langviage,
and have
kept
in view in the first
place
the statement of the case which Fick has
given
in his
essay,
'
Zuni
Aorist- und Perfectablaut
'
(Bezzenberger's Beitrage
iv.
167),
as this is
the most
systematic,
and the most
decidedlyadapted
to tlie Greek
language
:
but I
may
add that I have read
attentively
the more im- portant
of the other studies
bearing
on^
this
question,especially
those of
de Saussure
(Memoire
sur
le
systeme primitif
des
voyelles,Leipzig
1879), Kluge (Beitrage
zur
Geschichte der
germanischen Conjugation,
Strassburg1879)
and Johannes Schmidt
(Ztschr.
vol.
xxv.).
The thematic aorist is
fond,as a rule,
of short
stem-syllables.
Hitherto
this short
stem-form,compared
w*ith that of the
pi'esent
with a
long
vowel or
diphthong {(pvyelv (pevyeiy),
has been considered the more
primitive,
while
the heavier form of the
present
has been held to be due to intensification.
Fick and others invert this
relation,starting
from the heavier
present
form, and
regardingijielighter
form of the aorist as weakened from it.
He thus
really
revives the view of the ancient
gi-ammai-ians,
who
always
regarded
the 1
sing,
pi-es.
act. as
the
irpwrq
Himc. This acute scholar
attempts
to defend his
starting-point historically
also
by
some
general
considerations. That the structui'e of the verb started with the
present
is
my
own
view
also,on
which this book is based. But it does not at
all follow from this that a particular,
and in this
case
the
hea\'ier,
present
form must be older than the stem-form of the thematic aorist.
As
^icwjjii was
preceded by
an
obsolete
*cw/di,
so
"p(vyw may
have been
precededby
an older
*(pvyu),
formed
on
the
analogy
of the sixth class of
N N
546 EXCURSUS.
Sanskrit verbs. It was only
the
opposition
between the
lighter
and the
heavier form which could call forth the difference of
meaning: between
present-imperfect
and aorist. In the same
way
we can understand the
thematic vowel in the aorist in accordance with the
explanation
which I
have
attempted:
for if the aorist stem was
originally
a kind of
present
stem,
it
was just
as caj^able
of
receiving
this vowel
as
the heavier
kind.
The chief
advantage,according
to Fick's
view, seems to lie in the
fact that he thinks he can
point
out
one single
definite motive for the
weakening
which he
assumes,
viz. the accentuation. In this he follows
an
explanation
first
suggestedby Benfey
in Orient und Occident iii.6.5.
Greek indeed shows the
tendency
to accentuate the final
syllable
in the
aorists
only
to a
very
limited
extent,
i.e. in the
participle
of the
active,
in the infinitive of the active and
middle,
in the 2
sing,
of the middle
imperative
of all
verbs,
and in that of the active of five
especially
com- mon
ones : iSe,Xa/3"
etc. But in
Sanskrit,
in the
evidentlycognate
sixth class of
presents
{twld
"i=Lat.
tundit),
the chief accent
always
falls
upon
the thematic vowel of all
non-augmented forms,
and the
same
holds
good
of the
correspondingaorist,
e.g.
vidd-t-=fi()E beside d-vi(ht-t
=
eISe. It is almost
exclusively
in the
participle, e.g.
nom.
plur.
viddntas
=^fi^6rTEQ that the two
languagesquite
agi^ee.
It is
certainlysurprising
here that
precisely
those aorist
forms,
which
might
have been
regarded
as the
proper
sphere
for the establishment of the
phonetic form,
the
augmented
forms of the
indicative,
nowhere show the
slightest
trace of
the accentuation of the final
syllable.
If therefore
we refer the short
vowels and the
rejections
of the vowel to be mentioned
presently((nrely
beside
etteiv)
to the accentuation of the final
syllable
as the
causa
movens,
we must assume
either that these
shortenings
extended from what
we
cannot but
regard (especially
in the earliest
time) as
the much less
common moods, participles
or even infinitives, or
that
as
in
Sanskrit,so
even in the
primitive
Indo-Germanic
language
there
was a
system
of
lightforms,
not without
a
present
indicative
also,
in which this
operation
of the accentuation of the final
syllable
took
shape.
Fick's
conjecture
that the short vowel
along
with the accentuation of the final
syllable
was
originally
proper
to the dual and
plm-al
forms
only (*(/)vyo/iei',
*(l"vyETE
beside
^Evyio, ^cuyetc)
is without
any support
fi'om facts. We
cannot show that the vowel of the stem varied under the influence of
the
personalendings except
where
they
were
attached
immediately,as
in
the verbs in
/xt
(Skt.emi, imds, veda, vidmd,
Gr. olca
'id/xEr).
We
see
therefore that this
principle
of
explanation
does not settle the
question
so
veiy simply
and
beyond
all doubt. I do not wish to
deny
that there
is
any
connexion 1)etween the aorist forms with
a
short
vowel,
and the
accentuation of the final
syllable;
" the forms in which the two are
imited
are too numerous
for that
:" but it seems to me
by no means
proved as
yet
that the accent was the
^^rms
and the short vowel the
posterius.
But if even the
post
hoc is not
established,
much less
can we
regard
the
propter
hoc
as proved.
We have
also,as
Misteli
(Ztschr.
f.
Volkerpsychologie
xi. 234
f.)
has
recentlypointed out,
to take into
careful consideration the manner in which
we must conceive of the Indo-
Grormanic
accent,
whether it
was
rather musical
or
in the nature of
a
stress. Cf. Verner Ztschr. xxiii. 115. It is
only
after scholars have
attempted
to state
connectedly
the conclusions to which
they
believe
EXCURSUS.
547
they
can arrive
as to the accentuation of the
primitivelanguage,
that
we shall be able to decide
more positively
as to such ultimate
questions.
From the
pre supposed originalaccentuation,Fick, carrying
out
consistently
his
view,
which
always
starts from the
presentstem,
arrives
at the
following
effects
'
:"
1
)
d i u
of the
present
stem are
shortened into
a X v.
In the
jji-esent
stem I and
v are so
rare,
that we
really
have
only
to
consider the i-elation of d
(Ionic?;)
to ri
:
Kf-Ka.c-E~iv beside
Ki]C-eii'.
2)
The
"
of the root in the
present
is
rejected
in the aorist.
The number of these
instances,
like
veXo^ot
e-ke-kXe-to is
extremely
small. We cannot admit that e'ittov
belongs
here. Fick traces it back
to *l-J^E-J'TTo-v.But the combination fir is
exceedinglyimprobable.
Hence with the
exception
of ekekKeto there remain
only
the forms dis- cussed
on
p.
279,
which I
explainedotherwise,
and
ii'EyKElv,
if
we
derive
this with Fick from ii-ErEK-Ely. The
same
loss of vowel however
appears
also in
iiiuru), ylyvnuai.
Are we
here too to
lay
down
a
*fiifiru",
*yiyi'(jl.tfu
1
3)
Under the same
category'rejection
of the
e
of the root' Fick
brings
the reduction of the
diphthongsei
and
ev to
i
and
v,
which
neces- sarily
results from his
point
of view
:
XeItteii'
Xiwe'h',
KevdEiv kvOe'iv.
Considered
purely arithmetically
this is
correct;
as in ke-i:X-e-toso in
XtTTflr
as
against
the
present
XeIttew we
have to note the subtraction of
an "
;
but for the
ear,
that
is,
for the
livinglanguage,
there is a
very
great
difference between
a
vowel which
drops
out from between the
surroundingconsonants,
that is to
say,
disappearsaltogether through
the
intermediate
stage
of
an
irrational
vowel,
and one which, originally
united
Avith
a second vowel into the
unity
of the same
syllable,
then
disappears
before it. It woidd have been
thought
that this
union,
which
was no
loose
one,
must have
preserved
it. The
young
generation
of
philologists
delights
in
warning
us
against
constructions
'
which
can only
cut a good
figureon
paper,'
and
points
to the
livinglanguages
as a
j^rincipal
source
for the
discovery
of what is
possible
and real in
language.
Pro\^ded
that
we
do not
recklessly
mix
up
the distinctive charactei's of
particular
languages
and
periods
of
language,
I am
entu'ely
at one
with them.^
'
Fick incli:des in his discussion the vocalism of the
strong passive aorist.
But
as these forms
are specifically
Greek it is better to omit them in
questions
as tQ
the
primitive
Indo-Germanic
vocalisation,
of which relics
present
themselves
in the thematic aorist.
- I
may
remark in
passing
that it
seems to me an unfounded
charge
against
the older
generation
that
they slighted
the
importance
of the
living
langiiages.
To
say
nothing
of others, I will mention
only Schleicher,
who
pos- sessed
the most extensive
knowledge
of
living languages,
and made abundant
use of them, especially
in relation to Zetacism,
[cp.
also his
comprehensive
treatise
'
Die
Sprachen Europas '],
and Ascoli, who is
probablysurpassed by no living
scholar in this
respect.
The doctrine of
Bopp as to the
'
degeneration
'
of sounds
in the
course of the
historj'
of
language
is based
essentiallyon
the views which
resulted from a
comparison
of Gothic and Old
High
German
full-sounding
vowels
withthehalf-muteeof the Modern High German,
and the reduction of Latin sounds
in the Romance
languages, especially
in French. The
explanation
of the
s
in
verbal forms from the rt. as
would never have been
suggested,
had it not been
for the
knowledge
that
auxiliary
verbs
were so employed
in modern
languages.
The
case is the
same with the reference
of the
personal endings
to the stems of
the
personal
pronouns.
In
my
'
Principles
'
I have
everywhere
taken
pains
to
illustrate
phonetic
processes
in Greek from
living languages;
and this has not
been
neglected
in the
present
work either.
is N 2
548 EXCURSUS.
Some
scholars,
in
attacking
the old doctrine of 'the intensification of
vowels,'
have made
merry
over
the
'jumping
in' of
an a
into the heart of
the words. But Misteli
(Ztschr.
f.
Volkerps.
xi. 234
ff.)
is
right,
I
think,
in
regarding
the
'jumping
out' of
an a or e as not at all
more
conceiveablo. It would be desirable that
some one should
point
out to
us a
good many
indubitable instances of this
process
from that much
recommended medicinal
spring
of the
living languages.
For the
reverse
of this
phenomenon,
the
raising
of
^
and
u to ei and
ew,
we
have
at least one certain instance in
our modei'n
High
German
diph- thongs,
to which I have
already
called attention in
my essay
'
Com- parative
Philology
in its relation to Classical
Scholarship.'
That
in
a syllablebrought
into
emphatic prominence (cp.
p.
37
note),
the
original
short vowel
was raised to a
long one,
that i
was raised to
ei,u
to eu seems to me
quite
as conceiveable
as the
'jumping
out.' In
any
case
this new
theory,
which
might
be called the
'
descendingtheory,'
leads to
very
extensive
consequences,
viz. to the
proof
that all instances
oft and
u
in the
primitivelanguage
are
weakenings.
A word like the
Skt.
svddu-s,
which does not fit into the
system
at
all,or
like Ui
so,
which looks like
a
very simple
and sound
word,
must have
already
undergone
the
greatest
alterations " shall
we
say
from
*ajatnja1
" under
the
pressure
of
changing
accentuation. And is there
any
living
lan- guage
whatever which knows of i and
u
only
in
diphthongal
lanion 1
Such
a
view could in
any
case
only acquire a
hint of
probabilityby
means
of the most
comprehensive rhizogonic, phonogonic,
and
tonologic
investigations,
which far exceed in
audacity
and exuberance of
hyjio-
theses views which
are now in
some
quarters,
but not
by Fick, usually
treated with
irony
as
'
glossogonic'
4)
'
If the
rejection
of the
e
of the
present,'
Ficks
goes
on to
say,
'
produces
before and after
liquidsunpronounceable
groups
of sounds in
the aorist
stem,
the
liquids
become
sonant,
and the vowels
p
X and
v
arise.
These
appear
in Greek
as
ap=pa,
Xa and a.' In the
same
way
an
unpronounceable
group,
which
was to be
expected,
e.g.
ktv
is
'
splitby
a,'
that is to
say,
in the
case of
Krat'slv,
a
is
developed
as an
anaptyctic
vowel;
in the
same
way rrf^flj/
instead of the
*Tfie~ii'
to be
expected.
This view of the
a so common in the aorist
stem,
in which
many
scholars
now
agi'ee, perhaps
contains
a
fruitful result. "We shall
come
back to this
again.
On the other hand the
following objections
to the
general
view here
stated force themselves
upon
us. We should thus be
compelled
to
pre- suppose
for
every
aoristic form
a
correspondingpresent
as a
'
mothei'-
form
'
(Fick
says
'
basis
')
with
a
long vowel, diphthong
or e-sound,
hence
e.g.
for
apirrBai*)']peadai,
for XirerrOdL
^Xdrtrrdai,
for
Oiyely*deiyeiy,
for
ftaXt'i)' *ftiXfty or */3//\eti',
for Barelr *Beve~i}'. The two classes of the
thematic
present
formation,
which I
give as
the first and the
second,
"
of the
first, however, only
those with
t
in the
stem-syllable
" would
be,
so to
speak,
the
pnly
normal
ones
;
there would
only
have been
presents
like
Ae'ywor
(iievyw.
This view suits
very
ill the actual stock of
present
forms in Sanskrit and Greek. Our
survey proves
that a
much
greater
multiplicity prevailed.
The
variety
of the
pi'esent
as
contrasted with the
uuifoj-mity
of most other tenses
is,
I
believe,a
character indelehilis of
tlie structure- of the Indo-Germanic verb. We
only get
to the
present
forms of the I- and of the nasal class from stems with short vowels.
EXCURSUS. 549
We can
understand
Xiaaoi^iai only
from
\it,uWofiai only
from
a\,
Bcikio)
only
from
cuk.
How these forms fit into Tick's
system
it is not
easy
to
see.
In
any
case
there can have been no
lack of the
'
mutilations
'
to
which
many
investigators
have
now
such
a
dislike. As Fick
actually
assumes disyllabic
stems
(pvye,ftvye,
he
gets
an
almost infinite nimiber
of instances of
syncope.
Forms like
iriarig,nitriQfxer,
eBei^n must have
lost not
only
the half of the
diphthong
prosier
to their
stems,
but also
by
syncope
the final vowel of the
'
basis
'
:
and who can tell whether ta-ri
will be left to us 1 How does
a man
propose
to make such
hypotheses
appear
probable,
and how can
any
one
expect
them to receive
assent, so
long
as it is not shown in the remotest
degree
how the facts of the lan- guage
are to be
explained
with such views 1 But let
us return to the
aorist.
Among
the
non-reduplicatedforms,
of which
we
enumerated
118,
the
proposed
rule
as to the vowel suits
29,
viz. aoflr
(tjco^ai),
l^pv^^iir
,
idijrai
(cZ/w), EpuKelt',
cpaTrwr,
ipiKtiv,ipiTre'iVj ipvye'ii', t^eh',
ii^eaOai
(if
we start from the Doric
e'lKU)), tcvBEir,Xadeiv, Xnreli;Trap^e7y,^
T^ideJy,
o/i-TT) i/",
"Kpadelr,TrreaOui,nvdecrdai,
the two-fold
(Tire'ii',
or/^t/i',
(T)("7i', TapiTwfieda,r/i/aytT)',
rpaTre'iv,TpcKpe'iy,
Tv\ur, (pvye'iy,
while 89
aorists cannot be
explained
without the aid of unheard-of
present
stems
invented ad hoc of the kind noticed above. "We
recognised
41
redupli- cated
aorists. Of these 12 fit the
rule,
e.g.
KSKaht'iy^ KSKvOwat,XiXaOoy,
29 do not.
But
further,
the
originator
of this view has himself not failed to
notice that
a
part
of the aorists here
coming
into consideration stand
quite
outside of his
rule,
viz. those with
an "
in the stem. We have
indeed noticed
already(p.279)
that this vowel is the normal
one
for
the
present.
Still there
are
17 aorists with
" left,
like
yeylcrdcu,
ipe(j6ai, reicely,rtjXElv(besiderajitfTj'),
kXeh'. These Fick
regards
as
present forms,
which
were
only
later on
fitted into the
system
of the
aorist,
and
subjected
to the aoristic rule of accentuation. A view like
this attracts me
much
more
than the
attempt,
so
much favoui'ed
by
other
investigators,
to
explain
the abnormal vowel
by
means
of so-called
'
in- clinations.'
To what
present
are we to
suppose
that
yeyfadai
and
eXe'iy inclined 1 If the Greeks retained the instinctive
feeling
that
e
.suited the
present,
and
a
the
aorist,
I do not understand how in
pai'ticular
instances without
any recognizal)le
reason
by
the mere
play
of chance
the abnormal form could
creep
into the
place
of
a
normal form
once
extant. But I
can
understand
very
well that forms
existing
at an
early
date,
like
^yeyeadai,*r"fieiy,
*eX(iy assumed the force and accentuation
of aorists in contrast to other forms. Evan the
participles Icjy,idoy,
l/vwi'in which the force of a
present
still
survives,
have shifted their
accent. The
o
in
dopely,
oXErrduL is
certainly
to be taken in the same
way.
The thematic aorist remains
therefore,
even according
to Fick's
way
of
representingit, a tense-group
which did not
spring up
at
once,
but like
so
much else in the
language,
was
formed
by degrees
from
the union of elements of vai-iovis kinds. The
present
is not
distinguished
from the aoiist
by
any
altsolutely
certain criterion. As there are ab- normal
aorists with
",
so there are
presents
with
n.
For in forms like
ayw="Skt. dgdmi
Lat.
ago, apcio,
fipx^,/3\a'pw,ypd(pu),
/^/aj^o/^at,
we
3
[i.e.TrpaSeij/.Cp. e-irpa^-e-s
Hesych.
iii.
p.
164 Mor. Schmidt in the Doric
verse : vvv
3' ?ii"6esis
x^P^" (MS.
^yOes Sex'^/""')"''''
^'
^^po^^^i (Fick,
Bezzenb,
.Beitr. iv.
173).]
550 EXCURSUS.
cannot
helpregarding
tliisvowel
as a
primitive
one.
And therefore I
cannot see
that
as
yet
the view has been
by
any
means refuted that
an
aorist Uke
Tpairfiv
differs no more
from
an
Ionic
present
Tpdireiv
than
tXt'it'from the
presupposed present *"\fiv,
and that therefore in
every
Gise
the aorist
sprang
first from the conti'ast with
a
fuller
present
formation
deviating
in some
way
from it.
But it is
certainlynoteworthy
that the a
is
so
extremely
common in
the
aorist,so rare
in the
present.
Out of 116 thematic
aorists,
54 have
o. According
to the older view
a was
regarded
as
absolutely
a
heavier
vowel than
e.
How does this
heavy
vowel
come so
extensively
into a
system,
which elsewhere loves
light
vowels. If
we
could succeed in re- ferring
Xcx^t''
to the
same
principle
as Xnrely,
(puyilr,
as
Fick
attempts
to
do,
the 54 forms with
a
added to the 32 with
"
and
v
Avoiild
give
86
forms which follow the
same rule. To this extent I do not now reject
the new
view which has been
expressed
in
so
many quarters.
I would
formulise it thus
: a
is in Greek not
everywhere
the
same
sound.
By
the side of the full
sounding a
of
ayw,
a7rd = Skt.
djxi,
which I continue
to
regaid as
piimitive,
there is
an
a,
which I
might
call the iveak
a.
This latterhas
partly
sprung
as an
anaptycticvowel, just
as
in
afxtifiMy
ui.u\yu",aXslipii),
from the vocalic element in
a
liquid
or a nasal,as
in
TctfjiElv
beside
Te-rjjLEiv, partly
arises from
a
minimal vowel of the
same
natui'e as
that heard in the Indian
/'-vowel,as in
'i-cpuKo-v,
which
now
seems quite
identical with
a-fM/a-m,just
as [3pucv-c answers to the Sans- krit
mrdu-s. The
peculiarity
of Greek lies in the fact that thi.s
niuiimal vowel assumed the colour of the
a, just
as a
is
always
a
favourite sound in
conjunction
with those consonants. I do not see
any
decisive reason for
assuming
for Greek
or
for
a
preliminary stage
to
Greek
syllable-forming
nasals and
liquids:
I hold it rather the more
reasonable
course
with
Kluge
and Joh. Schmidt to
regard
these deduced
sounds
as
gi-oups, consisting
of
a
minimal
vowel,
which Schmidt denotes
by
a
small
a,
and the consonant concerned
;
thus
lapKi'iv,
latei
cpciKfii'.
That creations like
mntos
(with
the so-called
n sonans),
hharntns
(
=
hharantas),
tp-ns(Lat. trans),h^nutai(Gk. TavvTai)
ever
existed
any- where
but
on
paper
" which is in truth
veiy
long-suffering
" I shall
refuse to
believe,
until some one
has discovered
a
livinglanguage,
in
which sounds of this kind accented
as
well
as
iinaccented are
pointed
out to such
an extent and in such
complicated
groups
of consonants. At
the end of the
syllable
the nasal
disappearedaltogether
after this
a, just
as indeed
we
find the
same
disappeai-ance
after the
full-sounding
vowels
E, o, e.g.
if
for
kv-Q beside
tig,
in the Doric ace.
pi.
e.g.
in *va\oc=
*".nXo)'-e Att.
KaXovc,
and in
?h//io(tj,
"n-nifua-t.
Hence the fact which was
established from the
veiy
beginning
of
comparative philology,
that a
Greek
a
commonly corresponds
to the
syllables am, an,
Lat. em etc. in
the
cognate languages:e7r7-" =
soptem,
e-Kftro)==o?n/?""i etc. In verbal
forms the
a of the 1
sing,
in
i)ii, ijut,
of the 3
phu-.
act. in ndiacri and of
the 3
plnr.
mid. in
area, aro,
with the
a
of
Kurii^Td,
KUTaKrdiJtyai
is
to be taken in the
same
way.
Certainly
it
might
often be difficult to draw the line between the
w"ik
a,
and the
full-sounding
a,
which cannot be
got
rid of. There are
questions enough remaining
here. But it is
possible
to
adopt
the
recentlygained insight
into the
origination
of the
a,
without therefore
agreeing
with lUl these
hypothesesas to n sona^is
etc.
aad
as to the
EXCURSUS, 551
accent
as
the
impelling
force for all abbreviations.
Everywhere
in the
science of
language
it is better not to wish to finish off
everything at
once.
I content myself
with the
knowledge
that
an
aorist stem with
a
before the consonants mentioned
e.g. cpaKav,
wfuidih'
is the weak
stem-
form beside that with
e
in the
present,
e.g.
*hipKEij', -n-tpOeit'.
In
oppo- sition
to the radical view that of diffei'ent foi'ms
running parallel,
one
must be
always
the
older, the other the later,
I often
prefer to
assume
from the
beginning cognate duplicate forms,
the
iise
of which
only by
degrees
became defined the
one
from the
other,
as they
did here in such
a
way
that the heavier foims took the diu'ative
function,
while the
lighter came
to denote
momentai-y
action. The
appeal to living
lan- guages
and dialects
certainly
favours this view. For tliei'e is
probably
no living language, nor even
any
popular dialect,
in which all
wavei'ing
between fuller and
shorter,
heavier and
lighter
forms is
absolutely ex- cluded.
But
hereby too something
is
gained,
in that the forms with
"
now
take their
place
bettei' in the
analogies
of the aorists with
i
and
v.
"Wherever the realm of
caprice
and chance in
language
is
limited,
we
have to regard
this
as a gain.
INDEX.
SolTTOS,82 f
.
aaae,
194
adTKw, 194, 199
a,8paxev,
77
a^pordCa,,281, 454
d(8poTa^oju"f
(conj.),446,
4.53
a^pvvoi,
254
a-yaaadf,
523
a7'a7aj,463
07076?^,291, 292
ayayriarL,
39
0.711701771/,
336
a-yayoxo..
415 f.
d7a7i;pT7;s, 365, 410
aydyccfit, 27, 39
d7aCa",118, 208, 523
d7a6o'y,513
ayaioixai,118, 208, 235,
523
^yaixai,118, 208, 523
a.ydo,uat, 118, 208
a.yaira^e/xei', 339
d7a7ra-ai, -feu,235
d7a7r6Jrji', 336
aydarjcrde. 447,
523
d7a(rTJs,523
ay avos,
118
07011^0$,
118
d77"A6r;', 283-
o.yyiXK6uT03v
(imper,),
306
dyyiWu, 255
ayypd(p"v,342
d77pa'|arTa),
306
ayeipOfxiv(conj.),
446
a.yiip6vTt"iv (imper.),
306
ayeipco,215,
236
dyijxiv. 339
"yiv,342
d7"p6Veai, 276, 283
"7es,
302
a7e(r/foj',
529
dyivaros,520
0777,
491
dyriyip-, 65, 367
d77')7oxa, 415 f.
A. GREEK.
d7^oxa,367, 406,
415 f.
dyrjffi,
dyri,38, 317
ayif-co,
-eot),
177, 183 f.
ay Kapvffa-
6
VT a:
,
306
ayXaCilaQai, 475,
481
ayviw, 177, 184
071/05,
224
ayvvfxi, 110,
218
d7r"ij(racr/ce. 531
ay
viiia
a
0},
256
dyvuxTTOS,525
ay^TtpafTi.457
^7ovTi,46
(bis)
d7opd.215
ayop-dojxai, -d^w,
-fvofiai,
235, 252
d7opao'oC//Tes,
469
ayopiv4/j.iv,
339
d7p!x0cj', 502
dyptaivo),
253
dyp6)X(voi,
279
dyvp-fj-Ss, -T7)s,
215
d7i/pTdf(D,
236
^7XaCf, 223
dyxi$A(cs,
132
d7xw/)i|ai/T6y, 454
^701, 143, 145, 183 f.,
406
ayuviBarai,418
a7a"!/i'(,0|U.ai,
250
aSa/xas,353
dSd,uaTos,514
dSS-nv,372
d5"j/,283
dSiipev, 77
dSTjKores,372
d57i|Ua, 270
dS-fjaa!, 270
d5i":7'i-77, -ei 140, 190, 248
aSiKolr],335
ddiKolritA.ei', 335
dSiKOffuAo;, 335
aSpa/CTOi', 281
a5p6s,372
oSpwQ.',
254
S5i/Tos, 517
a^eAevai,252
dei5ejU6ya(,.339
adSpfft,
38
dei'So), 15.3
deiKeXios,513
aeiKiat,
481
dei'pa,, 110, 215, 236, 284
deiVeo,461
df
j/rer, etc,
120
de|a",144, 181, 265,
445
dtpa-p,
456
dgpra;/, 236
deffa,194, 272, 520,
543
dfffKovTo,194, 199
Sere,208
a^-dvQi, -alvct),afa", 132,
224
d^o/xai. 205
aCc;,226
d-iiOecraov, 256
dTjt/ai, 341
ddvpo),25.5
aidfo),237
oiSeTo,305
al5^u/xai, 258, 268,
522
ai54(T6r]T", 510
arSeo-is, 268
alSrifxccy, 268
arSo/ioi,143, 258, 268
a/Scis,268, 522
aWu, 58, 153
aludWco, 255
oiAe'co, 261
al/j.da(Tai, 256
a/uaroAoixos,
154
aivece,
523
aXv7)fJLl, 26
alvri(Tovni, 242
aXviyjxa, 242*
aiVi'^o.uai,
242, 523
alvicrcrofxai, 242
^
au'VfjLai,
1 12
di|ao-Ke, 531
aloAeai, 246
atdXAtti, 212, 255 536
554 INDEX.
aipfTutrai',
307
aipeto, 112, 2(;i,262, 542
alpw,110, 215, 284
aladavolaTo, ()6
alaedvofiai, 175, 182, 207 f.
aiadeaOai,276
aladiuQai. 28:i
aladrjffojxai, 271
ainBofxai,
182
a'iaeoo, 50;5 f.
aio-o-o., 222,
227
aiftrrJu), 244
aicr^yi'aj,
255
aire'ci, 112, 537
aJfrrj/xi,
26
alTrKToiv,
242
alridofiat, 237
aiViCw,242, 537
alrovpLiffda,
62
ai;(;udCt"), 237
a/a,,182, 208
aKct/xay,
353
aKci/iaTos,
514
d(cax6/aTo,242
aKax-ilv, -iaQai,291,
292
d/cax'7M"',367,
-7]fx.fvos,
426
aKax'Jcrf,
242
cLKaxiCcc, 110, 242, and
"
dwax.ufVos,367 f.,
420
aKe'o,;i()5
d""-,aKei-o/xai, 240,
522
d/fecTTcJs, 522
a/CTJ5"cra, 266
OLKTlKOa, 368,
403
d"nXs'5aTai, 65, 242, 417 f.
a/cTjx^Sores, 242,
378
(xKrixe/J-evos, 417,
426
awAauToy,
209
aK/xTi,
420
"nfjir\r, aKafxavT,
352
d/fofTi'^u,, 250
aKoufToj/,
310
"KouKa, 414
d"coi;(rais, 451
aKuuadwy, 533
d/couo-Tiaj/, 536
d/coi;"), 253
dKWKT),373
dAaiVcD,185
dAaActCco, 227, 237
a\d\7],uai,367 f.
a\a\TifXfvos, 426
dAaAfjo-flai, 378
dAdA7j(7o,423
a.\a\Kf7t/,
291 f.
aAaAKoi/, 2()5
d\a\vKTT)ixai, 236, 367 f.
dActAuKTo,368
oAaAuoreoi, 367 f.,378
dAdufxai,185, 282
oAaTrdfo), 454
li\a(Troi,
514
a\yr)ff(re (conj.),
446
dASauw, 282
a,\b7)aa"TKe,
532
dASijo-KO,, 189 f.
(bis)
dAegiVo),254
dAeT/zat,178
dAeK^efV,
500
dAeit^oi,
153
aXf^aa-eai,
444
aXe^eixirai,339,
444
dAe|6u,304
dAe'^o,, 144, 156, 265, 445
aKfofiat,
194
aKeaBai,
283
aKirai (conj.),
313
oAeuaTo, etc., 458
dAeC^uoi, 475
oAeuo,,
194
dAf'o,, 178
aXriXeafxat,
368
aKTjBqy, 510
dATJeco, 502, 504
aKr]\i(pa,
367 f.
a\6-aiya), -7](tku,
dAOo/xai,
185, 190, 194, 199, 264
dASiV/coi,
195
dAieyo,', 252
dAr^/ai, 178
aKivovcLv, 178
dAiVco,170,
178
dAiJo!,
244
a\iaKofiai,79, 133, 191,
195
aXicrjxivos,
373
dAiraiVto,117, 177, 185
a\i.Tiiv,
283
aXiTTifi-evos,-a"v, 373,
426
a\t(pOepd"Kei,
394
dAi'a,, 207, 249
a\Kddcc,
502
oAAaY^vai,
492
dAAdtrtroi, 256
'dAAaxa, 365
dAAdx^Tj,
500
oAAojuai, 203,
211
aWuf^av,
58
SA;Uej'os,
90
dAodco,
244
dAoiTjj', dAyrjj/,
329
oAdtu,305
aAcru, SAto, 90,
130
oAui'co, 251
oAt/KTCx^a,,
236
dAi;-|a,, -ffKu), -til,
195, 412
dAu(r/c-dj,a,, -dvon, aAvcTKc^,
175, 182, 194, 196, 199,
237
aK^pdvicMo, 181, 283
a\"pi(Ti0oiai,
272
aK"pf\aT-i]S,
272
aA(^o"i',
332 f.
aKwufvai, 339, dAwt'oi,
341
djudeij/,
249
b-jxaip-dKiTOs, 514
ajxapilv, 163, 281
a.p.apTdvca, 175, 182, 271
CLfxapToiv,
31
o.ij.apv(T"T-ji,
257
dfxdxiTos,514
d;ui3aT(is, 515, 517
dfi^AaKiCTKijo, 195, 199
dp-^X-irFKavw,-iV/cct,, 182,
195
d|Uj3At;c",
254
d/x^XvcrKfi,
195
dfji^Kvwaau,
257
d/i/SAcicr/cco, 195
d/xei^oi, 153
"/j."nrTO, 131,
373
djueiifffTot (conj.),
447
d^e'Ayes,139,
383
d/xiXyo}, 143
dixevai, 153
a.fxy.ivris,
372
d/xTrd^'oi'Tai,
224
'
ajj-TmraXuiv,211, 295
d;UTri(rx-"7f, -tadai, 285
d/.i.TrKTxi'^o/xaL, 184,
283
dfiirXaKeiV,
283
afj.-TTt'vTO, -Tryue,
129, 278,
286
a/xwddeiv,502
d^vaaui,
222
a/xipatpdacTKe,
530
afx"pa'pd"jo
,
166
a^cpfax^ia,
373
a.pL"pi^aKivixa.i,
475
aixcpifff^nna, 380,
428
d,U(pLiyifuixi,
113
a/xcpieaijai,
39
du"f"lfx4^VK"V,
377
dfx."pi(j^aTi'}Keiv,
394
diji.(pi(rKai, 191,
197
afx"piio,
480
awafidKeo, 304
ava^LiixTKOfxai, 190, 199 f.
ava^Kvardvai,
182
avafipoxiv,
491
avaPpciffKoiiv,
194
di/a^yeAioj/Ti,
46
dj'a')'e7pd(paTai,
66
dva-yiypdipovTaL, 417
avdyKTj,373
01^071/^0^71,
484
drayra-ffetco,
534
di/dSoCTTos, 208, 521
di/a5e5po/it", 373
di
aSpauerai,
468
dfa-06';U6j', -dineiv,339 f.
di/afle'caj'Tey, 465
dfaiAi'Sai, 69, 350
dyaiVo^c",217,
536
afaipaipififvos,
367
ai aiVOTjTos,,515
dj/d^ei/ce, 414
di/oA-iVKo), -Jtti, 195
INDEX. 555
aiaXccffw,
273
avafK/j-ixaTo-i-, 418
ai"civye\'i.ovri,
475
ai'aiTapeis, 498
avaTravio,
804
avaTreTw etc.,
480
avaaKo\oirtf7(Tdat, 481
ai'a(7(rei'aa/ce, 531
aracrffto,
256
a.vo.cTXO-IJ-'nv,
384
ai'ao"xou,
805
avoLTida, 41)1
avar^diKavTi, 46, 385,
415
ai'ttTi^et'Ti, 46
a^5a7'a.,156,
180
avdixo-i^vTi,
46
aj'Spifco,
250
a^/ePei,148
aj'6061',
127
arefieTac, 52
avtBiav, 49
aviKTr)jj.aL,
358
d;/"KT(5s, 515
av6\dff6a),
308
ai'f\Tri(TTOs,
515
avffjidai, 238
aviixopfxipecTKi,
529
ave-jTraixevrj.
358
dieTTTO/xefffl',
63
oi'eo'TaKe'Ta!,
422
dj'fffTa/covo'a, 394
d"e'xey, 304
aveaiy-ov,
-a etc., 81, 363,
393,
398
"
aviiavrai,417
dfeoSleTai, 436
aviiaQai, 273'-, 417
auecfixo;
407
dj/7J?). 315
di/r/l/oflej/,
399,
429
wri(pea".866, 423
ai/deXiaOuv,
310
dvid-o), -{w,
235
avi-effKe,
-riffKe,
529 f.
avKoOapiovTi, 475
avoiyrjiToixai,
493
avoiKo5ofxrid-i)fj.eiy,
340
tt'O-Td,
299
avar-finevai,
339
dj'Teu7reiroi7)Kcj', 374
di'TiacrrjTOi', 447
aiTil3o\oi7i, 335
afTiSwpriaaiaTo,
66
avTikfywvTL,
46
dj/Ti-oo),
-cto), 235, 287
dyTi(5co
(fut.),
479
avTlOUlVTOlV,
306
avTLTteiTovQiiXiv,
391
a.uTnrpiar)Tai,
319
drTiTerdx''''''") 66
avr\T\v,
339
di'TO/xoi, 143
avTCfT],
335
di/u7rd5r)Tos, 517
dw-co,
-7w, 122, 144, 163,
168, 171,
283
(fixt.
483)
itfco,122, 144, 171, 178
di/ai7a, etc., 873, 379, 387,
424, 429
avudeoii], 385
d^/oxe*,384, 387
df"T6, 461
dlidcrei, 246
doi/TOS,i;54
a.irayy"W((TK",
530
drrayYeWoiffi,
47
awaipee(TKOv,
530
airai.Tovixi(jff
,
62
airaWay fxivos ,
372
o.TraKXa^e'ioi'Tfs, 534
aTrdfXfnTTO,373
dTraltij/Tt, 469
aTratTTos,
263
d7ra(/)eri', 291 f.
d7ra(J)(o-Ka., 191, 195, 199,
292
aiTe^a.(pev,
500
dTTfiflrji'aj, 339,
341
d7r6l9oi'-T)S,
-7J,
335
dTreiAeioj, 241
d7r"iA7j/xeVos,y"?'72
aniKi^av,121
a.TT":KKrji(rQrjffav, 525
d7r"(T:rd5aJ'TO, 418
dTreffcroua, 491
airfCTTaKKai/
etc., 384, 385,
414, 464 f.
d-;re(7TeAA.ar, 457
dTTex^dj/OjUoi,
182
aTTexdeffdai,
285
awexOvcruixai,
271
a-m\f/rifxevos, 372
dTrrjAAd^T)!',
500
d7rr;AAdff(70e, 436
dTrrjAAaxa,407
airrji'ipa,
134
d:rrJx06To, 276
dTTie'ctJo-i, 319
dTn'/caro, 418
OTroaiVu^ai,112
anoaipeo,
305
aTr6^\7]Tos, 515
dTTo/Spifi^, 454
aTTOYe^e,
131,
144
aiToypa"pi(TQ-f],
70 f.
dTTO'ypail'eV, 469
aTToSapei/Ta,
492
dTToSdcrirOyUOi, 208
dTToSeoo'arSi, 47,
49
OTToSe'SpaKa,
357
d7ro5i5coTi, 88
aTrooivwvTi,178
aTTO-oS/iey, -Sd/xeiv, 339 f.
OTToSdi'Ta), 306
aTToSoPTiCU,306
dTToSocrdi'Tcoj', 465
aTtoSoffBccv, 310
UTToSpvcpai, 144, 150, 166
dTTOfp-yafle,
504
anSepffe,456
awofenrdddtv,69
dTrdeeo-TOS, 220
airoOpe^ofxai,
544
anodvaKetv, 197
dTTOKarao'Tao'dt'Ti, 469
ajTOK(K\avTai, 419
RFo/ceKicSui'ei'a'eTai,
436
airuKiKiKpaixes,
384
aTroKivriaaoKe,
582
dTTo/cAds, 127
A[nOK]TENET,
452
a.Tru\i\aixjxevoL,
361
aKo\e\eyiJ.evoi,
861
d7roA"Ad77)Tai, 373
dTToAeV/ceTi/, 581
d7roAo7t|drT0cocraj',
310
anoXoiaro, 65
airoKovixiOof,
67
air6\ei}Aa, 373
aiToXwXri,
432
airofieipiTai,
214
anoixvTTai,
219
drroraiaro,66
d7ro|iV^i;Tai, 114, 171
dnonecpevyr], 428, 481
'
diroTrAvveffKe, 580
dTroTrj/i-yerei/, 4:92
aTr6TTrr]6i, 298
diropo7,
88()
aTTiiarideiv, 501
dTrocTKiS^aff^ai, 117
airoffKArirai, 182
airoffraXaixev,
491
axoa-raXdivTes, 499
aTTuffTepoirj, 835
aTToaTTiXdvTwv,457
a.iTO'j(pay7]ffoivTO,
493
aTToreOvacrav, 428
dTTOTeicrf?
etc., 113, 141^
158, 469
o-iroriviTov, 310
airoTLuoiav,
328, 451
awoT/xriTai,
871
dTToupa?,133
airpaKTOs,
515
airrdfj-eada, 62
a-n-TO) (apio),82,
166
d7ri;5f)as, 465
d7rii5d;ue;/ai, 40,
339
aTTl/tTTOS,
514
aiTvTei4rco, 158
a.TTw\6fJLia(la,
62
apaip-qKus,
867 f.
apap-rjcre,-i(f,243
apdpa,
368
apapetv,
291 f.
apapiaKoo,191, 195, 199
a.
ap-, apT]p-v7a,
402
556 INDEX,
apdffffia, 219, 221, 227
a^ye(TTris,
242
apyfj.ivoi, iS72
"pScc,14:5,217
'ApfOoutra, 502
ap-fii/,
-fcrOai,284
apeioiv, 522
apiff-ns,-ovrai,
4S1
apea-Koo,
188, I'.H, 195,
514, 522
apea-rai,
(59,279, 284
apfrdui,
237
apeTT},
514
apT}yco,
15G
'dprifievos,
;572
a^)ripa,
3(57
api)peKa,
307 f.
ap7)piixii/os, 271,
417
apripoixivr),
3(57 f.
a^iOeiKeros,
514
dpifljadj, 5()7
atiicTTdu}, 237
dpKrTeuftr/ce, 530
dpnTTet'O),
252
dpi-,dpd-xeTai,
143
apKirjv,
342
dpKeoj,
239
^p^ei'os,
130
dp^i'j7^, 239,
242
"
dpjud^o),
239
apixoiixcna, 239
apfxaffjiivos, 372
apixo-dffoi, -TTui, 239,
242
^
apuu-jxai, -TUi, 110,
1G8
apwcro,
304
a.p6ixfxivai,
340
dpTTciCto, 1G7, 235,
453 f.
dpTTciuei'oj,
133 f.
apiriiiJiai, 235, 479
app-tiCo), -I'Ca', 226 f.,536
d/)(rai, 456
dpreaToi,
372
apT^oixai, 239
apTvudT],
499
apTv-w, -yct",
254
apvacrovTai,
168
apvrai, 163, 168
dpi^o), 168
apxffJLevai,
339
dpxei''", 252
dpxo/i"o-e', 62
apX"^.
143
"dffafXiv, 520
Aff^fo-Oe, 77
"(r/86o-TOj, 521
a(r"fjUJi, 469
atrflMaica),253
dffKeo), 240
aiTjxev-ioi, -i^oi, 243
"(r,usvos, 130
diTTra^ojuai, 227
diTTraipt.). 203, 214 f.
ifTirtTOs.280
Jto-o-oi, 218, 222
affTpdimcFKi,529
aaTpaTTTci},
164
a,(rvveTrjfj.i,
2(5
d(rxaAA.ai, d(rxaA.aa),
256
draAAct), 213
araffOdWci},255
areXeffTos,
522
dri^iia-o), -^'co, 235
driTdAAoD, 108,
213
arlTos, 158, 518
aTpffj.-4a", -i^uj, 243
a.Tpefj.if'iv,
481
^rpfCTTOs,
521
^TTao-i,298
aTTO/xat,
220
a.TTu),
222
au-ya(,'ojuai, 237
aiSaoi,237
av07](racrKe,
531
ahipvaav,
122
audevTvs, 283
avATjo'eOj'Ti, 469
au^ at'o),
-av4w. av^oi, 175,
181, 265, 445
aiH-^o-o), 270
av^ovfj.ei/os,
265
aOxeo).240
aOco
(kindle),152, 155
auo),
at"a)
(make dry), 155,
226
a(paiXT]cr4adat, 69, 542
a"pdrrcrw, 166,
257
a(pavuj,
155
d(/)ac"), 166
d(|)ej?,
319
a.(peir],
329
d(J)-6ir)Te, -eire,
330
a(pe'i\aTO,
464
a(p4\ai,
463
atpearriKr],
431
d4"6'T)7J, 517
a.(pi(i"-Ka, -fxai, -vra\, 273,
417
afpriT),
315
acplriTi,
38
d(/"i'oiTe,
334
d(^?X9"''
'^GG
d(^oC,305
a."ppalv""i,
253
dxeww,
no
ax^oiv,243
'^
ax^vcras,
265
^XS'JT',
498
Sx^oMai, 110, 143,
264
(bis),501,
504
dx^i^iw, 250
axi'tiCf. -47'
dx''a'''57)jui, 247
itX"";""'! llf*.
501
"XOlJ^o.t,
1 10
iia"
(satiate),
147
acopTO,
419
3a, Rt. 517
^a^aCw, 226
fiafidKTT]S, 226
Pa^d^uL,226
/3a5ier,481
/3a5iCa", 503
/3a5os,
503
/SaC^^, 224
/SaiTjc,329
/Sai^-co, 177, 185, 204, 216,
517
$a\-enu,
-iLv,
-4cr6ai,284,
349
jSoAeu, 304
^dx-nffOa, 34,
39
PdXricri,39
fiaXKiffKiTO,530
iSaAAeu,
304
iSaAAco, 202, 211
0d\oia-6a,35
^anfiaivw, 217, 377
^aTTTO),160, 162, 166
^ape'o., 240, 243
fiapiOeL, 502, 504
fiapvdea-Ke,
530
fiapvvo),
254
Paffevfxai,
469
^acriXevw, 252
/Sacij,517
fiacTKaivai, 253
jSao-zcw,189, 192, 200
^dffofiev (conj.),
446
fidaa-cov, 202
;8aT(5s, 511
/Sa.iC'^,
237
(8a(^^,
492
^a"prjvaL,
500
/Saco,148,
299
;85c{AAa), 211
/85eAAa.v, 211
^^iKvacrofxai, 256
fiSevi/vcrdat, 113
/35^0-^a, 146, 520
356'a), 146
/35uAA6ij', 211
^e^daa-i,48, 386
fiefiaws,
410
j8"/3a(Li6.',
424
jSeiSarat,424
^^PaQra, 426
^i"7\Ka, 379,
413
0e0iVK", 413
fi4fi\a-(pa, -ju/xoi, 358, 407
^4p\e"pa,
400
$""\-nai, 417
jSe/SArja-rat,
-to, 65,
435
^f^Xvxeiv, 432
/3e/3A7Vo(.413, 423
^Se/SArjxfTo. 416
;Se;8oA7JaTO, 271
fif^pida,
378, 401
Pf^poxa,
399
5
^4i3pvxci, 377, 401, 407^
INDEX. 657
Pe^pvxv.
370,
422
Bf^pdeois,
879,
423
l3ePpaiKiLs,
413
^efipwres,
387
BfPwcra.
395
^eioj-Lai (^eo/xat,/Sioyuoi),
468
PeXTos. 514
$ipvci,nida, 118, 178
/Se'ppeai,
118
^(TTOV,
464
Peco/xep,
320
/3^9i,297
jSTJi/ai, 341
firiffio, ^rjffiTO,
461
^"haojjiev (conj.),
446
/3i7o-(rco. 218, 256
jStjo). 315
jSi-ao),-a^'a), -ai'o), 234,
235
/ei/Sa^o), 226
/8i,8a"TT)s,
226
)3iSa? etc., 105
Bt^dadaiv,
503 f.
fii^pcLffKc^, 193, 199,
218
/3ij8i,479
fii-naeai(conj.),
447
^LviaK6txy)v, 527,
530
^laiaro, 65
Piccvai,341
pKoaKn/jLai,
194
P\d0ev, 489, 500
$\dBe,-ai, 144
^\a^-i](TOfi.ai, 493
$\a^vcT(reiv, 167
3Aa(,'6ii', 222
5
/SAaTTTO),160, 167,
168
^XaardveffKe, .530
ySAacTT-ciia), -e'oi,175, 182,
271
BXaaruv
(aor.),
284
B\daT-n-fj.a,
-"Tis,
271
/SAaffTTJcro), 271
ySAao-Tos.281
^\ei-!]ffda. 35
/SAeTTO),144
^X-herat,31.3,
315
/SAlTTCO,
256
jSAt'Cc^, 182, 222,
524
/SAiKTTaro),182
/SAuo.,222, 524
jSAaSo-KO), 190, 193, 199
fioadr](Ti-a",
-ovri,
468 f
.
jSoAAo^ai,
172
/SdAo^ai.144,
172
^oaKeffKovTO,
530
)3J(r"a., 189, 193, 265, 528
^ovKoXhffKes,530
PovKoXia^rj
,
469
$ov\"Tai (conj.),
322
liov\"vr]ada,
34
/SonAeuoi,252
/SouATj-jua, -(Tij,
265
fiovKofiai,172 f.,179, 265,
322,
353
/8oi/AoVe(r9o, 62
PocivTWV, 306
Ppa^ivw,
2.52
Bpaovvoo,
254
/SpaCo-. 220, 222, 225
^paafi6s,220
Bpdffffw, 220,
222
BpavKavciaOai,183
^paxilv,
284
/Spaxertra.
492
^p^/LLW, 144
ySpexco,
143
/Spi'^co.
224
ySpi'eo), 501,
504
^povrds.
134
^poi'Taco,
237
)3p"^C'"',
226
/SpvKo,,
218, 411
/SpWTTCO,
218
^pDX^Iv,
284
iBpuxa-,
218
BpwffeiovTes.
534
/BuC'^, 184, 222, 224
^ufe'co./Svi'co, 178, 184,
222
/SiJo., 184, 222
fiw${,(eiv,
226
PwAoixai,
172
fioird^iiv,
134
yayyaiveiv,217
7a56(r0at,156
yalverai,
122
7aic",
112, 209,
501
yafxer-f}, 514
70^60,
261 f. (fut.480)
ya/xricreiw, 534
yavdw,
112
7afU(Uai,
112, 194
yavvcTKO/jLai,
194, 199
7ap7aipa),
312 (bis), 376,
536
7ap7api^Q),
242
""
7aupiaj/,
536
(7) Sot/ire'o), 262
7"7cia(r(,
387
767a9ei, 391,
394
7e7a/ceii',
394, 414,
424
76700;^,282, 426
7"76j/ajUeVos,
272
yeyevrjfj.ai,
272
y4yev/j.at, 525
7"77)0a,378,
401
yfyXvfx^evos,
.358
7e7ova,
380, 399
767d;'6i;', 394
yeypaiTTT] (Boeot.),
61
yeypaTTToi,
61
7"7pai|/aTai,64, 67
7e7pai('aTai,
427
7"7pcii|/"Tai.
436
yeypKpeis,
379
76'7"jj/6, 377,
401
(imper.
422)
yeyoovfjxsv,
424
7"7a)j'"Tco,
422
yeyuivriffOL),
271
767coj'-i(rK:a),-"",
196, 262,
271
ytyUffa,
395
yeivo/jLai, 216, 543
76Aai,
41, 300, 384
76Aa;Mi,
26, 39, 134, 247
7?
Aacrei'oj'TO, 534
7eAao'T(ij,
,51.5
76Ac{a", 235, 523
7"Acij/T"l'J',
.306
76^?'",
261, 268
y"lxi^Q",
537
7e"J,
144,
268
76i'6ia-(TK"),
-fo), -a), 194,
199
yevecrdai,
284
76Ve(rts, 272
yevfirKero,
.531
yiv"Ti],
272, 514
yfViT7)s,
272
yivfjcro/xai, 272
yiVTjTOl,
61
yevoiaro,6.5
7e!/($/xe(r0a,
62
yivTo (became),
130
7eVTo (grasped),
131
yepaipci},
255
yevfifda,
370
7eii(rT-Jy, -e'oj', 520
76170),
152, 155
ye"pvp6ci},
24.5
77j0ea),yriQoixai,112, 240,
261 1, 501,
503
y^Kfcrdai, 179
yripavTefftrt,
134
ynpda-Ku;,
134, 190, 194.
199
77jpei5,
493, 496
yrjpiiw,
250
yiyv-o/xai,yiv-, 216, 258,
282, 542 f.
7i7i'^o-Kw, 187, 189, 192 fif.,
199
7tj'Ujuoi,
112
ytVW(TKCC,
193
7Aa(^"!, 225
7Aa7rTa),
166
yXdcpco,144, 166
7Arxo,iiai, 143, 150,
198
7AyKaij'a),
254
7Av(?)a),
144, 150
ypd/xTTTu,167
yvacprjyai,
493
yvi\ffios,
543
7J'?)T($s,
511
7^017)$,
yvoirjfj.ev, 329 f.
7j/"i0j,
297
yvufxev,
320
yvwjxevai,
339
7i/c5;/a",
341
558
INDEX.
yviJiOjxiV,
213
"yvojpi^w,
248
yfcirKc,18!), 193
yvctxToiaro, OCt,
486
ypoo(T6/j,e(T6a,
62
yviisffris,
526
yvwT6s,
511
"yoaaff/ce,
190, 530
yodo),234, 273
'yoyyu^ci),
226
yoyyvfffxds,
226
yo'iZ-nyLL, 383,
390
7(Jo"/, 284
ypafifiarevdJ,
252
ypacpeu,
491
ypa(p?]vai,
402
7pa4)co,
144, 265, 406
ypacpwiai,
47
"ypavj/gio),
534
ypitpw,
144
7pt;,YpuC'^, 224, 237
7jOLi;U7raj'a),
180
7pii7r-au'a),
-afi^co, 180
7puirds,
180
ypVITTOl,
180
7i;/ir({a",
244
Sa3?7,
494
"
8a7K"{i/w, 178, 180
SoSaij'eii', 21 7
SaS.;"r(re"r0ai, 218'
Saeio},316
SaTjfai,
494
SttTJo-eai,
490
SarjTai,
284
Sa?, 5a7e,300, 303
SaiodWco, 212, 255
SaiSvffaeffdat, 218
"
Sai'Cai,
454
SctiVJ,301
Saivvar',66, 331
5aii/."ju", 112, 208
haivvTO, 33 1
Saiw
(Saivviii), 112,
202 f.,
208
Saiw
(kindle),
209
SaKelv,284
SaKfrdv, 514
Sa/ci/afojuai,
,524
SdKiw, 170, 178,
524
SaKpvct),
250
5aA\ei, 211
SajuS(Fut.),
479
Sa/xd^w,117, 479,
523
Saudw, 176, 523
5o/ie^489,
500
MfxTj,491
5a/xrJ"T6, 313
SojUTjr;?, 315
5ajurof7Ke,529
So.ui/cfa., 176, 183,
.523
5d/iv"i,
171, 178
Ufivrifii, 117, 479,
523
SavSaiuetv,217
SaTTTo;, 167
SapSairro),
167
Saped"00, 175, 182
5ap0fTi/,
284
Sapdeis,
499
5a(rct(r/c"T0, 531
Sacr/xds, 524
SacTTao'Saxrar,
310
Saavvco, 254
Sc^trco^rai, 447
Sareaadai, 459
(bis)
SareV"', 208, 261,
521
Sea, Soa, 118
SfOToi, 61, 318
S^y/xeyoi,104
5e5o-a, -01/, 267, 292
SfSaao-eoi,417
5e5a7j/ce,
413
SeSaiarai,65
Se'ScKe,292
SeSdpoafpe,
407
SeSap^eroy,
419
SeSatrrai, 380
SeSoK^eVos,
209
SeSatis,379, 381
S^Seiy/xaL,
419
SeSeiTrvajU.e:',
388
SeSeiirvTjKet,
413
Se'oeix", 407
5"'5e|o,
423
SeSe^o^ai,
436
Se'Sero,434
Se'Sr/a, 396
SeSfiffde,
423
SeSrjco/xai,
436
SeSTJx"',
407
5e'5ia,120
565(6177, 422
SeSieVai, 424
SeSijjTTjjUOi,
374
SeSi-cTKOfiat,
-aarofxai,
193,
197, 199 f.
5e5ia)xa,401, 407
5eS/j.riaTo,
65
5f5oiKa, 4 15
SeSoiKevai,424
SeSo^Kco,394
SfSoKrai, 421
SfSopKa.357, 377,
399
565oi'Tr(iTos. 401
565($x07?,
70
SfSpay/xfvos,
.377
SeSpo/xa,
399
5e'5iiKe, 413
SeSiWeii/,394,
424
SeSuffTi'ix'Jfa,
373
SfSu)(T(ji, 436
5677(T(i/.i6fr9',
62
SfiSe'xaTai, 378, 405, 418
5er5"a,121, 378
SfiSifxev,
387
SeiSi/xeu, 424
36i5i(rK-0;uai, 191, 197
Seiolffffeo, 304
SeiSiffiTOfMai, 221, 411
Sei'Soi/ca, 378, 397, 413
SeiSiaaofxai, 376, 536
SfiSw, 393
OeiKai/ao/xai, 110, 176
f.,
183
SflKvve,301
Sei'/c;/!;^!, 1 10
SeiKvvyai,341
SeiAero, 232
Sei/xaivii}, 25.3
Serj/,210, 265
Senrv-fo}, -i(io, 240, 243
'
SeLTTVqffi'tCt!, 534
SenrfTjtreOvTi, 46
SeiTTVLflv, 481
Se/po., 203, 213
SeinrjTe,447
5e'/c6y, 304
SeKTO, 131
Se'AAo,211
Se/xcc,144
56r5i^AAa),
212, 377, 536
Se^aiaro,66
Seloiar', 66
5e|oucTai,469
SfOfiai,25 1
S4pK0fxai, 143
Seppu),213
Sepo.,144, 213
SeVis,517
Seo-jUf^s, 519
560-77(5^0), 239
(bis)
Se'tTTToij/a, 239
Seawocrvi/os, 239
56enrjTr)s,239
Seu/fo), 155
Sfiifxevov, 370
Sevofiai, 251
Sei^oi, 265
5e'(^(u, 144, 445
Se'xaToi.104. 370
Of'xft'M"'. 110, 183
Se'xoyuai, 110, 143
56;|/a), 144,
445
Of
CO,
517
STjeLTj/rjo-ea, 34
OVKco. 156', 180
5r;Ai7(r-6Tai,
-tjtoi (conj.),
447
5?7piaa(rea)t', 309
57jpLvd71TT)V, 499
Svpi-o/ia,, 207, 499
STjpfo), 249, 254
57)(ra(r/f6To, 531
Stjo),467
Sia^e^TIKei.428
Sia^e^KlffOe,
423
5(a7;'"5j'Ta), 306
Sja7raJj'ai, 341
INDEX. 559
5iaS4\\etv,211
Sid^Tifxa. 517
SidCfffdai, 220
StaKade^iofiev, 469
SiaKApiffTai, 371
Sia/cpii/fl-ciTe, --fiixeuai, 320,
4!i!)
SiaKa)Au"r"i
(opt.),
452
SiaAeAtt/U^gVos, 419
SiaA.exfl^J'at,
510
SuxKvaevvTL, 4G9
SidAuTOs,
5iaAi)T($j, 515
Sid/XeLTTTOS, 514
5ia7r"irAr;xos (?),
407
SiaTTtVAixe,402
Sja7r"7roA"^r)(rojU6j'Oj', 436
SiaTTpaWeir,349
Siapird^aii, 455
SiappliTTacrKev,
530
hidffTriixa, 518
SiacTKeSaf,480
SiardjUi'eii', 179
5iaTpv(pev, 491
Sia^epe'ro;;/, 310
Sia(p6apTiao/j.ai., 493
SiacpOepiTeL, 457
5ia(pdi(TKeiv, 193,
199
SiSdo-zfco, 196, 200,
265
SiOeVrcDr, 105
8i5rj,105, 517
5i5oi
41, 301, 384
5i5o?-(U"j', -Te,
329
SiSoicrfla, SiSoTtrSa, 34, 37
SiSd^fj/,
339
5i5oi'Tc")j', 307
5i5(io-0a), 309
5i5ou,301
SiSowoi, 341
SiSpdrai,
108
Siopdo-KO), 189,
193
SlSufTKCtl, 199
5i5a"0i,298
mccfiL,105, 376, 517
5i5")(ra), 474,
543
SiScoTi,38
(bis)
5i", 120
SieSdtrtrao, 450
Si"i\fyfj.ai,
361
Sie/fSurji/aj,
494
St"Kpidfv,
499
5""A6'7e"',
490
Sif\fyri(rav,
490
SifAexeei/,
490
Sie^ifiivaL,
339
Siepcrai,
214
Siepcrris,
456
SteTCTdXttTO,
66
SieT/xay-fu, -ov,
412, 489
Sierpt'iSTj,
500
Si"(peopas,
399
5i'Cr)MO', 5i(",106,
226
Si/cd{ijTo", 61
SiKtiCco, 235
flf., 453
(bis)
StKUf, 479
Si/catrcai, 455
Si/caoJtrt, 479
Sw^r^ 191, 284
Siyeuecrfc', 530
Sii'eaj, SiVco.SiVrco,178, 216
Sici-yrTjTos, 511
SioiKev,342
SioiTo,334
5io/xai, 148
SiTrActCo), 236
5i(T57]jU.ai, 106
Sixaico,234
Slif/aicn, 47
Sn^dco,237
Sio/fdeo), 502, 504
diooKefiev, 339
5("0/C"T0)/, 52
SicJ/cr/Ka, 373
SiwKco,
156,
411
Sfxr]6iVTa,
500
SroTraAi^oi, 454
5o, Rt. 517
Sodffcraro,118
Sof^i/ai, 346
So0a, 491
Soir]-ixev, -re, So7fji."v, 330
Soi'tj;/, 329
So/fd^oi, 235
Sottfo., 258,
262
SoKljUa^OVTOJI', 306
SoKifjid^ai, 237
5o"ci/xa|(^j'Tt,
454
doKifiw/jii, 26,
247
SoKoi, 335
SoKo'iT], 335
(bis)
SoKoiTjcai', 336
SoKOi/xt,
335
S("iU"vai, dSfiev,
339
(bis),
344
SoVtco,306
So|e?T",
469
S(^s, 298
Sdo-js,517
5($o-k:oj/, 528, 531
Soriip,
S6Tr}s,517
Sot6s, 512,
517
5oCv, 343
SoDi/ai,341, 346
SouTre'o), 262
Spaivcc,
216
SpaKe7i/,
284
SpaKevres,
493
5pa/x,
Rt. 544
SpafxeTv,
284
oparcdov,
284
Spao'eitoi',
534
^pdaffOfxai,
218
Spdui,
216
SpeV-to,-T"o, 144, 164, 168
5poKT(x^*"(x, 236, 281.
SpVITTdl,
166
Spurj/xev, 335
Spairji',
31
Sp'f'r]!,
335
SptSfiev, 335
5p(j}fxi,
335
5y. Rt. 517
Si^rj, 329
SC0(,298
5y0^7j,579
50;/,343
Swai, 341
Suva/tai, 76, 117
St;;/d^a(, 318, 524
Svvdjj.i(T6a, 62
Sl^J/a-J/TOI, -J/TO,
65
5v"'d(r9ij, 524
Si'ttjoi, 318
Suj/oj,Su^'eoi,118, 177 f.,
184, 198
SvTTTa),167
Svpo/jiai, 216
5^0-70;, 192, 197
(bis),
199
Svcrero,461
Svais, 517
SvffKe,531
SvcTKoXaiyoj,253
SvcrfxT],
519
SfCXspaiVco,254
Sua.,118, 148, 167, 517
Si),30
Sdtio/xev,
31.3
SoJpTJTOJ, 515
Soitreiftj', 534
"a(
=
6r"j),
328
4dyr)v,ea|e, eoya, 79, 362,
396
eaSa, 79, 362, 396
id\nv, 79, 491
edAwKa, 362
edAcci/,79, 133, 273
(dvaffffe, 79
iapSdXr],79
*
fdffOfjLev (conj.),446
ea-Toi, -TO,
65 f.
ed"pev, 82, 498
edo),34,
363
e$der],499, 518
^PacTov,84
6^ej8Aa(rTi^K6i,358
e/STjj/, 126
e/Stjtoj/,
54
eieiaji/, 134
r/8Aa^6, 275, 284
(aor.
pass.).
491
i$\aarr]Ka(T',358
e/SAao-TOi/,281
iPKd(per)(jav, 500
l/SAo).132, 387
i^ovKrie-riv, 510
r/8pa.,
133
"70^,
130
560 INDEX.
4yyeyvr}fiai,
373
4yyXvff(T(iJ,
256
fyypa(p4/j.(v,
340
iyypaipiv,
342
(yypa"p6vToov,
306
tyyva\i^w,
454
fyStKa^r^rat,
469
iyiywvi,
429
iydvao,
419
fy(lpr)ffiv.
40
fV^pt^.215, 368
e7"'\a|e,
235
eyevvaTO.
457
tytvro,
279
fyf-n\7ieioovTt, 46, 79, 319,
491
fy-qyepixai,
368
iyi)pav,
1 34
iyKaOfiffaro,
80
t-yKctTTTei,
165
(yKarfXlTTare,
464
fyKex^ipVKV,
431
fyKiKpa,
107, 300
fy KX'gaa.i,
525
ey/iev,
104
eyvwKa,
375
fyvoiv,
128
(ypajxfxivui.
358
fypdffdai,
fyp-ero, -fo,
276,
279, 284
typriyopa,
etc., 368, 380,
399
fypriy6pri.
431
iyp-nyopef,
384 (bis),
387
fypi](T(roo, 257,
412
eSaej/,284
e"""Tjv,
491
rSapOoj/, 279,
501
tSSeifrec,
78
eSeSoiKT],
431
e'SeSi^X^"'''"''
407
65f0\oi/,
480
(SfpKov,
278
fSfffKe,529
rSTjSa.367 f.
e'S^Sofa.403. 415
fS'fiSo-Ka. -rai,
273% 415.
417. 119
eSrjSoK-oiT), -(Stj,
422 f.
eSTjScis.380
fo'iKafff, 455
f'5ii/f(j,u"(70a,
62
eSjufj/ai,104,
544
eSo/fiVoJi',
133
fSoMs;/etc.,
128
fSoi/TTf,283 f.
Upadov.
504
^SpaKou,
278 f.
fOpai/,
127
fSOj'.129
^5urT|9i7"', 510
rs-w.
-o^ai,
143, 145, 207,
264 f.,467, 544
eSwKo, 282, 411, 464
iei\"OV,
79
",|6,
79
efiTTor,
79,
544
ielcra-o, -ro,
80, 83
eeXfiai,
362
eeK/ievot,
79
iipyaQiv,
502
ifpyfj.ivoi,
362
(fpfxfvos, eepTO,
81, 362,
364
6-,
e'-e'tro-aTO(45),80, 86
ftffffaro {f"(T),80,
520
eecTTO,
362
^/"iiroi/,
291
r/iSe,
278
rCfXei', 279, 284
e'^ey7/uej'ai,
359
eC^vyfxfvos,
419
rOi'61', 171,
178
e'CoAtai, 202 f.,
222
ef(^yU""r6',
62
eiV/?", 492, 500
eVa, 80, 85, 106, 282, 464
ei,v5av(,79, 81
idiipcu,
255
ief\-v"T0a,-etffda,
34
(bis),
37,
39
ieeKtiai,
38
"0f'Xw,266
iOeXw/jLi,
27
f.,
39
ref^ev,
127
eflTj/fo,
282, 411, 464
ieiodffi,
481
edKafffiivos,
358
I0OS,
506
tOpf^a,
544
e'eviej/,
147
100),
143
%ewKa, 273
iOiiKan, 385,
414
6?
(fut.),
33
eJo-Ko, -fioi,
363
etaffa,
elwv. 84
fyao-Kov, 190, 530
(la-raL.
-to,
65
flSa,463
"i5-cb),-617JI'.
-eVai,(is,344,
.391,402, 422
eiSricTai. 544
efSo/nai, 153, 266
flBoniv etc.
(conj.),313,
422
fTSoi/, 84
"i5u?o.I'Sura, 402
er-ntx.i (= el^ui), 121,
247
(ivy, 329
elrjcrda,
35
6('7JTO;',
54
tWtCocetc., 85
erSiKa. 364
elKa,
fiftai,
85, 364, 414 f.
elKaOoj,502
elK4j/ai
V. ioiKivat,504 f.
(Cktov,
387
e'lKvia, ioiKUia, 402
ei'/foi, 154,
394
f('/ca", 153
eiKcis,402
"(\a7nj/ofco, 237
("iXaTa, "t\ri(pa,e'lKvia,
i1\r^ixiji.a.i, 361,
396
"(Xeco,
268
flKiiKovOa, 369, 380, 398
elXriAovdfJiev, .387
elXri/x/xai v.
(tXaipa
el\iyiJ.4vos,
364
flKiffffov
etc.,
85
6lXi'x'*''"o" 405,
418
frA-Kof,85
efWo!, "yA.\co, 85, 179, 195,
211
elXov,fl\6ijLr]v, 85;
542
elKoxa, 361,
407
"l\vfj.4vos etc.,
364
el\vcp-6wv, -a^"i,235
efAo, 179, 268
ef/iai, 364, 421
f'lfiap-rat, -to,
361
(bis),
419
elixapT6s, 514
etneiv,340
6T/u""/ etc.
(Vtjmi), 85,
127
elue;/, eiTij*',
329 f.
eJjuei/ai,
339
elixi, 96, 99, 121, 148, 467,
517
elfii, 101, 146, 487
elvai
V.
ffififvai
elvi,39
e'lvvfjit,
113
eir|ao-i, 48, 402, 427
(bis),
438
6?|ao-/f",
531
elir-a,ov,
462
e'TTOio'aj/, 452
(XiraTov,310
eiirerv, 292
(lir-ffxevai,
-(/J-ev,
339
"?ir"(r"",531
eiTTfTriv,
54
61717?,
317
elTTVffda,34, 39
f'iirri"Ti, 39
efn-or,85, 544
efirto/ii, 27, 39
flpya^6fx7)v,
86
elpyaaixai,
.364
(Jpynai,372
e'lpyvvfxi, f'lpyw,
1 10
elpyw, 143
efpeo,
304
elpioi,
544
eipTj-Ko,-|UOi,
360,
544
eioiiKbiv, 394
INDEX. 561
(Ipua,364,
414
t1po/j.ai (ask),213, 2GS
flpnO/jLiS,
43
ilpnov,
86
ilpvarai, 364
dp(a(=:=a-ep-ju\ 173,
214
e'(pu(
=
p-J"ti, sav),
213
268, 360,
542*
da-a,86, 465,
521
fistSpaKa,
463
ela-da,
34
et'siSe'eij', 342, 349
fiaKcc,191, 197, 200
fla-S/xeffea, 62
ehTrXivaoinriv, 486
(Ispvriffecrdai, 493
elcrrrjKeiv, 86,
428
fifTTia-Ka, -/xai,
365
eitrTi'a;;'
etc., 86
fls"ppTiuai, 128
e?Te,329
f/XeT^Jv, 54
^Ixoy,86
fw,
316
(Xu-ea,So, 305, 363, 400
^tcdri, 491
(Ka/jLe,
278
^K^tovras,
148
fKyan'i-a-Kcc, -fco, 196, 199 f.
fK-yeydacrde,
416
fK7e7d/^6^',
424
eK7e7do!'Tai, 416, 417, 468
e/":5a;3;7,
494
*
eVSapeVra,
492
"V5D^""', 329
iKeK\"TO,291, 293
fKfKpayov,
290
eKSKpaTripixvf'-^s, 407,
434
iKi^dy.jjiiv,
456
.
iKfpSava,
457
eKfpaev,
456
eKTjo etc.,
459
""i'a9or, 504
(bi.s)
EKjaro, 120,
504
fKKayov,
285
e/c\a7rrj"'ai,
492
iKKaaQt),525
eK\eAa9a.';/,
293
iK\7i'iffTai,
358
i-K\'ivQr\, -KXiGrt, -KXivrt,
499 f.
(KKoyi^ecrdw,
309
fKuayi^vai,
492
fKfj.aiyo!,
216
fKVTiadrjv, 521
eKolKayav,457
(Kon'aivij(rdTr)v, 54
fKOfiev,
346
fKopeadev,
489
iKirfcpdvavTi, 385,
397
iKiri(pivyoi7]v, 31, 423
fKTr\ayr,ffOfj.at,
493
(Kirpafew,463
(Kpayfiffoprat, 493
fKp4ixw,60
fKpivve,
457
fKpv"pdev,
489
iKCTin^oiaro, CG
fKrav,
130
iKTdvQi),499
(KTaffa. 4 "G
(KTnfff^a.,358
fKrria-b),
449
iKTioraiaro, 66
^KTova, 399
fKTpifiriffeTai,
493
e/cTUTTf,
286
(KiinTa^oy, 236
.
iK"i)ave7,
475
(Kcppes,
107
eKci;^, 143
fKa^ay,
464
e\dfx(pe-nv,
499
i\d"ra(TKe, 531
. e'Aao'eioj'Tj, 534
"EAotroy,535
eXaufoi, 171, 178
e'AaxeTOi',
54
e'Aaxia,
494
e'Aao.,148, 178, 524
eKSofjLai,
143
e'Aeai'pw,
255
i\ey(Tov,
54
'
i\eyxa",143, 145
eAe'eij/, 343
eA-ejr, -tcrdai,284
eAeiTTTo,
131. 371
eAeAeiTTTO,
435
eAeA7)07]s,
431
eA6Ai(,W,226, 454
(KiXlKTO,
131
fXeaKou,
531
kXioTai,69,
350
eXiCTTCi),
69
eAeros,
514 f.
eAef^aipo^ai,
255
i\ri\dfj.fvos,
426
eATjAarai,
368
e\T}\eyKTai,
367
eATJA67/xai, 368
e'ArjAe'SaT
,
242, 418,
524
i\r}\i-yfxai, -kto,
367, 378
eAeAi7yueVos, 368
i\e\i(^eir9ai,
454
^K-fiKvOa, 367, 369,
542
e\il\veai",
385
e'ATJAuTc, 387, 502
iKi)jj.(per]V,
499
eAeeTv,284
i\d4fj.ey, -o(,
339
4\eiTws, 304
e'Aiwco,123,
172
-
lAiire, 278
lAiVo-o),227, 256,
454
tK,"peiv,
499
'
lAKec=), 259,
268
0 O
eAKyfl-Tafw, 236
JAkuo),523
eAKco, 143, 251,
268
eAAa/3",
78
(AAa-e/,-Tf, 119, 298
eAAiire,
78
eAAi/crij',
49
"AAa",
179
eAireo,
304
fXTToixai,
144
(\aai,
456
e'Aii
(fut.),
479
f/xadov,
501
ifiavrtn,
492
i/xapdudr}, 499
efidpvao,
60
eu-;3a, -1877, 299 f.
ifjL^airipLiv,
330
i/x^aXu, 141, 457
ilJ.I3a\odp.es, 43,
475
ifJ.$T]TOy, 310
ifx^ifid^avres, 226
iix^pajifva,
361
e/xfipaTai,
361
e"e0a),502, 504
ip.4\\iTov,54
(fXifiTiKov,
290
(bi.s),
429
inepi^a:;
454
ifxiffoo, 481
e/UEToy,
514
ifj.71fj.eKa,367,
369
ifjLiyiaKOVTO, 529
e.uiyiji',
491
e.uix^ej',
489
ejxfic.de,
78
efifiivai, efxevat, ififiiv,
ifxev,
338 ff.
e/xfieyeoLffi, 47, 476
ifj.fx6pavTi, 361, 385
%lxf.i.op-e, -ov, 286, 361, 399.
ifLvr,aOriv,
525
eMoAov, 133, 190, 193
e^opre;/,
163,
281
eVTraCo/xai, 223,
224
^
tfj-iraios,
223
ifiTTaffTripas,
223
ffxirar-iixfcrav, 407'
e/XTreTroSiCT/LieVoy, 373
6V7ri'7rA?je(, 297 f.
ffxTT\7]ao,
304
ffiirooi^w, 250
ifxv^av,
456
ifji(pavi^dvT(iiv, 455
ei'a7"fieD,uoi, 481
fvalpai, 255, 283
ivapa,
282
euapuv,
285
tyavoy,
458
fvavfffia,
520
iySayfi^icrOoi, 309
eVSeSid-'/cdTO, 373
iySiSiKTKca, 192, 193
eVSi/caJa/teVoi, 454
562 INDEX.
(y^ivtvfTi,
-If)
(lOUKfWS,
li"5
eVeyifst.,544
ivfiKf/xfy,
291
(vf/j-ixmo,
457
(viviTTov,202 f.
ivioi,;ii)4
(vfirpnOov, 107, 501, 504
ivriKaixiv,
4G4
eVijAoy.283
ivr]voxa,
;50D, 399
(vdvffKet,
197
iViKWaOLV,
49
iviirrw,iviffaw,1G4,
218
eVi-cr7r"(s), -airov,
279 f.,
287,
298 i'., 542
tviffiTOi,
334
(viffcrai
V. eViTrTW
(vveov,
78
eweTre,
132,
144 f., 1G5,
542
ewy^i, 113, 520
ivoLKiv,342
fvopcpT],
335
(vpa^m (?),
408
ivpLyiaKavw, 175,
182
eVravi^ei;/
(Fut.),
483
ej'Tacro'ir,
352
iVTiQvix7)^ai,
373
eVri,48
eVrpeVeu,
304
f
j'TuiJ/io),
408
fvv^p'iiris,
455
t'laA-eiTrTeof, 514
fla\i(pfi, 492,
500
f(aiJ.p\ovfj.ey,
195
f^ai/yeXioj,
475
fla^/SpaTroSieDj/TOi,
481
"|a7raTatrK0J', 527,
530
f^aTraTuAAto,
537
f|a7ra"p7)(re,
271
f^eyXv/xfiiytf,
358
*|"?,141
f^ei,
300
f'ler^ej/, 339
"^ei"r9a, 34
f|eiTi,
9G
*^iK\diTri"rav,
497
f^i\a.di(TKe,
531
e|fAai/i'O|U"O'0a,
G2
t^(\6cA"VTt,
4G
^|erapi{a),
454
"|ef(;6/i6i'os,
359
^f"Tri(TTai'aTO, 06
"|e7rA77,
131
f^fpvffaiTKf,
532
*|"Tp(o((re;'),
128 1'., 133
(^tTUfifu,
479
ilvfjL^KM, 133
tlripai-eTj, 490
^4i5.i7o, 208
tfiVfi, 114
f^ufjLfffda,
62
f^oyri,
469
(^opKlffeiv,
455
f'|opu|7),
455
f^wKiy^f,
455
*
"o""a. 197, 302, 377, 397
toiKeyat, (iKfyat, 402,
424
io'iKiffav,
431
eoiy, eoi,
334
(6\-fi,
-7]T0,
362
eoATra, 362, 378,
399
iSvTw,306
iovTuaav, 307
fopya,
363, 380, 399
fopyav,
385
iopTa{i),
363
'
eovprjKa, 80,
363
eovpricTf,
80
4TrayyiWafJ.4vxv, 457
fird7]y, 493
"7ra0oj/,
501
(Traivrjv,
339
eirdi'(rTOS, 208
eiratcc, 185
fira\t\\6yr]T0, 371
"irai"aTiTaAKiT(i",
422
e7ra|a,
450
"7ra|a/^ey,
43
iiravpacrdai,
463 f.
(Tzavp(li/,
283 f.
irravp-fu, -iffKui, 195, 262 ',
271
(TTavpTjcretTdai,
271
ilTiyiVTO,
130
iiriOy)IJLrj(Ta.Trjv, 54
(ir(^cii(Tfx4iiat, 521
iireiyerov, 322
fweiyco,
154
iTre'icTcppr)Ka,
464 f,
iiriKilVTO,
65
i-niKpiuviro, 216
eTreAatrSa), 178, 309
(Trffiv^av,
456
iizfvriuoQe, 429
i-KfvrvvovTai,447
e'TreTTATjyoz/, 290,
294
eTre'-irAo)!/,
133
firfTr6/u.(p(",
404
iTTiiT6uer], 431
(bis)
(TTiTTVaTO,
435
firipacra,
273
i-KecTa, 462
("n-fffdcov,
309
iiT(-aov,
-Tov,
286, 462,
542
iTT(reKia'a.T7]V,
54
cVfy, 304
iiri"pvov,
294
(TTe"ppa5ov,
294
fTrt(ppa.aci},
449
ini"pCiioy, 290, 429
iirrivuipQiti^ai, 374
iirrip(ia(fy, 342
eVi'/Sa, 299
iiri^aUy,
329
fTTi-^aivw, -0daK"ii, 200
iirifiitiifxiv, 319
"7r(/877, 309,
319
iirL^r)Ofj.iv, 313
iTnypd(pr]v,
342
fiririKfy,
89
firi6oiij.f6a, 334
iiridpi^avros,
544
itriKara^aXiouTi,
475
(irtK(Ki]puxfyi^',
407
"7rijU"AeOjUai,
266
eTTi/jifXriaovTai,
469
iiriixopros,
281
eTTio;/,
129
ilTiUVTUlV,
307
tTrnrpoffxey,
339
fTrtppd^aaa,
219
iTTippu/xBeKTi,
47
ent(riTLivnevoi,
481
iiricnroi, 334
iw'iffavros, 51 8
i-KiaTalfj.(a6a,
02
eiriffraixai.,
99 f.
iiriaTa/xiya, 27
iTTia-rd/xea-da,
62
(bis)
eTtiaracro, 304
eTrt'cTTTjTai, 318
iTnavyicTTaTOi, 61, 318
"7ri(rx",
299
^TTitrxo it;s,
333
iirLTe6eaip-nK7)y, 391,
424
"7riT"AecrTeoy,
522
eViTeTeAeKeTa,
;591
iTTiTeTpaTTTai,
373
iirirevKTai,371
eViTi/^"j'rjf,
336
("KiTvoy, 184,
282
eTTiTpaniii),
269
e7riTpoi|/^i',
469
4TriTpa\l/ia},
468
(TrtTpifiTJvai,
493
timv"pTJ,
493
eTTKpavffKeiv,
193
eTTLKppacraaiaro,
65
fTnwpKTlKf,
373
c'TrAe/CTjr,
493
^
rTTAero, 280,
543
e7rA7)(r07j, 525
fTrAoi;',
133
(iroriffdrav,
52
'
"o^uoi, 83,
145
"oxJl/ueros,
369,
373
..rpaQoy,
279
iirpia,
60
iTrpiduny, 120,134,
4592
rirt-aKor, 282, 412,
464
"
-"7Xa.
-596,407
J^Tj;',
279 f.
"7r
eVo
"7rT
eTTT
tVu^orro, 278
eVcc.
S3,
144
STTt^X'*'''''} "^18 f.
INDEX. 563
^pajjiai, ipd-ofiai,
-w, 119,
148, 520
"Epacros,
5:55
(pdrat,
818
tpdo),
148
fpya^-rirai, -ouiai, 454,
469
fpyanaiaTO,
6ii
fpyaaeiicv,
5)54
"^pyacnai,
872
ipyaarfoi',
512
(pydrrisetc.,
525
fpywfxai,
479
"p5co,204,
224
"fpfiSo),
508
epteifu,
254
ipidriffL,
39
epe'^ai, epeBl^u, 502, 504
fpeiKcc, 154,
508
'fpe7o,
305
-fpelofjLfv, 318, 822
ipeiTrco,
154
fpfTTTOfiat
(esse),1G6 f.
tpeTTTOI,
166, 168
fpipLTTO,
369
ep4cr6at,
285
"
dpevyu,78, 155, 180
4pivdoo, 78, 155
Jp4(p(ii, 144,
166
'Ep"x0"us,
508
4p"x0^v,
503
4p-r}p4oarai, 65, 367, 369,
418, 508
4prjptyit.4yos,
869
ep^picTTai,
869
"dprjpSrriKa,
867
ip-firvdev,
490
^priTvaaiTKe,
532
fprjTvu,
250
"p"5aiVa),
185
fpi5-T]aaa6aL,
271
ipi^ecTKOv,
580
^piKeiv,
285
fpi^avres,
454
tpiTreTi',
285
epnrevTi,
498
/epirerSv,
514
IpTTuftw, 251, 537
"p7r"),
144, 251, 537
ippdia-Tat,-to,
6o, 217,
360,481
^ppaicrdj],
525
^ppanrai,
360
fppriyfla,
391
eppTjyfiai,
359
^PPVX'^i
407
"ppi7o,
860, 878, 401
fppiyricri, 38,
422
ippiyovTi,
394
ippi^wrat,
859
eppi."piv,
287
epoLcpiyai,
407
eppoc,
457
fppv-qKa,
270, 8(;()
fppto, 145, 266
ippwya,
359, 400
fppco/xat,
360
eptreo,
462
epo-co,
144
ipuyydvw, 155, ISO
ipvyiiv,285
ipvOaivw,1 55
ipvKaKov,292
(bis)
ipvKoo,ipvK-dv!"i,-avdai,
181,
^
183, 292,
411
ipvovffL
(fut.), 483
ipva-ffofj-ev (conj.),
446
epi^O), 236
epXa-Tai, -to, 372, 405,
epX"o, epx^u,
804
fpXea-Oov,310
^PXOfJ-ai, 143
(bis), 192,
197,503, 51-2
ipandia,236
e'y, 298
r"rj3", 299
etrySn^/, 123
iaS(\\0UT"S,279
eVea-axaro,405, 418
eo-0",297
"0-010;, ro-^co, 207, 501,508 f
.,
544
((TiSeaKf,53]
fcrKe?)a!T/j.4i'os, 359
e(7Keua5a-Ta(,-to, 359,
418
i(TK4xpoiJ.at, 436
effKtjcpa,
401
iaKr)(pivai, 401, 407
iffKXriKatTi, 385
i"TKOl", 528
fa/j.apdyi^",
248
iffirdpdriy,
499
"(nrapTai,
359,
419
("Tir"fj.TreaKoy,
529
iaTTipiQovro, 502, 504
kair6ixr)v, 86,
294
f(j-Kov,
279 f.
(crirovOaKa,
380
eVo-ai
(/es),
872
4a"Tav,102
cVcret-Tai, -a6a(,469
tacTiva,
459
lo-ci,efy,"?,38
CO-CO, eo-o, 102, 304
icrcTorijxivov, 361
iaffovvTai, 469
ecrau-fxai, -to,
104, 180,
156, 361
iffcrv/xeyos, 861
i(7(rvfj."yos, 426
icTffvo, 417
'effffcoTai, 372
iffTddrjcray, 490
o o 2
fffTalrfy, 422
((TrdKavTi, 46
eo-To^ela,391
i(TTd\aro,67, 419
"(Tra\Ka,
414
'4ffTau.(v, 887
iffrd^ivai, 424
(ard^TaijLfs, 43
tcTTeKaev, 457
.iffTfprjy, 492
idT
(prjcrofxai,
436
i(m"pdvu}Tai,359
co-Tr/"a, 359, 379, 413
i(ni]Kiiv, 86
iaTT]Kri, 422
^(TT7\KCl), 895
4aTr\v,127
eo-T7)|a),
436
eo-Ti,
38
iffTi^iv,287
i(TTi^7)rai, 270
4(TToka,339^
iffTOpeaa,
272
fffTO"pa,
399
^
ecTTpaufxai,
419
i(TTpd(periy, 83,
499
iofToiy, 807
k(TT(ljs, 425
kffrSicra, 395
ecTTuxray,
307
eo-Two-i,
422
i"T(j"riKwyTo, 359, 435
eaxedoy, 501, 528
eo-Xo^', 279, 542
irauSy,258
iTdp(p9r]y {repir-),
83
eTeOe;/,490
iTfdrjTTf-a, -as,
48("
irfpfid^ay, 454
ir^ppaTO, 457
iTiTaKro,
419
eVeTaxciTo,66, 405
eTerfxov,
294 f.
eVeuxETOt', 52
iTr]T6/j.aKa, 367
eT\7]y,
182
^T/xayoy,282
eToijua^o!, 287
erope,
287
eVpciTrrji', 492
%Tpa(pov, 275,
49("
iTTaKay,
464
eri^Tra;/, 491
iTV-KT], 492
ei'a,
ivouToy,
84
euaSoj/,79
"UoC",237
6uaAai"a, 79, 362, 414:
ei/Sai/xoj/otTov, 54
e^'5a^'co, 181
ei;5r)o-0a, 34,
39
"{!5j)o-j,
39
euoo),
266
564
INl^EX.
(bteooKa,85, 273, 363, 111,
nOG
evepyfT-l^KOtffay,
301
.
fijiSov,81
evKTOL^ov, 230 "
(vicTiaefos,121",353
eOKTo, 131
fui'd^ecrOai, 235
et^rr;tra, 235
"C|ea((conj.),
447
evtreicrros,
514
evpCLKoiixiv,
414
eJ/jaf,
4G4
6iY'B(T0ai,
4G4
eJp6?v,283, 285
eiip^rrtv,
54
6;'pe-T({s, -reoy,
514
eupr)Ke (impcrat.),
422
eDpti^o,
271
evp-qffu,
271 "
"
ebpia-Kia, 101,
19G
ivpofjLiS,
43
ivpvvoi,
254
eSri
(?),
48
ciiTyx"''A'-f
"
335
fvXcipiO'Twp.es,
43
eyXSTaotrOai,
19S
fi^Xe^ai,
322
euxf''*''/^"')
537
e^Xey,
304
eSxof^at,143, 1"2 (bis),
198
evo),
155
e"payatxfv,
4G4
i"pavav,
4G4
epaaKe,
527 ff.
%"paTov,
53 f.
e"pia"TQiv, 79, 498
^"|)".'w,
31 G
f(pe\e(T6b)v,
310
^(pepcTfv,
457
i(pefr"rai, 521
e;/"-f)7rrai, -ijTTTO, 3G6
f(j)r]"Tda,
35
((pddparai,
G7
t"p6apiv, 489
tipOdpriu,
493
t(p6ap-Ka,-jxai,
41},
4 10
i(p9r\v,
127
i(pQipL7\i/,
129
i(pir)rt, 38
*^iA.-730ff, -aees/,49* )
trj"iOpl"iOijj.l,
;?35
f";"A.a3oi/, 223, 287
iipKiyi)v, 493
((pofxapTilrov, 310
(tpopevfi,
141
tfpaSev,
288
f"ppT]Ka,
4Gt
t(ptryau,
4G4
trf)!/./,
i:!0
t:pUTO;/,
54
^Xafo*',232
^XaV'?.
492
6X-6to-0o,-etr^a,34, 37
rxe",342
txfo'ices,
529
fX^o'oi',
4G2
exerw
(3
dual,
impcrat.),
310
"X*t"""
459
(bis)
e'X'J'', 342
f'XT/o-ea, 34, 39
fX'JC',
40
expff',
30
iX^^^poiaro,
GG
exflaipo),
255
fxOdpofxai, 175
?Xee(r0ai, 27G
exOo/xai,
143
eXO'".'48
eX'"''''',
4G
ix^fTwv, 30G f.
eXpa'a-^e,
282, 288
6X1^0,
130
"
exc^,
143, 518,
512
iX'^vdi,47
f^apiffaTo,
455
lil/eucT/uat, 350
"\pT}(pl(TTai,
359
eij/iox'Tai,
4G0
^Veo-S'. G2
6\|/y9e(/,
15G
64-0),108, 144, 26G, 359,
445
Ico,
6?j(ri,
319
ed;96o,
430
iiidovy,iwcra
etc., 80
ea)"a, fwcri-iai,
363
icpKeiv,
81
idiXiTiiv, 81
'i(Dp.iv,
320
idirqual,3G3
ioovov/xriy,
80
eoj^oxo'ei, 81
iWVTl,
4G
iwpa-ica, -fJ-ai,
3G3, 544
kdipaKau,
385
(cipyei,
81
,
3G3
iupra^oy,8 1
fcipcjy,
81
feaye,
70
/e/aSTj-pdra, 270, 3^2
/eiSiy,
420
/eiTT^j/,
291
fv\(j},
179
fiaZa-uTi,427
ficrd-nietc., V. lf(ra|Ui
/orSo,379, 544
/oi'SrAii, 2G, 383, 390,
392
fpdrpa,
.300
iae^e|a/io;', 58
(a/xidfrit!, 306
Carts,303
Cf^vrai,357
CeiVv/xef, 114, 178
CeioyTa,C"''"'"'^ot', 520'
Cf'AAc;, 211
(fVl'Vj.l.l,
114
CeVa-ei/, 14G,
520
Ceo-To's, 14G, 520
Cew^i'i'/uej', 340
Ceu^i^^ej'Oi,
339
Csi/yi'UyUI,
110
Cei'X^s'^C") 500
Ceo),114, 146
C^0",298
C^Aos,520
C'?Te'"), 105
Coe's, 302
Cou(r9a), 114
CwYf^co, 238
Cc^;/;/y^i, 114, 521
^divvvvrai, 319, 447
^wvvvaK^To,
529
^UlCOVTL, 46
^a, eactc.
(eV),
119
vPd-ffKOL,,
-u,
190
(bis),
194, 199, 237
y^vWiuv,
537
fiyyiXKo.,
414
7)yy pafip-evav,
374
'
vye/jLOvevci},
252
rjyfOfxat,
240
r]yepe9oi.'Tai,
502
TiylvecTKot',
520
fj^wricravTO,
455
j^5-ea, -61,
429 f.
pSei-jxev, -re,
433
ijSeiy,433
jySe-Mff,
-re,
432
"fj5-ricr9',
-eicrCa,35
^So^ai,
156,
180
^5on"(r0a,
62
r)Ovv(ti,
254
"^Si/CTjueVos,
420
7]'iSr]i.(.eu, 80, 431 f.
ryei^,^ia,^o,
433 f.
^6,p6
("r/6p), 81,
214
rifpiOov-rai, -ro,
502, 504
r]fpfj.evos,
419
i,eea),
2(5If., 503
^la,f/a(e'M')"
^i' f*
f)K-a, 85, 411, 464
"fjKa^ov,
88
ijKrjKori,
431
r]Kpou(ro,
60
^KCi),
394
TjAaffKaCo),
fi\d(TKii",
180,
105,
\99,237
INDEX.
5C,5
^Kdwe, 275, 282 f.
"i]\6afiev,
4G4
""i\QiTov,
54
(bis)
ilKirov,281
TjA/CTjcre, 85
rjWa^aTiiv,
54
ijAaaro,450
^
"")\(Xov, iXaoiv,285
^\ueor,284, 502 f.,
542
t^(pov,
283
^Kaiiia, 302
7]\wKiua.i, 424
^yttOi, 103
7};UO/)T0"', 103, 281
fm^KcLKov,\m, 283
^lH0\u(re,133, 273
ny^^poTov, 91,279,281,283
^/ie"', 33'J
V', 103, 181
ni'fj.-Ki(Tx6iJ.T]v, 283
v;|Li7rA.d"rjTai, 271
^/xTTAa/coc,
282
f.,
412
VfJLvvaBov, 504
rifj."pUffixo.i, 374
^./af,
339, 341
"rjvayTiw/xat, 373
"i]vapov, 282
i/rSare,79, 180
^vfyK-a,
-ov, 291,
402 f.
^vdoix(s, 43
^f'eo:/, 285
Yjvwxevoo,
252
-riviTrairoy, 292 f.
Tivoly-qv, 492
^yoia-Tai,
374
tj^t', 05
T.vrai,
319
"hvT(^6\ricse, 95
Vvdiyta,430
'")j'""'7fii',
432
"i)V(i)x^i]Ke, 374
ijvcix^ovi/, 95
^^|o,,
480
Tjirepowevui,
252
'^iroi/, 291
Tipafxau,
58
Vpdcrcrao, 450
ripe/x-ecc,
-I'^'co, 243
jjp-n-Ka,
-fj.ai,
368
ijprifxfada, 63
rip-hpeiv, 433
Vpvpeia-da,35,
432
"iipvpeio-To,
419,
434
rjp-r\ffiTai, 436
'JTplcrTafj.ev, 388
^p/co,414
ijpKfcraTov, 54
^uye, 155
^PX""
401
"^erSa, 35 f.
TiCT-eai;/, 310
f/o-i, 38
-^(TKe,
92
fi(TK1JTCU, 360
Vo, 304
^axufiixfi^os,
300,
420
Vt, 38
riTipLtiifferaL, 436
^Xai'"'', 103, 181
BaAcraw,256
Odyai,156
ea\6, 285
eaKieriffi, 39
BaKid'oiv,
502, 504
0aA,\co, 211,
202
ed\Tr7]"Ti,
40
eaATTco,CaAireiw, 144, 241,
209
GapL^aivcii, 254
6ai/aT"i', 535
^afeZj/,
285
SaTTTO!,100
eapo-e'w, 229,
240
eau^a^'o), 238
davjxalvw,233,
253
0eij7,
315
edrjixeu, 330
06i7j(/, eerej/, 329
0e?^ei/,
329
6e?rai,341
0"iW, 216
(bis)
6fio-/xai,
jxfv,
313,
314
eei'w, 210
efA7e"rK",
529
etAo::/,332
ee'Ato, 144
64\ci)VTi, 40
6ejj.euai, 339
ee^/e?!/,
285
divruv, 307
0eo,304
ee'oiTO, 334
esp^j/ai, 491, 496
Bep/xfTo,
232
Ofpfxco, 144
QipopiaL, Qepdojxai, 241, 209
depaS^ifvos, 450
eeVoj,144
ee's,298
e"(TM(^f, 598
fieo-Trie'eii/,- 481
eiaa^aOai, 220 "
0eT($s,517
eeWi, 319
ef)ai,320
fiTjyai/o!, 175,
181
eV)7a.,156, 181
67)17$, %,
315 f.
0i7"'7, 412, 517
^TjAeoj,202
0i]fjiiyr],
353
eijpcfw,
233
djjpfvai, 252
erjfffv/xfffe', 409
OTjTeuo), 252
0i77oniD,174, 180
0i7"?"',
285
6/70^,303, 450
0iVi, 120, 247,503
eAa"r(T"), 220
0At"a",H7, 220
0Ai/87"ai, 492
0Ai)3a),157
efaio-Ko., 190, 194
OvdcTKoc, 194
OvriaKta,190 f
.,
194
.
Qvri"TK"ii, 191
6o\vv(t!,
254
Qopuv, 285
edpvvixa:, 110, 194
0oO, 305
epdaKdv, 193 f.,199
epdaau, 218, 222
GpavadivTCL, 524
Bpf^aaKov,532
dprfffKivoc, 193
Qp-qaKoo,193
OpiyKow,244
BpvwTca,
100
"
0f;ci(r/ca", 110, 191, 194
6p(fffKw,
191
SiJfj', 342
OveffKs,527
61//:^, 203, 209
St/ioj-fri;', 147
ec^iero?,129
Ovix^evos, 370
^wcd, 0weoo, 171, 177, 178,
184, 210
"i5a., 147
GoiTrevoj, 165
StVTTOl,105
6tj}pr)cr"Tco,
256 -
Occ"Tovixfe', 409
0u)Td^6i"', 227
-
ewx^eiy,
156
'laiVsTO, 89
j'dAAjo, 130, 212,
365
'lavdov,
305
IdTTTCC, 107
idrTKco.
191, 197, 109
"au6j, 197, 520,
543
laxeoj,268
"faxoy,
80
loxuio,
373, 377
(dxco", 143, 208
IdeTu, I54crdai, 285
rSeo-Kf, 191,531
%y, %,
310f.
ioTjcrcD, 270
"5ta",202 f
.,
208
iS/iai, 372,
419
560 INDEX.
-iS/xei; -at, 310, 314. DS7,
421
l5pvi'6T](Tav,
4i)0
iSpio,111, '223,
254
iawfjLL,
27
761,301
leir},
32i"
Uyai,341
Itpdo/j-at,
237,
245
ifpevTO,
37I"
lepevw,
2i)2
Uplrfvx^i
416
^"0-0-0,
121
ifcii'a!, 173, 175, 182
'/(ey,
304
lCr](TOfiai, 271
rC-o!,
-OMQi,
80, 111, 182,
202, 222, 242, 2G6,
271
iTiyope'v, 368,
'394
Vi, 106, 517
i-nada,34, 39
i'jjtrj, 38 f.
ieoiVeo-ffai, 153
r0i(l.is),
21)7
10VU,250
"iK-ave,
-ero,
89
V/cwTi,154, 385;
394
iKavcc, 173, 175, 177
(l"is),
181
tKeaOat,
285
'iKfffQov, 54
(bis)
'tJCtVeucra, 89
iKfiivos,
131
iKvionai,177, 181, 184
lKu/j.eff6a,
62
iKTfp-iav, -uy,
536
iKTepucTffct},
257
f/CTO, 131
'/Ka", 151, 158, 181
lAaei,119, 298
'/Aa;uai, 195
rAac/io/xai, 195
f.,
411
iXaffu/xeada(coilj.),
447
lAfcOyuai,
195
"A,,oi,119, 298,
411
iKi]Ki](n, 411
ll\t-^'yi(f"7]S, 336
iiAAo,-,21 1
iAAwTT-eoi,-i(,w,-TW,
105
l\vfj.ivov, 122
ifxaou,
4o8
IfioiffcriAj, 256
lfif'ipo.\
255
lAie*',
339
"j"erat,1 2 1
,
340
ifi'iTpa"v, 458
ifiirdradu, 458
ifjLipaiviv,
;"42
"Va7(l"/Ta), 306
"V5oAAo;xai, 256
iVSlKO^TJTOI, 61
iVK-aToiraTo6i', 458
("i/i'tef. 111
Ivvfordai, 111
i|6i',
461
roi,334
iofrjj',
333
Ve''."5ll,312 ',313 L, 316,
317
tTTTrefo),
252
linroTeTp6"pr)Ka,
374
'lirrafiai, 108
rn-T"(r0a(,292
tlTTOfiaL, 165
iVais,383
iV-aico,
-a^w, 234,
531
?(ra^i etc., 38, 41, 67,
318, 366, 383 f.,42
7,438,
444
Iffd-ffKiTO
-(,'co, 236, 531
iVVji, 234
l(r7]fj.opTiv,
281
r"70i, 191
Ukoo, 191,
197
"(ro'ai, 244
'lard, 'iffTTj, 300
tVraj'To,65
ItTTavu, 170, 175, 177,
179
'Icnacro, 304
iiTTao-x',
529
r"rT77;Ul, 107, 518
"(m}s,383
"(TTw
(inipcrat),
305
larcifjieaOa, 62
Iffxc-yo-aaKov, 530
iVx-cij'a', -arao),
175 f., 177.
182, 183 f.,543
laxydyaa
,
457
larxvpii^Tai,
481
lo-xw,
283,
543
(bis)
lr4ov,517
iTTjs,
517
IrrjTiov,2;'6
Ir^ai,71, 350
Xree-v,
-cav,
307 f.
lufcD, 237, 454
Ix^vdaffKov,190
I'x^i'aai, 237
I'vp-erai, -ao,
165, 449
IwvQt,47
h-d^ao-i,
298
KaY/caiVw,177, 185,
217
icdyKavov,
107
KayK("iJ.4yr)s, 177, 185
;ia7X"Ci^. 227
Kaocii,
157
Kafji/ai, 494
Ka0otf;a), 253,
255
KaBavaivoc,155
/"oee,299
Ka.ei5oviJi.ai, 223, 480
Ka9"7ere,80
Kade^riv,469
Ka9(adfj.fyos, 465
KaQiffTaicviav,425
KadeffTi^^ii,
436
hctfieu,KdOov, 304 f..
KadevSai,
266
Kddriixai,
334
KadiyyvffOaL, 110
/ca6i^ai, 266
/ca0-ifer, -i|aj,
450-
/caei'^T),
24 1
/ca9i|o;',
456
"
Kadicrra,301
KaOlffTaTai,
318
Kaeiw, 482
Ka6op(f,
335
"
Kaiifiiv,
339
Kaiyu/xai, 113
Kalvco, 210 (bis)'
Kaio., 209,
524
KaKicd^eiy, 227
HaKOTex'^Vc'^'^t
468
KaKiJo), 244
KaKvyoo,
254
KttKX'^C'*'. 227
Ka\4iffKe,530
Ka\((TKero,
530
/coAexes,
143
KaAeco, 240, (fat.480)'
KaArH'co, 248, 524
Kd\T]fx.i,
20
/caATjoi,248
KaWvyoo, 255
KUXv^-T],
-lOP,
167
KaXvTfTCo,
167
KafMily,285
Kafxi^rai,475
Kafxycu, 171, 179
KafXTTTCC,
165, 167
KafMirvWci),
255
Kavax-rjcre,
-i^e,243-
/caj/eTt/, 282, 285
KO7r"T0S,
514
/fawi'er"JV, 241
/CttTVO), /caTTTW,
105
Kapj7,
493
KapKaipiiv,
215
KapTrevffrjTai,
469'
KapT(pfllU."V,
339
Kapv^u),
409
KO(rav6is,
122
Kao'/foAlX''', 357
'
KaffTopyvCa,
112
KaTcijSd,299
KaTaP-i^jxeyat,
339
Kara^qofiey,
313
Kara^uTj',
481
KaTaypevricy,
307
KaTaSsOap^T/h'Jf,
271
KaraSouAtTTacrQal, 455^
KOTaSi'/xet'oi, 339
(coTaeii'iKjar,
1 13
KOTofTjyatrKf,
531
INDEX. 567
KoTafleTre,330
KardBoire, !534
uaraKeiadiV,
50i
KaraKeiarai, G5
uaraKXiu, 482 (bis)
KaTaKMfrjyat,
41)2
Ko.TaKXivy](yojxai,
493
uaraKOfffxriaricrQe,
447
KaTaKreiv]i"n,
39
icaTa\e\dPr]K",3Gi
KaraXiireaKf, 531
KaTavevo^i,
399
icaTamippovriKa,
373
/varaTTief,
4G7
KaTa-KTaKuv,
287
KaTa-KT-r]Triv,
127, 282,
412
KarappworiKas,
372
KaTaaaTT7)(Tirai,
493
KaraafifCTfi,521
KaTOO-Kci/ai/,
479
KOTacr/ceuaTTTj,
455
KaTaffKiuffi,
479
/i:aTa(T(rco,
218
Korao-xe,
299
KaTaTedTjTTfiv,
394
i{aT"fi\a"p6Tis,
358
KaTeykoiTTKr/xiPOv,
358
/i'aT"'7i'a)a'0"V,
490
/L-areSijjra,
95
KaTeSi/cao'flej',
490
KaTe'iAoxe,
361
/careKeiaSe,502
KaT"KA.j;(r0jjt',
525
KareKXa^aTO,
525
KaTeKTd0e!/, 499, 518
KaTe\r)\v6ovTOS, 394
KaT"vacrdey, 489
KaTeirAriyri,
491
KareppaxSv^,
219
KaTeffTpd"p6r\ffav,
499
KaTeaci^afj-^s, 454,
523
icaTeacfitra/xes,
43
KaTeTdfxojxis,
43
liar-p
KiffT ai,
366
KajT]voKa,
369
KaTl(TX^"-^t
322
KcroiKHit,
481
KO.Topvx'flo'Sjj.iaBa,
492
Karvcppovrtvai,
339,
341
Koua^ais,79
KaucTT^j,524
Kczi/xScrai,
60
Kaxcti'co,
227;
Kaxa|ii,
469
KaxXaC'^,227
Kaco,
209
Ke'a-Taj,
-to,
66
/ceSarai,116
Keiaro,65
KUfxai,
100
Kfipco,
177,
214
Kelcro,
304
KeTrai
(conj.),
320
(cei'iii,
K""),
407
/"eKa5-"?f,-toj', -riffofxai,157,
223, 270, 293,
435
KeKaSfj-ifos, 131, 420
K"Ka\vfj.ij.(vos,
420
KiicipLW, 293
'
KiKaafiai,
113, 131
KiKafffXfVO^,
420
KiKacraai,
419 f.
i!ei:a"pricis, 165, 270, 378
KiKiKevffTO,
524
/C"K"uea,397
K^Kevrai,420
'',
525
Kacr)5a,378,
396
KiKriipe,
396
Ke/ci"'3i'i/"U(reTai, 436
iceKXayya, 377, 401
MKAe^aSs, 400, 408
KeK\eTai, 276
ueK\7)aT0,
65
KiK\r]ya,
377
KiKK-hyovres, 290, 393
Keic\7]yiis, 290, 394, 396,
401, 42G
KeK\f]o,
423
iiiK\riari,
436
KfKXiaTai,65
KfKAo^a, 399,
407
Ke/cAw-0i,-T6, 129, 290
ic4k\vk",422
KiKfji-qKa,
413
KiKfxrjws,
426
iceKOKev,
414
KEKO/XIKWS,
413
KeKO^iCTTTJ,
GO
K"Kova,
400
KetOTrcis, 379
ICSiCOpvdlXiVOS,
420
KS/COTTJOTt,
378
K"Kocpa,
407
KiKpaya,
290, 375, 377,
396
KeKpdyeTe, 387,
422
KiKpavTai,
421
iihcpaxBi, 290, 376, 387
K"Kpi7o'T6S, 377,
401
liinptKa, 385,
414
li^KpLKaicnu,
385
KiKT-nixai,
358, 375
KiKT^TO,
423
iceKvdcofft,
293
K4Kv(pa, 401
"
KeA-aSw, -aSe'o), 268
K"AfU0"lO"'T"J, 241
KiXivofiev,
322 (V)is)
KeAevTwwvr',
535-
KtAeuo),
251
iciXivoivfft,
47
KfATjTiia),-
250
/ce'AAco, 211
KiAofxat,
131, 144,
266
K^'ffat, 263,
456
KiVtiUy
263
KfVTT],
300
KiVTO,
1J"1
Kep-do}, -aid),
Kepa/xai,
I 1
5,
120, 209,
235
KfpdvWIJLl, 115
KippCO,
214
Kfpx''i',
179
K4px"^,K(pxv6o),
179
KfpaivTai,
318
/CfO-KfT',
529
K"u0a), /ceuOafO),151, 155,
175
(bis),
181
Kexo-va,
396
"/ceX"''"''''"')
385
Ks'xavSa,181, 401
K(xo-pT]"^"^,
436
/cexapT/cos,
271, 378
Kixdpovro,
294
K6Xf'V"'''''"'t 421
/cexi7f6Te,
422
KeX'I*''5Ta, 378,
396
/C6X'^"5-ei;', -ovToy, 394,
401
/ceX^^SeVai, 377,
401
Ke'xAoiSe, 196,
397
Kexo^C;
399
K(:XoK"i(no,
65
KiXoAuKTeTM,
43G
KfX'^'^'^''''')
434
KixRVlJ-^fos,
379
/ce'xi^j'Tai, 65
KexuipiSaTcti, 242, 418
Kc'o), 4G7
K-liaiey, 451
h'7)5aiVe(, 185
KTjO-(ii,-0/xai,
157,
26G
/()7/a'cf,
249
KrjTrixdpLTrat,
455
K-qpvaffu,
256
KtaOov, 113
h-iao-eai, 100, 120
/ciorai, 64,
100
KiyKpajXi,
107
Ki7Xa"''"',
175,
179
/ci0api'C",
250
kikaVko., 190 f.,200, 377
KlKXljcTKU,
191
Kii'aSi^to,
503
(civeco, 113, 177, 184
KiVi/^ai, 113, 177,184
KIVVVTO,
G5
Kivvpo/j-at,
Kivupl^w,
255
kI^olto,
121
Kipvdw,
Kipvyiixi,
115, 117,
176,
183
/cixa""^) 121, 175,
179
/cix"i'7, 121,
329
KiXe''', 121,285
K(Xf'-w, -ofj-fu,
313, 316
KixyifJ-fvai,
121, 339
KixniJ-i,
121, 179
KixAiCt^.
227
Klxpv^^l,
107
Ki'w,113
568 INDEX.
Kiuv, Kifiv,270, 285
K\ayy-duco,-4u, 180
KXd("^,ISO, 22HS 224,
454
KAoUtr/fc, 5iiO
K\aiotada,35
kAoi'co, 209, 260, 524
"cA.aJcD, 525
icXaireuTes,
492
K\av(TeioPTes, 533 f,
K\oufriaa!,
244
KXavtroiifxeda,
470
(fAauoTo's, 524
KA.aa",147,
223
"
ffXeioj,249,
524
KXfTrreffKe,
529
KAfTTTW,
165
KAi^i'oj, kAjj'w, 249, 524
K\rj(ra'., 525
K\7;(rToy,
525
KXiW, 172, 210, 518
K\iais,518
KAt-To'y,
-TVS,
518
KKi^oo,209, 223
KAC-ei,-T6, 120, 297 f.
KAUT($S,512
K\VW, 148
KAciC'^'. 218, 224
KAcio-Kw,11)2, 197,
199
KKJiffffu), 203, 218,
224
Kt/aicj, 210
Kvi^, 210, 501, 521
"yi70'"', 210,
601
Kvi^^,223
'C;'iO'(r-n"', -ovv,
246
Kj'cca'crai,
221
Koe'to, 240, 20 1
KotKvWu,
212
Koivaffavr^s,
240
KoAa, 479
KOActTTTO;, 160
/coAoioj,
253
Koixiiiv, 243
Koixilrxv,310
KO^'.^ojjL^vos, 243
KOfJLL'2, 481
Koudff-ricre, -ife,243
Ko^'-i'oi, -I'^o.', 207,
249
Ko^reTtra;', 492
KOTTTCD,
1 65
K-ope'ei (rut.),480
KOpfVVVjXl,
] 15, 193
KOptCTKW,
115, 190,
199
KopiffKovrai., 190
KOpVTTT-tKOS, -6X7]^,107
KOpVTTTW,
107
icopvatrw, 202, 250
KopvcpovaOai,
245
"KoarKv\ij.dTLa, 357
'
KO!j-ij.r]df?ij.ev, l'.29
KOTfo^jLai,
522
Koui^terj, 481
/fpo7"?;', 285
t"pa^u, 224
Kpaluw,
210
KpaTfrrKf,
530
KpoTuro;,
255
KpavydCc^,
224
Kpavyavdo/jLai, 183, 224
KpfKTtV,
342
icpeKu,
143
Kpefxafiai,
115, 120,
123
Kpffidvyv/xi, 115,
120
"pe/[i((a) (flit.), 480
KprtfjLvdw, 183
Kp-r)/xur],
300
Kpriij.vr]fj.t, 115, 117
KpMi^iiv, 223,
340
/cpi'Cc^, 223 f
.
/c/jiVe, 224,
285
KpLviffQu, 309
Kpj^'sD^'Ti,
475
Kpivdivres,
499
/fpiVco, 170, 172, 185, 210,
518
Kptvuvcri, 47
Kpivoivrt, 40
Kpoaivoi,178,
ISO
.fpovo), 178,
186
Kpv^Civ,
280
Kpv^rjuai,
494
Kpij/3a',
100
KpunraaKe (-f"T"e),
530 f.
KpvlTTOKTt,
47
KpVTTTltl,
100
Kpvcpels, 122, 492,
500
Kpv(p6(VTa,500
Kp^iC"^, 224
KTa/.terai, 130,.2 16
KTa;/er;/, 282, 286
KjaviuvTa,
475
''
KTeip((rKe, 530
KTe'.vvvjjii, 1 14
/cTei'w,114,
216
(b'-s)
liTe'iyccfMi, 27
/crej/e?, 475
K:Te'l'^'al, 457
h-TcVj/co, 114, 210
/crepEi^o),
454
/cTepioOcri, 481
KTepicrateu,
451
KTfWfjLev,
319
KroffoifTO,
486
KTi^olar,66
Kr/Co), 129, 223, 353,
524
KTlf^evos^ 129, 223,
524
KTlVVV^l,
114
KTvwio),261, 263
Kvxivt)}, 186
Kv5-("^'w, -o(^a',-iiJai, 181 f.,
254
/cue'w,
208
KuSe, 280
/cu.'"r/ca), 190, 200, 208
icvKavdu,183
KVKdw, 183
/ci'"ceci"', 183
KU cA-eo),.-({to, 246
/cuA-fco, -Ii/5w,-ivSiw,207,
249
KVfj.aivu, 253
Kvviu,184
Kinrrco,
106
Kvp-tu, Kvp-u, "ofj.ai,
214,
200, 208
KvpKavdw,170, 183
KvpOVVTWV,
306
Kvpcras,
450
Kvpr6cij,
244
/ci/'po!, 214, 208
Kvo), 190,
268
KwKvw, 370,
537
KCCTlWu,
255
Aa^S-eTv,-"0-eai,280
Aa;8"(r/"ov, 529,
531
\a$trwaav, 307
Kd^ow, 31
Aa;3or/,303, 450
AayacTfra!,
157
Ao-yx"'''^,
180
Aa^oi'oTO, 05
AaCoM"'.122, 180,
223
Adfu(r0at, 122 f.,180, 226
Aa^to, 223
'
Aae-"?;/,-eVeai,286
Aa0a., 151, 157,
180
Aa/ceTj/, 280
\aKi\aofxai, 271
AaAdfo),227
\afil3dvo", 174
(bis),
180
Aa/XTTfT-lv, 21)0
Kap-TTpiivw,
254
Ad/zTTco, 144, 236
Xd/xipo/xat,
475
Aoj/ffdj/a-, 157, 180
Ad|a(T0a(,
40O
AoTTTa', 107
AdcTK-u.., 191, 271
Ka"pijffcr-(:", -eroy,
52, 107
Aaxfiv,
280
AaxoJjJ',
330 f.
Aai^f;,
409
Adoj,147
Xeyis, Xeyi, 139 f.
\iy6/j."6fv,
03
A"7({j'Ta'f, 300
Ae'^a', 1 45
AciaiVw,
253
Aei'/Sa), 154
Acio'co,
238
Ae(-"ra), 151 f.,154, 180-
AeifflTTos, 515
\enovpycy,
342
Afixct',
154
A"KTo (counlc(l),
131
AtKTo (laid himself),
131
AeAa/3"Veai,293
\eXd"T]Ka,270,
201
\f\dea, 390
INDEX. 569
Xthadov,
293
Xi\dKovTo,290, 293, 295
\e\aKvta,
402
\f\aij.fj.at,
3G1
\4\afnre,377,
iOl
XiKaarai,
419
AcXaxacri,
3G1
AfAaxo;/, 293,
295
KiXtya, 3G1,
400
\e\(ifj.u(6ov,
07
\f\fi/j.fj.4vos,
420
AeAeiiTTOi,
419
AeAeiX", AcAix-M"'''^^) 378,
408
AfAei'v^'eTOi, 436
Ae'Ae/cTai,
3G1
Ae'Aexa,407
AeATj/ccis, 3G0, 377,
402
AeAr;/xjueV7j, 3G1
XeXirifxai, 378
A(XirifjL"vos,
209
AeAi/xMfVos,166,
378
\e\oya, 361
\4\uyxa, 400
A"A(57X"o-'. 360 f.,385
yXeAo^X'?)
391
A/AoiTra,360,
397
\4\vvTat,65
A"Aii7rrj/x"(r0',
62
XfKvcTOfiat,
436
AeAiiTO,
423
A"|"0, 461
AeTTTwoj,
254
AeVoj,144
\4(Txv,
191
Aen/caiVai, 253
A"u(r6^rai,
524
Xivaffu,
202 f.,218
X-qyefxevai,
339
A^7aj,157
Arje^^w,175, 180, 182
XvdeffKe,
529
A^eo),157,
180
K7]k4cv,271
ATJTTTliy,
514
At'/Sei, 154
Ai7|6,
224
Ai'Cw,224, 226,
454
AiOaCco,237
Ai9-iai',-tti/,
536
AiAcio.uoi,
209
XilxTTavta,154, 173, 180
Xi^u)crau, 257
AiV, 153
Xnt-4iiv,
-iiv,
-4a0ai,28G,
343
AiVei',491
AlTTTO),
166
Xiacren,304
Xiaa4(TKiro,530
Xl(7ffoij.at, 202, 220
AiToiW, 186, 220, 253
A4Tor-"uw, -6Ja,186,220,
253
Xir4"reai, 286
XiTOfxai,143, 150
AK^fpi/oCj/Tey, 166
Aixjuo-(a),
-".;,
154
Aoe'o)
V. Xov'ji,
Xot^dofjLai, 231
AolJoj,238
Xoirav,
535
AoC, 303
Xov/xat,
104
Aoi'w,A(5a), Aoe'o), Xovioi, 240,
261,
269
Au77d;/o^a(, 180, 224
XiCw, 224
AC01, 129
XvjiaivriTOi, 61
AucrcraiVo), 253
XvaaeTai, 221
Ai5to.129
AutJs,518
XVTT"J1,
224
Ava",
148
Xcc^aofiai,
245
Xo:l3aae7(Tef, 4G9
Aoj'r?, 335
XWOVTO,
104
MaS-doj,-iXco, 243
IJ-aOup,
286
y.a64rwcrav, 307
IJ.a6evfj.ai,
480
fiadr\aojxai,
270
/xai/xao),
104, 376
IxaivoyLai, 203, 216
fxaiofj-ai, 209
fiaKapi^w,
250
lua/cti;/, 286
fiaKaaffca,161,
256
IxavQavoi,
ISO
fjiavTiiofxai, 252
lxaTT4iiv, 286, 291,
343
(lapiuv,
249
fj.ap/xaipct}, 215, 377
ixap/xapvacra.;
257, 454
fxapfafiat,
118
fxapvavTO,
G5
jxapvao,
304
fj.apvu"jj."a6\ 318
fldpTTTCtl, 165
fxapTvp4ai,
fxaprvpoixai,
255,
260,
269
fj.d"T"roo, 219
fxacmyoiriy, 336
/xaffri^ai, 250, 454
jxaariw,
249
fj.aTTjcreroi' (conj.),
447
Ataxa/ray,191, 235,
241
/^aX"J',
535
fxaxeio/j.ai,
240
/xaxfoiaT,65
lj.ax4oivTO, 332
lxax4ovTai,480
/idx"o'6oj',
310
lxax4"TKu,196,*
/:iax')T"{y, 514
fiaxofiai, 143, 264, 269,
406
Hax^l^-^eOa, 62
[xeyaipu, 118, 255
HeyaXvyw,
254
lu.io4wy, iu.4Scay, 261
IJ.4S-U,
-ofiat, iJ.eS4w, 143,
157, 269
IJ-eeeiadw, 423
/J.edeia% 316
IJ.ed4\eaKe, 531
fj.e64n(v, 339
fJ.i6T}T},
315
fj.i6r]pij.6(TiJ.etT6a, 62
Hi6i4jjLey,
339
IxeO'nicri, 38
.ue^Jio). 190
IJ."6vff6r}y,
343
fiiQvffK-w,-0/j.ai,
190, 105,
200
/i60ua.',
250
fxeSufxiv, 320
fj-iiyvvfit. 111
|U6ioidacrKe, 530
jj-eiXiacna,
256
fieipo/xai,
214
fj.eXaiv(t", 253
^eAai'ef,
182
/teAeSauco,253
jue'Aei. 211
fifXeTau,
236
/te'AAco, 76,
211, 266
Ij.4xttw, 144
MfAa', 144, 266
IJ.4/xaa, 104
fj-ffxaacri,
360
fxefxaQriKaffi,
385
/j-efjiaOriKiTCii,
422
/jflxaKu7a, 402
lj.efjidfj.ev,
387
fjefjairoiey, 291, 293
fiefiapTTci'S, 401
fxefj.ax6Tes,
407
tj.efj.acis, 378, 402,
426
fj.4fi$Xe-Tai,
-TO,
266, 378,
417
ti4n^Xo:Ka, 380,
413
fjefiPXwvTOiiv, 387
fiefieydKovcra,
394
fj.efj.eTifj.4vos, 374
fiejxriKuis, 377,
396
M6"7;A6,212, 360, 378, 397
fj.efi-hXrf, 422
fx4fL7}va, 378, 396
fj.efj.iafj.fiai, 421
fxefj.ia(rfj.ai,
420
fiefxi^eTai,
436
fiefLiaQdirrovTai, 427,
439
fx4fjveo,
fjefjuTi,
4 1 7
fi"fj.veci!neda,
423
570 INDEX.
(jLefi-vrifMai,
378
fxffiv^firiv, 4 'J15
/xe/xvrjvro,
G5
lx4fj.vr]-(Tai,
-ai,
4 1 7
fxifMurjcro, 423
/j.f/j.vrfaojxai,
436
/.Le/jA'TiTo,
423
Ixifj-vSio etc.,
423
)U"Vow,3G0, 378, 390
fj.eiJ.6p7]Ke, 271
[xfixop-qrai,
361
l-Lilxopfj-ivov, 361
jxifxopvXjJ-^va, 420
fXifj.Trr6s, .515
;U"jUt'(,''(iTe 408
HifivKa, 360, 398,
413
/.i4iJ.(j"ofj.ai, 144, 145
juei'6T(^s, 514
/xeueTccffav, 307
/.ceyevvTi,
46
IxevoiffirjcrL, 24!)
jue'w,212, 258,
26i
(V"is).
266, 543
fxepOeiTa,
498
f.i.ipp.epa, 365
fiepixripi(a}, 242''', 451
fXiTafoiKiOL, 335
/ieTaxf'p'f"''"'"
481
fxeTeyypa(p'f](TeTat,
49."
fxeTfioi, 316
/.lereKiaO-i, -ov, 120,
50'J
juerexoi/TaJv,
306
/xeTpia(,w,
238
[xri5oij.at, 157
lJO)K-a.oixaL,"d^o), 273
IxTjicvfu),
255
A'-Tj^/ro;, 207,
249
IJ.r]7iofj.aL,
24'J
Miaf-eTj;/, -07)(raj', 489, 490
jj-iyvv^t
315
/xi^^rai, 500
[xiyi](Ti(T6ai, 5, 490
l^iyyv/j.1, 111, 198
p-i-hvrj, 457
fUKTO,
131
f/.ififo, 305
fxifivaiffKM, 190, 235
/.u/xv-naKoo, 189, 190. 193,
191, 199
/j-ilxvijcTKui, 190, 543
ixi.ixv"ii,
543
IxiviSiffKov, 530
l-avvdu, jxivvQiw,269, 5()3.
504
/Liivvpoixai,fxtvvpi^w, 255
fxiaryfai, 322
/xL(ry4iTK"To, 530
Atfo-yw, 111, 189, 192, 198.
542
HiX^rifxeuai, 500
/afaiffKo),
193
fivaofxai, 193, 543
jxvdtrKeT', 530
fivrjffaiaO'
,
6.5
lXVy](T6.(TKiT0, 532
lxvr](TOi"jXiQa, 447
jxoijj.vWa),
202
^oA"(^',
286
/.loA-evetv,-ovetv,
25.^
fj.o\vuoo,183
fjioviw, 244
fxopQrjvai,
498
lxop/j.o\i(T(To/j.ai, 257
IXOpfXVpiffKi,
L91
fxopfxvpw, 215, 377
/.t.6pvafj.ai, 118
ixoxd-^ffftv, -i^ouTa,243
M^X^'C'"''''', 46
ixv^ui, fxv^-ata,
-e'oi
(suck),
226, 269, 273
/xuC'"
(groan),204, 226, 451
/j-vdecTKopTo, 530
jj.v"Ti(TOfi.ai (conj.),
447
fxvKa.oiJ.0.1,204, 273
fxvK-e, -Of,
286
juyAAo), 204, 211
l^vpofiai,
214
fivaffit),
219
Mvco, 147,
202
/xurai
etc., 104
raeTTjpey,
210
vaardaffKi,190, 210
j/aieraw,
236
wia", 210, 220, 52 i
j/a/cTtJs, 221
^'dfTo-w, 221
vavfiax'OcriiovTa^,
534
^/aucricta),
244
//auTiWeTat (conj.),322
va.vTiWofj.ai, 255
veaCco,231
reao), reiico,231, 236, 238,
246
VilKOLOLVTep,
458
Viucaap,
458
fftKeifCTKe, 530
j/"iK"w, 240, 522
I'eTo,305
i"(i(pei 154, 158
vijxiQovTo, 502, 501
vefjL((Ti^op.at. 250
vefiiffcrdoi, 237
vifieffffTiQiioixiv, 313
ve/xicrffriOriTe, 510
vefxafiiirda, 62 f.
ve/xo!,
144, 266
rej'ao'jueVot, 221
vsuacrrai,
221
" veutniicrdci), 423
.
x/evevKao-jf,
385
vevr]afj.4fot, 521
vivorjKuii'. 394
rej/J/xiKO, 380
vtvotpe,
399
veofxai,
146
rec^o-, 231
VfVffov/xevoi, 470
x/ei/fTTa^cij, 236
veticti, 155
i-e'co, 148, 156
cecocrffei,
257
vnydreos,512
I'TJeo), 501, 504
rrjvea), 376, 537
vrjffowTi,
460
vr)(paiv(ii, 186
r7l(/)co, 144, 186
j'TJX'", 199
z/iCo;, 167,
224
vi.Kav,339
viKuffKOfiev,
527
vtKaco,
237
riKoU,335
viKwTi), -re,
336
/'iTTTo;, 162, 167, 168, 224
viaaoixai, 146, 210, 220
J'i"6i, 158
vKp^/xev, 339
VKpTjcro/j-M, 167
x'oeV,342
vofxevw,
252
VOfJ-KVjXfV,
481
rocror,.335
voaoifx av,
335
fotrijjiers,
481
i/oacpi^u), 250
I'oircpi^aLVTO, 455
rt^7"i, 143, 150
j'titrfTo), 219
rycTTaC.'oj, 155,
236
|aiVcu,
216
leit-iXiw, 454
|"a),"l47, 216
^T]paivcc,
25;"
|u7'j'ror/x6i',
330
^vij.-l3airifj.ev, -^alixiv, .330
i^vfx^KriTai,
320
^VjJ.^\7)Tr}V, ^VfL^XllVTO,65,
132
^vvi^riTOv,54
lui/eiAeKTOt, 361
^i'j'eAe7r)^6j', 492, 497
|w"^"peii9ei7}i',
494
4^16,
301
|uvTT)X0"i'y, 500
Ifip-ta,
-Ofxai,
i^vp-ioi, -duOy
214, 246, 260, 269
iuco,147, 216
uyKao/xai,
231
65af-acr0ai, -ecrOai, 445
oSa^o),
144
oSuSuffTaf,365
ddonTeTTopriKa/j.ei",
374
oSi'pOyuai, 215
INDEX. 57t
6Su(r9r)vai, 498
oSvcrcro/xai, 222', 521
iiSwSa,367, i)6D,
377
dSwSvcrrai, 369, 521
oCoo,203, 223, 264
uOofxat,
143
uiyvvfxi,
111
M?5o,153, 264, 371, 397,544
ojS-ai/o!,
-airo), -eco, -a.w,
181, 270
orSTjy,-Pa, 389', 390.
oiCvo), 250
orii^,
237
oliia, 371
oXk^vti,47
olKT)f/.ai, 372
olicTiffoicn, 47
oiKiovvres,
481
olKoS6jj.7]Tai etc., 372
ohiodoixTjTai, 423
oIicTelpu,
255
,
01/j.ui^ui, 237,
454
oh'o^apeici),
240
oiVoTTora^eif, 236
t"1o/j.ai,
267
o;Ja), 244
oTo-6, 450, 461
oiVeD/ies, 469
oT(r0a, 35 f.,42, 383, 395
olo-fle, 384
oi(T-w,
-o/xai,
544
olxvecc,184
orxo/io:, 184, 267, 417
oi'o), 207
OKe'AAco,21 1
OKveido,
240
OXiKiffK^V,
530
oAe'Kco,115. 143, 164, 411
oKia-eai,286
6\^aaco,272
oAeVw, 480
"
oAi'yoSpai'etiJt',
216
oXicdavw, 175
oAAve,
301
oAAu/xi, 115,
172 f.,272
oAoiaro,
66
oAoAvC". 227. 365,
454
oXofxivos,
172
o\o"pvpoixai,
255
o\a"\a, 367,
369
oAcoAj?,
422
u^iaAiCcc, 243
oMaArfo), 238,
243
ofjiapTov,
28 J, 286
bix7)yvpi^0jxai,
250
o^iXe'w.261, 263
vfxiwfxfda, 475 and note
OfXVVe, OjXVV,
301
o/xi't;0i, 292
oixvvjxi, 111, 274
v/xyw,
339
OfXVVVTOlV,
306'
^yuoiJa", 244
SfJ.OK\T](Ta(TKe, 532
ofxdpyvvfu, 111
ofj-ov/xat,
475 and note
bixdifj-oKa, 367, 369
oveipufffftt.',
257
ovrjfxevos,
426
oi'Tio-o,
304
ovdefxivai,27, 339
ovlv-nixt, 108, 292
oi/o/i-aC'^, -atVa",238, 239, 253
ovo/xai,
236
bvofxaivai v.
oj/o/iaJiai
bvSfxaffOfv, 489
ovofj.aaros,
515
owrriCo),121, 236, 537
o|i^ra), 254
oTn'^o), 250
OTriTrevc, 108, 292
67rAi'(,a), 454
oirKicrbixiffda, 62
OTTviu,251
oTTcoTra, 367, 369, 377, 544
OTrunreaav,
428
oKcinr], 391
oTTojpieiij'Tes,
481
opyaivai,
253
o/37afeiar,
457
o/"-yaa",
240
opeyi/v/xi,
111, 176
opejo,,
78, 111, 143,
145
opelrai,
475
opeovTO,
111, 261, 263
op"'x9eo^, 503, 504
bpexO^Cii, 111
8p77,309
UpTOm,26
opeo'co, 238
opiyvdo/xai, 111, 176, 183
opivviii, 172
opiVo), 111, 172, 177, 183
(5p/ci|ciTco,
455
opKi|"'co, 468, 483
dpnaivu,253
'6p/.:aoj/,
458
opfxdw,
237
opixiaro, 372
opju-wixedoy,
67
opvvfxai,
261
opyvfiev,
339
opvuyui. 111, 172, 177
bpoBvvw,111, 503, 504
vpofxai,
144, 544
opopuv,
291
opovca.
111
oppaTCi),
457
opcracTKe,
532
upaeo,
462
upiTTjcri,
39
i/po-o,
131
vpcTo/xey,
456
upcruifj.ev,
447
opu^^j'ttj,
494
opvaaui,
222
opi;x", 143,
150
opxeo/""', 229, 240
opwpa,
367, 369
dpcopsTat, 417
opojpe'xa-Tai,
-to, 367, 369,
378, 405, 418
opcopexoVes, 400, 407
bpiipr), 422
opcipri-Tat,
-to, 417, 423
bpiipvxa, 367
opcfTov,
54
cffffonai,
219
uiTcppaifonai, 186, 283
(XKppiaOai,
286
0(T(ppT)(TOIJLai,
271
o5Ae,120
o^AoVeroy,
172, 179, 35;^
oufeffdf,121
oup-qridaris, 536
oSTa,134
ovTafiff,
33D
ovTacTKe,
531
ovTacrrai,
372
oirra-a', -Ca",134, 236
ovri)ffa(TKi,
532
uipiiKiTri, 61
o(pii\6vToiv, 306
0(i)6iAco
(o"|)"iAew), 181, 182,
267
6"t"4Wetev, 457
b(p4\\cv, 256
(xpKdvia,
u(p\co, ocpXiffKoo,
6(p\icrKd.u(a, 175, 181,
182, 183. 196, 276
6(pKi](To), 271
ocppvwfxfi'os,
372
oxe'o-, 240
oxA-eCj'Tot,'laffiiav, 243
oifeioz/res, 533, 534
oii-ofj/TO,
o"//oia0', 66, 486
oil-o^ai, 219, 544
oi/zor,
359
ira777,
491
iray7}aerai,
493
TTaSaiVo), 254
"jraO-eety, -e7u,286
TrdenaOa,34, 39
vddTicri, 39
TraScoi'TJ,
46
"7rai5ei5a), 252
TrarCco, 250
TrailoCj/Ta^, 456, 470'
Trai-nraAAoi, 213, 536
iratcpd(raa", 221, 377
irara", 210
irdKaifXi, 26
7raA-aiw
(rjo)), 191, 234
TrdAAco,211, 213
ttoAto, 131
TrafxarofpayilcrTai,
69
572
INDEX.
"irafi.(paivci},
45, 183, 217
irafi(pavdu",
183
"rdix"p6apTos,
515
Trafdduu,1 80
TraiTTaivw, 217, 377
TraTTToAaajuai,
217
"napayyriKooVTai,
457
irapaSdKTfiovTa,
434
ivapaQivTwv,
3()G
irapaXaixfiaviTwcrav,
307
"jrapaAi^onai (conj.),
447
Topa^eii'az'Ta!,
300
irapafxiivarcoaav,
307
rrapafj.e"\p"Tai (conj.),
447
TrapayfvSixTiKa,
1573
TrapaTreTTTccK^TO},
422
,
Trapao-rd,
2'Ji)
Trapao-xe,
132,
299
"rrapapeairjat, 39, 316,
325
TrapSeTr,
280
irape^acTKe,
528
"Kapiiau,
328
irapsiXTTt'av,
385
TTop-eicrxiTai,
-"i(rx''io'0ai,
340
irapeKiaK^T,
529
TrapeKoivaTO,
246
"7rape^e\a.ar}a6a,
34
"7rap6|oC"'ri,
469
TTapfcTTTjicay,
385
"n-aperd^ccfcri,
47, 455
7rapex*'r'^'''"'')
307
"Trope'xoif,
332
Trap^xoKTav,
332,
452
TropexoVrw,
306
TTciprjv (naplvtJ-t), 339,
343
TTapicrTd/xevai,
339
TrapicTTaTat,
318
Trapixefx^XuKf,
379
irapoixuKev,
366
TrapTfTv/j.^fi,
408
"Kaptxi^vfijxa.1, 420
Trapc^XVKf,
366
Trapi'xat/ce,
413
Trdcraofiat, 221, 261,
521
iracrtjco,
220
Trao'xf^^'Taij', 306
-n-cio-xco,
192, 198,
542
Traracro-a),
256
TraTeV', 261, 263,
521
7rai/(ra)^f(r0a,
62
TTai^Aa^'co, 227
7ro(f)ci;/, 291, 293
"n-ax6Toy,
514
TTeSaatTKoj/,
530
TreSifiAoi, 457
7r"rOey, 304
Trei'eo), 154
TrtUfO), 168, 217
"n-fipajo/if;/,
455
7reipa(Te?(r9f, 469
7r"ipaarfyU"cr0a,
62
Tretpaaovfxai,
469
rretpd-w, -^co, 236
iritp7]Q(ifjLiv,
;S29
TreiprjO^j/ai,
510
7r"(pi7Ti(,ai,
236
Tretpoo,
214
TretVfai
(conj.),
447
"KilCTTiOV,
514
"KiKTu, Tre/CTeo),
162, 168,
261, 209
TTiKu),
168
7r"\ofl^;U"(r0O,
62
Tr"\a-0w,-ctf, 117, 502, 504
TreAacrfTfToy,
402
irfKefxi^w,
454
TreAeV/ceo,191, 527,
529
TTfAi-ylai,
455
*"
TreKofxai,120,
280
TreAoi,
144
"rreAai, 479
TTflXTifcrKf,
529
7r"^7ro';/Tai"',
306
W;U7rco, 106, 144,
145
7r6yu"|/aia9',
66
Trefx."^wiJ.fv,
447
TTevOelw,
240
TTei/jxpoy,
198
ne'vo/xai, 180, 192, 198
TreTrdYaio-^j/), 47, 385, 396
ireTraYoirj;/,
293, 336,
423
7r"7ra6ura, 402
7re7raix"',
407
"mwdXaaOe, 379
neTraXwv,
293
TrfTrKi-ai,
257
TTeTrape?;/, 293, 295
Tmrapp.[vos,
214, 419
TTeTrapc^vriKa,
374
TreTrafTai,
380
Tre-Tetpdcrdco,
423
Tre'TreiO-ei
(TreVio-ei))
290, 387,
402
TreTTeio-^uai,
419
Tmrepaafxfyos,
420
TT^Trriya,
396
"ncrrriyaaiv,
385
TreTTTjAc^Ti,
397
TTiTnaajxivos,
421
7r67riO-frt/, -eVflai,
293
Tre'ffAexa, TreTrAoxa, 399',
400, 407
TreTrATJarai,
66
'
irerXtjya,
375
TTfwKi^yov, 290, 429
7r67rA7)7oi'Tej,
290
7r67rA7)7v?a, 379, 402
7r"7rA7J7ti;s,
;i97
TreVATjea, 379,
401
7rfn\T]^o/j.ai,
43G
imT\r)pdiKovra,,
394
ir4TT\7)(Tfxai, 357,
521
TreVAoxa %'. TreTrAexa
ir"7ro^K[a);'],
394
nfTroiBa,
379, 397
TTfTTOlOaV,
385
TrcrrolOea,
430
TfenoidTjs,
391
TTfTToiBoiri,
423
TreTroieo/Ltej/, 313, 423
TreTToiflco,
422
TmroKwpK7]^ivos,
373
TVfnoixcpa,
399, 405, 407
"KiTT6vrifjiai,
380
"Kiirovda,400
"jrfnoudeijxey,
428
TreTrd^/Qejaes, 432
7r"7rdv0"(raj', 428
TreiroV^Tjs,
391
TTiTTOpilv.
294
TTeTTopSa,
400
TTCTToo-ee, 71, 384, 387
"n-eVoo-xot, 198, 400, 408,
541
TTCKOT-iiaTat,
65, 378
"niirpaya,
401
"Ki-n-parai,
423
TTfTTpuxa,
407
"mirpi)ffix"vos,
521
TreVprjo-o,
423
ireirpTjXfvai,
404'
"n-eirpwyyvevKriiJ.ei',
390
"nurpuyyvriKa,
374
TiirravTai,65
TreTTTepvycofiat,
358
TreTTTTjaSs, 127, 387, 412,
542
TreTTTo's, 512
TTi-KTVKTai,
358
Tre'TTTu), 165, 168, 219.
TreiTTuKa,
273
-,
542
TreTTTw/cecraf,
428
irtTTvQa,
401
"n-eTTueeVeai,
294
TeVi'/cToi, 358
TreTTupexdres, 400,
407
TeVuo-jLiai,
419
TTtwaaai.
420
TTfpaar (i'ut.),
273, 480
TTfpdaffKe,
530
Tre'poo^iai, 143, 145, 280
TTf'pOai,
131
Trepdefjievccv,
27
TTf'pea.',
143
Trepi5c^jU"0oi',
67
TrfpneTe;',
329
n"piKAi^,u6roy,
129
TZipLKTlOViS,
524
TrepijacloTa'crai',
307
TTfptcrT-qwa,
314 f,
TTfpKpvVai,
341
"KipvritJii, 117, 128, 193
TTipffOLiV,
486
TTfCTiOyTai,
470
TreVtrco, TTirroi,
165, 218,
219,
445
TveTauai,
120, 267, 280
WtTOl'J'l'/Xljllo,
123
INDEX. 573
izereiv,
286
"jreroixat,
120, 143, 145,
280
irerrji, v. "n-eo'crco,
trevOoiad',C5
"Kivdofjiai,
loG, 180
irevcurrQai, 470
Tacpayaa,
414
'ire"paiJfj.iuos, 420, 524
7r"0eu-j-a,
398
r-e(fieu'yoi,
423
W(^77,
2'.U
ire(pr}ya,
397
"jre(pri^acrt,
38."
irecp-l^creai,
436
irecprja-Ojxai,
217
"jr4"pdaKa,
358
-!re^i5eV0ai, 294
"7re(fi57)ir"Toi, 270, 435
Trecp\oiS4vai, 397
"weipo^riaTo,
65
"]re(^()j37juai, 380
ir4(p(jpfia, 400
trecppa^eeiv,
349
"K""ppLKa,378,
401
"KicppiKOvrai,
394
"KicppiKvlai,
378
Tret/jDyiot,
402
Trecpiyywy, 394, 401
Ttecpvyfj-ivos, 419
Tr6(^ll^'oT"S, 378,
403
iri(pvKa, 380, 385,
413
Trecpiicacn,
385
ire(pvKeiy,
394
"weipvKri,
391
ve(pvKri,
422
"ire(puK"is, 358
"r""J)t',\a|o,
423
"ire(|)vAaxa,
407
"ir6(/)yT6UKf)/xe:', 390, 414,
424
-jTEijfjuaiTaj,
426
"7rriyvufj.i,
111,
2U5
TTTjS^,
338
"JT^KTO,131
TTT^fiali/i/},
253
Trr](rcrw,
219
TT^TTO),111
"7ndi,a!, 241
TTiaij'tt',
253
irie'eiy, 342 f.
-TTifCjO) (TTie^ea;),
344 f.
"n-i'ei, 263
"n-i"7y, 286
irirjcrda, 34
7ri0-6rt', -fV9ai,286
in'eco, 304
"nie^trSojv, 309
TriBriarw, 270
irrst,129, 263, 298
"n-i6a"fj.e(r6\ 63
TTiKpaivoij,
253
iriAra^uai,
117
iriXmo), 183
TTiju-irXd, -irArj,
301
iriftTrAa^co, 170, 177
7ri/x7rA.e'ai, 176
"7ri/x7rA,)),ui, 45, 107
TrlixirpT],
300
TtijXTrpt]fj.i, 107
Trrr,343
TrlufffKf, 529
TTlVOl'TajJ',
306
TTivvixivri,
122
-n-iruff/co;,192, 197, 200
iriyvcrcrc!},
256
7r(WT(5s,122, 192, 197
TTtVw.179, 216, 263, 518,
542
TTiojuai,
467
inTr/(T;c;o, 189, 193, 199,
200
TriTTTT-, T717r-I^a), 227
Tnirpcio-Kco,
117, 120, 189,
193, 199
Trlirrriffi, 39
iriiTTCi), 543
TTiffTeVO),
252
TTiTt-e?!/
(aor.),
286
TTirvrifxi,
Tr'nvw,
TrtTi'-do), -4w,
114, 116, 117, 176, 183,
184, 282, 543
irKpavcTKCii,
193
Trlcpp-nijLi, 107, 128
"KXayxSi),
112
7rAaCii',"224, 454
TrAai'oi/^i,
26
Tr\4yvvfit, 111
TrAei'co, 156, 210,
524
irAe'/co), 111, 143
irXevaoviJ.eda,
470
ir\4o},156
Tr\i]yvvfii, 112,
224
"RX-nOai,107, 501,
504
irXrifx-, TvK-qyLjx-vpui,
255
irK-qpdivui (mod. gi'.),
254
TrA^fro-oj, 203, 219,
224
irAfJTo,127,
132
TTKiaffojjiai,
219
TrAvz/a-,
210
iryei'oi, 310,
524
TrreucreTTaj, 470
iri/eco, itvivu),
155, 156
irvlyai,
158
TTOf'l'TCO, 305
TToee'co, 522
7ro9T5a), 248
irodSpricrda,
34
voleifjLt,
26
iToi4v,342
TTOli^CTKi,
530
TTOitoij/,
332
TTOlfS,
139
TTOlTJai,
458
TToiTjffaTo-'O'aj',
307
TTOiTJC-oCj'Tl,
469
iroiiTCTwyTi,
46
TToi/fiAAto, 161,212, 233, 255-
iroifxa'ti/ecrKe, 530
"Koifxaivu,
253
TToioT, 335
"xoioif), 335
"TTOITTI^IJCO,
377
TonpdiTLos,
142
"Koicpvyixa,
221
TTOLfpiffirw,
221
170lS)VTl, 46
"KOXifJ.Tj(Ti'lOVTaS
,
534
"noX^puQifXiv, 339
TVOXi/xi^Cll,
'454
Tro\ifj.i^o/j.ev,
453
7roAi(,'ai, 250
iroixTTivoo,
252
"7rovTOTropev4fj.evai,
339
TrOTTTruSj'or, 227
TTOpeti', 287
"Kopivi-a6i))v, -adctxxai-', 310
TTOpfi
S'/jyai, 510
TTOpds,
252
nopevt)},
252
TTOpi'C'^,
243
TTOpvd/XiV, 117
"KOp(pVp"lV,
215
iTop(pvp4o),
215
TTOTeoiKeiay,
392
iroTeos,
518
TTOTTJTl;?,
236
7rOTl0e'7yU6I/OS, 370
TTOTi-KAaiYaxra, -KAaT70j',,
455
"KOTiireinnviai,
402
TTpaQ-ieiv, -ilv,287, 343
irpa^ioixev, 469
7rpa|-ia), -eTs,260
TTpa^Ol'Tt,
447
Trpdco'a!, 219
TTpiTret,
144
TTpeff^evffSyTas,
469
Trpr\(Tai(jKOv,
530
wpiaffeat,117, 120,
125
Tpiaffo,60, 304
TrpiXco, 223,
251
7rp,'a", 223, 251
"n-pd;3a,
299
"KpofidXeaKe,
531
irpoPefiriKri,
422
"npo^e^ovka, 265, -379. 401
ir/)0;8wrT6s, 148,
299
"Kpoypd,(prjvri,
318
TTpoSiSo'/Uf;',
339
"7rpo"i5"^ey,
391
irpoeKT}\vdoiT]s,
423
TrpoOe'iTO,
334
"KpoQiovcrii',
148
Trpo'id6fj.evos,
153
"Kpoicrao^ai, 218
Trpo/caA-fcTfroTO,
-i(,'6to,
243
(bis),
523
"rpoM\eyfj.4vot,
361
574 INDEX.
mpooi-ro,-VTO,
334
TrposapripeTat
(conj.),
423
irposSeKfo,
304
TTposSoKaci},
23i""
irposTji^at,
4 19
irpos6e7/j.ev,
330
"npdsOoiTo,
334
"KpOSKVI/ill',
184
TTpoarav,
148
TTpoTiSfyfxai,
104
TTpoTi6f/j.eiv,
340
TTpOTtdriVTl,
318
wpofpaaiovyrai,
481
irpoipvyoiaQa,
35
"irpo"pv\ax0e,
384
"npoxicpoiri,
335
7rpa"77ueiKr)|U6i',
414
"KTaipoi,
112
TTTaiO),
211
irrapelv,287
Trrdpfoiade, 171,
179
TrTapi/i/itai,
112, 171, 179
"KTapu,
144
Trrepdui,
244
"n-reputrcrw,
256
TTTfaeat,280, 287
iTT-hcrau), 127, 219,
411
TTTio-o-co. 160, 203, 221,
241
TTToAe/xi'^'u), 242
TTTi'^j'ai, 494
TTTVpO/JLal,
214
TTTvcrcrct),
219
TTTUCO, 147, 161
TTTwaKaCfp-ei/, 219
7rT"o(T"ca{[co, 237
"nrwrraw,
219, 256
"nvioi,501
TTvdfaeai,
287
TTvOfffdai,
504
TTuOoiaTO,
65
iri;0a), 501
-n-i/i/ecij/o^ai, 156, 174,
180
Tryof,
501
irvpiffffu,
256
TTvcTTeov,
514
TTi,300, 518
TriOi,129, 298,
542
TtiAlAfffKiTO,
530
"Tiiivris,
139
-irci;/a", 179, 518,
542
iruiTdaKe-Tai, -to, 195,
199
^aCc,
225
paiVco, 217, 360,
521
^ani^u,360
(la-mw,161, 166
pdaa-are.217, 521
^ao-o-co, 219, 221
^a(f)^j'ai,
492
^ax/Ct-S
250
^"'55a.,
224
pdC^aKoy,
530
peCr)CTt,
39
pe'Ca-, 78, 204, 224, 454
pei'o),
210
^e|ai(dye),
225"
peVo),78, 144,
145
(ifpeuKa,
360
pfpifpdai,
360
'pivcritrai, 470
pe'co, 78, 156
priyfv/j.L,
78, 112
py)yvwTai,
319
priyvvvTO,
65
prjyvvffKf,
529
prjKrds,
514
pvaicoixai, 194,
199
pTJo-o-o),
1
12, 219
^7)0-0-0) (stamp), 221,
222
prjT"^S,
544
pi7-e'a", -do.,78, 241, 246,
261,
263
piySivTi,
249
pt^^rfo),
78
pi'f'^, J^26
piTTi^oi, 165,
250
piTTaC^'co, 236,
245
piirraffK-e, -ov, 236, 245,
530
piTTTw, pnrreco,
78" 154, 165,
236, 245, 269, 360, 537
pi(pwai, 492, 500
pKpQiVTiS,
500
poi'i'-affx', -eo-x',
531
pot^eto,78, 240
p^C'^,204,
225
pyr/, 491,
537
pvi(TKOfj.ai, 196, 199
pvirSo), 165,
360
pinrrw,
165
pVffKiV,
529
pv(Tix6s,
420
pvard^eaKfv,530, 531
piyo-ra^co, 122, 236,
537
pvTos,
156
pcieadai,
114
ptiivvv^i, 78,
114
pu)Ojj.at,
78
(raiVo!,
217
eraipco,
214
fraATfi'Ct*', 250, 454, 456
(jao^co,
524
(ra"!o,244, 524
aaTTTjr],
314
f.,491
craTTO),
219
o-cito,
218
crad'fffTov(conj.),
446
(T^ivvvpn,114, 128,
521
treTa,159
(Ttioi,
78
ceAay-e'ci', -I'C'*',
243
o-eAotTKco,195, 199
(Tffj.vvvo3,
254
"Teadx6u,
423
(TeVeiffTai, 360
cri(rr]fxavTai,
360
(recrr]fj.a.fffx4yus, 420
o-e'cTTjTre, 360, 397
afanp-inai, -wt, 378, 397
(Tea7)(rp.ivos,
521
crealyrjTat, 360
(TecruarTai,
417
fficrvpKa.,
414
treDraj,104
"r"uco, 156, 361
0-1700), 503, 504
o-rj/fd^'o),
237
^"T-r]\aro,
212
crrjfxuyai,
457
cn']Tra!, 151, 157
crBefu, 144
o-i'aj, 458
cri*yaa),
237
0-17-;}^ (
=
0i7e7;/), 285,
343
ffiycir],
335
o-i'Cco, 225
aivvovTai,172
crivonai, 217
o-/ca^a",
226,
456
(TKalpw, 214, 236
(TKaXevui,
211
(TKa^i^cc, 211
(TKdWctl,
211
cr/cairToi,
165
(TKapi^w,
214
(r"acryU(5y,
226
ffKeodvvv/j.1,
116 f.
(T/ceSoD
(fut.),480
(TKfWci!,
211
o-/c"AeT(5s, 211, 514
(TKfXfOO,
211
(r/ceTTTOyUai,
161, 165
CKe'TTCO,144
ffKr]v-da.', -6C0, -o'w,246
cr/fTjTTTai,
165
(TKripiTTTOfxai,
1(;7
(TKijipdi^vai,
499
(T/ciajjcn,
39
ffKidu,237
o'/cioj'Tj/xi,
116 f.,170
(TKiprdtt}, 214,
236
(TKAripvvio,
254
(rKVlTTTli}.
1 ()5
crkoveu, 240
fr/coTrm^u),
237
(rKvd/j.aii"ii",
223
(TKu^'-oi,
-oyuat,
223, 226
tr/cuAAco,
21 2
(r/cuTeyo),
252
CKWITTU,
1 65
a/xapayriaai,
24 3
(r/iaa",
199
a/xrixo),
199
cro7|oj',
455
INDEX.
575
trov,
305, erovrat,
lOi
ffovcro,
304
o-Tratpo),
214, 215
cirapotrtro),
256
crirapecrOat,
287
(Tirdoi, 147
CTrtTj',
ffiriaQai
(eVw),287
(r7r"?v
(say),
287
(TTreio,
305
cireiptv, 213,
342
(TireipecTKOu,
530
ffTreipw,
214
aiTficracrKf, 532
"
(r7r"AXc{/x6vai, 457
cricevSricrda, 34
cireVSw, 143
aireppw,
214
a-rripxo,
143
(TTreuSeVef, 330
CTTrsuSeTOf, 310
o-ireuSco, 156,
3'JS
ffirevcrlui, 468
o-TTifc), 225
(TTroAeo),476
cTTa^o), 225, 453
(TTa/r?,
329
o-Tarj; (?),
316
"
(TTai-ricrav, 330
CTaA-atw, -ao),
-a^'co, 234
ffrafxfu,
339
crdixvos,100,
353
o-Ta^/ue 0-00)1',
310
o-Ttti/uo),
177, 179
CTao'/cej',
531
ffTf-yo},
143,
145
(TTfi^CC,155
CTftVeTOi,179
(TTefx'"') 152,
155
(rT"'A.Aa", 212
(TTefKpw,
155
"TT".'c"x". 192,
199
ffTivui,
144
aTfpyco,
143
arepofxai, crrepew,
144, 19G,
269
CTipQ^j.Liv,
490
(TTtpldKUl,
196
(TTev-TOl, -TO,
104
crT((pav6cii,
244
ar4"pw,
144
ffT?j0i, 298
"nT)vai,
341
(TT-^oynej', 313
airjpi^w, 454,
456
CTijSeoi,155
cTij'iu), 255, 453
"rTtA/3(u,
150
o-TixeTj', 287
CTixouo'i,
155
(rr'i,x"^,
143
ffToi/axfO},
245
(TTOpivVUIJil, 112,
116
crSpvv,301
o-rdp^/u^j, 112, 261
(Tjopvvria, 514
o'Tpo77aA.ai',
231
a-Tparriyidca, 244
"TTpa(i)6(vr(s,
499
ffTp^"p"Tai, 323
arpecpw,
144
(Trp^"pa(TKov, 532
(TTpo^'y-uAXai, -uAoco. 255
crroiivvG, 301
(TTpdvvviJii, 112,
114
(TTu'/e?;/, 287
(rTii7"a",
263
ffrvyrjcreTai,
492
arveiv,
104
o-Tu"^eAi'^a",
454
(jTiKpa),
158
Crco^iyAAa',
256
"J
vyy e/xos,
13]
o-v77j'orTO, 128
(Ti/AacKe,
530
o-uAtuo),
252
(rvWeyria6f/.fyos, 493
"Tu\ct",
335
avfx^acTiiovTa,
534
(TVfxfJ.^/J.iX'^y
"1*^''
au/xTrXaKfj
,
492
(TV/XTrwBl,
518
avfMcpepriv,
342
o-ii^a7a70xa,
415
o'i;i'a7a7oxe7a,
391
avvaywvL^aixivuy,
455
uuvapitpaKTai,
367, 368
cwax^rjcroCi/Ti,
490
(rvySia(pv\a^ioixev, 469
avviav,328
avvifidKovQo,
47
avviQ4fj.av, 58
avviQovTO,334'
(rvve'iKTi, 394
o"i';'"iAex'^y) "f^OO
o'l't'eiAoxn,
361
ffvi'(K(K\eiaTO,
525
(Twefi.iTpriffaij.(s,
43
(TU"'"|"'5o06t', 490,
(rvvippa(piv, 287
0"^/^'r;5"'aT",
430
ci.';'0u|a",
475
(TUVOKttJXOTe,
369
ffvvTptfir)(T6!j.e6ov,
67
ffupi'^a',
456
(Tvplcrdes,
139
ffupui,
214
crvff(T7iij.aLv6(T6iiot/, 309
o-uTo, 104, 130, 156, qlS
o-^a7eis,
492
o-t^oCt.), 219, 225, 454
a(pa\r\va.i,
492
(T"pd\Xoi}, 204
(TcpdrrwV. (Tc^o^o).
crcplyyoj, 145, 150, 174
o-^ufu', 225,
'^X^C'-'. '^X'i'^, 223, 236, 524
trxe,
298. 299
o-xfeeeiv,503, 504, 505
o-xei"*', (Tx^ffQai, 287
ax^lJ-iv. 339
o-xfj, 132, 279, 287, 543
o-xeroy, 279, 518, 543
(TX'n(r-(t(T6a, -effda,34, 37
(Txr}(roi,
486
o-xVa",279
TX'T'^', 223
o-xoittTo,
334
(7X017)1/,
333
o-t^C'^, Tc^C'",114, 523 f.
o-coA^7|ai, 455
^
(TWVVVW
{(TOCVVUflL),
114
(xdoVTO,104
ffw(ppovi^("}, 250
o-cio), 523,
(fut.)
484
Ta/cj7,
500
Ta/f7Jrat, 492
TUKUl,
157
Ta\ai-fj.oxdos, -(ppccv,
235
rafi-f^u,-ecrOai,287
ra/xtevecrKe,
530
TdjxvTiari, 38
To/ij/o),
179, 279
TayuTttf,
113
Ta;'ua!,
113, 522
Tapauo-co, 202, 218, 222
rdp^fi/xi, 26
TdpiTT^fifv. 491, 498
TapTTu"jJ.iea,
287
Tdp(pdr), 498
rdpxv, 222
Taero-o), 220,
TaT({y.
217, 512, 518
To^eTv,287
Tac^^ftti, 492
Te77"), 143, 145
re6a\y7a, 402
r^QdpffrjKa.,
380
ri6apa'i]Ka(n,413
TiQeiKa,
414
Tfdr]\a,
379
T"97}7ra, 378, 397
T(6r]aa,To,466
Ttdiyiv,
293
"TiQXaafjLivos, 358
T4e\t(pa,407
ree^Jj,519
Ti6vair)y, 422
T^QvaKTiv,391
Te6vdfj.ivat. 424
reSj'ao'i, 387
T"0"'ecSo'o, 395
Tefl^/eaJTo, 426
tievrim, 380, 413
TiQvT]^(i", 436
Tidopuv, 293
Ti6pafj./j.ai, 419
T"6a)7-,Te0a7-/xeVo(, 156
TfiVw,113, 202, 217, 506,
18
576 INDEX.
Telpw,202, 21-1
Tei"raiJL"v6s, 158
Tfix-fco,
-iXo,
243
veKuy,
287
reKuffdai,
481
Teicfj.aip-u, -oixai,
255
T6\"06J,
502
TekidfffKe,
530
re\40tji,
504
T"A6:'a), 240
-riKeoKOv,529
"Te\4(TKoi, 196,
19["
TeXeuracrco^'Ti, 46
TeAei/raa),
n45
TeAe'co, 522, (fut.)
480
TeXiffiiSixivos, ]9()
Te/x-eTi/, -e'cr^ai, 287
re'/xfi', 179,
279
Te/A(ij, 144, 179
TeVSoi,143
repefj.vos,
353
ripirev,
304
rfpirpai,
33
Tepwcij,
144
TSppCD,
214
Tep(raivu",
253
Tepcreiv, -ripcrai,
4oG
'
Tep!T-T]fj."vai,
-fjvai,491, 497
Tep(roixat,
144
repvcTK-b}, -ojjiUi,
189, 192,
195, 199
TeroYcij/, 294,
295
Te'ro/ca, 414
TiTaKTOl,
61
TfToipTreTO,
294
TerdcrOr]t", 435 "
reTarai,
419
reTaxa,
407
rerdxaTai,
41 8
T"T6\"i/Ta/coi'(ras,
391
T"T"l;|"Tai,
43G
TeTfvxa,
397
TeTfvxaTai,
05,
419
TeTeuxTJcrQai,207, 270
TeTTjKa,
378, 397
Teri?j(5Tes,
378
TSTtfifiixeada,
02
rerXa,
422
TsfrXaei,200, 378
TirKodt),422
rtTKa/xei',
388
TeTAa,u"i'at,
424
TtTXrjKas,
413
TeTOKO,
400
TETope;/,
294, 295
'irpaivoi,
2 17, .209,
543
TiTpa/xixai,
420
reTpd(paTai, 00, 405, 418
TiTpi"pdii},
423
rcrpaxv^Lfyos,
421
TETpe/iai'i'o), 177, 186, 217
T"TpT)ra,
217, 4GG
T6Tprjx"'a,
379, 397, 402
rerptya,
357
T"Tpi7iira, 377, 402
rerpiyuras,
426
TfTpirpa,
407
TerplcpaTai,
405, 418
T"TpO(pa, TiTpacpa (rpeTroi),
398, 400, 407
lerpoipa, rirpacpa (^rpecpu'),
400
Terrapes,
70
mvjfiriv,
434
TfTUKeij' etc., 150, 294
t"'ti/|o,
428
TeTii7rd;'T"s, 294
TiTVCTK-WV, -6T0,
197
rerv(pa"fj.ai,
408
TeTvxvi(''^s,
413
ifTvxiicri,
294
T"Tu;t0a),
423
Tfuxo),
150, 180, 207
TTj, T^re,
303
rrtKTos,
514
TTJ/CCO,
157
TliCTKOfieVOL,
19G
Ti0":, 301
TtOelfxiv,
330
TiOe'jtiej',
339
TidefMecrda,,
62
ridecTKe,529
TJ^eo-o,304
T1077,
41
TiOrifxevai,
340
T10-/7U!, 107,
517
TiflTjy, 383
Tierja-ea,
34
Tt'erjTi,
38
riOou,305
TlKTiV,
342
tIkto),168
TtXAco,
212
Tificiicracra,
^46
Tiyvjj.ai, 113, 171
TiW, 113, 170, 171 f..179,
518
Tio-ere (coiij.),
44G
Tiralverou,
310
TiTat'fO), 113, 217, 37G
TiTi'fco, 227
TITp7J;Ul, riTpaci},
108, 217,
543
TtrpuiffKoo,
1 15
TiTixXKOfiai,
191, 197,
200
Ti'o), 113, 158, 179, 518
TAoTe;/,329
TAijei,298
T/xdyer,
491
Tfxr]ycii,
157
TO-KO-l-Js(
=
Sa/coi"),
411
TOKcicra,
535
ToA^do),
237
rofxiiu},
535
TovQop-,rovQp-v^w, 227
To|d^o;uai, 237
To|"i5"",
252
Topevw,
252
Tope'o),
269
rSaaais,
465
TpoYfT;',
287
Tpatr-uv,
-effdai,287
Tpair(lofj."v,
313
TpaTre'o), 240, 209
rpdiru,
275
rpaipilv,
287
Tpd"p7),
491
rparpdrjvai, 498
Tpd(pci}, 275
Tpei'"", 201, 210
Tpe'^o), 144, 145
rpsTTco,
144, 279
TpeVo-e,
146
Tpe"l)oip,
31
Tpecpco,
144
Tpexoij
143,
544
rpe'o), 140, 204
Tpi'/Sw,
158
Tpi'Cco, 202, 225
Tpi(f"9e7(ra,
500
rpOTreu,
240
rpiJfa,,
225
rp^Xt^,192, 199
Tpiiiyw, 157
rpoovvvic, rp'jivvvijiif
115
TpctiTtaffKicrdw,
195
Tpu"Trd(riieTO,
530
TpuirrdffKOi, 190, 199
Tuyxd'"^,156, 174, 180,
220
tvkt6s,514
Tu/fo),
143, 150
ri'ix^oyepwv,
408
TUTTofeij', 270
TuTre?^,287
TVTrriarei,
270
Ti^TTTc;, 100 f.,105,
257
TvpavvriffiiovTa,
534
Tupai'vidai,
244
TupjSd^o), 236
Tvcxan,
220
TvfpXwffcroi,
257
TvcpSoo, 408
Ti''4)a), 158, 371
Tuxejy,
287,
405
Tuxno'f,
270
TvxycTi,
39
Tux^^'M', 27,
39
Toj^d^'ct), 227
"
y/8piCw,
250
vyi-aivo}, -d^oi,89, 177
vypwcrffut,
J;) I
vSiio/xfy,
2 1 1
2.-,2
yopeuci',
u5a"
(Ae'7a)), 143, 153
^6T(5y, 514
^Adei,162
INDEX. 577
vXaK-Tfw,
8 J),ir,2,
2.jG
vXdffffoi, 25(5
vjxivaiol,
SS6
vfxivalovv, 80
vfj.feiovffat,
241
I'loj',
455
inTttp{,fvvri,
469
virapxe/J-iv,
340
vTzapx^v,
842
virdKaBiuv, 503
VTTfXdiTeOV,
514
VTre/j.uriiJ.vKe,
359, 413
yWpeTTTe,
1 (56
UTreppciyT;,
41)1
vnepcrxoi,
334
yTTitrxfeo/xai,
177, 184
UTTJ/Jo), 244
v-rri/ueffKoy,
530
virvcoovTas,
190
iiirv differ
03,
257
iiro'ypoil'i^J'Tai,
469
imo5pi}ff(r(ii, 221,
412
uirt^eet;, 304
VTroA.i'd"i;',
202
wro7re7rTr)cST"s,
426
inroTTijxTrpfjffi,
39
inroTTTemiffi,
39
wTTOTayet's,
492
inroTidotTO,334
^
VTTOfpaVffKftV,
193
UTTTiajjcri,
39
varep-eci),
-i^'^, 243
iKpdyeo,
305
i"|;aii/a., 177, 183,
205
iKpavdoo, 183
ij^avev,
89
v(p(\oiaTO,
66
iKpfjcpafffxat, 292, 369
V(("i7]Tl, 39
\)(p6(ti(TL,
178
(padve-r], 499
^aYeTj/,
287
(payenev, 339, 340
(pdyofxai, 467
^ae,147
(pafdouffa,
502
(paedcoy, 502,
504
(^aetVc, 217, 254, 284
^aSi,
298
^airjyuer,"pa7^ev,
329
(pairts,
330
^oiV",183, 217 (bis),221,
236
(pajert,
47
^aj/,
148
^ai/ertrflai,
475
(papeffdat, 287
"pdvicTKi, 488, 532
"pdvt\,
492
"pap7]r],
315 "
"pdv7]6i, cf)ain)ru,
490
cpavriffeii', 490
"pafr]ffOfj.ai,
493
"Jjai/Tafoj, 23(5
"puuTi,
3 19
"/)ao,."JOl
"t"dpyvvij.i, 168, 220
(pdpKTeadat, 161, 168
(papfidffffw, 25(5
(pdpo),
145
(paffydperat, 183
(?)ao-Kco, 189, 193,
528
"pdffx,529
(paffci,
469
(fareios,
512
(paTi^eiv, 243,
537
^aTws,
3(J4
(^au),
524
(peyyu),143,
145
(peiSeo, 304
^eiSo/xai,
155
(pepefj-iv,
339, 340
(pepev,
342
(pfperwaav,
307
(p^pj;, 317
(pepd/xeada,
62
"("fp6i/Tcov,
307
(pepTa^et, 236
(pepTe,
104
ipepTos,
512
"/)tpw,128, 144,
145
(p6U7e(rK:e;',
529
"p6U77]"',
342
(pfvySvToov,
306
^"^70.,151, 152, 156,
181
4)"i:iC""', 237,
251
(pevKrSs,
514
(pev^ilw, 534
(^euloiW,66, 486
(pev^oiTO,
486
pev^ovfxiOa,
470
^"i97;s, (/)T7r;,
315
q!"7j/ii (dor. (?"o^i), 96, 99,
544
(pVP-iCf^,
250
(pijcrfla,
34
(pi)ffL,
38
"p0airj,
329
(p6air]Te,
330
(pBdvci), (pdaveu,
144, 179,
269
(pdeyyofiat,
143
(pdeipcti, (pOeppcc,
214
"p6epai,
457
(pdfpffavTfs,
457
"p6e(i"-fx"u, -fft,
319
"i)0T5l),
315
(peierai (conj.),
313
(p6ivvd(ffK",
530
(pdivvdco, 171, 172, 503, 504
(peifoi,(ijeit'ew, 171, 172,
179, 269,
518
(peid/xiffda (conj.),
313
(J)0ITo'!f, 518
(pt\ieffKe,
')'M)
(pi\tifxi,
26
(pi\fUTi,
47
"J)(A.e'a), 261, 261!
(piKrifJLi etc., 216
tp'iK-qffda,
31
(piKo'iT],
3i).}
(piTvcii,
250
"|)\({{",
223
(pAafffxlvos,
371
(pXeyidaj, 502, 504
"|)A"7a",
143
"p\il3oixai,
157
"p\uCw,221,
223
(pXvKTaiva,
221
"/)Aw5ci;/"o, 181,
221
^Xvo-ei, 221
"pA.u"r"rco, 221,
223
(pXuo),221,
223
"po$io,305
(puLviffffci), 256
(povdw,
53,5
(povfvo),
252
"|)o|(5s, 157
"popeoia\
47
(popew,
240
(pop'-fiixevat, -rjvai,-eer,
190,
336,
339
(popjxi^ai,
250
(popolri,
335
(povaa,
130
(ppdyvvfxi, 112,
220
(|)pa5ej/,
288
(ppd^effdov,
310
4.pci(a",
223
(ppa^wfxiffff
,
62
(ppdffffo,, 112, 168,204,220,
223
"?)pe's, 107, 128, 298
(ppi^Ss,
535
(ppiffffoi, 220
(ppuvTiffSr}v,
342
"ppu7"o,
158, 220
(ppvffffw,
220
"|)U77dj'a), 156, 174,
181
"?)U7erc,
288
(pvyeffKe,
531
"/)yCa;'w, 123, 173, 175,
182
(/"uCco, 225
"f"M7,
493
"pi;ia., 147, 209
(pvKdaaovTL,
46
(bis)
(pvXaffffovTwv,
307
(pvXdffffdi, 233,
256
"/)S;',
343
(|)wa),179, 216
(pvpaw,
457
(pvpw,
214
(/jwaco,199, 221
(pvffidu, 237
"|)WTis (?),
519
"|)UTeu(r"i, 141, 447
(pvrevw,
518
578 INDEX.
"("vt6i", 518
ipvo), 1-17,518
(pdy-w,
-vvixi, 112, 157,
225
(^c^Coi, 157, 225
(poupiiv,
231
XaSeTi/,
288
XaCo.,223
XaiW, 170, 197,217
Xa'^pfTov,
310
(bis)
Xai'pw, 215, 267, 271, 272
XaA.-aa), -d^co, -otw,
23i
XaXeTTTo), 161, 165
XaAKeucD,
252
XavSdvco,174, 181
Xaveri',
288
Xaviieiv,
217
Xapd"T"Tii",
256
Xapiei^ff^ai,
-181
XapiCofxai,
250
XapilK^Mefla, 455, 469, 483
Xo-piacrovrai, 455
Xo-povTO,
288
xd(r/c",
192
(bis),197,217
XaTi'^w,251
Xe'Cc-, 223
Xf(M"C"^, 236, 238, 253
Xfipt-aivw,
253
(bis)
Xeiw,
210
X^p-v'nrTov, -viipavTO, 167
Xeceio),
534
XfCoCjuai,470
Xea*,
x^^M"'.115, 156, 210,
518 f.,(fut.)
484
X^jpt^w,
244
X'^-""', -d^eij', 236
X-VoiSeV/cco, 196, 199
Xo\aitrL,
47
XoA.({a",
244
Xopevv,
252
X'^'"', 115
Xpoivu,217
XpcKTixio), 39, 261, 203,
282
Xpaoixai,
196, 526
Xpef^idoi',
502, 504
Xpe/xiTL^u,
168
XpeM'C'o.
168
XpfV^'TOyuoi, 168
XP^.
100
XpTl'^cxajxai, 1 96, 1 99
XP^t-,
92
Xprtvvvfiai
(?),
116
XP^c^a, 34
XP'JcTai,69
XpVO'Too,
69
Xpi",
303
Xpi/J-Trroo,
168
Xpio-TiJy, 147, 521
XP'o.,
147,
521
XpciC'".
115
Xptii'vufxi, 115
Xp"i;(r0a) (r),
309
X'^fo,304
X"iivvvixi, x'^^'^^^t 115
XcopalciTco,
455
Xt^cerai(conj.),
446
(f'aijua,
113
ypaifvixaL, 113
\paivuaij.a,
113
xl/aipcu,
215
;|/dA\"),
212
4'd"pi|is,
455
)|/da., 113, 199
"|/e7w,
143
ij/eSa), 143
4'e?(rai,
113
\fi"vBti",
156
ij/^c^ei, 144
){/7)xa",
199
;i//Cf o-0at,
225
'
xl/ivvdiou,
1 13
^livBos, 156
li/iTTTei, 221
^ux^*'*',
493
xf^vxio, 158, 199
^^ojpaj',
535
waTci"6r](Tu", 490
w^paro,
361
"poriKavTi,
46
")5o7r67roirj/xeV77, 374
iSijffao, 449
(S;Cc", 237
(fi\Oriv, 510
^0e"r/ce,190, 530
(w0t'a., 263
"\iff0oi", 503
iii/xoo-a etc., 87, 274
wvaaf'nai,240, 469
wvioixai, 120, 240
oiyjlTioj/,
536
SipiTO,S"pTO, 286
upipdrj, 499
"piJor,454
Upope,
293
wpvai,
78
5pTo V. iipero
"aa(TK(, 532
ojo-TiCfijueo-e', 62
OJCTTl^a), 537
"i"rTiot)i/Tai, 481
iiff(pp-ai/TO, -ovTo,
464
wcrpp-6fjir)v,
-apL-rjv,
283
ox^eXeiV^cotrai', 310
ucpeAriKrj,
431
w(pe\rireos,
515
""|)e\oy,ai"j)A.o;', 279, 283,
286
a"xp'dw,
244
VXt^Ka,
267, 273
^il'eoi', 533, 535
7?. ITALIC.
(Latin not distinguished.)
aamanaffed
(Osc),
441
abdo,
506
abnueo,
259
acceptus,
515
actud
(Osc),
306
acuo,
250
adagium,
103
aegrotus,
238
ago,
145
ahesnes
(Umbr.),
230
aio,181, 203,
230
alb-are, -ere,
244
albicare,
256
alumnus, 139,
353
angetuzet (Osc),
373
ang-it,
-et (Osc), 373
ango,
110, 145
animare, 238
apio,
166
apiscor,82,
191
I
apparere,
293
aptus,
82
arceo,
239
arcesso,
534
arrugia,
222
augeo,
181, 445
aiisim,438
auspicari,240
balbutio, 257
bovare, 231 "
INDEX. 579
cacare,
231
cadaver,
425
caecutio,
257
caedo, 151
calare,
240
calator,
240
Calendae, 240
cano,
236
canto,
236
capesso,
534
capio,
203
careo,
497
carino, 177
caveo,
240, 261
-cello,
525
censazet
(Osc.))
441
censeo,
240
cepit,
389
cerno,
170
cio, cieo,
259
clar-are, -ere,
244
claresco,
190
claudico,
256
cluo, clueo, 148,
259
coctiis,
512
coepi,380, 390
coliimna, 353
comare,
231
comminiscor, 193
comparascuster (Osc),
188
condo, 506
coquino,
177
coquo,
219
corrugiis,
222
credo, 506
cresco,
190
cubito,
236
cube, 166,
236
cumbo,
166
cupio,
203
capire,
203
damnum,
353
danimt (dane),
171
dapinari,
240
datiis,
512
deded (Osc),
389
dedeit,
389
dedet,
389
deicans (Osc.);
317
deico,
131
deikiim (Osc.)i
151
deivatud
(Oijc),
306
deleo,
259
depso,
145
depuvit,
211
desipire,
203
desivare,
364
destinare,
177
dicare, 236
dicere,
152
-dicus,
110
disco,
196
dixe, -m,
449
doceo, 196
domitus, 514
domo, 234, 273
doiico
(Old. Lat.),
151
duco, 152,
21 8^
6do, 104, 145,
265
eiscu
(Umbr.), 189, 192
eiscurent
(Umbr.), 188
eituns
(Osc),
307
erugit,
135
es (Imperat. to
rt.ed),
298
escit
(Old Lat.),
528
estod
(Old Lat.),303, 306
estud
(Osc), 306
esurio, 534
etu, -to
(Umbr.),306, 30"2
explenmit,
170
exstinxe,
-m,
449
fa(;ia(Umbr.),
317
facio, 120, 203,
411
facitud
(Old Lat.),306
factud
(Osc),
306
fallo,
204
farcio,168, 204, 220
fari,
524
fateor,243,
537
faxit, 438
fefacid
(Osc),
412
feido,151,
154
feliuf
(Umbr.),
392
femina, 353
fendo, 216
ferascit,200
ferinimt, 173
fero, 104, 145
fertu
(Umbr.),
306
ferv
-o, -eo,
259
fido,151, 154
filius,
392
findo, 170
tingo,
174, 180
tinio,
249
fio,
508
lieo,
259
fodio, 203
t'rango,112,
fremo, 145
frequens,
497
frico,234
frigeo,
360
friiniscor,176
fugio,202, 203, 225
fuia, fuiest
(Umbr.),
117
fuit,fuet,389
fulcio,203
fulg-o,-60,
259, 497
fumo, 231
furari, 231
furo, 151
futuo, 250
fuueit
(Old Lat.),
389
gaudeo, 209, 240, 261, 503
genitur,
278
genitus(bis),
514
gero,
236
gesto,
236
gigno,
543
glocio,
203, 218
gnatus,
511, 543
gnosco,
179, 193
gnotus,
51 1
gradior,
203
grandire,
249
gTava-re,
-ri, 210, 243,
grex,
215
gustus, 155,
520
habetutu
(Umbr.),
308^
habitare,
236
heriest
(Umbr.),
215
heriiad
(Osc),
215
hiemo,
236
hieto,192
hisco, 192
(bis),
197
igiiarus,
243
'
ignoro,
243
impedio, 250
inclino, 231
inclutus, 512
indago,
240
ingemisco,188, 191
inretio,249
in,sece,132,
145
inserinmitur
(Old Lai.),
173
interieisti,
389
inveterasco 110
invictus, 515
irascor, 190
ire,iri,206
itare,236
jac-6re, -ere, 167, 2(i;!,
236,335, 411, 497
jactare,236, 537
jugare,
238
juncti;s,
514
jnngo, 108, 110
labare, 152
labi, 132
lacesso, 535
lacio, 203
lambo, 167
lascivus,
146
lav-are,-fire,240, 261,
269
ISgo,
145
lenio, 249
levo, 238
libo, 231
licet,497
likitud
(Osc), 303,
300
lingo,
154
lino,170, 171, 178
linquo,154, 174, 180
AioKo/ceiT (Osc),
412
locutus, 515
hibet, 166, 240
lupuce (Etrusc),
412
580
INDEX.
luxare, 238
madco, 243
nianeo,
2(54
manus,
20'J
maturesco, 190
medcri, 270
raeditavi, 236
mejo, 203,
261
memento, 378
memini, 100, 375, 378, 390
memor,
365
memordi,
356
memoro,
230
mereo, 214, 361
metuo, 250
-miniscor, 192
miscco, 189, 192, 197
modulor, 256
molo, 211
moltas
(Osc.)"
232
morior, 203
moriri,
203
moveo,
153
mugio, 204, 226
multo, 232
mungo,
219
nactus, 515
nanciscor, 176, 200, 291
necto, 163
neo,
148, 259, 501
novare, 231, 238
novi, 375
nubo, 152
nuo, nueo, 155, 236, 259
nupturio,
534
nuto,
236
obdormdsco, 190
obiinmt
(Old Lat.),
171
odi, 375, 378, 390
olfacio, 283
olo,oleo, 259
orior, HI, 172,2 203,
261
ostendo,
236
ostento, 236
paci.scor,191,
200
pango,
III
papaver,
425
parentes,
278
pario,
203
parire,
203
l^aro,
243
pasco,
189, 200
patior,192, 198,
203
pavio,
210
pecto,
162
pcdo,
145
pend-6re, -ere,
497
ponsare,
236
pcposci (Old Lat.),73, 356
pepugi, 73,
356
ixrdo,
506
perfines(Old Lat.),
302
persni-(Umbr.), 170, 188
peto,
145, 259
*petulo,
256
pingo,
170
pinsio,203, 221
pinso,160, 221
piscor,
231
plango, 112, 224
plecto,
163
ploro,
209
posco,
192
potior,198, 249
potitus,515
poto,
236
praefica,
412
pravescere,
200
precor,
170
prebendo, 174, 181
proficiscor,
200
protitcor,
243
prospices(Old Lat.),
302
prufatted(Osc),
282
quaei'o,
259
quatio,
203
rapio, 1
67,
203
redinunt
(Old Lat.), 171
rego,
145
reminiscor, 193
re
pens,
145
rideo, 223
ructo, 78
rugio,204, 225
rumpo,
170
runcare,
222
runco (subst.),222
salio, 203
(bis),211, 236
salto, 236
salv-are, -ere,
244
salve,
173
sapio,
203
sarcio,161,
167
scat-o, -eo,
259
scindo, 116, 151, 170
scisco,189
sedeo, 152,
223
sedo,
231
sequor,
83,
145
sero (serui),81,
214
serpo,
86
sido, 152
siem, 324, 328
silco,240
simvilo, 238, 243
sincipnt,
392
sino,84, 171,
364
sisto,107, 359
solin-o,-unt (Old Lat.\l 73
sono,
231
sons,
352
sorbeo, 240
specie,161, 203, 204
stahituto
(Umbr.), 308
*
statuo, 250
stemo, 112,
171
sternu-o, -to,
112
stinguo,
225
stipo,
231
strangulo,
231
struo, 251
studeo, 156
subahtu
(Umbr.),
306
subdo, 506
siibfio,203
superstes,
352
taceo,
240
tagam, tangam, 278, 294
tango, 294, 295
tece
(Etrusc),
412
tego,
145
tendo, 506
teneo,
506
terg-o,-eo,
259
tero, 214
terreo, 240
tollo, 151,
235
torqueo, 240, 269
torreo,
497
tracto, 236
traho, 236
tremesco, 191
tremo, 145
tribarakavum
(Osc),
233
trudo, 152
tulo
(Old Lat.), 151
tuor, tiieor,
259
turbo, 236
turce
(Etrusc.),412,
413-
tusetutu (Umbr.), 308
=
tutudi
(Old Lat.),
395
ulciscor, 200
ululo, 365
unco,
231
iipupa,
365
urgeo,
240
uro,
152, 155, 520
ustulo, 256
ustus, 155
usus,
515
vado, 152
venio, 185,
204
venum (ire),80,206,
491
verro, 86, 123, 147, 520
verturanus, 139,
353
vestio, 249, 520
visio
(/8S"'a)), 146,
520
viso, 444
volo (wish),
145
voluntas, 352
volvo, 85
vomo,
367
INDEX. 581
0. SANSKRIT.
akar, 130
akshan, 279
akhjam,
280
agam,
126
agasisbus,
440
agrhnam,
16'J
aghasan,
279
aghajami,
2;56
akalcaksham,429
atviKi'irat, 258
agananta,
282
a^anisbta,
438
a^ati,
317
adar(;am, 278, 279
adarn, 126
adr9am, 278, 279
admi, 104
ad-dhi, 298
iidham,
126
adhukshat, 438
adhvarjiint,255
apaptam,
289
apipatat,
289
apipet,
376
apsanta, 439, 444
abudhanta, 278
abodbanta, 278
iibbut,126
abbaisbma, 438, 446
ajansam,
438
ajasisbam,
440
av(go),
212
aratijati,
249
aritat, 278
ar^ase,438
artbaje,
233
ardb, 163, 185
alambbanta, 1 74
av,
147
avidat, 278
avedisbam, 265
avo"am, 291
a^amat,
278
a^ana, 116, 173
asati,311
asabam, 279
astbam, 126
asmi, 101
asvarsbtam, 441
all,181
aban, 130
akamami, 151
ada, 365
adajami,
264
adar, 212
adunvasva, 109
aninat, 291, 365
apipam,
108
amamat, 291, 365
^jam,89
ara,
365
^rta,126
ardidat, 291, 365
ai-pipat,
291
as,
103
asate,
65
asitba,35
astbam, 281
aba, 103
ing,
154
iktbami, 188, 189, 192
indb, 153
invami, 171
ijarmi,
212
isbananta, 173
isbnami, 116
ibi,297
uksbaiijati,
253
ulilibami,
188,
200
uvaka,369
usb, 155,
520
ur^ajami,
240
rgbajami,229, 240
vl'ujati, 250
rklibami,
188, 192
(bis)
riige,
1 1 1
rnadbmi, 185
piomi,
109
j-taje,
239
irdbant,352
rdbnOmi, 185
e^ami, 154
edbi, 297
emi 96
ogaja-mi,
240
osbami, 151
(bis),
155
kamami, 151
ku
(bowl),
537
kupjami,202, 203
krpa-, krpaii-,krpa-jati,
'253
kratftjati,
250
kramami,
151
klamami, 151
ksban, 216
ksbanomi,
114
ksbinomi, 170
kbari^^,
226
gatkbatat, 306
gattbami,188, 192
gata,
511
gab,
166
guiig,
226
gubfimi,151, 155
grulsbe,
438
grbana-s,
173
gi-dbnus,
108
grama-s,
2 15
gbarsb, 147,
521
kataksba,429
kaje,
158
kin6mi, 113, 170, 172,
179
liorajisbjami, 234
tbad,1 16
tbid,116
^a^anti,105, 543
gagana,
356
|anaml, 272, 282
fanljati, 249
^agarajami,
215
^agarti,
368
gi'ije,
216
^igati,
105
^^nasami,187
^vAse,
350
gishe, 350, 448
g-ugosba,
356
gusb, 155, 520
gesbi,
298
gesbjami,
474
gosbami, 152, 155
^natii,511
giiejas,329
tata, 512
tatana, 395
tatre, 357
tan, 506
tanisbjami,477
tanute,
113
tarisbjami,
265
tasbtbau, 289
tastbivan, 425
tisbtliami,106, 107, 289
tutoda
etc., 356, 389
tudami, 150
turvane,
346
tulajami
235
tfpnomi,
170
trmpami,
170
tras, 521
trasjami,146, 210
trasajami,240
d^gami,
170
datta, 519
dada, 382
dadar^a etc., 357
dadami, 105
dadrgvaii,425
dadrns, 357
dadbami, 107
dadhidbve, 416
dadhiina, 389
dadbita, 331
INDEX. 583
^aknomi, 175
9am,
171
^inute,
113
Qush,
155
gri-na-mi, 170
grnthati, 170
q'e'te, 100
9Jami, 202
grathnami, 170
^raddha,
506
9ratii, 512
grudhi, 126, 129, 297
gvajami, 268
9vas,
521
sakadhjai,
351
satasva, 304
sad, 223
sanoti, med. sannte, 122,
171,283
saparjati,
255
samkiniti, 1 1 5
sasdva, 73, 356
Si'ihadhjai,351
sahasva, 304
sadajami,
231
sii (excite, send), 364
sedhami, 151
sklaad, 116
stava, 29
starajami,
251
str-nomi
(-nami), 112, 116
sthapajami, 231
snn,
156
(s)pa9Jami,
204
smarajami,
230
sravami,
156
svanajami,
231
svadha, 506
svadate,
156
svidjami, 203,
208
had, 223
hanati, 311
hajantat,
308
harjami,
215
hasate, 438
hasmahi, 438, 440
hiuomi, 170
D. IRANIC.
(Zend not distinguished.)
aeiti, 96
aistata
(Old Pers.), 79
atiyaisa (Old Pers.),
89
ada (Old Pers.),
126
adinam (Old Pers.),
170
apabarois,
332
amarij^ata (Old Pers.),
204
avaretha, 122
avaiti, 39
idi, 297
iririthare, 365
iQaite, 189, 192
ishaQoit, 188, 192
ukhshyant,
204
uzbarajat,
240
kerenava, 176
kerenvo, 109
qabda,
506
qh-j^-n,
329
gaidi, 297
gaozaiti,
151
gagaiti,
188
ga^aetem,
52
zahyamnam,
471
zinat, 170
zdi, 297
tatashat, 291
tanva, tanava, 113
thrazdum, 63
daidj^ata,
331
dan, 126
dadhami, 105, 107
daonha, 471
dato, 512
drazh, 218
nadent, 121
patiyaisa (Old Pers.),
89
pathyaiti,
220
perena,
170
pere^a,
192
(fra)mairyeite,
204
fradadatha, 36
fsanajaiti,
179
barayen, 324, 332
bar at, 317
bun,
'126,278
buMjai, buzhdyai, 351
bushyantem, 471
bvat, 278
maidhayauha, 270
mainyete, 204
yaonh, yah,
521
j'aozda, 506
vaeda, 379
vanh, 114
vakhshya, 471
varatha, 122
vidushi, 425
v^nhat, 438
verezyami, 202, 204, 225
verez-jeidjrd, -idj'ai,
351
v6i9ta, 34, 36, 379, 383
9aete,
100
9U9ruma,
356
9ta6maine,
344
9pa9ya,
204
crut5, 512
hi9taiti, 107
hush, 155
584 INDEX.
E. TEUTONIC.
(Gothic
not
distinguished.).
aflifnan,
180
aiaik,
iJG.'j
aialth, 865
aiai;k,356,
.365
airthakuntlis, 511
anabiuda, 156
ananiujan,
231
anasilan, 240
aukan,
4-15
bahhu
(O.
H.
G.),
157
baida,
154
baira, 138,
145
beo (A. S.),
467
biauknan, 181
bidjan,
203
bimunigon (0.
H.
G.),
256
biuga, 152,
156
chriuzigon (0.
H. G.),
256
dagen (O.
H.
G.),
240
dnihjan(O.H.G.), 240,
268
dreskan, 180,
1!I2
eiscon (O.
H.
G.), 189,102
faifah, 356
faifahu
-n,
-th, 889
faifluk,
358
faifrais,
358
faltha, 168
fairveitjan,
264
firstan(O.H.G.),
100
fiskon, 231
flewiu(0. H.G.),
210
flihtu
(0.
H.
G.)
168
fodjan,
261
forscon
(0.
H.
G.), 189,
192
frailina, 170
frathjan,
203
fraujinon,
254
fregna (0.K),
170
frigne(A. S.),
170
gahtllgjan(A. S.),
256
gaigrot,
358
ginem (0.
H. G.),
170
giisnjan(A. S.),
254
hafjan,202,
208
halon
(O. S.),240^
lilahjan,
203
hlinen (0. S.)"
281
hlinian
(A. ".),
281
holen
(O.
H.
G.),
240
ita 145
iesan(O.H.G.),
146, 520
kausjau,
240
kiusa, 152, 155
knau
(0.
H.
G.),
526
kustus,
155
laikan, 227
leiliva,152, 154
leskan,
189
lubaith, 246
lustns,
146
man,
878
merjan,
280
mikiljan,
256
misciuCO.H.G.), 189,192
naan, najan,
nawan (O.H.
G.),
148
namnjan,
289
uasi-da, -dedum, 507
niwon
(0.
H.
G.),
281
6g,
878
qmllu,qual(0.H.G.),211
raska
(O.N.),
189
rasko (0.
H.
G.),
189
rath
jan,
203
rinnan, 109, 172
saisost,37
saisoum, 389
sand]an,
106
satjan,
821
scawon (0. H.
G.),240
sinnan
(A. S.),
100
skaiskaid, 356, 357
skapjan,
203
skathjan, 208
sokidedum, 441
spehon (O.
H.
G.), 240
staiga,155
staistagg,857
staistald,857
stan(0,H.G.), 100
steiga,152, 155
straujan,
251
tagTJan,
250
teiha, 152
tiulia,218^
toumeu
(O. H.
G.),281
thagjan (O.S.),
240
thahan, 240
thaursnan, 258
thlasjan,240
thriskan, 189
thulaith,285
usskavjanj 842
ustliriuta,152
vagjan
240
vahsjan 204,
445
vaist, vait, 34,
153, 871,
379, 388
verstan
(M.H.
G.),
100
vigam, 138, 189
vitu-m, -th, 389
wunscian
(0.
H.
G.), 189,
192
(bis),198
ziljan(0.
H.
G.),
212
F. LETTO-SLAVONIC.
a.
Lithuanian.
alkstu,
168
ariil,202
aiiginti,
173, 181
^ugti, 173,
445
auksztas, 445
baidyti,
507
b^gu,
152
bezdd,
146
bijoti,
507
bhx2-ni-s, 175
"
biidinu, 180
bugstu,
163
bu-k, 450
bimdu, 178, 180
biisiii,busite, 471
diriu, 203, 218
dristii,
168
dakit^,
404
edmi,
104
eimi, 97,
171
eitu
(Low Lith.),
163
esmi, 101
g^sti,
163
gelbu (future, gelb^siu),
259
iesk6ti,
189, 192
jodamas,
507
kankil,kc^kti,175
INDEX.
585
k^.voju,
240
keptaa.
512
laidoju,
202
laukiu, 203
leku, llkti,
154
lu2tu, 163
lydinti,176,
507
marinti, 173
mirsztu,
163
mirti, 173
pjdinti,
176
plakvl,
219
plauju,
210
sed5u, 202,
203
sirpstfi,
163
spiriu,spirti,
295
tenkii,
180
nka-s, 174
udSu, 203, 223
velkii,85
verdu, 507
vesdinti, 507
vesti. 507
ve2u,
29
b. Church Slavonic.
bg,di^,
467
ber^,,
145
bSg?,
152
bichu, 438
MtatI, 151
cuvaja,
240
davu
(SeScoKoiy),
425
ddja,
247
dfilaja,
238
dru"iti, 218
ida, 507
iskati, 189,
192
jada, 507
jami,emi,
104
jasu,
438
kupuja,
253
melja,*203, 211
nesu,' 278
otub5gng,ti,
174
pisg,,
221
plet^,
163
plov-j^t, g,,
210
pola.(5a,
180
porjg,,' prati,
214
rastetl,
163
saditi,
231
stan^,
170
stati,100
stiza,
155
subiraj^,
240
suchu, 155
supati,
151
tukng,ti,
180
vezg,,
29
v"d6, 391
vSdeti, 260, 264, 391
zin^,
170
2^dati,
181
21utejeti,
244
znaja,
202
G. KELTIC.
Old Irish.
ad-chon-darc,
399
ailigim,
256
birt,281
caraim, 238
carub, 507
cechan, 389
cechladatar, 358
cechnatar, 389
cechuin, 389
gab-si,
427
gegrannatar,
358
gen-sam,
427
insadaim, 231
ne-naisc, 400
rodamatar, 389
sescaind,358
sescaing,
358
LONDON ! PEINTW) BY
8POTTISW0ODK AND CO., NKW-STUEET SQUARF
AND PAELIAIIENT 6TEEBT
QQ