Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/elucidationsofstOOcurtrich 
 
ELUCIDATIONS 
 
 OP 
 
 THE STUDENT'S GREEK GRAMMAR: 
 
/ 
 
ELUCIDATIONS 
 
 THE STUDENT'S 'GEEEK GRAMMAE.' 
 
 Peof. CUETIUS. 
 
 . \. 
 
 Fbom the German, with the Author's Sanction, 
 
 EVELYN ABBOTT, M.A., 
 
 FELLOW AND TUTOR OF BALLIOL COLLEGK. 
 
 SECOND EDITION, REVISED AND CORRECTED. 
 
 ^• 
 
 rH)^ XT'" 
 
 ITJHIVBRSIT7] 
 
 JOHN MUERAY, ALBEMARLE STREET. 
 1875. 
 
7t^ 
 
 ^.s'^^-^ 
 
 WatBon and ITcuJfcll, Pr-hter;, Londjii and Aylesbury.* 
 
(Sis' 
 
 PKEFACE TO FIKST EDITION. 
 
 The following pages are a translation of the ^ Erlduter- 
 ungen zu meiner Griechischen Schulgrammatik,^ published 
 in 1863 by Professor Curtius together with the sixth 
 edition of the Grammar. Being merely ' elucidations,' 
 they must be read in connexion with the Grammar in 
 order to be fully intelligible. Here and there, it is 
 true, quotations and notes have been added in order to 
 make the reading more continuous, but it was impossible 
 to render the book an independent one. Nor indeed 
 was it necessary, as the Grammar of Professor Curtius 
 is within the reach of English readers. ("The Student's 
 Greek Grammar," London 1862.) 
 
 The present volume then is a companion to the 
 Grammar. The whole work may be considered a 
 manual of the Greek language embodying in brief 
 the latest results of Comparative Grammar, so far as 
 these illustrate the Greek language. In many respects 
 it will be found to differ widely from the grammars and 
 philological works used in England ; but the most 
 distinctive characteristic is the scientific method, which 
 Professor Curtius pursues in dealing with language. 
 Throughout, he recognizes language as an organism, 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 dependent indeed upon man, and therefore parasitic, 
 but still an orcranism with definite laws of ^frowth and 
 decay. As such therefore it must be studied. We 
 must not approach it with a priori ideas derived from 
 metaphysics, but with the watchful and observant eye 
 of the student of nature. What we see, we know ; 
 what we deduce from our observations is probable ; 
 what we imagine is the baseless fabric of a vision. 
 
 On this conception of language two observations may 
 be made. 
 
 I. — It may become of great practical value. At the 
 present time there is a widely spread desire for scientific 
 method in education. It is often said, and not without 
 reason, that the classics are studied in our schools to 
 the exclusion of physical science, of our advances in 
 which we are justly proud. Without doubt the desire 
 would be more readily met, were not classics and 
 science felt to be widely separated. The study of one 
 is regarded as incompatible with the study of the other ; 
 and as it is impossible to study both in the time usually 
 set apart for education, the classics maintain their 
 prescriptive position. And yet this separation of the 
 two subjects is detrimental to both. The scholar accuses 
 the man of science of a ' want of taste ' ; the man of 
 science regards the scholar as one who neglects the 
 present for the past. But when we regard language as 
 an organism, and the science of language as a physical 
 science, this unfortunate separation is bridged over. 
 A common point is found where the advocates of both 
 systems can meet. Scientific method can be introduced 
 into our schools without drawing boys away from 
 
PKEFACE. Vii 
 
 classics, or increasing in the least the material amount 
 of instruction. 
 
 Again. Many boys leave school with Uttle or no 
 knowledge of Greek and Latin. Now it is not alto- 
 gether easy to answer satisfactorily those who ask 
 what is the value of this minimum of knowledge. The 
 practical value is nothing ; the educational value is 
 little more, if the tasks have been learned merely by 
 rote. To be able to decline musa is not a great accom- 
 plishment if we merely know how to decline it, and 
 remain in ignorance of the meaning of declension. Yet 
 the distinction between musa and musam conveys in 
 the simplest manner the distinction between subject 
 and object — a distinction which it is impossible to illus- 
 trate in an equally simple and regular manner from 
 our own language, because in form the nominative 
 and accusative — except in the personal pronouns — are 
 identical, and the difference is expressed by position 
 merely. This is indeed the great value of the study of 
 inflected language. It presents to the eye differences 
 which in uninflected language must be grasped by the 
 mind. Now by teaching language scientifically all these 
 distinctions and the reasons for them are impressed 
 upon the pupil ; and thus even a knowledge of the 
 declensions becomes of value. For though the boy 
 leaves school knowinor little or nothino: of Latin and 
 Greek, he knows something of language. And of all 
 knowledge this is the most valuable. For language is 
 i» a nearer relation to the mind than anything else. It 
 stands between us and the outward world ; we may 
 almost say between us and our own thoughts. Unless 
 
Vlll PREFACE. 
 
 we know something of its true nature it is almost 
 impossible for us to emancipate ourselves from its 
 dominion, and become thinking, not merely speaking, 
 beings. 
 
 II. — The organic nature of language is seen in the 
 fact that the changes take place in obedience to some 
 internal force, and are beyond the power of man to 
 hasten or retard. No one could introduce a new sound 
 or a new rule of syntax into language. Even the 
 attempt to do so argues a certain imbecility of mind. 
 Yet the constant use of books and writing tends to give 
 us too material a view of language. We are apt to 
 regard it as existing apart from the mind. As easily 
 could the plant exist apart from the parent soil. Written 
 language stands to spoken language much in the same re- 
 lation as the plants in a herbarium to those in a garden 
 — as dead structures to living. And yet, though we speak 
 of the science of language as a natural science, and of 
 the mind as the soil in which language, the plant, grows, 
 we must not be misled by the metaphor. There is this 
 important difference. The plant is wholly an organic 
 structure ; but language is not so. It is organic only 
 so far as it is unconscious. Thus inflexions changes of 
 sound etc. are organic ; not so the order of words in a 
 sentence or the mode of connecting one sentence with 
 another. Here rhetoric and logic have invaded the 
 natural domain of language. Or we may say that there 
 is in language a physiological and an intellectual 
 element, and that it is in virtue of the former rather 
 than the latter that language is brought within the 
 sphere of natural science. 
 
PREFACE. IX 
 
 It may not be altogether superfluous to point out 
 that a distinction must be drawn between Roots Stems 
 and Words, A root is a ' sound of meaning ' ; it is that 
 part of a \Yord which conveys the meaning divested 
 of any addition or modification. It is a sound, not a 
 word. Thus de is the root in rl-Oe-Tac, e-^e-ro, Oe-ai-^, 
 But when a root has become modified in any manner, 
 by the addition of syllables, or by internal change, it 
 becomes a stem : thus nOe is a stem formed to express 
 the present tense ; Oeau a stem formed to express an 
 action. As compared with roots, stems are change- 
 able. But TiOe and Oeau are not words : to complete 
 the structure a termination is needed, ^eo-69, rlOeraL 
 As inflexion is accomplished by terminations, it follows 
 that stems are uninflected ; and that, though changeable 
 as compared with roots, they are the unchangeable 
 elements in words. The three terms therefore express 
 three distinct stages of analysis, and in this respect are 
 of the greatest value both in grammar and etymology. 
 Whether they also represent three stages in the 
 historical growth of language is a matter which in 
 no way concerns the grammarian, however interesting 
 in itself. They are not arbitrary distinctions. In 
 language, it is true, the sentence is the unit ; and all 
 divisions of it are fractional. Thus even words are 
 fractions, and yet the distinction of words is useful in 
 practice and defensible in science ; it is based on defi- 
 nite principles, and not an open question to be decided 
 at the caprice of the individual. The same may be 
 said of the division of words into Roots or Stems and 
 Terminations. The parts are fractions no doubt ; they 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 are, it may be said, fractions of a fraction. Yet the 
 division is not capricious. The distinction between a 
 ' sound of meaning ' and a ^ sound of relation ' ; between 
 a ^ variable ' and an ^ invariable ' element, is as logical 
 as that between subject and predicate, substantive 
 and attribute. The practical use of the distinction in 
 exhibiting the unity of words in conjugation and 
 declension is beyond a doubt. 
 
 The chapters and sections are those to which the 
 Elucidations refer. 
 
 E. A. 
 
 Oxford, June 2Wi^ 1870. 
 
 In this edition I have revised the work with the 
 help of the author's Second Edition (Prag. 1870). . A 
 few footnotes have also been added and the indices 
 enlarged. 
 
 OXFOED, May 20th, 1875. 
 
 i 
 
CONTENTS, 
 
 Introduction 
 
 Page 
 
 1 
 
 PART I. — Accidence. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of the Greek Alphabet. 
 Writing and Sound 
 
 t before i . . . . 
 
 zeta ..... 
 theta ..... 
 
 Pronunciation of the Vowels and Diphthongs 
 
 at not a . . . 
 
 et not ai , , , 
 
 01 not t . 
 
 cu not oi , , » 
 
 ou . . . . 
 
 iota subscriptnm 
 
 ( 
 
 . 17 
 
 • 
 
 . 18 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 20 
 
 • ' 
 
 24 
 
 ; 
 
 26 
 
 
 28 
 
 ; 
 
 28 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Of the Sounds. 
 
 Hard and soft vowels •. 
 
 Epic lengthening 
 
 Consonants 
 
 Momentary and continuous sounds 
 
 Spirants 
 
 Digamma 
 
 30 
 32 
 
 33 
 34 
 
Xll 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of the Combinations and Changes of Sojjnds. 
 Organic lengthening . 
 Compensatory lengthening 
 Dissimilation . 
 Changes before /lc 
 Changes before a 
 G for double o- . 
 Auxiliary consonants 
 Changes with i 
 Metathesis of t 
 XX 
 
 atr (jr) 
 Double consonants 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Declension of Substantives and Adjectives. 
 
 Arrangement . 
 
 Stem and termination 
 
 Reality of stems 
 
 Division of Declension 
 
 Stems in v and i 
 
 Stems in . 
 
 Yowel-declension 
 
 A-declension . 
 
 Genitive Singular 
 
 0-declension, neuter . 
 
 Attic declension 
 
 Ace. Plural 
 
 Nom. Sing, of the consonant-declension 
 
 Vocative 
 
 Dental stems . 
 
 Diphthong stems 
 
 Stems in eu . 
 
 Elided stems . 
 
 Sigma stems . 
 
 T-stems 
 
 Comparative stems 
 
 Stems in apr . 
 
 Anomalies 
 
 Locatives 
 
 Suffix 01 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Xlll 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Other Inflexions op the Adjective. 
 
 (Ta from ta 
 
 VLO. 
 
 7roXi/5 . 
 Anomalies 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Inflexions op Pbonouns. 
 Reflexive stems 
 jEoHsms 
 Neuter Singular 
 Relative stems 
 Interrogative stems 
 
 CHAPTERS X.— XII. 
 
 The Inflexion op the Verb. 
 
 Arrangement . 
 
 Tense- stems 
 
 Leading conjugations 
 
 Classification . 
 
 Arrangement, etc. 
 
 Present stem . 
 
 Strong Aorist . 
 
 Future . 
 
 Weak Aorist . 
 
 Perfect . 
 
 Passive stems . 
 
 * Strong' and * weak' 
 
 Classes of verbs 
 
 Person-terminations 
 
 Moods . 
 
 Connecting vowel 
 
 Augment 
 
 Extension 
 
 Verb- and Noun-stems 
 
 Lengthened class 
 
 T-class 
 
XIV 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 I-class . 
 
 Future stem* . 
 
 Weak Aorist . 
 
 Perfect stem . 
 
 Active Perfect . 
 
 Aspirated Perfect 
 
 Pluperfect 
 
 Third Future . 
 
 Passive stems . 
 
 Short vowels . 
 
 Verbs in /ut 
 
 Nasalization . 
 
 Vowel roots 
 
 Nasal class 
 
 Inchoative class 
 
 E -class . 
 
 6 an auxiliary vowel 
 
 Mixed class 
 
 Concealed Inchoatives 
 
 Synonymous stems united 
 
 Future Middle 
 
 Intransitive and transitive meaning 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Derivation. 
 
 Formation of nouns . 
 Derivative verbs 
 Composition . 
 Connexion of the stems 
 Compound verbs 
 Compounds from a verb-stem 
 Meaning of compounds 
 Determinatives 
 Attributives 
 Compounds of dependency 
 
 PART II, 
 
 General Remarks 
 Comparison 
 Translations . 
 Selection of the material 
 
 — Syntax. 
 
 179 
 182 
 184 
 185 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 
 
 
 XV 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 Pa«e 
 
 The Cases. 
 
 Local theory . . . . . . . 186 
 
 Traces of lost cases 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 192 
 
 Replacement of lost cases 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 Mixed cases . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Accusative 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 195 
 
 Inner object . 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 196 
 
 Genitive 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Genitive with verbs . 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 198 
 
 Looser Genitive 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 199 
 
 Dative . 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 200 
 
 CHAPTER XVIL 
 
 The Peepositions. 
 
 Government of Prepositions ..... 203 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 The Tenses. 
 
 Double distinction of Time ..... 207 
 
 Grade of Time . 
 
 
 
 
 
 208 
 
 Kind of Time . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Triple kind of Time . 
 
 
 
 
 
 209 
 
 Aoristic Action 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ingressive Aorist 
 
 
 
 
 
 213 
 
 Effective Aorist 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The Aorist in other languages 
 
 
 
 214 
 
 Aorist Participle 
 
 
 • ' 
 
 216 
 
 CHAPTER XXL 
 
 Compound Sentences. 
 
 Form of the Sentence . . . , . .218 
 
 Parataxis .... 
 
 
 . 220 
 
 Correlation 
 
 
 , , 
 
 . 221 
 
 Hypotaxis 
 
 
 V 
 
 . 222 
 
 Particles . . . 
 
 
 
 
 Meaning of Sentences . 
 
 
 
 . 225 
 
 ■ Conjunctions . 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 224 
 
 Case-forms and conjunctions . 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 225 
 
xvi CONTENT'S. 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 The Infinitive. 
 
 Form of the Infinitive . . . . .227 
 
 Accusative and Infinitive . . . . . 229 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 The Participle. 
 
 Kinds of Participle . . . . . .233 
 
 Predicative Participle ... . . — 
 
?k^ OF THE ^)^ 
 
 fUiriVBRSITT] 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 Greek and Latin are commonly termed the classical 
 languages. If used in the old sense, to imply that no 
 other language is of the same rank in regard to dignity 
 and delicacy, the epithet is no longer strictly speaking 
 correct; since the modern science of language has 
 rather taught us to regard every language as in itself a 
 marvellous product of man's intellectual activity, and to 
 find in many of those already investigated a high degree 
 of perfection. But nevertheless as the circle embraced 
 by this science spreads wider, the conclusion becomes 
 more certain that in general framework and principle of 
 structure the languages of the Indo-Germanic family 
 remain unsurpassed. And among these again Sanskrit 
 alone perhaps can contest with Greek the claim to the 
 richest and most happy development of the germs 
 common to all. Still, when we direct our attention, not 
 so much to the faithful preservation of old sounds and 
 forms, and consequent transparency of the whole struc- 
 ture — on which account the language of the Indians 
 is of such vast importance for the general study of 
 language — as to the consistent accomplishment of aims 
 which from the remotest period floated before the 
 genius of language, to the light and flexible character 
 of the forms retained and the delicate shades of meaning 
 
2 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 expressed by them, to the richness of the vocabulary 
 which reflects every side of Greek intellectual life — we 
 can hardly avoid the conclusion that the language of 
 the Hellenes is that in which on the whole the most 
 complete structure is brought before us in the highest 
 degree of development. 
 
 At the present time this language forms a necessary 
 part of advanced instruction at school. This position, it 
 is true, it has attained, not by excellency of structure, 
 but by the contents of the literature of which it is the 
 key. And not even the most enthusiastic admirer of 
 Greek as a language will go so far as not to recognize 
 the object of learning Greek in a knowledge of Homer 
 Sophocles and Demosthenes, no less than in under- 
 standing the form of the Aorist or use of the Optative. 
 But since the only way by which the intellectual treasures 
 to be found in the Greek language can become so per- 
 fectly familiar as to have a real influence in education 
 is an accurate knowledge of the language ; and the 
 study of the language in the literal sense, that is, careful 
 practice in the forms and their uses, and the gradual 
 unlocking of the treasures of the vocabulary, justly lays 
 claim to a large part of the time devoted to learning 
 Greek — two considerations seem to suororest themselves. 
 
 It is, on the one hand, altogether monstrous that a 
 number of our schoolmasters should proceed, as they 
 do, to this task of teaching languages which mainly 
 devolves upon them, without ever studying the structure 
 of the language they have to teach — (what I say holds 
 good of Latin no less than Greek) — and that in many 
 German universities no opportunity is ever afforded 
 for this study. That this defect operates beneficially 
 on the delight of the teacher in undertaking his task 
 is what no one will believe. On the contrary, as we 
 always find most pleasure in teaching subjects which 
 
INTRODUCTION. 3 
 
 we love because we have laboured upon them, and 
 admire because we apprehend their internal organiza- 
 tion, we may suppose that those will teach languages 
 — and Greek especially — with more enthusiasm, and 
 therefore with better results, to whom the forms are 
 something different from a motley multitude of un- 
 intelliorible structures, and somethinor more than an 
 unavoidable task to be learned mechanically. The 
 task of teaching the elements of language is chiefly in 
 the hands of young men, and for these the transition 
 from the regions of science to the practical teaching 
 of a school is always very abrupt. For in the first 
 attempts at teaching it is almost impossible to apply 
 the studies in criticism, exegesis, literary history, and 
 antiquities, which fill up the time spent at the uni- 
 versit^^ But with the science of language the case is 
 different. Language becomes at once the subject of 
 instruction. And though of course, even here, scientific 
 investigation and the practical teaching required at 
 school are naturally far apart, it is by no means 
 impossible to enliven the latter even from the very 
 first by the insight obtained in the paths of science. 
 Changes of sounds, rules of accentuation, forms of 
 inflection are no longer what they were in the eyes 
 of one who has learnt to combine them into a whole, 
 and to recognize even in the smallest details the web 
 woven by the genius of language. To him even ele- 
 mentary teaching offers many of the charms of science. 
 The study of language at the university has therefore 
 a peculiar value as reconciling science and practice, 
 though such a reconciliation, it is true, is only possible 
 when instruction at school is so arranged — and in 
 Greek this can be done the soonest and most widely 
 — that the charms of science are to a certain extent 
 embodied in practical teaching. 
 
4 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 But not merely the pleasure of teaching — that of 
 learning also will be increased, if instruction in lan- 
 guage is not cut off from contact with science. For in 
 this way something of the delight which every glimpse 
 of order and law ensures will come even to the pupil's 
 aid. If when the forms have been impressed on the 
 memory, the pupil is taught by correct analysis to 
 see how they have arisen, and to perceive the special 
 causes of apparent irregularities, there is no doubt that 
 by such a course the attention is sharpened and the 
 memory rendered more tenacious. And who would 
 refuse to recognize the exercise of the understanding 
 also called into play by such a process? Nay, more 
 than exercise of the understanding. For the habit of 
 combining complicated details into a whole, of seeking 
 for analogies, the rejection of the shallow admission of 
 mere caprice and exception, carries with it a higher 
 element of culture. And this can be brought to the 
 help of the youthful pupil without in the least increasing 
 the material amount of his studies, but in the closest 
 combination with the acquisition of that which without 
 this must be learned for quite other objects,"* 
 
 In earlier times when instruction in the ancient 
 languages — which at that time was almost identical 
 with instruction in Latin — far outweighed instruction 
 of any other kind, an accurate and lasting knowledge of 
 
 * Obviously instruction in language, if imparted with regard to 
 the new science, approaches more nearly to the method of the so- 
 called exact sciences, a point of view to which Lattmann has called 
 at|}ention in striking words, — Zeitschrift filr Grymnasialwesen, 1866, 
 p. 895. In the general demand for 'concentration' in education, it 
 must be regarded as a considerable gain that instruction in philology, 
 as is shown at length in the essay referred to, stands in a less sharp 
 contrast to those branches of science which without doubt are deeply 
 moving the age. To find in this a 'concession to realism' appears 
 to me a very narrow and antiquated way of looking at the matter. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 5 
 
 language was acquired bj a method essentially the same 
 as that now followed in learning modern languages, 
 that is, by a certain passive devotion to the material 
 part of the language, in acquiring which the imitative 
 instincts chiefly were taken into consideration. And 
 if at the present time complaints are very frequently 
 made that the acquaintance of pupils with the ancient 
 languages on leaving school is not always in a satis- 
 factory proportion to the important space of time 
 devoted to learning them, the reason of this is still 
 without a doubt to be found mainly in the fact that 
 in modern times it is very difficult to attain an equally 
 concentrated devotion to the object of study among 
 pupils. Under such circumstances we ought not to 
 despise any means calculated to excite the student's 
 attention to the phenomena of language. And I should 
 think that in a more scientific treatment of instruction 
 such a means would be found ; and that even those who 
 take no part in the science of language would readily 
 avail themselves of it as conducing to an end which all 
 schoolmasters recognize as desirable. For no one will 
 deny that subjects are best remembered which have 
 been learned with pleasure and enthusiasm. 
 
 As a fact, the Greek language has not for a long 
 time past been -taught in school merely as a task for 
 the memory. On the contrary, more than a century 
 has elapsed since the attempt has been made in various 
 ways to make the forms more intelligible, and therefore 
 more easy to teach, by tracing them to their origin, 
 and by distinguishing between stems and terminations. 
 While our Latin grammars of the ordinary stamp 
 content themselves with paradigms of the conjugations, 
 and e.g. in tango tetigi tactum, are careful to conceal 
 the fact that the perfect and supine are formed from 
 the stem tag, but the present from the longer stem 
 
b INTRODUCTION. 
 
 tang^ there is scarcely a Greek school-grammar to be 
 found in which AABfl or \a/3 is not mentioned as a 
 stem or Hheme' beside Xa/jL^dvco, and thus one of the 
 most essential facts in the structure of the Greek and 
 Indo-Germanic verb, the distinction between the present- 
 stem and the verb-stem, is noticed as a fact in individual 
 instances, though not recognized as a principle. Even 
 the existence of several dialects in Greek with which 
 the pupil must be familiarised led necessarily to an 
 accurate study of the sounds in their relation to each 
 other. The difference between the Homeric iS-fiev and 
 the Attic La-/jL€v made an observation necessary on the 
 relation of B and <r ; and it was then almost impossible 
 to avoid the conclusion that cr had arisen out of 0, not 
 only in K€Kopva/jLevo<i as compared with the Homeric 
 K€Kopv0/jiivo<;, but also in ireTrvajxaL beside irevOofxaLj 
 and in consequence to take the same view of the sigma 
 in TreTrvcrrai 7ruaTL<; Tncrrt-?, and in spite of any aver- 
 sion to further linguistic analysis to allow some little 
 of this discovery to transpire even in the presence of 
 the pupil. But in Latin, on the other hand, the change 
 from c? to 5 in es-tis, from ed-tis, though quite analogous 
 to the last-mentioned change in Greek, is often regarded 
 to this very day as a mystery lying far beyond the 
 sphere of the schoolmaster ; and many would perhaps 
 even yet regard the comparison of it with the corre- 
 spending change in Greek as an improper innovation. 
 
 There is no doubt that Greek accidence has for a 
 long time been treated in a far more scientific manner 
 than Latin. Hence the step which still reinained for 
 the grammarian to take was in reality not very great. 
 His labour was directed chiefly to increasing and cor- 
 recting the analyses already long in use by others at 
 once deeper and more trustworthy — because resting 
 on a wider basis — which are brought forward by the 
 
INTRODUCTION. 7 
 
 modern science of lano^uaore with the aid of the com- 
 parative method tried and proved with such signal 
 success in Sanskrit. But at the same time other 
 changes, especially in the arrangement of the material 
 and the terminology, were thus rendered necessary. 
 And it is the main object of the following pages to 
 make many things of this kind clearer and more ac- 
 cessible to persons unfamiliar with the science of 
 language in a strict sense. 
 
 The science of Comparative Grammar which in the 
 region of the Indo-Germanic family of languages began 
 with the publication of Bopp's ' Conjugationssystem ' 
 in 1816, has now run its course for more than half a 
 century, and scarcely any person whatever, competent 
 to form an opinion, will treat it any longer with that 
 contempt which forms by no means a creditable page 
 in the history of modern philology. Indeed it would 
 now be a mere waste of words to dwell upon the im- 
 portance of such studies, and the value of the results 
 obtained. Bopp's ' Vergleichende Grammatik^ (2nd ed.), 
 Schleicher's ^ Compendium der vet^gleichenden Gram- 
 matik^ (Weimar 2nd ed. 1866), not to mention 
 other works of a more special character, or touching 
 less upon grammar in the narrower sense, put it in 
 the power of every one who chooses, to make him- 
 self acquainted with this new science even without a 
 previous knowledge of Sanskrit,— an important ad- 
 vantage which is sometimes overlooked. The results of 
 this science have also been reproduced in a popular 
 form suited to general readers by Schleicher in his 
 'Deutsche Sprache' (Stuttgart 1860), and Max Miiller 
 in his ' Lectures on the Science of Language,^ 1st and 
 2nd series (London, 7th ed. 1873). 
 
 On the other hand, a few words may here be 
 added on the particular position which the author of a 
 
8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 school-book has to take up in this respect. In her 
 first attempts to reach the mighty aims proposed, our .' 
 science could not always avoid falling into mistakes ; 
 and, as is usually the case in the youth of a science,' 
 regarded much as eas}'' of attainment which it was 
 found on repeated trials beyond our power to com- * 
 prehend or teach. Excessive enthusiasm was followed 
 by caution ; unhesitating confidence in our own powers; 
 of vision gave way to a more accurate inquiry into 
 our means of vision, and method generally. In this 
 way a small nucleus of truths was gained, which, 
 though perhaps it was still possible to look at them 
 from more than one point of view, were nevertheless 
 in themselves beyond all reasonable doubt. On the 
 other hand there were other deeper questions in regard 
 to which, as was natural in the ever-increasing spread 
 of the science, opinions were divided, and more than 
 one path struck out. From a work of a practical 
 nature the latter are of course to be rigorously ex- 
 cluded ; and we must strictly adhere to facts which 
 are accepted with scarcely any hesitation or variety 
 of opinion by those familiar with the science. Hence 
 it was my first principle entirely to exclude everything 
 which did not seem to me proved to demonstration; 
 and therefore though often requested by critics of my 
 grammar to insert this or that theory, which while 
 not altogether beyond a doubt appeared plausible to 
 them, I have not allowed myself to be misled, believing 
 as I do that in a school-book we must certainly keep 
 a step in the rear. In every vigorously advancing 
 science there are investigations which though com- 
 menced and not without important results are not as 
 yet brought to a conclusion and fully ripened. The 
 attempt to teach such theories in a school, where all 
 hypothesis is out of place, and simple * yes ' and ' no ' 
 
INTRODUCTION. 9 
 
 are absolutely necessary, is just the very thing which 
 often brings out in the plainest manner the weak or 
 missing links in the chain of our researches. So long 
 as such are to be found we must adhere to the old 
 explanation. For it is in a school-grammar as in a 
 state : reforms, however desirable, must be abandoned 
 when obviously beyond our reach, and we must be 
 content with the old established laws. Our principle 
 must be to keep the old explanation unless some 
 important and certain gain is to be obtained by a 
 change ; and to this I have adhered, at the risk of 
 being accounted over-cautious by many fellow-students 
 of language, and finding myself and my book cast 
 aside by 'advanced inquirers.' Nevertheless T do not 
 of course imagine that I have not fallen into mistakes 
 in this respect ; but I have at least acted upon the 
 most conscientious conviction in every case. 
 
 Further ; those results of science only could be 
 introduced which can easily be rendered intelHgible 
 from Greek alone, or at most from Greek with the aid 
 of Latin and German. The limits imposed by this prin- 
 ciple were not without the corresponding advantage 
 that the language is thus made to appear throughout 
 as a connected whole — an advantage from which even 
 science gains an additional charm. It cannot be 
 denied that the student comparing a number of indi- 
 vidual facts in different languages is occasionally in 
 danger of losing the connecting thread which combines 
 all the phenomena of a given language together and 
 unites them into a single product of the national genius. 
 For this reason the studies of linguistic inquirers con- 
 stantly require to be mutually supplemented by works 
 proceeding from different points of view. The special 
 grammar of a given language must endeavour mainly 
 to set in the clearest light the analogies which prevail 
 
10 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 throughout the language as a whole, together with 
 the more special rules and types found only in certain 
 limits, and floating, as it were, before the linguistic 
 genius of the nation. Thus, to take an instance from 
 Greek, it is absolutely necessary that one common 
 name should be found to denote the so-called tempora 
 secunda et prima, that is, shorter and longer forms 
 having the same function, though not always standing 
 on exactly the same level. The system of the Greek 
 language makes that indispensable. In such matters 
 the individual character of every language must be 
 carefully vindicated. The distinction mentioned be- 
 tween the tenses which I call ' strong ' and ^ weak ' is 
 as necessary in Greek as similar distinctions in German 
 grammar ; though scientific inquiry has to arrange 
 and explain many things of this kind in a different 
 manner. But inasmuch as every phenomenon must be 
 made clear from the Greek itself — though proved, 
 perhaps by comparison with other languages — the gram- 
 marian is compelled to make many omissions. Thus, 
 for instance, the relationship between the personal ter- 
 minations of the verb in the Sing., -/jlc -ai -tc and the 
 pronoun-stems /jl€ ae to can be pointed out even when 
 we confine ourselves to Greek forms ; but, on the other 
 hand, we should be led too far away from the form ac 
 of the second person were we to go back to the older 
 sj;em tva which may be obtained from the Sanskrit, 
 and from which, on the one hand, the '0a (ada) some- 
 times found in the secoild person singular, and, on the 
 other, the -Ol of the imperative can be explained. In 
 other cases also this inevitable method compels us to 
 assume auxiliary and intermediate forms, which, though 
 certainly in existence at some time or another, may 
 perhaps never have existed on Greek ground. This 
 also is a point often too little regarded in linguistic 
 
INTRODUCTION. 11 
 
 research. Science indeed cannot be too exact in this 
 respect ; but in a school-grammar some freedom may 
 be allowed in favour of the language which has to be 
 taught. An instance in point will be found in the fem. 
 of the part, perf act. The Skt. -ushi beside the masc. 
 -vat (vas) proves that -vca has arisen out of -for-La, r 
 being weakened to a and then dropped. But whether 
 this change took place when Greek had already become 
 separated from the kindred languages, or whether the 
 Grreeks brought with them the form -iisia from a 
 pre-Grreek period, must be left undecided. The inter- 
 mediate form foaca therefore, assumed in § 188, though 
 perhaps unknown to Greek lips, was nevertheless intro- 
 duced as a connecting form absolutely necessary for the 
 object in view. 
 
 The dialects are a very essential instrument in ex- 
 plaining Greek forms. Yet even these must be used 
 with the greatest moderation in a school-grammar 
 where the material must be kept within due limits ; 
 such forms only being available in explanation as 
 occur in books read at school. Happily Homer 
 presents so great a number of the most instructive 
 formations that this book alone outweighs all the other 
 dialects. Of it the most extensive use must be made 
 as being the most natural and convenient instrument 
 for explanation. The best method is to bring the 
 corresponding forms together before the eye on one 
 page, in which case the Attic forms in the text are 
 often at once explained by a glance at the Homeric 
 forms beneath. This arrangement presents a further 
 advantage to the teacher who proceeds intelligently 
 with his work. Attic Greek must, in my opinion, 
 form the central point in instruction, and must be first 
 impressed firmly on the memory as the most delicate 
 and complete development of the^ language. But when 
 
12 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the first and, so to speak, dullest drudgery is over, and 
 the forms are bemg established and fixed in the mind 
 by analysis, no harm will be done by occasionally 
 quoting a few Homeric forms in support of the analysis ; 
 and more especially at a later period, when the Homeric 
 dialect must of necessity be studied in order to read 
 the book, the most frequent opportunities will be given 
 for comparing it with the Attic, and renewing an 
 acquaintance with the latter. This indispensable com- 
 parison of the dialects replaces to a great extent that 
 more extensive comparison of different languages 
 which lies beyond the sphere of a school. It is, and 
 always was a scientific leaven in instruction in Greek, 
 and even the most declared opponents of all ' anatomy 
 of language ' have not the power to eliminate it. In fact 
 analysis of some kind is here absolutely necessary; 
 unless like the ancient grammarians, who derived 
 everything in the world except their language from 
 Homer, we would again teach that Oeolo has risen from 
 6eov, Movadcov from Movaajv, XcXaUat from XiXaij], 
 ideXrjai from iOiXy by Paragoge, Pleonasmus etc. 
 But no intelligent teacher will venture to act in such 
 complete contradiction to science and his own better 
 knowledge. Yet if this plan is not adopted, what 
 remains? Must every inquiry of a clever pupil after 
 the why and how be steadily set aside, and the 
 meaningless phrases instead of or ^for' used with 
 cautious indecision in order to conceal what is un- 
 intelligible and to repress every innocent desire, as 
 I think, for the tree of knowledge. Such a course 
 would I fear be as unworthy of a teacher as of a 
 man of science. 
 
 Hence the neod of a more scientific treatment of the 
 Greek language has been so widely felt that I am not 
 alone in my attempt to satisfy it. Ahrens' ^ Griechische^ 
 
INTRODUCTION. 13 
 
 Formenlehre des homerischen und attischen Dialekts ' 
 appeared in 1852 simultaneously with the first edition 
 of my grammar ; and there are many points in which 
 the two works agree. A later school-book, also pro- 
 ceeding from a correct insight into the study of the 
 language, is the ' Griechische Formenlehre fur Gymna- 
 sien,^ by H. D. Miiller and Jul. Lattmann (Gottingen 
 1863). This is not the place to enter upon a detailed 
 criticism of these works. My grammar is distinguished 
 from both, inasmuch as it includes not only a more 
 complete and systematic account of the whole ac- 
 cidence, so far as is needed in schools, but also a 
 sketch of the syntax. The latter, though brief, is I 
 believe sufficient for the object in view. Accidence 
 and syntax have already been almost entirely separated 
 too long, to the mutual detriment of both. It is now 
 high time to reunite them; and in explaining the 
 syntax to avail ourselves, at least to some extent, of 
 the results of our inquiries into the forms upon which 
 all syntactical constructions must rest ; and conversely, 
 to enliven and deepen the analysis of the forms, which 
 in some parts is very easily done, by a reference to 
 their usage. This object has at present, it must be 
 allowed, been attained to a very Umited degree ; never- 
 theless it is important that both parts of grammar 
 should at least be based upon the same view of lan- 
 guage, and carried out in the same spirit. In practice 
 I consider it essential — and my opinion is shared by 
 many teachers of experience — that one book, and one 
 only, should be used by the pupil in learning Greek, 
 from the time that he enters school till he leaves it, 
 with which he may become perfectly familiar ; and I 
 am astonished that, in spite of the present wide-spread 
 and not unreasonable desire for concentration in in- 
 struction, the student's attention in this very difficult 
 
14 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 branch of instniction should be distracted by the 
 successive perusal of a number of entirely different 
 manuals. 
 
 The unity of the grammar of course presupposes 
 that the teacher will make a selection for those com- 
 mencing the study of Greek. This I do not on the 
 whole regard as a very difficult matter. Experience 
 and practical instinct, together with the special char- 
 acter of the class taught, will supply the necessary 
 clue. Much as my book is used in schools, few com- 
 plaints on this subject have come to my ears ; on the 
 contrary many intelligent teachers have expressed the 
 opinion that the necessity for a personal study of the 
 grammar, and for teaching it to pupils according to 
 a plan of their own, has been a peculiar source of 
 delight to them. And the systematic arrangement 
 of the material, which I have attempted, unquestionably 
 renders the book more useful for reference, which is 
 and ought to be an important point in every grammar. 
 
 In conclusion I must say a word on the external 
 limitation of the contents in my book. All exceptional 
 forms or constructions of no importance in the pupil's 
 reading had of course to be excluded. Hence those 
 writers only are kept in view which are usually read 
 in schools — i.e. of the poets. Homer Sophocles and 
 Euripides ; and of the prose authors Herodotus Thu- 
 cydides Xenophon Plato and the Orators. Even in 
 these, phenomena which would hardly be discussed 
 in a school are entirely omitted. With regard to the 
 statistical citations commonly given, every one who 
 has studied the subject knows how misleading they 
 are. Although, in addition to the laborious quotations 
 given in our lexicons and several recent grammars, 
 we possess an excellent collection of the verb-forms in 
 the careful work by William Veitch, ' Greek Verbs 
 
INTRODUCTION. 15 
 
 Irregular and Defective ' (Oxford 1866), real complete- 
 ness is by no means attained as yet, especially in 
 reference to the compound verbs. In some cases also 
 we must allow that it is mere accident that a form 
 quite usual in the Attic period is not known to us 
 till a later era. With such forms we must not be 
 too strict. Thus according to Veitch the perf. med. 
 fjKovafxai is first found in Dionysius Halicarnasseus 
 (Rhetor, xi. 10). But it is hardly possible that no 
 perf. med. of so common a verb existed in the Attic 
 times, and since there is nothing in the formation 
 which points to a later origin (cp. rjKovo-drjv), rjKovafiac 
 is quoted with the verbs in § 288 ; whereas I held it 
 to be a sufficient reason for the exclusion of efcrajKa 
 and efCTUKa, the later representatives of efcrova, that 
 the first does not occur before Menander, the latter 
 before Polybius. On the other hand, in the formation 
 of comparatives (§ 197) KkenTriarepo^ stands among 
 others as a characteristic example of an irregular 
 formation, although the form is first found in Suidas 
 in the proverb NeoKXeiSov ytXeTrr/crTepo?. But since 
 that proverb owes its origin to the Neocleides satirized 
 in Aristoph. Plut. 665 the form is proved to be good 
 Attic. It was unnecessary to mention the superlative 
 which also occurs ; and I only quote this to show that 
 I have not been so inattentive and thoughtless as the 
 remarks of some of my critics would seem to imply. 
 On the other hand, I make no claim to absolute 
 consistency in this respect, and such in my opinion is 
 not required in a school-grammar. It appears to me 
 vastly more important that pupils should learn Greek 
 generally, than that stress should be laid in their 
 presence upon those delicate distinctions between Attic 
 and non- Attic, prosaic and poetic, to which such weight 
 is given in many quarters, owing to the commendable 
 
16 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 desire for correctness. Nevertheless I believe that the 
 more important notices of the kind will be found in 
 the grammar, especially in the later editions. It was 
 not my purpose to be exhaustive within the compass 
 allowed, still less to guide the student to the formation 
 of all the possible forms of every noun or verb ; but to 
 arrange neatly and accurately what is required for the 
 understanding of the Greek authors read at school. 
 The writing of Greek is obviously of secondary import- 
 ance in instruction, and I had no intention of aidinor 
 the pupil in this respect. And even if the teacher has 
 to add something here and there as the reading becomes 
 more extensive, the harm is not great. 
 
PART I. 
 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 OF THE GREEK ALPHABET. 
 
 The separation of this first chapter which treats of the 
 alphabet, from the second which treats of the sounds, 
 rests on the strict but sometimes neglected distinction 
 between letters as such, and the sounds of which they 
 are the symbols. This difference, in itself so simple, 
 must certainly be impressed upon the pupil. The 
 ancient grammarians knew nothing of it ; for instance, 
 they divided the vowels into long, short, and interme- 
 diate, and in this way obtained seven vowels in Greek, 
 € 7j (o a I V ; whereas, as a fact, there are no more 
 vowels in Greek than in Latin, viz. five, a o e i u — or if 
 a difference is made between Ion or and short, there are 
 ten, adocoerjllvv. The fact that in two cases 
 only there is a separate symbol for the long and short 
 sound is naturally of importance for the writing only, 
 not for the sound. Nevertheless down to the latesti 
 times, the greatest confusion has been caused even by 
 men of ability and learning, because they have allowed, 
 themselves to be misled by the old method of writing' 
 in which JE, as is well known, represents both the long)- 
 and short vowel, into the idea that in certain cases thej 
 1. c 
 
18 ACCIDENCE. § § 4^ 5. 
 
 long vowel could arise out of the short one. Thus 
 from the old method of writing HOMEPOS the con- 
 elusion has been drawn that the middle syllable of the 
 word was once short. With equal reason we might 
 argue that every Latin e must have been originally 
 short, because in Greek the symbol E continued to be 
 used for the short vowel only. The distinction between 
 long and short vowels is a fact of great antiquity in the 
 Indo-Germanic languages ; but most of them never 
 carried it so far as to use any different symbols at all 
 for the long and short vowels, and the Greeks only in 
 the case of € and o. 
 
 With regard to the accent also, it is important to 
 distinguish between the sign, the need of which was 
 first felt in Alexandrian times, and the tone signified, 
 in order to eradicate the notion, which a pupil is very 
 apt to entertain, that accentuation itself, and not merely 
 the marks of it, is a vexatious and quite separable 
 addition to the Greek language. 
 
 On § 4. 
 
 The pronunciation of ^ as ^ in Latin before unac- 
 centuated i is here only quoted as a practice now 
 current, without in the least intending to point it out 
 as established and recommended (cp. Corssen, Uehe?* 
 Aussprache Vocalismus und Betonung der Lat, Sprache 
 P 58 ff.). 
 
 On § 5. 
 
 Of the many errors current in regard to the pro- 
 nunciation of Greek none is more totally at variance 
 with the phonetic system of the language than the 
 rendering of f by the hard combination ts, which is 
 common in the greatest part of Germany. Even in 
 the middle of a word this combination was carefully 
 
; § 5. OF THE GREEK ALPHABET. 19 
 
 avoided by the Greeks, as e.g. in avv-acty for ai/ur-cro), 
 in Kprj-ai for Kprjr-aL, and at the beginning of a 
 word it would without doubt be more intolerable stilL 
 According to all that we learn from the grammarian^, 
 the sound f is rather to be considered one of the very 
 softest ; it contained that weak sibilant which is found 
 in German at the beginning of words, before vowels, 
 e.g. sein soil; and which can be just as easily distin- 
 guished from the similarly written sound in ist, as the 
 French soft s in maison from the hard s in son. Being 
 used to denote the weak sibilant exclusively in French 
 and several Sclavonic languages, this letter z is now 
 frequently adopted in several works on the science of 
 language as the common symbol of the weak sibilant. 
 In Greek this weak sibilant has in most cases arisen 
 out of the palatal spirant Jod. If, for instance, we 
 compare the Greek Zeu-9 with the Sanskrit name of 
 the sky-god Djdio-s, dj meets us just as plainly as when 
 from hid, through an intermediate dja^ we get the 
 iEolic ^dj i.e. dza, f therefore, which is shown by 
 prosody to be a double consonant, must certainly be 
 pronounced as dz, i.e. d with soft s* When in the 
 
 * One of the best modem essays, * On the Pronunciation of 
 Ancient Greek' (by Friedr. Blass, 1869), arrives in other respects at 
 results abnost identical with those given above, but contains fresh 
 doubts about f. The author merely allows that my pronunciation of 
 this letter in any case comes nearer to its genuine sound than the 
 unfortunate ts. But of the three reasons given for these doubts, 
 two, I think, can be easily set aside, and the third is not of great 
 weight. (1) f ought not to be pronounced, it is said, as dz, because 
 5y was a combination intolerable to the Greeks. But z, i.e. soft s, 
 is not identical with o; i.e. hard s. The difficulty of ds lay in the 
 incongruity of the soft d and hard a ; between 5 and the soft sibi- 
 lant is no antipathy. (2) ^AOrjva^e and other words are quoted to 
 show that in f the sibilant had the first place, the explosive sound 
 the second. But the derivation of ^Adrjva^e from ^AOrjvas-de is an 
 untenable supposition, as I have sho^\^l, Grundz. 576 — after Lobeck. 
 Lastly (3) as to the occasional transliteration of ^in Latin times by d^ 
 
20 ACCIDENCE. § 7. 
 
 ^olic dialect we find aB in the place of f, the change 
 is due to metathesis of the two elements. In this way 
 may be explained the modern Greek pronunciation 
 which has allowed the d to drop out, and preserved the 
 weak s only. For the origin of ^, see further Grund- 
 ziige der Griech, Etymologie 3 Aufl. p. 570 ff. 
 
 On § 7. 
 
 The lisping pronunciation of like the English thy 
 usual in modern Greek, has the advantage of marking 
 the distinction between 6 and r more sharply, but is at 
 variance with the nature of the old Greek ^, which is 
 proved {Grundzvge^ 383 fF.) to be a true aspirate — i.e. a 
 soimd compounded of t and 7i, chiefly by the fact that 
 it frequently arises out of t {av6^ ov = avrl ov, reOeiKd 
 for OeOeiKa) ; by the old method of writing in Latin 
 {tesaurus = Orjaavposi) ; and by the evidence of Dio- 
 nysius of Halicarnassus, De compos, verbij c. xiv., who 
 speaks of a Trpo^OrJKT) rov Trvev/jLaro^, In German we 
 may perhaps express % and <^ by ch and /, although 
 they were certainly pronounced as kh and ph, to escape 
 imposing upon ourselves too much that is foreign ; but 
 in the case of 6 it is not advisable to accustom ourselves 
 to a pronunciation which is foreign and also demon- 
 strably of recent origin. For H. W. Roscher's view of 
 the Greek aspirates, which is slightly different from 
 mine, cp. Grundziige, p. 388.* 
 
 we must take into consideration that a was never an adequate symbol 
 for the weak sibilant, and that 5 may have had even then in certain 
 cases the sound of a lisping sibilant as in modern Greek. Hence the ; 
 attempt was made to give it a sound incommensurable with Greek 
 letters — the f which formed position and contained a scarcely audible 
 d — by placing side by side the hard and soft sibilant. If ^76*' wa?- | 
 pronounced as <rdvy6v, wherein lay the peculiarity of the ^olic ? | 
 
 * H. W. Roscher's views on the pronunciation of the Greek p 
 aspirates will also be found in cap. ix. of his Essay, ' De Asjpiratione | 
 vvlgari a;pnd Grcecos,* Studien, I. 2. 63 ff. — Ed, 
 
§ 8. OF THE GREEK ALPHABET. ^1 
 
 On § 8. 
 
 I have treated the pronunciation of vowels and 
 diphthongs at length in Zeitschrift fur d. 6, Gymnas, 
 1852, p. 1. This difficult question is often placed in 
 an entirely false light by restricting it to the alterna- 
 tives of modern Greek pronunciation on the one hand, 
 and the Erasmian pronunciation with its numerous 
 errors and corruptions on the other. It is better to put 
 the question thus — How early do we find traces of the 
 modern Greek method of pronunciation ? At the same 
 time, we must be careful not to take all the sounds 
 together, but to examine each separately. The modern 
 Greeks have, it may almost be said, entirely reversed 
 the quantity of the vowels and to a certain extent of the 
 diphthongs also. To follow them in pronouncing €')(eL 
 like echi would render useless every attempt to make 
 the ancient verses tolerable to the ear ; and any one 
 who follows them in pronouncing ev as ev can form no 
 intelligible conception of a verse like Od. i^. 19 <i>epov 
 S' evr}vopa 'xoXkov, nor can he understand why forms 
 like ireiralhevvTaL were possible while others like t€- 
 TvirvraL were avoided. With regard to the diphthongs 
 we have a fixed terminus a quo in opposition to the 
 terminus ad quern of modern Greek. As a rule, the 
 history of these sounds begins with the distinct pronun- 
 ciation of both the elements ; in Greek, as in many other 
 languages, it ends with compressing numerous double 
 sounds into single ones. That the real diphthongal 
 pronunciation of at, ol, €l, was the oldest is the more 
 certain, because in Greek itself we find each of these 
 double sounds proceeding from the amalgamation of the 
 two elements — e.g. in 7rafc9 compared with Homeric 
 7rat9, 069 from Homeric 6t9, ripetva from repevia. 
 Equally certain is it that even at a very early 
 
22 ACCIDENCE. § 8. 
 
 period the diphthongal pronunciation began to be lost. 
 The only question is, how early did this take place ? 
 Was it so early that the diphthongal pronunciation 
 was quite unknown in the works of the best period? 
 or, on the other hand, so late that in using the 
 monophthongal pronunciation we introduce an ele- 
 ment of corruption into a period in which it had no 
 place? Since there are good reasons for selecting 
 07ie particular period, (which can hardly be any other 
 than the Attic,) and since it would be very ridiculous in 
 practice to have a separate Homeric and Attic pronun- 
 ciation, the Attic age must necessarily be our standard. 
 Within this period, which in round numbers reaches 
 from 500 to 300 B.C., the year 400 B.C. may fairly be 
 chosen as a fixed point, not merely because it is halfway 
 between the two limits, but because the new alphabet, 
 made public in 403 B.C., offers at least some footing in 
 regard to the sound of the letters. In many languages, 
 it is true, letters are retained from an old alphabet 
 which in no way correspond to the existing sounds. 
 But if an innovation in orthography becomes current, 
 it is a priori probable that it is on the whole in close 
 connection with the existing language. It is very 
 improbable that the EI of the older ^habet began to 
 be divided into EI and HI by public edict at a time 
 when the distinction between the pronunciation of the 
 two sounds was already obliterated, or that the new H 
 would have been introduced if the I which had already 
 been long in existence could have supplied its place. 
 On the contrary, we may naturally suppose that the 
 sound represented by H was at that time such that it 
 required a separate symbol ; and that on the whole the 
 new alphabet has handed down to us a picture of the 
 language as it was spoken in Attica at the time when 
 that alphabet was made public. Many difficulties, it is 
 
§ 8. OF THE GREEK ALPHABET. 23 
 
 "true, still remain. In many cases we cannot exactly 
 prove liow early the older pronunciation began to be 
 laid aside. It is certain that at and eu were the first 
 to change ; and that as early as the Alexandrian period , 
 they were pronounced in some districts as a and L In 
 the second century a.d. the grammarian Herodian in his 
 treatise Trepl 6pOoypa(j)La<; gave numerous rules to regu- 
 late the use of at and e, ec and u The distinction of rj 
 and €L, u and oi also required to be sharply marked here 
 and there, as is proved by Aug. Lentz, in the preface to 
 his edition of Herodian (I. p. ci.). From that time 
 onwards the need for orthographical precepts became 
 more widely felt, and in Byzantine times, owing to the 
 ever-increasing severance of orthography and pronun- 
 ciation, they reached a considerable extent. Evidence 
 of this is supplied by the Kavove^ of Theognostus, and the 
 treatise of Choeroboscus irepl 6pdoypa(f>La<;, in the second 
 volume of Cramer's ^Anecdota Oxoniensia.' Hence, 
 without being too bold, we may connect the beginning 
 of the corruption with the violent changes which the 
 Greek world underwent after Alexander. The mutual 
 confusion of the different Greek races, the supremacy 
 of the semi-barbarous Macedonians, the manifold contact 
 with non-Greek and especially oriental nations, could 
 not be without an influence on the sound of the lan- 
 guage ; especially as Greek literature from that time 
 onwards is cultivated far less by Greeks of Hellas 
 Proper than by those who had their homes in the 
 colonies, and especially in the newly-founded imperial 
 cities. That the corruption and confusion existed to any 
 noticeable degree before the time of Alexander is not 
 proved ; indeed, in many important points, the opposite 
 can be maintained with certainty. As it is an advan- 
 tage from a practical point of view to draw distinctions 
 wherever sufficient data for them are to be found, the 
 
24 * ACCIDENCE. § 8. 
 
 rule laid down in § 8 with regard to the pronunciation 
 of diphthongs — that both elements should receive their 
 proper value, as far as possible — may in general be 
 recommended with certainty.* 
 
 au therefore is not to be confounded with rj. That 
 the a of at continued to be sounded by the Attics is 
 proved mainly by erases such as Ka'yco from koX iyco, as 
 I have shown in detail in my Studien zur Gnech, und 
 Lat. Grammatik, I. 2, 273. G. Hermsmn, De emendanda 
 ratione grammaticoe Grcecce, p. 51, recommends a pro- 
 nunciation midway between a and e^ sharper than tj. 
 His advice has not been followed in Germany, but 9; and 
 at, e.g. in fiv^/jxov and Saifjuoyv, are still pronounced the 
 same. In any case, those who render ac by a must also 
 render ec by i, for there is no probability whatever that 
 corruption set in earlier in the one case than in the other. 
 It is useless to appeal to the Latin transcription in 
 support of this pronunciation, because it is certain that 
 ae, the Latin representative of the Greek ac, which 
 was originally written and without any doubt pro- 
 nounced as a diphthong — was carefully distinguished 
 from e by educated Romans, even down to Varro's 
 time (Corssen, Aussprache des Lat. I^ 674 fF.). 
 
 The monophthongal pronunciation of au has at 
 least the authority of the later Greeks from Alexan- 
 drian times and of many scholars ; but the ordinary 
 pronunciation of eu as a broad German ei is quite 
 absurd and utterly baseless. In German, ei is in 
 sound indistinguishable from at, weiser for instance 
 rhymes with Kaiser (cp. Rumpel t, Deutsche Grammatik, 
 
 * If any one considers this impossible, I advise him to request 
 a Bohemian schoolmaster to pronounce the diphthongs. There, and 
 as I believe in Austria generally — where owing to the intersection of 
 different nations and stocks the vocal organs are more pliable, this 
 rule is fully carried out; whereas in other provinces of German 
 civilization the greatest mistakes have crept in. 
 
§8. OF THE GREEK ALPHABET. 25 
 
 I., p. 36), and therefore it evidently contains the 
 elements a and i. But in regard to the Greek et 
 there is not the slightest probability, either from the 
 origin of the diphthong, which arises out of e or i\ 
 or from the transliteration of the Latins who some- 
 times used e, sometimes i ; or from the sharpening 
 into i which began to spread in the third century 
 B.C., that the a sound was ever heard, or that ei 
 and au had the same sound, or that e^ was pronounced 
 as at while at became a. We may maintain with 
 the greatest certainty that ainai or aind never re- 
 presented the sound of the Greek elvai. G. Hermann 
 saw this : De emend, rat,, p. 53, he says : ' Diphthongiim 
 €L male pronundari plena voce ut Germanicum ei aut 
 Brittanorum i longum, vel Latina lingua docere potest^ 
 ijuce istam diphthongum nunc in e nunc in i mutat, , . . 
 J^iC quibus merito colligi videtur, diphthongi et sonum 
 fuisse medium, inter e et i, eodem modo ut in quibus- 
 dam GermanicB regionibus ei pronunciatur,^ * 
 
 If there is little reason to follow the modern Greeks 
 in the pronunciation of at and ec, there is obviously 
 even less reason still to follow them in pronouncing 
 oc as i. Nothing is more certain than that ol became 
 sharpened into i far later than et or even r), Liscovius 
 in his tract on Greek pronunciation (Leipsic 1825), 
 which contains much that is still useful, refers (p. 140) 
 to the various orthographical rules which have come 
 down to us from the grammatical literature of the 
 ancients. He mentions the Ei^otemata of Basilius 
 Magnus, p. 594 (4th cent. A.D.), where among other 
 rules the following occurs — iraaa Xe^i^ airo rrj^ /cv 
 
 * In Swabia, on the Lower Rhine, e.g. in the word Rheiriy and in 
 the north-west of Moravia, and probably in many other districts of 
 Germany also, a real diphthong el occurs, clearly distinguished from 
 al, in such a manner that e and i are distinctly perceived. It is no 
 Very difficult experiment to accustom the young pupil to this sound. 
 
26 ' ACCIDENCE. §8. 
 
 avWal3rj<; ap-)(^o/JL€V7j Sta rov v ^}n\ov ypdcfyeraL TrXrjv tov 
 KolXop, The rule would be false if kv were pronounced 
 like KL, because in that case exceptions like Ki6apL<;, Kk, 
 Ki(r<r6<;, Kc')(^dv(o, kuov and many others ought to have 
 been quoted. Similarly in the Epimerismata . which 
 have come down to us under the name of Herodian, in 
 the Kavove^ of Theognostus (9th cent.), and in the Ety- 
 mologists, e.g. Etymologicurn Magnum^ p. 289, 11 : 
 TCL eU v^ airavra Sia tov v yjnXov ^pd(^eTai TrXrjv rov 
 TTpoL^. This case is especially instructive on account 
 of the great number of words in l^, R. J. A. Schmidt 
 has collected a great number of such facts in his 
 Beiti'dge zur Geschichte der Grammatik, p. 73 ff., and 
 deduces from them an explanation — undoubtedly cor- 
 rect — of the terms e 'y^iXov and v yfnXoVy i.e. that ^InXov 
 here means ' bare ' in opposition to the diphthongal 
 method of writing at and ol. For this reason also, 
 these terms first arose at a time when e (hitherto 
 named el) and v (hitherto v) were no longer dis- 
 tinct in pronunciation from ai and ol, Schmidt 
 rightly refers the alphabetical arrangement in Suidas 
 to the same principle. Isolated instances of a similar 
 arrangement are found also in the Etym. Magn, holhv^ 
 for instance stands after hpv(f>aKTo^^ and then, after a 
 number of words beginning with hoi^ follows Suo. Al- 
 thouojh rules and usaores of this kind were transferred 
 from older collections into these later ones, it is not 
 likely that they were borrowed without any altera- 
 tion, unless at the time when the Etym. Magn, was 
 compiled, i.e. as is commonly supposed in the eleventh 
 cent, 6l was regarded as phonetically identical with 
 Vj but as distinct from l, €l, rj, which at that time 
 were one and the same sound. 
 
 Such being the state of the case, two results follow. 
 (1) Those who pronounce u as t follow a system of 
 
§8. OF THE GREEK ALPHABET. 27 
 
 pronunciation which certainly did not exist in the fourth, , 
 and probably not in the eleventh cent. A.D., and which 
 without any doubt never came under discussion in 
 Herodian's time. (2) It is a great mistake to conclude 
 from the Latin transliteration of ol by oe^ that ol had 
 the sound of a German o, as is often maintained. For 
 since ol was pronounced for so long a time like u, this 
 letter also, according to the theory, must have been 
 pronounced as 6 ; which — in spite of certain mutual 
 changes between the sounds — no one will maintain, 
 and which is the more inconceivable because Quintilian, 
 XII., 10, 27, expressly says that the v sound was 
 wanting in Latin, and therefore was not like oe. The 
 Latin oe, the identity of which with the German 6 is 
 by no means certain, like ae only represents the Greek 
 OL because it is the successor of the older diphthong 
 with i. When Oinomavos was written (Mommsen, Corp. 
 Inscr, No. 60), both sounds of the diphthong were cer- 
 tainly pronounced. And if oe had been like German 
 0, it could hardly have given rise to u (oetier = uti, 
 poena = punio). It was a very unhappy thought to 
 introduce into these investigations this sound which, 
 so far as we can see, was entirely unknown at all 
 times to Greek lips. 
 
 The history of the Greek ol is therefore as follows : — 
 At the time of the general corruption of the diphthongs 
 it passed first into u, and then by a much later change 
 into i. All these deteriorations of diphthongs meet us 
 first in the Boeotian dialect, which even in classical 
 times replaced ul with ?;, €l with l, and ol with v: 
 o^eiXerrj, l/jll, tO? (Ahrens, ^oL 191). Besides, 
 even in modern Greek acute observers find delicate 
 distinctions between the several t-sounds, and quite 
 unmistakeable remains of older sounds in some words 
 (Thiersch, Griech, Gram,, 4, Aufl., § 7, Anm. ; E. 
 
28 ACCIDENCE. f S. 
 
 Curtius, Gott. Aiiz., Nadir, 1857, No. 22), a further 
 objection to the Itaeistic method of pronunciation which 
 reduces all to one level. 
 
 As distinguished from ot, which in sound was not 
 far removed from the English oi, ev must be pro- 
 nounced so that the sharper e may be heard before 
 the V. This is the regular pronunciation of the 
 German eu in Mecklenburgh, whereas the common 
 mode of pronouncing this diphthong identifies it with 
 oi or even ei (ai). The Bacchic exclamation evoc may 
 serve as a warning against the confusion of ec and 
 OL, alei and aevei against the confusion of ai and €t, 
 ev and et. 
 
 Two main proofs may be cited of the strict 
 monophthongal pronunciation of ov. (1) In the 
 Boeotian dialect ov represents even the short U-sound, 
 e.g. Kovve^, (2) The Latins never made the attempt 
 to write this obviously merely graphical diphthong 
 with two letters, although it would have been very 
 easy for them, having in earlier times the diphthong 
 ouj to do so. It is true that ov in certain cases cor- 
 responds etymologically to a diphthong, e.g. /Sou-9 = 
 Sanskrit gdu-s, yet the sound must have been simple 
 at a very early period ; and only when the letter T 
 became fixed for w, were the Greeks, like the French 
 in modern times, compelled to denote the simple vowel 
 by combining the symbols of the sounds which to some 
 extent denote the limits between which the vowel in 
 question lay. ' Inopia fecerunV says even Nigidius 
 Figulus in Aul. Gellius, N. Att. XIX., 14.* 
 
 The L subscriptum is called by Herodian aveK(^(ovr)T0V' 
 That it had ceased to be sounded as early as Strabo's 
 
 ♦ For some peculiarities of the old Attic inscriptions of great 
 interest for the history of this sound, cp. A. Dietrich, Zeitschrift filr 
 mrgleichende Syrachfvrschung , xiv. 48 ff. 
 
§ 8. OF THE GREEK ALPHABET. 29 
 
 time (contemp. with Augustus), is clear from XIV., 
 p. 648. Inscriptions belonging to a period even earlier 
 present considerable variation in writing or omitting it, 
 though it may have been sounded in the best period. 
 But it would be difficult to express it with our northern 
 organs of speech. 
 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 OF THE SOUNDS. 
 On § 25. 
 
 The vowels are divided into two classes which it is 
 of importance to distinguish. Those in the first class 
 I call liard^ those in the second soft vowels. The 
 choice of these technical terms may be called in ques- 
 tion ; indeed, there are perhaps no grammatical terms 
 against which some objection cannot be made from one 
 side or another. Nevertheless distinctive terms are 
 needed both in practice and in science clearly to mark 
 out essential facts ; and it seems to me that Compara- 
 tive Q-rammar, especially in her latest representatives, 
 has too carefully avoided setting new expressions in 
 circulation, from the fear that they might in some 
 respects be open to objection. The value of terms is 
 obviously underrated in the science of language. In 
 this respect J. Grrimm was far more fertile. How 
 strikingly does the single term Lautverschiebung mark 
 out a whole series of facts in the history of language ! 
 For a school-grammar accurately chosen terms are 
 indispensable. 
 
 The vowels which I call ^hard' have all arisen out 
 of an original a, which is still to be found in Sanskrit. 
 Hence in Greek also very frequent interchanges take 
 place among these vowels, as a glance at the dialects 
 will show. But besides these, such cases also as the 
 following are especially to be noticed : <f>prjv (stem (f)p€v) 
 
§ ?.o. OF THE SOUNDS. 31 
 
 €V(j)p60V (stem €v<f)pov) ev^paivo) (i.e. evcjypavtco) , Xeatv 
 (Keovr) Xeaiva (i.e. \eav\T\La)j ttoc/jliJv (stem iroLfxev) 
 TToi/juaLVco (i.e. Trotfiavcco) ; dfjua also stands by o/u/ou, 
 while the E-sound is in this case shown in the Latin 
 sern-elj old Lat. semol (simul). Cp. Grundzilge, 87, 300. 
 Hence we may explain ocKa-Be from stem oIko, verbs 
 in -o&) from stems in a, e.g. Kopv^o-co and vice ve7'sd^ 
 patronymics in -mS?;-? from stems in co, e.g. TaX- 
 Ov^idBrj-^;, derivative adjectives in -(a/c6-9, e.g. 
 IIeXo'TTOvvrjaia-ic6'<;, also from stems in -to. The 
 hardest of the vowels, which was obscured in other 
 forms, occasionally breaks out in its earliest shape. The 
 € of the vocative of the 0-declension, the inflexion 
 of the neuters in -09, gen. eo9, and much besides is 
 due to this common nature of the hard vowels. Thus 
 even without the aid of Sanskrit the original identity 
 of these vowels can be made clear. As they all go 
 back to a, we might call them A-sounds ; but such a 
 term would be, at least for schools, likely to mislead, 
 and we use the expression A-sound in a narrower sense 
 to denote short and long a in their common difference 
 from E and 0. Besides, in this case there would be 
 no common homogeneous name to denote the second 
 class L and i;.* ' Hard ' sounds are those which cannot 
 easily adapt themselves to others; 'soft' those which 
 are pliant and flexible. Thus the hardness of the first 
 class of sounds is shown in the fact that though har- 
 monizing with following soft vowels, especially in the 
 diphthongs (^ 26), they cannot be combined with each 
 other, but undergo changes of various kinds (§ 36 fF.), 
 while the soft vowels of the second class remain 
 
 * Benary (Rom. Lantlehre p. 4) names the vowels of the first 
 class Starr {fixed) and those of the second fliissig (vwhile). But 
 since we connect the idea of immutability with the word starr, and 
 the vowels a, e, certainly undergo numerous changes, the expres- 
 sions do not seem to me very happily chosen. 
 
32 ACCIDENCE. § 30 ff. 
 
 unchanged both before and after hard vowels (§ 35). 
 There is another indication of their soft nature which 
 lies beyond the compass of my grammar ; l and v pass 
 into the semi-vowels Jod and Van. The effect also of 
 t, and more rarely of v, on a preceding r, which by 
 direct contact with these vowels becomes softened to a 
 in certain cases (e.g. Ionic (^rj-ai for Doric (f^a-rl (§ 60), 
 (f>d~al, i.e. ^a-vcTL, for <^av-TL, av for older tu), is owing 
 to the soft nature of these vowels, from which a part, 
 so to speak, is separated off and expended in modify- 
 ing the preceding dental. Taking a wider view, it 
 is to this head that the phenomena belong to which 
 Schleicher gives the nama Zetacisrnus, the most essential 
 of w^hich are mentioned in §§ 55-58; and those which 
 I call Dentalismus {Grundziige, p. 442). For these 
 reasons the expressions ^hard' and ^soft' seem to me 
 quite appropriate. 
 
 It was impossible in the grammar to give any 
 further explanation of the dialectical phenomena 
 mentioned in § 24 D. Many of them no doubt are 
 not without a deeper reason. Thus the lengthening 
 of e to ei, and o to ov is due to the rejection and 
 transposition of consonants, e.g. in the Homeric 
 oijvo/jia, which stands for o-yvo-fia, cp. old Latin ffno- 
 men (rt. gnS = Greek yv(o)» The short middle syllable 
 may be compared with Latin nd-ta. Nevertheless 
 philologists have as yet been by no means successful 
 in discovering a definite cause for the lengthening in 
 all cases ; and therefore in a school-grammar it is 
 indispensably necessary merely to point out the facts 
 as such. 
 
 On § 30/. 
 
 In the division of the consonants I have attempted, 
 so far as possible, to reconcile the current expressions 
 
§ 30. OF THE souNrs. 33 
 
 ^vith those brought into use by the new inquiries 
 set on foot from a physiological point of view (op. 
 especially Briicke, Grundzilge der Physiologie und 
 Systematik der Sprachlaute, Vienna 1856, and Lepsius, 
 Das allgemeine linguistische Alphabet), What is here 
 called the organ, according to the usual terminology, 
 has received from physiologists the more accurate 
 desiornation ' reorion of articulation.' Hence it follows 
 from the terminology that we cannot in Greek speak 
 of linofuals, because the tono;ue takes as essential a 
 part in the pronunciation of a /c as in that of a r. 
 But the expression ^dental' as applied to r, S, 0^ is 
 thoroughly justified, the tongue being pressed against 
 the upper row of teeth in pronouncing them. At one 
 time \ and p were placed among the dental consonants. 
 But the objection has been made, and not without 
 reason, that \ has no necessary place of articulation, 
 but is really a pure lingual ; p on the other hand may 
 certainly be pronounced by the vibration of the tip of 
 the tongue against the upper row of teeth ; but it is 
 not necessary so to pronounce it. In a great part of 
 Germany, for instance, this sound is produced in 
 the back part of the mouth by vibration of the uvula. 
 Since we cannot decide which pronunciation was used 
 in the case of the Greek p* I have exempted X and 
 p from the organic division of consonants. 
 
 In the note to § 31 1 reference is made to the 
 designation of mutes as ^momentary' sounds, and 
 semi-vowels as ' continuous ' sounds, which is usual 
 among physiologists. In order not to multiply e.v- 
 pressions, other terms also, in some respects still 
 
 * On the pronunciation of Greek p cp. Plato, Cratylus, 428 E. — Ed. 
 
 t § 31. Ohs. ' The mute consonants are also called momentary, 
 because they are produced in a moment : the sonant are called con- 
 tinuous sounds, because we can continue to pronounce them for some 
 time.* This note is omitted in the Eng. Trans. — Ed. 
 
 D 
 
34 ACCIDENCE. § 34 D. 
 
 more striking, have been passed over. Among these 
 is the term ^explosive sound,' equivalent to mute, 
 — an expression denoting in the clearest' manner the 
 essential characteristic of these sounds, which are 
 produced by the sudden opening of a closure formed 
 in some particular region of the mouth. 
 
 On § 34 D. 
 
 The aversion of the Greek language towaixls spirants 
 — as I, with other grammarians, term the sounds j s v 
 — is a very important fact, by reference to which 
 numerous changes in Greek, and more especially dis- 
 tinctions between Greek and Latin, can be explained* 
 Of these three homogeneous sounds cr is frequently 
 dropped before vowels (cp. § 60 ^, § 61 h). At the 
 beginning of a word it passes for the most part into 
 spiritus asper^ but in the middle, apparently through 
 the medium of a spiritus asper^ it vanishes altogether. 
 The labial spirant f, in regard to which the absurd 
 notion that it could be prefixed to or inserted in a 
 word at will must once for all be abandoned, was pre- 
 served, as is proved by inscriptions, to a considerable 
 extent in ^olic and Doric from a very early period, 
 especially at the beginning of words ; of its existence in 
 the Homeric poems, in the words quoted in the grammar 
 there can be no doubt (cp. § 63 D), — The third spirant 
 Jod, produced by breathing over the palate, has not 
 come down to us in any Greek dialect, but the existence 
 of the sound at one time as inferred from the comparison 
 of kindred languages, is one of the most important 
 facts in the history of the language, by which a number 
 of apparently quite different processes receive a very 
 simple explanation (cp. GrundziXge^ 511 ff.). 
 
 With regard to the digamma in Homer (cp. on 
 this subject the extremely careful work of Hoffmann, 
 
§ 34 D. ^ OF THE SOUNDS. 35 
 
 Qucestiones Homeriece, Clausthal 1842, 1848), mj prin- 
 ciple was to give those words only as beginning with 
 the digamma, in which the existence of the sound is 
 proved, not merely by the criteria of the Homeric verse, 
 which by themselves are not in all cases sufficient, 
 but also by the evidence of the other dialects and 
 kindred languages. For this reason, the corresponding 
 words in Latin are given wherever the coincidence is 
 striking. Hence many words wall not be found here, 
 which are given with the digamma in other works, 
 e.g. Bekker's 2nd edition of Homer (Bonn 1858. 2 
 vols.). On the varying nature of the spirant, which was 
 sometimes pronounced according to the earlier and 
 sometimes omitted according to the later custom, I 
 may refer to the treatise ' Rationem quam I. Bekker in 
 restituendo digammo secutus est examinavit A. Leskien,' 
 (Leips. 1866) * In school instruction the digamma can 
 only be noticed so far as it explains the anomalies of the 
 Homeric verse which are mentioned in the grammar 
 and much apparent irregularity in the inflexion and 
 formation of words. The doctrine of the augment more 
 especially comes into consideration here, the acquire- 
 ment of which in §§ 236, 237, or the repetition of it in 
 the course of practical instruction, perhaps first gives ai;i 
 opportunity of referring to § 34 D, and so preparing 
 the way for a knowledge of the Homeric dialect. A 
 fresh opportunity is given in § 275, 2 ; and also in 
 many verbs belonging to the two leading conjugations, 
 especially in those of the 8th or mixed class (§ 327), 
 and in the composition of words (§§ 354, 360. Ohs,), 
 But it is also very important for the teacher always to 
 bear in mind that besides F the other two spirants 
 could be dropped in obedience to the laws of sound 
 
 * Cp. also Prof. Hadley's essay on * Bekker' s digammated text of 
 Homer,' in Essays Philological, etc. Macmillan 1873. — Ed. 
 
36 ACCIDENCE. § 34 D. 
 
 (e.g. elx'O-v = i-\_a~\€x-o-v). The cause of these phe- 
 nomena is therefore by no means to be sought m the 
 digamma only. Indeed, in the Homeric dialect a short 
 syllable is so frequently made long before m (e.g. ^€09 
 w), that we should be justified in assuming the existence 
 of a digamma, did not the kindred languages point 
 rather to an old Jod (Grundziige, 551), and make it 
 probable that in this very common word the effects of 
 that spirant, and not of the digamma, have been pre- 
 served. 
 
 Of f in the ^olic and Doric dialect the fullest 
 account is given in the admirable works of Ahrens, De 
 dialecto ^olica (Gottingen 1839), De dialecto Dorica 
 (1843). An excellent supplement of the evidence of 
 inscriptions is given in Savelsberg, De digammo, 
 Aquisgrani, 1854. On e as evidence for f {ieiKoat) cp. 
 Grundzilge, 527. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 OF THE COMBINATIONS AND CHANGES OF SOUNDS. 
 On § 40. 
 
 The most careful explanation of the vowel-scales is 
 given in Schleicher's Compendiurrij 55 fF. — For school 
 instruction it seemed sufficient to distinguish between 
 the two most essential kinds of lengthening, which are : 
 (1) Organic, the strengthening of a vowel in subser- 
 vience to aims present to the genius of language and 
 consequent lengthening of a syllable causing it to be 
 pronounced with greater force, (2) Compensatory, 
 which arises in consequence of the loss of a sound, and 
 is due to the desire to compensate the loss of consonant- 
 sound by increasing the amount of vowel- sound. 
 
 Organic lengthening can be made completely clear 
 only by the aid of the kindred languages. It is due to 
 the fact that the vowels were originally only three in 
 number : a i u. Of these, a was extended by reduplica- 
 tion and remained a simple sound, a + a=:a, a + a = a; 
 i and u became diphthongs, a short, and then a long, 
 being prefixed — ^, di, di — u, du, du. These two stages 
 of phonetic extension, known to Sanskrit grammarians 
 by the names Guna Q power ') and Vrddhi (' increase '),* 
 are in Greek confounded with other changes of vowels, 
 which appear to be of later origin. The hard vowels — 
 
 * Curtius uses the term Zulaut ; cp. Die ^raclivergleichung ^ eta, 
 p. 54 ; Gmndz. p. 51. — Ed. 
 
38 ACCIDENCE. § 40. 
 
 a 6 o — change into 77 (Dor. a) and ay not merely in forms 
 in which the kindred languages display a similar length- 
 ening, e.g. in perf. act., Kpay Ke-Kpcuy-a, \a0 Xi-XrjO-a 
 (Dor. Xi-XdO-a), 6S oS-coS-a, but the change also takes 
 place along with the addition of elements used for the 
 formation of stems, e.g. in the future, the perfect-stem, 
 the weak passive-stem, and in numerous noun-forms, 
 e.g. rerifirj-Ka, i'TroLrj-Orj-v, 770/77-0-^-9, ScfcaLco-fia, aocfxl)- 
 T€pO'<;, where the kindred languages have no corre- 
 sponding change. 
 
 This latter mode of strengthening sounds is almost 
 more important in a school-grammar than the other, 
 because it occurs more frequently. It is Sue of the 
 cases in which the special grammar of a language must 
 take its own course. The disturbance which has taken 
 place in the original relation is displayed in Greek most 
 conspicuously in the fact that not only are the hard 
 vowels lengthened far more frequently than in earlier 
 periods of the Indo-Grermanic language ; but also the soft 
 vowels c and v, instead of becoming diphthongs according 
 to the old usage, are simply lengthened as single vowels, 
 and this occurs to some extent in the same places, in the 
 same forms, which in the kindred languages, especially 
 in Sanskrit, have the diphthong. The Greek 1st per. 
 pi. heU'VV'fjiev corresponds in formation to the Sanskrit 
 dp^nu-mas; the first sing. heiK-vv-jiL to Sanskrit dp-no- 
 mi (dp-nau-mi). From the root ttXv, irXev-aovfiaL is 
 formed regularly by diphthongal extension, and may be 
 compared with the Sanskrit active form of similar 
 meaning pl6-skjd-mi; from the root </)u, on the other 
 hand, we have (f>v-a-co (cp. Sanskrit hhav-i-shjd'mi). In 
 this case the Zend future hu-sjeiti stands by the Greek 
 (jyv-aec, Schleicher, Comp,, p. 819. Bopp, VergL Gram.j 
 II, p. 553. By these facts my explanation is sufficiently 
 justified. In a school, certain subtler changes of sound 
 
§42. OF THE SOUNDS. 39 
 
 can be passed over without danger of superficiality. 
 Even the relation of o to e, and the corresponding 
 relation of oc to ec (e.g. t/jotto-? — rpeTrcOy olBa — elBivac), 
 which may be considered as a slighter form of organic 
 extension, I have preferred not to point out as such, 
 because a doubt might arise ia the mind of an inquiring 
 thoughtful student concerning the relation of the vowels 
 in erpairop rpeTrco and rpoirof;, a doubt which for him, 
 and to some extent even for us also, must remain 
 unsolved. Indeed it has been my object generally in 
 deahng with the sounds to call attention to none but 
 the most essential of the laws and tendencies which 
 govern lanoruage. 
 
 On § 42. 
 
 The principle of compensatory lengthening was first 
 brought into notice so far as I know by H. L. Ahrens, 
 Ueber die Conjugation auf pa (Nordhausen 1838, p. 
 34), although of course the fact that vowels were length- 
 ened in consequence of the rejection of consonants had 
 been observed previously. This principle is one of very 
 great usefulness in a school-grammar. In Miiller and 
 Lattmann it is thus very concisely defined : — ' The lost 
 position-length is replaced by a natural length : ' The 
 intention of language is in some respects most clearly 
 shown in aXKrjXxo-v, the origin of which from aXK-aXKo 
 (alius alium) is beyond a doubt. The exact repetition 
 of the sound was avoided ; but aXko was not replaced 
 by aXo, but by Doric aXoj Ionic rjXo (cp. ey^rrjXa == 
 iEolic ey\faXka), Later investigations on this process, 
 as prosecuted more especially by Delbriick {Studien I. 
 2. 137) and myself {ib. II. 159) make it more and 
 more plain that compensatory lengthening arises from 
 the dying away of certain consonants in their nature 
 nearly allied to vowels, especially o( n r I s. These, 
 
40 ACCIDENCE. § 46. 
 
 as they faded out of hearing, gradually increased the 
 ^ length of the preceding vowels. 
 
 On § 46. 
 
 ^Before mute dentals, mute dentals in order to te- 
 come audible pass into the sonant o-, — (Dissimilation).' 
 Although here, as elsewhere, I attribute an intention 
 to language, I need hardly remark that I do not mean 
 a conscious purpose. Anything of that kind must be 
 altogether excluded from the spontaneous life of lan- 
 guage, of which it is just in the changes of sound that 
 we have the most direct revelation. Obviously we have 
 here only to deal with an instinctive adaptation of means 
 to ends, an unconsciously pursued tendency of the 
 genius of language. In Greek this tendency aims with 
 marvellous energy at giving full value to each signifi- 
 cant element. This peculiarity may be called the 
 intellectual character of the Greek language. Thus, 
 when the proximity of other dental sounds made the 
 preceding dental of the stem intolerable in a pure state, 
 e.g. in ahreov, the tongue was placed as before against 
 the upper row^ of teeth in the position necessary for the 
 pronunciation of the S, but instead of the firm closure 
 required in producing an explosive sound, a compression 
 only was formed, and in this way the dental sibilant 
 was produced instead of the pure dental. Thus language 
 attains a double object ; the pronunciation is made 
 easier, and the dental element retained, though in another 
 form : cp. Latin es-t = ed-t beside ed-i-t ; claus-trum 
 from claud-trum. In lae-su-s = laed-tu-Sy the corruption 
 has gone further, in which case nevertheless we may 
 with probability assume an older form laes-tu-s, and this 
 through later assimilation became laessu-s, lae-su-s, ^ 
 
 * On the change of st into ss in Latin, see Roby's Latin Gramviar, 
 I. p. Ixii. ff., and the authorities there quoted. — Ed. 
 
§§ 47, 48. OF THE SOUNDS. 41 
 
 On § 47. 
 
 ' Before /^ a guttural becomes 7, a dental <r, a labial 
 /x.' Three changes are here classed together which do 
 not exactly stand on the same level, but which in a 
 certain sense may all be regarded as assimilation. The 
 principle is marked most clearly in the change of a 
 labial before /z, for in this case the preceding sound 
 becomes not merely similar to, but entirely identical 
 with yL6, oTT-yLta, ofi-fjua (in ^olic we find the reverse 
 change oir-Tra). But even the change of a dental into 
 o- can be regarded as assimilation in so far as the con- 
 tinuous sound (semi-vowel) a is nearer to the continuous 
 sound fjb than it is to a dental explosive sound. Lastly, 
 it is clear that among the guttural explosive sounds the 
 weak 7 is the most closely connected with //,, and there- 
 fore represents the other gutturals before that letter. 
 The numerous exceptions to the two latter changes in 
 the formation of words do not allow us to consider the 
 whole as a law, but only as a tendency of language. 
 The analogy of Ihe other person-terminations may have 
 had an influence in making this tendency more widely 
 spread in the inflexion of verbs, e.g. la-fxev like Xa-re 
 laaac, Tri'Treca-fjuac like TreTreco'ac TreTreiaraL ireireiade. 
 
 On § 48. 
 ' Before o- as a hard consonant 7 and % become k^ and 
 y8 becomes tt, — (Assimilation) : Ka is then written |^, 
 and TTO- >|r.' Here again it is important to insist on the 
 distinction between sound and the symbols of sound. 
 The want of such a distinction has given rise to the false 
 notion that ^ and ^/r are triple sounds, according as the 
 one = K(T ya ')(cr and the other = ircr ^a (jxr. The 
 absurdity of such a notion is evident, and it is worth 
 while, both in Greek and Latin, to guide the pupil into 
 the right path. 
 
42 ACCIDENCE. §§49,51,55—58. 
 
 On § 49. 
 
 The connection between the first and second divisions 
 of this section is sufficiently clear. As in t66;\^€-o-a so in 
 TTo-ai a dental sound has disappeared. There can be no 
 doubt, at least in the case of the dental mutes, that the 
 history of the change was as follows. First, the dental 
 became assimilated to the sibilant. This is sufficiently 
 proved by Homeric forms like iroa-aL Later on came 
 the desire to drop one of two consecutive sigmas. In 
 this way iro-ai arose, which indeed as well as iroa-ai is 
 found in Homer. The rejection of one of two sigmas is 
 a proceeding which explains numerous forms, e.g. Attic 
 Toao"^ compared with Homeric rocrao-^, i.e. to-t^-o-9 
 (cp. Latin tot for toti^ totidem), eaofiai compared with 
 Homeric ea-ao-fiaiy I3eke-ai with /SeXea-ac and the termi- 
 nation ac(p) in dative plural generally as compared with 
 the original -aa-iiy), apparently derived from (tFl{v), 
 It is important also to point out to the pupil (cp. § 62 
 D.) that the double consonants which are found in the 
 dialects beside simple ones belong as a rule to the older 
 forms, and not vice versa. 
 
 On § 51. — Ohs. 2 and Dialects, 
 The insertion of auxiliary consonants is in Greek 
 confined to a few cases, and can be explained by 
 reference to the precisely parallel phenomena of the 
 Romance languages, e.g. French cen-d-re =zjj2ii. cin- 
 e-rem, Vendredi = Veneris dies, chambre = camera, 
 com-h-le = cumidus (Diez, Grammatik der roinan. 
 Spvachen, I. 201, 206). Still nearer is the German 
 Fdhn-d-rich, and provincial Ilein-d-rich, Hen-d-rich, 
 
 On §§ 55—58. 
 In inserting these changes of sound in a practical 
 school-grammar I have the support of Ahrens. There is 
 however this difference between us, that he in p. 182 ff. 
 
§§55—58. OF THE SOUNDS. 43 
 
 of his Formenlehre quotes other clianges besides those 
 which I have mentioned — as e.g. those from Trt, ^t, 
 and (^L into ttt, by which the third, or T-class of 
 verbs, would be made a subdivision of the fourth or 
 I-class — changes which I cannot regard as established. 
 In Grundz. 626 fF., I have given the reasons for my view 
 at length. Miiller and Lattmann also in the Formenlehre 
 which I have quoted, assign a place to these phenomena, 
 confining themselves however to what is certain. As a 
 fact, I regard this innovation as one of the most im- 
 portant, because in this way a number of phenomena of 
 language, in appearance very diverse, are brought back 
 to one principle which is easily intelligible even to a 
 pupil. Chief among the classes of such phenomena are 
 the following three : (1) the formation of comparatives, 
 (2) the formation of feminine adjectives and proper 
 names, and (3) the formation of present-stems in verbs 
 of the I-class. When these have become familiar to the 
 pupil, the teacher may avail himself of a repetition of 
 §§ 55 — 58 to combine them all together and thus impart 
 an insight into the connection of all these phenomena. 
 
 All the changes here pointed out are due to the 
 operation of the old consonant Jod, which, we have 
 seen (p. 34), was not unknown in the oldest times to 
 the Greeks. But since this spirant frequently passes 
 into its kindred vowel in the very changes under 
 consideration (e.g. in reivo) for rev-jco), and elsewhere 
 also, in similar formations, appears as c, rjS-Uov, Ih-ico 
 (Sanskrit svid-jd-mij Grundz, 227), iroLijTp-Laj and 
 since in any case the most frequent changes and 
 the closest relationship between Jod and Iota must 
 be assumed as existing in that ancient period, I have 
 thought myself entitled to give a full account of its 
 operation without introducing a letter unknown to 
 the Greek alphabet, which however the grammars 
 
44 ACCIDENCE. §§ 55—58. 
 
 mentioned above have inserted without scruple ; but 
 I believe that it ought to be our object to introduce as 
 little as possible that is strange into a grammar. 
 
 On the several changes here mentioned the following 
 remarks may be made : — (1) The transposition of l 
 into the preceding syllable hardly needs any particular 
 explanation, metathesis being one of the most common 
 phenomena in language. Those who question the fact 
 may be referred to ^olic forms like fxekav-vay x^p-pcov, 
 the origin of which by assimilation from fieXav-ja, 
 X^p-jcov is self-evident. In several of the forms which 
 belong to this head the Jod of the second syllable 
 has further asserted its power in two ways : (1) it 
 combined with the preceding consonant into one of the 
 usual groups, and (2) also entered as c into the pre- 
 ceding syllable ; e.g. in Kpelaacov = Kper-jcoVy /jl€l^q)v 
 = /jbey-joyv (see § 198 Obs.), Here also belong daaaov 
 = Ta'X;-jov, and fiaXXov = jxak-jov^ in which the l has 
 only lengthened the stem-syllable and has not com- 
 bined with it into a diphthong. A similar effect is 
 produced by the J-sound on a preceding vowel in the 
 verbs Kpivw and avpoi (§ 253). The ^olic forms Kpivvco, 
 avppco are proofs that this explanation is correct. For 
 the self-same reason the whole phenomenon is best re- 
 garded as a resonance of the J-sound in the preceding 
 syllable, for which Zend offers a number of analogies. 
 The promoter of the change — the J-sound in the 
 second syllable — is, as a rule, dropped after exercising 
 this influence. Cp. Grundz., p. 630 ff. 
 
 (2) The most convincing proofs of this change are 
 those given in the text — Latin alius compared with 
 Greek dXKo<;y saUio with aXkopbat, Somewhat similar 
 is Old High German stelthn for steljan. 
 
 (3) and (4) These changes of dentals and gutturals 
 with Jod are discussed elsewhere in full {Grundzilge^ 
 
§§ 65—58. OF THE SOUNDS. 45 
 
 617 fF.). The most important results of the inquiry, 
 which brings the theory of spirants intq a consistent 
 whole for the first time, are the following : — aa — in 
 New Attic and Boeotian tt — arises only out of a hard 
 mute or aspirate (r, d, k, 'x) ; f— in Boeotian in the 
 middle of a word, SS — arises only out of a soft mute 
 (S, 7). Where the first group appears to rise out of 
 7, e.g. in (f)pdcr(r(o (stem cfypay)^ 7 is the representative 
 of an older fc ; compare Latin farc-io =z (ppdcraco, I 
 could make no use of this discovery in the text of the 
 grammar, because the change from k to y cannot be 
 made clear to the pupil in every case. The statement 
 therefore is allowed to remain for the present that 
 (TO- arises out of 7. Further, the assumption that acr 
 sometimes arises out of Sj is quite without foundation. 
 The comparative ^pdcracov, which is only founl in Iliad 
 K 226, belongs to ^pa')(y<;, not to ^paSv<i, and therefore 
 has arisen out of ^pax-j(ov (cp. § 198 D, Grundz,, p. 623). 
 
 aa arises out of rj in the following manner : — The 
 Jod of XcT-jd-fiaif for instance, was changed into a 
 sibilant, originally soft, but afterwards hardened — 
 XiT-a-o-fMac. From this group arose (1) aa by retro- 
 gressive assimilation (i.e. assimilation working back- 
 wards from the end of the word), and (2) tt by 
 progressive assimilation. 0j has gone through the 
 same changes, with the additional loss of the aspirate. 
 
 In the same way f is explained, the sound of which 
 is, as we have seen, dz. eB-jo-fjuat became eS-zo-fjuaCy that 
 is e^ofiat. In this case no further change took place. 
 
 At a period long anterior to the formation of existing 
 groups of sound, the gutturals, under the influence of 
 a following Jod, became thrust forward into the fore- 
 part of the mouth. Thus tjk-jwv passed by different 
 steps into '^t-jcov, oXcy-jcop into oXcS-jcov. The identity 
 in pronunciation of ci and ti in unaccentuated syllables 
 
46 ACCIDENCE. §62. 
 
 in Latin, and consequent confusion in writing — e.g. 
 patri-ciu-s and patri-tm-s, condi-cio and condi-tio, rest 
 on the same principle (see Corssen, Aussprache. P. 57),* 
 as also the change of the Latin c into the French 
 sibilant, fades — face. Out of the hypothetical forms 
 rjT-jcop and okih-jcov arose rjcracov {rjTTcov) and oXi^cov, 
 exactly in the same way as Xiaaoiiai (kiTTo/jLac) and 
 e^ofiai out of Xir-jo-fiai and kh-jo-jiai. The breathing 
 of % like that of 6 is lost in the process of change. 
 
 In countries where Sclavonian languages have come 
 into contact with German all these phenomena can 
 easily be made intelligible, because a great number 
 of the changes of sound peculiar to Sclavonic are 
 due to the influence of Jod on preceding consonants. 
 Whether it would be advisable in other places to 
 trace out to the pupil in detail these developments 
 of sound according to the indications here given, 
 is doubtful, not because such a course would be 
 beyond his comprehension^for this whole theory is 
 very simple and quickly mastered, if studied with 
 attention — but because it would occupy too much 
 time, and lead too far away from Greek as a his- 
 torical language. Nevertheless, it is to be wished 
 that the teacher, even if with his pupil he confines 
 himself to those facts of the history of sound which I 
 have here pointed out, should obtain for himself an 
 idea of the basis on which the whole rests. 
 
 On § 62. 
 
 After what has been said, I need not show in 
 detail that the double consonants mentioned in this 
 section preserve as a rule the older forms of the 
 language, and have arisen out of assimilation. In 
 
 * English readers may consult Roby, Latin Grammar, I. p. xlvii. 
 ff.— Ed. 
 
§ 62. OF THE SOUNDS. 47 
 
 nearly all the roots beginning with p more especially, 
 the earlier existence of a consonant before p can be 
 proved ; dppT)/cTo-<i is the assimilated form of a'fpr)/cTO'; 
 (Grundz» 494), irepippvTO'^ of irepL-apv-ro^ (329). In 
 the same way the double p after the augment (§ 234) 
 can be explained. 
 
 Thus too the first fi in (f>iXofiixeLhr}<i is proved to be 
 a representative of a by the fact that the root snii 
 (Grundz. 307) means in Sanskrit also 'to smile.' 
 fi6(rao<;^ (Ionic and ^olic) corresponds to Sanskrit 
 madhja-s and Latin medius (310). But in other cases 
 the attempt to explain the double consonant is a 
 failure, — e.g. in ivpv7)T0-<;, in which, with all the help 
 of the kindred languages, we can get no further than 
 the root ve (295). In Xa^elv also we cannot prove 
 the existence of an older sound before \ (484). A 
 Greek school-grammar therefore must be content with 
 pointing out the fact that the Homeric dialect has 
 often a double consonant in the place of a single 
 one. This fact is to be taken together with the 
 lengthening of short syllables at the end of a word 
 mentioned in § 77 D. The lengthening of the final 
 short vowel of a preceding word, like the doubling 
 of the consonant in the middle of a word, is in many 
 cases due to the influence of a consonant no longer 
 in existence — e.g. in hr}v, which as the form hodv in 
 Alcman proves has arisen out of hifdv, hifrjv^ and 
 is akin to the Latin diu^ signifying literally — ' a day 
 long' {Grundz, 520). The verse-ending opea vtcfyoevTa 
 II. E. 227, is to be explained by the older av which 
 is retained in this stem in the Gothic snaiv-s — ' snow,' 
 and the Lithuanian snig-ti {' to snow '). In both these 
 word-stems, and in many others, the first consonant 
 
 * fjL^aaos (/i^o-os) is for fxeO-jos, hence the rule given on p. 45 is not 
 violated. 6 is the Greek equivalent for Sanskrit dh. — Ed. 
 
48 ACCIDENCE. § 62. 
 
 was still, at the time of the origin of the Homeric 
 poems, a fuller sound. The influence of this sound 
 was in some cases, e.g. in the middle of a word, 
 indicated by the doubling of a consonant ; sometimes, 
 e.g. at the contact of two words, by the lengthening 
 of the final syllable of the preceding word. But there 
 is no doubt that the second of these phenomena occurs 
 before word-stems which in all probability never at 
 any time began with two consecutive consonants, e.g. 
 before /juiya-^; (Grundz, 306), in which from the com- 
 parison of Latin mag-nu-s, Gothic mik-ils, it is im- 
 possible to suppose that an initial consonant has been 
 dropped ; and which nevertheless in numerous lines 
 like elSo^ re [xeyeOo^ re (II. B. 58), and even AXa^ 8' 6 
 fieya^; alev (IT. 358) is preceded by most remarkable 
 lengthenings. Such facts are not to be removed by 
 bold alterations of the text, but must be fully recog- 
 nized. So long as we confine our inquiries to isolated 
 forms and sounds, we can obtain no correct idea of 
 them ; they become intelligible only when we possess 
 a proper insight into the peculiar character of the 
 Homeric dialect as a whole. The further our researches 
 penetrate, the more certain does the inference become, 
 that this dialect is the product of a conventional 
 minstrel-usage which preserved a number of very old 
 forms, and sounds regarded as in process of extinc- 
 tion ; but at the same time availed itself of many 
 formations of a later date and evidently in contem- 
 porary use ; and in this very way the dialect obtained 
 that character of variety, that luxuriance of forms, and 
 elasticity of rule, which, though almost inconceivable 
 in a language actually spoken, offered immense advan- 
 tages to the minstrel in the construction of his verse. 
 At the time when this dialect of the epic minstrel- 
 schools — if we may use the expression — became fixed, 
 
§ 62. OF THE SOUNDS. 49 
 
 much was taken for licence which was really archaism^ 
 and nothing was easier than that confusion should 
 arise, and the province of Epic licence should thus 
 extend itself bv false analogies beyond the limits of 
 archaism. In the belief that <^tXoyU./xefc8?;9 owed the 
 double yLfc simply to an archaic habit of doubling the 
 consonant, forms like efju/made, and even c/jufievatj 7. 365. 
 wero ventured upon ; and to iirl vevpfj (cp. Sclinur^ 
 Rt. snur^ Grundz,, 295) was added viro i/e</>eo9. At all 
 times these innovations were limited to a certain circle 
 of words by the authority of those who introduced 
 them with the 'greatest moderation. But the most 
 frequent opportunities for introducing them would 
 naturally be found in words of very common occur- 
 reoice, e.g. fi6ya<; and its derivatives ; just as it can 
 hardly be pure chance that only the two proper names 
 which occur most frequently in the Iliad and Odyssey 
 waver between a sinfjle and double consonant in the 
 middle of the word. Such remarks as these are not 
 in the least intended to dissuade from further inquiry 
 into the subject — for we may always expect to find the 
 oldest forms in Homer — but merely to justify myself 
 in quoting many of the peculiarities of the Homeric 
 dialect simply as facts ; and at least to point out the 
 way in which many of the riddles here presented to 
 us may be solved. At the same time what I have 
 said will show sufficiently what view I take of the 
 paths struck out by Ahrens, especially in Rhein, Miis. 
 II, 167 ft*., by Mehlhorn in his Sendschriehen an 
 Ahrens (Ratisbon 1843), and by Hoftinann, Qucestiones 
 Homericce.* 
 
 * On this subject compare Leskien's paper — ' Die Formen des 
 Fvtiirums nnd des i^usammengesetzen Aorists mit <t<t in den homer- 
 ucJien Gedichten, Studien z. Griech. und Lat. Grammatik, II, 67 ff. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 DECLENSION OF SUBSTANTIVES AND ADJECTIVES. 
 
 With regard to the mutual position of the separate 
 parts of the accidence, I have not felt myself called 
 upon to differ from that in general use. Several 
 attempts have been made of late from a scientific point 
 of view to place the formation of words or stems before 
 inflexion, under the impression that the order of origin 
 is in this way more strictly preserved, the relations of 
 the sounds as elements in all formations of words being 
 taught first, then the formation of stems, last of all 
 the changes which stems undergo when brought into 
 relation with other words — that is, inflexion. But even 
 in a strictly scientific work this arrangement could not 
 be consistently carried out without separating much 
 that is necessarily connected. Thus the formation of 
 the participles and infinitive — which is a part of the 
 formation of words — cannot be explained without 
 entering into the difference of tense- stems, a question 
 of inflexion ; and the last part of the theory of the 
 formation of words, which treats of composition, pn3- 
 supposes of necessity the declension of nouns. In a 
 school-grammar, at any rate, the far greater importance 
 of inflexion is quite a sufficient reason for teaching it 
 before the formation of words. The attempt to put 
 the verb before the noun in the theory of inflexion — 
 although frequently attempted owing to the influence 
 of K. F. Becker's system — has for a scientific basis the 
 
DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 51 
 
 false assumption that the verb as such, i.e. as a system 
 of forms, is older than the noun, whereas the modern 
 science of language leads more and more decisively to 
 the conviction that the forms of the verb owe their 
 origin to very various epochs of the creative period. 
 As a practical matter it is clear that the inflexion of 
 nouns can indeed be taught without a knowledge of the 
 verb-forms; but the inflexion of verbs cannot be taught 
 before the declension of nouns, on account of the 
 participles. Thus on every side we are forced back 
 again to the old method. 
 
 In the whole theory of inflexion everything turns 
 on the strong and sharp distinction between stem and 
 termination. On this is based all analysis of forms. 
 Even the pupil can easily be brought to understand that 
 the stem of a noun, to go no further for an instance, 
 which peculiarly and exclusively conveys the meaning, 
 runs through all the cases, while the terminations are 
 added to it to denote the several cases, among which 
 the nom. sing, naturally has a place. Compared 
 with all the earlier methods, the stem-theory has the 
 advantage of far greater simplicity. By the old gram- 
 marians the nom. sing, of the noun (like the 1st sing, 
 pres. act. of the verb) was regarded as the starting- 
 point. — the TrpcoTY} 6ecn<;, No attempt was made to 
 explain how the other cases developed themselves out of 
 this. They were contented with the simple fact ; nom. 
 09, gen. ou, dat. w, etc. The unity of the ^ third,' or 
 consonantal declension, as I call it, can never become 
 intelligible on such a method. In drjp, for instance, the 
 gen., as compared with the nom., gives us an additional 
 -09, whereas in crw/xa we find an additional -to^. In 
 ikiTi<^ the final 9 is replaced by -S09, in K6pv<; by -^09. 
 To avoid complete confusion, the expedient was invented 
 of learning the genitive as well as the nominative of 
 
52 ACCIDEKCE. 
 
 this declension. Thus in reality the first step was 
 already taken towards the stem-theory ; for the genitive 
 was of course selected merely because in it the element 
 which remains the same through all the cases — which 
 is no other than the stem — stands out in greater pro- 
 minence. To speak accurately therefore it was only in 
 the two first declensions that the old grammarians 
 derived all the cases from the nom. sing., in the 
 third they derived them from the gen. sing., beside 
 which the nom. remained as a simple fact which was 
 not explained further. The genitive here owes its pro- 
 minence, not to any peculiarity of its own, but merely 
 to the circumstance — quite accidental in the analysis of 
 forms — that it stands second in the arrangement of 
 oases on the old method. But leaving the arbitrary 
 nature of this position out of the question, the old 
 theory attains to no insight into the formation of cases. 
 It remains content with simple changes — for nom. -09, 
 gen. -ov, gen. -09, dat. -l, ace. -a, etc. ; but the stem- 
 theory gains a clearness of quite another kind by the 
 simple fact that the case-termination is distinctly named 
 as such and taught in combination with that which is 
 the really unchangeable element. Besides — and this is 
 an advantage of a most essential character — the nomi- 
 native also on this theory no longer occupies an excep- 
 tional position, but is developed like the other cases 
 from the single base common to all. There is another 
 way also in which their perverse treatment of inflexion 
 revenged itself upon the old philologists. So long as 
 one case or verb-form was derived from another at will 
 by assuming a change of sound {rpoirr)) or addition 
 {ifKeovaG^o^;)^ etc., no one hesitated to follow a similar 
 plan with regard to the formation of words. A rational 
 phonology was quite impossible ; and thus there was no 
 firm foundation for etymology, as an investigation of 
 
DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 53 
 
 words ; but in the place of it a soil was secured in 
 which all sorts of caprices and eccentricities sprang up 
 in great luxuriance. 
 
 Nevertheless since Buttmann's time {Ausf. Gr. I, 
 p. 159 Anm.) a certain regard has been paid to the 
 stems in the so-called third declension. In this respect, 
 it is true, Buttmann himself was very uncertain; for 
 he was inclined to leave the 'genetic method' to the 
 oral instruction of thoughtful teachers.' Matthi'a (I, 
 199) opposes even this 'hypothesis,' and wishes the 
 well-known apophthegm of Quintilian — inter virtutes 
 gi'ammatid hahehltur aliqua iiesdre — to be applied even 
 to the question, — ' What is the reason that the Greeks 
 form the words of the third declension in such various 
 ways?' Only, in this case we ought to read omnia 
 instead of aliqua! Here as elsewhere Thiersch takes 
 a far more certain and intelliofent course. But even 
 K. L. Struve, to whom Latin grammar is indebted for 
 essential corrections, in his Greek Grammar, p. 27 (Riga 
 and Dorpat 1823, 2. Aufl.), allows the genitive to arise 
 out of the nominative by various rejections and inser- 
 tions. KUhner, following the lead of Keimnitz, whose 
 treatise {System der Griech, Declination, Potsdam 
 1831) was written under the influence of comparative 
 grammar, was the first to make the stem-theory 
 dominant in the third declension. Since that time a 
 return to the old confusion in all its fulness has been 
 impossible. To a certain extent every author of a 
 school-grammar, even against his inclination, must 
 yield to our new insight. But even to the most recent 
 times the stems in 9, e.g. r^eve; (nom. yivo^), are ignored 
 by Rost and Krliger, though it is just as easy to con- 
 ceive that 761/6-09 has risen out of 761/6(7-09 as that 
 i-yiv-eo has risen out of i-yev-e-aro, and it is quite absurd 
 to regard the 9 in 761/09 as a sign of the nom., since on the 
 
54^ ACCIDENCE. 
 
 contrary that sign as a rule belongs only to the masc. 
 and fern, genders. Still the insight into the essential 
 laws of language, the possibility of recognizing the 
 regularity of the forms is in the eyes of many teachers 
 far too small a thing for them to move out of the old 
 track on that account more than is absolutely necessary. 
 Any one who wished to write a book on the sluggish- 
 ness of the human mind would find ample materials 
 in the history of our school-grammars, though numbers 
 come year after year into the market. 
 
 Among th6 consequences resulting from this stolid 
 acquiescence in traditional doctrines may be reckoned 
 the inconsistency of treating the first two declensions 
 as entirely different from the third. If we reduce 
 iravT'O^ to a stem iravr, we must also reduce Movad- 
 (ov to a stem Movaa, Xoyov to a stem X070. Such a 
 comprehensive treatment of the stems has been shrunk 
 from merely because in the case of the A- and 0- stems 
 there was no such pressing necessity for it in practice. 
 For the teacher can certainly allow the paradigm \07-09, 
 gen. \6y-ov, to be droned out after the old fashion with- 
 out any practical difficulty. But such a course is not 
 without some attendant evils ; it destroys the insight 
 into the unity of declension as a whole. And it might 
 perhaps occur to a clever pupil that as v only is the 
 termination of the accusative case in itoXl-v, av and ov 
 can scarcely be considered as such in %ftipaz/ and Xoyov, 
 that as 6rjp-&v has the termination -cop in the gen. pi., 
 this, and nothing more, is the termination in the 
 Homeric Movadcov, and that, in general, if the stem is 
 to be considered the unchangeable part of a word, the 
 vowels a and o, when they run through the whole 
 declension with few changes, can on any rational method 
 only be regarded as part of the stem. From a scientific 
 point of view there is not the slightest doubt that these 
 
DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 55 
 
 vowels form part of the stem ; and therefore it is quite 
 inconceivable why the truth should not be taught even 
 in school. In this way only is unity introduced into 
 great diversity ; whereas the apparent stems Mov<t, \oy, 
 which still adorn more than one grammar, have neither 
 a basis in science nor meaning in practice. 
 
 The consistent carrying out of the stem-theory is 
 sometimes opposed on the ground that it has to deal 
 with pure abstractions, whereas it is the real Greek 
 language as it existed in time past in the mouth of the 
 nation which has to be impressed upon the pupil, and 
 not a system of phantom-forms, which never had any 
 existence at all. This seems a serious objection. But 
 where is the Greek grammar which does not take refuge 
 in forms the existence of which can no longer be proved 
 from actual usage ? Were the endings -/^t, -o-6, -r*, or 
 those false stems \oy, tl/jl, yeve ever uttered as separate 
 words? Or did any Greek author ever use AABfl? 
 Yet for the last hundred years no grammarian has 
 appeared without such ^abstractions.' And if in regard 
 to such verbal themes the attempt is made to guard 
 against confusion of the real and hypothetical by the 
 use of large letters, we may avail ourselves of a similar 
 expedient in regard to our stems. Besides, where do 
 we find XeovT'O-t written, from which every one very 
 properly derives Xiov-ai? In a word, we are not 
 dealing with an absolute innovation, but only with the 
 consistent carrying out of a principle universally recog- 
 nized as correct ; indeed, in many cases the real question 
 is merely whether we are to introduce hypothetical forms 
 the existence of which can be proved by the severest 
 method of linguistic inquiry; or forms like Xoy, rifi, 
 yeve, which can be proved never to have had any exist- 
 ence at all. It is noticeable that the opponents of 
 innovation are the chief supporters of the latter forms. 
 
56 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 Besides, the stems are by no means mere abstractions. 
 There was a period in the Hfe of language — a very early 
 one, it is true, and long antecedent to the existence of 
 Greek as a separate language, because antecedent to 
 the formation of the inflexion common to all the Indo- 
 G-ermanic languages — in which in all probability those 
 forms which we now call roots and stems were actual 
 words, although for the most part they had not as yet 
 received the phonetic form peculiar to Greek. There is 
 also no doubt that a stock of stems, in the first instance 
 comparatively small, was increased by the addition of a 
 number of other stems formed at a later period by ana- 
 logy. But even apart from this, so to speak, antenatal 
 existence of stems, they have preserved at all times a 
 truly real existence in so far as they live in the com- 
 pleted forms of inflexion. They exist, though not 
 independently and separately, and have as much claim 
 to be recognized by science as cells in plants, or, one 
 may say as letters, which with very few exceptions, are 
 not used separately in actual speech. The noun-stems 
 prove their reality especially in the derivative forma- 
 tions — e.g. in 8/Aca-60-9, hiKaio-avvr], i/eoT?;(T)-9, iraih- 
 io-v, eu^evea-repo'^y and in composition — e.g. X070- 
 ypd^o-^, veO'TOKO'i, aaKea-iraXo-^, In many cases also 
 the pure stem appears in the vocative — ^duKpare^y 
 Bal/jLoVt vvfjL(f)a, and even the pupil can draw the inference 
 that the vocative is the noun in itself apart from any 
 grammatical relation,* and therefore without any case- 
 termination. Here we see plainly enough that language 
 is an organic whole, in which all the parts fit into each 
 other. Without a correct knowledge of stems no rational 
 theory of sounds or of the formation of words is possible, 
 
 * The importance of the vocative in declension appears to have been 
 felt by Aristarchus, to judge from the noticeable quotation in Varro 
 De lingua Zatina, VIII. § 68. 
 
DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 57 
 
 I and even syntax cannot be fixed upon a firm basis by 
 
 - any other method. 
 
 By a proper application of the noun-stems it is not 
 difficult to bring into view the essential unity of Greek 
 declension. But it is self-evident that in practical instruc- 
 tion the multiplicity of forms must be first impressed 
 on the memory ; and the unity which underlies all that 
 multiplicity — to the knowledge of which § 173 intro- 
 duces us — can only be enforced at an advanced stage 
 of instruction. We must not be led by the proof of 
 unity to pay too little attention to the variety which 
 nevertheless exists. The science of language in its 
 latest phases has chosen to undertake the proof of the 
 unity of all declension of nouns. Nevertheless, the 
 classification of varieties has its just claims, and we 
 must certainly observe the power of analogy by which 
 words which are like each other in separate cases in- 
 .fluence each other. Thus many anomalies, especially 
 Heteroklisis, are owing exclusively to the fact that the 
 instinct of lanoruaore extends these analo£:ies too far. 
 For instance, owing to the large number of proper 
 names in -t;-? nom. sing, which are formed from stems 
 in A, others like ScoKpaTr)^, Ji7jfjboa'devrj(;, which were 
 originally from sigma-stems, are treated as similar. 
 Such cases cannot be explained by mere relations of 
 sound or by the formation of stems; they are made 
 intelligible only by classification. The old grammarians 
 preferred to give the name of analogy to inflexion. 
 The analogies between similar and similarly treated 
 words floated before the instinct of language, while yet 
 purely natural, and were also the first to present them- 
 selves with clearness when that instinct became conscious, 
 and was awaking into a science. Without a due regard 
 to this element even science herself would be lost in 
 the vague and indefinite; she cannot on her part exist 
 
58 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 without .a certain system. That in the practical 
 course of instruction, proper to a school, we ought 
 certainly to divide the declensions, to distinguish and 
 arrange the divisions, needs no further confirmation. 
 
 The difference of the declensions is owing chiefly 
 — though by no means exclusively, since in some 
 cases, e.g. gen. sing., two terminations are certainly 
 in use — to the final letter of the stem. As this can 
 be either a vowel or a consonant, we have a primary 
 division into vowel and consonant declensions. This 
 division is not however perfectly accurate. Only the 
 stems endinor in hard vowels follow the first main de- 
 clension; and as a and o were originally one sound, 
 this is in reality simply an A-declension. The soft 
 vowels i and u, on the other hand, no less than the diph- 
 thongal stems which are very closely connected with 
 them, belong to the second or consonant declension. 
 For this reason objections have been made to my 
 dichotomy as illogical and misleading. The note 
 to § 135 is intended to give the pupil a hint on 
 the matter which at first sight is certainly not quite 
 clear. The intelligent teacher will find no difficulty 
 in pointing out the fact that here, as often, the ter- 
 minology is given a potiori; and that the consonant 
 stems not only form by far the largest part of the 
 second main declension, but give the type for the rest. 
 But from a scientific point of view the matter may be 
 explained more clearly. It is here that the division 
 of the vowels into hard and soft mentioned above 
 (p. 30) becomes of importance. At the end of the 
 diphthongs, the soft vowels pass into the correspond- 
 ing spirant — thus z/av-o? becomes vaF-6^ — but when 
 they stand alone, they develop a spirant after them, 
 which adapts itself to the rules of the consonant declen- 
 sion. Thus in Sanskrit from the stem bhu (nom. hhus, 
 
DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 5& 
 
 Earth) we have the gen. bhu-v-as (cp. plu-v-ia from the 
 root plu + ia). By analogy we should expect in Greek 
 (Tv-F'6^, from which cru-o? afterwards arose. In other 
 stems in v and still more in those in c the formation is 
 very variable. With some, e.g. stem kl, nom. /c/r-?, we 
 must suppose a gen. kl-j-o^, in which the spirant de- 
 veloped out of c corresponds exactly to the f in the case 
 previously mentioned. But in other stems S takes the 
 place of Jod, ipc, e/^^-S-o?. But that this S must be 
 reofarded as a sound arising out of Jod in accordance 
 with certain distinct analogies, I believe has been proved 
 in Grundzilge, 583 ff. Other stems again in l and v 
 undergo extension. The eu arising out of l passes before 
 vowels into e;, e.g. iroXej-o^, A trace of this Jod, which 
 must be dropped in obedience to the phonetic laws of 
 later Greek, is retained in the Homeric gen. ttoXt/o? and 
 Attic TToXeo)?. For Ebel has shown (Kuhn's ZeiUchr, 
 IV, 171 fF.) that the long vowel in both forms is due to 
 compensatory lengthening for the lost spirant. In the 
 same way ao-reo)? points to aaref-o^. Elsewhere, it is 
 true, Jod and Vau dropped out without any compensa- 
 tion, and hence arose the apparent but deceptive exist- 
 ence of 6 beside i or u as the final letter of the stem. 
 In reality e is always for an original ej or ef, and thus 
 these stems are shown to belong to the consonant 
 declension. On the other hand, in the formation of the 
 ace. sing, of masc. and fem., the true vowel nature of 
 the stems declares itself, ttoXl-v, ttoXv-v, and the voc. 
 sing, also, where it exists as a separate form, contains 
 the pure vowel-stem. The double nature of these stems 
 therefore is now clear. The only group not as yet 
 completely cleared up is the stems in o and cd. In the 
 grammar (§ 135 Obs,) I could only introduce the re- 
 mark that these stems have apparently lost a consonant, 
 but which the consonant in question is, it is certainly 
 
60 ACXJIDENCE. 
 
 by no means easy to discover. Only the two words ^(09 
 and alSci)^ leave no doubt on tlie subject. They are distin- 
 guished from the other feminines by the termination 9 
 in the nominative, t;^)?, -^olic av(o^, as the comparison 
 of the kindred language proves {Gy^undzilge, 371), goes 
 back to a stem ausos^ common to Greeks and Italians ; 
 in Latin this stem was lengthened by the addition of an 
 a (ausos-a, later aurora), just as the Indian word of the 
 same meaning ushas (for us-as) has the form ushds-d 
 existing side by side with it. Hence very little doubt 
 is left that in the case of a^'Soi)9 too we must regard at8o9 
 as the stem ; both these words therefore properly belong 
 to the sigma-stems. It is merely because they are the 
 only two words of their kind, and are declined through- 
 out as 0-stems without regard to the nom., that they 
 have retained their place in the grammar among the 
 latter. The masculines in o> (nom. 0)9), on the other 
 hand, point to another origin. Trdrpco^^; corresponds to 
 the Latin patruu-s ; and though there is no matruu-s 
 existing by the side of /Ltr;T/)(»-9, the derivative matruelis 
 shows that this form must once have been in existence. 
 These forms therefore appear to have lost a F, From 
 a common form patrovo-s, the Greeks by dropping the 
 o obtained 7raTpof-9, Trdrpco^ (cp. ttXco-co = TrXoF-co by 
 the side of ttXc-w = TrXeF-co, Grundzilge, 524). — The 
 feminines which have -w in the nom. I formerly con- 
 nected with stems in v, and there are certainly many 
 points of contact between the two. The same connexion 
 — somewhat differently carried out — has of late been 
 adopted by Leo Meyer, Ueber die Flexion der Adjectiva 
 im Deutschen (Berlin 1867, p. 57). But the rejection 
 of V in this case remains a very doubtful assumption, 
 and seems indeed to have been set aside with justice by 
 Ahrens in a more complete analysis, Kuhn's Zeitschrift 
 III, 81 ff., upon which we here at once enter. It is 
 
DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 61 
 
 very remarkable that the nominatives of these stems in 
 inscriptions and according to the evidence of gram- 
 marians had secondary forms in -«, At^tw, Sair^a).^ 
 Without question this form is the oldest, and at the 
 first glance we see that Saircfyo) is the regular nomi- 
 native to voc. Sa7r(j)0L, to which it bears exactly the 
 same relation as SatfiMV to Sacfiov, Ahrens is there- 
 fore quite correct in assuming ol as the primary ending 
 of these stems. This ending is shown most plainly in 
 the vocative. t Only we shall now have to go a step 
 further. The Ionic form of the ace. in ovv which is 
 found not only in the best MSS. of Herodotus (lovvy 
 BovTovp, Tcjuovv), but also on inscriptions (^Aprefiovv, 
 ATjfiovv, MrjTpovp)) certainly cannot be derived from 
 stems in ot, or indeed from stems in i/. Now we found 
 that the masc. in -&> sprang from -of : it will not there- 
 fore be too rash to refer the feminines in -o to ofi. Greek 
 t, corresponding to Sanskrit z, is an old suffix for the 
 feminine. The form oFv therefore as the feminine of 
 'oF or -oFo need not appear strange to us, and as a fact, 
 feminines of this kind are found existing by the side 
 of the very rare masc. stems in -w, in three instances 
 — though all are proper names — IlaTpco, Mrjrpco, 'Hpw, 
 1 have therefore no doubt that the supposed connexion 
 really existed, though I cannot here go on to establish 
 it in greater detail from the formation of words in 
 Greek and Latin. The result, with which we are here 
 
 * Cp. Tzschirner, Grmca nomina in w exevntia, Vratisl, 1851. The 
 latest example, 'Ap/ceo-^;, on an inscription of Selinus, is discussed by 
 Kitschl. Rbein. Mus. xxi, 138. 
 
 f The accusatives in -olv mentioned by Chseroboscus (p. 1202, 
 Bekk. Anecd.), which would suit very well with this view of the 
 stem, are without authority. In the place of Koltolv, the form which 
 I quoted in the first edition from C. F. Hermann's edition of the 
 inscription of Dreros, the correct reading seems rather to be Karovv 
 (Dethier, Ber. der Wiener Acad, histor. ]^hilol. Classe, 1859, xxx, 
 p. 431), by which the Ionic forms obtain fresh parallels. 
 
62 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 concerned, would therefore be that the fern, stems in o, 
 the mutilated form of an older oFi, have the same right 
 as the I-stems to be included in the consonant declension. 
 The actual f is retained only in those Ionic accusatives 
 in the vocalized form v. By the loss of f, -ofc became 
 -01, This stem appears in the voc. and lengthened in 
 the nom. * Between two vowels the t, like v, passed in 
 the diphthong-stems primarily into the corresponding 
 spirant, until at length it also became utterly lost. In 
 these, as in other similar changes, we must assume that 
 they did not all take place at once, but gradually, one 
 after the other. 
 
 To these remarks on the general classification of 
 the declensions may be added a few on the further 
 division of the same. In these we return first to 
 the vowel declension. This was, as we have said, 
 originally but one declension. The relation is pre- 
 served in Sanskrit. There the A is short in masc^' 
 and neut., and long in fem., so that in nom. sing, 
 the ending, as, d, a-m corresponds to the Greek 0-9, 
 a (t/), ov, and Latin u~s, a, u-m. The use of a for 
 the long vowel, and for the short one, is evidently 
 anterior to the existence of Greek as a separate 
 language. Latin has a full share in this division 
 of the vowels, the only difference being, that in the 
 latter language the has in certain cases, and at first 
 by slow degrees, been supplanted by u. Hence it 
 
 ♦ In this nominative in (p two remarkable facts are to be noticed : 
 (1) the want of s as the sign of the nom., and (2) the lengthening of 
 the vowel from to w. As to the first it should be noticed that the 
 feminines in t, with which we rank these stems in ot, have even in 
 Sanskrit, to a great extent, no s in the nom. The lengthening, it is 
 true, cannot be explained, as I used to think, by the analogy of 
 daifJLCJP and daifiov for SaiiJLWv stands for daifxops. But the analogy of 
 such forms may have been influential in causing the lengthening due 
 to the dropped f to be adopted in the nom., but rejected in the 
 vocative. 
 
§ 112. DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 63 
 
 has a more varied appearance : yet old Latin forms, 
 like equO'S, dono-m, are exactly similar to the Greek. 
 There is another peculiarity common to Greek and 
 Latin as distinguished from all the other kindred 
 languages. It is a very general rule that A belongs 
 to the feminine gender ; but in Latin and Greek we 
 find a number of masculines ending in this vowel. 
 No definite reasons have yet been discovered for 
 change of sound in these words. The assumption 
 of A- and 0-declensions is therefore equally neces- 
 sary in both languages. We put the A-declension 
 first for two reasons.: — (1) Because the A-sound is 
 the older ; and (2) in order to abide by custom. 
 — The change from the meaningless designation by 
 numbers to a terminology based on the characteristic 
 sound needs no defence. 
 
 On § 112. 
 
 All the stems of the A-declension are here said 
 to end in a. Ahrens {.Formenl. pp. 11 and 12) and 
 Miiller-Lattmann also assume stems in 77. But even 
 those very stems which like nfjirj, BUrj in the Ionic 
 dialect present the ?; to a greater extent* than any 
 others, confine it to the singular number, and 77 in 
 the dual and plural is unknown to the Attic dialect. 
 It is true that the Ionic admits y in dat. plural : but 
 in this case we have always the same vowel with- 
 out any reference to the singular : Movaa, Movarjai, 
 no less than f^dxv^ H'^XV^^* V therefore cannot pos- 
 sibly be regarded as the final letter of the stem. 
 A stem TtfiT} would never give us Tifiai, rtfjid-oyp, 
 Ti/jLci-<;, but conversely rifiij, tl/jl7](; could certainly 
 be produced from TLfia, The assumed stem TLfirj 
 therefore is found insufficient, w^hen we ask whether 
 all the forms can be derived from it with the as- 
 
64 ACCIDENCE. § 114. 
 
 sistance of the laws of sound — which is the only 
 proof that we have chosen the stem correctly. The 
 masculines also with their vocatives apd old nomi- 
 natives in a {linroTa) show clearly that the change 
 of the original a to ?; is a mere affection of the 
 vowel occurring here and there according to no fixed 
 rule. It cannot therefore be regarded as forming 
 ])art of the stem which has already been defined as 
 the unchangeable element in words. 
 
 On § 114. 
 
 The coincidence between Latin and Greek is here 
 most striking, except indeed in the two cases gen. 
 sing, and plur. But with regard to the gen. sing., 
 forms like paterfamilias (Biicheler Grundriss der lat. 
 Declination^ p. 32) may be quoted to advanced pupils, 
 fi'om which it follows that in the formation of this 
 case also there was originally no difference between 
 these two most clearly connected languages. On the 
 contrary we must assume, and there is further sup- 
 port for the assumption, that the ending -ajds^ still 
 retained in Sanskrit, formed the common starting- 
 point for Greek and Latin. From this -ajds, by 
 weakening the syllable jds, arose the Latin -aiSj (also 
 aes)j* which, on the one hand, became worn down 
 to ai (terrai) and further to ai, ae ; and on the other, 
 ^ was contracted into as (familias). But the Greeks 
 allowed the j to drop out, and contracted a-a9 to a9. 
 
 To the gen. • pi. in its contracted form the Latin 
 poetical forms in -um, e.g. ccelicolnm,f correspond 
 
 * On the forms of the gen. sing, in Latin A-stems cp. Roby, Latin 
 Grammar, p. 121. The termination -ais is found in one form only, 
 Proserjmais ; and the long i in terrdl is left unexplained by Curtius 
 cp Corssen, Anssprache, P, 772 foil. — Ed. 
 
 It is doubtful whether ccelicolum is a 'contracted' form. 
 
§ 125 ff. DECLENSION OF STTBST. AND ADJECT. 65 
 
 exactly. For drachmum ^neadum are imitations of 
 Greek forms. No form from the Latin is here com 
 pared with the dat. pi., because the fuller Greek form 
 in -0-6 is proved to be really a locative and quite 
 distinct from the Latin dat. and abl. plur., which 
 in the consonantal declension preserve the proper ter- 
 mination 'bus (Sanskrit bhjas). Such at least is the 
 decision of Bopp and Schleicher, Vergl. Gram. I, 485, 
 Compendium^ 586, in opposition to Leo Meyer, Decli- 
 nation, p. 99, and Bucheler, p. 66. 
 
 On § 125/. 
 
 The identity of the Greek and Latin 0-declension 
 scarcely needs to be especially pointed out. But the 
 use of the accusative termination in this declension 
 for the nom. of the neuter — a use found in Sanskrit 
 also — is very remarkable. Language utterly refuses 
 the characteristic formation of the nominative to the 
 neuter gender. Here in its place is added the termi- 
 nation of the accusative, evidently because the neuter, 
 even where it assumes the position of the subject in 
 a sentence, carries with it a notion of dependence, 
 distinct from the self-sufficience of the masculine.* 
 The a of the neuter plural, like the e of the voca- 
 tive, is obviously not to be regarded as a peculiar 
 termination, but as the final letter of the stem, which 
 in this case was lengthened, the Greek and Latin d 
 
 Apparently, two sufiSxes were in use for the genitive plur. at an 
 early period : (1) -sam, whence Grk. -duv — aacovj and Lat. -mm — sum. 
 This termination strictly belongs to the pronouns ; (2) am, whence 
 Greek -wv, Lat. -um. This was the termination of the nouns. Ccelico- 
 lum therefore, like dncum, has the noun-termination, and has not 
 passed over into the analogy of the pronouns. — Ed. 
 
 * We can easily realize this distinction. • It came by post ' is = ' it 
 was sent by post ' ; but ' he came by train ' cannot be paraphrased in 
 the same manner. — Ed. 
 
 F 
 
66 ACCIDENCE. § 125 ff. 
 
 having there arisen out of d* In the vocative, on 
 the other hand, the o-sound is represented by the 
 weaker e, the sound which after a stands in the 
 nearest relation to o. In my grammar I use the 
 word ' termination ' to express the elements which 
 are added to the stem with a change of meaning : 
 a therefore is not called a 'termination/ but merely 
 an ' ending, 't which general term I adopt to express 
 any sound or group of sounds whatever at the close 
 of a word. Scopa therefore ends in a, but has no 
 termination ; Bcopov has the ending ov, but the ter- 
 mination added to the stem Scopo is the o arising out 
 of -to. In the vowel declension, in which the stems 
 and terminations have coalesced in various ways, this 
 distinction is essential, and must certainly be observed 
 by the teacher. Even the pupil cannot mistake the 
 two ideas without danger of error and confusion. 
 Into such confusion the older grammars are constantly 
 falling. 
 
 In the 0-declension, and to a certain extent, it is 
 true, in the A-declension also, the separation of stem 
 and termination is not marked in the type throughout 
 all the cases. In dv6p(07ro-<;, dvdpcoTrO'V the division 
 is clear and simple, and the two parts are separated 
 by a hyphen. But to mark off the v in the genitive 
 avdpcoTTo-v is somewhat doubtful, because v alone can- 
 not possibly be regarded as the termination. Similar 
 difficulties present themselves in other cases ; the 
 separation therefore is omitted. 
 
 ♦ For a in the neut. pi. cf Latin, cp. BUcheler, i)ecl. p. 19. He 
 quotes Plautus, Men. 975, Stich. 378 ; Terence, Ad. G12.— Ed. 
 
 f This distinction is not strictly preserved in the translation of the 
 Grammar. — Ed. 
 
§ 128. DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 67 
 On § 128. 
 
 In the Attic dialect I have assumed -o only as 
 the termination of the genitive singular, because here 
 every trace of another element before the -o is lost. 
 But the observation on the Homeric forms in -olo 
 makes it sufficiently clear that -o has arisen out of 
 Lo, no doubt through the medium of jo. The chasm 
 also between the Homeric 6eo-lo and the form Oeov, 
 which was also in use in Homer's time, is filled up, 
 if in accordance with the indications of the Homeric 
 verse we allow certain genitives in -oo.^ Even Butt- 
 mann, Ausf. Gr, I, 299, suspected that the form oovj 
 which is contrary to all analogy and occurs but twice 
 (II. B. 325, Od. a. 70), both times before a double 
 consonant, ought to be written oo {oo Kpdro^, 60 Kkio^), 
 Ahrens went still further, inasmuch as he proposed, 
 Rhein, Mus. II, 161, and FormenL p. 15, to remove the 
 irregular lengthening in Od. k, 36 by reading 
 
 S&pa Trap" AloXoo fieyaXijropo'i 
 and naturally also k, 60 
 
 AloXoo kXvtcl Sco/nara 
 and similarly elsewhere. This sounds very probable. 
 But Leo Meyer (p. 27) goes further and gives forms 
 in -00 as Homeric, not only in cases where the con- 
 tracted form causes a difficulty in prosody, but even 
 in spondaic verses — e.g. B7]/jboo cfyrffjn^; (Od. f. 239) — 
 though the Homeric dialect certainly did allow such 
 verses under certain conditions ; and even maintains that 
 this older form ought to be restored in every instance 
 
 * Cp. Dindorf's edition of the Iliad, Oxford 1856, Praef. xxv. 
 The proposed form would be more probable if the sequence 00 were 
 common in Greek. Is it not possible that 6ov may be the middle 
 form between olo and od,J appearing as e {oeo oov), just as in the 
 futures we have irpa^iofiis, (pev^oijfieda, irpd^o/JL€V 1 — Ed. 
 
68 ACCIDENCE. § 133. 
 
 where it is not excluded by the metre. This is mere 
 extravagance due to ignorance of the language of Homer, 
 which, as we have already seen, everywhere exhibits 
 older and later forms side by side. In many of these 
 very verses the ear absolutely requires the later form. 
 In the grammar even those forms which have been 
 assumed with great probability have not been men- 
 tioned, because it is my invariable rule to pay atten- 
 tion to such forms only as really occur in current 
 texts, and in no case to enter the field of conjecture. 
 (On the genitive in oto in Homer see further Leskien, 
 in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 1867, p. 1 ff.) 
 
 In order to leave no room for the erroneous notion 
 that the epic genitive and dative dual in -ouv owe their 
 fuller form to a simple lengthening, it may be men- 
 tioned that those cases have lost a consonant before the 
 L, The complete termination, as is shown by the com- 
 parison of the Sanskrit vrka-bhjam — ^to the two wolves,' 
 was -<f)Lv. From \vko(^lv arose on the one hand Xvko'Cv, 
 \vKOLVy by dropping the </) ; and on the other, \v/coc-(j)cv, 
 XvKoL'Lv, by the addition of i to the stem- vowel, exactly 
 as in dat. plur. XvKOL-aL, Cp. Bopp, VergL Gram., I, 
 437, Schleicher, Compend., 590, for further information 
 on the dropping of the <^ and insertion of iota. The sup- 
 posed form \vKO(^Lv stands in exactly the same relation 
 to \vKOL(^iv as the locative forms TIXaTaiaa-i, ^AOrjvrjcn 
 (§ 179) to the ordinary datives in the Ionic form 
 UXaTaLaLai, 'AOrjvaiat, 
 
 On § 133. 
 
 The peculiar accentuation of the Attic declension is 
 evidently owing to the fact that these stems originally 
 ended in -do. From that time onwards, in spite of the 
 change of quantity, the acute continued frequently to 
 be placed . on the propenult : Meve-\ax)-^, MeveXeco-^;, 
 
134, 147. DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 69 
 
 « 
 
 avd}ya{L)o-v, avaryeco-v. For the same reason the same 
 peculiarity is found in the form of the gen. sing, 
 which is also called Attic^ e.g. TroXeco?; with which 
 compare Homeric 7r6Xr/o9. 
 
 On § 134. 
 The original termination of the ace. pi. -1/9 can be de- 
 duced from the Greek dialects even without the assistance 
 of the kindred languages. It is found in inscriptions 
 in the Cretan form TrpeLyevrd-vf; (Ahrens, Dor, 105) = 
 7r/3€<r/8ef Ta9, and apparently also in the Argive rov^ = 
 T0U9. Only by assuming such a termination can we 
 explain the forms of all the other dialects. The iEolians 
 of Lesbos replaced the lost v here, as elsewhere, by l, 
 Ta/9, Tot9, some of the Dorians by lengthening the vowel, 
 Ta9, TC09, others not at all, Ta9, T69, where the shortness 
 of the vowel is the characteristic. The lonians and 
 Attics adopted the compensatory lengthening usual with 
 them, Ta9, tou9. The Latin as, os resemble most the 
 Doric forms first mentioned. The old case-termination 
 occurs in the most complete form in Gothic vulfa-ns, 
 fiska-ns ; but traces are to be seen in almost all the 
 other families of the Indo-Germanic stock. (Bopp, 
 Vergl. Gr.^ I, 465 ff. ; Schleicher, Comp,, 547.) 
 
 On § 147. 
 
 The formation of the nom. sing, out of the stem is 
 an important element in the consonantal declension to 
 which the teacher must again and again return. Agree- 
 ably to the general principle of my arrangement this 
 formation is mentioned separately in each division ; but 
 the teacher will not find it difficult here, as elsewhere, 
 to give a connected view of what has been previously 
 
 * So too in the gen. plur. of masc. and fern., but the accentuation 
 of the neuter, e.g. do-reco^, is a matter of dispute. Good authorities 
 seem inclined to make such words paroxytone. — Ed. 
 
70 ACCIDENCE. § 147. 
 
 learned separately. The two formations of the nom. 
 sing, are distributed among the different kinds of stems 
 belonorinor to this declension in the foUowino^ manner : 
 the nom. sing, invariably ends in sigma in guttural and 
 labial stems, stems in 8 and 6, in the single stem in X, 
 a\, stems in weak vowels and diphthongs. Stems in 
 p^ and 9 never have sigma in the nom. sing. Stems in 
 T — especially vTj — in v and o, vary between the two 
 formations. From this synopsis it is clear that the 
 formation in sigma is the typical one, and predominant 
 by far. The intention of language was everywhere the 
 same, viz. to add the sibilant to the stem. Only in cases 
 where the addition gives rise to too hard a combination 
 of sounds this intention gives way to euphony. Even 
 then, language was intent upon distinguishing the nom. 
 from the stem. The lengthening which takes place in 
 the formation without sigma, e.g. from irarep to irarrjp^ 
 from Sac/jLov to Bal/xcov is manifestly due to the desire . 
 for compensation. Comparative grammarians therefore, 
 among whom Schleicher is most consistent (Comp., 
 p. 528), very properly assume as the original forms, 
 irarep'^, BaLfjiov-<;, aa^ea-f;. But for Greek grammar, 
 and especially for Greek school-grammar, the two 
 methods of forming the nominative, iroip^rjv from stem 
 iroLfiev, and eI-9 from stem ev, must be carefully dis- 
 tinguished. In cases where the addition of the sigma 
 causes difficulties, there are evidently before us two 
 periods in the history of language which must be chro- 
 nologically distinguished ; and this is, so far as I know, 
 a point of view w^hich has hitherto been unnoticed. 
 
 At a very early period in the life of language the 
 combinations rs and ss were felt to be distasteful. They 
 are avoided even in Sanskrit, and hence it is probable 
 that at a time anterior to the separate existence of 
 * We find fidKapSf Alcman 13 Bergk, and fidpTvs (infra p. 79). — Ed. 
 
§ 147. • DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 71 
 
 Greek the older termination -ars became -dr^ -ass 
 became -as, while in the other case-forms the short 
 vowel remained unaltered. From this ancient condition 
 of language — for which we have evidence in Sanskrit 
 pita (instead of pitdr = irarrjp) compared with Latin 
 pater, Sanskrit durmands = Greek Sv<;fjb€V7]<; — the Greek 
 borrowed the long vowel in irarrjp, p^rcopy (Ta<\>rj<i, alS(o<; 
 (St. aiSo<;). In the same way the combination ns began 
 at a very earlj period to be objectionable, and therefore 
 the sibilant was dropped in many cases, especially when 
 the stem ended in -n only. Thus ans became dn and 
 the Greek ov<; cov, e.g. in reicroyv = Sanskrit takshd (for 
 tahhdn) from the stem tcktov. The antiquity of such 
 foriiations is proved by the Latin o in ordo for or don, 
 stem ordon. 
 
 On the other hand, other combinations of sounds were 
 retained much longer, especially ns when a t had fallen 
 out after the n, for it is a comprehensive law in language 
 that hard combinations of sound are more tolerable when 
 they have arisen out of still harder combinations. Even 
 from a due regard to clearness of meaning language 
 imposes certain limits on the changes of sound. Thus 
 Latin ars for art-s, Mars for Marts remained unaltered, 
 while paters was intolerable, and for the same reason 
 we have dens, but not ordens or ordon-s. For the same 
 reason forms like rcOev-^ were long retained on Greek 
 ground ; they are indeed to some extent actually 
 vouched for as Argive (Ahrens, Dor. 105). From 
 this, at a comparatively recent date, came TL0€i-<; by the 
 usual compensatory lengthening, from oSoz/t-9, 6Sov<;. 
 It cannot certainly be denied that language was incon- 
 sistent. In the formation of participles especially, we 
 must assume an early variation, by which in the conju- 
 gation with the connecting vowel the lengthening of the 
 stem-vowel replaced the sigma. In the conjugation 
 
72 ACCIDENCE. § 148. 
 
 without the connecting vowel, on the other hand, the 
 form with the sigma remained, rt^ez/r-?, from which 
 later rcOek, A similar variation may be found in the 
 n-stems, cp. Tiprjv with eI-9. * 
 
 On § 148 Obs, 
 
 The reference to § 85 is intended to show that the 
 accentuation of ^Ayd/jbe/jupov harmonizes with the gene- 
 ral accentuation of compound words, as also that of 
 SooKpaT€<;, Arj/jboaOeve^; (§ 165). Accurately speaking 
 therefore the accent cannot be said to be thrown back. 
 As in the vocative we find the pure stem, we must 
 look to this case also for the natural stem-accent. 
 The intention of language which aimed at accenting 
 the first element in compound words can only be 
 carried out in the vocative. In the nom. it is frus- 
 trated by the length of the final syllable. This beccmes 
 still more clear from the comparison of forms like 
 'IdaoVy 'Aperdov, in which as being simple there is 
 no such intention on the part of language. There 
 are, it is true, exceptions like the stems in -rjvop, 
 e.g. 'EXirrjvop and others. It is not the object of a 
 school-grammar to point out individual cases of this 
 kind, and therefore the rule Is so framed that the 
 attention of the pupil is merely awakened to the 
 varieties of accentuation which occur. The attempt 
 to start in every case from the stem-form in explain- 
 ing accentuation, though scientifically correct, presents 
 great difficulties in practice. I believe I have done 
 right in limiting the accent, which in a true sense 
 gives life to the word, to really living forms, f 
 
 * I have discussed the formation of the nom. sing, in detail in 
 Studien II., 159 ff. 
 
 f There is a very interesting essay on ' Greek accent,' by Professor 
 Hadley, in Essays Philological and, Critical^ Macmillan 1873. Cp. 
 also Bopp, in Kuhn's Zeitschrift^ III, p. 1 ff. — Ed. 
 
§§ 149-156. DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 73 
 
 On § 149. 
 
 The difference between 'xapie-ai and TiOeiat is ex- 
 plained bj the fact that the adjectives from an early 
 period had forms in -er, i.e. in -fer, existing side by 
 side with the stems in -evr, originally -Fevr (arovofeaaa 
 on the epitaph of Arniades, Fleckeisen's Jahrb., 89, 
 p. 544). For the same reason the feminine of %aptet9 
 is 'XP'pi-eaaa (cp. § 187), that is 'xapL-Fer-ba^ in dis- 
 tinction from TLOela-a i.e. riOevr-ia, In a similar 
 manner the corresponding adjectives in Sanskrit vary 
 between the ^strong' form -vant and the ^weak' form 
 'Vat (cp. Ebel in the Zeitschr, filr vergl, Sprachforschimg, 
 I, 298). 
 
 On § 154. 
 
 Accusatives plural in -et? like TroXet? and y\vK€L<; 
 are noticeable. The anomalous contraction from -ca? 
 is probably owing to the analogy of the nom. plur. 
 The same holds good of the rarer formation of the 
 same case in stems in -eu (§ 161 Obs.), 
 
 On § 156. 
 
 For practical reasons, and for the sake of brevity, 
 stems in r and are classified with those in S, in 
 spite of the considerable differences between them. 
 The B in stems like iptS, iXircS has, — as I have 
 briefly mentioned already (p. 59), and elsewhere shown 
 in detail {Grundz,, 583 ff.), — arisen out of Jod, and 
 therefore never occurs except before vowels. The 
 true stem, from a scientific point of view, is here 
 ipc, iXiTL, and there is no reason whatever to assume 
 a nom. eptS?, cXtt^S?. On the other hand, in x^P^'^ 
 and KopV'^j we must assume real stems %ap^T and 
 Kopvd, and the formation of the ace. X^pL-Vy Kopv-v 
 is due to Heteroklisis (§ 174). 
 
74 ACCIDENCE. §§ 160, 161. 
 
 On § 160. 
 
 The formation of the ace. pi. in diphthong-stems, 
 with the exception of those in eu, is worthy of obser- 
 vation. The difference between ypa-e^, i.e. jpaF-e^;, 
 )8o-e9, i.e. ^oF-€<;, and the ace. rypav'<;, ySo{}-9, ol-?, 
 is explained by the fact that the termination of the 
 nom. pi. is -e9, but that of the ace. -1^9. This 1/9 
 could be added to those stems without any difficulty 
 — /3ot;-i/9, 7/oau-i^9, and afterwards the v disappeared. 
 There was no reason to insert the auxiliary vowel a. 
 In the same manner o-{)-9 is not contracted from av-a<;, 
 or the Herodotean 7r6X,Z-9 from 7r6Xt-a9, but both are 
 formed in the oldest and simplest manner. These 
 ace. pi. stand to those in -a9 in exactly the same 
 relation as ace. sing, in -v (^ov-v, ttoXl-v) to those 
 in -a. 
 
 On § 161. 
 
 The special peculiarities of the stems in -ev are 
 most simply explained if we start from the Homeric 
 forms. These present, for the most part, a long vowel 
 in those cases in which the u, or rather its representa- ' 
 tive f, is dropped. Forms like /8ao-tX,^-09, ^aaikrj-a 
 are apparently to be explained by the fact that the 
 lengthening of the vowel here compensates the loss 
 of the consonant, and therefore ^aacXef-o^y ^aaikeF-a, 
 not ^aaiXrif'0<;, ^aacXTjf-ay were the original forms. 
 From the Homeric forms arose ^aaLXi-m, ^ao-iXi-a^ 
 by metathesis of the quantity ; but the long vowel is 
 not preserved consistently throughout, for the i of the 
 dative is always, and the a of the ace. sing, and 
 plur. frequently, shortened. In the nom. plur. the old 
 Attic forms in -779 are apparently derived from forms 
 in -r]€<;. The effect of a lost digamma in lengthening 
 
§ 164 ff. DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 75 
 
 the adjacent vowel was first pointed out by Ebel, 
 Zeitschr, fiXr vergl. Sprachf,, IV, 171. We shall recur 
 to this phenomenon in discussing the augment. 
 
 On § 164 fi". 
 
 An objection has been made to the expression 
 ^elided stems,' because elision is the term elsewhere 
 given in the grammar to the rejection of one vowel 
 before another. By the addition ^ which reject the 
 final consonant in certain forms' I have guarded 
 against any mistake, and a better, and at the same 
 time shorter, term is not yet current. A closer exa- 
 mination will show that the three principal divisions 
 of the consonant declension have been so arranged, 
 that in the first division the final consonant is always 
 retained; in the second it emerges out of the vowel 
 in certain forms ; in the third, on the other hand, it 
 frequently disappears before vowels. 
 
 In the third principal division the sigma-stems 
 occupy the first place, owing to their frequency, and 
 because in them the characteristic mark of this di- 
 vision is shown most clearly. The discovery that the 
 sigma in 761/09, ev^evrj^ belongs to the stem has 
 already been mentioned as peculiarly fruitful in re- 
 sults, because by it alone we can gain a correct 
 insight into the formation of the vocative (ScoKpare^), 
 the nom. ace. voc. neut. (evyevi^;), the comparative 
 (evyevearepos;), and finally such compounds as cVeo-- 
 ^o\o-9, (TafC€o--^6po-(;, in which the older grammarians 
 were always compelled by their stupid and foolish 
 method to assume the addition of sigma — an addition 
 entirely without cause. The omission of sigma before 
 vowels is vindicated in § 61 b, and before a second 
 sigma in the dative plural, in § 49. Nevertheless, 
 a knowledge of Sanskrit was required to extend this 
 
76 ACCIDENCE. § 168. 
 
 correct view more widely. But when Bopp had 
 shown that /x€z/09 is exactly synonymous with Sanskrit 
 manas, that the genitive of the latter is manas-as, 
 the loc. manaS'i, the gen. plur. manas-dm, the loc. 
 plur. manas-su, it became clear that the corresponding 
 forms in Greek were at one time /jbevea-o^, ^evea-i^ 
 fjL€V€<T'Cov, fjL€V€<T-aL ; iTi fact wc find forms like ^eXecr-o-t 
 actually existing in Homer by the side of ^eke-eacri, 
 which naturally arose out of ^€'X£<T-e(TaL, When the 
 proper path had thus been pointed out, the true rela- 
 tion of the Greek to the Latin words of similar 
 formation also became apparent. It was seen that 
 the r in gener-is arose out of s ; that therefore the 
 old Lat. genes-is (cp. foedes-is in Varro L. L. VII, 
 § 27) — according to all analogy for a still older 
 genes-US J genes-os — was exactly similar to the oldest 
 Greek form. Even in the change of vowels the two 
 languages exactly correspond. The nom. only has 
 the deeper vowel; all the other cases present the 
 clearer one. Hence we might be inclined to assume 
 the nominative form {yivo<;) as the stem, and to 
 regard the forms with e (yeve^) as weakened from 
 this. But our principle is to denote the unchangeable 
 element as the stem, and therefore it was advisable 
 to start from the form with e ; at the same time 
 the kindred adjectives ev-^eve^, Sv<;-j€V€^, with their 
 unchangeable e (cp. Lat. de-gener), are most simply 
 explained from this form. 
 
 On § 168. 
 
 The stems with moveable r, few in number, are best 
 explained on the hypothesis that language has here been 
 led to waver between two stems, one short and the other 
 lengthened by the addition of r. Accurately speaking 
 there has here been no rejection of r, which would be 
 
§ 169. DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 77 
 
 without a parallel in the constant use of this consonant 
 in inflexion and the formation of words. But there 
 were two stems, e g. K€pa<; and Kepar, standing side by 
 side ; and each having the same sound in the nomina- 
 tive. From each cases were formed which continued 
 to remain in use side by side. 
 
 On § 169. 
 
 The same holds good of the stems with moveable v. 
 
 The rejection of i/ as a phonetic process cannot be vindi- 
 cated. This class contains scarcely any other than the 
 comparative stems, in which the -lov, as the correspond- 
 ing form in Sanskrit shows, has arisen out of -tans or 
 -jans (Sanskrit -yans, e.g. svdd-ijans = rjS-Lov), see Bopp, 
 
 VergL Gram,, II, 36, Schleicher, Comp., 480. Of the 
 two consonants v and o-, the latter has, as a rule, dis- 
 appeared, perhaps through the medium of vv as in .^olic 
 fjifjvvo^ =: Attic /jL7jv6<; for firjvao^; (cp. Latin mensis), 
 Latin, on the other hand, has thrust out the nasal, and 
 retained the s ; sud{d)v'{os. The older language (Varro 
 L. L. VII, 27 meliosem) carried the s throughout all the 
 cases ; but at a later period it passed into r between two 
 vowels, and at length remained only in nom. ace. sing, 
 of the neuter ; suavius (for suavios). But in the long o 
 of suavioris at least the effect of the nasal also is still felt. 
 I have no doubt therefore that for the Grraeco-Italic 
 period of the language we must assume a stem suadv- 
 ions. And it appears probable to me that even in Greek 
 certain case-forms with <r as ((r)faB-tova-'a-v = suddv- 
 ions-em remained current, which afterwards lost their 
 V : {(T)fdStoaa, and became regarded as analogous to 
 the sigma-stems. Such forms — at a somewhat later 
 period of the language — naturally rejected a : FaSioa, 
 FaBlco (rjSLQ))y exactly as alSoa-ay alho-a, aiSoo. Ebel, 
 Zeitsclmft, I, 300, quotes this view as Benary's (cf. 
 
78 ACCIDENCE. §§ 176, 177. 
 
 Pott, Et. Forsch. IP, 849). He himself is in doubt 
 about it on account of the three forms ^AttoWco, 
 UoaeiSa), and Homeric KVKeio), for which this explana- 
 tion does not hold good. But in fact the origin of these 
 three words is unknown, and every attempt at explana- 
 tion must be given up. In a school-grammar therefore 
 the old doctrine of the rejection of v must be retained, 
 especially as the origin of the comparative suffix cannot 
 well be explained without reference to Sanskrit.* 
 
 On § 176. 
 
 ^ Several neuter stems in apr, as (jypeapr, reject r in 
 nom. ace. and voc. sing, and p in other cases.' 
 
 That this explanation is correct is shown especially 
 by the Sanskrit jakrt, i.e. jakart (cp. Latin jecur) — 
 synonymous with the Grreek '^irap — in which both con- 
 sonants stand side by side, Grundziige^ 420. A parallel 
 to the rejection of p will be found in the Homeric itotI 
 by the side of irpori (Cret. Tropri), In the stems aKapr 
 and viapr the vowel in nom. ace. sing, is deepened and 
 lengthened : o-/cft)/>, vhtap. 
 
 On § 177. 
 Those words are to be regarded as anomalous the 
 inflexion of which cannot be derived from any single 
 stem with the help of the laws of sound. But on taking 
 a closer view of the relation which exists between the 
 various stems which are united to make one word, we 
 find that here again certain analogies come to the sur- 
 face. Some of the most extensive of these are mentioned 
 in §§ 174, 175. In § 177, on the other hand, several 
 anomalies are quoted in alphabetical order ; the main 
 .reason being that in each of these there is something 
 
 * There is an apparent rejection of v in a7}Zovs — a7}Z6voi, The con- 
 tracted form may however arise from the Mitylenaean d-^^w. Ahrens, 
 J^ol. p. 118.— Ed. 
 
§ 177. DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 79 
 
 deserving particular notice. Many of the words here 
 introduced can obviously be classed among the analogies 
 already pointed out. Thus the irregularity of "Apiji; 
 evidently rests on the same principle as that of Sco/cpdTT]^;^ 
 with an additional irregularity in the quantity of the 
 vowel; Homeric "-4p7;-o9, Attic "Ap€0)<; beside " Ap€o<;, — 
 The words yovu and Sopv, which are exactly similar, 
 together with No. 22 Kupa and their secondary forms in 
 T, are analogous to those mentioned in § 175 ; No. 20 
 epa)9 is analogous to those in § 169 D. But in the 
 first mentioned the metathesis of the final v into the 
 preceding syllable is peculiar ; Hom. yovv-a, i.e. yovv-a, 
 cp. Lat. genu^a, Bovpa = Bopv-a are parallels to the 
 metathesis of v in /nel^cov from fjuey-ccov. — No. 17 u/0-9 
 and 19 'Ai8-7j'(; with their complementary stems of 
 shorter and longer form have a precedent in oXk by the 
 side of aXfCT], va-fiiv and vajjbivr) (§ 175 D). The stem 
 oaao (No. 25), usual in the tragedians, stands to the 
 Homeric stem oaa, in oWe, exactly as ipi7}po-<; to plur. 
 €pLr]p-€<;, as BaKpv-o-v to haKpv. Further inquiry shows 
 that oaae has arisen out of o/c^-e, consequently that the 
 stem in 6kl {Grundziige^ 423) which is retained to this 
 day in the Bohemian dual oci (pronounce otschi), and 
 the stem in its original form in the Lithuanian aki-s, 
 — The rejection of p in ^dprv-^ is similar to that in 
 <^peapy Tjirap, The mobility of in the stem opviO is 
 like that in Kopvd (§ 156). 
 
 The remaining anomalies, which are not numerous, 
 can be explained in part by very simple changes of 
 sound. In dvrjp the irregularity rests on the same syn- 
 cope as in the stems discussed in § 153 ; only in this 
 case we have the insertion of a 8 as an auxiliary conso- 
 nant (§ 51, Ohs. 2). The stem dpv is only so far anoma- 
 lous as it is without a nominative. The a in dat. plur. 
 apv-d-oTL is obviously the same as in irarp-d-ac, dpBp-d- 
 
80 ACCIDENCE. § 177. 
 
 crt, vUd-<Tu — The same vowel is inserted in Xa-a-^ to 
 facilitate the formation of the nom. and ace. sing. The 
 stem was originally Xaf, from which Xev-eiv (Grundz,, 
 505). — vav-<; is so far anomalous that the diphthong 
 undergoes various changes, but these all take place in a 
 manner strictly in accordance with the phonetic inclina- 
 tions of the language. 
 
 The anomaly of ov<; is of a similar kind. The full 
 stem is found in the Ionic ovar-a. ovar became 
 weakened to 6 Far, the digamma was rejected, and oar 
 became contracted into wr. This contracted form was 
 used throughout in the Doric dialect, and the word was 
 therefore quite regular. In Homeric and Attic, on the 
 other hand, the nom. was certainly retained for a 
 longer time in the diphthongal form ova'^, from which 
 by contraction arose ou?. See further Grundz.y 374. 
 On the Homeric forms of this word a remark may 
 here be made. In Homer the following forms occur : 
 ace. sing. oS?, gen. ovaTO^, nom. ace. plur. ovara, dat. 
 ovacTLv. But singularly enough by the side of these 
 forms which occur so often as to be beyond doubt, we 
 find in one single passage the Attic form oxj/z/, at the 
 close of the narrative about the Sirens. Od. fi. 200. 
 ov a(f)tv eir coalv akeiyfr (viz, Krjpov), 
 
 In this passage Eustathius, it is true (p. 1707, 39), 
 gives the variant iraonv instead of iir coalv, but this will 
 hardly satisfy anybody. If however we compare the 
 corresponding account given in verse 177 — 
 
 €^€L7)<; 8' erdpoLaiv iir ovara iraaiv aXecyfraj 
 
 and 47 — 
 
 eiTL o ovar aXecyaL eraipcou, 
 it becomes very probable that the original form of 
 line 200 was 
 
 ft) a(pLi/ €7r ovar aXecyfr . 
 So too in Iliad W, 264, 153 we ought to read 
 
§ 179. DECLENSION OF SUBST. AND ADJECT. 81 
 
 ovaroevra instead of oDTcoevra with the more confidence 
 as the &) in the second place is very extraordinary, as 
 Buttmann perceived, Ausf. Gr. II, 451. Lastly we read 
 in Iliad A 109— 
 
 ^Avn^ov av irapa ov<; eXaae ^i(l)€Cj 
 
 where Bekker has now adopted Heyne's conjecture 
 avre Trap* ov<; to remove the intolerable hiatus. Perhaps 
 the pronunciation was at one time irap' oa<;. The 
 lengthening of the final syllable in the main caesura is 
 not at all remarkable. If this conjecture be true, we 
 should have the required transitional form assumed by 
 Herodian (Lentz II, 381) in this passage. 
 
 On the irregularity of the word Zeu-9, which is 
 explained by the comparison of the kindred languages, 
 we may here refer to Grundz, 562 ; for yvvr} to ib, 630. 
 With regard to the first word it can be made intelligible 
 even to the pupil that Zev-? stands for Auev-^ (cp. § 58), 
 and is thus not far removed from the stem AlF in 
 Al{F)-6<;, etc. 
 
 On § 179. 
 
 The locative was originally common to Greek with 
 all the Indo-Germanic languages. It is retained in 
 Latin in the names of towns (Romce, Corinthi), and in a 
 few appellatives in common use (domi, belli, ruri) ; but 
 we required the aid of Sanskrit in order to recognize it as 
 a separate case, distinct from gen. and dat., and to a cer- 
 tain extent from the ablative. It has left but few traces 
 in Greek ; o'Uol is the most common instance. jEschylus 
 has also irehou (Prom. 615, 272), and apfxoi ; the JEolians 
 fjbkaaoi, Joannes Alexandrinus {Tovlkcl Trapay^ikfiara, 
 p. 36, 6) quotes also ^vdol. The pronominal adverbs 
 TToZ, oly are other examples of this case, which is more 
 common in proper names, being frequently found in 
 
 G 
 
82 ACCIDENCE. § 178 D. 
 
 combination with a preposition, like the other cases, e.g. 
 iv nptavaioL on a Cretan inscription (C. I. 2556), and 
 in Simonides {Frag. 209 Schneid.) iv 'ladfiot x^l^^^ 
 = humi, which has been introduced into the text of the 
 grammar, is the only example belonging to the A-de- 
 clension. It is formed from a stem which is now found 
 only in 'xa/jud-Bc^, ^a/xa-fe, x^fjud-Oev, and with a change 
 of vowel, in x^/no-Oev. Some irregularities of proper 
 names are treated by Lobeck, Elem, Path, II, 252. 
 
 On § 178 D. 
 
 The Homeric forms in (^i{v) belong to an extensive 
 class of case-formations in which the characteristic 
 element was, in its original form, the syllable IhL In 
 Sanskrit we find the suffix of the instrumental plur. 
 -bhi-s, the dat. abl. plur. -bhjas (= Lat. bus), the dat. 
 instr. dual -bhjdm, belonging to this class. Connected 
 with it is the termination -bi, in Latin si-bi, ti-bi, u-bL 
 These various applications of this suffix, which in San- 
 skrit becomes specified by additional elements (on which 
 cp. Bopp, VergL Gram. I, 420 ff".), form the reason why 
 the Greek termination is not limited to one case, but 
 corresponds sometimes to the dat. in the sense of the 
 means or accompanying notion {6€6<^iv ^Irj-^i), some- 
 times to the locative (Bvpij-^L, irapa vav<f)iv), and 
 sometimes to the genitive, especially in combination with 
 various prepositions {diro 7raaa-a\6(f>L, Sia arr^deai^iv). 
 A complete enumeration of all the Homeric forms is 
 given by Leo Meyer {Gedrdngte VergL der Griech, und 
 Lat, Bed. Berlin 1862, p. 54 ff*.), and the whole 
 subject has been carefully treated by Franz Lissner in 
 the Programme of the K. K. Gymnasium at Olmutz, 
 1865. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 OTHER INFLEXIONS OF THE ADJECTIVE. 
 
 This whole chapter properly belongs to the formation 
 of words, and occupies a position here solely on account 
 of its great practical importance. 
 
 On % 187. 
 
 The observation on this paragraph contains in brief 
 the result of my more detailed discussion of these 
 formations in Grundz. 617.* In my earlier editions I 
 assumed that the hypothetical form iravT-ia passed first 
 into Trava-ta, and then into irava-a^ iracra. Further 
 inquiry has led me to the conclusion that this was not 
 the path which language followed. The cr is found in 
 all Greek dialects in this place, but in the Doric dialect 
 T before l does not become a (cp. ^a-rii (pav-rC) ; con- 
 sequently the a- cannot be due to the influence of the 
 c, but has more probably arisen out of Jod ; and from 
 TravT-aa came the usual form iraaa. 
 
 On § 188. 
 Without the aid of Sanskrit it would be difficult to 
 understand how the fem. in -via is connected with the 
 corresponding masc. stem in -or. The Sanskrit perfect 
 
 * In the English Translation of the Grammar the earlier view 
 is given. In the ninth edition of the original. the Obs. is as 
 follows. * The form of the feminine is explained thus. — The i (cp. 
 § 57) passes into tr. Before this a-, vt is dropped with compensatory 
 lengthening; vavT-ia, iravT-(ra, ira-aa, \vovr-ia, XvovT-aa, \\jov-<ra,^ 
 —Ed. 
 
84 ACCIDENCE. §§ 191, 198 D. 
 
 participle has the suffix -vat^ with an alternative form 
 'Vas, e.g. vid-vat =^elB-0T ; the fern. usJii, i.e. usi, e.g. 
 vid'Ushly for an older vid-usi. From this it is clear that 
 the Greek form in -oj goes back to -for ; an origin 
 which suits admirably the numerous Homeric forms 
 which like reOprj-cof;, rer^T^-co?, have a long vowel before 
 this suffix. As the Greek feminine termination -la 
 corresponds to the Indian i, we should have expected at 
 first to have -For-ia, But the weaker form in -^vas 
 appears to have existed beside the form -vat at an early 
 period. And this form also underwent a further weak- 
 ening, which in Sanskrit is common enough, but is rare 
 in Greek ; us, Greek u?, took the place of -vas, Greek 
 Fo^, just as, for instance, the shorter stem kvv took the 
 place of Kvovj and as the Greek u7r-ro-9 corresponds 
 to the Sanskrit svap-na-s (of the same meaning), for 
 which we have also evidence in Latin sop-io, som-nu-s 
 for sop-nu-s. Thus arose vcr-ia and with the usual 
 rejection of a between two vowels -vca. Cp. pp. 10 and 
 
 li.* 
 
 On § 191. 
 
 The stem ttoWo is connected with ttoXv through the 
 form TToXFo. The difference therefore consists merely 
 in the addition of a hard vowel in order to make the 
 declension both in case and gender more easy. The 
 Homeric 7rouXi^-9, ttouXu, is due to the attraction of the 
 vowel into the preceding syllable; cp. e^Vtby the side of 
 hi {Grundzilge 630). This process has been already 
 touched upon, and it was shown to be of great import- 
 ance for understanding the comparatives (p. 44). 
 
 On § 198 D. 
 On l3pd(Tcr(ov cp. Grundz, 622 ff. This form only 
 
 * These forms are discussed in detail by Sonne in Kuhn's Ztschr. 
 f. vergl. Sj)rachforschnng xii. 290 f. 
 
§ 199. OTHER INFLEXIONS OF THE ADJECTIVE. 85 
 
 occurs in II. K 226, and in deriving it from ^/?a%u-9j 
 and not, as is usual, from /SpaSu-?, we are merely 
 following the old tradition which can be shown to have 
 existed among the Greeks themselves, as the Scholion 
 of Aristonicus on this passage proves, ^paxicov, the 
 hypothetical form for ^pdcracov, is quoted by Hesychius, 
 who also explains the dialectical form ^p6aaovo<i by 
 ^paxvT€pov, and /3pd')(^LO'To-<i is used several times by 
 Sophocles. The reasons why we cannot allow aa to 
 arise from Bj have been already mentioned (p. 45). 
 
 On § 199.* 
 
 In my first edition dp^eivwv was compared with the 
 Latin ainoenus; a comparison which is by no means 
 improbable. But there are some difficulties in the way, 
 chief among which is the fact, that on this hypothesis, 
 this word would be the only representative in Greek 
 of the root am, am-or, ama-re, so common in Latin. 
 The comparison therefore does not seem to have attained 
 such a degree of certainty as to admit of its introduc- 
 tion into a school-grammar. 
 
 The stem ape?, which we most naturally assume for 
 dpeiwVj and with which aptar-o^ also is connected, is 
 without doubt related to dpe-rrj, but also to dpe-aK-w, 
 and belongs to the root dp- (to join or fit), Grundz. 
 318. 
 
 In the stem x^P' ^^ X^^P^^* %6/!/9t(7To-9 the fun- 
 damental idea is in all probability that of inferiority 
 (Grundz. 189). 
 
 The stem 97/cu is assumed for riaacov according to the 
 analogy of rjhv, Tayy, ^P<^X^ ^^^ others. The final 
 vowel may, it is true, have been perhaps somewhat 
 different. The kindred languages do not offer any 
 
 * On this subject cp. the excellent discussions in Franz Weihrich's 
 Be gradibm com^arationis. Gissae, 1869. 
 
86 ACCIDENCE. § 199. 
 
 analogous word, from which to draw a certain con- 
 clusion as to meaning and form. 
 
 For jjueiayv no stem has been given, because none can 
 be obtained without somewhat complicated combina- 
 tions. On the connexion of fie-icov with fjut-vv-o), Lat. 
 mi-nus, and Goth, mins, ' less,' which exhibit an 
 additional nasal, cp. Grundz, 313. fjLCKp6-<;, of which 
 the fuller form is ajiLKpo-^;, is certainly not connected 
 etymologicallj with this word. 
 
 More intelligible even to the pupil is the stem eXa^y , 
 which is preserved in the fem. iXax^'^ci, in Hjmn. in 
 Apoll. Pyth. 19, and in the compound ikaxv-Trripv^ in 
 Pindar. In Od. l 116, /c 509, Bekker now rightly 
 reads prjaof; eireiT eka^^la with Zenodotus, instead of 
 the xx^udl Xaxela. It is certain that the explanation of 
 this word by evyeLo^ mentioned in the scholiasts and 
 based on the derivation from Xa%atVeti/ (to dig), is 
 absurd, for in t 122 we have 
 
 OUT apa 7roLfJLV7j(TCV Karato'X'^TaL ovr aporoiaiv. 
 
 Most modern interpreters have followed Nitzsch, who 
 ^struck out a dark path' to another explanation, by 
 which, with the aid of a very doubtful etymology, he 
 arrived at the meaning ' rough.' 
 
 The comparative TrXe-lcov goes back to the stem irXe 
 (cp. TrifiTrXrjfjbc) in TrXe-w?, 7r\?;-/o-7;9, Ija.t, ple-nit-s y which 
 again is connected with the root ttcX, whence ttoXv-^. 
 
 The peculiar variation of the quantity and of the 
 consonants in Ka\6-<; is explained by the origin from 
 kalja-Sj which in Sanskrit means 'sound, whole,' and 
 corresponds etymologically to German heil (Grundz. 
 134). Hence KaXK-icov, to /cd\\o<;, and Doric even 
 KaXKa = /caX<w9. 
 
 The shorter stem, from which pacou, paarof; arose, 
 is seen most clearly in pa-Ovfjuo-^;, in Homeric pea, pela, 
 
§§ 200-4. OTHER INFLEXIONS OF THE ADJECTIVE. 87 
 
 while pa-hio-^y Homeric prj-l-Bio-t;, is a further adjectival 
 derivative from it. 
 
 On § 200. 
 
 The positive of varepo^ can only be quoted from 
 Sanskrit in the preposition ut, or as it appears to be 
 jnore correctly written ud, from which are formed ut- 
 tara-s ' the higher, later,' ut-tama-s ' the highest, latest.' 
 The a has arisen by dissimilation (§ 46). A suggestion 
 on a Greek residuum of this positive is given in Grundz, 
 214. 
 
 eaxctro'^ is evidently connected with the prep, e^, in 
 the sense of eoctremus. Grundz, 358. 
 
 On §§ 203 and 204 D. 
 
 The Homeric eiraaavrepoL is evidently to be compared 
 with aao-oT€pco, It is a comparative formed from a 
 comparative (cp. tt/ocot^o-to?). v stands for o after 
 ^olic fashion as in Trpu-raz/^-? from the prep, irpo, and 
 Homeric afjLV'Bi<i (cp. afia) aWu-St? (cp. dWo-ae), 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 INFLEXION OF PRONOUNS. 
 On § 205. 
 
 The stem of the third personal pronoun had originally 
 only the meaning ^ self,' and therefore even from the 
 very beginning, and not only in consequence of mis- 
 usage, could it be applied to the first and second persons 
 to express the reflexive reference of these to the subject. 
 This fact has been proved to demonstration by com- 
 parative grammar. The Sclavonian languages are of 
 especial importance in this respect, because to this 
 day they use the corresponding reflexive pronoun for 
 all three persons (cp. Miklosich, Ueber den reflexiven 
 Gebrauch des Pronomens ov, Sitzungsberichte der Wiener 
 Ak. 1). But in German dialects also the same phe- 
 nomenon occurs (Grrimm. Deutsche Gram. IV, 319) ; 
 and the origin of the r in the passive voice of the 
 Italian languages from se rests on the same ground (cp. 
 Schomann, Redetheile 109). Hence in Greek Fi--hLo-<; 
 later l-Sto-9 belongs to the stem Fe for older crFe. Hence 
 also the use of eavrov compounded with e, and the 
 derivative e6-9, 0-9 for the first and second person (§ 471 
 C). The want of insight into language on the part of the 
 editors of the old texts can occasionally be recognized 
 in the attempt to remove these usages by conjectures 
 which are at once superfluous and groundless. 
 
 The -^olic forms in Homer d/jb/jb€<;, vfifjie^;, etc., have 
 had to contend with a somewhat similar prejudice. To 
 
§§212ff., 213. INFLEXION OF PRONOUNS. 89 
 
 a certain extent they are allowed to count merely as 
 metrical helps which would be only introduced in place 
 of the common forms, where they fitted better into the 
 verse. But the ^olisms in Homer are by no means 
 few and not at all restricted to forms which are con- 
 venient to the metre (cp. iTraa-'avrepoL, p. 87).* 
 
 On § 212 /. 
 
 In all except the personal pronouns the characteristic 
 of the declension lies only in the formation of the neuter 
 singular, in which we find the pure stem, and not as 
 in the adjectives of the 0-declension, an additional v 
 in nom. and ace. case. But originally, this gender also 
 had a termination, viz. r, corresponding to the d in 
 Latin, i-d, illu-dj quo-d, so that aXXo is exactly identical 
 with aliu-d. For according to § 67 the dental consonant 
 could not be retained in Greek. 
 
 On § 213. 
 
 It is pure accident that a few forms of the relative 
 pronoun with initial spiritus asper are identical in 
 sound with some forms of the demonstrative pronoun 
 (the article of the later Greek). The relative stem 
 originally began with Jod. 0-9, tj, o, correspond to the 
 SsLnskrit ja-s, jd, ja-t, whereas the article arose out of 
 sa, Grundz, 367 fF. Nevertheless even this stem must 
 in the first instance have had a demonstrative meaning, 
 a residuum of which still remains in the Attic usage koX 
 09 e^?;, and in the demonstrative use of the adverb w9, 
 which is formed from this stem. In the relative use of 
 the forms with initial r, rov, tw, in the Ionic dialect we 
 see more plainly still that the separation of the relative 
 
 * An excellent account of the use of the dialects in Homer will 
 be found in Dr. Ernst Herzog's Untersiichiingen iiber die Bxldv/tigs- 
 geschichte der griech. und lat. Sjprachen, Leipzig 1871. — Ed. 
 
90 ACCIDENCE. § 214. 
 
 from the demonstrative was gradual in Greek. The 
 fact therefore is certain — and it is exceedingly import- 
 ant for syntax, and more especially for the explanation 
 of compound sentences — that the Greek language 
 arrived at its relative pronoun, the most complete means 
 for combining sentences, by starting from two pronoun- 
 stems different in origin, but both demonstrative. 
 Compare the detailed Untersuchungen ilber den Ursprung 
 des Relativpronomens, by Dr. Ernst Windisch in the 
 second volume of the Studien, 
 
 The form oov, as has been already mentioned (p. 67), 
 is in all probabiHty merely an incorrect mode of writing 
 for 00. More remarkable is the quite singular fem. e/;?, 
 II. U 208. Perhaps the old j has been retained here 
 under the form e. Other instances of a like nature are 
 collected in Grundz. 554 ff. 
 
 On § 214. 
 
 To the same change, i.e. of j to €, are due the 
 Ionic forms of the pronoun-stem tl, req), reoLaiv, as is 
 shown most clearly by the corresponding -^olic forms 
 r/ft), TioicTLv (Ahrens, ^^ol, 127). By the addition 
 of a vowel, the stem tl, like the stem ttoXv, passed 
 into the 0-declension. tl-o afterwards became re-o. 
 Finally the vowel was entirely lost by contraction. 
 Thus we may explain the Attic forms rov, tc5, which 
 again are only accidentally the same in sound with 
 the corresponding cases of the article. On the origin 
 of the stem n and its identity with the Latin qui^ cp. 
 Grundz. 446. 
 
CHAPTERS X.— XIL 
 
 THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 
 
 The following table, taken with some additions from the English 
 edition of the grammar, will give a convenient synopsis of the 
 arrangement of the verb which is discussed in the following pages. 
 The §§ are those of the Grammar. 
 
 INFLEXION OF THE VERBS. 
 
 List of Paradigms. §§ 225—230. 
 Elfd, Table L 
 
 Synopsis of Xvcj (exhibiting the meaning of the tenses). Table II. 
 
 VERBS IN w. 
 
 A. Vowel-stems. 
 
 1. Uncontracted Xi/w. Table III. 
 
 2. Contracted rt/ictw, 0tX^w, 8ov\6u}. Table IV. . 
 
 B. Consonant stems. 
 
 1. Guttural stems ttX^/cw, (pe&ycj, rdaa-cj. Table V. 
 
 2. Dental stems xj/eijdofAai, ireiduj, ko/ji,1^u). Table VI. 
 
 3. Labial stems tt^/^ttw, Xeiirta^ KaX&irTU). Table VII. 
 
 4. Liquid stems dipca, d77^\Xw, (nreLpoj. Table VIII. 
 
 VERBS IN fu. 
 
 First class rierjfiL, didujfu, Uri/jfu. Table IX. 
 Second class deUvvfii. Table X. 
 
 Chapter X. 
 Mrst Principal Conjugation or Verbs in w. 
 
 I. The Present-stem. 
 
 A. Inflexion of the Present-stem. § 231—233. 
 
 B. The Augment. § 234—242. 
 
 C. Contracted Verbs. § 243—244. 
 
 D. Distinctioa of the Present-stem from the Verb- stem. 
 
 § 246—253. 
 
92 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 II. The Strong Aorist-stem. § 254—257. 
 
 III. The Future-stem. § 258—266. 
 
 IV. The Weak Aorist-stem. § 267—272. 
 V. The Perfect-stem. § 272. 
 
 1. Perfect Active. § 276—282. 
 
 2. Pluperfect-Active. § 283. 
 
 3. Perfect, Middle, and Passive. § 284—289. 
 
 4. Pluperfect, Middle, and Passive. § 290—291. 
 VI. Forms of the Strong Passive-stem. § 292—295. 
 
 VII. Forms of the Weak Passive-stem. § 296—299. 
 Verbal Adjectives. § 300. 
 Verbs which have their stem- vowel short. § 301. 
 
 Chaptbb XI. 
 Second Principal Conjugation or Verbs in MI. 
 
 I. First class. § 302—317. 
 II. Second class (with yv). § 318—319. 
 
 Chapter XII. 
 Irregular Verbs of the First Conjugation. § 320 — 327. 
 
 Obs. — The verbs in to are divided into eight clashes, four of which 
 are contained in Chap. X., and four in Chap. XII. 
 They are as follows : 
 
 I. The Present-stem is like the Verb-stem, Xi5-w, r/-w, dy-uj, 
 
 Ti/j,d-(jjj etc. 
 II. The stem- vowel is lengthened in the Present-stem, <p€&y-(a, 
 XetTT-w, T^jK-u), etc. 
 
 III. The Present-stem affixes r to the Verb-stem, ti^ttt-w, ^Xdirr-w, 
 
 ^dlTT-OJ. 
 
 IV. The Present-stem adds i to the Verb-stem, k, 7, x with t form 
 (TO- (New Attic tt^, Trpdo-auj, rdo-o-u), rapdo-au). 
 
 d and more rarely 7 with i form ^, ^^ofxai, Kpd^u). 
 X with t forms XX, /SdXXw. 
 
 V and p throw the t into the preceding syllable, Tdvw, (pSeipta. 
 V. Nasal class. 
 
 The Verb-stem is strengthened by the addition of y or a 
 syllable containing v {ay, ye) to the Present-stem, Tly-u), 
 d/jLapr-dy-uj, Kv-y^-ia 
 
 VI. Inchoative verbs. 
 
 The Present-stem adds <tk to the Verb-stem, yrjpdaKca, yiyyib<rKU)y 
 evpicKoj, 
 
THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 93 
 
 YII. E-class. 
 
 A short stem alternates witli one enlarged by e. 
 (i.) e in the Present, yajuL-i-u). 
 
 (ii.) the € forms the tenses except the present, e.g. ^oaKcj. ^oa-Krjaoj. 
 VIII. The Mixed class. 
 
 Several essential different stems unite to form one verb. 
 
 The inflexion of verbs is the most difficult part 
 of accidence, but it is also the part which science 
 has done the most to elucidate. How we may best 
 succeed in presenting a synjpsis of the extraordinary 
 abundance of forms, is a question worth consideration 
 in the interests of science no less than in those of 
 education. The older grammarians, it is true, cared 
 little about the matter, and went to work in a purely 
 mechanical fashion, trusting almost entirely to the 
 learner's powers of memory. But this is just a point 
 on which scientific inquiry has every reason to come 
 to an arrangement with the requirements of practice, 
 if her results are to become fruitful and generally 
 accessible ; and, on the other hand, practice also may 
 certainly be expected to have some interest in the 
 attempt to apply the most important results of in- 
 quiry to a division of the subject-matter, and thus 
 to put order and law in the place of a formless chaos. 
 For this reason a few remarks on my arrangement 
 of the verb will be in place here, and they will be 
 the less superfluous because this arrangement differs 
 essentially from that found in most grammars. 
 
 A verb-form is chiefly distinguished from a noun- 
 form by the greater number of different elements 
 combined in it. In a case -form we have to deal 
 with but one invariable and one variable element, 
 Tra^S-o?, or at the most a vowel is inserted to con- 
 nect the two, TraiB-e-aa-c. But verb-forms of such a 
 
94 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 simple character as X-iiev, ay-o-fiev are few in number. 
 In t'W'fieVy ay-oL-re we have already an additional 
 element denoting the mood ; in dy-dy-ot-re a further 
 addition of temporal signification ; and a still further 
 addition- in f/y-ay-o-Py that is, the augment, which, 
 though also of temporal signification, is added for 
 a different purpose. In explaining the forms of the 
 verb therefore the grammarian cannot attain his 
 object by beginning with one invariable element — that 
 is, one stem only. Such a process would lead us to 
 create a number of widely different movable elements 
 for each individual form ; and also to ignore the rela- 
 tive stability of certain parts in comparison with others 
 more mobile, the smaller unities and groups existing 
 within the great whole, ay ay has a certain relative 
 stability in comparison with the individual forms dydy- 
 (o-fi€V, dydy-oL-/jL€V, dyay-elv, dyay-eadai, and the same 
 is the case with d^ as compared with d^ofievy d^ot^ev, 
 d^eiVy d^eaOai, Hence to prevent entire dismember- 
 ment, it is necessary to assume several fixed points, 
 i.e. several stems, in the verb. Practical grammarians 
 indeed have long since felt a similar need. Hence 
 for the Latin verbs a happy instinct established four 
 leading forms which together make up the so-called 
 conjugatum, or a verho. Had these four forms been 
 consistently retained and not mutually confused when 
 carried out into detail in the paradigms, the Latin 
 verb would as a fact have attained a certain degree 
 of classification. Greek grammarians sought to accom- 
 plish a similar object by impressing on the memory 
 the future as well as the present tense of the verb, 
 and then developing from the former the remaining 
 tenses with the exception of the tempora secunda which 
 could not be brought into this scheme — a scheme 
 utterly wanting in science like all the older grammar. 
 
THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 95 
 
 Even a schoolboy, were he to think of the matter, 
 would find it difficult to conceive how an aorist or 
 perfect could be derived from a future tense. But 
 even this plan shows more practical sense than that 
 other, which still meets with much attention, where 
 the ex.planation of the verb begins with mere abstract 
 rules about stem, characteristic, augment, etc., the 
 whole crowd of forms being afterwards added pell- 
 mell, and to crown all an alphabetical list — the most 
 wretched expedient of all. If I am not mistaken, 
 this is a subject where the proverb divide et impera 
 is applicable ; and indeed we can apply it the more 
 confidently as language herself leads the way. 
 
 Thus of the many different elements which are 
 united in the structure of the verb, some are easily 
 detached, and have therefore a more general char- 
 acter, while in others the union is more close, and 
 thus they become of a more special nature. Most 
 easily detached are the person-terminations, for they 
 can be joined to the most widely different stems, to 
 all the temporal and modal elements throughout the 
 active and middle voices. With these are to be classed 
 the terminations of the participles and infinitives, which 
 though nouns by origin, are in Greek — and this is 
 one of the most decisive advantages which the lan- 
 guage has over her sisters — used in the most different 
 tenses. The same holds good of the signs of mood 
 which also recur again and again, and lastly of the 
 augment, so far as it is common to three preterites 
 of entirely distinct meaning. All these elements have 
 nothing of the nature of a stem about them ; they 
 are added in much the same manner as the case- 
 terminations, and constitute the inflexion of verbs in 
 the narrower sense. 
 
 But with the second class the case is far otherwise. 
 
96 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 In combination with these different elements we find 
 others also differing widely among themselves, which 
 as being comparatively stable in contrast to the ex- 
 treme mobility of the others, may be named stems. 
 For, as we have already pointed out, Xvaa is as 
 much an invariable stem in €-\vcra, Xvaa-t-ixev, Xvcra-<;, 
 Xvaa-aOac, as ScKa in BUa-L, BUor^, Blica-i^^ and so 
 \e\v in \k\vK-a, XeXv-fiac, i-XeXxj-ro, To state the case 
 briefly, it may be said that in the noun, formation — that 
 is, formation of the word, or more correctly of the 
 stem — ^and inflexion in the narrower sense are distinct ; 
 but in the verb they combine, and encroach each upon 
 the other. He alone is completely master of the verb- 
 forms who from the verb-stem common to all can first 
 form all the special-stems, and secondly can inflect the 
 stems when correctly formed. , To these special-stems 
 as distinguished from the stem common to the whole 
 verb — the verb-stem — I give the name tense-stems ; 
 for thus I do not break with the old method which 
 connects the moods — ^participle, infinitive, etc. — with 
 particular tenses. Ahrens, with the same object in 
 view, uses the word ' systems,' Miiller and Lattmann 
 the expression ^groups of forms.' — As regards the 
 arrangement of the verb, we have here to answer the 
 general question concerning the relative position of 
 formation and inflexion. Theoretically we may defend 
 the arrangement which begins with formation, just as 
 in many scientific works the formation of stems precedes 
 the inflexion of nouns. But even from a scientific 
 point of view such a course is objectionable, for the 
 history of language was certainly not that here indicated. 
 The verb arises essentially out of a synthesis of pre- 
 dicate and subject : the germ of it being the verhum. 
 jinitum which from a very moderate beginning has 
 gradually developed into a great variety of forms. 
 
THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 97 
 
 Hence even in a severely scientific examination of the 
 verb it would scarcely be advisable to begin with the 
 formation of tense-stems which are in themselves 
 imaginary, and in practice such a course is even less 
 to be recommended. No one would, readily give his 
 approval to a plan in which the pupil is first taught to 
 form uninflected stems, and afterwards to inflect them. 
 Nor on the other hand, would it be well to give the 
 priority in our arrangement to inflexion in its widest 
 extent — that is, as carried through all the tense-stems ; 
 for the result of such an arrangement would be, that 
 the pupil would understand how to inflect \ua), \i;e69, 
 Xv€L, XiXvfca, X^Xu/ca?, iXva-dfirju^ without having gained 
 any conception of the manner in which these different 
 stems are connected together into one verb. The proper 
 course seems to me to lie midway between the two 
 extremes ; inflexion and formation are best treated 
 separately in each of the different tense-stems, and 
 thus the verb is broken up into natural groups which 
 follow each other in a manner adapted to practical needs. 
 This division into groups constitutes the peculiarity 
 of my arrangement. The danger lest in this manner 
 the verb should be entirely dismembered has been most 
 carefully provided against. First of all a preliminary 
 synopsis is given of the whole scheme (§§ 225 — 230) ; 
 then the verb-stem is retained as an integral in the 
 formation of each tense-stem, and the same paradigm 
 is carried throughout so far as possible ; another synop- 
 sis is also added, based upon an arrangement of the 
 stems according to the final syllable, and finally an 
 alphabetical list of verbs is given in the later editions 
 at the request of schoolmasters. This synopsis, it may 
 be remarked, cannot possibly cross with the other, but 
 will rather supplement the preceding explanation for 
 practical purposes, in the same manner as the synopsis 
 
 H 
 
98 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 of the consonant-declension given in § 172 supplements 
 the preceding explanation. 
 
 In the division of the verb according to tense-stems 
 I have purposely departed from the usual arrangement ; 
 but in some other parts I have, on the contrary, adhered 
 to it — viz. in the retention of the two leading conjuga- 
 tions. Strictly speaking, it is true, the distinction 
 between verbs in -co and those in -fit does not run 
 through the whole verb, but is felt only in the present, 
 the strong aorist, and, though to a limited extent, in the 
 perfect. It might therefore have been discussed in 
 each of these tense-stems. But the number of these 
 verbs in -//.t is small, and they present many special 
 peculiarities which make a more complete enumeration 
 of the forms used in each necessary. Hence our view 
 of the whole subject would be greatly obstructed by 
 intruding them among the other verbs. More especially 
 the pupil would be delayed too long with the formation 
 of the present stem, already sufficiently perplexing. 
 For this reason I thought it better to gather the verbs 
 in ^fxi into a separate conjugation. With this conces- 
 sion to traditional usage, which all schoolmasters will 
 find, I hope, acceptable, is connected another. A large 
 number of verbs with presents formed after the first 
 leading conjugation have aorists and perfects after the 
 second. Forms like e^rjv, eyvoDv, ttWc, redvdvac, can 
 only be understood and properly inflected when the 
 pupil has been taught to combine the person-termina- 
 tion and stem without a connecting vowel, as in earTjv, 
 etc. The large number of verbs in -o) therefore must 
 be divided into two parts, of which the first, as the 
 simpler, took the lead, but the second, as containing more 
 complicated phenomena, were placed after the verbs in 
 'fiL, Hence the four classes as given in §§ 247 — 253, 
 the remaining four not being added till § 320 if. In 
 
THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 99 
 
 calling the latter irregular I do not mean that they 
 stand outside all rule, in which sense the word could 
 not be applied even to the anomalies of declension. I 
 only call attention to the fact that in these the rule is 
 not simple. Besides the irregularity upon which the 
 classification is based, we find as a fact various peculi- 
 arities of less importance, additional forms of several 
 kinds, etc., in most of the verbs belonging to these 
 classes. This is a suflScient reason for terming such 
 verbs irregular although, in the most accurate sense, 
 the word can be applied only to the eighth or mixed 
 class. 
 
 But this division into classes, as a whole, needs 
 explaining. The first leading conjugation must of 
 necessity be subdivided. An alphabetical list of ir- 
 regular verbs is a most wretched resource, which 
 unfortunately has not yet vanished from our common 
 grammars, although few are utterly without an attempt 
 to arrange the irregularities. But what classification 
 shall we make ? What principle shall we go upon ? It 
 is easy, and appears logically consistent, to classify the 
 verb-stems on the same principle as the noun-stems ; 
 i.e. according to the final sound. The old division into 
 verba pura, liquida, etc., rests on this principle. But 
 no sooner do we compare the two kinds of stems than 
 we perceive the difference between them. Noun-stems 
 with the same final sound are for the most part simi- 
 larly dechned, e.g. (fyvXa/c, /cijpvfc, irarep, prjTop, \oyOy 
 vo/ubo ; but with verbs the case is different. \v and 
 ttXv are stems ending in the same vowel, but the 
 formation of the tense-stems is widely different : Xv-co 
 TrXi-co, Xv-aay TrXev-aovfiai, ay, irpay, Fay^ all end 
 in 7, but dya)y Trpdacrcoy dyvvfii,, are quite distinct : 
 so too XiTT and tvtt ; but in the present we have 
 Xeiirco, tvittoo. The synopsis given in p., 1Q3 ff. of 
 
100 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 the Grammar brings this variety before us, at least 
 in part. In short, for the formation of tense-stems 
 with characteristic consonants, especially the stems of 
 the future, weak aorist, and perfect, the difference in 
 the final sound of the stem is of real importance and 
 must not be left out of sight. But in explaining the 
 verb the essential point is the unity of each indi- 
 vidual verb, and this rests on the relation of the 
 various tense-stems to each other. The pupil must 
 be taught from a given present — e.g. Trpdaa-co — to 
 form a tense not belonging to the present stem ; and, 
 by a reverse method, to find the present of a given 
 form not belonging to the present stem : e.g. \nrelv. 
 He must perceive how such apparently diverse forms 
 can be reconciled, and this knowledge is the hinge 
 on which turns our insight into the structure of the 
 verb. If we arrancce the forms of a verb accordino^ 
 to the tense-stems, we ought as a natural consequence 
 to make the relation of the verb-stem to the tense- 
 stem the principle of classification. Now all the tense- 
 stems with the exception of the present can be derived 
 from the verb-stem in a very simple manner ; e.g. 
 d^o) is formed from a7 as irpd^ay from irpa^, i-dyr)-v 
 from Fay, as i-ypd(j>7)-p from the root ypa(j)» For this 
 reason the corresponding tenses in Sanskrit are called 
 ^ general ' — that is, tenses formed in essentially the same 
 manner in every verb. But the present stem is of a 
 very different character. The forms which correspond 
 to it in Sanskrit are called ^special-tenses' because 
 developed in various ways. The important position 
 of the present tense, and its relation to the other 
 tenses in the whole system of the verb was correctly 
 seen even as early as Buttmann. In § 112 of his 
 larger Grammar he says : ' By far the greater part 
 of the anomalies of the Greek verbs are due to the 
 
THE INFLEXION OF THE YERB. 101 
 
 union of forms which presuppose different themes ; 
 especially in such a manner that several derivative 
 tenses, treated in the regular way, presuppose a dif- 
 ferent present than that in use.' Hence Buttmann 
 regarded the irregularities as proceeding from ^a 
 change of stem,' or ^double theme,' and classified 
 them accordingly ; and in a similar sense Kriiger 
 distinguishes the Henses formed from the pure stem,' 
 or ' thematic ' tenses, from the present and imperfect ; 
 that is, from the forms of the present stem. What 
 the glance of acute scholars had discovered in the 
 Greek language alone is only set in a still clearer light 
 by comparative grammar. It was at once seen that 
 the structure of the Greek verb is based essentially on 
 the same distinction between two large groups of forms 
 as that in Sanskrit — as the Indian grammarians had 
 already perceived with a delicacy of insight far beyond 
 the reach of any Aristarchus. In detail, it is true, 
 i.e. in the manner of distinguishing the present stem 
 from the pure verb-stem, great differences occur. That 
 arrangement only can be correct which brings this 
 general principle into force, and at the same time 
 is suited to the individual peculiarities of the Greek 
 language. In this manner only can the analogous 
 phenomena be arranged together, and a real insight 
 gained into the structure of the verb. For syntax 
 also such an insight is of essential importance. The 
 various distinctions between the present stem and verb- 
 stem, now brought into prominence by the classification 
 of the verbs, are of great use in syntax, especially in 
 pointing out the difference between the aoristic action, 
 e.g. ^vjelv, and the durative, e.g. (^eiryeiv. And the 
 correct distinction between the tense-stem and addi- 
 tions which, like the augment, are made to particular 
 forms only, preserves us from grave errors in syntax. 
 
102 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 To these general remarks on the tense-stems and 
 the division into classes may be added a few on the 
 arrangement followed in regard to both. First of 
 the tense-stems. The arrangement introduced into the 
 Grammar is based mainly on practical considerations. 
 From a purely scientific point of view something might 
 be said in favour of beginning with the strong aorist 
 stem, as that tense-stem which in most cases, though 
 not always, is identical with the verb-stem. But the 
 objection at once arises that the strong aorist is found 
 in a proportionately small number of verbs ; and 
 further, when we come to unite inflexion with for- 
 mation, we find that the former can be developed but 
 imperfectly- in these stems because no primary tense 
 is derived from them. On the other hand, the present 
 stem forms, a desirable starting-point in every respect. 
 In practice the present is universally regarded as the 
 datum. Present stems also of the first class like \u, 
 <f>Vy 07 are identical with the verb-stem, and, as this 
 plass is v^ry extensive, form in fact the simplest basis 
 in. a grea^ number of verbs. Moreover, in the present 
 stem the best opportunity is offered for acquiring a 
 familiarity with inflexion, not only because in this 
 stem all the moods, together with the infinitive, par- 
 ticiple, and preterite, are carried through the active 
 and middle — which latter is also used for the passive ; 
 but also because an almost unlimited choice of ex- 
 amples is offered for practice. For in the inflexion 
 of the present stem every verb is regular. The pupil 
 can therefore be taught, by means of a good exercise- 
 book, to use the forms of e'^o), /juavOdvcOy Trpdaaoy, 
 7raj7%a), jLyvcocrKco, and other verbs in the present 
 stem no less than Xuco, dycoj etc. To me it seems a 
 great advantage that this important element in the 
 structure of the verb should first be accurately com- 
 
THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 103 
 
 mitted to memory in all its essential parts. With the 
 augment also and its use an almost complete familiarity- 
 may thus be acquired, for observations on those forms 
 which by accident occur only in the aorist (§ 236) 
 can easily be added afterwards. Further, the con- 
 tracted verbs are included in the present stem, for it 
 is in the forms of this stem only that the characteristic 
 contraction is found ; this too it is important to bring 
 clearly before the pupil. The usual method of sepa- 
 rating the contracted verbs from the so-called regular 
 verbs is not merely contradictory but impracticable, 
 inasmuch as the futurum secundum in the so-called 
 liquid verbs, and the Doric and Attic futures necessarily 
 presuppose a knowledge of contraction. 
 
 When the inflexion of the present stem is thoroughly 
 familiar to the pupil, the distinction between the present 
 stem and verb-stem discussed in § 245 fF. may be 
 mentioned. Even for instruction it will be more ex- 
 pedient if a familiarity is previously acquired with a 
 strong aorist like e-Xiir-o-v and all its forms, and the 
 difference between the stem thus brought forward, 
 which is also the pure verb-stem, and the present 
 stem, firmly based on a number of actual forms im- 
 pressed upon the memory. The question of the mutual 
 relation of these stems, thus forcing itself upon our 
 -notice, receives a satisfactory answer in the paragraphs 
 referred to, at least with regard to a considerable 
 number of verbs. At the same time the cardinal point 
 in the whole explanation of the verb — the distinction 
 between the pure verb-stem and the present stem, and 
 the notion of the verb-stem as a whole — is put in the 
 clearest light. The strong aorist stem also is fitted 
 to follow upon the present stem, inasmuch as the 
 inflexion in both is identical, and the pupil can at 
 once therefore give all his attention to the formation. 
 
104 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 The unity of the verb-stem being now clear, and the 
 necessary foundation laid for the further explanation 
 of the verb, the question arises what tense-stem must 
 follow next ? 
 
 In a severely scientific treatment of the subject we 
 might feel inclined to take the perfect stem after the 
 strong aorist stem, both being formed simply and with- 
 out composition. But inflexion and formation present 
 too many difficulties to make this plan advisable in 
 practice. The third stem therefore is the future, which 
 again in inflexion is identical with the present. But 
 the formation offers an opportunity of turning the pre- 
 ceding explanation of the pure verb-stem to account in 
 regard to such verbs as have no strong aorist, e.g. most 
 of those in the fourth class. Here we see that our care 
 in distinguishing irpay from irpaaa, Kpar/ from Kpa^, 
 rep from Teipj <\>av from i^aiv^ was by no means super- 
 fluous. In regard to many verbs of the third class also 
 the knowledge of the verb-stem can here be made avail- 
 able. At the same time, the changes which take place 
 owing to the combination of the verb-stem with sigma 
 can now be explained with the aid of the chapter on 
 sounds. The contracted verbs being already accurately 
 known, the contracted future can present no difficulty. 
 
 The sibilant common to both naturally leads from the 
 future to the weak aorist. In this there is little that is 
 new and peculiar in the formation. In the inflexion, 
 on the other hand, owing to the characteristic a and the 
 peculiar terminations of the imperative, infinitive, and 
 participle, much has to be learned. 
 
 But just in this very way is preparation made in part 
 for the perfect stem, which has the a in common with 
 the weak aorist, and is therefore placed next as the fifth 
 link in the chain. In this the most important point is 
 the explanation of reduplication, as the distinguishing 
 
THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 105 
 
 characteristic of the stem. Throughout the whole ar- 
 rangement care has been taken to prevent any confusion 
 between the augment and reduplication. The distinc- 
 tion between these elements is to be strongly marked, 
 not merely because science regards them as entirely 
 distinct, the augment being the sign of a past, the re- 
 duplication of a completed action ; but also on practical 
 grounds, in order to guard against the misapprehension 
 that either of them excludes the other — for in the 
 pluperfect both are found together, or that the augment 
 can be prefixed to any other than a preterite tense — that 
 is, a tense in the indicative mood. Even for syntax 
 this strict distinction is of importance inasmuch as it 
 thus becomes self-evident that the idea of past time 
 belongs in the first instance to augmented forms only, 
 whereas the idea of completion, conveyed in reduplica- 
 tion, runs through all the forms of the perfect. Owing 
 to the very different manner in which the perfect stem 
 is combined with the person-terminations in the active 
 — where a connecting vowel is most frequently found, 
 and in the middle — where such a vowel never occurs — 
 the two voices are more widely separated in this stem ; 
 and in the active voice also two modes of formation, the 
 strong and the weak, must be distinguished. But the 
 reduplication which is common to all serves as a link to 
 connect these forms. 
 
 The two passive stems bring up the rear. The 
 priority is given to that which, as uniting more closely 
 than the other with the root, we call the strong stem. 
 In it the inflexion of both the passive stems can be 
 learned, and preparation made for the study of the verbs 
 in ^L, In the weak passive stem the combination of the 
 verb-stem with the characteristic syllable Be, that is the 
 formation, is the important point. 
 
 In this manner I believe my arrangement of the 
 
106 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 tense-stems is sufficiently justified. Committed to memory 
 by the pupil in the separate forms, one after the other, 
 they must afterwards be combined, and the unity of the 
 verb brought into prominence, when using the synopsis 
 p. 103, in the constant repetitions which on other 
 grounds will be necessary. With this division is con- 
 nected an innovation in the terminology which has met 
 with some opposition. I refer to the expressions ^ strong ' 
 and 'weak' as used to denote the tenses commonly 
 known as secunda and prima. We have seen good 
 reason to place the tempora secunda before the tempora 
 prima in our arrangement of the verb. Could we then 
 continue to use these terms ? Ought we to confuse the 
 pupil by teaching him that one is two and two is one ? 
 The numerical designation of these tenses is moreover 
 objectionable for another reason. It leads us wrongly 
 to expect both formations in every verb, whereas the 
 rule is quite the reverse, one form or the other, not both 
 together, being found. A change in the terminology 
 was therefore in my opinion unavoidable in this case. 
 At the same time a comprehensive expression is given 
 embracing the whole of the so-called tempora secunda 
 and prima. For this reason, the distinction which from 
 a scientific point of view at first presents itself for the 
 active and middle aorist — the distinction I mean between 
 simple and compound — is not applicable throughout. 
 For the perfect, which I call ' weak,' cannot be proved 
 to be a compound tense ; still less can the passive 
 aorist, which I call 'strong,' be proved to be a simple 
 tense. The expressions 'old' and 'new' also would be 
 unsuitable, especially for the passive aorists. I am well 
 aware that the expressions 'strong' and 'weak' seem 
 also objectionable at first sight. But they have at least 
 the advantage of brevity ; they are used in German 
 grammars, although not quite in the same sense, and 
 
THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 107 
 
 are easily intelligible. That those forms are called 
 ^strong' which spring as it were from the internal force 
 of the root, and those ^weak' which are formed by the 
 addition of syllables externally, can easily be made 
 intelligible to the pupil ; and at the same time it is 
 very easy to compare the double formation of perfects 
 in German or Enghsh (nehme 'take' nahm 'took,' like 
 Tpiirco erpairoVy hege 'cherish' hegte 'cherished,' like 
 Xe7(o eXe^a). To this may be added the somewhat 
 extensive parallelism between Greek and German with 
 regard to the intransitive and transitive meaning of the 
 verbs quoted in § 329, sank and senkte like ehvv ehvaa, 
 trank and trdnkte like einov eTnaa, losch and loschte like 
 ea^rjv ea^eaa. Thus, as yet, I know no expression 
 which offers so many advantages with so few deductions 
 as this, and therefore I retain it till some one coins a 
 better. In necessary innovations it is often of more 
 importance that men agree, than upon what they agree. 
 I have still a few words to say on the arrangement of 
 the classes of verbs. The first and last class are to a 
 certain degree necessary consequences of my principle 
 of division, for which reasons have been given. They 
 are the extreme opposites. In the first class there is no 
 distinction between the verb-stem and present stem ; in 
 the last the distinction is so great that two essentially 
 different stems, and often a third, are united to make 
 one verb. In the division of the other classes my plan 
 has been to proceed from the lesser changes of the verb- 
 stem to the greater. Thus in the lengthened class (2) 
 the two stems are distinguished simply by the weight of 
 the vowels; in the T-class (3) and the I-class (4) one 
 sound only is added in each case ; but the additional I 
 gives rise to more or less striking changes of the stem. 
 In the fifth class the nasal is extended to the syllables av 
 and ve ; the sixth class has the important addition a/c. 
 
108 ACCIDENCE. §226. 
 
 and the inchoative idea often connected with it shows 
 that this addition was not made without a purpose. Tt 
 also gains further importance from the reduplication 
 frequently found with it. The seventh or E-class might 
 appear at first sight very simple, and fitted to have a 
 place among the first classes. But inasmuch as this e 
 is sometimes found in the present stem, sometimes in 
 the verb-stem, and serves to connect the most various 
 formations of tenses, we find in it a somewhat compli- 
 cated anomaly, which forms the proper stepping-stone 
 to the eighth or mixed class, as that in which alone, to 
 be accurate, we can use the word anomalous in the full 
 sense. 
 
 On § 226. 
 
 Of the origin of the person-terminations, and many 
 other questions respecting the structure of the verb, a 
 detailed account will be found in my ' Bildung der 
 Tempora und Modi im Grieddschen und Lateinischen ' * 
 (Berlin 1846), with which may be compared Bopp's 
 later explanation, Vergl, Gramm, II, 2nd ed., and 
 Schleicher's Compendium, and my pamphlet ' Zur 
 Chronologie der Indo-germ, Sprachf,^ p. 212. 
 
 In respect to the terminations -arai, -aTo I have now 
 followed Schleicher (Compend, 681, 692) in regarding 
 the a as an original part of the termination, after which 
 as in Skt. -ate, -ata the nasal is dropped. Similarly in 
 ace. sing, after the a and in the negative a for av, a- 
 Ta/cTO-9 beside av-rjveiJbo-<^. 
 
 It is important to bear in mind continually, and as 
 soon as possible to impress even upon the pupil, the 
 fact that the similarity between the 3rd pi. and 1st 
 
 * This work, so far as it concerns Greek, lias been recast, and pub- 
 lished as * Das GriechiscJie Verbum,' The first vol. has appeared. 
 (Leipzig 1873.)— Ed. 
 
§ 228. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 109 
 
 sing. SO often observed in the historical tenses, e.o-. 
 e-Xv'O-Vf is merely due to a corruption of the original 
 sounds. In the first instance the latter form was 
 €'\V'0-fi, cp. Lat. er-a-irij and also inqua-m (e)s-um. 
 This change of m into n can in this case be illustrated 
 in a common New High German form : ich bin = 
 0. H. Gr. In-m, On the other hand, the complete form of 
 the termination of the 3rd pi. in th€ historical tenses 
 was 'VT, A glance at the Latin forms will convince us 
 of this, without having recourse to more distant lan- 
 guages. Lat. er-a-nt stands for es-a-nt, which corresponds 
 to the Ionic ea-a-v, but has preserved the -nt without 
 mutilation. Even the Greeks themselves in the Doric 
 dialect still distinguished the two forms by the accent. 
 The 1st sing, was e-Xv-o-v, the 3rd plur. e-Xv-o-v 
 (Ahrens, Dor. 28), the difference being due to the fact 
 that the full form of the latter was i-Xv-o-vr. The last 
 syllable in the 3rd pi. being long by position, drew the 
 accent on the penultimate ; but in the 1st sing, the 
 general law of accentuation in the verb-forms took its 
 course, and the accent was placed on the preceding 
 syllable. 
 
 On § 228. 
 
 The comparison of the Greek conjunctive * with the 
 Latin conjunctive forms characterized by long a is 
 established by me in Tempora und Modi, p. 264 fF., 
 in agreement with Pott, but in opposition to Bopp and 
 other scholars. Schleicher takes my view, p. 710. 
 
 The element peculiar to the optative, which in most 
 cases is simply an iota, is also found in a fuller form in 
 the syllable le (e.g. Xv-o-te-v) and lt] (e.g. in Oe-lrj-v). 
 
 * On the Greek Conj. and Optative cp. Curtius, Mr Chronologies 
 pp. 230, 240 ; and Delbriick ' Ber Gehrauch des Con^uncUvs und 
 Optativs: Halle, 1871.— Ed. 
 
110 ACCIDENCE. § 230. 
 
 This fuller form is apparently the original one. It 
 points back to a pre-Greek syllable ja or ^a, and i must 
 be regarded as the shortened form of this syllable. In 
 aorist forms of the optative like Xu-(7€-ta-9, Xv-ae-ia-v 
 (§ 268) the old a has been retained without alteration, 
 and the a in Ionic fiax-o-La-ro can be regarded in the 
 same light (§ 233 D 6). 
 
 On § 230. 
 
 The far-reaching distinction between the two main 
 conjugations, which comes to the surface in Sanskrit 
 just as in Greek, I used to regard in union with 
 earlier explanations, especially Buttmann's, as due to 
 the presence. or absence of a moveable vowel, originally 
 serving to connect the stem and termination. This 
 view I have supported at length in Tempora und Modi 
 p. 39 ff., where I have also discussed the difficulties stand- 
 ing in the way of the different views of Bopp, Pott, and 
 others. The vowel in question which in Greek varies 
 between e, o and co, in Sanskrit only between a and a, 
 is regarded, on the other hand, by Schleicher as a con- 
 stituent part of the present stem {Compendium p. 763, 
 776) in such a manner that, for instance, \vo Xve, <^€po 
 ^epe and the Sanskrit counterpart of the latter hhara, 
 are regarded as present stems. This view, which when 
 working at my Grammar, and at the first edition of these 
 ' Elucidations/ I did not share, is, I am now convinced, 
 the correct one. In my treatise ^ Ziir Chronologic der 
 Indogermanischen Sprachforschung'* p. 225 ff. I have 
 given in detail the reasons which have determined me 
 in taking this course. To return to them here would 
 carry me too far, and quite beyond the sphere of these 
 ' Elucidations.' Here it may suffice to refer to the 
 fact that the vowel, merely because it is lengthened 
 in the conjunctive, and united with the sign of the 
 
§230. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. Ill 
 
 mood, is proved to be tolerably fixed and immoveable. 
 Hence for scientific objects I prefer to call it the 
 thematic vowel, and in preparing the ninth edition of 
 the Grammar, I hesitated for a long time whether 
 I ought not to introduce this name into the practical 
 work also. But I could not make up my mind to 
 this alteration, as I saw no essential benefit likely to 
 come of it for a school-grammar. In Sanskrit, where 
 this vowel "always appears as a and only varies in 
 quantity — bhard-mi, bhara-sij bhara-ti — bhara can very 
 easily be given as a theme or stem ; in Greek where it 
 varies between o (o)) and e it is too mobile for us to 
 establish it as a part of the stem without further expla- 
 nation, when the pupil has been accustomed to regard 
 the stem as something ^ fixed,' especially as neither (fyepo 
 nor (f>€p€ can be given for the base-form. It is in the 
 Skt. bhara that both first become one. The thematic 
 vowel has therefore in reality become in the course 
 of language a half-mobile element, combining the 
 completely rigid part of the stem with the thoroughly 
 mobile terminations, and I see no pressing reason for 
 withdrawing the term connecting-vowel^ if we explain 
 it in this way, from a school-grammar. From this 
 term the pupil will most easily obtain the correct 
 view that the vowel in question — the characteristic of 
 the first main conjugation — gives to this conjugation 
 the stamp of a certain uniform mobility. For if we 
 wished to make a strictly scientific division between the 
 two main conjugations based on the view here given, 
 we should say that the first, which is by far the more 
 frequent, exhibits a changeable vowel before the person- 
 terminations ; in the second the vowel, if present at all, 
 is unchangeable except in regard to quantity. 
 
12 ACCIDENCE. §§234,235. 
 
 On §§ 234, 235. 
 
 The augment is in all probability a demonstrative 
 pronoun-stem referring to past time, like the German 
 da^ damals (Tempora und Modi, p. 126 fF.; Schleicher, 
 Compend. 749). The original form in Greek as in 
 Sanskrit was a, of which certain traces still remain even 
 in the Greek dialects (Ahrens, ^ol. 229, to which add 
 Hesych, aa^eade BL6<f)d€ip€). Before consonants the a 
 regularly became e ; before vowels it took the form of 
 the initial vowel, and combined with it to form one long 
 syllable. Thus we can suppose the Doric ayo-p to have 
 arisen out of d-ay-o-v, from which, in the Ionic dialect, 
 must come ^701^. To the Greek ojp-ro corresponds the 
 Sanskrit ar-ta, which has arisen from a-ar-ta (Grundz, 
 323). This contraction had certainly taken place before 
 a became divided into the three sounds a, e, ; and after 
 that the root ar became fixed in Greek as o/o, S)p-To stood 
 beside op-vv-fit, as in the earlier period of language 
 ar-ta stood beside ar-nau-mi. The same was naturally 
 the case with initial e also, e.g. in ^aav = Sanskrit dsan 
 beside ia-ri = Sanskrit as-ti. With initial i and v we 
 might certainly expect a diphthong. But it must be 
 observed that primitive verb-stems beginning with this 
 vowel are not common. Hence they followed the 
 analogy of the initial hard vowels ; and by degrees the 
 feeling grew up in language that the augment (av^rjac^;) 
 was nothing more than a lengthening of the vowel. 
 The mobility of the augment also is common to Greek 
 and Sanskrit. But it would be quite wrong to suppose 
 that the augment is not essential, because it is some- 
 times dropped in poetry. Language not unfrequently 
 lays aside individual symbols of meaning, when, by 
 means of them, forms have been coined, so distinctly 
 
§§ 236, 237. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 113 
 
 marked, that the original elements are no lono-er 
 absolutely necessary. 
 
 The doubling of the p after the augment is owino- to 
 the fact that a consonant has, as a rule, fallen out before 
 it. With the aid of the kindred languages this conso- 
 nant can often be discovered, e.g. in e-ppe-o-v, i.e. i-apeF- 
 O'V = Sanskrit a-srav-a-m, from the root o-pu=r Sanskrit 
 sru (Grundz.j 329) ; e-ppeir-O'V, i.e. i-Fpeir-o-v from a 
 root Fpeir (ibid., 327), the F of which occurs also in 
 Koka-vpoylr. 
 
 On § 236. 
 [In some verbs the augment (e) becomes et instead of 17.] 
 This apparent irregularity, like that just mentioned, 
 may be explained from the history of language, and 
 reference is made to this fact in the observation on this 
 section. With the exception of ido), the origin of which 
 is still a matter of opinion, it has been proved that all 
 the verbs here quoted originally began with a consonant. 
 iOi^ot), suetus (Grundz., 236) ; eXtWw, vol-v-o (334) ; 
 €\k(o, Lith. velka (131) ; eTr-o-fiat,, sequor (420) ; 
 ipyd^ofjuac, Svork' (171) ; epir-co, serpo (249) ; ia-Tcdd) 
 ka-Tia = Vesta (370) ; €%-(i) (182) ; e'L/mrjv (373) ; etk-o-v 
 (509) ; elaa, sedes (225). 
 
 On § 237. 
 
 [Verbs which originally began with a digamma, i.e. with a con- 
 sonant, have the syllabic augment in spite of the initial vowel. 
 eoprd^u) has the augment in the second vowel : opduj and dvoiyu) have 
 both the syllabic and temporal augments.] 
 
 These phenomena like those in the preceding section 
 can all be explained by the loss of an initial consonant : 
 dvhdv(o = aFavSavco, Latin suavis (Grundz.,214:) ; ovpicOy 
 Sanskrit vdri, Svater' (326) ; oodeo), Sanskrit va-vadh-a 
 (244); cove-o-fiaL, vendo (300). ioprd^co stands for 
 iFoprd^o) (529) ; with e prefixed (cp. p. 34). The loss 
 
 I 
 
114 ACCIDENCE. §§ 238, 243 D. 
 
 of the consonant was readily compensated. In the first 
 instance, no doubt, the preceding vowel was lengthened 
 (cp. ^a(riXrjo<;) ; hence Homeric rj-elh-r] = i-feih-rj 
 (§ 317, 6 D), but afterwards the reverse process took 
 place, and the following vowel was lengthened (cp. 
 ^acn\eco<;) ; hence krjvhav-ov iwvo'XpeL, apparently with 
 a double augment, idXco-v (§ 324. 17) e^wpa-O'V (Rt. Fop. 
 Grundzilge, 324) av-ecpy-o-v, Ebel has rendered good 
 service towards clearing up these facts in Kuhn's 
 Zeitschr,, IV, 170 ff. The irregularities which from 
 the arrangement of the Grammar could not be men- 
 tioned here, because belonging to the aorist stem or the 
 later verb-classes, can easily be brought into combina- 
 tion with those here pointed out by means of the 
 references to these paragraphs, which are never omitted. 
 
 On § 238. 
 
 The position of the augment (and the reduplicated 
 syllable) between the preposition and verb-form is 
 proved in Derivation (§ 356) to have a deep foundation 
 in the structure of the language. The preposition was 
 always felt to retain a certain individuality : the real 
 verb-form follows it. After the pupil has learnt (cp. 
 § 446) the free position of the prepositions in Homer, 
 and how they can be separated from the verbs which 
 they define, a simple reference will show him that the 
 position of the augment rests on the same grounds. 
 
 On § 243 B. 
 
 [Homer inflects the a stems of contracted verbs in three ways 
 
 1. — The syllables regularly contracted by the Attic writers remain 
 open and unchanged ; doLdid-ei, vaierd-ovat, with fem. part. vaierduxTa 
 for vaierdovaa with a remarkable change of ov to w. 
 
 2. — Contraction takes place ; dperq. — dperd-ei, irpos-rj^da — irpos- 
 if}jjda-€. Sometimes ae becomes t), not a. 
 
 3. — Extension, instead of contraction, takes place when a vowel of 
 
§ 243 D. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 115 
 
 the same kind is inserted before the long one which results from 
 contraction ; opdu) contracted 6/)a), extended 6p6u).^ 
 
 In thus assuming an ^extension' I have adopted the 
 usual method of explanation^ For this a few words 
 of excuse are needed. It is one of the rare instances 
 in which I have purposely inserted an explanation into 
 the Grammar, though I knew it to be at variance with 
 the true course of the history of language. That forms 
 like 6p6(o, opda^y did not as a matter of fact arise out 
 of the contracted forms opw, opa^, but rather stand 
 midway between opaxoj opdec^;, and opco, opa^, could 
 escape no one who has an open eye to the history of 
 language ; and for many years I have treated these 
 forms in this manner in my lectures* In the main 
 therefore I fully agree with the view taken by Leo 
 Meyer in Zeitschr. /. ver^l. Sprachf., X, p. 45 ff., and 
 Ver^L Gramm., I, p. 292 fF. 
 
 All contraction of dissimilar hard vowels into one 
 long vowel rests on two processes : first, one vowel 
 became assimilated to the other ; and secondly, both, 
 when assimilated, became united into one long sound. 
 These two movements, as a rule, took place at different 
 times in the history of language, and the first must 
 necessarily precede the second. Here, as so often, 
 the Homeric language preserves the results of two 
 separate epochs of language side by side, the original 
 form without any change at all — vaieTaco, the assimilated 
 opoco, and the contracted opdofxevo^. On these various 
 forms see I. Bekker, Horn. Blatter I, p. 47. The 
 assimilation of vowels is by no means merely a pre- 
 liminary step to contraction ; the phenomenon also 
 occurs independently, e.g. in BeBd-aadat (§ 326 D, 40) 
 = BeSd-e-aOaCy in (f)advTaTo<; from ipaevraro^ shortened 
 from <j>a€Lv6TaTo^, and also in <padv6r} for (j)aiv6r}, 
 jodaaKov for jodeaKoVj a6o-<; for ado<; (cp. aaoorepo^). 
 
116 ACCIDENCE. § 243 D. 
 
 similarly in vr}7rcda<; beside vrjirUrj (original form vrjiria- 
 ja). In this assimilation we see most plainly the power 
 which one vowel exercises on the other. Even in this^ 
 preliminary stage the deeper 0-sound overpowers the 
 clearer A-sound ; but this, on the other hand, over- 
 powers the medium E-sound (§§ 37, 38). Hence, in 
 the first case the assimilation is retrogressive ; in the 
 second, progressive. 
 
 So far all is simple — so simple that such an expla- 
 nation could be admitted without hesitation into a 
 school-grammar. But now we find forms like opoaxra 
 opococTL opocovratj in which the processes mentioned do 
 not suffice ; for according to them we should expect 
 opoovaa opoovcn opoovrau. In the two first of these 
 forms Leo Meyer arranges the difficulty in a manner 
 by no means satisfactory ; but in regard to the third, 
 and forms like ^oocovra opocpev and the like, he assumes 
 without further trouble that they were wrongly written 
 down at the time of the settlement of the Homeric 
 text ; and ought therefore to be replaced by opoovrai 
 ^ooovra opooiev. Such a proceeding, even if it could 
 be justified scientifically, is absolutely inadmissible in a 
 school-grammar, where only the forms really in use 
 can be taught, not those which rest on conjecture. 
 But even from a scientific point of view Meyer's hypo- 
 thesis is not merely very rash, but totally untenable. 
 It is clear that according to the laws of contraction 
 in Attic-Ionic, opoovrai ^ooovra opooiev could never 
 have given rise to any other forms than opovvrai 
 ^oovvra opolev, Meyer (p. 53) seeks to invalidate this 
 objection by the remark, 'It is a far older and more 
 extensive law that two similar vowels should contract 
 into the corresponding long one.' But in this case 
 we have to deal with forms which are by no means 
 of great antiquity, but comparatively late, i.e. belong- 
 
§ 243 D. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 117 
 
 ing to a historically demonstrable period in the life of 
 the Greek language. At the time when contraction 
 began to force its way in, a difference must have been 
 felt between the vowels in 1/609 and those in opocovra, 
 otherwise we should not have vov<; as the contracted 
 form of the one, and op'Syvra as the contracted form 
 of the other. Now how rash it is to declare Homeric 
 forms, occurring again and again in the text which 
 has come down to us, to be errors of writing, in order 
 to obtain a uniformity w^hich is really no uniformity at 
 all ! The real forms opcovrat ^oMvra opSev vouch for 
 the existence of the opocoprai ^oocovra 6p6(p€v which 
 are found in the text of Homer. But how can we 
 explain the singular to, by the side of which stands the 
 long a of opda^ ? We must connect it I believe with 
 another lengthening which at first sight seems very 
 strange. From Bpa-ot-fiL comes Spco-OL'/JLL, from fivao- 
 fievo'^ /jbV(o6/jL€vo<;y and similarly viTV(oovTa<; from virvoov- 
 ra?. With the assimilation is here connected a change 
 of quantity of the same varying character as that in 
 ^aatXTjo^ beside l3aGc\eco<;, ^aacXrja beside ^ao-ikid, 
 and in the phenomena presented by the augment which 
 have been discussed already. In that case the length- 
 ened syllable was explained as arising from the desire 
 to compensate for a lost spirant. And so here : -ao), 
 -60), -Oft), have, as has been already mentioned, sprung 
 from a form -ajd-rnL The loss of the y, which in other 
 instances was vocalized, e.g. v€lk€lco TraXalco, was com- 
 pensated by the lengthening, sometimes of the preceding 
 vowel, ireivcuov hpcaoi-fiL^ and sometimes of the following 
 vowel, opocovra opocoat, and also ^oo)? = ^a{f)o<;. But 
 in some cases both vowels were lengthened, e.g. Bpoocoai 
 rj^oocoai, and in others again, neither — doiSidovaa, It 
 is not my object in this place to follow up the length- 
 enings in question any further, otherwise many other 
 
118 ACCIDENCE. § 245 ff. 
 
 dialectical forms would require discussion, especially 
 Doric forms like i/.L€TpL(o/ji€^ = i/juerpoiffjiev, ofxid/jLevoL := 
 ofjLovfievoL, which Ahrens explains, Dor,^ 210 ff. In 
 these also the long vowel is apparently due to the 
 same cause. 
 
 This is in brief my conception of the phenomenon 
 in question, with which may be compared the expla- 
 nation given by Dietrich in Kuhn's Zeitschr., X, p. 
 434. Like myself he is opposed to the views of Leo 
 Meyer, and I agree with him in many points, but not 
 in all. In any case this is a matter on which many 
 difficulties remain to be cleared up. I have therefore 
 put a check upon my desire to adopt at least some 
 part of our more correct views into the grammar, and 
 have preferred to allow the old doctrine to remain. It 
 has at least the advantage of being very simple and 
 intelligible. 
 
 On §245/. 
 
 Throughout the division of the verb-classes attention 
 has been also directed to the formation of nouns, be- 
 cause in them the pure verb-stem is often found in the 
 plainest form, and indeed can be shown there only 
 when no strong tenses are formed from it. As the 
 formation of words can seldom be a distinct subject 
 of instruction, it is the more important to point out, 
 as occasions offer, the most striking formations of 
 nouns. In this way not only are a number of words 
 impressed upon the memory; but at the same time 
 the pupil is made to feel that such words are not 
 mere vocabula to be found in the dictionary, but 
 essential forms of language, standing in the most 
 intimate relation with the formation of verbs. 
 
§§ 248-250. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 119 
 
 On § 248. 
 
 The lengthening of the stem-vowel in this class of 
 verbs is the more clearly organic, because the lengthened 
 form denotes the more extended action of the present 
 stem ; XeiiT-eiv as distinguished from XiTr-elv,* In this 
 case therefore phonology, inflexion, and syntax unite 
 (§ 484 fF.). Of this formation of the present stem a 
 few relics only remain in Latin, e.g. dlc-o Rt. dXc 
 (caiisi-dic-u-s)^ fld'O (older feid-o) Rt. fid (fid-e-s), 
 duc-o (older douc-o) Rt. due {dux , duds), [Cp. Verbum, 
 p. 214 1?.] 
 
 On § 249. 
 
 The attempts hitherto made to explain the T in the 
 present stem of this class cannot be considered as suc- 
 cessful (see Grrundz., 621 ff.). But there is no doubt that 
 the formation is exactly parallel with Latin verbs like 
 pleC't'O, neo-t'O. [Cp. Verbum, p. 227 fF.] 
 
 On § 250. 
 
 The changes of sound brought before us in the 
 formation of this class have been already discussed. 
 These verbs may be compared with Latin forms hke 
 fac'i^o verb-stem fac, fod-i-o verb-stem fod, pat-i-or 
 verb-stem pa^, the peculiarity of which also consists in 
 the fact that the i is confined to the present stem. 
 The corresponding class in Sanskrit is formed by adding 
 the syllable ja or jd to the verb-stem, e.g. Rt. kup^ 
 present stem kup-ja, 1st sing. pres. kup-jd-mi (I fall 
 a- wishing), Latin cujo-io. In the same language we 
 find the root jd meaning ' to go/ which stands in ex- 
 actly the same relation to the shorter sound i as Greek 
 
 * Yet observe that the lengthened vowel is present in the aor. pass. 
 i-\€(<p-d7jv, and in first aorists of this class, when they occur. — Ed. 
 
120 ACCIDENCE. § 268 ff. 
 
 li-vat to X-fxevau, Hence with Bopp {Vergl. Gr., II, 
 357) and other scholars, I consider it quite probable that 
 the present stem of the verbs of this class is due to 
 composition with this root. The original intransitive 
 meaning required by this supposition is still actually 
 demonstrable in many of these verbs in Sanskrit (cp. 
 Temp, und Modi, p. 88). In Greek the additional 
 element has become a purely formal instrument of 
 construction which is applied among other usages to 
 distinguish the present stem from the pure verb-stem. 
 But inasmuch as the action expressed by the present 
 stems \ery often denotes the eifort and desire to realise 
 the idea conveyed by the verb-stem, we may still per- 
 ceive a link between origin and meaning. Compare 
 English phrases like ^ to go a-begging ! ' German 
 hetteln gehen, sitzen gehen, [Cp. Verbum, p. 286 ff.] 
 
 On § 258 /. 
 
 In the future stem the requirements of instruction 
 made it necessary to deviate a little from the dis- 
 coveries of comparative grammar, the main drift of 
 which is as follows. In Greek the formation of the 
 future is retained most perfectly in the Doric dialect. 
 Here we find in addition to the a an Iota which as 
 in the present stem of the fourth class corresponds 
 to a Jod in Sanskrit. Thus a Doric future like Scoo-lco 
 corresponds to a Sanskrit dd-sjd-mi. But even the 
 Dorians retained the Iota only before w and o (Ahrens, 
 210) ; elsewhere it becomes €, e.g. Sctxrea?, and then 
 Bcoael^ by contraction {Gru7idzuge, 555). In this 
 shape the fuller form is known even to Attic as the 
 Doric future (§ 264), e.g. ifKev-aov-fjuai. For the 
 most part, it is true, the original spirant Jod was 
 entirely lost, and a alone remained as the characteristic 
 sound of the future. As therefore in the Grammar I 
 
§ 258 ff. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 121 
 
 had to assu];ne stems for the Attic dialect, the future 
 stem must there be \vcr. With regard to the origin 
 of this future formation I now adopt the view held 
 by Schleicher (Compend., 819), who sees in it a form 
 compounded with the future of the substantive verb, in 
 preference to the explanation given in my Tempora und 
 Modi, p. 317. \^Zur Chronologie der Indog, Sprachf. 
 p. 243.] From the root as (Greek €?) language de- 
 veloped a present form after the fourth class. This 
 was originally as-jd-mi and is retained in the Latin 
 ero = es'io, the middle form of which is the Greek 
 eaaojiai = iaiofiaL. As we have already suggested, 
 the additional ^o-mi signified originally 'I go'; the 
 hypothetical ea-L(o therefore would mean ^ I go to be,' 
 from which a future signification could very easily be 
 developed. Compare the French je vais /aire (pro- 
 vincial English ' I am a-going to do '), the Latin datum 
 iri with the rare correlative form in the active ' datum 
 ire ^ = ' daturum esse.'' With this ia-io) ' I go to be ' 
 or ' I shall be ' the other verbs must be compounded in 
 order to acquire a future in the same manner as the 
 perfect stem in Latin is compounded with ero, e.g. 
 cecid-ero, in order, to form its proper future, i.e. 
 the futurum. exactum. In the process of composition 
 the 6 of the root has been lost, — a phenomenon by no 
 means strange, the same vowel constantly disappear- 
 ing elsewhere in many languages, e.g. Latin s-u-mus, 
 s-Vr-nt for es-u~mus, es-u-nt In stems ending in X, p, 
 fi, V we find an e in the future : /juev-i-co, after which a 
 sigma has undoubtedly dropped out, so that we get 
 fiev-e-a-(o for /nev-eo-ico. Hence it might be supposed 
 that this e also belongs to the root e?, and that fiev-eato) 
 stands in the same relation to nrpaKaLO) as Greek ka-^ikv 
 to Latin s-u-mus. But in Sanskrit we find a vowel in 
 the same position which can only be regarded as an 
 
122 ACCIDENCE. §§ 265, 267. 
 
 auxiliary vowel or, more strictly speaking, as an ele- 
 ment necessarily developed out of the preceding mute, 
 e.g. in tan-i'shja-mij which corresponds to the Grreek 
 rev'i'co (i.e. t€v-€-(tlq)) ; so that the view introduced into 
 the text of the grammar — that the Greek € also is a 
 similar vowel — is the more natural. According to the 
 laws of euphony in Greek a between two vowels 
 disappears; hence it is lost in rev-e-ai-co, but retained 
 in TTpaK-aico, irpd^co. The view maintained by some 
 younger scholars that rep-i-co is a quite different forma- 
 tion into which this a never entered, is more easily 
 shown to be false by forms like /ceX-crw, /cvp-aco^ from 
 which it is clear that even the liquids and nasals did 
 not in the first instance avoid the combination with cr. 
 The distinction between the two formations is purely 
 phonetic, and therefore it is quite impossible to apply 
 the terms ' strong ' and ' weak ' to the future.* 
 
 On § 265. 
 
 The futures here quoted, eBofiai Trlofiai, are remains 
 of an older formation without a and therefore without 
 composition. Here as in elfit (§ 314, Obs.) the present 
 stem serves for the future. 
 
 On § 267. 
 
 The a- of the weak aorist is usually traced back to 
 the same source as that of the future, i.e. the root e?. 
 But while the future is compounded with a peculiarly- 
 formed present stem of this root, in the weak aorist the 
 verb-stem enters into combination with the pure verb- 
 stem 69, to which however the immovable vowel a is 
 appended in order to make the inflexion more easy. 
 We find the same addition in the Sanskrit praeterite 
 
 * A somewhat different view of the futures in -ew is maintained 
 by Leskien, Stud. II, 79 f . 
 
§ 272. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 123 
 
 ds-a-m, Greek ^-a for - ^cr-a-/-6, Latin er-a-m for es-a-m. 
 The stem \v-aa therefore means literally ' to be loosing,' 
 6-\v-aa ' I was loosing.' Thus the weak aorist stands 
 in the same relation to the strong as the Latin perfect 
 solutus est to the Greek \ekv-raL. In each we have to 
 deal with an auxiKary verb used for periphrasis, but in 
 the aorist, as in the future, this has become completely 
 amalgamated with the verb-stem. In the stems ending 
 in \, p, fi, V language struck out a different path in the 
 formation of the aorist from that followed in the future. 
 No auxiliary vowel was inserted, but these consonants 
 were allowed to come into direct collision with the 
 objectionable a which seldom maintained its place in 
 the conflict — e-Kek-aa e-Kvp-aa e-a-reX-aa (Hesych.), 
 but as a rule vanished, being either assimilated to the 
 preceding consonant, e.g. ^olic e-revva = i-rev-a-a, 
 Homeric cj(f>€\\a, and this may have been the older 
 process, or dropped without leaving any trace of its 
 existence beyond a compensatory lengthening — ereiva 
 &<^eCKa^ ea-reCKa, — The few non-sigmatic aorists formed 
 from other verb- stems may be explained in the same 
 manner. Language avoided the collision of too many 
 consonants by shortening the original elir-aa rjveyK-aa 
 to elira ffveyKu. 
 
 On § 272. 
 
 The perfect stem with its numerous forms requires 
 discussion at somewhat greater length. The peculiar 
 and essential symbol of this stem is the reduplication. 
 There can scarcely be a doubt about the aim which the 
 genius of language had in view in applying this instru- 
 ment to the formation of the perfect stem after the 
 remarks of Bopp, Vergl Gr., II, 388, Pott, especially 
 in his latest work ' Doppelung^' 205 fi*., myself, Temp, 
 und Modi, 111 ff., and others. That stem denotes 
 
124 ACCIDENCE. § 272. 
 
 the completed action. And to signify this language 
 employs the same means or instrument of which she 
 avails herself frequently for the formation of intensive 
 verbs, and generally to denote any strengthening of the 
 idea expressed by a word. 7re-<^ei/y as distinguished 
 from <j>uy and also from (peuy denotes in the liveliest 
 manner the action as brought to completion. For the 
 same reason the syllable of the stem is also strengthened 
 in many other ways in this tense. The Greek language 
 at least in the time of its fullest bloom used the perfect 
 stem exclusively in this, the obviously original sense, 
 and in doing so displays an antiquity superior to all the 
 other members of the Indo- Germanic family. Hence 
 it is better adapted than any other to represent the 
 original intentions of language in regard to the forma- 
 tion of tenses. But it is true that this, like other 
 advantages of the Greek language, would scarcely have 
 been seen in their true light, did not the kindred 
 languages offer us the material for comparison. 
 
 With regard to the form of reduplication it will here 
 be sufficient to refer to the fact that the similarity of 
 sound between the augment and the reduplicated syllable 
 before certain double consonants is purely accidental. 
 The accident however is in harmony with the widespread 
 tendency of language to avoid any undue repetition of 
 the same sound in two consecutive syllables (cp. Grund- 
 ziige, 659 ff.). 
 
 By reduplication all the forms of the perfect, however 
 widely they may differ in the mode of their formation, 
 are kept together as a whole ; and the unity of this 
 whole must not be obscured even in practical instruc- 
 tion. The reduplicated stem is seen in its purest and 
 most naked form in the middle, where the terminations 
 are added to it immediately, Xi-Xv-fiat, ire-Trpay-fiai. 
 In this case there is one mode of formation only. For 
 
§ 272. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 125 
 
 the distinction between strong and weak forms whicli 
 is carried out in the aorist to the complete separation 
 of two entirely distinct stems, comes before us in the 
 perfect stem in the active voice only ; and even there 
 the strong and weak forms are merely different modes 
 of forming one and the same stem. This must be 
 pointed out to the pupil, and he must be shown that 
 the distinction in this case is to a certain extent 
 secondary. 
 
 In the middle the perfect stem follows the conjuga- 
 tion in 'fiL in joining the person-terminations directly 
 to the stem ; in the active as a rule it avails itself of 
 a uniting vowel; TreTrpdy-a-fjuev as distinguished from 
 7r€7rpay-fjLai. The origin of this vowel can hardly be 
 different from that of the ^connecting' or thematic 
 vowel of the present stem. Forms without a uniting 
 vowel like cS-/jl€V, later ccr-fiev, ^e^a-jxev eara-re could 
 be treated separately in § 317. This is not the place to 
 examine in detail Schleicher's view of the a in the 
 perfect {Compend,, 731, 737), which in regard to some 
 forms differs from mine. But even from what has been 
 said it will be plain why the a cannot certainly as in 
 the weak aorist be regarded as an essential part of the 
 stem ; and why we cannot assume stems like TreTrpar/a, 
 yeyova. It is to be observed moreover that in the 
 aorist the a passes as the characteristic vowel through 
 the moods and verbal nouns, Xvaa-t-fiL Xvad-ro) Xvaa- 
 aOac, etc. ; but in the perfect this is not the case, 
 7r€7rpwy-o-i-fjLL ireirpay-evai. Here quite different vowels 
 make their appearance. 
 
 Older grammarians distinguished in the active be- 
 tween the perfectmn secundum and the perfectum primum. 
 Under the first came all those forms which in 1st sing, 
 join the a without any further addition to the redu- 
 plicated stem yijov-a, ireirpdy-a. Under the latter 
 
126 ACCIDENCE. 272. 
 
 came two classes of perfects — those formed with k and 
 those with an aspirate. But if we put the facts clearly 
 before us, we see at once without going back to their 
 origin that the forms in k can indeed be considered as a 
 separate class, but the aspirated forms cannot. For in 
 the first place, when we attempt to follow the old plan 
 in establishing the aspirated perfect as a separate for- 
 mation, we are met by the question : to what class are 
 we to refer the perfects of stems ending in an aspirate ? 
 fy€ypa(f>-a is regarded as a perfectum primum. It is 
 assumed therefore that in this case aspiration was 
 intended, but could not be carried out on account of the 
 aspirate already in existence. In this particular instance 
 the short vowel might be brought forward by which 
 yiypacf^a is distinguished from \e\7j6a. It may be said 
 that this short vowel shows that yey pa(j)a is not analogous 
 to the so-called perfecta secunda. But what are we to 
 do with aXrj\i<^a, opdpvX'd ? In the Attic reduplica- 
 tion the penultima is not lengthened as a rule — aicrjKo-a, 
 eXrjXvO-a, As the aspirate is found also in aXeiifxo, 
 Bioopvx-o'^, i.e. quite independently of the perfect stem, 
 it would be more reasonable in this case to assume a 
 perfectum secundum. But further, even Buttmann 
 (Ausf. Gr, I, 410) saw that a considerable number of 
 those changes of vowels which were usually regarded as 
 characteristic of the so-called perfecta secunda were to 
 be found in connexion with and bi/ the side of aspira- 
 tion. To be consistent, those who explain yeypa^a as 
 a primum because the vowel remains unchanged, must 
 consider 7r€7ro/jL(f)a KeKKo^a T€Tpo(j)a as secunda on 
 account of the change. But compared with the stems 
 Tre/JLTT /cXeTT rpeir these perfecta secunda have the 
 addition of a breathing ; they are aspirated. Hence if 
 we would strictly maintain the old distinction between 
 the perfecta prima and secunda, we must allow, either 
 
§272. ^ THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 127 
 
 that aspiration is no exclusive mark of the perfectum 
 primum, or that a change of the vowel is not an exclu- 
 sive mark of the secundum. In the first case there ceases 
 to be any reason for separating the aspirated forms as a 
 distinct mode of formation from the unaspirated ; in the 
 second there ceases to be any reason for considering 
 forms like ^eypa^a to be different from Xekr^Oa, In both 
 cases we have the indubitable result that a hard-and- 
 fast line cannot be drawn between the two formations. 
 
 This difficulty has been felt ; and the attempt made 
 in consequence to suppoi-t the aspirated forms by uniting 
 them with those in k. Buttmann (p. 408) assumes a as 
 the peculiar ending of this perfect, and he has often 
 enough been followed in maintaining that this spiritus 
 combined with the preceding guttural and labial mute 
 to form an aspirate, but ' between two vowels and after 
 a liquid it changed into k in order to become audible.' 
 But the science of language knows nothing whatever of 
 such a change of the spiritus asper into k. That mini- 
 mum of a sound which we call the spiritus asper appears 
 in Greek almost always as the last residuum of a 
 spirant. It would be against the analogy of the whole 
 history of sound for the strong guttural k to spring 
 from such a mere shadow of a sound. No one who has 
 the least knowledge of the manner in which such 
 questions are treated at the present day would even for 
 a moment agree to a theory which for Buttmann' s time 
 was acute, but which, though deserving notice as an 
 efibrt to introduce unity into variety, is, when examined 
 closely, without any foundation whatever. 
 
 Nevertheless the attempt to distinguish the aspirated 
 perfect as a special form has found a new defender 
 among the students of comparative grammar. No less 
 a person than the venerable founder of this science, 
 F. Bopp, seeks to maintain this distinction^ but in a 
 
128 ACCIDENCE. § 272. 
 
 manner in which, as I believe 1 have already shown 
 {Temp, iind Modi, p. 191), it is impossible for us to agree. 
 He discusses the perfects with k and the aspirated 
 perfects merely en passant^ while treating of the aorist 
 {Vergl, Gr., II, 446). The k of the three isolated 
 aorists e-Sco-zca, e-Orj-Ka and ^-/ca he compares with the 
 a- of the ordinary Greek aorist, and is of opinion that /c 
 may have arisen out of cr. But there is an entire absence 
 of any sufficient and established analogy for such a 
 change. For it is really no analogy at all that in 
 Ecclesiastical Sclavonic the spirant ch, rather than k, 
 appears as the representative of s ; and even less, that 
 in certain Lithuanian imperatives, which have no con- 
 nexion with the weak^aorist, k is used for s, especially 
 as this k is explained by Schleicher (Lith. Gr,^ p. 231) 
 in quite a different and far more satisfactory manner. 
 From these manifestly insufficient premisses Bopp goes 
 on to conclude that a is the source of the k in the per- 
 fect no less than in the aorist, and of the aspiration also. 
 But in regard to the perfect, even he can point to no 
 analogy in the kindred languages to prove the existence 
 of (T. The wide diffisrence between the sounds ic and a-, 
 which very fairly represent the extreme opposites 
 among the Grreek consonants,* thoroughly justifies us 
 in doubting and even decisively rejecting this explana- 
 tion. The reputation of such a scholar as F. Bopp is 
 not lessened by the fact that some of his opinions are 
 controverted by those who continue to work in his 
 spirit. It would be superfluous to make this remark 
 had not the authority of his name been used on this 
 very point to protect an assumption which has nothing in 
 
 * Savelsberg, it is true, has attempted to bring these sounds 
 together again, especially in Kuhn's Zeitschr. xvi., but without being 
 able to produce any convincing grounds in his favour, valuable as his 
 essay is in other respects. 
 
§272. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 129 
 
 itself to support it, and to bring forward as an estab- 
 lished fact that explanation of the perfects in which no 
 other recent scholar, so far as I know, agrees with Bopp. 
 The whole tendency of the modern science of language 
 leads us to point out wherever possible a distinct cause 
 for every sound and change of sound. Hence there 
 has been no want of other conjectures on the origin of 
 aspiration in the perfect, which are however no more 
 satisfactory than Bopp's. I may refer on this point to 
 Tempora und Modi^ p. 193, and Grundzilge, p. 459. In 
 the latter place I have treated this aspiration in com- 
 bination with the other cases in which a Tenuis or Media 
 becomes an aspirate in Greek, and the result is that 
 we can hardly regard the aspiration of the perfect as 
 anything more than a simple alteration of sound without 
 any definite reason, which can only be explained by a 
 tendency of the Greek language not unknown in other 
 instances also. The strong inclination of the Greek 
 popular speech towards aspiration has now been placed 
 in a far clearer light by W. H. Roscher's exhaustive 
 investigation 'De aspiratione vulgari apud Grcecos ' {Stud, 
 I, 2, 63 if.). 
 
 In maintaining this view of the aspirated perfect 
 which Pott originated, and has again advocated in his 
 later work ' Doppelung^^ p. 257, two circumstances still 
 deserve especial consideration — viz. (1) that the same 
 aspiration is found in 3rd pi. med. in -arai and -aro, 
 quite independently of the act. perf and without any 
 interchange with k, e.g. TerdxdTaL, Homeric epx-cLTat 
 (Rt. ep7), cp. § 287 ; and (2) the small number of the 
 aspirated forms, which are quite unknown to the Homeric 
 poems, where for instance we find Ke/coirm instead of 
 K€KO(f)ci)^, the form usual in later Greek. In Tempora und 
 Modi, p. 196, I have enumerated but twenty-one aspi- 
 rated perfects in all, a great portion of which are not found 
 
 E 
 
130 ACCIDENCE. § 272. 
 
 before the time of Polybius. To these, it is true, a few 
 more may yet be added. I have marked five which may 
 find their place here by the side of those already noticed. 
 Stems which have already an aspirate are naturally not 
 counted. From stems in k we find SeSet^a (Com.), 
 BeBrj'^a (Babr.), Se8/ft)%a (Hyperides, c, Lycophr,, p. 29, 
 6 Schneid.), ivjjvoxci, beside ireirXoxa (Hippocr.), kcky]- 
 pvxct, 7re7rX€%a, TreTrpaxa, eTrTrj^a (Demosth. 4, 8), 
 7re</>uXa;)^a, — from stems in 7, rj^a by the side of ayT^o^^a, 
 riXKa^a in compounds, ellXoxci beside XeXe^^a (Galen), 
 fiefjuaxdy fiefjLLx^j aviw^f^ by the side of ave(pf^a^ opoypexpre^ 
 (Suid.), T€Ta%a, — from stems in tt, ^e^e^a {airo^e- 
 ySXe^ore? Antipater ap. Stobaeum, 70. 13), KeK\o(f>a, 
 fceKocfya, TreTTO^^a^ T€Tpo(pa by the side of rirpacfya (from 
 rpeTTco), — from stems in /S, ^e/3Xa(f)a (Demosth. 19. 180) 
 by the side of e^acfya (C. I. n. 1570), riOXLcfya (Polyb.), 
 etX^y^a, TerpKpa, The quantity of the vowel in TerpLcjya, 
 fjui/jLcxO', and reOXn^a is not ascertained.* To these may 
 be added the doubtful iLaTreiraLx^^^ (Trai^co) in the much- 
 discussed expression of Sophocles on his own artistic 
 development, in Plutarch, De profect, in virtute, chap. 7, 
 for which Bergk (Prcef. ad Soph,, p. xxxi.) conjectures 
 Bia7r€7rXa/cm and SeSa/^Sac^'e (Hesych.), from SapSaTTTco, 
 the characteristic of which is not clearly shown in any 
 form. Such being the case it is obvious that the active 
 perfect, with the exception of the forms in k from vowel- 
 stems, is on the whole a rare tense. Buttmann saw this 
 {A. Gr,, I, 410). It is therefore very absurd to im- 
 press upon the memory of the pupil forms like rirvTra 
 and T€TV(l)a, neither of which are found anywhere, 
 though they have not yet disappeared from our gram- 
 
 * Cp. Gust. Stier. Ztschr. f. Gymnasialw. 1869, S. 440 ff. T^6a(l>a 
 whicli I formerly quoted is not proved, for in the only place quoted 
 for it, Crobylosfr. 3 Meineke (Com. Ed. Minor, p. 1170), the MSS. 
 have T^0ai<p€ which is as meaningless as T^da<f>€. Without doubt 
 riOXiipe is right, as Meineke has assumed, Ath. vi. 258 f. 
 
§283. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 131 
 
 mars and grammatical writings [cp. Veitch, sub. voc. 
 TUTTTO)]. And nothing is more unreasonable than to 
 require that the pupil should be taught to form an 
 active perfect to every verb. This is to make him learn 
 more than the old Athenians knew. He ought certainly 
 to learn that only which really occurs in the literature 
 preserved to us in the best period of Greece, and not 
 fancies fashioned after the model of supposed analogies 
 such as were the futura secunda which before the times 
 of G. Hermann and Buttmann disfigured our Greek 
 grammars. 
 
 This discussion will be sufficient to justify the position 
 which I have allotted to the aspirated perfect, but a few 
 words are still needed in regard to the form with k which 
 I denote exclusively as the weak perfect. This also can 
 be traced in its gradual growth from Homer onwards. 
 In Homer the k is inserted in the first instance after 
 vowels : reOvr^Km by the side of reOvT^m. At a later 
 period it forced its way into stems in X, p, v, and dental 
 mutes, ecTTokKa €(l>0apKa KeKo/uLiKa, From these facts I 
 formerly drew the conclusion that k was here nothing 
 more than a phonetic element introduced to unite stem 
 and termination. This view I now admit to be unten- 
 able for the reason that in no other instance has k grown 
 up out of the hiatus, and I have retracted it in the first 
 edition of the Grundzilge^ where p. 62 will be found a 
 conjecture on the origin of this k. In any case the 
 sound is analogous to other elements which are added to 
 the verb-stem. Schleicher, Compend. 708, adopts my 
 view of the aspirated perfect, but marks the origin of the 
 K as obscure, 825. 
 
 On § 283. 
 
 In order to understand the formation of the pluperfect 
 we must begin with the Homeric forms, e-jedrjir-ea is 
 
132 ACCIDENCE. §283. 
 
 distinguished from the perfect stem reOrjTr by the prefix 
 of an augment belonging to a past tense and the ad- 
 dition of -ea. On the origin of this -€a we can scarcely 
 have any doubt, when we call to mind the Homeric 
 imperfect ea — ^ I was' — which stands for iaa and a yet 
 older iaa/jL and came under our notice above (p. 123) in 
 treating of the formation of the weak aorist. Since this 
 icrafjL is exactly the same as the Latin eram (for esam), it 
 follows that there is the most complete identity between 
 forms like e-TreTrr^-ea and pepig-eram. The compound 
 form i-Treirrj'y-ea therefore is not different in value from 
 the periphrastic 7r€7rr)y(i)<; r^v {Temp, und Modi, 332 ; 
 Schleicher, Compend. 825). In the 3rd sing, the a 
 passed into e as in the weak aorist and the perfect ; 
 i'T€-67]7r€-€ : the 3rd plural i-redriir-ea-av has retained 
 even the <t ; — terminations in -aav being frequent in 
 other formations also and especially in rjcrav, eaav, so 
 that here there was no collision between two vowels. 
 Thus far all is quite clear and without any difficulty. 
 The old Attic first persons in -rj, e.g. i-TreirovOr), may 
 also be simply explained by the rules of contraction ; and 
 if at first sight it is strange that the 3rd sing., e.g. in 
 Homeric and perhaps Attic * yBr) — ' he knew ' — has the 
 same form, the explanation is that in this person also 
 there was in the first instance an a, and that the con- 
 traction took place at a time when the 3rd sing, did 
 not yet end in -€€ but in -ea, while the forms in -eiv of 
 this person are naturally to be regarded as contractions 
 of -€€(v) with V ephelkystikon, and therefore stand in 
 exactly the same relation to the more frequent forms in 
 ei as eTedrjireev to ireOrjiree. But here we are met by 
 a real anomaly. When the diphthong €l had become 
 usual in 3rd sing., which is everywhere the most 
 
 * Cp. Gerth, Qucesticnes de grcecce tragcedice dialecto. Stud. I. 2, 
 222. 
 
§ 291. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 133 
 
 frequent form, it became inserted at a later period in 
 forms where it was out of place like 1st and 2nd sing. 
 and the plur. and dual ; and after the analogy of nu- 
 merous other first persons sing, was introduced in that 
 person also. But i-XeXvKeC'V is a much later formation 
 than iXeXvKT}, Eustathius on Od. yfr 220 quotes good 
 authority for the fact that the best manuscripts of Plato 
 and Thucydides have r) and not ecv. The extreme point 
 of confusion was reached when ec found its way into 
 3rd plur. in which person there was never at any time 
 any occasion for contraction, and consequently for the 
 diphthong. But here also the result of the analysis of 
 language has been most splendidly confirmed by the 
 tradition of grammarians, which is the more trustworthy 
 because it has no point of contact whatever with scien- 
 tific views. The Atticists recommended the forms in 
 -eaav, rejecting those in -eiaav (Phrynichus, ed. Lobeck, 
 p. 149) and good manuscripts have the latter form but 
 rarely in Attic writers (Matthiae § 198. 5, Kriiger § 30. 
 6 Anm. Veitch p. 189). — In contrast to the common 
 formation of the pluperfect by composition the Homeric 
 i-fi€fjL7)K-0'V is formed simply, i.e. without the help of 
 the addition of the substantive verb ; so too those very 
 old pluperfect forms like i-reOva-aaVy i-TriTrtO-fJiev (§ 
 317), which have moreover no connecting vowel, being 
 indeed in no need of such an expedient inasmuch as 
 they follow the formation of the pluperfect middle, 
 rather than the active. 
 
 On § 291. 
 That the futurum exactum or 3rd future is com- 
 pounded of the perfect stem and the future of the root 
 €9, like the corresponding tense in Latin, BeScoaofiat like 
 ded-ero, needs no further confirmation after what has 
 been said. The insignificant variations in the quantity 
 
134 ACCIDENCE. §§ 292—299. 
 
 of the vowel in the future and the perfect stems which 
 consist exclusively in this, that the vowel is more often 
 found long in the future than in the perfect, may very 
 well be explained on two grounds. 1. The Greeks 
 had always a tendency to lengthen short syllables when 
 surrounded by others also short. Hence the co in 
 ao(t)(oT€po<;, €v(ovvfio<;. 2. The analogy of the common 
 middle forms was obviously not without a certain 
 influence — thus we have XeXva-ofiac following XvaofMai 
 in contrast to XeKv-jJuai, 
 
 On §§ 292—299. 
 
 The two passive stems are the most difficult forms 
 in the Greek verb. In analysing them, the kindred 
 languages are so far of no assistance that they present, 
 no form exactly parallel and used in a similar manner. 
 It is not our object here to solve difficult problems but 
 to put together results which can enliven and advance 
 • instruction in Greek. The following observations then 
 may suffice. The two passive stems like the Greek 
 aorist the future and the pluperfect are without doubt 
 compound formations. The passive meaning peculiar 
 to these stems is not denoted by the person-termina- 
 tions as in the other passive forms — on the contrary 
 the terminations of the two aorists are active — 
 but must lie in the stems themselves, i.e. in the 
 elements €{rj) and OeiOrj) appended to the verb-stems. 
 I have already stated in Temp, und Modi p. 329 ff*. my 
 conjecture that the € has arisen from the root ja ^to go,' 
 which we have already met more than once in another 
 phonetic form. Here this root would be used without 
 a connecting vowel after the analogy of the conjuga- 
 tion in -iJbiy e.g. as ard in e-arrj-v, 71/&) in e-^vco-Vj and 
 since the verb-stem, when it appears in its pure form, 
 has an aoristic force, the direct application of a stem 
 
§ 301. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 135 
 
 like ypa^-€ to express the aorist is accounted for. The 
 passive meaning of this root is vindicated by Sanskrit 
 forms in which the syllable ja combined with person- 
 terminations active no less than middle gives a passive 
 meaning and also by forms like the Latin venum ire or 
 venire, the passive of venum dare or vendere. i-ypd(l>'7)-p 
 therefore was pretty nearly equivalent to the Grerman 
 ich ging schreihen^ gerieth ins schreiben (' I went a-writ- 
 ing — fell a writing ') ; just as the German in Verfall, 
 in Verlust gerathen or verloren gehen is synonymous 
 with verloren werden (' to go lost '=' to be lost'). — In 
 regard to the weak passive stem only so much is certain, 
 that it stands in close connexion with numerous other 
 formations which present the same consonant 0. The 
 formations in point will be found collected in Grundz, 
 64. It is probable that this 6 arose out of the root Oe 
 (Sanskrit dhd) which even in Greek signifies not merely 
 ' to place ' but also ^ to do ' (e.g. Sappho, Frag, 62, tL 
 K€ Oelfiev ;), but how this comes to be used with a 
 passive meaning is a difficulty which I have attempted 
 to solve in Kuhn's Zeitchrift, I, 26. Schleicher, Com- 
 pend. 827 ; Corssen, Jahns Jahrb., Bd. 68, 368 ; 
 Lange, Ueber den lateinischen Infinitiv, p. 23, have 
 adopted more or less decisively my conjecture that in 
 the 0e we may recognize a compound, a combination 
 of the root 0e with the je already mentioned. 
 
 On § 301. 
 The shortness of the stem-vowel in the formation 
 of the tenses of numerous verb-stems, e.g. yeXdco, fut. 
 yekaa-ofjuac, is here pointed out merely as a fact, because, 
 though many conjectural explanations have been given 
 of this phenomenon, proof can be obtained in very few 
 cases. Since in the tense-stems in point a short vowel 
 is the rule where the verb-stem has lost a dental con- 
 
136 ACCIDENCE. § 301. 
 
 sonant before the additional elements, e.g. in irXjcL-o-to 
 from the root TrXar, f\>pii-(rw from the root ^pahj and 
 since the same stems present their final consonants 
 elsewhere in the form of <7, e.g. 7r€7r\ao--/tai, (^/oac-To?, 
 it is natural to connect both phenomena, the shortness 
 of the vowel and the frequent insertion of <7 (§§ 288, 
 298, 300), in such a manner as to assume that stems 
 ending in a dental sound must be our starting-point 
 in explaining them. In many cases this can be done 
 with probability. Thus reXe-w appears to be a denomi- 
 native from Te\€9 (nom. reko^i)^ to which re-reXea-jjuevo^ 
 stands in the same relation as /c€-Kopv6-/jL6vo<; to the 
 noun-stem Kopvd, In this case the formation of the 
 present from such a stem can certainly be explained 
 by the phonetic laws of Greek, Tekea-LO), reXe-lco, 
 Homeric reXe/c*), reXeo). Elsewhere kindred formations 
 with 8 or T have been brought forward, e.g. airaB-cov 
 for cTTTa-ft) cnrd-aco i-(T7rd(r6rj-Vj apvT-co by the side of 
 apv-cD for dpv-aco. But here the rejection of the dental 
 in the present between two vowels creates a fresh diffi- 
 culty. Since no phonetic law in Greek forbids o-TraBco 
 as a form of the present, we should, in attempting to 
 get rid of the old anomaly, create a new one which 
 was not in existence before. Besides, etymology is 
 against the assumption of a root aTraS {Grundz. 255). 
 This whole question has been discussed at length by 
 Leskien in connexion with the double a in future and 
 aorist forms. Studien II. § 67 fF. 
 
 Without giving my approval in every detail to the 
 positions and suggestions advanced in that essay, I 
 gladly allow that for many of the forms in question 
 stems in a have been proved with more certainty than 
 formerly. In regard to other verbs, the path followed 
 by Pott, Etym, Forsch. 11^, 970 fF., seems preferable, 
 and we ought to regard the confusion of verbs in aciy 
 
§ 304. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 137 
 
 and a^co, vco and v^m as the source of the phenomenon. 
 In any case these investigations are by no means suffi- 
 ciently advanced to exercise any influence on school- 
 grammar. The same holds good of the stems K€pa<;, 
 /cpe/^a?, Kope^^ which have been assumed for Kepd-vvv'/xi,, 
 Kp€fid-Pvv-/JLL, Kope-vvv-jJbLj and some other formations of 
 the same kind. 
 
 In €-vvv'fJLi alone the first v has been really proved 
 to be due to assimilation (root €9, fe?, § 319, 3), and 
 the same origin is in my opinion probable for a^e-vvv-pa 
 {Grundz. 522). But in a school-grammar the forms 
 €-a^r)'V, e-a/Srj'Ka make the assumption of such a root 
 unadvisable. The a which in the formation of tenses no 
 less than of nouns appears between vowel-stems and the 
 various terminations is as yet by no means thoroughly 
 cleared up, and cannot certainly be removed at a stroke 
 as it were by making it in every case a component 
 part of the stem. It is not from any carelessness or 
 inattention, but after the fullest consideration, that I 
 have preferred in such cases simply to point out the 
 anomaly. 
 
 On § 304. 
 
 The verbs in -puc might have been divided into more 
 classes than I have made. More especially it seems 
 advisable from a scientific point of view to treat as a 
 separate class those which distinguish their present 
 stems from the pure verb-stem by reduplication (§ 308). 
 But the number was too small to justify us in doing 
 so. There are but nine Greek verbs in all of this kind, 
 and they can therefore be regarded merely as a part of 
 the first class. The same holds good of the verbs in 
 -vrjpuL (§ 312 D), which moreover with the exception 
 of hvvapiai are not found in Attic prose. These also 
 are nine in number, Bdpr-vij-pn Kip-vrj-put KprfpU'Va-pbai 
 
138 ACCIDENCE. § 301. 
 
 fidp-va-fiaL Trep'Vrj'fjLi TriX-va-fiai, TriT-vrj-fiL <TKih-vrj-ixi 
 hv-va-fjiai. 
 
 Among these fjudp-va-fMac is used only in the present 
 stem, Bvva-fiat has an unchangeable stem Svva running 
 through the whole formation of the tenses and occasion- 
 ally increased by the addition of a signta {Svvd(TT7)<;) ; 
 and all the others are provided with secondary forms 
 of different structure which are in more common use. 
 To treat the dissyllabic stem dr/a ipa Kpefia also as 
 separate was the less necessary for my purpose, as no 
 certain explanation can be given of their origin. 
 
 On the other hand, the verbs in -vvfii are clearly to 
 be regarded as distinct. The syllable vv is restricted 
 to the present stem, and the number of the verbs of this 
 kind runs up to thirty-eight. In every respect there- 
 fore they may claim to form a class by themselves. In 
 their formation these verbs are evidently clearly allied 
 to those numerous and variously-formed verbs which 
 extend the present by the addition of a nasal, either 
 alone or in combination with different vowels, and 
 therefore they stand in close connexion with the fifth 
 or nasal class which immediately follows them in my 
 arrangement. As regards the origin of these nasal 
 additions, I recognize in the syllable vv, which corre- 
 sponds to the Skt. nu, e.g. op-vv-fjuev =: Skt. r-nu-mas 
 for ar-nu-mas, just as in the va (vrj) already mentioned, 
 a suffix joined to the stem, thus abandoning the view 
 maintained in Tempora und Modi, and agreeing with 
 Schleicher, Compendium p. 770. The present stems 
 op'vv Bec/c-vfi fjLir/-vv stand to the verb-stems op SeA/c 
 fiLy exactly in the same relation as the larger noun- 
 stems BofjL-o oTT-ai KXoir-ev to the shorter So ott or 
 ft)7r KXeir, On this matter I may refer to my essay 
 Zur Chronologie der Indog. Sprachf,, p. 227. 
 
§ 305 ff. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 130 
 On § 305 ff. 
 
 I have been reproached with the inconsistency of 
 regarding sometimes the short vowel, e.g. in 6e ho, 
 and sometimes the long one, e.g. in ^yvco 13 co), as primary 
 in roots which end in a vowel. But in assuming these 
 forms, with regard to which on the whole I differ but 
 little from other grammarians, I have acted upon a 
 definite plan : the root is quoted with a long vowel 
 where the length extends to the greater number of 
 forms, and with a short one where it is confined to 
 the smaller number. The distinction between i-Oe-rrjv 
 Oelvat dk'dL'^j he-ho-rau hovvai ho-ai-^, (j>d-0c cjya-ro-^ 
 on the one hand, and forms like yvco-vac yvco-TO-^i 
 yv(o-cn'<i, l3c(o-vaL, aXSi'vaL aXxo-ac^, re-rpco-fiac i-rpoo- 
 Orf-v, on the other, is sufficiently marked to justify the 
 distinction. In stems like those of aTrj-vat, fjuifjuprj-fiac 
 T€-07]-Ka, there is the further practical consideration that 
 as 7) can arise out of e no less than a, it is only in ara 
 fia Ova, that we can recognize the real stem-vowel. 
 The quantity, where it fluctuates, is purposely left 
 unmarked. In this way I believe all objections are 
 removed so far as Greek grammar, and at any rate 
 Grreek school-grammar is concerned. When we take 
 up a higher point of view so as to include in our 
 observation the corresponding forms in the kindred 
 languages, we shall, it is true, find reason to alter our 
 judgment. The Indian grammarians allow no roots in 
 a, but only in d, so that Sanskrit dd corresponds to 
 Greek So, Latin dd-re (by the side of do-nu-m), Sanskrit 
 dlid to Greek Oe, Sanskrit ^d to Greek /9a (^acvco). 
 But Schleicher in an essay in Kuhn and Schleicher's 
 Beitrdge, II, p. 92 ff., has brought forward weighty 
 reasons for universally assuming short a as the primitive 
 form in these roots ; and he follows this plan in his 
 
140 ACCIDENCE. § 321. 
 
 Compendium, But even in this case we must continue 
 to regard the long vowel as the characteristic in those 
 roots in which metathesis is found, e.g. in 71^0) ( = 
 Sanskrit gnd Latin gno by the side of German kann)^ 
 since that form of the root only in which the vowel 
 stands between the two consonants (e.g. 6av fiaX /nev 
 T€fi /3op (TTop) regularly presents the short vowel ; 
 but, on the other hand, when metathesis takes place, 
 the vowel is long (0i/7;-t6-9 ^e-^Xrj-Ka fjii-fivrj-fiaL 
 (TTpwvvvfJLL), Consequently in roots which present the 
 vowel in the latter position only, the length of the 
 vowel is a part of the stem. More obscure in origin 
 is a number of other stems like ^ico aX(o afi/SXcoy but 
 in these also the long vowel is undeniably fixed, i.e. 
 forms part of the stem. 
 
 On § 321. 
 
 In this, no less than in the following classes of 
 verbs (as is pointed out even in the observations in 
 the Grammar), we must carefully observe that over 
 and above the peculiar characteristics of each class 
 many isolated specialities present themselves. Since 
 language in general applies very various means to 
 distinguish the present stem from the verb-stem, we 
 cannot wonder that we sometimes find several of these 
 means united. Several pleonasms may be observed 
 in the most widely distinct provinces of language. 
 We need only call to mind comparatives like %e/o€t6- 
 T6/0O-9, and superlatives like irpwriaro^. No one would 
 think of availing himself of these extended forms to 
 overthrow the usual arrangements of the comparative 
 and superlative. Similarly in No. 1 of the verbs here 
 given, ^aiv'Ct), we find the double addition in the 
 present stem. From the root /3a arose first /3ai/, then 
 I3av-i. Here and elsewhere the doubt might arise 
 
§ 321. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 141 
 
 which of these two additions is to give the mark for 
 classification. Does /3atV« on account of the l belong 
 to the fourth or I-class (cp. fiaivofibac), or on account of 
 the V to the fifth or nasal class ? The first arrangement 
 would be recommended by the comparison of Latin 
 ven-i-o by the side of vin-i (cp. Umbr. hen-ust = ven- 
 erit). But in favour of the second is the circumstance 
 that in Greek the v occurs in the present stem only, 
 and we cannot therefore in this case establish a root 
 /3av, whereas, on the other hand, in <f>aLvot} though we 
 can go back to a root (f)a, yet if we leave a few Homeric 
 forms out of sight {(f>d-€P ire~(^ri-<TO'^aL) <^av only can 
 be recognized as the verb-stem, and the verb therefore 
 belongs to the fourth class. As in this case then we find 
 the fourth and fifth classes united, so the peculiar mark 
 of the seventh or E-class and especially of the second 
 division of it, viz., the lengthening of the verb-stem by 
 an € added to facilitate the formation of tenses, occurs 
 occasionally in all the other classes. There is only 
 this difference, that in the seventh class the additional 
 element is the mark which distinguishes the verb-stem 
 from the present stem, whereas in the other classes 
 it is something accessory and claims attention only for 
 the formation of certain tenses. We therefore who 
 have taken this distinction between verb-stem and 
 present stem as the basis of our arrangement, can be 
 in no doubt about the place which each verb ought to 
 occupy. In spite of afiapT-rj-a-o^ai, afiaprdvoi) belongs 
 to the nasal class, and the same is the case with av^- 
 dv-o) in spite of av^-rj-ao). In 6<\>X'L(TK-dv(o we find 
 the additional elements of the inchoative and nasal class 
 combined, as is pointed out by the reference to § 324. 
 But the proper place for the verb was in § 322, 
 among those which add -av to the stem. So too the 
 circumstance that the root itl is supplemented in the 
 
142 ACCIDENCE. § 321. 
 
 construction of many forms by the root tto, and con- 
 sequently must be mentioned in the mixed class, is no 
 reason that the relation of e-Tn-o-v to ttiV-o) should not 
 be mentioned in this section. 
 
 When the root-vowel is short, the mere addition of 
 the syllable av is not enough, but the nasal is also 
 inserted in the root and is thus doubly represented, 
 fMav0-av Tuyx"^^ Xa/ju^-av. This nasal is apparently 
 due to a repetition in the root of the sound contained 
 in the following syllable. 
 
 I have already referred (p. 138) to the connexion 
 of this nasal class with the verbs in -vv-^l This 
 connexion is especially prominent in some of the 
 verbs which belong to this place. The Homeric 
 dialect has preserved the form ri-vv'fit, and therefore 
 it is not impossible that tl-v-co arose out of ri-vv-co, 
 and <^Lvv-6-(o makes an older form ^Ou-vv-cd for 
 <^6v-v-a) not improbable. In § 318, 4, it is noticed 
 how frequently we find secondary forms in the 0- 
 conjugation beside the verbs in -vv-/jli. In this way 
 also we may explain iXav-vco by the side of the verb- 
 stem i\a. We may carry it back to iXa-vv-oy [cp. 
 Ahrens, jPormmZ., p. 127], and assume the same meta- 
 thesis of the V which is brought before us so plainly in 
 jovv-a =z ryovv-a (Latin genu-d). 
 
 No less plainly is the internal homogeneity of all the 
 nasal additions of this class displayed by the fact that 
 we possess double forms which exhibit a certain varia- 
 tion on the part of language in regard to the exact form 
 of the nasal syllable. Thus by the side of Bd/c-v-co we 
 find, in quotations of the grammarians only, Sayfcdvo), 
 which serves to combine forms like ^aivoy and dfiaprdvoo, 
 the connecting-link between afxapr-dv-w and KV-ve-(o is 
 LKav-co by the side of iK-vi-O'/jiaL, while the Ionic vy-pv- 
 fiaL {KaOlyvvfxai), retained in Hippocrates, forms the 
 
§ 324. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 143 
 
 transition to the verbs -vv-fiL (Lobeck, TechnoL, 209). 
 So too l(T'XjoiV(o (in a longer formation la'xavdco) by the 
 side of vTT'y afiTT'Lax-vi-o-fjuai. The numerous verbs 
 which belong to this place have been illustrated by 
 Lobeck on Buttmann, Ausf. Gr,, II, 64 fF. 
 
 On § 324 * 
 
 The sixth or inchoative class is one of those possessions 
 common to Greek and Latin which show how extremely 
 close is the connexion existing between the two lan- 
 guages. There is, it is true, something analogous to 
 it in Sanskrit. But only three verbs in that language 
 form the present stem in this manner — viz., by the ad- 
 dition of k'h, the regular representative of sk in Indian. 
 We might therefore assume a ga-sk-d-mi corresponding 
 to the Greek ^d-aK-o) (Schleicher, Compend,^ '^66), as 
 the predecessor of ga-k' h-d-mij 'I go,' from the root ga=z 
 Greek ^a. But not merely have the sounds lost their 
 original form in Sanskrit; in other respects also that lan- 
 guage stands below the classical languages in regard to 
 these forms. In it there is no trace of that specific mean- 
 ing of the additional element which in the two classical 
 languages is retained to so great an extent that the class 
 is termed from it the inchoative class. The inchoative 
 meaning is not only found in the verbs mostly of de- 
 rivative formation which are termed inchoative in the 
 strict sense, e.g. yTjpd-o-K-co (cp. sen-e-sc-o), rj^d-aK-o) 
 (cp. pube-sC'O), dva-^Loo-aK-o-zjiaL (cp. revivi-sc-o), but 
 may also be easily recognized in many others, e.g. in 
 fit'fjbvri-aK-o-fjLai (cp. re-min-i-sc-or), dXh-rj-aK-Oy (cp. 
 adole-sC'o), yc-yvoo-aK-co (= gnd-sc-o), Sc-Bd-aK-o) the 
 causative correlative of the intransitive di-sc-o. As the 
 inchoative meaning consists essentially in the fact that 
 the action comes to pass gradually, those present stems 
 * Cp. Veryum, p. 265 ff.— Ed. 
 
144 ACCIDENCE. § 824. 
 
 which denote the gradual working out of an action, e.g. 
 iTTL'^d'O'K'eLVj pac'i-sc'i are distinguished from the in- 
 choatives in the narrower sense, which denote a gradual 
 process, merely as transitive from intransitive, i.e. as 
 i-aT7]-fjLi and Latin sist-o from arrrj-vai and stare. Thus 
 therefore TrL'TrL-aK-o) fiedv-aK-o) dp-ap-L-cTK-co become 
 intelligible. The reduplication found in not a few verbs 
 in conjunction with the aK is naturally to be regarded 
 as an additional strengthening element, even as it is 
 applied in an independent manner in the verbs in -fjuc 
 to form the present, and occurs here and there in the 
 verbs given § 327, 14-17 {yi-yv-o-fiaL TrL-irra) TiTpd-o)). 
 After what has been said there can scarcely be any 
 doubt that this class originally comprised those verbs 
 only in which it was the intention of language to denote 
 in the present stem the gradual realization of an action. 
 Even in those forms therefore, in which such a meaning 
 can scarcely, if at all, be proved in the historical era 
 of the language — e.g. /SXcJ-o-zc-w Op^o-aK-co o-Tep-c-a-K-o), 
 Latin ulc-i-sc-or — we may reasonably assume that it 
 existed at an earHer period. We need hardly dwell 
 upon the fact that the <tk of the iteratives in -aico-v is 
 not different in nature and origin from the additional 
 element in the present, and consequently the iterative 
 was only an isolated preterite of this formation of the 
 present. The gradual realization and the repetition of 
 an action are regarded by language as nearly akin. 
 Both form the opposite to the sudden incidental action 
 of the aorist. This class possesses a peculiar interest for 
 the student of the verb in general, because we can in 
 this case prove a particular meaning for the additional 
 element in the present stem. It ought however to be 
 mentioned that the origin of this aK is unknown to us ; 
 the last and highest question therefore still remains 
 unanswered. 
 
§§ 325, 326. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 145 
 
 In the mode of adding the element also, Latin and 
 Greek present a high degree of similarity. We need 
 only compare {g)no-sc-o {g)nasc-or cre-sc-o with yc- 
 jvco-cTK-ci) Trc-Trpd'a/c-Q) ^kc-kXij-q-k-co, the derivatives 
 rj^d-a/c-co yr]pd-aK-(o with Latin ira-sc-or^ dX-l-aK-o- 
 fiac o-rep-l-a-K-co with Latin ap-i-sc-or pac-i-sc-or^ and 
 ScSd-aK-co Xd-cTK-co in which a guttural is lost with 
 di-sc-o, to perceive that the laws of formation are the 
 same. It is a striking fact that the genius of language, 
 — ever intent on delicate distinctions, — has separated 
 the iterative forms, which in spite of their close rela- 
 tionship have some peculiarities of application, from the 
 inchoatives, at least in part by the connecting-vowel; 
 ard-o-K-ov, it is true, is formed like (fyd-a-K-co, but e^-e- 
 (TK'OV tS-€-crfc-ov are distinct from a-rep-L-a/c-co evp-i- 
 afc-Q), and only dp-e-aK-co which, though elsewhere also it 
 retains the e, cannot be separated from dp'/nevo-^ dp-Tio-<; 
 in the sense ^ to accommodate one's self to ' ( Grundz, 
 317), makes use of the connecting-vowel. This desire 
 for distinction stands in my opinion by the side of the 
 consistent development of the germs handed down from 
 an earlier period, as a highly characteristic mark of the 
 Greek lan^uaije. 
 
 On §§ 325 and 326. 
 
 The seventh or E-class* is evidently composed of two 
 formations of quite distinct origin. But as we have 
 throughout made the relation of the present stem to the 
 verb-stem the basis of our arrangement, and this relation 
 in the verbs before us is shown in the fact that a super- 
 fluous e is sometimes found in one position and some- 
 times in another, it was certainly allowable for practical 
 purposes to bring both under one point of view. That 
 formation naturally occupies the first place which in 
 * Verbum,p. 370 ff.— Ed. 
 
 L 
 
146 ACCIDENCE. §§ 325, 326. 
 
 unison with the classes already discussed presents the 
 extended stem in the forms of the present. With regard 
 to the €, the addition of which distinguishes ^ajxe So/ce 
 Kvpe etc., as present stems from the verb-stems ^yafju Sok 
 Kvp, I have already conjectured (Temp, und Modi, pp. 92, 
 94) that it arose out of Jod. In my Grundz.^ 557, I 
 have illustrated and confirmed this explanation from 
 other sources. The identity of this e with the Jod of 
 the I-class is most apparent in the Homeric op-e-ovro 
 (B 398, W 212). As e is found even outside the verb 
 as the representative of an original Jod, this form, which 
 belongs to the root op (op-vv-fjii), may be compared with 
 Latin or-i-nntur. If my view is correct, and I can see 
 no reasonable ofbjection against it, the first division of 
 the seventh class presents at least in part the same ele- 
 ment which characterizes the I-class. But there are 
 good reasons for separating the two. Thus I could not 
 maintain the same origin for the e in all the verbs of this 
 class. In some it is quite as possible that the present 
 stem is formed from a noun, and the rest of the tenses 
 from a shorter stem. In 'x^paiatiew this is undoubtedly 
 the case. The word evidently proceeds from %/)a-o-t/xo-9, 
 and is derived from it in the same manner as ahcKe-oi) 
 from dBLKO'<;, The i became inserted in the radical 
 syllable by epenthesis, on which see p. 44. Hence 
 €'')(^paiafjb-0'V is quite an anomalous preterite, which like 
 e-TTLTv-O'V became fixed for the aorist solely because it 
 was distinguished from the imperfect e-^patV/x.-e-o-i^ | 
 (cp. i-TTLT-ve-o-v) as the shorter form. This origin of the ^ 
 €, which in the present case is certain and corresponds | 
 exactly to the origin of the same vowel in the derivative | 
 verbs in -eo), is at least possible in some other verbs, f 
 e.g. in (f>tXia) (cp. <^/\o-9), KTV7r-€-(o (/ctvtto-?), piTrri-Q) f 
 which Lobeck on Buttmann, II, 52, traced back to t 
 ptTTTo-?, and Herinann, Soph, Ajac, 235, compares | 
 
§§ 325, 326. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB; lAl 
 
 with jactare in contradistinction to jacere. Similarly in 
 ireKrico (Aristoph.) and many other verbs discussed by 
 Lobeck, Ajax 239. Compare also Pott II 2, 965 fF. 
 That a formation of the present, in which that tense 
 only belongs to the derivative stem and the others to the 
 primitive, is not unknown in Greek is proved by the 
 presents with a quoted in § 325 under n-p for this very 
 purpose, fyod-co fi7)Kd-0'fjuiL /MUKa-o-fjiac by the side of 
 e-yo-o-v fjL6-fjLr]K-a e-fjuvK-o-v. In Latin this combination 
 of two stems thus distinguished has prevailed, as is well 
 known, to a vBry great extent — e.g. lav-a-re (older 
 lav-e-re, Xou-ecp) by the side of Idvi, son-a-re (son-e-re) 
 by the side of son-ui son-i-4us, in which we cannot sup- 
 pose that the long a has been dropped. For this reason 
 I think it probable that the same view may be taken of 
 the second or E-conjugation of the Latins, the e in which 
 is confined to the present stem. Doc-ui therefore has 
 not ariseu out of doce-vij any more than eBo^a out of 
 iSoKTjaa, but in Latin as in Greek the forms without e 
 are to be regarded as the verb-stems, those with e as 
 extended forms, and therefore confined to the present 
 stem. Vanicek {Latein, Schulgr,, § 187) has also 
 arranged these verbs on this theory; and the arguments 
 which have been brought forward on the other side have 
 not convinced me that we are in the wrong. After what 
 has been said, sufficient reason appears to have been 
 given for the separation of the presents extended with 
 6 as a distinct class. The division and arrangement of 
 the phenomena of language ought not to be guided 
 exclusively by our conjectures about their origin ; but 
 above all by the evidence of the facts before us. And 
 there is no question that everything which comes under 
 discussion here was gathered up by the instinct of lan- 
 guage under the interchange of verbs in -eco and -co. 
 The second division of this class is of quite a distinct 
 
148 ACCIDENCE. §§325,326. 
 
 kind. Here the e comes before us as a vowel uniting 
 the stem and the additional elements of tense-formation. 
 In many cases therefore it is simply an auxiliary or 
 connecting vowel. Buttmann taking a similar view, 
 classed together (II, 56) the epic perfects, op-dyp-e-rau 
 (t 377, 524) and.a/c-7;x-e-/iez^o-9 {E 364, ^ 29), to which 
 may be added ap'r)p-€-/jL6P0-<; in Apollonius Rhod. In 
 many of the verbs belonging to this divisi^on we can feel 
 the need of such a vowel, just as e is always inserted 
 in forming the future of certain verbs (cp. Ahrens, 
 Formenlehrej p. 119 ; Miiller and Lattmann, p. 102), es- 
 pecially after p in the stems ep rop, after \ in /3ouX OeX 
 fi€\ after nasals in fiev ve/ju, after double consonants 
 aXe^ av^ a')(Q eyjr oXiaB hapO ^Xaar alaO ofxapr 
 ipp fieXX irepB dXO, and even in dental stems like aiS 
 evS (cp. evaco from evco) ktjS /xeS ttct the formation of 
 the tenses gains in clearness by the addition, in so far as 
 a number of phonetic changes are thus avoided. There 
 are also many anomalies in verbs of other classes which 
 may without difficulty be brought under the same point 
 of view, e.g. ifju-rj/ju-e-fca XoF-e-aaa ofju-co/n-o-TaL (cp. 
 Lobeck, Elementa II, III, Leskien, Studien II, 120), 
 eh'ifjh-o-TaL and iS-rjS-o-Ka, and the Homeric aorist from 
 7r€p-vr)-/jLt, i-irip-a-aaa (§ 312 D, e). In the first 
 instance the inserted vowel may have been universally 
 short. But in the E-stems the resemblance to the 
 vowel-stems in e was too close to be always avoided. 
 The vowel is still short in yep-e-a-i^ (cp. gen-e-trix), but 
 long in r^ev-Tj-ao-fxaL <ye-^ev-r]'fiaL. A great number of 
 these forms also are evidently of no great antiquity, es- 
 pecially those in which the present stem becomes a new 
 verb-stem by the addition of e ; jSoaK-rj-ao) KaO-t^-rj- 
 aofjbai (Plato) ci^-rj-aa KXanqacd jjueXX-rj-aco i'/JLv^-rj-aa 
 cocfyelX-rj-Ka Tvirr-rj-aco (Aristoph.). This convenient 
 analogy appears to have been an especial favourite in 
 
§ 327. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 149 
 
 the conversational language of Attica. It was aided 
 without doubt in some cases by the desire to avoid con- 
 fusion ; thus we have olrjcro/j.at by the side of oto-o/iai 
 ((1)6 pco), €pp7]o-co by the side of epw, ixeWrjcrw by the side 
 of yLteXw, ^e-qacD (from SeFijo-co) by the side of Srjcra), 
 axOeaafiai by the side of d^ofiac (ayco), ifjLwxead/jLrjv 
 (fid')(^o/jiat) beside ifjLa^dfjurjv (jidaaco), ^ad-'q-aofiai by 
 the side of firja-o/jLac {/jL^SofjuaL), and fidao) (fiata)), TraL^aco 
 {iraio}) beside iraicKii (iral^co), [Cp. Pott, Et. Forsch II '-^^ 
 957.] Any one who wishes to follow further the spread 
 of these aftergrowths must include the formation of 
 nouns in his researches, the vowel being equally com- 
 mon there. 
 
 On § 327- 
 
 This last or anomalous class also comprises very 
 various elements. But a further division of the material 
 is hardly compatible with the requirements of instruc- 
 tion. From a scientific point of view two principal 
 divisions may certainly be distinguished. To the first 
 belong those verbs the stems of which can be connected 
 phonetically. Among these may be counted the first 
 seven of the verbs given in this section (alp-i-o) ep^-o- 
 fiat epS-co io-Oi-co eTr-o-jubat 6'X^-co fiLay-co), and further 
 9, 10 (Tracr^ft) 7r/z/-ft)), and the five last {elirov ylyvofjuai 
 TTLTTTco TLTpdco l-avQ)), iu which reference is made in the 
 text of the Grammar to the connexion existing between 
 the different forms. Thus in the last mentioned the 
 present stem appears as a reduplicated verb-stem. 
 Nothing is more intelligible than that yt-yvo-fjuaL as well 
 as the Latin gi-gn-o has arisen out of the root yev and 
 in the same manner Trl-TrT-oy out of the root ttct. The 
 roots are clearly to be seen in i-yev-o-firjv and the Doric 
 e-Trer-o-v, In regard to the second verb the Latin 
 pet-e-re deserves notice. Like the old Latin gen-i-tur 
 
1^0 ACCIDENCE. § 327. 
 
 (Cic, de Omt,, II, § 141) it arises immediately from the 
 pure root. That pet-e-re and Trea-elv and also irer-e-aOat 
 are identical in origin is shown in Grundz, 198. In 
 many instances ifiireaelv is synonymous with impetere, 
 impetum facer e, e.g. II. O 624. The o) in ire-irTco-ica is 
 explained by the € of the Homeric ire-irre-d)^ to which it 
 stands in the same relation as ih-rfh-o-Ka to eh-rj^-e-a- 
 fiai. Without doubt the effort to distinguish the notions 
 of ' flying ' and ' falling ' has helped in the selection of 
 the 0-sound [cp. irrilxTif; and irrriai'^, ittcotlko^ and 
 TTTT^T^/co?]. , TL-rpd-co uccds no further explanation. The 
 stem rpa stands to rep {rip-e-rpo-p rep-e-co Latin ter-o 
 ter-e-bra) as /jlvt] (jjLc/jivijcrKo)) to fxeu {fiepbova), Tfirj 
 {TfjLrj(n<;) to re/i (rifjuvco). Another form of the shortest 
 kind is presented to us in the Homeric rop-elv, — In the 
 Homeric l-av-co the stem, which begins with a vowel, is 
 reduplicated simply by l as in L-rj-fjiLj and more exactly 
 still in l-aXX'O) (Grundz. 502). The root is af {Grundz. 
 361). Hence df-e-aa (a-e-aa) as Xof-e-aaa. In Odyssey 
 X 261, a rhapsody allowed to be of late origin, we do 
 indeed find the aorist lavcrac, but the derivation of the 
 word from the root dF is as little affected by this form 
 as the derivation of S^L-B&)-fiv from the root Bo by the* 
 occurrence of an isolated future BlBco-o-co, Thus in the 
 conjugation in co we have a residuum, by no means 
 inconsiderable, of that addition to the present which was 
 more plainly marked in the verbs in -/jll. c-ax-co also — 
 the stronger form of the present e;\;-ft) quoted under 
 No. 6 — is apparently to be traced back to the same, 
 principle of formation inasmuch as it stands for ac-ax-o), 
 i-(TX-co.^ 
 
 In the remaining verbs the phonetic changes are less 
 clear. A middle point in which the stems aipe and e\ 
 meet has been found in the Cretan d(t>aiXrjcrea6aL 
 {Grundz., II, 509). We may assume a root Fap which 
 
§ 327. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 151 
 
 alternates with FeX. The present therefore was pro- 
 bablj in the first instance Fap-i-ay after the analogy of 
 the I-class. From the penultimate the i passed into the 
 stem-syllable. — The way in which such forms as ep8-ca 
 and /3ef-&) may be connected could be pointed out even 
 in the Grammar, no phonetic changes being involved 
 beyond those mentioned in the chapter on sounds. The 
 same holds good of eirofjuai and e%a). With regard to 
 the first a word may be added on the aorist k-air-O'^rfv, 
 The Homeric forms e-aTr-co-fjuai e-cnr-e-aOai show that 
 the syllable € was originally considered part of the 
 stem, and therefore we have here to do with a redu- 
 plicated aorist in which e stands for ere as in the 
 perfect enrTTj-Ka. But in the Attic period the € was 
 confounded with the augment and therefore dropped 
 except in the indicative : aircofMaL (nreaOau Of the 
 forms belonging to e^j^w, 6^-(OK-a deserves notice. It 
 is regarded as an Attic reduplicated perfect, and stands 
 therefore for o;)^-w%-a [cp. olX'Cok-o] with a change of 
 the second aspirate into the corresponding tenuis [cp. 
 <r(o-Oi]'Tc]. — The irregularities of irivco are merely so 
 far difficult as the change of a hard vowel into c is usual 
 in Greek only before a double consonant. For this 
 reason the stems iro and ttl could not be explained in 
 the Grammar. The ^olic iroo-v-cB by the side of ttl-v-co, 
 and still more the forms of the kindred lanoruao^es 
 quoted in Grundzuge^ I, 263 leave no doubt that the 
 soft vowel has arisen out of the hard one. 
 
 Three verbs, ep-y^o-iiai ird-o-x-co and fjui-ay-o) have 
 the common characteristic that the additional element 
 in the present stands in connexion with the inchoative 
 class. If we compare ep-^-o-fJuai with the stem iX-v-d, 
 we perceive at once that ip and i\ are identical. As 
 then we have good reason to regard p as the older 
 sound when it alternates with X, we shall assume ip as 
 
152 ACCIDENCE. § 327. 
 
 the root, which corresponds to the Sanskrit ar ^ to go ' 
 (^Grundz,, 11, 503, 654). From this may be formed an 
 inchoative present ip-a-K-o-fMai, which again corresponds 
 exactly to the Sanskrit ar-kh, i.e. ar-sk^ a form, accord- 
 ing to the Petersburg Dictionary, found, like ep%, only 
 in the present stem. How the combination a'x^ is some- 
 times changed to cr/c, and then deprived of the sigma 
 in the press of accumulated consonants, is shown in 
 detail in the places cited above. But the stem ek also 
 was not used as a verb without alteration. First of alL 
 it took the additional vowel v which we see very 
 frequently in combination with X, and with this we find 
 it united in 7r/>09-?;Xu-T0-9 eir-rfKv-^. Then was added 
 that 6, which serves in a number of old forms to coin 
 peculiar tense-stems (§ 338 D), and frequently, e.g. 
 in iipy-^-6-O'Vj rj^ivv-a-O-o-v is affixed, as here, to a 
 vowel added to the verb. We mentioned this 6 above 
 while speaking of the weak passive stem (p. 134). In the 
 stem eXu^, which thus arose, the auxiliary vowel is of a 
 peculiar nature. Sometimes it is organically lengthened 
 like a radical vowel, e.g. iXev-oro/jLat, elXrfKovOa, some- 
 times, on the other hand, it is thrown out, as in the 
 Attic rjXOov, — Trd-o-x-co, beside the stems ttuO and TrevO, 
 has been frequently derived from Trad-a/c-co. The 
 aspirate, it was thought, which was dropped before a, 
 became united as the spiritus asper to the k in the next 
 syllable. But elsewhere we frequently find that the 
 sibilants are able of themselves to exercise an aspirating 
 power (c7 (^67709 beside airoyyo^). Hence the explana- 
 tion given is doubtful, and the more so as it is probable 
 (see Grundz. 653) that the 6 in irad is an additional 
 element. We are led, therefore, to a root ira with a 
 secondary form irev (cp. ya yev, ra rev), from which by 
 the addition of 6, we have ira-d irev-d^ and by the 
 addition of cj/c, iza-dK^ and with peculiar aspiration 
 
§ 327. THE INFLEXION OF THE YERB. 153 
 
 ira-aX' — Finally in regard to fjui-a-y-oD^ the Latin misc-eo 
 makes a connexion between the cry and the character- 
 istic letters of the inchoative class probable. In this 
 case, without doubt owing to some indistinct analogy 
 with forms like fiLjijvaL /jllj-vV'/jll, the medial takes the 
 place of the tenuis. 
 
 We have now only to say a few words on those verbs 
 belonging to this class which mark the highest degree 
 of irregularity, inasmuch as in them two or more 
 entirely distinct stems are combined into one verb. 
 These are but i^ve in number : viz. 4. iadico 8. opdco 11. 
 rpix-oy 12. ^ep-co 13. elirov. The phenomenon as a 
 whole is of peculiar interest to the student. It causes 
 us to throw a glance at the abundance of verb-stems 
 which the older language possessed to express nearly 
 related notions. Even the pupil can be made to under- 
 stand that, speaking strictly, in all these cases several 
 defective verb-stems of slightly different meaning 
 mutually supply each other's deficiencies, so as to form 
 one idea, rpix-fo e-Spa/jL-o-v are related to each other 
 in tbe same manner as if we were to say * I walk ' 
 (present), ' I ran ' (past) ; ia-ffco) e-<^ay-o-v as ' I feast, ^ 
 ' I ate up.' Occasionally we can succeed with the aid 
 of comparison in discovering the particular sense which 
 was originally proper to the separate stems. I have 
 attempted to do this especially in regard to the roots f^S 
 (ISelv), OTT {oyjrofjbaL), and fop (opdv), which supplement 
 each other, in Grundz, 95 fF. ; and Tobler in Kuhn's 
 Zeitschr,, IX, p. 241 ff. has examined this remarkable 
 phenomenon in a manner substantially agreeing with 
 my view. He places it very happily on the same 
 level with the irregularities in comparatives {a/ya66^ 
 /3€\TicoVj bonus melior optimus). It cannot be mere 
 accident that language has fixed on one of the many 
 roots which it possesses for the present stem, and on 
 
154 ACCIDENCE. § 327. 
 
 another for the aorist stem. If the primary notion 
 of the root vid was, as I beheve that I have shown 
 that it was, that of the discovering, perceiving- look, 
 that root was especially adapted to denote the moment- 
 ary act (conspicere) expressed by ISecv, while the root 
 Fop — which recurs in our ' ware ' {' to be ware of), and 
 in the Greek copa — in the primitive use of the root as 
 seen in the Homeric iirt opovrai (Od. 7 471, f 104), eVl 
 opcopec (II. W 112), no less than in ovpo<; ' watchman,' 
 denoted the cautious watchful look, and moreover in 
 the derivative opd-coy which presupposes a noun opa, was 
 thoroughly adapted to express the continuous action of 
 the present stem. 
 
 We pass on now to the several verbs of this category. 
 No. 4 ia0l(o obviously goes back to two distinct stems 
 only. eS and i(T0 can be brought into connexion 
 phonetically. The second form is increased by that 6, 
 which M^e find also in the present stem of ttX^-O-co 
 TTpij-O-co. The Homeric ea-O-ca is in ia-Oi-co increased 
 by the iota of the I-class. It is a noticeable instance 
 of the agreement between the Greek and Latin lan- 
 guages that the root eS, which the Latins inflect in many 
 forms without the connecting vowel es-t es-tis es-sem, 
 presents in Greek at least one form inflected in the 
 same manner — the Homeric eS-fjuevac, — The root c^ay, 
 on the other hand, is analogous to the Sanskrit bha^ 
 ' to divide,' from which springs hhagas, portio (^Grundz, 
 111), so that we have a similar transition of meaning to 
 that found in Sa/9 (Rt. Sa Ho divide'), unless we suppose 
 that the yet more concrete notion of ' breaking ' is the 
 primary one. This would agree very well with the use 
 of the Indian words hhag, and bhang. 
 
 In regard to No. 8 little need be added to what has 
 been said. The root ott in the first instance stands side 
 by side with the Latin oculus. The original /t-sound is 
 
§ 327. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 155 
 
 to be seen in the gloss quoted by Hesjehius okkov 
 6(f>0a\/ji6v, and in the changed form caused by the 
 influence of the adjacent c in oacre (rro/ct-e), oo-ao/iaL 
 ( =. oK-L-O'fiaL) ; see further Grundz, 423. — The com- 
 parison of the kindred languages leads to no certain 
 conclusions concerning the stems T/)e% and hpe^ (No. 
 11); but in regard to the verb-stems signifpng ^to 
 bear ' we find at least a number of points worthy of 
 notice {Grundz. 102, 2S1, 288). Thus the root c^ep is 
 found only in the present stem in both the classical 
 languages, and in both occasionally without a connect- 
 ing vowel, <\)ep'T€ = fer-te. The stem eVey/c, on the 
 other hand, is elsewhere found only in the Sclavo- 
 Lithuanian branch of language, and there merely in 
 the form Eccl. Sclav, nes (Lith. nesz) — a form not 
 surprising to those acquainted with the phonetic laws 
 of that language. The Latins seized upon the root tul 
 ( 1= Sanskrit tul, Greek rak rXd) to fill up the defects 
 of the root </)ep. The origin of the future oI(tco is as yet 
 a matter of conjecture, nothing certain having come to 
 light. 
 
 Of the three stems given in No. 13, ep and pe are 
 only phonetically different. Both unite in the root fe/j, 
 with which Latin ver-h-um could be compared even in 
 the grammar (cp. Grundz. 320). The root ferr from 
 which arose eVo? elTrov = Fe-FeTr-o-v, has, like ott, a 
 specifically Grreek tt, to which c in Latin corresponds: 
 hence Foyjr — vox, oaaa = FoKJa (Grundz. 419). We 
 may assume ' to shout,' ' shout out ' as the original 
 meaning of this root, which again was obviously well 
 adapted to express the aoristic action. To these may 
 be added a fourth stem, quite distinct from all three — 
 the Homeric aeir, the kindred words to which are given 
 in Grundz. 426. Here also the primary sound was a 
 guttural, as is shown by old Latin insece = evveire. By 
 
156 ACCIDENCE. § 328. 
 
 syncope we get the aorist evi-aTr-o-v, The imperative 
 6-(77r-e-Te is most naturally explained as reduplicated = 
 ae-air-e-re. 
 
 Further, in a certain sense the verbs here collected 
 do not exhaust the mixed class. As in Latin {e)sum 
 fid esse is compounded of the two roots es (Greek €9) 
 and fu (Greek (f)v), so we may join elfjil e<\>vv iricfyvKa 
 or yiyova together in Greek. There, is only this dis- 
 tinction, that for the Greek forms of the aorist and 
 perfect there is a present found in common use, whereas 
 fuam and the like belong to the archaisms of Latin. — 
 The three verbs also, which signify to strike, 7ra/&) 
 TTardaacy and ifKrjaaa) mutually supplement each other 
 inasmuch as the first two are used especially in the 
 present stem of the active, the third in the perfect 
 and passive stem TreTrkTjya, iirXriyrjv. But the relation 
 between the three is not so fixed and radical that they 
 could be included in the Grammar. 
 
 071 § 328. 
 
 The preference of the Greeks for the form of the 
 future middle over the active occurred to Buttmann as a 
 noticeable fact. In Ausf. Gr., II, 85 he collected fifty- 
 three primitive and fourteen denominative verbs, in which 
 the future is middle in form and active in meaning. 
 This number has been raised by Kriiger (§ 39, 12) to 
 seventy-seven from the Attic authors only, including 
 however the verbs which alternate between an active and 
 middle future form. Buttmann was of opinion ^ that this 
 phenomenon was one of the peculiarities of the middle 
 generally, rather than the future. In the older language 
 from Homer downwards, the middle is frequently used 
 for the active without any distinction of meaning.' 
 This view stands in connexion with an incorrect notion 
 of the older Greek language which Buttmann regarded 
 
§ 328. THE INFLEXION OF THE VERB. 157 
 
 as wanting in definiteness and development. We can 
 by no means assent to it ; on the contrary, the older 
 period is just that in which it is most impossible to 
 regard the middle signification as something separable 
 from the middle form. Kriiger therefore very properly 
 strikes out another path, observing quite correctly that 
 most of the verbs which come under this head ' denote 
 an expression of bodily or intellectual power,' and con- 
 sequently ^the middle form is not at variance with 
 the meaning.' In § 266 I have referred in a similar 
 manner to the signification of these verbs. It is true 
 that I have only noticed the ^bodily activity,' my 
 reason being that I am in that place discussing only 
 the so-called regular verbs, i.e. the verbs of the first 
 four classes. The expression of ^intellectual force' is 
 denoted almost exclusively by verbs which like ^L^vayaKoy 
 fiavddv(d nrda'yw belong to other classes. It is without 
 doubt a happy idea to combine the middle future of 
 active meaning with that kind of middle which 
 Kriiger calls ' dynamic,' and I call ^ subjective ' or 
 ^internal' (§ 480). For in this usage less than any 
 other is it possible to separate the middle sharply from 
 the active. It depends on but a slight difference in 
 the shade of thought whether an action is regarded as 
 purely external, or as one proceeding from the power 
 of the subject in any other than the ordinary sense. 
 For the same reason active and middle forms are 
 interchanged in Homer, even outside the future, in 
 ways far more various, as has been shown at length by 
 I. Bekker, Monatsher. der Berl. Ah 1864, p. 12. The 
 only doubt is whether in some verbs other usages of 
 the middle are not more in point, especially the indirect 
 or dative middle (§ 479) ; o-^ojjbat aKovaoiiai as well as 
 the Homeric opco^ai ISiaOac, and the common Greek 
 alaOdvojjLaL oXofiaL dir6)\jOLV(jo^ai eSo/juat TTLo/jbac like 
 
158 ACCIDENCE. § 329. 
 
 repirofiai eartdo/jLai, €V(ox€OfMat are certainly explained 
 more simply from the latter than the former. Here 
 language appears occasionally to have regarded the 
 action as one which the subject allows to take place of 
 itself. But at the same time it is certainly no mere 
 accident that this shade of representation is to be found 
 to an especial degree in the future. As the future 
 depends less on the volition of the subject, it is 
 natural to denote a future action as one which is 
 allowed to take place of itself, rather than one directly 
 called forth. The verb-root jd also, which we recog- 
 nized as an element in the formation of the future, 
 denotes merely the intention ; and it is not an insig- 
 nificant fact, that the intransitive werden serves in 
 German for the auxiliary verb of both the passive 
 and future. 
 
 On § 329. 
 
 In roots, in which an alternation is found between 
 the transitive and intransitive meaning, it is a striking 
 fact that the intransitive is evidently the earlier. This 
 is clear from the simple fact that it is found in the 
 tense-stems of older formation, whereas the transitive 
 force occurs in the present and the compound tense- 
 stems. We shall certainly not be wrong in assuming 
 that in the pi:esent stem i-ara ( = (TL-(TTa) the change from 
 the notion of ^standing' to that of ^placing' was not 
 uninfluenced by the reduplication, in regard to which 
 it is noticeable that the same signification is found 
 accompanied by the same phonetic element in Latin 
 sisto. As an aorist for this notion of placing the later 
 form arrjaac was adopted, arrjvac having been given 
 up to the older intransitive meaning. 
 
 ■ 1 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 DERIVATION. 
 
 On this chapter as a whole I may here repeat the 
 words which I have used on the subject in another 
 place {Zeitschr, f. d, 6. Gymn,j 1856, p. 13 ff.). ^ Deriva- 
 tion is rarely made a special subject of continuous 
 instruction. Yet it is not therefore out of place in the 
 Grammar. For when the accidence can be reorarded as 
 thoroughly mastered, the teacher will frequently find an 
 opportunity, in explaining an author, to refer to this 
 chapter, and by the help of the material here collected 
 to induce the pupil to avail himself of the leading prin- 
 ciples of derivation in order to facilitate and strengthen 
 his knowledge of the Greek* vocabulary.^ I believe that 
 I am not wrong in maintaining that the knowledge of 
 the vocabulary is a greater difficulty in learning Greek 
 than the acquaintance w^th the forms and their usages. 
 And owing to the excellent lexicons now in existence to 
 help him, the student is very easily led to entertain the 
 notion that a word is a thing on which it is possible to 
 have recourse at any moment to the dictionary. Against 
 such a purely external conception — which only en- 
 courages idleness — we have to contend. The pupil 
 must regard a given word not merely as a word, but 
 as a structure of speech imited to others by stem and 
 termination, no less than the grammatical forms. It is 
 true that etymology, when driven to excess, is a great 
 evil, and to neglect other subjects in favour of it would 
 
160 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 be very absurd. Nevertheless, here as elsewhere the 
 understanding may be allowed to assist the memory in 
 acquiring the vocabulary, though less regularly, and in 
 a manner which must depend entirely on the good sense 
 of the tutor. In the later editions of my Grammar I 
 have also sought to call attention to this part of instruc- 
 tion, by always comparing the formation of nouns, when 
 explaining the verb. But it must be borne in mind 
 that in the noun the terminations are the important 
 part, whereas in the verb the root and stem form the 
 starting-point and aim of our explanations. 
 
 To be exhaustive or complete was obviously quite 
 beyond my purpose in this place, and in the first section 
 also, w^hich treats of the simple formation of words, it 
 was no less impossible within the brief limits here allowed 
 to make any strong distinction between form and mean- 
 ing. On the whole, the derivation, especially of nouns, 
 is still a much neglected part of grammar, which even 
 in a severely scientific sense requires a thorough 
 revision. Valuable collections and comparisons are to 
 be found in the works of Bopp (Vol. Ill), Schleicher 
 {Compendium) J Pott {EtymoL Forsch,, 1st ed., vol. II), 
 Leo Meyer {Vergl, Gram, des Gr, und Lat» Band 2) ; 
 while with regard to the Greek language in particular, 
 this subject has been treated by Lobeck especially with 
 the accurate and comprehensive learning peculiar to 
 him ; and his work cannot be left out of sight, even by 
 those who differ from him in aim and method. In the 
 second edition of Kuhner's Ausfuhrliche Grammatik also 
 this section (I, 690 fF.) is comparatively copious. Still 
 this is a subject in which it is very rarely possible to see 
 to the bottom ; and since, for such an insight, it is of the 
 first importance to regard the phenomena of language 
 from a general point of view, I approached the subject 
 of derivation chiefly from that direction in my treatise 
 
DERIVATION. 161 
 
 De nominum Grcecorum formatione (Berlin 1842). More 
 especially I have there shown how impossible it is to 
 speak of any one original specific meaning in regard to 
 the numerous suffixes used in the formation of words ; 
 that, on the contrary, the different use of suffixes, 
 originally distinguished only by the slightest shade of 
 meaning, grew up by degrees in language, aided chiefly 
 by the distinction of gender. Those categories of mean- 
 ing therefore in which I have arranged my materials, 
 with a view to teaching at school, are all of later date, 
 and though necessary to the learner for acquiring a 
 knowledge of the language in its fullest development, 
 must not be supposed to have existed in the sense of 
 language from the first. The object also of this whole 
 chapter which is intended to be nothing more than a 
 brief conspectus, did not permit me to give any more • 
 detailed description of the classes introduced, otherwise 
 I should have had much to add on the changes which 
 the several categories of meaning undergo. Thus, even 
 a transient glance will show that the classes of words 
 placed under B {JSomina actionis) and C (Nouns denot- 
 ing the result of an action) have many points of mutual 
 contact, and in the selection of examples this has been 
 pointed out, at least to some extent. For instance, 
 among the nomina actionis we find Becrfji,6<;j which speak- 
 ing accurately can only belong to this category so far 
 as it denotes ^binding,' but so far as it means Hhat 
 which binds,' or ' is bound,' belongs rather to the nouns 
 which denote the result of an action (§ 343). The 
 Homeric form of the plural Sea-fia-ra (§ 175 D) there- 
 fore corresponds more accurately to the meaning of the 
 word than the masculine form used in the singular. On 
 the other hand, yivo^ is not confined to the meaning 
 of what is 'created' or 'born,' but encroaches on the 
 meaning of yeveais, ' birth,' ' origin,' to which is added 
 
 M , 
 
162 ACCIDENCE. §353. 
 
 also the collective application of the word to all that is 
 born — ^ race/ The difficulty which stands in the way 
 of a really satisfactory explanation of derivation is owing 
 in a great measure to the changeable nature of all these 
 categories, which, without rendering it absolutely im- 
 possible for us to maintain a few leading distinctions, 
 checks the enquiry into details at every step, especially 
 as in many respects we are still without any thoroughly 
 certain starting-point. In this respect almost everything 
 is yet to be done for science. Not till the various Indo- 
 Germanic languages have been investigated in a com- 
 prehensive manner, not merely with regard to sounds, 
 but also with a delicate observation of the meanings of 
 words, shall we be able to go further. Nothing what- 
 ever is gained by hastily identifying suffixes which are 
 only partially similar. On the contrary, at present very 
 little is possible beyond a careful comparison of pheno- 
 mena easily connected in sound and usage. As a useful 
 help for Greek derivation I may here mention Pape's 
 Etymologisches Worterbuch der Griechischen Sprache zur 
 Uebersicht der Wortbildung nach den Endsilben geordnet 
 (Berlin 1836), and Schwabe, De Diminutivis Greeds et 
 Latinis (Gissae 1859) — in its way a pattern of what an 
 essay on a special subject should be. 
 
 On § 353. 
 
 The derivative verbs are so arranged that the three 
 most common classes are placed at the beginning. 
 The common origin of the verbs in -oo) -aco -eo) from 
 the form in -ajdmi, which is preserved in Sanskrit, has 
 been already mentioned more than once. The dis- 
 tinction of vowels was certainly in the first instance 
 not irregular. With Schleicher (Compend,, 353), and 
 Grassmann {Ztschr,, XI, 94), I regard the vowel a 
 as the final vowel of a noun-stem ; but -jdmi, as has 
 
§ 353. DERIVATION. 163 
 
 been already shown, as an auxiliary verb, originally 
 meaning ^ I go.' If therefore we assume an Indo- 
 Germanic tima-jd-mi to correspond to the Greek rifid-co, 
 the former would mean, literally, ' 1 go honour.' Tima 
 is here assumed as a noun-stem, like Greek rcfjua. ISo 
 far as the meaning is concerned, we must, it is true, 
 from the first ascribe to the verb Agoing,' the power 
 of denoting the idea of ^production,' ^operation,' just 
 as we see the intransitive ara pass into XaTr)fjLLj and 
 inchoative verbs, e.g. ^oxtkw^ pass into causative. Thus 
 then this very signification ^ I bring into honour' was 
 retained for T4/iaa), while in other verbs the intransitive 
 idea of being ^busied about something' became pro- 
 minent. Now when the original a was divided, and 
 separate A and 0-declensions began to be formed in 
 Greek, it was natural that the same vowel should occur 
 in the noun-stems, and the verb-stems derived from 
 them. Thus, in the first instance, we may take it as 
 a universal rule that only verbs in -ao) should be formed 
 from noun-stems in a, and only verbs in oct) from noun- 
 stems in o. Moreover this relation of the noun-stems 
 and verb-stems will actually be found to preponderate 
 greatly in the language as it has come down to us. 
 For this reason, formations like iml(t06'(o tl/jlo-^ are 
 put first in the examples given ; but at the same time 
 a few are added in which noun and verb differ, e.g. 
 700-0) ^r)/iiL6-(o. The verbs in -ew occupy an indifferent 
 position since e is as far removed from o as from a. 
 But it is undeniable that in many cases the original 
 rule has not been retained. Not merely is a different 
 vowel found in verb and noun, but we even find a 
 vowel in the verb, which is quite unknown in the 
 noun-stem, e.g. Trup-o-w, BrjpL'd-ofiaLy larop-i-o). Many 
 reasons may be given in explanation of this anomaly ; 
 thus in some instances it is easy to suppose that the 
 
164 . ACCIDENCE. § 353. 
 
 stem retained in the verb was at a certain period of 
 the language in use by the side of the noun-stem. 
 But it is very doubtful whether we are always justi- 
 fied in making this assumption. Endings which fre- 
 quently occur easily acquire an independent existence 
 in lanoruaore. Verbs in -eco -aco were so common that 
 they were derived by extended analogy from noun- 
 stems in which the elements of the derivative did not 
 really exist. In this respect, as usual, Latin is even 
 less consistent than Greek. The Latin verbs in ^are 
 {-art) correspond to those in -a(o and -om, so that we 
 not only have coivndre from corona, but also domindri 
 from dominus. Nevertheless I think it probable that 
 at an earlier period of the language, Latin also pos- 
 sessed an 0-conjugation to correspond to the 0-declen- 
 sion. But this has been preserved only in a few verbal 
 adjectives like cegrd-tu-s ; from which we may, without 
 difficulty, go back to a form cegro-e-re ^to make sick' ; 
 to which cegrd-tu-8 stood in the same relation as laco- 
 t6-9 to laO'Q), And since the old o in Latin often 
 passes into u, we may without difficulty regard ndsu-tu-s^ 
 cinctU'tU'S, versu-tu-s, as similar forms ; and perhaps, 
 compare even argu-er-e with argu-tu-s to a Greek apyo-o) 
 (from apjo^ ^bright'), though, it is true, the form does 
 not occur. This subject is carried out further in my 
 essay 'Ueber die Spureneiner lateinischen 0-conjugation,^ 
 in the Symbola Philologorum Bonnensium, I, p. 269 ff. 
 In the other leading classes of derivative verbs, that 
 example is placed first, which gives the type, as for 
 instance in the seventh section ar^fiaiv-co from the stem 
 arffjuar. After what has been already said on these 
 formations of the present, it is hardly worth while to 
 remark that arjfiaLV-co stands for <Tr)/jLav-j(o. The Jod 
 belongs to the verbal element ; a-ti/nav is the noun- 
 stem a-rjfiar in an apparently older form. In the same 
 
§ 354. DERIVATIC^. 165 
 
 manner ovo/juilv-co is from an older stem ovofiav, pre- 
 served in Latin ndmen, Sanskrit and Gothic ndman, 
 and which also may be seen in vwvvfiV'0'(; among other 
 words. For here, as in the instance just quoted from 
 Latin, v has replaced the older o (cp. avoovv/no-^;, avv- 
 copvfiO'^), so that vr)'OvvfjLvo-(; corresponds to Latin 
 i-gnominu-s, which is the hypothetical stem-word from 
 i-gnominia. 
 
 With regard to composition, I have put together 
 the most essential rules as briefly as possible. Owing 
 to the extraordinary abundance of compounds especially 
 in the poets, this portion of grammar is of peculiar 
 importance in Greek, and cannot be omitted even in 
 school-instruction without endangering the accurate 
 perception of Homeric epithets, and many highly 
 poetical pictures in the Tragedians. Besides the compre- 
 hensive works already frequently quoted the following 
 deserve especial notice for this division : J. Grimm? 
 Deutsche Grammatik, Vol. II, esp. p. 969 ff,, where 
 valuable materials for Greek are discussed from the 
 author's point of view ; Ferd. Justi, Ueber die Zu- 
 sammensetzung der Nomina in den Indogermanischen 
 Sprachen (Gott. 1861), a work distinguished by the 
 most comprehensive learning, which must form the 
 starting-point for any more detailed researches of the 
 future, even though we cannot entirely agree with 
 the views on which it is based ; Lobeck, Parerga ad 
 Phrynichunij where some of the fundamental laws of 
 composition in Greek are established for the first time, 
 and many details discussed in a masterly manner. 
 
 On § 354. 
 
 * A noun standing first in a compound appears in the form of its 
 stem: da-Tv-yeiTiop, xo)Oo-5t5(i(r/caXo-s, craK^i-ir aXos.* 
 
 ' Consonant stems are usually united to the second part by the con- 
 necting-vowel : dvdpLavT-o-iro(.6-s, Trarp-o-KTovo-s ; <pv<TL'0-\6yo-Sf and 
 
166 ACCIDENCE. §^54. 
 
 it regularly stands in place of a in the stem : '{jfiepo-dpofio-s. The o is 
 di'opped before vowels, x^P-vyo-^) ^^^ remains where the word origin- 
 ally began with a digamma drj/jLioepyo-s (Homeric), 87} fiiovpyos (Attic).' 
 
 Even the mere fact that in the first part of a com- 
 pound the simple word-stem occurs in its pure form is 
 of the greatest importance in giving a correct insight 
 into the formation of language. Could this one fact 
 have been recognized, a number of errors would have 
 been avoided even before the remodelling of the modern 
 science of language. Here the stems are clearly to 
 be seen ; the knowledge of which alone makes the 
 declension of nouns intelligible. — By the manner also 
 in which the two parts of the compound are joined 
 together, we may illustrate important traits in the 
 history of language. In this relation the consonantal 
 stems show a strong inclination to provide themselves 
 with a vowel, or in other words to pass over into 
 the analogy of the vowel-stems. The vowel by which 
 the stem is thus increased,* was in the first instance 
 the sboro a. This a is retained in some words un- 
 changed : /cvv-d-fivui (II. $ 394), Troh-d-VLirrpo-v 
 (Od. <7 504) ; but as a rule it passed into o : /cvv-o- 
 K€(f>aXo'<; iroh-o-KCLKT], And as the same o by the force 
 of a gradually extending analogy became the regular 
 representative even of the a of the A-declension, e.g. 
 in /jLovao-fjuTjTcop, and became attached also to stems in l 
 and V, it is the vowel which is almost universally to be 
 
 * In this sense the expression * connecting-vowel ' could certainly 
 be justified in a school-grammar. That I regard this vowel neither 
 as a purely phonetic element, after the manner of the auxiliary vowels, 
 nor as dynamic, to which view J. Grimm inclined ( Gr. II, 403), inas- 
 much as he explained the 'composition-vowel' as the distinguishing 
 mark of * genuine' composition, is sufficiently clear from the text. — 
 Much connected with this subject is examined with industry, though 
 not without an admixture of rash hypotheses, by Rich. Roediger in 
 his work De priorii/ni memhrorum in nominibu^ grcdcis cmnpositis con- 
 formationefin^^'*' Leipsig 1866. 
 
§ 354. DERIVATION, 167 
 
 looked for in the syllable which lies between the two 
 component stems — 'the composition-vowel/ as J. Grrimm 
 calls it. But by another somewhat neglected formation 
 we are led back in the compounds to the old a, which ^ 
 from the original identity of the hard vowels (p. 31) 
 must always be regarded as the precursor of o or e. 
 The Epic poets with whom words must be made to suit 
 the metre have a whole series of compounds in which 97 
 represents o, and this not only in A-stems in which the 
 fact would be less remarkable, e.g. /jL0Lpi]-yev7](; (only in 
 vocative iuLocprjy€P€<;, II. F 182), but even in 0-stems : 
 P€7jy€ui]^ iT^/Kfyrj'^oXo'f;, and after consonantal stems : 
 al0p-T]'y€veTrj'(; €v-r)-y€Pi]^. This variation is evidently 
 due to the desire to gain a long syllable. But the o is 
 not, as we should have expected, lengthened into co, but 
 into 77. This points back to a condition of language in 
 which o and 77 were still united in an original a. For 
 the same reason we find occasionally in the same place 
 an a, e.g. dperd-Xoyo-^ TroXe/jbd^SoKOf; (Pindar) araSia- 
 hpofjuo-^ (Inscripp.). Thus then this fact in the compo- 
 sition of words establishes and confirms important traits 
 in the history of sounds ; and also shows us at the same 
 time how in the course of the formation of languages, 
 peculiar analogies arose, which were no longer under- 
 stood even by the genius of language, if we may say so,^ 
 and yet were retained with peculiar tenacity. 
 
 Other peculiarities which occur may be arranged 
 under three heads. 1. We have a number of old forms 
 in which the composition-vowel is rejected : TTvy-ixayp-<^ 
 (Od.) iJueKayxpoLTj^; (Od.) nTvp'^6po-<;. These forma- 
 tions are not actually denoted in § 354 as irregular, 
 inasmuch as o-aK6^'7ra\o<; (cp. e7re9^6Xo9 a-e\xi<=;(f>6po<^ 
 ^a)(T(f)6po<;), is there quoted in proof of the fact that 
 stems are found in their pure state in composition. 
 They are only so far uncommon as in the course of 
 
168 ACCIDENCE. §§ 356, 357. 
 
 time the vowels mentioned above passed into general 
 use. 2. We find all kinds of abbreviations in the first 
 word-stem, especially in those compounds with sigma- 
 stems^ in which they are treated exactly as 0-stems : 
 Tei'yO'ixa')(ia Kpeo-irdXTj-^J* 3. We find case-termina- 
 tions at the close of the first of the two component 
 stems ; sometimes the genitive : ovhevo^-oipo'^ (II. © 
 178)5 sometimes, and far more frequently, the dative, 
 8ovpL~aXo)TO~<; /CTjpeaa-L-^opTiTO-^ (II. 527) KrfpL- 
 Tp€(f)rj^ (Hesiod.) ; and the closely-allied locative HvXoi- 
 ^evrjf; (II. B 54). Since it is essential to the nature 
 of composition that two word-stems should be combined 
 into a whole, without further defining their mutual 
 relations, J. Grimm rightly names these compounds 
 ^ improper.' They are, to a certain extent, amphibious 
 forms, which stand on the boundary between synthetic 
 and syntactic combination. 
 
 On §§ 356 an^ 357. 
 
 * § 356. A verb — without changing its nature — can only be com- 
 pounded with a preposition. The looseness of the connexion in such 
 compounds is the reason for the position of the augment after the 
 preposition, aTro^dWio diri^aWov. For the same reason prepositions 
 are frequently separated from their verbs in the poets, and in Hero- 
 dotus, and in some cases even in Attic prose. This separation is 
 called tmesis. 
 
 When any other word is to be compounded with a verb-stem, a 
 noTnen agentis is first formed of the two, e.g. from \ldo-s and stem 
 ^aX, \i0o-^6\o-Sf and from this XiOo^oX^-u) ; so likewise from faCs and 
 judxoiuLai comes first vav-fiaxo-Sy and from this vau/xax^-o; ; from e5 and 
 stem ipy, eiuepy^Tris, evepyer^-ta. 
 
 § 357. A substantive of an abstract meaning can only be com- 
 
 ♦ Compare Schoenberg's tract, iiber griechische Composita^in deren 
 ersten GUedern viele Grammatiker Verba erkennen, Milan 1868, 
 where, however, the search after S- and T- stems,— for this is the final 
 object, — is carried to the extreme. 
 
§§366,357. DERIVATION. 169 
 
 pounded with a preposition without changing its ending, irpo^ovK-q, 
 In every other compound the abstract substantive must take a de- 
 rivative termination ; \l6os and /SoXt? make \i$o^o\ia, etc' 
 
 These two paragraphs contain the most important 
 rules for the composition of words in Greek. ' With- 
 out changing its nature/ i.e. so long as it continues to 
 be what it is, ^ a verb can only be compounded with a 
 preposition.' This is certainly the plainest way of stating 
 the regium prceceptum Scaligeri (as Lobeck terms it), 
 which that great philologer first embodied in the simple 
 observation that evayyeWo) could not be a Greek verb. 
 Lobeck, ad Phryn,, 560 ff., has illustrated the validity 
 of this law from every side ; and the few exceptions to 
 it, which are for the most part merely apparent. Com- 
 pare also Buttmann, Ausf, Gr,, II, p. 470 ff. The 
 instinct of language felt the verb to be something far 
 too mobile to enter into permanent combinations with 
 any other part of speech. In its whole framework a 
 very ancient synthesis of predicate and subject, forced 
 moreover to distinguish active and middle, kinds of 
 time, orders of time, moods, and this in not a few cases 
 by means of composition — and with the most various 
 changes of the stem-vowel — the verb was not adapted, 
 the verb-forms were not the places to combine two 
 different conceptions into a new whole. Only prepo- 
 sitions, which, being originally adverbs with case-forms 
 not yet universally obliterated beyond recognition, leave 
 the essential meaning of the verb-stem unaltered, and 
 rather denote the direction in which the action aims 
 both in the original or local, and in the metaphorical or 
 intellectual sense, can be brought together with verb- 
 forms under the compass of one principal accent, and 
 thus become one word with them. But the laxity of the 
 connexion is evident from the fact that in the Homeric 
 dialect, which in this respect resembles the Vedas, this 
 
170 ACCIDENCE. §§ 356, 357. 
 
 bond is broken at every moment, and the preposition 
 separated by means of the so-called tmesis from the 
 verb which it defines ; and yet more because the 
 augment and reduplicated syllable invariably dissolve 
 the connexion. By the position of these elements, e.g. 
 in (Tvv-i'Xa^'O'V irpo-^e^ovK-a, language shows us un- 
 mistakably that the real body of the verb begins after 
 the preposition. We might therefore even say that only 
 individual verb-forms, and not verb-stems in the proper 
 sense, are compounded with prepositions. The rule 
 holds good in Latin no less than Grreek, forms like cedi- 
 facio or cedi-ficio being as impossible as olKoSe/juco, But 
 inasmuch as the Latin language possesses those re- 
 markable semi-compounds, or improper compounds, like 
 calefacio, benedico, which are distinguished to a certain 
 extent by accent and vocalization from the compounds 
 proper, the rule is less strongly marked. 
 
 This dislike to permanent composition is shared 
 by abstract substantives. Lobeck, ad Phrpi., 489 fF., 
 shows that words like ^LaOo-^opd iaro-Sofcrj veKpo-OrjKr] 
 are rare, and only excused by their somewhat technical 
 use ; while, as a rule, language adheres to the principle 
 that two ideas can never be permanently united except 
 in personal nouns of agency, oLKo-ho/jio-^ {cedifex) Xido- 
 ^6\0'<; vav-/jLdxo-^. From these compounded and 
 recreated stems come in their turn, first the derivative 
 verbs, olKoSo/jLe-co (cedijlcare) Xido-jBoXeco vavfia')(e-o), 
 and abstract nouns like oLKoSofjuia XcOo/SoXla vav/jLaxLd, 
 just as if in German we did not, as we do, in contra- 
 distinction to the Greeks, allow wahr and sagen to form 
 wahrsagen, but first formed a noun wahrsager, and then 
 from it the verb wahrsagern, and the substantive wahr- 
 sagereL Thus it comes to pass that as a rule in verbs 
 and abstract substantives compounds are not found 
 without the derivative termination. The middle form 
 
§ 358. DERIVATION. 171 
 
 however has not, it is true, been preserved in every case. 
 It often has merely an existence in theory for the sense 
 of language. These rules are of very obvious import- 
 ance and give us in many directions a deep insight into 
 the nature of language. 
 
 On § 358. 
 
 * Compounds having the first part formed directly from a verb-stem 
 are rarely met with, except in the poets. They are formed in two 
 ways, viz. : 
 
 1. The verb-stem or present stem is joined directly to stems 
 beginning with a vowel, and to those beginning with a consonant by 
 means of the connecting vowel e, t, or w : daKe-Ovfxos (pres. daKv-cj, cl. 
 6), Treid-apxo-s (ireidotxaL and apxfi), etc. 
 
 2. A form strengthened by <t and resembling the weak aorist stem 
 is joined in the same way to the second part of the word : \v(T-i-irovos, 
 TrXrj^-Linros, etc' 
 
 The old compounds here mentioned, like SaKe-dvfjbo-<;, 
 which belong almost exclusively to poetical language, 
 I have regarded after the old plan as combinations of a 
 verb-stem with a noun-stem, although of course I am 
 aware that comparative grammarians (Bopp, Ve7'gL 
 Gr.j III, 438 ; Justi, p. 45) to some extent take quite 
 a different view of them. But many as have been the 
 attempts to estabhsh a noun-stem in the first members 
 of words like Sa/ce-^f/io-?, Xucrt-7roi/o9, which Grimm 
 regarded as forms of the imperative, and valuable as 
 have been the analogies brought forward in support of 
 this view, especially for the second kind of formation, 
 the question seems to me by no means settled as jQi, 
 and therefore in a school-grammar no other course was 
 open but to adhere to the old method of explanation. 
 
 In regard to this class of compounds we have now 
 before us the exhaustive researches of W. Glemm De 
 compositis grcecis quce a verbo incipiunt (Grissae 1867), 
 which in my opinion so far confirms this older view, that 
 
172 ACCIDENCE. § 359. 
 
 we may assume tense-stems in the first members of 
 these wordsj present or strong aorist stems in the com- 
 pounds without sigma like e^e-^/owz; <^t>7o-7rToXe/xo9, 
 and weak aorist stems in those with sigma like ttX^o-- 
 /c7T6o-9 K\avaL-y€\(o<;, The second formation stands to 
 the first as Ava-La<; to $6^8-/a9, irava-coXrj to tc/ott-wX?;, 
 Xeiyjr-avO'V to BpeTT-avo-v. 
 
 On § 359. 
 
 * In regard to their meaning compound adjectives and substantives 
 are divided into three principal classes. 
 
 1. Determinative compounds. In these the second word is the 
 principal, which, without in any way altering its meaning, is merely 
 defined by the first. These compounds may be paraphrased by 
 changing the first part either into an adjective or an adverb : dKp6wo\i-s, 
 i.e. &Kpa irdXis (Homeric .7r6\is dKpr}); jxea-yjix^pta, i.e. fii<77)-7]fji4pa, etc. 
 
 2. Attributive compounds. In these the first word also defines the 
 second, yet so that the latter alters its meaning, and together with 
 the first forms a new idea. These compounds can generally be para- 
 phrased by employing the participle of ^x^ or a verb akin to it in 
 meaning, and adding to this the second word as an object, the first 
 becoming an attribute to the object : fiaKpd-x^ip, longi-manus, i.e. 
 fiaKpas x^^pcts ^x^^> dpyvp6-T0^0'S, i.e. dpyvpovv ro^oy (pepcjv, 6/x6'Tpoiro-s, 
 yXavK-Qiri-Sj etc. 
 
 3. Objective compounds, or those of dependency. In these either 
 the first word is grammatically governed by the second, or the second 
 by the first, so that, in the paraphrase, one of the two must be put 
 in an oblique case: ijvi-oxo-s = rd 7]via ^x^^i \oyo-ypd</)Q-s, i.e. \6yovs 
 ypd<pu)Vy d^i.6-\oyo-Si i.e. \6yov-dl^Los, <f)L\6-/jLov(ro-s, deLai-daifKav, etc' 
 
 Even a question which appears to belong so pecu- 
 liarly to Greek, and to be so closely connected with 
 the first duties of philological enquiry, as the enquiry 
 into the meaning of compounds, was satisfactorily ex- 
 plained for the first time by the aid of comparative 
 grammar, and especially of Sanskrit. We do not know 
 that the Greek grammarians ever made the compounds 
 generally an object of minute study, or investigated 
 their meaning. The Indians on the other -hand with 
 
§359. DERIVATION. 173 
 
 the acuteness peculiar to the nation, have arranged the 
 infinite mass of compound words which occur in San- 
 skrit, in six classes according to their meaning. This 
 arrangement, though certainly not satisfactory in every 
 respect, brings into striking prominence the most 
 essential distinctions, and is therefore of great im- 
 portance, not merely for Sanskrit, but for all the 
 kindred languages, and even for linguistic enquiry in 
 the widest sense. Justi in the work so often quoted 
 has attempted in a manner well worth notice to make 
 this division clearer and render the classes more definite. 
 He is followed in one main point by Ferd. Heerdegen, 
 who in his dissertation De nominum compositorum 
 Grcecorum imprimis Homericorum generihus^ Berol. 
 1868, subjects the whole question of division to acute 
 and searching examination. Composition has been 
 treated from a more philosophical point of view by 
 Ludw. Tobler, Ueher die Wortzusammensetzung, Berlin 
 1868. 
 
 ^In the Grammar it was merely necessary to separate 
 distinctly and denote clearly those kinds of composition 
 which are most common in Greek. Now without any 
 doubt three kinds stand prominently forward, and among 
 these that is placed first which in many respects is the 
 simplest. Here the force of the composition is mani- 
 fested only in defining the second word more accurately 
 by the first. For this reason I join with Bopp in 
 calling this class of compounds ^ Determinativa,^ Ob- 
 jections have been brought against the term as too wide 
 because, strictly speaking, one word is defined more 
 accurately by the other in every compound. But in 
 this class the definition, and nothing more, is the essen- 
 tial part. «Justi (p. 87) prefers the expression ' defining 
 by apposition,' which certainly denotes the relation 
 more clearly, but is inconsistent with the view of 
 
174 ACCIDENCE. §359. 
 
 apposition whicli I have introduced with good reason 
 into my syntax (§ 361, 12) ; and moreover does not 
 cover all the cases which may be brought into this 
 class. In ofio-hovXo'^ (fellow-slave), for instance, we 
 cannot without some violence speak of ofio as in appo- 
 sition to Soi}Xo9, still less, in compounds like TrafifMijTfop 
 (Soph. Ant. 1282 — rovSe TrafjL/jLTjrayp veKpov) Av<;7rapL<; 
 ar/a'K\€LT6-(; apb(^L-dedTpO'V. For the same reason the 
 expression ^ attributive,' which Lange proposes for this 
 class of compounds, and which is adopted by Heerdegen 
 in a somewhat different apphcation, is unsuitable. To 
 this class applies the observation of Lobeck {ad Phryn,^ 
 p. 600) : ' Non solent Grceci substantivum cum adjectivo 
 ita componere, ut compositortim eadem significatio sit^ 
 quce fuerat appositorum,^ By the composition of two 
 words, language attempted as a rule, to express some- 
 thing which could not be expressed by simply placing 
 them side - by side. In some cases, it is true, the 
 instinct of language was contented with obtaining by 
 this method a technical, and therefore specially limited 
 expression, e.g. in a/Cjo6-7^o\^-9, which does not mean 
 ^ every high city,' but the fortified high part of the 
 city, that is to say the high city as raised above the 
 rest. Similarly in the numerous botanical compounds 
 with aypLO', dypceXaia, etc. ; which however came into 
 use by slow degrees. Others are coloured by the fancy 
 of the moment, or are nicknames with a special point 
 in them, as II. W 791 — aofxayipovra Be jjulv (j)aa e/xfievai 
 (cp. Od. o 357 — iv ^fiw jTjpa'i OrjKev), AlvoirapL^;. 
 
 The second class stands in the strongest contrast to 
 the first. The same formations have quite a different 
 sense according as they belong to this or that class. 
 This did not escape even the Byzantine grammarians. 
 Lobeck (see above) quotes Tzetzes ad Lycophr,, 731 — 
 KaWlirac^; rj KaXr]<; TraiBo^; MT7)p koI rj fcaXr} irac^ 
 
§ 359. ^ DERIVATION. * 175 
 
 (following Lobeck's certain emendation). Id the first 
 or attributive sense, according to my terminology, the 
 epithet is given to Phaedrus in Plato Phcedr, 261 A as the 
 sire of beautiful speeches. KaWi-Trat^;, in the second, or 
 as I call it, determinative sense, occurs in Eurip. Or est. 
 956, where Persephone is spoken of as KaXkiTraL^; Bed, 
 The peculiarity of the second class consists in this : that, 
 to borrow the striking expression of Justi (p. 118), ' the 
 subject is not in, but outside the compound.' That is 
 what I have attempted to point out by the epithet 
 ' attributive,' which word I do not use here in the 
 sense in which it occurs here in the syntax. These 
 compounds are nothing by themselves ; they have a 
 meaning only in combination with a substantive. In a 
 work of art the attribute is often added to god or hero 
 in the loosest manner without any regard to the 
 particular situation in which the artist introduces him, 
 and the case is similar with these attributive com- 
 pounds, which in epic poetry form a great portion of 
 the characteristic epitheta ornantia, like ^/ouo-o-zco/i,?;-? 
 X6u/c-ft)Xei/o-9, y8o-w7rt-9, poSo-BdKTvkO'<;, Since in this 
 case language, by simply bringing together two word- 
 stems under one accent, creates a new formation in the 
 shortest manner possible, we may say that these com- 
 pounds occupy in some measure the highest rank ; and 
 Justi very properly distinguishes them from the rest, 
 as ' the higher kind of composition.' But just for the 
 very reason, that in these compounds a peculiarly 
 energetic effort is required on the part of the creative 
 imagination, they do not suit except to a very small 
 extent the dead level of every-day speech. The 
 Indians name these compounds Bahuvrihij i.e. ' much, 
 rice,' or more clearly ^ rich in rice,' after an example 
 of the class which in Greek would be irokv-opv^o-^;, 
 Bopp, Vergl, Gr., Ill, 455 has used the term ' posses- 
 
176 ACCIDENCE. §359. 
 
 sive compounds,' because they ^ denote the possessor 
 of the qualities expressed by the separate parts of the 
 compound, so that the idea of possession has always to 
 be supplied.' This name and definition can be applied 
 to many, but not by any means to all the formations 
 belonging to this class. Even some of the examples 
 quoted in the Grammar, e.g. irtfcpoya/jLo^ (Od. a 226 — 
 7rdvT€<; K Q)KVfiopoL T€ jevoiaTO TTiKpoyafMOL re), heKaerrj^;, 
 show that the field occupied by these compounds is not 
 so narrow as Bopp supposes, and for the language of 
 the Tragedians the possessive signification is quite 
 insufficient. The stiff" and awkward paraphrase ^having 
 a double tongue' would not be an equivalent of our 
 word ^double-tongued ' (cp. afjL(j)i-y\coao-o(; in Eustathius), 
 and still less could we translate ircKpoykcoa-croL dpai 
 (^sch. Sept, 768 Herm.) by ' having a bitter tongue.' 
 Thersites is not called dfjuerpoeirr^f; because he has, but 
 because he utters unmeasured words [cp. Xcyv-cfyOoyyo-^;'] ; 
 olox^Tcov (Od. ^ 489) is not merely the man who has but 
 one coat, but the man who wears but one. x^^P^^^^^^ 
 (in Hesiod. ipj, 189) are men who practise the ' right of 
 hand '; the TroXvKepoD^ (f>6vo<; of the frenzied Ajax (Soph. 
 Aj. 55) does not possess, but falls upon ^ many horns ' ; 
 the Xei;/co7r7;%et9 ktvttol (Eurip. Phcen, 1356) denote the 
 beating caused by white arms ; in short, the connexion 
 of these compounds with their substantives can by 
 no means be explained in every case by the idea of 
 possession ; and I doubt whether any more accurate 
 definition is possible than that given in the Grammar : 
 ' The new idea formed by the composition is attributed 
 as a quality to another word.' The attempt to express 
 the same idea by other means than composition is 
 carried out in very different ways. 
 
 The third kind of compounds is so far nearer the first 
 than the second, that in it, one of two ideas is defined 
 
§ 359. DERIVATION. 177 
 
 by the other without undergoing any further change 
 or modification. But the relations between the ideas in 
 the two classes are different ; in the one case we have 
 congruity, in the other, government. Besides this, 
 another distinction, the freedom of position, comes 
 before us. In the third class also, it happens more 
 frequently than in the other two that the second word 
 had no existence before composition. This is especially 
 the case with the numerous compounds in -0-9 in the 
 nominative, which, chiefly in an active sense together 
 with those in -7/9 in a passive sense, arise from the 
 combination of a noun-stem and verb-stem, e.g. /^eXo- 
 7ro^o-9 l3ovv6/jLO'-<; in an active sense, beside the passive 
 /3oupo/jlo-^ iraTpo-KTOVo-^;, but also 6eoaTxryrj<i olKoy€vri<i. 
 But the essential characteristic of this class is the 
 relation of government which exists between the two 
 members of the compound. The difference of govern- 
 ment is shown by the examples. Those compounds are 
 the most frequent which when paraphrased by a par- 
 ticiple or verbal adjective require the dependent word to 
 be in the accusative or instrumental case. Examples 
 of the first are : 8pv-T6/jLO-<; Sopv-(f)6po-<i \o'X;-wy6-<i 
 LTnro-SafjLo-^ TTToXi-iropOo-^ LTTTr-aycoyo-f; €\k€'X^tcop, 
 of the second : alxP'-aXooro-f; Oeo-Bfirjro-^; iinro-^oTo-^ 
 vcivai-7ropO'<;. But the relations expressed by the other 
 cases are also found, e.g. the locative in -Grj^a-yevr^i; 
 or with the locative form Qrj^ai-yevr)^ opec-^drrj-f;, the 
 dative in e'in')(aLpe-Kaic6-^ Oeo-eiKeko-^j the genitive, in 
 German the most frequent, but rather rare in Grreek, in 
 olKO-(^v\a^ (^sch.) aarv-^eLToyv ')(opo-SiSdaKa\o'^, 
 
 This is not the place to enter further into the subject 
 of composition. Here I could only illustrate the leading 
 classes by a larger number of examples and a few ad- 
 ditional words of explanation. It will certainly be an 
 advantage to the pupil also iix the explanation of the 
 
178 ACCIDENCE. 
 
 bolder compounds in Homer and the Tragedians to cast 
 a glance into this laboratory of language. For the 
 wealth and wise moderation of the Greek language in 
 this respect are truly admirable. 
 
PAET 11. 
 SYNTAX, 
 
 The Syntax given in my Grammar will require far 
 fewer explanatory notes than the Accidence, because it 
 deviates far less from the usual treatment of the subject. 
 A thorough revision of this part of grammar is as yet 
 impossible owing to the want of the necessary scientific 
 preparations, and above all of ample collections of the 
 syntactical usages of the kindred languages, such as 
 have hitherto been made only for Latin, and alas ! 
 incompletely for German in the fourth volume of J. 
 Grimm's German Grammar — a book which the student 
 of Greek syntax will find remarkably instructive. The 
 want of a syntax of Sanskrit is still constantly felt. 
 For the Sclavo-Lettish languages Schleicher has at least 
 made a commencement in his Lithuanian Grammar 
 (Prague 1856), which was often instructive to me in 
 comparison with the Greek usages. To this must now 
 be added the fourth volume of Miklosich's work — Yer- 
 gleichende Grammatik der Slawischen Sprachen. Many 
 excellent hints of a general character, and important 
 comparisons for a particular department of syntax — the 
 prepositions — are contained in Ludwig Lange's paper, 
 ' Ueber Ziel und Methode der syntahtischen Forschung,^ 
 in the transactions of the Gottingen Philological 
 Association (Gott, 1852). Kvicala has lately expressed 
 
180 SYNTAX. 
 
 himself in a similar manner with regard to the require- 
 ments of syntax in his admirable review of Baumlein's 
 ' Partikeln ' — Zeitschr, f. d. 6, Gymn,, 1863, p. 304 ff. 
 [Cp. ih. 1864, p. 313 f.] 
 
 Following these preparatory works B. Delbriick has 
 commenced a more thorough system of comparative 
 syntax in his work Ablativ, Localis, Instrumentalis im 
 Altindischen, Lateinischen^ Griechischen, und Deutschen, 
 Berlin 1867, which is followed by the treatise ' De usu 
 dativi in carminibus Rigvedoe, Halis 1867, and the 
 German reproduction of the same subject in Kuhn's 
 Zeitschrift XVIII, 81 ff. (Ueber den indogermanischen^ 
 speciell den vedischen Dativ) ; and to which we have a 
 supplement in Ernst Siecke's dissertation ' De genitivi 
 in lingua Sanscritica imprimis Vedica usu/ Berlin 1869. 
 The ' Researches on the Origin of the Relative Pronoun 
 in the Indo-Grermanic Languages,' by Ernst Windisch 
 in the second volume of my Studien zu griechischen 
 und lateinischen Grammatik, p. 201 ff., also enter the 
 province of syntax. 
 
 In spite of these important advances, which I gladly 
 welcome, I have even in the last edition of the Gram- 
 mar felt that a certain amount of moderation was 
 prescribed in dealing with the syntax, since the careful 
 researches mentioned cannot be regarded as final even 
 in the parts to which they extend, and to a great extent 
 pass beyond a school-grammar. But that practical 
 instruction can and will in time derive benefit from this 
 quarter also is beyond doubt. For the present it is only 
 where the analysis of the forms secures a firm founda- 
 tion, or where the change in our conception of the life 
 and nature of language urgently recommends new 
 points of view, that a change can and must be made. 
 For the rest my aim was merely to put together in a 
 plain and compendious manner the actual usages of the 
 
SYNTAX. 181 
 
 language, as they have been fixed by the industry and 
 acuteness of the excellent philologists of the last half- 
 century. After Grottfried Hermann, whose works form 
 an epoch, K. W. Kriiger and Madvig deserve especial 
 mention in this respect. But in so doing a double 
 object had still to be kept in view throughout. First 
 the positive object of preserving the greatest possible 
 uniformity between the syntax and accidence both in 
 the general point of view and in the mode of expression, 
 and secondly the negative object of keeping at as great 
 a distance as possible all that was fanciful, all precon- 
 ceived notions or constructions such as still, alas ! con- 
 tinue to force their way into our grammatical manuals, 
 though in garbs changed for the occasion. All these 
 categories of language, forms of thought, relations of the 
 sentence or whatever else be the name by which they 
 are or have been called, on which so much weight is and 
 still will be laid to some extent from different quarters, 
 rest at bottom on the notion that thought was prior in 
 development to language, and that the forms of lan- 
 guage are the product of acute reflection^ the invention 
 of certain individuals who founded language, the inven- 
 tores, constitutores sermonisy as they were once termed. 
 This conception, which corresponds to the modes of 
 thought current in the last century, is now completely 
 contradicted especially by the profound researches of W. 
 von Humboldt and by all that the science of language 
 in the widest sense has brought to Kght since his time. 
 In this respect we need only refer to the various works 
 of Steinthal and Heyse's ^ System der Sprachwissen- 
 schaft' Thought grew up by and with language ; the 
 forms of thought with and out of the forms of language 
 in a thoroughly instinctive and national manner. Hence 
 the usages of syntax also are wholly a growth which like 
 growths of other kinds admits no tying up into logical 
 
182 SYNTAX. 
 
 formulaB; but can only be understood by historical study 
 and correct conception of the development of language. 
 
 If therefore in explaining the syntax we must to some 
 extent abandon that deceptive charm which may be 
 gained even in a school-grammar by connecting in- 
 dividual usages with general principles, if a certain 
 amount of dulness and dryness is the necessary conse- 
 quence of strict adherence to the truth— there are yet 
 other elements intellectual in themselves or calculated 
 to arouse the intellect which need not be despised. 
 One such element, for instance, was found in the 
 arrangement of the phenomena connected with each 
 other. Even where the ultimate questions must still 
 remain unanswered, the proof of such internal con- 
 nexion serves to combine individual usages together 
 and to give life to the study of them. But we must, it 
 is true, allow that in this respect the final sentence has 
 still to be pronounced in many instances ; and many 
 usages can be connected in more than one way. I am 
 very far from supposing that I have always taken the 
 right path here. The certainty attained in the acci- 
 dence is often not attained in syntax. But I can assure 
 the reader that the arrangement and connexion of the 
 different usages given in my Grammar is due to mature 
 consideration and that I have always kept the syntax 
 carefully in view though my studies have been more 
 especially directed to other departments of language. 
 
 Another more peculiar feature in my treatment of 
 the syntax is the connexion of Greek usages with their 
 equivalents in German and Latin. If, as we have seen, 
 the life of language is to be regarded as something in- 
 stinctive, it follows that the usages of language can by 
 no means be taught by rules and definitions merely, but 
 it is an essential part of teaching that they should be 
 connected with known usages in other languages and 
 
SYNTAX. 183 
 
 best of all with those of the student's mother-tongue as 
 the language with which he is most familiar. In this 
 way better than any other is made good that beautiful 
 saying of W. von Humboldt, that ' strictly speaking ] 
 language cannot be taught, but we can only awaken it I 
 in the feeling of the learner.' Thus teaching actually 
 becomes as in Plato an avd/juvrja-t^;, not however of know- 
 ledge acquired in an earlier condition of the soul, but of 
 the notions and perceptions born and bred in each in- 
 dividual. Thus, for example, I attempt in § 361, 10 to 
 bring the further predicate as conceived in the Greek 
 mind nearer to the pupil by a few German examples of 
 a kindred nature : — Ich fuhle mich gesund^ halte dick 
 hereit, wir nennen dich unsem Vetter, I explain the 
 apparent variety in the Greek genitive in combination 
 with substantives by the addition of German com- 
 pounds, § 408 : — e.g. Landsmann, ffausfreund, Eisen- 
 bahn, Erbtheil, Vater/reude, etc. ; in many verbal con- 
 structions and also for the genitive absolute (§§ 417, 
 428) : — stehenden Fusses, I adduce similar constructions 
 from German."* In this respect of course great mode- 
 ration must be preserved just as the comparisons with 
 Latin also must be limited to what is important in the 
 way of similarity or contrast. But it would be un- 
 natural to make no use of the grammatical conceptions 
 and analogies implanted in the pupil by his own sense 
 of language ; and it is not less undesirable that the 
 knowledge already attained of Latin should remain 
 entirely unconnected with his knowledge of Greek. In 
 regard to both languages moreover, it is quite as im- 
 portant to call attention to what is different as to what 
 is similar. Now the difference is often marked in the 
 shortest and most striking way by translation. This is 
 
 * These German parallels are of course omitted, or replaced by- 
 English equivalents in the translation of the Grammar. — Ed. 
 
184 SYNTAX. 
 
 the reason that I always lay such great weight on exact 
 translations of the Greek constructions. The transla- 
 tions in my Grammar are intended to he committed to 
 memory hy the pupil together with the Oreek examples. 
 For this reason they are added throughout and not 
 left either to the pupil's uncertain intelligence or to the 
 teacher's caprice. Indeed, the definite form of the 
 translation often appeared to me quite as essential as the 
 definite framinor of the rules. Moreover had I chosen 
 such instances only as admit of a correct translation 
 apart from the context in which they occur, I should 
 have been limited far more in my choice, or I must have 
 given references to the places where they may be found. 
 For many passages are not really intelligible till we see 
 them in the context. Of course these examples cannot 
 by any means take the place of independent exercises 
 in translation. But for such sufficient material could 
 not be given within the narrow limits prescribed for my 
 Grammar. Yet with a view to this object the latest 
 editions contain a few .untranslated examples. More of 
 the kind will be found in the exercise-books adapted to 
 my Grammar. Among these I may select for mention 
 the Griechisches Elementarhuch by Dr. Carl Schenkl, 
 which contain^ a large amount of material, well 
 arranged, and has perhaps sufficiently proved that it 
 serves its purpose by the simple fact that it has gone 
 through seven editions (7 th ed., Prague 1869). To this 
 may be added the Uebungshuch zum Uehersetzen aus 
 dem Deutschen und Lateinischen ins Griechische by Dr. 
 C. Schenkl (2nd ed., Prague 1861), and the still larger 
 collection ' Aufgahen zum Uehersetzen in das Griechische ' 
 by Dr. Gottfried Boehme (3rd ed., Leipsic 1868). 
 Besides, the reading of the easy prose authors, with 
 which instruction usually commences after the most 
 necessary grammatical knowledge has been acquired, 
 
SYNTAX. 185 
 
 offers at every step vouchers for the doctrines laid down 
 in the Grammar and supplies the teacher with ample 
 opportunities of explaining from the Grammar the 
 phenomena of language which come before us. 
 
 In selecting the matter to be comprised in the syntax 
 I have been very strict. It appeared to me the most 
 essential point to bring out in the clearest light the 
 typical usage of the language in the most important 
 phenomena. When this object has been attained by 
 the teacher with the aid of the Grammar and a suit- 
 able exercise-book, when once the sense of the rule, 
 I might say, of the syntactical rhythm of Greek 
 has been aroused^ it will not be difficult to explain 
 to the pupil isolated deviations and licences with re- 
 spect to what has been learnt. It is perhaps even a 
 gain for instruction that much is here left to the 
 discretion of the teacher. We must cling to the point 
 that the object of learning Greek is not to write the 
 language, but to understand the authors. Hence infor- 
 mation on every form found by the pupil is absolutely 
 necessary^ not so the description of the use of language 
 down to its most delicate ramifications. Yet in this 
 respect also* it is certainly not quite easy to find the 
 limit between too much and too little. Here and there, 
 it is true, the wish has been expressed by teachers 
 taking an interest in my book, that I would make 
 some enlargement in the syntax ; but, on the other 
 hand, the very brevity and conciseness of my synopsis 
 have been brought forward as an advantage. For this 
 reason I have hitherto acceded to the demand for 
 extension to a very slight degree. 
 
 OF 
 
 fMIVBESITY; 
 
CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 THE CASES. 
 
 With a great number of scholars^ and even one or 
 two comparative philologers of eminence, the view 
 still appears to meet with much approval, that the 
 cases denoted, in the first instance, relations of space ; 
 and were thence by slow degrees transferred to rela- 
 tions of a more intellectual character. At first sight 
 this assumption stands in a certain degree of unison 
 with the fundamental theory which, quite properly, 
 governs modern science ; and which, as a rule, recom- 
 mends us to start from what is concrete as distinguished 
 from what is purely ideal. Relations of directions in 
 space appear to be more concrete than the mutual 
 relation of the parts of a sentence, and therefore 
 fitted to form the basis of them. But on closer ex- 
 amination this appearance vanishes and difficulties 
 everywhere arise. Had language as a fact conceived 
 the action of the verb as a movement straining from 
 the subject towards the object, then not merely must 
 the point towards which this action tends — ^the quo — 
 have given rise to the case of the object, as many 
 assume, but obviously, the starting-point — the unde — 
 must also have given rise to the case of the subject ; 
 and thus, strictly speaking, but one local relation — the 
 uhi — remains for the other cases. Consistently carried 
 out therefore this assumption must lead to the conclu- 
 sion that the nominative is identical with the ablative, 
 
THE CASES. 187 
 
 and with the genitive also, if this case is regarded as 
 the counterpart of the ablative. But who would ven- 
 ture to maintain this ? The only certain starting-point 
 for the explanation of the use of the cases, — but also, 
 it is true, a point to which the advocates of the local 
 theory have paid the least attention, — is supplied by the 
 forms of the cases. Now when we look at their form 
 one group of closely-connected cases at once rises to 
 the surface — the nominative, accusative, and vocative. 
 Throughout the Indo-Germanic languages these cases 
 always coincide in the neuter ; whereas none of them 
 ever displays the least contact with the remaining cases 
 — that is, a vocative, nominative, or accusative form 
 never takes the place of a genitive or dative form, in 
 the way in which, e.g. in the Latin plural, dative 
 and ablative — in the Greek dual, genitive and dative 
 are identical in form. Within this group the vocative, 
 as the case of appellation, is without any case-sign, the 
 stem without any addition — the word in a condition 
 antecedent to the formation of the cases. The nomi- 
 native is unmistakably the case of the subject. In 
 it the form is most transparent. It appears, as Bopp ' 
 was the first to perceive, that the sigma of the nomi- 
 native is identical (with the pronoun-stem sa, which/ 
 in separate use is o in Greek. Language therefore' 
 denoted the subject as the leading word of the sen- 
 tence by a pronoun placed like an article after it. 
 The opposite of the subject is obviously the object. 
 We cannot see through the formation of the accusative 
 so clearly as that of the nominative ; but we have 
 alrieady seen (p. 65) that it is very noticeable that in 
 the neuters, that is, in words which from their meaning 
 cannot be subjects of an action in an operative sense, 
 like the masculines and feminines, the case of the object 
 represents also the case of the subject. If however 
 
188 SYNTAX. 
 
 this is in reality the relation, if reKvo-v from a formal 
 point of view is just as much the accusative of the 
 stem reKvo, as 6e6v is the accusative of the stem Beo, 
 how is it then pos&ible that reKvo-v originally signified 
 Howards' or Ho the child'? Or, to reverse the ques- 
 tion, granting that t^kvov originally signified this, how 
 could it ever be used for the nominative and vocative ? 
 Would or could language interchange the starting-point 
 of an action with the goal of it ? Such a change, if at 
 all, would at best be possible only when the original 
 meaning had been completely forgotten, through a 
 lingering process of decay. But this vicarious use of 
 the accusative for the nominative is of great antiquity ; 
 it is older than the separation of the Indo-Germanic 
 languages^. Consequently if it were the case, which 
 is certainly incredible, that in the very beginning the 
 creation of the cases arose out of ideas of space, this 
 point of view must have been already given up again 
 at the time when the forms of language became fixed, 
 before the separation of the languages of the Indo- 
 Germanic stem. But then it would further follow from 
 this, that this supposed relation of direction had already, 
 at that early period, become completely confused in 
 the sense of language ; and consequently it would in 
 no way be adapted to be taken by ns as a basis for 
 the complicated uses of the cases, as they became fixed 
 at a time obviously far later. In short, in the accusative 
 we see as plainly as possible how inadmissible the local 
 theory is. Here also the greatest difficulties present 
 themselves in explaining the individual usages. For 
 that widespread and very ancient kind of accusative^ 
 more especially, which I call the accusative of the 
 internal object, cannot without great violence be wrung 
 out of the category of quo,^ > 
 
 ♦ More on this subject will be found in my paper on die localis- 
 
THE CASES. 189 
 
 If therefore it is certain that in denoting the nomi- 
 native language started from quite other than local 
 perceptions, and if it has been found impossible to 
 explain the accusative from the category of quo^ the 
 whole local theory is now deprived of important sup- 
 port. For the charm of the theory lay just in this : 
 that the three oblique cases in Greek could be fitted 
 so neatly into these three convenient categories of unde 
 uhi and quo, Ubi and unde still remain. But for vM, 
 even the Indo-Germanic language had originally a 
 special case — the locative — which at least in one class 
 of languages is retained in form and meaning beside 
 the dative, and quite distinct from it. Elsewhere, it 
 is true, these two cases have several points of contact. 
 But still it by no means follows from this that they 
 were originally identical, and it would be very difficult 
 to derive the leading use of the dative, i.e. its use for 
 what is called the remoter object, from the category 
 of ubi. The case is similar with the ablative and 
 genitive. We do not see why these should be two 
 cases if both expressed originally one and the same 
 relation of space. Here too, especially in the plural, 
 where the ablative coincides with the dative, each case 
 takes its own course. And the application of the geni- 
 tive to bring into prominence the connexion between 
 two nouns — by far the predominant use in all languages 
 — is far removed from the notion of unde. To explain 
 the widely extended use of the genitive from this 
 category of unde is to explain an infinite abundance 
 
 tische Casustheorie, read before the Meissner Philologen-versammlung 
 (1863), p. 45 ff. of the Transactions. It seems worth notice that in 
 the discussion which took place after the paper between Lange, 
 Ahrens, Steinthal, and myself, in spite of some variety of views, no 
 one undertook to defend the original locative meaning of the accusa- 
 tive. In my tract * Zur ChronologieJ p. 250 ff., I have again touched 
 on this subject. 
 
190 SYNTAX. 
 
 of applications from a small and decaying minority. 
 Even the Latin use of the dative as of the genitive 
 should have warned us against the mistaken idea of 
 placing local relations at the head in these cases. For 
 in truth there is scarcely any ground whatever for 
 such a theory. If then it is now plain that in three 
 of the original eight cases, viz., the vocative, nomina- 
 tive, and accusative, it is impossible to carry out the 
 local meaning, and that in two, the dative and genitive, 
 such a meaning is barely conceivable, yet on the other 
 hand for two others, the locative and ablative, this 
 meaning is probable inasmuch as we can without diffi- 
 culty trace back all the functions of the locative to ubi 
 and those of the ablative to unde. But since both these 
 cases have become extinct in Greek, the local theory 
 has for this language a certain amount of importance 
 only in so far as the functions of these cases have 
 been adopted by others. Finally the eighth case — the 
 instrumental — in certain applications called also the 
 sociative or comitative, because it expresses all the 
 relations for which in German the preposition mit 
 (with) is used, is obviously of so specific a character 
 that it cannot be inserted without violence in any one 
 of the three categories. The form also gives us no 
 ground for regarding it as a simple variety of a local 
 case. 
 
 These few remarks will suffice to show how Kttle 
 reason there is for speaking of the local theory, as is 
 still constantly done, as an estabhshed fact. That is 
 not the case ; we are fully justified in completely dis- 
 regarding so unsound a basis in explaining the use of 
 the cases in Greek. The triple division of the oblique 
 cases in this language, which, by reason of its apparent 
 simplicity, has been essential in recommending the 
 local theory to favour, even if it has not created it, is 
 
THE CASES. 191 
 
 not a mark of antiquity, but rather a corruption of the 
 larger system of cases which is retained, to some 
 extent in Latin, and completely in Sanskrit. 
 
 This important fact must form the basis for the 
 arrangement of the use of the cases in Greek. There 
 was an early period in this language in which all eight 
 cases were in existence. Indeed many traces of them 
 all are still to be found. Case-forms which in indi- 
 vidual use have been detached from the others of the 
 same stem and thus have lost their status as such, we 
 call adverbs. In the adverbs in -Sov -Brjv Lat. -tim 
 the accusative form, in ef^? (Homeric e^eirj^) ofiov the 
 genitive form, in KOfiiSfj iravrdirao-LV the dative form 
 is unmistakable. The very common adverbs in -g)9, 
 like the Latin in 5 (for dd) and e (for ed) are proved 
 to be ablatives. The Doric pronominal adverbs in co, 
 TTw TovT(b TrjvS) ctc. (Ahrcus, Dor, 374) which stand 
 phonetically on the same line with ovrw, have retained 
 the original ablative meaning in so far as they are used 
 in questions implying motion from a place. Locatives 
 are concealed not merely in ;^a/xa-/ /jiiao-t, but also in 
 TTol oly in dfjLa')(€L dfjuiaOL Forms like cifjua iravr-r) i-v-a 
 corresponding to the Sanskrit instrumental in a, are in 
 all probability to be regarded as petrified instrumentals ; 
 while, on the other hand, the epic forms in -0^ also are 
 at least in part to be considered as another formation of 
 this case. Thus therefore even Grreek itself still points 
 back to a condition of language in which the cases were 
 more numerous ; and the question arises — how was the 
 language able to replace the gradually encroaching 
 decay of the cases? The answer obviously is that 
 another case by degrees assumed the functions of the 
 decaying one in addition to its own. In what order 
 this took place cannot, it is true, be ascertained with 
 certainty. But since we have good reason from the 
 
192 SYNTAX. 
 
 close relation which mutually prevails between the two 
 South European languages to presuppose that any share 
 which Latin had in the ancient heritage existed in 
 Greek also in a period which, though prehistoric, is not 
 imaginary, it is not improbable that those cases were 
 retained the longest in Greek, which were retained to 
 the end in Latin, while, on the other hand, those were 
 the earliest to decay which in Latin also ceased to exist. 
 Consequently the instrumental would be the first to 
 give way. The functions of this case were assumed in 
 Latin by the ablative, language regarding the instru- 
 ment as that from which the action indirectly arose, 
 but in Greek, where the ablative also was allowed to 
 drop out of use at a very early time, by the dative, to 
 which, as the case of the interested person, the comitative 
 side of the instrumental lay very near. After the 
 instrumental the ablative was apparently the next to 
 disappear. In its place came the genitive as the case of 
 connexion. For in the idea of origin the ideas of unde 
 and of connexion meet and touch. Lastly, the locative, 
 the proportionately late disappearance of which case 
 is proved by the numerous local adverbs with locative 
 forms found both in singular and plural — was replaced 
 by the dative, after it had already become considerably 
 extended by the assumption of the functions of the 
 instrumental. In these considerations moreover the fact 
 must not be overlooked that the use of prepositions 
 in combination with certain cases must have essentially 
 contributed to remove any indefiniteness in the ex- 
 pression, and, as it were, to relieve the cases of their 
 accumulated functions. Hence it follows that the accu- 
 sative alone in Greek has not exceeded the limits of its 
 original sphere. The genitive and dative are mixed, or 
 as Pott, Etym, Forsch.^ I ^, 22 terms it, ^ syncretistic ' 
 cases. The use of each of these cases cannot at all be 
 
THE CASES. 193 
 
 traced back to one single principle. Rather must we 
 analyse both into the modes of use which have run 
 together in them ; and therefore distinguish a double 
 genitive (genitive and ablative) ; and a triple dative 
 (dative instrumental locative). In Latin where the 
 genitive and dative have remained within their proper 
 spheres we can perceive most clearly the genuine 
 primary nature of these cases. It is significant that 
 neither case ever occurs in this language with a 
 preposition ; and that, generally, the older condition 
 of the case-system in Latin allowed writers to express 
 much by the simple case which in Greek required the 
 aid of a preposition. 
 
 Such being our conception of the cases (and the same 
 conception lies at the base of the works of Delbriick 
 and Siecke mentioned on p. 180),* it is self-evident that 
 we must be on our guard against all over-strict defi- 
 nitions of the separate cases, and not allow ourselves to 
 be led away by the delusion that our explanation be- 
 comes scientific when we trace back the various usages 
 by violent means to some single point confined within 
 narrow limits and strictly unalterable. Yet on the other 
 hand also it is clear that every case is to the sense of 
 language at a particular period something individual and 
 felt as such, and distinguished in its characteristic pecu- 
 liarities from others. It is also by no means indiiferent 
 for the nature of the separate cases, whether the lan- 
 guage possesses three or six oblique cases. We can, no 
 doubt, trace back a certain portion of the usages of the 
 genitive to the ablative and derive certain of its functions, 
 e.g. the genitive of separation, from this source, and 
 accordingly denote them as vicarious functions. But 
 the sense of language itself ceased in time to perceive i 
 
 * Cp. also I. Bekker, Ilomerische Blatter, p. 207 ff. 
 
 
 
194 ' SYNTAX. 
 
 the distinction clearly, connecting links became formed 
 unconsciously between the two cases, and the genitive, 
 increased by a part of the usages of the ablative, grew 
 up gradually into a peculiar case of more extensive use. 
 Hence a difficulty arises for the grammarian. It is, at 
 times, not easy to decide whether a mode of use belongs 
 to the original capital, or to the later inheritance of a 
 stem ; and again, when the inheritance is twofold, as in 
 the dative, to which part it belongs. In this latter case 
 however the relations are less complicated; and the 
 decision would perhaps only be difficult in regard to the 
 looser use of the dative treated in § 441. On the other 
 hand, the genitive, owing to the greater extent of appli- 
 cation, is much more difficult. Here the localists have 
 wrung everything out of their category of wide. And 
 how much may be developed out of this relation can 
 be shown by the extensive use of the German prepo- 
 sition 'von (of). The only point is to find the proper 
 limits. The genitive of the object compared with com- 
 paratives, for example, w^hich corresponds to the Latin 
 and Sanskrit ablative, can without violence be explained 
 as a later function adopted from the ablative. But still 
 it is undeniable that wdth this use the original and proper 
 use of the genitive offers many points of connexion. In 
 the sense of language the notion of the genitive has 
 become developed to that of relativity in general. In 
 the adjectives (§ 414), especially, this is clearly to be 
 seen. If the genitive with cl^lo^ avrd^io^ is certainly 
 a genuine genitive, if we must take the same view of 
 the adverbs quoted in § 415 — e.g. Trpoaco irpoaOev avco 
 — it is not difficult to regard in the same light the geni- 
 tive used with fiei^cov fieioyv. From the verbs also of 
 comparative meaning the genitive with comparatives 
 can hardly be separated, and yet it is certainly simpler 
 to explain the genitive with apx^iv ^aaCkeveLv from the 
 
THE CASES. 195 
 
 idea of relation than from that of unde* My principle 
 therefore was, in the genitive, not to be too strict in 
 holding asunder the originally different usages, and 
 mainly to keep in view the simple juxtaposition of what 
 can be easily connected in the period when the language 
 had become developed. 
 
 By taking this view of the cases we avoid a fault 
 which is noticeable in many explanations proceeding 
 from different points of view, — the fault of starting from 
 quite isolated and in part jpoetical modes of use. In 
 my Grammar, on the contrary, the leading use is always 
 placed at the head, — that use which gives the peculiar 
 type and characteristic of the case. For the accusative 
 the starting-point must in any case be the construction 
 with verbs, as for the genitive the construction with 
 substantives. But in Greek — for Latin in its stricter 
 fashion takes its own course — we can in every case 
 distinguish a more independent use by the side of the 
 usage found in a multitude of quite common construc- 
 tions. In time the cases obviously extend their usage 
 beyond the range of the original analogies. Therefore 
 I distinguish in every case a looser or freer use. 
 The last step in this path is the adverbial use. The 
 grammarian must make it his task to illustrate the 
 course of the history of language so far as possible by 
 characteristic examples. For the accusative the cate- 
 gory of the inner object is of supreme importance in 
 this respect ; in regard to which I have adopted 
 Kriiger's terminology. How very prone the Greek is 
 to supply in thought to every verb the notion contained 
 in it, in the form of the object, is shown by usages like 
 
 * It is true that the verbs in question have an analogy in the 
 similar use of Sanskrit, where, e.g., ig^ to be a master, rd^, regere take 
 the genitive (Siecke, Be genet, usu^ p. 57), and in the \jdX.potiri c. gen. , 
 while the genitive with comparatives is unknown to both languages. 
 
196 SYNTAX. 
 
 Soph. El. 1415 — iralaov BlttXtjv, where an attribute is 
 added to the internal object though omitted. Schomann 
 in his excellent work RedetJieile (Berlin 1862), especially 
 p. 148 ff., where he is treating of the origin of the 
 adverbs, takes quite the same view ; as also Haase on 
 Reisig's Vorlesungenuher Lat Sprachwissenschaft, Anm. 
 509 and 559. Both with justice laj stress on the fact 
 that even the substantive verb very easily admits the 
 notion of an internal accusative ; and consequently even 
 the freer and in part quite adverbial accusatives like 
 aKTjv eaav ai:e to be regarded in this light, clkt^v eaav 
 means literally ^ they were rest '; i.e. ' they were a quiet 
 being' [cp. § 400 c], in the same sense as we might 
 say, Hhey went a quiet walk.' In Sanskrit also the 
 accusative of the action stands in quite a similar manner 
 with the substantive verb in the paraphrastic formation 
 of the perfect, e.g. igdm dsa, or i^dm babhuva, literally 
 dominationem fui, i.e. ' I have ruled' (Bopp, Sanskritgr., 
 § 419). The great antiquity of this very use of the accu- 
 sative can hardly be doubted. The numerous adverbs of 
 accusative-form, the use of the supines in -turn in Latin 
 (nunciatum ire = ayyekirjv iXOelv), and much besides, 
 proves this. In Latin also the wider use of the accusative 
 is by no means always to be regarded as a Grecism ; but 
 sometimes as a residuum of a power of this case, which 
 in later times became more and more cut down. This is 
 shown not merely by such national usages as excubias, 
 infitias ire, with which the English phrase 'io stand guard' 
 maybe compared, but also by the very frequent occurrence 
 of usages of quite a Greek character in the older writers, 
 e.g. Plant., Epid.j IV, 1, 39: ut alias res est impense 
 improbus (Holtze, Synt axis prise, script, Lat., I, 221). \ 
 In the genitive — this orthography, and not genetive, I 
 will still be permitted in writing German and English — i 
 my chief object was to make clear the wide range of | 
 
THE CASES. 197 
 
 relations which this case can indicate, especially in the 
 simplest combinations of two substantives with each 
 other. To quote all the possible varieties of such combina- 
 tions was superfluous : on the contrary, my purpose was 
 simply to bring forward the most essential, and to make 
 it plain that all those different significations of origin, 
 possession, material, etc., are not really expressed by the < 
 genitive, but rather merely infused by the intelligence 
 into the con nexio n den oted_ by ^ genit ive. Hence 
 there are instances which can be subsumed under none 
 of these categories, and where the attempt to do so 
 would be simple sophistry, e.g. Demosth. Mid. 35 — 
 ^d^Tj^ vofjLo^;, And it would be foolish to assume a 
 special genitive of comparison on account of such a pas- 
 sage as Soph. Ant, 114 — Trripv^ Xevfcrj^; ')(i6vo<i. So too 
 there are other instances which can be placed with equal 
 right under two of the varieties quoted. opKcop ttlo-ti^ 
 can denote ' faith in an oath,' no less than the ' confi- 
 dence which springs out of an oath sworn,' the latter as 
 in So? fioc %e/oo9 o-r)? iriartVy Soph. Oed, CoL 1632, just 
 as fiducia viriuin is quite indefinite when standing by 
 itself, so that the translator is often compelled in these 
 loose combinations of two ideas, to introduce more than 
 is really there, owing to the want of similarly loose | 
 combinations in his own language. The partitive geni- 
 tive also is naturally nothing more than a genitive of 
 connexion with a whole, or to use an expression proper 
 in many cases, with a totality. This species of the 
 genitive was obviously first developed in the plural ; 
 but spread out widely from thence in all the kin- 
 dred languages. Hence I do not believe that we can 
 dispense with it. In a construction like Orjl3ac t^9 
 Boicorla^ therefore the genitive is certainly one of con- 
 nexion, but the specific kind of connexion here intended 
 is that of a part with the whole. 
 
198 SYNTAX. 
 
 In the use of the genitive with verbs, so widely 
 developed in Greek, I have felt myself specially called 
 upon to point out everywhere the relations to the more 
 familiar use in combination with substantives and ad- 
 jectives. Here the older German language, and the 
 Indian also, offers many valuable parallels. Here there- 
 fore it is especially instructive to compare J. Grimm, 
 IV, 646 ff. As opposed to the variety of the uses 
 of the cases in Greek, Latin presents a monotonous 
 logical consistency ; especially in the use with verbs. 
 For this use in Greek, I have, not without opposition, 
 given a wide range to the partitive genitive. J. Grimm 
 1. c. says : ' The accusative denotes that the object is 
 completely overpowered. In the genitive the power of 
 the subject is regarded as exerted to a less degree. The 
 active power is, as it were, only tried and roused, not 
 put forth to the full extent.' This is merely another way 
 of saying that the power of the verb, when a genitive is 
 added, refers only to a part of the object. How far we 
 can extend this category of the partitive genitive may 
 certainly be doubtful. Here we are still in want of 
 copious and properly-arranged collections, but thus much 
 is certain : where we find one and the same verb in two 
 constructions, sometimes with the genitive and some- 
 times with the accusative ; and this with just the distinc- 
 tion that the accusative denotes the object as completely 
 overpowered, or indivisible — then we are justified in 
 considering the genitive as partitive in distinction from 
 the accusative. Thus for the genitive with verbs of 
 ^aiming at,' or ^ striving after' (§ 419 d), Soph. Ant. 
 770 is significant : Tev^erat to /jur} 6av€LV, — On the 
 other hand, for the verbs of exclusion it is certainly 
 easy to regard the genitive as the representative of the 
 ablative just as also the ablative is found throughout 
 with the corresponding verbs in Latin. Yet we must 
 
THE CASES. 199 
 
 also bear in mind that the adjectives mentioned in 
 § 414, 5 correspond to these verbs. Since it is certain 
 that dfiotpo^ and Lat. expers have the same genitive as 
 €fji/jiotpo<; and pm'ticeps* there is no contradiction at all 
 in assuming an internal connexion between aire'xpfjbai 
 eipyco a7roTir/)^dvco, and fjL€Te')(co fieraSiBcDfjic Tvy)(^dv(o, 
 In the German language it is doubtful whether the 
 genitive has assumed the representation of the ablative, 
 but certain that a number of verbs of privative meaning 
 (J. Grimm, VI, 674 fF.), especially in the older language 
 take the genitive, and some of these are still retained. 
 Grimm explains these from the same point of view as 
 the constructions with the corresponding positive verbs. 
 But because the explanation from the ablative is also 
 possible, I have in the later editions quoted this class of 
 verbs in § 419 b, separately from the former. 
 
 The free use of the genitive I have everywhere com- 
 pared with the kindred applications of the more fixed 
 use, so as to point out an internal connexion. That the 
 genitive of the cause (§ 427) is combined with that of the 
 aim, i.e. the causa efficiens with the causa finalis^ needs of 
 course no justification. The genitive absolute also ought , 
 by no means always to be explained from the category 
 of unde. The evidence of Sanskrit is against this, for in I 
 that language there is no genitive meaning motion from ' 
 a place, but there is an absolute genitive (Delbriick, 
 Ablativ, etc., p. 43). There are also many construe- | 
 tions in modern German which warn us against that.t I 
 It is not improbable that a stock of similar usages was j 
 already in existence, when the ablative fell into dislike j 
 among the Greeks, and that the genitive absolute by slow j 
 
 * Similar constructions in Sanskrit are given by Siecke, p. 30. 
 
 f E.g. Ur ging eilenden Schriites, er ritt verhdngten Ziigels, ihr 
 zogt unverrichteter Sadie ah, er ward verdientermassen (mhd. also 
 unverdienter Bingen, Grimm, Gr., IV, 907) geehrt. 
 
200 SYNTAX. 
 
 degrees forced itself into the place of the ablative, and in 
 this way has now certainly become extended far beyond 
 its original range. Moreover the genitive absolute is in 
 Grreek itself a growing construction, the continually in- 
 creasing spread of which can be observed from Homer 
 onwards. On this as on many questions belonging to 
 this subject, compare the beautiful researches of Classen, 
 ' Beobachtwigen ilber den Homerischen Sprachgebrauch ' 
 (Frankfort-on-Maine 1854-6, new ed. 1867). 
 
 In the arrangement of the use of the dative the 
 various sources can be distinguished more definitely. 
 The instrumental use especially is plainly to be 
 separated off, as forming a close category to itself 
 with several subdivisions. But nevertheless a complete 
 analysis appeared impracticable. The dative of com- 
 munity (§ 436) has its source obviously in the sociative 
 or comitative use of the old instrumental ; for which 
 reason the ablative — elsewhere also the Italic repre- 
 sentative of the lost fellow-case — corresponds in Latin 
 to the Greek dative and the Sanskrit instrumental in 
 this usage. The preposition sa ' with ' is in Sanskrit 
 combined with the instrumental, the corresponding a/jia 
 ^vv (7VV in Greek take the dative, cum in Latin has the 
 ablative. Hence something may be said in defence of 
 placing this use after the instrumental use. But in the 
 language as we find it, the sociative dative * is more 
 nearly akin to the proper original dative than the 
 instrumental ; and in general it certainly forms the 
 connecting link between these two cases, since it was 
 easy to denote the person or thing connected with an 
 action by the same case-form which was already in use 
 
 * The remains of an originally wider application of the dative of 
 community, as taking the place of the instrumental, is the Hesiodic 
 phrase oOrtn Koi^irjOelaa [cp. fMla-yeadai'], which throws light on Soph. 
 Antig. 862 — KoifiijtxaTa — ^akJ) irarpl. 
 
THE CASES. 201 
 
 for the person interested. We need only call to mind 
 the Homeric <toI a/ju kairofjieO ', beside the Attic aol 
 eaTTOfieda* Hence the dative of community is put in 
 this place. With regard to the proper and, so to say, 
 genuine dative, I have distinguished two cases. That 
 kind of dative is put first from which the case has 
 received its name Botlkt], Kriiger terms this, which in 
 his arrangement is placed later on, ' the objective dative 
 of the thing interested' (§ 48, 7). It might otherwise 
 be called Hhe dative of the indirect object.' But it 
 appeared to me advisable to keep the term object within 
 the narrowest limits possible in a school-grammar, in 
 order to avoid confusion. Hence in the explanation I 
 preferred the words ' the person remotely affected by 
 anything.' The dative in transitive verbs like BiSovao 
 iirLTpeTreLv irapexeiv, and with intransitives like ^orjOecv 
 hoKelv Treldecrdac, and no less with adjectives like 0/Xo9 
 TTccTTo^i lKav6<;, IS as it were necessary. The enuncia- 
 tion remains imperfect without the mention of the 
 person. This is what the expressions ^interested,' 
 ' affected by,' are intended to mean. On the other 
 hand, the dative of ' the interest ' as I call it [cp. 
 Kriiger § 48, 3] is different. This dative is to a 
 certain extent added at pleasure ; not required by a 
 government of the verb which has become typical. On 
 the contrary, the sentence is extended in a peculiar 
 manner by the introduction of the word standing in the 
 dative. The so-called Dativus commodi and incormnodi 
 can be added to any verb whatever. For this category of 
 the datival use Delbriick (Kuhn's Ztschr, XVIII, 88 ff.) 
 quotes a number of highly instructive parallels from the 
 language of the Vedas, which prove that this use was 
 
 * Cobet ( Varies Lectiones, p. 22) points out that €7ro/uLai aoi cannot 
 be used in Attic of slaves attending their master, or soldiers following 
 a general. — Ed. 
 
202 SYNTAX. ' 
 
 far more extensive there than in the classical languages. 
 This dative is very frequently replaced by other con- 
 structions, especially with prepositions. Language has 
 the choice between two different modes of expression. 
 This, so to say, ' facultative 'use of the dative is seen 
 most strikingly in the ethical dative as it is called 
 (§ 433), which has received this name from the very 
 fact that it is not so much required by the thought, as 
 by a reference of the feelings. The choice, on the othec 
 hand, between the simple dative, which in this instance 
 has something personal in it, and a preposition combined 
 with the corresponding case, meets us most strikingly 
 in the combination with the passive (§ 434). — For the 
 rest, in all these instances especially few examples 
 seemed to be requisite to me, because there are but a 
 few in which we can speak of a peculiarly Greek idiom. 
 That the freer dative in its application to place and 
 time is derived from the locative, was already men- 
 tioned. For this very reason the Latins use the abla- 
 tive, which in their language has assumed a portion of 
 the locative use, in the same sense. The dative of the 
 manner on the other hand is explained by similar uses 
 of the instrumental (Delbriick, Ahl. hoc, Instr, p. 52). 
 
CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 THE PREPOSITIONS. 
 
 In order to understand the government of prepositions, 
 nothing is more important than the indisputable fact 
 that all prepositions were, in the first instance^ adverbs. 
 There was therefore a condition of language in which 
 these words did not yet exist as such, that is, in their 
 proper prepositional use. The government of preposi- 
 tions tended to become more and more fixed as language 
 developed. Excellent remarks on the nature and origin 
 of these words are given by Schomann, Redetheile, 
 p. 138 ff. Now as adverbs ^ the prepositions could 
 primarily take the genitive, as the case of connexion. 
 To this source of combination with cases, which is 
 often quite overlooked in the government of prepo- 
 sitions, reference is made in § 447, 2. avrl is, without 
 question, the locative of a noun-stem, of which we have 
 another case, the accusative, in dvra, and yet another, 
 the ablative turned locative, in Latin ante-d. The genitive 
 depends therefore on dvri in precisely the same manner 
 as in the German Angesicht Laid Kraft. With irpo, 
 also, to which the Latin ablative pro-d corresponds, the 
 case is no doubt the same ; and with htd^ the -^schylean 
 form of which — huai — has the sign of the locative, hid, 
 
 * I. Bekker {Homer. JBldtter, I. p. 273) says strikingly : * In Homer 
 the distinction between adverb and preposition is not sharper than 
 that between pronoun and article.' 
 
204 SYNTAX. 
 
 without question, goes back to a noun-stem [cp. S/%a] 
 which denoted duality. The same is the case with 
 virep = Sanskrit upari, which evidently signified in a 
 literal sense ' on the upper side,' as vtto {virai) ' on the 
 under side ' ; and with many others. Nowhere is the 
 perversity of the localists shown more plainly than in 
 the attempt to trace back the genitive in this connexion 
 invariably to unde. When, in Latin, the prepositions 
 in pro prce sub super take the ablative, that case is 
 here, as often, to be regarded as the representative of 
 the locative. But the genitive in Grreek depends in 
 this usage on the preposition which it takes, in the 
 strictest sense. The most decisive confirmation of 
 our view is found in the fact that all the improper 
 prepositions, that is, the prepositions which still con- 
 tinue to have more of the nature of adverbs, take the 
 genitive* 
 
 The first step in the departure from this adverbial 
 use of the prepositions was taken when they were used 
 in a supplementary manner, and in a loose connexion 
 with verbs, especially with a view to define more accu- 
 rately the direction of the verb. In the Homeric lan- 
 guage this usage is still clearly to be seen, in so far as 
 this, that here the preposition though often undoubtedly 
 forming one notion with the verb, can nevertheless be 
 separated from it not only, as continued to be the 
 case in the later language, by the augment and redu- 
 plication, but also by independent words. The careful 
 researches of Hoffmann on ' dfjL(f)i in der Ilias^ and 
 'Die Tmesis in der Ilias^ (Luneburg and Clausthal 
 1857-60), show very plainly how hard it often is to 
 decide whether a preposition must be taken adverbially 
 
 * But dfjia takes the dative ; and it must be borne in mind that the 
 * improper ' prepositions cannot be compounded with verbs like 
 the others, and therefore stand on quite a different footing. — Ed.. 
 
THE PREPOSITIONS. 205 
 
 or in combination with a verb. Now, inasmuch as the 
 preposition in connexion with a verb forms a whole in 
 idea, it can in this connexion require a case. When 
 we find in Od. B 43 auTov<; B' eloTJyov Oelov Bofiov, we 
 have an instance in which the older usage is no doubt 
 retained; and eU-cuyeiv as a whole takes the accusative. 
 H. I 89 illustrates the later use, when eh had already 
 become movable and independent — ^ArpeiBrj^; Be je- 
 povTa<; aoW€a<; rjyev 'Axat^cjv e? kXktLtjv, But in idea 
 the accusative here no less than in the former instance 
 depends on the unified conception in eladyeiv. Bj the 
 addition of a preposition signifying the direction, a verb 
 gains the power of governing an external object of that 
 to which the action is directed ; which however is 
 no longer felt to be such so soon as the preposition is 
 detached and placed immediately before the case. This 
 is the reason that the accusative frequently denotes the 
 aim ; and the other meanings also mentioned in § 447 
 follow from this. In a similar manner the dative is 
 often to be regarded as a dative of community, which 
 depends on the verb connected in thought with the 
 preposition, e.g. in the Homeric usage Trap Be ol earT], 
 Oeoyv Be ol (iy)(i irapearr]^ beside eVraore? irap 6')(ea(\)LV 
 — II. 565. This use of the dative also] is the reason 
 why the power of expressing a more external connexion 
 is ascribed in § 447, 3 to the dative in combination 
 with prepositions. — For the genitive, it is true, we 
 must certainly allow that to some extent, even when 
 dependent on prepositions, it is the representative 
 of the ablative ; yet in such a manner that even here 
 the ablative was dependent in the first instance on 
 the verb together with the preposition, e.g. A 346 
 — eic S dyaje KXiairj^; BpiarjtBay and the genitive 
 came in as its originally less definite representative. 
 [Cp. § 419 b.] 
 
206 SYNTAX. 
 
 These observations will be sufficient to indicate in 
 what manner I combine the use of the prepositions 
 with cases with the other uses of the cases, and to 
 refute the objection that I assume for the prepositions 
 a basis of local meaning, which I deny elsewhere. 
 
CHAPTER XX. 
 
 THE TENSES. 
 
 The doctrine of the use of the tenses required con 
 siderable revision. Here, as a fact, by a more accurate 
 inquir;^nto the form of language, quite a new founda- 
 tion had been obtained for the use of language ; and 
 without going further into the theory than was abso- 
 lutely necessary, I attempted to apply the insight thus 
 obtained to syntax. ^The older grammarians treated 
 the aorist throughout, and the perfect also in part, as 
 tenses of past time. But the analysis of the forms 
 proves in the most striking manner [cp. pp. 105, 112] 
 that language possesses no other means whatever to de- 
 note past time generally than the augment ; and therefore 
 the denotation of past time can only be primarily 
 assumed where the augment stands — that is, in the 
 imperfect pluperfect and indicative of the aorist, and 
 therefore generally in the indicative only. Now.ir 
 these indicatives we can see in the plainest mannerfthat 
 in such forms language denotes another notion in 
 addition to that of past tinie. and of quite a different 
 nature, e-yev-e-ro e-yLyv-e-ro e-yeyov-ei are distm- 
 guished from each other by something quite different 
 from that which distinguishes iyir/pefo from ycypofiac,^" 
 iyeyovec from ykyovS,. For this something, which is 
 denoted in the stem of the tense-form, and for this very 
 reason is marked as fixed and essential, we need an 
 expression. Hitherto grammarians have found none for 
 
208 SYNTAX. 
 
 it ; even the most artistic theories of the tenses, which 
 from the days of the Stoic grammarians down to the 
 most modern times have set up distinctions such as 
 were never observed in any living speech, left this point 
 out of sight. But for the Greek language this distinc- 
 tion is undeniably requisite even in a school-grammar. 
 w'ln the Greek sense of language lay a triple distinction 
 of time, which crosses with that of present past and 
 future, and runs through the whole rich system of 
 tenses moods and verbal-nouns. Not finding a general 
 name for each of these triple distinctions ready to my 
 hand, it became necessary to invent one. Now it was 
 evident that of these two distinctions of time, one was 
 rather external and the other internal. The distinction 
 of present past and future rests merely on the relation 
 of the action to the speaker. This distinction therefore 
 in which we have only to do with the standing-point, I 
 call the ' grade of time ' (Zeitstiife).^ jlhe action is 
 either coincident with the standing-point of the speaker, 
 or it lies, as a previous grade, behind it, or again, before 
 it, as a grade still to be reached. The expression can- 
 not, I believe, be misunderstood. In the image chosen 
 it is also clearly pointed out that the distinction is 
 removed by simple progression in time, without any 
 internal change. But the difference between yevecrOac 
 rylyveo-OaL ryeyovivac must obviously be denoted by a 
 word, which at once indicates that here we have to 
 do with a difference lying within the action itself, not 
 merely with the relation to something external to it. 
 In this sense I chose the expression ^kind of time' 
 (Zeitart *), especially as ' kind ' is the very word which 
 * To speak of a * timeless tense,' and begin teaching the use of the 
 tenses by recommending the pupil to ' erase' a number of tense-forms 
 — among them the future — I leave to others. Schomann (Fleckeisens 
 Jahrb. 1869. p. 210) uses the terms ' Entwicklungstadien ' or * Entwick- 
 lungsstufen' to denote what I call * Zeitarten.' 
 
THE TENSES. 209 
 
 we use to signify specific, internal peculiarities. J Heyse, 
 in his System der Sprachwissenschaft, in a similar but 
 not quite the same sense, distinguishes between ' subjec- 
 tive' and 'objective' time (p. 457 fF.). These expres- 
 Zs would, I believe, in any case be more equivocal, 
 what has already been said about the difficulty 
 attending innovations in terminology (p. 106) applies 
 to these technical terms, no less than others. 
 
 The triple kind of time must now in turn be dis- 
 tinguished by three different names. Two of these 
 present themselves at once. The action of the present 
 stem is continuous^ that of the perfect completed. But 
 how shall we briefly denote the action expressed in 
 the aorist stem? The word 'momentary' opens a 
 door to numerous errors. If this term is chosen, we 
 are tempted to measure the distinction between irotelv 
 and TTOLrjaai, vlkov and VLKrjaai, eySaXXe and e^aXe 
 merely by lapse of time, whereas in reality the dis- 
 tinction is quite different and far deeper. Whether 
 the artist wrote EUOIHSE or EUOIEI under his 
 work did not depend V6n the length of time devoted 
 to the task, but on his intention to lay stress either 
 on the simple fact that he was the artist, or on the 
 labour spent upon it. I preferred therefore to adopt 
 the terminology of Rost and Kriiger, who call the 
 aoristic action ' eintretende,^ The epithet is difficult of 
 translation, and cannot be represented in all its bearings 
 by any single English word. It is 'initial' as opposed 
 to 'continued,' 'culminating' as opposed to 'prepara- 
 tory,' 'instantaneous' as opposed to 'durative.' An 
 action so qualified is, first of all, quite distinct from 
 a beginning or impending act ; it has nothing in 
 common with the tempus instans with which it has 
 sometimes been erroneously confounded. On the con- 
 trary, it is opposed to two other actions. First, to a 
 
 p 
 
 sJ 
 
\vise) 
 
 210 SYNTAX. 
 
 continuing act. Thus the advent of winter is opposed 
 to its continuance. In a similar manner voarjaai (to 
 fall sick) is opposed to voaelv (to be sick) and ^ao-cXev- 
 crav to ^aatXeveiv, Secondly, as denoting an incident, 
 it is opposed to an act that is not yet finished ; and 
 this is the relation of irpa^ai (to accomplish) to irpdaaeiv 
 (to be doing), irelaai (to persuade) to TreiOecv (to ad- 
 ^ Lastly an act to which this epithet is applied 
 is invariably an act achieved at one blow, or an act 
 the single moments of which are not to be taken into 
 account. Hence this German word appears to me very 
 happily chosen for our purpose. It has been objected 
 that the word is equivocal and indefinite, but the Greek 
 aorist has, as a fact, its different sides ; and the peculiar 
 advantage of the word lies precisely in the fact that it 
 has a certain width of meaning, by which it becomes 
 applicable to the different sides of the aorist, while at 
 the same time a firm nucleus is unmistakable and can 
 be perceived by our sense of language. It will always 
 be a hopeless task to give a cut-and-dried definition of 
 the Greek aorist. The distinction of the kinds of time 
 rests on a certain instinct, which we can only acquire 
 by entering ourselves into the Greek modes of thought ; 
 and for that purpose an image or mode of expression 
 belonging to our own language is a far greater help 
 than any logic.f Among the living languages the 
 
 * This distinction between irelaai and ireWeiv is certainly not 
 universal, e.g. ^sch. Ag. 1212 — HeiSov oi)dh otUva. — Ed. 
 
 t Perhaps the aversion of the French mind to differences which go 
 beyond logical distinctions is the reason why a view of the aorist so 
 generally recognized in Germany meets with opposition in France, 
 even from those who elsewhere exhibit a favourable feeling towards 
 the works of German linguistic science. An eminent French philolo- 
 gist, Charles Thurot, in his * Observations sur la significatwn des 
 radicaux temporeU en Grec' (M^moires de la Soci^t^ linguistique de 
 Paris, Tome 1®''2« fascic, pp. 111-25), contests the existence of_the 
 
THE TENSES. 211 
 
 Sclavonic possesses very similar refinements as to the 
 kinds of time : and therefore Sclavonic-speaking people 
 find it very easy to realize the use of the aorist and 
 its distinction from the forms of the present stem. 
 [Cp. Kobliska, Ueher das Verhdltniss des Aorists zu den 
 
 distinctions which I call Zeitarten. The distinction between the im- 
 perfect and the ind. aorist, between the conj. opt. imp. infinitive of 
 the present on the one hand and the aorist on the other, — nay, even 
 the distinction between the preterite and the perfect does not, he main- 
 tains, exist at all, and in the use of the tenses, even in Greek, we can 
 only deal with simultaneite. anteriorite, posteriarite. But since these 
 categories are absolutely inapplicable, e.g. to the imperative, M, Th. 
 is of opinion that the usage is often as capricious as for instance that 
 of gender, and the fact that the orators sometimes said \^e and some- 
 times avayvQidL cannot be explained more than the masculine gender 
 of ^6(TTpv^ and the feminine of Xdpya^. A great number of passages 
 from Attic authors are quoted to show that the proposed distinctions 
 are 'plus subtiles que satisf aisantes ' (p. 121). *I1 est sou vent si 
 indifferent d'exprimer ou de ne pas exprimer la dur^e de Faction, et 
 d'autre part les formes synonymes du present et de I'aoriste sont si 
 nombreuses, qu'il faudrait que I'^crivain se ttit demand^ presque k 
 chaque membre de phrase, s'il devait choisir le present ou I'aoriste : 
 effort de reflexion incompatible avec le rapidity de la parole.' As if 
 there were any need at all of reflection in such distinctions, when 
 innate in a nation. A Sclave does not speak more slowly than a 
 German, and yet he makes distinctions of the kind with the greatest 
 accuracy, even when quite without education. As to the passages 
 quoted by M. Thurot, it would of course carry us too far to enter 
 upon them here. But the remark may be made that many of them 
 can be explained on my view without any excess of subtilty, as the 
 first (Xenoph. Cyrop. 1, 6, 40), where 6tl rax^ ^(pevyev, i-n-ei evpeOetrj 
 denotes the repeated experiences of coursing, Plato, Symp. 173 A, 
 where iirLVLKia ^Ove brings out the lasting sacrifice of victory in oppo- 
 sition to the result of the contest denoted by evUfjffe. That the strict 
 old use of the perfect began to be relaxed from Xenophon's time 
 onward has been remarked by German scholars. We may even allow 
 that the distinctions in question cannot in every case be plainly ex- 
 pressed, and the speaker was often free to choose, yet this does not 
 prove that the distinctions did not exist, and that the distinctions of 
 the tense-stems inherited from the original framework of the Indo- 
 Germanic language remained mere useless ballast in the acute and 
 delicate mind of the Greeks. Who can define in every case the dis- 
 tinctions between synonymous words in a language ? And yet every 
 
212 SYNTAX. 
 
 Formen des ^ecJiischen Ver^bums (Konigsgratz 1856) ; 
 Xvicala, Zeitschr.f. d. 6. Gymn,, 1863, p. 137.] 
 
 In the observation on p. 274 of the Grammar I have 
 attempted to define the three kinds of time more accu- 
 rately by means of another illustration, borrowed from 
 mathematics. The expression 'a point of time' is in 
 common use ; and to this I refer in saying that the 
 action of the aorist can be compared to a point. A 
 point, as is well known, does not admit of any exten- 
 sion at all; and in the action denoted by the aorist 
 its extension in time is not at all taken into account. 
 And as objects which are remote or passing into the 
 background appear as points in spite of their actual 
 extension in space, so also from the speaker's point of 
 view do the actions which he brings forward merely 
 as aoristic. But a line is opposed to a point inasmuch 
 as it admits of extension, though indefinitely.^ Hence 
 in carrying out the illustration, it forms the counter- 
 part to the continuous action, the essential charac- 
 teristic of which is that it admits of extension in time 
 without any internal limitation. Lastly, a completed 
 action is one completely limited in every direction. 
 Hence it may be compared to a surface bounded by lines. 
 
 It was not my purpose to follow out in greater detail 
 these leading conceptions peculiar to every tense-stem. 
 But some few hints may find a place here. In the idea 
 of an aoristic act we recognized two moments. On the 
 
 one familiar with a language feels these, and above all those who have 
 grown up in it ; and it is the duty of science, in the one case as in the 
 other, to trace out these distinctions often so fine and delicate, which 
 do not lose the right to exist because they appear indifferent, or even 
 distracting to a period of reflection. 
 
 * Pott uses the same illustration, Et. Forsch. 11'^ 635. In thi> 
 place and further on, p. 667, will be found remarkable developments 
 of the subjects here touched upon, and parallels from remote 
 languages. 
 
V THE TENSES. 213 
 
 one hand^ an aoristic action is opposed to a continuing 
 one ; as a man's arrival at a house is opposed to his stay 
 in it/ or the advent of darkness to continuous gloom. 
 In this sense an aoristic action denotes as it were the 
 starting-point of a line. ipaaOrjvaL or ipdaaadac, i.e. 
 /to fall in love,' (e.g. II. JI 182 — rjpdaar 6(l>6a\fjiolaLv 
 ISobv ivl fJbeXiroiMevrjcnv) is followed by ipav, as ap^av 
 by dp')(eiVy BcavorjOijpaL by Biavoeladat. This use of the 
 aorist we may call the ingressive [cp. § 489]. Here the 
 force of the aorist is especially prominent — so much so 
 that at times the aoristic action requires quite a different 
 translation from the durative. The word iyvcopiadr}, by 
 which the Greek chronologists denote the point of time 
 from which any one became a well-known character, 
 could only be rendered imperfectly in Latin by cognosce- 
 batur, which, it is true, shares the meaning of ' becoming 
 known' with iyvcopiaOrj, but introduces the notion of 
 a gradual process, of which there is nothing in the 
 Greek form. Eustathius in his life of Pindar (Wester- 
 mann's Bioypd(f)OL, p. 95, § 31) has preserved an expres- 
 sion of the poet's which has been often misunderstood: 
 ^ 7rpo9 8e ipoiT'^a'avTa, Scd tI ov tw €V irpdrrovTi t^z/ 
 Ovyarepa SiScoatv, ov jjlovov ev irpdrrovTO^ €(j)rj heladai, 
 dWd Kal ev irpd^avro^.^ If we regard €v irpd^ac 
 here as an ingressive aorist we get the meaning, ^he 
 answered that he did not need merely one who was 
 well-to-do (wohlhabende), but also one who had increased 
 his wealth (der wohl eficorhen habe). 
 
 On the other hand, the culmination of an act is 
 opposed to the preparatory steps ; as a bright flash is 
 opposed to a glimmer, the fall of night to evening twi- 
 light. Thus ScSovac can be used to express the simple 
 attempt to give, the offer ; hovvai the actual giving, the 
 handing over of the gift; dyeiv means to ^ead on,' 
 dyayelv ^to carry away'; KrdaOai 'io acquire,' /cT?j- 
 
214 SYNTAX. 
 
 aacrOai ' to possess.' We may term this the effective use 
 of the aorist. Here the tense denotes the last point in a 
 line ; and is preceded by the durative action. This use 
 of the aorist, under the name o-vptcXikco^;, was opposed 
 by the old grammarians to the action of the imperfect 
 which was denoted as irapaTaKTCKo)^, e.g. Aristonicus 
 ad 11. A 368 [cp. Friedlander, Ariston.j p. 5]. It rests 
 with language to bring into prominence one of these 
 two usages, or, from another point of view, the funda- 
 mental meaning of every verb and the context presents 
 sometimes the one, and sometimes the other sense to 
 the reader, though it also frequently happens that 
 neither can be distinguished with certainty, and the 
 notion conveyed by the tense is simply that of a point 
 of time without any reference to other actions. 
 
 The need of distinctions of time like those which 
 were certainly presented to the Greek from a very 
 ancient period in the use of the aorist is felt in all 
 languages. Here also we can find points of connexion 
 existing in our own sense of language, and to bring 
 out this is the object of the observation on § 485. 
 The effect of an aorist is frequently replaced in other 
 languages by composition with prepositions ; and in 
 this respect the Sclavonic languages offer the most 
 noticeable analogies. A parallel to^ the ingressive 
 signification is found in German compounds like 
 einschlafen einseheuj and Latin like insonare incitarej 
 where the ein (in) means simply that the subject is 
 entering into a certain state. In German the prefix 
 ^r — i.e. aus — forms more especially a marked parallel 
 to the use of the aorist, and similarly the Latin ea;. 
 Here of course language regards the earlier condition 
 or state as that from which the new action springs 
 forth, as in the intransitives erklingen erwachen er- 
 qrimmen erschrecken ersterben, and in the transitives 
 
THE TENSES. 215 
 
 erwecken erjinden erregen erkennen erschliessen [cp. 
 Grrimm, W., Ill, p. 694]; Latin ejicere evenire 
 evincere evitare excitare exclamare emori. Yet an- 
 other point of view is taken up in the use of the 
 preposition con, e.g. in conspicere = IBetv, consequi, 
 distinguished from sequi, as denoting the happy ter- 
 mination of the action commenced in the simple verb, 
 conticuere omnes = ialr/rjaav 7rdvT€^,jCohorruit ^zplyrja-evj 
 comedere, ' to eat all up together.' The co7i (compare 
 also the Greek a-vvreXelv beside the aorist) denotes the 
 collective moments of the action which are united for 
 the complete attainment of the object. Quite analogous 
 is the application of the prefix ge in German.* In a 
 similar manner per denotes the action as brought 
 through to an end ; persuasit is related to suasit as 
 erreure to eireiOe [cp. p. 205 note]. The German word 
 stehen, out of compounds, denotes as a rule a state which 
 the Greek conceives as the result of the act necessary 
 for attaining it and therefore denotes by the perfect ; 
 €o-T7}Ka ich stehe (I stand, I have placed myself). In 
 compounds, on the other hand, the word does not denote 
 a state, but for the most part an individual act, and 
 corresponds therefore to the Greek aorist ; arrjvai auf- 
 stehen (to stand up). The same meaning may be also 
 found in the M. H. German, e.g. von dem Rosse stdn. 
 In German and Latin therefore the value of a verb is 
 altered by composition with prepositions, in much the 
 same manner as in Greek by the change of kinds of time. 
 It is true that the two phenomena are not completely 
 co-extensive. In Latin the perfect combines the signifi- 
 cations of the aorist and the perfect proper ; conticui 
 therefore answers not only to the Greek iauyr]cray but to 
 
 * Cp. Schleicher, ' Die Deutsche Sprache' 2 Aufl. p. 231, and the 
 extensive collections in ' Die Verba perfecta in der Nibelungen- 
 dichtung ' by Martens, in Kuhn's Zeitschr. XII, 31 ff. 
 
216 SYNTAX. § 496. 
 
 '(T€<TlrfrjKa also ; and in conticesco, the present correspond- 
 ing to the perfect conticui, we have a union of the 
 effective and inchoative significations unknown in any 
 Greek form. The German erwachen stands, it is true, in 
 the same relation to waclien as the Homeric iypeaOai 
 to iypr)jopevai, but there is also a prolonged erwaclien 
 (awaking, expergisci — iyelpeadac), whereas eypero de- 
 notes merely the point of time when the sleep ends. 
 The German word therefore is not a perfect translation 
 of the Greek one. This is a subject on which a wide 
 field for observation still remains open, as Schoraann 
 {Redetheile^ p. 139), though from a somewhat different 
 point of view, has already briefly pointed out. In our 
 lexicons also scarcely anything at all has been done to 
 trace out the distinctions between the different kinds of 
 time in Greek, though these are almost quite as im- 
 portant in explaining the various usages of the word as 
 the distinction between active and middle to which so 
 much attention has been paid. This neglect arises from 
 the TrpcoTov 'yfrev^o'; that the aorist and perfect are tenses 
 of past time, and that the difference between the present 
 and aorist, the present and perfect, affects the real 
 meaning of the verb no more than that between present 
 and future. 
 
 On § 496. 
 
 The view of the tenses here brought forward as the 
 correct one appears to be contradicted to a certain 
 extent by the fact that the participle of the aorist is 
 frequently applied to actions previous to a point in past 
 time. Since the participle, like the other non-augmented 
 forms of the aorist, has nothing whatever to do with 
 the denotation of past time, and since time previous 
 to a point in past time is not the less a kind of past 
 time, we do not here understand at once how the 
 
§ 496. THE TENSES. 217 
 
 participle became used in this sense. But the enigma is 
 solved when we examine the nature of the aorist and 
 participle. The latter, an adjective in origin, fixes one 
 action in relation to another. The action which is 
 denoted by the finite verb is the principal one. When 
 the secondary action continues side by side with the 
 principal action, it must stand (TraparaKTiKm) in the 
 participle of the present ; if again referred to the 
 future, the proper sign of the future is needed; and 
 similarly, the perfect participle serves to express an 
 action regarded as complete in reference to the principal 
 action. If however it is intended to denote the second- 
 ary action without any reference to continuousness and 
 completion and futurity, but merely as a point or 
 moment, the aorist participle alone remains for this 
 purpose. We indeed by a sort of necessity regard a 
 point which is fixed in reference to another action as 
 prior to it, but strictly speaking this notion of priority 
 in past time is not signified by tha aorist participle. 
 But owing to the frequent use of it in narratives, it is 
 quite intelligible that the notion of priority in past time 
 became spontaneously connected with the aorist parti- 
 ciple. For this reason, therefore, it could not be passed 
 over without mention in the Grammar. Even from the 
 examples quoted in the observation (y€\daa<; elire ' he 
 began to laugh, and said ' : JiSe Si tl^ eiireaicev IScov e? 
 TfKrjaLov dWov, '^dpLaal jiol aTTo/cpivd/jLevo^;), it is clear 
 how nearly the past and present often seem to meet in 
 the participle. In the predicative use of the aorist 
 participle with another aorist more especially, it is often 
 quite impossible to speak of priority in past time, e.g. in 
 6V i7roL7)aa^ dvaixvrjcra^ fjue (Plato, Phcedo^ p. 60 C) — ^* 
 ' you did well to remind me.' Again in Herodotus, V, 
 24 we have ev iTroirjaa^; aTrt/co/xez/o?, where it is quite 
 clear that the notion of the verb is not subsequent to 
 
218 SYNTAX. §496. 
 
 the notion of the participle, for the kindness consisted 
 precisely in the coming [cp. Kriiger, § 53, 6. Anm. 
 8 ; § 56, 8. Anm. 1]. So too in the proverb \d6e 
 ^L(0(Ta<;, both actions are regarded as on one and the 
 same level in point of time. Aken ( Grundz. der Lehre 
 von Tempiis und Modus, p. 8) aptly names this case ' the 
 coincidence of two points.' If therefore in those other 
 usages the priority merely arises out of the connexion, 
 without being expressed as such by language itself, the 
 preterite signification of the aorist participle stands 
 exactly in a line with that of the infinitive and optative, 
 when these refer to past actions in categorical sentences 
 (§497). In a sentence like Xu/cXcDTre? XiyovraL iv 
 I ScKeXla olicrjcrai, language does not really denote the 
 grade of time at all, but only the kind of time ; and the 
 aorist is used because the fact is regarded merely as 
 an incident, and no stress is laid on the continuance of 
 it. Were it otherwise, were it our object to denote a 
 continuous state, we might use oiKelu, e.g. KvK\x»)Tre^ 
 XiyovTac t6t€ iv ScfceXta olfcelv, and in translating it 
 must have used ^have dwelt' or ^ dwelt' just as in 
 the case of the aorist. In these cases, it is true, the 
 aorist must as a rule be translated as a past tense, 
 but it is not on that account felt to be such in the 
 Greek sense of language, for in Grerman (and English) 
 we are frequently compelled to mark a grade of time 
 which the Grreeks left out of sight. Exactly the same 
 holds good of the indicative aorist as the representative 
 of a German and Latin pluperfect (§ 493). The past 
 time is here expressed in Greek, but the priority in 
 past time is left unmarked. Here, as a rule, German 
 stands far nearer to Latin than to Greek. Many points 
 belonging to this subject are carefully discussed in the 
 programme by Pfudel- Die indirecte Rede bei Xenophorij 
 Colberg 1864. 
 
C HAPTE R XXI. 
 
 COMPOUND SENTENCES. 
 
 On § 519/. 
 
 Here it was my object to indicate at least the two 
 principal points of view which present themselves in 
 discussing the combination of sentences — viz., the form 
 of their combination, and the signification arising out 
 of it. The formal side therefore is taken first and 
 explained in § 519. Here too, owing to the brevity 
 necessary in a school-grammar, it was by no means 
 easy to introduce the knowledge of the origin and 
 growth of the form of sentences derived from the 
 historical study of language, and at the same time to 
 give the necessary prominence to the forms occurring 
 in actual use. In Greek as we find it even in the 
 Homeric poems, the two leading forms of combination, 
 parataxis and hypotaxis, meet us as characteristic, but 
 it is clear that the latter is, historically speaking, 
 invariably a development from the former. Hypotaxis 
 was impossible until the relative had become sharply 
 distinguished from the demonstrative, but in the first 
 instance as we have already seen (p. 88), this was not 
 the case.* Even in Homer the demonstrative and 
 
 * Besides the researches of Windisch on the relative pronoun 
 already mentioned (p. 180), in which the idea of * reference' is ex- 
 plained in detail as the step to the relative, we may refer on this subject 
 to the Qucestiones de attractione enuntiationum relativarum, scr. 
 Richard Forster, Berol. 1868. [Cp. also Pott, Et. Forsch. 11^, 405.] 
 
220 SYNTAX. § 619 ff. 
 
 relative still coincide in many instances, and in con- 
 sequence we find the older parataxis still frequently 
 underlying and breaking up through the Homeric 
 hypotaxis. The best-known instance of this is the 
 case of Se in apodosis, which admits of no other ex- 
 planation. But the same confusion, or more correctly 
 speaking, the same incomplete separation of the two 
 forms, is also to be seen in the various usages of the 
 copulative article side by side with a hypotactic com- 
 bination ; e.g. II. A 218 — o? /ce Oeol^ eTn7reidr]rai, fjLoXa 
 T €k\vov avTov [cp. § 624, 5] . Hypotaxis has obviously 
 arisen out of parataxis in two ways. First directly, 
 one of the sentences, which originally were equally 
 independent, being thrust into the background. In 
 this manner have arisen relative sentences — subordi- 
 nate and parenthetical — like fjurjviv ovXofiivrfv ij fivpC 
 'A'x^acoc^ aXye €6r)K€v, These sentences continue to 
 preserve something of the free nature of paratactic 
 combination, even as they are carried on in a tho- 
 roughly paratactic manner (§ 605). But a far more 
 fertile source of hypotaxis is the correlative combina- 
 tion of sentences which in innumerable instances forms 
 the connecting link between parataxis and hypotaxis. 
 In a Homeriq sentence like II. A 125 — aWa ra /juev 
 ttoXlcov i^ iirpdOoiiev ra SeSaaraL, we perceive as yet 
 no formal distinction at all between parataxis and cor- 
 relation. Emphasis alone marks the second member 
 ra BeBaarac as the most important. Here we see how 
 one of the two demonstrative pronouns became weak- 
 ened into a relative while the other became more and 
 more prominent. The attention was roused by the 
 accent in the first member (irporaaL^^ and satisfied 
 in the second {cnrohoaL^) ; and in this consists the 
 essential characteristic of correlation. The more also 
 that the demonstrative pronouns and particles became 
 
§ 519 ff. COMPOUND SENTENCES. 221 
 
 separated in form from the relatives, the more did 
 correlation begin to be distinctly marked as differing . 
 from parataxis. Even in Homer the correlative com- 
 bination of sentences is developed to a great extent. 
 But in the later language also this combination of 
 sentences is of great importance on account of the 
 hypothetical clauses (§ 534), and therefore it could 
 not be passed over. In its nature the correlative 
 combination is distinguished from the hypotactic by 
 the fact that in correlatives neither of the two sen- 
 tences can be regarded as absolutely pre-eminent, and 
 therefore we cannot yet speak of any subordination. 
 As the protasis is completed in the apodosis, so con- 
 versely the apodosis is not intelligible till we refer to 
 the protasis, whereas at least some kinds of hypotactic 
 combination are of such a nature that the main sentence 
 is easily intelligible by itself, but the dependent sentence 
 contains an addition not absolutely required to make 
 the meaning clear, e.g. § 531 — tovt avro vvv SlSacrx 
 oTTco^ av iKfjuddco. This is the reason that in the earlier 
 editions of the Grammar down to the fifth the correla- 
 tive sentences are separated from hypotaxis and put 
 in a class by themselves. From a historical point of 
 view such an arrangement is correct enough. But 
 in Greek as we find it the distinction cannot always 
 be realized and still less made fruitful in practical 
 instruction. From Homer downwards language is at 
 pains to amalgamate correlative sentences more closely. 
 Even the fact that the pronouns and particles are 
 frequently allowed to remain in the apodosis obscures 
 the mutual interchange of the clauses, which is again 
 still further confused by the frequent transfer and 
 combination of the particles peculiar to the protasis 
 and apodosis. Thus av and k€v are particles belonging 
 properly to apodosis only, but in certain shades of 
 
222 SYNTAX. § 519 ff. 
 
 hypothesis they are attracted by prolepsis into the 
 protasis. Hence arose el av, edv, rjv or e? kcv. In a 
 similar manner iirel may certainly be analyzed into 
 iiTL and el. €7r/ which is here adverbial in the sense 
 of ' thereupon ' [cp. Sanskrit api also] is in the first 
 instance a correlative, in regard to time, of el, a par- 
 ticle of similarly temporal signification = ^ when.' iirel 
 elBev eyvco is therefore an abbreviated expression for 
 el elBev iirl eyvay, i.e. ^when he saw, then he knew.' 
 Similarly Latin tametsi = tamen etsi, tamquam from 
 quam (protasis), and tam (apodosis), and simul atque 
 priusquam. When in the effort made by language to 
 bring forward as quickly as possible the leading thought 
 of the sentence confusions of this kind had become 
 numerous, the distinction between correlation and 
 hypotaxis disappeared altogether in many cases. Both 
 stand in common contrast to parataxis ; hence the 
 separation between the two has been given up in the 
 Grammar. But for the same reason it is quite impos- 
 sible to bring forward throughout the real nature of 
 those correlative sentences which now appear as a kind 
 of hypotaxis. This is done only in the hypothetical 
 sentences (§ 534), in which the correlative relation 
 can easily be made clear. The dependent interrogative 
 sentences also have without doubt arisen from this class 
 — question and answer, or the ^dialogue form' as I. 
 Bekker terms it {Horn. Blatter I, p. 61), being an 
 essential kind of correlation. In elire fjuot riva yvcofjLijv 
 e%efc9, the second sentence was originally an inde- 
 pendent question, which formed the protasis to the 
 apodosis eliri (^ What opinion hast thou, that tell me'). 
 But I very much doubt if it is advisable to point this 
 out to a pupil, for the fact has little in common with 
 the teaching of Greek as distinct from other languages, 
 but applies equally to all. Moreover, it is often a 
 
§ 519 ff. COMPOUND SENTENCES. 223 
 
 matter of doubt what view ought to be taken of such 
 sentences, and exact knowledge is in many cases im- 
 possible, until we have enquired into the origin and 
 primary meaning of the conjunctions. 
 
 The second point to be noticed in the combination of 
 sentences is the meaning of the sentence or the relation 
 of ideas which prevails between the matter of one 
 sentence and the matter of another. This is denoted 
 in two ways — by moods and by conjunctions. (L) I do 
 not here enter upon the use of the moods, partly because 
 I believe that my exposition hardly needs explanation, 
 and partly because we may expect soon to have a 
 complete investigation from the points of comparative 
 syntax. Compared with the influence of the conjunc- 
 tions, the power of the moods is somewhat indefinite * 
 for the meaning of the sentence. By the use of the 
 two moods, which, when connecting sentences, may be 
 termed oblique after the analogy of the oblique cases, 
 no more is really signified than that one sentence is to 
 be regarded in comparison with the other as something 
 merely required or thought of. (2.) The meaning of 
 the conjunctions is at first sight more specific, but on 
 going deeper and enquiring further into their origin, 
 we frequently find that the specific meaning is merely 
 a delusion. The same particles co?, the fundamental 
 meaning of which is undoubtedly ' how,' and otto)?, 
 which is not materially different, meet us in nearly 
 
 * This harmless sentence, which in the first edition ran thus, — 
 ' The power of the moods is obviously somewhat indefinite ' — causes H. 
 Aken, in his School-Grammar, p. xii. , to break away from his subject, 
 and charge me with the absurdity of wishing to do away with the doc- 
 trine of the moods altogether by this expression. This is significant of 
 his style of polemics — for which, by the way, I have never given the 
 least cause. That Aken in his work mentioned on p. 218 has advanced 
 syntax in more points than one, I gladly acknowledge, and always 
 have done so. But his system in which he makes a mood out of a 
 tense is in contradiction to the facts of the structure of forms. 
 
224 SYNTAX. § 519 ff. 
 
 every sort of sentence — relative, temporal, final and 
 categorical, on ' that,' and on ' because,' both natu- 
 rally, as the Homeric o shows most plainly (e.g. ^120 
 — cp. I. Bekker, Homer. Bl, 1, 149), identical with o rt, 
 are one and the same, the inference being that language 
 did not mark the distinction between categorical and 
 causal sentences, el was unquestionably a temporal 
 particle in the first instance, like the German icenn^ 
 which is a weakened form of wann. iirei has already 
 been explained from this original signification, and from 
 it also the meaning of el with the optative discussed 
 in § 547 is rendered intelligible. Hence we see that 
 even the hypothetical relation was not originally distin- 
 guished by language from the temporal. It follows 
 therefore that in all our classifications of sentences we 
 are rather logical than grammatical, importing more 
 into the words than the language really means. Never- 
 theless some arrangement of dependent sentences ac- 
 cording to their meaning is necessary in instruction. 
 But it would be very absurd to preserve a strict 
 consistency in this respect in opposition to the genius 
 of the language. An able teacher will perceive that I 
 have guarded against that. Thus the sentences in 
 which OTTO)? occurs with the future indicative are indeed 
 included amongst the sentences of purpose in § 552 
 Obs. for the sake of completeness, but they will be 
 found explained in detail among the relative sentences 
 in § 553, and that with reference to § 500. The future 
 indicative in a sentence like a-KOTret ott(o<^ tcl irpwyfiara 
 (70)6rj(TeTai becomes intelligible only when we remember 
 that OTTW? is really a relative particle signifying ' how ' ; 
 ' consider how, in what manner, the state will be 
 preserved.' The modal signification changes into the 
 final by a usage parallel to that of the Latin ut. 
 Elsewhere also I have been at pains to avoid anything 
 
§519ff. COMPOUND SENTENCES. 225 
 
 like those logical systems, which do but stand in the 
 way of a living insight into the processes of language, 
 and to refer to the connexions and transitions which 
 prevail between usages apparently distinct. 
 
 If now we ask how language has distinguished the 
 conjunctions from each other, and consequently the 
 sentences introduced by them, we must here as else- 
 where go back to the form. The conjunctions used in 
 the protasis and apodosis have all with few exceptions 
 arisen out of relative stems. But they display different 
 forms, and four cases especially can be distinguished, 
 viz. accusative, locative, instrumental, and ablative. 
 Accusatives are o, the compound otl (= o tl), Latin 
 quod, and perhaps also quia, as the plural of quod, ore 
 as an accusative of substance brino^s the contents of the 
 dependent sentence under the action of the governing 
 verb in the leading sentence ; and therefore serves as 
 the conjunction in sentences of assertion and opinion. 
 €(o<i and the correlative t€co9 (cp. quamdiu — tamdiu) are 
 also accusatives, the case being here used in a temporal 
 sense as in the Latin quantum — tantum temporis, rjo^;, 
 a form proved by the metre in Homer, corresponds to 
 the Sanskrit ^at^a^, the neuter accusative of the pronoun- 
 stem java(n)t (quantum), which is used in exactly the 
 same sense. o-t€ is naturally to be explained in the 
 same manner (I. Bekker, Homer. Bl, I, 150 f.). el is 
 a locative used in a temporal signification (cp. Latin 
 uhiy, in form it may be compared to the Latin si and 
 Oscan svai (cp. also Romai, ;j^a/xa/). As we have 
 already seen, it meant ' when,' with this qualificsftion, 
 that it did not, like ore, refer to a continuance of time, 
 but merely to a point. X-v-a is an instrumental of 
 the relative stem ja, which is here weakened into L 
 Originally therefore it meant ' wherewith ' and may be 
 compared to the Latin instrumental ablative quo and 
 
 Q 
 
226 SYNTAX. § 519 ff. 
 
 the German damit Finally co? together with ottox? 
 and the correlatives m ovrco<; are ablatives. Here as 
 in the other adverbs in w? the modal signification of 
 the ablative has arisen out of unde. In this manner 
 *the doctrine of sentences may be connected with the 
 doctrine of cases and from the very forms of language 
 a principle of arrangement may be obtained for the 
 sentences introduced by conjunctions. We might 
 divide them into accusativCj locative, instrumental and 
 ablative sentences. In so far as such an arrangement 
 rests on elements which we find denoted in language 
 itself, it would be more justifiable than the arrange- 
 ments now in use, which have arisen from mere abstrac- 
 tions and for that very reason are found to be unsuitable 
 and incomplete, when we classify the individual phe- 
 nomena under them. The sentences thus divided into 
 four classes might in turn be collected under the 
 common name of conjunction-sentences and distin- 
 guished from the relative sentences in the narrower 
 sense, i.e. from sentences introduced by actual case- 
 forms of the relative pronoun. Only the interrogative 
 sentences would then, it is true, still require a separate 
 treatment. But I need hardly remind my readers that 
 such an arrangement must first be carried out in a 
 strictly scientific manner, and worked through on all 
 sides, before it is fitted for a place in a school-grammar. 
 In such a work, especially on account of the great 
 importance of the hypothetical sentences for the con- 
 struction of the relative as of the temporal sentences, 
 we can hardly avoid giving an earlier place to that 
 class of sentences than to the latter. 
 
CHAPTER XXIT. 
 
 THE INFINITIVE. 
 
 On § 559 /. 
 
 In the infinitive as elsewhere it is necessary to start 
 from the form. The infinitive in its origin is the 
 petrified case of a substantive of abstract meaning, but 
 one which in many instances is united more closely to 
 the verb than all other abstract substantives. As to the 
 definite case-form which underlies the infinitive, scholars 
 are hitheiio only so far agreed, that the forms in at. — 
 elireiJL6vaij ^er^ovkvai^ XerfeaOai — are pretty generally 
 regarded as the fullest and oldest. But whether these 
 forms are really locatives or datives is a point on which 
 views differ. In my treatise De nominum formatione, 
 p. 58, I have attempted for the first time to establish 
 the locative form of the infinitive. Bopp, Vergl. 
 Gramm,, III, 323 ff., pronounces for the dative, and 
 also Leo Meyer in his treatise on the infinitive (Gottin- 
 gen 1856), and Lange in his review of my Grammar, 
 Zeitschr.f. d, 6. Gymn., 1855 ffl, p. 728 ffl and Delbriick, 
 De usu dativiy and Kuhns Ztschr. XVIII, 81. These 
 scholars lay stress more especially on the circumstance 
 that in the dialect of the Vedas forms distinctly dative 
 are applied as infinitives. I am joined by Schleicher, 
 Compend,, p. 415, in starting from the locative, and also, 
 though less decisively, by Schomann, Redetheile, p. 66, 
 and in his treatise on the doctrine of the infinitive, which 
 we shall soon speak of. Two reasons especially seem 
 
228 SYNTAX. § 559 ff. 
 
 to me to be in favour of the latter view. In the first 
 place datives in ac are unknown in Greek, whereas 
 certainly one locative at the least occurs with this 
 termination — x^/^^h ^^ which, after what has been said 
 al with the weaker form el may be joined. As %ayLta6 
 is a locative from x^f^^y ^^ must the infinitives in -fjuevai 
 be regarded as locatives of abstract substantives in 
 -fi€va. We must assume a noun-stem iB-fjueva, the 
 suffix of which is only distinguished from that in 
 TrXTjo-juova by a diff'erence in the vowel. If this iB-fieva 
 signified ' eating,' the locative eB-fievac means literally 
 ' in eating.' In the second place the meaning of the 
 locative is exactly suited to explain the various usages 
 of the infinitive. The infinitive denotes the limits, the 
 sphere, in which the action of a verb moves, — Bivajxai 
 XajSelv, also the province in which the meaning of an 
 adjective is realized — Oeieiv aveiiotaiv o/jlocoi,. In this 
 sense the Indian grammarians use the locative, in order 
 to apply the idea contained in a root, e.g. biidh (= 
 Greek ttvO) vedanS (locative from the nom. vedana-m 
 ' knowledge '), i.e. elBivac, and therefore exactly in the 
 manner of the infinitive. Yet after the recent more 
 accurate accounts of the infinitive in the Vedas, I allow 
 that, syntactically, the use of the Greek infinitive can 
 be explained to a great extent from the dative, after 
 the manner of the German infinitive with zu. My 
 account of the infinitive therefore is tacitly based on 
 the assumption that it was originally a locative, and by 
 slow degrees has grown up to a wider usage. At the 
 same time it was also natural to presuppose that 
 language herself lost the consciousness of this origin at 
 a very early period, and therefore I have been very 
 careful not to allow this view of the origin of the form 
 to have too much influence in the arrangement a»d 
 explanation of the usage. 
 
I 567. THE INFINITIVE. 229 
 
 On § 567. 
 
 The explanation of the accusativus cum injinitivo given 
 by me in agreement with some earlier grammarians 
 has been lately contested from two directions highly 
 worthy of notice — by Schomann in his Lehre vom 
 Infinitiv in Fleckeisen's Jahrb, 1869, p. 209 fF. ; and 
 by Miklosich in his treatise ' uber den Accusativus cum 
 Infinitivo\ Wien 1869. Both bring forward against me 
 the not unfounded objection that after intransitive verbs 
 the accusative and infinitive is often not to be conceived 
 after the analogy of the looser use of the accusative, 
 e.g. in the Homeric sentence ov yap ttco? ^e^rj/juevoi/ 
 earc fxd')(e(T6aL. An accusative dependent on €<tti in 
 this manner — for this governing verb and not fid^eaOai, 
 as Schomann assumes (p. 221) must in my view be the 
 source of this case — is of course unheard of. But any 
 one who, following the historical method of modern 
 linguistic science, attempts to explain the phenomenon in 
 question by asking how it has arisen^ how it has become 
 developed in connexion with simpler and therefore cer- 
 tainly older modes of use of the accusative, will find it 
 easy to assume that the numerous cases in which the 
 construction can be explained without any violence 
 by allowing the accusative to depend strictly on the 
 governing verb, have drawn others after them in which 
 such an evident relation cannot any more be recognized. 
 Very easily, in my opinion, could the feeling of language 
 be so far led astray as to regard the case frequently 
 found with the infinitive as separate from the govern- 
 ing verb, and accompanying the infinitive somewhat 
 loosely, and consequently to use it even after those 
 intransitive verbs which could not take an accusative 
 without an infinitive. Hence, in order to avoid any 
 
230 SYNTAX. §667. 
 
 misunderstanding, I have made a corresponding addition 
 in the ninth edition of the Grammar.* 
 
 Against such an extended analogy Miklosich has not 
 really much to urge. He says (p. 488) ^ I am well 
 aware that the series of phenomena connected by means 
 of analogy with a rule does not stand equally close to 
 the rule in all its members'; and even Schomann (p. 
 221) seems in principle to be reconciled in a certain 
 degree to such an assumption. The reason why the 
 latter continues to search for another explanation is 
 obviously this : that he believes that the construction 
 here in point must be wholly explained out of the idea of 
 the accusative. But such explanations are entirely dif- 
 ferent from those which we attempt to establish. ' The 
 accusative,' Schomann says (p. 218), 'is the only case 
 which exhibits the object as dependent on an external 
 activity.' Putting out of view the fact that an import- 
 ant part of the use of the accusative — that of the inter- 
 nal object — does not suit this description, and that the 
 so-called dative of the remoter object denotes a thing 
 dependent on an external activity, I doubt whether an 
 idea of that kind ever floated before the feeling of 
 language, which is the source of the use of language. 
 Such an idea is rather the product of the reflective 
 intelligence. Hence, when Schomann continues, ' The 
 accusative is therefore owing to its dependent nature 
 peculiarly suited to be the subject-case of the infinitive,' 
 I cannot regard this as an explanation^ and in this I 
 agree with Miklosich. 
 
 * In the Grammar after explaining the accusative and infinitive by 
 prolepsis, Curtius continues — * If the governing verb is intransitive or 
 passive, the accusative is originally the less definite (§ 404) : ^Xttis icyn 
 trdvra koXQs ^x^iv, ''there is hope in regard to everything that all is 
 weU," i.e., " we may hope that all is well." Yet the use of this accusa- 
 tive and infinitive spread widely from this centre, so that we cannot 
 assume that transformation in every individual case.' — Ed. 
 
§ 667. THE INFINITIVE. 231 
 
 Miklosich's objections arise out of another considera- 
 tion. In ecclesiastical Sclavonic and Gothic the dative 
 is found accompanying the infinitive as well as the 
 accusative. In Gothic this dative may perhaps be ex- 
 plained from the government of the main verb — though 
 Miklosich will not allow this ; in ecclesiastical Sclavonic 
 this is quite impossible in many cases ; and in Sclavonic 
 the more so, because there abstract substantives also 
 are combined with the dative. But if, Miklosich argues, 
 there is a subject-case with the infinitive, which cannot 
 be explained by the government of the main verb, we 
 must give up this explanation for the accusative and 
 rather look for the reason of both modes of denoting* the 
 subject in the use of the infinitive with nouns (p. 490). 
 Even if this conclusion were correct, it would increase 
 our insight but little, for neither the dative nor the 
 accusative is frequently used with nouns, and thus the 
 desired object — to find, wherever possible, points of 
 origin and connexion between the whole phenomenon 
 and obvious usages — remains unattained, as indeed 
 Miklosich himself unreservedly confesses. Still I see 
 no urgent reason to assume at once an internal con- 
 nexion between two combinations of cases which happen 
 to be externally similar. In Greek we sometimes find a 
 dative with abstract substantives which has great simi- 
 larity to that Sclavonic use, e.g. ol avOpoyiroi ev rcov 
 /crrffidroyv TOL<i 0€o2(; eiaiv (Plato, Phcedo, 62); hidaraai^; 
 T069 V€ot<; e? Toi;9 irpea^xJrepov^ (Thuc. vi. 18). Here as 
 well as in the verbal adjective and the Latin gerundive 
 the dative denotes the logical subject, as also in old 
 Latin, quid tihi hanc tactio est? But the accusative 
 could very easily have obtained a somewhat similar 
 function by quite a different path. 
 
 What determines me in adhering to my view is 
 mainly the German use. In sentences like 'Ich hore 
 
232 SYNTAX. § 567. 
 
 ihn reden^ Hch heisse sie hommen^ ^ ich lasse euch 
 gehen,^ our sense of language connects the accusative 
 with the governing verb just as though no infinitive 
 were present. In the older language there is a far 
 more extensive use of the infinitive and accusative, 
 given in detail by J. Grimm, G. IV, 115 fF. If we 
 leave Gothic out of sight, because there such a con- 
 struction may possibly have arisen out of imitation of a 
 Greek original, constructions like 0. H. G. ' er sih saget 
 kot sin ' (dicit se esse deum), M. H. G. ' ich host in wol 
 den erst en sin,^ show us how far the use of language 
 went. Have we then a right to explain this wider use 
 as radically distinct from the narrow use still current ? 
 Who then can prove that ' ich heisse dich gehen ' has 
 nothing in common with KcXevco ere cnnevaL, and juheo 
 te ahh'e ? In German also where the connexion of the 
 accusative in_question with the governing verb appears 
 never wholly to have dropped out of sight, the ac- 
 cusative and infinitive is occasionally combined with 
 intransitive verbs, e.g. 0. H. G. with chund ist (notum 
 est) not ist (necessarium est) : modern High German, 
 following a more logical method, but as I believe retain- 
 ing a correct feeling of the original relation, was the first 
 to limit more and more the usage, which in older times 
 extended far more widely. Rightly examined, our 
 sense of language is here, as often in my belief, a far 
 more certain guide than the hair-splitting combinations 
 of philosophy. 
 
CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 THE PARTICIPLE. 
 
 While the use of the infinitive in Greek is on the whole 
 simple, and chiefly requires explanation at length in 
 regard to one point only, viz. the combination w^ith 
 cases, the participle presents a considerable number of 
 peculiar usages. In classifying these I have, in all 
 essentials, followed K. W. Kriiger, without however 
 adopting his arrangement. The expression ' attributive 
 use ' is intelligible without explanation. The ' appositive 
 use' is connected with the definition of apposition given 
 in § 361, 12. By 'apposition' I mean an addition of 
 a looser kind, which as a rule is synonymous with a 
 descriptive parenthesis, or subordinate sentence. Hence 
 the appositive participles are a shorter, looser, and 
 therefore also less definite mode of expression, serving 
 essentially the same purpose, which is attained in a more 
 compact manner by relative and conjunctional sentences. 
 Classen in his excellent remarks on the use of language 
 in Homer (cp. p. 200), gives the name ' predicative ' to 
 the use which I call appositive. I am aware that 
 this term can be justified, in so far as the appositive 
 participle, as distinguished from the attributive, pos- 
 sesses, it is true, a certain predicative power, which 
 meets us most decisively in the absolute constructions. 
 But still it appeared to me more advisable to limit the 
 expression * predicative participle,' as Kriiger has done, 
 to that usage, in which the participle serves to sup- 
 
234 SYNTAX. 
 
 plement a verbal predicate (§§ 589-94), and forms as 
 such an essential part of the predication. This widely 
 ramifying use, to which the Greek language is especially 
 partial, is of supreme importance to the pupil. The 
 predicative participle, or, to speak more truly, the par- 
 ticiple which unites with the verb to form a predicate, 
 has without doubt arisen out of the appositive ; \av6dvco 
 Ti TTOLMv means properly, ' I remain concealed while I 
 do something.' But the participle becomes so much 
 changed by usage, that the real predicate is often con- 
 tained in it, laOt, XvTnjpbf; oiv. And therefore especially 
 as the usage is a widespread and manifold one in com- 
 bination with cases, a special name is absolutely neces- 
 sary for it. Here, as in the discussion of the participle 
 generally, I have felt myself specially called upon to 
 familiarize the Greek usages by the comparison of 
 the corresponding but more familiar phenomena in 
 German. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 Ablative, 190. 191, 194, 199, 226 ; 
 Latin plur., 65. 
 
 Abstractions in Grammar, 55. 
 
 Accent, 18, 68, 72, 109. 
 
 Accidence and Syntax, 13, 180; 
 arrangement of, 60. 
 
 Accusative, sing., 187, 195 ; plur., 
 69, 73, 74 ; ace, and inf. 229 ff. 
 
 Adjectives, fem., 43. 
 
 Adverbs, 191, 203. 
 
 ^olic dialect, 19, 20, 27, 36. 41, 44, 
 69, 77, 87, 88, 90, 123, 151. 
 
 Ahrens, H. L., 13, 39, 42, 49, 60, 
 63, 67. 
 
 Aken, 218. 
 
 Alexander, effects of his conquests, 
 23. 
 
 Alexandrine period, 23. 
 
 Alphabet, 17, 22. 
 
 Analogy, 41, 49, 57, 78. 
 
 Anomalous, nouns, 58, 78 ; adjec- 
 tives, 86 ; verbs, 100, 149, 164. 
 
 Aorist, strong, 101. 106 ff. ; weak, 
 104, 106 ff., 122 ; passive, 134 ; 
 participle, 216 ; infinitive and 
 optative, 218 ; meaning of, 144, 
 209 ff. ; ingress ive, 213 ; effec- 
 tive, 214 ; in German and Latin, 
 etc., 214 ff. 
 
 Apodosis, 220. 
 
 Argive dialect, 71. 
 
 Aspirates, 20 ; aspiration, 129, 130, 
 162. 
 
 Assimilation, 41, 45, 115, 123. 
 
 Attic dialect, 45, 67, 132, 151 ; 
 declension, 68. 
 
 Attraction of vowels, 44, 84. Cp. 
 Metathesis. 
 
 Attributive compounds, 174. 
 
 Augment, 36, 112 ff. 
 
 Basilius Magnus, 25. 
 
 Bekker, I., 36, 86, 116, 157, 224. 
 
 Benary, 31. 
 
 Bopp, F., 7, 65, 123, 127 ff., 160, 
 
 173, 227. 
 Briicke 33. 
 Buttmann,*63, 67, 81, 100, 127, 143, 
 
 156. 
 Bucheler, F., 64, 66. 
 
 Cases, 63 ff., 186 ff. ; decay of, 191; 
 
 explanation of, 192 ; in Latin, 
 
 193,196; with prepositions, 204. 
 Changes of sounds, 6, 32, 38, 40 ff ., 
 
 128. 
 Choeroboscus, 23. 
 Classen, 200, 233. 
 Classification of the noun, 57 ff. ; 
 
 of the verb, 99 ff., 107. 
 Clemm, W., 171. 
 Comparative grammar, 7, 76 ; 
 
 syntax, 182. 
 Comparatives, 43, 77 ; irregular, 84. 
 Compensatory lengthening, 37, 39, 
 
 69 ff., 123. 
 Composition, 165 ; composition- 
 vowel, 167 ; of verbs and abstract 
 
 nouns, 168 f. ; meaning of, 172 ff. 
 Compounds, form of, 166 ff. ; kinds 
 
 of, 172 ff.; sentences, 219 ff. ; 
 
 classification of, 226. 
 Conjugations, 96, 110. 
 Conjunctions, meaning of, 223 ; 
 
 form of, 224 ff. 
 Conjunctive, 109. 
 Connecting- vowel in nouns, 79 ; in 
 
 verbs, 110 ff., 122, 126, 145, 148 ; 
 
 in compounds, 166. 
 Consonants, 32 ff. ; double, 47, 113; 
 
 auxiliary, 42 ; compound, 41. 
 
236 
 
 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 Continuous sounds, 33. 
 Contracted verbs, 114 ff., 163. 
 Contraction of vowels, 116. 
 Correlative sentences, 220. 
 Corssen, W., 18, 24, 46. 
 Crasis, 24. 
 
 Cretan dialect, 69, 78, 82, 150. 
 Curtius, E., 28. 
 
 Dative, dual, 68 ; plural, 73 ; 
 sing, and plur., 189 ; use of, 200. 
 
 Declensions, 53 ff., 57, 68, 74 ; dif- 
 ference between, 68 ff. ; division 
 of, 62. 
 
 Defective adjectives, 85 ; nouns, 
 78 ff. ; verbs, 149 ff. 
 
 Delbriick, B., 39, 180, 202, 227. 
 
 Dentals, 33 ; changes of, 40 ; omis- 
 sion of, 42 ; Dentalismu^, 32. 
 
 Derivation, 62, 159 ff. 
 
 Determinatives, 173. 
 
 Dialects, 11, 32 ; ^olic, 19, 20, 34, 
 36, 44, 87, 123 ; Boeotian, 27, 28, 
 46; Doric, 34, 36, 69, 83, 86, 
 109, 112, 118, 120; Homeric, 35, 
 48, 67, 80, 84, 88, 161. 156, 169, 
 204, 220 ; Ionic, 61, 69, 74, 80, 
 142. 
 
 Dietrich, A., 28, 118. 
 
 Diez, 42. 
 
 Digamma, 34, 62 ; in -^olic and 
 Doric, 36. 
 
 Dionysius Halicarnasseus, 15, 20. 
 
 Diphthongs, 21 ff. ; stems, 74; in 
 declension, 58 ff . 
 
 Dissimilation, 40. 
 
 Djaus, 19. 
 
 Dual, 68. 
 
 E IN THE Greek Alphabet, 17. 
 
 Ebel, 59, 73, 75, 77. 
 
 Elision of, v, 11 ; of er, 75 ; of r, 
 
 76. 
 Etymologicum Magnum, 26. 
 Etymology, 52. 
 
 Feminine terminations in i, 61, 
 84. 
 
 ' Flying ' and ' falling,' 50. 
 
 Formation of tenses by composi- 
 tion, present, 119 ; future, 120 ; 
 aorist, 122. 
 
 Future, 103, 120 ; exactum, 133 ; 
 middle, 156. 
 
 Genitive, 64, 67, 189, 196 ff.; with 
 
 verbs, 198 ; dual, 68. 
 Grammar and science, 8 ; at school, 
 
 9, 13. 
 Greek dialects, importance of, 5. 
 Greek language, how taught in the 
 
 middle ages, 4 ; modern Greek, 
 
 21, 27. 
 Grimm, J., 30, 88, 165, 171, 179, 198. 
 Guna, 37. 
 
 Hard vowels, 30. 
 
 Heerdegen, 173. 
 
 Hermann, 24, 25,-181. 
 
 Herodian, 23, 26, 28, 81. 
 
 Heteroklisis, 57. ^ 
 
 Heyse, 181, 209. 
 
 Hoffmann, 34, 49, 204. 
 
 Homer, 7 ff., 11, 21, 42, 47, 67, 81, 
 
 82, 114 ff., 131, 156,219. 
 Humboldt, 181, 183. 
 Hypotaxis, 219 ff. 
 
 Inchoative verbs, 143. 
 Infinitive, 227 ff. 
 
 Inflexion, 50 ff., 82 ; of verbs, 93 ff. 
 Instrumental case, 190, 200. 
 Ionic accusatives in -ow, 61. 
 Iota, suhscHptum, 28 ; in optative, 
 
 109. 
 Irregularities of the verb, 15, 101. 
 Itacism, 28. 
 Iterative verbs, 144. 
 
 JA 'to go,' 110, 119, 120, 135, 158, 
 
 163. 
 Joannes Alexandrinus,81. 
 Jod, 19, 34, 43 ff., 69, 73, 83, 89, 
 
 120, 146, 163. 
 Justi, 166, 173, 175. 
 
 KOBLISKA, 211. 
 
 Kriiger, 53, 101, 157, 181, 201, 209, 
 
 233 
 Kuhner, 53, 160. 
 Kvicala, 179. 
 
 Lange, L., 179. 
 
 Language, science in, 3 ; the life 
 
 of, 40 ; inconsistency of, 71 ; 
 
 language and thought, 181. 
 Latin transcription of Greek, 24, 
 
 26, 27, 28. 
 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 237 
 
 LantverscTiiehung , 30. 
 
 Lengthening of vowels, 39, 47. 
 
 Lentz, A.. 23. 
 
 Lepsius, 33. 
 
 Leskien, A., 35, 68, 136. 
 
 Linguals, 33. 
 
 Liscovius on Greek pronunciation, 
 
 2.5. 
 Lissner, 82. 
 
 Lobeck, 82, 146, 147, 165, 169, 174. 
 Local origin of the cases, 187 ff. 
 Locative case, 81, 189. 191, 227. 
 Logic and Grammar, 210, 232. 
 
 Madvig, 181. • 
 
 Matthia, 53. 
 
 Meaning of words, 161. 
 
 Mehlhorn, 49. 
 
 Metathesis, 44, 74, 79, 84, 140, 142. 
 
 Meyer, L., 60, 65, 67, 115, 116 ff., 
 
 160, 227. 
 Middle and active, 156. 
 Miklosich, 88, 179, 229 ff. 
 Momentary sounds, 33. 
 MUller, M., 7. 
 MUller and Lattmann, 13, 39, 43, 
 
 63, 96. 
 
 Nasal element in verbs, 138, 140, 
 
 141. 
 Neuter nouns, 65, 66, 188. 
 Nigidius Figulus, 28. 
 Nominative singular, formation of, 
 
 69 ff., 187 ff. 
 Nouns, abstract, 169 ; nouns and 
 
 verbs, 51, 118 ; declension of, 
 
 50 ff. 
 
 0-DECLENSION, 65. 
 
 0-conjugation in Latin, 164. 
 Optative, 109. 
 
 Organic lengthening, 37, 119. 
 Orthography, 22. 
 
 Pape, 162. 
 
 Parataxis, 219 ff. 
 
 Participle, 233 ; Latin, 88. 
 
 Passive stems. 105, 134 ff. 
 
 Perfect, 104, 123 ff. ; secunda and 
 prima, 125 ; aspirated perfects, 
 126 ff„ 128, 131; participle, 11, 
 83. 
 
 Periphrasis, 123, 132. 
 
 Person-terminations, 95, 108. 
 
 Phonetic changes in verbs, 150 ff. 
 
 Pleonasm, 141. 
 
 Pluperfect, 131 ff.; Homeric forms, 
 133. 
 
 Pott, 123, 129, 136. 147, 160, 192. 
 
 Prepositions, 169, 203. 
 
 Present tense, 43, 100 ff., 119; 
 Present stem, and verb stem, 6. 
 Cp. Stem. 
 
 Pronouns, reflexive. 88 ; neuter of, 
 89; personal, 88; relative and 
 demonstrative, 88, 219 ; interro- 
 gative, 90. 
 
 Pronunciation of f, 19 ; of 0, 20 ; 
 of the aspirates, 20 ; of modern 
 GTeek, 21, 27 ; of diphthongs, 21 ; 
 changes in, 22 ; of at, 23 ; of et, 
 24 ; of oi, 25, 27 ; of u, 27 ; of 
 eu, 28 ; of ou, 28 ; of Latin, 18, 
 27, 46. 
 
 Protasis, 220. 
 
 QuiNTlLiAN, on Latin pronuncia- 
 tion, 27 ; quoted, 53. 
 
 Reduplication, 124, 144 ; Attic, 
 
 126. 
 Reisig, 196. 
 
 Roscher, H. W., 20, 129. 
 Rost, 53, 209. 
 Rumpelt on the pronunciation of 
 
 German, 24. 
 
 Sanskrit, characteristics of, 1, 
 19 ; vowels in, 31, 37, 58 ; nom. 
 .sing., 70 ; stems, 76 ; perf . part. , 
 83 ; verb, 101, 111, 119, 121, 
 138. 139, 143, 228. 
 
 Schleicher, A., 7, 32, 37, 65, 110, 
 
 Schmidt, R. J. A., 26. 
 
 Schomann. 196, 203, 227, 229 ff. 
 125, 139, 160, 162, 227. 
 
 Schwabe, 162. 
 
 Science in language, 3, 4. 
 
 Sclavonic language, 46, 88, 128, 211, 
 214, 231. 
 
 Siecke, E., 180. 
 
 Soft vowels, 31 ff. 
 
 Sounds and letters, 1 7. 
 
 Spirants, 34, 59. 
 
 Stems, 51 ff.,56; in diphthongs, 58 ; 
 in o and w, 60 ; in a, 64 ; in r 
 and 6, 73 ; elided stems, 75 ; 
 in T, 76 ; in y, 77 ; in verbs 
 
238 
 
 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 and nouns, 93 ft., 99 ; of tenses, 
 99 ff. ; in compounds, 166 ; how- 
 far abstractions, 55. 
 
 Strabo, 28. 
 
 * Strong ' and ' weak ' tenses, 10, 
 106, 125. 
 
 Struve, K. L., 53. 
 
 Suffixes, meaning of, 162. 
 
 Syntax and accidence, 180 ft. 
 
 Tenses, 'strong' and 'weak,' 10, 
 106; arrangement of the, 96 ff., 
 102 ff. ; present, 101 ff. ; strong 
 aorist, 103 ; future, 104 ; perfect, 
 104 ; passive, 105 ; genei'al and 
 special, 100 ; use of, 207 ff. 
 
 Terminations, 51, 66; person-ter- 
 minations, 95, 108. 
 
 Theognostus, 23, 26. 
 
 Thiersch, 27, 53. 
 
 Time, distinction of, 208 ff. 
 
 Tmesis, 170, 204. 
 
 Tobler, 153, 173. 
 
 Transitive and intransitive mean- 
 ing, 158. 
 
 Translation, 184. 
 
 VANfgEK, 147. 
 
 Vau, 32, 59. Cp. Digamma. 
 
 Veitch, 14. 
 
 Verb and noun, 51, 93, 96, 164; 
 classes of, 107; inflexion of, 91 ff. ; 
 stems in, 94 ff.; division of, 95 ff. ; 
 arrangement of, 96 ff . ; a syn- 
 thesis, 96 ; classes of, 99. 
 
 Verbs in -jull, 137 ; nasal verbs, 
 140 ; inchoative, 143 ; verbs with 
 e, 145 ff. ; anomalous, 149 ; 
 defective. 153 ; derivative, 162. 
 
 Vocative, 56, 72, 187. 
 
 Vowels, 17, 30, 37,58, 167 ; auxili- 
 ary, 108, 125, 147 ; long, 32, 48, 
 117, 134; short, 135, 139, 147; 
 in inchoatives and iteratives, 
 145. 
 
 Vriddhi, 37. 
 
 WiNDisCH, E., 90, 180. 
 
 Zend, 38, 44. 
 Zetacismus, 32. 
 
GEEEK INDEX. 
 
 iiyayeiv 213. 
 dydyu)jUL€v 94. 
 dyaK\€LT6s 174. 
 ' Ay dfM€/M>ov 72. 
 Ayecp 213. 
 dyrjoxa 130. 
 dyvvfAi 99. 
 570^ 112. 
 d7/o(6Xaia 174. 
 dyuj 99. 
 ddiK^u) 146. 
 'A^T/i/a^e 19. 
 *Ae^P7i(rL 68. 
 'AtSr/s 79. 
 a/5c6s 60, 71. 
 ai'Sw 77. 
 aiei 28. 
 
 aidp-qyev^TTjs 167. 
 aia-ddvofJLai. 157. 
 aix/Jid\(iJTOS 177. 
 dKOiJCTOfiaL 157. 
 dK7}X€fx4vos 148. 
 dic/)67ro\ts 172, 174. 
 d\5^<rAca> 143. 
 dXei0a; 126. 
 dXrjXKpa 126. 
 dXicTKo/MaL 145. 
 dX/c7j 79. 
 d\\7iX(ov 39. 
 AXXo 89. 
 £XXo/Aa( 44. 
 dXXos 44. 
 dXXu5ts 87. 
 dXwi'at 139. 
 fiXw(r« 139. 
 fi/Aa 31, 200. 
 dfiaprdvu) 141, 142. 
 dfMeivujy 85. 
 
 4/x/aes 88. 
 d/xoLpos 199. 
 d/xuSts 87. 
 d/JL<pL64aTpoif 174. 
 dv 221. 
 
 dva^Liba-KOfiaL 143. 
 d;'5d»'a; 113. 
 dvbpd(T(. 79. 
 dvS/otcwTOTrotos 165. 
 dv4(^ov 114. 
 dj/^VXa 130. 
 dvTjvefios 108. 
 di/77/) 79. 
 
 dl'dplOTTOS Q6. 
 
 dvvaoi 19. 
 dvoryaioj' 69. 
 a^trfXo7oj 172. 
 d^ofiev 94. 
 ctotStdet 114. 
 do(.8idova-a 117. 
 d-JT^X^/^^'- 199. 
 diro^dXXo) 168. 
 diroXa^aofiai 157. 
 'ATrdXXw 78. 
 diroTvyxdvoj 199. 
 dpapl<TK<a 144. 
 dpy6s '0(j) 164. 
 dpel(t)v 85. 
 dpiffKta 85, 145. 
 dperq. 114. 
 d/)eTa\67os 167. 
 ^ Aperdov 12i. 
 dperri 85. 
 Ap7;s 79. 
 
 dpKTTOS 85. 
 
 dp/x,ot 81. 
 d/)^ai 213. 
 dpi'dcri 79. 
 dpprjKTos 47. 
 'AprefioOy 61. 
 
 dpvTCj 136. 
 a/)i/cj 136. 
 dpX"^ 213. 
 da^eoSe 112. 
 dffcroTipu) 87. 
 d<rrea>5 59. 
 dcTTvyelrojv 165. 
 druKTOs 108. 
 av^dvci) 141. 
 au^T^cro; 141. 
 a^ws 60. 
 
 d(paL\7j<T€<Tdai 150. 
 dxO€(TOfjLaL 149. 
 
 B. 
 
 jSaiVo; 140. 
 ^a(nX€V€iv 210. 
 /3a(7tXeu(rat 210. 
 ^aa-iXijos 74, 117. 
 /Sdo-icw 142, 163. 
 ^i^afxev 125. 
 ^^l3Xa<pa 130. 
 /3^/3X?7/ca 140. 
 /3^X€(ri 42. 
 /3i77</)t 82. 
 /Stwi^at 139. 
 
 ^Xib<TK(jJ 144. 
 
 /36es 74. 
 ^o-qdelv 201. 
 ^o<rKr](T(jj 148. 
 ^ovpofxos 177. 
 /3o0s 28. 
 Boi'ToOi' 61. 
 
 /SOWTTIS 175. 
 
 ^paSi^s 85. 
 ^pd<T<T(t)p 45, 84. 
 ^pdxi-<TTos 85. 
 ^pax^s 45, 85. 
 /Su^ot 81. 
 
240 
 
 GREEK INDEX. 
 
 r. 
 
 y^yova 125, 156. 
 y^ypa<pa 126. 
 yeXdu) 135. 
 y^yeos 53: 
 yev^aOai 208. 
 y4p€(TLS 148, 161. 
 7^1/05 53, 75, 161. 
 yrjpdaKco 143, 145. 
 yiyvofiai 144, 149. 
 yLyvibaKu 102, 143, 
 
 145, 157. 
 7Xai'KtD7ris 172. 
 y\vK€ts 73. 
 yvCbvai 139. 
 7»'W(7is 139. 
 7vci>t6s 139. 
 7oda(r/co»' 115. 
 7odw 163. 
 701/u 67, 79. 
 yovva 79, 142. 
 7i;j/i7 81. 
 ypaes 74. 
 ypavs 74. 
 
 ^. 
 
 Sai/xwy 24, 56, 61, 62, 
 
 70. 
 Sals 154. 
 SaK^Ov/jLos 171. 
 daKpvoy 79. 
 ddfivrifii 137. 
 deSdacdai 115. 
 5^56txa 130. 
 S^Sorat 139. 
 dedtbao/xai 133. 
 de'/jau) 149. 
 hetKVVfxL 38. 
 deUyvfiev 38. 
 deiffidaiiJiwv 172. 
 
 d€Ka€T7)S 176. 
 
 dea/xds 161. 
 drjfiLOvpyds 166. 
 Arj/xocrSivris 57, 72. 
 
 At) /jLOVV 61. 
 
 S?;?' 47. 
 
 dripidofiai 163. 
 Sid 19, 203. 
 Stai'OfZo'^at 213. 
 diayorjBrjvat. 213. 
 5ta7re7raix^$ 130. 
 5t5d<r/cw 143, 145. 
 StS^vat 198, 213. 
 
 5/5a;/it 150. 
 SiVtti 96. 
 dUaLos 56. 
 biKaiocrtjvT] 56. 
 BiKaitafia 38. 
 Su'T? 63. 
 5ic6/)i;xos 126. 
 5odz/ 47. 
 Soi5y^ 26. 
 SoAceti/ 201. 
 56/)u 77, 79. 
 dopv<p6pos 177. 
 Sdo-ts 139. 
 5oG»/at 139, 213. 
 dovpa 79. 
 6oi/pidXa;TOS 168. 
 hpdoijJiL 117. 
 dpvrd/mos 177. 
 dp^KpaKTOS 26. 
 bpujwai 117. 
 dijvafjiai 138. 
 Si^o 26. 
 
 A^Liffirapis 174. 
 dva/xev/js 71. 
 5u)/oa 66. 
 Swcri'w 120. 
 
 E. 
 
 f ^i'iXd;^ 26. 
 
 fdyrjv 100. 
 
 edXivv 114. 
 
 ed** (ci fi?/, '^j', eif /cev) 
 
 222. 
 eai/Toi! 88. 
 edw 113. 
 ^j8aXe 209. 
 ^jSaXXe 209. 
 ^i8i7»' 98. 
 eydpeffdaL 216. 
 iyiveo 53. 
 ey^uero 207. 
 ?7>'aj;/ 98, 134. 
 €yvu}pL<T6'r} 213. 
 iypd<t>'qv 100. 
 iypeaSai 216. 
 eyprjyop^vai 216. 
 id-nborai 148. 
 ^So/Atti 122. 
 ^5o^a 147. 
 ^dpa/JLOV 153. 
 ^oi^v 107. 
 ^5wKa 127. 
 ielKoai 36. 
 
 HpyoLdov 152. 
 
 ^^o/iai 45. 
 
 irfv davov 114. 
 
 ^77S 90. 
 
 e^^Xiyo-t 12. 
 
 e6>^T?7i' 139. 
 
 ^^77/ca 127. 
 
 ^^t^w 113. 
 
 et' dx/ 222. 
 
 et5^j/ai 39. 
 
 eiXiyXou^a 152. 
 
 €i:X7?0a 130. 
 
 eZXo*/ 113. 
 
 ei'Xoxa 130. 
 
 elVTyj/ 113. 
 
 et>i' 156. 
 
 eli/at 26. 
 
 eiVi' 84. 
 
 elTra 123. 
 
 cItto;/ 149, 153, 155. 
 
 6i/)7a; 199. 
 
 els 70, 72. 
 
 ets 205. 
 
 efo-a 113. 
 
 erxo** 35. 
 
 ^KTayKa 15. 
 
 ^KTOPa 15. 
 
 fXal^^'(^; 142. 
 
 eXa097j8jXos 167. 
 
 iXax^Ta 86. 
 
 eXaxvTTT^pv^ 86. 
 
 ^X€Xi>/ceii/ 133. 
 
 Aefa 107. 
 
 iXe^ao/uLaL 152. 
 
 AtTo*/ 103. 
 
 iXLaaoj 113. 
 
 ^/fw 113. 
 
 'EXtt^i/o/o 72. 
 
 eX7r/s 51, 73. 
 
 Auo»/ 109. 
 
 Auo-a 96, 123. 
 
 i/ii^jjLrjKOP 133. 
 
 i/jLeTplcoixes 118. 
 
 i/JL7)fl€Ka 148. 
 
 ^/xyua^e 49. 
 4/j,ij^T]aa 148. 
 iv^voxd 170. 
 eVw/Ai 137. 
 ^e 87. 
 
 eoprd^o) 113. 
 ^os 88. 
 
 eiraaff^rrepoL 87. 
 eTret' 222. 
 l7ret<rc 209. 
 
GREEK INDEX. 
 
 241 
 
 iweinriyea 132. 
 iir^indfjiev 133. 
 kireirbver) 132. 
 iirea^dXos 75, 167. 
 
 ^TTTjXvS 152. 
 
 irrl 222. 
 
 €Tr L^6.(TK€LV 144. 
 
 ^TTioj/ 107, 142. 
 iirixaipeKaKds 177, 
 iiroLeL 209. 
 iiroirjcre 209. 
 ewoiifjeriv 38. 
 ^TTOAttti 113, 151. 
 e/)av 213. 
 ipda-aadat 213. 
 ipacrdTJuaL 213. 
 ipyd^ofiaL 113. 
 ^/)5w 151. 
 ^/ot5os 59, 73. 
 epiTfpos 79. 
 ^PTTW 113. 
 
 ^/Jpeoi/ 113. 
 ^/Jp^(Tw 149. 
 ^pXOfiaL 151. 
 ^pws 79. 
 I'o-ai' 109. 
 ^(r/377»' 107, 137. 
 icTdiu) 153. 
 €(Tiy7}<ra 215. 
 ealyqaav 215. 
 ^aofiai 42. 
 icnrda-BTjv 186. 
 ^acrofiai 42, 121. 
 ^(rraX/ca 131. 
 ^(TTare 125. 
 ?(7r97»/ 134. 
 €(TTidofjLai 158. 
 
 €<TTldlO 113. 
 
 iffxaros 87. 
 iTeSriTrea 131. 
 €Tidva(rap 133. 
 iTevva 123. 
 ^rpairov 39, 107. 
 e5 irpd^aL 213. 
 ei)a77e\Xw 169. 
 ei)76»'?7S 75. 
 evGpyirTjs 168. 
 ev-qvopa 21. 
 
 €VfJL€V^<TT€pOS 56. 
 
 ivvvTjTOs 49. 
 eSoc 28. 
 €V(ppaiv(x) 31. 
 €ii(f>p(av 31. 
 evcjjvv/JLOS 134. 
 
 e^xax^ofiai 158. 
 ^(pSapKa 131. 
 ^X« 21. 
 ^X^o-Kov 145. 
 ?Xw 102, 113, 151. 
 ^rj/aWa 39. 
 ?i^7;Xa 39. 
 
 i({3VOx6€L 114. 
 
 iibpaop 114. 
 ^ws 225. 
 
 r<i 19. 
 
 ZeiJs 19, 81. 
 fu76^ 20. 
 
 H. 
 
 ^a 123. 
 
 7i^d(TK(a 143, 145. 
 T}^(hu)(n 117. 
 ^'St; 132. 
 ^5t'w 77. 
 7]8i<jjv 43. 
 ^6^57; 114. 
 ^/ca 128. 
 i^KovcTfiai 15. 
 ijKOua-OTjv 15. 
 4x^01/ 152. 
 iJXXaxa 130. 
 TuxepodpdfJLO^ 166. 
 ijfii'va.dov 152. 
 i5»' 222. 
 ijveyKa 123. 
 Tivloxos 172. 
 ^os 225. 
 ^Trap 78, 79. 
 •H/)c6 61. 
 ^(Tai/ 112. 
 ^o-o'WJ' 46, 85. 
 ^Xa 130. 
 17WS 60. 
 
 0. 
 
 6 Off (TOP 44. 
 <7etV 109. 
 ^etmi 139. 
 deodjULrp-os 177. 
 BeoelKeXos 177. 
 ^6010 12. 64. 
 OeoaTvyrjs 177. 
 ^^(Tts 139. 
 
 QTj^ayevTfjS 177. 
 <9^/) 51. 
 OrjpQu 54. 
 O-qaavpbs 20. 
 ^J'?7r6s 140. 
 
 dplbcTKUJ 144. 
 
 ^j5/)7;0t 82. 
 
 t 32. 
 
 t subscriptnm 28. 
 'lao'oi' 72. 
 taiJo; 50. 
 /5e?»/ 154, 215. 
 Z5^(7^a6 157. 
 IZeffKov 145. 
 rSios 88. 
 /S^w 43. 
 rSAtc*/ 125. 
 teVat 120. 
 t/cai/6s 200. 
 i/cdj/w 142. 
 Z^t 27. 
 tfifievac 49. 
 ?m 225. 
 'loOi/ 61. 
 fTrTrayoryc^s 177. 
 iirird^OTOs 177. 
 iT7r65a)Ltos 177. 
 iTTTrdra 64. 
 To-atri 41. 
 'lo-^Aiot 82. 
 rcTAtej' 41, 125. 
 fore 41. 
 I'o-TT/An 144, 163. 
 
 ICToddKTJ 170. 
 
 lo-Topiuj 163. 
 fcrxw 150. 
 
 K. 
 
 KaBL^-qffOfKiL 148. 
 KaXavporJ/ 113. 
 KaXXlirais 175. 
 AcdXXoj 86. 
 /faX6s 86. 
 K€Kripvx<i 130. 
 KiKXo<pa 126, 130. 
 
 KCKdfJLlKa 131. 
 
 KeKOirdis 129. 
 K^Kpaya 38. 
 /c^Xo-w 122. 
 ic^y 221. 
 
242 
 
 GREEK INDEX. 
 
 KepdvpvfiL 137. 
 
 Kr)p€(TO-L(f>6p7)TOS 168. 
 K7}p(.Tpe<f>T}S 168. 
 
 KldapLs 26, 
 
 KIk\7J<TKU) 145. 
 KlpVrjfML 137. 
 
 Kts 26, 59. 
 kl(T(t6s 26. 
 Kixdvcj 26. 
 KIWI' 26. 
 KXanfjtTU) 148. 
 /cXeTTTiVre/Jos 15. 
 kolXov 26. 
 k6/ous 51, 73. 
 Kopv<p6u} 31. 
 KoiJi'es 28. 
 Kpeiaauv 44. 
 KpeoiribXtjs 168. 
 Kp-qp^vajxcLL 137. 
 K/oiyo-i 19. 
 K/OiVw 44. 
 KTOLO-eai 213. 
 KTTjaao-daL 213. 
 KTvir^uj 47. 
 kvk€lCo 77. 
 KwdfivLa 166. 
 Kvviuj 142. 
 Kvpo-oj 122. 
 
 Xaas 80. 
 Xa/SeZi/ 47. 
 Aaroij' 61. 
 Xax«a 86. 
 X^atm 31. 
 X^w 107. 
 XetTreti/ 119. 
 XeifTTW 99. 
 XeXiy^a 38, 126. 
 XeXu/ca 96. 
 Xau/xat 124. 
 XeXvaofiai 134. 
 XAvrat 123. 
 X^ovai 55. 
 Xei^eii' 80. 
 XevKibXcPos 175. 
 XeW 31. 
 At/t^. 61. 
 XiSo^oXia 169. 
 Xl0o^6Xos 168. 
 XiXakai 12. 
 XiaaofiaL 45. 
 Xoyoypdtpcs 56 172. 
 
 X6701' 54. 
 X670S 54. 
 Xoxa76s 177. 
 
 XVKOLV 68. 
 
 Xuotej/ 109. 
 Xiyo-etas 110. 
 XutriTTOi'os 171. 
 Xi^w 99, 102. 
 
 M. 
 
 fiaOi^a-ofJLaL 149. 
 fjLaKpdx^f'P 172. 
 jxdXXov 44. 
 fiavBdvo} 102, 157. 
 /jidpva/Jiai 138. 
 jxdpTvs 79. 
 ^dx^^ 63. 
 /xaxotoLTO 110. 
 IxaxdpLOLL 149. 
 /Lt^as 48. 
 fjiedTLKTKU) 144. 
 /xe^^wj/ 44, 79. 
 fxelwv 86. 
 fjLeXayxpoirjs 167. 
 fjLeXavva 44. 
 lxeXX7)<TU) 149. 
 /jLeXoTTOLos 177. 
 fi^jjLaxd 30. 
 fxifuxoL 130. 
 jUL^/xv-rj/jLaL 139, 140. 
 Mej/^Xaos 68. 
 /iiev^Ot) 121. 
 /u^vos 76. 
 
 IX€<T7)/JL^pia 172. 
 
 fi^ffffoi 81. 
 flier aos 47. 
 ixerahibujpn. 199. 
 Acer^X''' 199. 
 
 pLTjVVOS 77. 
 
 MrjTpovv 61. 
 MrjTpib 61. 
 fjL'qrpws 60. 
 fiiKpds 86. 
 /iti'iyw 86. 
 fiio-ycj 151, 152. 
 pt.L(Tdo<f>opd 170. 
 /uio-^^w 163. 
 jjLLfjLv^aKOfiaL 143. 
 fivoibfievos 117. 
 fivrj/JLCov 24. 
 /idi/os 32. 
 fxovvos 32. 
 MoDo-a 63 
 
 Mouo-dwv 12, 54. 
 Moi5«r7;(7t 63. 
 
 2V. 
 
 vaierdovai 114. 
 vavfxdxos 168, 170. 
 j/aOs 80. 
 vavtriiiropos 177. 
 vav<f)Lv 82. 
 verjyevrji 167.' 
 veLKeiuj 117. 
 
 V€6t7)S 56. 
 
 p€ot6kos 56. 
 ^eu/j^ 49. 
 videos 49. 
 vrjiTidas 116. 
 i/i/cav 209. 
 VLKTjo-at 209. 
 vL<t>6evTa 47. 
 j/dos 117. 
 voaeiv 210. 
 voariffai 210. 
 v^/jULcpa 56. 
 
 vdsVVfJLVOS 165. 
 
 «. 
 
 ^ 41. 
 ^eii/os 32. 
 ^77/^td'a> 163. 
 ^1^1/ 200. 
 
 o. 
 
 65oi5j 71. 
 55w5a 38. 
 5 224. 
 0? 81. 
 oT5a 39. 
 oi'TjaoiJ.aL 149. 
 of/caSe 31. 
 oUelv 218. 
 oiKoyevi^s 177. 
 olKotofiiuj 170. 
 oJf/fot 81. 
 oiKo<p^Xa^ 177. 
 olojxaL 157. 
 ors 22, 74. 
 6/cAfOj' 155. 
 dX/rw*/ 46. 
 
 d/JLldofieVOL 118. 
 
 5^/xa 41. 
 6fx68ovXos 174. 
 
GKEEK INDEX. 
 
 243 
 
 ofiou 31. 
 ofjubixoTai. 148. 
 
 6ov 67, 90. 
 
 dinra 41. 
 
 oTTws 223, 224, 226. 
 
 opdco 113, 115, 153. 
 
 OpCL^dTTJS 177. 
 
 opiovTo 146. 
 bpbifiev 116. 
 opScoaa 116. 
 6pu>fiai 157. 
 opdiperai 148. 
 dp(ap€x6T€s 130. 
 opibpvxa 126. 
 6's 88, 89. 
 ^o-o-e 79, 155. 
 6<T(ro/j.aL 155. 
 6'rt 223. 
 
 ov5€v6s(i)pos 168. 
 oHvoixa 32. 
 oup^w 113. 
 o5s 80. 
 o(h-ws 226. 
 6(p€i\^Ttj 27. 
 dcpdakfidv 155. 
 o^XiaKOLPO) 141. 
 d^j/ofxai 157. 
 
 n. 
 
 Traidiov 56. 
 Trats 22. , 
 7ra/w 156. 
 7raXa/w 117. 
 Trap.fj,7yr(ap 174. 
 iravrds 54. 
 wap^x^Lu 201. 
 Traca 83. 
 Tra<Tcra\64>L 82. 
 Trdo-xw 102, 152. 
 Trardtro-w 156. 
 Trar^/) 70, 71. 
 Trarpda-L 79. 
 irarpOKTOvos 165, 177. 
 nar/)c6 61. 
 irdrpajs 60. 
 TT^Sot 81. 
 Tre/^eii' 210. 
 TreiBeadaL 201. 
 Treicrat 210. 
 HekoirovvqaLaKos 31. 
 ireiralbevvTaL 21. 
 Treireia-fJLai 41. 
 
 7riir\a<TuaL 136. 
 iriirXexa 130. 
 Tr4Trofji<f>a 126, 130. 
 ireTTpaya 125. 
 • ireirpdyap.ev 125. 
 ireirpayfjLaL 124. 
 TT^TrpaxO' 130. 
 TT^Trrwxa 150. 
 TrepippvTOS 47. 
 Tr4pV7}fiL 138. 
 TTCffeiv 150. 
 irireadai 150. 
 irefpvKa 156. 
 TreipvXaxa 130. 
 TTt^t 98. 
 
 wLKpoya/jLOS 176. 
 irlXvaixaL 138. 
 TrifnrXrj/jLL 86. 
 TTif^w 142, 151.,. 
 irlofxaL 122, 157. 
 irnriaKO} 144. 
 TTLTrpdcKW 145. 
 TTiTTTO; 144, 149. 
 TTtcros 201. 
 TriTvr}fjLi 138. 
 7rXd(7w 136. 
 nXaraiao-t 68. 
 irXelwv 86. 
 TrXeuo-ou/xat 38, 99. 
 ttX^w 60, 99. 
 irXi^du} 154. 
 
 TrXT^^tTTTTOS 171. 
 
 irX-qcrffW 156. 
 irX(b(i} 60. 
 woddviTTTpov 166. 
 
 TTOdOKaKT^ 166. 
 TTOt 81. 
 
 TTOieZi' 209. 
 TTOLTJaai 209. 
 
 TrOL7)<TLS 38. 
 
 iroLTjTpLa 43. 
 iroLfiaivio 31. 
 
 TTOL/JL-qV 31, 70. 
 
 TToXets 73. 
 iroXe/uiddoKos 167. 
 TToXews 59, 69. 
 TToXrjos 59, 69. 
 7r6Xii/ 54, 59. 
 7r6Xis 74. 
 7roXi5s 84. 
 JlocetSco 77. 
 iroaai 42. 
 iroTi 78. 
 TTouXiJs 84. 
 
 irpd^ai 210. 
 irpd^io 122. 
 TTpdaa-eLv 210. 
 irpdaffu) 99, 102. 
 irpeiyevrdvs 69. 
 irpea^vrds 69. 
 Jl/umi'crtoi 82. 
 7r/)6 203. 
 irpo^^^ovXa 170. 
 irpo^ovX-q 169. 
 Trpot^ 26. 
 "Trpoarj^da 114. 
 TTpoa-qXvTos 152. 
 TrpvravLS 87. 
 TrpdoTKTTOS 87, 140. 
 TTToXiiropdos 177. 
 
 TTTCUtrtS 150. 
 
 irvyfidxos 167. 
 ni;Xot7ei'77S 168. 
 TTvpdu) 163. 
 Trvp<p6pos 167. 
 
 pq,Sios 86. 
 pgtwi' 86. 
 p^a 86. 
 p^^w 151. 
 priTCjp 71. 
 piy7]<T€P 215. 
 
 pLTTT^U) 146. 
 
 pododaKTvXos 175. 
 
 <raK€(nraXos 56, 165, 
 
 167. 
 (TaK€0-<f)6pos 75. 
 '2ia7r<pip 61. 
 (Ta<l>'i}S 71. 
 
 (T^^VVVjXL 137. 
 
 <T€Xa<r^6pos 167. 
 aeatyrjKa 216. 
 creiJet 28. 
 (77) fxalv 03 164. 
 
 <TKLdv7)/JLL 138. 
 (TlCcip 78. 
 (TfJLLKpds 86. 
 
 <7dos 115. 
 
 (ro(pdjT€pos 38, 134. 
 airadobv 136. 
 (TTadiadpdfios 167. 
 (jTdffKOV 145. 
 (TTepidKO) 145. 
 
244 
 
 CT'fld€(T<f>LV 82. 
 
 (TTTivaL 139, 215. 
 CTri<TaL 158. 
 (TTovbfeaea 73. 
 (r6 32. 
 (t(>v 200. 
 o-vviXa^ov 170. 
 (TuvreXety 215. 
 (ri;6$ 60. 
 (Tijpo) 44, 
 (Tus 74. 
 <T<p6r/yos 152. 
 Sc&/c/)ares 56, 72. 
 2w/cpdr?7S 57, 79. 
 <ru)/u,a 51. 
 
 "HaXev^iddris 31. 
 r^^a(/)a 130. 
 T^^ei/ca 20. 
 r^(?i7/ca 139. 
 T4e\L(f>a 130. 
 reOvdvai 98. 
 redvTjKUis 131. 
 r€0u7}(bs 84, 131 
 re/z^w 43. 
 Teix^cTL 42. 
 reixo^ax^ct 168. 
 
 T^KTdJV 71. 
 
 reXew 136. 
 rej/^w 122. 
 ripcLPa 21. 
 T^piyv 72. 
 T^raxa 130. 
 TerdxcLTai 129. 
 
 TCTLTJlbs 84. 
 T€TLfJLr]Ka 38. 
 
 T^rpi0a 130. 
 rirpocpa 126, 
 
 T^TpUJJJLaL 139, 
 
 Wy 90. 
 r^ws 225. 
 Tt^ei's 71. 
 TLdeiaa 73. 
 
 130. 
 
 GREEK INDEX. 
 
 
 Tijudw 163. 
 
 (t>i\os 201. 
 
 ti^tJ 63. 
 
 </>6ws 117. 
 
 Tt/AoOi/ 61. 
 
 0pdcrw 136. 
 
 T^j/co 142. 
 
 4>pd(raio 45. 
 
 Ttrpdw 144, 150. 
 
 0p^ap 79. 
 
 TtV 90. 
 
 ^pij*/ 30. 
 
 r6(ros 42. 
 
 (pvyelv 101. 
 
 rp^TTw 39, 107. 
 
 0i/(ret 38. 
 
 rp^TTos 39. 
 
 (pv<Tio\6yos 165. 
 
 T.5 32. 
 
 01^(70; 38. 
 
 Tl^TTTW 99. 
 
 <p(a(r(f>6po5 167. 
 
 tOs 27. 
 
 
 V 32. 
 
 5 i/'tXet 26. 
 vld(n 80. 
 OSwp 78. 
 vZ6s 79. 
 ij/x/x€s 88. 
 
 VTT^/O 204. 
 vTTvds 84. 
 j^d 204. 
 vafiivT) 79. 
 iiarepos 87. 
 
 ^admaros 115. 
 0a(ii/^7; 115. 
 0(f(9t 137. 
 ^ttJ/T^ 32. 
 0d(r£ 32. 
 0aT£ 32. 
 (parts 139. 
 0^/)w 153, 155. 
 (fiipuyv 71. 
 077(r£ 32. 
 (I)dlv(a 142. 
 0iX<^w 146. 
 (pCKofiixei^'fls 49. 
 
 (pLXdfJLOVffOS 172. 
 
 X. 
 
 Xaiuiddis 82. 
 Xa/xaif 81, 227. 
 Xapfets 73. 
 XOLpiecTL 73. 
 XaptWera 73. 
 Xap« 73. 
 X^p^ioTcpos 140. 
 X^ipojp 85. 
 X^^fXfjy 44. 
 xopvy^^ 166' 
 
 Xopod(,dd(TKa\os 165, 
 
 177. 
 Xpaia-fxiu) 146. 
 XpvcroKdfirjs 175. 
 X'^po-v 54. 
 
 1// 41. 
 
 ¥^. 
 
 /2. 
 
 &^7}(Ta 148. 
 w(9^w 113. 
 wviofiaL 113. 
 (Dpro 112. * 
 (3&S 36, 89, 223. 
 tbribevra 81. 
 Ci<f>d\7}Ka 148. 
 (r.0eXXa 123. 
 
LATIN INDEX. 
 
 aegrotus, 164. 
 -^neadum. 65, 
 aliud, 89. ' 
 alius, 44. 
 amare, 86. 
 amoenus, 85. 
 amor, 85. 
 anted, 203. 
 apiscor, 145. 
 argutus, 164. 
 ars, 71. 
 aurora, 60. 
 
 belli, 81. 
 benedico, 170. 
 bonus, 163. 
 
 caelicolum, 65. 
 calefacio, 170. 
 causidicus, 119. 
 cinctutus, 164. 
 claustrum, 40. 
 cohorruit, 215. 
 comedere, 215. 
 condicio, 46. 
 consequi, 216. 
 conspicio, 154, 216. 
 conticuere, 216. 
 Corinthi, 81. 
 coronare, 164. 
 cresco, 145. 
 cum, 200. 
 cupio, 119. 
 
 dare, 139. 
 datum ire, 121. 
 datum iri, 121. 
 daturus esse, 121. ' 
 degener, 76. 
 dens, 71. 
 dico, 119. 
 
 disco, 143. 
 diu, 47. 
 docui, 147. 
 domi, 81. 
 dominari, 164. 
 donom, 63, 139. 
 douco, 119. 
 drachmum, 65, 
 duco, 119. 
 dux, 119. 
 
 efficere, 215. 
 emori, 215. 
 equos, 63. 
 eram, 123. 
 erant, 109. 
 ero, 121. 
 esse, 166. 
 est, 40. 
 estis, 6. 
 evenire, 216. 
 evitare, 216. 
 excitare, 215. 
 exclamare, 215. 
 excubias ire, 196. 
 expergisci, 216. 
 expers, 199. 
 extremus, 87. 
 
 facio, 119. 
 familias, 64. 
 farcio, 46. 
 feido, 119. 
 ferte, 166. 
 fides, 119. 
 fido, 119. 
 fodio, 119. 
 fui, 166. 
 
 generis, 76. 
 genua, 79, 142. 
 
 gigno, 149. 
 gnosco, 143, 146. 
 
 humi, 81. 
 
 id, 89. 
 
 ignominia, 166. 
 illud, 89. 
 in, 204. 
 
 infitias ire, 196. 
 inquam, 109. 
 insece, 155. 
 irascor, 145. 
 
 jacere, 147. 
 jactare, 147. 
 
 laesus, 40. 
 lavare, 147. 
 
 Mars, 71. 
 matruelis, 60. 
 medius, 47. 
 melior, 153. 
 meliosem, 77. 
 mensis, 77. 
 minus, 86. 
 misceo, 163. 
 
 necto, 119. 
 nomen, 32, 165. 
 nota, 32. 
 
 oculus, 154. 
 optimus, 163. 
 ordo, 71. 
 oriuntur, 146. 
 
 pacisci, 144, 146. 
 particeps, 199. 
 patior, 119. 
 
246 
 
 LATIN INDEX. 
 
 
 patricius, 46. 
 
 salio, 44. 
 
 tango, 5. 
 
 patruus, 60. 
 
 sedes, 113. 
 
 tanquam, 222. 
 
 pecto, 119. 
 
 semel, 31. 
 
 terebra, 150. 
 
 persuasit, 215. 
 
 senesco, 143. 
 
 tero, 150. 
 
 petere, 150. 
 
 sequor, 113. 
 
 terrai, 64. 
 
 plenus, 86. 
 
 serpo, 113. 
 
 tesaurus, 20. 
 
 pluvia, 69. 
 
 si, 225. 
 
 tibi, 82. 
 
 poena, 27. 
 
 sibi, 82. 
 
 tot, 42. 
 
 prae, 204. 
 
 simul atque, ^22. 
 
 
 priusquam, 222. 
 
 sisto, 144. 
 
 ubi, 82, 225. 
 
 pro, 204. 
 
 somnus, 84. 
 
 ulciscor, 144. 
 
 prod, 203. 
 
 sonare, 147. 
 
 ut, 224. 
 
 Proserpnais, 64. 
 
 sonitus, 147. 
 
 uti, 27. 
 
 pubesco, 143. 
 
 sopio, 84. 
 
 
 punio, 27. 
 
 stai-e, 144. 
 
 vendo, 113, 135. 
 
 
 suasit, 215. 
 
 venio, 141. 
 
 quid, 225. 
 
 suavis, 113. 
 
 venum dare, 135. 
 
 quo, 225. 
 
 sub, 204. 
 
 venum ire, 135. 
 
 quod, 89, 225. 
 
 suetus, 113. 
 
 verbum, 155. 
 
 
 sum, 109, 156. 
 
 versutus, 164. 
 
 reminiscor, 143. 
 
 sumus, 121. 
 
 Vesta, 113. 
 
 revivisco, 143. 
 
 super, 204. 
 
 volvo, 113. 
 
 Romas, 81. 
 
 
 vox, 155. 
 
 Romai, 225. 
 
 tactio banc, 231. 
 
 
 ruri, 81. 
 
 tametsi, 222. 
 
 
 ■^^-^^ 
 
 OF THE 
 
 
 Printed by Watson and Hazell, London and Aylesbury. 
 
UNIVEESITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY, 
 BERKELEY 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 Books not returned on time are subject to a fine of 
 50c per volume after the third day overdue, increasing 
 to fl.OO per volume after the sixth day. Books not in 
 demand may be renewed if application is made before 
 expiration of loan period. 
 
 
 z\ 
 
 : 31954LU 
 
 75m-7,'30 
 
VB 00168 
 
 U.C.BERKELEY LIBRARIES 
 
 CDMtEaatitM 
 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA UBRARY