for the most part a telic sense, i.e. it generally denotes a perfect or pluperfect action. In those persons which end in a vowel, the original termination in n, otherwise lost in Assyrian, is preserved, the vowel being attached. This is in a few rare cases ŭ, though i generally takes its place, a not being met with. The prevalence of i is to be explained partly by the fact that the additional vowel is mostly found in relative and subordinate sentences, partly by the influence of ni, the conditional enclitic. The final syllable of the person-ending was long; hence we often find yusaldidu'uni written for yusaldiduni. When followed by the enclitic conjunction, the accent was thrown upon the final i, which, accordingly, generally has the consonant after it doubled: thus, ikhdhūniv-va for ikhdhuni-va.

The aorist of motion answers to the accusative of nouns, and hence signifies motion towards a place. Both have in Assyrian the vowel a, which corresponds to the termination of the Hebrew Cohortative in the verb and the local case in the noun, long recognized as a relic of the old Semitic. accusative.

The long originates in the primitive mimmation (amma, am, Arabic, anna, an), just as in Arabic yactulănna or yactulăn becomes yactula in pause. Assyrian, when it drops the mimmation, preserves the original short quantity of the Vowel. While in Assyrian the aorist in a very frequently signifies motion (e.g. aslula, "I carried off"), in many instances it denotes a purely quiescent state (e.g. ebusa, "he made"); but in this case it either stands in a conditional sentence or has its object following it, so that the action of the verb is moved forward to the noun. I have not found it

used as a cohortative, a sense which arises from the idea of motion in urging oneself or another forward to do a thing, and implies a continuance of the action desired by putting it into effect. When it stands in a relative sentence it exactly corresponds to the Arabic subjunctive, a use of the form originating in the conception of limitation implied in the termination (as in the accusative of the noun)—the action having proceeded to a certain point and no further,—from which also arises the idea of motion. The accusative is the object to which the mind travels. Hence it is expressed by the broad vowel a.1

The Paragogic or Energic aorist is merely that in which the attached vowels retain the primitive mimmation, once possessed by all noun-cases, and which has become a nunnation in Arabic. The final ma is generally the enclitic conjunction, in which v has been changed into m on account of the preceding m (see p. 28). Thus we have abnuv or abnum (“I built”), iddinūnum ("they have given "), isrucunimma ("they have presented and"), usetsamma (“I brought forth and"), uselamma ("I brought up and”).

The Moods, excluding the Indicative, are four in number: (1) Precative, (2) Subjunctive, (3) Imperative, and (4) Infinitive, though the latter would better be described as a verbal

noun.

(1) The Precative is formed from the aorist, as in Arabic

1 We have to distinguish the enclitic a for va, "and," from this tenseending. Final u coalesces with the a; thus aslula for aslulu-a (aslulwa) "they carried off." The augment of motion is found also with the Present (especially when used cohortatively), as well as with the Imperative and Precative (see below). So, too, the mimmation.

2 In classical Assyrian this final ma is always the enclitic conjunction.

and Aramæan, by means of the prefix li or lu. So, too, Ethiopic often prefixes lă to the shorter form of the Imperfect in the same sense. In Assyrian, when the first letter of the verb is a vowel, lu is used; a, u, or yu are absorbed by the u of the prefix which is lengthened: if, however, the first letter be i, lu-i is contracted into li, which becomes le before e. This lu must be distinguished from the particle lũ, denoting past time (like kad in Arabic, or sma in Sanskrit), which never amalgamates with the verb. Dr. Oppert points out its connexion with the of the Talmud and the Aramaic (as in

The Precative is .(להון and להוא the forms in Daniel

confined to the first and third persons, the Imperative being used for the second; but it is chiefly found in the third. Examples are lubludh (joined with anacu), lucsud ("may I obtain"), lusba-‘a (with the augment of motion added) and lusbim ("may I be satisfied with"), lurabbis ("may he enlarge"), lutir ("may he restore"), lirur ("may he curse"), libi'elu ("may they rule over"), liscunu, ("may they place"). Irregularly it was even used in later times with the second person: thus Nebuchadnezzar has lutippis ("mayest thou make"). The same form is used for the masculine and feminine of the third person. The subjunctive enclitic -ni may be attached to the Precative; e.g. lissū-ni, “may they carry away" (in a quotation).

(2) The Subjunctive is hardly to be called a distinct mood. It is formed by the subjunctive enclitic ni added either to the Perfect or to the Permansive, e.g. utsbacuni. In some cases the enclitic cannot be distinguished in form from the fuller plural

1 This, however, may represent the of the Aramaic third person of the verb.

termination of the aorist: generally, however, an accusative pronoun is inserted between the verb and the enclitic, e.g. abilu-sina-ni ("I have possessed them"), ikabu-su-ni (“be

calls it"). The enclitic is used after the relative or such particles as ci. A common idiom is to use this enclitic without ci, followed by va ("and") and an aorist (not unlike the use of waw consecutivum); e.g. itsbatuniv-va emuru, "when they had taken, they saw" (where the first v does not represent the mimmation, but points out that i has the accent thrown back by va). Ni must be compared with the Ethiopic enclitic nă added to 'sca, "until," shortened probably from nē, which is attached to the accusative of motion. Both probably go back to nā (as in nāhu, nawā), Arabic anna, Hebrew N. Compare Assyrian eninna, "again" (?).

(3) The Imperative is confined to the second person, the second person singular feminine ending in -i, the second person plural masculine in - long, feminine -a. The subjunctive augment of motion is sometimes attached to the second person singular masculine, e.g. sullimă (pael), "complete." It would be more true to say that the final a was the primitive form which was afterwards contracted, the object-vowel (ă) being used rather than the subject-vowel (u), as in Arabic, because the action passed on from the speaker to the object. The length of the final vowels in the plural is sometimes denoted by otiose characters, as in Arabic: thus, salkhu'u-su for salkhū-su, "do ye extend it." In Shaphel, the imperative is always formed as if from Aphel: e.g. suscin for sususcin, as in Hebrew hactél for hehactél.

The Energic Augment may be used (especially in Baby

lonian), with both the imperative and the precative, e.g. surihimam, "cause to be exalted;" lusbim, "may he be sated with," besides lusbiam, which combines (like surihimam) the Conditional and Energic Augments.

(4) The Infinitive is a verbal substantive, and as such may take the feminine termination. It would be better called, as in Arabic, a nomen verbi; and as such will be considered further on.

The participle prefixes mu in all conjugations except Kal, and the Pael of concave verbs, as in the other Semitic tongues. This mu is the pronoun ma, mi, manu, etc., as Ewald has pointed out. Assyrian here agrees with Arabic, as well as really with Hebrew and Aramaic, in which shewa is equivalent to the short ŭ of the other more conservative languages: Æthiopic alone has retained the original a.

THE PERSONS.

As in the other Semitic languages, a distinction is made in the attachment of the person-suffixes in the Permansive and the Aorist. The Permansive is conjugated as follows:

I have taken the greater part of the above from Dr. Hincks. The form of the second singular is restored from the forms of the pronoun in Assyrian, atta and atti.