the first person, and the third person is objective in its nature, and both of them therefore need more than the second. But in verbs in -w the vowel preceding the person which, like Sanskrit a, expresses the process of being or doing, takes up in the singular the engagement of the person, and well nigh absorbs the person in its own subjectivity. In Doric the second singular, both present and past, of verbs in -, and verbs in -w, is apt to end in oa, a stronger expression of it, σ and both denoting the second person (67). In the first person dual and plural, and second and third dual in Sanskrit, the sense of present engagement makes the individuals to be so fully thought that in the present they are denoted by s in vas, mas ; but without the sense of present engagement the predominant consciousness of self so prevails in the first dual and plural that in the imperfect potential and imperative the associated individuals are not distinguished (va ma). In Greek there is neither the same predominant sense of self nor the same sense in the person of the present engagement, and though the natural distinction of self from the associated individuals maintained the originally in the first plural of all the tenses, as in Doric, yet the plurality came to be expressed with less sense of the individuals by as massed together, and was expressed alike in the present and the past. In the other persons of the present and imperfect the differences between Greek and Sanskrit are merely euphonic. 67. The Greek optative, which corresponds to the Sanskrit potential (18), agrees with the imperfect in its person endings, except in the first singular in verbs in -w, which expresses more sense of the engagement of self than in the imperfect. In verbs in, the third plural, both in the imperfect and the optative, is fuller than in verbs in -w, expressing the person by, as well as the plurality by av, probably because these verbs, having less sense of the process of subjective realisation in their stem, have the thought of the subject thrown more on the person. In the imperative also the third person which, in the singular, is -rw, corresponding to Sanskrit -tu, and in the dual -rwv, is in the plural either -vrov, which adds to the Sanskrit -ntu a final n of combination, or -rwrav; which seems to indicate the strength with which the command is thought, first as applied to the individual, and then pluralised by the addition of a third person plural. In verbs in -, as in the corresponding Sanskrit verbs, the second singular imperative is 0; for where there is no vowel annexed to the root or stem to express process of what is realised, there tends to be more stress thrown on the person, so that it requires a stronger form. 68. The person endings of the perfect correspond to those of the present in the dual and plural, to those of the past in the singular; but the nasal of the first singular is vocalised and absorbed by the a of the tense element. The persons are thought with more distinctness in the singular than in the dual or plural, and their want of present engagement is more strongly noted. In the dual and plural the sense of present accomplishment is sufficient to cause the persons to be thought as in the present. 69. In the middle and passive, as in the active, the first person has less affinity for a in Greek than in Sanskrit (17); and therefore its consonant is not vocalised. The present engagement of the person is expressed by -a, as by Sanskrit -ē; but this is not, as in Sanskrit, carried through the dual and the plural. It gives place in the dual to, which expresses a sense of combination, and in the plural to a or, which gives an element of extension, except in the third person, which, by reason of its objective nature, needs, as in the active, to be animated with present engagement, and therefore takes -a; and this in the past is changed to -0. It is only in the third person that the dual and plural endings of the present differ from those of the past; the third dual of the past ending in -, as in the active voice. But in the singular the first person is expanded into a double expression -un, a thought of the first person () as quiescent - being substituted for the present engagement -al. In the second and third singular as in the third plural, the is dropped and the endings are -(6), -850. In the first person dual and plural, present and past, the associated individuals are denoted by 0, a relaxed utterance of s, and which corresponds here to h in Sanskrit and Zend. But in the second and third dual and second plural, and also in the imperative in the third singular and plural, oe is an expression of the person element, expanded and relaxed by the abiding and quiescent nature of the middle or passive; which, however, is abridged in the perfect when the root ends in a consonant, by dropping and the vowel which precedes it. 70. The first aorist corresponds to the fourth formation of the Sanskrit aorist (27); and the second aorist to the sixth formation. Reduplication seems to be lighter in Greek than in Sanskrit; it does not take the vowel of the root. The perfect takes an element which is doubtless akin to σa of the first aorist, and which seems to be xa, becoming xa after a vowel, and dropping X after a consonant, the consonant having been aspirated. When the root ends in a dental, the dental is dropped, and za is taken. When the root ends in a mute, it is apt, especially if a monosyllable, to change a radical ɛ to o. The pluperfect in Doric ends in -a, in which the is probably a vocalisation of 6, the past element added to the perfect being -60%. In the ordinary form the a is dropped, and so becomes before the person endings, as io becomes si in siui. The future corresponds to the Sanskrit future in -sya-, y being dropped, and it takes the present person endings. There is another future formed from the root by adding to the vowel which precedes the person endings (52), so that in the first singular becomes ~, and in the other persons o becomes ou, and becomes î A second perfect also and pluperfect are formed from the root, or from the present stem, dropping from the tense element the x or the aspiration. When the root ends in a consonant, and is a monosyllable containing, is changed to o in the second perfect, to a generally in second aorist; sometimes a short radical vowel is lengthened in the second perfect. These secondary tenses, the second aorist, second future, and second perfect and pluperfect, are a remarkable feature in Greek. They are mostly formed from the root, whereas the first aorist and first future may be formed from the root, strengthened with Guna. The secondary tenses also add to the root weaker elements than those which belong to the corresponding primary tenses. Few verbs, however, have both formations. Verbs whose stem ends in a vowel, form, with very few exceptions, only the primary tenses. No verb has all the tenses. 71. Verbal stems ending in a consonant subjoin immediately the element of the primary tenses. The final consonant of the stem, if a dental, is dropped. If it be a liquid it relaxes the of first future and first aorist, so that this is vocalised, and in the future absorbed into the vowels which follow it (52), but in the first aorist into the vowel of the stem either as or as a lengthening. Verbal stems ending in a short vowel are apt to lengthen it before the subjoined element of the primary tenses. This seems to take place when the vowel expresses a verbal element of thought added to the root, as when a expresses an external application of what the root denotes, as in ruw; the subjective possession of it, as in p.; o the causation or making of it, as dixiów. In such cases the element expressed by the vowel is in a great degree absorbed by the root, and the addition of another verbal element, as oa, &c., in combining with it strengthens the thought of it and draws it out. When, however, the final vowel of the verbal stem is radical, or has no meaning additional to the root, it is not lengthened. And when the verbal stem has a syllable ending in a consonant added to the root, as -aw, then it takes up the tense element as a stem ending in a consonant takes it. 72. Greek, like Zend, has, besides the optative or Sanskrit potential, the subjunctive formed as in Zend (52), except that it never takes the imperfect person endings. It expresses the aim or end of a present or future fact or a probable supposition; the optative the aim of a past fact or a less probable supposition. The optative in verbs in - is strictly similar to the potential of the corresponding verbs in Sanskrit. The first aorist optative in Æolic took the between σ and a, and lengthened it to 1 For Greek is distinguished above all languages by its sense of tense and of mood, the latter especially appearing in the extent to which the contingent and ideal are thought as well as the actual in the various positions in time in reference to the standpoint of the speaker, so that all the tenses have the optative, and all but the future tenses have the subjunctive and imperative. A future expectation or command is thought from the future standpoint as present, while an expectation or command of what is future is itself present. Zend and Vedic Sanskrit approach Greek in their sense of the mood of the tense. 73. The full form of the infinitive is eva, the dative of a verbal noun (57) in -ev, which by its nasals expresses the going on of the verbal succession, thought as a noun. The nasal part of the form has a strong affinity for those stems which have an element of process corresponding to Sanskrit a of the first conjugation; and their infinitive ended in -Ev, from which afterwards was dropped, and the ending became ɛ. Other stems held by the latter part -var in their infinitives, the being vocalised and dropped after the strong a of the first aorist, but retained after the weaker a of the perfect, which becomes . In the middle and passive the verbal noun whose dative is the infinitive ends in -60, which is a relaxed utterance of the issuing of fact into realisation (27), expressive of the relaxation or quiescence of the middle or passive. The infinitive, though properly a dative, may be abstracted from being governed, and being thought as an aim may be used in any case, even as a nominative. In such use it may be accompanied by the noun in which as a verb it would be realised as its subject; but not being a verb realised in a subject it is thought externally to the noun as an aim attributed to it. Thought passes from the infinitive to the noun with a sense of attribution to it, so that the noun is thought as an object; and being thought abstractly as an object to which, without further particularising the relation, the noun is thought as an accusative, and is expressed in that case; so that the construction is an accusative depending on the infinitive (230). 74. There is a remarkable difference between the Greek passive and the Sanskrit passive. The latter is distinguished from the middle only in the present parts of the verb, the former only in the other parts. It is to be observed, however, that in the non-conjugational parts the passive is expressed in Sanskrit by the participle and verb substantive (30), and therefore more as a completed effect than it is expressed in Greek. This must also be the significance of the passive element in Sanskrit in the conjugational parts. So that the passive is thought throughout more as an effect in Sanskrit than in Greek. In the perfect the sense of effect generally needs no other expression than the reduplicated root with the middle or passive persons of the present. But in the aorist and the future an element expressive of the passive is subjoined to the root. This in the first aorist and first future is -07-, sometimes -on-, and in the second aorist and second future --, the relaxed consonant and long vowel expressing the passivity of the being. In the perfect sometimes, especially when the stem ends in a vowel, there is a trace of the passive element in the addition of to the root. In the future the person is thought with present engagement as expecting it, but not in the aorists, and accordingly in them they lose the middle or passive form, and are the same as if they were the past persons of a neuter verb. The Greek thinking the passive in the effect and yet as a personal verb, developed a future perfect, which is not in the active or middle. 75. The Greek participles are similar to the Sanskrit. 76. Το the Sanskrit causative formation of verbs (31) correspond some of those in -αζω, -ίζω, -αινω. Τo the intensive formation (33) correspond, according to Bopp, τωθάζω, παιπάλλω, δαιδάλλω, &c. ; the latter, instead of lengthening a, add. There are also formations from the perfect, as τεθνήκω, κεκλήγω. Frequentatives also are formed in -αζω, -ίζω, -ύζω, as ῥιπτάζω, αἰτίζω, ερπύζω. Desideratives, like δρασείω, are formed from roots, as Sanskrit desideratives in -sya from the stems of nouns. To the Sanskrit denominatives (34) correspond ποδίζω, ακοντίζω, γυναικίζω, ὀνομάζω, μελαίνω (μελανιω), &c. ;2 also with desiderative meaning στρατηγιάω, &c. And there is another denominative formation -ενω, not in Sanskrit, πολιτεύω, διατρεύω, &c. 77. The following examples of the derivation of nominal stems in Greek, though not arranged as those of Sanskrit in 3, may readily be compared with them. The stem, when not given by dropping -s or -, is in parenthesis. Nominal stems derived from verbs or roots. Substantives denoting the agent: πομπός, τροφός, ἀρωγός (ἀρήγω); κριτὴς, οικέτης, ποιητής; σωτὴς; ῥήτως (-03) ; ἰατρὸς; γραφεὺς; ὄρνιθο θήρας bird-hunter; ταμίας; τριηράρχης; ἱερεὺς. Feminine agent, αὐλητρὶς (-τριδ), ἀυλήτρια fute-girl; σώτειρα. Adjectives active, ὑποπ τὸς suspecting; καλυπτός covering; πτυάς (-αδ) spitting; φοράς bearing. Substantives denoting the action: ποίησις, θυσία, παιδεία, φθορά, τομή, κωκυτός; the state, ὀδυρμός weeping, κλαυθμός, θ a verbal element, πότμος, ἡδονὴ, ἀγχόνη strangling ; the activity, δύναμις, φῆ μις, φήμη, γνώμη, μνήμη, γραμμή; the instrument or means, ἄροτρον, λύτρον, ἐχέτλη handle; the thing done, πρᾶγμα (ματ) ποίημα; the abstract act, λόγος, χάρις, ἐλπίδα; passive object, βέλεμνον, κρή· δε· μνον ; abstract defined by the root, κράτος (-ες). Adjectives neuter and passive, λοιπός, ἐκλιπής (-ες) failing, φιλητὸς loved, φιλητέος (-τριος, Sanskrit tarya (37), to be loved), σεμνὸς (σεβνὸς), στυγνός, δειλός timid, σιγηλός silent, μια ρὸς impure, μνήμων (-μον) mindful, πιθανὸς persuasive. Nominal stems derived from nominal stems. Patronymics masculine, Κρονίδης, 'Ατλαντιάδης, Κρονίων, Ακρισι ωνιάδης, Ιαπετιονίδης; feminine, Νηρηί; (-18), Αδραστείνη, Ακρισιώνη, κυνιδεὺς young of dog. Diminutives of substantives, -ίσκος, -ίσκη, ίσκιον, εἰδ-; -ίον, ίδιον, -άριον, -ύλλιον, -ύφιον, -άσιον, -αίον, -υλος, -ίχνη, ίχνιον. Amplificatives, -ων, -άδ. Feminines, θέαινα-, βασίλισσα. Locals, -ών, εών, ἀνδρῶν, man's apartment, περιστεριών dove-cot. Substantives from adjectives, σοφία, ἀλήθεια, παχύτητα, δικαιοσύνη, ἱερωσύνη. Adjectives from substantives, ἀργύρεος, ουράνιος, ἀνθρώπειος, πατρώιος, μητρ·ώιος, ἀνθρώπινος, ἀνθρωπικός, πεδινὸς, “σκοτεινὸς, ξύλινος, ἑσπερινὸς, 1 Bopp, Vergl. Gram., sect. 753. 2 Ibid, sects. 763, 769. |