Of most unprefixed verbs there are two forms, a perfective and a durative, or a durative and an iterative; of others there are three forms, perfective, durative, and iterative; of many there are four forms, perfectives of two kinds, a durative and an iterative, or a perfective, a durative, an iterative, and an iterative of an iterative. The difference is often unexpressed, being involved in different applications, for many forms are perfective or imperfective, according to difference of meaning; and many verbs can be used in the same meaning either perfectively or imperfectively. The same forms are often perfective or imperfective, according to difference of accentuation or quantity of vowels.1 If the perfective form of a verb has gone out of use it is replaced by the imperfective, and this goes out of use as such; and an imperfective gone out of use is supplied, an iterative by a durative, and a durative by an iterative. A simple iterative gone out of use as such is supplied by a double iterative, which serves also for a durative. A perfective is often got by giving a prefix to the durative form. A prefix gives either direction or perfectivity, the prefix carrying the mind to the end of the process. 2 The iterative verbs of the fifth and sixth classes (213), generally become durative by getting a prefix,3 the prefix having the effect of summing up the iteration into the duration expressed by final a; but many of them become perfective of iterative, especially with naon, and po-, which expresses extension.4 228. In Old and New Slavonic, and in Upper and Lower Servian, the verb is dual when the subject denotes two things, whether they belong to each other or not. With two or more subjects in the singular the verb is respectively dual or plural. If a collective subject denotes persons or has taken the place of the plural, the verb is plural. 229. The present tense of durative verbs is not unfrequently used with a future signification, to express the future more vividly. The strictly present is going on and is therefore durative; and a present perfective is present only in anticipation, as a future, or as what may come at any time.? If a past tense precede, a present perfective may be thought from the standpoint of the past; and in the later languages it is so used as historical present.8 In Russian the second plural person ending is sometimes added to the first plural of the present to refer the verb to the speaker and to several other persons, who are addressed as with a call for co-operation.9 The imperative (optative, 215) is sometimes used to express a supposition, concession, or condition; and its second person singular may be used when thought from the standpoint of a past tense preceding it to express a quickly passing fact generally thought as in past time, the subject of this fact being, as it were, commanded in the second 1 Miklosich, iv. p. 3 Ibid. iv. pp. 317, 332. 6 Ibid. iv. p. 771. 280-282. 4 Ibid. iv. p. 331. 2 Ibid. iv. p. 285-287. 5 Ibid. iv. pp. 765, 766. 8 Ibid. iv. p. 778. person singular to realise it. Such a fact is also expressed by the stem of many verbs, and thought in present, past, or future.1 The imperative is sometimes used in dependent clauses generally after a question, in which use it is rather an optative or potential than an imperative, dicta ö dzãcov? monstrabo vobis quem timeatis.2 The past participles bulo, buvalo, of the verbs by (Sans. b'ū), buva (durative), when connected with a present put it in the past.3 The present participle active has often a passive meaning, the action being thought as belonging adjectively to its object (167). And there is a form in -ste, which Miklosich thinks might be a neuter accusative of this participle, which is used like a gerund (167).5 The passive participle is often replaced by an adjective, the action of one thing on another being thought as qualifying the latter.6 230. In Slavonic that which the subject realises is more external than in Teutonic. Slavonic thinks the verb more in the external process of accomplishment, so that the subjectivity is carried to the end of the process in the perfective verbs; and doing or being as an end or aim in the infinitive retains its connection with the substantive which has it for an aim; whereas the infinitive has well nigh lost that connection in Teutonic (168). The infinitive is so verbal in Slavonic that it is contrary to the genius of the language to govern it with a preposition. When the substantive to which the infinitive belongs in Slavonic is different from the subject of the principal verb, it is put, not in the accusative, as in Latin and Greek, but in the dative; the infinitive, according to Miklosich, depending on the verb and the dative on the infinitive. This view of the construction of the infinitive leads Miklosich to deny that in Slavonic or Latin the infinitive can ever be really used as a nominative. But we know that in English the infinitive, with to before it, can really be thought as a nominative to a verb, e.g., to die is gain. The infinitive is not necessarily dependent on a principal verb, but may be abstracted as an aim attributed to a substantive expressed or understood, in which attribution thought passes from the infinitive to the substantive to which the aim is attributed. The latter, therefore, does depend on the infinitive through a sense of attribution, and in Slavonic is in the dative as that to which the attribution is made (73). That the infinitive does in this way govern the substantive to which it belongs is proved by the analogy of the verbal noun (see below), which plainly does govern its noun. The infinitive as an aim can express a wish, purpose, or command as well as an object of a verb or of a noun of action; and as a dative it can express a condition or circumstance in proximity to which a realisation takes place. 10 The infinitive active can take the place of a passive infinitive 10 (167). The supine expresses in many of the Slavonic languages the direct object of verbs of motion.11 1 Miklosich, iv. pp. 782, 794, 798. 4 Ibid. iv. p. 821. 7 Ibid. iv. p. 872. 10 Ibid. iv. pp. 846, 849, 850, 852-861. 2 Ibid. iv. p. 798. 11 Ibid. iv. pp. 3 Ibid. iv. P. 815. 6 Ibid. iv. p. 17. 9 Ibid. iv. p. 848. 858, 874. A verbal substantive signifying the being or doing is formed from all verbs by adding -iye to the stem of the past passive participle, so that its stem ending is -tiye, -eniye. It is declined through all the cases of the singular number, and like the infinitive takes the subject of being or doing in the dative. Like the infinitive also, it may take the place of the passive, and in Old Slavonic it governs its object like the finite verb. It may be governed by a preposition, and is qualified by an adjective.1 ARMENIAN. 231. The Armenian language has lived through three periods clearly distinguished from each other. The first extends to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era, and contained, according to later writers, a considerable number of literary works, mostly historical, of which only a few fragments remain. This first period had its alphabet, and a greater richness of forms than the subsequent period, but its articulations cannot be recovered. The second period reaches from the fifth to the twelfth century, and includes the classical writers of Armenia. It begins with the introduction of a new alphabet by Mesrob, arranged after the Greek, and founded principally on the letters of the first period. The third period begins with the twelfth century. It added to the alphabet two letters ō and ƒ, and varied considerably from the second period in pronunciation and in the use of the grammatical forms. It is the language of the second or classical period that will be studied here.2 232. The Armenian alphabet has eight t- consonants, of some of which it is difficult to distinguish the nature. Their utterance is thus represented, t, ts, d, dz, tsh, dsh, dsh analogous to tsh in form, and next but one after it in order; ds, dsh, dsh analogous to ds in form, and next but one after it in order. They may, perhaps, taken in this order, be regarded as t, t, d, d, t, t, d, d, though not properly distinguished as such in speaking. And then the Armenian alphabet would contain the following consonants: k, k' or ', I, g', t, t, d, d', t, t, d, d', 0, p, p', b, h, x, y varying to h, s, z, 8, z, v, w, r, l, r, n, m, to which in the third period of the language was added ƒ. The vowels are: a, e, è, e, i, o, u written ov, and to these was added in the third period ō; in the beginning of a word Ŏ is pronounced wo, and ě is pronounced yě. Two concurrent vowels preserve each its full value, except that ĕ before a is pronounced y, and there are the diphthongs ai, ui, au, and At the beginning of a word or syllable y is pronounced, and at the end of a word it lengthens a or o preceding it. The aspirate g' is etymologically akin to , r. It takes the place of λ in the alphabet and in writing Greek words; but it is pronounced gh. It probably corresponded originally to the 7 of the Slavonic and Tartar languages (203). The modern Armenians pronounce g, d, b, as k, t, p, and k, t, p, as g, d, b; this looks as if they used for both an intermediate utterance which seems to transpose them; but Lepsius says that there Miklosich, iv. p. 877-880. 2 Lauer, Gram. Arm., pp. 1, 2. is an actual interchange of pronunciation. The accent is on the last syllable.1 233. There is no grammatical gender nor dual number. The Armenian noun has the peculiarity that in the nominative, accusative, and vocative singular, the final vowel of the stem, if it end in a vowel, and if it end in a consonant the vowel preceding that consonant is dropped, and a similar tendency appears in those cases in the plural also. It is as if in the other cases the case relation strengthened the thought of the substance (Def. 4), referring rather to that part of the idea than to the whole, and consequently strengthened the stem ending which involved that element; while in the nominative, accusative, and vocative, the weak case relation and the substance tended to be absorbed into the substantive idea, and the stem ending to be weakened. The dropping of the vowel of the last syllable often renders necessary the insertion of a vowel, generally i or u before the consonant, which is then at the end, to facilitate its utterance. also when there is already an i or u before that consonant, it is apt to be lengthened to è or ui, in the aorist participle and other stems ě to ea; which seems to indicate a strengthening of the residue of the stem by the absorption of the substance or case relation. Stems which end in u often when they drop u take y instead of it. But Some stems which end in o, i, or u change this vowel to a in the instrumental singular and in the oblique cases of the plural. This a is probably pronominal and arthritic (Def. 7), the instrumental relation being so strong as not to combine with these stems without its help, and the indefiniteness of the individuals in the plural rendering its help necessary with the strong oblique relations. This view of the nature of this a is confirmed by the fact that the only stems which have -a in all the oblique cases, singular and plural, are proper names, and that even the female names formed with -uhi take -a, changing the i before a to y. Proper names are so concrete that they do not take up an element of relation so readily as common nouns (V. 60), and are therefore more apt to use an arthritic connective (Def. 7). But in other nouns also the vowel i or u, which is at the end of the fuller form of their stem, may be connective, and may by its addition weaken the vowel of the last syllable of the stem. If a stem end in o, which is preceded by y, the y becomes v. The original stem ending was -ya, and this became -vu; but when the u is dropped or changed to a the y returns. Of stems ending in a vowel, most of those which have a guttural or dental before the final vowel end in i. The stems which end in a consonant end in g', r, or n. Stems which end in g or y have in their full forme before the final consonant, those in n have a or i. Those in in change it to an in the instrumental singular and the oblique cases of the plural, the substantive idea being thought in these cases principally in its substance, and that part being consequently strengthened in expression. Some 1 Lauer, p. 3-6; Lepsius, Standard Alphabet, p. 133. times final n is dropped after another consonant in the reduced stem.1 234. The nominative singular is the reduced stem; the nominative plural takes -k, which is generally added immediately to the reduced form of the vocalic stems, but those which end in u, particularly those which in the reduced stem change u to y, are apt to retain u in the nominative plural, and to insert n between u and k. The nominative plural of stems which end in a consonant sometimes join k immediately to the reduced stem, as all those in -Oivn (ovvn), sometimes to the fuller stem, as all those in -g or -rn. Many reduced stems in -n insert u before the n in the nominative plural for facility of utterance.2 The accusative singular is the same as nominative singular. The accusative plural differs from nominative plural only in taking -8 instead of -. The accusative, when defined, is preceded by z, which is probably a demonstrative element; z is repeated before an adjective or genitive, which is connected with an accusative.2 The vocative singular and plural is the same as the nominative.3 The genitive singular is the fuller stem; but stems ending in -o or -a take y (h), those in -o often take -t. The genitive plural adds -ť to the fuller stem; and those u stems which take n before k in nominative plural retain the n in genitive plural. Very seldom the genitive plural is formed from the reduced stem.4 3 The dative singular and plural is the same as the genitive. But some u stems form also a dative singular in -um.4 The ablative singular case ending is -ē, subjoined to the fuller stem; thee after a or o melts into y, or rather has a mere lengthening of those vowels, but it absorbs into itself final i. Stems ending in -čan make ablative singular in -ene, dropping a, those in -in make it in -nē, dropping i. Sometimes in the ablative singular stems ending in a vowel take m instead of their final vowel before -ē. Those o stems which form genitive singular in -ot, sometimes in the ablative singular add to this instead of to the fuller stem. The ablative always has ior y prefixed, which means in. The ablative plural differs from genitive plural only by this prefix.5 The instrumental case ending is -v added to the vowel stems, but absorbed by final u without lengthening it; -b added to the stems which end in a consonant and to some of those which end in -u, especially those which in the reduced stem take instead of u; n before b becomes m. The instrumental plural adds -k to the instrumental singular; -avk and -ambk may become -ōk.o 235. The adjectives are declined as the substantives. Many of them, however, especially polysyllabic ones, which have the form of reduced nominal stems ending in a consonant, are not declined.7 The comparative suffix of adjectives and adverbs is -guin, fuller form -guni, joined immediately to stems which end in a vowel, final i of stem being changed to ě; but when it is joined to stems ending 1 Lauer, p. 8-13. 4 Ibid. p. 16. 2 Ibid. pp. 14, 81. 3 Ibid. p. 15. |