Page images
PDF
EPUB

§ 82. finitives, and a few other noun-stems which are allied to these, or seem to be otherwise noteworthy; 3. comparative- and superlative-stems; 4. stems of cardinal- and ordinal-numbers. The last section, although of subordinate value for the explanation of the construction of language, is appended on account of the high interest of the numerals from other points of view. Hence under this last head we pass over the morphological arrangement, and direct our attention exclusively to the function, by discussing the separate numerals one by one irrespective of their phonetic expression.

Note. It is obvious that here, in the chapter on morphology, if we had wished to be consistent, no regard should have been paid to the functions of stems, and that, since stems are not yet words, no distinction should have been made between verbal-stems and noun-stems. Likewise, the treatment of stem-formation should include the stem-forms of tenses and moods as well as all other stem-forms. The formation of verb-stems (in the widest sense of the word) does not, of course, belong to the statement of word-formation (conjugation), in which only the subject of person-terminations is to be treated, because the latter are the only elements which make the verb-stem a real member of a sentence, a word. However, in order not to divide the subjectmatter in a way hitherto unusual, thereby rendering this work difficult to be used by students accustomed to earlier systems, we determine to leave the theory of tense-stems and moodelements to the section 'Word-formation' (conjugation), and under 'noun-stems' (in Part II.) to refer now and then to similarly formed verbal-stems.

Hitherto we have no thoroughly scientific arrangement of Indo-European stem-forms. As regards Part II. of our fragmentary exposition of Indo-European stem-formations, in which we shall have to produce at least a fair number of stem-formative suffixes, we shall for the present follow the example of G. Curtius (De nominum Graecorum formatione, Berlin, 1842) in adopting a phonetic principle of arrangement; that is to say, we shall treat successively (1) stems without suffixes; (2) the simplest vowel-suffixes; and (3) suffixes having one or more consonants. Under the last head the suffixes ya and va will come first; after them suffixes with so-called liquids; and, finally, those whose chief element is a momentary sound,

to which has been added the suffix as. Compound suffixes § 82. should strictly form the last division and be treated separately; however, since the question whether a given suffix is simple or compound cannot always be answered with certainty, and since, moreover, compound suffixes often very closely resemble simple ones in function and employment, we here treat compound suffixes under their first elements.

1. Formation of Derived Verbal-Stems.

On derived verb-stems generally.

Derived verb-stems, though presupposing noun-stems, are here treated before the latter, because, like primary verb-stems and roots, they frequently underlie noun-stems.

All verbs which possess no stem-formative elements, except those which serve for the formation of the tense-stems, have the form of stem-verbs; but those verbs which, in other forms than the present, show besides the root such elements as were not originally used for the formation of present- or other tense-stems, have the form of derived verbs.

At later periods of language-development, present-stem formative elements easily become united with the verbal-root so closely, that they even remain in forms other than those of the present tense, e.g. iu-n-g-o, viug, where n is the present infix; yet perf. is iu-n-c-si for *iuc-si, even iu-n-c-tu-s for *iuc-tu-s, cf. iug-u-m: a verb does not however become in any way a derived one by this union.

Intensive verbs in Sanskrit and Zend must be considered as closely akin to verbs which are reduplicated in their present- or aorist-stems; as we do not, therefore, hold them to be derived, in the stricter sense of the term (they show no constant additional element), we cannot deal with them in this place, but shall do so later on where we discuss 'present-stem-formation.'

It cannot be denied that sometimes verbs which are obviously derived may assume the form of primary verbs, e.g.

§ 83.

§ 83. Sk. kršņa-ti (behave like kršṇa-s), from subst. Kršņa-s (proper n.); Goth. salti-th (he salts), pf. saisalt, from subst. salt (salt), whilst at others stem-verbs appear in the form of derived verbs, as e.g. Lat. habe-t, Goth. habai-th (3 sg. pres.), Lat. habē-bo (fut.), Goth. habai-da (pf.), which we can hardly consider derived, is conjugated just like decidedly derived-verbs, e.g. Lat. mone-t, f.f. mānaya-ti (causes to think), fut. monē-bo, √man (think), Lat. men (cf. Lat. me-min-i, primary verb from same root), stem of causative verb mānaya-; Goth. veihai-th (hallows), pf. veihai-da from veih-s (holy). In fact the forms of undoubted stem-verbs and those of clearly derived-verbs are so intermingled in certain of the existing languages, that from a purely morphological point of view a sharp and complete distinction between primary and derived verbal-stems is impossible, and not unfrequently it is still doubtful to which class a given verb belongs. Certain tense-stems often have the forms of derived-verbs, whilst others show those of the stem-verbs, e.g. Lat. vidē-mus (pres.) beside vidi-mus (pf.), etc.; v. 'Conjugation.'

Since we are here considering the form only, not the function of the words, we can arrange derived verb-stems only according to stem-formative elements, not according to the relations which they express. Hence we speak of stem-formation by means of ya, etc., not of intensive, causative, etc., verb-stems. We place first those formations which can be proved most archaic, and let follow in order those which occur in particular languages only of our family, and which must therefore in all likelihood, be considered as later formations.

It is often hard to pronounce with certainty what is the next underlying form in the case of derived verb-stems. We could not venture to decide off-hand whether, e.g. Sk. bhāráyā-mi, Gk. popéw-(μ), stem bhāraya-, Gk. popeye-, is formed by stepformation and by sf. -ya- from verb-stem Sk. bhára-, Gk. pépe-, in Sk. bhára-ti, Gk. þépe-(T)ı (3 sg. pres.), or by means of sf.

-ya- from a substantive stem Sk. bhāra-, Gk. pópo- (n. sg. Sk. § 83. bhára-s, Gk. þópo-s).

Note.—The formation of the present-stem has been considered as the formation of a derived verb whenever it expresses an evident relation, as e.g. the passive or inchoative. This, however, is not admissible, were it only for the reason, that originally every kind of present-stem-formation represented a distinct relation. If this were not so, all verbs would exhibit one and the same present-stem-form. Besides there is no doubt that we count as derived verb-stems' only such formations as are not confined to the present-stem; and it would, moreover, be impossible to distinguish verbs as stem-verbs and derived-verbs.

Verbal-stems in original -ya- (-a-ya-) with root-vowel § 84. raised to first step, when formed from verbal-stems. Verbal-stems in non-radical -ya- are found in all Indo-European languages, and must therefore be ascribed to a period as early as that of the original language (their function is manifold, especially causative, transitive, but also durative and intransitive). They naturally lean to verbal-stems and nominalstems. The formative-element -aya- is probably to be broken up into -a-ya-, a being the final sound of the fundamental nominal- or verbal-stem, while ya is a very commonly used element in stem-formation (cf. pronominal √yɑ, of rel. and dem. functions). The root-vowel is regularly raised a step.

Indo-European original language. Only one kind of such verbs, and of this only a few forms can be traced, esp. the pres. (and what is akin to it), e.g. 3 sg. pres. bhāraya-ti (=Sk. bhārάya-ti, Gk. *popeye(t)ɩ, i.e. þopeî; in Sk. with causative, in Gk. with durative function, from a stem bhāra-, popo-, origl. √ bhar, Gk. pep ferre); further future bharaya-sya-ti (Sk. bhārayi-šyá-ti, Gk. Popń-σei=*popeye-σye-Ti), and lastly the compound aorist a-bhāraya-sam (ẻ-þópn-σa). So too sada-ya-ti (he places)=Sk. sādá-ya-ti, Goth. sat-yi-th, √ sad (sit); vaida-ya-ti (foretells)=Sk. vēdáya-ti (id.), Goth. (fair-)veiteith (looks to) for *veit-yi-th, √vid (see, know), etc.

§ 84. The correspondence between Gk. and Sk. makes it not unlikely that formations such as e.g. maran-ya-ti (dies, durative) from an abstract noun, n. sg. marana-m (whose final a, as often happens, has dropped out before sf. ya, √ mar, die), were not foreign to the origl. lang. In the formation of the remaining tense-forms languages do not agree. Probably the simple aorist was not formed at all, and the perfect expressed by periphrasis.

Sanskrit. E.g. bhāráya-ti, 3 sg. pres. causative vb. √bhar, either belonging to a noun-stem bhāra- (load), bhara- (bearing; or the act of bearing), or to a verb-stem bhara- (bhára-ti he bears); sādáya-ti, in the same way fr. √sad (sit), cf. stem sāda(m. placing down, setting); vēdáya-ti (makes to know) similarly fr. √vid (see, know), cf. vēda- (m. knowledge, holy writ); bōdháya-ti (makes to know), budh (know), cf. bōdha-, pres.-stem and noun-stem, bōdha-s (knowledge, instruction). Roots in -ar often have no step-formation, e.g. dāráya- and daráya-, √ dar (burst, split); vārάya- and varáya-, √ var (cover, choose). Further, before two consonants the step-formn. does not take place, e.g. kalpáya-, √ kalp (be in order; kalpa-, adj. fitted, subst. m. order); indeed we actually find weakened root-syllables, e.g. grbháya-, √ grabh (grasp, akin to grbhá-s, gripe); mrdáya-, √mard (grind, both these examples belong to the more archaic language). Elsewhere also unraised a is sometimes found, e.g. damáya-, √ dam (be tame, tame; cf. dama-s, the act of taming, breaking in), etc. Roots in i, u, have the 2nd step, e.g. nāyá-ya-ti, √ni (lead); çrāvá-ya-ti, √ çru (hear). The perf. of these verb-stems is periphrastically formed by means of an abstract-form in ā and the perf. of an auxiliary verb, e.g. vēduya-kakāra, lit. 'notionem feci'; the aorist does not belong to these stems in -aya-, but was formed from the reduplicated root. This reduplication has the force of a causal function, which may be taken as a step-formation of the active, e.g. á-vivid-am, pres. vēdáya-mi; other forms of these verbs lose y, thus the past formed from the future (the so-called conditional),

« PreviousContinue »