formation of the moods - forgotten books

COMPARATIVE GRAMMAR

OF THE

SANSKRIT, ZEND,

GREEK, LATIN, LITHUANIAN, GOTHIC, GERMAN,

ATND SCLAVONIC LANGUAGES.

TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAV

EDWARD B . EASTWICK,

Or MBR TOX cOLuOE, OxTORD, nun-RR OR THE M IATIC SOCIETIES or PAR I S AN !)mmu r, or Tm: osmuw OB l I N

’

TA L M N'

lETY, AW or Tux PHI LOLOGICAL

soon -

rt or LONDON , uoxonu r un nmn or Tm: MADRAB LITER ARYsocIETt. m om s-son or OR IENTAL LAN

-

om ens AND LIRRAR IAN I N

Tn: EAST - IVDIA commas, numwunr , AND TRAN-

sum s; or

Tm: ZARTAS II‘

I' NAyAH . Tux R xggAn- x- SANJKN, TH! mum

m . TR E - o- n.m AR , Tun Own s—TAN, T IIE

ASVXR - l - SI‘ IIA I Li, are. m e. ETC .

VOL. III.

SECOND EDITION .

WILLIAMS AND NORGATE,

LONDON , 14, HENR IETTA STRE ET, COVENT GARDEN ;

ED INBURGH,

SOUTH FREDER ICK STREET .

COMPARATIVE GRAMMAR .

PART I I I .

VE R B S .

FORMAT ION OF THE MOODS .

POT ENT IAL, OPTAT IVE, AND CONJUNCTIVE .

7 16 . In the dialect of the Vedas the L6; mood or con

junctive is also formed bythe insertion of an a, in cases

where, in the corresponding indicative form , an a iswanting,

bythe lengthening of which the mood in question m ightbe formed. Thus, from the aorist (lb/nil, he was,

”comes

the conjunctive bhuvat. he maybe ; where, bythe augment being dropped, the meaning Of pasttime is also te

moved, as is likewise the case in the potential and imperative from clear,

“he made (for akort, according to

comes karat, he maymake ; from chikét- ti , he recognises

“

(R. kit. Cl. chilcétati, he mayrecognise .

”So in

Old Persian, ahatiy, he maybe,”from astig, he is

”

(Behist. IV . 38. where the Sanscrit s in Old Persian isretained before t, butbefore vowels becomes II .

From the aorists also, in the Véda dialect, come con

junctive moodswith the terminations ofthe present; hence,karati , he maymake (RigV . 46. from akar. The Védadialect even forms the conjunctive mood bythe simple

D

Aoristof the fifth formation, which in the Véda dialect is more ex

tensivelyused than in classical Sanscrit.

3 0

954 VER BS .

annexation of the personal term inations of the present to

the base of the aorist, thus e. g. r ink-lulu(vi prep ), he mayannounce , from vyavdchat(Rig V . CV. L .)

IMPER AT IVE .

7 17. This mood, which, in classical Sanscrit, is form ed

only from the present indicative , is distinguished from the

latter merelybythe personal term inations (the firstperson

of the three numbers excepted : see which havebeen alreadydiscussed. T he dual and plural, with the

exception of the third person plural, have the secondaryterm inations ; so that e .g. bharaldm, let the two carry,

“

is distinguished from abharatdm, the two carried, onlybythe om ission of the augment. In Greek the di fference

of the term ination m y of ¢epérwv. from my of the imper

feet écpepé-mv, is unorganic, as ra wand my are originally

one, and both rest on the SanscritMm .

718. The second person singular of the Sanscrit first

principal conjugation—Le. thatwh ich corresponds to the

Greek conjugation in w, to the Latin fourth conjugation,

and to the German strong and weak conjuga tion is

distinguished from the second principal conjugation, wh ichcorresponds to the Greek p l, inasmuch as in the active

(parasmfiip) it has lostthe personal term ination ; so thate . g. bhar—a , let him carry (c d. bar - n) term inateswith the classsyllable, to which , in the dual and plural, the

personal term inations are annexed (m bhur- a - tam=

qi ép- e- rov. m bhar—a - ta=¢ép- e- re). The loss of the per

sonal term ination appears of great antiquity as in Greektoo, ¢ép

-

e is said for ¢ép- e- o. ; and in Latin leg

- pf um - d,

man- é, and and- f. are likewise devoid Of the personal sign.

The e of legs is, in its origin, identical with the i (from a, see

l .) of leg- i - te, and rests on the principle, that in Latin, atthe end

of a word, e is preferred to i ; hence, e. 9 . more from the base mart.

FORMATION OF THE MOODS . 955

719. In German the strong verbs have, in the second

person singular of the imperfect, rejected the class vowel,

and terminate, therefore, with the final letters of the root,‘

without, however, in most cases, containing the actual root

itself, as the vowel of the root, according to the analogyof the present indi cative , appears at one time weakened ;

as e. g. in Gothic, bind, from the rootband. to bind

Sanscrit. bandit; at another time with Guna, hence, inGothic, biug, bend, from the root bug= Sanscrit, bhujbeit.

“bite, from the rootMi r - Sanscrit, bhid, to cleave

(see p. The Sanscrit also, and Greek, retain, in the

present imperative, the Guna gradations of the present

indicative, or, mostgenerally, that of the Special tenses ;

hence, e. g. in Sanscrit, bddha , know (from baudh) frombudh, and in Greek, (peéye from ¢v'y. The German weak

verbs reta in their class character (see corre

sponding to the Sanscrit aya , of the tenth class : the sylla

ble ya , however, is contracted to i (Gothic ci as in

general the syllable ya atthe end of a word lays aside its

vowel, and changes the y into one . Compare, e. g. the

Gothic tam- ci, tame, from tamya, with the Sanscritcausal

dam - aye! Latin dam- d ; Greek Ba'

zp- a s. In the second

weak conjugation, let luig- d, lick,

“be compared with the

Sanscrit causal léh-

aya , from lib, to lick in the con

traction of a(y)a to 0, however, la igé approaches nearest

to Latin imperatives like dam- d, as the Gothic d= é

In the third weak conjugation, compare hab—ai, lhah- a i .

sil- a i , with the Latin forms of like signification, hob- é,

Thus in Latin die for dice. With regard tofer it is to be observed,thatferoalso, inthe indicative, istobe joined ratherwith the Sanscritbhar

(Nari ) ofthe third class thanwith thatof the first. Thus, as fer- s,fer- t,

fer-tic, corresponds to bi - bharshi, bi - bhar- ti

, bi—bhri—tha , so fer answers to

bibhri- hi (from bibhar- dhi), the personal termination being suppressed, as

in er=Greek, 10 - 04, Sanscrit64 116 from ad- dlu'

(for as- dhi).

3 Q 2

956 VERB S .

tac—é, sil- é, where the 6 is a contraction of a i, and answers

to the Sanscrit ayof eye (see p. In the second person plural tam

-

yi- ih (from tam -

ya- ih) corresponds to the

Sanscrit dam - aya- la , Latin dom- d - le, Greek Bay- é e- re. In

Greek and Germ an the imperative second person plura l is

notdistinguishable from the present indicative . In San

scrit, however, the imperative has the term ination of the

secondaryforms (ta) opposed to the the of the primary;

thusm l damayata , tame ye,“opposed to m dama

yatha , ye tame.

”In Latin domdle is distinguished from

domdtz’

s, where the latter form answers to the Sanscritdual indicative present(m damayathas, Gothic lamyals).the former to m damayata ,

“tame ye (see

The term ination to, of the second and th ird person of the

so - called future of the imperative, and the Greek term ination n o of the third person singular, correspond to the

Veda term ination fat, which answers for the second as

well as the third person and in the latter, as has alreadybeen remarked, is most correctlyretained in the Oscantud (licitud. estud.) As in m the expression of the per

son is twice contained, so it is in the Latin second person

plura l tdte, for which in Sanscrit m tdta m ight be ex

pected, which, however, does not occur. In the third

person plural nto answers to the Greek v-

rwv (legunfo=Ae’

yéwwv), which was before compared with the Sanscrit

m iddle forms in anldm

72 0. The Sanscrit term ination 3, plural val, is derivedfrom the pronom inal base 1! to. byweakening the a to a

vowel of m iddle weight, while in the present indicative , as

See 470. The editionofthe FirstBook of the RigV. byFr. Rosen,

which hasappeared sincethiswork was commenced, hasconfirmedtatto be

the termination of the second person of the imperative . H . XLVI I I . 1 5 .

occurs 1! if:m pra noyachehhatét,“give us and CI". 5 .W

charkritdt from the\

intensive of the root bri,“to make.


generallyin the primaryforms the extreme weakening to i

takes place . We have, therefore, the forms - ta, - tu. - ti , as in

the interrogative, in the isolated case lea , 1m , lei . In Zendthe uof the imperative term ination is occasionallylengthened e. g. in the frequently- occurring 90031 409mraotzi ,

“let

him say: on the other hand, Vend . Sade, p. 1 4 2 ,

kha ratu, let him eat,”

Koaswaui} vanhatu, let him put

on.

”

72 1 . The Sanscritm iddle termination sea (from Iva . see

of the second person singular is in Zend corruptedwith a preceding a to anuha (for anlwa), where the v is

changed into the vowel u, and has stepped before the h ;

the nasal, however, which, according to is placed before the h, remains, though otherwise 3 it occurs as a gut

tural nasal, only in direct combination with h. The com

bination {thv appears, however, too uncouth to be adm itted

in Zend ; and wherever, therefore, itwould occur, we find in

its stead w); aah : hence, too, ¥pxw3 m >sb vivagtuhald

Sanscritm vivasvatas, of the Vivasvat”

(VendidadSade, p. Several examples of imperatives in anuha

occur in the eighteenth Fargard of the Vendidad, where,however, the text corrected byBurnouf (Yacua, Note A.

p. 17) according to the manuscripts is to be referred to, as

the lithographed copy(pp. 457, 458) has, more than once,anha faultilyfor (muha : xwguawwggmmat vaSt'ra ydoahayamz ha ,

it

put on the clothes m hd

frd z aita Snayapuha , wash thyhands ;

” I MWJQMJJAOM GwGfi -‘W an d aéimawim ydi anuha,

This form is based on the causal of the Sanscrit root gas“to

T I take c’

nayanuha as a passive verb with a middle

signification ; thus Vend . Sade, p . 331,twice Gylasgo a )

us’

tamim énayaé'

ta ,“lethimwash his body (Anquetil, p . 360, il lavera

son on the other hand, p . 330, uéa (ui é tamim with

a conjunctive vowel between the preposition ui (=Sanscritn ut) and

the

958 VER BS .

spread out wood (compare Sanscrit i ll!yam , in the ape

cial tenses m yachh, with the preposition m d, to ex

SO also in the Vend. Sade, p. 39, for m vauwywhunvapha we oughtto read x v gm q iw hunvanuha , according to the manuscri pts m ade use of byBurnouf, and for

”traumasviéap ha , hearken (Vendidad Sade, p. per

haps also my vz'

sagmha should be read.

Remark .

—In the Latin Edition of mySanscritGrammar

of the year 1832 (p. 330) I have taken the form assi gmnpw

hunuvanuha , or, as the lithographed manuscript reads,

xwywwt hunvanha, as the imperative m iddle, and trans

lated frdmaitm hunvanuha kharéteé (according to Anquetil,

qui me mange en m’

invoquantavec artisan”) by me celebra

ad edendum.

"The root ha is, as is remarked l. c. , added to

the conjugational character of the first class, besides thatofthe fifth class nu. for without this unorganic adjunct the

form would be hunushva (=Sanscrit 331! sunushva). It

is certain thatthe Zend roothumust in Sanscritbe an, and

the opinion which Burnouf ascribes to me (Journal Asiatique , 1844, Dec. p. that the Zend hu rests on the

Sanskrit3 ha .

“to offer,

"has been neither expressed by

me at p. 78 1 , nor in myCriticalGrammar, p. 330, nor anywhere else . That a Zend w h never corresponds to the

SanscritRh has been expresslyremarked in and itis

also remarked in 53. thatw ll, in an etymological respect,never corresponds to the SanscritQ h, but always to the

pure or dental it8 . Had I wished to compare, therefore ,

I. 0. its Sanscrit type with the Zend ha I could onlyhave

referred to one of the roots 3 su, of which one, like the

the following word (see 5 18 . p. The transitive meaning of the

root ind is, on the other hand,usuallyrepresented byw a) limit”: in

the active ; e. g. Vendidad Sade p . 233, Eugen»

[GQJN Q -{U/JJMOOat'

ido vaitrzio fraim‘

idhayf’n “let them wash these

clothes.

"


Zend ha , belongs to the fifth class. On the meaning

celebrare, wh ich I have given to the Zend ha (accordingto Anquetil invoquer avec ardeur

”

) I did not desire to layanyparticular stress ; for mych ief objectwas to settle the

value of the grammatical forms which Anquetil m istook,and I wished to recognise, in the interrogative form , an

imperative term ination based on the Sanscrit a - sva , and in

kharéteé, the dative of an abstractsubstantive, while, according to Anquetil

’

s translation qui me mange”

) it m ightbe taken for a third person present. In both respects I

now find myself supported by the Sanscrit translation of

Neriosengh, which is given byBurnouf, which renders”anympwhunvagm ha byM y parisafiskdram lamb

.

and&img

7»e kharéleé byW khddandya for the

eating,”or

“the The explanation of the appended

commentary ism m dhdrdrth am sanmanayafr i .s.

on account of the food honour The root m i 1m

occurs several times in the ninth Ha of the I z eschne, from

which our passage is taken ; and indeed in the third

person of the imperfect hunc’

ila (once hunvata with the

addition of the character of the first class), which Anquetileverywhere paraphrases by ayant invoqué et s

'

étant

I have translated it by laudabat,"

and

regretthatBurnouf has notgiven us Neriosengh’

s trans

Burnouf remarks, Nos Inanuscrits senttrés—confus en cetendroit

celui de Manakdji am sa iiskdras'

charu,maisje as suis par sfir

da fl 5011 le numero II . F. lit.W uhskam fikuavec fl felt an

dessus de la ligne .

”However, I have no doubtthatBurnouf is rightin

reading 35learn.

‘I' SO Burnouf reads for the m sanmdraya of the manuscripts,which is unmeaning.

1 Burnouftranslates honors-moi comme nourriture, Inwhich I cannot

agree with him ; for dhdrdrtham, can onlymean“on account of the

food,

”not as food ; and inkhadanéya , as thetranslation of kharéteé, the

relation of cause is apparent.

960 VER BS .

lation of this expression also. Undoubtedly, however,the ci rcumstance that the verb derived from hu everywhere refers to ”slimy haoma , the personified SOma -

plant,

speaks in favour of Burnouf s opinion, that the Zend hu

has the same signification as the Sanscrit root3 an; vi z .

to press out the sap,”where it is to be further re

marked, that in Sanscrit the verb from this root isespecially used in relation to the SOma-

plant. I avail

myself of the occasion which has led me to speak of the

ninth Ha of the Iz eschne, to correct an error to wh ich Iwas led bya false reading of the lithographed manuscript

of the Vendidad Sade. Four times in this Ha the mas

culine nom inative of the interrogative occurs before the

accusative of the pronoun of the second person. T he

lithographed manuscript J eads once ensuf'

d&

.u.u5 kaaié

thwatim (p. once GwmfiQ N

» Icasé thwarim (sa 3, p. 40, bym istake), oncewgca xgkai éthu'

a i im (p.

and once Gwedlsduax j kas’ithuwa iim (p. Here, therefore, two readings support the separation of the two pro

nouns,and two their combination ; and atfirstI supposed thatthe form of writing in which theywere separated was the

rightone, where, in the I? or i of kai é and kaéi, was to be

recognised an appended pronoun, like the Greek demon

strative c (adrow'

, éxewom’

: see and Gram . crit. Add .

ad r. The 3, however, I regarded as the sign of the

nom inative, and this itreally is ; for though the Sanscritterm ination as in Zend regularlybecomes 6, but 3 in the

m iddle and beginning of a word before vowels h, therem ight, however, be an exception in the case of the term i

nation as occurring before an enclitic, where as m ightretain its original form ; for in Zend a: is not so

much the palatal sibilant as the ‘I in Sanscrit is, for the

latter occurs before no other mutes but palatals only;

while as occurs b efore mutes of all organs (see and

before mutes which are not palatals always corresponds to

FORMATION OF THE MOODS . 96 1

the SanscritIt3, exceptbefore p , where this Springs from the

Sanscritv. as e. g. inwe.»s’

pd Sanscrit'

a aim . AS, however,we learn from the notice of the various readings of the Parismanuscripts, which have been in the meantime publishedbyBurnouf (Yacna, Note R . p. that kai é, and

the combination of the interrogative with the following

q fd thmaitm, thee,”is the prevailing reading (we find

the words joined seven times, and separated onlyfive times,

and seven times 5 occurs—for i twice, and for 6three times)it adm its of scarce anydoubt thatthe vowel which stands

between km} and thwa iim is inserted onlyto assist the

utterance, and that we must regard km’

thwarim as the

original form ; so that, as is the case before the enclitic

particle ka , the sibilantof the nominative has maintained

itself under the protection of the following consonant, andremained too when a conjunctive vowel was inserted

to aid the pronunciation"

I shall not decide whetherthis vowel must necessarilybe an g E, and could not be

either i qr a . Let, however, the quite sim ilar case be

considered, where, between the preposition as) us}, and the

verb kisiami, in the lithographed manuscript at

least, at one time 5 E, at another A i, at another as a oc

curs as the vowel of conjunction (see 518. p. We

may indeed expect, that in all places where the litho

graphed manuscripthas i or a some one or other of the

manuscripts has 5; and undoubtedlythis, the shortest ofall the vowels, is best adapted for insertion as a mere

vowel of conjunction, as, too, it is regularlyused for this

Thus, as oughtto have been remarked at the forms 4355cbitya, of the second,

”and ”559 476 thritya, of the third

,

”

pointto a

timewhen the‘

I'

of the Sanscritdvitiya , tritiya, was stillpresent, onwhich

accounttheyhas notcommunicated an aspiration to the preceding con.

sonant, as is the case e. g . in méréthyu, where the combination of the

T - sound with the semi - vowel is prim itive.

962 VERBS .

purpose , to prevent the direct combination of r with a

following consonant without anyother vowel be ing

used for this object. Here, too, the question m ight be

started, why no interposed vowel is to be found in the

com binations Icas’

lé, who to thee,”

and kaS-na, which

man (for who generally: see p. mentioned byBurnouf l. c. (p. cxxxix), while Icaéthwa i im nowhere occurs

The reason of this, I doubt not, lies herein, that tlm '

ai im ,

on accountOf its double consonant, less easilyunites witha preceding 5, than it? and mi ; while (on St and I” in are

quite favourite and usual combinations. On the otherhand, Iz isldm i, though its initial sound is one of weak

consonants, required the interposition of a vowel whencombined with 115. because i h is an impossible combina

tion in Zend. At the beginning of the twenty- first

Fargard of the Vend . (Vendidad Sade , p. 498)we five times

find 11 2571 10323 lé , i . e. adoration to thee (= Sanscritm 3

names each time written separately, though the two

words evidentlyought to be joined, as the vowel of conjunction

‘

é , and the retention of the term inatioh as, for

which (I would otherwise be substituted, sufficiently de

monstrate . It appears, however, that on account Of the

polysyllabicalness of the word, to which in this case the

enclitic [6 is attached, the phonetic combination appears

less intimate, and this mayalso be the reason why°

the t

cannot, as in kas’

te, follow the 5 without an intermediate

vowel. We maysee howmuch the Zend inclines to use mo

nosyllabic pronom inal forms enclitically, in that it attachesthem even to prepositions, which have become detachedfrom the verbs to which they belong : hence, GQ ‘GN “xw)5w»pw frdma i im hunvanuha in the passage cited

above ; so ”usyxmm g ewe»: am mim ydianuha , which

That Anquetil’

s translation “addressee votre priére

”is incorrect

requires no proof.


Neriosengh translates byElm . i . e. wish or Obtain

me ; and Burnouf(Journ. As. Dec. p. 465)byuinvoque

We mayalso here prelim inarilyremark that, for the first

tim e, we have learned, through Rawlinson’

s late ingenious

discoveries, that in Old Persian also the pronouns readilyattach themselves as enclitics to the preceding word, andthat if we read without the a (which in old Persian is

sometimes conta ined in the consonants, and sometimes not),

y, wh ich is regularlyadded to the i at the end of a word,

as well as to the diphthong a i, the Old Persian enclitics

will, in like manner, be all monosyllabic . For this, as

for other reasons, I read auramaz ddma iy, Auramaz da

to me,

”for Rawlinson

’

s - ma iya (former reading m iya).72 2 . The first person of the three numbers of the im

perative follows in Sanscrit and Zend a peculiar principleof formation, which, as has already been remarked, cor

reSponds rather to the conjunctive or Lét than to the

other persons of the imperative . An 4 is prefixed to the

Anquetil altogether omits to translate this expression, for which, in

the lithographic manuscripts (p. occurs bymistake ydsanha . Bur

nouf thinks he recognises in the rootya}, the Sanscrit“ ydcb,“to

demand, ask ; but a diflicultyarises in the i for Sanscrit ch of

which I have elsewhere metwith no example. The root“Ira yach h

,as

substitute ofwtyam, answers better, on accountof its finalconsonant, as

3 ebb in Zend is regularlyrepresented bya’

; on which account I have

above 72 1 . )preferred aydsaaianuha ,“spread out, to this root. Here,

however, the meaning of the Sanscrit In yam,W gachh, preposition

“ a, doesnotsuit. Perhaps the a (manm)ydsanuha In question is radi

cally identical with the frequentlyoccuring ayé’it, I praise (or m

voke”i)which leads to a Sanscrit rootmm,which is onlyretained in

It“ yasas, glory. W ith regard to the Zend 8 for the Sanscrita or

a see 42 . It'

Is probable, however, that In dyed , as also ingenitives in

yé‘

M forgain, and'

In present forms'

Inyemi , besides the preceding 31 thevowel also of the following syllable has an assimilating influence in the

change of a or ato 6: hence we find, indeed, dye'

c’

é, butnottiyééq auha, but

éyc'

is'

anuha .

964 VER BS .

personal term inations, the term inations ofthe presentindicative m iddle which end in 6 lengthen this diphthong to di ,

and the verbal theme keeps, in the second principal conju

gation, the strengthened form , which elsewhere enters onlybefore the lightpersonalterm inations. The firstperson sin

gular has ni for its ending, where n is clearlya corruption of

m and is suppressed like the latter in the Sanscrit m iddle ,while the Zend maintains this decided advantage over the

Sanscrit, that it for the most part retains the personal

character, and presents dueto match the Sanscri tdi . This

film (1 1 16 ther efore bears the same relation to the active

Jim dni, that, in the Greek present indicative, youdoes to

In . In order to exh ibit the principle of formation of the

Sanscrit firstperson imperative I here presentthe said per

son Of the three numbers of the two active forms of the

rootfatdoish, to hate," compared with the corresponding

forms of the present indicati ve .

ACTIVE. MIDDLE.

IND IC . IMPERAT . IND IC. IMPER AT .

0 o o o o

SIng. d'

veshm z , dvésh- d- m . dvishé. dvéshdz .

Dual dvishvas, dvésh- d- va . dvishvahé, dvésh- d - cabdi .

Plur. dvishmas. dvésh- d—ma . dvishmahé. dvésh- d- mahdi .

So in Zend, Vendidad Sade p. 477, several times JIm /M&

jan- d- ui Sanscrit han- d- m'

) I W ill smite , dCStmyIn

'

l'

The lingual Ii occurs on account ofthe euphonic influence of the

preceding lingual sibilantaccording to of mySanscritGrammar.

1‘

In Sanscritalso the first person imperative sometimes occurs in the

sense of the future or presentindicative, to express a decided volition of a

positive impending action, c g. Sunda and Upas. I . 2 6 . Anquetil takes

jam‘

mi as the third person Of a preterite, and renders it(p. by ii

fl ame,

”and once by seront anéantis.

”It needs, however, no proof

thatjam‘

tai is reallythe first person imperative, for Zoroaster speaks to

Ahriman the wordsOwing J ALI/A38. $65 JMG$73»with):duschda curd ma inyé jandm

'

dma da é'

v6 dtc’m,&c.

,

“Vicious

Ahriman,

FORMATION OF THE MOODS .

pp. 1 32 , 479 .

l >>xjp759 Ic

'

érEnav- d- né I should make,==Sanscritkrin-

avdni from karaev- d-

pé).72 3. In verbs of the first principal conjugation and of

the ninth class, as also in roots in d of the second or thirdclass, the modal d combines with the preceding a or d ;

hence e.g. unfit]bhardm’

, letme carry Zend J/m 7w bardm’

,

m iddlewa s), bardné (Vendidad Sade, p. So wim xsipvi

'

idné,“I will obey yaz dné (see p.

“I

should Offer gym /E750) péréndné, I should destroy (Vendidad Sade , p. 335, compare Burnouf, Yacna, p. 530, iii);

Q /wdxyob slmg yaoschdathdné, I should purify l.o. p. 480).T

Ahriman I will destroythe Daéva- created people. Uponwhich (p. 478)Ahriman says to Zoroaster,

”M IGAIZI IS 9 mm» {99m g

mamadama merechanuha ashaum Zaratustra

Slaynotmypeople, O pure Zoroaster !

Vendidad Sade, p . 1 24 . wi se st; mo 955» (team 15 vir’

dné’

,

“ I

thee,”so I. c. are other imperatives in the sense of the future

,

as ”h om eland; gaudnxetaco g55”

az em te'

gai t/Ida vart’dhayéni ,

I willmake thylands increase'

make fruitful,"Anquetil p. 2 71 .

“je

rendra i votre mondefertile ci abondante

1 See 637. I am now,however, of opinion, in departure from what

has been remarked atp . 1 1 2,thatthe th of «lath is a substitute of db

, and

I take da as the syllable ofreduplication, as inthe Sanscritdadhdmi . The

N 5Ad Inida ithyai m, deponent,

”mentioned atp . l 1 2

, corresponds

to the SanscritW a ided/tyne, ”mfd‘li ’fidlai- da ithita to the San

scritm ni - dadht'

ta . In thegenitive of the participle Of the

reduplicated preteriteWW’Q") datlmslui corresponds to the Sanscrit

dadlmshas while in the nominative dadlwdo Sanscrit

dadh - i - vdn)and in the accusative 98w3ew>>w dadhvc‘

ionhc'm

Sanscritdadh- i - vdiwam), the alteration of db to th does nottake place,

an alteration which most probably is found only in the weak cases.

Perhaps in Zend th is considered weaker than (III and d, and this maybe

the reasonthatthe interrogative verb, where itappears withouta preposition or other incumbrance of composition, or even with compositional

incumbrance, butwithoutreduplication, also exh ibitsnoth inthe exampleswith

966 VERBS .

After 33ycomes I? for d ; hence e.g. caredhayéni ,“I will make to grow (Vend. Sade, p.

tglngwfiuwxsdl

fi'

ahdrayéné.

“In the production of this 6, however, the i

or 4? of the termination bears the most important part, forif the 3; alone was the efficientcause , itwould also influence

the following vowel, if i or 6 did notoccur in the term ina

tion this, however, is notthe case, hence e.g. ”awe“varEdhaya, make to grow (Vend. S . , p. Magnetics?radchaya, make to give light, kindle

”

(p ASQ MQQN IJIMC

yasinayata ,

“sacrificio colite

”(Burnouf,Yacna, Note A. p. 13.)j

'

SO in the second person plural m iddle, ggwwggx zmbvdrayadt

'm,

“defend ye ; Gged

'

wggx zwefidhdrayadhwém.

“preserve ye (Burnouf, l. o. Note D. p.

with wh ich I am acquainted ; while, where the reduplicated verb isburthened bycomposition, th almostuniversallyoccurs inthe base- syllable,though db also is occasionally found, e. g . in yaoshdadha

'

iti (Burnouf,Yacna p. In cases where the forms with th followthe analogyOf

the Sanscritfirstclass, as e. g . in nidathém,I have made

,

"

(Burnouf l. c. )I regard the vowelwhich follows th notas the class vowel, but, as in the

conjugation of the rootm stbd, was.”s

’

td, asthe shorteningofthe radical

vowel(see I alsonowconsidertheverbal- theme smidha , towash,

”

as a compound of the root ind and dhc‘

i, the radical vowel ofthe latter

being shortened (compare BenfeyWurz el lex . , I I . The perhaps not

numerous forms mayappear surprising inwhich the vowel of the syllableof reduplication of the Zend root dha (withouta vowel preceding, dd) is

long, as inthe example mentioned byBurnouf (l. c.)nidhdthaye'n, they

maylaydown.

”Here eitherthe lengtheningof the syllable of repetition

is a compensation for the shortening of the base- syllable, or the genius ofthe language takes doth for a m ondaryroot,withoutbeing conscious that

the d, with its vowel, is in facta syllable of reduplication, as in Sanscrit

the forms dJ- hi, give, (from dad - din; Zend daz - di) and dhé - hi , place,

”

(from dIIad- dhi), no longer give the impression of reduplicated forms.Vendidad Sade, p . 32 . gfm swnb saw”,

&ln3w7mwasddM urvdném vahistc'm ahzim frahdrayéné

‘

,I will

make his soul go to the mostexcellentplace Anquetil, p . 1 39,“jeferai

aller librementson ame aux demeures célestes .

”

1'

Yaénaye‘

mi isadenominative fromwh o Sanscritycy'

na , offering.

”

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

968 VER BS .

form thus e. g. da - dama , da - dhd - ma , notdad- ma , dad h- ma

(compare

72 4. Besides the m iddle term ination dné, which surpasses

the Sanscrit in correct retention of the original form , the

Zend also recognisesthe abbreviated form of which, hewever, itmakes butunfrequentuse . An example is m aul;vi

'

idi in the fourth Card Of the Visperéd (Vend. S . , p.

where Ja mal; 935» az ém vis'

di , occurs seven times, wh ichAnquetil renders by With the preceding imperetive ditdya, the present indicative accords

best; so that, in the want of positive examples, we m ightbelieve m a st; vi

'

idi. to be onlya more energetic form for

the present indicative m‘

i é. The form musi ng yaz di ,

which occurs several times in the twenty- second Fargardof the Vend. , is rendered byAnquetil rendez hommage ,

and the context requires also the second person, for ya z di ,

&c. , expresses the command ofOrmuz d directed to Zoroaster,to whom he promises, as the reward ofthe reverence requiredof him , thatwhich follows, dathdni . I will give (= Sanscrit « f a daddni , first person imperative). I see also no

reason to assentto Burnouf in placing (Yacua, p . 495) thewords JWSMQ yaz di, &c. , in the mouth of Zoroaster ; and

I take yaz di to be the imperative active of the causal form ,

and, indeed, as a contraction ofyaz aya whether itbe thatthi s expression reallyhas a causal signification, and means

“lethonour,

“or thatthe causal form has here the same

meaning as the primitive form , as in Sanscritalso is not

unfrequent]ythe case . In a phonetic view, the relation Of

yaz di to yaz aya resembles that of m ; ndi . conduct,”to

the Sanscrit in naya . With regard to yaz di, as well as to

ndi, we mustassume that, in compensation for the suppres

Literally,“make to come, the causal of Itd,

“to stand, with the

prepositiona. Anquetil takes the adjoining accusative as a nominative,

and ditdya asthe third person.


sion of the final a , the a of the preceding syllable is length

ened, or, which comes to the same thing, the a of the final

syllable is tmn8posed, nearlyas in the change of ashavan

pure,"into ashdum (with m for n) in the vocative . The

form a », ndi . conduct, occurs six times at the end of

the ninth Ha of the Iz eschne in combination with noiém

(Vend. S . , p. Anquetil(p. 1 1 2 )renders 982 70 89M IGga i n;adi emndi kéhrpém by enseignez

- moi le moyen d’

anéantir son

amps.

” The literalmeaning, however, is“conductthe body

to destruction, (e. g. az dis, of the ahés.)Here, perhaps, the composition of the imperative with theaccusative Icéhrpi

‘m mayhave given occasion for the con

traction of naya to ndi. This, however, does not preventthe assumption that, without anyspecial Occasion, a trans

position of the a of the syllable ya mayalso take place,since the Zend is particularlyfond of transposing the a of

the syllables ya and co, and form ing them into a diphthongwith the vocali z ed sem i - vowel. I shall return to this sub

jcet in the emendations to 4 2 .

72 5 . In respect to Syntax, itdeserves noti ce that the

firstperson of the imperative in Zend notonly, as has been

alreadyshewn bysome examples, sometimes supplies the

place of the future indicative, but is also used as the conjunc

tive, governed by”dug yet/Ia , that. “ Thus, in a pas

sage quoted by Burnouf (Yacna, p. 42 7) with a different

object from the fourth chapter of the Y escht de Gosch,4 1ason 985» A96»; yatha az ém bandayéni ,

“that I

bind ;"

Jpsuw ip asp ) ula baa'

iIFm vddhayéni, &c. ,

and (that I) beat those who are bound ;“

mp )

”soap s/Aw) uta bas’

lém upanayéni.“and (that I) conduct

those who are bound.

"On passages of this kind Burnouf

‘

s

Thisword is not once written quite correctly in the lithographed

manuscript; the correctreading, however,maybe easilyfound bya com

parison of the several erroneous ones.

3 a

VERB S .

Opinion maybe based, that the forms in dni (or éni), in

point of sense , belong as well to the imperative as to the

potential, while he denies in toto thatthe m iddle form in

dné (or éné), which was first brought to light byFr. Win

dischmann (Jenaische Allgemeine Litt. Z. July 1834, p.

belongs, in point of signification, to the imperative, and ex

plains the forms in (15. according to their meaning as

genuine imperatives m iddle ofthe firstperson(Yaqna, p. 530,

Note). I cannot assent to this opinion, as e. g.

&IA\5A§C

gaz and, offer,“in the passage quoted above (p. has as

imperative a meaning as the first person for the mostpartadm its of. while vzsdi according to its signification.

is rather a present indicative , and yaz di is explained

as the second person imperative active of the causal.72 6 . Among the European sisters of the Sanscrit, the

Gothic alone presents a first person of the imperative.

but onlyin the plural, where, e . g. , visam, simna,"

(Lucxv. corresponds to the Sanscrit vasdma , habitemus.

without, however. being formally distinguished from the

present indicative ; as the Sanscritterm inations mas and

ma in Gothic are represented by mere m, except in the

conjunctive, where ma corresponds to the Sanscritn ma

of the secondary forms. It has been already remarked

that, according to its formation, the imperative of the

Sclavonic and Lithuanian does not belong to the proper

imperative (see 677.

I here give a general view Of the points of comparisonwhich have been arrived at for the imperative present.

CANBK R IT . ZEND . GREEK LATIN .

sg. act. han- d - m’

, jan- d- ui ,

bhar- d-

gu'

. bar- d - a i,’

sg. mid. karav- di, knrav- d - né .

bar- (i i, bar- d- né ,

1 Barani cannotbe supported byquotation, butis clearlydeduced from

the middle bardné'

and the plural barc‘

ima (V . S . p.

unusua l I . L E N D Uufi b l . L A I I L‘ e « o r

pl. act. bar- d - ma , bar- d- ma , ba ir

sg. act. olé -Ju'

,

2 da z - di,3

é- dhi,‘

bhar- a ,

vah- a .

‘vah—a - tdt,5

sg. m id. dat- sva ,

‘

bhar- a - sva, bar- an—uha,’

du. act. bhar- a - tam,

pl. act. bhar- a - ta, bar—a ta ,

bibhfi - ta.

vah- a - ta, va z—a - ta , er e- re.

pl. m id. bhar—a - dhvam, bar- a - dhwé'

m, (pe'

p- e- oee,

sg. act. vac- a - tu. vanh- a - tu,

vah- a - tdt, m afia - MI,“l

ceh- i - (o,

da . act. bhar—a - tdm,

pl. act. bhar- a - nfu, bar-

a - ntu

2 D é - Iu‘

from dadd hi for dad u'

from dadt‘

i - dhi, See 450. 481 .

3

33Sf“)da z di from dad . di, See where for daz dhi read3)

dumb, as Q 4”; occursonlybetweentwovowels. Thuswe twice read in

V. S . p. 50, daz di - M , give to me,

”with m i

, to me,”

enclitic, where we mustremember, thatin Sanscrit, also, the forms ame,“mei, and i té.

“tui , tibi,”are used onlyenclitically just as in

Old Persian ma iyand ta ig. We musttherefore take the (inV. S. pp . 505,

507, 508)frequentlyrecurring &cc gaudy} dathdm

’

té, I will give to

thee, as dathdm‘

té,since composites in Ztmd are frequentlyseparated in

writing. If, however, datham’

té is to be taken as oneword,I shouldthen

explain the th as being for dh, on the same principle as thatbywhich therootdd, to lay,

”in the reduplicated forms, whentheyappear in compo

sitiou, regularly exhibits th for dh in the radical syllable. (See p. 964,

Rem.4 From ad - dhi for as- dlu

'

.5 956 Rem .

0 For dadd- sva . (See7 See 72 1 . 8 See p. 653,

Note

72 7. In the Veda dialect and Zend occur forms also

which correspond to the imperative of the aorist in Greek,3 a 2

972 VERBS .

and, like the latter, have with the augment, which is the

true symbol of pasttime, also laid aside the past signifi

cation. To the Greek first aorist corresponds { Itbhti'

sha,

be or become (see Westerg. r. up, pref. w) euphonic

for bhfi- sa=¢6—cov. The v Of the term ination eov, i f or

ganie, maybe deduced from g", and this from 0, as. e. g. , 86g

See 97. W ith regard tothetransitionoffinal 9 into vcomparealso7711 ,

he was,”with the Doric t): andm at of the Védas : moreover the

cuff. are Sanscrit tat. Latin tua 42 1 . The form - 0¢v, as it

approaches closer to the Sanscrittax and Latin {us than 8: does, mustbe

regarded as more organic than the latter, which, as Buttmann remarks,

1 16. 4. Rem . is of frequentoccurrence onlyin certain particles, in

which the originalmeaning whence”

) is notso perceptible, and is foundelsewhere butseldom where the metro requires it(swede. Pind .

, sta pes.

Calimm .

, Atfiéaoe, m itt-root Observe, also, the complete rejection of the v in the ace . of bases ending in a consonant(traf épa=Sanscrit

p itaram,Latinpatrem), as well as, in particular, the abundantlydemon

strated fact, that final letters are the most exposed to weakening and

complete extinction. The weakening of s to n is too, in itself, notmore

remarkable than that of a to another liquid, viz . r ; whi ch, in Sanscrit,so frequently takes place according to settled laws, and occurs dialecti

cally also in Greek (see and is found in several k indred lan

guages in certain parts Of Grammar ; as, e. g .

,in Irish the termination

mar Of the 1 stp. pl. represents the Sanscritmas, Latin mus, Dorie per,which latter

,in the common dialect, is corrupted toyell. The Sanscrit

secondaryterminationma , which also occasionallyoccurs in the present,is veryprobablyan abbreviation ofwas (see which firstappeared

after the separation Of dialects ; an abbreviation which enters more

extensively into Old Persian, since there the final a after a and a has

become the weakened form Of all terminations. There fore I cannot

agree with Pott(Etym . Forsch . I I . —towhom G. Curtius (Forma

tion of the Tenses and Moods, p . 2 7)ascents—in deriving onlyat: from

mas, butpeatfrom ma , as if the uwere onlya later suffix or echo. W'

hy,itmightbe asked, have similar enduring resonantletters (notused likethe v e

’

tpekxvtm xév to prevent the hiatus) not been suffixed to distinct

vowel- ending forms, e. g. to the t of the voc . ofthe 2 d decl. or

to that Of the dual The Doric termination was in the

3d p. pl. imper. (Rtydww, ”admin -w, dwo'rw'

ciwm) may be regarded with

at


from Bride. We should therefore have to regard- o

-

a0t as

the original form , and from thatwas, and afterwards - O'

oy,

with the change of a to o, which is preferred before nasals

(see p. In this manner, if the v of nix - cow appears

to be the personal term ination, and, in fact, in a place

where the Veda dialect has lost the personal termination

(bhti - sha from bhd- sha - dhi), then itmust he remarked that,in Prakrit also, the term ination hi , which is a mutilated

form of did, is much more extensively used than in

Sanscrit (see Lassen, p. 338. HOfer, p. From c ad:

a m iddle term ination ones. maybe developed, accordingto the principle Of redraw-Ou from ruxlra

'

rw, redraw-He from764mm ; for as all term inations, whi ch in the active be

gin with -

r, are preceded in the m iddle bya'

, where 7 passes

into 0(see so it cannotbe matter of astonishment,

i f, from the tobe -

presupposed redraw: is formed réxlraew,and hence, by rejecting the 00, mil/ at, which presents an

accidental agreem entwith the infinitive active of the aorist,

atleastequal justice asan abbreviation of n ew; as, vice ven d, wawmaybe looked on as a lengthened form ofwe), for the Doric dialecthas not

in all cases preserved the most ancient forms. Pott(l. c. ) finds, in a

physiological view,the interchange between 9 and v difficultto compre

hend ; as, though both are dentals, yetthe difference in their pronuncia

tion is vast. Still greater, however, isthe difference between thatof amute and the nasal corresponding to its organ ; and yet, in Sanscrit,

final mutes, if they occur before a nasal, pass into the nasal of their

organ (atishthanmtirdlmi, he stood atthe top,”for - tm); and in Latin

somnus stands for 30pm» ; inGreek e q ual: for tre or : while reversedly,

in Lithuanian and Sclavonic, without its being occasioned by the

neighbouring letters, the n of the number nine (Sanscrit navan) hasbecome d (see 31 7 and in Greek the n of the suffix li7i man,Latinmen, has become -r (d- vopa f=m ufiman, nomen). I am also Of

Opinion thatthe Véds termination tuna, in the 2 d p . pl. , has arisen from

mm, and therefore is onlya reduplication of the common termination ta ,

and rests, therefore, on the principle of the Latin imperative- ending i dle,

and the Véda tdtof the 2 d and 3d pers. singular.

974 VER BS .

as in Latin also, ama - re, be loved (the last syllable of

which is onlya fuller form of the reflexive , which we,see have recognised in amo- r, is in sound

identical with the active infinitive . If, however, the

imperative nix - ca t has arisen from n’

nr- o-

aaet, the abbre

viation is onlyone degree greater than, in the indicative,

that of é-rmr- o'u- ao to é'rtivr- Oto. We return to the Véda

dialectto remark, that to forms like m ad - 7m, irrespective

ofthe personalterm ination, correspondsthem né—sha - tu(cheuphonic for 3, see which is cited byPanini (III . 1 . 8 1 .

Schol.)“lethim conduct. ” In the second person dualW

bhdshatam (W upabht'

ishatam, see Westerg. , r. g bhfi.

prefix an ape), corresponds adm irably to «Meat-

rev, and in

the third person plural,m s'

rO- sha - nlu, theyshall hear

(Rig. V. I. 86. in respect of the aoristic suffix, to forms

like Au- a'é - v

-

rwv.

72 8. InZend as yetno imperatives have occurred, which,like the Véda 53 bittithe , &c . , would correspond to Greek im

peratives ofthe firstaorist on the other hand,way deli - di”,

give (Vendidad Sade, p. 3 1 1 twice , pp, 42 1 , corre

sponds to 86-

9, from 80- 0t, m ay (Id - ta , give ye (Vendidad Sade , p. to 867 6 , and (Id - ta do ye ,

"make ye,

(in comp. ”(0.39 60l yaoschddla , purifyye, VendidadSade, p. 367, frequently)to Sé- re. I think I discover a m iddle imperative aorist in mwgw ddogzhd, give thou

(Vend idad Sade, p. 2 2 2 , from the bottom); butwe re

quire to understand the passage where this expression oc

curs bythe aid ofNeriosengh‘

sSanscrittranslation, aswellas

a comparison of manuscripts. Itis probable thatwe oughtto read m erg es)”ddogmhd, where the long itwould present

no difficulty, as in this passage other originallyshort a’

s at

the end of a word are found lengthened. In the Véda

I write d itta for ddtd, as inthis passage long a stands for shorta

everywhere atthe end of a word .

976 VER BS .

indicative occurs corresponding to vdvridhasva, when re

garded as an aorist, would not be a sufficient reason for

rejecting this v iew ; for hitherto no indicatives 06,1 12 s

anésham, aérdsham, have been found to correspond to the

aorist imperatives mentioned in 72 7 bht'

isha . bhtishatam,

mealtain, srdshantu. If, however, with Westergaard, we

assume potentials and imperatives of the perfect, we can

then, with him , derive vdvridhasva from the perfect indi cative vdvf idhé. But, according to the signification, the

reduplicated imperatives and potentials, which all have a

present meaning, are better derivable from the aorist

(which in its moods lays aside its pastsignification togetherwith its augment) than from the perfect, where the re

duplication expresses past time, and which, therefore,must remain in the moods likewise ; as, e. g. , in Gothic.ha iha ityausignifies I was called,

“not

“I am called.

”If,

however, in the Véda dialectthe reduplicated modal forms

spring, in part at least, from the perfect, we must thenassume thattheyhave, through a perversion, surrendered

the past signification, which belonged to them , so thatthe

German conjunctives of the preterite in this respectstand

on older ground. The explanation of the reduplicated

modal forms from the intensive, attempted in 709. Note,is now far from satisfactory to me ; and I now hesitatebetween the derivation of them from the perfect, and the irdeduction from the reduplicated aorist. To the latter

m ight be referred m‘

séda . seat thyself (see Westerg.

pp. 177, asw anééam (see presents an ana

logous indicative . To the avdcham mentioned in the said

belongs the imperative sa iivdchdvahdi (1 p. da . m id. R ig. V.

L 2 5.

72 9. Traces of an imperative of the auxiliary future

occur in classicalSanscrit. Butthe few examples hithertofound all belong to the 2 d person pl. of the m iddle ; vi z .

m prasavishyadhvam, shew ye (Bhagavad - Gita,

FORMAT ION OF THE MOODS . 977

3. M bhavishyadhvam, be ye (Maha- Bharata ,

III . 14394. Ramayana, ed. Schl I . 2 9. and an“vétsyadhvam, find ye,

”Obtain ye (Maha- Bhar. I .

The conjecture elsewhere expressed, that bysaticakshyata

(in Stenz ler’

s Brahma- Vaivarta - Purani Specimen I . a

future imper. act. of the 2 d p. pl. is established, I mustnowretract; as, byrepeated exam ination of the passage, I find,

bythe context, that form satieakshyata, which Stenz lerrenders we should read safiraxhata (i . e.

i

CONDIT IONAL .

730. The Sanscritconditional bears the same relation in

respect of form to the auxiliary future that the imperfectdoes to the present, i . e. the augment is prefixed to the root,

and the secondary personal term inations supplythe place

of the primary: hence, e. g. , W addsyam,

“I would give,

and also“I would have given,

“answering to ddsydm z

’

,

I will give .

” We maytherefore, as in departure from

myformer opinion I am now inclined to do, regard the

conditional as a derivative from the auxiliaryfuture ; so

that, although the substantive verb is contained in it, thereis no necessity for assum ing the existence of an obsolete

Observe,thatinmanuscriptswritten inBengal,and especiallyinthe manuscriptused byStenz ler,the r isfrequentlynotdistinguishable from the v

,

as isremarked l. c. p. 10. The it31 after the qla b is added byStenz ler

as an emendation. Themeaningalloquimini , however, doesnotagreewith

the context, whilstarceteprineipem corresponds to the sense of the prece

ding 81. In 81. 32 ofthe same Spec. occurs a form worthyOf notice in

respectof syntax, viz . the imperative brflta as representative of the con

junctive governed byM 5 yadi mtg/am bruta,“ifye speak the truth .

”

SO in the fifth book of the MahaBhar. the second personpluralm iddle of

the imperativeprayacltchhadhvamgoverned bychat nacketprayachcltha

dlwam amitmghatimiyudhishthiraayt‘

i’

it5am abhipst'

tari wakam,

“ ifye do

not give the fiend- slaying Yudishthir his required share .

”In the Big

Veda (I . 27. 1 2 )we find the firstperson pluralof the imperative, or La ,

afteryadi yadi i aknavdma , ifwe can.

"

978 VER BS .

deg/am , I would be, or I would have been ; and even

though such a form should have exi sted,we m ight still

regard degam as a derivative of asydm i, I will be (= Lat.

ero. en'

s, see . which has disappeared from use ; just

as addsyam as a derivative from ddsydm i . The circum

stance, that in none of the European kindred languages a

mood analogous to the said one in Sanscrit is to be found,

m ight lead us to the conjecture, that it is of comparativelylate origin, as in Latin the imperfect conjunctive (see

which resembles itmost, but has evidentlysprungup on Roman ground. Compare (la - rem from dd - sem , for

dé - satm with W a - da- syam .

73 1 . The Sanscrit employs but seldom its conditional,which, in the earlier period of the language, is commonlysupplied bythe potential : a few examples, therefore, maybe given here (manuscript vi i . yadi m praaayéd, rdjd

da pgian dap dyéshv atandritah'

1 éfilé matsydn ivd’

palcshyan

durbaldn balavattardh'

, If the king did not indefatigably

punish those worthy of punishment, then the stronger

would roastthe weak on spits.

“Buthere follow four poten

tials, allstanding in the same relation,which are nevertheless

explained by the Scholiast by conditionals ; vi z . adydt.

would eat,"

byakhddishyal avalihydt would lick, byavdlékshyat sydt, would be ,

"

byabhavishyat andpravartéta ,

would become,"byprdvartishyat. In the eighth book of

the Mahfi Eh . (SI. 1 6 1 4) we read, vrijinari hi bhacét kit'

i chid

yadi karaasya pdrthiva I ml”smd i hy astragai divydni prddd

syat bhrigunandanah'

, If anyfault attached to K arnas, 0

Prince, the son of Bhriguwould not have given him the

heavenlyweapons.

“The conditional occurs as well in the

antecedent as in the relative sentence , and, in fact, the first

time in the sense of the pluperfect conjunctive, l. c. 81 . 709,

nachéd arakshishya*

imafi janam bhaydd dvishadbhir évam

For arakshishyas on accountof the 6following,

FORMAT ION OF THE MOODS . 979

balibhir prap zditam I tathd bhavishyad dvishatdm pramddanam

If thou hadst not freed from danger this band assailed

bypowerful fiends, then theywould have been the joyof

their enem ies. Thus, in the Naishadha- Char. 4 . 88, api

se vajram addsyata chét {add tvadishubhir ryadalishyad asdv

ap i ,“If he (Brahma) had given also the thunderbolt(to

thee, the God of love, as a mark), so would even this havebeen rent in twain (have been split) bythydarts.

Remark—In Zend I know of no instance of the con

ditional ; some resemblance to it, however, may be traced

in the form Gwsswcfix >m 7hfravacsyanm. atthe end of the

44th Ha of the Iz eschné (V . S . p. which Anquetil

translates“

je parle cla iremewt. I consider this form to be

the first person of the auxiliary future, wh ich, in the

absence of examples, I formerly thoughtmust end in yémi

(see The fact, thatthe firstperson of the future is

veryfrequentlyreplaced bythat of the imperative, is per

haps the reason of the rare occurrence of the form er. If,

however, I am right in explaining the form fravacsyafim

as the first person of the future, ithas lostthe i of the ter

m ination ; as in Prakrit, where, except in the form in

him i (see the term ination m i of the future auxiliaryhas everywhere dropped the i , whereby, however, the

preceding a has been shortened ; hence, e. g. gmsumarissari,

“I will call to m ind, corresponding to the

Sanscrit smarishydmi . In Zend, through the loss ofthe final

i an occasion also for the mutation of the d preceding the mto 6 has disappeared ; the term ination dm , however, must,according to 6 1 become 93

1 arim ; thus, gwgw csx >>xs7h

fravacsyanm =—Sanscritm tfitp mvakshydmi . In the same

Ha, at the end of which occurs the form Gwsswcfim m fi

fravacsyafim, occurs also six times the form fravacsyd (V. S.

p. which Anquetil, in like manner, translates by“

je parle

cla irement or“

je vous parle cla iremm t. Then follow

the words which Zoroaster (not Ormuz d, as Anqueti l

980 VERBS .

supposes) speaks. If, however, fravacryd is really a first

person, it must still belong to the future only; and it

would then, in thi s form , as compared with that in arim , be

an abbreviation sim ilar to that of the dual case - term ina

tion bye—for which, in accordance with the Sanscritbayam,

we should expect byai im—and to thatof the fem inine pro

nom inal locative termination a (see for the Sanscrit

dm . The occurrence infravacsyd of a long a is in agree

ment with the fact that, in the Ha above mentioned,

particularlyatthe end of a word, 6 is found for an origi

nally short a ; e. g. in m ete ?» im am, hear ye .

"If,

however, m QM m mAfravacsyd is notthe firstperson of

the future , it can onlybe taken as the second person of the

future imperative, and mustthen be regarded as a com

mand addressed byOrmuz d to Zoroaster.

D ER IVATIVE VE RBS .

732 . The appellation derivative verbs strictlybelongsonlyto denom inatives for passives, causals, desideratives,and intensives, stand quite as near the root as the ten

classes of the so- called prim itive verbs, excepting the secondclass (see 5. which latter maybe regarded as the

base - form of all the rest. The passive, also, is identical

in form with the m iddle of the fourth class, and the causal

with the tenth class while that form of the intensive whichjoins the personal term inations direct to the root is dis

tinguished from the third class onlybythe strengthening of

the syllable of reduplication, and in thatthis extends also to

the universaltenses. And here we must observe thatthetenth class also extends a partof its class character to theuniversal tenses. We m ight—as the pasq

’

ve agrees withthe middle of the fourth class, and the causalwith the tenthclass—reckon in all twelve classes of verbs ; so that, perhaps, the intensives would fall under the eleventh class, andthe desiderativesunder the twelfth. It is, however, certain

PASSIVES . 98 1

that the verbs called derivative in idea, and as regards

their origin, must be classed under those which express

only the simple verbal notion along with the relations of

person, time, and mood ; and must also be regarded as

later, and originating in the first place from these latter.

For before there could exist a verb signifying, e. g.

I cause to hear,"or

“I wish to hear,

”or I am heard,

there must have existed one more simple with the mean

ing I hear ; and though m érdvaydmi , éus'

rusltdmi ,

and s'

rt'

iyé, maybe derived from the root itself, am , more

readilythan from sf iadm i.“I hear,

"or its theme ayina (a

contracted form ofswan), still s’

rugmmaystand as the base

form from which the so called derivative and secondaryverbs have proceeded, by the suppression of the class

syllable mi before the characteristic affix of the derivative

base referred to ; just as the causal bases, when passivesare formed from them , lose their characteristic affix aybefore the passive character ya as, e. g. , from irde- aya - tt

'

,

he causes to hear," comes s

'

rdv-ya - té (for érdv- ay-

yaté),he is made to hear. According to this scheme the

derivative verbs have , in pointof fact, onlythe bare. rootatbottom as formative material butthe sole reason ofthis is,that from the prim itive verbs, whose offspring theyare,

all ingredients are removed which do not belong to the

expression of the radical idea, in order thatthe derivativeform should not be too unwieldy; just as certa in compa

ratives and superlatives spring, not from the full base of

the positive, but from it abbreviated bythe removal of theformative suffix (see 2 98 . pp. 395,

733 . Letus now consider the formation of derivative

verbs severally, beginning with the passives. These inSanscrit, in the special tenses, annex the syllable 1 : ya to

the root, and join thereto the personal term inations of

the m iddle . The conjugation agrees exactly with the

m iddle of the fourth class (see so that in the present,

982 m ass.

in the example given atp. 696, we have onlyto annex the

m iddle term inations (see in the place Of the active.

I give belowthe 3d per. sing. and pl. with the correspondingpersons of the m iddle (for the class peculiarities of which

refer to of the roots budh, Cl. 1 , to know (Goth.

Qua - bud, to command tud, Cl. 6, to push (Lat. tad,tundo); vas, Cl. 2 , to dress oneself (Goth . vasya , I put

on caus. edsaydm i) bhar (bhg'i , see Cl. 3, to

bear ; yuj, Cl. 7, to bind"

(Lat. jug, Gr. (try); star (sto

ri ,

sffi , see p. 680. Note) Cl. 5, to spread,“

to deck prt'

,

Cl. 9, to gladden, to love (Goth . frigd, I love

31) PER . SINGULAR . 31) PER . PLURAL.

ROOT . PASSIVE . i f I DDLE . PASSIVE . DI IDDLE .

udh, Cl. 1 . budh-

ya- té, bddh- a - té . budh-

ya—alé, bddh- a - ‘nié .

ad, Cl. 6, tud -

ya- té, tud- a - té. tud - ya - até, tud- a - nlé.

Cl. 2 , vac-

ya - té, vac- (é . vas-ya - nlé, vac- cute.

1

ar (bhr), Cl. 3, bhri -ya- fé. bibhri - (é. Him-

3104 1 13? bibh'r- alé.

l

g'

, C]. 7, yuj-

ya - fé, yank- (é. yuj-ya - até, yuTIj- alél

ar (stf i), Cl. 5, slar- ya - té, sfri - au- lé. .111c1r-

3/ a- 11té,

2stri - nu- alé .

’

Cl. 9, prf-

ya- té. prf

-n- té. prz'- ya - nlé, mi - gw- té.

‘

See 5. 459 .

2 Roots in ar, which in the pure or lightforms con

tractthis syllable to ri,when onlya single consonantprecedes the radical

vowel, exhibitthe syllable ri before the passive characterya , which ri

I consider to be a transposition of if , and the latter a weakening of the

Old form ar, which has remained after a double consonant; hence ,

star-ya té corresponding to bhri-ya- té . W ith regard to the protection

which two combined consonants afi'

ord to the primitive syllable or, com

pm the circumstance, that the imperative termination hi (from dhi)

remains in verbs of the 5th class after two combined consonants, but

cannot be supported by a single consonant; thus, china,

collect,”

Opposed to dpnuhi, Obtain (see Bythis principle I would also

explainthe factthat, theLatinrootatt‘

i (=SanscritF IT stht'

i,

to stand

has, almostin everycase, preserved the original length of the base- vowel

in Opposition to dd (=Sanscritdd). The transposition of fitt\bhir to

See

984 VERB S .

s'

nayaéta, let him be washed, or washhimself (see . p. 957, Note). In support of the view, that

the formsm ayaauha and s’

nayaéta maybe taken as passives

with a reflexive signification, itmay here also be adduced

that in Old Persian a sim ilar phenomenon occurs ; vi z . in

ne ? %-

f patipayanvd’

(Beh . IV.

which Benfey, in myopinion rightly, renders guard thyself (Rawlinson by

“te expeditum habe and refers to the

SanscritrootInpd (with the prepositionpati =prati ,) which,therefore, in agreementwith the Zend, has shortened the

long 6 before the passive characte r.

735. If, with the Indian Grammarians, we regard the

Sanscritjdyé (irregular forjaugé)“I am born,

"as a m iddle

of the fourth class (see then the correspondingZend verb maybe explained in the same manner. As, how

ever, the meaning to be born is strictly passive, and

the syllable ya in the form above mentioned as the passive character,

and the whole as a by-no- means- surprising change of the passive into a

reflexive or m iddle meaning, while in Greek, Gothic, Latin, Lithuanian,and Sclavonic, the reverse is the case. If the form squg sjjxtu/nidhayt

’nti, ils deposent,

”which Burnouf has mentioned atp . 36 1

, and

which I amunable to quote, be onlya differentreading Of the nidhayéinté

mentioned above in the lithographed manuscript, I would also then re

cognise in ita passive, and dtaw attention to the fact, thatin Sanscrit

also, in the passive, the active term inations notuncommonlytake the

place Of the m iddle, so thatthe passive relation is to be discerned onlyin

the syllable ya (see Lesser SanscritGram .,2 d Edit. If, how

ever,we take nidhayt

'nti as active, we must then explain they laydown

”in the sense of one lays down,

”and consider naré irista as the

accusative (see p. Constructions of this kind, as far as I know, are

notconfirmed byunmi stakeable forms,and I therefore prefer explaining

the verb as passive .

Rawlinson and Benfeyread patipayuwc‘

i I doubtnot, however, thatthe a inherentin 3) mustbe here read in conjunctionwith it. The

terminationuvd, for have (euphonic for had), corresponds to the Sanscritimperative terminationwe .

PASSIVE S . 85

the form of the m iddle of the fourth Class is identical with

that of the passive, I prefer to explain in both languagesthe forms with passive signification as reallypassives ; and

I adopt for the Sanscrit a m iddle jan of the fourth Class, a

kind of deponentwith the active meaning to bring forth,of which, however, but few examples occur, as, e.g . , Ramay.

ed. Sch]. I . 2 7. 3 . 31 m putragt vy- ajdyata , she bore a

son"

(with the prep. vi). The Zend root [A15 z an, the

passive of which frequentlyoccurs in combination with the

preposition as) us (= Sanscrit“

a?! at), likewise rejects thefinal 11 before the passive character ya : the preceding a ,

however, is notlengthened, or the long a, which had beenintroduced, is aga in shortened ; wh ich cannot surprise us,

as from the firstthe long a atthe end of a rootis shortenedbefore the passive

a“ya . Hence, e. g. ,, aq

ofimuxsx ) as

- z ayéinlé,“theyare born,

”a"corresponds exactlyto the before - men

tioned nidhayéinlé Of the imperfect we find the

second and third person singular ; vi z . xwgusgxgxssc)

ui az ayaaha , thou wastborn,

“

(see 466. and and

fi z ayata, he was born"

.l'

736. As the m iddle of Sanscritverbs of the fourth Classis identical in form , and, as I believe, in origin also, withthe passive, and therefore fa} mriyé, morior,

"felt? mriyalé,

moritur,“mayalso stand for the passive, itmay here be

remarked, that the corresponding verb in Zend, the con

junctive of which, ma iryditi , frequently occurs (Vendidad

it Vend S ., p. 136, A17»)

any ”333873! ”awry ”61 14 101112 3

”pa nsflsx l .upflqos: xfxsoxfdsq fi qcfi u

1033x154 1 ) dvaét'

bya hacha

nt'rt'bya dva nara uéz ayé inté mithwana s’

triclta nairyaiclta , duobus at

kominibus duo homine: nascuntur, par, feminaque masque.”

Anquetil

(p . translates de deux hommes naquirentdear hammer distingués, to

male s’

étantuni ti la femelle.

”

"

tVend. S., p. 39, ya ; be(so I read for in

. he) pathré usz ayata,“that

a sonwas born to him .

986 VEBBS .

Sade, p. 2 4 has replaced the m iddle termination by the

active, as also in Sanscritthe active term ination frequentlytakesthe place ofthe m iddle in acknowledged passives. The

abovementioned mairyditi is so far older than the corresponding Sanscritverb, in thatithas experienced neither thetransposition of if to ri mentioned at 733. Note 2 . (mri

guié. like bhri-

yaté)nor the weakening of a to i, butma iryditi

moriatur stands for maiyditi , in consequence of the assi

m ilative power of the 3, (see 5. and affords us a new

proof of the unoriginalityof the SanscritV .

ri ; and shewsthat in Sanscritnotmri , butmar, is the true root, whencecomes, in Latin, mm , which presents to us in the io, in, of

morior, moriuntur. a fine remnant of the Sanscrit passivecharacterya 1 1. Compare in inmor- ia- nturwith the Sanscrit

ya of mri—ya - nté. The conjunctive mor- ia - r, mor- ia- ris, gives

us still more exactlythe character of the Sanscritpassive,onlythathere the Latin 6 appears long, inasmuch as ithas

absorbed the modal exponent i . The Lithuanian also has.

in the said verb, preserved the passive character, which wehave already recognised in gemmu from gem

-ya,

I am born, gim-yau, I was born.

“So we have m ir

iau, I died, while the present mir—sz tu, I am dying,“

belongs to a different conjugational form . In Latin, too,

maybe mentioned jio as a remnant of the old passive . I

divide the word thus,f- io, and regard it as an abbreviationof fu- io, (just as in Old Persian b—iyi

’

l‘

let him be

Sanscrit bhtiydt), and therefore analogous to the Sanscrit

TheGothic alsopresentsa remarkablyanalogous form tothe Sanscrit

jet-yé, I am born,” in the isolated form m . kiyanata,“enatum

”

(Luc.

viii . which presupposes in the present its- hiya,“chasm

,

"and there

fore a simple verb,ki -ya , naaeor,

”for kin-ya, as in Sanscrit,jdeyé for

janyé .

1‘

Euphonic for hyd, asyunites veryoftenwith a pmeeding consonant

withouta preceding i .

PASSIVES . 987

bhfiyé'

, exclusive of the m iddle personal term ination of the

Sanscrit. Compare, therefore, f - iw with bht'

i- ya- nté, f - ie- t

with bhz'i -yé- ta, f - ié—mus with bht'i- yé- mahi . As the Sanscrit

passive is frequentlyused impersonally in expressions like

W irdyotom,

“let itbe heard,

“instead of hear thou,

"

mm dsyatdm, let it be placed,"

Wemamré.“let it be

dead,”I will also here further Observe, that in Georgie,

whose grammatical relations with Sanscrit I have elsewhere

pointed outi , such modes of expression are verycommon,

vi z . in the verbs or tenses called by Brosset indirect,"

whose element of formation, in or ie, presents an num is

takeable resemblance to the passive character ; compare,

e. g. ,35005031 m—gon- ia . it is thoughtbyme (= Sanscrit

W 111 17? mayd jiid - ya - té, it is known by me for“I

th ink,” 3330335633305 shé- mi - qwareb

—ia , it was loved byme I had loved (see

“The Caucasian members, &c. ,

p. Butthe common Georgie passive also, where it isretained, corresponds, in its principle of formation, to the

here mentioned 1 : ya , and most clearlyin the third person

plural, e. g. , in 330336533055 she- i - qwarebian, omanlar,

answering to the active 33033553335 she- i - qwareben,

amant,”the term ination of which, in its abbreviation,

corresponds to our German forms, as lieben (from liebent)l. c . p. 56.

737. Originally the Sanscrit passive character ya may

perhaps have extended over the universal tenses ; and in

roots ending in d or a diphthong I think, even in the pre

4‘ The passive of 511 12 to be, mustbe looked for as impersonal onlyin

the 3d per. sing. ,aswe also find the ueut. of the part. fut. pass. in con

structions of this k ind ; 0. 9 . (Hit. ed. Bonn. pp. 17. tavd’

nucbaréna

mayd bhavitavyam,

“mine is itto be thyattendant—“I mustbe thy

attendant. The idea “to be"is expressed bythe active of 5116, as

bhavdmi means aswell “I become, as“I am.

i The CaucasianmembersOf the Indo European familyof languages.3 s 2

988 VERES .

sent state of the language, I recognise a remnant of it,

vi z . in the y, which, in the aorist, the two futures, the

precative, and the conditional, precedes the conjunctivevowel i ; e. g. , in addyishi .

“I was given,

"ddyitdhé and

ddyishyé.“I shall be given, ddyishfya , may I be given,

addyishyé. I m ight be given.

“I am led to this view

principally bythe circumstance, that that form of the in

tensive which, 01 1 accountof its passive form and active sig

nification, I term deponent, reta ins the passive character inthe said tenses and moods after vowels other than a ; hence,e. g.

, achéchzil/ ishi ,“I collected,

”chéchi

'

yildhé, chéclu‘

yishbyé,

I will collect,"from f! chi

f

If the “Ity occurred only

after 1 11 d, it m ight be assumed, as was formerly myOpinion, to be a mere euphonic insertion (see smaller

SanscritGram . as. e. g. , in t1m yd- y- ia , going,"

from yd with the suffix in. The reduplicated preterite of

the passive is in all verbs, like the corresponding tense in

Greek, exactly like that of the m iddle ; so that, e. g. , z gidadris

'

é signifies, as m iddle, I or he saw,

”and as passive,

I or he was seen.

"Moreover, the reduplicated preterite

or perfect is thatone of the universaltenses of the passive ,

which, with the exception of the third person singular of

the aorist, is the only one in common use . I cannot re

collectto have seen in anyauthor other universal tenses, orother persons than the third singular of the aoristxl

Before the yOf the passive character i and uare lengthened, asgene

rallytheyexerts a lengthening power over i and upreceding it, except

when the iyis onlya euphonic developementOf i or i , as, e. g. ,in bhiyac,

“timoris

,

”from NIH - as. Observe, with respect to the lengthening in

fluence of the Sanscrit tr, thatin Latin alsoj within a word alone pro

duces for itself length byposition.

‘

I'

This ends in i, and wants the personal sign, e. g. ,ajani ,

“he was

born. Inthis i might be recognised a contraction of the passive cha

racter 1: ya to this view,however

,are opposed forms like addyi ,

“he

W’

al

PASSIVES . 989

738. With respectto the origin of the passive character1 !ya, a .very satisfactory explanation, I think, is given of

itbySirG. Haughton,

“wherein he mentions thatin Bengali

and Hindt'

i stani the passive relation is expressed by an

auxiliary verb, which signifies to go": m 1 jdnd (from

ydnd, see in Hindt'

tsttim’

, and 1 11 yd in Bengali ; in the

latter, e. y. , 1 3 mg [card ydi signifies I am made, as it

were I go in making.

"Now in Sanscritboth { i and 1 11

yd, Class 2 , signify“to go but of these itappears best

to keep to the latter root, which, in Bengali, also expresses

the passive relation : and I believe that the shortening of

the syllable 1 11 yd to‘

Il ya is to be ascribed to the rootbeingburthened bycomposition, which rendered a dim inution of

the weight of the auxiliaryverb desirable . The a of the

passive ya is therefore radical, and not, as in the first and

sixth Class, 8. conjugational affix : it follows, however, theanalogyof the class syllable a , just as, according to 508

the root an sthd, to stand,”after its abbreviation to F!

stha subjects its final a to the analogyof verbs of the first

and sixth Class. Through the m iddle term inations com

bined with the appended auxiliaryverb, and expressing the

reflexive relation, the auxiliarykeeps the meaning to go

oneself“

; and while the Bengali kard ydi signifies simplyI go in making,

”the Sanscrit composite implies more,

vi z . I go (betake) myself in making.

” Compare the

Latin constructions like amatum iri , to be gone in love“

remark, also, eeneo in opposition to rendo as also the ex

pressions of such common occurrence in Sanscrit, like to

was given, because here y is the passive expression : the however,

mostprobablyis identicalwith that of addy- i - shi, I was given,”addy

i - shma , we were given adt‘

iyi, therefore, would be an abbreviation Of

addyishta .

In his edition of Manu, B . I . p. 32 9, and in his Bengali Grammar,

pp. 68 and 95 .

990 VEBBS .

u

go in joy, to go in anger, for to be rejoiced,“

to

be angered we even find grahaaati samupdgamat he

went in sei z ure, for“he was seiz ed,

"

in the Rfim . (of

Schl. I. i .

CAUSALs.

739. The Sanscrit and Zend causal is, in its formati vecharacter, identicalwith that ofthe verbs ofthe tenth Class

(see In explanation of the affix v q ay, in the

special tenses w aya , the Sanscrit furnishes the roots 1 i ,

to go, and Q i'

,

“to wish,

" “to demand,

” “to pray

“

from both arises, byGuna, before vowels we ay, and in

combination with the character of the firstClass, 1m aya .

The meaning to wish," “

to demand, appears, perhaps,adapted to represent the secondary notion of the causalverbs, in which the subject completes the action, not bythe deed, butbythe will : thus: e. g. , kdraydm i , I cause to

make,“would properlymean I require the making,

”whe

ther itwere intended that anyone made .“or anything

was made . Butif the causal character springs from a rootwhich originallysignifies to go,

”we must then obser v

e,

that in Sanscrit several verbs of motion signify also“to make

“

; e. g. , védaydmi m ight properly signify“I

make to know.

”

740. Although, as has been remarked (p. all Ger

man weak verbs are based on the Sanscrittenth Class, stillthatform alone, which has mosttrulypreserved the Sanscritaya , vi z . that which in Gothic, in the lstper. sing. pres. ,

term inates inya (Grimm'

s firstweak conjugation), isused inthe formation of causal verbs, or of transitive from intran

sitive verbs, butnot in such a manner thatthe language,like the Sanscrit, could form a causal from everyprim itive

verb, but rather so thatitis contentwith those handed downfrom Old time . These in Gothic, agree with the Sanscritcausals also in this pomt, that the radical vowel always

appears in the strongest form thatthe prim itive verb has

992 VERBs.

pret. ar- ra is, pl. ar—risum); hna ivya, I lower, from the

roothniv (kwiva , I bow myself,”

prct. haai v. pl. hnivum).So in Sanscrit, e. g. , védaydmi é= a i) I make to know,

Zend. Astojjxsuxsb paédhayém i'

. from rid, to know.

Our new H igh German causal remains, such as sei z e,

place."lege, lay,

"sen/cc, sink,

”are, by reason of ah

breviations of their endings, no longer to be distinguishedfrom their prim itives, and furnish a remarkable pl

'

oof of a

corruption of form graduallyreaching a point where it

becomes imperceptible. Without the fortunate preserva

tion of Gothic forms like salya , and other formations of

the Old German dialects, corresponding more or less, it

would have been impossible to trace in the e of seiz e a re

lation to the Sanscrit aydmi of sddaydmi, and hence an

agreement in the principle of formation of the German and

Sanscrit causals. So earlyas the Old German the causal

character appears much defaced ; e. g. , in nerent, alunt

(vivere fucinaf)to be found in Notker, for uerianf, Gothic

nasyand lego“

pane,"for legio. legiu, Gothi c layyu; layent,

“

pamml,”for legianf , Gothic lugyaml, l. c.

74 1 . In Old Sclavonic that conjugation corresponds inwhich we, in 505 have recognised the Sanscrittenth Class :ittherefore corresponds also to the Indo- Germanic causalformation : italso contains the verbs which bytheir signification alone rank as causals. and to which, as prim itive, corresponds a non- causal or intransitive verb. In

accordance with the Sanscrit- Gothic principle noticed in the

preceding these casual verbs exhibita heavier vowel thanthe prim itive. or theycontain a vowel, while the prim itivehas lost its radical vowel. Thus, as in Sanscrit, from the

ItOften occurs in combination with the prep. ni

nivaédhayémi, according to Anquetil,“jep rie ;

”according toNeriosengh,

m 5: nimantraydmi, i . e. I summon (see Burnouf, Yacna, p.

1Vith regard tothe foundation of the d of the term ination émi see p . 963,

Note.

CAUSALS . 993

root mar. to die (in its abbreviated form , 1 , whichGrammarians regard as the prim itive), comes the causalmdraydm i .

“I kill.

“ “I make to die

“

; so in Sclavonic,

from the radically abbreviated mgXi mrti,“I die,

"comes

a causal, M0313. moryzi,“I cause to die

"

(Dobr. p.

which perhaps no longer adm its of citation inOld Sclavonic,

but is confirmed bythe Russian MOpro moryd. The same

is the case with saewrn ear- i - ti . to cook"

(trans), com

pared with ng'

a vr-

ye- tt

'

(intrans), with Bxi anfrn bdd- i - ti ,

to wake ,“compared with 11 1 11,t bhd-

yeti ,

“to awake

“

(Sanscritbodltaydmi, I wake, budhyé,“I For

the e of the prim itive the causal receives the heavier o ;

hence, e. g. , noaoaiwrn po- Iosch- i - ti . to lay. compared

with Asika'ru lesch-

a- ti, to lie .

”The a Of sad- i - ti , to

plant,”

properly to set, corresponds to the Sanscritd of

add- ayd- m i (Goth . satya , I while the 1; ye of warm

ayes- ti , to place oneself (euphon. for syed- li . see

has probablyfirstweakened the short a of the root to e,

and then (as is commonlythe case in Sclav.)prefixed a y.

Compare the Lithuanian sédm i ,“I sit,

“answering to sodim

‘

t,

“I plant,

”with the remark thatthe Lithuanian a frequently

supplies the place of the long d, as, e.y. , in the nom . pl. of

fem inine bases in a (asz wos= Sanscrit as’

vds, the mares

Here mayalso be noticed the Irish suidiuyha im ,

“I set,

plant“

(answering to suidlu’

m.

“I where git, as

generallyhappens in the Irish causal verbs, represents the

Sanscrity (compare p. 1 10, and Pictet, pp. 1 48, Of

Sclavonic causals notice also gM T nT n rast- i - ti . to increase ,"

properly, to make to grow, (rast- ye- lz’

. to

SanscritvarrI/i ayt‘

imi,Zend raré

'

dayémi, I make to grow," “ 1 ih

crease .

”T he Sclavonic verb has retained the affix t

,whence the radical

d mustbecome s. As, however, the prim itive verb had alreadyan a, an

augmentation of the vowel in the causalwas impossible . Compare also

the Sanscritrid/1 (from ardh),“to grow,

”which is probablyan abbrevia

tion of vardlt.

994 vsass.

sacrum eyes- i - ti to suspend. (cis- ye- ti , to na -

po

i - ti , to give to drink (no prep. , p i- ti , to drink pO

- ko

i - ti , to quiet, (pa- chi - ti, to As the Sclavonic

as ye is the usual representative of the Sanscrit z e of

(see 2 55. so isthe vowel relation between vyes- i - ti , to

suspend, and the root s ic, to hang,”like that of the

Sanscriteds- aydmi, I make to enter,“to visdmi , I go in.

”

The Sclavonic rootvis is also probably identical with the

Sanscritsis, which, in combination with the prep. fatm’

in the causal, signifies, among other things. to adjoin,

“

to annex,”and brings us, therefore, verynear the sig

nification of the Sclavonic causal, vi z . to suspend,”as

generallythe Sclavonic and Sanscrit roots meet one ano

ther in the idea of approaching (WM dais means

to approach,“m upavis, to place oneself The

formal relation of (na)poiti, to give to drink,”to p iti . to

drink, cannot be correctlymeasured without taking in

the Sanscrit; for from a S clavonic pointof view itwould

seem as if poiti had arisen from p iti bythe insertion of

an a, while, in fact, the O of poiti rests on the Sanscrit dof the root pd, to which corresponds the Greek to of mil- Gt,

we'

trwxa , and the o of «21160417, as also the Latin 6 of pd- lum,

pd- lurus, and the Old Prussian no ofpuo

—lon, to drink”: the

i of piti is based, like the 7 of the Greek a il- 61 , m'

vw, on the

weakening which has already occurred in Sanscrit of pd

to p i”, whence the passive p i

-

yalé, bibitur,"the perf. pass.

part. p i- ta - s. drunken,

"and the gerund pi

- trd, havingdrunk .

“The Sclavonic causal has, according to the gene

ral principle, preserved in pa the heavier vowel of the

root, and thatwhich stands nearer to the original d. The

relation of po- lcoili , to quiet (po- ko- i - ti, pa to

po- chi - ti , to rest,

”is, however, of a different kind. For

if, as I doubt not, Miklosich is right (Radices linguaSclav. p. 36) in comparing the Sclavonic root 1m chi with theSanscrit it(from H), to lie,

"to sleep,

“itmustthen be

CAUSALS . 995

Observed that the sai d Sanscrit root, as also the kindred

Greek rootxe'

t‘

pat, assumes an irregularGuna augment,whichextendsthroughout, and which appears inGreek either in theform of net, or in thatof (xoc

'

m, K ai- Tog, xoma’

w,

To the latter form corresponds the Sclavonic Ito of po- ko- i - ti,

where, however, the radical vowel is lost, for the followingi is the expression of the causal relation.

742 . The form i , in which, in Old Sclavonic, the causal

character for the most part appears, corresponds exactlyto the form into which, in Gothic, the causal ya contractsitself before the appended auxiliaryverb of the preterite

(see and before the suffix Of the pass. participle ;therefore, aswe have inGothic, sat- i - da,

“I placed,

"

sat- i - th’

- s,

placed"

(Gen. sat- i - di - s); so in Sclavonic, sad- i - ti ,“

plan

tare,“sad- i - ly,

“

plantat,”sad- i - shi ,

“

plantas,”sad- i - m,

“

plan

tamus,"sad- i - te,

“

plantatisf’

In the 1stper. sing. and 3d per.

pl. of the pres. 13. yr? (from yo- m), IAT b yaty(from yanty), corresponds to the Gothic ya , yand, Sanscrit ayd

- m i, aya- nti ,

provided that euphonic laws do not introduce an alteration,

as is the case, e.g. . in saschdt’

i for sadyt'

i. In the im

perative (see the causal character is - lostin the moodexponent; hence sadi,

“

planters,” “

plantet”

(Goth . satya is,

sadyem,

“

plantemus, CAA'BTEsadyefe,

“

plantetis”

(Goth . satya ima , satyaith), as nesi ,“ferns," “feret.” With regardto the preterite of the Old Sclavonic causal, correspondingto the Sanscrit aorist see where, however, the i of

B iYi M Ix baid- i - ch,“I did wake,

” corresponds, not to the

Sanscrit i of abddh- i - sham , I did know, but, as has

already been remarked to the exponent of the

causal relation ; while in Sanscrit the aorist is, with the

exception of the precative active corresponding to the

Greek aoristOptative, the sole tense in which the Sanscritdivests itself of the character aya (in the universal tenses

ay). As, however, all causals assume the reduplicatedform of the aorist(see so the incumbrance of the

996 VERBS .

root bythe reduplication, combined with the augment, is

perhaps the reason of the loss of the causal character :

perhaps even the reduplication is held as compensating forthe causal expression, justas, in Latin, sisto, opposed to the

unreduplicated and intransitive sto. or as in gigno==Sanscrit

jajanmi , I beget, opposed to w ear from gnaseor.

743. The Lithuanian veryseldom uses for the formation of

causals from primitive verbs the forms contrasted in 506.

with the Sanscrit w aya . The only examples which

occur to me are z'

indau, I cause to suck,"from f indu,

I suck, and grdu- yu,

“I pull down (make to fall in) a

house , from grainy- u,

“I fall in like a house . The to of

yrdw- uappears to be onlya developement from the d, as,

in Sanscrit, forms like babhtiva , I was,“

he was, frombhti . If we take grt

'

i as the root, the causal form grdu- yu

corresponds in its vowel incrementto Sanscrit causals likebhdv- ayd- m i , I make to be,

" “I bring into existence ,

“

from bht’

i, to be.

"The usual term ination of Lithuanian

causals is inu(pl. inc - me), bywhich , as in Sanscritbyaya, are

formed denom inatives also, as e.y. , iIg- inu,

“I make long,

”

a denom inative causal from ilga- s, long.

“The n of these

form s, in departure from that mentioned above

extends over all tenses and moods, as well as to the parti

ciples and the infinitive ; for I cannot agree with M ielcke

(p. 98. in considering it to be a deviation from thisrule , that before 3 (according to Sanscrit principles) it

passes into the weakened nasal sound, which I express,

like the Sanscritanusvdra , byti (see thus, e.y. , Iaupsiti- su, I will praise.

744 . T he Lithuanian formations in inu agree with theSanscrit, Zend, German, and Sclavonic causal verbs in this,thattheylove a heavyvowel in the root; so thatmanyhave

preserved an original 0 , while the primitive has corrupted

that vowel to i or c ; whence theyappear to us exactly in

the light of the German Ablaut system (see p. 38, Note).

CAUSALS . 997

Thus, as e. g. , in Gothic, to the intransitive site. I sit

(which is a weakened form from sale), corresponds a pre

terite sat, and a causal satya , I place so in Lithuanian, to

the neuter verb m irsz tu, I die ,”answers a causal marina,

I cause to die ”

(Scr. mdraydmi , Sclav. moryz'

i) and to the

gem- ma (from gem

- ya), I am born,

”represented above

as passive, corresponds a causal ga- minu, I beget.

”

The following are causals, with a answering to the e of

the corresponding intra nsitive : gadinu,“I ruin,

”kill,

opposed to gendu, nagendu,“I am ruined

“

; lean/time, I vex,

Opposed to ke nchiu,“I suffer.

”In the Lithuanian causals

also, in place ofthe organic a . o is found answering to the e of

the intransitive (as in Sclav. , for example, in sodina,

I plant,”

answering to sidmi , I sit.” There is much

that is interesting in the vowel relation of pa- klaidim

‘

t, I

m islead.”

bring into error,"to pa

- klystu, I m islead myself (euphon. for pa

- klyd—tu), for the yis, in pronunciation,

identical with i ; so pa- kla idinu, in respect to its Guna

form , corresponds verywell to the Goth ic causals like

hna ivya, I humble,”and Sanscrit, as védaydmi (= va ida

ydm i), I make to know”

(see 109 The same is the

case with at- ga iwinu, I quicken (properly I make to

live, compare gywas, living,“Sanscrit jt

’

v, to live

the prim itive of which, I recover myself,”

become freshagain,

”lively,

”is probablyan abbreviation of at- giugit

‘

t

wa idinii~s,“I shewmyself (see contains a stronger

Guna vowel than weiz dmi , I see , and corresponds to thejust- mentioned Sanscrit causal védaydmi . An example of

the manner in which a Lithuanian causal has, just like itscorresponding intransitive , corrupted an original a to e, is

deyinu,“are,

”answering to the intransitive (18914

”5,

“M ike.

“

In Sanscrit the fourth Class of the root dah (dahydmi ardea

represents the intransitive meaning, and the firstClass (dahdm i“uro

the transitive On the latter is based the i rish dugha im uro.

”

998 VEBBS .

745. The circumstance thatthe Lithuanian formation inc

(lstper. sing. inu), like the Sanscritaya, forms aswellcausalsas denom inatives, and that the causals so formed, like the

Sanscrit, German, and Sclavonic, prefer a powerful radicalvowel, gives us ground, (in variance from the assertion set

forth atthe end of 495 . which I gladlyretract), for seekingto compare the Lithuanian inc and Sanscritaya . We m ight

in the i of ina recognise the weakened form of an originala , as it appears also in the forms mentioned at 506. in

iyu, iya . T he n, then, as semi - vowels are easily inter

changed, mustbe held to be a corruption of ity“

. The i .

however, of ina , inu, as in the forms in in, plural i - me

(myl- i - me, we love m ight correspond to the San

scrity of the derivative aya ; so that, e.y. , the syllable in

of sod - ia - ti . to plant,”would be identical with the i of the

Sclavonic sad- i - li of the same meaning, and with the Gothici of sat- i - ta , I placed,

”

(compare The n of the

Lithuanian form would then be anunorganic affix, like a rindwhich has grown upon the vowel term ination of the verbal

theme , according to the same principle bywhich, in German, so manynom inal bases have received the affix of n ;

so that, e. g. , to the Sanscritbase vidhavd. a widow“

(atthe same time a nom inative, see to the Latin vidua.

and Sclavonic vdova , corresponds a Gothic base eiduvdn

(Nom . m6, and to the Sanscrit fem inine participialbases in anti respond Gothic bases in andeia (Nom . andei).If this view be taken, we mustthen assume thatthe verbaltheme of sodi (Sanscrit sddaya), extended to sodiu, has taken

up the character of the SanscritfirstconjugationalClass, and

See 2 0. As regards the transition of theyinto another liquid, re

mark the relation Of the German Leber (labial for guttural, as in GreekMap, see Graff, I I . p. 80) to the Sanscrityakrit(fromyakart)and Latin

jacur. W ith respectto the transition of I to n, Observe, e. g . , the relation

of the Doric fivdov tomay.

1000 VEB B S .

from the second to the first conjugation. In Latin, there

fore, the three verbs sido, sedco, and sedo, can only be re

garded as three kindred verbs, which, each in its own way,

are referable to the Sanscrit root sad. To the Sanscrit

trdsaydmi , (Prakr. tdsémi), I make to tremble,”

to fear,”

I terrify, corresponds terreo by assim ilation for lerseo,

from treseo. The fourth conjugation presents sdp io as a

form fairlyanalogous to the Sanscrit causal svdpaydmi, I

make to sleep, (svap im i, I sleep, irregular for smpm i),Old Northern svep ium,

“sop imus,

”

(singular srep), Old H ighGerman ia - suep iu, Russianythm a alo usyplayu

“. The causal

notion, however, is lost in this sdp io also, as there is nointransitive sdpo of the third conjugation corresponding to

itas a pointof departure . The German dialects have , in

deed, preserved the prim itive (Old H igh German sldfu).but ithas become estranged from the causal bythe ex

change of the sem i - vowel v for I (see In Russian,

onthe other hand, emuo splyu, I sleep (euphonic for spyu),corresponds, as verb of the Sanscritfourth Class (seeto the causative u-

syplayu (u preposition), the yof wh ichis based on the Sanscrit ti of contracted forms like sushu

p ima , we slept, supta , having slept; with which, also,may be compared the Greek t3a of I here place

opposite to one another the corresponding form s of the

Latin and Old High German languages for compari son

with the Sanscrit sedpaydm i and its potential svdpayé -

y- um

(see

sndp- ayd- m i , ia - suep

- ia.

avdp- aya- si, ia - suep

- i - s.

svdp- aya

- fi, in- suep- i - t.

svdp- ayd

- mas, ia - suep- ia - m .

eedp- aya

- lha, ia - suep- ia—l.

svdp-

aya -nti , ia - suep- ia - nt.

it The 1 is sli m required byp ; ayutherefore=aytimi

CAUSALS . 1001

svdp-

ayd-

y- cm,

’sdp

- ia m, ia—suep - is. Isvdp

- ayd- s, sdp- ié—s, 1' sdp

- id - s, ia - suep- ié- s.

svdp- ayé t, sdp

- is- t, sdp- ia t, ia—suep - is.

svdp-oyé- ma , sdp

- ié- mus, sdp- id - mus, ia - suep—ié—més.

ssdp- ayd

- la, sdp- ié - lis, sdp

- id - fis, ia - suep- ié- t.

avdp- ayd

-

y- as, sdp- is- nt, sdp

—iamf. ia - suep- ié - n.

746. In the Latin firstConjugation, which has preservedthe two extremes of the Sanscrit causal character aya in

the contraction d, the verbs acedre, pldrdre, lavdre and cla

mdre, as well as the abovementioned seddre, presentthemselves as genuine causals, both in signification and in

origin, though theyare no longer perceived to be such bythe genius of the language, since their prim itive has eitherbeen lostor estranged in form . Necare, which, speciallyregarded from a Roman point of view, must be taken as

the denom inative of new(nee- s), corresponds to the SanscritMK- ayd

- m i perirefacio,”causal of nué -

yd- m i , Cl. 4 . pereo.

Another form ofm nds'

aydmi , with softened meaning,

is noceo. In Greek véxug and vexpég are to be referred to

the Sanscrit root m i , from male. I believe I am right inregarding pldro as a corruption Of pldvo for the reason

mentioned at 2 0. Itwould consequentlycorrespond tothe Sanscrit pldvaydmi ; properly I make to flow,

”from

the root plu, to flow,

”which, in the Latin fluo, has ex

perienced an irregular phonetic modification while inpluit.which belongs to the same root, the original tenni s is re

tained. In lavare (Greek Action) one of the two combinedinitial consonants is lost; in other respects, however, lavacorresponds still better thanpldro to the Sanscritpldvaydmi ,to was

“to sprinkle (in m iddle to wash

on whi ch also is based the Old High German flewiu,§ I

See §. 689 .1 691 , 692 . tSee § . 694 .

This is, like lawwhen compared with its intransitiveflue, estranged

from the primitivefliusu,“1 flow,

”in thatithas keptitself free from the

inorganic is (see p.

1002 m ass.

wash . In Carniolan plev- i - m , 1 water,

”I dissolve

(Metelgo, p. is the regular causal from plav- a - m,

“I

swim (=Sanscrit“ if! plav- d- m i). Clamo properlysig

nifies (if I am right in explaining its m as a hardened

form of 0 (see p. I make to hear,”

and possesses,

therefore, a concealed affinityto clue, ionic» and is identical

with the Sanscritirde- ayd- m i (sfrom It), I make to hear,

I speak,“with the Zend 5rdv- ayd

- m i of the same meaning.

the Carniolan slav- i - m, I praise, (sluyem I hear the

Old Sclavonic taosafli slovlyii (from bkzgosbvlyd, I bless

the Russian slavlyu, I praise,"and the Lithuanian sz ldwiyu,

id. (see747. Roots, which in Sanscritend in d, or in a diphthong

to be changed into d, receive before aya the affix of a p ;

hence, e. g. , sthdp- ayd

- m i , I make to stand, from stbd ydpayd- mi, I make to go, I set in motion,

“from yd.

As labials in Latin are not unfrequently replaced bygut

turals“, I believe, with Pott (Etymol. F. p. that the

Latinfacio should be deduced fronjap io, and be identifiedwith the above - mentioned ydp - aydmi though properlyonlythe to of the fourth, and notthat of the third Conjugation

Sanscrit 1: of the fourth Class), corresponds to the San

scritcausal character. The agreementof forms like cap io,

capinal, cop iam, &c. , and the analogous forms of the fourthConjugation, m ight, however, easilyfavour a transition of

the latter into the third. The same appears to me to be

the case with facio, which I compare with the Sanscrit

bhdvaydmi , I make to be,“I bring into existence ;

but in so doing I assume that the e is a hardening of

the radical 01'

(see as roots in d in the Sanscrit

causal never assume a p . The Gothic gives us baa- a, I

Compare, e. g . , quinque with paiicMn, m’

we ; eoquo with pachdm".srs

'

trtm, Servianpechem, I roast.

”

1 From t‘

i—forda, before vowels 60, is theVriddhi form of ti ; see 8 39.

CAUSALS . 1003

build (from bau- ai - m), as the kindred form to the Sanscritbhdv- ayd

- mi and Latinfacio in the second and third per

sons, therefore, the character a i of baa- a i - s, bau- a i - th,

answers to the Sanscrit aya of bhdv—aya-

si . bhdv—aya - ti .

From a German pointof view, however, we could as little

perceive the connection between our batten. to build, and

bin. I am ,

“as recognise in Latin the affinityof the roots

offac- io andfik i . If, however, I am unable to comparethe c of the said form with the Sanscrit causal p , still I

think I can shew in Latin one more causal in which c takes

the place of a Sanscrit p , vi z . doceo, which I take in the

sense of I make to know,

“and regard as skin to di - sco

(properly I wish to know and the Greek éda'tqv, Saddam»If the d of these forms has arisen from 9 (compare Amid-mpfrom Famine)»then dooco leads to the Sanscritjfidp - aydm i ,

I make to know (ia- nd - m i , know,

”forjti

'

d- nd - m i), and tothe Persian dd - as- m, I know As an example of the

Latin causal, in which the original 11 has remained un

changed, letrapio be taken, supposing itto correspond to theSanscrit rdpsydm i, I make to from the root( 1 rd,to give,

”which, in myopinion, is nothing but a weaken

ing of dd. There also occurs, ,together with rd, in the

Veda dialect, the form rds, just as, together with dd, exists

a lengthened form dds. In its origin the root Id, to which

are ascribed the meanings“to give, and

“to take,

”appears

to be identical with rd and dd.

748 . To the rootswhich , in Sanscrit, irregularlyannex a p

The derivation (elsewhere admitted as possible)from [up (lumpdmi),“to rive,

” “break,”

destroy”

(compare Pott. I . to which mmpo

belongs, is less satisfactory, as a in this explanation mustbe taken as the

Guna vowel, with the loss Of the proper vowel of the root. The Latin,

however, avoids the use of Guns, and generallyretains the radical vowel

rather than thatof Guns e. g. in video, which is based on the Sanscrit

causal védaydmi , I make to know,

”from the rootvid .

3 T 2

1004 VERBs.

in the causal, belongs Q .

ri , i . e . or (see to go, whence

arp- ayd—mi ,

“I move,

” “cast,

”send (s

’

ardn arpaydm i,“sa

giltoswith which, perhaps, the Greek épez

’

aw is con

nected,’ which, however, as causal, should be épem éw, or tips:

mi c», or épema'

t (see . 1 9 . Inasmuch as the theme

epem has lostthe true causal character, this verb has acquired

quite the character of a prim iti ve verb, justlike ids-

rm, whichPott has referred, in the same wayas the previouslymen

tioned Latin jacio. to the Sanscrityap- aydmi , I make to

go.

”Ifdin- rte does notbelong to kshipd to throw,

”but, like

the others, to arprtydmi, itis then a transposed form of ip‘n-

‘

rw.

749. The Sanscrit root inpd, to receive,“

to rule ,“

assumes, in the causal, l; hence paldydmi . So, in the Greek

Bd , c-

reM w, iciM w, the second 71 of which appears to have

arisen byassimilation from y. as W e; from dAyog=Gothic

ALYA, Latin alias, Sanscrit anya - s (see p. Bd ,

therefore, is forM y», from as(see 5. the radical

vowel being shortened which, however, in the trans

position ,GM (BefiM- xc) has preserved its original length ;

Pa ir m ight be taken as a transposed form of sip-Ir, and the e as a

vowel prefix, as, e.g. , in e

'

kaxti - r=Sanscrit Iaghu- s. Observe, also, that

the trof mikmyé,which Sonne (Epilegomena toBenfcy’

sGr. Roots, p .

identifies with the Sanscritcausalp , belongs to a root, which in Sanscrit

ends in or (n), viz . to war (wri), towhich Pottalso (Et. F. p . 2 2 5) has

referred it: odkmyf, therefore, properly= mak ing to sound. Should,

too, the Lith . sm ilp inu, I whistle,”notwithstanding its as for s, belong

here, then remark the shorter form adduced byRuhig of the 3d per. sing.

m ilpya . the bird whistles,” where p ia corresponds to the Sanscrit

forms inpayati , such as arpayati , he makes to go,”he moves.

1 The derivation of kship pro- supposes an abbreviation of fife-m from

Itpt'

m -

to ; so thatp would have taken the place of the Sanscritsibilant, asin xpet

'

oov, which Fr. Rosen has compared with the Sanscritrootkshi, to

rule”

; see his Rig Véda Sanhita, Annot. p. xi . , where, too, xpaurvds is

compared with kshipra , swift (from kehip ,“to and the Latin

crepucculum with kshapd, night (betterwith Its/tapas).

CAUSALS . 1005

ovéM w, from oveAyw(é'

o-

ra a), for oraAyw, from076

q pc)=Sanscritsthd, which, incombinationwith variouspre

positions, obtains the notion of movement“; c’

a’

zM w, fromIaJtyw, is to be referred, in a manner di fferentfrom c

’

aivrrw, to

the Sanscrit root in yd, to go, to which also belongs5711 1 , as reduplicated form for ycywu (fut. fiawz qm rfiryd

syami, compare Lithuanian yé—su, I will ride PerhapsxéA- Aw from xeA- yw=Sanscrit chdlaydmi ,

“I move, causal

of the root I Q chal, to move oneself ; perhaps, also,wan- Km, from nah -

gm, for wadyw=8anscritpddaydmi, causalof pad, to go,

”to the causal of which maybe referred also

the Latin pel- lo as byassimilation from pel

-

yo. All theseforms, therefore, if our explanation of them be correct, havelostthe initial (1 of the Sanscrit causal chara cter aya of the

special tenses, and are herebyremoved, as itwere, from the

Sanscrit tenth Class to the fourth (compare Pott II.As inGreek, verbs in cm, am (for eye», ayw),a , are the proper

representativesof the Sanscritcausal form ortenth Class ; andas these extend their character also over the presentand im

perfect; so here, too,mayxaAe'

w be considered as a concealedcausal, which, like the Latin clamo, properlysig nifies tomake

to hear,”and answers to the Sanscrit .s

’rdvaydmi (sfrom k).

Accordingly I take xahe'

m as a transposition of M a - éw for

xM F- e'

m.

750. The Zend, it appears, has no part in the use of

the p , which, according to is, in the causal, to beadded to roots in d ; at least I know of no example whereit is found : on the other hand, we find evidence of the

discontinuance of the addition of a p in ”5.34 10p ditdya ,

make to come,"

bring (Vend. S . p. 55. several times)

Observe, also, thattogetherwith stbd there exists a rootsthal, and

with pa a rootpal. To sli m! belongs our ate place,”Old High Ger

man stella , from stelyu; properly, 1 make to stand”=8anscritstdlaydmi .

1006 VERB S .

= Sanscrit dslhdpaya, from m sthd, to stand, with the

preposition d, to approach . In x gwpwm asiago, from

ds'

td- aya, the a of derivation has coalesced with the radi cal

vowel ; so inOld Persian

avastdyam (from ava-

asid-

ayam), I restored (Beh . I . 63.

66. In Prakrit, on the other hand, those roots also

which end in a consonantfrequentlytake, in the causal, the

said labial, in the softened form of b, where, however, the

root is previously lengthened by the addition of an a ;

e. g. , ji'

vdbéhi , make to live,”

jfvdbédu, let him make to

live (see Delius, Radi ces Prt’

ikrit s. r. jfv). In Sanscrit

also, in the unclassical language of popular tales, forms of

this kind occur ; and indeed ji'

vdpaya, for the just- men

tioned jz’

vdbéhi (Lassen’

sAnthol. Sanscrit, p. which latter

surpasses the Sanscritin the preservation of the imperative

term ination hi from dhi . In the lst. per. sing. pres. is

found, L c. , jz'

vdpaydmi (Priikrit jfvdbémi), and in the part.

perf. pass. jz‘

vdp itali= Prfikritjz

‘vdbidd. Lassen, in m en

tioning these forms, remarks (Institut. linguae Prakrit, pp.

360, that causals of this kind still exist in Mahratta ;and I was surprised at finding myself able to trace the

analogy of these formations even to the Iberian lan

guages”

since in Latin, as G. Rosen remarks, the affix up

(onlyp after vowels) always gives a transitive meaning to

verbs. Thus gnap , to unveil,”

to make evident,"cor

responds to the Sanscritjfidpaydmi , I make to know,

”

while gnu, to understand,”agrees with the Sanscrit root

1 1“to know.

”In Georgian the said causal affix ap

pears in the form ab, eb, ob, aw, cw. ow, Without, however,the verynumerous class of verbal bases whi ch soterm inatebeing regarded as causals in meaning, which cannotsur

See The Caucasian members of the [ ado- European familyof Ian

wages?

1008 m ass.

with the kindred forms in Greek is thus the more striking.

We find, e. g. , yuyulsdmi , I wish to contend (R . gadh),

bubhfishdmi, I wish to adorn (R . bhush), but notjaga

dishdmi, butj zgadishdmi , I wish to speak"

; notjafi dsdmi .butw jg

'

fiidsdmi, Mid . jijndsé,“I wish to know,

“ “to

learn,

“ “to inquire.

" To i fidsdmi'

corresPonds in

form the Greek yc‘

yvé o'

xw, and Latin (g)no- sco which latter,like all similar Latin formations, has lostthe reduplication.

To m imndsdmi , desiderative of mud (memoram nunciare,

laudare), corresponds mpvéaxw, and the Latin f em inism .

In the special tenses the Sanscrit places an a bythe side

of the desiderative sibilant, which, according to the ana

logyof the a of the first and sixth Classes, is liable, in the

firstperson, to production (see and also in Greekand Latin, in the same way as the said classvowel isrepresented (see I give, for comparison, the

present and imperfect active of w jfi iiflsdmi overagainstthe corresponding forms of Greek and Latin.

PR ESENT .

SANSCR IT . GR EEK . LATIN .

Sing. jiji‘

id- sd- m i, ycyvé - axw,

jijfid- sa - si, yc‘

yvé - cncc- g,

jijii'

d—sa - ti , yz'

yvé- cncc,

Du. jg’

jfid- sd- vas,

yt-

yvé- a

'

xed rov,

jijfid- sa - tas, ycyvo'

raxe- rov,

Plur. jzjfi'

d- sé - mas, yryvé - axo—peg,1 1]fid

- sa- tha , yc‘

yvé- oxe- re.

jzjfid- sa - nti, yeyvé - axo- wc,

Clearlyonlya transpowd form of man, to think, with the radical

vowel lengthened, as, e.g. , inGreek, Biflhmra from Bah, win-m m from

fl’

f f .

DESI DERAT IVES . 1009

IMPF.3 FECT .

SANSCR IT . GREE K . LATIN .

Sing. ajzjiid- sa - m , éyc’

v- oxo- v,

ajyiid- sa - s, éyz’

v- o

'

xe g,

ajijfid- sa - t, éyc’

v—axe,

Du. ajrjiid- sé -‘

cc ,

ajifiid-

aa- tam, é'ycyvé axe- rov,

ajijfid- sa - tdm, é-yz-

v xé- n;v,

Plur. ajljfid- sé - ma , é'yryvé - d xo-

pev,

ajijfid- sa - ta, é-ycyvé - oxe-‘

re.

ajtjiid- sa - n, é'yryvéi - axo- v,

In the universal tenses Sanscrit desideratives layaside

onlythe vowel which is added to the sibilant; while in

Greek and Latin the whole formation extends onlyto the

special tenses ; and, e. g. , yvé- cm springs from the simple

unreduplicated root, and hence stands in no closer analogyto the Sanscritjzjiids—i - shyami . That in Latin the future

noscam departs from the Greek arises from this—that the

future of the third and fourth conjugations, according to itsorigin, is onlya mood of the present; and hence , e. g. , noscés

corresponds to the Sanscritfifi dsés, and Greek ylyvé axou.

752 . Itmayreasonablybe conjectured thatthe desiderative form is no stranger in Zend, but I am unable

to furnish satisfactory examples. Perhaps the forms

”wnfl n gg . jg'

iisagmha and JQ J-wwdggg ‘ jg'

jisditi, in the

Fifteenth Fargard of theVend. (Vend. S . , p. 431 , Anq . , p.

are to be referred here . The first- mentioned form , which

Anquetil translates est vivanle, is evidently, like the

xv guaagzeo) pew-Fi anuha , ask,

”which follows it, an impe

rative m iddle ; and Jpsmwsu& jy°

isdfi i , which Anquetil

renders on s'

approchera ,

"

is, like the Jpw xi7fc) pérésdili ,

inlerroget,”which follows it, the 3d per. sing. of the con

junctive active . Perhaps ass -

guwéggg . jzjjisagmha maycorrespond to the Sanscrit hum jzjiidsasva , inform

thyself,"and Jpamwsgga jzfisditi be based on a tobe -

pre

supposed Let- form mm jzjii'

dsdti I will not venture

to decide this point, anymore than as to the forms which

occur in the same page of the Vend. S . , xwg m egx gsgm imarésanuha , and Jm wd §7»GJGm imari

'

zcsditi , which likewise have the appearance of desideratives. As regards

the origin of the desiderative character 8, it is probable it

springs, like the s of the auxiliaryfuture and of the aorist

of prim itive verbs, from the rootas of the verb substantive .

Compare , e. g. , didik—shami , I wish to shew,

”with dék

shydm i,“I will shew,

”and adidik- sham, I W ished to shew,

“

with the aorist adik- sham, and the imperatives of the aori st

mentioned above like bhz'

isha , néshatu.

INTEN SIVES .

753. Besides desideratives, there is in Sanscrit anotherclass of derivative verbs, which receive a reduplication,

vi z . intensives. These require a great emphasis on the

syllable of reduplication, and hence increase the vowels

capable of Guns, even the long ones, byGuna, and lengthena to d ,

a. g. , vévéémi (or‘

véviéi'

m i), plural véviémas,"ifrom

vis’

, to enter dédi'

pm i (or dédz'

pfmi) from dz‘

p , to shineldlb

'

pm i (or lo'

lup z'

m i) from lap , to cut06'

bébhzishm i (orbdbhtishz

‘

m i) from bht’

ish, to adorn s‘déakmi (édéakfm i).

from sale,“to be able .

”As in Greek to is a veryfrequent

representative of long a (see 5. so, as has been else

were remarked Glossarium , Sansor. a. 1830, p. TwGéCw

has quite the build of a Sanscrit intensive , onlythat it isintroduced into the w conjugation. In wama

’

zM w, da cdc'

zM w,

After the analogyof verbs of the third Class, regard being had to theweight of the personal terminations (see 486 . To the lighttermi

nations, beginning with a consonant, i may be prefixed as conjunctivevowel, when, however, the Guna of the base syllable is dropped ; hence,e. g. ,

véviéimi .

INTENSIVES . 101 1

paqui , parade-

aw, the insertion of an i in the

syllable of repetition supplies the place of the lengthening of

the fundamental vowel ; so in wommiw (R. m m, wvéw, fromwvc o, fut. poq wa

'

w, pomfiMw, where the v of the

root is, in the syllable of repetition, replaced by0, since wedoes not form a convenient diphthong. On this analogyrests also dofdv§ and xomtiMw.

754 . Roots beginning with a vowel, of which onlya few

possess an intensive, repeatthe whole roottwice, in such amanner thatthe radical a is lengthened in the second placehence from at, to go,

"ai d.‘from as

’

. to eat.”

I be

lieve I recognise a clear counterpart to these intensive

bases in the Greek dyes-

y, though this forms no verb, but

onlysome nominal forms, as viva-

76g, dyes-

766g. The case of

the w for 6: is just the same as in the above - mentioned

TwOa'

Cw. On the other hand, in dw'

vmu, dmm eéw, draréM w,

the base syllable has experienced a weakening of the vowel,like that which enters into Sanscrit desideratives 75 1 .

ad init), which does not, however, preventme from referring

these forms, according to their origin, rather to intensives

than to desideratives (compare Pott II . p. so also

dhahétw and éAeN’

tw exhibit the same weight of vowel in

the base and in the syllable of repetition.

755. Roots, also, which begin with a consonant and end

with a nasal, in case theyhave a as the base vowel, repeat

the whole roottwice in the Sanscrit intensive, butlengthen

the radical vowel neither in the syllable of repetition nor

in thatof the base . The nasal, in accordance with a uni

versal rule of sound, is influenced in the former syllable,

so as to conform itself to the organ of the following con

sonant; and in roots which begin with two consonants, onlyone enters into the syllable of repetition ; hence, e. g. , dan

dram from dram , to run bambh'ram from bh'ram, to

wander about m jangam from gam, to go. So in

Greek, wapqi at'

vw from ¢a im , the v ofwhich, though notbe

101 2 vanes.

longing to the root, is nevertheless reflected in the syllable

of repetition (see On “ Itjangam is based, I be

lieve, the Gothic gagga (i . e. ganga, see 89. so thattherefore yam, in the syllable of the root, has lost the term ination am and gagg has entirelyassumed the characterof a root, which in High German has produced a new re

duplication (Old High German, giang from gigang, our

gieng, see And in the formation of the word, gangholds as an independent root; whence, in Gothic, gahts

gait (inna -

gahts, fram -yukta). The Lithuanian presents

éengiu“I step,

”as analogous form t.

756. Some Sanscrit roots also, which do not end in a

nasal in the intensive . introduce a nasal into the syllable

of repetition e. g. , chaiichal(or chdchal)from cha l, to moveoneself pamphul from phal. to burst,

“with the weaken

ing of the a to u in the base syllable ; so cha iichur from

char, to go.

"As liquids are easilyinterchanged, it may

be assumed that here the nasal of the repeated syllable is

onlya changed form of the radical liquid 1 or r. So in

manyGreek reduplicated forms ; as, m’

pvrMpc, m'

mrpmi l,

7pafvw, yf'

yyhvpog, yawahftw, ya'

wpawa , Ton/Oopt'

s , rav

‘rahetiw, reVOpnddw, weptppndé v. The following are examples

in which the liquids remain unchanged in the syllable of re

petition pappafpw, noppépw, péppepog, p eppa fpw, peppqpc'

Cw,

xapxafpw, yap-

ya fpw, BopfiopéCw, woptpépa , wopcpépw. Com

pare with these the intensives of those Sanscritroots in or

which contract this syllable in the weakened forms to wri these, in the active of the intensive, repeatthe wholeroot twice , exceptwhen th is beginswith two consonants, in

The final a is the class syllable 3d per. pl. yagg- a - nd.

1' Euphonic for gag- ta

, the nasal being rejected. W ith respectto the

suffix, compare the Sanscritga - ti - s, gait,”for gan- ti—s

, see 91 .

tIn Lithuanian itoften stands for the Sanscritg orj . Compare, e. g.,

éadas,

speech, with the Sanscritgad, to speak .

"

INTENSIVES . 1013

which case onlyone enters into the syllable of repetition

e. g. , dar- dfcar- m i, pl. da'r- dhri - mas, from dhar, dhri, to st0p,

”

to carry but sdsmarmi , according to the universal prin

ciple, from smar, magi , to remember. To dardharmi ,

potential dardhg'iydm. 3d. per. dardhriydt(from dardharg/dm,

dardharydt), corresponds the Zend. daréda irydt in a pas

sage of the Vendidad (Vend. S . p. slrg7wgb ”Guys”J ”paw

!

qem gfldi zm sli7eg a55

7»

quot.) Jays? yalha véhrlcd chath'waré

'

z angro'

baréthrydé hacha

pulhrém nischdaréda ivydt as the fourfooted wolf tears away

(carries oh) the child (the son) of her who bore him (themother according to Anquetil (p. comme k loupa quat

're pieds enlere et déc/cire fenfant de cells qui a porté

(cet If, however, qem gszsg fig du/ nischda réda irydgdoes not come from the Sanscrit root dhar, dkg

- i , it springs

from { g dar (ti to split,“

tear asunder (Gr. dépw,

Gothic la i 'ra) ; whence , in the Véda dialect, the intensive

dardar (see Westerg. R. qin classical Sanscrit dadar.

The first derivation, however, appears to me far the more

probable atall events, the form in question is a sure proofthat in Zend also intensives are notwanting.

757. Some Sanscrit roots, which have a nasal as theirlast letter but one, take this in the syllable of repetition ;

hence, e. g. , bambhary'

mi from bhanj, to break dandansm i

from daris’, to bite (Gr. dax); chan- f- skandmi from skand,“to mount (Lat. scando); the latter with 1

?

as vowel of

conjunction between the syllable of reduplication and that

of the base, as also in some other roots of this kind, and

atwill, also, in those roots in ar whi ch admita contraction

to fl , and which nevertheless mayassume a short i instead

of a long one ; hence, e. g. , char- f- Icarmi, or char- i - karm i ,

with char -karma from Icar, kri to make .

”

W ith regard to the‘

é inserted in daréda iryat, see 44 .

1014 vanes.

758 The intensive forms pan- f-pad and pan

- f—pat, from

pad, to go,“and pat,

“to fall (Pan. VII . 4 . appear

obscure . In explanation of these it may be assumed,

thattogether with “Q pad and 1m:pat there have existed

also the forms pa id and pant with a nasal, as togetherwith many other roots which terminate in a simple mute

there exi st also those which have prefixed also to their

mute the nasal corresponding to their organ ; as, e.g. , panth

with path, to go.

” Together with dah, to burn,

exists also a rootvi! dafih and hence maybe deduced the

intensive form dandah (Pan. VII . 4 . to which the

Gothi c tundya, I kindle (with the causal character ya ,

see has the same relation, as above gagga

ganga, I go, to jangamst759. In Latin, gingv

-ia has the appearance of a Sanscritintensive, and is byPott also referred here, and radically

W ith panth are connected the strong cases ofpatlu'

n, way, as also

the Latinpom , ponto ic, as wayover a river,"

and the Slavonic luk 'l‘

b

puty,“way

”(see with path is connected, amongst other

words, the e h mim (see Glossarium Sanscr. a. 1 847, p.

1”W ith regard to the tfor d of tundya , see 87. The retention of the

second d of the Sanscritform daadah is to be ascribed to the influence of

the a preceding it(compare Remark,also, the form sandya, I

send,”inwhich I think I recognise the causal of the Sanscrit root sad,

“to go,”

(sddaydmi, I make to with a nasal inserted. Grafl’

sets

up (IV. p. 685)for the Old High German a rootsand (3 for Gothic t, and

t for d, according to which he likewise endeavours to compare

with the Sanscritdab, butwithoutfinding anyinformation as to the n

and tthrough the intensive formm dandab . On the primitive root

dab, if noton the causal form da'

hay, is based also the Old High German

dab - t or tall- t(ourDocht, D acht), which bymore exactretention of the

radical com mute is completelyestranged from the intensives (in meaning causals)sand or cant. Initial Media; remain in German frequentlyunaltered, e. g . , in the abovementioned gagga, I while

the Gothic rootqvam,

“to come

”

(qvima, qvam), which is based on the

primitiveyam,has experienced the regular change of Medias to Tenues.

DENOMINATIVES.

761 . Denom inatives are not so frequentlyused in San

scrit as in the kindred languages of Europe. Their formation is effected either bythe addition of the characterof the loth Class, or bythe afli x ya, aya, and asya bothwhich latter ought probablyto be divided into s- ya and

asya, so that in them the root of the verb substantive

as is contained, either entire or after dropping the vowel

(compare As the Latin verbs of the 1 st, 2d, and

4th conjugations are based on the Sanscrit loth Classforms like laud- d—s nomin- d - s, lu- m in—d- s, ao

lor- d- s, flactu- d- s, wsw- d- s, domin

’- d- s, regn

'- d- s, sorori

'- d- sf,

cwn'- d- s, plant

’- d-

s, p isr d- ris, aw- é- s, calv

'- é - s, can

’- é - s,

é- ris, feroc- f- s lascivi- f- s, tipp

i- i'

xs, aborti- f- s, fin

'-

i'- s, sif - f- s,

correspond to Sanscrit forms such as kumdr’

- aya—si, thou

playest,”from kumdra, a boy q ch

'- aya

- si, thou

sage cited leads to the root nud the t,therefore, of the form in ques

tion is nota sign of the person, butradical (euphon. for d), since the per

sonal character of the 2 d and 3d pers. sing. of the imperf. , according to

cannot combine with roots ending in a consonant; hence, e. g. ,

ayunak, thoudidst bind,”and he bound,” for ayunaksh, ayunakt (see

smaller SanscritGrammar, W ith respectto the syllable of reduplication, the form d- nav- i - notfor snow is remarkable on account of the

insertion of an t, as, according to grammatical rules, such an insertion

occurs onlyafter r and a, see and smaller SanscritGrammar,

500. 501 . 508 .

I give the 2 d per. , asthe latexhibits the conjugational character less

plainly, and presents the leastresemblance to the other persons.1' From cor-arias, notfrom carer for from the latterwould have come

carom, notsororio.

i The IndianGrammarianswronglyexhibita rootkumdr, toplaywhich, if onlyforthe numberof syllables, is suspicious—and thence derive

human , a boy in which I recognise the prefix lau, which usuallyexpresses contempt,

”buthere diminution,

”and mar-a, which does not

occur byitself, but is joined with martya , man,"as mo In

generalthere occur, among the roots exhibited byIndianGrammarians,many

nsxommuwss. 017

rejoicest, from sukha , contentment; ydktr’

mya - si , thouencirclest, from ydklra, band

”

(R . yuj to ksham

aya- si, thou supportest,

”from kshama, patience .

From these examples we see that in Sanscrit also the

final vowel of the base word is rejected before the verbal

character for otherwise, e. g. , from ydlctra- aya - si would

come ydktrdyasi . That in Latin forms like coen’- d - s the

a does notbelong to the base noun is seen from thi s, thatthe final vowel of bases of the second declension is rejectedbefore the verbal derivatives 6, é, and i

’

; hence, regn’

- d- s.

calv’- é—s, lascivl f- s. As to the retention, however, of the

organic u, vi z . thatof the fourth declension before it(aestud- s, fluclu

- d- s), I would remark, thatin Sanscritalso 14 shewsitself to be a veryfirm vowel, inasmuch as it maintains

itself before the vowels of nominal derivative suffixes ; and,

indeed, itmoreover receives the Guna increment, while a

and i , i . e. the heaviest and lightest vowel, are dropped ;hence, e.. .g mdnav—a—s, man (as derived from Mann), from

menu sauch- a- m,

“

purity,”fromW suchi ,

“

pure

ddéarath- i s, Son of Dasaratha,“from dasaratha. Before i’,

however, in Latin, the uof the fourth declension disappears

in denominative verbs, as in the above - mentioned abm't’-

z‘-

s.

762 . As a consequence of what has been said in the

preceding I believe that a suppression of the vowel of

the base noun is also to be assumed in Greek denom inatives in ace, cw, ow,

acts, I therefore divide, e. g. , ci -yop’

d “, dyap

’

m'

o-

paa pop(ff - dc», xvco'

a"- 6w, wohep

’

- 6w,

“sated -

(its,

manydenominatives, amongstthem also with, to rejoice, which con

tains the prefix m (Gr. ed), as certainlyas gzqdulikh, dolore afi cerc,

”

(from duh'

kha, contains the prefix dus=Greek avg . Bythe

IndianGrammarians, however, dulikh likewise is considered as a simple

root.

I have already, in pointed outanother mode of viewing the

forms of.» and ice , but in 503. I have given the preference to the

3 U above

101 8 m ass.

stoked- (Cw, and recognise in the a of a the Sanscrita of

aya- mi, and in the Cthe corruption of I; y, as in Ceu'

yvumcompared wi th the SanscritR yqj and Latin j11ngo (see

while in forms in aw, cw, ow, the sem i - vowel is sup

pressed ; and, moreover, in the two last forms the verycommon corruption from a to e, a has taken placeItadm its of scarce anydoubtthat in forms in 1Cm also the

1 is onlya weakening of a ; for though the weakening of

a to i is not so frequent in Greek as in Latin and Gothic ,still it is by no means unprece dented, and occurs, to

quote a case tolerably simi lar to the one before us, ini’

Cw, i’

Copau, compared with the Sanscrit root sad, to place

oneself,”Gothic SA T. (sita ,

763 . The lightness of the vowel i may be the reason whythe form in 1Cwhas become more used than that in and

thatthose bases which experience no abbreviation before thedenominative derivative element bythe relinquishment of

their final letter admitscarce anyletter but1 before C; hence ,

e. g. , nod- (Cw, d'

ywv- 1'

C0pa 1 , dxow-w, dvdp-w, a ipa

-

r-w,

dhox-w, ywwx-w, p ax 1

'

Cm, K ev- (Cw, puma - ICw, xepa

'

r-w,

xepyar-w, épya r f'

Cw épp- aéCw, 611011.

- ai , yawn-aa'

Copau ,

which, I think, oughtnotto be divided eppoi - Cm, dvopd- Cm ; so

easyis it, from the pointof view of the Greek in particular,

to identi fythe a of éppa'

Cw, dvoyd , dyopa'

Cw, ciyopa'

oyw, and

the like , with the a of the base noun. For then the analogyof these verbs with aCopa 1 , NF

-

a'

Cw, six - a (from the

base eixor), 6 1181 i n», 761161 « i s», a ches - dw, wages « in», and withthe Sanscritdenom inatives in aya , would be unnecessarilydestroyed ; for as o and 17, and occasionallyv and 1 , are dmpped

above, and do so nowwith the greater confidence, as the other membersalso of our fam ilyof languages, the denominatives of which I had not

then considered, followthe same principle .

Notfrom yaw, butfrom the base yovvar, whence yotivar - or, yodyar - a .

DENOMINATIVES . 101 9

before the derivationaw, a there is nothing more naturalthan that 01 also should give way before the same. But as

bases in a and 1; (from 61, see produce principally denom inatives inu'm, a

'

1Cw, and those in o principallysuch as endin 6w, 1

'

Cw, from this the influence of the final vowel of thebase noun on the choice of the vowel of the derivative maybe inferred ; a and q favour the retention of the original a ,

while 0, which is itself a corruption of a , readilypermits the

a of the derivative to be weakened to o, inwhich itseems tore- appear unchanged, butwhich (if we wish to allow in its

fullextentthe transm ission of apparentlyautochthonic Greekforms from the time of the unityof language) presents no

obstacle to our placing on the same footing as regards their

principle of formation, verbs like wohep(o)- 6w, xpuo(o)- 6w,

a’

yxuh(o)- 6w, and such as a ipa‘

r- dw, dp’

fiev- da , nap- da), 1101704111 11

6w, 0ahacra(a)—6w, xv1aa(a)6w,and toour recognising such verbsasd'

yop(a)- a'

o-

,d a 1 , rohp(a)dw, d1¢r(a)-u

'

m, u1n(1y)- dw, as analogous

with xvv—u’m, yeve1(o)- u'

m, o (o)- u'

m, dW 1(o)- da1 , vepea(1)- u'

m, a s

Aex(u)- éw. The proposition appears to me incontrovertiblethatthe Greek denom inatives in a , cm, ow, 1Cm, correspond to the Sanscrit in aya (lstper. aya

- mi , Zend ayé- mi);

and that, as in Sanscrit, Zend, and Latin, so also inGreek, thefinal vowel of the theme of the base noun is, for the most

part, suppressed before the vowel of the derivativef : where,however, itis retained, wh ich is onlyattimes the case with1 and v, the vowelof the verbal derivative also remains after

it(dnp1 - tio-

pa 1 , dtppu- dw, ixflu Forms like dnpf- o—pau, “177 1

'

o-

pa 1 , 11 1711 151 0, “6015- 11 1, daxpé- w, belong to another class of de

nom inati ves,which exists also in Sanscrit, ofwhich hereafter.

764. In German, also, the final vowels of nominal bases

Examples, in which 1 and v are retained, are d eco dxpc- da ,

dims- dopa , ixatuie) .

1' G . Curtius is of a difl

'

erentopinion Contributions to theCon'

parison

of Language,”

pp . 1 19,

3 U 2

1020 VER BS .

are suppressed before the vowel or y(for ay) of the verbal

derivative , which is based on the Sanscrit aya ; hence,in Gothic audag

'

ya, I account happy, from the base

audaga (nom . audag’- s, see happy; gaur

i- ya ,

“I

sadden,

"from gaura , nom . ga11r

’

- s, sad ska/T-

ya , I

make,"from skafli , creation,

”nom . skaft

'

- s ;"

mand -

ya ,

“I prepare, from manvu, nom . manvu- s,

“ready; maurlhr

'

ya ,“I murder,

“from maurthra , nom . maurthr (see

murder ; 1‘

tag'ri

-ya ,“I weep,

“from tagra , nom . tayr

’-

s,

a tear,”

(Greek daxpv, Sanscrit 1157 11 , from Among

those Gothic denom inatives which have retained in the pre

sent the last syllable of the Sanscrit derivative aya, the

verb ufdrskadv-

ya ,

“I overshadow,

“stands alone, since this

verb has retained the final vowel of the base skadu(uom .

- as)before the verbal derivative (with euphonic change into

a), while other bases in u follow the general principle ;

hence, thaara’- yan, to thirst (impers. thaursyilh m ile, I

thirst, literally,“it is a thirst to from thaursu

(1 10m .- na),

“dry; dauth

'- ya,

“I slay,

"from dau- thu- s,

death ;“i as inGreek, 0a va r

’- 6wfrom 601 11 11170. T he follow

ing are derivatives belonging here , and springing from

bases ending in a consonant: namn-

ya ,

“I name, from

naman(nom . acmé, see 1 4 1 and duff -

ya , I shew, from

augan (nom . augd), an eye . The former, like the Latin

nomin- o, and Greek forms like a ipa r- dw, a ipa r

-w, preserves

the final consonantof the base, but has, however, adm ittedan internal abbreviation, like that of the Sanscritweakest

This does not occur in the simple form, but compounded : ga

skafl’- s,

“creation

,

"

creature ; ufar—skqfl’

- s, commencement.

t Compare Sanscritmar- aydmi,“ I make to die ; the Gothic suflix

thra=Sa1 1scritIra , ofwh ich hereafter.

I Sea1 cclyfrom 1111utl1(a)- s, dead,”for the Old High German clearly

comes from tad (theme tdda), death,not from 1 131 (nom . masc. téte

'

r),“dead .

”

DENOMINAT IVES . 102 1

case (ndmn- as, on the other hand, (mg- ya (for

augan-

ya or augin-

ya) follows the principle already men

tioned in by which Sanscrit denom inatives are

governed, such as varm'

myd - mi ,“I harness, for varman

aya- m i , from varmnn. Compare, besides the Greek forma

tions discussed l. o. , also derivatives from comparatives ; as,

fiehr1(ov)- 6w, pe1(o 11)- 6w, éhamflov)- 6w, xax1(ov)- 6w.

* InGreek,also, bases in 2 rejecttheir final consonant, together withthe vowel preceding it, which is the less surprising, as thisclass of words has in the declension, too, preserved but

few tra ces of the a of the base (see Hence , 1 1q

(600- 601 , from s hape; (see ciA-

y(ea)- éw, from dhyeg ;

dodev(ea)- éw, from dadsveg ; revx(ea)- 1'

Cm, from veuxeg ; Wp

(aa)- dw, from ‘

ynpa g

765. We return to the Goth ic, in order to adduce some

denom inatives from Grimm ‘

s second and thi rd conjugations

of weak verbs. The second conjugation, which exh ibits 6 11

(S. for the Sanscrit aya , and has therefore , like the

Latin, first rejected the ayof aya, and then contracted

into one long vowel the vowels wh ich, bythe loss of the

y, touch one another, yields, e. g. , fiski

- d- s,

"thoufishest,

"

for comparison with the Latin p isc'

- d- rie. The Gothic base

fiska (uom . fish - s, see has abandoned its a , as the

Latin p isci its i , before the vowel of the derivative (seeThe Gothic thiudan

'- 6- s, thou re ignest, from

the base thiudana (nom .- n

'

- s), king, resembles, in its

principle of formation, the Latin dom ini

- d - s, as the Gothic

first strong declension masculine and neuter and the Latin

second on one side, and the Gothic second weak conjuga

tion and the Latin first on the other side, are in the i r

origin fully identical. To Latin denominatives from the

first declension, like cmni

- d- s (see correspond Gothic

On the other hand, ”haw- (Kw, notwhi - ag’

w.

102 2 vsaBs.

verbs of the same class ; as, ja iria’- 6- s, thou blamest,

from the base fa irind (nom . ma ), blame . To aestu- d -

s,

fluclu- d—s, corresponds laaf - d—s, from the base luslu,

“desire,

”

longing,

"with the rejection of the 1 1, however, of the

nom inal base . Bases in an weaken their a to as in the

genitive and dative hence, frauyin—d—s, thou re ignest,

from frauyan,“lord (nom . frauya, gen. frauyin- s), as in

Latin, nomin- d- s, Iumin- d- s so yadyin—d- s, thouadministerestthe priest

’

s office, from gudyan, nom . gudya ,

priest.“

Some bases terminating in a add 11 before the

formation of a denom inative, and likewise weaken the a of

the base to i ; thus, skalkin—d- s, thouservest,”from skallca ,

nom . skallci

- s, servant,"

gen. skaIIci - s (see hdrin- d- s.

11013566319 from h im , nom . hdr’- s, adulterer reikin- d- s,

thourulest, from reikya , nom . reiki (see rich.

”

That class of weak verbs which has contracted the Sanscritaya to ai, and stands on the same footing with the Latinsecond conjugation (Grimm

’

s third weak conjugation), presents, e. g. , arm

’

- a i - s, thou comm iseratest,”from arma,

nom . arm - s ; as, in Latin, m iserl—é- ris from m iscru(m iser for

m isera—s); ga—hvcif - a i - s, thou steyest,"from hvez

’

ld, nom .

lweila , time,"

delay.

“

766. The Sclavonic uses, for the formation of denom inatives, that conjugational form which corresponds to the

Sanscrittenth Class. But, as has been remarked in 505

not onlyDobrowsky’

s third conjugation belongs to the

Sanscritverbal class justmentioned, but also the greater

portion of those verbs which, in 500 I wrongly classedall, without exception, under the Sanscrit fourth Classwhilst I can now recognise as sister forms of the Sanscritfourth Class, of Latin verbs like capio, and Gothic likecabs -ya, I grow.

”onlysuch verbs of Dobrowsky

’

s first

conjugation as combine the formative elements oommen

cing with a consonant; for example, the ch of the preterite ,

the l and v of the participle preterite active, and of the

102 4 vanes.

PLUR AL .

sxxscnrr. onn scuwom c .

rdd- ayd- mas, ryd—ayc- m,

rdd- aya - tha , ryd—aye—le,rdd—aya - nti . ryd

767. Both in Sclavonic and in Lithuanian the yof thisconjugational class is dropped before the formative elements

which begin with a consonant, and then, inLithuanian, onlythe o is left, and, in Sclavonic, the more ancient a ,

whichcorresponds to it; hence, the infinitive in Lithuanian is

raud - o—ti, in Sclavonic ryd- a - ti , and the future in Lithuanianraud- o- su. The Sanscrit, on the contrary, preserves the aybefore formations beginning with a consonant, bythe in

sertion of a vowel of conjunction, vi z . i hence, rdd- ay—ishyami corresponding to the raud- o—cujustmentioned ; and

in the infinitive rdd- ay- i - tum answering to raud—o- ti, ryd

a - ti f, sup. pm aa'r

'

b ryd—a - t. The verbs under ParadigmB . in Dobrowsky and K opitar have lost, in the present

and the forms connected therewith, the a of the class

character, and retain onlythe y(agol- yz'

i ,“I speak,

“for

glagol- ayii) before formations beginning with a consonant,

but exhibit the a in other places, in accordance with theverbswhich have ayzi in the present; thus, e. g. , PAAPOAAx

'

b

glagol- a - ch, I Spoke,

“

glagol- a - ti to Speak,

”like p

'

b laax'

b

ryd- a - eh, p'

b lAA'l

‘uryd- a- ti . The Lithuanian presents no

forms analogous to verbs like glagol-

ya'

, since forms like

myl- ia, plural myl- i - me, correspond to Dobrowsky’

s thirdconjugation vol- yd, plural vol- i - m, see whileforms like penu, la ikau, plural pen

- a - me, la ilc- o- me (secexhibit the Sanscrit aya in the abbreviated form ,

From rydayo- nty, see 2 55 . g.

T I do notmean bythis c omparison to assertthatthe Lithuanian and

Sclavonic infinitive suffix is connectedwith thatof the Sanscritlanguage .


which in rand - aya, p'

b lAAl x ryd- ayfi, enters, save in the

present indicative and its derivatives, onlybefore suffixes

beginning with a consonant.768. The Lithuanian and Sclavonic nominal bases, like

those of the kindred languages alreadymentioned, whentheyterminate with a vowel, which is generallythe case,reject this before the verbal derivative ; hence, in Li

thuanian balt'- oyu, I appear white,

"balt

’- inu, I make

from balta, nom .- ta—s, white ditwan

’

myu“I

bestow, from diiwana fem . gift cz'

yst’- iyu, I puri fy,

from czysta, nom ,- ta - s, pure gataw

l

- oyuand gafaw’- iyu,

I make ready, from gamed- s, ready de f - iyu, I

divide,"from deli - s, portion ; apyolc

’- ia, I deride,

"from

apyolca - s jest didd’- ia 11 , I enlarge,

”from diddi - s ; brang

’

inu, I render dear, from brangu- s. The following are

examples of denominatives in Old Sclavonic : 11 11 11 11 115

dyer- aya, I make,"ata ax

'

b dyef- a - eh, I made, from

11 11 11 0 dyela, work ; noaon'h 'rb podob

’- ye- ty, itis fitting,

”

infin. noaosa'm podob

’- a - ti , from podoba , use 3 1411 1 1 5 1411 3

Cnamena - yii, I denote,”from 3 11 11 1 1 511 (namen, nom . Cnamya

(see mark (K opitar Glagol. p. ra am a lzn

glagol' “

I speak,"infin. glagoF

- a - ti , from glagob , nom .

glagol, word.

“In forms in 8 115 infin. ov- a - ti , the 8

12 appears to me, in departure from what has been re

marked at 2 55. h. as a contraction of as or on 2 55.

and the v of ov- a - ti as the euphonic alteration of the final

element of the diphthong 8 12= ov. The corresponding

form in Lithuanian is auyu, the first 11 of which, before

vowels, likewise changes into its equivalent sem i - vowel ;hence, e. g. , nasz f - 1iuyu,

“I live in widowhood, from nasz lfi

Denominatives in inuhave all a causal signification, compare 744 .

1 W ith the formations in iyu compare the Greek in z 1ym, see

762 ; iyuand have the same relation to one another as 1Cu1 and afm

have to one another in Greek .

102 6 vanes.

widow, pret. nasz f- aw- au, fut. nasz r- au- eu. So in Old

Sclavonic ; BaonshYx vdov’- ti pret. BAOBOBAx

'

b vdoel oo.

ach, infin. naosona'rn vdov

’- ov- a - ti , from saona edace,

widow Sanscritvidhavd. "111 511 8 111 1 imen- ii -yz'

i ,“I name,

“

infin. nmsnosa'rn imen- ou- a—ti , from the base m an im .

Other examples of this kind occur in Dobrowsky, p. 372 .

We mayregard the 12, w, of these form s as a lengtheningof the theme of the base noun, and divide, therefore, as

follows : cdovd—yii, vdovav- a- ti, imemi—yai , imenov- a - ti , wherewe mustrecall whathas been observed at 2 63. regarding

the unorganic introduction of Sclavonic bases into the de

clension in y. In denom inatives in 1318. yeyfi, as, e. g

nora'r‘stflx bogat

’- yey12,

“I am or become rich,

”infin.

nora'r'h 'rn bogat

’- yeti, from the base bogato, nom . bogat,

11 ye corresponds to the Sanscrit a of aydm i , which willnotappear surprising when we consider the peculiarityof the

Sclavonic in constantly prefixing to vowels a y. The

following are examples of denom inatives from Dobrowsky’

s

third conjugation (see alumi na schen’-yd- sya I

marry.”infin. m nn'rnta schen

’

- i - ti - sya, from sk i ns schena.

“woman ro'rona hYx gated- 13111 (euphonic for vyd),

“ I pre

pare,”infin. ro'ronn'rn gotov

’- i - ti, from ro'roso gotovo, nom .

m . gotov“ready 111311 1171 zyeF

-

yd,“ I heal,

”infin.

n'h a a 'm zyeF- i - ti , from t o z gela, nom . q

'h A '

b zyel,healthy.

”

769 . I have already, in compared the Greekdenom inatives in can , as alyda - O

'w from a ipa-

r- yw (see

with those in Sanscrit formed with 1 : ya . While,

however, in Sanscrit, the final vowel of the base noun, if

short, is lengthened, the same in Greek, accd'

rding to the

analogyof is dropped ; hence, e. g., dW éM w from

dweh(o)-yw, wom w from w01x17\(o)- yto, d iku'

M m from a f

xa7\(o)- yte, paNi aow from yakax(0)-yw, pedtfoaw from p61

7t1x(o)-yw. Bases in p. pa, and v, transfer the y, vocaliz ed to

i , to the preceding syllable, instead of assimi lating it to


the preceding consonant; hence, Taxpaf- p- o-

pm from Taxpap

yo-

pau, from réxaap ; a d ip- w from a ap(o)- yw, from

Oapo ; peym’

p- wfrom pe

‘

yap-

yw, notfrom yé‘

ya - g, butfrom the

base of the oblique cases pcyaAo, the Abeing exchanged for p(see pehafvw from achau

-

yw, from the base peAav ; 1 1 01

pa fvw, narrative), Tex-m ire), aisbpa fvw, edrppa fvw, from nomav-

yw,

&c. , from the bases nowsu, nenov, TGK TOV, 6144 1011 , edtppov, withthe retention, however, of the original 01, instead of the unor

ganie vowels e, 0 (see In denominatives from substan

tive bases in par, as xvpa fvw, oweppafvw, anyafvw,

xemafvw, the v probablysprings from the original form of the

suffix par, as this is a corruption of paw, and answers to the

Sanscritman, and Latin men, m in.

‘ Itappears, however, tome impossible to determ ine with certaintyas to the case of

the preponderating number of denom inatives in aww, whosebase nouns term inate neither in v, nor in a letter which canhave proceeded from v. I cannot, however, believe thattheGreek language has produced such formations independently,and that, therefore, theyare entirelyunconnected with thekind of forms handed down from the period of the unityof

language. Perhaps the bases in v, and those which term i

nate in a consonant which is a corruption of 11 , have onlysupplied the type for the formations in awe»; and verbs like

dheafvw, a’

x‘

rafvw,yhvxafvw, Geppa fvw, ép1da 1’

vw, xnpa fvw, havefollowed the beaten path, in the same wayas, in German,

manybases have pressed into the ao- called weak deelension, in thattheyhave extended the original lim its of the

base bythe addition of n, or the syllable an. Perhaps,too, cum , in a portion of that class of verbs whi ch havethis term ination, vi z . those which have sprung from otherverbs, is some wayconnected with the Sanscrit formation

aya ,with which we have before compared Lithuanian

See and compare G . Curtius Dc nominum Grazeorumforma

tions, p . 40.

102 8 means.

causals and denominatives in inn (see If the v in

those denom inatives which have not proceeded from bases

in v, or par for p aw, is a corruption of the 3) (compare

then the 011 preceding m ight be regarded as representing

the (1 (compare which, in most Sanscritdenom inative bases in itya, precedes the sem i - vowel ; for though

this 11 belongs to the nom inal base, and is in general a

lengthened form of short a (chird-yati , he delays, from

chira, long still the same, in course of time, m ightcome to be regarded as a portion of the derivative, and

be suppressed before its Greek representative m , as in the

formations in aw, a , 8 m. Those verbs in cum which ap

pear to spring from more simple verbs, m ight, in their

principle of formation, be contrasted in a difl'

erent manner

with the Sanscrit; as, e. g. , adafvw dpa ivw

xpada fvw(xpadaiw), xaha fvw(xahdw), stand in the same rela

tion to the corresponding shortforms, as, in the Veda dialect,cham nydmi, I does to chardmi . The broader

forms come from the noun of action 1 m charana, the

going (euphonic for - na , on accountof the r preced

ing). Some Sanscrit verbs, however, of this kind do not

exactlycorrespond to the noun of action, from which theyspring, but exhibit a weakening or contraction of the

vowel, or the pure radical vowel instead of the gunised

one of the base word, seem inglyon accountof the incumbrance caused by the verbal derivative ; thus, bhurapydmi ,I receive (Rig. V . 50 6. bhuranyantam mm), from bha

rana , the bearing, receiving (R. bhar, bhO

ri); tumnydmi , I hasten (Rig. V . 1 2 1 . 1 . twang/an) from tvarana .

the hastening (R . tear); churapydmi , I steal (seeWesterg. Radices p. from charana, the stealing

(R. char). As, according to rule, a noun of action in m m

It occurs in combination with the preposition at, out,

"in the

Yajur- Véda, see W’

estergaard Rad. p. 337.


may be formed from every root, and on this, too, are

based all the German and Ossetian infinitives”, it cannot

surprise us that, in Greek, a few denom inatives of thiskind remain, whose base nouns have been lost; and thus,e. g. , ada fvw, from adavyw, would come from a lost nom inalbase adavo, or Mapafvw, which has no short verb

corresponding to it, rem inds us of the Sanscrit noun of

action mara - na- m, the dying,

”from mar, m

o

ri, to die,"

causal maraydmi . Let attention be given to the Greekfem inine abstracts in 0 11 17, which correspond to the Sanscritin and, or and ? Verbs in am may, in part, owe theirorigin to obsolete nominalbases in a vo.

770. How necessary it is, in the explanation of denom i

natives, to look back to an earlier state of language, and

atthe same time to exam ine the kindred dialects, is shewnbyan interesting class of Gothic denom inatives, in whichthe n likewise plays a part, though it is no wayconnected

with that of Greek verbs in c aves, in whatever way theselatter maybe explained. I rather recognise, as already

stated in my Conjugational System ,

”

(pp. 1 1 5, a con

nection in Gothic verbs like ga na, implem'

, as-

gutna ,

“

Wander,”distaum a , disrumpor,

"and- bundna ,

“solver,

"

ga- ha ilna , sanor,

"

fra—qvistna, perder,"

ga- valma , exciton

us- lukna, aperior, dauthna , merrier,"with the Sanscrit

passive participles in 1 ia ; as, bhug- na , bent,"to which

the Greek verbals in vo- g correspond (07 117 - 1169, asp- wig

and from which the Gothic passive participles have some

what diverged, in that they do not append the suffix na

di rectto the root, but retain the class syllable ; thus, binga - n1(a)- s, bent,

”answering to W bhug

- na -

s ; while the

verbs just mentioned point to a period of the language,

E . g .

,Gothic bindan, Osset. batkin, to bind "=Sanscrit band/1am ,

the binding.

”

1 Examples are : ydchand, precatio ; arhand,“honoris testificatio.

1030 vaass.

when the suffix was still, as in Sanscrit and Greek, added

direct to the root; so that, e. g. , gaska idna, I separate

myself (1 . Cor. vi i . 1 1 . yaba gaska idna i , édvxwpwdii), answers

better than ska z'

d- a - as, separated,”to the Sanscrit fag

chhin- nas (euphonic for chhid- nas), cleft. Compare, also,

and - band- na . I am loosed (set with bund- a - n(1 1)- s,bound bi - uc - na , I am enlarged,

”with bi - auk—a - n(a)- s,

enlarged fralas- na. I am dissolved, destroyed, lost,“

with lasa - n(a)- s,“loosened (Sanscrit Iii - na - s cut off,

torn galak- na,

“I am closed,

“with ga - luk—a - n(a)—s,

closed ; and- lét- na, I am unloosed,"with lél- a - n(a)- s,

tranquil qf- lif - na, I am left remaining,

"I remain

over with the tobe-

presupposed lib—a“left remaining (Ia ib

d

s, remnant for lif- a - n(a)- s, as

the law for the transposition of sounds would lead

us to expect, in answer to the Greek Aefvrw“: from the lost

verb leiba, la if, libam (Old High German, bi - h‘

ba, I re

main,”bileib, I remained, bi - Iibamés, we remained

afar- haf - na ,

“I raise myself above (de ep- a fpoyw), with afar.

haf -

ya - n(a)- s, raised over,"

elevated dis- taur- na, dis

rampor,”with dis- taur—a - n(a)—s. diraptas ga

- thaars- na, I

dryup”

(Eqpafvopw), with ga - thaara- a - n(a)- s.“éCrypappévog,

from the non- existing verb ga- tha irsa, ga

—thars, gathaarsam.

D is- Imaap- na. dimmpar,

"from the root hnap (kniupa ,

Imaap, Imapam, Imapans), is so far irregular as it has the

radical vowel guni sed, whilst otherwise denom inatives inac , like the passive participle with the same term ination,

attach themselves to one of the lighter forms of the verbal

theme. Us- geis- na, also, percellor,

“stupca, from the to

be -

presupposed geisa, gais, yisam (Grimm . II . p. is con

In departure from what has been remarked atp. 44 1 , I nowagree

with Benfey(Greek Wurz cllexicon II . p . 1 1 ) in taking the Sanscritroot

rich (from rile),“to separate,

”to leave,

”as the root ak in to the Latin

lie (linqao), Greek km , and Gothic Iii ; lib .

1032 vanes.

iv . 39. qfilambn neqbfpaxro). It is possible, that from the

simple adjective bases at first simple denom inatives pro

ceeded, and from these , which no longer exist, or cannot becited, compound denominatives ; thus, from dumbn cam e,

at first, dumbna, and thence afdambna ; as, in Latin, from

mam- s, matesco, and thence obmalesco.

772 . To return to the Sanscrit, we must remark thatdenom inatives formed with aya partlyexpress a wish ; as,

e. g. , pati-

ydmi, I wish for a spouse,"from pati patri

yam i , I wish a son, or for a son, or children,"from patra .

These forms lead us to the Greek desiderative denom inativesin which, however, in departure from the Sanscrit,rejectthe final vowel of the base noun, while the latter

lengthen it, but in doing so weaken (1 to thus, pant

ydmi for putrd-

gémi .*

And Greek forms like 0ava r’

- 1dw,

arpamy’- 1dw, M aui are properlybased on the causal

form of the justmentioned Sanscrit denominatives in ya ;thus, 6avar

’- 1¢iw, 0avar

’- 1do-

pev=Sanscrit forms like patri

yayd - m i , patri- yayd- mas, while patri

- yé - mi , putri- yé - mas,

would lead us to expectGreek forms like 0avar’- 1w, 0avar

'

1o-

;1 cv, or, according to 502 Gavaoaw, flavao'

ooyev. It de

serves, however, notice, that, in Sanscrit, denom inatives in

ya occasionallyadopt the causal form without a causalsignification ; thus we find, without a causal meaning, 1the gerund asdyayitvd, which belongs to the causal form ,

but is used as com ing from the denominative asfi- ydmi ,

I curse,” “

execrate ”

(intrans.

“I am wrath,

“from a n

Butwe find in the Veda dialectaéva-yami, eqaos cap io,"from «live,

a horse”

(S . V . I I . 1 .

1'

Nal. 1 4 . M i d asc‘

iyayitvd tam,“ it'd camerando cum . On

the other hand, dhflmdyaydmi , the causal of dhiimd—ydms’

,

“fame, has

also a causal meaning : dhflmdyayan diéati ,“causing the regions of the

world to smoke .

”

DENOMINATIVES . 1033

773. With the causal form of denom inatives in 1 : ya

maybe compared also the Latin in igd. The i would thenbe the final vowel of the base noun, either in an unaltered

form , as in miti - gd- s, levi - gd

- s, nevi -yé- s

“; or the weak

ening of a heavier vowel (see as in fum i - yé-

s (for

fama-

gd- s, orfamo—gd- s), remi -yé - s, clari - gd

- s, casti -yé- s (but

par-

gd- s with i suppressed); or the unorganic extension

of a base ending in a consonant, as in liti - gd- s opposed to

jar-

gd- s. The 9 mustbe taken as the hardening of y, which

indeed occurs, perhaps, nowhere else in Latin, but is not

uncommon in the kindred languages (see pp. 1 10. and

and with which is connected the fact, that in Greek Coftenstands as the hardened form of an original y(seeThe 11 of the forms in question, as generallyof those inthe first conjugation (except where it is radi cal), must bethe contraction of the Sanscrit a(y)a and thus fum i - gd- s

would be, as it were, the Latini z ation of the Sanscrit

dhzimd -yaQ/h - si , thoumakestto smoke If, however,we agree with the common opinion, which, however, is op

posed byD iintz er, Doctrine of the Latin Formation of

Words p. in recognising in the verbs in igo com

posites with ago, we mustthendivide thus, mit‘

- z‘

go,

&c. , and assume a weakening of the radi cal a of ago to i ,

and a transfer of igo from the third conjugation to the

first, both of which things occur in facere, which, at the

end of compounds, becomesficare.

774. Bases which, in Sanscrit, end in n, rejectthat letter

as well in desideratives as also in other denom inatives in

ya. Other consonants, also, are occasionallydropped beforethe denominative suffix ”

llya ; hence, vrihd-yé,“I become

great"

(Mid ), from orikol, in the strong cases crihant, pro

I retractthe conjecture expressed at 1 .

T See p. 379 and 772 . note

3 x

1034 vsass.

perlya participle presentfrom car/1 , arih, to grow. Thus

tripe-yé, d- yé from the participles fripant, tripat, rdhant,

rdhat(see Westergaard Rad. pp. 337, We m ight con

sequentlyexpectfrom the participle of the auxiliaryfuture

forms like dd- syd- yé for dds-yat- yé, or ddsyant- yé and it

follows thatwe mayregard the Greek desideratives in a'

e1'

w

as denom inatives, e. derive them from the participle, and

not from the indicative future . The e, for instance, of

napa- dw- o

'

efwmust then be looked upon as the thinning of

the o of the sufi x 0111 , and napa- dwae

’- 1'

wmusttherefore bederived from napadwao(w)- 1w; just as above, nick

’

aCdpevog from dekow . But if Greek desideratives in aefw

spring from a future participle, then Latin desideratives

in tario, as M aria, naptario. pariaria, esurio (from es- turio.

see may be placed by their side as analogous

forms”in which the 5 appears to correspond to the San

scrit suf 1 ! ya , though usuallythe i‘of the Latin fourth

conjugation corresponds to the Sanscritaya , while the sim

ple ya is represented by the i of the third conjugation.

As, however, the i of the third conjugation is occasionallyaltered to the i

‘

of the fourth '

i'

, it cannot surprise us thatsome denom inatives of the Latin fourth conjugation should.

in their origin, belong, notto the Sanscrit formation aya ,

butto ya and so eqa’

- ia, eqa’- 1

‘

s, both as regards its base

word and its derivation, might be compared with the V6dian asvdydmi, equoscap io,

"mentioned above 772 .

775. Denominatives with a desiderative meaning are

The shorta of verbs in tario occasions me no difficultyin deducingthem from the participle in tam e . The incumbrance of the verbal derivation appearsto have occasioned the shortening of the vowel, as in deno

m inatives like colb’

ro,honiiro

,compared with color, cold. ris, honor, handr

- is.

1 See and Struve On the Latin D eclm sion and Conjugation,

p. 2 00 (fromfodio, in Plant. ,fod iri from gradior, aggrediri frompario,

in Enn. , par-ire from mariar

,morimar).


also formed in Sanscrit bythe suffixes eye and asya ; e. g

arishasydmi , to long for the bull aéva - sydmi , to longfor the stallion (eqaio); madhv- asydmi , to wish for

honey.

” We have alreadynoticed the agreementof theseforms with thatof the auxiliaryfuture, as also, as respectsthe sibilant, with the desideratives which spring fromverbal roots. From Latin maybe adduced im itatives in330, as has already been done by Diintz er Doctrine of

the Latin formation of words p. Whence, e. g. ,

patri- ssa would stand byassimilation for patri - syo (compare

the Priikrit futures, with i as the extension of the

base noun, as inpatri - bus. The i of attici—sso, grazei - sso, is theweakening of the final vowel of the base noun. The first

conjugation, however, does notadmit of comparison withSanscrit desideratives like as

’

va - sya—ti, which leads us to

expectthe Latin third conjugation, as in derivatives fromverbs like cape

- sea, incipi- sso, lace- 330, peti

- sso, which admit

of comparison with Sanscrit verbal desideratives in sa—in

so far as their 3 reallystands for sy—or also with the aux

i liary future. The e or i of Latin forms is, however,most probably the class vowel of the third conjugation,

though usually this does not extend beyond the specialtenses. Incesso, from cede, is probablyan abbreviation of

incedesso ; and arcassa, if it comes from cede. of arcadesso.

776. Outwardlya similaritypresents itself between the

Sanscrit nominal desideratives in aya or asya , and the

Latin inchoatives in asco and esco : these, however, as te

spects their principle of formation, are scarcelytransm ittedfrom the time of the unityof language, butmostprobablyfirst originated on Roman ground, by the annexation, as

it appears to me , of the verb substantive with the meaning

to become to nom inal bases, which, when theyterm inate

in a vowel, drop this before the vowel of the auxiliaryverb (compare Thus, as pas- sum from pot

- sum for

poti- sum. pot

- cram for poti- eram ,

‘

so, e. g. , paell'

- (1sco, if

3 X‘2

1036 vsass.

ascor, paer’

- asco (from the base paeru,- r6), tener

'- asco, and

tend - esco, cod - asco, yef - asco (from gela), herb’- esco, exaqu

'

esco, plam'- esco, flamm

'

- esco, amar’- esco, aar

'

- esco, cle f - esco,

vetust’- esco, dale- esco,fares- esco, celebr

'o esco, cord - esco. Whe

ther we ought to divi de Iong’- isco, vetust

'- isco, or Ionyi - sco,

vetusti - sco, mayremain undecided. In the former case thei of the auxiliaryverb m ightbe compared with thatof theGreek imperative fer in the latter i is the weakening

of the final vowel of the adjective base, as in compoundslike bngi

-

pes and derivatives like longi- tudo. Bases ending

in a consonant experience no abbreviation thus, arbor.

esco, carbon- esco, lap id—esco, mair- esco, nod - esco, dit- esco, but

opal- esco from opulent

- esco, which reminds us of the Sanscrit

denominatives from abbreviated participial bases in at

mentioned above The verb substantive, which Ithink I recognise in these formations, answers to the oh

solete future esco (esct'

t, mperescit, obescit), whi ch, however,in composition, has occasionallyretained the original 11 ; asin Old Prussian, also, in its simple state, asma i , as- sa i , as- f,

corresponds to the Lithuanian es- mi , es- si , as- l How

close the notions of futurityand of becom ing, as of future

existence, approach one another needs no mention. Withrespect to the guttural which has attached itself to the

root of the verb substantive, asco, esco and the isolated

future escit, resemble the Greek imperfect é'

axov, which ,

with the rejection of the radical vowel, enters also in

to combinations with attributive verbs (d1ve6e- axe, xahée

axov. M ora - axe)“ The Latin esco, also, when added to

I have no hesitation in ascribing the vowelwhich precedes the a to

the temporal base of the simple verb ; for the o of is,in its origin,

identicalwith e, and stands in place of the e of i xdkeec, g

i

rdl es, onlyon

account of the nasal which follows : the e of the 3d person of the lst

aorist is identicalwith the a of the other persons, which is everywhere

retained where an ending follows it.


verbal bases, relinquishes its initial vowel for the a e

(é), and i (i'

) of forms like laba - sco, ama - sco, censada - sco,

gemra sco, palle- sco, vire- sco, rubs- sea, senti - sco, obdormi - sco,

are clearly the characters of the first, second, and fourthconjugations ; on which accountwe here divide differentlythan above, in paer

’- asco, clan- esco, claw- esco &c. In com

pounds with bases of the third conjugation the i of gemi

sco, tremi - sco, muét be regarded as bynature short, as itis identical with the i of gem

- i - s, trem- i - s (seewhich leads us back to the Sanscrit a . The i of pro

fici—scor, concup i - scor, is identicalwith that offact- s, profici - s,cup i

- s ; nanci - scor presupposes a simple nanco, nanci - s

frage- sco exhibits a for the i offrangi- s (compare and

has lightened itself by the rejection of the nasal of the

root. To Latin forms like laba - sco, ama - sco, palle—sco, cor

respond, in their principle of formation, Greek forms like‘

ynpd- oxw, fwd- 0 1cm, lhd- mcopw, d’

Adrj- oxw; where, however, it

is not asserted thatthe Latin 6 of the second conjugationis connected with the Greek 1; of forms like neq

‘n‘

An- xa ,

though both lead us back to the Sanscrit aya ; butof this the Latin contains the two first letters in the con

traction of a i to é (see while the Greek 7 of

(pdbjo'wand es, so of duke-fete, ¢1Aéopemcontain the first and

third letter of the Sanscrit aya, either separate (in as, ea),

or united in n. The 1 of forms like edpf- axw, crepi

- axw,

dAI- axopw, dpfih fiaxw, isscarcelya vowel of conjunction, but,

in myOpinion, only a weakening of a heavier vowel ; thus,eépfaxw, w epf

- axw, for edprjoww, arepé- axw; d N 617G

ovcoaaufor d Aw- axw, dAw- axopau; to which, among other

things, the futures edprj- c'm, dAé - o

'

opw, &c. , point. We must

remark the weakening of o to 1 in 611 11 11 1711 1 for 611611 1711 1 ,

61 1 1 1 17 6610 for dnovrredw’; and, moreover, the forms dhdfiaxw

See and compare dwam v’

; and dam which forms, bythe

lengthening of the radical vowel in the second syllable of the root, which

is

1038 vsass.

and dAOf- axw which exist together. I am now inclined, in

departure from whatwas remarked at 75 1 to assume that

the Greek reduplicated forms in in spite of their

striking resemblance to Sanscrit verbal desideratives like

i i (compare are nevertheless notbistoricallyconnected with them , but, as comparativelyyounger

formations, have arisen from the junction of the verb sub

stantive in a form analogous to the imperfect 50 11011 and

Latin future cecil, but deprived of the radical vowel, toroots repeated according to the principle of the Sanscrit

third class (see Thus, yryva'

ioxw, mpwjo'

xw,

presuppose simple verbs like vim/ 1.111 1 , pfpvmu, according to

the analogy of didum, 1401111 1 , 5661111 1 , or such as 717116111,

11 111 1161 1 1 . And 57v and 711601 1 1 bear the same relation to

the probably existent 71711 11 111 1 that and 8130 11 1 do to

8130111 1 . If, however, the Greek reduplicated forms in

must, with regard to their principle of formation, be

looked on as distinct from Sanscrit verbs like jg’

fiidsdm i ,the same must hold as regards Latin forms like 1111 - 3110, di

sco (perhaps from dida—sco), pa—scor, na - scor (gna - scor bytransposition from ga it

- scar), which correspond to Greekunreduplicated forms like Bd- axw, 011 15

777. In Sanscrit, denominatives mayalso be formed byannexing simply an a to the theme of nom inal bases inthe special tenses, which a, like that of the first and sixthclasses of primitive verbs is suppressed in the

universal tenses. A final a of nom inal bases is dropped ;

hence , e. g. , Idhit'- a - ti ,

“he is red,

“from Idhila. I am nu

able to quote from authors instances of such denom i

natives : there occur, however, among the roots exhibitedbyIndian Grammarians of the first or sixth class, several

in which I think I recognise denom inatives from bases in

is twice repeated in its full form, correspond admirablyto the Sanscritintensives there mentioned .

1040 vsaas.

in no (asfullna , implem' mentioned above be

long to the class of denom inatives here mentioned . These

verbs in na come from participial baseswith the same term i

nation, which, like the Sanscritbases in a (rdht'

t‘

fl - ti), rejecttheir final vowel before that of the class ; thus,M a

’- i - th,

impletur, from fidlna—i - ih, forfullna- a - Ih(see plural

fulln'- a- nd, as in Sanscrit rdhit

'- a - li , rdhit

'

fl - Mi . Butthis

kind of formation holds, in Gothic, only for the present

and its derivatives, while in the preterite an 6 takes the

place of a or i so that, e. g. , fulln’- 6- da, I was filled,

"in

its principle of formation agrees with Latin forms like

regn'- d- vi , the base noun also of which, regnu kingdom

as with respect to its derivative suflix, is con

nected with the tobe - presupposed Gothic base fullna (San

scritpaima,

FORMATION OF WORDS .

778. With regard to the formation of verbs there re

mains nothing to be added to what has been alreadysaid

regarding the structure of roots and the classes of verbal

bases which proceed thence, and subsequentlyre

specting the formation of derivative verbs. The prim itive

pronouns, and the appellations of numerals, do not followthe ordinaryrules for the formation of words (seeand, with their derivatives, are discussed in the paragraphsallotted to them . We shall now discuss simplythe for

mation of substantives and adjectives and, first, thosewhich stand in close connection with the verb, and, bothin the organi z ation and in the application of language, playa very importantpart: we allude to the participles and

the infinitive. Itm ight be said thatwe oughtto treatof

pp. 43

and 82 , Rem . 48 . In Persian the presentof the verb substantivemaybe combined with any substantive, adjective, as well as with the

personal pronoun ; e. g . , piram,

“am sum manam,

“egomm .

”

FORMATION or woans. 104 1

the formation of nouns before treating of their inflection,

because words must be formed before theyare inflected.

But for practical considerations it appeared more useful,at first, onlyto laydown the principle of the formation of

words generally, as is done in and to defer

the more full investigation of the subject to this place .

Atall events, the theoryof the formation of tenses must

precede that of the participles, as the latter, for the most

part, irrespective of their nom inal suffixes, rest on a prin

ciple of formation similar to that of the correspondingtenses of the indicative, and bear a sisterly, i f not a filial

relation to them . Itwill, however, be clearlyseen fromthe following paragraphs how requisite an acquaintancewith the forms of cases, and with the distinction of genders,

is to the understanding of the theoryof the formation of

words.

779. The participle present active forms a point of oh

servation as regards the representation of the originalunity of the Indo—European languages ; and it is hereworthyof notice, that several of the still living tongues ofour quarter of the world have, in some cases, preservedthe ori ginal formative suflix in a more perfect form thanthe Sanscrit in its most ancient sources. The full formof the suffix is at the Sanscrit, however, exhibits the n

onlyin a few cases, which in all places, where a divisionof the theme into stronger and weaker forms occurs, hasreta ined the original and full form of the base (seehence, e. g. , bharan, bharantam= q§épwv, (pépowa , fererdem,

dual bharantdu, Véda bharantd (nom . ace.

plural bharantas (nom . voc.) cpépovreg,ferentes but in the

accusative we find bharatas. bythe loss of the n in the latter

partof the word, Opposed to ¢é

pow~ar, and so in allthe other

cases of the three numbers the n is dropped in Sanscritand in the genitive singular bharatas stands, from thisloss, in an inferior position when compared with the Greek

1042 FORMAT ION or woans.

¢épowog,Latinfe mntis,Gothicba iran- din- s(see p. andour

German strong participial genitives, as stehendes, Wheaties.

a

The Lithuanian also has till the present time retained the

nasal of the participle presentthrough all the cases of the

three numbers in both genders : it extends the theme,

however, in the oblique cases, bythe addition of ia and,

according to a universal lawof sound, changes the tbefore5, when this is followed byanyvowel but e, into the sound(sch, which Ruhig writes ch, Mielcke cz hence, e. g. , degafis,

the burning (= Sanscrit dahan), according to the ana

logyof Zend forms like bara'is, Latin like fer-

ens, E olic as

rcdévg, accusative degrmti ii (for degantien, from - iari), genitive deganchio.

780. The Old Prussian, difl'

ering from the Lithuanian,

extends the participial base in the oblique cases bythe

simple addition of i , and so far agrees entirelywith the

Latin, which, e.g. , forms simplyferem from the base ferm i ,which has not exceeded its original limits, butwhich, inall the other cases, follows the analogy of bases in i .

F erenti - a and fermti - um belong as decidedlyto the i de

cle’

nsion asfacili - a , facili - um . We are therefore right individing ferente

—m just as facile- m (from facili - m). thoughfrom a base,ferenl, the accusative could be in no case otherthan ferentem=Zend barént- ém . The participles present

masculine which remain to us in Old Prussian are, dilants,“the worker,

”working ; f sidans, sedans ,

”emprz

‘

ki - sa’

ns,

prawns,” dative empri

'

ki - sewai—smu, according to the pro

Verbs of the third class, in Sanscrit, owing to the incumbrance of thesyllable of reduplication, have lost the nasal in the strong cases also

hence, e. g .

, dadatam compared with steam , dadatas with elbow-rec (com

pare

1 According to the mode in whi ch the two following examples are

writtenwe should expectdilam but as respects the retention of the

T- sound,dilants corresponds to Gothic forms like M iranda.

FORMATION or wonns. 1043

nom inal declension (see nia zdfillz‘

nti - s, of the under

age ,

”notspeaking (ivgfantis) rip inli

- n, sequentem l"

empriki waitia inti - m (ace. contradicentes wargu

seggienti- m , malqficoa.

"The following are adverbial da

tives, giwantei, living, and atanintei (also staninti) stand

.ing,”from the bases giwanti (Sanscritjz

‘

vaat), ctaninti (seeNesselmann, pp. 52 and

781 . Before the feminine character i'

, the Sanscrit, according to the difference of conjugation of the respectiveverbs, either retains the nasal of the participial suffix or

rejects it, and in such a manner as thatverbs of the first

principal conjugation regularly retain,it, and but rarely

reject it, while converselythose of the second o rdinarilyreject it, and onlyoccasionallyretain it; while the Gothicand Lithuanian have constantlypreserved it. Compare ,e. g. , with the Sanscrit vasantz

‘

, the inhabiting (also vasah

'

, Nal. 13. from vas, Class 1 , the Gothic visandei

(Them . visandein, see 1 2 0. the abiding or being

and with the Sanscritdahantz‘,“the burning,

"the Lithua

nian deganti (gen. dega'nchids, see p. 174, Note In Greek,

Bepaa év-ng is in form a solitaryparticiple present fem inine

with ¢8= Sanscrit according to the analogyof the fem i

nine bases in 7pcd=trii Latin tri - c, mentioned in 1 19.

T he rootq as, Class 2 , of the verb substantive; forms in

Sanscrit salz‘

, the being,

"never santz

‘

the Lithuanianesanlz

‘

therefore surpasses the Sanscrit both in the reten

tion of the radical vowel and in that of the n of the suffix.

B illi, I speak . The inseparable preposition au, combined withthe negation ni, corresponds to the Sanscritava .

‘

I' Also rip intinton, in the last syllable ofwhich I think I recognise an

appended pronoun or article=Sanscrittam, Lithuanian tan,Greek rdm

As regards the o for a , compare the accusative of the participle perfect

passive dé lo- n

,

“datum”=Sanscrit dattam, from dadcitam,

irregularly

for datum .

IO44 FORMATION OF woans.

In the masculine nom inative , also, the Lithuanian emits

has two points of superiority to the S anscrit son. the re

tention of the radical vowel, and of the nominative sign

the latter is shared also by the Latin sens, of pre

sens, ab—sens, to which the abovementioned’

Old

Prussian sins, of emprflci- sins. admirablycorresponds. The

Greek, for the most part, with its d'

w, contrasts disadvan

tageouslywith the Lithuanian crude ; for whi le the latter

has, togetherwith thewi se sign, preservedthe complete root,we m iss in awboth the enti re rootand the expression of

the nominative relation. The epic and Ionic form e'

wv,

however, leads us to conjecture a formerlyexisting é'

aa w,

and the suppression of the a in this position is notsurprising according to 1 2 8. Itis, however, notless marvellousthata form which, in Greek, has been corrupted for thousands of years, quite up to remote antiquity, and which

has been tolerably accurately retained bythe Latin onlyunder the protection of the prepositions pm : and ab

“.

should have remained quite perfect in the Lithuanian upto the present day.

78 2 . The Indian Grammarians assume at, in the strongcases ant, as the suffix of the participle present. I cannot.however, attribute to the suffix the a of forms like bharanl,

anymore than the o of the Greek ¢épow z the vowel belongs in both languages to the class syllable ; i . e. the o

of ¢ep- o- w is identical with that of ¢ép- o-

pev, (pep- 04 m , and

with the e of é'

qSep- e -

g. &e. That the Greek participial suffix is simplyv

-

r, not ov-

r, is clear from the conjugation in pt, where w attaches to the final vowel of the root orof the verbaltheme (Od o- w , r i fle- v7 , ia

'

ra - v'

r, detx- vv- vr): theSanscrit, however, in accordance with a peculiarity, which,in myopinion, firstarose after the separation of languages

On the other hand, inpotens, just as in the simple cm , the sibilantis lost.

FORMAT ION OF wosns. 1045

in cases, where the ator tof the suffix would be added to

a letter other than a or d, prefixes to the suffix an a

(compare 437. Remark, and or extends the ver

bal theme by the addition of an a ; hence, e. g. , striavant,

strewing (for striate d), answers to the Greek base

c ropvw r. The e of Latin participles of the third conjugation, e. g. , of veh- e- ns, och- e- ntem Sanscritaah- cm , vah- a

ntam, Zend vaz - a - ni , vaz - a - ntém), is in origin identicalwith the class vowel i (from a, see of veh- i - s,

veh- i - t, &c. (see and is based on the circumstancethat before two consonants the Latin language prefers l toi (see In the fourth conjugation, ia, e. g. , in aud

i - ens, represents the Gothic ya and Sanscrit aya of forms

like satya - nds, placing Sanscrit sddaya - n, makingto sit

”

(compare It does not require mention,that in verbs of the firstand second conjugation the a and

e, as in am - a - ns, mon- e- ns, belong to the conjugational syllable ; the a , however, of da - as, eta - us, fa - ns. and fla - ns. to

the root: and as little does it require notice, that in German and Lithuanian the vowel which precedes the n of

the participle present is identical with that of the classsyllable . Compare, in Gothic, ba ir—a - nds, the carrying,

"

m hs-ya - nds (Zenducs- ya- iti), the growing (seesat- ya - ads, the placing.

"making to salb- d—nds,

the with bair- a - m (Sanscri t bhar- d- mas),we carry, vahs- ya - m ,

we grow, sat-lya - m, we place

(Sanscrit sdd- ayd- mas), saIb- d- m,we anoint and in

Lithuanian, weé- a - fis, the conveying,

"with wez - a - mé, we

convey myl- i - fis, the loving,"with myl—i - me, we love .

”

With regard to the non- correspondence of the Lithuanian

es- a - Iis, being, to es- mi , I am ,

"es- me, we are ,

“we

mustobserve, that here an auxiliaryvowel is necessaryin

the participle, which in the Sanscrit s- a - n (accusative s- n

ntam)occurs in the same form , while the Latin - sens places

in its stead an e, and the Old Prussian - sins an i .

1046 FORMAT ION OF WORDS .

783 . In Old Sclavonic, the so- called gerundives corre

spend to the participles of the kindred languages, and that

of the presentto the participle presentactive here under

discussion. Inthe nominative singularmasculine ,where,vety, whens,

”answers to the Sanscrit saloon, Zend

vaz ani . Lithuanian weéafis, and Gothi c vigands, we should

scarce observe the analogy of the Sclavonic form to those

of the kindred languages, as, according to a universal law

of sound, all final consonants in Sclavonic are suppressed'.

but in the dual, RBBE IpA veCwis/mha'

t, corresponds to the

Védian m kania and Zend vaz anta ; and in the plural,

3 82 ,8 a (veCuashche) answers to the Sanscrit valiant- as,

and Greek é'

xow- eg (see p. 618, Note where it is to be

observed, that q ! shch more frequently occurs as the

euphonic alteration of t(Dobrowsky. p. 39, K opitar, p.

justas d, under sim ilar circumstances, becomes aka acbd

a sibilant, therefore, is prefixed to the T- sound, and, be

sides, the original tis changed into ch, as in Lithuanianlikewi se the latter is used before i , with a vowel following.

See I nowthink thatthe monosyllabic words also must

be subjected to the universal law, as I no longer recognise in the forms

NM nae and BM ]; vac of the genitive and locative plural of the two

first persons the Sanscrit secondaryforms nae and ear,butI refer the

t'

b s of the genitive to the Sanscritpronominal genitive termination ram,

and thatof the locative to the Sanscritlocative terminationm . The fact

that the s of these terminations is elsewhere changed into x ch (see

2 66. m . 279. Mid p . 366, Note and that in Sanscritthe genitive

termination ram occurs onlyin pronouns of the third person plural, con

ceals the causal nature of the ending of the forms nAt'b na - s, BM'

b

va - s butin Old Prussian also the ending 1 111 36m, in the form much

nearer to the Sanscritson, hasmade itswayinto the pronouns of the first

and second person ; hence here are found non- son, spa», ion- m imam

after the analogyof std - son,m v=Sauscrittea- sham, answering to the Scla

vonic NM '

b na - s and BAC'

b va - s.

1' Asto if,=uiz , see the Remark atthe end of the preceding


express, as in Lithuanian, byit(see in grammatical terminations

or suffixes, correspond to a Sanscritn orm with a preceding vowel(a or

There appear, therefore, if I have not overlooked anything, the

following

l Accusative singular of feminine bases in a eg.

, BAOBE vdovuic,

viduam

2 . Accusative singular of pronouns of the first and second person : M ia

man, T A tan=Sanscritmam, tvc‘

im like the reflexixe (A can.

3. Accusative plural ofmasculine pronominal bases of the third personinya , and therefore also of definite adjectives compounded with the

baseya . Compare m yan,“003

,with the corresponding Sanscrit

ydit, ques,”and Old Prussian accusatives like echo - as, sold - us

,

has,"wira ons, viros, Gothic vaira - ns (see

4 . First person singular present, where 413 uri=Sanscritami e. g .,

vefmim ahdmi ,‘ MK: ayun=aydmi , e . g. , rydayunz rédayami (see

6. Third person pluralof the present,where E'l

‘

b wity=Sanseritanti ,

e.g . , BE3 31 W!) vefuntyz ra hanti and in Dobrowsky

’

s third conju

gation (see K opitar, p. IN ”) yarity: Sanscritayanti .

6. The above mentioned gerundive or participle present.

The nasalvowel in the genitive singular and nominative accusative plural

of fem inine bases in ya, e.g . , in BOM—A volyan, voluntatis, an

“volun

tats: (nom . appears surprising. If we consider,however, that in

the three cases spoken of the Sanscritgrammar exhibits a final 8,which

is also contained in the Lithuanian and Lettish,which approximate closelyto the Sclavonic languages, as also in Gothic in all the words which cor

Compare 2 66. The Polish also, in the corresponding forms, has

a written nasal vowel, though now, at the end of a word, the nasals,

though written, are no longer pronounced ; justas in the instrumental,where I regard the Sclavonic vdo- voy- un=Sanscritvidhavay- d as joining to the old instrumental term ination the new also, with a corruption of the my(Dobr. gives onlym) to the now probablyveryweak

nasal sound a. Remark , thatIn the plural instrumental, the feminines,especially rather than the masculines and neuters, have the termina

tion mi (see p. for which, in Lithuanian, both in masculine and

fem inine, stands mis, onlythatthe masculines in a have contracted a m“to a is.

FORMAT ION OF WORDS . 1049

respond to the Sanscrit feminine bases in ( H, we are led to infer the

nasaliz ation of a final s, as in the Prakrit instrumental termination

hi iz Sanscrit blz is (see The 3; especially appears to have

protected the nasali z ed vowels which follow it, as we may conclude

from No. 3. and the gerundives mentioned below (Remark A

place where the Old Sclavonic has a nasal vowel atthe end of a word,

while the Sanscrithas a simple vowel, occurs inthe nominative and seen

sative singular of neuter bases in n ; in mum ima iz , “nomen

”

(from the

base imen from iman), answering to the Sanscrit ndma, from ndman.

Here, however, the nasal of the Sclavonic nominative and accusative can

notsurpriseus, as itbelongstothe baseword, and theLatinalsohasfirmly

preserved the n of the base in the nominative and accusative singular

neuter. Thus, as in Latin, nomen, semen, opposed to heme, sermo, &c. , so

am iman, t'

lmn sysman, Opposed to RAM’

b I kamy,“stone

,

”from

kamcn.

Remark 2 . The verb substantive gives t'

b l sy=Sanscritsan, Lithua

nian sens, and in the feminine EXI lpn sunshchi=wfl satf (forsani

‘

i), senti .After the y in the nominative masculine the nasal and the old a re

mains ; hence Bum biyan,“csedens

,

”feminine Bulfi qln biyuiishchi . In

Dobrowsky’

s third conjugation the HR extends also to the other forms

with qr hence Roam volyan,“volem ; Boam lpa volyanshche,

“vo

lentes Boam qln volyanshehi , As regards the use of the

gerund, itis limited to those constructions inwhich the participle present

stands as predicate, and in German the uninflected form of the partici

ple isused ; hence (Lue. xxiv. I3.) B'Bt'I

‘

A llAXI qJA byesta idwisheha,

they(two)were going,”is the translation of the Greek flour nopevdprvos,

onlywith this pointOf difference, in which the Greek is inferior, thatthe

Sclavonic has the dual of the verb as well as that of the participle.

Where the participle stands as epithet or substantively, the Sclavonicuses the definite form of the participle (see and in this the

participle is fully declined ; thus, I. c. , xz mqv dm’

xove av is rendered

Rbtb o'r'

bt'romml fi vysyotstoyarishchmiyun.

784. The same suffix that forms the present participle

So, in Lettish, alum - s is both the genitive singular and the no

minative and accusative plural of akka , spring of water (compare

Latin aqua, Gothic ahva, stream,

”

genitive singular and nom inative,

accusative plural ah- vé o s Lithuanian uppé'

, stream Sanscrit ap,

water

1050 FORMATION OF WORDS .

is added in Sanscrit and Zend to the theme of the auxi

liary future ; just as in Greek and Lithuanian, where

Oé - O'w- v, dé—o'

ov- ra , dil- se- z is, dii - se—ntin, correspond to the

Sanscrit dd- sya - n, dé - sya - nlam . In the fem inine the Li

thuanian dh- se- nlz’

, the (woman) about to give, an

swers adm irably to the Sanscrit dé - sya - nti'

deg- se- as,

the (man) aboutto burn, accusative deg- se- ntin, answers

to the Sanscrit dhak—shyo- n, dhak—shya - nlam and in the

fem inine, deg- se- nti to dhak- shya

- nlz'

. The Lithuanian root

bu, to he ,"

gives bu- se- as,

“

futurus, bu- se- nti ,“

futura ,

”

as analogous to the Zend bfi—sya - as, bei - sya i—nli . Som e

what further of? lies the Sanscritbhar- i - shya - n, bhav- i - shya

121 11 on account of the Guna of the radical vowel, the in

sertion of the vowel of conjunction, and the suppression

of the nom inative sign in the masculine . As regards the

e of Lithuanian future participles like dii - se- ris, bu- se- ris,

I see in it, not a corruption of the i of indicative forms

like dil- si - me, (labimus (see buta corruption of

the a of Sanscritbases like da- sya—ui it is therefore identical with the o of the Greek dw- O

'

o- v-

r ; and the Lettishalso gives an o for this Lithuanian e, as to the 0, also, of

the present participle it Opposes an 0, while for the i of

the future indicative it has, in like manner, i ; e. g .

buhschols,“

futurus = Lithuanian busms buhschoti , futura"

—busenli ; as essai s', being = esmis, fem inine essoti

S ee 2 1 . and 104 .

t The future participle in Lettish occurs onlyin paraphrasing the con

junctive, and the presentparticiple also has the fem inine form in ti onlyin this k ind of phrase, but elsewhere sc ha, wh ich, in myopinion, comes

from schia, and this frmn schi so thatunder the influence of the i , with

a vowel following it, the t is changed into sch,as in Lithuanian into eh

(genitive esanchios=Lettish essochas). Refer towhathas been said be

fore regarding the origin of the 1p shch in the Sclavonic gerund .

The coincidence of the Lettish feminine termination scha with the Greek

cm ,

O52 FORMATION OF WoRDs.

pakt’

, bibe, which likewise belongs to the present of the

second class. With respectto the accentuation of the par

ticiple present active, I mustdraw notice to the fact that

the Greek conjugation in [u agreeswith the correspondingSanscrit conjugation in this (the reduplicated verbs ex

cepted), that it accents the second syllable of the par

ticiple in question, and that therefore, in this respect,

cropvég, cropirév-

ra , stand in the same relation to ¢épow,

cpépowa , as, in Sanscrit, strinvdn, sto

rfnrdntam, to bhé ran,

bharanlam. The Sanscrit, however, differs from the Greekin allowing, in the weakest cases (see the accent

to sink down to the case syllable ; hence in the geni

tive singular and accusative plural sfri - nva - tds opposed

to crop- VIS- wog, O

'

rop- vé- vrag. The Sanscrit differs from

the Greek also in this, that in the accentuation of

the participle present (the theory of the weakest cases

excluded) it is governed by that of the correspondingtense ; thus, bridh- a - n, tud—d- n, shrichyan, cho

‘

r- éya - n, accord

ing to Infdh- é - m i, tnd—«i - m i , slick- yd- mi , chdr—éyd- m i . In

the second conjugation (see the participle presentis governed with respectto its accent bythe heavyterm inutions, especially by that of the third person plural,

and, in irregular verbs, participates also in the abbrevia

tions, which the root experiences before heavyterm inations : hence from rasmi,

“I will,

"comes not résout, but

uiént, willing,"

according to the analogy of us'

més,

ushthd, uscinli . The third class has, as well in the entire

singular (with few exceptions)as in the third person pluraland in the participle present, the accent on the syllable

of reduplication ; hence ddddmi, I give , dadatz’

, theygive (see (Iédat, the giving (see 779. Note),the latter opposed to the Greek r ider

'

s, while ddddmi ,détlhdmi. agree with 313mm,

“Hami l.

Remark . The principle of Sanscrit accentuation appears to me to be

this, thatthe farther the accent is thrown back , the graver and more

FORMATION OF WORDS . 1053

powerful the accent; and I believe I mayassert the same principle in

Greek also ; onlythathere, outof regard for the harmonyand euphonyOf the word, the accent in polysyllabic words cannotoverstep the limitofthe third syllable, while the Sanscritplaces the accentonthe fimtsyllable,without reference to the extent of the word, and contrasts ba

’

rdmahé

with the Greek (pcpdpeda. A very strik ing proof of the dignity and

energyof the accentuation of initial parts ofwords, and, atthe same time,

a veryremarkable point of agreement between Sanscrit and Greek se

centuation, is afforded bythe circumstance, that both languages, in the

declension Of monosyllabic words in the strong cases (see which,

with respectto their accentuation, are, as itwere, pointed out bythe

genius of the language as the mostimportant, laythe accenton the base,but in the weak cases allow itto fall on the case termination. Here

,

however, the accusative plural, though in respect to sound it belongs tothe weak cases, yet passes, as regards accent, in most monosyllabicwords in Sanscrit, as in Greek, for a strong case which cannotsurprise

us, as this case in the singular and dual belongs, in each respect, to the

strong cases. Compare the declension of vdch, fem . ,

“speech,

" “voice,

"

with the Greek (in (from Four for fox, Latin, vac).

S INGULAR . PLURAL .

SANsCR IT . ORR-Rx . SANseR IT . GREEK .

N . v. va‘ik N . v. ao N. v. vd

'

ehas N . V. 6’m r

Ace. vc‘ieham Ace . d1 m Ace . vdchas Ace. 81m :

Instr. vdehci Instr. vdgbhfs

Dat. vdoté D . Ab1 . vdgbhyds

Gen.Abl. caches Gen. cin- 6: Gen. vdchcim

Loc. vdchf D . «in - i Loc. vc‘

ikshu

DUAL .

SANSOR IT .

N . A . v. vdchdu Ved. voichdI . D . A . vdgbhyc

‘im

Gen. Loc. vdchds.

I consider as a consequence Of the emphasis, which lies in the accentua

tion of the beginning of a word, the circumstance that active verbs, to

See the exceptions in BOhtlingk , Afirstattemptas to the Accentin

Sanscri t”

(St. Petersburg, I4 .


which the middle verbs also belong, in Sanscrit principallyaccent thefirst syllable, so that, therefore, the energyof the action is represented

bythe energyof the accentuation ; and I perceive an agreement Of the

Greek accentuation with the Sanscrit in this, thatGreek verbs throwback the accent as far as possible . In dissyllabic and trisyllabic forms,therefore, the two languages usuallyagree mostfullyintheir accentua

tion of verbs. Compare i t,“ with émi , Blocnwi with aada'

mi,won,“with

dddhlimi , (fie'

popev with bhdrdmaa, 3¢epov with dbharam. In forms of

more than three syllables the Greek approaches the Sanscritas clomlyas,without a violation of the fundamental law of its system of accentua

tion, is possible ; hence the already-mentioned ¢ep6pc6a compared with

bhdrc‘

imahé (from m ind/id, see and also c’

dxpoii eda compared with

dbhardmahi . A quite similar agreement, together with a similar con

trast, appears between the Greek and Sanscrit accentuation in cases in

wh ich the Greek , in accordance with the Sanscritprinciple, throws backthe accentof the base word in the vocative.

“ This evidentlyhappens, in

both languages, in order to give emphasis to the name of the person

called, and to bring itprominentlyforward bythe voice ; and in the vocative, in the three numbers of allwords

, the Sanscrit(where this case is

speciallyaccented) always accents the first syllable, however long the

word be, and wherever the accentmayfall in the other cases. To the

nominatives p itfi, matci'

, duhitc‘; (acc. p ilaram, mdta

’

ram,duht

’

tdram), cor

respond the vocativesp itar, md'

tar,chi/altar, with which the corresponding

Greek vocatives mirep, pfirep, M arep—as comparedwith wa‘

re'

pa ,

p imp (for scrip), M rf'

pa , M dma (forM aria), M a f épa i stand in SW

prising agreement andthis isthemore remarkable, as the words denotingafiinityin our familyOf languages belong also, in another respect, to those

expressions which have preserved the ancient slm p with astonishingfidelity. W'

hile, however, the Sanscrit also exhibits vocatives like risk

vamitra , the Greek, owing to accentual limits prescribed to it, can onlyshewsuch as

’

Ay¢ipcpvov, which, however, does notpreventus from re

cognising, even in forms Of this k ind, the agreement of the Greek and

Sanscrit vocative theory; and justas little, in myopinion, could forms

like compared with bha‘

rdmahé cause us to overlook the affinityof Greek and Sanscritverbal accentuation. The principal part Of the

Sanscrit first conjugation (see is formed bythe firstclass,which

comprehends almostone half of the whole number of roots, and to which ,

Compare Benfeyin the “Halls Journalof GeneralL iterature, May1 845, p. 907.


deg/ at (Bola), t‘

Iyama, On the other hand, in cases where

the modal elementcoalesceswith the preceding class vowel into a diph

thong, the accentremains Onthe same syllable as is accented inthe indicative ; thus, bha

'

rés, bluirét, (pt'

pm, dx'

pocpev : on the other

hand, tudés, tudé'

t,&c. , according to the analogy of mass, mea t. The

analogyof the sixth class is followed bythe potentials of the aoristOf the

sixth formation peculiar to the Véda dialect; hence, éakc'

ma,“possimuc.

”

In the six classes Of verbs belonging to the Sanscritsecond conjugation (see as also in the perfect Of all verbs, the heavypersonalterm inations exercise a similar influence on the attraction ofthe accent

to that manifested in Greek in all classes of words bythe length Of

the final syllable, onlythatthe heavy personal term inations in Sanscritnot only attract the accent

, but appropriate it, and, if dissyllabic, totheir first syllable . In thiswayémi d/IdJmt

'

jéhd

m i,

“abandon, are in the plural imés, dadmds (for dadamcis, m iddle

dadmdh ifijahimés. In the fifth, seventh, eighth, and ninth class

, as also

in the perfect, the Guna syllable, or the heavier class affix or insertion,

exercises an influence in throwing back the accent hence, chindmi, I col

lect"

(plural chinamas); yundjmi ,“ I bind”

(pluralyuhjmé s); tamimi ,“ I

extend”

(plural tanumds) yum‘

z

'

mi , I bind (plural yanimas) tutu'

da ,

I did thrust”

(plural tutudimrf), instead Of the forms china‘

mi , yi inajmi ,&c.

,which

,according to the fundamental principle Of verbalaccentuation,

would be looked for. The heavym ilk of the participle present(at, ant),the a Ofwhich, justlike thatOf the th ird person plural, is viewed, with

respectto the accentuation, as an essentialportion Of the term ination, or of

the suffix,follows, in the just-mentioned verbal classes, the analogyOf the

heavypersonal term inations, especiallythat Of the third person plural

butin the weak cases (with the exception of verbs Of the third class)allows the accentto fall down to the case term ination ; and the feminine

i,in case the suflix loses its It

,follows the analogyof the weakest cases.

The same principle is followed bythe participle presentOfthe sixth class.

Slims Ved. II . 6. 2 . Remark the dropping Of the s Of the com

mon dialect(bhtiytisma), as in Zend, see 701 .

1'

Reduplicated roots accentonlythose heavvterminationswhich beginwith a consonant

, a nd accord to those commencing with a vowel no ih

fluence in casting back the accent. The vowel a , which precedesn in the

third person plural, holds as regards the accentuation as belonging to thepersonal termination. Hence yt

‘

inti, they go,

”compared with e

'ti

butda’

dali,“theygive (see 5. notdadtiti, like ddddti,

“he gives.

"

FORMATION or WORDS . 1057

I annex the nominative, accusative, and genitive singular masculine (the

neuter also of the genitive), and the feminine nominative in i : dvt’

shdn,

dvishdntam, dvishatds, dcishati'

; dadat, dddatam, dédatas, dazlati yu’

ii

jén, ymy'

a'

ntam, yw'

ijattis, purg’

ati ; chinvdn, chinvtintam, chinvatés,

chiavati tanvdn, tanoéntam, tanvatés, tanvatI yunan, yuné ntam, yu

nattis yunati tuudtin, tundantam,tundatds, tundtinti —As InGreek , par

ticiples presentactive Of the conjugation in In, in agreementwith the pre

veiling principle in the corresponding Sanscrit conjugation, accentthevowel which precedes the v, instead of the first Of the base-word

, and

aropmir, Irrepvévra, avopmiv'

re, aropmivres, stand for comparison with the

Sanscritctz-I'

gwan, striavtintam, strinvdntd (in the Véda dialect)stripedntas,itm ightbe conjectured thatoriginally the heavypersonal terminations,as theyexercise (see as in Sanscrit, a shortening influence on the

preceding syllable, have also, in like manner, attracted to themselves the

accent. Then the Doric forms 8I86W I,rtae

'

vrt,ia-

rcivrt, demmim't,m ight

be regarded as remnants Of an Older system of accentuation. In the Op

posits case, we mustlook upon Sanscritforms like strinumds, compared

with the Greek avdpvvpev, as the consequence Of an influence upon the

accentuation exercised bythe heavypersonal term inations, and firstse

corded to them bythe genius of the language after the separation of Ian

guages. I have no doubt that forms like strindmi (from stamomI'

:

w épvfipt), yuntii'

, through the influence of the weight of the second

syllable, first, afterthe separation Of languages, transferred the accentfrom

the first to the second syllable. This takes place also in some verbs Of

the third class, which we find, therefore, in this respect, as itwere, in

the period of transition from the original system Of accentuation to that

more recent, in which, in the second principal conjugation, the weight,of the second syllable hasmade its influenceon the accentuation efl

'

eetual.

However, in the Veda dialect, in those roots alsowhich adm itthe sccen

tuation Of the radical syllable, the accenting of the syllable of reduplication seems principallyto prevail. Benfey(Glossaryto the Slims. Veda ,

p. cites from bhar, bgi , Class 3, the forms bibltarshi ,“fe n,

”bibhrate

‘

,

“ferenti ,

”bibhrat

‘

i,

“females,

”

(as Véda pl. fem . for bibltratyas), Opposed

to bI'

e ti,

We mustnotinfer from bibhérti , and similar forms, thatar is really

the Guns of rI’

it is natural, however, thatin parts of grammarwhere

vowels”capable of Guna receive it, that those verbs which admit Of

weakening should preserve the full form of the root, as vai , towill,"

becomes contracted to ui onlyin places which do not allowof Guna ;hence

,


A strong proof of the emphasis of the accentuation Of the beginning of

words (in Sanscritalways Of the firstsyllable) is afforded in SanscritandGreek bythe suflixing Of the degrees of comparison,m iyans (in the

Weak eases iyas), tea, { I ishlha, tw o, which, where they are added

,

always require the accentto be thrown back as far as possible. Thus,

in Sanscrit, from wade,“sweet comes the comparative wddiya’rie,

‘

nom inative masc. svddiydn, and the superlative reddishtha - s. Tothe latter

corresponds the Greek fidw'

ro - I‘

, and to the nom inative and accusative

neuter Of the comparative svtidiyas the Greek"otov while r

'

Idt'

ovor,

for well known reasons, do notexhibitan agreementOf accentuation with

svtidiya'

n,wdd iyasas. The Greek degrees Of comparison in repo, ra

-ro

,

follow essentiallythe Same principle, I'

. 0. theythrow the accent as far

back as possible, bywhich, however, onlythe syllable preceding the

suffix is reached, SO thatthe accent is Often necessarilytransferred from

the beginning to the m iddle Of a word, as in BeBaui-repor, BtBa Ié ra -ror

,

compared with Be’

fia ior. In Sanscrit, on the other hand, the degree suf

fixes,corresponding to the Greek repo, raro, exercise no influence at all

on the accent; and the positive base retains the accent on the base

in whatever part of the word soever the same may occur ; thus the

hence,us’mas, we will, opposed to ed em i, I will (Comp . Vocalismus

,

p . WhenBenfey,who, inthe“HalleJour nalq

'

eneraIL iterature

(May1845, p . 944) contrasts the Greek 8” v with the Sanscrit rigidm i,remarks

,thatinGreek If isGuuleed, because itisaccented, andthatII is for

the same reasonGunised in Sanscrit,I cannotassentto him in either point.

In the firstplace, I recognise in forms like”opwlu, O

'

TopVU/M (the latterno Guna, butonlythe discontinuance Of the abbreviation Of ar

to ri , which was admitted In Sanscrit, justas in rpt'

ros compared with the

Sanscrit tritiyas (Latin tertI‘

us,transposed from tretI

'

us,for tritius), the

abbreviation Of the syllable rI‘

has ceased . In the second place, I cannot

adm itthatforms like rintimI‘

, strI’

qIIimI‘

,have

, for this reason, Gunised the

second syllable because it is accented ; for if the accent occasioned the

Guna,we should also expectfor bzbharshi and vivakti (in the éda dialect),bé

'

bharshi, vecalm

“

,and for desideratives like p ipdsami, p épdsdmi . To

me, therefore, the principle setforth above, vi z . thatthe accenting Of the

firstsyllable belongs to the verb,butthatheavysyllables have Often de

stroyed the original accentuation, and appropriated the accent to them

selves,appears far more natural. The Greek replaces the Guns of rinomI

‘

,

strI'

IIdm I'

,bythe lengthening Of the vowel (cropvibm opposed to cropviipcv),

butnevertheless preserves the original accentuation.


case, butthe strong cases spring from « Inf

, the m iddle

from eat, and the weakest from fish (euphonic for as).

From ash comes also the fem inine theme Iishi'

, to which

the Lithuanian IIsi is an admirable counterpart; hence

degnai , the having burned = Sanscrit déhtishi', for dado

lIushI‘

(see The Oblique cases Of the Lithuanianfem inine participle spring, for the mostpart, from an ex

tended base usia ; hence the genitive singular degusid- s,

as ra IIkd- s, from ranka, hand.

” Compare herewith theGreek Ina Of rervcpuia , which has been already elsewherecompared with the Sanscrittutupushi

'

sf787. With the weakest form Of the Sanscritparticipial

suffix above mentioned are connected also, in Lithuanian,

the Oblique cases Of the masculine, butwith the same nu

organi c aflix Of ia , which , tOO, the participle present has

retained ; thus, genitive degusio (as millco from mil/ca - a)corresponding to the Sanscrit de‘hush- as, dative dcg

- usia

accusative deg- usi - I'

I for deg- usia - Ii . The nom inative degens 1 8

based on the Sanscritstrong theme déh- iwas (i as conjunc

tive vowel), butthe s Of the Lithuanian form scarcelybelongs to the base . but is the Sign Of ease, and extends, as in

The vocative singular, which in general disclaims long vowels (see

shortens the long a; hence, can compared with the nominative

van, since anusvara (h)after the s is dropped (see becomes n. I am

notinclined with B6htlingk (Decl. p. 10)to representvans as the original

formOf the suffix ; for if, aswe oughtto be, we are guided bythe strongcases, which in general, where differentmodifications of the theme occur,have preserved the ori ginal form ,wemustthentake vans tobe the ancient

form, and allowthatthe vocative, as is its wont, has shortened the vowel,

which perhaps is onlya consequence of the emphasiz ing the beginning of

the word in the vocative byaccenting it. Bohtlingk also, in his z eal for

the vocative, represents iyaris as the theme Of the comparative suffix iyc‘

iris,

iyas (see the long aofwhich, in Latin, takes the form of 6 in all

the Oblique cases.

‘1‘ “On the I nfluence of Pronouns in the Formation of Words,"

p . 4 .

1 According to the analogyof the adjective declension, see § 2 8 1 .

FORMAT ION OF WORDS . 1 061

the participle present, to the vocative also ; while the Sanscrit, as itcannotbear two consonants atthe end of a word

(see in both cases abandons both the nom inativeSign and the final consonant Of the base thus, nominativedeli - Leda, vocative déh- i - van, corresponding to the Lithuanian deg

-

ens.

“The Zend, on the contrary, has retained

In the Old Prussian Catechism there Occur two perfectparticiples

inw as verydeserving of notice, vi z . klantiwuns,“having cursed

,

”and

murrawuns, having murmured,

”which stand nearer to the Sanscrit

vans than anyother European kindred form . The uofwuns, as also that

of the common form ans (afler consonants also ons, and sometim es ans), isevidently, like the e of the Lithuanian ens, a weakening of a , Originallya; as in widdewu,

“widow"=Sanscrit vidhavt

‘

i, Latin vidua , and some

similar fem inine nom inatives. The uOf the plural -usis, accusativeusins,

and Of the accusative singular usin, is, on the other hand, organic, and

identicalwith the Sanscrituof the base of the weakestcase and Of the

feminine, as also with that Of the corresponding forms in Lithuanian.

Nesselmann (“The Language of the Old Prussians, p. 64)represents the

participles in uns (ans, ans, wuns) as indeclinable, and takes usis as an

independent form with declinable terminations. I,however, consider

wuns, am , one, ans, asthe singularnominative masculine,with sasthe sign

of case, as in Lithuanian ens. This participle seldom requires declension,as itis principallyused for a periphrasis Of the perfect indicative, and thus

Occurs in the nominative relation ; e. g .,asma i murrawuns bite lrlanti

wuns,

I have murmured and cursed”

(literally, 1 am the person

having murmured and cursed The nominative singularusuallytakes

the place of the plural, as also in Lithuanian the presentand perfect par

ticiples have lost the termination Of the plural nom inative, and in this

case onlyhave rejected the s of the nominative singular : hence, from

sukeI'

Is, having turned, comes the plural sultan. Where, however, in

Old Prussian, the plural relation Of the participle perfect is reallyex

pressed, itends inusis, probablyfrom a lengthened base in usi (compare7 so thati - s of the Lithuanian plural termination corresponds to

they- s of bases in i (awy- s,

sheep,"

from the base awi ). The examples

Occurring in the Old Prussian Catechism maybe found in Nesselmann,

p. 3 1,n. 84 . madliti

,tytwireta i ious immusis laukyti , tytwirsta i ious

aupallusis,“ask , andye shall receive (be having received) seek, and ye

shall find (be having found). The future,which iswanting inOld Prus

SIan,


the nominative Sign in its participles ; as. gumw dadh

ado, having made,”rid- ado, knowing whi ch it

has also done in the participle present, a point in wh ich

it is superior to the Sanscrit, and agrees with the Lithua

nian, Latin, and Goth ic ; for from 1 11 can is formed in

Zend, not gulp ado, but {git} vaIin. It is clear, however,thatthe 0 Of ado does not representthe s Of the theme of

the strong cases, as the suffix cantalso, in the nominative,

forms cdo (compare Burnouf Yacna, Note R . p. In

the accusative, dadhvdonhi‘m corresponds to

the Sanscrit (ladlI - i—c isam in the weakestcases, and be

fore the fem inine character I'

, the Zend suffix is contracted,like the Sanscrit suffix, to ash

“; hence, in the genitive

lwdgg dathushd (Vend. s. p. 3. for dadhushé'

, see p. 965 .

sian, is always periphrasticallyexpressed bythe auxiliaryverb signifying“to be,

"with the participle perfect; hence, p . 1 2 ,u. 1 5 .

, pergiibons wyrst,he is come (is the person having come). The Oblique cases ofthe per.

feetparticiple, from being little required, seldom occur, and spring like

wise from the theme increased byI‘

,while the Lithuanian adds in to the

base. The onlyinstances thatOccur are, cu- Ia II - Iisi - as, the slain"

(mor

tuos, forwhich, also, aulausins and aulauwussens), and ainan-

giraIn-usi - n,

“to those born in" (the place), the latterwith passive signification,which,

except in the root gem, gim,does not occur in this participle. If we

should notadmita nominative plural in usis, the above-mentioned forms

m ightthen be taken as singular nominatives, with a plural signification.

The circumstance, however, thatthe realand frequently-occurring singular

nominative always term inates in as, and that, too, the participle present

leaves the old base (in nt) in the nominative singular unlengthened, and

in the other cases lengthened onlybyi , ismuch opposed to this view.

The single feminine form Of this participlewhich occursdeservesmention

vi z . the nominative singular aulausc‘

,

“mortua ,”for aulauust’, as above

avian- sins together with aulauusins. T he final I? corresponds, therefore,

to the Sanscrit‘

I'

and Lithuanian I'

of feminine forms in IIsII‘

I'

, usi .

The lithographed Codex of the Vendidad Sade has,almost in all

places, a s s for myI II I,however, agree with Bum ouf in reading q ,

I II as probablythe sole correctreading.

1064 FORMATION or WORDS .

789. To the form vat, whence come in Sanscritthe

m iddle cases of the perfect participle'

, belongs the Greek

61 , which has preserved the ancient accent(seebut after losing the digamma, which is generallylost in

the m iddle of words, in case it does not assim ilate with

a preceding consonant(see re'

craapeg, as, for instance,

also in the suffix ew= Sanscrit cant(of the strong cases)thus, the same relation that dpweA6(F)ev-

r has to San

scrit forms like dhéna - vant endowed with riches, see

wreck has to tutupvét, to which, as nominative,

accusative, and vocative, in Greek, rermjxig corresponds(seeTo the plural locative tutup

- vé l- eu corresponds

the Greek dative 7m ¢- o’

(-

r)- m . Mention has alreadybeen

made of the fem inine form in rich , as abbreviation of vow ,

and of the affinity, as regards formation, of Te-

rvcpui'

a with

the Sanscrit tutupfislu‘

(see The Latin, perhaps,

in secflri - s presents a remnant of these fem inine participlesin uahi

'

(euphonic for an), and the proper translation,

therefore, is, perhaps, the cutting (instead of the hav

ing cut the u being lengthened, and the sibilant beingchanged between two vowels into rsl

‘ As several parti

cipial suffixes are Often used also in the formation of de

rivative words, there is, therefore, ground for comparingthe suffix 6 m in words like lap id

—dsus, [ma in- t18m , fraela

ésas, forml

- dsus, p isc’

- dsus, with the Sanscrit mm of the

strong cases, to which ithas nearlythe same relation thatthe comparative suffix idr has tom l

'

ydi ia (see

See where itmustbe also noticed thatthe nominative, accu

sative, and vocative singular ofneuters in the threefold theme gradation

always are connected with the m iddle form .

T See 2 2 . In the Véda dialect there are abstract snbstantives in

MM,with the accent on the radical syllable (see p . as

, Mpuaht“ire (properly,

“the burning from tap , to burn aims/13,

“strife,

from tar (tfi I),to overstep.

”


onlythatthe original sibilant is retained, though the v islost, just as in aop io

= svap imi sore, sordrem = 8vasdr,

evasdram sol= svar, heaven (from c ar, and this from

war, to shine Zend hearé, the sun.

” With respectto the prolongation of the suffix bya vowel afiix, comparethe relation of the suffix trim to tdr, Sanscrit Mr (see

5.

790. In Old Sclavonic the gerundive preterite correspondsto the participle here spoken of, as is mostclearlyapparentin the feminine singular form , in which, in verbal bases

ending in a vowel, B '

bn m fishi corresponds to the SanscritZend ushi', and Lithuanianusi . Compare D

'

b I a'

bn m byhaving been (fem inine)with the Sanscrittug s? babhziv

68m”, and Lithuanian baw- m i. In the nom inative plural

masculine (used also for the fem inine), B'

b lIIE i shr —W ith e

as the term ination of case Sanscritas, Greek eg—

answers

to the Sanscrit vdiz sas, and therefore B'

b a lE by- z}3}w to

babhz'

c'

r- vd'

risas ; on the other hand, in the singular the sibi

lant is lost in the nominative masculine ; thus, B'

b lB‘

b by- é

corresponding to the Sanscrit babhd- vtin and Lithuanian

baw—eris (see 5. where itmust be observed thatgene

rallythe Sclavonic has lostthe original final consonant, so

thatthe 3 also of the Lithuanian bum- mic belongs not to

the suffix, but to the case sign. After consonants the vof the gerundive suffix is suppressed ; hence , e.g. , NEH ) ne§,

having carried (for nee plural asth ma neishe (fornata

'

bms neazishe), feminine singular nat'

b rrm usa’

rshi (fornee- fishi).

Remark . In the Sclavonic that tense of the indicative is wantingwhence the past participle or gerundive has proceeded : on the other

hand, I am now of opinion thatthe Lithuanian perfect(also aorist),which

I formerlycompared with the Sanscritfirstaugmented preterite (Greek

imperfect), must be compared with the Sanscrit reduplicated preterite,Greek perfectand Gothic preterite of the strong conjugation. I assume,therefore, that in buwau, I was,

”

or I have been,” instead of the

3 2

1066 FORMAT ION or WORDS .

augment, the syllable of reduplication is dropped, as in Gothic preteriteslike baug,

“I bent,”bugum,

we bent"=Sanscritbubhéja, bubhty'

imé ;

and I compare itwith the Sanscritbabh iiva , towhich, with regard to its

medialu,itcorresponds better than to the imp erfect é bhavam . Bureau

does i ndeed closelyresemble also the Sanscritaoristdblu‘

ivam,butin the

third person buw- o answers better to bablui v- a thanto dblnit and in both

the plural numbers the forms given above (p . 762 ) answer better tobat iv- i -ué (from - a - va) babluiv- a - lhtis (from - thae), babhfiv- i -md (from- a - ma), babhfiv- a than to (ibhaitam,

a'

blu‘

i - ma, dbhfi- ta . The conjeeture thatthe Lithuanian perfectbelongs to the universal tenses, and notto the imperfect, is also confirmed bythe consideration that the imper

feet in Sanscrit and Greek always takes partin the base Of the present,i . s. in the class peculiarities, while the Lithuanian preterite, which is

called perfect, does not; hence the perfect Ofgrin- nu

,

“ I am acquainted

with,

”which corresponds to Greek verbs like Mac-m

, Latin like star- no

(see p. is notgau- nau,butyaw-mi (future gciu-w). In the perfect,

too,t or st of the present base is dropped, which formerly, when we

sought to compare this tense with the Sanscrit- Greek imperfect, ap

peered a difficulty(see As to the circumstance thattheyor i

(see p . 72 2 ) compared with the Sanscrit fourth class is retained in the

perfect, and that from liepyu, I order,

”comes the perfect liepyau

(future liepsu) from traukiu,“ I draw

, the perfect trauk iau (futuretrauk - eu), thismaybe explained from the near resemblance in form of

the fourth class to the tenth, inwhich the retention of theyor i in the

universal tenses is regular. In general the perfectloves ay, and often

adds one in verbs which do not exhibit one either in the presentor in

any other tense ; as from dfimi (for di dmi), or dfidu, I give,”comes

daw-yau(future chi - ea); from demi (for dedmi), I lay,”deflyau(future

déi su=dhdqydmg 06 from cimi, or einu,“ I go,

”eff/cu (future

ci - su=Sanscrité - shycimi). In everycase the form of the participle maybe safelyinferred from thatof the perfect indicative ; butwhen the yof

the firstperson singular indicative disappears in the other persons, it is

lost in the participle also ; thus, from daw-yau, second person dew-ci,

participle dew- cries, fem inine daw-usi butfrom dé’

yau, second persondé’

yei,

participle dé’

y- etis, feminine dé'

y-usi ; from é'

yau, ivi,

”second person é

’

yei ,participle é

'

y- eris, fem inine {q ua-i . It is beyond doubt, therefore, thatas

If the Lithuanian perfectbelonged to the Sanscrit- Greek imperfect,then the perfectof diiduand M a would mostprobablybe dfidau, dedau=Sanscritddaddm, adadhdm,

Greek e’

a'

dwv, e’

m'

dyv.


so far as theyattach themselves to anytense of the indi

cative, have the suffix mdna or dna . I consider the latterto be an abbreviation of the former, as it is represented in

Greek, just like mdna , bypevo : nor is it probable that

the Sanscrit should have originally appropriated to the

participle present of the m iddle voice two suffixes which

resemble one another so closelyas mdna and dna and

whi ch, in use, are so distributed, that the former belongs

exclusivelyto the first principal conjugation—only withthe exception, thatthe tenth class, probablyon account of

its greater fulness of form , adm its also duo—while the

latter is fixed in the second conjugation ; and, moreover, inthe perfect, to which, as it appears to me, on account of

its incumbrance with the syllable of reduplication, the

shorter form is more agreeable, where we must remark,

that in the present participle active also the reduplication has an influence on the weakening of the participialsuffix (see 779. Note). The auxiliaryfuture has everywhere preserved the complete audix mdna hence, da- sya.

mdna - s, both m iddle and passive dared- never. With thisagrees the Lithuanian dii- se- ma -

s (feminine - ma), qui da

bz’

tur."since in Lithuanian the said participial suffix has

been abbreviated to ma , which nevertheless does not causeus to overlook its connection with the Sanscrit mdna and

Greek pevo. In the participle present diid- a - ma - s, qui

datur," corresponds to the Greek Staci- peter, and Sanscrit

dddh- dna - s (for dadh- md- nas, and this for dadA- mdna- s)the latter, however, is m iddle only, and the passive parti

ciple ism df- yd-mdna - s.

“The Old Prussian, which

approaches the Lithuanian veryclosely, has, in one of the

two examples of the said participle which remain to us in

the translation Of Luther’

s Catechism , preserved the origi

Several roots in 6 (among them (16)weaken this vowel before thepassive characterya to i .


nal form of the suffix with astonishing fidelity, itmaybe

said, in its perfect Sanscrit form , unless, perhaps, the a of

the firstsyllable be short. The example I mean is, po- klaus

t- mana - s, heard, or rather being heard,”aixovépevog

in form, however, h oxhvépevog would be the corresponding word, as klaus or klus is the Prussian form of the

Greek root can; (Sanscrit fire , from (km ), and po corresponda to the Greek 61rd, Sanscritape . Besides poklausf

manas, the Prussian Catechism presents one more form ,

which, with respectto its suffix, evidentlybelongs, in like

manner, to the participle passive present; vi z . eni - m- u—mne,agreeable, properly becom ing accepted as the parti

ciple perfect passive also signifies both accepte d and

acceptable . 1’

The participle presentpassive suits the passage where the expression

occurs better than the perfect participle (Nesselmann, p. stawidas

madlas aststeismutawan en dangon em'

mmewingi blwpoklausi'

manas,

such prayer is acceptable to and becoming heard (=is heard) bytheLord in heaven.

1‘

Nesselmann (p. 104) takes m imumne to be a typographical error,

though he gives no reason for this opinion. The terminationmus does

notappear to me doubtful : the internal vowel is omitted, as in the Latinal-u- mnus, Vert- u- mnus and as in the Zend forms bar- a -mném

,

vaz - a - mm’m, ofwhich hereafter. SO in Old Prussian, from fram ers- s,

“body,”comes the accusative kermnem (also kermenen and kermenan).

This kermms for km nenas is, according to its formation, probably, inlike manner, a passive participle ; so that, properly, itsmeaning is equi

valentto created,”

made (Sanscritkurdmi ,“I make,

”compare Latin

creo, creatura). Pott refers the Latin corpus, and Zend kéréfi-s (accusa

tive kehrpm ,to the rootklrip , kalp which

,however, is itself connected

with fear (kg- i), as Pottalso assumes (see mySanscritGlossary, a . 1 847.

p . As regards the final e Of enimumne, itis either an adverbial or aneuter termination. The passage wherein the expression occurs requires

properlythe nominative singular neuter (Nesselmann, p . 2 4, n. 56, sta ast

Iabban bite dygi enimumne pri'

ki B eiwan musesmupogiilbenikan, this is

good and acceptable before God our as Iabban also is reallya

neuter,


792 . With respect to accent in Sanscrit, the participles,m iddle and passive, in mdna , dna , follow the same principleas the active participles (see p. i . e. theyare governedbythe accentof the corresponding tense in the indicative ;

so that the suffix receives the accent only in cases inwhich the indicative has it on the personal term ination,

which happens in the heavyterm inations of the present

of the second principal conjugation (with the exception of

the third class, see p. 1056) and of the perfectof all verbs.

The Greek corresponds, in forms like rerun-

pews: (Opposed

to runrdpevog), to the accentuation of the Sanscrit cognateforms, only that the latter have the accent on the final

syllable of the suffix, so that tutup - dnas corresponds to the

Greek rerun-

prince”

neuter, according to the analogyof Sanscritneuters in am (see

If,however, sm

’

mumne is a neuter, in thatcase the 3 stands, as frequentlyhappens in Old Prussian, for a, and the case - sign is suppressed, as in the

pronom inal neuters, sta,

“this

,

”lea , what (accusative ha and kan),

and in Lithuanian neuters, as géra,“bonum If

,however,

there is a typographical error in thisword, which is an isolated one of

its k ind, we m ight perhaps conjecture enimumnem=mnan. As regards

the vowelu, itis probablylike the LatinuOf al-u- mnus,Va t-u- mmcs

for which we m ighthave expected al- i Vert- i - m(i)nus—the cor

ruption of an original a, and corresponds to the Sanscrita of the first and

sixth class

Atthe time when the Sanscrit suffix dna had notyetlostitsm, it

will probablyhave had, like the Greek - p¢'

vor of rerun-

pi vot, the accent

on the first syllable ; for that the circumstance of the suffix beginningwith a consonantor a vowelmayhave an influence on the accentuation is

clear from this, thatthe verbs Of the third class in the present indicative

have the accent only on those heavyterminations which begin witha consonant, while in cases where the heavyterm ination begins witha vowel

,the syllable of repetition is accented (see p. hence,

bibhri - véluf,“we two carry

”

(Mid ), but second person bibhr- iithé, third

person bibhr dté’

, so also in the participle present middle bibr- daa, not

“blur- (ind : itis highlyprobable, however, thatbibhri -mti nawould be said

if the m of the suffix were retained.


the Old Prussian mana , of the abovementioned pokla Iw- f- mana - s ; while the form mna , which has lost its in

ternal vowel, finds an accidental countertype in the Latin

man, of al- u- mnus, Vert-u- mnus, and the Old Prussian mac,

of en- z’

m- u- mne In Zend, also, this suffix, as in

Greek, has, beginning even with the present, both a m iddle

(or purelyactive) and passive signification, while the San

scrit in the passive prefixes the character ya to the parti

cipial suffix Thus we find in the Vendidad Sade , p. 2 03,

barEmaae'

m , being carried and va z é'

mnem ,

being conveyed,”as adverbial accusatives in reference to

the nom inative plural maz dayadna .

”At times the final

vowel, also, of the suffix mana is suppressed, together withthe m iddle vowel ; so that thus onlya m is left, to whi chare affixed the case term inations. Thus, in nyds

’

émn- d,

celebrantes, yéz imnd, venerantes,"which indeed, according

to their term ination, m ight also be singular nom inatives Of

bases in a , but in the passage where they occur clearlyshew themselves to be plurals Of bases in We m ight,

m l) Gsee’mw ”w ewasmag sx eAlec we »

gum;

N QQOJA} 49mmwt) wt) “Cl

/”937m .wb Gfpg spn p

jwwxg~x 7d 9Max») yat atte‘

ym ma z dayasna padha ayantt‘m ed

tachentc’m cd bare'

manem rd vaz t’mm'm vd tachi a ipya nasdumfrajaiann,“ If those

,who being worshippers Of Ormuz d, going on foot, or or

carried, or riding approach a corpse .

”Anquetil(p . 31 2 )translates

S i un Maz de'

iesnan allanta p ied, ouen bateau, porté (dans une voiture),ouélevé dc quelquejapan que ce soit(aperpoit)un mort. In a similar pas

sage (l. e . p . 2 79) occurs baremnem,and likewise vaz émném.

T Vendidad Sade, p . 482 N ani arihén askavand havo

‘

ya z asta nydfimno‘

yéz'imné Ahurama z duhm Viri sintpuri , Ia ’vam manum habentes (le nd

manu (enemies), celebrantes, emu-

antes Ahurama z dam .

”Anquetiltrans

lates (p. 4 16) Qu’

iln’

yaitque I’

hommepure qui coupe Is B arsom ctque,ls tenantde la ma in gauche, tlfasse iz eschné aOrmuz d . I consider myti i

emad as an abbreviation of ni -ycis’

, and refer,on this hand, to the rootyd} ,

p. 963,Note .


therefore, also distribute the forms barZ’maém and vaz'

émném

into barémn- Em and oaz émn- em, as bases which end in a

consonant have, in the accusative,‘

em as their termination.

That, however, in general in Zend the suffix spoken of has

not lost its plural a, is shewn by form s like vaz émna

(Vend. S . p. which, as nom inative plural, can belong

only to a base in a 2 3 1 . Note); thus, csayamana (l. c .

p kshciyamdnds, from kshi , to rule,”

csa

yamndo plural fem inine (l. c . p.

genitive plural Sanscrit prayajamdndndm, from yaj,to honour,

”to sacrifice. An example of a form in daa

(for mdna) in the second principal conjugation is aS- dna

(l. c . p. as nom inative plura l for the Sanscrituédads,from vaé, to wish,

”with an irregular contraction of the

syllable va to u. The following are examples of parti

ciples of the future passive : z aizhyamana or

- mna , aboutto be born (Vend . S . pp. 2 8 and and

uz ddkhyamna , being about to be raised

up = Sanscrituddhdsyamdna (Vend. S . p. 89, see

795. In close connection with the participial suflix mdnastands the Sanscrit suffix man, the original form of which

appears to be man, which has remained in the strong cases.

The words formed with it have, like the kindred partici

ples, either an active or a passive signification : some are

abstract substantives, like the Greek formations in now;

(zphe'ypovfi, xappowj, weca'

pomj, wMa'

powj, mutton/ ii, gbewpavfi),which, in form , are essentially identical with the partici

pial fem inines in new), as e and 0 are originallyone

See where, however, we should read M350) “M alaya, for

”fi ery-sz a zihya and the remark atthe end of the on the incor

rectness of the wayinwhich the word iswritten must be cancelled, and

the itof the participialforms referred to be reallyregarded as an euphonic

alteration of the n of the root(A35 can.

1 074 FORMATION OF WORDS .

—and with regard to the accentuation of the last syllable

of the suffix, they agree with the Sanscrit and, and (for

M ad, mand), of the second conjugation (see But

few masculines in man remain to us in Sanscrit, and these,too, are, for the most part, but rarelyused The follow

ing are examples : s'

tish- man, fire,”

as that which

dries ash- man, the hot time of year, as the burn

ing véman, weaver’

s loom ,

”as weaving or apparatus

Of weaving sz‘

man, border, as binding,

”from fa si,

to bind,”with the i lengthened ; pdp - man, sin, as

that which is sinned (peccatum), from a lost root.Some masculines in man have a vowel of conjunction i ;as, har- i - man, time,

“as carrying away,

"destroying

sar- i - mdn, the wind, as moving itself,” “

blowing ;

dha '

r- i - mén,"

form ,

”as borne,

”sustained (thus the

Latin form , from the root fer); star- i - mdn, bed,"

as

Spread out (compare stremen). Thus, also, the two

abstracts jén- i - man, birt and mar- i - man, death,“

which are likewise masculine, but are distinguished fromthe other forms in man byaccenting their first syllable ;

fan- i - man, mar—i - man like sushman, &c. opposed to

harimén, sarimén, starimén, dharimtin, bhariménd‘

Compare ¢7teypomj with Sanscrit middle participles like yufzjcind,the binding,

”from yutjmaAd.

1' See Bohtlingk , The Untidi Afi mes, p. 58 . W ilson renders binari

mduby“nourishing,

” “cherishing ;

”BOhtlingk by maintenance . I

think,however, I mayventure to deduce from the accentuation that itis

not an abstract substantive ; for otherwise, like mariman,“death, and

jam’

man,“birth, itwould have the accent on the radical syllable (see

p . The expressionw e Imtumba , bywhich, in the Unfidi Book

of K dumudi‘

, bharimdn Is explained, according toW ilson also, signifies, not“nourishing,

” “cherishing

”

(though to the rootkutumb, an instance of

which has notyet been metwith in books, the meaning “supported

"

(dlcritytim) is ascribed), but, amongstotherthings, “family; and I con

jecture thatbIIarimé n signifies“fam ily,

”in the sense of “thatwhich is

maintained


nection Of which with its apparent root (R far, 1 £71 ,

to break, Is, as regards meaning, by no means clear.

In Greek, adjective bases in youcorrespond, both as to ac

cent and as to the non- d istinction of the fem inine base

from that Of the masculine neuter ; as, pvijpov, TMM V,

Afiapov, i'

dpov, (ppcid/I ov, ém ow'

jpov. To the paroxytone mas

culine substantive bases mentioned in 795, like IiI’

whman,“

fire, as“drying, correspond in Greek such aswvefiuov

lung, as“breathing v nov, datpov god,

“

god

dess, properly‘‘

shining,

”arijpov. With the there

m entioned tri - syllable oxytone masculine bases like

harz’

man,

“time,

"as taking away, compare trade

-

adv,

Ij‘yepdv. Here, too, belong—as 6, like 0, is a corruption of a

—some bases in pév ; vi z . nomév herdsman,”as causing

to feed, compare pasco and the Sanscrit rootpd, to sup

port,”

to nourish some ; Mac-iv, nvdpév (the two latterfrom roots now obscured). The suffix 116W, “div- cg, of

xeufiyé v, flnpa'

w, xezpé v, Aemo’

w (from heIB-

pé v), has preserved, through all the cases, the long vowelfwhich , in the

corresponding Sanscritsuffix, is retained only in the strongcases : so, too, the corresponding Latin man of the bases

sermdn, termdn (=term inus, see témdn, and palm :

Itbelongstothe Sanscritrootdiv, “to shine whence deva, aged

div,heaven ; divasa ,

“day, & c. (See Benfey, Gr. R . L . I I . p .

T ll’

ith respectto the T- sound in dfrrpfiv and m aps”

, and which is

Often added to the rootbefore the suffix no, remark a similar circumstance

in Sanscrit, where, before the suffixes van, vara, and the gerundial suffixya , a euphonic tis always added to roots which end with a shortvowel ;as from j i comesjitvan andjitrara , conquering jitya (with prepositions preceding), after the conquest.

”

1 Compare Pott, Etym . I nq . II . 594 . and I . where té - mo, as well

as rig- mun

, is compared with the Sanscrittaksh,

“f fangere,finda -

e,f abrieari whence, also, taka/Ian, a carpenter and our D eichsel, a chip

axc (Old High German dihsila, and Anglo- Saxon dhiml), and the Old

High German dehsa and dchsala, fem inine,“axe (Grafl

'

,V . as

cleaving.

”


It is also highlyprobable thatto the Sanscrit formationsin man belongs the Latin ho- m in, for ho- mdn (in the old

language he- mo, he- mdnis). I take the h, as has been

already remarked elsewhere Berlin Annual R eg. of L it.

Grit.“Nov. 1 830. p. 79 1 ; compare Pott, Etymological 1 m

quiries, I . p. 2 1 7 ; and Benfey, Gr. R . L .

”II . p. to

be the representative of the f offui, &c. , and thereforehb

'

as=jb'

, in f'

o- re,fo—rem. Let reference be made to the

Prakrit hdmi and havdmi, I am ,

”for the Sanscritbhavdmi,

and the dative termination hi , of mihi , compared with theSanscrit hyam, from bhyam (see 5. 2 15. and 2 3. at the

end). Man, therefore, according to the Latin expression,

is simply“the being, as in Sanscritjana, the horn (root

ian, to produce,"

to bear There is also in Sanscrit

an appellation of man, from i t i , to be,“vi z . bhuvana

(see Wilson); and two appellations of the earth , vi z . t i

(the simple root) and t imi (compare Latin humus). I am ,

however, not aware that bhavat, being,”

also signifies

man,

”as Benfey l. c. asserts. The resemblance of the

Gothi c base git-man, man,

”Old High German go

- mon,

ko—mon (nom inative guma, gomo, homo), on which is basedour yam, of B riiutt

'

gam, bridegroom (Old High German

brzit-

gomcm, properly Brant- Mann) to the Latin homin,

lie- man, is surprising : the relationshi p, however, I am now

of opinion, is confined to the suflix, and the German ex

pression in reference to its root belongs to the above- men

tioned Sanscritjana (compare Grad'

, IV . p. with the

retention of the old medial (see 5. and with the loss

of the n, as in the radically, and, bysuffix, related lei - mm ,

germ (see 799. Note and in the Latin yé- m inus (see478. at the end). Properly, therefore, gu- man, go- mon,

cleaving. W ith the active signification among Latin formations in

M onlyremainspulmOn, lung,”as breathing,

”bytransposition from

plumdn (Ionic


signify the born. The circumstance that we have

already the Sanscrit rootjan contained in Gothic in the

forms kin (keina , kain, Ieinum , whence our K ind, child

kun (Jam i , sexi ’

) and qvin (qveins, lawful wife, as she

who bears, compare yowri), need not preventus from ad

m itting a form which has preserved the original medial.

I would recall to m ind the factthat both the Gothic qvam,

to come (gm‘

ma , goam), and gagga . I go,”are derived

from the Sanscrit rootgam , to go (see Butto

return to the Latin suffix men—from it arise the forms

mdnia, mdniu, by the addition of ia or in ; as, tdria ,

from Mr (victdria, from victor), with this difference, thatthe

prim itives in mda Of derivatives like quer- i - mdnia , al- i

mdnia , al- i - mdnium, oer- i - mdala (root cer= Sanscritkar, Iqri ,

to make have disappeared . From adjective and sub

stantive bases also spring, bythis double suffix, abstractslike acri - mdnia , wgri

- mdnia, casti - mdnt'

a , m iseri - mdnium, tristi

menium, testi - mdm'

um, matri - mdnium. I consider the i of

forms like casti - mOnia , (amt- mania, to be a weakening of

the final vowel of the base - noun (see Vocalismus,"

pp.

132 , 162 , and and the i of matri - mdnium to be an ex

tension Of the base , which, in the generality of cases, is

added to allbases ending in a consonant. I therefore nowregard the 6 in the nom inative plural as a contraction of

a i , and as the Sanscrit ay(from a i), of ay- as avé- s, for

example, therefore, has the same relation to the Sanscritucuy- as that mon- é- s has to mda - aya

- si , Prfikrit mdn- é- si

(see p. and thus pede-

s, amanté- s, come from the ex

tended bases pedi , amanti. Remark that bases in II also,in the nom inative plural, have simple 3 for their termination, and that here the lengthening Of the n represents the

Sanscrit and Gothic Guna ; e. g., fractal

- s, as in Sanscritszinav- as, and in Gothic sunyu- s, son,

”from i nu, sunu

(see Compare, also, what has been said before (5.regarding the Old Prussian present participle .

10m FORMATION OF WORDS .

with passive signification, mat- man, sand, as triturated.

also neuter (nominative masculine malma, neuter malmd,

see 140. and hiuh- man,“heap,

”as

“heaped up,"

from the root, lost as regards the verb, huh (euphonic hauh,see to which also belongs hauhs, high (Grimm ,

II. p. The Old High German places over aga instthe

Gothic- Sanscritman the form man (nominative mo), and in

this form corresponds to the Greek pov. The following

are examples : waits- a - mon, and wahsmon, vegetables.

fruit,”as growing,

"or having grown ; glt

‘

z - e- mon,

lustre ka- smag- mon, taste with passive signification ;

sdmon, seed,"as sown (Latin se As in Sanscrit

the suffix man also forms abstract substantive or adjec

tive bases, as prath- i—mda, breadth,

"from p j ithzi , broad

(from prathu, compare Greek wha'

ré); krishne i - mén, black

ness,”from krishnd, black we mayalso here mention

the Old High German rdta- mon (also rdto- mon, rate- man),

from the roots kin, chin (chin- i - t,“pullulat, ar- kin- i - t,

- cht'

ni- t,“gt

'

gnit,

see Graff, IV. “jars,“to produce,

” “to

bear (Latin gen, Greek yer), whence jcin-man neuter, and Jami-man

masculine, birth,”which agreeswith kimon in rootand sufiix . Ger-me n

,

for gen-men, corresponds in Latin. W ith respectto the rejection of the

final consonantof the rootbefore the m of the suffix, compare the (5.

above-mentioned Sanscritr6- man,“hair of the body,

”as

“growing,

"for

rat-man ; and Latin forms likefulmen, forfulg-men ; Iii - men, for lac- men

aswellasgt-mo’

mu(see 478 . conclusion),which is probably, in rootand

suffix, connected with lei - man. To Iii -men corresponds, in rootand sufl‘ix,

the Anglo- Saxon lib -man (nominative koma). light,"for Zach-man, com

pare Gothic huh - man;“lightning

1'

The kindred Sanscrit rootvahsh, to grow, would, in the middle,form vékshamdna asparticiple present.

This has been alreadyexplained inthe above sense in myReviewof

Grimm’

s German Grammar (“B erlinAnn. Reg. of L it. Criticism,

”Feb.

‘

182 7, p. 767 ;“Vocalismus,

"

p.

I The final vowel of the base word is rejected before the vowel Of conjunction 6.

FORMATION'

OF WORDS . 108 1

redness, from the adjective base f étu, as a veryremark

able analogous form . The Latin uses for this object the

suffix mdm'

a, or feminine mania (see 797. conclusion), extended from min.

800. In Lithuanian the suffix spoken of appears in the

form men, nominative m3 ; and thus, from a Lithuanian

pointof view, the obscure p iemen, nom inative p iemi'

t, shepherd’

s boy," corresponds to the Greek wozpév, watpév (see

5. and airmen, -m i’

t, stone,“to the Sanscrit, also oh

scure, és'

man, —md . From a Lithuanian pointof view, the

bases any- men, z'

el-men,“sprout,

“Shoot,

"as growing,

"

(auguand z‘elu,

“l yes- men, apron- string,

“ “

girdle

(gas- mi.“I have a girdle on ap

- si -yds- m i,

“I gird myself

sic- men, stature"

(stowyu,“I stand,

” compare Sanscritsthdman, strength, from stbd, to stand are quite intelligible.

Semenys.

“linseed,

”

properlyonly seed (sEyu,“I sow,

“

future s'

é- eu), is a nom inative plural, as akmeny- s, stones,

from the extended base M eat“and leads us to expect a

singular semii ; and therefore corresponds to the Old HighGerman base sdmon and to the Latin semen.

The Old Sclavonic presents a few masculine bases in MEN ,

whi ch, in the nom inative, contrastmm mywith the Lithuanian mt

°

t and Sanscrit md (see 2 60. at the end, and

p. but prefer, however, the form meny, from the pro

longed base meni (Dobrowsky, pp. 2 87 and 2 89, under m e

any). From a Sclavonic point of view, however, onlyplamen (nom inative plumy. or plameny, flame ,

"as burning,

"

The sufiix men forms the entire plural, with the exception of the

genitive (Marten- a, Iap idum”=Sanscrit Osman- 6m), from the extended

ment. In some cases Of the singular the suffix is extended bythe addi

tion of ia ; thus, in the genitive, c'

zkmenio (like toil/to, together

with the organic dkmen- s instrumental t

'

z kmeniu(like wilka), together

with akmeni - mi accusative éhmeni - ia; locative dkmeniye, according to

the analogyof awiya, from the base awi, a sheep .

4 A

1 082 FORMAT ION OF WORDS .

is etymologically intelligible (mum'

i 'rnm plamuili- smi,

“comburi nAA II'm pal

- i - ti , were,

"& c. ; see M iklos.

p. RAMS“kamen, stone (nom inative kamy, or kameny)answers to the Lithuanian alcmen, akmh, and Sanscrit tit

"

man, Mind.

801 . To the Sanscrit neuter bases in man (nominative

ma, see mentioned at correspond the Latin

in m in(men in the cases having no termination beyond the

base), the Greek in par, for paw(see and the Gothic

and Sclavonic in man. MEN men. The Latin and Greek

formations which come under this class have, like their

Sanscrit sister forms, either a passive signification,which ,

indeed, is generallythe case ; as pratfamen. strumen, sémen,

agmen, seymen, garment,“wpa

'

ypa‘

r, natnpa'

r. papa-

r, &xovepa r,

ypamta'

r, yhvppar, dopa-

r, Bpwpar ; or an active significa

tion, as j h'

imen, ltimen. (from lucmen), fulmen (from fulgmen).

tegmen, teg- i - mend

' teg-u- men, reg

- i - men as guid

German, from genmen, is founded on the frequent interchange of

liquids‘

tThe 6of try- i - men, reg- i - men, is identicalwith the class—vowelof the

third conjugation, and leadsus, therefore, to the Sanscrit a of the first

and sixth class, which in Latin has beenweakened to i oru(veh - i - mus,

och -uui , see this isclear from the longt'

of the fourth conjugation

(mol- i - men, fuIc- i - men, as mol- i fitlc- i and the d of the first

(certamen, lcvfimen, Forms like agmen, fragman, tegmen, on the

contrary, belong to thatperiod of Sanscritwhich combinesthe suffix man,withoutreference to the conjugation of the verb, almostinvariablydirectwith the root. In the Latin second conjugation we should expect 4?

before the said suflix, and the mentuderived from it: for it, however, wefind, where the suflix is not combined directwith the root, according tothe analogyof the third conjugation, i oru; hence, red- i - men, doc- u- men,

doc-u- mentum, mon- i - mentum,mon-u- mentum. In general, the Latin 1!of

the second conjugation does notkeep its place so firmlyas the two other

representatives ofthe Sanscrittenth class(see p. hence, also, doc-ui,doc- tum, opposed toum - d- vi, am - d- tum

,aud - i - vi , aud- i - tum.


with respectto its concluding element, as a form analogous

to 4 01,v (and, therefore, as a derivative from depot-

r, from

depart), than as a participle for denevo : on the other hand, I

look upon dtdvavo, which Passow takes to be analogous to

wiwvavo-

g and dmihapvo- g, as a participle (properly, there

fore, doubled from a reduplicated verbal base 8480, which

has sprung from 860, and from which a present indi cative{6

‘

t might have been expected ; thus, dt'

dupvo-

g, like

dtdépevo-

g, onlywith the suppression of the m iddle vowel of

the suffix, as in the Latin al- u- mnu. and in the above - men

tioned eu- im- u- mne. Compare, also, the participial

substantive bases in pvo, fem inine pm , as, fieAepwo, acetate,

peptpva , which have been alreadydiscussed byPott(E . I .

II . p. under this view, and whi ch have no correspondingverb, any more than the abovementioned 8:80pm , though

fieAepvo, just li ke fishes, is visiblyconnected with Ba’

M w.

802 . The Old Sclavonic neuter bases in mm men havein the cases, which in Sanscrit and Gothic drop the final

1 1, retained the original a with a resonant nasal ; hence,m m iman. names (see 783. Rem . 1 . conclusion), fromthe base imen= Sanscrit std- man. Here belong, also, the

bases can!“ eye- men, seed,

"as sown (syc-

yati , to

sow Latin semen, Old High German sdmon masculine

(see 793. Note 3) nnm sn p iemen,

“letter of the alpha

bet,“

as written (pis- a - ti, to write 3namsn (na

I cannotrefrain from drawing attention herotothe strong agreement

between the Sclavonic rootpic and the Old Persianp ic/t, with the prepo.

sition m‘

ai - pich,“towrite down,

”to describe,

”

properly, to hew in.

"

Rawlinson (Beh . translates . fi5. fi 22 £ 777.4 71.nip ishtam by

“scriptum and, IV . 7l.

, f? K »,

VZVHIIZZ'M

”III niyap ishaQ/a)m by“imcrip i .

”I think, however, thatwe must,

with the g19, read also the a contained in it; thus, niyapaishayam for

whetherthis form be taken as a causal—thus, I have caused to describ eor as a verb of the tenth class, in both casesGuns is indispensable .

The


men, a sign, as making to know (Cna - ti to

know and a fewwords from obscure roots (Dobrowsky,

p. The Gothic furnishes besides na - man,“names

(nom inative accusative name, see whi ch, in the

other German languages, has become masculine, onlyalde

man, age,"if this word really be, as Gabe]. and LObe

suppose, a neuter, which cannot be discerned from the

but once occurring dative aldO'

min (Luke i . As the

neuter abstractof an adjective itwould correspond to the

abovementioned 799. conclusion) Sanscrit neuter bases

like krishfi- i - man, blackness,

“from lambda, black

while the there- mentioned rdta - mon, redness,“like namon.

names (nom inative name), has perhaps first become

neuter as it was gradually corrupted. The 6 of the

Gothic aldd-man I take to be the lengthening of the a of

the base alda (see old,”which, indeed, does not

occur, but maybe inferred from the cognate dialects (seeGrafi

'

, I . If, however, aldd-man i s derived, not from

an adjective, but from a verb, we must suppose a lostde

nom inative aldd- m , I grow old (see and alde

mon would then correspond to Latin formations like certa

men We can hardly imagine any similarity of

formation between the above and the Old High Germancompounds alt- duom. alt- twin (see Grimm , II .

803. From the suffix men, m in, an extended form mentu

has proceeded in Latin (argu- mentu- m, mon- u- mentu- m , incre

mentu- m, co-

gno- menlu- m , sed- i - mentu- m in which I do

not agree with Pott(E . I . II. in recognising the affix

of a participial suffix ta (tus, ta . tum), butone that is simply

phonetic ; just as, in Gothic, the base hun- da (nom inativehands) stands over againstthe Sanscrit s

‘an of the weakest

The causalform ofthe Sanscritpish, Class7, to beatdown,”

to bruise,whence the meaning to engrave,

”to hew in,

”is easily deducible

appears to me the mostprobable.


cases, and Greek xw (xéwv, manic), or as, in Latin, the San

scrit roots tan, to extend,”

and hen (from dhan), to

smite,"

to slay (Greek Gav), has become extended to

tend, fend (f=dh, 0, see and, in Sanscrit itself, ban

and chand (from kand), to shine,”are originallyone. A

mate is readily attracted to the side of a nasal, and the

former as easilyannexes a vowel ; and thus, for the Latinextended suffix manta , without reference to gender, we find

a parallel in the Old High German munda (from manda),nominative mand, butonly in the solitarybase hliumunda ,

nom inative hlt’

u- mand (abbreviated lin- mand, our Leumund,

renown fame,"as thatwhich is heard,

"as inGothic

hliu- man, car,"as hearing (compare Grimm , II . p.

The Greek base éN q , worm,

”as winding itself, has

added to the suffix air, mentioned above onlya 0. butin this respectstands as isolated as, in Old HighGerman, the justmentioned hlt

‘

u- munda . The form éAmW(chats/yes) exhibits, instead of the T- sound, a guttural, andthus rem inds us of the relation of our yang, young(Gothic Yugg- s, themeyugga yunga), to the Sanscrityuvan,in the weakest cases ytia (genitive min- as), and Latinjuvenis, junior. Thus the Old High German suffix unga (ourany) of abstract substantives, as in ar-find- unga, inven

tion, warn- unga, warning,"may be identical with the

Sanscritfeminine form of the suffix ana (and); so thatthefirst a has become weakened to u, as in the polysyllabicforms of the preterite, as bunti, thoudidst bind, com

pared with the monosyllabic bent, I bound,“

be bound.

"

In the same way our root sang, to sing, (Old HighGerman singe ,

“sang,

"second person magi), maybe com

pared with the Sanscritroot svan, to sound (compareGratf. VI . p.

804. I think I discover the origin of the medio -

passivc

participial suffix mdna , and of the cognate nom inal suffix

man, in the combination of two demonstrative bases ma


expressed bythe root, or on whom thataction is aecom

plished . Abstracts, also, are formed bythis suffix, which,however, is seldom adopted in that state of the language

which has descended to us ; while the corresponding suffixes

of the Lithuanian and Greek (ma, no) are of veryfrequentuse . The following are examples in Sanscrit: rukmci - m,

gold, as glittering"

(ruck, from rule, to yugma- m, pair,

"as

“bound together tigmd, adjective - ma- s.

ma. ma- m), sharp“ “

hot (roottii, fromtig, to substantive neuter (tigmé - m) heatIihimti , fearful rootbhi‘. to fear dhtimd - s,

smoke, as being moved”

(root (111 12, to move ) ,

yud h- ma- s, combatant," contest,

" “arrow (yudh, to

fight gharmd- s, heat, apparentlyas moistening, by

sweat (root gha'

r, ghri , to sprinkle ishma- s, tone

(rootish,“to idhma- s, wood. as being burned

(root idh, to burn To the latter correSponds the ZendMeans» ces

’

ma (nominative m6). Remark the agreement

of the abovementioned Sanscritwords in the accentuationof the suffix with Greek formations like crowd- g. nomad- g,Kappa-

g, ddvppd- g, mand- g, nomad-

g, ¢Aoya6~g dyad-

g, pond-

g,

xvpui—g, a o- O—pé- g, yuan

- 01 1 6 1 . In Sanscrit, also, there are

a few words formed with ma, whi ch, like nérpo-

g, ciao-

g,“

a'

vepo-

g, give -

g, and some others of Obscure origin in Greek

(Ruttmann, II. p. have the accenton the radical syllable . Here belong, for example, bhdma- s, the sun, as

giving light,"éu

’

shma - m, fever, as drying.

"To the

masculine nom inatives in ma - s correspond numerous Li

thuanian abstracts in i - ma - s, or, with m doubled, i - mma

oi is the Guna form of the rooti ,“to go (compare Thus,

in Sanscrit, vé rtman, way, from cart, crit.“to go.

"

1" W ith regard to the doubling of the m, compare the doubling of

liquids so common in Old Prussian. I believe I have discovered itto bea fixed law in Lithuanian, thatthe doubling of the m in the said suffix is

only


the i of which , as in Sanscritforms like jan- i - man, birth

(see is onlya vowel of conjunction. The followingare examples : gimm

- i - mme - s, birth ey- i - mma - s, going

(ei - m i . I go fly- ou, I went pa—gadinn

—i - ma—s, ruin

(pa -

gadina, I mar In this manner, in Lithuanian,

abstractsubstantives are formed from adjective bases also,in which formation a final a of the adjective base is weakened to a, while bases in a have their vowel unchanged.

The following are examples : gddu- mme - s, avarice,”from

gi’

tda- s,“avaricious gra

- e‘u- mme—s, beauty, from grain- s,

beautiful ; darku- mna - s, ugliness,"

from def icit- s,

ugly; drasu- tnna - s, boldness, from drast‘

t- s, bold

(compare Greek Opaetig, Oapatig, Sanscrit dharsh. dhO

rt'

sh,

to dare riata- mna - s, hardness,”from riata - s, hard

aalrsz tu- mma - S height from aulcsz ta - s high iIgu- mma - s

length,”from iIgi

- s (for ilgia - s, see long?“

806. The Latin has buta few words in ma - s. and thoseof obscure origin and etymology, to Offer in comparisonwith the Indo—Lithuanian in ma - s and Greek in fro—g ; as,

cu- i - mus', which, like the Greek d'

v- e-

ao-

g, has originatedfrom the Sanscrit root an, to breathe,

”to blow (see

a); fu—mus= 001465, Sanscrit dht'

i -mds, smoke (rootdhzi, 00, see perhaps pd- mw-m, apple,

"as non

rishing, or being tasted (Sanscrit pd, to support,"

and to drink,” compare pa - bulum, pa

- sco, pct- vi. pd

- tus, pd

onlythen permitted or required when, exclusive of prefixes in combina

tion with the verb,the verbal base is monosyllabic. If

,however, itbe

polysyllabic, the m is notdoubled ; hence, indeed, gimm - i - mma - s,birth

,

”

and also uz -gimm - i - mma - s, idem cu-gruw- i - mma - s, circumstance

(gruwu, I occur butnotgraudén- i - mma - s, warning,

”butgraadén

i - mas (grandm a,I

Bases in ia , nominative is, drop their i before the uoftheir abstractswhich has arisen from a ; hence midda - mmus

,

“greatness, from widd i

'

s,

a

great.”

lo9o FORMATION OF WORDS .

him); and the adjectivesfor- mus (compare ferveo, fer- men

tum), f ir- mus (compare for- tic, fem), al- mus. In the Ger

man languages, also, the formations Of this class are, for

the most part, no longer conscious of their origin : theyoccur in Grimm , II . p. 145, where. however, the bases in

ma and those in mi , which have both losttheir final vowelin the nom inative singular, are notdistinguished. I re

gard the suffix mi, which exists also in Sanscrit and in

Greek,“as merelya weakened form of ma, as in the Greek

pronom inal base a: (accusative pt'

v)= Sanscrit ma (seeThe Gothic bagms, tree (theme bag

- ma), probablymeans originally

“the growing (Sanscritbarh, brih,

to grow the adjective base arma, nominative arms,

is perhaps an abbreviation of ard- ma, and a shoot from the

Sanscrit root ard, to vex,

”with which I would compare,

also, the Sanscrit dr—ma (nom inative masculine arma - s,

neuter arma - m) a maladyof the eyes bar-m i (nom inative

harms), lap,”

Springs evidently from the rootbar (baira,

bar) to carry. In Old High German dau- m, don- m

(theme - ma, or - mi vapour, corresponds to the San

scrit dhti - md- s, smoke tra it- m, theme tron- ma (OldSaxon dro- m, df d- ma), leads us to the Sanscritroot drd

“to

sleep saw- m (theme sou—ma), seam ,

“to finl Siv, to sew

(Old High German siwu. hel- m,

“ helm , as eo

vering,

"springs from the roothal, to conceal (hilu, haI,

hulumés).807. The feminine form of the suffix, vi z . md, does not

occur in Sanscrit in substantives ; butthe Greek in an, as

yva'

mn, ortwnj, ypaawj, correspond to it; as do the

Latin, like flamma , from fiagma, fdma, spt’

ima, strt’

ima, gltima

E . g .m dal- mi - s, masculine, Indra’

s thunderbolt,”from dal,

to cleave m bht‘

i -mi - s,

“earth,

”feminine, from bhti , to be,

” “to

become dove - pe r, daii- pt- s, Oi - pt- r (Ion. genitive S im- os).


from silbna- s. weak ; byaary- hé, ugliness, from byaun‘

i - s,

ugly. The following are examples of Russian abstracts

in ba : MoanGa molyba, begging (MOIUO molyu, I beg

eny2k6a. Sluschba , service (cnyzky alasoku, I serve

tmpafltfia straschba, watching (cmepery staraya, I

watch anq fia aléba , hunger (anus alc’

u, I am hun

gry Perhaps, as we have seen in Gothic m take the

place of b in the dative plural (see so we mayassume the converse mutation of m to b ; and, in fact, inthe formations in u- bni (theme nebnya neuter, a—bnyd fem inine, see Grimm , II. p. occasionallyu-fni . If we re

trace the b, which is evidentlythe more genuine form , to

m , then vit- u- mni (vit- u- bni. knowledge ,

“would resemble

Latin formations like al- u- mnus (see 478. conclusion); and

in myopinion the Gothic like the Latin uis onlya classvowel, and therefore a weakened form of a , or, in Grimm

’

s

weak form of the second conjugation, of 6 ; and therefore

vund -u-fni , fem inine, wound,"is for vand- ti-fni , from vund- d,

I wound. It deserves notice, that, together withfra z’

st

u- bni , fem inine, attempt,“there occurs also the form fra ist

d- bni (genitive plural fra ist- d- bnyd, Luke iv. evidentlyfrom a weak verb fra istd (compare the Old Northernfret

'

sta ,

tentare,“

see Graff, III . which cannotbe cited ; forthe strong verb fra isa gives no authority to the t, and

would make us expect only fra is-u- bni . In fast- n- bni,

fasting,“the n represents the a sound of the diphthong

a i of the third weak conjugation, where we must observethatthe i elementof this diphthong is dropped also before

personal term inations beginning with nasals ; thus, asfasta - m, we fast.

"

fast- a - nd, they fast,"for fast- a i - m, fast

a i - nd. sofast- u- bni , from fast- u- ma i forfast- a i - ma i.808. In order to exhaust the presumptive cognates of

the Sanscrit participial suffix menu, the Latin suffix mnlu

mustalso be here mentioned, the l of wh ich . perhaps, likethat of alius=Sanscrit anya - s,

“the other,

”rests on the


favourite interchange of the liquids (see We divide ,

therefore, fa-mulus, properly the making (forfac- mulus);

or if, as Ag. Benaryconjectures, it belongs to the Sanscritrootbhaj to honour,

“to serve (compare Gothic and- bah

ts, servant,"

he who serves ; sti - malus (for stig- mulus),

sting,“

as sticking (compare, accord ing to Vossius,w ith ). ovt

'

ypa , &c”) Compare the Irish suffix mha il, infas

a - mhail, growing (fasaim, I grow - a - mdna - s.

"i

If, however, the a offasa - mha il is not a class vowel, as in

fas—a—mar, we grow“= Sanscritvalcsh- d- mas, butto be in

cluded in the suffix (to be divided, therefore, fasin that case the lastportion of the word properlymeans“like,

“and is mostprobablyan abbreviation of the adjec

tive samhuiL'

l' whi ch occurs uncompounded. Words like

fear- amhuil, manlike,“can scarcelybe explained otherwise

than as compounds offear and amhatl. The Latin suffix

mule m ight, however, be also connected with the Sanscritmara ; whence, udmara andjasmara , voracious,

"from ad,

jas, to eat,”srimara (Wilson), according to some authori

ties, a young deer,”from sar, sri, to go, Thi s suffix,

however, as v and m are easilyinterchanged, is originallyone with the more usual care ; whence nas

’

sara, transi

tory,”from naé, to be ruined bhdsvara, shining,

“from

bkas, to shine ; sthdvara, standing,

”immoveable, from

stint, to stand.

“

809. Before we pass on to the consideration of those

participles which do not, like those alreadydiscussed, belong to anytense of the indicative, and make no distinc

tion between active, passive, and m iddle, we mustmentionone other participle peculiar to Latin, vi z . the participlefuture passive in ndn. I have already, in my Conjuga

Itbeing taken for granted thatvaksh is used in the middle. F for

Sanscritv is, in the Irish dialectof the Celtic, veryusual.

Compare the Sanscritsama , “like, Latin eimilis.


tional System considered this, with regard to its

form , as a modification of the participle present active ,and think I must continue to supportthis view, though it

maybe objected that, in this manner, the passive and fu

ture signification of the said participle will have no foun

dation as respects form . Butwords seldom express in

form those relations, to denote which theyare destined bythe use of language and grammatical forms often change

their original meaning, as, in Persian, the forms in Mr or

ddr (fargl ldr, deeeptor,”dd- ddr dator,

“which are

based on the Sanscrit nouns of agency in far, Greek in

mp, and Latin in tor. tar- is, are used, contrary to the iroriginal intention, with a passive meaning ; also, gi - rif - tdr,

capfus, captivas, prceda ; res- tar, liberatus hush- tar,

occisas yItf- tdr, sermo (see Vuller'

s I nst. L . P ers.

p. while converselythe participles in tah or dah, which

are based on the Sanscrit passive participles in ta , have

generallyan active signification, and reta in their original

passive meaning almost onlywhen in combination with the

auxiliaryverb shndan to be hence burdah, qui tulit

Sanscrithmid- s (from bharta - s),“latus; butburdahm isha

vam ,

“

feror,”

properly lotusfie.

“The Latinferendas ap

proaches verycloselythe Persian presentparticiple barin

dah. bearing and, like the latter, has weakened the

originaltennis (offerent)to a medial, and extended the base

bythe addition of a vowel, both which changes take placealso in Prakrit and Pali (see p. This Opinion that

The choice of d ortin the suffix depends on the preceding letter .

Compare 9 1 . conclusion.0

1'

The Sanscrit also has a fewwordswhich, in their origin, are evi

dentlypresentparticiples, but have added to the atalso an a,or have

preserved the a of the base ta (see § . Theyaccent the suffix ;hence, bhdsantti - s, sun

,as

“lighting,”opposed to bhdsant(see 786 .

rahanta s, a certain tree,

”as

“growing,

”opposed to wheat; gada

yantd s,


sickness, from siuk(a)- s sick, (see Grimm, I . p.

In Greek, too, there are a few adjectives, the fem inines of

which represent abstracts ; in such a manner, however, as

thatthe latter is distinguished from the feminine adjective

bythrowing back the accent, in agreementwith whathas

been before remarked on sim ilar phmnomena in Sanscrit;hence, Oépnry, heat,

"xé xq , wickedness,

“Opposed to 06pm},

xamj; as above, ydéas, fame,"opposed to yaét

'

w, famous

(see 785. Remark); janiman. birth,"marimun, death,

opposed to words like sariman, wind,“as blowing

Butto returnto the Latin participles in nda , secundus,

the following one ,"has correctly reta ined the original

design of the suffix ; and the conjecture, therefore, that it

is a contraction of sequebundus is unnecessary: yet, in myopinion, words in bundus in so far belong to this class, as

most probably the verb substantive is contai ned in themin the same wayas we have recognised it in the imper

feets and futures in bam, be (see 52 6. When, how

ever, Voss derives the forms bundu from the imperfect,

as, errabundus from errabam , vagabundus from vagabar,

gemebundus from gemebam, he appears to be in error, as thisderivation is not supported by the sense ; as gemebundus

signifies, not qai-

gemebat,"but gemens.

"I allow, there

fore, between gemebam and gemebundas only a sisterly re

lation, and take bundu—s rather as the participle presentofthe rootfa,

“with the extension of the suffix atto min, as

in the future passive participle under discussion. In Per

sian the participle present of the rootbi’

i. to be, would

probably be havandak (for bwandah, compare bavam, I

maybe and in Sanscrit from bhz’

i reallycomes bhtivant,

being (base of the strong cases), to which the Latin

bundu, exclusive of the suffix a , has nearlythe same rela

Regarding b forj ; see 1 8 . 62 6.


tion as bam (ama - bam) has to d- bhavam . The first a of

bunda I take to be notthe radical vowel offa, butthe cor

ruption of an original a, as in the third person plural (vehu- nt= Sanscrit nah- a nti). As a proof that the forms in

banda - s are, in their origin, participles, may be adducedalso the circumstance that they occasionally govern the

accusative ; thus, in Livy, vitabundus castra, mirabundus

m spasm . Butshould these forms originallybelongto a tense other than the present, we m ight recognise inthem obsolete future participles, and assume thatthe useof the participle in turns has caused them to be less freelyemployed, given room for their being dispensed with, andchanged their signification. An especial corroboration of

this view is to be found in the factthatthe majority of

forms in header belong to the first conjugation, and thatin old Latinity futures in be occur also in the third and

fourth conjugation, a form which mayoriginallyhave be

longed to all classes of verbs ; as, as has been shewn, forms

like legam and audiam are nothing but present tenses of

the subjunctive mood, and used as a compensation for the

lost futures (see We should consequentlyregard

Iascioibundus and sitibundus as analogous forms of old futures

like scz‘

bo, dormiho, onlywith the vowel shortened, as beforethe suffix bundu- s, with the exception of the d of the first

conjugation, only shortvowels are found, and, therefore ,

we have gemi bundus, fremébundus, Opposed to dicébo, and

pudibundus opposed to pudébit.

8 10. Letus now betake ourselves to the considerationof those participles whi ch, withoutany formal designationof anytemporal or lineal relation, have retained their destination ia this respect merely by the use of language.

These are in Sanscritthe future participle in tar, tri , the

perfect passive participle in ta or no, and the future passive

participle in ya, tavya, and aniya . The first- mentioned

participle, which is, atthe same time, a noun of agency, has4. R


been already discussed in 646, 647 ; somewhat, however,remains still to be observed on the subject. And first

mustbe noticed the coincidence in accentwhich exists be

tween the Sanscrit and Greek, since the formations inmtar, like the Greek inmp, regularlyaccentthe sufi x ; thus,ddtdr, nominative ddtd(see dator and datum , as in

Greek dom'

p janitdr, nominative janitd genitor,“

and

g“

enituru8”

‘

yeve‘

rnp. On the other hand, the sufi x rop,

which in origin and signification is identical with mp, and

the long vowel of whose nominative reap, is to be regarded

onlyas a compensation for the wantof the case - sign, has

lost simultaneously its organic length and its accent: it

admits, too, of scarce any doubt, that, in Sanscrit, theweightof the suffix tar is the cause of its being accented,according to the same principle bywhi ch, in the second

principal conjugation, the heavy personal term inations

assume the accent(see 785. Remark). The Greek forma

tions in m-

c, whi ch in 145 . have likewise been compared

with the Sanscrit in far, have, in part, remained true to

the old accentuation, since in forms of more than two

syllables a vowel long in itself byposition, with a gene

rally, and occasionally also with x, p, v. and A precedingthe suffix, serves like a dam to the accent which be

longs to the suffix, and prevents it from receding fartherback ; hence, indeed, 86mg opposed to dorijp, ddtd butpaym‘nis’ : wom

‘

njs‘ , Cnhw‘njg, dtxao'

rwjg, &xovrta'

rrjg, fiao'

rax'

njg, (pop

mx‘njg. Auyatmjg, edeuv-

njg, nomtA'

njs‘, a ap'njs‘, opposed to

forms like yapémg,yevérqg, navdaxémg. The e of formslike‘

yew- é- rns'

,yew- e- rrip, navdak- é- rng, is mostprobablya corrup

tion of t; for itcorresponds to the t‘

, which often occurs inLatin, and still oftener in Sanscrit, between the root and

the suffix e. g. yew- e- rrip and yev- é- mg correspond to the

Sanscritjan- i - ldr and Latin gen- altar.

81 1 . In the weak cases the Sanscrit suffix (dr suppresses

its vowel, and the accentthen falls on the case terminations


thus, notonlyixé-n—g compared with ixé-rn-

g, butalso ebpe'

n -

c

Opposed to eépeTfi-

g.

8 12 . The words denoting affinity in I Q tdr, tyi , are ev i

dently, in their origin, nouns of agency(see“Vocalismus,

p. for p itdr, weakened from patdr, and thi s again from

pdlé r, means properly nourisher, or ruler,”from the

rootpd ; and mdtdr, mother,“I regard as she thatbrings

forth while I dissent from the Indian Grammarians who

derive itfrom man.“to honour,

”and prefer deducing itfrom

the rootma, to measure,”which, with the preposition m

'

x,

outof (a ir- ma), signifies to make,"

to produce,"and

evenwithouta preposition is capable ofthis interpretation.

it

Duhilér, daughter,"signifies properly suckling. from

duh. to m ilk ; ndptdr, grandchild, is in its final ele

ment essentially identicalwith p itdr, father (this, how

ever, is perhaps opposed to myformer opinion, see p. 387,

Note here not in the sense of father,“butto be taken

in its primitive meaning, while we regard the compound

notas a possessive butas a determ inative ; so thatnaplar,in Opposition to p itdr, as ruler,

"or fam ilychief,

"would

signify the not ruler, or subject, and thus it m ightmean anymember of a fam ilybutthe father ; as also in

the Veda dialect, napal, which has preserved the original

I now find a strong confirmation of this Opinion, whi ch is elsewhere

expressed (“Vocaliunusf p. 1 82 ) in the Veda dialectin the FirstBook Of

the R ig. Véda (Hymn 61 . which has been edited in the interim byFr. Rosen

,where the genitive mdlur occurs as masculine, with the

meaning“creatoris.

”The Old Persian furnishes the noun of agency

framdtdr (fra preposition), which is connected in root and suffix with

métar, the accusative of which, framdtdram, occurs repeatedlyin the

inscriptionswith which we are acquainted, and is rendered byLassen,

imperatorem. I have no doubtthatthe above-mentioned Védianmdtur

has an accusative mdtdram (notmdtd'

ram), and that, therefore, the theme

is properlymdtdr, notmdtd’

r, as the d is shortened onlyinwords denot

ing affinity.

FORMATION OF WORDS . 1 101

length of the rootpd, signifies in the passages cited byFr.

Rosen (on the B ig. V . I . 2 2 . son,

”though in form it

corresponds to the Latin base "q uit. as also its fem inine

napti'

, daughter,”to the Latin base nepli

'

, Old High Ger

man mfl i (nominative accusative tuft). B i nd- tar, brother,"

has clearlylost a consonant before the suffix, for there isno rootbhra. If, as the Indian Grammarians assume, the

root is bhrdj, to shine, we must then observe that therdj, which is probably related to it, and from which Pott

deduces bhrdj (for abhi - rdj), signifies besides to shine,"also

to rule, and, therefore, the brother maybe so desig

nated as ruler in the fam ily, which, according to Indianmanners, the eldestbrother after his father‘

s death reallyis (see Vocalismus, p. But bhra, in bhmtdr, mayalso have sprung from the rootbhar, bhp

' i .“to carry,

“to

support,"bythe transposition and lengthening of the radi

cal vowel, just as in Greek from Baa : BAr’

raw, BéBAq—xa ,

Baa- pa , &c. , from wen- = Sanscrit pat, to fall to fly

(m'

m w from mus-

ru) z w as andm (1 17 60 15) wrwpa , m iimg),

and in Sanscrit from man, to think,"mad, to mention,

"

This fem inine form leads to the conjecture thatthe masculine napdt

in the weakest cases (see rejects its 6 that, therefore, the geni

tive would be napt- as, for napdt- as, since fem inine bases in tgenerallyfollowthe analogyof the weakest cases ; as, réfii -

‘

i,

a queen, follows

thatof raffl e,to the king,

"ffi

‘

ri - as, of the k ing,

”& c. Before term ina

tions beginning with a consonant, where naptwould be impossible, Ishould expectnapdt thus

, napad . bhyas, to and “from the sons.

”If

such formswere confirmed, I still could notassentto Benfey'

s (Glossaryto the Si ms Véds, p. lo6)conjecture, that d in napdt, as also the 6 of

forms like datér- is, & c.

,is a lengthening thatoriginallybelongs onlyto

the strong cases, which, in Latin (nepdt), has entered into all cases. It is

more natural to suppose the theme of the Sanscritstrong cases to be the

original one, and therefore, also, in the classical languages, for the most

part, carried through all the cases, as is the case in the example before uswith the suffix tor,mp, contrasted with the Sanscritstrongtdr (shortenedinthe vocative to tar)andwith the participle present in at.


which is regarded by the Indian Grammarians as a dis

tinct root. If, as now appears to me more probable, this

is the derivation of bhra- tdr, vi z . from bhar, in that case the

brother is properly the supporter,”as the stayof the

mother, sisters, and younger brothers after the father's

death. “ So the husband, also, in relation to the wife, who

is termed bhdryd the female to be supported, to be

cherished is the supporter,”and as such is called bhar

tdr, nom inative bhartd; a word, the creation of which sti ll

lies within the clear recollection of the language, and

which, therefore, in departure from its supposed cognatebhratar, follows the ordinarydeclension. The appellation

of“sister,

”in Sanscritsoasar, has still preserved the long

vowel in the strong cases, but has, on that account, likethe Latin sow-Or from sostdr, lost a t, which has remained

in the German and Sclavonic languages (Gothic wistar,English sister, Old Sclavonic sestra). and in the Lithua

(nominative sessii, genitive sesser- s, see 144.

has assimilated itself to the preceding 3. Své - s(t)dr is

properly the wife belonging"

(regarding the pronounsva , see and is, in its final element, akin to strt

‘

,

woman, which Pott is undoubtedly right in deducingfrom the rooten, mi , to bear a child (E. I . I. p. so

that, like fe—mina (see 478. conclusion), it originallysignifies the parturient, and is a regular fem inine noun of

agencyup to the loss of the radical vowel.

8 13. The shortening of d to a, which most words denoting aifinityhave experienced in Sanscrit and Zend in

the strong cases, appears to have existed so early as the

time of the unityof language, as it is scarcelyfortuitousthatpitéram, p itafi du(Véda 4 d). p itdras, stand in the same

So in a passage of Sdm’

trt(p . 16 ofmytranslation of TheDeluge

When the husband (of the mother) is dead, thatson is culpable who isnotthe protector of his mother.

"


food, giving is riches who strikes, &c. (I . 4. 1 . 5.

yd ddfityd éaéamdndya sunsafé déla jaritrd (euphoni c for

tve’

)ukthydm,

“who is giving that which is com

mendable to the praise singer, who slays with care, and

expresses the juice of the (Sema)”

(II . 1 4. tvdshgd

ad dd z’

vya i i vdchali paijdnyd brdhmagmspdtih'

, Parjanyas

Brahm is creating for us godlike speech‘“(I . 1 .

data’

si édtravé vadluim,

‘“thouarthurling death atthe foe

'

(II. I take péta as a future parti ciple in the

following passage : péta vritrahd sutdm d gha gamat, po

twms Vrilrt'

occisor 86mm succum adeat (II . 8 .

As regards the cause of the retrogression of the accent inthese expressions, I have no doubtthatthe aim which the

language has in view is most emphaticallyto express, bythe accentuation, the energyof the action, which, in the

case where the form in tdr as a participle governs the ac

cusative, appears in its full force ; and I am of this opi

nion, as, as has alreadybeen remarked (see 785. Remark,

at the beginning), the accenting the initial syllable of a

word in Sanscrit is the most emphati c.

Tuishtdr is paroxyton also as a noun of agency.

1 According to Benfey’

s translation,“let the Vritra- slayer drink the

juice,’’

& c. pdta would=pdtd sydt, bihem sit. 1 doubt, however, thatthese participlescan, withoutan auxi liaryverb, representthe potentialorimperative ; for the indicative onlyofthe verb substantive is, in Sanscrit,veryfrequentlyom itted, as being bythe sense itselfunderstood. The en

clitic ghd (for gha), which stands in the text in the common dialectha ,

which, as well asM , occurs in the Védas, and attaches itself to pronouns

especially(see F. W indischmann’

s Sankara, p. 73 ; and Benfey’

s Glossarytothe same Véda, p. givesme occasiontoremark, thatI now, in de

parture from myformer explanation regard the Gothic k, and

our ch in mi - k, thu- k

,si - k, mi - ch, di - ch, si - eh, as well as the Old High

German It inunsi - II,indi e, iwi - II,was, as a particle which has grown up

with the base, and as identicalwith the Sanscrit ha , gha, and Greek ye’

(Dor. 1Eol. yd), and therefore die/I sis-=Sanscrittvdi i - Ita , Greek m'

ye, as,

in a phonetic pointof view,tah

, Gothic ik=aham, c'

yoii .


815. As to the origin of the suffix tar, itmaybe re

garded as springing from the verbal roottar (I ti Thisroot properlysignifies to overstep,

”to transgress, but

also to accomplish," “

to fulfil ; e. g. prahjadm, a pro

m ise. And itmustbe observed thatseveral verbs of mo

tion express also to transact,“

to do as, char signifies

(1) to go,"

(2 ) to pass through, (3)“to do,

”to prae

tise,

”to arrange. Thus, ddtdr, deter, dam , datum ,

”

may be taken as the accomplisher,“the exerciser of

giving,“or, also, if we keep to the prim itive signification

of the root, as, the man who passes through the actionof giving ; as, pat

-aya, properly going to the farther

shore,"is used in the sense of perusing. The verbal

roots, therefore, in combination with the suffix tar, are to

be taken as abstract substantives, which cannot surprise

us, as some of them appear as such without anyannexa

tion of a formative suflix ; as, bhz'

,

“fear,

”from blu

‘

, to

fear ; hri’

, shame,"from kri

’

, to fear gadh, strife,”

from gadh, to strive . Itmaybe requisite here to oh

serve, that in Latin several formative suffixes beginningwith 0 can be traced back to the Sanscrit root Icar, kri

(with which creo is connected). Thus, for example, cri for

serif—nominative masculine oer, fem inine cri - e—and cm in

volucer, flying,

”

properly fulfilling the action of flyingludicer, lud icrws, sport,

”

pleasure , causing enjoyment;

involu- cre, thatwhich envelopes or serves thereto ; lava

crwm, thatwhich makes to bathe,“

to bathe ; ambula

cm - m , that which makes to walk out, gives occasionthereto, hence promenade sepal

- cru- m , that which

makes to inter, a grave ; Iu- cru- m, thatwhich causesto pay,

”

gain ; fuI- cru- m, for fuIc- cru- m, that whichmakes to support,

”a support.

"As r and l are easily

Q ‘ (C

Compare Heafey, Greek E tymology, II . p.


interchanged, I have no hesitation in referring to thi s class

also the suffix win, and comparing it with the Sanscrit

kara, makingIthus, ridica - lu- s, properly making to

laugh pia- culu- m, thatwhich makes to atone ; spesta

culu- m , thatwhich makes to see,"

gives to see vehi

culu- m, thatwhich makes to ride ; pd- culu- m, thatwhi ch.

makes to drink m ira- culu- m, thatwhich makes to won

der ba - culu- s, thatwhich makes to go (368mm, é'

Bq - v).

816. From tdr springs, in Sanscrit, bythe affix Of an a,

and with the suppression Of its own vowel, as in the weak

cases, and before the feminine character i', the neuter suffix

tm , and thence the fem inine trd. The neuter form is prin

cipallyused, and, like the feminine trd, Of rare occurrence,

forms substantives which express instruments, which are,

as itwere, the inanimate accomplishers of an action. TheyGunise the radical vowel, and, for the mostpart, in accordance with the Greek analogous forms in rpo, Opo, rpa , Opa ,1~

accentthe first syllable of the word The following are

examples : né tra - m ,

“an eye,

”as conducting, or in

strumentOf conducting”

(root m) e - tra - m, ear (rootem ,

“to hear gd

—tra - m ,

“limb (root gd, to

vés- tra - m ,

‘‘ ”

garment (root eas, to put on e'

t’

zs- tra - m ,

arrow“

(root s'

as. to ydlctra - m, band"

(rootto bind dentist-rd. tooth (root datis

’

, to

At the end of compounds bkas- kara - s,

making brilliance,” “the

sun ; bka -yan- kara - s,mak ing fear,

” formidable .

1"

It is a questionwhether the 8 of dpo, dpa , is produced bythe in

finance of the p, in analogywith the lawof sounds in force in Zend (see47 or whether independentlyof the p a change or weakening Of the

tennis to the aspirate has taken place, as has become the rule in Ger

manic languages (see The latter appears to me more probable, asthe combination rp is veryusual ; but 8 for an original r occurs also

before vowels, as in the suffix dew-=Sanscrittas, Latin tus and

in the personal terminations of the m iddle and passive which beginwith00(see


ruption Of a, and the said word be,

contrasted with Sanscritformations like khan- i—tra - m and vdd - i - tra - m . Itmay, how

ever, be the case, that the e Of (pep- e- rpov is identical withthe classvowel e Of (pép- ev re, tpép

- ev rov, &c then ¢ép~e~rpovwould correspond to Sanscrit formations like pat- a- tram,

as

wing,”as

“instrumentofflying ;

"védh- a- tra - m, weapon,

“

slaying krz’

nt- a - tra - m, plough, as cleaver“

(rootkrztfrom kart, in the special tenses lei

- int, compare xet'

pm)fOr which, indeed, the Grammarians assume a suffix atra,

the a of which, however, appears to me identical with theinserted vowel of the firstand sixth class ; thus, pat- a - tra - m,

like pat- a- ti , he flies M M- a - tra- m, like lm

'

nt- a—ti, he

cleaves. Thus InGreek the nOf forms like (fil'

W po- V and

xo’

pq- Opo

- v evidentlybelongs to the verbal base, and is identical with that of (ph i- mo, nopé- O

'u. The same is the case

with the a and 6 Of the corresponding class of words inLatin ard- tru- m, fulgé- tru- m , fulgé- tra, veré- tru- m, where it

must be Observed, that, according to 6 the d of the

firstas well as the 6of the second conjugation are identicalin their origin with the n Of the abovementioned Greekforms. As, however, the 8 of the second conjugation is

less permanent than the d Of the first and the :‘

Of the

fourth (see 801 . Note), we cannot be surprised to find,

not mné- t'ra , mulgé- trum, but mub tra, mule- tru- m not

moné- tru- m, but mon- s- trum . The s of monstrum corresponds to the euphonic it mentioned in 95. A sim ilar

one is also to be found in lu- s- trum and flu- s- tmm. Vi - trum,

glass,"as itwere, instrument of seeing,

"or making

to see,

”has lostthe d of the root. We should have ex

pected via- tram (see according to the analogyOf

ras- trum, res- tram, clans- tram. cos- tram. In the thi rd con

The Indian Grammarians include the i of the abovementioned words

in i - tra in the suffix .


jugation, the class syllable Of which has, from the time Of

the unityof language, as a rule not extended itself beyond

the present, with its derivatives, and the imperfect, the

suffix is joined, for the most part, direct to the root, e. g.

rte- tram, spec- tram. In the fourth conjugation we should

expect f- trum, in accordance with d - trum in the first, and

é- trum in the second ; but haw- tram, from ham - is, is in

conformityto the other anomalies Of thi s verb.

817. The Zend has, according to changed the tofthe sufi x tra into th, but leaves itunaltered after sibilants,

which, in general, do not adm it Of th after them ; henceAJQuJ ebdmL yaoschddthra, means Of purification (V. S .

p. nominative accusative - thrE- m (see ddithré- m,

eye"

(as seeing is connected in its root and suffix

with the Greek Géa rpov, although the meaning of the latter

has taken a different direction, since it signifies the placewhich affords the Spectacle. The corresponding Sanscrit

root is most probablydhydi , with which Pott (“E . I . I .

"

p. 2 31) has been the first to compare the Greek deéona t,although dhyd i signifies not to see but to think, whereit is to be Observed that3“budh, to know,

"

has, in Zendreceived the meaning Of to see, as fi gm

’

d, to know,

has in Latin, while the Greek rootid (ei'

dw, oida)unites the

two meanings. Remark, also, with Burnouf (“Yap

-no,"

p. the NewPersian rootdz“,“to see (infinitive di

'

and the contraction which the Sanscrit rootdhydi has ex

perienced in the substantive dhi'

(nom inative dhi - s), nu

derstanding,

”insight.

“The following are examples in

whi ch the suffix spoken of has preserved its original tenuisunder the protection p f a preceding sibilant: vaitrém, robe,

"

fem inine cai tra (see 137 Sanscrit vcislra - m, see 72 1 .

The presentbinam belongs probablyto a differentroot, and, in fact,to the Sanscritvid .

1 1 10 FORMATION OF WORDS .

Note and AJN AM‘} vde’

lra (as theme), the willow, as

growing”

(connected in its root with the Old High

German base wahs- a - mon, shrub, fruit,“

see

whence the often occurring odi travat, willowy,”

as also

vd§trya (nominative -

yd), farmer.

"The Zend uses the

formations in thra, tra. also in the sense of abstract sub

stantives, which, according to what has been said

regarding the radicallyconnected Latin formations in trim ,

cannot surprise us. The following are examples : 93765755

dar- E- thré- m, possession,

“reception,

“retention (San

scrit root dhar, dhri, to keep 957637s mar- EJhrEm,

mention (Sanscrit root smar, smri , to

9:57d khdthréim, splendour 95

7pa mg khdii - trém ,

I doubtnotthatthis expression comes from the Sanscritrootvaksh,“to grow,

” which, in Zend, in the devoid of Guns special tenses of the

fourth class, is contracted to use. W ith respect to the suppression Of

the guttural in the above form , compare the relation Of the Sanscrit

chash- té,“he says,

”to the root chaksh, and the Zend chashman

,

“eye

"

(as saying,”

to the same root, and to the cognate San

scritword chakshus.

‘

f At the end of compounds pduru- khdthra , having much lustre

(see Burnouf, Yuma ,”

p . I consider khtithra to be an abbreviationof kharthra (kharéthra, according to and derive it from the root

khar,

“to shine,

"whence

,also, ¥Is7xe khari

’

mé,

“lustre.

”The root

car (from svar, see corresponds in Sanscrit. The loss of the final

consonantof the rootappearsto be compensated bylengtheningthevowel,as in the Sanscritjdté , born,

”fromjan khdtd

, engraven,"from khan.

Observe, also, the relation Of the Zend JGAIISAS z az dmi,I produce,

”to

the Sans. jqianmi . Burnouf gives another derivationof khc‘

ithm,

“lustre”

(l. c. p . 4 1 9)dividing itinto hi m,“mus,

”and 601m

, according to whichits literal meaning would be

“mum ignem hadem ,

”and therefore tit/Ira

would be connected with the word (itar,

“fire,

"

which isused in its nucompounded form , and the a of which is suppressed in the weakestcases ;hence dthr- at

,

“igne ; tithr- a iim,

“ ignium . Burnouf touches also on

the possibilityOf the prefix 3 cu, ha ,

“fair,

” being contained in kh/ithra

inwhich case its proper signification would be pulchrum ignem h abens.

A


worship, whence, according to 102 bloat- fro, in analogywith the Zend khdi - tra, taste,

”from khdd- tra so gils

- fra ,

tax, nom inative accusative gilstr, from gild- tra, gild

- ir,

from the weakened form Of the root gold ,with the prepo

sitiouus and fro, to repay?“

The a of the Old HighGerman gels

- tar, leek - tar, ghels- tar (Grafi

'

, IV. I take to

be an auxiliaryvowel inserted to remedythe harshness of

an accumulation of consonants at the end Of a word, and

whi ch, on the annexation of the case- terminations in theseand sim ilar words, is again dropped, hence genitive plural

gheIs- tro so from blues- tar, blos- tar, oblation,

"dative blos- tre

from hIah- tar, laughing,

“laughter, dative blah- traf

We have, therefore, in the common German expression

Ge- Itieh- ter, as also in the Engli sh laugh - ter, analogousforms to the Zend abstractneuter bases in firm , tra, as also

to the Sanscrit formations in tra, Greek in rpe. and Latin

in tru. Thus in English also slaugh - ter,”which in its

radical part, graphicallyatleast. is more perfectlyretained

than the cognate verb slay. Probably, also, thunder”

and wea—ther are to be included in the class of words

which are formed in Sanscritbythe suffix tra, though thet- sound Of the suffix is lost in the appellation of thunder”

in the Older dialects (Old High German dmmr masculine .

Old Saxon thunar, Anglo- Saxon thunor); on the other hand,

in Latin we have ton- i - trus, ton- i - tru, Where the u Of the

fourth declension is matter of surprise, as the Sanscrit a

W ith respectto the interchange of t, th, and d (bias- h a , gib - tra ,

compared with maur- thro), in sufi xes ori ginallycommencing with t, I

refer the reader to 9 1 .

1 Whether the gender be masculine or neuter is notto be determ ined

from the caseswhich occur (accusative hlahtar, dative hlahtre and Idahta '

e); as, however, the perfectlv analogous bldstar shews itself, bythe ac

cusative plural bléstar, to be neuter,I agree with Grafi

'

(IV . in

considering hlahtaralso asneuter, inaccordance with the analogousGothic

and Zend forms.

FORMATION OF WORDS . 1 1 1 3

would lead us to expect onlythe unorganic uof the seconddeclension(see The corresponding Sanscrit root issian, to thunder, whence staa- ayi - tmi- s, the thunder.

“”5

Weather”belongs to the Sanscrit root ed, to blow,

whence also the Lithuanian wZ—t‘ra, storm .

”TO return

to the Gothic ; fd—dr, sheath (themefd—dra). and huIi - s- tr,

veil (theme huli - s- tra), belong to the class of words herediscussed. The latter proceeds from the verbalbase hid- ya

its i , therefore, is the contraction of the syllable ya, as in

the preterite hul- i - da . I regard the s as an euphonic affix,

as in the Latin lu- s- tm—m, flu- s- t'rum (see 815. conclusion),cap i

- s- rrum. The following nominal derivatives are ana

logous : avi - s- ir, sheep- cote,

”as place of the sheep,

”

from the lost primitive base avi Sanscritavi , Lithuanian awi); and navi - s- tr, grave,

”as place of the de

from m us, theme nova , with the weakening of the a to i ,

as in the genitive naoi - s (see Observe that the

Greek and Latin languages very frequentlytransfer the

suffixes of verbal derivatives to nominal derivatives. F é- dr,

Ayis the character of the tenth clan , and itnuthe sufi x,which forms

adjectiveswith the significationofthe participle presentand masculine appellatives ; as, harshayitn rejoicing,

”and as a substantive masculine

“son

,

”as the sensor of rejoicing

”

(so m adam ,

“son,

”from sand to

The i is evidentlymerelya vowel of conjunction, as in the

future stan- ay- i - shydtt’

,“itwill thunder there also exists, as well as

i tnu, a more simple snfi x tau, as in hatmi - s, masculine ,

“sickness,

”and

“a weapon,

”as

“slaying, from ban,

“to slay.

”The t of tan and itnu

maybe regarded in the same light as the euphonic tmentioned above797 Netc); so that, therefore, onlyanwould be leftas the true suffix,

as appears in Nut“sun,

"as

“giving light. The circumstance that

the Latin ton- i - tru- s, toa- i - tru, stands in the class of wordsunder discus

sion in a veryisolated position, owing to its u of the fourth declension,maylead us to compare it, with respect to its sufiix also, with the San

scri td oaayitmi - s, byassuming an exchange of the liquids ; so that tru

would stand for but, justas in the Latin put-md (forp Iu- md)an 1 stands

over againstthe Greek nasal of in seam (compare W . )4 0

1 1 1 4 FORMATION OF WORDS .

sheath, theme fd—dra , in its obscure root corresponds to

the Sanscrit pd, to receive,”and in its entire form to

pdt'ra - m,

vessel,“

as keeping.

” With respect to the

Gothic d, for the th, which was to be expected, compare

fa - drein, parents, with the Sanscrit p i—tdrdu (for pm ),

which is also radicallyconnected with fd- dr (seeThe Old High German fd- tar, foo- tar, fodder”

(for fd—tr,Anglo- Saxon. fd- dr, fd- dher, fo- ddar, fo- ddur) is identical inroot and suffix with the appellation Of sheath, whichsupports,

“but only in a different manner from that in

which fodder does. To this class of words maybe

added, with more or less certainty, a few other Old HighGerman neuters which end, in the nom inative and accusative, in tar or der : vi z . flu- dar, float,

“from the rootflu

Sanscritplu), which has generallyassumed the affix of

a z fid—dar, floor,M i

from the same root;rue - de r, rudder, apparentlyas making to flow or navi

gate ,

“in root and suffix akin to the Latin m—tmm, and

Greek fié- opaw(has from ope(F)w, Sanscritsrdvdmi, from the

root am , to flow, causal srdvay), and radically, perhaps,also with re- musxl

' Perhaps, too, we ought to class herewundar. wuntar, wonder, and muldar, glory. I as derivotives from roots nowunknown.

8 19. To the Sanscrit feminine suffix tra, as in ddtishgrd,

tooth (see corresponds the Gothic thld, in nethld

(nominative and accusative néthlo),“needle,

”as

“instrument

of sewing as in the Greek axétrrpa , butwith i for r ; which ,according to cannot surprise us, particularlyas the

Greek sufi xes rho, OM , 77W, 07h; (see Pott, II . p. are

The Sanscritform forfiu- da r,fldd a r, would be pld- tra -m‘

tGratf, I I p . 493, presupposes a rootrad butthe Anglo - Saxon rooan,

rowan, revan, remigare,

”mentioned byhim, proves the contrary, and

answers to the Sanscritcausal base erdody.

1 Gothic vulthus, probablywith thu, =Sanscritta, as suffix .


tive forms require the mostpowerful accentuation, i . a. the

accenton the first syllable ; in the passive participle under

discussion the suffix receives the accent: hence we have

paktds. cactus,"

accusative palddm, standing similarlyop

posed to pdchan, coquens,”

pdchantam, coquentem , as

above 785. Remark) suchydté, purificatur,”is opposed

to éi’

tchyalé, purificat.” Greek verbals in 76- 9, which, as

scarce needs to be noticed, are identical with the perfect

participles passive of the cognate languages, have re tained

the Old accentuation, and thus we have word- g, i re-

rti, wordv,‘

standing in the same relation to 1 61 09, the drinking

(compare 785. Remark, near the end). that, in Sanscrit,

pip/rite, bibitur, has to pz'

yaté (Class 4. middle), bibit.“

The paroxytone or proparoxytone accentOf abstracts in re

appears to be preserved principallywhere, together withthe abstract, the passive verbal is actuallyinuse, and where ,

consequently, there is the more ground for bringing theabstractmeaning prominentlyforward bythe accent; whilstotherwise the abstract follows in its accentuation the pre

vailing example Of verbals with passive signification ; hence ,indeed, mites, d

'

po-

rog, fi

lm-

reg, rptiw'

rog, i'

yeras, (fi e-mg, Op

posed to words, dpordg, dim-

R ig, rptryvrr'

o'

g, éyero'

g, dl e-

rd; (die;rov); butnotxdwe

‘

rog. xo'

rxtrrog, butxowero'

g, xwxwdg,

dAom-dg, as these abstracts have no oxytone passive verbals

to match them . There are, however, some isolated abs

tracts, or words which express the time of an action,

which have the accentthrown back, as fit’

orog, defame - reg.

8 2 1 . The participial suffix wto is either joined direct tothe rootor bya vowel of conjunction t

'

. TO the firstkind

of formation belong jiid- ta- s, known Greek v- rd- s‘,

Compare the Sanscritpads, p ita, p itdm, from the rootpd, to

drink which, in the pas ivo, has the a weakened to 6. There is also a

middle rootpi of the fourth class.

FORMATION OF WORDS . I ll?

Latin (g)nd- lu-

s, i - gnd- tu—s dat- té - s, given,

“ Zend dd - té

(theme ddta), Latin da - tu- s, Greek do- rd—g ; ém—td- s, heard,

Greek xAv- rd-

g, Latin cIu- tw- s bht’

i—td- s, been,

“being,

Greek (pv-‘

ré - g ; bhri - ld—s (from bhartas, see borne,Zend bc’rétd (theme - ta), Greek («pep- rd- g) di- tbsp- ro- g, Latin

fer- tits, bearing,

"fruitful stri - td- s, extended (from

startds), Zend fra - iitdrétd (fra preposition), Greek orpa- rd- g.

(transposed from (n ap Latinstra- tu- s; pale- 16’ s,

“cooked,

Greek wei r- 1 6 4 (rootnewfrom s ex, Sanscritpooh, from pale,

Latin coc, from poo), Latin coc - tu- s ulc- té - s, Spoken (irre

gular for valdds), Zend uctd (hi'

ictd, well- spoken“

(from hu

uctd), ytdc- td- s. bound, Greek Cevx- rd- g, Latin junc- m- s'

bhrish- té—s, roasted (from bhrashtds, and this from bhralc

ids), Greek tppvx- ré- g, Latin fric- tus bad- dhd- s, bound

(euphonic for badh- té - s, rootbandh), Zend bas- td lab- dbd- s,

Obtained (euphonic for labhi és), Greek Nrn- rd- g ; jd- té - s,

born (rootjan), Zend z d- td, Greek ye- rd- g, in the com

pound mM -

yerog ; 1 ma id - s, thought”

(rootman), Zend matd,

(compare news- 1 6g); dish- td- s, shewn”

(euphonic for dishtés, from (life- 168 , see Greek (363x765) civawddeucrog,

xetpddemrog, &c. , Latin die- tits dash- té - s, bitten"

(euphonic for dds- Ids, from dale- ids),Greek (3016- 76- 59, didqx

'

rog, xapdcd

dom-

cg ; drish- ld—s, seen (from darshtds, and this from

From daddtas, with irregular retention of the reduplication of the

special tenses .

T See and compare Greek analogous form ,as accords, 711 07 69 .

W ith regard to the Latin form Of this participle in rootswith a T sound

see 101 .

I Itis a rule in Sanscritthat before formative sufiixes beginningwitht, which require no Guna augment, the a and m Of the rootare rejected

jan, to produce, to bear, and khan, to engrave, lengthen their vowel

in doing this. From hart,“to smite, to slay,

”comes hatds, with which

we maycompare theGreek so me, as Q ENQ (cpdvor, s nows), like amin e»,

most probably belongs to the Sanscrit root ban, from dhan (nidhana ,

death

1 1 18 FORMAT ION OF WORDS .

dark- tax). Greek (deport ém'

depxrog ; ushtd - s, burnt, La

tin us- tu- s. The following are examples with the conjunc

tive vowel i : prat- i - tdv- s, estima te"

(root rutprath, whence

grit/trip s, broad,"from prathti

- s. Greek shard- g, Lithuanian

pla- ti

‘

s- s); afich- i - té as. cred its,"

pat- i - té - s. qui oscidit,

“SO

in Latin, dom- Hus, mon- i - tus, mol- i—tus, gm - i - tus. In Greekthe e Of forms like pews- 76g, oxea- e- rés, ép

‘lr corre

sponds, where we again leave itundecided whether this t

be a corruption of an i or an

82 2 . The Latin forms in idus, springing from neuter

verbs, and for the mostpartof the second conjugation, as

pall- i due, fern- i - dus, fi

‘ig- i - dus. ton - i - dus, tim i - dus. tep

- i - dus,

flu- i - dus, correspond to the participles in ta in Sanscrit,whi ch spring from neuter verbs, and have an active sigui

fication, and especially to those which have a present

meaning ; as, tear- i - tds, hastening,“

sthitds, standing,“

suplds, sleeping (also having éaktds, being

yat- tas, striving, bi d- his, fearing, fart- ids, being

Regarding the active signification of this participle in neuter verbssec 61 3. conclusion ; so, in Greek , m rds,

“standing,

”Sanscritsthi

h is (weakened from sthdtds), which likewise signifies presenttime : on

the other handpra- sthités means both proficiscem

”and projectas.

1 Compare and Curtius De Nominum Grower-um formations,

pp. 38, 60. Indian Grammarians assume a suffix (unddi) a id, the a Of

which,however

, is most probablyonlya classvowel,with which the

Greek e might be compared ; thus, iprr- c- rdr (compare fps - care) like

pack- a - tds, fire, as cooking. The abstracts dds- auras, death, and

d - a - Tos‘

, fatigue,”have preserved the conjunctive vowel in its original

form and thus correspond to the Sanscritmar- a -td-s, death where,

however, we must Observe that the Sanscritroot mar, mg- i, to die,”

in its verbal conjugation, does not belong to the first or sixth class anymore than the Greek roots Gav and cap .

I The form with the conjunctive vowel (iak - i—tds)has a pamivc signification, soyot- i -tds, obtained byefi

'

orts, sought for,"comparedwithya!

tds,“striving.

"In Latin, vice vered, mp

- i- dus, active, opposed to rap - tus,

passwe.


that I could thence infer the existence of sim ilar forms in

the time of the unityOf language, While I would prefer as

sum ing a casual coincidence in the simi lar abbreviati on of

a common element. In Greek the r) or to of forms like

duh - 774 69, Tty-

fl- TO

'

S' (from rcp

- d- rog), xerp—w-‘rdg, corresponds to

the character of the Sanscrittenth class, and therefore to

the Latin d and i'

Of cm- d- tus, aud- f- tus. In Gothic, where ,

as generallythroughoutthe German languages, this participle remains regular onlyin the so- called weak conjugation, the Old tenuis, instead of, in accordance with 87

becom ing an aspirate, has sunk down to a medial, in suchwise, however, as that before the s of the masculine nom inative, and in the accusative, which has lostthe final vowel

of the base and the case term ination, a Hz for d enters

(compare 5. According to the difference of the con

jugational class, an i (from ya), 6, or at, i . e. the three dif.

ferentforms of the Sanscritcharacter of the tenth class (ay,see o.) precedes ; hence the bases tom- i - da ,

’ “domi

tus friy- d amatus ga- yuk- a i - da , suly

'

ugatus

nom inative masculine tamiths, friydths, gayukaa'

ths accusative tamith, &c. ; genitive tumidi - s, & c. (see The

direct annexation of the participial suffix occurs in Gothiconlyin certain irregular verbs, and in such a manner that,according to the measure of the preceding consonant, eitherthe original tennis is preserved, or has become (I (see62 6. Thus the base bauhta , 1 purchased (bugya .

Compare Sanscrit dom- i - tds (from dam - ayi o ttis I) from daméydm i,

causal of the rootdam, to tame,”butof the same meaning as the prim i

tive and the Latin dom- i tus.

1 Itmaybe regarded as the denominative of the Sanscritpn‘

ya , dear,

beloved ; and it is also, radically and in its formation, akin to the

Greek (Ink s- rd: (from denominative of fi lter, transposed from

ohm ), the r; ofwhich has sprung, like the Gothic 6, from (2 .

I Euphonic for buhta (see and this from bukta , from the root

bug.

FORMAT ION OF WORDS . 1 1 2 1

I purchase corresponds to Sanscrit forms like bkulcld,’

eaten (rootbhuj from bhug), Greek like ¢pux76, and Latinlike junctu mun- do, believed,

"answers to the Sanscrit

ma - té , thought,"

believed,"for manta, as the fem inine

substantive base ga- mun—di (nom inative - n- da) does to the

Sanscritbase md(a)- ti , meaning.

82 4. In Lithuanian the participial suffix spoken Of is re

tained quite unaltered in form , and, indeed, in allverbs, so far

as theyhave a passive . In the nom inative masculine ta - s

corresponds to the Sanscrittd- s e . g. selcta - s followedSanscrit sakta- s (rootsack, from sale, to [G. Ed. p.

follow,

“ compare Latin sequor); reg- ta - s, fastened = San

scrit sak- td- s for sag- td- s (root fig sahj, from sang, to

fasten degta - s, burnt = Sanscrit dag

- d ha - ssl' In the

nom inative feminine salt-ta, segla , degta , correspond to the

Sanscrit sakld'

, dagdhd, onlywith the a shortened, as in

Gothic, Latin, and Zend forms like bauhta (genitivebauhtd- s), juncta , ”paw; basta (see to the Latin

juncta corresponds literatim the Lithuanian junkta , from

jangin, I yoke (the kept- as, kepta (from Itepp z

‘

t,“I

bake,“see corresponds to the Sanscrit pak- té - s, id,

Greek nenrd-

g, 7 75, Latin coctu-

s, ta . Forms like wes- ta - s,

conducted (rootwed), correspond in a euphonic respect

to Zend like bad- té, bound”(root bandh(, iriS- td, dead

(rootirith), andGreek like rue - 1 6g, K err- 1 6; (see TO the

Gothic participles Oftheweak conjugationcorrespond the participles of thoseLithuanian conjugations,whichwe have above

In the former parts Of thiswork the accent is notgiven to Sanscrit

words, as the subjectof Sanscrit accent had notthen been investigated.

In 1843, Bt‘

ihtlingk published a treatise on Sanscritaccentuation (as the

Author of thiswork tellsus inthe Preface to his Fifth Part),which opened

up a new field of inquiry. The mark over the a then, in bhulcté , is the

accent, and does notdenote vowel length .

1' D b euphonic for t, see 104 . In Irish, dag/ta int, I burn, corre

sponds to the Sanscritdahdmi and dagte, burnt,"to the passive parti

ciple daghda- s,Lithuanian degtas


p. 704)compared with the Sanscrittenth class ; thus,

myl- i - tas, beloved pen- g4 am nourished ;” Ia i Ii - y

82 5. The Sclavonic languages have, if the opinion ex

pressed in 62 8. be well founded, transferred to the active

voice the passive participle here spoken of—with the re

tention, however, of the meaning of past time—and have

weakened the original tto I, probablybychanging it in

an intervening stage to d. In the former pointtheycor

respond to the New Persian, where the participle in question has, at. least generally, an active signification : in the

latter point theyagree with the Georgian, where W 0

jam - u- Ii signifies eaten”

(Sanscrit jam, to eat and

09300309 0 thbob- i - Ii warmed (Sanscrit tap , to

[G . Ed. p. The suffix no lo (n. m . I“) I’

. neut. lo. f. la)is

joined, in Old Sclavonic, either directlyto the root or to the

classsyllable, the latter in the verbs which correspond to theSanscrit loth classand theGermanweak conjugation ; hence,e. g. B b IA

'

b byl’

, smaa byla, B h IAO bylo, been =Sanscrit

bhiitds, td, tdm (pers. brideh); murb pi- l

‘

, nnaa p i- la , nnao

pi- lo,

“ having drunk = Sanscrit p i - tds, td, tdm, drunk ;NEtA

'

b near, Mama Name ti es- lo, having borne ;BoyA l

‘lA'

b bdd- i - I'

Boyanaa bdd- i—Ia, Doyanao bad- i - Io,

having waked = Sanscrit bddh- i - tds, hf, tdm, waked .

” iii

Should, however, these Sclavonic participles notbe connectedwith the Sanscritparticiples in to, it appears to me almostimpossible to compare them with forms in the cognatelanguages ; at leastI do not believe thatthe suffix la , whichoccurs in Sanscrit only in a few words, e. g. in chap

- a - ld - s,

trembling.

“or the suffix m . the use of which is in like

manner but rare, e. g. that of (lip- rd- s, shining, can have

served as the source from which the Sclavonic participialsuffix 10 is derived.

i ! \Vith regard to the change Of the old t- sound into I, compare also

the G ipsyrim - Io, dead,

”from mudo

,Prakritmudo (nom .


I, too, believe, that had the tobe-

presupposed form nest stood alone, it

would, owing to the firmness of the combination st, and its being such a

favourite, never have become nesl. And though I assume d as a m iddle

point between tand l, and allow the language, in its corruption of the

suffix referred to, to have proceeded from to to do, and thence to have

arrived at lo, I nevertheless do notthink that in every individual verb

this process has been de new and independentlycarried on ; nordo I ima

gine thatthere ever existed in Sclavonic a participle nesd’

, nesda , nesdo ;

but I assume thatthe tof the suffix under discussion has, in the different

(G . Ed. p . 1 159 ] conjugations, and the majority Of verbs, graduallybeen corrupted to I. Were, however, Zn, in the majorityof Sclavonic

verbs, once substituted for the suffix to,itmight, as itappears to me

,

be transferred bythe force Of analogyto those verbs also with whose

final letters a tagrees betterthan I. Onlyinthe m e thatthe combinationcl had beenunendurable in Sclavonic would the roots in s and those in d,

wh ich, according to a general euphonic law in Sclavonic (seechange this letter before 0 into 1, have necessarilyretained the elder form

of the suffix. I musthere recal attention to the fact, thatthe Bengali

also possesses a preterite, which appears to be of participial origin, and

has I for its most essentially distinguishing feature ; e. g . kdrildm, I

made (her- i - ld - m), 2 d pers. karili . It is highlyprobable that, as Max

M iiller Reportof the British Association forAdvancementof Science

for 1847, p. 2 43)assumes, the l of these forms has arisen from t, through

the intervention Of a m iddle pointd, and thatthe entire form owes its

origin to the Sanscritperfectpassive participle in ta ; so that, therefore,

kdrildm would equal the Persian kardam, from which it is materiallydistinguished onlybythe further weakening of the d to l, and the inser

tion Of the vowel of conjunction i , which, also in Sanscrit, isverycommonin the participle referred to. In the 2 d pers. sing. kdrili answers to the

Persian kardi . With regard to the use in Bengali of the Sanscritpassive

perfectparticiple withoutalteration of form and signification, it is to he

remarked thatthis is avowedlyborrowed ata later period (see Haughton,and so, in general, in the Bengali lingual Thesaurus one has to

distinguish between the wordswhich have been, as itwere, moulded and

remodelled in the lap of the daughter language, and those which have

been adopted newlyfrom the Sanscrit. Should we, however, be desirous

of seeking outin order to explain Bengali preterites like korildm, a class

of words in Sanscrittowhich theywould in external form correspond

better than to the passive pastparticiples in to, we mustthen betake ourselves to the suffix iIa (properlyIa , with i as conjunctive vowel), whichhas leftbehind onlya verysmall familyof words, to which belong among

FoRMATlON OF woaDs. 1 12 5

others an- i - ld - s, wind, as blowing ; pat/z - i - Id - s,“traveller (from

path,“to One doesnot, however, see howthis rare suflix with a

presentsignification has arrived atthe destination of forming a preterite

in Bengali from everyroot. Another modern Indian dialectwhich fur

nishes a corroboration to the Sclavonic languageswith [G. Ed . p.

respectto the participleunder discussion is the Marathi ! Here a perfect

passive participle in'

kt 13 16 springs from everyverbal root

i ‘ It is verymuch to be regretted that the learned Professor has

been guided in his remarks on the Marathi language by Carey’

s

Grammar, which was published half a century ago, and at a Pre

sidencywhere the Marathi language is not so well known as atBom

bay. Hence he gives a past participle in a to transitive verbs, thefact being thatthis participle is never separated from the vowelwhich

marks the gender, and must be, e. g . m ! pdhild, “ft? “pdhih‘

,

mfg? pdh ileri , neverm pdhil. The sentence I !"m mmya bayakés pdhil, I saw the woman,

”is altogether incorrect. It

should be lfi'

3? 1 1m m mm ti bciyakdpakili, or a? mmmfg? mitttyaMyakéld pdhileri . W ith reference to the term ination 8 s

and 3 1 Id in this case (be itthe dative, or, as I regard it, the accusative),Dr. Stephenson rightlylays down the following rule : When motion to

a place is intended, then a s is preferred ; butwhen the dative is the

object of a verb, then {51 Id is more common ; as, i tw $551 16

gcir‘

awdsgeld, he is gone to the village mi anm m tydne

tyei Myakold mdriler'

t, he beatthatwoman. I am ata losstoguesswhere

the learned Professor found authorityfor statingthatthe Sanscritshorta is

pronounced in Marathi like 6 ; for so far from this being the case, I donotbelieve thatthatsound of 0 ex ists in anyof the modern languages of India,exceptBengali , save, perhaps, before r .

—[Note bythe Translator.]

1“ The Sanscrit short a is pronounced in Marathi and Bengali like 6

so that the neuters of the participle under discussion in thatlanguage

correspond exactlyto those of the Sclavonic, as ncalo (see 2 56 The

long a in the masculine of the Marathi adjectives is probablybased onthe Sanscrit nom inatives in as

,so thatfor the suppression of the s com

pensation is made bylengthening the preceding vowel. On the other

hand, the pronom inal nom inatives i ? ta, he,”

and i tjo‘

, which"

(jfrom see are based on the corruptionwhich the term ination as

has everywhere experienced in Zend, Pali, and Prakrit (see 56

Adjectives, as such, are notdeclined in Marathi .

1 12 6 FORMATION OF WORDS.

e. g . pdhild,“having seen,

0 held,“having made,

”the latter being, as

it seems, from [cam for haf ild. Compare the Bengali karildm, I

made,"and the Prakrit kada from karda, made.

"The active con

struction of other languages is, in the Marathi , changed into the passive

bya periphrasis in the pasttenses, which are wanting in thatlanguage,as in mostof the Sclavonic dialects ; and thus, e.g. mya1 held, myd kéli,

mya‘

t held, which Careytranslates by I did,”is literallynothing else

than “a mefactus,facta,fi etum although Carey, in this and analogous

tenses, appears in realityto recognise an active form of expression : for he

remarks (p.

“Itmustbe observed thatthe gender of the verb, in theimperfect, perfect, and pluperfecttenses, varies, to agree with thatof the

object. ” Thatwhich, however, is here called the object, is, in fact, the

grammatical subject, and the participle is governed bythis, not onlyingender, but also in number. Atp. 1 2 9 itis remarked, Itmustbe oh

served, thatwhen the verb is used actively, viz . when the object is ex

pressed ia the accusative, the form of the neuter singular onlyisused .

When the objectis inthe nominative case, the verb is passive, and varieswith the gender of the subject." Ex. “IIM W mydr

'

abap/ome

palu‘

IO,I sawthewoman w? 1 11 i ?M myaitMyokdpdhih

'

,

“the

womanwas seenbyme.

"I am convinced, however,thatthe firstconstrue

[G . Ed . p. tion isquite as much passive as the second ; forwere it

active, the pronounmusthave stood in the nominative, and have sounded

therefore lfi'

min, and notmyt as in the second. The difference be

tweenthe two constructions is onlythis, thatin the firstthe neuter pas

sive participle stands impersonally, or contains the subject in itself, and

governs an accusative while in the second the participle isthe predicate

of the subject, expressed bybdyal6, woman.

” Could the firstconstruc

tion be imitated in Latin itwould be literallyrendered by“a me femi

nam visum (est). In Greek, constructions such as robs (pillows am apa

m vre'

ov correspond to this. In neuter verbs, i . e. the substantive verb incombinationwith various ideas, the Marathi participle in Id , ti, 3 , like its

Sanscrit prototype in ta - e, ta, ta- m

,has an active signification. and has

therefore also the pronominalor substantive subjectplaced before itin thenom inative ; and thus we have, e.g . m6: geld

- ii, I went,

”

properly I

am having gone since the substantive verb,in spiritatleast, is contained

therein (see 62 8 . Rem. fem. mi ityeti - it 2 d pers. masc. tahgeld - s,

H for Sanscritall of the defective rootpack (pacing/anti , I see‘i' Myd corresponds to the Sanscritinstrumentalmayd.

i Evidentlyonlyan inorganic extension of the abovementioned myd.


tioned (p. 1 1 2 5, Note pronominal nominatives, as 16, which ;while M in M id

,answers to the ordinaryadjective- nom ina

tives in a. Carey, in the different verbs and auxiliaryverbs which his

garmmar exhibits, gives, in the 3d pers. mass. of the 2 d aorist present

under discussion, prettyindufi'

erentlyeither M, orM,orMia, only inMai

he gives onlyta, butelsewhere either 165: or té . The nasal of the former

is mostprobablyonlyan inorganic affix,which the Marathi occasionally

adds also to some other forms which end in a vowel ; as, e.g. in the in

strumentalmi myc‘

i ir,“byme

”

(with myti), mentioned above (p.

and the analogous tvdit, bythee”

(Carey, p. togetherwith the ted

from the base tva (see corresponding to the Zend Grammar. W e

mustsimilarlyregard, I doubtnot, the Anusvara of the repeated participlein if! tarp, as kdrlti ir, kértdti, doing, continuingto do,

”sincethis participle

Ed . p . is onlybyitsrepetitiondistinguished informationfrom

that bywhich the 2 d aorist present is periphrastically denoted. The

case is different with the termination Mir of the lst person, in which

the never- failing it is the expression of person=Sanscritmi, and the pre

ceding portion of the word is the masculine nominative. The fem inine

allows in the letperson the suppression of the it; hence kb'

r- te', I

make,"opposed to edit- (b it, I can

”

(Carey, p. with o! for i , which

appears in the 2 d person kb'

rti - s, while the masculine form retains its 6

(kO'

rtd- s).

82 7. Byfa with the conjunctive vowel if in Sanscrit areform ed, from substantives, also adjectives, which can be

taken as the passive participles of tobe-

presupposed de

nom inative verbs ; as, e. g. phaF- i - ta- s, furnishedwith fruit,

"

from phala’

, fruit; whence m ight spring a denom inative

phaf- ayd

- mi , supplied with fruits, which would form a

passive participle phal- i - la- s. Corresponding forms inLatin

are such as, b arbd - lus, ald - lus, fimbrid—lus, could- (us, aurf- tus,

turrt'- tus, t

'

ersci - Ius, vent- (us, asfd- lus, cinclti - tus, jus- tus, nq’as

tus, scales- Ins, robust- hrs, (robur, roboris from robus, robes is),bones- tux (hono

‘

r- z’

s from - s- is); and in Greek, forms like

reporter- 769, Optpahw- rég, a r

’

zhw 76g, tpohtdw- rdg, &vavdpw- ‘

rcig.

Letattention be directed to the inclination towards a long

Carey, p. 02 , té hété ,“he is

"

(literally, he


vowel before the suffix, evinced as well in Latin as in Greek.

In like manner asthe originallyshortitof the 4th declension,

and the i ofthe 3d, is lengthened, so also is the inorganic uofthe 2 d in nasal-tux, and so is, in themes term inating in a con

sonant, the i which extends the base (see p. e. g. in

mart- tea, patri- tus, which, according to form atleast, belong

here ; so also in Gree k isthe owhich extends the base ; hence,e. g . cliched

- array. Theword (brag-

b rag stands alone, properly,furnished with a wagon,

“whi ch, bythe suppression of the

final vowel of the base , and the assum ing a vowel of conjunction l, corresponds admirablyto Sanscritformations likemuch

“sealed,

“from madré,

“a seal.

"

(G. Ed. p.

Here belong also the Latin formations in é- tu- m, arboré—tum ,

quercé- fum. fimé—tum, pome

- tum, which, as Pott too assumes

Etym . Inqui ." p. as itwere presuppose denom inativesof the 2 d conjugation, in which we might well expect

participles like moné- tus (see pp. 1 107,

8 2 8 . In Lithuanian and Sclavonic also adjectives springfrom substantive bases, which in form and signification

correspond to the passive perfectparticiples here treated of.Examples in Russian are poram b rii rog

'

- a- tyi

'

,

“horned

(Lithuanian ragtime), from porn rog’

, theme raga, horn ;voa ocam b ri

'

r volos’- a - ty

‘

i , like hair,"from volos

’

, themevoloeo

'

, hair FOpGam i’

r garb’

- a- ty

'

i , humpbacked, from

gorb’

, theme garbs, hunch imenim b rii ime—ni - lyi'

, named,“

from ism imya, theme imen name mpecaovimb rfi tres

nov- i - tyi . embroidered,” covered with embroidery,

"from

tresna , embroidery domov- i - tyt, domestic,“from Ron

'

s

dom’

, house (see p. The words whi ch belong

O The above examples, according to Dobrowsky(p. applyin part

also for the Old Sclavonic : compare, therefore, the formations beginningwith a consonant from the denominatives treated of in 766, e. g . the

infinitives in a - li, i - tt’

, ou- a- ti (5. withwhich the insertions a, t'

(ov- i)

(based on the Sanscritaya) ofthe nominal participles above are identical.


here have, partofthem , inserted an a before the tofthe participialcharacter,according tothe manner oftheGreek verbalslike axe s - 76g, aixou- a - rcig, and of the Lithuanian abstracts instg, opposed to the Sanscrit in (d, and Latin in (a , (at, hit, of

which hereafter. Thus, e. g. inRussian, k amenicmbrl‘

tkamen

i - styi , stony (Lith. airmen mepnicmbm tern’- i - sfyi

'

,

thorny (tern'

, theme terno, thorn = Sanscritfriaa fromtaraa , grass Gopoaacm brfi boroJ - a - slyi

’

, bearded, pro

vided with a“beard,

“ compare Sanscritourdlc,[G . Ed. p. arid/t, to grow, Lith. barz du, beard.

”

barc - ii—tas, bearded In Lithuanian an ausuallypre

cedes the suffix {a of this class of words (occasionallyinstead of it ii.=uo), after the analogyof the denom inatives

treated of in 766, 767, in the formations beginning witha consonant and in factso that here also the final

vowel of the base noun is dropped before the vowel whichforms the denominative verbal base ; thus, e. g. m igf

- o—tas,m isty,

"attended with m ist,

“from migla , m ist Plank

”

d- tas, hairy, from plauka- s, hair ; plunksu

'—o- tas, fea

thery, from plunksna, feather dumbf - o- tas, slimy,"

from dumbla - s, slime .

”In forms like akmm - ii - tas, stony,

raj - fame, horned,

"from the bases alt-arm , raga , itis only

a substitute for the simple a ; as, e. g. inwash- ya, I drive,

Opposed to dumoyu, I think (see p. The verbs,

however, in rig/ufor oyu, do not retain their ii. in the for

mations beginningwith a consonant, buthere exhibitsimplyo ; whence wai - o- las, driven,

“not waé- ii - fas. In forms

which admit of comparison in Sanscrit a long a fills the

place of the Lithuanian ii ; as, e. g. in daddmi. I give,"

(Lima, stone (nom . of éfiman) for the Lithuanian diimi ,

alrmii .fl

The simple 0 also is Often, in Lithuanian, the

I see, therefore, no reason to compare the forms in tita - s, eta- s, with

the possessives in Sanscrit like diam- rant,

- vat,

“rich,

”from «Marta ,

“riches,

”which are formed bythe suffix card (in the weak cases vat).

Cf. Pott, I I. p. 646 .


itself also in the corresponding Latin suffixes MI and hi“.

hence, a. g. iad- rrrr, xaxé—rq ‘

r, &‘

ypté-mr, wha rti- rrrr

[G . Ed. p. facili - ldt, habili - ldf, Icvi - ldl, celui -MI, civi - ldl,

puri- ldt, veri - ldl, anxie- ldl, ebrieb tdf, socie- tdl, liber—tdt, (for libe

ri - fdt, as liber for libera -

s), puber- tdt, majes- tdt, (from majus),t

'

eius- fdf, venue- fat. eyes- tat, poles- tdtd

'

felic- i - fdl, virgin- id d1 .

hered- i - fdl, juven- trif, sense- tail, air- tat, servi - tt'

if. In sense- fa,

juven- fa , vind io- ta , (from cindee—s, triadic- is)the suffix appears

withoutthe addition of a t. The German, too, as has alreadybeen shewn, l. c. , is notwanting in analogous formations.

Their theme ends in Gothic in tho, which correspondsas exactly as possible to the Sanscrit ta (see 69.

and in the noun is abbreviated to tha hence, e. g.

(Iiupi- tha. depth,

“hauhi - tha, height, gauri - lha. mourn

fulness."niuyi - tha , novelty,

"in the i of which I recognise

the weakening of the a of the adjective primitive- bases

diapa , hauha , gaura , niuya, in agreementwith the principleobserved in Latin, which, in like manner, weakens the inor

ganie u of the 2 d declension, which corresponds to the

Gothic lst, to i (see or to e in case that another i

precedes it (puri- fdt for puru

- ldf, saris- fat for variu- tdt).The organic ualso of Grimm '

s 3d adjective- declension is

weakened before the suffix under discussion to i ; i hence,

See Influence ofthe pronouns onthe formationofwords, pp. 2 2 , 2 3 ;

where, however, from the classical tongues onlyhit, nrr, are contrasted

with the SanscritM . It, however, admits of no doubtthattiltalso belongshere, as the weakening of the d to 6 cannomore surprise us, than that of

a to u(cf. tcirus=SanscritMr,

1“ Eyes- tatandpores

- tatcome from the participialbases egeat, potent,

and, indeed, so thatthe nasal is thrown out, and the tchanged to a beforethe tfollowing (see On the other hand, volun- tdtfor calm - tat

(from volmt)has preserved the n in preference before the final consonants.

This is also Pott’

s view(E. I .,1 1 . p. who here refers to the Greek

xapu’

a - raros, from xapt'

evr ; be, however, admitsthe possibilityofpoles- tat

being derived from potis.

1 Regarding theweightof the u, see 584 , and Vocalismus, p. 2 2 7 .

FORMAT ION OF WORDS . 1 1 33

aggvi- tha , narrowness, from eggua, narrow ; maavi - lha ,

readiness,"from manvu, ready afgrundi - tha , abyss,

"

from the base grands, ground ; belongs, atleastas regards

formation, here. The bases in ya , with a [G. Ed. p .

consonantpreceding, rejecttheir a before the suffix thd, and

vocalise the yto i : hence, niuyi - tha , novelty,”from the

base niuya butnotfa irnyi - tha, butfa irni - lha,

“age,

“from the

base fa iraya, nom . masc. fairne i - s (see Gabelentz and LOwc,

Grammar, p. 75 so unhra ini - tha ,

“impurity,

"from the

base unhra inya, impure.

”T he following are examples of

th is class of words in the Old High German (where d

occurs for the Gothic 01 , according to hreini - da ,

purity herdi - da, hardness sany‘li - da , softness ster

chi - da, strength (see Grimm , IV . In English the

following words belong here : heal- tic, keig- fh, leag

- th,

depth, and some others. The New High German ex hibits

these formations only in local dialects, as in the Hessian ;e.”g Lang

- dc, T i ff - de, Breile de, the latter answering to the

Sanscrit pO

ritIcu- ta, and Greek s ha re- m7 . With the suffix

under discussion the German languages form also abstractsout of the themes of weak verbs ; e.g. in Gothic, svegni - tha ,

“

joy, exultation”

(svegnya,“I meri - tha ,

“notice,

rumour"

(mérya ,“I varyi - tha, condemna

tion (ga - saryye , I Here the i is the con

traction of the class- syllableya (=Sanscritaya , seeas in the preterite and passive participles ; as, adk—i - da , I

sought,"sdk- i - lhs,

“sought SO in Old H igh German ; e. g.

hdni - da , scorn"

(Mniu, I scorn c ri - da , ga- hdri - da ,

hearing (Mr- ia, Gothic hates-ya . I hear The Gothic

ganad- tha, mourning, complaint (gaun- d, I sorrow,

“

preterite gaun- d- da), is the offspring of a verb of Grimm ’

s

2 d weak conjugation. This, a solitaryexample of its kind,

which first came to lightbythe publication of the transla

tion of the Pauline Epistles (2 Cor. vi i . confirms the opi

nion thatthe i . which in all other places precedes the ”I,

1 134 FORMATION OF WORDS.

belongs not, as is commonlysupposed, to the derivative suffix,

[G . Ed . p. butto the prim itive base, as I Should haveassumed even without the form gonad

- the, to know)”

830. Bases ending in a consonantadd, in order to lighten

the combination with the consonantof the suffix, in some

words in Latin, an i , in Greek universallyan 0 ; hence, e. g.

virgini—fdt, capaci

- tdl, felici - fdf, pehavd—rm'

, xapcewci—mr, in

opposition to such words as jam - tat, jam - ta, juven- fril. oo

Iun- tdt, scaccia, sense- fail, value- tat. To the latter corresponds,in Gothic, the solitaryspecimen of its kind, gun

- do, youth,"

Latinjapan- ta, with the contraction, however, which the

Sanscrit sister- word yuvan has experienced in the weakest

cases (e. g. gen. grin- as, Latin min- é, see and the

Latin in the comparative (junior). W ith regard to the

inorganic affix ga of the base yugga whence wem ighthave expected yuggi - lha, see 803. The d for th in

yun- da must, I believe, be ascribed to the influence of the

preceding 11 , although this liquid adm its also of the combination with

83 1 . Inno province of European languages has the type ofSanscrit abstracts, as airfield- la,

“whiteness,“bahaZ- ta.

“

plurali

ty,"been retained so trulyas in Sclavonic. In order to see

this, we mustnot,with Dobrowsky(p. assume a suffix etc

for words like dubrota. goodness,"butmustplace the a on

[G . Ed. p. 1 170] the side of the prim itive base, to which itin factbelongs therefore dobro- ta , notdobr- ofa . So among

it Influence of the Pronounsonthe formationof lVords, p. 2 2 . I had

inviewthere onlythe forms inwhich the i exhibits itself as the weakeningof the a of the primitive base, as in diup i - tha from diapa . The explana

tion of the i as the contraction of the syllableya in forms likefa irni - tha ,age, forfa irn-ya - tha

,is here given for the firsttime.

1 See 53. 9 1 . The feminine Sanscritsuffix ti, which is there spoken of,

shews itself three times in the shape of di after a (ya - mundi,“money,

”

ana - min- di, conjecture,’

ga- Irun- di, and twice in the

form of (hi (ga - kun- fhi, appearance,”

ga- maia - Mi, community


i am. of the same meaning. As regards the origin of the

suffix tdti, I have scarce any doubt of its connection with

the more simple id whether it be, as Aufrecht con

jectures Journal of Comparative Philology. p. that

in the appended ti the suffix is conta ined, wh ich is em

ployed for the formation of prim itive, i . a. verbal abstracts,of which hereafter, or thatthe tdti is a simple phonetic ex

tension Of at; so that ti is properlyonlythe repetition of

to, with the weakening of the a to i , according to the prin

ciple of aorists, like ap ipam for 4pdpam, from 4p (see

and of reduplication- syllables like ti , p i , for M, pd. in tigh

gham i,“I stand p ipdsdmi,

“I wish to drink,

“

from pd It m ight be also possible that at first

onlya twas added to the suffix ta, in the same wayas to

roots with a short final vowel, and in Greek to those witha long final vowel, where theyare found atthe end of com

posites a T - sound is added as a support.“

The i of ldli

would, under this view of the subject, wh ich pleases me best,

be onlyan off- shootof later growth ; and the forms in fat,

which occur occasionally in the Védasf must consequently[G . Ed. p . 1 172 ] be recognised asthe oldest. The analogousZend abstracts in {atwould not, therefore, have lostanyi belonging to the base, but onlydispensed with a more modern

affix, which would also have remained aloof from the Greekand Latin, in case thatthe final T- sound of the suffixes nrr,

same signification as its prim itive si irva, we mayregard the entireness,

totality as tantamountto the all,the whole.

”

1“Of this more hereafter. W ith regard to the Greek compounds like

dyvdr- r, dpofipé r, and especiallywith regard tothe inclinationof theGreek

to extend bases ending in a vowel bythe addition Of 7 , see Curtius, De

nominum Graecorumformatione, p. 10.

1 Benfey(Glossaryto the S . V . ) quotes several cases of de‘

vcitdt and

Aufrecht(l. c. p . 163) adduces from the 2 d book Of the R igveda the loca

tive ofw- ilailtit, persecution,"which presupposes for the primitive erika

(commonly wolf the meaning following, pursuer.

”


W , h it, is an heir- loom broughtfrom their original Asiatichome, and has not firstsprung up on European soi l. It

would, however, be surpri sing i f the suffix under discussion,

in Greek, Latin, and Zend, had Sprung from the form tdti ,

butthe final i in the three languages justnamed had been

lost without leaving a trace, as this vowel elsewhere, inGreek and Zend atleast, has never allowed itself to be dis

placed in the classes of words in i , which are common alsoto the Sanscrit. The abstracts in comes (at(g

enres id; se

cording to which have hitherto been discovered in

Zend, are , besides the frequently- mentioned haurvatdt. en

tireness,"

and amerétdt,“immortality uparaldt,

“supe

riorité,"

(see Burnouf, Yacna, p. from upara . superm ,

”

(see Sanscrit upari , over, Gothic uar, drvatdt,“

firmness,"

(Burnouf. Etudes, p. from drea firm ,

"

= Sanscrit dhruva(Old H igh German triu, true paour

cattlt, antériorité,”

(Yacna, p. 2 85 Note from panama,

anterior,"

Sanscritprirva ustatdt, greatness,"

(Aufrecht,Journal, p. from mta , high, alt/m ,

standing up, raising oneself,”

(see for utstha ;

(em prwgwhvanhutdl, riches." (Aufrecht l. c )=Sanscriteustilati (see beginni ng of this yavatdt, duration,

“from

yam , idem (Bur nouf, Etudes. p. ma sque ?» arstdt, per

haps the Védic arishllmlti (see beginning of this and

Brockhaus, Glossary); rai ariitdt, according [G . Ed . p .

to Anquetil, droiture,"ofuncertain derivation, whence the

signification also is unccrtain.1'

I regard amen! as Sanscritamara , immortal. The word, there

fore, in Védic form,would be amartitdti or amarétdt. Regarding haur

tanfrit,see beginning of this Note .

T Ra isin? is, according to the form, a participle present, and signifies,

perhaps, shining,"and its abstract“lustre . Compare ras

'

,wh ich lies

at the rootof the Sanscritraimi,“beam of light,

”which does not else

where occur, butis probablyrelated to las, “to shine .

"

4 F.


833. If the Sanscrit suffix tdti or as, as a formative of

denom inative abstracts, is reallyOld, and if it existed in

the period before the separation of languages, we maythen

refer to it another suffix from the province of the Euro

pean sister- languages, and one which is likewise fem inine ,

vi z . dulhi , nom . duth- s, the use of which, on the presuppo

sitiouthat it is short, would be to be so regarded as thatthe long a had firstbeen shortened and then weakened to

u; as, e. g. the uof Anglo- Saxon nom inatives of Grimm ’

s

first strong feminine declension (yg'

fu) answers to the Go

thie short (giba) and Sanscrit long a As regards

the consonants, the law of the mutation of sounds in GO

thie would lead us to expect thathi but in accordancewith whatwas remarked at we cannot be surprised

that in the former place the old tenuis has been changedto a medial instead of to an aspirate. Formerly in th isclass of words “

eternity (sec Grimm , II.

from a to—be-

presupposed adjective base aya/ca , nom .

masc . ayuk—s,‘ stood quite isolated. Butnowthe sources of

language which have been latelydiscovered supplyus withthe bases manag

- dulhi,“a crowd (nom .

- dufhs, 2 Cor. vi i i .

and m ikil- dulhi , greatness”

(gen. m ikil- dulha i - s. ace. m ikil

dad /o, From the final 3°

ofthe Gothic suffix, in case Of

[G . Ed . p. its being reallyconnected with the VédicIdli , ldl, one mustnot, however, deduce the inference thatfdtiis necessarilythe elder form , for the Gothic could easilv

furtheradd to the T - Sound, as the original final letter of the

suffix, an i ; asthe declension of consonants,withthe exceptionofu in Gothic, and generallyin German, is not a favourite ,

and the lightestvowel i is readilyapplied to transfer a

6 After removing the suffix Ira, we mayso compare aya with the more

simple base a iva, nom . aiv- s, as supposing thatthe syllable ea has been

contracted tou, and then thatthe i , on accountof the vowel following,has passed into its semi - vowel.


regular suffix for the formation of nouns of agency, itnevertheless forms

several appellatives, which, according to their fundamental signification

are nouns of agency; as,e. g . tanti - s,

“weaver,"

properly“stretcher ;

[frighti - s, man,

”as plougher

”

(Véda). According to th is, the beforementioned édntati - s would properlymean extender,

”i . e. augmenter,

"

or grounder, creater of happiness,”which gives a more satisfactory

sense than if itbe taken, instead of as dependentcompound, as pomeuive,

according towhich itwould signify“having the augmentation of happi

ness,”which sense is not suitable in the passage of the R igvéda thathas

been cited. Butwhen,in a passage of the Yajurveda (VII . the

Scholiast Mahidhara takes jyéghthdtdtim as an actual possessive (which,however, is notconfirmed bythe accentuation), in thathe explains tdti as

being a derivative from tan,

“to extend, and therefore, according to the

sense, as vistdra, extension,”we cannotthence infer thathe recognises

in the words formed bythe suffix ta'

ti in general, or in anyparticular

branch of them, possessive compoundswith tciti , extension,”as the last

member of the compound ; for he adds to the explanation above givenanother and a more satisfactoryone

,and explains jyéshthdtéti as a simple

word formed bythe suffix tdti,when he refers to PRnini , V . 4 . 4 1 se

cording towhich the suffixunder discussion, incombinationwithjycfphtha,produces onlya strengthening (pr as

'

arisd, properly extolling”)of the

meaning of the originalword, and thereforejyefghthdtati - swould be equi

valentto the best of all,

”or the notoriouslybest.

"If we wish to

confirm this signification of the (according to Panini) isolated in its k ind

jyéshthdtdti , bythe circumstance of its being in its origin a possessive

[G . Ed . p. compound,we mustthenassignto itthemeaning,“the

extension (as itwere, mosthighly including“the best.

”

834 . We mayhere at once notice another suffix, wh ichin Sanscrit, justlike til, ”If, tdti , forms abstracts from adjecfives and substantives, vi z . the neuter suffix tea, which is

probably an extension of the infinitive suffix tubya tm

therefore, from tu- n, as the hereafter- to- be - discussed suffix

tavya is from tu, with Guna, and ya . The abstracts in tea

are oxytone ; e.g. amrimtrd- m,

“immortality, from amrt

’

ta

nagna- tvd- m , nakedness,

"from nngnd bahu- tvd- m, as ba

led- ta, multitude ,"from bahti. This class of words has

been retained with all possible exactitude, exclusive of the

insertion of a euphonic a before the t of the suffix (see


in Sclavonic, as a tea, according to in Old

Sclavonic could take no other form than £00; and the nominative tva - m, in like manner, could be noth ing but tvo.

The final vowel of the prim itive base is rejected in Sela

vonic ; hence, e. g. A'

Bnt'rno dyes- ehm, maidenhood, from

A’BRA dyeva, maid en nAonc

'l‘

BO edou- stvo, widowhood,"

from BAOBA vdova, widow aoyk ant'rno lfikav-

‘

stvo,“cun

ningness,"

dostoin—stvo, worth from the ad

jective bases Iii/cave, cunning,

”dostoino, worthy

"

(seeDobrowsky, p. The Gothic, in the onlyword whichbelongs here , has changed the old tenuis of the suffix a tva

to (1 instead of into th, as infidvé'

r, four”1 1mg chatuar

—I mean the neuter base tltiva - dva , serfdom ,

"

nom . acc. thic - dc, from the prim itive base thiva, nom .

thin- s, set-f."

835. In the Véda dialecttra occurs also as primary(Kritsuffix in the sense of the cognate tarya , and forms from Icar,Icri . to make,

“the paroxonytised kdrtva=kartavym

“

facien

due, as neuter substantive (nom . ace. karma - m), work,"

as be ing to be done.

”SO in Zend [G . Ed. p. 1 177.]

”0565754 bér

‘

éthwa,"

ferendus.

" Here belong, in myOpi

nion, the Old High German masculine substantive - bases in

den (nom . do). for the most part abstracts ; as, e. g. saep- i

do (or - da), sopar;"irr- a - do, err- i - do, irr- e- do. error , yach

i - do,yulc- i - do, prurigo;”l - d- do,

“

foramen; the interme

diate vowel of which I assign to the class syllable of the

verb. The e of the Sanscrit suffix Ira is dropped in the

Old High German, with reference to which we may note

also the still more marked abbreviation of the numera lfior

compared with the Gothic fidvclr and Sanscrit chatvdr- as.

T he Goth ic has retained the sem i - vowel in the suffixes

which belong here : fva, neut. (nom . tv), from vaurs- te,

Comparative with the prep. upa , upa - be’rc'thwélara (V. S . p. 2 55,

s ec Burnouf, Etudes, p.

1 142 FORMATION or WORDS .

work ti n-d, fem . (nom . thva, see from fri - a - thra .

love fi - a - lhva (forfiy—a—thva), enm ityf : sal- i - ibrds,

pl. harbour“

(cal- ya,“I turn in, remain, pret. sal- i - d u).

Old High German sal- i - tha , sal- i - da , sel- i - da ; non, fem . (nom .

ted, see from tah- led, watch, ga- trd, street

"

(Sanscrit rootyd, to go Old High German ga- z a (yé - m .

“I go uh- tvd, morning, twilight, (Sanscrit ush, to

burn, to give light, ughc’

w, aurora Here belong also, Ihave no doubt, some Sclavonic abstractfem inine - bases (to

gether with nominatives) in tea, which Dobrowsky(p.

reckons with the formations in ca , since he derives them ,

notfrom the root, butfrom the infinitive in Ii e. g. rim -m a

[G. Ed. p. schan- tva , mowing, harvest,”

(fli bllfl'

x schynmi.

“to cut down k a h 'rad Mari- (ca , (k a rma;

Idynwi, eaccror AOB IITRA Iov- i - tra. m afia,"

(loo- i - ti ,

capture I now prefer to deduce also the above- men

tioned Lithuanian abstracts in be , b3, and the ah

straete in be , which so frequentlyoccur in the Sclavonic dialects, from the Sanscrit suffix tea, i . a. from its feminine ted,

and, in fact, so as to assume, after the t- sound is dropped ,

a hardening of the v to b, with regard to which I would re

call attention to the relation of the Latin and Zend adverb

of number bis, and that of the bi, which appears in both

languages atthe beginning of compounds, to the Sanscritdvis, dvi (see p. From adjectivebases spring, in

Slowenian, among others, the following feminine abstractssladko- ba, sweetness,

“from sladek(o) sweet; gerdo- ba ,

5 It springs, perhaps, from earth,“to be (rat

'

rtlm, earth, raurthum),with 3, therefore, for th, according to 102 . p. 1 02 .

1' Fromfrfyé, I love,’

mightbe expectcdfriy- é - thva ; yetthe short

ening of 6 to a, according to cannotsurprise us.

I W'

e might have expectedfiy- ai - thea but onlythe firstpartof the

diphthong of the classsyllable ai has remained, as infiy- a,“ I hate

,

fiy- a - m, we hate,”forfiy- ai,fiy- a i - m.


in Sanscrit, Greek, and several Latin expressions which belong here, joined directlyto the root, but bythe interven

tion of a conjunctive vowela (later e, OldNorthern i); hence ,

e. g. in Gothic, bug- a - n(a)—s, bent,“

(for Sanscritbhug- mi - s.

(from the rootbug,‘

(biuga, bang, bug- u—m). The denom ina

tives discussed above point to an older period inwhich the n ofthis passive participle plays an importantpart.

[G . Ed. p. but is joined directto the In the

Sclavonic languages the suffix beginning with n of the

perfectpassive participle has Obtained still wider di ffusionthan in the German dialects. The Old Sclavonic verbs

which are based on the Sanscrit lst class, exhibit, in the

place of the original I t! aya before the participial suffix

under discussion, either a (a), or R (ye), or K ; e. g. m aroa an'

b

glagol- a - n

'

, said 3be1 m'

b Zyrya- n’

,

“seen ; VOA IGN

'

b vol

ye- n’

, willed,”

(see The verbs which are based

on the Sanscrit lst class add to the root, as in most of the

persons of the present, an E. Compare “stem ; nes- e- n’

,

borne, fem . nes- e- na, neut. nes- e- no, with nes- e- shi, nes- e- fy,

nes- e- m'

, nes- e- te, nes- e- cu, nes- e- la. Perhaps, however, inthis class of verbs the e is notthe old classvowel, but an

insertion of later date, like the a of the correspondingGothic participles. It is to be noticed, with regard to the

It is an oversight, that, in 5. the a preceding the n is identified

with the classvowel ; forwere the class character retained in the passive

participle, in thatcase the verbs (see belonging to the Sanscrit4th classwould retain the syllableya ; the passive participle Of turf -ya ,“ I m isc,

”would be haf ya - m , nothaf - a - ns. Thus

,from rains-ya , I

grow,

”the participle under discussion is ralw- a - m , notrates-yam s, where

itis to be observed, that in neuter verbs this participle has in the Ger

man languages, as ia Sanscrit, an active meaning ; thus, cabs-yam s, qui

crevit.”

1 A directjunction of the suffix is found also in the adjective air- luk

na - s, open, properly unlocked ; so the neuter substantive- base barna, nom. barn,

“child, as born (like rc

’

x- vo- v), compared with the

actual participle baur- a - m .

FORMAT ION OF WORDS . “45

verbs belonging to the Sanscrit lst class, that, in Sanscritalso, the character aya (dropping onlythe final a) extends

over the special tenses. This, too, is the case in Germanwith the corresponding affix of the weak conjugation. It

is surprising that the Lettish languages, although theyborder nexton the Sclavonic, are nevertheless distinguishedin the case of the participle under discussion, that theyemploythe suffix ta more constantlythan the latter do the

suffix no, fem . na . In the Lettish languages, however,

analogous forms in na - s are not altogether wanting : theyare, however, no longer conscious of their origin, and pass

for ordinary adjectives ; as, e. g. the Lithuanian silp- na - s,

weak weakened,”see silpstu, I become weak, pret.

silpau); p ilna - s,(Lithuanianpil- n'- s), full,

"

[G . Ed. p.

properly filled, = Sanscrit pair- paw,

" Zend pérénd, fem .

p‘

eré 'né for perena (see 5.838 . Just as the passive participial suffix la, in Sanscrit,

forms from substantives possessive adjectives, like phal- itd- s, gifted with fruit

"

(see so for a like purpose

is used the suffix no, in like manner, with the insertion of

a conjunctive vowel i , which the Indian Grammariansinclude in the suffix. Examples are, phaIi

- nd- s, gifted

with fruit; mal- i - na- s, covered with dirt." With theseagree, in respectof accentuation also, Grecian formationsli ke a ed

'

- v6~g (Ruttmann, II 1 1 9. properly“endued

with evenness, hence (1) flat, even, (2 ) living in the

plain Oxoretvé-

g (from axorecr- r- ré -

g, see“endued

The ti of the Sanscrit form owes its origin to the labial preceding ;otherwise its place would be filled byi , as, e g. in stir-nd - s : the old form,

however, is evidentlypar-na - s, and the true rootispar, whence p iparmi ,

I fill.”Onpar

-

na is based also the Zend base perena , of which the first

a is founded on the original a, while the second is explained by 44 .

The i of the Lithuanianp ilna - s is a weakening of the original a , as that

Ofwilka - s, wolf,

”compared with the Sanscritvrt

'

Ica - s from varka - s, sec

l ., and Vocalismus,

”

p. 100.


with darkness ¢aew6~g (from -

g) endued with

light dpcwé-

g (from Opes- t- ré -

g),“gifted W i th mountains.

The e of eddtewé -

g is the weakening Of the a of edb‘

c'

a , where

itis necessaryto recall attention to the fact, thatthe suffix a m

also is veryfrequentlypreceded byan e as a weakening Of the

finalvowelofthe prim itive base ; e. g. podeé vfrom dado- aw. In

wordswhich express a time, as e. g. inx6ea- r- ré—g, rjpefi- c- mi - g,

d p’

- v6~g, the fundamentalsignification lies more concealedbute awé-

g properlymeans nomore than with yesterday,combined with yesterday,

”belonging thereto,

”as our

German expressions also, like gestrig, heufig, conta in a pos

sessive suffix. In Spite of the di fference of accentuation. I be

[G. Ed. p . 1 1 82 ] lieve thatadjectives, too, like Eéh vog. MO:

rog, o’

zdapéwcvog, are not distinguished in their formativesuffix from the oxytone forms in t- mi—g, butthatthe languageonlyaims at bringing these expressions prom inentlyforward with more emphasis, and therefore gives the moreenergetic accentuation (see p. There occurs also, in

Sanscrit, a word among the formations in ina which socentuates not only the suffix but the prim itive word, vi z

m aring- i - na - s, horned,

“from W sringa ,

“ horn.

In Gothic the conjunctive vowel has been lengthened in

the corresponding class of words to ei see beforewhich the final vowelOf the base word is likewise dropped ;hence, e. g. silubr- ci - n(a)- s, argenleus (also silubrius, Math2 7. fill- ci - n(a)- s, pelliceusf

"liuhad- ci - n(a)- s, lucidus ;

suny- ei - n(a)- s, vet

-

dx from the bases silubm (nom . silubr),&c . ; sunyd (nom . sunya). The following are examples in

Old High German : hulz - f“ligntma ;

wstein- duh), Ia

p ideus,” boum - t

' “arboreus ; rdr- f arund inaceus ;

"

eihh- z'

qucrnus,”

xiegul- f later- fl irts.

”In New

High German the vowel of conjunction t’

has been weak

ened to e, and, after r, altogether dislodged ; hence, e. g.

eiclr- e- n, tann- e- n, gold- em, tuck- em , Ieder- n. From plurals

in er (out of i f , see Spring forms like halter- a .

1 1 - 18 FORMATION OF WORDS .

pressed bythe base noun ; as, e.g. from osi - s. ash, “Lyna - s,

“ash - wood ;

"from 59a , berry,

"fiy

’- y

- na - s,“a place

where manyberries are from akmfi (theme alanen), ak

men-

y- na - s, heap of stones. Words like bar- nus

“m isera

ble“

(properly gifted with from be'

da, m isery,"

dyw’- na - s, wonderful,

“

(“

gifted with from dywa - s,

wondrous work,”appear to have losta vowel Of conjane

tion ; for else the final vowel of the prim itive base wouldhardlybe suppressed before the suffix. Compare Russianformations like pyly- nyi , dusty,

“from fl b ld b pyly, dust;

maclib- nyi'

, mealy, from mulca ; bolot’

myi , marshy, from

[G . Ed. p. bolofo, marsh.

” There are, inLithuanian,also formations in awe, with o as conjunctive vowel, whichrun parallel to those above mentioned in o- ta - s e. g.

ttrilni

- O- na - s. to will, from wilna, will; raud- o—na - s,“red

”

endued with a red from m edia, red colour.

"

839. In Latin the denom inative formations in nu- s, fem .

rta, which answer to the Sanscritand Lithuanian forms in

i - na - s, stand in multifarious relations to their base word,which do not require a detailed explanation here . The

originally short conjunctive vowel t' has been lengthened,as in the older German languages, and the final vowel of

the base word is suppressed, as in the sister languages.

The following are examples : cal- i - nu- s, Vejent- ti nu- s, reg- 1

'

na, carnifie- f- na , doclr- i - na (for d ocldr- i - na). terrfr {mu- 8 , tonslr

f- nu—s (from toaster, whence tensor, see cf. tonstrir) ;stagn

’

J—nu- s, gulf- i4 10, discipf

-

z’

ma (for discipuh'

na), ore- 1'

mc- s,fer’- t

'- nu- s, tabuf - t

'

mu- s, pt'

sc'

fl f- na, mar'

a’

mu- s. ali’- é- nu- 8 ,

hmP- é- um'“

pecu- f—nu bov- f- ml- s. The conjunctive vowel

(2 for i , to avoid two i - sounds following one after the other.

1'

I‘

hc retention of the organic uof the 4th declension, in opposition to

the suppression of the other vowels, agrees with the phenomenon, thatin

Sanscrit also a is retained before the vowels of the derivative suffix in

preference to the other vowels, and, indeed, with Guna increment, and

with euphonic change of the 6 (=as) into av.


is most commonly suppressed after r (as in German, see

hence, e.g. ebur- nu- s, pater- me s, mater- awe, cer- nu- s,

velar- me s, quer- nu- s, inter- nu- s, eater- nu- s, infer

- nu- s, super- me s.

Also after 9 (from c); salt‘

y- nu- s, ilig- nu- s, Inrig

- nu- e, if we

oughtnot here to divide thus, sali - gnu- s, and assume the

dropping of the final consonant of the prim itive base (seeabie-

gnu- s, privi-

gnu- e), when gnu- s (for genus, ginue)Would

signify produced (cf. Pott, II . The Indian Grammarians assume also a suffi x fan. the z

‘

of which is probably,in like measure, onlya lengthened conjunc [G. Ed . p.

tive vowel, so that”z - nawould be identicalwith the above - m en

tioned i - na . Examples are : sum - i'- na - e,

“yearly,

”from samd,

“

year ; kuF- i'

z - na- s,“noble

”

(“

gifted with good fam ily, gooddescent from kulam, race . The Latin (1 also, In words

like mont- d- nu- s, urb- d - nu-

s, sol- d - nu- s, eater- d- nu- s (see veter

f- nu- s, valet- nus ). c’

ent- d- nu- s (Ib’

ent- f- nu- s), opp idfld- nu- s,

ins-ar- d - nu- s, R omtd- nap s, Afric‘—d- nu—8, is probably only a

vowel used to connectthe words ; so thathere also onlyan

is the true suffix, as e.y. tuin cord- d- tu- s, seeler- d - tu- s (seewhere we would recal attention to the disposition

which the secondary suffix tn also has to be borne bya

long vowel. We m ight, however, also so regard the forms

d - nu- s as though they bore the class- character of the lst

conjugation and presupposed verbal- themes like montd,

celerd, after the analogy of mud, lauda.

840. As the Sanscrit bases in a produce notonly fem i

nines in a, butsome also in i‘

, we may also regard suchfem inines as indrdm

‘

, the wi fe of Indra,

"the

wife Of Rudra,"rarugzdm

‘

. the wife of Varuna,"mdtuldni

’

.

the wife of an uncle bythe mother’

s side"

(from mdtula),kshatrt

‘

yda i'

,wife of the kshatriya caste,

"as productions

of the suffix a m 1 , and bring them into relationship withthe Latin, Lithuanian, and German formations which have.

gtfor it, through the influence of the preceding r .


been described ; butin this class of Sanscritwords I hold thed, not, as in Latin forms like mont- d - nu- s, for a conjunctiveor classvowel, butfor the lengthening Of the a of the prim i

tive base, which in all the words which belong here ends in

[G. Ed . p. a . I divide, therefore, thus, e. g. mdtuId- m”,

for which we m ight also expect mdtuId - nd.

’TO these

fem inines correspond inGreek Oéawa , Aéxawa , flan/a, d'

xawa ,

,uoht'

afidawa, déowowad' from Gears - a , &C. (see Fem i

nine patronym ics also, ltxptoté - m, adm it Of being referred

here , with the lengthening, therefore, of the final vowel

(O= Sanscrit a) Of the prim itive base, as in Sanscrit, in

case we oughtnot rather to distribute it’

Axpwt- a'

I- vn, and

look on the w as the conjunctive vowel. T he latter view

is corroborated byLatin forms like Mell- d- nia , together with

Mell- d- na (as it were, the honey Valf - d- nia.

matr- d- na , patr—d- na . We divide, therefore, also P erri - (la m,

Bell’- 6- na , Morb

’- 6- m

°

a, Orb’- d- na , although the 2 d declension,

in which the u and o are interchanged atthe end Of the

base, authorises the referring the 6 to the prim itive base .

n ui84 1 . InLithuanian the fem inine suffix ene + corresponds to

the Sanscritd - m’

,Greek awa , tow), and Latin O- m

'

a, (hm. Withrespectto signification also, e. g. brOP- gne, brother’

s

corresponds adm irablyto Sanscrit form ations like mdtuldm'

.

wife of anuncle bythe mother'

s side .

” Other Lithuanian‘V

formations of this kind are : bern'- ene , the serf

’

s wife,

from berna - e kaltr’- 5n3,

“the sm ith’

s wife,

”from Icahn- st

Indian Grammarians regard (in in these words as an affix inserted

between the base - noun and the feminine i , which theycall dnuk, where

the It probablydenotes the accentuation of (in.

1“Ae

’

m rowa presupposes for den tin-

S a nom inative masculine dem o- S,

the final syllable of which we maycompare with Sanscritcompounds likenripa

- s, ruler of men”

(from pd, to

I From é'

m'

a (see p. 174, note).

From broli- s, brother,”from bralia - s.


tion of gydenu,“from which Bosworth Dictionaryof the

[G . Ed . p . Anglo- Saxon language quotes the form

gydene (e as the weakening Of Important are the Old

Norther nforms,as apynya , she - ape ,

"cargynya ,

“slIe

for the support Of the view, thatthe doubled n of the forms

spoken of stand byassim ilation for my. T he 31 comes by“Umlaut from a , which approaches closer to the Sanscritd

Of (Infthan the i of farm, which probablysprings from itbystill further weakening. For trirtin, in Old H igh German,

wirtan actuallyoccurs (Grafl’

,I . In the circumstance

that bases in on before the suffix farm, in, drop the final

consonant of the base , together with the preceding vowel

(e. g. afi- inna , af

'- irr for af tm - imra . af on- ia), the Germ an

agrees with a sim ilar phenomenon in Sanscrit, where basesin 1 : generally rejectthis consonantwith the vowel pre

ceding itbefore vowels and 1 ; yof the derivative suffixes ;

hence , e.”g rdjhyd- m (O ,r with the weaker accent, rdjhya - m),

“kingdom ,

“from rcya'n.

‘

king.

”

842 . We return to the primary suffix an, in order to

remark, that by itand its fem inine all, in Sanscrit, some

oxytone abstra cts also are formed direct from the root; as,

Observe thatalso the above - mentioned formations in twyn,in Anglo

- Saxon, and even in Old High Germ an (in K ero and Is ), have

lostthe final vowel of the base in the nom inative (see Grimm,I I .

justas in NewHigh German, through which, however, theyneverthelessdo not fall under Grimm

’

s 4th strong declension, i . r. the bases in 6.

I II Anglo- Saxon, on the other hand, the real fem inine bases in i have

nearlyall passed into that declension, the final vowel of wh ich ends ori

ginallyin 6 (Goth ic i . a. into Grimm’s 1 st declension, fem inine of the

strong form ; a nd thus tired,“deed,

"

presents no single case, which we

mustnecessarilyderive from a base d i and the nom inative accusative

plural dra in, and dative (Irwin- m,belong decidedlyto the lstdeclension

just so the accusative singular deede (like gefe), as the final i has alreadybeen dropped in the accusative in Gothic (m i st, gratiam,

”for ansti).

1“

According to theweak declension, see Grimm ,I I . 319 . Compare the

masculine rarg’- r

, wolf, with the Sanscriterika- s from rurka - s.


e.. g. m yaj- h’

é - s, worship, sacrifice (Zend lasing: yas’

ml, theme ma); yat- na - s,‘‘

cfi'

ort; p ms'

md- s,

“question

(Zend ”la m“fras- na , neuter, fras- ne- m, see Brockhaus,Glossary p. raksh- nd- s, protection, support; ydch- i

‘

id,“the request, entreaty (risk- ad,

“thirst.

"An exception

as regards the accent is to be found in svdpna- s, sleep

(Zend Maj- no, see to which the Lithuanian sdp- na - s,

dream ,

“verywell corresponds, onlywith the rejection of

the w. InGreek“mr -

9 corresponds, In Latin com - nu- s(see1 2 6. Note). To Sanscritfem inines likeydch- i

'

rd corresponds,irrespective Of the accentuation, the Greek vex

- W). InLatin

we may perhaps refer here ru- f- na and rap- f—na , which,

therefore, have reta ined the class vowel i (seeand, indeed, lengthened it, as in generalthis suffix, inLatin,

loves to have long vowels before it(f- nu- a, d—nu—s, d- na).The Old High German Ioug

- na ,

“

falsehood, lying (seeGrafi

'

, II . and the Old Saxon hof - na , to weep, to la

ment, undoubtedly belong here . TO the masculine ah

stracts in a we I refer the Old H igh German Iong- i - n or

Ioug- e- n, negatio"

(Graff, l. theme long- i - na , Ioug

- e- na .

with a vowel Of conjunction inserted (cf.843. There is a close affinity in Sanscrit between the

participial suffixes Wta, 3 no, and the suffixes Fa ti , fa ni,

which are used principallyfor the formation of fem inine

abstracts, in the i of which I recognise the weakening of

the a of the pronominal bases ta , na . The suffix fa ni

appears only in those abstracts whose roots in the perfect

passive participle replace the suffix ta byna ; thus, e. g. Iti

a i - s,‘‘

tearing apart, gId- ni - s,‘‘

exhaustion, jz'

rr- ni - s.“old age,

”

hdni - s, abandonment,“ compared with the passive partici

ples Iu- nd- s,“torn asunder,

"

gId na- s, exhausted,

”

j zr- pd - s,

aged, Old,"hf- né - s,

“abandoned (irregu [G . Ed . p.

lar for hd- nd- s), to which, with rega rd to accentuation, theybear the same relation as in Greek, e. g. mire-

g to word: (see

The comparison of owé - m-

g with n a - ré- s‘

. from an

4 F


obscured rootn ot, is closer. In Lithuanian bar- ni - s, quar

rel“(barn,

“I is a fine remnant of this kind of

formation of fem inine abstracts : in Old Sclavonic this class

of vocables is somewhatmore richlyrepresented bywords

like aaub da - ny,

“impost

”

(for dani , see BgANb

bra - ay, war,"

properly the contesting"

(1503117; borywi ,I by transposition from ber ry

-=Lithuanian

bar- ni - s (Dobrowsky, p. In Gothic here belong theo o 0 s

femrnrue bases lug- m , a he ana - bus- m , command

(8 for d, ana - biuda ,“I command, root bud); caiIa - ciz - ni .

subsistence, properly

“welfare (2 from 8 , see 86. 5

rootvas; r isa, vac, vésum); ta ik - ni , Sign"

(originally the

shewing, e.g. Beck i/um, Sanscrit die, from dik, to

siu—m'

, the looking, viewing ; nom inative Iiugnks, & c.

(see Moreover, the suffix ni, in Gothic. is a com

mon means for the formation of fem inine abstracts fromweak verbs, the character of which is retained before the

suffix,with contraction, however, of the syllable ya Of the

lst conjugation to ei, as in the 2 d person singular Of the

imperative . The following are examples from the lstcon

jugation, which is here mostrichlyrepr esented n- ci - a(i)- s,salutatio ,

” Irauh- ci - n(i)- s, eraltatio,‘ haus- ei - n(i)—s.

“aud i

gamél- ei - n(i)- s, scripture . The 2 d conjugation fur

nishes us onlywith Iath- d inritatio ; m it—d- a(i)- s,“cogifafiof

”saIb- d anelio :

"the 3d onlybau

- a i - a(i)- s.

[G . Ed . p .

“cedi/

‘icatio at- vit- a i - n(i)- s, obsert'al io

midya—sreip - ai - n(i)- s,“dilut' ium ; lib- at

'- u(i)- s, vita lab- a i

n(i)- s,“apes (the verb is uncited).

844. To the Sanscrit oxytone passive participles in ta

It being presupposed that the only citable accusative with two

meanings, Iiugn, actuallybelongs to a feminine base liugni (see Grimm,

I I . p. otherwise the neuter of the passive participle mentioned

above has mostclaim to thisword, and then liayn(a)would pro

perlysignify the lied,”and correspond to Sanscritforms like bhayna- m

,

the bent. ”


the mowing (pyauyu, I mow s- mer- ti - s, death

the pa- z

‘

inti - s. knowledge , agnition, acquaint

ance“

(finnmr, I know pri-

gim- ti - s, nature

"

(gems ,

ussoo'r"

The Old Sclavonic has corrupted the i of the

suffix under discussion in the nom inative accusative sin

gular to b 3; (see and, in general, the abstract

fem inine bases which belong here follow the declension of

kosty(theme kosti , see p. The base pa- mya

- ti (HAM /11T H,

memory”

) I now read, according to p. 1048, pa- mari—ti,

as a is an a with a nasal sound ; the Sclavonic mart- ti ,

therefore, has this superiority over the Sanscrit md- ti ,

that it has not entirelylost the nasal of the root before

the suffix. Compare, also, the above - mentioned Gothi c

base ga- mundi , nom . ga

- munJ - s. Tire following are other

Old Sclavonic abstracts belonging here, which I annex in thenom inative snaroaa'rb bingo

- duty, benefit t'

bmeb'rb

s’- mry- ty, death (see Mikl. , Radices,

”

p. 52)=Sanscritmg

'i - ti - s, from marti - s ; RAM T b rIas- ty. dom inionc'reams stras- ty, suffering

"

(root strad); eyes- ry. infor

mation”

(root eyed, compare Sanscrit causal céddydmi , I

make to know, I inform ,

”from the rootaid,

“to TO

this class Of verbal abstracts belong mostprobablyalso the

Sclavonic and Lithuanian infinitives in ti, ofwhich hereafter.

[G . Ed. p. 845 . InGreek the tOf thissuffix, exceptin

xii- re g, [I ii- re g. (=Sanscritmd- ti- s, Sclavonic mad ¢é ~fl ~g

(together with (poi d'

mrw- fl - g (with d'

prrw- O'

t- g, compare

Sanscritpi‘d i - s, the has been retained unaltered

onlyunder the protection of a preceding a . The protecting

9 D at-yanswersadmirablytotheZenddditi - s,mentioned above (p. 1

fromya - dsch- dditis, properly making pure,”and to the Gothic base dé - di

(t=a, see Old High Germantd- ti, nom . tat(our That). The San

scritleadsus to expectdbd - ti - s,from the root“dint,

“toplace, tomake.

”

1' Miklosich (Rad. , p . 1 0) rightly compares the Sanscrit root vridh

(from card/r), to grow,”from which vrid- dlu

'

s (euphonic for cridh - ti - s),

growth, increase, succes .

”


sibilant, however, as in the justmentioned Sclavonic formations, is the euphonic representative Of an original t- sound :hence, e. g. m

'

O - n -

g (together with “GI- Or g), mice -

re g (withweG- ov- g), Mia - re g. With respect to the weakening of the -

r

to c , which generallytakes place after vowels, compare the

same phenomenon in the 3d person singular Of the conjugation in ,u, and of the 3d person plural Of allverbs : as, therefore, Sc

'

é‘

w- m , n’

Gq- m , so also Sci- or g, Oé - m - g. After gutturals

and labials, with which the a' unites itself in writing to f, tit,

the weakening of the t- sound tO the sibilant is of mostfre

quent Occurrence ; hence, e. g. Ceca-

g (=Ce - O'

c- g, euphonicfor (earn

-

g) compared with the Sanscrit yfik - ti—s, Latinjunc—tio wédn -

g’“(= 1ré1r- a

'

t-

g) for Sanscrit pdk- tis, Latin

coc- lio. It adm its of no doubt, that, in Greek, the c has

Obtained an influence on the -

r preceding, which does not,indeed, prevail completely throughout, but is shewn in its

preferring an a' to the r ; hence e. g. the Opposition be

tween Ceux- rd—g, wea - rO-

s‘

, and (sax- or g, new- 0 11° Whi le in

Sanscrit, yak- tbs, pélc- ti - s, {rip

- ti - s satiating =Greekre

'

pw- m - g), with respectto the initial consonants Of the suffix,

agree with the passive participlesyak- 164 , pak- té - s, {rip

- 164

(Greek repw- vd- g for repw

- rd-

g, see Observe, that

the Sanscrit, in accordance with the Greek, has retained

the more energetic accentuation for the abstract(see 785,

p. while the participle has allowed the accent to sink

downupon the finalsyllable thus,yu’

lcti - s [G . Ed., p.

compared with yukté - s, as (safe ; compared with (sumo-

g.

846. In Greek, from m , by the inorganic addition Of

an a , the form ma has developed itself, in sim ilar wise as

above 1 1 9 . p. 130)we saw - 7p:a . e.g. in 6pxrfa'

7pca , answer to

the Sanscrit tri’

. The extended form ma appears, as has

already been elsewhere remarked,1~ to be most inclined to

unite itself with forms which, byderivative letters or com

Hm from m n=Sanscritpack from pak, Latin ooo.

1'

Influence of Pronouns on the formation OfWords, p . 2 3.


position, have enlarged themselves ; while it rather avoids

monosyllabic roots. We find, indeed, Ova-fa , but notAw a

’

a ,

cpuO'

t'

a , fwm'

a . On the other hand, we find, e. g. dompam'

a ,

im ram'

a , Oeppam'

a , armad a , émfiaa'

c'

a (with ém'

Bam - g). Ex

ternallythese forms approximate to nom inal abstracts, wh ich

are formed bythe suffix ca from adjective or substantive

bases, in so far as these change a 1' which occurs in the final

syllable into a'

; as, e. g. &xaGapO"

from dxé dap'

ro-

g, ti da

vaO"- t'

a from &Gé va ‘

ro-

s'

.

847. In Lithuanian, also, there occur verbal abstracts,

which, like the Greek in ma , have given an inorganic atfix

to the suffix ti under discussion, and pr esuppose bases in

tia, whence, in the nom inative , comes (3 (see p. 174. Note).Thus, together with the pyzi - ti - s, the mowing,

“mentioned

above (p. 1 1 92 G. there exists a pyét- Eofthe same signifi

cation, and at the same time a masculine pyéti - s (for pyutia - s, genitive pyuchz

’

o, euphonic for pyutio, see 783. p. 1046)another example is beg- 13, the running.

"The nom inalah

stracts iny- stz , as bagot’

- y- sle'

, riches,“from bagota -

s, rich ,

“

yann'

- y- sla youth,

”from yauna - s, young,

"di5m

’- y—sl3,

godhead,”from dié’wa - s, God,

"merg

’-

y- slé, maidenhood,"

[G . Ed. p. 1 196 ] frommerge, maiden,

"representthe above

mentioned Sanscrit abstracts in M (compare dim?

y- slé with déca -ui'

, but appear, with regard to

their sufl‘ix, to belong to ti , and, like Sclavonic formations,

as Ionoc'rb yum - sly,“

youth, rogsc'rb gore

- sty, bitter

ness,” have inserted before the ta euphonic s.

‘Irrespec

tive of this, theyalreadyanswer to the Latin nominal als

stracts in tin or lie- s (see as cani - lia . cani - tie- s, p i

gri- tia, p igri

- lie- s, justi - tz'

a, amici - lt’

u, paeri- Iia , pueri

- tie- s,

the i Of which (before the t) I regard as the weakening of

the finalvowel Of the prim itive base (cf. p. 1 167G. An

example of a neuter belonging here is servi - tt'

um. In

1. See Dobrowsky, p. 302 , and compare the formations instvo=Sanscrit(no


to he remarked on account Of the pure retention of the

suflix. Mar- s and men- s have probablylost an i belongingto the base (therefore from morti - s, menti - s): the former

answers to the Sanscrit mo

ri - ti - s (from marti - s) death,”

the latter to mci - Ii - s for nw’

m - ti - s.

848 . With the suflix ti , in Sanscrit, masculine substantives

also are formed, which, according to their fundamental sig

nification, denote the person acting ; as, e. g. yé - ti - s, tamer.

binder (of the from the rootyam pé- ti - s, lord

(ruler), husband,” for pé- li - s (rootpd, to support, to rule

sdp- ti - s, horse,

"as runner fiid- ti - a

'

l'

relation.

"To

[G . Ed. p.

pdti-

s answers the Lithuanian pati - s in

wiesz -

pati- s (usually -

pat'

- s), the Gothic fa - dt, nom . fath - s

(see the Greek wé - O'

t- g, Latin pO- ti - s. TO this class

of words belong, further, among other words, the Greek

pa’

z v- fl -

g, the Latin rec- fins (from who), the Gothic ga - drauh

t(i)- s, soldier”

(root drug, doing m ilitaryservice,”

pret.

drauh, pl. drug/um); gas- l(i)- s, guest,”as it appears to me

,

as eater,"1 Sclavonic gas- (y. Here belong, further, in

Lithuanian, gen

- li - s, relation,” and the following with a

The root sap,“to follow, akin to each, id. (from salt), the Latin

oequor, Lithuanian seku, I follow, Greek Eva-0pm , probablydenoted ori

ginally“rapid motion,

”as also other terms used to denote a horse, are

based on the notion Of rapidity. Compare Weber, Vajasanéya- Sanhita

Specimen,”I I . 54 .

1 Perhaps from jan (“to bear, to produce transposed to (com

pare dlzmd with dham). In the Véda dialect this suffix forms also ad

jectives with the signification of the participle present; e.g. vriddhi

(euphonic for vridh- ti), growing jdghghi (euphonic forjfiehti),“lov

ing (Rigv. 1 . IO.

1 Compare Sanscritghas,“to eat, to which the Latin hosti - s also

appears to belong, as, in Sanscrit, K h and Q gh are Often interchanged,

and g h is represented in Latin also by h . In Lithuanian, gas-

pada,house- keeping,

”appears, in respectto its initial syllable, to belong here,

andpadd seems to be radicallyakin to the Sanscritpadé - m,Greek m ad

- v.

Compare also the Latin hos-

pea.


lengthening Of the base byan inorganic a, which, however,is wanting in the nominative (see kwes- ti - s” in

viter"

(gen. Irwechio, root Iewet, whence kwetu and Im echiu,

I invite ra isti - s, head- band”(risz u, I

kanwz - ti - s, stopple"

(kamsz au, I stop ram- ti - s, sup

port“

(properly the supporter, pa- remyu and ramstau,

I yau- ti - s,“ox

"

(Sanscrit yu, to couple,"

ydzi- mi, I compare Latin“

jumentum . Perhaps,also, in the Latin nominal derivatives cmk - sti - s, agre

—sti - s,onlyti is the true suflix, and s a euphonic prefix,

’as in the

Lithuanian formations like yaun-y- ste, youth,

"

and the Sla

vonic in 84 00(see 834. SO the s of campe- strt—s, terre

stri - s, silve- slri - s, m ightowe its introduction onlyto the inelination a thas to lean on a preceding 3 ; [G . Ed . p .

SO thathere tri would present itself as the true suffix, and

as a development from the above - mentioned Mr

Sanscrittdr, fem . m”. If anyone, however, would desire,

with Pott(l. to recognise in the syllable sti Of ayre- sti - s,

cwle- sti - s, the root of to stand,”

according to the ana

logyof Sanscrit compounds like divi - shthé - s, standing in

heaven,

” heavenly,” I still see no reason to recognise in

the above - mentioned Lithuanian and Sclavonic classes of

words compounds with derivatives from the said verbal

root, as a euphonic s in the forms spoken of does not sur

prise na more than in the Greek words aixou- a - rég, aim e

a - rrig, aixov- cr- rmég. 1~ The e of the Latin formations in e—sti - s

and e- strt I regard as a corruption Of i (see occasioned bythe following combination of consonants.

849. The Indian Grammarians assume a suflix an to

Dome- attain presupposes a more simple dome- 0th (compare Pott,

Et. I .,I I . and thus, too, rus- ti - cus a more simple rus- ti - s.

1‘art- x09 presupposes abstract bases in n , as m -

pow (Bd- m -

po- r, tpi

- cn

ao- r, m é - m -

po- s) presuppose such bases in a t. See Pape, Etymol.

Lexicon,”

p. 1 40b.


explain some rare words ; as, arati - s, m . , wrath," and

with the accent on the root, drati - s, f. , fear, care (fromthe root or,

.

ri, to move oneself,”

compare Latin ira) ;ramalt- s, m. , the God of Love,

"as sporter

”(root ram ,

to cukali - s, m . , wind, as blower. I believe ,

however, that in this class Of words ti only is the true

suffix, and a the retained classvowel (see p. The

Lithuanian presents as analogous forms gym- a - sti - s, li fe ,

“

and rimm - a - sti - s, rest,”the s Ofwhich istherefore euphonic .

The latter answers also radicallyto the Sanscrit ram - a - li - s,

as ram ,with the prep. (1 (dram), signifies

“to rest.

“On

the other hand,from gyw

- a - sti - s we had to expect

ft'

c- a - ti - s. The circumstance thatthe said Lithuanian wordsform in the genitive gywaschio. rimmaschio, from gyum chia

[G . Ed . p. and rimmaschia (chia euphonic for - tia, see

p. and are become masculine, which the Sanscritabstracts in ti never are, need notdeter us from recognising the aflinityof formatio

’

n Of the words Spoken of in

both languages, as sim ilar extensions of the lim its of words,as also changes Of gender, are notuncommon in the Indo

European stock of languages. I refer,with respect to

both these points, to the Latin in- i - tiu- m for ia - i—ti - s abovementioned Together with gym- a - sti - s, life,

"and

rimm - a - sti - s, there existalso, in Lithuanian, some analogousmasculine abstracts which exhibit e for a as the m iddle

vowel ; thus, luk - e- sli - s, the writing mok- e- sfi - s, paying rup

- e- sli - s, care ; ga il- e

-ui - s, penitence pylc- e

sli - s, rancour “

(pykstu, I am wrath, pret. pykau). In

Greek we find a few analogous forms which admitof com

parison with the above - mentioned Sanscrit abstractdr- ali - s,“ fear, anxiety,

“in which 6 has been inserted : vép

- e- O'

c- g,

Aéx- e- m - g. eO

’

p- e- m - g (see p. where the agreement in

accentuation is also to be noticed.

850. The suffix ni , moreover, is, in Sanscrit, not onlya

means of forming fem inine abstracts, but produces also


does notspring, as cap illus from caput, from another term for

the head (Sanscrit stras from kiras, head,"

Greek xc’

zpa);

pdni - s signifies, perhaps, the nourishing

”(Sanscritpd, to

support, to nourish, compare pe ace), butm ight also havelosta final radical consonant(as, e.g. lu-na , lit-men, for lac- nu,

luc- nwn,fulmen forf i lly-men), and maybe named from to

bake f i - ni - s, perhaps forfid - ni - s, from fid, findo; fe’

i - ni - c

[G . Ed . p. 1 2 0l.] is referred byPott(Et. I. , I . and I

believe rightly, to the Sanscrit bandit, to bind,”with

which he also compares fido, fwdus, and the Greek a side

(rootm0) ; consequently, in the latter forms, the old a , as

in our pres. binde (see p. has been weakened to i ;

whi le the i i of fii—ni - s forfad- nix is closer to the Old a,

and compensates byits being lengthened for the consonantthat has been droppedf But i f flint: belongs to bundle,

the umight also be radical, which, however, I do not be

lieve, asf'

zdo also, and m ien», have lostthe nasal, and rootswhich term inate in a mute with a nasal preceding dis

pense rather with the less important nasal than with the

mute hence, in Sanscrit, e. g. buddh- a- s, bound.

”- m

'

- s

I hold to be akin to the Sanscrit root saji, adhe reref’

saiij, qfigere”(sak- fd- s. itmayoriginallysig

The p Of the Sanscrit pack (from pak), Greek vréfrm, has beenchanged into a guttural in coquo, which does notpreventthe assumption

thatthe original labial has notbeen entirelylost.

t Regarding the Origin of the aspirates offunis andfido, opposed to the

Greek m idm, see and Ag. Benary, Doctrine Of Roman Sounds,

"

p. 190. As regards the Greek 1 r for Sanscritb, we find the same relation

in an d, compared with the Sanscrit rootbudlc,“to know.

”The circum

stance, that in Sanscrit, together with band/z , there exists another root

which cannot be cited, band/z , cannot instigate me to refer the Latin

ftZ- ni - s rather to this banditthan to band]: butI believe thatthe weakening Of the a tou(see which

,for the reason given above, has

been lengthened inLatin, has found itswayinto the Sanscritbandit, Latinfi - ni- s, and Gothic band - um

,we bound,

”for the firsttime after the

separationof languages, from a principle common to the three languages.

FORMATION OF WORDS . 1 1 65

nify held fast, held in, hence slow, inactive. In

Lithuanian, segumeans I fasten,

“the original a of which

has maintained itself in sak- ti - s (gen.- les), clasp, buckle .

L é - ni - s, if itbe akin to Aefog, can have ni onlyas forma

tive suflix. In Sanscrit, lz'

, cl. signifies liquq'

acere, sol

vere,"whence li - nd- s, solutes, extinctus If, cl. adhce

rere, inkm ere, incidere.

[G . Ed. p . 1 2 02 ] 85 1 . The intermediate vowel- weakeningof the pronom inal bases 7! ta, 71 na , exhibited bythe suffixes

tu, nu, shew thattheystand in the same phonetic relation tothe forms ta , na . ti. ni , as that in which, in the interrogative,the form Icustands to Ira, ki (see 386. 389. The

suflix tuis particularlyimportant in Sanscrit as a forma

tive of the infinitive, and of a gerund in tvd. I have al

ready, ia mySystem ofConjugation (pp. 39, represented

the former as an accusative, with m as the sign of case,

and the latter as an instrumental, and will not repeat herethe grounds which induce me to regard the infinitive in

all languages as an abstract substantive, with the privilegeof governing, like the so- called gerunds and supines, the

ease of the verb, and to employseveral other freedoms inconstruction. The Indian Grammarians assign the m of

the infinitive in tum to the suffix, which theycall tit- mun,

in order to express byn, which is joined bymeans of the

conjunctive vowel uto the tum, which theyview as the

true suflix, the denial of the accent, which rests on the

radical syllable ; hence, e. g. def- tum, to give stint- tum ,

“to

stand ; pdk- tum,

“to cook ; t'rds- tum

,

“to tremble dt- tum,

“to eat; vet- tum, to know.

” Thatthe Indian Gramma

rians regard the finalm of these forms notas the sign of the

accusative, and therefore as alien to the true suffix, mustsur

prise us the more, as in the Véda dialect, of which I was ignorantwhen I firstbegan to treatof this subject, the abstract

substantive in la occurs also in other cases, and, indeed, in

the dative with the termination tavé or tavdi, and in the


genitive- ablative with the termination tds. In these forms,

however, the Indian Grammarians refer the case- term ina

tions 6 or di, and s likewise, to the suffix (Panini , III. 4 .

yetwe can hardlyimagine itpossible thatPanini , when he ,

[G . Ed . p. l2o3.] e.g. III . 4. says, i'

svaré ldsun- kasundu,I

i . a. that in construction with i'svara , lord, capable,“the un

accented suffixesMS and asmaysupplythe place of the ia

finitive suflix tum, he can therein have overlooked that

here is the genitive of the suflix In, and as the genitive

term ination of abstract substantives without any suffix.

It is, however, certain thatthe practicalGrammarians Oftenoverlooked that which was not far to find, if it was no

longer clearly perceptible in the usances of the ordinarylanguage of the day; and if Panini has made a m istake

here, we cannotwonder thatColebrooke also, who, in h is

Grammar,keeps strictlyto the rules handed down by the

native Grammarians, should assign the formations in tdv(un),fum(un), and (lated, to the aptotes

” Grammar

Of the Sanscritlanguage,“

p. 1 2 2 ) and, e. 9. place kdrtum, to

As regards the infinitive in tum, and the gerund in ted, A. IV. v .

Schlegel, too, has, in noticing myview of these forms (Indische B ibliothek,

”I . p. so far assented, as to saythatthe assertion thatthe infi

nitive in tum is the accusative Of a verbal noun in ta “has a certain spe

ciousness,”for the supine of the Latin has undoubtedlythe appearance

of a verbalnoun Of the 4th declension. As regards, however, the form in

ted, Schlegel verydecidedlydenies the justness of viewing in a gerund of

the same (i . 0. according to his idea) any oblique case whatever of an

abstractsubstantive governing the case of the verb ; buthe will have theform in question called “

an absolute participle,”

perhaps because it, ashe remarks at p. 1 2 4

,when it governs an accusative

,can be aptlyren

dered into Latin bythe ablative absolute ; e.g . tan drishtvd byso rise .

Though, however, tan drishtvti might aptlybe so rendered, yetthis does

not prevent its properlysignifying“post- actionem videndi cum

, after

seeing him for the instrumental, which I recognise in drishtvd, ex

presses also, where itrefers to a time, the relation after hence, e.g .

achiréna kaléna, after a short (not long) time ; consequently this

gerund

I 168 FORMATION OF WORDS .

lathe, thus. As regards the infinitive in tum, the circumstance thatthis form does not in all places express the

but I had myself before, inmyConjugation- System, pp. 57, 58, drawn

attention to the difference ; as, e. g . between vaktum, from the baseuchta,and uktvd, from the contracted base uktu and, moreover, lV. v. Hum

boldt(Indische Bibl. , I . II . in a « minus and profoundlypenetrating examination of the disputed point, whether the form in tvd be an

indeclinable participle or a gerund, has not been deterred bysuch diffe

rences from recognising inthe infinitive and the form in tva a formative

affinityand common suffix, and from unitingwith me in representing the

latter as a gerund invested with the termination of the instrumental and

expressing the relations Of this case (1. c. 1 1 . p. On the other

hand, Lassen (l. c. I II . p . 1 04)consents indeed to recognise in the form

in led a gerund, but denies it tO be an instrumental. His objectionagainstthe original identityOf the infinitive and the gerund (which, as is

evident from what has been said,I have never asserted) is from the

“Older forms Of the gerund

”which occur in Panini (VI I . I . Be

fore I mention these forms, I must repeat, that, as Lassen lays down in

other places, that alone is to be considered as ancientwhich the Veda

dialectexhibits differing from the classical Sanscrit otherwise we must

(to keep to the instrumental) regard the Védic instrumentals, mentionedin the Scholiastto Panini, VI I . I . dhitf

, malt, sushfuti (for dldty- a'

,

maty- d,m Muty- d), which have dropped the case- term inations—aswell

as locatives like clmrman for charmoni, l. c.—as Older than the forms of

the classic language which are providedwith the case- term ination. After

the analogyOfthe said Védie instrumentals may also be explained the

Védic gerunds in wt(e.g . vritvf, B igv. I . 52 . if we,with K uhn

Journal Of Lit. 1 844 , p. compare these formswith Védic

instrumentals like dhg'iglmuyd, with courage,

”which I now readilydo,without, however, assum ing, with the said learned man, thatsuch instru~

mentals come from bases in at butI hold the yOf dhfi shnuyd, umyti,for a euphonic insertion (see and I refer to the analogous feminine

pronominal instrumental amu-y- d through that of the common lan

guage Opposed to the masculine neuter amu- n- d . The feminine theme Of

the pronoun spoken of has indeed a long I7, exceptbefore the euphonicy;as, however, adjectives also can lengthen a finaluin the fem inine, so maydkg

- ishnu-y- d and um -y- d be derived from dhrighm‘

i, ura‘

i . Were it, how

ever, preferred to derive them from dhrishnvi, arvi , because adjectives inucan annex an { (see we should still feel no slightground for

assuming


accusative relation, but is also found expressing rela

tions otherwise far removed from the [G. Ed . p.

assuming, togetherwith the pronominal base amd, a base amvi, simplyin

order to annex theretothe term inations beginning with a vowel, especiallyas from amvi

‘

, according to the onlyrule which prevails in Sanscrit, must

come amvy- d, amvy- é - r. If we, however, choose to consider the y in

amu-y- (i,amu-y- O

'

s, as an insertion, the inference of this recoils also upon

the said Véda forms dkg-ighnu-y- d, uru-y- a

,which in the Scholiast to

Panini (l. c) are represented as=dhgighnu- n- d, uru- n- d, and belonging tothe masculine or neuter, which can hardlybe established bythe Védatext. In the substantively-used dhg-tshanga, with courage, the gender

cannotbe discovered from the passages Of the B igv. which lie before me.

I regard it, however, as feminine, until I find proof to the contrary. The

Védic gerunds in mi’

,ifwe derive the tvi from lu-y- d, accord with the

abovementioned Védic instrumentals (dhiti from diary- a, in so far

thatthey, in like manner, have, after dmpping the termination, changed

the preceding semi - vowel into the corresponding long one. But if the

term ination tvf do notreston this principle, I would explain, as I have

before done, h itfrom tvei'

as the consequence Of the weakening of the

vowel, according to the principle Of forms like yu- ni - mds foryu- nd - mar

(sec—The Védic gerunds in ted-ya have the appearance of da

tives from bases in tva as they, however, have nota dative, but, in like

manner, an instrumentalmeaning, and also in their formation, exclusive

of the affix ya , approximate to the usual form in tva, butnotto the

abovementioned abstracts in tea, e.g. gatvdya (Schol. to Pan.

VII I . 46) to gatva, vrittvaya (Yajurveda XI . 19 . to vrittmi, kritvdya

(l. c. to Irritva (cf. karma - m, 835 . I would rather

,with Panini ,

regard tvdya as a lengthened form Of ted with the affix ya, than con

versely, with Lassen (l. c. p . look upon tvd as an abbreviation Of

tvdya . The lengthening of the instrumental termination 42 to aya is like

thatbywhich, in bases in a, the dative term ination 4 has prolonged itself

to aya (from d- i - a , see onlythe 3, here is the representative of

the i contained in the diphthong é, while the yof tut‘

iya is perhaps an

euphonic insertion (see as, e. g. in ya -y- ia,“going

”

(rootyd,suffix in); and in the Védic dha-yas

,

“the carrying, supporting

”

(root

dlui,suffix as) - Besides tvi and tvdya , tvinam also (Pan. VI . I . 48) is

named as the representative of the termination tad, Occurring, however,as added to the rootyqj,

“to honour" (iahtvinam for ishtvd) and in the

scholiunI on the said SI‘

ItI'

a we fi nd also a form in tcdnam,viz . p itvcinam

4 G for


accusative, may have chiefly occasioned the overlooking[G . Ed. p. its m to be the sign of the accusative ,

forpiled. If these forms, ofwhich I knowno examples thatcan be cited,

are reallyequivalent in meaning to those in tvd, and therefore expressive

of instrumental relations, I can butrecognise in their term ination nam an

enclitic ; and I could onlyjoinwith Lassen in conjecturing a suffix tvan,

and deriving from it pitcdnam, after the analogy of rajtinam, and in

regarding ightvinam as a weakened form Of ishtvanam, if the forms ighgvf

mm and p itvdnam were shewn, according to this signification, to be accu

estives ; but I could in nowise be induced to look upon the form in ted,which is also the prevailing one in the Vedas, as an abbreviation Of that

in tvdnam. M . Professor Lassen, in his polemic againstmytheorywith

regard to the form intvd, has kepttheprincipalpointofmyargumentquite

in the back ground ; viz . this, that the formswh ich terminate in tea, if

we regard them , as Lassen does, as gerunds, express in all places, as is

well demonstrated byW . v. Humboldt'

s copious investigation, onlysuch

case- relations as are denoted bythe instrumental, butwh ich are quite

and entirelyremoved from the accusative, as also from the dative ; and

were this notthe case, the mere form would never have led me to recog

nise in the formations in tvd the instrumental Of feminine substantives intu

, which, with regard to their gender and their suffix,find a good sup

port in the Greek abstracts in nS- c (as {Om towhich I first drew

attention in mytreatise On the influence Of Pronouns onthe formationofWords

”

(p. However, Lassen further remarks (I. c. p. that

ifwe compare the lingual use Of this gerund, the instrumental or ablative

” were perhaps better adapted for expressing the notional relation of

this verbal form , than the accusative, which is never suited for that pur

pose. Into the province of the ablative, however, in my opinion, th is

gerund never enters, unless one thinks Of the Latin ablative, which, atthe same time, represents the Sanscrit instrumental; hence, e.g . in a

passage Of the Bhag. (II . jitramaybe aptlytranslated bythe ablativeOf the gerund (vincendo), thus, eel Occisus « slum es adeptum , vetvin

ccndopossidebic terram .

”If need be, however, I would regard here also

the instrumental gerund as expressing the relation after,”

after con

quering thouwiltpossess the earth .

”A Sanscritablative, perhapsjayat,

“from the victory,”or

“on account of the victory,

”could hardly be

expected in this and similar passages. Stillmore decisivelythan in the

passage justquoted, is the genuine instrumental relation, or that Of the

Latin ablative of the gerund expressed in a passage Of the Hitopadés'

,

already

1 1 72 FORMATION or WORDS .

Such passages, too, require especial notice where one and

the same verb simultaneouslygovern the accusative of the

infinitive and that of a person, in exact agreement with

the construction of the Latin and Greek accusative with

the infinitive, and with sim ilar constructions in German ;

as, I ch aah ihnfallen" “

I saw him fall”

(cf. Conjugationsystem, pp. 75, 107, and Hofer’

s Infinitive, p. Thus,Savitri . V. 100. (Diluvium , p. yadi mdfijz

‘

vitun ichchhasi .“Si me virere Ram . ed . S chl. II . 12 . m . , na jt

'

vilun

(editvishahé, non vivere te m atinee , Vrihatkathfi, p. 3 14, 31.

1 72 , kam ap i rdjdpmi sndlun talra dadaréa , he Saw a certainking bathe there.

“In verbs of motion the infinitive ex

presses atthe same time the place to which the motion isdirected. AS one, however, moves toward an action in

order to execute it, the accusative term ination of the in

finitive here enters upon the province of the dative , whichlatter case, in Sanscrit, most usuallyexpresses the causalrelation, while the proper dative relation is for the m ost

part expressed bythe genitive , which in Prakritand Pailihas indeed quite supplanted the dative . Thus, e. g. R idimba

I . dgatd hantum iman car-

van, arisen in order to destroyall these ; Ram . ed . Sehl. I . 2 0. abhyaydd drashgum

[G . Ed . p. ayddhydydn narddhipam, he came to see

the prince of men in AyOdhya II . 97. dvdii ha ntum

abhyéli bharatah'

, Bharat draws near to slay us both .

“

Hence the language may have arrived at expressing,

through the accusative of the infinitive, the causal relationalso, in places where it is not the object of anyverb of

motion, or where the direction of the motion is immediatelytowards a distinctly- expressed place. and the infinitive onlyexpresses the reason of the motion ; thus, e.g. Mah . I . 2 876,

munir’

z virajasan drasligun yam ishydmi tapdranam, to see

the immaculate hermit I will go into the wood of peni

tence Hitfip. (Bonn. Ed.) p. 47. pdni'

yam pdtum ya

mundkachchham agamat, He went to the shore of the


Yamuna to drink water. Without a verb of motion,

Draup. 4. alan té pdyduputrdndm bhalctyd klééam upds itum,

“Awaywith thy love to the sons of Pandu, in order to beardistress IndralOka, I. 1 5. 16 , druhasva rathdttamam

sudm'labham samdrddhum. ascend the best of chariots,which to ascend (on account of the ascending) is hardlytobe attained.

“I now, too, regard the infinitive as express

ing the dative relation where it is by the side of words

which express a time, or byother substantives, and atthe

same time itappears to representthe genitive or the Latin

gerund in di ; as, e. g. Nalas, 20. m. , nayap laud vilambitu-m,

this is notthe time to hesitate " to the hesitating, for

the hesitating thus Urvas'

i (Lenz , p. Bollensen, p.

this is notthe time to see samkm tus Drau

padi III. 7 The time has approached for these most ex

cellentheroes to come here to the, or for the,

Hitfip. ed . Bonn. p. 59, line 6, sthdtum ichchhd, the wish to

stay"

(not“of staying Ram . ed. Schl. ll. 9. 7 irdtuii

chhandah'

,the wish to hear Mah . l. [G . Ed. p.

pdaglavdn hantum mantrah'

,the plan to slaythe Pandavas

(for the slaying, on accountof the slaying, not, ofthe slayHitOp. ed Bonn. p. 1 19. S]. 40, yddd hmi s

'

aktih'

,the

power to fight; Arjun’

s return, 9 . o. (Diluvium , p.

antaram paddd vichalitum padam, room to move footfrom foot. Observe that the ordinary accusative alsooccasionallyexpresses the relation of the cause or of the

object; as,Bhagavad Gita, XVI . 3 . 4 . sampadan dd im

‘

m

abbijdtd’

si, to a godlike destinyart thou born.

"Con

verselywe sometimes find the dative of common abstracts

in constructions where the infinitive was to be expected inits genuine accusative function. I have already, in a Noteto Arjuna

'

s journey to Indra’

s heaven“

(p. drawn

attention to such a use in upa- kram .

“to begin, to com

mencc.

” We read, vi z . R idimba, I . gamandyd’

pachak

ramé he began to go to the going,"

or on accountOf


the going. instead Of the going so Ram . ed. Schl. I . 2 9.

Still more important is another passage of thiskind (Maha- Bhar. III. where the dative dependent

on upa- lcram governs the accusative exactly after the

manner of an infinitive, astrau’

daréandydl

pachakramé,

he began to surveythe arms.

"

Sim ilarlywe find abhi

rdchay (causal of W abhiruch), to be pleased, to

will, to wish,"with the dative of abstract substantives in

stead of the infinitive standing in the accusative relatione.g. Ram . ed. Schl. I . 36. S. , gamandyd

”

bhirdchaya . be

[G . Ed . p. 1 2 1 2 .] pleased to go”

(to the going, instead of,

the going, actionem eundi). So also utsah, to be able ,“

in which again the remarkable circumstance occurs, that,in the example before me the dative governed bythe said

verb, vi z . paribhdgdya, to enjoy"

to the

like the ordinary infinitive paribhdktum. governs an accusative, Mah . III. 16543

“Thee, O Ma ithili , I cannot enjoy”

(tvdm ndl

tsahé paribhdgdya). So we sometimes find

the dative expressing the place towards which a motion ismade, for which purpose the accusative is altogether and

Speciallyemployed ; e. g. Mah . II. vandya praravrajuh'

,

theyWent forth to the wood III. 10076 déramdya yach

chhdva, we go (both of us) to the herm itage .

"

On the

other hand, we find precisely in its place the dative of

abstract substantives as representative of the infinitive

in the causal relation ; e. g. in a passage Arjuna’

s

Journeyto Indra’

s heaven,"

p. 74) of the 1 2 th part of the

Mah . , alreadyelsewhere quoted, in order to dwell(vdsdya)twelve years in the wood (wenthe) ; Draup. 8 . Sura

tha sent to slay Nakula (vadhdya nakulasya), the most

excellent of the elephants Schol. to Pfinini , II. 3. 1 5

it We find, however, also the infinitive in constructionwith upaIa-

am

e . g. Indraléka, I . tam dpraqhtum upachakramé, he began to take

138V“Of him.

”


pared the abovementioned (G. ed. p. ad”

tsahé pari

bhdgdya. As in the passage mentioned this paribhdga

governs an accusative, so also is the form in ané occa

sionallyfound with an accusative ; buthitherto I know of

no parallel example to place bythe side of that already

quoted elsewhere Arjuna’

s Journey,”&c. , p. It

[G . Ed . p. occurs Nalus 7. tam suhriddn an

m kaSchana nivdrané’

bhavach chhal'td dz'

vyamdnam, but

none of his friends was capable of restraining him (inthe restraining) playing.

"It is more rare to find the

locative of a substantive formed bythe suffix a as repre

sentative of the infinitive. One example occurs, Rfighu

vanes. 16. where, however, it is uncertain whether tadvichayé be to be taken as a compound, or whether tad be

an accusative neuter, governed by vichayé, to seek .

“I

annex the whole pasSage I samajfidpayad déusuredudndyinas

tadvichayé (or tad.

vichayé)“he commanded therewith all

fishermen to seek ' that(bracelet,"valaya masc. It

maybe considered as a point in favour of the view wh ichregards tad as the accusative governed byvichayé thatboththe dative and accusative of abstracts formed bythe suflix

0 occur as substitutes for the infinitive in constructionwith the accusative. As regards the dative, I recall attention to tuam paribhdgdya. to enjoy thee ,

“in the passage

quoted above (p. 1 2 1 2 G. An instance of the accusativeof this class Of words governing the accusative as substitute

for the infinitive is afforded us in the K riyfiyfigasara. of

which we have to expectan edition from Wollheim : chakré

vivdhan tdfi banyam, i . e. lit. , he made to marry that

inThe commentarytakes tadvichayé as compound, and explains tad bytasyd

"

bhm anasya . I,however, do notdoubtthattad, whether it be

taken as the firstmember Of a compound in the genitive relation, or as an

accusative governed by vie/rage, certainly refers to valaya, bracelet,”

and notto dblzarazaa , ornament,”which, inthe preceding Sldka, stands

atthe end of a Bahuvrihi (tulyapushpdbltaraaali).


maiden. Here we must return to the fem inine form of

the suffix a , vi z . d, isolated accusatives of which are em

ployed in Zend for the infinitive, where it expresses the

accusative relation (see I now [G . Ed . p.

prefer to translate the varaydm prachakramuh'

, mentioned at6 19. p. 842 , and which remains, as yet, a solitaryexample,

by“theymade to gain,

"than by

“they made gaining.

“

To this form in dm mayalso be referred the Maratha infinitives in (bi , e. g. wtEfrain, to make, to do,

"so that 13

would be to be taken as a corruption Of an original 6, asin the firstpersons as, fi ichchhit

'

d. I wish (= Sanscritichchhdmi) ; i t kb

'

rti iz ,“I make ; ti sdkt

'

iri, I can for

which , in Sanscrit, we should expect, according to the lat

class, kardmi , Sakdm i . It appears to m e, however, more

probable, thatthe said infinitives have losta t, just as in

bhdfi. brother,"for bhrdtd . If this view be just, still the

Maratha infinitive cannottherefore be compared with theSanscrit in tum, because there is no reason apparent whythe u should have been lengthened ; but I would ratherexplain 3 (i i i , from fluid, for team, in the same way as

team,

“thou,

"in Marathi has become 1 tcfri . In the

Maratha infinitive, therefore, the suffix a tva would be

conta ined, which in classical Sanscrit forms denom inativeabstracts (see and in the Védic dialect also verbal

abstracts (see From this suflix I should prefer

also to deduce the Maratha gerund in 3 1 (in ; thus, e.g.

m Efrain,

“after the making

"

(“having from

the instrumental kO'rtvdnafi with the suppression of the

final a, which is left in the Prfikrit gerunds as

If pralcram be notconfirmed in the meaning“to make, we must

translate “theybegan to Obtain,

”which does notprejudice the infinitivenature of the form in dm.

1 or. m ethane, or deem ,

“bythe GOd"=Sanscrit dé

”é“n. a .


[G. Ed . p. patina , ghét'

o'

na , lahit'

t'

na, vildhit'

iaa, agantt’

ina .

ghettfina .

’ The Prakrit, however, is notwanting also In

The tof the gerundial suflix appears to be preserved principally, if

not solely, under the protection Of a preceding consonant. The firsttof

yhéttflp a (Sanscritrootgrab) evidentlyrests on assimilation, be it that

the p or the h Of ghti'

nh (inf. ghégzht’

duh and ghéttuiz ) has assimilated itself

to the t following. In hattt‘

igta , from has, the firsttstands decidedlyfor n. Lassen also (Inst. p. 367) compares these Prakritgerunds with

those in Marathi, buttraces them both back to the abovementioned

(G . ed. p. butasyetunciteable, gerund in tvdnam. Againstthis

explanation, even if the gerund in tedeum were better established thanitis, as accusative, the Objectionwould presentitself, thatthe Prakrithasnowhere else allowed the accusative sign atto be lost, buthas everywhere

retained itinthe form of an anusvara . Lassen (l. c. p. 2 89)also deduces

the Prakritnominal abstracts in ltana (byassimilation from tua p a) from

the already- mentionedwan butsince then, in the edited Véda textan

actual secondary(taddltita suffix tvana has been found, which, as such ,as also byits form,

has a much stronger claim to be regarded as the origin

of the Prakrit“and . The following are examples : mahitvami - m,

“great

ness”

(from the Védic mahi, ink/ditund - m, friendship ;”

martyateami - m, mortalityor humanity”

(i). I cannot, however, see

the reasonwhyBenfey(Glossaryto the Sema - Véda, s. v. mala’

tca’

)calls

the suffix tvana more organic than tea : for the broader form might aswellbe an extension Of the shorter, as converselythe shorterbe an abbre

viation of the broader. Theyboth appear to be of primitive antiquity.

The former we have alreadyrecognised in Gothic and Sclavonic (see

834 . on the latter is based very probablythe Greek 06m ;e.g. in docked -wry, diorama

-6m, amtppomivq , which has passed into the femi

nine. W ith regard to the syllable w , for the Sanscrittea, compare the

relation of 0-6 to tva - m,

thou”

In Marathi we meetwith the

Védic suflix tvana in the ratherobscured form of in abstractneuters ;as, bi ldpdgtd, childhood (see Vans K ennedy, Dictionary,

”I I . p. 1 6)

with p for tu(cf. Schluss and Hoefer,“de Prficrita dialecto,

p. Carey(Gramm . , p. 32 ) writes I!“pb'

gz forw pend, and sup

presses also, ia his dictionary, veryfrequentlythe finalvowel of Sanscrit

neuter bases in a : he writes, e.g . ,m pap, sin,

"

M (166611 ,“tooth,

”

m payee,“milk

,

” “W ilden,“sandal-wood,

”

m m“,“03 .

hit-alum,

”for m papa, &c.


of abstract radical words, or of an abstract feminine base

term inating in dhi or dlz i'

, of which only the dative in

dhydi has been retained ; so that th is form has gained a

still more genuine infinitive appearance through the lackof other cases from the same base . The term ination

dhydi is always preceded bya or aya , by, therefore . the

theme of the special tenses of the lstor 6th class, with a

as classvowel ; or bythatof the loth class, or causal form ,

with the chara cter aya . Compare , e. g. , p ib- a - dhydi (strictly

p ibadhydi, cf. In order to drink (Bigv. I . 88 .

with p ibati, he drinks kshé r- a - dhydi, in order to flow”

(I. c . 63 with kshdr—a - ti sdh- a - dhyal. in order to con

quer (S . V. ed. Benf. . p. with séh- a - ti vand—d - dhydi .

in order to praise ,"with the accusative, B igv. I . 6 1 . s.

viram vandddltydi,‘

in order to praise the hero,

with edad - a - té char- é - dhydi,“in order to drink (l. c. 6 1 .

with clzér- a - ti ; mad- ayd- dhydi,

“in order to gladden or re

joice,”with mddtiyati (causal of the rootmad, to rejoice ,

“

Yajurv. 3. iéayadhydi, in order to enjoy, to the enjoyment

"

(Rosen, R ig- Védze Specimen. p. with ia- ayati .

“

[G . Ed . p . The is’

adhydi,“in order to stride through,

cited byWestergaard (Radices, p. belongs probablytothe Védic i i. cl. 6 and answers, therefore, to iti- ti - ti , he

goes (Naigh . II . Among the infinitivcs in dhydi, the

combinationwith prepositions the firstaccent,and in other forms from the

infinitive base in la the onlyone falls on ‘he preposition ; e.g. (invetawi i,

“inorder to follow”

(from dim and étavti i,B igv. l. 2 4 . prétidhdtavé ,

“ in order to place, to support (from prati,“against,

”and dht

itavé, l.

A denom inative from is,“wish

,food ; hence it signifies also to

wish (so B igv. I . 77. I have already, in the “Journal for Lit.Crit. ” (Dec. 1 830

, p. explained the form ie'

ayadyfii, which Sayana

regards as an instrumental plural, and explains byéaltan‘

t'

ydili , as Rosen

does by eroptatas,”as an infinitive, butI then found a difficultyin the i ,

in that I presupposed a verb of the loth class, which would lead us to

expectechayadhycii . Cf. Lassen,Anthol. , p. 133 .

FORMAT ION OF WORDS. 1 81

form vdvfidh- é - dhydi , in order to make grow (B igv . I .

6 1 . stands hitherto quite isolated, and maybe regarded

as a first attempt to form infinitives out of the them es

of other tenses than the present, or also as a remnant of

a lingual period, where, perhaps, from all or most of the

tenses of the indicative, infinitives in dhydi m ight havebeen formed. Westergaard (Radices, p. 189)takes the said

form as the infinitive of the perfect, with which , in formtoo, it adm irably corresponds, as the root vardh (v

O

ridh),to grow, also to make to grow, to augment, to ex

tend,"

in the Véda dialect, everywhere exhibits ed for on

in the syllable of reduplication. The factof vdvridh- é - dhydi

belonging, according to its m eaning, which Sfiyana explains

bythe causal infinitive vardhayitum, to the present, cannotbe impugned by its derivation from the perfectbase, as

in the Védas the participles also Of the reduplicated pre

terite veryOften appear with a present signification e. g.

B igv. I . 89. S. , tushtucdiisas,‘

laudantes. The a inserted in

tdvridh- a - dIIg/di is evidentlythe conjunctive - vowe] a, whichbelongs to the perfect, and which , in several places of the

indicative, has been weakened to i (see compare

also, with regard to the accentuation, the dual forms vd

uridh -

ti - thus , vdvfidh- d- tus. Just, however, as this a of the

indicative is referred bythe Indian Grammarians to the

personal term inations, so Panini (III . 4. regards the a

of the forms in a - dhydi as reallya mem [G . Ed . p.

ber of the formative suffix.

it

Itmaybe leftto further ex

Panini gives, l. c . , the suflix spoken of in six different forms, viz .

adhydi, adhydin, kadhydi, kadhydin, iadhyé'

i, s'

adhyt‘

i in. The final a ne

gatives the accentuation Of the suffix (cf. p. 1 2 02 , G. and the initial e'

points outthatthe rootappears in the form of the special tenses ; hence,

e . g . the abovementioned p ibadhydi , according to Sayana (ed . M iIllcr,

p. 7 contains the suffix éadhydin while madayddlcydi , since ithas

the accenton the a,which is reckoned to belong to the suffix, according

to Mahidhara contains the suffix s'

adhyti i . Compare the suffix Ea , i . e. a

according


am ination Of the usances of the Vedic dialect to decide

whether we have not to assume also aorists Of the infini

tive in dhydi , but with present signification, as in the

potential (see It is certain thatwhen, as byBen

fey(Glossary, p. the potential forms like huvéma , Ine

vémahi. nahiya, and the participles hardt, huvdné (from the

form hu, which is a contraction of hvé, to are

ascribed to the aorist, we maywith equal justice regard

the infinitive d - hurdd hydi, to invoke"

(Yajurv. 3. as

the aorist. For the present I prefer, however, to as

sume that the form hu, which is contracted from Iwé, is,

in the Véda dialect, inflected according to three difl'

erent

classes, and refer the said potential forms to the 6th class.the participles huvét, hurdnd. and the plural m iddle htimtihé

(the latter with irregular lengthening of the u), to the 2 d,

[G . Ed. p. and forms like Aerate.‘

he calls,“to the

according to ‘Vilson Introduction to the Grammar of the SanscritLan

guage,"2 dm . , p. bywhich adjectives like piba

'

,“drinking paiya,

“seeing ; pdrayti ,

“filling.

”By I: is pointed out the pure, devoid of

Guna orweakened form of the verbal theme ; and henc e, e. g. , tothe form

t‘

ihttz -atlhya i,“to invoke

”

(Yajurv. 3. from the form lau,which is

contracted from hré,is the suffix kadhydi assigned. Adhyti i, or, without

accent, adhydin, is the suffix when it is appended to the form Of the root

strengthened or incapable of the Guna- increment; e.g. in kehdradlcydi

(B igv. I . 63. in order to flow,

"from the rootkghar, Cl. 1 .

I believe I mayventure to trace back to 1 m, Cl. the Zend da,“to

speak,”which asyethas not been satisfactorilycompared with the San

scrit (see Burnouf, Etudes, p. wh ile another da, which signifies

“to run,

”evinces unmistakeably its affinitywith the Sanscrit roots of

motion : di m, died, and M e (the latter likewise to run I look upon

the transition ofRh toJ (I in this light, viz . thatthe former has first

become &j, and thence d, since of the deli sound onlythe firstelement

remains. In the former respect, compare the relation of[Ma ma

“to

slay,”to the Sanscrit 1 1 Iran in the latter, thatof the Old Persian

adam,I,

”to“ital

uim ; and of the NewPersiandest,“hand,

”toW

hé eta dtinem,

“I know,

”to“ If“jtim

‘

imi .


assume that the conjunctive vowel, which enters between

the appended verb substantive and the personal term ination, does notextend itself to infinitives like m i ght,

“to

drive,"

jishé, to conquer.

”The first example occurs in

the Schol. to Para , III . 4 . the latter B igv. I . 1 12 .

anai rtiri ydbhi’

rdtham dvatam jise'

, by which ye help the

courserless chariot to conquer on accountof conquering Sfiyana calls the term ination of this infinitive formksé,

’because the radical vowel has no Guns. The gunised

infinitives in 86 (euphon. she, on account of the precedingi. e, Ir), like the l. c . adduced méshé, to cast, to castdown

(rootmi), answer better to the lstaoristformation, vi z . to

the m iddle of roots ending in a vowel, which reduce the

Vriddhi augment of their active, on account of the too

greatweight Of the m iddle term inations, to thatof Guna ;while the roots ending in a consonantrenounce all increase

to the vowel in the m iddle. We m ighttherefore refer all

LG . Ed. p. infinitives in sé, whether with Guna or

not, to the lst aorist formation. But whether the infini

tives in 36 are to be considered as formed from the lst

or 2 d aorist, their agreement is remarkable with that of

the lst aorist in Greek ; as, Ari - cat, fl irt- oat, Seine- ca t ; for

which, in Sanscrit, if hi . to cut tap , to smite, to

wound,"

dii (from dik), to shew,

“had formed an infi

nitive of this kind, we should have expected Iii- She, tap

- she,

dik- shé : to 60cm : would correspond bhd- Shé ; where we mayrecall attention to the fact, thatthe Veda dialect has inthe imperative also reta ined aorists of this kind and, in

deed, from the root blu'

i, the forms bht’

i blui

shatam (upa - bhtishalam)= ¢6oarov. without our being able

to trace the analogous indicative form .

The grammatical technical language decides, with respectto the se

cent and the stronger orweaker form Of the root, according to Pan. l. c.

sf, ten, and


856. The Védic infinitives in ad, and their analogousGreek forms in can, conduct us to the Latin in re. which,in the Annals of Oriental Literature, p. 58, I have al

readyendeavoured to compare with the Greek infinitives

of the 1st aorist. It is certain that in the Latin infinitives

in re (from are), justas in the Greek lst aorist, and the fourfirst formations of the Sanscrit aorist, the verb substantive

is contained. This is clearlyseen in poem s (forpot-

se), as

possum, throughoutits conjugation, exhibits the combinationOf pot (byassim ilation pos)with the verb substantive (re

garding pot- ui from pot

-fut, see Es- se for cd- se (withcd- e- re)most accuratelycorresponds with the said Sanscritinfinitives ; and if, in the Vedas, an infinitive of this kind

should occur from the root ad, itmust, in accordance withthe well- known law of sound, he no other than at- sé. In

fer- re from fer- se, and eel- [e from vel- se, the sibilant of the

auxiliary verb has become assimilated to the precedingconsonant. For fer- re we should have expected in the

Véda dialectbhri - shé, or bhar-

shé. To the Latin infinitives

da - re, std- re, i'- re, would, in Védic Sanscrit, [G. Ed. p.

correspond dd -

sé. SIM - set.i - si é (according to the analogy

ofji or é- shé (after the analogyof me- shé). Observe,that only those Latin verbs which absolutely, or in some

persons bythe direct annexation of the personal term inations to the root, are based on the root of the Sanscrit 2 dclass (see mayor mustalso annex this suflix of

the infinitive directly, while all others retainthe classvowel,

and, indeed, in the third conjugation e (for i , from a), onaccount Of the following 1 (see hence veh- e- re cor

responds to the abovementioned Sanscritvale- she(euphonic

If not sthi - she‘

,with the d weakened to i

, as in sthi - tri (p. 1 1 18,

Note and in elm- ti

1' In the Schol. to Pen . 1. c. we actuallyfind preske

‘

as compounded

Ofpra - iahe‘

.


for rah Perhaps, also. we ought to look upon the a

of the infinitives mentioned byPfinini (III . 4 .0 ) in asé as

the classvowel and so the often- occurring jive“in

order to live“

(cf. jio - a - ti, he lives )would answer to the

Latin r iv—e - re. Another example of this kind is yifi'

jtisé,“in order to adorn,

"which, in a passage cited byBenfey

(Glossary, p. 34) of the 5th book of the B igv . , runs para llel

to the dative stdtavé of the common infinitive : eém i trti

prishann f ifijtisé vdmi stdtavé, I come , 0 Pfishhan, thee to

glorify! I come (thee) to praise !"

Thus, B igv. I . 1 1 2 . s

chdkshasé stands beside the dative of the common infini

[G . Ed. p. tive dzave: bywhich deedsye enable the

blind (Rijrasvas) to see, the Sronas to go.

"

857. We cannot overlook the possibilitythat the a of

the Sanscrit infinitives in use m ight also be the radical

vowel of the verb substantive, though the latter is lost in

compounds, and in many simple formations (see

T hen - asé would correspond to the Latin ease, inasmuch as

case is notto be divided into es- se and here, therefore, theroot of to he

"would occur twice, which we have ad

m itted as possible above, in the subjunctive essem. i Be

that, however, as it m ay, the forms in asé and 36, if therreallycontain the verb substantive, accord , as regards the

principle of formation of the final infinitive expression,with

the simple infinitives, which exhibitthe dative of bare ra

dical words ; as, driéé'

,

“in order to see . T hese always

express a genuine dative relation ; as, e. g. B igv. I . 2 3.

sti ryan dri ed, in order to see the sun ; 13. idén mi

barbir dsarlé,“in order to repose on this our straw ;

CC

Cf. e.g . pa'

t- a - tra - m (p. 1 108 . 2 . tira - ti - s,

“fear

t E .g. B igv. where itgoverns the accusative : We are to

them (belonging or devoted to Maruts), in order to live the whole life

(life’

s duration)"

(eaveschid (iyurjivtisé).

I See and Curtius Contributions, p. 352 .


dently an abbreviation Of the older i - er (laudarier, viderier.

credier, see p. The transition Of the active re into ri

before the appended er of the passive can scarcelyarise in

aught else than in the avoidance of the cacophonywhi ch

would be occasioned bytwo successive e in forms like

laudareer. We cannot be surprised thatthe e of the active

infinitive term ination is short, when, as the representative of

the Sanscrit and Greek diphthong sé, c an, it ought to be

long, as vowels atthe end Of a word are, for the mostpart,

[G . Ed. p. 1 2 2 7] subjectto abbreviation, or to entire sup

pression,

“The length of the z

‘

of the passive infiniti ve

maybe regarded as a compensation for the er that has

been droppedxf

Observe, e.g ., the shortfinal e in bend

,male ; while in adverbs from

adjectives of the 2 d declension a long é is found, inwhich I believe I recognise the Sanscrit diphthong é of the locative of bases in a

Latinuof the 2 d declension). Compare, e.g ., nové with the Sanscrit

locative nacé,from the base nara, new.

"

Observe, also, the occasional

shortening of the l? Of some imperatives Of the 2 d conjugation (cave,and the regular abbreviation of the 2 of Old High German conjunctivesatthe word

'

s end ; as, bere,“he maycarry Sanscrit bhérét, Gothic

bo ira i (5. 694 . p.

1 I should notwish to have recourse to the rule which is setforth in

the prosodyof Latin grammars, thati atthe end of a word, exclusive of

certain well- known exceptions, is long, since in all cases in which , in

Latin, the final i is loiig, there is a reason for it athand ; e.g . in the

genitive singular and nominative plural Of the 2 d declension(see pp. 2 15 ,

I now refer the dative termination i rather to the real dative ter

m ination in Sanscrité than to the locative termination i ; as in

the plural also the term ination bus evidently answers to the Sanscrit

dative ablative ending ; while in Greek the dative singular and pluralequallywell admit Of being compared with the Sanscrit locative (see

1 95 . The length of the i of tibi (ibi , ubi), mihf, contrasted withthe Sanscrit datives {films/rim,

mdlzyam maybe looked upon as

compensation for dropping the personaltermination am withoutthis loss,

from bhyam,hymn, we should find in Latin bium

,hium. In the lst

person singular of the perfect, the length Of the i maybe looked upon as

eompensation


858 . It remains for us to mention the infinitive of the

Latin perfect. Here we see, in such forms as amavi - sse,

monui - sse, legi- sse, audivi - sse, the infinitive of the verb sub

stantive, as plainlyas, in the pluperfects like amaveram, we

discoverthe imperfect, with the loss, there [G . Ed. p.

fore, of the vowel of the auxiliaryverb wh ich I assume in

amaveram also (see But if the said perfect iafinitives are, just as the pluperfects, evidentlymodern formations, still forms like scrip

- se, consum- se, admis- se, divis- se,

dic-

se, produc- se, abstrac—se, adoce- se see Struve On the

Latin Declension and Conjugation p. whi ch are of

frequentoccurrence in the Older dialect, have everyclaimto be regarded as transm itted from an ancient period of

language, and to be placed beside Greek aorist infinitives ;

and, indeed, with so much the more right, as all the Latin

perfects are veryprobably, in their origin, noth ing else thanaorists(see We may, consequently, compare scrip

- se,

dic- se, with the Greek ypa'

rlr- a'

at, debt- oat» and adoce- se withthe Sanscritvale- shementioned above (p. 1 2 2 2 G. It is

here importantto remark, that. for all the perfect infinitivesofthe 3d conjuga tion quoted byStruve l. c. ,there are also analogons perfects (aorists) of the indicative as points of depar

ture ,justasthere are forthe Greek infinitives in can(Eatnlrat),indicatives in c a (Ea , 4m); onlyinvas- se.divis- se (byassim ilation from invad- se, divid - se, cf. are more perfectlypreserved than invd- si , divi - si , which have lostthe final consonant of the root; in compensation for which, in diet- Si , the

compensation for dropping the personal termination (see 552 . Conclusion): in the 2 d person the i Of the termination rti represents, if the ex

planation given in 549 . be com et, the long a of the Sanscrit ending

tMs. In a similar way, the t of uti is based, as I now assume, in

departure from on the long 4 of Sanscrit pronominal adverbsin {Ila e. g. uti corresponds to the Védic ltd - tied, how2

”

(Pan. V .


shortradical vowel is lengthened. The future perfects‘ like

faso, capso, aao, accepsod‘ whi ch in appearance are analogous

to the infinitives in se. as also the perfect and pluperfect

(G. Ed. p. 1 2 2 9] subjunctives, as az im, ausim, objexim, e:rcessis.

dimis, indwu’

s, traa is, spom is. amissis. injezrit, extim it. ademsit.

serpsit, incensit,faz cm, estinxem, intelleres, recesset. p ixel, tratret

(see Struve, l. c. , p. can hardlybe puton the same foot

ingwith the infinitives in se first, because the leastofthesehave an indicative perfect in si (sci=c- si)corresponding to

them and secondly, because , even if thiswere the case . still,e. g. capeo, arim, extimcem, could not, perhaps, have been derived from the tobe - presupposed cupsi. cu

'

, and the

actually existing extim i, bythe term ination of the future

perfect and of the perfect and pluperfect subjunctive beingsubstituted for the term inations Of the perfect. The said

three tenses and moods are comparativelymodern forma

tions, and are formed by combining the future and the

present and imperfectsubjunctive Of the verb substantive

with the perfect base i of the attributive verb ; and the

aflinity of their concluding portion with the si of per

feets like sap- Si consists, consequently, not only in this,

that in the latter also the verb substantive is contained,

but in primeval relationship, which extends beyond the

time Of the separation of languages, if I am right in

identifying such perfects with the Sanscrit 2 d and Greeklst aorist formations (see We gain, therefore ,

nothing towards the explanation of the forms under dis

In departure from whathas been remarked at tic I now regard

fa re, and similar forms, as real future perfects.

1' The e for i in accepso, and similar forms

, is based on the principle

laid down in whence aecepeo, ayes-5m, like acceptas, aigiecme, foracciptus, abjictue.

I Amara- re from anta ci - ero, cf. aware- rim from amavi - sim,

according to 7 10 ama vi - ssemfrom amavi - tssem .


[G . Ed. p. 1 2 31] at once in the perfect indicative,"las it

laid aside the augmentin the imperfectand aorist: or whe

ther this renunciation first took place when the verb was

encumbered with the addition Of the auxiliaryverb sub

stantive , just as the reduplicated aorists (perfects) in com

position with prepositions for the most part dispense with

the syllable of reduplicationfi while the analogous Sanscrit reduplicated aorists (as ddudrueam) throughout reta in

it in composition also. Be that, however, as it may, at

some time or other reduplicated future perfects, too, willhave existed : thus, e. g. ftfaxo (or Macro). cecapso, whi ch ,

in essentials, would correspond to the Greek future perfects,as, Ad d- copay rerzhr- ao-

pat, to which will have originallycorresponded also active future perfects, as, hew- aw, rel

-(m

o'w, whose ofl

'

shoots theyproperlyare. Should this not be

the case, we have nothing leftbutto abide bythe opinionexpressed above and still earlier in my Conjugation- System

“(p. that, as is also assumed byMadvig}

the future perfects under discussion are formally, as also

partly as regards their meaning, primary futures. In

fact, aaro is as like the Greek digs»as one egg to another.

Madvig fitly compares forms like levasso with those in

Greek like yeAtio'w. The doubling Of the 3 would couse

quentlybe purelyphonetic, without etymological meaning.

as, e. g. in the Greek éyéAaaaa , mentioned byMadvig, and

like éréAeo'

oa , mentioned with a sim ilar Objectabove

Then, perhaps,faea , capa, op tmda, would have the same relation to

fef'

aca, orprfaca , &c . , as, in Gothic, e. g . band to the Sanscrit babandlla

(see 58th ); and those preteriteswhich have still retained the reduplica

tion in Gothic, as, e.g. ga igrot,“I

, he wept”=Sanscritchalm inda .

1'

Itis probablyto the weak form of the roots, and their terminating in

a vowel, thatdo and d o owe the pervading retention Of the reduplication

in composition.

1 De formaram quarundam verbi Latini nature etusu (Solemnia

academics etc.,Haunile

,1 835, p. 6.


Moreover, if levasso be regarded as an abbreviation of

k levasso, and as an actual future, it cor [G. Ed. p.

responds, in respectto its denoting the future relation to

yeNi aw, just as, exclusive of the passive personal term ina

tion, to the Greek future perfect like re-

nprjaoaat. ThisOpinion is especiallyfavoured bythe Old infinitives in ssere

(Struve, p. 180) with the signification of the primaryfuture, impetrassero, reconciliassere, ezpugnassere, aver

-un

earsore, depeculassere, deargentassere. Theycorrespond, irrespective of the infinitive suflix, which throughout, in Latin,is that of the aorist, and of the doubling of the s, whichcannot surprise us, to the Greek future infinitives like

yeka’

wew. We m ightreasonablyexpectthatsuch infinitives

not only originally existed in the lst conjugation, but

thatthere were such forms also as habessere, axere

faxere, capsere. It may be proper here to consider alsothe future perfects of the Oscan and Umbrian languages,

as both these dialects, in several other grammatical points,

present us with older forms than the Latin. It is im

portant here to notice, that the Umbrian, in most of the

future perfects which have remained to our time , exhibitsthe combination of the future perfectof the verb substantive

with the presentbase, orthe simple rootofthe principalverb,but in such wise, that, after consonants, and also, in one ia

stance given byAufrecht and K irchhof (Umbr. Language,

p. after a vowel(i - ustiverit), the f of the rootfit is re

jected ; hence, e. g. faIc-ust, signifying he is making to

have been,"whi le the Latinfecerit means, he is having

made to be Other examples are, covort- ust, converterit,“

ampr- e-fus. ambiverit

”

(cf. fus. also fast, ambr- e

furent, ambiverint (cf.furent,‘

ffuerint“fecerint.

”

The Oscan follows the same principle, only it is wantingas to the perfect retention Offa ,

‘ butalso in the simple a ,

e. g. in dileust. dixerit,"

pruhibust, probi [G . Ed. p.

buerit,"

q akust,“

fecerit Mommsen Oscan Studies.“

p. 62 )


has recognised the. rootf ubefore the lightwas thrown uponit bythe Umbrian. As the rootfit in the conjugation of

the verb substantive regularlymakes its appearance in the

perfecttense first, ithas hence won for itself the capacityof expressing the relation of pasttime, which, however, isno Obstacle to the

“fast

”in Oscan signifying also

“erit

”

(see Mommsen. l. c. p. the latter being in excellentagr eement with the Zendian square -Ne}; blisyéili , and

Lithuanian bus (see p. 918 G. Wherefore, also,fife/rust

maybe literallytaken to mean, he is having made to be ,

since here the principal verb expresses past time by re

duplication : the like maybe the case with some redupli

cated future perfects in the Umbrian (l. c . p.

859. We return to the infinitive, in order to remark

next, that, in the Véd ic dialect also, accusatives of abstractradical words are used as infinitives, and, indeed, in the

genuine accusative relation, only, however, where the infi

nitive is governed bySale, to be able .

"According to

Pfinini (III . 4. they are divided into two classes, of

which the one strengthens the radical vowel, the other

leaves it without extension. The Commentaryfurnishesas examples, agnifi vdi dévd vibhdjan (an euphonic for am)114

‘

s'

ulmuvan, the fire could the gods not distribute

apalupan(- am) mil

oin/mucosa, they could not destroy.

To these we add, also, outof the Rigvéda (I. 94 . iaké'

ma

[G Ed. p. tvd samidham ,

“would thatwe could kindlethee ; and a passage from the Atharva—Véda, cited byAufrecht (

“Umbrian Language,

“

p. md 3“a preli

dlldm is'

am , they cannot dispose the arrow.

” Thoughthese infinitives mayscarcelyhave been limited originally

In this passage, which is detached from the context, I cannotanswerfor the exact meaning of vibluijam . As regards the lengthening Of the

vowel of the rootbhaj in this infinitive form, compare the feminine substantive blaij, portion, fortune, homage.


ay- afim. Especial notice ought to be given to the form

trii barakavum, if it, asMommsen conjectures, is reallya perfeetinfinitive ; inwhich case e- um, euphonic for u- um, from

fu- um, is the infinitive of the rootfa with past signification

(cf. p. 1 2 32 G. ed. dik- ust,“dircrit,

”from dik—fust). Cur

tius ’ has compared with the Oscan present infinitives in

um the Latin venuna ‘

l' If this comparison be, as I think

it is, correct, then this word, of which only the dative

(veno, venui)and ablative veno are preserved, mayoriginallybelong onlyto the 2 d declension : moreover, the uOf the

4th declension, as formative suffix Of an abstract in Latin,

would stand quite isolated, while that of the 2 d is frequentlyrepresented bythe Sanscrit suffix a as a means of forma

tion of masculine abstracts. These, for the mostpart, ac

centthe radical vowel, and Gunise itwhen capable ofGuna ;while a radical a before a simple consonant is lengthened.

The following are examples, in addition to those alreadymentioned : bhéda - s, cleaving

“

(root bhi d), Chhéda - S, id.

(rootchhid);ydI

ya - s,“combining (root Icrddha

(rootkrudll) ; hdsa - s, laughter"

(roothas); kdma - s, wish ,love (rootkam). In Greek, abstracts like waiAo-

g, p66” ,

dpdpo-

g, fipdpo—g, rpdpo—g, quire

-

g, whd(F)o-

g, [G . Ed. p .

mire é'

M -

yxo-

g, i’

pepo-

g, correspond both in the suffix and

in the accent. The L ithuanian, on accountof the retentionOf the original a in abstracts Of this kind, resembles the

Sanscritmore than the Greek and Latin, which latter, withthe exception at least of the base venu, alreadyspoken of,

Journal of Archaaology,” June 1847, p. 490.

‘

l’

Venando, properly,“ I give to sell veneo

, for mama so,“ I go to

the selling.

”

I As 0 is a heavier vowel than 6,the choice of this vowel in place of

the e,which elsewhere prevails in the roots referred to, rem indsus of the

vowel incrementwhich appears in the corresponding Sanscl itabstracts,although a, as also 45

, is onlya corruption of an original a (sec 3 . p. 4,

and cf. 2 55 .


presents for comparison onlyludu- s, and perhapsjocu- s (thelatter from an obscure root). The following are examples

in Lithuanian : mi i'

gaw-s, sleep

"

(mggmi ,“I ni

mala - s, reproof, accusation” .

(meta, I bade - s,

hunger (bddt‘

t.“I hunger,

"cf. Sanscritbddh or eadb, to

jiika - s, laughter”

(cf. Latinjocu- s); Icéra- s, strife,

war ; menu- s, understanding (ment), I think,“meno- s,

“I am skilful in something ma ina - s, exchange ; oZda - s,

order, regulation réda - s,“advice .

"

860. TO thi s class inthe Old Sclavonic belong those masculine abstracts, of whi ch Dobrowskysays (p. 2 67) thattheycontain the pure radical syllable : theycontain, however. infact, the suffix o, corrupted from a (see 2 55. a. which,in the nom inative and accusative, is suppressed, or, morecorrectly, replaced by

‘

b , which Dobrowskydoes notwrite.

The following are examples li on'

s Iov’

,

“the sei z ing

"

(Sanscrit lflbha - s, Tok '

b tok’

,

“the flOWing

(Tekxt tekari , I run sgoa'

b bred”, passage, forth ;

lltxoa'

b isxod'

, exit ra ttan glad”

, [G. Ed. p .

hunger tToyA'

b staid”

, shame ; t'rgsa'

b strad‘

, fear ;

from the bases love, toko, &c. Observe the agreement

evinced bythe Sclavonic with the Greek in the choice of

the stronger radicalvowel, so that e.g. Tok'

b tok’

. has exactlythe same relation to tekmi , I run,

"that, in Greek, 8p6po- g,

has to dpépw, (po'

fio-

g to cpéfiopat, &c. The relation of

(royal ; staid”, shame, to t Ia slyd, in t'rb latrrn m styd

yeti sari .“to be ashamed (see Micklos. Rad. p. 88)resembles

that of Sanscrit abstracts like ydga - s,“joining ; to their

Thisword deserves notice on accountof the retention of the Old a,

which, in the verb and mostof the other formations ofthis root, has beencorrupted to e. M atti, I cast,

”ué- mata - s

, reproof,”at- mota - s

,“out

cast”

(also at- mata - s), hear the same relation to one another as, e.g . in

Greek, rpe'

rral, frpa'lmv, rptisror.

‘l‘ Sanscrit gridh,“to crave, from yard}; or gradh, Gothic grédt

‘

m,

to hunger, see Glossarium Sanscr. (Fasc. 1 . a. p. 107 .


roots with u, for oy12 is in Sclavonic the Guna of II I 3,

(see 2 55.

861 . III German, too, the masculine abstractswhich belongto this class have, bysuppressing the final vowel of the base

in the nominative and accusative, acquired the semblanceof radical words. As, however, the bases in a and i are

not distinguishable in the singular, it remains uncerta in

whether e. g. the Gothic thlauh- s,“flight,

”stands for tillauha - s,

or for tillaulli - s (see in the former case itanswers

to the Sanscritformations like ydl

ga- s. combination but

The rootof the said Gothic abstractis lhluh ; whence thh’

uha,thlauh,

thlauhum,the latter euphonic for thluhum (see The fact, that

(blank - s corresponds, as regards its vowel, better to the preterite than to

the present, mustnot induce us to derive itfrom the preterite instead of

from the root: OtherwiseWe should have almost as much ground for de

riving e. g the Sanscrityoga - e from yuytfja I or he joined”

) bhéda - s,

“rupture, from bibhéda and

,in Greek, dpdpo

- r from dédpopa . The

truth is, that, in the formation Ofwords, recourse is had sometimes to the

pure, sometimes to the incremental radical vowel and,moreover, in

Greek and German, attimes to the original radical vowel, attimes to itin

a form more orless weakened . Ilad, in Greek, 8ptipos been said for dpdpor,stillthe abstractwouldnothave been tobe derived from the aorist(zdpapov);butitwould have had onlythis advantage in common with the latter

,

the retention, namely, Of the radical vowel in its original form while the

e of dpe'

pw is the greater, and the O of dédpopa the lesser weakening of the

old a . InGothic, uisthe least(see and i the extremeweakening of

the a ; wherefore run(a)- s,“course, stream,

"from the rootrann, to run,

toflow (rimm, rann, rum mn), standsonthe footingof Greek abstracts likedpdpa

- c : so far, in reality, the said Gothic word belongs to the a - deelen

sion. We can, however, on accountof the form of its radical vowel, justas little derive itfrom the plural ofthe preterite, as we could derive e. g .

amt/ilk,“delivery

”

(neut. ) from the same, because it exhibits the vowelof the present instead of thatof the root itself (f olk). Neither

,too, can

we derive drwl, fall, for drum - s or drusi - s (the nom inative sign is

dropped in bases in so and at), from the plural of the preterite ; but, like

the latter, itconta ins the pure radical vowel,which, in the presentdriusa ,isGunised byi (see and, inthe singularpreterite draus, bya . That

the class ofwords under discussion is notwanting in Zend also is proved

by


Grammarians, divides itself from the infinitive and its

Védic representatives.

863. The form in 103, according to Pfinini (who never

theless does not regard it as a genitive, but as an inde

clinable (I . 1 . as in the gerund in led, and in the geni

tive Of abstractradical words, where it stands for the in

[G . Ed. p . finitive’

) occurs only in constructionwith i

'

évara , lord, capable (III . 4. The Scholiast gives as example, {some

'

bhicharit6h'

, capable of

afi'

ronting (lord of Another genitive of thiskind, though notrecognised as an infinitive, and also not

lim ited to the construction with i'

shrara , is ké rws, of the

doing, making, transacting,

“which Naigh. , II. mentions

with the infinitive dative kdrlavdi , and the gerund krifvz

(see p. 1 2 05, G. under the words signifying karman

deed and which, B igv. I. 1 15. is governed bymadhya.

in the m idst."

1' As regards the relation Of the gerund

The genitive termination as is looked upon bythe IndianGramma

rians in this case, not as a ease - termination, butas a formative sufiix ,

which iscalled inthe technical language k - as- tm (cf. p . 1 2 2 0, Note, G .

and is therefore unaccented, though, in general, the monosyllabic basewords have the accent onlyin the strong cases on the base syllable (seep . 1085, G . cd . , 785 . Remark). We mayascribe the accentuation of

the radicalwords,where their genitive represents the infinitive, to the

circumstance, thatthe infinitive outbids the common abstracts bygreater

power of life and action ; and itwill be well to recallwhathas been before said regarding the double kind of accentuation of the forms

in Mr (tri), according as they, as participles, govern the accusative, or

stand as more inactive nouns of agency. The datives, too, Of abstractradicalwords have, where theystand as infinitives, in general the more

powerful accentuation, atleast in the cases inwhich, according to Panini

(III . 4 . the infinitive in é (in the technical language k- é - n) takes the

place of the future passive participle, as in the abovementioned

example ati - kra’

mé,in opposition to the oxytonised driéé

'Pan. III . 4 . 77.

B igv . I . 23 .

‘

l‘ M adhyci kdrtc‘

is,“ in the m idst of doing (Of .Madhya

‘

is an

abbreviation Ofmadkyé =madltya i, see where the suppressionof


or the instrumental Im‘

fvd’

, after, or with, or through

making,

“to the accusative, which springs from the base

kartu, or to the common infinitive kdrtum , as also to the

datives kdrtavé, c rtavdi, and to the genitive kérlds, and,

in general, the relation of the gerunds in fed to the infi

nitives of the same root, it must be Observed that the

gerund in roots which adm it Of increment or weakeningalways exhibits the weaker form Of the root, and has the

accent, withoutexception, on the case - term ination. Com

pare, e. g.

INFrNtrrve . ROOT .

véktum, each, to speak

svdptum, snap , to sleep.

pré shéum, p mchh, to ask .

yéshgum, yaj, to Offer.

"

grdhi'

gum , grab, to take

érdtum, firm . to hear.

bhdvitum, bhu, to be

yfi'

kfum, yiy'

,to join.

bhl’

itlum , bhid, to cleave.

sthdtum, stbd, to stand

hdnlum, ban, to slay.

864 . This distinction in the form Of the root and Of the

accentuation does not prevent the assumption, that the

gerund and the infinitive originallyhad the same theme

and the same accentuation, that, e.. .g to

gether with ydktum,

“to

'

Join,

"a ydkttd,

“after,

"with , or

“through joining,

"

mayhave existed, just as the distinction which exists in

the participle present between the strong and weak cases

of the case- term ination is compensated bylengthening the final vowel of

the base, inwhich respectcompare Latin datives like lupo‘

from lapot(see

5. and compare m rasanta for “a vasanlé in the Schol. to

Pen. VII . 1 .


cannothave been an original one ; and, e. g. , to the accusa

tive tuddntam an instrumental tudé ntd must have corre

sponded ; for which, in the language as it has remained

to us, the oxytone tudatd, which has also lostthe nasal, is

left(cf. p. As the weakening of the gerund occurs

in the root, and notin the suffix, I further recall attenti onto the declension of pathfn, way, from whence spring

only the m iddle ca ses, while the strong strengthen the

rootbythe insertion Of a nasal, and, atthe same time,

centuate it; and, moreover, exhibit the suffix also in a

stronger form (panthdn compared with pelican); while the

weakest cases suppress the suffix, as also the nasal of the

root, and letthe accent sink down on the case- term ination

hence, e. in the instrumental we find pathd opposed to

[G . Ed. p. pdnthdnam ,

“viam and pathibhyas ens.

"

The declension Of vdh, bearing (atthe end Of compounds)also presents a great agreementwith the formal relationof the gerund in ted to the infinitive ; that is to say, withthose gerunds which, in roots beginning with va , suppress

the a and vocalise the 0 ; only in compounds in edit the

long syllable vd is contracted in the weakest cases to long12, while the short syllable va Of the gerunds is contractedto shortu in other respects édIy

- tihé. through the ri cecarrying,

”has the same relation to its accusative still- cd

,

ham, as, e. g. , uktvci has to sat-tum. A short i t is exhibited

by mind- edit,“ox (wagon- drawer in the weak eases

hence, anad- ahd, e.. .g stands exactlyIn the same relation to

anad - tdham, as uktvd does to tdlttum. With regard, how

ever, to the circumstance that the fem inine bases in tu,from which the gerund and the infinitive Spring, have

Anad - uh is assumed to be the theme ; butitadmits Of no doubtthatnah is the true base Of the final member Of this compound, and thathenceuh has arisen bycontraction. The nominative is anad—vdn, and presupposes a theme with a nasal afra id- edit}; (cf. sufl

'

. vain).

1 2 04 FORMATION OF WORD S .

could onlyhave been inferred from the instrumental in

ti l- d.

"butnow is also apparent from the Védic dative forms

in trio- (i i . The Greek abstracts in 76-

9, as Board-

g. Bpm-

nS- c,

edariS- g, éwn'n

'

z - g, éhenrlf- s‘

, yeAa - a - rt'

z -

g, 6pxn- tr -

g, which were

firstbroughtinto this province of formation in mytreatise on

the Influence ofPronouns on the formationOfWords"

(p.

[G . E d. p . testi fyin like manner for the fem inine na

ture Of the Sanscrit cognate words : they, however, testi fyalso, and this is well worth notice, that itwas after the se

paration of the Greek from the Sanscritthatthis class of

abstractsubstantives raised itself in Sanscritto the positionof infinitives and gerunds, while thev still moved in Zendalso in the circle of common substantives. Under this headis to be brought N’E

’EQ’ p

FrE- tu, the feminine gender of

which is proved bythe accusative plural perétt'

is; but its

abstractnature has been changed into concrete . It, per

haps, originallysignified passage, crossing,“

fbuthas, however, assumed the signification

“bridge . Perhaps, too,

z antu, city (originally, perhaps, production, creationthe gender of which is notto be deduced from the form s

that now occur, is to be classed here The instrumental

ans-(4m; z mithtrd, through production. m entioned above

2 54. Rem . 3. p. as also xwdwg‘ jmithwa,

“through

sm iting, slaying, I and the ablative z mithwdt, I now rather

refer to the suffix Ihwa = Sanscrittea . as in the Veda dialect

the sa id suffix also forms prim itive abstracts (seeand, indeed, from the strong form of the root; so thatfrom mtjan and a han m ight be expected the bases wjanlea and { a hantva . I am led to this opinion partien

t From a masculine or neuter base,in classical Sanscritatleast, would

come tuna.

‘tRootpt'rt’=Sanscritpar (pri ), see Brockhaus, Glossary, p . 376.

I See § . 1 60. p. 178, whereja izthwa should be read for z a itlhwa . Inthe

Ger. ed. s. 1 59 is here wronglygiven for 5. 1 60.


larlyby the ablativeqom cdgmsz afithwdt,

’which answers

better to a theme z aizthwa than to z antu, as from bases in

uno other ablatives ind; have elsewhere been found, butonlysuch as have shorta before the t, or those [G. Ed. p.

that append the ablative sign di rect to the them e. The

instrumentals in thwa (or thwd, see 2 54. Rem . 3. p. 2 81)adm itof being deduced from feminine bases in in quite as

well as from neuter or masculine in thwa . But it is de

cidedlyfrom a base in thwa thatthe accusative raélhwém ,

comes, from the theme of which raétfnea pro

ceeds the denominative raéthwayéili, he defiles.

”The

primitive verb does not occur, whence it is uncertainwhether raéthwa is reallya prim itive abstract.

865. It is clear that the Latin supines are identical

in their base with the Sanscritinfinitive bases in (it, althoughthe analogous abstracts with a full declension, as or- tu- s,

inter- i - tu- s, sta - lu- s, ac- lu- s, duc- tu- s, rap

- lu- s, ac- ces- su- s (from

ac- ces- tu- s, see cd- su-

s (from cas- su- s for cas- tus),

cur- eu- s, vom - i - tu- s,i have, like their analogous forms in

i V . S . p . 83, «ch afi ng w

ante hemim'

s generaliomm,

”see Gram . Crit. , p . 2 53 .

1 Cf. Spiegel, The l9th Farg. of the V . p. 82 .

1 The Sanscritalso frequentlyjoins the suffix under discussion to the

root bymeans Of a conjunctive vowel i ; and forms, e. g.,from cam

,

“to

vom it,”the base vemita ; whence the infinitive vém- i - lum (=sup . ram - i

tem), and the gerund eam - i - ted. It’

ith regard, however, to the infinitive

and gerund notuniversallyagreeing as to the insertion or notOf the con

junctive vowel, and to our finding bythe side Of the infinitive bhde - i - tum,

to be,”e.g .

, a gerund bhi - tvti, I would recall attention to the circum

stance thatthe suffix edits of the perfectparticiple, when it is appended

to the rootbya conjunctive vowel i, rejectsthis conjunctive vowel in the

weakest cases (instr. péch- égh

- d, opposed to the ace. peck- i - elias- am),

which does notpreventme from assum ing, thatin th is participle all 08 808

originallycame from the same base . We do not require to explain the

absence Of the conjunctive vowel in theweakestcases bythe circumstance,thathere the formative sufiix beginswith a vowel, as p éch

-y- fishd (for

peck- fe w)


[G . Ed. p. Greek, notremained true to the fem inine

gender. How exactly in other respects, in many roots,

the accusative of the Latin supine agrees with that of the

Sanscrit infinitive, exclusive of the gunising Of the latter,

maybe inferred from the following examples

LATI N .

stbd- tum, to stand, statum .

(Id- tum , to give,”

datum .

dhmti - lum , to blow, fldtum.

jfid- tum, to know;n

ndlum.

pé- lum. to drink,

"

ptilum .

é'

I

- {um to go.

"itum (cf. i

'

rug).

lid- tum, to sleep, q uiétum .

ye’i - lum, gdo

—i - tum to fo'

l'

ium.

srti - tum, to flow, rutum (cf. rivus).

star- tum, to strew, stratum.

pale- tum, to cook,

"

cortam.

dale- tum, to anoint, umtum.

pleh - i - ashd)could as little surpriseus. as, e.g.

,ninéy- i - tha (with shims),

from the root rti ,“to lead, which prefixes a conjunctive vowel i at

pleasure to the personal termination tha , and necessarilyto the personal

endings eu, ma , sé, vahé, make, dhvé ; hence niny- i - vd, niny- i - mti, niny- i

phi , &c. The verbs of the loth clan,and the causal forms which are ana

logous to them,have all of them, aswell in the infinitive as inthe gerund,

the conjunctive vowel i after the character ay(for aya of the special

tenses), and gunise radicalvowelswhich are capable of Guns ; hence, e . g .

,

ekt‘

ir- ay- i - tum, owr- ay- i - tvd,from char,

“to steal.”To the 03; corre

sponds the Latin ti or i, from forms like am- d - tum

, and - i - lum (see

On the other hand, verbs of the Latin 2 d conjugation,though theyare based in like manner on the Sanscrit loth class, relin

quish their conjugational character, and add the suffix either direct to

the root, or bymeans Of a conjunctive vowel i (doc- tum, mon- Hum,

for doc- é - tum, mon- é - tum, cf. son. Note 1 . s. 1 1 1 5 Note u , G . ed. )flé - lum

, p le- tum make a necessaryexception; dél

- é - tum makes a volun

taryone.

1 2 08 FORMATION or WORDS .

altogether lost in th is form ,though it is preserved in its

original shape in the already before- noticed composites

like bulum -bime (see 685. p. 9 13, and under the

protection of the following labial. I annex a few Lithua

nian supine constructions out of the translation of the

Bible : isz é'

yo seyZ-yas taste,“A sower went forth to sow

“

(Matt. xi i i . kad nuzyeninmiesfelus, sawnusip irlduwalgm .

thattheymaygo (going) into the villages to buy them

selves victuals“

(xiv. nuZyeitsyes/skate paklydusbi, go

ing to seek thatwhich is gone astray"

yus i32 3

yote sugtiulumanned,“are ye come out for to take

me ? (xxvi . Nevertheless, the use of this supine in

the rece ived condition of the Lithuanian after verbs of

motion is not exclusively requisite ; but we find in the

translation of the Bible, in such constructions, more fre

quentlythe common infinitive in ti, or with i , suppressedt

’

; e. g. , Matt. ix. 1 1, as: alt

'

e'

yaugriesz miisus wadinti ,“I am

come to call sinners" (cf. Sanscritvad, to speak x. 34,

as: as aleyaupakaym'

t susli ,“I am notcome to send peace ;

”

v. 1 7, ac ateyaupanukint'

, bet iszp ild it'

,

“I am notcome to

destroy, butto fulfil.” On the other hand, the Old Prus

sian—a language which approaches the Lithuanian veryclosely

—has two forms for the common infinitive, of whichthe

,One corresponds to the accusative of the Sanscrit infini

tive and Latin supine, as also to the Lithuani an supine ;and

,indeed, as in the common declension, retaining the

sign of the accusative in the form of n ; e.g. , (Id- tun or

[G. Ed. p . da- lon,“to give

“Sanscritddtum, psi

- ton}to drink pd

- tum, gem- i nt,

“to bear a child =jtin- i - tum ;

and the other, with the term ination tutti, presents a re

markable Sim ilarityto the abovementioned Védic

infinitive dative in tardi (for tedi), of which no trace is leftin auv other cognate language of Europe . Ithas, however,

Ten from tun, cf. 77.


unconscious of its origin, in like manner an accusative signification ; where I would rem ind the reader, that in the

Védas also the infinitives in dllydi , discussed above

in spite of their dative form , occasionallysuppress the

cusative relation ; thus, Yajurveda VI . 3 atmestgdmadhydi ,we wi ll go.

” As regards, then, the Prussian form in

tmei , if we deduce twei from tu- ei, ci answers as the femi

nine case- term ination to the pronom inal datives in et'

as,

ste- ssi - ci , this Sanscritta - sy- di,Gothic thi - z - a i (see 349.

p. Itm ight, however, be, thatthe es'

of the said in

finitive form maybe based on the Sanscrité (=ai) of theVéda forms in lav- é, so that, e.ya da- lwei , to give,

"would

have the same relation to its accusative da- tu- n, that, in theVeda dialect, the tobe-

presupposed dar tav- é, which, withoutGuna, would be dci - te - é, has to datum. The Rigveda fur

nishes us with pd- lav- é, the sister form to pd—lw- ci, to

drink (I . 2 8. The other Prussian forms which belongto this class, and which Nesselmann, p. 65, has collected, arebid- lwei, bia - twid

‘ “to fear (Sanscritbkt

‘

, to fear,“bhagd

std- (wet, to stand ; al- trd - twai , to answer ;

billi - lwei'

, tosay (Sanscritbrt'

t'

, tospeak [G Ed P 1 2508

en- dyrf- lteei, to regard (Sanscrit dars'

, drift, to see

paIItzps- i - tu-

eLI to covet (SanscritMaps, infinitive lilaps

In another passage Of the Yajurveda (III . the infinitives dim

t‘ddhydi, to summon,

"and mddayddhydi , to rejoice,

”are governed by

a verb (according to the Schol. , ichehhdmi ," I wish, I and have,

in like manner, an accusative meaning : ubht‘

t

'

vdm indrt‘

igni dlmvtidhyt‘

i

ubhd rad/tam ): salui M dayddhya'

i,“Ye both, Indra and Agni, (will I)

call, both willtogether gladden on accountOf riches.

”

1 For twei occur also twi, twey, and twe, see Nesselm ., p. 65 .

1 P a is a prefix, and the initial consonantof the rootdoubled, accord

ing to the inclination peculiar to the Prussian to double consonants.

Compare the Sanscritrootlab/t,“to attain (hapfidwo, a afiov), the (133i .

derative ofwhich would regularlybe It'

laps (see for which lips.

From 1055,“to attain,

”appears, too, through mere weakening of the

vowel,


tum, to wish to attain, r. labh); kirdf- iweis to hear ;

madli - twei , to ask cu—schaudi - twei, to trust schlt'

s'

si

twei ,“to serve huf f- twat}

“to have ; wacki - tmei,

“to

allure gallin- lmei, to slay leiyi

’

n- tmey, to direct;

m unin- twey, to honour ; sund in- twei,“to punish ewin

tin- twei , to hallow menen- iwey, to think, to mention

(Sanscritman, to think) gir- twei, to praise (Ved. gir,

“song Of praise ; ari

- nd-mi .“I gun- treat, to

drive ; lim - twei, lemb- tway, to break"

(Sanscritlump -d - mi ,

I ranc- twei , ranck—twey, to steal is- tmei, is

twe,“to eat;

“I tiens- twei, to fascinate ; tees- twei (from

wed- twei), to conduct. “

867. More frequentthan the infinitives in tum, ton, and

twei , are, in the Old Prussian language, the infinitives in

t, as, da- t, to give ; sta - t,“to stand boa - t,

“to be

giw- i - t, to live teick- n- t, to procure (Sanscrittaksh, in

the Veda dialect, to These have, as I doubtnot,

losta final i . and answer to the Lithuanian infinitives in

ti , the i of which is also frequently apostroph ised (see

[G. Ed. p . 1 2 5 1 .] p. 1 2 48 G. and in Lettish, as inPrussian, is utterly lost. § Here also are to be ranked the

vowel, the rootlabh,“to covet

, to have sprung. The Prussian rootlap ,

to command,"appears to belong to the Sanscritlap , to speak .

"

Eu- wacké'

mai, we invoke,"cf. Sanscriteach (from oak). infinitive

vaktum, to speak .

TAkin to this is, among otherwords, the Lithuanian ranted, hand,

as taking,”Old Prussian accusative ranka - n, plural accusative ranka - as .

In Sanscritthe as-yet-unciteable rootral: (also Zak)means to obtain.

”

1 Euphonic for id- tmei, id- twe (see cf. Sanscrit infinitive

at- tum from cd - tum.

The following are examples in Lettish : yak - t(=jd- t), to rule"

(cf. Sanscrit rootyd,“to see- t

,

“to bind”

(Sanscritrootat, id. )cc- t

,

“to go ;"bih- t(=bi - t),

“to be afraid"

(Sanscritrootbid) ; bub - t

“to be

”

(Lithuanianbot- ti, SanscritUni - ti, the being”

teem- t,

comers (Sanscritrootvam).


resemble in this respect the Prussian infinitives in twei

explained above (see p. 1 2 49 G. and, amongst others,

also the Greek infinitives, which I regard, where theyare notmutilated (as those inyew, cv, etv, from ycvat). universally as

datives. Of this more hereafter. Butwe have here furtherto recall notice to the fact, that in Zend, also, the dative

of abstract substantives inti isused as representative of the

infinitive, yetonlyto express a genuine dative relation, vi z .

the causal one thus,Vend. Sad. p. 198, karslayaé- cha hictayaé

cha para- kanlayaé- cha, in order to plough, and to water,

and to dig.

"from the bases karsli , hit-Ii, para

- kanti ; l. c .

p. 39, khae eé, in order to eat, on accountof eating

"

(see p. However, it is further necessaryto inqui re whether datives of this kind anywhere else in the

Zend- Avesta as genitive infinitivcs govern the case Of the

verb,for which, in the passage quoted. there is no occasion.

868. I regard as accusatives, though in like manner

without case - termination, and as originally identical withthe Sanscrit infinitive accusatives in tum, and their Latinand Lithuanian sister- forms, the Old Sclavonic infinitives

in 'l"b t

' called “supines,

“which are governed onlybyverbs

of motion as the ObjectOf the motion ; but from such con

structions also are expelled in the more modern MSS. and

printed books bythe common infinitives in T II ti (see Do

[G. Ed. p. browsky. p. Taken as accusative,the term ination 'l

"b t

'

has the same relation to the Sanscrit

tum that tbm '

b syn“

. filium,

"has to mini m .

"In the

dative we should expecttovi after the analogyof contour

syncs- i ,“

filio = Sanscrit stinae—é, Lithuanian sume- i . The

examples given byDobrowsky(pp. 645, are : luq wr'

b

maichit'

(“artthoucome hither to tormentasP Matt. vi i i . 2 9)

oytm'r

'

b tic/tit'

; neonoa'kaa

'r'

b propovyedat’

, (“He departed

thence to teach and to preach,”xi . B llA

'B'r'b e idyet'

(“what

Lithuanian sunu- n, Gothic sunu, see 2 62 .


wentye outto see ?"xi . syeyat a sower went

forth to sow,

”i i i . v

'

L’

oryestit’

(“theydid

run to bring word, xxvi i i . In respect of syntax, it

deserves notice thatthe Old Sclavonic supines can be alsoused in construction like common substantives with the

genitive ; so, Matt. vi ii . 2 9, mtichit’

nus, to torment us,"

instead of ny.

869. We return to the Latin supine, in order to considermore closely the form in it}. As ablative, itanswers, at

least in respectof signification, to the Védic ablative Of the

infinitive in Ms which, however, has not hithertobeen found in its strictablative function, butonlygovernedbyprepositions (see while the corresponding Latinform in tt

’

i avoids the construction with prepositions. Its

ablative nature, however. is clearlyshewn where the abla

tive of another abstractstands beside itin a sim ilar relationas Terence : parvum dicta , sed immensum erspectatione Li

plemque dicta quam re sentfaciliom . As the 4th declensionalso adm its datives in i i for ui . we m ight regard the

supine in hi , when itstands byadjectives which govern the

dative, as a dative ; thus, e. g. , jucundum cognita alque auditu

as= cognitui, auditui . I would rather, [G . Ed. p.

however, not concede to the suffix a 3d case, and believe

thatthe form in hi m yeverywhere be taken as an ablative.

and, indeed, in most cases, as an ablative more closelydefined. which can be paraphrased by on accountof,

" “in

respectto,"as above. dicta quam refaciliora.

”The asser

tion. however, that it is possible to express the relation of

removal bythe ablative of the supine I now retract, since,in a passage in Cato R. R. (primes cubita surgat. posh

-

emits

cubilum eat). I no longer agree with Vossius (see also Ramshorn, p. 452 ) in recognising the supines Of cumbo, but onlythe common ablative and accusative of the concrete cubitus

couch , bed. therefore Rise the first from bed, go last

to bed.

"Moreover. in obsonatn redeo (Plaut.) and redeunt

1 2 1 4 FORMAT ION OF WORDS .

pasta ores, I cannot. with G. F. Grotefend (p. 347, see also

Ramshorn p. recognise the ablative of the supine ; as

the ablative of obsonatus and pastas. with which the sa id

supine is, in its origin, certainlyidentical here, suffices verywell. It is, however. certa in, that the Latin supines. in

respectto syntax, stand verynear to the common abstracts

of the 4th declension ; and I do notthink that the Latin

brought its supines with it as such, or as infinitives, so

earlyas from the Asiatic progenital land, butI now onlyas

sume a formative affinitywith the Sanscritinfinitives intu—m .

as with the Greek abstracts in w—g ; but I adm it of the

syntactical individualiz ation of the Latin supines first shew

ing itself on Roman soil, as, indeed, in the older Latinityalso, the abstracts in tio have obtained the capacity, like infi

(G . Ed. p. nitives, of governing the accusative‘ whi ch

the more modern language has again resigned. The case

is differentwith the forms of the Lithuanian and Sclavonic

supines, which correspond to the Latin supines and the

Old Prussian infinitive 866. which stand in the

said languages isolated, and without anysupporton a class

of words provided with a full declension, and shew themselves to be transm issions from the time of identitywiththe Sanscritand the earlier, as the sa id languages, throughseveral other phenomena, pointto the fact thattheywerefirst separated from the Sanscritata time when the latter

language had alreadyexperienced sundrycorruptions, withwhich the classic and German tongues are not yet ae

quainted’

f

O The following are examfles in Plautus: Quid tibi hanc digito tactic

est quid tibi istunc tactic estl’

quid tibi hanc notto est quid tibi hanc

aditio est quid tibi Imc receptio ad te estmeum virum 9 quid tibi franc

curatio est This idiom therefore appears to have been retained, or

generallyto have been adopted, in questions only.

1 1 have expressed myselfmore fullyonthis subjectin a treatise read

before the Academyseveralyearsago, butstillunprinted, On the Lan

guage

1 2 16 FORMATION or WORDS.

[G . Ed. p. be assigned with more rightto itthan to

other abstractsubstantives. inwhich itcan be inferred only

atthe beginning ofwords having become a principle ; for the Greek con

trasta, e.g.,a i m, forSanscritram,

with the Zend ham . The Sanscrit(h is

properlyan aspiratedg (gh), and, inpronunciation, hasthe same relationto

1 916thatthe Greek xhas tothe Sanscritkit(I: h), inwhich, as gene

rallyin the Sanscritaspirates, an h is clearlyheard after the said tenuis

or medial. The Sanscrith istherefore, as itwere, aweak x, and leadsus,in the Lettish- Sclavonic languages, which have no aspirates, to expect a

g, which we here also frequentlyfind in the place of the Sanscrith ; as,

e.g . , in Lithuanian degu, I burn"=Sanscrit da

'

luimi and in the Scla

vonic stormmogur’

i , I can,”which is based on the Sanscritrootma izh

,

mais, to grow,

”whence “ m isfit, great

”

(cf. magnus, pe’

yas), to

which the Zend lg»; ma z é is radicallyskin, with 2, therefore, con

trasted with the Sanscrith and Sclavonic, Greek, and Latin 9 . IVhere,

however, theLithuaniancontrastes it Frenchj, Sclavonic 2k ) and the

Sclavonic a3with the Sanscritb, there I regard the sibilantOf the said

languages, not as a corruption of the SanscritIt, butof a g, in the same

manner as, in Italian, the g before e and i has, in pronunciation, become

dseh (Englishj): moreover, in this case the Lettish and Sclavonic lan

guages, in spite of their near relationship, no longer invariably agree

with one another ; since, e. g., the Russian contrastswith the Sanscrit

harisa , goose,"the form ryinmay, andthe Lithuanianthe form z

'

asis. In

the Zend thiswordwould, in itstheme, be eitherany-assIran/ta orAtwyug

ja zz /ta (see the h ofwhich the Lettish - Sclavonic languages

would have scarcelyconducted back to its pointof departure, s. I would,

also recall attention to the fact, that in the Lettish and Sclavonic lan

guages occasionallyweak sibilants occur for the Sanscritg or thej 1 ,

which was firstdeveloped out of the 9 after the separation Of languages.

Thus the Lithuanian éada - s,“speech, and z

'

odi - s,word,

”lead to the

Sanscrit rootgad,“to speak forwhich

,in Zend, we haveJ ags; jad,

To the Sanscrit root1 31 jiv,“to live,

"corresponds the

Sclavonic rootalum schiv ; while the Lithuanian in this root has pre .

served the original guttural (gym s,

“living,”

gywm n,“ I which

is a proof thatthe corruption of the original guttural in this root, in Sanscritand Sclavonic, firstmade its appearance after the separation Of the

Lettish- Sclavonic languages from Sanscrit. The divergence of the Let

tish

to require .

’


from the general sense whether the action passes from the

subject or to it, as in general the abstract substantives ex

tish and Sclavonic languages in the word God deserves notice ; for

while the Lithuanian diewa - s, and Prussian deima - s, are based on the

Sanscritdéva - s, God"

(Zend daéva, “evil the word bog (theme

bogo), which is common to perhaps all the Sclavonic languages, leadsus

to the Old Persian baga , with which K uhn also, l c. , has compared it,

while I, ata time when I was as yetunacquainted with the Old Persian

expression (Glossarium Sauser.,Fasc. II . a. 1 84 1 , p. compared itwith

w bhagavat(from bhaga,“felicitas,

“felts, beatus, vene

rabilis”

(applied onlytogodsand saints); andunder in!Maya I havemen

tioned the Lithuanian bagota - s, and Russian bagotyi , rich (cf. Mikl.

Radices,”s. v. Bor'b boy

’

,The Sanscritrootbhaj, from bhag,

signifies,“toworship, to adore, to love ;

”and as the sufli x a has also

a passive signification, the Old Persian and Sclavonic term for God

mightoriginallyhave also signified worshipped, adored,”the possibility

of which, with regard to the Sclavonic word, is also admitted byPott

(E . I .

,I . p. I would, however, byno means found an argumentfor

a special affinitybetween the Sclavonic languages and the Old Persian on

their agreementin the designation Of God”

(in Persian, as the

Sanscrit itself supplies a verysatisfactoryroot for that and, moreover,

two languagesm ightveryeasilyhave fallenuponthe same method, quite

independentlyof each other, so as to have designated God,”or

“gods,

from adoration as, too, the NewPersian i z ed, God,”is based

on another root for “to pray,

"viz . on 1 11 yaj (Zend yaz ), whence the

perfect passive participle is, bycontraction, ishtd - s. Though the opinion

expressed above 2 1 . and supported also byBurnonf (Yaqna,

p . be correctwith regard to the original identityof the Lithuanian

swanta - s,“holy,

"Old Sclavonic tBM’P

’

b svaht’

, id . svaiztiti,

“sanctifi

care,

”see Mikl. Rad. p. 79, Prussian swint- s, holy,

”acc . swinta - n

,

swintint, to hallow,”it is nevertheless importantto Observe

, that in

th is word also the Lettish and Sclavonic languages have therebydiverged from the Arian, or Medo- P ersic

, In thattheyhave not changed

the Sanscritgroup of sounds, in into sp, but have leftthe Old semi - vowel

unaltered. The Sanscrit supplies, as the original source of the word an

der discussion (See Weber, V . S . Sp. I I . the extremelyfruitful root

s'

vi,

to grow,

”in the contracted form i a, if this be notthe old form, and

s'

vi an extension Of it. Fromsvi we m ight expects'

vayanta, according to

4 x the


[G . Ed. p. 1 2 58 ] press in no degree whatever the relation

Of activity or passiveness. Moreover, the Sanscrit infini

tive is wanting in a passive form ; and where it has, or

appears to have, a passive signification, this is discoverableonlyfrom the context, as, e.g. , in a passage of the savitri

(5 . Of which I annex the translation : this man, bound

byduty deserves notto be summoned bymyservants,

more literally,“is not deserving the summoning

“

(nd’rh

6‘

nétum), where the circumstance thatm’tum can be rendered

bya passive infinitive does notjustifyus in assigning to

it a passive signification. It has,if one will so view

it, an active meaning with reference to the servants of

Yama, and a passive with reference to Satyavdn, while in

[G . Ed . p. pointOf fact it denotes neither activitynor passiveness, but the abstract summoning. leading

away, which is itself irrespective Of doing or suffering.

So also in the Hitfipadé'

sa (ed. Bonn. p. abhishéktum,

to Sprinkle,“has no passive signification, which Lassen

(II. would make this infinitive borrow from the pas

sive participle ninip ita . In my opinion, nirzip ita retains

its passive meaning for itself, and does notconsign it to

the infinitive . That however, I. c. , the sprinkling (thekinglyinauguration bysprinkling) is notperformed bythe

elephantOf the said person, but byanother, is clear fromthe context. In order to leave the active or passive rela

tion as undefined as in the original, I translate atavz‘

rdjyd'

bhishéktum bhavdn nin'

ip itah'

by“to the sprinkling for the

forest- sovereigntyyour honour is chosen.

871 . We sometimes find the Védic dative also Of the in

finitive base in tuwith an apparent passive infinitive sig

nification ; as, e.“y, S . V . (ed. Benfey, p. z’

ndrdya sdma

the analogyof jayanta’

(n. pr.,originally conqueror and from in,

s

'

avanta and, without Guna, ivanta to which the Sclavonic CBN r'

b

evaI'

It’

, theme svasito, would correspond admirably.


the literal translation would be, if your wish to reta in

li fe long,

“and then the Obtaining Of life would refer to

the persons addressed ; but by the appended mayd, byme, the sense is essentiallyaltered, and the retention of

life referred to the speaker, though the life m ight be thatof those addressed if the contextallowed Of this ; butdhdra

[G . Ed . p. yitum , to receive,“

remains, however,in so far, a genuine active infinitive , as it governs the se

cusative (pl.) prdpdn I' itam. In order to im itate as

closelythe grammatical complexion Of the original in translating it into German, we might perhaps render it thus

,

i f to youthe wish (is)for the long retention of life throughme ; onlyhere the word that signifies to retain

“must

be rendered as the common abstractwith the genitive ,‘

instead Of as verbal with the accusative ; and instead of theadverb long

”the corresponding adjective must be pre

fixed to it, while the proper infinitive is importantlydis

tinguished from the common abstractbythis, thatitadm itsof no epithet.

872 . It is worthyOf notice, moreover, how the Sanscrit,being deficient in a passive infinitive, shifts for itself in

cases where such an infinitive was to have been expectedafter verbs which signify

“to be able in such sentences

as vinci potest. The Sanscritthen, in such cases, expressesthe passive relation bythe auxiliaryverb sq fair, to be

able,"to which ithas lenta passive, perhaps especiallywith

a view to constructions Of this kind, which, however, isonlyused impersonally; e. g. Mah . I. yadi s

'

akyaté,“if

it is possible“

(literally, i f it is could on the other

i f the infinitive in Sanscrit, which in the German is rendered byE rhalten,

”mustbe regarded as a substantive retention,

”notas verbal

retaining. —Translator.

‘

tThe reader will pardon this expression, which must be coined in

Order to render wird gekonnt I had onlythe choice between it andis been able.

"

Translator.


hand, e.g. , Nal. 2 0. nd harturi .I’

Iakyatépunah'

, it(the garment) cannot be recalled,

“

(literally, is not can- cd to re

as i f one could say in Latin, af erre nequitur,“in

stead Of“af erri acquit.

“The Latin language, however,

allows Of the doubled expression Of the passive relation,both in the infinitive and in the negative auxiliaryverb

nequeo,” hence, e. comprimi nequitur (Plaut. retrahi

nequitur (Plaut. apud. Fest), ulcisci (pass), m quiturvirginitas redd i nequitur Observe, also, the way inwhich the passive Of the infinitive future in Latin is para

phrased bythe accusative of the supine [G . Ed . p . 1 2 62 ]with in

’

where, therefore , the auxiliaryverb has, exactlyas in the Sanscrit s

'

akydté, is could,”taken upon itself the

denoting Of the passive relation, which the accusative Of

the supine, like its cognate form in Sanscrit, is incapableOf expressing ; thus, amatum iri, literally, gone to love

(in love). instead Of to gO to be loved.

" That,too, the

indicative of iri can be used in constructions of this kind,i s proved bya passage in Cato (apud Gel] 10. contu

melia per hujuscepetulantiam mihifactum ilur, Insultis gone

to do to me,

“instead of

“

goes to be done to me .

“

I firstdrew attention to the peculiarityof Sanscritidiom, as regards

the construction Of the passive Of ink,“to be able, with the infinitive,

in myreview Of Forster’

s Essayon the principles of the SanscritGram

mar"

(Heidelberg Ann. Reg.,18 1 8

,NO. 30, p. and afterwards in

a Note on Arjuna’

s journeyto Indra’

s heaven, p. 81 ; and I believethat itwas desirable, to express a meaning on this subject, as the sin

gularity Of a passive to a verb which signifies“to be able and the

circumstance that in]: admits also of being used as a m iddle of the 4th

class (e.g. ialq ase'

,

“thou canst,

”N . XI . m ight also induce the

Opinion that the Sanscrit infinitive in tum has both a passive and an

active meaning ; and that, therefore, e. g hanta it iakyaté literallysigui

fies nothing else than occidi potest.”

This is, however, opposed bythe

passages inwhich infinitives are dependent on the decidedlypassive par

ticiples of the preterite s'

akitri (see p. 1 1 1 8 Note and of the future

{likya e.g .

,Ram. I . 44 . punar na fakitz

‘

i nétun gangd prdrthayata‘

r,


[G . Ed . p. 873. Letus now turn to the German in

finitive and we will, inthe firstplace, callattentionto the re

markable agreementwhich the Gothic shews to the Sanscritin this

,thatin the wantOf a passive infinitive in the cases in

which this form , did itexist, would be placed after the auxi

liaryverb signifying“to be able

“

(mag, I can,

“ “I am able

"

)it expresses the passive relation in the auxiliaryverb. As,

however, may, I can,

"is a preterite with a present sig

nification (cf. and as the Gothic is not in a position

to form a passive, exceptout of present forms (seeand not, like the Sanscrit and Greek, out of other tensesalso, it has recourse to the passive participle mahts,

mahta, maht, which, like the formal indicative preterite

mag, has always a present signification ;"E

on which se

count the temporal relation, if it be a past one, can be

denoted only by the appended verb substantive, while

“the Gauge (would)notbe able (possible)to bring back bythe wisherHidimba, I . kin tuéakyam mayd kartum

“what, however, (is)to beable (possible) to do byme

”

(=what, however, can be done byme).

Lassen (HitI‘

Ip. I I . remarks that constructions Of this kind can in

nowise be lim ited to s'

ak, to be able,”but it is nevertheless certain

that the construction of the active infinitive with the passive of a verbwhich signifies

“to be able is the most original and mostdeserving Of

special notice ; for thatverbswhich signify“to begin

”have in Sanscrit,

as in other languages, a passive, is just as little surprising, as that the

action which is begun is expressed in Sanscrit, as in German, bythe

active infinitive, as itis notnecessarythatthe passive relation should be

expressed both atthe beginning and in the actionwhich is begun, thoughconstructions Occur in Latin like vasa conj ici coepta sunt while

we in German say, e.g . , das Haas wird z ubauen angofangeu, the house

is begun to build (to be built) and in Sanscrit(Hit, ed. Bonn. p. 49,

l. téna vihdrah’

kdrayitum drabdhali ,“bythis one (would)a temple

be begun to be built. ” It is self- evident that, in constructions of this

kind, the action expressed bythe infinitive does notstand in an active

relationto the subject.Cf. Grimm,

IV. pp. 59, 60.


corresponds to the perfectpassive participle Of the Sanscrit

and Latin. This skulds (fem . skulda, neut. skuld). receives

[G . Ed . p. in like manner the expression of the pas

sive relation, which the language is incapable of expressingin the accompanying infinitive : hence, e. Luke ix. 4 - 1,

skulds istatgiban in handtms manné, as itwere ,

“he is be ing

compelled to deliver into the hands Of men, instead Of,

he mustbe delivered"

péM eI a apada’

doadat). Moreover,

in Gothic itOften happens that it can be known onlyfrom

the context and the accompanying dative (alone or with

from, from which, in Gothic, frequentlyrepresents the

Sanscrit instrumental, that the infinitive has not the com

mon active meaning, but a passive one .

"EThus, in Matt.

vi . 1 , it appears from the dative im, bythem ,

“that the

preceding infinitive has a passive signification, and thatdusat/Ivan im,

which we, in order to imitate the construetion, musttranslate by to the seeing bythem ,

“translates

the Greek xpOg TOOeadfivat adv-

079, where the infinitive has,

through the prefixed article, the form Of a concrete. With

out, however, the im, which shews what is the proper

meaning, da sa ihvan.“to see,

“for

“seeing, could not

well be otherwise taken in this passage than as active , and

the preceding words, which lead us to expect a passive ex

pression, would notjustifyus in taking the said infinitive

as passive—Von Gabelentz and Liibe (Gramm . p. 140 re

mark, that, by a Germanism , the Gothic active infinitive

after the verbs to command, to will, to give"occurs with

a passive signification. I cannot. however, perceive any

passive signification of the infinitive in the examples ad

duced l. c. , except in da ushramyan, to crucify“

to

the crucifying, to be crucified Among others, the

following are cited as examples : Matt. xxvi i 6 1, mm vitan

thamma hla ira , command to watch the grave , exactlyas,

Cf. the analogous Sanscritconstructions, p. 12 68 G . ed .


in Latin,jube custodire sepalcrum onlythat [G. Ed. p.

the Gothic verb vita. I watch,”and therefore, also, its in

finitive, instead Of the dative, governs the accusative, whilethe Latinjabers also admits Of the passive infinitive, as in

the Greek text, xe’

heuaov alaqtah a'diivat ri wré tpov com

mand the being watched with respect to the grave

Luke vi i i . 53, anabaud iz ai giban (dare, not dari OOOiiva I)mat, He commanded to give her(actionem dandi ci). meat,

"

jussitei dare cibum. compared with the Greek dté-

rafev

dodijvau(paye'

i v, He commanded the being given to her

(actionem “rat? dari ei)to eat(with reference to eating);

" Ia

constructionwhich cannotbe im itated inGothic, buttowhichUlfilas, in Mark v. 43, (ha ihaitiz a i giban matyan) therebyapproximates, in that he renders qta

'

ye'

iv by an infinitive,

which, however, here stands as the Object of giban. to

give,“in the common accusative relation, and does not

,

like the Greek, express the relation“in reference to (as

nédag Most common is the representation Of the

Greek passive infinitive by the Gothic active infinitive

with a passive signification to be deduced from the context,in cases in which the infinitive expresses the causal relation, and the Véda dialectuses the dative in tu, or anotherinfinitive form (see while the Gothic employs the

infinitive with the preposition da. or, also, the simple infini

tive, butthe latter almostonlyafter verbs of motion, whereit

, irrespective Of its possible passive signification, corresponds to the accusative Of the Latin supine ; e. Luke

v. 1 5, garunnun hiuhmans managai hausyan [G. Ed . p. 1 2 61 ]

yak Ieikindnfram imma, great multitudes came togetherto hear and to healing =to be healed, Oepameéeadac) by

Bythis nu- German rendering I merelywish to shewthatthe Greek

passive infinitive stands in the accusative relation. The case- relation of

the infinitive eta-

yet» is likewise accusative, and corresponds to that of

rdrpov inthe preceding example.


him ; Luke I I . 4, 5, urran than yah ioscf am an

mith martin. and Joseph also wentup to the taxing (to be

taxed)with Mary 2 These. i . 10, qvimith ushauhyan, he

cometh to the glorifying (to be glorified évdoEacOfiva I).

Butabove (p. 1 2 65 G. for da saihvan, to the seeing

(to be seen saihvan alone could scarcely stand, as no

verb ofmotionprecedes : forthe same reason, atMatt. xxvi . 2

also (atgibada da ushramyan, is betrayed to be crucified,eig rd m av dijvac), the preposition da could not be re

moved. On the other hand, the strictlyactive infinitive is

Occasionallyalso found in the causal relation without da .

and without being preceded by a verb Of motion ; e. g

Eph. vi . 19, ci mis gibaidaucaurd kanayan runa a ivag

gélydns, that utterance may be given unto me to

make known the mystery Of the gospel (see Gabe]. andLObe, Gramm . p.

875. In German, and indeed so early as in Old HighGerman, the infinitive Often apparentlyreceives a passive

signification through the preposition z u(Old High German,

z a, z e, xi , z o, zu. With it, for the most part, is found theverb substantive ; and we render theLatin future passive par

ticiple, when accompanied bythe verb substantive, bythe

infinitive with z u e. g. puniendus estby er ist z ustrafen,"

he i s to punish (i . e. he is for the punishing fitted

thereto on the other hand, in English we have, he is

to be punished er istgestrafl zuwet J. Grimm .

IV. 60, 61, gives examples of the Old and M iddle High

German, from which I annex a few : z e lcarawenne"E

sint

preparanda K er. z e kesez z enne ist (“consti

tuenda K er. 1 5b. ; z a peldnne ist [G. Ed. p.

(“orandum Hymn 1 7. I istxi firslandannc intelli

gendum Is. 9. 2 . daz er an xc sehene denfromven weere

gust, Nib. 2 76. 2 . Buteven withoutthe accompaniment Of

l‘ Regarding the dative form, see 879 .


arrive atthe same method independently Of each other,

proves that it is verynatural. I further recall attention,

with J. Grimm (l. to French sentences. such as, je lui

ai vucouper lesjambes il se la isse chasser and, moreover,to the fact, that in certain verbs the Latin adm its both theactive and passive infinitive, which. however, proves thattheformer is perfectlylogical and correct, as itis notnecessity,i . e. the actualwantof a passive form , which occasions its use .

876. As regards the form of the German infinitive, it

appears to me beyond all doubt, that, as has alreadybeen

elsewhere The Caucasian members Of the Indo—EuropeanFam ily Of Languages, p. remarked, the term ination

an, afterwards en, is based onthe Sanscritneuter suffix m m,

the formations ofwhich in Sanscritalso veryfrequentlysupplythe place Of the infinitive,

"and on whi ch, too, are

grounded also the Hindiistani'

infinitives, as also the SouthOssetish in in, the Tagaurish in ti n, and very probably,

also, the Armenian, in the final l of which I think I recog

nise the verycommon corruption Of an n (see as is

the case, among other words, in "UL a il, the other,"

com

pared with the Sanscritanya - s, Latin aliu- s, GreekW ay, and

the Gothic base alya (see The vowel which precedes the l of the Armenian infinitives belongs, however,

notto the suffix, butto the verbal theme, which we maylearn from its changing according to the difference Of the

conjugations hence, e. g. 1: 1:p ber- e- l, to carry.

”

1'

(Sanscrit

[G . Ed. p . 1 2 70 bhar- ana,"the carrying,

Gothic bair- a - n, after the analogyOf pbpbal‘

ber- e- m, I bear,

2 Sec pp. 1 2 1 1,1 2 13, G . ed.

t I write the Armenian consonants in the LatIn character, according

to their parentage, and the pronunciationwhich is assigned tothem bythe

order of the alphabet (see Petermann, p. The vowel Ir e, wh ich is

often pronounced likeye, corresponds etymologicallyto the Greek e, and,

as the latter generallydoes, to the Sanscrita .


pbp lruber- e- s, thoubearest m ta - l, to give (Sanscritddna , the giving, gift

"

)with mwd‘

ta - m, I give, mum ta - s.

thougivest”

(Sanscritdddd - mid ddd - si); fi wLma - a - l, to re

ma in, with .‘

Itim d‘

mn- a - m, I remain,

”fl aw ma - a - s, thou

remainest .IL- m'

bloL merhan- i - l. to die,"

with .Ibm tlnd‘

merhan- i - m, I die,"

Ill- um'

bpu merhan- i - s.“thoudiest. " In

the German languages also the vowel preceding the final n

Of the infinitive does notbelong to the infinitive suffix, but

to the classsyllable . In the weak conjugation (= SanscritCl. see it is tolerably clear, that, e. g.

,the

syllable ya Of satyan, to place"

(see the a of which,according to an universal rule Of sound is weakened

before a final 3 and th to i , is identical with the same

syllable in sat-

ya ,I place ; satya - m. we place ; sat-ya

- nd.

they place .

” I therefore divide the infinitive thus.sat-

ya- n. In forms like saHI - d- n,

to salve"

(pres. salb- d,

salb- d- s, saIb- d- th, it is still more clear that the sim

ple n is the suffix Of the infinitive . In Grimm ’s 3d con

jugation of the weak form , the i of the diphthong a i is

dropped before the n of the infinitive, as generally beforenasals, thus, hob- a - n, to have

,

”SO, too, hab- a - m,

we have ,"

hab- a - nd,“theyhave, contrasted with hab- ai - s, thouhast,

hab- a i - th. he has, ye have on the other hand in Old

High German. hab—é- n. to have,”as also hab- é- m , I have,

hab- é- nt, theyhave .

”In the strong verbs, which, with

the few exceptions in ya (see a), belong to the San

scrit lst class, itm ighthave been before assumed thatthea preceding the n in the infinitive is identical with the

Sanscritfirst a Of the suffix ana ; thattherefore, e. ba ir

an, to bear,”

quimau. to come ,

”bindan, to bind , beitan.

to bite,"

grétan, to weep,” correspond [G . Ed. p.

also, with respect to the lst a Of the suffix, to the Sanscritneuter abstracts which are akin in formation, bhar- ana.

“the

bearing. supporting,“

gam- ana. the going. bandh- ana ,

“the binding,

“bhéd- ana. the separating,

”h and- ana ,

“the


weeping ; and this was formerly myOpinion. As, how

ever, the verbs which correspond to the Sanscrit4th class

retain the character ya in the infinitive, and, e. g. , the infi

nitive of oaks-

ya,“I grow (pret. vdhs), is oahs- ya - n (not

oaks- ou). and thatof bid-

ya, I pray”

(pret. bath, pl. bédum).bid- ya

- n (notbid- ou). I now regard the a of forms like

bair—a - n. bind - a - n, &c. , as the classvowel, and therefore as

identical with that Of bair- a . ba ir—a - m. bair- a - nd, bind- a , bind

a -m . bind- a - nd and I derive in generalthe German infini

tive from the theme Of the Special tenses, with which italways agrees in respect of the form Of the radical vowelsince, e. bind- a - n, to bind,

”bitty- ou. to bend, corre

spend in this respect to the present binda , biuga, but not

to the true rootband. bug, or to the singular Of the prete

rite band, bang (plur. bundum. bugum). ConsequentlytheGerman infinitive stands in exact accordance with the Armenian, i f I am right in viewing in the l Of the latter the

corruption Of an n, and therefore in the before - mentioned

1: 1:p ber- e- I, a form exactlyanalogous to the Gothic ba ir

am , Old High German ber- a - n.

Remark.—As the Armenian I: e, like the Greek 6, is the most

common representative of the Sanscrit a ; so the Armenian 1st cou

jugation, inthe greatmajorityof its verbs, viz . in those which interpose

a simple I: e between the root and the personal terminations, corre

spends to the Sanscrit lst and dtb classes (see which two

classes cannotbe distinguished in Armenian, a language inwhich Guna

is unknown. The inserted Ir e, therefore, of forms like Pbp lnl‘

bend- m,

I hear,

”

[afrlrfi'u ber- e- s

,thou bearest,

”

Flrlvbdjg bero s- mkh, we

[G . Ed . p. 1 2 72 ] bear,” p fip lr‘

b ber- e- n, they bear, corresponds to

the Greek e of forms like (pip- ea rs, ¢s’

p—e- rov, itbsp- e - r, (tbsp- e, and

to the Sanscrit a of forms like bhdr- a - si, thou bearest, bhér- a - ti,

he bears,”bluir- a - nti

, they bear.”

The lengthening of the Ar

menian 5 e to 5 in pfi'

lrl; ber- t’

,

“he bears, Ffi'

lrfip ber- t- kh, ye

bear,” I regard as compensation for the dropping of the personal expres

sion after the class—vowel for the Ida of the last- named form is, to a

i As the 3d person bet-6, for beret=Sanscrit bharati, Gothic ba irith,

has


the character of its Indian prototype still more trulythan the 1stconju

gatien. AS, however, the Armenian m a more frequentlycorresponds to

the Sanscrit long If than to the short, itwould also be possible thatthem a under discussion, like the Latin 5 of the lstconjugation, with whichFr. W indischmann compares it,

’is based on the Sanscrit aya of the

loth class (see The circumstance, however, thatthe Arme

nian a- conjugation contains manyneuter verbs, while the Sanscritaya isprincipallydevoted to the formation of causal and denominative verbs,

makes the deduction Ofthe Armenian 2 d conjugation from the Sanscrit

loth class little probable, and favours ratherthe derivation from the lstor

6th class, or from the 4th, containing scarce anybutneuter verbs, which

inArmenianmighteasilyhave sacrificed the sem i - vowel Of their character

ya (cf. Petermann, p. In the Armenian 3d conjugation there are

manyverbswhich add nuto the root, and therebyat once remind us Of

the Sanscrit nuof the sth class (see with which Petermann

also has compared them . Those which add a simple u have probably,like the Sanscritverbs Ofthe 8th class, lostanu(see

877. The Hindiistfini infinitive also has dropped the first

vowel Of the Sanscritsuffix anafl‘

and. on the other hand,

“1 Foundation of the Armenian in the Arian FamilyOf Languages,in the treatises of the 1stclass Of the Bavarian Academyof Lit. , B . IV .

PartI .,in the special impression, p. 44 .

T The (I bywhich transitives like jdl- a- nd,

“arm ,

”is formed from

intransitives like jISI- nd, ardere,”I derive from the Sanscrit causal

character aya , in the same wayas the Latin d of the lst conjugationBythis a causatives also are formed from active transitives ;

e.g ., bidh- d - nd,

“to cause to here,

”from bédh - nd

, to bore”Sanscritl

bhéd- ana - m,

the cleaving,”rootbhid (Gilchrist,

“A Grammar,”&c

p. IVith regard to the causal here exhibiting a weaker vowel thanthe primitive verb, while in Sanscritthe causals usuallyexperience an

incrementto the vowel, itis probable thatthe Hindfisti mi finds a reason

forweakening the radical syllable in the incumbrance of the causal bytheaffix 6. Where, however, the causal or transitive loses the proper causal

character, it Often exhibits a stronger vowel than the primitive ; e. g.

Shakespear, with more probability, compares the word all? vedlcan

from um vyadh, to pierce.

’

In the original, Professor Bopp writes

bid - d - na and bed- std, which do notoccur in ourdictionaries—Translator.

D


lengthened the finala, in case we are notto [G . Ed . p.

suppose that it is derived from the feminine form of the

suffix um m m, which is used in sanscrit for the formation

Of abstractsubstantives much more rarelythan the neuter

The following are examples : m dsand, the sitting ;

m ydchand, the request m tundaua'

, the praising.

Herewith agree, in respect Of accentua [G. Ed . p.

tion, also the Greek aéowj and rjdowj; while &yxévq and

dormiwy, in this latter respect, differ ; but the latter has re

tained the 01d a - sound Of the sufli x. TO this head, too, have

"a ir- mi,

“to slay (Sanscritmdréydmi,

“I make to die from mar- rid

to die (6=Sanscritd, m6r- nd=wtmmarana , “the —In the

w of Hindfistiini , causals like chat- wind,“to make to go

”

(chat- mi ,“to

I recognise a corruption Of the p Of the causals like Jw- dp- (iyd - mi

,

d iscussed above The transition of the p into wappears, how

ever, to have taken place at a time when one more vowel preceded the

labial ; as, e. g ., in the numerals c

‘

ktiwc'm5 1

,Ma

zda 52 , sdtc‘

iwc‘

in 57, in con

tradistinction to timon 53, pt‘

iclcpan 55, where itadmits of no doubt thatboth won andp61: are based on the Sanscritpah

'

chds’

at60, and therefore

e‘

ka'

won on €kapaiichfz§anfir-

pan on tfipa'

r‘

ichriéat, the nasal of which is

lost in the Hindustani pochdv50, while the simple L; panel; has°

re

tained it. The length of the d offilepdnch, compare with the Sanscrit

shortvowel, mayperhaps serve as a compensation for the dropping of the

syllable an for short (1 appears in Hindustani regularlyas

short a, which Gilchrist, according to English pronunciation, writes u.

The Hindustani ismostextremelysensitive with regard to the weightof

the vowel, and therefore weakens the long (i of pi nch again to 5when

the overloading the word bycomposition gives occasion for this, e. g . in

po'

ndrb’

h 15 ; thus, sétrdh 17, apposed to « it(from saptun)7.

t“ The vowel here given as 6byProfessor Bopp is undoubtedlyd, and

the word isuniversallywritten mat-mi . More than that, the sound

6 docs notexistin the language, exceptbefore r, anymore than itdoes in

Marathi , as has been noticed before . It is true thatin Bengali“

shorta

is pronounced like 6 and hence Dr. Careyhas imaginedth istobe the case

in Marathi , butthere isno foundation for such a belief—Translator.

4 L


already been referred 803. sub. as conjectural cog

nate forms, the Old High German abstracts in unga ,while

those in New High German have losttheir final vowel.

It does not, however, appear probable to me, that the

Hindustani infinitives are based on these fem inine abstracts,but I regard their a as the lengthening Of the Sanscritshort a, which in general, in Hindiistiini , when final, is

either entirelysuppressed or lengthened the latter, amongother words, in the names Of male animals, while those Of

females term inate in i'

. and the generic name has lostthe

original final vowel(see Gilchrist“A Grammar, &c. , p.

Thus, e.g. , the general term for the buffalo (Sanscritma

higha) in Hindiistani is 5’n ma ihik,

’while the male

buffalo is maihikd, and the female ma ihikz'

, the latter= San

scritmahishi'(see As the Hindfistani has lostits neu

ter, the Sanscritneuters, which in their theme are notto be

distinguished from masculine bases, have inthe said languagebecome masculines, and we may therefore unhesitatinglycompare the Hindiistiini infinitives in 5 ml with the Sanscrit abstracts in can; thus, e. jd

'

l- m to burn = San

scritjvaland- m , the burning,

”or rather=jra land- s, as the

Sanscrit neuters have, in Hindfistani'

become masculines.

The Oblique case in é Of the Hindfistan'

i infinitive points to

a Sanscrit base in a, in which we easily recognise

the Sanscrit locative of bases in a (sec therefore, e. in jb

'

lné. to we perceive the Sanscrit

jvalané, in the burning.

The common term for a male bufi'

alo in Hindfistfini is

bha irisii , and for a female M bha ihs and inMarathi, é !“what

'

s-d

and ti llmi mic. “file?”ma ihik, inwhich a mere provincial pronuncia

tion changes all to k, is comparativelyseldom used. Translator .

f This form in ausuallyexpresses in the Hindiistiini infinitive the ac

cusative relation, as is also occasionally the ease in Sanscrit. I recall

attention to the passage of the Ramayana cited above inwhich

graham!


[G . Ed. p. with the phenomenon, that, in general,

neuter bases in a have lostthis vowel in the nom inative

justas in Afghan, has become declinable (see Preface to the 5th Part,

p. and also distinguishes the genders hence, e. g.,

wb'

h mfz ré -yé ,“he will strike

we?! mdré -

g‘

i , she will strike ;

116m mdrén-yé,“theywill strike .

”

After

i”The Preface here referred to is as follows I have, in the partnow

laid before the public, notyetbeen able to finish myComparative Gram

mar, butgive here preliminarilythe conclusion of the formation ofmoods,

the locative of the derivative adverbs, and a partOf the formationOfwords,viz . the formation Of participles, and Of those substantives and adjectiveswhich stand in close connectionwith anyparticiple through the derivative

suffix. Since the publication of the 4th Part Of this hook, ComparativeGrammar has acquired a new region for research in Sanscritaccentuation

which hitherto had remained almostunknown, and which BOhtlingk’

s

academical treatise,“A first attempt regarding the accent in Sanscrit,

”

opene doutto Aufrecht, in his pamphlet, De accentucompositorum

Sanscriticorum”(Bonn, treats of the accentuation Of compounds.

Benfeyand G . Curtius have been the firstto draw attention to detached

instances Of agreementbetween the Sanscrit and Greek accentuation,the

former in his notice of BOhtlingk'

s treatise (IIalle JournalofGeneralLite

rature, May the latter in h is brochure, “The Comparison Of Lan

guages in their relation to Classical Philosophy (2 d Ed . pp. 2 2 , 2 3,

I believe I recognise a common fundamental principle in the system of

accentuation in both languages in this, thatin Sanscrit, aswellas inGreek,the

l“) Some veryvaluable corrections, which have since been confirmed bythe

accentuated Veda- text, are given byB oltz mann in h is brochure “On the

Ablaut”(Carlsruhe, p. 9 . ThusHoltzmann has been the firstto shew,

or rather tounderstand rightly, the rule of Panini on this head, concealed in

an obscure, technical language, thatthe plural Of bridhiimi is not accented

bé - dht‘

imtis butbodh z‘

imas thatOf dOtFJhM i notdvighmas butdvishmeis. Hence

itis clear thatthe division Of the personal term inations in 480. into heavyand light, is also of importance for the theoryOf accentuation, and thatthe

heavyterminations here, too, principallyacton the next preceding syllable,since theycan remove from itits accentaswell as the Guns.


accusative singular, together with the case- sign. As,

therefore, e. the Gothic base word daura, door. con

After whathas been said, ithardlyneed be remarked thatthe Hindi

atTan'

i imperative also, inmostpersons Of both numbers, is identicalwiththe Sanscritpotential and the corresponding moods in the cognate Euro

pean languages ; so that, therefore, e.g .

,mdré,

“ let him strike,”for

mare- t, corresponds to the Old High German forms like bere,“lethim

carry.

the accenting of the beginning Of a word, or the throwing back Of the ac

centas far as possible, is considered the most emphatic, and thatwhich

imparts the greatest animation to the whole word (see p. 1084 G . ed.

1052 E . Hence follows a verypervading, though hitherto almost

overlooked, agreement of the two languages in the accentuation Of that

partOf speech which is formallyand significantlythe richest, viz . the verb(see p. 1086G . cd.

, 1054 E . A mostconvincing proof Of the emphasis

given byaccenting the firstsyllable is furnished bythe Sanscritinthis,thatitwithdraws this species Of accentfrom the passive, but allows itto

the m iddle Ofthe fourth class,though in sound thetwo formsare identical ;

thus, fuchydté compared with s'

fichyate‘

purificatf it also

deserves especial notice, with reference to th is point, that the oxytone

nouns Of agencyin tdr (nom . til), when theyare found as participles go

verning the accusative, and therefore, to use an expression employed byChinese Grammarians

, are changed from dead words to living ones, then

receive also the mostanimated accentuation hence,e.g.

, (Lita maglu‘ini,

‘

(he is)giving riches,’

opposed to datamaghd'

mim,

‘the giver of riches

'

(see A similar contrastitto be found in the Greek paroxytonc

abstracts in f or, as compared with the verbals in n ic, which correspond to

the Sanscritperfectpassive participle ; e .g .

, wo'

f or, the drinking,’

Opposed

to m 6r=Sanscritp ints,‘drunk

’

(see The two languages, when

theyaccentthe sufii x in the case before us, do not intend to layan em

phasis on the suffix, butrather to remove from the whole word the em

phasis, which lies in accenting the first syllable . In accordance with the

theoryhere laid down is also the circumstance thatthe Greek gives the

paroxytonc accenttothe interrogative m'

eupon the number Of its syllablesbeing increased, as in a question there is an increase Of animation which

we also mark byraising the voice ; while itoxytonises the indefinite prO

nounOfthe same sound, inagreementwith the Sanscritweak casesOfmono

syllabic base words (see p . 1085 G . cd . , 1 053 E . I cannotallow of a

logical


trasts with the Sanscrit nominative accusative dvdra - m

[G . Ed. p. the form dour ; so instead Of the Sanscrit

carry, the Gothic like baira i, and Greek like ¢époa Butinthe 1 st per

son singularmdrdit,“letme strike

”(atonce future and subjunctive), I

think I recognise the Sanscrit imperative terminationtini, with 12 there

fore for d, as above (p. 1 2 15 G . ed.) in the Maratha present. The Hindii

stani fails to distinguish the Sanscritterminations ami and tint, as bothhave

logical accenteithertothe Sanscrit(in simple words), nor to the

and I cannotsee a reason for the proparoxytonising of bddhdmi , I know,

’

bddlzdmas, we know,’

andthe oxytonisingOf t'

mds, we go (indisadvanta

geonscontrastto la w), inthis, thatin the first- named formsthe radicalsyl

lable, and inthe latter thepersonal syllable, should be broughtprominentlyforward as the mostimportant, butI think itrather owing tothe factthat

the mostanimated accentbelongstotheverb butofthis the form imds is,as itwere, cheated through the influencewhich, in Sanscrit, in disadvanta

geous contrasttothe Greek, the heavier personalterminations exercise, in

certain conjugational classes, on the removalof the accent. In forms like

stg'i admi,

‘ I strew,’

yund'

mi, I bind,’

the length Ofthelastsyllable butonehas, in disadvantageous contrastto the analogousGreek forms (crepvfipt,86am“)exercised a similar influence inattractingthe accentas thatwhicha long penultima exercises inLatin inwordsOfthree ormore syllables (seep. 1090G . cd . , p. 1057E . while inGreek itis onlyin the firstsyllablethatthe quantityhasgained a disturbing influence onthe originalaccentuation ; sothat, e.g. vjba

'

awstands In disadvantageouscontrastwhencompared

alike with the Sanscrit svadiydn (see p. 109 1 G. ed. p. 1058 E . Tr. and

with itsownneuter qdwv, as inthe dualOfthe Imperative (pepe’

m v, compared

with the Sanscritbhdratdm, and the 2 d persondu’

perov(=Sans. blab-

0mm).Besides the Greek, no other European member of our great lingual

familyhas remained constantto the Old system of accentuation, inwhichthe accentforms an essential partof grammar, and does its part in aidingto decide the grammatical categories. In Latin the kind of accentuation,

which

Denlowis of a differentOpinion,who, in hiswork, De l'

accentuation deslanguesIndO- EurOpéennes (Paris, p. 44 , EnSanscritl

’sccentaune sig

nification purcmentlogique, etil porte sur toute syllable que la pensée veutmettre en évidence etfsire ressortir da reste da mot, quelle que soit se dis

tance da commencementoude la fin de celui - cl. ”


contrasted, in Gothic, according to 356. Rem . 3 bindana ;

and we should have looked for forms Of this kind after the

difi cultyon account of its final 6. For it the Marfithi'

exhibits in the

imperative the form mdrd, which I think maybe explained from Sanscrit

forms like bo’dh- a - ta, knowye, so that, afier dropping the t

, the two

a sounds have coalesced as I also, in the 3d person singular of thepresent,

derive { é ichchhé ,“he wishes,

”from the Sanscrits

‘

ct - d- ti,bycasting

outthe t, and contracting the a- i to 4, according to Sanscrit rules. Cf.

Greek

to a fixed rule, st‘

imi, ‘two sons

’

(Lithuanian tuna), forms the vocative

trim? (see p. 1086 G . cd. , 1054 E . Atthe end Of the nextPartI shall

have much tosupplyregarding Sanscritaccentuation ; for inthe remark at

Iwould notgO back’to allthe formerparts ofthe Grammar, butonlylaydown the fundamentalprinciple, onwhich the mostremarkable agreements betweenthe Sanscritand Greek accentuation rest, and atthe same

time drawattention to the groundswhich have occasioned one or other of

the said languages to diverge from the original path, in which, in myopinion, the Sanscritand Greek meet. I shall also have some supplemen

taryremarksto Offer onsome points Of grammar andthe doctrine of sounds,as I have already, in the presentPart, pointed outsome alterations in for

mer views. In addition to what has been remarked atp. 1 138 Rem .

G . cd. , p. 1 104 Note 1' E. Tr.

, regarding the ch Of our pronominal accusa

tives mi - eh, di - eh, si- ch, and the Old High German h of the accusative

pluralunsi - h, iwi - h, I have since found a very interesting analogyin the

Afg_hfin, where, however, the h referred to, which I think I recognise in

hagha ,

‘the, this,

’

as sister- form Of the Sanscrit sdha, Védic edgha or

séyhd, Greek dye, has become declinable ; hence, in the plural, haglni , andin the fem inine singular nominative, haghé, the latter like dé, she,

’

con

trustedwith themasculine do, he,’ beinga softening ofthe Sanscritbaseta .

In the syllableya, too, Of ‘we,’

I think I recognise the said par

ticle, and in the remainingpartOf the word the Sanscritaccusative armdn,

funds, with the loss Of the firstsyllable, which is also dropped in the New

Persianmt‘

i, we,’

which, justlike shumti,‘

ye,’

is based on the theme of

the SanscritOblique plural cases (yuqhmdn, bade).

W 1 . Ewald, inthe“JournalOf Eastern Intelligence, IV. 300. K laproth

“Asia,

Polygl."p. 56, writesw ho .


preposition do, to, which governs the dative ; but we

find in this position also onlythe form in an. e. da sairan.

to sow,

"da bairan, to give birth to whether it be that

the preposition do originallygoverned the accusative, likethe Latin ad of cognate meaning. and the infinitive, atthis

more ancient epoch, remained unchanged, or that ithadlost its capability of declension in Gothic earlier than in

the other German dialects.879. In the Old and Middle High German, as also in

the Old Anglo- Saxon dative of the infinitive, the doublingof the n is surprising yet I cannottherebysee cause toderive the datives, and the analogous [G. Ed. p.

genitives Of the Old and Middle High German,i from

another base than that of the nominative accusative

of the infinitive, and to see in it a differentsuffix from the

Greek forms like du’

pct from map- c- rt=Sanscrit bhér- a - tt'

(see

In the 2 d person the formmy ichchltés=ichchlta is, compared with the

Sanscritichchh d - si,’

Is formed, in myopinion, bytransposition, justas, inGreek, du

’

pm from (pep - e- m=8anscritbhér- a - si (see 5. So also, in

the 3d personplural, ichchhétfrom ichchh - dntt'

, with, at the same time,

rejection of the a . If the Marathi can be held to throwlighton the

IIindiistfmi , which closelyresembles it, we mightregard the 6 Of HindI'

I

stfini forms likemdré, beatye,”asthe corruptionOf (i, justas, in Sanscrit,

W shédaian 16 for slzdgla ian, sédlmm,

“to carry,”for sddhum (see

“Abridged SanscritGrammar,”

1 02 . 2 28 . Rem . l

it See the examples mentioned above Old Saxon examples

are ,jaramie, blidz eanne, thdlonne Anglo- Saxon,faranne, récenne, gffi '

em

manna, see Grimm, I . 102 1 . In Gothic the form vigmma (da vigarma,

tic m ihepov, Luke xiv. even though not an infinitive,would be re

markable on accountof the doubled n, if the readingwere correct. It is

mosthighlyprobable, however, thatwe oughtto read vigana (see Gabel.and Liibe on I. The word belongs, however, in respectof its suffix of

f ormation, to the Sanscritclass ofwords in and, and is probablya neuter,

therefore nom inative accusative vigan.

tE . Old High Germantop énnes, ofraging MiddleHigh German

wt'inennes, Of weeping.

1 2 42 FORMATION OF WORDS

Sanscrit mm, of which we have just treated. I hold the

doubling of the n to be Simplyeuphonic, i . e. a consequenceof the inclination for dOIrbling n between two vowels hence ,

also, e. g. , in Old High German kunni (or chunni), in Old

Sclavonic Imnni , inMiddle High German kt’

inne, correspondsto the Gothic kum

’

, sex.

"The word is radicallyakin to

the Greek ye’

vog, Latingenus, and Védicjtinus(gen.jénush- as),birth and its formative suffix is ya (dat. pl.ya

- m),which is contracted in the nominative accusative Singular

to i (see It is impossible, however, that the

doubling of the n in this kunni, kii nne. &c.,should give oc

casion to those forms to assume a different formative suffix

from ya, of which more hereafter.

”

880. The originaldestination of the preposition z u, to,

before the infinitive, is to express the causal relation, whichis done in the Veda dialect bythe simple dative term ina

tion Of the infinitive base in In, or of some other abstractsubstantive supplying the place of the infinitive ; and for which,in classical Sanscrit, the locative of the form in one is also

frequently employed, as, in general, the locative in Sanscrit

is veryOften used for the dative. The Gothic, in its use of

the infinitive with da, keeps almost entirelyto the stated

fundamental destination of this kind of construction, in sen

[G . Ed. p. tenoes like “he wentoutto sow”

(da sa ian);he thathath ears to hear" (da hausyan); who made ready

to betrayhim da galévyan ina). It is, however, surprisingthatUlfilas too at times expresses the nom inative relationbythe prepositional infinitive ; e. g. , 2 Cor. ix. l . , 75ypé qtew

Thatthe Gothic, also, is not free from the inclination to double then between two vowels is shewn by f orms like uf - mnnnan,

“to think ;

ufar- munnén,“to forget (Sanscritman,

“to kinnn- s, jaw

bones =Greek ‘

ye'

w - s‘

, Sanscrit hand- II. In Sanscritthe final n after a

shortvowel, in case the word following beginswith anyvowelwhatever,is regularlydoubled ; c deann I

’

IIa, theywere here .

”


the Object, neither bythe verb nor bythe infinitive, but

which, as in the Greek text, expresses the relation in

respectof,"which relation is very frequentlydenoted by

the Greek accusative (midst; chads, tip/Java xahdg), but is

strange to the Gothic, except in the construction with theinfinitive . I regard the infinitive in such sentences in both

languages as the subject, and therefore as nom inative ;

and the verb, not as Gabelentz and LObe do (Gram .

p. 2 49. as impersonal, though we m ight translate itby“ithappened, it hefel, itbecame,

"&c. , but just as much

personal as when we, e. say, to sit is more pleasant

than to stand the rising up is seasonable, is now be

coming“to enter is easy.

“ That which is peculiar in

the Greek and Gothic constructions referred to is onlythatthe infinitive cannot, like an ordinaryabstract, govern the

genitive ; thattherefore, in Greek, e.g. , it cannotbe said,

7 08 Otipavoi} and 76; napehflei’

v, nor in Gothic kim ina yak

a irthds hindarleithan, butthat in both languages the personor thing to which the action whi ch is expressed by the

infinitive refers, must be placed in the accusative, sincethe infinitive admits not Of the nearer destination eitherbyan adjective or bya genitive, not even there where theGreek infinitive, byprefixing the article, is made more of

a substantive than of itself itis. Of the examples collectedbyGabel. and Ib be, l. c.

, the first, mirth afslauthann allans

(Luke iv. must appear the most surprising, since the

[G. Ed . p. Greek text(é'yéve-

ro Oéyfiog évri vrtiwag) fur

nishes no motive for a construction unusual in Gothic.In fact, the Gothic translation would appear veryforced ifearth here correspond in sense to our word, SO that itwould be requisite to translate literally, there was amaz e

ment(with reference to) all,”or amaz ement was (with

reference to) all.”

As, however, the Gothic oairthan, as

the said learned men have shewn in their Glossary. also


signifies to I here take allans as the accusative,

governed bya verb of motion (which , too, the Greek éye’

vero

in this passage is), and I translate literally, there came

amaz ement (over) all,"

or amaz ement fell upon all."

Moreover, in another quite sim ilar passage, Ulfilas finds it

suitable to translate the Greek évri m i l/rag bycan alla im, vi z .

Luke i . 65, yak vartk ana cllaim qgis (m i é‘

ye'

ve'

ro évri min ag

¢6fiog), and there came fear upon all.”

Itwould thereforebe wrong in this passage to translate vartk by

“

faclus est.

Of the Gothic examples, therefore, collected byGabelentz

and Lohefi of the infinitive with the accusative, letus dis

pense with the lst, which has justbeen discussed, and also

with the 5th (John xvi i i . because in itthe Gothic con

struction differs from the Greek, in that, as I doubtnot,the accusative ainana mannan is governed as the objeetivecase bythe transitive infinitive fraqvistyan, to destroy, to

slay,”l'

so thatwe have onlyfour examples leftwhich belong here. These are, Col. i . 19, in imma galeika id a aIla

fulldn bauan (év (2 6793eddéma’

e m'

iv 76whwj [G. Ed. p .

puma),“ it pleased the dwelling in him (in respect of) all

fulness (of all fulness); Luke xvi . 17, 12 k az étiz d ist himin

yak airlka hindarleithan tkau vilddis ainuna crit gadriusan,

(edxovré repov dé can rev odpavdv xai Trjv V5V Irapehfiefv 7 06

vépouI u'

av xepau'

avweeeiv), butitis easier to pass away(the

passing away)with respect to heaven and earth (=of hea

ven and earth) than to fall (the falling)with reference toone tittle of the law Rom . xiii . 1 1

, mél istunsyuus slépa

urreisan§ (dips: 77377 éfi'

ga vao é'yepfiiivac), Itis time (in

Remark the connection Of the Gothic root earth with the Sanscrit

rootvart, vrit, to go,”and the Latin certo (see Pott, E . I . , I .

1’ Gramm . , p. 2 49 . 5 .

1 Itis better to putone man to death for the people.

This passage is, in Gothic, so far ambiguous, that am maybe bothdative and accusative, especiallyas the dative more frequentlyoccurs in

constructions


reference to) for us now to rise (the rising) from sleep ;

Skeir. (ed . Massmann. p. gaddk nuvas thanz uk

gaqr issans vai rtkan,“it were therefore fitting, in respect

of this (the)being agreeing.

”Itbecomes a question, then,

is this kind of construction as itwere indigenous in the

Gothic, or only an imitation of the Greek 2” I believe

the latter ; and, indeed, because in Gothic the accusativeelsewhere never expresses the relation

“in respect of.

Moreover, Ulfilas gladly avoids this kind of construction,

as he shews. byfrequentlychanging the infinitive construetion of the original text into a verbal with the conjugation ci, that,

“or byusing, instead of the accusative of

the person, the dative , whether the relation be the proper

dative one or the instrumental. In the latter case he

follows, indeed, the Greek textword byword, but, bythe

change of the accusative into a dative, the construction

[G . Ed. p . becomes essentiallyaltered, and such thatwe , in New High German, also can,

without much con

straint, im itate it: e. Luke xvii i . 2 5, ratkiz d allis istulban

clantha irktha irkdnet/lids tha irhleitkm z thangabigamma in thin

dangardya gut/Is galeith an(edxoa é repovyap ear: xépnhov

eia eAOeiv for it is easier for the camel (the) passingthrough the eye of a needle, than for the rich (the) entering into the kingdom of God ; Luke xvi . 2 2 , u-

artk than

gasvillan thamma Imlédin (é‘

yéve‘

ro 33: &wofiavefv 75V m wxdv),

there was,however, dying through the poor man Luke

vi . 1 , vartk gaygan imma lka irh (d isk (é'yéI'e-

ro 8Ia 1ropet'

feafiac

0:6e Téiv n opc’

pwv),“there was going through him

through the corn- field.

"On the other hand, the Greek

constructions inwhich the Greek text exhibits the accusative with the

infinitive.

i t As regards the example in the Skeireins, I mustrecall attention to

the fact, that these were hardlycomposed originallyin Gothic, butmost

probablywere translated from the Greek .


co- ordinate, and stand in the relation of apposition to one

another (I saw h im"and falling,

”actionem

Itappears, however, from the context, but is not formallyexpressed, thatthe action expressed bythe second object is

performed bythe person orthing expressed bythe firstobject

(“I sawthe stone fall To this head belong, for the most

part, the examples collected byGabelentz and Lobe, p. 2 49

,un

[G . Ed. p. der of which I annex a few

Johnvi . 62 ,yaba i nugasailwith sunumansussteigan.“ifye shall

see the Son of man ascend up (edv adv Oewpfi-

te rc‘

wuidv 7 06

dvfipé vrou Matt. vi ii . 1 8, ka ika itgaleitkan sipdn

ydns kinder marein. he bade the disciples go over the sea ;

Mark i . 1 7, gatauya iqvis vairthan nutans manna, I wi ll

make youto become fishers of men, (Iranian: {4469 yevéaea cdh efg aivfipé mov); John vi . 10, vaurkeitk tkans mans ana

lcumbyan, make the men sitdown, (Ironja'

a‘

re rodsa’

vfipo’

nrovg

dvaneee'

fv); Luke xix. 14, mi vileim thana thiudandn afar

unsis, (of) Oéhopev Tofirov Bamhefiaac eqi winds). In the last

quoted example, and the others 1. c . , n. we cannot, in

deed, follow the Greek- Gothic construction ; we cannot

say, wir wollen nicht diesen herscken fiber ans, we wi ll

not this to reig n over us but I doubt not, that here

i The following are to be excepted from NO. Eph . iii . 6, where

cham ber, stands in the nominative relation, and the accusative of the

person expresses the relation in respect Of ;”

and 1 Tim . vi . 1 3, 1 4 ,

where, indeed, the infinitive fastan (mpfio-

at) stands in the accusative

relation, butthe accusative ”ml: (Ire) lies beyond the direction of the

verb , and likewise expresses the relation “ in respect of.”

Although

am binda, like the Greek wapayye’

hhw, governs the dative, nevertheless

Ulfilas skipsthe Greek 0m, although, in order notto express the 2 d per

son twice, he might aswell have omitted the less importanta t, which

accompanies the infinitive to express a secondaryidea, which is of itself

tolerablypatent. Ulfilas, however, appears to find a truer im itation of

the Greek construction in saying,“I give thee charge to keep (the keep

ing) in respectof thee the commandment, than in saying,

“I give thee

charge to keep the commandment.”


here also the accusative of the person, like that of the in

finitive , stands as Objectof the verb S ignifying to will, to

seek, to mean, to believe, to hOpe , to know, & c . The

Old High German still accords to this kind of constructiona tolerablyextensive use (see Grimm , IV. e. Notker,

er sik sagetkotsfn (“se deum ease Tat, ihweiz megin

fan mir I2 : gangan ( nevi virtufem de me eri isse Hymn. .

unsik erstanfan Icelaubaméa nos resurgere

884 . We now turn to a nearer exam ination of the Greekinfinitive, and must therefore first of all recall to remem

brance the point of comparison,which we have already

obtained (p. 1 2 2 3 G. ed.) between the Védic infinitives in

sé and theGreek inc an. Ifthis comparisonbe based on a sure

foundation, we have, in the term ination a : [G. Ed. p. 1 2 81 ]

of forms like N ew, rdxlrau, a genuine, and, as itwere, Sanscrit

dative termination, while the common Greek datives are

based on the Sanscrit locative (see It is the more

important to remark this, as all other Greek infinitives,

partly in their common form , and partlyin their oldest

form , end in ac, and therefore may be regarded as old

datives which are no longer conscious of their derivation

and their original destination to express a definite case

relation, and hence can be used as accusatives and

nom inatives, and, in combination with the article, as geni

tives also. Exactly in the sense of Sanscri tdatives (whichmostusuallyexpress the causal relation), and, as itwere,as representatives of the Védic infinitive datives li ke

pdtav- é,“in order to drink, on accountof drinking,

”appear

the Greek infinitives in sentences like Edwxev a il-td 806t(popficrau; a

'

vfipamog Ire'

dwxe ghee Cnrfiaac, on accountof the epai Ouopéwp iéva : évri rdv fiaathéa 06x

é'yc'

yvero 7d iepai (Xen. Anab. I I. 2 . As regards the for

mal developmentor gradual defiguration,we mustantedate

the form in e-

pevau(e.y. dxou- é-

pevac, ein- é-

pevac, fife- perm), as

a pointof departure for the infinitives in cw. and thatinpen/ac4 M


for the forms in vat(as ass- m , r ide- va c). Bydropping the

case- term ination a c, which had become unintelligible, there

arose from e-

pevat, firste-

pev (dxou- é—nev, eivr- é- nev, dfi'

é-

pev),

and hence, by casting outthe p, cm (E 01. dynv, Der. cv,

dyev) for e- cv. The conjugation in a: shews also, in the

common dialect, byforms like‘

rIOé- vac, iard- vac, dtdd- vac, dem

v6- va c, that the term ination at is essential to the infinitive

thus the perfect infinitives (re-

nup- é- va c), and the passi ve

aoristinfinitives, which, according to their form . belong to the

active (rq - Ov'

j- vac, m - ii- vac), exhibit however, in the epic

language, for the mostpartthe full form pevat.

[G. Ed. p. 885. As regards the origin of the forms

in perm , I formerlv thought(“COIIjugations- system , p. 85)of

deriving thisneva z from the suffix pevo=Sanscritmdna ofthe

participle m iddle and passive , so thata : would have taken the

place of the o of have like an adverbialterm ination. The de

rivation of an abstract substantive, which the infinitive is,

from a participle , could not be a matter of surprise ; but

itwould be strange, in the case before us, that the infini

tives in peva c, &c. . should be entirely excluded from the

m iddle and passive, with the exception of the aorists with ac

tive form . If the infiniti ves in neva c. pew, vac, v, belonged

to the middle or passive, their connection with the parti

ciples pet/o would, in myOpinion, be placed almost beyond

doubt: as active infinitives, however, I now prefer to de

rive them from the Sanscrit suflix man,which form s

abstracts (see and I place them as sister- form s

over againstLatin abstracts like cod a - men, sold - men, tenta

- men, regi- men (see p. 1083, the n of which, in

the Greek formations in par , is corrupted to 7 , which,however, does not hinder a particular branch of this fa

m ilyof words, vi z . the infinitives, from asserting its rightto a more ancientplace bya firm retention of the old n,

while the vowel has undergone the favourite weakening to

c. In Greek, therefore, the originally identical sufiixes


seas- a - mk, to stand, where the a is the classvowel, but

the mh, as has been already elsewhere remarked,‘ve ry

probably an abbreviation of mhuin, as the bases in n in

[G . Ed. p . the Gaelic languages in the nom inative

frequentlysuppress the n (cf. and, indeed, not un

usuallytogether with the vowel precedingxl'

886. Should the Greek infinitives in nev notbe abbrevia

tions of “even, but have originally cc- existed as different

case- relations, we must assume thatthe datives in p erm ,

which are formed according to Sanscrit- Zend principles,

have been simply designed to express the causal relation

(cf. and that the forms in nev, as naked neutral

bases, were appropriated to the designation of the accusative and nom inative relation ; that, however, after the mean

ing of the termination in nev- ac had been forgotten bythe

language, the forms in v and v- a I have been used indi ffe

rently bythe language . I here recall attention to the

displacementof personalterm inations, and their appearance

in places wh ich do not belong to in the Goth ic

passive (see as also of the exaltation of the accusative plural to the universal plural term ination in Spanish ;while in Italian the nom inative term ination plural has

been extended to all cases, but in Umbrian the ending of

the dative ablative plural, wh ich is more to the pointhere ,

has become the term ination of the accusative , which hencein the said dialectterm inates inf (= Sanscritbkyas, Latin

In English the pronom inal forms him and

whom , which, in their origin, are datives, and, bythe irm . correspond with the Sanscrit smdi of (63111415, gasmai, &c.

The Celtic Languages, p. 59 .

1'

Thus there exists, together with the abovementioned oll- a - mba ia,

instruction,”a concrete oll- a - mk (genitive oIl- a - mkan)

“a doctor.

"

I IntheGerman butitwillbe seenthatthis isawrong reference.

See Aufrechtand K irchhof, p. 1 13 ; and cf. , e. the accusative tri -jbu-f with the Latin dative tribus bobus and Sanscrittri - khyasyé - bkyas.


(see p. 485) have assumed an accusative meaning, and, in

order to express the dative relation, require the help of the

preposition to. As regards the infini [G . Ed . p.

tive in particular, it must further he remarked, that the

Védic infinitives in dhydi, which usuallydenote the causalrelation which belongs to their evidentlydative term ina

tion (see occasionallyoccur also with an accusativesignification. Thus we read in the Yajurv. 6. 3. m

’

zmasi

gcimadkydi , we will go.

"In Latin the infinitives in re, i f

the explanation given above be correct, have become altogether untrue to their original destination, and

appear only inthe accusative or nom inative relation ; whilethe Old Prussian infinitives in twei, which are likewise

known as dative forms, express onlythe accusative relation

(see p. 1 2 49 G .

887. In favour of the opinion, that the difference be

tween the Greek infinitives in v and vac is organic, so thatboth forms. which in the present condition of the language

are of the same significance, originally belonged to diffe

rent case - relations, we must allow weight to the circumstance, that in no other place of Greek Grammar do we

meet with an entire abolition of the diphthong onatthe

end of a word ; as in general, in other languages also, the

diphthongs do notadm it of be ing discharged so easilyas

the simple vowels, because, before their utter absorption,the path is open to them to surrender one of the two ele

ments of wh ich they are composed. Universally, where

the SanscritGrammar exhibits an6 (= a i , see 688. p. 9 17)atthe end of the inflexions, the Greek preserves either ac.

for example , in the medio-

passive personal term inations

(pa c, O'

a c, Ta c, wa c=a 36, M, a id), or oc, as in the plural nom i

nativcs Of masculine bases in o (e. 9 . Der. roc’=Sanscrit té,

Gothic tha i , see and in one single termination a ,

vi z . in the personal term ination ne0a=Sanscrit maké from

madké, Zend ma id/16 In general, the Greek per


[G. Ed. p. 1 2 92 ] tinaciously retains the final vowels, and

has notallowed the removal of anyof the Simple vowels

butthe lightestof all the primaryones, vi z . i, and this, too,butveryseldom, perhaps only in the 2 d person singular

of the principal tenses (scdw- g= dcid¢l- si , see while

in Latin and Gothic the i has disappeared from the per

sonal term inations : the Gothic, indeed, has even dropped

the entire diphthong ac in the dative S ingular, since the

Gothic singular datives, with the exception of those of

the fem inine pronouns, as has been pointed out above

(p. 500, 356. R emark are in fact void of term ina

tion,so that, e. sam e,

‘

ifilio. corresponds to the San

scrit mimic - é auksin (theme auksan) bow, to the Sanscrit

u'

lcskan- é.

888. Itremains for me onlyfurther to explain the Greek

infinitives of the middle and passive in adac, wh ich I th ink

I was b efore (p. 659, wrong in explaining. Theyshare the term ination acwith the active infinitives like AO

- aac, redrac, rcdé- vac, rcOfi-

pceva c, dxov- é - neva c, reru¢- é ccac. I

recognise the base Of the passive or m iddle signification in

the a , which I now look upon as the reflexive, the original0 of

wh ich has, in of}, oil3, become the rough breathing (see 34 1 .

p. butbefore 0 itoccupies such a position that itcould

reti re into a weak aspirate . Butif the sibilantof forms like

Aé'y- cc - Oac, ride- adm , belongsto the reflexive, these forms are,

in this respect, based on the same principle as the Latin like

amari - er, legi- er (see In general, a passive or

m iddle infinitive, which was unknown to our great fam ilyof languages in its primazval period, would have been the

easiestand mostnaturalto acquire byaffixing the reflexive ,as the Lithuanian, too, transfers to the infinitive also the s

appended to its reflexive verbs, e. g. , wadinti - s, to name

oneself (see 476. p. Similar is the procedure of the

[G . Ed. p. Northern languages, in which the reflexive,

in forms li ke the Swedish toga - s, to be taken (from (aya.


Ter6¢(a)- 0ac,‘rc

’

m -O'

ea - flac, or“rc'

rr re- O'flac, &c. The rootOrr

dkcl of the auxiliary verb is in these compounds repre

sented simplybyits consonant; for the diphthong ac is, as

in the active infinitive, a case - termination, where we must

recall attention to the circumstance, thatthe Sanscrit root

also, d hcl,“to set, to make,

"which corresponds to the

Greek (from as also all other roots in a when theyappear without a formative suffix as adjectives of common

gender at the end of compounds, drop their final vowel

before case - term inations beginning with a vowel ; and

hence, from dhd, placing, making,

" comes the dative d he

(= dha i , Greek Oac). The rootdlcd appears as an abstract

substantive of the fem inine gender in trad- dial, be

lief,“

properly, belief- placing,

"or b elief- making, the

dative of which, according to the universal principle of

feminine bases in long a, is i rad- dhdydi . In compoundswith prepositions other naked roots in 4 also occur as

abstract substantives, e. d-jiid and command,"

prati-fiid, promise,

”

pra- bhd, lustre.

”c d, in the Vii-d ie

dialect, with the preposition a i , forms nidkcl (see Benfeywhich should properly signify laying down,

"but

has become an appellative with the meaning net."

As

the root dha enters combinations more easilythan otherroots, and is suited foruse as an auxi liary,1

'

the conjecture

[G . Ed . p. 1 2 95 .] is not far fetched that it also has its

share in the formation of the Védic infinitivcs in a dhycli

discussed above whether it b e that this dhycli be

8 The accumulation of consonants dislodged this rcflexive according

to the analogyof 643.

1’

Cf. Zend xyebkwa yac‘

isclc- dci , to make purify"

M al/ca , to make wash”

(p. Latin ven- (Io Greek ahfi- flco

(Pott, E . I . , p . nip- 0c». The first part of nip

- 0c» answers to the

Zend pare,“to annihilate (see Burnouf, Yarn. p . 634, and Benfey, Gr.

R . L. 1 1 . p. 362 whereto belong also the Latin per- do and per

- co (as

ven- do compared with ven- co).


an abbreviation of dkay- di , as dative of dkcl, or thatthe aof the root in this composition has been weakened to z

‘

, for

which the weight added bycompounding mayeasilyhave

given occasion.

”The strictlyfem inine dative term ination

as, of infinitives like p z’

b- a - dkydi would be better establishedaccording to this, than if, according to an earlier attempt

at explanation, dhi were taken as formative suffix, and the

db as a distortion of t; as the fem inine bases in short i . inthe dative, more frequently exhibit ay- é than y- ai , while

polysyllabic fem inine bases in I”, and in general those in a .

long final vowel, never exhibit8, butonlydz“

, as the dative

character. But i f in the Védic infinitives in dhydi is in

volved the root dhd, and in the Greek in a - Gac the corre

sponding rootOn, there arises hence a remarkable affinityof

formation betweenum? yaj—a - dhycli , in order to venerate ,”

and dC—e- ada c, wh ich is also radically identical with it(cf.Ind. Bibl. III . which, however, could not induce me

to recognise, with Lassen, in the Védic forms the infinitive

of the m iddle ; for in the first place theywant the sibi

lant, which is so important an element [G . Ed. p.

in the Greek medic-

passive infinitives ; and secondly, theVeda - texts which have intermediately appeared have not

furnished uS with the means of perceiving anynearer rc

lation Of the forms in cllcydi to the m iddle. I should prefer to regard the possible affinityof formation of the San

scrit and Greek infinitives in dlcydi , 0 in no other

Cf. the passives, as dict-yaw, p i

-ycité, for dha- ydté, pfi-ya’

té. I here

further call attention to the Védic dki ,“work, action, which Occurs,

Naigh . 2 . under the words signifying kccrman,“action,

”and perhaps,

as such, is to be referred,notlike dict, und. rstanding, to the rootdkyc

‘

c'

i,

to think, but, as an anomalyof another kind, to dkc‘

i , to make .

”Al

though, then, this dki , as a monosyllabic word, forms, in the dative, dlu'

ye

or dkc’

yai , this does notpreventthe supposition thatit, in a primmval, as

itwere privileged composition,mayfollowthe principle of the polysyllabicfeminine bases in f, and may, after the analogyof nadydi, form also dkyci i .


lightthan this, thatthe two languages, after their sepa

tion, accidentallycoincided in an analogous application in

the infinitive Of a mutuallycommon auxiliaryverb ; which

can little surprise us, as this verb is well fitted in signifi

cation to enter combinations with other verbs, and to oh

tain the appearance of inflexions ; and hence it occurs also

in other members of our great fami ly of languages in

compounds more or less obscured. If, however, this auxi

liaryverb was once gained in Greek for the infinitive of

the middle and passive, and, in its obscured nature, had

once assumed the function of an inflexion,then the rootOH

combined itselfwith itself in combining with a - fla c, just as,in the aorist and future, with fln- v, On- oopal .

889. We have one more Sanscrit gerund to speak of,

which indeed,as such, stands isolated in Sanscrit, but,

with respectto its formation, presents many coincidenceswith the European sister- tongues ; I mean, the gerund in

ya .

”Its signification is the same with that in tva, but it

occurs almost onlyin compound verbs ; while in the pre

sent condition of the language, as itappears to me, ted, on

accountof its heavier form, avoids verbs encumbered with

[G . Ed. p . prepositions. The following are examples

of gerunds in It ya : a i - dka'

ya.“after (with, through)

laying down anu- s'

milga , after hearing nir-

gamya ,

after going out ni - visiya , after going in ; prati- bhidya .

after cleaving d - tcidya. after impinging. I also consider these gerunds as instrumentals, and, indeed, accordingto the Zendian principle (see so that, therefore, e.ynidha

'

ya stands for nidhdyd, from ni—dhdya - d. I have al

ready expressed this opinion in the Latin edition of mySanscritGrammar (p. and found it confirmed since

then through Fr. Rosen'

s edition of the firstbook of the Rig

li Rootswith a shortfinalvowel receive the aflix of a t. The accent

restsonthe radical syllable.


bases of abstract substantives like diub- ya, theft, from

diub(a)—s, thief (see unléd-ya, povertv,

”from un

lécKa)- s, poor galeik- ya, resemblance,

"

from galeilc(u)- s,like Icnvit- ya , ignora nce,

"

from auvil(a)- s, foolish

kaukisf- ya, height,“from hauhisl(a)- s, the highest.

In the nom inative accusative, according to 1 53 the a of

the suffix ya is suppressed, and y vocalised to i ; hence ,diubi . anledi , &c. The following are Latin abstra cts of this

kind mendar- ia - m. artific—i a - m , princ ip- ium, consort- ia - m,

jejun'

- ia - m . conviv'

- iu- m . This class of words is more

scantily represented in Greek by forms like povoya’

xi

- co- v,

fleonpén’- cc - v. There belong,however, alsoto this class, though

with theirmeaning perverted, words like ép-

yae'

njp- co- v, duca

crnjp- co—v, Ana-

rrjp- co- v, vavmjy- ao- v ; and from bases in eu such

as rpo¢e?o- v, xovpefo- v,with, as itappears, digamma suppressed ,

for rpo¢éF- co v, xovpéF- co- v.

89 2 . InOld Sclavonic corresponds the neuter suffix Int I'

ye

(euphonic for iyo, see 2 55. n., p. so thatthe vowel corre

spondingtothe semi~vowelis alsoprefixedto it,while, however,

[G . Ed. p. inRussian itis wanting ; BECEAHK vesnliye,’

“joy,

“

(Russian Rec I ie cesefc’

e) from BECEA'

b eesel‘

, joyful.

Abstracts in Annie anigo, mule cuige, tunicyeniye, Tme tigle,

are formed with the suffix under discussion from the perfect

passive participle in a sim ilar manneras inOldHigh German

are formed e.g.farld z ani'

, abandonment,”eru-

elila‘

, choice,

”

with the fem inine form ofthe suffix 1 ! ya , outof the partici

ple belonging to the conjugation ofthe verb referred to ; e. g

“annals cknyaniye,“expectation,

”from “am": ckayan

’

, he

expects Mus eums yarleuiye,“unveiling,

“from lass em .

ym-Ien

’

,

“he discovers nu'rme piliye, the drinking,

”from

m I'r'

b pil’

, drunken.

” With this suflix are formed also

collectives in the Sclavonic languages as in Sanscrit; e. g. in

See Miklos.

,Radices, p. 8 . Dobrowsky(p. 2 83)writes BEIEM E,

and similarlyin the other examples given 2 82 of this class ofwords.


Russian apeRIe drevie, manytrees, from apeso drevo, a

tree . So in Sanscritkaisya - m, hairs,“from hair.

“

893. In Lithuanian, which has lostthe neuter gender of

substantives, the class of words under discussion has be

come masculine ; and then, according to 1 35, the syllable

ya is contracted before the nominative sign 3 to i, and the

final vowel of prim itive bases, as in the sister- languages,

is suppressed ; and thus, with regard to the nom inative, itappears as though the simple change of a or a into i couldform an abstract from an adjective . Cf. e.g

yéJ - i - s, blackness, with yéda - s, black ;ilg

'- i - s, length,

”with I

'

lga- s, long ;

karsz ti

- i - s, heat, with karsz ta - s, hot;

sz alt‘- i - s, coldness, with sz alta - s. cold ,

auksz t'

- i - s. height, with auksz la - s, high ;rc

'

cgsz t’- i - s, sourness, with rc

'

cgsz- tu- s.

“sour

daug- i - s, multitude,"with “

dang,”

many,"indecl.

In several of the oblique cases the a ofthese abstracts, which

is suppressed in the nominative, is, bythe euphonic influenceof the preceding i , changed to e (of. 157. p. 174, Note

I

),hence, e. ilgie

- ma. longitudinibus," compared with iIga - ma,

lungis.” Prim itive abstracts also are formed in Lithu

aninubv the suffix ia , euphonic ie, nom inative i - s : thesecorrespond, therefore, exclusive of their vocalisation of the

semi - vowel to i . tolerablywell to the Sanscrit gerundialbases in ya , e. piil

- i - s, fall"

(pfdu, I fall ncusz - i - s,

blow (musz cc, I sm ite kandi - s, bite (kandu, I

894 . The fem inine form of the suffix itya , v i z . 1 11 yd,

forms prim itive abstracts with the accent on the sq ix ; e..y.

vrajyd,

‘‘

travelling”

eidyd, knowledge ; fag/yd,”

the

s From {If -yd, with irregular Guna ; as, e.g.,in cié - rac. The y

of the suffix acts like a vowel, hence ayfor


lying. Hereto admirably correspond Gothic abstract

feminine bases in yd (d= a. nom inative ya or i

for example, vrakya, pursuit (gen. rrakyd- s), corresponds

also radicallyto the before - mentioned m emjyd, with a

tenuis for a medial. according to 87. T he other abstracts

of this formation which have been retained to our time

are, brakya , strife,"

(properly, breach kro‘

pc’

, cla

mour ;“ha iti. command uwandi,

“environs. Observe,

that erakya , brakya. and us- vandi (gen. usvandyci - s). have

retaine d the true radical vowel, and hence correspond, not

to the weakened present (crika, Irrika , rinda), but to the

[G . Ed. p . monosyllabic forms of the preterite . So

bandi , band, fetter fdlu- bandi ,“leg

- iron ; 01 1 the other

hand, ga - kincli. band,“with the extremest vowel- weaken

ing of the present, and ga- bundi , id. , with the m iddle vowel

weight of the polysyllabic forms of the preterite and per

feetpassive participle. An inorganic extension of the base

with n (see is found in ratk-

ycl(gen. ydn- s), reckon

ing, account; sakyé, strife ea ih- yé'

, contest (veiya ,

“I ga

- run-

ycl, overflowing"

(rimm , rmm ,

c

run

num).895. In the Sclavonic languages the class Of fem inine

abstracts, which in Sanscrit is formed direct from the root

bythe suffix 111 yd . is prettynumerouslyrepresented : it

ends in old Sclavonic in the nom inative in la ya ; e. g. ,

ROMA volya,“will;

”fl i EA lA sckelya,

“mourning ;”k oyna la

kcfplya (A euphonic), business.

”InLithuanian the a - sound

The contraction of ya to i occurs, if preceded bya naturallylongvowel, or one long byposition, or if one simple word of more than one

syllable precedes (cf. 135 . &c. , Gabel. and Liibe, p. The latter

case, however, does notoccur in the class of wordsunder discussion.

‘

f Cf. the Gothic rootsak,from say, according to with the &In

scrit liq sa‘

l‘

jj,“afi gcre,

”with abki maledc

'

c‘

cre, oly’

ur

gore abkc'

skanga- s, according to I

‘Vilson, l .

“a curse or imprecation,

"

0 “anoath

,3.

“defeat,"4 .

“a false accusation, &c.


the above - mentioned Gothic bases in yon, nom ina

tive yd thus con- tngicl.- ic}n- is, susp icid, obsidio

'

. ambagici ,

cup id, as in Goth ic rathyd. genitive rathydn- s, &c. III Greek

« 1 corresponds as exactlyas possible to the Sanscrit 1 11 yd,

but is, however, in the primary formation, but ratherweakly represented. The following are examples : nevc

'

a ,

yavc’

a . dyaprc’

a , a’

cpnhaxc'

a . In verbs in euw(see which

especiallyfavour this kind of formation of the abstract, the v

is lostbefore the suffix, but probablyfirstpassed. on account

of the vowel following, into F; thus, e. g. , dpcm ec'

a from

cipco-

rc'

a . More frequentis the appearance of the suffix co'

c

(e-

ca)as a means of formation of denom inative abstracts, in

forms like edda cpov- c'

a , Ii - c'

u, paxap—c’a , a

’

cvdp- c'

a . crocfi- c'

a .

xa cc’- c'

a . daN- c'

a , dweh’

a’

a .- c

'

a . arpam'

y’- c'

u, &Arjfleca ,‘

[G . Ed. p. 1303 ] d'

voca (a’

voi

- ca). To these denom inative ah

streets correspond in Latin, such as capac- ia . feroc- c

'

a. in

fant- ia. prresent- ia , inert- ta , concord- ia , imp

- ta. perfid’- ia .

superbi

- ia , barbar’- ia pauper

- fé- s, barbari

- is - s ; {af

id(n), commun'

rebelf

897 . The Old High German has in all cases, except the

genitive plural (heilci - n- cl for keilyd—n- d see dropped

the vowel of the Sanscrit bases in yd. which the Gothichas surrendered onlyin the nominative singular under the

circumstances stated above 894 Note and has changed

The bases in or (see lose their final consonant, as in the

oblique 08 808 ; thus, dhfifleca from cihq deo - uc, as dhqflé—os from dhqflea - os.

The combination of the c of the suffix with the preceding 6 or 0 of the

base word is the occasion of shortening the final a . The Homeric canoes,

also testifies to the original length of the a of such formations. In ana

logywith the phenomenon thatbases in s suppress this consonant beforethe sufi x ca, is the phenomenon that bases in n, in Sanscrit, suppress not

onlythis consonant, butalso the preceding vowel before vowels and the yof a derivative suffix hence, e. g . ,

raj -ya - m, kingdom"

(Gothic rec'

k- i ,

theme rec’

Ir-ya ,“dom inion, from rec

'

k(a)- s, ruler, supreme for

rcgjan- ya - m,from rcy

'

an, a king.


the sem i - vowel into the corresponding long vowel (seeGrimm ’

s 2 d strong decl. to which, in the dative plural,the case - signm(or n)is attached.

‘ To this class belong nearlyall the words of Grimm’

s 2 d declension feminine of the

strong form (I. p. which, like the Gothic 3d weak deelension fem inine, with the exception of the formations in nissi.conta ins almost only abstracts, which have been formedfrom adjectives (participles included), with the suflix cor

responding to the Sanscrit1 11 yd as, e. [G. Ed. p. 1304]

ckalt'

- c‘

. cold, warm'

- c‘

. warmth,"half - c

”. height,

“half - f.

grace, ndk’- i'

, nearness.“

scdn'

q‘

. fairness. beauty,”

snozi

- i'

, sweetness,"

stiff - f,“stillness. tinf - i

'

, depth,rot

'- I

‘

. redness.”marz

’- i'

. blackness. from the adjectivebases ckalta. cold,

"wanna, &c. I call especial

attention to the abstracts arising from passive participles,

corresponding to the Sanscrit in ta and na, and formed

with the suffix under discussion, which, irrespective of

gender, accord with the Sclavonic abstracts mentioned

above as, nn'rnle p itiye,“the drinking sum mit

ckayaniye, expectation.

"The following are examples of

Old H igh German abstracts ofthiskind er- welif - f.

“choice,”

e fr- u'

elcsaldt'

- i'

, alternation.

"

vir- terkinét'- i'

, pretext,"

var

bi z ani

- i'

, abandoning.

”ar- kaban

'

- c‘

. elevation, érist- pman’- i'

,

primogeniture,"from the participial bases erwelita (nom .

- ter), &c. , varldz ana (nom .- nér), &c. The formations in nf

(Grimm , II. 161 . are much more numerous than those

I conjecture thatthatis long also in the dative plural, thus heiIi - m, as

the long vowels maintain themselves better before a final consonantthan

atthe end of a word . Compare the conjunctive forms like dz c’, opposedto daft

,dz fn (see 71 1 . p.

1 Nom . masc. clca Itt- r, warmé - r, with the pronominal afl'ix of the

strong declension (see p. 868, 2 88 . Rem . Atthe beginning of com

pounds stands either the true base in a,or, and indeed more generally,

the base mutilated bythe removal of a e mikc’

la - motand mikkil’- mot,

magnanimous”(Graff. I 1 . Of thismore hereafter.

4 N


in tc‘

(Grimm II . but both spring from scarce anysource but compound participles. Italso deserves notice ,

that such formations are lim ited to the Old and Middle

High German. with the exception, perhaps, of the Old

Northern um—géngni, conversatio,”mentioned by Grimm

(p. I should notwish the abovementioned remark

able coincidence between the German and Sclavonic to be

so interpreted as thatanyshould found on itthe conjecture

of a Specialaffinitybetween these languages ; for since the

Sanscrit suflix 1! ya . fem inine 1 11 yd, as a means of forma

tion of denominative abstracts in the European languages

[G . Ed. p. 1 305 ] has been universallydifl'

used. it is not in

the least surprising that the Sclavonic and High German

usually coincide in this point, that they have used thissuflix also for the derivatives from passive participles. It

m ight be possible thatthe Latin abstracts also in tidn, sidn,

were not formed, as has been before remarked (see p. 1 195

G. byan extension of the suffix ti , but have been de

rived from the passive participle with the aid of the idn

discussed above ; thus, e. g. , coct’

from cod a - s, mot'

- ic7(n)from mate - s, miss

'

- id(n)from m issus, orbdt'- id(n)from orbdlu-

s,

as above (p. 1303 G. commun'

c n) from communi - s. en'

io(n) from unu- s, as in Old High German crueliti

- i'

from

898. It scarcelyneeds mention thatthe e of our abstractslike K c

’

ilte, cold War-me, is the corruptionof the i

'

of the analogous High German abstracts, as in

generalnearlyall vowels in the final syllables ofpolysyllabi cwords have. in New High German, and the majority so

early as in Middle High German. been weakened to e.

Withoutattention, however, to the intermediate stages, it

would have been impossible, in words like K alle, Grease,Lc

’

inge, cold, greatness, length to recognise an affinityof formation with the Sanscrit bamjyd.

“traflic (from

bana’

j,‘“trader and collectives like yavyd,

“a number of


Hence, height; diup'

depth ;lagg

'

length ; bra idi

breath manag'

multitude ; magatk’

virginity,"

napfiev’

- c'

a , from

the bases has/ca (nom . m . hanks). &c . , and the substantive

base magatki (nom . magatks). Moreover, from weak verbal

themes in ya (Grimm’

s lst conjugation) spring abstract

bases in ein, in which the verbal derivative in ya $ 3 1 1

scrit aya) is dropped before the abstract suffix ein hence ,

e. g. , ga- aygv hemm ing in.

”from ga

- aggeya , I nar- u

row ; ba irkt'

announcement, from ba irhtya , I an

[G . Ed . p. nounce caia - mér burthening,

”

from va ia - merya, I burthen.

"

1' The inorganic n of this

class of words occurs also occasionally in Old High Ger

man, buthas here atthe same time found its way into thenominative (see Grimm . I .

899. With the suffix ya , fem inine yd, future passive par.

ticiples also are formed in Sanscrit, which , for the mostpart,accentthe radical syllable, but some the suflix, with the

weaker accent(Svarita). The latter kind of accentuationoccurs only in roots which terminate in a consonant(including the syllable ar, which is interchanged with w

In departure from I now think that the cases in which the

Gothic ec'

n corresponds to the Sanscrit feminine character 3oughtto be

limited to the classes of words mentioned in since in the sf of the

class ofwords here discussed we must recognise a contraction ofyd, after

the analogyof the conjunctives ; such as ti - ei - ma ,“we ate =Sanscrit

ad-yé - ma , Latin cd - i - mus 71 1 . p.

1 There are in Old High German also verbal abstracts of this kind,

onlythatthe inorganic n is dropped ; e.g . , mend - i , joy,”from mendia,

gaudeo (cf. Sanscrit mand, touf’- i'

, baptism,

"from

toufiu, I baptiz e.

”Observe, that in Sanscrit also the character of the

l0th class and of the causal forms is suppressed before certain formative

suflixes, while properlyonlythe final a of aya ought to be suppressed

(sec e.g ., before the gerundial suffix ya, with which we are

here mostconcerned, ayisusuallysuppressed ; e.g . ,ni - edd -ya, after the

givingup,”for ni- véd- ay-ya .


and which are either long bynature (length by positionincluded), or are in this class of words, to which also belongappellatives, which, according to their fundamental mean

ing, are future participles, augmented byGuna or Vriddhi }

At leasta, i . e. the heaviest of the simple vowels, beforetwo consonants in this class of words admits a different

kind of accentuation ; whence it is clear that the language

here seeks to avoid the combination of the greatestvowel

weightwith thatof the strongestaccentin one and the same

syllable . The following are examples : gahya - s, celandus ;"

gfihya - m, subst. a secret {dye - s.“cele [G. Ed- p

brandus s'

di isya - s, laudandus ddhya - s, mulgendus (rootduh); (friéya - s,

“spectandus

”

(rootJars, (iris, see chéya - s,

colligendus“

(rootchi); stdvya—s and stdvyb—s, Iaudandus

bhqz’

yc‘

z - s, bhéjyb- m, subst. food (root bhuj)

pdchyb—s, coquendus (root pach) ni - vdryd- s. arcendus

(rootvar, vO

ri . cl vdkyd- m , discourse,

"

as to be apo

ken kdryd- m, business,

"as to be done (rootIrar, Jeri);

kharya, a spouse,"as

“to be supported, to be cherished

(rootbhar. bhf i); Zend hq xf; vahmyd (theme - ya), ia

rocandusffl' To these adm irablycorrespond some Gothic

In the technical language Of grammar this participial suffix, in case

it accents the Svarita, and provided the radical vowel is augmented, is

called « itpyat.

1‘ From the denominative vahmayémi , with the suppression of the cha

racter of the loth class ; as in Sanscrit, e.g ., ni - rdryd - s

,

“arccndus,

” from

ni - vdr- dyd - mi . NO formal Objection can be raised to the explanation

given byBurnouf (l. c. p . according to which vahmya would come

direct from the base vahma , invocatio.

”I prefer, however, thata form

which evinces itself byits signification to be a future passive participle

should be also formallyso explained, inwhich, as is shewn bythe analo

gous forms in Sanscrit, there is no difficulty. Neriosengh, too, regards

x gggeyxlp vahmya, as also the yaénya which accompanies it, ofwhich

hereafter, as the future passive participles (Burn. , p . and translates

the former bysu- namaskaraniya bans and the latter by

drddhaniya


adjective bases in ya, which , as has been alreadyelsewhere

remarked, are to be sought in Grimm'

s 2 d adjective de

clension of the strong form (in Gabel. and LObe, p .

Here we find the bases anda - nem- ya. agreeable.w

properly.

“accip iendus unqvéth

-

ya , inexpressible (rootgoath, qvitha ,

goath, qfvéthum); anda - sétya , contemptible, horrible

"

(root

sat. to S it,"

sita, sat, sélum, and- sat, to be bashful”)akeir- ya , clear, plain,

intelligible"

(gaskcir- ya .

“I explain

[G . Ed. p. 1309 ] un- nut- ya. useless,“

properly, unenjoyable (rootnut, to obta in, to enjoy,

"niuta, nant, autum) ;

braids- ya, serviceable un- brfik—ya,“unserviceable riur—ya ,

destructible, perishable, transitory”

un- riur- ya .

imperishable , ddxdaprog (riurya ,

“I wit-

ya,“m ild,

"

properly, gustandus is identicalwith the Sanscritsvdd -

yc‘

z - s

of d - ssdd -

yc‘

z -

s,“

gustandus,h “

jucundi and akin to

svddIZ- s.“sweet (Greek 1386-

53 Old High German snesi,

sweet,“in the uninflected form), theme suoz ia=Gothic

sfilya . Among substantives, the neuter base basya, berry

(n. a . besi), belongs to th is class, i f itcorresponds, as I conjeeture itdoes, to the Sanscritbhdksh-ya—m, food,

"

properly, to

be eaten”(from bhalrsh, to eat,

”Greek and has

lost the guttural of the root. in the same way as, e. g. , in

Zend, the Sanscrit aleshi, eye, has been abbreviated to

ashi . In the Old High German beri (theme berg/a), the s has

become r, as, e. in u-drumés, we were Gothic resum .

Remark—The theoryof the nominative singular of the adjective basesinya, feminine ya, admits, now thatwe have before us the remains of

the Gothic translation of the Bible in von Gabelentz and Lebe’

s edition,

and, moreover, the Skeireins edited for the first time byMassmann

, of

From the rootnam (nima, nam, ne‘

mum). W ith regard tothe lengthening of the radical a to é (=Sanscrita

'

, see in this and analogous

forms, compare Sanscritforms likepdchyd- s, coqumdus.

”

1 Rootsvad (seem inglyfrom m . well,”and ad

,

“to eat

“gustare,

middle “jucunde capers.


suffix ya , has occasioned the suppression Ofthe suffix in the nom inative

(cf.

[G . Ed . p. 131 1 .] 900. The Lithuanian also has som e re

mains of the future passive participle under discussion, but

i V. Gabelentz and Lobe (Grammar, p. 74)assume, in the class of ad

jectives here spoken of,bases in i, though, with respectto the correspond

ing substantive declension, theyagree with me that the same conta ins

bases in ya . IV

ith regard to the adjectives,however, the cognate lau

guages, and the Oblique cases of the Gothic itself,speak justas emphati

callyin favour of the proposition thatthe bases of Grimm’

s 2 d declension

of the strong form end in the masculine and neuter inya, and inthe fem i

nine inyo‘ —Sanscrityd), whence, according to 137. we shouldhaveya

in the nominative . The agreementofm'

uyi - s, nevus,

”niuya,

“nova

with the Sanscritndvya - s,uévyd, andthe Lithuanian nauya s

,nauya, and

that of midyi - s, midya, with the Sanscrit médhya - s,mcfdhyd, and Latin

media - s,media

, speaks verydecidedlyagainst the Opinion that the yof

the Gothic forms is an insertion (l. c. p. 75,d. Justso theyof the

base aIya (nominative, mostprobably, alyi - s) is identicalwith the Sanscrityand Latin 5Of anyd - s

,aliu- s I cannotallotto this class fem i

nine nominatives in s, as the feminine bases, which in Sanscritterm inatein d, have, from a period so earlyas thatof the identityof languages, lost

the nom inative sign (see I regard, therefore, the forms brI‘

iks,

serviceable,”séls, good, and chef" , clear,

”although in the passages

where theyoccur theyrefer to fem inine substantives (1 Tim . iv. 8, 1 Cor.

xi ii . 4, Skeir. IV. as masculine nom inatives, which, in consequence of

a peculiarityof syntax, represent adverbially, aswe use uninflected ad

jectives (er is! gut, sic istgut, he is good, she is the nominative

of thatgender, whatever itmaybe, to wh ich the substantive referred to

belongs. Thus, as has been elsewhere shewn (Nalus, 2 d Edit. , p. in

Sanscritthe masculine nom inative singular Of the present participle may,by an abuse, refer to anygender or number, in sentences like bhdimi

sdntvayan ardeha , Bhaimi spake flattering”

(for stintvayanti); and,in like manner, in Ulfilas (Rom . vii . the masculine participial basenimanda, taking,

”refers to the feminine substantivef mvaurhts, sins,

”

towhich, in the verysame passage, also the masculine aam'

s,dead

,

refers : inuvitdthfi avaurhts vas navis,withoutthe lawsinwas dead .

The actual fem inine nom inatives Of bra/cs, &c. , could scarcelybe aught

else thanM M, self, chei'

rI’

, according to the analogyof substantive forms,with


onlyina substantive form . To this class [G. Ed. p.

belong walg- i - s(from walg- ya - s, see food,

"as tobe

eaten (walgau, I éod - i - s word,"as to be spoken

(cf. éad- a - s speech,” éadu I prom ise,

”Sanscrit gad, to

speak In Latin, em- im - ia - s. properly=erimeadus, is, se

cording to its signification, the truest remnantof this classofwords. Formally, gea

- i - us also, and ia -

gen- ia-m , belong to

th isclass. To the latter corresponds, in rootand formation,

the Gothic neuter base lam -

ya, nom inative Jami, sea .

"

In Greek, d’

y—co-

g (originallyakin to corresponds to the

Sanscrit ydj-

ya- s. veneraadus.

"From a Greek point of

viewthe following are more plain : may q Iiy- Ia-

g. wci 'y- Io-

g. IIéM a ,

“ball”as

“to be thrown,"is to be derived, I

conjecture, from waxy/a , byassim ilation,‘ in the same wayas

miMw from wahyw, but with this di fference, thatwhile the

2 d Aof”w e is based on the Sanscritcharacterya of the 4thclass,1

~and hence is excluded, e. g. , from the abstractwa

’

Ao—g.the A ofwaiM a corresponds to the llyof the participialsuffix under discussion. Ile

'

IM a , therefore, and d w, with

regard to the consonantwhich follows the root, have just as

little in common as, e.. .g in Sanscrit, labh-ya- s. deside

with a long penultims, as hrép i, clamour (see 894 . Note).

Such a form have we than actuallyexisting in the, of its kind, unique

adjective form véthi,“gram

”

(nom . masc. probablyvéths),where itis im

portantto remark, that, inthe single passage where itoccurs(2 Cor. i i .

itdoes notstand,like the masculinesbrake, séls, skeirs, which representin

the before - mentioned passages the feminine, as predicate, butas epithet,

we are untoGod a sweetsavour of Christ”(Christaus daunssiyum vélhi

goda). I do not believe thatUlfilas could here havewritten odths for

véthi and I consider the latter form as feminine nominative in the said

passage entirely free from suspicion, provided theunciteable masculinenominative be oéths, or, according to the analogyof salts, oéthis (cf. Gabelentz and LObe, 1.

9 See p . 41 4, G. cd . , 300.

1 See (3. 501 .


randus, and lIibh- ya - té. desideral I agree with G . Curtius

(“D enom inum Graecorumformatione, p. 6 1) in referring to th i s

class also thOf- d- Io-

g and a’

pté - d- Io-

g, as also éx‘

rd- d-

Ia-

g. The

inserted 8 maybe compared with the twhich, after shortvowels, is pr efixed to the Sanscritgerundial suffix 1: ya , or,

which is here more to the purpose , with that of som e ap

[G . Ed . p. pellatives, wh ich, according to thei r fundam ental meaning. are future passive participles ; as, chi - t

ya - m, funeral- pile,“

properly colligendum“(from chi , to

collect bhg'f- t- ya

- s, servant, as to be supported,

“from

bhar, b‘

ri, to bear, to support, to nourish .

" To this class,according to its formation, belongs, although with activeignification, the Greek a rd- dw—g. properly standing

“

(cf.

m a - 769=sfi - té - s).

901 . The Greek Io is of more common occurrence as the

formative suffix of denom inative adjectives (Buttmann,

1 19. than in the primary formation of words ; and

here, likewise, has its Sanscrit prototype in the secondary(Taddhita) suffix of words like dfv- ya - s, heavenly,

“from

div, heaven ; hrfd- ya - s. am iable, agreeable,” from hrid,

heart dyr'

- ya- s. the most excellent“

(“standing on

the from dyra- m, summ it; dhé n

i

-

ya- s, rich,

from dluina - m, wealth Marya - s, canine,”from the

weakened base Saa r - Greek xvv ; rdth’

ya- s. car- horse "

(“belonging to the rdth

'

-ya - m,

“car- road from

rdtha - s,“car ;

”

yaiasyc‘

z - s,“famous,

"from yaa

'

ms, fame

m has -

yc‘

z- s,

“secret,

"from rdhas.

“mysteryf

”ndv—yb. 3 ’

In the two lastexamples the demission and weakening of the accent

is occasioned bythe circumstance thatthe suffix is preceded bymore

than one syllable ; with which maybe compared the phenomenon, that,

inGothic, the same suffix, under the same circumstances, experiences in

the nominative a contraction or suppression (see In adv-yd - s

(Pan. VI . the long a has the same influence inweakening the

accentuation that, in Gothic, e.g. ; the ti of sfit—i - s,has in weakening

the suffix.


names correspond Sanscrit patronymics like kdurav-

yé- s.

K uruide“from 1mm , in which the firstvowel of the pri

maryword receives the Vriddhi augment, while the accenthas sunk down upon the final syllable .

902 . In Latin this class of words is less numerous thanin Greek ; yetto it belong, both various adjectives and

[G. Ed. p. appellatives, and also proper nam es.

The following are examples : egreg- ia - s, patr

- ia - s, impera

tor- ia- s, pra’tor- ia- s, censor- ia - s, soror

- ia - s, nox’- ia - s, IuJ - i a - s,

(from ludu- s, not from ludo), Mar- ia - s, Octav'- ia - s, Octav

’- ia ,

N erf - ia - s, N Off - ia . As regards the appellatives of coun

tries in Id in Greek, and their relation to the names of the

inhabitants, attention must be recalled to the circumstance,thatabove we have re cognised the Greek m as the

simple extension of the Sanscrit fem inine character f,

among other words, in fem inines in rpm (dude -

rpm) com

pared with the Sanscrit in tri'

(ddtri‘, female giver, see

accordingly, the names Of countries in ca m ightalso be taken as simple fem inine formations of the base

words expressing the names of the inhabitants ; so that,therefore. e. Maxedow

’

a would appear in a Sanscrit form

as Makadan- I‘

, and would properlysignify the belongingto,

“notto say the spouse,

“of the Macedonian, or, too,

the mother of all the Macedonians. This view would

receive emphatic supportfrom the circumstance, thatthereare also names of countries with feminine themes in IS, the

Idof which,=Sauscrit i'

, has the same relation to the primaryword denoting the inhabitant, as above Mano

- 18

(for lam p- Id)hastoAna

-

nip, or as, e. g. , Ii-yepov- I'

d to the mas

culine base i epov, andmuch the same as, in Sanscrit, mahali’

.

the great,”

(fem .)has to mahdl. The following are exam

ples of this kind : “flaw-

rid from fi fiaw ("Afiaw es); nape - I

'

d,

Persia,“from Ilépaq

-

g, Persian man, feminine Ilepc c'

g.

If, however, the Greek names of countries in m are onlythe

fem inines of the names of the inhabitants,and if their ter


m ination is only an inorganic extension of the Sanscritfem inine character i

'

, we m ight also explain in the same

manner the Latin, as Gallia, Germania, Italia, e oin, and

assume thatthe a (= Sanscrita , Greek 0) of the masculinebases Gallu, Germaau, Italu, Greece , is suppressed before

the fem inine character i , extended to ia , according to the

same principle as that bywhich, in Sanscrit, the a, e. of

deed,“God

“

(nom . deed- s), is suppressed [G . Ed. p.

before the I”of chief,

“

goddess,“and as, in Greek, the O, e.

of the base Aaxo is lost before the feminine cc of Aax’

- I'

a .

We can,even in the names oftowns, F lorealia, Valentia, P la

centia , recognise fem inine participles, the special form of

which has been lostin the proper participles, as, in general,the adjective bases ending in a consonant have transferredto the fem inines also the form which originally belongs

onlyto the masculine and neuter. Feminine participialforms like ferentia, tundentia, compared with the Sanscritbhérantf, tuddnti

'

, and Greek ¢épovaa , from gbepowca , cannotsurprise us in Latin. Observe, also, the affix which

, in

Lithuanian, the fem inine participle has gained in the

oblique cases (see Note ‘, p. 174, and

903. To the Sanscritdenominative adjective bases in ya,as divya, heavenly

" correspond most exactlysome Gothic bases in ya , fem inineyd; vi z . deaf -ya, Olivifer,from the primitive base aléva n. , nom . alév,

“oil calf -

ya ,

Old, from althi f. , nom . alth’

- s h ad - ya, dead (nom . m .

navis), from navi m ., nom . w as,

“dead ana - ha im

'-ya ,

“homely af—haim'-

ya, absent, from ha imd f. , nom . pl.

ha imd- s mild-

ya, chief, from reika m . , nom . reilrs, su

preme, chiefta in ; uf—a ith-

ya, sworn,"from aitha m . , nom .

a ilh- s, oath ia -

gard-

ya, homely, domestic,”from garda ,

nom . yards, house eu- kaf -ya, careless.”from hard f. ,

nom . kara,“care The definitions laid down above (p. 1309

G. cd. , hold with respectto the nom inative masculineof these adjective bases. TO the Sanscrit denom inative


appellative bases like rdth’- ya, m . car- horse, n. car

wheel,”correspond in Gothic such as leilc- ya,

“doctor (nom .

IeiIc- eis, see from Ieilca n. , nom . leik,“the body

ba ird’-ya, herdsman,

"from ha irdd f. , nom . ha irda,

“herd

blo‘

str’- ya, worshipper,

“from the unciteable prim itive base

bIdstra (see faurstass’-

ya , superintendant,”from

[G . Ed. p. the unciteable faurstassi, the superinten

dence " (from - stas- ti, s from d. according to nom .

faurstass (cf. us—stass. ragini

- ya, coun

sellor,

“from ragiaa n. , (nom . ragin, counsel The Go

thie marks also with the favourite extension Of the base bya masculine bases like fwd-

yam fisher" (nom . fish-

ya , se

cording to yudfi-yan, priest,"

vaur:tv'

-

yan, la

bourer,"

(turf - yam planter, gardener, va i - décf -yan, male

factor,"from the primitive basesfiska , m . fish,

"

guda , m .

“God, vaurstva, n. work, aurti. f.

“

plant,"and the to

be -

presupposed va i - dedi , f. m isdeed (dedz'

, nom . déds,

deed,"see There are also some prim itives, i . s.

substantive bases, inyon, springing from verbal roots, wh ich ,

according to their signification, are nouns Of agency; vi z .

af- ét-

yan, eater, devourer“

(rootat: its , at, étum); nf - drugk

- yan,“drinker, tippler ;

“vein- drugk

- yan, wine - drinker“

(rootdragk= drank : drigha, drag/c, druglcum); dulga - ha it- yan,

“creditor, (literally,

“debt bi - hait—yan,

“boaster ;

“

arbi - aum- yan, heir, literally, inheritance - taker”(root

nam : a ima, aam. némum, humans); faura -

gagg- yan, i h

tendant”

(root gagg, to go,"

see ga- aiath-yan,

[G . Ed . p .

“ companion,

“

properly,“

goer

i f Root cant/I, whence we should expect an unciteable verb sintha,

santh, mathum (see Grimm, I I . p. and whence, also, is formed bythe audix an (Dom . a), ga - siathan, of equivalentmeaning, which answers

to Sanscritbases like rdjan, king,”as ruler. The causal sandya, I

send"

make to go,"see has the same relation, wi Ih regard to

its d, to swath, that standa , I stand,"has to stbth

,I stood.

”Yetthe

d of sandya is more organic than the th of walk, at leastsand can bemore


river,”as cleaving, breaking through Sal-yc

’I- s, javelin,

arrow,

”as moving itself.

” To these are to be added some

follow IVeber (V. S. Sp. l . p. 57) in deriving the Sanscrit stir-ya fromaim of equivalentmeaning, and the latter, according to Indian Gram

marians,from rti

,

“to bear, to bring forth

”

(Unad. I I . 35 . then sI‘irya - s

and sI‘ira - swould originallysignify, bringer forth, producer. I

, how

ever, prefer, as has been alreadyelsewhere done (Glossar. Scrt. a . 1 847,

p. 379)to re fer i ra, though there Is no formal impediment to the deriv

ing it from ed, to the rootsoar (car),“to shine

”and I recall attention

to the fact, thatin Zend, too, slum»hear! (euphonic forhear, seethe syllable ouhas been contracted to d in perhaps all the weak cases,

of which, however, onlythe genitive lair- 6 can be cited, which hereby

stands in a relationto its nominative accusative and proper theme similar

to thatwhich the Greek saw- 69 holds to Item, and cannot possiblybe de

rived from a differentrootfrom thattowhich the nominative accusative

heart"belongs. On“sear is based also the Latin sol (from sue! for

mar, as sep ia from suopio, from the Sanscrit root soap) and the Greek

(n ip, from a fep with that favourite affix before liquids, I, which occurs

also in Eccprjv, which, with the Latin sermo,belongs to the Sanscritroot

sear, sari,“to sound,

"whence comes the Védic sfiayd, speech,

”

spoken,”or

“to be spoken,”and

'

In which likewise occurs the contrac

traction of ea or ad to a. The opinion thatsiI'

ra - s, sun,’ ’

Springs from

rti orm , to bear, to produce,”

finds confirmation in the fact, thatano

ther appellation of the sun, viz . sav- i - ld'

r has decidedly arisen

from the rooteuor rti . Thisword occursfrequentlyinthe Védic hymns :

I would not, however, from the circumstance thatthe Védic poets delight

in extolling the sun-

god as producer”

(ofthe produce of the fields), as

also as supporter”(plishan), deduce the inference thatthe proper desig

nation Of the sun, which existed so earlyas the time of the unityof the

languages, must have pointed towards this image ; for itcertainlyap

proximates more to the primaryviewof people to designate the sun as

fighting,”or

“shining, than as producing,

”or nourishing.

”To the

M eritnames Of the sun belongs also the hitherto unciteable srivana - s

(Unad. I I . which, as a derivative from the rooton or szi , is perhaps

onlya poetical and honorific title of the sun. Itmay, however, be pos

sible, thatthe rootwhich lies atthe base of theword srivana - s is notthe

well- known rootof to bear, butan abbreviation of war or our,“to

shine as,e. g . , togetherwith Im,

“to offer,”exists also a roothu, to

call,”abbreviated from had together with s

'

vi, to grow, a

form

FORMATION OF WORDS. 1 2 81

fem inine oxytone bases inyd; e.g. , kanyd. a [6 Ed. p .

maid,”as

“shining

”(“inthe lustre ofyouth from kan,

“to

shine jagd, Spouse,"as having children (forjanyd, root

jan). The following are examples in Zend : 34 bér‘

éz - ya,“

growing,

“or,with a causalsignification, making to grow

ma ir—ya ,“Slaying

"

(making to die), [G. Ed . p.

form i n and in Zend, togetherwith [AIS can,“to strike

,

”a form z a ,

whence «padfsm d ; upd- ebit,

“lethim strike”

(cf. and together

with to live, the forms 4& j3, 5and m 35& jyd. Might

we assume, together with war, sur,“to shine,

”a rooton, of the same

meaning, I should derive from itthe appellation of the moon too, sdma - s,

whichwould therefore develope a radical inaffinitywith theGreek och - 6m;

(from while another rti- ma (the SOma- plant) belongs to a

differentrootsu, which signifies to express.”If sdvana - s be a genuine

appellation of the sun, itwill admit of comparisonwith the Gothic basem am a (nom . sunna), byassimilation, from sue-nan, for suvanan. But if

the Sanscritsti vana - s originallysignify producer, I would rather derive

the Gothic base sunnan (also sunnc‘

m, fem .)from svarnan or suntan and

this, in like manner, byassimilation, so thatitwould be based onthe root

ERsoar, sur, to shine, to be light,”and m mfor no would be the for

mutive suffix, the fem inine form ofwhich is contained in the Latin term

also for the moon (lu- na from lac- nu).

i f Rootbdre'

z,bare: (cf. barez - nu

,

“great =Sanscritvarh

, vrih,“to

grow”(see Burnouf, Yaqna, p. I have no scruple in assiguing,

with Anquetil, to this root, in the passage referred to (V. S . p. a

causal signification ; and I recall attention to the fact, that in Sanscrit

too, especially in the Véda dialect, the root vardh, vridh, with which

ear/I, vrI'

h , is originallyone, is often used in its prim itive form with a

causal signification. Above (p. 1 1 8,

1 2 9 . L . the Zend roothere's,

bards , is erroneouslyplaced beside the Sanscrit root blm ij, to shine

the participle bere'z ant, ofwhich 1 . c. mention ismade, signifies properly

growing,”and hence great, high,

”like the Sanscritvrihdt(strong vri

M at),which correspondsto it. and bywhich itis also occasionallyrendered

byNeriosengh, whose translation I wasunable to procure, and ofwhich,evenup to the presenttime, I onlyknowthe passages published byBurnouf

(see Burnouf'

s Review of the FirstPartof this Book in the “Journaldes 1833, p . 43, of the special impression, and Brockhaus, Glossary,

p. 381 .


murder ; III/s»; kainé from ka inyd, maid, as sh ining .

In Lithuanian to this class belong, first, several m asculine

bases in ia (nom . is or ys for ia- s, see e.g. , ga id

-

y- s

(gen. ga idz io, euphonic for ga idio),“cock,

”as sing ing

“

(gied - mi ,“I sing, Sanscrit rootgad, to speak rysz -

y- s,

band“

(riszu, tek- y- s, tek- i - s,“ram ,

“

éyn -

y- s, sorcerer,

” éynnau,“I know secondly,

fem inine bases, and, at the same time,nominatives in 5,

from ia, as éynii,

“enchantress, witch,

”as

“knowing could,

sun, as Shining.

"though obscured from the point of

view of the Lithuanian. From the Old Sclavonic we re

fer here, MEAB ‘

BAb medv- yedy, bear,”literally,

“honey- eater

(theme -

yadyo, see which, in Sanscrit form , wouldbe madh- radya

- s, (madhu, honey,"before vowels mad/w).

and Re zha b voschdy. guide (euphonic for rody): ogb ory,“ horse,” leads to the Sanscrit root or, ri, to go, to run,

“

whence dra, “fast.

904. We return to the Sanscrit future passive participle,in order to notice two other formative suffixes of the sam e,

which likewise find their representatives in the European

sister- languages, vi z . tavya and ani’

ya. Theyboth requireGuna, and the former has the accenteither on the first

syllable or on the second ; in the latter case the scurita .

The suffix am‘

ya always accentsthe i' hence, e.g. ,ydkldrya - s

(or -ya- s) and ydjani'

ya - s,“

jungendus, from ya}. To the

suffix tavya corresponds, in myopinion, inLatin, tz'

vu(sieu),in Greek 760 : the former has preserved the form , the latter

[G . Ed. p. the signification, more correctly; yet the

M air-ya is, according to its formation, identical with the Sanscrit

mdryd,“occidendus,

”from the causal of the root mar, mri,

“to di e

"

(mardydmi,“ I slay, Russian mow-ya , see but has, in both the

passages explained byBurnouf Etudes, pp. 1 88, 2 40,passim), as decidedlyan active signification as the only, in signification, causal berezya,making to grow.

”


ar- téya, plougher (an), I plough, Latin are, Greek

dpéw); at- p irk- teigo, redeemer, ransomer geM - toya,

“helper"

(gelbmi.“I help, fut. geHI - g- su); gan-

y- toya , pro

tector" (qanau, I protect,"fut. gaa

-

y- su); gund—i - toya,

“I attempt, fut. gund

- i - su); mal- i15- toya, teacher

"

(mohiw‘

a“I teach pra

- de'itoya, be

ginner (pra - de- m i , I nom . artoyis, alp irktoyis,

&c. In Old Sclavonic correspond nouns of agency in

m m a - tai (Dobr. p. theme a - tayo (see e. g. .

A03oga'rau do- Zor- a - tai , inspector 8 03A

'I‘

Aii vOZ- a - ta i'

,

auriga“

driver neeaara'ra i

'

rpre- lag

- a - ta i'

, « ple-rater.

"

These forms presuppose verbs in aymi, infinitive ati (see 55.766. 767. regarding the Ii , p.

906. I think I recognise in Gothi c some interesting re

mains Of the Sanscrit participial formation in ant‘

ya,

bhéd-

a - nf'ya - s,“

findendus,”in whi ch remains the vowels

surrounding the a are suppressed ; thus, aya for Sanscritam

‘

ya, in remarkable agreementwith the Zend aya , from

yési

- nya , or ”AA/saxc yasi

nya, venerandus, ado

raadus“

(see p. 1308G . ed. ,Note) Sanscrityajamyaxl' To this

P’

erku,

“ I buy, pret. [fir/tau, cf. Greek rrpt'

apat, frc'

p- vq

-

Ia , Sanscrit

kr‘

i - nd - mi, emo

,

”Irish crcanaim

,I buy, purchase,

” Welsh pymu, to

buy, see Gloss. Sanscr. , a . 1 847, s. r. log- i .

tThe Sanscritrootyaj is, in Zend, eitherSAIL yaz oryas'

, before I Italwaysya}, asthe combination ea wasgenerallyavoided in Zend hence the

Sanscrityaj'

ria ,“sacrifice

,

"is inZendyasna and from thisBurnouf (Yacna,

p. 575)derivesthe above- mentionedyasinya,which , as regards form,

would

suitverywell. In support, however, of myview, I refer to what has

been said above (p. 1308 G. cd.,Note)regarding vahmya, and believe that

ifyarinya came from yaIina, itwould rather have the signification of the

presentactive participle than thatof the participle future passive, which

Neriosengh, too, gives to it. The form yés'

nya rests on the common

euphonic influence of the preceding and followingy(cf. p . 903, Note i t),which, however, has notpenetrated throughout in thisword, butthe ori

ginal a has, on the contrary, veryOften keptits place in it(see BrockhausIndex, underyamya ,yogayaafim, yagnydcha).


class belong inGothic the masculine neuter [G . Ed. p.

bases ana - Iaug—nya, to conceal,“

ana - siu—nya, visible,

and a ir/r aga.“holy, properly, if myconjecture be rightly

founded, worthy of veneration”=Sanscrit arch- anfya,

andus"

(root arch from ark), as above the

Greek dyco—g=Sanscrit yaj-

gc‘

I- s, venerandus.

”The base

aria - laugaya is arrived at through the secondary base

ana - laugnyaa of the weak declension, which has proceededfrom it, whence come the plural neuter um—laug - nyda - a

(1 Cor. xiv. dative and - laug- nya

- m (2 Cor. iv. On

the other hand, the strong neuter analauga , whi ch occurstwice as nom inative and once as accusative, is in so far

ambiguous, as a base ah a - laugaa would have the nearest

claim on it (see As, however, the suppression of

the syllable ya in the nominative masculine, mentioned

above (p. 1310G. is possible, under the same circumstances, also in the nom inative accusative neuter (see Gab.

and LObe, p. 75. so the forms that have [G . Ed. p.

been mentioned in gdu- a , ya - m , leave no room for doubt

thatana - laug- n stands for ana - laug

- m'

, and has ana - laug- nya

for its base . Just in the same way the weak neuter

anasiu- nyd, visibile” (Skeir. ed. Massmann 40. proves

Graff, too (I . refers, with respect to the Old High German

erchan,“egregias, tothe Sanscritrootarch : in Anglo- Saxoneorcmm—stan

signifies precious stone.

”According to the law for the mutation of

sounds, we should expect in Gothic c irk - nya for a irk- nya, but ithas te

tained the original tenuis ; as, e.g . ,in slépa=Sanscrit eedp - i - mi,

“ I

sleep”

(see 2 0. Regarding the radical vowel (II, for i from a, see

82 . The nominative afrlmi - s admits of being quoted, butthe reading

is not quite sure (see Gab. and Labs on 1 Tim . iii . If we ought to

read a ir/ms, th is m ightaswell come from a base a irhna as from airhnya

(see p . 1310G . The circumstance thatthe compound un- a irka’- s,

bythe pluralun- a irlmai (2 Tim. i ii . dative un- a irlma im (1 Tim . i .

clearlyrefers itself to the base eu- airhna , affords no certaintythat the

theme also Ofthe simple word ends in no, as it often happens thatwords

are subjected to mutilation in composition.


thatthe strong neuter nom inative anasiu- n’is an abbrev ia

tion of ana—siu- a i , and belongs to the base ana - siu- nya ,

which is also confirmed bythe adverb ana - siu- a i - ba . At

the base of all these forms lies siuas root. which appears

to have been formed from se ihv, bycasting outthe h and

vocalising the euphonic I) (see to u,'l' while the a of

the diphthong a i was dropped, together with the II, to

which itowed its existence (see To the abbreviated

root siubelongs also the abovementioned (5. abstract

sI'

u the looking, the regarding,"which corresponds

to Sanscrit formations like ld- ni - s,“the cutting Off.

“From

the abstractbase siu- m’

, the seeing, is found, bythe suffix

ya (see the derivative masculine base siun‘- ya ,

seer,“nom inative sinusi - s, in the compound sitba - sinusie,

eye witness,"literally, self- seer,

"air/76mm. In Lithas

nian we refer to the passive participle under discussionkaas- a i - s, a bit,

"from Icaris- nya - s (from the roothand, to

bite as also some words which, in the nominative, ter

m inate in iny- s (from inya

- s); e. g. , raridiay- s,“the found

(raadI‘

I ,“I find pl

'

ész iny- s. the fresh-

ploughed field

(pldsz u, I split, pa- suntiny

- s, envoy"

(“m iltpn

dus,”from sunchiufrom sunliu,

“I send kretiay

- s, the

[G . Ed. p. fresh manured field"

(Irreehiufrom kretin,

I manure mgz’

I'

ny- s, dunghill (prop erly, cleansed

out, mhéu, maria, I castoutthe The i preced ingthe u, if it does not belong to the classsyllable, so thatthroughout a present in in would be to be presupposed ,

may be taken as the weakening of the a of the Sanscrit

ani'

ya.

See Gab. and Liibe,Grammar, p. 75 . a.

1' W ith respectto the phenomenon, thatof the he, forwhich the Gothic

writing has a peculiar letter, onlythe uneasential euphonic affix has re

mained, compare the relation of our interrogative wer to the

Gothic hva- s (Sanscritha - s).


honorandus, honors dignus, from prg'

ana, the honouring.

The suffix {ya is perhaps onlyan extension of ya, so that

the long vowel which corresponds to the semi - vowel y isfurther prefixed to it. Stillmore certain is, in myopinion,

the proposition that the secondarysuffix vya set forth bythe Indian Grammarians is to be identified with the suffix

ya , as in the words which are apparentlyformed with vya

the v easilyadmits of being explained as a portion of the

primary word. Thus, for example. we may suppose a

transposition of bhrdtur. pitur—

as weakened formsof bhrdtar,

p itar, as in the uninflected genitive of this class of wordsto bhrdtru, pitru and hence, byvocali z ation of the r to

.

ri .

and change of the a into its sem i - vowel, on account of the

y following, deduce bhrdtO

riv- yd- s, brothers‘ offspring,

“

p ifriv-

yd- s, father

'

s brother just as, in Gothic, the pluralsof the terms of relationship in tar, thar, Spring from bases

in tru, thru (transposed and weakened from tar, thar); so

that, e. g. , brdthriv—é, “fratrum

”

(cf. sImiv- é.“

filiorum,

wfrom

the base sun s), in the portion of itwhich belongs to the

base, approaches verycloselythe Sanscritbhrdtriv-

gc‘

z - s. To

p itriv- yd- s corresponds (with a diverted signification), as

regards the form of the primaryword, the Greek a arpmé—g

stepfather, and, with respectto formation, also the fem inine Iorrpma

'

t, forwhich, in Sanscrit, we should have to expect

mdtriv- yd. Justas, in Sanscrit, we separate the o from the

suffix, and assign itto the primaryword, so we must di

[G . Ed. p. vide, too, the analogous Greek words intonurpu- cd-

g, harps-

Id s, and derive them bytransposition fromwarvp

- Io- g, [lfl‘

TUp‘

lO-

S‘ (from warap

- IO- g, parap- Io-

g), as above2 53. p. 2 69, Note f), waned- at, p Irrpd

- O'

I, from warap- O

'

I ,

Wrap- or. The Zend has, in the above - mentioned

403.17JMJI brdtur-yé, avoided transposition. I doubtnot, however, thatthisword, with those in Sanscritintrio- ya, and the

Greek in rpu- IO,

- Ia , belong to one class : moreover, the

molars tfiiryé. a female relation in the 4th degree San


scrittur- fyd, quarto, see 5. 32 3. p. 452 , Note supports theconjecture mentioned before, thatthe Sanscrit suffix i

'

ya is

onlya phonetic extension of the suffix ya, and thereforethe participial termination ani

'

ya also an extension of anya

(Zend aya, and Gothic aya). I do not lay anystress for

the support Of this view on the, In classical Sanscrit, isolated varénya, eligendus

"

(for taraniya - s), with which some

other analogous Vedic forms class themselves, as itscarceadm its of any doubt that oaréaya.= varaiaya, is a trans

posed form of oaragri'

ya, just as, in Greek, a’

IpeI’

vwv is a

transposition of dpewwv (see 5. 300. p.

908. After having considered the participles, infinitives,

upines, gerunds, and some formally- connected classes of

substantives and adjectives, we now turn to the descriptionof the remaining classes of words. while we treat, in the

first place, of the naked radical words, then of the wordsformed with suffixes, and indeed, as regards the Sanscrit,according to the following arrangement of the primarysuffixes, some of which, however, are at the same time

used as secondary, i . e. for derivations from nom inal bases.

PR IMARY SUFFIs xl'

[G. Ed. p.

a , fem . d or i'

vya , see ya , p. 132 7 G. ed.

i no, fem . ad. 55. 842 .

u m'

, 851 .

nu, ma

In the original a misprintoccurs herewhich mightgive some troubleto the German reader. We have 462 . for p. 462 . Owing to m istakes

of this kind I have in severalplaces beenunable toverifythe references.

Translator’

s Note.

1 I adm itinto this catalogue the sufi xes of the participles also, which

have been alreadydiscussedwith a reference tothe paragraphs adverted to.

Such suffixes, however, as neither reappear in the European sister lan

guages, nor are of importance as regards the Sanscrititself, I leave an

noticed.


in at. out, t. at, 55. auto,

ana 809. p. 1094, Note.

am‘

ya, see ya ma, 805.

dna, 792 . m i

as man, 795.

or menu, 792 .

is Ira. aka. aka, ilra , aha

ya, tavya, aai'

ya' ta, fem . td, tdti. 83 2 .

ra , ira, ura , éra , dra tdr. to

ri , 8 10.

la. ala . ila . ula ti, 843 844 a - ti , 849 .

en tuf. , 851 . tu. m . n. , atu. athu

van tra, fem . trd. a- tra, i - tra, 8 18 .

nor. vdris, or.t, ugh. 5. 788. ton, 835.

909. Naked radical words appear in Sanscrit

a) as fem inine abstracts ; e. anu-jiid, command bhi'

,

fear krI‘

, shame te igh.“lustre yodh, strife

kahudh, hunger ;"mud,

“

joy; sum-

pdd.“luck bhds,

lustre . Tothis classbelong the above

[G . Ed . p. 1330] Vedic infinitives with a dative

or accusative term ination from bases which otherwise have left behind no case. A media] a is, in

some formations of this kind, lengthened ; hence, e. g . ,

vdch, the speaking,"

speech,”from each. 80 also

in Zend punt; vdch, speech,"

and fi di , question"

(Sanscrit rootprachhb)Atthe end of compounds in the sense of the present

participles, where the substantive preceding usuallystands in the accusative relation ; or simply as ap

pellatives, which, according to their fundamental

meaning, are nouns of agency. The following are

examples: dham am id, acquainted with duty ari

- h6n. slaying foes duh'

lcha—héa, removing pain

a See see, 894, 906.

1 2 92 FORMATION or WORDS.

akshi ,‘

eye, and Latin Oculus. P dc, peace .

”from a

lost root, probably means originally“ joining, as a deri

vative of the Sanscrit rootpair(from pale).

91 1 . To the class Of words(b) in 909. correspond G reek

bases li ke xép—wfi (properly, washing a

’

s vpo- rpofi,

wa ldo apog—cpuy, dream - 01 1 17, xopuO Bov- vrhq

'

y, y’ta '

ya

In the two lastexamples, and other combinations wi th

an”, the length of the final syllable appears to have thrust

down the accentfrom its former position, and thus to haveoccasioned an accidental agreementwith the Sanscrit ac

centuation of this class of words (dharma - vid, whi ch’ ¢ I

I do notregard as original ; so in 1 3007 xarappw'

y,

with a passive signification, whereby, too, { 07 (in

3121 17, veoL’

u'y, yehavotwy, and the Latin basejug (conjug)answers to the Sanscrit- yaj,

“

yoked. TO the simple base

fl itdviqh,“foe, as hating, corresponds rpw

'

y, gnawer,

devourer, and the Latin due. as masculine, guide,”as

fem inine, she thatguides as also rég, king,”as ruling,

”

the Sanscrit sister form Of which, rdj, appears only in

[G . Ed. p . 1 332 ] compounds, as dharma - fdj, king of righ

teousness.

"Observe the lengthening of the radical vowel

in the Latin rég (opposed to rigo). after the analogyof

the Sanscrit pari - vrdj. beggar”

wanderer aroundwhile the radical vowel of the Sanscrit fdj is, from its

origin, long. We mention further. as examples of Latin

radical words at the end of compounds, arti -fic. carni -fic,

pel- lic, in- dic, jt

’

i—dic, Oh- t'

c, P ol- lilo, for- cip, man- cip, princip ,

art- cup . pres- S id, ia - caid. The latter answers, byits passive

signification anvil,”as thatwhich is struck upon), to jug

in con-jug. Greek and Sanscrit - yuj, yoked. In

mostof the remaining examples the i rests on the weak

cuing of an original a, and the e, which enters into the

l' I regard the verbal root fkgh, to see, as a corruption of akda.

FORMATION or WORDS. 1 2 93

nominative in its stead, on the principle laid down in 6.

S id, in prca-sid, is identical with the SanscritShad in divi

- ghdd (euphoni c for - sad), sitting in heaven,” “

dwellingthere,

”caelicola . a so- far anomalous compound, inasmuch

as the first member of it is provided with a easel-termina

tion.

‘A ct- cup exhibits the intermediate weakening of the

vowel, which otherwise only occurs before l (of. 490.

Rem . and which therefore finds a more suitable placeinpres

- Std, consul(from salio, Sanscritml,“to move oneself

9 12 . With the t, whi ch in Sanscrit(according to 909. b.)is added to roots with a short final vowel, the Latin tOf

- it, going,"and stit(as weakening of stat) in super

- am,

anti - stit, has been already 1 1 1 . sub. fin.) contrasted ; and

since thenPotthas also compared thatin pari - etxj'

properlygoing around, surrounding (as above pari - sru

'

t flowingand Curtius that in indi—get(cf. [G. Ed. p.

indi - gena).l The Greek adds such a tto rootswith a longfinal vowel(see Curtius l. c.) in compounds like dyd

‘

po- Bpé r,

é yo-Bpé r, d-

yvo'

rr, d- m airr, Auto- 011771 . The terminations

- 8mjr, xp ij'r, (d oa-

rpé r), have onlya passive signification, which, in Sanscrit, does not occur incompounds of this kind, while 1 6min and d

yvé r, are used bothactivelyand passively. As regards the vowel Of these formations, it rests, for the most part, on transposition, which

The circumstance thatthe Latin a, corrupted from a, becomes 5whenthe word is encumbered bycomposition, exceptingwhen it stands under

the protection of two consonants, or in a final syllable, proves that in

Latin the i is held to be lighter thanthe inorganic shorta.

1 Euphonic forpari - ii .

1“De nominum Groa formatione, p. 10. With respectto the drop

ping Of the n in the rootgen, cf. the Sanscritj fia forjan- a,“born ; and

with regard to the appended t, the phenomenon that, in Sanscrit, the

roots in an and am, in case theyreject their 13 before the gerundial suffix ya, then add, like roots with a short final vowel, s t hence, e. g . ,

ni - hé - t-ya, from hon,“to slay.

”

FORMATION OF WORDS.

is readilyoccasioned byliquids, and lengthening ; where it is

to be noticed thatr, and w, according to their origin, 5; (see

g. and thatin Sanscrit such transpositions occur, since,e . g. , together with man, to think,

”there o ccurs a rootm ad,

to mention”(cf. mpvrjexw, fut. prof- cw); togetherwith dham

to blow (only in the special tenses), occurs a form dhma,

which the Grammarians assume .to be the originalone . The

roots a re) (of. a im-w from mvrérw), dym(cf. 0m; (cf.

gdavov, Oé varog), Km] (cf. mimi cs), 0’

p (cf. ardpvum, Latin

ste mo), guide us to the Sanscrit roots pat, to fall ; dam ,

to tame ban (from dhan), to slay iram (from kram).Ham. to be tired ; star, atatom

”, to strew. If concrete

bases then, like - fipo’

rr,d

yvmr, with euphonic 1, represent theSanscritnaked radicalwords like -

pd,“drinking,

”then, Irre

spective of gender, the abstracts yeah»? and 75'

p may be

compared with the Sanscrit abstracts like anuzifizi,“com

[G . Ed . p. forthough the mOfthe said Greek

bases is not radical, it nevertheless belongs to the verbal

theme, and, like aw in ép- c'

Io-

pau, yeA- éo-

pev, represents the

Sanscrit character aya of the loth class In de

parture, too, from a former opinion I find this

latter in the form of or 17 in compounds like kayo- Grjpa- g,

im Io-

v éi g, onho-

paxn-

g, I'I'

mj- g. eha - vrwh irg. Comp

are

the base - Or)pa with eapa O'w, q a - Twp

'

a rena with vanity- ou

from mafi a- ow who; with m ay

- ou, mxv- rwp ; maxi) with

paxij- O'

oyat. paxvrrqg, puxy-

pwv. Tpi'

fiqg in wa ldo- rpi'

fiqg,

di appaxo- rpc'

fiqg, can hardlySpring from the rootrpcfi with a

Here belongs the Latin quiét(also quid), whi ch has remained true tothe feminine gender, and the rootOfwhich

, qui=Sanscritif (from (bi ),has united itself with the character I! ofthe 2 d conjugation (=Sanscritaya, ay, for which I hold the 0 of qui—é- vi, qui - é - tus.

Cf. im-

pl- é - vi

,im-

pl- é - tus, I

'

m-

pl- é- s, im

-

pl- é- mus, im-

p I- é- tis. The

three lastforms, irrespective of the preposition, correspond to the Sanscrit

pdf aya - st, par- dya-mac, pdr- dya - tha, Of the causal ofthe rootpar (1!l

to fill,"the vowelofwhich Is passed over inLatin.


dant of Dasaratha ; and in Zend, xgflsiwm dhuir’-

ya

(from ahura, see 4L),“Abarish ”

referring to Ahura

z dir’

- i , golden, from z a iri. gold .

“In

Gothic, - ddg’- s, daily (theme ddga. see offers a

similar relation to its prim itive base daga, nom inative

dag'- s, day,

“as 6, according to is the most usual

representative of the length of the a . According to the

principles of Sanscrit, we must assume that the adjectivebase ddga , which occurs only in the compoundfidurdflga ,

“of four days

“

(nom . fidurddg’- s), is formed from the sub

[G. Ed. p . stantive base daga, in such wise that thefinal vowel of the latter is suppressed before the derivative

sufiix a in the same way as, e. g. , in Sanscrit, that of

m sanvatsara, year,"is suppressed before the Taddhita

sufiix a contained inm sdfivatsar’- é , yearly while

apparentlysdrivatsara , yearly,“seems to be formed from

saf'

watsara, year bysimply lengthening the first vowelof the primary word. The Lithuanian, too. the o of

which is always long, and frequently represents the San

scrita, exhibits, in some derivative words, 0 in the place of

the a of the primitive base ; thus, plOt’

- i - s, breadth

(theme plotya), comes from plai d- s. broad and IOU- 12 3.

riches (theme lobya), from Iaba - s, rich in the same

way as, in Sanscrit, e. g. , mtidhur-ya - m , sweetness, from

madhuré , sweet?“

As in Latin, also, 6 frequentlystands

for original 6, e. g. , torment-= Sanscrit weisdram, we m ightrecognise in def - u- m a remnant Of the Vriddhi increment,

Guna and the Vriddhi incrementOf a, that, however, Guna takes place

with a more seldom thanwith the lighter vowelsuand i .

See 89 1 893. If, in Lithuanian, in this class ofwords a primitive

a of the base word does notpass into 0, perhaps the length of position

protects the original 0 hence, inthe examplesmentioned abovekaraetis, best,

”sealtis

, cold,”not korsz tis, sz oltis. In general, I

knowhitherto of no example inwhich a stands before a simple consonantin anabstractof this kind.


which the Sanscrit Grammar requires, when, with the

suffix a, to which the uof the Latin 2 d declension corresponds, a derivative is formed with the secondary idea of“springing from ; e. sdmudr

’- d-m ,

“sea- salt.

“as that

wh ich springs from the sea (samudré , nom .era- s). There

fore, as the neuter sdmudr'

- d- m maybe explained as com

ing from the masculine base samudrd, with the suppressionof the final vowel before the derivative suffix a , so I thinkI mayventure to explain dv

’-u-m as offspring of the bird,

from a vi - s. In Sanscrit itwould be quite regular, if avi.instead of vi, signified a bird,

”to find an dv

'- d- m com ing

from it as a term for“an egg.

”The Greek 66V from

(BF- (iv, which as respects its accentuation [G . Ed . p. 1331 ]also answers to the Sanscritclass of words here Spoken of,

has lost its primitive on the other hand, exclusive of gen

der and accent, die: (from (lif e),“sheep- skin fur,

"stands in a

relation to its prim itive base 61°

from (i f : (Sanscrit dvi

sheep Sim ilar to thatwhich the Latin dv’- um for def - um

holds to avixl‘

In the form «Zia- v for «3'

v I do notregard the I as the retain ed final

vowel of the primaryword, but recognise in to the Sanscrit sufiix ya ,

which, justlike a, forms personal and neuter patronymics.

1'

In rjvepdets I cannot rec ognise an accord to the SanscritVriddhi in

crementof the secondaryformation of words, as I do not dcrIve It from

d'

vepos, butfrom Juno; (in the base Of which is also found in

some compounds (fivepétpwvor, fivepdtpovro- s). Moreover, the Sanscrit suf

fix, which corresponds to the Greek cw requires no Vriddhi increment.

Justas little in Sanscrit, in compounded words, does a vowel lengthening

ofthis k ind occur, li ke thatwhich the Greek exhibits in some compounds,

especiallyinthosewith prepositions and monosyllabic prefixesand basesOfwords, or those which become monosyllabic by the suppression of the ir

finalvowel, and which takes place in order, perhaps, to bring forwardmoreemphatically, after such weak preceding syllables, the principal part ofthe word in case itbegins with a vowel ; hence, e Susan a

-roe (cinem as),

Burma}: (fixer), dvmim os, Ovrv'

pwm'

os (drum 86mm: (for accepts), durab

hedpos (dl edpor), bvré vvpos (arena), edrjperpos

4 p retiree -roe


[G . Ed. p . 1338 ] 914. The Sanscritprimarysuffix a,which ,

as also the secondary, I hold to be identicalwith the demon

strative base a (see has, together with its sister

forms in the cognate languages, been already considered

(see p. 1 2 35 G . ed .) as the form ative suffix of masculine

abstracts. In Gothic, mostof the abstracts which, in respe ctof their suffix, belong to this class, have become neute r, and

term inate, therefore, in the nom inative singular, with the

final consonantof the root(see The following are

nearlyallof them anda - beil,“blame

“; anda

bi - ha it, strife ; ga- hait,

“

prom ise (formallyour“Ge/miss,

behest af - Ié! forgiveness ; bi - ma it, clipping bi

-fa ih,“delusion ; fra - fveit,

“revenge ; ana -filh, delivery,

”

from the bases anda - beita, ga- heita , &c. As regards the

radical vowel of these abstracts, what has been observed

above (p. 1 2 37, Note) holds good . We mustnot, therefore ,

derive the base anda - néma, acceptance, the gender of

et’

n'

yvvtrror (dime £131}v (dwjp), 61566179 (root eddv oe, dVfiK tO ’

TOg

(impair (tim e), dwjxovtrros‘ dvdidvvor (686m), e’

w'

jxoor

i vfiha ‘

rov dvdntoros (dpwpt), nporfi'

yopoe (ti -yopetico), neptdidvvor,rptfipq r, pomq r, nodvq r, woddwvxor, wavvjyoptr, wavé hedpos. I moreover

recall attention to the fact, thatin Sanscritthe Vriddhi incrementof the

secondaryformation ofwords supplies the place of the Guna incrementOf

the primary; thus as, e.g . , bddlI - a - s, the knowing, and bddli - c‘i - mi

, I

know,

”comc from the rootbud/I, so bduddk - d - s

, Buddhist,”comes from

buddhti, Buddha,”as adjective, knowing, wise. Thatthe secondary

formation Of words, in as far as the class Ofwords referred to in general

requires an augment, calls for Vriddhi instead of Guns, maywell arise

from this, thatthe base words to which the secondary suffixes are at

teched are Of themselves more heavilyconstructed than the naked roots,

whence arise the prim itive nouns or verbs. Hence,in the secondary

formation Of words,long vowels, and even Guna diphthongs and short

vowels before two consonants, are augmented ; for which the primaryfor

mation Ofwords, exceptwhen the rootends in a vowel, feels no occasion.

The base anda - beila is,after removing the preposition, identicalwith

the abovementioned (p. 1 2 35 G . ed. ) Sanscritbhéda ,“cleaving.

”

1 300 FORMAT ION OF wORDS .

oi 'ywy- é -

g, a'

riAB- é- g, and some with a passive signification,

Aom—d-

g, xudI- d- g, m ir e

- g, a id- d-

g. Sothe substantives hose d-

g,

shell,“as to be peeled 63—6—5, way,

”as to be gone,

to be trod"

(Sanscrit root sad, to go,”and to seat one

self In Sanscrit, too, there are substantives of this kind

with a passive signification ; as, e. dar- d- s. neat. dar- d - m , a

[G . Ed . p. hollow,

”as being cleft léh- d- s, food

,

as to be licked ; jan- d- s,

“man,

“as

“born.

” The follow

ing accent the root: edh- a - s (opposed to the Greek a id- é -

g),

wood,”as

“to be burned

“

(rootindh, properly, id}: vés- a - s,

house, as place entered (Greek oix- o-

g from Foi k -

o -

g.

Latin vi‘

c—u- s. Old High Germanwih, theme wiha , village ,

borough,”from an obsolete root). To the fem inine bases

of this class of words belong, in Greek, bases also in ad, of

Which the 8 is only an inorganic aflix (see p. e. g . ,

Oops- aid, “

gaz el, as seeing”(also 86pm) paixdd (hoaxrj), as

fem inine, from paixé ; roxa'

zd, the bearing (female

wAw(F)d8, the swimm ing, the wandering around (female)”

rtm éd, hammer,”as

“striking .

”0

9 16. In Sanscrit, as well as in Greek, adjectives of th iskind of formation occur principally atthe end of com

pounds. and in both languages have partlyeither not beenretained in isolated use, or have, perhaps, never been usedSimply. Thus, in Sanscrit, dame. tam ing,

“appears only

in the compound aria - damé - s,’

foe - tam ing, and the cor

responding Greek dapo only in I‘

mréd‘

apo-

g. So, in Latin,

- dic- u- s. Joqu- u- s. -

;fic- u- s, f ay- we,

- sequ- u- s, wool- we,

- cub- u- s

(incubus). Jag- tb s, mar-up s. f er, -

ger (for fer- u- s, yer- u- s),

Aria, euphonic for arim,is the accusative,which occurs also in many

other compounds Of this k ind, inwh ich the firstmemberusuallystands

in the accusative r elation instead of the naked theme which was to be

expected according tothe universal rules of composition e.g., in paran

- dar(i - s,“towns- cleaving

”(literally,

“urbem findcm priyaiI - m dd - s,

am iably- speaking ; bloayan- kard - s, fear- causing.


-

par- u- s (oviparus), - liqu

- u- s (re- liqu- u- 3=Greek ho

’

hr- o-

g),

f rag- um (naufragus). The following. perhaps, are the soleexamples which occur simply: sci - u- s.vag

- u- s. u- s,parc-u- s.

These substantives belong to this class : cogu- u- s =Sanscrit

pach- d- s from paIr d

- s, merg~u- s, proc

- u- s(cf. precor),son-u- s,as

"sounding

“= Sanscritsvan .EG . Ed. p .

- d- s,“tone,

"

jug- u- m , vad—u- m (properly, passed through,

as above a ll dar- d- m , a hollow,

”as cleft and perhap

tor- u- s, from storus, as spread out.”G

To this class alsoare to be referred the fem ininesmola . mill, as

“

grinding,

“

and toga , as covering. 1’ The a of compounds likeparricida ,

caelicola , advena, college, transfuga, legirupa, indigena, I now, in

departure from 1 16 , rather prefer viewing in such a wayas to recognise in ita distinct fem inine form , and thereforethe Sanscrit long d of forms like priya i ieadd,

“the am iably

speaking (female) which atthe same time stands for the

masculine, while, conversely, the Greek, atthe end of com

pounds, bya m is- usage, transfers the masculine neuter o=

Sanscrit shorta, into the feminine also, and contrasts, e. g. ,

the form wohdxoptogwith the Latin multicoma ; since, as itappears to me, the burthen Of composition is an Obstacle in

the wayof the free movementand liabilityto change of the

enti re word, on which account its concluding portion relin

quishca the exactdiscrim ination of the gender

W ith respect to the lom of the s of liter- no, avdp- wpt, cf. the rela

tion of “tenure”to the Sanscritrootstaa,

“to thunder,

”and Greek em

in Eri s- fl op .

T In Latin the interchange of the sounds e and o in one and the same

root occurs but seldom,and the etymology in the cases which occur

is obscured, while in Greek it is self- evidentthat, e.g. , ¢6pos and (pipe;

are radicallyidentical.

I The circumstance, thataswell in the Greek as in the Latin 2 d‘clensionthere are simple feminines, such as trapdt

'

voc, 680 9 , vvja os, alvus,

humus (Sanscrit bhz‘

imi—s,fem . , fagua docs not im

pede the supposition that the Greek 0 and Latin inorganic uof the 2 ddeclension


[G . Ed. p. 134 2 ] 917. The Gothic exhibits, in the class

of words under discussion, 1)masculine substantive bases

like daura - vard—a , gatekeeper ; vrak- a , persecutor

veg- a . wave,

"

as moving itself"

rig- a , way (as

“the

o e s

place onWt h one moves tt - a(nom . thin- s), servant“+

declension do not originally belong to the fem inine ; as also the corre

sponding Sanscrit, Zend, Lithuanian, and Gothic a , and Sclavonic a, never

stand at the end Of a feminine base . That, however, conversely, the

Latin a at the end Of compounds like caeli - cola does not correspond to

the Sanscrit- Zend masculine neuter a may here be further supported

bythe consideration thatcompounds are most subjecttoweakening, andthat, therefore, the retention Of the Sanscrit masculine neuter a un

changed in Latin can leastbe expected in compounds. Butif the fem i

nine form in compounds like parricida has once found itswayinto the

masculine, or attached itself to th is gender alone (aslicola), itcannot sur

prise as that, In an isolated case,a Simple word appears in the fem inine

form as masculine, vi z . serib- a for scrib- u- s. The case is differentwith

nan- ta, where ta stands for ‘

rns, as inpoeta=1rourrfis ; and as in Homer,

e .g a ixprrrd, im rdra , 771 1137 0 , fixe'

ra , pnr iera , f or a ixprrnis, & c .

Here either the case- sign has been dropped, as in Old Persian is regu

larlythe case with the final 3 both after short and long a ; or, which I

prefer assum ing, these forms are based on the Sanscritnominatives in m,

Zend ta (see Of bases intdr, on which rest, inGreek,notonlythe

bases inmp and rap, as has alreadybeen remarked in butalso the

masculine bases in m=rii,which have lost an p (see also 8 10

,and

Curtius,

“D e nom inum p . It is therefore no casual

circumstance, that in the Homeric dialectnearlyall the class of nouns of

agencyreferred to exhibitmasculine nominatives in a ; and it is hence

notimprobable thatsnipe- atm ,too

,originallybelongs to this class ofwords,

and is therefore abbreviated from et’

zpvon'

ra , as, according to its meaning,

itis a noun of agency.

The nominative vrak - s, which can alone be quoted, m ightalso belongto a base eraki .

t This answers, in respect Of the lengthening Of the radical vowel a

it? é see to Sanscrit formations like pdd- a - s,

“foot,"as

going,"from pad,

“to go.

”

1 In myopinion properly“boy, from a rootthav=Sanscrittu, to

grow ; as, mag- u- s

,

“boy,”from mag=8anscritmalt, man/t, “

to grow.

”

From


(zwam'

z,“I sound, tdk- a - s. footpath (tekit. I run,

weid- a - s, face, visage,"

as seeing (wei z d- mi, I see ,

[G . Ed. p. wa idiao- s. [ letmyself see , m ink- m e,

which, atthe end of compounds, has often a meaning tanta

mountto maker, accomplisher,"or one who is occupiedwith

thatwhich the firstmember of the compound expresses

as, balni - niak—a - s, saddler, saddle - maker (balua - s,

gri iki- fnink- a - s. sinner, sin- comm itting

”

(grié'

ka - s,

lauki - nink- a - s, countryman,agriculturist, agricola (lauIta - s,

migsi - nink- a - s, butcher, carnifex"

f. , San

scritmaz iad, m . n darbi - nink- a - s, workman, doingwork

”

(darba - s, remesti - nink- a - s, artisan, work

ing at a craft”(remesta - s. Observe the

weakening of the final vowel of the first member of all

The base verb ninlcudoes notoccur in its simple form,butonlyin

combination with the prepositions in, ap , ac , and (see Nesselmann’

s

Lexicon, p. and probablymeant originally“to go, then to do

,to

make.

”Cf. the Old Prussian nails- ant, towander,

”and Russianm

’

k - nu,

“ 1 howmyself.”To the Lithuanian - ni - Ita- s

,in the compounds spoken

of, corresponds, in Russian, unk'

b nil: e. in c’haefl bnnk '

b syedelynik

’

,

“saddler

,

”i . e.

“saddle- maker.

"The Old Prussian appears to form

with nika (nom . ni c for nika - s, acc. nika - n) nouns of agencyfrom ver

bal bases (see Nesselmann, p. I regard, however, all the words

classed here as compounds, similar to the Latin op ifex, arlifar for

although, e. g. , waldnix,ruler,

”Of which only the dative wa ldnilru

occurs, might be derived from the verbal rootmold,“to rule

,

”still no

thing prevents the assumptionthatitproperlysignifies using authority,"

and contains a lostor unciteable substantive waId - s or walda - s (them e

walda ), dom inion.

”Cristi, the substantive base of crixt- nia'

,

“baptist”

performer of occurs in the compound cri tti - la islca - s,bap

tismalregister and the substantive base dila (ace . diIa - n), in dil- nilr- a - ns,

workman, performing work"

(ace. and for da ina - alge- nik- a - mans

(dat.“the daylabourers, those working for daily pay,

”occur the

substantive bases deina, “day”

(Sanscrit dine), and alga ,“pay

”

(gen.

alga- s), butno verb ofwhich the word referred to could be the noun of

agency; and this is the case with mostof the other formations which

belong to this class.


these compounds to according to the principle of the Latin

language , as, cmli- cola , tam - cola , fracti -fer, [G . Ed. p.

Zuni -yer, for cmlu- cola, terra - colaj ructu-fer, lana -

ger.

’The fol

lowing are examples of adjectives Of this kind of formation

gym- a dtdwir- a - s, Open“

(at-went, at

- rak- a - s, unlocked (rah- ind, I lock,”atrak- im

'

t.“I

isz - tis- a - s, stretched out“

(ti siu, I To this classofwords belong, inold Sclavonic, bases like 'l

‘0k 0 toko.

“river,

”

as dowing ;”

pro- rake, prophet o'rgok o oi - roko, boy,

properly,“ infans vq

’

mog, (Mikl. Rad. p. Bosonoto vOdO

nose, hydria,

”

properly water- carrier ; nom . Tok'

b tok’

, &c.

The following are examples with a passive significationrgaa

'

b grad”

, town,

”as enclosed“

(grad- i - ti, to

ME AT)m il’

,

“dear(beloved),pleasant, as in Sanscritpur- (t- m, n. ,

par- t

”. f. , town,

”as filled priy

- d- s, beloved”

(rootI).F919. Between the Sanscritand Greek there exists the re

markable coincidence, that the adjectives formed with the

suffix under discussion in combination with the prefixes

3 an,ed,

“light,

”

sq th at309. heavy,”mostgenerally, if

not in Sanscrit invariably, have a passive signification}The accent in Sanscrit rests on the radical syllable ; e.

sukdr- a - s, being lightlymade,lightto make ; suldbh- a - s,

being easily attained dusltkdr- a - s, [G . Ed . p.

be ing made heavy, hard to do durldbh- a - s, being with

See and Vocalismus, pp. 139, 162 , Note it. W ith respectto

the Lithuanian s'

in r6tponis,“senator,

"I must, however, in departure

from 0. (conclusion), remark, thathere the i is not the weakening of

the a ofpona- s,

“lord,”butthe contraction of the suffixya or ia, accord

ing to 135 .

T Hence, according to settled laws Of sound, and according to the mea

sure of the letters following, dash, dur, duh .

1 Those forms cannotbe allowed toweigh as exceptions inwhich an

does not signify“light,

"but has a meaning tantamountto fair, good,

pleasant e.g B igv. I . 1 1 2 2 subluira ,“bringing fair (load).


difficulty(heavily) attained ; dubst’

th- a - s, being h eavy to

bear durmt’

trsh- a - s, id durdhdrsh- a - s, be ing heavily

pressed dusbpdr- a - s. being heavily filled ; dughgdr - a - s

(euphonic for dustér- a - s). being with difficulty (heav i ly)overstepped.

“So in Greek, e. g. , eticpop- o-

g, edxdrox- o—g, stirre

pt'

ypa qb- O- g, edénBOA- o- g. edavdywy—o—g, ddgtpop- o—g, dds-rpotp-o -

g,

- 0-

9, ddmho- o- g, dugupo’

apax- o-

g, dugava’

uop—o-

g.

92 0. As secondary(Taddhita) suffix a in Sanscrit form s,

usuallywith the accent and Vriddhi of the first vowel of

the primaryword (l)Masculine substantives (with fem inines ia which stand to the primary word in the rela

tion of derivatives, or in anyother relationship, as, e. g. .

edsishtlt’- d- s, from edsislttha , descendant of Vasishtha

mdnav- d- s, (from mam?) man, as“descendant of Mann

drdupad’- i‘, (from drupada)

“Dri

'

iUpadi , daughter of D ru

pada ;”ddshitr—d - s,(from duhitdr, - tri) son of the daughter

ndishadh'- d- s, Naishadha,

“

from nishadha , in the plural,“the countryNishadha ; id iv

i

- d - s. (from i iva) follower,

worshipper of sive . (2) A kind of patronymics of things

bywhich, e.g. , fruits are called after the trees on whichtheygrow, and are represented, as itwere, as thei r sons ;

e.g. , di vatth'

fi -m . (from aivattha)“the fruitof the tree Asvat

tha . To this class belongs also the alreadymentioned ed

mudr’

- a- m, sea - salt, as thatwhich is produced from the

(3) - m,

“

youth ,"

from yuvan, young.

"

(1)Neuter collectives, as, kdpdti

- d - m ,

a flock of doves,"from kapo

‘

ta . (5)Adjectives and appel

latives having various relationships to the primaryword

e. rdjat'

- a- s, of silver,”from rajatd- m, silver dyas- ci - m ,

of iron, from dyes (theme and nom . = Latin aes, ace- is,

[G . Ed. p. from ass- is, Gothic a is, theme a isa); adu

kar’

- d- s, porcine,"from sz

’

ikora, swine adrivalsar'

- d - s,

yearly, from salivaisara, year dcdip’

- d- s,

“a car covered

with tiger- skin,

“as adjective, made of tiger

- skin,

”from

d'

vz'

pa , m . 11 . (drips - s,- a - m), tiger

- skin.

"


the 3 Of which is onlyan inorganic affix, wh ich has been

added to the originally long a of MAI (see so that

the Greek word, put into Sanscrit form , would be nothingelse but mdli , whence, as from the name of a tree , we

should have to expect, with the suffix under discussion, the

name Ofthe fruit, mdP- ddm. But if inGreek and Latinwe

derive the names of trees from the names Of frui ts, after

the same fashi on as those Of the inhabitants of countries,as above we have endeavoured to represent the

names Of countries as the fem inines Of the names of the

inhabitants, then, irrespective of accent, we might as

easilyarrive from a formallymasculine neuter base MN to

a feminine base MAB (for q'

i), as in Sanscrit, e . fromdyas- d, the iron (masc. and neut.)(nom . ,dyasd

- s, dya d- m),to dyast

‘

. TO class (5) correspond Latin adjectives whi chhave been formed from substantive bases in Or(originally63,Sanscrit, as), by the suffix u (from a), e. g. , decdr—u- c,

sopdr- u- s, hondr- u- s, sapdr

- u- s.

92 2 . That in Zend, too, analogous forms to the classesOf Sanscritwords discussed above are notwanting,

is proved bybases like ”QM csay- a , king,

“as ruling

(V M csi, to rule ”ZOQ gar- a, throat,

"as swallow

ing,

“”7”Q

-

gar- a ,

“swallower,

”Assam

- ydz-

a. worshipper,“

”Ia-

gIm - a, slayer,"

”&a - ya6d1t- a, combatant,"

at

the end of compounds. Especial notice should be given

[G. Ed. p . to the compound drq m - vand (theme

dunno), Druj - slaying,

“as analogous to Sanscritcompounds

like arin- damé - s, foe - tam ing I at least am of

Opinion that we cannot venture to assume that in Zend,in departure from Sanscrit, the adjectives which are

formed with the suffix a govern also, in their simple state,

an accusative ; and that, therefore, drujé'

m and sand,

which in the manuscripts are not, in writing, joined to

gether, can be regarded as two independent words, as inthe manuscripts Of the Zend - Avesta the different portions

FORMATION or WORDS . 1309

Of a compound veryOften appear written separately.

“An

example Of a Zend word, formed with the secondarysuffix

a, isto be found in ayagzha,“iron, an iron- vessel

”

Sanscritdyasa), from (seeBurnouf, l.92 3 . The feminine Of the suffix a, vi z . 6, forms, in

Sanscrit, oxytone abstracts like bhidd, cleaving'"

chhidd,id. kshipd, the casting blailtshd. the begging

'"

kshudhd, hunger‘“mudd. joy.

"

f 80. inGreek, amongstother words, ([Jopé , (peopé , xovpd, (paw. Tom}, (pu‘

yrj. In Latin,

beside fuga, it is probable thatcura , the base word of curare,belongs to this class,whi ch itseems to me has sprung fromthe Sanscrit root Itar, leg

- i. to make (kardmi,“I make,

”

kwrmés, we make."see The Gothic furnishes for

this class of words the feminine bases era/rd. persecution

(opposed to vraka, nom . oral-s, perse [G . Ed. p.

bidé , request; bald,"use I ; da ild,

“sym

tharbd want,“id- reigd, repentance ll saurgd,

care ; vulvd, plunder (root valv: vilva. vale , vulvum).

Burnouf Etudes, p. M ) is of a different Opinion as regards the

case before us, who, however, regards, and undoubtedlywith justness, asa compound the expression tba t

’

shé- ta éurvé o which immediatelyprecedes,the members of which are, in the original manuscript, similarlysepa

rated, aud translates itby triompltantde la haiac.

”

1'

Remnants of this class Of words, which, however, are not placed

here bythe Indian Grammarians, are the before- discussed accu

satives of the periphrastic preterite and the Z end infinitives in awn.

M riyayd, hunting,”is an isolated word from a theme of the loth class

t h a perfectdeclension.

1 Root bat(presupposes a strong verb bata , bét), whence bats, “good,

English“better." In Sanscrit the rootblmnd, to be fortunate

,

”corre

sponds ; whence bhddra, fortunate, admirable,”see Glossarium Sanscr.

,

a. p. 2 43 .

Root dil (=Sanscrit dal,“find: presupposes a strong verb deila ,

dad, dilum,see Glossary, 8 . 1 847, p . 164 .

From a lostroot, which perhaps signified originally to blush, then“to be ashamed,

”and appears to be connected with the Sanscrit root

rahj, whence raktci , r ed.


yiuké, strife ; lwdtd threatening ; nom . vraka , bide ,

&c. , The following exhibit inorganic n : reirdn.“the trembling brdthra - lubdn. brotherly love trigdn,

mourning“

(see Grimm , II. p. 53, n. Dom . reird,

&c. The following are Lithuanian examples

Of this class Of words : maldé‘z , request”(meldé iu, I re

deyc‘

z , wailing”(whence deyoyu, I lam ent.

wail ramsz é‘

z , stopping (remszu, I raudc‘

z ,

complaint”(Sanscritrootrad, to 95da , shame

(whence ggdinu,“I pa

-

galba,

“ help"

(gob -mi,

pa-

gemi, I help prtc

- spanda, Oppression spaudéiu,

I pa- baiga,

“accomplishment

"

(bo igie , I ao

The following are examples inOld Sclavonic (inDobrowsky, p. MABAmlva,

“tumullus

”

(mlv- i - li , MOABH'I‘H

molte i - ti , ”Ana slave, glory roysa gdba,

perditio"

(gdb- i - h’

, M‘BNA myenu, mutatio

,

”

noshaa po- byeda, vicforia f

’

oy'r

'hxa ti - lyecha,“comalutio.

92 4. The suffix i is either identical with the demonstrative base i (see or, as I now prefer to assume, a

weakening of the suffix a , which made its appearance in a

period before the separation Of our stem of languages ; in

the same wayas, in Latin, the bases in uOf the 2 d deelen

sion = Sanscrit a), as also those in a (=m d), have fre

[G . Ed . p . quently perm itted this vowel at the

end of compounds to be corrupted to i , e. in imbellis,

imberbis, multiformis. This suffix forms in Sanscrit, (1) fem inine abstracts accenting the root, especially in the

Véda dialect; e. ré Iih- i - s,“quickness ; lqri

'

ghi - s, the

ploughing tvfgh- i - s, lustre ; sé ch- i - s,“friendship, pro

perly,“the following (root sac/I, to follow, cf. Latin

sequor and socius with sachica - s, friend p - i - s, writv v .

Ing mm 38786verezdh- z - s, Increase, fortune ac cepts}

Dative vereidhyé, gen. pl. varc’idhinanm, see Burnouf, Etudes,

pp. 8 16,32 4.


m sddas, assembly (perhaps originally sitting and

Greek 5809, é'

de(a)- og. Consequentlv the i Of ccedi. Iabi,

nubi, sedi, &c. , which lies at the base Of the oblique cases

as theme, might have been deprived of a following 3 , or r

for 3 (see and so the whole have migrated into the

i - declension ; where I recall attention to the exactly sim ilar

abbreviation which munus. mum - is (from manic- is), hasexperienced in the compounds immuni - s, and opus, operis,

from op is- is Sanscrit6pm , épas

- as), in Op i-fex for Operi

-fec.

(2 ) Nouns of agency, and appellatives whi ch, according to

their primarymeaning, are nouns of agency, or denote instruments. Theyare for the most part masculine, and

accent, some Of them the root, some the suffix. The

following are exammes : chhfd- i - s, cleaver ; ydj- i - a, sa

crificer ; pdch- i—s, fire, as cooking éh - i - c, snake,

“

as moving itself (rootmih); pégh- i - s, thunderbolt,”

as

“crushing ; vas- f- s,“

garment dhvan- i - s, sound kav- i - c,

poet,“as speaking

”

(root 1m , to chhid- i - s, f.

axe, as cleaving ; ruch- i - s, f. beam Of light.“

Also

some adjective bases, as étich- i , pure bddh- i, knowing,

wise ; tau- i . much“and, with reduplication, ja

’

gm i,

[G. Ed. p.

“quick (root yam,

“to go,

”Ved .)

gdghn- i, slaying

”(root han, with the accusative

(S. V. Benfey, p. séswi , giving,

” with the accusative

(Ved . l. sdsah- i , enduring“

with the accusative (l. c. p. To the paroxytone nouns of agency, as

ydj- i - s, sacrificer, corresponds, inGreek, rpéx- I - g,

“runner:“

with (ch- is, snake,“in Zend m g» az - i - s. the etymologi

callyobscure é'

x- I -

g is identical ; and so, too, the Latin

anyu- i - s, the uof which (=v) is onlya favourite affix after

gutturals. To the oxytone fem inine formations like chhid - i - s,

In the Véda dialect, roottu, to grow. From the same rootcomes

the Old Prusian tori - lam , much and the adverb touls, more”

(properlya comparative with c==Sanscritiyas, yas, cf.


axe, as cleaving, belong, probably, Greek fem inine

bases li ke pap- 1’

s, needle,”as sewing ; ypa¢ style,

"as

writing Icon- I'

d, hanger. sword,”as sm iting ; « (pay- I

'

d,

butcher’

s knife,“as slaughtering and,with passive signifi

cation,As-Ir- I’

d; with both active and passive,AaB InSanscritthe masculine as- i - s (cf. enci - s), sword,” as being whirled

(root as. to has a passive meaning. The Greekterm ination 18, the 8 of which is undoubtedly an inorganicaffix, is, however, in so far ambiguous, thatits 1 is frequentlythe abbreviation Of a Sanscriti'; and as the Sanscritsuffix a

=Greek a (see 5. frequently forms its fem inine by z’

,

and, e. parallel with the masculine nadd- s stands a fem i

nine nad z‘, likewise river,

”as making a rushing noise

,

“

so we m ight also regard the said Greek formations in cb‘

as

corresponding to the Sanscrit formations in i'

, and thereforederive, e.

‘

ypadu’

d from a tobe-

presupposed masculine base‘

ypadxi or ‘

ypé tpo, in the same wayas, e. g. , fe

male leader of an army,” comes from orapam‘

yé ; xopwv’

from xopwvé. Beside the Sanscritadjective bases like Sti ck- i,“pure,

”bddh- i,

“knowing,”the Greek rpédm places itself

as analogous. In Gothic, to this group of words belongthe masculine substantive bases yugga - laudi , young man,

youth”

(root led, to grow”

- Sanscrit m h from rudh),nominative lauth

'- s nae- i , [G . Ed . p.

nom inative nau- s,‘ mum

'

,

“thought;

”saggvi ,

“song

”(with

euphonic I), see and the fem inine bases da ili , por

tion”(Sanscrit rootdaI, to qvéni ,

“woman,

”as

bearing“

(Sanscritrootjan,“to The Lithuanian

remnants ofthis class Of words are all fem inine , and theirorigin lies beyond the consciousness of the Lithuanian lin

gual intelligence . To this class belong, as ancienttransm is

i ' From nahv- i,with euphonic v (see It, with the Latin nee

,

Greek ve'

xv, vcxpd, belongs to the Sanscrit root m i , from nah,“ to be

ruined .

”


sions from the time oftheunityOf language, any- i - s, adder“

Sanscrit éh- i - s, Zend az - i - s, Greek fix- r s, Latin angu- i - s ;

ak- i - s,“eye

“=Sanscrit (flesh- i (neuter), Zend up » ash - i ,

(see 52 . conclusion) iis—i - s,“ash,

“accords well with the

Sanscrit rootval-sh. ZendM ) ucs, Gothic cake, to grow.

”

Perhaps kand- i - s,“moth

,

"has grown up on L ithuanian

ground (cf. kandu, I bite, Sanscritm khand,“to bite

,

“

W.Ichad, to eat. In Zend the adjective bases Jgflzxy

darshi,“ courageous, and JGAU; admi ,

“flexible

,tender

,

“

belong to thi s class ofwords. The following are exam ples

Of substantives : ashi,“eye,

"as

“seeing

“

(see “632 3driwz

'

,beggar (see 45 . p. 4 2 , and cf. the Sanscrit root

darbb, dribb, to 5» az i , snake"

(= Sanscrité hi)Alta i) cam . probably, harness, as covering (Sanscritrootvar, eri , to cover.

“ With respectto the secondarysuffix i , in whi ch the European languages have no share,

the example quoted above maysuffice .

92 5. The suffix u, in which I think I recog nise a de

monstrative base, whence come the prepositions ut, rip e ,

and upé ri , forms, in Sanscrit, (l) adjectives from desidera

tive themes with the signification of the participle present.They, like the latter, govern the accusative, and retain also

[G. Ed. p. their energyby the accentuation of the

first syllable, i . a. in the case before us, of the svllable of

reduplication ; e.g. , ditirikshuli p ilérdu wishing to see the

parents“

(Sav . 5 . 10a). (2)Adjectives which , in agreement

with the Greek in v, and Lithuanian in u, for the most

partaccentthe suffix ; e. tanu'

,

“thin (properly, stretched

out,"root (an, to stretch Greek 1 aw stretched,

“

"long ;

”svddu

’

, rootsend, “to tastewell

Greek 536, Lithuanian sald z‘

t, from sladz‘

t for swadz‘

z (seeIaghz

'

c. light moveable,"root Iangh, to spring

a See Burnouf, Yagna, p. 444 .


from mj or raj) ; nun din, quick)“whence the super

lative ”M 4434“ di ista ; )wgwl; vaphu,“

g

can'

t (see The reason that, in Latin, adjectives

corresponding to this class of words are wanting, is, as h as

been alreadyelsewhere remarked.‘

l'

thatthatlanguage has

added to all the words which, according to their orig in,

belong tothis class, the inorganic affix Of an i . In thi s way.

from the Sanscrittam’

chas been formed lenui, and yard, for

gard, has become gravi (transposed from gam i); from laghz’

;

has come levi (for legui); from svddii, sad e i (for suadui); frommridzi. for mardzi, mollz

'

. as it seems by assimilation from

molvi (cf. pp. 42 8, where the [ corresponds e ithe rto the Sanscrit r or d. (3) Appellatives ; e.g. . ddru,“wood,

"as

“to be cleft; I (aha, m . f.

“arrow,

“as

moving itself bdndlm, m kinsman, from bandh,

to bind ; rdjiu, m .

“ cord, as“bind [G Ed . p . 1 3571 ]

ing (cf. Latin ligare mm'c, m . artificer, as m ak

ing ; bhidz'

z . m . thunderbolt,“

as cleaving tami , f.

body, as stretched out; also in Zend (see 180.

p. So, in Greek, beside the already- mentionedddpu, perhaps also the bases 76pm f. (Sanscrit root ga r,31

-

“

i, whence gir, f. voice véxu (Sanscrit root

nae, from nak,“to be ruined

”

(=Zend yaw, naaiu,“a

corpse"

(see o-

réxu, ear Of corn,"

as raised

To the superlative dr'

ista, which Neriosengh translates byvegavattama (see Burnouf, Vahista,

”

p. 1 4,“Etudes,

"

p. corresponds

admirably the Greek deem s. In Sanscritwe should have expected

di ighgha .

1‘ Influence of the Pronouns on the formation of Words,’

p. 2 0.

Of. ddpv, in the Oblique cases “pm , as, 76m , together with ydw,

Sanscritjdnd, n. The Gothic lengthens the two neuter bases bythe aflix

of an a, which is again removed from the nominative and accusative, ac

cording to hence, trim ,“tree,

”hm

'

va , knee,”nom. ace . triu,

Imin (dat. pl. kniva - m, trim - m).

FORMATION OF WORDS. 1 3 1 7

up“

wfixu=Sanscritbdlu'

t arm, Zend 5 ambdz u(Sanscritrootbdh or vdh,

“to in Latin curru,

“car,

”as run

ning ; perhaps am , if itbelongs to the Sanscritrootwué,

from ale, in the signification to whence alsohas come the Sanscrit ai - dni - s, thunderbolt,” as pene

trating. The Gothic furnishes us with several masculinebases for this class Of words, which, exceptlith- u, limb,

"

as moving itself“

(rootlid: to mag- u, boy (root

mag, originally to grow.

"then to be able come from

lost roots ; vi z . a im , messenger (Sanscritrootar, ri, to

go fdt- u,“foot,

"as

“

going"

(Sanscrit pad,“to go,

“

whence pad and pdd—a - s, auhs-u, ox,“

(Sanscritnlcgh, to wet;

“to sow,

"whence zikshan bull g

'réd-u,

In Lithuanian, dangu- s, [G. Ed . p.

heaven, as covering (dengiu, I cover") probablybelongs to this class.

92 6. The Sanscritsuffix an, in the strong cases (in, forms

appellatives which denote the person acting, and, like the

In so far as it is connected with m ix» (rootanx= Sauscrit d ig/t,“tomount

”

)the a isonlythe Guna vowel, like the o of o'rdxo

- s.

T In this case acne is a denominative from ace, as in Greek, e.g. ,

wpé - m from 7mm (see Against a former conjecture, which Iagreed with Pott in encouraging, that am , and similar words in the

European sister languages, belonged to the Sanscritroot(6 (from to

sharpen,”with the preposition d, speaks the circumstance, that in San

scrititself th is preposition does notoccur in combinationwith 36; and thatin the Greek forms, which are most probablyconnected with the Latin

acuo, viz . (in), dam), dxpds, &c. , as also the Lithuanian ass - tru- s,

peaked, sharp,”ass - m3, sharpness,

”and the Sclavonic Ot'l‘e

'

b os- tr’

,

sharp,"

in all of these the initial vowel belongs to the root. As fi llmi is a compound Of ck, the Sanscrit dg

- rwm, peak,”mayalso be as

signed to this root, and an anomalousmutation Of the tennis to the medial

be assumed .

I The gender is uncertain : grédd, I hunger,"is a denominative.

The Sanscritsupplies the rootgridh, from gradh,“towish, to require,

”

whence also the Sclavonicglad'

, hunger.

”


majority Of the analogous Greek formations in av, cv, or,

qv, aw, accent the radical syllable. The following a re

examples : sndhan, friend,"

as loving rdjan, k ing ,

as ruling fdkshan, carpenter, as cleaving, form ing

tilcghaa , bull, as impregnating , tag- {sham an appellation

of Indra, originally, causing to rain,

"also bull,

“as im

pregnating with seed.

"To the latter, from the rootvarsh,

vflgh, to rain, to rain over, to besprinkle, to whence ,

also, other names Of male animals, corresponds, in root,

suffix, and accentuation, theGreek base d'

pa-

cv (from Foipc ev),by assimilation, dfifiev, from an Obsolete root. The suffix

under discussion further exhibits itself in Greek in the

same form in the base sTp- ev, youth, as speaking . T h is

suffix, however, diverges from its original destination in

the adjective base rep- cv, in which cv has a passive significa

tion, like the or of né-Ir- ov, ripe,”

properly, cooked,”wh ich

is originallyidentical with it. The suffix ov appears, in its

original destination in TéKT - OV, contrasted with the above

mentioned m takeh- ou, a carpenter,”and with dem itted

accentin ovary- 6m drop, as trickling rpu

‘

y- dv, dpq

'

y- dv,

(in- 86V, six- (iv. The originala ,with the genuine accentuation,

has remained in rdhav.

’

As regards the bases in av and a w,

[G. Ed. p. it is to be Observed thatthe Sanscrit suf

fix an forms the strong cases in an (see with the

exception ofthe vocative singular, and this latter is probablythe Older form of the suffix, which appears to me to have

arisen from one , so thatthe dropping Ofthe final a has been

compensated bylengthening the first. The shortening of

the vowel of the suffix under discussion, and its entire sup.

pression in the Sanscrit weakest cases (see 5. have,however, probablyentered into the differentlanguages in

dependentlyOf one another, and probablyforthe firsttime

after the separation of languages. Compare, e. the plural

nom inatives omjvrwv- eg, staves, as KM?

dwv- sr, billows,"as d i

'

Gwv- eg, ei'

pwv- eg, rpc

'

fiwv- es‘

.


spond well to the Sanscrit, like sndh- da - cm, rdg da - am . A

weakening Of the original 6 to i is found in pert- ia , no

minative, peat- en (according to the i of wh ich for

6 resembles that Of the base homin, the nom inative of

which belongs to a base hO- mda (see p. In

Gothic the suffix spoken of has throughout in the singular,

in the cases which, in Sanscrit, are weak, justlike the suf

fix man experienced theweakening Of the a - sound to

i (see TO this class belong the bases(some of which

have sprung from lost roots) hon- ou, cock,” as singing

(Latin cano, Sanscrit iaris from kai is, to say stun- an ,

judge (Sanscrit root stu, to faura -

gagg- an.

superintendant”

(literally, ar- ou, eagle,“

as flying”

(Sanscrit root or,_ri , to go alt- ou, sense ,

understanding"

(of. alt- man, spirit,"

aft-ya, I th ink ,

I mean lint- ou, hypocrite nut- ou,“catcher ; ga

sinth- ou, companion ; skid- ou, debtor" (root ska], to

owe, to be obliged veih- an, priest,"

as consecrating[G . Ed. p. spill

- ou, announce r ; auhsan, ox,

=Sanscrit zikshan (see nom . auhsa=rilcshd (seeIn Old H igh German the Gothic 0 Of this suffix

and of the suffix man has been corrupted to o or u: in

the genitive and dative plural, however, we find inorganic6, while the Gothic an- é, a

'- m (for an- m), would lead us to

expect a short a (see Grimm , I . p. The i Of the

Gothic genitive and dative singular has remained, or been

further corrupted to e, which latter, in the Middle and

New High German, has extended itself through all the

cases. The Old High German bases in on. e. bot- ou, mes

senger,”as announcing

"'

l'

ore- ou, ox, has- ou, hare."

as

Sp illd, I announce, I relate . The s is probablya phonetic prefix

or an Obsolete preposition. Compare the Old Prussian bills , I say,”Li

thuanianbiloyuid. , Irish brt‘

,

“word,”and the SanscritrootbrI

‘

i,

“tospeak .

”

1‘

Properly, Offering. The rootbut,“to Offer,

”is based on the San

scrit


springing (Sanscrit éai , to spring, said , harehIcmf - ou, runner,

"twi nk- on, drinker,

"

fah- ou, sei z er,”

heri - z oh- ou,“leader of an army, correspond excellentlyto

Greek bases like cipiry- dv, and the nominativeswhich drop the

u, like bot- o (our B ole, messenger,”from the base Eaten).

to the Latin like edo, combibo. The English language ex

hibits a remarkable remnant of the Sanscrit sufiix an in

the plural oxen,"which, accordi ng to form , is nothing but

the form of the Sanscritbase fikshan a little altered, whichappears in German in the form Ochsen, not only in the

plural, but also in all the oblique cases of the singular.

Through its limitation to the plural, the ancient formative

suffix has, inEnglish, obtained the appearance of an expres

sion of plurality and justso in brethren"

(Sanscritbase

bhrdtar, bhrdtg-i), chicken, and children, where the ori

ginal state of our stem of languages gives no occasion forit. In modern Netherlandish this suffix has fixed itself in

the plural of all regular words, and has [G . Ed. p. 1362 ]

hence become a distinctmark of plurality for the practi

cal use of language . Regarding a sim ilar abuse of another Sanscritsuflix in the oldest period of H igh German

(see92 8. The suffix under discussion does not form in San

scrit regular neuter bases butsome anomalous neuters ini form theirweakestcases (see from bases in an, e.g. ,

Mesh- i , eye (as from alrghdn, which may, per

haps, have originallyhad a perfectdeclension, and on which,

perhaps, alt-ska, which, atthe end of compounds, takes the

place of dkshi, is based, with the loss of an n, as also ra'

j- cu,

which is the word most in use of this class, is regularlyreplaced as the final elementofa compound byrdia . Con

scritbud/c,“to know, and has assumed a causal signification ; so that

baton, as making to know,

”approaches nearer to the old meaning than

the verb biutu, “qfl

'

ero.


versely, in German, several bases of words, which , in theirsimple state, term inate in a vowel, assume, at the end of

compounds, the suffix an, e. g. , inGothic, ga - d ailou, sym pa.

thiscr“

(from go,“with,” and da ili, nom . , da ils, f. part

“

)

ga- hla iban, companion (hlaiba, nom . , Ma il

'

s, m . , bread

as—lithan, palsied“(us,

“from , and lit/m, n. , lithu- s, m . ,

member In Old High German the appellation of

day (simple theme toga, nom . tag) has, in several com

pounds, by extending itself to tagon, re - approached its

conjectural Sanscrit Sister word aihan,’ Zend (IASJJA!

(see 2 53. p. To return to the Sanscritneute r baseakshdn, eye, whence, in the Véda dialectalso, the m iddle

[G . Ed. p. cases spring—at least the instrum ental

plural akshébhis—the Gothic base auganf corresponds to it

in root, suffix, and gender. Asthe nom inative, accusative , and

vocative plural of neuters in Sanscritbelong to the strongcases, we Should here expectfrom akshdn the form akshdni ,from akghdgz

- a (see and to this the Gothic augén- a ,

“eyes,

"adm irably corresponds (see 801 . p. 1083, Note).

In Gothic, however, the nom inative , accusative, and vocative

singular of neuter bases in an also prove themselves to be

strong ; hence, augd for the alcshd to be expected in San

I regard dia mas an abbreviation of dtihan(rootdah, “to burn

, here ,“to give light see Gloss. Scr. , a . 1 847, p. 2 0, where, however, as in mySanscritGrammar, this anomalous word, which forms the middle cases

in dims, is erroneouslygiven as masculine. lt is neuter, and therefore

forms inthe nominative,accusative,and vocative plurala'

luim‘

(theVéda forma'

lui belongs to the base cilia), dual dha i , or Vedic éltani , see Benf. Gloss.

1 T he sibilantof the Sanscrit rootmaybe a later affix, and is wantingin the Gothic, as in the Latin oeulus, the Lithuanian aid - a, and Greek

root «in, from dx. For the g in augan we m ight expect11 , according to

and therefore auhan, which form probablypreceded augan. In

that case we should regard the u as the weakening of the Old a , and

explain the a of the diphthong cuaccording to 82 . With the Sanscritaksha at the end of compounds the Gothic base iha or c ilia

, of [mi/ m,

one- eyed,”has been alreadycompared (sec 308 . p.


gether, and indeed so, that an, or rather an (seeoccurs only in the strong cases, and in extends over all

those weak cases which do not, as is done in the sa i d words

by the weakest cases, entirely divest themselves of the

suffix, and, beyond these, also to the vocative, whi ch espe

eially inclines to a weakening of the vowel. Moreover,

the accent in the words spoken of is so divided , that the

cases with the suffix an (an) follow the accentuation of

rdian, king, ruler,"and Sim ilar words. and those with

the suffix in (excepting the vocative, 785. Rem . p.

that of - kdrin, making.- eddin, speaking,

"and Sim ilar

formations in in. Thus, e. g. , from the root month, to

shake, comes the base manthan,“a churn,

"as shaker

"

[G. Ed. p. (accented like rdjan); and hence , byweakening the root

,the suffix, and the accentuation

, the

base mat/tin, which is found also at the beginning of com

pounds, and is therefore viewed bythe grammarians as

the proper theme . The analogy of mdnthaa, mat/tin, is,

moreover, followed bythe alreadymentioned panthan, p a

thin, way,”where the suffix under discussion has a pas

sive signification ; a circumstance which has already been

remarked of the Greek rptfié v, which is, in formation, akin

to it. The root is path,“to go,

”

perhaps originallypanth :the signification, therefore, ofpdnthan, pathin, is tantamountto gone upon, trodden.

"Inthe Véda dialectthe accusative

singular panthdnam, and the nom inative plural pdnthdnm ,

allow the n to be cast out, after which the two a - sounds

coalesce ; whence pdnthdm. panthds, a remarkable thoughfortuitous coincidence with the Greek ez

’

xoiJg, et’

xoég, for

siniva, ec’

xdt'og, eixdvag.

930. The suffix in is used in Sanscrit also for the formation of derivative words, and then denotes the person

gifted with the thing which is expressed bythe prim itive

and has, therefore, a passive meaning like the prim itive

pathe’

a ,

“way,“

as“trodden.

”This in has likewise the


accent; e. g. , dham’

n, rich, endowed with riches (nom . In.

dltam“, according to from dhand, wealth kéi in,

covered with hair, having beautifulhair”

(from kééd,and as substantive masculine a lion" the

Martin and Icarz’

n, the elephant,”

properly, having a trunk,“

from hasld, karé . hand, trunk.

“It appears to me to

adm itof no doubt thatthe secondaryin, too, is a weaken.

ing of an, or rather (in, which, in Greek and Latin, has

remained in the form of «or, M, in possessivesto which theuse of languagehas imparted a partlyamplified significa

tion, in like manner as several of the Sanscrit formationsunder discussion maybe regarded as ampliatives ; since ,

e. g. , Icéi - ia , as“lion" is

“the shaggy [G. Ed. p.

dant- ia, (“

gifted with teeth as elephant"is the large

toothed m art in (from drivishgrd, tooth as boaris the tusk- endowed. So in Greek, e. g. , the bases, and,

atthe same time, nominatives,yva’

zG- mv, thick- cheeked”(pro

perly only having xe¢ai7\’

-mv,“thick - head ;

ya'

o'rp

- wv, thick- belly, having a great paunch IIAOt'

rr- a r,

properly, having great riches ; in Latin, e.g. , ad s

cap it- da, front- da . li ed

- 6m bucc'- da, h bi

'

m , gui - da . Graf - (In,

from a lost base, is perhaps, together withnected with the Sanscritlcééd (Dom . Mid- s, althoughthe Sanscrit5(from k)would lead us to expect in Latin c.

But if, notwithstanding the connection which Pott(E. I. ,

p. 588) conjectures should be well founded, we mayrecognise in the name Cass- 6a a cognate formation ofthe abovementioned Sanscrit appellation of the lion (HQ - (n fromké§

’- da), and of the proper name of a Danava, which we

meetwith in K filidasa’

s Urvasii‘

, while the feminine formof the said word (kéi

’- z'

ni) in the Nalus appears asthe name

of a female attendant of Damayanti‘

. As regards the ao

In Sanscritwe should have to expectfrom mica, nose, a ruff - in,

formed with in .


centuation, the Greek possessives correspond to the S anscrit

nouns of agency in an, 611 : compare e. g. , th e plural

ydorpwv- eg with rdjdn- as. The fem inine formati on fiéyxwva

(for (iv-mama) is remarkable : it corresponds to r éAawa,

péAawa (see and therefore presupposes a m asculine

neuter base (iv-mow, and represents the Sanscrit fem inine

possessives like Icés'

ini'

,having (fine or much) ha i r,

“for

Icéédmf

. 80, according to its form , Oepévrawa i s based , not

on depot-now, but on a tobe-

presupposed base depawa v and

[G . Ed. p. represents the Sanscrit fem inines like

rdjfiz‘

She that rules,“ queen for rdjani

'

, and th is for

rdjdni'

.

93 1 . It is importantto observe, that where the G reek

possessive suffix a w refers notto persons but to room s,

which are gifted with the thing expressed by the base

name, the accentuation which has been recognised above

785. commencementof Remark) as the more energeticand animated is replaced bythe weaker, since the accentsinks down from the first or second syllable of the wordto the suffix ; thus, e. g. , imré v, properly, gifted with

horses, with the tobe - supplied secondary idea of room ,

and thus “stall for horses so dvdp

- é v, ywam- é v, m 0

’

off - u3mdpweA’- é v, e lf - div, peNoo

’- é v, wepun epe

- é v,“in Op

position to the living possessors of the things denoted, as

I‘va

'

dwv, IIAOt'

rrwv, Xet'

v , K edm'

zhwv, Tt'

fxaw. The accented

I regard the e of srepta-repe

- dwas the thinning of the finalvowel of

the base of the primaryword, which in trepw'rep

i- siw, according to the

prevailing principle (see is suppressed. SO ciparelte- éwtogether

with (inner - (for, OZw- dw together with Olaf- chit, pods- aim with flog - aim

xakxe- éw, )tvxve- é w. There is no source for the c of m yw eav in the pri

m itive base nmvm r ; and it is probablyintroduced through analogyW iththe forms in which the e is founded on the final vowel of the prim itive

base, and the origin ofwhich is now lostsightof bythe language . W ith

respectto the weakening of o to 6 compare vocatives like Mme from 716m

(g.


as biting (rootda i ii from dank : Greek Oa k); vdh—amb m,

car,"as carrying

“ .tdp

- ana- s, sun, as burningddh- ana - s, fire,

"as burning ddrp

- ana - s, m irror,"as

making proud (root (Imp , drip in the causal)‘

ai r- a g a - s,

[G . Ed. p.

“boat,” as ferrying over. Hereto

well correspond, with respect to accentuation also, G reek

bases in awe, and indeed to the neuter, such as apex

(asickle,

”as cutting yhécp- avo- v, kda - avo- v, Jp

‘

y-

a vo- v,

Trj'y- avo- v(for Téxavov), fix- aver (as meansof holding O'

xéw

- avo- v. The following are examples with a passive m ean

ing : akéx- avo- v, wOw- avo- v, fi pr avo- v. To the masculine

forms like ddh- ana - s,“fire,

”as burning,

”correspond trré¢

- avo- g, xd- avo-

g,xOO- avo- g. In Lithuanian, tothis class belong

most probably words like tele- z'

ina—s, runner, where the

first vowel of the suffix isweakened as regards quality, but

lengthened as regards quantity, and has drawn to itself the

accent. The following are other examples bé'

g- {g

'

na - s,

fugitive kla id- z'

ina- s,“wanderer ;

”

pa—kla id- z

'

iua- s,

“rover

"

(klys- lu,“I wander,

“

pret. hlyd—cu); lep - t'

ina - s, weakling ;

mal- {ina - s, mill riy- t'

ina - s or ryg- zina - s,“devourer”

(ryg - ti,

I swallow, I In Gothic, perhaps the base tlciud- ana , nom .thiudan

'

- s,

“king,

"if itoriginallysignifies ruling,

belongs to this classi . In OldHigh German the masculine

i t The following have a passive signification : e.g. , a'

dy- anwm, conch ,

bed, and (is- ana - m, seat.“

To the former corresponds the Zend

fay- ana-m. Another example in Zend is a fiekhar

-um'-m, sustenance,”as

“being eaten”

(Burnouf, Yacna,"

p.

1‘ As in Sanscritthe ayof causals and verbs of the loth class, whichhas its influence in the formatiOII ofwords, is dropped before the suffixana (da

'

rp - apa- s, notM am as); so inGreek the a of the correspond

ing verbs in ciaofalls off : hence oxe'

vr- avo- v, the a ofwhich has nothing todowith thatof a lta r- rim.

1 The lostrootthud is perhaps an extension of the Sanscrittu,“to

grow”(whence « ivas, strength

” which we have alreadyrecognised in

Gothic inthe form in tav(see p. 1 342 G . ed 8. 3d Note).


base wag- ana, wagon,

”nom . ace. wag

- cu, irrespective of

gender, accords adm irablywith the above - mentioned San

scrit edit- ana- m . The suffix under discussion forms in

Sanscritadjectives also with the accenton the final syllable

of the suffix, as tidbit- and. fair"

(i dbh- and- s, - and, - ami - m),properly, shining

“

(roota'

mbh, to shine [G . Ed p. 1370-J

jval- ami , flam ing ; chaI- and, tottering, So

inGreek, cxm vé -

g, covering ix- a vé- g, sufficient.

933. Letus now examine somewhat closer the Sanscritsuffix as, the dative of which we have alreadyrecognised asthe term ination of Védic infinitives (see and whoseorigin we have sought in the root as of the verb substan

tive (see 855 The Indian grammarians, however,recognise as infinitives, i . e. as representatives of the formin tum, onlythose forms which have no other case from the

same base accompanying them , as is the case, e. with

fi‘

ette- é,“in order to live, the sole remnantof the basefiede.

On the other hand, chdkshas- é, which above (atp. 12 2 4G . ed

in a passage there quoted from the R ig- Veda, we

have seen standing beside a dative of the common infinitive

in a sim ilar relation, is looked upon bythe ScholiastSziyanaas no infinitive, clearly because chcikshas, the seeing,

“is

retained with a complete declension, and for example has

a nom inative, which is wanting in the Vedas in the formin in in the simple word.1

' The S imple suffix, called asun

it To this class of words I refer the Zend z av- ana,“living

(cf. Burnouf,“Yacna,

”Notes, pp . 81 and 88, from the contracted

roota n, forju(cf. 109 5) 2 . p. 1 19, and

t J ivc‘itu, “

vita , which occurs inthe nominative, I should agree with

Benfeyin regarding as an infinitive, were it found in sentences like na

salm6tijivdtum,he cannotlive,

”or likejivitaii

'

jivdtum,

“vitam vivere.

”

In the passages, however, quoted byBenfey(Glomary, p. the sigui

fication vita is sufficient; moreover,jivcitu is not, like the infinitivcsin la, a feminine, but a masculine and neuter (see Unadi, and

signifies, like the Latinword, akin to itin rootand formation, victus, be

4 R sides


[G . Ed . p. 1371 .] or asi bythe Indian grammarians, with

reference to the difference of accentuation forms

[G. Ed. p. A) Abstractneuters with the accent on

sides “living,"also “nourishment, food, means of living (cook ed rice,

and, moreover, medicine,”as makingtolive

”

.t en, however,

Benfey, in his recently-

published Complete Grammar of the Sanscrit

Language,”

p . 431 , says thatjivtitum appears in the Védas distinctlyas

an infinitive,I am unable to perceive th is distinctness, atleast from the

passages quoted in the Glossary to the S . V.,just as I am unable to

deduce, with Benfey, the masculine nature of these infinitives from the

Védic infinitive datives in tavé as, indeed, as the said learned m an h im

self says ia 727. V.,which is adduced as proof, the fem inines in uOp

tionallyform the dative in avé, while the masculines do so necessari ly.

Nowthe Vedic infinitive datives actuallyavail themselves of the option

of using in the dative both the termination é with Guna, and also the

termination di , inasc h as theyemployboth the one and the other form,

with this peculiarity, that before the heavier and exclusivelyfem inine

termination di theyganias the uof the suffix . I will not here, in sup

port of myviews, refer to the gerund in tvd, as Benfey (l. c . , p . 4 2 4)

pronounces no opinionwhatever on itas to its gender and case, and espe

ciallyas to the grammatical categorytowhich it belongs : as, however,he remarks (p. 420, thatalan kriivasignifies do not,

”

properly,enough done,

”itm ight be imagined thatthe form inted, in construe

tionwith alam,is a perfectpassive participle ; while 1 am convinced that

alan kritvd properlymeans enough with doing,”and Im

’

tvd here clearlyshews itselfto be an abstractsubstantive in the instrumental (see p . 1 2 04

G . cd. , Note). It may appear strange that one should find

this gerund, or rather the equivalent form in ya (on account of the

weight of composition), in constructions where, instead of it, a prepo

sition m ight be used ; but even here, too, if we view the said form

as the instrumental of an abstract substantive or gerund there is no d if

ficulty; for alila '

amya parvatan m di‘

, according to Benfey, the river

behind the mountain,”means properly, the river after crossing the

mountain (of the i . s. the river atwhich, after crossing the

mountain, one arrives ; amaratvam apahc‘

iya (Arj. 3 . maybe aptlyrendered by exceptimmortality,

”butapahdya does nottherebybecome

a preposition, for it properly signifies with abandonment,”i . s. with

exception (of and the instrumental termination of the ge

rund (sec expresses here, as is veryusual, the relation with .

"


[G . Ed . p. as being drunk (root pi'

,

“to drink

édh’

ms, wood, as about to be burnt"

(root i adb , to

each- as, Speech , as spoken ; Zend ”n ewt;each- oi , id. Here must be ranked some masculine basesin the Véda dialect like vékshas, ox,

"as drawing ,

”i f it

springs, as the Grammarians assume (see BOhtling , Unadi

suffixes IV. from the root cab, with the affix of a

sibilant. It m ight, however, as I prefer supposing , come

from snitch, to grow,

”so that itwould properly sig ni fy

the great, like the term for a buffalo, mahishd, from

another root to grow. An isolated form is the oxytone

fem inine ugh- és,“aurora, as shining Zend 33mg ”

ash- mi, id. , likewise fem inine, aec. We epi ng ”ushdogthém =

Ved. ushds'

am (roof: “I ask,“to burn, here to shine

This word deserves especial notice, because in the Veda

dialect it exhibits a long d,it

not onlyin the nom inative

singular, but occasionally also in other strong cases, and

indeed even in the genitive plural (ashd- sdm, see Benfey’

s

Glossary) and thus as it were prepares the Latin form

[G. Ed. p. aardt- a which, through the ap

pended a, has the same relation to the Sanscritushde, that

grow re’

pe- v- or. The latter contains, like the Ia tinfaci - n- ar, the class

voweloftheverbaltheme. In Zend tothisclass belongs N ASISZUQkhan

- n- as,“lustre

”

(nom . ace. Itharéno‘

, according to 56 1k , gen. kharéna igh - n'

,

according to from the root khar=Sanscrit rear,“to shine

”

(see35 . and 8 l6. lastNote), the e ofwhich is explained by 30. W'

ith

Sanscrit formations which insert a t- sound, like ard- t- as, p ai

- th - as, we

m ightcompare the Greek ps'

yc- o- os, in case itdoes notcome from p e

’

yne,but, like the latter, from the obsolete root(which, too, has lostits verb)pey=Sanscritmalt, ma iih,

“to grow.

”

The form ugluis- d, atthe beginning of cepulativc compounds, shews

itself to be the Védic dual termination of the base ut fs, as the Vedadialect, as has alreadybeen elsewhere remarked, admits also, in the that

member of such compounds, the dual termination.


(qwr- a has to oper, the theme of the oblique cases of opus

Sanscrit tip- us, work.

“

0) Adjectives with the signification of the presentpar

ticiple ,which , in combinationwith the substantive preceding,

and standing in the accusative relation, appear partlyas

appellatives, but in the Veda dialect, which is here of

Special importance to us, reta in in composition too theiradjective natures. The following are Yédic examples

nri - chélcshas, seeing men ; nri - mdnas, th inking ofmen

nri - vdhas, b earing man or men sldma - vdhas, bringing

hymns ofpraise vised- dlId-

y-

as, hearing all”

(with euphon.

y, see § . risadas (rim - atlas consum [G . Ed . p.

ing the foes.

” To this class belongs the Zendash- adj- as, destroying purity,

"if Burnouf

’

s analysis of

it From the Vedic instrumental uglcrid - bhis, for which probably the

form uslcdd - bhyarwilloccur as dative and ablative, andushritsuas locative,1 should notchoose to infer, with Benfey(Grammar, p. thatas has

arisen from atof the present participle, as s in Sanscrit, in the common

language too, is changed, according to fixed laws, into t; hence, e .g . ,

from eas, to dwell, the future tat- syt

‘

im i, and aoristduff- sum. More

over, the s of our suffix provI s itself, bythe cognate Greek, Latin, Ger

man,Lithuanian, and Sclavonic forms, to be a sibilant, existing there be

fore the period of the separation of languages ; and which, inthe vedic

Sanscrit in the word under discussion, at the beginning of compounds,passes over into r (uglier- batik, waking I likewise recall at

tention to the fact thatthe base word ap ,

“water, allows its p beforethe bit of the case- terminations to be changed into of, without its beingpossible to thence infer that up , on which are based the Latin aqua

and Gothic aht'a , river, has proceeded from ad or al. I would rather

assume, with Weber (V. S . Sp. 1 . thatonlythe formswith d belongto a base at(rootat, to move oneself ) However suitable this root, to

which the said learned man has, 1. c.,assigned a numerous family, maybe

for an appellation of “water, I nevertheless prefer assum ing thatthe

circumstance, that in forms like ab- bhyas the base separstts itself less

sharplyfrom the termination than if the terminationwere preceded bya mute of a different organ, has given occasion for the change of the

1) into (1 .


this word is right Etudes,"

p. In the Véda d ialect

there are also simple adjectives of this kind with the accent

on the suffix ; e. tar- ds, quick, properly hastening,

”

contrasted with tdras, quickness ; tavés, strong,

“

pro

perly, grown, contrasted with trio- as, strength ma hds,

great, likewise, originally, grown“

apes, acting“

(as warrior, sacrificer,"see Benfey

’

s Glossaryto the S . V .

s. contrasted. with dpac, work agde, going, hasten

ing, quick”

(see Benfeyl. The latter lengthens the a

of the suffix in the same wayas ushds. Yes- ds, fam ed

(contrasted with yééas, glory has a passive signification,

properly, praised (cf. Zend d- yéié,”I praise, I glorify,

“

see

934 . ToA) correspondGreek abstracts in 09, s(e)- og'

f; e. g

dlefid- os, pfid- og, 7556- 09, Aha- os(=Sanscritrah- as, see 933 . A),

xfid- og, (they- or, (Ved. bhdrg- as, lustre,

"for bhrdj- as, root

bhrdj, to shine, from blzrdg), é'

d- os the sitting wa'

O- og,

[G . Ed. p. pa’

d—og, Gripe - 09. A fem inine base in 09,

with a pervading o- sound, and lengthening ofthe same in the

nom inative, is a id- és, whence a ida'

i - g, a ido’

(o - og. Assecondarysuffix, also, as, eg appears in Greek as a means of formation

Cf. mahét, great, from the same root, properly a present par

ticiple with the signification ofthe perfectparticiple, and with the ano

malythat the strong cases lengthen the a , and thus exhibitmalta‘

ntfor

mahant.

1“

Sec § . 1 2 8 . The difference in vowels between or and t(a )- os', & c .,

probablyrests on this, thatin loading the base with the case- terminations,

the language prefers the lighter substitute of the old a to the heavier, in

remarkable agreementwith the Old Sclavonic, where, e . the Sanscrit

mis and Greek védior are paralleled bythe form 11 5 8 0 nebo, but the

genitive mibhar- as,

- os bythe form HEBECE ncbes- s (cf. the some

whatdifi'

erentview at 2 64

1 The corresponding Sanscritsa‘

d - as has, in common Sanscrit, assumed

the sig nification“assembling,

”butoccurs in the Védas also with that of

“seat

"

(so Yajur- Véda, 19 . Regarding the Latin sods- s (see p. 1 352

G . ed . g.


lieve it originallydoes, lord of greatness. The Latin

exh ibits the Sanscrit neuter suffix as in four shapes, but

principally in thatof us, sr- is.

”The other forms are i ts,

or—is, ar, or- is, and ar, ar- is, For the class of words under

discussion 933. A ), the Latin neuter suffix furnishes but

a few remnants, obscured as to their root; viz rdb -

ar (cf.rdb- us- tus, see which, liketheVedic tau- as, strength ,

“

comes from a rootwhich signifies to grow"

l asfled - na}and reel- us(scales In Latin, in case of the suffix under

discussion as a formative of abstractsubstantives, the neuteris replaced bythe masculine, and, indeed, with a lengthening of the vowel (Or, from which, however, in the

nominative, through the influence of the final 7 , is aga in

[G . Ed. p. shortened. With respect to the vowel

length of the true base word, compare the strong cases

and the genitive plural of the above - mentioned (pp. 1373 ,

1375, G. ed.) forms ashes and ay- ds in the Veda dialect;e. the accusative singular ush

- és- am, ay- ds- um, with flu

- d-

r- em, langu- dr- em, md - dr- em, frem - dr—em, trem - dr- em , ang- dr- em, pad

- dr- em, sapdr- e1n, Od- dr- em (Greek root

fn- dre- m, sopdr- em, son- dr- em, am - dr—em, &c. The s of the

old nom inatives like clamds is, perhaps, not the original

final consonant of the base , butthe nom inative sign before

See 2 2 . The e of the oblique cases, for t'

,which mightbe expected

according to owes its origin to the following r (of.‘

f Sanscritrootruh,“to grow,

”from rudh, and rid/t, id.

,from roomor

ardh (see W ith ruh, from rudh,compare the Irish raudh,

“strength ,

power, value, as adjective strong, valiant; see Glossarium Sauser.

a. 1 847, and Ag. Benary, Doctrine of Roman Sounds,”

p. 2 18 . With teference to the Latin 6 for dh we must note the relation of ruber to the

Sanscritrudhircim, blood, and Greek é- pvdpér.

I Fromfoidus, from the rootfid . W ith regard to the Guna, compare

the Greek 1re'

1r0t0a .

Cf. Sanscritcldta Id- m (see“guile, deceit,

”

probablyfrom cit/tad,

to cover,

”with I for d (see


which the base has dropped its final consonant(seeThis suffix forms, in Latin, abstracts from adjective bases

also, hence , e.g. , amar'

or, nigr’

- or, aIb’- or.

935. The Gothic has added an a to the sibilant, whichhas become incapable of declension, and has weakened the

preceding vowel to i. As in the Iininflected nominative and

accusative Singular neuter the finala of the base is dropped,

we obtain here the forms hat- is. hate agis,

rim - is, rest"

1'

; sig- is,

“victory rigs

- is, gloom .

"

1Perhaps the s of Imh

'

str (theme hulistra), [G . Ed . p.

is not, as has been conjectured above (see 8 18. p. a

euphonic insertion, but India is a lostabstractwith the suffix

is and the suffix tra appended. Moreover, some neuter

bases in do appear to me to have abstracts in is, with i

suppressed, as prim itive bases for their foundation I mean

the forms hun- s- l (theme Itunsla), sacrifice, from [tun- ia l,

from a lost root ban or hun ; svum -

s- l, pond,”as place

Rootpg, whence 69 ,“ I feared, according to form a preterite. The

Old High German ckiso, theme ékison, has exchanged the neuter with

the masculine, and further added to the base an i t, but preserved the

old sibilant, inwhich it surpasses the suffix ira, which, in 2 41 , is com

pared with the Sanscritas.

T Sanscritrootram,with prep. 4 (ti - ram),

“torest, Lithuanianrimela,I rest

,

"Lettish rahms “

tame, quiet, sedate .

”The Greek

ripe’

pa , ripcpc’

oi , &c., answer, in their r), to the Sanscritcompound dram.

Itis notimprobable, thatin the adverb ripe'

pa s (before vowels) the suffix

under discussion is contained in its original form . Moreover, the es ofthe

comparative fipepe’

a - fl pos appears to me to belong to the suffix as, as or,

according to regular rule, has its etymologicallyestablished place beforethe suffixes repo, rare, and is dislodged in some places onlybya misuse,and driven Where itdoes notbelong.

I It has already been compared, in myGlossary, with the analogous

Sanscrit raj - as. This word, from the rootra i'

z'

jsignifies, indeed, not

“darkness,”but “dust but from the same root

is derived, byanother suffi x, a term for night and rqjas is con

tained in the compound rigid- ram , gloominess.

”


of swimming (root, seamm, weakened to svimm, svumm).

Svart- is- I, blackness,“

presupposes a more simple abstract

start- is, which would correspond to the Greek secondaryabstracts like 3020- 09, and, irrespective of gender, to Latin

like nigr'

- or, alb’- or. More important appears to m e the

deduction, that most probablythe Sanscrit suffix as has

been preserved in Gothic in combination with another

suffix assigned to abstracts, and, indeed, with the retention

of the old a - sound. I believe, vi z . thatthe Gothic m asen

line abstracts in as- su- s, as, e. drauhlin- as- su- s, m i litaryservice (drauhtind, I do m ilitaryservice frauyin- as—su- s.

lordship"

(frauyin—d,“I lsikta - as- su- s, healing

”

(leiki itd, I heal maybe explained byassimilation from

as- tu- s, as, e. sis- 8a , I knew,

”from uis- ta for cit- ta , and ,

in Latin, ques- sum, from quas- tum for quot

- tum (see

Most of the formations of this kind are based on weak verbs

in ia - d,‘ the analogyof which is followed, also, bythiudin- I

government, dom inion,

”though the base word

[G . Ed . p. thin- done has an a before the n, wh i ch,however, without reference to the verbs in i i i - 6, m ighthavebeen weakened to i on accountof the incumbrance of the

heavydouble suffix (cf. Irrespective of the newlyappended suffix su, from tu, leikin

’- as- sus has the same rela

tion to leikind,with reference to the suppression of the 6 of

the verbal theme, that in Latin, e. the abstracts am'- 0r,

clam'- ar, have to the verbal themes amd, clamd, where the

dcorreSpondstothe Gothicd Sanscrit“ aya (see

Further, from adjective bases are derived, in Gothic, some

abstracts in as-

su- s, vi z . ibn’- as- sus, similarity,

”from ibna ,

nom . m . ibns, like,“and vanin- as - sus, want.

"The latter,

however, springs, not from the strong adjective bases vana ,

Dom . In. vans, wanting,

”butfrom the weak base canon, the

a beingweakened to i , as in the genitive and dative vanin - s,

See Grimm, II . 175 . and Gabelentz and LObe, Grammar, p. 1 18 .


The former, after withdrawal of the second suflix, answers to

the base of the Sanscrit infinitive jiv- és—é, in orde r to

live ; the latter to the above - mentioned Gothic rim - is

(theme rim - ism), rest.”

In cd- esi - s, food " (them e edesia ,

see perhaps originally the eating,"and in deg

- esi - s,“the month August,

"as burning, I recognise the San

scrit suffix as with the affix ia, which, in general, the L i thaanian loves to append to suffixes which originallyterm inatewith a consonant. With reference to this I recall atten

tion to the participles of the presentand perfect937. TO the Sanscrit appellatives mentioned in 933 .

under B), correspond some of their literatim analogous

appellatives in Greek, as gA- og, gAe(a)- ogsdra- s,

“pond, water,

“as

“flowing ;“

péwog=mdnas.“spirit,

“

as thinking ¢Aéy—og=Védic abstractbhérg- as, shining ;

[G . Ed. p. fi é es ard- t- as, river (see p. 1372 , Note 2 ,

G. ed. , 933. B)Note); am'

J- r - os,“skin, as

“covering

‘w;

m fi- B- os, (see Curtius l. c. , p. 2 0 and cf. ado-

ra - B- rig); d'

x- os (cf.

Sanscrit aah- as, driving, é'

vr- os, from Fe'

x- os=

Sanscritwick- as, from vale-

as ; TéK - OS‘

,ye’

v- cc. In Latin to th is

class belong, e.g. , oI- as, ol—eris, from ol- is- is, greens,“as

growing gen-us,fulg- ar. corp

- us, body,"as made

"

(see

p. 1069, Note pee-us, pacer

- is, beast, as“tied up

(Sanscritpaéz’

c- s, rootpa ir, from pak, to bind vell- us, Op- as

(= Sanscrit tip - as, To the u arising from a of

the uninflected cases corresponds accidentallythe corruptionwhi ch the Sanscritsuffix as has experienced in the form us,bywhich neuter appellatives are formed which, for the

mostpart, accentthe root(Unfidi , II. p. 1 1 3) The following are examples : chdlcsh- as, an eye. as seeing (0P

suppressed in the nominative. In the genitive the words mentioned 1 . c.

are amen -hie, &c.

it Latin cu- ti - s, Sanscritrootal.-u, to cover, see Benf. , Gr. Root- Lax

p. 61 1 and cf. , with respectto the inserted r, the abstractxii- h os.


posed to the Vedic chdkshas); yéj- as, sacrifice ; dluin- as,

(also masc .) bow,

“as slaying (roothan, from dhan,

“to

slay,"a i—dhana, death ténus, body,

”as extended ;

jdnus, birth in the Védic dual the two

worlds, as created”

(8 . V. II. 6. s. 17. in adm irable

agreement with the Latin genus (Greek yévog) of cognateformation. The Vedic adjective jag/4 23, conquering,

"

irrespective of the weakening of the vowel, corresponds tothe above - quoted 933. under C) adjectives like tarés,“ quick .

"I regard, too, the suffix is, which forms some

abstracts and appellatives, for the mostpartoxytone, as a

weakening of as. Examples are, sack- a’

s, n. lustre (rootsuch); arch- is, f. id. hew- is, n. clarified sacrificial butter"

(rootha , to sacrifice chhad- is (Optionally roof

(root chad, to cover jydt- is, n. sheen, [G. Ed. p.

star (rootjyut,“to Observe the accidental coin

cidence, as respects the weakening of the vowel, with the

Gothic suffix isa from agis, fear,”&c. Perhaps

the Latin cinis, cin- sr- is, from cinis- is, belongs, in respectofits suffix, to this class, in which case its original significa

tion would be the glowing ashes,”and itwould be radi

callyakin to t al lean, to shine .

”

938. To the Védic formations mentioned in 933. under

C), like - ch¢ikshas, seeing,”

- manas,“thinking, atthe end

of compounds, correspond, irrespective of their accentuation,

the numerous class ofGreek bases like - depxég (aidepxég. dfu

depxég), - a ‘

yég- dexes (a avdexég), - 7\afiég (edhafiég,

peaoAaBe’

g), and with a passive signification, e.- fia¢ég (1 70

Avfiatpég, - 8pv¢ég InGreek, as wellas in

Sanscrit, we mustdistinguish from this class Of words the

possessive compounds, the last member Of which is, in itssimple state , a neuter substantive base in I Q as, cc ; as, e.

In the Véda dialect, in this meaning, also masculine, sec \Veber,

V. S . , Sp. II . 74 .


m sumdaas, having a good spirit, well- intentionedGreek eupevég, nom . m . f. sumamls, eupewjg (see To

the simple oxytone adjectivesmentioned In 933. C) as (0 763 ,nom . m . f. was, hastening, quick,

”corresponds in G reek

dreub‘

ég, dreudrjg, which stands to the corresponding abstract

in a sim ilar relation as regards accent to thatoccu

pied bythe taras mentioned above to taras, quickness.

939. The suffixes ra and la , fem. rd, 141, I consider, on

account of the verycommon interchange between r and I

(see as originally one ; and I regard as class

vowels, or vowels of conjunction,

” the vowels which pre

cede these liquids, as also the mutes k, t, and ih, in seve ral

[G. Ed. p. suffixes given bythe IndianGrammarians,

am , am , éra , dra, ala, ila , ula , aka, aka, ika , aka , atra, itra ,1utra, athu. With ra, la , a - la , i - la, u- la , i - ra, wro, are

formed base words like dip- rd, shining,

”tuba- ré , da z

z ling, white bhad- ra ,

“happy, good z”

ahead- rd, m .

moon,

"as giving lighti ; stilt

- la. White (Ved. s'

uk- ré ,

giving light, shining (rootsuch, from sale, to

chap- a - Ia, tremulous, shaking

“

(root champ, to movetar- a - Ié , shaking (roottar, tri

'

, to overstep,“

to move

oneself mud- i - ra, m . voluptuary,"chhid- i - ré . m . axe,

sword"

(root ehhid, to cleave”

) cu- i - lé . m . wind (an,to breathe,

”cf. Irish anal, path

- i - lé , m .

The é and 6 of a smallnumberOf rare words, e.g . pat- 6e- ra, moving

itself"

(as subst. masc. pat- é - ra - s

, aah - O- ra,

“good

"

(rootcab ,“to endure

’

are perhaps the Gauss of the vowels i andu, which are

Often found inserted as copulatives.

1 Regarding a - tra, i - tra , see p . 1 108 . The a of var- 124m, upper

garment,”as

“covering,

”is either onlya weakening of the a of a - tra

, or

the character of the 8th class, which is merelyan abbreviation of the

syllable nuof the 5th, to which var, vyi , belongs. Itis certain thatthe v

of the radicallyand formally cognate Greek A v- rpo- v belongs to the

verbal theme. Of. the Sanscritrootval, Cl.“to cover.

1 Cf. Latin candeo,candé - Ia

, the latter also as respects the suffix.


where sittingtakesplace,”

fa ir- veit- la, n. (nom . acc. fa ir- veIt- l)stage The Old High German, in order to avo id the

harshness of two final consonants com ing together, insertsan a in the nom inative and accusative singular, wh ich theme

has Often made its wayinto the oblique cases (cf. p .

and often assumes the weaker form of u, i , e. To this class

belong, e. g. , the masculines sez - a - l or sez z - a- I, a chai r,

[G . E d. p . sat- a - l, a saddle, also sat-u- l, sat- i - I,

sat- e- l; huot- i - I, warder, mcir- hcwt- i - la , custodes muror um“

(Grafl'

, IV. fdz kengel, foot- traveller"

(Grimm , II . 1021 ,

Graff, IV. bit- c- I,“

procus, pit- al- a, proci , nuptia rum

petitores (GramIII stein- bruk- i - l, stone breake r

sluoz - i - l, key,“as locking, accusative plural sluoz - i - la

stdz - i - I, pestle.

”The following are examples of O ld

High German adjectives of this order of formation (G rimm .

II. scad- a - l, norias, s - a - I, somnulentus, sprunk- a - l,

exnltans,“suiIc- a - I, taciturnus.

"

9 41 To the Sanscrit formations like chap- a - Ié - s, tar -

a

- lci - s, trembling“

(see correspond, in Lithuanian,

dang- a - la - s, covering

”

(dengiu, I cover draug- a - lrI - s

,

the companion,

"masc . , draug- a - Ia . fem . (drauga , I have

communion with and, with passive signification.

myz- a - Ia i , (pl.) urine

”

(mg/ z it, mingo wgm- a - la z‘

, (pl.)“the discharged in Greek, forms with a inserted, or with

e which has proceeded therefrom , as, 7pox- a - 7t6-

g,‘

rparr- e- Aé -

g,

m dr e—Ad—g, a i'

O- a - Ao-

s'

, Bedtime- whom pey—a - Ao (Gothic mile- i

- la . nom . m ik- i - I - s, Sanscritroot, mah, to ei'

x- e- Ao-

g,

and the reduplicated xexpi'

up- s- Ao- g, duga épcp

- e- Ao-

g, ednép-

Ir- e

Ao-

s. To vid- u- rti - s, knowing," correspond ¢Aey~v-

pé-

g,

éx- u-

pci- g ; to forms like harsh- u- lé - s, lover, antelope ,

properly, rejoicing,” correspond, irrespective ofaccentuation,

ei'

d- v- Ao- g (cf. vid- u- rd-

s), xaprr- é—Ao-

g. The weakening, how

ever, Of the vowel of conjunction a to £2. appears to have

been arrived at bythe two languages independentlyOf each

other ; so the Latin, in analogous formatives like trem - u


- lu- s, ger- u- lu- s, strid-u- lu- s,jig-u- lu- s, eing

- u- lu- m, einc- u- lu- m,

spec- u- lu- m, teg

- u- lu- m, teg- u- la , reg

-u- Ia , mus- cip- u- la, um- ic

- u- lu- m, where the Imayhave had its influence in producinga from a . As from a - la in Sanscritwe maydeduce a - ra .

we mayhere call attention to Greek forms like anB—a -

pé—g,

(pav- e-

pé-

g, Aax- e—pd- g, and to Latin like [G. Ed. p.

Ien- e- r, gen- e- r

‘

(theme ten- e- ru, gen- e- ru), if the e of the lat

ter does not, on accountof the r following, stand for i . Tothe form m i - Ia (ou- i - lti - s, wind

,

”as blowing

"

)belongs,

perhaps, the Latin i - li , in adjectives like ag- i - li - s,frag

- i - Ii - s.

fac- i - li - s doc- i - li - s (see 4 19. sub. for which, if the con

nection be justlyassumed, we should have expected ag- i

- lu- s, &c . I would draw attention to forms like imberbis.

inerm z'

s, for the more organic imberbu- s, taerma- s (see942 . As secondarysuffixes, t m , a la (i - ra, i - la , i

'

r- a,Ma)form a smallnumberOf oxytone adjectives as, e. asma - rd,

stony,“from 65mm : stone madhu-mi , sweet, properly,

gifted with honey,”from mddhu, honey (cf pédu); sri - lf

’

t.

fortunate,"

Zend tif f- m , from Iii - i, luck pd iis'

u- lé ,

dusty,"from pdfisu, dust phéna

- lé ,

“foam ing, from phdao,

foam ; médh'

- i - ra, medh’

i - lé , intelligent,"from med/Id ,

understanding)“ InGreek this secondaryformation also

Of words is more numerously represented than in San

scrit. I refer the vowelwhich precedes the p in all casesto the base word, and take the e Of words like (peeve

-

p6 1 .I

voae—po—g, xpue pé—g, voe—pé-

g, (poBe-

pé- s, de-

pé-

s‘

. “K i t

BaaBe-

pé-

g, according to the measure of the term ination of

Perhaps the wordswould be betterdivided thus, médlci - ré , medhi - M;and we m ight recognise in the i the weakening of the a of the prim itive

base, in the same wayas, in Latin, the final vowels of the primitive basesare weakened to i before various derivative suffixes ; e .g . , eari - tas, amari

- tudo. The uof words like danturé , having a projecting tooth,"is pro

bably likewise onlya weakening of the final vowel of the base word

(dénta , tooth a weakeningwhich theGothic tunthu- s also hasunder

gone in its simple state.


the base word, as the thinning or shortening of o, a , or n.

‘

[G . Ed . p. Conversely, lengthenings Of o to r) (=w, see

also occur ; hence, e. vomrpd- g, paq -

pé- g (cf. fl exes}aim-

p6 1 . The old a , ofwhich a, e, are the mostcommon

corruptions, has maintained itself in pvaa-

pé-

g (late r “w e

-

pé-

g), M a -

pé- g, a fieva -

pO- g—the latter from the base a flévog,

ode’

weg, the suffix of which corresponds to the Sanscritas (see—antl in Aapv

-

pci—g. cip

‘

yv-

pé-

g, has been weakened to

W I A vowel of conjunction is found in alpar-

n-

pé—g, édp -

q

-

po'

- g. To pean - 3, dusty,”

phéna- lé - s, foamy,

"cor

respond forms like Flew- A61 (scarcelyfrom fityéw, but from

53709, as above afieva -

pé—g from adévog),xapa - Ad—g, ” (anti - M g

(for armpa - Ao—g). I would now, too, in departure from 4

rather refer to this class those Latin formations in Ii , whi chSpring from substantives. Consequentlythe d after bases ending in a consonant in forms like earn- d- Iis, augnr

- d - Ii - s, & c . ,

would be to be regarded as a vowel Of conjunction equallywith theGreek 1; ofthe alpar - n-

pé-

g, édp-

q-

pé- g, justmentioned.

The vowel relation Of Itto a la, AO, is the same as, e. in

the genitive singular thatof pad- is to pad- as, wad- 65.

943 . To the Sanscrit primary suffix ri , which occurs

onlyin a few words of rare use, e. g. , in drib- ri - s, and angli

- ri - s, masc. foot,“as going

“

(rootaah and angh,“to

corresponds the Greek pl Of i'

d-

pt-

g, i'

B-

pt, for which, in Sanscrit. vfd- ri - s,

- ri , would be expected. The Latin has pre

fixed to the suffix ii a vowel of conjunction in eel- e- r, them e

cel- e- ri , the i of which, together with the case - sign, has

been suppressed in the nom inative masculine. The Oh

solete root eel (car- cello, pres- cello) corresponds to the Greek

xeA (xéM w), whence xéhng, runner,"and to the Sanscrit

in! (from kal), to go, to run (asyetnotfound as a verb).

Cf. p. 1307, Note, G . ed.

1 Cf. use, contrasted with the Sanscritnaktam (adv. bynight and

Latin now, and awewith the Sanscritnaklui .


cognate languages too : Latin equu- s, Lithuanian ass—tea , a

mare,”Greek i’m ro—g, from i'k xo- g(byassim ilation from i

’

x Fo -

s).

Old Saxon elm, in the compound ehu- scalc,“servus equa rius,

“

Zend new» a i - pa (see The following are other

examples in Sanscrit of extremely rare use : [chat- ed, f.“bed (root khatt.

“to pad

- ou- s.“car. as

“

go

ing ; pragh- va - s, sun,

“as burning.

“ We find an ex

ample of an adjective in f ish- ea ,“affronting,

”as a lso in

the oxytone pale- ea, with a passive signification, cooked ,

"

“ripe.

"In Gothic the adjective base Ias- i - va, nom . las - i - v

'

- s,

weak, from an Obsolete root, appears to belong to th isclass of words. In Latin, 1) must, after consonants, except

7 , l, and q (ou cu).becomeu therefore an=llea in adjectivesli ke de- cid- uu- s, oc- cid- uu- s, re- sid- uu- s, vac- uu- s, noe- uu-

s,

con- tig- uu- s. as

—sid - uu- s. On the other hand, de- clt

'-

eu- s, tor

- ru- s, pro- termu- s, al- vu—s(properly, the An

1‘

as vowel of conjunction is found in cad- i—eu- s. recitl- f- cu- s,

vac- f- vu- s, noc- z‘

wu- s. Tom pak- cd ripe ,

"cor

respond, in respectto their passive signification, e . g . , Per

- sp ic-uu- s, ia -

gcnauu- s, pro

- m isc—uu- s. In Greek the suffix

cu, in which I formerly imagined I recognised a Guna formOf the suffix u, maybe explained bytransposition from ra , Fa,

with the thinning of the o to 6 ; thus, e, dpopet'

zg, 7pa¢eéginstead Of the impossible Span

- Few, ypaqb- Fé-

g ; and in the

secondary formation, e. im retig, properly,“gifted with

horses,“from ime - g. The Greek so mightalso be deduced

from the Sanscritva, regarding uas the contractionof on ; as,e. in 81rvog=svépna

- s, and the e as the vowelof conjunction,whether itstand for a or for t. In the latter case, 8p0p

- e- dc

would answer to the abovementioned (p. 1390G. ed.)Gothic

[G . Ed . p. base las- i - cd , and to the Lithuanian for

See Schmeller,“Glossarium Saxonico- Latinum. The genitive would

be eh- ua - s or eII - na- s so thatthe suffix has been retained verycorrectlyin this word.


InatiOIIs like stég- i - u- s, thatcher ; findé- fi - u- s, who sucks

much and long (z‘

iadu, I suck pe‘

ch- i - u- s, baker’

s

oven"

; cz isch- i - u- s, purgatory (chist- iu.“I

For this class of words, and the Greek in so, there is, however, another source in Sanscrit to which we maybetake

ourselves for their explanation. I mean the suffix yu,which, like the Greek cu, has the accent, and forms a small

number of words (see BOhtlingk’

s Unadi Affixes, p.

among which are tas-

gt'

t- s, thief" 1 ; jan- yti—s, a living

creature,"

as producing"or begotten

"

(cf. jan- tti - s,

suadh- ya- s, fire, as purifying.

”It also forms some

abstracts, as. bhuj—gt'

t- s, the eating ; man-

yé - s, hate ”

(Zend ma in- yu—s, spirit, as thinking and, with t iaserted. myi

- t-yt'

t, m . f. n death. To this would correspondin Lithuanian skyr- ia - s, separation (shirru, I separate

InGothic, perhaps drun- yu- s,

“clang, belongs to this class.§

946. As regards the origin of the suffix ll va, I believe

I recognise in ita pronom inal base, which occurs in the

enclitic vat, as"

(according to form a nom inative and accusative neuter, see as also in ad. or,

"as,

”and, besides

these, onlyin combination with other demonstrative bases

preceding, inter alia, in the Zend ava, this" (seePerhaps, also, the reflexive base sva on which the

old Persian huva, he (euphonic for hva), is based, is

nothing butthe combination of sa with [G. Ed . p.

ca , the final vowel of the former being suppressed, as in

s- ya. from sa - ya , this947. The suffix van forms, a) adjectives with the signifi

cation Of the participle present, which occur onlyat the

D z'

for d, on accountof the i following.

1 Pott, too (E . I 1 1 . p. notices a possible relationship betweenthe Greek suffix cv and the Lithuanian

'

iu.

1 The roottas,“to take up,

”which has notyet been metwith as a

verb, here probablysignifies “to take .

"

Cf. the Sanscritdboua,“to sound, and see 2 0.


end of compounds, especially in the Veda dialect ; e. g . ,

suta -

pd- can, drinking the SOma ; edja - dd- van, givingfood.

"

b)Nouns of agency, like rile- van,“extoller ; gay.

- van, sacrificer.

“c)Appellatives, e. g. , rah- van, tree . as

growing idle- van, elephant,”

as powerful, strong .

“

The Zend furnishes a remarkable word of this class, vi z .

Ix >>7xg ear- van, time,

"in which I recognise a word radi

callyakin to the Sanscrithar- i - mda. which signifies tim e ,

"

as carrying away, destroying”

(see The G reek

xpdvo-

g‘ is referable, in my Opinion, with equal facility, to

the Sanscrit root bar, Irri, with which, in Greek, obsolete

root, xet'

p, the hand,”as taking,

”is also most probably

connected. The omission of the radical vowel inxpévog, ifwe refer the o to the suffix, can occasion no doubt; while the

suffix ovo adm its of readycomparison with the Sanscrit- Zend

van. With respect to the necessary dropping of the d i

gamma, compare the relation Of the suffix evr to the San

crit cant; and with reference to the vowel added to th e

final consonant of the suffix, the relation of the Latin lentu

(with lent) to the same suffix (see948 . T he Sanscrit suffix nu (see 85 1 ) forms oxytone

adjectives and substantives ; e. g. , gridIz- m

'

rs. wistful, eager

lras- mi- s, trembling, fearing dhfish-

gni- s, venturing,

hold (a, on account of the preceding sh) ; bhd—mi - s, the

sun, as giving light; (mane- s, f. m ilch - cow,

"as giving

[G . Ed. p. to drink”

(rootdhé“to drink,

“with causal

signification); st’

i- mi

- s, son,

”as born.

”80, in Zend,

A nyhowtaf - nu- s, burning"

(see Anya »? rad- nu- s,

straightforward, true“

‘

f; barésh- nu- s, high ,great, as substantive, summ it I ; jar

'

gfi-nu- s, mouth,“as

a Cf. Burnouf,“Etudes, p. 107.

1, Root ra~=Sanscrit ry(from raj), whence ryti ,

“dim, see

Burnouf, Yacna,”

p. 1 95 .

B ¢V¢75=Samvrih, Véd. brilt, togrow,

”

see Burnouf,Etudeg

"

p. 194 .


bridle . Under this class of words is to be reckoned the

Gothic hai - m(i)- s, f. (theme hatmi), village,"from the

obsolete root hi with GuRa= Sanscrit if, from lei . to lie,

to sleep the plural, ha i - mds. belongs to a base hai md f951 . The suffix I ka (a - Ita, d- ka, i - ka, u- ka, t

'

i - ka , see

I regard as identicalwith the interrogative base ka ,

which , however, as suffix,must be taken in a demonstrative

or relative sense, as indeed its representative also inNewP er

sian and Latin has both a relative and interrogative m ean

ing. In direct combination with the root, Ira is not of

frequent occurrence in Sanscrit. The mostcurrentword of

this kind of formation is sash- Icé - s, dry,”the Latin sister

form Of wh ich siccu- s has probably arisen by assim ilation

and weakening of the uto i from sue cu- s. Thatthe 5 ofthe Sanscritroot, for which, in Latin, c were to be expected,

has arisen from the dental its, and not from It, is proved

[G. Ed. p. by the Zend .egq ne ’ hush- Ira dry.

"

T he x eh Of the Sclavonic toyx'

b stich'

, dry, is based

on the Sanscrit sh of the root (see 2 55 . The

Lithuanian form Of this adjective is saus- a - s. With a - ka ,

d- lca , i - Ica, u- ka . are formed adjectives, and nouns of agencyor appellatives, which accent the root; e. g. , nért- a - lca - s,

dancer,"fem . ndrt- a - Icz

‘

, female dancer ady- a - ka - s,

guide (root ni’ with the Vriddhi); khdIt- a - ka . digging,

“

fem . d p - d - ao, loquacious,” fem . Iat'

(Am . K O., 1 11 .

khan- ilta - s, digg

er ; mubh- i - ka - s, mouse,”as stealing

“

rootmush); ham- u- Ica, longing ;"

ghat- u- Ita, destroying

(roothan, to slay," causalghdtt

’

ty). li ke forms paroxytoneadjectives from frequentatives and jagar, -

g_ri , to watch,“

it Akin, in the firstsignification perhaps, to the roots arch, ruck (fromark, rule, as m i from rak), to shine,

”or to Ias,

“to shine.

"There is

no rootm i .

1 Regarding the European cognates of the Gothicword, see Glossa

rium Sauser. , a. 1847, p. 360.

FORMATION OF WORDS. 353

thus only from reduplicated roots, which, as it appears,

support,

thei r heavy build bya,

long vowel ; hence, e. g

caved- 134 .a , loquacious,"

jayar- z’

i - Ira, watchful." Hereto

correspond, irrespective of the r eduplication, in Latin,

cad - ii - cu- s and mand- ci - cu- s. F id- ti - cu- s, presupposes a pri

m itive fid- z'

i—cu—s or firLt’

i - c - s. As t’

i- Ita, t'

i- cu, is only a

lengthening of aka. ucu, so perhaps, the Latin, i'- cu of

cm - i - cu- s, pud- i—cu- s, is a lengthening of the Sanscrit i - ao,

while med- i - eu- s, vom - i - cu- s, subs. vom - i - cc , pert- i - ca (if it

comes from partia), have preserved the original shortnessThe bases cert- i - c, vort- i - c, pend

- i - c, append- i - c, pad

- i - c (from

pédo), have lostthe final vowel of the suffix. Under md - ha , is to be ranked the Latin d - c, with the final vowel

suppressed in bases like cd- d - c, vor- d- c, fall- d- c, ten- d- c,

retin- d -

c, sequ- d- c, loqu

- d- c(as abovejdlp - d- lxa ,

so too d- e—as 6 d, see 4 .

—in cel- d- c, vel- d- c (for vol- d- c),fer- d—c. In Greek, amt- am g from a lost root

Springs from (puAax), correspondsas exactly [G. Ed. p .

as possible to the Sanscrit formations like mirt- a - lca - s,“a

dancer,”and cpa - am , for (per- 61x01 (cf. to such as

d p - dlca - s,“ loquacious, chatterer,

”and, in Latin, such as

loqu- dc- s. The base nip- 5x for nap

- 6x0, likewise from an Oh

solete root, corresponds to the Sanscrit bases in film, andLatin in d- cu. TO the above mentioned feminine ndrt- aln

‘

,

dancer”(also corresponds, in point of formation,

the Greek yew- aux, in which I recognise a transposition of

yw am (see for which, in Sanscrit, janaki‘

, as bear

ing children, would be to be expected, as fem inine to theactually existing jda

- aka - s, father,” as begetter.

”—TheSanscrit formations like hhda - i - Iea - s, digger,

”are most

trulyrepresented in Lithuanian, of all the European mem

bers of our fam ily languages, by nouns of agency like

deg- i - ka - s, incendiary (degu.=Sanscritddh- d- mi , I

See Dantz er, The Doctrine Of the Formationof LatinWords,”

p. 37 .


Icid- i - kha - s, wood- floater (Mid- mi , I float wood

hul- i - Itha - s, thresher”

(hullt‘

t, I thresh, pret. hulau). The

Gothic places as parallel to the Sanscrit a - Ita, of hhdn—a—ha ,digging,

”the suffix a -

ga'

l' in gréd

- a -

ga ; n. m . gréd- a -

g'

- s,

hungry,”

properly, desi ring (Sanscrit rootgrid/t) from

gradh, to crave .

"

952 . It is probable thatthe n Of the forms in ng (them e

nga)which occurs in all the German languages, with the

exception Of Gothic, with a vowel preceding (i oru), is an

unessential insertion, just as, according to 56. in Zend

forms like mananha, formanaha Sanscritmanasd. If this

be the case, we maycompare Old High German forms like

[G. Ed . p. lam - ing, king”

(also kun- ig), theme hun- inga, with Sanscritformations in a - Ita (na

’

rt-

aIta- s, dancer,“

p. 1 395G . and Greek in a- xo-

s‘

,-

a- no-

g, l. which

I prefer to do, rather than regard the i as existing even

from the time of the unityof languages ; and I thereforecompare i - nga with the Sanscrit i - lca , e. g. , in l-hdn- i - lra - s,

digger“

The original meaning of lam - ia—g wasprobably man,

”xa

-

r’

egoxfiv, as the English“queen”

is, pro

perly, merely woman (cf. Gothic yueta(i - s, woman"

= Sanscrit Il'f’a'

tuani - s, woman, as bearing childrenand corresponds in root and suffix to the above - mentioned

(p. 1 396G. ed.) Sanscritjdn- a - ka- s, father,”as begetter.

“

Should, too, in the often- mentioned abstract substantives inunga I, the guttural be the principal letter, and the last

syllable, therefore, the most important part of the suffix,

then unga, e. g. , in hail- unga, healing”

(Grimm, II .

mustbe compared with the Sanscritfeminines in a - ltd, e.g. ,

G The doubling of the consonants verycommonlyserves in Lithuanianonlyto mark the shortness of the preceding vowel, see K urschat, Con

tributions,"I I . p. 32 .

1 Regarding the medial for the original tenuis, cf 9 1 . p . 80.

Sec 803. and p. 1 2 75 G . ed .


bases grédu, hunger, cult/m , Splendour, notgreda-

g‘

- s,

hungry,

”ca ltha -

g’

- s, famed,

”would come, but onlv

grédu-

g'

- s, caltha -

gi

- s. Perhaps, however, the preponderatingnumber Of the adjective bases in a -

ga , nom . m . a -

gs, which

come from substantive bases in a , has had an influence on

the formation Of the adjectives derived from greda , vulthu,

and given them , byan abuse, a for u,or the said adjec

tives come from lostsubstantive basesgréda ,vultha (cf.wh ich , perhaps, for the first time after the production of

the adjectives referred to, have been weakened to grédu,

vali ka , justas the Sanscritbasespdda , foot,"

danta , tooth ,

“

[G . Ed . p. 1399 ] have become , inGothic,fdlu, tunthu. The

Gothic substantive bases in i lengthen their final vowelbefore the suffix ga to ci hence, e. g. , anstei - ga , favourable ,

“

m ahtei - ga , powerful,”listei—ga, subtle,

"from the fem i

nine prim itive bases casti , grace,”

maltti , m ight,listi , subtilty.

”Fem inine bases in ein, nom . ei , produce .

in like manner, derivatives in ei - ga as, e. gabei-

ga, from

gabein, n. gabei ,“riches and so, too, the neuter base

gara irthya , peace (nom . gavairthi), whence gavairthei - ga,

pacific.

"As several abstra ctfeminine bases in ein com e

from adjective bases in a (see p. 1306G. so, perhaps,from sina, nom . sin(a)—s, Old

,

”mayhave come an abstract

sinein, age and hence sinei - ga, old,”i . e. having age ;

and for thiudei -

ga, good,”I presuppose a fem inine base

thindein, goodness"

(from thinda , n. , nom . thiulh, good

Of verbal origin is la isci—ga, teaching”

(from le is-

ya, I

teach,”

pret. le isci - da); and so, andaném - ei - ga , accepting,

may have sprung, not from the above - mentioned

base and anéma, acceptance,”butfrom a tobe -

presupposedweak verb anda - némya . In New High German the i of

words like stem ig,“starry,

”

gfinstig, favourable, ltriifi ig,

powerful,”mac/dig, m ighty,

”has won for itself the ap

pearance of an important portion of the suffix, the more ,as it has kept its place without reference to the primary


word and hence, e.g. , we equally find steinig, stony,muthig. mettlesome,

”answering to the Gothic bases staina

- ha, mddwgd and, with more exactness, machtig,corre

sponding to the Gothic mahtei - ga .

954. The Gothic adjective bases in iska , our isch, I shouldbe inclined to derive from the genitive singular, althoughthis case does not correspond universallywith exactnessto

the adjectivesunder discussion ; e. g. , the anomalous genitive

funins, of the fire,"does not correspond to funisk(a)- s,

fiery,”in the same wayas gudis, Of God,

”barnis, of

the child,”to gudisk(a)- s, godlike ,

"[tarnisk(a)- s, childish.

”

The circumstance, however, that also in Lithuanian, Let

tish. Old Prussian,and Sclavonic, there [G. Ed. p.

are adjectives in which a sibilant precedes the k of the

suffix under discussion, induces me to prefer looking on

this sibilantas a euphonic affix, on accountof the favourin which the combination sh is held, thatwe maynotbecompelled to assume for the said languages a suffix ska ,

sz ka , tk o ska,which would meetwith no corroboration intheAsiatic sister languages. The following are examples in

L ithuanian : diew'- i - sz ka - s, godlike,

”from diewa - s ; wyf

- i

- s::lea - s, manly,” from wyra

- s ; Etmv’

d - sz ka - s, Lithuanian,

from (emu-e, dang’

- i - skz a - s, heavenly,"from dangu- s : in

Old Prussian, deim'- i - ska - s, godlike,

"from deiu:(a)- s,° taw

’

- i - ska - s, paternal,“from tam(a)- s arw

’- i - ska - s, veracious,

from amt- s, true (Nesselmann, p. in Old Sclavonic,

ak antk b ii schen’- skyi

'

(nom . m . Of the definite declension, see

“feminines.” from fli ENA solici ts , woman ; mog'

b tk b lii

mor’- skyi , marinas, from MO511 more, theme moryo (9.

sea ; MIg'

b tk bnmir’- skyi

'

, mundanus, from Mien m ir’

,

theme mire, world”

(see Dobrowsky, p. The sup

pression Of the final vowel of the primitive base points to

the circumstance, that in the Sclavonic formations also of

this kind a voweluniversallypreceded the suffix. Itis most

probable , too, thatthe a Of the Greek dim inutive formation


in r are, t- trm; (a ard- f- c'

xo-

g, watdz- t'- O

'

ku, ovc¢av- I'

is

onlya phoneti c prefix. In support of this view we mayrefer to the euphonic s, which , in Sanscrit, is inserted be

tween some roots beginning with k and certain preposi

tions”, e. g. , in parishltar, J ig

- i , to adorn, properly, to put

around.

” Compare, also, the Latin 3 in combinations like

absco-ndo, abspello, abstineo, ostendo (for Obstendo).

[G . Ed . p. 955. In Latin I regard the i Of words

like belli - cu- s, cwli - cu- s, domini - cu- s, uni - cu- s. auli - cu- s, as a

weakening of the final vowel Of the base word , like

the i before the suffixes hit and ttid in and at the be

ginning Of compounds. I compare here the said word

with the Sanscrit like madra - ka - s, bdla - ha - s, sindhu7lta - s,

and Gothic like staina- h(a)- s, m6da -

g(a)- s, kandu-

g(a)- s. In

words like cici - cu- s, classi - cu- s, hosti - cu- s. the i demonstratesitself to belong to the prim itive base, while the i , whi ch isappended to bases terminating in a consonant, e. in arbi

cu- s, patri- cu- s, pedi

- ca, and that, too, in the Latin ablative

plural(pedi - bus=Sanscritpad - bhyds), and in compounds like

pedi- sequus, have been first introduced in Latin to facilitate

the combination with the following consonant, on whi chaccount I am unwilling to place such words, with respectto the i before their suffix, on the same footing with Sanscrit words like hdimant

'- i - kd—s, wintry, cold,

”from hé

manta winter ; dharm'

- i - kd- s, virtuous, devoted to

duty, from dharma, duty, right dkshe i - kti - s, dice

player, from al.-ska, dice .

“ To these, however, correspond, with respectto accentuation also, Greek derivativeslike woken

’

q - xé- g, ddehdf- t- né -

g, annex- a xi s, tbp’- t- x6~g, don

"

- t- x6-

g, pmop-

t- k ti- g, datpov- t- xd-

g, dpwyar- z - né—g, yepovr - t- xci- g.

To Sanscrit forms in which the suffix is appended without the intervention Of any vowel, as above sfndhu- ka - s,

corresponds. irrespective of the accentuation, a’

taru- né -

g. Re

See my Smaller SanscritGrammar, 2 d Edition, p . 62 .

1 360 FORMATION OF WOR DS .

[G . Ed . p. jan- tti - s, animal,”

as producing, or

produced.

” SO in Gothic, hlg'

f- tu- s, thief, as stealing

(cf. e’

vr- rw); skil- da - s,“shield,

”as inGreek,

“dim - rug in Hesych. , i f the form is genuine, and pép- ni - g,

which Pott, as itappears to me rightly, traces back to the

Sanscrit root amri (i . e. smar), to recall,”to wh ich the

Latin memer, and Old High German mdriu, also belongj"

With the abovementioned (5. Note I) Vedic jz'

v-d- tu

m .

“life,

”m ightbe compared, as regards the inserted a.

the abstracts from nominal bases in Latin like princip - d - ht- s,

consul- d- tu- s, patron'

fi - tu- s, triumvir’- d - tu- s. trifa¢n

'

- d - tu- s.

sen’- d- lu- s. These, however, are. as it were, only im ita

tions Of the abstracts, which Spring from verbs of the first

conjugation i as also sen- d - tor answers to nouns of agencylike am- d- tor ,

‘

and jani- i - tor (from jaaua ,

with the suppres

sion Of the two final vowels), of - i - tor (for oler- i - lor, just like

q fifex for oper- i -fex), to those like mon- i - tor. So in Greek,

dxpw- ‘nip from dam; and as m—g and mp are originallyone

(see 8 10. numerous denom inative formations Inm-

g, like

amid-m1 , tami r ip-

g, WON -“h rs, xwpq

- rq—gj fi apr4 1 7

-

9, lItO'

a- rtrs

'

,

At’

ytvfi-m- g. I believe, too, thatImayreferto thisclass pan0nym ics in I- da

-

gordry- g, as K GKpO‘R- t

'nafl-

g, Mehrow12 8771 5 K pov- t

- 3q-

g,‘

Imrord- dq-

g. Roped- Orr- g, as I assume a change of the

tenuis to the medial, as in the Latin forms like tim- i—da - s(see

Itmayhere be Observed, that the Greek patronym ics i II i - mv (theme I- mvor i - ou), too, stand, in respectto their

[G . Ed. p. suffix, if we regard aw, or, as the impor

tantpart Of it, combined with a class Of words, which is

originallydestined for the formation of nouns of agency

(see which is also the case with the fem inine pa

Cf. Mal-ya ,“ legal”, and the Sanscrit root rhlmd (sec to

cover,

”I therefore from (I (see

1: See Glossarium Sauser. ,a . 1847. p. 39 2 .

Cf. Pott, I I . p . 654 .


tronym ics in 48, since the corresponding Sanscrit as femi

nine Of a , forms both fem inine nouns Of agencyand appel

latives with the fundamental meaning of a participle pre

sent nadi‘, river,”as purling, from nada. and

fem inine patronym ics like bhdimi"

(see958. Some fewsuffixes still remain to be discussed,which

occur only in the secondaryformation of words : among

them is the Sanscrit éya , fem . éyd, which is used for a

purpose sim ilar to that of ya , according to 901 . In its

origin, too, éya appears identical with ya , and to be onlya

phonetic extension of the latter. The accent in forma

tions in éya rests either On the final syllable Of the suffix,

or on the first syllable of the entire word ; e. g. , atr’- éyé - s,

“descendant Of Atri dds

’

éyd- s, son of a slave,

”from

ddsa ; gdir'

- é_yt’t- m. bitumen, from giri. a mountain

vrdih’- éy¢i

- m, rice - field,”from vrffti, rice ; mdh

’Jfiyd- s,

earthen,”from ma in

”

pdt'

srush'

- éya - s. referring to men,

”

consisting Of men,

”from purusha dh’

- éya- s.

“anguimts,

from ahi . anguis grdfv'

- éya- m, belonging to the neck,

"

from ym‘

ca, throat, neck. TO the three last examples

correspond also, in throwing back the accent as far as pos

sible, Greek words like Aedvr- eto-

g, Aedv'

r- se- g, a i'

y- eto-

g,nuff- eto-

g, atdrjp- eto-

g, dpyfip'

ww-

g. To this class belong, inLatin,

words like p ic- eu- s. ciner- eu- s, flor- eu- s, aer- eu- s, argent'- eu- s,

curl

- eu- s, ign'

- eu- s (cf. PottEtym . Inq . , II. In theseformations, therefore, and in the Greek in eo-

g, the Sanscrit

diphthong of e. which is contracted from a i, has left behindonly its first element in the Shape Of e, a: (as in éxdrepo-

g

= ékatara- s, see onthe other hand, [G . Ed . p.

in p’eb- éju

-

s, the Sanscrit suffix éya (g=Latinj)has been re

tained with the utmost exactness, and so, too. in some pro

per names, asPomp'

- €ju- s, Petr’- éju- s, Lucc

'- éju- s (see D iintz er.

Doctrine Of the Formation of LatinWords.”

p.

959. T he secondarysuffixes vat, mat, in the strong cases

cant, manl, which form possessive adjectives from substan4 T


tives, are perhaps simplyphonetic extensions Of the pri

marysuffixes can and man (cf. 9. and, on the otherhand, via and min. e.g. , in léjas- vin. gifted with light,

"

medha- vfn, intelligent.”sud- min

”,

“lord, owner

”

gifted

with his own (sva”

) have been formed byweakening the

vowel from van and man. It is most probable, too, that

m atand mant, as also can and man, are originallyone, as

v and m are easilyinterchanged. A comparison has alreadybeen drawn between vantf

‘

and the Latin lent, extended to

lentu. InGreek the suffix cvr (from Fcw)corresponds,which ,

as is usuallydone byits Sanscritsister- form cant, allows theaccentto fall on the syllable which immediatelyprecedes ;hence, e. g. , doAd- ew, dyaehd

- evr. 6Arj- evr . roApfi- ewnrup- d- evr ,

psMr- é—ew, daxpv—d—evr, pare d

- err, as in Sanscrit, e. g. , dhand

want.“rich,

”from dhdna , riches ; médhd- va

'nt,“intelli

gent,”from médhd, understanding lakshmi - vaat, for

tunate,”from lakshmi

'

. fortune .

”

960. The suffix 1m tuna, f. tani'

. forms adjectives from ad

verbs Oftime . TheyaccentOptionallythe firstsyllable Of the

suffix or the syllable preceding, e.g. . hyas- tdna - s orhyds - tana -

s,

hestemus,”from hyas,

“

yesterday sens- tdna - sor ivds- tana - s.

[G . Ed. p. 1 406 ]“crastinm ,

”from seas,

“tO - morrow;

”sdya

- tdna—s or sayda - tana - s, respertinus,”from sdyam.

“ateven

ing”

(properlyan accusative) ; sand - ldaa - s or sand- tana - s.

sempitemus, from sand. always.

“InLatin corresponds,

as needs hardlybe mentioned, timt in eras- time s. diu- finu- s

(cf. divd- tana - s, daily,"

from died,“in the day pris

- tinu- s lengthened to tfnu in vesper- tz

'

nu- s, matu- tfnu- si

0 The Indian Grammarians refer the d, which I regard as the length

ening of the a of the primitive base, to the suffix .

t See and “ Influence Of the Pronouns on the formation of

lVords, p. 7.

I Matti (an adverbial ablative like aoctz’

t), which is to be presupposedas base word, is perhaps connected with the Sanscrit bhdtu,

“sun so

that


II . and Benfey'

s Gloss. to the S . as I derive it, as

I formerlydid, from the preposition apa.

962 . The demonstrative base sya. fem . syd (see

which is limited in classical Sanscritto the nom inative

singular, with which, mostprobably, the genitive termina

tion sya is connected (see has, in the secondaryfor

mation Of words, likewise its presumptive equivalent, vi z . in

the nowbutseldom found sya (euphonic shya), through wh ichmanu- sIIya

- s.“man,

”is formed from mand.

“Manu, and dhénu

- shya, a cowtied up (to be comes from dlténti . ’If

words Of this kind have originallybeen numerous, we m ightthen refer to this class the Latin riu. which is always pre

ceded byan d. and assume the favourite transition Of s into

r, thus, e. tabew- d - riu- s, palm'- d - riu- s, arbor- d- riu- s, (er- d

- riu- s, tz’

gnl

- d- riu- s. actu- d - 1 ia - s, conlr’

- d- riu- s. advers'

- d - riu- s,

prim'- d- riu- s, secund

'

- d - riu- s, from tabeE - d - siu- s. &c. But

i f the r of these forms is prim itive, rium ight be regarded

as an extension of the suflix ri=Sanscritf’t ri (see

as together with palm’- d- riu—s there actuallyexists a form

[G . Ed. p . 1408 ] palm’- d- ri - s. The 6 can in neither case

be referred to the proper suflix, but is to be regarded as

that Of forms like princip- d - tu- s, sen- d- luo s, sen- d - tor (see

p. 1403 G. ed.)963. The Latin d- riu guides us to the Goth ic suflix

urge . to which, however. I can concede no‘

affinityto the

former, whether it be that the Latin r is prim itive , or

has arisen from s. The Gothic is unacquainted with anyinterchange between the s and r, and we must thereforeallow the r of the said suffix to pass as original. Itforms

nouns of agency, and, in the secondary formation, words

which denote the person who is occupied with the matter

denoted bythe base word. To this class belong the mas

The IndianGrammarians form both these wordswith the suffix ya

with { Itprefixed .


culine bases la isarya , teacher (law'

s -ya, I teach sdk

arya, exam iner”

(sdk- ya , I liuth- arya . singer”

(lint/Id, I sing”

) bdkl

- arya ,

“scribe ”

(bdka , theme bdkd.“letter,

”pl. bdkds, mdt

'

mrya , toll- gatherer”

(mdta . toll. custom vulf—arya , fuller”(calla, wool

The nom inatives are, la is- areis, sdk- areis, &c. (see 9.

A neuter is vagg'- arya , nom . vagg

- ari , pillow for the head

(Old H igh German, wanga , cheek It is perhaps byan accident that the sources of Gothic literature whichremain to us supplyno nouns of agency from roots of

strong verbs : these , however, are notwanting in the otherGermanic dialects. The following are examples in Old

H igh German, Of which I annex the nom inatives : scri'

b—eri .“scribe bet- eri. adorator ; halt- dri , servator he

‘

lf- dre,

adjutor ,’

aba - nem - dri . susceptor sez - ari . cond itor ,”

[roam - sceid- ari. interpres somnii ,” “

interpreter of dreams.

The following are examples derived from nouns : gart’- eri ,

hartulanus; hunt'

- eri ,“centurio muni z

‘- eri .

“monetarias;

"

havan'- ari ,

“

figulus”

sataf—ari . “ephippiarius

waginl- ari. rhedarius

”vran

hé‘

nd- vurf- ari,“F rancofu In [G . Ed . p .

New High German this class of words is verynumerouslyrepresented bynouns of agency, as Geber, giver Seher,

seer D enker, thinker B inder,“binder ;

"Springer.

springer L iiufer, runner Trinker, drinker ; S chnei

der. cutter Streiter, striver Backer. baker ; F c'

in

ger, se i z er ;”Weber.

“weaver Forscher, prover

'

ucher,

seeker D reher. turner Brauer, brewer and denom inatives, like Gartner,

“

gardener Schreiner,“joiner ;

Topfer, potter ; Z iegler, tiler Wagner,“cartwrightu;

F rankfurter,“inhabitant Of Frankfort Ma inz er,

“inhabi

tant Of Mainz ; B erliner, inhabitant Of Berlin.

”The

i t Regarding the difference Of the vowel before the r, and especiallyas

to this class Ofwords, see Grimm, I I . p. 1 2 5 .


following are examples in English : giver, singer, k iller,

bringer, seller, brewer ; glover, gardener, wagoner.

“Per

haps the Gothic arya is on one side an extension, and on

the other a mutilation of the Sanscrit suffix tdr, tri (seean extension byadding the suflix ya , as above

”,

in ber- as- yds, parents,”as

“bearing children,

”we have

seen the Sanscrit suffix ugh (from eas)in combination with

ya ; and a mutilation bydropping a t- sound (1, fit. or d, seethus, e. g. . la isarya , teacher, from la istarya, justas,

in French, the tOf the Latinfrater, pater. mater. has disap

peared in the formsfrere, pére, mere, and thatof the suffix

tor in the nouns of agency in car. in forms like sauv- eur

= salvator), port- cur. vend- cur If the form

was once arya , and Obtained from tdr, which correspondsto it in the difl

'

erentGerman dialects. itmightthen easilyhave extended itself as well over roots as nom inal bases,to which the perfect form with the initial t- sound had

never been appended. A form like Geb- ter or Gebder, for

Geber, giver, could never have existed ; perhaps, however, in Gothic , a base gif

- tarya may have exi sted, the fof which for b. after dropping the I, became again b (as in

[G . Ed . p. 14 10] the pret. pl. , e. g. . gébum compared withthe sing. gaf , gaf - t). therefore gibarya , to which our Geberwould correspond.

COMPOUNDS .

964. In the Indo- European languages the verbs are

compounded with scarce aught but prepositions, which in

Sanscrit are always accented, and some Of which, exceptin the Veda dialect, never occur in the uncompoundedstate . I annex some Sanscrit verbs compounded with

See and, with reference to analogous extensions inLithuanian,

s787.


in combination with the root indh it signifies to kindle ,

which iadb. also means by itself. In Zend, too, such sepa

rations of the prepositions from the verbs often occur”;

and in German manyOld combinations are SO altered, that,

in the proper verb (not in the infinitive and the parti ci

ples, and especially not in the formation of words), we

place the preposition thathad been prefixed either directlyafter the verb, or separate it still farther from it byseveral intermediate words : we say. e.g. . ausgehen, aus

gehend. Ausgang. to go out,"

going out,”

egress but

not er ausgei t, he goes out, as in Gothic usgnggith, buter gehtaus, he goes out, er gehtven diesem Gesichtspunkfcans.

“he goes from this point Of view out; while, how

ever, after the relative and most Of the conjunctions we

prefix the prepositions, since we say. e. g. , avlcher ausgeht,who goes out wenn er ausgeht,

“if he goes out dass

er ausgeht, that he goes out. Moreover, in prepositions, whose meaning is no more clearlyperceived, and

also in those to which there are no correlative prepositions with an opposite meaning, as in ein, in.

"

opposed

to ans, out,

”cor. before,

“

Opposed to nach,“after, an,

[G . Ed . p . 1 4 1 2 ] on, Opposed to ab. off."or where the

verbalmotion has a decided preponderance over the prepositions]. or where the significations Of the preposition and

the verb have blended completelytogether. the separationof the preposition from the verbal root is not allowed ;hence, e.g. , er begrcifl. beweist, vergeht, verble ibt, z ersffirt,

z erspringt. umgeht, umringt, t'

ibersetz t. t’

iberspringt, be under

stands, proves, vanishes, remains, destroys. shatters, goesround, surrounds, translates, crosses.

"The phenomenon

under discussion maybe SO regarded, as that onlythose

prepositions which are accented, and whose signification

i t For examples see 61 8 , where the translation offrd hum'anha

is to be corrected according to p. 960.

COMPOUNDS . 1369

is clearlyretained, have the power of separating themselves

from the verbs to which they belong. while in Védic Sanscrit and Zend those prepositons, too, the meaning of whichhas quite disappeared in the verbal notion, may be de

tached from the verb .

966. In Sanscrit there are but veryfew”verbs which

enter into combinations other than prepositional, and even

of these onlythe gerund in ya and passive participle in

ta for the mostpart appear in multifarious combinations ;e. kuyiglali

- Igrita , made into a ring,

"

ékf becomeone ; which forms need not be regarded as derivatives

from compound verbs like kundali - Icarémi, ékf- bhavdm z’

, but

it is probable that here the participles Iq ita and bhz’

t'

ta

have, as already independentwords, united with the first

members of the compounds. In Greek, as is well known,the verbs which are compounded with other elements than

prepositions are, with veryfew exceptions, not prim itivecombinations of the particular verb with the precedingword, but derivatives from compound nouns ; as, e.g. ,

roxo'

yAucpe'

wfrom Toxo'

yhécpo- g (see Buttmann, 1 2 1 . The

same is the case with Old High German [G . Ed. p .

compounds, as hunts- 31096,“

plaudo,”from hernia- slag, clap

ping the hands rdt- slagd,“consulo,

”from rat- slag, ad

vice and in the New High German, as, ich wetteg'ere, I

ich Icq eistcre,“I criticise ich brandschatz e,

“I put

under contribution”(see Grimm , II. p. In Gothic,

e. vei - védya ,

“I testify, comes from veit- vM - s, witness,

“

andfluvaurdya, properly,“I am loquacious,” either from

the substantive base fl uvaurdein, nom .- ei, loquacity,

”or

with this latterword from a tobe -

presupposed adjective base

filuvaurda, loquacious.

“The Latin, on the other hand,

produces verbal compounds by direct combination of a

v ie

See shorter CriticalGrammar of the SanscritLanguage, 2 d Ed ition,585 .


substantive, adjective. or adverb with a verb ; e. g. . signi

fico, e di -fico. anim'

- advewto, nun- capo (cf. oc- cupo, and see

taIi -pedo, magni-fico, e qui

-

paro, bene- dico. male- dice .

In Greek, from the participle Saxpvxéwv we mayinfer a lostverb 8axpuxéw, and from the adverb vowexo

'

wwg the partici

ple vovvéxow, and hence a verb vowéxw. With respect to

the accusative vow,we may compare vowexévm g with the

above - mentioned 9 16 ) Sanscrit compounds like aria

dame- s, subduing- foes, and the Zend dng’

ém - vam}, D ruj

slaying On the other hand, we need not, withButtmann 1 2 1 Rem . I), regard duxpu in da lcpuxe

'

a w as

an accusative, as in this word the accusative (and no

m inative) is not distinguishable from the theme. Com

pare Sanscrit compounds like madhu- lz’

h, bee,"

as lick

ing honey.

"

967. When Buttmann 1 2 0. in Greek, assumes com

pounds, of which the firstpartmustbe a verb, which most

usuallyterminates in m , the a Of which, however, as vowel ofconjunction,mayalso be elided, [ am unable to agree with himinthis. Should, however, in such compoundsas sem aa zm v,

éyepm'

xopog, 7pedn'

xpwg, Sapam'

fipo'

rog, (pufévwg, waumi vepog,[G. Ed. p. fic

'

ylraa'm g, whfifcmrog, a verb be contained,

we should have to define to what part of the verb , to

whattense, to whatnumber, and what person, these forms

in m or a’

belong. Having previouslydeterm ined them to

be verbs, I should explain them as obsolete presents in thethird person singular. according to the analogyof the conju

gatica in pa, since 0 1 or n , as term ination of the third person,

originallybelongs to all active present forms (see 5.thus, Sela

-

«Sa igon: would properlysignify he fearsthe gods,"

and stands on the same footing with the French compoundslike tire- botte, tire- bwchon, porte- mouchd tes, pone- manteau,

pork-

feuille. I would rather, however. with Pott(E. I ., p.

recognise in the first part Of éptm'

Xv and sim ilar com

pounds abstract substantive bases in a : (from m ace

1 372 FORMATIQN or WORDS .

Sanscritpossessive compounds, and a transposition of the

individual members of the compound must be assum ed,

as, e. g. , in the Vedic compounds like mandayét-

sakha - s,

friends-

gladdening,

"

kshaydd—vz‘ra - s, ruling men,

“tardd

- dvésha - s, foes where the first m em ber of

the compound, a present partic iple in the weak them e ,

should properlystand atthe end, as the person expressed

bythe participle is subjected. in construction, to the alte

[G . Ed. p. ration of the case - relations, wh ile the

word itgoverns, according to the sense, abides ever in the

accusative relation as, e. g. , in Greek, And i -waves. “ hav ingthe relaxation of toil

”relaxing toil,

”min/o; is not sub

jected to anyalteration of the case - relation, and hence the

order nova- Mm ; would be the more natural. In compoundslike dm

'

yépaxog, (pv'

yévroh ig, N a omi-twp, 7tm6vaug, Aeuro'

yapog,

(pméfio-

rpvg, (paw-Yancy, the prefixed adjectives answer, in te

spect to their formative suffix, to those which we haveseen above atthe end of compounds ; and as they,

for the most part, have the m eaning of the participle pre

sent, they may be compared with the above - mentioned

Védic forms like taréd- dvésha - s. saperons inimicos.

”The

e of forms like dpxé‘noNs

‘

, Saxéoupog'

, (pepévrovog, is probablyonlythe thinning of an s, as in the vocativef ; and thereforea

’

s e in oipxévroh zg is the same word which forms the con

cluding portion of a oAfapxo-

g, and in the inflectionless voca

See Fr. Rosen, Rigveda- Sanhita, at H . VI . 6. In Zend, too,

there are compounds of this kind ; e.g ., ”7ébfexw 7hfi ddlzag- vira

,

The compound sqosm g n nwp q7hf rédat

vis'

parim- hujditi ,

“creating prosperity,

”where v‘

iépanm stands in the case

governed bythe participle, while the substantive is ruled bythe positionof the whole in the sentence, and therefore stands in the case governed bythe verb ; and in the case before us, according to three MSS . to the read

ing ofwhich Burnouf (“Yacna, p. 2 62 ) justlygives the preference, in

the dative, while onlythe lithographed Codex gives htg'

ditim for hzg'

diteé .

1' Sec 2 04 .

creating men.

’

COMPOUNDS . 1373

tive appears likewise in the form aipxe. The prefixed adjectives make choice inthe root, too, of the lighter vowel; hence(pepe, in opposition to (papa, e. g. , (pepearé cpq -

g Opposed to

aracfiuhétpopog. The 1 , too, of repm and dpxi , in repm- xépau

vog, aipxc- xépauvog, &pxc o

’

s fi-Cmos‘. &cu per

haps, be rega rded as aught else than the weakening Of an

o= Sanscrit a, Latin u, of the second declension, and therefore mustreston the same principle onwhich , in Latin, e. g

the relation of cmli - cola to cwlu- cola or caelo- cola is based,

as m ight be expected if the Latin did not love the most

extreme weakening Of the final vowel in the firstmember

of compounds (see Vocalismus,”

p.

968 . While the Latin, in its nom inal compounds, regularlychanges the final vowel of the base of the firstmem

ber of the compound into the lightest [G . Ed. p.

vowel i ' , the Sanscrit, exclusive of a few anomalies, exhibitsthe firstmember of the compound (which, however, as alsothe second, mayitself, too, be compounded)universallyin itstrue theme. onlythatits final letter is subjectto the euphoniclaws, which,withoutthe compounding too,obtainwith respectto the initial and final consonants of two contiguous words.

I annex a few examples of dependentcompounds, of a classto be more closelyexam ined hereafter : ldka - d é - s, world

Hence,e.g .

,ca li - cola for coda - cola or « BIO- cola, Zuni -yer for lanager,

fracti -fer forfi-uctu-fer, mani -pulus for manu-

pulus, cf. 6. and 2 44 .

82 9 . In a lbd-

galerua, albd-

gilvue, ma d- bibus, the final vowel of the basehas been reta ined in the form which lies atthe base of the dative and ablative singularand genitive and accusative plural; while low -

plea, lengthened

[acti - ples, isbased onthe formwhich has assumed theoriginala inthe nominative aud accusative singular. Before vowels the final vowel of the first

member is suppressed ; hence, e.g . , un’

- am’

mis,flee - animus occasionallyalso before consonants

,for example in nau-fi

-

agus for navi -fragua, au

- spe.r for avi - epex, vin'

- demia for vini - demia or vind- demia, puer’-

pera for

pueri -pera or puerd-

pera, mal- Invite (with assimilation) for mani - Iuvicz

from manu- Iuviaz .


protector ; dIIard- dharé - s, earth - bearer ; mnli - bhramd- s,

error of the mind vz‘

rinf- tt'

rd - s.“shore of Vi rini

madhu-

pé- s,

“bee,

"as

“honey- drinker ; bht’

i - dhard- s,“earth

bearer”

p itfi- bhrdtd, father’

s brother”

(see

gd- dhu

'

lc(theme gd cowherd literally, m i1k

ing- cows ndu- stbd- s, standing. being In a ship (Diluv.

GI. marud-

gapd- s,

“troop of winds

“

(euphonic for

marut rdja—putré - s king‘

s son nabhas- tald- m , at

mosphere .

"

[G . Ed. p. 969. The Sanscritdoes notuse a vowel

of conjunction to lighten the two members of the com

pound, and it must be regarded as a consequence of the

effem inacy which has in this respect entered into Greekand Latin, thatthese two languages, in the composition of

nouns, with the exception of some isolated cases,do not

understand howto combine a consonants]term ination withan initial consonant, but insert a vowel of conjunction, or,

which is the same thing, extend the first member with a

vowel affix ; for which purpose the Greek regularlymakes

choice of o, occasionally of 1 , while the Latin invariablychooses the weakest vowel i . The 0

'

alone, in Greek , has

left itself prettyoften free from the inorganic afiix ; hence ,

e. aukea - ¢6pog (see rakes aaxéo-waAog, 6pm

- x§log, ened - Bates, pva - xéhevdpov (pale-

(prime(for (poor- dm'

pog,

cf. And v, too, in the bases peAav and s aw, the

For réjan n is dropped atthe beginning of compounds(see1" Thatthe a in this compound is not a euphonic afiix, butbelongs to

the base, and thathence, in the genitive, pal- 6: stands for pea - 69, as, e.g . ,

p i ano: for pe'

vw oe, is plain, as well from the Latin mus,mar- is, from

mar- is, as from the etymologyof the Sanscrit"nigh- dd , mouse,"from

mask,“to steal

,

”see Glossar. Scr. , a. 1 847, p. 2 08 . In Latin the com

pounds mue—cip ala and mus- cerda are deserving notice, as theyhave inlike manner retained the original 8 without the addition of a vowel of

conjunction. I mustdissent from Buttmann 1 2 0. Rem . as I can

byno means recognise a euphonic or formative 0' in Greek compounds.


shortening of the aor r; (from a”

, see both which vowels.

in all fem inines. correspond to the Sanscrit d (see

even where the a has been shortened in the nom inative and

a ccusative singular. The change ofa, a, or I), therefore, is like

the shortening of the Sanscrit d to a in compounds like

priya- bhdryd, dear Spouse,

"where the fem inine base priyd

[G . Ed. p. is changed into the masculine - neuter

base bybeing shortened to priya .

970. In remarkable coincidence with the Greek, the

Sclavonic, too, atthe beginning of compounds, weakens thefeminine a=Sanscrit d (see § . 552 . to the masculine

neuter o (= Sanscrit a . Greek 0, see hence, e . g

BOAONOC'

b redo- nos,“hyd

fria,”

properly,“carrying wate r

for coda [1 030 -Loft[coco- dot. caprimulgus"for koz a - du’i .

The latter would, in Sanscrit, be ajd - dluik (theme - d12h).The Greek. however, adm its also long vowels at the end

ofthe firstmember of compounds and so, e. g. , cmd -

ypcidms‘

,

vaxn-

¢6po-

g, resemble the Sanscrit compounds like chlulyd- kard—s, “umbrella- carrier,

”

properly, shadow- maker.

”Few

has again lengthened the form yea, which has beenfirst developed from yéa , and ven

-

yewjg, Aamrad-

q- tpdpo-

g,

exhibitn=é for a=d, as, conversely, ais usuallythinned to 0 .

Forms like a i'y- Ifi-vrovg, vuxr- f- Bcog (= vvxr- 6-Bcog), answer,

through their conjunctive c, to Latin like noct- i - color and so

also in forms like peAec- f- wrepo

-

g, properly,“having long

pinions, I can onlyrecognise in the l a means of compositiou in accordance with what has been remarked at

1 2 8 ; and in this I differ from Buttmann 1 2 0. Rem .

Compare, with reference to the firstmember of such com

pounds, and the inserted vowel of conjunction, Latin forms

likefmder- i -fragus. In forms like opelfiémg, the diphthonge: is explained bythe dropping of the a which belongs to the

base ; While in the Latin compounds opifex. munificus. vi z /ni

ROBA ko§a=wm aya , as ROC

'l‘b kostyr - mfutid /I i, bone .

COMPOUNDS . 1377

f our, for oper- ifex, &c. (cf. fwder- i -fragus), not only the r

which corresponds to the Greek a , butalso the precedingvowel, appears to have been passed over.

'[G. Ed. p.

SO, too, horr- i cus, terr- i cus, maybe regarded as abbre

viations of horrdr- i -ficus, terrdr- i -ficus (cf. sopdr- if er. houdr- i -jicus). In accordance with the almostuniversalweakening in Latin of the final vowel to i , we find in Greek,beside the alreadymentioned dpxc and repm , also dpyz in

nip-

yi- vroug, &pyI - ddovg &c. . xaAm in xaAm

'

waog, xahxcfiocxog,

pup: in pupf- vrvoog, and ¢OE¢ in (poff- xechos‘

.

971 . The Gothic, in my opinion, never makes use of a

conjunctive vowel in its compounds, and does not requireone, as ithas but few bases which end in a consonant, andthese are principallysuch as term inate in n. These, how

ever, as in Sanscrit, suppress (see the n atthe be

ginning Of compounds ; hence, e. g., amakka - bagma. fig

- tree”

(theme m ale/can, nom , amok/ca. for smakkan- bagma

auga- daurd,

“window,

“

properly, eye - door,”for augan

- daurd.1‘

as above, rdja -

putrd- s, for rdjan-

putrd- s.ll [G. Ed . p .

Bases in r avoid the harshness of the combination with a

II' A somewhat different explanation of op i/‘

ea' has been attempted

above (p. 1352 G .

1' SO in Latin, homi - cida, sangui -mga, for which m ighthave been ex

pected homin- i - cida , sanguin- i - cuga . In Greek

,in a similar way, the r

is Often suppressed in the sufiix par (from paw, see and then the

preceding a is generallyweakened to o ; hence, e.g. , am pao- cpdpoe for

m eppar—o- cpdpoe : on the other hand, o

’

vond- xxv-roe, which in Sanscrit

would appear in the form ndma - érutti - s. The Latin retains the a of no

men in nomenclator withoutappending a conjunctive vowel.

1 The neuter nom . and sec . augé (see affords no ground for the

supposition that cayda is the theme (cf. Gabelentz and Lobe, Gramm. ,

p. 1 2 9) we cannot, therefore, inthisexample, speak ofthe shortening ofthe

finalsyllable. Such anabbreviation, however, occurs in inorganic femininebases in fin and eia (see hence, qvina - kunds

,having the sex of

women”

(theme qvindn, nom. qvind, mari - saivs, sea,"lite

rally, ocean- sea”

(theme marein, nom . marei).

4 U


following consonantbytransposition hence, brdthra - lubd, or

brdthru- lubé'

, brotherly love.

”F ida r. four

"= Sanscrit

chatar (of the weak cases, and at the beginning of com

pounds), admite, ontheotherhand, ofthe combinationofrwithi t 6 ‘

(1693 (see hence ,fidur- dogs.“everyfour days, quar

tan.

“Asthe Gothic, in the nominative and accusative sin

gular, suppresses a and i of the base, itherebycomes to lookas if the said bases properlyterm inated with a consonant,while the a or i which enters into the composition seems

to be a compositional or conjunctive vowel. Such a com

positional vowel, however. I can no more admit in the G er

man languages than ia the firstand second declension of the

Greek and Latin ; and as I recognise inGrimm’

s firststrongdeclension of masculines and neuters, bases in a, and in the

masculines and fem inines ofthe fourth, bases in i , I look uponthe a of compounds like I a -faurhts, god

- fearing,

”coina

-

gards. vineyard,"and the i of such as gasti

-

gdds. hospitable,

”

gabaur- di - vaurd, birth - register, as distinctly be

longing to the firstmember ofthe compounds ; and I regardthe said examples as standing in perfectaccordance withthe above - mentioned Sanscrit compounds like [dica-

pdld- s, mali - bhramé - s.

’Justso, inGrimm

’

s third declension,

[G . Ed. p. compounds like fdtu- bandi , iron for the

feet,“handu- vaurhls, preparedwith the hand, correspond to

Sanscrit like madhu-

pc’

z- s, honey- drinking, and Greek like

neon- wags. Bases in d(=d,see shorten thatletter to 0 ,

wherebythere results an accidental agreement with the

nom inative and accusative singular ; hence, e. g. ,airtha - kunds,

I have already, in myreviewof Grimm’

s GermanGrammar (Journal of Lit. Criticism,

1 82 7, p. 758,“Vocalismus,

”

p. shewn thata

compositional vowel is altogether unknown inthe German languages, and

is limited in Latin to the cases in which the firstmember ofthe com

pound terminates with a consonant(honér- ificm). In Greek it has bydegrees extended itself over the whole third declension, butkeptalooffrom

the firstand second, where itis the leastneeded.


ya retain,evenwhen preceded bya long vowel,the fullthemal

form ; hence, hra inya - ha irls, having pure heartz“besides

which I do notknowanother compoundwith an adjective baseinya as the firstmember, for in midya - sveipeins, deluge ,

”

properly,“earth - inundation,

“m idya, though identical with

the adjective base midya, stands as substantive , wh ile the

Sanscrit sister word, mad/lye in the abovementioned

(p. 142 3 G. cd. , Note) madhyaldkd- s, earth,"

as m iddle

world,”stands as adjective. The pronominal base alga

Sanscrit anya, alias,"

corresponds in alya- kuns to the

Greek &M o in dM o—yewjg.972 . In Old H igh German, too, the final vowel of the

bases of Grimm'

s first strong declension, masculine and

neuter, has beenprettyfrequentlyretained, e itherunaltered ,

or weakened to o or e hence, e. toga- rod, redness of

morn“

aurora"

) {age- Ida . dailypay taga

- efetuo, and

toga- alarm , lucifer (

“day sp iIa

- htis, ap ilo- htis,

sp ills- he

'

s, playhouse ; grape- hi s, grave

- house. Bases,

too, in i have occasionallypreserved this vowel, or cor

rUpted itto e, e. g. , in steti - got, loci genius ; pn'

z'

ti - ehamara,

briute - chamara. bride - chamber ; prziti-

grba, bridal pre

sent brit'

ti -gomo, bridegroom bride’

s The

Lithuanian, exclusive of the obscure compounds in a inka - s

discussed above (p. 1344 G. regularlyrejects the final

vowe], as also the term ination ia. ya (nom . i - s, gi as, see

[G . Ed. p. of the substantive, adjective, andnom inal bases, which appear as the first member of com

pounds, when theyhave more than one syllable e.

wyni—kala is, “ hill planted with vines (wyna - s, wine

uyn’

- médis, vine ; rigid- dams, wonder- worker (dymo- s,

krau- Ieidys, one who lets blood"

(It-rauya - s,

blood”=Sanscritkravya ,

“flesh

"

griZk- twanis, Siindflul

deluge ; auksi

- kalys, auksa - kalys. goldsm ith"

(auksa - s,

Grié'

ka - s,“sin;

"twana - s

,

“flood : theGermanword,however,hasavow

cdlynothingtodowith sin, and is inOldHighGermansin-flq jfi -fiflt.

COMPOUNDS . 381

gold auksa - darys, worker in gold ; bae —skuttis, orbarz du- skuftis,

“raz or,

"

properly, beard- shaving (barz dc‘

z . f. ,

beard didi

- burnis, one thathas a greatmouth"

(diddi - s, theme didia, euphonic didéia, great did

’-

galwya,

he that has a great head wih’

wdgis, one - horned”

(wiena - s, one saw’- redus, obstinate (sawa - s, suns

973. The Zend, as has been already remarked, instead

of the naked theme, places the nominative singular as the

firstmember Of its compounds, and I have alreadydrawn

attention elsewhere to a sim ilar use in Old Persian . It

cannot surprise us i f, in the European sister- languages also,isolated cases Occur, in which the nom inative Singular

takes the place of the theme ; and I differ from Buttmann

1 2 0 Note in thatI do nothesitate to take the GreekGeog Of Bede - Sores in Hes. to be justas much the nom inative

as the Zend daévd (from daévaa, see in the quiteanalogous compound daévd- ddtc, produced bythe Daévas

"

(Sanscrit déva, In Oe'

crcpa-

rog, and some othercompounds beginning with deg, one easily recognises a con

traction of Geog. Perhaps, also, in the compounds beginningwith vowe l, as rammed-mg Naum

'

doog, Nat/0 76617,

Naumpe’

dwv, the nominative mug is con [G . Ed. p.

tained as representative Of the theme 1 and to it an I has

been,

’

added as conjunctive vowel (cf. ifnot, I should

prefer to regard wave : as a derivative which has been formed

from vav=Sanscrit ndu, with the suffix a : (from re). and

which has ceased to be used byitself. Itappears to me less

probable thatitis the dative plural of m ile, and least of all

would I take the 6 here as euphonic. The Gothic banrya of

baurgs- vaddyus, town walls,“I take to be the genitive, as

itstands in the genitive relation, and as this irregular word

See MonthlyIntelligence Of the Acad. of Lit.,March 1 848, p. 1 35 .

1' I recall attention to the fact, that in Sanscrit onlymonosyllabic

words carrythe a of the nominative into the locative, towhich a case

sign does notproperlybelong.


exhibits, as well in the genitive as in the nominative, the

form bawrgs. In Sanscritwe m ight take divas in d ivas

-

pati- s as the genitive of die. as I also formerlydid : as,

however, there is a compound divas-

pf ithivy- da . heaven

and earth,”which is passed over in this explanation,

and

in wh ich divas does not stand in the genitive relation, I

now prefer to assume a base divas, to be found only in

composition, which is also contained in the proper name

diva- ddsa (see Benfey’

s and whence , too, has pro

ceeded the extended base divasa, as in general the suffix

asa is onlyan extension of as. To the base divas, whichis onlyfound atthe beginning of compounds, correspondswell the Latin dies in dies-

p iter. The second part of thiscompound is indeed onlya weakening of pater, to be ex

plained according to buthere hardlysignifies father.”

but, in accordance with its etymology, ruler”(see

The Greek exhibits a real genitive, which, however, Buttmann 1 20 Note will not recognise as such , in the

compound vend - 0mm,in which the singular surprises m e as

[G . Ed. p. 1 42 7 ) as little as in our term Schif sha'

user,

ships’ houses. Moreover, the firstpart of oddevéa—wpa

I cannottake otherwise than as the genitive.

974. The Indian Grammarians divide compound wordsinto six classes, which we will now exam ine separately in

the order in which theyfollow one another in Vdpadéva .

FIRST CLASS .

u

Copulative Compounds calledDvandva .

‘

This class consists of the compounds of two or m oresubstantives. which are cc - ordinate to one another, i . e. which

T he Sanscrit term dvamlva - m, ,i . e. pair,

’

is a reduplicated formformed from the theme dva, two

”

(cf. —N .B . I spell this

word as itis found in the German, butQ a, when compounded with ano

ther consonantinSanscrit, ispronounced like to. SeeWilson’

sGrammar,

p . 6, l. 18 .

- Tramlator.


been butveryseldom cited in Zend. I annex the conclu

sion of the passage referred to, according to Burnouf’

s

corrected text: “

5789” rpm 7dxsgpfi Iowan q

uash/3735 gongx7g»)suso> ”Q Q

M’Q ’yatké’r

'

éno’

it

aphé cshathrdtaméréshantapai n- vim ap hushamané dpa

- urvaré,

i . c. , literally, thathe make under his dominion not dyingbeastand man, notdryingup water and tree .

”Neriosengh

translates prettyexactly, only with a difi'

erentnotion for

the compound pain- vim yas'

chakdra tasya rdjyé amarda

paiuvi'

rdn ai oshfni udalcdni vanaspati’

n, i . s. , who made in

his kingdom undying the males among animals and notdrying up the water, trees.

“Burnouf (l. c. p. 145) draws at

tention to the circumstance, thatyetmega; properlysig

[G . Ed. p. nifies“

pour qu'

ilfit,”nor has it escaped

him that pain- vim may also mean Ies troupeauz et les

hommes"

(p. he translates, however, in accordancewith Neriosengh, car il 0 , sons son rigne, afiranchi de la

mort lea males des troupeaux, de la sécheresse les eauz et lee

arbres. I admitthat am’

ére'

shanta'and aim m ight also

be plural accusatives, and I recall attention on th is headto whathas been remarked above (5. 2 31 Note) regardingthe manner in which neuter forms have found their wayinto the plural of masculines. This does not, however,

preventme from letting. in the passage before us. the a of

the said words, according to 2 08,stand for the dual ter

m ination, as, in myOpinion, itgives a much more suitable

sense, if, bytaking pain- vim as Dvandva we place, not

onlythe males of animals, but animals and human beings

In the sibilantOf this form I recognise neither anyconnectionwith

the character of the future, norwith thatof the desiderative, but simplya phonetic affix, and recall attention to the fact, thatthe Sanscrit, too,

has several secondaryrootswhich have appended a sibilant. In the case

before us the Lithuanian min e - ta , I die”

(pret. min -fact, fut. mir- eu,infin. mir- ti), fortuitouslycoincideswith the Zend.

COMPOUNDS .

of both sexes under the protection of the government of

Yima.

975. To return to the Védic Dvandvas, I must draw

attention to the circumstance, that the dual termination,

which is commonto the nominative, accusative, and vocative,is retained also in that case, in which the whole wordstands in another case- relation, and the last member,

therefore, ends in bhydm or 63 e. g. , dydvd-

prithivi - bhydm,

to the heaven and to the earth (Yajurv. XXII.

indra-

pflshadh'

, of Indra and the Sun (l. c. XXV.

This phenomenon maybe explained bythe language hav

ing become unconscious that the first member actuallycarries a case - term ination, whereby remembrance maybe drawn to the abovementioned [G . Ed. p .

Zend idiom , bywhich the nom inative singular verycom

mouly takes the place of the theme. If we should also

actuallyrecognise, in forms like indra. agnf, simplya pho

netic lengthening of the a and i of the common language,we could not, however, by this mode of explanation,clear up p itdr- d. dydv—d. pfishap

- d and kghd'

m- d. It is alsoimportantto remark, that, as Benfeyhas been the firstto

notice where the first member of the Dvandva is sepa

rated from the second, the former assumes the requisitete rm ination of the Oblique cases of the dual, but a onlythere where suitable for the connection with the otherwords. Thus, in a passage cited by Benfey 1. c . of theBigv. (IV. 8. we find the genitive, mitrdyds aerating/63,

of Mitra and Varuna ; on the other hand dydvd. as ac

cusative dual separated from prithivi (Bigv. I . 63. This

phenomenon in expressing the numeral relation is owingto the speaker

’

s, when he names each part of the com

pound thing which is usuallythought of together,having

In his Review of BOh tlingk’

s Sanscrit- Chm tomathy (GottingerLearned Notices,


the other in his mind, and this latter thus ideallycomprehended under the name of that he mentions (cf. 2 1 4. lst

Note), so that, therefore, e.y. , dydvd-

prithivi", properlysig

nifies, Heaven and earth, earth and heaven ; hence, too,the

name of one member of the compound maybe understood ,

and, e. g. in a passage ofthe Sama- Veda (II. 3. 2 . 8 . 2 . and

the dualm itrd occurs in the sense Of‘‘Mitra and Varuna,

"

and I am of opinion thatthe dual rddasi’

,which, in classical

Sanscrit, also signifies heaven and earth, denotes by itsbase rddas only heaven,

”though the meaning earth

[G . Ed . p. has also been ascribed to iti'

. I draw at

tention here to a similar procedure in severalMalay- Polynesian languages, since, e. g.

, in the New Zealand ld- ua (lit.

thoutwo,”therefore, as it were, the dual of the second

person) signifies, thou and LI" Here, ta answers to

the Sanscritbase tva, thou,"and no, which, when standing

by itself, is dim, to dva.

976. Combinations of more than two substantives in one

Dvandva appear not to occur in the Vedic dialect and

Zend ; atleast, [ knowof no example. Examples in classic

Sanscritare : aga i- cdyu- ravibhyas. From fire. air. and sun

(Mann, I . gfta- vdditra - nf itydni , Song. instrumental

music, and dance (Arjuan’

a Journey to Indra’

s heaven,

Forp rithivyad,withthe case- terminationsuppress. d, cf. p. 1 2 05 G . ed.

1 lVilson, perhaps correctly, derives radas from rad,

“to weep,

”with

the suffix as the heaven”therefore would be here represented as

weeping”

and the drops of rain as its tears. This is cer

tainlynotmore unnaturalthanwhen the cloud (mef

glui) is represented asmingem .

”Moreover, the Greek oi pavde admits of being derived from a

rootwhich, in Sanscrit, signifies to rain,

”viz . from ran k

, urish, withthe loss, therefore, of a sibilant, as xat

'

pa) from xai'

po-

e (Sanscritrootharsh,brisk). Ofipavds

‘

,therefore, would be a transposition ofFopavdr. Regard

ing the suffix avo,see p. 1369 G . ed.

1 See“Onthe connection of the Malay- Polynesian languageswith the

Indo- European,”

p. 87.


SECOND CLASS .

Possessive Compounds, called Balsam-Mi . it

978. Compounds of this class denote as adjectives or

[G . Ed. p. appellatives the possessor of that whi chthe separate members of the compound signify, so thatthenotion ofthe possessor is always to be supplied. For th is

reason I call them possessive compounds. The last

member is always a substantive, or an adjective taken as

a substantive, and the firstmember maybe anyother partof speech but a verb, conjlinction, or interjection. The

final substantive undergoes no other alteration but thatwhich the distinction of genders makes necessary; whence ,

e. g. , chhdyd, f. ,“shadow,

”in the compound vipuM- chchhdyaxf

has shortened its long fem inine d, in order to become re

ferable to masculines and neuters. So, in Greek, the fem inine final vowel ofthe bases of the firstdeclension becomes

0 =Sanscrit a), and in Latin u, in possessive compoundslike nohéomo-

g, noAéxoyo—g, a ioMpoq o-

g, multi - Oomas, albi

- comu- s, multi - vias. The procedure in Old High Ge rman

is the same, when it places the feminine substantivefarwaorfarawa, &c

“colour,”atthe end ofpossessive compounds,

and then furnishes the whole word, where itrefers to mas

culines or neuters, with the term inations of the said gen

ders ; hence, e.g. , nom . m . m ic- varawar sco, sea havingthe colour of snow”

(Grafi‘

, III. neut. goltmarawa z ,

having the colour of gold.

“I see , therefore, no occasion

to presuppose, for the explanation of such compounds, ad

jectives which do notexist; otherwise we m ight, with equaljustice, assume in Greek and Latin adjectives like xopog,

Thisword signifies having much rice,”and it is properlyonlyan

example of the kind of compounding here spoken of, as, in Greek and

Latin, m kéxopoe, multicomus, mightbeused to denote the same.

1 Chchh, euphonic for GM , on accountof the sh irtvowelpreceding.

COMPOUNDS. 389

comus, hairy,”

and for Sanscrit an adjective chhdya- s,

shady. The Greek has forgotten how to re- transform

into its feminine shape the o which has arisen from a or

1) in compounds like a ohéamog, a ohtixoyog, and contrasts,therefore, with Sanscrit fem inines like vipulachchhdyd,

having a large shadow,

”and Latin like [G. Ed. p.

multicoma , albicoma, masculine forms like aohliamog, wohéxo

pog (see p. 1 34 1 G. on the other hand, the Latin,

according to the principle laid down in has changedthe final vowels of the bases of the firstand second deelension frequently into the lightest and mostsuitable vowelofthe three genders.

’ Hence, e. g. , multiformis, difi'

ormis,

biformis, imbellis, abnormis, bilinguis, inermis so, also, the

organic uof the fourth declension in bico'rnis while, on theother hand, mann- s, in the compound Iongi

- manus, has

passed into the second declension.

979 . Just as the neuter Sanscrit Irrid, heart (fromhard), in the possessive compound suhrz

’

d, friend, pro

perly, having a good heart, has become masculine, andis therefore, in some cases, distinguished from the simple

hrid, so ithappens with the Latin neuter base cord in the

compound bases miseri - cord concord, socord hence the secusatives m isericordem, concordem , socordem, answer to the

Sanscrit suhrz’

dam. while the simple cor as nom inative

and accusative, corresponds to the Sanscrit hrid (euphonichfil). The Gothic neuter base ha irtan suppresses, in the

underm entioned possessive compound, the final a, and ex

The final e of neuters like difl'

orme isonlya corruption of the i atthe

end of a word (sec

T Properly, for the unfortunate having a heart,”not cujue cor mise

rel.”SO the Gothic arma - ha irts, pitiful,

”

properlysignifies“having

a heart for the poor for in it the adjectivebase arma is contained, asthe base misera in the Latinmisericors, which base isweakened tomiseri,according to 968.


bibite then arma - hairta as theme, and arma - ha irt- s (OldHigh German arme- herz er in Notk .) for arma - hirta - s, (see

as masculine nominative (pl. arma - hairtai); so

bra inge- hairts having a pure heart hauh—hairts (for

hauha—hairts, high ominded,”

properly, having a highheart. The Greek and Latin, too, 00 [G. Ed. p.

casionallydrop a final consonant at the end of possessivecompounds ; hence, e.g. , in Greek 6pé vupog, éa rdovopog,

dramas, adda lpog, in Latin, exsanguis (properly.“having the

blood out,”

gen. idem . , for exsanguin- is), malti - genus for the

latter we m ight have expected multi - genor, if the suffix of

the simple word be contained thereinuucurtailed, and also

without affix, as as, eris= Sanscritas, asas, has retained the

old 3 only in the uninfiected cases of the neuter(seebut for it exhibits r in the masculine and fem inine (see

p. 1377 G. hence, bicorpor, opposed to the simple cor

pus, corporis. The base gener (genus. gener- is) appears withthe inorganic affix of an i in mulli - generi

- s. The Greekoccasionallyappends an o to bases ending in a consonant,

e.g.,to afip in drape-

9, Oedvrupo-

g (properly, having God’

s

to ifdwp in 65:73pm“

, pehdvud‘

pog.

980. The Lithuanian uses its possessive compounds for

the mostpartsubstantively, and adds to their lastmember

as to that of almost all its compounds, the suffix ia ,

nom . m . is ’; hence, e. did - barnis, the large

—mouthed “

(burna, mouth,“cf. Sanscritbra, to speak did -

galwis,

great head“

(“having a great head, galwa, head”

)ketur- kamp is, four- cornered”

(kampa - s, corner trikoyis,three - footed, having three feet

”

(kdya, foot The

feminine of the Lithuanian possessive compounds, and otherclasses of compounds, ends, in the nom inative singular, in ii,

" 46

from ia T; hence, e. g. , na - bage, the poor,”

properly,“not

a See and p. 1345 G. cd., Note.

1 See 895.


does not castback the accent, butallows itto sink down on

the final syllable ofthe whole base hence, e. g. , mahd- bdhti - s,“a greatarm , opposed tomahd- bdhu- s, great

- armed, whileinGreek the possessive compound peyahdaoh g, great

—town[G . Ed . p . form ing,

“and the determ inative Me'

yahd

woAIg, properly, great- town,

” have the same accentuation .

982 . The form mahd, in the justmentioned compoundsmahd- d Iu- s and mahd- bdln

'

l- s, is an irregular abbreviation

of mahdt, great”

(theme of the weak cases), whi ch, at thebeginning

‘

of possessive and determ inative compounds,drops its t, and then the lengthening of the a maybe re

garded as compensation for the consonantthat has been

d ropped. Although in Sanscrit, according to all

the parts of speech , with the exception of verbs, conjunctions, and interjections, maystand as the firstmembers of

possessive compounds, still for the most part, as also in

the European sister- languages, adjectives, including partici

ples, appear in this place . I further annex some ex

amples from the Maha- Bharata : chéra- ldchana - s, hav

ing beautiful eyes ; bahd—vidha - s, ofmanykinds (vidhd .

m . or vidhd f. kind tand- madhya - s,“ having a

thin m iddle ; vi rfipa- n

’

z'

pa- s, having a disfigured form

(wipe- m, form tz’

kshpd- da i ishgra - s, having pointedteeth (danshfrd f. tooth lumbé -jathara - s, having a

swagging belly; sphurad- dshtha - s, having trembling lips

(sphurdmi, Cl. 6. I jdyad- ratha - s. proper name ,

Signifying having a conquering car jité - krddha - s,“hav

ing subdued anger gald- vyatka - s, having departed grief,

i . e. ,

“free from grief.

”The following are examples in

Zend :In qod

ilwzi?» éri'

radcshan,

“ having good oxen“

(from s’

rz‘

ra and ucshan) ; kérési

adcshan,

“ having thin oxen

(kér‘

éi a=Sanscritkri in) kéréiids’

pa, proper name, havingv v 'l

thin andwipe); fldwxlgqoq ycfi cshaétd

Sec Burnouf,Yacna, p. 82 8, n.

.COMPOUNDS . 1 393

-

pathri'

, who has bright(beautiful) children. The fol

lowing are examples inGreek : pa d- dunes, [G. Ed. p .

peya - xédqg, peya - xherjg, Aevxd- m epog, doNxd- O

'mog, Aeux’- 6¢

OaApog, fiadfi- w epvog, noAé-

xpuo'

og, ram’

m renhog, ,ueNip- fiwhog,

peAav- d- mpog, xhurd- i ra i g, w d—fiovhog. The following are

Latin examples : magn’-

animus. multi - ccmlis, longi-

pes, alri

- colo'

r, acu-

pedius se mi - color, fissi -pes, flex’

m nimus. Gothicexamples are : laus

’

-

qvithr’

- s, having an emptybody, fasting (for Iausa laus

’

- handus, having empty hands ;lausa - vaurds, having wanton

,vain words, speaking nu

profitably (vaurd, n. , theme vaurda. hra inya- ha irts, having a pure heart (see Examples in

Old High German are : lang- lz

'

per, having long lifelanch-maeter, long

- suffering milt- herz er, having a mild

heart. “ For Lithuanian examples, see 980. Examples

in Old Sclavonic are : MHAOtEeA'

b m ilo- serd’

, misericors,“

literally, having a loving heart neenookb lfi chernO- okyi'

,

black- eyed B'BAOI‘

AABb lIi byelo—glavyi'

, white - headed ":The following are examples in Sanscritof possessive com

pounds, which have a substantive as their first member

bandht’

I - c ma - s, having love to kindred lyéktu- kdma - s,

having a desire to leave (see bdla -

putra- s,

“hav

ing a child as son (Sav . II. mdfritshashgha- s, having

the mother as sixth (Hid. I . in Greek, Icw - d- cppwv,xvv- o- Oapmjg, Bou—xétpahog, dudp—d—Bovhog : in Latin, angui

This compound (according to Festus)should properlybe ace -

pee, in

the theme acu-

ped . Through the appended suffix in itanswers to the

Lithuanian compounds In Sanscrit the theme would be (isti

-

pad (from dint), and in Greek dine—Irons, dxé - wrod- or. The firstmemberof the Latin compound is therefore important to us, because adjectivebases terminating in an originaluhave elsewhere, In Latin, universallyreceived the Inorganic afiix of an i (see p. 1856 G . ed.

1 Grafi'

(II . p. 46) unnecessarily assumes an adjective lib, lively,

while we maybe satisfied with the substantive lip , lib, life.

”

I The two lastexampleswith the afiix of the definite declension.

4 x


[G . Ed. p. comus, angui—pcs, ali -pes, pudor

- i - color : in

Lithuanian, em f - dentist, having gaps in the teeth (sz ulcké,hole, gap

"

) sz un-

galwis, dog’

s head”(an abusive word),

properly, the dog’

s headed (cf. The followingare examples in Sanscrit, with a numeral atthe comm ence

ment: dvi -

pdd two- footed ; trichalcra, three - wheeled“

(saws -V) ; chdtugh—pad, fourfooted"

(1. c.) in Zend ,

Alb any; bi - z anhra, two- footed ;”

[Mcsoxplfléx pl cha thru- cha§man, havmg four eyes ; cshvas - aehi ,

having six eyes ”wknal’b gusxw haz aahrd—ghadsha .

having a thousand ears in Greek, dc'

wovg, dead-

rapes, dino

pog, rpc'

woug, Te‘

rpdxuxhog : in Latin, bipes, bidens, bicwpor,

tripes, tripectorusl, quadrupes, quad-

r’

mrbs, quinquq’olius in

Lithuanian, wien‘

- ragis, one- horned" (ragas, horn,

"see

dwt- Icoyis, two- footed tri - koyia, three foot

tri - lcampis, three - cornered ; tri - galwis, three- headed

ketur- Icoyis, fourfooted in Sclavonic, Rannoeor'

b yed im- rog

’

, one- horned cI'Ielvrye- aog

’

, fourfooted (noga, foot in Gothic, haihs, one - eyed (see

p. in Old High German, ein- hanter, one - handedein- oager, one - eyed ; zui - ekker, two- cornered fear

:fausser, fourfooted.

”The following are examples of

Sanscrit possessive compounds with a pronoun as the first

member : svaydm-

prabhu- s. having lustre byitself (svaydm ,

self,”see prob/Id, tad- dkdra - s,

“ havingsuch appearance mad- vidha - s,

“like me,

”

properly,“hav

ing the kind of me .

"Examples in Greek are : a Ii -rdfiovkog,

[G . Ed . p . a frrddmog, adroddvarog, adrdxopog, wh om;

In theweak cases dvi -pa’

d. The numerals in this kind of composition

retain the accent onlyunder certain conditions : usually it falls on the

final syllable of the whole word (see Aufrecht, “De accents compositorum

Sanscr., pp. 1 2

, 2 0.

1 With an extension Of the base pector (cf. biompor)bya vowel affix,as in Greek forms like dedvrvpor 979 . conclusion).


uz - vénan, hopeless, having the hope out (vén(i)- e, f.hope Old High German, ar- hi‘rz ér. ez cors ;

"uis- later

(for m ars ar-mdt, spiritless ; ar- wdfan, un

armed, defenceless. In a sense opposed to that of the

privative prepositions, the preposition so, with“whi ch

occurs only as prefix, is employed in Sanscrit to express

persons or things which possess thatwhi ch the final sub

stantive expresses ; e. g. , sé - kdma - s, with Wish,"i . e.

being with the circumstance of the wish, having a satis

fied wish ;"

sé - ruj,‘‘

sick, being with sickness ; sd - rdga—s,

id. (rack and rdga,‘‘

sickness sé - va'ma - s,

‘‘

sim ilar,“

pro

perly,“conco (vam - m,

‘‘ colour sa-

garva-

s,‘‘

,proud

being with pride”

sddaya- s. sympathi z ing”

(dayd,sympathy So In Latin, e.. .g cancers, comers, concolor,

covgformis, confinis. commodus, communis (for can and mum s,

cf. immunis); in Greek, e.y. , o-

Iivopog, adv-meme, avweNjg,afivopxog, O

'

Iivowhog, advopfipog, advances“, a lived‘

og, o'vy

-

yovog,

oévdpovog, oéppoptpog, onwditaxrog ; the latterwith the extension ofthe substantive base bya (see conclusion). On

the Sanscritso is based the Greek d (from d for e a) in com

pounds like d'

ydhax-

rog, dydhaf, a’

zdehcpdg, do og. Mentionhas alreadybeenmade elsewhere ofthe exactretention ofthe

Sanscritpreposition sa in the Greek a-

acpq'

g, properly, with

light, being with brightness.“

In Sanscrit, bhds,“bright

ness,”would regularlycombine with sa into the compound

sé - bhds, and this, in like manner, would signify“ clear,

shining. In Gothic, ga -

guds, pious,”

properly, beingwith God, belongs to this class of words, being the anti

[G . Ed. p. thesis to the above - mentioned af-

guds

and also ga - liugs, false ga- daila, sympathiser,

"with

Whenused alone, calla as verbalprefix, a im . The formerappearsalso

inthe compound cahddéva - s, and the latter in some nominal compounds.

7 Properly, b eing with lying it presupposes a lost substantive

COMPOUNDS. 1397

portion having (for ga- dail(i)- s, see 5. ga

—hlaifa,“companion, with bread having

”

(for ga l. If

I have been wrong in comparing, in the Gothic formations in Ieilc

’- s, and the forms analogous to them in

German, with the Sanscrit in driiwa, theymust then be

included in the class of compounds under discussion, andwe must recognise in their concluding elementthe sub

stantive leik’

- s, body; then galeika, sim ilar, signifies

properly, with bodyhaving,” “having the body, i . e. , the

form in common with another, and itwould correspondin its formation to the Latin coaformis, Greek adppoq og,

and Sanscritsé - rz’

ipa- a

' The form anthar- leik’

- s,“separate,

”

deducible from anther- leikei , difi'

erence ,” would then

literally signify having another body,"i . e. another

form,

"d popcpog (cf. Sanscritanydrz

'

ipa- s, other shaped

S . V. II. 8. I. 4 . I .

984 . The Sanscrit prefixes an and dus (before sonantletters dur, cf. like their sister forms in Greek, ed

and dog, stand in the class of compounds under discussion

for adjectives, wherebysuallows the accentwhich belongs

to it to sink down on the final syllable of the base,

or before words which are formed with the suffixes as

and man on the penultima ; hence, e. g. , su-

péias (nom .

m . f. supéids), having a good form sumdnas, nom . m . f.

sumdnds, having a good spirit, well- intentioned,“in op

position to eu-jfhvd- s.“having a good [G Ed . p. l44a.j

tongue (jihad. f. tongue su-

paraa- s. having good

wings.

"The following are exampleswith dus, dur, bad

di’

Ir- dtman (nom .- md), having a bad soul dt

'

cr- baIa - s,

having bad strength ; dtir- mana- s (nom .amends), hav

ing a bad spirit."To the latter corresponds, irrespective

of the accentuation, the Greek ausnes‘

(see as

Likewise similar, from m,with, and riipa,

“form ; so dau- f ilpo

- s,“similar,

”from (inn

,

“after,

”and rapa, form .


edpevfigto sumdnds. Other Greek examples belonging tothisclass are : edpeitég, GOFG‘

YéOUS‘

, elimpdlog, GIIMAOQ,

dégpopog, dugapo’

a'wxog, ddghex

-rpcs. Examples in Zend of thi s

class ofwords are : 015759m

' Ila - kérFP,“having a handsom e

body,”nom . hu- kérEf- s (see swagge hu-ji

‘

li .

having a good life (see hu—puthra, f. hu-

p athrz‘

,

having handsome children due—manas', hav

ing a bad spirit III/dubs ”, due- skyadthna , hav ing

a bad deed , acting badly sn ip dusch- vacha ii, hav

ing bad discourse .

THIRD CLASS.

Determinatives called K armadhdraya.

985. The last member of this class of compounds is a

substantive or adjective, which is more closelydefined or

described by the first m ember. The first member maybe anypart of speech, excepting verbs, conjunctions, and

interjections ; the mostusual, however, is the combinationof an adjective with a following substantive. Adjectives,which have a peculiar theme for the fem inine, use , if the

concluding substantive be fem inine. notthe fem inine base ,

butthe primaryform common to the masculine and neuter.

The accent falls most commonly on the final syllable of

the united base . The following are examples : divya- liusumd- s, heavenlyflower ; priya

- bhdryd,“dear spouse

[G . Ed. p. 1 444 ) (not priya- bhdryd); saplarshciya- s, the

seven Rishis ; a - bhayé - m , not fear,

adhrishta - s,

“invincible ; (in- rita - s. untrue stipn

‘

ta - s,

Inseparable adverbs and prepositions have the accentatthe begin

ning of these compounds : justso substantives wh ich denote the thingwith which the person or th ing to which the compound refers are com

pared. TO the numerous exceptions from the rules of accentin this classof compounds belong, inter alia , the compounds described in like

su- ldbha - s,

“being easily attained ;"dur - ldbha - s,

“beingwith difficultyattained.

”


lightas a feather himmefli lau, sky- blue ; dunkefli lau,

dark blue ; Unschuld, innocence Unverstand, ind is~

cretion ; unreif, unripe uneben, uneven i fbermachf,

overpowering force Abmeg, by- way Ausweg, out

let Beigeschmack, false taste ; Uni ts-

rock, petticoat;

Vorhut. vanguard schwarz gelb, tawny Vorrede,“

pre

face Vorgeschmack, foretaste Vom iting. forenoon

N achgeschmak, after- taste ; Milerbe, co- heir ; Mifechuld ,

participation in guilt Abgotl,“idol Abbild , image .

"

In Old High German onlythe compounds with sdmi, whi chare wanting in our dialect, willbe here mentioned bym e as

analogousto the above - mentioned (p. Sanscritadm i- bhaktas,

“half- eaten,“Greek i

‘

yp c'

xevog, Latin semi - mortuus,viz .

admi - heil. half well ; rdmi - qree, semi - virus ,”

admi - wz’

z ,

“subrufus half white The following are examfles in

Gothic : yugga - lauths, young man, youth silba - siuneis' ,“eye

- witness, aid-

roams afar- dagrl'

, the other (following)day anda - vaard. answer counter- word

"

) unda

face, countenance afar-

gudya ,

“ high priest,

dpxlepeég ; afar-fi lls, overfull. Examples in Lithuanianare : pirm

-

gimm immas.“

first- birth ;"

pus- déui s,

“dem i - god

[G . Ed . p . pus- semi , half- sister pus

-

gywis. halfdead (literally, semi pus

- said, peninsula ;

san- kareiu- is, competitor san- tewonis. co- lleir prybuttis,vestibule.

"Examples in Old Sclavonic are : NOBOl

‘

fAA'

b

nova-

gruff , new- town BbtetaAna ii vyse- slavnyi , entirely

famous nbtssaarb l ii vyse- blugyi , quite good abtq f '

b

vyse- z ar

’

,wayfiamheég ; tamoanaeq

'

b samo—videz ’

, eye

In case the lastmember of this compound occurred in its ancom

pounded state, and thatthe whole is not,which I consider more probable,a derivative from a tobe-

presupposed silba - riuns,“self- seeing.

”

1“ In Sanscritapardkpa

- m (from apara - ahna - m) is called “the after

noon,”butliterally, the other day the other partof the

I Wei z n does notoccuruncompounded.

COMPOUNDS . 1 401

witness, adro'

m ng inRussian, nonsens pol- deny,“noon”

HOJIBO‘I b pol- nooky, m idnight IIOJIyGOP

'

b’

pols- bog,

“demi

god catmfl oq efi enb lfi svyello—chelenyi , light green

eoafl aa'hmefi b ao- vladyetely, cc - owner.

”

FOURTH CLASS.

DependentCompoundscalled Tatpuruglta .

987. This class forms compounds, Ofwhich the firstmember

is dependenton, or is governed by,the second, and there

fore always stands in some oblique case - relation. Examples,

in which the firstmember stands in the genitive relation,are contained in 5. 968 . So in Zend, e. g. , aespsx dtm g,amand-

paili- s, loci dominus spindle/m g) nmdnd—pathni ,

loci - domino aespm dmfipxg z antu

-

paili- s, urbisdominus

in Greek, oixé—wed‘ov, a paré- a ed

‘

ov, civo—drjmy, oixo- rpéhaf,Oeaavpo

- di éhag in Latin, auri -fodina , auri -fur, mus- cerda

(see p. 1 4 1 8 G . ed Note), su- cerda , imbri - citor, Marti - cultor

in Gothic, veina-

gards, vineyard aurti - gards, kitchen

garden veina - basi,“grape keiva -fronya, master of the

house smaklca - bagms. fig- tree

”

(see daura - vardr,

warder, keeper of the gate daura - varda, [G . Ed. p.

portress, door- waitress ; rigid- loan,

“guerdon of victory

"

(for sigisu- laun): in Lithuanian, wyn

’- fig3, grape

"

(aya.

berry,”see wyn

i

- sz aleii, vine"

(sz akd=Sanscritlid/did, in Old Sclavonic, AOMOt'rgonTean doma

stroilely,“stewar ta

'a'roaaseq'

b svyeto- douez’

, light

giver soroeoanq a bogo- rodiz a, mother of God u'a'rao

raamen'

iepyetlo-

glashenie, gallicinium”

(Dobrowsky, p.

Examples in which the firstmember Of the dependentcom

Lit. “half- day. If L . Diefenbach is right, as I think he is, in com

paring the Lithuanian pussé'

,

“half,

”with the Sanscritpdriva, side,

"

the Sclavonic polmayalso be referred tothisclass, and Imaybe regarded

as the representative of the Sanscritr, as isdone byMiklosich,who traces

back 11 011 1 : pol’

to“ para,“alias.

”


pound stands in the accusative relation have been g iven

on a former occasion ! In Sclavonic, aoaonorb coda- nos”

,

“hydria,

”

properly, water tothis class. In

the instrumental relation the firstmember of the compound

appears frequently in Sanscrit in combination with the

passive participle in ta, and thatmember then rece ives theaccent which belongs to it in its uncompounded state ;

hence , e. g. , pati-

y’

ushtd, a marito dilecta.

”Thus, e. g. , in

Zend, irrespective of the accentuation, which is he re nu

known to us, Mpdb7l¥7dm )dx7xs z arathusthrdfrdcta ,

nounced byZaratusthra Mwfl sxsmaz da- ddta. m ade

byMaz da (Ormuz d): in Greek, fled- dares, Bed- rps-

Irrog ; in

Gothic, handu- vaurht’- s, made with the hand, e pO

-Iroc

'

q rog

in Sclavonic, gxko'raoeennnu

'

i rmilco—tvorennyi, id. (rmilra ,

hand,"see In the dative relation we find, e.

fin! p itn'

. and fgm hirapya , in the compoundspitfl - sadrisa - s,

“like the father hirapya

- sadriéa - s, like so in

Greek,Geoec'

xeitog; inGothic,gasti - go’

ds,“hospitable,

”literally,

to the guestorguests good in Russian, Gorouoaofinbu‘

i

bogopodobnyi ,“Godlike ; Goronocaymnb lfi bogoposlyshnyi ,

[G. Ed . p. obedient to God In the ablative

relation stands m adbhas, heaven, In the compoundnab/Ias- chyuld- s, fallen from heaven. In the locativerelation is ndu, in the above - mentioned ndu- stbd- s, stand

ing in the ship.

”

988. To the class Of dependent compounds belong, too,

our German formations like Singvogel, singing- bird

Springbm nnen. well- head ; Z iehbrunnen, draw- well ;

Schreiblehrer, writing- master S inglehrer, singing

- mas

ter Fahrwasser, water- channel Esslust, desire to

eat; L esez immer, reading- room Scheidekunst, analy

See 9 16 92 2 .

‘l‘ In combinationwith eadriia and pratiriipa the firstmember takesits proper accent.


lanquin trag- a - diorno, female supporter,

” “Caryatis

web- e- hIis, web- house," “

teatrino . The few remnants of

the Sanscrit 4th class a.) contract, in Old HighGerman, the classsyllable ya (itya)to i. of whi ch lief - i .

- hanna , midwife,”appears to be a solitaryexample . As

wasku, I wash,“and slg

'

fu, I drag,”do notbelong to thi s

class, the i of wask- i -waz ar and slijp- i - stein (literally, wash

water,”

draw maybe regarded as the weakeningOf a . The svllable ya Of the first weak conjugation is

likewise contracted to i (see Grimm , II. p. and thislatter vowel is frequentlyweakened to e, or entirely sup

pressed hence, e. g. , wez - i - stea , wez z - e—sten, ne z - stdn,

“whet

stone. The second and third weak conjugations afford,in Old High German, no examples of this class of com

pounds, which has continuallyextended itself in the course

of time, and is mostnumerouslyrepresented in New HighGerman. Since the weak conjugation, as I think I have

proved, is based on the Sanscritloth class (see I

would further recall attention to the factthatthe characterof this class is retained in the accusative forms in aydm

discussed in and in the Zend infinitives in ayarim .

FIFTH CLASS.

Collective Compounds called Dvigu.

989. This class forms collectives, which are m orecloselydefined bya numeral prefixed. The final subatan

[G . Ed . p. tive, without reference to its prim itive

gender, becomes a neuter, for the mostpart in a, or fem .

in i'

. The accentrests on the final syllable of the collectivebase . The following are examples : tri - gupd—m, the three

properties“

(guaa , chatur-yugd- m . the four ages of

the world"

(guga , paiichéndriyd—m, the five senses

(indriya , tri - khatvé - m or tri - khaivz‘, three beds

(abated, tri - rai rd- m, three nights”

(rdtra, for the

COMPOUNDS . 1405

simple ratri, pafichdgnf, the five fires“ ; tri - ldkz“,

the three worlds. Examples in Zend are 57mm bydr‘

é,

biennium,

”for bi -ydré(5, according to Gi zudw fiflé

thri - csapar’e-m, triaoctium ”5,5m ”639 chathru- mdhya.

four months, acc.—mahi'm (see 3 1 2 . and mm ,

GgZudM nava- csaparé- m,

“nine nights m bwm cupg md

pancha- mdhya, ace. five months sg7x dw dfwx >>md

csvas- csaparé- m, six nights.

" To these, vi z . to the neu

ters, correspond in Latin tri - viu- m. point where threeroads meet, bi - viu- m, ambi quadri - vium, bi - duu- m,

tri - duu- m , for which we maypresuppose a simple dun- s, or

da - a , or dun-m, as an appellation Of day for all threeforms dawm, according to the Sanscrit principle, mustbeemployed inthe compound. In Sanscrit, died appears as anappellation of day,

”in the compounds died- bards , sun.

”

as day- maker divd- map i - s. likewise sun,

”lit. pre

cions stone of day, and divd- madIIga- m, noon m iddle

of The adverb died, byday,”does not suit for

these three compounds. From the base died in Latin,

after suppressing the i, we mustgetduo. [G. Ed. p.

The Latin forms like bi - aod - ia - m, tri - noct- i a-m. quinqu’

wrt

ia - m (see bi - enni

- ia - m, have quitted the original position of genuine compounds, by annexing a neuter suflix.

The Greek prefixes the feminine form of the suflix to the

neuter in Ia- v, which latter, however, is not wanting.

Examples are rpmpepz'

a , rpcodc’

a , rerpaod‘

c'

a, re'

rpaédlov(quad

rivium), rerpavvxrc’

a , rpwéxrcov(lrinoctium). In exactaccord

ance with the Sanscrit neuter compounds like chatur

-yugd- m stands réGpI-mrov : on the other hand, the Sanscrit,

too, can, from its copulative compounds, form with the neu

Viz . the sun and four fires kindled in the direction of the four quar

ters of the world, to which he whoundergoes penance exposes himself.‘tThe i of ambi is the weakening of the final vowel of the base, which,

in the nominative singular, would form,were itimaginable, ambit- 3.


ter suffix ya derivations, which do not alter the m eaning

of the primary word . Thus, together with the above

mentioned tri - guna- m, tri - ld , there exist, too, the form s

traigas-ya

- m, trdildk - ya - m. of equivalent meaning so

chdturvara’

-

ga- m, the four castes,

”from chaturvand - m .

These, therefore, irrespective of the Vriddhi augment, are

the true prototypes ofLatin forms like tri - ean’- ia - m , quadri

- enn’- ia- m, &c. , and of the Greek rpI

- dd’

- Io- v. rpI- vdx-

r—Io- v.‘

[G. Ed. p. SMI TH CLASS.

Adverbial Compounds called Avyayibhdva .

990. The first member of this class of compounds is

either, and indeed most commonly, a preposition. or theT9

privative particle a , an, or the adverb ydthd, as ; and

the lastmember is a substantive, which, without reference

to its genderwhenuncompounded, always assumes the form

The term “collective compounds would be unsuitable for th is class

of compounds, if, with the IndianGrammarians,we included in th is clam

also adjectives like pa iichagava - dllana,“having the wealth of five bul

locks,

” “five bullocks rich .

”If,however,we do notregard the having a

numeral for the firstmember as the most important condition of these

compounds, I do not see anyreason forwithdrawing adjectives like that

above mentioned from the possessive class, and placing them in a class

with the collectives,which are more narrowlydefined bya numeral. The

word which IndianGrammarians put forth as anexample of this class of

compounds, viz . dvigu, is likewise no collective, but an adjective of the

class of compounds, with a trifling overplus ofmeaning beyond what literallybelongs to it, “having two bullocks.

”It should

, however, signify,boughtfor two bullocks,

”butmustoriginallyhave meant scarce aught

else but “having the value of two two bullocks. ”

The peculiarityof this compound consists, therefore, only in this, that

dvigusignifies, byand for itself, not“two bullocks,

”but the worth of

two bullocks.

”If 96, with a numeral, should form a real collective, its

base receives the extension of an a hence,e.g .

, paTIcha -

gaed- m

,

“five

bullocks.

”Cf. , with respect to the a which is used to extend bases

,

Latin compounds like multi - colér-u- s, tri -pector-u- c,and Greek like ded

‘ fl vP‘O- se

1 408 FORMATION OF woans.

1) With particular suffixes, the most important of which

have been alreadyconsidered (see I musthere

furthermention, that, in departure from 2 94 . Rem ark 2 ,

I now prefer to trace back the Gothic adverbs boa - dré,

whither,”hi - d-

ré, hither,"

yain- dré, thither, to

the Sanscritpronominal adverbs in tra Theywill therefore have experienced an irregular transfor

mation ofthe tennis to the medial,“

parents,”

contrasted with the Sanscritp itérdu. As regards the l

of the said Gothic adverbs, it would lead us to expectin Sanscrit, according to d for a. This 6 occurs

in the Sanscrit suffix when it is appended to certain

substantives and adjectives. Thus we read in the

Schol. to Panini , V. 4. manughyatrd vasati, he dwells

among men dévalrd gachchhati, he goes to the

gods.

”

[G. Ed. p. 2 )With case- forms ; e. the form of ad

jectives, which is common to the nominative and accusative singular neuter, represents also the adverb. 1 , how

ever, of course consider the said form tobe the accusative,as anyOblique case is better adapted than the nom inative to denote an adverbial relation. The following are

examples : madharam,

“lovely, pleasant éi

'

ghrdm. kghip

quick nilyam,

“ever

"

(aftya- s,

chirém , long ; prathamém, first; dvitiyam, for the

second time babzi, much bhtiyas, more bhé'

yigh

(ham, most. So in Latin, e. g. , commodum, plerumque,

potissimum, multum, primum, secundum, amplias, recess,

In classical SanscritI have notmetwith forms and constructions of

this kind : theyseem to be limited to the Véda dialect. BO'

htlingk cites,

inhis Commentaryto Panini, p . 2 30, two passages of the firstbook of theRigveda : inthe one (32 . occurs paratrd

'

, in many, i . s. in many

places or members (Schol. bahushv anvayavéghu) inthe other (50.

dévatrd, in the sense of “among the gods.

”

INDECLINABLES . 1 409

facile, difi cile. SO, in Sclavonic, the adverbs in a are

identical with the accusative (nom . also) neuter Of the

corresponding adjective ; e. MAAO male,“little smoro

mnogo,“much ; sonrodolgo, long, a long time.

“TO this

class belongs, in Gothic,filu, much,”

very.

” Observe,too, the adverbialuse of neuter adjectives in Greek, bothin the singular and in the plural, as pé

'

ya , peyéha , p mpo'

v.

pmpé , k aNiv, m'

ov,“f axzi, 5186, which likewise must Of

course be regarded as accusatives. The adjective baseword for dqpév, long, is wanting : it is probably, just

like 80707569 akin to the Sanscrit di'rgha from dargha or

drag/Ia, longus,”whence the adverb dI

‘rgham . Some

Sanscritadverbs are, according their form , plural instru

mentals, formed from adjective bases in a , e. uchchdc’

s.

high.”loud,

"from uchchd ni

'

chdis. low,

"from m

'

chci

éandis, slow, from the unused éana . [G. Ed. p.

The Lithuanian, which forms instrumentals plural in

a is, eis (from iaia), from bases in a and is (diewa is= Sanscrit dévdis. see exhibits, in remarkable con

formitywith the Sanscrit, adverbs also with plural iastrumental terminations ; e. g. , pulka is. frequent,

”from

pulka karta is, attimes,“from karta

once ; maharaia,“in the evening,

“from wakam - s.

evening M id i - mic, bynight p ietu- m is, atnoon.

The instrumental singular occurs in Sanscrit likewise

in some forms which pass for adverbs e. g. , in ddkshigzé

- II- a , southern,

”from dékqhigza dchiré -

ri- a , soon,

”lite

rally,

“after not long : ahndya, soon

,

“literally, this

day,"is a dative . The Old High German adverbs with

a dative plural term ination like luz z i'

loém, paulatim ;

the Anglo- Saxon like middum , inmedia,

"

miclum ,

“mag

nopere ,’ the Old Northern like IOIIgum, longs,

"

fornam,

“slim

"

(Grimm , Ill. p. rem ind us Of the Sanscrit

and Lithuanian adverbs first discussed, with the plural

termination of the instrumental. The following are

4 v


examples in Sanscrit Of adverbial ablatives p aschal

hereafter drdt,“near,

"also far ; adhastdt. under

purestdt, before,”from the lostbasespaécha , &c .

rdt, swift,”from (whim , not long.

” To this classhave already been referred the Greek adverbs i n m;

(from arr).m They enrich, to a certain extent, the de

clension Of adjectives byone case ; andButtmann

remarks thatmg maystill be regarded as a term ination

enti relydevoted to the inflection of the adjectives. We

[G . Ed. p. must, however, here give up the sim

ple rule, that the termination 09, nom inative and geni

tive, passes into tag, as cog cannot possibly, as an inde

pendent case - term ination, arise at one time from a

nom inati ve, and that of the masculine gender, and at

another from a genitive. The agreement in accentuation, e,g . , of carpal; with Iroqxig, Of edOéwg with 66069 etifléog,

corresponds with the phenomenon, that in Greek , as in

Sanscrit, the accent regularlyremains on the syllable

on which the base or the nom inative has it; thus, in

Sanscrit, from the base same, like,“comes the nom ina

tive samd- s, ace. samé - m, abl. samd—t, as inGreek from Ond

come the analogous forms 614- 69 dud- v, The fol

lowing are Latin adverbs with an ablative form , e.g. ,

continue , perpetuo, rare, prime, secundo and in Gothicthese have a genuine ablative signification, e. hva - thrd,

whitherP" tha - thrd, therefrom (see 2 94. Rem . l);and the following have notan ablative meaning like the

Greek in cog and Latin in 6 : sinteind,“always sniu

See 183. Since, then, Ahrens (“D e dialecto Dorico, p. 376) has

similarlyexplained theDoric adverbs in a (1rd), row-63, « as,m e), which,as representatives of the adverbs in dew(see have a genuine ablative meaning. Bytheir term ination as

, for m- r, theycorrespond adm i

rablyto the Gothic adverbs, which are likewise strictlyof an ablativenature, like alyathré,

“aliunde

”

(see 2 94. Rem .


verbsbyadding the syllable mayto the infinitive but I

believe thatthe languagehas arrived in a differentm anner

atadverbs like laupsin- tinag.

“in a praiseworthymanner

(infin. laupsinti , to praise than by appending the

syllable my to the infinitive suffix i i . I believe , vi z .

that in Lithuanian abstractbases in tine - s existed, whichsuffix might be added to the root or the verbal theme

in the same way as the infinitive suffix ti . I pre

suppose, therefore, e.g. , abstracts like laupsintina-

s, the

praising, myfilina - S, the loving and I deduce there

from the adverbs laupsin- linay, myfi

‘

linay, in the same

way as gieray,“bane,

"from giera

- s, bonus.

“I regard

the suffix tina as identical with the secondary suffix

tvana(see p. 1 2 16G. cd. ,Note), which forms abstracts in the

[G . Ed. p . 1 459 ] Véda dialect. With regard to the lossof the v, remark the relation of the Lithuanian sapna

- s.

sleep,

”to the Sanscrit svdpna

- s. To the Védic suffix

tvana, and in factto its locative lvané I refer

also the Old Persian infinitives or gerunds in Iana iy, if

Oppert is right, as I th ink he is, in assigning the tof

chartanayand Ihastanayto the suffix’

; char- lanay thenranks itself under the Sanscrit root char,

“i re,

"

also‘

tfaeera"

agere," “

committers; and thas—tanayunderthah,which Rawlinson comparesf with the Sanscrit rootw&afis, the final sibilant of which is protected bythe t

following. But if itbe correctto divide chartanayand

Benfeyrefers the t, e. g. thatof chartana iy,'

to make,”to the root,

and takes am as the suffix .

1“Journal of the RoyalAsiatic Society,

”Vol. XI . p. 176. I formerly

thought (Glossar. Sauser., a. 1 847, p. v) of a connection Of the Old Per

sian Mali with the W rit chairs/I ; but if we do not followBenfeyin

referring thastanay(the original confirms also the reading thaatam’

ya)to

the Sanscrit root chéght, to strive,”other Persian forms are wanting

with ”I for Sanscritch, though it is true that further instances maybe

quoted where the Persian Y<l III is substituted for sibilants.

INDECLINABLEb . 1 4 1 3

thastanay, instead of chart- anewthasi - anay, in which.too, Rawlinson recognises gerunds, then the agreement

with the Lithuanian verbal adverbs under discussion isvery remarkable ; and I think that laupsin—tinag, mglé- tinag, which Ruhig translates by in a praiseworthy,loveable manner,

”signify, according to their origin.

nothing else than in the praising,“

in the loving,

”

“in laudando,

” “in

992 . There are in Sanscritalso several [G. Ed. p.

adverbs which can be referred to no settled principle of

formation. To this class belong, among others, the negative particles a (as prefix), no (see the adverbs of

time, sand , adya, to- day"

on this dayaivas, to- morrow”

(Latin eras), byes, yesterday,"

pond ,

“in the past yearI,

”sadyas, simultaneously (probably

from so, this,

”and dyas from divas, day the prefixes

eu, well,”

fine,”and dus, ,

bad.

"

As in Greek, togetherwith the abstracts in o-

vvv) (see p. 1 2 16 G. cd.,

Note), there existadjectives in (mm : (see Aufrecht, Journalof Compsr.p. e. g. , pawdwvor, together with m m ; and as, in

Sanscrit, the suffix tva, which is speciallydevoted to abstracts, and withwhich Pott(E . I .

,II . p. 490)compares the Greek sufi x mm ), may, in

the Véda dialect, form also the future pamive participle (see 00,

in Lithuanian, together with the tO- be-

presupposed abstracts in tina - s

there exist also adjectives with the signification of the future passive ;e.g . , bar- tina - s, vituperandus biyo- tina - s, timendm 5

”wes- tina - s,

“ducendus”

(wedu, I lead,”

cf. conclusion). In myopinion. it

cannotbe denied thatthese formations, too, have much in commonwith

those in tvana inSanscrit; and if, in Lithuanian,wherewe ordinarilyfind

masculines for Sanscritneuter substantives, thereneverexisted abstracts intina - s

,we mustthen derive the adverbs in tinag from those adjectives.

1 Probablyfrom the demonstrative base ca (dun- dé, 42 2 ”and see

Gloss. Sanscr. , a. 1 847, p.

1 From par forpara, the other (see and at, a contraction

probably of the syllable vat, from vatsara, year.

”Pott (E . I . , I I .

p . 305)rightlycompares the Greek wept'

zm .


CONJUNCTIONS .

993. The differentmembers of the Indo -European fam ilyof languages agree in the construction of genuine conjunc

tions’

in this point, that theyform them from pronom inal

roots (see butgreatdifference prevai ls in specialities,i . c. , in the choice of the pronouns, whence conjunctions of

the same meaning are formed in the various languages

[G. Ed . p . 1 460] and groups of languages ; so that, e. g. . our

dass, Old High German daz , answers neither to the

Sanscrit yet, ydthd, nor to the Latin quad, ul, nor to the

Greek 37 a, «39, im , 3am , nor to the Lithuanian yog, lead,

nor to the Russian kio, at leastnotto the last as an en

tire word, but onlyto the concluding portion of it(to)(cf.The Old High German daz is nothing else than

the neuter Of the article , and the difference in writingwh ich we make between dos and Jess has no organic foun

dation, as the s in the neuter Of the pronouns and strongadjectives is everywhere based on an older 2 , and properlyshould always be written 9. I see no sufficient ground

for regarding, with Grafi’

(V. the conjunction da z as

the neuter of the relative, though the Gothic thatei con

tains the particle ei , wh ich gives relative signification to

the demonstrative ; but for the conjunction dass the de

mOnstrative meaning is more suitable than the relative ;

and when we say. I ch Iecias dass er [trait]: ist, I know

thathe is sick, this is tantamountto I ch weiss disses:

istkrank,“I know this : he is sick ; and I have, for this

reason, already, in myConjugational- system (p. calledthe conjunction class the article of the verbs. We cannot

place a verb or a sentence in the accusative relationwithoutprefixing to ita conjunction, i s. a pronoun,

whichis the bearer of the case - relation in which the sentenceappears. As neuter, too, dass is adapted to express the

nom inative relation : th is it does in sentences like, Es ist

5!


hintufrom him, whatP and also for the is justmentioned ,

to which the kim serves, in a manner, onlyas a fulcrum as

yddi , if,"to ca, and, in Latin, si to ac. inyddivd . sive, or

,

“

which I'd , ve, bythemselves signify.

994 . The justmentioned Sanscrit yadt‘

, i f has

sprung, I doubt not, from the relative base ya, to wh ich,

too, the Gothic conjunction ya - bai , of equivalent significa

tion, likewise belongs (see 383. p. 539) on the other

hand, the it(see contained in i t! obéi , if,wis to be

[G. classed under the demonstrative base i ,and can scarcelybe anything else than the neuter of the

said base, notoccurring in use byitself, and identicalwiththe Latin i d. It may be left an Open question whetherthe Gothic I

'

ba of n'

- iba, i f not,”be a contraction of ya - ba

(cf. thauh- yaba), or whether its i belong to the base of the

Sanscrit it, with which the Gothic i - ih, but,"

if,"is also

connected in its base. The Latin si belongs evidently,

like se- d and si - c, to the reflexive base (cf. si - bi). The

Greek 6? m ightbe taken as an abbreviation of édc, and so

be compared with ufayddi , to which itwould hear nearlythe same relation that, e. cpépei does to bhérati, he bears.

"

Our wean. if,"is identical with warm, When, and the

meaning i f is still unknown to the Old High German

adverb of time hwanae. hwemw. The Old High German

expression for Irena, and also for ob, whether,“is ibu,

I’

pu, &c. (formally=-_Gothic iba. English Middle HighGerman obe, ob, on which our Ob is based, which has lost

the signification if,"the case - relation of which is always

accusative , a relation expressed in the Latin 1 mm and atmm

also bythe form . The transition of the lightestvowel iin the Gothic iba and Old High German ibu, ipu, to the

heavier O of the Middle and New High German obe, ob. is

Zend5 1°C yéz i, 438 °C yéidhi, sec 638. Note, 703 .

Rem. sub finem (foryédhi, betteryéidhi).

CONJUNCTIONS . 14 17

so far remarkable, in thatlanguages become defaced, in the

course of time, usuallyonlybythe weakening, notbythestrengthening, of vowels.

“ In Sanscrit the above - men

tionedyddi signifies, like the Greek ei. and [G. Ed. p . 1463 ]

Old High German i - bu, i -pu. besides if,”also whether.

The Lithuanian yey, if,"

answers, with respectto the

diphthong ey, to the adverbs ay, ey, discussed above (p. 1457

G . but, with reference to its base, it is identicalwiththatof the Sanscrityddi (see In the syllable gu

Of yey-

gu, if, perhaps”

(also yei - g), I believe I recognisethe Sanscrit particle ha, Vedic gha , glad, hd, Greek ye, discussed above 8 1 4. p. 1 104, Note); and in the gi ofyey

-

gi,

albeit, although, notwithstanding,

"the parti cle f

i

g hi ,

which occurs withoutanyperceptible meaning, or signifies

for,“and in the latter case, too, never appears atthe be

ginning of a sentencexf995 . From the relative base ya spring also, in Sanscrit,

the conjunctions yet and yathd, that the former in the

It Towhathas beenObserved above p. 539)regarding the syl

lables ba, ba i, inthe conjunctions referred to, and of the adverb in a - ba,

which spring from strong adjective bases in a, one more attemmatexpla

nation maybe here added, according towhich ba mightbe based on theSanscritpa, whereby, from the demonstrative bases a andu, the preposi

tions ci—pa and Ii -pa have arisen. The Gothic prefers between two vowelsamedial instead ofthetenuesofthe formative sufi xesandtheterminations

while, atthe end of aword, an aspirate is preferred (cf. 5. p. 1 1 2 0)hence the preposition af, contrasted with the Sanscritd- pa, cannothinder

us from recognising also, in the conjunctions yaba i, n'- i- ba, and in the

adjective adverbs in ba, the Sanscrit sufi x pa of a-

pa, u-

pa, pratf-

pa,

sami - pa the Latin pe, of pro-

pt, Item-

pa, quip -

pa (from quid-

pt), 809 -

P8

Then, too, in Lithuanian, the pronominal adverbs tai -po, tai - p, so,”

kitta i -p , otherwise,”kai -po, ka i - p, as,

”katm i -p,

“inwhich manner,”

astrai -p , in another manner,”and the conjunctive yei - b, in order to,

mustbe referred to this class, in respectto their labial, in departure from

p. 540.

‘

tSee where, too, mention ismade ofthe Greek ya'

p.


sense of the Latin quad, and like it, according to form , the

neuter of the relative ; the latter in the sense of at, and,

like it, originally signifying as)“ In the Veda dialectthere is found, also, a conjunction of rare occurrence , ydt,that,

”as adverb, as,

"a veryinteresting form ,

which wasfirstrega rded byK uhnf as a conjunction, and, according[G . Ed. p . 1 464] to formation, as an ablative according to

the common declension (for yésmdt). We have, therefore,

in thisydt, as itwere the prototype ofthe Greek dig, whichcorresponds to the said ydtboth in its base (see and

in the significations as and that,“and as ablative , if I

am rightin taking the g of the adverbs in mg as a corruptionof “

r-l: As correlative to grit, and, as it were, as twin

brother to the Greek 76g, Occurs also, in the Véda dialect,the demonstrative adverb tdt. with the signification so,

“in

a passage of the Fourth Book of the Rig- Véda (VI.

cited byBenfey(Glossaryto the SRma- Véda, p. where ,

in one verse, grit is found with the signification as,"and

(fitwith thatof so.

"

996. Our so, where itanswers to wean, oughtto be re

garded as a conjunction, just as much as wean ; for in

sentences like V enn er gerund ist, so wird er kommen. If

he is well, then he will come, so then is as much the

supportof the following sentence, as wean, if,“is of the

preceding ; and it is quite impossi ble to translate'

it in

languages in which a corresponding expression is wanting,

as theyfeel no occasion, in constructions of thatnature , tointroduce the following sentence with a conjunction, or to

prefix, as it were, an article to its verb. In the later

Regardingyé - thd,see 42 5 . and as to atfrom uti for anti, p . 1 2 2 7

G . cd . ,Notet. Regarding the use of the Zend conjunctions A

geing yag,

Jada“; yatha , see and p. 1 42 8 G . ed.

1 See Hoefer'

s Journal, I I . p. 174 .

I See and p . 1 445 G . ed.


was later that I first represented the preposition a- dbd- r

under,”as adverb, below,

”as a derivative from the demon

strative base a .

“ To a- dhara- s, a- dhama - s, correspond, inLatin, injeras. infimus (see p. the former of whichVoss derives from the verb infero, while [G . Ed . p . 1 466]

the Sanscritadluima - s, in the Up adi - book (V . is formed

from the verbal rootav, to help,”with the suffix am . If

we would divide the words thus, dadha- ra - s, a- dlui - ma

-

s, we

mustthen derive these adjectives from a—dhés, under, be

neath, the 3 being suppressed, as dva -m - s, avé - ma - s, have

clearly sprung from the preposition asa, from , downfrom, though, 1. c. , arama - s, isassigned to the verbal rootac.

to help.

”The former derivation would not preventus

from deriving the prepositional and adverbial adhé r, itself,“

from the demonstrative base a bya suffix dhas, as a modifi

cation of tas.

998. To dti, over, Zend .sqom aiti . belongs probablythe Latin atof at- avus (see as also the Lithuanian

ant,“up,

“with a nasal inserted (cf. p. and with

outa nasal, butwith altered meaning, at, according to Ruhig,to, back,

” only as prefix ; e.g. , in at- cimi, I come hereat- diimi,

“ I give back .

”The Greek a

’

Iv-n

'

and Latin ante

appear doubtful to me nowas derivatives from ati , because

div-

rat, which itis not possible to separate in its origin from

civ-

rI'

, cannoteasilyhave come from dv-n'

, though dwc'

mighthave come from div-m bya verycommon weakening of a to l.

But if div-m be the old form , then W ante, end, presents

itself as the medium of comparison, at the root of whi ch, asthe Opposite to beginning,

“i . e. thatwhich is before, lies a

prepositional ideasf Our ant in Antwort, answer,”

as

See “On some demonstrative bases, and their connectionwith different prepositions and conjunctions,

"1 830, p. 9 . Cf. C . G. Schmidt

,

Deprwpositionibus Gra cia,”1 82 9 .

‘

l I have literallytranslated this obscure passage, which means thatW anta, end,

”as the opposite towhatis first, or before, mayverywell

be

PREPOSITIONS . 1 42 1

counter- word, has alreadybeen compared byThiersch withthe Greek a

’

um'

: the Gothic anda in ands - vaurd, ands - nahti,

evening”

(properly, fore - night,“or the time meeting

anda - numfls, acceptance, the taking in front of,

anda - nems,“agreeable,

” opposed to and‘- nima ,

“I accept,"

speak in favour of div-m as the older form. In its isolatedstate, and in mostcompounds, too, the Gothic preposition, onwhich our cat, in entsagen, entsprechen, &c. , [G . Ed. p .

is based, has lost its final vowel. The Sanscrit substantive

base anla ,

“end,

”has been changed inGothic to andya, nom .

andeis (also andi, nom . andis), and the latter substantive has,

in our Ende, kept itself free from the second alteration of

sound 87 which antand eat, inAntwort, entsprechen, &c. .

have undergone . In the Veda dialect there is an adverb

anti, near,”which recurs, too, in the later language (see Ben

fey and from whi ch, in the firstedition of myGlos

sary, withoutbeing aware of its existence, but presupposingthatsuch a form did formerlyexist, I have derived the sub

stantive unlike - m, nearness.

”It is probable that this

vfa anti has been formed from the demonstrative base m m,with a suppressed, and with the same suflix as thatwhich

forms ci - ti from a. The substantive W (into. end,“may,

however, be regarded as the etymological brother of afar

anti,“near,

"as itmaybe derived from the same pronom inal

rootthrough another, butcognate suffix. A verbal rootsuit

able for the derivation of data, end,“is notto be found ; at

leastthe rootam,“to go,

”to which the IndianGrammarians

have recourse (Uniidi , III. does not appear to me to be

a dangerous competitor with the demonstrative base am .

999. The suffix fit dhi of vfu ddhi ,“over, up, to

wards, answers to the Greek 8: of locative adverbs like né - GI,

be the source from which (I'

m-

a, over against,”hassprung, and mayitself

have a prepositional idea as its base, as there is a similar idea atthe root

of beginning.

”Trandator.


3- OI, odpa vé—OI . The possibility thatthe Greek 5730 may

have arisen from a’

wdc for side, and be akin to vfwddh i, hasalreadybeen noticed (see 2 94 Rem . p. I com

pare with more confidence the Latin ad, as also the Gothic

and, as far as,up to (Old Saxon anti , ant), if this belong not

to W énta, end,"

and so be originally identical with

uncle . and. The greatmobility in the transition of mean

ings in prepositions, combined with the facilityof alteration

[G . Ed . p. in form, causes us here a difficulty in ar

riving atcomparisons which can be entirelydepended upon.

For comparison with the Gothic preposition at, near, at."

we find in Sanscritno other preposition than ddhi . To theLatin ad theGothic atwould correspond exactly, with regard

to the law for the mutation of sounds, butthe German lan

guages do notstand in directconnection with the Latin.

1 000. The Sanscritpreposition é -

pa, from,

”has already

been mentioned (p. 1 462 G. cd. , Note) as an offshoot of the

demonstrative base a , and as analogous, with respect to its

termination, to Ii - pa : the Greek I’

z - no'

(like M 6 to ripe),Latin a - b (like su- b to u-

p a), Gothic of (according to

English o-f, our a - b, correspond to it. The preposition I fqIi - pi,

“over, on,

”in ap i

- dhd,“to cover, properly,

“to lay

upon (as conjunction, also as conjectural derivative of

the base a , has, with regard to its termination, no analogousform elsewhere. Formallyithas the same relation to d-

pa

that, in Greek, o’

w- T I'

has to dv- ra . To Iip i correspondsthe Greek em

’

, butwith respectto the vowel, and more re

stricted signification, the Lithuanian ap answers better ; e. g.

in ap- auksinu, I gild

"I gild ap

- deakin, I cover

(“I cover ap

- duméyu,“ I reflect”

(“I think

tip-

gala ,“ I overpower (gald, I ap

- si - imma,“I take

upon myself ap- beriu,

“ I spill (“ I over ap

- tu'

ystu,“ I overflow ap ipyaustau.

“ I

Ncsselmann (Lexicon of the Lithuanian Language) remarks regard

ins


to the Greek locative adverbs abrci- dx, Gbpn- qn and

the Latin datives and adverbs ti - bi, si - bi , i - bi, u- bi , ufru- bi

[G . Ed. p. To the preposition vfit abln’

.

the Greek a’

pdn'

, Latin amb Old High Germanumbi (our um)have the same relation, with respect to the inserted nasal.

that (indi e), ambo, have to milubhdt’

(theme ubha). both.

”

Under the Sanscritpreposition abbi mustalso be ranked our

bei, as prefix, be, Old High German bi'

. bi, Gothic bi (see

g. p. with the suppression of the initial vowel, as in

Sanscrit, for the abovementioned dp i, as preposi

tion pi is more commonlyused than the full form ép i : this

pi, however, would lead us to expect, inGothic, ratherfi than

bi . In Latin, the amb just mentioned need not deter us

from bringing ob also under this head. as the division of one

and the same form into several is noth ing uncommon. For

nmb, we find also am (like our um forumbi)and an, e. g. , in

ma -

picotar, cm- icio, d a -fractus. In Zend, likewise, the pre

positionunder discussion appears in two forms, viz . in that

ofJuJ» a ibi and see)» a iwi . To another preposition con

useted with the demonstrative base a, the Zend m inisters thisservice, thatitstilluses its form in its original demonstra

tive signification with a fulldeclension ; I mean, the preposition duo,

“from ,

” “down" (see The prepositionalmeaning in the European sister- languages is most clearlyrepresented by the Old Prussian inseparable an, e. in

au- md- sna - n“ablution”

(cf. Russian MO Io mnyu,“I

au- lau- t,“to die

”

(see 5. p. 1062 , Note, and cf.

Sanscrit Iii,“abscindere, evellere,

”Lithuanian lawonns,

In Old Sclavonic both oyI2 and 0 seem to be

shewn that Anquetil’s traditional, but, in a grammatical pointof view,

mostfaulty, translation of the Zend booksmightlead to the developement

ofthe grammatical system of the Zend language, evenwithout the aid of

the Sanscrittranslation of the Yaéns byNeriosengh, which often follows

the Zend textword for word.

PRE POSI'

I‘IONS . 142 5

assignable to this class, the latter, however, notin all com

pounds (see Dobrowsky, p. The following are ex

amples : oyg'BBA

'rn d—ryeCati, abscindere ;”

OyMann'rn

il- maliti,“minorare. diminuere ;

”oyaanwm [G . Ed. p.

t‘

l- dalii i , “elongare , oe m n

'

tI- gasiti,“extinguere; oyaor

'

b

t‘

l- bo “pauper

”(“not rich OMb I'l

‘n o- myti,“abluere

ot'rasn'rn o- slaviti,“dimitiera ;

”ongoslgrm

'n o—p rovergati,“dejicere, abjicere.

"

1002 . Besides i t! dva, I fitabbi , too, lays claim to the

Sclavonic preposition o, which appears in Polish in the

forms obe, ab, and o, and, indeed, most frequentlyin the last

(Bandke, The following are examples : obe- z na - ch,

to make known" (Sanscrit abhi -jiid like jv‘

i’

d, simply, to

obe- lz’

wa - ch, to calumniate" (lz’

y- ch, 068

- Igna- ch, to adhere round Ob- cowa - ch. to go about, to

associate with ; ob- iaz d, riding about o- kaz a - ch, to

shew round about o-

garnia- ch, to embrace

”

(Sanscrit

gf ih- nd- mi , from grahndmi for grubb- na—m i. I take, I

grasp o-

grycha- ch, to gnaw, to nibble round.

"To

return to the preposition W five , I do notbelieve thatthe

Latin ou of au-

fugio, au-fero, can be compared with it, but

I hold to the common derivation of this an from ab' : on

the other hand, I believe, with Weber, that I recognise in

aver- nu- s a sister- word of the Sanscrit doom - s, inferna"

(see p. 1466 G. which springs from tiva. As regards

the addition of the suffix nuto the Latin form , I would re

callattention to the relation of infer- nw- s (with inferus)to theSanscrit ddhara - s (see p. 379) of equivalentmeaning.

Should the Sanscrit preposition dva , from ,

"

be

further retained elsewhere in the European languages, then,

in myopinion, the Old High German privative d (Grimm ,

i f The assimilationto (if -fem, afifugio (like qfifero from ob-fero), must

be avoided, because the form of has been claimed alreadybythe prepo

aition ad (cf. Pott, E . I .,II .


II . , p . 704)would have the next claim to it. As W tips .

from ,

”and the corresponding European forms, are used

[G. Ed. p . 1472 ] for negative (see so, too, the

preposition dc would be sim ilarly employed, and, after

dropping the semi - vowel, the two short a must have

been contracted to 6. But i f d is, as J. Grimm (l. c

p. assumes, identical in its origin with or, out.

Gothic us (cf. then the Sanscrit dris, of wh ich the

original signification was probably tantamountto out,

herefrom ,

“ hence visible , evident, m ight perhaps

have the next claim to the paternity of this preposition,

with which,too, an Irish preposition, vi z . as, likewise

meaning out,”

admits of comparison. If unfit-q avg, bereallya preposition, and therefore drir- biafi e signify, withreference to the moon, arisen,

"

properly, become forth,and drish

o

rita signify disclosed, properly, made forth ,then the Latin and Greek er, may also be comparedwith it, so thatwe should have to assume a hardening of

the v to I: (see1003. From the demonstrative base a comes, in Sanscrit,

the adverb a- las, thence,"expressing separation from a

place which m ight, as justlyas a - dhés, under“

be

used as a preposition, and to which the signification“from

”

would be verysuitable. This isthe meaning in Sclavonic

of the preposition OT'

b o- t’

, which, as regards form , I holdto be identical with the above - mentioned atas, with the

observation,that the Sclavonic almostas commonlyas

the Latinterm ination as, representsthe Sanscritterm inationas, the s of which ,

according to 2 55. I . , must necessarilybe dropped ; hence, e.g. , HoB

'

b nov’=Sanscrit nard- s, Latin

nova - s; 3 53mm : cc§- o —d - mas, veh- i - mus. I know,

however, no term ination in which Sclavonic '

b is based on a

Sanscritor Lithuanian i, but for that letter stands n i or b

the former, e. in Aam da - si , tlIougivest”=d¢idd - si

the latter in Aal Ila - my,“ I give =ddddmi ; TOM]: lo- my.


[G . Ed . p. 1 474] 1005. InLithuanian, po, as a separable

preposition, signifies, among other things,“under,

“e.g . , pa

dangami , under the heaven where, however, it m eans

after,”e. papita, after noon,

”itsprings, probably, from

a differentsource, and is akin to the Sanscritadverb pa échdl,an ablative form Of pa icha which occurs in no other case,

with the primaryelementof which the Latin pox- t, too, is

to be compared, but in such wise, thatthe suffix t(from ti,

cf.pos- ticus), has nothing to dowiththe Sanscritcha (from ba),

though, amongstother words,the Lithuanianlevy, maybe con

nectedwith it, inpas- kuy(=paskuy),“hereafter,

”which is perhaps a dative (like willcui lupo, from the base parka.

InOldPrussian,pans- dan, with a nasalinserted,means here

after, as in the dative term ination plural mans Sanscrit

bIIyas, Lithuanian mus With respectto the suffix

dan, pans- dan answers to p irs

- dan, before,”in the pri

mary element of which the Sanscrit purés (from penis),before,

”is easilyrecognised, of which hereafter. Without

suflix, pas signifies, in Lithuanian, near,“with the accu

sative . The inseparable Lithuanian pa may partly be

based on the Sanscritpreposition dpa, from, e. in pa

bbgu, I run away pa-

gaunu, I purloin, I take awaypartly on épa , to, towards,

”e. g. , in pa

- darau, I pre

pare (darau, I make pa-

giru, I praise (Old Prussian,gir

- tirei, to praise ,"

po-

gir- sna - n, praise, accusative);

pa- éintis, acquaintance.

"

1006. Regarding the prepositions which have probablysprung from the base W and. this,

"see 373 . I for

merly imagined'

l‘

a relationship between the Latin and

From pas(cf. Persianpea, hereafter and elm as,ache/Ia

, high,"

from at,

“upwards ni - clm,“low,

”from m

’

.

1 See On the Demonstrative, and the origin of the Case- sign”in the

Transactions of the Historic- Philological Class of the Royal Academyof

Literature for 1 82 6 .

FRsPOSITIONS. 1 42 9

German preposition in, Greek i v, and the [G. Ed. p. 1 475]demonstrative base i ; butthe i of in, and the Greek e Of i v,

mayeasilv be regarded as a weakening of a, as in inter

Sanscrit antdr,’

and the Gothi c adverb inna ‘thrd, from

within”

(see 2 94 . Rem . 1 . p. is much easier explainedas com ing from the base and , bydoubling the liquid (cf.

than from the base i . Byweakening the final a

of the Sanscrit base and to u, we getthe preposition fl

dnu, after,"whi ch has the same relation to and thatthe

interrogative base ku 386 ) has to the extensivelyused

ka . The Sclavonic no and na - d‘

, over”

(cf. Greek dudOld Prussian na, no, up,

”Lithuanian nil, niig,

appear, like pa, pod’

, pa , to have lost an initial vowel.The lastpartof the compound pronominal base and, vi z .

na (see with the weakening of a to i becomes a

preposition, with the signification“down,

”and is, too, the

source whence our nic- der, Old High German ni - dar (see2 94 . p. has proceeded . There can, too, be scarce

anydoubt that the Sanscrit preposition fa ni lies at the

rootof the Sclavonic adverb nn3'

b ni - C’

, under 3 1 , g’

,

consequentlywould be an appended sufiix, as perhaps, also,in fl -

B’

b i - g’, out, for which, in Lithuanian, isz ish),

in Old Prussian is, id. Perhaps the preposition signifyingout,

"has lostan initial n, as mun imai i=Sanscritndman,

so thatthe said prepositions, at leastwith regard to theirbase , rank themselves under the Sanscrit ni - s, out,

"

which is evidentlyformed from ni byappending s, as s is

frequently added to prepositions, and, indeed, withoutaltering their meaning. But though, in Sanscrit, nis

has assumed a meaning different from thatof ni. still, inZend, ithas retained thatof a i , down,

“

[G . Ed . p. 1 476]

It W ith regard to the db, see 1003 . conclusion.

1: I hold the g for an enclitic (cf. 994 . conclusion) 3 (so) frequently

represents a long a e.g . , in dvimi,“ I give

”=ddddmi .


also, since in this language nis- had or nis- bidh, nis- badh

represents the Sanscrit a i - shad (euphonic for ni - sad) in the

specialtenses ni - sbid, e.g.,V. S . p. 440 : ya ; ahmi , umdae

ndirika nis- haddt, when in this place a woman sits

down.

”If, at the time when the Lettish- Sclavonic lan

guages separated from the Sanscrit, the locative sufi x

ha in Sanscrit (from udha , see already existed

in this abbreviated form , and, indeed, simultaneouslywith

the more perfectudha , then the suflix 3 1 : L"of the Scla

vonic forms nn3'

b ni - C'

, 113 5 i t"

, m ight be derived from the

suffix ha (cf. A31 ) at", I,

”Lithuanian a sz , with the Sanscrit

ahdm), and, as has alreadybeenremarked, inthe and’

of formslike “OAT: pod

’

, the elder form of the Sanscrit audix, pre

served in Zend, m ightbe recognised, in spite of its cor

rupted form .

1007. From the above - mentioned (5. spa has been

formed, as itappears, with the suffix ri, the Sanscritupd- ri,

and under itis to be classed the Gothic ufa - r of equivalent

meaning, Old High German uba - r, oba - r, our I'

I’

be- r, English

ore- r, Greek I'

nré-

p, Latin super. To the Gothic ufa—r corre

spond as regards their suflix, several locative pronom inaladverbs; e. g. , hva - r, whither ?”tha - r, there ;

”

ya ina- r, yon

der ;”a1ya - r,

“elsewhere ; hé - r,

“here.

"Should, too, the Gothic

iup , on,

”OldHigh German df, ourmy

", come from the San

scritpreposition (we , so that the old tenuis would have te

mained inGothic, asthatofavop , tosleep,”has beenpreserved

in the Gothic slépa, we should then have to assume that

the vowel a has, bythe weaker Guna, become in (seeand the Guna been replaced in Old High German bylengthening the vowel. But from an Older 11 in New HighGerman must come on (see It is impossible to

compare in anyotherwaythe said German preposition withthe Sanscrit. The Greek presents for comparison g‘

k - d'

l,

in the suffix of which we easily recognise the corruption[G. Ed. Of ti, which appears in Sanscrit in the

1 432 FORMATION or woans.

Rem . 1 . p. With respectto the retentionofthe old tenuis

in the Gothic forms at, (Ila, &c. , in so far as theyare reallyconnected with the Sanscritpreposition at, I recall attention

to the relation of the Gothic slépa to the Sanscrit svépimi

as also of the pronominal neuters like {ha - ta , this,the,

”to Sanscrit like ta - t In Zend, the tof the

preposition under discussion has been changed into a: xi,

or, especially before sonant consonants, into 5 z ; hence,

e. g. , ”pm awsx ) ué- i - hista , stand up, arise (seexwgubéxsx x ) as- a - z ayap ha, thou wast born

“

(1.uz - ddta, held on high uz - vaz a iti,

he bears on high.

1009. From the preposition dpa, from comes, in San

scrit. most probably épura- s, the other (see in

the same wayas éva - ra - s, the lower,”from é va (see

and in Zend, upa - ra superior,”

altus”

(cf. Old HighGerman oba the higher from upa . Observe,with respect to the signification, the derivation of the

Gothicframa - theis (theme frama - thya) alienus,“from from,

from . From épura- s, came, by Aphmresis, the m ore

current form para- s, which, like dpara - s, nagé

- s, and, in

Latin, alias, alter, has been assigned bythe language itself,through its declension, to the pronouns moreover, in

pointof fact, the idea of other is not far removed fromthat of the remote demonstrative . The prepositionswhich, in myopinion, come from para , are pré , prdti , para.

puma, pari . P ré formed by a very ancientsyncope from para , means before, in front, forwards,[G . Ed . p. forth .

” To it corresponds, in Zend. fraor frdf. in Greek mud, in Latin pré

'

, in Lithuanian pm

G E .g . , in the possessive compound apuré - ka ivyé , having a h igh

body,”see Burnouf,

uEtudes, p. 1 82 .

1' See 47. Ifwe takefra as the ancientform,

we mayrecognise in

it an instrumental, as in the Sanscrit pro (cf. p. 1 2 97 G . I re

call

PRE POS ITIONS . 1433

before, e. g. , in pra- diim i , I give provender be

forehand ; pra- dgmf, I commence p m

- neszu. I re

present prad rakas, prophet

"

pra- stoyu,

I p m- sz ak - ti. to dance away pra

-

girti, to

drink away, i . e. by dancing, by drinking to squanderone’

s money: in Sclavonic nga pra new ; e. g. , inneaata'

b

pra- dyed

’

,

“proavus f n

eaauoyk

'

b pra- vnilk

’

,

“prom os ,

”

neama'm pra

- mati, firstmother ; npoang

s'rn pro- vidyeti ,

“providere ;

”neonoa

‘

haa'rn pro

-

po- vyedati,

“prcedicare ;

”

neoan'm pro

- lili,“profundere ; upoaoau

'm pro- voditi, de

ducere in Gothic, perhaps, fra (cf. our ver (OldHigh Germanfra , transposed far, for, fir, fer); e.g. , infra- létan, to leave free, to release (to let & c. ; fra

Jamaan, to despise”(kunnan, to know”

) fra -

quimau,

to expend, to lay out"

(properly, to make proceed,“

quimau,- buggan, tobuy

fra -

qvilhan,“to curse, to execrate”

(guithna , to say

fra - vaurkyan, to sin"

(m ar/cyan, to do, to make A

weakening of fra is fri , in fri - saluts, picture, example“

(sakan, to admonish, to interdict,”ia - sakan. to indicate,

”

to describe Perhaps, too, the Lithuanian and Scla

vonic pri is a weakening of p m.

1010. From pm maybe derived the preposition prali.towards,

” unless this, as I prefer assuming, just like pra,has come direct from para, and is therefore an abbreviated

form of para- ti, which made its appearance so earlyas in

the time of the unityof language . Thus [G . Ed. p . 14803

much appears certain, thatthe suffix of pre- ti is identical

with thatof i - ti, thus, and a- a, on.

”In Greek, 1 rpo-n

'

,

(Cret. 1 rp6g (see 1 52 . p. vra-

rc'

, corresponds.

call attention to the fact, thatin Sanscrit, too, evidentinstrumentals occur

as prepositions ; e.g ., paréaa, over,

”frompara .

Slowyu, I stand.

”In Sanscrit, « M ,

“to stand, receives through

pra‘

(prci - atlni)the. signification to proceed.

1434 FORMATION or woans.

The latter answers, with respectto the loss of the semi

vowel, to the Zend m d paiti, which, when isolated.‘Q ( C

signifies not only towards, but also on, over e. g. ,

barFshnushupa iti ga irinmim. on the summits of the moun

tain ;"in combination with each,

“to speak, it signifies

towards,”and the whole means to answer (see 536.

In Lettish corr espond pretti, pratt’

, towards.

against, with the accusative, sometimes also with the

genitive ; in Slowenian, proti, towards,"with the dative ;

in Lithuanian. priesz , id. , with the accusative. In Latin,

pan , pol p03 in forms like par- rigo, pol

- hm , poe- sideo.

have arisen most probably, by assim ilation, from pot

or pad, and perhaps pre has come from pra i , for

prati(cf. Pott, I . 92 ,Ag. Benary Doctrine ofRoman sounds,”

p.

101 1 Para (insep.) is little used in Sanscrit, and sigh i

fies back, away, forth ; e. g. , para- ofa, to return back

(cg-it, vart, to go para

- hon. to strike back, to drive

forth pdldy(for pardy), to draw back, to flee”

(cry“to

go paraiich (para- each), in the weak cases par-deli ,

adjective turned back”

(mi ck, to pard- kn

'

sh,”to

draw forth ; para-

pat,“. to fly away para

- bin}, to go

to ruin'

a,(bh to be, to In Lithuanian the

corresponding word is par, l“back, 2 .

“down

"

eug , in par- cimi , I come back ; par

- wadian, I call

back ; par-

palm I fall down par- si - klaupyu. I kneel

down ; par- daué'iu, I plunge down.

”In Zend the pre

position para by itself has the meaning before, in re

ference to time, and with the ablative”, and wapa’ corresponds

[G . Ed . p. 1 48 1 .] in Greek. In Sclavonic the inseparable

preposition pre, which generally means through or

over, across,” m ight be referred to thi s class, provided

See Crit. Gram. lingua Sanscr., p. 2 53. According to form, the

Sanscritp a‘

rd seems to be an instruments]aswell as the Zend para .

1436 FORMAT ION OF woans.

over the bridge ; pér nakliti , through the night; pe’

r

buttati, through the house (see Nesselmann Lexicon,

p. Thatthe e of this pér, and the Russian e of pen ,

are corruptions Of a , and that therefore pe’

r, pen , and the

Lettish par, over, across,”

are originally one, is self

evident: it is, however, impossible to decide with cer

tainty whether the Sanscritpara, back, forth, away,

” is

the sole source Of the Lithuanian, Lettish, and Sclavonic

preposition under discussion, or whether, in accordancewith its signification, in spite Of the similarity of form.

it is based at one time on m para, at another with the

Greek a épdv, wépq v, on m para, the further shore,“which

probably proceeds from para- s, alias

”In Sanscrit the

neuter accusative, too, Of para , alias, remotior, ulterior,”vi z .

paw-um, is used as a preposition. with the meaning,

“

that side, behind,”with reference to time, after.

” Thereis also, in Sanscrit, a preposition paras, over, across yonder, on that side,

" whence the adverb paras- tat all Of

them bases Of prepositions in the European sister- lan

guages, Of sim ilar sound and similar signification. The

Latin per must likewise be brought under this class, and

mustbe compared especiallywith the Lithuanian per. We

have already noticed perm in pereadie, as sister-m Of

para,“alias (see p. The Latin re before

vowels red like prod euphonic for pro together with theOssetish ra admits Of being regarded as an abbreviationOf m para (cf. Pott. II. p. for the surrender Of the

first syllable Of a dissyllabic preposition is something so

common, that two languages maywell accidentallycoin

[G . Ed . p . cide in that point in one and the same

word. In Ossetish,e. we have ra -jurin, to answer.

”

Jurin (infin. see p. 1 2 69 G .

“to speak ; cf. Sanscritgir from

gar,“voice and see G . Rosen

'

s Ossetish Grammar, p. 39. In some

other compounds occurring 1. c.

, m , or, transposed, ar, expresses, so far as

the

PREPOSITIONS . 1437

101 2 . In Gothic the inseparable fa ir, as far as its formis concerned, m ight as well belong to par

- i , around,”with

which I have before (p. 68) compared it, as to para. In

anycase the i Offa ir is a weakening of a, and the precedinga a euphonic prefix according to 82 . With regard to

its signification or operation, however, fa ir, to which our

ver corresponds, answers, in the cases in which it is not

based onfra (see p. 1479 G . better to para(with whichI have also compared it in myGlossary, a. 1 847, p.

than to pdri . Perhapsfa ir, faur, faura and fra are originallyone, and have all proceeded from para, atleastan

para, back, forth, away,”

answers just as well for the

compounds cited atp. 1479 (G. and for all our com

binations with ver, and, in some respects, better than u

pré . Thus, e. g. , the place Of our ver in cerlcommen,“to

perish ,"verfaflen. to go to ruin,

”verleiten, to m islead,

”

verfa'

hren, to seduce,”verirren, to lead astray, vergeben,

to give away, to resign,

"verschenken, to bestow,

"ver

scheuchen, to scare away, verbrciten, to divulge,”verja

gm , to chase away,”verachten, to despise,

”scriban, to

squander,”may very well be represented in Sanscrit by

para, exclusive Of the circumstance that this preposition,

as has already been remarked, has become Of but veryrare employment. In the idea of separation, removal, the

Sanscrit para and our oer coincide, and | G . Ed. p .

that which corresponds to the latter in the Older dialects

(see Grimm , II.

1013. The meaning of the Zend para , before,”is re

the latter is notto be taken as appropinqnation, viz . in

ra - tz awin, ar- tz awin, to arrive,”in opposition to a

- tz awin, to depart,

”

the a of which can onlybe a remnantOf a more full Sanscrit preposition,

probablyfrom (51 10 (cf. Latin ab, a); ar- chasin,

“to bring to,”opposed to

a - chasin,“to carryforth .

”From SjegrOn

’

s Lexicon I cite in addition,

ra - vadzm ,

“to leave Off ra - dtun,

“to give up, to deliver ;”ra - (dae

cla m,“to step aside, to retire .

"

1438 FORMAT ION or woans.

presented inGothic byfaura ,four, the a Of which I regard

as the weakening Of a , like thatOf the Sanscritp aras,“be

fore .

” To the 11, however, must, in Gothic, accord ing to

an a be further prefixed ; as, e. in bournas for bur-ans.

borne,”from the rootbar= Sanscritbhar, bhj

‘i . to bear.

”

On the Gothic faura .jaur, which signifies notonly before,”

butalso for,”are based our car andfai r. In the Old High

German fora . fora, for, furi, fori, fore, &c. , the meanings

before and for”are not firmly distinguished by the

form (see Grafi'

, III . The i Offuri I take to be the

weakening Of the a Offora . As in Latin gutturals veryOften stand for labials, e.g. ,

in quinque for p inque

coquo for poquo (Sanscrit pooh, from pale, to so.

perhaps, the c Of cdram m ight be taken as the representa

tive of p , and the whole word he referred to the class of

words which,in Sanscrit, Zend, and the German languages,

signify before .

”The Latin 0, like the Greek « 1

, stands

verycommonlyfor an original a , as, e. g. , in datdrem= dd

tdram, sap io=svdpdydmi wherefore for ctiram we shouldhave to expect in Sanscrit pdram (cf. Greek wepar wépqv),which Occurs, not indeed as preposition, butas accusativeof the above - mentioned (p. 1 482 G . ed.) substantive para.

further shore,"as in general the lengthening of an a in

the derivative forms is, in Sanscrit, of verycommon cc

currence .

1014. The Sanscrit péri , around, Zend 47m » pairi .

m i me) pairis, maybe taken either as an abbreviation of

apari, and as a derivative from apa , to whi ch it wouldhave the relation that upari has to (spa (see or

we maypresuppose, which appears to me less satisfactory,a base par, and look upon pari as its locative : so much

[G . Ed. p. seems certain, thatpar- i is etymologi callyconnected with other prepositions beginning with a labial.

In Greek, wcpc'

corresponds, and in Latin, most probably,the pari (see which stands quite isolated in pari - es,

1 440 FORMAT ION OF WORDS.

of péram, but is connected with the derivative suffix of

paramd- s,which springs from para ,

“aliaaremotus,

”and whi ch,

according to its derivation, m ightjustas well signi fy“remo

tissimus,"as

“erim ius, altissimus, summus. With th isp arama- s.

has been elsewhere compared also the Gothic fut- ma (theme

fruman),“

prior, primus,“the Lithuanian pir- ma - s.

“

p risms."

and the Latin“

primusf”

The comparative adverbframis

has the same relation to the positive base frama , that. e.g.,

kauhis, higher,”has to hauha ; and the preposition fram,

just like f aur, has the form of a nom inative and accusative

neuter, butmust of course be taken as an adverbial accusative.

1016. The prepositions which spring from the demonstrative base sa (see signify, all Of them , in San

scrit, with .

”Theyare sahd, sam. sa, sdkam, samém, and

sdrdham. The former corresponds in its suffix, to i - hé.

here”

(from i - dhé . and occurs in the Vedas also

in the form Of sadlzd. The Zend in this preposition furnishes us with a powerful corroboration Of the orig in of

prepositions from pronom inal roots, since it uses Au»

had/ca, which corresponds to the Védic sadha notat all as a

preposition, but as a pronominal adverb with the signifi

cation here on the other hand, itemploys another form,

hathra (see which is formed from the base ha bya

locative adverbial suffix, both as a preposition with the

meaning wit and as an adverb with the prim itive sigui

fication here, there.

”Sam and sa appear, in Sanscrit, only

[G . Ed. p. as prefixesqL but in Zend the feminine

accusative form 931» harim occurs also as an isolated

preposition governing the genitive }: On the Sanscrit ram

See Gloss. Sauser.

, a . 1847, p. 2 09 .

‘

1‘

See and p. 1 44 1 G. ed.

1 SO in a passage Of the Vend. Sad . , p. 2 30, elsewhere cited Ann.

Reg. Of Lit. Dec . 1 831 , p. 961» ha izm "dirt

na izm, with women.

”

PREPOSITIONS . 1 44 1

are based the Greek 06V, the Old Prussian sea , the Lithuanian san in sun- dom ,

“contract”

(or sari - dom ). sari in com

pounds like sari- ti’wonis, co- heir,”

sari - darbininka - s, co

labourer,”3 11 (separatewiththe instrumental), theOldSclavonic

t'

b s’

,the Old High German sin in sinfidt, dilutium .

”To

sa corresponds the Greek oi o'

a of the compounds discussed above (p. 1 44 1 G. With sci /cam, of which I knowexamples only in the Véda dialect(see Benfey

’s Glossary),

the Latin cum maybe compared, supposing the first syllable

to be suppressed. And, further, the Gothic ga with (see

p. 1 44 1 G. ed. , sub . adm its of being sim ilarlycomparedwith sakam . The derivation from Itsa is on thataccountdoubtful, because one does not meetwith other examples

in which an original sibilant has been hardened in German

to a guttural. It would be better to trace back the Latin

cum, through the medium of the Greek Eév, to sum. As

regards the violation Of the law for the mutation of con

sonants in the Gothic ga i f we derive it from sci /cam, I

would recall attention to sim i lar phenomena which havebeen m entioned before.

’ The Sanscrit sdr—dham, or sard

dham,with,

”I hold to be an adverbial compound, formed,

according to from sa,“with,

”and a rdha, arddha,

half,”so that the meaning of the substantive has been

entirelylostin the whole compound. From the pronom inal

base, or which comes to the same thing, from the preposition

8a, I derive, too, the Védic adverb sciehrl,“simul,

” which I

regard as the instrumental Of a tobe -

pre [G . Ed . p.

supposed adjective base , an sé - cha , and as analogous, with

respectto its formative suffix, to a i - cha , low,

”from a i, and

uck-

cha,“high,

”from at. In Old Persian, hachd is used

as a preposition with the meaning“out, from , without,

"

with the ablative, just as, in Zend, ”pasty hacha , which,

Sec 823 , 943 , conclusion.

5 A


with the ablative or instrumental, signifies out,”

from ,

and with the accusative for.

1017. In Zend fpng matmeans with, and governs the

instrumental, and standing by itself, too, expresses the

relation with .

’

According to its formation, it appears

to be the accusative (and nom inative) neuter Of the de

monstrative base ma , which, in combination with the

base i (i- ma), produces the neuter i - mag, this”

(see

Thus, therefore, mat would be, in its primary meaning,

identical with as sa - m, m sa - md- m, &c. W ith its

theme that Of the Greek as of as- ‘

rti admits of be ing com

pared, which, in its formative suffix, coincides with thatof xa - ra

’

, the base of which is identical with that of the

Sanscrit interrogative base ka . The interrogative sigui

fication might easily pass into the demonstrative, and

thus xa be adapted to the developement of prepositions,as, too, our fainter, Old High German bin- tar, conductsus back to the Sanscrit interrogative ; since the Gothicdemonstrative base hi (see 396 . and 2 93. ace . masc.

hi - na, is based on the Sanscrit ki, with which we havealso to compare the Latin hi -c (see With the Zend

[G . Ed . p. ma our mi - l, Gothic mi - th, with the pre

positions beginning with v, w, in other German dialects,have alreadybeen compared (see 2 94 . p. 383, Note).

101 8 . The sole verbal root, which, so earlyas the time

of the unity of our fami ly Of languages, at least at the

For exampleswith theablative, sec § . 180. p . 198, and p. 1013 ;for exampleswith the accusative, see Brockhaus Glossar. , p . 403. In the

passages in which Benfey Glossaryto the Cuneiform Inscriptions

makes the Old Persian hoe/atgovern the instrumental, I can onlysc

knowledge the ablative, as the ablative of bases in a, on account of theregular suppression Of the final t, is equivalent in sound to the instrumental. Regarding the form aniyanti, haste

, see MonthlyReportofthe Academyof Literature , March 1 848, p. 1 33 .

SUPPLEMENT.

Swan I wrote that part Of mywork wh ich treats Of the Formation of

the Tenses, Shaffarik and M iklosich have broughtto light some Old Scle

vonic formswhich were before unknown, and which are too importantfor

me to conclude thiswork on the Comparison of Languages withouta

supplementarynotice of them . Theyare as follows

1 ) Preterites wh ich deviate from the ordinaryformation, in that, ia

stead Of the ch of the lat person singular and plural, which has been

shewn 2 55 . m . ) to come from 8 , theyhave retained the original sibilant, and thus afford a practical demonstration thatthe said tense is,with

out a doubt, essentially identical with those Sanscrit and Greek aorist

formswhich append the substantive verb to the principal root. ‘ The

311 person plural exhibits the organic s for sh . To this clam mustbe

referred,e.g . , Ian, ya - s

'

,I ate,

"1st person plural probably

ya - som’

, 31]person lam ya - sa ri , from the rootyad a Sanscritad, the d of

which mustbe suppressed before the s of the auxiliaryverb, according tothe same principle from which, in the 2 d person singular, we find em

ya - si for the Sanscritat- si . Compare, also, Greek aorists and futures like

spam” , scan contrasted with Sanscrit like dtciut- sam, tat-mimi

,from lad

,

“to knock .

”The Sclavonic, as a general rule, does not

admit of the combination Of a mute with s, or the junction of two sibilants ; hence, e.g .

,noreum po

-

gre- sah, they buried

"

(rootgrrb);s'

- trmi - s’

,

“ I terrified”

(roottra its).

[G . Ed . p . 2 ) Preterites which correspond tothe Sanscritaorists

Of the sixth formations, and to Greek aorists like {Am - ow, {M o- r,

i’

nm - o - v (see In verbswhich are based on the Sanscrit1stor

61h class (see 109 . as the augment is lost in Sclavonic, a distinc

tion from the presentin this aoristformation is onlypossible in the per

sons, inwhich there exists a distinction between the terminations Of the1 st and 2 d persons. The lstperson singular ends in '

b, which corre

sponds to the Sanscrita and Greek 0 of forms like abada- a - m,wary- ow z

the 3d person plural ends inX: u- r’

z, agreeing with the Sanscrit am and

Greek 0- 10 of ébudh - a - n, {duty- ow . The 2 d and 3d person singular end

in E, as, according to 2 55 . I. , the original final consonants are suppressed

in Sclavonic ; hence, e. newnes- e,“thoudidst bear,

"and “be home,

”

contrasted with Sanscrit and Greek forms like dbudh- a - s,til/udh - a - t

See 54. 561 and Miklosich, Doctrine of Forms in the old Slowenian, p. 50.

SUPPLEMENT . 1445

sew- c tipsy- e. lVe may, towit, now assume that the aorists in x'

b,

as netox'

b nes- o- ch’

,

“I here,”are notused in the 2 d and 3d person

singular, butborrowthese persons from the second aorist(see Miklos. , l. c.,

p . If this be the case, then 5 b ! by, thouwast,” “he was,

” belongsto the Sanscrit fifth aorist formation (see and answers in the

2 d person as exactlyas possible to the Sanscrittibiae- s and theGreek {di v- s,in the 3d to dblu

‘

i - t,‘

e"5 . The analogyOf these forms m ight also have

had its influence on those conjugational classes in which the first aorist

formation is altogether wanting in other persons ; so thatthe addi men

tioned above mustbe explained according to the selfsame prin

ciple as that on which restforms like ness and therefore not the verbsubstantive, but onlythe character Of the 2 d and 3d person has beendropped after the i of btidi . Btidi , therefore, would stand for bnid- i - t

,in

the 2 d person, brid- i - s, in the 3d, Media According to the firstaoristfor

mationwe should have to expectbt‘

cd - i - she .

3) Imperfects, which, like the firstaorists, append the verb substantiveto the theme of the principal verb, but so thatthe latter, without refe

rence to the remaining tenses, always contains the character of the San

scritloth class, and, indeed, for the mostpart, in the form of 1 1 ye‘; but

the ch, sh, or s of the auxiliaryverb is always preceded byan a , or byits

occasional representative'B ye (see Mikl. 1. c. p. inwhich I recognise

the Old a Of the rootwas, which is found still in anuncompounded state

in Old Prussian (asmu, asma i, asma,I am I divide, therefore, thus,

e.g . , B'BA

'BAx'

b vyed -ye- ach’

,from 1si t rye- my, for [G . Ed. p .

eyed- my, I know,

”accordingtothe Sanscrit2 d class(i firvéd—mi); while

the first aoristB 'BA'Bx

'

b vyed -ye- ch'

, the infinitive vyed-yeti,

and the participles preterite n'BA

'BB'

b vyed - ye—v’

and n'BA

'BA'

b tyed-ye- l’

,

in like manner, followthe Sanscritloth class, or causal form . Compare,

e.g .,in the case before us,m t

‘éd—dyd- mi , Prakritréd- é- mi, I make

to know. 7 Perhaps axe arh'

(from as), 2 d and 3d person am s ache,

is the Obsolete, in its simple form,imperfectOf letslb

'

b yes- my, for i ts":

es- my,“I am and perhaps we ought to recognise the reason Of the

vowel di fference between the imperfect and present in this, thatacb’

is

based on the Sanscrit augmented dram, as, in general, the Sclavonic a

corresponds more frequentlyto the Sanscrit6 than to the shorta, which

has commonlybecome E or 0 (see 2 55 . Compare

OLD sc1 .Av0Nxc.

Ax'

b ach’

AlllE ashe

Cf. 74 1tS ee é 13 , p. 1 10.

1 448 SUPPLEMENT .

OLD SCLAVONIC .

Alli s ashe

Az oB11 ach- o- vye

At'l‘

A asta

AC'I‘

A as - ta

Axon!»acII- oom

'

ACT ! as- te

Axfii ach- u- a

I recall attention, moreover, to the fact, that in Sanscrit also the rootIn

furnishes a tense, Of occurrence in composition only, viz . the future syda i

(see4) Remains Of the Sanscrit auxiliaryfuture, towhich the Greek in

cm ,trio and Lithuanian in cu, correspond. The Sclavonic forms

of this kind which have been discovered up tothe presenttime (inMikl. ,

p. 73)all Occur in the 1st person singular ; e. g., “331 11 1 11 3 ic- mi - sltmi,

“tabescam”

(rootmi). The other futures mentioned byMiklosich have,

all butone, an 11 after the future character ts ; e. g. , oset Xx ab brymm'

l,

“tandabo

”(rootbri) ; B

'

b tk onb ltmfx c’

c- kopymuit,“claleilrabo

"

(root

Imp); 11 .1 .1 c plasnur’

a,

“ardeba (rootpla); “ Rb lfl lfii t

’

kysnsil,tangam

”(rootW

'

h k t’

k). These forms have probablythus arisen : the

[G. Ed . p. 1 493] character of the verbs discussed in 496 , p. 692, has

been appended to the future base which ends in a, justas if, in Greek,hum ,

rvtjrvw, were said for have), rv'

tjrw. The form B'BI‘ACIAIE byq a.

syayuh, from hyry.“torun,

"stands quite isolated. Incasethisform

,whieh

Mi klosichtranslatesbyammo, is, accordingto its formation, a future, then inthe syllable CIA ayawe have exactlytothe lettertheSanscritfuturecharacteraya the a precedinganswerstothatOfthe infinitive byrg a- ti andanalogousforms ; and the whole corresponds, as regards the syllable yu insertedbetween the base bycgasya and the personal termination it, to present

forms likeBHM‘Y‘ {nag/a ir, I 1(HOW -

"W The verb substantive has leausa fixture participle in the following forms Of the definite declengim

serm htm 'rfl c byshuitshfeyr,“rd“0. 1 mm

"ab rrna

’uu'rAArO byshuinlftango,

“rm

“

; pen an ce sb rmmm 'rmm n byslmnstiimi , instr.

pp. 09, Cf. the Zend future participle wwgoaop btisyaris,“futu

rus,”ace . brisyantc

'm,and the Lithuanianbuseris, acc . buseati i1 (see

5) Remains of the Middle. For eye- my, I know”

(abbreviated fromryed- my=€anscrit vé - mi), occurs, as Miklosich remarks, in the Older

MSS. n'hsjh vycdye. This form is explained, correctlyin myopinion,

See it500 , p. 746 : respecting the nasa1 see 4. 783. Rem. 1 .

1 448 SUPPLEMENT .

da- s- ta ; as alsowith thexof lax'

b ya - cla'

,

“ I ate,“axon“,ya -c - g

we ate,”Aax

'

b da - eh’

,I gave,

"

Aaxosrb da- ch- o- m

’

, we gave

and with the sh of lam a ya - sha iz, theyate, sauna da - ska ir, they

gave .

”All these forms belong to the Sanscritfirst aorist formation (see

662 . conclusion) ; and as yad and dad, bydropping the final d, put

themselves on the same footing with the roots ending in a vowel, leta

comparisonbemade between tar-n . ya - s- t’

, thouatest,”AAt'r

'

b da - sut’

,

“thougavest,"and the Sanscritmiddle a- yé - s- tluis, thouwentest,

”and

between lat'r'

b ya - s- t’

,

“he ate,"AM T !) da - s- t

’

,“he gave,

”and

- s- ta ,“he went while IM 'I

‘

E ya - s- te,“ye ate, AM T ! da - s- te,

“ye

gave,”would correspond to the active aya - s- ta , ifyd, or, in general, the

roots in d, admitted the firstaorist formation. We compare, therefore,

more aptly, a - né - qh- (hds, thou leddest a - né- ah- ta, he led”

(seeTo these forms corresponds also thatmentioned byMiklosich,

[G. Ed . p. p. 37, among other aorist and imperfect forms which.

with respecttotheir personal terminations, are to be referred tothis clam,vi z . Bb lC'r

'

b by- s- t'

, c'

yrvc'

flq e, c’

yeve'

flq forwhichwe should find,inSan.

scrit, dbhé -

sh- thds, d - bho-

ghga, if bhzi ,“to be, to become,

"followed this

aoristformation. I cannotputfaith"lk in a replacement of the secondary

personal term inations, which belong to the aorists, bythe primary, with

the exchange of b yand 1 »(see 2 55 . and the removal of the 3d per

son into the 2 d : otherwise we should have to charge the language in thecase beforeus with three errors, while, according to myviewof the Old

Sclavonic, itretains the meritof having preserved, in accordance with the

oldestGerman dialect, the old middle . The Gothic and Old Sclavonic

make up one another’s deficiencies with regard to the middle, inasmuch

as the former has preserved the present, the latter the preterites (theaorists and the imperfect). The fact thatthe Russian, in the 3d personsingular and plural of the present, contrasts a

‘

b with the Old Sclavonic

b y, e.g ., Hecem

'

b nes- e- t, aecymmnes- u- t, forOld Sclavonic “Etl 'l'b

nes- e- ty, NECr‘

fa'l‘b nes- u- izty, mustbe explained, inmyopinion, thus, that

the old i of the Sanscritforms like bér- a - ti, bér- a - nti, which inOld Scla

vonic has beenweakened to by, has in Russian, as in several othermo

dem languages, been entirely lost. As, however, the Russian ortho

graphy requires that the imperceptible ‘

b be added to the final conso

nants, i . e. to those which are notfollowed bya perceptibly- sounding by,the Russian forms, therefore, nes- e- t and nes- u- t

, can, in the Rumian

character, be writtenno otherwise than necem'

b, necym

'

b .

Cf. Schleicher, Doctrine of Forms of theChurch (or Kyrillian) SclavonicLanguage, p. 337,where. in discussing the personal terminations here spokenof, the middle has been quiteunnoticed.

ALPHABETICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS .

A heavierthan i 6.

A ou privative of pronominal origin 371 .

Ablative singular 1 79 in Zend inLatin and Oscan in

Greek 1 83 , in Gothic 2 94 . Rem . 1 . p. in Armenian p. 1 2 72

G. ed. Note, dual plural 2 44 .

Ablaut, see vowel- increment, vowelweakening, vowel- interchange .

Accentuation p. 1052 .

Accusative singular in Old Sclavonic of the pronouns of

the firstand second person, and of the reflexive in German p. 1 1 1 3

Note G . ed. dual inOld Sclavonic 2 73 . plural in

Old Sclavonic 2 75 .

Active 4 2 6.

Adjectives pronominal and derivative 404 , definite declension

in Lithuanian and Old SclavonicM. in German 2 87.

Adverbs 32 4 , pronominal 42 0, adverbial compounds $1. 990.

Ampliatives 930.

Ammx‘

ira in Lithuanian 10 in Old Sclavonic Rem . l .

Aorist in Latin in Old Sclavonic 56 1 . and p . 1 490G. cd .,

Supplement1 )andArian Languages, affinitywith the Sclavonic and other European lan

guages nottraceable p 1 2 1 5 Note.

Aspiration thrown back in Sanscritand GreekAtmanépadam 4 2 6 .

Augment derivation from the demonstrative base a 540.

Auxiliaryfuture in Old Sclavonic, Supplement

Avyayi‘

bhdva p. 1 452 G . ed .

Bahuvrihi p. 1 432 G . ed.

- bam, of Latin Imperfects, from[cm- bo, of Latin Futures, fromfoM. 662 .

Cases, formation of division into strong, weak, and middle

cases difi'

erence of accentuation in strong and weak

cases Rem. p. 1053 .

Causals in German 740 in Old Sclavonic in Lithuanian in Latin 745 . p. 999, in Old Persian in Lasish

750. p. inHindustani Note f .

Collective Compounds 989 .

Comparative degree git} . 307, in Latin 35. in German 301 .

in Old Sclavonic in Lithuanian 306.

Compounds 1 4 10G. ed.

Conditional 730.

Conjugational classification Latin lst, 2 d, and 4th conju

1 450 ALPHABETICAL TABLE or CONTENTS .

gations=Sauscritloth clam j. p. 1 1 1 Latin 3d conjugation=Sanscrit1st, 6th, and 4th clan the German strong

verbs=- Sanscrit 1st clam p. 105, or 4th class 1 093 1 1 ; the

German weak conjugation=Sanscrit 10th clam 1 093 10, Armenian

conjugations p . 1 2 71 G . ed.

Conjunctions p. 1 459 G . ed.

Conjunctive in Sanscrit, Zend, and Greek in Latin 674 , 690,

of the imperfect of the perfect 71 0. and p. 1 2 2 8 G . ed., ofths

pluperfect 858 . and p. 1 2 2 9, G . cd. , German conjunctive, preterite

present Lithuanian conjunctive 684 , Hindusti nip. 1 2 76 G . ed. Note

Consonants, permutation of 87.

Copulative compounds (doandva)p. 1 42 7 G . ed.

Dative Singular, in Sanscrit and Zend 1 64, in LithuanianinOld Sclavonic 2 67, in Latin p. 1 2 2 7 G . ed. Note 1 , in German

356. Rem . 3, in Greek dual in Lithuanian 2 1 5.

p. 2 3 1 , in Old Sclavonic t}. in Greek plural 2 44 ,

inLithuanian inOld Sclavonic in Greek 2 51 .

Degrees of comparison 2 9 1 .

Demonstratives j. 343.

Denominatives 76 1

Dependentcompounds (tatpuruslta)p. 1 446 G . ed.

Deponentof intensives 760.

Derivative verbs 732 .

Desideratives 751 .

Determinative compounds (“m edium-aya)p. 1 443 G . ed.

Dual, its cases 2 06.

D vandva p. 1 42 7 G . ed.

D vigup. 1 449 G. ed.

é, in Sanscrit, Old High German, and Latin, from at'

in Greek (q), Gothic, Latin, from 69 1 37. p. 1 445 G . ed.,

in Latin and Gothic, through reduplication p. 82 7.

Feminine, character of

Final consonants suppressed in SclavonicFruit, names of 9 2 0, 92 1 .

Future 646, 692 , in Old Sclavonic, Supplement in Hindustanip . 1 2 76 G. ed . Note.

Futurum exactum p. 1 2 2 8 G. cd., in Umbrian and Oscan p. 1 2 32 G . ed.

Genitive singular 2 54 . Ram . 3, in Old Sclavonicdual 2 2 5, in Zend 2 54 . Rem . l, in Old Sclavonic 5. 2 73. plural2 45, in Old Sclavonic if. 2 84 . Note 783. Note p. 1 046

Gerunds, in Latin in Sanscrit, in tvd p. 1 2 03 G . ed . Note

p. 1 2 40 G. cd., in aya, p. 1 2 96 G . cd .

,inMarathi p. 1 2 1 5 G . cd ., in

Prakritp. 1 2 1 5 G . cd., p. 1 2 77G . ed. Note.

Guna, inSanscrit in Greek 2 6. p. 2 4, 49 1 , in Gothic inZend inLithuanian§. 744 . p. 997,

'

inOldSclavonic 0,sf. 74 1

Heavypersonalterminations, influence of 480.

1 452 ALPHABETICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS .

Moods, formation of5

. 672 .

Neuter 1 1 3 .

Nominative singular 1 34 , of the bases inn 1 39, of the bases in ar, rs‘

(Q ) Of neuters 1 48, in Old Sclavonic dual 2 06,

in Old Sclavonic pluralM. 2 2 6, 2 74 .

Numerals 308 .

Numeral adverbs 32 4 .

0 in Sanscrit and Zend from a +uM. 33, Greek u, Gothic and Latin

6, from a p. 1 484 G . ed .

Optative 672 .

Ordinal numbers 32 1 .

P aram dipadam 4 2 6 .

Participles future 784, perfect 786, middle and passive

perfectpassive 836.

Passive 733 .

Perfect 588 .

Personalterminations 434 , middle and passive 466, weightof 480.

Pluperfect9. 64 1 .Possessives 404 .

Possessive compounds (bahuvrilu'

) p. 1 432 G . ed .

Potential 672 .

Prepositions p. 1 465 G . ed.

Present 607.

Preterite - 5 1 3 .

Precative 701 , 705.

Primaryforms Of nouns 1 1 6.

Pronouns 32 6, derivative pronominal adjectives 404 .

Pronominal adverbs 42 0. 0

from or, dr, ra, rt‘

, ru and p. 1 057Note (prichehhdmt’

)1 094 02 , tritiya

R from vM. 409 , Note 447, Table, Note 0.

Reduplication 546, 579, 589, 763.

Relative 382 , 383.

Roots 106.

Radicalwords, p. 1 32 9 G . ed.

changes 2 2 1 36, 302 , p. 1059, p 1 374 G. ed . Note .

rejectedSound, system of j. 1 , Old Sclavonic Rem . 1 , Mutation of,side Consonants.

Special Tenses 109 a

Strong cases 1 2 9 .

Suffixes, Sanscrita , pp. 1 2 35, 1 338 G . cd. ,Greek 0, p. 1 2 35 G . cd. , Latin

14, p. 1 2 36 G . cd.

, Lithuanian a, pp. 1 2 36, 1 343 G. cd . ,Old Sclavonic o,

p . 1 2 36 G . cd.

, German a, pp. 1 2 37, 1 2 38 ; Sanscrita 9 1 3, pp. 1 339,

1 345 G . cd. , Greek 0, pp. 1 339, 1 346 G . cd. ,

ad, p. 1 340G. cd . , Lithua

a o I I

rt from ru, 1nmgwmt, I hear, for sm p omt, rootsru.

ALPHABETICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS . 1 453

nian a, p. 1 343 Latin 11

, p. 1 340G . cd . , a, p. 1 34 1 G . cd . , Gothic

a , p. 1 34 2 G . cd. ; Sanscrit' *a , p 1 346 G . cd. , Greek ito, p. 1 347G . cd. ,

Latin p. 1 347 G . cd. ; Zend a,ita , pp . 1 348, 1 349 G . 1111 .

Sanscrit6, Greek a,

Latin a,Lithuanian 11, Old Sclavonic a, Gothic 6,

nominative a ; 671 , nominative 6, p . 1 349 G . ed .

Sanscrit Zend Gothic Old Sclavonic nominative b 31, Greek 1 , 18,

Latin Lithuanian 1°

92 4 .

Sanscrit11 , Greek v,Lithuanian 11

, Gothic 11,Zend 11 j. 92 5 .

Sanscritan, (in, Greek av,GP,

or, our 92 6.

Latin 671, nom 6 ; nom . en, Gothic an,nom . a , Old High German on

,

m m . o Lithuanianen,nom . p. i 363 G . ed Sanscritan neut. ,

Gothic an, nom 6 92 8 .

Sanscrit 9 2 9 . Sanscrit Greek “ow, Latin

*6r1 , Sanscrit1“in? 930.

Sanscri tana , fem . and, ani, Zend ana , Greek avo, Lithuanianfina,Gothic

ana,nom . an

’- s, andn, nom 11 716 932 .

Sanscrit aniya 904 , 906 Zend 713/a, Gothic nya, Lithuanian

nya, inya 906 .

Sanscrit(inn 79 1 .

Sanscritas § Greek es (nom . or, as, re), h e, Zend ‘aii, Latin us,eris; 113 , or

- is; ar, or- is; 11r, 1 1r

- t'

a; or, dr dr- 1’

sf§ 934 , 937, 938 ,

Gothic iea neut. (110m . and aec. 1°

s) is- tra,t°

e- Ia,s- la , as- su (drauhtin

- as-m - s) 935, Old H igh German us- ta, us- ti, os- ta, os

- ti, Lithuanian

as- ti 936.

Sanscrit 11 3, p. 1 382 G . ed.

Sanscritis, p. 1 382 G . ed.

Sanscritya Latin inneuter Sanscrit‘ya neut. , Gothic ‘ya ,Latin fl u

,Greek *to Old Sclavonic 41 1 1 16 iye Lithua

nian Sanscrityd, Gothic y6, nom . ya or 1°

894 , Old

Sclavonic ya, Lithuanian ta , 6 895 . Latin t°

a,16,161 1 , *1

°

a ,‘ it’,

9 1671,Greek 1a Old High German

iti 897, NewHigh German ‘ 1:

Sanscrit 1“571i, Greek h a , Old High German

tyo, neut. rlom .

Gothic itein, nom . e1°

898 Sanscritya fut. pass port, Zendya , Gothicya , Lithuanian ia, nom . 1

'

s, Latin Greek h o 899 Sanscritl"ya , Zend *

ya , Greek ‘ 10,“1 0

,Latin it1

°

11 ,‘ ia N. Latin it:

for Sanscrit 5, Greek 16 (i) 902 . Goth ic ‘ya , fem .*y6, {yamyan,

Sanscritya , Zendya, Lithuanian t°

a , fem . 5, Old S

clavonicyo 903 .

Sanscritya , Zendyu, Lithuanian Gre ek w, p . 1390G . ed.

Sanscrittya‘

ris, iyas, see Comparative .

Sanscrit it(1,11, see Possessives.

Sanscrit‘dya , Greek “610,

‘ ro,Latin ‘eyu, *eu 958 .

Sanscrit ra , la , a - Ia , i - Ia, u- Ia , i- ra , u- ra , é - ra , 6

- ra 939 , Zend ra

3S. 940 Greek po, 710, Latin ru, Ia , Goth ic ra, Ia , Old H igh German

a - la, u- la , i - Ia , e- Ia , nom . a - l,&c. § Lithuanian a - la , Greek a - lto,

r- ho, v -

po, v- ho

,a -

po, r-

po, Latin 11 4 11 , 11 4 11 , e- ru, i - h'

(i) 94 1 .

The mark prefixed distinguishes the secondarysuffixes from the

primary.

1 454 ALPHABETICAL TABLE or CONTENTS .

Sanscrit q"ra,‘ la,

‘ i - ra,‘ i - Ia

,a i - ra ,

‘ i - Ia, Zend‘na

, Greek‘po, “11,

Latin ‘li (i)9 942 .

Sanscritri, Greek p1 , Latin 76, c- ri 9. 943.

Sanscritru, Lithuanian ru9. 944 .

Sanscritva , Latin 1711 , 11 11 946

Sanscritvan, Zend van 9. 947.

Sanscritwant, vat, Zendwant, vat, Latin‘ntu, Gothic 1"Iauala

4 10, Lithuanian ‘ leta,linta , la, ant 9. 4 1 1 . Sanscrit ‘vant

, val,

Latin 1”lent, lentu, Greek cw 9. 959 .

Sanscritvac, 176711 , vat, ugh, fem . 1151159. 786, Lithuanian e7'

1 (nom . ci - c),usia

, nom . f. t1si, Old Prussian wan- 1,11 71 - 1 , 071 - 1 , m m (nom . m . 1 11 i)

Zend vdonh, 61h, fem . 646i 787, Goth ic 11 1 12 1 (nom.

pl. m . 6671 1 1 761,

“the parents,

”as

“having begotten"

) 5. Greek

or, ma , Latin 1‘

1 r1'

(sec- uri - s), ‘61 114 Old Sclavonic v°

ol1, fem.

v’

shi (after vowels) 9. 790.

Sanscrit 7ta, Zend 71a , Gothic 7ta,Lithuanian 71a, Old Sclavonic no

,

Greek vo,Latin 71 11 Sanscrit71a, fem . 716

, Zend na,Greek Latiu71 11 , 71a , Old HighGerman7ia , f. 716, nom . 71a

Sanscrit ‘ i - na, Greek*1 - vo, Gothic

‘ei - na , Old High German fi i - u,

Lithuanian q'*1°

- 71a ,‘ i - m

’

a,*y- 71a (=i - 71a), ‘o- na

,Old Sclavonic “4 10

9. Latin ‘ i - nu, i i i - 71a , ‘6- 71 11 ,‘é- na ,

‘d4 1 11,1171 11 9. Sanscrit

‘ 1 - 71a 9 839 . p. 1 1 85 G. ed .

Sanscrit f ni,m 1

‘

ituld &c . Greek ‘ awa , ‘ o - m, Latin*6- 71a ,

- 71 ia , Lithuanian ‘e - né

'

, Old Sclavonic‘ hwlaynya , OldH igh

German ‘ 1‘

7171a , New High German inn, Old Northern WW“

99. 840, 94 1 .Sanscrit f., Greek v1

,Old Sclavonic nom. li b 71g, Lithuanian

Gothic 71 1°

Sanscrit71 i m . ,Latin 71 i

,Old Sclavonic 71 i, Lithuanian71 1

°

f. 850.

Sanscrit 71 11 , 1 - 7111 , Zend 71 11, Lithuanian 7111 , 1 71 11 , Gothic 71 11

, Latin 71 11

fourth declension, Greek w 99. 948, 949 .

Sanscritat, ant, t, at, see Participle presentand future .

Sanscritma, Zend ma, Greek 110, Latin 771 11 , Lithuanian 1°

- 711a, i

-mma,Gothic ma , Old High Germanma Greek Latin ma,Lithuanian 7na, 9. Gothic 7716 9. 950.

Sanscritmi, Gothic mi

Sanscritman, 771671, i - man, i . 771671 , Zend man Greek par,

paw, 11 1 17, Latin 771671,min, m671

- ia Greek 111 17 Gothic

man, Old High German 771071, Lithuanianmen, nom . OldSclavonicMEN , nom . Mb ! my Greek par, Latin men, min, Old

Sclavonic MEN neut. ; Sanscrit *i - ma71, Old High German ‘m

9. 799 . conclusion.

Latin7710711 11 ,Greek 11 1 110, P4777OldHighGermanmunda, nom . 771 11714

Sanscrit 77167111 , Old Prussianmana, Lithuanian ma, Greek po o,Latin

77117111 , 7717111 , Gothic mony6, f, Old Sclavonic mo, Zend mana, 771m ,771 11

9. 79 1 —795 .

Latin 771q

1 456 ALPHABETICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS .

Sanscrit‘tra, Zend‘tlu'a 9. 4 2 0.

Sanscrit"rti , Gothic ‘dré

Sanscrit‘tara , Zend Mara, Greek ‘repo, Latin Hem , Gothi c fi lte r-a, OldHigh German

‘dara 9. Old & lavonic More, ‘tero 9. 2 9 7.

Sanscrit‘tama , Zend Mama, Latin‘timu

,*1 imu

, Goth icum gm’.

ista, dum'

- i1 ta 99. 2 92 , 2 95 .

Sanscrit"113, Latin ‘tm ,Greek Mew, Old Sclavonic dti 2 93 . (p .

42 1 .

SanscritHana , Latin tinu 96 1 .

Sanscrit‘tavya , Latin tivu, Greek n o 9. 904 , Lithuanian toya , Old Sclavonic a - tayo, nom . a - ta 1

Sanscriti tya, Gothic i thya, Latin ‘tiu, Greek 0 1 0

Sanscrittva, Zend ”0165 tlzwa, Goth ic tva, neut. nom . to

,

time, Old High German don, nom . do, Old Sclavonic tea, be, Lithas

nian ba, 63

(1) 864 , and p. 1 2 44 G . ed.

Sanscrit‘tva , Old Sclavonic Mtvo 9. 834 .

Sanscrit fi vano, Prakrit tland , Old Persian tana , Greek fem . h ump,adj. i fo

-wo,Lithuanian adj. tina, adv. tinnypp. 1 2 1 6, 1 457 G . ed.

Sanscrit‘tha, Greek ro,Latin tu, Lithuanianta , Sclavonic to, Goth ic tai l,

dan, nom . ta , da 99 32 2 , Sanscrit11them,

Latin ‘tem 9. 4 2 5 .

Sanscrit1MM ,Zend tha , Latin ta , ti 9. 4 2 5 . and p. 1 2 2 7 G . ed Note.

Sanscrit‘fdd, Sclavonic da, g~da

,Lithuanian da 9. 4 2 2 .

Sanscriti dbd, Greek‘xa, 9. 32 5 .

Sanscritrice, Greek m 9. 32 4 .

Sanscrith ya , Latin t‘riu(i)9. Gothic arya, ‘aryaSanscrit‘ha

,Zend dha, Greek 6a, Gothic th, 4 9. 4 2 0.

Superlative 99. 2 98.

Supine in Latin, pp. 1 2 45, 1 2 53G . cd. , in Lithuanianand Lettish, p . 1 2 47

G . cd.,inOld Sclavonic, p . 1 2 52 G . ed.

Tadhita suffixes, p. 1 335 G . ed.

Tenses, formation of 9. 507.

T - sound suppressed atthe end of a word in Greek 99. 1 55, 456, inGer

man Rem . 1 . p . 3 85, 432 .

U,middle vowelweight 584 .

Umlaut9 72 .

Verb 9. 42 6.

Vowelweakening 2 72 , 605 .

Vowel strengthening, See Guna.

Vowel interchange, in German 68,589 , pp. 1 335, 1 338 G . ed inOld

Sclavonic 9. p. 1 2 37 G . ed. ,in Lithuanian 9. pp. 1 2 36 G . cd.

,

Note, 1 336, 1 34 1 , in Greek in Latin p. 1 336 G . ed.

Visarga

Vocative singular in Old Sclavonic dual 9. 2 06, in OldSclavonic 9. plural 9. 2 2 6, in Old Sclavonic 9. 2 80. Table .

Vriddhi p . 1 335 G . cd.

Weak cases

‘Vorde, suffixesused in formation of, Vida Suffixes

CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS.

2 . Regarding 19from a i sec p. 9 1 7.

3. Regarding 1 and 0 see also p. 1 375G. ed. Note

Road at,1 1, or at.

5 R egarding rdtponi q from rdtponyas see G . ed Note.

9. 7. Regarding the weightof the 11 see 584 .

1 6, for never read seldom .

9. 2 0. Mention should have been made here of the Cretan rpé, thee,from rFé=Sanscrittvd .

9. 2 6. RegardingGreek 01 as Guna of 1 see 9. 49 1 regardingGuna in OldSclavonic and Lithuanian see 99. 0

, 74 1 , 746.

9. 32 . What is here said respecting o is to be ‘ corrected according to

9. 447. Note .

and: according to Burnouf, occurs occasionally as the termination

of the genitive singular of the u- hases for the more common N ) icur,

e.g .

, “shaggy; baz ao‘

s,brachi i .

”

9. 35 . p. 32 . The Zend data in Icha - dcita, belongs to the Sanscritrootdhd,

“to place, to make, notto dd, to give see 9. 637.

9. 40. Last line but one,for 1 1315 59) 9 1 hufl'drir read wflefi gbw

9. 4 1 . p. 37. l. 1 9 for 135571 9111 1 11 tihii i rya read M 537J)wm (iltuirya .

9. 42 . To be completed according to p. 963 Notc.

9. 4 2 . p. 7. for yread A155ya .

9. 42 . p. 4 . 5 . to be corrected according to 9. 72 1 .

9. 1 4 . forla mZudm dtha rvan read

lx >>7x gom titarvan .

9. 1 7. for 81 110623 51J dadhwdo read gum dad/1 11120 . The

rootcorresponds to the Sanscritdhd see

9. 45 . p. 2 0. for a,» abi read a ibi .

9. 45. p . for aovc’ read, according to Burnouf, am (i . a

over and yaémi signifies

9. 1 2 . for dturuné read alaurum'.

9. 1 3. for“a taruna readm tam qaa .

9. 5 . for Gfé ik’ kf’rept

‘m read Gf$ f785 110131 1

7111 .

I take this Opportunityof cancelling whatis said atp. 1 155, Note Had

I remembered the Note at5. 447. I should not have written mynote, or

changed the d; in sevcraI places into L. which latter letter is reserved, it

seems, for the final syllable. Translator.

5 B

1 458 COEBECTtONs AND ADDITIONS .

9. 49 . p. l . omit

9. 49 . p 6. 7. for ai tharim read a itaitm .

9. 6 1 . lastline. The term ination a im from (in belongs to the potential, precative, and subjunctive.

9. 2 0. Also between a 1 nd r (haz anra ,9. 2 Regarding the Zend d: 0 sec 9. 447. Now.

9. 90. p. 78 . Itis b etter to regard the phenomenon here discussed, so as to

assume d in Gothic to he the proper character of the 3d person, and

the Old High German tas the regular substitute for it. The d

maintained itself also in the Gothic passive (bair- a - da), and the active

form ba irith isto be deduced from ba irid, as theGothic prefers aspirates

to medials atthe end of a word . The same is the ease with the pamirs

participle, the suffi x ofwhich in Gothic is do, which inOld H igh German, ia consequence of the second phonetic change, becomes ta , sothat,byproceeding in the corruption, we recur to the original form .

9. 1 6 (111 is an abbreviation of da i=Greek rat, Sanscritté’

, sec

last line, is to be c orrected according to9. 6 1 6. 2 dNote . The 1 of

tars- t,tors- ta

,belongs to the root.

9. 99 . p. 4 . add E D .

9. 100. p . 4 . Regarding cédi , ridi , from recedi, vividi, see 9. 547.

9. 1 00. p. 90. cf. 99. 547, 576, 579 .

9. concl, cf. Sclavonic and Lithuanian 9. 457.

9. 10931 - 1 01 1. 8. The accent distinguishes here the latclass from the 6lb,since, e .g, forpritati we should have, did itbelongtothe 61 11 class, pa la

'

ti .

9. 1 07. 1. To the 2 d class belong also FLA, FA, and NA .

9. 1. 1 1 . I now consider the v of and sim ilar verbs, aspurelyeuphonic, cf. 9. and Latin forms like coquo, ”71 11 110, etinyuo.

9. 1 o9 .h 1 - 1 p. 6. for 9. read p . 107.

9. p. 1 1 7, 1. 2 1. for 591 . 111.737is,

kc’erc'lwiti read[8783

kt‘ri'naottt.9 - 1p. 1 1 8, l. 2 0. Tobe corrected according to p. 1 32 0, G . ed . Note.

9. ll 2 . p. 1 5 . forkimak read kimali .

9. 2 5 . To be corrected according to p . 1334 G. ed.

9. 1 30, 1. 2 6. for“m imlrtini readwaftinch -4 131

9 1 2 5 . 1ast line but one, for“ in the oblique cases

"read “in most of

the oblique caste .

Respecting the nom inative singular of Gothic bases in ya see

p . 1 309 G . ed. Remark .

p . 1 5 1 , l. 1 9 . I now prefer tak ing the i of homin- is,&c.

, as the

weakening of the o of homo. The relation resembles that of Gothic

forms like ahmin- is,alunin

,to the nom inative and accusative altma

,

ahman, which preserve the original vowel.

9. 1 4 1 . p. 1 53 . 1 . 9 . for 71am6n- a read r1umpt- a (p. 1 083Note).

9. 10. for Twp read rap, and at1 . 1 4 . rep for Twp (as termina

tion of the base).

9. 1 48 . p. 1 63, l 2 forhupwip vachaé read thawi) vat-116.

1 460 CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS .

9. cf. Old Prussian 4 011, e g, in sk i - son, raw.

9. 2 49 . fifth line ofTable, fortri - n- t‘

im read tray- d - ndm, from the extended

base traya .

9. 2 54 . p. 2 74 , 1. 1 2 . Lithuanian 11 1111 12 .

1 . 1 7 wilktls forwit/1 11 .

Rem . 3, p. 2 8 1 , l. 1 1 . As to 1 11c v 1 1161 171 11 16, see p . 1 2 44 G . cd.

p. 2 87, Regarding turré- s and similar form see p. 1 079 ,

p. 305, for brdtar- s read brtithr- li, according to 1 1m correction

at9. 1 94 . p. 2 10, l. 2 3.

9. p. 31 1 , The suppression here noticed of final 1 refers to

Dobrowsky’

s incorrect orthography. In point of fact, however, the

final 1‘

in Old Sclavonic has either been retained unaltered, or has become 11 y, e. thatwhich Dobrowsky, 1 . c. , writes dadjat, they

give, slit, theyare, should be correctedto .taasvrb dada itty, tfi'l

‘

b

suitty. Regarding the nasaliz ed vowels, see 9 783 . Remark .

9. Here, according to 9 783. Remark, wemustdistinguish betweenoy and 111 11 71 .

p. 3 1 8, l. 1 3. forW pdndara read ptindaca .

s) p . 31 9 . cf. Remark .

1’p 32 3, Of. Remark .

m p. 32 4 . The vowels mentioned here, preceded byy, are, with the

exception of 16 ye and ‘B ya, nasaliz ed vowels (sec Remark)and hence, pyaty, five

,mustbe pronounced pasty(in the original

character

9. 2 59 . p. 32 9, l. 1 5 . To be corrected according to9. 647, lastNote.

9. 2 66. cf b.

lastline buttwo, for 111 (according to Dobrowsky)we should read

M b my.

9. 2 80. Table. In the instrumental, myis everywhere to be read for m.

9. 2 94 Rem . 2 . Regarding hi- dre

'

see 9. 99 1 .

9. 2 . for better read best."

p. 4 i 4 . Inthe Lithuaniancomparative adverbs like daugiaus, moremaéaus, less,

"I regard the uasthe vocaliz ation of the n thus, dau

giaus from daugians, where ians=Sanscrit73711 135 of the strong cases.

9. 2 . read e'

7rn i (inthe accentuation=Védic saptci).

9. 31 9 . Rem p . 440. J . Grimm,in his historyof the German language ,

p 2 46, agreeswith my explanation of eiy;w olf, and am logous formsin Lithuanian and Sclavonic.

p . 44 1 , Note I now prefer, with Benfey, to assign the Latin

Iinquo, Greek M im e,Gothic qf- lif- na , to the Sanscrit rich, from rib,

to leave.

"

Regarding the Old Sclavonic nas’

,vas

’

, sec first Note

p. lo46.

9. 340. l. 3, 4 ofp le. Respecting the It ofthe Gothic mi - k, thu- k (andthatof si - k,

“self

"

)sec p. 1 104, Note 1 . In Old Sclavonic weshould read for tya, according to Rem aud‘l i

,man, tail.

CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS . 146 1

9. 341 . p. 476, 1 . 3 . Respecting the originofthe Sanscri tsea, see 9.

9. 343. p. 478, l. 1 6."l"b t

’

with the semi - vowel'

b .

r. 479, l. 6 . Regarding torus, see p . 1 343G . ed. ,Note.

9. 4 . forya: readyas.

pp. 539, 540. l. 8 . As to the Gothic sutiix 6a and Lithuanianp , cf. p. 1 46

G . cd .

,Note . 1 . 1 9

9, 1 5, Regardi ng qua ,as plural neuter, see 9. 394.

9, 4 1 5, Regard ing lei/ts, see, too, p . 1 44 2 G . ed.

9. 4 1 0. p. 587, l. 10. As to forms like 71 1n“, see also 9. 9 1 2 . conclusion.

9. 59 2 , 1 . 7. to be corrected according to p. G . cd. , Note.

9. 9 . cf. the Zend um,thus,

"from the base a ; as to the Latin

uti, see p. 1 2 2 7 G . cd .

,Note f .

9. 436. p. 609, l. 1 7. and 9. 4 1 2 . p. 11 1 9, Table 1. 3 and 7, for s 11 should bewritten it. uh

,see 9. 783. Remark"

9. 455 . p. 635, Fordaz dhi read daz di, andso, perhaps, az di, tfischdi .

for a z dhi , visthdh i, did the said forms actuallyOccur, m1 the Sanscritdhin Zend loses its aspirate after sibilants.

p. 636 Regarding az dhi, &c., see the preceding correction.

9. 456. p. 638, l. 8 . for 9. 433 read

9. 458. p . 640, l. 2 0. for 17read 5 .

9. 460. To be corrected according to 9.

9. 463. Of the termination antonlythe thas been dropped, but the n iscontained in the precedingnasaliz ed vowel (see 9. 783. Remark), hencewe should read artfor a, mi for 8 .

9. 464 . p. 646, Note, Respecting vacsnyatr‘

i see 9. 9 2 2 .

9. 465. Table, p. 648 . In the 3d person pluralct'

the Old Sclavonic, for li ly,aty, we should read wiry, a itty, and for a , an, see 9. Remark .

9. 466 . p. 649, 1. cf. 9 473.

9. 470. p. 653, Noter

. of 9. 71 9 . p. 956, Note.

9. 472 . lastline butthree, for special forms read secondaryforms.

9. 474 . p. 659, l. 2 2 . To be corrected according to 9. 888 p. 1 2 9 2 G . ed.

9. 480. p. 670, lastline Of Table, for sfityread rarity.

9. 485. firstline of table, for kfi - na - mi read kri - nd- mi .

9. 490. In the German preterite, the weakening of the vowel is producedbythe polysyllabicness, see 9. 42 0. Rem. 1 .

9. 495. p. 69 1 , 1 . 1 . cf. p. 996.

9. 496. firstline of Table, for9316- 1111 read gyb- nu- ri .9 . 500. p. 695, 1. 1 2 . for bhtivaytimi read Mdvaycimi .

9. 503. p. 700, 1 . l . foruck(oy)- a(6p,evor read dedow)- a{6p evoc.

9. 504 . p. 701 . From line 16. In this point”to line 1 9 . The Prfikrit

expunge.

9. 1 6. of. 9. p. 99 2 .

9. 506. Mielcko’

s 4th conjugation, too, belongs to the Sanscritloth class,see 9. 698 . Note.

p. 704, 1 . 4 for .r'

ravayéehi read irdvayéah

9 507. p. 71 2 , for nefzi , vefuty, read vef-u- n, naf- u- rily. see 9. 7 and

52 2 . 52 3. The Lithuanian bavau, &c. , and kirtan, are to be expunged .

1 462 CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS .

9. 531 . 1 . 8. for K riiger read K nhner.

9. 552 . lastline butthree. cf. p. 1 2 2 7, Note

9. 561 . lastline of Table, for bed- M itt: read bt‘

td- i - shan.

9. 569 . p. 79 2 , Note 9, instead Off for Itreadf for p .

9. 647. p. 878, 1. 13. for m p read Top .

p. 879, l. 5. To be corrected according to 9. 8 1 8.

9. 664 . firstline of Table. Zend forms of the lst person singular, like thetheoreticallyformedm i

, are notquoteable ; cf. 9. Rem ark.

9. 2 . cf. 9. 731 . Remark .

9 668 1. 1 2 . 1 5 . for z ap read35

can.

1. 30. for z anlnyamana read z atihyamana . and from 1 30. to

end of expunge.

9. 72 4 . p. 969, 1. 8. for JAM/Gian»,

ndi emmi i read JAM/Ggerm ,ww’www.

9. 74 1 . p. 993, l. 2 1 . Accordingto K urschat, o inLithuanian is always long .

9. 751 . p. 1008. cf. pp. 1037, 1038.

9. 770. p. 102 7, l. 2 9 . To be corrected according to

p. 1030, l. 1 9 . forufar- hafiya - n(a)- s readtgfar- Iq - a -Map .

9. 785. p. 1 053, lastline Note, for 1 845 read 1 843.

p . 30. In compoundwords I nowascribe the throwing backof the accent in the vocative to the circumstance that compounds in

Greek regularlythrow back the accentas far as possible . I therefore

assume thatthe accent in vocatives like’

A7tipepvov, «wanton, reSIS on

that syllable Of the base word to which itoriginallybelongs, and that,on the other 11ant1, in eddat

'

pmv, rfida ipovor,

ithas sunk down from its original position on the base forwell- known

reasons.

9. 805 . p. 1089, Noteit,formiddu- mmus, middie, readdiddu- mnwc, diddt

’

s.

9. 807. p. 1 09 1 , 1. 8. cf. p. 1 1 78 G . ed. 1 . 4 .

9. 809 . p . 1 095, 1. 2 3. cf. 9. p. 62 7.

P. 1 462 G . ed . and the conjunctions of equivalentmeaning in

other languages, appear also in the nom inative relation in sentences like“er tatungewiss, ob er kommen wird, Oder niche,

” “ It is uncertain

whether he will come or not.”The Latinutrum, as neuter, is adapted,

byits case - termination, as well for the nominative as the accusative

relation. The signification“if,

”is, moreover, claimed byour Ob

,in

combinationwith schtm, gleich, and wold (abet-hon, obglcidt, obwohl).

F1NIS .

formation of the moods - forgotten books

Documents